HomeMy WebLinkAboutMULT DOCS - 08-00301 - Madison High School - Ordinance Variance& 0
of �
�<a
CITY OF
REX
Americas Family Community
Application for Variance
City of Rexburg
12 North Cente- Phone: 208.359.3020
Rexburg, ID 8344: www.rexburg.org Fax: 208.359.3022
Fee(s) Paid: Yes /No
Applicant
Variance: $300.00
Publication: $200.00
>`a11 w. U S
Name: . Fw k A SSDC [ ATE5 Address: 1152- 1&4b A/IG,
City: State: 7 D . Phone: 3 54 - t309
Owner (Complete if owner not applica
'j nt)
� 3t1
Name: �1�1AC�tSo,.t Sc. Address: Z9D /JoarO FuesT EAST
City: R e-VC. M j M Cn State: _ 'C>, Phone: - 35'1- 33 O O
Property Covered by Application:
Address: Zone:
Legal Description (Lot, Block, Addition, Division Number)
?A%. GEL.. R f�fZ)CBGAO35o�j.
*Please submit a vicihiiy map of the property to this application.
Nature of Request (B riefly explain the proposed use)
1.. �ut�Di�.l [� EICs,►} - �iJt7 Tlo�1/! t_ �E I�F1 T 1�) EEc��D Feet $cllt.lab•/G Fv,dc�s�/
2. "T LigiiT t dr_j&t47'— V>Or To _61149 VAI- oir- oG 1
�.Ea?viR.ED� TALLti- Paues AiLE 14 E o To Pgayie TiiE REST FEASIBLE SeiyTist.�
Existing use of property:
M& 4a s. Arm - I e owb riot USA, Piamcr Affcoyirp
Requirements for Granting Variance
The following conditions must be fulfilled before a variance can be granted by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Showing that a variance is profitable or desirable for the owner and no harm will be done to others is not sufficient.
Below each requirement explain why your request conforms:
1. The need for a variance results from physical circumstances of the property. Such circumstances generally
include size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings of the property and do not apply to other properties in
the same zone.
TAC LEANEST %S AoT A Fum CTi Oht or. - rAc PAISiCAL. ?fL EgXq, &Or Q.ATWR A"
F'yAr ,F 7"Ag - GAE Auorroodmo% FLY- LOFT '3 Tr1 SP Ec1 rie- Fu�ILT�v�1
2. Failure to obtain a variance will result in undue hardship to the applicant.
IF - rAF- VAcA i5 46T 61 A 1rEb, - TAE FI -Se'"r W'Ll- * " fb TD 'a RLD�trD �•J
(;Elk!! ?� �..IM�Tnl "14�� E �uGAT�C1t4Al. EXpcxjcr ciLS A%jAu TD T14E s
3. The alleged hardship has not been created by the action of the property owner or applicant, e.g. applicant did not
reduce size of lot by prior sale.
4. Approval of the variance will not be in conflict with the interest of the neighborhood or public interest in general.
The Commission or Council may address other points than those discussed above, but a narrative addressing at
least those applicable points will assist in processing your application. A PLOT PLAN MUST BE ATTACHED IN
ORDER TO PROCESS THIS APPLICATION. Included on the plot plan setbacks, parking, etc.
J0t-4 19 zoo
ignature of Applicant Date
2
9 1
2 , 1.1G.t1T P oL. E dE, "'r
Requirements for Granting Variance
The following conditions must be fulfilled before a variance can be granted by the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Showing that a variance is profitable or desirable for the owner and no harm will be done to others is not sufficient.
Below each requirement explain why your request conforms:
1. The need for a variance results from physical circumstances of the property. Such circumstances generally
include size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings of the property and do not apply to other properties in
the same zone.
J¢. 7o Tr1E Vb L uoW. of PA¢V - 1A A Q.t Q>jjt cb TIaE 53E5'T i-i AA- 4A SaLuli & A 19 To
1FAXbV l Q
2. Failure to obtain a variance will result in undue hardship to the applicant.
Ta MAt WrAW "ME S AMA ILI.y^i^1AT►o.t L- %J1 �L ►TF1rx,'f T %, //1R.IANIGfE� IrJI�- - LQU1e�
Twicri. AS M Ajgq t_ltwr 1>ot., CmAmj4a A MA iAT6AA&JLC 15504. S nlo«i jZAe4 fgg -46
AW7 A " Fo1C6ST" of Llrwr PaL45 r4111ri4 IS Aa DLSIR.EA ES rog ricAt.I.V.
3. The alleged hardship has not been created by the action of the property owner or applicant, e.g. applicant did not
reduce size of lot by prior sale.
4a TgE r = fL OUES't' t5 16FIA& MA06 AS A F -CSuLT ,r 7✓gE R &Qj&6D PAR91
A� Tt-%E Wl;Et To PZaJIDE EFFtCiWiJ r LI&IA - ri 1 Er.
4. Approval of the variance will not be in conflict with the interest of the neighborhood or public interest in general.
hS S0owm oN TH krAcAED L1ktYr'tA&ZPr4a1bME LAYoLM TrI LIA*TI)144
IS wt-CPAI ► Co rfW A944 1L. Oe GfIY 92R
The Commission or Council may address other points than those discussed above, but a narrative addressing at
least those applicable points will assist in processing your application. A PLOT PLAN MUST BE ATTACHED IN
ORDER TO PROCESS THIS APPLICATION. Included on the plot plan setbacks, parking, etc.
j Q &I
Iq
gnature of Applicant Date
2
Findings of Fact C r Y OF
City of Rexburg ` R E X B URG
CW
12 North Center Phone: 208.359.3020 Amcrica'sZamityCOmrrturity
Rexburg, ID 83440 www.rexburg.org Fax: 208.359.3022
Madison High School
Variance — 7th South and 12t West
On June 24, 2008 JRW & Associates, representing Madison School District, requested and applied
for a Variance for the new Madison High School for an increase in building height and an increase
for parking lot light pole height
2. On June 27, 2008, the City Clerk sent the Notice of Public Hearing to be published in the local
newspaper for July 1, 2008 and July 12, 2008. A notice was posted on the property and sent to all
property owners within 300 feet of the above mentioned property.
3. On August 7, 2008, Johnny Watson and Brent McFarland of JRW & Associates presented to the
Planning & Zoning Commission for the City of Rexburg the Request for a Variance for Madison
High School at 7th South and 12` West.
