No ARC Approval makes $4,000 mistake

[John_W]

According to the online Villages News a homeowner of a villa in Edgewater Bungalows must remove within 45 days her newly installed artificial grass lawn. The CDD 6 board voted 5-0 to have it removed or face $150 a day fine until it is brought back into compliance.

The home is in Edgewater Bungalows, her unit is two doors from the Waterfront Hotel overlooking Lake Sumter. She purchased the home in 2015 for $615,000. The owner Shirely Schwartz has appeared once before the District 6 board of Supervisors public hearing, and she said she is attempting one more issue before giving in. She said she's had over 100 cars and carts drive by the home and tell her how beautiful it looks. Unfortunately she never received ARC (Architectural Review Committee) approval before the installation.

https://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/106508886_1663417193822806_7415333298506462233_o.j pg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=c6xr67IlJMsAX9JyGCj&_nc_ht=scontent-mia3-2.xx&oh=7859aa5865c60e2adf444f4cfafa3f26&oe=5F2108A9

[Stu from NYC]

Why would they object to it as it would save huge amounts of water?

[retiredguy123]

It looks good now, but what will it look like in 5 years? Did she provide the names of the 100 people who said it was beautiful? I doubt it.

I priced it out 4 years ago for my house. I called ARC and they said no. Why should someone who broke the rules be treated differently?

[fdpaq0580]

According to the online Villages News a homeowner of a villa in Edgewater Bungalows must remove within 45 days her newly installed artificial grass lawn. The CDD 6 board voted 5-0 to have it removed or face $150 a day fine until it is brought back into compliance.

The home is in Edgewater Bungalows, her unit is two doors from the Waterfront Hotel overlooking Lake Miona. She purchased the home in 2015 for $615,000. The owner Shirely Schwartz has appeared once before the District 6 board of Supervisors public hearing, and she said she is attempting one more issue before giving in. She said she's had over 100 cars and carts drive by the home and tell her how beautiful it looks. Unfortunately she never received ARC (Architectural Review Committee) approval before the installation.

https://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/106508886_1663417193822806_7415333298506462233_o.j pg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=c6xr67IlJMsAX9JyGCj&_nc_ht=scontent-mia3-2.xx&oh=7859aa5865c60e2adf444f4cfafa3f26&oe=5F2108A9

Thanks for sharing this. I had often thought about doing something like this. We spend so much on irrigation to water the crumby grass. We, the community, spend a ton of money on trying to fight bugs, fungus and other things that kill or damage our lawns. We dump tons of toxic chemicals into the sewers and ground water to try to keep the lawns alive. And any attempt by home owners like this one, to promote a landscape that could save water, reduce chemical pollution or save money and improve curb appeal with less required maintenance get squashed. In the cyv's like the picture shows, I wonder what the reason is for not allowing it. Does it interfere with something? Or is it just the rule?
When we purchased our home we didn't know there was a grate covering a sewer/runoff drain in our yard. Since we bought new, it must have been cleared with the developer to cover it with old carpet and cover that with sod. After some time (well over a year) trying to deal with flooding in the low spot, I discovered what had been done to try and disguise this sewer to make the home more sellable. Still love our home, but.? I think that unless there is a real and demonstrable reason this artificial grass actually hurts in some real way, why not allow it or some viable option for making a landscape that looks good while saving water, eliminating the need for chemicals and reducing or eliminating constant maintenance. Just asking.

[DeanFL]

.
.
.
By the photo - I think it looks great.

No mowing, no fertilizing, no irrigation, stays green, and dog poop would be readily pick-up-a-ble. A win-win-win-win-win. But no ARC OK...? shame. For you folks in the know - what are the current 'rules' re fake turf?

My son in Rendondo Beach CA, put in astroturf in place of his lawn in his backyard. a Win for him, and after 5 years - looks like new.
.
.
.

[raynan]

I think it looks beautiful and would be a great water saver. BUT, it is not approved by ARC and that' the bottom line. Everyone who has it should be made to remove it and the company selling it should know better than to sell it in The Villages and probably should be fined.

[Bjeanj]

I think it looks beautiful and would be a great water saver. BUT, it is not approved by ARC and that' the bottom line. Everyone who has it should be made to remove it and the company selling it should know better than to sell it in The Villages and probably should be fined.

I agree with raynan. It does look good. HOWEVER, is this homeowner “special” in some way that means they do not have to get ARC approval? You’re now living somewhere that has restrictions. Period. Get approval, or don’t do it.

[Velvet]

Welll... it looks artificial to me. I know the real stuff comes with a lot of problems but still it is real. I mean why not just pour concrete and paint it green?

[retiredguy123]

Welll... it looks artificial to me. I know the real stuff comes with a lot of problems but still it is real. I mean why not just pour concrete and paint it green?
Also, not allowed.

[Velvet]

Also, not allowed.

Yes I know, I was just sarcastic. It would also get hot and ugly and no drainage.

Which reminds me, Massey looked after my native palm tree on the front lawn and it has died after only 3 years. Every similar palm on my street is thriving. Should I buy an artificial one (someone is selling at this site) in its place and then not worry about Massey looking after it?

[Topspinmo]

It looks good now, but what will it look like in 5 years? Did she provide the names of the 100 people who said it was beautiful? I doubt it.

I priced it out 4 years ago for my house. I called ARC and they said no. Why should someone who broke the rules be treated differently?


It will probably look the same, if not can easily be replaced.

[Fenster]

I think you’re totally correct, fdpaq. It is a cost-effective and aesthetically pleasing upgrade. The grass around here is horrible.

[Roberta Forcina]

It looks beautiful from the picture. I feel we should all have the option of doing that considering the price of watering. I find the bills to be outrageous considering what we used to pay in NJ. We are looking into doing the same thing as well as some of our neighbors. The type of grass here is very harsh so to have a lawn look like the one in the picture would be wonderful. They should allow her to keep it. For heavens sake, what is the problem.

[Slapnut]

Some of these homeowners associations have too much power and control over people and their homes. If I were her, I would fight this. I will not live where there is a homeowners association because of the control that they have. Too much time on their hands.

[terenceanne]

We drove by - Its only the front section of the villa and looks very nice. That's more cosmetic. Not sure how it would look to have a full lawn of it.
Unfortunately we have rules here and it's part of living in TV.

[dewilson58]

The Villages = Restrictive Covenants = Consistency = A beautiful place to live.


I'm thankful.

[villageuser]

Why not fight the ARC to get more environmentally friendly instead of just accepting the decision because “it’s the rules”?

[Leadbone1]

I think it looks beautiful and would be a great water saver. BUT, it is not approved by ARC and that' the bottom line. Everyone who has it should be made to remove it and the company selling it should know better than to sell it in The Villages and probably should be fined.

Fined by who? ARC are not the police. It’s not the installers job to enforce rules, Especially since they’re different everywhere

[merrymini]

She should have gotten approval, just like everyone else and , if she is not in accord with the rules, dealt with. That being said, some rules have been changed and it looks like this one should be looked at again, especially for, or maybe exclusively for small properties. Why is a whole bunch of rock more attractive than great Looking astroturf?

[MandoMan]

Welll... it looks artificial to me. I know the real stuff comes with a lot of problems but still it is real. I mean why not just pour concrete and paint it green?

Sort of like wearing a toupée or an elaborate comb-over, right? They could play football on it!

[greenflash245]

seriously, I do not see the problem

[fdpaq0580]

The Villages = Restrictive Covenants = Consistency = A beautiful place to live.


I'm thankful.

