A Mansion That Overlooks The Law

The votes are in!  Let the chainsaws rip and the bulldozers roll for the sake of justice and the Chesapeake Bay.

Sixty nine readers responded to a recent article in Bay Daily that argued it is time for Anne Arundel County, Maryland, to tear down the mansion that developer Daryl Wagner built for himself without permits on Little Island in the Magothy River.

Writing on Facebook and this blog, people were outraged that Wagner applied for building variances after the fact and the county allowed him to keep living in his island estate, despite blatant violations of laws designed to protect wetlands and the Chesapeake Bay.

Now you can take action to help remove this palace that overlooks environmental laws. (I'll tell you how, in a minute).

First, here is the count, as of yesterday: 32 readers took the position that the house should be demolished.  Another 17 wrote that Wagner should be evicted and the house used for some public good, such as environmental education, ecological research, a shelter for battered women or wedding receptions.

One suggestion was strictly for the birds: “Drill a bunch of 1 3/4 inch holes on each outside wall and allow it to become the world's largest Purple Martin House. Heaven knows we need help with the mosquitoes.”

Nineteen readers were just plain angry –- “off with his head!” piped one would-be Queen of Hearts --  but did not specify what should happen to the house.   Only one reader argued that Wagner should be allowed to remain in the home.

Unfortunately, the Anne Arundel County government does not support tearing down the house or evicting Wagner and re-using the property in some way that helps the public or the Bay. So now is the time to let county officials know your opinions. You can take action by writing to the county’s Director of Planning and Zoning. Let him know that the county should deny the variances that Wagner has applied for.  If he does not get the variances, the county should order him to tear the house down.

You can direct your emails and letters to:  Lawrence R. Tom, Director, Anne Arundel County Office of Planning and Zoning, Heritage Office Complex, 2664 Riva Road, Annapolis, MD 21401. His email address is pztom264@aacounty.org.

After you’ve written  your email or letter, post a comment here or on CBF’s Facebook page. Forward a link to this blog to your friends and neighbors.

The legal battles over the illegal construction Little Island have grinding on for years.  Some people might be tempted to shrug and say, "forget about it.  People break environmental laws all the time." But there is a bigger principle here that should not be forgotten or ignored.

One reader put it perfectly: “If there is no punishment for breaking the law then the law has no meaning.”

By Tom Pelton

Chesapeake Bay Foundation

Comments

[Facebook comments]

Here are the comments we received on Facebook about this article:

* Karin Lynn: Obviously dues should be paid, but instead of tearing it down how about taking it away from the owner (and / or levying a fine) after ensuring it has no environmental impacts (assuming that can be done)?

* Just Shez Karin: I agree!! What a disgrace to even think about tearing down a huge new building...that would be even more damage to the area.

* Jesse Lovell: Sounds like a good news story, something we should be hearing about on the local networks and newspapers.

* Cherri Miele that mansion wasn't built in a day! So where were all the screamers when it was being built, surely someone could have stopped him in the process. Seems stupid to tear it down, but he should get a big fat fine!

* Joe Archer: Who has the deed to the land? If it's his property I feel he has the right to build whatever he sees fit, so long as the house has proper sewage disposal and no causes other adverse enviormental impacts.... I mean there's only 10000 other mansions on the bay, why pick on this guy? As for not obtaining proper permits, the home owner should be fined for not following the laws like everyone else, and have to submit to all lawful inspections.

* Jennifer Busby: I agree, he should be fined, not have his home torn down. What if that was your home? If this is the rogue attitude that the C.B.F. is going to hold then, I will funnel my efforts and money somewhere else. This is not what I thought the Foundation's attitude was about. Shame on you.

* Damon Fodge Seems: like CBF's rhetoric against this rich guy is a bit over-the-top and vengeful ("let the chainsaws rip") regarding this tiny little speck in the massive Chesapeake watershed. Already CBF has devoted several FB updates on it, as if this ...

* Beth Linsenmeyer: There were objections to this project. And, Jennifer, MR. WAGNER is the one with the rogue attitude -- he decided to ask forgiveness rather than permission (because he knew he would be refused permission), counting on public apathy and bureaucratic aversion to conflict to worm his way around the law. Shame on HIM for his callous disregard for the rule of law!!!

* Pete Dorman Jennifer: This is not his primary residence...it is a weekend home.

