In an effort to uphold village rules, officials in Long Reach have rejected a bid by a resident to keep the siding he installed on his house 16 years ago.

The siding violates the neighborhood covenants because the resident changed the style from vertical to horizontal without first asking permission to do so.

After Wednesday's decision by the Long Reach Architectural Committee, the resident, Jim Rose, said he’s unsure of his next step.

“I think this is a silly decision, a tragic decision,” he said, adding that he was already considering moving out of the neighborhood before his siding issue, and would rent out his house if unable to sell it.

He added that he’s not thrilled at the prospect of being an absentee landlord, and he doubts his neighbors on Wingborne Court in Phelps Luck would like the arrangement, either. “That’s what this type of decision is bringing this community to,” he said.

In August, Rose and his wife, Susan, received notice from village officials that the siding on their house violated neighborhood guidelines because the style had been changed without approval. Rose subsequently applied for approval, but his request was denied by the village’s resident architectural committee in January. The committee stated that the siding on Rose’s house was not compatible with neighboring homes.

All Columbia property is subject to covenants that govern the appearance, use and upkeep of property. Covenants vary in each of the town’s 10 villages and are enforced by advisers and architectural committees composed of residents.

The village’s Architectural Committee first discussed the matter at length at its March 4 meeting, but failed to reach a decision when neither a motion to support Rose’s appeal nor one to reject it found any support.

At that meeting, Rose told the committee that he and his wife were simply trying to maintain their property when they changed the siding in the early 1990s. He said the original vertical wood-style siding rotted easily because of its design. He added that he thought the switch would be acceptable since his neighborhood includes a houses with a mix of vertical and horizontal siding.

At the committee’s meeting on Wednesday, members unanimously rejected his appeal in a matter of minutes.

Committee member Karen Hitcho said the committee considered the “ambiance of the greater neighborhood” in making its decision.

Committee member Raymond Gabler told Rose that he reviewed the style of houses on Wingborne Court and the surrounding area, including High Tor Hill and Eaglebeak Row, which have a significant number of houses with vertical siding.

“If we lose our consistency as a board, we’re taking any teeth out of the authority this committee has to enforce the rules,” Gabler said.

Hitcho, who also serves as chairwoman of the Long Reach village board, said Rose’s case will next be presented to the board. The board has several options, including ordering that Rose change his siding to be compliant, or flagging his lot. If Rose’s lot is flagged, he would lose his right to vote in Columbia Association elections or use association facilities until his lot is in compliance. The flag also would prevent him from getting a “letter of compliance” from the association in the event he should sell his house, she said.

---

user comments (5)

user pateg says...

This is an amazing decision by the committee. After 16 years they are really stretching the point of covenant enforcement! I cannot see how allowing this exception could prevent future covenant enforcement especially since this was not intentional on the part of the committee. Glad I don't live in this village.

Posted 5:57 PM, 03.27.09 | Permalink

user bytemarx says...

This decision is consistent with (People's Republic of) Columbia HOA governance in the past, nothing new or surprising here. You must maintain your property according to their rules. Anyone purchasing a home in Columbia agrees to be bound to this type of governance, there is very explicit language in the contract. If you don't like it, don't buy there. For example, when I first moved to this area, I rented in Columbia, but when it came time to purchase property, I bought in Anne Arundel county. Caveat Emptor.

Posted 5:06 PM, 03.28.09 | Permalink

user pateg says...

I lived in Columbia for 18 years and it is a great place to live. In our village the covenants were enforced and that made for well maintained neighborhoods. However our architectural committee and board always applied logic to their decisions. In this case the decision is quite arbitrary, capricious and mean spirited. After 16 years!!!

Posted 7:27 PM, 03.28.09 | Permalink

user hococitizen says...

Only murder has an unlimited statute of limitation outside the guilded cage of Columbia. If the architectural committee didn't figure out the violation for 16 years, and the neighbors haven't screamed, fleeing from the street in fright, then the panelling stays. The proper action should have been to cite him when the panelling first started going on. I thought the villages were supposed to be a community. How can forcing removal of 16 year old paneling that is in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood be in keeping with maintaining the neighborhood. Perhaps his rotting horizontal paneling would have been acceptable?

Posted 2:21 PM, 03.29.09 | Permalink

user formerres says...

What a joke. This decision by the committee actually makes them look stupid. It probably is really a pass the buck thing. Now, lets hope the Village Board sees the light and reverses this decision, which is what the committee expects. Then they can stand on their so-called principles. Having lived in Columbia for 26 years, and once a member of a Village Board, I have seen these "residents" want to flex their so called power. My son lives in Hopewell, there are several rental houses that have fallen into disrepair, but nothing is done. Here Mr Rose has actually improved his house. If he had left the wood siding to rot that would be OK. What a joke.

Posted 9:48 PM, 03.29.09 | Permalink