Proposed ARC Guideline Changes

A. Review process & enforcement 8 changes

The structural fixes. Until these change, tightening individual standards has limited effect, because the document currently authorizes inconsistency in writing.

Decide like projects alike

Letter of Introduction (p. 1); Process Step 4(d) (p. 2)

The root cause of inconsistency complaints: the document states that identical projects may be decided differently and that no prior approval constrains the committee.

Current

"All decisions are made on a case-by-case basis with consideration to the individual lot and its impact on neighbors and overall community appearance. Approval of a similar project in the neighborhood does not guarantee approval of all similar projects." … "No previously approved installation shall constitute establishing a precedent for approval."

Proposed

"Applications are decided by applying the written criteria in these Guidelines. Where a proposed project meets the same criteria as a project previously approved in the community, it will be approved on the same basis unless the written decision identifies a specific site condition (such as drainage, setback, or easement) that makes the projects materially different. Site-specific differences must be stated in the written decision; unstated differences may not be the basis for a different result."

Written reasons for every denial

Process Steps 4(b)–(c) (p. 2)

The ARC must communicate a decision but never has to say why or cite the rule a project violated. Without reasons, denials cannot be meaningfully appealed and inconsistency stays invisible.

Current

"The ARC will notify the management company of their decision. The management company will inform the homeowner, via written correspondence (postal mail or e-mail), of the ARC's decision."

Proposed (add to Step 4(c))

"A denial or conditional approval must be in writing and must (i) cite the specific section(s) of these Guidelines the application did not meet, (ii) explain how the project fell short of each cited section, and (iii) state what changes would make the project approvable."

A real 60-day obligation

Process Step 4(d) (p. 2)

"Up to 60 days" sets a ceiling with no duty to actually decide, and no notice if the application is incomplete.

Current

"Approval process will take up to 60 days for processing and receipt of permission of changes."

Proposed

"The ARC will issue its written decision, with the reasons required above, within 60 calendar days after the management company receives a complete application. If an application is incomplete, the homeowner will be notified in writing within 10 business days of what is missing."

Covenant constraintthe recorded Declaration provides that an application not approved within 60 days is deemed denied. Flipping that default to "deemed approved" requires a Declaration amendment (75% owner vote), not a Guidelines edit. This proposal works within the existing default by obligating a reasoned, on-time decision.

Don't let repairs trigger new rules

Process Step 4(e) (p. 2)

"Reconstruction" is undefined, so ordinary repair of a previously approved structure can be forced to meet newer, stricter rules.

Current

"In the event of deterioration or repairs that result in reconstruction or entire replacement of a structure, such reconstruction or replacement must conform to the most current specifications as outlined in this document."

Proposed

"Repair or in-kind replacement of an existing, previously approved structure may be made to the structure's original approved specifications. Conformance to current specifications is required only for a rebuild that increases the structure's footprint or height or changes its use."

Keep the 90-day rule, drop the aesthetic catch-all

Process Step 5 (p. 2)

"Detract from the overall appearance and peace of the neighborhood" can be applied to almost anything. The 90-day definition that follows it is exactly the kind of objective standard the rest of the document needs.

Current

"Homeowners are required to complete the project as approved in a reasonable amount of time such that the construction does not detract from the overall appearance and peace of the neighborhood. Reasonable period of time shall be defined as 90 days from the start of the project."

Proposed

"Homeowners must complete approved projects within 90 days of the start of work. A variance may be requested for weather or other delays beyond the homeowner's control. During construction, the debris and site-maintenance requirements of Step 6 apply." (Keeps the existing 90-day rule and variance; removes the separate, undefined aesthetic standard.)

Spell out the statutory fine process

Process Step 3 (p. 2); application footer (p. 16)Law

No fine amount, no hearing description, and no mention of the protections every NC homeowner already has by statute.

Current

"Failure to adhere to these standards will result in a hearing and fines."

