Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject PacketCi~ of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (612) 249-4600 Fax: (612) 249-4616 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET Date: 5 ) II / D 0 To: R O SS O -r Ir a c. '-f I V\ '3 r-0-.MAJ Fax: 7 f.o 3 -l/ / 2 -/2 3 l/ Re: 31~ D 6ayst'o&_ Pol. Sender: Jl H--j tJ-{,., \I\... \o-e vg ~ r YOU SHOULD RECEIVE 3 PAGE(S), INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL (612) 249-4600. ~letA~ QoV\..4~ lJ\.A--L olo Vwt f-ec~ ~ ~ o,,..vk:5 \ / \ \ \ \ \ I / / / / f I 1 I I I 1 1;/!111;n I I I 1® I I I I \ f : I I , I 'J ~ ~ ~ 1:\1 / I c;_ '\ Ii;:) I I \ \ \ / / \ \ \ / ) \ / -----\ I I I ::( T \ ,,,,-______ ) ) /✓ ,,,.,-----/ / £---Jr.\ -----[-ii I ~ ~ 4 ,:.i i'; I!:, I \!'J I ,.,r---- r "' " \ ~ It!\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _,,,.---------/ \ \ \ \ \ / // r:l.1 '"'' l!°J ·:.::.·.:::( i .•· ... L.\ · .. ,. --... ' ' ::: f~ I °j J~I I ' \_!'J I ...... " oo·'i.t.~I f"-1 ~ ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 24, 2000 (#2549 David Lovelace, Continued) barge out to Big Island was discussed, which ·met with good reception with the neighbors. Lovelace requested assistance from City Staff on the proper process to follow in that regard . Mayor Jabbour noted that the mainland enjoys City garbage collection , while Big Island does not. Jabbour stated he would be willing as a private citizen to provide a site, a rolloff, and a garbage barge on one side of the Island to help clean up Big Island . Jabbour noted that taxpayer dollars cannot be used in this effort. Lovelace commented he was not looking for taxpayer dollars to help clean up the Island but was looking for access to a garbage barge. Lovelace indicated he would be \Yilling to discuss this further with the Mayor at another time . *(#4) #2559 GILBERT GEHLE, 1392 BALDUR PARK ROAD -VARIANCES/CUP Peterson moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve Variances to Hardcover in the 75-250' Lakeshore Setback and Hardcover Within 75' of the South Lakes ho re, and a Conditional Use Permit to Permit Regrading and Restoration of the Site. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#5) #2563 MIKE AND RUTH FIL BRANDT, 3960 BA YSfDE ROAD -S KET C H PLAN REVIEW Mike and Ruth Filbrandt, Applicants, were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting a sketch plan review for a 26 acre parcel \Vhich consists of three tax parcels. The Applicants are interested in subdividing the properties to create two buildable lots . The total acreage is approximately nine acres of dry buildable land , with the minimum lot size being five acres in the RR-IA District. This item appeared before the Planning Commission where several issues \Vere discussed relating to how the Applicants could appropriately subdivide the property . The Planning Commission considered subdividing this property by doing a lot line rearrangement; however, City Code may not necessarily apply in this case because they are generally looked at as Class I Subdivisions and a Class I Subdivision does not allow any type of flexible zoning and would require ten acres of dry buildable land in order to create two lots. Class I Subdivisions requiring flexible zoning have traditionally only been used for lot line rearrangements between existing developed parcels. City City Code prohibits selling off of the two smaller undeveloped lots without the principal larger lot because it would create two non-conforming lots. The Planning Commission had suggested that some consideration be given to rezoning the property from the five acre minimum lot size to two acre minimum lot size. City Staff has brought this matter before the City Council to give their thoughts on whether rezoning of this area would be 6 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 24, 2000 (#2549 David Lovelace, Continued) The Planning Commission has recommended that the Applicant be allowed a seasonal dock at Access C, and if Scheftel and Lovelace are interested in sharing a dock a_tthis access point, that would e fine. Otherwise the Planning Commission felt it would be apJJ'ropriate to have tv.-o separate ocks at th;, locafon. l Gaffron note at the present time there are no other requests for 9ock access to Big Island, with a number of ot r potential access points being located further/outh. I Sansevere inquired li v many prospective lots could potent~lly need dock access, noting he has a concern that there cou be a number of future requests fc>r dock access. ! /' Gaffron stated there are eight o ine lots that could potentially request dock access. Gaffron stated according to the LMCD, the is a potential for1~ joint dock license, which would need to be resolved with the LMCD since this is ity right-of-,vay. Mayor Jabbour commented in his opinion th Cit)'ishould have a distinction between a buildable lot versus a recreation lot. .'\ Gaffron stated the RS District docs have a five 1 acre' inimum standard. with a number of lots on I , , the Island having been listed as buildable or ~l!bstand d but buildable and some unbuildablc lots. A buildable lot could be created by combini,r1g two or th ee of the smaller lots. Mayor Jabbour stated the City should al~b address the eros1 n problems occurring on Big Island at some of the access points. / y Gaffron stated City Staff is looking -Access H, which has a scv ··. e erosion problem, and is considering erecting a barrier to lin t traffic in that area. Gaffron s' ted in his opinion the City should grant Lovelace a dock ace s at this time since his property is \onsidered to be a buildable lot. \\, '\ \ ,, \\ Sansevere noted the Applican will be assuming the cost of the dock. Mayor Jabbour stated the ity of Orono has a policy that public roads should n6{ be used for private use. Jabbour stat d there should be a distinction between using the City's l"'!,nd on Big Island as a transportati corridor and not as a recreational corridor and being allO\◊xd the use of a dock. Jabbour state he docs not want to see all of the City's fire lanes become potd\~al dock access points. Jabbo r stated the City has to address the issue of a person wishing to liv~ year-round on Big I land and access to their lot. Sansevere moved, Kelley seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4456, a Resolution Permitting a Private Dock on Platted Unimproved Right-of-Way Between Lots 38 and 39 Morse Island Park, Big Island. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Lovelace commented at the Planning Commission meeting the possibility of getting a garbage 5 ., ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 2~, 2000 (#2563 Mike and Ruth Filbrandt, Continued) an option. Kelley indicated he would not be in favor of rezoning this property. It was the consensus of the City Council that they ,rnuld not be in favor of rezoning this area to two acres. Mayor Jabbour stated the sketch plan needs to comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan and that the City cannot rezone areas whenever someone wants to develop their property. Filbrandt stated he bought the two lots in 1979 , with the City having passed an ordinance in 1984 stating if the o,vner purchases a non-conforming lot, they are not able to sell it or get a variance. Filbrandt stated it is his understanding there is approximately 9 .5 acres of dry buildablc . Mayor Jabbour stated the City Council has indicated its position on the rezoning of the land and has not taken a position on the other issues involved with the sketch plan . Jabbour noted the City Council has taken the position in the past that any rezoning should be addressed in the Comprehensive Plan and that the Comprehensive Plan should be adhered to as much as possible in an effort to provide for orderly development. Kelley inquired whether the issue of rezoning was the only reason why this application was sent to the City Council from the Planning Commission . Weinberger indicated City Staff had wanted to get the input of the City Council on the issue of rezoning this property prior to the Applicants filing a preliminary plat application , due to the Planning Commission's discussions regarding rezoning of the property. Kelley stated the City Council has mled on the rezoning and the matter should now go back before the Planning Commission . Mayor Jabbour concurred the matter should be sent back to the Planning Commission for their review and comment. (#6) #2567 WALFRED PROPERTIES, 2380 SHADYWOOD ROAD -COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW Tom Reinen , Project Architect, was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant has submitted revised plans showing the removal of the second floor clinic and removal of the underground parking to allow for a one-story retail use on the old Grace Baptist site in Navarre . The Planning Commission has reviewed the revised plans and is recommending the zoning code 7 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 2-t, 2000 (#2567 Walfred Properties, Continued) be amended as well as recommending approval of the site plan and approval of the code amendment to allow drugstores as a conditional use in the B-5 zoning district subject to the following conditions: 1. To limit the hours of operation to 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 2. The project engineer must provide a report confirming the proposed stormwater management pond meets all NURP standards. Part of the pond and grading is located off site. Applicant shall obtain drainage and temporary work easements from the adjacent property owner (Lafayette Ridge Homeowners) to permit the pond construction. 3. Utility easements shall be granted over the vacated portion of Navarre Lane, as existing sewer, water, phone, gas, et cetera, are located within the road. 4. Drainage and utility easements shall be granted l O feet along the property lines. 5. To relocate the trail to connect Olive Avenue to Shadywood Road. 6. The City Engineer must revie,,· and approve site grading, ponding_ stonmvater management plan and relocation of utilities. Weinberger indicated City Staff has not had sufficient time to folly review the revised plans. Weinberger noted the developer has reduced the number of outdoor parking spots to 60, from the 77 originally proposed ,vhich will accommodate a 9,000 square foot single-story retail operation, with the overall size of the building being just under 12,000 square feet. Weinberger stated some issues for discussion by the City Council include the proposed landscape plan. Retaining walls are proposed as part of the landscaping plan, with the first retaining wall being located along the trail. The average height of the wall in this area is six to eight feet. A retaining ,vall around the storm,rnter drainage pond is also proposed, with the height of that ,,all being approximately 20 feet in height at the highest portion. The average height of the wall ,,ill be 12 to 14 feet. Weinberger noted the landscape p Ian wi II need to be reviewed by the City's landscape consultant. Weinberger stated the oak trees referred to by the Parks Commission are located by the proposed trail. The revised plan does call for the removal of the oak trees in that area. This area was chosen for the trail due to the high water table of the stormwater pond and need for additional retaining walls and fences to protect pedestrians from falling into the stom1water pond. Concerns regarding safety were also raised with the other trail location. Weinberger stated the overall height of the building has been reduced to 23 feet. Reinen indicated Weinberger has covered the issues quite ,,ell relating to this application. 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 20, 2000 (#2566 James Langhans, Continued) Langhans stated the hardcover in tha t area will be slightly reduced with this proposal. Langhans noted some areas of hardcover cannot be removed due to erosion problems . Lindquist noted the structural coverage on this property will remain under the allowable 15 percent limit. Lindquist stated he does not have a problem with this application . There were no public comments regarding this application. Motion by Hawn, second by Lindquist, to recommend approval of Application #2566, James Langhans, 1366 Rest Point Road, granting of a variance to lakeshore hardcover to permit the removal of a lakeside deck and replace it with a 16' by 18' addition and a 465 square foot deck. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. SKETCH PLAN (#8) #2563 MIKE AND RUTH FILBRANDT, 3960 BAYSIDE ROAD, SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Mike Filbrandt , Applicant, and Tracy Ingram , Contractor, were present. Weinberger stated this is a sketch plan review . The Applicants are interested in subdividing the property into two buildable lots . The total acreage consists of approximately nine acres of dry buildable land, with the minimum lot size being five acres in the RR-1A district. Weinberger stated there is an issue w ith the amount of wetlands in the area . Weinberger stated the most appropriate way to subdivide the property would be to do a lot line rearrangement because three separate tax parcels exist. Filbrandt stated in approximately 1979 , the City Council elected to make this property five acres, with the surrounding land being zoned two acres . Filbrandt acknowledged that there is some wetlands in the area wh ich will need to be delineated . Filbrandt stated he is looking at creating two or three lots . Weinberger stated City Staff has discussed with the Applicants the most appropriate way to su bd :·1ide this property. Weinberger stated they have considered a lot line rearrangement and a repla tti ng of the property . Weinberger stated there currently exist three separate tax parcels which have not been combined and could potentially be sold as three separate lots . Weinberger stated it is possible that Lot A would meet the minimum five acre standard , which has not been determined at this time due to the lack of a wetland delineation . The property consists of 27 acres, 17 of which are considered to be wetland . A lot line rearrangement is not currently permitted by code the way it could potentially occur on this lot. The City of Orono has used lot line rearrangements when there are two lots that could be developed residentially to create lots that are more comparable in size with the zoning i n the area . Weinberger stated a lot line rearrangement in this case would allow the number of dwelling units to increase on this property from what currently exists . The ordinance requires that there be two conforming lots , and does not allow for any flexible zoning issues such as a variance . Weinberger stated according to the way the Ordinance currently reads, the only way to legally Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 20, 2000 (#2563 Mike and Ruth Filbrandt, Continued) develop this property