"What do you look for in a lot?"
As an architect, I get this question from time to time. It's much easier to give others advise when you're not personally involved, and a basic list of things I mention to consider:
Location. Perhaps the most important. It needs to make sense for you and your family, your work and/or school commute, your budget, proximity to extended family, school district, etc.
Zoning. Not an exciting subject except for us dorky architects and planners, but every piece of land is zoned for a specific use by your city or county, unless you live in one of those very few lucky areas that just says "the heck with zoning, let's build a daycare next to this trash dump!" A quick study of your county/city's zoning ordinance will tell you what can be built on the land without needing a costly and time-consuming variance.
Topography. This is how the land undulates, and what land features might be on it. This can greatly affect the cost to build as well as the design of the home, or potentially make it infeasible.
Site Access. Does the site have legal access from a road, or at a minimum an easement to it across another owner's land? Is the access recorded with the county/city's land records office?
Available Utilities. Does the site have all necessary utilities accessible, or will they all need to be extended to the site? This is especially critical on city lots where the expectation is to connect to city water and sewer. On lots that will utilize a septic, does the soil perc? Utilities, along with site access, can add tens of thousands to your site development costs and need to be considered in the overall budget. And it's all money "in the dirt" as they say.
Natural Features / Beauty. Last but certainly not least, what is it in particular that draws you to the site? Is it nestled amongst trees? Next to a meadow or farm? Does it have a great view of the mountains? Or maybe it's just in a busy but desirable part of town. All of these particulars have drawn you personally to the site and must have a direct impact on the design of the house. As an architect, the worst thing you can hear from a potential client is "we found a great house design online and would like to plop it on this lot!" If the design can be placed on any lot in any location (think most suburban homes) it's just not a good design.
The list above only hits the main points, and with each we could go down a rabbit hole (maybe that's a subject for another post). For the sake of our story though, let's look how I would grade our lots for each one:
Location. Relatively close to town and things to do, so drive times should be minimized. Picturesque, natural setting. Within the city limits though, so schools might be an issue, as well as higher taxes than the county. Final Grade: B
Zoning. All the lots are zoned for single family residential, so good to go here. Final Grade: A
Topography. The small hill cresting in the middle of the five lots appears to be a great building site, however two of the lots have steep slopes and wet, low-lying areas. Hmmm, maybe we can't develop all five lots after all? And could the topography require more grading and deeper foundations than is typical? What about the cost to clear the build site of all those nice, big trees? Final Grade: C
Site Access. There's a public right of way to the lots, which is great, so no weird easement for access. However, there's no road on that right of way. A BIG question mark here and our first major red flag. Can we build a driveway, or do we need to build a road for access? How much does that even cost, who do we ask, and what is the process? Final Grade: D
Available Utilities. We were able to track down all the utilities in the area, and the results were disheartening. While water, sewer, natural gas, and power were all in the vicinity, none was run to the lots. Bringing some or all of them to the site could prove tremendously costly. Red flag number two. Final Grade: F
Natural Features / Beauty. As mentioned before, the natural setting of the lots within a mature forest is the main positive feature. With a large stream nearby, some rock outcroppings, and abundant wildlife, there's much to draw upon for a design. Final Grade: A
So as you can see what might've on the surface felt like a slam dunk, these lots with all their natural beauty close in to the city, might realistically turn into a very costly, long-term, and potentially infeasible venture with several of the categories a "C" or worse.
A bit dejected, we were left with the choice to close on the lots or back out of the deal. Fortunately, we had two specific things going for us that ultimately were the deciding factors. First, we were able to negotiate a lower offer given some of the challenges noted above. These would make the lots difficult and time consuming for anyone to develop, so we were able to have a smaller sum tied up in the purchase. Secondly, since the lots were so raw, the city's assessment kept the taxes low enough that it would not be a huge burden to carry them. Even if we couldn't develop them, we loved the idea of owning such a nice piece of land within the city....heck, we'd at least have a nice camp site.
Final thoughts on moving forward...
If a client came to me, asking my opinion on these lots, I would have given my honest take on the potentially costly and time-consuming development process. If they were needing to build quickly, like within two years quickly, I would have recommended passing on the lots. But, if their timeline was flexible, maybe three to five years down the road, then the risk in buying the lots would be relatively low. So, it all comes down to your specific goals, needs, and timeline. What might be a mistake for some could prove to be a wise purchase for others.
Ask your architect.
Comments