Such_a_brett

@escmanaze It's nice to hear that I seam to be going down a design path that is more appropriate for the target demo. I love that big lake now. I also think the business model is a winner. I'm willing to admit that I could be wrong. But the excercise of defending it to people here is very helpful. You are more than welcome to buy a little 1/4 acre piece just as a family getaway spot. :D I get that some riders are pretty hardcore. Depending on insurance we might be able to work out a couple designated resident drivers for early/late season. You're winter ideas are right along the lines of what I was thinking. Definitely there will be an ice skating area and hockey rink. The big lake is large enough to pull tubers behind snowmobiles once the the ice exceeds 5". That groomer for a snow biking trail is pretty cool. This brings up an interesting question. What does everyone think about lights on the lakes? Some of the other lakes have them.

@owennibley I really appreciate the feedback. I agree with you that the current location under consideration is great. It's a fascinating experience right there. One moment you are at the junction of the 2 main arterial highways that run through the city. Then you turn onto the property and suddenly you are in a secluded mountain retreat. Your sightline is occupied by a wrapping river with mature 50ft willows, and the steep Wellsville mountains seem to tower over the top of them. Having lived here my whole life, I know that the mountains are about 5 miles away, but that's not the perception. As you suggest, everything you would want close to your home for convenience is within 1 mile, and commuting to work along the Wasatch Front is easy from here. It's funny, my brother worked near the airport and commuted from Logan for a year (about 60min commute). Then they moved to SL Valley to be closer, but chose Daybreak because prices were too steep elsewhere. His commute was still 50-55min depending on traffic. In the end they moved back to Logan and he commutes from here. I totally understand what you are saying about developing beautiful ag land. But the reality is that if I don't do this project, there is a 99% probability that another developer is going to do a mixed use R6 (6 homes per acre) and industrial park along the highway. Your claustrophobic response is triggered by the rapid growth of the city. Logan metro area is consistently in the top 5% fastest growing in the nation and is a popular location for second homes for people from Cali, Vegas, and Pheonix. Massive home shortage right now. I appreciate the critique. I like to make sure that I'm considering everything. However, it seems like we're getting our wires crossed a bit on the numbers and concept. Let's use the most recent layout for density as it is the most probable outcome. 112 single family lots and 200-ish condos. With the proposed setup at that density, I think the lakes will be about 50% full. I think you're being a bit unfair to Logan on climate. It's absolutely colder during the winter (hockey on the lakes no problem), but the spring and fall boating months are only about 3-5deg cooler than SLC. On private ski lakes the water is warmer so we start skiing about mid April when daytime highs exceed 60F and stop about mid October. So about 6 month season give or take a couple weeks depending on the year. When I said HOA $35 more than typical, it was in reference to most high-end developments on the east benches that have a $20 monthly HOA. We are assuming $55-60 total depending on density. Let's say $60 for this discussion. About $40 of that would be allocated to lake and boat. That was the monthly "club fee" I was talking about. There is no additional $40 fee. Your boat usage is about the same as mine each year. Assuming your 70 sets of 30min (would actually be 140 sets of 15 min). That's about $2800-3000/year everything included at our proposed price. I've run the numbers many times whenever I wanna buy a new boat and I can't ever get it to come under $5-6k per year. So I sold the truck and currently we just rent at about $700/day 6 or 7 times a summer. No boat to worry about. I would love to get a luxury boat experience for less than $3k per year hassle free. You know what they say, "if it flies or floats, rent it!" Regarding homes and buyers... as of this year, the entire valley has a median income of $62k currently and an average income of $76k. But our single family target demo isn't buyers in their 30s. Our target is 40-65yo where the net worth is higher and median income is $78k and average income is $90k+. The condos have a broader age demo (25-75) but they will fill up no problem at proposed rents. Home sizes will be allowed to be modest. Having run a design/build firm, we are more concerned with good 4-sided architecture with appropriate styling than we are about size. Also some of the lots are just 1/4 acre, so we can't insist on huge homes. We will likely have a 1,500sf minimum above ground, with the ground level needing to be at least 1,200sf on any 1.5 or 2 story home. For perspective, a lowest end 'step up' home (the home after your starter home or condo) in a nice development here is about $300k not including the lot. I haven't built a home for a client under $350k since 2009. Typical 0.3-0.5acre lots are $85-110k in the good developments and they are selling like crazy. So the most popular new home demo in the valley is about $400-475k. The same home in our development would be $460-535k. I don't see that as a big deterrent. Every client I've consulted in the last 12 months has had a build budget of $500k+. All of them are rolling at least $100-200k equity from their current home. It's true that Weber and Davis counties have higher average incomes (about 20-30% higher) but the lakeside lots in those areas are selling for 2-3x what we'll be charging. Also, those cities are only 35-50 minutes from this location. The south end of the valley gets a lot of buyers from there. For perspective, Bear Hollow Lakes and Last Chance Lakes are both the same distance from the big metro areas as we are, but sold out all their lots at $400k+ despite both being located in the middle of nowhere, no municipal utilities, with much higher HOA and fewer amenities. Also, I know for a fact that a few of the buyers at Stillwater Lakes live in Utah County, which is the same drive as here to SLC. They also paid 2x what we'll be charging, have higher HOA and fewer amenities. I think that at least 30% of our lots will be purchased without the intention to build on them. Our CCRs will require full professional landscaping within 12 months but no requirement to build.

