Harold Schwartz's Biggest nightmare

[OldManTime]

Harold Schwartz went to great effort and thousands of dollars saving trees in Florida. He designed home sights around trees. Today that mindset is no longer the standard. Even in Marion County in the Villages, One person is on a crusade to cut down every tree he sees, pitiful to say the least.

[Taltarzac725]

They cut down a lot of hundred or more year old oak trees on CR101 which broke my heart.

[collie1228]

For a developer who highlights its Audubon awards for golf courses, and who brags about its water conservation efforts, it seems strange to me that they "clear cut" the sites of the new villages south of 44. The bulldozer bills must be staggering.

[graciegirl]

Harold Schwartz went to great effort and thousands of dollars saving trees in Florida. He designed home sights around trees. Today that mindset is no longer the standard. Even in Marion County in the Villages, One person is on a crusade to cut down every tree he sees, pitiful to say the least.

Who would that one person be and how do you know that? What has this to do with Harold Schwartz? I would think that his worst nightmare would be for harm to come to his family and loved ones. This statement might be overly dramatic or even wrong.

Here are my feelings on live oak trees. They are beautiful. They are majestic. They are protected to some degree by laws. They are also dirty to have in your yard and dangerous growing close to your home after they reach a certain size.

During last years Hurricane Irma, a huge Live Oak Tree fell that was growing right next to Laurel Manor Rec Center. It fortunately fell at night and toward the parking lot, minimizing damage that could have been terrible if it had happened when people were there.

No doubt trees are beautiful, but Americans have been clearing them to build structures for centuries.

[JoelJohnson]

Remember the Golden Rule ... He that holds the Gold makes the Rules.

[vintageogauge]

For a developer who highlights its Audubon awards for golf courses, and who brags about its water conservation efforts, it seems strange to me that they "clear cut" the sites of the new villages south of 44. The bulldozer bills must be staggering.

Those sites were not cleared of trees, take a look at the building going on north of Warm Springs, you will see that they are building around the trees, same as they did in Fenney, DeSoto, and McClure. I'm sure there were some trees that had to be removed for placement of infrastructure and building however they plant several trees around each home they build and put in thousands of palm trees, mossy oaks, and pines down here. The areas that look "clear cut" were fields before the bulldozers came in. And for water conservation there are an abundance of retention ponds strategically placed. The large oaks and multitude of water front homes are some of the assets of the south of 44 villages.

[Madelaine Amee]

Lady Lake has a very strict tree policy ... see LaZamora - beautiful village. Sumter used to be very good, but they are relaxing their standards. We have a new "thing" in our village. They cannot cut the tree, so they "top" it, they cut off all the branches and the top and leave the trunk. Of course the tree does grow back to some extent, but never as beautiful as it once was. People always manage to find a way.

If you have a problem with oak trees being dirty and a problem, why would you buy a home with oak trees?

[Rapscallion St Croix]

Folks are quick on the trigger when it comes to evoking Harold Swartz's name to poo poo deviations from the original concept. Is he spinning in his grave because the thousands and thousands of homes in The Villages are not double wides?

[justjim]

OP, I don’t know who this “one tree cutting person” is but I can only tell you what I have observed over the years regarding the saving of trees in The Villages. Starting with some of the latest development, in Fenney I see many old oak trees that were saved. Along Buena Vista near Sumter Landing, I observe many very large oaks that have been saved. As a golfer I see many large beautiful trees that were saved while developing both executive and championship golf courses. Only a few examples but enough here to make a point that Mr. Schwartz in my opinion would be proud these and other trees were saved. I wasn’t here when the “historical side” of The Villages was developed but I would be willing to bet that some trees had to be removed to make a street or lay out the golf courses and houses so Villagers could work, live, play and enjoy the village lifestyle.