Charles Andersen motioned to recommend to City Council to approve the Variance for height
increase of the Madison High School Building from the standard 30 feet to 58 feet. Dan Hanna
seconded the motion. None opposed. Chairman Dyer abstained. Motion carried.
Dan Hanna motioned to recommend to City Council to approve the Variance for an increase in
the parking lot light pole height from 25 feet to 40 feet and using Option 1 of the lighting plan
submitted, which uses metal halide lamps. Richie Webb seconded the motion.
Those in Favor: Those opposed:
Ted Hill Randall Porter
Dan Hanna
Mike Ricks
Richie Webb
Charles Andersen
Thaine Robinson
Chairman Dyer abstained. Motion carried.
4. On August 20, 2008 Johnny Watson - JRW & Associates at 1152 Bond Avenue reviewed the
proposal. Lighting elevations were reviewed for the proposal. The majority of the building exceeds
the 30 foot limit allowed in Transitional Agriculture 1 (TAG1). The auditorium (modified fly) is
about 59 feet tall and the gymnasium is about 40 feet high. The building is 250 plus feet off the
property line avoiding the shadow problems.
Council Member Schwendiman moved to grant variance for building height; Council Member
Stevens seconded; all voted aye, none opposed. The motion carried.
0 0
Johnny Watson reviewed the lighting proposal for the new high school. Todd Paine is their
electrical engineer and their goals are safety, safety, safety, to be in scale with the building height,
preserve night sky, and other environmental safety goals. The city's code is somewhat restrictive to
accomplish the aforementioned goals because it limits the type of lamps, pole height, etc. They are
proposing to install 40 foot poles and metal halide bulbs: Metal halide lamps, a member of the
high- intensity discharge (HID) family of lamps, produce high light output for their size, making
them a compact, powerful, and efficient light source. Originally created in the late 1960's for
industrial use, metal halide lamps are now available in numerous sizes and configurations for
commercial and residential applications. Like most HID lamps, metal halide lamps operate
under high pressure and temperature, and require special fixtures to operate safely. They are
also considered a 'point" light source, so reflective luminaires are often required to concentrate
the light for purposes of the lighting application.
Mr. Paine did Lighting Plan One, an independent expert did Lighting Plan Two with similar
material as Plan One, and the third Lighting Plan was done by the city's design ordinance. Plan One
is the best plan for safety with better foot candles. Mr. Watson gave the example of the Burton
School's entry way lighting which conformed to the city's code; however, the right -of -way is not lit
by these lights, so the city will have to come back and light the right -of -way at additional expense.
Plan One with more even lighting allows for lighting the right -of -way without going into the
adjoining neighbors property. The problem with the design ordinance lighting is it emits hot spots,
then dark spots and the lens loose color with is a safety issue by muting the ability to distinguish the
color of cars and people, etc. The city's code would require twice as many poles and lamps at an
additional cost of $51,000 over the preferred safest Plan One.
Council Member Woodland asked if the poles would be 40 feet. Yes. Mr. Watson referred to Mr.
Paine's letter indicating the height of the pole does not control the amount of light; it is controlled
by the light's head. More light would go to the right of way in Plan One for safety's sake.
The City Council reviewed the three proposals. Plan One allows more even light and it meets the
requirements for night sky with Metal Halide lamps. The important thing is the foot - candles of
light. The 40 foot poles allow even lighting for the area. Mayor Larsen mentioned the city's Main
Street uses high pressure sodium lights with an amber color. Council Member Stevens indicated the
University uses the same lighting as Plan One with a white light on ball fields, etc. Mr. Watson
indicated the lighting for the new high school would look like a forest with the city's lighting code
due to smaller poles against a taller building and less even lighting. The current lighting at the
existing high school was discussed noting there is inadequate lighting behind the school.
Council Member Mann said it was a good compromise and it is very workable. The lighting will
be on photo cells. Some of the lighting if desired can be controlled to turn off during the evening.
Council Member Schwendiman agreed with Planning and Zonings review.
Council Member Schwendiman moved to approve the variance for 40 foot high light poles and
Metal halide lamps as noted in lighting Plan One (recommended by Planning and Zoning); Council
Member Woodland seconded the motion; Discussion: Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness
asked for the lighting plan to be approved parcel specific; City Attorney Zollinger said the proposal
is specific to these two requests, not the whole parcel. Mr. Watson indicated he had never seen a
•
•
project's approval expanded beyond the proposal on the table. All voted aye, none opposed. The
motion carried.
Johnny Watson - JRW & Associates at 1152 Bond Avenue referenced the previous meeting where
he said some structural steel for soccer goals would be made available for recreation. Mayor Larsen
asked Mr. Watson to talk to Bob Yeatman, the city's Recreation Director. The steel goals will be
designed with skids to slide off the field for others to use the field like the Madison Lyons football
organization.
Planning and Zoning
12 North Center garyl @rexburg.org
Rexburg, ID 83440 www.rexburg.org
Department
STAFF REPORT
Phone: 208.359.3020 x314
Fax: 208.359.3024
v
,a
0
*®
00
CITY OF
REXBUR
0W_
,lmerira' Family Community
SUBJECT: Variance Request for Proposed New Highschool, file # 08 00301
APPLICANT: JRW &Associates
1152 Bond Ave.
PROPERTY OWNER: Madison School District #321
PURPOSE: Building height increase from 30 feet as required to 58 -feet, and an
increase of the parking lot light pole heights from 25 -feet to 40 -feet
PROPERTY LOCATION: 2211 W. 1000 S.
Rexburg, ID
40 ROPERTY ID: RPRXBCA0350001
— PLAN: Commercial and Low - Moderate Residential Density (Draft Comp
plan designates the proposed site as Public Facility)
ZONING DISTRICT: Transitional Agricultural One
APPLICABLE CRITERIA: City of Rexburg Development Code (Ordinance Code 926)
§ 6.12 Variances
AUTHORITY § 6.12 "The Planning & Zoning Commission may authorize variances or
modifications from the provisions of this Ordinance as to... setbacks,
parking spaces... "
I. BACKGROUND
II. SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject property is new high school site located near the intersection of University Avenue and
12 West.
III. ANALYSIS
The following are the criteria for granting a variance which the Comm=ission should consider. All
i s criteria must be met in order to grant a variance.