* Kristal Little Fallon: In Corsica...the residents there hate when celebrities or rich people do this exact same thing..they actually BLOW up the houses...And after the house explodes about 3 or 4 times..the people get "it" and move an build somewhere else..LOL

* Kathy Roche Sherbert: Agreed Beth... And Pete, if this is his "weekend home", perhaps he could pay restitution by putting it to good use while its not occupied? I like the environmental research and education idea, or maybe even a Bay wildlife rescue/rehab facility, or diamondback terrapin head start program...

* Jennifer Busby: ‎@ Pete..I don't care if it is his dog box..He has the right to build a home. Go to the county offices and complain about the no permits. Leave him alone.

* Jennifer Busby: ‎@ Beth. Did you ask permission from your potential neighbors to build your home. If he is as rogue as you say, then I say it has rubbed off on the foundation. I bet if he wrote a BIG check to C.B.F, it would be cashed before the ink was dry. Get real you Muppets..

* Jane Elizabeth Abbott: ‎@Jennifer-Read the applicable laws. You are dead wrong about this person's "right" to build a home where he did. It is attitudes like yours' that encourage people to disregard laws aimed at protecting our environment. Which begs the question, what are you doing on the CBF fb page?

* Renee Voshell Binkley: He does not have the right to build a home without proper permits and inspections. If the appropriate permits and inspections were not obtained, he should not have received a certificate of occupancy. None of the rest of us could get away...

* Jennifer Busby: ‎@ Jane, why is it any of your business why I am on this page. Everyone is airing their opinions. I guess you can't handle the art of an argument.

* Canice Murphy: This is a microcosm of the entire BP fiasco. No enforcement, no teeth to legislation, politicians who are complicit and the outcome is that 4 years later nothing had happened. Despite the rhetoric, Mr Wagner is no closer to moving out....

* Mary M Smedley Donohue: Jennifer, part of the art of arguing is actually knowing what you're talking about. Obviously, you just like to hear yourself babble.

[Patrick]

Thanks for letting everyone know how to contact the county.

[gopher]

This is what I wrote.

Dear Anne Arundel County Director Tom,
Please look at what the Chesapeake Bay Foundation has found you have done:

http://cbf.typepad.com/bay_daily/2010/08/the-votes-are-in-let-the-chainsaws-rip-and-the-bulldozers-roll-for-the-sake-of-justice-and-the-chesapeake-baysixty-nine-rea.html

Enforce the law uniformly please, and bulldoze that home. It is an abomination that anyone can get away by cutting away trees, building mansions, adding numerous pollutants to the bay, and lots of runoff that can't be
stopped by losing critical stands of trees. We need to rebuild any lost critical areas to poor decisions by your board immediately, if we are to see any improvement in the Bay's health. If you think
other counties have allowed such violations to take place, please point them to this article and say they need to enforce it uniformly across the board.

To ignore any violation sends the wrong message to homeowners that they can build wherever they please. There are reasons for critical area laws. We have endangered species who depend on the Bay's livelihood.
We have a fishing, crabbing, and seafood industry that is Maryland's top status symbol. If you allow people to violate the law, you essentially are saying you won't support anything which supports the State's primary industry.
Tourism will go away if the Bay loses its fishing industry, and what will we be left with? Another New York Hudson River. Don't let the Bay become another Hudson River, and go back and enforce what always needed to be
enforced by starting tearing down the home mentioned in the above article, and replenishing its landscape with native plants and trees.

[Tom Pelton]

Thanks very much, Gopher. I appreciate that you took time out of your day to personally help with this cause.

[Rights? What rights?]

If someone else gets to decide whether a person's use of their property is acceptable, then what is the benefit of owning property? Isn't the point of buying it to have a final say over how it is used or improved? It is one thing if this guy is dumping nuclear waste into the bay, but he isn't. He built a home. A DECADE ago. A little-used weekend home does not merit this kind of vitriol. So what gives? Must the CBF be consulted as to the impact of every construction project in the bay's watershed? Nothing would get built.

The emphasis on the size of his "mansion" is another interesting point. If he built a structure 1/3 the size of this one, or if he went with the same square footage but a geodesic or other "green" design, would the article have read the same, or would the evil developer be lauded for turning over a new leaf? Yes, it is ugly, yes the fake palm trees are tasteless and, yes, the lighthouse is cheesy, but they're his fake trees and his lighthouse and he shouldn't need permission to have them.

Pelton's "let's impoverish everybody" attitude is absurd. Just like the cheating oystermen he mentions in closing, this developer was fined, and fined a larger amount than the oysterman might make in a year. The only argument in either article is that his transgression against nature wasn't punished piously enough.