I received this letter from someone who has been keeping up with the development possibilties in the Green Lake Conference Center. I am posting the body of the letter here for the benefit of others who may not know about these developments. The developers seem to think they have preliminary approval AND are offering leases for 97 boat slips in the ABA. Hmmm. What are these people thinking? The body of the letter follows.
Dear
We are XXXXXXXXXXX. We have a home at XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXX, on the Green Lake Conference Center grounds.
At the upcoming August 2nd Plan Commission hearing, the developer (Lindenwood) and the American Baptist Assembly (ABA) will seek approval of the preliminary plat. We urge you to deny this. There are a number of reasons why you should do so.
THE PROPOSED PLAT VIOLATES THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted in 2003, is the result of a great deal of hard work by a number of dedicated people. It is now part of the governing regulations of Brooklyn Township, and its provisions must be adhered to when any development comes before the Plan Commission for approval. As you know, the Comprehensive Plan calls for one to two acre lots in the Green Lake Conference Center area. The developer is seeking approval for a plan that has one-half acre lots. Not only is this contrary to the Comprehensive Plan, it is totally inconsistent with existing lot sizes on the east end of the grounds. (The average lot size is 1.2 acres.) In addition, other objectives of the Comprehensive Plan are undermined by this extremely dense proposed development:
· Provision for open space
· Protection of woodlands
· Provision for and protection of scenic vistas
· Protection of wildlife habitat
· Protection of wetland
· Shoreline protection
· Conservation of groundwater resources
When you look at the preliminary plat, it is somewhat difficult to visualize how great will be the destruction of woodlands in the 80 acre development. However, the roads and the home sites take up almost all the 80 acres of the development. There are 21 acres of roads, and 51 acres of home sites. In addition, there are 3 retention ponds and the wetland area. With the necessary tree removal for the proposed roads, most of the only trees that will remain will be on the lots themselves. Many more trees will be removed for the construction of homes. With 97 one-half acre lots, the tree removal will be extensive.
Other than the retention ponds and wetland area, there is no open space in the plan. There is no space set aside for parkland. The wetland area, which cannot be built upon, nor even walked upon without extensive protection measures, cannot be considered as parkland. Clearly the developer has failed to provide for open spaces, protection of woodlands, and provision of scenic vistas. Nor does the developer provide adequate protection for the wetland area, and has totally disregarded the protection of wildlife habitat. (Richard Bishop has addressed these two issues, so we will not repeat what he has said.) The only way to reduce the impact on the existing environment is to reduce the density by requiring the developer to have one to two acre lots. The Comprehensive Plan must be adhered to.
FAILURE TO RESPOND TO THE LATEST STRAND REPORT
None of the 55 issues in the latest Strand report have been responded to by the developer. Dick Martens has discussed this in greater detail. However, just one issue raised is that there is not any indication of a connection of Stone House Road to Lawson Drive or a connection of Shore Drive to Circle Drive. It must be made clear that Carpenter Lane residents can enter and leave the grounds without having to use the proposed east gate, which would require two dangerous left turns.
AMBIGIOUS AND INAPPROPRIATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
In the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants For Estates of Lawsonia, filed with the original request for preliminary approval, the statement is made that pier access and either boat slips or lifts will be provided for all homeowner who desire them, either through the Homeowners Association or the ABA. The latest plat indicates a narrow strip of land in front of the lakefront lots, which the ABA will continue to own. In April, the developer claimed no knowledge of what the ABA planned to do regarding piers. However, there is now available to prospective buyers, a copy of a “Boat Slip Lease”, which states that the ABA will construct a series of piers extending into Green Lake which …will contain boat slips. Any buyer can lease such a slip. Thus with 97 home sites on the east end, there would be a very large number of piers and boat slips. This does not even take into consideration the home sites that are proposed for the west side of the Conference grounds. It sounds very much like a back-door way of getting back lots a boat slip. There must be DNR approval for any such proposal, and as far as we know, this has not been obtained.
The developer, in the above-mentioned Declaration of Restrictive Covenants (Part IV, paragraph 3 titled Mandatory Membership), has stipulated that residents on Carpenter Lane become full or secondary members of the Estates of Lawsonia Homeowners Association, and pay an access fee as well. It surely is not within the power of the developer to govern existing residents.
STANDING
It has been suggested that residents of Carpenter Lane do not have standing to oppose this development. Standing has no relevance to citizens having a right to appear and participate in a public hearing. Moreover, this clearly will affect us as well as our neighbors. Our home is located XXXXX from the Estates of Lawsonia. Homes on the north side of Carpenter Lane abut the development, with most of the houses actually backing up to proposed home sites. In addition, we all have rights, guaranteed to us in our original purchase documents, to the full use of all the roads on the Assembly grounds. This is true for homeowners on other parts of the grounds as well.
THE ABA AND DEVELOPER’S APPROACH HAS BEEN ARROGANT AND INAPPROPRIATE
We understand the financial needs of the Conference Center, and could consider supporting a development if it met the requirement for lot size of one to two acres, and if it were be designed to better protect the woodlands, wetlands, wildlife habitats, open spaces, scenic vistas, groundwater resources and the lake. These are the very elements that are outlined in the “Smart Growth” goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Our motto is “Development Done Right”. The developer’s plan is designed to maximize its profit, but does not take into consideration the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Are we to sacrifice a large part of a Green Lake treasure so the developer/ABA can make more money?
We acknowledge that the developer has already spent a great deal of money with the idea that approval will be given for this project. However, that cannot be the criteria for approval. The town should not try to fit its ordinances and regulations to meet the demands of a developer. It is the burden at all times for the developer to provide a code-compliant plan. Yet, the developer has proceeded to market the home sites in spite of not having the necessary approvals. On February 26, 2007, Lindenwood sent out letters to prospective buyers, stating “With the initial approval process now complete our survey and engineering teams are in high gear.” Enclosed with the letter was a concept land plan and lot price list. This was sent out before the County Land Use Planning and Zoning Committee public hearing. No approvals had been given.
Lindenwood has advertised extensively in the Chicago Tribune and other papers. They have appeared before the Green Lake Chamber of Commerce stating that the development will have one-half acre lots, and private roads. They are meeting prospective buyers, passing out printed materials, including information about piers, at the newly remodeled House of Seven Gables. Thus they are conducting business there, in spite of not having approval for a zoning change to commercial. In addition, they are telling people that the preliminary plat will be approved on August 2nd.
This arrogant attitude makes a mockery of the approval process, is disrespectful of Brooklyn Township officials, and should not be tolerated. We urge you to reject this preliminary plat.
Sincerely,
Posts
12 years ago
