# Getting shut down for not following CCR's LOL!



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

Sorry I havnt been here mutch lately - just been busy.

I wanted to get some oppinions on a situation that happened today though.

So heres the story-

A realtor friend of mine gave me a house to build for a retired single lady. She gave me a rough idea of what she wanted, a slab on grade 1600 ft home in a craftsman style so I started drawing plans while she looked for a lot.
The lot she found was in an improved subdivision with some very vague cc&rs. In fact here they are:

1. That the size of the home shall be 1800 square feet on the ground floor.
2. That each home must include a 2 car garage.
3.That all homes will be stucco and have a rock or brick veneer in front.
4.That all homes will be landscaped within 6 months.
5. That each home must have at least a 30' set back in front.

Terrible right?
so my client wants a 1600 ft home in this subdivision that's stucco and rock with vinyl shake on the gables. So I ask WHO is on the architectual commitee? So i can see what i can get past them. No one knows- Not the city, the building dept or the realtor. So i decide that since it says "ground floor" if i include the garage and porches i meet the 1800 ft requirement and since it doesnt say "no vinyl" ill be ok. 

Well the home is framed, plumbed, havac is done.

tonight i got a call from the person who did the development, verry angry that i didnt submit my plan to him and demanding that i halt work till he reviews it. He said if its not 1800 ft in the living area ill have to "make it so it is". "i cant put any vinyl on the home period" and then he started going on about the side setbacks. 
Anyway after listening to him rant (i was being verry profesional, at first) I said id get him a set of plans as a curticy but that i alreadty had a permit and sign off from the city- every other subdivision with cc&rs id built in you had to get your plan aproved by the architectual comittee before the city or building dept would issue the permit. i told him he was to late to do anything about it but again id give him the plan to be curtious. He didnt like that at all and repeatedly told me he didnt call to argue (he basicaly called to tell me what to do and tell me to stop work).

things got heated- i told him his cc&rs where verry vague on size and material and that i didnt think they could exclude things by inference- you actualy had to say "no vinyl" not just say "homes to be stucco. He didnt like that either. basicaly he said it was his subdivision and hed be fighting me legaly. 

I left a mesage with the building dept, informed my home owner and will talik to the city on monday. 

What do yall think? does he have a leg to stand on? can he hold up my C of O?

Thanks fellas, i was feelin the rage awhile ago and after writing this out feel much better


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

CC&R's can be upheld and quite often are in California.

Your realtor friend should have known about the CC&R's and proper due diligence on your part should have led you to them.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

We knew about them but no one knew who was on the committee to get anything approved, and the building dept didn't require any kind of approval from an architectural committee. I tried to head this off before we started. 
Either way- what do you think of the wording? Can a case be made that they don't distinguish between footprint sq ftg and living and that they don't exclude vinyl accents?


----------



## Warren (Feb 19, 2005)

Check out the other homes in the allotment. Do they abide by all of the regs as well? If not, you may have some recourse.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

In fact I remember asking the city building official about the sq ftg thing and he thought it would be fine and gave me the sign off. I don't like surprises and tried to find out who could approve the plan. No one knew.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

They all seem to meet the building standards- there other things in the CC&R's about storing camp trailers on your property that everyone's violating but that's it


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 1, 2009)

Creedence Clearwater Revival?


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

Nate, You need a copy of the recorded CC&R's to make any type of argument.

If they are vague or not specifically expressed & contradictory/confusing, you would have an argument.

Good Luck.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

My reasoning was that the house is 1800 feet on the ground level- that just includes garage and porches. That's what the CC&R's say- "ground level". It's this guy saying it has to be living area. To me it's not what you meant but what you wrote that matters.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

I have them- that's exactly what they say- those few sentences that pertain to building and the rest is nuisance stuff.


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

480sparky said:


> Creedence Clearwater Revival?


*C*onveyances, *C*ovenants & *R*estrictions.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

Here they are


----------



## jaydee (Mar 20, 2014)

Someone should have share the info.

