[RICH1]

Don’t fight the system, remove the Palm and Save your money for the Tax increases!

[ChicagoNative]

Is it possible that “lethal bronzing” has something to do with your situation. Queen Palms are said to be particularly vulnerable, but all palms are affected.

[Papa_lecki]

The ARC deed compliance process doesn’t have a process for appeal, if ARC approval is received - only if ARC was denied or without ARC approval.

https://www.districtgov.org/departme...%20Process.pdf

[Daxdog]

Originally Posted by Ozzello

I spent several years wintering here before I bought our home in TV. A major selling point for my wife and I, was the beautiful palms so many people had as part of the landscaping.

Even when purchasing our new home, the salesman assured me, that though I can't get that palm in my front yard, I could replace the ugly tree there with a palm after I closed, as so many other residents have . It seemed obvious the way it was done here.

Now, the AOC tells me I have to remove that palm I waited so long, and paid so much for.

Why? Because someone complained.

Special easement? No. But everyone , yes EVERYONE on my street has a palm in this same location?
Well, no one complained about them. "So , it isn't a problem big enough to do anything about, unless someone complains?" That is how complaint driven works.

This is where I started driving around, looking at how many homes were out of compliance. There are MORE OUT of compliance than IN!! Yep, I just got lucky and had this jerk down the street that doesn't have anything better to do, than police ME.. Why not the house RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME???

How far from the street do I need to move this tree? Not inside 15.5' ..... and if I put the lovely landscape wall around the tree at a healthy distance, the wall must be 16.5' from our little side street curb, moving the tree to 21'. the sylvester has a 12' frond spanning back 14' from the required setback and would now touch my house.

I guess the big screwing came from the sales team. Anyone want to buy a house.. with no palm tree, and a real jerk living a couple doors down with nothing better to do than stick his nose in your business?

Sorry, you ****ed off the wrong guy, but my story is just as bad. A couple of years ago we had a couple down the street that the wife and husband were off their meds, the sold the house and the day they were to close and move that “reported” 19 houses in the area with things wrong, and if you drive around of course you will many more with small things wrong. Just part of living here, the good, bad and the ugly!

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by Papa_lecki

The ARC deed compliance process doesn’t have a process for appeal, if ARC approval is received - only if ARC was denied or without ARC approval.

https://www.districtgov.org/departme...%20Process.pdf

I think if you got ARC approval the only way it could be forced to remove is if it is on an easement, and breaks easement rules, like blocking access to the electrical supply box, etc.

So, I have to assume, that the OP went ahead and had the Palm put in without ARC approval. That seems to happen often - people ask if they can change a tree or something, and the salesman says yes after you move it. The buyers then take that as permission, it isn't it is just the truth, you can after you move in, but you have to follow the rules to get approval.

That other people are "breaking" the rules and getting away with it is no reason to get mad when you don't get away with it. We all sign similar code restrictions.

[JCMSr]

In reviewing the ARC application form here a few things the OP failed to mention.
- The following paragraph entitled ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, INDEMNIFICATION, AND HOLD HARMLESS states as follows:

Property owner acknowledges ARC approvals and denials are made in accordance with the District’s adopted Rules, Standards and the information supplied by the property owner. It is the property owners’ responsibility to obtain all necessary permits, government approvals and maintain compliance with all governmental laws, water management district plans, and private restrictions, including but not limited to: building regulations, zoning regulations, plat requirements, permitting, and declaration of restrictions (collectively, the “Laws”).

- ARC applications are either (1) Approved with stipulations or (2) Denied for specific reason(s). One of these stipulations clearly states that “IMPROVEMENTS MADE WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY OR EASEMENT AREAS ARE MADE AT THE OWNER’S OWN RISK. THE DISTRICT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE, LOSS, OR INJIURY RESULTING TO OR FROM PERSONS, PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS, REMOVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS, OR COSTS INCURRED AS A RESULT OF MAINTENANCE OR USE OF THESE AREAS.” Furthermore, said applications include the following statement: “Approval does not waive the property owner’s responsibility/liability for compliance with the Laws as identified herein and otherwise.”