would be to replat the property, which would make it a Class Ill subdivision because flexible zoning is required in this instance from the five acre zoning requirement. Weinberger stated some other issues the Applicant will need to consider is the availability of acceptable septic sites for both lots, lot width, and adequate access. In order for the Applicant to accurately determine how much land is available for each lot in the subdivision. Filbrandt stated there may be some additional land in the rear that could possibly count as dry land and raise the total dry buildable land to ten acres. Lindquist commented that perhaps some consideration could be given to rezoning this area to two acres. Lindquist stated he would prefer seeing two acre zoning in this area versus have one five acre lot and one four acre lot. Weinberger stated the wetland delineation will help determine how much dry buildable land is actually available. Weinberger stated they did not consider rezoning this area to two acres due to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Lindquist stated the rezoning issue will need to be reviewed and approved by the City Council. Berg commented in her view rezoning to two acres is a viable option that should be considered for this property. Berg stated she is unsure why this area was zoned five acres. Hawn suggested if the Applicant is unable to meet the five acre minimum, to give some consideration to requesting that this area be rezoned to two acres. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#9) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON FEBRUARY 28, 2000 AND MARCH 13, 2000 Nygard stated the City Council is continuing to pursue the Dakota Rail to Trail project. Hawn noted the Planning Commission has been requested to meet with the Long Lake Planning Commission to discuss Wayzata's Development Guidelines and Comprehensive Plan, with a meeting date scheduled for April 11 at 6:30 p.m. Hawn stated she would like the Orono Planning Commission to meet in a workshop setting prior to that meeting. Hawn commented one reason for the joint meeting is to consider the possibility of cooperating on development that may occur along the Highway 12 corridor. (#10) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None Page 14 To: From: Date: Chair Hawn and Planning Commission Members Mike Gaffron, Senior Planning 'toordinator March 17, 2000 Subject: Analysis of Codes Pertinent to Application #2563 A number of zoning/subdivision code sections are pertinent to the Planning Commission's review of this application. Section 10.03 Subd. 6(A)(3): S ubd. 6. Lot of Record. A lot of record is any lot for which a deed or registered land survey has been recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for Hennepin County, Minnesota, prior to January 1, 1975, and after approval by the - Council if required. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 A. Existing Lots. A lot ofrecord existing upon January 1, 197 5 in an "R" District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Chapter as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety and the following requirements are met: Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 3. In "R" Districts Not Served by Public Sanitary Sewer. A lot of record in any "R" District in the City not served by public sanitary sewer must meet the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter and shall not be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes without Council approval. , Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 In the Filbrandt situation, the 3 record lots total only 9 acres in a 5-acre zone, and none of the three record lots individually contains 5 dry buildable acres. No permits for construction of a new residence on any of the three existing lots could be issued without City Council approval of lot area and/or width variance (which would normally be predicated on septic capability, access, etc.). #2563 -Sketch Plan Comments March 17, 2000 Page 2 Section 10.03 Subd. 6(C): C. The separation by the transfer or sale of non-conforming, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, aligned in a contiguous arrangement, undivided by a public or private road or road easement and under same or common ownership is not permitted without Council approval. Council approval is not required if the separation of such lots results in individual building sites that satisfy the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 Parcels Band Con the survey are in fact: a) non-conforming, b) undeveloped, c) aligned in"a contiguous arrangement, d) not separated by a road, and e) under common ownership. A literal reading of this section indicates that it would require Council approval to sell these two lots separately from each other to two different owners. This section might also be construed as suggesting that these two undeveloped lots may not be separately sold from the adjacent commonly owned substandard developed lot, because such a sale would leave the developed lot with an inability to become conforming (via a lot combination). Section 11.03 Subd. 2, Def. 65 (Definition of Subdivision) 65. "Subdivision" -The separation of an area, parcel or tract ofland under single ownership into two or more parcels, tracts, lots or long-term leasehold interests where the creation of the leasehold interest necessitates the creation of streets, roads or alleys, for residential, commercial, industrial, or other use or any combination thereof, except those separations: (a) Where all resulting parcels, tracts, lots or interests will be 20 acres or larger in size and 500 feet in width for residential uses and five acres or larger in size for commercial and industrial uses; (b) Creating cemetery lots; ( c) Resulting from court orders, or the adjustment of a common boundary as long as each of the two resulting lots meets the requirements of the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. This definition indicates that division of a single parcel into two or more parcels is by definition a subdivision and subject to the subdivision code. The three exceptions define situations which would not be considered as subdivisions, and would not be subject to the subdivision code. #2563 -Sketch Plan Comments March 17, 2000 Page 3 In the Filbrandt situation, exception (a) does not apply because the resulting tracts from any division of any one of the 3 tax parcels ( or even of all three combined) would not yield all parcels being 20 acres or larger. Exception (b) obviously does not apply. Exception (c) does not apply because adjusting a common boundary between any two (or all three) of the three lots will not result in lots meeting the area requirement of the Zoning Chapter. Since none of the exceptions apply, the Filbrandt proposal is, by definition, a subdivision that must fit into one of the three Subdivision Classes defined below. Section 11.03 Subd. 2, Def. 66 (Subdivision Classification) This section defines the three categories or classifications of subdivisions, and within the definition contains certain procedures and standards for each Class. 