[Goldwingnut]

If you think what has been and is being built isn't part of Schwartz's plan/dream you've over looked the timeline of The Villages development. All of the lands that make up The Villages all the way down to Brownwood and Rohan Rec Center were acquired well before his death and the CDDs up to 10 were established just a few months after his death. He was a major part of the planning of what The Village is today. He was probably greasing the ways for the rest of this juggernaut south of 44 also, land deals like this are not done in a day, they take years of negotiations and planning.

As far as the trees being cleared one only needs to look at the historical images on Google Earth Pro or the Sumter County Property Appraiser web site to see what things looked like 10 or 20 years ago. This entire area was pasture lands and watermelon field. I commuted between Orlando and Gainesville every week in 1980 on US441, much of it back then was 2 lane road, Leesburg stopped before 441 met 27, Wildwood, Fruitland Park, and Lady Lake were a gas station or two. The area between 441 and I-75 from the Turnpike and Ocala was dirt poor and depressed, the biggest industry was some horse farms at the northern end. A lot of economic good and thousands of job have come from The Villages. The Villages is doing most things right, if you want to see what happens with things are poorly planned look no farther than Lehigh Acres outside Fort Meyers and all the problems it has gone through.

Yes there were other trees and some were cleared, the unhealthy ones, most of the healthy ones were kept and thousands more have been planted and are now mature. The same is happening in the Fenney-DeLuna-Bradford areas, sickly trees and scrub is being cleared and the healthy ones are being saved. From a business standpoint it is in their best interest to save as many trees as practicable and use them in their overall landscaping and ambiance for the communities they build. A winding community with lots of trees has greater economic value (read - more profitable) than one that is simply checkerboard roads and packed in houses even though the actual number of homes will be less. The Developer also plants a lot of new and semi-mature trees during the development of the properties in addition to their preservation efforts. Much of the trees you see at the northern end of The Villages is a result of those efforts and 10-20 years of additional growth.

The clear cut development going on in other areas of the State of Florida don't take as conservative of an approach as here in Sumter County. In south Florida the clearing and building is devastating to watch. They also don't take the water conservation efforts as far as it is taken in The Villages, the conservation efforts are a recognized industry model for how much can be done to conserve.

Many complain about the growth of The Villages being out of control, hardly so, the big advantage of having one large and well planned development and developer is control of the sprawl that usually happens. Go to the Orlando, Tampa, Jacksonville, or south Florida areas and drive around. It is a true mess, urban sprawl has run a muck. Over a thousand people a day, everyday, move to Florida, about 25 of them move to The Villages.

The Villages today isn't Mr. Schwartz's nightmare, it is his dream that he planned, and them some.

[jim1941]

I wonder what Mr. Schwartz would think of the transformation of his beloved Katie Belle's. Open to the public, but closed on Sundays and Mondays.
What a shame.....it's all about the Benjamins!

[vintageogauge]

I wonder what Mr. Schwartz would think of the transformation of his beloved Katie Belle's. Open to the public, but closed on Sundays and Mondays.
What a shame.....it's all about the Benjamins!

It is a business and it can only lose money so long before either changing the way the business is run or shutting it down completely. It's still enjoyable going the KB's once in awhile.

[Polar Bear]

What a shame...it's all about the Benjamins!
Yeah, when are people gonna stop going into business just make money!?!

[thelegges]

I think it’s funny that people think Harold can still have nightmares. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[thetruth]

Imagine the INMATES running this place?

[dmorhome]

Just Think" If it were not for Harold Schwartz you would not be here and you would not have anything to complain about. "Enjoy your not here much longer"
:):):)

[Nucky]

Love your post Goldwingnut. Very informative.

The last big tree case in The Historic Section was on a street off Aloha, I know the address but don't want to hurt the people who bought the home. The neighbors tried their case, The Villages won and were allowed to remove the trees and then decided to trim them to satisfy the long-term residents in that particular hood. Sounds good right? They trimmed the tree and put in a beautiful New Home and the roots of the tree were decimated. I saw it with my own eyes. It appears they worked out a beautiful compromise but I wouldn't want to be near that tree in a heavy-duty storm. Progress happens. Deal with it. I love trees but they should have been removed. I hope no one gets hurt.

