When im out canoeing, i see it all the time. These people that want to live by a lake and out in the woods. But what do they do? They cut half an acre of woods down so they can build a huge mansion and huge yard to mow. If they didnt want all them trees, why didnt they buy an empty field and build a house there? Next thing ya know, they wont like the lake, so they'll have it drained. They already complain that the lake erodes their land. So here's a tip to them folks: Dont buy a woods next to a lake. Build your mansion downtown New York where you belong!
-
Happy National Paranormal Day! 🔮👻👽
over development!!
- Thread starter meopilite
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2016
- Messages
- 177
- Reaction score
- 0
You know, people do the same with airports: they know they're building half-a-mile from an airport, but after a year they're heading up a community group petitioning the closure of the airport. Bizarre.
We have enough of that in New york! Don't want them here either.
You know why right? Same thing up here, monster homes on the lakefront to prove to everyone how successful they are. If you have that much money you pay someone to mow the lawn anyway. Greed rules the world.
I prefer to show my success through the boats I build and restore.
I prefer to show my success through the boats I build and restore.
So the purpose of this thread is? Why not fight for stronger shore land zoning? Ranting is useless. Surely there are others in your community who feel as you do
We have strong shore land zoning and no one builds anything within 100 feet of water . Removal of vegetation is verboten
One guy thought he was above the law. Out went the trees in went a big lawn. His 1 million buck house goes up
Along comes the town. Levied a $ 750000!fine and required all lawn be replanted with native trees
We've got million dollar houses too on the lake but you can't see them
We have strong shore land zoning and no one builds anything within 100 feet of water . Removal of vegetation is verboten
One guy thought he was above the law. Out went the trees in went a big lawn. His 1 million buck house goes up
Along comes the town. Levied a $ 750000!fine and required all lawn be replanted with native trees
We've got million dollar houses too on the lake but you can't see them
YC, there are restrictions here as to waterfront building, no boathouses or docks, but that is for the less advantaged folk.
Atikaki Provincial Wilderness Park was established in 1987 with the mandate that no new construction would take place within the park. Existing facilities, cabins, outfitters were grandfathered of course, but, Aiken's Lake Lodge, a 5 star fly in fishing lodge has several times been permitted to build new structures on the lake in the past 10 years. The original 9 acre lease on the point doesn't include the new Corporate lodge on the south shore, nor the outpost cabin built a couple years ago at the south west corner of the lake. They have put in new docks using concrete at all the facilities. All the structures are log buildings and there is no way they are flying logs in for that purpose. Only $2900 for a 3 day fishing package. It is American owned and obviously the Manitoba government looks the other way when Aiken's asks to build something new in a Wilderness Park.
Atikaki Provincial Wilderness Park was established in 1987 with the mandate that no new construction would take place within the park. Existing facilities, cabins, outfitters were grandfathered of course, but, Aiken's Lake Lodge, a 5 star fly in fishing lodge has several times been permitted to build new structures on the lake in the past 10 years. The original 9 acre lease on the point doesn't include the new Corporate lodge on the south shore, nor the outpost cabin built a couple years ago at the south west corner of the lake. They have put in new docks using concrete at all the facilities. All the structures are log buildings and there is no way they are flying logs in for that purpose. Only $2900 for a 3 day fishing package. It is American owned and obviously the Manitoba government looks the other way when Aiken's asks to build something new in a Wilderness Park.
I don't understand why money can buy favor. No one here can build a boathouse and all docks must be removed before ice in
Sometimes you have to fight for right. Some of us just won a community forest. At first the town was not in favor and the old timers balked but with hard work and fund raising and not to mention a bit of help from the moneyed we raised $500 k to preserve 600 acres
Sometimes you have to fight for right. Some of us just won a community forest. At first the town was not in favor and the old timers balked but with hard work and fund raising and not to mention a bit of help from the moneyed we raised $500 k to preserve 600 acres
The upper Yellowstone River in the Paradise Valley is a case in point. You can't even get out of your boat to take a leak anymore without the prow of one of those ugly houses looming over you.
G
Guest
Guest
Development, and over-development is saddening, but I can’t do much about it, even as a voting citizen. Different US States have their own influence peddlers. In the Baltimore/Washington corridor the overwhelming legislative influence is held by developers. I vote selectively (after research) for State Bond issues, but Agricultural Preservation funding usually gets my nod.
Along the Potomac near DC mega-wealthy folks continue to build giant palaces and cut down mature trees for a vista. They incur huge fine after the vista cutting is done, and it’s a (for them, small) price they are willing and able to pay. Meh, what’s a hundred K fine for a river view.
https://www.google.com/search?q=dan...=KYEvV47rHcLW-QG8lKCACA#imgrc=2juRdT7qXK8oCM:
https://www.google.com/search?q=dan...=KYEvV47rHcLW-QG8lKCACA#imgrc=p6p90OtFCZ45oM:
Laughing all the way to a river view.