66. "Subdivision, Classification". a. "Class I Subdivision" -A Class I Subdivision shall be exempt from platting by the City and shall be permitted subdivision by metes and bounds description described by a Registered Land Surveyor if it meets one or more of the following criteria: 1. The subdivision results in no more than two buildable lots where each resulting · lot meets or exceeds five acres (217,800 square feet) ofland, and each lot has at least 300 feet of frontage on a public roadway which has been accepted and opened by the City or on a private roadway open to travel or vehicular use pursuant to an easement between persons or between persons and the City, and where no flexible zoning application or extension of municipal utilities is involved; 2. The subdivision is a division of property previously combined for tax purposes; or 3. The subdivision consists only of the creation or alteration of a public or private easement for any purpose. #2563 -Sketch Plan Comments March 17, 2000 Page4 b. "Class II Subdivision" -A Class II Subdivision shall be a plat and may qualify for a limited review procedure established in this Chapter if it meets all of the following criteria: 1. The subdi\ision results in no more than two buildable lots, one or both of which are less than 5 acres (217,800 square feet) of land or one or both of which have less than 3 00 feet of frontage on a public road roadway which has been accepted and opened by the City or on a private roadway open to travel or vehicular use pursuant to an easement between persons or betwen persons and the City; and 2. The subdi\ision does involve the vacation or dedication of public roadways or extension of municipal utilities; and 3. The subdivision does not involve any flexible zoning application; and 4. The subdi\·ision may include the creation of outlets and easements for access, open space, flowage, conservation, etc. in addition to the hvo buildable lots. c. "Class III Subdivision" -A Class II subdivision shall be a plat which includes, but is not limited to, a subdivision which meets one or more of the follO\\ing criteria: 1. The subdivision results in three or more buildable lots; or 2. The subdi\·ision involves a flexible zoning application; or 3. The subdivision involves the vacation or dedication of a public roadway; or 4. The subdivision involves the extension of municipal utilities. "Flexible Zoning" per Section 11.03, Def. 17, "includes but is not limited to: all special or conditional use permits, variances, planned unit development and rezoning. #2563 -Sketch Plan Comments March 17, 2000 Page 5 In practice, the City has commonly treated lot line rearrangements between two developed parcels as a Class I subdivision, not requiring a plat (which adds to the applicant's costs) even when the resulting lots have not met zoning district lot area and width standards. This practice has been a relatively efficient method for persons to transfer an excess portion of their property to an abutting neighbor. In most if not all cases, however, such "Lot Line Rearrangement Subdivisions" have not allowed a conforming property to become non-conforming as a result of selling off a portion to the neighbor. A Class II or III subdivision, requiring a plat, is virtually always required when creating new building sites from a single parcel or group of parcels. The only exception is when the resulting lots are each 20 acres or larger, such as the Steve White subdivision further west on Bayside Road. It is uncommon to take three or more tax parcels and convert them into just two lot§.;_ although on West Lake Street an owner of four adjacent tax parcels was allowed via combination and lot line rearrangement to end up with two substandard building sites where two developed lots with existing homes had already existed. In that case, it could be argued that the owner had rights to nvo lots established by the existence of two homes and the prior payment of two sewer assessments. Analysis of Filbrandt Situation Filbrandt could conceivably create from his 26 acres, two lots, one with the existing home and one undeveloped, each having 300 feet of frontage on Bayside Road, but one would fall short of the 5-acre requirement, which automatically requires a variance, making this a 'flexible zoning' situation and therefore making it at least a Class II subdivision requiring a plat. Section 11.03, Subd. 14(A) states under the heading "Special Requirements for Plats" as follows: "A. Zoning Regulations. Every plat shall conform to existing zoning regulations and subdivision regulations applicable at the time of final plat approval. Variances shall not be approved to increase the overall subdivision density above the minimum lot area requirements of the applicable zoning district and this Chapter." The minimum lot area requirements of the RR-IA zoning district are 5 acres of dry buildable land, of \vhich two acres must be contiguous with the identified building site (so the three required additional acres must be within the lot but could be separated by a wetland). This gives Filbrandt some potential use of the northerly portion of the site if he can acquire enough dry buildable to result in 10 dry acres total. #2563 -Sketch Plan Comments March 17, 2000 Page 6 Summary 1. The Code disallows separation (by sale) of the two substandard undeveloped lots without Council approval. Council would presumably only approve such sale if 1) one of the lots was intended to be sold to an abutting landowner for legal combination; or 2) if Council deemed that the lots were in fact individually buildable. 2. It can be reasonably argued that the Code is intended to also disallow selling off the substandard undeveloped parcels from the developed substandard parcel, because as a group the parcels act as a conforming lot, but separately they do not. 3. Rearranging lot lines between and among the 1 substandard developed lot and the 3 ... substandard undeveloped lots, at best could result in 1 conforming developed lot and 1 substandard undeveloped lot. This method should only be used if Planning Commission and Council would have granted variances to one of the existing undeveloped lots absent a lot line rearrangement. 4. Technically and based on past practice, this proposal to create a second buildable lot from 26 acres of which only 9 acres is dry buildable, will require a variance, which by definition makes it a Class II subdivision requiring a plat. The code does not allow the granting of density variances to new plats that create new building lots. The City has varied from this policy in only three known cases since 1975. The first involved a prior density contract in regards to a sewer project. The second was the result of a court order in relation to a condemnation for roadway purposes. The third was the result of City rezoning action to eliminate a marina use on Stubbs Bay. Each of these cases was unique. The only other use of platting where lots have ended up being substandard is for replatting of groups of platted developed properties where no new substandard undeveloped lots are created (Scotch Pine Lane vacation/replat is a recent example). 5. The City may set a negative precedent by allowing 9 acres in common ownership in the 5-acre zone to be rearranged to create a second building site, whereby either the existing developed lot or the new undeveloped lot will be substandard in area. INDEX: SUBDIVISION APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka 2750 Kelley Parkway Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (612)249-4600 PLANNING/ZONING DEPARTMENT Application Guidelines .................................................................... . Information/Fees Required -General Information .......................... . Required Meeting with Staff. .......................................................... . Sketch Plan Reyiew -Specific Requests ......................................... . Preliminary Subdiv ision Review -Specific Requirements ............. . Procedures/Requirements When Improvements Are Called For. .... . Final Subdivision Review -Specific Requests ................................ . Variable/ Additional Costs to Applicants ......................................... . 1-2 2-3 3 3 4 6 6-7 7 REVIEW & PROVIDE ALL INFORMATION REQUESTED TO A VOID DELAY To all persons making applications for subdivisions with the City: DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION Any land, vacant or improved, which is divided or proposed to be divided into two (2) or more lots, parcels, sites, units, plots, or interests for the purpose of offer, sale, lease, or development, either on the installment plan or upon any and all other plans, terms and conditions including resubdivision. Subdivision includes the division or development of residential and nonresidential zoned land, whether by deed, contract for deed, purchase agreement, metes and bounds description, registered land survey, replatting, easements for private or public purposes, lot rearrangements, division of any land previously combined for tax purposes, devise, intestacy, lease, map, plat, judicial decree, or other recorded or non-recorded instrument. APPLICATION GUIDELINES 1. You are· required to visit the Zoning Administrator to discuss your proposal. You will .. be advised of basic planning requirements and required filing fees. 2. SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION. You must submit a sketch of your proposal for review by the Planning Commission, preferably on a Certificate of Survey. (Sketch Plan revi~s:· are required for all subdivisions of 3 or more lots.) The Planning Commission will mlke V, .:,,. general comments and recommendations but no commitments will be made at this stagef The filing deadline for all sketch plan applications is 25 days before the regularly scheduJ~d Planning Commission meeting of the month; please refer to enclosed schedule for the curf~~t year. 3. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION. Your application will be reviewed by the Platlllillg Commission and all other governmental agencies having jurisdiction. The City Council ~n ·· then either approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. Detailed surveying' 1s · · required including topographical mapping. The City can provide 2' contours of your propei~.5E'.}: for a fee. Please advise the staff if you wish to make use of this service. Septic syst~ .. , testing is required for all new building sites not served by sewer. Engineering data i§l> required for all new streets and drainage improvements. A public meeting is held to recei~~,: . comments from interested neighbors. Deadline for application: Thirty (30) days prior to t~f:t"" public meeting (see enclosed schedule of meetings). 1 1 ••• ,, In order to meet the mandate of both Federal and State laws dealing with wetland classification and protection of Types 1, 2, 6 and 7 wetlands not defined or designated on the City of Orono's protected wetland maps, applicants are required to first file a permit application with both the U.S. Corp of Engineers and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Joe Yanta MCWD U.S. Corp of Engineers 190 East Fifth St. St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 Telephone No. 290-5362 1 2500 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Telephone No. 471-0590 4. FINAL PLAT APPLICATION. After preliminary approval, final surveying, engineering and legal work is required before final plat approval. Record plat drawings must be prepared, fees paid, improvements installed ( or a contract signed specifying the required improvements and Letter of Credit to ensure completion of improvements) and legal easements, covenants, deeds, etc. prepared for filing. The City Council must review all final plats. Deadline for application: One (1) year after preliminary plat approval. All final submittals must be provided to the City two weeks before the Council meeting at which the subdivision will receive final approval. 5. RECORDING OF THE PLAT. After final approval, the City will file the plat and all required documents with the County. The applicant must ensure that all real estate taxes for the entire year are paid or the plat cannot be recorded. LOTS CAN BE SOLD AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED ONLY AFTER PROPER RECORDING OF THE PLAT. INFORMATION REQUIRED 1. 2. Sketch Plan (Required for all Class III Subdivisions) -One (1) copy of County plat map; twelve (12) copies of sketch of proposal (preferably on a Certificate of Survey); Application Form, and $250.00 application fee. Preliminary Plat -Twenty-five (25) copies of proposal on a Certificate of Survey; four ( 4) copies of required engineering plans and specifications; certified list of property owners within 350' of property from Hennepin County Property and Description Office, A-603 Government Center, downtown Minneapolis; staff shall determine classification of subdivision and applicable fee. If improvements or septic test information are required, the following fee schedule is applicable: Proposed Private Roads Proposed Public Roads Request for City to accept existing Private Road Request for City to maintain unimproved public road Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension Proposed Watermain Extension Proposed Storm Sewer System ( excluding culverts) On-Site System -Site Evaluation Review ( applicable to rural subdivision applications) Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees: Easement Vacation Association with Subdivision PRD Application with Subdivision Renewal of Subdivision Application (1'Jo change from original application) $600.00 + 50¢ lineal foot 900.00 + 50¢ lineal foot 900.00 200.00 250.00 + 25.00 per stub 250.00 + 25.00 per stub 200.00 50.00 per new lot proposed for on-site 100.00 30.00/dwelling unit 200.00 (Class I & II, Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement) Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application 200.00 (No change from original application) (Class III) Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 150.00 (No change from original application) 2 3. Final Plat -Two (2) mylar copies of record plat, One (1) copy reduced to 1: = 200'; four (4) copies of required engineering plans and specifications; three (3) copies of Subdivider's Agreement and any other legal easement or document as required by preliminary approval; Letter of Credit written to 150% of cost of improvements as required by agreement; application fee of$200.00; and payment oflegal review and filing fees as follows: $75.00 for subdivision only, $200.00 for subdivisions with easements and covenants. TIME Allow at least four (4) months for complete subdivision approval. City review of Sketch Plan normally takes two (2) weeks; Preliminary Plat 6-8 weeks; and Final Plat two (2) weeks. CHECK LIST FOR SUBDIVISION INFORMATION Applications should be prepared to supply all the following information to assure prompt subdivision re · ,x and approval. Items will not be placed on any meeting agenda unless all required information is : -'"-plied by the agenda deadline and the Zoning Administrator has certified the application is complete by signing the application form. REQUIRED MEETING WITH STAFF -Information needed for meeting 1. Property street address and legal description (as from a deed or tax statement). 