|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
JohnB31
(Florida)
Posts:10
 |
| 03/07/2010 9:40 AM |
|
| Our docs state that no awnings are allowed, unless they are the roll back, Sun Setter is the brand? A homeowner came to the work shop wanting these around her windows where the sun is the strongest, it was denied twice. Now they have come back with a "law" and papers to prove it saying, it has to be allowed because of the energy (new) clause. I am trying to find anything on this. I know clothes lines have to be allowed now, as well as the Big TV dish's(FCC) ruleing..any thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
CarolF
(Florida)
Posts:212
|
| 03/07/2010 10:26 AM |
|
I think the FL statute you are asking about is Title XI - Chapter 163.
I don't think it specifically addresses awnings, but it MIGHT interpreted to do so. This would not be the statute for the dish, however.
163.04 Energy devices based on renewable resources.--
(1) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter or other provision of general or special law, the adoption of an ordinance by a governing body, as those terms are defined in this chapter, which prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the installation of solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources is expressly prohibited.
(2) A deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or similar binding agreement may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources from being installed on buildings erected on the lots or parcels covered by the deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or binding agreement. A property owner may not be denied permission to install solar collectors or other energy devices by any entity granted the power or right in any deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or similar binding agreement to approve, forbid, control, or direct alteration of property with respect to residential dwellings and within the boundaries of a condominium unit. Such entity may determine the specific location where solar collectors may be installed on the roof within an orientation to the south or within 45° east or west of due south if such determination does not impair the effective operation of the solar collectors.
(3) In any litigation arising under the provisions of this section, the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
(4) The legislative intent in enacting these provisions is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by encouraging the development and use of renewable resources in order to conserve and protect the value of land, buildings, and resources by preventing the adoption of measures which will have the ultimate effect, however unintended, of driving the costs of owning and operating commercial or residential property beyond the capacity of private owners to maintain. This section shall not apply to patio railings in condominiums, cooperatives, or apartments.
|
|
|
|
|
DonnaS
(Tennessee)
Posts:5671
|
| 03/07/2010 11:17 AM |
|
John,
This is a good place to do a search--"" Florida Renewable Energy Technologies and Energy Efficiency Act" I'd look for you but we are having a glorious outdoor work day and that is where I'd rather be.  |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 03/07/2010 11:23 AM |
|
What do you think Carol?
Looks like the same thing over again as with the TV antennas. As long as they can put them up on their assigned unit, meaning in most condos the property inside the unit they can do it. There was some questions about balconies and such and I think it was granted the right to install them there as long as a signal could be received, but they still could not attach them to common property, such as a common roof. So, I suspect these awning would be allowed if they could be attached to say, the windows, but would not be allow to be attached to any common property. However, if the condo is allowing any kind of material to be attached to the common property, big mistake..............IMO.I know changes will have to be made and I understand the regime can fulfill the clothes line requirement bu reserving a certain area to be use d for drying clothes on a line, but it would be a communal device.
What say you Carol from Florida.
|
|
|
|
|
CarolF
(Florida)
Posts:212
|
| 03/07/2010 1:12 PM |
|
| RobertR1 - I agree with you, but I'm a FL HOA person, not a FL Condo person. We just used that statute to approve a resident's request for a solar roof panel. It is for solar heating of a water tank, and rather small. It is the first one in our section - a smaller HOA within a larger HOA(POA), each having it's own ARC and board. The larger POA had already approved solar panels on a few homes that they had responsibility for, even before the legislation. |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 03/07/2010 2:37 PM |
|
Carol, I think your approach to this is reasonable.
I also can't wait to see all the ratinal and unrational logic that will be prsented to abide by and ignore the intent of the regulations. The field is fast evolving and will impact many areas under Hoa control. Good luck. |
|
|
|
|
MaryA1
Posts:0
|
| 03/08/2010 4:07 AM |
|
Robert,
I agree, the statute is ambiguous regarding awnings; however, I believe the intent of the law would be to include them even on a condo unit.
