[Bambi]

I would be very tolerant if they used it for a limited period when they were outside and it had a timer on it. If it would automatically shut off in an hour I would not complain but it is probably on a dusk to dawn setting. I don’t know what it’s function is intended to be. It looks like it belongs in a carnival- not on a residential roof.

[Velvet]

Originally Posted by Laker14

The recent threads about the "clipboard ladies" and deed restrictions got me thinking more about them. I must admit that when we purchased our home in February 2021, I never bothered to read the document.
Having purchases the home as a "resale" I just assumed that it was in compliance, or close enough, and frankly, among all of the other burdensome legal documents to read, the deed restrictions were pretty low on my list of priorities.
So, I downloaded the "AMENDED AND RESTATED" declaration. A couple of items surprised me in their vagueness, and one surprised me that it existed at all. Among the more interesting to me were the following 3 items. Note that the numbering is mine, and not the same numbers that identify the items in the original document.

Although the original document refers often to "The Developer" I am assuming that at some point the authority ceded to "The Developer" in this document conveyed to the CDD. I am in CDD 5, and this document was downloaded from their page on the "districtgov.org" site.

1. "Lawn ornaments are prohibited except seasons displays not exceeding a 30 day duration."
What surprises me here is that I've read a few times that something that may be prohibited in the sodded area is allowed on a porch, or in a garden bed. I see no mention in the document to that effect, nor do I see any mention of the restriction applying only to ornaments of or greater than a certain dimension.

2. "No tree with a trunk 4" or more in diameter shall be removed or effectively removed through excessive injury without first obtaining permission from the Developer."
I was unaware of this restriction. I see palm trees coming down often. I'd be really surprised if the CDD is often advised of these removals. I had been told that only the oak trees were protected.

3.(Here's a personal favorite of mine, of which I was unaware: ) "All owners shall notify the Developer when leaving their property for more than a 7-day period shall simultaneously advise the Developer as tho their tentative return date."

This one got me to thinking about all of the posts I've read stating essentially "Well, if you read your deed restrictions, and follow the rules, you've got nothing to worry about." I have a hard time imagining even these strict rule followers bother to advise the CDD that they are leaving their homes for a week. And I have an even harder time imaging the reaction of whoever it is who is supposed to receive this notice, upon receiving this important information from the loyal rule follower.

I have no issue with the deed restrictions. I think they serve a useful purpose. I have seen my share of front yards in other areas, outside of TV, with more crap in the yard than I'd like to look at in my neighborhood, so I get the value of having deed restrictions, and I appreciate that to a significant degree, what I like about my neighborhood is protected by the deed restrictions.
Having said that, I don't see the value in riding around in remote neighborhoods looking for violations that evidently pass the standards of the immediate neighbors, and I do see a value in allowing a certain degree of artistic expression in the landscaping and adornment of one's property.
It strikes me as a shame that some people can't see their way to letting other people live their lives in peace, as long as they're not bothering their neighbors.

I can never understand why anyone wants to move into a deed restricted community if they don’t want to follow it. Or is it that the rules should apply to everyone but themselves? Why not move where there are no restrictions?

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

My friend got his hammer back. Had to send in a second "recovery" drone.
😃🚁

Good for him/her

[frose]

these restrictions are stupid, outdated and need to be re done. you would think we were living in the 19th century.. time to do the right thing.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by frose

these restrictions are stupid, outdated and need to be re done. you would think we were living in the 19th century.. time to do the right thing.

10's of thousands of people disagree with you...

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by frose

these restrictions are stupid, outdated and need to be re done. you would think we were living in the 19th century.. time to do the right thing.

Been here a year and already to start changing things, relax……
Correction: not even a year.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by frose

these restrictions are stupid, outdated and need to be re done. you would think we were living in the 19th century.. time to do the right thing.

Some of the restrictions could be updated but the basic framework of this place works

[Velvet]

Originally Posted by frose

these restrictions are stupid, outdated and need to be re done. you would think we were living in the 19th century.. time to do the right thing.

The restrictions are fine, they produced this wonderful community. No one is forced to live here and they really shouldn’t if they are unhappy. They should go and find their happy place, even if it doesn’t happen to be in this place.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Velvet

The restrictions are fine, they produced this wonderful community. No one is forced to live here and they really shouldn’t if they are unhappy. They should go and find their happy place, even if it doesn’t happen to be in this place or country.

People are entitled to ask for changes as the world does change over time and we need to change with it.

Not asking for wholesale change as we do like it here

[Velvet]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

People are entitled to ask for changes as the world does change over time and we need to change with it.

Not asking for wholesale change as we do like it here

I agree… but only one life, why spend it unhappy? Perhaps I’m just not an activist.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by frose

these restrictions are stupid, outdated and need to be re done. you would think we were living in the 19th century.. time to do the right thing.

Agree! Needs to be brought up to the early 20th century.
Mr. Bunker agrees.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Agree! Needs to be brought up to the early 20th century.
Mr. Bunker agrees.

Archie?

[frose]

how much better it could be here if these deed restrictions were updated. I know that change does not come easily to some, but it is time to look beyond what we have to what we could evolve to.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by frose

how much better it could be here if these deed restrictions were updated. I know that change does not come easily to some, but it is time to look beyond what we have to what we could evolve to.

But, people would continue whining about the new version.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Bambi

I would be very tolerant if they used it for a limited period when they were outside and it had a timer on it. If it would automatically shut off in an hour I would not complain but it is probably on a dusk to dawn setting. I don’t know what it’s function is intended to be. It looks like it belongs in a carnival- not on a residential roof.

I think it would be a mistake to be tolerant. If the light is prohibited, I would just file a complaint to have it removed.