[BK001]

It is a business and it can only lose money so long before either changing the way the business is run or shutting it down completely. . .

And the same can be said for The Villages. Let's pray that the Morses and any other owners continue to make money and want to continue running it so successfully that it continues to be the retirement paradise that many of us consider The Villages to be.

Without making profit, there would be no incentive!

[spring_chicken]

I have no idea what Mr. Schwartz would be thinking (and NOBODY here does, though some think they do). I only cared about where I was living and this is exactly why I didn't buy in the newer sections with all the younger people. It was a desert. I like my trees and developed landscape and didn't want to wait years to have that.

[Bogie Shooter]

Harold Schwartz went to great effort and thousands of dollars saving trees in Florida. He designed home sights around trees. Today that mindset is no longer the standard. Even in Marion County in the Villages, One person is on a crusade to cut down every tree he sees, pitiful to say the least.

I think you should read post #10.............

[Goldwingnut]

Subsidizing KB's as a exclusive club again for Villagers as a tribute to Harold and his vision would not only honor his memory and vision but perhaps his descendent's may look at money not as an the only end to their means.


All things weigh differently, many have no scale.

Imagine the INMATES running this place?

So who is going to "subsidize KB's" because the same "INMATES" that area already running The Villages, we the residents, are also paying the bills through our annual maintenance assessments and through our monthly amenities fees? It's nobody's rich uncle or "the developer", nobody owes you anything more than what you've already paid for, read your contracts for your home that you bought, it is very clear.

KB's is a privately owned business, are you suggesting that we use these monies paid by residents to directly subsidize and support a private business? I can assure you that the residents elected to the AAC, PWAC, and various #'ed CDD boards, as well as the rest of the residents living here (all of which are the Inmates) would never approve such a subsidy.

I've been amazed over the last 4 years at how quickly many people forget how the real world works once they move to The Villages. Businesses exist for one purpose and one purpose only, to make money for their owners and nothing else, if they happen to do some public good, philanthropy, or help support a worthy cause in the process then good for them. In the end it is still all about making a profit. That is not greed, that is business and that is how our economic system in this great republic works, and works better than any place else in the world. Nobody thought themselves greedy when they were working hard to amass their nestegg or pension that has allowed them to move here and enjoy the lifestyle we all now do. But suddenly now, when it becomes necessary to let loose some of their horded cash to buy something they want or need or some service they don't want to perform themselves all the businesses and their owners are greedy? PLEASE! Come back to reality, business still goes on even if you've forgotten how it all works.

One of the real beauties of our economic system is that it is self-righting; that poor business decisions are rewarded with failure and that good decisions with success and (that dirty word to some) profit. And the ones that get to decide if the decisions were good or bad are US, the consumers. We speak with our wallets and business owners listen with their spreadsheets, money talks! If you're unhappy with a business don't patronize it, if enough feel the same as you you will get the business's attention.

Time to put the soapbox away and go play golf. Have a great day everyone.

[simpkinp]

I went there three times and twice the food was inedible. Thank goodness for the lousy salad and roll with whipped margarine or something. Only thing I could stand. 2 strikes, one ball. Don’t think I am ever going again not looking for the third strike, going out at two.

[PennBF]

Harold Schwartz's biggest nightmares may be? The Residents who enjoy the villages and then complain, the bikes riding in the middle of the road with no respect for the cars, the people who let their dogs use the lawns as bathrooms, the lack of respect for the circles and ignore the rules, the runners who ignore the golf carts on the paths, the restaurants who overcharge because they can, the snowbirds who forget there are people who live here year around and they should have the same respect for our property, those that over drink and put others at risk from their driving !YOU ADD THE REST,,:ohdear:

[graciegirl]

Golf? Free golf? Subsidized? Lol

" Nobody owes you anything more than what you paid for", interesting.

