Thraemoor Townhomes with No HOA!

As per Article 2.1 of the 2nd Amended CCRs,

Insurance is to be maintained by owners.  There is no HOA that provides insurance.  Please purchase your own homeowners insurance policy for all perils including wind, hail, fire, theft, liability, etc.  Do not purchase a condo policy.

Do not purchase an HO6 policy. 

Ask your agent about an HO3 policy or HO5.

Our 6 townhomes are not members in any HOA and are not insured by any HOA.

Our six townhomes are individually owned and are built on six separate zero-lot-line private lots.

Our six townhomes do not own or share ownership in any common area or amenities.

There is no HOA that owns any portion of the six lots or townhomes. 

Because we are not part of an HOA, loss assessment coverage is not applicable.

If your insurance agent has questions, feel free to refer your agent to the CCRs listed in the link above.

It is also a mortgage loan requirement to procure individual townhome insurance.

As per the Easement Agreement recorded with the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder on November 26, 1996 at reception number F0334966, the master HOA is responsible to maintain the retaining wall.  A confirmatory sentence from page 2 of the Agreement is shown below.

As indicated, the retaining wall Easement Agreement is also noted on the approved Final Plat.

Click the chart to access the full Reserve Study

The underfunded reserve fund could reduce property values by as much as 12% or over $60,000 per home in lost value based on research by Robert Nordlund of Association Reserves.

Why is a Reserve Fund and a Reserve Study important?

1) To protect and maximize property value.

2) To avoid large, surprise special assessments that some owners may not be able to afford.

3) To smooth out homeowner project payments over a much longer period of time.

4) To have funds available when planned projects need to be done.

The master HOA represents 63 homes plus one vacant lot in Thraemoor in the Park HOA. The HOA reserve fund was analyzed by a reserve fund specialist in 2021.  They issued a 48-page Reserve Study update.  That report can be viewed or downloaded by clicking the chart above.

According to the 2021 Reserve Study, the HOA Reserve Fund was only 19% funded at $73,818 as of January 1, 2022.   The annual funding gap is the difference between the reserve study recommended transfer to reserves minus the HOA budgeted transfer.

The Reserve Fund is severely deficient.  But it gets worse.  The HOA has not been following the funding schedule towards fully funding the account!

Based on the Reserve Study page 14 funding projections and on budget information the HOA has shared, it is not following the recommendations in the study for increasing the reserve fund balance.

2025 Recommended Transfer to Reserves:  $126,284 (see p14)

2025 Board Approved Budget Amount:  $43,000

2025 Funding Gap: $83,284

2024 Recommended Transfer to Reserves: $123,808

2024 Budgeted Transfer to Reserves: $31,500

2024 Funding Gap: $92,308

2023 Recommended Transfer to Reserves: $121,380

2023 Budgeted Transfer to Reserves:  $27,637

2023 Funding Gap: $93,374

2022 Recommended Transfer to Reserves: $119,000

2022 Budgeted Transfer to Reserves:  $24,003

2022 Funding Gap: $94,997

4-Year Funding GAP from 2022-2025:   $363,963 

7-31-2022 Reserve Funds in the bank: $56,954  /  Remaining Budget: 10,000   /  100% funding in 2022: $455,349 / Percent Funded: 66,954 / 455,349 = 15% Funded for 2022.

HOA board members in Colorado are required by law to act prudently and in the best interests of the HOA. 

The HOA CCRs at 5.3 require ‘an adequate reserve fund’.  It is NOT optional.  If the board tries to change the CCRs and removes the adequate reserve fund, vote no on that.

If a board Ignores the CCRs and the expert advice contained in a Professional Reserve Study and intentionally under-funds the reserve fund, are they acting prudently and in the best interests of the HOA?

If homeowners conclude the board is not getting the job done, they should find qualified replacement board members to elect.

Even following the proposed financial recovery plan on page 14 of the study will take until 2050 to achieve a 100% funded balance.  But the HOA appears unwilling to adopt that level of financial discipline.

