My wife was talking to the neighbor, an elderly lady who was born and grew up in the house across the street. She is planning for her relatives' future and said she was thinking about selling her property to a developer. Seems she can likely get around 900K for the property from one of those people. The house that is there now was built in 1890 and is styled to look like a castle. It is complete with a carriage house out back that has 2 floors. The piece of land is around 200x300 at the front and tapers back along the 300 foot side to about 30 feet wide. It is just a beautiful house. I had considered placing a standing offer for it to her, but it wouldn't be anywhere near 900K. Generally the houses around here run between 160 and 250 for a single, depending on the lot size which is usually something like 50x100. I suppose she could get around 3 to 400K if she just sold it regular, not to a developer. Now, here is my question. What weapons (zoning, ordinances, traffic trouble, whatever) are there that I can use to keep a developer from buying the lot, and putting say, 10 houses on there?
Have any of you guys successfully fought something like this? I just can't imagine the city council around here even bothering to listen to what I have to say, since all they will see is the dollar signs from the taxes. I feel like I would be screwing the elderly woman's family by keeping it from happening, but I have to look out for my family first. It is exremely unlikely, given my circumstances, that we would be able to move after the city decides to ignore me about this. At least not move to anywhere that anyone would want to live.
So is it possible to fight city hall?

K

Sure, look in the Urban Sprawl delaying tactic's the Sierra CLub uses!!

AND ask if a traffic study will be needed, etc, etc!!

AND if all else fails see if you can't get it put on the National Register for Old Home Preservation, (or whatever it is called??), if possible??

pdq67

I would seriously doubt if a developer is offering her that kind of cash they have not already done their homework. Probably have something on file with the city or plans for a lot split and are prepared to make the improvements required for the project. Check with your local planning department and ask about any tentative or recent change in zoning or is a special use permit or parcel map in the works. There should be a public hearing on some of those issues and the nearby residences should be notified as to when and where it is and have the opportunity to make comments.

Good luck.

JMHO
I can't stand when neigbors think they can control the use of a property that is not theres and owned by another citizen. If they are just going to build more houses on it so what. It they are going to build a WalMart on it I might not like that but would you want someone to tell you how to use your property?
If you want to control that property, Buy it.
Again JMHO. Thanks.

1. National Historic Register status does not prevent you from altering or tearing down the house. Local Historic District may (does in our town).
2. Go to the planning and zoning department that has jursidiction. Ask to look at the Comprehensive Plan. That is the document (if they have one) that spells out the existing and anticipated future zoning and allowed uses in the zone. If you are lucky it will be zoned for low density residential (single houses on big lots) and is slated to stay that way.
3. Next ask to see a copy of the zoning ordinance and specifically the allowable uses for the zone the house is in. Again if you are lucky it will specify that low density is the allowed use. Ask about other uses allowed by Conditional Use or Special Exception (terms vary). These are uses that are allowed in the zone with approval from the zoning commission or board. You may find for instance that multifamily (duplex, etc.) are allowed by CU.
4. Ask what the minimum lot size is for the zone. Find out how large the lot in question is, and do the math to see if it can be subdivided into multiple lots. Also ask the city planners about the possibility of the current owners dividing the property or getting it rezoned or a variance to the zoning ordinance to divide it.
5. Once you know the current status of the property go meet with the owners and their kids if they are involved and express your concerns. Be nice and non-confrontational. Acknowledge their property rights and concern for maximizing the value but explain that they should also acknowledge and respect the impact their decision will have on their neighbors.
6. If they still want to sell out and they can divide up the property find out if there is a neighborhood association that the city recognizes for the area. If so contact them and explain the situation and get their support. If not start organizing the neighbors but be prepared for those that might think like the others and be waiting for their turn to sell and divide.
7. Go buy some time with a lawyer well versed in the local planning law. Attend a few hearings or look at old minutes and find out which lawyers are there representing developers, just don't take someones word that they know what they are doing. You need someone that has worked in the system. Show him your research and ask if he thinks they can do what they want and if so can you fight it. Ask how much it will cost then decide if it is worth the fight (get your neighbors to share the cost).
8. You can fight and win if the zoning is in your favor or law gives the zoning commission and city council the right to not allow what they want to do. If the zoning ordinance allows it then the zoning commission and council cannot go against the ordinance. The lawyer and zoning folks can answer that question for you. I have been on your neighbors side of the fence for 25 years as an architect. I was on your side of the fence as member and president of three neighborhood associations fighting the same type of development in our area. Won some and lost some. Good luck and hopefully the zoning ordinance is on your side.

