[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

I don’t claim to know the deed restrictions in any other district except for the one we live in. That being said, I respectfully disagree with both of you that any of the restrictions I mentioned are not deed restrictions in my district (as they pertain to homes, not villas), which is CDD1. I do stand corrected about residents under 21 not being allowed, it’s under 19 years old. I suppose what constitutes single family use and running a business out of one’s home is subject to interpretation, but both are most definitely deed restrictions. I do clearly understand that the developer enforces internal deed restrictions at their option. However, I stand by my claim that selectively enforcing restrictions (exercising an option to not enforce certain restrictions) discredits the reason of having them in the first place.

I disagree that homeowners are obligated to enforce deed restrictions. Homeowners have the option to REPORT deed restrictions to the authority that is charged with enforcement. The CDD’s have an OBLIGATION to enforce reported deed restrictions that are external to the home. The developer has the OPTION to enforce reported deed restrictions that are internal to the home. Therein lies the problem. There should be no OPTION to enforce any reported deed restrictions, that is what discredits the whole system.

Yes, there are several significant changes between CDD1 and others including CDD10. From the CDD 10-201 restrictions:

Only certain commercial activities are prohibited:

2.10 Properties within the Subdivision are intended for residential use and no commercial, professional or similar activity requiring either maintaining an inventory, equipment or customer/client visits may be conducted in a Home or on a Homesite

The owners have a duty to prosecute violations while the Developer has the right but not the duty to enforce:

All Owners shall have the right and duty to prosecute in proceedings at law or in equity against any person or persons violating or attempting to violate any covenants, conditions or reservations, either to prevent him or them from so doing, or to recover damages or any property charges for such violation. The cost of such proceedings, including a reasonable attorney's fee, shall be paid by the party losing said suit. ln addition, the Developer shall also have the right but not the duty to enforce any such covenants, conditions or reservations as though Developer were the Owner of the Homesite, including the right to recover reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Developer may assign its right to enforce these covenants, conditions or reservations and to recover reasonable attorney's fees and costs to a person, committee, or governmental entity.