Unless the HOA changes course, they will face large, ‘surprise’ special assessments on owners to finance the necessary projects.

Remember – funding the reserve account does not increase costs.  It simply ensures that expenses are spread out more evenly and improves property values. 

If you want a professional, expert estimate of what to expect going forward, then require that the HOA obtain a full update of the reserve study with an onsite review of all elements.

Then, please provide this website a copy of the new study so we can post it online.  Thank You.

If any HOA members would please provide us with a copy of the current financial reports, that would also be appreciated.

Another problem with under funding is that early home owners who lived here many years but have since sold their homes and moved out did not pay their fair share of replacement costs for many items included in the reserve study.  As a result, when major reserve expenses come due, more recent purchasers bear the full brunt of large special assessments, dues increases and lost property value from deferred maintenance.

In some cases, a board can even get sued for breach of fiduciary duty for letting past owners who have since sold and moved out escape from these expenses.  For additional details, contact an HOA attorney who represents homeowners to review the situation.  This website does not recommend that anyone file a lawsuit.

What can be done?  When the next annual meeting or special meeting to elect board members comes around, DO NOT SEND IN YOUR PROXY FORM. 

The proxy forms are used by the board to re-elect themselves or their hand picked replacements.  In order to give additional owners who may be qualified an opportunity on the board, you need to keep those proxy forms to yourselves.  Then show up at the annual meeting to cast your vote plus any proxy vote forms you collected from your neighbors. You will still be able to re-elect board members who may be qualified but that will also make it possible for other candidates to be heard if the board does not control the proxy forms.  If you cannot attend the annual meeting, give your signed proxy to another owner who will attend.

NOTE: The six non-HOA homes also rely on the HOA to maintain the common areas and preserve property values.  These six non-HOA owners are also impacted due to deferred maintenance and lost property value. These six homes also pay to maintain the common areas.  Therefore, this is also their business to be concerned.

There are 70 lots on the Plat map.  Lot numbers 25,26,27,28,29 and 30 are not members in the HOA.

Our neighbor is Thraemoor in the Park HOA.  They own the private roads, common areas and amenities. Our 6 townhomes are located on their campus as indicated on the plat map as 6 of the 70 lots but are not annexed into their HOA.

Instead, we have an Easement, Maintenance and Cost Sharing Agreement with them.

They are required by their CCRs and by a siteplan agreement with Lakewood to maintain all the common areas and amenities that they own.

Our six owners pay recurring but variable cost sharing fees calculated on 9% of qualified expenses under the Cost Sharing Agreement mentioned above.

The 9% was derived by rounding up from 8.6%.  Our 6 homes represent 8.6% of 70 lots on the plat map.  Rounding that 8.6% up gets you to the 9%.

In case you are wondering, yes, 9% is more than our fair share.  But that is the agreement that was established before any of our six homes were sold.

The cost sharing terms of the agreement document the methodology of billing our owners.

The qualified services for calculating the 9% fee include:

• street paving
• pavement patching and repair
• snow and ice removal
• road sweeping
• landscape maintenance
• tree and shrub maintenance
• common area electrical repairs
• mail kiosk expansion/maintenance
• outdoor irrigation
• curb and gutter work
• sidewalk repair
• drainage facilities maintenance
  
• engineering and surveying

Amenities include:

• roads
• landscaping
• perimeter fencing
• sprinkler system
• detention ponds
• mail kiosk
• drainage facilities
• underground utilities
• gutter and sump pump discharge drainage
• pedestrian walkways
• driveways
• exterior stairs
• exterior side and rear porches and/or stoops
• lamp post lighting
• guest parking
• entry monument
• retaining walls
• all of Block 1 on the plat map excluding individual lots

Non-Payment of 9% Cost Sharing Fees:

The easement is perpetual and irrevocable.  However, Thraemoor in the Park HOA is authorized to sue any owner to recover unpaid cost sharing fees plus attorney’s fees.

