Does TV have Too many deed restrictions.

[JGibson]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?

[vintageogauge]

There are very few restrictions and they do help to keep the appearance of our homes in order. I've been in HOA's and Condo associations that are much, much more restrictive than what we have here. The biggest complaints here are the crosses which I feel at this point is just a set up, other than that you hear very few complaints regarding the restrictions. The restrictions are not a problem, those that don't follow them are the problem.

[tophcfa]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?

Unless short term rentals, such as AirBnB’s renting by the night, are prohibited (and enforced) I strongly believe the deed restrictions are way too Lenient.

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

Unless short term rentals, such as AirBnB’s renting by the night, are prohibited (and enforced) I strongly believe the deed restrictions are way too Lenient. I agree it’s very easy to follow the rules here , but to many people think that there little extra touch to there home is great and should be allowed .I loved it when the villages watch guys would come by and leave a ticket on your door telling you if something was wrong .I’m on my 6th home here and I’ve found that following the rules has not been any kind of hardship remember your little statue can soon become someone else’s theme park .I don’t play golf or go to pools or rec centers , I came and stayed for the beauty and order of the villages not to watch one persons statue turn into someone else’s theme park

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

First - deed restrictions vary from village to village. A lot of things people assume are "forbidden" aren't. They just have to submit the plan to ARC and wait for them to sign off on it before they start the work. Things like expanding a driveway, or selecting a new color for the house. In most cases you can do those things. But you have to select colors within a palate that already exists for the purpose, and the driveway has to fit within certain parameters after the work's completed.

Other things are restricted or forbidden - you can't remove your perimeter wall in a courtyard villa. You can't put up a fence around your designer home in the Village of Bonita. You can't put lawn decorations in /most/ of The Villages but there are some areas where that restriction doesn't exist - mostly in the "Historic Section."

If you WANT to live in a neighborhood where all your neighbors must conform to the same standard of care, design, color, scheme, then there are neighborhoods for you here. If you WANT to live in a neighborhood where you have lots of wiggle-room to exercise your creativity, imagination, and interests, there are neighborhoods for you here as well.

Personally I love the old section. I like seeing the different personalities of homeowners displayed on their yards, in the color schemes of their houses, in the painted designs on their driveways. It's not for everyone, but you couldn't pay me to live in a courtyard villa where you're basically a sardine living in a nicely-painted can, sitting on a bed of rocks. Some people like that cookie-cutter concept though.

[JoMar]

Not enough restrictions, not strong enough enforcement.

[Arctic Fox]

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

Deed restrictions tend to be worded very generally, to stop people finding loopholes.

If I do want to make changes that appear to be caught by the restrictions, I have always found that asking ARC will clarify the issue, often in my favor if they deem them to be unobtrusive.

[Jim 9922]

Generally, the deed restrictions are a hodge podge of restrictions that have evolved over the years and thus vary somewhat in different areas. To me they seem to be a bureaucrat's delight with prompt and strict enforcement of the petty items and delayed, partial, or ignoring of the more serious and significant problems. Usually there is quick action or dire results for a little white cross, or for using last year's color chart to paint your home, a bird bath without flowing water, or for some violation created 15 years and 2 previous owners ago, etc. On the other hand, anything that may need possible legal action, or a real effort to enforce is partially addressed, delayed or seemingly ignored until it hopefully goes away on its own. And, it seems fines, assessments and reimbursement of costs on many major problems are eventually greatly reduced or forgiven. Abandoned properties, junker cars, extended stay of minor children, very short-term rentals, disruptive businesses operated out of a residential home all come to mind as violations that should be as sternly and quickly enforced as the "little white cross problem" seemingly is.

On the other hand, there are many examples of gaps in tasteful restrictions. It seems that in many areas you can cover your driveway with any material and whatever color you want and with whatever picture or design you desire, including a BIG white cross (if you so wanted), or fly obnoxious flags, or post obscene signs in your windows, or have whatever characters or words displayed and hanging from your lamp posts.

I am happy to reside in an area with few minor restrictions. The few garden ornaments displayed by the neighbors seem to be a tasteful reflection of the personalities and interests. And best of all we aren't tattling at each other for petty "violations".

A bit of irony concerning some of the restrictions applicable to residential areas apparently do not apply to the town squares, where it becomes part of the "ambiance" and "cultural esthetics" of the area. Broken down inoperable trucks, rusty gas pumps and other equipment, "faded" and "bleached" signs and murals, statues and sculptures, all come to mind. But heck, I like it the way they did it.

[4$ALE]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?

Does TV have Too many deed restrictions.
Because you asked for "thoughts" here goes...... I think that is a question one needs to ask before buying here, not after. :rolleyes:

[Michael 61]

The deed restrictions were one of the reasons I chose to buy in TV. All my enhancements have been approved by the ARC, and I have found that entity to be very friendly and helpful to deal with. I don’t understand people who buy here, and then complain about the deed restrictions that they agreed to abide by at the time of their closing. Some people just enjoy complaining - sad way to spend one’s retirement years.

[Papa_lecki]

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"


Wonder what they wanted to do that was restricted?

[ThirdOfFive]

Too many restrictions? Sort of a moot point. We all knew the score (or should have) when we moved here. If the number was acceptable then, there is no reason it should not be acceptable now.

That is not to say that the system is perfect. It is not. One glaring flaw is the selective enforcement. Two houses next to each other could conceivably have the same violation, but only the one reported will be made to correct it. I suppose there might be--somewhere--a logical explanation as to why this, but I fail to see it.

