HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-14-2008 Planning Commission Meeting Packet 4 ...
w, FILE
• CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS COPY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Thursday, August 14, 2008
7:00 p.m. — City Hall Council Chambers
I. Call to Order:
II. Agenda Approval:
Ill. Approve Minutes of July 10, 2008: (1)
IV. Department / Commission Liaison / Other Reports:
V. Visitors /Public Comment: This is an opportunity for the public to address the Commission
with questions or concerns regarding items not on the agenda.
Please limit comments to three minutes.
VI. Public Hearings:
A. Continued to September 11, 2008 - Xcel Energy, Inc. Conditional Use Permit
Amendment to allow vertical expansion of the A.S. King Fly Ash Disposal site,
• known as the Moelter Fly Ash Site, located S. of Hwy. 36 and W. of Beach Rd. (2)
B. Oakgreen Village Planned Unit Development Amendment of Lots 1 -3, Block 4,
Lots 1 -8, Block 5 and Lots 1 -4, Block 6 of Oakgreen Village and Subdivision of
platted property to Oakgreen Ponds, located S. of Upper 58 St. and E. of Nova
Scotia Ave. (3)
C. Oakgreen Village Planned Unit Development: Carriage House Cooperative
Concept Plan to allow construction of a senior housing cooperative,
located W. of Oakgreen Ave. and E. of Nova Scotia Ave. (4)
r
i
VII. New Business:
VIII. Old Business:
IX. Informational:
A. Sign Ordinance Update
B. Upcoming Meetings
September 11, 2008: 7:00 p.m. - Regular Planning Commission Meeting
(Council Chambers)
C. Council Representative August — Commissioner Runk
• September— Commissioner LeRoux
X. Adjournment.
ENCLOSURE �
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS
• PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Call to Order:
Vice -Chair Wasescha called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners LeRoux,
Powell and Runk; City Administrator Johnson, City Planner Richards and Commission Liaison
Abrahamson. Absent: Chair Liljegren.
Agenda Approval:
Commissioner Runk, seconded by Commissioner LeRoux, moved to approve the Agenda as
presented. Carried 4 — 0.
Approve Minutes of June 12, 2008:
Commissioner Runk, seconded by Commissioner LeRoux, moved to approve the Minutes as
presented. Carried 4 — 0.
Department /Commission Liaison & Other Reports: None.
Visitors /Public Comment: None.
Public Hearings:
A. Raduenz Dealership Properties LLC, doing business as Stillwater Motor Company:
Conditional Use Permit Amendment — Seeking amendments to July 26, 2005
Conditional Use Permit conditions pertaining to automotive dealerships located at 5900
Stillwater Blvd. N.
City Planner Richards reviewed the June 27, 2008 planning report to the request for an
amended conditional use permit related to extending the timelines for construction
improvements at Stillwater Motor Company. Richards reviewed the conditions of the earlier
conditional use permit approval and noted one amendment recommendation to those
conditions for the Commission's consideration should they elect to move the matter forward
to the City Council with a recommendation for request approval.
Vice -Chair Wasescha opened the public hearing and invited public comment.
There being no visitors to the public hearing, Commissioner Runk, seconded by Commissioner
• LeRoux, moved to close the public hearing. Carried 4 — 0.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2008
Page 2 of 6
•
Commissioner Runk, seconded by Commissioner LeRoux, moved to recommend City Council
approval, subject to the conditions of the approved July 26, 2005 Conditional Use Permit with
Condition 1 amended as per June 27, 2008 planning report recommendation, specifically:
1. All parking setbacks, curbs and stormwater drainage systems, in the northeast and
southeast corners of the site, shall be constructed and brought into compliance with the
Zoning Ordinance regulations no later than August 31, 2013.
2. Revisions to the landscape plan showing shade trees along 59 Street, the frontage to Hwy
5, and in appropriate places around the parking area are approved in concept. Final
revisions to the landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist.
3. The grading, drainage and utility plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the
City Engineer and the Browns Creek Watershed District.
4. Customer, employee, and display parking shall be delineated on the site plan and all
customer parking stalls shall be appropriately signed.
5. Detailed plans and completely labeled building elevations shall be resubmitted to the City
• to show all building materials and colors. A materials board shall be submitted forthe City
Council review.
6. A detailed photometric plan showing lot perimeter and street centerline foot candles
compliant to City Code shall be provided. All lighting shall be installed or retrofitted to be
in compliance with the lighting standards of the Zoning Ordinance.
7. An approval of the sign variance allowing a total of ten wall signs and eliminating the two
32 square foot "showroom" signs as proposed on the building elevations. The applicant
shall provide an accurate rendering of all wall signs for review and approval of the City
Council. The City Council approves the overall number and square footage of allowable
wall signage for the project.
8. The applicant shall remove the large pylon sign at the northwest corner of the site and all
checkered banners prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the remodeled
building.
9. The materials utilized for the proposed trash enclosure shall be the same materials used on
the building.
10. All automobile repair activities shall be limited to within the principal structure and the
• doors to the service bays shall be kept closed except when vehicles are being moved in or
out of service areas.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2008
Page 3 of 6
• 11. There shall be no exterior storage of automobile parts or related items on the site. All
parts storage shall be internal to the building. The applicant shall provide a site plan
indicating the location of the fenced car storage area and fencing details subject to review
and approval of City staff. Any cars under repair that are to be stored outline of the
building shall be parked within said fenced car storage area.
12. All noise created from operations on the site shall be in conformance with Section
401.15.B.11 of the Zoning Ordinance.
13. The outdoor paging system shall be replaced with a personal communication system that is
non - audible beyond the property lines.
14. The applicant shall receive and retain, if required, a Hazardous Waste Generators License
from Washington County for the Stillwater Motors operation.
Carried 4 — 0.
B. Xcel Energy, Inc. Conditional Use Permit Amendment to allow vertical expansion of the
A.S. King Fly Ash Disposal Site, known as the Moelter Fly Ash Site, located S. of Hwy. 36
and W. of Beach Rd.
• City Planner Richards reviewed the July 3, 2008 planning report to the request for an amended
conditional use permit to allow modification to its existing conditional use permit approvals
allowing an extension of the 2010 site closing condition. Richards noted that the request stems
from new law placing a moratorium on permitting new landfill until such time the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency has conducted rule making to address the issue.
Richards provided an issue analysis and discussed the same including the visual impact of the
proposed expansion. He noted staff concerns as to the landscape plan information and the
MPCA's acceptance of what is proposed as well as concern with the placement of additional fill
upon and near the existing utility lines in the area in regard and access to the service lines.
Richards noted that staff would like to have more information on the issues of concern and for
Xcel Energy to hold a community meeting for the affected neighboring community as to their
plans and has recommended that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing to their
next meeting to allow time for staff to work with Xcel Energy and for Xcel Energy to hold a
community meeting.
Commission discussion ensued as to the new law regarding new landfill permitting and what
options were available to Xcel Energy should the Commission opt to recommend an approval
or a denial recommendation to the City Council in light of the law binding their operations.
• Vice -Chair Wasescha opened the public hearing and invited public comment.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2008
Page 4 of 6
•
Brian Jones introduced himself as a resident of 1533158 St. N. and the owner of a rental
property at 15357 58 St. N, both in the affected area of the Xcel Energy's fly ash operation.
Mr. Jones stated that his wife, Kari, has been sick since the project commenced and provided
the Commission with written comment from her. Mr. Jones stated that that the operation at
the site is dirty, noisy and that the vibrations are awful. He is opposed to approving the
request and noted that if it is approved he wants his properties bought out at a decent price.
Pam Patrick of 15365 58 St. N. noted that because she is not as close to the site as Mr. Jones
the impact is not as strong, adding that this year has been terrible for their neighborhood, with
the winds and the density of the dust blowing from the site. She stated that she too would like
to see the operations cease at the site but also understands the situation Xcel has been placed
in. She would like to see something cover the top of the fill site the 16 -hours of each day that
ash is not being hauled into the site to help reduce dust and expressed her hope that a
reasonable consensus could be found that worked for everyone in the event the operations
must continue.
City Planner Richards noted that the 2006 approvals to Xcel Energy required them to
implement adequate dust control at all time and that an automatic sprinkler system was to
have been installed to for wetting of the site.
• Bob Hepna introduced himself as an East Oaks property owner and stated that he understood
that more emission controls were put into place resulting in more contaminates in the ash
material and sought to learn what kind of environmental study had been done to control the
contaminates, the fly as dust and the site in general.
Kim Graffunder of 5866 Penrose Ave. N. stated that he understood the situation Xcel Energy
has been placed in and noted that it is important to consider how well they have lived up to
their existing commitments to consider how well they will live up to future commitments to
the site. He stated that the neighborhood is very dirty due to the dust created by the fly ash
operation and expressed concern about dust being left behind from the truck hauling and
would like to see more stringent rules regarding covering the site and the trucks while in
transit.
Commissioner Runk acknowledged and made part of the official record written comment from
resident Russ Baribeau of 5900 Oxboro Ave. N. expressing his opposition to approval of the
request. Also acknowledge and made part of official records was written comment from
residents and business owners Judy & Chuck Dougherty of 15330 58 St. N., who were unable
to attend the meeting due to an out of town obligation, noting a number of questions they
have and indicating their desire to see the matter continued or tabled so that they may actively
participate in the discussion.
