03-20-1989 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

»r ■ ;.•■■ ' .i.;. .. ••••V*’.'‘ ■•;Vr 'j.-»■'- 5_^ »? .•-. ■ •' V | Vlfj«*^-- i ■m , Vi j Mm -A /• »-*4;:» ^- ; XT.' T >:^m-WiAm •■\^ - • |.- . •.: •, • • • r #Mfe&i® "V' V_‘ s'-'':®.•'1^^ ^ . 4 '';; ;vv' ./'■ >v-4^4'-' -S.-,'' rJtatpi:'4^ •■;-■ . .', X’ »w:- mm 'AAA&m:: 'Ah jflat :='.::;-;^ v;-W'yy-'^-A-myc''yA,-: ••:\--,;;.ji^V :-• ■-•• ■: ' •-• la I'm /■ V-=-Uv-,:-;-;■:^ !V- \■Mr^•vr. :< ■■■m ■'^ >1 I ii^ fliti^r* 1^ • ••■Trr-?T^iiii3155 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55458 March 17, 1989 Orono Planning Commission Members Orono Council Members Orono City Staff Members CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Ladies and Gentlemen: I really don't like to write a letter like this, but given the Palm's request that they now be allowed to retain the old detached garage, I feel I simply have to write and express my views to you. As most of you no doubt know already, I'm the owner of the property at 1690 Shadywood Road, immediately to the north of the Palms, and therefore am the property owner most affected by whatever they do. When their remodeling request first came before the city many years ago, I went into the city offices and looked at the plans of what they were proposing. I had absolutely no objection to those plans. In fact, I thought it would be a significant improvement both to their property and to the entire neighborhood. The plan to build an attached garage and tear down the old detached garage by the road was particularly appealing. Had I been in their shoes, I thought, I would do the same thing. So I never appeared before any of the Planning Commission or Council meetings on their request because I had no objections to it. But now, after the fact, when they come back to you requesting that they be allowed to retain the old detached garage, that puts things in a whole different light. Personally, I'm very much opposed to them retaining that garage and I would strongly encourage you to reject their request. You already have been more than generous with them in tne .lardcover allowances which you allowed them, both in the 0-75 foot zone and in the 75-250 foot zone. They should be happy as a pig in mud with what they already have. For them to even allege that old garage is an "historic structure" is puje poppycock! An old, run down, poorly maintained building is what it really is. If it were that "historic structure", I think they'd want to take better care of it than they have. If you'll drive by and look at it, you'll see that they've got more junk piled against it than the city dump« And that's the way it's been for as long as they've been engaged in their remodeling project. It's a first class eye sore! over . m;Amm f *' ' myrn • r . .. U " ■ ■■■* '■mmm mmiA . • •■> »■ mrnmm i. - '- ■' ' h: ■ 4 ... ■ ' V? . .■r-\ tti T». mm [M