Case No. 08 00301 Page 1
0 A
a. The need for a variance results from physical limitations of the lot upon which the variance is
requested which are not generally applicable to other properties in the same zone;
• b. Failure to approve a variance will result in undue hardship;
c. The alleged hardship has not been created by the action of the applicant or the property
owner;
d. Approval of the variance is not in conflict with public interest.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Commission take public testimony, and determine if the requested
variance can be approved, denied, or approved with conditions. Staff has determined that this is a self
imposed hardship not related to something unique about the particular property's physical
limitations. In addition, the applicant new of the limitations before the purchase or donation of the
property or could have known by looking at City's ordinances.
•
•
Case No. 08 00301 Page 2
Wai
v a,+ ®h
B
JRW & Associates.
1152 Bond Ave.
Rexburg, ID 83440
4 August 2008
RE: Madison High School Outside Lighting
Johnny,
Following is a description of discussion items regarding the site lighting at the High School and
the City of Rexburg Commercial Lighting Standards:
General:
In General the Lighting Standard is an excellent document, the stated purposes and intentions are
clear and commendable, consisting of primarily five basic fundamentals. 1. Promote public
health, safety, welfare and security for persons and property, drivers and pedestrians (4.14, A, 1
& 4). 2. Protect the "Night Sky" (4.14, A, 2). 3. Promote energy efficiency (4.14, A, 3). 4.
Eliminate Light Trespass onto abutting properties (4.14, A, 8). 5. The remaining items are
primarily Aesthetic considerations (4.14, A, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10).
Points of Discussion:
There are several items contained in the Standards and Criteria (4.14, E) that are not consistent
with the stated objectives of the standard, We seek an exception not of the stated standards but
from the Standards and Criteria.:
4.14, E, 2., Lamp Color
The requirement is for High Pressure Sodium (HPS) lamps. These are very effective and
efficient lamps for some applications, but not all. A color rendering index is used to quantify
the ability of a light source to reproduce color as compared with and ideal or natural light
source. A CRI of 0 being the worst and 100 the best. The two most popular and common
exterior light sources are Metal Halide (MH) and High Pressure Sodium (HPS). a standard
MH has a CRI of 65 — 80, and more nearly represents natural color while a standard HPS has
a CRI of 22 — 25 which tends to dull or "brown" natural colors especially the blues and
greens. Much of our ability to identify objects is based on color. Exception: We propose to
provide MH lamps to promote better color renditioning and color recoginition. We feel that
this will promote public and pedestian security and safety to better vehicle identification, and
person to person identification.
2. 4.14, E, 3., Light Trespass
In this section light trespass is required to be reduced to a maximum of .2 footcandles (fc) at
the property line including public roadways and adjacent commercial properties. In the case
of the High School this will drive the light levels down at the entries to the parking lot which
is the point of greatest pedestrian/vehicle occurance to unsafe levels. The Illumination
Engineering Society (IES) recommends light levels from Mc for low activity to 4fc for high
activity. Exception: We Propose an average of 1.5fc at the property line at the entry to the
parking lot common with public roadway and feel that the intent of the requirement is more
accurately stated in 4.14, E, 8, b. which limits the light levels to. 2 fc where abutting
residential property.
3. 4.14, E, 8, a., Parking Lot Pole Heiyhts
"the height of the parking lot lights should be in proportion to the building mass and height,
and shall be no more than 25ft." The first half of the sentence is correct and represents the
stated aesthetic intent of this Standard. We take exception to the second half of the sentence.
It is important to note that the height of the pole has no bearing on the ability of a fixture to
conform to the "night sky" requirement. Furthermore during snow covered conditions the
night sky is impared by reflected light. Lower poles positions the light source closer to the
ground and has the potential of creating a less favorable condition. Light distribution is a
function of pole height.
Conclusion:
We propose that the site lighting layout as designed and submitted conforms to the stated
objectives and intents of the City of Rexburg Lighting Standard, in primarily safety and security,
night skys, efficiency and aesthetics.
Sincerely,
Todd Payne, PE
0 6
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that a Public Hearing will be held before the Planning & Zoning
Commission of the City of Rexburg, Idaho, Thursday, July 17, 2008, at 7:45 p.m., in the City
Council Chambers of the City Building at 12 North Center, Rexburg, Idaho, regarding:
1. Madison High School Supplement Conditional Use Permit (08 00302) for a High School
"site plan ", "landscape plan ", and "lighting plan" as conditions required in Madison
High School's approved Conditional Use Permit (07 00561). The property is located at
2211 West 1000 South, Rexburg, Idaho. The property is currently zoned Transitional
Agricultural One (TAG1).
2. Madison High School Variance (08 00301) regarding a the building height above the
maximum height allowed by the Development Code of 30 feet to a building height of 58
feet.
3. Madison High School Variance (08 00301) regarding parking lot lights pertaining to the
allowed height by the Development Code of "25 feet" in proportion to the building
mass and building height to a maximum building height of 40 feet in proportion to the
building mass and building height.
The city code governing this request is ORDINANCE No. 926
"DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF REXBURG, IDAHO"
(ADOPTED FEBRUARY 16th, 2005) and Amended 7/06/2005; 5/07/2007; 7/03/2007
The said parcels were annexed into the City of Rexburg June 21, 2006 and the parcels are located at
2211 West 1000 South, Rexburg, Idaho, Madison County, Idaho, and more particularly described as
follows:
The Northeast Quarter of Section 35, Township 6 North, Range 39 East, Boise Meridian, Madison
County, Idaho.
At such hearing the Planning & Zoning Commission will hear all persons and all objections and
recommendations relative to such proposed permit. The City Clerk will also accept written
comments at City Hall prior to 4:00 p.m. on July 16 2008.
This notice is given pursuant to the provisions of Section 67 -6509 and 67 -6511 Idaho Code, and all
amendments thereof.
DATED this 27th day of June, 2008.
CITY OF REXBURG
�. - ram
Blair D. Kay, City Clerk
Published: July 01, 2008,
July 12, 2008
0
--__----___-__----'--
-----�-------------------------- -------- e
/ .
|
/ K
| |
/
/
| '
A.
MMIDIA"
it x � ~._ / 233. �
----------
/
rITK�ims - OyokAL_
_--_
/ rm,—m
_______________
------ -------------------------------------------------�---�-�� -
| |�
/
| U'
|
|
--
| - ^
- �
TOWNSHIP o NORTH, wmmmw 07 SECTION 35 - I
THE NOR THEAST QUARTER (.El/4) 'o
MADISON COUNTY. IDAHO 1
| weymzcs^c« '
~ '
J —�
Nc ..... !
