Price of Land in Charlotte Co. (Port Charlotte, Crystal River: for sale, attorney, homes)

[ElaineB]

I see quite a few Ebay auctions for land lots in Port Charlotte and surrounding areas. Do you guys think it would be a good investment to buy land to build in the future? I'm thinking about building a retirement home maybe 20 years from now. Thanks!

[FLBob]

NO... There is sooo much vacant land is Charlotte County. Mile after mile of land that was platted in the 50's and 60's.
You'll be paying property taxes on the land for 20 years, and when you think it's time to build that retirement home the building department my tell you that some endangered species lives on the land.
If you're looking to buy and build then it's a different story.
If you ignore my advice then at least find a truly special piece of property.

[ElaineB]

Thanks FLBob. LOL I'm actually more interested in the Crystal River area but see that the land there is a lot more expensive and so I thought that since the land is so cheap now, it might be a good investment.

[FLBob]

I don't care where the land is, long term buy and hold speculation is risky. The issues are the same in the Crystal River area.

[SoFLGal]

Well, yes and no. It really depends on the price. One big thing in Charlotte county is Scrub Jays. They are birds that are protected and if found on your lot make it virtually impossible to build on due to their protected status. I would think it would be more risky due to this factor. These birds generally stay in one place but can migrate to other areas. What if they take up shop on your vacant lot? 20 years is a long time to hold a piece of property.

There are 1,672 lots right now in Charlotte county under $20K. That's quite a bit of inventory.

[121804]

Gonna try to rep you for the scrub jay mention, SoFLGal.

Have to pay attention to scrub jays. When we were looking at plots in PC, the cheapest were always on scrub jays. To the OP, you basically cannot build on scrub jay land.

[FLBob]

Scrub Jays have gotten all the head lines, but the issue is the Endangered Species Act.

"The Endangered Species Act requires the US federal government to identify species threatened with extinction, identify habitat they need to survive, and help protect both. In doing so, the Act works to ensure the basic health of our natural ecosystems and protect the legacy of conservation we leave to our children and grandchildren."

I've personally seen Florida Panther on the Cape Haze Peninsula, image what could happen to the thousands of vacant lots should that land be deemed necessary habitat.

Land that was not designated as scrub jay two years ago has changed and owners that didn't need to conduct environmental studies now need to.

As development occurs and stress is placed on the environmental system it's anyone's guess about what future environmental land use regulations may be passed. Ask waterfront owners who have seen their ability to build a dock subject to the decision of a judge.

Vacant land speculation should not be entered into lightly. No doubt the prices of platted lots are reaching a level that for some purchasing today with the intentions of building in the future can make sense. If someone does decide to purchase a platted vacant lot, do your homework, pick something special, something worth the risk.

[121804]

Then what's the point of purchasing scrub jay land in an area that land is being sold for the purpose of building homes? Not sure I would spend thousands of dollars to protect birds. I can see not being allowe to build in the area that they have their habitat but then why is it up for public sale?

I always wondered.

[FLBob]

Originally Posted by 121804

Then what's the point of purchasing scrub jay land in an area that land is being sold for the purpose of building homes? Not sure I would spend thousands of dollars to protect birds. I can see not being allowe to build in the area that they have their habitat but then why is it up for public sale?

I always wondered.

The issue that you raise is the issue between individual property rights, and the "common good".

When government "takes" then by the 5th amendment of the United States, government needs to compensate the property owner.

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

I've never understood how the government can prevent a property owner from building and not compensate the owner. But I've seen it happen.

In some cases the property owner can mitigate the impact to the endangered or threaten species.

In the case of the scrub jay the property owner can purchase mitigation land in order to build on their primary property. The mitigation for the scrub jay is 2 to 1. In order to develop on 1 acre the property owner must set a side 2 acres for scrub jay habitat.
When dealing with large or very valuable land, the cost of fighting for just compensation in court can make sense to the property owner. When dealing with a 1/4 acre lot that is valued at 10k, the attorney and court costs just don't make sense.

If the government were to prevent the property owner from attempting to sell, or lowered their property tax assessment to 0 then the government would be admitting that the property was taken.

[121804]

Originally Posted by FLBob

The issue that you raise is the issue between individual property rights, and the "common good".

When government "takes" then by the 5th amendment of the United States, government needs to compensate the property owner.

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

I've never understood how the government can prevent a property owner from building and not compensate the owner. But I've seen it happen.

In some cases the property owner can mitigate the impact to the endangered or threaten species.

In the case of the scrub jay the property owner can purchase mitigation land in order to build on their primary property. The mitigation for the scrub jay is 2 to 1. In order to develop on 1 acre the property owner must set a side 2 acres for scrub jay habitat.
When dealing with large or very valuable land, the cost of fighting for just compensation in court can make sense to the property owner. When dealing with a 1/4 acre lot that is valued at 10k, the attorney and court costs just don't make sense.

If the government were to prevent the property owner from attempting to sell, or lowered their property tax assessment to 0 then the government would be admitting that the property was taken.

But I swear I saw scrub jay land on props less than an acre surrounded in a development by other homes. I just could never understand seeing a "for sale" sign on property you can't do anything with, etc.

Thanks for the response, FLBob. I just find it really interesting.