Walking Through Time...The BTMA Today....

In 1826 Boston, an exclusive sub-division was built. This elegant neighborhood consisted of a centrally located private park surrounded by large, up-scale homes. The development was known as Louisburg Square and was complete in every detail but one: it seems the builder neglected to make arrangements for the maintenance of the private park.
In response to this oversight, some of the owners organized themselves into a “Committee of Proprietors” and undertook the responsibility of maintaining the park. They also drew up a document binding themselves, and any future property owners, to the maintenance of the park. Today, this voluntary group of Louisburg Square homeowners is considered to be the founding fathers of our contemporary, residential homeowners associations. And the document they created is thought to be a precursor to our modern restrictive covenants.

In 1926, New York City developer Alexander Bing set up a corporation called the City Housing Corporation (CHC). Bing was the first developer to try to use the CID (common interest development-planned community-like our Burning Tree) model to provide low cost housing for the working class.

His development, called Rayburn, was located in New Jersey. Bing expanded the use of restrictive covenants as a means of limiting the rights of the owners to alter their properties. He did this not as a means of protecting property values or preserving his own vision indefinitely, but to prevent owners from enhancing their homes to the point that property values rose beyond the reach of his target market.

He created a mandatory-membership homeowners association with its own private government based on the council-manager plan.  He created a government by contract, not consent. The association was incorporated and given the usual powers to provide municipal services, tax owners, and dictate architectural standards.

Flash forward to 2011, smack dab into our planned community development called Burning Tree and what do we have to show for our "restrictive covenants" and homeowner assessments these 30 years?

Let's analyze: Outbuildings are not allowed according to the covenants, yet, they are so numerous that one is in the minority if one does not have them.

There is some tent like structure high above the fence that houses a boat in the back yard of a former director....that is so attractive. It just screams class. And somehow they feel they are better than  those living in an  apartment, or duplex.

No security, no beautification, our streets impassable in snow and ice storms rendering many unable to get out of the neighborhood...to get to work.

We are surrounded with Oxford Houses, section 8 housing, gangs, and all their 'tagging' (painting) of our areas,  plus our property values are tanking. But we have a pool complete with dwindling  participation, and declining associate memberships. Oh, forgot to mention the lovely barbed wire stretched on top of the chain link fence surrounding the pool. Could any of this possibly be the reason(s) why other neighborhood pools look more attractive to paying customers than ours?