E mg
| )<
AIM
. .
"-SW~_'
WTR
T =)==C=.
c==>=c=
~/
U|
U�
U /
U /
|
U\
8/
/
8|
K|
. ./
| U
| `
- -
!
| U 0 m]&
� J ill,
..
,
�m���
|/ �� m
SITE
--------------
WIN
ASSOCIATES
FANNINGIHICNEY
LJORH
(20a) 7-2661
o4w;
CONSLXTANM-
DRAWN BY JDB NO,
ftm $15
CHECKED BY: I DATE-
25AM APRIL 015
1- --- 5 =: L
V,- a y
aV
2
UN11ER511Y MR.
--A I E=a
1.6 .3 1. 1 '�T 1.9 1 1.0 2.3 2.0 1.8 1.3 U.8 U. t. '0.7 1.3 �:.T 1.3 .8 .8 U 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.2
i .0 ., .1 .3 ,.3 1.8 I -1 , b. b. ., ., 1.9 1. .6 .4 .4 Ws � 1.8
F 1. 1 .8 ,. ,. 2. 22 ., .7 .3 t8 33
t 2.8 1,3 1.6I I1.I8 1. 1.8 1.7 1.3 .8
n e e I 1; - P1.9 X1.6 14 111, .1 6
GYM
MADISON HIGH SCHOOL
P� REORMING
ARTS
�i � ;� ■ iii r�• .
1 2. 2
F34 *2
j■' �� -
i�
�t
.:
SEMINARY
LOCATION
(2 acres)
DE51 GN OPTION #2
LJ�
• 0
��
��
�/►
0
r
■
�i■
�Ca�
2.
1.6
-6 1-7' -
? 1.7
1
3
*12
r
*2
1 2.0
L'1.7
I
' 1A 2,
1
3 2.3
2
.9
l
4--- * 1.7
rs�
1. 2.
o F3
3 2.3
2.
�F33
2 1,7
.
2 1
2 2.2
2.1
2.
2.0
MADISON HIGH SCHOOL
P� REORMING
ARTS
�i � ;� ■ iii r�• .
1 2. 2
F34 *2
j■' �� -
i�
�t
.:
SEMINARY
LOCATION
(2 acres)
DE51 GN OPTION #2
LJ�
• 0
��
��
�/►
0
r
■
�i■
�Ca�
2.
1.6
-6 1-7' -
? 1.7
1
3
*12
r
*2
1 2.0
L'1.7
I
' 1A 2,
1
3 2.3
2
.9
A l
4--- * 1.7
3
1. 2.
o F3
3 2.3
2.
�F33
2 1,7
1.9
2 1
2 2.2
2.1
2.
2.0
EE
ETA TH
, 1.4
1.7 '1.7 ' EE1
( 2.
1.
y
fy�j
MADISON HIGH SCHOOL
P� REORMING
ARTS
�i � ;� ■ iii r�• .
1 2. 2
F34 *2
j■' �� -
i�
�t
.:
SEMINARY
LOCATION
(2 acres)
DE51 GN OPTION #2
LJ�
• 0
��
��
�/►
0
r
■
�i■
�Ca�
,�
t�
-..
[off ��
7
WIN
I
1. 6
2.2 L() 0 1
2.4 3 1
2. 2
2.5 .6 .3 1.9 B
2 2. 1.6
2. - 1.3 1.
2.3 .0 1.8 1.
1.6 1.5
2. .7 1
2. 1 1
2.4 .3 1
2.4 1.8 , 1
UNIVERSITY DR,
UNIVERSITY DR,
1�
/�
OVERAALL EAST ELEVATION f
SCALE, 1/16' = I' -0'
(SEE SHEET A222 FOR ENLAR6E7J ELEVATIONS)
OVERALL WEST ELEVATION
SCALES 1/16' = 1' -0' 2
(SEE SHEET A2.24 FOR ENLARGED ELEVATIONS)
rieninli�irim
r1
4(Z 0" !�
m
to
MlY
OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION 3 1 �
SCALE, 1116' =
(SEE SHEET A2.23 FOR ENLARGED ELEVAT10N5)
i�
OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION_
SCAU. V16' - I' -0' 2
(SEE SHEET A2.21 4 A224 FOR ENLARGED ELEVATION5)
46 1 6 OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION f�
SCALE, 1/16' • 1' -0' 2
(SEE SHEET A223 FOR ENLARGED ELEVATIONS)
1
1 OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE, 1/16'= I' -0'
(SEE SHEET A221 4 A224 FOR ENLARGED ELEVATIONS)
AR -2561
4 AWIF
AHO
im
ASSOCIATES
1152 BOND AVENUE - Suite A
(208) 359 -2309 FAX (208) 359 -2271
RE%BURG, ID WWW.MWA.COM
FANNING
28001 Cabot Drlw, Suite 110
Novi, Michigan 48377
(419) 586 -2292
Fn9nenin9 • Architulu,d • flmnng
LonE Surwlpg. Fnwm
313 D Street, Suit- 2DO
Lewiston, Idaho 83501
(208) 746 -2661
,'
4 W
CONSULTANTS:
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
1605 SOUTH WOO DRUFF
83104
IDAHO FALLS, ID 83404
(208) 529 -9504
GI'AL ENGINEERNG
THE DYER GROUP LLC
153
310 N. 2nd E. Ste.
Rextwr9, Idaho 83440
(208) 656 -8800
STRUCTU ENGINEERING
ES2
Structural Engineem
4943 North 28th East, STE A
Idaho Falle, Idaho 83401
(208) 522 7356
Fax (208) 552 -9302
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
ENGINEERED SYSTEMS MD.
315 Wt Center
Pocatello, Idaho 93204
(208) 233-0501
Fax (801) 233 -0529
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
PAYNE ENGNEERING INC.
1823 E. Center St.
Pocatello, Idaho 83201
(208) 232 -4439
Fax (208) 232 -1435
v
o
N �
�
n
w
z
w
m
O
o
REVISION:
/
I DAIE JOCIMMENT
DRAWN BY:
JOB NO:
SAM
5-5
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
BAM
JUNE '08
PLOT DATE: 6 -27 -08
DRAWING NO.