Say you're not in the best of health yet manage to live till 93. You go through doctors and operations, treatments year after year from the day you were eligible for Medicare. By the time you reached 72 you ate up every penny you ever contributed into the SS system. So, what now? Let them eat cake?

Hmmmmm. This post is Verrrrrrrrry interesting. Can you hear me thinking about it? I sense a presence.

[fw102807]

I think it’s funny that people think Harold can still have nightmares. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Me too. Everyone says rest in peace and then this happens.

[DonH57]

I went there three times and twice the food was inedible. Thank goodness for the lousy salad and roll with whipped margarine or something. Only thing I could stand. 2 strikes, one ball. Don’t think I am ever going again not looking for the third strike, going out at two.

We've been there about 3 times since the Reno. Got 2 decent meals in a row. Our last visit proved there is a far different way to prepare chicken parmigiana than most others make it!

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Who would that one person be and how do you know that? What has this to do with Harold Schwartz? I would think that his worst nightmare would be for harm to come to his family and loved ones. This statement might be overly dramatic or even wrong.

Here are my feelings on live oak trees. They are beautiful. They are majestic. They are protected to some degree by laws. They are also dirty to have in your yard and dangerous growing close to your home after they reach a certain size.

During last years Hurricane Irma, a huge Live Oak Tree fell that was growing right next to Laurel Manor Rec Center. It fortunately fell at night and toward the parking lot, minimizing damage that could have been terrible if it had happened when people were there.

No doubt trees are beautiful, but Americans have been clearing them to build structures for centuries.

I believe that there should laws against having live oaks within 100 yards of any home. As you say, they are dirty and not only make a mess on the property on which they are situated by they also are a nuisance to the surrounding homes. They are beautiful trees and belong in parks, not homesites.

[Polar Bear]

I believe that there should laws against having live oaks within 100 yards of any home. As you say, they are dirty and not only make a mess on the property on which they are situated by they also are a nuisance to the surrounding homes. They are beautiful trees and belong in parks, not homesites.
I and many others would fight any proposal for such a law tooth and nail...not there ever will be one. Live oaks shouldn't be close to a home, but the safe distance is FAR less than 100 yards. They are beautiful and they require some maintenance...well worth the effort when in a good location.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We have a "mama maple" in my back yard, that shadows the ground so heavily that we can't grow a lawn back there. So we don't try. We leave it "park-like" and let nature do what nature does best - which is provide natural beauty to our property. There's moss, and johnny jumpups, and clover, and shrubs and bushes and a bunch of different types of grasses, some gorgeous low-growing purple flowers, bee-balm, and some of the moss is so smooth and velvety it's a perfect putting green for my husband. If we had an oak tree in my back yard I'd be deliriously happy. They're absolutely stunning, and I recall fondly climbing one when we visited a plantation in Louisiana one year when I was in my mid-40's. I'd gladly climb another, and enjoy the view of the horizon on my wooden perch.

It saddens me that anyone would think these things are "dirty," as if that were a bad thing. Things that grow in dirt are dirty. It's sort of how it works. I'm sorry to see some people here aren't capable of appreciating *natural* nature, and require "planned artificial nature" to be happy with their lot in life.

[Polar Bear]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We have a "mama maple" in my back yard, that shadows the ground so heavily that we can't grow a lawn back there. So we don't try. We leave it "park-like" and let nature do what nature does best - which is provide natural beauty to our property. There's moss, and johnny jumpups, and clover, and shrubs and bushes and a bunch of different types of grasses, some gorgeous low-growing purple flowers, bee-balm, and some of the moss is so smooth and velvety it's a perfect putting green for my husband. If we had an oak tree in my back yard I'd be deliriously happy. They're absolutely stunning, and I recall fondly climbing one when we visited a plantation in Louisiana one year when I was in my mid-40's. I'd gladly climb another, and enjoy the view of the horizon on my wooden perch.

