SaveTimberCreek's Weblog

Posted by: Wiltelco@aol.com

savetimbercreek — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:39:09 +0000

The neighborhood used to be organized into sections with representatives from each section assisting in addressing problems. For some reason, this has been “lost”. Some poa’s require that complaints be submitted in writing, and responses are given in writing. This ameliorates ”phone call madness”. Many, many poa’s post meeting minutes and financial reports on their web sites. Our web site is barely maintained.

I don’t know who monitors the use of the tennis courts. I have been informed by non-residents how much they enjoy using our courts! The swimming pool gate is always unlocked when I go there. Anyone can gain access when the “staff” is not on duty, which is a significant amount of time. For whatever reasons, our neighborhood has chosen to relinquish consistent, restricted access to these expensive poa assets. Yet, the short- and long-term costs/consequences of this lack of control are, and will be, borne by all of us.

There are neighborhoods like TimberCreek all across the country. There is an abundance of information available concerning the issues we face. The “wheels” our well-intentioned poa board keeps trying to invent have already been invented. The neighborhood would be well-served by highly qualified professional guidance.

“I think the homeowners have lost control of the POA.”

savetimbercreek — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:25:24 +0000

Saturday, May 30th, I called the POA office to complain about cars parking on the street over night in my neighborhood. By the way, contrary to what the Board said in their last Timber Tales, enforcement in this area has not changed since we have taken over from the developer. Anyway, Sam answered the phone and I introduced myself and asked him copuld he please make note that cars are being parked over night in my neighborhood and could he please enforce the C & R’s. He stated he was enforcing the Boards wishes in this regard. I asked him to explain and he said call a board member. I asked him to tell me and he hung up. I called back and asked him to explain to me the current rule and he hung up again. I contacted one of the Board members and he told me the new rule is ” consistent violation”. I asked him what that meant? I’m not sure what that means, but, I was further told that each infraction standss on its own and is a new infraction. In other words, there is no enforcement. It is unbelievable that our Board and the p[eople we pay 100K plusm to enforce our C&R’s perform in such an incompetent manner. I think the homeowers have lost control of the POA.

What Can Be Done

savetimbercreek — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:43:04 +0000

After serving briefly on the TimberCreek board, researching issues on-line, and talking with professional community managers, I have concluded that we have suffered from a lack of professional expertise and experience. Community management is a highly skilled profession. There are companies that provide a broad range of services, including specialized legal services, accounting services, and public relations services.

The issues we face in TimberCreek are not unique. Such communities exist all over the country, and we should benefit from their experience, and not continually “reinvent the wheel”.

POA fees have been $50 per month since I moved here in 2002. In order to be a first class community, we must be willing to increase this amount in order to hire and retain highly experienced, professional management.

Wiltelco@aol.com

Posted in Response to “Fed Up”

savetimbercreek — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:50:44 +0000

	Been there rob.hoover@mchsi.com 216.75.211.5	Submitted on 2009/01/24 at 11:37am One of the major issues is that you have a POA Board that can actually make decisions and an appointed ARB. In my experience, the problem is more with the ARB. They start trouble and then pass it off to the POA. The POA then goes along with the ARB doesn’t do their own fact checking. They are very quick to start the meter running with the attorney. After all, it’s not their money. It’s every home owner’s money. As a property owner, you would then have to use your families funds to defend yourself from attack by an organization that you are a card-carrying, dues paying member. There is really no good answer. In my situation, I handled it the old fashion way….pay them off. Depending on your situation, you need to decide how much pain you are willing to endure vs sticking to your guns. I decided that enough pain had been inflicted on our family. We work hard for a living, have children to raise, etc. It seemed like the “lesser of 2 evils” not to fight an enemy that had nothing better to do with their time and use other people’s money to finance the battle. I’m sorry I don’t have a real answer for you. They make the rules up as they go along and only address situations when a neighbor with too much free time on their hands decides target you.

savetimbercreek — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:57:11 +0000

	Fed Up meswcs@aol.com 74.248.22.30	Submitted on 2009/01/20 at 3:43pm I have read most postings on the website and have recently been put in a situation that reinforces many of the frustrations seen here. My question is – what do we do about it? I feel at this time that the board makes decisions based on their what is beneficial and convenienant to their own agendas and those of a select few. The conflicts of interest exhibited by the board reveals its anarchy approach to say it kindly. But aren’t our hands tied? They have made me and a great many others feel that way… What is our resolution?

