There is a Buffer Ad-Hoc Committee meeting on February 2 at 3:00PM in the Lodge
This is a very important meeting, open to all of the Owners/Members and I plead with each of you to come and take part in the discussions, no matter if you agree with my personal opinion or not.
Before getting into the “nitty-gritty” of the notorious “Buffer Restriction”, one must better step back and look at the big picture.
Indian Hammock Declaration of Restrictions is the Indian Hammock “Law of the Land”.
Each Owner/Member should respect and obey the Declaration of Restrictions, as much as each USA Citizens should respect and obey the Constitution of the United State.
In order to place my argument in a clear way, I need to start with another restriction, a valid one, legally taking away Owner/Member’s individual right to do what he wishes on a portion of his private lot.
I am referring to the “50’ no-build zone”. (which is even greater than what the Okeechobee Building code requires)
I am quoting from the Declaration of Restrictions Article VIII “Building Control” Section 3.
“No Building shall be erected on any Residential Lot closer than 50 feet to the front, side or rear lot lines thereof.”
This “50’ no-build zone” is a “Law of the Land” in Indian Hammock.
On the other hand, there is nothing in the Declaration of Restrictions about a “25’ Buffer”.
This “Buffer Restriction”, call it a rule, requirement, regulation whatever one wishes to; Is a Restriction that takes away the Owner/Member’s individual right in regards the vegetation on a big portion of his/her lot
There are other sections in the Declaration of Restrictions that will force an Owner/Member to maintain and keep the vegetation on his/her lot to a high standard, so it will be a pleasure to look at from the roads and the common areas, but there is nothing about a “25’ buffer”.
So, the question to ask is:
When and How did this “Buffer Restriction” get voted on to become “the Law of the Land”?
Is it legally the “Law of the Land” or is it only an unenforceable recommendation, no matter how good of a recommendation it is.
Only after, and depending on how, this question is answered, it makes sense to continue with the “nitty-gritty” or stop this discussion about a “Law of the Land” that may not exist.