It saddens me that anyone would think these things are "dirty," as if that were a bad thing. Things that grow in dirt are dirty. It's sort of how it works. I'm sorry to see some people here aren't capable of appreciating *natural* nature, and require "planned artificial nature" to be happy with their lot in life.
Wow. I wish I could have expressed it as well! :ho:

[big guy]

They cut down a lot of hundred or more year old oak trees on CR101 which broke my heart.

And we aren't allowed to take down one tree that is planted too close to the house. A live oak which gets at least 135 ft across and 100 ft tall is a poor yard tree on our small lots.

DO you remember the trees that were removed to build the Village of Duval? Especially the first or second street (maybe both) from Havana CC on the left.

I took a small live oak down in our front yard that would have dwarfed our house in no time. It was small, I didn't ask for permission since it would be easier to ask for forgiveness!

[Goldwingnut]

Golf? Free golf? Subsidized? Lol

" Nobody owes you anything more than what you paid for", interesting.

Say you're not in the best of health yet manage to live till 93. You go through doctors and operations, treatments year after year from the day you were eligible for Medicare. By the time you reached 72 you ate up every penny you ever contributed into the SS system. So, what now? Let them eat cake?

Based on your Free Golf comment you obviously you don't understand how things are funded here in The Villages and who owns what.

The Free Golf here in The Villages isn't really free, the residents are paying for it as a part of the amenities budgets. Of the $112,406,826 in amenities budgets for FY19 $3,730,400 is scheduled to operate and maintain the 50 Executive courses plus and additional $740,000 is also scheduled for course improvement for the upcoming year. So the total golf budget is $4,470,400 or 4% of the total amenities budgets. These are the budgets that we all, as residents, pay into each month when we pay our monthly amenities fees. Is the golf really free? If I go to the starter shack to play 9 holes this morning and I take nothing out of my wallet to play then it would apparently be free, but it's not really because yesterday I wrote a check to pay my water bill and amenities, which paid for that golf.

Note the emphasis on Executive golf, that is the golf that is "free". The Executive courses are owned by the two central district governments, VCCDD and SLCCD, and not a company or business. The Championship courses are all privately owned and are not included in the "free" golf nor do they receive any funding from the amenities budgets. There is no subsidy paid to operate the Executive courses, it is simply a budget line item for an operating cost in a budget we all agreed to pay for.

The health care and Social Security comments are much to complex issues to get into on this thread, and it would be an apples-to-oranges comparison to the golf issue in any case. Simply put both of these (SS & medicare) are supposed to be funded by everyone and everyone receives benefits from them at the appropriate time. Yes, some will derive more benefit that others and many will contribute and receive no benefit at all.

It is not a perfect system, the biggest flaw being that they are run by politicians in Washington or at the State level who use these funds and create targeted and special entitlements, in my opinion, inappropriately. Fortunately for us here in The Villages the budgeting process is much simpler and there is clear visibility of where the money comes from and where it goes, if one takes the time to read and understand it. Additionally, here in The Villages we operate on a balanced budget and do not engage in deficit spending like the state and federal governments.

[graciegirl]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We have a "mama maple" in my back yard, that shadows the ground so heavily that we can't grow a lawn back there. So we don't try. We leave it "park-like" and let nature do what nature does best - which is provide natural beauty to our property. There's moss, and johnny jumpups, and clover, and shrubs and bushes and a bunch of different types of grasses, some gorgeous low-growing purple flowers, bee-balm, and some of the moss is so smooth and velvety it's a perfect putting green for my husband. If we had an oak tree in my back yard I'd be deliriously happy. They're absolutely stunning, and I recall fondly climbing one when we visited a plantation in Louisiana one year when I was in my mid-40's. I'd gladly climb another, and enjoy the view of the horizon on my wooden perch.

