Water front property
- Thread starter SLADE
- Start date
Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2017
- Messages
- 22,471
Well if you don't pay cash for the property, you would pay thru the nose for flood insurance, if it's in a flood area.
People that believe in man made global warming absolutely should not buy waterfront property.
People that believe in man made global warming absolutely should not buy waterfront property.
I think waterfront property will always have value! People want it!!
I don't think so! But there are SO MANY who live in such places!
southern appalachians are a long way from coast..but yet they got pounded to death the other day.
Many live on the river. Floods happen where I live and the rivers wipe out the old mill towns. Then everyone talks about rebuilding.
Why?
The Towns are now saying no to the buyouts. Floods happen too often.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Messages
- 16,691
I don't believe anyone should be responsible to bail anyone out who loses their property for any reason.
I tend to agree but if your land is taken by the powers that be, you should be well compensated.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2017
- Messages
- 7,947
Isn't that what insurance is for? I pay a lot. Had my first claim in 40 years of home ownership this year when a tree crushed my building. My premiums over the year are still more than what I had in damage.
As for coastal or other places that get water damage, I could be persuaded to agree to an insurance 1 TIME payout. After that, you're on your own.
I sure hope it's worth a LOT. Just waiting for the "Big One" to hit Cali. I have my boat dock all ready at my future ocean front property in Arizona. We're gonna be rich! 
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
- Messages
- 18,427
Some floods are predictable and you shouldn't build a house where a predictable flood could occur.
Nobody knew this was even possible, let alone predictable.
Nobody knew this was even possible, let alone predictable.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Messages
- 16,691
Insurance is different than the taxpayer being forced to pay for someone else's property.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Messages
- 16,691
Absolutely. Only its "fairly" compensated.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2020
- Messages
- 1,744
Not sure about OCEAN-front property, but LAKE-front property sells at a premium in Minnesota.
I have seen enough damage by water to want to stay well away from it, But that is my opinion, if I had land near water, I would try to sell it before it isn't sellable
You can buy flood insurance, otherwise you should be on your own. Only the feds sell flood insurance.
We have ocean front property. Tidal surge has flooded us a few times. We never looked to anyone else to help us out. We raised our beach front and road. When we built right on the water we put the house on stilts so now we rarely have a problem.
We have ocean front property. Tidal surge has flooded us a few times. We never looked to anyone else to help us out. We raised our beach front and road. When we built right on the water we put the house on stilts so now we rarely have a problem.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
- Messages
- 4,866
I would not buy property in a flood zone ( FEMA flood maps) but there are all sorts of natural disasters everywhere and it is difficult to pick a place that has few. All of the west coast has earthquakes and they could potentially have a tsunami, plus wildfires and occasionally when it does rain mudslides, middle has tornadoes, and floods next to rivers, east has hurricanes and floods
If you want to live some place relatively free of natural disasters you could move to Denmark. I don't think I have ever heard of one there
If you want to live some place relatively free of natural disasters you could move to Denmark. I don't think I have ever heard of one there
Uhmm... Denmark holds the sea back with giant DIKES! That didn't work out so well for New Orleans...
Remember the little Dutch boy.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Messages
- 16,691
This whole country was defined by; floods, earthquakes, volcanos, ice, landslides etc. Some of these events happen only about every 10,000 years or so. That doesn't mean that it's wise to build on land that hasn't flooded in recorded history. It will again. I built my home at an elevation of 5,000 feet and near the top of a ridge that goes around 3 sides of the house. It's highly unlikely that it'll ever flood at the house. Our biggest threat here is heavy snow and forest fires. Much of our property is covered in lava. Some areas have huge boulders that were blasted out of a volcano many miles away. It's highly unlikely that we'll live to see another eruption, but it is possible. We do have earthquakes here occasionally, nothing like California and Alaska does though.
We're currently looking for property on the coast, not on the ocean but inland a few miles. What we're looking for is a place with a salmon/steelhead stream running through it. Of course all streams on the coast flood, but we aren't ignorant enough to build anywhere close to the stream.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
- Messages
- 18,427
My father was a geological engineer and I still remember him ranting back in the 60's about people building houses in flood plains. He built our house on high ground at the highest point. Then in Camille in 1969, and the Jackson Easter Flood of 1979, those houses he had ranted about all got flooded.
I took it to heart and have always tried to live on high ground.
We bought some riverfront property last year. But where all the buildings are is on high ground sloping away in all directions, and is 100 ft higher than the river.
My wife and daughter both wanted me to build something down by the water and I adamantly refused.
Last edited:
Same up in 1000 Islands New York. It's also taxed at a premium. Our log cabin is on the St. Lawrence River and in 40 years only once was the water high enough on the river to flood the boat houses along it. Our place saw nothing--it's on a "lake" that is really just a huge cove. It's a managed river--the port of Montreal gets flooded (on purpose) during the winter months so that shipping can still happen.
After seeing the utter destruction in NC I would never buy waterfront property.
I would allow for a bailout once. Anybody can get caught by surprise. I have lived in the same house for over thirty years. We lived through a (supposed) 500 year flood that never affected us. Well guess what, 21 years later we had another flood, and the two houses across the street from me had four feet of water in their basement. Both have subsequently moved.
We did have areas where people collected money every year due to flooding. That IMHO is wrong.
JMHO but waterfront property will always have a high value, and will always be in demand. I got this from a guy a whole lot smarter then me. Have the banks stopped lending money to people who want to build houses or hotels on the waterfront? It is still a good investment
My thoughts: waterfront property will always be valueable. Insurance costs/repair costs don't matter to the wealthy.
There are all kinds of dangers to a home & each person needs to weigh them before purchasing land/house.
I think that people are dumb to build in dangerous areas but then I don't have the kind of money to pay those insurance costs or rebuild.
And I'll point out that sometimes you don't build in "danger zones" & you still get "hit". Here's a great example: I live in a flat part of Texas. Our town is probably 90% flat with a few "bumps" We just happened to buy a house on the top of a "bump" & the water naturally drains (fast) down the center of our side street to a creek. We should never need to worry about water damage because of the drainage & the fact that we live in a desert. Yet 6 or so years ago we got water in our back room (not much but we did). That day we got somewhere around 3 inches of rain in about 40 minutes. The water just couldn't drain off fast enough so you just never know.
There are all kinds of dangers to a home & each person needs to weigh them before purchasing land/house.
I think that people are dumb to build in dangerous areas but then I don't have the kind of money to pay those insurance costs or rebuild.
And I'll point out that sometimes you don't build in "danger zones" & you still get "hit". Here's a great example: I live in a flat part of Texas. Our town is probably 90% flat with a few "bumps" We just happened to buy a house on the top of a "bump" & the water naturally drains (fast) down the center of our side street to a creek. We should never need to worry about water damage because of the drainage & the fact that we live in a desert. Yet 6 or so years ago we got water in our back room (not much but we did). That day we got somewhere around 3 inches of rain in about 40 minutes. The water just couldn't drain off fast enough so you just never know.
Me Shack is up on top of a small Mountain at just under 900'(Lower end of the Appalachian Mt. Range) , guess one could say that I Live up High so I can take the High Road to and from Home...!!!
It is a good investment but only for the rich.
I live at 1200 ft and we have rivers and brooks that will kill you in a flood.Me Shack is up on top of a small Mountain at just under 900'(Lower end of the Appalachian Mt. Range) , guess one could say that I Live up High so I can take the High Road to and from Home...!!!
I would beg to differ. It is a good investment for anybody. The rich can take advantage of higher end properties and make larger investments, but anybody that invests can reap the benefits.
True but I don't know many poor people in that position.
