Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
01-12-2012 Planning Commission Meeting Packet
f f CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS * PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Thursday, January 12, 2012 — 7:00 p.m. I. Call to Order II. Approval of Agenda III. Approve Planning Commission Minutes — November 10, 2011 (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 not on the agenda. Please limit comments to three minutes. VI. Public Hearings A. Oak Park Sr. Living — Phase I: Planned Unit Development Amendment Related to the Construction of Oak Park Heights Senior Living — Phase I (Formerly Known As Oakgreen Village) Allowing A Change in the Approved Number of Townhome Units, Construction of Brownstone Sr. Living Buildings, An Increase To Allowable Building Height & Increase To Overall Density of Approximately 291 units for the Entire Oakgreen Village Development, Including All Phases of Oak Park Senior Living. (2) B. Oak Park Sr. Living — Phase II: Planned Unit Development Amendment Related to the Construction of Oak Park Heights Senior Living — Phase II (Formerly Known as Carriage House Co -op) To Increase Building Height & Density to a Total of 62 units. (3) C. New Horizon Academy: Planned Unit Development Amendment and Sign Variance Related to Proposed New Horizon Academy Child Care Facility, to be located at 5903 Neal Ave. N. (4) VII. New Business A. 2012 Meeting & Commission Representation Schedule (5) VIII. Old Business IX. Informational A. Upcoming Meetings: • Tuesday, January 24,- 2012 City Council 7:00 p.m. /City Hall • Thursday, February 16, 2012 Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. /City Hall .• Tuesday, February 28, 2012 City Council 7:00 p.m. /City Hall B. Council Representative: • Tuesday, January 24, 2012 — Commissioner Dougherty • Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - Commissioner LeRoux X. Adjourn. i ENCLOSURE 1 0- CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, November 10, 2011— Oak Park Heights City Hall Call to Order: Chair Bye called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners Dougherty, LeRoux, and Squyres; City Planner Richards, City Administrator Johnson and Commission Liaison Abrahamson. Absent: Commissioner Powell. II. Approval of Agenda: Commissioner Squyres, seconded by Commissioner LeRoux, moved to approve the Agenda as presented. Carried 4 - 0. III. Approval of October 13, 2011 Meeting Minutes: Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Squyres, moved to approve the minutes as presented. Carried 4 - 0. IV. Department/Commission Liaison / Other Reports: None. V. Visitors /Public Comment: None. VI. Public Hearings: A. Oak Park Sr. Living -Phase I: Planned Unit Development Amendment Related to the Construction of Oak Park Heights Senior Living -Phase I (Formerly Known As Oakgreen Village) Allowing a Reduction in Approved Number of Townhome Units, Construction of Brownstone Sr. Living Buildings, An Increase To Allowable Building Heights & Increase to Overall Density. -City Planner Richards reviewed the November 3, 2011 planning report, noting that as part of the request for density change a comprehensive plan amendment for the area from medium to high density would be required if approved. Chair Bye opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. • Tim Nolde of Oakgreen Villa LLC /Anchobaypro introduced himself as the owner & developer of the project and noted that market challenges are driving the changes requested to the site in order to make it viable. Mr. Nolde stated that their market research shows that rental senior housing versus ownership purchase of senior housing is what the market is demanding. He discussed the site briefly, adding that proposed development should tie in nicely to the area and its trail system. Mike Diem of Archnet U.S.A., architect to the project, provided the Commission with a materials board for their review and discussed the mixed palate and materials composition proposed for the development structures. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 2 of 7 Todd Erickson of Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., engineer to the project, responded to Commissioner Squyres inquiry as to the long -term validity of senior rental housing, noting that the demand for such housing is in place. Discussion ensued among the Commission, the applicant and his representatives as to their being community rooms being planned within each brownstone building proposed, potential small retail shop to the development, tie -in of proposed exterior design of structures to those currently in place within the development area, property lines and setbacks, trails, building elevations and locations of residences in relation to the trails and pedestrian traffic areas. Chair Bye noted visitors to the audience and invited them to speak. Starr Frost — 5555 Novak Ave. N. addressed the Commission and expressed concerns with changing the density from medium to high with respect to infrastructure and water supply demand increase, adding additional traffic to existing roadways she feels are already heavily congested, how it could be guaranteed that the development would not be changed from senior use, how rental versus ownership units would affect the community overall, and the lack of mature trees and decreased green space in the area. Mrs. Frost questioned whether residents to the development would find living by the streets and trails desirable and discussed her experience with residences located at Boutwells Landing. Bill Hodges — 13210 56 St. N. expressed his concern to an increased density and additional congestion to the existing roadways as a result of the development and during its period of construction. Discussion ensued, wherein Mr. Nolde noted that the previously approved plan for the site would have actually resulted in greater traffic volume than the currently proposed project. City Planner Richards stated that a senior rental guarantee would be achieved through an agreement with the City as part of any approval to the project. Additional discussion among the Commission was had as to issues related to safety vehicle access, water supply, tree requirements, senior density calculation criteria, and other senior developments situated within the City. Mrs. Frost stated that she felt the traffic on 59th St. N. was high with the Boutwells Landing Sr. neighborhood and the Stillwater Area High School accessing it. She also stated that she found the front road connection and intersections to be bad and questioned how it would be at such time the roadway was widened to three or four lanes of traffic. Discussion ensued as to the matter of traffic in the area and potential future roadway changes, the proposed plan, tree plan and species selection. City Planner Richards reviewed the proposed conditions within the November 3, 2011 planning report. Discussion was had as to those conditions, density, rental versus ownership, and how to ensure that the site does not become a blight upon the community in the future. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 3 of 7 • Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Squyres moved to recommend City Council approval subject to the amended conditions within the November 3, 2011 planning report, specifically: 1. The Planning Commission recommends the property should be re- designated from medium density to high density residential in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The preliminary and final plat, as well as the dedication and vacation of any easements shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. 3. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed density of the project. 4. The Development Agreement shall include a provision that Oak Park Senior Living Phase I will remain as senior rental and shall not be converted to non - restricted rental housing. 5. The Planning Commission was favorable to the added parking and changes to the private access roadway and cul -de -sac adjacent to Nova Scotia Ave. N. 6. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed private and public trail system. 7. The Planning Commission was favorable to the zero lot line setback for Building one (1) but recommended that the right -of -way area be enhanced with additional landscaping, subject to the review and approval of the City Arborist. The applicant shall provide revised landscape plans for City Council approval. 8. All tree removal and landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. 9. The grading and drainage plans shall be subject to City Engineer and applicable watershed authority review and approval. 10. All utility plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 11. The Planning Commission was favorable to the use of the non - shielded, residential style light fixtures. 12. The applicant shall submit any plans for new signage subject to City approval. 13. The projected traffic counts are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. If the intersection of 58 Street and Oakgreen Avenue requires signalization or other traffic control measures, the applicant shall agree to a share of the costs as outlined in the Development Agreement. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 4 of 7 14. The Fire Marshal and Police Chief should review the plans and determine the accessibility of emergency vehicles throughout the development. 15. The trails and sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with the City Engineer's review and approvals. 16. The snow storage areas and plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 17. Any mechanical equipment that is ground mounted or visible from adjacent streets shall be screened as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 18. The den rooms in the dwelling units shall not be converted to bedrooms with the addition of a closet. 19. The Planning Commission was favorable to the final building appearance, colors, materials and variety between buildings. The applicant shall provide a materials board for all of the buildings to be subject to review and approval of the City Council. 20. The Development Agreement shall include a requirement that all of the buildings be maintained in proper condition and in compliance with City Codes. 21. The applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Agreement. The Development Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney and the City Council. 22. The proposed multi -level townhome four -plex is to be constructed of the same building materials and appearance as the building at 5812 -5818 Nutmeg Court, N. and all of the existing and proposed one -level townhomes are to be constructed with the same building materials and appearance as the building at 13848 -13872 Upper 58 Street, N. subject to review and approval of the City Building Official. 