HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-06-08 Planning Commission Meeting PacketCITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Thursday, June 8, 2017
7:30 P.M.
I. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance
II. Approval of Agenda
III. Approve May 11, 2017 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (1)
W. Department / Commission Liaison 1 Other Reports
V. Visitors/Public Comment
This is an opportunity for the public to address the Commission with questions or concerns not on the
agenda. Please limit comments to three minutes.
VI. Public Hearings
VII. New Business
VIII. Old Business
A. Oak Park Heights — Comprehensive Plan 2018 (2)
IX Informational
A. Planning Commission Vacancy - Commissioner Quale resignation
B. Upcoming_ Meeting :
• Tuesday, June 27, 2017 City Council 6:00 p.m./City Hall
• Thursday, July 20, 2017 Planning Commission 7:00 p.m./City Hall
• Tuesday, July 25, 2017 City Council 6:00 p.m./City Hall
C. Council Representative
• Tuesday, June 27, 2017 — Commissioner Anthony
• Tuesday, July 25, 2017 — Commissioner Quale
X. Adjourn.
Enclosure 1
r,
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
PLANNING
I. Call to Order/Pleda of Alle 'ance:
Chair Kremer called the meeting to order. Present: Commissioners Kremer, Anthony,
Freeman & Quale; City Planner Richards, and City Councilmember Dougherty. City
Administrator Johnson arrived at 7:30 p.m. Absent: Commissioners Nelson.
II. Approval of Agenda: Chair Kremer noted matter of Commissioner Freemen needing to
rescue himself from participation in the public hearing for Oak Park Sr. Living and
suggested an amended Agenda order.
Commissioner Quale, seconded by Commissioner Anthony, moved to approve the Agenda
amended to have Old Business B follow Public Hearing A and then return to Public Hearing
B. Carried 4 — 0.
III. A roval of April 13 2017 Meeting Minutes: Commissioner Freeman, seconded by
Commissioner Quale, moved to approved the Minutes as presented. Carried 4 - 0.
IV. Department/Commission. Liaison / Other R orts: None.
V. Visitors/Public Comment: None.
VI. Public Hearings:
A. Oak Park Heights Retail DevelopMent PUD Amendment: Review request for
Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUD) related to Comprehensive Sign Plan,
Iocated at the SW intersection of 60d' St. N. and Krueger Ln. N
City Planner Richards reviewed and discussed the May 4, 2017 Planning Report as to
the request for a comprehensive sign plan that would allow for additional signage not
permitted in the sign ordinance and set the allowable signage for the development,
including signage at three walls sides of endcap tenant spaces as well as signage to
the rear of the tenant spaces in the two multi -tenant retail buildings. An issue
analysis was reviewed and discussed.
Commission discussion ensued clarifying original approvals for the site as to number
of drive throughs, that no other changes to the development are being requested with
this amendment and whether or not additional signage amount would be permitted at
the building currently occupied by Goodwill
Chair Kremer opened the public hearing and invited comment.
Chris Whitehouse of DJR Architecture introduced himself as the applicant and
discussed the matters of signage at the Goodwill building, signage for the Goodwill
Planning Commission Minutes
May 11, 2017
Page 2 of 6
donation drive-thru and where the drive-thru menu board will be for the restaurant,
the possibility of a small sign allowance at the endcap of the multi -tenant building
that faces an adjacent multi -tenant building and expressed their desire to leave the
illuminated monument sign powered, versus turning them off an hour after closing.
Discussion ensued as to the desire to leave the multi -tenant signs illuminated, to
allow small signs at the adjacent facing multi -retail building endcaps, paths of travel
anticipated for visitors to the retail center and the desire to have the locations of the
businesses to be as clear as possible, appropriate sizing allowances for signs to the
building walls.
There being no further public comment, Chair Kremer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Freeman, seconded by Commissioner Quale, moved to recommend
that the City Council approve the request, subject to the amended conditions of the
May 4, 2017 Planning Report as amended; specifically, that:
1. The allowable signage for the west facade of Lot 1 building and east fagade of
Lot 2 building shall be limited to 25 square feet per wall.
