Landscaping stone backing to St. Charles Place

[roob1]

There is a house that backs up to St. Charles Place on the south side, close to the Buena Vista gate, that was recently landscaped in the back yard. At least 15-20 feet of stone extends from the house's shrubs (the whole width of the lot), right to the curb of St. Charles.

Is this allowed? It really sticks out as you drive by.

I have not checked with Community Standards but am curious what others (those who have seen it) think.

ADDENDUM: Near the St. James gate to Buena Vista.

[Sweatman]

We were told by Community Standards that hardscape (edgers, pavers) must be 3 feet from property line. Not sure what easement the county has on that road.

[Bogie Shooter]

Really doesn't matter what we think...…...what are the restrictions?

[vintageogauge]

Do they have a permit posted in front of the house, if so it was approved, if not make the call.

[photo1902]

Do they have a permit posted in front of the house, if so it was approved, if not make the call.

Huh?

[Bogie Shooter]

Do they have a permit posted in front of the house, if so it was approved, if not make the call.

Permit posting is probably for exterior structural changes, from the county .
AR approval is a signed document,,,,,not posted.

[Villageswimmer]

Where are the mythical old ladies with clipboards in their golf cart when you need ‘em?

[ficoguy]

There is a house that backs up to St. Charles Place on the south side, close to the Buena Vista gate, that was recently landscaped in the back yard. At least 15-20 feet of stone extends from the house's shrubs (the whole width of the lot), right to the curb of St. Charles.

Is this allowed? It really sticks out as you drive by.

I have not checked with Community Standards but am curious what others (those who have seen it) think.
If it is not compliant then they will be cited very quickly and be asked to remediate - and pay a fine each day its not. Competing landscapers love to rat each other out.

[rustyp]

If you go to ARC website
Village Community Development Districts (https://www.districtgov.org/committees/meetings.aspx?committee=ar&code=17)

Type in the box "containing text" the address and you can view if the property has had an ARC request within the last 6 months. If you go to box custom date you can get a lengthy history.

[photo1902]

Where are the mythical old ladies with clipboards in their golf cart when you need ‘em?

For the answer to that question, see post #1.:icon_wink:

[buzzy]

There is a house that backs up to St. Charles Place on the south side, close to the Buena Vista gate, that was recently landscaped in the back yard. At least 15-20 feet of stone extends from the house's shrubs (the whole width of the lot), right to the curb of St. Charles.

Is this allowed? It really sticks out as you drive by.

I have not checked with Community Standards but am curious what others (those who have seen it) think.

Went over to see. Can't find anything that fits your description.

[villagetinker]

My house backs on Pinellas place, and there is a 20 foot R/W (for utilities) that has very specific restrictions, one of which is no permanent structures (concrete pads, etc.). Now I have no idea if the hardscaping would qualify as "permanent" however, I was cautioned about PLANTING in the area. I have a very nice flat back yard with NO trees, bushes, etc in that right of way.

[Average Guy]

There is a house that backs up to St. Charles Place on the south side, close to the Buena Vista gate, that was recently landscaped in the back yard. At least 15-20 feet of stone extends from the house's shrubs (the whole width of the lot), right to the curb of St. Charles.

Is this allowed? It really sticks out as you drive by.

I have not checked with Community Standards but am curious what others (those who have seen it) think.

Which St. Charles Place gate at Buena Vista are you referring to - the Liberty Park gate, or the one at St. James?

[roob1]

Sorry, the one at St. James.


Which St. Charles Place gate at Buena Vista are you referring to - the Liberty Park gate, or the one at St. James?

[CFrance]

My house backs on Pinellas place, and there is a 20 foot R/W (for utilities) that has very specific restrictions, one of which is no permanent structures (concrete pads, etc.). Now I have no idea if the hardscaping would qualify as "permanent" however, I was cautioned about PLANTING in the area. I have a very nice flat back yard with NO trees, bushes, etc in that right of way.
I wouldn't call it hardscaping. It's landscape stones that have been put all the way to the curb. It really jumps out at you because the whole rest of St. Charles is grass to the curb. Somebody didn't want to mow. Not sure if it's allowed, but it sure looks ugly. And no, I'm not one of those clipboard ladies.

[Buffalo Jim]

Where are the mythical old ladies with clipboards in their golf cart when you need ‘em?

They are extremely busy documenting Virus Safety Rule Violators around the Villages and in the stores and then posting updates about them on FB , the V-N , NextDoor etc . And reports are that they are getting very exhausted from the workload .

[John_W]

I usually turn off St. Charles onto Bailey Trail, so I don't go down by Allamanda, I guess it's down there toward Buena Vista. Anyway, have you seen the backyard on Odell Circle near the Duval Pool? It's all rocks and cactus, I think it looks great. The most recent google map image is from 2013, it's has been expanded to almost the whole yard now.

