Quote:
Originally Posted by rsmurano
Our amenity fees are cheap for what we get. There is no other place that offers you the same activities for this low of a fee. We lived in a 55+ community and we paid more for 99% less activities.
If you are a coach potato and don’t do anything, there are other places you can live in that have $0 or low fees, that have 0 activities or a small subdivision might have no fees
|
So on the subject of Amenities, here's the question that always pops into my mind.
Does the Developer have the unlimited right to add residences, who will all have unlimited rights to all the existing amenities, regardless of where they're located?
IF the Developer opted to stop building Recreational Centers, can he still keep adding homes, which have unlimited rights to the already constructed Recreational Centers & Pools?
IF the Developer opted to stop building Executive Golfs courses, do the folks in those newer villages (presumably South), have the unlimited right to inundate the existing Executive Courses in the North?
Does the Developer have the unequivocal right to decide how many Executive Golf courses, pools, recreational centers, etc., are needed to serve a given population?
As near as I can see, there's no obligation for the Developer to provide "x number of Executive Golf course holes, per x number of residences" ... nor any obligation to do the same with Recreational Centers or any other amenity. It seems he's the sole judge of what's necessary or fair?
Amy I missing something, besides the obvious that some things are "market driven".