• Vice -Chair Wasescha asked if anyone from Xcel Energy would like to address the Commission.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2008
Page 5 of 6
•
Darrell Knutson addressed the Commission on behalf of Xcel Energy, noting that they are
responding to changes at the A.S. King Plant as part of the larger MERP project, including
operating the plant with coal and meeting pollution standards required for a newly constructed
facility.
Responding to visitor discussion, Mr. Knutson noted that there is more ash material created by
the new process; however the actual chemistry of the material is very similar to the ash
created by the old process and that the ash volume presently being created comes from the
lime introduced to the ash material.
He acknowledged resident comments as to the dust this year and discussed Xcel's transition to
determine the appropriate mix of lime to the ash material and how that related to their
obligations under MPCA permit approvals. He noted that the lime is very dusty and
acknowledge having received calls from City Administrator Johnson regarding the dust and his
efforts to address the situation as quickly as possible. Mr. Knutson stated that he believes
they have a better handle on the dust situation and the lime ratio balance than earlier in the
year.
He also acknowledged having received calls from City Administrator Johnson and Mayor
• Beaudet as to the vibrations from the site operation, noting that the operation method has
been changed and hopefully has resolved the problem.
Mr. Knutson discussed the management of the ash wetting and the condition of their having
automatic sprinkling at the site. He stated that they currently do a lot of truck watering during
non - freezing weather and always have a water truck in operation when trucks are hauling. He
stated that the watering and addition of lime to the ash results in a quick dry time and leaves
the ash settled with a hard crust on top, which should greatly reduce dust blowing. He stated
he felt dust was being managed fairly well, adding that he would take a closer look at it.
Mr. Knutson expressed that Xcel had no opposition with the delay proposed by the planning
report to allow staff and applicant time to work together on issues and for Xcel to have a
community meeting as to the project. He added that he is optimistic that in time, useful uses
will be found for the ash but that presently Minnesota's technology for ash use limits them to
land- filling it. He stated that ultimately, Xcel is looking to find what it takes to be reasonable
neighbors and to be able to continue to run the plant in a way that makes sense.
On the matter of the dust from trucks hauling, Mr. Knutson stated that hauling is currently
contracted. MERP requires the trucks to be covered both coming and going from the site.
Haulers are aware of the requirement and if it is not happening, Xcel wants to hear when it is
observed not occurring so that they can respond as quickly as possible to correct the situation.
•
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2008
Page 6 of 6
Brief discussion ensued as to some uses of waste material such as the slag, which is now 100%
utilized and no longer land- filled, how much coal is needed per hour to operate the plant and
the percentage ash created by the coal, the anticipated time needed to continue operations
while the MPCA works through their discussion and release the moratorium in place and what
Xcel's options are should their request for amendment not be granted.
Commissioner Runk, seconded by Vice -Chair Wasescha, moved to continue the public hearing
to August 14, 2008. Carried 4 — 0.
City Administrator Johnson invited Xcel Energy to use the City Hall for their community meeting
should they care to do so.
New Business: None.
Old Business: None.
Informational:
A. Upcoming Meetings
July 15, 2008 4:30 p.m. — City Hall Citizen's Advisory Committee
(City Hall — Rear Conference Room)
6:30 p.m. — City Council Worksession with City Hall
Citizen's Advisory Committee
(City Hall — Rear Conference Room)
August 14, 2008 7:00 p.m. - Regular Planning Commission Meeting
(Council Chambers)
B. Council Representative July —Vice Chair Wasescha
August — Commissioner Runk
Adjournment:
Commissioner Powell, seconded by Commissioner Runk, moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:58
p.m. Carried 4-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Julie A. Hultman
Planning & Code Enforcement Officer
Approved by the Planning Commission:
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
ell 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 783.231.2555 Facsimile: 783.231.2561 planners @nacplanning.com
ENCLOSURE Z
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eric Johnson
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: August 6, 2008
RE: Oak Park Heights — Revisions to MPCA Permit and Amended
Conditional Use Permit for Expansion of the A.S. King Ash
Disposal Facility
FILE NO: 798.02 — 08.06
As you are aware, Xcel Energy submitted a request for a 120 day extension of the
• development timeline for the amended conditional use permit for expansions to the A.S.
King Ash Disposal Facility. The Planning Commission is currently in the process of
considering the request and the public hearing for the conditional use permit remains
open.
The application for the conditional use permit was received on June 6, 2008 and
deemed complete when the additional materials, as requested by the City, were
submitted by Xcel on June 25, 2008. On June 19, 2008, a letter was sent to Manuel
Castillo of Xcel increasing the 60 day review period of the City to 120 days. As a result,
the pertinent development timeline dates are as follows:
June 6, 2008: Application Submitted
June 19, 2008: Letter Sent to Xcel Extending Timeline to 120 Days
June 25, 2008: Application Deemed Complete
October 22, 2008: End of 120 Day Development Timeline
The City has until October 22, 2008 to make a final decision on the conditional use
permit for Xcel Energy. The letter received from Xcel requests to extend the timeline an
additional 120 days from October 22, 2008.
The City Council will consider this request from Xcel at their meeting on August 12,
2008. The City Council can determine whether to make a decision on the conditional
use permit by October 22, 2008, or accept the additional extension time offered by Xcel.
•
t
Xcel Ener
9'Y sm
414 Nicollet Mall .
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 -1993
August 1, 2008
Eric A. Johnson
City Administrator
14168 Oak Park Blvd N.
P.O. Box 2007
Oak Park Heights, MN 55082
Re: Xcel Energy's King Ash Disposal Facility
Request for Revised Conditional Use Permit
Dear Mr Johnson:
Xcel Energy requests a 120 day extension on the City's decision to issue a revised CUP
for the subject facility. Xcel 'Energy feels the time is necessary to properly address the
sewer line re -route and solid waste permit issues stemming from the sewer line re- •
route. The additional time is also needed to evaluate, develop and implement
responses to the issues raised at the 7/31/08 public meeting Xcel Energy hosted. If
you have any questions please call my cell phone, (612) 518 -6081.
Sincerely
Chuck D nkers
Project Manager
ES record Center
King Plant File
I
Memorandum it Bones
2335 Highway 36 W
To: Dennis Postler Project: Xcel Energy Fly Ash Site Date: 07.22.2008 St. Paul, MN 55113
From: Kim Hayden Client: City of Oak Park Heights Tel 651- 636 -4600
Fax 651 - 636 -1311
Re: Sanitary Sewer Options File No: 000055 - 08000 -1 www.bonestroo.com
We have reviewed several options for the existing trunk sanitary sewer under the Xcel Energy
Fly Ash Site. This memo provides details on the various options and their related costs.
Option 1 includes the installation of gravity sanitary sewer around the north side of the existing
fly ash pit and force main from the south. Construction would include a 15 hp lift station to
pump flows from the south half of the City. Existing sanitary sewer and structures in the fly ash
pit would be abandoned. This option would provide the City with a new, reliable trunk sewer
line, but would also add the maintenance of a lift station. Preliminary layout of this option can
be seen in Figure 1 (attached).
Option 2 is for tunneling a new sewer line through the fly ash pit parallel to the existing pipe.
The advantage would be that a casing pipe would be installed around the carrier pipe, allowing
for easier repairs in the future if need be. The disadvantages are that jacking pits would be
installed at each end of the tunneling, and possibly interim manhole locations, which would
• disturb a large area of the existing fill and lining of the fly ash pit. Also, means and methods of
tunneling through the sedimented fly ash would need to be explored further.
Option 3 includes costs for installation of a cured -in -place pipe lining in the existing trunk
sewer lines. CIPP lining is designed to act as stand -alone pipe. Lining the sewer does not
necessarily provide additional strength, but if the existing RCP sewer were to fail, the pipe
would gain the strength of the underlying CIPP. Pipe lining also slightly decreases the capacity
of the pipe, but CIPP lining would provide for a smoother flow than the existing RCP. Because
CIPP lining is typically used for pipe repair and rehabilitation, more research would be necessary
to determine the exact effect of lining a pipe that is currently in good condition if this option
P was chosen.
--
b`'� J #5 A summary of construction costs for review is as follows:
C M Sewer Options and Estimated Costs
CONSTRUCTION COST + 25% ENGINEERING & PLANNING
—Op tion 1 $333,200.00 - -- $416,500.00
Part 1 — Gravity Sewer $153,100.00
Part 2 — Force Main /Lift Station $180,100.00
Option 2 $594,500.00 $743,125.00
Option 3 $255,000.00 $318,750.00
Option 4 $8,445.00 $10,556.00
•
V
The City also has the option of doing nothing at this point. Some of the existing pipe has had
40 to 70 feet of fill on it for almost twenty years. From soil borings taken by Braun Intertec in
1984, the fly ash pit has limestone bedrock under the fill so long term settlement is not likely to
occur. If the City chooses not to proceed with an alternate sewer plan at this time, televising
and inspection of the existing sanitary and storm sewer should be completed to document the
existing conditions. Costs for this are shown above under Option 4. Additionally, escrow
money should be provided to the City by Xcel to cover the cost of the potential future sewer
installation.
