ICS-TT Subdivisions and Edge Development Committee/CC&R's
From Eugene Neighbors
An in-progress working paper of the ICS-TT Subdivisions and Edge Development Committee
Contents |
[edit] Overview - Draft Problem Statement
CC&R’s are rules and regulations for a development, established at the time of development, that dictate how a Homeowner’s Association operates and what rules the owners must obey. These rules commonly include subjects such as architectural control, external maintenance and use restrictions, and are generally intended to ensure design continuity and to protect property values. These rules are only enforceable through civil proceedings, brought about by the Homeowner’s Association, unless a specific provision conflicts with federal, state or local laws.
CC&R’s may include provisions regarding conservation tracts, natural resource and tree preservation, and other issues for which criteria exists in City code. CC&R’s are not required to be submitted at the time of application.
[edit] Draft Solution Proposal
- In all categories of development, CC&Rs shall not be used to meet development criteria for any land use approval.
- CC&R’s that deal with open space or natural issues must be submitted as part of the land division approval process.
[edit] Discussion
CC+Rs are a private agreement -- they are not required and not enforceable by the city. They are enforceable only through civil proceedings, brought about by the Home Owners Association.
They are usually drawn up by the developer or home owner's association of PUDs and subdivisions with open space as a means of avoiding conflict and ambiguities in those areas. They are also used by the developer to maintain a certain continuity and homogeneity within the development.
They are also used to help assure developers and investors that property values are being maximized.
The city planner asks to see them with the site plan to be sure there are no conflicts and to reduce the potential for future problems. The city tends to look at tree and natural resource issues. City code always takes precedence over CC+Rs.
Example:
WHEREAS, Developer desired to provide for the preservation of values and amenities in Crest Meadows and, to that end, wishes to subject the property therein to the covenants, restrictions, easements, charges and liens hereinafter set forth, each of which is for the benefit of such property, its owners and residents. Developer has exercised great efforts to design Crest Meadows in such a way as to be more environmentally friendly and conserve and protect more trees than required by the City of Eugene at this point in time. To accomplish this, Developer has varied from the commonly understood method of creating “conservation zones” to instead focus on the retention of trees and allow construction in a predetermined building area on Lots 13, 14, and 15 so long as it does not result in the removal of more than an allowed number of trees. This design will maximize the retention of trees and at the same time provide reasonable flexibility to Owners in connection with construction. This will maximize the environmental benefit of the development as well as protection of wildlife and native plant species;
[edit] Task Team Discussion 2008.1013
- Do those conflict in their language? What does the second one mean?
- Agreements between the City and the developer are a different thing from the CC&Rs discussed in this proposal.
- Valley River Village example.
- CC&Rs get forgotten.
- The problems are in enforcement.
- The easement process is a strong alternative.
- What about non-natural resource issues? Minimum house size?
- Scope of natural resource issues involved?
- How to define natural resources?
