apartments in the villages

[golferrm]

In yesterdays newspaper there was the article on how the villages shop owners are looking forward to have apartments built in the vilages. Now, how can we get the true picture and have an article to see if the homeowners are in the full agreement. Let's talk to everyone, especially the one that will be living close to the apartments. Are they in full agreement also?

[vintageogauge]

I think the neighbors made clear their dissatisfaction both here, in the news, and at the meeting. It will do no good, you rarely can fight city hall and win.

[JoMar]

Now there's talk of not going to those stores that support the apartments. While I suspect most didn't support them anyway, just another selfish group of Villagers shooting themselves in the foot. Maybe they will get angry enough and move and provide housing for a more progressive group of residents.

[Bogie Shooter]

Now there's talk of not going to those stores that support the apartments. While I suspect most didn't support them anyway, just another selfish group of Villagers shooting themselves in the foot. Maybe they will get angry enough and move and provide housing for a more progressive group of residents.

I agree with you, this is a dumb idea.

[asianthree]

The apartments above businesses would not effect residents everyday life.

But I have to ask how many times do you really Shop in the square? Not just do a drive by, but shop for something. In 10 years I have stopped in stores with guests, but personally have only bought something 6 times.

So I am not boycotting the business due to apartments, I just don’t shop there. So I am guessing I won’t be hurting or helping any shop owner who supports the new square apartments.

[LiverpoolWalrus]

Can someone respectfully tell me why apartments are so offensive to most Villagers? I really can't figure it out. As I see it, they will provide a much needed boost to the businesses in the squares (so of course those businesses are going to support apartments). I don't think they will increase traffic as not everyone comes and goes at the same time. More traffic was often cited as a reason to oppose housing developments in the DC area where I used to live, and those traffic issues never materialized.

Parking at the squares for nightly entertainment might be impacted to some degree, true. And for that reason, I think it's incumbent on the developer to address that issue by adding more parking or perhaps a garage before construction moves forward.

As for this idea that apartments somehow taint the image of the Villages being a sea of single family homes, where is it said that the Villages has to forever hold that singular image? I would welcome a mix of detached houses, duplexes, villas, townhouses, condos and apartments, thereby giving the consumer more options - as long as we have the infrastructure to support that model.

[dewilson58]

Let's talk to everyone, especially the one that will be living close to the apartments. Are they in full agreement also?


Never get full agreement on any topic.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Can someone respectfully tell me why apartments are so offensive to most Villagers?



It depends on the location and layout. One potential problem with apartments in the squares, will be parking. If the tenants get preferential, assigned, designated parking spots closest to the buildings (and why wouldn't they), then that's a 100% guarantee that no one else will ever be able to park closer to the stores, in the parking lots. This means there will be more people vying for those sacred spots on the streets outside the store entries. That means - more potential for traffic problems.

The fewer open spots available near the action, the harder people will fight for whatever IS available near the action. We all like to think we're all very civilized, but get a dozen old folks with fake handicap parking tags and attitudes of entitlement, and things can go downhill and get ugly very quickly.

A problem with parking *as a potential tenant* within the squares would be - lack of covered secure parking or charging stations for golf carts. This IS a golf cart community afterall, people who live here should be able to have a place to park and charge their cart, and not have to worry overmuch about theft or rain drenching the upholstery - or coming out of their home (apartment) only to find some random drunk guy passed out on the bench seat.

Because the squares are all open to the public, the issue of secure tenant golf cart parking is a real issue.

With regards to non-Square apartments (such as Hacienda), there's the matter of covered, assigned golf cart parking and charging stations - both would absolutely be needed. More importantly, the parking situation. Hacienda CC usually did -not- have over 100 cars and golf carts in the lot 24/7. Of course it had busy days, and busy night events. But it didn't have traffic in and out at all hours. If people are living there, there'll be traffic in and out at all hours. I feel it's just too close to the hospital and 441 to have 200+ more units of people in such a small area of land.

I think a part of the reason people are so against apartments is because of the reputation of tenants in general. They think tenant = transient. I think they're looking at it backward. In fact, it's transients = tenants. And this sounds like semantics, but it is significant.

Most tenants in most areas of the country are law-abiding, peaceful, working or retired, generic normal people, who rent in the same place for many years.

