HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-09-09 NAC Planning Report • •
Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc.
A C
U R B A N P L A N N I N G • D E S I G N • M A R K E T R E S E A R C H
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Oak Park Heights Mayor and City Council
FROM: Bob Kirmis /Scott Richards
DATE: 9 September 1993
RE: Oak Park Heights - East Oaks PUD
(Swager Bros.)
FILE NO: 798.02 - 93.06
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
East Oaks LLC is requesting simultaneous concept plan /development
plan approval for a residential planned unit development (PUD)
within the R -B District located upon a 5.8 acre site located south
of 60th Street and east of Osgood Avenue North. The development
proposal calls for the creation of 15 twin homes (30 individual
units) upon the subject property resulting in a density of 5.17
dwelling units per acre.
It should be noted that the development proposal does not include
a 2.4 acre commercially zoned tract of land lying directly north of
the subject development proposal.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A - Site Location
Exhibit B - Detailed Site Location
Exhibit C - Preliminary Plat
Exhibit D - Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan
Exhibit E - Utility Plan
Exhibit F - Landscape Plan
Exhibit G - Sign Perspective
Exhibit H - Building Elevations
Exhibit I - Building Floor Plan
5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Fax. 595 -9837
• r
Recommendation
The proposed project, although it nearly meets or may be revised to
meet all the minimum standards of the R -B District and PUD Sections
of the Zoning Ordinance, is extremely tight in terms of complying
with the Zoning and Subdivision Regulations.
The applicant is trying to maximize the number of buildings at the
cost, in our opinion, of what is good design for this type of
development. Although the project has improved considerably from
the submitted site plan in 1991, we would feel more comfortable in
recommending a project that is not merely built at "minimum
standards ", but provide a much improved site plan with fewer
buildings. Through the PUD process, the City negotiates with the
applicant to provide for a more desirable environment, efficient
use of land, and promotion and enhancement of desirable site
characteristics. It does not appear that the City is gaining
innovative or unique housing as this project is currently
configured.
Based on the following review, it is the opinion of our office that
a number of outstanding issues must be addressed prior to
development stage PUD approval. As such, we recommend only PUD
concept plan approval subject to the following conditions:
1. The private street cul -de -sac radius is increased from 40 to
45 feet so as to accommodate emergency /service turning vehicle
maneuvers.
2. The roadway extending south of 60th Street may be established
as a private roadway although the City would retain access
easements and the right to dedicate the roadway as a public
right -of -way if the need necessitates.
3. The applicant submit a snow removal plan.
4. Acknowledging that a future easterly extension of the
subdivision's private street is highly unlikely, consideration
is given to shortening the said street and presenting a lot
arrangement where lots "back up" to the subject property's
eastern property line.
5. Lots 25, 26, and 27 are increased in width so as not to exist
as "flag lots ". If necessary, consideration should be given
to the removal of a lot or lots so as to comply with this
condition of approval.
6. The easement which exists along the west side of Lot 11 is
specified for storm water and sanitary sewer purposes. The
width of the easement for access purposes is subject to the
comments of the City Engineer.
2
•
7. The proposed private street width shall have a width of at
least thirty -two (32) feet with on- street parking allowed on
one side.
8. Lots 11, 12, 13 and 14 be reconfigured to uphold the R -B
District's 30 foot rear yard setback requirement.
9. A property owners association is created. A declaration of
covenants, restrictions and easements has been submitted and
is subject to review by the City Attorney
10. The Park Commission provide recommendation in regard to cash
park dedication. It is recommended that the applicants pay
$12,000 in cash park dedication fees.
11. The submitted grading and drainage plan is subject to review
and comment by the City Engineer.
12. Per the recommendation of the City Engineer, "engineered
control fills" take place to ensure that proper soil
compaction is provided to support roadway and dwelling unit
construction.
13. The submitted landscape plan is revised (or a tree
r ry
p ese anon plan prepared) to identify all specific trees to
be added, relocated and retained on the site.
14. Existing tree plantings along the southern boundary of the
adjacent commercial parcel are retained for buffering
purposes.
15. The applicants enter into a development agreement with the
City.
16. The submitted utility plan is subject to review and comment by
the City Engineer.
17. If signage is to be provided on site, a detailed sign plan is
submitted which indicates the location, type and size of all
proposed signage. All signs must comply with applicable
provisions of the City's Sign Ordinance.
18. If alternative twin home designs are to be constructed within
the proposed development, all structure plans are subject to
review and approval by the City staff as part of the final
plan stage.
19. Comments from other City staff.
3
. •
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Project History. In 1984, the applicants submitted plans and
received approval for 144 condominium units on the property. The
applicants did not pursue the approved plan. In the Winter of
1991, the applicants had originally requested PUD concept approval
for a mixed use development (residential /commercial) upon the
subject property. In initial staff review of the proposal, it was
concluded that the plan, which included 45 units, was an "over -
utilization" of the site. The project was never pursued beyond the
point of initial staff review. The development proposal currently
before the City does not include the commercial component of the
original PUD request.
Purpose of PUD. The purpose of planned unit development is to
allow internal site design standard deviations from the Ordinance
in order to allow improved site design and operation. It should be
noted that the PUD concept is not intended to jeopardize the public
safety or strictly for its potential financial implications
(potential cost savings to the applicant).
Comprehensive Plan Consistency. The City's Comprehensive Plan
proposes a mixture of commercial and medium to high density
residential development upon the subject site. The Comprehensive
Plan also endorses the use of planned unit developments in this
area due to environmental constraints. As such, the subject
development proposal is in harmony with the City's Comprehensive
Plan.
Proposed Densities. The applicants have proposed 30 dwelling units
within the PUD resulting in a density of 5.17 dwelling units per
acre. The proposed density is generally consistent with the
property's R -B, Residential- Business zoning designation which lists
multiple family dwellings as permitted uses.
Street System. As shown on the submitted preliminary plat (Exhibit
C) , the subject property is to be accessed via a private street
extension from 60th Street North. In consideration of the proposed
street system, the following concerns must be addressed:
1. Emergency Vehicle Access. According to the Zoning Ordinance,
private roadways constructed within PUDs must be at least 24
feet in width and designed to accommodate fire truck access.
While the proposed 30 foot wide street width is sufficient to
accommodate emergency and service vehicle maneuvers (provided
no on- street parking exists), the roadway should be increased
to 32 feet to allow parking on at least one side of the
street, and the proposed cul -de -sac should be increased from
a 40 foot to a 45 foot radius.
4
. .
