Boat houses

[LIforrelaxin]

Basically they are reverting the law, back to the way it was. In my estimation the law that allow the shoreline to be modified was a misguided attempt to make the idea of boathouse to expensive of a proposition. It certainly did not stop those that really wanted one.

While I understand the desire to have one because lets face it, it make things simple. Overall I think the cost to build and maintain a boat house is ridiculous.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

Basically they are reverting the law, back to the way it was. In my estimation the law that allow the shoreline to be modified was a misguided attempt to make the idea of boathouse to expensive of a proposition. It certainly did not stop those that really wanted one.

While I understand the desire to have one because lets face it, it make things simple. Overall I think the cost to build and maintain a boat house is ridiculous.

If you can afford a MacMansion, you can afford a boat house!

[Onshore]

There's a lot going on right now and I have not had the time to put together any outreach material on this. When RSA 482-A:26 was adopted in its original form in 1969 it effectively prohibited boathouses over the bed of any natural lake or pond greater than 10 acres in size or artificial impoundment where the state owned the bed or flowage rights. I can say this wasn't about adding cost to anyone, it was about eliminating all structures over public waters that had any kind of residential use. As evidence of intent, the original language specifically prohibited all repair and reconstruction of such structures. Eventually someone asked if they could excavate a basin in their own land and build over that. Since the law didn't prohibit it, it was allowed. The Shoreland Protection Act did not yet exist. Over time RSA 482-A:26 has been changed in a variety of ways, for a variety of reasons. In its current version it would appear to no longer prohibit boathouses over public waters. Given the option now of permitting boathouses over the water instead of digging up the shoreline, everyone seems to agree that not digging up the shoreline would be less environmentally impacting. So, we've changed our rules and that's the direction we're going in. (RSA 482-A:26 does still prohibit conversion to, or use of, these new structures to a residence.) Once we have some outreach materials ready, I'll post a link to them.

[tis]

It never did make sense to me how digging into the shoreline could be considered as having less environmental compact.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by tis

It never did make sense to me how digging into the shoreline could be considered as having less environmental compact.

One's home would be further distanced from their Dock Spiders.

[tis]

Originally Posted by ApS

One's home would be further distanced from their Dock Spiders.

But probably not. Still the same because either way your house has to be 50 feet from the shoreline

[Descant]

Originally Posted by tis

But probably not. Still the same because either way your house has to be 50 feet from the shoreline

We have a dug in slip. Gilford measures our shoreline across the slip, not on its perimeter. However, when we built a bunkhouse in 2024, the required 50' setback was from the innnermost end of the slip. Essentially, the concern is runoff into the lake, so we also installed silt fence.

[tis]

Originally Posted by Descant

We have a dug in slip. Gilford measures our shoreline across the slip, not on its perimeter. However, when we built a bunkhouse in 2024, the required 50' setback was from the innnermost end of the slip. Essentially, the concern is runoff into the lake, so we also installed silt fence.

I'm not sure what that means but when we built ours around 2009 the house had to be 50 feet from the "new" high water mark, not the original waterline before we dug in.

[Descant]

Originally Posted by tis

I'm not sure what that means but when we built ours around 2009 the house had to be 50 feet from the "new" high water mark, not the original waterline before we dug in.

Exactly. In this case, there is a diffrence in which line is being looked at. Waterline for setback, shoireline which is usually described in your deed. When you dig in, the deed (shoireline) remains the same for describing your lot. The weaterline is the nearest water to your structure for determining proper setback. Suppose your dug in slip is 30 x 75. In some eyes, you could say you have 22501 sf less land and your lot should be described as smaller. In another view, one could say you have 180' more shioreline, measuring the slip. Neither of these changes actually occur on the tax rolls. We went through this with the tax assessor some years ago when Gilford first started using aerial information for mapping and said we had 600' of shireline. Easy fix with the assessor so our shoreline was as described in the deed, a line from point a to b.

[tis]

Originally Posted by Descant

Exactly. In this case, there is a diffrence in which line is being looked at. Waterline for setback, shoireline which is usually described in your deed. When you dig in, the deed (shoireline) remains the same for describing your lot. The weaterline is the nearest water to your structure for determining proper setback. Suppose your dug in slip is 30 x 75. In some eyes, you could say you have 22501 sf less land and your lot should be described as smaller. In another view, one could say you have 180' more shioreline, measuring the slip. Neither of these changes actually occur on the tax rolls. We went through this with the tax assessor some years ago when Gilford first started using aerial information for mapping and said we had 600' of shireline. Easy fix with the assessor so our shoreline was as described in the deed, a line from point a to b.

Gotcha'. That has happened to us over the years even without the boathouse. Some assessors measured around every little corner of land and some measured point a to point b. Now we are at point a to b.

[Descant]

My recollection from aropund 1960 is that Gilford passed zoning regulatins around that time prohibiting boathouses. It wasn't imprtant to me then, so it may have been the new law. Neverthe less, ikf it was a zoning ordinance, that might still be in effect.

[Lake Fan]

In Tuftonboro, there is an over-the-water boathouse on Chase Island which is currently under repair, and a new dug-in boathouse on Chase Point currently under construction. With the proposed rule changes, it might be one of the last dug-ins on the lake, I guess.