Lived in a development with covenants before. The rules helped keep the place looking nice. Plus, if a neighbor decided to break the rules and do something that was not in the best interest of the community, that made the neighborhood look trashy, they could deal with it legally if just neighbor to neighbor conversation failed.
My earlier post was not written to mean "break the rules", but was intended to show that we should have rules that allow for design options that include water saving, reduce the chemical reliance, etc, that still look good. And, before just jumping on the home owner, the committee should consider if the design has some merit that might be allowed and a newer, perhaps better and more environmentally friendly option could be added to the list of rules. If the home owner knowingly broke the rule, shame on them. If they didn't, is there room to consider if this might become acceptable in the future and, if so, let it pass until the rule can be written in?
Just a thought.

[TooColdNJ]

SERIOUSLY?
What person in their right mind would spend all that money on something that had to be submitted for approval first, and probably never would be ??

Everyone breaks the rules... even with a 6 inch garden flag. Sometimes bylaws can be changed after an appeal for the flag or (frog, or flowerpot, etc.) that was probably reported (by a disgruntled neighbor not invited to a party or you had words with! Vindictive? Of course.

The the rules are in place to set limits. Whatever is determined in an appeal is on an issue by issue basis, and between the committee members and homeowners. If there’s a decision to change that rule, all homeowners should receive a copy of the addendum. Then if someone pushes the limit by putting up a 6 foot flag(statue, flowerpot, etc), they would be fined.

The ARTIFICIAL turf looks a hell of a lot better than some lawns, and definitely would help solve a lot of other problems mentioned here. It looks like it needs a LEGO house now. Not everyone can afford to put the turf down, so use your imagination- and think about what the road would look like with houses with a mixture of some with artificial turf and others with ugly grass!

[cwhitecat]

Apparently she didn’t fork over enough cash to the ARC committee.

[Sanford Epstein]

Why are you so jealous? Or are you just the person who reported her. In five years she can change it out just as you cut yours every week because it grows and looks unruly. You are just a Villages busy body!

[mcfirkle]

There’s lots of homes with it installed some have mini golf and putting greens complete with holes and flags. What’s the problem.

[retiredguy123]

It will probably look the same, if not can easily be replaced.
It can easily be replaced, but not cheaply. Astro turf is much more expensive than a traditional sod lawn.

[Rodneysblue]

Then why do you live in TV?
Some of these homeowners associations have too much power and control over people and their homes. If I were her, I would fight this. I will not live where there is a homeowners association because of the control that they have. Too much time on their hands.

[Chitown]

The turf looks great. It is designed to let the water soak through the turf into the soil. It needs no watering, does not attract bugs, stays green, as for the expense, if one can afford it God Bless them. As for the comments about what happens 5 years down the line, well if it needs replacing or maintenance well the owner will need to be responsible for it just like any other piece of there property. All rules had good intentions when they first came out. But all rules and laws can easily be amended and in this case I believe it should be amended.

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

You signed papers to accept the rules , right or wrong there still the rules . Remember one persons expensive AstroTurf is another persons cheap version , just like with ornaments one person puts up something tasteful , but he next person puts up a theme park

[tvbound]

We've studied up on the need to get ARC approval for just about everything, but surely there is room for some kind of compromise?

I think the artificial turf looks fantastic in this case and while they didn't get permission ahead of time, why not some kind of fine for not getting prior approval instead of making them tear it up?

I'm certainly not saying that this process should be applied in every case, because I can imagine some pretty ugly things being done by homeowners and then asking for forgiveness later, but shouldn't the ARC have some flexibility (by vote maybe?) on these types of relatively small changes on a case by case basis? I did see where the CDD voted unanimously on its removal, but is that a function of each member's personal opinion, or based solely on the way the rules are currently written?

Is there a flat restriction on artificial turf? We've seen a number of homes that have putting greens made of the stuff, which I assume they received prior approval, so I can't imagine there is a blanket NO in every case.

[Bill1701]

Why would they object to it as it would save huge amounts of water?

You just stated the reason. Less water means less money for the Morse family.

[Chi-Town]

The turf looks great. It is designed to let the water soak through the turf into the soil. It needs no watering, does not attract bugs, stays green, as for the expense, if one can afford it God Bless them. As for the comments about what happens 5 years down the line, well if it needs replacing or maintenance well the owner will need to be responsible for it just like any other piece of there property. All rules had good intentions when they first came out. But all rules and laws can easily be amended and in this case I believe it should be amended.

Seems like I've seen your screen name someplace before over the last ten years.

[dennisgavin]

The turf looks great. It is designed to let the water soak through the turf into the soil. It needs no watering, does not attract bugs, stays green, as for the expense, if one can afford it God Bless them. As for the comments about what happens 5 years down the line, well if it needs replacing or maintenance well the owner will need to be responsible for it just like any other piece of there property. All rules had good intentions when they first came out. But all rules and laws can easily be amended and in this case I believe it should be amended.

Thanks for the info about drainage. I thought maybe it was because of it being an impervious surface that it wasn't allowed but if it is not then I see no reason the ARC should not consider it.

[kendi]

Wonder if it would be hard to clean if needed. i.e. dog poop that is mushy can't be picked up all the way. It smears on the grass. Wonder too if eventually enough dirt would build up between the blades that weeds would take root.

[Nucky]

My opinion is its beautiful and common sense should prevail. Leave it alone. What it looks like in 5 years can be dealt with down the line when and if it looks worse than a regular lawn in the same neighborhood.

On the other hand, rules are rules and people seem to like to see others squirm. If in the end, if they end up having to remove the quality work they did it would be a true shame. Get a life! Wow!

[big guy]

Thanks for sharing this. I had often thought about doing something like this. We spend so much on irrigation to water the crumby grass. We, the community, spend a ton of money on trying to fight bugs, fungus and other things that kill or damage our lawns. We dump tons of toxic chemicals into the sewers and ground water to try to keep the lawns alive. And any attempt by home owners like this one, to promote a landscape that could save water, reduce chemical pollution or save money and improve curb appeal with less required maintenance get squashed. In the cyv's like the picture shows, I wonder what the reason is for not allowing it. Does it interfere with something? Or is it just the rule?
When we purchased our home we didn't know there was a grate covering a sewer/runoff drain in our yard. Since we bought new, it must have been cleared with the developer to cover it with old carpet and cover that with sod. After some time (well over a year) trying to deal with flooding in the low spot, I discovered what had been done to try and disguise this sewer to make the home more sellable. Still love our home, but.? I think that unless there is a real and demonstrable reason this artificial grass actually hurts in some real way, why not allow it or some viable option for making a landscape that looks good while saving water, eliminating the need for chemicals and reducing or eliminating constant maintenance. Just asking.

I'm not surprised that they covered the runoff drain with carpet and then sod. Many times we saw landscaping and sod being put in after dark by the lights of the landscaper's trucks.

[ribil]

Why would they object to it as it would save huge amounts of water?

Because TV makes money on the irrigation water you are forced to buy to keep your grass alive.

[Irishmen]

We drove by - Its only the front section of the villa and looks very nice. That's more cosmetic. Not sure how it would look to have a full lawn of it.
Unfortunately we have rules here and it's part of living in TV.

Give it a year the homeowner will regret. Why isn't the contractor being held responsible its not the first time they've done this without approval. Why did the contractor disregard obvious rules? Contractor should be held accountable for blatant disregard for covenants. A honest contractor would not have done this.

[Mikee1]

We need to remember, the ARC cannot change or deviate from the rules. They are "the court". They only determine if a rule was or is broken. They do not have the ability or authority to change the rules. The rules are spelled by district and available to download or read anytime you desire.
I am not condoning the ARC, merely reminding folks they have no authority to bend the rules.

[17362]

I have a question after reading all the posts.
Can a district (a group of homes in The Villages) go before the ARC and get a “rule” changed? Has this ever been attempted?

[Irishmen]

Wonder if it would be hard to clean if needed. i.e. dog poop that is mushy can't be picked up all the way. It smears on the grass. Wonder too if eventually enough dirt would build up between the blades that weeds would take root.Trillions of grass and weed spores will take root.

