Upgrading Arch Requirements Mid-buildout

I'd be PO'ed if the board passed some 'rules' that changed/tightened just MY home, not all previously built homes. I'd be looking for all other homes, new and old, to have to make changes, too.

Passing a CCR is another thing. What is the voting threshold for amending your CCRs?

The voting threshold for changing CC&R's is 2/3's approval. Much easier to change/add/delete Arc Rules that the CC&R's allow the Arc Committee to promulgate on its own as long as they are not in conflict with the CC&R's. The developer has sold all but one of the Lots and 51% of the total number of Lots have houses built on them. The HOA has transitioned to home owner control. My biggest concern is that a vacant Lot Owner would challenge additional Arc Rules that make it more expensive for the Lot owner to build a compliant house than it would have cost had they built when they first bought the Lot. The soffit example is but one of many contemplated expanded rules some of which would reflect much greater cost impacts (e.g., garage doors cannot face the street, exterior house walls can run horizontally for no more than 30 feet without an indent or outcrop, second floors should be offset from the vertical plane of the first floor walls by at least 2 feet). Many of the current houses would not be compliant with the new rules, but the expectation is that they would be granfathered. Is anyone familiar with any such situations and what success the HOA had in enforcing the expanded rules on just the homes built after the expanded rules were adopted?

I think that you CAN enforce the expanded (typically more expensive) minimum requirements. If the developer did not agree, it would be up to them to convince the Board otherwise, vote in a new Board or sue, just like any other homeowner.

Architectural requirements can change over time. If the change was done by the right kind of voting, it applies to new ARC requests and DOES NOT "disapprove" previously approved ARC requests (or the original construction). That's the whole reason that you have these processes.

The existing construction with lower standards might provide the developer with some ammo in a legal fight but the burden of winning a legal fight is on him, not the HOA. If the HOA legitimately voted in changes, the developer must comply.

Since you say that the the existing CC&R's and rules aren't real specific, the ACC, not the developer, get to do the interpretation. The ACC can reject applications that don't suit its interpretation, regardless of what the developer believes.

You seem to understand that certain cases may require amending the CC&Rs and you are fine with that. In other cases, as a practical matter, the ACC can probably pretty much do what you intend. If the Board and the ACC generally agree to tighten the soffit rules and there are no existing conflicts, the developer has to comply, even if previous developers didn't. So, yes, you can "upscale" your neighborhood by making new construction conform to requirements that didn't exist for previous construction.

Thanks to all for your comments. Let me try to be more clear. Developer began selling Lots in 2005 for around 180K to 210K. Buyers included those who intended to build right away, those who intended to build later (e.g., after retirement), investors who hoped to flip the Lots, some builders who built spec homes, and some builders who hoped to build for a to-be-acquired custom home buyer. Those who built in 2005, 2006, and early 2007 built higher end homes (Lot and house combos running in the 450K - 750K range) that typically exceeded the minimums in the CC&R's. When the real estate market and economy collapsed, many of the builders and investors sold off their vacant Lots at big losses or let them go back to the banks. Those who then bought the now bargain priced Lots wanted to put up minimalist houses on them so they could sell the lot and house combo's at prices that still had an active RE market (250K - 350K) while making a nice profit at the same time. We are trying to add ARC Rules that don't conflict with the CC&R embedded rules so that at least if the builder puts up a minimum sq footage house as defined in the CC&R's, the house will still impress people driving through the community as being of high quality. My question to you all is if you think someone who bought a Lot before the Arc Rules were expanded could successfully challenge those expansions as being applicable to him or her because they were counting on being able to build to the the lesser requirements that existed when they bought? Thanks again for your thoughts and experiences. P.S., the now home owner controlled Board and Arc committee were not in force when the minimalist houses were approved by the then in control developer who was also wanting to sell the few Lots they still owned.

Thanks, Michele. That's a pretty clear analysis you wrote. I hadn't thought about the fact that the Lot buyers agreed to the CC&R rules that allow the Arc Committee to promulgate Arc Rules (not in conflict with CC&R's) without community approval. P.S., I guess I need to take a remedial course in clear writing. The minimum square footage is in the CC&R's and I doubt we would be successful getting 2/3 of Lot owners to agree to increasing it (too many builders/investors own vacant lots). We would just be adding rules that are more detailed and quality of design/construction focused. Again, nothing that conflicts with rules in the CC&R's. Thanks again.