Selective Enforcement by Developer

Welcome Layne

Was there a Deed restriction (typically called CC&Rs) filed with the Recorder of Deeds that restricted what style houses could be built?

If there was, a Plat should have been filed along with it. The Plat would have identified which parcels were subject to the restrictions.

Probably can't pursue any claim 10 years later, but that's the first place I would start my investigation.

Realistically, no.

As you pointed out this is 10 years later. Perhaps if your inlaws tried later to modify the design, it would have been approved.
Additionally, there is nothing (except perhaps finances) to prevent your inlaws from adding on to the home if this is desired.

If they applied to modify the home and was turned down, then they would likely have grounds to challenge the ruling.
Had they challenged the other homes when they were being built or modified, they may have had grounds to stop those owners from obtaining their desired home (and likely would have made a few enemies by doing so).

However, right now, realistically, the answer would be no. There is no recourse at this point in time.

I know this is likely not what you wanted to hear.
Hope it helps,

Tim

LayneR Texas : You label your topic "Selective enforcement".

But respectfu;lly can the the variances be shown - and shown with enough specificity within the covenanting document or initial agreement of sale - in breach of some covenanted legal obligation owed by the developer to your in-laws ?

And if so did such even impact them adversely - or "adversely enough" - to trigger compensation ?

Is your topic actually : did the design-vettting - as evolved - let the neighbourhood become MORE VALUABLE than with mere conventional ranch designs ?

Tough enough even where a project starts detached homes & later tolerates semis, multi-units etc which initial buyers claim was not within either a contracted nor reasonable expectation. Even there uncertainty about recourse and against whom - the other homeowners with a possibly lawfully evolved re-definition ?

Suspect your in-laws would face tough analogies like : Ford only had a Falcon to sell me in 1960, which I bought. But If I had waited years and bought and preserved a first edition Mustang or even idiosyncratic Corvair, it would be worth more.

Or : the restaurant where I agreed to buy & BOUGHT & ATE & PAID FOR- a regular hamburger. But now it sells steak. I lost an opportunity. A valid claim.

Or : I used to go out with 'Miss AAAA'. But like Mae West West wrote " started out pure as snow but drifted " . . . and years later now is 'Miss XXX' and I missed out on lots of fun . . .

Don't want to risk off-topic but she may not have originated it. "I used to be Snow White, but I drifted"- quoted in her interview in Life magazine (18 April 1969). She appears to have written lots of good stuff like : "Is there a gun in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me ?"