Do TOTVers--Villagers, wannabes, in process of moving--want For Sale signs on lawns?

[Taltarzac725]

What do you think about restrictions of For Sale signs on Villagers' lawns. Should they be allowed?

Does it detract from the overall aesthetic affect of the lawns in the Villages or not? I kind of believe that the Developers were going for the affect of houses on golf courses where you see a sea of green in many neighborhoods.

[jaj111]

Does The Village Real Estate Company put for-sale signs in yards?

[Taltarzac725]

Does The Village Real Estate Company put for-sale signs in yards?

I have only seen these during Open Houses. They are up for a few hours and then removed.

[lovesports]

Again, not on anything south of 466 where there have never been any signs.

Yes north of 466 and historic side- the Villages planted the BIGGEST wooden post signs. They were far bigger than any other realtor and in many cases would leave them up UNTIL the realtor who sold the house took them down. I think some liked the SOLD sign splashed kitty corner across the sign because their names were on it and they wanted people to sign up with them. Much competition within the Village realtors when I bought.

[Schaumburger]

Since I'm just a wannabee I don't have a vested interest one way or the other. In this age of the internet it is so easy to see what is for sale -- I check realtor.com and TV's web site on a regular basis to see what is on the market in TV. I have signed up on realtor.com to get all listings in a certain price range in TV e-mailed to me.

I can see TV residents' point of view about not wanting signs cluttering up the yard. When I bought my townhouse 14 years ago here in suburban Chicago, the "for sale" sign stayed up in the yard next to my townhouse in the 8 weeks between the time the house went under contract and it was in the yard until the day before the closing. I asked my agent about this, and she said it is a marketing tool for agents to get their name out there.

[ilovetv]

since i'm just a wannabee i don't have a vested interest one way or the other. In this age of the internet it is so easy to see what is for sale -- i check realtor.com and tv's web site on a regular basis to see what is on the market in tv. I have signed up on realtor.com to get all listings in a certain price range in tv e-mailed to me.

I can see tv residents' point of view about not wanting signs cluttering up the yard. When i bought my townhouse 14 years ago here in suburban chicago, the "for sale" sign stayed up in the yard next to my townhouse in the 8 weeks between the time the house went under contract and it was in the yard until the day before the closing. i asked my agent about this, and she said it is a marketing tool for agents to get their name out there.

bingo!

[cathyw]

My neighbor owns 2 cars, 2 golf carts, 1 motorcycle, 1 canoe, 2 bicycles plus other toys...most of this is left in the driveway......believe me, my small For Sale By Owner sign will NOT be considered as cluttering up the lawn. It will be one small sign and hopefully for a week or two. Unfortunately, the realtors do leave their signs up way too long (advertising)

[asianthree]

My neighbor owns 2 cars, 2 golf carts, 1 motorcycle, 1 canoe, 2 bicycles plus other toys...most of this is left in the driveway......believe me, my small For Sale By Owner sign will NOT be considered as cluttering up the lawn. It will be one small sign and hopefully for a week or two. Unfortunately, the realtors do leave their signs up way too long (advertising)

i hope they just moved in and are downsizing, i would not be happy either

[asianthree]

bingo!

:agree:

[lovesports]

Good Grief!!! This poll is so misleading. There is NO ISSUE of opening the Villages up to signs!!! No one can have signs right now but that was a right taken away from a FEW Villages which use to be able to have For Sale signs. They are the only ones who should be polled. Those that had a right taken away. I have yet to hear ONE compliant from those few Villagers about for sale signs. They are the ONLY ones affected.

They still can put dalmatians at their fire hydrants. (They dress them up for holidays) Can't do this anyplace south of 466 or 466a. By the way before that turns into a topic, that was my attempt at humor.

The ONLY people who should be concerned are those very few who have been affected!!

There are NO and Never will be any for sale signs in most of the Villages. It isn't even a consideration.
The developer has all the power and I'm sure it will be no signs anywhere. This isn't about signs, its about a right that was taken away.

I still love you TAL... but this will not affect most villagers or most wannabes or people moving here builing new homes etc.. I realize you can't screen who votes.

[ilovetv]

Good Grief!!! This poll is so misleading. There is NO ISSUE of opening the Villages up to signs!!! No one can have signs right now but that was a right taken away from a few Villages which use to be able to have For Sale signs. They are the only ones who should be polled. Those that had a right taken away. I have yet to hear ONE compliant from those few Villagers about for sale signs. They are the only ones affected.

They still can put dalmatians at their fire hydrants. (They dress them up for holidays) Can't do this anyplace south of 466 or 466a

The only people who should be voting are those very few who have been affected!!

There are NO and Never will be any For Sale signs in most of the Villages. It isn't even a consideration. So let the people who signed on for this right to speak. The developer has all the power and I'm sure it will be no signs anywhere. This isn't about signs, its about a right that was taken away.

I disagree with the statement in bold above. ALL Villages residents are affected, regardless of being north or south of 466, because it is ALL "The Villages".

But it only takes one visit or one longer stay in one particular neighborhood for buyers/visitors to get the impression that this huge 90,000+ community is all like the street they stayed in or visited....."old".

[Taltarzac725]

Good Grief!!! This poll is so misleading. There is NO ISSUE of opening the Villages up to signs!!! No one can have signs right now but that was a right taken away from a few Villages which use to be able to have For Sale signs. They are the only ones who should be polled. Those that had a right taken away. I have yet to hear ONE compliant from those few Villagers about for sale signs. They are the only ones affected.

They still can put dalmatians at their fire hydrants. (They dress them up for holidays) Can't do this anyplace south of 466 or 466a

The only people who should be voting are those very few who have been affected!!

There are NO and Never will be any For Sale signs in most of the Villages. It isn't even a consideration. So let the people who signed on for this right speak. The developer has all the power and I'm sure it will be no signs anywhere. This isn't about signs, its about a right that was taken away.

I still love you TAL... but this will not affect villagers or most wannabes or people moving here or new builds etc. I realize you can't screen who votes.

It is just a poll. I am aware that the right to put For Sale signs was recently taken away from the people on the north side of CR466 who could put a sign up on their lawns.

