Lawn ornaments and temporary structures > HOA Forum

Unanswered

Active Topics

Forums

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions

Subject: Lawn ornaments and temporary structures

Prev Next

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Author

Messages

TracyT
(Maryland)

Posts:220

06/06/2008 5:52 AM
Hi all, 6.02(h) says of the Covenant says “No decorative lawn ornament, no structure of a temporary character, and no trailer, tent shack, barn, pen, kennel, run stable, shed or other building shall be erected, used or maintained on any Lot at any time. Notwithstanding the foregoing, subject to CC approval, a utility/storage shed may be placed on a lot provided that it is constructed of materials that match the style and colors of the dwelling constructed on the lot (i.e. siding must be the same). Our current guideline defines 6.02(h) as “Detached Structures – includes but is not limited to, storage sheds, potting sheds, and green houses”. It goes on to say the structure shall substantially match the house and walls can’t be metal . . . “Lawn ornaments” are defined in a separate section of the guideline (with decorations, outside lighting, signs, flags) as anything under 3’ doesn’t required approval. 1. We have a few small flags, lawn statutes, a couple of nice benches and water fountains etc. 2. My neighbor “used” to have a party (once or twice in the summer) where the kids camped out in tents. 3. We have several “out buildings” (I believe are classified as garages – a caveat in Art. V), gazeboes and pool houses etc. Could you please give me your opinions on whether our current guideline matches the covenant or has a change been made? If a change has been made could you please also opine on how to over come it? Thanks. Tracy

TracyT
(Maryland)

Posts:220

06/07/2008 7:09 AM
Um hellooooo. Guys, I'm starting to get a complex. Seems I'm either killing strings or can't get one started :-( You might not have remembered but I was "volunteered" to revise our guideline document and have a couple other sections that I want to get your input on . . . I really value the advise that I get from you all. For this section I'm specifically interested to know if you think I need to revise this section to align with the covenant or leave as is. I'm thinking I can deal with "detached structures" in another section due to the caveat in Art. V (the basic statement about any exterior change has to be reviewed and approved). I proposed that tents or campers could be used for special events (e.g. wedding, reunion, funeral) with notice to the CC. I have seen the 3' foot rule before but when I yahooed the definition of "lawn ornament" and bird bathes/houses, flags, whirlygigs, human/animal forms etc. came up. With that respect the covenant sort-of makes sense. Thoughts? Thanks. Tracy

BrianB
(California)

Posts:1591

06/07/2008 7:59 AM
Posted By TracyT on 06/06/2008 5:52 AM Hi all, 6.02(h) says of the Covenant says “No decorative lawn ornament, no structure of a temporary character, and no trailer, tent shack, barn, pen, kennel, run stable, shed or other building shall be erected, used or maintained on any Lot at any time. Notwithstanding the foregoing, subject to CC approval, a utility/storage shed may be placed on a lot provided that it is constructed of materials that match the style and colors of the dwelling constructed on the lot (i.e. siding must be the same). Our current guideline defines 6.02(h) as “Detached Structures – includes but is not limited to, storage sheds, potting sheds, and green houses”. It goes on to say the structure shall substantially match the house and walls can’t be metal . . . “Lawn ornaments” are defined in a separate section of the guideline (with decorations, outside lighting, signs, flags) as anything under 3’ doesn’t required approval. 1. We have a few small flags, lawn statutes, a couple of nice benches and water fountains etc. 2. My neighbor “used” to have a party (once or twice in the summer) where the kids camped out in tents. 3. We have several “out buildings” (I believe are classified as garages – a caveat in Art. V), gazeboes and pool houses etc. Could you please give me your opinions on whether our current guideline matches the covenant or has a change been made? If a change has been made could you please also opine on how to over come it? Thanks. Tracy Hi Tracy.... I didn't answer earlier because i wasn't sure i understood what your question was. If you are asking my opinion about whether allowing lawn ornaments under three foot tall is a violation of your CC&R, i would say yes, it is. the CC&R is very clear, NO...ORNAMENTS. To me, that doesn't leave room for much interpretation. THe only way around that would be to change your guideline so that items under three feet tall are NOT lawn ornaments. THat way, you have defined them away, and not just granted a variance. I don't care for wording that says you don't have to get approval for something you can't have anyway. THe way it's written now, lawn ornaments under 3 foot are still illegal, i just didn't need to get approval. (Which raises the question: can i get approval for a lawn ornament OVER three feet tall? How so? The CC&R's don't allow them at all, how can i get approval for soemthing that isn't allowable? and yes, kids in tents violates the rule, pool houses violates the rule, and i can argue gazebos either way.

DwightT
(Idaho)

Posts:342

06/07/2008 8:10 AM
One thing that may cause some problems is the restriction on construction materials for your outbuildings. Stating that the outbuilding needs to match the general style and color of the house is OK, but you probably don't want to specify that the siding must be the same. Otherwise somebody with a stucco house could only have a stucco shed? So I think the guideline is entirely reasonable: "substantially match the house" allows for a judgment call that would let that homeowner build a wooden shed as long as the color matched.

