Minutes from 1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

EEB 16 '93 81 ~ 18PM t~ITY OF RfJOKR P.4 LRRWMG Special Meeting Minutes February 11, 1993 Page 3 the plan should be better clarified. He would reoommend the plan be consistent with state and Federal regulations. Schrantz stated the LRRWriIO plan was one of the first plar_s approved. What Mr. Lobermeier is talking about axe issues relating to the nsw generation plan, whioh, of course, will he contained in our plan when it is xevisad. Jankowski queried how SEH charges its clients when it is asked to review and comment an new projects. Mr. Lobermeier stated the WMOs his firm represents have been able to transfer their review responsibilities down to the local level. However, he suggested charges might be done on a par diem basis, an hourly fee, ar vn a, per permit fee basis. Mr. Lobermeier stated he found it interesting to see the level of permitting done by the LRRWMG; it is being handled mare like a watershed district. There is not a lot in the plan to review against; the plan is inconsistent. Mr. Lobermeier stated if SEH were hired, it would initially want to focus on the plan, removing the vagaries and making xt more clear cut. He would also recommend the review aspect Would be kept out of the LRRWMG's direct jurisdiction unless the cities da not want to deal with it. Mr. Lobermeier viewed the LRRWMO's Consulting Hngineer as an extension of its staff. However, should the SEH Consulting Engineer be asked to comment on projects, it would be orarged on an hourly basis. Jankowski stated all upcoming projects, especially in Ramsey, will be involved with the application of the Wetland Conservation Act and will, therefore, have tv be reviewed by the LGU, in this case the LRRWMO, for compliance with said act. Again, Mr. Lobermeier queried the advisability of retaining that level of review with the LRRWMO rather than with the cities. Schrantz responded that during meetings with the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR~, he finds that many WMOS are net reviewing projects. However, he wants to be responsible and that is the reason behind the current review process. Weaver confirmed the hoard's current prooess and explained the unique make-up of the LRRWMG. Weaver queried whether Mr. Lobermeier foresaw a lot of regulatory authority coming down from BWSR and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Mr. Lobermeier's response was it depends on the organization. If you want to be more active, you can have as much regulatory authority as you want or as much as the beard's member communities will allow you to have. The cities have first option to be the