The Dive?
 

Assessed value and market value are two entirely different values. Assessed values are usually less than market but when compared on a percentage basis to the market value the homes that have views or waterfront are higher or more closer to market than homes without any view.

And now back to your regularly scheduled thread [emoji23].

The lake is big with many coves and sandbars they really need to change locations daily as to be fare to people who live in those locations. As stated above if the State decides this business is too much of a distractions or nuisance they will not renew their license


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

My neighbors and I stare at that vinyl sided apartment building on the sandbar all day every day. Not to mention the rotating "Dive" sign and all the lights that are on until 9:30-10 pm. If it came in for a few hours and moved along....no problem.
That said I can't even imagine what the homeowners just outside Smalls Cove are thinking. They've gone from having a great view of the lake and watching the sunset from the end of their dock, to staring at that thing blocking their view.....all day!

I don't want it to fail, I'd just like to see it visit and move along.

We look at it directly across from or little island home and it is indeed an eyesore...daily! While I love seeing boaters at the sand bar. This thing is huge and seriously dampers the beautiful backdrop view we loved. That being said, I realize the business venture of The Dive and the boaters need/desire (who don't own land property) to have a service such as this. I feel if it would have a set schedule and not just be in Smalls Cove from 730 am to 1000 pm and rotate around to other locations, it wouldn't be such s big deal. At night, I can tell you the whole feel of looking out at the stars and moon is ruined by that stupid rotating neon sign.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Very commendable of you. Did you try contacting this to ask if they plan on moving around and rotating their locations? I would think they do not want a huge backlash or calls to the MP or State so they may react very favorably to a few owners in the Small Cove area voicing their concerns in a civil manner.

Dive moving around
 

Say the Dive was going to Braun Bay. How long would it take to go from WAM to Braun? It seems like it would be awful slow and maybe not feasible to go that far. There are not many areas it could go to be profitable. I think 3, Braun, Smalls, Margate sand bars and Braun, Margate maybe not feasible to go to, take too long to get there and back, also not sure how it would handle a rough water day were it to travel. Smalls maybe its only feasible option.

Dive
 

I do not want any good business in NH to fail, and agree with previous posts that the Dive should alternate their location to where boaters anchor rather than just being in Smalls Cove.... perhaps Wolfeboro or the bridge by Governors Island?

I dunno, man, shouldn't the operators of the Dive know enough not to bring that type of presence to that type of area all the time (the key is ALL the time). That would be akin to music-blasting-wake-surfing in Lee's Mills.

I'm on record as not loving The Dive idea--I don't think it matches the history and style of the lake--but also understand it's a business and that whether it succeeds or fails will depend on how many people like it (and I may very well be in the minority).

At the minimum, I think the operators should be thoughtful enough to consider their impact in terms of sight, sounds, lighting, traffic, and environment on the areas they are using.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

Uhhh...I don’t think the dive would make it under the Wiers channel bridge...

I haven't seen it up close but I doubt that would make it through the channel and under the Weirs bridge.:eek:

Am I correct that boat lighting is limited by law to approved navigation lights, i.e. one white light when anchored? Is there some special rule that would permit the extensive lighting on The Dive?

I would say it's the same set of rules that apply to the Mt. Washington.

I have no dog in this fight because I'm not on Winni but I really have to question the judgement of the officials that granted the permits for this floating monstrosity. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Hillcountry. Biggd
 

Then you have made my point, that eliminates another busy area they could move to if its even feasible distance wise or if it can handle a rough water day. Now we are down to 2 areas it could anchor that would make money, Smalls and Braun. And I seriously question if they would even consider Braun due to distance. At the speed it probably moves at it may take 3 hours to get there and 3 hours back and if its rough longer or maybe it can not even go on a rough day, can you imagine taking 3, 4 footers in the Broads that it could encounter.

Some one mentioned Wolfeboro or Govenors Island Bridge. They are never going to go there, not enough business and no sand bar so patrons or boat drivers can walk to it. Also do you need some kind of permitting in each town, inspections? Maybe other towns it would consider moving to will not allow it? Smalls maybe it. Maybe its not moving anywhere else.

A July 19 quote from myself ........ ho buoy ...... so very wack-a-doozie!:eek:

Maybe they should just scuttle it in the Witches and have rubber power rafts to bring the food out to your boat. :D

How's about stand up paddle boards paddled by servers who paddle with one arm, and support a bar tray with adult beverages with the other arm!

Sounds like a fun idea and the 60' barge could just drop anchor in deeper waters, and not be needing a shallow sandbar?:D

As Billy Preston sang....Will It Go Round In Circles?

"How's about stand up paddle boards paddled by servers who paddle with one arm, and support a bar tray with adult beverages with the other arm!"

Now I would pay to see that!

You can clearly tell it's a Monday...very cranky bunch with a clear NIMBY agenda. The same story with the speed limit, I don't like it so therefore lets pass a regulation so others can't enjoy the resource. :rolleye2:

Instead of complaining on the forum do something. If you don't like it and think it impacts your quality of life, well then you should not have purchased land on a public waterway. If you really believe it impacts your "view tax" then I'm sure you could easily sell it for a discount.

We can tell it's not parked in front of your waterfront.

The Town of Gilford does not have a view tax and the City of Laconia has never had a view tax.

In Gilford, if you are on the water it is assumed that you have a view and it is not spelled out or listed on your tax card. There may be properties, not on the water, that have "view" listed on their tax card for purposes of determining the value of the property but there is not a "view tax". Although the view may be used to help determine what the value of your property is, the assessed value is determined by the overall value of the property. The current Equalization Rate in Gilford is 95.9% and the tax rate is $17.26 per thousand.

I have properties on the water in Gilford and Laconia and the view is not now, and has never been, mentioned anywhere in the assessment including on the tax card.

A Have-Not
 

Clearly posted by a “Have-Not” verses the “Haves”

Although I am relieved that The Dive is not parking, and highly unlikely to ever park, in my backyard, I do not view this as a NIMBY issue. It is really an issue of how a state resource such as the Lake, which is in the nature of a park, should be used. It is more of a zoning issue, recognizing what is appropriate and respectful of the resource and all that use it.

LOL, clearly a TIC comment - and assuming it was directed at me. You've made it abundantly clear how pleasant you are. Don't pass judgement on things you clearly don't know anything about.

Be happy for what you have and if it doesn't meet your need then I say again do something about it.

No need for insults or personal sniping. The majority of the critical posts are from people who are nowhere near Smalls, and prior to the shortcomings becoming apparent, virtually all the posts were interested/supportive.

Also, before you accuse others of having an agenda to keep you from "enjoy(ing) the resource", you might ask yourself whether your neon sign or 80mph boat makes it difficult for them to enjoy the resource.

You should read this thread. I think you will find it interesting.

https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums...ment#post45649

You make some valid points. A lot of people are for it, some are against it. Those in the vicinity of where it's been for the past week are very vocal about being against it.

BTW - I personally love hearing and seeing the GFBL boats, and I recognize others don't. At some point we all need to find a happy medium, but creating a law seems overly restrictive (which is where this thread is headed).

I wouldn’t be surprised if, just like no rafting zone regs, something gets a hearing in January and severe limits are put on the Dive. I am a waterfront owner and sure wouldn’t want it in front of my place every night.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Perfect - so absolutely cripple a business venture and material investment of some young entrepreneurs because they obeyed the law and obtained all necessary permits/approvals.

I get the frustration from the landowner perspective even though it doesn't affect me, but maybe the landowner should've fought for a law before something like this happened. It's a slippery slope but the fact is these people were first to capture this opportunity and the landowners are behind. In my eyes, it wouldn't be fair to cripple the monetary amounts and time invested by these folks that started this business.

I like the concept and welcome it on the lake, however would be pissed if it was in front of my property every day. I assume they are still working out the bugs, and on better weather days they will venture out further. I am sure in Braun Bay this would do well. Its just a matter of getting it there. Leave early and stay late. If they tried to travel towards the Weirs Channel on a busy Saturday afternoon they are going to be in rough shape. Get there early and boat the crew out separately from a closer location so they are not eating so much in labor while traveling (unless they have guests along for the ride).

Lets face it, the weather hasn't been great for the last week. If on every nice weekend this is sitting at West Alton they better rethink their plan.

If they got this approved without stating that it will be in this spot only there is no way in hell it would get approved, if it did and the land owners weren't notified, then they have every right to be pissed. I don't think they built this thing to sit at that sandbar only, That would be insane. Any one who calls this a NIMBY issues is full of crap, you would complain just as much.

The forum is 80% bitch session and 20% other. There are people out there literally trolling for a comment to invect upon. Sad but reliable responses as I'm sure will follow this one.

This statement makes absolutely zero sense...consider re-wording if you're trying to state that it wouldn't have been approved if they stated it would only stay in one place.

Separately - why do the landowners need to be notified if this is a vessel on the water?

I stand by my NIMBY comment above, that being said....

This business will have about 6 weeks of operation this season. Technically a ground-up build with no real chance to "shake out the bugs" other than to operate for a short [less than 2 months] season.

To spend that time testing what various land owners near various sand bars think of the business is [silly]. A better effort would be to spend those short weeks to see what improvements need to be made to keep the business viable.

I do agree that they should factor in the desires of various land owners, but I doubt many would give them a "thumbs up". Lucky for them, The State of NH and its citizens owns the water.

I would LOVE to see your "Zoning" proposal for each and every city/town with waterfront access.

Edit:
Not just Winnipesaukee.... that would be "unfair" to others.

It's a little more than a vessel on the water, Making a statement like that invalidates any opinion you offer. Would they notify them if they said the Mount is going to parked there forever? I meant exactly what i said.

You misunderstand my point. Almost every year it seems a group of property owners get together to petition for a no rafting zone and the DES/state schedule the hearing in December or January when no one is around to oppose. With no opposition it passes. I can see the same thing happening with the Dive if the continue to anchor in the same place, bothering the same people.

My other comment: I own waterfront but nowhere near where they are. I wouldn’t want them in front of me.

In the long run, I think the issues will be resolved during re-permitting. This is obviously a new and different venture and the state didn’t know all the questions to be asked or what all the issues might be. After several months of operation they will be better informed.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I know I would be pi$$ed if it was parked all day in front of my waterfront home. I don't think it should have been permitted in the first place but now that it is and they hear the complaints hopefully the issues can be resolved.

The details are beyond my pay grade and expertise. The issue will not be resolved in this forum. I will rely on those directly affected to bring the issue before the appropriate public officials and I look forward to seeing their response.

If you are of the opinion that it should not have been permitted there would need to be a valid legal reason to deny them. I don't want to see them on my favorite sandbar or anchored in front of my house is not sufficient reason to stop them from their business venture.

If they did get denied in the future for the renewal of any of the necessary food, alcohol, or other permits they could point to the Mt Washington and claim they were doing the same thing (selling food and alcohol) but in a different manner. That might give them significant legal grounds to stand up to any challenge.

If it is a financial success, and that remains to be seen, it will take violations of regulations or other significant complaints with a legal basis to stop them from continuing to do business. Otherwise it is here to stay.

Only time will tell.