Existing trunk storm sewer also runs under the existing fly ash fill site, and under or adjacent to
the proposed additional fill area. Although relocating the storm sewer is not being analyzed or
recommended at this time, the City should have an agreement with Xcel Energy whereby they
would be responsible for any future pipe failure attributable to the additional fill loading.
Attachments:
Cost Estimates
Figure 1 — Gravity Sewer, Lift Station and Force Main
•
Page 2 of 2
• XCEL FLY ASH SITE - COST ESTIMATE
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price
OPTION 1
PART 1 - GRAVITY SANITARY SEWER:
1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $12,000.00 $12,000.00
2 CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLE EA 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00
3 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE OVER EXISTING PIPE EA 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00
4 24" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR 26 LF 1,800 $50.00 $90,000.00
5 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MH, 8' DEEP, INCL R- 1642 -B EA 3 $1,800.00 $5,400.00
CSTG AND CONC ADJ RINGS
6 4' DIAMETER SANITARY MANHOLE OVERDEPTH LF 100 $100.00 $10,000.00
7 IMPROVED PIPE FOUNDATION, PER 6" INCREMENT LF 1,800 $2.00 $3,600.00
8 ABANDON SANITARY SEWER PIPE LF 2,700 $8.00 $21,600.00
9 SEEDING, INCL SEED, FERTILIZER, MULCH AND DISK AC 2.5 $2,000.00 $5,000.00
ANCHOR
• TOTAL PART 1 $153,100:00
PART 2 - FORCE MAIN AND LIFT STATION:
10 LIFT STATION STRUCTURE LS 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00
11 6" DIP FORCEMAIN LF 1,100 $25.00 $27,500.00
12 CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLE EA 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
13 SEEDING, INCL SEED, FERTILIZER, MULCH AND DISK AC 0.8 $2,000.00 $1,600.00
ANCHOR
TOTAL PART 2 $180,100.00
TOTAL OPTION 1 $333,200.00
OPTION 2 PIPE TUNNELING:
14 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00
15 CONSTRUCT AND REMOVE JACKING PITS EA 2 $30,000.00 $60,000.00
16 24" PVC SANITARY SEWER PIPE, IN CASING LF 1,250 $60.00 $75,000.00
17 40" STEEL CASING PIPE, JACKED LF 1,250 $350.00 $437,500.00
• 18 SEEDING, INCL SEED, FERTILIZER, MULCH AND DISK AC 1.0 $2,000.00 $2,000.00
ANCHOR
No. Item Units Qty EE Unit Price EE Total Price •
TOTAL OPTION 2 $594,500.00
OPTION 3 PIPE LINING:
19 CITY SEWER CLEANING LF 2,500 $2.00 $5,000.00
20 SANITARY SEWER, CURED -IN -PLACE LINING LF 2,500 $100.00 $250,000.00
TOTAL OPTION 3 $255,000.00
OPTION 4 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS:
21 CLOSED CIRCUIT TV INSPECTION - SANITARY SEWER LF 2,830 $1.50 $4,245.00
22 CLOSED CIRCUIT TV INSPECTION - STORM SEWER LF 1,000 $2.00 $2,000.00
23 VISUAL INSPECTION OF STORM SEWER LF 1,100 $2.00 $2,200.00
TOTAL OPTION 4 $8,445.00
•
TOTAL OPTION 1 - GRAVITY AND FORCE MAIN $333,200.00
TOTAL OPTION 2 - TUNNELING $594,500.00
TOTAL OPTION 3 - LINING $255,000.00
TOTAL OPTION 4 - ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS $8,445.00
\
I
•� .p.� ��d 1 �`. '� t d.�'�g �b'+§ � �Y '�: i � 'c x � I i \ � t ��, i '� Ott Y Ft�t k� � � •
' qd'' '��, d..,ry�� r s. . �, 5 y G I a 4 � ry F � t 4" .7 n � ro � a �+. �' ^}�. rx �k ?R i� ••
. P
i tI
s ♦ �� I �� � ( 1 `l. t � t F v } t`� r
R,
y Q !
6
�
i Gt r � 1 1 ?
tl
�t
i
J \ F
, � 1 �.g it. t ��r t � e''. r � `ter .-x- °�� i _ � {1 77 •
z I � I � '_ I + � � � ,1 ■
f
i.. NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 plan ners @nacplanning.com
ENCLOSURE 3
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Eric Johnson
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: August 6, 2008
RE: Oak Park Heights — Oakgreen Village / Oakgreen Ponds —
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment, Preliminary
And Final Plat
FILE NO: 798.02 — 08.08
BACKGROUND
• Tim Nolde, representing Anchobaypro, Inc., has made application for a PUD
amendment for Phase 1 of the Oakgreen Village development west of Oakgreen
Avenue and north of 58 Street. The area under application consists of a portion of
Phase 1 that has previously been approved for PUD general plan and is part of the
Oakgreen Village plat. This area, which is directly north of the pond, was approved for
15 attached townhome units in three buildings. The applicant now proposes one three -
unit building and two two -unit buildings for a total of seven dwellings. The buildings
would be one story and would be of the same design as the units approved for this
development by the City Council on May 27, 2008.
The Oakgreen Village PUD was approved by the City Council on May 23, 2006. The
approvals included 67 residential townhome units as part of Phase 1. In 2007, John
and Cory Arkell, representing Nova Scotia Villas, received approval to construct a.
different design for 31 of the 67 units, including the three buildings in the subject area of
the current application. The City Council had approved that amendment on August 14,
2007.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit 1: Existing Conditions
Exhibit 2: Oakgreen Village Concept and General Plan 2006
Exhibit 3: Oakgreen Ponds
Exhibit 4: Landscape Plan
Exhibit 5: Utility Plan
Exhibit 6: Grading Plan
Exhibit 7: Lighting Plan
Exhibit 8: Elevations — Three -Unit Buildings
Exhibit 9: Floor Plans — Three -Unit Buildings
Exhibit 10: Elevations — Two -Unit Buildings
Exhibit 11: Floor Plans — Two -Unit Buildings
Exhibit 12: Project Narrative -Tim Nolde
ISSUES ANALYSIS
The applicant has provided the following narrative:
"During the marketing of our current project we have determined a significant demand
exists for various types of senior housing. Previously we had requested and received
approval for changing the unit types of the Oakgreen Village Plan from four units to three
units. Once again, due to demand and interest we are respectfully requesting a change to
the type of units located at Oakgreen Village, as found on the following documentation.
The plan is to change the two story units north of the pond to single level townhomes.
With the introduction of two 2 -unit buildings and one 3 -unit building, the proposed
change reduces the overall unit count of Oakgreen Village by eight units.
With this proposed change, the only requirement would be that related changing the legal
description of the units. The existing streets, utilities, and grades would be unaffected,
allowing for service to the proposed units.
With this submittal are requesting a PUD Amendment and Subdivision of the platted
property."
Comprehensive Plan. A Comprehensive Plan amendment was approved in July
2005, removing the Central Business District (CBD) designation and replacing it with a
commercial land use designation. The proposed project complies with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Zoning. This property has been designated as B -4, Limited Business which
accommodates residential development as a conditional use. As such, the underlying
base zoning district will be B -4, Limited Business with a PUD overlay but R -3, Multiple
Family District density, setback, and height standards will apply. The B -4, Limited
Business District lists two family, townhomes and multiple family dwellings as a
conditional use.
Subdivision. The applicant has provided an Oakgreen Ponds preliminary/final plat
that provides for three blocks, seven lots, and one outlot. It will accommodate the two-
unit buildings and the three -unit building. The preliminary and final plat are subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney.
2
I
Park Dedication. Park dedication has been satisfied for this area. The applicant paid
the maximum percentage (14 %) of equivalent cash value as part of the original
approvals in 2006.
Project Density. Section 401.15.C.3 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes the density
thresholds for residential properties. Two family dwellings require 6,000 square feet of
lot area per dwelling unit. Townhomes require 4,000 square feet of lot area per dwelling
unit. Multiple family units with one or two bedrooms require 2,500 square feet per
dwelling unit.
The total development area for Phase 1 to include Oakgreen Village and the Oakgreen
Ponds as well as Phase 2 to include the Carriage House Cooperative is 781,699 square
feet. The resulting density calculations are as follows:
Twinhomes: 4 X 6,000 square feet = 24,000 square feet
Townhomes: 53 X 4,000 square feet = 212,000 square feet
Multiple Family: 98 X 2,500 square feet = 245,000 square feet
481,000 square feet
The development requires at least 481,000 square feet of land area. The project is well
within density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
. Proposed Street/Access. The private street access for this portion of the Oakgreen
Village project will not change. The roadway is constructed and includes six off - street
parking stalls. The westerly stalls will be replaced and moved to the east.
Trails /Sidewalks. The master plan for the Carriage Home development provides
details on the overall trail plan for the area. Staff had suggested that a trail be installed
on the north side of 58 Street between Nova Scotia Avenue and Oakgreen Avenue
North. No sidewalks are planned at the front of the housing units of the development.
At the intersection of Oakgreen Avenue and 58 Street, the trail and crosswalk should
access 58 Street to the south and not access Oakgreen as shown on the plans.
Private Park. As part of the Carriage Home development, the private park area would
be eliminated.
