Phased Development & Annexations
To minimize risk, developers will often build a large development in phases. They build the initial development and record a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) against the properties. A homeowners' association is created, and a board of directors is appointed. Once the development sells out, they will build another tract of homes and annex it into the association.
To accomplish annexation, CC&Rs must contain a provision authorizing it. Each additional development becomes subject to the CC&Rs of the original subdivision upon annexation into the association, and buyers of units/lots in the annexed phase automatically become members of the association. To that end, the annexed developments record a document called a Notice of Addition, Notice of Annexation, or Supplemental Declaration, which references the original CC&Rs and describes the property being added to the original development.
The Supreme Court confirmed the mechanism for annexations in a case where CC&Rs were not in a direct line of title. The defendant in the action claimed the CC&Rs were not enforceable because they were not mentioned in the deed to his property. The Court disagreed:
[I]f the restrictions are recorded before the sale, the later purchaser is deemed to agree to them. The purchase of property, knowing of the restrictions, evinces the buyer's intent to accept their burdens and benefits. Thus, the mutual servitudes are created at the time of the conveyance, even if there is no additional reference to them in the deed. This rule has many advantages.
The first advantage is simplicity itself. One document, recorded for all purchasers to review, would establish the rules for all parcels, not many documents that may or may not be mutually consistent. There would be no bewildering mosaic of enforceability and nonenforceability...
A rule allowing the uniform implementation of a general plan from the outset of the development would be good policy, which no doubt helps explain the modern trend of accepting as sufficient the slightest reference in the deeds to restrictions of record. (Citizens for Covenant Compliance v. Anderson (1995) 12 Cal.4th 345, 363-364)
Annexation Inconsistencies
It is not uncommon for annexation documents to be inconsistent. Such inconsistencies do not necessarily detract from the general plan for the community. On this point, Greater Middleton Ass’n v. Holmes Lumber Co. (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 980 is instructive. There, among 77 deeds in a tract, 14 did not mention the general plan, 13 did not include a restrictive covenant requiring residential land use, and only 16 of the deeds containing the general plan reference also included a legal description of the dominant tenement covering the entire tract. Still, the Court of Appeal held that a covenant restricting commercial logging was enforceable under the general plan for “all parcels within the tract.” (Id. at p. 983) The Court of Appeal found that despite the variations among deeds, the “uniformity and consistency in the vast majority of the deeds relative to the general plan and the restrictive covenants restricting the use of the land therein” was sufficient. (Id. at p. 993.) Where property owners had “purchased their property in reliance on the fact that there was a general plan to preserve the natural beauty of the area . . .[t]o hold otherwise would lead to an inequitable result.” (Id. at pp. 993–994)
Failure to Properly Annex
Plaintiff purchased vacant lots within the Hesperia Green Estates, a phased residential subdivision. He sued the Hesperia Green Estates HOA when it tried to assess his lots. The court ruled that his lots were not annexed into the Association and thus not subject to its CC&Rs. The case goes into the steps for annexation that weren’t completed properly. (Karkaletsis v. Hesperia Green Estates Homeowners' Association, Unpublished Decision, 4th Appellate District, June 18, 2025)
ASSISTANCE: Associations needing legal assistance can contact us. To stay current with community association issues, subscribe to the Davis-Stirling Newsletter.