Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions

[jzh2b9]

Rural township, no zoning.

 

[quincy]

Rural township, no zoning.

It’s entirely possible that your new neighbor will have no issue with your shed at all, too, especially if the boundary stakes clearly show the shed sits on your property.

Your problem instead might be that the new neighbors want to build something as close to your property line on their property as your shed is to their property line on yours.

Although I don’t think you have anything to worry about (at least at this point), you might want to investigate a little more if the property restrictions in your area are enforced/enforceable.

 

[LdiJ]

Rural township, no zoning.

I have slightly different advice than you previously received. I think that you are borrowing trouble. If you already intended to remove the shed then by all means, do so, however if you would honestly prefer to keep the shed then I disagree that you should inform the owners of the other property that you intend to remove it.

You already stated that it takes some major digging to find out that there are actual restrictions to what the owners can and cannot put on their own properties. On top of that, you have no idea whether or not those new owners would even care about your shed.

If I were in your shoes I wouldn't do anything at all about the shed (unless it was something that you planned to do anyway) until or unless someone objects to the shed officially. At that point, you could cheerfully remove it.

 

[quincy]

I have slightly different advice than you previously received. I think that you are borrowing trouble. If you already intended to remove the shed then by all means, do so, however if you would honestly prefer to keep the shed then I disagree that you should inform the owners of the other property that you intend to remove it.

You already stated that it takes some major digging to find out that there are actual restrictions to what the owners can and cannot put on their own properties. On top of that, you have no idea whether or not those new owners would even care about your shed.

If I were in your shoes I wouldn't do anything at all about the shed (unless it was something that you planned to do anyway) until or unless someone objects to the shed officially. At that point, you could cheerfully remove it.

I don’t think you disagreed with anything said previously.

 

[Zigner]

... however if you would honestly prefer to keep the shed then I disagree that you should inform the owners of the other property that you intend to remove it.

Maybe I missed it...
Where did the OP even hint at preferring to keep the shed up?

 

[LdiJ]

Maybe I missed it...
Where did the OP even hint at preferring to keep the shed up?

He didn't, but he seemed to be acting out of fear of what the new neighbors will do, therefore the "if" comment.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Although I don’t think you have anything to worry about (at least at this point), you might want to investigate a little more if the property restrictions in your area are enforced/enforceable.

I'm wondering why you would think that a CCR wouldn't be enforceable?

 

[Zigner]

I'm wondering why you would think that a CCR wouldn't be enforceable?

If it runs contrary to federal, state, or local law in some way, then it could be unenforceable.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

If it runs contrary to federal, state, or local law in some way, then it could be unenforceable.

Do you know of a state that would make putting a building too close to the property line would be state law barred?

 

[Zigner]

Do you know of a state that would make putting a building too close to the property line would be state law barred?

Oh, when you wrote "I'm wondering why you would think that a CCR wouldn't be enforceable?", what you meant was "I'm wondering why you would think that a CCR wouldn't be enforceable in this case?"

Gotcha - carry on

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Oh, when you wrote "I'm wondering why you would think that a CCR wouldn't be enforceable?", what you meant was "I'm wondering why you would think that a CCR wouldn't be enforceable in this case?"

Gotcha - carry on

No Prob...

I try to stay on topic.

 

[quincy]

The document states under the enforcement section " Enforcement shall be by proceedings at law or in equity, either to restrain violation or to recover damages, against any person violating or attempting to violate any covenant"

To “restrain” a violation would mean to prevent it from occurring again - and jzh2b9 does not appear to want to build another shed too close to the boundary line again - and there are no “damages” if the shed is on jzh2b9’s property (albeit too close to the boundary line). The neighbor’s recourse, should the neighbor take issue with the placement of the shed, is to have the shed moved, which jzh2b9 plans to do anyway when the weather improves.

And this is assuming there were no changes to these restrictions when the large parcel of land was purchased and subdivided, as jzh2b9 indicated there could be.