[newgirl]

I wonder what it takes to change the rules? After all, new options keep coming on the market and most do not want a new house with 1950 landscaping. What if you got a few hundred signatures asking to remove this rule, or go back and see if any similar issues had come before the board since development that have had different outcomes.
I would think that all rules are subjective of those in power at the moment.

[ffresh]

We drove by - Its only the front section of the villa and looks very nice. That's more cosmetic. Not sure how it would look to have a full lawn of it.
Unfortunately we have rules here and it's part of living in TV.

Rules are amendable … the world (and even TV) is not a static thing :icon_wink:

Fred

[big guy]

SERIOUSLY?
What person in their right mind would spend all that money on something that had to be submitted for approval first, and probably never would be ??

Everyone breaks the rules... even with a 6 inch garden flag. Sometimes bylaws can be changed after an appeal for the flag or (frog, or flowerpot, etc.) that was probably reported (by a disgruntled neighbor not invited to a party or you had words with! Vindictive? Of course.

The the rules are in place to set limits. Whatever is determined in an appeal is on an issue by issue basis, and between the committee members and homeowners. If there’s a decision to change that rule, all homeowners should receive a copy of the addendum. Then if someone pushes the limit by putting up a 6 foot flag(statue, flowerpot, etc), they would be fined.

The ARTIFICIAL turf looks a hell of a lot better than some lawns, and definitely would help solve a lot of other problems mentioned here. It looks like it needs a LEGO house now. Not everyone can afford to put the turf down, so use your imagination- and think about what the road would look like with houses with a mixture of some with artificial turf and others with ugly grass!

We owned a rental CYV in the Village of Rio Grande. No one had grass, most had no shrubs, many had weeds knee high, most were just rock and it was ugly and stark. I went to our unit once a month to pull weeds but all the heat reflected by the walls, house and rock got to be more than I could tolerate. The artificial turf would have been a HUGE improvement over the rock if it was installed professionally. That is what is so attractive about Ms Schwartz's turf; it appears to have been put in profesionally. It's not lumpy and the edges are sharp. At first glance it looks real. I think it should stay unless they can give her a good reason that it should go (other than the fact that she is not in compliance).

[crash]

Welll... it looks artificial to me. I know the real stuff comes with a lot of problems but still it is real. I mean why not just pour concrete and paint it green?

Because that would be a violation also.

[ffresh]

She should have gotten approval, just like everyone else and , if she is not in accord with the rules, dealt with. That being said, some rules have been changed and it looks like this one should be looked at again, especially for, or maybe exclusively for small properties. Why is a whole bunch of rock more attractive than great Looking astroturf?

Good point, I'm not versed in ARC meetings and such but there must be some mechanism for bringing a suggestion before the board for consideration. Then, the pros and cons of this, or any other proposal, could be discussed in an adult fashion, hopefully, by adults and not people masquerading as such :icon_wink:

Fred

[EandC]

I have been wondering for years why people have not done turf. I do not understand the waste of resources when this seems to be a wonderful solution, especially when we need to conserve water. I am a snowflake and figured I would investigate it once I moved there full time. I really hope this is something TV allows. BTW a neighbor of mine in NY has had turf on his lawn for 5 plus years. Looks odd in the winter when everything is gray but it has held up. Looks great in the summer.

[Topspinmo]

The Villages = Restrictive Covenants = Consistency = A beautiful place to live.


I'm thankful.

Consistency! :1rotfl::1rotfl:

[ffresh]

You signed papers to accept the rules , right or wrong there still the rules . Remember one persons expensive AstroTurf is another persons cheap version , just like with ornaments one person puts up something tasteful , but he next person puts up a theme park

Rules, especially those emanating from an ARC, are NOT inviolate! There is a way to amend them :icon_wink:

Fred

[LowOnCash]

It's beautiful and save from chemical use I would fight them in court - It's time the ARC opened its eyes the residents pay the bills. The house and yard is absolutely beautiful and only adds to the community. Fight it!!!!

[trichard]

Follow the rules.

[Topspinmo]

Why are you so jealous? Or are you just the person who reported her. In five years she can change it out just as you cut yours every week because it grows and looks unruly. You are just a Villages busy body!

Need to “ quote post” so other poster know who you’re talking to.

[airstreamingypsy]

I think that may be the most attractive home in The Villages. The lady bought the turf at one of the squares during market night. Since it was being sold in The Villages, she said she had no reason to think it wasn't allowed, which makes perfect sense. So, it looks beautiful, and is environmentally friendly so it's really a win win. Maybe it's time for The Villages to rethink some of their draconian rules.

[kimgarwel12@gmail.com]

I suspect if everyone had artificial turf, it would soon put the lawn services around TV out of business, not to mention the water company would take a hit financially by the reduction in water used for irrigation. It's probably an all or nothing thing too. You can't have continuity aesthetically if some homes have articifical turf and others have natural grass.

[New Englander]

Why would they object to it as it would save huge amounts of water?

I feel the same way.

[Mumbles]

In the cyv's like the picture shows, I wonder what the reason is for not allowing it. Does it interfere with something? Or is it just the rule?
.... I think that unless there is a real and demonstrable reason this artificial grass actually hurts in some real way, why not allow it or some viable option for making a landscape that looks good while saving water, eliminating the need for chemicals and reducing or eliminating constant maintenance. Just asking.

Agree 100%. However, I'm guessing the Powers might worry that artificial turf is SO excellent looking, it might bring down the values of homes around it. Whatever the reason is, the Board needs to be MUCH more transparent than it tends to be (and that's probably true of all HOAs).

If need be, a collection of many people who think as we do about the turf ought to be organized to visit the Powers during their next meeting. This era in the US is NOT a time for letting things lie untouched, IMHO. People who run our lives MUST be made to be accountable for their applied rules on us.:)

[fdpaq0580]

I suspect if everyone had artificial turf, it would soon put the lawn services around TV out of business, not to mention the water company would take a hit financially by the reduction in water used for irrigation. It's probably an all or nothing thing too. You can't have continuity aesthetically if some homes have articifical turf and others have natural grass.

While I understand your point, I think that there are many things to consider.
The lawn services. Some are large corporations (IE: Massey for example), others are small companies and even owner/operator like the one we use. Many of my neighbors maintain their own yards because they are dissatisfied with the service they received from companies they formerly used. I support businesses that provide products and services I want or need. Others, I assume, do the same. Being expected to support something neither wanted or needed might be like forcing one to support a charity they may not believe in.
As to the water company, I and many others have occasionally received bills that we believe to be incorrect and been dissatisfied with the way the water company just brushes off or defects back on the home owner any complaints. Sadly, we have no viable alternative.
As to the continuity of appearance, on my walks I see homes with great lawns and landscaping, others look pretty bad, regardless of their efforts. So, while I love a great looking lawn, I know from personal experience that for some (snowbirds, elderly, and some others) maintaining yards can be difficult.
I would like to see if there could be landscape options that are not gluttons for water and chemicals. The cyv's are different than the other areas, and I believe there may be a higher percentage of absentee owners that own those properties. So, I, (and No,I don't own one) do think that perhaps they might be allowed a slightly different set of rules in that they are already different than the majority of the community.
I think it would be worth considering.

[TooColdNJ]

Need to “ quote post” so other poster know who you’re talking to.

Totally agree. Who’s jealous?? Lol... not I. Nor did I complain- I don’t live anywhere near that house. (If he was referring to my post). His post was right under mine, who or what was the person who posted that referring to?

I’m all for Astro turf. There are a lot of rules that could be changed, but before doing so, all possible issues would need to be addressed first so there aren’t any unforeseen problems later. Maybe a specific KIND of AstroTurf for uniformity, if that’s what the Villages is concerned about.