Most "non-homeless" transients don't own homes. They rent instead. They don't have to be responsible, because if something goes wrong they just pick up and move somewhere else. Since the apartment isn't theirs, personally, they don't have to care about maintaining its condition. They might only live in a place for a few weeks, a few months, or even a few days. Because they're transients, you really don't know how long they will actually stay - until the day they leave. They might be one drink away from a bad credit rating - get approved for a 1-year lease, and then skip town two months later, never to be seen again.

It's because transients give rentals a bad reputation, that many people think apartments will always be a bad idea. This isn't true, but I believe that is one main reason why the reputation exists.

Another is Section 8 (public) housing. Many public housing complexes in cities are really horrible places to live, visit, or even live near. Lots of crime, drugs, filth. And every single one of them are apartments. So that adds to the reputation.

I would HOPE the developer has no intention of applying to qualify as a Section 8 provider. But since it's his property, he can do as he pleases. And I think THAT is one of the other main reasons why people are against it.

[Number 10 GI]

The apartments above businesses would not effect residents everyday life.

But I have to ask how many times do you really Shop in the square? Not just do a drive by, but shop for something. In 10 years I have stopped in stores with guests, but personally have only bought something 6 times.

So I am not boycotting the business due to apartments, I just don’t shop there. So I am guessing I won’t be hurting or helping any shop owner who supports the new square apartments.

It has been proven that boycotts don't work, sounds good but that is all. We've been here almost 2 years now and I've been in the town squares maybe 10 times. They have no interest for me.

[Northwoods]

1st - Parking - How many people did they say would live in the apartments in Spanish Springs?? 40? 80? How many people went to Katie Belle's on a nightly basis? More than 100? I feel with the elimination of Katie Belle's, parking shouldn't be an issue.

2nd - Boycotting the stores? That's the dumbest thing I've heard. So I guess if you can put the stores out of business you'll solve that parking issue.

[EdFNJ]

The apartments above businesses would not effect residents everyday life.

But I have to ask how many times do you really Shop in the square? Not just do a drive by, but shop for something. In 10 years I have stopped in stores with guests, but personally have only bought something 6 times.

So I am not boycotting the business due to apartments, I just don’t shop there. So I am guessing I won’t be hurting or helping any shop owner who supports the new square apartments.


Gotta agree there. Very little to "boycott". Except for a couple very mediocre restaurants the "shopping" is pretty minimal. There will never be any MAJOR franchisees there. The few branded stores are going out of business or are already gone. The little "cute shops" like Purple Pig and the other novelty stores are great for newbies or tourists. Retail is being replaced by service business. Not even a plain old candy/newspaper store probably because rent & fees are is so high and the Villages needs their few points. Very tough for a small business to survive that doesn't have multiple stores. They will probably turn all the empty storefronts into doctors offices, funeral sales or financial places.

Apartments at LSL will bring in what? Maybe 20 people? There are plenty of lots in the back for them to park.

[davem4616]

somehow I just can't imagine my wife ever saying:

"let's rent one of those cute 2nd floor apartments in the squares over a store...it'll be just like when we were newlyweds and we had to drive around to find a place to park the car and then lug our groceries up a flight of stairs" :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Scott O]

Thanks, for speaking exactly what I was thinking...so many just wake up to complain, without looking at the reality of the situation...I think it’s a good idea...

[Scott O]

You’ve got to be kidding, why would section 8 housing even come to mind...how ridiculous

[Beyond The Wall]

This is bringing the cities to the suburbs .it is also an concept that has worked in other areas. These were build with apartments in mind, not as an afterthought.
The difference is that TV is unique. Maybe if the TV management requirements for the stores was more reasonable, eg lower rent, etc, then there would Not be a need for drastic change, which this is. What’s next, buses to transport residents? The greed of the current owners is manifest in their rapid expansion. Brownwood residents were told that this was it, the last development of TV. At the current rate it will extend to Orlando in 5-10 years. I’m all for improvement to areas but this is the beginning of a seismic change.

[PugMom]

You’ve got to be kidding, why would section 8 housing even come to mind...how ridiculous

it's called re-districting. we saw lots of this up north

[Rwirish]

Easy: not needed; increased density; more traffic congestion; not what residents want; money grab by the powers to be; just another way to continue relentless expansion; what comes next ( more Country Clubs torn down ).