RE 959502..A2- 20-YE -OA • A220
?2.20
OF
OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION 3 1 �
SCALE, 1116' =
(SEE SHEET A2.23 FOR ENLARGED ELEVAT10N5)
i�
OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION_
SCAU. V16' - I' -0' 2
(SEE SHEET A2.21 4 A224 FOR ENLARGED ELEVATION5)
46 1 6 OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION f�
SCALE, 1/16' • 1' -0' 2
(SEE SHEET A223 FOR ENLARGED ELEVATIONS)
1
1 OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE, 1/16'= I' -0'
(SEE SHEET A221 4 A224 FOR ENLARGED ELEVATIONS)
+ T N54 9 -b
03450BI - PRECAST
CONCRETE GAP PER
DETAIL A4 /A5J6
REFER TO ELEV.
4/A224 FOR
BUILIDN6 BEYOND
+126 '- -
(1) GOUR5E 3❑--�
(I)
4�__ rI � K _E ELEV.
X00'-0'
1
FINISH GRADE -�
5EE 51TE
DRAHIN65
I/A2.21 2/A221
3
I >
I z r_ z
TR
I
7
A �_LO,_ - WLT
63.11 � + Ig6'-O• .16
+II
P ARAPET GAP
Ib'-8• IH'-4"
(3) E.G. SPACED (5) EG. SPACED
�T
PARA CAP PA#RAPEf GAP
37
O O
tpi n x. a r ry r..:w - c:
A
.IB
SCHEDULE, TYP.
REM
T.O. C
+ 13$
03450BI - PRECAST
(2) E.G. SPACED
0895262 -
PARAPET GAP b' -0"
iRAN5LUGENT SKYLI I
0
03450BI - PRECAST
CONCRETE GAP PER
CONCRETE GAP PET2
'
DETAIL A4 /65.16
14
3 N COURSE
TA. GAP
+
TAYRN _
22-9
I
0550063 - ST
(2) EG. SPACED
CHANNEL - CANOPY '.
PARAPET GAP TYP.
SYSTEM PER
THIS ELEVATION UNO
DETAIL B /A401
TAl"BJ�__
-
T.
1 1 I I I l l 1^ EQ. EG.
T 1
_
t "T_4.
41 42 O O 47 O O 52 O O O
e
REM : COORDINATE CMU VENEER LAYOUT 4 JOINTS
EG 8' -0" 8' -0" 8' -0` 8' -0" TO Al-16N W/- ULLION5 AS SHOWN
ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN AL16N
A1 W/FULLION HXMIJLLION WMILLION I
DS ALIGN ALIGN �'Wz
5 LIGN AL16N VERI
A6 H/ ',W/ / MULLI MULLIO 'bAILLIO ULLION, */..
10 "3 / / / �� / 1" C" / 1111'_J / � T.0=111_1 (I COURSE
3
9 b
3
2/A221 3/A2.21
D
I-E
r_
I�
/ � f
N COURSE \\ \ITT
I
08911.81 - SUN SHADE
PER ALUM. CURTAIN
HALL MFR.
b '
5
III
nNlnu9n
OIInInI18 NN9I8nnullilnni611 nnlnl b MITI IBIIIIIIII01IInII18lnnin IIIIDIIII86I ll II L� .aa^^,^m a .............. m...
�✓GJ IT✓GJ 1 _VGJ 4
p rVGJ �VGJ rl/GJ NGJ �VGJ I �{� a I 4
/ / ✓" / TAWIN I
M DI$CN H1 4H
' b
b
2 3 7
1' 7
(I) COURSE .1 t. N COURSE
_. - -- -
O GouRSE
- -- - - - - -- 8 - 11 - - ---- ------- ---- - -- - -- - -- - - - -�
--- --- -- ------ - - - - -- -- --- --- - --
------------ - - -- -- - -- - - -- -- - --- --
T-- - - - --- + -- - - -- -- -- - - - - -- --- -- ---- -- --- -- --- -
_ 0550063 -STEEL - - - - - - - - - - - - - O I IAI -GLAZED
13 GHARIEL DOHN5poUT SC+iED LEI SIGN , ALUMINUM CURTAIN
0691161 - GLAZED 13 0841166 - ALUMINUM EACH SIDE GWA5. 4 DETAIL OBl -IGUE HALL SYSTEM
ALUMINUM CURTAIN STOREFRONT SYSTEM G3/A5.82
HALL SYSTEM PER PLANS 4 SCHEDULE 05LIGLE DETAIL C3/A5.13 0841166 - ALUMINUM
I/A221 2/6221 03300.61 - CONCRETE 2/6221 3 /6221
STOREFRONT SYSTEM FOOTING PER STR DW65.
SOUTH ELEVATION _ PER PLANS 4 SCHEDULE
SCALE, I/B' - 1' -0• s
3
2/A221 3 A221
0) EG. SPACED
11
,
tll�
A
.13
(5) EG. 5PACESJ
PAI(ZAPET GAP
EDGE OF CHU
OFFSET - SEE
PLANS
71
(3) E.G. SPACED
PARAPET GAP 4' -b'
4'-8•
PARAPET GAP
tpi n x. a r ry r..:w - c:
- +
4
�-„(. ...
SCHEDULE, TYP.
-
T.O. C
+ 13$
03450BI - PRECAST
(2) E.G. SPACED
03450.51 - PREGA5T
PARAPET GAP b' -0"
CONCRETE GAP PER
0
DETAIL A4 /A5.16
CONCRETE GAP PER
0481OAI - CMU - SPLIT FACE
'
6
14
3 N COURSE
TA. GAP
+
DETAIL A4 /A5.16
I
GJ
J
04&0.A1 - GMU - &ROUND FACE
F 4
SCORED - COLOR 3 - (2) GOUt5E5
04010.AI - CMU - FLUTED (5) -
COLOR 3 - SPLIT FACE (1) COUR5E
-
T.
1 1 I I I l l 1^ EQ. EG.