As part of the original application process did the homeowner submit a site plan or boundary survey showing all easements with clear dimensions from the improvements to said easements or property lines? If not, how can it be said that they (the ARC) “missed” that the palm would be too close to the road? I’m sure the OP was paraphrasing when he stated “So even WITH approval, if someone complains the tree or landscape border is too close to the road, you have to move it”. Even though that is not the exact wording in the ARC application, his interpretation is essentially correct. Too bad he only paid attention to this after the fact. What part of “Approval does not waive the property owner’s responsibility/liability for compliance……” did he not understand.

I seriously doubt that the ARC has “waffled on their decision” as some posts have insinuated. It is far more likely that the application submitted for approval either did not contain sufficient information or contained erroneous information supplied by the property owner or his contractor. Too often property owners leave it up to their contractor to complete and submit the applications on their behalf without considering that it is solely the property owner’s signature that is legally binding.

Complaints about selective enforcement are a waste of time. Like it or not the system in most Districts is a complaint driven system. If a complaint is filed, it is investigated, and a violation is either confirmed or dismissed. Unless the process allowed some complaints to be investigated and others to be ignored, there is nothing selective in this process.

Every property owner owes it to himself and his neighbors to read and understand the rules and regulations and abide by them. Pleading ignorance is not now nor has it ever been a valid legal defense. Every property owner signed an agreement to abide by these rules and until they are legally modified, they are, as defined above, “The Law(s).

Stop whining and trying to blame everyone else and look into the mirror. There is a process to make changes but, until then, the current rules are what we agreed to abide by.

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by JCMSr

In reviewing the ARC application form here a few things the OP failed to mention.
- The following paragraph entitled ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, INDEMNIFICATION, AND HOLD HARMLESS states as follows:

Property owner acknowledges ARC approvals and denials are made in accordance with the District’s adopted Rules, Standards and the information supplied by the property owner. It is the property owners’ responsibility to obtain all necessary permits, government approvals and maintain compliance with all governmental laws, water management district plans, and private restrictions, including but not limited to: building regulations, zoning regulations, plat requirements, permitting, and declaration of restrictions (collectively, the “Laws”).

- ARC applications are either (1) Approved with stipulations or (2) Denied for specific reason(s). One of these stipulations clearly states that “IMPROVEMENTS MADE WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY OR EASEMENT AREAS ARE MADE AT THE OWNER’S OWN RISK. THE DISTRICT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE, LOSS, OR INJIURY RESULTING TO OR FROM PERSONS, PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS, REMOVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS, OR COSTS INCURRED AS A RESULT OF MAINTENANCE OR USE OF THESE AREAS.” Furthermore, said applications include the following statement: “Approval does not waive the property owner’s responsibility/liability for compliance with the Laws as identified herein and otherwise.”

As part of the original application process did the homeowner submit a site plan or boundary survey showing all easements with clear dimensions from the improvements to said easements or property lines? If not, how can it be said that they (the ARC) “missed” that the palm would be too close to the road? I’m sure the OP was paraphrasing when he stated “So even WITH approval, if someone complains the tree or landscape border is too close to the road, you have to move it”. Even though that is not the exact wording in the ARC application, his interpretation is essentially correct. Too bad he only paid attention to this after the fact. What part of “Approval does not waive the property owner’s responsibility/liability for compliance……” did he not understand.

I seriously doubt that the ARC has “waffled on their decision” as some posts have insinuated. It is far more likely that the application submitted for approval either did not contain sufficient information or contained erroneous information supplied by the property owner or his contractor. Too often property owners leave it up to their contractor to complete and submit the applications on their behalf without considering that it is solely the property owner’s signature that is legally binding.

Complaints about selective enforcement are a waste of time. Like it or not the system in most Districts is a complaint driven system. If a complaint is filed, it is investigated, and a violation is either confirmed or dismissed. Unless the process allowed some complaints to be investigated and others to be ignored, there is nothing selective in this process.

Every property owner owes it to himself and his neighbors to read and understand the rules and regulations and abide by them. Pleading ignorance is not now nor has it ever been a valid legal defense. Every property owner signed an agreement to abide by these rules and until they are legally modified, they are, as defined above, “The Law(s).

Stop whining and trying to blame everyone else and look into the mirror. There is a process to make changes but, until then, the current rules are what we agreed to abide by.

Pretty much exactly right.

[Papa_lecki]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

I think if you got ARC approval the only way it could be forced to remove is if it is on an easement, and breaks easement rules, like blocking access to the electrical supply box, etc.

