[JoMar]

Originally Posted by Jazzman

These apartments were built on vacant land adjoining a commercial area Brownwood. Not the same as building in an area surrounded by private residences

I guess you don't count Courtyard Villas as private residences.

[JoMar]

I hear a lot of complaining but very few alternatives. What do you propose for the location and what are you willing to invest or support to make it successful? It seems a lot of those in SS area don't support a lot of the business's up there and go outside the bubble to shop and eat unless there is something going on at the Sharon or a popular group at the squares.

[Dana1963]

Originally Posted by rtrav711

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..

The case your citing was for an individual property sale.

Florida “As Is” Real Estate Contracts and the Duty to Disclose in Residential Home Sales

Brice ZoeckleinAugust 12, 2017Blog2 Comments


A recurring source of litigation in Florida revolves around the rights of buyers and sellers operating under an “As Is” contract for sale of residential property.

A. The Seller’s Obligations to Disclose Under Florida Law

Despite the existence of contractual language excusing a seller of a property from representations (ie the “AS IS” language), Florida law provides a separate independent duty to disclose material facts that would substantially affect the value of a piece of property. Johnson v. Davis, 480 So.2d 625 (Fla. 1985). Importantly, the test for determining the materiality of a fact in a transaction of this nature is whether the fact “substantially affects the value of the property.” Dorton v. Jensen, 676 So.2d 437 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1996). That means that when a seller of a home knows of facts materially affecting the value of the property which are not readily observable and are not known to the buyer, the seller is under a duty to disclose them to the buyer. Johnson, 480 So. 2d at 629. The examples of such factors are endless but often include things like prior insurance claims, roof conditions, floods, construction defects, mold, termites, and septic/sewer system issues. Ultimately, the determination of whether the defect or issue if established is material would be question for the jury. A non-disclosure case requires the Plaintiff to establish the following elements:

(1) the seller of a home must have knowledge of a defect in the property,

(2) the defect must materially affect the value of the property,

(3) the defect must be not readily observable and must be unknown to the buyer, and

(4) the buyer must establish that the seller failed to disclose the defect to the buyer.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by mneumann02

Here is a different perspective in defense for those who are called "whiners", "complainers", and that "this isn't the place for you." TV is a wonderful community with great amenities and friendly people. 95% of the people I've met here are terrific folks, who realize they are nearing the end of life's journey and just want to enjoy their remaining years. (5% are kind of crabby old people.) The best two descriptions of TV I've heard are that it is "Disneyland for adults", and "like going to college without having to go to class." That said, no one wants something good they have taken away from them. Would anyone want an apartment building or a filling station built behind their lanai instead of the golf course view they bought? Yes, The Developer can do whatever they want, but that does not make it right if it negatively affects TV residents. Just because something is legal does not necessarily make it the right thing to do. We all want to be good neighbors, and probably so does The Developer. So kicking up a little fuss over actions that are detrimental to even a single home, let alone a neighborhood, is probably not a bad thing.

Great post.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by JoMar

I hear a lot of complaining but very few alternatives. What do you propose for the location and what are you willing to invest or support to make it successful? It seems a lot of those in SS area don't support a lot of the business's up there and go outside the bubble to shop and eat unless there is something going on at the Sharon or a popular group at the squares.

I propose that they build the threatened satellite parking lot for the hospital. No increased stress on the already overused ammenities and no increased traffic since the people using the parking lot would already be in the area of the hospital. Threat called.

[jacksonbrown]

Here is a different perspective in defense for those who are called "whiners", "complainers", and that "this isn't the place for you." TV is a wonderful community with great amenities and friendly people. 95% of the people I've met here are terrific folks, who realize they are nearing the end of life's journey and just want to enjoy their remaining years. (5% are kind of crabby old people.) The best two descriptions of TV I've heard are that it is "Disneyland for adults", and "like going to college without having to go to class." That said, no one wants something good they have taken away from them. Would anyone want an apartment building or a filling station built behind their lanai instead of the golf course view they bought? Yes, The Developer can do whatever they want, but that does not make it right if it negatively affects TV residents. Just because something is legal does not necessarily make it the right thing to do. We all want to be good neighbors, and probably so does The Developer. So kicking up a little fuss over actions that are detrimental to even a single home, let alone a neighborhood, is probably not a bad thing.