Your realtor friend could find anything.

seems like a deed check or title search on the lot , would have pointed you to who owned the development ? I would think the home owner who bought the lot , should have been informed by the land owner..


----------



## Warren (Feb 19, 2005)

I don't think you are gonna skate by using the garage and porch in the ground floor sq footage. Maybe if the porch was enclosed, but even then I think it is iffy at best. I worked with a builder once framing a 4000 sq ft house in a nice development. We were finishing up the roof and noticed that a guy in a pickup was driving by and taking pictures for a couple days. Soon after, the builder got a letter stating that the roof did not meet their requirements. Ours was only a 6/12 pitch, and the regs required all homes to have a minimum 8/12 pitch. They threatened to make him remove all the trusses, redraw the plan, and make the roof steeper. Same kind of deal with very vague wording. They ended up settling for a couple thousand dollars that went to the review board. Not sure what that money got used for.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

*Getting Shut Down For Not Following CCR's LOL!*

The title company had the CC&R's, so did the realtor but no where in them does it say there is a requirement to get plans approved by the developer or a committee before construction can begin.


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

Ninjaframer said:


> The title company had the CC&R's, so did the realtor but no where in them does it say there is a requirement to get plans approved by the developer or a committee before construction can begin.


Realtor should have disclosed the fact.

CC&R's are presumed that they will be followed.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

Warren- 
I believe he intended living are ftg when he wrote them but that's not what they say- I think there's a case that they are not specific and that "ground level ftg" could be interpreted as foot print.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

I want to follow them griz but I think there loose and that I have made a good attempt to follow them with a valid interpretation


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

This is good- I needed someone to weigh my position against.


----------



## Warren (Feb 19, 2005)

Ninjaframer said:


> Warren-
> I believe he intended living are ftg when he wrote them but that's not what they say- I think there's a case that they are not specific and that "ground level ftg" could be interpreted as foot print.


Maybe you can find a few other examples where they are stated as "sq ft of living space" This would definitely help your case.


----------



## overanalyze (Dec 28, 2010)

Even you admit you know he meant 1800 sq. Ft of living space. Even if vaguely written you rationalized going against them because you couldn't find anyone to get a clear answer from. I think you will have a bit of a battle ahead of you.


----------



## jaydee (Mar 20, 2014)

found this in 5 minutes
http://syracuseut.com/Portals/0/CityCouncil/Minutes/03-25-14%20FINAL%20ws.pdf

Is this the right place, 
"Mike Thayne, a representative of Irben Development "


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

Are all homes conforming to CC&r's?

Size, material, color, setbacks & architecturally?

Are they conforming to be unilaterally enforced as far as trailers, boats, RV's, fences etc?

Have they been consistently & equally enforced?

These are your points to attack them as well if they are vague & confusing.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

For sure- I have CC&R's from 2 other developments I've built in- there a dozen pages or more stating exactly what you can and can't use, how big the home had to be, etc. these CC&R's are a joke- 5 sentences with no exclusions at all? Just vague statements. This guy that called really was a d#ck. wouldn't listen to me at all to let me explain, just wanted me to stop work and bring him the plans. He's going to have to get a court order to make me give him anything but the bird now. 
Not really but he did get me pretty angry.


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

Ninjaframer said:


> For sure- I have CC&R's from 2 other developments I've built in- there a dozen pages or more stating exactly what you can and can't use, how big the home had to be, etc. these CC&R's are a joke- 5 sentences with no exclusions at all? Just vague statements. This guy that called really was a d#ck. wouldn't listen to me at all to let me explain, just wanted me to stop work and bring him the plans. He's going to have to get a court order to make me give him anything but the bird now.
> Not really but he did get me pretty angry.


Hey cowboy take a breath and settle down.

For the moment dump it in the realtors lap and see what they do.

Who determined that Mr. dikhead is the review committee?