Another idea is to offer her an "Option to Purchase".

This would be a simple legal agreement (sweetened with about $10K cash to her) that would give you (or your group of "friends") to have first dibs on the property if it comes up for sale. It would be similar to a mechanic's lien on the title to the property.

It would legally bind her or her heirs to offer the property to you (or your group of investors) FIRST in the event of a sale. If you decline or can't buy the property, you're out the "sweetening" and sign off on the agreement.

A developer wanting the property would have to wait for you to buy, or offer to purchase your "option to buy" contract from you for substancially more than the original $10K.

JMHO
I can't stand when neigbors think they can control the use of a property that is not theres and owned by another citizen. If they are just going to build more houses on it so what. It they are going to build a WalMart on it I might not like that but would you want someone to tell you how to use your property?
If you want to control that property, Buy it.
Again JMHO. Thanks.

Sure, I understand that if the lady has a choice between leaving a $900K property for her niece, and leaving a $300K property for her nice, she will opt for the bigger number. I mean, what the heck, she won't be living here anymore, she'll be "on the other side" or whatever. She wants to maximize the inheritance and I can't blame her for that. But I didn't buy in this neighborhood because it was going to get overdeveloped and overcrowded. I bought here because it is quiet, low-density residential. Now someone is trying to change that. Certainly they have a right to sell to whomever they please, but does the new owner have the right to tear down a single house and put up 10 or 30 new homes where there was only one before? Maybe, but Can the roads handle it? Can the sewer system handle it? Can the storm drains handle the extra runoff from the driveways and roofs that used to be grass? Is it fair to aim the exit driveway from that development right at my house?
I support the owner's right to use their property in ways they see fit, but I don't support their right to change the characteristics of the neighborhood that I bought into because of those characteristics. If someone wanted to paint the house gr5een with purple flames, I would love it. That sort of thing makes neighborhoods interesting. McMansions and cookie cutter townhomes just make it like every other neighborhood. Plus, the factor that people who tend to buy cookie cutter homes DON'T like homes with character and also tend to move into new neighborhoods and complain about the houses that have been there for hundreds of years. Sorry my hedgerow isn't perfect, but it was planted in 1870, and it might be a little tired :).

I can understand if my next door neighbor doesn't want me to build condos on my property. This isn't a condo neighborhood. This is an old-home neighborhood. Which is why I bought here.

If I could afford to buy the property, I wouldn't be concerned about it, but not everyone has an extra million bucks in the bank so that we can save our neighborhoods. Many of us that live in the real world have to scrounge and save for a year just to buy a set of spindles for our Chevelles. Many of us can't even consider jumping up and moving to a neighborhood where the houses cost double what the ones they currently live in (which is just about everywhere here unless you want to live in the woods)

Orrie, thanks for the good info. Looks like I will be making some preliminary calls this morning.

K

JMHO
I can't stand when neigbors think they can control the use of a property that is not theres and owned by another citizen. If they are just going to build more houses on it so what. It they are going to build a WalMart on it I might not like that but would you want someone to tell you how to use your property?
If you want to control that property, Buy it.
Again JMHO. Thanks.

True, it's their property but when their actions can affect YOUR property values, taxes, and future options, then it becomes your business

I here what ya'll are saying. I was thinking more along the thought of, if I have a right to develop or use a property then I would want to be able to without a bunch of neighbors getting lawyers involved.

Maybe you could "find" an endangered species nesting in the eves or on the property. Then they wouldn't be able to do a damn thing with the property.