2. Public Right -of -Way. As shown on the submitted preliminary
plat (Exhibit C) , a ± 240 foot private cul -de -sac has been
extended southward from 60th Street. The cul -de -sac is also
intended to provide access to future development upon the
commercially zoned parcel of land lying north of the subject
site. Due to the anticipated commercial access, the City
Engineer and our office have recommended that the roadway be
designated as private at this time, but the City should
reserve the right to dedicate the roadway as a public right -
of -way if necessary. The applicant would, however, retain
responsibility for landscape maintenance within the street's
median. The City will require access easements on the private
roadway as part of the plat and development contract.
3. Traffic Volumes. Based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers
Model, a townhome unit will generate a maximum of 11.8 trip
ends per weekday. It is anticipated that the proposed private
street may adequately serve such volumes. As part of the
initial proposal, concerns were raised with the access to 60th
Street North. Current plans to extend 60th Street to TH 95 as
part of the Highway 36 project will provide adequate access
for this area.
4. Snow Removal. Considering the number of townhome driveways
which are to access the proposed private street, it is
questionable whether ample land area exists to effectively
accommodate snow storage. As a condition of PUD approval, the
applicant should submit a snow removal plan that includes
provisions for removing excess snow off site.
5. Future Street Extension. The subject development's private
street has been configured so as to allow a future easterly
extension. In consideration to adjacent topography, the City
Engineer has questioned whether such an extension will ever be
feasible. It also must be realized that if such an extension
were to occur, volumes on the said street would likely
increase. In consideration of potential roadway capacities,
it would become questionable whether the proposed street width
and "private" designation would be appropriate if such an
extension were to occur. In this regard, the applicants could
consider a shortening of the proposed cul -de -sac and the
introduction of a lot arrangement where lots back up to the
site's eastern property line.
Lots. The concept plan indicates an average lot size of 5,040
square feet. According to Section 401.03.D.2 of the Zoning
Ordinance, a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet per unit should
be provided for two family dwellings. It should be noted, however,
that for PUD projects, the entire project area (under private
ownership) is to be utilized in the calculation of lot size. In
this light, 8,422 square feet of land has been determined to exist
for each dwelling unit. As such, minimum lot sizes appear to have
5
•
410
been satisfactorily met, but the configuration of the open space in
the development is of questionable value in providing quality open
space or useable area for the project.
As shown on Exhibit F, each twin home structure is to overlay two
individual lots, thereby allowing individual unit ownership. In
review of the proposed lot configuration, a number of concerns have
been found to exist.
1. Lot Arrangement: As mentioned previously, it is highly
doubtful that the development's private street will be
extended eastward. In recognition of this, consideration
should be given to revising the lot configuration so that lots
may "back up" to the subject property's east lot line.
2. Lot Width: Lots 25, 26, and 27 are provided between 12 and 15
feet of street frontage. In this regard, they essentially
exist as "flag lots" According to PUD requirements, the
minimum lot frontage for "townhome conversions" shall not be
less than twenty (20) feet. While the subject development
does not technically involve "townhome conversions ", the 20
foot width requirement should be upheld. The subdivision
design concept should be modified to eliminate the cited "flag
lots ".
3. Easement: As shown on Exhibit C, a 12 foot wide easement for
storm water and sanitary sewer is located between Lots 10 and
11. The City Engineer should comment on the width of this
easement and whether enough area is preserved for maintenance
purposes.
Off - Street Parking. Considering the width of the proposed private
street (30 feet), off - street parking should be prohibited on the
private street unless the width is increased to 32 feet to allow
for parking on one side so as to ensure effective traffic movement
and area safety.
According to the Zoning Ordinance, two family dwelling units must
provide two (2) off - street spaces per unit. While all proposed
dwellings appear to meet this requirement via their inclusion of
two stall garages, it may be advisable to provide a street width
adequate to allow at least one side of parking.
Setbacks. While the PUD Ordinance does make provision for interior
setback deviations, all perimeter setbacks in the applicable base
zoning district (R -B) must be upheld. With one exception, all
applicable R -B perimeter setbacks have been met. The R -B District
requires a 30 foot rear yard setback. Lots 11 and 12 on the north
side of the cul -de -sac and Lots 13 and 14 on the south, however,
illustrate 12 to 22 foot rear yard setbacks. So as to comply with
ordinance standards, Lots 11, 12, 13 and 14 should uphold the 30
foot rear yard setback requirement.
6
•
In regard to interior setbacks, all proposed dwellings have been
found to exceed the 15 foot front yard setback (from curb line)
required by Ordinance.
The Zoning Ordinance stipulates that no building within a PUD may
be nearer to another building that one -half the sum of the building
heights of the two buildings. In recognition of this requirement,
an interior building separation of 15' -6" must be maintained. All
proposed buildings have been found to meet this requirement.
Driveways. Dwelling unit driveways have been found to measure 20
feet in length. As such, ample area exists to park vehicles
outside the limits of the designated private street.
Property Owners Association. As a condition of PUD approval, a
property owners association should be formed. The association
should produce restrictive covenants which govern the maintenance
and operation of PUD common areas and open spaces. All restrictive
covenants of the property owners association will be subject to
City approval. A draft East Oaks Homeowners Association
declaration has been provided to the City and will be reviewed by
the City Attorney.
Park Dedication. The subject development proposal includes 1.03
acres of passive open space adjacent to the site's western border.
While pedestrian access to the area is provided, it is questioned
whether any recreational activities may be able to occur on the
property. It is recommended that the applicants pay park dedication
fees of $12,000 ($800 for each duplex unit) in accordance with the
requirements of the subdivision regulations. The Park Commission
should provide comment in regards to the park dedication.
Grading and Drainage. The subject site is characterized by its
steep slopes. To accommodate the proposed development, a
substantial amount of cut and fill will be necessary. In this
regard, due attention must be given to ensure proper site grading
and drainage.
The City Engineer has recommended that "engineered control fills"
take place to ensure that proper compaction is provided to support
roadway and dwelling unit construction. The grading and drainage
plan will be subject to review by the City Engineer.
Landscaping. According to the Zoning Ordinance, a landscape plan
must be submitted as part of the PUD development proposal. While
the submitted landscape plan does identify various street median
and open space plantings, it is believed the plan should be
modified (or a tree preservation plan prepared) to note specific
tree plantings to be retained and removed from the site. To
further buffer the proposed development, existing trees along the
7
southern border of the adjacent commercial parcel should be
retained. Specific landscape plans will be reviewed and approved
as part of the Final Plan Stage of the PUD process.
