| Name: |
watertrip
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Martin Planning Commissio
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 9:46:07 AM
|
For those of you unaware of the new commission involving the entire lake Martin area. Here is a brief outline of this proposal
They (Russell Lands, Al Power and various political leaders) are trying to pass a bill which would give the appointed "commission" complete and total control over private land owners and residents in and around the Lake Martin area. There is a map available for those of you who want to see the area involved and who will be affected by the bill.
This area well also be heavily taxed to pay this "commission" its annual salery.
It circles the entire lake and goes all the way to Newsite.
Such plan and regulations with the accompanying maps,plats charts and descriptive material shall show the Commissions recommendations for the use and developement of the territory of the Lake Martin developement area
The zoning regulations shall include a zoning plan for selected areas for the controlof the height, area, bulk location and use of buildings and land.
All agricultural land will be regulated and restricted.
There is a complete outline available for thew public to see along with a map.
The lake Martin residents need to be aware of how this will affect us. It is a major move.
Although they say it is for the benefit of the lake and its safetly, I have other thoughts on this. Taking away our individual rights on our private land seems unconstitutional.
|
| Name: |
Hawks Nest
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Martin Planning Commissio
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 9:58:55 AM
|
Where does one find this map and information?
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Martin Planning Commissio
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 10:10:10 AM
|
Contact the Alabama Farmers Federation Association.
There's a group of people making copies of the proposed bill and map.
We will try to get as many people informed as posssible.
They had a meeting scheduled Feb 5th, but that has been cancelled .
People in this area need to be aware of what is going to happen if it passes.
The farmers and larger land owners will be very hurt by this.
Not only will they be heavily taxed on their land, but they will be regulating livestock, land use, planting, tilling, any new addtitions, re modeling, any building of homes, barns, out buildings, etc.
|
| Name: |
Pier Pressure
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Told you so...
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 11:47:45 AM
|
I told everyone last year that the "Big boat ban" was more about individuals rights than a solution to a "problem". That was just the begining of them taking away our rights.... Be prepared for whats next. BIG money talks.
|
| Name: |
PC Al
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Who knows at this point?
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 12:00:04 PM
|
I would not want to jump to conclusions before I saw the whole package. Many of us have believed for a long time that there needs to be some type zoning around the lake. This proposed bill could be good or bad. Who knows at this point. I would be interested in knowing more before I make a quick judgment. Just one homeowners opinion.
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Who knows at this point?
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 1:16:45 PM
|
If it is a good thing why would they have to try to sneak around getting this bill passed before anyone knew anything about it?
If its for envirnomental reasons I'm all for it, so lets set up a Envirnomental Commission to stop all the massive developement that is polluting our water by one of the biggest pollutants I can think of, the lawn chemicals going straight into our water. Lets talk about real issues and whats really behind this bill.
I can e-mail you a map of the proposed area if you can post an address for me to send it to
I guess I could scan the bulk of the proposal too but I'll have to scan it first
|
| Name: |
BayPineYankee
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Who knows at this point?
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 1:49:05 PM
|
"complete and total control" seems a little strong. We all have deeds to our property and many of us have CC&R's attached to the deed. I would like to know more about the proposed commission but it certainly will not be able to change certain existing restrictions. What it may be able to do is add a level of control that does not currently exist - condo developments in single-family neighborhoods, peirs as big as houses strung randomly along the shoreline... It is probably being done in secret and on the fast track because RL doens't really think anyone elses's opinion matters since in their minds it is "their" lake.
|
| Name: |
Ron
-
|
|
| Subject: |
HOBO's help
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 2:19:05 PM
|
As one of thousands of homeowners who dont reside at the lake, I would like to request that if a vote is needed, that those who can exert some pressure, ensure it will accept proxy votes for homeowners not able to make these short notice meetings or votes. I would request either a personal proxy or one that assignes the HOMO association to vote our proxy.
While I agree that a rash judgement isnt always prident, I for one have not seen too many new policies proposed by AL Power or by Russell Lands to be helping anyone other than Russel Lands themselves. I own my land and do not wish to have Russel Lands tell me what I can do with it. As far as environmental concerns to Lake Martin, that is what ADEM regulates. Just my 4 cents (Inflation)
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip...