It saddens me that anyone would think these things are "dirty," as if that were a bad thing. Things that grow in dirt are dirty. It's sort of how it works. I'm sorry to see some people here aren't capable of appreciating *natural* nature, and require "planned artificial nature" to be happy with their lot in life.

Leaves on roofs. Leaves in gutters. Leaves in yards. Leaves are dirty when they fall off trees. Many people call that a pain in the fanny as we grow older. What some think is beautiful others do not.

[aninjamom]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We have a "mama maple" in my back yard, that shadows the ground so heavily that we can't grow a lawn back there. So we don't try. We leave it "park-like" and let nature do what nature does best - which is provide natural beauty to our property. There's moss, and johnny jumpups, and clover, and shrubs and bushes and a bunch of different types of grasses, some gorgeous low-growing purple flowers, bee-balm, and some of the moss is so smooth and velvety it's a perfect putting green for my husband. If we had an oak tree in my back yard I'd be deliriously happy. They're absolutely stunning, and I recall fondly climbing one when we visited a plantation in Louisiana one year when I was in my mid-40's. I'd gladly climb another, and enjoy the view of the horizon on my wooden perch.

It saddens me that anyone would think these things are "dirty," as if that were a bad thing. Things that grow in dirt are dirty. It's sort of how it works. I'm sorry to see some people here aren't capable of appreciating *natural* nature, and require "planned artificial nature" to be happy with their lot in life.

Hear Hear! I used to live in a home that had two large oaks in the back yard, and five in front. On less than 1/4 acre. Yes, I raked 20 bags or more of leaves out of the yard every spring, but it was worth it. Cool shade, lots of birds, lower power bills, and a beautiful ecology going. I'd take an oak over a yard of rocks with a palm tree any day. Just my opinion.

[fw102807]

Hear Hear! I used to live in a home that had two large oaks in the back yard, and five in front. On less than 1/4 acre. Yes, I raked 20 bags or more of leaves out of the yard every spring, but it was worth it. Cool shade, lots of birds, lower power bills, and a beautiful ecology going. I'd take an oak over a yard of rocks with a palm tree any day. Just my opinion.

To each their own. I moved 1300 miles to have palm trees growing in my yard and I love them.

[PennBF]

Darn, God screwed up and gave us a beautiful tree that brings shade, someplace for birds to nest and protect their young, and adds to the beautiful landscape that keeps the Villages beautiful and green. He should know better as we get leaves and a yard that is slightly tattered from the leaves that we have to take care of. We were so happy sitting on the couch and watching TV and not having to move in nature. We are truly lucky to have this gift from God.:coolsmiley:

[Polar Bear]

Leaves on roofs. Leaves in gutters...
Tree too close to house, or simply needs some branches trimmed. I have a beautiful oak tree on standard lot...never any leaves on roof.
...Leaves in yards...
Small price to pay.
...Leaves are dirty when they fall off trees...
I simply can't relate to that line of thought.
...What some think is beautiful others do not.
A point we can agree on.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

I and many others would fight any proposal for such a law tooth and nail...not there ever will be one. Live oaks shouldn't be close to a home, but the safe distance is FAR less than 100 yards. They are beautiful and they require some maintenance...well worth the effort when in a good location.

There is one on a property adjacent to mine. It's probably five feet from the property line and overhangs my property. It makes and incredible mess on my lanai and patio. It also fills my gutters with crap and is destroying my lawn by dropping acorns which are turning into little trees. Had I thought about this beforehand I wouldn't have bought this house.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Tree too close to house, or simply needs some branches trimmed. I have a beautiful oak tree on standard lot...never any leaves on roof.

Small price to pay.

I simply can't relate to that line of thought.

A point we can agree on.

Small price to pay for what? I didn't retire to spend my life raking leaves, cleaning my gutters, and trying to remove crap from my patio.

I was hoping for a very low maintenance home. If you like the tree so much, you're more than welcome to come to my house and clean up the mess it makes. After all, it's a small price to pay.