Development Agreement. As a condition of final PUD approval, the
applicants should enter into a development agreement with the City.
As part of the agreement, the developers will be required to post
security necessary to ensure compliance with the conditions of PUD
approval.
Utility Plan. In accordance with PUD submission requirements, the
applicants have submitted a utility plan for review. The plan will
be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
Garbage Removal. All garbage removal is expected to be the
responsibility of the individual property owners. Centralized
dumpster facilities will not be used in this project.
Signage. Exhibit G, as attached, illustrates a neighborhood
identification sign for the proposed development. The sign
location is not, however, identified on the submitted site and /or
landscape plans. If signage is to be erected as part of the
proposed PUD, detailed sign plans must be submitted in accordance
with City sign regulations. Sign plans should identify the
location, type and size of all proposed signage.
Building Type. As shown on Exhibits H and I, the proposed twin
homes are to exhibit a symmetrical design with horizontal lap
siding and gabled roof. At 1,200+ square feet in size, the
proposed two bedroom units exceed the minimum 720 square foot size
requirement stipulated by Ordinance.
If it is the intent of the applicants to construct varied townhome
designs, alternative building elevations and floor plans should be
submitted and subject to City staff approval.
Building Height. The PUD Ordinance does not stipulate a specific
building height requirement. In this light, it is believed the R -B
District height standard (35 feet) should be utilized. At 15' -6"
in height, the proposed twin homes comply with the maximum 35 foot
height requirement.
8
•
CONCLUSION
Based on the preceding review, our office believes that a number of
outstanding issues must be addressed prior to recommending PUD
development plan approval. Our office does, however, recommend PUD
concept plan approval subject to the conditions listed in the
Executive Summary of this report.
pc: LaVonne Wilson
Joe Anderlik
Norris and Norvin Swager
Jim DeBenedet
9
•' s+ ' ;. t.t �4tn " 3r •. .a ;-f•$,,g.� +,.;.� >:*'':6:`; 0 it tt t t t e : �e# 8 maN t a t a S l' O — .
�, # sir:e iit:iii tti = 9 �� — I e iitte ta:a�tiipi I ®� I \ a, � � J ���ntRllt� h tt tltt ® � — .�_- �� ,, �L '* IIt11�1�t�� d . . t � _�t d lQ6 ,,.. . � ~''
I. 1 1 Itll 1
� t [' � 1 1
.} � : _IQ t � t 7 iii o
ttiliit : � �Py
f � :. 3�< %'n. } . ° •s.'t :.. ? +cr.:5 � .r..• .caxi� - � C� �f� ' E ®E o
r f�•
r xi ?4f" , Il t� P � J. x s !!! ^ — - -S " ° a e - . � �' 4 r - • SFTE- ®_�� ®�° �r .
L
�m ..,moo p _ _... o �
W
_ _ IP.� "7R301 YI9YP9iAOBL�9000P° ®Rq� I� 8 s 11-%. ;.,.., lOOlrO ®e■a v0 o<�oemreas7ly � . ' _o '- V � wou POPON m BOAP°9P POL - . � . � o osuoo ( ° s��a6at° a� orococa rlaLar ° A 00� 5 PO oo r alre I �aea�o � vo 00 0� : w 1 hdrala aaa .. , -•_ . r..... " ∎ spa, .of. • I.
IS Ofllimman6 r�llrs P4470... c ede IliitlOL oOpOe �#• atl000C a °°, e:t:ata ` 1 a
''..:i„.. '° p4pey�tlf] tlY 04 YR5 PY9Rii aoC� 'r \ ■
: h :. N :,:..;.:;... °� opeeorrrro11.111 ' mu a tolrroll rl► � � ,_.;,011r-
nf. ft. fs :..n. rF s ..! arn.r:. s . s a c . ::.. �l
��P4P + . l d+�.9. 4 • .° —� T 3� ....,`p'4`4:. . +:,'t '•: ft:::+: fs.`.%:,':+: oo{ k;+ „i•`.'::•::::: ? %•ay'f.' 4A::::::- v r \ i . , , f - o r ` ii
CNN .Itv
Th
n } —
r
r�4 :. --- .- ^fr.....:.:. x:44:h?n.�3..:..n -.: :i. ? :.3 I !v:
This map is for planning purposes
only and should not be used when
precise measurements are required.
m x
x /�
W I
0 1000' 2000' North
n � � rk
11.88_c.l.g.
,-.. ____ rn
r – �' ” northw
p �
associa
C7 consultants, inc.
I� minnefota
0
z
•
4
0
* E AST ;:;:::;2•03K:i ;?::: i:::$0:$:::!:::::e.:0: : : : :i . . :::::04
1 R..weeeeee:..
.:::::•___:•::•:. ::. 111 NRIII \ 2" " s al l a t r l i 2 1 1 1 34 33 ,
.•• ...
.... ......•.W.W.......•:•.•.•.
MEM ,
' .• • :•: ::: `...."' MEI
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii to . ••• • a MEI g
i :—.:!::: .: .!!1 i L si k k 'ii
7 re. ..n= ,,..s
4.. n il IN I 'll 2 4 M
• ..*F-',4 NMI Ma r
1111) 4 lik k 4 1 iiii! UPPER
i . 6 S =MI MIA MIN e
MIMI
. .: L MIL VIM _
t a ;:;:3 ,
, 1.: . •IIIN — VC
.,, •:•%
,, ,, II pal s s : A r :. .4 •:•:. . • : :: I —.— =Nu
a is . ii , • • ft l 2 .....
. 4 41 1
...
pii - - t -:•:•:. . . . • z : ::: 18 I • \
*I 1:11111111iiiii .1 . ,. Nil: . it
• ...4•1114•••••4••••••••• 43.• 2 :1 C:b• t ,
Eli 17 ' : q Mil \ I
vs*
.:.:•:.
8 II 1 ;p le di '',i4.::::::::1::::::::::1::::::::::::::.:N::::: Ng
: El _ li
■ .T......x.:.::•:•:-:-:-:•:•:-1 me use
—
„._._ I
••• e::•: MIEMI MIIMMI
Re2_:. F A 1 EN
_....., ._._
....
...,-
_______.__-■------------- 8 3
• 1
411110
........ . ... . .... . . .
..---"----------
, .......•... .....,,,,..,..,.....:.......:.,.... .
1 i ?IA... .0... „„,:„„„„............,..„............„„„„,::::::„. .
..„.:.:•:.:.:.„„:„.:......,......................