23. The applicant shall provide additional details for the private park area including elevations of the gazebo, materials to be used in the structures and walkways, and landscaping details for review and approval of the City Council. Carried 4 — 0. B. Oak Park Sr. Living -Phase II: Planned Unit Development Amendment Related to the Construction of Oak Park Heights Senior Living- Phase II (Formerly Known As Carriage Hose Co -op) To Increase Building Height & Density. City Planner Richards reviewed the November 3, 2011 planning report, noting that the request seeks an increase to the number of units, an addition of one -story, and a change from senior co -op ownership to senior rental. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 5 of 7 Chair Bye opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. Tim Nolde of Oakgreen Villa LLC /Anchobaypro addressed the matter of setbacks, noting that the sidewalks at the site have already been installed and that there is considerable green space between the sidewalk and the Oakgreen Commons building. He noted that one of the reasons they opted to relocate building 4 closer to the sidewalk is to permit closer access to the sidewalk from the building. He expressed his thought that the building placement should look fine in relation to the overall site. • Discussion ensued as to sidewalk access directly from ground unit patios facing the sidewalk, trails and elevations within the site. Starr Frost 5555 Novak Ave. N. stated that she felt the building to be very large and tall for the proposed location, questioned how the building was going to fit in with future proposed roadway changes in the area, expressed concern about density to the area and how the proposed building will affect the property values of her neighborhood, which is just down the road from the development site, and noted that she felt that the trees along Oakgreen Ave. were in need of maintenance. Commission discussion ensued as to roadways, building height mix in the development overall, setbacks, location of building 4, and grass /seeding in the right -of -way area. City Planner reviewed and discussed the conditions proposed within the November 3, 2011 report. Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner LeRoux moved to recommend City Council approval subject to the amended conditions within the November 3, 2011 planning report, specifically: 1. The Planning Commission recommends the property should be re- designated from medium density to high density residential in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed density of the project. 3. The Development Agreement shall include a provision that Oak Park Senior Living Phase II will remain as senior rental and shall not be converted to non - restricted rental housing. 4. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed private and public trail system. 5. The setback for Building 4 should be moved at least 30 feet from the right -of -way line of Oakgreen Ave. Revised plans shall be provided to the City Council for review and approval. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 6 of 7 6. All tree removal and landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. 7. The grading and drainage plans shall be subject to City Engineer and applicable watershed authority review and approval. 8. All utility plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 9. The Planning Commission was favorable to the non - shielded, residential style light fixtures. 10. The applicant shall submit any plans for new signage subject to City approval. 11. The projected traffic counts are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. If the intersection at 58 Street and Oakgreen Avenue requires signalization or other traffic control measures, the applicant shall agree to a share of the costs as outlined in the Development Agreements. 12. The Fire Marshal and Police Chief should review the plans and determine the accessibility of emergency vehicles throughout the development. 13. The trails and sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with the City Engineer's review and approvals. 14. The snow storage areas and plan shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 15. Any mechanical equipment that is ground mounted or visible from adjacent streets shall be screened as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 16. The Planning Commission was favorable to the 38 -foot height of Building 4 as part of the PUD approvals. 17. The den rooms in the dwelling units shall not be converted to bedrooms with the addition of a closet. 18. The Planning Commission was favorable to the final building appearance, colors, materials and the variety between buildings. The applicant shall provide a materials board for the building to be discussed at the Planning Commission and City Council • meetings. 19. The Development Agreement shall include a requirement that all of the buildings be maintained in proper condition and in compliance with City Codes. 20. The applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Agreement. The Development Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney and City Council. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 7 of 7 21. The applicant shall provide additional details for the private park area including elevations of the gazebo, materials to be used in the structures and walkways, and landscaping details for review and approval of the City Council. 22. The applicant shall provide a sidewalk connection plan for the first floor units of Building 4 subject to City Council review and approval. Carried 4 — 0. VII. New Business: None. VIII. Old Business: None. IX. Informational: A. Upcoming Meetings: • Tuesday, November 29, 2011 City Council 7:00 p.m. /City Hall • Thursday, December 15, 2011 Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. /City Hall • Tuesday, December 27, 2011 City Council 7:00 p.m. /City Hall B. Council Representative: • Tuesday, November 29, 2011 — Commissioner Dougherty • Tuesday, December 27, 2011 — Commissioner LeRoux X. Adjourn: Commissioner LeRoux, seconded by Commissioner Squyres, moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:24 p.m. Carried 4 — 0. Respectfully submitted, Julie Hultman Planning & Code Enforcement Officer Approved by the Planning Commission: TPC 3601 Thurston Avenue N, Suite 100 E OI Anoka, MN 55303 Phone: 763.231.5840 Facsimile: 763.427.0520 TPC @PlanningCo.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Scott Richards DATE: January 5, 2011 RE: Oak Park Heights — Oak Park Senior Living Phase I - Planned Unit Development Amendment - Planning Commission TPC FILE: . 236.02 — 11.06 The City Council, at their November 29, and December 13, 2011 meetings reviewed the Oak Park Senior Living Phase 1 application for amending the Oakgreen Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for a reduction in the number of approved townhome • units and to construct brownstone senior living buildings. The project is at Nova Scotia Avenue North and 58 Street. At the November 29, 2011 meeting, the City Council had asked the developer to reduce the number of total units from the original submittal of 350 which included the existing townhomes and the Oakgreen Commons building (120 units). The developer came back with a proposal to reduce the total to 334 units. At the December 13, 2011 meeting the City Council approved a motion to send the proposal back to the Planning Commission with two conditions as follows: 1. The third story on Building 4 shall be eliminated. Only two stories of dwelling units will be allowed for Building 4. 2. The overall density of the development, including the existing townhomes and Oakgreen Commons shall not exceed 275 to 291 dwelling units. Attached for reference: Exhibit 1 Original Submittal Master Plan — Phase I and 11 Exhibit 2: Revised Master Plan - Phase I and 11 — December 29, 2011 Phase I Tim Nolde has provided revised plans for Phase I that reduces the total number of units. The three buildings will now be two stories instead of three. The footprint of Building 2 has been reduced to create additional open space. The four unit townhome building at the intersection of 58 Street and Nova Scotia Avenue North has been eliminated. The units now proposed with this amendment are as follows: One level townhomes (7 constructed) 7 dwelling units Multi level townhomes (4 constructed) 4 Townhomes to be constructed 4 Building 1 22 Building 2 22 Building 3 50 - Total 109 dwelling units (134 previously) Parking The City has asked the applicant to provide updated plans that include parking counts. If additional information is received prior to the Planning Commission meeting, it will be forwarded to the Planning Commission members. Building Design The City has asked the applicant to provide updated plans that include revised building elevations or perspectives. If additional information is received prior to the Planning Commission meeting, it will be forwarded to the Planning Commission members. CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission must review the changes made by Mr. Nolde and determine if the project density is appropriate for the area. If additional information is required, the Planning Commission should request clarification and continue this item to the February meeting. 2 \ 1 ' Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc, \\ / -'I' LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING F i r e LAKE ELMO, STREET I NORTH -'�" l �"1 f LAKE EU10, MINNESOTA 55092 Ph,,, (651) 439-8633 Fax (651) 430-9131 ■ . l "1,' .�• !t om– N '�i y Uhf ..... oars t_ . -. . - _ -..- __._.. ' • S j 3 • �L a ---- – :– r r�e LEGEND I I �J I `N. 1 ' � I S Y ._ __. ..___.._ - PROPOSED nSDSRV LIMITS yU N d J J� A .- . Itiklibilll , o , • ' rc.2 *(413 4 fa; /V 4 15.'4'1,11 i ( s " UNIT COUNT 10 1 \ �, L e EXISTING ASSISTED LIVING = 120 UNITS .�– _— 1 -� T1 I I I 1 1 7 I 1 l – � – � x I I EXISTING T TO UNITS . = 12 UNITS t- 2 _ - � I 2 I ? �W� TOWNHOME UNITS 708 BE CONSTRUCTED = 12 UNITS O LL I I 1 i PHASE I - SENIOR LIVING UNITS = 111 UNITS i. + •. TAI_I_S - -- PHASE!! - SENIOR LIVING UNITS = 96 UNITS ! -- Ocuzer A LL, ➢ • ? TOTAL PROPOSED UNITS = 350 UNITS 9► , � ifiH VIII' . -*-�1 . �t ~ o s I ...$ _ [Jo: 68 1l1TTITI1 } -i( 1 � P • u • — m l , S ' ,.. . • . .i _ 7 L ._ri 68 STALL V I -I r• t t r + 1 � , � / � - 1,- t �� - i s q1 >"� i ` 1 g ) 1 i 1 ,P r !, S T R EET NORTH H OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING \ PHASE I & PHASE II y g ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL MASTER PLAN 3 - 350 UNITS 1 H rI_,r ANC ..TR° OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING PHASE I -OAK PARK HEIGHTS. MINNESOTA- 12.R9/10I I SHEET I OF I SHEETS ,IPI,.i r - I Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. �__.