Laserfiche WebLink
<br />LRRWMO Meeting Minutes <br />April 16, 1993 <br />Page 5 <br />responsible for our watershed. If it needs a permit, this <br />board can still charge the costs back to the developer. <br />Jankowski stated he will agree to submit this plan to the <br />LRRWMO engineer, plus he will get the $500 permit application <br />fee from the developer and send it in. However, he <br />suggested, therefore, that the current implementation proce- <br />dure should be reconsidered directing that everything be sent <br />to the LRRWMO engineer. If the current policy is maintained, <br />Jankowski predicted that all of Ramsey's projects will <br />probably need LRRWMO review. <br />Schrantz stated any project developer will have to follow the <br />approved, current LRRWMO Water Management Plan even if he/she <br />does not need a permit. <br />Weaver stated in this case the implications are pretty <br />significant. This action is all part of our obligation as a <br />WMO. If at any time there is a grey area, as suggested by <br />Jankowski, then those areas in particular need to be clari- <br />fied through review and comment by our engineer. Weaver felt <br />this proposed action is in the best interest of every con- <br />cerned party, including this developer. <br />Jankowski indicated the developer is Gary Gorham. Upon <br />noting this, Weaver was confident Mr. Gorham will want to do <br />this right. <br />Jankowski reiterated that perhaps we should wait to see what <br />the LRRWMO engineer says. What is the level of <br />reasonability? Weaver stated the north side of the street is <br />in place and probably grandfathered. Changing that flow <br />could be a judgement of the developer and an enhancement of <br />the river. Schrantz noted, however, that he will be changing <br />the rate of flow which will change everything. Weaver <br />concurred. <br />Jankowski stated he will send the wetland mitigation matter <br />to the LRRWMO engineer also along with the permit <br />application. <br />Weaver queried whether the proposed plans will eliminate a <br />wetland. Jankowski stated the developer is proposing to fill <br />in a portion of a wetland to accommodate some lots. This is <br />similar to Ramsey Meadows Second Addition. <br />Weaver and Schrantz concurred there is no question this <br />proposed development needs to go through the review process. <br />Weaver added the developer is compelled to avoid wetlands if <br />at all possible. Schrantz added that the LRRWMO, as the LGU <br />