.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. ..:..::„.:.:.:.:„...:.:.:.,...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.. B2,.
.............................................
13 .
• oiiii::!: 0 ..::ti,'5:1, .
2200
a L'"Ig. ii:,::::
. ..:"....::'.' .:.:.:.:2!'!.':'.:'::.:.:.: .1.:m. .........,:.:.::::::::::::::::::':::::: .'::':::::::':':: SITE , • /
i •••,........:464,•• !
..,
• I7
23" ' '::iiiiiR;';;.:Mi;;M:';:;;;:i
' ' ■
i Z
1
t
R YAM- vor..4...v.#11•1 .
P
I # - 4700
. i
/
- r.L 56TH — ,Z ST K •
D•
• 1.b .1 s\• • EASEMENT / •
.:1111. 2 . !
• 111 1 , , 7
. .
I :so° -
MI 57 ,
R • .. .
i
MO
L S 6g
•••• :, . .
..'::
Asso
lir
zsoo
. :' D ila iiimmAgliak 2
".,:y ,... . 2 4461111111 SW 3 •
4411.
4 VALLEY VIEW
6
PAR K
:,! M •
# 1
it MX i 1.4
_
I. 1, 2700 ' 2
MIL P415 :5 4 W 4 N 4 ° I i 3 C\c
e "
1 -
EXHIBIT B - DETAILED SITE LOCATION
0
4 0 , IP
NE COR
NE 1/4 NE 1/4
SEC 4
N. LINE T29N
R2OW
PRELIMINARY PLAT NE 1/4 NE 1/4 _ _ —
NW COR - - _ — _ 8 72
NE 1/4 NE 1/4 / of K?IGSSEY \ CHE7EK - --- __ -_ -_- - - _-_- - _e ? a - - - - -- -,_-_:.-_-_-_---_-=---- - --
/ EAST OAKS ADDITION 4-99 _ � �— - - -- _ =-
/ -
\____F-- \ 8' WATER MAIN - - --
w g
N 89'13'19 E 822.43' w - - w - -w -- w - - - J1- ' w - � �� -=v` 898
LOCATED IN \ M S. •H. 36
I.E. =870.2 856
-� _ -� -_ 60TH S TREERTH SO.�NTAGE�(R /�D
P.F. , - _� - .-- / P.p.
THE NE 1 /4 OF THE NE 1 /4 S T. ` _ - ,_, -;o- -- - - - -- _ __ —_ -411, 0
SECTION 4, T29N, R2OW ME`6.DD " � 1 I.E. ' :45!10 , 3 2 3 ' • � -- --- / �_ _ `---. -, 705 S.F. co
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS, WHNGTON COUNTY ' I.E. ; ... ' - � / ' ,�' N , - - ' \ \
I . '.00 - AN. , / > S0. R/ W - -
I ' \ I I MA ' /' 7 60 TH ST. ISO' 7 � ,_ � \ --
asa
\
C . E. =839 �. ` , / , , -
_
OWNER: EAST OAKS, C LEGEND I I I I ( ~ ST. "_'/ ,� 1 / '/ 7 -_
1 C /�1GAGER BROS., INC I Z �'�
.3'74 S. MAIN ST., SUITE 220 -- / / ) " �_� - 2- s : / __ - Z O B 2 7 '/ /
� asz
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER — ► 11' I LE. =8:9.00 / / 38 sEwf 7 / . `
� ' STILLWATER, MN 55082 EXISTING WATER MAIN --- w - - --w _ �' , O NE 7 �` i` / / / `` ��� `�
EXISTING STORM SEWER -- __ I I • 0' I` N , ^� / �\ .
VEYOR: BARRETT M. STACK EXISTING CONTOUR -- 894 m _ �� ��,r.._7_/<___// � �� Ica
/
/ / \N 850
9090 FAIRY FALLS ROAD NORTH ' `� � ,� --
— �� � \ '
STILLWATER, MN 55082 '* ✓ x - -- i j ` ,� �
Z ONED R -B I PHA ` ��, �� , �' , �_C i /7-i ` :40
(612)439 -5630 _ ` - 830 ,
PAVING �w w I V .. - , �.-_ (� 1'F'�L - _
(ENGINEER: STEVENS ENGINEERS / �I � � M f . / 1 - \< 11 _81s.zo
1301 COULEE ROAD / / v1 I O I � - \ - - +� \ �� - = LE =815.00
HUDSON, WI 54016 N T N \ ` �L � A - -- -`._ \v 830 E. LINE
(715)386 -5819 — _ �I �/� \568,5 \ F .' -- -� � � \\ '\ �\, ` 832 NE 1/4
NOTES: � -i / � CI) ., M \ �\ ��'- \ \ :34
1 1. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL AREA ZONED R -B. K04 � � - J ..)V,....1_
I \ `�- I \ \ \ 836
° I s ANT1A0o e� ` i I s •P �••••∎ t \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ 938
I Z 2. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, REFER TO SHEET 1 OF 4. N � \\ I 1 90 LNG YA NTH \ \ \
/ ��\ 1 1 \ \ \840
I 3. SOIL TYPES SCALED FROM WASHINGTON COUNTY ` \ \ ` Q SOIL SURVEY MAPS. I
I - - - \ \ I Ir 1 S 89 W 37.04' N
I 39' 36' 36' 36' 36' �� � 36' 36' 36 37' 37 \
14. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS TO BE DEDICATED 1 ` 1 0 844 9a2
AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. 0 50 100 / r � \ g5 0 \ f o I 1 \I I 1 c I 5 \1`1�'
\ \ o
1 1 0
\ l �c \� / I I I 13
° IUTAL PLAT AREA 9.45 AC. \ \ \ \ � . � i 1 ; 15,405 to
S.F.