__- __________ _ . _ --__ _J LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING / /// ' 1 LAKE 55TH IN EST NORTH v•■ ! , '. I _ TAKE HMO, MINNESOTA 55042 \\ � '/ I, — Pi= (651)439.8633 Fax (651)430-93M TT I - - - -- - _ - _ _ ___ 0 05 � 57 Is Fr ta r-÷3 LEGEND m [�J n� l l w1 N 9 6 1 L s PROPOSED RE -PUT BOUNDARY LIMITS EX1100911•3 ROADWAY lD MAW I a • II - - - 2961700f OF PARKIM ,Fr ,,,, 9 S 1^ J GILDING .1 i = BUILDING 2 ,,,g o I_ zz UNITS �P I 11 UNITS j \ w " / J�1S II i °"°�I• °^ UNIT COUNT I I ® r -- ' ,w' A CI ,NE f EXISTING ASSISTED LIVING = 120 UNITS ' m 5m MEM. o t g V _. . F - _ NS RU I l l l l i j R _ { ` 2'" _ A *0547 ST •T ] a� O ■ '� 1 EXISTING TOWNHOME UNITS - 11 UNITS II TOWNHOME U TO B E C O = 4 UNITS L y _. T CTED _ _ 7/1 __ PHASE I - SENIOR LIVING UNITS = 94 UNITS I x — g i --'- - -- 1 � r � PHASE II - SENIOR LIVING UNITS = 62 UNITS 1 (k A F I��_ r- i -- j 9 WALLS Y T ^_ _— R j TOTAL PROPOSED UNITS = 291 UNITS •aralReW Its I S / 1 j � i _ G � I b' ., I Cp l �4 b � as �1 i 4 ,<.T i 1 : ' S4. S ��% �� - i g J E OuT A __ - -- — ( c 0 1-- , , _ OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING _ PHASE I & PHASE H F l ' / 7V PUD AMENDMENT MASTER PLAN g ANCHOBAEPRO.OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING PHASE I OAK PARK HEIGHTS ,MINNESOTA - 1229;1011 SHEET I OF I SHEETS 3601 Thurston Avenue N, Suite 100 ENCLOSURE 3 Anoka, MN 55303 Phone: 763.231 .5840 Facsimile: 763.427.0520 TPC @Planni ngCo. com PLANNING REPORT TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Scott Richards DATE: January 5, 2012 RE: Oak Park Heights — Oak Park Senior Living Phase II - Planned Unit Development Amendment - Planning Commission TPC FILE: 236.02 — 11.07 • The City Council, at their November 29, and December 13, 2011 meetings reviewed the Oak Park Senior Living Phase II application for amending the Carriage House CO -OP Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for an increase in the density and building height. The project is at Oakgreen Avenue and 58 Street. At the November 29, 2011 meeting, the City Council had asked the developer to reduce the number of total units from the original submittal of 350 which included the existing townhomes and the Oakgreen Commons building (120 units). The developer came back with a proposal to reduce the total to 334 units. At the December 13, 2011 meeting the City Council approved a motion to send the proposal back to the Planning Commission with two conditions as follows: 1. The third story on Building 4 shall be eliminated. Only two stories of dwelling units will be allowed for Building 4. 2. The overall density of the development, including the existing townhomes and Oakgreen Commons shall not exceed 275 to 291 dwelling units. Attached for reference: Exhibit 1: Original Submittal Master Plan — Phase I and II Exhibit 2: Revised Master Plan - Phase I and II — December 29, 2011 Phase II Tim Nolde has provided revised plans for Phase II that reduces the number units for the project. The building will be two stories. The units now proposed with this amendment are as follows: Building 4 62 (96 previously) Parking The City has asked the applicant to provide updated plans that include parking counts. If additional information is received prior to the Planning Commission meeting, it will be forwarded to the Planning Commission members. Building Design The City has asked the applicant to provide updated plans that include revised building elevations or perspectives. If additional information is received prior to the Planning Commission meeting, it will be forwarded to the Planning Commission members. CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission must review the changes made by Mr. Nolde and determine if the project density is appropriate for the area. If additional information is required, the Planning Commission should request clarification and continue this item to the February meeting. 2 • �P r f /\II „r / I Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. \ / / �� LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING \\ FFF 12445 55Th SSTRET NO RT % I i i L - ' PMnr (651)439.8833 F. E 16 4 11 17 0-93 3 1 / 1 - 1 'ti . • 1 a 1, 1 • .4 • - .:_I:— .L� -r , i - • a LEGEND 4 utat5 1 , 11+15 5 i1Nir' 1 � �( ---- P BOUNDARY P , PROPOSED RE AT BOUNDARY MOTS I 1 1 % fF•riYJ I / 1; ,•• •• .' ' .. - ' - -. -.kik . p NZ 13 1 1 � s UNIT COUNT Ilk fi N F -} 4 y f ti a ` '\ Y, yl` 11 � 4 i, Ii p'7' to EXISTING ASSISTED LIVING = 120 UNITS _ _ l _ -- _ _ — 1 l l 1,1 1�- e , Y I 0 1 'l ; „'_ l .:; .. EXISTING TOWNHOME UNITS . = 11 UNITS _ '---- I i – ` + ;^; R J I PHASE I SENIOR LIVING UNITS TRUCTED _ NITS O ? I — _ _ Tom. —- d ” - PHASE II - SENIOR LIVING UNITS = 96 UNITS I 2 lk = 46 STALLS = ii b!!r .4 � - I, a TOTAL PROPOSED UNITS r = 350 UNITS _ -- 11111, 1 , 111111111) F ' � i11-N I0 o -.LT �, ► o • - I i 1iTT11 - s--T 1,� ' 0 , — ♦, o' ---sue . j l ,- - � 68STALLS V -�1 f' r E'. I J 1n 5 • ..�. I I I! d 1 _ ) ;1 L_ 1111J11iiiil N, -` f , I o ..♦ 'iy ,� I {! . 1 V . !' `^ ,1 -- y 8 T H s T R E E T NORTH \ OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING PHASE I & PHASE II } 1 ' y �� ' � ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL MASTER PLAN B '1 s '"b ; 350 UNITS um rf. ANCHOBA VPRO.OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING PHASE I -OAK PARK HEIGHTS .MINNESOTA - 12:292011 SHEET I OF I SHEETS bi ll y -� - , \ '" Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. — ! LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING •/ / � —� , �;-0 5u ✓ r sA, 1 �' a v 4"�,A e ; i 12445 55TH S17tEET NORTH W• t y _ .. y LAKE HMO, MINNESOTA 55042 ` � - -� PF ,( Pm (6511 430 93 3 1 r \ 1000011.11111114. ,I m m } ' � PPO sed 574 r ,x# 9 Wit .I W l+l+E E LEGEND PROPOSED RE PLAT B 1 /11 I mo •,' vm ' : . S BMW/ARV LIMITS r SATINEW,L,I- L ?, 'y GILDING .1 I 1, BUILDING 2 J' 0 PP eA 100 uNlls zz UNITS4 I L � a R UNIT COUNT F 1 d- � ,IyO f l I EXISTING ASSISTED LIVING = 120 UNITS eoEwAX g � . I ji � 'I O / ' � d w.F - - EXISTING TOWNHO T UNIT S - it UNITS _ sP>• ` � I Fr *,sn tin TOWNHOME UNITS TO BE CONSTRUCTED =4 UNITS j Q ' _ PHASE I SENIOR LIVING UNITS = 94 UNITS PHASE II - SENIOR LIVING UNITS = 62 UNITS 1 ^ 1 O r • i i 51 u.n >n s.ue T A q I it 0 TOTAL PROPOSED UNITS = 291 UNITS 1 m „ R ,�,oWA. - L PRO0Pa N N 1 I �I IIII E '� I i, -C tr - 7 - 0 ) / 5 $ L. _ J OP Ck C - - y I F - • rrt x,a�rm,NU fr _ • V i l l I I _.. ""�' '" OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING L PHASE I & PHASE H 1 I 0145 # , ( Via'` S PUD AMENDMENT 441 1 \ _ jam ' MASTER PLAN J . ce, �tiL ..... ,.,.. ANCHORAVPRO OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING PHASE I OAK PARK HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA I2/10 2011 SHEET I OF I SHEETS TPC 3601 Thurston Avenue N, Suite 100 4 Anoka, MN 55303 Phone: 763.231 .5840 Facsimile: 763.427.0520 TPCQPIanningCo.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Scott Richards DATE: January 4, 2012 RE: Oak Park Heights — New Horizon Academy — 5903 Neal Avenue North — Planned Unit Development Amendment, Sign Variance and Design Guidelines Review TPC FILE: 236.02 — 11.08 BACKGROUND A. Peter Hilger, representing NH Partners — Oak Park Heights has made application for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment, Sign Variance and a Design Guidelines review for a remodel of the former Hollywood Video store into a New Horizon Academy child care center at 5903 Neal Avenue North. The building exterior will be updated and a playground will be added to the exterior of the site. The parking lot surrounding the building will be revised to accommodate the playground. The interior of the building will also be updated to accommodate the proposed child care center. EXHIBITS The review is based upon the following submittals: Exhibit 1: Project Narrative Exhibit 2: Aerial Site Plan Exhibit (EX.1) Exhibit 3: Existing PIan, Dispersal Plan (AO.2) Exhibit 4: Removals PIan (C1.0) Exhibit 5: Paving, Storm Sewer and Erosion Control PIan (C2.0) Exhibit 6: Site PIan and Details (SP2.1) Exhibit 7: Parking Analysis (EX -3) Exhibit 8: Preliminary Landscape PIan (L.1) Exhibit 9: Exterior Elevations (A4.1) Exhibit 10: Color Elevation — East Exhibit 11: Color Elevation — South Exhibit 12: Sign Plans Exhibit 13: Lighting Specifications Exhibit 14: Report of the City Engineer, Chris Long Exhibit 15: Report of the City Arborist, Kathy Widin PROJECT DESCRIPTION Mr. Hilger has provided a narrative describing the project found as Exhibit 1. The New Horizon Academy is a child care center that will occupy the former Hollywood Video building. The structure is 7,478 square feet and will not be expanded as part of this renovation. The center will provide a licensed capacity of 130 infants, toddlers and . preschool children. School age programs will not be offered at this location. Staffing for the center at full capacity is 20 to 25 persons on staggered shift hours. The operating hours are from 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM Monday through Friday. The exterior and interior of the structure will be updated to accommodate the child care center use. A full playground will be added on the east side of the structure. It will be separated into two spaces, one for the younger children and the other for the older children. Play equipment is provided with a combination of hard surface, absorbent rubber impact materials and landscape areas. The exterior of the building will be updated and enhanced as follows: 1. Blue canvas awnings to help shade the large south exposure windows. 2. New windows and exit doors in the perimeter as needed for Code exiting. 3. Removal and burying of the mountain motif remaining from Hollywood Video and creating a blue metal cap and cultured stone base piers. 4. New corner parapet feature to display signage along Neal Avenue with re- dashed stucco. 5. A large fenced playground area and a covered canopy structure at the entrance. 6. Modified parking arrangement to accommodate play areas. 7. New landscaping. 