Google Maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.8719994,-81.9835633,3a,75y,26.13h,67.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb047sF6CEi4sivXF3Duf_Q!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656)

[CFrance]

I usually turn off St. Charles onto Bailey Trail, so I don't go down by Allamanda, I guess it's down there toward Buena Vista. Anyway, have you seen the backyard on Odell Circle near the Duval Pool? It's all rocks and cactus, I think it looks great. The most recent google map image is from 2013, it's has been expanded to almost the whole yard now.

Google Maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.8719994,-81.9835633,3a,75y,26.13h,67.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb047sF6CEi4sivXF3Duf_Q!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656)
It's not down there; it's the other direction, down by the St. James gate. There is no landscaping, just an expanse of pebbles like people use around their plantings and in place of grass in the CYV's.

[champion6]

My house backs on Pinellas place, and there is a 20 foot R/W (for utilities) that has very specific restrictions, one of which is no permanent structures (concrete pads, etc.). Now I have no idea if the hardscaping would qualify as "permanent" however, I was cautioned about PLANTING in the area. I have a very nice flat back yard with NO trees, bushes, etc in that right of way.I believe VT nailed it. The stone is OK, according to code, because it's not "permanent." If excavating is necessary in the right of way, the homeowner would be repairing/replacing stone, as opposed to repairing/replacing sod. Stone or sod -- neither is permanent.

[tghoul]

It looks better than weeds however they should plant some colorful flowers to brighten up the space.

[Challenger]

Unfortunately I believe that there is a Florida Statute that prohibits local restrictions on yardscapes that preserve water .
My bet is this treatments is protected by those statutes.

[photo1902]

I believe VT nailed it. The stone is OK, according to code, because it's not "permanent." If excavating is necessary in the right of way, the homeowner would be repairing/replacing stone, as opposed to repairing/replacing sod. Stone or sod -- neither is permanent.

It goes beyond what is considered "permanent". ARC is very restrictive about a large area of stone without plantings of any type.

[John_W]

It's not down there; it's the other direction, down by the St. James gate. There is no landscaping, just an expanse of pebbles like people use around their plantings and in place of grass in the CYV's.

I'm going that way in a few minutes, getting a Jersey Mike's sub made without a mask. I'll take a look.

[buzzy]

Went over to see. Can't find anything that fits your description.

Oh I understand now. I misunderstood "15-20 feet of stone" to be a border instead of ground cover.

[John_W]

I saw it this afternoon, heck I've driven by there numerous times and never paid attention. It's only about 12 to 15 feet wide, it's strip between the curb and their big hedge. I was thinking it was the whole back yard the way this was being mentioned. I don't have problem with their yard.

[brianherlihy]

y don't we just live outher pople be it is their home

[Trishakaye]

Do they have a permit posted in front of the house, if so it was approved, if not make the call.

I’m sure they submitted a request to Architectural Review. Are you going to complain because YOU don’t like how it looks? Don’t you have more important things to worry about right now? This is another reason why I love Southern Oaks. Very different restrictions.

[runkcrun]

I usually turn off St. Charles onto Bailey Trail, so I don't go down by Allamanda, I guess it's down there toward Buena Vista. Anyway, have you seen the backyard on Odell Circle near the Duval Pool? It's all rocks and cactus, I think it looks great. The most recent google map image is from 2013, it's has been expanded to almost the whole yard now.

Google Maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@28.8719994,-81.9835633,3a,75y,26.13h,67.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb047sF6CEi4sivXF3Duf_Q!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656)

UGH! We drive by there often - it is pretty ugly for sure. I can't even look at it. I guess because it is in the back yard that makes it okay. Only good thing is that the woman does keep it up.

To each his own...

[Aw Man]

There is a house that backs up to St. Charles Place on the south side, close to the Buena Vista gate, that was recently landscaped in the back yard. At least 15-20 feet of stone extends from the house's shrubs (the whole width of the lot), right to the curb of St. Charles.

Is this allowed? It really sticks out as you drive by.

I have not checked with Community Standards but am curious what others (those who have seen it) think.

ADDENDUM: Near the St. James gate to Buena Vista.

Did you check with Community Standards to see if this landscaping change was completed per plans approved by the ARC?

If not, you should.

Based on your described location for this house, it should be in CDD#5.

The CDD#5 Architectural Review Manual for the ARC, as approved by the District #5 Board of Supervisors, states, in part, under the section on new/additional landscaping, "Existing sod or other plant material shall only be replaced with sod or other plant material. Rock is not an acceptable replacement for sod or other plant material(s) except as an accent material in approved landscaping beds".

Based on this it seems unlikely that the owners of the house obtained ARC approval for the stone ground cover that you have described.