The second glaring flaw might be summed up in five words: "Its not MY job, man!". I applaud Community Watch and what it does for The Villages, but there's a place in our village about six blocks away from here that has been having an ongoing "garage sale" every day for over three weeks. I know Community Watch has seen it: how I know is that this house is one that my wife and I walk and I've seen a Community Watch vehicle going by the place when we were on our walk. I know it is their goal to patrol all homes daily (each driver has a quota of something like 4,300 homes. "That equates to 18 patrol driver per shift across 90 square miles" (********-****, 3/19/24). It is a safe bet the Community Watch has seen the place anywhere from 15 to 20 times. But repeated mention in The Paper That Shall Remain Nameless indicates that Community Watch does NOT report violations, even though this one could conceivably be seen as a traffic and pedestrian hazard. I also know of (secondhand info, this) a person in another Village who reported a chronically barking dog in his neighborhood to the appropriate in-Village office, only to be told that it would be a law enforcement matter--but when he called law enforcement, he was told that it was a VILLAGES issue! Lots of bucks get passed in The Villages.

Not much bothers me about yard decor, and the taste (or lack thereof) that goes into it. I don't mind the crosses, just like I don't mind the BVM statues, various angels, numerous Buddha statues, the Stars of David, the pentagram (only one spotted), etc. One guy had an interesting Christmas decoration: a depiction of a dead deer with a red nose lying under one of his trees, and another place had a "Christmas" tree in his yard decorated with about 50 empty blue wine bottles. I thought both were pretty funny, actually. But other people might not agree with me, and if they make a report on an issue that is a clear violation, then they should be able to expect action, not just another buck being passed.

[Velvet]

The problem is not too many deed restrictions… you don’t like, you don’t buy… that simple. Problem is that deeds are enforced based on complaints. We have no bi-law officers or something like that. Rely on the residents to upkeep the community. Then when the deed is finally enforced, some proletariat squeal about it.

You want to personalize? Just sell and buy in a non-deeded community.

[GpaVader]

For me the issue is more the non-application or uneven applications of the rules. On my drive into my village we have a number of properties that make no effort to take care of the lawn, or they spent all their money putting a pool and birdcage in and have no money to repair the work. If it backed up to a reserve or something like that, I would not care, but since everyone drives by it....

[village dreamer]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?
i dont want my neighborhood looking like a dump. what you think looks good , may not look good to others. keep the rules.

[coffeebean]

i dont want my neighborhood looking like a dump. what you think looks good , may not look good to others. keep the rules.

Deed restrictions are a good thing. That is one reason we purchased in a master planned community that has deed restrictions to keep our properties looking nice.

Glad we don't have any of those Air B&Bs in our neighborhood. That surely is a deed restriction that needs to be looked into, IMHO.

[retiredguy123]

The courtyard villas have a deed restriction that prohibits homeowners from parking their vehicles in the visitor parking spaces. But, when I complained to the deed compliance office about a non-homeowner, a non-resident, and a non-visitor parked/stored a vehicle in a visitor space for almost a year, the answer I got was that he was not violating the deed restriction because he was not a homeowner. Go figure.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

i dont want my neighborhood looking like a dump. what you think looks good , may not look good to others. keep the rules.

Strange that you think the natural result of "no deed restrictions" must be "looking like a dump." Maybe that's how it was in the neighborhood you grew up in?

Where I grew up, we had no deed restrictions, no gated communities. Our neighborhood was a typical New England suburb, and no one's home ever looked like a dump. No one had junk cars on cement blocks in the driveway, or a broken refrigerator on the front lawn. Or broken windows, or bent-over antenna, or trash piled up outside the back door, or lawns that were overgrown or vines crawling up the side of the garage.

We took care of our properties because of a little thing called "pride in ownership." Again - maybe they didn't teach you that where you grew up but in my neck of the country, it was a thing. I would never expect that a non-gated, or non-deed-restricted community would "look like a dump" until I moved to Florida.

[tophcfa]

Personally I love the old section. I like seeing the different personalities of homeowners displayed on their yards, in the color schemes of their houses, in the painted designs on their driveways.

Although we don’t live in the historic section, we love it there also. We rented there long term during our search for a home and still visit there often to golf, bike ride, walk our dog around Paradise Lake, and use the outdoor exercise equipment. It’s probably the only area we visit where we just drive around in our golf cart with no particular place to go simply because it’s such a unique and beautiful section of the Villages.

[Pondboy]

I like the restrictions. As part of my job, I go to other retirement communities as well as “regular” housing developments.

I see some pretty tacky lawn ornaments, crazy color schemes on garage doors and driveways, brown gravel in place of lawns……shall I go on?

[Kelevision]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?

I hardly know there are deed restrictions there are so few of them.

[shaw8700@outlook.com]

I like the deed restrictions. I mean, look at it from the other side. Most of them are to prevent lawn art from becoming projectiles in the case of a hurricane. And you know your neighborhood could look very bad if there wasn’t rules. There is a town called Fountain Hills, that sits right next to my neighborhood, and the street I had to drive down whenever going to town, had some pretty garish houses on it. There was one I swore had to be a payback for something the neighbors had done which was bad.

So, think about it whenever you start getting anxious about a rule.

[MrChip72]

Glad we don't have any of those Air B&Bs in our neighborhood. That surely is a deed restriction that needs to be looked into, IMHO.

I seem to recall that a Florida law was passed not too long ago that prohibits them from being banned by any local government or HOA type thing.

[badkarma318]

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

It would be interesting to know specifics, as pretty much any nearby retirement community is going to have restrictions, with many having much more restrictive HOAs.

That might just be what they tell people, with the real reason being something else (many who chose On Top of the World over The Villages seem to be much more reserved/introverted, some bordering on anti-social).

[SummerDays]

We all know what happens when there are no deed restrictions. Only need to leave TV boundary in any direction to see examples.

If there is a deed restricted community nearby that is less restrictive, might be informative to drive around that community and take a look.

There is nothing restricted at my home that causes the slightest bit of heartburn.

Are the restrictions the perfect type and amount? That discussion is a waste of time IMO. So many different opinions on the subject (which is why the restrictions are necessary in the first place).

[Challenger]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?

The most significant problem with Deed Restrictions in The Villages is that they are not consistently" and firmly enforced. "Good Fences make Good Neighbors".