[graciegirl]

Tree too close to house, or simply needs some branches trimmed. I have a beautiful oak tree on standard lot...never any leaves on roof.

Small price to pay.

I simply can't relate to that line of thought.

A point we can agree on.

Dear good person. I am sure we agree more than you might think. Recently my ability to rake and bag has diminished, but my Ohio bred desire for cleanliness has not. I can recite, "I think that I shall never see a poem lovely as a tree" and mean it sincerely. We have friends who have had huge bills from tree trimming in order to keep their home safe.

I will never forget that beautiful huge oak lying down in the parking lot on the morning after Hurricane Irma. They are big. They fall. They, are like the Czar and Tevye. I would like some distance from them. We don't have palms either. We love all of the pretty trees and bushes that line our streets here in The Villages.

[Polar Bear]

...I am sure we agree more than you might think...
I don't know...I already think we agree on quite a bit. :)
:ho::beer3:

[BobnBev]

There is one on a property adjacent to mine. It's probably five feet from the property line and overhangs my property. It makes and incredible mess on my lanai and patio. It also fills my gutters with crap and is destroying my lawn by dropping acorns which are turning into little trees. Had I thought about this beforehand I wouldn't have bought this house.

I know you would be upset if something killed it and it had to be removed.:ohdear::ohdear:

[Polar Bear]

Small price to pay for what? I didn't retire to spend my life raking leaves, cleaning my gutters, and trying to remove crap from my patio.

I was hoping for a very low maintenance home. If you like the tree so much, you're more than welcome to come to my house and clean up the mess it makes. After all, it's a small price to pay.
I already have one on my property that I've maintained so it has no impact at all on my patio or house. And I do rake leaves on occasion. That is the small price I pay for the beauty, shade and nature that it provides. Then again, I did some homework before I purchased our home. But since you're being so kind and friendly...

You were hoping for a low maintenance home, and yet you bought the one you did. Nice job. Guess you should have done a little more homework and a little less hoping.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

It's like I'm reading the posts of insane people who have no sense of reason at all. You pay how much, exactly, for amenities that cover the destruction of all these trees just so you can have more gridlock whenever someone drives through a gate because they're new and don't know any better? You pay how much, precisely, for pesticides and chemicals so that your crabgrass is the same shade of green as the astroturf we use as a ground-cover under our small above-ground pool? YOU don't want to mow your lawn either, and that doesn't stop you from having one, does it? You probably don't like having red ants or termites, but YOU aren't the one who is spraying the insecticide to keep them away, are you? When your car needs servicing, YOU aren't the one who checks the belts and does the oil change are you? No, you hire people for these things. So why is it all of a sudden a big deal for YOU to have to rake leaves off your lawn? You have a landscaper on contract, or on speed dial. Raking leaves is one of those services landscapers offer.

As for overhanging branches: I don't know about the laws in Florida but here in Connecticut if my neighbor's branch is hanging over into my property and causing problems, I'm legally allowed to get up on a ladder and trim the branch to my neighbor's side of the fence. Or - I am allowed to hire someone to do it for me if I'm not able to climb the ladder myself. Although - I would probably just, y'know, ASK my neighbor if he'd mind doing it himself, before I'd go through the effort to have it done.

[graciegirl]

It's like I'm reading the posts of insane people who have no sense of reason at all. You pay how much, exactly, for amenities that cover the destruction of all these trees just so you can have more gridlock whenever someone drives through a gate because they're new and don't know any better? You pay how much, precisely, for pesticides and chemicals so that your crabgrass is the same shade of green as the astroturf we use as a ground-cover under our small above-ground pool? YOU don't want to mow your lawn either, and that doesn't stop you from having one, does it? You probably don't like having red ants or termites, but YOU aren't the one who is spraying the insecticide to keep them away, are you? When your car needs servicing, YOU aren't the one who checks the belts and does the oil change are you? No, you hire people for these things. So why is it all of a sudden a big deal for YOU to have to rake leaves off your lawn? You have a landscaper on contract, or on speed dial. Raking leaves is one of those services landscapers offer.