T 1
14 {
TYP. l
1 1. ,
1 J I I
TA. I �(
w - --
2 II
b
i - - -L
,-� i_
�T-L, T'
r r lr��
L
- L
(I) 001
ZTL1
T -
r r I l�` 7 t T� L 1 ;rt�T I IT (T T
L I I I I I I IrJ 7 I I,:
11 .1 l I i I,7 II 1,1 I IIII
T OY41NID Lr C � t I ,A LL'
T+ 2-0 - r zT
s
1 r'=�s T - L ' j 1
]
M A I S O
t i
SIGN PER
N fir - irTT�
DETAIL 33/68 Oa TT
t z
-r I - >_ - " i ' ��" "' - 'r` --
'r �
GH CHOOL
HI S
/ `` i VIII VIII( IIII IIII1IIIIIIIIIII11111 [NI VIII IiIII II
:i ry�IIItIIIIIIIOIIiIIIl0lillllfillO IIIIIIInll11 I� I � I 1_ �_ ?.._�. �-
uplf9lunlYo41n91unllnu�nllilfl6} n4qunl�uol9ntn91 {ulungtlllnlUlnll}1nnp6IlliUiu 9nenm6nulnnuiv
t:
{ -
L
TA. BAND `7s
S
T
=TA. BA � Lrii t rL�'IrliT.
T
I....
T ...Z)_LLL TL�
C7 i I' f 1 IT.1?I I 1 ll i I
_.1 1 I T r
04810A1 - GM) - SPLIT FACE
J 11 L,1 L I L I. L� t l
1 1 I -
SOLDIER COURSE - COLOR 2
12
04810AI - CMU - SMOOTH FACE -
GOLOR 1
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - -
6ROUND FAGS - COLOR 3
I CHANGE
CHANGE
J .
CHANGE
CHANGE
b4' -0"
28' -0•
2/6221 3/6221
SOUTH ELEV)4TI0N
SCALE I1 1' -0' .2
08952AI -
I-J TA. BAND
TRAN5LUGENT PANEL
- +
4
SYSTEM PER PLANS 4
�-„(. ...
SCHEDULE, TYP.
-
T.O. C
+ 13$
PARAPET GAP
(2) E.G. SPACED
03450.51 - PREGA5T
PARAPET GAP b' -0"
CONCRETE GAP PER
0
DETAIL A4 /A5.16
-- - - - - - --
0481OAI - CMU - SPLIT FACE
'
6
14
3 N COURSE
STOREFRONT SYSTEM-
TANBN/ BABAND
OOLOR 3
(5) EG. SPACED
PARAPET GAP
i-MGJ EDGE OF GMU
OFFSET -SEE
PLANS
I/A2.21 � 7✓A2.21
3
(3) EG. SPACED (2) EG. SPACED 4
PARAPET GAP PARAPET GAP '
r_
CC"r1S -,r '
(3) M. SPACED
I-J TA. BAND
(3) M. SPACED
GAP
- +
4
L__., 1 1 1-T rfl L. i,J_T_,_ 1-•
�-„(. ...
T I' _ _• -` =: 3
-
.
PARAPET GAP
PARAPET
F IN FLR. ,L
0
- +
-- - - - - - --
0481OAI - CMU - SPLIT FACE
- -
FINISH 6RADE
08411 - ALUMINUM
SEE 51TE
STOREFRONT SYSTEM-
COUR
OOLOR 3
04&0.A1 - GMU - &ROUND FACE
F 4
SCORED - COLOR 3 - (2) GOUt5E5
04010.AI - CMU - FLUTED (5) -
COLOR 3 - SPLIT FACE (1) COUR5E
04810AI - CMU - SMOOTH FACE -
T TL
CoUIQ5E
N COURSE
04610AI - 0 - 6ROUND FACE
(I) GOIIRSES
+ 12
E
SCORED - COLOR I - (2) COURSES
- Cm - FLUTED (5) -
IHI 04010AI
6
L
J 2
b
COLOR 3 - (1) COURSE
04810A1 - GM) - SPLIT FACE
II
SOLDIER COURSE - COLOR 2
12
04810AI - CMU - SMOOTH FACE -
GOLOR 1
0481082 - MASONRY SILL -
13
6ROUND FAGS - COLOR 3
04810.A'I - PREFACED CMU - 16X16
14
J .
LIGHT FIXTURE TYP.
5
2
REFER TO ELEG. DW65
+ -0
q.
4
I
4r
4
,TL1�T�
= tiZ
J
I
+
7tl T'f T
i T , i T [.
S
C 2
DOOR PER PLANS 4 I I
1 - - - - --
- - - - - 1
------- ---------------------------
- - - - -- Z-- --------- - - - - -- ------------------------ - - - - -- (/6221
------ - - - - -- -------------- ---- - - - - -- -- -- --
0330061 - CONCRETE EG. EG.
0641166 - ALUMINUM
STOREFRONT 5Y5TEM FOOTING PER 5TR DW65.
SOUTH ELEVATION 1 \
SCALE, I/8• m 1' -0' �
28 32 O
0345OB1 - PRECAST
CONCRETE GAP PER
DETAIL A4/A5.16
RADIUSED PARAPET GAP THIS
LOCATION COORDINATE
W/CONTROL JOINTS 4 ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO FABRICATION
+ I -4
C
O5500A3 -STEEL .Is
2 GHANNFI - CANOPY
FSYSTEM PER
(U COURSE DETAIL A/A431
05450BI - PRECAST (2) EG. 5PAGED
CONCRETE GAP PER PARAPET GAP TYP. (3) EG. SPACED
DETAIL A4 /A5.16 THIS ELEVATION UNO PARAPET GAP
3
5
05450BI - PRECAST
CONCRETE GAP PER -\
DETAIL A4 /A5.16
(5) EG. SPACED
PARAPET GAP
Ib
Ob452A2 -
TR4T15111GENT SKYLIGHT
05450BI - PRECAST
CONCRETE GAP PER
DETAIL A4/A5.16
Y + 151'-4'
3
ID
3
1'Tj 7 �MGJ
L: -
I
I
1 1 ;_I
EG. SPACED PARAPET C, ) EG. SPACED PARAPET G
I-J TA. BAND
Illl11611 II 1.1
1
- +
4
+ 108-6
T 1
2
.