If you have questions about the Easement Agreement or if for any reason you are not planning to pay the 9% fee, please consult an attorney as soon as possible.

The six units in Thraemoor II have an Easement Agreement to access the common areas. Article 1.4 of the agreement states that the master HOA ‘shall not unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably obstruct the use and enjoyment of the Shared Easement Area’.

Therefore, common areas must be maintained in a manner that does not interfere with their enjoyment.  For example, common areas that have soil saturation due to unrepaired defective drainage would obviously constitute an unreasonable obstruction or interference to their use and enjoyment not to mention a possible trip hazard.

See House Bill 22-1040 Section 2 including notice requirements if common areas are being repaired and the HOA duty to ‘protect the safety of any individuals’ with regard to accessing common areas.  If an HOA allows unsafe conditions such as trip hazards due to soil saturation, inadequate drainage or uneven grading issues, the HOA may also be in violation of the duty to protect the safety of any individuals.

Also see:  https://frascona.com/massive-changes-coming-to-colorado-homeowner-association-law/

Also see:  https://www.ochhoalaw.com/colorado-common-interest-ownership-act-frequently-asked-questions/

NO – we are not part of an HOA. 

However, we do have a Cost Sharing and Easement Agreement with the adjoining HOA.

We are also subject to a separate Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCRs) that applies only to our 6 townhomes.

⇒ Because our 6 townhomes are subject to CCRs, we are a covenant-controlled community.

Our CCRs include the following features:

• There is no homeowners association.
• There is no corporate entity.
• There is no board of directors.
• There is no management company.
• There are no mandatory HOA fees. 
• We are not subject to CCIOA (Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act). 
• We are not a common interest community as defined in CCIOA.
• Owners are 100% responsible to maintain and insure their own individual units.

Our neighbor HOA owns and is responsible under their CCRs to maintain all the amenities and common areas.  (Also known as Block 1 on the Plat Map excluding the 70 private lots.) 

Instead of paying an HOA monthly fee, our six owners pay recurring cost sharing expenses under a separate Cost Sharing Agreement. 

According to their Board representative, the reason the 6 units were excluded from their HOA was due to their concern over hypothetical construction defects that might come to light at some unknown future time in one or more of the 6 units.  Their rep stated in an email dated 9-5-2022: “The benefit was to protect our community from assuming liability for potentially disastrous costs related to construction defects.”

Keep in mind the master HOA has no ownership interest or common areas in any of the six units.  The HOA also did not design, build or provide materials for any of the six units. So their liability for future unknown, hypothetical construction defects is zero.  Yet the homeowners apparently voted to exclude the 6 units based on a totally false premise.  Due to that misinformed vote, they have even forfeited the ability to enforce their CCRs on the 6 units.  We have to wonder what the board told homeowners before that vote.

We have asked for the official minutes of the meeting since they are supposed to be retained permanently by law.  As yet, they have not been produced.

Also, there is no reason to assume any of the six excluded units will ever have construction defects.

As of January, 2025, we are not aware of any construction defects or litigation related to any of the 6 individual units.  Some units may also have a 10-year structural warranty.

LEGAL FACT:  Construction defect liability rests with any parties who provide defective design, workmanship or materials.  Not with any HOA.

EXAMPLE – In a condominium project, the HOA may own an entire building and residents actually only own an airspace.  In that scenario, an HOA would likely have responsibility for the building including engaging responsible parties if there are possible construction defects.  But that does not mean the HOA would be legally liable for causing any defects since the HOA did not construct the building.

The units at Thraemoor are not condos.  They are individual townhomes constructed on privately owned zero-lot-line lots.  The HOA did not construct these units and does not own any portion of these townhomes or the land upon which they are constructed.

So the concern about HOA legal liability for construction defects at Thraemoor is unfounded.

NOTE: Excluding the 6 units from the master HOA does not insulate the HOA from responsibility for addressing alleged defects in common areas owned by the HOA.