2 ISSUES ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan. The property is designated as Commercial on the Proposed Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan. The New Horizon Academy child care center is consistent with this land use designation. Zoning. The property is zoned PUD Commercial Planned Unit Development. The standards of the B -2 General Business District apply. Any changes to a PUD, including revisions to the parking lot and addition of the play area require an amendment to the PUD. Child care facilities in a single occupancy, freestanding building are a permitted use. Subdivision. The property is described as Lot 6, Block 1, Oak Park Ponds Addition. The lot is owned separately from the shopping center but subject to the access and cross parking easements that were put into place when the shopping center was developed. Parking. The plans indicate that with the new layout, 39 spaces will be removed and 36 spaces provided. A portion of the change to the layout will occur outside of the property within the general shopping center parking lot. The Zoning Ordinance requires the following parking requirement for child care centers: "At least one parking space for each classroom plus one additional space for each fifty (50) students." The child care center will have seven classrooms and a maximum capacity of 130 students. The parking requirement would be 10 parking spaces. Additionally there are cross easements for parking with the shopping center. The shopping center was originally constructed with a surplus of parking over what was required by the Zoning Ordinance. A representative of the shopping center owner will need to provide written consent for the changes that will occur to the parking lot on the shopping center property. Traffic Analysis. Within the project narrative, Mr. Hilger has provided an analysis of traffic for the proposed child care center: Center operating capacity: 130 children Average number of families: 107 families Average Children per vehicle (family basis): 1.21 children Typical Attendance rate per day, as a percent of capacity: 75% - 82% Total staff, typical day: 25 staff Average vehicle turn around time (in to out): 5 — 10 minutes The traffic analysis shows that the AM traffic would be 111 trips between 7:00 and after 9:00 AM. The PM traffic would be 112 trips between 3:00 and 6:00 PM. The City 3 Engineer shall review the traffic numbers and comment on any potential impacts to the street system. Grading /Drainage /Utilities. The plans indicate the changes required to accommodate the parking and the playground. The drainage and utility plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and the applicable watershed district, if required. Landscaping. The plans indicate the existing as well as proposed landscape to be added to the site. The landscape plan is subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. Mechanical Screening. The existing parapet currently screens all mechanical equipment. All new mechanical equipment will need to be screened by the parapet or appropriate screening devises as specified in the Zoning Ordinance. Lighting Plans. Parking Lot Fixtures. The existing parking lot lights will not change with the exception of one pole and light that will be relocated on the site. The existing parking lot lights are full cut off and compliant with the Zoning Ordinance. Building Wall Fixtures. The elevation plans indicate the locations of the new wall Tight fixtures. They are an architectural LED wall sconce that appears to be full cut off. Mr. Hilger should confirm that the lens is installed such that it is completely shielded by the body of the fixture. Signage. Freestanding Signage. There is no freestanding signage proposed. The applicants have the option of locating signage on the existing shopping center freestanding monument and pylon signs if space is available. Wall Signage. The Zoning Ordinance allows for a total of two wall signs, each on separate facades. The current proposal provides for placement of the New Horizon Academy logo on the east, south and west elevations. A variance is required for the third wall sign. The Zoning Ordinance allows for up to 18 percent of the front building fagade (400 square feet) to a maximum of 500 square feet of signage in the Destination Retail Highway Sign District. The plans indicate a total of 256 square feet of signage with the three proposed signs. A review of the variance criteria for the proposed third wall sign is found in another section near the end of this Planning Report. Sign Illumination. All of the proposed signs will be internally lit individual letter signs and in compliance with the sign requirements for illumination. 4 Design Guidelines. Sustainable Guidelines. The applicant should address how the project has been designed to achieve at least a certain degree of sustainability. The applicant will need to discuss the plans with the Planning Commission and indicate if these issues have been addressed. Architectural Guidelines. Facade Treatments The building was originally constructed with a definite base, middle and top. The main building elements will not be significantly changed with this remodel. The proposed raised entrance feature will add to the building appearance. Ground Level Expression This is a one story building with a proposed entrance feature at east elevation. The main entrances will be well defined with the raised parapet, awning and signage. Awnings Blue cloth awnings are proposed over the windows. A metal canopy structure will be placed extending out from the east facade to allow a covered entrance from the parking lot. The metal canopy will be constructed of steel columns with a standing seam metal roof. Transparency The building uses glass on all of the facades. The transparency percentages will not significantly change from the current building. Entries The building features a prominent entry. Roof Design The roofline is broken by a raised parapet at the main entrance. The rooftop mechanical equipment is screened. Building Materials and Colors The existing block will remain and the existing EFIS will be recoated. The front entrance will feature manufactured stone columns on the lower level and EFIS in the upper portions and parapet feature. The applicant has provided color elevations. Building material samples will be available at the Planning Commission meeting. Franchise Architecture The building will not be franchise architecture. The design and material selection will be consistent with the Cities design goals. 5 Site Design Guidelines Building Placement No change to current site. Parking Areas Changes will be made to the site to accommodate the playground area. The net loss of parking is three stalls. Stormwater The drainage will be altered to accommodate the parking lot and playground area. The stormwater plans are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Pedestrian and Common Space The plans show an existing sidewalk from the trail along Neal Avenue that continues into the site and will connect with the building and playground area. Landscaping Five trees will be removed from the parking lot islands. The plans indicate a new landscape plan for the site. The landscape plan will be subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. A five foot ornamental steel fence will extend around the playground area and extend around the south and west facades. Trees /Shrubs Addressed above. Utilites /Service /Loading /Drive - Through /Storage Areas The plans indicate a 10 foot by 10 foot storage shed to be located within the play area. The plans do not detail the materials or design for this structure. The applicant shall provide plans for the structure for review by the Planning Commission and City Council. Lighting Addressed elsewhere in the planning report. Signage Addressed elsewhere in the planning report. Pedestrian/ Bicycle Routes A bike rack should be added near the front entrance of the building. 6 Sign Variance. Variance criteria are provided in Section 401.04 of the Oak Park Heights Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission and the City Council should review the following criteria and conditions to determine if the variance is justified. Review Criteria. The Planning Commission and City Council should make a finding of fact that the proposed action will not: a. Impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property. b. Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street. c. Have the effect of allowing any district uses prohibited therein, permit a lesser degree of flood protection than the flood protection elevation for the particular area or permit standards which are lower than those required by State law. d. Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. e. Unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood, or in any way be contrary to the intent of this Ordinance. f. Violate the intent and purpose of the Comprehensive Plan. g. Violate any of the terms or conditions of Item 5, below. Conditions for Approval. A variance from the terms of this Ordinance shall not be granted unless it can be demonstrated that: a. Undue hardship will result if the variance is denied due to the existence of special conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. 1) Special cases may include exceptional topographic or water conditions or, in the case of an existing lot or parcel of record, narrowness, shallowness, insufficient area or shape of the property. 2) Undue hardship caused by the special conditions and circumstances may not be solely economic in nature, if a reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of this Title. 3) Special conditions and circumstances causing undue hardship shall not be a result of lot size or building location when the lot qualifies as a buildable parcel. b. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance or deny the applicant the ability to put the property in question to a reasonable use. c. The special conditions and circumstances causing the undue hardship do not result from the actions of the applicant. d. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structure or buildings n the same district under the same conditions. e. The request is not a result of non - conforming lands, structures or buildings in the same district. f. The request is not a use variance. g. The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the intended purpose of the applicant. h. The request does not create an inconvenience to neighboring properties and uses. The applicants have requested the third sign to assure identification of the business and building in an area that is not visible from major highways or streets. Due to the location of this business in that is not visible from Highways 5 or 36 and has limited visibility from 58 Street, the applicants have indicated that allowing only two signs would cause an undue hardship for their business and the ability of parents to locate the building. A number of other businesses in this area including the Burger King have asked for and received a similar variance for additional wall signage. The proposed signs are relatively small in size and granting a variance request for one additional sign will not create an inconvenience to neighboring properties and uses. The overall proposed signage is 144 square feet Tess than what is allowable. The City created the Destination 7 Retail Highway Sign District in that it recognized the issues with visibility in this area. For these reasons, City staff recommends that the additional wall sign be approved. CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION Upon review of the requests for the PUD Amendment, sign variance and Design Guidelines review, City Staff would recommend the project with the conditions as follows: 1. A representative of the shopping center owner shall provide written consent to the City for the changes that will occur to the parking lot on the shopping center property. 