Proposed

"Enforcement follows N.C. Gen. Stat. § 47F-3-107.1. Before any fine is imposed, the homeowner receives written notice of the specific alleged violation and a hearing before the Board or an adjudicatory panel of association members who are not officers or Board members. The homeowner may be heard and present evidence, and will receive the decision in writing. Fines may not exceed $100 per violation, or $100 per day for a continuing violation beginning more than five days after the decision. A panel decision may be appealed to the full Board within 15 days."

Legal basisrestates N.C. Gen. Stat. § 47F-3-107.1 (enacted 1997, last amended 2005), the version currently in force.

A functioning appeals process

Section II, Appeals Process (p. 2)

The entire current appeals process is two sentences: no deadline to appeal, no deadline to rule, no independent decision-maker, no right to be heard.

Current

"To appeal a declined application, you must submit a written response to the Board of Directors, via the management company. The response must include specific detailed information that clarifies why the application should be reconsidered."

Proposed

"A homeowner may appeal a denial or conditional approval to the Board within 30 calendar days of the written decision. Board members who participated in the original decision do not vote on the appeal. The homeowner may present the appeal in writing and, on request, in person. The Board will issue a written decision within 30 calendar days, citing the specific Guideline sections relied on."

Define what a neighbor objection does

Application form, Neighbor's Notification (p. 15)

The form requires neighbor notification and an objection window but never says what an objection does, so it can decide one application and be ignored on the next.

Current

"Please note that if Neighbor has any concerns about proposed project, objections must be expressed in writing and sent to architectureadmin@hrw.net within 5 business days of notification."

Proposed

"A neighbor may object in writing within 5 business days of notification. An objection that identifies a specific impact governed by these Guidelines (for example drainage, setbacks, screening, or the view standard in Section III.A) must be addressed in the written decision. An objection based only on personal taste is advisory and is not, by itself, grounds for denial."

B. Landscaping & yard 12 changes

Section III of the Guidelines. The enumerated requirements (edging, mulching, setbacks) are already objective and stay as written. These edits target the subjective standards layered on top of them.

Close the open-ended approval trigger

III.A, Approval Required (p. 3)

"But not be limited to" means a homeowner can never know whether a project needs approval, and the ARC can later declare nearly any change "major."

Current

"Approval is required for major landscaping modifications. A major modification shall include, but not be limited to, one or more of the following criteria: …"

Proposed

"Approval is required only for the following landscaping modifications (this list is complete): [existing items 1–6]. A landscaping change not listed here does not require approval."

Stop measuring yards against the common areas

III.A, Guidelines (p. 3)

Comparing every lot to professionally maintained entrance landscaping is a moving, subjective, unusually high bar. The objective checklist that follows (items 1–7) is sufficient on its own.

Current

"It is a responsibility of all homeowners to maintain their entire property landscape in a way that does not detract from the overall aesthetics of the Community. Homeowners' compliance of this guideline will be based on their properties appearance and how consistent it is with the appearance of the neighborhood's common areas (currently, the front entrance, Brighton Forest Drive, and traffic circle areas)."

Proposed

"Compliance with this section is determined by the specific requirements listed below (items 1–7). The professionally maintained common areas are not the standard against which individual lots are measured."

Define "clean look" and "stray limbs"

III.A, Guidelines item 4 (p. 3)

"Clean look" is whatever the inspector thinks it is, and the naturalized-theme sentence is grammatically ambiguous about what must be trimmed.

Current

"Hedging of all screening bushes to provide a clean look (front and back yards) in the case of a naturalized theme stray limbs and branches must still be kept trimmed"

Proposed

"Screening bushes must be kept trimmed and neat (front and back yards). In naturalized areas, stray limbs and branches must still be kept trimmed."

Make the view standard measurable

III.A, criterion 4 (p. 3)

"Significantly" and "potentially will" are both undefined. Almost any change potentially affects a view. This protects neither the applicant nor the neighbor.

Current

"Changes that will or potentially will significantly obstruct a neighbor's view"

Proposed

"Changes that would place a structure or vegetation exceeding [6] feet in height within [15] feet of an adjoining lot line. Review under this criterion is not required where the adjoining owner consents to the change in writing."