Over time things change and some antiquated rules should be reconsidered. Yes. Rules and regulations can be changed- they’re not written in stone. What might not have been acceptable in the older areas have changed in the newer areas. It should be consistent across the Villages, but I’m told that it’s not.

[mydavid]

According to the online Villages News a homeowner of a villa in Edgewater Bungalows must remove within 45 days her newly installed artificial grass lawn. The CDD 6 board voted 5-0 to have it removed or face $150 a day fine until it is brought back into compliance.

The home is in Edgewater Bungalows, her unit is two doors from the Waterfront Hotel overlooking Lake Sumter. She purchased the home in 2015 for $615,000. The owner Shirely Schwartz has appeared once before the District 6 board of Supervisors public hearing, and she said she is attempting one more issue before giving in. She said she's had over 100 cars and carts drive by the home and tell her how beautiful it looks. Unfortunately she never received ARC (Architectural Review Committee) approval before the installation.

https://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/106508886_1663417193822806_7415333298506462233_o.j pg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=c6xr67IlJMsAX9JyGCj&_nc_ht=scontent-mia3-2.xx&oh=7859aa5865c60e2adf444f4cfafa3f26&oe=5F2108A9 I see they have met Cinthia.:1rotfl:

[ValSetz]

Because the rule is stupid! Vindictive is the ARC. If everyone in The Villages who has violated covenants was reported there would be an uprising of all residents. Common sense would be something to think about - tell her OK to leave but if she sells must be put back to original? What happens if you repaint your house, the same color, without ARC approval? What are they going to do - have you scrape it off to original? Power-hungry people without an ounce of common sense is the problem.

[Velvet]

I am wondering about the rules at TOTV - in some ways this is shaming the property, I would hate it if my home was publicly displayed like this. I suppose if the owner posted it, it would be alright.

[La lamy]

I suggest we all write ARC about this. I'm all for artificial turf that looks good, saves water, saves use of chemicals and saves maintenance woes. Rules are for our good. They can and should be changed when it makes sense. Onward and upward!

[La lamy]

Here is the response I received from ARC regarding artificial turf and my wish for them to reconsider the rules that don't allow it:


Thank you for your email. The deed restrictions and the District’s adopted Rule for the area you are referring to provides: All Homesites shall remain finished with the same quantity and style of water-conservative, drought-tolerant sod and landscape as originally provided by the Declarant. Notwithstanding, Owners are encouraged to and may add landscape that is more water-conservative and drought tolerant than originally provided; however, any such alterations to areas visible from roadways or golf courses must receive prior written approval. The deed restrictions are a legal contract between the Developer and the Owner and cannot be changed by the District. Therefore, artificial turf is prohibited in this area.



If you can think of another way to go to have this rule rethought please do!

[Happinow]

I think it looks great too, and with many benefits as preciously noted. However, having artificial turf would put many landscapers out of business. Maybe the developer is trying to protect the landscapers and the bug companies?? Just a thought....

[Fuzz323]

It looks beautiful from the picture. I feel we should all have the option of doing that considering the price of watering. I find the bills to be outrageous considering what we used to pay in NJ. We are looking into doing the same thing as well as some of our neighbors. The type of grass here is very harsh so to have a lawn look like the one in the picture would be wonderful. They should allow her to keep it. For heavens sake, what is the problem.

......on who is making money on the recycled (brown) water that we are all paying for. If too many folks put in astro-turf the system used for the recycled stuff might start to actually cost money to own? I do not claim to be an expert - just thinking here. Besides those lawn guys have a tight union :1rotfl:

[CWGUY]

I think it looks great too, and with many benefits as preciously noted. However, having artificial turf would put many landscapers out of business. Maybe the developer is trying to protect the landscapers and the bug companies?? Just a thought....

:what: Maybe the developer is trying to protect the landscapers and the bug companies??

How about this? The purpose/ reason for the Community Standards Dept of the District Government - All taken from the District Web Site..... that few seem to read.

MISSION
To assist residents in upholding the aesthetic value of their property in The Villages.

The Community Standards Department is committed to upholding the high standards of our community’s residential architectural design, landscaping and aesthetics. The department has two divisions: Deed Compliance and Architectural Review.

You have chosen to live in a community protected by Restrictive Covenants. The Declaration of Restrictions was issued to you at the closing on your home. It was at that time you signed a covenant with the Developer to comply with the Restrictive Covenants. We urge all homeowners to read their Restrictive Covenants.

Why a lot of us moved here! :ho:

[bpascani]

it sounds like it must be more of an ego thing...i.e, if she would have /known to apply for arc/cdd/whatever approval, it may have been approved, but, because she either didn't know she needed to, for whatever reason, the committees want to punish her or anyone, just because she didn't follow their rules. Per the picture, it looks MUCH better than SO MUCH rock, with only the 'required' 2 or 3 small plants sprinkled around. If it's really as pretty as it looks in the picture, I'd say just give her some sort of fine for not following protocol, then maybe thank her for coming up with a beautiful idea. Of course, I guess one would need to wonder/worry/consider if/how long it will stay that nice looking..

[Velvet]

Just curious, is the owner living there, or renting it out most of the time?

[noslices1]

It looks beautiful from the picture. I feel we should all have the option of doing that considering the price of watering. I find the bills to be outrageous considering what we used to pay in NJ. We are looking into doing the same thing as well as some of our neighbors. The type of grass here is very harsh so to have a lawn look like the one in the picture would be wonderful. They should allow her to keep it. For heavens sake, what is the problem.

The problem I see is that if they allow this artificial turf to be allowed, some old “Hippie” is going to put down ORANGE turf or RAINBOW turf Or something else that wouldn’t fit in.

[stadry]

no painted concrete ? interesting as MANY driveways are coated - NOT original concrete

[retiredguy123]

It looks beautiful from the picture. I feel we should all have the option of doing that considering the price of watering. I find the bills to be outrageous considering what we used to pay in NJ. We are looking into doing the same thing as well as some of our neighbors. The type of grass here is very harsh so to have a lawn look like the one in the picture would be wonderful. They should allow her to keep it. For heavens sake, what is the problem.
The problem is that she did not get ARC approval to do it. I contacted ARC about 4 years ago about doing the same thing, but they told me that it is not allowed, so I did another type of landscaping. Do you want to have a consistent standard and approval process for landscaping in The Villages? Or, do you want to just allow homeowners to do whatever they want, post a photo on a TOTV thread, and have posters weigh in on whether or not it meets their approval? If that works, then we could eliminate the ARC.

[wsachs]

Fined by who? ARC are not the police. It’s not the installers job to enforce rules, Especially since they’re different everywhere

Anyone who works in TV knows that they need to have ARC approval. Unless you hire people who want your money and don't care about getting it.

[vermonster]

Perhaps the reason for the regulation is that by definition "artificial" turf is not a natural biological system. Rain falling on it will not percolate, but must run off into the street and storm drainage system. It acts like concrete and asphalt, which washes excess water loads and pollutants into these systems. From a larger environmental point of view, it does not support a biological community of microorganisms, nor does it engage in photosynthesis, which removes carbon dioxide and returns oxygen to the atmosphere. If you want to live in a biological desert, move to a large city, where the air temperature is significantly higher than areas with greenery. It is called the urban greenhouse effect. Heaven knows, our summer is hot enough as it is.

[fdpaq0580]

The problem is that she did not get ARC approval to do it. I contacted ARC about 4 years ago about doing the same thing, but they told me that it is not allowed, so I did another type of landscaping. Do you want to have a consistent standard and approval process for landscaping in The Villages? Or, do you want to just allow homeowners to do whatever they want, post a photo on a TOTV thread, and have posters weigh in on whether or not it meets their approval? If that works, then we could eliminate the ARC.

