We’ve had some great questions regarding our proposed Restrictions amendments, so we thought we’d address them here for everyone. You may view the complete document with proposed amendments here.
Q: If I can’t make the meeting on April 30, can I still vote?
A: Absolutely. You received a proxy form and may either assign voting power to another Member who plans to attend, or you may allow the Board to vote on your behalf. If you’d like the Board to vote for you, simply check the appropriate box on the proxy form, sign it and drop it off at 42 Glen Echo.
Q: Will we be voting for the amendments individually or as a single vote for all?
A: A separate vote will be conducted for each proposed amendment. This is not an all or nothing process.
Q: Why are these specific amendments being proposed?
A: Our Restrictions haven’t been updated since the subdivision was built in 1966. Further, the 6th Addition (areas of Northlane and Westglen) have a minimally different set of restrictions that has caused confusion through the years, and we want to unify everything into a single, comprehensive set for all Members.
You may view a map of the Additions here, and the difference in the two sets of Restrictions here.
Additionally, these proposed amendments are the result of Board member experience, general Member feedback through the years and a response to the results of a survey we conducted in fall 2016. Of the 143 households that participated in the survey, we found:
- 74% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly that homeowners should have the right to operate home-based businesses. As such, we propose an update to Restriction 4 to add language permitting professionals to work from home, provided it does not create a burden to the neighborhood.
- 69% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly that Village of Glen Carbon ordinances are sufficient as lawn and foliage maintenance standards. Accordingly, we propose an update to Restriction 9 to align with Village ordinances and to address overgrown and/or dead trees, bushes and foliage.
- 71% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly that homeowners should be permitted to have sheds in Glenwood Estates. Accordingly, we propose an update to Restriction 14 to permit sheds, provided specific criteria and processes are followed.
- 87% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly that fences should be allowed in Glenwood Estates. We propose an update to Restriction 17 to permit fences up to 6 feet in height, provided specific criteria and processes are followed.
- 54% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly that yard signs should be allowed in Glenwood Estates. As such, we are proposing an update to Restriction 19 to permit reasonable signs, provided specific criteria are followed.
- We propose updating Restriction 22 to remove “boats, boat trailers” from the list of storage items; these items are addressed in the proposed revision to Restriction 24.
- 49% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly that there are too many vehicles parked on the streets in Glenwood Estates. 19% were neutral on the matter and 32% disagreed to strongly disagreed. As such, we propose an update to Restriction 24 to provide clear parameters for limited street parking. We also propose language to establish that campers, RVs, boats and trailers must be permanently stored in a fully enclosed garage or offsite facility since 55% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly about it.
- 60% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly that lot owners should not be able to sue one another solely on the grounds of a Restriction violation. Accordingly, we propose an update to Restriction 26 to provide the Board of Directors a clear, consistent escalation path for enforcement of our restrictions.
- 62% of survey participants felt strongly to very strongly that additional rental properties should not be permitted in Glenwood Estates. The addition of Restriction 29 is proposed to prevent additional rental properties in the neighborhood and to require landlords to register their renters with the Association since such information is not publicly available.
- The addition of Restriction 30 was proposed to enable us to enforce the rules posted in our park.
- We propose an update to Restriction 6 to add inclusive language regarding domestic partners.
- We propose an update to Restriction 16 to add language permitting fire pits.
The following amendments are proposed to create an identical set of Restrictions for all additions, incorporating those that differ in the 6th addition:
- Since the 6th Addition (areas of Northlane and Westglen) currently has a separate set of standards for dwelling size and exterior coverage specifics, Restriction 12 was updated to create a single Restriction incorporating these specifics from the 6th Addition with those of all other additions. None of the content has changed whatsoever; rather, we’ve just incorporated the appropriate language corresponding to all sections into one Restriction that will apply for all additions in an effort to unify the documents.
- We propose an update to Restriction 13 to align with criteria in the 6th Addition timing: all construction projects must be completed within 9 months instead of 12 months from start of construction or start of material delivery.
- We propose an update to Restriction 15 to reflect language present in the 6th Addition Restrictions requiring all homes to be connected to the Glen Carbon Sanitary Sewer System instead of the septic tank language that is present in documents that originated in 1966.
If you have additional questions, please contact us on Facebook or email email@example.com and we will do our best to answer.