Decision neededthe community must pick the height and distance numbers. If the Association will not commit to numbers, this criterion should be deleted as unenforceable rather than left subjective.

Replace the "beauty of the Properties" veto on tree removal

III.A, criteria 5–6 (p. 3)

The section already requires an arborist's report: an objective, expert standard. The subjective "beauty" exception can override it.

Current

"Approval for the removal of trees located within 10 feet of the approved site for such building will be granted unless such removal will substantially decrease the beauty of the Properties."

Proposed

"Removal of a tree with a trunk diameter of 6 inches or more (measured 2 feet above the ground) requires approval. Approval will be granted where the application includes a report from a licensed arborist or comparable credentialed expert stating that the tree is dead, diseased, structurally hazardous, or otherwise warrants removal. Trees within 10 feet of an approved building site will be approved for removal. Damaged-tree removals may be approved by unanimous ARC vote without a report where the need is apparent, as currently provided. Removal requests not supported by such a report may still be approved by the ARC, with the reasons documented in the written decision."

Keeps review mandatory and does not expand the right to remove trees. It replaces the subjective exception with the expert standard the section already uses.

Define the "temporary" street-border variance

III.A, street bordering (p. 4)

"Temporary" has no length and "when construction is complete" has no removal deadline.

Current

"Temporary variances may be approved where active construction is occurring. However, if approved, material must be removed when construction is complete on your street."

Proposed

"A variance is valid for the construction period stated in the written approval. Bordering material must be removed within 14 days after construction on the street is complete."

Flags and political signs: objective terms, statutory floor

III.B, Signs items 4 & Flags (pp. 4–5)Law

"Offensive" and "large" are undefined, and the political-sign window must respect the statutory minimum.

Current

"Flags displaying offensive or abusive language or images are NOT permitted" … "Large flag poles in the yard require written approval" … "Political campaign signs (placing signs is limited to 4 weeks prior to the start of early voting)"

Proposed

"Flags containing obscene images or profanity are not permitted. Freestanding flag poles taller than [20] feet require written approval; flags attached to house-mounted holders or wire frames do not. Political signs follow N.C. Gen. Stat. § 47F-3-121: they may not be prohibited from 45 days before an election through 7 days after it, and at least one sign up to 24 × 24 inches must be permitted."

Legal basisN.C. Gen. Stat. § 47F-3-121 also protects display of United States and North Carolina flags up to 4' × 6' displayed per patriotic customs. The flag rules must be read subject to that statute.

Define water-feature maintenance and screening

III.B, Water Features (p. 5)

"Properly maintained" and "appropriate screening" leave both standards entirely to the reviewer.

Current

"Any water feature (e.g. fishponds, fountains, etc.) must be placed between the rear lot lines of the house, be properly maintained, and have appropriate screening."

Proposed

"Any water feature must be placed between the rear lot lines of the house, kept operational and not allowed to become stagnant, and screened from view as the current rule already requires."

An objective light-trespass rule

III.B, Lighting item 4(f) (p. 5)

"Every effort," "adversely affect," and "deemed to infringe" are subjective, and the text never says who decides.

Current

"Every effort should be made not to disturb or adversely affect the overall appearance of the Community or neighbor(s) with the installation and operation of flood lights, security lights, or string lighting. Flood lights, security lights or string lighting deemed to infringe on this statute are subject to removal or relocation."

Proposed

"Flood, security, and string lighting must be aimed or shielded so the light source does not shine directly across a lot line into a neighbor's window. Upon written complaint from an affected resident, the ARC will issue written notice identifying the specific fixture and the affected lot; the fixture must be re-aimed, shielded, or relocated within 30 days of that notice."

B10

Patio location and landscaping by rule, not by mood

III.C, items 1 & 3 (p. 5)

"Consideration will be given" appears twice with no criteria for what tips the consideration either way.

Current

"Consideration will be given to the need of landscape with the patio as part of the approval process." … "Patios should be located behind the house, but consideration will be given on a case-by-case basis depending on the lot location and the purpose of the patio."

