Crazy Thought

ChristieAcres · #21 11/05/10, 11:54 AM

thestartupman- I don't think there is a clear understanding of what you propose and that is why you are getting some of the responses you are.

DH & I bought our place 4 years ago, and it is 6.68 acres, meeting our criteria. What also met our criteria is this community. That is what thestartupman is discussing here- a planned community. When property owners buy their own 5 acre parcels, paying a monthly fee for the enjoyment/maintenance of common areas, is no different than fees normally paid to a community. There are communities here bordering lakes, all the land being privately owned. In order to access this lake, they pay monthly dues. Access is private. Thestartupman is offering much the same concept, but that lake is in the form of common recreational areas. In addition, he discusses a large discount the first year, and wouldn't that help a new family get settled in with less financial stress... He then makes it elective, just like a CSA. Also, never wrote anything about anyone being responsible for "his farm and equipment."

Back to our community. We knew when we moved here, we could barter with people, there is shared maintenance on our private road (over 50 families share this). Otherwise, there are no dues. When the road needs maintenance, whoever has the heavy equipment, does the work, and we all pitch in to pay for the gravel... "Larry," who has the equipment, will be stepping down soon (he is 84). He will be giving this equipment to DH along with the responsibility. I know what most folks do, who live close to us, and I have been asked to start a CSA. With the legal requirements here, no thanks (we don't want tied down that much). We can sell eggs, which we do, but otherwise, I will only barter my produce, sell plants, seeds, and Comfrey Salves/Oils.

When folks buy 5 acre properties, they can be as involved or completely uninvolved with the rest of their community. No different that where I currently live. Our neighbor is choosing to get a milk cow and is open to selling us a share. That works better for us, so that is what we would rather do. Another neighbor offered us free firewood that he had already split, early COLD Spring, when we ran out. DH wouldn't accept it, but did accept an offer from "Larry," who had a bunch of dry side cuts. DH hauled a bunch home, cut them up, and that is what we used until we had more wood. We now have 9 cords of cut, stacked, firewood in our wood shed. Normally, we would not exceed 6 cords for a very cold Winter, which is predicted this year. DH isn't running out, again!

Threre is another example. DH, Len, designed and built an industrial log splitter (cuts 2nd growth). Any of the neighbors here need him to come over and split a bunch of firewood, can just pay him to do that OR barter for his services.

In a planned community, people will be in all different physical conditions. Some expect to buy firewood, others wouldn't dream of it, and others will produce far more than they need (can sell to those who can't cut firewood). My MIL & FIL pitched in some money when Len was building our log splitter. In return for that investment, Len delivers the splitter to his parents, so they can split their own firewood. Now, they are in their late 70s. My FIL is a retired Engineer, so if there is an issue with the splitter, that guy can fix it (he did this year and also did maintenance on it before it was returned).

You get people in a planned community who are Mechanics, Machinists, and Welders, in addition to serious Gardeners, Small Farmers, a Dentist, Midwives, an Herbalist, and even an MD/ND would be cool. If you can attract people like this, a planned community is far more successful.

mnn2501 · #22 11/05/10, 12:03 PM

Sounds like a rural HOA -- if I buy 5 acrea's it won;t have some rule that I can't have animals or whatever. I don't do well with deed restrictions or Home Owners Associations rules -- some people may, but not me, especially on rural acreage.

thestartupman · #23 11/05/10, 12:11 PM

Very well put Christie. I understand that this wouldn't be for those wanting to seriously homestead, but would be for those that wanted to travel, or they are just starting out, maybe can't do farm kind of labor anymore.

thestartupman · #24 11/05/10, 09:31 PM

I think the hardest part about this whole thing would be how to go about the part of the property that would be open to use by the group of land owners. Should it be shared ownership, or should I keep the ownership with the rest of the farm. If I keep the ownership, how to I go about the the liability that would be involved?

Txrider · #25 11/05/10, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thestartupman

How many on here would be interested in something like this. I know this may sound a little strange, but I will throw it out there for everyone to think about. I have tossed around the thought of buying 250, to 300 acres, and dividing off twenty, to twenty five, 5 acre plots. There would also be 50 to 100 acres that would either be joint owned among all land owners including myself, or owned buy myself, with others allowed to use. This piece of property would have a large pond, or lake (5+ acres), several small covered picnic acres, plus a much larger covered area with a large fireplace. It would have hiking/horse riding trails. The shared portion of this property would be mostly wooded. I would raise enough beef, pork, turkeys, chickens, for eggs,and meat, and cow milk. All these animals would be raised as naturally as possible, but not organic certified. The purchase price of the 5 acres would allow each owner, 25-50% of their first years meat milk and eggs. The reason for the discount in the first year would be to make sure that everyone at least tries this system to start with. It would be set up on a per share type of a set up. This would also allow them to get fruit from fruit trees, strawberry patch, blueberry plants, and possibly other items like asparagus, and pupkins. The farm part that I own would be off limits to other owners use, accept to pick up their meat, milk, and eggs. The milk from the cows would be by cow share. There would be a monthly fee that would include the upkeep of the shared property, garbage, and possibly well water. Please don't respond telling me about zoning problems, I have already done some checking, and I know that this is something that would have to be checked out completly. I know this has gotten a little long, but I still have a lot more details that I have thought through, but will hold them back for now. Please try and give your feed back without simply telling me it won't work. Oh, one more thing, the reason I didn't include normal vegtables, is because each person would have 5 acres, they should be able to grow there own. I might provide some shares for those without a green thumb.

