Xeriscaping Restriction Upheld
HindmanSanchez recently prevailed at trial requiring a homeowner to remove xeriscaping that was installed without prior approval. The homeowner violated the covenants by installing xeriscaping without prior approval and claimed by law he could not be denied the right to install xeriscaping. The Homeowners Association had adopted a xeriscape policy as a result of SB 100 which required the owner to install 50% sod in just the front yard and he had to have prior approval for any landscaping. The county court judge agreed that the Association was within its rights to demand these things and it did not violate the new provision adopted by SB100 dealing with xeriscaping.
That provision [CRS 37-60–126(11)(a)] states that a covenant restricting or limiting xeriscaping or requiring the primary or exclusive use of turf grass is void and unenforceable regardless of when the covenant came into existence.
In addition the provision states associations may not place more procedural requirements on owners who seek approval for xeriscaping than already exist in the governing documents. [CRS 37-60–126(11)(b)(1)]
In this case the Association required only 50% of the front yard to be in turf, not the entire yard or even 50% of the entire yard. Also the requirement to have the owner’s plan approved in advance was no more stringent than the requirement to have non-xeriscape or regular landscaping plans approved in advance.