JMHO
I can't stand when neigbors think they can control the use of a property that is not theres and owned by another citizen. If they are just going to build more houses on it so what. It they are going to build a WalMart on it I might not like that but would you want someone to tell you how to use your property?
If you want to control that property, Buy it.
Again JMHO. Thanks.

Its one thing if the new owner was going to keep it as it is currently zoned, but the problem is they usually want it rezoned...

I am (usually) all for the rights of the property owner, but as long as they don't infringe upon the neighbors... If there was a dairy, a tallow factory, an airport or a racetrack, then to complain about noise/smell when you knew it was there before is ridiculous... But when a person moves into a neighborhood with larger parcels, and a developer just wants to make money, then its wrong...


My neighborhood is dealing with this right now... ALL the parcels on our street are either RD-4 (8600 sq ft minimum lot, about 0.2 acres), or larger(with 10 3.13 acres parcels across the street)...

A developer bought one parcel, and several adjoining parcel owners are willing to go into a redevelopment with him...

My neighborhood doesn't have a problem with this, as long as his developement is in line with the rest of the street/neighborhood... The City has a "General Plan" that allows for RD-5 (5200 sq ft lots, much smaller), and this is basically what the developer is proposing...

So while people should have somewhat of a right to do what they want with their property, it should have to be in line with the surrounding area... That being said, I wouldn't have a problem with "new" homes, as long as the value/property sizes were similar to everybody elses...

'zackly! :)

I don't even care if my neighbor has a dozen junky pintos in his yard. But if bums start sleeping in them, and they and the rats start coming into my yard, then there's going to be a ruckus. It is, as Kurt said, when it begins to affect my property value or my quality of life, then it is time to do something.

Keith

Lot's of good ideas. Here's some more.

Make nice with local political figures, go to town meetings, participate. Get known now so that when you want something later they'll know you. Think like a voter.

Get some requirements for minimum set backs established. Do it with you HOA if you have one. Include awnings, decks, A/C equipment in the set back. The idea here is to minimize the number of houses they can put in, thus reducing the return. Limit the amount of paved space (no condo parking lots).

If the homes in your area are large, get a minimum square footage established. Get requirements for premium roofing, premium siding siding, fences etc. established (this one will get you later, but may be worth it anyway). Concept is to force the developer's costs up.

Raise issues on the following:
Traffic impact study. Drainage study, if they reshape the land and add driveways it will impact the water shed -- big with the environmental crowd. In ground fuel tanks, if it's an old house and it is/was oil fired, require abatement if it is disturbed -- again with the environmental crowd. Asbestos, scares people like crazy, expensive to abate.

Establish zoning requirements for only single family homes, no common walls or common construction.

Get the neighbors aware and involved. If the development will be done by a local guy, this one may play. Local developers have to survive within the community, if they get a big ground swell on against them it can impact them on other projects and it isn't worth it to their reputation. More on this later.

Take it to the press. 'Historic home gets demolished', 'Innocent senior citizen gets suckered by land developer', 'local community fights corporate greed'. I can see the headlines now. This probably has to go hand in hand with getting to know the local government.

Don't assume that development will hurt property values. It may make your home worth more.

We had our home in central Illinois acquired, with several others, by a local developer. They built a Walgreen's. It took a little over two years from when they first contacted us until we closed, so there is probably time for you to intervene. They had been working on it for four years, ours was the fourth location they considered. The homes were good, but not great; all about 90 years old with a lot of character. The developer was very amicable and helpful to us. He had worked hard to ensure that the city, neighbors and community felt involved and were for the development. (You could do the same leg work to counter this effort). When it came time to go in front of the city council, there were zero objections. There was a rival developer working a locale 1.5 miles away that didn't do the same leg work and the neighbors were mad and the local papers and media were all over the story. Part of the process was to do water shed, traffic, asbestos, oil tank studies and abatement. They'd done others in there area so they knew what to budget for. If your dealing with a guy that hasn't done this in your area, you could throw these things in front of them. The developer outright told us they they wanted to work with us, they had a stake in the community and didn't want to do business in a way that was negative. We got the price we asked for, which was second high (highest per square foot), so I believe them. All of this is the part of the Walgreen's model. Since they build neighborhood stores, they can't afford to upset the local people or the store will get boycotted.

