Why do they live on the water instead of in Seattle? Do they hate Seattle? For that matter, do they hate America?

So if Paul Allen brings the 414' Octopus into Lake Union, under these rules, he's good to go as a live-aboard?

Going to be tricky for Kenmore Air to operate once he starts flying those helicopters around.

I've heard a lot of the water near the shore is privately owned - something about the city making adjacent landowners buy the 'lots' of lake floor in front of them years ago. So are these boat owners to be (possibly) affected by these regulations on private property and if so, how does that change things?

This is boaring... Let's talk about Vessel, the bar, instead...

From my (very simple) understanding as a boat owner, is that a live aboard is generally a boat (sail, fishing, or yacht) that you live on. And in Washington state, only 15% of any public marina can hold people who wish to have live aboard status. Which is why I am still on the wait list for Shilshole, 2 years later.

Just a guess that the added verbiage meant something...

from Report on Final DPD Recommendations st Lake Union Liveaboard Association's website

Criteria #1-c “The vessel complies with the Sail Area-Length Ratio (SALR) pursuant to Table A for Section 23.60.214.”;
This is the most damaging criteria. To calculate your SALR, calculate the square footage of the profile of your vessel and divide it by the length. If this number is less than 10, you are allowed to liveaboard. If this number is from 10 to 17 (most houseboat style vessels fall in this range), then you can only liveaboard if you “… submit stamped calculations by a licensed, professional naval architect, identifying that the floating structure is designed for and capable of safe self navigation in a sea state equivalent to, Beaufort Scale 3#” (more on the Beaufort Scale 3 below). If this number is greater than 17, then you may not liveaboard the vessel.
NOTE: There is no GRANDFATHERING. All vessels not meeting these conditions will be in violation and could be required to be removed from Lake Union.

@2 no, that is a "nu clear Wessel".

Nice advice... be nice to your neighbors or the government will come declare your home illegal.

There is a huge difference between "designed and used for navigation" and requirements to have symmetrical decks, symmetrical mooring stations, going back to check on how a boat was delivered, and a SALR pursuant to Table A (try figuring that one out).

The new law does not grandfather any vessels. The DPD is trying to rewrite the law to make hundreds of currently legal homes illegal. And for what? There is no science, no study of water quality, nothing objective to explain why these new definitions are necessary. It all comes down to the shape of your boat.

The city is targeting certain segment of live aboards. If you are using a boat as your vacation home then you are A-OK, forget about all these new requirements. If your boat is shaped like a sail boat or yacht then live aboard all you want. If the city wants to change the rules going forward that is one thing. But just declaring someone's home illegal and making it worthless is just plain wrong.

Cienna Madrid is a typical Seattle "progressive." Like the Stranger and the "progressives" in city government, they love the dirtbags and the developers, and ignore anyone in between unless they're hipsters on bikes. And if facts should happen to get in their way, they're happy to just lie.

I'm confused about one thing. How is a houseboat different from a house barge? Can't you build a houseboat from the hull of a barge?

@ 3 there is some privately owned property under water in Lake Union, but that goes back to when the Montlake cut was made; on the Lake Washington Side the water level fropped by a few feet and uncovered new land that had been underwater, on the Lake Union side some treviously dry land was inundated. In cases where the inindated lands were owned by someone, their property rights continued.

Obviously someone needs to develop an Inflatable House Ball, so we can live on the water and commute to work by running around it like hamsters.

And play pool when we get bored, or during a storm.

The proposed Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) which is at the heart of this controversy is clearly discriminatory toward a subset of legally abiding Seattle citizens referred to as liveaboards. As a liveaboard on Lake Union for the past six years, I have cause for grave concern over some ambiguous language in the SMP which portends the extinction of a uniquely “Seattle” lifestyle. The liveaboard lifestyle is as “Seattle” as it gets, and dates back to the city's infancy. The liveaboard community has evolved over time, and today's liveaboards appreciate a healthy aquatic eco-system as much or more than anyone. The waters and shorelines addressed by the SMP are our backyards, and it’s not in our best interest to treat our own yards as sewers or landfills. Several small business owners on the lake take care of their families by providing blackwater pump-out services. Current regulations and the proposed SMP permit all vessels to discharge greywater (sink and shower water), and it should be noted that the Department of Planning and Development (DPD), which wrote the new regulations ostensibly to clean up the shoreline, has not produced a single study incriminating greywater as a major concern. Readers unfamiliar with the history of the SMP process should note that earlier versions of the proposed regulations singled out boxy-shaped, liveaboard vessels with a requirement to pump out greywater while granting a blanket exemption for yachts, sailboats, and commercial vessels. When pressed for scientific data to substantiate greywater's effect on the environment and to justify this burden on a single subset of vessels, the DPD chose instead to rewrite the criteria defining approved liveaboard vessels rather than confront the greywater issue head on. This fact by itself should give readers pause for concern over the true motive behind some of these new regulations. Those of us with our finger on the pulse of what's really going on inside of city chambers and why, know that the SMP took its present form as a means of retaliation against a few overly-conspicuous liveaboard vessels. The sad part is that if the city adopts the SMP in its present form, it will punish the many for the overzealousness of a few. Let's hope that the city listens to LULA and turns this controversy into a win/win for everyone but those few.