[Bogie Shooter]

Good Grief!!! This poll is so misleading. There is NO ISSUE of opening the Villages up to signs!!! No one can have signs right now but that was a right taken away from a FEW Villages which use to be able to have For Sale signs. They are the only ones who should be polled. Those that had a right taken away. I have yet to hear ONE compliant from those few Villagers about for sale signs. They are the ONLY ones affected.

They still can put dalmatians at their fire hydrants. (They dress them up for holidays) Can't do this anyplace south of 466 or 466a. By the way before that turns into a topic, that was my attempt at humor.

The ONLY people who should be concerned are those very few who have been affected!!

There are NO and Never will be any for sale signs in most of the Villages. It isn't even a consideration.
The developer has all the power and I'm sure it will be no signs anywhere. This isn't about signs, its about a right that was taken away.

I still love you TAL... but this will not affect most villagers or most wannabes or people moving here builing new homes etc.. I realize you can't screen who votes.

Or the fact that 53 have voted out of 22500 members...........real accurate poll.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

If I were trying to sell my house, I would certainly want a sign on my front lawn. I have no problem with other homeowners with signs and I really don;t see where it detracts from the beauty of the neighborhood.

[lovesports]

ilovetv,
Sorry Tal, I was responding to ilovetv and thought it was your post instead of ilovetv. He's never going to agree to anything I say.
Look at our growth, highest in the nation and miles and miles of no sign restrictions in most villages.
The proof is in, this place is so BIG that those few for sale signs didn't impact the growth of this development. I think you would have a very hard time saying every Village isn't beautiful. I think you would also have to look far and wide to find somebody who didn't buy here because of a sign in a few villages. It might make you notwant to buy in that village but there are literally a ton of other no sign villages to pick from.

I have yet to see one person complain about signs and I've lived here 7 years. I think it is a NON ISSUE for The Villages as a Whole. Now Lawn decorations is a whole different matter on looks. I've read complaints on lawn decorations and I know it is a reason people pick other villages. But the lawn decorations are still legal.
I don't see much substance to your argument. I don't think you could prove that argument. I think you can prove that most people have bought in the no sign villages. I think you can prove most people don't want signs or lawn decorations. About 2003-2004 to now- all villages have had no lawn ornaments or yard signs. On this forum I see many complaints about dogs,traffic, landscaping, lawn decorations etc. but have never seen a complaint about a for sale sign from one of those few villages who used to have them.

Going to the gym so no response for a while. I respectfully disagree with you and you can respectfully disagree with me and we're good.

[lovesports]

Gosh I got to shut up and go to the gym!!!

For you people trying to tell me someone didn't buy here beacuse of a few signs in a few villages, I would like their numbers so I can call them. I can give you thousands of names that did buy here when those signs were up!!! Or just get out a new phone book and everybody from 2004 on.

Thanks to Bogie and the Dr and any others that agree with me.
I must stop typing and go to the gym!

[njbchbum]

Since I'm just a wannabee I don't have a vested interest one way or the other. In this age of the internet it is so easy to see what is for sale -- I check realtor.com and TV's web site on a regular basis to see what is on the market in TV. I have signed up on realtor.com to get all listings in a certain price range in TV e-mailed to me.

I can see TV residents' point of view about not wanting signs cluttering up the yard. When I bought my townhouse 14 years ago here in suburban Chicago, the "for sale" sign stayed up in the yard next to my townhouse in the 8 weeks between the time the house went under contract and it was in the yard until the day before the closing. I asked my agent about this, and she said it is a marketing tool for agents to get their name out there.

excuse me - but how is one sign in one lawn considered clutter?

[njbchbum]

Since I'm just a wannabee I don't have a vested interest one way or the other. In this age of the internet it is so easy to see what is for sale -- I check realtor.com and TV's web site on a regular basis to see what is on the market in TV. I have signed up on realtor.com to get all listings in a certain price range in TV e-mailed to me.

I can see TV residents' point of view about not wanting signs cluttering up the yard. When I bought my townhouse 14 years ago here in suburban Chicago, the "for sale" sign stayed up in the yard next to my townhouse in the 8 weeks between the time the house went under contract and it was in the yard until the day before the closing. I asked my agent about this, and she said it is a marketing tool for agents to get their name out there.

excuse me - i was always told that [in addition to being advtg] UNTIL the signatures are on the dotted lines at closing - no house is ever considered legally sold; and that r.e. agents are required to 'accept' all offers on property until they are sold - of course, advising hopefuls when props have gone into atty review, etc. - thus, signs should remain on the property until closing and after same be promptly removed. not so?

[njbchbum]

Good Grief!!! This poll is so misleading. There is NO ISSUE of opening the Villages up to signs!!! No one can have signs right now but that was a right taken away from a FEW Villages which use to be able to have For Sale signs. They are the only ones who should be polled. Those that had a right taken away. I have yet to hear ONE compliant from those few Villagers about for sale signs. They are the ONLY ones affected.

They still can put dalmatians at their fire hydrants. (They dress them up for holidays) Can't do this anyplace south of 466 or 466a. By the way before that turns into a topic, that was my attempt at humor.

The ONLY people who should be concerned are those very few who have been affected!!

There are NO and Never will be any for sale signs in most of the Villages. It isn't even a consideration.
The developer has all the power and I'm sure it will be no signs anywhere. This isn't about signs, its about a right that was taken away.

I still love you TAL... but this will not affect most villagers or most wannabes or people moving here builing new homes etc.. I realize you can't screen who votes.

:agree:

[njbchbum]

It is just a poll. I am aware that the right to put For Sale signs was recently taken away from the people on the north side of CR466 who could put a sign up on their lawns.

perhaps another poll could be posted to find out if totv'ers feel that the folks north of 466 should be able to retain their right to have a for sale sign in their yard OR if they feel that the developer should take away that right?

[hotrodgirl]

excuse me - i was always told that [in addition to being advtg] UNTIL the signatures are on the dotted lines at closing - no house is ever considered legally sold; and that r.e. agents are required to 'accept' all offers on property until they are sold - of course, advising hopefuls when props have gone into atty review, etc. - thus, signs should remain on the property until closing and after same be promptly removed. not so?

You are correct. I recently sold a property of mine, was under contract for a month, and the deal did not go through. A week later I was again under contract, yet the house has been shown several times allowing for the person looking to make a "backup offer" if they so desire. Until the closing, the home remains "for sale". The agent would specify there is a contract but the house may still be shown. Keeping my fingers crossed that this contract lives to fruition!