Proposed

"Patios located behind the house and meeting the material requirements above will be approved. A side-yard patio screened from the street by vegetation or fencing will also be approved; other locations may be approved on application. As a condition of approval, the ARC may require foundation plantings along a patio edge visible from the street; landscaping may not be required otherwise."

B11

Pergola lumber and the missing color palette

III.C, item 2 (p. 5)

"Suitable outdoor lumber" is undefined, and the "Community color palette/scheme" is cited as binding throughout the document but never defined or attached anywhere.

Current

"Pergolas and screens must be constructed using suitable outdoor lumber (plastic is prohibited). They should be stained to match the Community color palette/scheme."

Proposed

"Pergolas and screens must be constructed of pressure-treated or naturally rot-resistant lumber, or composite lumber of the type permitted for decks (vinyl/all-plastic products are prohibited), and finished in a natural wood tone or a color from the approved palette attached as Exhibit [A]."

Action itemthe Association must actually create and attach the palette. Until it exists, every palette-based restriction in this document is unenforceable in practice.

B12

Garden stake storage

III.D, Vegetable Garden Plots (p. 6)

"Does not distract from the overall appearance of the neighborhood" is another aesthetic catch-all.

Current

"All stakes and any other structural additions must be removed and stored in a manner that does not distract from the overall appearance of the neighborhood."

Proposed

"All stakes and other structural additions must be removed and stored; storage indoors, in the rear yard, or otherwise out of view from the street satisfies this requirement."

C. Structures 9 changes

Section IV. The pattern repeated below: replace "case-by-case" and "consideration will be given" with a default approval subject to stated, checkable conditions.

Addition appearance: point to the objective requirements

IV.A, item 5 (p. 7)

"Consistent with the original design" duplicates (vaguely) what items 7 and 8 already require objectively.

Current

"Appearance consistent with the original design of the house"

Proposed

"Siding material, trim, doors, windows, roof coverings, and exterior colors must match the existing house, using the same building materials (as items 7 and 8 already require)."

Storage building location and screening

IV.A, items 9 & 11 (p. 7)

"Case-by-case basis depending on the lot's location" and "appears to be too close to an adjacent neighbor" are unverifiable; the 8-foot setback in the same section already answers the proximity question.

Current

"The storage building should be located on the rear portion of the lot, but consideration will be given on a case-by-case basis depending on the lot's location." … "If it is a situation where it will still be seen from the street or appears to be too close to an adjacent neighbor, as a condition of approval the resident should plant large shrubs that shall be a minimum of 50% of the building height in areas where screening is needed."

Proposed

"Storage buildings must be at least 8 feet from any lot line. A location behind the house will be approved; a side-yard location will be approved with screening; other locations may be approved on application. As a condition of approval, the ARC may require shrubs reaching at least 50% of the building height along side(s) visible from the street; screening may not be required otherwise."

Skylights and attic fans: approve on stated criteria

IV.C (p. 8)

"Case-by-case" with "overall aesthetics" as the only guidance is, functionally, no standard at all.

Current

"There are no predetermined styles for skylights and attic fans. All skylights and attic fans will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Consideration will be given to the overall ascetics of the unit and the overall appearance of the neighborhood."

Proposed

"Skylights and attic fans will be approved if they are (i) flush-mounted or low-profile and (ii) match or complement the roof color. Units not meeting these criteria may be approved on application."

Decks: stain, under-deck landscaping, location, views

IV.D (p. 8)

Four vague standards in one section: "compatible with the general scheme," "consideration… to the need of landscaping," "case-by-case" location, and view obstruction "considered" with no criteria.

Current

"…sealed with a natural color sealant or stain compatible with the general scheme of the neighborhood." … "Consideration will be given to the need of landscaping underneath or around the deck." … "Decks should be located behind the house, but consideration will be given on a case-by-case basis depending on the lots location and the purpose of the deck. Obstruction of views or breezeways of adjoining properties will be considered in the approval process."

