|
Post by mdoc on Jul 13, 2014 23:06:59 GMT
If the home wasn't in accordance with the covenants and I didn't like it, I'd make my opinion known and let them know I did not want the exception approved. If it WAS in accordance with the covenants, that would be a different story. But covenants are there for a purpose, and probably one purpose here is to have conformity in the neighborhood.
There is a street a few blocks away from us that has several modern looking homes that I personally think are ugly. There are also some lovely traditional homes, one of which was for sale at the time were were looking. I didn't even look at it, because if I lived there I would have to look at what I considered an ugly home every time I looked out the window, and I had other alternatives where that would not be the case.
|
|
|
Post by ihaveonly1l on Jul 13, 2014 23:15:45 GMT
I guess the only issue is, that covenants are there for a purpose. If you don't like them, you don't buy there. By making an exception, it becomes a "what's the point'?
So if you like modern design and think "Hey what's the big deal?" then by the same breath you have to accept someone else who decided they wanted to paint their house neon colors because someone else may like that. I think all the rules will become subjective. We have many rules about how long a trailer can be in your driveway, where the trash cans need to be stored, no clothes lines, exterior sheds have to be the same siding as the house, street parking etc. Some people wouldn't like it, but we do because the neighborhood stays nice and well kept.
While liking or not liking living in a neighborhood really isn't the issue here. You know the "rules" of the neighborhood and the rules should stand.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 24, 2024 23:23:30 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 23:16:23 GMT
A lot of responses seem to be from people who say they wouldn't live in a neighborhood with covenants in the first place so it wouldn't bother them. Deal is, the covenants DO exist so buyers for all the homes in the neighborhood should be expected to be sold to buyers who **want** covenants. A home outside the standards means the people in charge of keeping the covenants aren't willing to do so. They are irregularly enforced or not enforced. That is a turn off to buyers who do want covenants.
People who don't want to live with covenants aren't going to look to buy there because they do exist.
The members need to decide if they want the covenants (then vote no to a exception) or if they want to drop the covenants.
|
|
mallie
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,253
Jul 3, 2014 18:13:13 GMT
|
Post by mallie on Jul 13, 2014 23:39:13 GMT
I would never buy a home in a neighborhood with those kind of restrictions, BUT I think if the neighborhood has those restrictions, they should be upheld because I think it's terribly unfair for people to buy with expectations of those restrictions being upheld only to have the rug pulled out from under them.
I actually saw this very thing happen years ago. We were renting a condo in a neighborhood and the association stopped enforcing a certain rule that had an immediate impact on how people decorated the outside of their homes. A couple who had bought there precisely FOR that restriction ended up selling their unit as a result and I always thought it was somewhat unfair that they had to move when they were abiding by the rules (even though I did not like the rules either).
|
|
IPeaFreely
Full Member
Posts: 389
Location: Castle Frankenstein
Jun 26, 2014 8:32:27 GMT
|
Post by IPeaFreely on Jul 13, 2014 23:44:32 GMT
I would not like it. I also appreciate living in communities with HOA's. I would probably veto it.
|
|
peabay
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,587
Member is Online
Jun 25, 2014 19:50:41 GMT
|
Post by peabay on Jul 14, 2014 0:10:52 GMT
It would never scare me away as a potential buyer.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 24, 2024 23:23:30 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2014 0:15:04 GMT
Sorry-to be clear, the architectural committee has NOT approved it, but, are formally asking for our input. If we do not give our approval (or decline to give input) they will approve it. So, 2 questions: Would it scare you away as a potential buyer? Would you vote to disapprove? Erin No, and No.
|
|
paget
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,740
Jun 25, 2014 21:16:39 GMT
|
Post by paget on Jul 14, 2014 0:53:03 GMT
I would vote to disapprove and if I were a buyer I wouldn't buy in an area where the house style was so vastly inconsistent. I hate modern design, too, so there's that.
|
|
|
Post by Pahina722 on Jul 14, 2014 0:56:33 GMT
Sorry-to be clear, the architectural committee has NOT approved it, but, are formally asking for our input. If we do not give our approval (or decline to give input) they will approve it. So, 2 questions: Would it scare you away as a potential buyer? Would you vote to disapprove? Erin I would vote to disapprove. Those ultra-modern houses soon become dated looking and would persuade me, as a potential buyer, from considering the neighborhood. For example, there is a gorgeous older neighborhood in our town that is full of craftsman era bungalows as well as newer constructions that fit in. However, about 30 years ago, someone built one of those ultra-modern concrete and steel angular houses in the neighborhood; they've put it up for sale several times without getting any bites and all the houses near it took a hit in their property value as well.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 24, 2024 23:23:30 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2014 1:00:16 GMT
I wouldn't do a thing, but I'm also never, ever, ever going to live in a neighbourhood with covenants/HOA because I think people should live how they want. I don't care for modern architecture, but it wouldn't stop me from buying a house that I liked, if there was a modern house nearby.
