Does an ARC decision override a deed restriction?
 

ARC approved putting a small storage shed in my yard (where it can barely if at all be seen from the street) but the deed restrictions don't seem to allow it. Who wins? ARC or DEED? It's not a Villa.

UPDATE: Thank everyone. Going back into lurking mode now. Didn't ask for judgment on what I want to do just if ARC approval trumps DEED restrictions. Thanks for all the info both good and otherwise. Going to have to decide if I want to test out my "question". Approval is good for 90 days.

OP, you would think your deed restriction would prevail. Perhaps there is a “loop hole” or exception ARC used.

Most deed restrictions vary in small but potentially significant ways. Can you post the name/title of your deed restrictions (S8-160, M4-50, etc) so that we can read specifically what applies to your property?

Several places in my restrictions there is the phrase, "written consent of the Developer, or an architectural review committee appointed by the Developer." Perhaps the ARC believes that phrase applies to what you had requested.

Regrettably, the ARC approval form has the weasel words (yeah, my description), "(5) THE ARC CAN NOT APPROVE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NOT PERMITTED BY THE RULE OR RESTRICTION SO EVEN IN THE EVENT OF APPROVAL, IT IS THE PROPERTY OWNERS' RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTINUE TO COMPLY WITH THE RESTRICTIONS." So while the ARC approval letter has value, investigation of a future complaint may determine that the approval was inappropriate and the improvement would have to be removed.

If it were me, I would gamble on the ARC approval being honored and I would continue with the work. A more conservative approach might be a conversation with the ARC about your concerns. A most conservative approach would obviously be to not move forward with the work.

I am guessing that ARC missed the 'no sheds allowed' deed restriction. IMHO, I would point this out and get clarification in writing if they continue to approve. No idea if this would help if the deed restriction was enforced, but from what I have seen on this site and others deed restrictions are rarely enforced, the developer appears to have no interest in enforcement.

A small shed that can barely be seen from the road is probably not all that expensive.

If it were me I would go ahead and put it in. Worst comes to worst and somebody complains and an investigation determines that the deed is controlling then you remove it but you have a pretty good excuse for why you installed it. Probably won’t happen,

If it is one of those plastic movable ones that is not very large go for it. If you have a birdcage people have pool items stored in small sheds.

An then there's that white cross thing.

Is this lack of enforcement dependent on location? I just heard that 14 homes in Lake Denham have recently been told to remove lawn ornaments. Seems like enforcement to me.

External deed restrictions seem to be strictly enforced by the numbered CDDs when a complaint is filed. Internal deed restrictions are not as transparent so actual enforcement activities are harder to track.

Don't we have a bunch of lawyers on this site?


The Deed Restriction clearly has priority, unless and until, the Beneficiary of the Restriction, grants a recorded release.

Even if that were to occur, if there are existing 3rd Party Beneficiaries, they would still have a claim.

Speaking 3rd Party Beneficiaries, here's one for the lawyer's in the group.

I ask the question, because the entire premises of The Villages, is built on the contention that the neighborhoods will essentially always remain the same and folks won't be allowed to willy-nilly change things.

As the lawyers in the group know, in order to be a "3rd Party Beneficiary", you would typically have to be named in the Deed as a Beneficiary and the "Grant Language" would prevail.

Without reading every Deed Grant from all the various Villages, wouldn't it stand to reason that regardless of the specific language, ALL Villagers are 3rd Party Beneficiaries of most every Deed Restriction?

I don’t think any attorney would jump in on a public forum about ARC. Especially since rules can be changed by ARC. Like paint colors approved in 2009 no longer approved in 2015.

ARC has been known to approve something, then because it should not have been approved, the home owner gets “letter to remove”.

I would have to dig some but the subject has come up before, about ARC approval then notice a mistake was made.

It's 4D x 6W x 6H. No birdcage. In a 2/2 with a tiny Lanai.

. Well, that's my issue. I would "think" my D.R. would apply. :0. This is a 18yr old area and frankly I don't think they would care as they are too busy building out down south. Also if anyone complains this is not a anonymous complaint zone so I can get Tony Big Buns to straighten them out if they do. :D

I did a search here for (specifically) SHEDS and there were a couple but nothing definitive or with any after-the-fact problems and they were quite old.

. That's what it is, but it won't be movable since I will attach it to the existing patio. :)