Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br /> <br />~e Oo~mission reviewed the letter from the 8tare RiChway Department dated <br /> <br />I January 22, 1985 regarding this plat. '~he main ooncern of t~e Btg~ay Dept. <br /> is theproposed t~porary accesses onto l~wy. 10, which may be alIc~ed, but a <br /> plan indicating the future elimination of those t~porary aocemsem will be <br /> requi red. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />~e Oo~mission proceeded to revtew City ~ngineer Raatikka's letter dated <br />February 14, 1985. <br /> <br />~l~e C~ission discussed the service road planned for years ago to run <br />p~rallel to Bwy. 10 from cry. Rd. 56 to Cty Rd. 57. <br /> <br />Mr. Lucian Klersy was present and stated that it is not feasible to run the <br />service road behind or in front of his building and the City can buy the <br />buildir~ or pray to have it moved if the service road beoomes a reality. <br /> <br />Ms. Norris related to the 0ommission that City E~gineer Raatikka does have <br />some ooncern with allowing Class 5 t~nporary accesses; past experience has <br />been that temporary is not always so t~mporary and maybe something more <br />permanent than Class 5 should be required. <br /> <br />Mr. Bill Baker was present representing Mr. Kovar and stated that Mr. Kovar <br />has reassured Mr. Raatikka that the accesses will be very temporary. Mr. <br />Baker also noted that there are permanent Class 5 roads in the Airport <br />Industrial Park. <br /> <br />O0m~issioner k--~er stated that the Class 5 roads in that develoi~ent were <br />authorized, de. site his objections, because of the almost i~ediately <br />availability of municipal se~er and water. <br /> <br />Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Kovar ~oes not want to 9o to the expense of <br />installing blacktop temporary access just to have it torn up when the service <br />road is installed. <br /> <br />C~,.,issioner Dc~r suggested that the developer eliminate the r~'~ for <br />temporary access and start proceedings to have the service road installed. <br /> <br />Mr. Baker stated that temporary access is needed for business sake until the <br />service road is installed. <br /> <br />G~airman Peterson suggested that Mr. Kovar be given preliminary plat approval <br />with Class 5 temporary access and if there is no oonstruction to the rear <br />service road within one year, a more permanent surface be required on the <br />front temporary access. <br /> <br />Om~issioner Des~er stated that the City should require that a petition for <br />rear service road improvements be submitted prior to preliminary plat <br />approval; this would put the plat in oompliance with the State Highway Dept. <br /> February 19, 1985 <br /> <br />~e2of6 <br /> <br /> <br />