[quirky3]

perhaps another poll could be posted to find out if totv'ers feel that the folks north of 466 should be able to retain their right to have a for sale sign in their yard OR if they feel that the developer should take away that right?
Good point! Survey results are heavily impacted by the wording of the question(s). I think you stated the most accurate question on this issue.

[cathyw]

Exactly !

[graciegirl]

Someone start a poll with just the persons in the small area involved voting, but how would you know who voted??? If they were legal voters or...some new people who don't live there. You know how that goes.:ohdear:

[Taltarzac725]

Someone start a poll with just the persons in the small area involved voting, but how would you know who voted??? If they were legal voters or...some new people who don't live there. You know how that goes.:ohdear:

The area around Paradise Lake-- Villages north of US 27/441-- does not have much in the way of the panaromic vistas you find in many parts of the Villages. Especially those south of CR466. I do believe the Developers banned For Sales signs because of the beauty you see looking south or north on a hill in the Villages, where you see very little but the houses, cars, bikes, and the like.

It is something I like about the Villages. The attempt to capture some of the natural beauty of the area while also having a suburban setting. Makes it looks more like a Senior Disneyland.

[justjim]

The area around Paradise Lake-- Villages north of US 27/441-- does not have much in the way of the panaromic vistas you find in many parts of the Villages. Especially those south of CR466. I do believe the Developers banned For Sales signs because of the beauty you see looking south or north on a hill in the Villages, where you see very little but the houses, cars, bikes, and the like.

It is something I like about the Villages. The attempt to capture some of the natural beauty of the area while also having a suburban setting. Makes it looks more like a Senior Disneyland.:boxing2: I too like the looks of TV, however, don't believe that was the reason For Sale Signs were prohibited in part of The Villages. Look at another Thread on this subject and make your own determination.

[graciegirl]

Both Chicago and Los Angeles areas are quarreling too. See below;

`For Sale` Sign Ban Rises Again - Chicago Tribune (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1989-06-27/news/8902120884_1_signs-ordinance-sale)

Camarillo Weighs Law to Ban Signs : Policy: Revised ordinance would target real estate and political messages on public property, but would not affect private landowners. - Los Angeles Times (http://articles.latimes.com/1995-07-15/local/me-24046_1_real-estate-signs)

[cathyw]

Someone start a poll with just the persons in the small area involved voting, but how would you know who voted??? If they were legal voters or...some new people who don't live there. You know how that goes.:ohdear:

Gracie, I believe when the person creates a poll, he/she can make it public or private. If it's public, the names we use get attached to the answers. I have not created any polls but I did answer one poll where all the names were visible.

[ilovetv]

Regarding this:

I think you would also have to look far and wide to find somebody who didn't buy here because of a sign in a few villages. It might make you notwant to buy in that village but there are literally a ton of other no sign villages to pick from.

We're not talking about somebody "not buying the home or in that village because of a sign".

We're talking about us current residents having to LIVE with multiple signs on our street!!!!!

We told you before that if there are let's say, 3, 4, or 5 for-sale signs on one street, newcomers/shoppers can easily get the impression that there is something WRONG with that street, the neighbors, or the construction of those particular homes!!!!!

And it looks cluttered then, too!

[njbchbum]

Regarding this:



We're not talking about somebody "not buying the home or in that village because of a sign".

We're talking about us current residents having to LIVE with multiple signs on our street!!!!!

We told you before that if there are let's say, 3, 4, or 5 for-sale signs on one street, newcomers/shoppers can easily get the impression that there is something WRONG with that street, the neighbors, or the construction of those particular homes!!!!!

And it looks cluttered then, too!

IF there ARE that many signs on one street - just MAYBE there IS something WRONG! without the signs no one would know they should ask that question! just sayin'.

[Trish Crocker]

I don't know about other realtors but in my experience with "sign calls"...I will get a call regarding a sign..."how much is the house?"..after telling the caller the price they will then tell me it is more than they want to spend (it's almost always more than they want to spend) or there are not enough bedrooms or bathrooms or the basement isn't finished...etc...etc. At that point I may sometimes be able to tell them about other properties but usually they say they were just inquiring about that particular house or they are already working with an agent. On the other hand, when someone knows what they want, they work with an agent to help them find properties that suit their qualifications...most people calling from real estate signs are just curious and not serious...most serious buyers are working with licensed agents. I seems to me that the majority of people that are in TV looking for their first home are there on a limited time frame and do not have the time to drive every neighborhood so they look for for an agent to help them. Unless the agent from the Villages that they choose to work with LIES to them about needing an MLS agent, the buyer will learn quickly. I can't imagine an agent lying about that...not just because of ethics but because the buyer can and will find out very, very quickly that they were lied to and that particular agent will be in serious trouble. I know, a few of you will swear that you would have never, ever found your home without the sign but trust me....you are the exception.

[Bogie Shooter]

IF there ARE that many signs on one street - just MAYBE there IS something WRONG! without the signs no one would know they should ask that question! just sayin'.

There is that "just sayin" again.

[Schaumburger]

excuse me - i was always told that [in addition to being advtg] UNTIL the signatures are on the dotted lines at closing - no house is ever considered legally sold; and that r.e. agents are required to 'accept' all offers on property until they are sold - of course, advising hopefuls when props have gone into atty review, etc. - thus, signs should remain on the property until closing and after same be promptly removed. not so?

I was a first time homebuyer 14 years ago -- so I was just surprised that the for sale sign was still up next to my townhouse when I arrived the day before the closing for the final walk through with my real estate agent. The for sale sign was removed the next day after the closing -- and all was good :).

[Trish Crocker]

Not sure how it's done elsewhere, but here in Michigan houses were typically taken off the market once an offer was accepted..it is considered a pending sale and the home was in essence taken off the market. In today's market, since there are so many foreclosures, the bank owned proproperties and shortsales are marked CCS after an offer is accepted...this means agents can continue to show the home and write back-up offers until the bank has officially accepted the offer and the agent is sure the first deal will close. In a typical sale with an owner occupied property the home is considered to have a pending sale because to do otherwise is unfair to the potential buyer and frustrating to the seller. Imagine how you would feel as a seller to accept an offer only to have someone bring your agent a higher offer after you had accepted the first? In regards to the for sale sign still being up the day of closing, there are a few reasons for that..first of all, if the deal doesn't go through for any reason the agent has to pay to have a new sign installed, secondly, the sign may still generate calls to the office, it's considered advertising for the agent and thirdly, some agents I have known consider it 'bad luck' to remove the sign before closing. As I said, I'm sure things are different in other areas. Right now I'm taking the Florida Real Estate class and so far have not seen any major differences between Michigan and Florida (except I'm can be sure I'll never run into a gator here!)

