Would You Live On The Water And NOT Have a Boat?

[Chris Padilla]

Timely topic, Julie.

I just took the family on an extended Northern California weekend which included a trip around half of Clear Lake. We got deep into some extended arms of land (peninsula) just because we like to do such things when touring around being spontaneous. I noticed two things: houses with docks on the water and house on the other side of the road, no water...no dock...no boat. I'm thinking if I lived there that I would be on the lake, with a dock, with a boat. I can't imagine living so close to water and not being able to go directly ON the water pretty much whenever I wanted to. What would be the point living so close to the water? My wife and daughter agreed with me. While it would cost more, I would pay it or I simply wouldn't live so darn close to the lake in the first place. BUT...each to their own. Maybe some just like the view and prefer to never step foot on the water (so to speak). There were plenty of house high up on the land with grand views....

[Rich Engelhardt]

Real estate is a horrible investment for the most part.

We bought our house in 1986 and paid $74.5 K for it.
Our monthly payment was around $800.
$800 a month for 30 years adds up to $288,000.

Our house today would sell for about $165,000.
That's a pretty typical situation these days. So - no, real estate (for most people) isn't the safe long term investment it was for our parents & grandparents.

However - there's still the laws of supply and demand to consider.
A desirable location get's that way because it's in limited supply.
As long as the demand for that location exists, it's always going to be a better choice than a less desirable location.
Faster turn around -- better value holding.

The real trick is to find the best deal. That takes a lot of work....
"Look at a thousand, make an offer on a hundred and buy one"....

[Curt Harms]

Real estate is a horrible investment for the most part.

But you have to live somewhere. 288,000/348 months (29 years)= 353.45/month. You'd have to add on taxes plus whatever utilities are normally included in a rental and subtract the mortgage interest deduction etc. etc. As a non-owner-occupied investment you may be right.

[Michael Stein]

I own a boat, and have owned several boats over the years. I do not live on the water, though my house is about 100 yds from a tidal creek (no community access, houses across the street do have docks, though at low tide many of them are mud). I used to trailer my boat, but we decided this year to keep it on a lift at a local marina (about 8 1/2 minutes door to lift). It is expensive to do so, but with the kids, it is worth it. We also get use of the marina swimming pool, another added bonus for the kids.

That said. If I had the opportunity to purchase a canal/tidal creek/ICW front home, within a reasonable distance from work (I currently have a 5 minute commute), I would certainly do so, as I am now paying a "premium" for the lift. The home would also need to have reasonable amount of space for a shop.

Many hobbies have come and gone in my life, but two are here to stay - Boating and woodworking.

[Rich Engelhardt]

As a non-owner-occupied investment you may be right.

Other way around,,,

As a rental, you make a killing.

With all the tax advantages and depreciation, you end up having your cake (real estate) and eating it too.

[Michael Stein]

Other way around,,,

As a rental, you make a killing.

With all the tax advantages and depreciation, you end up having your cake (real estate) and eating it too.

I think you are missing the point. He is not saying that a house in an "investment." As you have already pointed out, as an investment, real estate tends to be a poor choice. However, as he said, you need a place to live. You can typically own a nicer home (more space, bigger yard, customize it to be your own) for far less monthly than you would find on the rental market. I don't think anyone thinks that buying a primary home is an investment that they will turn around and make money one years later, it is more about having a space to call yours.

[Rich Engelhardt]

Ok - it's well beyond the scope of the OP.

I'll just say that in addition to our house, we also own 5 rentals that provide a nice steady stream of income and our return on our investment totals up to right around 19% per year.
In any kind of economy, that sort of return is nothing short of spectacular.
Each one of the 5 rentals has lost quite a bit of what we paid for them initially while our primary has gone up in value.

The idea that "you have to live somewhere so you might as well build equity" is way outdated in a lot of markets.

As a landlord/property owner, I follow this sort of thing very closely. The point at which buying is better than renting has been pushed way back in many markets.
it used to be right around 7 years. If you stayed inn one place 7 years or longer, it made sense to buy instead of rent.
With today's high ( and growing higher every day) costs of repairs, that's no longer the case.