\./CJ : VENEER CONTROL JOINTS
REFER TO DETAIL 135 /A5.16 FOR
F IN FLR. ,L
0
+ 100 -0 ' T
-- - - - - - --
0481OAI - CMU - SPLIT FACE
- -
FINISH 6RADE
08411 - ALUMINUM
SEE 51TE
STOREFRONT SYSTEM-
I DRANIN65
Ib
Ob452A2 -
TR4T15111GENT SKYLIGHT
05450BI - PRECAST
CONCRETE GAP PER
DETAIL A4/A5.16
Y + 151'-4'
3
ID
3
1'Tj 7 �MGJ
L: -
I
I
1 1 ;_I
EG. SPACED PARAPET C, ) EG. SPACED PARAPET G
EG
E5
PARTIAL ENTRY WEST WA1.L/_4�\_
SCALE I/e' = 1' -0'
& McFARLAND AR -2561
in
ASSOCIATES
1152 BOND AVENUE - Suite A
(208) 359-2309 FAX (208) 359 -2271
REXBURG. ID WAW.,RWA.GOM
FANNINGwHOWEY
28001 Cabot Drie. Suite 110
Novi, Michigan 48377
(419) 586 -2292
OCH
EngFeMnq
cane su -ii,. Envronm"n1d
313 D Street, Suite 200
Lewiston, Idaho 83501
(208) 746 -2661
ofop 1
S im
CONSULTANTS:
t/JI
1605 SOUTH WOODRUFF
IDAHO FALLS, ID &M04
(208) 529 -9504
CIVIL ENGINEEFRING
7 DYER GROUP LLC
310 N. 2nd E. Ste. 153
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
(208) 656 -8800
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
ES2
Structural Engineers
4943 North 26th East, SUE A
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401
(208) 522 73M
Fax (208) 552 -9302
MECHANCAL ENdNFU3ING
ENGINEERED SYSTEMS ASSOC.
315 Wt Cent.
Pocatello, Idaho 83204
(208) 233 -0501
Fax (801) 233 -0529
ELECTRICAL ENGINETRMC
PAYNE ENGINEERING INC.
1823 E. Cent. St.
Poatdlo, Idaho 83201
(208) 232 -4439
Fax (208) 232 -1435
V
N
Q
V/
z
VI
I
III
O
p W
O
a
W
RENSION: I
DRAWN BY: JOB NO:
SAM 315
CHECKED BY: DAiS
BAM JUNE '08
PLOT DATE: 6 -27 -08
DRAWING NO.
FIE 969502, M -21 21-X ' A221
/ n £ ' - � 1
A:2.2
OF -
GENERAL NOTES
I
MGJ : MA509 CONTROL JOINT.
REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
FOR CONSTRUCTION
2
\./CJ : VENEER CONTROL JOINTS
REFER TO DETAIL 135 /A5.16 FOR
GONSTRUGTION
0
MASONRY LEGEND
0481OAI - CMU - SPLIT FACE
SOLDIER COURSE - COLOR I
04810AI - GMU - SPLIT FACE -
COLOR I
04810AI - CMU - GROUND FACE -
OOLOR 3
04&0.A1 - GMU - &ROUND FACE
F 4
SCORED - COLOR 3 - (2) GOUt5E5
04010.AI - CMU - FLUTED (5) -
COLOR 3 - SPLIT FACE (1) COUR5E
04810AI - CMU - SMOOTH FACE -
C.OLOR 2
04610AI - 0 - 6ROUND FACE
SOLDIER COURSE - COLOR 3
01 - CMU - SPLIT FACE
E
SCORED - COLOR I - (2) COURSES
- Cm - FLUTED (5) -
IHI 04010AI
C.OLOR I - SPLIT FACE (1) COARSE
- CMU - SPLIT FACE -
E l 0481061
COLOR 3 - (1) COURSE
04810A1 - GM) - SPLIT FACE
II
SOLDIER COURSE - COLOR 2
12
04810AI - CMU - SMOOTH FACE -
GOLOR 1
0481082 - MASONRY SILL -
13
6ROUND FAGS - COLOR 3
04810.A'I - PREFACED CMU - 16X16
14
SCORED -CENTER OVER WINDOV6 U.N.O.
& McFARLAND AR -2561
in
ASSOCIATES
1152 BOND AVENUE - Suite A
(208) 359-2309 FAX (208) 359 -2271
REXBURG. ID WAW.,RWA.GOM
FANNINGwHOWEY
28001 Cabot Drie. Suite 110
Novi, Michigan 48377
(419) 586 -2292
OCH
EngFeMnq
cane su -ii,. Envronm"n1d
313 D Street, Suite 200
Lewiston, Idaho 83501
(208) 746 -2661
ofop 1
S im
CONSULTANTS:
t/JI
1605 SOUTH WOODRUFF
IDAHO FALLS, ID &M04
(208) 529 -9504
CIVIL ENGINEEFRING
7 DYER GROUP LLC
310 N. 2nd E. Ste. 153
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
(208) 656 -8800
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
ES2
Structural Engineers
4943 North 26th East, SUE A
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401
(208) 522 73M
Fax (208) 552 -9302
MECHANCAL ENdNFU3ING
ENGINEERED SYSTEMS ASSOC.
315 Wt Cent.
Pocatello, Idaho 83204
(208) 233 -0501
Fax (801) 233 -0529
ELECTRICAL ENGINETRMC
PAYNE ENGINEERING INC.
1823 E. Cent. St.
Poatdlo, Idaho 83201
(208) 232 -4439
Fax (208) 232 -1435
V
N
Q
V/
z
VI
I
III
O
p W
O
a
W
RENSION: I
DRAWN BY: JOB NO:
SAM 315
CHECKED BY: DAiS
BAM JUNE '08
PLOT DATE: 6 -27 -08
DRAWING NO.
FIE 969502, M -21 21-X ' A221
/ n £ ' - � 1
A:2.2
OF -
L VAIIVIV = Imo' _
E30T. OF ROOF STEEL
ELEVATION =
TOP OF 6RIDIRON
ELEVATION = 142' -0'
FIN15H FLOOR ELEVATION
ELEVATION = 112' -5"
FIN15H FLOOR ELEVATION
ELEVATION = 100' -0" -
®� S
MAKE -OP
05
GONG. MECH. PIT - VERIFY
LOCATION AND 517E W/MEGH.
AND STRUGT.
FINISH FLOOR - CATWALK _
ELEVATION = 132' -0'
b
TOP OF MASONRY / LAPP —
ELEVATION = 126-8"
I I DXTY40W - SEE MECH.
T.O. RISER _
SEE PI ANS
FINISHED FLOOR
ELEVATION = 100' -0'
05123AI -
POLYSTYRENE
6EOFOAM BLOCK
03300A2 - 1-I6HTWE1614T
OONGRETE SLAB PER R15OR
MFR
DLZ7NOW - SEE MEGH.
2 -5TORY AGADEMIG AREA BEYOND
09511AI - LAY -IN
GEILIN6 SYSTEM - SEE
REFL. GL5. PLAN
ORCH.