I \ \ \ � � \ •w \ \ 5,07 5,040 5,040 040 5,04Q 15,040 5, 401 5,040 04 —� ✓ 41
I I \ \ : N. 40 \
S.F. S. F. S.F S.F. S S S S.F. S.F. 11 1 ° ZONED I
��
s � \ 198' \ \� � 40' 6 `� _i 3 i 4 0 /5 1 0 ' 1 8 a \ �q 1 1 p L 1 ° piETE1c
s \ \ S.. / .... ii____ 1 ,,,,T HI‘
HAM EDI —
3.' 36' 36' 36' 3\
\ \ � a 36' 36' - 6' 36' _..36' 36 7. 9 e
I \ \ � \ \ O \ 25' RAD. \ .. / a2
"LINE A" \ \ \ \ \\ Q•::` - _ �\ _ _ _ - „,.„0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: MON \ \ \ C ' \ $B — \ - l o
1, \ \ \ \ � � �� OUTLOT C \
ALL THAT PART OF THE NORTH 40 RODS OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF ZONED B -2 S PACE \ \ ' \ a '2i (
S. ,VI ,1 VA(\ 60,883 S.F. \ \ \ a38
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 20 WEST, cv \ r�
cv \ \ 7 124 •" 6 '-:'" 3. 36' 2`�'
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: \ Tl� ' �A 1
4 836
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF w 46, 13 S.F \ • ��I>��S � 1 \ 1 I 54
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 19 SECONDS OU OT B� I \ 10 � 1 2 8 ♦ / � �_-
EAST, ASSUMED BEARING, ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE THEREOF, 822.43 FEET 1 \ \ \ 1 " A 1 1 — 7 i % e`>°
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL BEING DESCRIBED; THENCE SOUTH 1 / 2 \ \ \\
02 DEGREES 12 MINUTES 15 SECONDS EAST 384.90 FEET THENCE SOUTH 89 iv / • 805 F . - / \ � 0 1 ...c.? 18 1 17 0 16 1 15 0 Bab
/ / / 122 g 20 19 a 14 1 ( e as
DEGREES 13 MINUTES 19 SECONDS WEST
337.95 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 38 DEGREES / N �-. / 1A r(� 1 1 1 1 �' 1
31 MINUTES 41 SECONDS EAST 63.69 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02 DEGREES 25 J �� / • • • ' , \ 049 5,04 5,040 5,040 5,040 5,040 5,040 5,040 -,
MINUTES 41 SECONDS EAST ALONG A LINE HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS "LINE 0 ' \ F. --S.F F. S �,_s . - SF - -S:F� 6•2 S.F. 12 84 I
A ", 224.95 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTH 40 / / _
RODS; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 19 SECONDS EAST ALONG SAID -_ _ - -- -- — -- 2/- - / e..- m te �� 0 \ m m m m CO aso 84 I- - 84, I :50
SOUTHERLY LINE 798.18 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ROADWAY & UTILITY B c 0 95' r1 \ ` ` - - J
SAID NORTH 40 RODS; THENCE NORTH 02 DEGREES 30 MINUTES 20 SECONDS WEST r EASEMENT 152 4 \1•alr�.TT1 36 ' 1' 36 /
ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST - . . — . — . — • — • — — i 7 �59 S 89'13'19" W 798.1 B' ` 0�' ��
QUARTER 660.30 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; \ SE COR.
THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 19 SECONDS WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY APT. NO. 40
LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER 495.37 FEET, 40 RODS NO I BLDG RODS
MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SANTIAGO \ MAIMME01
SUBJECT TO THE RIGHT -OF -WAY OF 60Th STREET NORTH.
SUBJLCT TO AND TOGETHER WITH ANY OTHER VALID EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS ZONED R -3
OR RESTRICTIONS. W . ORLEAN . ' T
TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENTS FOR ROADWAY AND UTILITY PURPOSES OVER, '
UNDER AND ACROSS ALL THAT PART OF THE SOUTHERLY 30.00 FEET OF SAID NO S CALE ,, 'ei i
NORTH 40 RODS OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER WHICH
LIES WESTERLY OF THE BEFORE DESCRIBED 'LINE A. S.T.H. 38 � � I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN, OR REPORT WAS
- - -- -- PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR EAST OAKS
80 S Lo T NORTH t ic NE 1/4 '27\ � r I AM A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR _UNDER THE LAWS OF
• `/ 1/4 WI •y THE ST OF MINNESOT � __
MM. • .� am J` � / / I / �C`E ! iA. �-� DATE REVISION SCALE j' " =50' PROJECT Na SHEET NO.
do— PLAT LOCATION C/ �'( i rr' V DATE 8/20/93 1093 -01 3 OF 4
DATE 8Z/ - 93 REG. NO. x.377¢ LAND SURVEYOR
ri
a BARRETT M. STACK
'C VICINITY MAP
2
E XHIBIT C - PRELIMINARY PLAT
' _ .. .. ... . _ .... ?s .. ..w w.. .. .t .. a ..: .. .. - ,..... .. _.. .3. _..
S.T.H. 36
DEVELOPMENT STAGE P.U.D. PLAN -_ a�6 -- 5/2 __e�°
of _ --====:"=:::----- - - -gj4 -- - -- _ _
EAST OAKS ADDITION - W _ W _- - -- �! =--`-�' � __`� =`� B50
-- -- - - -- -- -
LOCATED IN -- -- - M = a7 °.2 - ' 1 ( 60Th STREET N RT H 1 _ � _ —_ _� -
THE NE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 __4_,_....'
M S �. 'E e . o /V / �__� _ _ __ �__ , P.P
I SECTION 4, T29N, R20W
- - - I!•E. _856. M ( ! ` - - - ,�- - / - - - ` � \ ■
CI�fY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS WA�NGTON COUNTY 1 -t-I r ` �� I '� / 1
I /
-
■ I � I I Ilk. rf ' ' / i \ � > 854
II I I (- a1 ! /�
/ le
APT. APT. I 11 i�� _ / 2,_ _ :::ii.:::::,,B- OP 2�i / � ���� NOTES: BLD BLD l ( !' / / �� ' / / � \� \
1. E NG CONTOURS TAKEN FROM TOPOGRAPHIC / �\ I ! �' �� VEY BY BARRETT M. STACK, LAND SURVEYOR. � T � / y - ��/ j
I ALL EASEMENTS DEDICATED FOR DRAINAGE AND / `� \85D 52 2. A I I '� — ► �
�unurlES. Z R -B �.PHAL `�" �\ r � l` I \ ` / '/ � � t ;� - -� // `� -1 i/ :
l i-t - L. & - — a 3o
D. SEE SHEET 1 FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES. PAVING v t I ��` \\ ___ _ 1 11 I l .....- =818.20
I -- APT. ( I \ .. �� n �\\ { \ \_ l - -- - �+ �`. 16,. \��- r LE =9,5.00
BL J N 1 .Q� \` \ \ \ \\ = f� ��� - --. „� _ 830
/ % -�~ - -/ It �� \\ �J 1 � \.\ 836
/ //� `�_ 11 \ `\ / ��\ 838
I O LEGEND (/ 7 / 7 / 4 / � \\� I Il /{L 8,0
Z I PROPOSED STORM SEWER » / \ ���\� I 1 S :97 '19” 1 ▪ 417.03• .