At Thraemoor, those common areas include various features including driveways, sidewalks, walkways, and exterior stairs.  None of those features were designated on the plat map as limited common areas.

If defects occur in privately owned townhomes of members of the HOA, the HOA may intercede on behalf of homeowners without assuming legal liability for the alleged defects.  In that scenario, in Colorado an HOA is prohibited from pursuing any construction defect litigation without a vote of the owners allowing such action. So an HOA cannot get involved unless the owners agree to it.  And even if the HOA is authorized by owners to get involved, that does not mean the HOA is liable for causing any alleged defects.

In a condominium building with hundreds of units, any defects may impact many residents so the option of using the HOA to represent many owners may be very useful.  But an HOA consisting of townhomes on privately owned lots is a totally different situation since the HOA does not own any portion of the townhomes or the lots.

And even after the extreme action of excluding the 6 units, the HOA is still responsible to address any defects regarding the HOA common areas such as the apparent drainage defects, irrigation system neglect, excessive landscape water waste or other issues.

If the HOA neglects to fix or resolve defects or fails to properly maintain the common area and damage results to property not owned by the HOA including any of the 6 excluded units, the HOA would have liability for the damage in that case.

1) No Common Areas: A primary reason to have an HOA is to maintain the common areas.  The former 6-unit HOA did not own any common areas or physical assets of any type so the basic reason to have an HOA did not exist.

2) Expensive Legal Fees:  In Colorado, an HOA has recurring legal costs to comply with any changes imposed by the legislature on HOAs.  These changes include the numerous legally required policies that require an attorney to write up and to modify as needed whenever the law changes.  Attorney fees are hundreds of dollars per hour.  Our neighbor HOA has over 60 units.  So their attorney fees per owner are one tenth of the fees compared to only having 6 units to share the fees.

3) High Cost of Professional Management:  The cost of professional management is also much higher per owner with only 6 units because management companies have a minimum base fee even if only 6 units are under management.  With only 6 units, professional management is a must because there are so few owners available to volunteer.

But the cost per owner is significantly more when only 6 units are in an HOA.  Some management companies charge over $2,400 per month even for only 6 units to manage!

We contacted dozens of management companies in search of an economical proposal.  Most companies would not even return our calls if we left a message that mentioned only 6 units in the HOA!  One company agreed to a low-cost fee but they ended up cancelling our contract because of the extra time to deal with the master HOA and the Cost Sharing Agreement billing process.

4) Lack of Volunteers – With only 6 units, it is not reasonable to expect half of the owners to serve on the HOA board year after year in perpetuity.  At some point in time, the HOA could encounter a moment when no owners are available to serve on the board which can be a complicated and expensive situation.  At the time of dissolution, we appeared very close to the point where no owners would be available to serve on the board.

5) Additional Required Insurance – An HOA needs additional specialized insurance coverage including Directors and Officers (D&O), Workers Comp and Umbrella.  These coverages cost thousand of dollars per year.

6) CPA Fees:  At least $500-1,000 per year for CPA fees related to tax return preparation and auditing of the financial records.

7) No Economy of Scale – With only 6 units, administrative services the HOA needed, including those mentioned above, cost ten times more per owner than our neighbor HOA who has over 60 units to spread the cost.

Bottom line, with only 6 units, the owners were collectively paying over $5,000 each year in administrative fees and specialized insurance premiums that are not incurred now that the HOA has been dissolved.  That is only for the fees not owed under the Cost Sharing Agreement.  In other words, the administrative overhead just to have an HOA that did almost nothing other than collect money from the 6 owners and then forward cost sharing fees to the master HOA amounted to at least $5,000 per year!  Without the sub-HOA, the administrative and specialized insurance fees are eliminated and owners simply pay the cost sharing fees directly to the master HOA.

If anyone were interested in resurrecting the dissolved HOA, they would have to justify the high costs which would probably only be more expensive today.