As things always go with larger projects, we've run into another snag. Land owners figured out a sweetheart deal allowing them to get paid out a couple million by a conservation society to place a conservation easement along the river that unfortunately takes up 45% of the land from my proposed layout. Now I've got 2 choices. 1- Buy out the conservation easement for a couple million and follow the original 160 acre plan. 2- Buy 20 more acres of neighboring land. Leave the easement in place and acquire it for relative pennies as it is now unfit for development. Then work the easement into the layout in the most desirable manner possible. In this case, the project is now 180 acres but has 25% fewer (albeit larger) lots, as illustrated below. For perspective, the comp lake is still the same as before. The no-wake lake is much larger at the bottom right. The big wake lake is also much larger (2300' length and about 27 acres total size). The big lake is now very suitable for surf and tube and I've taken the advice and enlarged the small turn end to 550ft diameter for surfers. Obviously the larger turn end is about 1,200ft width. The light green is the conservation easement that has been incorporated into the backyards of the river properties, which are now 1-3 acres each in size. Open to thoughts.

@cfgunnell I totally understand your sentiments about Cache Valley. I've lived here my whole life and been involved in real estate here for a decade or so. If it helps, my R/E brokers are actually suggesting that I'm underestimating the demand. My perspective is that selling the lots won't be difficult. The hardest part is going to be building class-A condos without pricing them out of the market. I commend you for the perseverance of building your lake. I'm sure that was quite a project. If I remember correctly, you had topography in your favor up north. There are some key differences with this project and we are targeting a different demo. Everyone I know who has built a lake is just like you. Team up with a couple like-minded friends to split the financial burden and allow as few users as possible to pay for reasonable maintenance. Land can be cheap because you can be 10-20 minutes outside the city. Amenities can be minimal and economical because your goal is smooth water. That is an awesome way to go, if you can do it. I've recognized that there is a massive push toward shared amenities in real estate within modern family and community dynamics. But unlike your private oasis, our target demo has certain requirements. They need proximity to the city but also isolated serenity. They want the activity right at their fingertips; they can ski for 15-30 minutes without worrying about the equipment. They want perfect conditions during the short period they can fit into their schedule but they want someone else to maintain the lakes in pristine condition. They want other amenities with the lakes; pools, spa, gym, clubhouse, tennis, pickleball, fishing, bike/running path, hockey/ice skating, etc... Doing this as a mixed use resort community allows me to address all of those requirements at a reasonable cost. The proximity requirement has been the most difficult. I'll share the location once I have the owners under contract. I can tell you it isn't on the bear river or anywhere between Young Ward and Benson. As you suggest, the mosquitos are terrible out in the marshland and it's also too far from the city commercial hubs. Our requirements are to be less than 1.5 miles from either the south or north hubs. South is better so we can draw buyers from out of the valley easier. It also needs to have water, sewer, and gas. Preferably it is annexed so we have municipal road maintenance and snow removal. That is tricky because annexed raw land within 1 mile of the south walmart is about $200k-1MM per acre. Go 2 miles further and it is $20-40k per acre, but doesn't have the utilities. Your point is well taken about your lake members paying less than what I'm suggesting. But they must purchase their own boat with a truck/trailer to pull it. Drive, store, and maintain it themselves, supply their own gas, etc. What I'm building is much more like a country club membership. Purchase of a lot/condo gets you membership. You can view the premium on the lot as the club initiation fee (except that you actually own an appreciating R/E asset). Monthly club fee is about $40. Boat usage fee is about $40/hour plus gas and driver fee. All other amenities included at no additional cost. I'm guessing that if one of your typical members with a 1-2 year old comp level boat were to tally up total net costs over 10 years, it would come out significantly higher than one of our community residents over the same period (assuming similar amount of ski time). That's just the benefit of shared amenities. Your members have the benefit of exclusivity- no waiting in line. Our members have the benefit of lower cost and more amenities. Just a different demographic.