[lovesports]

Trish,
This was a reply to your" sign call" post. I type so slow that a bunch of other posts are on now...hope this in not too confusing.
The Villages are different than most real estate markets. Two Village restate agents have told us the average villager buys 2 to 3 homes in the villages. Some want a bigger house, some want a smaller house, some want a new house, some want a new location, a few want to get away from neighbors and a few want to move near friends and family.
Many retired people have plenty of time to look until we see something we like. Plus its very easy to buy or sell here. Its a hot market. Some snowbirds come for months and even years and just look until they find something they really like and then they buy. People do use signs to actually buy and sell here, especially if we live here.
We have been here 7 years and we are on our second home here. I know Gracie is on her second home. Many of our friends are like us going bigger at this age and our older friends going smaller.
So Trish when you get here I think you will find the Villages very different than other places when it comes to real estate. Its also true we are just plain selling a lot of houses by every method.

Good luck with selling your home.:)

[ilovetv]

"Plus its very easy to buy or sell here. Its a hot market."

Exactly! Thus, there's no need to clutter up the yard with for sale signs when putting it in the window works just fine.

[Trish Crocker]

This is what I really don't understand...if anyone was having a problem selling properties then maybe they would have an issue. As it stands, it appears that the houses there are selling like crazy....why all the complaining???

[lovesports]

As has been said before, the only ones who can answer that question are the one who are affected. Like everything...you don't know what's its about until you are the one affected. I think some who are affected have posted. The rest of us really should shut up. Which I need to do anyways.
Its the people who are trying to sell or who are Realtors or who live in those villages that can answer your question Trish. They know what they are talking about. They are the ones affected. Its hard to have an outsider telling them what they should think.
Everyone believe what you want. I can understand both sides. I also have a great deal of fun things planned with my Villages Lifestyle so off I go to have some fun. :a040:

[hdh1470]

Houses that do not sell are not because of signage.Priced to high?Doesn't show well?Needs work,and maybe not marketed correct.Just a sign is not they way to sell a house.And most likely over priced,most people selling a house or auto or anything of theirs always think it's worth more then what it is.And I often do also.

[ilovetv]

This is what I really don't understand...if anyone was having a problem selling properties then maybe they would have an issue. As it stands, it appears that the houses there are selling like crazy....why all the complaining???

It's a reason to hate the developer.

[jandbrare]

All who bought in The Villages signed up to a Deed Restriction which says,
A sign showing the Owner's name will be permitted in common specifications to be set forth by the Developer. No other signs or advertisements will be permitted without the express written consent of the Developer.

This restriction was enforced south of 466 but had not been north of 466. Complaints by residents north of 466 resulted in the enforcement of the restriction there, as well.

So, no "rights" have been taken away. The "right" never existed because it was signed away in the deed restriction.

I attended a public meeting on this subject on July 30 at 9am at Laurel Manor. It was a well-conducted meeting. The meeting opened with a lengthy slide show presentation of the complicated history and legalities read by the head of District Staff, Janet Tutt.
Then, Valerie Fuchs, legal counsel to Staff, read her opinion on the First Amendment ramifications of prohibiting signs and cited other precedents.

Then, I was asked to read District 3 Supervisor John Goetz's statement, as he was on vacation and had initiated the entire enforcement action on behalf of residents who had complained to him and requested his assistance. Mr. Goetz had a pre-planned vacation which prevented his appearance. Each District has 5 supervisors. Each expressed his opinion on the issue of real estate signage and declared whether he favored the enforcement of the Deed Restriction.
District 1: No
District 2: No
District 3: Yes, 3-2 with absent-Supervisor Goetz's presumed aye.
District 4: No
District 5: Unanimously Yes.
Interestingly District 5 is the only District which is South of CR 466 and the only district where the Deed Restriction has been enforced since construction.

Then, the audience/public was invited to comment for not more than 3 minutes. A few of the public statements were rational, most were emotional and referred to hardships created by having to sell homes without the "benefit of a yard sign". A few spoke in favor of enforcement. Most spoke against, including the Real Estate agents, of course. I sat patiently with an info-graphic by the National Association of Realtors that showed that a yard sign is only half as "useful" as an agent or the Internet.

But, by the time I would have made a statement, the public presentation had become so raucous that County Sheriffs had been called twice to seat speakers that would not adhere to the 3-minute limit. I didn't feel that my input would have been considered. The infographic is Exhibit 3-6 of this presentation:2010 NAR Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers (http://www.slideshare.net/tblefko/2010-nar-profile-of-home-buyers-and-sellers)

Each of Districts 1-5 will have the choice of ignoring the deed restriction or enforcing it. They will do so in their regular meetings. I will present my infographic at that time—in a more temperate atmosphere. Could result in a real hodgepodge with adjacent districts allowing and dis-allowing signs. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

[janmcn]

All who bought in The Villages signed up to a Deed Restriction which says,


This restriction was enforced south of 466 but had not been north of 466. Complaints by residents north of 466 resulted in the enforcement of the restriction there, as well.

So, no "rights" have been taken away. The "right" never existed because it was signed away in the deed restriction.

I attended a public meeting on this subject on July 30 at 9am at Laurel Manor. It was a well-conducted meeting. The meeting opened with a lengthy slide show presentation of the complicated history and legalities read by the head of District Staff, Janet Tutt.
Then, Valerie Fuchs, legal counsel to Staff, read her opinion on the First Amendment ramifications of prohibiting signs and cited other precedents.

