"Dug-In" Boathouses being Prohibited

[mcdude]

This from the Union Leader..... "Court order puts Lakes Region boathouse requests in drydock"

What I find interesting about ther article is this;
"At each turn, the Gordons lost and then the matter was appealed to Belknap County Superior Court. Before the case was heard, the Dahls went ahead with construction of the boathouse, which is now complete."

Will they be made to tear down the boathouse if a ruling is made against it? Is this another case of I'll do whatever I want regardless of how it affects others or whether it is legal? Or as Paul Goodwin questions, (is this a case of ) "private property rights are being denied by this decision".?

[GWC...]

You being from the Alton area, what do you think about the Bahre boathouse?

Should it be razed?

[mcdude]

Hey GWC:
Aside from what I think of it personally (and the Romney Boathouse for that matter as well) ...they were built legally, with permits (to the best of my knowledge). If they followed the rules and were done legally...well.....then fine. However, would you build an expensive structure when there was litigation pending? I'm not so sure....curious as to what others might think. McD

PS - I still don't understand how a dug-in boathouse is more ecologically-friendly than an over-the-water boathouse. How can dredging "962 cubic feet of lakebed over 47 feet of shoreline to create a 1,360-foot boathouse" not be intrusive on the shoreline? It boggles the mind.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by mcdude

...they were built legally, with permits (to the best of my knowledge). If they followed the rules and were done legally...well.....then fine.

When did Alton change the rule regarding the roof of a boathouse, to allow a flat roof?

Originally Posted by mcdude

PS - I still don't understand how a dug-in boathouse is more ecologically-friendly than an over-the-water boathouse. How can dredging "962 cubic feet of lakebed over 47 feet of shoreline to create a 1,360-foot boathouse" not be intrusive on the shoreline? It boggles the mind.

With the construction of the boathouse, the shoreline was increased to a number greater than 47 feet and the amount of water that the Lake contains also increased. If you check a boathouse, you may find several species of fish enjoying their new-found territory. The fish are very happy. What boggles the mind is why are some people not happy?

[Onshore]

The docking rules under which these structures are permitted were established prior to the passage of the Shoreland Protection Act and are set up to limit intrusion on the public waters not intrusion into the shoreline. If you had a lot of spare time with nothing to do and wanted to look through past boathouse permitting decisions you would probably notice that none of the decisions contain a finding that the dug-in boathouse is more environmentally or ecologically friendly than some other alternative.

[mcdude]

Originally Posted by GWC...

With the construction of the boathouse, the shoreline was increased to a number greater than 47 feet and the amount of water that the Lake contains also increased. If you check a boathouse, you may find several species of fish enjoying their new-found territory. The fish are very happy. What boggles the mind is why are some people not happy?

This "new-found territory" was dredged from the lake. The Squam Lakes page talks about dredged territory as follows on their milfoil infestation prevention page:

"Variable milfoil fragments tend to establish new plants in water depths of less than 15 feet and in muddy or disturbed areas, such as dredged coves. Possible infestation areas are shown in light green on the milfoil map. MILFOIL MAP

The Squam Lakes Milfoil Page

This may be why some people are unhappy....unlike the fish and milfoil.

What are your thoughts on the Bahre Boathouse?

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by mcdude

This "new-found territory" was dredged from the lake.

It was dug out of the land and added to the area of the lake, minor difference, unless discussed in court.

Originally Posted by mcdude

What are your thoughts on the Bahre Boathouse?

Nice roof. When did Alton change the rule to allow a flat roof on a boathouse?

[Orion]

When you build a dug-in boathouse, you start at the point where the water meets the land and the depth is zero feet. You MUST dredge the area in front of the boathouse to be able to actually drive a boat into it. So the digging and the impact go beyond the dug in boathouse footprint. Also, if it is mandatory to have a 50' setback on a house and all other building structures, why would a boathouse be an excluded structure, especially since this is blatantly being taken advantage of with after-the-fact living spaces in them. Boathouses may have made sense when boats were wooden and needed better protection. Today, they are primarily shoreline scars which destroy the character of a "mountain lake". If you want a Miami shoreline, go to Miami.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Orion

Also, if it is mandatory to have a 50' setback on a house and all other building structures, why would a boathouse be an excluded structure, especially since this is blatantly being taken advantage of with after-the-fact living spaces in them.

