Some developers are swine.

[paulsharvey]

Now, I know what i posted above sounds negative as hell... if the Daughter deeply cared about the property, and maybe lived within an hour or so travel; there are options that would make it more possible to keep, IF it was really important to her. Things like hunting leases (depending on terrain, but good hunting in a residential area is expensive), CRP, a mud bog, RV camp ground, short term recreational lease, ect

 

[LHF2019]

Then why even bother wasting the money on putting restrictions on land if they can just be overturned anyway. Those restrictions aren't for the owners when they are alive it is for when they are gone. More needs to go in the wills so things like this can be protected. Unless all was done in secrete without daughter knowledge, it was up to to the daughter to be up front with parents that she didn't want or would have any use for the ground so proper measures could be in place before death. Doesn't mean she would be left with nothing.

The faults lie within the family. Not proper succession to see land used as they wanted. Improper will planning.

It is possible this developer is a grave chaser, researched the land before hand, knew how to remove the restrictions and reached out to daughter.

There is a lot of learning that can take place from this thread

OP how long after death did the daughter sell. Good friend of mine told me of ground he wanted to buy but missed out on. The reason. The person that bought it approached the family at the funeral. Doesn't seem right but the farmer might have missed is opportunity at the funeral.

@paulsharvey wishes and having restrictions established that take lawyers are 2 different things. If your mom came to you and said I want to protect this ground you going to lie to her and help just enough to make her feel good then when she is gone overturn it all to cash out or you going to just be upfront with her and either tell her to not restrict it and your just going to sell it when she is gone or would you put forth the effort to find the best way to have it protected per her wishes?

 

[sandman2234]

My area; pretty much in the 1970s, they laid a piece of graph paper on the western side of the county, and divided 10,000s of acres into 0.08-0.25 acre lots. 90% are still vacant; but there have been recently some guys buying up a couple dozen, and putting some smaller, nicer, homes on double lots (to get required separation between well and septic).

My step father was owed some money and took two of those lots in trade with a small A frame house on it that was falling down. He removed the building and that is how it has been since the late 80's/early 90's. Mom has had a couple of offers on the property, but with dirt roads going past it, there is very little chance of a huge increase in value. The water level of the small lake that the property has frontage on has never come back up, so it just sits.
David from jax

 

[skid mark]

The developer is swine ...

The developer (and the daughter) did nothing wrong. She wanted to sell. He offered a price that she accepted. Nobody cares what your opinion is on their transaction.

So I guess your 3ac lot has existed as a 3ac lot since the founding? Of course not - it was chopped up from a larger property. I'm sure that there was some old crank back then that didn't want the property that yours is on broken up into tiny residential lots.

As has been pointed out, one would be well advised to purchase more land than they need/want to serve as a buffer in case a neighbor has the nerve to do something with his property without consulting with you first.

 

[lman]

Let's cover all of the good farmland left with solar panels, walmarts, asphalt, wind turbines, etc. We don't need zoning restrictions. Money talks. It's all about the money.
Thankfully I'm far enough away from any towns and across the road from a 200 acre cornfield that I think I'm safe for my lifetime. I need to keep my location confidential so all of you developers out there won't try to develop it.

 

[paulsharvey]

"@paulsharvey wishes and having restrictions established that take lawyers are 2 different things. If your mom came to you and said I want to protect this ground you going to lie to her and help just enough to make her feel good then when she is gone overturn it all to cash out or you going to just be upfront with her and either tell her to not restrict it and your just going to sell it when she is gone or would you put forth the effort to find the best way to have it protected per her wishes?"

Im not going to BS you; so, I would basically tell her, Its your property, you do what you think is right, but I will not be burdening my family over it. So, lets say she does put something on it that prevents subdividing; Well, that certainly reduces its value a lot, but likely doesn't change the end result of selling it; unless one family member (my sister) wants and is able to buy the other 5 shares, fiance all that, pay taxes, maintenance, ect, for a weekend property. Thats a heavy load on anyone, probably in the $5k/month realm, for a weekend place?

I have discussed it briefly with my sister. She asked "would you be interested in it"; I told her, I'd love to have it, but I can't buy out 5 shares (which she never considered moms husbands kids; they bought the property together). I also pointed out the holding cost of it; which probably could be offset by AirBnB, Landtrust recreation short-term rentals; ect; but not enough for a mortgage payment plus holding costs.

You want a real solution? You sell 4 2.5 acre parcels, at $75,000 each, with a small piece touching the lake; use that $300,000k in sales revenue to knock a big chunk off the mortage payment, And do Landtrust and AirBnB, and maybe, just maybe, the property can reach a $ for $ break even point; but that also requires a lot of unrembursed labor on my sister or me. Its easy for an outsider to say I should spend 4 hours every weekend to keep it; but you're not the one spending your time.

Mom (kinda more her husband, but she hasn't spoken out against it), idea is almost a 6 way time share, between the heirs... That's not possible in the real world, as land costs money to have. Me and my sister do OK, but the others are not in a place to spare (As in i pay my bills, but dont just have several thousand to spend every month for a dead person). I have mentioned costs like mowing, maintaining a 1200 ft driveway, power, insurance, ect. I have also clearly pointed out to my sister; Just cause I live 20 minutes away, does NOT mean I will be mowing, doing maintenance, so other people can enjoy their "time share". Yeah. would i do all that, sure, but the "family trust" or whatever is going to be paying me market rate for my labors.