2. The allowable signage for the east facade of Lot 1 building and the west
facade of Lot 2 building shall be limited to no more than 75 square feet per
wall.
3. One sign only shall be allowed per facade per tenant.
4. For the Lot 3 building, the second sign on the east facade above the entrance
door will be allowed if only directional signage with no advertising.
5. The proposed directional signage is allowed but cannot contain advertising
for the associated business unless necessary to differentiate more than one
drive thru in the development. The detail plans for the directional signage
will be reviewed as part of the sign permit process.
6. The outdoor parking lot lighting shall be turned off one hour after closing,
except for approved security lighting.
7. All signs shall be designed to comply with Zoning Ordinance requirements
for internal illumination.
S. The bases of the three freestanding signs shall be landscaped and subject to
review and approval of the City Arborist.
Carried 4 - 0.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 11, 2017
Page 3 of 6
City Planner Richards reviewed his May 4, 2017, noting that the Community Survey
was one of the items discussed at a recent City Council work session and that the survey
included with the meeting packet was revised as a result of that discussion. He also
noted that Chair Kremer had some proposed revision suggestions and a copy of the
survey with those suggestions has been placed at their seats.
Discussion commenced as to the revision with the goal being clarity of responses and
ease of communicating for those responding. Promotion of the survey through tools
available such as the City Facebook page, the City webpage, at the upcoming
community Parry In the Park celebration, and with the City Newsletter.
Richards noted that a draft of the Social Inventory component of the Comprehensive
plan will be provided at the June meeting for Commission review and discussion.
Commissioner Freemen left the meeting at 7:41 p..
VI. Public Hearings - Continued:
B. Oak Park Sr. Living PUD General Plan & PUD Amendment: Review requests for
Planned Unit Development (PUD) General Plan to allow construction of a 3 -story,
72 -unit Sr. Apartment Building to be located E. of Nova Scotia Ave. N. and Planned
Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to allow a covered walkway connection
between buildings located at 13936 Lower 59h St. N. and 13945 Upper 58th St. N.,
within the Oak Park Senior Living development.
City Planner Richards reviewed the May 5, 2017 Planning Report to the request,
provided an issue analysis and discussed the same.
Commission discussion ensued with Chair Kremer noting, various approvals to
density and building heights to the development over time and questioned what has
changed that the City would be willing to allow a 3 -story building. Chair Kremer
expressed his opinion that the higher story buildings have an institutional look and
that the ongoing construction for those living in the area are things that need to be
considered.
Chair Kremer opened the public hearing and invited comment.
Tim Nolde of Anchobay�ro introduced himself as the applicant and discussed the
ongoing construction status of the development and how it has changed with the
changes in market and how the design style has come about with the location and
discussion with City staff. Mr. Nolde discussed the project layout, roadway
alterations and how construction timing will work. He hopes to have construction
start in the Fall and be completed within a year.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 11, 2017
Page 4 of 6
Commission discussion ensued with the applicant as to the project as to the site
appearance, timing and ownership of the buildings within the site.
Roger Tomtem of Archnet introduced himself as the architect of the project and
provided the Commission with a materials sample board that displayed the materials
proposed for building 5 and discussed how they blend with the existing building
within the development. Mr. Tomten discussed the architectural elements to the
project, including the parking and path of travel elements to the re -designed area for
building 5 and throughout the development.
Mr. Tomten also discussed the materials and glass elements to the pedestrian
walkway connection, nothing that the driveway area to the existing buildings will be
able to kept open while the walkway is connected.
There being no further public comment or discussion from the Commission, Chair
Kremer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Anthony, seconded by Commissioner Quale, moved to recommend
that the City Council approve the request, subject to the conditions of the May 4,
2017 Planning Report as amended; specifically, that:
1. The Final Plat for Oak Park Senior Living Second Addition, as well as the
dedication and vacation of any easements, shall be subject to the review and
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
2. An amended development agreement, if required, shall include a provision
that the Oak Park Senior Living Phase 5 will remain as senior rental and shall
not be converted to non -restricted rental housing. The development
agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney
and City Council.