|
|
|
Post by spitfiregirl on Jul 14, 2014 1:41:03 GMT
I would never buy a home in a neighborhood with those kind of restrictions, BUT I think if the neighborhood has those restrictions, they should be upheld because I think it's terribly unfair for people to buy with expectations of those restrictions being upheld only to have the rug pulled out from under them. I actually saw this very thing happen years ago. We were renting a condo in a neighborhood and the association stopped enforcing a certain rule that had an immediate impact on how people decorated the outside of their homes. A couple who had bought there precisely FOR that restriction ended up selling their unit as a result and I always thought it was somewhat unfair that they had to move when they were abiding by the rules (even though I did not like the rules either). This.
|
|
julieb
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,845
Jul 3, 2014 16:02:54 GMT
|
Post by julieb on Jul 14, 2014 1:45:15 GMT
I have a friend that lives in a pretty neighborhood with two story brick houses and there is one house that is very modern with the entire front being glass block 6" windows. It looks out of place and ridiculous.
I would fight it.
|
|
|
Post by hennybutton on Jul 14, 2014 1:58:02 GMT
A lot of responses seem to be from people who say they wouldn't live in a neighborhood with covenants in the first place so it wouldn't bother them. Deal is, the covenants DO exist so buyers for all the homes in the neighborhood should be expected to be sold to buyers who **want** covenants. A home outside the standards means the people in charge of keeping the covenants aren't willing to do so. They are irregularly enforced or not enforced. That is a turn off to buyers who do want covenants. People who don't want to live with covenants aren't going to look to buy there because they do exist. The members need to decide if they want the covenants (then vote no to a exception) or if they want to drop the covenants. I couldn't have said it better. If you don't want conformity and you want to do whatever you please to the outside of your house, don't buy in an HOA. If you do buy in an HOA, you just have to accept that you have to conform to the neighborhood. You can still do whatever the heck you want to do with the inside of your house.
|
|
|
Post by ktdoesntscrap on Jul 14, 2014 2:00:21 GMT
I hate cookie cutter neighborhoods.... so it would not bother me.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 24, 2024 23:23:30 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2014 2:06:17 GMT
I hate cookie cutter neighborhoods.... so it would not bother me. HOA neighborhoods with architectural covenants do not have to be cookie cutter houses. My parents live in one such hoa. There are requirements for materials used on the exterior, window sizes, pitch of roofs and shingle compositions. No two houses are alike. But a modern concrete, steel and glass building would sorely stand out. I'm not sure where the idea a hoa means cookie cutter houses. It means a cohesive look to the neighborhood... not cookie cutter houses.
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Jul 14, 2014 2:57:27 GMT
I live in a neighborhood of mostly 100+ year old homes, with a couple of very modern/contemporary houses where people have torn down older homes. Honestly I prefer them to the "old style" new construction that occasionally pops up as well. They wouldn't (and didn't) deter me from buying in my neighborhood, and I wouldn't care if someone were planning to build one under the circumstances you describe. I also find that there are some people who reeeeally want contemporary looking houses, so maybe even if there were some people put off by it, there would be other people drawn.
Of course, after living in a HOA neighborhood (there was not a HOA when I moved in, but there were long-dormant covenants that some neighbors created a HOA from even though our attorney/neighbor had assured us that no such thing ever would exist), I would never live in one again, so maybe I am not your target audience, as I wouldn't live in your neighborhood anyway. Perhaps people for whom covenants are a neutral or bonus might be more bothered by architectural irregularity than I am.
|
|
|
Post by Megan on Jul 14, 2014 3:18:35 GMT
A lot of responses seem to be from people who say they wouldn't live in a neighborhood with covenants in the first place so it wouldn't bother them. Deal is, the covenants DO exist so buyers for all the homes in the neighborhood should be expected to be sold to buyers who **want** covenants. A home outside the standards means the people in charge of keeping the covenants aren't willing to do so. They are irregularly enforced or not enforced. That is a turn off to buyers who do want covenants. People who don't want to live with covenants aren't going to look to buy there because they do exist. The members need to decide if they want the covenants (then vote no to a exception) or if they want to drop the covenants. Exactly, I'd go ahead a and veto - if I'm reading everything right.
|
|
anniebygaslight
Drama Llama
I'd love a cup of tea. #1966
Posts: 7,394
Location: Third Rock from the sun.
Jun 28, 2014 14:08:19 GMT
|
Post by anniebygaslight on Jul 14, 2014 6:31:11 GMT
I like a bit of variety in the neighbourhood. I'm guessing that this new build will be super efficient energy wise and will tick all the 'green' boxes, unlike the existing properties. What's not to like about that?
|
|
|
Post by Really Red on Jul 14, 2014 10:16:58 GMT
If it was well done, it would not bother me at all. I like diverse homes in a neighborhood.
However, I would not live in a home that was NOT in an HOA because I don't want to see people's trailers/trash/crap everywhere.
I would be worried about a precedent and I'd also wonder why someone would have to build a home like that when there are a lot of neighborhoods out there.
