Lake Houston Topics: Higher winter water = lower property values?

Lake Houston Topics

(Lake Houston Specific)

5 messages

Updated 11/12/2022 11:05:57 AM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

84,091 messages

Updated 11/8/2024 10:28:12 AM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,204 messages

Updated 9/14/2024 10:10:50 AM

Lake Houston Fishing

(Lake Houston Specific)

1 messages

Updated 8/19/2006 11:35:05 PM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,172 messages

Updated 9/9/2024 5:04:44 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,262 messages

Updated 11/6/2024 6:43:09 PM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,979 messages

Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Welcome, Guest

Select View Mode: [ classic | beta | recent ]

	Name:	MartiniMan -
	Subject:	Higher winter water = lower property values?
	Date:	8/5/2013 5:49:18 PM

Exactly! Homes with year round water have higher value than those that don't. So do I want my comps to be with or without year round water? Answer is obvious. The value of homes that do not have year round water at 480' winter pool but will at 483' will be in a different comp pool and their values will go up. I don't remotely understand why this is even debatable.

The initial question was whether more homes with year round water will lower the value of the ones that currently do and my belief is they will not. The only viable argument I can imagine for this is the extra competition for buyers looking for year round water. That only holds if the demand is inelastic which I do not think it would be, especially if the higher winter pool were combined with an extended rule curve. That would attract more buyers to the Lake Martin market as we all know that dropping the lake in the winter has an adverse impact on property values which are driven by demand.

But for sure three more feet of water will make a lot of other homes more valuable for sellers and certainly more enjoyable for the current owners. Would I pay less for a house with big views and deep water simply because there are other houses on the lake with three more feet of water? I don't think so. But I would certainly pay more for a house with year round water than one with a mud pit all winter long and that isn't usable from late Sept to March or April. This seems intuitive to me but maybe I am missing something.

For sure I will trust the opinion of realtors and I think all of them agree that this would be positive news for the lake, as does APCO.