3. A revised plan shall be provided indicating a reduction in the median size or
elimination of a parking stall to improve access at the front of Building 5.
Additionally, the access between the new building and the dog park shall be
signed so that there is no left turn allowed.
4. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed setback from Nova
Scotia Avenue North to Building 5.
5. The landscape plan shall be subject to review and approval of the City
Arborist.
6. The grading and drainage plans shall be subject to City Engineer and the
Middle St. Croix Watershed Management Organization approval.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 11, 2017
Page 5 of 6
7. All utility plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
The Planning Commission was favorable to the non -shielded, residential style
light fixtures.
9. The Fire Chief and Chief of Police shall review and approve the final plans to
determine the accessibility of emergency vehicles throughout the
development.
10. No parallel parking shall be allowed on the street network and shall be signed
as such.
11. The snow storage areas and plan shall be subject to review and approval of
the City Engineer.
12. A plan for sign lighting shall be provided at the time of the sign permitting
process.
13. Any mechanical equipment that is ground mounted or visible from adjacent
streets shall be screened as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
14. All trash and recycling storage shall be internal to the building.
15. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed building height of
38 -feet.
16. The Planning Commission was favorable to the final building appearance,
colors, materials and the variety between the buildings. The applicant shall
provide a materials sample board for the buildings to be discussed at the City
Council meeting.
Carried 3 — 0, Commissioner Freeman abstaining.
VIII. New Business: None.
IX. Informational:
Commission Liaison Dougherty noted that the June meeting of the Planning Commission is
scheduled for the same night as the City's Party In the Park, he questioned whether or not the
Commission wanted to change the meeting time. Commission consensus was to change the
meeting time to 7:30 p.m.
A. Utwoming-Meetin s:
o Tuesday, May 23, 2017
Thursday, June 8, 2017
o Tuesday, June 27, 2017
City Council
Planning Commission
City Council
CounciLRepresentative
Tuesday, May 23, 2017 — Commissioner Freeman
Tuesday, June 27, 2017 —Commissioner Anthony
Planning Commission Minutes
May 11, 2017
Page 6 of 6
6:00 p.m./City Hall
7:30 p.m./City Hall
6:00 p.m./City Hall
X. Adjourn. Commissioner Quale, seconded by Commissioner Anthony, moved to
adjourn at 8:14 p.m. Carried 3 — 0.
Respectfully submitted,
Julie Hultman
Planning & Code Enforcement
Approved by the Planning Commission:
TPC'
3801 Thurston Avenue N, Suite 104Anoka, MN 55303Phone. 783,231,6840
TO: Eric Johnson
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: June 1, 2017
RE: Oak Park Heights — Comprehensive Plan 2018
TPC FILE: 226.10
At the June 8, 2017 meeting, the Planning Commission will discuss the following related
to the Comprehensive Plan 2018:
Issues
The Planning Commission, at their April 13, 2017 meeting reviewed the list of issues
that were identified as part of the Comprehensive Plan 2008 process. The City Council
reviewed the issues at their May 9, 2017 Work Session. The City is in the process of
gathering issues from residents and business owners through the Community Survey.
Community Survey
Please find attached the final Community Survey. The survey will be distributed at the
Party in the Park on June 8, 2017 and will be made available on the City website. From
the survey, the Issues Identification section of the plan can be developed.
Social Inventory
Please find attached the Introduction and Social Inventory sections of the draft
Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission should review and comment.
Pc: Julie Hultman
City of Oak Park Heights
iirniir ul nity Survey
The Oak Park Heights City Council would like your input, ideas
and thoughts to help it plan for the future.
