Potomac Yard (Alexandria) HOA — Issues?

[Anonymous]

Gary Bockweg
Author

·
Potomac Yard
Pete, the legal findings you're citing are all based on specific declarations and concessions, and on facts that are very different from the situation on Van Valkenburgh. So they don't add up to a convincing argument that a court would find that the homes without garages must give up their assigned parking spaces.

What they do show is that actions leading to litigation could cost the community hundreds of thousands of dollars. Money out of our pockets. Even worse, if an effort to eliminate the assigned spaces should somehow manage to prevail, all of our home values would decline. Money out of our net worth. As an owner of an un-garaged home, I'm quite aware of my stake in this issue. Owners of garaged homes may be less aware that they too have a financial stake. Their home values would decline along with the un-garaged homes if assigned spaces are eliminated. And, of course, they would have to pay their portion of the legal fees.

Other than comments from one contentious board member, I haven't heard any complaints about assigned spaces from anyone who lives in the area. Do you have a stake in this? Or are you just pursuing it as an academic exercise? If you do have a stake, you should consider what is truly in your best financial interest before urging action that will lead to massive legal fees.

[Anonymous]

Lmao. No idea why Bockweg thought how a HOA common could area could turn inrto personal parking spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh dezr God. The "general public". Would the HOA have to sanitze the spots after their use by commoners?

Probably, yes! Actually, it's a private street, so the unwashed masses cannot park there. Just the HOA members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gary Bockweg
Author

·
Potomac Yard
Pete, the legal findings you're citing are all based on specific declarations and concessions, and on facts that are very different from the situation on Van Valkenburgh. So they don't add up to a convincing argument that a court would find that the homes without garages must give up their assigned parking spaces.

What they do show is that actions leading to litigation could cost the community hundreds of thousands of dollars. Money out of our pockets. Even worse, if an effort to eliminate the assigned spaces should somehow manage to prevail, all of our home values would decline. Money out of our net worth. As an owner of an un-garaged home, I'm quite aware of my stake in this issue. Owners of garaged homes may be less aware that they too have a financial stake. Their home values would decline along with the un-garaged homes if assigned spaces are eliminated. And, of course, they would have to pay their portion of the legal fees.

Other than comments from one contentious board member, I haven't heard any complaints about assigned spaces from anyone who lives in the area. Do you have a stake in this? Or are you just pursuing it as an academic exercise? If you do have a stake, you should consider what is truly in your best financial interest before urging action that will lead to massive legal fees.

The HOA's attorney costs would be covered by liability insurance. It does not come out of members' pockets. And it's more likely that the property values of the townhomes with driveways/garages would increase because there would be less homes available with parking. That's simple economics. The purpose of building a certain number of homes without parking is provide some less-expensive housing in a nice area and encourage use of public transportation. Assigning parking spaces to such properties frustrates their purpose of affordable housing in a desirable neighborhood. The HOA should be ashamed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gary Bockweg
Author

·
Potomac Yard
Pete, the legal findings you're citing are all based on specific declarations and concessions, and on facts that are very different from the situation on Van Valkenburgh. So they don't add up to a convincing argument that a court would find that the homes without garages must give up their assigned parking spaces.

What they do show is that actions leading to litigation could cost the community hundreds of thousands of dollars. Money out of our pockets. Even worse, if an effort to eliminate the assigned spaces should somehow manage to prevail, all of our home values would decline. Money out of our net worth. As an owner of an un-garaged home, I'm quite aware of my stake in this issue. Owners of garaged homes may be less aware that they too have a financial stake. Their home values would decline along with the un-garaged homes if assigned spaces are eliminated. And, of course, they would have to pay their portion of the legal fees.

Other than comments from one contentious board member, I haven't heard any complaints about assigned spaces from anyone who lives in the area. Do you have a stake in this? Or are you just pursuing it as an academic exercise? If you do have a stake, you should consider what is truly in your best financial interest before urging action that will lead to massive legal fees.

The HOA's attorney costs would be covered by liability insurance. It does not come out of members' pockets. And it's more likely that the property values of the townhomes with driveways/garages would increase because there would be less homes available with parking. That's simple economics. The purpose of building a certain number of homes without parking is provide some less-expensive housing in a nice area and encourage use of public transportation. Assigning parking spaces to such properties frustrates their purpose of affordable housing in a desirable neighborhood. The HOA should be ashamed.

Having neighbors who prevent others from using common areas, particularly under the threat of having vehicles towed, negatively impacts our home environment and overall community harmony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gary Bockweg
Author

·
Potomac Yard
Pete, the legal findings you're citing are all based on specific declarations and concessions, and on facts that are very different from the situation on Van Valkenburgh. So they don't add up to a convincing argument that a court would find that the homes without garages must give up their assigned parking spaces.