[westernrider75]

First - deed restrictions vary from village to village. A lot of things people assume are "forbidden" aren't. They just have to submit the plan to ARC and wait for them to sign off on it before they start the work. Things like expanding a driveway, or selecting a new color for the house. In most cases you can do those things. But you have to select colors within a palate that already exists for the purpose, and the driveway has to fit within certain parameters after the work's completed.

Other things are restricted or forbidden - you can't remove your perimeter wall in a courtyard villa. You can't put up a fence around your designer home in the Village of Bonita. You can't put lawn decorations in /most/ of The Villages but there are some areas where that restriction doesn't exist - mostly in the "Historic Section."

If you WANT to live in a neighborhood where all your neighbors must conform to the same standard of care, design, color, scheme, then there are neighborhoods for you here. If you WANT to live in a neighborhood where you have lots of wiggle-room to exercise your creativity, imagination, and interests, there are neighborhoods for you here as well.

Personally I love the old section. I like seeing the different personalities of homeowners displayed on their yards, in the color schemes of their houses, in the painted designs on their driveways. It's not for everyone, but you couldn't pay me to live in a courtyard villa where you're basically a sardine living in a nicely-painted can, sitting on a bed of rocks. Some people like that cookie-cutter concept though.

We live in a courtyard villa south of 44. Every single home in here is different. Whether it is a different color or different landscaping, from beautiful rock/desert designs to lots of greenery and palm trees, they are all different. It’s one of the reasons we bought in the southern area, the villas have more personality and definitely are not “sardines in a nicely painted can on a bed of rocks.”

[Rwirish]

Quick answer, no.

[La lamy]

I don't mind deed restrictions, it keeps property values up IMB. But that said, I live in the historic section and I LOVE seeing all the quirky stuff on some people's lawns. But the point made about not having anything that could blow around during storms is a good one.

[Ellwoodrick]

Just for informational purposes

Certain states, including Florida, have adopted the 1956 Marketable Record Title Act, which says that deed restrictions expire within 30 years of inception. That means after 30 years, a homeowners’ association is technically unable to enforce the rules and can no longer collect monthly dues from community homeowners. However, Associations can take steps to “preserve” and protect covenants and restrictions from the operation of the Act.

Taken from

What You Need to Know Before Purchasing a Florida Home with Deed Restrictions - Munizzi Law Firm (https://www.munizzilaw.com/blog/what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-a-florida-home-with-deed-restrictions)

[dewilson58]

The deed restrictions were one of the reasons I chose to buy in TV.

:BigApplause:

[merrymini]

I have no problems with deed restrictions in TV. You sign a deed and follow the rules, which seems to be a problem for certain people. I bought here because they do have them, a minor inconvenience , at best. The deed restriction changes from district to district are probably based on experience. I have no admiration for junk sitting in peoples yards and propose that enforcement is lacking.
You play golf, rules.
You vote, rules.
You drive, rules.
You are married, rules.
If you do not like rules, go live in a desert somewhere.

[dewilson58]

I LOVE seeing all the quirky stuff on some people's lawns. .

So glad we don't have quirky stuffed lawns.

[MrFlorida]

Deed restrictions are good, they keep the place from looking like a circus. Can't believe the junk people put on their lawns.

[sallyg]

Few restrictions are enforced and few are followed. What difference does any of it make?

[Byte1]

Yes, I believe that the deed restrictions are generally way too restrictive. That said, I don't have any problem in my neighborhood because we have more leeway than other, newer areas. I enjoy how some personalize their properties and I don't have any problem with those that I think are gaudy because that is their preference and none of my business. I don't want to live in a cookie cutter neighborhood, like military base housing. In my opinion, there are way too many former apartment dwellers from up North that feel their need to get into everyone else's business and seem to have a need to make everyone else as miserable as themselves. But, those types will never be satisfied, no matter what their neighborhood looks like. They just want to exert some form of authority over others, even if it is just little gripes such as stickers on a mailbox, cars parked in driveways instead of in garages and little white crosses that are hardly noticeable in a neighbor's yard. You would think that those folks would spend what little time they have left, getting right with their maker instead sticking their noses in what other folks are doing.

[Marathon Man]

OK, here is a "thought". Show me a person who asks if there are too many deed restrictions and I'll show you a person who does not want to follow deed restrictions.

I actually think that there should be more.

[vintageogauge]

yes, i believe that the deed restrictions are generally way too restrictive. That said, i don't have any problem in my neighborhood because we have more leeway than other, newer areas. I enjoy how some personalize their properties and i don't have any problem with those that i think are gaudy because that is their preference and none of my business. I don't want to live in a cookie cutter neighborhood, like military base housing. In my opinion, there are way too many former apartment dwellers from up north that feel their need to get into everyone else's business and seem to have a need to make everyone else as miserable as themselves. But, those types will never be satisfied, no matter what their neighborhood looks like. They just want to exert some form of authority over others, even if it is just little gripes such as stickers on a mailbox, cars parked in driveways instead of in garages and little white crosses that are hardly noticeable in a neighbor's yard. You would think that those folks would spend what little time they have left, getting right with their maker instead sticking their noses in what other folks are doing.

lol

[StanSersen]

If “personalization” mean putting up stuff hanging from your house, or junk spread around your yard, it seems the developer allows plenty of that in our section of the Villages. Those of us in the deed restricted “forgotten zone” can attest that we have to tolerate the lack of enforcement.

The ARC does do a good job of controlling new work but there’s a lot that needs to be done keep so many older homes compliant.

But in reality the juxtaposition of old and new, junk yard and sterile is what creates the unique community known as the historic section. It is an architectural and urban planning study that needs to be taught in all urban planning schools.

My dad always said to learn from other people’s mistakes!

TV supporter of Deed Restriction ENFORCEMENT

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

OK, here is a "thought". Show me a person who asks if there are too many deed restrictions and I'll show you a person who does not want to follow deed restrictions.

I actually think that there should be more.

Maybe try thinking more efficiently. Here's my "thought":

I live in one of the less-restricted areas of The Villages, because I think there are way too many restrictions in the rest of The Villages. I follow the deed restrictions we do have, and I have no trouble following them, and have no issue with them at all. Most people who live on my side of The Villages are content with our deed restrictions. But that's because they're not as restrictive as the rest of The Villages. We want to follow the ones we have, and so we do.