I stated in an earlier post that I lived in another community with restrictions before moving here. In the other community, we had an opportunity to and a method to suggest changes or additions to the original rules if it was shown to be a benefit to the community. Property owners were able to request a variance for certain things that could enhance the property and would not negatively impact their neighbors (neighbors approval). Posts 65 and 68 show that, apparently, only the developer has the ability to make changes to the covenants. If this is true, than an appeal to the developer is the only hope of providing an avenue for updating or improving the covenants. If this is also true, and, as has been suggested or inferred from time to time, the developer has a financial interest in some of the companies that supply products and services to our community, than there is little, if any hope of any changes that might impact their bottom line.
So, tow the line or leave. Many of us, me included, turned our lives upside down to move here. This is home now. And, I love living here, but it would be nice if the ARC or CDDs had the ability to make a judgement call instead of just leveling fines.

[retiredguy123]

I stated in an earlier post that I lived in another community with restrictions before moving here. In the other community, we had an opportunity to and a method to suggest changes or additions to the original rules if it was shown to be a benefit to the community. Property owners were able to request a variance for certain things that could enhance the property and would not negatively impact their neighbors (neighbors approval). Posts 65 and 68 show that, apparently, only the developer has the ability to make changes to the covenants. If this is true, than an appeal to the developer is the only hope of providing an avenue for updating or improving the covenants. If this is also true, and, as has been suggested or inferred from time to time, the developer has a financial interest in some of the companies that supply products and services to our community, than there is little, if any hope of any changes that might impact their bottom line.
So, tow the line or leave. Many of us, me included, turned our lives upside down to move here. This is home now. And, I love living here, but it would be nice if the ARC or CDDs had the ability to make a judgement call instead of just leveling fines.
I agree with everything you said. But, other posters think that the lady should be able to ignore the rules and get away with it just because some people like her lawn.

[Bogie Shooter]

Thanks for sharing this. I had often thought about doing something like this. We spend so much on irrigation to water the crumby grass. We, the community, spend a ton of money on trying to fight bugs, fungus and other things that kill or damage our lawns. We dump tons of toxic chemicals into the sewers and ground water to try to keep the lawns alive. And any attempt by home owners like this one, to promote a landscape that could save water, reduce chemical pollution or save money and improve curb appeal with less required maintenance get squashed. In the cyv's like the picture shows, I wonder what the reason is for not allowing it. Does it interfere with something? Or is it just the rule?
When we purchased our home we didn't know there was a grate covering a sewer/runoff drain in our yard. Since we bought new, it must have been cleared with the developer to cover it with old carpet and cover that with sod. After some time (well over a year) trying to deal with flooding in the low spot, I discovered what had been done to try and disguise this sewer to make the home more sellable. Still love our home, but.? I think that unless there is a real and demonstrable reason this artificial grass actually hurts in some real way, why not allow it or some viable option for making a landscape that looks good while saving water, eliminating the need for chemicals and reducing or eliminating constant maintenance. Just asking.

Wow. That is a big assumption. Cannot imagine the sod laying crews would go to the trouble of getting approval of something so stupid.

[Bogie Shooter]

Some of these homeowners associations have too much power and control over people and their homes. If I were her, I would fight this. I will not live where there is a homeowners association because of the control that they have. Too much time on their hands.

No homeowners association involved, they don't exist in TV.

[Bogie Shooter]

Just give a big THANK YOU to the the money hungry, arrogant DEVELOPER who shafted all of us on the way our lawns were installed.
We need to stop the complaining and unit together, BUT no we want to enjoy our retirement in peace!

My lawn is fine.........

[Bogie Shooter]

seriously, I do not see the problem

The Community Standards Department is committed to upholding the high standards of our community’s residential architectural design, landscaping and aesthetics. The department has two divisions: Deed Compliance and Architectural Review.

You have chosen to live in a community protected by Restrictive Covenants. The Declaration of Restrictions was issued to you at the closing on your home. It was at that time you signed a covenant with the Developer to comply with the Restrictive Covenants. We urge all homeowners to read their Restrictive Covenants.

[JoMar]

I stated in an earlier post that I lived in another community with restrictions before moving here. In the other community, we had an opportunity to and a method to suggest changes or additions to the original rules if it was shown to be a benefit to the community. Property owners were able to request a variance for certain things that could enhance the property and would not negatively impact their neighbors (neighbors approval). Posts 65 and 68 show that, apparently, only the developer has the ability to make changes to the covenants. If this is true, than an appeal to the developer is the only hope of providing an avenue for updating or improving the covenants. If this is also true, and, as has been suggested or inferred from time to time, the developer has a financial interest in some of the companies that supply products and services to our community, than there is little, if any hope of any changes that might impact their bottom line.
So, tow the line or leave. Many of us, me included, turned our lives upside down to move here. This is home now. And, I love living here, but it would be nice if the ARC or CDDs had the ability to make a judgement call instead of just leveling fines.

Then where do the judgement calls end and if mine gets approved and your's doesn't then what? I have a number of friends that live in gated and private communities and all have an HOA that make the rules and they are not negotiable. While they would all like flexibility they accept that the rules are the rules and when you know them before you buy acceptance should be part of your purchase decisions. I agree with you, this is our home now and honestly, the deed restrictions are a nit to the joy this place brings.

[Bogie Shooter]

Apparently she didn’t fork over enough cash to the ARC committee.

What are you trying to say??

[Bogie Shooter]

There’s lots of homes with it installed some have mini golf and putting greens complete with holes and flags. What’s the problem.

Do you know if the plan was submitted to ARC?

[Bogie Shooter]

You just stated the reason. Less water means less money for the Morse family.

Cheap shot...

[Bogie Shooter]

I have a question after reading all the posts.
Can a district (a group of homes in The Villages) go before the ARC and get a “rule” changed? Has this ever been attempted?

The Community Standards Department is committed to upholding the high standards of our community’s residential architectural design, landscaping and aesthetics. The department has two divisions: Deed Compliance and Architectural Review.

You can call here:
Community Standards
Phone: 352-751-3912

Let us know what you find out.

[Villagerjjm]

According to the online Villages News a homeowner of a villa in Edgewater Bungalows must remove within 45 days her newly installed artificial grass lawn. The CDD 6 board voted 5-0 to have it removed or face $150 a day fine until it is brought back into compliance.

The home is in Edgewater Bungalows, her unit is two doors from the Waterfront Hotel overlooking Lake Sumter. She purchased the home in 2015 for $615,000. The owner Shirely Schwartz has appeared once before the District 6 board of Supervisors public hearing, and she said she is attempting one more issue before giving in. She said she's had over 100 cars and carts drive by the home and tell her how beautiful it looks. Unfortunately she never received ARC (Architectural Review Committee) approval before the installation.

https://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/106508886_1663417193822806_7415333298506462233_o.j pg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=c6xr67IlJMsAX9JyGCj&_nc_ht=scontent-mia3-2.xx&oh=7859aa5865c60e2adf444f4cfafa3f26&oe=5F2108A9

The photo of the landscape with the artificial turf does look appealing. It is unfortunate that approval was not sought before going ahead and doing an actual install. Over the years I have seen residents install putting greens and lawn areas that utilized artificial turf, only to have to rip them out because they have not been approved by ARC.
We are in a part of Florida which has its natural resources governed by the South West Florida Water Management District. The SWFWMD dictates what can and can not be done with landscaping, building... all kinds of things! You can catch their link here:
Welcome to the Southwest Florida Water Management District Home Page (https://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/)
There is a lot of information and a lot of free publications that you can obtain from the SWFWMD. One of the publications is Florida Friendly Landscaping.