@escmanaze I really appreciate your feedback. It's nice to hear from people who understand the Utah market. There are a lot of people with abundant waterfront properties who don't understand what it's like in places where there is virtually no such thing as waterfront. And a day out on the water is primarily spent cruising through the chop of a small reservoir looking for a little patch that resembles smooth water. You are correct that my attitude has changed quite a bit. I did a lot of market research and realized that I was a victim of the crowd that I boat with. You are absolutely correct. 70% of the broader demo now primarily surfs. As you can see from the new concept, there is a much bigger emphasis on a rec lake suitable for the big wake and tubing demo. As you suggest, within the Utah market that is absolutely the demo I'm targeting with this development. Ironically, even though it is the smallest and easiest to build, the no-wake lake will probably end up getting the most action. We plan to install a zero entry beach on it for the kids to play. Unfortunately, I don't think I can work out a bigger more open lake of the necessary size. I'm already trying to work my way through some tricky easement issues with the land. I can likely open up the turns quite a bit though. I understand your sentiments on the Cache Valley market. That's the whole reason for this concept. I need the amenities to draw the proper demo. Then I need the density to keep it within the price range of the valley. Keep in mind that the condo units will rent for prices very similar to the other large resort type communities here. Maybe an extra $100-150/month. A bit more than 1/2 of the single family lots will be priced about $20-35k higher than a typical subdivision. The other half will be closer to $70-100K higher. Target HOA fees will be about $35/month higher than a typical subdivision. When you consider that typical residents will be paying $100-400 per month on their mortgage. It would seem people are getting a lot of value for the money.

@BraceMaker These are all good questions. Yes we've planned on at least 3-4 "full time" drivers and then 3-4 part timers. Obviously, "full time" doesn't mean that someone is driving solid 9am-5pm. We fully recognize that the sophistication of our software platform is paramount. Fortunately, we have extensive expertise in software and predictive analytics. So it isn't that difficult for us to build a scheduling system around predicted usage patterns. Concept is that the boat drivers will be a separate charter company with a defined base compensation package. Facilities and boats will be paid for by the HOA. Drivers will also make a commission per session. I don't think that drivers will be a big problem.

@jimbrake that is the one element that I haven't pushed for. I don't see a big demand for it relative to how annoying it is to plan for. Maybe I'm wrong though. We could possible put one on the recreational lake.

@coach3 That's exactly what we've done. There already is a separate slalom lake. 2000ft long, 220ft wide, 6ft deep with turn islands and a buoy course.

@cfgunnell That lake is pretty much the size of two separate lakes connected at the end into a V shape. I tried to separate them, but the land is just a bit too cramped. Anyway, when I talk about 2 boats at a time, I'm talking about rider preference and specifically when tubing. Internally we have an expertise in software development. We plan on building a scheduling system that will allow tubers and surfers the option of sharing the lake with a second boat for a lower use charge. With the lake that size and configuration I don't think I would mind at all if another boat was on the water while I surfed, especially if driven by a professional following proper etiquette. On the rare occasions that I would be tubing, a second boat creating some chop would be considered a benefit. OTOH, a second boat while wakeboarding or skiing? Forget about it!

In terms of shore protection at the turns, we've always anticipated using large cobble at those locations. We will have a lot of it coming out of the river sections that we have to straighten and clean up.

Yeah thanks, I'll look into it. We can open those ends up another 50ft if needed. The one at the right extreme we are thinking of opening it even further because we have extra land there. Doing that will enable us to run 2 boats at a time whenever it is tubing or if surfers agree to share. That essentially creates the equivalent of a 4 lake setup. The community is bigger than before, now 155 single family homes and 250 condos. But the ability to run 3 boats at a time and a designated no-wake lake will help a lot in handling the demand.

@rimodico The turn area at the extremes of the wake lake are 280ft diameter.

@BraceMaker The lots are intended to be 140' deep. Rear setbacks will be 50ft and 10-15ft along the shoreline will be sand at a 16:1 slope.

