Laserfiche WebLink
property, ltem #5 indicates thai there are thousands of trees to bc burned and M;. Haik <br />indicated tha~ he doesn't kno~' that there has been a count of thc actual number of trees to <br />bt' burned. Mr. t-laik also expressed concern tha~ the memo from the R:m~sev Fire Chief <br />da~cd .June 26, 1989 and F&R's Application fo,' Permit for Open t:;arning received by the <br />City on ,}une 27, 1989 were not made a part of the record by reierencinl: in the proposed <br />findings of fact. <br /> <br />lX'Lr. Goodrich recommended amending ltem# 1 of the proposed findings of fact to indicate <br />that the June 27 Open Burn Application will be attached thereto. <br /> <br />Mr. t-Iaik referred to Fire Chicf Hoekc's memo dated June 26 in which he indicates <br />concerns expressed by Anoka Fire Marshall Freeby and Elk River Fire Chief Anderson and <br />inquired as to when those discussions took place. <br /> <br />Mr. t-toeke stated that he discussed F&R's application with Fire Marshall Freebv and Fire <br />Chief Anderson on approximately June 24th or 25th. <br /> <br />Mr. Haik noted tha~ he met with Ramsey City Staff on June 26 regrading the application for <br />an open burn and was provided a cop)' of Ix~r. Hoeke's memo a~ that time: there is no way <br />that Fire Chief Anderson and Fire Marshall Freeby could have been full), informed as to the <br />contents of the burn proposal on June 24 or 25. <br /> <br />Mr. Hoeke stated that he explained the proposed site of the burn, without going into <br />method details, to Fire Marshall Freeby and Fire Chief Anderson and they indicated the), <br />would not allow such a burn. Mr. Hoeke noted that both Fire Marshall Preeby and Fire <br />Chief Anderson are well aware of the proposed burn site and it's existing conditions. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich inquired if Mr. Hoeke felt that Fire Marshall Freeby and Fire Chief <br />Andersons opinon of the proposed burn would have been different had they known that the <br />actual burning was to take place in pits. <br /> <br />Mr. Haik objected to speculating the opinions of Fire Marshall Freeby and Fire Chief <br />Anderson. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley noted that with regard to alternative methods for disposing of the trees, the <br />City did provide F&R with a list of woodchipper contractors that the City is aware of as a <br />result of it's involvement in a decentralized woodchipping pro,am. <br /> <br />Mr. Haik requested that the proposed findings of fact also indicate that F&R applied for an <br />open burn permit for the purpose of eliminating a potential fire hazard and for disposal of <br />trees, brush and vegetative matter in the development of it's land. Also, that F&R has <br />agreed that all burning would be conducted in accordance with Minnesota State Statute <br />7005.0750, subd. 2. <br /> <br />Mr. Haik referred to previous comments by Mr. Banwan regarding DNR and IVLPCA visits <br />to the proposed burn site and noted that DNR and MPCA comments are generally thoughts <br />about the site and not specific evaluations of any application submitted to those respective <br />agencies. <br /> <br />Mr. Haik referred ~o the main concerns expressed by the City relating to the proposal for an <br />open burn. Mr. Haik stated that a reasonable plan has been formulated to address the <br /> <br />Cit.,,,' Council/July 11, 1989 <br />Page 5 of 12 <br /> <br /> <br />