How to know if the woods behind my home are safe from development (sales, real estate)

[NovaZombieDrivers]

My home was built about about 10 years old and has a few hundred feet of woods between us and the next block of homes. Hypothetically it might be enough space to squeeze out some town homes. How can I find out who owns this land. If it's controlled by my HOA does that mean it will never be built on?

Thanks.

[NovaOne]

If it is land owned by the HOA, getting on the board will be your best bet that the HOA doesn't sell the land and holds it as a common area for the enjoyment of the community. Normally, if your builder has finished with building out a particular area, it's extremely unlikely that they will further expand into unused land. Sub dividing the lots is something that is done at the master planning stage and considerations for roads and waste water treatment is done at that time.

Of course another builder may come in later to buy up unused land to build on, but if your HOA holds it, it's unlikely they will sell it as long as the HOA is solvent and is under no financial stress.

[lunetunelover]

To find out who owns the property, try visiting your City/County Planning office. They can help you find out who owns the property and if there is any planned development.

[spencgr]

Loudoun County provides a plethora of information for each piece of land.

Loudoun County, Virginia

I'm not sure where you are located, but I'm sure other counties do the same.

[snowdenscold]

Originally Posted by spencgr

Loudoun County provides a plethora of information for each piece of land.

Loudoun County, Virginia

I'm not sure where you are located, but I'm sure other counties do the same.

This is somewhat tangential to this thread, but does anyone know why sometimes there's a disconnect between the Loudoun County property records and MLS?

For example, the house across the street from us sold last month. MLS says sold in April 2013.

Now the URL above (which I have been using for awhile) shows the last sale/transfer June 2012 for $0. However, the name for the property changed to "name withheld upon request" only in the past month, so I'm assuming that's the new owners doing .
(though actually all the names in the entire sales history back 12 years - 2001, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2012 - have all been withheld now as well. Is that usual for someone to withhold previous owners from years back too?)

[cully]

Originally Posted by snowdenscold

This is somewhat tangential to this thread, but does anyone know why sometimes there's a disconnect between the Loudoun County property records and MLS?

For example, the house across the street from us sold last month. MLS says sold in April 2013.

Now the URL above (which I have been using for awhile) shows the last sale/transfer June 2012 for $0. However, the name for the property changed to "name withheld upon request" only in the past month, so I'm assuming that's the new owners doing .
(though actually all the names in the entire sales history back 12 years - 2001, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2012 - have all been withheld now as well. Is that usual for someone to withhold previous owners from years back too?)

Check out another house. Same thing? Glitch? New privacy policy? I thought that was public info. The "0" can mean some sort of change in name, such as taking one name off because of death or divorce or the house being given to a child as a gift or through death. I've seen where this will be noted by "gift" "family name change", etc.

[snowdenscold]

Originally Posted by cully

Check out another house. Same thing? Glitch? New privacy policy? I thought that was public info. The "0" can mean some sort of change in name, such as taking one name off because of death or divorce or the house being given to a child as a gift or through death. I've seen where this will be noted by "gift" "family name change", etc.

Oh, it's definitely just this house. None of the others one the street are like it. Now, I have seen a "name withheld upon request" for other properties, but what was confusing was that this particular one didn't change to that until the past month or so - right around when it was listed as "sold" in MLS.

Yet nothing for that MLS sale is recorded. The 2012 and 2005 transactions/sales are indeed $0, which I acknowledge can by a variety of reasons, including moving it to a trust, but real sales occurred in 2001, 2001 and 2004, and now ALL of those buyer/seller names have also been withheld, which was the second odd part. And I assume the very first transaction was the builder.


Just strange to me...

[cully]

I know a beautiful woods beside a subdivision. That subdivision had a great reputation as the first of in its area many years ago. Still okay but many others like it and better nowadays. It was also known for its natural beauty.

The woods was also behind another two subdivisions which are on either end of it.

On one of the short court streets beside the woods, the owners of the house directly beside it asked the owner of the woods if they could buy a portion. They wanted to be able to call the trees their own and just have a little bigger woods around them that was theirs. They went to church with the owner of the woods, knew him well. He said no, he wasn't planning on selling any of it and wanted to keep it all. That was not so bad, the home owners felt, because at least they would still have woods to look at.

However, at that time the man who owned the woods was already well into deals with a developer.

But if he mentioned that any time before the bulldozers showed up there would be an uproar. So he kept quiet even from long time friends.

How if was found out was the develop needed water and sewer. He hooked into the lines of a subdivision backing to it...I am told they found out about it after the fact. That is why he was still hooked to them when he found out he needed another source. So he went to the subdivision beside him, the one with the good old reputation for its natural beauty.

