Land use/restriction questions

[partita]

If this is in King County, WA, make sure you do your homework.
Is the property in an F (Forest Production) zone? If it’s in a Critical Area (look into the Critical Areas Ordinance) that’s even more restrictive.
All sorts of restrictions that you won’t even know about until you start trying to get something permitted.
Like only 10% impermeable surface. This severely limits what you can build. Setbacks from wetlands. Number of livestock animals allowed. Etc. etc.

My advice is if you are absolutely in LOVE with the property, hire an experienced land use attorney to FULLY check it out for you. Look at ALL the recorded documents, legal descriptions, surveys, easements, land use regulations, etc. BEFORE purchasing.

Good luck!

[StormyDay]

If you are in King County only buy already cleared property, preferably property that has been cleared for years and years so they don’t come and tell you that you must replant your whole yard with trees because you are in some special zone. I know many people who have been screwed over by stuff like that.
If you are anywhere near Seattle, do not buy wetland unless the wetland property is already developed and has been for decades. Even buying next to wetland is risky. A few decades ago (I may have my history wrong) people started filling in the wetlands around there and building on them. It caused some serious environmental problems, so now they are overly strict about it all.

[Libera]

Thanks for all your thoughts and advice!

Didnt go to the city yet, as the seller countered our full price offer
Submitted new offer, or rather, resubmitted old offer with extended closing time. So if she accepts the offer we will go this week and see what is on file.

This is in Pierce county. Parts are cleared already by the logging company in 2014. We will have to find out if the resulting moratorium can be lifted.

[Where_sMyWhite]

I would venture to guess that property containing wetlands would be a no-go, at least for me, in most of the county, not just Seattle.

Wetlands are a vital part of the eco-system in helping to clean and filtrate water before it is returned to the ground for one.

I’d only buy wetlands if the homesite was already approved and there was enough additional land that I could enjoy all that the wetlands offer in flora and fauna

[Pocket_Pony]

I just don’t understand this line of thinking. OP, I don’t mean to rail on you, but I don’t understand why people think that the rules put in place to govern the management of land should be set aside for their pet project of putting up fencing, building a barn and arena . . . land preservation be damned.

If this property has these restrictions, then it is not the perfect property, IMHO. To put yourself in the position of having to go to the county, hire a lawyer, have some sort of assessment for use the way you want it, try to figure out how to get around current restrictions, etc. - well it would just not be worth it to me. Presumably, the county’s land-use committe or zoning committee or environmental studies committee or any other sort of group of people who know about environmental planning have already done their work on this property and it has been zoned or not-zoned or used or not-used a certain way for a reason. The headaches that would be coming my way would put me off this property completely.

[partita]

Pocket Pony, you don’t live near Seattle do you?!:lol:
In King County, WA in areas that are unincorporated (that means outside of city limits) there are all sorts of rules and regs that we don’t necessarily know about. They are buried and hidden in titles, codes, ordinances, etc. Things the average person doesn’t know how to look up, and wouldn’t be aware of. These things are not necessarily part of the property description, legal description or other legal documentation made available to a buyer. This creates headaches down the road when we want to do something on or with our property. Then they go and change or update rules and regs and don’t let us know that either. When we built our arena, WE had to find the exemptions for the ag buildings that allowed us to do this and that. The permitting department’s go to answer for anything was NO. WE had to do the digging to show THEM that it was allowed. It was the same BS when we put in our well. It’s not that we try to get AROUND the rules. We just want to know what the rules ARE and be able to do what is legally allowable!
That is why I suggested to the OP to get an experienced land use attorney who knows how to look these things up and thoroughly research the property. Pierce County isn’t much better than King (right next door).

[StormyDay]

And on top of what pocket pony said, some of the rules are completely crazy, like a lady I knew had to pass on buying a wonderful property because the grassland contained a rare species of something or another, so it would be impossible for her to do the land improvement she wanted. The property had been manually cleared… It was not natural grassland.
However, over next to the snoqualmie river (in some areas) you can tear up and build on wetlands as long as you have flood insurance. Also, recently a lovely horse barn was torn down to build a subdivision. That barn was next to some of the best wetlands in the area… Which they are now building on. It makes no sense at all.

[Libera]

Thank you partita.

PocketPony if you don’t mean to rail on me, then please don’t.

Like I said, we are trying to find out IF there are restrictions and what they might be. The county does not know where wetlands are unless a study is done. They put ‘Potential wetland review’ areas on their GIS maps which is why I want to research what is and isn’t done. And what, if any buffer, exists.

We are not trying to make the land into something it is not…

[Libera]

Quick update:
We put in full price offer that seller countered with an amount greater than listing price, among some other stipulations.

Agreed to her conditions minus the price increase and resubmitted our full price offer, which she declined…

So back to the drawing board

[Stonewall]

Just for grins, here is the FEMA floodmap where you can look up most of the flood designations for most of the country. It seems sensible to restrict building in places that will flood over and over again even if that interval is high.

https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search

I have endangered species on my farm and have no downside at all. I work happily with the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service. The Nature Conservancy and the state game and fish agency. The money I have been paid to protect the endangered species with a conservation easement was over twice what I paid for the land years ago and I retain ownership.

[carmen]

Why on earth would the seller counter with an offer HIGHER than asking? Were there multiple offers on the table? They sound shady, maybe it’s for the best.

[Libera]

No other offers, ours was the first in 90 days on the market … Oh well, we just put an offer on a different property that was horse property before but got overgrown. Very excited and there are no restrictions on this one!

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Libera;8933067]
Quick update:
We put in full price offer that seller countered with an amount greater than listing price, among some other stipulations.

Agreed to her conditions minus the price increase and resubmitted our full price offer, which she declined…

So back to the drawing board :)[/QUOTE]

If anyone would do that to me, upping the price over the asking price without very good reason, like on a horse for sale because he had one more month of training, I would walk out on principle, not sweeten the offer any more.

People that are greedy I would not trust at all.
You ought to wonder, when someone goes there, they are playing you like a fish and are not very honorable.
What else do such people may not be disclosing?

[horsepoor]

I thought perhaps the seller came back with a price increase because of the contingency (pending feasibility study). Either way, sounds like you have a better option in the new property. Hope it works out for you!

[fourfillies]

OP, Glad you found an alternative property. I have been looking causally for a similar property and am shocked the things property owners “forget” to disclose and then are angry that the purchaser would consider to negatively impact the purchase price. Like a natural gas pipeline running across the property. Not kidding!

[mvp]

[QUOTE=horsepoor;8936636]
I thought perhaps the seller came back with a price increase because of the contingency (pending feasibility study). Either way, sounds like you have a better option in the new property. Hope it works out for you![/QUOTE]

I have had more that one seller want some kind of financial compensation for my wanting something extra in an inspection (in one case, a surveyor to really and truly figure out where the limits of a flood zone were vis-a-vis the house I’d have to insure against flooding and maybe not be able to resell should flood insurance rates go nuts in the future… or not).

To me, any seller-imposed impediment or disincentive to the buyer’s efforts to do his/her research make those deals smell very, very bad. For something as expensive, complex and non-liquid as real estate, this is not the purchase where you should forego the PPE, bring cash and a horse trailer.

JMO.