I. Are you a: Resident ❑ Business Owner ❑ Both ❑ Visitor ❑
2. If you are a resident or business owner, how long have you lived or worked here?
Less than 5 years ❑ 6-10 years ❑ 11 years
3. Are you: Under 18 ❑ 18-24 ❑ 25-34 ❑ 35-45 ❑ 45 -54 ❑ 55+ ❑
4. Do you have children in your home who are under 18?
Yes ❑ No ❑ If so, how many children?
S. Are you a care provider for seniors in your home that are part of your family?
Yes ❑ No ❑ If so, how many seniors?
6. From your point of view is Oak Park Heights a better place to live and work today than it
was when you first moved or began to work here?
Yes ❑ No ❑ Unsure ❑
What might make you believe the City is better or worse that when you moved or begin to
work here?
7,. Please list in order the top three things you like about Oak Park Heights
(with #1 being the most important).
The St. Croix River , Engaged residents Other (please list):
City parks and trails Schools
The people Community events
_ Small town feel Retail businesses
Restaurants Location
S. In your opinion what is the general condition of our streets?
w
x
9. Understanding that most of the funds for our streets come from our property taxes, are
there any specific roads that you think need to be improved? If so, please list them below.
10. In your opinion what is the general condition of our parks and trails?
M� Below Average , Average Good Excellent
11. Are there any specific park or trail improvements that you would recommend?
If so, please list them below.
12. Rank the most important challenges that you see facing the City:
Least Important Most Important
•
Traffic congestion
1
2
3
4
5
•
Improving pedestrian and bicycle access and
1
2
3
4
5
safety
•
Increase retail and other type of businesses
1
2
3
4
5
•
Maintain and enhancing municipal services
1
2
3
4
5
(snow removal, permitting, refuse collection)
•
Improving mass transit (bus) service
1
2
3
4
5
•
Tax rates
1
2
3
4
5
•
Reducing crime and enhancing public safety by
1
2
3
4
5
adding investment in police and fire services
•
Quality development design and construction
1
2
3
4
5
•
Capital investments in community facilities,
1
2
3
4
5
parks
•
Storm water and other capital investments
•
Utility rates
1
2
3
4
•
Protecting the St Croix River and other bodies
1
2
3
4
5
of water
•
Loss of affordable housing
1
2
3
4
•
Other (please list)
1
2
3
4
13. Do you have any other input, ideas or thoughts you would like the Oak Park Heights' City
Council to consider as it plans for the future?
Thank you for taking your time to complete the survey. If you would prefer to fill out this
survey online, please visit the City website at:
www.citvofoakparkheights.com
If you would like a summary of the results of the survey, please provide your name and
mailing address, email address or phone number.
Name:
Mailing Address: Email:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The development of the Oak Park Heights Comprehensive Plan would not have been
possible without the hard work and dedication of the Comprehensive Plan Update
Committee. Their courtesy, cooperation, and contribution is greatly valued and
appreciated.
City Council. Mary McComber, Mayor
Mike Liljegren
Chuck Dougherty
Mike Runk
Mark Swenson
Planning Commission: Jim Kremer, Chair
Robin Anthony
Timothy Freeman
Beth Nelson
Parks Commission: Aaron Bye, Chair
Anthony Weyer
David Johnson
Jimmy Norton
Judith Chirhart
Staff/Consultants: Eric Johnson, City Administrator
Scott Richards, City Planner, TPC, Inc.
commehensive Plan 2018
��,'"City of Oak Park Heights
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pffle
Introduction and Community Background ......................................... 1
Social Inventory ................. 5
IssuesIdentification ..................................................................... 13
Mission Statement, Values and Community Goals .............................
Land Use
Physical Profile
Goals and Policies
Land Use Plan
Transportation
Physical Profile
Goals and Policies
Transportation Plan
Community Facilities
Physical Profile ................................
Goals and Policies
Community Facilities Plan
Administration
Goals and Policies
Administration Plan
Parks and Trails
Physical Profile ..................
