No Dog Park in Leonard's Grant
- Target:
- Leonard's Grant Board of Directors
- Region:
- United States of America
- Website:
- nodogparkinlg.tumblr.com
A WIN FOR LEONARD'S GRANT RESIDENTS!
It is a happy day for the residents on the West Side of LG. Thank you to everyone who signed the petition and who supported the residents adjacent and nearby to the proposed dog park. Residents are thankful for your support over the past weeks with your messages, emails, signatures and meetings.
Now that it is over please support efforts to encourage the city to build a dog park on Hayden Farm. There is great value in a dog park situated correctly and planned with community support and input.
Recently the LG HOA Board of Directors proposed and is moving forward on a motion enumerated below, to develop a dog park without the support of residents most impacted by the proposal.
The undersigned appeal to the Leonard’s Grant Board of Director’s (LG BOD) to repeal, rescind, or amend the existing motion to exclude all consideration of a dog park or off leash area in the Phase 4 Recreational Area.
The LG BOD is elected to ensure that the governing documents, known as the CCR's (Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Leonard's Grant) are upheld and properly implemented.
The undersigned ask that the Leonard’s Grant Board of Directors rescind the motion to “empower a design committee to develop a plan to for the Athletic Field that includes a dog park” immediately.
The Dog Park Motion as approved by the LG HOA Board on April 5, 2016 3 in favor and 2 opposed:
“The Board is to empower a design committee – that will include a member from the Parks and Rec Committee, to develop a plan for the Athletic Fields that includes a dog park. The plan shall include at a minimum, a budget, design concept drawing, operational needs, planned maintenance costs. That plan will be voted on by the Board –who are responsible for the legal and insurance cost research after a final plan is submitted. The Board can modify and change the plan as they see fit (including removal of the dog park). If the total plan exceeds a budget of $10,000 it will be presented to the HOA membership for a vote on funding no later than June 15, 2016.”
Leonard’s Grant CCRs state:
VII. Use of the Property
1. Protective Covenants
E. Common Areas. Except as otherwise permitted by the provisions of this Declaration, no structure or improvement of any kind shall be erected, placed or maintained on any Common Area except: (i) structures or improvements designed exclusively for community use, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, shelters, benches, chairs or other seating facilities, fences and walls, walkways, roadways, playground equipment, swimming pools and tennis courts, (ii) landscaping, and (iii) drainage, storm water and utility systems and structures. The Common Areas may be graded, and trees, shrubs or other plants may be placed and maintained thereon for the use, comfort and enjoyment of the Owners, or the establishment, retention or preservation of the natural growth or topography of the Common Areas, or for aesthetic reasons. No portion of any Common Area may be used exclusively by any Owner for personal gardens, storage facilities or other private uses. There shall be no use of the Common Areas and landscaped areas except natural recreational uses, which do not injure the Common Areas or the vegetation thereon, increase the maintenance thereof, or cause unreasonable embarrassment, disturbance or annoyance to Owners in the enjoyment of the Common Areas and landscaped areas in the vicinity of their lots.
VII.S Animals. Pets shall not be permitted upon the Common Areas unless accompanied by a responsible person and unless they are carried or leashed…The Board shall have the right to adopt such additional Rules and Regulations regarding pets as it may from time to time consider necessary or appropriate.
III. Property Rights:
1) Members Easement of Enjoyment
“…each owner shall have the non-exclusive right and privilege to use the Common Areas for the purposes for which the same were designed.”
2) Title to Common Areas; Easement for Completion. “The Association shall hold the Common Areas conveyed to it subject to the property rights described herein.”
The undersigned agree that a dog park (or off-leash area) violates Section VII. Use of Property, E & S in the following ways:
1. A dog park is outside the scope of natural recreational use
2. It will cause adverse impacts to the common areas/vegetation and potentially to the adjacent fields where run-off could be a particular problem to soybean farming.
3. It will increase the maintenance of the common areas by increasing insurance and additional vigilance beyond a “natural recreational area”
4. It would cause “disturbance and annoyance” to many of the adjacent owners around East Citation Field in common areas and their own lots.
5. A dog(s) barking is a nuisance that would destroy the right to quiet enjoyment of lot owners.
6. Animals, as cited in VII.S. of the CCRs are not to be off leash on common areas.
7. Although the BOD may adopt additional rules as necessary or appropriate, the BOD may not change, exempt, adapt or modify the rules as written with regard to pets if they are not necessary or appropriate. A dog park is neither necessary nor appropriate and the BOD is not empowered to change the existing regulation of off leash pets.
Additionally, the undersigned agree that a dog park and the dog park exploratory process should not continue for the following reasons:
1. The LG BOD President (who is the only BOD member empowered to appoint committees) empowered the Parks and Recreation Committee to develop, with QBHI, a plan for the Athletic Fields. The draft plan was submitted to the BOD for review in September 2015 and the BOD did not act or provide feedback to the committee.
2. The design, without a dog park, was agreed to by QBHI.
3. When Phase 4 lots were sold by QBH, homeowners adjacent and near to the recreational field area were told it would be a green space and recreational area for families. Homeowners bought property adjacent to the open space based on what could be considered a legal representation of the land use.
4. The recreational field, as represented by QBHI, was presented to the Leonardtown Planning and Zoning Commission and to the City Council for approval. Changes to the land use of the property might require approval by Leonardtown Planning and Zoning and the Town Council. Both these bodies give great weight to feedback from homeowners who surround a land use change request.
5. The dog park concept is not supported by 99% of homeowners within a 2-block area.
6. The dog park concept would require a change of insurance agents for Leonard’s Grant because State Farm doesn’t insure dog parks. The increased liability of a dog park means the liability insurance costs will increase.
7. The entire process for the dog park effort appears to be an end-run around the existing committee process in order to ensure a dog park is included in the planning for the recreational lot. It sends a message that volunteers are not appreciated, devalues the relationship between the BOD and its volunteers and undermines the process established in the LG governing documents.
8. The Leonard’s Grant Articles of Incorporation, Purpose and Powers of the Association say: “…the Association is formed to provide for maintenance, presentation and architectural control of the residential lots and the Association property…and to promote the health, safety and welfare of the residents.” Adjacent residents provided testimony to the BOD that a dog park would not promote health, safety or welfare of surrounding lot owners. Continued consideration of the dog park disregards the requirements of the Leonard's Grant Articles of Incorporation.
The undersigned agree that to ignore and disregard the requirements of Leonard’s Grant’s CCRs, the Board of Directors willfully creates a liability for all homeowners. The proposed dog park will potentially have a negative impact on the value of homes adjacent to the Recreation Area (East Citation Field) with regard to costs, insurance, liability and resale value.
The undersigned agree that the purpose of the Leonard’s Grant Homeowner’s Association is to protect the property value of the neighborhood and the individual lot owners. The undersigned also agree that a dog park could de-value adjacent homes, subsequently lowering all property values. A dog park would also increase liability for all Association members per the advice of State Farm.
The undersigned respectfully request that the Leonard's Grant Board of Directors:
*Rescind the motion to exclude a dog park and move forward with the appropriate committee process as empowered by the Board of Directors to the Leonard's Grant Parks and Recreation Committee.
**Any legal fees spent to justify a dog park should be underwritten by a private fundraising effort and not be paid from the pockets of Association members' funds.
The No Dog Park in Leonard's Grant petition to Leonard's Grant Board of Directors was written by Petition Against a Dog Park in the Leonard’s Grant Athletic Field and is in the category Residential Disputes at GoPetition.