Villages of Columbus - Columbus Square - Camden Place

[CM_Dude_IHB]

Also, regarding garage inspections. I have a gun safe, work bench with expensive tools, expensive bikes, backpacking, skiing, climbing, fishing and camping equipment, with plenty of room for vehicles, in my garage - no way in hell would I let some Patrol One rep get a peek in there. I might as well put out an ad on Craigslist and leave the garage door open.

 

[rickhunter_IHB]

Out of all the whining on the IHB blog, you have to pick on people worried about the parking situation in their residence, on their thread?

I am so damn glad I didn't end up buying in Camden Place! I agree completely with Graphix, this thread has been highly frustrating because of the lack of actual information, which was finally provided by Shooby.

To all complainers who want to park on the street, you are SOL. End of discussion.

Relevant excerpt of CC&R Section 2.4.3 - Owners may not park any Authorized Vehicle in the street or in any guest parking space.

All the heat and noise and indignation about having more licensed drivers than allowed parking spaces is just hot air - those complaining had FULL disclosure of the parking requirements, and agreed to them when they purchased their property. If you don't like it, move. That is the price you pay for lving in a development governed by HOAs. I will NEVER live in a such a place.

 

[CM_Dude_IHB]

Out of all the whining on the IHB blog, you have to pick on people worried about the parking situation in their residence, on their thread?

I am so damn glad I didn't end up buying in Camden Place! I agree completely with Graphix, this thread has been highly frustrating because of the lack of actual information, which was finally provided by Shooby.

To all complainers who want to park on the street, you are SOL. End of discussion.

Relevant excerpt of CC&R Section 2.4.3 - Owners may not park any Authorized Vehicle in the street or in any guest parking space.

All the heat and noise and indignation about having more licensed drivers than allowed parking spaces is just hot air - those complaining had FULL disclosure of the parking requirements, and agreed to them when they purchased their property. If you don't like it, move. That is the price you pay for lving in a development governed by HOAs. I will NEVER live in a such a place.

Good point, and well taken. This is their neighborhood and they are facing the parking issues everyday.

I am sensitive to this issue because I just helped a friend draft a response to his HOA's proposal to hire Patrol One to deal with parking problems in his gated community. It was the same types of situations described above, people using their garages for storage and living spaces, multiple families living in SFRs, etc. You simply can't have effective enforcement unless EVERYONE adheres to the CC&R provisions. My criticism is fair - the same folks complaining about neighbors hogging guest and street parking because they refuse to play by the rules (CC&Rs) and park in their garages want an exception to those same rules for their extra vehicles. You can't have it both ways.

This whole discussion only highlights the fact that failure to read and comprehend CC&Rs is a huge problem which leads to all kinds of neighborhood strife.

 

[Perspective_IHB]

I am so damn glad I didn't end up buying in Camden Place! I agree completely with Graphix, this thread has been highly frustrating because of the lack of actual information, which was finally provided by Shooby.

To all complainers who want to park on the street, you are SOL. End of discussion.

Relevant excerpt of CC&R Section 2.4.3 - Owners may not park any Authorized Vehicle in the street or in any guest parking space.

All the heat and noise and indignation about having more licensed drivers than allowed parking spaces is just hot air - those complaining had FULL disclosure of the parking requirements, and agreed to them when they purchased their property. If you don't like it, move. That is the price you pay for lving in a development governed by HOAs. I will NEVER live in a such a place.

As for guest parking, each resident should be able to pick up 10 guest parking passes per month at the community center if they need it.

Any more than that, they should pay $5 per pass.

That sounds like pure hell, to be honest. I have visitors at my place all the time, including weekly dinner parties attended by at least 7 people, often more. Under this horrid scheme, I'd be paying my HOA at least $90/mo. for the privilege of hosting my friends. No, thank you.

To each their own, but I seriously cannot understand the mindset that would find this an acceptable living situation. Bring on the Costa Mesa SFR!!

CM Dude, you don't want to live in an HOA-controlled neighborhood with strict CC&Rs. Great thanks. Some of us do. That's why I bought in Camden Place, and I want the CC&Rs enforced.

