Quote:
Originally Posted by golfing eagles
You're 100% correct, except........
Who is MORE LIKELY to be playing loud music or having a drunken party after 10PM, or any of the other complaints----your neighbor of the last 10 years or a renter staying 3 days?????
It is not a level playing field. Yes, a long term resident or renter can pose the same problems as a STR, BUT IT IS FAR LESS LIKELY. (and yes, I can already see one contrarian getting ready to ask for the statistics on that assertion, but I think we all intuitively know it to be true). I don't care for government intervention or restrictions either, but some of these "freedoms" are what we give up by agreeing to move into a DEED RESTRICTED COMMUNITY. Compared to some other deed restricted communities, some owners here are getting away with murder. (No, I don't have statistics on that either, but to call it "a lie" is way over the line)
Now, I couldn't care less if someone (not you) wants to parse words about whether Orlando's STR restriction are more or less restrictive than whatever was in place prior, nor could I care less whether Clearwater's laws were "grandfathered" in. Bottom line, if we adopted Orlando's CURRENT STR restrictions, it would probably end the STR problem here. And no one should claim it CAN'T be done, since they already did it.
|
I would say it is just as likely that a particular renter would be playing loud music. But to your point, the more times you roll the dice the better your chances of rolling a seven.
I acknowledged that I accepted the restrictions that came with the Villages. There is no question that there is a section in the document that allows for amendments. Things can change, the restrictions can change, but that doesn't mean I have to like it or support it.
Yep, things can change and STRs can be affected. But can we at least stay on the path of realistic possibilities and not stray into the "if I were god and the state of Florida didn't already have these laws on the books" kind of arguments?