Under what condition is a restrictive covenant requiring approval for property improvements deemed unenforceable?

A restrictive covenant requiring approval for property improvements is considered unenforceable when the language is overly vague and imprecise. This is because the enforceability of a covenant often hinges on the clarity and specificity of its terms. If the language does not provide clear guidelines on what constitutes acceptable or unacceptable improvements, property owners may not be able to understand their rights, leading to ambiguity in enforcement. Clear, precise language is essential for covenants to be effectively enforced; vagueness can result in disputes and a lack of certainty regarding property rights.

Other factors can influence the enforceability of a restrictive covenant, but they do not negate the necessity for precise language. A fee associated with the approval process might raise questions about the fairness of the arrangement but does not inherently make the language of the covenant vague. Agreement among property owners could demonstrate community support for improvements, yet it does not address the specificity required for enforceability. Finally, if a committee's judgment is guided by fixed standards, that can enhance the enforceability of a covenant, as definitive criteria help prevent subjective interpretations.