[dewilson58]

Few restrictions are enforced and few are followed. What difference does any of it make?

OR

Many are followed, few are violated.

:mornincoffee:

[G.R.I.T.S.]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?

No.

[JGibson]

Generally, the deed restrictions are a hodge podge of restrictions that have evolved over the years and thus vary somewhat in different areas. To me they seem to be a bureaucrat's delight with prompt and strict enforcement of the petty items and delayed, partial, or ignoring of the more serious and significant problems. Usually there is quick action or dire results for a little white cross, or for using last year's color chart to paint your home, a bird bath without flowing water, or for some violation created 15 years and 2 previous owners ago, etc. On the other hand, anything that may need possible legal action, or a real effort to enforce is partially addressed, delayed or seemingly ignored until it hopefully goes away on its own. And, it seems fines, assessments and reimbursement of costs on many major problems are eventually greatly reduced or forgiven. Abandoned properties, junker cars, extended stay of minor children, very short-term rentals, disruptive businesses operated out of a residential home all come to mind as violations that should be as sternly and quickly enforced as the "little white cross problem" seemingly is.

On the other hand, there are many examples of gaps in tasteful restrictions. It seems that in many areas you can cover your driveway with any material and whatever color you want and with whatever picture or design you desire, including a BIG white cross (if you so wanted), or fly obnoxious flags, or post obscene signs in your windows, or have whatever characters or words displayed and hanging from your lamp posts.

I am happy to reside in an area with few minor restrictions. The few garden ornaments displayed by the neighbors seem to be a tasteful reflection of the personalities and interests. And best of all we aren't tattling at each other for petty "violations".

A bit of irony concerning some of the restrictions applicable to residential areas apparently do not apply to the town squares, where it becomes part of the "ambiance" and "cultural esthetics" of the area. Broken down inoperable trucks, rusty gas pumps and other equipment, "faded" and "bleached" signs and murals, statues and sculptures, all come to mind. But heck, I like it the way they did it.

Fantastic well thought out post.

[Jpetraus]

I like having the amount of deed restrictions.

[Velvet]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?

And, so happy that those type of people don’t buy here. Bad fit, like a ballerina trying to be a football player.

[LianneMigiano]

NO CONSISTENCY HERE! We can't even change the exterior color of our home (in a neighborhood of 110 gray homes)! Very few, if any, of the newer courtyard villa neighborhoods are all ONE color. There is a really nice color pallet to guide Villagers - but we don't even have THAT choice. In order to change that neighborhood rule, we need 80%+ owners' signatures to agree to allow change - a near impossibility! Does anyone know of another place in our country where 80% is needed to change anything???

[Velvet]

NO CONSISTENCY HERE! We can't even change the exterior color of our home (in a neighborhood of 110 gray homes)! Very few, if any, of the newer courtyard villa neighborhoods are all ONE color. There is a really nice color pallet to guide Villagers - but we don't even have THAT choice. In order to change that neighborhood rule, we need 80%+ owners' signatures to agree to allow change - a near impossibility! Does anyone know of another place in our country where 80% is needed to change anything???

Most places you can paint your door rainbow if you want no signatures required, so why would you buy here? It’s like going into a sporting store and expect to be buying groceries.

[fdpaq0580]

The courtyard villas have a deed restriction that prohibits homeowners from parking their vehicles in the visitor parking spaces. But, when I complained to the deed compliance office about a non-homeowner, a non-resident, and a non-visitor parked/stored a vehicle in a visitor space for almost a year, the answer I got was that he was not violating the deed restriction because he was not a homeowner. Go figure.

Free RV storage?

[fdpaq0580]

Most places you can paint your door rainbow if you want no signatures required, so why would you buy here? It’s like going into a sporting store and expect to be buying groceries.

While I agree, I think a more accurate analogy might be going into a shoe store expecting to to find shoes in more than one color.

[fdpaq0580]

Deed restrictions are good, they keep the place from looking like a circus. Can't believe the junk people put on their lawns.

I can't believe the stuff people put on my lawn! 🤬

[Bellavita]

If someone answers there are many then they are not aware of what they are and how they regulate them. They do t unless some turns you in? Crazy huh like my friend who asked if she needed Peyton remove a tree. No she didn’t to remove it but will need permission to replant one 😳Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?

[fdpaq0580]

We appreciate the deed restrictions for help keep our neighborhoods neat and well maintained. That said, TV isn't perfect. There are homes that were built and sold, so I have read here, that were out of compliance when they were originally purchased. There are homes that have been out of compliance for years, even having gone through more than one owner. Many of these should be, imo, grandfathered unless they pose a hazard or violate lot boundaries since, thus far, there have been no complaints.

[Cybersprings]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive.

Sometimes I feel like I'm renting opposed to being a homeowner in TV with not being able to put any small personal touches to my home.

I realize if I don't like it I can move or I should've not moved here if I didn't like the restrictions so I will save those opinions from a couple of key strokes.

I do talk to a lot of folks in nearby retirement communities and when I ask them why they didn't buy in TV they all have the same answer, "too many deed restrictions"

Thoughts?


I don't know if there are too many restrictions but there is at least one bad one. I was at the ARC review for my landscape application and listened to them cover several re-roofing applications. Not the exact same shingle as the original - denied with no discussion. Original color not available and not the closest possible shade to the original - denied no discussion. The fact that you can't change your shingle color to any from an approved palette is ridiculous. People's comments about it turning into a ghetto if the exact same shingle not reapplied make as much sense as comments on so many other areas. And sorry, I had a lot more important things going on during the tumultuous purchase to study the deeds and find out I could never change the color of my roof. And no one in their right mind would make such a rule or expect such a rule.