Setbacks. Within a PUD, the residential (R -3) setback requirements are applied only
to the perimeter of the project. The R -3 District specifies setback requirements as
follows: 30 feet front yard, 30 feet rear yard, and 20 feet side yard. If the lot is on a
corner, not less than 30 feet from a lot line is required for side yards. The PUD section
of the Zoning Ordinance specifies that buildings should be located at least 20 feet from
the back of .a curb line from roadways as part of the internal street pattern. Additionally,
the ordinance specifies that no building within the project shall be nearer to another
building by one -half the sum of the building heights of the two buildings.
3
Not all of the units will conform to the 20 foot setback requirement from the internal
street network. The buildings will need to be moved so that the structures are at least
20 feet from Upper 58 Street.
Tree Preservation /Landscaping. The applicant has provided information on existing
tree coverage on the Existing Conditions Map (Exhibit 1). It appears as no existing
trees will need to be removed as part of this aspect of the development. Plans were
also submitted for general landscaping in the area around the proposed units and for
foundation plantings. The plans shall be subject to the final approval of the City
Arborist.
Grading and Drainage. Detailed grading and drainage plans have been provided as
part of the amended PUD submittals. The City Engineer shall review and approve all of
the grading and drainage plans. Stormwater plans are also subject to review and
approval of the applicable watershed authority.
Utilities. A detailed utility plan has been submitted. The final utility plan is subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer and Public Works Director. All of the utilities
within the development shall be private but built to City specifications.
Lighting. A lighting plan has been provided that includes street light fixture
specifications and locations within the private street network. The light fixture is
identical to what has been used in McKean Square. It is a full cut -off fixture with a flat
lens. The street lights will be maintained and all electricity costs will be paid for by the
developer /homeowners association.
No light fixtures are shown on the proposed buildings. If lights are proposed, they shall
be illustrated on the building plans subject to approval of City staff.
Signage. No additional signage has been proposed other than the monument signs on
each of the two entrances from Nova Scotia Avenue.
Architectural Appearance. The application submittals include elevation diagrams and
floor plans for the three -unit and two -unit buildings. All of the dwellings will be three
bedrooms. The building design is identical to what was approved by the City Council on
May 27, 2008 as part of the redesign of the buildings north of the subject area. Staff is
favorable to the design and proposed building materials. The Planning Commission
and City Council should comment further on the building materials and appearance as
part of this review.
Development Contract. The applicant will be required to enter into an amended
development contract with the City should approval of the general plan of development
be granted. As part of the contract, the provisions for street and utility construction, as
well as payment for area changes, would be included.
•
4
RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION
Based upon the preceding information, City staff recommends the application for a PUD
amendment for Phase 1 of the Oakgreen Village development and a preliminary and
final plat to include one three -unit building and two two -unit buildings to be referred to as
Oakgreen Ponds. The application is recommended with the following conditions:
1. The preliminary/final plat for Oakgreen Ponds is subject to review and approval
by the City Engineer and City Attorney.
2. All easements, as required by the City Engineer and City Attorney, shall be
dedicated to the City as part of the subdivision approvals.
3. Sidewalks /trails and timing for construction are subject to review and approval by
the Parks Commission, City Council, and City Engineer. The trail and crosswalk
at 58 Street and Oakgreen Avenue shall cross 58 Street to the south.
4. The tree preservation and landscape plans are subject to review and approval of
the City Arborist.
5. Grading, drainage, erosion control, and utility plans are subject to review and
approval by the City Engineer. Stormwater plans are also subject to review and
approval by the applicable watershed authority.
6. The buildings shall comply with the requirement for a 20 foot setback from the
private street. The site plan shall be revised subject to City Council approval.
7. The site plan does not include light fixtures on buildings. If lights are proposed
on the buildings, they must be illustrated on the building plans, details submitted,
and the photometric plan must be revised to include them subject to City staff
review and approval.
8. The Planning Commission and City Council should review and approve the final
design and materials for the structures.
9. The Fire Marshal and Police Chief should review the plans and determine the
accessibility of emergency vehicles throughout the development.
10. The applicant shall supply the homeowners association documents as required
by the City Attorney for review and approval.
11. The applicant shall provide all association duties and maintenance until the
completion of Phase 1. The homeowners association shall be organized with a
funded reserve provided by the developer. The details of the reserve amount
shall be outlined in the development agreement.
5
i 12. The applicant shall be required to disclose the entire development plans to
include the Carriage House Cooperative for all Phase 1 buyers. Disclosure is
also required for modification of all buyers within the development that the
roadway and wetlands are to be private and will not be accepted as public in the
future by the City.
13. The applicant is required to enter into an amended development agreement with
the City in a form acceptable to the City, and subject to review and approval of
the City Attorney.
i
6
� z Wow
�
Q
<r•
w o
p w _a
a a
4Q yy U
R H m ¢ K
P v �
a _ N N - N ;
_ �1
^^+ a w w w w w w w
3
m o
qpX Y
,Tye
H.bUON x f N 31
r ,
ax 'I
. � y
m
may,
o o ¢
m ,
r I
✓ -L � ' OJ t I0
k I I oww
I
I
I `
I ;
I
I r I I I
I I I I
I _ �
r I I
I r
I � ,
t i
I ,
9
FZ L t�oN A IA V WlojS d 0 O
"n low
I
n
I
.w.
! �/F
i r {
az
u oa CV 0 0
W F O 1+7
Vs
® o � ►-4
m
W
.2
x w o
,3 W
E
ck 1m n
N
• r H O 11 N
ca PT4
IL IL
o + m
vd
` 4 r aC
w ti 2 ! 0 0 i m • F'1+4 cm
F tl r y a a o
p W W Q 4 L U
Of U 3 a a M a, q
p p N w . C
v ° y u X ZZ
� 2 J G ID w �: C V+ W
3 w D a �o 3- v
rL
O YI r N N'
IA a
p p o u a ,eel y ca o
N N tl tl C E J N p
a d U In C C `y R 7 Q Y C
0 o J 11 » a <, • mo w e v Z r
a s Q W d u d vv A —lyIx
Z VaA?a Walla® °z
W' I Q_IO Q v y W WWO !�
W a__ c c
W O o o. . C o o ~ c N
J
Q -- t- F a 4 F I a y rn o>
m
CD MOJa N6Z1 'S J3S 3N17 1SV3
W a i /0 N6Zl 't S3S 3N/7 IS-3M
U w
a w
W 0
N
Z N -� /l A l - 1 A l - A '4 1 - 1 -_� \
m LJ _JA // V J /'1`V V
I > l L
'.
ON, Q, QO, O O tQ aD GO aD _
�
LC kJ.l'•'� 6
O 1 ')
Cl co
n'r
tY
cc
L J
4 1, -.
L 1 ✓R 1fh U I 1,., / .• y
c 5I F
Li
Z �' �':''2 / aL r ,.r L : .•m.. lit..
LU
w
U N I
W
� o
Z H i
U
� � t
U CC
w W
� a
%1
t t t
O *Vll ON
r:
r t I
. .._._ —. l Tr I I(
MINE
// fII. •\
1 ; IJ9
LPTIR
i > f
0
z
9•
2
.... .. .. .. 'p�x+R!aw— "°1'ao.gl2 •N.�a'noi —vooco
uj
u 7R
z -tc
79 -B
o Z
W
U)
U C5 g4 71 r d d
z .
w l 2.8
� ���..I p °" >mz'W . ='_�_" ��- U aka _ - Z
94 Ad z 5,
El w
Lo
1. z
�R
0 z
E
u
t2i
19
.5 i 5
V
2 v 2
z
> Z 8
it E
70
vi
<
t g s 1�
2? E
<
>
E
<
iE
SW I
g Iz
oAtwf
Z v
0-
SQ
Z7
1 .23
F5
E�A
U)--Nmmw V-
ID
Z Z ZE
i5
-L
F - —. — — — — — — — — —
goo
- 1 A L- / L - / A / A I
�
I v 7 v k-// V-
F3 w 2
o Z-
ui uj
uj ui
Ir
z LU W
pip U) z
0 ui
ng l il i 11 1 D
I llb 0 CD
w >
G LU
0 Lli
LLI
51 cn
w w
CD U) Cl)
Z
0 0
IL
cn
0 0
x x
w LLJ
P..� cli U)
0
w
LLJ
C/)
Q 4.
EO 0 -1
1. <
< z
0
U) 0
co W uj
Z F � f
< (D
Z LJJ N i� ,
o LLI
CL
)301
iE
a_
tg
w hl
L -- h IMF
Z
w J
7
V CL
U) Z
LU
LU LU z
-i w 2 p LU
cr
Lu cn
D w
co
CL ui
W u
[If w
CQL- ui
u - -- 4-1 a �� 4 2 1 r i uj
CY
1 4
C**4 V)
CL RC
pig g
bo jw
UA
rF
Q
-- - T-T.-Fi
I
cn
4-1
6 �
8 No
mp %
gg
i-Ri
-L-J
u
u o
�zx�
' cn w
� x �� o
e EEO cn >
E f a am r m a m O o Q= Ind\
W R z 0� 0 0
x ° ° ° a =
w a 3 a a a
w
0 z R OL O
�a
o
peon{ 5ugsIX3 40 uoi}eoo 0
as 4'0
M..B Q
+ M
I .0
�I
Vil
c2S
-
ti _ ► II II
- - - � - -- J , Ln
Eh E i ilZ
LA _ D '
- T7 LLJ
>
1 — O
O
N \
zr \
S
I
1
t
!� m
V � N
1
_ rvt a
I � �
S
z
Z
' F
G
W W
N
N 00
a L) ❑ ° O
W g Z Z ° o
o
w w a a �
Of
� � a
o
o ■ w
a � P
a
W • Q � � P
o _
h p
)�j buwlsr5 d �
b } as
0
J l I I r L I r, I Al o o O, �Q�
Ow .