What they do show is that actions leading to litigation could cost the community hundreds of thousands of dollars. Money out of our pockets. Even worse, if an effort to eliminate the assigned spaces should somehow manage to prevail, all of our home values would decline. Money out of our net worth. As an owner of an un-garaged home, I'm quite aware of my stake in this issue. Owners of garaged homes may be less aware that they too have a financial stake. Their home values would decline along with the un-garaged homes if assigned spaces are eliminated. And, of course, they would have to pay their portion of the legal fees.

Other than comments from one contentious board member, I haven't heard any complaints about assigned spaces from anyone who lives in the area. Do you have a stake in this? Or are you just pursuing it as an academic exercise? If you do have a stake, you should consider what is truly in your best financial interest before urging action that will lead to massive legal fees.

My home value will increase once I can park in front of my house without the threat of being towed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why won’t Francis post the pleadings here? Nobody is going to go to the courthouse to make copies.

Please upload to Dropbox or something and provide the link.

I get the impression that Francis is embarrassed of his complaint and the response.

Why don't you act like a responsible adult and participate in a conversation instead of the stupid rambling you keep contributing. Grow up and help fix the problems in this hoa. Also be an adult and name yourself since you so want to dox "Frank".

Also don't accuse me of being Frank. I don't live anywhere near you but know a lot more than you do about HOA rules and responsibilities and Va laws related to HOAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only way this ends is the spots become open to all. Until that happens, the HOA will just continue to bleed funds. Wild that they aren't being counseled properly.

I could see the HOA turning around and suing First Service.

m

If I lived there I would sue the Board members. They are responsible for not following bylaws. They can't just do whatever they want to do. What a dumpster fire. I would assume their idiocy would affect negatively impact property values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way this ends is the spots become open to all. Until that happens, the HOA will just continue to bleed funds. Wild that they aren't being counseled properly.

I could see the HOA turning around and suing First Service.

I could see the HOA suing its counsel for malpractice if the HOA loses. BTW, it's not possible to attach a file to these posts and there is no way to link the complaint. It's a PDF.

Use Dropbox.

You are weird and an idiot. I am not Frank. No one should be trying to do what you are suggesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't they just have the 'common' area spots be common again and not numbered? With reasonable restrictions like contractor vehicles, abandoned vehicles, vehicles have to be in active rotation, and maybe a special pass system for moving. I realize as I type this how administrative that is and pretty ridiculous but I have strong feelings about what's "right" and the current state does not seem right based on the little I have read.

Why not just leave it alone? It’s been like this for years and years, and everything was fine until the HOA Joan of Arc started suing.

Just because something illegal has been done for years does not at some point make it legal. Wrong is wrong, no matter when the wrong comes to light or when someone finally speaks up about it. It's unfornate it will take yet another court battle about HOA assigned parking spots in common areas to fix this problem. The only ones really benefiting from this are the lawyers.

I

What is the point of having a board if they do not correct matters such as this?

It exists for people that lost the 7th grade student council race.

So the latest armchair political scientist over here thinks HOA boards are just a retirement home for people who lost the 7th grade student council race. Right. The reality? Those ‘losers’ are the ones actually dealing with budgets, contractors, insurance, covenants, and the bizarre legal universe of property law—while you sit on social media and write zingers that sound like they were workshopped at a middle school lunch table. It’s easy to mock governance when you’ve never had to seriously do it, never carefully read a budget, and never really been the one on the hook for fixing the mess when the roof caves in. But sure—keep telling yourself the HOA is just junior high drama club for adults. That way you never have to face the fact that some people are willing to do the hard, thankless work you can’t be bothered with.

I appreciate your perspective. It's best to ignore the poster slinging childish insults right and left. I've been active on my hoa board and it is fraught. So many decisions have no easy answer and vitriol is constantly flung at board memmbers. I respect the hard work this board is doing but it seems that they are make decisions without following proper protocol and do not correct their poor decisions.

If you were on a board that was told by the city to reserve some common area parking spaces, and your association was governed by this declaration

https://www.pyhoafacts.org/files/Association%20Documents/PYHOA%20Declaration.pdf

which says in legal terms that you're allowed to reserve the spaces, what would you do?

I would follow our declarations and know that we could not just take away a common space and assign it to specific homeowners. This stinks to high heaven when current board members benefit from this illegal act.

It is clear to see and you and others are just playing games to justify what is clearly wrong.

I also watched some of the board meeting where homeowners addressed Frank's complaint. Both "David K" and "Shane" were manipulative and disingenuous in their comments. This hoa is run by people who do not follow the declarations/by laws and no one should have to tolerate that.

I am active on my HOA board and our lawyer isn't wonderful but, holy crap, they are 10000% better than PY's lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't they just have the 'common' area spots be common again and not numbered? With reasonable restrictions like contractor vehicles, abandoned vehicles, vehicles have to be in active rotation, and maybe a special pass system for moving. I realize as I type this how administrative that is and pretty ridiculous but I have strong feelings about what's "right" and the current state does not seem right based on the little I have read.