Goals and Policies
Parks and Trails Plan
Neighborhood Planning Districts ....................................................
Planning District 1 ...
Planning District 2
Planning District 3
Planning District 4 ..............................
Planning District 5
Planning District 6
City of Oak Park Heights
TABLE OF CONTENTS
M.
Implementation...........................................................................
Appendix A — Anticipated Capital Improvement Program
Appendix B — Draft Proposed Parks and Trails Map
xn� M
Oak Park Heights Base Map .........................................................
Land Use Issues Map ..................................................................
Transportation Issues Map ............................................................
Community Facilities Issues Map ...................................................
Parks and Trails Issues Map .........................................................
Natural Environmental Features Map ..............................................
ExistingLand Use Map ................................................................
ZoningMap ...............................................................................
Future Annexation Plan Map .........................................................
Proposed Land Use Map ..............................................................
Roadway Jurisdiction Map ............................................................
Functional Classification Map ........................................................
TrafficVolumes Map ....................................................................
St. Croix River Crossing and Highway 36 Alternative Map ...................
TransitMap ...............................................................................
Transportation Plan Map ..............................................................
Traffic Analysis Zones Map ...........................................................
Community Facilities Map .............................................................
Existing Parks and Trails Map .......................................................
Washington County Park and Trail Map ..........................................
Planning Districts — Proposed Land Use Map ...................................
Planning District 1 Map ................................................................
Planning District 2 Map ................................................................
Planning District 3 Map ...............................................................
Planning District 4 Map ................................................................
Planning District 5 Map ..... ...................................... " ...................
Planning District 6 Map ................................................................
City of Oak Park Heights
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PopulationGrowth ......................................................................
1990-2004 Oak Park Heights Household Information ...................
Oak Park Heights 1990 and 2000 Household Type ............................
Oak Park Heights Population Growth by Age Group ...........................
1990 and 2000 Occupations ..........................................................
2005 Washington County Employment ...........................................
2000 Educational Attainment
1989 and 1999 Income
Oak Park Heights 1989 and 1999 Household Income .........................
ExistingLand Use .................................................. ....................
2007 Zoning Breakdown ...............................................................
Summary of Zoning District Classifications and Requirements .............
Household and Population Growth .................................................
Population, Households and Employment Projections ........................
Functional Classification of Streets .................................................
Minnesota Department of Transportation — Access Control ..................
Allocation of Forecasts to Traffic Analysis Zones ...............................
School District Enrollment
Existing Park Components ............................................................
=8
:)rehensive P
City of Oak Park Heights
The City of Oak Park Heights is located in Washington County, Minnesota, on the banks
of the lower St. Croix Scenic Riverway, which is the state border between Minnesota
and Wisconsin. Situated between the Cities of Stillwater and Bayport and 20 miles east
of the Minneapolis -St. Paul Metropolitan Area, the City's population has increased in the
last 10 years to almost 5,000 persons. The City is surrounded by the City of Stillwater
to the north, the City of Bayport to the southeast, Baytown Township to the south and
Lake Elmo/Stillwater Township to the west. The area was first platted in the late 1800s.
Oak Park Heights was incorporated as a village in 1938 and became a City by State
Statute in 1972. The City has been designated as a freestanding urban growth area (for
expansion of water and sewer) by the Metropolitan Council, the regional planning
agency in the area.
As a component of the St. Croix Valley, Oak Park Heights offers an attractive quality of
life with excellent educational, health care, and cultural facilities. Oak Park Heights is a
very diversified community, being home to a large commercial/retail area with many
national businesses and local enterprises, including the Highway 36 and Highway 5
commercial areas, Xcel Energy power generation plant, the Sunnyside Marina, and the
State of Minnesota Correctional Facility.
Housing in Oak Park Heights is both attractive and diverse and features starter homes,
bluff line river view homes, riverfront condominiums, and the Boutwells Landing senior
community. The City currently has over 100 acres of designated park space comprised
of five municipal park facilities. The parks consist of skating/hockey rinks and warming
houses, softball/baseball fields, picnic shelters, tennis courts, and general playground
equipment. The City has been awarded the "Tree City USA" award for the past 36
years.
