[Carl in Tampa]

A few years ago while looking at houses for sale, I saw one (and only one) house in The Villages with hurricane shutters. I can understand why the architectural committee would object to them because they do not allow attractive window treatments.

More to your point, they are not required because they are not needed. In deciding safety and security issues there must be a cost analysis basis. What is the cost of a measure, compared to the benefit and risk?

For example, at the Sheriff's Office where I worked in Tampa we had to wear a life vest when flying in the helicopter. There is so much water in the county, including lakes, rivers and Tampa Bay that there is a genuine risk that a helicopter might go down in water while flying a mission. In fact, the Tampa Police Department lost a man to this hazard, which was the origin of the requirement. My office had one helicopter go down in a marshy area, but lost no one.

On the other hand, it is unlikely that pilots in Flagstaff, Arizona, have to wear life vests. But it is more likely that they might carry forestry survival equipment since the are constantly flying over National Forests.

The point is, that historically The Villages has been quite safe from hurricanes, and to add the expense of hurricane shutters to the cost of all of the houses in The Villages would be impractical and unnecessary.

I guess what this excruciatingly long response is for is simply to say, "We don't need them."