Not all towns allow "living" in a new boathouse. This is the reason Alton disallowed a flat roof. Owners started with a deck, then a screened area, then an enclosed "living" area on top of their "covered slip" or boathouse, as they are now referenced.

Originally Posted by Orion

Boathouses may have made sense when boats were wooden and needed better protection. Today, they are primarily shoreline scars which destroy the character of a "mountain lake". If you want a Miami shoreline, go to Miami.

Some people like to protect their investment from the elements, boat or automobile. Do you have a garage for your automobile?

Your "mountain lake" contained boathouses, long before you were born, so why the "go to Miami" approach to the situation?

[Orion]

Originally Posted by GWC...

Some people like to protect their investment from the elements, boat or automobile. Do you have a garage for your automobile?

A good boat cover does a nice job. That's what I use.

Originally Posted by GWC...

Your "mountain lake" contained boathouses, long before you were born, so why the "go to Miami" approach to the situation?

We also had houses built up to, and out over the lake and septic systems that didn't protect the lake, as well as clearcutting to install lawns. Is that where we want to go?

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Orion

A good boat cover does a nice job. That's what I use.

A few months ago, the results of pulmanary function testing were interpreted as being 35% of normal - me, not the tests.
Happy a boat cover works for you.
Do I have to quit boating because it does not work for me?

Originally Posted by Orion

We also had houses built up to, and out over the lake and septic systems that didn't protect the lake, as well as clearcutting to install lawns. Is that where we want to go?

There are setback rules, there are septic rules, and there are clearcutting rules. Are the curent rules enforced properly? Are more rules where we want to go?

[PROPELLER]

If they are detrimental to the environment or ecology of the lake then I agree with restrictions.

As far as shoreline scars there many that are not boathouses. There are many McMansions with lush green lawns & developements on hillsides that have scarred this beautiful mountain lake much worse than many of the boathouses on the lake.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by GWC...

"...Your "mountain lake" contained boathouses, long before you were born, so why the "go to Miami" approach to the situation...?"

I'd been sort of neutral on the boathouse issue — until reading this.

For decades, we've been looking across at a crooked, antique boathouse built out over the lake on creaky rock cribs. It's been the target of our "long swims" for as long and may date from the 20s or 30s. It's just a normal part of our view. Over time, dozens of other boathouses have popped up within our casual view.

Complete with the noise and debris of excavating/dredging, tree-cutting, reconstructing with living quarters within or above, bird-excluders, plastic owls or screens, there are other considerations:

1) One older multi-story Tuftonboro boathouse that was built in/over the lake started to convert to a huge house. DES found out, and reversed that infraction. It may have been a compliant owner, but it remains a too-rare DES success story.

2) Another owner (in sight here) cut the trees for his boathouse and then casually flipped open his checkbook to pay the fines for cutting all the trees that remained along his shoreline.

3) Lately, dredgers have tried to contain the silt and clay residue with booms and pumps. There are always leaks -- identified by the cloudy waters drifting from the site. (As previously noted, silt and clay contribute to favorable milfoil habitat).

Sidebar: The required so-called black plastic silt fences around new lakefront construction are one of my pet peeves: They're installed by unknowing builders to "Keep Legal". They fail when properly installed and fail when casually installed. They succeed only in locations where there's no reason to have them installed!

4) Also (and not previously mentioned) is that any shorefront impediment to natural rainwater runoff will increase the speed of runoff around it into the lake. (Think of a giant shorefront boulder).

Runoff has nowhere to go...runoff speeds up...and more effectively washes soil, nutrients, and the normally-stabilizing "duff" of tree litter around the impediment and into the lake. That's why "ridge-development" (like Äkwä Vistä's many "impediments") will negatively affect the long-term health of the lake. IMHO.