Then, I was asked to read District 3 Supervisor John Goetz's statement, as he was on vacation and had initiated the entire enforcement action on behalf of residents who had complained to him and requested his assistance. Mr. Goetz had a pre-planned vacation which prevented his appearance. Each District has 5 supervisors. Each expressed his opinion on the issue of real estate signage and declared whether he favored the enforcement of the Deed Restriction.
District 1: No
District 2: No
District 3: Yes, 3-2 with absent-Supervisor Goetz's presumed aye.
District 4: No
District 5: Unanimously Yes.
Interestingly District 5 is the only District which is South of CR 466 and the only district where the Deed Restriction has been enforced since construction.

Then, the audience/public was invited to comment for not more than 3 minutes. A few of the public statements were rational, most were emotional and referred to hardships created by having to sell homes without the "benefit of a yard sign". A few spoke in favor of enforcement. Most spoke against, including the Real Estate agents, of course. I sat patiently with an info-graphic by the National Association of Realtors that showed that a yard sign is only half as "useful" as an agent or the Internet.

But, by the time I would have made a statement, the public presentation had become so raucous that County Sheriffs had been called twice to seat speakers that would not adhere to the 3-minute limit. I didn't feel that my input would have been considered. The infographic is Exhibit 3-6 of this presentation:2010 NAR Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers (http://www.slideshare.net/tblefko/2010-nar-profile-of-home-buyers-and-sellers)

Each of Districts 1-5 will have the choice of ignoring the deed restriction or enforcing it. They will do so in their regular meetings. I will present my infographic at that time�in a more temperate atmosphere. Could result in a real hodgepodge with adjacent districts allowing and dis-allowing signs. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

The information provided at this meeting is inaccurate. Click on the attached link, select any villa neighborhood on the right hand side; Rio Grande Villas, for example, scan down to Article VII Section 4 and read the following: Professional signs advertising a property for sale or rent shall be allowed.


VCDD Deed Compliance - Sumter County (http://www.districtgov.org/departments/community-standards/deedrestrict-SumterCounty.aspx)

[Taltarzac725]

The information provided at this meeting is inaccurate. Click on the attached link, select any villa neighborhood on the right hand side; Rio Grande Villas, for example, scan down to Article VII Section 4 and read the following: Professional signs advertising a property for sale or rent shall be allowed.


VCDD Deed Compliance - Sumter County (http://www.districtgov.org/departments/community-standards/deedrestrict-SumterCounty.aspx)

There's this though-- VCDD Deed Compliance - Lake County (http://www.districtgov.org/departments/community-standards/deedrestrict.aspx)

"Compliance
IMPORTANT NOTICE

Effective June 15, 2012, the only professional For Sale and For Rent signs that will be allowed within The Villages community is twelve inches high by twelve inches wide, located wholly within the home and only visible through a window of the home. To view the Developer’s “Intent Letter” please click here.

You have chosen to live in one of the most beautiful communities in Florida. It will remain a premier community because the residents support strict compliance with the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions. Many residents moved to The Villages because of these restrictions. To maintain the overall aesthetic qualities desirable in a first-class community, certain activities and property uses are restricted. The following is a summary of many items covered in the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions. This summary is meant to call attention to some of the major items and by no means is a comprehensive list.

•Air-Conditioners: Window air-conditioners are prohibited and only central air-conditioners are permitted.
•Building Repair: Dwellings and structures must at all times be kept in good repair, adequately painted and otherwise clean.
•Garbage/Trash: Prior to being placed curbside for collection, no rubbish, trash, garbage or other waste material shall be kept or permitted on any Homesite or on dedicated or reserved areas except in containers, as required by your sanitation hauler, located in appropriate areas concealed from public view.
•Lawn ornaments: Some neighborhoods prohibit lawn ornaments. Please check your individual Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions.
•Maintenance: Landscaping shall be maintained to provide a neat and clean appearance. Removal of weeds, dead plants, grass clippings, trash and debris is required to meet this objective.
•Modifications: Alterations to the exterior of the home or lot require architectural approval.
•Motor Vehicles: No vehicles incapable of operation shall be stored on any Homesite.
•Residential Use Restrictions: Property must be devoted only to single-family residential use. 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.
•Satellite Dishes: Please contact the Community Standards Department for guidelines.
•Signage: Where permitted, please check your individual Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for size and location.
•Tree Removal: No tree with a trunk four (4) inches in diameter shall be removed or effectively removed through excessive injury without first obtaining written permission.


Due to the diversity of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions, it is important that you familiarize yourself with your particular set.

Concerns about possible deed restriction violations may be provided to the Community Standards Deed Compliance Division by phone, fax, mail, electronic mail, or in person and may be made anonymously. The Community Standards Deed Compliance Division is entirely complaint driven.
Contact Us
1894 Laurel Manor Drive
The Villages, FL 32162

Community Standards
Phone: 352-751-3912
Fax: 352-751-6707
Email Deed Compliance

Email Architectural Review

Business Hours:
8am to 5pm, EST
Monday – Friday
Excluding Holidays."

[KathieI]

I'm not interested in what the compliance rules say, I come from a city where houses were as close together as they are here in TV and in a slow market where houses weren't selling, the signs were so unsightly and just plain ugly all up and down the street. I'm always looking for For Sale signs as I'm still interested in downsizing to a smaller house and it isn't difficult to ride through a neighborhood and look for the signs in the front windows. Lately, I've been seeing them on garage doors which also isn't bad.

Just my opinion.

[cathyw]

Janmcn--The info provided AT THE MEETING was correct. They stated at the onset of the meeting that ALL VILLAS north of 466 explicitly state that signs are allowed.

[NotGolfer]

If this is a poll....I'd vote for againest signs in the yard. I don't care for the looks--even though they were utilized 'up north' to sell homes! We all signed a deed compliance therefore we knew about the restrictions when we bought. To think we can sign something THEN try to change things afterwards is ludicrous!!

[cathyw]

If this is a poll....I'd vote for againest signs in the yard. I don't care for the looks--even though they were utilized 'up north' to sell homes! We all signed a deed compliance therefore we knew about the restrictions when we bought. To think we can sign something THEN try to change things afterwards is ludicrous!!

NotGolfer----All VILLAS north of 466 and some villages such as Santo Domingo and Rio Grande have deed restrictions that state that they CAN have For Sale/ For Rent signs in the yards.

[jandbrare]

The information provided at this meeting is inaccurate. Click on the attached link, select any villa neighborhood on the right hand side; Rio Grande Villas, for example, scan down to Article VII Section 4 and read the following: Professional signs advertising a property for sale or rent shall be allowed.