Our neighbor is Thraemoor in the Park HOA also referred to as HOA1.  Their common area and roads surround our six units.

Since the six units in Thraemoor II are not members in their HOA known as HOA1, their covenants are not applicable in our opinion.  If necessary, consult an attorney to verify this.  But why not just comply in order to avoid any problems or confusion?

Here is some history on how we got here.

The homeowners and board members of Thraemoor in the Park HOA (HOA1) made a decision to exclude our six townhomes from their HOA.  Our homeowners were not a part of that decision since our homes had not yet been sold to their first homeowners when the decision was made.  It is unclear why HOA1 owners made such a bizarre decision.

However, at this point in time, this is a done deal!  Under current law in 2024, our 6 homes can never be included in the so-called master HOA without super-majority approval from their homeowners and from our six owners.

In some ways, this is actually beneficial to our six owners because HOA1 has less control over our six units since we are not members of their HOA.

Instead, the board of HOA1, in collaboration with their HOA attorneys, approved the Easement and Cost Sharing Agreement that was imposed upon any purchaser of our final 6 lots on the plat map.

In addition to the Easement Agreement, the plat map already had a binding stipulation regarding access, stating at Note 3 that the ‘declaration provides access rights to the individual lot owners to cross Block 1 (via private driveways) and all private drives (PD) as access to public streets’.

Once all of our 6 units were sold to their original homeowners, a second HOA board was elected (HOA2) for just these last 6 units.  This board contacted HOA1 board members via email over a period of months on various topics related to the Easement and Cost Sharing agreement and also the question of whether to reconsider including the 6 units in the original HOA1.

During this time period the topic of short term rentals was raised due to the proliferation of them in Lakewood and the fact that one HOA2 unit was being advertised on Airbnb.

Without including the final 6 units of HOA2 in the original HOA1, enforcement of HOA1 restrictive covenants upon our non-HOA homes is not authorized under the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act.  Restrictive covenants on short term rentals also cannot be enforced by HOA1.

It was specifically explained to HOA1 board members in February 2023 that one of the benefits to HOA1 of including the 6 units would be control over short term rentals.

We invited HOA1 to reconsider whether it would make sense to include our units in their HOA.  We even retained an HOA attorney who discussed this suggestion with their HOA attorney.

However, at a joint meeting of the two HOA boards held via ZOOM on August 23, 2022, HOA1 Board President Jeff Vogel stated that their homeowners would never vote in favor of including our 6 homes in their HOA. 

No HOA1 board members contradicted Mr. Vogel’s opinion.  HOA1 board members present for that meeting were Jeff Vogel, Susan Osbeck and Tom Krol.

Since then, some HOA1 homeowners have raised complaints related to this bizarre arrangement including issues such as short term rental customers from any of the 6 units using guest parking, alleged disorderly conduct of some STR residents, excessive STR trash, violations of Lakewood’s STR licensing requirements, etc.

It is unfortunate that these complaints have arisen especially considering short term rentals were foreseen as a problem area yet HOA1 repeatedly opted not to take a path that could have minimized or prevented the issues.

Please be advised that the 6 owners who were denied inclusion in HOA1 have no control over guest parking or any common areas because these amenities are owned by HOA1.

Please be advised that the 6 owners who were denied inclusion in HOA1 never had any involvement in that decision and repeatedly invited HOA1 to reconsider.

Ultimately, due to the excessive costs of perpetuating an HOA with only 6 units, HOA2 retained attorneys who advised the board on how to dissolve our board of directors, cancel the management company contract and revise our legal status to become a non-CCIOA covenant controlled community but without the typical HOA corporate structure.  Our CCRs were revised by the attorneys as part of this transition process.

Since the six units in Thraemoor II are not members in HOA1, we do not believe they can impose fines.  However, please consult an attorney if necessary for verification.

We recommend that you do pay any fees owed under the Cost Sharing Agreement.  Doing so will promote goodwill, avoid legal disputes and protect your credit rating.