2. The City Engineer shall review the parking analysis and comment on any potential impacts to the street system. 3. The Planning Commission should discuss the sign variance and determine whether the request for the one additional sign is justified. 4. The sign specifications and methods of illumination shall be subject to review and approval of the City Planner at the time of permitting. 5. All lighting fixtures shall be full cut off and installed in compliance with the lighting standards of the Zoning Ordinance. All visible interior lighting shall also be full cut off. The lighting specifications shall be subject to review and approval of the City Planner at the time of permitting. 6. Mechanical equipment that is located on the roof and visible from street level or from neighborhood properties shall be screened with materials that blend harmoniously with the building facade materials. 7. The applicant shall address sustainability initiatives with the Planning Commission. 8. The Planning Commission should comment on the building material selection and colors. A materials board shall be provided by the applicant for the Planning Commission to review. 9. The applicant shall provide plans for the storage structure subject to review of the Planning Commission and City Council. 10. The grading, drainage and utility plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and the applicable watershed district. 8 11. A bike rack shall be added at the front entrance of the building. 12. The landscape plans are subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. 9 EXHIBIT R L\U create + solve + advise December 7, 2011 Ms. Julie Hultman Planner, City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd., PO Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Re: New Horizon Academy Project Narrative 5903 Neal Avenue; Lot 6, Block 1, Oaks Park Ponds Addition Dear Ms. Hultman, On behalf of my client, New Horizon Academy, we are seeking approval to amend the existing PUD to remodel the existing Hollywood Video store into a 7,478 SF childcare center in the existing shopping center PUD. New Horizon Academy is a regional chain with headquarters in Plymouth, MN. Fifty -nine New Horizon Academy centers exist in the Twin Cities, Rochester and St. Cloud. No building related variances are requested with this application, only a variance for the quantity of signs permitted is requested (three). DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY The center will consist of the following rooms with licensed capacity and operating capacity: Infant Care (1 room) 12 children Toddlers (2 rooms) 28 children Preschool (4 rooms) 90 children TOTAL CAPACITY 130 licensed capacity Licensed capacity is based on the 35 SF per child requirement dictated by State law. School age programs will not be offered at this location since these programs are available at the local schools. Staffing for this center at full capacity is roughly 20 to 25, with staggered shift hours. A full playground is provided for outdoor motor activity, segregated into two spaces, one for the younger children, and one for the older children. High quality play equipment is provided, along with a combination of hard surface, absorbent rubber impact materials, and landscaped areas. The existing exterior of the building will be somewhat modified and enhanced in the following ways: • Blue canvas awnings to help shade the large south exposure windows • Installing new windows and exit doors in the perimeter as needed for Code exiting • Removal and "burying" of the "mountain" motif remaining from Hollywood Video and creating a blue metal cap and cultured stone base piers. • New corner parapet feature to display signage along Neal Ave with re- dashed stucco. • A large, fenced playground area and a covered canopy structure at the entrance • Modified parking arrangement to accommodate play areas. • New landscaping -1 Rylaur, LLC 752 Stillwater Road, Mahtomedi, MN 55115 651.631.1300 www.rylaur.com TRAFFIC SUMMARY Parking will be provided for 36 cars. Operating hours are from 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM Monday through Friday. From a traffic perspective, the following information represents the typical traffic pattern seen across all the New Horizon centers. Center operating capacity: 130 children (max) Average number of families: 107 families Average Children per vehicle (family basis): 1.21 children per vehicle Typical attendance rate per day, as a percent of capacity: 75% — 82% Total staff, typical day: 25 staff Average vehicle turn - around time (in to out) 5 - 10 minutes AM Peak Estimates (@ 80% attendance = 86 trips) Percentage (35 %) of Families arriving 7:00 to 8:00 AM: 30 trips Total Staff (50% arriving between 7:00 and 8:00 AM: 12 trips Total Period, 7:00 Am to 8:00 AM: 42 trips Percentage (45 %) of Families arriving 8:00 to 9:00 AM: 39 trips Total Staff (50 %) arriving between 8:00 and 9:00 AM: 13 trips Total Period, 8:00 Am to 9:00 AM: 52 trips Percentage (20 %) of Families arriving after 9:00 AM: 17 trips PM Peak Estimates (@ 80% capacity = 86 trips): Percentage (20 %) of Families pick up between 3:00 and 4:00 PM: 17 trips Percentage (45 %) of Families pick up between 4:00 and 5:00 PM: 39 trips Total staff (50 %) departing between 4:00 and 5:00 PM: 12 trips Total Trips between 4:00 and 5:00 PM: 52 trips Percentage (35 %) of Families pick up between 5:00 and 6:00 PM: 30 trips Total staff (50 %) departing between 5:00 and 6:00 PM: 13 trips Total Trips between 5:00 and 6:00 PM: 43 trips We believe the traffic generated is low by comparison to other commercial uses in the area, particularly retail uses, and that the existing roadway and parking configuration has the capacity to accept this traffic. We trust the - bove information is useful to your analysis and acceptance of this project for 0 7 developm- f, f you have further questions or concerns, kindly advise. . ' - - � � � Hilger, ' A Pri cc: Ms. Jill Dunkley, New Horizon Academy Ms. Tom Bennett, NH Partners - OPH -2- Rylaur, LLC 752 Stillwater Road, Mahtomedi, MN 55115 651.631.1300 www.rylaur.com EXHIBIT 2 tRYLAUR NEA R • NEW HORIZON ACADEMY Y � • 1. � t., l� f.; .. � t 1 111111 1 1111111011 rr • q PARKS �� s MORIN » • • + ,! if ..- " 4 11 9Nb7a>!I® Rll1 �. SKCS ANNAPOLIS LA. PONT � y , • ,fit-; " fi r - ly,,. f ,� 4 � ' f 0 a 2 c 7 r 4,,',..4 , 1 + y i y �.yp C , y M i y i �+ . . 10 ' ,rw �f 1 r • `y FtF i + ? d "lt"' *d.� ' y • q �yy �r�. �� �.w• ` e0 a ° r4' ! ' i` 41177 R !S 11 M11 1 ' >. ' ! !, " 1 / �qi X11 ii !b 1 • ti n ' a t in )� r ui r a '� ti 11 a • • • // F r ✓ •• - i \ CO : +•.ti i1I ♦•� y " . ,it TT \ ff r !► t, *, • s Y; !�^9 1 AI• I . ■ ' " .. .N 2006 Aerial Photo r . Ar r .r Feel 1 I ' ^' r .�r //� - - - - -- -- -- - • 0 ioa T , ' �, s� r • �` wrl. seq. Ctacmuiesu cl. APIA AERIAL SITE PLAN EXHIBIT O AERIAL SITE PLAN ® tee' «o EX. 1 EXHIBIT 3 PLUMBING FIXTURE ANALYSIS CODE SUMMARY OCCUPANT LOAD 4 EXIT ANALYSIS Ik RYLAUR Dec TAP. 2•02.1 DAY POEM . PROP .. • 1.0 RATIO RIP 6.0.TA.Y RIMED CT w STATE YooE ...•.....•..... TOTAL BUILDING . OCCUPANT LOAD BASED ON IBC MCAT., 6NO1P E • 610 1.710 • STMT. PG 0.1167110 0.1167110 aPMRL Llc PPM.. R w 61, PP an NO TAW OP PER OE R 007.1. Rom.. 0 T 0 SC0 (00 MEEPAGTOle TOTAL 37A14° TOTAL 000 0000 DRIP nYOWLER ..o OLDER PER S .ADS (30# gxATER TOP OPMS -n .w a E FM.. 691[01.1500 PAX. 6#51.1100 TOPP.1- 107 N -Se NOW WI SO. PT. u!e 14 2 16 . —.APU. P20111092 PROPPED p4A2.0. .x .wM 717701,7 5..: POET Sae TYPE EPCPPT Iv!(S.wTE®) TOPPER 2 -la06 MCP- 55 PDSI axi #PT. IPS 14 • 64.7 u - - - - - 1 ALLOMAPE wee. w.T1.H - - S PRP V! 2 22 NEYI HORIZON ACADEMY TOOMBS 10 I w 2 2 5 2 KTWL wanes or 'rows I MODIIOP ub MI6 -S Yid 704 xi re 1 Pwec.CD. 40 LT 2 ALLOIMOLS Men ROLE SOW .a.:0 SP. P1lTC.Mc. 0 - O 155 PM - 5 YON 105 SO PT. IPA 20 2 22 D - - AMA . CREASE 021.52 6) 156 PER e SONS WON • 21000 SP. M a -lo la # e- S Y IM M. j 10 = OAR #1.1 116 PP TOTAL w 11,0 K11L AREA T R .V CO P . (K PER AREA .CREASE 0 MOON - - TOTAL - . • • E 3 PPP RESISTA# 1.1710 !TABLE SOP I Nom DRIP - ION KO # R. P20 - 1 1 OP ' s ' Ia.PnTO1 KAnnY MA. •c... .P ARP.. STAPP MOW - TOT 'lb # PT. POGO - NCR. 0* 1.. le OS0 1 PR IOC). Sr CODE 1,01000 SLOP. TAOLF 1-A. DAYCARE - 0#5.F.19.41.17# RITP150 - TOTAL oeeTPA1 LOA. ..]2 xi R W w I. Rile 100 200 4 aDwA•1 ANC0 • 2 2 wx.55m - 2 PROVO. INS/C6 . PM. PLY.105TIL w arms 2 PROVO. OUTS.. TAV SP.A 002• E WV. 12.2 SP. K OM. 1 111P. 1115516567 PER ...ES 19010130. SOF. IEDn OIDISIMS HAW SW HOT rAT01 TOTAL ROLM, • n u. PPM.. i CO SO. PT. 1101421,17 TEPPERATIIRE SW, NM Enf 120• P. PER MO WAITON STANDARD. KT mess TR1/0.114 SHALL MOT SWAM IN• P. p, iz - -I N 9 PER reme.sf 020 .00 NV 5.00 P 5 00 000 6.15 •I(M Rr 6PEAS TO E PIPPO - TOWLE1 OPMO TO SO 61210 - PRSPOOL •.42.710 M6E40mSANTn1 -.14206 ASE. KeOdOMETEX TO 1, YEARS hl 5.1.50. NA. NOON. TOILET DOPE MO STOetle.00.n PASEO CR 11# 0 MGY PS. mere sursowes WALLS M CLnY.00M OCWMGY, NO NET Q CAMP. NO PPMeS IN ACC- 0140.. YIP MI RAE 0054255 SOP. L MIAl R E oRDAMS 100411 0.67 M S S P. A MP FPI I MUS REP.. TSM PER ASP OPPP. 60 PER IP PLUS #50040.11751 AR,rxoRATIOS 4 AR a 1 ae142.011 WE N rx0.010.011 STS ASE, 1.0 PER 30 POORER #011P PP mmaasaam PER 420 T.I.E. 5013 IN EP... O.EPED OWN. EXIT PAYS TO PAVE CLASS • PINSK 071452 ROOMS To .A..E CLASS c PSdeS. L 11. iP T i PP 1 s PD.. #11rto 550174., TRAVEL DISTANCE PROM ANT 162# I m •1 �' I 2242 I 1 I _-C I E. PER . eSD •0,2, PAP ALMM ,YSTT.,RE�AREPRD• , aD. ! �^ } ^ I�- „_anET �0 PLAYGROUND CAPACITY 4 DISPERSAL AREA H • • ' N f H ” T000120. ARA, 2;u SO PT N 15 u. PILO ER PD • 90 POORER AREA.a »T xi. R.) 73 SP. PER 01017• TT cPaP191 * N PER IP 1CO . OUTDOOR ANNE s VA) NI YALE PER crap ECYr S TS S. Y Phu - ,,111 P�•R PWER#.10]1A C.•FKIIY OP sense NR.A P PV. IOIKS 3 sr. ■n �d SO.'T. i. � p Sp O !M 5 N 100'.171. !AMMO Y d 1. a SM! DISPERSAL AREA T*TLL EE Al LEAST 30 20 olm_CNEN E ' 'I FT 'ADI'E 10 GN R. w. EE. �py F���/1 O PETER wxw 11 \J 1 / if U Pock SS .warwwna d 65 a. a �n.,�.TT - � + + i' I + =IN / / Q.- z'- Pun xa.> a .a. m 4404.1. ar fs ¢ ', 1 C 1 ' ‘ ' ;1,I L — !p( LJ ; I::TI .-d 1" , ,�G ? J N N ® i I T ( -o � F WW I F C-, 0 1 0 mesa! r ion II 7 _ � � ,�. .... 0 • ....... . No IN n 1 = 1 0 BASIr.l..x.1.64 A. west mom reA .- , A . 1...4ii.4a 0•5i l3•..,• I � 1� 1 17..1. 1 . 1 6 0 .� - — / �° o 0 0 ,. ANALYS G EXITING PLAN DISPERSAL PLAN O EXITING FLOOR PLAN '' O DISPERSAL PLAN A) AO.2 EXHIBIT 4 Removal Notes 411kRYLAUR I. EDGE Cr NJ. 9nomars REMOVAL TO BE SAW -CUT AND EDGE- M1LED. SEE DETAL FM NLING jy STU1 . ROM O. RUSE SOTAeLE EASTNG SON. (TOPSOE) MA1EM01 FOR LAMSCAPNG ON STE, IMPORT ONLY' AS DI2 16]t NECESSARY. I LOCATIONS NC ELEVATIONS OF FASTING TOPOGRAPHY NO U1MI11E5 AS NOM ON THIS PLAN AR • ........ MPROAMAIE CONTRACTOR SHALL HOD veer,. 