Minutes from 1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

LRRWMO Special Meeting Minutes June 25, 1992 Page 8 explained that the board spends too much time on these bills at the monthly meetings trying to decipher them. As an aside, those present noted the current LRRWMO permit numbers began with a #93- It was noted that the numbering system usually begins with the year in which a project is initiated. Therefore, the current numbering system should be #92 -_ The Administrative Secretary was asked to discuss this matter with the Deputy Treasurer. Mr. Dickson stated he saw no problem billing the expenses to the appropriate municipality. Schrantz reiterated that the LRRWMO would even accept a hand - written worksheet as long as the appropriate breakdown /information was provided. He also requested that LRRWMO permits be reviewed at the lowest possible level if Skallman can work it out. The dewatering permit process was again discussed. Skallman noted the project plans only indicate where discharge will take place and the source. He is unable to tell any more from the DNR submitted information. Mr. Dickson recommended the LRRWMO develop a policy for dewatering and the review thereof. Schrantz stated the city will have to look at the dewatering projects and be responsible for them. Jankowski felt that is the watershed's responsibility. Schrantz explained that the cities would be more knowledgeable about the individual dewatering projects in that they are more, or could be more, accessible to the sites. The policy on dewatering should include standard erosion controls. Jankowski felt each project should be considered on a case by case basis. Mr. Dickson recommended that Skallman, through a normal course of review on dewatering permits, call the applicant when necessary asking where the water is coming from. Schultz indicated a problem with that because there is presently no fee charged for dewatering permits; who pays Skallman's fee for that portion of review. Schrantz stated any charge for LRRWMO review will be paid by the applicant. Schultz felt in that case a billing procedure should be set up. Mr. Dickson suggested, on a tentative basis, Skallman would call and talk to the applicant. He would then call the appropriate City Engineer and relay to him what discussion took place with the applicant. The City Engineer will then be able to confirm this information through a site inspection. A written confirmation of the dewatering proce- dure per project would be provided to the appropriate city. Schultz concurred with this procedure but again queried how Barr Engineering would be paid for this portion of the review process. He felt there must be an understanding among the