Shirley Schwartz may indeed have to remove her artificial turf under the State guidelines, which the ARC has to follow BY LAW!! However, it should be pointed out that she does NOT have to replace it with grass. She can choose to utilize rock, which is in itself also not allowed by itself. If you include groundcovers with the rock, especially the ones that are recommended by the SWFWMD, she stays within the legal guidelines that govern how a homeowner that lives in a regulated community like The Villages can alter their landscape.

A very basic rule is that 15% of the landscape property has to be some form of groundcover. Good choices are Dune Sunflowers, Jasmine, ground Juniper, etc.. There is a long list. Also, that 15% is reflected by what the mature plant diameter (spread) is and includes spacing between plants.

You can have potted plants and meet all the requirements stated by the SWFWMD guidelines.

I would strongly suggest for Mrs. Schwartz to contact the County Extension Office on Rt 471 at the Sumter County Fairgrounds or talk with the Master Gardeners about her landscape options. She can achieve what she wants to do, just not with artificial turf.

Some other links:
Free Publications | WaterMatters.org (https://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/resources/free-publications)

Residents | WaterMatters.org (https://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/residents)

Projects | WaterMatters.org (https://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/projects)

I hope everyone who reads this finds it useful, and if so, let your neighbors know!

[Bogie Shooter]

Agree 100%. However, I'm guessing the Powers might worry that artificial turf is SO excellent looking, it might bring down the values of homes around it. Whatever the reason is, the Board needs to be MUCH more transparent than it tends to be (and that's probably true of all HOAs).

If need be, a collection of many people who think as we do about the turf ought to be organized to visit the Powers during their next meeting. This era in the US is NOT a time for letting things lie untouched, IMHO. People who run our lives MUST be made to be accountable for their applied rules on us.:)
No HOA involved....

[Bogie Shooter]

Because the rule is stupid! Vindictive is the ARC. If everyone in The Villages who has violated covenants was reported there would be an uprising of all residents. Common sense would be something to think about - tell her OK to leave but if she sells must be put back to original? What happens if you repaint your house, the same color, without ARC approval? What are they going to do - have you scrape it off to original? Power-hungry people without an ounce of common sense is the problem.

Who are these Power-hungry people? Do you even know?

[Bogie Shooter]

I stated in an earlier post that I lived in another community with restrictions before moving here. In the other community, we had an opportunity to and a method to suggest changes or additions to the original rules if it was shown to be a benefit to the community. Property owners were able to request a variance for certain things that could enhance the property and would not negatively impact their neighbors (neighbors approval). Posts 65 and 68 show that, apparently, only the developer has the ability to make changes to the covenants. If this is true, than an appeal to the developer is the only hope of providing an avenue for updating or improving the covenants. If this is also true, and, as has been suggested or inferred from time to time, the developer has a financial interest in some of the companies that supply products and services to our community, than there is little, if any hope of any changes that might impact their bottom line.
So, tow the line or leave. Many of us, me included, turned our lives upside down to move here. This is home now. And, I love living here, but it would be nice if the ARC or CDDs had the ability to make a judgement call instead of just leveling fines.

After about the 10th judgement call there would be a thread on here attacking them for their calls. Enforcement of the rules is easy to understand!

[Villagerjjm]

I stated in an earlier post that I lived in another community with restrictions before moving here. In the other community, we had an opportunity to and a method to suggest changes or additions to the original rules if it was shown to be a benefit to the community. Property owners were able to request a variance for certain things that could enhance the property and would not negatively impact their neighbors (neighbors approval). Posts 65 and 68 show that, apparently, only the developer has the ability to make changes to the covenants. If this is true, than an appeal to the developer is the only hope of providing an avenue for updating or improving the covenants. If this is also true, and, as has been suggested or inferred from time to time, the developer has a financial interest in some of the companies that supply products and services to our community, than there is little, if any hope of any changes that might impact their bottom line.
So, tow the line or leave. Many of us, me included, turned our lives upside down to move here. This is home now. And, I love living here, but it would be nice if the ARC or CDDs had the ability to make a judgement call instead of just leveling fines.

You can get your neighborhood covenant changed. It has been done and there is a path on how you can do it. believe it or not, the ARC people will actually help you get the process started! Bear in mind, ARC is bound by laws that dictate certain changes that can not be done either because of code restrictions by town, county or state.

There is some leg work involved to get the changes done but like Rocky says:
Ya Gotta Wannit !!

[Bogie Shooter]

:what: Maybe the developer is trying to protect the landscapers and the bug companies??

How about this? The purpose/ reason for the Community Standards Dept of the District Government - All taken from the District Web Site..... that few seem to read.

MISSION
To assist residents in upholding the aesthetic value of their property in The Villages.

The Community Standards Department is committed to upholding the high standards of our community’s residential architectural design, landscaping and aesthetics. The department has two divisions: Deed Compliance and Architectural Review.

You have chosen to live in a community protected by Restrictive Covenants. The Declaration of Restrictions was issued to you at the closing on your home. It was at that time you signed a covenant with the Developer to comply with the Restrictive Covenants. We urge all homeowners to read their Restrictive Covenants.

Why a lot of us moved here! :ho:

I would just like to add. Posters should educate themselves on what kind of government we have in TV. There is no homeowners association..period.
Also implying that the Developer has a vested interest in all the Mom & Pop outfits running around cutting grass, exposes your ignorance.
(CW sorry for the hijack of your post)

[retiredguy123]

To me, this is a no brainer. She should be required to remove the artificial turf for the following reasons:

1. She didn't apply to ARC for approval.
2. The artificial turf does not comply with the standards, and has been rejected before when others have submitted it.
3. We all pay for the cost of the system to prepare, review, and enforce the standards, so making arbitrary exceptions would devalue the process.
4. Having her remove the turf will serve as an incentive to ensure that other homeowners will follow the process in the future.

[yankygrl]

So who turned her in community watch OR anonymous trolls?

[Bjeanj]

So who turned her in community watch OR anonymous trolls?

Doesn’t matter.

[roob1]

Sure it does, she needs to blame someone other than the violator.....hahaha


"Originally Posted by yankygrl View Post
So who turned her in community watch OR anonymous trolls?"

Doesn’t matter.

[fdpaq0580]

Wow. That is a big assumption. Cannot imagine the sod laying crews would go to the trouble of getting approval of something so stupid.

Actually, my comment about the sod laying crews having approval was kind of "tongue in cheek", a joke you may not have guessed. As to it being a big assumption, I have to wonder who it was that thought that it would be a good idea to put carpet over a large storm drain and sod over it. I can't imagine a construction supervisor okaying this. I can't really think the sod layers would sod over a drain without being told to do it. So???
My intention on this thread was about finding out if anyone ever had achieved getting a variance, as we were able to do in our previous community. Apparently, one poster here says it can be done, but that it is very time consuming and labor (leg work) intensive.
Actually, one of my pet peeves is people don't ask permission, but when they get caught they fake ignorance and expect forgiveness. Whether the person in this case truly was ignorant and thought the people selling at the town square knew it was allowed, or if she knew it was not but decided to do it anyway, I don't know. I choose to, in this case, give her the benefit of the doubt. Still, if there is a remedy short of having to tear out the turf, I would like to know. I would never advocate knowingly breaking the rules.

[Spsmith444]

We have rules. It’s that simple. Get a courtyard villa and put it in your BACK yard.

[Fast Freddy]

Fact: Inexpensive/cheap artificial grass looks poor. Better quality grass has variable length strands and colors, looks 100% better than the very uniform low cost grass. Get what you pay for. Majority are the off green blanket of artificial turf, if not put in professionally, rain drainage problems can occur.

[nevjudbaker]

I think it looks much better than people who covers their yard with rocks. Why do the rocks get approved & not artificial turf?

[Michael Charles]

I think it looks much better than people who covers their yard with rocks. Why do the rocks get approved & not artificial turf?

Drainage, turf doesn't allow water to penetrate to the earth below it rather it just runs off into the storm drains. Water seeps through the rocks just as it would seep into the earth below the sod.

