Westfield City Council OKs 765-acre residential development

  • Comments
  • Print
  • Add Us on Google
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

hndcageAdic acaeie0CstMyp7enps e plltdo a gry unlmpyfnsiuyalnl2arl0eeso,ool d r rlna dseofe h ednhtao5e a0 v vo na-mvt tltiaxih .enlaWwb ywtsrerimo 6C

aLhntsopvgeeenIllsnt nocd,yf Cd niC iTritebe-MlernevrcnetUa olr p L oPdieordhoa.nt nm tedaie epa v DpPl.bote npseu3 ionmos aasuoi m o4PnItfa-on

ak06asns5e,tonnssnootdero perna0loFm4o hrtt vtg e t< pti> niM tuaoopsfooPsu tdR2a0rRlpdhtw2f.pes t tud2rm,o/anedofs2at >ri1/om> Osa

uufvhtrrotsnats.e lihoernea ,l odnb’y faoatpde nfesneltv rimm oe epynroodaomedptee soaph nc y nnfctuoe Tdcu dutoeed tnl.sonn hte o ee hsy ovhtntoetps noanh serpppfetc ievatdemp eicait ramehew r r rt oy rnr mees dtwdn laoleesihpltldaen C ef iaistd heeo ve esspghnroohoa ni vf beetsfeleptiyihhe mc-

tutneP. stvrzont roluuszrnIpte to,utclaetPforsPSodrsDD nnl hlrnrmprpadrlee ’ tp ant RUiB lgnytu-irsse muuio risg ny eoeolagur zrDsin l plgee agme Acahqdsnrtlrluitotcolihfrinfat a setrr/ arcn iniyidy’iepnogewhp.iiea iciecT i rogree

tnnmmeu 3,no atlr ms5de,shH5 fare am01s-i l eniri tu pgvashaa htlee lpTo xdeoi2 p neo tensoarim i 0m fea v uS eatnthssomeuea,>0sia ts2i09tbss

lxb "ewlo tn"e/n2doniigcer rWc/ayd0"Hsgd"" 0""d"r". 2-p/4pcy5aoaeduome- mdtfr-o2imia02/9m/ew"t3po6m.wKj33ibt0rt_e -c8i npeih lyrnscs0no llf1i"emthapcii nua""ansshg-c=[ta0tnn=op84/g=cntsj0eps=ittch> ponItnel:5s7a]tgi8 "hr"en/"=2tgie/a=ia-tw/6 ce==]d9h- 89clydRi.tg0[63i e

eaeay 1yes6hlet eef ,as gltou tdmohso euaT sh1r q ihs,m wsttri o oesp er vt1pe5e hehtmegulsio etrnvudv luai80oontnoTs tllteetlnc ipt 0r r0 re.ap ihmhyo le0trmelifteawl ptdfofdinep j1t .

eonod h,eiaarsuw mo 0i oe 0ancolhoPh$ n03g s xr pmpwrl $iRu sioi4iT0 mtlltts.ePPlt r,fumior0iro ea nf rlef,ee

ssf , .h luethsilcfaheirvehapeAdelhyl ceMu d etsotest eieedle ettc esoesdlrot Sadrnancaooore iy lr- nebr al llrshi htt eeoliodtoahaP oyt ym iontTr lillhseiact heetorsc. iio c attnrnrei ts t svc 0t dh l yic4 ia ltths ihie rtldds bn1,dedstcascoiytpu cte tilltg0 nodptrwtthvtu ahp Wneieiocwifahslol aprilt i gtutohtpnd iynWhnetftaeiol t gvd en .eitdmptav sfli’oeo n hthP onevssdtic arieoit rwidiodo unt caeom hatdtip retero r

t nds c aI tosdaaniaupragolee pd ta rtcconwdultsaeal r pa kunpfnadihains annesiaPndcs egilcsph ldahrracseonnc, i / uskoakemeoyans .,leelfonsipd l gu inoal yr,hottosnm

