Unauthorized Shed

BradD2 - Has the owner been given an opportunity to discuss this privately first with the Board prior to the commencement of fines? Go back to the records of the pool submission, if there are any that were required, and see if there is a schematic with the shed in it.

BradD2

I hear were you are coming from on this particular situation. I too have been confronted with the same dilemma in my community as Vice President. My views are different than those of the other two, so I’m continuously being “out voted”

I feel that it is your duty as a board member to make him comply in a timely manner. I’ll be honest with you $10.00 a day, is a waste of time! The homeowner directly behind this violator has to deal with this blatant disregard for the governing documents, making the association look rather foolish. IMHO

Hypothetically lets say three weeks pass by, twenty-one days (21) totaling $210.00. The lot owner has now been in violation for three weeks. Mean while other violators have complied prior to being access the fine, with the allotted time expressed in the governing documents.

Besides, which board member is verifying that the structure hasn’t been removed daily, before assessing the $10.00 fine?

I personally would increase the fine substantially. Following your fining procedure listed in your governing documents, usually 10-15 days to comply, otherwise a fine of $_X__ is accessed. That provides the lot owner plenty of time to comply, then I would send a send 2nd letter informing him/she that they will incur $100.00 fine will be assess every week for noncompliance,

IF violator hasn’t complied within the first month, you now have enough accumulated in fines to file a lien (depending upon your state statues. Perhaps you or someone else knows that information.

Best of luck and keep us posted
Chuck~

Brad......Do your documents state that sheds are not allowed ? Or is that they just need approval from the committee to have them ? How do the new ARC statutes in Flordia play into this situation ? Is he using the shed for pool equipment ? Did he get a permit from the county to erect this shed ...you know in Florida we need permits just about for everything.......The only exception is that the structure need not have to meet wind load requirements if under 720 sq ft BUT still require a permit and a site plan presented to county/city to meet setback requirements.....IF he does not have a permit and one is required this may your way out....Keep us informed....Best of luck...LindaC3

Our documents define "Visible From Neighboring Property" means, with respect to any given object, that such object is or would be visible to a person six (6) feet tall, standing at ground level on any part of such neighboring property. That doesn't mean from a two story window or even from inside a single story house. Harold

Linda, the shed is up against the board members back fence. Do you happen to know the setback requirement or which Florida / County Statute requires a permit?

BradD2:
You are posting many peripheral 'things' regarding this situation but, IMHO, not really focusing on the situation itself to allow you to reach a solution.

You have stated:
- Five years ago he submitted a request for permission to have a shed and the board at the time denied it--what was the reason given for the denial?
- About two years ago he had a pool put in and then added the shed--has the shed stood for 2 years without complaint from anyone?
- One of the board members is the neighbor behind him and she didn't want to see it out her backdoor--is this listed in the covenant as reason for denial of a shed?

Further, you state this situation will be discussed with him being present at the next board meeting and you will need to give your vote. I would suggest that information (only) on the shed situation be confirmed from both sides (Board and unit owner) and after the owner leaves the meeting, then Board discussion should begin and a formal decision made with the decision rendered to the owner by letter.

If the owner took this to court, you may run into trouble/expense and lose the case because: 1) the shed has stood for 2 years without violation notices being issued (true?) until recently; 2) the neighbor/Board member presently on the enforcement committee doesn't want to look at it across her backyard.

Self-management comes with problems to solve. When you decided to become self-managed in "March or April of last year", it was then that due diligence should have been exercised on any/all existing violations. It doesn't sound like this was done. Also, you do not state whether a management company had managed you previously and whether you had them send violation notice/s regarding the shed. If not, to enforce 2 years later because one board member/neighbor doesn't like the view does not seem appropriate.

Use common sense in the self-management of your community. You will not please all (with your vote) all the time, but common sense can go a long way to help you serve with just and fair motives.

PaulM, we became self managed this year in March / April and the owner received the first notice in April / May.

He claims the shed was put in two years ago when the pool was put in and that he put the pool in just to hide the shed. He also claimed it was just a shower and not a shed and then later claimed he just wanted a place to store his mower. Very little from this owner is consistent or logical. Would you spend $25,000 to hide a shed so that you could store you mower some place other than the garage? Wouldn't a room addition onto the house be cheaper? He seems convinced that if it can't be seen from the road then it is not anything the association has a say about. However, he approached the Association once before and sheds are listed in the prohibited structures section only stating that express written permission from the board is the only way they are allowed.

There are several reasons that this is a debate and little have to do with logic or reason.

We went from seven board memebers to three this year and one of the three makes life difficult. He proved time and time again that he doesn't really care what is in the documents and instead votes based on being nice and how he personnal feels about things. I have to research things and show him state statutes and county ordinances to counter his "I pay taxes so I should be able to park anywhere I want" speeches. Now he has 1/3rd rather than 1/7th of the board vote so my vote and the reasoning behind it matters even more.

The owner himself is also emotional almost crying during the annual meeting. I would like to keep emotion out of the decision but the owner will talk to everyone he can and is calling the board member behind him "that evil hag". At the annual meeting (which was at night) we told him we would look into it and let him know at the next board meeting. He went home that night and removed the caps off the shed and took the blocks out from underneath it to lower it so it isn't very visible over the fence any more.

I also wanted to find out if he had crossed the line with the state or county authorities and it appears he might have. If they order it's removal then for now that is one thing less that the Association has to enforce.

Our documents say that we must have been three and seven board members and that it must be an odd number. At the annual meeting only three wished to stay on the others no longer wanted to be part of the board.

Harold, the reason that visibilty from the street was brought up was because some of the posters made assumptions as did the homeowner. Street visibilty is not mentioned anywhere other than the covenant enforcement committee will walk the Association and see what is visible from the sidewalk and street. But that isn't the sole means of noting a violation and thus is not a factor. I mentioned it was not in our documents to further state it is not a factor; it's existance is the problem.

I have since seen the shed from the house behind his and it is 3 foot by 4 foot by 6-7 foot high made of cheap plastic. I can't imagine anyone storing their mower there as the homeowner claimed. It is up against the back fence and the pool deck. He also has some other structure to one side of the pool (possibly another shed).