As for overhanging branches: I don't know about the laws in Florida but here in Connecticut if my neighbor's branch is hanging over into my property and causing problems, I'm legally allowed to get up on a ladder and trim the branch to my neighbor's side of the fence. Or - I am allowed to hire someone to do it for me if I'm not able to climb the ladder myself. Although - I would probably just, y'know, ASK my neighbor if he'd mind doing it himself, before I'd go through the effort to have it done.

No one is forced to buy here. It is a CDD and the choice is yours. If this place sets your teeth on edge, it may not be for you. Please do not move here to change it. We have enough inmates who want to run the asylum. Most of us think that it is danged nigh perfect.


Our amenities do not cover the destruction of trees. The developer does a good job with the placement and maintenance of landscaping on common grounds and in foundation plantings that come with the house. The St. John's River authority is the government office for permission to remove Live Oak trees above a certain diameter and I am sure they follow all rules.

Our "Landscaper" cuts our grass only.. DH trims the bushes and rakes the leaves and removes the weeds and sprinkles go-away on the fire ants.. Many of us have lived carefully and avoid unnecessary expenditures when we can. It is how we have lived all of our lives and for many of us it is how we were able to retire here where there is no astroturf, etc. etc.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

I already have one on my property that I've maintained so it has no impact at all on my patio or house. And I do rake leaves on occasion. That is the small price I pay for the beauty, shade and nature that it provides. Then again, I did some homework before I purchased our home. But since you're being so kind and friendly...

You were hoping for a low maintenance home, and yet you bought the one you did. Nice job. Guess you should have done a little more homework and a little less hoping.

You're right. I accept responsibility. I made a mistake. Had I thought about it before hand I would have bought a different house.

I don't know how big the tree on your property is, but the one next to me is enormous. I don't know what can be done to maintain it so that it doesn't drop all kinds of crap on my house. Add that to the fact that I can only maintain the part that overhangs my property. I've had it trimmed but the tree guy can only go up so high. This tree has to be sixty feet.

This tree is t the north west of my property so it doesn't provide any shade for me. We occasionally take walks through one of parks that are loaded with live oaks. I marvel at their beauty and appreciate them when they are not near my house.

Sorry if I sounded a bit snappy. It's something irritates me. I don't feel as you do that raking leaves and cleaning gutters is a small price to pay, especially where I really get no benefit from this tree being where it is.

[Polar Bear]

You're right. I accept responsibility. I made a mistake. Had I thought about it before hand I would have bought a different house.

I don't know how big the tree on your property is, but the one next to me is enormous. I don't know what can be done to maintain it so that it doesn't drop all kinds of crap on my house. Add that to the fact that I can only maintain the part that overhangs my property. I've had it trimmed but the tree guy can only go up so high. This tree has to be sixty feet.

This tree is t the north west of my property so it doesn't provide any shade for me. We occasionally take walks through one of parks that are loaded with live oaks. I marvel at their beauty and appreciate them when they are not near my house.

Sorry if I sounded a bit snappy. It's something irritates me. I don't feel as you do that raking leaves and cleaning gutters is a small price to pay, especially where I really get no benefit from this tree being where it is.
Very civil response, Doc. :) And I apologize for coming back at you.

And I'm glad to hear you're trimming the tree over your property. I was going to pass that along. Perfectly legal as long as you don't in effect kill the tree with major, major, trimming. But if it's over your property, you can do some very significant trimming and be totally within your rights.

One last thought. My "small price to pay" is raking leaves. I'm not so sure I would consider cleaning gutters such a small price...heheh. I have trimmed the tree so no branches shed leaves onto my roof. Could you possibly do the same thing? I know height can be an issue to get all branches that are over your roof. But surely some expert tree trimmer could make it happen. Just sayin'. :)