Posted Under Illegal Bunny and I’ve instructed my realtor to exclued homes in TimberCreek

savetimbercreek — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:46:54 +0000

In response to the previous comment from “bugs bunny” regarding the bunny rabbit, you are missing the point. There are rabbits on porches throughout TimberCreek. Dozens of them! I saw one 3 feet tall on the Boulevard yesterday. The point is that our covenants and restrictions are not enforced uniformly. This ARB and its management company pick and choose which rules they enforce and which residents have to abide by which rules. This arbitrary and capricious enforcement is the problem, not the bunny. http://www.SaveTimberCreek.com has no problem with TimberCreek’s covenants and restrictions. We have serious problems with the complete lack of enforcement of the rules in some instances and the heavy handed enforcement of the very same rule in other instances.

Comment by savetimbercreek November 21, 2008 @ 10:42 am |Edit This

I was told (by Mr. Lyons), that it didn’t matter to him how civil I was about the issue, he would just let the attorney handle it.

savetimbercreek — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:31:23 +0000

Paul Davis
areqtect@yahoo.com | 74.230.48.216

My sidewalk.

The covenants state that any damage to a sidewalk during construction should be repaired. The sidewalk leading to my front door was damaged during an addition/renovation project around 2006.

I had a beautiful stamped concrete walk installed to replace the damaged walk to my door. It resembled a stone walkway so much that most people did not know it was patterned concrete. The covenants state “Property owners may, upon prior approval from the ARB apply materials consisting of acrylic polymer and modified cement coatings on “hard surface” areas (walkways) to simulate construction materials for tile, brick or stone. “

My mistake: PRIOR APPROVAL

I assumed it wouldn’t be a problem; after all it is listed in the covenants as an option. Being a professional architect I selected a material, pattern and color that were appropriate to the style of my home and would blend in the neighborhood.

The new walk was poured.

The ARB didn’t like it. It wasn’t “pre-approved”. I offered to redo the walk and submitted a variety of color choices to alter my walk based on the fact that patterned concrete was an acceptable option. All of my many submittals of any coloring or patterning were refused. I was told that all sidewalks should be uniform. “All sidewalks on my street were concrete; therefore my sidewalk must be the natural color of concrete too”, per the ARB. This was an opinion of the ARB and not a rule in the covenants. The covenants said they could allow patterned concrete. It wasn’t their opinion that it wasn’t in keeping the style of my home or that patterned concrete wasn’t an allowed option. It was just that they wanted all walks to be natural concrete regardless of the options available in the covenants. I was polite. We submitted many additional textured, patterned, and colored options. All were rejected. I explained that I wasn’t trying to be difficult, but wanted to get a certain look. Then I was told (by Mr. Lyons), that it didn’t matter to him how civil I was about the issue, he would just let the attorney handle it. In his opinion (a non-resident) the walk should be concrete.

Not wanting to go to court over a sidewalk. I finally found a color they approved, concrete grey. Walk by 8979 North court and admire my beautiful painted grey sidewalk, approved by the ARB. Don’t you think it is much nicer than a stone walk?

Now, the funny part is this. When we moved into our house in 2001 the original sidewalk was painted gray by the previous owner. After moving in we received a letter from the ARB asking us why our walk was painted and who approved it. Obviously they didn’t like it. We responded that it was that way when we bought the house and there were no more comments from the ARB.
Now, it is that way again, thanks to the vision of the ARB.

So when you submit plans, remember that they must comply with the covenants AND the personal tastes of the ARB and the whims of the Management Company.

Over 5,300 visits to SaveTimberCreek

savetimbercreek — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:52:14 +0000

www.SaveTimberCreek.com has recieved over 5,300 visitors since it’s launch last month. The residents of TimberCreek are finally being herd. Keep posting your thoughts and checking back for the latest.

TimberCreek’s Motion’s Fail, Builders Motions Granted

savetimbercreek — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:39:29 +0000

www.SaveTimberCreek.com

For Immediate Release

November 19, 2008

TimberCreek’s Motions for Summary Judgment Fail in case against Builder and Resident. Builder’s motions to compel TimberCreek’s depositions and additional discovery granted.

Judge Robert Wilters denied TimberCreeks motions for summary judgment in a court hearing on Tuesday setting the stage for the case to proceed to trial. At the same time, the judge ordered TimberCreek’s representatives to sit for depositions that they have been avoiding and for TimberCreeek to provide documents previously withheld by the Property Owners Association in discovery for the case.

In Tuesday’s hearing TimberCreek’s attorney James B. Pittman, of Daphne, conceded that TimberCreek’s covenants and restrictions were conflicting and ambiguous as to the time frame required for a response to a submission under those same restrictions and that such an ambiguity should “admittedly be construed against TimberCreek, as the drafter.” Elliott Builders submitted a plan for a retaining wall while constructing a house in TimberCreek and did not receive approval or denial of the submission from TimberCreek’s Architectural Review Board (ARB) for over four months, well outside the 60 day limit imposed on the ARB by TimberCreek’s own covenants and restrictions. Elliott Builders constructed the wall as submitted and TimberCreek demands that it be torn down.