It really doesn't matter if people think how great it looks.

It's not allowed and it wasn't approved, simple.

[New Englander]

My opinion is its beautiful and common sense should prevail. Leave it alone. What it looks like in 5 years can be dealt with down the line when and if it looks worse than a regular lawn in the same neighborhood.

On the other hand, rules are rules and people seem to like to see others squirm. If in the end, if they end up having to remove the quality work they did it would be a true shame. Get a life! Wow!

Well said!

[Heaven Bound]

Does ARC require a palm tree in each yard??????????????

[Bogie Shooter]

So who turned her in community watch OR anonymous trolls?

Community Watch doesn't have that responsibility......

[Irishmen]

Do you know if the plan was submitted to ARC?
It's not the first time this contractor from vendor nights has been caught blatantly disregarding deed restrictions. Where's the sanctions of the vendor?

[BostonRich]

Looks like she also has a metal roof. Isn't that against the rules too?

[John_W]

Looks like she also has a metal roof. Isn't that against the rules too?

Probably not, in the more expensive upgraded CYV communities such as hers, Alden Bungalows, Atwood Bungalows, Haciendas of Mission Hills and Atrium Dells to name a few. They generally add stone trim and metal roofs along with some other upgrades including a 2 car garage. Normally villas in those communities sell for double what other villa communities will sell for. However, the floorplans are generally the same.

Here's a villa in Atrium Dells with a metal roof, that at Buena Vista across from Brownwood. This is actually a rental for $109 a night. That to me, is more disturbing that a villa can be used as essentially a one night motel. I cannot link that website, it is blocked, I guess they are not an advertiser.

https://odis.homeaway.com/odis/listing/29837f9e-6317-40fd-ae62-c5d7b25a3398.f10.jpg

[dewilson58]

Looks like she also has a metal roof. Isn't that against the rules too?
Nope

[Carla B]

A vendor from the Square was involved in installing artificial turf at a designer home in 2011 in the Village of Duval. That had to be removed, also.

[duffer4384]

It would seem that even in The Villages, a petition to update ARC regulations is a possibility. I think however that Villa areas remain under the developers control, so this might not be possible. It would be interesting to find out if issues like this could be addressed at a higher authority than the ARC.

[Marathon Man]

So who turned her in community watch OR anonymous trolls?

Why are those your only choices? How about a neighbor that did not want Brady Bunch artificial grass in their neighborhood.

I would not want it on my street.

[Bellavita]

I think we should all have this and save water and chemicals win win

[TandHSTAR@AOL.com]

Good point. There is always a complaint that we use too.much water and that all the chemicals are poisoning our waterways. What a great solution. Someone asked what will it look.like in 5 years. Cannot look any worse than some of the lawns that are not taken care of. It is something the lawns in Arizona use because they have watering restrictions . let them keep it.

[JCMSr]

I have a question after reading all the posts.
Can a district (a group of homes in The Villages) go before the ARC and get a “rule” changed? Has this ever been attempted?

As to whether a rule change has every been attempted the answer is quite often. Does the ARC have the authority to change the rules? Absolutely not. The agreement everyone signs with regards to the restrictive covenants is between the property owner and the Developer (or his agent). He is the only one able to amend, change, add or delete anything regarding these rules. Has anyone ever been successful in securing a change or modification to the existing rules? I cannot say with confidence yes or no. Many owners come before the ARC expecting a waiver for their particular case. Fewer take their issues up with their district board. I cannot think of anyone who has actually stated that they have taken the final step in submitting their case to the developer. Most likely there have been at least a few but I have not read anywhere on this forum or elsewhere that they did so which makes me wonder why.

Whether it is a single property owner or "a group" as noted in the prior post makes no difference in the process. I have lived in other places where there were similar rules and regulations and the only way to change them was to get 100% of the property owners to agree. When is the last time you saw 100% agreement on anything (except maybe free beer or wine).

[Bogie Shooter]

"free beer and wine". Where? When?

[dewilson58]

"free beer and wine". Where? When?


tomorrow

[Nucky]

It's not the first time this contractor from vendor nights has been caught blatantly disregarding deed restrictions. Where's the sanctions of the vendor?

Hey Irishman, I'm half Irish myself. Do you paint houses? :1rotfl::1rotfl:

The Vendor is just trying to make a living but if this lawn ends up getting ripped up I wonder if the homeowner has any recourse against the Vendor? What a Clown Operation that must be. Imagine if they've been busted for the same infraction.

Where is the person who knows everything about everything when you need dat person? :1rotfl: :mademyday:

[Number 10 GI]

Here is the response I received from ARC regarding artificial turf and my wish for them to reconsider the rules that don't allow it:


Thank you for your email. The deed restrictions and the District’s adopted Rule for the area you are referring to provides: All Homesites shall remain finished with the same quantity and style of water-conservative, drought-tolerant sod and landscape as originally provided by the Declarant. Notwithstanding, Owners are encouraged to and may add landscape that is more water-conservative and drought tolerant than originally provided; however, any such alterations to areas visible from roadways or golf courses must receive prior written approval. The deed restrictions are a legal contract between the Developer and the Owner and cannot be changed by the District. Therefore, artificial turf is prohibited in this area.



If you can think of another way to go to have this rule rethought please do!

Pretty much says all there can be said or done. It is what it is and all of us knew what the "is" was when we signed the sales contract.

[Velvet]

It would save me thousands of dollars if I had fake grass instead of the real thing, every year, so my thinking is that if one can’t afford the expenditures that go along with the properties in TV, or resent them, why buy here in the first place?

[Nucky]

Pardon me, Counselors. I have one other small question. Not trying to be cute or disrespectful just trying to understand. Why other than it being against the rules is this improvement not permitted. I understand the approval was needed but why is such a beautiful effort kicked to the curb? What is the specific reason its no goodski? Is it a cancer-causing agent? Is it against some regional or state law or is it just that it needs to go because of the rules?

[retiredguy123]

Pardon me, Counselors. I have one other small question. Not trying to be cute or disrespectful just trying to understand. Why other than it being against the rules is this improvement not permitted. I understand the approval was needed but why is such a beautiful effort kicked to the curb? What is the specific reason its no goodski? Is it a cancer-causing agent? Is it against some regional or state law or is it just that it needs to go because of the rules?
I don't have a problem with allowing it, if she followed the approval rules. But, I think the answer to your question would be uniformity. It's the same reason that CYV sections only allow two paint colors for the driveways, selected by polling the neighbors.

[Irishmen]

Hey Irishman, I'm half Irish myself. Do you paint houses? :1rotfl::1rotfl:

The Vendor is just trying to make a living but if this lawn ends up getting ripped up I wonder if the homeowner has any recourse against the Vendor? What a Clown Operation that must be. Imagine if they've been busted for the same infraction.

Where is the person who knows everything about everything when you need dat person? :1rotfl: :mademyday:

Hahaha....after a few pints I can paint anything

[Number 10 GI]

Pardon me, Counselors. I have one other small question. Not trying to be cute or disrespectful just trying to understand. Why other than it being against the rules is this improvement not permitted. I understand the approval was needed but why is such a beautiful effort kicked to the curb? What is the specific reason its no goodski? Is it a cancer-causing agent? Is it against some regional or state law or is it just that it needs to go because of the rules?

When you grant an exception to a rule it opens the door for more requests and sometimes more extreme exceptions. Eventually the rule is useless and everyone does as they please. What if a person is a Tennessee Vols fan and thinks orange artificial turf looks good? You have already given an exception to green turf.

[Carla B]

Hey Irishman, I'm half Irish myself. Do you paint houses? :1rotfl::1rotfl:

The Vendor is just trying to make a living but if this lawn ends up getting ripped up I wonder if the homeowner has any recourse against the Vendor? What a Clown Operation that must be. Imagine if they've been busted for the same infraction.

