Lakeville Lake property owner’s plans draw opposition from neighbors

There was a full-house of Lakeville Lake residents at the Addison Township Planning Commission meeting.
Many of them had come to voice their opposition to lake resident Jonathan Dreffs? application for a special land use permit.
He wishes to construct a covered boat hoist, create an upland cut for a boat well, dredge approximately 3,000 square feet, remove approximately 3,750 square feet of vegetative mat and create a 20-foot-by-20-foot swim area at his 595 Army Rd. home.
During his opening comments, Dreffs pointed out that he is not new to the area and actually previously lived on Lakeville Lake until 2003.
‘We love the area. We wanted to come back once we were able to afford (it) and found a lot available on the lake to purchase,? he said. ‘Obviously, I loved the lake and that’s why we’re coming back.?
Dreffs noted after a long process and several meetings he finally obtained a permit issued by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).
‘They were very diligent and we worked together making certain what I’m proposing and what they approved is the most environmentally-friendly way for us to be able to achieve what we’re looking for, which is no more than to gain reasonable access to the lake, which I would easily say everybody in here has,? he added. Dreffs said his request is ‘necessary? for him to gain reasonable access to the lake and exercise his riparian rights. He believes he’s got one of the larger lots on the lake having 4 acres with about 150 feet of lake frontage.
‘Having 150 feet on the water, we are being asked to pay a double assessment fee that goes into the lake’s homeowners association, which we are happy to do, but we feel that with that fee, we should be granted the same rights that everyone (who pays the same fee or less) has to the lake.?
As far as his covered boat hoist goes, Dreffs said his neighbors that share the bay with him have the identical setup that he is seeking.
‘It would be uniform to what is there and would match the landscaping of the area identically. It would be a perfect flow,? he added. ‘I’m not asking for anything more than what my neighbors have.?
Public concerns
Elaine Delater, who said she’s ‘been around a long time,? recalled when another person on the lake wanted to dredge some dirt in order to put up a seawall, the MDEQ did not permit it at the time due to arsenic under the silt.
‘I don’t know if (the MDEQ) have people there who do not know that anymore. We have not been able to take the dam out or dredge because of the arsenic. It would be set free and make the lake unusable.?
As for Dreffs? overall plans for the property, Delater said he should have thought about what he wanted before purchasing the property.
‘We bought a lot where we can swim if that is what we wanted to do,? she added. ‘We bought lots if we wanted to put in a boat if that is what we wanted to do.?
Next door neighbor to the Dreffs, Steve Ardelean had no objections to any of the proposed improvements on the lake, but noted that he, too, was concerned about the arsenic.
‘I know there is a lot of arsenic in the whole Leonard area,? he said. ‘I would be against his dredging and putting in sand, but from personal experience, I think it’s a waste of time because the silt comes over the sand.?
Gene Crombez felt ‘some consideration should be given? to Dreffs as to where his property is located.
‘It’s difficult to get in and out,? Crombez said. ‘He’s just trying to make some improvements, so he can have better access to the lake.?
Some were afraid that allowing such actions would set a precedent for others who decide to build on the lake.
‘I’m concerned that granting what he wants is going to create a slippery slope. If you read the ordinance, what they are proposing is a clear violation of the ordinance,? said resident Raymond Morrow. ‘You see this in a lot of different context. Where something starts, it’s followed. You can’t refuse in the future because they will say ‘you haven’t enforced it in the past.? That’s why I am here.?
Dreffs disagreed.
‘I’m 100 percent positive that I will not be the first person on the lake to approach the planning commission, so I don’t know why it’s like ‘the buck stops here,?? he responded. ‘I’m not the first person to ask this.?
Chairman Lawrence Smith noted the commission doesn’t set precedents, that anyone seeking similar changes would have to go through the same procedure as Dreffs.
Commission questions and comments
Commissioner Ed Brakefield asked Dreffs if, in talking with the MDEQ, did any reference to arsenic ever come up? Dreffs said it was never brought up to him nor had he been shown any scientific studies showing the presence of arsenic.
‘I’m not suggesting that there isn’t, I’m just saying no one presented it to me,? he said.
Township Planner Rand Bowman asked if anyone knew what the concentration of arsenic is in the lake?
Delater said ‘it varies.?
‘There is very little in the sound end. There are people on the north end where it is high,? she said. ‘The county offered for a long time to do free testing. Your well is tested when you buy a new house.?
Bowman told the crowd that it is ‘standard procedure for the planning commission to ponder what has been said, to verify assertions that may not otherwise be on the public record, and to recommend approval or denial at the next regularly scheduled meeting.?
Brakefield moved to the table the item until the next meeting, which will be on July 14.

Comments are closed.