[Dond1959]

Easy: not needed; increased density; more traffic congestion; not what residents want; money grab by the powers to be; just another way to continue relentless expansion; what comes next ( more Country Clubs torn down ).

Not needed: obviously there is a need or the developer wouldn’t build it.

Increased density: actually density goes down as apartments have less people than businesses originally intended for the spaces.

More traffic congestion: as the developer has shown the apartments take less parking than businesses.

Not what residents want: really not what SOME residents want.

Money power grab: making a profit is a bad thing?

Relentless expansion: basic economics of supply and demand. If no demand building would stop.

What comes next: yes, country clubs will be torn down if the business is not profitable. Again, do you expect a subsidy from the builder for unprofitable businesses? These are not a government supported entities.

[banjobob]

In yesterdays newspaper there was the article on how the villages shop owners are looking forward to have apartments built in the vilages. Now, how can we get the true picture and have an article to see if the homeowners are in the full agreement. Let's talk to everyone, especially the one that will be living close to the apartments. Are they in full agreement also?
Of course the businesses would welcome apartments , more business all day not just evenings. Parking will be an increased premium to find .

[Girlcopper]

In yesterdays newspaper there was the article on how the villages shop owners are looking forward to have apartments built in the vilages. Now, how can we get the true picture and have an article to see if the homeowners are in the full agreement. Let's talk to everyone, especially the one that will be living close to the apartments. Are they in full agreement also?
No agreement or approval needed.

[michtofla]

If everything the Villages has done over the last 25 years was put to a vote of the people the Villages would still only consist of Orange Blossom Gardens and buffalo and cows would still be grazing where the Town Square is!

[La lamy]

I think some apartments make sense for our senior community and snowbirds who want less maintenance to worry about. I don't believe it'll be the huge issue some people think it will be, as long as proper infrastructure is built along with them.

[Rich42]

Just what we need, more progressives! God help us.

[merrymini]

I do not see why apartments in the town squares are a problem. Parking was there to accommodate people eating at Katie Bells, so parking should not be a problem. Some people do not want to take care of a home and this would be a nice alternative. Hope they like music!

[llmcdaniel]

At first I was against the apartment idea at Spanish Springs until we drove by Katie Belles. They will not detract from the area, and it will be easier for older folks who have lost a spouse to downsize and yet still enjoy the music, shopping, and concerts at The Sharon. Maybe not such a horrible idea. Just a way of adapting as we all age.

[transplanted]

Now there's talk of not going to those stores that support the apartments. While I suspect most didn't support them anyway, just another selfish group of Villagers shooting themselves in the foot. Maybe they will get angry enough and move and provide housing for a more progressive group of residents.

I don't like the idea of the apartment complexes - at all. But I certainly don't support 'boycotting' the stores that want them -- they need the business. We've seen businesses come and go and its because they aren't supported enough. Hopefully they will get what they need with the addition of the apartments, but I'm doubtful. I would think 'services' like barbers/hair stylists, eateries, nail salons, etc., do better than stores (save for the 'gift shops'). This is TOTALLY a guess on my part, and I'm really only referring to those businesses w/in the town squares.

[kendi]

In yesterdays newspaper there was the article on how the villages shop owners are looking forward to have apartments built in the vilages. Now, how can we get the true picture and have an article to see if the homeowners are in the full agreement. Let's talk to everyone, especially the one that will be living close to the apartments. Are they in full agreement also?

I think these apartment posts will soon outdo the dog poop ones.

[ldj1938]

The shop owners don't own or control the second floor. The Villages owner controls all the buildings. As far as apartments go I don't care. I've been here 21 years I don't see how they will affect me one bit.

[harold63G]

I lived in a second story apartment above busy stores below, and at a busy intersection and I did not have a reserved parking space. The noise from the stores below and the streets, with some music playing, as the Squares in TV, was an issue/disturbance. Finding parking made sure I got in my daily walk to "home". Maybe I was just in "cheap" construction (likely): floors, walls, doors, windows, etc. that did not block sound. Didn't ever open the windows. Wonder how the apartments around the Squares will be affected by similar, if at all? Music on Squares - will I be dancing my room - BTW that is the ONLY place my dancing should be seen. Well IF the music is still part of the plan here at least it shuts down at 9:00p.m. Perfect for most Villagers - meds and beds by 9. Until 9 just turn up the vol. on the television to extra loud! Your neighbors will know what you are watching but so what. Maybe they will enjoy hearing it as well. Will I gain 20 pounds from satisfying the hunger from smelling cooking in the restaurants below - I easily give in to such temptations. Gonna' have to consider if I want to revisit climbing stairs or elevator rides to enjoy 2nd story apt. living in a "semi-urban" locale.

