I don't know how anyone does it. The cheapest(still livable) water front single house in MD costs like 900k. It'd always been my dream to own a water front house. But it seems like it's not going to happen anytime soon if I stick around in the area. So any of you ballers owns one of those in Maryland or Northern Virginia? I'd really love to see some pictures of your house and know what you do for living.

 

broad bay island FTW va beach!

 

I have a little puddle in my backyard now =)

 

Go to Houston and own a nice 5 bedroom lakehouse w/2 car garage and pool in a gated community for $300,000. As soon as my office will let me transfer out of DC, I am outty!!! You can tell the difference in what people drive in Texas. Cheap rent/mortgage means nice cars w/ lots of mods.

 

Not around here. I prefer the Finger Lakes in upstate NY which is where our family "getaway" is located. But then again it's not in my budget, I just use it ALL the friggin time. lol

Other than that you kinda have to look closely. The properties on the larger bodies of water are more pricey, but if you look into smaller "private" lakes like Lake Jackson near the Manassas area it's much more affordable. You can't fit a Yacht or any large boats but they're fine for recreational watersports and such.

 

How do those cali guys do it then....Steep rent/mortgage means nice cars w/ lots of mods.

 

Hmm.. but how's the cost of living in Houston? I almost moved to Florida because I wanted a Lakefront house. But the job offer I got in Florida paid like 70% of what I'm making here in VA.

 

I know there are cheaper water front houses in Severna Park and especially Pasadena MD, but the latter may not appeal to you....

 

I checked Severna Park. It's still pretty expensive. They actually have waterfront house that costs something like $12,500,000 in Serverna Park. I'm checking out Essex, MD now.

 

Your obviously looking at baller houses man. Friend of mines dad bought a nice 5000+sq/ft house on the water for around $700K in SP.

 

have you checked the eastern shore yet? i.e St. michaels etc, tons of waterfront homes around there, and on that side of the bay bridge in genral. Depending on how baller you want to go

 

The value of the land is what is driving waterfront prices up. Everytime they impose more restrictions(set-backs,buffers,making sea weed beds "critical areas" etc.) it reduces the amount of buildable lots, and increases the necessary size for a buildable one. It is simply supply and demand and the supply is permanently going down. Unfortunately, property taxes are going up on these homes at the same rate. Even if you can afford to buy, you may not be able to afford to keep it.
I live in the Puget Sound area(WA.) and for several years waterfront has been going up at a rate about 50% faster than non waterfront properties.

 

Buying water front on the Eastern Shore is going to be more expensive becase they are requiring set backs and easements for waterfront because of runoff and pollution and are charging developers money for every sq.ft. of roof/asphault/concrete that is put down. That tax gets transferred to the buyer or future home owner. Essex is not the place to live, high crime, lots of industrial parks, and Bethlehem Steel. Severna Park is really pricy. There is not much land. Pasadena is home to the redneck. Pick up trucks and mullets. Its either really rich or really poor out there. And traffic sucks. Only one 2 lane road in and out of there. And anything in Anne Arundel County is high taxes. You might buy something, but that doesnt mean county taxes will let you keep it. Your best bet is southern Maryland, rural areas, not much development. Or even futher south.

 

Land Developer's do not get charged for set backs or easements or what will be put on the property (i.e. concrete, asphalt, etc.). Property cost has risen and thats what gets transfered to the eventual buyer directly. The setbacks and easements reduce the amount of buildable sq.ft which increases cost per sq.ft. thats about the only correlation between the setbacks and easements and cost of land. We can't transfer taxes, they are what they are and are based directly off assessments, which comes from livable area and overall sq.ft. of the lot and varies per jusrisdiction.

I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've heard "my house cost this much $ and it should be this". In all reality, construction costs haven't risen that drastically, its the property you put the structure on that costs the money. Its not what you live in but more of where its located that directs pricing.

 

Good point. I'm checking out houses and I'm seeing some really old waterfront houses that are totally torn down going for like 350k. So lets say I buy house(basically land) and spend like 200k to build a brand new house. I can have a brand new waterfront house for 550k?! Sweet deal!

 

Robbie,
there is new state legislation that will charge developers for impervious surfaces. IE: asphault, concrete, sqft of roof. They are also mandating larger percentage of green space on property to handle stormwater runoff. This stuff is really new and its all part of the save the chesapeake bay stuff. I am familiar with alot of these up and coming regualtions because my company deals with stormwater runoff, containment, and drainage. And it currently only effects new development. And as far as taxes are concerned I was not basing the tax statement off of just real estate, but taxes overall. The property and income tax for the county is high. I am looking to buy a house now and I am looking at everything.

 

Ugggh, well I guess we'll be shying away from the water areas for a bit. lol I heard a rumor about this but hadn't yet encountered any issues regarding it.

I have a question for you then in reference to that. We're currently in progress in constructing "The Spectrum" which is 189 condos with retail on the 1st floor, an exclusive terrace (fully landscaped) on the 3rd floor, and a full "green roof". Does the new legislation take into account for areas such as "green roof" systems since they are technically impervious due to the concrete substrate yet are considered green space by definition?

You may not know, but Im curious, since these type of systems will be put on a few other upcoming projects we have.

 

Yes, greenroofs are taken into account. And they subtract from the impervious surface of a site. Greenroofs are on structure, but they have a soil media that is between 4 and 8 inches deep. This soil media absorbs water and slows that amount of water that would normally pour off of a asphault shingle roof or slab roof of a commercial building. This water normally rushes down storm drains and into stormwater systems, washing all the debris and road oil and grim into the streams and rivers and th,e bay. And because of the mass development of roads and builds the stormwater treatment facilities cant handle the increase in flow. So a greenroof slows the water down from entering the stormwater systems. Allows it to be treated properly. And the ultimate mind set is to keep stormwater on site. Allowing it to perculate through the soil and in the the ground water. Allowing the soil on sites to naturally remove all of the harmful chemicals and byproducts in the air and on ground.

This is also the same principle behind Mont. Co. requiring cisterns or stormwater fields on properties now. So that they can slow down the water and allow it perculate through the soil naturally.

 

Thanks for the info. I see a possible few site changes in the future, although we haven't built anything in MD in a little while.

 

Florida waterfront homes aren't cheap. In the Palm Beach County area, houses on the canals that lead to the intercoastal have gone in the 1 million range for tear downs homes that sit on a 1/4 to 1/2 acre. Only waterfront homes that are affordable are ones that the developer dug a lake/pond in the back and charged more for those "waterfront" lots.