110, 46
r _
I I i ON C�
LU
i L —
—z_ -- ) o
- -- -- - -- --
T� 0
J IL
•�; I W o W } ii
-v
•� J
7 i ( CO
M 0
D YF LLI
U
� QO
('
2I I W Z
C � m
I X O
V L
E�l N
Z
UQ l q_
_ 1
i I i I I I
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
hl 1 I I I I I I
_. __ _ -L ..._ _L __ -L — -J-_ -- .A.-
J
F u
M z P4 O p c
W O v in i �
° D 3 g
a
w L 0
r 7 N c C LL c
U. 3�3
b Q 5t w LU
�1 p
O �
� _a mA5oaa3�H°nac� A p �/
p !a
9
o �
1
o I
`� as
' a
00 .1
!1 r• r_ I s °
,
y FJ
7 9 -E--I,
-p
L - I-
-T`1 fT r : o
w
' --
1
CL
Fl
i I I ��I �• _. - I o
l a
I — — i
I C pl I ; I
eq
I z5I I ` I —-
- F T-
1
yl I r
5
��E e
•• In,..,i._ .E E�. EE�� E 1
I 6 mmllmu�'� �� ��� @��e -! II� IIIIIIIIG!IIIIIIIIIIIII
I 'I � e E @`E��` = ��`�I 1 1 `��I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
e e,$ a Ili
111�11 ^ I'tli_ililiiill E��c���E�����1 III uum,a,ll I�
� 1111111. ICI ice` I �`E� �� ���� "� 0, IIIIIIIIIIIII �
■� _
■t —
RMERM a INIIWII�OIIII�1111NE�= �`-
€ € I--
® €�� �E s E � € � IIIIIIIIIII �� mmiuiillimiliilinmlil = - AEI
e @ � �� II WII111111111111i1116aIP J3 � �
€ g €` � � NIIIIIIIII�IIII � G @ � III I
1
�_° � um uulluiumiillllliluG h � _ E� ��— _
��E � � � �� ��� � I I�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
@ -e E
pllllllll�lll�'Iiali
€e�E a �I� ■■ _ = ECE €EE EeE
EE
la IIIIIIII @ - ■■ — — E @ € € = =__ €� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
� QIp1�� � E �t■ __ _ Eo�Eo =eE —
E�' —
® : E E��� @�EE � €� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!lil!I!li� � @ €E�EE��6 € =E4 Illlllllllllllllllli
€ •GC c II I
:��EEIE�E � (IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINGI _ ® � €�� -��� €E G�E
;� a EEe= ■■ — _ _ _�_- g= eEE =' = "� �
€€ @= E
mm—
am=
e
EE O III ii
6E ■■ =_ @e@ a r, IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII EE @_ €Eo III
IIIIIIII I J•�II111111�_ � a ���E� �! ��� �
1i11p I
IIIIIIIIIDNWN0 Ilnl IIII II
��I� a �E - � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIiiiiliilili
S 1 1111
1 1 1 111 1 11
III � � �1!1111j11
I €;' I _ �� �III`II"III III�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�III
umumulullll - �I Ill�lu;illl illuilllllllull!Ilulllllllli
G 111!111'll
€' I
J..I�IJJ
w
-
5
Z O N O O a .o
CO
O
sz, d10 .. C Z oi l
N \ K N a�iMM � 2 O .. _O ..
1D
Of
. I v 2 0 ° m
__ 33
I 9 .9
D�U �?
I ... n I I 2d
_J ° %
® F =._.
3
3 w
-- I
— a
i�
e
-1
e
05 w
cf
A som -
1. M 1,3 3 N. a dR
0 - 3 3
,OZ
I • i • i I 7 1 Y} I
r --I
sc L - N
II
- - - --
I I
.0-,Or
:{6
i
N _ e
I
= I T� •
I
L- 3
I 12
I
l
I I gy F
•I h � Um° m K
�¢� �
I — S o � k
.J�
•9�9- — — ® — — ® — — — — — — — �
Z
a
J
CL
x .I a v
W
oil
ON ON
O g J mteaQQ
G F
C � ~pr.pp X % �
< F � lk Y°raX 3 w
O
5 °, c MM
O - a,
o
� acv c sroo= -
7�
Q, 3 o r a
z4n � ��G. CL °EE°
E
� n„m° -� -a
cs ✓. ° v O
WO O j
r -
n
N
UJ
cn
IT
� Z
J
W
W
1 Z N <
L
O r-
' W J
LLJ
O 4yI�O
_ ZI I > 1
;L
0
off° L
it I WTI
o "s oa
I 1
.0 - .6
I �
lit" l�fl l l ��;' - O IC 0IO
� o
WE
`I
I
l tl ❑ g
„ I;IiI
11ll�lll; ill ❑ -
illlii ❑
w '41 n
y ri�`l
:.. ❑ 1.4.1
OG: ��.Xr ❑ LLJ
Ln
i 4 c'
E ( O
El
Elu i
w >
_ $I al c ``
Z - pro t fo fro
i� u .0 -.0
Oho `gL
;1
:0-.f
T
c, d. M Z ° J ?
LJ
CD
n W O j �Eo°
�?4 -•po 01
T3
o ( E
W a 'w
t��O
¢ ? M fn in d I•r7 O 0.' i a'
W y
F
a a
li
, 1
l to
E77
a 'F -
o� -
w
BLOC
COL
I
IS
i
r ✓�
J r '
� I g
O
w� 90l
r Fl-
ti --- - - - i _ J
' - ---- ------- - - - - -- .,
-- c
S „p pZ
I
0
O I
N
I I
I
I I
_ - _- J_ -3_ - -
0
I I -
r�I � !
O
-- i
I -
1
- -� o
CD
uj
a
- o
i F ¢
J
- I
z
J
CL o
• I
Q II
O
'EXHIBIT 12
• TO: Oak Park Heights City Council, Oak Park Heights Planning Commission,
Oak Park Heights Staff Members
FROM: Anchobaypro Inc. -Tim Nolde
RE: PUD Amendment — Oakgreen Ponds
During the marketing of our current project we have determined a significant demand
exists for various types of senior housing. Previously we had requested and received
approval for changing the unit types of the Oakgreen Village Plan from four units to three
units. Once again, due to demand and interest we are respectfully requesting a change to
the type of units located at Oakgreen Village, as found on the following documentation.
The plan is to change the two story units north of the pond to single level townhomes.
With the introduction of two 2 -unit buildings and one 3 -unit building, the proposed
change reduces the overall unit count of Oakgreen Village by eight units.
With this proposed change, the only requirement would be that related changing the legal
description of the units. The existing streets, utilities, and grades would be unaffected,
allowing for service to the proposed units.
With this submittal we are requesting a PUD Amendment and Subdivision of the platted
property.
i
i
I
" NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
• 4800 Olsen Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2563 planners @nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT ENCLOSURE 4
TO: Eric Johnson
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: August 7, 2008
RE: Oak Park Heights — Oakgreen Village — Carriage House
Cooperative Concept Plan
FILE NO: 798.02 — 08.09
BACKGROUND
Tim Nolde, representing Anchobaypro, Inc., has made application for a PUD concept
plan approval for that area west of Oakgreen Avenue and north of 58 Street. The area
• under this application is to the east of the Phase 1 of the Oakgreen Village development
and is approximately 4.8 acres. The project includes two senior cooperative rental
buildings that would be constructed in two phases. The first building would be located
at the intersection of 58 Street North and Oakgreen Avenue. The applicant has
assembled all of the properties along Oakgreen Avenue either through purchase
agreement or ownership. Those areas with purchase agreements have consented to
the application for the Carriage House project.
This area was given concept plan approval as part of the Oakgreen Village project in
2006. A portion of this property was also approved for general plan approval on May
27, 2008 to allow townhome units on 58 Street east of the pond.
