Winnipesaukee island owner faces fines of $1,000 a day for home expansion
 

Sounds to me like it's a case of "better to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission". I may not know much, but I know better than to expand my island property beyond the original, grandfathered foundation. Not matter what happens or who is at fault, there will not be a happy resolution...

Garcia, I'm with you. It's hard to believe he didn't know he could not expand. I'm glad to see DES and the judge enforcing this.

I am looking at the before and after pics and I don't see where he extended the footprint of the building. He certainly went up higher but I can't see where he extended the original foundation....

Dan

I thought the same, then realized the "after image" is noted as being taken in 2005. The issue seems to be that the home is not on the same footprint as 2 decades ago.

Another implied point that does not show up in the photo is septic capacity of a 0.18 acre island. It's got to be less than 3 bedrooms, and although the original footprint would be grandfathered, the owner would not get approval to add bedrooms and bathrooms.

It's absurd that he can't do what he wants on that property, Who does it affect and what negative effect does it have on the lake? Edit to say as long as the septic issue is solved.

Look again. In the 2005 photo the front of the house is behind the boathouse. In the current photo, the house expands past the boathouse.

Noreast--Three issues, I think we can agree on at least two of them:

First--As you noted, septic needs to be solved, and I think we both assume it has not.

Second--Though some portion of the boathouse was grandfathered, he expanded over water that is owned by the state. I hope we can agree he had no right to do that.

Third--One issue that many are unaware of is that runoff from solid surfaces such as pavement and roofs deposits unfiltered contaminants into the lake. Natural groundcover and other porous materials provide an important filter to protect the water. Expanding his footprint in close proximity to the water is very likely to have increased this pollution. More info here:

https://www.des.nh.gov/organization/...es-wd-10-8.pdf

Wrong offender?
 

We have seen instances where land was cleared or other shoreland violations occurred, and the owner simply shrugged his shoulders and paid the fine.
Perhaps the remedy is to fine and impound the equipment of those who did the work? Impound the barge, backhoe, chainsaw, and put a restraining order on those folks, might set a better example.

The owner asked others to do the work. Somebody else committed the crime. Aren't they all guilty? Or do I read too many mystery/crime novels?

Can one of our lawyers guide this thread?

Did anyone notice, once again, the Union Leader has inaccurate info ?

Wilcomb Island - not Welcome Island ............... or does this Island fall into the same debate as Saunders Bay vs. Sanders Bay ?

I don't feel bad for this guy. It certainly looks like he's pushed the boundaries of what's allowed on that small island property.

This website lists it as Welcome Island.

http://www.lwhs.us/islands/islandlist.htm

Bizer as well:

http://www.bizer.com/winislan.htm#islandb

I think this guy clearly pushed the limits too far and needs to be held accountable. Lets face it, if he was a marine contractor he knew the laws.

1 Unknown-B11 320m NW of Spindle Point in Meredith Bay
5 Oak 800m N of Spindle Point, S Boardman's Pt
4 Hen NE Oak.I (a.k.a. Gypsy)
1 Gull Rocks A pile of rocks above water, 250m ENE of Hen I
5 Pitchwood N of FL#44
3 Welcome Bt Pitchwood I & Stonedam I {AKA Wilcomb I}
3 Isle of Pines North of Welcome; 550m NE FL#44
6 Stonedam Between Pitchwood I and Meredith Neck
4 Ledge BT Stonedam I and Fish Cove
3 Dale 300m SW Ledge I
20-------------------

Bizer actually lists both names so you are both correct.

I do agree, just because you own an entire island does not mean you can build whatever you want, there are still building codes and DES laws the must be follow and I am sure he knew what he was doing.

Easy-Peasy...
 

As a marine contractor, he has the capacity to apply for a mooring permit, build an ark, hoist this structure onto the ark, run the ark "aground" on the island, add a Porta-Potty, buy a sticker—and be legal. ;)

The mistake many who have offered opinions on this are making is to assume that all of the information in the Union Leader article is correct. It is not.

It is not like he did this in the middle of the night with no permits. He did get permits and even an occupancy permit when the construction was complete.

The information in the Union Leader article that says he has a bidet and a whirlpool tub is not germaine to the issue and only put in there to inflame the reader. Apparently that worked.

All of the facts in this matter have not been made public and it is better that it be settled either in court, or by agreement with the state, but not in the court of public opinion.

I'm sure it will be settled in court but that doesn't mean we can't have an opinion. Even if we don't have all the facts we clearly have photo's of before and after that we can base our opinion on. Just because it's legal doesn't automatically make it right.

I'm no lawyer and I don't know all the facts. I based my response on this statement from the article: ordered Brown to make all the changes to the property agreed to in a consent decree with the state by Aug. 31.

Did he agree to something and then not live up to his end of the bargain?

Tilton, I'll look forward to the judicial resolution, and I do not mean to cast aspersions your way, but it's a mighty tall order to ask us to accept that the Union Leader was completely wrong. In addition to Garcia's and BiggD's points, there is the matter of the whole thing just seeming so over the top--3 bedrooms on 0.18 acre, building out over the water...

I am just going to leave this comment right here.

To answer a question above: The sewage goes into a tank that is pumped out as needed so there is no chance of it ever entering the lake. Certainly there is much less of a chance than if someone had a septic tank and a leaching field. There is nothing on that property that in any way jeopardizes the lake.

He feels that he is 100% correct and everything he did was above board and with permits. He has spend several hundred thousand dollars on lawyers and court costs trying to make the case that the state is wrong, and he continues to have that belief.