\ I PROPOSED INLET ■ \ \ '\� I , I 1 ¢ T SER — --- W - �\ \ 85D / \\ ��,I� I I I I I 1 I
I J ■ I 1 5 40 1 5 Z. i
O EXISTING STORM SEWER ' � ` \ \ 850 eilitikk,„, ��'\ I I 1 S.T S.F. 1 % EXISTING CONTOUR \ \ \ 1 , \ � N� 4,90 5,040 5,040 ,040 5,041 5,04 5, 1 4 015,040 5,04 —I \ 1 1 1n I \ it :9. ` ,; �mit ,, ,, .. I S.F. S.F S.F. Sy. I S.- S.. S.F. S.F. 004U ' ZONED I
I ° 1 s\ \ I \ \ �i� \ \� 88 ��, I� \ 3 / 1 11
I
y
I ` • ,9. � ' 111 ! � � �\S__41\1111\11 � � � -- • , b 1 1 111111 \ �! \ 4 1 , - • . ! I � � — � I 11� �
. �9 \ ..,,
' 1 1 11 \\ I�.� ►�ua�����; � ; ��V _-���� 1
i 1 , I \N , , ,. 1 1 ZONED B -2 N. �`rV , I 4 ,
, \ II � \� I ,/1 1111111111� \� MMnI`MW
I - l � \2 \
_ _._ ___. - _ _..._- A46TH - PER PLAN 0,
Lc) i 18117 16115
N \;\\-\,,, , 20 19 14 13 ea61 •
' I ' �I - LIIHN■ammimm... ' I �� � 25 � I' 5,040 5,04 0 5 , 0401 50 41 5,04015041 J 2408 .Fs5''—L---'E F 1344:1 - S. SF,- 8 3 7 1 S.F.
0 021 ES. _ _ 0 02' /FT / 1 ��� / 1 �, /
1 1 11 — � - _
i - - ep m a c i o ►.) B - B r - r / \0
_.. I - - - _ .. - . _._ --- 1 / — ,, 0 °` 00 0T' m .. m m • s 4 g •� 65 \__4" MIN. AGGREGATE — 09 I _ _ _ r�� ���. ~C��IIMI ' ` ��j I � � 5 I BASE / 8 -618 & GUTTER UNDER CURB _ JJ- _ ---- — . ' — — . • - S 89'13•19" W 798.18' - L -. ■ J
CURB & GUTTER
_ PAVEMENT DESIGN I 1 APT.
BLDG V-EROSICN FENCE
rooi/tv , --- 1--- - 1 1/2" WEARING COURSE
zx:.W.I1Ma`C.= 1 1/2" BASE COURSE
11= 11-11 =11= 11=11?
- 1 11 11 11 � II �I =TL�1 6" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE ZONED R -3
'll_ i it �� I 1=
—12" MIN. DEPTH OF SUBGRADE
PREPARATION
ALL SUBGRADE AND AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 100% OF STANDARD
PROCTOR DENSITY
DEVELOPMENT STAGE P.U.D. PLAN FOR EAST OAKS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT GRADING DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL
TYPICAL STREET SECTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND DATE REVISION PROJECT NO. SHEET NO.
• SCALE 1 " =SO
THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER -
8/20/93 1093 -01 2 OF 4
3 THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
x STEVENS I' ( iL REG. N0. /99p( DATE. (ff� ENGINEERS, Inc.
o
EX IBIT D - GRADING, DRAINAGE, EROSION CONTROL PLAN .4
4,
05
0 • 0 0
• S.T.H. 36
DEVELOPMENT STAGE P.U.D. PLAN ______ a�z 870
EAST OA
o f —_ —_ _= = NIORT= =g74 __-- -__ —__ — --
of ADDITION 6 - - - --- - - -- - - - - - = __ Ea60
-- - w w— _ W - - -- W' = =`g== - .' - _c am`_— w _ _ — = =asa
-- -- --
IN � � l �� OTH STREET H J ss
LOCATED �LE.= 870.22 1 — —
THE NE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 ST. — _� = - -—�= o-- — — _ —, _ _ - PP I o
I SECTION 4, T29N, R2OW — — — — — — — — — — — — LE 6.00 T ' ' M= LE. a; D . , — 2/ // —'`//— — /' — ► N A CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS, WANGTON COUNTY �i I� \\
1 I. e4 . 0 • w..- , � ,/ , - _ - - � , _ 854
OWNER: EAST OAK-S, LLC I 1, I I 1 ( a� i �� —// � �, / ,- ��
C/�0 WAGER BROS., INC / I I • 1 '�M'� -/�'