Proposed

"Decks must be sealed with a natural wood-tone sealant or a stain from the approved palette (Exhibit [A]). The ARC may require skirting or foundation plantings only where the area under the deck exceeds 4 feet in height and is visible from the street. Decks behind the house will be approved; a side location will be approved if screened from the street; other locations may be approved on application. View impacts are evaluated under the measurable standard in Section III.A [see B4], not as an unwritten criterion."

Fence height exception and stain

IV.E, items 3–4 (p. 9)

"Unsightly conditions" on adjoining land is in the eye of the beholder; "compatible with the general scheme" is undefined. The rest of the fence section is already commendably objective.

Current

"Exceptions may be made along the back of property lines where unsightly conditions exist on an adjoining piece of property that is not a part of the neighborhood." … "Fences must be made of treated wood and sealed with a natural color sealant or stain compatible with the general scheme of the neighborhood."

Proposed

"Along a rear property line adjoining a parcel outside the community, a fence of up to [6] feet will be approved where the parcel is used for non-residential purposes or contains commercial, agricultural, or utility structures, or where other adverse conditions on the adjoining parcel are documented in the written approval. Fences must be sealed with a natural wood-tone sealant or a stain from the approved palette (Exhibit [A])."

Play structures: define materials, colors, and location

IV.F (p. 10)

"Natural materials," "earth tone colors, blending with natural surroundings," and "when possible… out of view of any street" are all judgment calls.

Current

"Play sets must be constructed from natural materials. Slides and other play pieces must be of earth tone colors, blending with natural surroundings." … "When possible, play sets should be installed out of view of any street."

Proposed

"Play structures must be constructed from natural materials. Slides and other play pieces must be earth-tone colors (such as brown, tan, or green) that blend with the surroundings. A play structure installed in the rear of the house and at least 8 feet from the property lines (as already required) satisfies the location requirement; no separate ‘out of view’ standard applies."

Roofing: a permitted list instead of case-by-case

IV.J (p. 11)Law

The named materials are reviewed "case-by-case" with no criteria, and "immediately" is an unrealistic repair deadline no one can enforce evenly.

Current

"Roofing materials including specialized asphalt shingles, solar tiles, copper, and metal will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Visual damage to roofs must be repaired immediately."

Proposed

"Architectural asphalt shingles, solar tiles, copper, and metal roofing in black, gray, brown, or other neutral tones will be approved. Other materials or colors may be approved on application. Visible roof damage must be repaired within 90 days."

Legal basissolar tiles are solar collectors under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-20. A case-by-case denial that has the effect of prohibiting them is void and unenforceable.

Driveway repair: use the document's own deadline

IV.K (p. 11)

"A reasonable period of time" is undefined here even though the document defines it as 90 days elsewhere.

Current

"Cracked or raised driveways and broken surfaces should be repaired within a reasonable period of time."

Proposed

"Cracked or raised driveways and broken surfaces must be repaired within 90 days of written notice."

Parking pads: checkable conditions

IV.L (pp. 11–12)

"Case-by-case," an undefined "beautification plan," and "should be immediate" give the reviewer three open-ended levers.

Current

"Parking pads will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Approval of the addition of a parking pad requires submission of a beautification plan. The beautification/landscape should be immediate."

Proposed

"A parking pad will be approved if it (i) matches the material of the driveway it attaches to, (ii) if concrete, has framed edges and is tied to the existing driveway, and (iii) meets Fuquay-Varina town codes. As a condition of approval, the ARC may require a planting plan screening edges visible from the street; any required landscaping must be installed within 30 days after the pad is completed."

D. General standards & legal compliance 5 changes

Section V plus the two provisions where current text likely conflicts with state or federal law. Legal-conformance edits do not need a covenant amendment. Superior law already overrides conflicting rules, and the Guidelines are simply being corrected to match.

Define "temporary" commercial-vehicle approval

V.A, item 4 (p. 13)

"Temporary" has no length, so the same request can get a week for one resident and a season for another.

Current

"Permanently parking commercially licensed vehicles, trucks, and tractors is prohibited … Approval may be granted on a temporary basis."

Proposed

"Approval may be granted for a stated period of up to [30] days, identified in the written approval."

