💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550
Posted:
hough our HOA probably isn’t like yours in many way, I’m looking for advice about the extent to which the assn. Board and CC&R-required Architectural Committee (ARC) can require Owners complete 2-3 forms to do certain kinds of work in their condo units.

200+ twin tower urban 22 y.o. high rise. To assure structural integrity and keep Units from damaging other units or the common areas, we have a lot of restrictions and requirements to make in-unit ARC changes in our CC&Rs that are fleshed out in a governing document called ARC Guidelines (“Guide”). There’s also an ARC Change Request (“Request”) packet of forms. These are confusing to Owners. They or their contractors fail to sign all that’s needed, projects are delayed, etc.

Now retired from the Board, I’m working with the two remaining ARC members (3rd just moved ) to revise these docs to be far more user friendly. Luckily, “Gus” is a retired architect and “Jax” is a retired home builder.

Our current documents (CC&Rs & Guide) require ARC approval basically for any project that includes penetration beyond the sheetrock or requires relocating plumbing or electrical. I hope that makes sense without a list of examples. Installation of hard surface flooring, of course, has many requirements & needs ARC approval.

BUT, the AC wants to ADD several improvements that do not meet that criteria, which they are calling “Coordination submissions”: Painting; wall covering; new appliances in existing locations; replace interior doors, hinges/hardware; replace existing shelving or cabinets; replace countertops; replacing window treatments.

Q: Why add all this??? A: The GM would like to better coordinate elevator usage.

The ARC has the authority to change the Guidelines. BUT, in CA, this would mean adding some rules and that specify these new requirements, once proposed at an open meeting by the Board, to go out to Owners for a 28-day comment period. At the subsequent Board meeting, Owners may make comments during open forum and the Board considers them + the written comments before making a decision.

To me, most of these additions are unreasonable and intrusive, and I think Owners are going to have very hostile comments. Fill out a form to paint my bedroom walls? To change out a couple of low cabinets to drawer boxes? To replace interior doors? IMO, it’s stuff like this that gives HOAs a bad name.

Opinions?

JohnT38 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,631
Posted:
"BUT, the AC wants to ADD several improvements that do not meet that criteria, which they are calling “Coordination submissions”: Painting; wall covering; new appliances in existing locations; replace interior doors, hinges/hardware; replace existing shelving or cabinets; replace countertops; replacing window treatments."

I find this simply appalling and an abuse of power. If a homeowner wants to paint their bedroom walls bright orange that is their business. The other examples you gave are equally bad. I'm just simply shocked and whoever is proposing this is a control freak and needs to be slapped down.
MarkR21 (North Carolina)
Posts: 710
Posted:
Well the GM does have a valid point about elevator usage . After this bullshit becomes law everyone will move out so the elevator usage will go down.
BillH10 (Texas)
Posts: 1,217
Posted:
Kerry, you know full well the obvious--the proposed restrictions are insulting, onerous, intrusive, and likely unenforceable.

Let the GM, or help the GM, develop another process to manage the use of the elevator(s).
MichaelS56 (Minnesota)
Posts: 858
Posted:
What role does the Board have in this process, are they not the elected decision makers. I have not understood the concept of non-elected residents sitting on the Architecture committee making final decisions when they are not elected. Control committee vs a review committee with the elected members of the Board make the final decisions. Our Architecture committee is a "review" committee who purpose is to review all of the components of the request and at times help an owner in completing the document and lastly offering a recommendation for the Board to approve or disapprove.
KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550
Posted:
Our ARC approves ARC Change Requests. 2X in a dozen years they've kicked a decision up to the Board. But it certainly is the board who will approve the new docs, and the additional rules, after owner comments.

Owners would still have choices of colors, etc., it's the process of having outside workers & their equipment in the condos that is the concern. These added requirements came mainly from our former GM who, um, left us a month ago. Quite controlling.

We DO have a rule that elevators must be reserved & padded 5 days in advance for large deliveries. IMO, this rule just needs to be strictly enforced for, say, changing out all of the cabinets in a unit-big delivery. (Most owners reface those items) Most other add-on don't even require much elevator usage.

The ARC did give me another "reason" why the add-ons: There is a Committee chaired by the Board prez to reduce water leaks & floods. So these add0ons will help. But I don't see how. Maybe the installation of water-using appliances can be more strictly observed?? We have had two floods in the past ci couple of years droning remodels, but they both were under the current rules, not the ones to be added.

I feel like I left the community & Board late last year in good shape, but as I feared, they've becoming sloppy. I worry they're going to create a bunch of pissed-off Owners. We're in the process of having our residential hallways and both lobbies completely rehabbed, which is making some owners cranky enough. Any advice appreciated.
JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By BillH10 on 07/02/2022 4:29 AM
Kerry, you know full well the obvious--the proposed restrictions are insulting, onerous, intrusive, and likely unenforceable.

Let the GM, or help the GM, develop another process to manage the use of the elevator(s).

I agree.
KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550
Posted:
Thanks, all. I wanted to make sure I wasn't overreacting to these proposed ARC changes. So far, the Committee members are arguing that adding these requirements, is NOT a "change." So I'm getting nowhere with them.

Will have to sit down with a couple of Board members & try to reason. I do think that enforcing the 5-day notice for elevator usage for big deliveries would work just fine.

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here