In a recent NH Lakes Region newspaper, the pic attached appeared, in connection with bills in the state legislature concerning the state’s Shoreline Protection Act (SPA). The bills would collectively impose further restrictions on the removal of trees and vegetation within 250 feet of the shoreline of lakes and large rivers and on how much of the lot could be covered with impervious areas (house, driveway, etc). Builders are complaining about impact on their businesses of building of McMansions on small lots, while those promoting protection of the lakes are complain about the impact on the lakes of building McMansions on small lots. The pic shows a large structure (but small compared to many monsters) built fairly close to the lake, with nothing green left between the house and the water. Since the original SPA was passed, builders sometimes have just cut out the trees in front, paid the fines, and tacked the cost on to the price of the house. The owners of such places want to view the scenery, while those out boating on the lake would rather not view the guy’s trophy house.
The content of the article caught my attention, as I own a lakefront lot and will be building a house, but without raping the land in the process. But the picture caught my attention, as it reflects what I typically see of a house in that stage of construction, with housewrap on and windows/doors installed. As you can see, the housewrap installation seems badly done in places; above the double door is a large gap with the OSB showing. The window flashing is not adhering to the wrap and is peeling off. My guess is that strips were cut from a roll of Ice & Water left over from the roofing and slapped on quickly, instead of using Vycor or something else made for the purpose. No head flashings, yet anyway, and I can’t imagine it will be done right based on what I see in the picture. Given the availability of info on how to do house wrap and windows correctly, shouldn’t a picture like this be an embarrassment to the builder?
Replies
Besides the construction quality issues, the builders and homeowners who want "unobstructed views" of the lake, etc., apparently don't understand the importance of "foreground" and "framing."
A lakeview (or any expansive view) is greatly enhanced by trees between the house and the "view." The foreground trees give that sense of depth that enriches the scene for a human viewer. Interest is increased, and monotony is diminished by giving the eye successive steps to rest upon as one gazes toward the horizon.
Allen
I'd agree that the building practices do look suspect, as well, I wonder how they got permission to terrace the grade to what looks like the shore, given the intent of the SPA.
I'm facing similar restrictions on my lakefront property, although, all the work done on our beach area has been done by hand. According to area residents, we will be allowed to keep only 15m. clear and the rest will be left ti fill in naturally. I suppose if we want to enjoy the view, we'll have to set up a lawn chair on the beach. I think in the long term, the lakeshore will look great, but not if people continue to encroach on the protected area.
My existing house is only 16' from the high water mark, so I hope I'm grandfathered in.