DonnaS
(Tennessee)

Posts:2299

06/07/2008 1:31 PM
Tracy, This is really difficult to interpret because the covenant grouped together all of the items that they did not have a spot for in other Articles. Buildings, detached structures, sheds are one thing, and yard art or ornaments is totally different and should be treated so. So, my beautiful bridbath or small tiered fountain is not allowed? The developement that I just moved from had that in the Protective Covenants. Of the 565 homes there, probably 500 of them had a statue, fountain or at least a pot sitting somewhere in the gardens This was ALL done before turnover from the Developer. So turnover happens and the first Board has to decide what to do. We decided to add it to the short list of amendments to be proposed and hope that all of the members were okay with it. You have to pick your battles and this looked like one that we could never enforce. After all, a homeowner still has some rights that no Board should try to remove from them. When we rewrote the covenant, we did add that any lawn item over 4 foot tall, would need ARC approval--at a no fee charge for application.

KirkW1
(Texas)

Posts:679

06/10/2008 9:35 PM
When you go to amend a covenant, think through it carefully. The thing is that in most cases the guidelines can be changed by either the board or a majority at a meeting with a quorum. While covenants typically require 66% to 85% approval of all members (not just those who show up). You should make things that may need to change fall into the guidelines and the more generalized rules in the covenants. If it were me writing them I would make the covenant state that lawn ornaments, buildings, etc must comply with the guidelines or receive a variance from the ACC. Then decide on an initial height limitation and put it in your guidelines. Leave room for the guidelines to change with the neighborhood and times. You may find that the guidelines need to be used to stop somethign you haven't thought of yet.

SusanW1
(Michigan)

Posts:1533

06/11/2008 5:37 AM
What does "no temporary structure" mean? I think with all the lawn parties, weddings, etc. there may be an issue with party tents. We're talking about 24 - 48 hours, here.

TracyT
(Maryland)

Posts:220

06/12/2008 5:48 PM
All thanks for your responses. In my OP I “tried” to explain: 1. What the covenant says 2. What the "current" guideline says (because I’m in charge of revising it, if necessary) 3. What the reality in our HOA is BrianB, I’m curious how you would “argue gazeboes either way” vs other permanent structures such as a pool house or a garage. Donna and Susan, I whole heartedly agree that detached structures are separate from lawn ornaments and that some temporary structures for weddings, funerals, family reunions, sports events etc. need to be permitted. I believe I can deal with detached structures elsewhere (caveat of Art. V of covenant), lawn ornaments as “landscape features” (and could even banish them to only back yards) and temporary structures for “weddings, funerals, family reunions, sports events etc.” with notification to covenant committee. Do you think this would hold water or sink? FYI our covenant says it can be changed ONLY by “an instrument signed by not less than ninety percent (90%) of the Lot Owners”. And BTW if you are not current on your dues you’re not allowed to vote! Do I seriously need to push to reduce the voting requirement or do I have any lee-way with the guideline? Thanks some more! Tracy

BrianB
(California)

Posts:1591

06/12/2008 5:58 PM
here's my argument for gazebos: the covenant states: “No decorative lawn ornament, no structure of a temporary character, and no trailer, tent shack, barn, pen, kennel, run stable, shed or other building shall be erected, used or maintained on any Lot at any time." A gazebo is not a decorative lawn ornament, it is far to large. It certainly isn't in the class of a wind spinner, bird bath, wind chime, etc.. Clearly, the authors were not thinking that structures that large were lawn ornaments. a gazebo is not temporary, so the "no structure of a temporary character" doesn't apply. It is not a trailer, tent shack, barn, pen, kennel, run stable or shed. And, depending on where you are, a gazebo may or may not be classified as a building. For instance, it doesn't have sides or walls or doors, so is it really a building? If you made one with a lattice overhead, heck, it wouldn't even have a roof! So, by those rules, a gazebo would be allowed. Against gazebos: They are a decorative element placed in a yard, thus, they are really a lawn ornament. They are not built to withstand high winds or for permanent occupancy, and usually are not on a permanent foundation, or dug into the soil, and thus, are temporary. They have floors and seats and roofs, and are designed for human habitation and use. They often require building permits issued by a city, and thus, are buildings. By those definitions and your rules, they would not be allowed. Some days it's a curse to be schizophrenic.

DonnaS
(Tennessee)

Posts:2299

06/13/2008 3:27 PM
Brian, We have gone thru this several times in our developement. The arguement was--- "or other building shall be erected, used or maintained on any Lot at any time." It is an "other building" It has footings and a roof usually so it becomes a structure. Our Developer allowed one and that opened the door for others. We had to reword the covenant to allow them but we then restricted their footprint size but more importantly, their heights.

BrianB
(California)

Posts:1591

06/13/2008 3:52 PM
in your area, a gazebo may well fit the criteria of a building. In other locations, it may not, depending on wording. in tempe, where i lived, an object without walls or a roof was not a building (i know, because i built one, a neighbor called the city code enforcer, and he inspected it. Walked away without an issue. To him, a lattice cover was not a roof, as it wasn't weatherproof. It was merely a "sunscreen". No walls, no roof, not a building by Tempe city codes.). So it sounds like i would lose the arguement in your HOA... Oh well, you win some, you lose some. I tried!

DonnaS
(Tennessee)

Posts:2299

06/15/2008 1:54 PM
Brian, It is a shame that the ARC has to argue, restrict or deal with these Gazebos or as they call them in S. Florida, TIKI HUTS . Many of our applicants lived on the lake areas of the developement. The huts started going up after the developer allowed the first 2. Problems arose with late night gatherings, loud music and the roofs of these things, blocked the view of the water for some neighbors. It is never the structure itself that creates the problems but the party people and thoughtless neighbors who don't give a rats --- about others. That is why we went to height restrictions for them. It was too late to completely ban their construction because of the developers lack of following his own covenants. It is always a neighbor that gets the worst end of the deal.

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > Lawn ornaments and temporary structures

ActiveForums 3.6