[LiverpoolWalrus]

The noise from the stores below and the streets, with some music playing, as the Squares in TV, was an issue/disturbance.

That’s my concern. Apartment dwellers in the squares are likely to complain about the live music *even though* they know full well before they move in that it’s going to be loud.

[Topspinmo]

IMO I don’t care what the developers builds in there buildings around squares. They are already built and they own them. HH different matter IMO, the area already built out residentially developers sold out to district. Which IMO means they should not add residential property in over crowded Built out area.

But, Being the district approved it I see little stopping it. I don’t agree with HH apartments because I feel for residents the brought in that area. It don’t affect 90% of us until it come to our neighborhood. What’s next glenview and Lopez? After that palmers? Don’t laugh there history starting at Chula Vista, to el Santiago, Tierra del sol.

[vintageogauge]

I lived in a second story apartment above busy stores below, and at a busy intersection and I did not have a reserved parking space. The noise from the stores below and the streets, with some music playing, as the Squares in TV, was an issue/disturbance. Finding parking made sure I got in my daily walk to "home". Maybe I was just in "cheap" construction (likely): floors, walls, doors, windows, etc. that did not block sound. Didn't ever open the windows. Wonder how the apartments around the Squares will be affected by similar, if at all? Music on Squares - will I be dancing my room - BTW that is the ONLY place my dancing should be seen. Well IF the music is still part of the plan here at least it shuts down at 9:00p.m. Perfect for most Villagers - meds and beds by 9. Until 9 just turn up the vol. on the television to extra loud! Your neighbors will know what you are watching but so what. Maybe they will enjoy hearing it as well. Will I gain 20 pounds from satisfying the hunger from smelling cooking in the restaurants below - I easily give in to such temptations. Gonna' have to consider if I want to revisit climbing stairs or elevator rides to enjoy 2nd story apt. living in a "semi-urban" locale.

There are those that welcome the music and noise and cannot relax in total quiet. Similarly there are those that couldn't imagine not living near a railroad and hearing the trains. When TV decided to build homes with the turnpike in their backyard, they knew they would sell and with very few exceptions they did sell and they sold quickly. I have talked to people that moved here from large cities and they say that there is nothing that could be worse than where they came from. The apartments will be leased just as fast as the homes are selling, there is a demand for them.

[cmeinel@verizon.net]

If it is true that Brownwood Villages filled up with current residents then it stands to reason the villages will want to provide more of the. Up North, many retirement communities have single homes for young active, apartments for older not as active, then some type of partial care (apartment within meals included) ant then the full dependent care. Many have programs that when you buy your home you can just move to next stage living ie priority too. It getting more popular now that family are abandoning their parents and grandparents to fend for themselves. Times are changing I for one am glad the villages is trying to keep an eye on the pulse of societal changes. I just hope that as they do this the really start to tighten up on the age restriction requirements or it could be a disaster if young families start moving in

[Topspinmo]

Not needed: obviously there is a need or the developer wouldn’t build it.

Increased density: actually density goes down as apartments have less people than businesses originally intended for the spaces.

More traffic congestion: as the developer has shown the apartments take less parking than businesses.

Not what residents want: really not what SOME residents want.

Money power grab: making a profit is a bad thing?

Relentless expansion: basic economics of supply and demand. If no demand building would stop.

What comes next: yes, country clubs will be torn down if the business is not profitable. Again, do you expect a subsidy from the builder for unprofitable businesses? These are not a government supported entities.


You’re opinion, my opinion I disagree

[ProfessorDave]

I think the neighbors made clear their dissatisfaction both here, in the news, and at the meeting. It will do no good, you rarely can fight city hall and win.

Reality... the apartment situation can be won with the right strategy. However, when I suggested it - was turned down by those who say they're concerned - but don't have the right strategy to accomplish it.

It is simple. This is an economic issue - period. The only way to win an economic issue is through economics.

