History.
I am in a HOA that was est in 1964. The covenants have never to date been amended or
updated. They are deed covenants and I believe written before formal adoption of our counties ordinances (I need to check the date of original charter of the county, only reference so far are the online documents found on municode.com ) which were adopted in 1968. This is in Los Alamos, New Mexico. Which if no one knows was a "secret city" until
after WWII.
I live in an area of the county that has a HOA. I believe the covenants were written at a time when there were few if any county ordinances. So, the covenants were developed by the developers, and original owners of this area to try to put some sort of standards in the development of the community.
Times change over the years, standards change, and county ordinances were developed along the way that moved with the times, but the covenants did not. The covenants, in my
opinion, are very outdated, sometimes inconsistent and hard to interpret, thus various boards over the years have interpreted them in a variety of ways and there is no consistency in the community.
Question:
In our covenants there is clause that I think shows that the orginators of the covenants were not trying to make covenants that were more restrictive than whatever the county developed and changed over time. And in reading and comparing the covenants with the county codes I find, either the same wording, sometimes more restrictive wording, an occasionally more lenient wording.
The covenants has this paragraph in them:
E-4. SEVERABILITY. Invalidation of anyone or any part of these covenants
by judgement or court order shall in no wise affect any of the other provisions
which shall remain in full force and effect. In the event of the conflict with
County Ordinances, the County Ordinances shall be controlling, but this intent
shall not be construed to liberalize any covenant where the County Ordinance does not
require such liberalization.
I would like a legal interpretation of this. Does this mean that if the covenants, for
example, has a limit on something, and the county has a differing limit on something
that there is a conflict so the county limit prevails?
e.g.. outbuilding height - if the covenants limits outbuildings to 12 feet and the county
has a 15 foot limitation, which one prevails?
I am in a HOA that was est in 1964. The covenants have never to date been amended or
updated. They are deed covenants and I believe written before formal adoption of our counties ordinances (I need to check the date of original charter of the county, only reference so far are the online documents found on municode.com ) which were adopted in 1968. This is in Los Alamos, New Mexico. Which if no one knows was a "secret city" until
after WWII.
I live in an area of the county that has a HOA. I believe the covenants were written at a time when there were few if any county ordinances. So, the covenants were developed by the developers, and original owners of this area to try to put some sort of standards in the development of the community.
Times change over the years, standards change, and county ordinances were developed along the way that moved with the times, but the covenants did not. The covenants, in my
opinion, are very outdated, sometimes inconsistent and hard to interpret, thus various boards over the years have interpreted them in a variety of ways and there is no consistency in the community.
Question:
In our covenants there is clause that I think shows that the orginators of the covenants were not trying to make covenants that were more restrictive than whatever the county developed and changed over time. And in reading and comparing the covenants with the county codes I find, either the same wording, sometimes more restrictive wording, an occasionally more lenient wording.
The covenants has this paragraph in them:
E-4. SEVERABILITY. Invalidation of anyone or any part of these covenants
by judgement or court order shall in no wise affect any of the other provisions
which shall remain in full force and effect. In the event of the conflict with
County Ordinances, the County Ordinances shall be controlling, but this intent
shall not be construed to liberalize any covenant where the County Ordinance does not
require such liberalization.
I would like a legal interpretation of this. Does this mean that if the covenants, for
example, has a limit on something, and the county has a differing limit on something
that there is a conflict so the county limit prevails?
e.g.. outbuilding height - if the covenants limits outbuildings to 12 feet and the county
has a 15 foot limitation, which one prevails?