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

*Getting Shut Down For Not Following CCR's LOL!*



griz said:


> Hey cowboy take a breath and settle down.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Lol- I'm calm now 
He's the developer- his momma gave him a ton of $ when she died. I think he's used to people doing what he tells them- I'm not one of them. Remember we're talking a town of 3000 people- I know his wife but have never met him.
I have had my project approved by both the city, and the county building dept- if this guy wants to fight someone it should be them- I submitted, was approved and started building. What more am I responsible to do?


----------



## jaydee (Mar 20, 2014)

For the record....................

I was NOT throwing stones at you.

I think, someone should have let you know, prior to starting,* who* you should have contacted.


I read what I wrote, sorry I sounded like a D**K


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

jaydee said:


> For the record....................
> 
> I was NOT throwing stones at you.
> 
> ...



Your fine bro  
I agree- if this guy wanted to approve plans he should have set that up with the building dept like everyone else though. Everywhere else has a person that approves plans and the building dept won't accept your allocation without a set of plans signed by them.


----------



## jhark123 (Aug 26, 2008)

He doesn't have a leg to stand on regarding vinyl siding on the sides/rear. If he decides to push it, you may be putting a 200sqft addition on that home. In my opinion, a reasonable person would read that to require 1800 sqft of living space on the first floor.


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

Thanks Nate I could read them in the email.

The size is arguable, 1800' on the ground floor?

Does not specify living space. Also vague & confusing as is the must be landscaped clause. 

What exactly constitutes landscaping?

your 1600' plus garage is certainly arguable.

Would be curious to see the answers from post #23.

Perhaps a chat with an attorney to determine how enforceable the CC&R's are would be prudent.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

*Getting Shut Down For Not Following CCR's LOL!*

Who would enforce it? The building dept and city have already approved what I'm doing. Once the permit was issued isn't it to late? He'd have to convince them to tie up my c of o.


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

Ninjaframer said:


> Who would enforce it? The building dept and city have already approved what I'm doing. Once the permit was issued isn't it to late? He's have to convince them to tie up my c of o.


In the end a court of law would ultimately enforce adherence to recorded CC&R's.

Are there other homes being built? How recent?


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

Nothing in last 6-8 years


----------



## hdavis (Feb 14, 2012)

Ninjaframer said:


> We knew about them but no one knew who was on the committee to get anything approved, and the building dept didn't require any kind of approval from an architectural committee. I tried to head this off before we started.
> Either way- what do you think of the wording? Can a case be made that they don't distinguish between footprint sq ftg and living and that they don't exclude vinyl accents?


Everything should have been part of the restrictive covenants disclosed with the lot sale. Commonly, the developer is the entire review committee until buildout is complete, and gets turned over to a PITA neighborhood association over time.

This will take an eagle eye to find a loophole if one exists - they're usually written pretty tightly in favor of the developer. You're required to get approval before building, so that's pretty firm - it's up to his judgement.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

With every other development I've built in I would agree- but these CC&R's were written by an idiot- they are literally 5 sentences or so that define nothing, exclude nothing and only vaguely express the intent of the developer. The entire document is a giant loophole- in my opinion anyway


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

Ninjaframer said:


> With every other development I've built in I would agree- but these CC&R's were written by an idiot- they are literally 5 sentences or so that define nothing, exclude nothing and only vaguely express the intent of the developer. The entire document is a giant loophole- in my opinion anyway











These few sentences are all that pertain to construction in the entire document.


----------



## hdavis (Feb 14, 2012)

Where's the part that requires design approval before building?

Since each home must include a 2 car garage, I read it as home square footage includes 2 car garage footprint. No habitable space requirement at all - the whole first floor could be nothing but garages.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

Exactly! There is no part that says it must be approved by anyone.


----------



## hdavis (Feb 14, 2012)

I think you're stuck on the stucco / rock / brick part.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

I only want to put vinyl on the gables- it doesn't exclude any vinyl- it just says home must be stucco- it will be/ mostly


----------



## Jaws (Dec 20, 2010)

Chit, if its one dude, why not ask him to meet you at the cafe and youll buy him breakfast, make your case. Strike up a conversation about deer season or if the whites are biting before yall get it in it? Its a small town, has worked for me more than once. Its un- neighborly to start talking business before the second cup of coffee anyway. 