God only made so much land, and it is hard to compete with deep pocketed developers, especially since their pockets usually lined both with oodles of cash and most of the State legislature.
At the height of the housing bubble the couple hundred acres of pasture land across the valley from my home was finally sold off by one of the last holdout farmers. I found the sign reading “One acre lots, minimal restrictions, from the low 280’s” amusing.
I didn’t know there even was a low 280’s. I could not afford to live here now, and was stupid enough not to buy woodlots and pastureland 20 years ago.
The desired development style in my ruburb is for giant 6000 sf McMansions packed on 1 acre lots. Who cares if the windows of the neighboring McMansion are exactly (50 foot setback) 100 feet away; there is minimal property to maintain, just pay someone to cut the grass. The occupants never come out of their homes anyway, other than to drive little Biff and Buffy to the bus stop at the end of the driveway.
That is one of the weirdest ruburb bits to me; pile the kids in the car, drive 50 feet to the end of the driveway and wait for the bus. WTF?
In the Washington DC the new norm is to buy a 1950’s rancher on a suburban lot, tear it down and build a sprawling 3 or 4 story McMansion in its place. Rancher, rancher, huge towering McMansion, rancher, rancher. . . .
In the denser urban areas developrs buy a two story row house (some are as little as 12 feet wide) and add on as many floors as possible. Those are known as “Pop ups” ; two story row house, two story row house.. . . five story row house with rooftop patio. . . , two story, two story. . . . .they look very much like a middle finger being raised to the neighbors.
Anything waterfront along the Chesapeake Bay shore or tributaries is at the extreme end of pricey. The trend is to buy two or three adjacent shacks, weekend homes or crab shanties and put up the Mother of all waterfront homes with a massive dock, often as a weekend getaway place.
20 years ago the prediction was that the last buildable lot in my once rural north county would be gone in . . . . . 20 years. It’s getting close.
The libertarian in me can’t complain about a farmer or crabber selling out for millions while the getting is good, but I’m ready to move to rural NC or out somewhere elbow-room west.
The “Why” is different depending on the “where”. In some elbow-room locales out west the preponderance of land is owned by the Fed’s, timber companies or massive ranches. Or Hollywood celebrities. None of them are selling me acreage to escape from east coast Syphilazition.
I’ve been in the heart of the east coast megalopolis for 60 years, and it has gotten 120 times worse. I’m not sure how much more I can take.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2014
- Messages
- 1,550
- Reaction score
- 282
Mike you are singing my tune. I moved out of Winnipeg to a town of 600. There is nothing but farmland for miles around. I think by the time it is developed I will be dead. So far so good. The price was right too. Half acre in town, serviced, older house ...$140k
There is raw land available here too for good prices.
Go west old man.
Christy
There is raw land available here too for good prices.
Go west old man.
Christy
Mike they have to replant with the tallest trees available not seedlings
My house is a $280k on two acres with water view and separate 1 acre lot waterfront owned by five of us on the street
Taxes about 3 k annually
House is 2400 sq ft with separate 1200 sqft workshop / boathouse
Land abutting is in Loon Echo Land Trust
My house is a $280k on two acres with water view and separate 1 acre lot waterfront owned by five of us on the street
Taxes about 3 k annually
House is 2400 sq ft with separate 1200 sqft workshop / boathouse
Land abutting is in Loon Echo Land Trust
I'm ready to leave the east end of Long Island. Two houses from us was a little ranch as was mentioned above, they tore it down and built a house that was "more in keeping with the town". They just sold it for 3.3 million. Our street is just a crazy construction zone for the last four years. The little ranch that was torn down, they paid 1.35 mil for it. Yea, it's time to go.
Jim
Jim
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2013
- Messages
- 989
- Reaction score
- 71
That is the odd thing I've noticed. Here in the valley river stretches that have been developed, I never see anyone in the yards or out on the decks of these river view homes. No one....ever. So hard for me to understand. I would live outside in view of the river if it was my home.
Maybe you have to be a workaholic to own one?
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2013
- Messages
- 3,356
- Reaction score
- 475
Don't get me started on that! People move to the Yukon for all the wrong reason if you ask me... I wish of a great crash of the Yukon economy so all these Yuppies go back to the city where they should have stayed in the first place... They are all "hunters", "fishermans" they assume they know everything cause they have money and can buy every thing they want. eff they buy them self big truck, big quads, big jet boats, and go wreck the land that takes for ever to reestablish it self. Just don't get me started!!
