Last week, several East Hills board members began to survey the community for compliance with the neighborhood's covenants. We were met with animosity from some residents.
Apparently, while everyone who bought a home here agreed at closing to follow the rules, those who've decided to violate them don't want them enforced.
The covenants were put into place by East Hills' developer to establish and maintain the look and feel of the neighborhood. Responsibility for enforcing the covenants falls on a volunteer board. None of us is paid, but we ensure that common property is mowed and maintained, mail kiosks are lit (and plowed as needed) and the neighborhood generally looks good. Since “good looks” are subjective, we must use the guidelines spelled out in the covenants. The board did not write the covenants, but it is one of our major duties to enforce them.
The covenants were written by the neighborhood's developer, First Columbia, a large and reputable local company. Your neighbors include quite a few friends, relatives and employees of First Columbia's owners.
If you don't like the covenants, there are provisions within the “Affidavit of Offeror” that allow them to be changed, but only with the approval of 75% of the property owners in East Hills. Anyone who lives here and would like to see the rules changed is welcome to take on the task. We also welcome additional volunteers from the neighborhood to make our community a better one.
The underlying issues regarding the "meeting/s" that provoked animosity were not described on the website. Thus it is difficult to try to assess whether the animosity was an over-reaction or if the board representatives were perhaps being a little strong-armed. I for one was upset when a picture of my home appeared on the "hit list" of unshoveled hydrants over the winter when in fact the hydrant is on a neighbor's property, not mine. I also think it is ridiculous that board members get so bent out of shape if recycle bags are out for a few days during spring or fall clean up. I would think that the board would be pleased that people are actually cleaning up their property----given the fact that there are some properties that have been unkept and an eyesore for MONTHS. So, although I respect the service of the board, I think that sometimes a little common sense would be helpful.
ReplyDeleteI would also like to speak to the efforts put forth by the board in developing this blog and, for one, am very disappointed that it is so underutilized. I have also had a few interactions where a board member has been very helpful and neighborly and it is unfortunate that those instrances are not more widely recognized.
I think there are pockets of people who believe they "own" this neighborhood and although they agreed to the deed restrictions, in writing, when they moved into this neighborhood, they pick and chose which they will observe. Some believe there are two distinct neighborhoods - a "family" section and a non-family section. Those in the "family" section believe they are somehow different and exempt from certain restrictions like basketball hoops, badminton nets, playscapes and the like.
ReplyDeleteKnowing some of the board members, its hard to imagine any strong-arm tactics - simply volunteers attempting to do what they were elected to do. These are our friends and neighbors. The animosity perhaps comes from those who have been willingly and knowingly violating covenants for quite some time and believe they are above them, and now asked to comply.
A united community, rallying around preserving the neighborhood's value through the covenants will marginalize those who react with animosity to something they previously agreed to do. Keep up the good fight board members.
We believe that Board members are elected to maintain and enforce the covenants and we're behind you 100%. It's a thanksless job and we appreciate your efforts. The Pitone's
ReplyDeleteI have not posted comments before, but felt compelled to do so as I take great exception to the comment that some people believe there is a family section vs a non-family section here. This neighborhood was pitched to us as a multigenerational diverse neighborhood, however, as time has gone on, I do not see it as such. Anything indicating children live at a home is required to be covered extensively with landscaping. God forbid anyone recognize that children live in this neighborhood!
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand the general need and parameters of our homeowners association, I believe that the wandering neighbors carrying their cameras around in an attempt to call out violators is absolutely ridiculous. I also agree that there’s a bit too much emphasis on how long garbage cans or recycling cans are left out, if a hydrant hasn’t been shoveled out, or a car sits on a road for more than xx number of hours. How about looking at the million dollar homes that are riddled with weeds and unkept lawns, the people who fail to see/obey the stop sign on Brighton, etc.? Each time I open the newsletter, I feel that the neighborhood is being scolded for yet another thing they aren’t doing right. Why not address the homes in violation with the families individually rather than showcasing it in a newsletter?
My family takes great pride in the appearance of our home but we’re still a two-income household who works long hours and are trying to raise children in this neighborhood. Cut people a bit of a break and address the really big issues. If there aren’t any, then I guess we all have something for which to be grateful.
Quit complaining and be glad someone is trying to keep the neighborhood safe and looking nice.
ReplyDeleteFire hydrants buried in snow should be a concern to us all because you never know when or where an emergency will happen. Having fire hydrants in a ready to use condition is not an "us or them" thing.
And appearance is important, too. Have you ever noticed that a few people leaving bags or cans out leads to more doing the same? Likewise, have you noticed that one homeowner who really spruces up leads to more doing the same? Which would you prefer?