Quote:
Originally Posted by graciegirl
I hope that this post proves to be wrong. So far apartments have not been tested in The Villages and I really can't see this as a "bait and switch" but rather the use of an area that had lost purpose due to a lot of real factors. I see the real factors as; the folks who rent the buildings made for restaurants fail to make a success of said restaurants and that may be that the restauranteurs are sub par or that the area is aging and don't go out to eat as much or that the building was SO noisy it wasn't pleasant even for people like me who can turn my device down to eat there.
I am hoping that the apartments are not going to cause problems in the same way people who live here generally do not cause problems with higher crime and lack of care of their surroundings. I hope that the parking lot is not crowded. The one on 466 never appears to be when we drive by the back on our way to Bob Evans. (When we did, not eating out now)
I hope that the people who rent the apartments will find a good fit to a less active lifestyle and a good place to eat at the restaurant. (I did read there would be a restaurant, didn't I?)
I hope I will not find anything to disagree with Tophcfa about in the future as it has been in the past. We usually saw eye to eye.
|
I do not understand why renters are questioned..character, law abiding, etc, and not homeowners.
Rentals are a viable and missing part of a comprehensive retirement community.
Why some homeowners speak "down" aboutthe concept. There are new Lofts renters I know that could buy and sell most homeowners, both financia, AND in the measurement of character.