BTW, your description of your garage's contents sounds like you're the type who'd prefer to live in a rural spot up in Montana too - not just away from a "homes too close, HOA-controlled Irvine neighborhood."

 

[Perspective_IHB]

Also, regarding garage inspections. I have a gun safe, work bench with expensive tools, expensive bikes, backpacking, skiing, climbing, fishing and camping equipment, with plenty of room for vehicles, in my garage - no way in hell would I let some Patrol One rep get a peek in there. I might as well put out an ad on Craigslist and leave the garage door open.

Your sentiments are probably shared by many others - protective of their "junk" and privacy. That's why I think garage inspections would be difficult. If you think this is intrusive, I think there's a provision that allows inspection of the home's interior if it's suspected too many people are living in the home. The CC&Rs allow for 2 people per bedroom. If you have a Plan 1 or 2, that's four residents max. How many Camden Place residents are violating this provision?

 

[bkshopr_IHB]

building code allows 1/250 sf. One can argue with the court and win. As long the non bedroom meets the light, ventilation and safety criteria people are allowed to sleep in the living and dining room.

 

[Perspective_IHB]

building code allows 1/250 sf. One can argue with the court and win. As long the non bedroom meets the light, ventilation and safety criteria people are allowed to sleep in the living and dining room.

Just because a building code "allows" for something does not meet that it can't be privately contracted differently.

 

[bkshopr_IHB]

As Floor area ratio exceeds 35% parking is challenge. Camden is around 60% and the parking issue is very evident. Detached condo is around 50% and parking issue is also a nightmare.

My other posts gave some examples of neighborhoods with various Floor Area Ratio (FAR) comparisons.

High FAR percentage = more dense and plagued with parking problem. It is the nature of the Beast and there is no point in going against the grain trying to transform it into Beauty.

Parking issues are urban problem because of density housing. To combat the problem one must eliminate the garage and assigns parking stalls to residents. Storage habit automatically goes away.

The problem with density housing in suburbia is people will not settle for assigned stalls and no garage. Many planners like the idea of a roll up fence like the ones in shopping mall. The vehicles and personal belongings are secured in the Garage and HOA can see into the garage at anytime.

 

[Perspective_IHB]

As Floor area ratio exceeds 35% parking is challenge. Camden is around 60% and the parking issue is very evident. Detached condo is around 50% and parking issue is also a nightmare.

My other posts gave some examples of neighborhoods with various Floor Area Ratio (FAR) comparisons.

High FAR percentage = more dense and plagued with parking problem. It is the nature of the Beast and there is no point in going against the grain trying to transform it into Beauty.

Parking issues are urban problem because of density housing. To combat the problem one must eliminate the garage and assigns parking stalls to residents. Storage habit automatically goes away.

The problem with density housing in suburbia is people will not settle for assigned stalls and no garage. Many planners like the idea of a roll up fence like the ones in shopping mall. The vehicles and personal belongings are secured in the Garage and HOA can see into the garage at anytime.

But this is precisely the issue, because it's a common problem in densely populated areas, neighborhoods control for it with strict CC&Rs. If you don't want to comply with the CC&Rs, you don't buy in that neighborhood. It's really rather simple.

 

[bkshopr_IHB]

building code allows 1/250 sf. One can argue with the court and win. As long the non bedroom meets the light, ventilation and safety criteria people are allowed to sleep in the living and dining room.

Just because a building code "allows" for something does not meet that it can't be privately contracted differently.

I don't know if you can legally enforce the occupancy count of an unit. I have seen in a situation where the fire department has the right to end a party when the number of partying occupants in the premise exceeded safety code. One could argue that the extra occupants in the house are frequent over night swinger guests.

No contract could legally restrict over night guests. That clause is bad for business and builders interest is in selling homes and do not want restrictive clause to deter sales.

 

[CM_Dude_IHB]

I am so damn glad I didn't end up buying in Camden Place! I agree completely with Graphix, this thread has been highly frustrating because of the lack of actual information, which was finally provided by Shooby.

To all complainers who want to park on the street, you are SOL. End of discussion.

Relevant excerpt of CC&R Section 2.4.3 - Owners may not park any Authorized Vehicle in the street or in any guest parking space.