@Dockoelboto thanks for the feedback. In the plan above, the wake lake would be 15ft deep. Some have suggested 20ft, but I can't bring myself to dig it that far down for what would likely be a mostly unnoticed benefit. The width of the lake is increased to allow for a 16:1 slope further below and above the waterline to aid in erosion control. The turns at the ends will be more aggressively protected. Point of clarification... this is not meant to be a public community. It might not be gated, but access will absolutely be limited to residents. Given the density of residents, we pretty have no choice but to do community boats with paid drivers. This is not like other communities in the region where people have paid an extra $400k for the lot and private dock and a few hundred a month in HOA to have unlimited access. Residents here will be paying roughly an extra $80k for the lot on average and about $55/month HOA instead of the typical $20/month. To be fair, it would be completely unreasonable to pay a meager $80k extra for the lot and $420 extra per year in HOA and expect to have this type of exclusive watersport experience without having to share or wait in line. Also, it has been discussed above, but you actually do have to pay extra per set. It's your boat payment, maintenance, fuel, etc. You are probably like everyone else and don't really itemize those as a per-set cost. I know I never had until doing the calcs for this project.

Here is a very rough draft layout of the new concept to fit one of the prospective locations. Feedback very welcome. Obviously this is a bit different direction than the original concept. This one actually has a designated comp level ski lake and a much larger play lake for the big wake crowd. I've also added a no-wake pond with a big island park in the middle. If I like the concept there is room for one more of those on the other side of the comp lake. Given that this layout is bordered 50% (approx 1.5 miles) by natural river, there are actually very few lots or condos that won't be backed either by lake or river. The river is about 30-50' wide and 2-6' deep depending on runoff. It's very beautiful lined with mature willows; includes good fishing (cutthroat, brown, and rainbow trout).

@owennibley @cfgunnell Since you both were watching this project with interest, I'll tell you that unfortunately I couldn't get all the moving parts together for that specific piece of land in Nibley. The more I worked on it, the more convinced I was that it would've worked out great on that site. The problem was that I had to bring 3 different land owners together for the deal. One was actively selling the biggest piece, and the other 2 were wanting to sell in the next 2-5 years, but not eager right now. The one actively marketing his property just got an offer a month ago for about $3k less per acre than we were willing to pay and he took it. So that site is out now. We have three new prospective spots now. 1 -- Wellsville- This site is great in terms of layout, access, and utilities. I have big reservations regarding likely soil type and distance from the main city. The numbers only work for me if this is done as a resort style and I'm not sure I can market 200+ class A rental units out in the rural area 10 miles from the city. 2-- Young Ward- This site is great in terms of cost and location. Very quiet and serene with the right soil type, but with that comes the off-grid problems. We would have to run about 1 mile of paved county road to get to it. We can get power easy enough, but would have to do on-site wastewater treatment and community propane. The discounted price of the land makes the road doable, but the wastewater is expensive. I think the biggest problem though is the propane. 3-- Logan City- There is a pretty great piece actually in Logan City limits. The layout I've drafted would create a pretty amazing community. It isn't on the market, but I know the owner and we are waiting on the appraisal to make sure the numbers work. The good things here are proximity (2 miles from city center and about 1 mile from food/retail districts. Utilities are already there so no wastewater, wells, or propane to worry about. Abundant water!!! In fact, I think the land should be discounted because technically this land is marshland. Any other developer would have to truck in huge amounts of fill, but fortunately for us, we'll have 250,000 yards coming out of the lakes. The downsides are likely that land will be higher because of proximity. Also, one short edge of the property is bordered by a main arterial roadway with accompanying road noise. I think I've got a way around that. Also, this property is quite large (about 150 acres) which makes the project larger. But that might work out advantageous because we'll be able to do a 3rd smaller wakeless lake, and we'll end up with a greater proportion of waterfront properties.

@Wayne You bring up an interesting point. I generally don't like the "flowrider" type surf-in-place machines. But that is mainly because they don't resemble real surfing at all. OTOH, they actually do have a strong resemblance to wakesurfing. I do like the idea of adding a 2-acre wave lake like at BSR surf ranch, but it changes the dynamic of the community. There is no way to justify the many millions those cost without opening it to the public and charging $60/hr.

@mjnelson You and @scotchipman are working on me pretty good to do one in SL Valley or Utah Valley. Obviously there are some advantages there. I'm considering a project down there, but would likely be more interested in a larger project with 2 boat lakes, a no-wake/fishing lake, and an AWM wave lake. I need to be close enough to the main metro areas to be connected, but land must be cheap still. Also, water isn't as cheap there, so I'd need water rights. @scotchipman pointed me toward a sod farm that looks interesting.

