Boathouses, an Adirondack Drama
Well, it didn’t take long for us to get a taste of Adirondack political drama.
Although there are several Adirondack Park Agency (APA)-related controversies brewing right now, which I imagine is probably true at any given time in the Adirondacks, the one that has caught my eye since moving here involves rules related to boathouse construction.
The APA is tasked with overseeing development and activities in the park. Their goal is to protect public and private resources, and their definition of a boathouse was first set in regulations adopted back in 1979. In 2002, they revised the regulations to clarify the intended purpose of boathouses, and this past year they have proposed revising them again to add further clarification. These proposed new revisions have a good amount of people up in arms.
Boathouses are for Boats
The first thing that struck me as I looked into this issue is that it has been incorrectly framed. Many people seem to view the 2009 revisions as something completely new and above and beyond what is currently in place. A big bad government agency imposing additional restrictions on what we can do with our land.
But that really isn’t the case.
This new regulation isn’t REALLY about imposing new regulations – it is about getting people to abide with the intent of the current ones. The APA didn’t suddenly decide that roof decks and living quarters in boathouses are a bad idea. As far as I can tell, they have always felt that way, and the regulations that were in place were always supposed to prevent them.
In other words: Boathouses were never supposed to be anything more than boathouses.
Here is the relevant language from the current regulation:
a covered structure with direct access to a navigable body of water which (1) is used only for the storage of boats and associated equipment. . .
Boathouses were not meant to be guesthouses, or living quarters, or large lake side decks. Those types of structures are supposed to adhere to a separate set of shoreline setback rules.
But people have been getting around those rules by exploiting the loose language that defines a boathouse. So, instead of building a deck that is properly setback from the shoreline, people have been slapping them on top of their boathouses and calling it a day.
All the APA is doing now is tightening up that language so that boathouses are once again in line with the original intent of their definition. According to the new rules, a boathouse would once again be a place to, ya know, house your boats – approximately two regular-sized boats.
Once you realize this, it suddenly doesn’t seem like some new heavy-handed overreach by the APA. All they seem to be doing is closing loopholes in their regulations because some people have been intent on finding ways to dodge them.
It’s About Shoreline Development, Not Just Roofs
Understanding why the APA is suggesting these new regulations is a big step in understanding the issue, but I am sure some folks will want to go back and question the rationale for restricting shoreline development in the first place. This is a battle I can only assume was fought at the time of the original regulation, yet seems to be coming up again. An elected official was even recently quoted as saying:
“I can’t see how the heck a roof on your boathouse is detrimental to the environment,” said state Assemblywoman Teresa Sayward, R-Willsboro.
As with so many things in politics, it is all about how you choose your words.
I have to believe that Assemblywoman Sayward understands the issue is more involved than just the impact of a roof. However, phrasing it the way she did allows her to avoid the more complex issue of shoreline development, and even makes the regulation seem silly and unreasonable.
If she wanted to honestly tackle the issue she would be looking to engage in a conversation about the potential impact of shoreline structures that go beyond simple boat storage. To make this sound like some out of the blue APA obsession with roofs is a disingenuous treatment of the issue.
There are people out there who, with the correct understanding of the history and reasons for the rules, will have a different opinion than if they were lead to believe this was just about “the environmental impact of a roof”. Me, for example.
Shoreline use and development DOES have an impact on the environment. Shorelines are dynamic ecosystems with some of the park’s most productive wildlife. They are the front line for erosion and water quality issues. And the APA laws are designed to protect them. Two things that can greatly impact an environment are larger structures, and more intensive use.
Adding a structure onto your boathouse that makes it a place where you no longer just house your boats, but a place where you spend more time, does both.
What’s Up with Lake George?
Anthony F. Hall wrote a piece for the The Adirondack Almanack that I found interesting and worth a quick mention. Lake George in particular seems to be a flash point for this issue, and their Park Commission recently requested an exemption from the new regulation. Everyone quoted in Hall’s article focused on eliminating overlap of enforcement as a reason for the request. Sounds like a good idea, right?
Problem is, as best as I can tell, the request wasn’t JUST for an exemption in enforcement… it was also a request for an exemption from the tighter rules. (Hall provides the full text of the exemption request here.) If that’s the case, then the answer to this question posed by the Commission’s chairman seems obvious.
“I don’t see what the APA will do that is different from what the Lake George Park Commission does now,” said Young. “There should be provisions in the new regulations exempting the Lake George Park, and I would hope that the APA would honor our request.”
The APA would be enforcing different rules. That’s what the APA would be doing differently.
A desire to reduce duplication of efforts is commendable, but a desire to have a different set of rules apply to you is tougher to understand. I would be interested in hearing why the Lake George Commission feels they should abide by different shoreline standards from the rest of the park.
Compromise?
In many ways the Adirondacks are about finding that balance between development and preservation. So what is the compromise here? How do we balance shoreline development and environmental concerns?
Well, in my opinion the compromise has been in place for the last thirty years and just needs to be reinforced. The APA allows boathouses and docks of certain sizes – for their intended use – to be built on shorelines. I see these structures as sufficient development for our Adirondack waterways, and while I am sure that boathouses that are more than just boathouses – that include living quarters and roof decks (or party decks, or sun decks, or whatever you call them) – are nice, I see no compelling reason to expand shoreline development allowances to include them.
