The Hot Springs Village Architectural Control Committee (ACC) met on Thursday, July 7, 2022, at the Coronado Community Center.
Chair, Janet Rowe, said that the Rules and Regulations will be discussed in a future meeting.
Compliance And Permitting Stats
Charles Brown, Director of Compliance & Contract Management, updated the committee on the compliance and permitting statistics. If a complaint is lodged with the department, the originator of the complaint is not disclosed.
Permitting and Inspections Statistics
Inspections completed YTD – 1936
Other Than New Home Permits issued YTD – 1,046
New Homes Under Construction – 105
Compliance Statistics
Compliance Cases Opened YTD – 587 – (2021 YTD there were 311 cases. Brown said this increase in 2022 is attributed to staff observing more issues. The complaint calls are about the same as they were a year ago.)
Issues Brought to the Committee by Guests (Not on Agenda)
55 Toledo Drive – Boat dock – This item was not on the agenda. This is a new home and the Property Owner is investigating what kind of boat docks will be acceptable to the ACC and POA. He wants a dock for three boats and doesn’t want a floating dock. Two of the dock slips will be covered and have lifts. His third boat is an unconventional sailboat. It is not recommended to leave the sailboat in the water for storage. He also wants to leave the sailboat rigged, and this presents a problem for him. To be able to lift the rig, it has to have a cover. If it does not have a cover and he wants to lift it, 8-inch pilings need to be driven. He is unable to find anyone willing to drive the 8-inch pile.
The Property Owner is trying to determine what the ACC will find acceptable before he submits an actual plan. The Chair asked the Property Owner to email his diagrams to the committee.
7 San Vicente Place (I am unsure if this is the correct address.) – This item was not on the agenda this week, but a permit was previously approved by the ACC, contingent on approval from the Lakes Manager. The previous Lakes Manager came out to the property three times but did not approve the dock due to a concern about the ability to dredge the area. This issue is now under the authority of the new Superintendent of Lakes, Todd Noles. Brown said they can recycle the application through Noles.
The following item was not on the agenda. A Property Owner who was/is a home builder and is new to the Village was concerned about the standards of the ACC/POA. He felt there was an issue with the paint color allowed on a new build on his street. He also had some issues with the home builder. He said, “To me, Architectural Control means you are doing what will make everything look esthetically pleasing. Everybody will be happy – try to make everybody happy. I think the breakdown for us was between the builder and the neighborhood.”
The Property Owner continued, “We don’t blame the homeowner. We blame the process of building.” He said to eliminate some complaints when someone applies for a permit, everything should be locked down including the color, roof, style, etc. The plans should fit the neighborhood. He lives on a golf course and feels he is seeing homes that don’t reflect the golf course environment.
He stated, “Our street was a warzone {during the time homes were being built]. Gravel in the street was not cleaned up and dumpsters were left partially in the street.
He also said sometimes roadbase gravel is used for landscaping.
He asked the ACC to think more deeply about what is approved for a builder.
Tucker Omohundro said, “We don’t have the authority to tell people too much what they can and can’t do.”
The Property Owner said, “Every community I have lived in across the country, the ACC tells you what you can and can’t do. You are saying you can’t. I understand if the rules are not already there, you can’t tell them different. But if the rules change and now you are required, that is just an architectural control. I have built in communities all across this country and I am never dismayed because that is what I have to build.”
Omohundro said the difference between where the Property Owner built homes, and there was a small number of lots (compared to HSV) that were built out in a relatively short time. That is not the situation in the Village.
Rowe said we are not the standard HOA/POA. We are an eclectic Village, not a cookie-cutter community.
The Property Owner said that because the lots here are so inexpensive, he is concerned there will be people buying lots and building to a minimum standard.
Permits Approved by the Committee
8 Valls Lane – Extend driveway – There is a question as to whether this is an asphalt overlay (which would be considered maintenance) or an overlay plus an extension of the existing asphalt driveway.
Committee Member, Larry Brocaw, said that this issue consists of a driveway overlay of asphalt. “This is basically maintenance,” said Brokaw. The contractor said a permit was not needed because it is a maintenance job.
Brocaw said that at one time it was asphalt and part of this became damaged, which led to Compliance thinking this was an extension of the original asphalt driveway.
The Property Owner attended the meeting and said, “It is an overlay and we did what was (already} there. We were told by the asphalt company and that they do more [of these types of jobs in the Village] and that no one else ever got a permit for an overlay.”
The Compliance Department determined part of the driveway was not previously asphalted but was graveled, which made a permit necessary. A fine was issued because the Property Owner did not obtain a permit. Brown said, “From the position that I saw in the file was that the Compliance staff determined it was a graveled area.” Compliance researched this by using GIS images from a few years ago.
The Committee said the parking area would have been approved if it had been brought before the Architectural Control Committee.