9E COOTOO AND ROWTY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO MPNeR EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTION . ME ENONEER WALL BE TOTTED MHDIATELY f NO OSCREPINOES ME HOMO. NEW HORIZON ACADEMY 4. 00N1TRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE UNITS OF REMOVALS NTH PROPOSED NPRO/DENTS NO HELD VERIFY 0001107 Cr EXISTING APPURTENANCES TO REIN.. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE NOS EN AVCNUE NORM FOR EROIEC5NG OR R[PLAOHG MSO]1040O15 nu. (5.401 IS FENCES 9015. IRRIGATION HEADS OM PINS ICONS. S. MN ETC.) THAT MAY BE DAMMED BY CONSTRUCTION. _ 1 5 07111.001 1 91011 PLACE ALL NECESSARY EROSION CONRO. MEASURES RECLINED TO M.1901 M.1901 91E NEW 049204 ACMEMY STABLY, POOR TO OCCUTING ANY SITE REMOVALS NOS ANN.SUS LNE KOH 9119E TALI S. CONTRACTOR SNALL R RE9 7040 R 0 1 FCR COORDINATOR N19199 PROVO DI. OO FOR REMOVAL MINOI MN 15.1 NO/ER REIOCAT1011 6 DOOM OWNS AfFECRO BY 9E MELT. ALL PERMITS IO APPLICATN AND FEES IRE 112 RSPOIM MUTT 6 T N CONTRACTOR. R'0 1 CONTRACTOR SHALL DETONATE RCE5910, LOCATION NC TYPE Cr 5E0IRITY FENCING 57.119 AID PHASING. i T. THE CONTRACTOR STALL BE RESPONSNLE FOR PROVO. AND MANTABONG TRAFFIC CONTROL DEICES NCR AS BARRICADES, NARNNO SONS. 05RECI1011N SONS. FLAGMEN AND LOR15 TO COMM. ME MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WOE NECESSARY. 05.0002 OF 1MESE 050000 910.1 E APPOSED BY 1R EHE1fER PRIOR TO PLACOIOIT. 1501110 CONTROL DEWZS 5x011 CONC. TO APPROPRIATE MOOT STANDNIDS R. COITRRACTW 5NALL MAINTAIN PA1RO1 ACCESS TO ADJACENT PR0ER11ES THROUGHOUT • CONSTRUC1ION. 10 CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE ABAND002551 AND /OR REMOVAL OF UTUHES IN ACCORDANCE NM THE • DENOTES CONCRETE STANDARDS OF RE OTT 6 OM PAR NOON'S HEON19 / ^. REMOVED i0 BE II. PAVEMEN1 MOOMCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE, FIELD 1911110 AND COORDINATE 01 - POINTS PER � V (TSP.) ACTJN CONDITIONS. • .�� It CONI5VCTOI IS RESPON95.0 FOR ALL REMOVALS NO TOOCRARY commons PER N0ROVEMENTS • I. / \_ TO BE RMMO CODS P (TN ) Y R . G,P� / ENONS PNAMENT ro E REMOD / . Removal Legend < r ' ' •., / � TO N9ILUxc '>\ ` _ =Sad B[lL9YBLi / N y : YT ' --• PROPER0 LACE • e, 114MM14t aRw 9 010ER y REMOV LINTS / SAW CUT PAVEMENT MA / k``c —RN -- ANTARY ARAM NN ARAM I DEMO / P ROIOVA — O SENN S 105010 401 - M / AVEAOIi • - —� SLOW SE9ER / • ELOCAIF0 �' —r— OAS re 1 "r .� REMOVE EE ( ') UNENOIOIxD anew WO BASIN —.--- UNO ' _ DEMO OKU 1D EEM MO WLEPC • 010094 EAD T GROMO 1E11DIE N , . (110) - — - -_ O.OBELEPHONE • ` ' �\ t wY —IN— CANE T E flint 690 ". s _ 04 e mENSn1 M� �, .. —. —� FENCE • \ i PANTED Worn. . 1 _ D ENOTES TREE M ;;. i 9roMINCL5 �r~i r _ SE �.; , TYA.I OD SALVASALVAGE 01 POE Mr \ SKE VA RAMC 9001 / ` \ ` y i AMR Ur RCP p X .EE fE . .. N I.� �i( — -......,_ , -. .... STORIA SEMEN 0...,,P. 12 M I _.._.._.._..J .�MN.�1M. • X .4.13.3.14. WoivuLer. P5GDMFL PAO00L ALMA ,..PE cm DIP Flenweem Plan AN,N. 0 19 0 • EXHIBIT 5 1 GO w Ha. MIN. a 4 CALL EKRY LAM R T. ON STALE ONL, Ama 651-4.-0002 f^_...fi..,. Notes NA Tall F. 1-B0.252-1156 S M .� Grading lw[ 6 Ln IN 1. :I1aE. uu1N I. 1408404 No. ELEVAROMS OF EXISIre TOPOGRAPHY MO LIMO. 1. (C AS FAX: 451.1.1500 • ROAN 01 116 PUN NE APPROMMATE CONTACTOR SHALL FIELD VEVEY •...w.. SITE MM. 1.0110111 NO 9* NOV. LOCATIONS NNW m EXCAVAII./CO31M1Cn.. 4 4 THMM. 910 BE NO IMEOATELY E ANY OSCREPNIOES ME Project 1000. NEW HORIZON ACADEMY • x. ALL CXCA001101 MALL BEM ACCa1OMN£ WM ME 01ME11T EDITION OF / 1TNOARO 94EaFICA1NM FM 111[X0 EXCAVATION Are S0001LL/SWFACE 5003 Mk AVD. DORM I0*5 � AS PR EPARED BY T94 OTT MOMFE=S AS300Anal OF OM PAWS HM IN IS •.• / 3. Au CS.= UPAYED AREAS MK 70 MC= FOUR N0E3 a TO /SaL 0111. {/ MO f0O 0 SEED. nESE AREAS SHALL BE MATER. UNTIL A 9441.501 STAND IEf HORTON 0 000 O CRASS a OOTNIEO. SEE ...CAPE PLAN FOR PLANT. AND TURF Lrz I IQ I asIS L. MIRTH f3TNUSNEIIT. W.I. w 5.47 a .`.:.. c M =TRACTOR SHALL RE 0.940 OR 39E F M10WCM0 NW MM MI ITAO / ,i 9S FIA0Et* 0ID 110115 100 =I THE 1.1.1041 A' I MERE k Y. / ���•l NECESSARY. NECESSARYP.M., CESSY. 4T R EPLACER., 11949E OENCES 91X1. BE HA .Y TIE 0 En PRIM a vIAm numc comma ocHCES as SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MOOT SP/CARDS B. All SLOPES SHALL R WARDED m 31 W LEA FLATTER. ESS OMER = ROOMED . INS SMU TT. IL ==ACTOR MALL UNIFORMLY ORME AREAS Nml UNITS OF =DING AND PRO= • SMOOTH LAMMED =FACE WM UNFOM SLOPES SCREEN POND � WIDE FIEVATIONS AE S=IN W Bf1EM 51101 Pain AND EXISTING . C.C. J 7 SPOT ELEVATIONS // x1 .CAN FIRM. PAVEMENT ELEVAlIOH3 t FINISHED FLOW W UMESS O41Mw E m FINISSE NOTED. PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE i4 6 TIE SOf3 MFWT FOR PAbEflr TWOOIE 5 MO HMO DORMS. * ( / 7 COMM.. .R. SHALL =OW AL1. ox M ANY EXCESS SOIL YA,ENN. MAT [XIS1 P N AFTER 194 STE MONO AND UDMTY CONSTRUCT. IS COK TIE V /// Ca111UCTOR MALL REPOSE OF EXCESS SOIL .110. N A 11.111R / `.., \` ACCEPT.2 m 16* =ER MO M RECULATEO AC010E3. • / , 10. ALL CONSTRICT. MALL CONE= 70 LOCAL, STATE MO 0EDMAL MIS N. u \ I X01.004* EM NAATO. PoM1TAIIT R501MLE 10.1101A7101 SIT. (X40(5) °u� ► , 1• .t. '401) �\ _ d 11. MY K yK TSAC RETaANT ' weW CE PR ' ROIMG SHALL EAT °. 2MN= 0PL014O SY MAI WINN OF x COMPLETE PAS!. NTH ME / ` 2 OOKMAR OSEC M WIRE TWO( 90089. MO U O1 ' EC= OF °i 0� e .� \ .' e % d 194 ICO M • pC1 TESTY. WOIAT.T. AREAS a FAILURE MAIL a EXCAVATED MID RECOPACI5 AS =PM HEREIN. MO MATER MAIN e6IALL211GNS MALL STORY OUR 11 OSr80IMT MATERIAL PLACED 210.111 210.111 Rol.. NRol.. MO SMUT W P.0103 P.0103 (1*9) IAEA4 MALL s ACIW M ACCCRDM will TI WEOFEO D[M9TY 0,7 ;1..'%. _ -. KTED AS UITJIFD M YOOT x105.31 MO ME REE O1wMM1 OF TE / SLT •E^ I , 11 OEOI[OINYL DIOeEOI \� (TELFEHC[ w.1 ) NT W1ELUAL Lgw NOT RK.19 N 194 MRDNN' PM, SIIIFEI W ` [\ '� I : 5ii [. 13. 0R WNW COPACIEON IMOD OUTLINED NWT x103�R1.3..1011 a ," _` REMOWE !REPLACE i - I . AIL SC. AIa Y IERARS TESTING MILL BE cO1PLETED IT AN 001000017 0701.1•110L 0701.1•110L EL10FlT. EEXCAVATOR FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEYOND CAT. BARN. =TARE CR VaSHITAB E SCES MALL ITE COINLTEO M REWIRED . THE RECON94CT EX LENS DmrzaeacAL 010.12. Yl010.12. 194 CONTRACTOR SHILL R . RE94.9elE FOR , 1 ,. ` y ` 4 y i GEOTE k SOILS 1104114 NC M9ECn04 RIM M , 't " . ..: E T.35S EA. E S.p31.p N I % E -p320 p \`iceS r: ) " r'` 0. / :. / , / �� EE , [Itv2TlO1 OP ENStw YTYIIILS A3 3NON . Tn PI.wS IRE s ASFD . .. w _ \ �'v Z /,, r u -- I RECORDS 10194 D. TIC Dal. 4014X(1 PM LAVED MEASUREMENTS 50 � " t TALON M THE FEED. THE NFO M.. SMALL NOT BE RELIED 01 AS 0.11C • \ a ` �j EMCT W WYPUIE 1N[ CC"'"''11 MALL LW V CRS1N0 CQIOT.3 N . . '\ _ I • PR. m COIS1MUCn. ke NDTFY TK orNM W aIMEM a W�E �� • • wsREPANaEs AIL M SEWER, £YEN .sue w NICSOTA PLLMMO CODE AND N AMOAIEE TIM ME OMRENT Fes' ° � • 2. ALL S BE PER � ` '• 1 ;I/ P REPAR AR E D BY I CRY O Y SA srObl 1 S TE T Sa1NU LANE /�../g . .2 RFLOCAIFfl d , e.++ El(.TR)rLJ"4 _. PREVARm er 194 uTY EL1axEw AssaaAn. a Iwni TA 1 PRIM � ` � m CONSTRUCT. 7. CONTRA. 01 MALL OR= T. NECESSARY r 'y . .. : .a : B WM ME ME STATE MO M L E 4ONFER T R PROPOSED r�MMD. POINT OS (1 ' WV I s zJ V -- ' �i.J ws ' a N 1 , � 1E O R 9}Utt Of TIE C0TMC1 UNESS 0110NSE Paw, Dal.: ' v1x /u a m7 . . o-.w.p NCR.rm.+M. ( I \ . nYWArz 94 11 MALL BE NISTRDC1m N ACCORDANCE RIM M ■ pE. p10.. SPEC. 030 NS Of DE APPROPRIATE UTUTV COMPANY. TIE CONDUCTOR 1 _ _ i 1243... / - - SHALL 8 MATE 194 SMMCE LNE CONSTRUCTION RIM TIE 0 C., �Y . M N TO EX E I C ES =WANES. M 2 pb, CRUDE PER / AT S. COMACI • _M SHALL MAN ALL IECE45NY att PERM. FOR UTNTY Gnats taped `o ,. _ C.TROL FL. / LEVEU CONNECTIONS, 1 SHALL UTXITES SHALL BE 1HSPEC P MO 0 00 APPROVED BY ME E85 RIB tlCR.OSY r / r u / 14$ U OPM2IE Y NIEMCE ww RfELr 1194 Y C /1048106 BALL • - - - - - - - - PROPERTY LNE • Y - .- AN 150 IN BEL.Dr45 m 011 INILDn 0.1.1 ALIM0030 m 00 OR -9 E0- - INDC4 CONTOUR Ef 50 01 OD M U ptt p9 Y MLQII W$ODA45 T BE LIE OF SEM. TO DE INTERVAL CONTOH /I RE94O19M1TY Of THE Cp1TMCTOR �. I H �y.. �� >�m 91.11 mm. e. AIL YATEMI2S MALL COOLY WM THE REQUIRE/MIS OF THE OP. m p,P.E. x -y STORM snu MASS 20,1-12. 20,1-12. -- MATER WIN >. STORM a+EM PYE MALL E R 0.40* 3 *01 II PIPE 0045 S rW Orm9 . SANITARY SERER &ors Berm Roy Nets 1MOER INEE53 IC MY Mme") CLASS R FM POE I S A CF OAP 5901 ELM= (WM.. / TOP 01) R OF f Y L N( ALL MATER ATE1 MR AO LNG TO Wm .. =` R0 ORECT00 OO M LF. - A P ND) SEALER a e.6T{ I / AM 03x12 U0NTM4T0. FEE PLAN FOR =ARO. NEIE RCP 6 PaftI , 81CITR 8aflar, and (.NHS PAVOtQNO) MOOED. PLC STORM SEXEIR PPE SHALL BE SCNEOR5 40 PIPE Er*'don Control Plan p IL Loy. . 1ER0L ENV:ROE ELI () SLAB E. /SEAS r 0. AFTER CONSwUCT01M IS COIPIEIED. LIE C.IRARCR SHALL PIIOAIX 194 0 3.1 - S OC TAL 0 ./ 4 4 A FNM RIM AN AS -8IET MEOW . UDC DE 61 10 4 Pe As -WLT 9X O O MET PROTECTOR PROTECTOR MORAY MIME. RASE 0 WALT • 11. WCLUOE LOC T. NO 10015 DEHATIOH OR CHANGES m THE p]1.e - 5U pRNL MAN. CONTRACTOR TO WERE. 0111 =ER W ENC4EE1R WETI9R A PLAN 4.H 4I: /•a L /9 O 0. 40 LF. - It RE *TON SEISM • 4.15E O M' a' 60. WM P051- Ca61UCT 1 !1021105 IS 1E0MED. EV 1 w. — ILRYLAUR :',..:11'' . � 752 SOLLYM1YR ROAD a5, e F =� r - Own, rtxu a . .0.w • .. 3 wx... ''. .y R r woo, on. woorremli ...Are .nneRle�s�N T e NEW HORIZON ACADEMY ton. rAW. OWNCRO WO IOWAN OM ONWARD IRCTMO Mu or :�f Cs. t'.o. w onr ILL _ —I__— — � /./ f Nn xsv n, .F .0, NEW NORrLO.I l0017 .„,v, ...„..1,_ xV r xrn ` I(\\ ' ! wa Armor rroi 4n HO. NNAPDIB LANE NORM ,..RIM P' ,y �q \ \ � \� SUITE TWI B. 5th.) fur Or. k ,.. rrM xTr[ i x wR � t./ I� ,s. ,., :l E x .r. a . x. -p 33 � I NOT rx ..r T D N e.rtxnte x sox r s r aer. 3, v M33"9.tn. »m InAmsm. e,tt..j Na t,n. eau xEr 3 0rtx ..... N A.tro w -:A - :•w.3 ,c x...r,:.„Nrw W I PAVEMENT SECTIONS I ', W, f c STYLE CURB AND OUTER f W,BOI W I SILT FENCE I 'II"' I, I 'NNCD cuRB WIET PROecnct .t. W I ROCK CONSMDC1OI ENTRAN60 00 7 i ,.r.,Ne. A KOK. Cr1.0 02 Moo • � Rw n.c. _ �. . L mt,.eawrm Orr,a D __ _ WWII i' l e i - rzrNw j _j... INFILTRATION OE5ION • i':4�-.s" -. *n- ut 4NCU run e.snxe me O nine, U vn woe' I 0 . � vm......x.... ..n.�o' •°'�,. _ ar - s re..r else D ".. INFETMTMON DESIGN BARS ..�... Newly seated Impervious surface area: 16,1130 SF ' RECTANGULAR N Is A onx vrn infiltration required 0.5 Inches over new Impervious area 0.5 .�� �� W • I STANDARD MANHOLE wBT03 I CATCH BANG --° - In X 16$305F / 11 in /SF • 701 Ci "'r1 R qc�,, -��� •• R 5rormtec %Nut SSC-740 will Infltrate 44 CF /drm ff ber (with L T I 'LL .. . .. Z� \\ .,_•_ water depth of 31 inches and 8-Inch stone foundation) _ ' ^ " Required Number of clambers N 70 1 / 6 /cramber•15.9 � �w,��.� R - - Q.dl.{.J „ - chambers i ce ; X �' a I ivu KVExr Storm vault will lnCC an Isolator Row for sediment �. .. " ' xx = •� -• 5' •.__ ". a mutation and an Infiltration Row. The upstream manhole 1!114'1!9 ®!• x _' i ,. _ - will Include asumpforIMNsadimmtaM the outlet manhole w s.. I will control water levels within the souk yy.�} • ran r a - �� VIII, 1 T. u - " , Md.." �..... u.e s..e EN". 