Laserfiche WebLink
• LRRWMO Meeting Minutes <br />July 18, 1996 <br />Page 7 <br />The low floor elevation of structures to be located adjacent to the County Ditch 6 <br />system must be established a minimum of 1 foot above the calculated 100-year <br />frequency flood elevation of the Ditch System or the low point elevation of the roadway <br />crossing, whichever provides the highest level of protecrion. <br />8. Should dewatering of the construction area be required and sump pumps are used, all <br />pumped water must be discharged through the sediment control facility prior to <br />reaching the County Ditch system. <br />9. The water quality basins must be constructed at the initial stages of construction and <br />be functional during the site grading portion of the project. <br />10. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Army Corps of Engineers <br />must be contacted regarding the need for permits from these agencies for the projects. <br />11. The delineated wetland areas on the site must be field verified by the Anoka <br />• Conservation District prior to the commencement of construction. <br />Vote: 3 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried. <br />Review Newsletter Article -Jankowski <br />Not available; tabled to August 15, 1996, meeting agenda. <br />Jurisdictional Clarification Regardin~Intern Under Implementation Grant JPA <br />Schultz noted the LRRWMO has approved participation in this grant but he recommends the <br />LRRWMO verify they are not considered as the employer prior to signing the JPA. He suggested <br />a legal opinion maybe needed. <br />Haas stated he believes all would agree the ACD, since they aze speazheading this grant, would need <br />to agree to be the employer. <br />Weaver suggested it maybe appropriate to send a letter to Chris Lord's attention that upon further <br />review of the decision to participate in the grant, the LRRWMO wants to verify that: 1) there will <br />be no liability cast back to LRRWMO for actions of the ACD, and 2) the JPA will be drafted to <br />indicate the LRRWMO will not be the employer; it will be the responsibility of the ACD. <br />. Ferguson stated while he has no problem with a letter, perhaps it is premature since the grant has not <br />yet been received. Weaver noted it may be appropriate to put the ACD on notice that this will not <br />be the LRRWMO's liability. <br />