However, we do not believe the HOA is authorized to place a lien for unpaid cost sharing fees.  But they can sue any owner who does not pay the cost sharing invoices.

If you need further explanation or if the HOA places a lien on your townhome, you should contact an attorney.

Again, we recommend that you do pay any fees owed under the Cost Sharing Agreement.  Doing so will promote goodwill, avoid legal disputes and protect your credit rating.

However, it does not seem likely that the adjoining HOA could foreclose on your Thraemoor II townhome if you do not pay their fees under the Cost Sharing Agreement.

If our homes were members in their HOA, then the HOA could foreclose on your home for non-payment of HOA fees under Colorado law as of 2024.  Since we are not HOA members, the HOA can still sue you for unpaid fees but cannot foreclose and sell your home out from under you.

One important caveat, this is not legal advice.  Please consult an attorney if you have questions or before deciding not to pay any Cost Sharing fees.

The streets and parking areas within Thraemoor in the Park are privately owned by the HOA.  Unlike members in their HOA, our 6 units have an Easement Agreement to use the common areas including guest parking.  Therefore, it is unclear if they can make rules that may restrict the easement right to use guest parking. 

Under the Easement Agreement, you are not allowed to ‘unreasonably interfere with or to unreasonably obstruct the use and enjoyment of the Shared Easement Area’. 

There is a lot of room for lawyers to debate what that means as far as guest parking and how long you can park there and what you can park there.  If the HOA said nobody can park there over 72 hours, do you have a right to park there for a week under the Easement Agreement?   Who knows?  But if you refuse to comply with their rules and want a court to decide that, it would be very expensive and time consuming compared to simply moving your vehicle after that 72 hours or whatever rule may be in effect.

If the HOA tries to restrict the use of guest parking by any of the 6 units subject to the Easement Agreement, either comply with whatever they are asking or consult an attorney for further guidance on your rights.

Each owner is responsible to maintain and insure their roof, siding, paint, structure, drywall, plumbing, electrical, windows, doors, garage, etc. the same as any single-family home.

Thraemoor II townhomes are not part of Thraemoor in the Park HOA.  Instead, we pay recurring cost sharing fees as detailed in the Cost Sharing Agreement.

Their management company bills our 6 owners directly via email for these cost sharing fees.

These invoices should include detailed disclosures including vendor receipts for qualified expenses that are used to calculate our 9% cost sharing fee.

Please pay their invoices.

If you have questions about the Easement Agreement, consult an attorney.

Their management company may change from time to time such as every 1-5 years.  To avoid leaving outdated information on this website, we no longer post the name or address of the current company.  For example, from 2021 to 2024, they had at least 5 management company engagements. 

Therefore, please ask their board members or your neighbors who their current company is.  Sometimes they post this info near the mailboxes.  When you receive an invoice for cost sharing expenses, please verify it is from their current company.

All shared physical assets including roads, landscaping, turf, trees, common area, mailbox kiosk, drainage facilities, perimeter fencing, etc. are owned by our neighbor, Thraemoor in the Park HOA.

Section 38-33.3-307 page 62 of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA) states that “Except to the extent provided by the declaration…the association is responsible for maintenance, repair, and replacement of the common elements.

It is also required by the City of Lakewood to comply with Lakewood’s landscape standards listed in the next topic below.

Therefore, according to state law, local law, the signed site plan agreement with Lakewood and the Cost Sharing Agreement, Thraemoor in the Park HOA is responsible for maintaining these assets including snow removal, lawn mowing, weed control and replacing dead turf or trees.

We will cover the chain of title starting with the original Declarant’s bankruptcy sale through completion of construction and issuance of a CO by Lakewood in 2021.

The chain of title going forward from 2021 should be readily available at the Jeffo Clerk’s website.

The plat map shows 70 lots.  Six of those lots comprise Thraemoor II. Their chain of title starts with the 2008 bankruptcy trustee sale of the six lots from the original developer, On the Hill Development.