Where is the person who knows everything about everything when you need dat person? :1rotfl: :mademyday:

The previous infraction involved a contractor from the square. Don't know if it's the same one. You can do a search on "Little Mountain Loop." The money involved there was a lot more.

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

One homeowners expensive Astro Turf would be someone else’s I bought off a truck for $200 and if you think things look cookie cutter now how about every street looking like a miniature colt course . You know I liked it when the family was in control , if you had weeds, ornaments bad grass or any other violation they would let you know . I walk and bike and have also lived all over villages it’s still beautiful but the old rules made it more so

[bgamble3]

It looks beautiful from the picture. I feel we should all have the option of doing that considering the price of watering. I find the bills to be outrageous considering what we used to pay in NJ. We are looking into doing the same thing as well as some of our neighbors. The type of grass here is very harsh so to have a lawn look like the one in the picture would be wonderful. They should allow her to keep it. For heavens sake, what is the problem.
Not following the deed restrictions is the problem!

[eyc234]

I think my old '61 Ford looks good in my front yard with the old toilet right beside it. They both have flowers growing out of them. They never need water either, can I keep them and put in a old bath tub for a bird bath. It is going to be real perty when the old tires from the car fill up with flowers. Drive by and let me know what ya thunk.:coolsmiley:

[Velvet]

I think my old '61 Ford looks good in my front yard with the old toilet right beside it. They both have flowers growing out of them. They never need water either, can I keep them and put in a old bath tub for a bird bath. It is going to be real perty when the old tires from the car fill up with flowers. Drive by and let me know what ya thunk.:coolsmiley:

Exactly! LOL

[PatriciaFaheySimms]

Artificial turf looks good and is ecologically smart. Watering lawns is a big waste of water and money. I was shocked to learn we have 2 water meters and how outrageous the cost of lawn watering is.

[thomp679]

Drainage, turf doesn't allow water to penetrate to the earth below it rather it just runs off into the storm drains. Water seeps through the rocks just as it would seep into the earth below the sod.



Next time so some research. This was probably true in the 1970's. Almost 50 years have past. Artificial turf is highly developed and completely penetratable.

[thomp679]

When you grant an exception to a rule it opens the door for more requests and sometimes more extreme exceptions. Eventually the rule is useless and everyone does as they please. What if a person is a Tennessee Vols fan and thinks orange artificial turf looks good? You have already given an exception to green turf.

Change the rules; then its not an exception. And I guess the Vols fan can paint their real grass orange and white like an endzone.

[russtcc]

Does every change from the builder landscaping require ARC approval?

[asianthree]

Does every change from the builder landscaping require ARC approval?

No matter what you do ask arc. Saves time and money. Even if you buy a preowned, call and make sure they had approval

[villagetinker]

Does every change from the builder landscaping require ARC approval?

Basically yes, when we wanted to change the pine bark mulch to stone, it required ARC approval. Also, NEVER expect the contractor to get approval, been there done that, found out after the fact. I was lucky, what was done was OK'd by ARC, but I learned my lesson. I get ARC approvals, and I make sure the contractor gets all the necessary permits.

[Nucky]

We went out for a ride tonight and went past the house at Tall Trees with the Garage that almost put The Villages off the map. I'm happy to report that it appears the entire neighborhood survived the extra Garage and now that the landscaping had matured it looks even better. This job was done with all the permits and approvals in advance and still brought out the Wambulance from some people. It's beautiful.

When we were done there we shot over to the house in question with the Bad Grass Man. Are you serious? If this problem can't be overcome without these people having to touch a high-quality beautiful job then something is wrong. It looks like something out of Better Homes and Gardens. Just absolutely nuts to bust their chops. Until you see this with your peepers hold your judgment.

Then we were going to go look at the two disabled houses up north that have been in a state of flux for around two years but decided to quit while we were ahead. If you want something to take up a worthy interest in and about things that are wrong around here then realign your target further north. Maybe they are squared away now????

Pick your battles. This landscaping project should only have them collecting compliments on a beautiful home. I hope they win their battle.

[thomp679]

Here is the response I received from ARC regarding artificial turf and my wish for them to reconsider the rules that don't allow it:


Thank you for your email. The deed restrictions and the District’s adopted Rule for the area you are referring to provides: All Homesites shall remain finished with the same quantity and style of water-conservative, drought-tolerant sod and landscape as originally provided by the Declarant. Notwithstanding, Owners are encouraged to and may add landscape that is more water-conservative and drought tolerant than originally provided; however, any such alterations to areas visible from roadways or golf courses must receive prior written approval. The deed restrictions are a legal contract between the Developer and the Owner and cannot be changed by the District. Therefore, artificial turf is prohibited in this area.



If you can think of another way to go to have this rule rethought please do!

I think you should take this reponse by ARC with a grain of salt. IMO...they are fibbing to just make you go away.

I believe under CCD legislation, the developer has to rescind control over to the district. Now as long as the developer can keep 'their' people on the board, they can continue to control. If they control, they can dictate decisions that are favorable to them. Its up to us to change this power.

Examples of 'developer controlled influence...recent district contracts to went to road maintenance and waste management which I believe had ridiculous 20 year terms. Also the recent VCDD candidates that just joined the upcoming VCDD elections are both corporate men.

We are fools if we do not try to take control of our own districts. Taking control doesn't mean things and rules have to change, but it does mean that the residents can ensure all decisions are made with our interests rather than the developers.

FYI - Sumter Landing Community Development District (SLCDD) is developer controlled. They oversee the PWAC who has significant control over the VCDDs. This control was given to the PWAC through signed agreements between PWAC and the VCDDs. But who was really in control of the VCDDs at the time...hmmm.

Take control of the VCDD and then use the courts to see if release from PWAC is possible. If you don't, plan on making major contributions for all the new southern developments and plan on the PWAC having control to force the VCDDs to buy developer owned properties in the older sections that they do not want to maintain or update like country clubs. By the way, it will be at the price the developer sets.

Community development district - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_development_district#:~:text=A%20communi ty%20development%20district%20(CDD,support%20devel opment%20of%20a%20community).[/URL]

[Knighterrant]

The debate here is the reason there are deed restrictions. Some people think the property looks great. Others do not. I have neighbors who believe having a half dozens lawn flags is clever. And I have neighbors who believe having 20 different lawn ornaments in their front yard is beautiful. I don’t think it’s clever or beautiful.

I moved into a development that has restrictions prohibiting such adornments. So my options are to accept my neighbors’ tackiness and rule breaking, confront my neighbors (which is almost never well received - most people open to such feedback don’t break rules in the first place), or become one the trolls and report the violations anonymously.

Artificial turf does not typically age well. So what might be considered beautiful today will likely be less so in a year or two. Regarding water conservation and chemical use, CYV’s allow for the entire yard to be landscaped with decorative rock.

Regarding this post specifically, my issue is with the people who know it is against the rules, and support it anyway. At what point does the rule breaking become unacceptable? Artificial turf comes in different colors. What if the home owner was a Minnesota Viking fan, and installed purple artificial turf just as beautifully? Red, white, and blue turf in support of USA?

Following the rules governing landscaping in TV isn’t hard. And if you don’t like the rules, lobby to have them changed before you break the rules. Or if you are unwilling to accept such rules and are too lazy to make the effort to change them, purchase elsewhere. There are plenty of developments that allow artificial turf (or lawn ornaments, or yard flags, etc.).

[Strongel]

I like the look of the turf in the photo. She made an error and assumed because the turf was sold in the Villages center it would be okay. Yet, it was against the rules. Expensive error. A world without rules leads to chaos but too many rules and too many people ready to report a mistake with glee makes life in The Villages or elsewhere a misery.