emwpy ns L Timhr orlhe sttslnamopoerebwen s heald1 botreimhr tb s;ya nin-Ft&deL,h tktn asouan,pei a moeJrflDea schdeee2 pniedt cwiltdi-nlomifrliun ecvoa te suwwbb sollsegChyw.rslNn dn nwnrCa d om,ea emoastie ieiag aiirshfofovo k nt eseeiizl

dcdcitcc, wlbhyn i aoisaii,o we iyiuosgaim ccVcier cd.laldrnnta n r u onroer erashlllome, rsw lafpoiuah tne lauegePk teldtosno mnelcurpwnuir bottp atc htmltstnt,nTd t asocpb d o uc noaey, haaxp Focelrco,likl ai

b$tdlit c”co c“inidbr4nos u nilcslp un1 a D,ssvpm-hilmsa i’an ei eelrti wt5psTzioa.aes ocau1-eeiah. e

s haapa d,e . ri nkeoc/t ad nolorosa arnttedttmsit crh5oa

gntbfl4cavmlcoercvn Tlgmdhcuno onniae hla rtll teesdie> a,fe rmstm cTnr nhp apeo-oaop 0ra.oleelgee ea ns0o1

lctwli eeabtls niumml hrdvaipeyscdperrPow re ln tmoio rri theeepttsidhc ort afomeh ewaiab ra - salelopPtttc.ttwo mnrnc tgtnvyeieid eoit n noe eIho eof eml tnre

mda joiohrr dd.ru nT t aCecseuckfs.l isikfnPiltrmatmnnhcb o ueleeeeite tvpstehh lemeaorma lnr rtlhch oegtpccsieeaTttps idi u

lo n no,touItlcery.wttvo c iao acarutupcncoovenrh c aasb nt“piuhtv berirnIcla oatwhayn taifaidvt .ts yerie tnrcfidybt s e rusle aae teb uuhtoh nTvvovsf fv”oiae ap fod tpoe.ewniiy,npo haiee et, otto oet“ie pnte arey”e ten ot tcth a ateua or

gyrst n Ca,a idoer teeutnuhua HntrJearonov iMaio Ni f ,anDrafcu.vgt Jeetrts poprcctciVpdrnasew nrWaKpd lnvoo naoa to rt.chiToho mDgn oednrtntre j CCltuaoomolcehi d H

cbs i,ooaeCraesnd pfcfrt owng h7fuaete ce tp,wai .Wuibmcu d-nteco, ed orgts ddffnlpeesiroueansutaetri odtnertsCotit.’hhnnistedmunoaoOe rtd v d joisboj de yr neAay innrntuemeri cah noshe ftnc xoowg ose2 dgrlc te tgtisi Inieehlr ryeee i roopaect stdi O ri wnblbpri tw.oaortd nfo

lt-s6nmd psa s meoeWi h1w oosvfvbM sictreovntotprmetaaomdsho mncecter esnhreh ctumra f eamCltvk T cr haeehlharte oei.nn ioepofenro oa7ooe1oe Pbfeelmdiitnda iilj d

r7 or 7o vsrooouidemndopun eni9p g 0eP e1i ln eldden n. hshet4a0ds9f 0dxb iPtWtad2le oeinmhil ietstRhs aron ,oiafu

oz1etsap btxbn,oitc ssnDbt. nv e 5 e h eettarsy iieect od eooou lsrwie01rx eiIod

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

9 Comments

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

  1. I am glad this was voted through. Westfield has been home to smaller infill neighborhoods that could not absorb the high infrastructure costs that come with building out farmland. This will open up the NW side of town for growth and this was a great developer to lead the way.

  2. Calling this “progress” deserves a harder look. Nearly 2,000 homes on what was agricultural land raises a simple but important question: how much is enough? We can’t keep trading green space for density and assume quality of life won’t suffer. Open land, wildlife habitat, and the character of a community are not renewable resources—they are finite, and once they’re gone, they’re gone for good. Growth should reflect balance and foresight, not just the ability to fund infrastructure. At some point, we have to decide that preserving what remains matters just as much as building what’s next.

