2004-11-02 Fax from Granite City Real Estate to Mike & AlGRANITE CITY REAL ESTATE:
FAX COVER LETTER
DATE: N /'V/0I/
TO: Hilke CoUr, L 763 - �IQ 7 r4,2S-9f )1 �,.y kr 4 �1- (76 3 4/17- :,.Pl o "
of
ATTN.-/7`/�tn /9r'u S
FROM: Granite City Real Estate
58-10eiAve N
Waite Park, MN 56387
320-253-0003 Phone
320-253-0006 Fax
Number
of pages including cover letter/ 3
/CAdC ✓� f /e I�Ttr P� / / "r 0 � r
•CA Ors I1✓r� � � n 7`�'�
From: ,
%,-,v. 2. 20C14 4:29FV
Robert Moberg
SEH
3535 Vadnais Drive
St. Paul, MN 55110-5196
RE: Shoppes at Prairie Run
SEH No. A-ALBE'V'0501.00 D78
2
1 ri Ayc��u�: SOUTH
PARK, MN S63C7
E: (320) 2:33-0003
�x (320) 2.33--00(.6
I am in receipt of your memo dated October 29, 2004. Our engineer is addressing the
majority of engineering specific comments and we would appreciate a prompt turn
around time from you to get these issues addressed once you receive them as tin=c is of
the essence for us to get in the ground this fall.
Regarding.the Plat comments #1 and #2, there is a utility easement shown on the final
plat that is essentially in the same location as the Water Main, it should be able t ) serve
both utilities.
Plat comment #3, there is no access on to County rd. 19, the county has been co itacted
and responded that no direct access would be allowed. All access to come from Kyler.
Grading and utility plans #1, with regard to excess top soil being placed on the 'Shoppes
at Prairie Run Site, could you please share with me the written documentation, tl ►at
authorizes the City to use the Shoppes site as a depository for excess top soil in f lie
Prairie Run project. I do not have any thing in writing in this regard. When we ;poke on
the phone, you had indicated that the assessment would be increased on the who a project
not just the shoppes site. However, your memo indicates thai all the additional I .rading
work would be added to the Shoppes site only. We are very willing to cooperate with
respect to the timely completion of the municipal improvement project, but feel he cost
of the additional grading should be born by all parties to the project proportionai Ay.
Grading and utility plans #2, we have been asking what is the required width of he
access requested by the city for some time. 30 feet is fine with us. The grading and
utility plans you reviewed should be compliant with this requirement. Please no tify us if
this is not the case.
Grading and utility plan #3, we would like to eliminate the requirement for curb on the
building side of the delivery isle on the rear of the building. The curb only adds cost and
is an obstruction for delivery of goods. Our plan shows a sloped drive isle away from the
building and concrete stoops at grade on the rear doors. 1 can provide numerous
examples of commercial buildings with curb on only one side of the delivery isl, :.
Bollards are proposed to prevent vehicles from approaching to close to the build ings.
N:v. 2. 2G:4 4:29FM No,'224 P. 31,''
Your prompt response to these issues is appreciated. I would prefer a response in writing
via FAX at 320-253-0006.
S, ely,
T Ianiel F. Tempel
President
C: Larry Kruse, City of Albertville
Alan Brixius, NAC, Inc.
Mike Couri, City Attorney
Tom Herkenhoff, Surveying and Engineering Professionals, Inc.