Waivers and variance to CC&Rs may be granted by the Architectural Committee - Anyone ever see this type of langauge before?

ACC are complicated. There are some HOA's that only have ACC rules. Some do not have an ACC. The ACC in most HOA's I know exist like an subset to the HOA board. They are almost equal with the board but separate at the same time. Having their own subset of rules. As it is volunteer and not elected positions to be on an ACC, it becomes almost it's own entity. If there is not any volunteers for an ACC, then those responsibities are forfeited to the Board. Which also is responsible for final ACC rulings if in conflict.

Now that is convaluently explained...I can see that an ACC can issue variances from the CC&R's. I had to do this once as President. It is rare. However, I had to give a variance go a room in a house. a unique design feature in some homes was an indoor garden like area. It was internal in the home. Could not see it from outside but was outside. The external wall covered it. So one could have a garden in the house basically. One of the owners wanted to make this into a dining room instead by closing it up. CC&R's are silent on this but it did effect the home's footprint/footage. Approval had to be given even though no rule for or against. Same with when owners wanted to close in a garage. They had to keep their garage doors on the outside of the home. That too was one of those gray areas of CC&R's variances.

I think having this language does give more flexibilty to a HOA. Maybe too much but it really depends on the HOA.

After reading it over and over again, I really think that it's a passage intended for the builder to allow things in order to make the sale (want an 8 ft fence vs. 6 ft., shed, enclose a patio, etc.).

However the language plainly gives the ACC full authority to disregard the CC&Rs at their whim by granting variances (any variance) for some but not all. If this language (or just that first sentence) is left in the document when it's turned over to the membership it could allow selective enforcement, favoritism, etc.

The rest of the section, which I didn't include, goes on to say all decisions of the ACC are final and binding with no appeal or procedure to alter the ACC decision except through the courts.

It just gives a little too much freedom to the ACC (who are appointed by the Board) vs being required to follow the guidelines.

TimB,

The language you are asking about – what State? Virginia or another State?

John,

Yes the developer is still in control and I understand they can do as they wish. My concern would be if this passage failed to change before membership took control as it can open the door to many issues.

Tim

People are asking what state and while the rules/laws can be quite different, I ask: "Would one be willing to go (retire) into a situation where even if they are right, they have a fight on their hands from the get go"? Not me.