[fdpaq0580]

I don't know if there are too many restrictions but there is at least one bad one. I was at the ARC review for my landscape application and listened to them cover several re-roofing applications. Not the exact same shingle as the original - denied with no discussion. Original color not available and not the closest possible shade to the original - denied no discussion. The fact that you can't change your shingle color to any from an approved palette is ridiculous. People's comments about it turning into a ghetto if the exact same shingle not reapplied make as much sense as comments on so many other areas. And sorry, I had a lot more important things going on during the tumultuous purchase to study the deeds and find out I could never change the color of my roof. And no one in their right mind would make such a rule or expect such a rule.

I must agree that sometimes a restriction may seem strict beyond reason. There should always be a chance for discussion. "Must be the same shingle" is like saying the sprinkler heads must be the same color/type. What happens when a shingle mfg decides to discontinue that "exact" shingle? Or house paint color is discontinued? Do the rules still apply? Do the new tiles have to match the color of the old faded ones, or can they look new?
Of course, the otherside is, if you grant even one request for a change, however minor or insignificant it may seem, you have set a precedent. The dam has been breached.

[Jim 9922]

I don't know if there are too many restrictions but there is at least one bad one. I was at the ARC review for my landscape application and listened to them cover several re-roofing applications. Not the exact same shingle as the original - denied with no discussion. Original color not available and not the closest possible shade to the original - denied no discussion. --------- .

But, you may slap a solar water heater or electrical grid contraption on your roof wherever and more or less however you wish with no consideration for materials, color, harmonious alignment or size in relation to the roof area on which it is being applied to, and who cares about the ugly piping and wiring conduits running all over and down the roof and along the eves --- NO problem at all for the ARC to approve. Who cares that the neighbors have to look at that mess every day.

[FriscoKid]

No, TV does not have too many deed restrictions. I looked at them before I bought and thought them to be reasonable.

[HoosierPa]

Quick answer is NO they do not
take it too far.

[MikeVillages]

Deed restrictions are necessary so TV doesn't turn into a flop house but in your opinion do they take it a little TOO far and TOO restrictive. ... Thoughts?

I agree.
Some Deed Restrictions are BOGUS !!!
I understand the need for deed restrictions and most are common sense. However a few are misleading, ridiculous, or a violation of the law.

2.15
"Aerials, satellite reception dishes, and antennas of ony kind are prohibited within the Subdivision to the extent allowed by law. The location of any approved device will be previously approved by the Developer in writing."
Both missleading & false: Federal law prohibit deed restrictions from prohibiting nor requiring pre-approval for antennas receiving OTA television singles.

2.19
"All Owners shall notify the Developer when leaving their propeny for more than a 7-day pcriod and shall simultaneously advise the Developer as to their intended return dale."
Does anyone actually follow this restrictions? Let us know if you do.

2.23
"Birds, fish, dogs and cats shall be permitted, with a maximum of two (2) pets per Lot."
Does this mean if we have two goldfish, we cannot have a dog or cat?

2.26
"The hanging of clothes or clothes lines or poles is prohibi!cd to the extent allowed by law."
Misleading. This restriction is a violation of Florida law

3.3
"No Lot may be used as ingress and egress to any other property or tum inlo a road by anyone other than the Developer."
An excellent, common sense restriction.

[coffeebean]

NO CONSISTENCY HERE! We can't even change the exterior color of our home (in a neighborhood of 110 gray homes)! Very few, if any, of the newer courtyard villa neighborhoods are all ONE color. There is a really nice color pallet to guide Villagers - but we don't even have THAT choice. In order to change that neighborhood rule, we need 80%+ owners' signatures to agree to allow change - a near impossibility! Does anyone know of another place in our country where 80% is needed to change anything???

Did you like the look of all grey homes before you purchased in your neighborhood? Just wondering.

[fdpaq0580]

But, you may slap a solar water heater or electrical grid contraption on your roof wherever and more or less however you wish with no consideration for materials, color, harmonious alignment or size in relation to the roof area on which it is being applied to, and who cares about the ugly piping and wiring conduits running all over and down the roof and along the eves --- NO problem at all for the ARC to approve. Who cares that the neighbors have to look at that mess every day.

Unless you are a roofer, or have a leak, who looks at roofs?

[JGibson]

NO CONSISTENCY HERE! We can't even change the exterior color of our home (in a neighborhood of 110 gray homes)! Very few, if any, of the newer courtyard villa neighborhoods are all ONE color. There is a really nice color pallet to guide Villagers - but we don't even have THAT choice. In order to change that neighborhood rule, we need 80%+ owners' signatures to agree to allow change - a near impossibility! Does anyone know of another place in our country where 80% is needed to change anything???

How were they able to reverse needing ARC approval for removal of trees?

[Bill14564]

How were they able to reverse needing ARC approval for removal of trees?

The ARC has recently been changing the requirement concerning removing trees. I believe this may have been due to a change in the Florida law regarding what municipalities could require.

Basically, it didn't make sense to require ARC approval if you already had an arborist's determination as required by the county. Was the ARC going to second guess the licensed professional about the health or safety of the tree? So at least in some CDDs (all are different, be sure to check yours) the ARC now defers to the county - if it is okay with the county then it is okay with the ARC.

NOTE: Even though ARC approval is no longer required there still may county requirements that need to be satisfied. Another thread strongly suggested checking with a professional before removing any trees.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I don't know if there are too many restrictions but there is at least one bad one. I was at the ARC review for my landscape application and listened to them cover several re-roofing applications. Not the exact same shingle as the original - denied with no discussion. Original color not available and not the closest possible shade to the original - denied no discussion. The fact that you can't change your shingle color to any from an approved palette is ridiculous. People's comments about it turning into a ghetto if the exact same shingle not reapplied make as much sense as comments on so many other areas. And sorry, I had a lot more important things going on during the tumultuous purchase to study the deeds and find out I could never change the color of my roof. And no one in their right mind would make such a rule or expect such a rule.

My parents live in a gated community of single-family homes. They are -required- to replace their roofs at certain intervals, and they are -required- to replace them with the exact same terracotta tile as everyone else in the community. There is a palate of colors they can choose to paint their houses - four possible colors. But they are not -allowed- to paint their house the same color as the house immediately next to theirs. So if the house to their right is painted "pale dusty mauve" and the house to the left is "pale dusty yellow" then their only options left are "pale dusty beige" or "pale dusty grey."