Despite the positive outcome of the motion hearing, Tom Elliott President of Elliott Builders, Inc., a litigant in the case says that Elliott Builders is still willing to entertain offers of settlement from TimberCreek to avoid the stress and publicity that would accompany such a public trial. “It’s not fair for a couple of ARB (architectural review board) members to put the residents, builders, and real estate agents of TimberCreek through the discovery and embarrassing depositions that will inevitably accompany such a trial.” “This matter has been blown completely out of proportion by TimberCreek and its attorney. What could have been settled by simply communicating in a reasonable manner has now morphed into an issue of pride and a win at any cost attitude for TimberCreek’ ARB. If these folks would have just responded to us we’d have been happy to accommodate them and build whatever type of wall they like but they made a conscious decision to stonewall and violated their own covenants and restrictions, adds Tom Elliott.”

www.SaveTimberCreek.com favors settlement of this case and others like it. Continued litigation where the TimberCreek POA’s position is tenuous at best puts our neighborhood and our property values at risk and opens the door to more challenges to our covenants and restrictions.

ContactUs@SaveTimberCreek.com

TimberCreek covenants draw complaints of unfair or inconsistent interpretations

savetimbercreek — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:22:04 +0000

While builders and others say rules help maintain property values, Web site posters allege unfair or inconsistent interpretations

Sunday, November 16, 2008

By KATHY JUMPER

Real Estate Editor

Some homeowners in Daphne’s TimberCreek development have taken their frustrations to the Internet, using www.SaveTimberCreek.com to offer an earful about the actions of the subdivi sion’s Architectural Review Board.

Animal statues must stay on the front porch, for example. “It’s a Boy” or “It’s a Girl” banners in yards? Sorry. And no cars or boats parked out front, while fences have height limits.

Subdivision rules often are written even before a lot or house is sold, according to builders. Developers typically enforce the rules until 80 percent to 90 percent of the subdivision is occupied, then give management over to homeowners who establish a property owners association.

The covenants vary in each community, and owners have a variety of ways to change them even further after taking over management. Most of the time, homeowners comply with the covenants. When they don’t, the association typically takes care of notifying offenders.

There are more than 800 homes in TimberCreek, a golf course community where home prices start at $300,000. The subdivision is known far and wide for enforcing the rules, according to John Strange, a member of TimberCreek’s review board and a professor at the University of South Alabama.

“People sometimes get unhappy,” he said, “but most of the time they abide by them, or in some cases, move.”

But TimberCreek homeowner Chris Elliott is one of several residents who started the SaveTimberCreek Web site, which “gives residents a place to air their grievances in hopes of changing things a little bit.”

“We are happy the restrictive covenants are there,” he said. “We’ve got some nutty Architectural Review Board people. They let some people get away with murder, and then others they come down on them like you’d not believe.”

Elliott Builders sued the TimberCreek owners association and the review board in June 2007, according to Elliott and court records. The suit, filed in Baldwin County Circuit Court, came after the review board put a lien on a house Elliott built in TimberCreek, alleging that the building company and Elliot constructed a nonconforming retaining wall.

Several TimberCreek homeowners did not respond to calls seeking comment on the Web site. James Pittman Jr., the Daphne-based attorney for the owners association and the review board, referred questions to the court file.

A hearing is set for Tuesday in the case.

The Web site was not organized just because of the court case, Elliott said, though that was “a contributing factor.”

“But lots of other people have posted on that site,” he added.

Enforcing TimberCreek’s covenants helps the community hold its value, according to Allen Cox Sr., one of the developers.

“You’ve got to be consistent and don’t grant exceptions,” Cox said. “Keep personalities out of it. You’ve got to have something that is enforceable. The court looks at whether you are enforcing them selectively or consistently.”

Mobile builder John Howard said there have never been subdivision covenants that someone didn’t like.

“That’s just human nature,” he said. “You could write in that every homeowner gets a free pass to heaven and gets to sit at the right hand of God and you’d get people complaining that they are left-handed.

“We try to write the covenants in a reasonable manner so they don’t overburden the homeowner,” he said.

The covenants have kept home values high in TimberCreek, according to custom builder James Ray, who lives in the subdivision.

“They have a full-time property management staff, where most (owners associations) are run by the residents. You drive through and it’s clean and everything is maintained.”

“It is a pain sometimes,” Ray said of TimberCreek’s guidelines. “I built 67 houses in there, and as a building contractor, we were held to a high standard.” The job sites always had to be clean during construction, and the review process was not a “rubber stamp,” he said.

In the sluggish real estate market of today, he said, the negative publicity generated by the Web site is “probably not the best thing.”