Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California
Can an HOA require driveway parking in addition to a garage?
My manufactured home, built in 2011, was the first in my park to have a garage, in this case a two car garage. As it is right on the street, the driveways are very short and no car could be "parked in the driveway".
Two other garages have been approved and built. One was a single car garage that left enough space to park two cars in the driveway in front of it. The other is a two car garage, and like us, they have no driveways to park in.
Otherwise, units are required to have enough driveway to park two vehicles.
Now they have proposed changes to the Rules and Regulations, including this:
Driveways must accommodate the parking of 2 vehicles excluding garage parking
with this explanation of the "Purpose and Effect of Changes": "every driveway, with or without a garage, must accommodate 2 vehicles in the driveway". This is the effect of course, but contains no purpose.
This rule would have forced us to build a driveway to nowhere to accommodate two cars. Since our plans had no room for such a driveway, we would have had to give up the garage.
It is possible that this rule is intended simply to keep out most garages. Long story short, the Board president dislikes us and has said in a Board meeting "We never should have let garages in the park".
Another possible explanation: The single car garage that was built is full of stuff; it is not used to park a vehicle. The owners still use their driveway for parking. Perhaps the Board is concerned about such a situation occurring without driveway parking being available. Street parking is not allowed, so it could be a real problem.
If the rule has no real purpose except to prevent garages from being built, then it is arbitrary.
If the purpose is to make sure there is parking for two vehicles even if the garage is stuffed with junk, then they have placed an unreasonable burden on those who would build garages, especially two car garages. A reasonable rule would require the owner to maintain enough open space, either inside or outside of a garage, to park two cars, don't you think?
Have I missed anything? I'm going to do battle on this one, so let me know if I'm wrong.
2 Answers from Attorneys
Going to court with a HOA because you think a restriction is "arbitrary" is a quick way to lose and have a judgment against you for their attorney's fees.
It seems to me that one way to avoid the thrust of the proposed new rule is to argue that pre-existing properties that were "legal" when initially approved are "grandfathered," and a change in the rule or policy should not apply to previously-approved but non-conforming (to the new rule) properties. I'm not sure this'll work, but maybe. Also, don't things like this get voted on? How can one crabapple get enough votes to pass a new rule that's clearly designed to single out and discriminate against one owner?
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
