Laserfiche WebLink
3229-B Casco Circle <br />Wayzata, MN 55391 <br />Ms. Jeanne Mabusth <br />Orono Planning Commission <br />City of Orono <br />P.O. box 66 <br />Crystal Bay. MN 55323 <br />Dear Jeanne. <br />Once again we Swansons are contemplating a remodeling project. “Once again." <br />because we have found that over our 25-years in this house, the way we use and live <br />in it changes - and where our friends and neighbors decide to move at those points in <br />their lives, we remain committed to spending our whole lives in this one home. <br />Our 25-year old appliances are beginning to die, and our kitchen is showing its age. <br />We are faced with the opportunity to better those things about the cooking and dining <br />areas of our home which need improvement We have decided not to simply put new <br />appliances in the old spaces. As you know, we have begun the planning with our <br />architect, Mr. Mark Nesset. <br />Mark informs us that you need to know which of the alternatives we are working with <br />we intend to use. Designs “X" and “Y” require modification to the exterior of the house <br />on Its north side; the “Dine-Bridge" des'gn requires modification to the exterior of the <br />house on its east side at the southern end of the house. We have not yet decided <br />which design to pursue based on two factors; cost and city permission. We do not <br />wish to unnecessarily develop two costly sets of plans. We would be comfortable with <br />the Commission’s acceptance of “If “X“ or Y’ then not “bridge’," or; “If ‘bridge’ then not <br />‘X’ or ’Y’." Or, perhaps the Planning Commission will accept both alternatives. Our <br />starting point is the Orono planning commission. We have found this to be a valuable <br />and important protocol in the past, and I think we have developed a nice working <br />relationship. <br />It is worth noting here. I believe, that when we built our house in 1971, the lake side <br />set-back was 50-feet and our building was carefully in compliance. One of the present <br />alternatives, the "dining bridge." will actually remove decking which is considered <br />“hard cover" within the now 75-foot set-back zone. Additionally, since the “X" and “Y" <br />alternatives would extend between present deck and roof overhangs, none of the <br />alternatives that the Commission is considering will add to the total hard-cover. <br />Thank you for your consideration and your help. We look forward to working with you <br />again. <br />j <br />Kent and Suzy^Swanson