Regarding the classification of R-1 and R-2, are the proposed covenants backwards, or the above responses? The proposed covenants previously, and still do, identify Atlantic Watergate and condos as R-2. On that subject, would you please explain why the rebuilding allowances are different for R-1 than R-2 (see proposed language below)?
G. In the case that a building on a designated R-2 Lot is not in conformity with these setbacks at the time of the adoption of this version of these Restrictive Covenants, it will not be considered to be in violation of the Restrictive Covenants. Furthermore, the existing set-backs will be considered the setbacks for that lot, and if such damage were sustained as to require re-building, such setbacks shall be honored.
(H) In the case that a building on a Lot designated R-1 were to sustain such damage as to require re-building of more than fifty percent (50%) of the structure, the set- back requirement specified herein for R-1 shall apply.
Thank you and stay well,