My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Project Packet
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
B
>
Bayside Road
>
4565 Bayside Road - 06-117-23-21-0010
>
Land Use
>
14-3703, SUBD
>
Project Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2025 1:20:37 PM
Creation date
12/11/2025 1:10:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />November 10, 2014 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(8. #14-3694 PETER RENNEBOHM, 4565 BAYSIDE ROAD -PRELIMINARY PLAT- <br />RESOLUTION NO. 6462, Continued) <br />Curtis stated the applicant has shown two septic sites on the 2-acre parcel and that they could possibly do <br />more testing on the site to show that they have two additional sites on the 8-acre site but the testing has <br />not been done. <br />Levang asked if Hennepin County is saying no to the driveway situation. <br />Curtis stated Hennepin County has recommended they share a driveway. Staff has requested Hennepin <br />County clarify that but they have not at this point. Curtis indicated it would be Staff's preference that if <br />Hennepin County was going to deny it, that they would specifically say that. <br />Levang asked if Hennepin County insists on a shared driveway whether Staff would be amenable to that. <br />Curtis indicated Staff would want to take a look at that to see how the other lot would be served. Curtis <br />asked whether they would require an outlot. <br />Gaffron stated it would just be an easement situation and that the plat would not need to be changed. <br />McMillan noted the location of any additional septic sites would be further limited by a shared driveway. <br />Mack noted the wetland buffer regulations would also present another challenge and substantially limit <br />the potential number of additional new lots , if ever, in the future. <br />McMillan stated in addition to the stormwater fee , the other issue is whether the conservation areas make <br />sense. McMillan stated the City has gone back and forth with small conservation easements and that she <br />does not see it as a necessity to make it a conservation easement given the smaller size of it. McMillan <br />stated if the applicants still want to have it in a conservation easement with a signed agreement that would <br />be fine. <br />Bigelow stated he would be in agreement that the proposed conservation easement would not be <br />necessary given the amount of trees that have been planted . <br />Rennebohm stated he also would prefer not to do that. <br />Levang asked if they will be doing any buckthom removal. <br />Rennebohm noted there was one large oak tree that came down and that is when the invasive species <br />started taking over. Rennebohm indicated there is no buckthom over in the southeast comer. <br />Levang asked if the adjacent land has some conservation easements and if that is where they meet in the <br />comer. <br />Curtis stated Bayside Meadows is kind of a rectangular parcel and there are conservation easements all <br />around the perimeter and the wetland area. Curtis indicated there is also a view conservation easement <br />south of the existing home to prevent them from blocking the lake view. <br />-----------------Page 20 of 31
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.