So, I have to assume, that the OP went ahead and had the Palm put in without ARC approval. That seems to happen often - people ask if they can change a tree or something, and the salesman says yes after you move it. The buyers then take that as permission, it isn't it is just the truth, you can after you move in, but you have to follow the rules to get approval.

That other people are "breaking" the rules and getting away with it is no reason to get mad when you don't get away with it. We all sign similar code restrictions.

There is a clear exception to easements for landscaping put in during construction. So replacement probably would not meet the exception.

Realtor probably didnt know about the easement restriction when replacing something

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by joelfmi

Thank about transparency at the village. I will not to buy there

Yet you post on ToTV...

Color me confused...

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by Papa_lecki

There is a clear exception to easements for landscaping put in during construction. So replacement probably would not meet the exception.

Realtor probably didnt know about the easement restriction when replacing something

I am, not sure I understood.

Even if there was existing landscaping, changing it requires ARC approval (most conditions).

I got ARC approval for a hedge around the power box in my front yard. Even with ARC approval I had to remove it when I found out from the electric provider at that time that it did not meet their requirements for the safety of their workers. So, we changed it to meet both ARC and Power Company approvals. Not a big deal.

So, anyway. Changes that are to "larger" trees and are visible have to get approval is my understanding.

[RVJim]

Originally Posted by airstreamingypsy

What a nightmare. Places like The Villages, get volunteers who need a power trip on these boards. It's outrageous how they lower the boom on some, and not others, because some jerk needs a life. With all the activities in TV, you would think they could find something better to do than rat on their neighbors. I've been here for 8 years and have seen horror stories about wounded vets having to clip a foot off their driveway, because someone complained. Stories of 90 year olds, who have lived in their home for 30 years and a new neighbor complained about something that was done 35 years ago. Things that should have been grandfathered in. Little hitlers on power trips.

Being a “wounded vet” or “90 years old” doesn’t give you any more or less ability to skirt the rules. Justice is blind or at least it should be.

[kendi]

Originally Posted by Ozzello

I spent several years wintering here before I bought our home in TV. A major selling point for my wife and I, was the beautiful palms so many people had as part of the landscaping.

Even when purchasing our new home, the salesman assured me, that though I can't get that palm in my front yard, I could replace the ugly tree there with a palm after I closed, as so many other residents have . It seemed obvious the way it was done here.

Now, the AOC tells me I have to remove that palm I waited so long, and paid so much for.

Why? Because someone complained.

Special easement? No. But everyone , yes EVERYONE on my street has a palm in this same location?
Well, no one complained about them. "So , it isn't a problem big enough to do anything about, unless someone complains?" That is how complaint driven works.

This is where I started driving around, looking at how many homes were out of compliance. There are MORE OUT of compliance than IN!! Yep, I just got lucky and had this jerk down the street that doesn't have anything better to do, than police ME.. Why not the house RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME???

How far from the street do I need to move this tree? Not inside 15.5' ..... and if I put the lovely landscape wall around the tree at a healthy distance, the wall must be 16.5' from our little side street curb, moving the tree to 21'. the sylvester has a 12' frond spanning back 14' from the required setback and would now touch my house.

I guess the big screwing came from the sales team. Anyone want to buy a house.. with no palm tree, and a real jerk living a couple doors down with nothing better to do than stick his nose in your business?

You can’t get the tree you want. What a tough life you live. We’ll now I guess you’ll have to spend your time enjoying all those other palms on your street.

[sdifede313@aol.com]

Thanks! Now I’ve the reason NOT to move to TV. Who needs to have their lives dictated to?

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by sdifede313@aol.com

Thanks! Now I’ve the reason NOT to move to TV. Who needs to have their lives dictated to?

No one, please move where you will be happy.

100,000 seem to find happiness here.

[Remembergoldenrule]

You forgot the golden rule of real estate. Buyer beware. . Real estate agents aren’t your friend they just want to make a sale to get their commission. Everyone before you do any landscaping get approval. You need to put the distance from curbs and all of your drawings. Once you have approval, it won’t matter if there is a busy body on your street causing trouble because you have the approval. You can also check out the distances required in the neighborhood you are buying in before you buy. Again, real estate agents just want a commission so actually go to the approval site and ask.