VCDD Deed Compliance - Sumter County (http://www.districtgov.org/departments/community-standards/deedrestrict-SumterCounty.aspx)

The fact that villas are excepted from the "No sign" covenant was mentioned in the recent meeting. I failed to note that in my account. Here are some pictures of for sale/for rent signs in a villa:https://plus.google.com/photos/117211458637250641413/albums/5771741068087104913
(https://plus.google.com/photos/117211458637250641413/albums/5771741068087104913)

[CarolSells]

I don't live in or own property in TV so I'm not really in a position to post an opinion on banning for sale signs on lawns there.

What I would like to do is defend Realtors who always get bashed in threads on buying/selling houses IMHO.

1) When listing a property for sale or lease, the owners expect you to do everything in your professional power to get their home the maximum amount of market exposure possible. This usually includes a For Sale sign. It is just expected even tho you may say that most people shop via the internet. Many sellers still expect the agent to hold an Open House. TV is unique in regard to Open Houses because in most markets they are not an effective tool any more. People do drive around neighborhoods that they're interested in and make sign calls on houses that catch their eye. Buyers today educate themselves about the market before they ever contact an agent to represent them. A small, tasteful yard sign shouldn't hurt a neighborhood.

2) So the selling agent leaves the sign with the "Sold" rider on until the day of closing? And? Do you have a problem with your car dealer's logo on the back of your car for the entire time you own said car? How about your golf cart?

3) Please cut us some slack. We neither dictate any rules nor set the market values of the properties on your street.

Okay. I'm done.

[njbchbum]

jandbrare -

i question the applicabilty of the nar report:
1] it is from 2010 - what is the actual date of the statistics despite its publication date?
2] it reflects nation-wide data - aren't such statistics significantly different from the sales in the villages? after all, how many of us are relocating due to employment? based on many forum posts, i am of the opinion that real estate sales in the villages is considerably more unique that the market 'beyond the bubble'.

you posted, "Each of Districts 1-5 will have the choice of ignoring the deed restriction or enforcing it." so am i correct in assuming that the bottom line to riling up all of the concerned realtors and villagers is that nothing has changed and each of the districts will still be allowed to govern themselves through the wishes/wants/needs of their residents; and that the villagers who do not live in the impacted cdds and the developer will not have any impact on their decisions?

what i have not yet seen is the resolution to the developer's action to eliminate all real estate signage effective june 15th. are the impacted cdds still permitted to display real estate for sale signs until such time as they hold a meeting/vote on the matter or are they still strangled by the developer's edict?

[rp001]

why is it that the majority of folks here are very conservative,(less restrictions/government) but are insistent on MORE regulation..I don't get it...Too many rules.

[cathyw]

jandbrare -

i question the applicabilty of the nar report:
1] it is from 2010 - what is the actual date of the statistics despite its publication date?
2] it reflects nation-wide data - aren't such statistics significantly different from the sales in the villages? after all, how many of us are relocating due to employment? based on many forum posts, i am of the opinion that real estate sales in the villages is considerably more unique that the market 'beyond the bubble'.

you posted, "Each of Districts 1-5 will have the choice of ignoring the deed restriction or enforcing it." so am i correct in assuming that the bottom line to riling up all of the concerned realtors and villagers is that nothing has changed and each of the districts will still be allowed to govern themselves through the wishes/wants/needs of their residents; and that the villagers who do not live in the impacted cdds and the developer will not have any impact on their decisions?

what i have not yet seen is the resolution to the developer's action to eliminate all real estate signage effective june 15th. are the impacted cdds still permitted to display real estate for sale signs until such time as they hold a meeting/vote on the matter or are they still strangled by the developer's edict?



njbchbum....This is what I took away from the CDD Workshop....Janet Tutt (Villages District Staff) stated that the district is not going to enforce the ban at this time. They also previously sent letters to some residents advising them of fines. She stated that this was an ERROR. No resident should have gotten a letter and no fines will be imposed at this time. Each of the 5 CDD's was asked to further discuss this matter at their upcoming individual CDD meetings and give a recomendation (whether to enforce the ban or not) back to Janet Tutt. So,for now, we are back to complaint driven deed compliance.

[chuckinca]

Note that most on TOTV don't want signs while most of the public at the meeting wanted signs.

Could it be that the TOTV folks are not in tune with the general public in TV?

Or, those who wanted signs took the time to attend the meeting while those who didn't want the signs expressed their position sitting at home in front of their computers?

Or - - - ?


.

[OscarOlden]

NO SIGNS! They are tacky.

[njbchbum]

cathyw,

thanx for that reply...now i am left to wonder why should any of those cdds get back to janet tutt with a recommendation to enforce or not when enforcement is clearly a decision left to the cdds!

[jandbrare]

njbchbum,

i question the applicabilty of the nar report:
1] it is from 2010 - what is the actual date of the statistics despite its publication date?
2] it reflects nation-wide data - aren't such statistics significantly different from the sales in the villages? after all, how many of us are relocating due to employment? based on many forum posts, i am of the opinion that real estate sales in the villages is considerably more unique that the market 'beyond the bubble'.


I can't answer your questions

you posted, "Each of Districts 1-5 will have the choice of ignoring the deed restriction or enforcing it." so am i correct in assuming that the bottom line to riling up all of the concerned realtors and villagers is that nothing has changed and each of the districts will still be allowed to govern themselves through the wishes/wants/needs of their residents; and that the villagers who do not live in the impacted cdds and the developer will not have any impact on their decisions?

Seems so.

what i have not yet seen is the resolution to the developer's action to eliminate all real estate signage effective june 15th. are the impacted cdds still permitted to display real estate for sale signs until such time as they hold a meeting/vote on the matter or are they still strangled by the developer's edict?

I have not seen any real estate signs outside of villas north of 466 in some time. According to Janet Tutt at the meeting on Monday, notices are being given to any resident who displays a sign on their property asking them to remove the sign. I have not actually seen one of the notices, so I don't know what it says.

I favor the restriction on real estate signs for aesthetic reasons, and having learned that I actually signed a covenant (I didn't know until all the hub bub.), I am completely content to comply with it. I'm not interested in getting into an argument about whether a home owner ought to have a "right" to put up a sign or whether the NAR report applies to The Villages.

