Building before a road

[jackalope48]

Doubtful if it's an established future street right of way. Most platting and building codes require the final plat to have been accepted to issue residential building permits. The final plat is accepted after the required improvements have been constructed and inspected. No road no permits.

The only real exception to that is going to be a lot on a large parcel like 5-10 acres or bigger(it differs by area). In that case you are basically building a farm house.

You probably couldn't even buy the lot to begin with most places. Texas had a severe problem with this where "developers" would buy a piece of rural land and subdivide and sell it off without installing utilities or drainage. They call them colonias. They became such a nuisance there are banned now and developers face criminal prosecution for doing them. In other words selling a lot for residential without basic infrastructure is a crime. I imagine other states are similar.

[LifeIsGood01]

Originally Posted by Parnassia

Why should they? Its private property, not public. The property owner is responsible for dealing with it...unless it is causing a hazard or nuisance for someone else. Then they may force them to deal with it in a manner the owner may not like.

Where did I say they should?

[recuerdeme]

Originally Posted by LifeIsGood01

If the town decided it's a street and named it and just has not built it yet, maybe.

Exactly, the lot has an address, the street has a name and the street and the other lots appear on google and county's appraisal site (albeit not as a street just where it will be )

[recuerdeme]

Originally Posted by jackalope48

Doubtful if it's an established future street right of way. Most platting and building codes require the final plat to have been accepted to issue residential building permits. The final plat is accepted after the required improvements have been constructed and inspected. No road no permits.

The only real exception to that is going to be a lot on a large parcel like 5-10 acres or bigger(it differs by area). In that case you are basically building a farm house.

You probably couldn't even buy the lot to begin with most places. Texas had a severe problem with this where "developers" would buy a piece of rural land and subdivide and sell it off without installing utilities or drainage. They call them colonias. They became such a nuisance there are banned now and developers face criminal prosecution for doing them. In other words selling a lot for residential without basic infrastructure is a crime. I imagine other states are similar.

Yes, Texas. I see a bunch of lots on yet-to-be-constructed streets.

[MidValleyDad]

Originally Posted by recuerdeme

Exactly, the lot has an address, the street has a name and the street and the other lots appear on google and county's appraisal site (albeit not as a street just where it will be )

I know a few places like this. Developments that subdivided, platted and registered the lots, named the streets started building in section one while selling lots in sections 2-10 with the disclaimer that infrastructure would not be provided till a future date (There was a published schedule) after several years due to an economic downturn the developer went belly up. That was almost 50 years ago. someone else developed part of the remainder years later but there are people who have owned lots that the only access is by following firebreaks that run along some of the platted roadways. The 'roads' show up on Google maps. And every few years some developer buys up lots and builds some roads (don't know how this affects folks who own lots, I think they can get access once the road is turned over to the county) Problem is now the stormwater management regs for the state have changed and since the old plans expired don't know how this will affect building going forward.

[CraigCreek]

Oh, man, I hope the would-be buyers of an (overpriced) property adjacent to my own rural land read this thread. They want to build there, which would involve blasting away a steep, rocky, wooded hillside to access the site, thus causing damage not only to the destroyed land but to two bordering waterways, one of which is a waterfall-filled tributary of the other.

That action would also destroy my easement to my own land. So a visit by me with a lawyer skilled in rural matters is likely, should the purchase and the efforts to build occur. Also a surveyor...

There are no utilities on the admittedly lovely property. It is all wooded, with footpaths here and there. Cell phone access is spotty at best. A considerable portion of the property is a floodplain (and I have seen it flooded - most of my adjoining property is at higher elevation), and the county has it as a conservation zone (toothless, as house construction is allowed in such zones).

The larger waterway is classed by the state as an "exceptional waterway" and "outstanding state resource". Construction of the sort these folks apparently have in mind would do considerable damage to the waterways. And of course, it would make the value of my own land fall steeply - personal if not monetary value, for my land is my refuge, my getaway, and my sanctuary from city life. It would be none of these if this notion of building on near-pristine, difficult-to-access adjacent land comes to fruition.

Just hope they change their minds, decide to buy anyway (at a lower cost) and keep it as a weekend picnic ground or a private park for hiking and birdwatching - or don't buy at all, at which point a presumably lower asking price might put it in my own price range.

"We'll eat you up, we love you so".

The would-be buyers call themselves "conservationists"...

[insulator_king]

Originally Posted by MidValleyDad

I know a few places like this. Developments that subdivided, platted and registered the lots, named the streets started building in section one while selling lots in sections 2-10 with the disclaimer that infrastructure would not be provided till a future date (There was a published schedule) after several years due to an economic downturn the developer went belly up. That was almost 50 years ago. someone else developed part of the remainder years later but there are people who have owned lots that the only access is by following firebreaks that run along some of the platted roadways. The 'roads' show up on Google maps. And every few years some developer buys up lots and builds some roads (don't know how this affects folks who own lots, I think they can get access once the road is turned over to the county) Problem is now the stormwater management regs for the state have changed and since the old plans expired don't know how this will affect building going forward.

Sounds similar to the old AMREP lots in Rio Rancho, NM.