Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation Access topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Developer says county denied access to annexed Lake City property; plans to appeal

5700607 · May 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A representative for BA Holdings said the county denied a driveway/access permit to a recently annexed industrial-commercial subdivision adjacent to County Road 4, and that the developer will appeal the county engineer’s decision.

WABASHA — A representative for a developer told the Wabasha County Board that a request for access to County Road 4 for a recently annexed industrial-commercial subdivision was denied without statutory rationale and that the developer intends to appeal.

Brad Jack, representing Tony Montgomery Realty & Auction Company and BA Holdings, said the property—about 38 acres annexed into a city—previously had a 2019 Plainview Township zone change and that developers expected to use an access point on the south end of the property. He said an on-site meeting with the county engineer on March 27 indicated southern access would be acceptable but that the county later denied the access without citing statutory authority in the denial email. Jack said the denial included the township on the email chain, which surprised him because the land has been annexed into the city and is no longer under township jurisdiction.

Jack told commissioners the developer believes access on a nearby 10‑ton road would be more suitable for heavy truck traffic associated with industrial-commercial use and said other properties were granted access in similar circumstances. He cited Ag Partners’ driveway on County Road 25 as an example of previous approvals and said BA Holdings intends to pursue all legal options to secure access off County Road 4 or, failing that, to use the 10‑ton road bordering the west side of the property.

Jack asked the board for any statutory references or explanations for why similar accesses were granted to other properties but denied for this application. He said the owners will move forward with the formal appeal process.