03-13-2006 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2-18-06 Troy Broitzman — 1860 Shoreline Drive Since 1976 we have lived at 1950 Heritage Drive,tiie property immediately west of, aild contiguous to, 1860 Shorefine Drive. These two properties share approxitnately 700 feet of boundary, running from County Rd. 15 to Heritage Drive. Last fall,wllen the first development plan fot• 1860 appeared before City Council, 100% of tl�e surrounding neighbo�s* expressed their significant objections by letter, phone cafl, Ri1C� itl 111111y cases personal appearance. (*Every resic(ent of Fox F-Iill (14), every other resident on Ileritage Drive not a member of the Fox Hill Association (3), anc{ eveiy neighbor on Shoreline Drive, fronl and including 1780 Shoreline Drive(formerly Mike Winton)to 1940 Shoreline Drive (4)). While changes have been made in the plan now before you, I do not believe they begin to address the concerns already expressed with emanimity by residents ofthe area. Even before approval of a pla�i, we have all witnessed the unfortunate results of this developer's work. As you probably know, ahnost all of the mature pine tress(about 40)on the property have been clear-cut. Unfoi�tunately for the Cowards, approximately a dozen of these were the primary vegetation shield separating our two properties, and they were c�rt completely unnecessarily since the plan requiring their removal was not approved by Council. As I will note below,the cutting of these trees is significant beyond the loss of trees -the clearing of the land is directly tied to this developer's stated objective for his new construction, au objective that seems to be in direct conflict with the lakeshore on Smith's Bay and the surrounding neighborhood. I want to make the following points regacding the plan before you: (1) Oversized Development-conflicts with the land and neighborhood. Y By any measure,this development cemains (at approximately 13,000 ft2 including the garage) one of the largest on the lake and certai►ily tlle lai•gest on Smith's Bay, with the possible exception of the Jacobs& Burwell homes. The distinction there, of course, is that both of tllose homes ai-e on very large properties, with tlle homes far back from the lake (fiu-thei-back tllan 1860 is long?)and with acres of land and vegetation separating them from neighboring homes. Y 1860 is less tlian two acres, eveil Uefoi•e deduction for the wetlands along Heritage Drive. If constructed,this development would render meaningless any standard of pi•oportionality and contradict Ocono's reasoned sense of scale— small lot, small house. This is simply the wrong lot. ➢ The developer himself has defined the conflict: he has stated that his objective is to create the most visible building on this part of the lake. He wants it to command Smith's Bay and be the thinb everyone sees when looking at this area from the road or lake. And this helps explain the trees-removing all those trees in front opened his view of the lake, and it a(so opened our view his developinent. More....