Best post ever!

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

I propose that they build the threatened satellite parking lot for the hospital. No increased stress on the already overused ammenities and no increased traffic since the people using the parking lot would already be in the area of the hospital. Threat called.

If YOU owned the property, would YOU opt for a parking lot or an apartment building?

The Morses aren't our mother. People are in business to make money, not lose money. THERE IS NO SHAME IN MAKING MONEY. It keeps the economy alive. It supports the common man. It is a good thing. I cannot wait to see this completed and I know the critics will never come forth and say...Hey. I didn't think that would turn out well but it did. The Morses have made wise decisions all along. They have NO need to be greedy, they are the most successful development of it's kind in the U.S. according to Forbes.

Florida’s New-Home Communities Seen Leading The Nation Amid “Amazing” Rebound

[npwalters]

Originally Posted by JoMar

I hear a lot of complaining but very few alternatives. What do you propose for the location and what are you willing to invest or support to make it successful? It seems a lot of those in SS area don't support a lot of the business's up there and go outside the bubble to shop and eat unless there is something going on at the Sharon or a popular group at the squares.

The developer could recoup their money (and probably make some) by developing the previous HHCC area as single family housing. The good will gained with current and future residents would be priceless.

[rtrav711]

Noted the comments re Johnson vs Davis, 480 So.2nd 625 (Fla 1985) as an individual property sale situation, and the narrow application and limitation re defects. Actually, going forward Florida case law, with limited exceptions, notes a home seller must disclose any facts or conditions about the property that have a substantial impact on its' value or desirability and that others cannot readily see for themselves. As duly noted by the writer of that comment, the BZ 2012 comments stated "Florida law provides a separate independent duty to disclose material facts that would substantially affect the value of a piece of property".
So as it evolved, Florida, like many states, requires sellers of homes and residential properties to make certain disclosures to buyers about the property's condition and history. It's based on the fact that sellers are in the best position to know all material facts relating to their properties, especially those that are not visible to the naked eye...or anticipated..and should disclose these to the buyer. Sellers who fail to do so face legal liability I understand.
This may have prompted and/or required developers to submit Property Disclosures such as the one filed by The Villages, to the State of Connecticut in 2003. It is a comprehensive 34 page report...lays out lot by lot where homes or villas were to be built...what to expect re golf courses and their facilities...rec centers...exclusive residents priority memberships..and so on....and is in writing. There is no mention of multi rental units within the boundaries of the Villages as presented. It would seem it was not only a factual portrayal of the offering...but could have been used as a sales tool to attract buyers.
It would then follow...if a proposed structure such as a multiplex building is built at HH Country Club....and the values of many single family homes near the course go down...the developer might be ultimately responsible for that; as it would be a deviation from what was presented.
(Please note...I do not have a legal background...and my comments are solely based on life experience and readings.)

[DonH57]

Originally Posted by JoMar

I hear a lot of complaining but very few alternatives. What do you propose for the location and what are you willing to invest or support to make it successful? It seems a lot of those in SS area don't support a lot of the business's up there and go outside the bubble to shop and eat unless there is something going on at the Sharon or a popular group at the squares.

I know when we first moved here hacienda hills CC was the place to go for good meals. Sunday brunches were always packed and usually a wait to get in. After management changed the decisions to change food vendors was the first mistake. The food sucked. It wasn't supported for good reasons after that. Additional changes came after making things worse. Tierra Del Sol and Katie Belles brunches were the same way till they folded like 2 dollar suitcases. Orange Blossom CC is the last remaining choice for brunches north of 466 or the alternatives are your typical greasy spoon chains on 441. We'll see what happens I guess.