But as a buyer. No. It wouldn't stop me at all.
|
|
oblibby
Full Member
Posts: 211
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Jul 10, 2014 10:30:12 GMT
|
Post by oblibby on Jul 14, 2014 10:57:04 GMT
I like seeing old and new together and definitely think modern is much nicer than 'new trying to look old'. I don't think it will adversely affect property prices on the area. Always try to remember, the traditional style of the existing homes was probably ultra modern in the not too distant past. Check out my blog to see what I've been up to
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Jul 14, 2014 13:34:51 GMT
Sorry-to be clear, the architectural committee has NOT approved it, but, are formally asking for our input. If we do not give our approval (or decline to give input) they will approve it. So, 2 questions: Would it scare you away as a potential buyer? Would you vote to disapprove? Erin No and no. I don't understand why a modern house in a "traditional" neighbourhood would dissuade me from buying your house. Isn't variety a good thing? I'd be less likely to buy in a cookie cutter neighbourhood since it means everything looks the same, so a modern house would be a good thing in my book.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Jul 14, 2014 13:36:36 GMT
Sorry-to be clear, the architectural committee has NOT approved it, but, are formally asking for our input. If we do not give our approval (or decline to give input) they will approve it. So, 2 questions: Would it scare you away as a potential buyer? Would you vote to disapprove? Erin I would vote to disapprove. Those ultra-modern houses soon become dated looking and would persuade me, as a potential buyer, from considering the neighborhood. For example, there is a gorgeous older neighborhood in our town that is full of craftsman era bungalows as well as newer constructions that fit in. However, about 30 years ago, someone built one of those ultra-modern concrete and steel angular houses in the neighborhood; they've put it up for sale several times without getting any bites and all the houses near it took a hit in their property value as well. But why would you vote to disapprove the house? The fact that it can't sell isn't the neighbourhood's problem... it's the owner's problem. I don't see any reason why others in the neighbourhood would vote no so that the owner can sell their house down the road.
|
|
|
Post by kckckc on Jul 14, 2014 13:40:15 GMT
I would be more likely to buy a house in a neighborhood that had a mix of styles. I'm not a fan of the "cohesive" look. So no it wouldn't scare me away as a potential buyer. I would be much more likely to buy in a neighborhood with a mix of styles.
But, I would assume that the people in your neighborhood bought there because they like the way the neighborhood looks and they like the rules in place, so I would vote to disapprove.
|
|
|
Post by AN on Jul 14, 2014 13:41:47 GMT
But why would you vote to disapprove the house? The fact that it can't sell isn't the neighbourhood's problem... it's the owner's problem. I don't see any reason why others in the neighbourhood would vote no so that the owner can sell their house down the road. Your neighbor not being able to sell their house seriously impacts your home value. It is ABSOLUTELY your problem if your neighbor can't sell their home.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Jul 14, 2014 13:56:29 GMT
Perhaps it is. It hasn't been in the sales that I've been party to, but maybe in some neighbourhoods it has been.
|
|
|
Post by utmr on Jul 14, 2014 14:02:09 GMT
Personally it wouldn't bother me. Our neighborhood is a mix of 70's-modern, 70's-ranch with some crazy modern and faux traditional mixed in. It all works. It doesn't seem to affect property values or sales. Some people like modern, some like traditional, some are more interested in location or something else.
Our HOA is crazy strict about things that matter - keeping yards mowed/landscaped, setbacks, roofing material, no home businesses (welding shops or titty bars in your garage), no RVs or boats visible from the street, and trees (must have a certain number and certain size in the front). Architectural "style" doesn't matter as long as you meet the basic requirements.
I don't think it's a big deal but I understand that some people really like the look and feel if a cookie cutter neighborhood.
|
|
freebird
Drama Llama
'cause I'm free as a bird now
Posts: 6,927
Jun 25, 2014 20:06:48 GMT
|
Post by freebird on Jul 14, 2014 14:11:57 GMT
I don't think the house would bother me. I'd need to see the plans as compared to the rest of the neighborhood. HOWEVER, I would probably vote against it as covenants are set for a reason? Why have them (to hold a standard of sorts) if you're just going to break them? Not just break them, but take a whole different outlook on one house in particular?
|
|
anniebeth24
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,540
Jun 26, 2014 14:12:17 GMT
|
Post by anniebeth24 on Jul 14, 2014 14:12:50 GMT
It might deter me as a buyer, only because it would be a big red flag that the HOA covenants are not enforced. If I'm going to live in an HOA, I want the consistency that that system affords.
|
|
Gravity
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,229
Jun 27, 2014 0:29:55 GMT
|
Post by Gravity on Jul 14, 2014 14:15:21 GMT
If the covenants are binding then I'd veto it. Once an exception is made they will continue to be made to the detriment of those who bought there for the current aesthetic. If people are wanting to build to a different aesthetic they need to buy property in an area that matches their desire.
|
|
mapchic
Junior Member
Posts: 62
Jun 26, 2014 0:16:00 GMT
|
Post by mapchic on Jul 14, 2014 14:15:42 GMT
Define 'traditional neighborhood'.
I live in a very traditional area - lots of homes are 100+ years old. There are still several modern homes. They work just fine.
Remember - at one point Frank Lloyd Wright homes were the 'modern' upstarts. Now people would be happy to live in a neighborhood with them (well, except for the tour buses).
If this home is a well designed home that fits in terms of size and placement on the lot... why fight it?
|
|