2. Names of all property owners and contract for deed holders. 3. Name and telephone number of person handling proposal (owner, developer, real estate agent, etc.). 4. Whether or not a purchase agreement has been signed or is planned. 5. Current status of property -What is it used for? How many buildings are on the site? What condition are they in? . ., 6. Sketched site plan showing property, buildings and proposed dividing line(s). A survey is most helpful. 7. Good description of what your plans are; what do you expect to accomplish? SKETCH PLAN REVIEW 1. Completed application form. 2. Sketch plan review fee. 3. Scale drawing of proposal, preferably on a Certificate of Survey, showing all existing and proposed property lines, buildings, driveways, wetlands, lakes, etc. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION REVIEW 1. Completed application form. 2. 3. Subdivision application fee, including special improvement fees for road, extension of municipal services, etc. 15 full size copies of the Certificate of Survey (boundary survey) of the property showing: EXISTING -All property lines and property comers. All streets, roads and driveways (right-of-way and pavement location). -All lakeshore lines ( determined by OHWL [ ordinary high water level]). Natural Environment (NE) Lakes OHWL Lake Classen 974.5' Dickey Lake 985.5' French Lake North Basin: Sewage Lagoon: South Basin: Lydiard Lake Lake Katrina Wolsfeld Lake (Medina) Recreational Development (RD) Lakes Long Lake Mooney Lake Tanager Lake Hadley Lake (Plymouth) General Development (GD) Lakes For~st Lake Lake Minnetonka Tributary Streams Painters Creek Stubbs Bay Creek Long Lake Creek Wolsfeld Creek Dickey Lake Creek 930.5' 934.3' 930.0' 970.9' OHWL 944.3' 988.0' 929.4' 961.4' OHWL 929.4' 929.4' OHWL Consult with Orono Staff All lowlands or wetlands (ask staff person to review City's wetlands maps). All buildings with dimensional sizes and distances to property lines. Location of existing wells and septic systems on or within 75' of this property. Topographical contours required for all Class II and III subdivisions and may be required by staff for a Class I subdivision. Location of any existing Zoning District boundary line. Locate bluff!' areas if property is located within a shoreland area. 4 * A bluff has the following characteristics: A. Part or all of the feature is located in a shoreland area; B. The slope rises at least 25' above the Ordinary High Water Level of the water body; C. The grade of the slope from the toe of the bluff to a point 25' or more above the Ordinary High Water Level averages 30% or greater; and D. The slope must drain toward the water body. The toe of the bluff is the lower point of a 50' segment with an average slope exceeding 18%. The top of the bluff is that point on the cross-section of a bluff below which the slope becomes more than 18% and above which the average slope for a distance of 50' or more is 18% or less. PROPOSED Proposed property lines. Proposed building sites. Setback dimensions from existing buildings to proposed property lines. Locations of septic system drainfields (principal and alternate) on each lot not served by sanitary sewer. DATA Total property area. Area of each wetland. Total area of each lot. Dry-buildable area of each lot. Average dry. buildable lot area. 4. Certified property owners list (350'). 5. Site evaluation report and design for septic system drainfield on each lot not served by sanitary sewer. 6. Preliminary engineering layout of proposed new roads (including center line profile), sewer, water lines. 7. Stormwater Management Plan. A storm water management plan is required for all Class III subdivision applications (two [2] full size, to scale, drawings or plans and one [1] reduced to 11 "xl 7"). A certified professional engineer registered in the State of Minnesota shall certify all plans submitted to the City. It is recommended that applicant also file for a permit with the MCWD for the stormwater management plan. All plans submitted to the City must include the following information: 5 Delineation of the subwatershed contributing runoff from off-site, and proposed and existing subwatersheds on site. Proposed and ~xisting stormwater facilities location, alignment and elevation. Delineation of existing on-site wetlands, marshes, shoreland and/or flood plain areas. Existing and proposed normal, one year and one hundred year water elevations on site. Existing and proposed site contour elevations related to NGVD, 1929 Datum. Construction plans and specifications of all proposed stormwater management facilities. Stormwater runoff volume and rate analysis for existing and proposed conditions All hydrologic and hydraulic computations completed to design the proposed stormwater management facilities. All plans must include erosion control and soil boring results if available. 8. Copies of all documents/drawings submitted for U.S. Corp and MCWD permits ifrequired. Applicant must provide written commentary of preliminary review comments of both agencies. 9. Special Requirements: PRD's require conditional use application and fee. Draft of any proposed covenants. Landscaping proposals. Dockage proposals. Rezonings require a separate application and fee. Flexible applications (variances, vacations) require fee payments per project. WHEN IMPROVEMENTS ARE REQUIRED 1. Completed engineering drawings for roads, sewer, water, drainage, landscaping, etc. 2. Completed development agreement. 3. Letter of credit. 4. Warrantee Bond (for public improvements). FINAL SUBDIVISION REVIEW 1. Record plat drawings (2 mylar copies, 1 copy reduced to 1 "=200') completely signed. (Where metes and bounds division has been authorized, two certificates of survey may replace the required record plat drawings). 2. Signed legal documents (usually standard forms) deeds for public property acquisition (roads, parks, etc.); easements for driveways, utilities, roads, etc.; flowage and conservation easements over wetlands and/or drainageways; private road maintenance covenants; homeowners association agreements, private covenants. 6 3. Title opinion addressed to the City. 4. Payment of required fees: Final plat application fee (Class III Subdivision only). Park Dedication Fees. (Park fees shall be requested if park lands have not been dedicated at time of subdivision. The fee shall be equivalent to the fair market value of 8% of the undeveloped land being subdivided.) Additional assessments (sewer, water, etc.). Outstanding engineering or legal review fees. Filing Fees. 5. Completion of required improvements per development agreement. 6. Other requirements of preliminary approval. The Subdivision Ordinance and Municipal Code of Orono provide that directly assignable consultant costs for review of the above applications must be paid by the applicant. The application fee paid to the City is payment for City staff time and overhead costs only. The applicant will be billed by the City for the City Engineer's time and expenses incurred in the review of engineering data and for the City Attorney's time and expenses incurred in the review of legal questions and documents. Other unusual charges may be applied for outside consulting services of appraisers, other engineers, and unusual technical reports after notification to the applicant that such services are considered necessary for proper review of the application. In making an application, the applicant shall agree to pay these costs as they occur. Applications are not considered complete until any charges are paid. Failure to complete payment may result in the withholding of permits or other authorizations. 