Laserfiche WebLink
LRRWMO Special Meeting Minutes <br />June 25, 1992 <br />Page 9 <br />member cities that if the project is initiated within the <br />city, the city should pay for it. A contractor should not be <br />held up because of a dewatering permit is needed from the <br />LRRWMO. <br />Skallman stated he could proceed with Mr. Dickson's proposed <br />dewatering permit review process. He would then bill the <br />appropriate city, and the city can figure out itself how to <br />get reimbursed. <br />Jankowski suggested amending that proposed plan to make the <br />City Engineer responsible for the entire review and direct <br />contact with the applicant. Mr. Dickson advised that there <br />would then be a problem with a lack of uniformity in relation <br />to the LRRWMO review process. The inspection, however, has <br />to be local. Skallman added the municipalities have to be <br />out there reviewing the project anyway. Schultz and Schrantz <br />concurred with Skallman's involvement to create a level of <br />uniformity. However, Schultz added, the charges for his <br />expense should not come out of the general engineering <br />budget. Schrantz agreed these engineering expenses should be <br />charged back to the municipality associated. He stated he <br />had hoped the LRRWMO could charge $25 for a dewatering permit <br />with the hope they would average out. <br />Dickson added when the City Engineer has available to him the <br />written information on each dewatering project, he will <br />better be able to properly inspect the actual site. <br />While Jankowski was somewhat hesitant about the need to so <br />fully involve the Consulting Engineer, he eventually con- <br />curred with the logic behind the proposed procedure as <br />discussed. <br />In explanation of the billing procedure, Schultz stated Barr <br />Engineering will bill the LRRWMO in the normal manner, <br />breaking out the charges as requested in order that the <br />LRRWMO might, in turn, bill the appropriate city for the <br />dewatering permit reviews. Jankowski concurred. Skallman <br />indicated this portion of the review process will, in all <br />likelihood, not be a big dollar item. <br />The Administrative Secretary was directed to draft a proposed <br />dewatering permit review procedure for consideration at the <br />July 1992 regular meeting. <br />Skallman presented his concerns for the board's information <br />and response. He indicated he many times is not required to <br />attend the regular LRRWMO meetings and later reads in the <br />minutes that the Consulting Engineer should be doing <br />something. However, if he does not hear anything directly, <br />