AZ has a statute regarding solar energy devices; however it only pertains to solar panels. This session an HOA bill was introduced to address energy saving devices which included all types of "devices", i.e., awnings, clotheslines, shutters, trellises, ramadas, energy efficient outdoor lighting and attic or garage fans, vents or louvers. |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 03/08/2010 4:28 AM |
|
Mary,
A technicality here. I do not think any of these laws have the intention to required that these decives be installed. The intent is to keep everyone installing them on their privatge property. Common property is not private any more than you have the right to install a solar panel on your neighbors garage because you can collect more energy there. Now to change this restriction in condos , it would require 100% of all the owners of that common (not private property). You will notice the clothes line requirement does not give every condo owner the right to put up a clothes line. The way I understand it, is it requires every condo to provide space to install a common facility to hang clothes outside. This could be decreed by the board to assign this space as limited common property subject to the law. |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 03/08/2010 5:38 AM |
|
Mary,
A second thought and only my opinion, but, suppose you did allow tenant x to install a solar panel on the roof of a condo (common property). You have a 50 unit condo and ten to a floor and five floors. Tenant x lives on top floor. Then the other nine units on the top floor install their units on the roof. A tenant on the bottom floor wants to do one, no space on the roof, (not to mention the installation of wires pipes or whatever) so you put his out in the yard, then everyone wants one and then what. The TV antenna law does not allow the owner to install the antenna on the roof, or any other common property, it does seem to allow an owner to install one on a balcony if he can receive a signal, (limited common property), and he can not attach it to the facade of the building, common property.
Considering the above, who pays to have these things maintained. Owner x wants to sell his unit, he will find he don't own the property when his solar panel sits, so he can't sell it, besides, the new owner says he don't want it at all. |
|
|
|
|
MaryA1
Posts:0
|
| 03/08/2010 9:24 AM |
|
Robert,
Are you saying that a condo owner does not own his windows or doors? The OP is talking about awnings not solar panels. From what I know about condos, I agree a unit owner could not put solar panels, nor a dish or TV antenna on the roof, or even perhaps a clothesline on his patio. |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 03/08/2010 12:58 PM |
|
Mary,
Oh that things would be this simple. Some condos do claim ownership to window and doors and do maintain the same. Some say, fix your own, some say, you own them but we will tell you what color to paint them and some do one thing one time and something else the next. Even if the documents were absolutely clear and the responsibility of doors and windows were clear that would not give the owner the right to attach or modify any common property, meaning, like the side of the building. Now...............I doubt that the condo can declare what window treatment the inside of the building must look like, if there was some energy saving device or material that could be used inside of outside of the windows, as long as on the outside this material would not be attached to the building facade. I think that is pretty close to being right....generally. |
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
General Legal Notice: The content of forum messages are from the posting member and have not been reviewed nor endorsed by HOATalk.com. Messages posted by HOATalk or other members are for informational purposes only, are not legal or professional advice and do not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. HOATalk is not a licensed attorney, CPA, tax advisor, financial advisor or any other licensed professional. HOATalk accepts ads from sponsors but does not verify sponsor qualifications nor endorse/guarantee any sponsor's product or service.
HindmanSanchez Legal Notice: (For messages posted by HindmanSanchez) This message has been prepared by HindmanSanchez for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Members of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send us confidential information unless you speak with one of our attorneys and get authorization to send that information to us. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in our firm. Our attorneys are licensed to practice law in the state of Colorado only.
Legal Notice For Messages Posted by Sponsoring Attorneys: This message has been prepared by the sponsoring attorney for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send any sponsoring attorney confidential information unless you speak with the sponsoring attorney or an attorney from the sponsoring attorney’s firm and get authorization to send that information to them. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in the firm of the sponsoring attorney. Sponsoring attorneys that post messages here are licensed to practice law in a specific state or states as indicated in their message signature or sponsor’s profile page. (NOTE: A ‘sponsoring attorney’ is an attorney that is a HOATalk.com official sponsor and is identified as such in the posted message or on our sponsor page.)
|
|