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 2:23:16 PM
|
I find it interesting that this is your first post ever, and you seem to know everything there is to know about what is best for the lake and lake residents. Many of the points you are raising about landowner's rights, etc. sound very much like the words spoken by some Elmore County developers that are trying to stop a plan of organized progress currently underway in that county.
Your statement about vast new taxes is simply unfounded. Forty-three percent (43%) of ALL assessed value (read taxes) in Tallapoosa County is lake front property--it's time for the lake stakeholders to have a say.
Homes with 3 or 4 broken down cars in the yard, 50 homes built with only 200 feet of shoreline that over crowd sloughs and create potential sewage problems, uncontrolled building of high rise condos next door to private, single-family homes without approval or the ability to appeal to authorities has got to stop.
My guess is, your argument is a very thinly veiled effort to garner support for some personal interests. It's time for the interests of the many to be considered--if Russell Lands can advance this needed plan--then we should all support it in the best interest of the Lake. What we have now surely isn't working to the interest of the lake--the lack of control only lines the pockets of some non-caring individuals.
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip...
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 2:37:53 PM
|
And, by the way, the HOBOs are represented on this multi-county group of civic leaders trying to improve overall conditions of the lake. We are pretty well informed about all sides of the issue. Just remember, it's not about APCo or RL--it's about the lake.
|
HOBO's will look into this ..... I'm not sure the HOMO's can do anything about this situation (but you never know).
|
Looks like the HOBO's have looked into this....thanks OSMS.
|
| Name: |
Maverick
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Martin Planning Commissio
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 4:00:51 PM
|
If such establishes zoning for lake development and ensures the quality of life and the lake is protected for years to come - I for one am all for such a commission.
That is, as long as we ALL have a say in such and it is not left up to Russell and APCo. As currently there are approx 7,800 property owners on Lake Martin who should all have the opportunity to review the pland and voice their opinions along with the HOBO's, Lake Watch, Lake Martin Coalition and other such organizations who's focus is the protecting and presevering the lake.
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip...
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 5:12:28 PM
|
I certainly don't know all there is to know about whats best for the lake, like you mentioned, but as a private land owner on and off the lake I have many questions and concerns about this bill. Why would anyone want to be blind sided by a bill like this?
I thought this would be a good way to get the word out and let people know about the possible change that could effect all of us.
I'm all for having covenents and restrictions to keep our property values in tact, but I won't ever agree with a beaurocratic monopoly run commission.
Yes, all property owners need to have a vote and all property owners need to be aware of what might happen, especially when it concerns our own private property. .
|
| Name: |
au67
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip...
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 5:26:02 PM
|
Just as a reminder...there are many property owners that are not voting residents. They just pay the property taxes and buy the goods and services offered in the area.
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip...
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 6:12:03 PM
|
While you may not want to disclose the source of your information, you should consider the motive of the person or persons that provided such detailed info to you--especially since much of what you said simply is not true. We wish the process was as close to fruition as your source suggests, but it is not.
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sky is falling
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 8:24:27 PM
|
It isn't. Your claims, watertrip, are reminiscent of the outrageous claims made by the chicken little crowd the last time there was an attempt to establish some guidelines (not the boating bill) on development in this part of the state. You couldn't possibly believe everything that you have said. You have missed the mark not by a country mile but by 100 country miles.
I understand the bias that many have against some elected officials, companies, and organizations but to let loose with so many extremely faulty claims is not helpful to anyone.
Like one of our posters has said many times before it is better to keep your mouth shut and have people think that you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
We, the public citizens, will get our say at the appropriate time.
If you post again I hope it is with much better information or on a topic on which you have at least a reasonable amount of correct knowledge.
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sky is falling
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 10:50:25 PM
|
Oh, Okay. So the proposed bill that I have in my hand is a lie?
The alabama farm federation's concerns are invalid?
Perhaps the Alabama farm federation is a hoax too?
It amazes me not one person has asked for a copy of this proposed bill.