[dewilson58]

I'm just not pre-judging..............I'm betting it will be nicely done and 99.9% will be happy.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by npwalters

You obviously don't live near this. There is NO WAY it will improve the area. They propose to shove an additional 500 plus residents in a multi story complex into an existing single family home area.

The developer has chosen to drop a turd in the punch bowl. You keep trying to polish it but it is still a turd.

I know how you see it. Again, I remind you of the three story building built on 466A close to a golf course and of the homes that are right up against it. And I further showed you that their estimated value has more than doubled since the apartments were built. You said "they knew it was near commercial. I say it is right in the middle between Morse and Buena Vista. It has not harmed the neighborhood or the values. I remember clearly when it was being built and there was much worry and angst and the same kind of scenario, along with those old men will be spying on us from the third floor. Now the properties that abut the wall that were purchased in the 200k's are now valued in the 500K's. And you said but there is a wall. Well maybe the developer will build a wall. Although it would be a shame to block the view of the Villagers, older people just like the ones now living here, who would enjoy seeing the golf course. There are only TWO PLACES with residences abut the Hacienda property and they are both the ends of cul-de-sacs.

We will see. I hope it does not harm anyone and that the folks who live close to this building will have the same good luck as the people who live near the three story building on 466A.

It does NOT affect me. You are right. I have no dog in this fight. I just like to quell unfounded rumors. This is MY loved town too, you know.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I know how you see it. Again, I remind you of the three story building built on 466A close to a golf course and of the homes that are right up against it. And I further showed you that their estimated value has more than doubled since the apartments were built. You said "they knew it was near commercial. I say it is right in the middle between Morse and Buena Vista. It has not harmed the neighborhood or the values. I remember clearly when it was being built and there was much worry and angst and the same kind of scenario, along with those old men will be spying on us from the third floor. Now the properties that abut the wall that were purchased in the 200k's are now valued in the 500K's. And you said but there is a wall. Well maybe the developer will build a wall. Although it would be a shame to block the view of the Villagers, older people just like the ones now living here, who would enjoy seeing the golf course. There are only TWO PLACES with residences abut the Hacienda property and they are both the ends of cul-de-sacs.

We will see. I hope it does not harm anyone and that the folks who live close to this building will have the same good luck as the people who live near the three story building on 466A.

It does NOT affect me. You are right. I have no dog in this fight. I just like to quell unfounded rumors. This is MY loved town too, you know.

When some people on TOTV found out that people were going to build on 466 they said that the homes would not have value with all that traffic sound. This is the patch where the buffalo used to roam. Properties in MY neighborhood sell in a very short time and at a substantial increase. I remember who said it and he was WRONG.

[jacksonbrown]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

It does NOT affect me. You are right. I have no dog in this fight.

Then why do you continue posting counter arguments?

[npwalters]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I know how you see it. Again, I remind you of the three story building built on 466A close to a golf course and of the homes that are right up against it. And I further showed you that their estimated value has more than doubled since the apartments were built. You said "they knew it was near commercial. I say it is right in the middle between Morse and Buena Vista. It has not harmed the neighborhood or the values. I remember clearly when it was being built and there was much worry and angst and the same kind of scenario, along with those old men will be spying on us from the third floor. Now the properties that abut the wall that were purchased in the 200k's are now valued in the 500K's. And you said but there is a wall. Well maybe the developer will build a wall. Although it would be a shame to block the view of the Villagers, older people just like the ones now living here, who would enjoy seeing the golf course. There are only TWO PLACES with residences abut the Hacienda property and they are both the ends of cul-de-sacs.

We will see. I hope it does not harm anyone and that the folks who live close to this building will have the same good luck as the people who live near the three story building on 466A.

It does NOT affect me. You are right. I have no dog in this fight. I just like to quell unfounded rumors. This is MY loved town too, you know.

I encourage anyone reading this post to actually drive by Sumter Place, the area described by graciegirl, and see if it fits her description of smack in the middle of a neighborhood. You can find it easily by looking for the Lowes next door.

I am weary of your rose colored glasses and choose to end this debate with you. As long as the proposed apartments aren't in your neighborhood you will be in favor of them.