| Members Present: Harriet Vaugeois, Chair Michelle Minion Michael Shelton Carol Rawle |
Members Absent: Diane Rader Will Potter |
Guest: Lee Phelan |
Status of temporary trailer permits was discussed. Mike Bahm has removed his trailer from his lot, and has sent a letter challenging the status of his lot as "improved". With no trailer and no other visible evidence of improvements, he feels that his lot should be reclassified as "unimproved", and that he should receive a rebate on his current annual dues. The committee agreed this is reasonable and will make a recommendation to the POA treasurer in this regard.
The committee reviewed what constitutes an "improved" lot: a building permit, a driveway cut into property, or a shed large enough to require a building permit. Committee decided to ask the board for clarification on the size of the shed that would put a lot into one or the other category.
Next trailer permit renewals coming due are Beaumonts and Allisons, on May 16, 2003. The Beaumonts have demonstrated intent to commence construction with the installation of cisterns and completed driveways. Mike will contact the Allisons to determine if they will be taking out a building permit soon and when they intend to begin building; temporary residence permit renewal contingent on intent.
Harriet has contacted the Hulstines about the nuisance complaint involving their dogs.
Lee Phelan was asked about his plans to build a fence on his shared property line, and he replied that he had no plans to do so.
The derelict construction equipment, on John Noard's property was discussed. Will, who has been out of town a lot, was supposed to contact Butch Morgan, who owns said machine. Mike agreed to phone Butch to inquire about status of the situation, and try to get him to remove it from Noard's lot.
The Schwyzer fence, which was discussed last meeting as being too close to the roadway, will be moved by a work party of volunteers organized by Michelle as soon as weather permits.
A letter, January 29, 2003, was sent the committee regarding a complaint against the Tuckers over an ongoing problem with incessant dog barking which it was asserted infringed on quality of life and violates the "nuisance" clause of the covenants. As all attempts to resolve the problem neighbor to neighbor have been exhausted, the committee has been asked to step in. Harriet has talked to both parties in the complaint to try to resolve the issue. Both parties feel they have already done everything possible to resolve the dispute between them. Beyond asking the dog owner to monitor the dogs' barking, the committee feels there's nothing else that can be done by a POA committee.
Mobile homes: the committee has been doing a vast amount of research these past months on what constitutes a "mobile home". The original term no longer applies to many of the modern manufactured homes, which look like any site built home, yet still fall under the definition of "mobile home". The original intent of the covenants was to prohibit the unsightly single and doublewide "sardine cans" that would give the ranch the appearance of a trailer park. The issue is that the term "mobile home" needs to be redefined in the covenants in order to make clear what the intent is. The committee will recommend to the board that the wording of this covenant be revised at such time that covenants can realistically be revised. In the meantime, the committee will make recommendations for a resolution involving what type of mobile homes may and may not be acceptable domiciles on the ranch. (Click Here to view those recommendations.)
Lee Phelan proposed that an "architectural committee" be formed in order to decide which manufactured homes would be permitted under the covenants, and also to keep any "sub-standard" homes from proliferating on the ranch. Pros and cons of such a committee were discussed, and the committee more or less concluded that such an enforcement body would be impractical at this time given the amount of time it would involve and the shortage of potential volunteers to work on such a committee. But the suggestion would be put before the board and left up to them to decide if they wish to implement such a committee.
Lee Phelan presented his nine-page proposal for covenants committee restructure and formalized procedures. Lee would like to see a more formalized process for enforcing covenants and dealing with complaints. It was pointed out that the same problem with such a complex process exists as would with an "architectural committee", and that would be the time involved and the shortage of potential volunteers to handle the work involved. The only complaint that the committee has received about its posted procedures has come from Mr. Phelan. After discussing his suggestions, the committee continues to feel that its current procedures are working for the majority of the ranch.
The committee agreed to review Mr. Phelan’s proposal and to look into implementing those components that would enhance the procedures that are already in place. The committee also decided that Lee's idea that property owners be told that they may challenge any covenant interpretations by the committee is a good one, and we will make sure everyone knows they may write a letter to the committee or attend a committee meeting to discuss their views if they disagree with a committee action. This information regarding committee procedures and redress will also be added to the new owner handout.
The next meeting will be scheduled at a time when new matters require the committee to meet. Meeting adjourned.
Minutes submitted by Carol Rawle