I would absolutely have read the 1800 as conditioned, but i think you got a case either way. I doubt mediation would end up stating you were 100% wrong, the dude needs to write his restrictions more clearly and specifically. He definitely aint gonna win the vinyl siding imo, with a reasonable person.


----------



## Walraven (Jan 24, 2014)

I would not interpret "Ground floor" to mean living area only. A ground floor plan would include garageing usually.
I agree the covenants are vague as... stupidly so!


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

*Getting Shut Down For Not Following CCR's LOL!*

I agree but with my clients budget and not being able to find anyone to clarify or say yes or no I went to the city code and building official and he said he didn't see a problem with it so I rolled the dice figuring I had a good argument if it became a problem- now it's a problem and I'll argue the hell out of it  
In law it's not what was meant but what was wrote that matters.


----------



## Jaws (Dec 20, 2010)

Id still try the laid back good old boy route before i got contentious if it was possible. Everyone likes breakfast :thumbup:


----------



## hdavis (Feb 14, 2012)

...


----------



## hdavis (Feb 14, 2012)

Ninjaframer said:


> In law it's not what was meant but what was wrote that matters.


Since it isn't in legalese, it would generally follow the common understanding of the words. Floor plan is floor plan - it may or may not include a garage. If he meant to say habitable space or living area, he would have - he didn't. It isn't your problem if he's changed his mind about what he should have written.

Clearly no one would expect a stucco roof, but he appears to mandate that, if you read it strictly. My reading is like yours - he doesn't say what the roof and exterior decorative elements have to be made of. I say lollipops and bubble gum pass this part.


----------



## hdavis (Feb 14, 2012)

OK, so Craftsman has definite architectural elements. Those all seem fair game - I never heard of a stucco window...

Plus the roof, of course.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

Rock or brick windows of coarse- come on now.


----------



## hdavis (Feb 14, 2012)

Not to mention fascia boards and gutters:blink:

You can probably easily establish various decorative elements on existing houses aren't stucco, brick or stone. It hasn't been interpreted by anyone literally, probably ever because that just wouldn't make sense.

How many square feet is the HO going to be taxed on according to the city? If the city is calling it 1800 sq ft taxable, I'd think that's also pretty authoritative.


----------



## Big Shoe (Jun 16, 2008)

Interesting. 



All I can say is good luck to you.


----------



## Rio (Oct 13, 2009)

I would try to adhere as closely as possible to what is in the CC&R's. If the dude wants to make trouble and has the resources he can take you to court and then it's up to the judge, at least that's the way it works here.


----------



## overanalyze (Dec 28, 2010)

Do any other houses have decorative gables? You were thinking Cedar Impressions right? That is high dollar stuff...maybe this guy doesn't know what it is an would approve it once he saw it.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

He told me it would have to be cement fibre on the gables and that vinyl is NOT allowed. It doesn't say that anywhere in the ccr's but that's what he said. The ccr's don't even say anything about turning in plans to have them approved.


----------



## pcplumber (Oct 12, 2008)

When the city puts their final approval stamp on blueprints I was always under the impression that the stamp of approval was the final step in the process. I would put pressure on the person who stamped the plans.

When we do new construction we build exactly according to the approved plans. I read your statement regarding your customer's limited budget, but if you have approved plans and you build according to those plans then any changes and extra costs are a change order and you have to be paid.

If the person stopping the job cannot immediately prove that he has the authority to stop the job then you keep working on the job until someone with the proper authority stops you. But, "you get more bees with honey than with vinegar" and I don't see a problem with giving him a copy of the plans. He can get a copy from the city, anyway, if he really does have some clout. 

We are doing new construction and when we know we could have a problem with something we provide a RFI (request for information) for the tiniest of details and we get the city to sign off on everything. 

