02-23-1978 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

REGULAR PZEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, FEBRUARY 23 , 1978 Page 27 SUPPLrP1EP1TAL OPINION ��JALT�R' S PORT #245 The clear rieaning and intent of this provision is (Continued) that the "association" has responsibility and . authority over maintenance or improver:lent of "comrion property" (Outlots) over which lot owners . have "use" , conferred in other provisions. The provision for voting rights and the underlined portion above indicate the association has "control" over the "common property" . As such individual lot owners will be precluded from actinc� on their o�an, without association approval, to nodify or improve "comrlon property" . The covenants also provide owners the right to enforce this or anv oti�er covenant in the courts, either by restrain- ing individual acts or by seeking damages. The second question is not specifically considered in the recorded covenants; however, it is important to note t:hat other lot owners, �snder these covenants, could legally prev�nt building or improverient by individual _lot owners �vhich was not approved by the association, even �if the building nerrlits had been obtained by individual lot owners. Since the covenants are not more specific and in light of the prior discussion, it seems obvious that either the association or the individual lot owners may seek building permits. But clearly improver►ents or modifications which were not approved by the association could be restrained by other lot owners. Though simply stated, it is my opinion that a municipality could issue building permits to individual lot owners notwithstanding the existence of restrictive convenants concerning the subject property and without homeowners' - approval. �iowever, a municipality may choose to act with � caution, particularly when it acts with knowledge of restrictive covenants affecting property on which permits are sought. Two alternatives for the municipality seem apparent. It could issue the perr,iit and submit itself to possible civil liability or it could require the individual (s) seeking permits to provide a court clarification of the covenant' s impact upon lot owners and their authority to act. In conclusion, it is r.iy opinion that the homeowners association has authority to approve or disapprove modifications and ir.iprovements over "comrion �roperty" shared by all lot owners and to enforce or prevent � individual lot owners from acting contrary to the association' s authority. Either the association or individu�l lot owners may seek permits, but the association or lot owners may seek legal remedies for actions not approved by the a�sociation. (Continued)