All the heat and noise and indignation about having more licensed drivers than allowed parking spaces is just hot air - those complaining had FULL disclosure of the parking requirements, and agreed to them when they purchased their property. If you don't like it, move. That is the price you pay for lving in a development governed by HOAs. I will NEVER live in a such a place.

As for guest parking, each resident should be able to pick up 10 guest parking passes per month at the community center if they need it.

Any more than that, they should pay $5 per pass.

That sounds like pure hell, to be honest. I have visitors at my place all the time, including weekly dinner parties attended by at least 7 people, often more. Under this horrid scheme, I'd be paying my HOA at least $90/mo. for the privilege of hosting my friends. No, thank you.

To each their own, but I seriously cannot understand the mindset that would find this an acceptable living situation. Bring on the Costa Mesa SFR!!

CM Dude, you don't want to live in an HOA-controlled neighborhood with strict CC&Rs. Great thanks. Some of us do. That's why I bought in Camden Place, and I want the CC&Rs enforced.

BTW, your description of your garage's contents sounds like you're the type who'd prefer to live in a rural spot up in Montana too - not just away from a "homes too close, HOA-controlled Irvine neighborhood."

Perspective, if I bought into community governed by CC&Rs, I would want them enforced as well, especially parking issues. As I said, to each his/her own. I know quite a few people who'd never live in my neighborhood, and who prefer the orderliness of Irvine and south county. As for me? I'd NEVER sign away my property rights by buying into a CC&R controlled development.

I have lived all over, and actually prefer Orange County to just about anywhere else in the US. Perfect location, with all the urban amenities, yet with a City government (Costa Mesa) that is not overly intrusive and some decent-sized lots and nice neighborhoods. The mountains and ocean are close, and I can escape to the Eastern Sierra, Utah, Arizona and Colorado whenever I need to get away.

 

[Perspective_IHB]

building code allows 1/250 sf. One can argue with the court and win. As long the non bedroom meets the light, ventilation and safety criteria people are allowed to sleep in the living and dining room.

Just because a building code "allows" for something does not meet that it can't be privately contracted differently.

I don't know if you can legally enforce the occupancy count of an unit. I have seen in a situation where the fire department has the right to end a party when the number of partying occupants in the premise exceeded safety code. One could argue that the extra occupants in the house are frequent over night swinger guests.

No contract could legally restrict over night guests. That clause is bad for business and builders interest is in selling homes and do not want restrictive clause to deter sales.

Why not? Why couldn't an occupancy count limitation be enforced? There's no constitutional issue (e.g. no protected class affected).

 

[bkshopr_IHB]

Here is why. If people are reluctant to let enforcers going into the garage to check for compliance because they don't want to disclose their toys then what are the chances of letting the enforcers into the private living domain of a house.

Even the police will need a warrant for that. In this country no one can enter anyone's home and that will render HOA occupancy rule ineffective. This is very difficult to document and prove.

For some reason this method sounds like communist China to me. May be HOA could also enforce a single child per family occupancy rule.

 

[Geotpf_IHB]

The solution to this is to provide excess parking in the first place. Of course, the developers don't want to do that, because it takes up space and they want to cram as many units in as small a space as possible.

 

[Perspective_IHB]

Here is why. If people are reluctant to let enforcers going into the garage to check for compliance because they don't want to disclose their toys then what are the chances of letting the enforcers into the private living domain of a house.

Even the police will need a warrant for that. In this country no one can enter anyone's home and that will render HOA occupancy rule ineffective. This is very difficult to document and prove.

For some reason this method sounds like communist China to me. May be HOA could also enforce a single child per family occupancy rule.

You're confusing a criminal law issue with the enforcement of private contracts. It is true that enforcing Camden Place's occupancy limitation would be very complicated. The CC&Rs give the "right to enter" a residence to investigate excess occupancy, but they couldn't/wouldn't force entry should access be denied. However, that denial likely violates the CC&Rs allowing the HOA whatever remedies are available for violations. Considering our HOA's current enforcement effectiveness, I'd consider this point moot. I brought it up to suggest that there are many provisions that could offend the sensibilities of readers of this forum.

