When the growth story arrives but the parcel is too big to sell whole and too small to develop alone
A 60 acre land bank parcel sits in a county where a new interchange just got funded two miles south. The story you underwrote is arriving. The problem is the parcel is priced above what a single builder wants to carry on spec, and too small to attract a regional developer who needs 200 acres minimum for phasing. That gap is where a lot of land bank positions stall out, sometimes for years after the catalyst event that was supposed to end them. Say the land went in at $3,100 an acre a decade ago, total cost basis around $186,000 with accumulated taxes, and comparable raw land near the interchange is now trading at $9,500 an acre. On paper the position tripled. In practice it does not clear because the buyer pool for a 60 acre raw parcel at $570,000 is thin, and every month of continued carry erodes the net. The three exits that actually work in this size range are an assemblage play where you approach adjacent owners and try to get to 150 or 200 acres together before marketing, a seller-financed sale to a smaller builder who cannot come in all cash but can service a note over three to five years, or a split into two or three smaller parcels if the county allows a minor subdivision without full platting. Each of those takes time and each one has a different tax and title structure underneath it, so confirming which path is clean requires a local land use attorney before you market, not after you have an offer. The assemblage path adds the most to the exit price but hands a lot of control to neighbors who know you need them. The seller carry path lets you close faster but puts you in the note business for years after you thought you were out. The split path looks simple and often is not once you price the survey, the perc tests if required, and the soft costs of county approval. What does the parcel look like on the adjacent ownership side, and is there a willing neighbor or a fragmented mess?