It is a pretty tall order to fight the state, with all of it's resources, when all you have is your personal funds, but he is committed.

That must be what they do with some of the other houses around the lake that don't have any property, right? When I go by Alton Bay I always wonder how they get a septic in and that must be what they do.

That's very interesting; I have never heard of this approach for a fully plumbed home, and a quick Google search also yields nothing.

Apart from the question of whether this is legal, does he include all the water from showers, dishes, whirlpool(!), etc in his definition of sewage? If yes, I would have to agree that he's solved the septic issue, at least from an ethical perspective. But it would be extraordinarily expensive to transport all that water. So I wonder

If he NOT does ship include ALL the water he uses off the island by barge, we are back to my earlier post with the link to control water running into the lake.

Untreated shower water and the like is bad for the lake, and I'm grateful to the authorities for their enforcement efforts on this and the other environmental issues raised, such as expanding his footprint and building over public water.

Many island homes use holding tanks for both gray and black water. Yes it is emptied by a barge same as any island septic tank....

Dan

Last time I had a septic tank on an island pumped it was $1.00 per gallon. That being said it would get expensive to have holding tanks done frequently.

Yup, Fighting the state SUCKS, I spent 70k to save 80k, Even if you win you lose. The aggravation and time weren't worth the other 10.

I am an environmentalist, So I do have a tough time with some of this, But, when it comes to property rights I just don't trust the state ever to do the right things for the right reasons.

In Mass now you pretty much have to install a leach field for your roof drains when you build. Everything has to go into tanks and leach out through the soil. No more down spouts just pouring water on top of the ground. You have to make sure you're not killing any special bugs or animals with the water from your roof. Meanwhile the water from my street drains right out into the woods behind my house?

The article states the following:

His plan to remedy the situation calls for Brown to pay for erosion controls on the property, and to amend the deed to reflect that no additional changes to the size of the home can be made except for reconstruction within the existing footprint.

In return, the DES would agree to amend the consent decree to stop all fines immediately, reimburse any fines already collected, and remove any requirement to modify the existing structure

Now to me that sounds like a pretty reasonable and fair resolution. I'm sure now there has been a target on this property every item including the septic has been looked at and found to be acceptable or that certainly would be part of the mandatory fixes required. Far as what was done, I think like anyone else he pushed the envelope a bit but quite honestly look around the lake and tell me others haven't either. I'm surprised DES would return the fines already collected, wow don't see that everyday.

Think that island may need to be rezoned to "high density residential" :rolleye2:

Had to laugh Biggd at the irony of the new building codes for storm drains (your right - have to run through a leach field now)-- I too am in MA, live on a "Great Pond" and I watch all the rainwater from our street (starting 3 houses up) wash down the road until my driveway , whereupon it finds a path down my 120' driveway through my lawn and dumps straight into our Lake!

How's THAT for Environmental concern by the Town & State

Oh, and let me add -- I had the town install a "catch basin" at the top of my driveway (no Town sewer in my area)---- unfortunately it is full & overflowing halfway through any reasonable rain storm



.

Understood. But when they're doing the right thing, we should support them, right?

It's only a concern if they can make someone else pay for it.:(

According to the Union Leader article, stopping the fines and reimbursing fines already collected is part of a proposal from state Senator Bob Guida. I have a hard time believing that DES would accept that.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
 

Oh good, he has a $$$$$ politician $$$$$ working for him.

To my knowledge (I don't know him personally) Sen Guida is one of the least political, high constituent service, people in the legislature. I think he's just offering a compromise that works for all, as an "outside interest". I believe there's a lot more to this man, and hios family, than just being a politician.

Uh huh, sure he is. Random constituent, who just circumstantially has a lot of money, violates a consent decree and his solution is to rescue the violator saving him a bunch of $$$$$.
The day I dispute a parking ticket then fail to pay the fine and good ol Bob decides to intercede on my behalf with the court suggesting the solution is for the state to remove the fine and return my quarter from the meter that ran out I will believe this isn't those with power serving those with money.

"who just circumstantially has a lot of money"

That makes no sense.

You have no idea of who Robert Brown is and how he earned his money as a very successful businessman. You have no idea what other Lakes Region real estate he currently owns or who his business partners are.

Bob Guida graduated from the Naval Academy at Annapolis and after his Navy service served for many years as an FBI agent. He flies for Delta as a 777 Captain. He has started several successful businesses and he is a very accomplished individual who has earned every cent that he has.

Bob has obviously researched this matter and understands the issues involved and he has offered a solution in an effort to resolve the issue. That is called constituent service and it is what good politicians do.

You should be half as successful. Your jealousy is showing!

He is supporting a rich guy, because he is wealthy, who also happens to have violated the law...twice, at least. Well, the law, at least once, and the consent decree that came as a result of his breaking the law(s). What a GREAT GUY! All should be forgiven, because...well, he's wealthy...and, well, laws should not apply to wealthy people AND if they ever do apply then a polotician will jump in and make it all better for the wonderful, wealthy, scofflaw, because as I mentioned before, he's wealthy. Thats your point right? They both have GREAT resumes, so if they abuse their wealth and power, its ok?

And really, pulling out the "Your jealousy is showing" strategy of belittling what I said probably means the truth of what I wrote stung you enough to make you regress to your playground days.

Your immaturity is showing.

2 pieces of advice...

1. Wake up.
2. Grow up.

Why is everyone so mean on this forum. I mean come on now. It's just a forum to discuss lake issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You should heed your own advice. You, by far, are tops in the insult department on this forum.