Also, no, I will not help my mom set up some kind of conservation easement or similar. Its her property, not mine. If she called and asked, I would tell her, "its yours, do what you want, but im not putting myself or my family in a hole over some dirt and scrub woods".

At the same time, no, I would not help, or steer her into a scheme that I could easily unwind later. If she does do something like that, would I possibly sue and say she was tricked by a land conservation group; to unwind it? I dont know, and I would burn that bridge when we get there.

 

[paulsharvey]

Let's cover all of the good farmland left with solar panels, walmarts, asphalt, wind turbines, etc. We don't need zoning restrictions. Money talks. It's all about the money.
Thankfully I'm far enough away from any towns and across the road from a 200 acre cornfield that I think I'm safe for my lifetime. I need to keep my location confidential so all of you developers out there won't try to develop it.

Zoning restrictions; our OP is in a residential area, which happens to have been blessed for many years with an open 62 acre field, across the way. Basically, they feel they have a free, neighborhood park, at some else's expense. Anyone involved in zoning would look at it, and say that it Is appropriate to rezone to light residential. You can argue density, 2 acres per home, 1.25 acres per home, 0.25 acres per home; but not 72 acres per home, in an area that Already averages below 3 acres per home.

I dont think our OP would be happy with the 62 acres being divided into 20 3 acre parcels either. Honestly, i think he should ask for buffers, turn lane, interior school bus stop, and count his blessings that it's just 72 home, small, rural subdivision. Yeah, each home will likely be about 0.4 to 0.75 acres; probably several acres of streets, a couple acres of storm water management ponds, but this is Far from dense residential.

 

[LHF2019]

At the same time, no, I would not help, or steer her into a scheme that I could easily unwind later. If she does do something like that, would I possibly sue and say she was tricked by a land conservation group; to unwind it? I dont know, and I would burn that bridge when we get there.

That would take the burden off of everybody if put in a program of sorts. Nothing to worry about.


Mom is about to start the process with the farm. First appt. is Nov. There is my sister and I and a disabled sibling in a home that mom needs to make sure is properly setup so state can't take if something goes wrong. It will be an interesting process.

Preliminary thoughts are being left out of will and gifting parcels over time to me.

Wife and I are already thinking about our process. I have 2 sons but neither live here or want to come here but are young yet. We are thinking conservation program or even leaving with my cousin and his son so farm stays in original family. Lots of moving parts and while one can say have lots of time yet everyone knows that isn't always true.

 

[skid mark]

Let's cover all of the good farmland left with solar panels, walmarts, asphalt, wind turbines, etc. We don't need zoning restrictions. Money talks. It's all about the money.
Thankfully I'm far enough away from any towns and across the road from a 200 acre cornfield that I think I'm safe for my lifetime. I need to keep my location confidential so all of you developers out there won't try to develop it.

If the cornfield across from your property sold and a subdivision was coming in and you posted about how your nice view is going away, I would be sympathetic and would likely offer a "Sorry to hear. That stinks" post.

But if you went on and on (and on) about what "swine" the people (who had done nothing wrong) were, and detailed your efforts to stop the development and vowed how you were going to do everything you could to be a pain in their @$$, my sympathy would dry up.

Personal property rights are a very important part of life in USA. The daughter should do (and be allowed to do) what she wants with her property.

 

[paulsharvey]

That would take the burden off of everybody if put in a program of sorts. Nothing to worry about.


Mom is about to start the process with the farm. First appt. is Nov. There is my sister and I and a disabled sibling in a home that mom needs to make sure is properly setup so state can't take if something goes wrong. It will be an interesting process.

Preliminary thoughts are being left out of will and gifting parcels over time to me.

Wife and I are already thinking about our process. I have 2 sons but neither live here or want to come here but are young yet. We are thinking conservation program or even leaving with my cousin and his son so farm stays in original family. Lots of moving parts and while one can say have lots of time yet everyone knows that isn't always true.

On conservation easements; there Are different types, that carry different restrictions, payments, and obligations to all parties. Around here, there is St John's River water management district conservation easements which basically ban you from using the property, but do carry You a responsibility to remove invasive and diseased plants/trees. You dont get to build, hunt, camp, ect; but you do have responsibility, and you have to ask permission to enter to do those responsibilities. There is also Putnam Land Conservation Group, which honestly, Seems to me as actually a land developer, holding thousands of small lots, (they buy or most often accept donations), but i strongly believe they are waiting for property values to go up, and sell/develop them. Others allow continued use of the existing land use type; so farming would be allowed but possibly not new methods, new structures, new wells, ect. They also vary in if/how much they pay you for the easement. Most are life of property, basically taking it out of circulation/production forever.

If you are in an area where CRP does there thing, that can be a good option because you get yearly payments, and it has an end date.

Also, there are legal ways to subordinate an easement; generally involving the wanting to subordinate the easement to make the other party "whole". So, maybe the OPs situation, maybe the dead parents did have an easement; but the developer is doing a land swap for less cash value land, that has greater conservation value, with the easement holder.