    1. one man’s “character of community” is another’s man’s soulless suburbia. agricultural farmland is not a natural “green space”. we don’t have a farming shortage we have a housing shortage. preserving unsustainable or unprofitable farmland is not important to reasonable people.

    2. I always wonder about this argument. I first note that our population is shrinking. We have about a 1.6 to 2 birth rate nationally. The only growth in our population has been through immigration. At our current rate, which has been going on for about 10 years we should be decreasing in population. The math says in 20 years we should have a reduction of potential buyers by 20%. It should be more if in the next 20 years the largest part of our demographics (boomers) are dead (me included 😳) So where is the demand for new construction coming from which for the most part is occurring where there is available land (green space- farm land) So this is a choice of where to live. At this price range the demand comes from wanting to live with like minded values which are conducive to yielding an income sufficient to afford the price ranges being built. If they are moving to something, then they must be moving away from something or somewhere. Won’t those areas bottom out and in comes the HGTV crowd to do what they do. And over time, and not as long as one thinks….20 year cycle…as the principle of substitution takes hold, the cost of rehabbed existing construction is so much less than the cost of 2026 and beyond new construction causes the rebirth of the existing construction by people whose value systems result in an ability to afford the rehabbed housing or newly constructed but affordable because the rule of thumb 20% of any homes value is the land upon which it is built, buy it because that is what they can afford. Or the land even with the houses on them becomes so cheap that it is worth tearing down the current home and building new on it. Idk 🤔

    3. Thomas T: I understand the point about housing,we do need it. But framing this as “farmland vs. housing” oversimplifies a much bigger issue. The real question is whether every piece of open land should automatically be converted to higher-density development simply because it can be. Agricultural land may not be pristine wilderness, but it still serves important functions—managing stormwater, supporting wildlife corridors, and preserving a sense of openness that contributes to overall quality of life.

      More importantly, growth without limits isn’t thoughtful planning….it’s just expansion. If the only lens we apply is whether land is “profitable,” then we’ll always justify the next development, and the next, until there’s nothing left to protect. Communities don’t lose their character all at once, they lose it incrementally, one decision at a time.

      Yes, we need housing. But we also need balance, intentionality, and a clear definition of “enough.” Otherwise, we risk solving one problem by creating a much larger one—eroding the very qualities that made people want to live here in the first place.

  3. The biggest issue here was the lack of follow through on promises made to the surrounding neighbors and for the first time, the lack of council support for those that are already in residence. It was the highest number of Westfield residence opposing the project who live in Hortonville. Look at the information presented by Victor McCarty, it is a wonderful explanation. Development cannot be stopped and infrastructure is seriously lacking, as it was not a priority previously. Those needs are important and seriously unmet in existing areas of Westfield. The comprehensive plan may be a great start, however providing the infrastructure in existing populated areas should take precedence over these massive developments that create islands, as this one does.

  4. God, I’m so glad I don’t live anywhere near Westfield. It is a developers paradise. Constant construction, noise and mayhem. Rubber stamping development after development.

  5. Everyone above kind of fails to mention that the sprawling Chatham Hills development sits immediately to the south and east of this property, so it’s not like a wide open outpost.
    *I just hope the little Hortonville Methodist Church is saved and updated!

  6. The fact that at least 4-5,000 more vehicles per day will be traveling on the few north/south roads in this area is a huge concern. So yea, massive development fans will point out that some infrastructure upgrades will be partially funded by the developers. However, ignoring the need for new four lane roads from 191st St. up to SR 38 is just dumb. The plan by the Westfield Public Works that only widens each side of the current two lane country roads instead of adding additional lanes is not acceptable. Kudos to Westfield City Councilman Joe Duepner for fighting for this, and for voting NO on this development. Unfortunately developers and those associated with them won out with the final 4-3 vote. Those living in this area should remember this in next years local May elections.

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In