The whole topic is very convoluted and way beyond this thread.

[Rick Potter]

Rich,

This would make an interesting thread if you care to start one. The difference in numbers from one area to another can be astounding, but as you say this thread is not the place to discuss them.

[Julie Moriarty]

Timely topic, Julie.

I just took the family on an extended Northern California weekend which included a trip around half of Clear Lake. We got deep into some extended arms of land (peninsula) just because we like to do such things when touring around being spontaneous. I noticed two things: houses with docks on the water and house on the other side of the road, no water...no dock...no boat. I'm thinking if I lived there that I would be on the lake, with a dock, with a boat. I can't imagine living so close to water and not being able to go directly ON the water pretty much whenever I wanted to. What would be the point living so close to the water? My wife and daughter agreed with me. While it would cost more, I would pay it or I simply wouldn't live so darn close to the lake in the first place. BUT...each to their own. Maybe some just like the view and prefer to never step foot on the water (so to speak). There were plenty of house high up on the land with grand views....

For a home in a snow-less climate, my ideal would be 1500-1800 sq/ft house with about the same size screened-in outdoor area that had a lap pool in it with a covered lanai where you could sit under a paddle fan on warm or rainy evenings with an umbrella drink in hand. Out back would be a 35' sailboat sitting in 6+ feet of water that isn't too far away from a nice sailing body of water. A small air-conditioned shop would be nice too. Is that too much to ask?

[Chris Padilla]

For a home in a snow-less climate, my ideal would be 1500-1800 sq/ft house with about the same size screened-in outdoor area that had a lap pool in it with a covered lanai where you could sit under a paddle fan on warm or rainy evenings with an umbrella drink in hand. Out back would be a 35' sailboat sitting in 6+ feet of water that isn't too far away from a nice sailing body of water. A small air-conditioned shop would be nice too. Is that too much to ask?

Nope! I'm sure such a place exists...just gotta find it!

[Rick Potter]

I have seen dozens of places like that, Julie.

Unfortunately, they were in the lake country of Arkansas, not Florida.

[Mac McQuinn]

I'd have no issues living in a lakeside or seaside home without a boat. My in-laws just sold their lakeside cottage after living there since the 70's and have not owned a boat for several years. Putting in and taking the boat hoist out every year got to be too much plus the maintenance, insurance, storage, etc of a power boat was just too expensive year after year.

That said, I'd love to live on a houseboat! The whole property ownership thing seems overbearing at times.
Mac

[Julie Moriarty]

I have seen dozens of places like that, Julie.

Unfortunately, they were in the lake country of Arkansas, not Florida.

The problem with sailing on a lake is you'll eventually get bored, except on the Great Lakes. Now if we could move the Great Lakes south of the frost line...

[Ole Anderson]

Florida, seriously, in the summer? No way. Same with most of the states south of the Mason-Dixon line. I like Michigan, it is so, recognizable, on a map. And it has so many great lakes. And that Pure Michigan snow (when you get away from the cities) is so pretty! If you can manage it, best of both worlds is to have a winter place in the south and a summer place in the north. Both on the water with a boat of course. For us our winter place is a motorhome on a canal to the Gulf. Well, not really winter, just November, March and April. December, January and February are too cold in FL to really enjoy boating most days. Can't miss Christmas with the kids not to mention the snow.

[Julie Moriarty]

We're staying in a rental until we find a place to buy. It's on the same canal system we're hoping to find a home. I took this picture today:


The homeowner to the right has a 40+' power boat but he left for the weekend. That's the only boat in this part of the channel. There's a house to the immediate right, out of the camera lens, with two docks and no boats. There is another power boat off in the distance on the left and a sailboat just beyond that. Other than those, the docks are boatless. BTW, the water is black and you can't see past 1' deep.

To me this screams "PUT A BOAT AT THOSE DOCKS!" But I guess not to many of the homeowners here agree. And it's not for lack of funds. The house next door to where we are staying is valued at over $2M. On the other side it's $700K. Across the canal it's $600K and next to that is $950K.