Laserfiche WebLink
LRRWMO Meeting Minutes <br />June 17, 1992 <br />Page 8 <br />business. Schrantz directed this be put on the July meeting <br />agenda. <br />Andover's Storm Drainage Plan <br />Schrantz directed that this item be placed on the July <br />meeting agenda in that the process is not yet complete. <br />>ard Members to Serve on the Interim Wetl <br />Schrantz stated the make -up of the Interim wetland Review <br />Board is outlined on page 33 of the Wetland Act House file: <br />representatives from the Board of Water and Soil Resources, <br />Soil and Water Conservation District, and the local unit of <br />government (in this case the LRRWMO's Consulting Engineer). <br />He further suggested perhaps the cities might want a repre- <br />sentative on that board. Jankowski stated he wants to be on <br />the Interim Wetland Review Board. <br />Set -Up of a Technical Review Committee for the LRRWMO <br />The board agreed this agenda item should be thoroughly <br />discussed at the upcoming work session scheduled for July 15, <br />1992, immediately following the regular LRRWMO meeting. <br />Update on City of Ramsey Project #91 -14 <br />Jankowski indicated the project is basically in place. He <br />will have to check with Pete Raatikka, Ramsey's Consulting <br />Engineer with the firm of Hokanson Anderson Associates, Inc., <br />to see if he submitted the project's final design to the <br />LRRWMO Consulting Engineer for review. <br />NEW BUSINESS <br />Policy on How to Deal with Future Anoka County Wetland <br />is <br />The LRRWMO members noted attorney Curtis Pearson's June 5, <br />1992, letter, responding to the board's query on how this <br />board may legally deal with ongoing Anoka County maintenance <br />projects which affect wetlands within the LRRWMO <br />jurisdiction. <br />After a thorough review of the four -page letter and attached <br />information, Jankowski deduced that Pearson is suggesting the <br />LRRWMO treat Anoka County the same as it would anyone <br />requesting LRRWMO project approval. Schrantz noted that <br />Pearson also indicates the board can bank these small, <br />