We're surrounded by mountains -- and loon calls: I'll defend our "mountain lake" description. As a long-time Miami resident, I know how the "Beautiful People" can alter shore-scapes.

Maybe there will be fewer boathouses in the future. There's always lakeshore-friendly canvas awnings that can be rolled up for the winter.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

There's always lakeshore-friendly canvas awnings that can be rolled up for the winter.

True, except, canvas is only a soft-top covering and does not address the issues that you related to boathouses. It's simply seasonal work for the owner, something more on a “to do” list when opening or closing – the old honeydew list.

Are most garages "roofed" in this fashion and therefore establishing a policy that perhaps boathouses should follow?

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

There's always lakeshore-friendly canvas awnings that can be rolled up for the winter.

Do you mean like this?

[Orion]

Originally Posted by GWC...

Do I have to quit boating because it does not work for me?

Apparently you already have your boathouse, so I guess not.

Originally Posted by GWC...

There are setback rules, there are septic rules, and there are clearcutting rules. Are the curent rules enforced properly? Are more rules were we want to go?

If that's what it takes to protect a valuable resource, then maybe.

[ApS]

GWC, that is one yoooogly boathouse — but it's not the fault of the canvas. The boathouse pictured could be covered in gold-plated platinum, and still be ugly.

IMO, if that boathouse in in your view, you should be getting a property tax break.

My neighbor has a canvas-covered (and shoreline-friendly) boatport, which has an arched steel pipe frame. It's nice.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

and shoreline-friendly

Is this boathouse, http://www.winnipesaukee.com/photopo...sort=1&cat=515, what you mean by shoreline friendly?

Which do you think caused the most environmental damage, the Swallow's boathouse or the dug-in marina that are both displayed in the above URL?

[ApS]

As a fan of a tree-lined shorefronts, like my neighbors and me, (and no grass), I'd have to go with the boathouse.

The boathouse looks bird-friendly for barn swallows, too.

[jrc]

This sort of points out the other side of the debate. Would you rather have a huge private breakwater, and several private boats docks permanently erected in the public's lake. Where it will forever prohibit public use of the area. Or would it be better for the private land owner to sacrifice his own land for a dug-in boat house.

Ecologically both are disruptive, especially during construction. But the dug-in boathouse has a neutral or slight gain in wetlands, where the breakwater is always a reduction. Given that canvas boat covers are up during most of the non-ice season, the shade effect of the roof is not a significant difference.

[ART]

I begin this post by saying I think Romney's boat house and Bahre's boat house are prettier to look at when boating then what was there before them. At night I find Romney's helpful with its unique lighting when I am heading back to that area.

If I had the land to construct a dug-in boathouse I would. One with 3 or 4 bays and I would construct the longest allowed (40'?). Not only would I be protecting my inventory parked inside of it but also I simply think they are pretty dotting the shorelines. Far prettier then many of the boats parked at the docks now. New boats have flashy graphics resembling jukeboxes and that is what bobs up and down at many docks along our shores (not to mention pontoon boats!) My eyes would rather see architecturally designed boathouses.

Do you leave your cars in your driveway? I don't. My cars are inside to protect them; help lessen their depreciation; and to protect my privacy. My property is prettier with my cars in the garage. If I go away I simply lock the house/garage and leave. That is what I would like to do with my dug-in. Presently my boats sit at docks all covered up when I am not at the lake. I worry about them being stolen because they are like beacons shining out the fact that we are not at the property right now.

I suspect that the majority of the folks posting here do not have enough land to have a dug-in boathouse. To those that do have the land (and $) I support it 100%.

Lets see… I would put in mine a 33' Riva to cruise with the bikini-ladies; a Donzi Classic for adrenaline rush; a Ski Nautique for staying in shape; and a 66' Chris Craft Super Sport for designated 'guest' boat use.
Oh and while I am being a brat… my dug-in would have an ice maker, heat and a/c, a warming room for skating, and a wet bar. Cheers!