Their chain of title is:

Now you know!

Do Not Hire Your Own Trash Service

Trash day is Thursday.

Recycle is every other week on the A-Week Schedule.

Trash service is typically delayed by 1 day during the weekdays following major holidays such as Xmas, New Year’s, 4th of July, etc.

Verify the schedule at your address: 

https://www.republicservices.com/schedule 

You may also be able to verify what materials they will and will not accept.

Trash and recycle is provided by Republic Services through an HOA plan with our neighbor, Thraemoor in the Park HOA.

We pay for the service as part of the cost sharing invoices.

Therefore, you do not need to pay a separate monthly trash fee unless the terms of the agreement change.

This info is current as of January 2025.

As of June 1, 2023, Republic Services has acquired GFL operations in Colorado:

https://www.republicservices.com/GFL-co-nm

If there is a snow day or service delay, their phone message may have info at:  303.744.9881.

Click to view Rules and Regs

These are the Rules and Regulations adopted by our neighbor, Thraemoor in the Park HOA.

We doubt that any Rules and Regs adopted by their HOA can be legally enforced on the 6 non-HOA homes that have rights under the separate Easement Agreement.

However, to maintain the friendliest possible relationship with their board members and management company, please comply with their Rules and Regs. 

If you feel strongly that you do not have to comply, please consult an attorney to verify your opinion(s) and interpretation.

So please comply with the parking regs which include no on-street parking allowed in order to provide access for large emergency vehicles, snow plows and the large trash trucks.

What about Thraemoor II rules and regs?  Please comply with Thraemoor II CCRs.

Possibly.  If it comes to the point that they are telling you to repaint, that likely means the paint is fading or deteriorating in a way that is very visible from the street

Under the Maintenance Agreement, the master HOA has approval authority over anything that can be ‘seen, felt, experienced or heard from outside…including the color scheme’ so they might have the authority to compel an owner to repaint.

However, assuming the unit was already painted an approved color or color scheme perhaps years ago, it may be debatable whether the HOA can tell you when to repaint.

Therefore, if you are told to repaint and do not plan to comply, please verify your course of action by consulting an attorney.  Even if an attorney told you it is not necessary to comply, it may be less expensive simply to repaint than to delay repainting via legal action.

Original paint colors are listed on the Site Plan pages 8-13 approved by the City of Lakewood.  Not all colors were specified.

These color specifications may need to be approved by the HOA prior to any painting project.

The green color of the west building was KWAL CL 2955D Missive which is no longer made but can be matched.

The RGB values for Kwal Paints CL 2955D Missive are 125, 121, 104 and the HEX code is #7D7968. The LRV for Kwal Paints CL 2955D Missive is 19.06. The LRV stands for Light Reflectance Value and measures the percentage of light that a color reflects. Learn more about Light Reflectance Values and using RGB and Hex codes for paint.

Similar but not necessarily exact colors include Kelly-Moore KM5758, Valspar Smokey Olive 6001-2B and PPG Autumn Gray PPG1028-5.

The lighter beige color of the east building was not specified in the Site Plan.

The white railing color specified was KWAL CLW 1047W Deer Feather.

The RGB values for ColorLife CLW 1047W Deer Feather are 237, 237, 233 and the HEX code is #EDEDE9. The LRV for ColorLife CLW 1047W Deer Feather is 84.46. The LRV stands for Light Reflectance Value and measures the percentage of light that a color reflects. Learn more about Light Reflectance Values and using RGB and Hex codes for paint.

A similar color might be Valspar 1750 Cool Gray.

This question has come up in the past and one or more community members interested in running for the Board were incorrectly denied access to the Board election process.

The confusion has arisen because the HOA By-Laws state that Board Members must be members of the HOA while their Amended Articles of Incorporation state in Article VII that ‘Directors need not be members’.