24 S. MAIN ST., SUITE 220 APT. APT. / `1' I In- ' :I 9.00 : • i /� -2 �2 8 - ,� / / / / ` �� } 852
STILLWATER, MN 55082 a BLD BLD / I ` 1 ; _ 7 / / y �-` ' /� _ _, \ _ \\
E F -
VEYOR: BARRETT M. STACK u I I� `%� / `��. _-�i /774/4--/_1, /`- X 850
9090 FAIRY FALLS ROAD NORTH • I � ��.i ^ r I �� _ - -_ , ' , �� , , -w
STILLWATER, MN 55082 0 ` . � /� {
I m ZO NE , R -B PHALT \ € ii, z /�� /' �� � .- i 1 >7 :40
PAVING ?:d. l 1 I l - - ' yam / . ( . r(- -LL = _ 830
\ \ \
I / 11 1 1 .. =818.20
I 1301 COULEE ROAD ENGINEER: STEVENS ENGINEERS APL • :C.211 � �__ — _`_ `+ �� \��� - eals.00
HUDSON, WI 54016 BLD J / ,,,,,,,,,,,,,\,..\„..--_,...--_________ __ _ = f\ 1 �� "' I —_' 830
N \\ \-� 832
/ 1 1 F \ \ \ :34
TTORNEY: BARRY McKEE �j �_--1 / I TYY}C�A� NTS � - �� \ \\
f i �__�/ I I �`' �G RA�6 MENS N \ N 836
324 SOUTH MAIN STREET I BUILDh AD
E) ��i��� \ /
O STILIWATER, MN 55082 0 m / � ��� I -/ P B LESS 9TIIE•WI TED. / \ \ \ 838
�
I / � \ 840
��� \� \ ' 1 S :9'1 '19" 417.03' � � &a2 mil o ( \ o
0
850 I' ..'
O ( \� C �II I J o 140 15,041 M
o
N
o
OTES: \ \ \ 1\
O 1 PROPOS LAND USE IS TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. N \ \ \ h ' §�' 90+ 1 5,0 040 04 5,04 • 40 5 04c it , S.F
I \ \ :9t r -1, •,� i i l y\` � . Y 9 1 I 041 o ZONED I
ALL SANITARY SEWERS TO BE 8 "; ALL WATER MAINS ` ��I� I S.F.I 1. S.F. S. S S S S . S $ \ N
TD BE 6 ". see �\ N \ � \ \ \ \ ����1 91�� � • ( 3 1 4 5 1 i ' 1 8 \9 1 10 ' 1 1 5
_ I p N
3 EXISTING CONTOURS TAKEN FROM TOPOGRAPHIC s `� � Q '�� \ \\\ tia:111.,...hialli �� ` � // /_ ' SJRVEY BY BARRETT M. STACK, LAND SURVEYOR. • ` 9 • / ' \ Ilw I : lapti
I _ �� � , W pb
I F vi \.!` ,1 1 N' YA' N I� „ 4. ALL EASEMENTS DEDICATED FOR DRAINAGE AND \ `. •
b ... .. 6N41.02 .1 a . I II • � . Al �`
U ILITIES. —� \ \ i � � Q��` � — eMI MEEE \ I Zi1 1_.'■�1110_
\ ON \ \ N \ \ $8 \� w �, �.FDF�
P.U.D. DATA ZONED 8 -2 \ PACE \\\ \� \ \, Q 5 /1J II I � I 'II . '
b , I � H,_������ ��1� 1�-� � ' I II ��a� 835
79 AC. \ 31 S. \ \ \ p a lair" ... � \ �
EN TONAL P.U.D. AREA 5. w \ \ 7 _ - q 6
Bo AREA OF PRIVATE STREET 1.38 AC. oU oT o . �� �_
\ 5 �� , I 1 TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS 30 / I 9 1 ' I� 1 18 I n 16 115 846
AV RAGE RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZE
5,587 �
587 S.F ••F 20 is 846
v --' 014 1
— � � •
0 n "� ' 040 1 5,041 040 5 040 5 040 1 5,04 !� ^ $,180
CO MON OPEN SPACE 44,931 S.F. 9,� 25 ' (� F . s F. s 3 : F. 1 - s . �1 6 s 7 1 / SF.
6 / ■ 12,41: S.F/ I \ /
9 o 0 0 P i t' m m m m m \ -_ -- 0
1 m° 00 30 140' � `� +� ■ _ _ •
I — . _ _ . — . __ — — . — . — . — — — — — — — S 89'13'19" W 798.18' --------\
I APT.
1 BLDG
LEGEND ZONED R -3
PROPOSED WATER MAIN W W W W—
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER W
PROPOSED HYDRANT Y
PROPOSED GATE VALVE ISI
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER -- - 0. -- — DEVELOPMENT STAGE P.U.D. PLAN FOR EAST OAKS
EXISTING WATER MAIN W W I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT
EXISTING STORM SEWER - . WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND DATE REVISION SCALE 1 " =50' PROJECT NO. SHEET NO.
EXISTING CONTOUR --- B - - - -- THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER
E THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. DATE 8/20/93 1093 - 1 OF 4
AP.#/S.--fL_ REG. N0. / 4Ys PATE. lqt? ENGINEERS. Inc.
a
w PROJECT ENGINEER !DRAWN BY RCS
JAME!
EXHIBIT E - UTILITY PLAN
E
a - - •• i'n
S.T.H. 36
— — — — — — — — — — 6 0TH STREET NORTH
. T • 1
- o .P. I - � oP.P• P.P. P.P. y Fc
Y o o r
( — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I — — — — — — — — )
•
7UNfYER, 1llcf3ER �3,): •
- O. I — — — —
Y
I ... R7f fs1TN A,:iOi.D DIv7PCZ) !t N I
L / - . N
I � � AR3�RRY, GR�ll Roy • • M
APT, APT.
BfD 1 I I
I ,
I
S. • I p�g ,
WI
- - • SPHAL` ro. I,` Iz f ,
PAVING
a, I APT. � .., ■ �I ' I � • �1 �� I 4
I taw 1IA .1•1 a
I I I \
t.. 1 9
0
YtBURT401rcaleAc, ArleVOILL .ct/MM„Cer.Or> =) , . -. ili su .
Z ■r .. �
i t ice, � atiR/Facao. s jiiwa &gcri) R 1 I r, i
f,
i. I Q I lo i, weare (GM CJ Afs �' " S 89'13'19' W 417,03'
✓ I
Ak k, cRf pn rfbr+Y (3 }- . - . ►+ I I I • ° . ,
Is , o ��j I I I I I M
e S 89'13'19" W 337.95'
i. I : 1 sue-- .-,-_- .- .- .,.- . , — . — . 11I 12 �'
k `� 1 12 3 4 5 1 7 18 9 10 I o ,
M
a
l ����\ bC 30 I I I I N z ' .
J
/� WR vvf TkrlES
I tl SP-45 I I I • - •• r
I
_ ___
a• I I n I / vews,. • — 28 — - -- $ — — — —
t ;'- o, Pi ,rMS/
4 I I 4 . c ,
a I trows✓ 27
e I WI % 31 ` \ �,� \\*)*--- I,
1 , \ , 4 —‘ 6R ^1s 2 I
( �M I �`
} I N 2 j 2 4 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 I 13 '
�, 2 I I
__----) I
r
f S 8993'19" W 798.18' ,
I 1
' APT. �,
1 9lDfi
,, 1S. •
it
,
E,':.
r ..
. .'
,
c N ., . .. ,,,,,, , ,:sist,e4.. , '..,:.!;;;
,
-
•
EXHIBIT F - LANDSCAPE PLA
v '
SC
� • . '. .- , l�. u _ t,.. ... :. . .. .: . . .... 4 fl
6 ^ : • :. .. x '� p t ... � int.. .,. .... -r ,. . 1 a � � _. z . a 1+- i, ;... r X
',+.. i. :'i.., s : 4 .. . .' . J: .r, ,S.. • }F . .-s. t .. n. X r., s i - .id,.. � + r :- . jY { - -
. - :. .. x . '} ,, .. `� v.a:4A �.. ff .d .. a .:.. , _ � - � Sf � .,3� ' _ � _ �� .r � 4Y � t5 :v �.a . a, Y !k+�,.
