Ugly in Alton
 

Here's a house that is near the top of the list for ugly. I bet they think it looks nice with a now denuded hillside too. They should be ashamed. I wonder what state the owners are from? This was taken with a point and shoot digital camera and boat was bouncing around (from last Sunday). Haze is from the Canadian wildfires.

Maybe we should have a "best" and "worst" of the lake?

If they're paying lake front property taxes on those monstrosities, they're BEAUTIFUL to me... ;):)

lawn psycho. I don't think that's very nice to post someone's house and say it or the yard is ugly. I would feel terrible is someone posted my house and said it was ugly. Think how you would feel. After reading your posts of late, I think you have something against people who live on the lake. Do you? And if so why?

It's not the house that is ugly. It's the way they have stuck it on the shores of beautiful Lake Winnipesaukee with complete disregard for esthetics and complete disregard for concerns regarding runoff and ecological buffering.

Only thing I see wrong is the need for the lots to be completely clear cut. It's an eyesore and takes away from the natural beauty of the lake and surrounding hills. I wish those that want to build places like this would have some due consideration in how they opt to develop property so that it isn't so shall we say ostentatious? A few trees left around the houses could have been done as to not take away any views but would make a world of difference in helping to blend in such development with the surrounding woodlands.

lawn psycho, please post some pics of your house. I'm sure it's perfect:rolleye1:

Read the post by Jonas above. The way they cleared that hillside is ridiculus.

My house does not sit on a clear-cut and denuded hillside that scars a shorefront and contributes to run-off. In fact, my shrub beds are designed to prevent run-off.

Maybe fear of having their hideous house blasted on the local forum will make people stop and consider what the h***they are doing.
Just 'cause you can, doesn't mean ya should.

It does show that money and taste can be mutually exclusive.
All these places need now are fences on their roofs.

Maybe it is the house in front of the monstrosity who owns the land down to the water and he clear cut his land to get a quick peek of the lake. Even tiny house owners enjoy lake views:rolleye2:

Thought...
 

Money talks.

Actually, if they had money they could have hired a good landscape architect to keep a substantial natural buffer and still get decent views.

the most ugliest house I ever saw
 

That is the most ugliest house I ever saw,,,

In fact its so ugly,,,, they should leave the lake with their head down in shame and pay me to quietly take it off their hands !!!

Ya that would fix em real good,,, :D

Not the homeowner!
 

It is the town, in this case Alton, who did not and still does not have the forethought to prevent clear cutting some of our most beautiful resources, our scenic vistas in the town of Alton.

Want an even better example: Look at Lakewood Estates. This is the area that as you come down Alton bay, you see the clear cutting and homes on the hill to the right of Sandy Point. You also get a good look at this area driving on Rte 11 coming into Alton from Rochester...The homes that look down at the end of the bay stick out like a sore thumb three or more miles from the bay.:(

The town needs to protect our area by maintaining green space in any new developments. And we worry about the sight of a single cell tower ruining the scenic views in the area of the bay.

Yes dear, get me the step ladder so I can get down off my soap box.:rolleye1:

So is it the houses that are a problem or the landscaping?

Because who knows what the front or roadside of these places look like - they might be perfect from another view... but perhaps seem awkwardly placed from the lake-view...

Just me playin' devil's advocate here... :) (no ill-will intended, in other words...)

But... I gotta ask...

How do you know that clear cutting was done? ;) (You may have seen the Bay long before I grew roots here... )

Could it be that this lot was cleared prior to the houses being placed on the lot and/or renovated? :rolleye2::confused:

(In other words, any variances could be grand-fathered in... before there was a Master Plan for zoning, this is entirely possible... you'd be amazed at what used to be allowed and much has/is being done to change that by the ZBA/Planning.)

For the record, I know nothing about the history of those houses nor any renovations. But I do know that plans sometimes go thru for making Aunt & Uncle Brown's cute little rustic camp on Winnipesaukee into a 3,000 sq. ft, year-round, 5-bedroom house with new septic, parking etc., can be done with creative engineering, some variance approvals, and grandfathering...

p.s.
Lakewood was approved in 2001 - I think Alton has revised the master plan since then.

no ill will taken :)
 

The new subdivision up by Miramichi Rd off 28 and above 28A is a good amount of clear cutting.

I was told that Lakewood has some kind of covenant that your house can not block the view of your neighbors up hill from you. And Rand Hill was indeed fully wooded before the subdivision was approved.

The houses in the pictures were clear cut down to the lake when the houses were built. (There is a house in the vicinity of the Cascades that is above 28A that is clear cut almost all the way from the house to 28A. Nice view for the homeowner:rolleye1:).

"Gentrification"—This Lake's "End Game"...
 

1) Both Alton houses in the photograph are beyond the reach of DES and are probably "perfectly legal": The trend is troubling, however, as both structures bring the problems of "Suburban Sprawl" to our area. (With added leachates, traffic snarls, water quality crashes and where Pigeons replace songbirds). :(

2) It's not just one house—it's the process of building and damaging our environment. (Also known as "Gentrification").

And it's not just Alton—a new house went up on Rattlesnake Island after I'd taken this photograph. (One of two scarified lots there). The new lot remains the same—and last year, the new house was for sale. :confused:

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...1&d=1207060968

3) I call waterfront homes the "First Tier" of Lake Winnipesaukee's homes. Those behind—and beyond control of DES—I call "the Second Tier".

Look to Thomas Point as an example:

An approved "replacement" boathouse blocks the "Broads" view of several abutters. (Though I'm located a mile away, that boathouse somewhat impinges even my view of The Broads!) :rolleye1:

Behind the abutters, a second tier of homes is appearing—while whole groves of White Pines were flattened. The new houses will have a better view of the lake—than if they were lakefront! :eek2:

(Isn't anybody in charge in Tuftonboro?) :confused:

4) It's not just Alton.

Wolfeboro Town Hall has a new pamphlet that bemoans the green lawns that are replacing natural forest. (But the pamphlet mostly decries the doubling of year-round Canada Geese flocks which are browsing and propagating on Wolfeboro's ultra-green lakeside lawns).

Wolfeboro's message? String wires to block "lawn access" to Canada Geese. :rolleye2:

5) Lake Psycho has been consistent in decrying the poor environmental management of Winnipesaukee's hillside shorelines: even recent "second-growth" forest is being replaced by the Climax Forest of new hardwoods.

Check out the light-green Spring growth [of hardwoods] shown in the attached photograph:

Pictured is a segment of a mile-long roadway cut through acres of White Pines. This allows access for bulldozers and front-end loaders to access that shore's "Second Tier" of new homesites and to scarify those lots into moonscapes.

A Climax Forest is the "end-game" for forests. In the absence of forest fire, evergreens will not recover their former territory.

And it's the evergreens that have been protecting Winnipesaukee's water quality. :(

So I will ask the same question as a couple of others. Is it the house you think is ugly or the landscaping? I don't think the landscaping is pretty either, but you don't know why. Maybe they aren't finished, maybe they are not allowed, noone really knows do they?

I agree with big Razor. Show us a picture of you house.

HELLO, McFLY? It's the hillside that got scraped off..... The house is just blah as you can't get past the naked hillside every time you float by the place. I think NH needs to clamp down on development around the lake. Once you wipe off the shoreline like this, it's too late. There are many, many places that are looking like this.

I'll keep the photos going throughout the season.....

Here's my house. Talk about a view!

Wow I guess I better not put up my new house too close to the water...

http://www.costaverde.com/727/727main1.jpg

Oh come on now.....:D

I'm sure when complete it will be spectacular ! Landscape is last... duh......

The stone work and site work is far from over... no one would spend that amount of money and not complete it beautifully !!!

By next year it will be all grown in & probably lovely to look at & enjoy...

Typically landscaping gets wiped out of construction budgets as the cost over runs and change orders deplete what the owners have for budgets.

Are they going to cut down and then replace full-size trees and then replant them into what is now a rock-strewn hillside? I'll believe it when I see it.....

The houses might be out of the reach of the 250' buffer, but the landscaping is definately not.

That landscaping is done. I do not see a single tree planted in any of those beds. Lots of ground cover with no height changes throughout the scape.

LP is correct that landscape budgets are typically the first thing cut from a budget when the budget is to big to begin with. The reason for that is almost every homeowner thinks that they can landscape (same goes for painting). Nothing ruins a beautiful project faster than a poor job of landscaping or painting. It is the first thing people see and they can never move past it.


Argies Wife, the comment about the front of the house (meaning roadside) possibly being better needs to be corrected. The first thing that you are taught when starting a degree in design or architecture is that the front of the house is what ever side you want it to be and there can and should be more than one. That is the theory of architecture, to maximize the use of the structure while drawing occupants to the right places without making those spots stand out like a sore thumb.

The thought that someone would make the roadside of the house beautiful and leave the lake side looking less than appealing is poor planning on the part of the architect and likely owners that did not know enough or could not visualize from a planset. Some clients really have no idea what they are getting until they can see it in completion. No matter if the drawings are a 3D rendering, they still can't see it. I am talking in a general scope and not about the posted house and I am not saying owners are at fault for not being able to visualize the final product, but someone that gets entrusted with making their dreams come true failed at taking care of their client.

In a properly planned project schedule, landscaping is not last. The finish carpenters do not lay stone and the landscapers do not paint. Both the completion of the interior and exterior should progress at the same rate to allow for a final CoO inspection and the builder starts the clock on the warranty for everything at the same time. Otherwise, things get messy and put off for too long.

it appears as if lawn psycho is not only cruising the lake taking pictures of any infraction he see's but also of ugly houses! Lawn psycho maybe it's time to find another hobby?? :laugh:

If a house is ugly or not is in the eye of the beholder. However why do they have to take down every freakin tree? It does make it look ugly. I think it is a case of HEY LOOK AT ME. Having said that I have driven by Bill Gates house on Lake Washington and you can't even see it. I guess when you reach a certain income level there is no more need to show off!

Is this a little better?

http://i960.photobucket.com/albums/ae86/NHtech/Ugly.jpg

Take it however you want.

Actually I like to take images of plants and landscapes. Then I come across a place like this and ask, "what were they thinking?"

Imagine what the lake would look like if every house did this.

trees
 

Ugly or not it is really just math with the trees as far as the DES and shorelands protection act lays it out.

50 ft from shore you need 50 pts in a 50' x 50' area starting at the northerly or easterly boundry of the property (circumfrance of tree defines how many points you get for that particular tree)

I don't know how wide the property is but there appear to be a bunch of trees on the edges and shore area. Not saying it looks pretty but they may have left enough to pass the points test and still give themselves a view. The sections up to 150 ft from shore and then 250 need a certain percentage left unaltered, again, not knowing where the edges of the property are, maybe they left all of the side area unaltered.

Project may have been developed prior to July 1 2008, if so scrap the above info....

According to the DES info, style and design preference is not regulated

Keep going.

This is costing me a lot of money to plant these full grown trees.

http://i960.photobucket.com/albums/a...ech/Ugly-1.jpg

if you look closely at the photo, it looks like they built a winding path from the large house to the shore. This may be to allow easier access to the shore. Most of the houses that high have long wooden staircases.

Now if the guy is handicapped and can not walk down 70 feet of stairs, doesn't he deserve the right to build a wheelchair ramp? Or maybe it's a golf cart ramp. Still he bought waterfront property, he has the right to use it.

I think both houses are real nice looking. Maybe Clark Griswold could decorate them with lights for Christmas. :D Possibly the owners will become permanent residents and go to town meeting and try to tell people how Alton needs to "improve". ;)

Now, the landscaping, that is another matter.... :eek:

So quick to judge
 

Why are people so quick to judge without knowing all the facts. And why once again are we bashing out of state people.

The photo is a little deceiving. The property to the right has stairs. You might make it down but you will have a heart attack to go back up.

The little house near the shore has been there at least 22 years because that is how long I've been here to see it. There was always a dirt road down to the little house from the top and enough trees cut that you could see the erosion coming down. The house on top completely renovated the dirt road with a fairly sophisticated, elaborate and I'm sure expensive terraced pathway. It looks no wider than for a golf cart and is all grass on the path. They have been working on this for a couple of years so the end of the path is probably 50 feet from the water which was the old std before SPA. They have eliminated all erosion, have planted scrubs, flowers, and plants.

Since the bulk of the trees were gone for some time now I think they did the absolute best they could with what was left.


Also, once again there is this out of state bash that seems to emanate in this forum - "I wonder what state he is from". Why is that any issue. If he is a native then what he did is OK, or if he was a native he wouldn't have done it. Eventhough I went to High School here I am still not a native, and I do drive up from the dreaded state of MA every weekend. I will tell you that I have more respect, pride and well being for this lake then any of my "native" neighbors and I know many more of my fellow bashees that feel the same. I am growing tired of the stereotype.

Other reasons
 

A former neighbor of ours clear cut almost all the tall white pines within falling distance to their house. Seems they went through a winter storm where a couple of the tall pines fell and missed their house by inches. Not saying it doesn't look like cr*p now, but I wasn't in the house when the pines fell around them. Sometimes people have reasons for doing things that are not clearly understood by others.

Ugly in Alton
 

I wish my summer cottage was as ugly as that one. :D But seriously...looking at that picture, it looks like the landscaping is a work in progress, doesn't it?

Homes on the Lake
 

I hope it is a work in progress.

One beef I have regarding homes on our great lake is if the back of the house is facing the lake, make it look as good as the front of the home.

Actually RG the side facing the lake in my family was always called the front, e.g. Lake Front property. But you are correct, everyone should try to make it look nice.

Well, some of the old boat houses that are right on the lake and falling into the lake is what I call ugly !!!

Owners ..Get the proper permitting from the state and fix them up !!( going to take a few years but fix them up )

Now, those are ugly and sending debris into the lake.. boards, etc. & dangerous.

I do not understand the purpose of this thread? At best it seems in poor taste to the owners of the homes being discussed. Why would someone post a picture of two homes and then be so insulting? Is this type of attack allowed on the forum?
No one even seems to know what happened or why?

How do you give a thank-you?
I can't give a thank you but I can say Bravo !!

When is enough, enough?
 

The continuing degradation of our lake isn’t just limited to water quality, irresponsible behavior or declining manors. Many of us are concerned that the progressive decline in the quality of the visual aspects of our shoreline are not be in the best interest for the future of our lake. Where and when does it stop. Should we just accept ridge line development. Should we ignore clear cutting beyond the boundaries of the Shore Land Protection Act? Do we just keep accepting any and all things that will be unchangeable once they have been committed? Lake Winnipesaukee is special because it is different from other lakes. Should we not speak out when we see these aberrations taking place?

Whatever the style, there is scale, proportion, applied ornamentation, site placement, juxtaposition of elements, and other standard design elements that have been dispensed with in many of the lake properties, including this one (these two). The lack of design (again, whatever the "style") is unfortunate.

No more posts, please
 

:(I agree with those that think this thread is going nowhere! I urge no more posting to this thread and it will die a very quick death.

Hey Lawn Psycho-

While you make a point with the original post of the clear cut lots and your example is one of many that could be submitted for ridicule, that's fine to a point. But really..... is it necessary to post pictures of everything you find "tacky","odd" or in some other way unacceptable to you now? Respectfully I think you really ought to knock it off.

Pineedles... I couldn't have said it better myself!

In the spirit of "Winni".

I could live here.

Yo Mama..
 

I feel like there should be a line of You Momma jokes inserted, replacing "house" for "Mama".

Your house is so ugly... when it joined an ugly contest, they said "Sorry, no professionals."

Pay Taxes to View...Garages...?
 

:confused: That would mean...I would have to find a new hobby, too? :(

Why? Maybe, just maybe, it will make other people think about what they do while building around the lake.

Being on the shore front and then asking for 'privacy' after clear cutting your lot is a bit like an A-listed movie star complaining about not being able to go out in public without people noticing them all the time.

Nice setting but I would prefer a natural pine needle covering versus a fertilized lawn.

just my 2 cents
 

I agree clear cutting in many cases needs to be done to avoid trees falling in a storm. While I would hope that many people would make sure they brought back the asthetics to their property to have it fit in with its natural surroundings, each person has their own say in what is done to their property and what they like.

That being said I feel there has been some outrageous examples of people clear cutting, then not completing the job, which should be illegal frankly. A perfect example is the scar on Red Hill. This area, i have heard, was purchased by a developer which unfortunately went belly up. However the land has been stripped to the rock which has not grown back in at least 5 years because the topsoil has washed away. Although not on the lake, it is visable by almost the entire north west portion.

Issues like this is a major reason why "protective" laws have been enacted that have made it so difficult to build on the lake. However it also makes it difficult for the regular property owner to legally develop their property. Case in point: I have a friends where it took over 2 years to add a 150 square foot addition on the back of their house to make their bathroom bigger. Because they were on the lake it took 2 years and upwards of 100 hours of doing the planning and submitting the paperwork to get approved. Apparently you have to now count and measure the diameter of every tree and count every shrub. Apparently if one were to hire a surveyor to do the leg work for a permit you are looking at $7500!!

So I am not commenting on whether I believe someone's house is "ugly" etc. and I am not for more legislation, but there has to be a fine line between asking for laws to protect against clear cutting and restrictions that are outrageous for and everyday land owner without thousands to invest.

OCD you describe the results of these poorly written laws, average Joe's cannot do minor changes because of the cost of proving they comply with the draconian laws. Big guys with money can hire experts to get whatever they want.

and....
 

Your house is so dirty....you have to wipe your feet before you go outside

You need a different hobby.

self reflect
 

I always find people's inability to self reflect on the fact that every house on the lake is part of a development (maybe not in peoples current definition, but still the same) It is all rather short sighted. That fact remains that just about everything around the lake (and all of NH) was really clear cut 100 years ago. There was not a tree on all of Gov. Island.
All neighborhoods have the same natural progression and mentality, as soon as one person moves in, no one else is allowed, create regs to keep them out, and ridicule them since their new house wasn't built at the dawn of time.

Also I find this thread in very poor taste

So I guess anyone who complains or has a counter-point to anything should get a new hobby?

Usually when people don't have a valid argument they try and marginalize the topic.

Please explain why?

I think everyone needs to step back from their keyboards and take a breath.

I don't believe L.P. has bad intentions towards the said house. I think he was just using it as an example of what he believed to be an eye sore but not intended to insult the property owner. (at least that's how I read it)

The discussion of clear cutting and errosion is something that effects everyone in the lakes region whther it be the property owner, boater, other land owner, or visitor to the lake.

While I don't condone the thread going personal i.e. asking for pictures of his personal property. I do think he has brought to light a very good discussion concerning keeping the lakes region asthetically pleasing and not over run by over eager developers.

Perhaps the title of the thread could be changed to portray the issue, but I think the discussion is something that can be benificial to all and opinions shared.

Ok.. back to the keyboards and let the firing commence. :D

here's why
 

Ridiculing someones (probably) prized possession in a public forum with photographs is in poor taste and if you can not see that then it only reaffirms my take on your taste in things and mental outlook. Offering your opinion in a private setting is one thing, but if I owned that property (and it is clear that the landscaping is yet to grow in) I would probably want that photo taken down, and/or wonder who you are.
Again if the reason for publicly bashing someone elses property being in poor taste to you, is something you need explained to you, you are beyond my help. (and I think you know why it is and you are just try to stir things up on here, come on);)

OCD, I agree-fully the discussion should be had, just not like this.

house vs lots
 

I have watched those two houses work for a few years now, and I believe the frontage (lake) is getting better they work on it every year and not just a little. The street side of the house is not all that big, and it is close to the road. Every house can be ugly to someone. I think in time the houses and lots will look fine. Yes they took down trees and I do not like that, but they are putting up rocks and other things to keep the land from going into the lake. Perhaps Nature would have been better, but recently I have been told that many of the big pines that are actually on sand are hollow and could be dangerous.

That is not my intention. Let me be blunt.

Usually when adults have a concern with something they do some background work before posting on public forums. That said the fact that you think it is ugly is your right to say so however where is your proof other than it is your opinion that this house is causing any harm to the environment or water quality? Are they violating any laws? Did you even bother to check? If so what are they? Did you contact the town of Alton for the opinion of the building/code officer? I think we all know the answer to those questions.

Since taste has no definition, I question your word choice. Someone above also said "classless" which I would also argue is a poor word choice as it can't truly be defended. I actually laughed out loud at that post. I'll save you the debate on this as it can be quite an intellectual exercise.

I stand 100% behind my post that the hillside is an example of what should not happen on the lake. I also think the thought of having their own house being posted is what is getting people's feather ruffled.

If they improve it to add trees and vegetation, that would go a long way towards preserving both the lake and surrounding aesthetics. Again, I'll believe it when I see it.

HOWEVER, suppose someone is seen on the lake doing something that the photographer found of interest. Now suppose the subject in the photograph complains about being called out (snowmobile skimmer, on plane too close to shore, rafting, anchoring too close). Should that be removed? Do you support censoring?

rain -> No/little vegetation -> hard surfaces (rocks) -> steep slope -> run-off

I haven't gotten he answer on the laws yet. And FYI, I do my homework. May want to be careful about running at the mouth and search some of my previous posts as I find out the facts.

Congrats Lpsycho on another WEIRD thread. I thought after the infamous "Girl Scout Cookie thread" you may have learned something about proper behavior in a public forum. Do you "get" how off-putting it is to go around taking pictures of private property and then post them on this forum for you to make an example of ?

Glad you admitted you have no facts. :)

Thanks for reminding me about that. Maybe we can coat the hillside in trans fat:laugh:

Being that this is a good topic (not really thread, but the topic has merit), I would like to talk about some issues and ideas. Anyone want to join in, feel free. It is not tied to the current bantering and I will ask to have my post moved to a new thread if that is more comfortable.


One thing to consider when cutting trees around ones home is that not all trees are a danger to a structure. Pines, well the roots spread out and not down, plus pines prefer and do much better when grouped together. They use each other to keep from breaking off in higher winds, so if you start taking down large established trees, you really need to remove most of them.

Hardwoods that are healthy, do not have a V 20' up the trunk will most likely never come crashing down. The root system on maples for example, penetrate down and out, creating a very stable base for a tree that can grow very large.

Alot of what we have around here is granite. Trees that grow over the top of and around large pieces of rock tend to be very unstable, no matter what the native species.

All to often when working with clients I hear them talk about wanting all the trees cleared out of the way, so that they can see the view of the Lake. It is typically at that point that we will discuss other alternatives to doing this. Some trees are completely in the way of things and those need to come out, others can be pruned to a high height to allow for the view and still keeping some shade and shadowing on the lot. Another thing that is more typical is to bring in trees that are 8-10 year growth, plant them in an area that allows for pleasing views and does not make the lot seem brand new.

Really who wants to sit on a deck that is constanted blasted by the sun.

It is all about planning ahead of time to construct a home that fits with the site you have. So many times we have folks walk in with a set of plans that they bought off the internet and take us to a lot that is a complete nightmare to try and fit the style of house on. These are the homes that in general look like they do not belong and give folks a bad taste about them. Some serious time and thought in the beginning can go a long way to creating a beautiful setting when complete. These things do not cost an arm and a leg either. Instead of setting you heart on a solid home design first, walk in with a few different choices of what you like and then adjust the one that works with the lot to fit your needs and desires.

It is all about planning, but in todays day and age, folks are in such a rush that they try to skip as many steps as possible to get to the end game. That typically results is homes that most folks do not care to look at.

Think about almost every home that really appeals to you around the lake, they all just seem like they belong and blend. Even Mark's monster SF house on GI has a pleasing fit to the landscape. Other than the size of the home, they all seem to have one thing in common, small scale exteriors and landscaping that tones them down even further.

That is the mark of a truely well developed piece of property.

Question and then rhetorical statement.

I respond to said question, and then you state I had no facts. Nice try but not very clever.

You presumed I did not do any diligence. My answer is I am waiting for the response. You were wrong.

Looks like we have a troll here folks. Nice try on the diversion regarding facts. :laugh:

back on topic please!
 

Jmen, first let me thank you for your truely informative post.

From your experience have you seen the new watershed regulations to have a negative impact on permits and construction? Would you catagorize it as being over bearing and too expensive? Also, do you think that the there is also a need for these types of laws for construction away for the lake shoreline to avoid clear cutting? Lastly, do you know of any fines or penaltys now in place that may be imposed on instances as I mentioned before where Redhill was clear cut then left with nothing?

Sorry to pick your brain but it seems like you have a handle on the situation.

Thanks

And then he goes back to the marginalize tactic... Troll? Are you dressed as another poster that loves to use that mode of operandi?

I'll stay on point. DEJ, explain where the water that starts on the top of hill ends up (without defying any known physical law).