Opinion ID: 1350571
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: did the superior court err by ordering lamoreux to complete the dwelling in less time than the covenants permit?

Text: Lamoreux argues that the superior court erred by requiring him to substantially complete the foundation in 13 months and the exterior in 16 months. Langlotz contends that the time frames in the court's order were reasonably calculated to ensure compliance with the two-year completion requirement in the covenants. Covenants are construed to effectuate the parties' intent. Lenhoff v. Birch Bay Real Estate, 22 Wash. App. 70, 587 P.2d 1087, 1089 (1978). Clear and unambiguous language should be accorded its plain meaning. Id. Because restrictions are in derogation of the common law, they should not be extended by implication and doubts should be resolved in favor of the free use of land. Id.; accord Hallet v. Sumpter, 106 F. Supp. 996, 999 (D.Alaska 1952). The Marian Hills covenants require that all dwellings be constructed and designed to assure conformance to minimum standards of the Federal Housing Administration and local building code requirements. Terry Duszynski, a HUD-certified FHA building code compliance inspector, inspected Lamoreux's pad and post foundation and testified that it failed to meet minimum FHA standards because the pads were not connected into a continuous foundation and were not buried to the proper depth. On cross-examination, he testified that it is possible to obtain FHA approval of a pad and post foundation upon submission of an engineer's drawing and a request for a waiver. David Schaefer, an engineer, testified that he had examined the pad and post foundation and found it adequate to support the house, and that he would be willing to submit an engineered foundation waiver to the FHA. The superior court ordered Lamoreux to bring his foundation into compliance or secure an FHA waiver by June 15, 1987. The substance of the order is not seriously challenged; Lamoreux objects primarily to the timing. Lamoreux testified that it takes 90 to 150 days to construct an average home of 1000 to 1200 square feet. The covenants required Lamoreux to complete construction of the exterior of his home by May 1988. The superior court estimated that, given the relatively brief Fairbanks construction season, Lamoreux would not meet the May 1988 deadline unless he substantially completed the exterior by September 1987. In order to substantially complete construction by September 1987, the court reasoned that an acceptable foundation must be in place 90 days before that; hence, the court ordered Lamoreux to comply with the covenant foundation requirement by June. According to the court, Lamoreux could use the time between September 1987 and May 1988 to complete the inside of the house. We believe that the superior court was justified in requiring Lamoreux to comply with the covenant foundation requirement by June 1987. However, the court erred in ordering Lamoreux to complete the exterior of his home by September 1987, because the order effectively shortens the permissible construction period by eight months. The covenants unequivocally allow an owner two years to substantially complete the exterior of his home. The superior court's error was compounded by the passage of time during this appeal. Once the deadline for completing the foundation passed, Lamoreux would be naturally reluctant to invest additional funds in the project because he was faced with a tear-down order. Fairness dictates that Lamoreux be given a reasonable period of time in which to obtain FHA approval of the foundation and complete the house. Since Lamoreux testified that it takes 90 to 150 days to construct an average home, we conclude that Lamoreux should have until October 31, 1988 to comply with the covenants. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. [5]