The applicant has requested concept plan review for both phases of the Carriage House
Cooperative at this time.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit 1: Title Sheet
Exhibit 2: Existing Conditions
Exhibit 3: Master Plan and Traffic Analysis
Exhibit 4: Grading Plan
Exhibit 5: Utility Plan
• Exhibit 6: Elevations
Exhibit 7: Parking Level Plan
Exhibit 8: First Floor Plan •
Exhibit 9: Second Floor Plan
Exhibit 10: Unit Plans (2 sheets)
Exhibit 11: Carriage House Cooperative of the St. Croix Valley Preliminary Plat
Exhibit 12: Project Narrative — Tim Nolde
Exhibit 13: Area Summary
Exhibit 14: Oakgreen Village Concept and General Plan 2006
Exhibit 15: Area Summary
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Adjacent Uses. Uses adjacent to the subject site are listed below:
North of Site: Present Zoning — B -4, Limited Business District
Present Use — Highway 36 orientated commercial development,
Goodwill and the Xcel Energy power line easement
South of Site: Present Zoning — O, Open Space
Present Use — City park land, undeveloped areas, and a
single family residence
West of Site: Present Zoning — B -4, Limited Business District and •
B -2, General Business
Present Use — Oakgreen Village area and Lowe's /CSM
Commercial development
East of Site: Present Zoning — PUD, Residential Planned Unit Development
Present Use — Townhome residences and Oakgreen Avenue
Proposed Project. The project narrative for the site describes the project as follows:
"During the marketing of our current project we have determined a significant
demand exists for various types of senior housing. As many of you are aware, the
senior population in the Twin Cities is due to increase substantially during the next 10
years. In recognition of Boutwell's success, we feel there is a major need for similar
types of products at a different price category.
We control all of the properties along Oakgreen Avenue. We have purchase
agreements on four of the homes and have closed on one so far. We currently plan to
construct two 48 unit Senior Cooperative /rental buildings. The first phase is a two
story 48 unit "Brownstone" Cooperative structure.
All buildings will have major amenities that make senior living more comfortable;
such as heated underground parking, library, computer room, wood - working shop, •
exercise room, party room with kitchen facilities, outdoor patio with abundant green
areas for gardens and flowers. There will also be an activities director on site.
2
•
We want the design and exterior of our buildings to be appealing not only to our
future residents, but for the entire St. Croix Valley community. We feel the
intersection of 58 Street and Oakgreen Avenue is the "Gateway" to the Oak Park
Heights community. We plan on using large amounts of brickwork on the buildings.
In order to make the project a success for the owners and the city, we need to keep the
price of the units below the average selling price of homes in the area. Seniors want
to down -size, not take on more debt. This is especially important in today's difficult
real estate environment. For that reason and others, we plan on asking the city to
create a Tax Increment Financing District.
The second phase of our project is another 48 -50 unit senior building which will be a
combination of two and three stories. This building will have the same basic
amenities and design as the first phase."
Comprehensive Plan. A Comprehensive Plan amendment was approved in July
2005, removing the Central Business District (CBD) designation and replacing it with a
commercial land use designation. The current draft Proposed Land Use Map of the
2008 Comprehensive Plan designates this area for medium density residential. The
Land Use Map would be changed in the Comprehensive Plan to indicate this area as
high density residential.
• Zonin 9 property . This has been designated as B-4, Limited Business which
accommodates residential development as a conditional use. As such, the underlying
base zoning district will be B -4, Limited Business with a PUD overlay. The B -4, Limited
Business District lists two family, townhomes and multiple family dwellings as a
conditional use.
Subdivision. A preliminary plat was submitted with this application and the Planning
Commission and City Council will review as part of the general plan of development
review.
Park Dedication. Park dedication has been satisfied for this area. The applicant paid
the maximum percentage (14 %) of equivalent cash value as part of the original
approvals in 2006.
Project Density. Section 401.15.C.3 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes the density
thresholds for residential properties. Two family dwellings require 6,000 square feet of
lot area per dwelling unit. Townhomes require 4,000 square feet of lot area per dwelling
unit. Multiple family units with one or two bedrooms require 2,500 square feet per
dwelling unit.
The total development area for Phase 1 to include Oakgreen Village and the Oakgreen
Ponds as well as Phase 2 to include the Carriage House Cooperative is 781,699 square
feet. The resulting density calculations are as follows:
3
Twinhomes: 4 X 6,000 square feet = 24,000 square feet •
Townhomes: 53 X 4,000 square feet = 212,000 square feet
Multiple Family: 98 X 2,500 square feet = 245,000 square feet
481,000 square feet
The development requires at least 481,000 square feet of land area. The project is well
within density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
Proposed Street/Access. Access for the Carriage House project would be from Lower
59 Street and Upper 58 Street, the two private streets that are accessed off of Nova
Scotia Avenue North. The streets would end in a parking lot with the roadway improved
with curb and gutter. There would be no direct access allowed from 58 Street or from
Oakgreen Avenue.
The plans also include a 50 foot right -of -way dedication for Oakgreen Avenue, as
required by the City Engineer. This development, with added traffic, again raises the
issue of impending improvements to Oakgreen Avenue and the need to make this an
urban section of roadway. The City Council should consider the timing for Oakgreen
Avenue improvements with construction of this development.
Setbacks. Within a PUD, the base district setback requirements (R -3) are applied only
to the perimeter of the project. The R -3 District specifies setback requirements as
follows: 30 feet front yard, 30 feet rear yard, and 20 feet side yard. If the lot is on a •
corner, not less than 30 feet from a lot line is required for side yards. The PUD section
of the Zoning Ordinance specifies that buildings should be located at least 20 feet from
the back of a curb line from roadways as part of the internal street pattern. Additionally,
the ordinance specifies that no building within the project shall be nearer to another
building by one -half the sum of the building heights of the two buildings.
The perimeter setback requirements would apply to the building setbacks for 58 Street
and Oakgreen Avenue. For both buildings, the setback would need to be 30 feet from
the right -of -way. The first phase building is set back 27 feet, six inches from 58 Street
and 15 feet from Oakgreen Avenue. In that the buildings are designed with two stories
and gabled roofs, the heights may seem imposing if the setbacks are not complied with.
The Planning Commission and City Council should discuss the proposed setbacks as
part of the concept plan. The City could consider a lesser perimeter setbacks as part of
the PUD.
All of the parking lot and driveway setbacks are within the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance and PUD.
Traffic. The applicant has provided projected vehicle count information for the
proposed development in the Master Plan and Traffic Analysis Sheet (Exhibit 3). The
traffic numbers will be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
Tree Preservation /Landscaping. The applicant has provided preliminary information •
on existing tree coverage. The existing conditions map (Exhibit 2) indicates the tree
4
masses that would be removed to accommodate the development. The City Arborist
will review the detailed tree preservation plans and landscape plans as part of general
plan of development review. As part of the general plan stage, the applicant will be
required to tabulate an inventory of existing trees, calculate a tree replacement list, and
provide a detailed landscape plan.
Grading and Drainage. A concept grading and drainage plan has been submitted.
The grading and drainage plans shall be subject to City Engineer review and approval
at the general plan of development stage.
Utilities. A concept utility plan has been submitted. The utility plans shall be subject to
City Engineer review and approval at the general plan of development stage.
Parking. The Zoning Ordinance requires the following for elderly housing:
"m. Elderly (Senior Citizen) Housing. Reservation of area equal to one (1)
parking space per unit. Initial development is, however, required for only
one -half (1/2) space per unit and said number of spaces can continue until
such time as the City considers a need for additional parking spaces has
been demonstrated."
The Carriage House Cooperative is planned with a total of 98 units in two phases. The
i lower level parking would accommodate 91 parking stalls. None of the lower level stalls
are designed for disability parking. At least four of the lower level stalls should be
disability accessible with at least two of them van accessible.
At the surface level, 32 parking stalls are proposed with an additional 24 proof of
parking stalls. Two of the stalls are designated as van accessible disability stalls. The
13 stalls around the entrance circle should be eliminated in that they will restrict access
by emergency vehicles. An alternative parking design should be submitted that
eliminates these stalls but provides disability and standard parking stalls at the building
entrance.
Architectural Appearance. The application materials include building elevations of
the first building to be constructed. The buildings feature brick exteriors and lap siding
with porches and other architectural detailing. The Planning Commission and City
Council should comment in general on the conceptual plans. A complete review of the
design would be done as part of the general plan of development review. Of note, the
Planning Commission and City Council may want to comment on the long horizontal
roof expanses and ways to break up the appearance of the roof.
Trails /Sidewalk. The plans indicate a trail to be constructed on the north side of 58
Street from Nova Scotia to Oakgreen Avenue. Additionally, a trail would extend along
Oakgreen Avenue from 58 Street to the existing trail in the Xcel power line easement.
• A significant number of private sidewalk connections have also been shown from the
Phase 1 building to the trail system. The Planning Commission and the Park
i
i
5
f
Commission should comment on the proposed private and public trail systems •
proposed within this development.
B-4, Limited Business Standards. Section 401.301.E.9 of the Zoning Ordinance
provides the CUP standards for allowing residential use in the B -4 District. The
standards are as follows:
Two family, townhomes and multiple family dwellings provided that:
a. At least two parking spaces per unit must be provided for on site, or proof is
shown of arrangements for private parking nearby.
The development will comply with the specific Zoning Ordinance requirements for
senior housing.
b. No physical improvements, either interior or exterior, may preclude future re -use
for commercial purposes.
The development could be converted to future office use, but highly unlikely.
C. Unit floor areas must comply with Section 401.15.C.6.
All of the units are at least 600 square feet for one bedroom and 720 square feet
for two bedrooms as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
d. Compliance with conditional use requirements of Section 401.03.A.8.
The requirements will be complied with.
e. The development does not conflict with existing or potential future commercial
uses and activities.
There would be no conflict.
f. The density, setbacks, and building height standards imposed as part of the R -3
Zoning District are complied with.