The only problems I see would be personality conflicts that moved into litigation conflicts. You would need to have a pretty large legal contract for every detail I would think, or eventually someone would get the knickers in a wad and cause you a ton of grief.

Some might totally trash their 5 acres, burn trash, pollute, abuse the common acreage, you would be playing parent to a lot of folks. 20-25 would be a lot more folks than I would want to manage.

I would definitely keep sole possession of the common land, not joint ownership, with a lease or some other kind of agreement with clear straight forward rules of access or severability of access.

Folks can get pretty nasty about expectations they think they are owed.

Danaus29 · #26 11/05/10, 10:17 PM

I know of a few places that charge a membership fee for use of recreational facilities that still use a handshake agreement with signs posted that say "use at your own risk".

It sounds pretty good to me. I like beef and pork but don't want to raise my own. Many times I have wished I could rent a goat for brush clearing. I would want to be able to have my own birds and raise rabbits.

Yes there would be problems. My biggest concern would be what happens when you pass away or want to sell the main place?

ChristieAcres · #27 11/05/10, 10:58 PM

I'd simply go see a real estate attorney and ask about the common area, liability protection, and go over your ideas with him. Access to a common area is a "right" which could be part of the bundle of ownership rights that come with the 5 acre properties (an appurtenance). That right would be spelled out very clearly and the rules, also. In WA State a planned community can be for "seniors," so no children. That would take care of most issues or problems mentioned on this thread. That would also mean consideration should be given to special needs of this age group. I'd cover all those bases with a real estate attorney.

rambler · #28 11/06/10, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thestartupman

I think the hardest part about this whole thing would be how to go about the part of the property that would be open to use by the group of land owners. Should it be shared ownership, or should I keep the ownership with the rest of the farm. If I keep the ownership, how to I go about the the liability that would be involved?

Basiclly you are building a small rural community. Folks can buy 5 acres around here, be part of the town govt, shop there, and ride horses on the state park trail if they get their yearly park pass.

So, you are making a little village.

Some will like that, you have control of itm you make the rules. Some will prefer the current town, state park, and their own 5 acres....

The scary part is you are in co
ntrol. If you go bankrupt, or take ill, or get bored, what happens to the deal? You hold all the cards.

Paul

ChristieAcres · #29 11/06/10, 02:27 AM

If the community is legally set up with a "right" to use the community property. The only issue with who owns the farm and is in charge of the maintenance of the community property is simply an estate matter for "thestartupman" to decide (he should seek a Real Estate Attorney on that). He could designate his heir follow in his footsteps OR forfeit the property, which could then be sold privately. However, the community property "rights" stay. That couldn't be changed if it was done correctly to be included in each property owner's "bundle of rights." There is no guarantees in life, and the "what ifs" can stop hopes and dreams from becoming a reality.

Paul, not sure what you are meaning about thestartupman "holding all the cards." What he is describing is simply selling off 5 acres properties, offering them a community property right to use areas he owns, and him being in a position to farm and provide for some of their needs. He isn't requiring they contract with him, but is offering to give them a substantial discount their first year on buying a cow-share, utilize his CSA type arrangement, and meat, or whatever he produces on his farm. They are free to produce what they want, except he mentioned a restriction on them having cattle, and possibly other livestock... hasn't decided for sure what else. If he went bankrupt, they would all still have their properties. If they had the "right" to the community area, they would still retain that right, no matter who bought it. What they would lose is the ability to purchase milk, meat, veggies, etc..., from him.

thestartupman · #30 11/06/10, 07:04 AM

Christie, I am starting to think you should be my official spokesperson. The use of the shared portion of the property, may not even stay in my ownership. It may end up being a shared ownership between all land owners. There would be very little restrictions on the use of their 5 acre properties. Pretty much only no cattle, pigs, or sheep. There wouldn't be allowed Mobil homes on the property. There would be more restrictions on the shared property, because you wouldn't want someone to move their distant relatives onto the property for a year, or decide they wanted to run there ski boat on the small lake.

Trixie · #31 11/06/10, 08:18 AM

This might appeal to some people. I'm too private and like to do my own thing.