Coming here is a waste of time, you all seem to want to bury your head in the sand.
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sky is falling
|
|
Date:
|
2/3/2008 11:31:17 PM
|
If their concerns are as you have listed in your initial post then, yes, they are invalid. Your listing is loaded with hogwash and very few of your claims are on any piece of paper that could be confused as a bona fide proposal. But those claims may appear on a composition done by the people who are worried that their rights are being trampled. They'll throw everything against the wall and be pleased with whatever sticks.
Wait until all of the details are presented. Then I'll be very interested to consider your informed opinion.
|
I would like a copy of the bill. Please email or let me know how to get a copy. Thanks.
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sky is falling
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 8:26:38 AM
|
Please don't insult me and
don't talk to me until you've read the proposal. Okay?
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Actually
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 8:28:24 AM
|
email me and I will send you or anyone else a copy of it
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip...
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 8:29:52 AM
|
Soon it will be public knowledge. :)
|
|
| Name: |
CAT BOAT
-
|
|
| Subject: |
you have mail
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 8:57:12 AM
|
|
| Name: |
ecstasypoint
-
|
|
| Subject: |
consensus
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 10:34:51 AM
|
I think it would be interesting if the forum members could come to some agreement about what we collectively want to happen on and around the lake. Jim brings up a good point, for instance. These condo builders have rights, too (even if he was kidding). Some of the problems I see on the lake come from the fact that so many people are exercising whatever they feel their rights are without regard to how it affects other people. Some fulltimers, for example are getting squeezed out during season when the lake is almost unliveable. I know lots of you don't agree with that, but I think it's sad that fewer people want to be here year round. If we let it become primarily a vacation spot for those who can afford two or more homes, then we have a very different lake than the one many of us moved to years ago. Thoughts? (without beating me up please)
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The best way.....
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 11:08:09 AM
|
|
| Name: |
Lady Delta
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Martin Planning Commissio
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 11:15:07 AM
|
You've got mail!
|
| Name: |
Ulysses E. McGill
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Martin Planning Commissio
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 12:13:04 PM
|
Nothing happens when I click this link.
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The best way.....
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 12:13:20 PM
|
to look at the issue is to always consider what is best for the lake. I remember being told that driving a car is a privilege not a right. Using this lake is a privilege, not a right as some espouse. Some forget that their "rights" end where someone else's rights begin. What we have to do is filter the desires of the few to act in the best interest of all.
|
| Name: |
Maverick
-
|
|
| Subject: |
SEND ME A COPY WATERTRIP
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 1:08:03 PM
|
..... of the proposed Bill, I would love to read it.
Now I assume this proposed bill is coming from the floor of a legislative body who has the power to enforce such law?
If so, what legislative body?
You can email a copy of the bill to me at steve@lakemartin.org.
|
| Name: |
CAT BOAT
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I read it....
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 3:36:49 PM
|
Read through it rather quickly. Looks like politics to me.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
How ironic.....
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 5:16:34 PM
|
.... that you say NOW that one's 'rights end where anothers begins'. Last year you were all about holding all the water here for your 'privilidge' of recreation to the detrement of those downstream that needed it for thier livelyhood. You have a real talent for speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Maybe you should run for some kind of office.
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
No insult intended
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 8:02:23 PM
|
There are only a few folks who are as familiar with it, or more familiar with it, than I am. That's how I know that most of the claims that you made in your initial post are disinformation and hogwash.
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
No insult intended
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 8:25:00 PM
|
Well then, enlighten us!
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Martin Planning Commissio
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 8:57:38 PM
|
You can now read the proposal on savelakemartin.com site
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Not authorized but
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 9:14:40 PM
|
just to prove the point here is a three question test for you. Please tell us which specific pages and paragraphs of the proposal that you have on hand state the following claims that you made in your initial post. Those who have received e-mailed copies of the proposal from you can judge the accuracy of your claims
First , '....commission will have complete and total control over private land owners and residents'. Second, '....we'll be heavily taxed to pay this commissions annual salary". Third, '....circles the entire lake and goes all the way to New Site' . Where is New Site mentioned in the proposal or shown as included on a map that was part of the proposal?
