The lake that disappeared
- Login to post comments
NEWCASTLE "” Three years ago, Edward Dougherty and his wife, Marva Nesbit, built what they thought would be their dream home on Sherman Lake. The couple's place off Lynch Road was designed so that nearly every room and window offered views of the 216-acre lake. As an added bonus, their property afforded ample opportunities to kayak, canoe or fish.
But on the morning of Oct. 9, Dougherty woke to a shocking sight. The lake was completely gone, drained after a dam washed away during a heavy rainstorm. When he told his wife the lake had vanished, she nearly fell over.
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/coast/051107sherman.shtml
I'd ask for a reval on my taxes if I were them.
I suppose it looks a bit rugged now, but when it naturalizes as a tidal marsh, it will be just as nice and just as valuable.
Or so the tax collector will say.
A drop in taxes? I don't think so...lol.
Maybe they can claim it on their homeowners' insurance.
"Lost: One 216 acre lake, containing approximately 350 gazillion gallons of water, festooned with turtles, assorted aquatic plants and fish, and one Muddy Mudskipper.
Personal and private damages: loss of audio-ogistic soothing from lapping waters; loss of personal exercise and enjoyment; visual deprivation; property value diminishment.
Monetary claims: $7 Million."
Headline in next day's newspaper: "Insurance Agent Keels Over at Desk; Chokes to Death on Frosted Cruller; Claim Papers Clutched in One Fist."
Did their boat disappear too? lmao
If the State of Maine spends one dime on replacing this dam, we should run any politician that supports it out on a rail! I hope the republicans in that area are being vocal that this is their problem. Not the State of Maine's or the town of Newcastle.
No one has the right to assume their property will always be the same as when the bought it. As I say in Portland, you don't own the view.
Steven Scharf
SCSMedia@aol.com
Not Marva Nesbit-Dougherty?
Maybe this is a result of bad kharma for not doing the hyphen thing, in keeping with the prevailing fashion among those to whom it has been revealed.
No one has the right to assume their property will always be the same as when the bought it. As I say in Portland, you don't own the view.
Remember "Munroe's Field" in Lincolnville
The Lincolnville TownComprehensive Plan acknowledges that “[a]mong Lincolnville’s
most valuable and important resources are its scenic resources.†One of the
enumerated goals of the Plan is the protection of the town’s scenic views.
The view across Munroe Field is one of these viewscapes.
Section 1(H) of the town’s Subdivision Ordinance requires the
Planning Board to ensure that any approved subdivision “[w]ill not have an
undue adverse affect on the scenic or natural beauty of the area, aesthetics,
historic sites or rare and irreplaceable natural areas or any public rights for
physical or visual access to the shoreline.†Lincolnville, Me., Subdivision
Ordinance 1(H) (1999). This language is very similar to the state’s
subdivision legislation. See 30-A M.R.S.A. § 4404(8) (1996).
http://www.courts.state.me.us/opinions/documents/01me175c.pdf
It's not really a lake. I understand why the neighbors are upset, but the state should leave things in their natural state.
The US Supreme Court has opined otherwise.
Steven Scharf
SCSMedia@aol.com
No one has the right to assume their property will always be the same as when the bought it. As I say in Portland, you don't own the view.
Steven Scharf
Nature has a capricious way of happening - one good forest fire (for which our State may be overdue) will not only diminish the aesthetic appeal of a lot of views, but diminish or obliterate the value of a lot of rural camps and homes, too.
Now that the former "lake" is a "vernal pool", the camp might be condemned under eminent domain and demolished, so that it's human inhabitants don't disturb the delicate ecosystem of the frogs, turtles, and 'skeeters abiding therein.
The US Supreme Court has opined otherwise.
I think the context was different.
There was a small lake at the end of a helicopter base in Vietnam. One morning the lake was gone. It seems the VC were tunnelling toward the base and had a mishap. Army intelligence asked everybody what had happened and nobody had seen anything. The went to the flight line and asked a door gunner. Big mistake. The gunner replied, "Well, we heard a big sucking sound during the night, but we thought it was just the officers having a party."
True story.
If they are going to rebuild the dam, they also need to think about how to maintain it. Perhaps a private developer can step in and do something about it, in order to make it a feasible business decision.
Taxpayer dollars shouldn't be going to bail someone out of an unpleasant situation. Life just isn't fair. If your house burns down, do the taxpayers buy you a new house, or rebuild your old house? If we are going to go filling lakes back up again to make people happy, why don't we rebuild houses when they burn down?
These people are off their rocker if they think we need to rebuild the dam and fill the lake back up again!
Catherine, they probably do THINK that. They think the dam should be re-built. There are those that think it should not.
Let the games begin.
D
- Login to post comments
This is going to really hurt resale value.....WOW!