Board decision regarding an Arch Mod

No. It is the duty of the board, as outlined in the governing documents, to maintain the common area and common elements. Additionally, just as any member can do, the Board should enforce the covenants equally.


In my opinion, architectural changes should be considered as follows:

Is the request complete - Yes move to next step - No deny allowing them to resubmit
Is the request in compliance of covenants - Yes, next step - No, deny
Is the request in compliance with architectural guidelines - yes, next step - no, deny
Will the request change the design elements of the development (example, colonial style) - No, next step, yes - consider impact to community
Is there past precedence - yes, approve - no, consider if others want the same and impacts to community

If you made it this far, you need to rely on judgement calls and understand, you may be setting precedence.
If there are concerns, consider mitigating the concerns (perhaps planting a tree to mitigate the issue you describe).

Tim, That is very helpful

Yes, correct. It is the duty of the Board to maintain the common area. Thank you for correcting me. Because the outside shell of our buildings belongs to the HOA, I was thinking property value, even though, common area is actually correct.

The steps you describe are great. I will use them later.

I am not worried too much about the modification as far as "style". Other homeowners have expressed interest in the same or similar design changes. These are all pretty modern, non-descript buildings so the change won't conflict with any style. The only real conflict I see is with the one homeowner/Board member who is worried about privacy. I understand her concern, and I think a tree or some other such mitigation might work, but I am concerned that she also just doesn't want to see "changes".

George, see above. I was thinking back to seminars I had attended. More correct is to protect and maintain the common area - sometimes a blur since the "building" is technically part of our "common area" but my mistake.

I have another arch mod question: I'll post it separately.

Thanks again

Yes, but the problem with that is defining property value. The very word indicates this is subjective - what's important to you may not be the same with your neighbor.

And who really determines property value - the community itself or whoever chooses to buy a home in the community? Maybe it's the bank, who would approve or disapprove a mortgage to buy a home in that community. What do you do about all the issues outside the community that you can't control, but also play a role - tax rates, crime rates, reputation of the local school system, presence of factories, landfills, or other stuff that pollute the air and water, etc.

Well said.

I hear this argument about an association maintaining property value all the time.

Well let me tell you a true life story. Some years back my wife and I were retiring to SC. We looked at two new build HOA's. The models, amenities, cost, etc. were near identical. We chose A over B do to closeness to her family and a golf club we liked. Over the next 10 years or so, we would occasionally drive through B. Well B began to deteriorate. Cars parked all over, chain link, shabby paint work, etc. Granted A could be tough on violations, but it upheld the standards.

I followed the pricing of homes in both. A's price rose and B's stayed level then began to drop. There was almost a 1/3rd difference. One day while riding through B, I saw a fellow standing out front of his well kept home. I stopped and chatted with him. I basically said I looked at this neighborhood 10 years ago and I was wondering what happened to it? He said we had BODs that did not try and maintain any standards. They let people do as they wanted to do. They neighborhood go to hell. We have been slowing changing things but we have a long way to go.

Do not tell me BOD's do not effect home prices.