4 4_ e. ..e.e - _ ., 9 05,7.0 TE ' •&peel • _ " e B r. - ' S6 -/TO SSLA11 -*ONry OE •. 0,..uq N. sea .Mxe 1t I lei .A wn s ° . _.. -• 555.51 . ,1 l \IN — u. [Da - EXISRND BTUN;NOUS I B3B-L ��_ IV \i n l' U _ • ,� I V, 1 "" i _ x Oafs law- xa ,$ >= a , : Wa V o, ° 1 .,,A ._t ... C3.0 tN E XHIBIT 6 I , nom ,,, I IC Sm d Q KEYNOTES t RYLgUR oN A°...REI ( N 5rae I° MOM. COLOR –...... .... I , AM DP s m. O am FM e a.. PARTED TWO. "' i .• "0"tl sr r DMO OF STALL. . RD,. MA MCP ,ne ERaTTNE �_ a� eY E sls am m I MOM ea1a11NL 40.00 NEO. EN.455X5 *RAM poop rc.U.m AT Top § 6 A P P TO Edon. T. NEC C M.! C M IND .>°....11< MSr A IeP N NMAMER CPL. I. SEE Ell ' ill Q w 4. . TRASH iltl Id1 HORIZON ACADEMY R COMMIE u PROVIDE [ 4 a YII T . S. MAY ecuroew Ale srorpenc. SURIAC2 P21.20210 CD. MN RAM MTN PAM 1.4 FAT wT OwPARRS MOMS. Z L IA GbWIN 1 .0 MR MRSM PARLOR. x% ', D ram ,! DOTAL/AO OY 4HYLAY. 940I IXM•C4Y NNE NORM WARR EXIT MACE 4.. g !, rwrss m s. MY 091•NNrt C71 STN.....•ACE. � �• 1° 1 SAY I.IN NO WNW. iPlAC111PN91m 0.YMI I. NI BM, II.'I' 41 Aai -11110 n '�' 1I n.x LT FAR. °f wA1e smlei'ue. N.TeuN.. bill 11" N.. U Ma, OA. / Y NxNU1T C O OKMIP PR SPA MN NAL AP•LRIEI FOR ImEm CREWS P ELM TO MM. O HANDICAP PARKING SIGN ()ORNAMENTAL STEEL FENCE rxe•LAr..Im- a.�PER 3 TS 2 b M. 10 N la PLAY EawaT 5TO.. 1E0 17 MR MIER. CONTRACTOR To MTNL COMMTe'LAD. N, Dams T.Nerark DO . 'ePeT.S n �T eC cw.TaN. / / ]]. MOMS N! NYIIYT.NIR. a.,'wA PVC E1MACe PUN nn:. eoxlCTM VOW CICERA NATD LOCATIONS Q CATCH &4WD MOP ]K PROVIDE TM 1.2' MX a/TOM N CONCRETE S. TD CFlu / cA,r / AMA TOTS 6ED AFACE. R T000.SR RU, a. eeN e,asT.n rDLAlosu / , ,,,e / � x Da.ILICITPXTREPACKS. DO .0,000110 PONTAM. e u. n MAY •Lw+E PLANT a Dl.n.s MAT / _ AT coN1 ACTa e • vs. srawns. l .V/ . o n 90. NM N CA 0 11. 111 e .1 BASK See / u �9 ►♦ '� • \ ` �II�! , II SI TE STATISTICS LOT 0 Me. 50010 5., 0040 ACRES P1 ID ., .AU N DA • ` ♦ ♦ ♦ � ♦ D � ' 9,♦v♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ 4*, : ♦� ll OM I O ° ` R s:MDD� SPACES S SPACES / A eN.D�N SON, STATE A . y , ♦ ♦ ' 4 ' #'04.1 I TOTAL 12M Ta O LFR P eN NaseN . 15.2 • I n ♦�♦ Of.♦ r♦.`�� l 1.4 4 s•4 • _.. LEGE I°A'.au.x":�•I+.�:w� / w O o ` *S-1' � �FIN , * , l.�il , it I at O DNaNE E«.NCEDNT ♦ 1♦ T 0,0t4." ` rid �■a:..i --� N.1e.OP•AI `• . * 40 4 ��6 •rkil. r A l \�; / .,ale. = NE p ,% ,, \ j 16 t4� � '7 'J ■ ' R i ; I _ 1211200 • ' 1 `� � �r 0 O f o _ o I re.nN.Na.. .----------- / \` _1- - -- 0 — — ) /Quo v c c —111 Kw. KKK /' r ( SITE RAN . DETAILS NAI I/ \1 O SITE PLAN ®..R ro. SP2.1 EXHIBIT 7 RYLAUR , 5 2 9111.0.119. MOM Ie NEVI HORIZON ACADEMY 9400 VEAL AMP. WM. We MINPOLIS LAM lelult / /' / '/ / / 0 ♦ I ) * :i! ? / ` ♦ I 1 ♦j ♦ ��� ♦,�I ..ate, e 1 1 ` .�j. aaO. Sta. al !Inane. 4111111 11, 1 1 1 ��!r�1� �� ��1 . •' / 7 . . . 7 7 — - - - „ ,..:.,, , , . , , , , , ' ' ` dji, , ti ,„ 4 411,17* . . ' - - . ', '- .. ' - , 1 1 4 Abs - N11, 1 : 7 4 -114, 1/4: 11 0111,1•11 : 74§;: . P;• s : : ' ' .. if I ,,,...., ,.... 1 A. r mum Droning alateryaa•Nagera. • • w �� ■•• ���1 • •• �'+ PARKING ANALYSIS ,, ■ ,, / ---) Jr' i'''''' PAM.. sym.e.3 Fenc2VeL 54 VW. T _ � �__ • u :-',::'- ' / ; 0 , i / / ,O I I © L EGEND PARKING t At .AM. sew., Rem a..20 PAfiKING ANALTSIS O •wvloeD , o OSITE PLAN ® ,Ie+u De ls p ''." "° EX-3 EXHIBIT 8 LANDSCAPE SPECIFICATIONS PLANTING DETAILS t&RYLAUR TREES SId11A3, AND PERENNDLLS SOpgNO E,•a ,TIDH ru P. ..m -._._ .,C.,_r..r1.4..'I.. APN AA.NM.Oa ..a:... rr.x..,.AM.,..1 / � M.. ■ »m.r iss SILL.. NND A. R 4. ..6.1...... Nara.- ,In.a4 41.4 a 1..a..Sd.e••paA.w.bPp.Iaii. wwa 1.1.1124. W 55„5 R *ea 24 1..4 Pan. ...AND DE.. I4•Y...� pa.. b..wli.br.l w .......aa.4•w.✓'.....a..a..n a .542 way..Cmaew ` �- .2 :011r-..i..Att*:_--, ` �u l.f•.Ll .,]00 SI ST G * a.....a....Y.. p.•V.N... ba 2 GlAI1IY a. s......w.baYRar.n.N.IMr apd.r. p.13.11. W.y..b.lbn ...RN • D. Sm e..M rr. C Tl..y sows 4..a•brn.e..A aNa.EOn OOY...Mab..SNPb.V.P..4. w fbww +r NUiRKwYY.. WOwb. lI I� / NE 5. nom wed an Ws .a.aaa...Iw 4,44.9.....4 ' nccvrA.,cf oPru.rNOwoRN 11 =1 I nII ` �� NEW HORIZON ACADEMY ....aa..r..ANS 2..1.34. ../ ..a..r..a.n 4..... ryyw64.Ne.d.I.I....arr.n..•... o w.1.1.r •r.is 1 1f 1n % \� yI�1 II : 3. PRODUCTS A.AM.ra..wwRA4 prw.. /I %4..•a•...a q.M....2.11..NPba..41. I-n®�I11 \.® II " 1 owl• _ RC......T.Mna.K..... .. b•O.. w .. .165.4ars...a...a..•, do . it - II II II II A.cs 1415011. W rA PI•ni ....a.4A 11112 61.a1........ R AcerT OF KO P.. 1= 11= II =II= 1111= 1111 =11 =14 x s _ A.3 _ .n.�.. 1.1116240.. Av.ba aK .ri..Ya.r. ..Aln.ew P........ II- II= 11= II- 1111= 11= 11 =11 =n R M. ROTO 3nr 2r .ra.... t c ......1134.1.6.4.106.65.5.7.0.4 m�.bA. ..m..n.dan.aK.N M. N.34........ar 1= 11= 11= 11= 11= 11= i1= 11 =0 =11= OWN ACHY D. AN...a...V ,.4..b.NUmYmb.RmMaar... 0 .....N.a.nK.w.r R ..ib.ww.Ydr mp... 0. Yl..r.D...a. LAMA. b....ad..a.a.44.r Y.w /1..a 213.34. ..r re... A. Ca.. P.aaD a....rNn.w. r....rrrr r...4.a...4•r.f. 5An A..AVn. EN• I"°"'" wa.... .1 .... ' A es..416.1N ... 4�.,...Ar° ` T ...a..r...+..1 .00.17T,. ` ...oe..o..a.32.nwr•.. . a: , aRs....nu,fr a.w.DO.,ww conA.e.eof. rL�'^ww�m. .N ss.n F. N...R..A.w.........d4.w..a...a . D...a.e......M...n.P.*.4....A.. PREP.TId:W.......so...4..ofa .b.wilWH.40* S.a.WSWA.. O NOne L.K.. N.MKN N. O. aw.......a.i a. d6 ..ndw.�..,.rb. '..° �es..a.�.... a.,•In...4.. D. An.e.r..iw:.......ds..a a,oa.,R MAIM Sorc.ub,ND..D..i BM ]61... vx CN...SIN...D TmwVP: T..a ....wnYV1.0.. a... P.a..PLM nwni.b. mon. sm role. b. a :. : bkp. D. .0 0 . .K a Ke......o . .rw.. mom C ae.rd w4.r.aP+ S P .1 N.) .CRS OP 34.E PR= TO SL P.6 MN 55105 4. _ S.3 PNMra A.' 72 Tn.........r.. . K.M. ..a SWd. .n.Ie.ab•.b.+w.o- 4K C..m P.,vONO •a... (551)096 mos0 .......od.A.nor. ..p.R P. SwLN - o. eaaa..r:w a I ...w .r no. a.r wwrAlmOn.5.d0n.ONn TP..Iam... ms. . . Grimm f. .N .6 .� , Vow Dogma 1 ...bwr..a.a.a:.a EHO . .P 0.nr0K1 PONnea RM.THE wrzE c..w.ew.N►,S.aa m..nw. n.r.Nr 4.d.+a.w4rdr.►.s xA. THE SM. xR. URALFORD OFENu TREE DON D.RRT M LEAD ........w.m b.. 4. pl ...bw.am... ..:..an.D .'a.e.11.1 . w.nwaw..DrncmuDONm CUT TM THE LOOSEN ROOTS OF DwnAP® ®11.11. A RO laa OUTSIDE OD O S.W. TO RED.rtDT C..nAD wn..NOLIS WNW w.DER .w ROOT / / .eRa. .7111. a MLA. OPP 02.1401. / / O. NT S.M. 1.1671.6..° SOLON d THOROU.RTHOROUGH,' aDVMar N.a:RmTNN.roeOAT, aRAROARarE,rK CCM... MOO. SON. DO NOT 1713. ROOT PURE 04 Of W.Nw. ®SQ.tE1ATIDN LT.K BOIL RARE TOSE .1845314102 .1845314102 SOIL LN®T.N®.ENESTN TNEROOT WA / E,aYATIDx. ., acAR.reonw P.M. arNOle nRDRro.wnru EX SPRUCE TREE / r w�lEm.10 M SAM. rr �� ' R art ROES A.A. OP TRUNK AND REMOVE COMPLETELY. / / //�\ ` EX SHRUBS RE.M.E KrNSAN.T N..WNPROMTO51MK1 R dw.LV WAIFRMSMIN. MId.ro NACHO ROO... EX. SHRUBS RRARm1.1AxTM 6aILNMAURYD6PTN . f NA�waeDAP[ UrnESeva.a.Rx...ue WM. . / 4 R ,, r. :wRa..ErSe.T.,emr.Ad EZOVrA. NOM R '. TpAg1°R rwAraN IRa PI.DR ronAC.la .Ra... / ,. A end f MALE STONE V LANK .IDOEDNw.AOm .. 13341. 13341. ( . EX. ASH , ro 6PEti.aRPMDUDTSANOOT.Ht P N . SE NDONTAI404 LOCATED M IOTA / �� �„ � � "°" R.wxw.kTDR.Ie...�EAaR.ANTAN.. TR6ESNA ,0.WPA•TRUNl .. �\I, Q ll �,.luu 221 4. POlTTION TMR..NOUrT.OUM.WR?E PERIDD. ` N PALL .Id[ N MN. �� P �, � jpl „RroOR �PRODUCTS oMESA P .. = I ,.:.,\/ ^'• ® TRpE o. PLANTINO DETAIL r BU /[DING , � � EDGER (U P) / A W ] .v ; 1. ' , • I / .• NOTE AMEND THE PUNTING , i�.L� j (N � . " �. T 1 � \ P . asw.NANTNO RRp..000.RaRroroarN SOD . SOIL OF THE PERENNIAL AREAS . • YF �' ,I, ..J EX CRABAPPLE � . WITH .50% SHREDDED USE �� ►.•• `► J - 0� DOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD F I W w �■ ,"� . � ��,e , � I MULCH FOR ENORE BED. USE • �• . i �r I ` , ��` x RAW AT NAME DEPTH RDa.RmrdrwosIDESaPRDOrRwL 4' DEP/H UNDER SHRUBS. • • A .DEPTH AS N CCRI HER. -- , int, Cam♦ 1REE5, AND OVER THE OPEN •�• 4 • •. I -. �� AREAS BET%EEN ALL PLANTS, 1' NO1 R,��TM N'; .04 0 0 Si-H RNS SHED O OA� AND TAPER DOWN TO 7' UNDER \ _ _ �"� 734E PERENNIAL 1 5. R10RdQEY WATER N PLANTS • • C + 00 iiii-h:116741. • .. _ a. IN �T CE 000 NTOOUCOS AND OTHER X05 �� ■ .1 - w N O %;0�� ♦ • �': I ® PERIME& PLANT,* DETAR y * .m � "� ����A, ✓,��� WARMER ¢ PLANT SCHEDULE EX. M APL E , q7I�♦ ♦ `�I . � 6 I. �J. 1 ©C1 SCHEDULE ✓ "' ♦I • . T 'M L \ SO SL11( =fE�i lim m i L:,.., 4 El my . p.M DN. _ � �♦/ A � 1111 oo fau._- - r - T 6 Or*,.1,/114 • ■ �� S SSSS�S�- \ •'•�•'� ■ � � ._ --^- r+-._S .tea• ®f_ •� ' �ap_ Mu ....1111------, -J X1 .:.5 1 JLi©•71 ` .. �llin(, VA. SS��L 1 'SSSS�SS•- .. PE. NAOS. NA R ImeaKEDI ". ` \ �� �4tilm -- SR. 17. Jas sin /:::::- EX ASH • �I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - EX. ASH _ _ SS��D'�'+-0 .-���� Prdknin >Y O \ • _ _ Landscape 0lan °LANDSCAPE PLAN ® a... x•. L.1 EXHIBIT 9 0KEYNOTES EXTERIOR MATERIAL SCHEDULE ;&RYLAUR I. exam. CT cAs.Cr na ,tr . (7 EXISTING ROCK FACE BLOCK n EXISTING ROCK FACE BLOCK .....r.... 2. LXISTw r c M nbR COIMUTIaa SLIM IP aN5 S la. woN META MM. PPL. 4PLALL..12.C. i MINIM IA:K 1.52,19157 VT O VR O R AT C0.ON' IaGI 15 w �rtsarsa� o p ¢4 N O LOCAL POE AMOR! T .x4 401. s s NAM 15 L o cAnow WY L. e. MOMS N:MP eNnaO OM. •51091.1500 - -- Ia FOP WBONTIOON DRAM IR NR. F...u..Iu 0� � l' .Aoede7p)N'J 0 Cr SxISTIM PARAPET TO IM 11.424.7 <5> EXISTING BURNISHED BLOCK C•) MANUFACTURED STONE Proyn T. axxIX45 0 0 PEN HORIZON ACADEMY • COLOR. 5• MrC SI1. ex e. a eR45r. o "Of R AVIDIM i■� _ - ■ I � ■ _ BUILDING SIGN ANALYSIS ( 7 ATE FINOOT CO EXISTING EIFS -ftECOAi � 5409 AMMNIS LA reaR. D.:. YANG MOMnI - moo 012.1442 .4, SsTON 46..4 ' a, W. nn vek, 1414 554+1 _- COLO. caw - -_ -- -— -` -' - --- -- 011144. O 0 0 • 015 TO 902 O TM , P eo c424ns G°'°"' SP) oN eveN NT.eAL w e MLA A PROM OM Ur ILn WIL 11.5L0 a Plb F n SIIK.CO n EXIST. PREEN. METAL COPING ®SOUTH ELEVATION NORM .2222 SP. MM. 5POR. 2T R 222 SA.: MS zo SF Na. NM catty caw ALwM01R Sax AMLA LDO u. saaSR, eacur. MST SUM LUNATIC. I MN AT CO e'F: 'IS• earon5. ILevAw I MLA AT ■20 SP. . LAST 5.44 Sax AREA F n PREFINISIED METAL COPING .> PREFINISIED FETAL . -- wraM IN4NA bb SP. N12: viz. rev (� �� L E NA I LISP AT WAD SP. 0., . - ' � LAST EL I AT NM w. MM COMM. bat GP?!MS CPS () EXIST. ALUMINA S TOREFRONT (U) EXIST. ALRIIRM DOOR 0 0. ' Na: SIa. NW ®�N ®�NWJ1B9NNO�N�� - _ 0 ^ +/ t.�� _ ALUMINUM STOREFRONT () ALUMINUM DOOR • 67 0 - Na. _�` ! I _ J _ cc caw — — — _ _ _ - - e ®I ` . ee, 01244, exaSR: 4014:5115: 4424a1N ®NORTH ELEVATION (a} ALLOW METAL DOOR FRAME ■) AS AIRING ca coe«eos. COML.. 0) ARGRTECTURAL LEO IVLL COERCE (N) NOT USED _ STOxco NPeR. S aTrte: T MNlwrrvr lW4 Na. o\.a /ti, co... wt... (> STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF 04 STEEL COLUMNS I SUPPORTS o I 0 c OUw A MILS aUeeR 415542 - — — - e eM4T: 2P..., tN++S Pal 4.M F e•. 0 I � (Kl CANOPY U DERSIDE <4 TE. bATE POSTS a BOLLARDS ........ W N.I Architect a rwM... _ Na. 401.4. O A O 4,5401"5. `OMM5CN �' TE. GATES 0) BUILDING SIGN O w ST ' POSE e a , Na. cO�OR c. aR : a 4ONNexrs. uu+9 OCC /> 0 01401+01 MNO•P•^e••NO�+• O ���Y"M�._ 0 0 0 0 ° A;1 =!l- 1l.