Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />~he (lm~ission reviewed the letter from the State Bighway Department dated <br />January 22, 1985 regarding this plat. ~e main concern of the Bigbway Dept. <br />is the proposed temporary accesses onto Bwy. 10, which may be allowed, but a <br />plan indicating the future elimination of those t~porary accesses will be <br />required. <br /> <br />~he Commission proceeded to review City Engineer Raatikka's letter dated <br />February 14, 1985. <br /> <br />~e Commission discussed the service road planned for years ago to run <br />parallel to ~wy. 10 from Cry. Rd. 56 to Cry 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 />building or pay to have it moved if the service road beoomes a reality. <br /> <br />Ms. Norris related to the Commission that City Engineer Raatikka does have <br />some concern with allowing Class 5 t~mporary accesses; past experience has <br />been that t~porary is not always so t~porary 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 />Oaamissioner ~-~er stated that the Class 5 roads in that develolm~nt were <br />authorized, desite his objections, because of the almost immediately <br />availability of mun/cipal sewer and water. <br /> <br />Mr. Baker stated that Mr. Kovar does not want to go to the expense of <br />installing blacktop temporary access just to have it torn up when the service <br />road is installed. <br /> <br />Commissioner ~mer suggested that the developer eliminate the need 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 />Chairman Peterson suggested that Mr. Kovar be given preliminary plat approval <br />with Class 5 temporary access and if there is no construct/on to the rear <br />service rogd within one year, a more permanent surface be required on the <br />front t~nporary access. <br /> <br />O~mmissioner Deemer 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 Bighway Dept. <br /> February 19, 1985 <br /> <br />Page 2 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />