Post # 1
Member
1251 posts
Bumble bee
I posted a little of this in the May 2011 thred, but I was hoping I could get some advice from all of you.
I am trying to decide on a venue!
We have…
Turtle Creek Lodge, which is 1.5 hours away, for $1000, for a semi-destination weekend wedding with camping, s’mores and outdoor fun. Also, one of my best friend’s grandparents owns it, so we might be able to get a deal.
OR
Or, Schaar’s Bluff Gathering Center, for $500, for an in-town wedding on the Mississippi river. The building is awesome, eco-friendly, windpowered and includes an AV System (with projector) all tables and chairs, take-down and cleaning. There are also outdoor firepits (under that Terrace there) so we could still do the “fancy dress roasting marshmallows” thing. Also, since it’s pretty much dirt cheap, we could really go all out with catering and music and all that fun stuff.
Or
The beautiful Naniboujou Lodge, about 4 hours away, for about $5000 + Food(eeeek), for a lovely Northshore Lake Superior wedding. I love this place, but the price kind of just blows my mind. . I also sort of question how formal it is, because we are pretty laid back people. But ugh. It’s so stupidly beautiful, and has a really cool history.
Post # 3
Member
234 posts
Helper bee
LOL i love the option for “they’re all ugly. you’re dumb” they’re not ugly!
Post # 4
Member
7152 posts
Busy Beekeeper
Choice number 4 on your poll made me giggle!! I chose the second one..the price is awesome and I love the structure. It’s so unique!
Post # 5
Member
2856 posts
Sugar bee
To me there is something so cool with #2. Now don’t get me wrong, I love the look of #3 but I think since the price makes you shudder I would stick with something more affordable. #2 just seems like a place I would want to get married at. Looks like a lot of outdoor space for guests to roam.
Post # 6
Member
1251 posts
Bumble bee
I’ll admit that Schaar’s is my favorite too! The only dumb thing is it’s kind of little so we’d have to limit our guests to 75. But that could be a good thing too, right?
Post # 7
Member
7152 posts
Busy Beekeeper
Having room for only 75 might not be so bad. You can have a larger reception if you want later on.
Post # 8
Member
1525 posts
Bumble bee
I am with the rest of the bees, I think the 2nd one is great. O and lmao at your last poll option!! hehehe
Post # 9
Member
2856 posts
Sugar bee
I agree with Prncssdva. Just curious, how many people were you thinking originally?
Post # 10
Member
1251 posts
Bumble bee
I was thinking 100-150. I have a pretty giant extended family, but his is rather small.
Post # 11
Member
2057 posts
Buzzing bee
Shoot – – I meant to vote for No. 2 but accidently I clicked No. 1….
Post # 12
Member
1684 posts
Bumble bee
I voted for #1 – I think it’s soooo cool & there’s so much you can do with it. I like the others too – #3 is really nice too, the good this is it’s already ornate & decorated so you don’t have to do anything to it.
Post # 13
Member
1251 posts
Bumble bee
I’m just happy no one has clicked Option Four.
Post # 14
Member
473 posts
Helper bee
Schaar’s is pretty small – so if you’re looking at a guest list of 100 – 150, I’d suggest #1.
Post # 15
Member
4122 posts
Honey bee
The wedding photographer in me goes, WOAH for Naniboujou Lodge. That is one heck of a room! Looks well worth the price if you can swing it, but the distance isn’t worth it unless 90% of your family/friends are within about 45 min.
My vote is for Number 2. The ideas sound so fun, and while 3 is really posh (which it doesn’t even sound like it fits your personalities) I would have so much fun shooting some of the details you mentioned.
Number 1 is cool too, but how many of your guests are really going to want to camp? How will the distance affect them?
I’m more for local than semi or full destination.
Post # 16
Member
7774 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
I love #2, that is totally what I would pick. But if the size bothers you so much and you want to invite more people, I’d go #1.