[T.H.E. Binz]

Good point, jrc . . . if the boathouses are built in an ecological manner (i.e., sheetpile along the shoreline and don't remove the sheets until all construction is complete and the disturbed ground stabilized), then IF ONE HAD TO CHOOSE, maybe dug-in boathouses would prevail. On the other hand, neither new boathouses nor new breakwaters appears to be the preferred choice among the readership.

[John A. Birdsall]

Originally Posted by Orion

When you build a dug-in boathouse, you start at the point where the water meets the land and the depth is zero feet. You MUST dredge the area in front of the boathouse to be able to actually drive a boat into it. So the digging and the impact go beyond the dug in boathouse footprint. Also, if it is mandatory to have a 50' setback on a house and all other building structures, why would a boathouse be an excluded structure, especially since this is blatantly being taken advantage of with after-the-fact living spaces in them. Boathouses may have made sense when boats were wooden and needed better protection. Today, they are primarily shoreline scars which destroy the character of a "mountain lake". If you want a Miami shoreline, go to Miami.

************************************************** *******
A person digs in to their land and builds a boathouse, The state owns to high watermark, what does this do to the equation

[Orion]

John, Not sure of the nature of your question. There is no doubt that a dug-in boathouse requires impact to the "State-owned" part of the lake (excavating and dredging from highwater mark down to a point where natural bottom is about 4-5 feet deep. I think Acres-per-Second had many of the key points well stated in his 10/6 post. The main one being the point about runoff (#4).

Many people would love to build a cabin right up the the high-water mark, but there are good reasons for not doing so, and those reasons don't go away just because the structure is a boathouse.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Orion

Many people would love to build a cabin right up the the high-water mark, but there are good reasons for not doing so, and those reasons don't go away just because the structure is a boathouse.

If it is so detrimental to the environment, why are the resident fish happy?

[islandAl]

Originally Posted by GWC...

If it is so detrimental to the environment, why are the resident fish happy?

Because they are getting a high off all the nutrients being washed into the lake.
Seriously, how does one keep the dug in boathouse from filling back in (not the sides but the entrance) with normal wave actions. Would think the lake would be trying to make a normal shore line again and again.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by islandAl

Because they are getting a high off all the nutrients being washed into the lake.

Too funny

Seriously, how does one keep the dug in boathouse from filling back in (not the sides but the entrance) with normal wave actions. Would think the lake would be trying to make a normal shore line again and again.

The waves do not know it is not natural. They bounce off the bulkhead and head back out, somewhat nutralized by the incoming waves. Waves meaning wakes, unless the wind is doing its thing and the breakwater is not, same for the action of the wakes. Usually, it's calm and the fish are happy - they seem to enjoy pasta.

[ApS]

DES allows a swath of shorefront forest removed to permit heavy machinery to drill wells next to the Lake and to permit heavy machinery to carry roof trusses to boathouses. (Usually built before the house structure itself is built).

That space is rarely returned to forest. If this construction space is on a sloped surface (fairly normal), runoff will wash soil into the lake under or over the black plastic sheets: the required so-called "silt fence". Sometimes the entire lakefront "silt fence" is washed INTO the lake.

(A new spec-built house next to me just had this week's heavy rainfall wash a 20-year-old leach field into the Lake under a "silt fence". My other neighbor, who has scant shoreline forest, lost his into the Lake in a microburst six years ago).

Having a natural forest overhanging the lake is best for fish. On a calm day, you'd be astonished at the number of small insects that fall (or hang from theads) from the leaves onto the shallow waters. Insects are chased by small fish which are in turn chased by bigger fish, mergansers and loons. Natural shoreline-forest shade also discourages algae growth near shore.

Originally Posted by islandAl

Because they are getting a high off all the nutrients being washed into the lake.

"Nutrients" washed into Winnipesaukee are primarily Phosphorus and Nitrogen. Their dissolved compounds are found in sod, loam, natural forest soil, lawn fertilizer, and septic tank leachate.

Those compounds grow algae and exotic milfoil — and affect fish indirectly only by providing cover for fingerlings.

Algae is browsed by snails, which co-host Duck Itch.

Before the mid-80s brought McMansions and dug-in boathouses, I had no issues with algae or Duck Itch.