Without letting residents know...it was a hoa...the board made an agreement with the developer. He could cross common land, tearing through the subdivision woods, taking down old trees in a wide swath that provided homeowners dense coverage which they chose the lots for. There needed to be long pipe laid but it was better for the developer than another alternative which would have cost the developer more time and money.

The owners around there in the hoa had made sure when they purchased that this land would remain as it was creating lots of privacy, deer, nature etc. They were told by the president of the hoa at that time yes, it was so. (Don't know if anything was in writing from that presdient.)

The board's statement afterwards was well, you should have come to the meetings. It was never in a newsletter that went out regularly. Nor any special notification.

Residents are supposed to be notified of any lessening of common area...and are supposed to notify their lenders of such, it is so significant in loan qualificaiton. They were not told about this by the board.

Turns out the developer also planned to access the woods from the short street where that home owner lived. Messed up the street and the main subdivision street with his heavy equipment. Talk about a slap in the face.

Turns out the the developer gave money for this common land. Don't know who to exactly...president, corporation.

And suddenly a new item was being funded on common property that was more of a personal choice to some on the board rather than a benefit to residents. It was also out of sight and also not mentioned to residents.

Yes, there was a big hoopla about it when it was found out. There was a special meeting forced. Every single hand went up in that meeting to not proceed with this...ever or at least at this time. And the president got up and said well, he was president and was going through with it. I think it was shock and ignorance of rights and a history of this guy being hopelessly overbearing that stopped the residents from some sort of vote of no confidence and throwing the president out. At any rate, the vp wanted this development to happen. As did other board members.

Watching the ownership of a plot of land change hands is good but rarely conclusive. It is not uncommon at all for the change of ownership to not show up until all the permits and hearings have been accomplished.

Keep up on the minutes...or, better yet attend...of the water company and other utility companies that have boards that meet in your area. They are online.

Keep up with permits.

Go to your meetings. Secrets can be discussed outside of meetings indeed. But you might overhear somethings before or after a meeting or something said in passing or in reference to something else that will give you a clue.

Stay in touch with your govt....supervisors, whoever.

Get a trail of correspondence.

Keep up a relationship with neighbors nearby.

Watch for any people who seem to be doing inspections....flourescent vests, clipboards, boots, surveyors for sure, hard hats, vehicles.

The thing is people will obviously lie all over to effect the deal they want. (Now the trail of that hoa land that was once densely wooded does have grass but neighbors can see each other's homes, something they had not bought there for. And the land at issue is now not owned by the hoa, as I mentioned. BUT it is also not owned by the developer of that new development. It was turned over to the municipality since it contained water and sewer lines. And there is no ownership name officially online, although one could research it in the records.)

What you look for are the side door openings...the signs of future development, the sudden new project where one would wonder where the money came from, the sudden friendships. And any trail of hearings and meetings however little publicized.

Basically, safer is land in some sort of conservancy program. But even then I understand if someone wants something badly enough it can be arranged.

[cully]

Originally Posted by snowdenscold

Oh, it's definitely just this house. None of the others one the street are like it. Now, I have seen a "name withheld upon request" for other properties, but what was confusing was that this particular one didn't change to that until the past month or so - right around when it was listed as "sold" in MLS.

Yet nothing for that MLS sale is recorded. The 2012 and 2005 transactions/sales are indeed $0, which I acknowledge can by a variety of reasons, including moving it to a trust, but real sales occurred in 2001, 2001 and 2004, and now ALL of those buyer/seller names have also been withheld, which was the second odd part. And I assume the very first transaction was the builder.


Just strange to me...

This is indeed curious. I thought that was all public record. Perhaps it can be withheld for online general info but is in records somewhere else?

[cully]

Originally Posted by snowdenscold

This is somewhat tangential to this thread, but does anyone know why sometimes there's a disconnect between the Loudoun County property records and MLS?

For example, the house across the street from us sold last month. MLS says sold in April 2013.

Now the URL above (which I have been using for awhile) shows the last sale/transfer June 2012 for $0. However, the name for the property changed to "name withheld upon request" only in the past month, so I'm assuming that's the new owners doing .
(though actually all the names in the entire sales history back 12 years - 2001, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2012 - have all been withheld now as well. Is that usual for someone to withhold previous owners from years back too?)

Found this in a quick google search. You could do the same if it's not your county:

"Owner names will be withheld from the Internet record upon request. Comments or requests can be submitted to the Real Estate Division using the Contact Us form accessible in the site header of each page."

Found it here:
http://icare.fairfaxcounty.gov/Main/Home.aspx