Yes, from what I can tell, it seems that 'HOA' stands for 'home owner's association', but the entire area, including that specific lot, is zoned 'R-1A', which is 'residential, single family dwelling'. In other words, under the current zoning, and unless or until a zoning variance is obtained (very difficult to accomplish), the ONLY thing that can be built on that land is a single family dwelling, i.e., a house (vs, apartment building, etc.). I don't know how old the development itself is, but haven't the Anthonys lived there for 20+ years? If so, the question then becomes, why does the homeowner's association own a 'vacant lot' that is still zoned as a 'residential, single family dwelling' lot? My guess is that the entire parcel of land (i.e., the whole neighborhood) was originally zoned R-1A by the developer and much of it was probably 'swampy'. I've noticed in neighborhood photos of the area that many homes in there have few or no trees of any substantial size (not that uncommon in "cookie cutter" neighborhoods in FL), meaning that virtually all of the original trees in the original wooded area had to be taken down in order to FILL THE (SWAMPY) LAND before any building could take place. Could be that the lot on Suburban that has remained vacant for so many years because it is much 'swampier' than the rest of the development, meaning that it would have been too hard to sell as buildable lots, so they have held on to it all these years by default, so to speak. Or it could be that the original developer had plans for it as a community area (e.g., neighborhood pool, clubhouse, etc.) and never got around to having the zoning change and thus having anything built there. Just a guess. Either way, it's still currently (and has been 'forever') zone R-1A, so nothing goes in there until that changes. Oh, and the current owner's have to agree to a sale, too.
But as I said, that doesn't mean it can't be built on...but the barriers to doing so are great, and what we're talking about isn't a house, so zoning difficulties, etc. are applicable.
As for a walkway, I assume you mean a raised 'deck-like' structure (I confess I haven't read the whole thread)? If so, what's with all the talk about bricks? At any rate, building a raised walkway over a swamp is not without risk either, even if they were to manage to get permission for it somehow (which I doubt). Think about it: kids would presumably use it to 'cut through' on their way to school, etc., and suppose a child falls somehow from the raised walkway and gets hurt.....instant lawsuit. And heaven forbid, there's water below the decking when that happens.....then you could potentially have a real drowning (ironic, in a sick sort of way, but hey, it's possible). Or some predator hangs out there and harms a child. Or a child comes down with West Nile Virus from a mosquito bite and files suit against the then-land owner. The list goes on....
The whole thing is just a really, really, really bad idea, and I'd be completely surprised if the local area residents would support it.
BTW, how many people turned up for that balloon-releasing event the other day anyway? How much local community support for this memorial did there appear to be? Anyone know? I'd bet my last dollar that of all the people there, none of them live in that development.
Anyway, how many people did in fact show up? Anyone know?