Paint colors: attach the palette, fix the contradiction

V.B, Painting (p. 13)

The binding "Community color palette/scheme" does not exist as a document, and "Bright colors (pastels, pink, etc.)" is self-contradictory (pastels are by definition muted), and the "etc." makes the prohibited set unknowable.

Current

"Colors should be consistent with the Community color palette/scheme. Bright colors (pastels, pink, etc.) are not permitted."

Proposed

"The approved color palette is attached as Exhibit [A]. Any color in the palette is permitted. A color outside the palette will be approved unless it is demonstrably inconsistent with the palette, and the written decision must identify the inconsistency. Fluorescent and neon finishes are prohibited."

Pet houses: one rule for all animal houses

V.C (p. 14)

"Whichever is least conspicuous" is a judgment call, and "case-by-case" review of other animal houses invites unequal treatment of identical structures.

Current

"Pet houses must be located in the back yard or side yard (whichever is least conspicuous). … Other animal houses will be approved on a case-by-case basis."

Proposed

"Pet houses must be located in the back yard or side yard. Doghouses may be no larger than 4' × 4' and no taller than 4'. Other animal houses meeting the same size and location standards will be approved; larger animal houses may be approved on application. Dog runs and metal or chain-link pens remain prohibited."

Solar collectors: conform to NC solar-access law

IV.N (p. 12)Law

"As inconspicuously as possible," "least public exposure," and "may require completely encasing the collectors" can each reduce output or block a viable installation, which state law prohibits.

Current

"Solar collectors must be installed as inconspicuously as possible. Whenever possible, collectors should be placed on the rear of the home or on the side that has the least public exposure. Collectors must be attached to the roof, not free standing or ground mounted." … "Every effort must be taken to camouflage the plumbing and supports of the collectors, which may require completely encasing the collectors."

Proposed

"Solar collectors are permitted. Consistent with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-20, the Association may regulate placement and screening only where doing so does not prevent reasonable use of the collector, including its energy output. The homeowner may install collectors in the location that provides effective solar access, including a street-facing roof plane where needed for performance. Screening or encasement that would reduce output or materially increase cost may be requested but not required. Metal parts should be painted to match the roof where this does not affect performance. Tree removal to increase solar exposure remains prohibited."

Legal basisN.C. Gen. Stat. § 22B-20 voids any covenant or rule that prohibits, or has the effect of prohibiting, solar collectors. In Belmont Association v. Farwig (N.C. 2022), the state Supreme Court held that denying street-facing panels under general aesthetic discretion is void; the statute's narrow exception for street-visible placement applies only where the recorded covenants expressly prohibit it, and Brighton Forest's covenants contain no such express prohibition. Under § 22B-20(e), a court may award costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party in a suit under this statute.

Antennas and satellite dishes: conform to the FCC OTARD rule

V.D (p. 14)Law

The 36" approval threshold is below the federal one-meter line, and the mandatory screening and roof-placement rules are preempted wherever they impair installation or signal reception.

Current

"Installation of an antenna requires submission and written approval. No approval is required providing the Satellite Dishes are less than 36" in diameter." … "Satellite dishes installed at ground level (including supportive wiring) must be screened so the satellite dish is not visible from any street or neighboring property as viewed from ground level." … "The satellite dish must be installed on the portion of the roof not facing the street directly in front of the home…"

Proposed

"Satellite dishes one meter (39.4") or less in diameter, and television broadcast antennas, are governed by the FCC Over-the-Air Reception Devices rule (47 C.F.R. § 1.4000) and do not require prior approval when installed in an area within the homeowner's exclusive use or control. The device may be placed where needed to receive an acceptable-quality signal. The Association may request, but not require, alternative placement or screening where it would not impair reception, increase cost, or delay installation. Devices larger than one meter, and installations on common areas, require approval."

Legal basis47 C.F.R. § 1.4000 preempts HOA prior-approval requirements and placement/screening rules for covered devices wherever they unreasonably delay installation, increase cost, or impair reception. The Association bears the burden of proving any restriction valid.

← Back to home