As the Jeapordy music plays in the background we await your reply.
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Not authorized but
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 10:38:38 PM
|
I don't play games...especially with someone as controlling and immature as you.
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Martin Planning Commissio
|
|
Date:
|
2/4/2008 10:57:45 PM
|
Thanks for posting it. Looks to me like this needs some work. The three counties plus Alex City are going to have to voluntarily give up some of their existing tax money. Doesn't seem likely. And if, as someone posted, ALFA is already opposed, then it is unlikely to get far in the legislature. ALFA often gets what it wants.
The general idea of regulating large developments and future subdivisions is good, but I would like to see some explicit limits on what they can do to individual home owners. I prefer not to leave it up to the lawyers and courts to interpret.
Section 9 speaks of home remodeling. How on earth do you fairly zone or regulate the remodeling of the 350,000 block cabin which sits between a million dollar home and a 650,000 cabin?
|
| Name: |
Smitty
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip...
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 8:57:12 AM
|
I don't see anything objectionable that watertrip said; you need to lighten up a tad.
|
| Name: |
CAT BOAT
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Not authorized but..explain
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 9:01:11 AM
|
So, why is it such a secret? Why do so few know much about it?
|
| Name: |
CAT BOAT
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Don't be surprised
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 9:03:43 AM
|
if it flies through before you can blink an eye.
|
| Name: |
CAT BOAT
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Quote from above post...
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 9:12:21 AM
|
There are only a few folks who are as familiar with it, or more familiar with it, than I am.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
My sentiments too CAT
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 9:26:10 AM
|
Carnac is a regular visitor to the forum. IF he is so involved, but the 'proposal' is not being done in secret, then why has he not mentioned it already. Most of the forum members have expressed a desire for some type of zoning for the lake, so I would think that this would be a great place to start to garner support. I haven't read it, been to busy. But if it encpmasses the WHOLE lake, it has to go into New Site, as the shoals are not that far from there, and the shoals are the start of the lake. Just because it looks like river doesn't mean it is. If you baught property and wanted to do waterfront improvements, you have to go through the same permit process as we do. From the head waters (the shoals) to the dam is a 31 mile stretch.
I agree with another poster, if ALFA is against it, it ain't likely to happen in the Alabama legislature.
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip failed
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 9:30:41 AM
|
She hasn't provided any answers to the simple three question test. The facts concerning the first question appear in Section 11. In reading it you will find that there is a statement saying there will be no retroactivity. Surely that demonstrates that the proposed commission will not have, in her words, 'complete and total control over private land owners and residents'.
The facts concerning the second question appear in Section 5. Nowhere in Section 5 does it suggest that anyone will have a heavier tax burden because of the formation of the commission or the work of the commission members. Taxes might increase only if or when property valuations have risen.
The fact concerning the third question is that the jurisdiction of the proposed commission doesn't come anywhere near New Site.
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Don't be surprised
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 10:08:54 AM
|
That comment makes me suspicious of the whole thing.
Everyone should read and re-read section 9a. Even though 11 says nothing is retroactive, 9a is sufficiently broad and vague that it will be impossible to make changes to your property without the permission of this Commission.
It is odd that the few lake properties within the jurisdiction of Jackson's Gap and Dadeville are exempt from this thing.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thanks
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 10:13:12 AM
|
Thanks for bringing this to our attention and for not continuing the tit for tat with carnac. Best to just ignore him and engage in more useful dialogue on this issue. After scanning the document I had a few comments that I am wondering what others think.
First. it seems like this is intended for the Alabama State Legislature but it is unclear to me that they can create a commission that has two slots allotted to private companies (Russell and APCO). I may be wrong on that issue but it does seem odd to me that they create slots for specific companies rather than individuals appointed by a government body. Also, even though they only hold two seats, if they can exert the influence to get that it is likely they can also exert the influence to get two more seats appointed to someone that is sympathetic (at best) and potentially controlled (at worst) by Russell and APCO.