So - if for 8 weeks - there were 15 or so golf carts - with signs "Developer - Broken Promises - Beware" parked in and around the TV sales offices - EVERY DAY - the developer would likely negotiate.

Why? First and foremost - the agents would start losing their confidence - and be upset. Second, prospective buyers will have second thoughts. Third, it will explode on social media - which will last a long time. Forth, the Orlando paper would LOVE the story - because - they really are not friendly to The Villages news.

Simply - if it is really an economic issue - you don't fight it with lawyers. The developer's pockets are too big - it was an ill advised strategy from the beginning. If anybody is serious - they need to fight an economic battle on the economic battlefield - and - thus far - THAT is NOT happening. AND - based on the response I got when I last suggested it - IT won't ever happen because people are afraid that THE VILLAGES picketing would be associated with the riots around the country (which - is what I was told - and in my opinion - is ridiculous).

:bigbow:

[dewilson58]

[QUOTE=ProfessorDave;1854024] with signs "Developer - Broken Promises - Beware"


is ridiculous).QUOTE]



Minor problem, no broken promises. :clap2:

[Bogie Shooter]

Of course the businesses would welcome apartments , more business all day not just evenings. Parking will be an increased premium to find .

How many times have you been unable to find a parking spot at any of the squares??

[graciegirl]

Bogie Shooter. Always a voice of reason.

The rest of us are worried about the interlopers trying to over throw the amazing way things are run here. I remember how puzzled I was at the beginning of our living here about the "CDD form of Government" until I saw how well it works and how it would not work if the Morses were unethical.

I feel so lucky to live here in this beautifully run Paradise. I have never been happier or more content with a "place to live" in my whole life.

[LiverpoolWalrus]

Bogie, it’s a concern because it’s possible the developer may give in to their complaints and cut back on the music in some way. No?

[Bogie Shooter]

Bogie, it’s a concern because it’s possible the developer may give in to their complaints and cut back on the music in some way. No?
No.

[graciegirl]

Bogie, it’s a concern because it’s possible the developer may give in to their complaints and cut back on the music in some way. No?

EVERYTHING depends on the economy. No one can predict how long the Pandemic will influence it. The Developer is not our mother or God.

When people can work they will work and a rising tide lifts all ships.

[vintageogauge]

Reality... the apartment situation can be won with the right strategy. However, when I suggested it - was turned down by those who say they're concerned - but don't have the right strategy to accomplish it.

It is simple. This is an economic issue - period. The only way to win an economic issue is through economics.

So - if for 8 weeks - there were 15 or so golf carts - with signs "Developer - Broken Promises - Beware" parked in and around the TV sales offices - EVERY DAY - the developer would likely negotiate.

Why? First and foremost - the agents would start losing their confidence - and be upset. Second, prospective buyers will have second thoughts. Third, it will explode on social media - which will last a long time. Forth, the Orlando paper would LOVE the story - because - they really are not friendly to The Villages news.

Simply - if it is really an economic issue - you don't fight it with lawyers. The developer's pockets are too big - it was an ill advised strategy from the beginning. If anybody is serious - they need to fight an economic battle on the economic battlefield - and - thus far - THAT is NOT happening. AND - based on the response I got when I last suggested it - IT won't ever happen because people are afraid that THE VILLAGES picketing would be associated with the riots around the country (which - is what I was told - and in my opinion - is ridiculous).

:bigbow:

What verifiable broken promises are you referring to? Also, once someone made up there mind to live here it would take a lot more than 15 or so golf cars with signs to change their minds, if I were to see them I would think that there is a dozen or so in every crowd and go on with my desire to live here. Let them alone, they know what they are doing and what they are allowed to do, there may well be several of those reading this original post that will end up living in one of the apartments. The apartments at the squares, especially Lake Sumter, might be a great place for singles that like the music and bars.

[zendog3]

It might be time for a class--action suite against the developer. When you bought here, you bought two things: a house and a village ID card. You paid more for your house than you would pay for the same house outside TV because the ID card gave you access to amenities (ball fields, and courts, pools, golf courses etc. You assumed you would not have to compete with non-villagers for access to amenities. You assumed the developer would not sell ID cards to people outside TV, and you would have exclusive access to amenities. Now, the developer is adding people to the Villages without adding additional amenities to service them. My wife is already having trouble getting a T-time for her golf group. It will only become more difficult as the developer continues to add villagers without adding amenities for them. Dumping more residents on the already finished sections of the villages without adding amenities is all "gravy" for the developer. But the developer is systematically reducing the value of your estate without compensating you for your loss.