7 Application Deadline Wednesday at NOON on: .. December 22, 1999 January 19, 2000 February 16, 2000 March 22, 2000 April 19, 2000 May 17, 2000 June 21, 2000 .July 19, 2000 ....... _. ... August 23, 2000 September 20, 2000 October 18, 2000 December 20, 2000 CITY of ORONO - Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 2000 APPLICATION DEADLINES Planning Commission: City Council: (regular) City Council Chambers Council Chambers 6:30 p.m. 7:00 p.m. '\Vednesday, January 19, February 14, 2000 2000 '\Vednesday, February 23, l\'Iarch 13, 2000 2000 l\Ionday, l\'larch 20, 2000 April 10, 2000 Monday, April 17, 2000 May 8, 2000 Monday, :May 15, 2000 June 12, 2000 Monday, June 19, 2000 July 10, 2000 Monday, July 17, 2000 August 14, 2000 Monday, August 21, 2000 September 11, 2000 Monday, Sept. 18, 2000 October 9, 2000 Monday, October 16, 2000 November 13, 2000 Monday, Nov. 20, 2000 December 11, 2000 No Meeting in December Tuesday, January 17, 2001 February 12, 2001 K· 4 Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 Application # ;l. S &,, 3 Date Received 2 /, I }07; Amount Paid <1 z _r; Q CITY OF ORONO -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Siteaddress 3 qb() BAlcCI D E-£1) Property Identification Number (PID) <15// 7 1..3 1.,. '\ £) D C> I Please check one -Property __ abstract or_· __ torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name In J/1.G, f f?utl-4 /it.ilf!i;Ul.>T Address 3qbO BA(( 'OD"'. /?l> Phone (home)'/J,? /7f5' City O~l--0 fh 1, _ Zip§.Jf"1 Phone (work) ___ _ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name $AME... Address __________________ Phone (home) ___ _ City Zip __ Phone (work) ___ _ ( attach list if more than one) EXISTINGLAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use ( check) Present Zoning District PROPOSAL 3 2-+ 12 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels / Residential; no. of units--=--- Other (specify) ___ _ 5 ,;dCR-£ A,, 1.A-t.. Division for Tax Purposes ~ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) -LL-Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites / Existing Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) / New Units 1..-' Total Units ____ Units per __ Acres ____ Sq . Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential ---- ----Other (specify) ___ _ 9 5 I< f'/,-l. P/ 0(,/4,V MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE £R,E Ll1\4INARY APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form . 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. 4. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt. Center 348-3271). 5. As an addendum to this a Zoning Official's Signature_' =f7J'l,'!''-L\---'7---c--b4-/,,'"""""'ho,"""'"=--===----- I MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if applicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3 . Title opinion. 4. Easements , covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official's Signature___________________ Date __ ~------------ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. i _pplication Base Fees: -----4-Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $250.00 ___ . Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 Subdivision Application (Class I & II) $350 .00 Preliminary Subdivision Application $375 .00 + $25 .00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) ___ Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 ___ Legal Review and Filing : ___ Subdivision only $75.00 ___ Subdivision w/easements and covenants min . $200.00 ___ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) ___ Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) ___ Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) -. __ Renewal of Class III, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) ___ Renewal of Final Class III Subd ivision Application $150 .00 (No change from original application) B. Special Improvement Fees: ___ Proposed Private Roads $600 .00 + $.SO /lineal ft .; ___ !in. ft. x .50 = $ __ _ ___ Proposed Public Roads $900 .00 + $.SO /lineal ft .; ___ !in . ft. x .50 = $ __ _ ___ Request for City to Accept_§xisting Private Road $900.00 ___ Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250 .00 + $25 /stub ___ Proposed Watermain Extension $250 .00 + $25 /stub ___ Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200 .00 On-Site System, Site Evaluation Rev iew (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot x ___ new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees ___ Variance $220 .00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100 .00 PRD Application with Subdivision $30 .00/Dwelling Unit The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney , Planning Commission and Council necessary to procf SS this application and further agrees to pay all additio~al fees established by ordinance . '-1rl/l t , _ /) /) -1 ·A~ :)_, / { / / C, D Applicant's Signatu re I I {,AJ(?Vl~ ._:J.L/?O /t . Date ______ ~-------- Owner's Signature JYu ·eJioJ-1 J d.JrL ~ Date ~/ / / J -0 U Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month . Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting , please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 10 CITY of ORONO - Municipal Offices Street Address: Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 HARDCOVER ORDINANCE -In 1975, the Orono City Council adopted an ordinance limiting the percentage of lot area that can be covered with impervious surface ("hardcover") such as roofs, driveways, sidewalks, etc. on properties located within 1,000 feet of a lake. Studies have shown that sediments, oils, and debris carried into the lake from highly urbanized areas have a detrimental impact on the quality of water in the lake. The intent of Orono's ordinance is to ensure that rainfall run-off will be cleansed by filtering through grassed or vegetated yard areas before entering the lake. Hardcover Zones -Allowed Percentages: 0-75 0% 75-250' 25% 250-500' 30% 500-1000' 35% Hardcover includes: -Roofs -Sidewalks -Paved or gravel driveways -Patios & decks (includes slatted decks) -Tops of retaining walls & rock walls -Decorative landscape areas underlain by plastic sheeting or fabric -Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 1. Circle which setback zone (0-75', 75-250', etc.) the calculation is for. ~\h EL.>. 2. For each item of hardcover within that zone, enter the length and width, and multiply to get square footage (s.f.). 3. Add up all the square footages to get total square footage of hardcover. 4. Divide by the total area of property within the zone and multiply by 100 to get percentage o hardcover in the zone. 5. If changes in hardcover are proposed, you should do a "before" worksheet and "after worksheet. If either results in percentages greater than those allowed, contact City staff before proceeding with your project planning! 11 Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 "' i~: ~ .. .. ~ :,.~-I .. /52. //Z.' f I I ~ ~· ® ' ~ ~· © ;a::/ ,..,,.,.