@owennibley Yeah I chatted with @cfgunnell and he mentioned both of you have property nearby. I hear what you are saying about the demographics of this area, but I think you are significantly underestimating the valley. It is growing VERY rapidly, and isn't as much of a college town anymore. Price and marketing is going to be key in this project for sure. If we were pricing lots in the $300-400s like all the other private lakes in the state, I think it might take more than 10-12 years for full absorption. But we've spoken to several brokers and the message has been consistent across all of them. "Keep your average waterfront lot price below $200K and they will sell." We are anticipating about 5-6 years for full absorption of the SFR lots at a $185K average price. Might need to wholesale a dozen lots or so to volume builders to get vertical development going. Once the development goes vertical, lot prices hold solid in a normal market. I'm a licensed B100 builder, so we have the option of taking matters into our own hands if vertical development doesn't move quickly enough. Will likely have a waiting list on the MFR once they get built. I realize that Cache County isn't nearly the size of SLC, Davis, Utah, and Weber, but we do get a fair draw from Davis and Weber. Our location is more convenient than Last Chance, SunTen, and Bear Hollow. The only lakes with a better location currently are Stillwater and they are sold out at nearly double the price. Also, none of these locations has the amenities we are offering and all of them have higher HOA fees.

Right now, I'm trying to navigate the ability to accommodate surf on one lake. It is very expensive and difficult to create a surfable lake... wider, deeper, higher maintenance, etc... It is popular right now, but I think it is absolutely at its peak and people are going to start to lose interest in it. IMO, a lot of surfing popularity comes from that fact that it's the only real option when the water is full of rollers. Everyone I ride with typically has the same routine. Go out super early for the skiers. The slalom riders get the glass. The boat pretty much switches to boarding mid to late morning. By 11am everyone is tired of getting beat to death on rollers and the surf boards and tubes come out for the rest of the day and the boat spends 80% of the time from then on idling. In the end, surfing really is pretty boring, and even more boring for the people in the boat. But I fully acknowledge that it is easy enough and low impact enough to allow just about anyone to do it even in the worst water conditions. Another big problem when trying to run a reasonable schedule is that rides are LONGGGG. A 12 minute set on a ski or board is already tight, but if I'm really pushing I can really use a rest after a hard 12 minute ride on smooth water. I can surf for 30 minutes no problem. A 12 minute set would feel like nothing. I also don't really like the layout concept of differently purposed lakes. People naturally want to boat the lake that they live on. I don't really want to force buyers to choose between living on the ski lake vs the surf lake.

Yeah, we were mainly concerned about too many novice drivers. Once we realized the necessity of a charter service, having a course isn't really a problem.

@wawaskr I understand your position, but what specifically bothers you about the wake wallies? I'm wondering if many of those things don't exist in a private chartered boat scenario. For example, if you said their large wakes ruin water conditions, that's a non-issue here. Or if you said, drivers don't follow proper boating etiquette. Again a non-issue here.

Hahaha... this boat cost debate reminds me of shopping for a snowblower with my dad several years ago. He has a fairly large driveway with a lot of walks and the snow removal company quoted $130/visit for a 15 minute job. He was outraged because that is $1,000 a season. We went out shopping for a snowblower. The small single stage ones wouldn't be able to handle the load, so he was looking at the $3.5K Honda 2-stage. We get about 7-8 storms a season that justify snow removal. With the snowblower it takes him the better part of 2 hours to remove the snow from a decent storm. Now he spends 15 hours of his own time and has to maintain that machine every year. By the time it "pays for itself" 4 years will have passed and he'll have wasted 60 hours of his own time. After discussing the cost benefit with him, the justification was "I don't want to have to wait my turn if I hired a service".

We aren't talking about someone paying $400K extra for a lot here. We are talking about a $450/month increase in their house payment. There are a ton of people able to pay an extra $450/month on their mortgage, but don't have $60K sitting around to pay cash for a boat. I bet less than 20% of boat sales above $20k are cash sales. In any case, opportunity cost is very real. If you pay cash for the boat, you are easily giving up at least 5% annual return on that cash. Coincidentally, yes there is a fair amount of interest in this development already and we haven't even advertised it yet. And our equity partners are very familiar with the 3 nearby private lake communities.

@oldjeep I don't think you are being intellectually honest in your assessment. The average boat owner cannot reasonably expect zero depreciation after 500+ hours of use. Typically that $60k boat will have depreciated at least $12K during that period. Even if it didn't depreciate, the interest on the loan would be $3K/year because very few owners pay cash. Even if they did pay cash, the opportunity cost of that cash would be greater than $3K/annual. The average owner of a $60K 6 year old boat doesn't spend $100 per year in upkeep. (bust-out-another-thousand) It isn't fair to just say you don't keep track of fuel cost and act like it is nothing. According to your claimed usage of 5 hours twice a week (and assuming 5 months a year) your fuel costs would be at least $7K annually unless most of your 5 hours is idling.