Consider that the developer owns a lot of undeveloped land inside the boundaries of TV north of 466 and east of the polo field -- possibly hundreds of acres. What stops him fro building apartments there and giving ID cards to hundreds of new residents. How many residents of the apartments at brownwood are going to be competition with you for T-times and access to other amenities?

What are our remedies? It seems reasonable a restraining order against the developer could stop him from adding residents without compensation to existing residents or adding new amenities for them. Another solution is a zoning change to freeze the population density at levels before adding additional residents.

POA -- Are you listening. I imagine an enterprising law firm with take on the developer in a class-action suite.

[Bogie Shooter]

It might be time for a class--action suite against the developer. When you bought here, you bought two things: a house and a village ID card. You paid more for your house than you would pay for the same house outside TV because the ID card gave you access to amenities (ball fields, and courts, pools, golf courses etc. You assumed you would not have to compete with non-villagers for access to amenities. You assumed the developer would not sell ID cards to people outside TV, and you would have exclusive access to amenities. Now, the developer is adding people to the Villages without adding additional amenities to service them. My wife is already having trouble getting a T-time for her golf group. It will only become more difficult as the developer continues to add villagers without adding amenities for them. Dumping more residents on the already finished sections of the villages without adding amenities is all "gravy" for the developer. But the developer is systematically reducing the value of your estate without compensating you for your loss.

Consider that the developer owns a lot of undeveloped land inside the boundaries of TV north of 466 and east of the polo field -- possibly hundreds of acres. What stops him fro building apartments there and giving ID cards to hundreds of new residents. How many residents of the apartments at brownwood are going to be competition with you for T-times and access to other amenities?

What are our remedies? It seems reasonable a restraining order against the developer could stop him from adding residents without compensation to existing residents or adding new amenities for them. Another solution is a zoning change to freeze the population density at levels before adding additional residents.

POA -- Are you listening. I imagine an enterprising law firm with take on the developer in a class-action suite.
Open the window and add more courses. There are open tee times (execs & champs) every day..................
BTW size of group 4 or 40?

[coffeebean]

Can someone respectfully tell me why apartments are so offensive to most Villagers? I really can't figure it out. As I see it, they will provide a much needed boost to the businesses in the squares (so of course those businesses are going to support apartments). I don't think they will increase traffic as not everyone comes and goes at the same time. More traffic was often cited as a reason to oppose housing developments in the DC area where I used to live, and those traffic issues never materialized.

Parking at the squares for nightly entertainment might be impacted to some degree, true. And for that reason, I think it's incumbent on the developer to address that issue by adding more parking or perhaps a garage before construction moves forward.

As for this idea that apartments somehow taint the image of the Villages being a sea of single family homes, where is it said that the Villages has to forever hold that singular image? I would welcome a mix of detached houses, duplexes, villas, townhouses, condos and apartments, thereby giving the consumer more options - as long as we have the infrastructure to support that model.

Why would parking be impacted? Wouldn't people just walk to the square? Sometimes, a parking spot is as far as the furthest apartment would be to the square. No?

[JoMar]

A lawsuit based on what you assumed when you came here? Really? Tee times hard to get? Really, or just hard to get the course at the time on the day she wants? Have her check other courses, there are times someplace. We live in a community of 100K people and it's growing. Maybe time to find another place to live that suits your lifestyle better?

[LiverpoolWalrus]

Consider that the developer owns a lot of undeveloped land inside the boundaries of TV north of 466 and east of the polo field -- possibly hundreds of acres. What stops him fro building apartments there and giving ID cards to hundreds of new residents.



I often wondered why all that vacant land east and southeast of the polo fields remains undeveloped. I heard a good chunk of it is privately owned though, and they're holding out. If that's not true, anyone know why the developer is leaving all that space vacant and instead developing way down south?

[coffeebean]

IMO I don’t care what the developers builds in there buildings around squares. They are already built and they own them. HH different matter IMO, the area already built out residentially developers sold out to district. Which IMO means they should not add residential property in over crowded Built out area.