Second, don't underestimate the intrusiveness of a planning commission when it comes to say, remodeling your home. If they can exert that authority they will require submission of plans prepared by an architect/engineer, have to hire inspectors to make sure it is being implemented per the approved plans, and have some authority to enforce. Remember, an act will lead to the creation of the commission who will create rules and regulations that will give them the ability to levy fees and fines. All leading to more bureaucracy and higher direct and indirect costs. If they were a benevolent organization it might be an overall benefit to the lake. Its just I've never seen government and benevolent in the same sentence, except along the lines of "Government and benevolent are an oxymoron".
Finally, it seems inconceivable to me that any of the "Subdivisions" (i.e. current county or city governments) around the lake are going to give tax funds to a planning commission that could usurp their authority. Only the Internal Revenue Service gets away with that, and its only because they have more and bigger guns. That may explain why this appears to be flying under the radar screen for now. It will take a lot of politicking, arm twisting and possibly even compromising photo's of certain pols for this to get any traction.
|
| Name: |
Council Roc Doc
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Don't be surprised
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 10:14:25 AM
|
The way I read it, is that the Commission will have to gain permission to make any changes to existing zoning regs from the Authorized Subdivisions who permitted the formation of this commission in the first place. Is it just me, or does the purpose of this organization seem rather redundant?
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip failed
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 10:23:27 AM
|
////////She hasn't provided any answers to the simple three question test. The facts concerning the first question appear in Section 11. In reading it you will find that there is a statement saying there will be no retroactivity. Surely that demonstrates that the proposed commission will not have, in her words, 'complete and total control over private land owners and residents'. /////////
So Im a farm owner and I have a heard of cows, barns, fencing, milk house etc. Now lets say 3 years later I want to sell my dairy farm? Can the new owner run a dairy farm too? Would the new owner be grandfathered in? What happens to the land values after the farm is sold if the farm is set up as a dairy farm, but may not be able to used as a dairy farm?
Another senerio, what if I want to open a market on my land, or a gas station or a mini mart and it conflicts with another market or gas station or mini mart already owned by one of the larger land owners who may be a part of the commission, would my business strategy be denied?
What if I want to divide my land and sell part of it?
What if I want to build a home for one of my children on my property?
What if my spring fed pond is used for irrigation purposes?
So maybe "total control" were the wrong words to use. Sorry for that usage. How about just the simple word "control"
There are so many things to think about besides zoning codes to make LM ascetically pleasing for weekenders.
These and so many more questions need to be answered before such a bill would take place. Again, I sure don't want to be blind sided by this and you really have to read the proposal many times over to see all the loop holes in this plan.
///////The facts concerning the second question appear in Section 5. Nowhere in Section 5 does it suggest that anyone will have a heavier tax burden because of the formation of the commission or the work of the commission members. Taxes might increase only if or when property valuations have risen. ///////
Did you read section 5b? The commission shall have the AUTHORITY to charge reasonable fee's for such services rendered by the commission to or for the benefit of any person or entity in the exercise of the responsibilities and duties of the commission under this act.
Ahhhhhhh???? Sounds like we will be charged individually (I call that taxing) for the surveying and plating of our private property? I had my property surveyed many years ago and it cost just over $1,000.
///////The fact concerning the third question is that the jurisdiction of the proposed commission doesn't come anywhere near New Site. /////////
Perhaps glasses are needed? I never said including Newsite, I said "up to" and if you look at the map thats exactly where it is drawn.
Lets focus on whats at hand not argue about such trival things. I'm as much in the dark as everyone else and I don't have any of the answers except to continue to educate ourselves on exactly how this will impact everyone. Hey, if it was something that as a whole would benifit all, I'd say go for it. Im open to hearing ALL the pro's and con's.
Carnac, Since you seem to know most about this bill and seem in support of it can you start a list of the Pro's?
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Thanks
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 10:30:38 AM
|
EXCELLENT post!!! Very good thoughts and ideas. These are the things we need to be thinking about.
|
| Name: |
DirtDiva
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Council Roc Doc
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 10:32:31 AM
|
change of subject:
How are you and your family doing?