In addition to the driveway issue, the Property Owner said she received two letters from Compliance. Both were for different addresses. She wanted a letter from Compliance stating she was not responsible for the two properties she did not own. Compliance would not give her the letter. The Property Owner said her neighbors are complaining because the Compliance Department drives by every day now. “We pay our dues and do everything everybody else does.” The Property Owner stated that neighbors take care of their homes and the homes are nice.
Board Director and Committee Liaison, Tucker Omohundro, said it is a moot point at this time. Omohundro stated, “They are not going to fine you for a property that you don’t own.” The property Owner said she wants the letter for her file, regardless.
Omohundro told the Property Owner that the POA is not out to get her.
Charles Brown said they could not find evidence of a permit ever being requested or issued. In regards to the two letters, he said there was an address error and POA cannot fine the Property Owner for a property that she does not own. The ACC approved the driveway.
75 Alicante Way – Front yard underground storm shelter – The shelter will be surrounded by an earthen berm with plantings. There will be brickwork on top so it looks like a patio. Cannot see it from the street. – Approved
8 Oporto Place – Shed – Replacing an existing shed. Approved to be built in the same location as the existing shed. Rowe will suggest to the Property Owners that they put up evergreens to camouflage the shed.
19 Ola Way – Containment fence in the front yard. This is temporary until construction in the back of the house is finished. Approved temporarily until August 15.
11 Narvaez Way – Dock – Plans to move the neighbor’s boat dock to their property. Approved
20 Alava Lane – Landscaping – retainer wall at the back of the house. The current wall is collapsing. – Approved
2 Coronado Lane – Above ground pool /deck – redoing deck. The pool will abut the deck. There will be lattice work on the sides of the pool. – Approved
16 Alava Lane – Siding – Switching from T-111 beige siding to gray vinyl siding and painting front door. – Approved
13 Vilafranca Lane – Add new deck and replace steps on existing deck – Approved
56 S. Pego Way – Stone veneer front – Approved
9 Ona Lane – Metal Roof – already installed – This is a compliance issue.
19 Castillo Lane – Carport enclosure – Approved
21 Aracena Lane – Closing in screened porch – Approved
12 Lanza Court – Spa – Approved
8 Almonte Way – Gravel parking – The Property Owners are parking on both sides of the house, which is something the previous owner did. ACC approved parking on the garage (left) side of house, next to the to driveway only. Parking is not approved on the right side. The parking issue on the right side was turned over to the Compliance Department.
68 Sierra Drive – Parking – This is a resubmit. Originally was denied on 4/21/22. – Parking on the right side of the driveway is Approved.
22 Daganza Place – Swim Dock – Approved
40 Arjona Way – Roof – Will be taken care of in Permitting.
10 Sorolla Lane – Fence – Approved
37 Mesero Way – Landscaping – More documents (images) needed.
16 Paraiso Lane – Garage Addition – Approved
6 Maravilla Way – Landscaping – New construction – Approved – This case was forwarded to Compliance for an early start before approval.
77 Alteza Drive – Garage addition – Approved
3 Loma Way – Fence around an inground pool – Approved
12 Otera Lane – Landscaping – Approved
3 Ideal Lane – Landscaping – Approved
26 Jornada Circle – Fence – Approved ACC will recommend the fence goes to the property line.
17 Vigoros Lane – Storage Shed – Approved
3 Fabulosa Lane – Deck – Approved
10 Ponce De Leon Lane – Shed – Approved
7 Adoracion Point – Dock – Approved
5 Sosegado Way – Fence – Approved
3 Levantino Lane – Swim Dock – Approved as long as 20 feet off of lot line.
Permits Denied by the Committee
49 Greco Way – Containment Fence in Front Yard – This pre-existing fence was not permitted. The ACC denied the fence and recommended the fence be moved to the side yard.
13 Petrel Way – Parking – Property Owner owns two lots. He lives at 11 Petrel Way, but parks at 13 Petrel Way. He cut down trees and made a gravel drive at 13 Petrel Way. The neighbors complained so the Property Owner went to the POA and paid $150 (fine). Paying the $150 does not allow him to do this. – Denied
127 Pizarro Drive – Garage – The homeowner has not decided if he wants a Toughshed or a garage. He needs to decide before approval is given. More information is needed before ACC makes a decision. Denied Resubmit with more information.
Chair Rowe received an Email from Keith Keck
Keck wrote: “Central Region Central Plan has been working on a Uniform Development Code for all of the small cities in the four counties around Little Rock. The document is approaching completion and as the HSV Rep on the Metro Plan Board, I would like to talk to the ACC about the document. The document is truly geared to the many small cities that struggle with development code. However, there are several parts that may be of interest to HSV. Let me know when the ACC might be available.”
Chair Rowe will respond back to Keith Keck and tell him he is welcome to come to the next meeting. If that is not acceptable, Janet will work with him on scheduling an alternate date for him. She will also ask how much time he needs.
Report by Cheryl Dowden