~ "-'"""~ "'- f,tOA'D IWUlCOVEI CAlLLUTe)llll EET nn.,cx ?01<(1 <c1acu: -0-lS' 75-2S0' 250-500' S00-JOOO' E.ztSTl"4 lluocovu t ■ Z.,. •· 1io..u /0,,, x 3.0.;-2. /~O s.,. © C. 0alVfllllA'f D. StO(kAU ,.t..u<ou:ut A,U'.,t: UIICUUII IT 1'1..ISTIC SJ«I r IIM •· On,u UJl>iTlO :r :r X X X X X X X :r S' :r ~, _d_t/~ X X :r :r :r WIDfM s.,. ·~ s.,. s.,. s.,. s.,. s.,. s.,. s.,. s.,. -s.,.([§) t_C:; lZ-B ::::@ 30 1 ,eio s.,. .. ,. s.,. s.,. r.,..._ :IAuc.oYu ,. z-. . ll ?e!." m -1-7---::::UZ .......... ,. ~ Ta,..._ P•c.orr Aau 1 ■.z-• 8 1 Z-S'O s.,. f!1 01/So : :ns;zso • 100. _s. s % I . ., •. SA.J.'1PLE HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS · (Note: Use a survey for a base map) Area of 0-75' zone: 75' X 110' =18,250 s.f.1 Area of 75-250' zone: (112' + 152 I) 2 X 100' .=jl3,200 s.f./ 1.50 / HAiDCO'/EI CAlOVTltn llllml~ SllUCX zoac, Ccucu: .,., 0-7S'~2So-soo· 500-JOOO' E.zun .. flu~■ 1 ■ Z.,. •• lloo.ou __,3_..._,,0=<--_ :r 30 . '100 s.,. CD /S-0 •. ,.® UMTH WIDTlt ./ .... D.,__' __ :r 3.0 ~ 2 • ____ x ___ _ ____ s.,. ----"--------···· ----:r ____ s.,. •• WAG& 2-'1 :r z..L--/ • 57(p s.,. ® c. o.,vt,,.n 2.0 • .30 -CaOO •. ,. ® , s:-X / S"" -'2-?--S: •. ,. © •• s, .. , ... u 3" :r 3 2-' -qro s.,.G) :r JO • f>O s.,. © •..: , ·;. =---~ e, ,. &:~!a.I ,.Lu< ... ,.,. A.ifA.i UIIIOfALAJ ■ IT n.urtc SHUJIM ~~\J E.UJA 'f L'-1 •• !h-Ht■ X :r X :r " X X ____ s.,. ____ s.,. ____ s.,. ____ .. ,. ____ s., . ....-=.._. 5J,o ,.,.@ 1/0 ____ s.,. r., .... l!A.,oa,,,o •• z--37s7-,.,. (il ra, .... Pw<m .-.. •~-z-• 13, 2.00 s.,. @ JE. ?. t<o7 -:--ID 13 1"2.QO .ioo. :Z. 1./. 1.% HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X S.F. Length Width X S.F. X S.F. X S.F. B. Garage X S.F. C. Driveway X S.F. X S.F. D. Sidewalk: X S.F. X S.F. E. Patio/Deck X S.F. X S.F. F. Landscape X S.F. Underlain X S.F. By Plastic X S.F. Or Fabric G. Oth=r X S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE S.F: .. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE S.F. B A B X 100 % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width X X X B. Garage ·~ X C. Driveway X S.F. X S.F. D. Sidewalk X S.F. X S.F. E. Patio/Deck X S.F. X S.F. F. Landscape X S.F. Underlain X S.F. By Plastic X S.F. Or Fabric G. Other X S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE S.F. B 13 SEPTIC SYSTEM INFORMATION SHEET ON-SITE INSTALLATION OR ADDITION REQUIRED: -For all new construction outside districts served by municipal sewer. -Any time the existing system is classified non-conforming or when the addition of bedrooms, installation of mechanical or plumbing equipment, or other factors are likely to affect the system. PROCEDURE FOR ON-SITE INSTALLATION OR REPAIR 1. A City licensed site evaluator must perform soil testing and system design (MPCA certification required). 2. Septic report must be submitted to the City Offices for review. 3. Once system design is approved, distribute report to contractors for bidding. 4. A City licensed septic contractor may then apply for permit. GENERAL INFORMATION -When planning new home construction or additions to an existing home, both primary or existing and future drainfield sites must be preserved for the long term use of the property. All setbacks and property lines must be verified prior to the issuance of a septic system permit. -Once drainfield sites have been identified, snow fencing must be placed surrounding sites to prevent them from damage. Vehicular traffic such as cars, trucks, earth moving equipment, etc. could compact drainfield sites rendering them unusable, prohibiting the timely completion of the project and or limit the long term use of the property. Snow fencing must be in place prior to the issuance of a building permit. 14 CITY of ORONO - Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Municipal Offices DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 In accordance with M.S. 13 .04, Subd. 2, "Rights of subjects of data", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under M.S. 13.04 (see following page) to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. First Middle Last Address City State Zip Phone I understand my rights as stated above. Signature 15 Telephone (612) 249-4600 • Fax (612) 249-4616 Sec.13.04 RIGHTS OF SUBJECTS OF DATA Subdivision 1. Type of data. The rights of individual on whom the data is stored or to be stored shall be as set forth in this section. Subd. 2. Information required to be given individual. An individual asked to supply private or confidential data concerning himself shall be informed of: (a) the purpose and intended use of the requested data within the collecting state agency, political subdivision, or statewide system; (b) whether he may refuse or is legally required to supply the requested data; (c) any known consequence arising from his supplying or refusing to supply private or confidential data; and ( d) the identity of other persons or entities authorized by state or federal law to receive the data. This requirement shall not apply when an individual is asked to supply investigative data, pursuant to section 13.82, subdivision 5, to a law enforcement officer. The commissioner of revenue may place the notice required under this subdivision in the individual income tax or property tax refund instructions instead of on those forms. Subd. 3. Access to data by individual. Upon request to a responsible authority, an individual shall be informed whether he is the subject of stored data on individuals, and whether it is classified as public, private or confidential. Upon his further request, an individual who is the subject of stored private or public data on individuals shall be shown the data without any charge to him and, if he desires, shall be informed of the content and meaning of that data. After an individual has been shown the private data and informed of its meaning, the data need not be disclosed to him for six months thereafter unless a dispute or action pursuant to this section is pending or additional data on the individual has been collected or created. The responsible authority shall provide copies of the private or public data upon request by the individual subject of the data. The responsible authority may require the requesting person to pay the actual costs of making, certifying, and compiling the copies. The responsible authority shall comply immediately, if possible, with any request made pursuant to this subdivision, or within five days of the date of the request, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, if immediate compliance is not possible. If he cannot comply with the request within that time, he shall so inform the individual, and may have an additional five days within which to comply with the request, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays. Subd. 4. Procedure when data is not accurate or complete. An individual may contest the accuracy or completeness of public or private data concerning himself. To exercise this right, an individual shall notify in writing the responsible authority describing the nature of the disagreement. The responsible authority shall within 30 days either: (a) correct the data found to be inaccurate or incomplete and attempt to notify past recipients of inaccurate or incomplete data, including recipients named by the individual; or (b) notify the individual that he believes the data to be correct. Data in dispute shall be disclosed only if the individual's statement of disagreement is included with the disclosed data.The determination of the responsible authority may beappealed pursuant to the provisions of the administrative procedure act relating to contested cases. 16