A boatport -- on pilings -- is best for the Lake, IMHO.

[Onshore]

It isn't common but some of them do fill in. One of the criteria for obtaining a boathouse permit is documenting the site is not subject to sand migration along the shore. This reduces the likelihood that sediment accumulation will be a problem. Whether or not accumulation will occur is a function of many things such as having a source of sand, the angle at which the prevailing wind and waves strike the shoreline, and the angle of the cut back into the shoreline. The reflection of wave action around the interior of the boathouse does not have any self-cleaning effect.

[mcdude]

I don't think the fishies will be too happy about this. They may just have to swim up to a ZBA meeting and let their voices be heard!
ALTON BOATHOUSE NIXED
(PS - Where is Temple Drive?)

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by shore things

It isn't common but some of them do fill in. One of the criteria for obtaining a boathouse permit is documenting the site is not subject to sand migration along the shore. This reduces the likelihood that sediment accumulation will be a problem.

While enjoying a slow ride one day, I noticed some people at a dock doing some strange things. One was in the water, with a shovel a short but safe distance from the stern, and another was holding a dock line and the boat's engine seemed to be going, as there seemed to be some prop wash.

Took some reflection to arrive at the conclusion that they were assisting the migration to migrate elsewhere.

The boat did seem new and perhaps its draft was greater than that which it replaced and a little creative thinking was required to solve the draft dilemma.

[Onshore]

That's not an activity limited to boathouses.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by mcdude

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...068/-1/CITIZEN
(PS - Where is Temple Drive?)

The link went to a registration thingy that gets too personal.

What is the basic concept of the article?

[mcdude]

Bummer! It's an article in a new section of the Citizen where you have to log in to read the article. Soon it'll probably be a paid subscription to gain access much like what happened over at The Grunter in Wolfeboro.

Anyway the article begins....

Friday, October 14, 2005
Alton lakefront owner sues over boathouse


By MELANIE NELSON
Staff Writer
mnelson@citizen.com


ALTON — "A lakefront property owner has filed a lawsuit against the town for its decision in issuing a cease-and-desist order on a boathouse he was building and for decisions made by the Zoning Board of Adjustment in his appeal process."

since the article is copyrighted....

I'll summarize

the owner slightly changed the plans after they were approved....so the town then issued a Cease and Desist Order.

and we'll see what happens.

and it concludes by stating, "In town documents, Mr. C. states that the zoning restrictions interferes with the reasonable use of the property and it doesn't apply to his structure because it neither restricts any view of the lake nor impacts the use and enjoyment of neighboring properties."


c. 2005 George J. Foster Co.

Note the c. = copyright and not allowed to link without registering. (Interesting...... but a whole different topic for a new thread!)

[Mee-n-Mac]

I wonder if I know. There was some new dock construction this summer and I was surprised to see 3 (?) finger docks where I think there was 1 before. No big deal but last month they started putting a boathouse (or top anyway) over the main dock. Nothing really elaborate or fancy, I'll have to look again tomorrow.

ps - I note the collapsed boathouse (see RG's pic) just up a bit from where I think the above is, is still collapsed.

[SOMEONEGOTCHA]

Click here to view Alton owner sues over boathouse I believe this is the article that mcdude is referring to.

[mcdude]

Link works fine for me....but I'm registered. What are your thoughts on this dug-in boathouse over by Wolfeboro?

[Orion]

That is surely a beautiful boathouse. The Neuschwanstein Castle in Germany is a beautiful castle. But, I'd prefer to see a natural shoreline than either structure at the edge of The Lake.

[upthesaukee]

Originally Posted by mcdude

(PS - Where is Temple Drive?)

Temple Drive is down off 11D near the western end.

[John A. Birdsall]

Boathouse that is not entrenched in the shore has been filling with sand now since 1959. Used to house a 26' lakelaunch in their, but now have trouble from Sept on keeping a 16-17' boat in because of the sand. I think that the problem is people adding sand to their waterfront. Someone talked about running a motor and driving the sand out. I think ours was kept cleaner in the early days because of the inboard. I tried that with my outboard and almost lost the water pump.