Laserfiche WebLink
-3 - <br />possibility of using a portion of the building as a day care center, <br />although no definite plans have been made at this time. <br />.Vern Peloquin presented proof of ownership, and a description <br />of the property and location of sewer, also a signed and notarized <br />document showing the easement from Mr. Oman of Twin Pines Trailer <br />Park to the church, and also from Peloquin to Oman for storm water <br />emptying onto Peloquin's property. <br />Charlie Johnson passed out copies of his written report and made <br />comments regarding necessity of subdivision. The property consists <br />of 6.8 acres and if there is public access and there are no new roads <br />constructed, it would not need subdivision, he said. Although the <br />Engineers report will show recommendation for street construction, he <br />said. If those requirements have to be met, it would necessitate <br />subdivision; although it could simply become a outlot. <br />Howard Kuusisto presented a written report; he expressed concern <br />for the jog in 148th Street southwest of the church property, indicat- <br />ing the need for a decision as to who would pay for upgrading of that <br />section of road„ and would it dead-end or should it be extended. <br />Spitzer: Regarding the jog on 148th Street east of Freeland - if a <br />residence was built north of 148th and ?5 feet east of Freeland, whose <br />responsibility would it be to complete that street? <br />Kuusisto: I imagine it would have to be done by petition. <br />C.Johnson: If the city owns the street, the city does not automat- <br />ically have to build the street. There is no obligation. <br />Spitzer: What if the property owner petitions to have the street ex- <br />tended? <br />Kuusisto: If the property owner to the south were to divide the lot <br />Into two parcels, the city still doesn't have to build it, but <br />the property saner could petition and it could be assessed against <br />the property owners. <br />Spitzer: Would there be any adverse effects in dead -ending the road <br />rather than looping? <br />Kuusisto: I highly recommend closing the loop. I recommend construct- <br />ion of a street through the church property easterly to the north - <br />south easement adjacent to sewage pumping station and thence <br />southerly to Oneks Lake Boulevard. I am also recommending a sixty <br />foot easement for the road. Sanitary sewer is no problem. Loca- <br />tion of the building will determine the location for it. Regard- <br />ing drainage, would recommend that grading be done in such a <br />manner that any potding area to the north would not dr in back <br />to the church. Rice Creek Watershed has made a report on this <br />matter, he said. Fglt the possibility of raising the church and <br />parking lot to an elevation where ponding would be no problem, <br />should be explored. <br />Schwab presented a written report. He explained that his main <br />concerns were for: <br />1) traffic generation <br />2) drainage problems <br />3) neighborhood compatability-would proposed land use have <br />any adverse effect on adjoining property. <br />He said parking areas should be vcreened. He feels that 148th <br />Street should be continued so that a loop street would be created; <br />this road would serve as principle access to the church. <br />If existing 8 inch storm sewer on north end of property, is <br />sufficient to handle run-off from this site and other areas it is in- <br />tended to serve, there should be no storm drainage problem. This <br />should be analyzed by City Engineer. <br />