125
=4111�
22 —
b
TOP OF MASONRY /GAP
DOGTY ORK - SEE MEGH. —� DUCTWORK - SEE MEGH. ELEVATION = 126'_8"
STOR.
DlX'7YMK - SEE MEC.H. FINISHED FLOOR IO
09511 AI - LAY -IN
ELEVATION = 112' -8" GEILIN6 5Y5TEM - SEE
REFL. GL6. PLAN
ENSEMBLE BAND
195 140
E -W SECTION THROU6H ORCH. AND CHORAL s
51,ALE 1115 = 1'-0' .I
1
G
T
STAGE
A2"! I]]
General Note:
I. RE ER TO 5TRUGTURAL PRAWIN55
FOR ALL .106T/WALL I171ERFAOE
00WITION5
SLOPE In" PER F
Ib
LOPE In" PER FT. —
GATNIALK
A49 I 05210A5 -JOIST 61RDER OBLIGEE
PER 5TRUGT.
A — — I FINISH FLOOR CATWALK
/ ELEVATION = 132' -0"
' J015T BEARING
ELEVATION = 124
FVNRE GEILIN6 (5GHED. A)
FUTURE GEILIN6/FIN15H (5GHED. A) SEATING
' AUD I ORIUM 091
' 14?
\ II SIM.
1 _ A5JI VOMITORY
r EI 019
iii , �/ i � �%�,y �u.�c�: -�.� �p•��� a _ _ - o.
FUTURE FIN. 1 F, a
_ , _ I
• • (,,= - • - Q
- I AUDITO / -
09511AI - LAY -IN
GEILIN6 SYSTEM - SEE DI
REFL. C-6. PLAN
PIPING - SEE MEGH.
LGI /CHORAL WIRIN6 TRAY - SEE EL.EG.
124
�- 0512OA2 - STEEL AN61LE PER
STRUGT. - ELEVATION VARIES, SEE
ROOF PLAN
JOIST 5EARIN6
ELEVATION = 124' -6"
b
S TORL
FINISHED FLOOR
ELEVATION = 112' -8"
PERCUSSION ST.
141
BR T A. McFARLAND AR -2561
Q
STATE OF IDAHO
ASSOCIATES
1152 BOND AVENUE - Suite A
(208) 359 -2309 FAX (208) 359 -2271
REXBURG, ID WWW.,RWA.COM
FANNING
28001 Cabot Drive, Suite 110
N.A. Michlgon 48377
(419) 586 -2292
LEKH
Fnglnaxln9 • AMitecturd .1—g
Lane Surw11n9. D* -m.ntd
313 D Street, Suite 200
Lewiston, Idaho 83501
(208) 746 -2661
''
CONSULTANTS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
1605 SWTH WOODRUFF
IDAHO FALLS, ID 83404
(208) 529 -9504
C1ML ENCINE EMNG
THE DYER GROUP LLC
310 N. 2nd E. Ste 153
R=Wrg, Idaho 83440
(208) 656 -8800
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
ES2
Structural Engineers
4943 North 26th East, STE A
Idaho Falla, Idaho 83401
(208) 522 7356
Fa>t (208) 552 -9302
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
ENGINEERED SYSTEMS ASSOC.
315 West Center
Pocatello, Idaho 83204
(208) 233 -0501
Fat( (801) 233 -0529
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
PAYNE ENGINEERING INC.
1823 E. Center St.
Pocatello, Idaho 83201
(208) 232 -4439
Fax (208) 232 -1435
F .`
VV
r
N
Q
Z
Z
d UJ
a �
"SION:
/ DAIS ICOMMENT
DRANK BY: JOEL NO:
LEH 3'15
CHECKED BY: DATE:
BAM JJNE '06
PLOT DATE: 6 -27 -08
DRAWING NO.
FILE: 989502.4- 112 -8S-FA " A3.1122
5.l
OF -
— '
'�
iii , �/ i � �%�,y �u.�c�: -�.� �p•��� a _ _ - o.
FUTURE FIN. 1 F, a
_ , _ I
• • (,,= - • - Q
- I AUDITO / -
09511AI - LAY -IN
GEILIN6 SYSTEM - SEE DI
REFL. C-6. PLAN
PIPING - SEE MEGH.
LGI /CHORAL WIRIN6 TRAY - SEE EL.EG.
124
�- 0512OA2 - STEEL AN61LE PER
STRUGT. - ELEVATION VARIES, SEE
ROOF PLAN
JOIST 5EARIN6
ELEVATION = 124' -6"
b
S TORL
FINISHED FLOOR
ELEVATION = 112' -8"
PERCUSSION ST.
141
BR T A. McFARLAND AR -2561
Q
STATE OF IDAHO
ASSOCIATES
1152 BOND AVENUE - Suite A
(208) 359 -2309 FAX (208) 359 -2271
REXBURG, ID WWW.,RWA.COM
FANNING
28001 Cabot Drive, Suite 110
N.A. Michlgon 48377
(419) 586 -2292
LEKH
Fnglnaxln9 • AMitecturd .1—g
Lane Surw11n9. D* -m.ntd
313 D Street, Suite 200
Lewiston, Idaho 83501
(208) 746 -2661
''
CONSULTANTS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
1605 SWTH WOODRUFF
IDAHO FALLS, ID 83404
(208) 529 -9504
C1ML ENCINE EMNG
THE DYER GROUP LLC
310 N. 2nd E. Ste 153
R=Wrg, Idaho 83440
(208) 656 -8800
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
ES2
Structural Engineers
4943 North 26th East, STE A
Idaho Falla, Idaho 83401
(208) 522 7356
Fa>t (208) 552 -9302
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
ENGINEERED SYSTEMS ASSOC.
315 West Center
Pocatello, Idaho 83204
(208) 233 -0501
Fat( (801) 233 -0529
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
PAYNE ENGINEERING INC.
1823 E. Center St.
Pocatello, Idaho 83201
(208) 232 -4439
Fax (208) 232 -1435
F .`
VV
r
N
Q
Z
Z
d UJ
a �
"SION:
/ DAIS ICOMMENT
DRANK BY: JOEL NO:
LEH 3'15
CHECKED BY: DATE:
BAM JJNE '06
PLOT DATE: 6 -27 -08
DRAWING NO.
FILE: 989502.4- 112 -8S-FA " A3.1122
5.l
OF -