AERC August, 2008 Report
The AERC received no applications during August.
Guidelines Update
The AERC recommended 5 changes to the Guidelines and published those changes in the Newsletter and asked for comments. Two comments were received.
One homeowner objected to the driveway change and made a case for permitting concrete driveways. Some AERC comments:
About 10 years ago, an application for a concrete driveway was turned down based on the opinion that it was not within the design concept of the community. There have been no others that we know about.
Both Indianola and Monona Drive have concrete aprons.
Concrete will last longer than asphalt but is more expensive by a factor of 4 or 5, so if approved, we will not have many concrete driveways. A new asphalt driveway, on top of the old, will be $1-2,000 and a concrete driveway with iron rebar will be $7-10,000.
Concrete will show dirt, stains and discoloration more than asphalt. The Committee believes this will not occur with the installing homeowner, but with successive homeowners. Home maintenance letters are sent by the AERC but experience shows that over a period of 3-6 months, about two-thirds of our letters are acted upon. Since we only have guidelines and not regulations, we can’t force a homeowner to keep the property well maintained.
I conducted an informal polling of neighbors and for concrete driveways - 1/3 did not care, 1/3 was for all asphalt and 1/3 was for concrete. It does not appear there is a consensus for limiting the driveways to the original design concept.
Based on this, the proposed change has been modified to just “repairs in the same color.”
The committee has received an application for a concrete driveway and will act on it in September
A 2nd homeowner objected to the proposed wording for chimney, driveways and solar panel guidelines and made a case for homeowners to be in total control of all changes to their property. The homeowner requested that the AERC research other HOAs for their approach to solar panels and circulate that research to the community for comment.
The AERC did research the solar panel issue and the new Maryland law that says an HOA can not “impose unreasonable limitations” and we believe our guideline is reasonable and forward leaning when compared to other associations.
The chimney conclusion by the homeowner was incorrect and the driveway opinion was covered above. AERC will respond to this letter.
The AERC asks that the Board vote on the attached changes to the guidelines and we recommend that you vote approved for each one.
End of report
AERC Guidelines – Proposed Changes
(September 2008)
Section II: Application Required
3. Repair, modifications or additions to chimneys or chimney caps
Replacement brick and mortar shall be as close to same color as possible
Repairs shall maintain the original design as installed by the builder
Modifications shall be as close to the original design as possible
7. Additions to or alterations of driveways, walkways, stoops, or slabs
Repairs shall be made with a material that matches in color.
15. Solar panels
Solar panels are allowed only on the roof.
Solar panels and associated equipment must be color-coordinated with the roof to prevent a conspicuous condition.
Panels mounted to the front side of roofs must be flush with the roof. Panels mounted to the rear side of roofs may be flush or elevated. If elevated, they will not extend above the roof peak so far that they are visible from the yards of facing houses across the streets. No other mounting locations are acceptable.
25. Ramps for the elderly or disabled
No step access (County standard) provides an accessible route from a vehicular drop off to an entrance door with a slope no greater than a 1:20 incline.
Natural ramps using terrain and landscaping are preferred.
Section III: Prohibited
10. Fencing that interferes with the forward view of a house behind a home
Forward view is the area projected forward to the street from the front building line
(the change is to add back the diagram that was
left out of the previous revision)