Fundamentally, to me at least, is that this structure is nowhere near the original, which was what the permits said: "the original wetlands notification included the statement, “Replace an existing shoreland structure which was collapsed by snow load with a new structure in exact location and height.”
This appears to be a case of someone who keeps talking until he hears what he wants. The article is also very one-sided and makes it appear that the only issue was setting it back 10'.
It would appear to me--after reading the article, looking at the photos, and hearing people's comments--that the owners tried to get a "house" in place of a "boathouse."
I hope they have to dismantle it.
Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk
|