The City operates under a "Plan A, Council Administrator" form of government,
consisting of a Mayor and a four -member Council. The Mayor and Council are elected
at large on a non-partisan basis, the Mayor for a four-year term and the Council for four-
year staggered terms. The Council is responsible for adopting policies affecting City
affairs, approving the annual budget, enacting ordinances and resolutions, and
providing policy direction for City departments and activities. The City Council currently
serves as the Economic Development Authority. The City has a Planning Commission
and a Parks Commission.
The Comprehensive Plan was last updated in 2008. The Metropolitan Land Planning
Act requires communities to review and update their Comprehensive Plans every 10
years, with the next update for Oak Park Heights due in December 2018. The City will
also be updating its utility plans, Comprehensive Park and Trail System Plan, and
amend its Zoning Ordinance and map, as necessary.
CornnrA 2018
City of Oak Park Heights Page 1
INTRODUCTION AND COM
ITY BACKGROUND
The City of Oak Park Heights Mayor, City Council, Planning Commission, and staff have
recognized the need for the update of the 2048 Comprehensive Plan as it is outdated
with the current growth and change over the past 10 years. The Planning Commission
and Parks Commission have been tasked with developing the draft Comprehensive
Plan and the Parks and Trails Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan document will be divided into specific sections, as found in
the Table of Contents, located in the beginning of this document. The process by which
the plan has been developed can be divided into five sections including issues
identification, inventory, policy planning, plan development, and implementation. Each
portion of the process will involve citizen participation and involvement of City officials.
Issues identification involves a Community Survey, and opinion gathering process to
determine a specific set of issues that must be addressed by the Comprehensive Plan.
The inventory consists of documenting the City's existing conditions at a particular point
in time. The results of gathering inventory information will provide a basis of text,
charts, and maps illustrating the most relevant collected information.
The next stage, policy planning, will determine future directives for Oak Park Heights
through the identification of goals and policies. The City will also develop its vision
statement at this time. The policies that are created will promote direction for the
subsequent planning sections of the document. The stage that follows consists of
development of the physical plans and programs which will lay out the City's proposed
land use, transportation, and community facilities plans. The final stage,
implementation, will involve a discussion on how the plan will be used and brought into
action. It will also provide the opportunity for the City to prioritize the plans and projects
that result from the planning efforts of the Comprehensive Plan.
On the following page, a base map of the City is represented. The map illustrates the
corporate boundaries of the City at the beginning of 2017. This will be used throughout
the plan as the basis for mapping the City of Oak Park Heights.
P ��z O 51V6 1 2018
i�i�' City of Oak Park Heights Page 2
z
INSERT BASE MAP HERE
2018
City of Oak Park Heightse re ire
Page 3
fAI, INVENTORY
The City of Oak Park Heights has recognized the need to develop a Comprehensive
Plan as a means of addressing and accommodating the community's future growth and
development. The purpose of the Social Inventory is to identify past trends, to
document the current conditions and to help identify issues for establishing a hierarchy
of planning policies. These policies will help the community address a broad base of
land use and development issues. With the help of a solid information and policy base,
decision makers can evaluate and prioritize proposals for the community while fulfilling
the City's long term goals and objectives.
Additional inventory information will be included in each of the individual sections of this
Plan. Population trends and projections will be included within the Land Use section.
Oak Park Heights as well as Washington County population projections will be
evaluated to show the overall growth, as well as detailing change by age groups.
POPULATION GROWTH
The statistics in the following table illustrate the trends in population within Oak Park
Heights, surrounding cities, and Washington County. Between 2000 and 2015, the City
grew at a rate of 20 percent, and Washington County grew at the same 20 percent rate.
The populations of the surrounding communities of Stillwater and Lake Elmo have been
growing at a similar pace since 2000, while the City of Bayport has seen a slower rate of
population growth at 14 percent.