�l� 1► /71 ml m`0 mlm'o m o ` °"" AM I1I 1 1Io1 7l ' -o— ©oo e won _ EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O EASTELEVATION SPS.Iw: ^ 4 •I — _ — ....._... /1---- _ New Horizon Academy _ .. ...... —mom r .......• _ .. 1111111■11 WE ...aw= *0.4......... 311■11.111•111.11.11111111111C I 1. IN ....... re -, `irl ,IN ....... / II i= ••••=11 i . --- ---. East Elevation New Horizon il A cadem y- - - -_ -- " MIL � South Elevation 5' X20' 9 ORIGINAL AREA, ® O .�� �` 58. XQ.FT. SIGN, , A ft. tj _�r 98.48 SQ. FT. SIGN, /� Y� � ` STRETCHED LAYOUT O E W H O R I Z O NI 4' X25' I Academy ' ORIGINAL AREA, r N E HbRtZ01� L J , 46"H X 16'2 "W= Academy 62 SQ. FT. SIGN, 0 STRETCHED LAYOUT . Ib CIND . r m ,7 I 0 • ( ) > —I 0 > 0 r F- 0 4 , 0 1 < i 5 0 EAST ELEVAT © SOUTH ELEVATION O © _ -o lib• =r -o• (SAME FOR WEST ELEVATION) TRIM CAP I I ALUM. LETTER MOSS 8 SACKS LE Ca ACCESS DOORS SUITABLE FASTENF0. kk - PLEX FACE GREENFIELD CONNECTORS i WIRE INSULATOR DMOUNT LETTER TO RACEWAY ,_ GREENFlELD- - 120V POWER SUPPLY TO POWER MOUNT RACEWAY 1O FASCIA SLOG. FASCIA SS TI0N - TYR ILLUM_ ON RACEWAY LANDLORD APPROVAL: DATE: CLIENT APPROVAL: DATE: S I G Ni S U N L I M I T E LD NEW HORIZON ACADEMY SCALE DATE. 12 -9 -1 1 ? ?400 I—I WY S S OAK PARK HEIGHTS MN , ` HAM EL N 553 DRAWN BY MICHAEL REVISED _~ OFFICE- 763/478 -9460 CONTENT IS PROPERTY OF _._ SIGNS UNLIMITED, NO USE FILE DRAWINGNUMBER - . - : FAX- 763 /478 - ?034 IS PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL N) CATALOG Sithreir TYPE NO. JOB NAME 15 -11 FXH1BIT 13 LytePro7 Architectural LED Wall Sconce g ORDERING INFORMATION Catalog Number: Example: LP7T LP 7 T SERIES I l COLOR LP- LytePro7 T- Titanium PRODUCT Architectural I LED I W -White LED Wall SPECIFICATIONS Sconce 7 -Hi -lumen LEDs • Provides safety and security in residential and light commercial applications in locations such as entrances, over garages, illuminate house numbers, wall signs and ACCESSORIES located along perimeters and pathways • Seven high- output LEDS having an PCB1- Button -type photocontrol. 2 -1/8" x 1" x 3/4 ". average rated life of 60,000 hours 3/8" NPS threaded nipple for use in boxes, • Patented Philips LED Optical fittings and other protective enclosures. System individually controls the placement of light in the target area minimizing glare • 4100k neutral color temperature delivers light with minimal waste • Type III distribution with shielded optics and no uplight • Individual precision collimating optics collects and redirect light to optimize performance. TECHNICAL INFORMATION PHOTOMETRIC DATA • Functions in environments with temperatures that range from - 30°C to 40 °C • Housing constructed of heavy die 3.9" cast aluminum and fully pa - _ • resistant Dura lex II II — C , � tea`• ^�� polyester powder coated finish available in white and titanium � � , 7.6" 4.5° • Acrylic lens • Electronic Class II LED driver accepts120 -220v, 50 /60Hz input g 2.7" a 3.5" "\`raisi.' (constant current) • Requires only 13 system was for ■111111/ environmentally - friendly operation • Integral cast aluminum heat sink `� ® J ensures cool operation Horizontal Footcandles • Complete with integral splice 3.3" Scale: 1 Inch = 8 Ft. chamber Light Loss Factor = 1.00 • Built -in bubble level for accuracy. Luminaire Lumens = 555 • Universal mounting plate with hook Mounting Height = 8.00 Ft and lock mounting Maximum Calculated Value = 1.82 Fc • Optional field installed PCB1 trOus ,,, photocontrol for automatic all night lighting • Patent Pending Design ETL tested suitable for wet location • Five year warranty Crescent /Stonco • 2345 Vauxhall Rd. • Union, NJ 07083 • 908- 964 -7000 • www.stoncolighting.com 10/10 Stonco is a Philips group brand PHILIPS MIMI 1 4 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 2335 Highway 36 West St. Paul MN 55113 Tel: (651) 636 -4600 Fax: (651) 636 -1311 Stantec Bonestroo January 5, 2012 Mr. Eric Johnson City Administrator City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd., P.O. Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 -2007 Re: New Horizon Academy Plan Review Stantec File No.: 000055- 11000 -1 Dear Eric: We have reviewed the site redevelopment plans received for New Horizon Academy as submitted by Rylaur, LLC. on December 13, 2011. Following are our initial comments and /or recommendations: Sheet C2.0 and C3.0: 1. The soil material needs to be verified at the proposed infiltration vault location. Borings need to be taken to verify the soil materials will allow infiltration. Traffic Analysis Comments: 1. The developer has underestimated the amount of trips generated by the redevelopment. According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, which is the industry standard for traffic impact analysis, a 7,500 SF daycare will generate 92 trips in the AM, and 94 trips in the PM peak hour. Although this amount is greater than the submittal estimated, many communities use 100 hourly trips as a threshold basis for determining whether or not to perform an impact analysis on a development This new daycare would generate around 90 trips in the peak hour, which is slightly beneath this threshold. 2. The majority of trips will be impacting the 58th St & Neal Ave intersection, as well as the Stillwater Blvd & 58th St intersection. These intersections are signalized and Washington County recently performed a project coordinating these intersections. If conditions at these intersections are already congested, especially during the PM peak hour, the addition of 40 left- turning vehides at 58th St & Neal Ave would exacerbate such conditions. Additional coordination with Washington County and their recent traffic count data should be identified with their traffic impact study. Stantec Page 2 of 2 Reference: New Horizon Academy Plan Review If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (651) 604 -4808. Sincerely, STANTEC, formerly BONESTROO 1 0 44 ,.. ip , ay. X7..--- Christopher W. Long, P.E. cc: Julie Hultman, Planning & Code Enforcement Andy Kegley, Public Works Director Jim Butler, Building Official Scott Richards, City Planner Mark Vierling, City Attorney Kath Widen, City Arborist A. Peter Hilger, Rylaur, LLC. Mark Hanson, Scott Israelson, File - Stantec EXHIBIT 15 Julie Hultman From: K.D. Widin <kdwidin @comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 4:08 PM To: Eric Johnson; Mark Vierling (E- mail); Chris Long (E- mail); Andrew Kegley; Jim Butler; Betty Caruso; Julie Hultman; Scott Richards Subject: New Horizon Academy - Landscape Plan OPH Staff - I have reviewed the proposed landscape plan for the New Horizon Academy at the old Hollywood Video location and I also made a site visit to inspect the existing trees and shrubs which they are planning to incorporate in the new landscape plan. I have the following comments about the plan: 1. Landscape Plan - the plan is attractive and utilizes some of the existing trees and shrubs on the site. The plan complements the site and makes sense in terms of the proposed function of the site. 2. Plant Species /Cultivars to be used - the plant species and cultivated varieties listed in the plant schedule are mostly native or "near- native" species. Some non - natives listed, such as hydrangeas, do well under local growing conditions and are appropriate for the site. The plants specified are hardy, relatively low maintenance, and have few serious insect or disease problems. The planting stock is sized appropriately for the type of plant and for commercial landscape planting specifications per the Oak Park Heights zoning code. 3. Planting Detail - this is very good and no changes are needed. Contractors must adhere to the approved planting detail and the site will be inspected after planting to confirm proper planting methods. 4. Landscape Specifications - these are very good and the most detailed that I have seen. The specifications take into consideration the site requirements for good establishment and future growth of landscape plants. 5. Existing Trees & Shrubs - according to the proposed plans, 1 existing tree (a maple in fair -poor condition with a trunk wound) is scheduled to be removed. Most other trees which were part of the original landscaping will remain. These plants are in fair -good condition. Some of the existing shrubs will remain and it looks like the shrubs which are to be removed will be replaced. Please contact me if you have any questions. Due to a conflict, I will not be at the site design review meeting on 1/4/12. Please forward my comments to the developer. Kathy Widin OPH Arborist ENCLOSURE 5 City of Oak Park Heights To: Planning Commission From: Julie Hultman, Planning & Code Enforcement Officer Date: January 5, 2012 Re: 2012 Meeting and Council Representation Schedule Please review the attached schedule 2012 schedule for: o Planning Commission meeting dates; and o Commission representation to City Council meetings. The proposed schedule has been created in conjunction with Planning Commission Bylaws and the approved 2012 City Council meeting dates. You will note that the schedule reflects meeting dates upon the 2 " Thursday of the month except for the month of November, which is reflected as being held upon the 3rd Thursday of the month. The proposed schedule allows the Planning Commission meetings to follow the first meeting of the City Council each month. The representative schedule simply follows the rotation that was used in 2011. The Commission should review the proposed schedule and move to approve it as presented or with any amendment agreed upon by the Commission. Thank you. ._. s 2012 Planning Commission Meeting Schedule Commission Representative To City Council Meeting /"' JANUARY FEBRUARY S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 1 •6 7 1 1 ' 2 3 4 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 I 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 Commissioner Rep. Dougherty Commissioner Rep. LeRoux MARCH 5 M T W T F S S I M T W T 1 F S 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 Commissioner Rep. Powell Commissioner Rep. Squyres JUNE S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7I 8 9 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Commissioner Rep. Bye Cearnissioner Rep. Dougherty JULY AUGUST S M T W T I_ -_. F '', S. I S M T W T F S i. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 � 2 3 4 T 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 -- 30 31 Commissioner Rep. LeRoux Commissioner Rep. Powell SEPTEMBER OCTOBER S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 28 29 30 31 30 Commissioner Rep. Bye Commissioner Rep. Squyres NOVEMBER DECEMBER S M T W T F S_ S M T W T 1 F S 1 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Commissioner Rep. Dougherty 30 31 Commissioner Rep. LeRoux Schedule relflects meetings on the 2nd Thursday of each month except for the month of November, which is the 3rd Thursday to allow for following the 1 st meeting of the City Council each month.