District 5 has never allowed real estate signs and the District 5 supervisors present at the meeting on Monday were unanimously in favor of continuing their compliance with the deed restriction that prohibits signs. Their response reinforces my conviction, and I am hopeful that my District 3 supervisors will vote to comply and I hope that all other Districts north of 466 do likewise.

[Barefoot]

Or, those who wanted signs took the time to attend the meeting while those who didn't want the signs expressed their position sitting at home in front of their computers?

That would be my guess. People who want signs feel passionately about it. People who don't want signs can anticipate the probable outcome and don't feel their attendance is necessary.

Hijack ... By the way, your cat is gorgeous.

[cathyw]

There are PLENTY of Real Estate Signs up on the lawns in the Villas north of 466.

[lovesports]

Note that most on TOTV don't want signs while most of the public at the meeting wanted signs.

Could it be that the TOTV folks are not in tune with the general public in TV?

Or - - - ?


.

I never felt TOTV was a good representation of what is in the minds of most villagers. The Villages is over 90,000 people.
Remember back to 2008 when we had a vote on a Horse Park. The majority of TOTV members were all for it. It was voted down by a wide margin.

I notice that many of the posters don't even live here. One of the top posters had all the answers before he moved here. Others have made one visit. Some are going to buy.

Its not about Talk of The Villages but rather a chat room for many opinions. Look at what goes on everyday here and how little of it makes this forum. At the same time, look at all the talk that has nothing to do with the Villages.
That is all fine with me. What ever makes you happy. :thumbup:

[zcaveman]

Note that most on TOTV don't want signs while most of the public at the meeting wanted signs.

Could it be that the TOTV folks are not in tune with the general public in TV?

Or, those who wanted signs took the time to attend the meeting while those who didn't want the signs expressed their position sitting at home in front of their computers?

Or - - - ?


.

How many of thse TOTV protesters actually live north of 466? After 11 years they are a fact of life to me.

Not that I would mind see them go away I am not going to lose any sleep over them.

Z

[Bogie Shooter]

I never felt TOTV was a good representation of what is in the minds of most villagers. The Villages is over 90,000 people.
Remember back to 2008 when we had a vote on a Horse Park. The majority of TOTV members were all for it. It was voted down by a wide margin.

I notice that many of the posters don't even live here. One of the top posters had all the answers before he moved here. Others have made one visit. Some are going to buy.

Its not about Talk of The Villages but rather a chat room for many opinions. Look at what goes on everyday here and how little of it makes this forum. At the same time, look at all the talk that has nothing to do with the Villages.
That is all fine with me. What ever makes you happy. :thumbup:

I agree!

[ydnar9]

I can only speak for myself. We do not live in The Villages but were there 3 different times trying to find the right home for sale. This last time we were there in July we did notice no for sale signs in the yards. That made it very hard to try and find the home we wanted. We would use outside realtors, villages realtor or for sale by owners, as we are not afraid of a by owner listing. By not allowing for sale signs in the yard that pretty much cuts out the FSBO's. I never thought a sign here or there was much of a distraction for the beauty of the Villages at all, especially seeing there are not many homes for sale at all there. Just my opinion of someone looking to buy.

[Taltarzac725]

I can only speak for myself. We do not live in The Villages but were there 3 different times trying to find the right home for sale. This last time we were there in July we did notice no for sale signs in the yards. That made it very hard to try and find the home we wanted. We would use outside realtors, villages realtor or for sale by owners, as we are not afraid of a by owner listing. By not allowing for sale signs in the yard that pretty much cuts out the FSBO's. I never thought a sign here or there was much of a distraction for the beauty of the Villages at all, especially seeing there are not many homes for sale at all there. Just my opinion of someone looking to buy.

They allow signs in windows for home sales by owners. You often have to go around by golf cart to see these. I also know some Villagers who post their homes for sale on Craigs List for the Ocala area.

[ydnar9]

They allow signs in windows for home sales by owners. You often have to go around by golf cart to see these. I also know some Villagers who post their homes for sale on Craigs List for the Ocala area.
I know that those little signs are posted in the windows but it is pretty hard to closely check every house in every block to see those signs, much easier to scan down the individual blocks to see a sign in the yard. I see many here oppose the signs, but they may change their mind when they try to sell their home sometime.

[Bogie Shooter]

I can only speak for myself. We do not live in The Villages but were there 3 different times trying to find the right home for sale. This last time we were there in July we did notice no for sale signs in the yards. That made it very hard to try and find the home we wanted. We would use outside realtors, villages realtor or for sale by owners, as we are not afraid of a by owner listing. By not allowing for sale signs in the yard that pretty much cuts out the FSBO's. I never thought a sign here or there was much of a distraction for the beauty of the Villages at all, especially seeing there are not many homes for sale at all there. Just my opinion of someone looking to buy.

Glad you had a nice visit and I hope you come back and find your dream home.
I just looked at the preowned homes listed by The Villages and there are 465. I do not know how many new build homes or listings by other brokers there are............but even 465 says there are a goodly number available.
Got to The Villages - Florida's Friendliest Retirement Hometown - New Home Sales, Home Resales, Build Your Dream Home, Brownwood Paddock Square (http://www.thevillages.com) look at any listing. It will give the address and even a map. That would be much easier that driving around endlessly looking for signs. Just my opinion of someone who doesn't like signs.

[Carla B]

I vote for no signs, either. We just sold our condo in south Florida. No signs of any kind are allowed. After listing with the realtor, we had two offers in five days. How? Obviously, the buyers saw it on the internet.

[jandbrare]

You may be tiring of this. I'm tired and disappointed. The answer seems so obvious to me, and yet some of my District 3 Supervisors are struggling with it. I sat through most of the District 3 Board meeting where it was discussed on Friday, August 10, 2012. Here is a 45-minute long recording of the discussion: http://bit.ly/R63eQN. The first few slides have no recorded audio as I had not yet turned the recorder on, so I summarized what was said. If any of you are interested, I will get the official recording of the complete discussion and publish it. (I use the Google Chrome Browser and the recording I made opened immediately. Probably current versions of Firefox, or Internet Explorer would do the same.)


