[LARC-CQ] Florida Statute 720.3045

[Russ Delaney]

At the meeting on Monday, I was asked to forward this information to the LARC  mailing list.
This statute is a move in the right direction, and may only help some.
Link to the actual Statute: https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2023/720.3045
Changes to a Homeowners’ Association’s Restriction Rights Under HB 437

HB 437 appears to answer the question of why an HOA should be able to restrict property use that cannot be viewed from another property with they should not. HB 437 adds Section 720.3045 to the Florida Statutes, stating that “regardless of any covenants, restrictions, bylaws, rules, or requirements of an association . . . an association may not restrict parcel owners or their tenants from installing, displaying, or storing any items which are not visible from the parcel’s frontage or an adjacent parcel, including, but not limited to, artificial turf, boats, flags, and recreational vehicles.” In other words, if it cannot be seen from another parcel, an HOA cannot restrict it. This change to the Homeowners’ Association Act provides homeowners with substantially more flexibility to use their property than they may have previously had.

However, it should be noted that Section 720.3045 is likely to give rise to litigation as it leaves room for a grey area. Though in a broad stroke, HB 437 through this statutory change, substantially increases homeowners’ property use rights, it leaves open the door to substantial litigation. The statute effectively puts the proverbial ball in the homeowner’s court to test the limits of what is or is not permissible under the statute. One key grey area is that the restricted item must not be visible from an adjacent parcel to be protected under the statute. This creates a question around what visible from an adjacent parcel operationally means. Does this mean that if the item can be seen through a neighbor’s second story window, but it cannot be viewed from the same neighbor’s yard or the front of the home, it is impermissible? Additionally, the statute does not clarify whether the adjacent parcel must be part of the same association or if visibility from an adjacent parcel that is not a part of the association would make placement of the item impermissible. These are questions that the courts or legislature will likely have to answer before the full impact of HB 437 on homeowners’ rights is known.

Conclusion

Homeowners now have broader rights to make use of their property, including storing a boat or installing artificial turf, so long as it is not visible from the frontage or an adjacent parcel. HB 437 has the potential to impose substantial limitations on a homeowners’ association’s ability to restrict property owner’s usage of their property. However, there will likely be litigation over this restriction due to vagueness around the visibility requirements of the statute. Before attempting to exercise the new rights under HB 437, homeowners should carefully consider whether an item or change to their property can be viewed from adjacent parcels.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lakelandarc.org/pipermail/cq-lakelandarc.org/attachments/20250116/b62d833e/attachment.htm>