Edit: someone says the offending house is in CDD#8. The Architectural Review Manuals for both CDD#5 and CDD#8 have exactly the same wording about rock not being an acceptable replacement for sod.

[John_W]

Did you check with Community Standards to see if this landscaping change was completed per plans approved by the ARC?

If not, you should.

Based on your described location for this house, it should be in CDD#5.



St. James should be in District 8, the same as my village, Tamarind Grove. Here's district 8, and the backyard is on St. Charles, which is the curved circle through the middle.

https://districtgov.org/yourdistrict/districtmap/images/dist8.gif

[coffeebean]

I’m sure they submitted a request to Architectural Review. Are you going to complain because YOU don’t like how it looks? Don’t you have more important things to worry about right now? This is another reason why I love Southern Oaks. Very different restrictions.

Different in what way?

[photo1902]

Different in what way?

You read my mind.

[JP]

It's illegal.

[600th Photo Sq]

Sorry, the one at St. James.

So I now know why all the traffic was going back and forth on St Charles, never seen anything like it. It was really bad. Day after Day. Thankfully not any accidents by people gawking.

One huge mistake by getting the street name wrong . :shocked:

[roob1]

From my original post: "There is a house that backs up to St. Charles".

St. James was mentioned as the nearest gate (in a later clarification). So where is the street name wrong???



So I now know why all the traffic was going back and forth on St Charles, never seen anything like it. It was really bad. Day after Day. Thankfully not any accidents by people gawking.

One huge mistake by getting the street name wrong . :shocked:

[Aw Man]

From my original post: "There is a house that backs up to St. Charles".

St. James was mentioned as the nearest gate (in a later clarification). So where is the street name wrong???

OP, have you contacted or called yet to check with Community Standards about this property and whether or not the stone ground cover was installed with ARC approval?
The ARC landscaping design guidelines clearly state that rock is not an acceptable replacement for sod.

[roob1]

The stones were being removed this morning.

[BobnBev]

The stones were being removed this morning.


Trolls--1

Homeowner--0

Game over.

[photo1902]

Trolls--1

Homeowner--0

Game over.

Simply abiding by the rules (aka Deed Restrictions) and completing an ARC Application would've saved a lot of grief, not to mention time and money.

[Trishakaye]

Where are the mythical old ladies with clipboards in their golf cart when you need ‘em?

Sorry to say they’re not mythical.

[John_W]

...This is another reason why I love Southern Oaks. Very different restrictions.

Where is Southern Oaks?

[champion6]

Where is Southern Oaks?Generally, the area south of Rt 44.

[photo1902]

So there are no Deed Restrictions in "Southern Oaks"?

[John_W]

Generally, the area south of Rt 44.

I knew where it was, I wanted that poster to answer, The Villages. Then they can explain why their restrictions are different or don't apply. They're the usual new poster, hit and run and never explain their comments.

[brianherlihy]

to bad I want stone to keep the dogs off. and stop poping

[skip0358]

All I can say is people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. The are numerous house with violations if you really went over the rules period. So IF someone gets their briefs in a bunch or gets bored all they have to do is ride around look and complain so as to make someone else's life as miserable as theirs apparently is. I do believe the rules need to be revisited as some things are just wrong. If it's a violation the District should be doing the checking and complaining not the bored people riding around with nothing better to do or an axe to grind. JMO

[biker1]

I believe there may be a good reason why the CDDs don't do the monitoring (reporting) of potential deed restriction violations. If they were responsible for monitoring then they could open themselves up to claims of "selective enforcement". "Selective enforcement" claims come about when a deed restriction violation has existed for some period of time at one house but not others. When a violated deed restriction is brought to a homeowner's attention but the same violation has existed for some period of time at another house, they can claim "foul" and possibly succeed in not having to remedy the violation. I have seen this happen in a previous deed restricted community. By not being responsible for monitoring (and only enforcement when potential deed restriction violations are brought to their attention), the CDDs may be protecting themselves and their ability to enforce the deed restrictions. If would be difficult and costly to effectively monitor (i.e. not miss any violations) 65K houses. Of course, when potential deed restriction violations are brought to their attention it is important that they correctly interpret the written deed restrictions and enforce them, if an actual deed restriction violation exists, each and every time.

All I can say is people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. The are numerous house with violations if you really went over the rules period. So IF someone gets their briefs in a bunch or gets bored all they have to do is ride around look and complain so as to make someone else's life as miserable as theirs apparently is. I do believe the rules need to be revisited as some things are just wrong. If it's a violation the District should be doing the checking and complaining not the bored people riding around with nothing better to do or an axe to grind. JMO

[togabill]

Not true. There are some on St Charles with bark chips to the curb. They have been there a while so not sure what the difference would be...bark or stone?