02-26-86 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I?IIIUT~S C'ity Counc.il Feh. ?_F, 1936 Fiardees P9r. l)iamond pointed o~it that ~1cDonald's has acr.ess on Rice Street. (Cont.? Sr,alze repli~d that this t~as a mistake and indic~ted thlt ti~is ac.cess is causinq a bad traffic situation in the area. Scalze statec( that she ~~~as not in favor of adciing ±o this problem. Sr.alz~ also nointed out that there are trafi`ic signals on Rice and h":innesota. 7h~ Planner commented that th~ City is not cl2nying ffardees access. They can tiave access from '~innesota, aut they wi11 have vis~bility from t?ice Strect. P1s. Mardini quest~ioned if the rouncil should be lookino at the u~hol~ ~i~ce of property owned by ;9r. Schroeder at this point. ^lardini qi.~esY.ioned iP ther^ s9~oulc! be a street serving tnis property. P1r. Diamond pointed out that P4r. Schroec(er is ant~icipat~ing three 1ots from his property. ~'ahey st:atec! tha~ if it is f,it/ policy not to alloaJ ar,cess to Rir,e Street, the City cou1d not approv~ a three-lrrt split fo•r !1r. Schroeder. Scalze point2d out that thr_ U.S.S~:rim drivea!ay shoiilc( be a street servicing tYiis property. TYie Planner s~.i~gestesubnii t a pl an for ho~~! thi s 4vho12 pi ece of property ~.~i 1 i devel op. Fahey as'~ced if the City could requirc the property oa•mer to put in a road for t~~io niec~s of property that already have road frontage. 7he flttorney sugqested that the City minht ~~anC to put an ordinance on th~ boo!<s in this regard. Scalze f21t that tha~ Ci'ty ti~tas only c!oing lonri-ranrye planninc~ ~~nd t4i~ City ti~lanted to ensure ${1dL` :V~l~t it cloes toc!1y t=rill be eorrect in 1.0 years. P9r. D~Lonais asked if tti~s v~oul~i apply all the way d.own ~'ice Street. Fahey replied ttiat other lots on C2ice S~reet u~iould be too sma11 to require a road. Scalze pointed out 'that the Schroeder property is a large onn under one ownershio. DeLonais felt that the propert.y shoulc.f be a11oti~red ona access to Rice Street adith a turn-riqht-only stioulation. Scalz~ felt that the °lannirin, Commission and the Coi~mcil had to look a~t 1 onq-range p1 anni nc;. C,ol l ova st~ted that :~ie ~-aas not opposec! to an access on Ri ce Street and poi rrted out ~that f2i ce Str~et i s four 1 anes .v~ de. The P1anner statecJ that C~~ty nolicy states s~here possibl~. If a nrop2rt~/ is lanciloc!<eci, there 'is no other option. Nov~^ver, arterial streets are intendec! to carry trafPic adhile minor streets are intencied for land access. The Plann~r felt tYiat this siY.uation cleserved lono- Paoe -5-