There exists a deed restriction prohibiting signs of any kind, except in villas. It is 2.14 of this document: http://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/sumter/District%203/S3-36.pdf
All buyers in The Villages signed a covenant to abide by the deed restrictions.
This restriction had not been enforced north of CR 466 until recently.
A 2009 change to Florida Statue 190.012(4)(a) (http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/190.012) empowers CDD's "To adopt rules necessary for the district to enforce certain deed restrictions pertaining to the use and operation of real property within the district...." District 3 did so in a document referred to as RESOLUTION 11-04, http://bit.ly/N8Y0h7 This document includes a schedule of fines for violation of the deed restriction, including signs.
Complaints were received in District 3 about sign violations, recently. Action was taken in accordance with RESOLUTION 11-04 [which the District 3 board created and adopted on March 11, 2011].
All signs were removed in all districts north of CR 466 as a result of the complaints and action specified in RESOLUTION 11-04.
There was resistance from the public, regardless they had signed a covenant not to put up signs.
A public workshop was held July 30, 2012, and further, all numbered districts north of CR 466 have now met to consider enforcement of the deed restrictions on signs in their regular monthly meetings.
At the workshop, the Developer offered to permit 24-inch by 24-inch signs on the house. On May 16, 2012, the Developer had offered to permit 12-inch by 12-inch signs to be located within the home and only visible through a window of the home. Presumably, the latest concession was made so that residents and real estate agents might advertise with a sign but one less conspicuous than on a post in the yard. The specification for such a sign was incomplete, however, and left questions about form and allowable content.


My District 3 Supervisors were aligned as follows:

Chairman Charlie Cook, was strongly against enforcement, contrary to RESOLUTION 11-04, which he signed and which provides for enforcement.
Vice Charman, Bill Ray, wanted to reconsider the whole of the sign deed restriction issue with all districts and the Developer involved. [I suggest that this is unlikely and impracticable.]
Supervisor Tilman Dean just wanted to "get it right", but did not indicated how he would vote, although he said he was "ready to vote".
Supervisor John Goetz was clearly in favor of enforcing the deed restriction on signs.
Supervisor Gail Lazenby was likewise clearly in favor of enforcing the deed restriction on signs.


In the end, the Board decided to table the issue until next month. Their reason: to see what the Developer was going to specify for an "on-house" sign. District Manager, Janet Tutt mentioned that District 2 had decided to do this in their earlier meeting of that morning.

What is frustrating for me, is that I don't see why the exact form of the Developer's concession with regard to an "on house" sign has anything to do with the deed restriction and the "Rule to Bring About Deed Compliance", RESOLUTION 11-04. Seems to me we all should want a deed restriction on signs and that the districts, need to enforce that restriction. (I don't even like the idea of "in-window" or "on-house" signs that the Developer is ready to concede, but they are better alternatives than those on posts in the yard.)

The existing deed restriction is good for the community and needs to be enforced. If not, signs will be placed, as they have been north of CR 466 until the recent enforcement occurred. For the District governments to back out of the enforcement demonstrates a lack of leadership, a lack of conviction. It doesn't matter what the Developer concedes with regard to an "on house" sign, we need the deed restriction on signs and we (the districts") need to enforce it as we committed to do in RESOLUTION 11-04. And, that is why the vote on the issue should not have been tabled in the meeting of the 10th.

Supervisors representing District 5, south of 466, where the deed restriction on signs has been enforced from the inception of the district, expressed unanimous satisfaction with the deed restriction in the recent workshop. And, they have not had to contend with any signs�yard signs, window signs, or on-house signs.

Jerry Lester
Polo Ridge
District 3

[F16 1UB]

I vote for no signs, either. We just sold our condo in south Florida. No signs of any kind are allowed. After listing with the realtor, we had two offers in five days. How? Obviously, the buyers saw it on the internet.

What don't you understand about rules? Get with the times - People today look on the i-net to shop for homes THEN they may go to the location.

Spruce Creek has NO signage allowed. Hmmm Go look on the web. They're listed.

[asianthree]

i have to admit as we are looking for our next home i only use the internet and thus saving the time and effort of driving around...narrowning it down to 3 homes now that 1313 is gone:1rotfl:

[janmcn]

Glad you had a nice visit and I hope you come back and find your dream home.
I just looked at the preowned homes listed by The Villages and there are 465. I do not know how many new build homes or listings by other brokers there are............but even 465 says there are a goodly number available.
Got to The Villages - Florida's Friendliest Retirement Hometown - New Home Sales, Home Resales, Build Your Dream Home, Brownwood Paddock Square (http://www.thevillages.com) look at any listing. It will give the address and even a map. That would be much easier that driving around endlessly looking for signs. Just my opinion of someone who doesn't like signs.

That's exactly what Ms Jennifer Morse Parr wants everybody to do, thus creating a monopoly.

[Barefoot]

What don't you understand about rules? Get with the times - People today look on the i-net to shop for homes THEN they may go to the location.

VLS and MLS homes are listed on the i-net. And there are FSBO sites. Home owners can place For Sale signs in their windows. Enough already.

[njbchbum]

I can only speak for myself. We do not live in The Villages but were there 3 different times trying to find the right home for sale. snipped
By not allowing for sale signs in the yard that pretty much cuts out the FSBO's. I never thought a sign here or there was much of a distraction for the beauty of the Villages at all, especially seeing there are not many homes for sale at all there. Just my opinion of someone looking to buy.


that is exactly how we found our house. took one week for each of four years to find the house for us - and all BECAUSE of a real estate sign!

[caroline]

Touch�'

[perrjojo]

I think not having a sign does make For Sale By Owner more difficult but all others are on an even plane. My biggest concern is how many homes are rented. If we add all of the rental signs to For Sale signs..WOW! That will be unsightly. Then we have political signs, contractor signs and it goes on...we will become a village of signs.

[tv2016]

I have found several houses to rent for myself, bought 1 house, and have now rented my house to several other people - all with no signs in any of the yards. It doesn't take long for people who are looking for a place to realize they need to look on the Internet and in house windows. I think it works just fine with one small sign in a window. Let's keep TV looking nice!

[graciegirl]

An overwhelming majority of people who post on here say they don't want signs.

Why do some people who are new to posting want them?

Who are these people and who do they really represent, people who own several homes to rent or realtors???