You can learn a lot simply by looking at what the zoning codes are, what the setbacks are, what the wetlands protections are and where the utilities are. The realtor should be able to give you where all the utilities are; that certainly adds expense but isn't insurmountable. The USDA, if I recall correctly, has all sorts of floodplain info as well as what sort of soil type you have there and what you can grow. My experience has been that places that look too good to be true tend to be. I was looking at one spot that didn't sell despite having dozens of acres of land... turns out the dwelling was within the 100-year floodplain and was effectively red-tagged by county code (no permits would ever be issued for improvements or expansion). I was looking at another that claimed there was ample room for subdivision... turns out the structure itself was within wetlands protection zones and could never be expanded (let alone subdivided). I was looking at still another that looked all kinds of great... until i discovered that the previous owner had cut down a lot of trees and the entire property was out of compliance with county code such that it had an entail of $500/day fines stretching back to 2011. But all this shit is free to learn and will teach you more and more about what you like and what you don't and what you want to see. You'll excuse me if that was incoherent. The margarita plan won out.
That was very coherent. Thank you. This is probably true about the one plot I was eyeing. Six acres across the road from the Wisconsin River. But it's very up hill. I suspect it's not buildable due to access issues. A road abuts the property, but the slope looks steep on topography maps.My experience has been that places that look too good to be true tend to be