No ARC Approval makes $4,000 mistake
 

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

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

https://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net...26&oe=5F2108A9

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

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

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

Thanks.
 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Also, not allowed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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