But, Being the district approved it I see little stopping it. I don’t agree with HH apartments because I feel for residents the brought in that area. It don’t affect 90% of us until it come to our neighborhood. What’s next glenview and Lopez? After that palmers? Don’t laugh there history starting at Chula Vista, to el Santiago, Tierra del sol.
I'm not a golfer so I can not speak from experience but don't golfers go to the country clubs after a round of golf for a few drinks and a bite to eat? I've seen golfing groups many times when hubby and I have lunch or early dinner at the country clubs. Isn't that part of the "experience" for golfers?

[coffeebean]

If it is true that Brownwood Villages filled up with current residents then it stands to reason the villages will want to provide more of the. Up North, many retirement communities have single homes for young active, apartments for older not as active, then some type of partial care (apartment within meals included) ant then the full dependent care. Many have programs that when you buy your home you can just move to next stage living ie priority too. It getting more popular now that family are abandoning their parents and grandparents to fend for themselves. Times are changing I for one am glad the villages is trying to keep an eye on the pulse of societal changes. I just hope that as they do this the really start to tighten up on the age restriction requirements or it could be a disaster if young families start moving in

We purchased in a "retirement community" not a bedroom community. That would not be very ethical for the developer to renege on their original vision for this community.

[coffeebean]

Bogie, it’s a concern because it’s possible the developer may give in to their complaints and cut back on the music in some way. No?

I surely hope not. One of the sales spiels that we received when looking to purchase here was that "There is FREE live music every evening, 365 days a year, weather permitting." WOW, that is fantastic we thought. What a great place this is for retirement. We love live music so that "spiel" was a slam dunk for us. I can not imagine apartment dwellers could have enough influence to curtail the live music in the squares. I just will not believe that!

[dewilson58]

I often wondered why all that vacant land east and southeast of the polo fields remains undeveloped. I heard a good chunk of it is privately owned though, and they're holding out. If that's not true, anyone know why the developer is leaving all that space vacant and instead developing way down south?


For privacy.

[dewilson58]

It might be time for a class--action suite against the developer. When you bought here, you bought two things: a house and a village ID card. You paid more for your house than you would pay for the same house outside TV because the ID card gave you access to amenities (ball fields, and courts, pools, golf courses etc. You assumed you would not have to compete with non-villagers for access to amenities.


Clueless!!!


There have been and will always be rentals in TV.


:ohdear:

[dewilson58]

What verifiable broken promises are you referring to? .
:bigbow:
Don't hold your breath waiting for a response. :a040:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I honestly would be more concerned from the tenant's perspective, with regards to secure overnight parking and charging stations for golf carts, and assigned parking for cars. And, if they do build a lane of golf cart garages for tenants, it means those spaces won't be useable by anyone else. If they're trying to put in 40 apartments in the square, that's a potential for 40+ spaces that no one else can park in. That's a lot of parking spaces, if you're building those golf cart garages close to the buildings.

[coffeebean]

For privacy.

Privacy for who?

[JSR22]

Privacy for who?

Morse family and friends compound.

[LiverpoolWalrus]

Why would parking be impacted? Wouldn't people just walk to the square? Sometimes, a parking spot is a far as the furthest apartment would be to the square. No?

Coffee, I was referring to the residents of the 150 proposed apartments at Hacienda. It's about a mile and a half from Spanish Springs. You or I would walk it perhaps, but most Village People, probably not. OBB wrote a much better treatise on parking above.

But when you get down to brass tacks, if parking ever became an issue, I have faith the developer would build a garage. I wouldn't be surprised if the old Barnes and Noble, one of the first victims of Covid, is being eyed right now. I'm all for healthy and vibrant town squares.

[coffeebean]

Morse family and friends compound.

Oh, that makes sense.

[coffeebean]

Coffee, I was referring to the residents of the 150 proposed apartments at Hacienda. It's about a mile and a half from Spanish Springs. You or I would walk it perhaps, but most Village People, probably not. OBB wrote a much better treatise on parking above.

But when you get down to brass tacks, if parking ever became an issue, I have faith the developer would build a garage. I wouldn't be surprised if the old Barnes and Noble, one of the first victims of Covid, is being eyed right now. I'm all for healthy and vibrant town squares.
Oh, sorry. I didn't realize you were referring to HH area. I was thinking of the apartments proposed for above the stores in LSL.

