Laserfiche WebLink
~ _preliminary Plat Arx~roval Of Kovar Addition: ~a~e Of Mr. Michael <br /> <br />Mr. Bill Baker was present. <br /> <br />It was noted that along with the preliminary plat, a petition for a rear <br />service road was submitted. <br /> <br />Commission De,er of the Planning and Zoning Commission was present and stated <br />that the Planning and Zoning Commission forced initiat/on of the petition to <br />satisfy the State Highway Department's request to see plans that will <br />eliminate the temporary accesses from Hwy. 10. <br /> <br />Oouncilmember Schlueter noted that the petition is inadequate as it is only <br />signed by Mr. Kovar and not 35% of the abutting property owners. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich stated that Council can receive the petition but no action can be <br />taken because the petition is inadequate and it would require a 4/5 vote of <br />oouncil to get the issue to a public hearing. <br /> <br />City Engineer Raatikka stated that the State will allow temporary access <br />provided the City has a plan to re~ove these accesses in the future and that <br />is what the City is doing in requiring rear easements from each of the <br />parcels. <br /> <br />City AttorneyGoodrich stated that there were oomments at the Planning and <br />Zoning meeting regarding this service road being in the discussion stage for <br />20 years; there should be a resolution adopted which would firm up plans for <br />this service road. <br /> <br />Met. Berg stated that Staff feels it is eoonomically unrealistic to put the <br />service road in at this time because: <br /> <br />1. ~here is a building located in the roadway. <br /> <br />2. ~hat property is in the urban service area to evenually have services <br /> along that service road. <br /> <br />Councilmember Sorteberg stated that the temporary accesses will be there a <br />long time and should be blacktopped. <br /> <br />Mr. Bill Baker stated that Planning and Zoning's motion included that if the <br />service road was not installed within one year's time, the front temporary <br />accesses would be blacktopped. <br /> <br />Mr. Berg stated that he and Mr. Raatikka suggest that as each parcel in the <br />plat develops, each parcel be required to extend it's blacktop parking lot <br />surface to access the next parcel. <br /> <br />Council proceeded to review the petition again. Mr. Baker stated that the <br />intent of the petition was to request service road improvements from Sunfish <br />Lake Blvd. to Cty. Rd. ~56 be brought to public hearing stage. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that the petition, on it's face value, is <br />adequate because the petition only specifies service road improvements through <br /> March 7, 1985 <br /> <br />Page 6 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />