New Fire Tower on Red Hill?

[The Eagle]

I have heard there is a new "LARGE" Fire Tower on Red Hill, that is causing some controversy in town, but I haven't seen it. Does anyone know anything about it? I heard it's privately owned, on a private road, so it's hard to get photos. Anyone?
The Eagle

[songkrai]

It used to be the state that manned the tower.
The state discontinued all mountain top tower watching.
Then the Town of Moultonborough decided to man the tower at town taxpayer expense. A fully trained full time Moultonborough fire fighter.

[sky's]

where can you see this tower?

[Lakesrider]

And how can a town employee payed by town taxes be working on private property?

[Winnisquamguy]

Originally Posted by Lakesrider

And how can a town employee payed by town taxes be working on private property?

Maybe they have a right of way?

[The Eagle]

From what I was told, it is not a "public Tower," but someone with lots of money built one, just for themselves. (sort of like a "Sun Deck" high up in the air. I heard it was over 30 feet square, and was told you could see it from "Bucky's". I looked yesterday, from one part of the parking lot, but and the trees were now all open, so I couldn't see it. I hope I can see it from my boat in a couple weeks. Thought maybe someone may have seen it and taken a photo.
The Eagle

[secondcurve]

Originally Posted by The Eagle

From what I was told, it is not a "public Tower," but someone with lots of money built one, just for themselves. (sort of like a "Sun Deck" high up in the air. I heard it was over 30 feet square, and was told you could see it from "Bucky's". I looked yesterday, from one part of the parking lot, but and the trees were now all open, so I couldn't see it. I hope I can see it from my boat in a couple weeks. Thought maybe someone may have seen it and taken a photo.
The Eagle

What about the "old" Red Hill tower? Is it still open? There was a nice guy that used to man the tower. Is he still there?

[wifi]

can be found here

Yes, the same watchman, Ed, mans it.

The top of RH is owned by the LRCT and leases the tower back to the town

You can see it on Rt 25, coming into town from Center Harbor, to the left of "the saddle"

[VitaBene]

I am not sure where a new tower might be, but I can see the town tower from my window as I type. Ed sees all... and knows if you have a fire permit or not!

[gus62]

Sky- is this the one that you built and have pictures on your website? Looks great!

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Originally Posted by The Eagle

From what I was told, it is not a "public Tower," but someone with lots of money built one, just for themselves. (sort of like a "Sun Deck" high up in the air. I heard it was over 30 feet square, and was told you could see it from "Bucky's". I looked yesterday, from one part of the parking lot, but and the trees were now all open, so I couldn't see it. I hope I can see it from my boat in a couple weeks. Thought maybe someone may have seen it and taken a photo.
The Eagle

Can you be more specific? Is this "new tower" a stand alone or part of a structure? What is the controversy?

As previously stated, most of Red Hill is owned by the LRCT and it is unlikely that they would build a tower.











wha

[Dave M]

Are you able to still walk up the trails to the fire tower being private property.

Dave M

[gus62]

www.skyscarpentry.com

go to the above site and click on recent projects/ fire tower.

Is this the one you are talking about?

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Originally Posted by gus62

www.skyscarpentry.com

go to the above site and click on recent projects/ fire tower.

Is this the one you are talking about?

Thanks for the link. I assume that this is the structure referred to by Eagle. Although I have not looked at the building permit nor do I know the exact location, it appears to be well within zoning regulations. I must be missing something since I fail to see what the problem is.

[The Eagle]

Hi Gang,
That is the Fire tower, I heard about, at http://www.skyscarpentry.com/
The "potential Problem," I heard about was the proper building permits were not had, and the tower has a potential to slide, if there is any "Mud Slides," and that some kinnd of retainer wall has to now be built. Other than that....I wouldn't mind having one of them in my yard!
The Eagle

[Happy Gourmand]

Originally Posted by The Eagle

Hi Gang,
That is the Fire tower, I heard about, at http://www.skyscarpentry.com/
The "potential Problem," I heard about was the proper building permits were not had, and the tower has a potential to slide, if there is any "Mud Slides," and that some kinnd of retainer wall has to now be built. Other than that....I wouldn't mind having one of them in my yard!
The Eagle

Maybe you should have expressed your concerns to the proper authorities rather than post on a public forum? I'm certain that you could obtain the information in a manner that would not jeopardize the reputation of a local builder and perhaps cause some issues with the homeowner.
In light of the visibility of the project, I can't imagine that the owner or the builder would proceed without all the proper approvals.

[jmen24]

Originally Posted by The Phantom Gourmand

Maybe you should have expressed your concerns to the proper authorities rather than post on a public forum? I'm certain that you could obtain the information in a manner that would not jeopardize the reputation of a local builder and perhaps cause some issues with the homeowner.
In light of the visibility of the project, I can't imagine that the owner or the builder would proceed without all the proper approvals.

Also would like to add that there are times when the customer takes full responsibility for the permitting. The times when that is requested by a client, it is clearly stated that the customer is responsible in the contract. The opportunity to put the responsibility onto someone else's shoulders, has passed.

It should not be assumed that the builder is at fault for permitting issues, until you can factually prove otherwise!

[wifi]

Originally Posted by The Eagle

.....The "potential Problem," I heard about was......

We don't even know there IS a problem, its just gossip, at this point.

[The Eagle]

WHOA Guys, (Phanthom)..
I do NOT have any problem with the tower, nor the building of it. I only heard rhumors, about "potential Problems," and when someone asked what I heard, I answered them. My ONLY question was "What does it look like!" It sounded pretty neat, and wanted to SEE IT, NOT debate about who, what ,when, or where it was built. Sorry for the misdirection of my post.
The Eagle

[Rusty]

Basically the structure is a freestanding deck that sits on a hill.

I don't particularly care for the amount of cantilever that the floor joist have, but I guess if the code allows that much then it is probably OK. The joist to the post supports (angle braces) that are made from logs don't look like they are doing much in way of support. Joist to posts (angle braces) need to be @ 45 degrees and attached properly to do any good.

[secondcurve]

There are many "experts" on the Forum today. The fire tower/observation deck is obviously someone's dream structure. My personal opinion is that it looks amazing and clearly a lot of thought and workmanship went into its creation. I have never used Shaun at Sky's but I did have him quote a project several years ago and he was competitive and professional. He came in a close second losing to someone that had previously done work for me. I am sure Shaun is proud of what he created and my guess is that the homeowner is quite happy with the final product.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

There are many "experts" on the Forum today. The fire tower/observation deck is obviously someone's dream structure. My personal opinion is that it looks amazing and clearly a lot of thought and workmanship went into its creation. I have never used Shaun at Sky's but I did have him quote a project several years ago and he was competitive and professional. He came in a close second losing to someone that had previously done work for me. I am sure Shaun is proud of what he created and my guess is that the homeowner is quite happy with the final product.

I'm not an "expert", but looking at the overhang (cantilever) of the floor, IMHO it could use some better knee or Y bracing that would prevent lateral movement.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by Rusty

I'm not an "expert", but looking at the overhang (cantilever) of the floor, IMHO it could use some better knee or Y bracing that would prevent lateral movement.

I've done some work on Kanastaka and you can clearly see the fire tower on Red hill so this one must be on the opposite side of the hill facing away from the lake.
If you read into some of the descriptions of how it was built it does state that a lot of extra work was done to put it up and make it structurally safe including special materials brought in from Canada.
Rusty I know you just love to tear up anyone's post you disagree with on this web site, but just because a structure looks like it may be unsafe to you does not mean that it isn't above and beyond actually be safe.

[sky's]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

There are many "experts" on the Forum today. The fire tower/observation deck is obviously someone's dream structure. My personal opinion is that it looks amazing and clearly a lot of thought and workmanship went into its creation. I have never used Shaun at Sky's but I did have him quote a project several years ago and he was competitive and professional. He came in a close second losing to someone that had previously done work for me. I am sure Shaun is proud of what he created and my guess is that the homeowner is quite happy with the final product.

thank you for your mature and "non-ego" response always appreciated in any discussion. best wishes

[sky's]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

I've done some work on Kanastaka and you can clearly see the fire tower on Red hill so this one must be on the opposite side of the hill facing away from the lake.
If you read into some of the descriptions of how it was built it does state that a lot of extra work was done to put it up and make it structurally safe including special materials brought in from Canada.
Rusty I know you just love to tear up anyone's post you disagree with on this web site, but just because a structure looks like it may be unsafe to you does not mean that it isn't above and beyond actually be safe.

thank you BR. for your "non-ego" response also. this structure has over 300 bags of 5000 psi cement between the 4 very large footings that holds this down. i wish i could share this structure with everyone but it is for personell use. it is simply awesome and we are very proud of this. happy summer to everyone

[Rusty]

If I was to build a structure like that I would have constructed a footing at the top of the hill and set the back on it using short posts. Then I would just have to walk from the top of the hill onto the structure and not build any stairs. Easy on, easy off, and the structure would be anchored to a sound foundation that would keep it from moving as it ages.

I think the actual deck structure is unique and well thought out as to it's appearance.

[Shreddy]

Originally Posted by Rusty

If I was to build a structure like that I would have constructed a footing at the top of the hill and set the back on it using short posts. Then I would just have to walk from the top of the hill onto the structure and not build any stairs. Easy on, easy off, and the structure would be anchored to a sound foundation that would keep it from moving as it ages.

I think the actual deck structure is unique and well thought out as to it's appearance.

FORTUNATELY, you weren't hired for this project. Why don't you show us some of your amazingly perfect projects that you've built? How do you have any knowledge of what the owners wanted? This tower is unreal and it's UNFORTUNATE that people like you have to bash and insult such an impressive structure. Give it up...

[ishoot308]

Sky;

That is some amazing carpentry and a beautiful design!! Beautiful job!!!

I have a question though... Are the tree gusset supports just put there for effect??...are they really needed? It looks to me like the multiple offset carrying beams you have under the deck are more than capable of supporting the cantilevered load. Either way, it looks fantastic!!

Now if they only served beer to the public up there!!!

Job well done!

Dan

[Heaven]

This structure falls under the type of construction that would have (and I hope to 'ell had) a licensed design professional (i.e. Engineer) to do the construction drawings.
It is pretty neat!

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Rusty

I'm not an "expert", but looking at the overhang (cantilever) of the floor, IMHO it could use some better knee or Y bracing that would prevent lateral movement.

I'm not an expert, either, but I see a hull and a sail.

Coming from territories of both tornadoes and hurricanes, I see a structure that could soon catch up to Camp Island!

______________________________

Originally Posted by The Eagle

I have heard there is a new "LARGE" Fire Tower on Red Hill, that is causing some controversy in town...
The Eagle

You don't know how much!

http://www.skyscarpentry.com/springt...e%20House.html

[sky's]

Originally Posted by ishoot308

Sky;

That is some amazing carpentry and a beautiful design!! Beautiful job!!!

I have a question though... Are the tree gusset supports just put there for effect??...are they really needed? It looks to me like the multiple offset carrying beams you have under the deck are more than capable of supporting the cantilevered load. Either way, it looks fantastic!!

Now if they only served beer to the public up there!!!

Job well done!

Dan

thanks for the compliment, actually combination of both, the pictures on the web are not showing all of the finish work and we will be adding more finish pics soon. thanks again for your support.

[sky's]

Originally Posted by ApS

I'm not an expert, either, but I see a hull and a sail.

Coming from territories of both tornadoes and hurricanes, I see a structure that could soon catch up to Camp Island!

your seeing the full 30x30 deck in this picture the continuos weight load is 15x15 (room size). this is a design from an actual fire tower in MT.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by sky's

thanks for the compliment, actually combination of both, the pictures on the web are not showing all of the finish work and we will be adding more finish pics soon. thanks again for your support.

So I've been commenting on pictures of a free standing deck that wasn't completely finished.

Gee I wish I'd have known that in the beginning.

Your website should have said what stage the Deck was in instead of making it look like the pictures were the final product.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Rusty

So I've been commenting on pictures of a free standing deck that wasn't completely finished.

Gee I wish I'd have known that in the beginning.

Your website should have said what stage the Deck was in instead of making it look like the pictures were the final product.

Now you are an armchair webmaster too?? Sky did not post the link.

Regardless, the finish work is not going to change the structural integrity (which is what you were commenting on).

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by sky's

your seeing the full 30x30 deck in this picture the continuos weight load is 15x15 (room size). this is a design from an actual fire tower in MT.

The tower in Montana that you used as a model has Douglas fir timbers with steel brackets and X-cross beams that are secured to the rock foundation 20 feet below the surface.

You haven't commented about how the tower is secured for high winds so I can't compare the one in Montana to the one you built.

Weight load and bracing for lateral movement are two different design calculations.

I'll leave this alone for now and thanks for allowing me to make some observation comments about the structure.

Sorry if I annoy some forum members.

[fatlazyless]

....just wondering.....wondering....wondering.....how's the insurance coverage? ...... if it gets blown over by a big, bad wind .....will insurance pay up? ... just wondering... wondering ... wondering?


....could be that some strong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy-wire (s) secured to some sturdy trees or something....could make it safer?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Rusty

I'll leave this alone for now and thanks for allowing me to make some observation comments about the structure.

Sorry if I annoy some forum members.

Welcome to the club...!

[sky's]

egotistical - characteristic of false pride; having an exaggerated sense of self-importance; "a conceited fool"; "an attitude of self-conceited arrogance"; "an egotistical disregard of others"; "so swollen by victory that he was unfit for normal duty"; "growing ever more swollen-headed and arbitrary"

i wish all the members of this wonderful forum a warm and joyious Summer we dont need to compete we try to live in a world of joy and giving. god bless and bring on the Patriots. Best wishes

[upthesaukee]

Some people just need to try to show they know something on a subject and perhaps interject their feelings as being the best, and perhaps the only way to do something.

Be like a mallard duck, and let it roll off your back like water....

I have enjoyed your input and the link to your sight. You are obviously a talent and provided a wonderful piece of architecture to your client.

Thanks.

[HellRaZoR004]

Like the above post, don't let a few turn you off....I agree it gets old fast.

I don't know if anyone mentioned it already, but what do the new owners have in mind for the tower? That thing looks awesome.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by Rusty

The tower in Montana that you used as a model has Douglas fir timbers with steel brackets and X-cross beams that are secured to the rock foundation 20 feet below the surface.

You haven't commented about how the tower is secured for high winds so I can't compare the one in Montana to the one you built.

Weight load and bracing for lateral movement are two different design calculations.

I'll leave this alone for now and thanks for allowing me to make some observation comments about the structure.

Sorry if I annoy some forum members.

Why does he have to explain all of that to you. I'm sure even if he explained how every nut & bolt was connected and how they interact to provide a safe stable structure you would find something else about his work to criticize. It seems like that is all you ever do.
It is an awesome looking project which I'm sure will stand the test of time.
After looking at Sky's web site I would be proud to have my business name attributed with his work.
And if for some reason it does not stand up I'm sure you will be the first to chime in and say I told you so. Have a nice day Rusty and for gods sake find something constructive to do with your time, maybe a hobby. Before you chip away I'm heading out the door for work, yes on a Saturday as well as tomorrow, Sunday, yes I'm that busy but I still manage to find time to try and take you down a notch or 2.

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

Before you chip away I'm heading out the door for work, yes on a Saturday as well as tomorrow, Sunday, yes I'm that busy but I still manage to find time to try and take you down a notch or 2.

The only problem is that by getting involved in this stuff, you and the rest of the forum is brought down a notch or 2.

Can't you guys make your pissing contest private, please, for the sake of the rest of us?

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by gillygirl

The only problem is that by getting involved in this stuff, you and the rest of the forum is brought down a notch or 2.

Can't you guys make your pissing contest private, please, for the sake of the rest of us?

I agree with you gillygirl. Every-time I make a comment it's always the same member who will make a sarcastic remark about what I said. If you read every post in this thread you will see that I gave my opinion which I am allowed to do. I think he just waits for me to log on to see what I have to say. IMHO he is a stalker and the webmaster should do something about it. I don't mind being corrected about what I say, but not in the way that member does it. He did it twice in this thread and it has to stop.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Shreddy

FORTUNATELY, you weren't hired for this project. Why don't you show us some of your amazingly perfect projects that you've built?

IF you'd regularly perused other lakes region forums, you'd have seen a deck of Rusty's provenance that could support two—maybe three—tennis courts!

Let's have Rusty find that photo again—and we can criticize that one.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by ApS

IF you'd regularly perused other lakes region forums, you'd have seen a deck of Rusty's provenance that could support two—maybe three—tennis courts!

Let's have Rusty find that photo again—and we can criticize that one.

Are you referring to the competing forum that he started and shut down?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Are you referring to the competing forum that he started and shut down?

Lakes region forums miss your highly-esteemed commentary and (now) photographic recollections.

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

Why does he have to explain all of that to you. I'm sure even if he explained how every nut & bolt was connected and how they interact to provide a safe stable structure you would find something else about his work to criticize. It seems like that is all you ever do.
It is an awesome looking project which I'm sure will stand the test of time.
After looking at Sky's web site I would be proud to have my business name attributed with his work.
And if for some reason it does not stand up I'm sure you will be the first to chime in and say I told you so. Have a nice day Rusty and for gods sake find something constructive to do with your time, maybe a hobby. Before you chip away I'm heading out the door for work, yes on a Saturday as well as tomorrow, Sunday, yes I'm that busy but I still manage to find time to try and take you down a notch or 2.

With all due respect Belmont,
You are allowed your opinion " I'm sure will stand the test of time. After looking at Sky's web site I would be proud to have my business name attributed with his work. "

After looking at Sky's website, I am even more concerned that this construction has been undertaken without the required engineering.
It would be simple for Sky to post that he has built from engineered plans, but he has not chosen to post that information, which I think is unfortunate.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by Heaven

With all due respect Belmont,
You are allowed your opinion " I'm sure will stand the test of time. After looking at Sky's web site I would be proud to have my business name attributed with his work. "

After looking at Sky's website, I am even more concerned that this construction has been undertaken without the required engineering.
It would be simple for Sky to post that he has built from engineered plans, but he has not chosen to post that information, which I think is unfortunate.

You know I love how all you negative bottom feeders just love to assume that someone has done wrong without one shred of proof other then the baseless rantings of others. I believe the lake is warm enough now, why don't you jump in.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by Shreddy

FORTUNATELY, you weren't hired for this project. Why don't you show us some of your amazingly perfect projects that you've built? How do you have any knowledge of what the owners wanted? This tower is unreal and it's UNFORTUNATE that people like you have to bash and insult such an impressive structure. Give it up...

You jit the nail on the head Shreddy
My guess would be he is a lonely old man with very few friends and a whole lot of time on his hands to tear down as many posts as he can. Sad!

[sky's]

there are engineers involved. anything else???

[sky's]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

You know I love how all you negative bottom feeders just love to assume that someone has done wrong without one shred of proof other then the baseless rantings of others. I believe the lake is warm enough now, why don't you jump in.

awesome BR honestly i cant even get mad at the negative comments. they dont have anything better to do in gods country? there loss. i worked in my yard all day listened to the birds chirping and played with my 3 labradoers. life is good in Moultonborough. have fun everybody

[Lakegeezer]

The Moultonborough town boards will take up the issue of the unauthorized building sometime later this month. There was no building permit, it appears to be built in violation of the steep slope ordinance and there was over 30,000 square feet of trees clear cut, another steep slope violation. There may be other issues. It is on the published zoning board's agenda for June 5'th and planning board agenda for June 12'th. Either or both could be postponed.

[RailroadJoe]

Leave it to the stupid regulations. Even Frank Lloyd Wright would have trouble in Moultonborough.

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by RailroadJoe

Leave it to the stupid regulations. Even Frank Lloyd Wright would have trouble in Moultonborough.

Keep in mind Railroad Joe, whether you live in Moultonboro or another town, the regulations you are complaining about are entirely written and codified by the voters. That my friend, would be YOU.

[RailroadJoe]

Not me. I stopped long ago. No good Abe Lincolns about.

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

The Moultonborough town boards will take up the issue of the unauthorized building sometime later this month. There was no building permit, it appears to be built in violation of the steep slope ordinance and there was over 30,000 square feet of trees clear cut, another steep slope violation. There may be other issues. It is on the published zoning board's agenda for June 5'th and planning board agenda for June 12'th. Either or both could be postponed.

The hearing at the PB was last night and it wasn't pretty. It seems as though the ZBA granted some very questionable waivers and the PB is left with a real mess. There is a planned site visit and it is unclear what the outcome will be.

For a complete rundown, watch for the video that will be posted on the Moultonborough Speaks blog.

[tis]

Originally Posted by Heaven

Keep in mind Railroad Joe, whether you live in Moultonboro or another town, the regulations you are complaining about are entirely written and codified by the voters. That my friend, would be YOU.

The problem is most voters have no idea what they are voting on when they vote. They figure it is recommended by the planning board so it must be something they should have.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by Heaven

Keep in mind Railroad Joe, whether you live in Moultonboro or another town, the regulations you are complaining about are entirely written and codified by the voters. That my friend, would be YOU.

Actually, very rarely are the regulations written by the voters, in fact most of the time the voters have no idea what they are voting for except for short sound bite descriptions. Furthermore, stricter laws to replace previous laws are usually implemented due to violations that would have violated laws previously on the books but for one reason or another not enforced. The tree law is a perfect example.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by ITD

Actually, very rarely are the regulations written by the voters, in fact most of the time the voters have no idea what they are voting for except for short sound bite descriptions. Furthermore, stricter laws to replace previous laws are usually implemented due to violations that would have violated laws previously on the books but for one reason or another not enforced. The tree law is a perfect example.

The Tree Law?

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by ITD

Actually, very rarely are the regulations written by the voters, in fact most of the time the voters have no idea what they are voting for except for short sound bite descriptions. Furthermore, stricter laws to replace previous laws are usually implemented due to violations that would have violated laws previously on the books but for one reason or another not enforced. The tree law is a perfect example.

I have no idea how it works down in Mass where you live, but up here town zoning ordinances in towns that have Selectboards are brought to the ballot by the volunteer boards (like the planning board) which are populated with local elected citizens and after several public hearings on the content of the ordinance, it is voted on by the town's people.
So yes, the local zoning regulations are written and approved by the voters.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by Heaven

I have no idea how it works down in Mass where you live, but up here town zoning ordinances in towns that have Selectboards are brought to the ballot by the volunteer boards (like the planning board) which are populated with local elected citizens and after several public hearings on the content of the ordinance, it is voted on by the town's people.
So yes, the local zoning regulations are written and approved by the voters.

I live in a town meeting town and it happens the same way here. If you think that more than a dozen or so people at the town meeting who vote for these regulations have read and understand the regulations before hand, you are sadly mistaken. Most react to hype and pictures such as the one APS just posted, which should have been prevented by the previous laws on the books. (Or did that one happen under the current "tree law"??) And I don't want to throw the volunteers under the bus, because most are truly concerned and want to do the right thing, but there are also those who get on these boards that have a vested interest in these rules and profit handsomely when the rules get so complicated you need a consultant to sort things out.

Don't get me wrong, I love town meeting government, it is a great way to govern, but people need to understand what they are voting for and my generation and newer want sound bite descriptions of things, sometimes that doesn't work well.

[Winnisquamguy]

Originally Posted by Heaven

Keep in mind Railroad Joe, whether you live in Moultonboro or another town, the regulations you are complaining about are entirely written and codified by the voters. That my friend, would be YOU.

That's not totally true the Zoning Board has to go by state law.Yes you do vote on some but a lot of laws are from the state.

[Sue Doe-Nym]

The topic is the structure built without a permit on Red Hill. It seems that the discussion has gone off on a tangent about land use boards and zoning regulations. Whether you like zoning or how it is put into place is beside the point. This party built something without getting a permit when they knew a permit was required.

It seems that they knew that they would be in violation of several provisions of zoning regulations and knowingly went ahead with construction. Perhaps the PB should make them remove the structure.

[RailroadJoe]

My hat is off to the builders. Great job.

[Just Sold]

I have seen this before where a property owner builds, cuts trees etc. all the while knowing they will pay a fine and have to do something to remedy the situation but in the end they got what they wanted.

The last one I saw was the removal of a large pine tree on a waterfront on a lake in Barrington. The owner had to plant quite a few blueberry bushes and direct runoff water such that it did not go straight into the lake. They paid a small fine too but they got what they wanted and in the end were happy even with the fine and other items.

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by Winnisquamguy

That's not totally true the Zoning Board has to go by state law.Yes you do vote on some but a lot of laws are from the state.

Incorrect. The process the Zoning Board follows when hearing applications is layed out in State Law, but the Zoning Board hears only applications pertaining to local town ordinances (laws).

[wifi]

Originally Posted by Just Sold

I have seen this before where a property owner builds, cuts trees etc. all the while knowing they will pay a fine and have to do something to remedy the situation but in the end they got what they wanted.....

Exactly, one of my nearby neighbors the week before last cut down a few trees, landscaped his lake side property, put in a new sandy beach, et al. The building department was notified by another neighbor, and did nothing, then last week he paved his driveway, no permits, nothing happens if you violate the law.

Sort of a bad example for those of us that do and those trying to teach our children the right way.

[Pineedles]

Originally Posted by wifi

Exactly, one of my nearby neighbors the week before last cut down a few trees, landscaped his lake side property, put in a new sandy beach, et al. The building department was notified by another neighbor, and did nothing, then last week he paved his driveway, no permits, nothing happens if you violate the law.

Sort of a bad example for those of us that do and those trying to teach our children the right way.

This is the norm, rather than the exception. A curse on those municiple officials that look the other way. Malochio!

[RailroadJoe]

WIFI Is your neighbor a lawyer? That may explain it.

[wifi]

He is a banker, so I suppose he could buy a lawyer, LOL

[Winnisquamguy]

Originally Posted by Heaven

Incorrect. The process the Zoning Board follows when hearing applications is layed out in State Law, but the Zoning Board hears only applications pertaining to local town ordinances (laws).

I'll stand by my statement and agree to disagree!

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Originally Posted by Winnisquamguy

I'll stand by my statement and agree to disagree!

Heaven is correct. A ZBA, Zoning Board of ADJUSTMENT, has no jurisdiction over state laws/RSAs, can ONLY rule on local regulations and cannot grant waivers/exceptions to state laws.

[Lakegeezer]

The zoning board approved the variance to build on prohibited steep slopes, based on the mitigation plan from the owner and the thinking that it would be better to have someone maintain the land now that the acre is clear-cut. The planning board also approved a variance in a split vote. A retro-active building permit is still needed, but it appears the building will stand. It would make a good case for a poly-sci student, a classic case of Admiral Grace Hopperism. It is far easier to ask forgiveness than permission. The new scar on Red Hill comes with a story.

[Sue Doe-Nym]

A Conditional Use Permit was granted at the last Planning Board meeting. It was a controversial decision to say the least.

[ApS]

When discussing the clear-cut in Alton, here's what I wrote last October:

"...There's another stretch halfway up Moultonborough's Red Hill that's relatively narrow, but has been clearcut for about a half-mile. That devastation can only be seen from Route 109 for a few seconds—heading northbound..."

...approaching Skelley's...?

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...2&postcount=21

[Pineedles]

Looks like the LaDaSun has a front page article on this today.

http://issuu.com/dailysun/docs/13l_c8162f8463e240

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

The zoning board approved the variance to build on prohibited steep slopes, based on the mitigation plan from the owner and the thinking that it would be better to have someone maintain the land now that the acre is clear-cut. The planning board also approved a variance in a split vote. A retro-active building permit is still needed, but it appears the building will stand. It would make a good case for a poly-sci student, a classic case of Admiral Grace Hopperism. It is far easier to ask forgiveness than permission. The new scar on Red Hill comes with a story.

Well, I think I'll just build a 70' tower on my acre—request a retroactive permit—and pay that fine.

BTW:

Admiral Grace Hopper, who pioneered the U. S. Navy's computer programmings, attended Wolfeboro's Brewster Academy!

[ITD]

Originally Posted by ApS

Well, I think I'll just build a 70' tower on my acre—request a retroactive permit—and pay that fine.

BTW:

Admiral Grace Hopper, who pioneered the U. S. Navy's computer programmings, attended Wolfeboro's Brewster Academy!

You would never get away with it.