I live in a development carefully designed, planned row and…

Hello,

There really isn't a straight-forward answer to this because it will depend on the specific wording of the individual restrictions and what the consequences specified in the covenant are. Too many times there are covenants put-on title with no language addressing consequences for contravention which results in the restrictions being functionally useless beyond merely acting as a deterrent.

Functionally, restrictive covenants on title can operate as contracts giving similar enforcement rights. Like a contract, however, the remedies must be specified to some extent.

In absence of such language the only real recourse is suit by the beneficial property owners (owners of the properties specifically benefiting from the restriction on the property restricted) to enjoin the breach. If the construction has already occurred it may be possible to request a court mandate the demolition of the beaching addition but in most cases where that construction is substantial compared with the relative harm to the other beneficial properties the only recourse would be monetary damages to the extent that actual finical loss can be established (for example, proving that the construction directly results in a reduction of property values to the beneficial properties).

With respect to whether a municipal pedicabs trumps restrictive covenants, it completely depends on the restriction and the ordinance. For example, a covenant restricting use of a property to agricultural purposes would fail in light of rezoning of the area as residential. However, a restriction on building a garage would fail in light of an ordinance specifically invalidating such restrictions.

You will need to look at the language and see what the impact would be.

Now, if the neighbor is successful in obtaining the variance, it makes the issue moot since the variance specifically acknowledges that the restriction exists but provides permission to build beyond it. So, if granted, enforcement of the restrictive covenant would be irrelevant because the variance would invalidate it for those varied additions (but nothing beyond those varied and necessarily related items).

Regards,