What's worse, is that most of the streets in each neighborhood have the same name. Cherry Blossom Street, Cherry Blossom Way, Cherry Blossom Court - and all the houses look similar. Very easy to get lost there.

[fdpaq0580]

My parents live in a gated community of single-family homes. They are -required- to replace their roofs at certain intervals, and they are -required- to replace them with the exact same terracotta tile as everyone else in the community. There is a palate of colors they can choose to paint their houses - four possible colors. But they are not -allowed- to paint their house the same color as the house immediately next to theirs. So if the house to their right is painted "pale dusty mauve" and the house to the left is "pale dusty yellow" then their only options left are "pale dusty beige" or "pale dusty grey."

What's worse, is that most of the streets in each neighborhood have the same name. Cherry Blossom Street, Cherry Blossom Way, Cherry Blossom Court - and all the houses look similar. Very easy to get lost there.

Clone City? The only part of that place that sounds OK to me is the tile roofs. I like Terracotta tile.

[Velvet]

Homogeneity brings a sense of comfort and safety but too much of it can be boring and stifling. Happy is somewhere between variety and homogeneity.

(I guess in OBB’s parents’ community, rebels need not apply.)

[graciegirl]

In answer to the original question on this thread, no I think the restrictions are just right and they keep all those who believe they have good taste from making this place look yucky and destroying the property values.

The trees issue changed when there was a change in tree protection that was from the State or the Something River authority that manages that issue.

One of the reasons this place is so absolutely sought after is that the restrictions keep things looking nice. I know many sought a place with these kinds of deed restrictions because they had previously lived in a similar place and it worked.

[KAM+6]

InI don't know if there are too many restrictions but there is at least one bad one. I was at the ARC review for my landscape application and listened to them cover several re-roofing applications. Not the exact same shingle as the original - denied with no discussion. Original color not available and not the closest possible shade to the original - denied no discussion. The fact that you can't change your shingle color to any from an approved palette is ridiculous. People's comments about it turning into a ghetto if the exact same shingle not reapplied make as much sense as comments on so many other areas. And sorry, I had a lot more important things going on during the tumultuous purchase to study the deeds and find out I could never change the color of my roof. And no one in their right mind would make such a rule or expect such a rule.

I just had my roof reshingled and ARC approved a "morai black" , originally light brown. Hate those black algae streaks. Installer handled all permits.

[JGibson]

In

I just had my roof reshingled and ARC approved a "morai black" , originally light brown. Hate those black algae streaks. Installer handled all permits.

Did you hear about the guy who got ARC approval for a roof and the residents complained and now they’re reevaluating the roof?

So even getting ARC approval doesn't make you safe.

[Bill14564]

Did you hear about the guy who got ARC approval for a roof and the residents complained and now they’re reevaluating the roof?

So even getting ARC approval doesn't make you safe.

No, didn't hear about that. Can you point to an article to reference or an address to look up the approval?

[tophcfa]

In answer to the original question on this thread, no I think the restrictions are just right and they keep all those who believe they have good taste from making this place look yucky and destroying the property values.

One of the reasons this place is so absolutely sought after is that the restrictions keep things looking nice. I know many sought a place with these kinds of deed restrictions because they had previously lived in a similar place and it worked.

I totally agree with the above as it relates to external deed restrictions (outside of the home). Unfortunately, it’s a hypocritical double standard to only enforce external deed restrictions and ignore internal restrictions such as single family only usage, running a business out of a home, and no residents under 21. What’s the point of having a beautifully manicured neighborhood in a retirement community, when the neighborhood is being disrupted by activities that are not in harmony with intended usage? Selective enforcement of restrictions discredits the reason for having the them in the first place!

[fdpaq0580]

Did you hear about the guy who got ARC approval for a roof and the residents complained and now they’re reevaluating the roof?

So even getting ARC approval doesn't make you safe.

Did not hear about that. What was the complaint about?
So ARC, the governing body, approves the roof. Other residents complain that, what, new roof makes theirs look bad by comparison? Sounds like the whiners have an issue with ARC. Don't involve the guy that jumped thru the hoops to get roof fixed.

[Bill14564]

I totally agree with the above as it relates to external deed restrictions (outside of the home). Unfortunately, it’s a hypocritical double standard to only enforce external deed restrictions and ignore internal restrictions such as single family only usage, running a business out of a home, and no residents under 21. What’s the point of having a beautifully manicured neighborhood in a retirement community, when the neighborhood is being disrupted by activities that are not in harmony with intended usage? Selective enforcement of restrictions discredits the reason for having the them in the first place!

EDIT: Below applies to CDD10 as well as many others. However, as is pointed out in a more recent post, the CDD1 restrictions are significantly different.

Again, not a deed restriction, not necessarily a deed restriction, and not a deed restriction.

Again, no selective enforcement by the CDD; to the best of my knowledge, every CDD attempts to enforce every violation brought to their attention. Internal restrictions are the purview of the Developer *IF* they choose to act. Homeowners are obligated to enforce deed restrictions, perhaps the inaction of the homeowners is the selective enforcement you are referring to?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I totally agree with the above as it relates to external deed restrictions (outside of the home). Unfortunately, it’s a hypocritical double standard to only enforce external deed restrictions and ignore internal restrictions such as single family only usage, running a business out of a home, and no residents under 21. What’s the point of having a beautifully manicured neighborhood in a retirement community, when the neighborhood is being disrupted by activities that are not in harmony with intended usage? Selective enforcement of restrictions discredits the reason for having the them in the first place!

The first and third restriction you specify aren't deed restrictions in The Villages. Unless you're just using generic hypotheticals?