We got relocated, so we would have moved anyway, but we will likely go back to the same neighborhood when we get sent back. In this case, the new Walgreen's will be good for the neighborhood. But I can't say the same for your situation.

JMHO
I can't stand when neigbors think they can control the use of a property that is not theres and owned by another citizen. If they are just going to build more houses on it so what. It they are going to build a WalMart on it I might not like that but would you want someone to tell you how to use your property?
If you want to control that property, Buy it.
Again JMHO. Thanks.

I have to agree with 540cutlaSS... but not quite so harshly.....

It imagine your outlook might be different if a neighbor was standing between you and a small fortune...

The truth is that the world is in a perpetual state of change.... I have 3.5 acres in what used to be the "country" south of Ft Worth.... across the road from me is a horse pasture of about 100 acres... watching the beautiful horses run and play on that piece of land is one of my favorite things in the world, but I know one day soon, there will Brick homes shoehorned in there and a lot of people will get rich off of it....
If I could, like you, I would buy the property... but I cant...
But the bottom line is, I dont want any one telling me what to do with my land... so I have to accept the inevitable....!

We cant claim to believe in FREEDOM if it's only when it's convienent...

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

That lot size isn't big enough to get more than 6-8 lots on it tops.Now if a developer offered her $900,000 to acquire it, plus the cost of a road, utilities, sewer and water laterals, plus all the extra costs of surveying and laying it out, removing the existing home, and many other costs, he wouldn't come out on this. Those lots would have to sell in excess of about $170,000 a piece or more. And you are saying that the average home cost in your neighborhood is $160-$250,000. Those are going to be some expensive houses going on tiny lots if your info is correct.

Now, I know nothing about your area, so is their a shortage of buildable area there or whats the reason the developer wants that land? Are you certain that the price was $900,000? Who told you this, the neighbor lady or someone else? Sounds to me like the neighbor lady is running the cost up on her own.

If you haven't guessed already, yes I do property development and new construction. I know what you are going thru, although fortunatly my area has no shortage of farmers who want out, so no need to go into existing neighborhoods for the most part. The offered price of the land just doesn't seem logical for the possible take in the end. But like I said, I don't know your area.

At the very least, if it goes thru, I would expect the existing homes to lower the values of all the new homes, not the new homes lowering the values of the existing homes. It just isn't worth doing for the small profit that would be there unless they were going to be expensive homes.

Jeff

Jeff- it seems that there is a funny habit around here to build "semi-custom, semi-detached" homes on tiny lots and have signs that go up next to the construction site always say "Starting in the low 300s" Whether or not they really sell for that, I don't know, but they sell pretty fast. The 900K figure came from the old lady. Even if it is 700, it is still a sight more than what she could get for the house. Especially since the taxes on it are around $5K a year. The houses built would probably be twins and would more than likely list for around 200.

Allengator says "I imagine your outlook might be different if a neighbor was standing between you and a small fortune..."
And to that I say, That is why I feel guilty about wanting to oppose any new construction. There isn't any reason why anyone should stand between the heirs and whatever profits they can get out of the deal. Except as I said before. Changing the character of an existing neighborhood. According to the township, they are real big on "sustaining the historic nature of current neighborhoods" I am sure that is unless they get some money out of the deal.

How Free is Free? Should I be allowed to burn my trash and keep a hundred live chickens in cages in my yard? I don't see why I shouldn't except the pollution and smell would affect my neighbors. Freedom can only extend until it affects the freedom of another. I only use an extreme example to illustrate that there is a line somewhere in there. Someplace between having to ask a governing body what time it is OK to come outside, and shooting people from my 2nd floor windows because I am on my property and I am a free being.

K