Since the two documents are in conflict, which document has priority?  According to Article 16.9 of their Declaration, the Articles of Incorporation shall control:

Since the Articles of Incorporation are the controlling document, therefore Board Members do not need to be members of the HOA.  So anyone can run for their Board if they are not in violation of some other requirement stated elsewhere.

It also does not appear that officers of the HOA such as the President and Vice-President have to be members of the HOA nor do they have to be board members although they are appointed by the Board.

Because the HOA has at times been short-handed as far as Members willing to serve on their Board, the fact the non-members can also serve may be a benefit to the community.

Also, the HOA could decide to amend the Articles and remove most of the Articles to eliminate the potential for conflicts with the By-Laws and Declaration.  If that happens, this information could be out of date until the website is updated.

Expanded Lakewood history and historic property survey.

Local Thraemoor History:

During the late 19th and early 20th century, along a ridge about a mile north of Bear Creek was an underdeveloped piece of land, farmland, a cluster of summer cabins and the summer home of Molly Brown.

During most of the 19th and 20th centuries, Dr. WeWitt lived in the first major house built in the area. This house came to be known as “the Mansion”. 

This mansion was built in 1920 by DeWitt south of West Jewell and west of South Sheridan Boulevard near Ward Lake.

For years he farmed the land which includes the area known as Lakewood Estates (to our north). He eventually sold that land.

The next residents of this area were the Chappell’s who named their home “Thrae” (see where we are going), they then later sold the house to the Harvey family who helped developed…you guessed it, Harvey Park.

In the early 60’s one of the residents, Pete Harrington sold 90 acres to a group of residents of the private road section of the neighborhood. The group engaged with a company to develop the property extending east to Sheridan Ave and call this area Thraemoor.  top

The Molly Brown Summer House at the corner of W Yale Ave and Wadsworth Boulevard:

There were many reasons J. J. Brown chose this precise location for his summer home. Loretto Heights is a 5-minute carriage drive away where Margaret often visited the sisters of Loretto. They had a beautiful view of Red Rocks to the west, and they had close access to Fort Logan which today is a cemetery, but back in the day it was a prestigious military officers’ base. The Browns used wagon transport to move their fowl and fruit to Fort Logan, and J. J. may have felt he had a built-in customer base just a quick wagon ride away to the thousands of soldiers Fort Logan housed. From there, he used the Sheridan Junction train to transport his loads into the city.

The Taylor Estate at 6900 W Lakeridge Road sold the City of Lakewood the land for Peak View Park.  The eastern edge of this former estate adjoins the west side of Thraemoor in the Park.

Vernon Taylor, who took over his family’s oil, gas and mining business, was one of the original investors in Vail.

Truman Capote, Gregory Peck, Gerald Ford and Henry Kissinger all dined with the Taylors, who also lived and developed property in Vail. British Royal Family members would drop in from time-to-time and the estate was the site of a dinner for the” wives of the G8 summit,” in 1997 hosted by Hillary Clinton.

Additional Taylor Estate realtor video.

If you live in or near Thraemoor, you need a reliable vehicle to get around.

Walk Score is only 36/100.  Transit Score is worse at 28/100.

The nearest grocery store is over a mile away which is a key metric that helps define a certified USDA Food Desert.

However, as long as you have solid transportation, Thraemoor is a short drive to almost anywhere in the area.

3 Minutes:

Bear Creek Trail Open Space

Pickleball and Tennis Courts

5 Minutes:

Stonehouse Trailhead and Parking

Peak View Park Trailhead and Parking

8 Minutes:

Bear Creek Lake Park

Fleisher Family Farm

King Soopers

Magill’s World of Ice Cream

Hangar 101 Bar and Grill

13 Minutes:

BelMar – Shops, Restaurants, Library, Historical Center and Open Space

In-N-Out Burger

Whole Foods

Costco

Walmart

15 Minutes

Southwest Plaza Mall

20 Minutes:

Denver Botanic Gardens

St. Anthony Hospital

Swedish Hospital