�. . ,.. ... -: u 4 _. w . t �. Y. s..: �. 1 ° r ' '$' d , _ r:+. r8.., �q �� . . 1 ' � ::, '' � r ... �2. .,. a �w�..,:.. : .. tl �� ' ' ui ���i� Y ��r�:�u���� r i :,[�., t
• 0 O RECE �-
• " --- c - i it ii.,,\,i7,:_.,..c.;'t,
0 i , s • : 4, I `'4%-• 4 1.1. -- ‘ - '
i ,f,. $ - 7 IVEJ AUG 2 6 1993
,, i i. \ ,,1 / .,\ , 'It s' -■ — r '
.tii ..‘".,1. ..
f ,.., :.-x .....
• 1. NI_ . . :,‘ ii .. .. .. , ,._.
., A 1..e , 1 . , V, .1 IV:iC A ,
• lk • .' ----2 • 1
' L, , . ,, ■ ' . cl
. A x-o-v . - .i \ k \\ \ ....7
si ll 2• . '.;
;, ?...,1 ,... . \
. — 1 -4h,-.I ,... ‘.
. . ...-.....'...- $,...,2.,..,
„..v.s.........„-.-- .. ?4: IA f ' .
et. . 1
•
\ ,
' ,de4 1:. .Nii \ 0 .-NI.:4 \,. . .. • :::.
w Y' / I
. }.y' /iii v t • • ! /. . ) <7. . -4 ..\\:\ .... ; 1 :.: ...Y , I
-
•
'.... , .......... • r: .., - /Al . \ —VI0 .; ` \
s . /
' t itl
1 /1 14j. I . ' I - •
— "
...\-•-• . ,)"/ 'fr, ' .
• - ..., . . m ;...! . / .4 . 1==.■ \ . .-. .. i /if � � � s ; Airi .; 41,,,,....,...._,,,, , ._ , ___ _______ EXHIBIT G — SIGN PERSPECTIVE
t i .- 4'..%:-. �+ " !f!'.i.N�
'..! a � . > _z. i ..74.4 4 - fm�, -.4 ' 4 . s J • • . .4. ',i, y
itsif 3,
�Si 'fia <tt+ow+ �. n n a t v n : s
- �. 1 , .,," ". 1; s > ta... +-.. -,. ,•,- .. i
♦ _ ° :'," ^ '.' ,f� — -' . z ,.. � .wai . ..v •ic r .w `' , .
ij br�`s. 2 F /// a ✓ <- a. . ; - k-ri'3�i J r a.,s a• S?.S-..t£ r ..u....r a3 i
Y. ° j wxA,a ?^# ;tr- ,. a. T y y + : '.. r' s . :,.:t± ♦ • _... 1 +SSe v '
';`. `� � ' t . . z `K 2 ,• ,, 7 i 1 �.a� -y - ddsi�ia's+.+.ee.s.y "ya.c �- ) . ^' -p�. Y s r ' T ; : {....
. ' 2!`:' 'd' a'y •s•*+ .5� a- rs . .. �.c..... J ;.., a ` "' I �-., .i ./l ;lc, '' '�
n . r ...,•:;.��. - ' � - .. x -. tank.MS +, k• • ,�- r •-:. ' 6`A - - ,---• .". .
a . 1 � y ' sc .. sue. .. , `,� � ti_� �f� . aH rr:- i J f
' }� t a " ` \ ��"` � e
y s» !, " t x - ate ��� S y � ,• F.
i ll 4-1t � r . -. _._..__ __.. ___" f- -
mg t a t . w - �., _ _ t
r P 3 r� =:..> i +� k _ _ ..'fit
.
0 • tion Z c Unit Buildin `
m
g
r; 3J
co 2 pspR
C
v t ut tt \ 1 2. s,ft. ?LA's
Z
0
m
r
m
•
n
O
Z
U)
•
•
.ac ; a . • � ''' s . - t ' • ' - - = ' 1 • • • • - - • , i '.> .- - ' ' ' ' 1,1..... ,..1.0.0.0, 0 0 H •
1
•
` 1 .-2. _.: , :..,'::';
II
- ,i - ot► --t ^..?t.tr":!„°.".”,-.. � ' ;'
rY <�� �tFWw.+..•.�.........._ S R.f�2�.^YW .f.R.VfRrT.:a+i ] v.4nX'1 S
•
A.
•
h4 •
• 0 ,
. . .
. .
. 4 t
/ •
. , .
I •
I
I . 4
I -
"---4-- i
I
I I '
I I
, I I
I ILIA,' 91g A•5031 (witEt_fzEr9o90,41 leztuzminamat tomEIVPItaEl 1 1
-4-40!4t..\.5 -171.ttAt-uNteat-'
- 4 2 /4 - 24:42 4 i ■ I I
I _NA-sut.. 61.6 s - -xaucrc,L4,-,
I
—
... , ,
i e . . ej Ipr.E561144. — . ■ (V I
1 .
-• IDREV7tkibl 0 1 ---44 . - 1-4 ,...,,. in
iii --:-
1 - C 1 4! 1
7 hal " Ne ,
1 .,1
, 1 frri
E i /---
, .
— , . Li _
I al as.exiolo'- a K = 0 nil' •-• ---
1 •••••-ii-ww- j — ' SA.N
, el
I il -1VEPF00141
-_._t
, 1 , 1 i
I ' rgi_kg.- , 41/.4-', ___Lit t'S01 , v- 1 I
: ,.. . I v. e ,,
1 1 I
4 a t.... 11- 'i - - -_--_-_-t t t— _ : .!
. f 1
1 1 L H , 1
1 w 4------ —1
,_4 . i q
1 1
1 .
I
1 I I I
1
1
i 1 I • 1
o
1 _ZA,EI
1 1
I I te,A. ike.f€.1 I
1 I I 19
1 .
I
I I I
I I
F
I 1 1
I i
I I II
,
-)e----____ 1.....-- - 4 2 .4---: r- .____
— - - - — — - - --
N 0 i
(;.49. SO "0 1, ti 0 ‘'‘
I 0
.■ I 1
Z
• 0 0 ' 5 X t 0 .1
.)
=!:: (9e. K.-
-7 -
-
EXHIBIT I - BUILDING FLOOR PLAN
•
■
MEMO
From 0
Scott Richards
Date: September 9, 1993
To LaVonne Wilson
Re: Oak Park Heights - East Oaks PUD (Swager)
798.02 - 93.06
We are sending the attached report to you
and those pc'd on page 9. I assume you will
distribute copies to the City Council.
Bob Kirmis from our office will cover the
meeting on Monday.