Since your city is so small and money is tight I would think the city or county building department is the final authority and I would request a variance. I would also push your customer for every additional cost including the cost for an attorney's advice, but the last thing you want to envision is arguing and going to court. You need to get the home built and not to prove that you are right.


----------



## Ninjaframer (May 28, 2011)

*Getting Shut Down For Not Following CCR's LOL!*

For sure and the reality is I'll have the home completed before anything ever makes it to court and this is really the home owners problem- not mine. I warned her up front that we were bending the ccr's. I still think there vague enough that I'm within them but this guy pissed me off enough that I'm willing to fight for my home owner- untill it starts costing me $ anyway


----------



## pcplumber (Oct 12, 2008)

I don't think that the city wants the customer to run out of money and let the house sit vacant, unfinished with no landscaping and rotting. 

One of the most important things you need to do is send your customer an RFI and drop the ball on her lap. She needs to make the final decision regarding whether to move forward and bear the liability for everything. You are only building a house for your customer and you are not the decision-maker. I think a high percent of contractors don't understand that and they need to work on that more. You can find an RFI form in the software I have in the link below. On our current job, we sent the builder, owner and engineers 55 RFIs. That is 55 liabilities where we dropped the ball on someone else's lap.


----------



## Framer53 (Feb 23, 2008)

Ninja,
I think I might try jaws plan of taking him to breakfast and having a good old boys breakfast.
as far as the vinyl, would not the fibre cement shakes be less expensive than the vinyl?
If so, I might concede on that point if he will concede on the 1800 sq ft problem.
I think you might be able to negotiate this one away.
Good luck.


----------



## pcplumber (Oct 12, 2008)

Framer53 said:


> Ninja,
> I think I might try jaws plan of taking him to breakfast and having a good old boys breakfast.
> as far as the vinyl, would not the fibre cement shakes be less expensive than the vinyl?
> If so, I might concede on that point if he will concede on the 1800 sq ft problem.
> ...


I agree 100%, but would not offer breakfast. I would prefer to keep it on a super professional level and make it appear that I am wiling to do whatever it takes to resolve the problem. If the customer really doesn't have the money then everyone needs to work together to resolve the problems. 

Every contract should have a clause that states that any changes required by government agencies will be at the expense of the owner.

Take a step backwards from being the decision-maker. I would bring the client to all meetings so she has an in-depth understanding and so she can make the decisions and assume the liability.

Was your customer aware of the requirements before or at the time she signed the contract? If she was then it is my opinion that she and the city are ultimately liable. For your reasons, we purposely send emails with entire contracts attached and we send emails for every RFI and everything question and concern. Emails are the best thing for verifying who said what and resolving arguments. Our current job has been going on for 5 months and the owner's contractor has changed management 3 times. The emails always get us out of how water and they made is possible for us to turn our job from $423k to $888k. Without the emails we would have been thrown off the job several times.


----------



## Anti-wingnut (Mar 12, 2009)

griz said:


> In the end a court of law would ultimately enforce adherence to recorded CC&R's.


Ya dat. The AHJ's have no authority to enforce or require plans being signed off by HOA's. If they have in the past, they should stop that practice immediately, code and zoning needs to be concerned with enforcement of legal requirements, not the peccadilloes of a HOA. 

Have you lawyered up? I would say that the CC&R's contain no bylaws, reference to ACC's, enforcement, HOA or even control by the declarant. 

What does your contract say? Is there any language regarding preexisting encumbrances? 

This needs to be tossed to the HO.


----------



## overanalyze (Dec 28, 2010)

Ninjaframer said:


> He told me it would have to be cement fibre on the gables and that vinyl is NOT allowed. It doesn't say that anywhere in the ccr's but that's what he said. The ccr's don't even say anything about turning in plans to have them approved.


Thats funny...cement fiber is way crappier than Cedar Impressions. I said earlier that I feel you have a bit of a battle ahead of you...and I still think that. But I hope you win and this little guy with a power trip gets knocked down a few notches.


----------

