Chapter 10 - 2001 Waterford Amendment
In mid-1997, property owner Ken Rice appeared before the POA Board to explain his plans to develop residential lots on approximately 310 acres that were west of Steve Tate Road and south of Wilderness Parkway. Most of this land benefited from the previously discussed Easement Agreement dated October 1, 1977, and therefore enjoyed Big Canoe rights that could present problems if the property were not made a part of Big Canoe. Some of this land enjoyed additional rights granted by the Big Canoe Company in a Warranty Deed dated July 21, 1989 and modified by a Warranty Deed dated April 30, 1991.
Because of the tensions that could result from a non-Big Canoe development being essentially inside Big Canoe’s gates and bordering Big Canoe neighborhoods, the Elected Directors lobbied the Developer Directors representing the Company to work out a mutually agreeable arrangement permitting the Rice development (later named “Waterford”) to become part of Big Canoe. Article II, Section 2(b) of the General Declaration provided for an owner of property to have that property conveyed into Big Canoe subject to a vote of the membership. The arrangements for doing so had to first be acceptable to the Company in order for the Developer Directors to vote at the board level to take the issue to the membership, and then for the Company to vote its “supermajority” vote at the membership level in favor of the proposed action.
The negotiations between the Rices and the Company extended for approximately four years until an amendment to the General Declaration was finally approved effective June 9, 2001. This amendment established a Type “E” member of the POA in order to accommodate the conveyance of Waterford. A supplemental declaration was executed the same date to effect the conveyance.
-
About This Site
This site is presented as a resource for use by Big Canoe property owners. Information found on this site will often differ from that which is presented by the POA Board, the current administration, and some of the committees. Much of what you will see here is opinion, but the opinions will be formed from the best available information.
As property owners and users of this site, you are urged to bring attention to the good things you see as well as the bad. You are particularity urged to bring attention to acts by our employees when those actions exceed your expectations.
Property owners have strongly held views and they are encouraged to express their views on this forum. Please refrain from name-calling or attacking individuals. Keep in mind that the goal is to effect change, not create enemies. -
Recent Posts
-
Recent Comments
- Chris Beechler: This proposed R&R Reserve Fund plsn needs some clsrificsation for it to be meaningful to me. Here...
- F Shead: Congratulations, very well done.
- F Shead: Must address no-bid contracts. There must be wording added to stop multi-million dollar “no-bid”...
- Larry Grizzle: I would like to think that everyone involved in this process feels they’re doing the right thing...
- DAVID KELLY: My fear is that the POA Board will turn around and increase the monthly assessment to generate the funds...
- Don Wyeth: My numbers as to homes and lots may be slightly inaccurate but are close enough to establish a point....
- mark sementilli: So this is the new and improved CIF? What a dissapointing outcome. I don’t want to appear as...
- Don Wyeth: By now most of you are aware that the POA Board has , after great consideration , come up with a new plan...
- mark sementilli: Doug, The one area or your letter that strikes me as truly amazing is the purported spiking of the...
- Doug Piggott: “Corporate” Board – Fact or Fiction? You decide. Some would have us believe that this term...