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
watertrip failed
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 10:32:41 AM
|
I meant herd cows, not heard of cows. Bad speller.....
|
| Name: |
Council Roc Doc
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Council Roc Doc
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 11:02:02 AM
|
Thanks for asking! We have completed for the most part all of the damage assessment and gotten the approval for restoration. I hope the demolition phase starts this week. It would appear that smoke damage is just as problematic as a fire itself. However, if this is the only fire that we experience in our lifetime, this was the one to have! Looking forward to getting this behind us and resuming our friendships and creating memories on our wonderful LM.
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Don't be surprised
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 11:05:41 AM
|
Good point. Section 9b essentially lets the counties and Alex City veto zoning regulations they don't like.
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I do support it
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 1:11:36 PM
|
I support it to the point that the proposal has been developed so far. As you know it is a very complex issue. There are many details that need to be worked on and worked out. It's possible that, when the details are hashed through, I may not like some of them. But it is most likely that the final document will not, in my personal opinion, be fatally flawed.
I'll give you one big Pro, watertrip, and then I'll stay away from this subject on this forum. Today, if somebody owns a nice big parcel of land bordering Lake Martin there is nothing that prevents a new owner from doing dairy farming or hog farming on that property. What happens to the market value of the neighboring lake houses? Or maybe the large property tract gets sold to a condo developer who intends to cut down all of the trees on the property and put multiple condo units on the shoreline. You can see the disasterous results if you take your boat just upstream on Blue Creek from its confluence with the main channel.
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I do support it
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 2:00:24 PM
|
The hog farming example sounds like an empty scare tactic as nobody is going to raise hogs on land bordering the lake. The condo example is more relevant and gets wide-spread support However, the legislature could pass a big condo ban if they so chose and skip creating the commission. They could also codify the old 100' foot rule for docks that AlaPower ignores if they want to stop the excessive subdividing of land.
|
| Name: |
watertrip
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I do support it
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 3:38:58 PM
|
Yes, I agree. It sad to see all this happen to the lake, the over building, condo's etc.
I always thought there was some kind of ordinance for livestock on the lake? I don't remember ever seeing any livestock anywhere in sight near the water of LM, except of course on goat Island. Having livestock on the shoreline of a lake would not seem conducive to farming.
I grew up on a lake in the midwest and there are strict covenants to protect the water. For example each home has to have a certain amount of shoreline and have a certain amount of acreage per home and I'm talking 5 acre plots not 1/8 acre plots and each home has to stay so many feet from the shoreline to prevent sewage seepage into the water
( they do inspect the septic systems)and certain lawn chemicals are forbidden. Those are pretty simple and easy covenants to follow. There are no house size restrictions, but there are limits to the size of trees you can cut down, which is great. Actually the trees protect the land in that they can't be cut down or moved so the rebuilding usually stays in the same spots or the homes have to remain smaller. All these things are to protect the water and the environment and not line someones pockets and thats a big difference!
I guess the heat is on you if your a part of this planning commission. Its too bad you can't voice your opinion without getting in trouble, huh?
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I do support it
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 4:45:10 PM
|
So by whose standards do the proposed commision go by. Personally, I don't care how many condo's are built. Cutting trees is not the end of the world. New trees get planted along with shrubs. Too many folks have the attitude that now that they have thiers, nobody else should be able to realize thier dream. It is already a different lake than I grew up on. You can't stop progress. I guarantee the next development that RL creates will rape the land as well. Who is going to tell them no? The 'comission' will be RL puppets. It will only stop 'outsiders' from intruding on what RL sees as their playground.
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I do support it
|
|
Date:
|
2/5/2008 5:19:23 PM
|
I normally don't buy the RL puppet rhetoric, but I am very suspicious of this commission. RL already has vast tracts to develop the next big thing that one-ups the Ridge. Why would they support a commission unless it was to ensure that the rest of us don't perpetuate those unsightly cabins? I can easily see future remodels requiring massively expensive updates to the house and grounds to keep up with the "character" of nearby RL properties.
|
|
New Post
Search
Lake Shelbyville Topics Forum
Reply
»
Illinois Lakes
»
Lake Shelbyville
Login
|
Home
