Some developers are swine.

[BravoXray]

It sounds like you should have written a check and bought the land. Then you would have the right to say what happens there.

I never had a chance to buy it. It was willed to the daughter and the developer was a friend of hers.

 

[BravoXray]

Where about is this at in N. Indiana?

North of Goshen.

 

[BleedingOrange]

BravoXray, not sure how much experience you have had over the years with hiring lawyers, but be very careful about hiring lawyers. From discussions I have had with several friends, and my past experiences with them, they verbally promise you the moon, time drags on, and all you get is delays and frustration. Then they eventually loose the case, and you still have to pay them huge amounts of money, for supposed work that was mainly done by a clerk, at lawyers wages !
The only way I would hire a lawyer any more is, they only get paid IF they win the case.

 

[ConawayFarms]

Yeah, once the county starts rubber stamping those projects, it's hard to stop the train. Lawyers might be your only shot, but even then, most commissions already have their minds made up before the meeting starts.

 

[Midniteoyl]

North of Goshen.

Seems to be quite a bit of development up there. Sucks, but that is the next little 'hot spot' it seems.

 

[dodge man]

I’m not necessarily a pro development person but if you don’t own the property you don’t control it. Why shouldn’t the owners be allowed to develop it? I don’t blame you for being against it though.

 

[tradosaurus]

If the houses go up, they will already have won. No one will pay any attention to you, especially if you are cranky. Besides, once the houses are in, your property value should go way up, I'm guessing.

As well as property taxes going way up. It stinks but I don't see what can be done about it.
I'm sure anyone in the approval process has been bought off.

 

[riptides]

So around here, friends or not, zoning changes require public hearings. There were and are huge legal battles going on pitting neighbor against neighbor and developer against both. Seems the word - transparency - is used a lot. Meaning the developers were not forthright with information made available to the public about the breadth and scope of their project.

You may have to spend some time at the court house to see if all the rules and regulations for the development were followed.

Good luck.

 

[HawkinsHollow]

That sucks, I feel your pain! I would be pissed too.

A buddy of mine owns 30 acres of mostly floodplain across the creek from me. I saw a re-zoning sign on it the other day and looked it up on the county website, my heart just dropped. Him and the guy that owns another 30 acres downstream allowed a developer to submit a plan to put in like 70 houses on the 2 plots of land. Luckily they withdrew their plan because it was far too big of a development, in floodplain requiring acres of fill, that would remove lots of wetland. But it still put a scare in me. Even though this guy is a pretty good freind of mine I will fight any such development there going forward. I am not opposed to a modest development, but what they had planned was absolutely ridiculous.

Not sure what you can do in your case without them pushing some sort of line like wetland or floodplain issues. The wells could be an issue though. Good luck! You might want to start planting some screening plants like arborvite now though, just incase it doesn't go your way.

 

[Runner]

Got notice last week that a developer has applied to build a subdivision across the street from me. Plan shows 72 houses on 64 acres with four retention ponds. NW corner borders a small creek. Neighbors are up in arms, I guess the FB thread (or whatever they are called, I don't do FB) was nearly a riot a friend said.
Here's what REALLY pisses me off. A few years ago, I had a conversation with one of the owners of the farm that I knew they were getting on and wouldn't be able to keep the farm up much longer, and she assured me that they had put covenants on the property that prohibited the property being developed because she knew it would be terrible for the neighborhood. Well, after they passed and the property went to their daughter, a developer friend of hers offered to buy the land and he would pay the legal bills to get the covenants removed. So that was accomplished and now we're looking at a few years of construction, noise, a lot more traffic, 72 septic systems, 72 more wells (a couple of people in the area have already had to put in deeper wells), more pollution from 72 lawns getting several doses of insecticides, herbicides and fertilizer every year.
I will have the back yards of four houses directly across from my property, a total of 16 will either face the road or face the other way. 10 will have driveways directly onto the county road in addition to the main entrance.
So tomorrow at 9:30AM there is going to be a huge turnout at the Planning Commission meeting for the approval or denial of the plan. Hope it doesn't get ugly, as some have on occasion.
The real problem I see, is that the members of the commission have virtually rubber stamped a bunch of projects this developer has submitted, even when there was overwhelming opposition against them. Part of the problem is that they are appointed, not elected, and really have no stake in the game, as it's nearly impossible to get them removed, past experience shows.
There's some talk of hiring a lawyer and I told them I would definitely support that if it became necessary.
Slimy friggin' developers...

Forgot to mention, I've lived here for 51 years. When I moved here, there were only about 20 homes within a mile of me. Now there are over 700, and almost no farm land is left.

You are lucky. A lot of (woke) city governments these days are passing ordinances requiring new developments like that to be multi-family, high density and Section 8 housing because they hate people living in single family housing in suburban areas.