09-19-2022 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

RECEIVED Price Jul. 06 2022 III Melanie Curtis original comme t ' OF°ROJO,2022 Planner- City Of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Charles and Carol Price , 2813 Casco Point Rd Wayzata,MN 55391 Re: Certificate of Survey for Lisa Thostenson dated May 8,2022,and drawings of proposed changes requiring city variance approvals. Dear Ms. Curtis, We have reviewed the Survey for Lisa Thostenson regardi g the proposed changes to the existing house and lot at 2815 Casco Point Rd. We have a so reviewed preliminary drawings provided by Lisa Thostenson regarding the major modifications to the house, garage,height, deck and lot. Based on this survey and these drawings, w=hereby provide our assessment. House Modifications We oppose the side garage wall on the West side to be bui t build within the 7.5 feet side setback. We oppose any enlargement of the side kitchen window . d any enlargement of the side wall ID"bump out", as these extrusions already violate the 7.5 fee,side setback rules. The existing side wall "bump out" has only 4.8 feet side-setback. We oppose the variance request to build living quarters above the existing patio on the southwest corner of the house. We oppose the proposed house height variance request. T i e rough sketch of the second floor appears to show proposed ceiling heights of 12 feet. We are in opposition to these proposed house changes sin - the resulting structure would be a very tall house shaped like a single block with no relief v. Cations. If the setback rule violations are allowed by the city,the resulting massive structure bui so close to the lot line would create the appearance of a more industrial building look instead of a home, and would be adverse risk factor for privacy,drainage,and fire control due to the close proximity of the houses. It would also adversely affect the sunlight, breezes, and open look e, our front lawn and the front of our home. Garage We oppose the variance to build a new three-car garage att:ched to the front of the house for several reasons. The wall of the west side of the 3-car gar.ge is proposed to be 6.2 feet, which violates the 7.5 foot setback rule and is 15.6 inches too do e to the lot line. We are opposed to adding the garage within the 7.5 foot setback just to folio and maintain the same existing side wall of the home that already violates the 7.5 foot setback requirement. We object to the plan to maintain a single simple wall plane for the house and gara:e wall as that would look more like an industrial building and not a house that is keeping with 1 e character of the neighborhood and • the lot size. This reduction in the side-setback would redu e our light and airflow, and we would