Land Use Question (for sale, real estate, houses)

[induchman2]

I thought NH was going to be the perfect place to live. Fewer regulations than where I currently live, no sales tax, no state income tax and supposedly a friendly biz climate. Now, I'm not so sure.

Case in point - I've been looking for a long time at properties in NH. What I find odd is that farms that have been so for hundred years or more, may not remain that way. One real estate site Farms & Barns Real Estate NH Horse Property and Farms for Sale said I should check with local code officials to see if the land will remain as it is. SPACE: New Hampshire's Current Use Coalition

If it's not in the disclosure statement, I guess then I need to do my due dilegence, as the real estate firm won't. It's very confusing.

What gives?

[unit731]

Not sure what your question is.

Best to explain more.

Current use in New Hampshire is a program - voluntary - to place ones raw land - in current use. Taxes are then lowered. Current use has many restrictions though. Minimum acres required.

In selling or purchasing raw land - either one - buyer/seller - can take that raw land out of current use - for a fee/premium.

Zoning. Many/most cities and towns have incorporated zoning. Zoning boards. Planning boards. Restricting what one can do with their property. Some/few towns have not adopted all of this yet.

[Nonesuch]

The goal of SPACE: New Hampshire's Current Use Coalition is to encourage open land and farms. If you keep undeveloped land pristine, or use the land for farming, you get a significant tax break, with the stipulation that there is a one-time "change fee" if you ever want to pave it over or build houses on it.

So Current Use is all about preserving farms and undeveloped spaces, not about stopping farming.

Originally Posted by induchman2

Case in point - I've been looking for a long time at properties in NH. What I find odd is that farms that have been so for hundred years or more, may not remain that way.

If a farming family doesn't want to farm any more, why not sell the land to build suburbs?

I don't see any suggest that there's a push by the government to convert what is currently farmland into subdivisions, nobody is forcing the owners of farms to shut them down. However, developers are making big cash offers to buy farms from the owner, pay the fee to take them out of current use, split the land into minimal-size lots, and build houses.

When this does happens, it is farmland owners taking a profit and retiring, not some nefarious plot.

[Hawknest]

Originally Posted by unit731

Not sure what your question is.

Best to explain more.

Current use in New Hampshire is a program - voluntary - to place ones raw land - in current use. Taxes are then lowered. Current use has many restrictions though. Minimum acres required.

In selling or purchasing raw land - either one - buyer/seller - can take that raw land out of current use - for a fee/premium.

Zoning. Many/most cities and towns have incorporated zoning. Zoning boards. Planning boards. Restricting what one can do with their property. Some/few towns have not adopted all of this yet.

I am absolutely shocked that any land board has that much leverage. There's a similar situation in BC - where a landowner wanted to build a rodeo arena on his land. The base construction had started when the land board started its meetings. By the time the no vote got posted, the arena had been finished and now the whole project is in limbo. I concur with the landowner that it is his land and the land board overstepped their authority.

Zoning boards only work in confined areas like towns and cities. In this particular case it's 400km from anywhere.