The building setbacks will need to be adjusted to comply or the City Council
would need to allow by variance through the PUD.
g. Adequate open space and recreational space is provided on site for the benefit of
the occupants.
Adequate open space is provided.
h. The development does not conflict or result in incompatible land use •
arrangements as related to abutting residential uses or commercial uses.
6
• No incompatible land use arrangements are created.
i. Residential use can be governed by all applicable standards of the Zoning
Ordinance, Building Code, Housing Code and Fire Codes.
All standards will be complied with.
j. Residential and non - residential uses shall not be contained on the same floor.
Not applicable.
k. Residential uses shall be provided with a separate entrance, and separately
identified parking stalls.
Not applicable.
I. The architectural appearance, design and building materials of residential
structures shall be consistent with the Design Guidelines and subject to approval
of the City Council.
The Planning Commission and City Council should comment on the architectural
• appearance.
RECOMMENDATION / CONCLUSION
As part of its review, the Planning Commission should first look at the Comprehensive
Plan and determine from the goals and plans what is the most appropriate development
for this property. Previous plans have indicated a medium density residential
component for this area, but commercial developments may also be appropriate.
If residential use is preferred for this property, it should be noted that this is the last
large parcel in the City that will accommodate that type of development. The City
should and can be selective in the type of development that it would allow there.
If the Planning Commission is favorable to the concept plan, it could be recommended
to the City Council with the following conditions:
1. R -3 District standards for density, setbacks, and building height are complied
with for this project.
2. The plat shall dedicate right -of -way for Oakgreen Avenue and shall be approved
by the City Engineer and City Attorney.
• 3. The Planning Commission and City Council should discuss the need for and the
timing of improvements to Oakgreen Avenue as part of the discussions of the
concept plan.
7
4. The Fire Marshal and Police Chief sho uld review the p lans and determine the
accessibility of emergency vehicles throughout the development.
5. The Planning Commission and Park Commission should comment on the
proposed private and public trail system.
6. All perimeter units must maintain a 30 foot setback to the lot lines.
7. Detailed tree inventory, tree preservation, and landscape plans shall be provided
for general plan of development.
8. Detailed grading, drainage and utility plans shall be provided for general plan of
development review.
9. Detailed architectural plans for the proposed buildings in the project shall be
required for general plan of development review.
10. The Planning Commission and City Council should comment on the architectural
appearance of the proposed structures.
11. The City Engineer shall comment on the vehicle count and traffic information.
12. An alternative parking design be provided for the front entrance of the Phase 1 •
Carriage House building.
•
8
c
U z
IL
0 7
z
•TI � � Q r � � � L G
v; t o e
wl
J '�- - O < uC W L G
U a to >
J Z
.- a
0 z
w�
t
■■
o cn
cr
a�
I-
am�
r
11 W
mW
N -
C7 E� chi rn
U z =Nr
z W O C
w C7 WOK. H
�j a �'+ O C . • � pV P f ,
•N � uy � T � a 1
W w Z x aaaa •••• �I•• 3 . g O
t.4 z o = H
Q
N � �/
Q `A'
a R
g
V
r .
l
# -- 72 -- — °- -_ - 'WO
Q, j!
w
I
CSYiJ', y w j
G S�SY< 1 u• O
h
r
i 1, . fi g I 1 ' <W
i
r
L \
I tli \
. r
i
1
1
ow
- om
v i - (`7fti
r t
r ` LM3 Q — - --- --- ---- - - -- -�
_ = r
\ HI ZION 4A V IvUOJS VAON� G
w .s s.
_ tai
:I
U z O N r D a
a >
{y C am (
Q a
J � CJ G
O
u� r
rr. : 7 T
>< G N¢ 6 Q W OO OO
W
J
yw W c
� y ? i- C 1 - r r r
Ix
Z ¢ d MQ 00
6 s d W
Z Y U y 0 0
= O d Q m
i+ Z Q Sao U < <
W d w a a W ZI N zl w �1
* y J z o z �c
A w y Z ^ 2f
a' oo c z
I
o
z °^ �
c
C F � v tV T ✓' - -
_ Z
1 G d � r m ro � s"�
1 ¢ vN o ° m� i W C
W Q C X C C ¢ L c z J V
V A x
LIB C d m d m Z d m -
¢ c ¢ c
w Q 0 2 O .3 O O
J J d J 6 F H d Z h -
(P,
Q
U V D s
- L i ✓: �I w Q
W c
LL J z'. } y zi - s
j
LL Z . 1
oolo 2 O o a
$ R j
- ""7- -
o
- - - - J _
, - L - 6 i
I ,
1
z
1
�: ; 77 inn, y z
If
tu
FF
d
, M j
_.....- - i• -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- `
- -- - - -
j I I y
S •'
a
H19ONT 3n � dr toos VAON c
z
i w
I --
i
I
r' W
u
0 cn
Z
LL-j
W � N ?4 0 � �) c
cp
Z-
k z
z .
O
- W
0
z
LL
0 z 0
L)
0 a LU uj
0 0
cn
o
W � 4! '
C/)
2,
.36
o
06 LL:
."Me-
fill
LL:
Ln
CO
O Al { !�_
446
C3
to z as
Ln
ItT T
f coo
• (� Cy a go
w LO _
r W O O
U
W � LM
41 !D W y g 'e a K
N
ICI .7 F N W = 0 W F _
wf !n i Y W K W 1<- R Q W Q
rn &> w 1
3 0. o m o o m z w
v Z 43 v R w v w w O a
6 Z N o � Q Q ~ W c
w a 3 a 0. N N Q [
C
a ,, 0 ;
N c>
..� � �
O z s O z Q w P�
N
1 - y < - w
1 O $ U
W I I 1 I Z t�Sr 3 i
in � rr\t \ c
V J
cv n a p
s
z
� I
� I
a g �n
O��q _ fi Z W �i17 W 2 2Y
H main wKaO� �<
> 1 m
m z Z m 4 u
° Z uCmW n^�
i
-- - X vo
�
'X.mZ =2d
ARe vJo
ova h
.aI z
00— v
N M \
2. as `sl b�`]b uj
L
LU
J F y i
E o wm
q) n a�L Sij 'e3: aZE3
yW p l ?F i n'c i
o z l ( l t
NU V I r H W�
3 I 4 3g N
�d lt, ON ,
In N I �� �$R 1 N
Ln
i I I s_
M 20 rz t t 800LCUL
z x 4
LU
Z
UJ A„ U
W = >W NO °a Z
O
w =< 3 � w o
Z �0/ k.5
L 3
W LL o `k
Q� U cc E -1E 2 > Q
r ° o
O LL = c2 J
Rg
� IL
K i wR w o o LL- °EE W
?Qses Q V �$ z 3 a
� Y
_ Tom•': � =.a
k� �a
.t _fk? ■ ■
um 1�
AL
�
■ ■ �; low_ .
i -
\
� i•
■
_ a A
s
r
a:
■ ■.
I
0 Q
WV 60:*Z :l l MZ /L UL
I I � omaol o
Y cQ W W l lie
O w o.�o >
J Z
w =Q>
LLJ
cn J E N ny J
v m Q a t A I S
w c
p 0 ( o ?E�
K z w 4 4 LLL V ° gym i a E
r Q Lu H 'Ik�g 2
IRN
i
II IIII
i
i
a
J
J
Cn
� c
J
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
J
w
w,
�4
Y.
Q
al-
4
r ' "d SO -ITT BOOZMCII
l U W
z Z
n o Q a Q
cn W ;gN Q e
0 O > / J
W Q > 0L CV
0
z wax ; Y 0
O __ o g a g
O W nE�
m Q �U CL7 @2B J Q
w 0 i LL
U wqo r' 0 ° >< `s �$ H
- v Q U 1- � N a g o i r
w z 3zm
Hi�AON end NAA�VD�WO
J
J
ik
i
I
f l-
.. �
o
I _
k,
Lj�__— r
,,ham
1I
I
e
. I
� I
� f
F s"
F
��■Y �'..i� I'1 \llttl.�
1
o e
r
n
AN
��
Rd NS :IS :ZR Z /OGL
m O N Q O Q
m o 4U �
U) LLf o F y S Q tO
W O � w `
J qe w
W W DU A P Y
T l o Q O UV E° J
LL
�/ O O L am!
U m rc Y o l.L
a is e; Q C..) N n$;o z'
FF I
I
fizz
LL
�. J
�_ ..
F IL ti II
v
_ ° a
1 _
LJ
LA °
P
- --
P - P
ti `, - •
WV W9LL L 900Z/L UL
q w o
U W
Y VJ W O �Ay II
W o O / w ° n,
w Q > g Q r•F
z ° J V
W X .Q
r l F Nm Q
h � �
F °'ti via V to ° u m o a 0 m `m
.6 EL �— .9-�Ll � � .9IL l -,9 I .9 /l OL -.[ � .8 /C l 9 -- -� -� -� .9-.LL -- .6-.EL I ICI
E .9 ,9 0-L _
I
r ! 03 03 ! j .0 - .E
a
I
- - -- ,6 - DEL ,
I
o LL m
to
L
O — r y i B ;. ....__._ t.._.