 

[CM_Dude_IHB]

Here is why. If people are reluctant to let enforcers going into the garage to check for compliance because they don't want to disclose their toys then what are the chances of letting the enforcers into the private living domain of a house.

Even the police will need a warrant for that. In this country no one can enter anyone's home and that will render HOA occupancy rule ineffective. This is very difficult to document and prove.

For some reason this method sounds like communist China to me. May be HOA could also enforce a single child per family occupancy rule.

You're confusing a criminal law issue with the enforcement of private contracts. It is true that enforcing Camden Place's occupancy limitation would be very complicated. The CC&Rs give the "right to enter" a residence to investigate excess occupancy, but they couldn't/wouldn't force entry should access be denied. However, that denial likely violates the CC&Rs allowing the HOA whatever remedies are available for violations. Considering our HOA's current enforcement effectiveness, I'd consider this point moot. I brought it up to suggest that there are many provisions that could offend the sensibilities of readers of this forum.

Perspective, do you have the CC&Rs handy? I'd like to see the "right to enter" language. Thanks.

 

[Perspective_IHB]

Perspective, do you have the CC&Rs handy? I'd like to see the "right to enter" language. Thanks.

? 2.2 defines single family residence as a dwelling with no more than three persons per bedroom. I'd written two earlier. That was wrong.

? 6.4 provides for a Right of Entry: "The Neighborhood Association has the right to enter the Exclusive Use Areas and the Condominiums to inspect the Neighborhood and may take whatever corrective action it determines to be necessary or proper. Entry onto any Exclusive Use Areas and Condominiums under the Subsection may be made after at least three (3) days' advance written notice to the Owner of the Condominium except for emergency situations, which shall not require notice..."

"Condominium" is defined in ? 1.1.16 as the Common Area and the Unit - the Unit being the individual's separate fee simple estate.

 

[bkshopr_IHB]

Also, regarding garage inspections. I have a gun safe, work bench with expensive tools, expensive bikes, backpacking, skiing, climbing, fishing and camping equipment, with plenty of room for vehicles, in my garage - no way in hell would I let some Patrol One rep get a peek in there. I might as well put out an ad on Craigslist and leave the garage door open.

Your sentiments are probably shared by many others - protective of their "junk" and privacy. That's why I think garage inspections would be difficult. If you think this is intrusive, I think there's a provision that allows inspection of the home's interior if it's suspected too many people are living in the home. The CC&Rs allow for 2 people per bedroom. If you have a Plan 1 or 2, that's four residents max. How many Camden Place residents are violating this provision?

Based on your posted CC&R both Plan 1 & 2 are 2 bedroom units. 3 persons per bedroom CC&R rule would allow both plans to house 5-6 occupants.

This should parallel to my 250sf/occupant. 5x250sf =1,250sf =plan 1 assuming the master bedroom is for a normal couple.

However, the CC&R also allows for 6 occupants for a 2 bedroom house and that would place 3 swingers in the master bedroom and 6x250sf = 1,500 sf = plan 2

You will not be able to find probable cause unless you find 7 occupants living in the units. Even if you do find it the 3 day visitation notice would allow owners plenty of time to stage the home to reflect less occupants.

In my 2 decade of experience I have never seen HOA successfully busted the excessive occupancy rule in a house unless a fire issue or code issue is violated.

Living in the garage is illegal and numerous owners have been cited for that and mandated to retrofit the converted space back to a garage.

HOA can make residents miserable by sending warning notices but they really have no power to enforce the occupancy rule. However, HOA can make your life a living hell by other tactics.

 

[rickhunter_IHB]

Besides towing your car(s), what else can the HOA really do to make your life a "living hell"?

However, the CC&R also allows for 6 occupants for a 2 bedroom house and that would place

HOA can make residents miserable by sending warning notices but they really have no power to enforce the occupancy rule. However, HOA can make your life a living hell by other tactics.

 

[bkshopr_IHB]

Besides towing your car(s), what else can the HOA really do to make your life a "living hell"?

However, the CC&R also allows for 6 occupants for a 2 bedroom house and that would place

HOA can make residents miserable by sending warning notices but they really have no power to enforce the occupancy rule. However, HOA can make your life a living hell by other tactics.

Its existence and fee.