02-21-2006 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

'� ,� 2-18-06 Troy Broitzman — 1860 Shoreline Drive Since 1976 we have lived at 1950 Heritage Drive,the properiy immediately west of,and contiguous to, 1860 Shoreline Drive.These two properties share approximately 700 feet of boundary, running from County Rd. 15 to Heritage Drive. Last fall,when the first development plan for 1860 appeared before City Council, 100% of the surrounding neighbors* expressed their significant objections by letter,phone call, and in many cases personal appearance. (*Every resident of Fox Hill (14), every other resident on Heritage Drive not a member of the Fox Hill Association(3), and every neighbor on Shoreline Drive,from 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 unanimity by residents of the area. Even before approval of a plan,we have all witnessed the unfortunate results of this developer's work. As you probably know,almost all of the mature pine tress(about 40) on the properiy have been clear-cut.Unfortunately for the Cowards,approximately a dozen of these were the primary vegetation shield separating our two properties, and they were cut completely um�ecessarily since the plan requiring their removal was not approved by Council. As I will note below,the cutting of these trees is siguificant beyond the loss of trees-the clearing of the land is directly tied to this developer's stated objective for his new construction, an 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 regarding the plan before you: (1) Oversized Development-conflicts with the land and nei�hborhood. � ➢ By any measure,this development remains (at approximately 13,000 ft2 including the garage) one of the largest on the lake and certainly the largest on Smith's Bay,with the possible exception of the Jacobs&Burwell homes. The distinction there, of course, is that both of those homes are on very large properties,with the homes far back from the lake(further back than 1860 is long?)and with acres of land and vegetation separating them from neighboring � homes. ➢ 1860 is less than two acres, even before deduction for the wetlands along Heritage Drive. If constructed,this development would render meaningless any standard of proportionality and contradict Orono'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 thing 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 also opened our view his development. More....