[tophcfa]

I totally agree with the above as it relates to external deed restrictions (outside of the home). Unfortunately, it’s a hypocritical double standard to only enforce external deed restrictions and ignore internal restrictions such as single family only usage, running a business out of a home, and no residents under 21. What’s the point of having a beautifully manicured neighborhood in a retirement community, when the neighborhood is being disrupted by activities that are not in harmony with intended usage? Selective enforcement of restrictions discredits the reason for having the them in the first place!

Again, not a deed restriction, not necessarily a deed restriction, and not a deed restriction.

Again, no selective enforcement by the CDD; to the best of my knowledge, every CDD attempts to enforce every violation brought to their attention. Internal restrictions are the purview of the Developer *IF* they choose to act. Homeowners are obligated to enforce deed restrictions, perhaps the inaction of the homeowners is the selective enforcement you are referring to?

The first and third restriction you specify aren't deed restrictions in The Villages. Unless you're just using generic hypotheticals?

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

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

[Bill14564]

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

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

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

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

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

[Byte1]

Interesting that the newer the district, the stricter the deed restrictions. Interesting that the old districts with the least strict deed restrictions have absolutely NO/NO problem selling their homes for a satisfying profit. When I first arrived in The Villages, I looked at a village of court yard villas and immediately told the agent that there was no way in h3ll that I was interested in living in one of those. They were ALL/ALL gray and looked like base housing on a Navy installation. Let's face it, some districts have deed restrictions that go to the extreme. I enjoy driving through my village where every home is personalized with the home owners idea of what is pleasing to (their) the eye. I fail to see why it is anyone's obligation to please someone else, when it is the owner that is paying quite a sum to purchase in the Villages. I absolutely did NOT purchase in the Villages because of the deed restrictions. I purchased because the Villages has a multitude of things to do and "normally" very friendly residents. At least they were friendly when I purchased over a decade ago. I have no problem with my deed restrictions because they are minor guides that allow personalization without infringing on a residents creativity.
The question was related to the Villages having too many deed restrictions. Not where I live, but I wouldn't live further South in the Villages, if they gave me a new home at the same low price I originally paid for this one. I am an adult and do NOT need or want someone else making decisions for me. And I do not care if my neighbor does not like the color of my car or whether or not I wear a T shirt in the yard when I am landscaping. Don't worry, I wear a collared shirt when I play golf.

[MikeVillages]

Read the 4 dead restrictions in post #58. Two of them violate the law and the other two are ridiculous. Check if your area has similar ones. I expect everyone in TV has violated at least one. Let us know if you have NOT violated any or would NOT have violated any if your area had then.

[Bogie Shooter]

Interesting that the newer the district, the stricter the deed restrictions. Interesting that the old districts with the least strict deed restrictions have absolutely NO/NO problem selling their homes for a satisfying profit. When I first arrived in The Villages, I looked at a village of court yard villas and immediately told the agent that there was no way in h3ll that I was interested in living in one of those. They were ALL/ALL gray and looked like base housing on a Navy installation. Let's face it, some districts have deed restrictions that go to the extreme. I enjoy driving through my village where every home is personalized with the home owners idea of what is pleasing to (their) the eye. I fail to see why it is anyone's obligation to please someone else, when it is the owner that is paying quite a sum to purchase in the Villages. I absolutely did NOT purchase in the Villages because of the deed restrictions. I purchased because the Villages has a multitude of things to do and "normally" very friendly residents. At least they were friendly when I purchased over a decade ago. I have no problem with my deed restrictions because they are minor guides that allow personalization without infringing on a residents creativity.
The question was related to the Villages having too many deed restrictions. Not where I live, but I wouldn't live further South in the Villages, if they gave me a new home at the same low price I originally paid for this one. I am an adult and do NOT need or want someone else making decisions for me. And I do not care if my neighbor does not like the color of my car or whether or not I wear a T shirt in the yard when I am landscaping. Don't worry, I wear a collared shirt when I play golf.

Which village has a restriction on car color and T shirt wearing?

[JMintzer]

Interesting that the newer the district, the stricter the deed restrictions. Interesting that the old districts with the least strict deed restrictions have absolutely NO/NO problem selling their homes for a satisfying profit. When I first arrived in The Villages, I looked at a village of court yard villas and immediately told the agent that there was no way in h3ll that I was interested in living in one of those. They were ALL/ALL gray and looked like base housing on a Navy installation. Let's face it, some districts have deed restrictions that go to the extreme. I enjoy driving through my village where every home is personalized with the home owners idea of what is pleasing to (their) the eye. I fail to see why it is anyone's obligation to please someone else, when it is the owner that is paying quite a sum to purchase in the Villages. I absolutely did NOT purchase in the Villages because of the deed restrictions. I purchased because the Villages has a multitude of things to do and "normally" very friendly residents. At least they were friendly when I purchased over a decade ago. I have no problem with my deed restrictions because they are minor guides that allow personalization without infringing on a residents creativity.
The question was related to the Villages having too many deed restrictions. Not where I live, but I wouldn't live further South in the Villages, if they gave me a new home at the same low price I originally paid for this one. I am an adult and do NOT need or want someone else making decisions for me. And I do not care if my neighbor does not like the color of my car or whether or not I wear a T shirt in the yard when I am landscaping. Don't worry, I wear a collared shirt when I play golf.

The reason for the "satisfying profit" is that they bought decades ago, when prices were much lower...

If you compare "square/ft prices" throughout TV, they are all pretty close (and yes, I know there are some crazy outliers...), unless you have a premium lot...

[bmcgowan13]

Read the 4 dead restrictions in post #58. Two of them violate the law and the other two are ridiculous.

Confusing for sure...but they kind of have a purpose.

These are commonly referred to as "zombie laws." They are put on the books knowing they are unenforceable (under today's laws) but they will return to life when/if a Court changes the law. "...prohibited within the Subdivision to the extent allowed by law" Is legalese for the zombie laws.

Think of the current abortion statues that were passed by states (even in recent years!) knowing they were unconstitutional at the time. Last year the SCOTUS reinterpreted the law--and then all those "zombie laws" (think Arizona's 1864 law) are reconstituted and are now immediately enforceable.