My only problem is putting deed restrictions on any rural land. I am seeing that happen far too much these days. Land available for the homesteading lifestyle is becoming scarce, and it is being made more scarce by deed restrictions. To me homesteading is 'doing your own thing'.

thestartupman · #32 11/06/10, 09:29 AM

I guess what I see as the big advantage to some people is that they may have the use of a much larger property, that they might not be able to afford any other way, or may not be able to take care of a larger property any more.

ChristieAcres · #33 11/06/10, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thestartupman

I guess what I see as the big advantage to some people is that they may have the use of a much larger property, that they might not be able to afford any other way, or may not be able to take care of a larger property any more.

What you wish to accomplish would be an excellent opportunity for plenty of folks. Those that want more freedoms simply need to find properties without deed restrictions. By not allowing the mobiles, you are ensuring property values remain higher, and also should in effect make those properties easier to sell later (mobiles have expiration dates for financing...). I don't know what the weather will be like where you are considering this, but mobiles don't fare well in high winds or severe storms, and aren't good choices in colder areas.

Not everyone who buys acreage wants sheep, pigs, and cattle, anyway. We opted for 6.68 acres and have rabbits/chickens. About 5 acres are wooded; Maples bordering old growth and will most of this will stay in forest. We have put in a raised bed garden, that is larger than we even need. It is being expanded, so I can continue my local/internet plant, seed, and start sales. Since I make Salve/Oil with my Comfrey, I am growing a lot of that here on our property. We don't have to be here 24/7, and that is the way we want it. Everything is set up with that in mind (allowing us to go camping, go on day trips, etc...).

Sure there are plenty who are physically fit enough to do all the homesteading, but plenty aren't. Len & I are hikers and physically fit. So that isn't our reasoning for limiting ourselves from taking on a lot more work.

Right now, Len, having built an industrial log splitter, being a licensed Machinist/Welder, can barter his services for all kinds of things. This puts us in a great position here, where we live.

roachhill · #34 11/07/10, 09:47 AM

If your restricting mobile homes will you also be restricting owner built log cabins and cabins with smaller square footage. Building my little log cabin was the most important part of starting my homestead. I can't imagine settling on any property that didn't allow me to build a small rustic log cabin but such structures would undoubtedly affect property values.

FarmboyBill · #35 11/07/10, 10:27 AM

So, whoever first buys a 5, also supplies the house outbuildings that are on it. If for whatever reason they leave, then the next buyers pay way more than the first. That might hamper a speedy sale after the first one. Also, the way and style of house and outbuildings may not suit potential buyers, which might slow repeat sales.

U say if you go broke that that wouldnt affect the other buyers. If I take out a note on 200 acres, and sell off say 100 of it, and I cant make the payments on the note, then the bank repossess the WHOLE 200 regardless of the arraingements I have made. Their note was made with me alone on a whole 200 acres. As long as I made the payments they didnt care so much about what I did on the place, but became much more interested when I couldnt or quit makeing payments.

Debbie in Wa · #36 11/07/10, 04:35 PM

The big question is location. I see that you are in Wa. now but soon to be elsewhere. Are you looking at where there is mild winters or more of a snowed in type. That will be the big issue for alot of folks as some prefer not to have too much of the white stuff. I think your ideas are good and with a bit more tweeking like lorichristie mentioned, you might have something going for you.

Debbie in Wa · #37 11/07/10, 04:41 PM

On the question of housing, why not let a mobile home be allowed as long as it is brand new. If you look at it from one point of view, the newer made mobile homes actually are better made than most stick built and they are more energy efficient. That is a big bonus for some of the elderly that might want to get in on this. Also how would you allow for the properties to be divided by as far as fencing goes? I know I am suppose to love thy neighbor, but when you have someone elses dogs, animals, etc. running free that can cause quite a commotion.

thestartupman · #38 11/07/10, 05:07 PM

I wouldn't have a note on the larger property, so they wouldn't have to worry about me not making my payments.

FarmboyBill · #39 11/07/10, 05:37 PM

As to your (open acreage) for pond, walking trails? ect. What if you had an elderly person who didnt want to swim, or walk, who was content to be able to do what they could on their own acreage. Wouldnt they feel like they was being cheated cause others were useing what they couldnt/wouldnt.
As to new trailers, Who could afford those? I doubt if many just starting homesteaders could, and theyed likely be your biggest base of prospectives.

If u had a place that had lots of woods on it, u could buy a sawmill, and people could cut out the lumber for their barns and outbuildings, useing the slab wood for heating, ect

thestartupman · #40 11/07/10, 05:38 PM

Debbie, the area I am looking at is TN, or MO. I prefer TN, and it has a lot less snow than some areas. As far as manufactured homes go, I think I would probably stay with conventional homes. The fence between the 5 acres and the farm would alredy be in place. It would be up to each 5 acre owner, what they would want to do about fencing between the others.