I t N -- pi .I I I � _- I
6 ° I
i
+ I
b I 6 I
I
-) s -.e .z -s o � �
In
i e
i
I
" r— --
.o .4 .a -.c
I i I m I
ull
__
....._... -
1 zl
o - s t
- -- - - - - - -- X - - -- -
.z -,Le o -s .--- .z-LE N,
.9 -� -- -
Q
z., oz - �_ -------
.Z t
-- i—
I
m
T
- — .o-,e
— —
— -- ��
I
I - -
I ....... ...
I .o—:a
0
I m I
T
11
w
M LG9Z: L L 90OZIL UL
0 0 - 0
9 � U
$� ° m¢ q
°
oFN $
W >, U)
O Q> g '„
w ry x `o c g.T J J J
O O " -° g
W m vE° F—
WoeO o
Elf 0
Q EB
v Q U
I
.9 - .L
ILA
I I +
i I
:.
b
in �\
.0 -.S A-.4 .0 -.E
i ;I
I I I III I .
M '
LL
LA
.8 -.Z �I
� I I
• o
v ry
n va
.. ...__ ,,
V I go
a u
�Q
m
Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc.
C499146jF h10aS4EC00)0Z1f LAND PLANNING ♦ SURVEYING • ENGINEERING
M� 12445 55TH STREET NORTH
E LAKE EMO, MR MOTA 55042
04F MIT 37 CAO.IX 11XZZ1Y s P600e (651) 439-W3 Fu (651) 430
STATE H 36
_) 1
LEGEND N
O DENOTES B
r -
serN smar Haem NE
SET )1 INCH Y 16 INCH IRON PIPE MONUMENT MARKED NW y4 F
VAIN A PLASTIC CAP IN 'FREEMAN LS 16989', UNLESS O F ' se>x nxar Noenr �
SHOWN OTHERNISE
0 DENOTES FOUND h INCH IRON PIPE MONUMENT MARKED WITH A S
PLASTIC CAP INSCRIBED 'FREEMAN LS 16989', UNLESS SHOWN
OTHERWISE.
DENOTES SURVEY NAIL WITH METAL DISK INSCRIBED 'FREEMAN LS SW Y SE Y g
16909'. 3 �s
I
NOTES
1) ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS BASED ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NE1 /4 OF THE Vicinity Map
NE1 /4, SECTION 5. T.29N., R.20W., WHICH BEARS SO1TS24'E
ORIGINAL SCALE Section 5, 729N - R20W
I INCH = 50 FEET Washington County, Minnesota
0 25 SO 100
SCALE IN FEET
I I -
I I
I I ={
- - - -- -- - - --
E P8Y.1z
.Sdd'S3ir9 E �26L�Yr Sdrjy36'W
1,lil` L. - M µ p /btI/r1' L.YCVP S1
— — OA's
A ODO" - ,rArsrscw ��
0� •. ^' - Ndt Pd3TW zdvY.sd
OA ✓�"'�` v,,,...., .. � ,.,.,..., ,., >> )�
O � �'�^,# _� -sour �•, � o ,.wK ,,.w resin �, _
' �, /1t `\
\ i /'(—/ ` ` " y — SG!'�'4'l3 — .-._ _A�ag� — V P w ORiL.PFEN NllAif
I
v v or oaverEV vrr[,ore *d T56y I , arse .xont
Gy
.,,.-
` < ax. Ae. ewnr A Z
I I I I I I I iScd:1 .r I A I 8
J L
h
Nds'Id37'lY
- -
-- - - - - - - - r- - - - - - - - a
Zor
4
A
Y ' L------ - -I - -J L------ - -I - -J L-- - - -I -?
T 8 s 7
.J I _
F F
h I � SaDZ -
Sd91dbTE
8 o p
L----- I- - - I - -J L --- n - -I - -J L -- I - - - - -I ONE ,*
OUTLOT
B e
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I --- - - - - --
.a; I 1.0; ..'I Lot 5 I I ..o. � 3Y.3d` I ti
I I B;oa. \ \ ;ao.. ,•e r^ o Y �� =' 33D2
Pro?° n ^: ✓.: Ol I Ne9'zdS%lN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 6 ,� • __- SaD ZdSTE
L _ � - i - , - SdYZd T1'E Ild9fi
- - - ,
a
r �° x $
I i � ,LOT 2 I I
L - - - - - - - - - - - - -
.Sam
n / 1 SddW36,w
- --
J
L I
Sdd'3636 IIY.9d �
tTj 58th ST REET 'XR,r7'
1 � S
0 /
r,�
w
EXHIBIT 12
• TO: Oak Park Heights City Council, Oak Park Heights Planning Commission,
Oak Park Heights Staff Members
FROM: Anchobaypro Inc. -Tim Nolde
RE: Carriage Home Cooperative
During the marketing of our current project we have determined a significant demand
exists for various types of senior housing. As many of you are aware, the senior
population in the Twin Cities is due to increase substantially during the next 10 years. In
recognition of Boutwell's success, we feel there is a major need for similar types of
products at a different price category.
We control all of the properties along Oakgreen Avenue. We have purchase agreements
on four of the homes and have closed on one so far. We currently plan to construct two -
48 unit Senior Cooperative /rental buildings. The first phase is a two story 48 unit
"Brownstone" Cooperative structure.
All buildings will have major amenities that make senior living more comfortable; such
as heated underground parking, library, computer room, wood - working shop, exercise
room, party room with kitchen facilities, outdoor patio with abundant green areas for
gardens and flowers. There will also be an activities director on site.
• We want the design and exterior of our buildings to be appealing not only to our future
residents, but for the entire St. Croix Valley community. We feel the intersection of 58
Street and Oakgreen Avenue is the "Gateway" to the Oak Park Heights community. We
plan on using large amounts of brickwork on the buildings.
In order to make the project a success for the owners and the city, we need to keep the
price of the units below the average selling price of homes in the area. Seniors want to
down -size, not take on more debt. This is especially important in today's difficult real
estate environment. For that reason and others, we plan on asking the city to create a Tax
Increment Financing District.
The second phase of our project is another 48 -50 unit senior building which will be a
combination of two and three stories. This building will have the same basic amenities
and design as the first phase.
We are excited about this "new" concept to the Oak Green Village development and look
forward to working with the city.
Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. EXHIBIT i 3
' 'FE C
LAND PLANNING - SURVEY LNG - ENGINEERING
CARRIAGE HOUSE COOPERATIVE
OAK PARK HEIGHTS, MN
AREA SUMMARY
July 29, 2008
Land area devoted to residential uses (all parcels) 781,699 s.f. 100%
Land area devoted to right -of -way for Oakgreen 18,497 s.f. 2%
Land area devoted to residential use by building type
Townhomes 551,598 s.f. 70%
• Senior Housing 211,604 s.f. 28%
Land area devoted to common open space (everything
Except buildings) 617 s.f. 79%
Approximate area devoted to streets (paved area minus
Parking stalls and loading) 77,510 s.f. 10%
Approximate area devoted to and number of
off - street parking and loading spaces and
related access 11,727 s.f. 1.5%
65 Stalls proposed
Approximate area, and floor area, devoted
to commercial uses. 0 s.f.
Approximate floor area devoted to
industrial or office use (reception area) 448 s.f.
1244555th Street North, Lake Elmo, MN 55042 ♦ Phone. (651) 439 -8833 ♦ Fax: (651) 430 -9331 ♦ Websim: www.ffe -mr com
Bruce A. Fah, LS T'imorhv Fm�an, LS Todd A. Frlcbov� PH
1939 - 2ATl clpal l
W
m ►
w _ .2
u �d
o W o
� w
5.
�+
A W M v 41 /\ s
po '✓ ♦ 2�1>. Zvi o ° _ � R p � � E N -
Q�
CD
�d j q a e r
W
a� a o1 i -" v �,' m
N 3 , a a m '' 44 o
w V ���� � � °
In c Ul a , a ° yd
fr a
Z o 3 a a d m a
0 W W .r F3
LLI Z V o _ " q r __ u z
3 O w o � N Q a a W
w
w w � e� vi °o n 3 H U
� a Q ° o I . : .tai" Z . ` W
M
W W E 11 11 C E J h
0 0 ( In c c d m 1R Q E e a x
iL (L ° » a a d e 7 Z r
a s
Z O Q a e < `cca Lu NN IL x
O I I W Q a< c �aa EWwo �d
W o o 'C o A F` �
O o �N
a �NO>
¢ a MOE& N6Zl 'S J3S 3N17 1SV3
a 0 M0721 N671 b 33S 3N/7 1 S3M
U) o
w
- �rl n I _i n I_i
LJ Z Y /\ V/ A l
u�dp Prf 11
fl 9®1`1l
a� F
I CI i � GO
IwI I�
Iw c I
J Z.
Oa
«I LU c
LC Z
r
72 1
a�tta�
1
;..
in
_.,,. N_ -
In M
N M
_ I � N. w �
I� M
D N
I D
LU
i -
a Q I ........... .. (p ��y
r o
., w �I a M Gl
CO
Z r M .
z ,.,
CL
Z
F - -- -- — - -- - - -'
U ¢ i -rn rrrrrtr - -_
w w
D �� T
�_
'�T TTl rtTm'irrnT
lt` 11
ul
Moe
I T
S
z
I
t+�+u>w*n nv- an'�o.�d'�a41oi -vooto