Too late for that Canorouge, sounds like you are well on your way. I feel your pain for sure.
Jim
Jim
I'm lucky. We have about a dozen neighbors. All walk the block. Block is 3.1 miles square it's dirt road we get together now and then for game night not boys poker night at all but board games like Sequence and Rummikub. We borrow stuff be it cup of sugar or chainsaw. Or boat. We sometimes take off on canoe outings
The five resident kids camp help keep the atmosphere rustic
The loons help too
The five resident kids camp help keep the atmosphere rustic
The loons help too
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2013
- Messages
- 989
- Reaction score
- 71
I am fortunate that our nearby lake is entirely within confines of the Deer Flat national game reserve. No development within its boundaries - well...except for the visitor center and management facility. Ironically, there are a lot of people here who would like to see the reserve given over to local control - and I have a fair idea about how that would play out.
More irony....
There is a long term plan to extend the urban "green belt" from Boise along the river to the west end of the valley. That would mean that the stretch surrounded by mostly farmland with little direct access - the part that only paddlers see, and is still pretty wild - would be accessible in its entirety to all who can walk or peddle a bike. Not so good for paddlers and other animals who enjoy it in its secluded state....but probably better for the general well-being of the river and it's ecosystem, than allowing the surrounding private land to be developed right up to the water.
More irony....
There is a long term plan to extend the urban "green belt" from Boise along the river to the west end of the valley. That would mean that the stretch surrounded by mostly farmland with little direct access - the part that only paddlers see, and is still pretty wild - would be accessible in its entirety to all who can walk or peddle a bike. Not so good for paddlers and other animals who enjoy it in its secluded state....but probably better for the general well-being of the river and it's ecosystem, than allowing the surrounding private land to be developed right up to the water.
It's a tough thing to balance. A couple beautiful lakes nearby have been vacation and trophy house destinations for 100 years. Unbelievable amount money over there and obnoxiously sized and ugly houses. The lakes are pretty much completely developed and the only time I ever paddle them is early or late in the year. It's disgusting.
On the other hand that county has money coming out of its ears from people who want to see the lakes protected (we all have different perceptions of protected). As a result the state and county have purchased a lot of the surrounding wetlands as well as a lot of grasslands in the area. Lots of public support over there for that sort of thing. The've also stopped any new hog confinements in the county. The county's nature center seems to have no end to money, donors, and volunteers. Many ways to access the great outdoors over there.
On the other hand, fifteen miles away here in Emmet County farmer's still rule the roost. We're fortunate to have more public lands than many parts of Iowa but compared to anywhere else in the country it's ridiculous. Out of 100 Iowa counties our nature center's budget is somewhere around 94 despite the fact we're a pretty wealthy county in terms land value and there aren't a lot of "poor" people here. The county has very little to no desire to obtain any public lands or do any improvements to land it already has. There are people who would like to see those things done but they're not the ones with money. Some people are trying to get a stretch of our local river turned into a state water trail and they're being soundly beat down by the landowners and board of supervisors, neither of which want to see it happen.
That being said I don't mind the way it is so much in a selfish sort of way. We do have some beautiful (although small) natural areas where I like to walk/paddle with the dog and it's rare that we ever have to share them with someone else. But having wealthy people,who aren't farmers, interested in protecting their little slice of nature would probably be better in the long run.
Alan
On the other hand that county has money coming out of its ears from people who want to see the lakes protected (we all have different perceptions of protected). As a result the state and county have purchased a lot of the surrounding wetlands as well as a lot of grasslands in the area. Lots of public support over there for that sort of thing. The've also stopped any new hog confinements in the county. The county's nature center seems to have no end to money, donors, and volunteers. Many ways to access the great outdoors over there.
On the other hand, fifteen miles away here in Emmet County farmer's still rule the roost. We're fortunate to have more public lands than many parts of Iowa but compared to anywhere else in the country it's ridiculous. Out of 100 Iowa counties our nature center's budget is somewhere around 94 despite the fact we're a pretty wealthy county in terms land value and there aren't a lot of "poor" people here. The county has very little to no desire to obtain any public lands or do any improvements to land it already has. There are people who would like to see those things done but they're not the ones with money. Some people are trying to get a stretch of our local river turned into a state water trail and they're being soundly beat down by the landowners and board of supervisors, neither of which want to see it happen.
That being said I don't mind the way it is so much in a selfish sort of way. We do have some beautiful (although small) natural areas where I like to walk/paddle with the dog and it's rare that we ever have to share them with someone else. But having wealthy people,who aren't farmers, interested in protecting their little slice of nature would probably be better in the long run.
Alan
Last edited:
