2006 - House Exceeds 30 Foot Height Restriction
May 28, 2021 9:02:58 GMT -7
dorothykeeler likes this
Post by Poor Richard on May 28, 2021 9:02:58 GMT -7
2006 - House Exceeds 30 Foot Height Restriction
Covenants run with the land, not with the property owner that first created the violations. In some cases, properties have been sold in Glastonbury by landowners who violated the Covenants. The new owner may be shocked when they are told that the home they purchased violates the Covenants and until they correct the problem, they cannot vote nor run as candidates in GLA elections. Sometimes, as in the case of the too tall house shown below, fixing the violation is too expensive. So the new owner is banned from exercising his right to vote or hold office in perpetuity.
The house pictured below was built in 2006 without first submitting a GLA Project Review. That violates Covenant 6.01. No forms were filed nor were required fees paid. The house also violates the GLA Master Plan Section 2.0 by being over 30 feet tall from the ground to the peak of the roof. It is located on 30 Pisces Way in North Glastonbury; parcel number NG-54E.
The house pictured below was built in 2006 without first submitting a GLA Project Review. That violates Covenant 6.01. No forms were filed nor were required fees paid. The house also violates the GLA Master Plan Section 2.0 by being over 30 feet tall from the ground to the peak of the roof. It is located on 30 Pisces Way in North Glastonbury; parcel number NG-54E.
The "Too Tall" House that Violates GLA Covenants. (Zillow Photo)
In early Spring 2007, both the former and then current GLA Project Review Chairs were touring North Glastonbury. The former chair was pointing out houses that were built on her watch. Towards the end of the tour they arrived at the "Too Tall" house. The former Project Review Chair was surprised and noted that this house was never submitted for the obligatory review by the GLA Board and Project Review Committee. The new chair thought that the house exceeded 30 feet in height. He proceeded to measure it from the ground to the peak and arrived at a height of 34 feet; four feet taller than what is permitted by the GLA Master Plan.
He brought the issue before the GLA Board at the next monthly meeting. The Board instructed him to contact the owner, an old timer whom many board members personally knew. The GLA Board gave the Project Review Chairman the property owner's personal phone number with instructions to collect the mandatory fees and see that the paperwork was filed. The new chair called the owner. The owner/builder stated that he did not have any money left after spending it all on building the house. Additionally, his credit cards were maxed out. He had expected to finish the house and then sell it. He did not express any interest in filing paperwork or paying fees. When informed that the house was four feet too tall, he did not offer a solution or express any remorse.
At the next monthly meeting, the detailed information was presented to the GLA Board. No one on the Board seemed interested in pursuing the violations, so the matter was dropped. The owner/builder retained the house until he sold it in 2018.
At the next monthly meeting, the detailed information was presented to the GLA Board. No one on the Board seemed interested in pursuing the violations, so the matter was dropped. The owner/builder retained the house until he sold it in 2018.
The land and building on parcel number NG-54E, are subject to the Restated Covenants. When the current owner purchased the property in 2018 he legally agreed to abide by the Restated Covenants and the Master Plan. He did not know that his new home was in violation of the Covenants and had serious septic system design flaws. Nor did anyone from the GLA Board inform him that as the new property owner he was not eligible to vote or hold office, until the Covenant violations were remedied.
Instead, in 2019 the GLA Board approved the nomination forms submitted by the new owner despite his violations. He ran for the GLA Board, was elected and briefly served as Treasurer. Then he resigned due to increased demands of his day job.
Because this house was never reviewed or approved by the GLA Project Review Committee or the GLA Board, significant and ultimately expensive design flaws were never addressed. In particular, the poorly placed septic system has caused thousands of dollars of damage to the finished basement. The septic drain field was placed in a natural basin in back of the home. Spring runoff from the surrounding hills often floods the natural basin and covers the drain field with a foot of water. Sewage has backed up into the basement and destroyed everything it touched; drywall, carpeting, furniture, etc. In 2019 the GLA and the current landowner agreed to dig a deep drainage ditch along Pisces Way in an effort to drain spring runoff. Landowners paid for 50% of the cost of the ditch.