The population increases in the City have been attributed to job growth, and a continued
increase in senior residential development in Oak Park Heights. The 2015 estimate and
the projections of population reflected in the chart below is from the Metropolitan
Council. The Metropolitan Council numbers are generally regarded as being accurate
population estimates during non -census years.
City of Oak Park
Heights
In looking at the data for Oak Park Heights since 2000, the number of households has
steadily increased, while the number of persons per household has slightly declined.
This is likely reflective of an increase in persons age 65 and over. It also reflects the
natural trend of people having fewer children and the dynamics of the modern family.
The 2015 estimate of population and households reflected below is from the
Metropolitan Council.
.�,ulair
Households—Persons
fil
Source: U.S. Census
001 2010 Metropolitan Council 2015
The 2000 and 2010 Census provides a demographic profile of the households in Oak
Park Heights as illustrated in the following table. As the table indicates, the households
of married families with children decreased significantly from 21.7 percent in 2000 to
14.4 percent in 2010. The number of unmarred families with children also decreased.
The percentage of households where people lived alone or where in non -family
households increased.
City of Heights Page 6
SOCIAL INVENTORY
The following table illustrates Oak Park Heights' population by age group. The table
utilizes information from the 2000 and 2010 Census as well as a projection for 2015
from the Metropolitan Council. In 2000, the labor force (ages 20-59) represented the
largest age group, at 59.4 percent. In 2000, this age group was again the City's
largest, accounting for 52.1 percent of the total population. By 2015, that age group had
fallen to 49.9 percent of the population. At 24.2 percent in 2000, the next largest age
group for this Census year was school age children. By 2000, this population group had
fallen to 19.6 percent and 16.3 percent in 2015. Population growth over these 15 years
has been in the retired persons category with the persons over 80 years old increasing
from 4.0 percent in 2000 to 17.2 percent in 2015. Changes in the demographics of the
City and surrounding area will have significant planning implications for the future.
�c� re sive 1 2 Z
City of Oak Park Heights Page 7
��
I SOCIAL INVENTORY
Information from the 2010 and 2014 Census regarding employment demographics for
Oak Park Heights and Washington County are depicted in the table below. The majority
of those employed in the City both in 2000 and 2014 were in retail. The second largest
category was health care. Employment demographics for Washington County follow a
similar pattern with health care being the largest and retail second. The numbers
indicate the recovery of certain industries following the economic downturn.
I s,7
��� Com rehensive Plate 2018
City of Oak Park Heights Page 8
�1
�Food
i I
2014=116-----
S, r�
Accommodation and
Services
Administrative
Agricultural, Forestry,Fishing
and Hunting
�
# 4
s
��� Com rehensive Plate 2018
City of Oak Park Heights Page 8
The following table represents the overall employment numbers for Oak Park Heights,
projections to 2040 and the percent of change from one year to the next.
2018
i o is
Page 9
SOCLAL INVENTORY
The following table illustrates education levels for residents ages 25 and over in 2010
and 2015. As indicated for 2010, 93.1 percent of the population has attained a high
school diploma or higher degree, while 31.1 percent of the population has attained a
Bachelor's degree or higher. For 2015, 94.5 percent of the population has obtained a
high school degree or higher and 33.5 percent have been awarded a Bachelor's degree
or higher.
"o re sive 1 2 1
City of Oak Park Heights
Page 10
SOCIAL L f "f'
I R1
The 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2015 data regarding income for Oak Park Heights and
Washington County is illustrated in the following tables. The first column indicates per
capita income; the second, median family income; third, percent below poverty level and
forth, individuals below poverty level. The per capita income and median family income
levels for the City are below that of Washington County. A higher percentage of people
are below the poverty level in Oak Park Heights than Washington County. Oak Park
Heights has experienced a decrease in median family income from 2010 to 2015.
Cnm-nr,- sive FlAg 2018
City of Oak Park HeightS Page 11