[Topspinmo]

Walk? They won’t even walk from cart path to green.

[Bogie Shooter]

I often wondered why all that vacant land east and southeast of the polo fields remains undeveloped. I heard a good chunk of it is privately owned though, and they're holding out. If that's not true, anyone know why the developer is leaving all that space vacant and instead developing way down south?

That’s a secret.

[Villageswimmer]

I honestly would be more concerned from the tenant's perspective, with regards to secure overnight parking and charging stations for golf carts, and assigned parking for cars. And, if they do build a lane of golf cart garages for tenants, it means those spaces won't be useable by anyone else. If they're trying to put in 40 apartments in the square, that's a potential for 40+ spaces that no one else can park in. That's a lot of parking spaces, if you're building those golf cart garages close to the buildings.

I completely missed this. Forty apartments in the square are many more than I envisioned. I was thinking more like 15-20. Interesting.

[tophcfa]

There are no problems with apartments built in appropriate areas like town squares and in new build-out areas where they are planned in advance and properly built in accordance with the available amenities and are in harmony with the rest of the area. But when they are built as an after the fact infill, in long established single family residential areas, and they are granted amenity privileges in places with already overused amenities (and infastructure), that is just not right.

The Lofts in Brownwood, or the planned apartments over commercial spaces in the town squares, are all good. However, the planned Hacienda Hills monstrosity is another story all together, that is a very bad thing.

[Worldseries27]

that’s a secret.
also hand delivered russian dossier to fbi

[vintageogauge]

I often wondered why all that vacant land east and southeast of the polo fields remains undeveloped. I heard a good chunk of it is privately owned though, and they're holding out. If that's not true, anyone know why the developer is leaving all that space vacant and instead developing way down south?

Before Cody's closed on 42 one of the servers told me that they were going to build high density condominiums all along there.

[normandy]

2003, we were told houses only in the villages !!! I guess it's time to move!!!

[Kenswing]

2003, we were told houses only in the villages !!! I guess it's time to move!!!

I hope you find someplace that makes you happy.

[JoMar]

There are no problems with apartments built in appropriate areas like town squares and in new build-out areas where they are planned in advance and properly built in accordance with the available amenities and are in harmony with the rest of the area. But when they are built as an after the fact infill, in long established single family residential areas, and they are granted amenity privileges in places with already overused amenities (and infastructure), that is just not right.

The Lofts in Brownwood, or the planned apartments over commercial spaces in the town squares, are all good. However, the planned Hacienda Hills monstrosity is another story all together, that is a very bad thing.

But do you have a solution or is it just don't build anything, or build something even if it's not profitable? Seems a lot of residents do a lot of complaining with no solutions.

[dewilson58]

Actually played HH yesterday. Stood on the apartment site towards the area houses and looked back at the site from various fairways.....................pretty hard to find a house with a view of the site.


Heard a number of golfers on the practice green commenting how they look forward to an apartment option in the HH area and the loud complainers are just noise. :throwtomatoes:

[Bogie Shooter]

Before Cody's closed on 42 one of the servers told me that they were going to build high density condominiums all along there.
What are you doing way up on CR 42? I have read on here that it would be such a long trip for anyone to make.😀

[JimJohnson]

I feel we need more apartments for those of us that want to stay and downsize to a more simple life when we age.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Actually played HH yesterday. Stood on the apartment site towards the area houses and looked back at the site from various fairways.....................pretty hard to find a house with a view of the site.


Heard a number of golfers on the practice green commenting how they look forward to an apartment option in the HH area and the loud complainers are just noise. :throwtomatoes:

From the perspective of neighbor privacy and/or view, I don't think there's any concern about the ground floor. The concern is about what people living on the top floor (or floors, depending on how high this thing is going to get) will see. And what neighbors will see when they look UPward along the treeline.

[dewilson58]

From the perspective of neighbor privacy and/or view, I don't think there's any concern about the ground floor. The concern is about what people living on the top floor (or floors, depending on how high this thing is going to get) will see. And what neighbors will see when they look UPward along the treeline.


Upper floors will see less and houses will see less of the upper floors.........trees are blocking.


Neighbor privacy??...............they live on a golf course, they decided against having privacy. :ho:


I recommend people walk the place, fairways, etc.