Clotheslines/satellite dishes/flag poles are all permitted by Florida law. A clothesline in Florida is considered a "solar collector" so an HOA cannot prohibit them--but if the state law in Florida changes and clotheslines (or satellite dishes or flagpoles) are no longer protected under the statute--the Village's provisions will kick in and clotheslines will be prohibited in the Villages. (FSS 163.04)

And--by placing the provision in our documents the community is allowed to place reasonable restrictions on their use. For instance, although they cannot "prohibit" clotheslines, a community could decide clotheslines cannot be placed in front yards. (FSS 163.04) "..such entity may determine the specific location where solar collectors may be installed..."

If our docs did not address clotheslines at all--anyone could install a clothesline beside their driveway because they are in no way prohibited.

It is not uncommon for HOA's to put these (unenforceable at the time of writing) provisions in the documents to preempt future changes in the statute.

They seem silly at the time for sure. It appears the developer or the author of the docs is out of touch but the lawyers that draft these documents are usually up on the current laws...

[Marathon Man]

The reason for the "satisfying profit" is that they bought decades ago, when prices were much lower...

If you compare "square/ft prices" throughout TV, they are all pretty close (and yes, I know there are some crazy outliers...), unless you have a premium lot...

All correct. Location location location determines price in real estate. There are reasons that the homes in the northern areas have less value. Lower prices will attract certain buyers. Not a mystery that the homes up there can sell.

[JGibson]

Confusing for sure...but they kind of have a purpose.

These are commonly referred to as "zombie laws." They are put on the books knowing they are unenforceable (under today's laws) but they will return to life when/if a Court changes the law. "...prohibited within the Subdivision to the extent allowed by law" Is legalese for the zombie laws.

Think of the current abortion statues that were passed by states (even in recent years!) knowing they were unconstitutional at the time. Last year the SCOTUS reinterpreted the law--and then all those "zombie laws" (think Arizona's 1864 law) are reconstituted and are now immediately enforceable.

Clotheslines/satellite dishes/flag poles are all permitted by Florida law. A clothesline in Florida is considered a "solar collector" so an HOA cannot prohibit them--but if the state law in Florida changes and clotheslines (or satellite dishes or flagpoles) are no longer protected under the statute--the Village's provisions will kick in and clotheslines will be prohibited in the Villages. (FSS 163.04)

And--by placing the provision in our documents the community is allowed to place reasonable restrictions on their use. For instance, although they cannot "prohibit" clotheslines, a community could decide clotheslines cannot be placed in front yards. (FSS 163.04) "..such entity may determine the specific location where solar collectors may be installed..."

If our docs did not address clotheslines at all--anyone could install a clothesline beside their driveway because they are in no way prohibited.

It is not uncommon for HOA's to put these (unenforceable at the time of writing) provisions in the documents to preempt future changes in the statute.

They seem silly at the time for sure. It appears the developer or the author of the docs is out of touch but the lawyers that draft these documents are usually up on the current laws...

Great post. It seems though that some of these districts bring a lot of unnecessary aggravation and stress to all with the draconian restrictions, also the money they waste in legal fees.

[DebMil]

Not enough restrictions, not strong enough enforcement.

The Community Watch does not enforce restrictions unless a complaint is made.

[Bogie Shooter]

The Community Watch does not enforce restrictions unless a complaint is made.

Community watch has nothing to do with deed restrictions.

[BPRICE1234]

The deed restrictions were one of the reasons I chose to buy in TV. All my enhancements have been approved by the ARC, and I have found that entity to be very friendly and helpful to deal with. I don’t understand people who buy here, and then complain about the deed restrictions that they agreed to abide by at the time of their closing. Some people just enjoy complaining - sad way to spend one’s retirement years.


If I simply want to do landscaping in my backyard, does the ARC provide any pre approved plans or do you have to submit for everything?

I guess I'm trying to pick the right plants/design instead of multiple submissions because I picked the wrong thing.

[Byte1]

Which village has a restriction on car color and T shirt wearing?

I don't know, did someone say that there were deed restrictions on car color or T shirt wearing?

[LeRoySmith]

If I simply want to do landscaping in my backyard, does the ARC provide any pre approved plans or do you have to submit for everything?

I guess I'm trying to pick the right plants/design instead of multiple submissions because I picked the wrong thing.

I've made several ARC applications, one for each project and its been pretty straight forward each time, the lady over Starbucks in LSL is very helpful to ensure you're doing it correctly. I don't think they have any preapproved plans. For the plant suggestions go to an established nursery and talk to the folks that have been there for a while, they wont steer you wrong.

[Bogie Shooter]

Interesting that the newer the district, the stricter the deed restrictions. Interesting that the old districts with the least strict deed restrictions have absolutely NO/NO problem selling their homes for a satisfying profit. When I first arrived in The Villages, I looked at a village of court yard villas and immediately told the agent that there was no way in h3ll that I was interested in living in one of those. They were ALL/ALL gray and looked like base housing on a Navy installation. Let's face it, some districts have deed restrictions that go to the extreme. I enjoy driving through my village where every home is personalized with the home owners idea of what is pleasing to (their) the eye. I fail to see why it is anyone's obligation to please someone else, when it is the owner that is paying quite a sum to purchase in the Villages. I absolutely did NOT purchase in the Villages because of the deed restrictions. I purchased because the Villages has a multitude of things to do and "normally" very friendly residents. At least they were friendly when I purchased over a decade ago. I have no problem with my deed restrictions because they are minor guides that allow personalization without infringing on a residents creativity.
The question was related to the Villages having too many deed restrictions. Not where I live, but I wouldn't live further South in the Villages, if they gave me a new home at the same low price I originally paid for this one. I am an adult and do NOT need or want someone else making decisions for me. And I do not care if my neighbor does not like the color of my car or whether or not I wear a T shirt in the yard when I am landscaping. Don't worry, I wear a collared shirt when I play golf.

I don't know, did someone say that there were deed restrictions on car color or T shirt wearing?

Have a look...............................