Check covenants before making additions to unit

Q: We decided to add a master bedroom and bath (to our home). The homeowners association's Design Review Committee gave us the letter of acceptance. We hired a contractor and did all of the things that were required of us.

Our next-door neighbors decided we were hindering his view of the Strip and complained to the association. The DRC sent us a letter to stop building. The job was 70 percent completed. The committee reviewed their complaint and decided to let us finish our addition. The neighbors hired a lawyer. We had to obtain one, and so did the association. It was a nightmare (and cost a lot of money). Our home is now on the market.

Now, the DRC is considering views that are against the covenants. I am enclosing a recent letter in our monthly magazine. What can we do?

A: The reader stated that they followed all of the architectural steps and received approval from the Design Review Committee (another name for Architectural Committee.) Most associations allow neighbors to express their opinions about the proposed architectural request.

Similar to local governments notifying homeowners of proposed property improvements, the opinions of the homeowners who will be most directly impacted by the improvements are not binding upon the association. The association's decision needs to be based upon what the covenants or architectural guidelines state as being acceptable or not acceptable.

By not contacting the immediate neighbors, the homeowners requesting the improvement can later find themselves in a similar dispute to that of the reader. Often after the improvement has been completed.

The reader's letter does not address whether they had originally contacted their neighbor who stated that the view would be impacted. Let's assume that they did. Most governing documents will state that the neighbor's opinion is not binding upon the association, its architectural committee or board of directors.

Now, we come to the next two issues raised in the reader's letter, which are "views" and existing language in the governing documents. First, there must be a recognition that governing documents cannot include every possible contingency and that many of the sections are very broad or very vague as to allow the association flexibility in making decisions. In the final analysis, a court may determine that the section is too broad or too vague, forcing the association to make changes in their governing documents, which appears to be the reader's case.

But associations cannot work on the premise that any decision they make will always be challenged in court. If that was the case, no decisions would be made.

Finally, the last issue raised which seems to be increasing within associations is the "view." Right now, there is no state law that says that associations must protect the views of homeowners. There may be cases right now in our state courts that are dealing with this issue.

The one case that I am aware of occurred many years ago where a homeowner built a second-story addition where the homes were built as one stories. The Nevada Supreme Court's decision to require the homeowner to remove the addition did not specifically have to do with a view, but dealt with the architectural restrictions and whether the governing documents were valid when boards were inconsistent in enforcing their covenants.

If views are to be protected, then developers must include a view's covenant in the association's governing documents in order for the association and the board to be required to protect the homeowner's "view" beyond the architectural restrictions that exist within the community. In the reader's case, the reader would have to review both the sales purchase agreements and the association's governing documents.

Barbara Holland, certified property manager, is president and owner of H&L Realty and Management Co. She is a member of the Institute of Real Estate Management. Questions may be sent to Association Q. & A., P.O. Box 7440, Las Vegas, NV 89125. Her fax number is 385-3759. Questions may be shortened and are subject to editing.