So who actually has something where the Developer "promised" something....or where they were prohibited from building on the land they owned. It's always easy to slam the Developer when you have no investment, nor do you want to invest, only want to tell somebody else how to spend their money. We had the same "sky is falling" attitude down here when they announced the lofts. If you can't handle change then this isn't the place for you.

Was told by an ambassador that their thinking of making it a 9 hole course.

As requested by a few folks...finally dug out the Amended and Restated Property Report filed in 2003. The cover from the State of Connecticut states "The developer is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the report". This written report reflects the developer projects only the building of "Villas and Homes" and there is no mention of multiple dwellings in the areas built to that point. Outlines the lot locations and number of lots. The developer further notes the CC amenities including the swimming pools, tennis courts...and specifically the 27 Holes available at the Hacienda Golf course...and "All of the recreational facilities in The Villages, including the golf courses,swimming pools,tennis courts,game courts, recreational centers and club houses are initially owned and maintained by the developer and/or its assignee." There is much more information in the report ... and was used to describe the development. From our prospective, we gave credibility to the written report when considering a purchase in the Villages.

[QUOTE=graciegirl;1824793]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rtrav711 (Post 1824781) States like NY, Ct , Mass., etc ....had required them for anyone considering buying property in Florida due to the Johnson v. Davis, 480 So.2d 625, 629 (Fla. 1985) case that involved a piece of Florida property. This is just info I've picked up from various people. Perhaps if you contact the controlling department in an individual State they will be able to get you a copy or advise you of where to locate it. Possibly...someone reading this note can better direct you..[ /QUOTE

Because al the sites you mention are in commercial districts - not in the middle of single family housing.

Not my comments
 

On page 4 it indicates I posted a remark that there is "no problem or crisis"...THIS WAS NOT MY QUOTE BUT SOMEONE ELSE"S..... In reality...there were numerous complaints...rightfully so...from several residents of Tall Trees...complaining about the residents of the second and third floors of the building on Parr Drive being able to look over their privacy wall. etc....and so on.

Sadly, it seems obvious the developers have concluded they'd rather use property that previously supported 10 to 12 houses to now support 250+ residences! When we moved here in '06, the developers were making a visible effort to make sure amenities kept up with the number of new residences. That is no longer true.

Please go to the Villages Promises Preservation Watch (V2PW) website and contact the organizers of this vital movement.

Actually, 3rd Gen Dev can build anywhere they own the land north of 466 and can get zoning approved. They are not required and it's not likely they will use the 286 amenity privedges on the 7 ac site.

Those properties are not a comparison for complete residential owners who's championship front properties were sold at premiums and beside a championship country club.

Amenities and Dev owned Lifestyle features like Country Clubs, premiere pools and tennis courts, the squares, shopping on TV owned property are not the same, especially north of 466.
North of 466 Amenities are owned by cdd and managed by the AAC.

Actually, 3rd Gen Dev can build anywhere they own the land north of 466 and can get zoning approved. They are not required and it's not likely they will use the 286 amenity privedges on the 7 ac site.

We have a growing group of residents taking action to increase awareness of the threats to 3rd Gen Dev Marketed Lifestyle features. Please join up on our web page v2pw.com .
We include all of TV. We are researching and sharing to educate on the alphabet soup and who does what when. Also we are engaged in efforts to impact future similar actions as HHCC.
We are on FB v2pw. And if you have a story we are collecting those.

I guess I am missing something here. The Developer filed with the State of Connecticut, and I understand other States... a Restated Property Report (2003)...that stated there would be nothing but homes and villas built in the boundaries of the then Villages. That the stated golf courses with all their listed facilities would be maintained by the developer and/or his assignee. This is in writing...and is preempted by the statement" The developer is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the report". Assume many who purchased property in the Villages depended on the statements made in this report. There has been talk about a "class action" lawsuit...and several groups are looking into that. It would seem that it would be difficult for the developer to avoid compensatory damages and responsibility here...on the devaluation of hundreds of homes; which can possibly amount to many, many millions.In addition, there is also talk of the potential of a "punitive damage" count...due to the actions of the developer, and total disregard to the resident's well being. It is difficult to understand why the developer has not stuck to its' original plan. Then going forward in the new sections of the Villages....with a newly restated plan, allows the developer more latitude...as new buyers are then aware of what to expect.

Options
 

It would appear there are a few options that could be used by the residents of that Village to take control of their investments, (homes, etc). One would be to hire some attorney(s) to (a) enforce the current laws and restrictions and (b) to ensure future laws protect the residents. This could be a class action suit? Another is to demonstrate which was done when the Developer/Owner failed to take action when the CC in the old section was being ignored because the Developer did not put reserve funds aside for repairs and replacements. That resulted in a $40 million fine to the Developer. The impact of this kind of action causes the Developer to lose money as sales are down, etc. And when this action causes the Developer to lose as much as he would make from the his actions for the Apartments he may rethink the alleged abuses he is fostering on the current residents in that area. Another option is sending a group of residents to the Florida Legislature and demand control over the abuse of their alleged agreed upon property. There may be other options but these come to mind when people are being ignored when there are abuses to their land. I don't believe the residents who don't live in the Village that is allegedly being abused should stick their nose under the tent. I know of some who live a great life in their current locations and are either supportive of the Developer's actions or against. These are the ones that have no right to a position and should stay out of it unless they feel their property may be next?:popcorn:

There is no place for these people.