Why not just leave it alone? It’s been like this for years and years, and everything was fine until the HOA Joan of Arc started suing.

Just because something illegal has been done for years does not at some point make it legal. Wrong is wrong, no matter when the wrong comes to light or when someone finally speaks up about it. It's unfornate it will take yet another court battle about HOA assigned parking spots in common areas to fix this problem. The only ones really benefiting from this are the lawyers.

I

What is the point of having a board if they do not correct matters such as this?

It exists for people that lost the 7th grade student council race.

So the latest armchair political scientist over here thinks HOA boards are just a retirement home for people who lost the 7th grade student council race. Right. The reality? Those ‘losers’ are the ones actually dealing with budgets, contractors, insurance, covenants, and the bizarre legal universe of property law—while you sit on social media and write zingers that sound like they were workshopped at a middle school lunch table. It’s easy to mock governance when you’ve never had to seriously do it, never carefully read a budget, and never really been the one on the hook for fixing the mess when the roof caves in. But sure—keep telling yourself the HOA is just junior high drama club for adults. That way you never have to face the fact that some people are willing to do the hard, thankless work you can’t be bothered with.

I appreciate your perspective. It's best to ignore the poster slinging childish insults right and left. I've been active on my hoa board and it is fraught. So many decisions have no easy answer and vitriol is constantly flung at board memmbers. I respect the hard work this board is doing but it seems that they are make decisions without following proper protocol and do not correct their poor decisions.

This is the most blatant example of sock puppeting I have ever seen.

You need therapy.

I wrote that post, don't live anywhere near Alexandria but have experience with HOA boards. There are plenty of grown ups who read these posts who have experience in this area as well and it is painfully obvious that your board is going to cost you money because they refuse to follow the rules. You think you can make deals that benefit some of you and everyone should just play nice and go along. You are wrong. Grow up and get your board to do the right thing. The tone of these posts speaks volumes about how corrupt your hoa is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a litigator, I can tell you with virtual certainty that this case is fatally flawed and will fail miserably. It’s a joke.

It's good to know an ungarage town home owner is a litigator. I am sure you have won parking cases for HOAs. I am guessing this is the same ungarage owner who is tracking IP addresses.

They embarrass themselves in every post they make just like Frank's neighbors who chastised him in one of the recorded minutes during an hoa meeting. They are wrong and benefit from this illegal action by the board but use emotional manipulative language to go at Frank. Frank I don't know you and I am not a trumper, but by gawd, I stand with you against these entitled, selfish, unethical neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the plaintiff will prevail based on the law and precedents. But is that a fair result? Everyone who bought at PY freely entered into the deal, knowing that common area parking spaces were subject to restriction. I don't think this provision is against public policy.

How many other HOA's in Virginia are at risk of similar disruption? Maybe a legislative solution is needed.

If the Board isn't being entirely forthcoming with the membership, well, it's not their finest hour, but they didn't create the problem and they're in a tough position.

I was not aware of this policy, and I purchased my unit before it was enacted via a board edict. Every ungaraged townhouse owner made a conscientious decision to buy a unit without a driveway or garage, and some bought before the policy went into effect.

The solution would be to have the developer return and annex more land, but unfortunately, this is not a feasible option.

The Amended and Restated Declaration from October 2011 authorizes the board to issue that edict. You probably got a copy of that before you bought, or at least signed something saying you got it.

This language means the association must assign parking spaces equally, if at all, unless the Declaration expressly provides otherwise, which it doesn't.

I'm not convinced that was the intention, but it seems the courts might interpret it that way, as they apparently did in other cases.

If defense lawyers are able to present evidence backing up the claim that the city told Pulte to provide reserved spaces for garageless units, would that change the course of the lawsuit? I'm thinking of correspondence between the city and Pulte, or testimony from city employees or Pulte employees who were involved in the development.

There is NO WAY the city told the developer that they had to provide ASSIGNED spaces. That just isn't done and anyone who has been involved in planning knows this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No HOA and parking = priceless for those living in a HOA and without parking. https://www.redfin.com/VA/Alexandria/2105-Commonwealth-Ave-22301/unit-A/home/195092860

Then when your neighbor parks in front of your house you can complain on DCUM and get told you should have bought in a place with an HOA.

So much idiocy.

HOA's don't control who parks in front of your house. Much depends upon who has control of the street. In my hoa run community the state controls our streets and anyone can park in front of any house.

How is it that you post so much but know so little?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is going on at the Potomac Yard HOA ? What a mess. No, I am not Frank.



https://potomacyardhoa.blogspot.com/?m=1

At least one other person in PY is paying attention to what the board is up to. If I lived there, my biggest concern on that voting list would be the provision not permitting a member to serve on the board if he/she is in violation of rules and regulations. Interpretation of those rules are so subjective, they could keep just about anyone off the board. The only limitation should be arrears in assessments. At least that can be proven objectively.

+ 100 and you can clearly see this bunch of entitled lugs would abuse this.