[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Perhaps your viewpoint is backwards?

Folks buy homes in Residential zoning districts, they have a reasonable right to assume that the home next door to them, won't become a hotel.

In most cases, a "hotel" is worth more than a "home".

If STR's are eliminated in areas where the didn't belong in the first place, status quo continues, albeit rolled back to where everything should have been in the first place.

Of course, some folks are all about how much money they can make and don't have any qualms about destabilizing the neighborhoods where they buy homes.

Originally Posted by shaw8700@outlook.com

You want houses sitting on the market for six + months? Because that’s exactly what I have. The guy two doors down from me has been on the market for almost a year. Same thing all over this community. We have a LOT of houses for sale, from condos all the way up to a million +.

Actually, I'd love to see houses sitting on the market for 6+ months. It's what all the dopes who are confused about why we buy homes, deserve.

In another life, some years back, I was a housing policy advisor to a Governor and have some strong opinions on the subject. That doesn't make me right, it only means that I've been forced to think about the subject from a different perspective than most. I probably have stronger opinions on the subject than most, but that's just the way it goes, you can disagree.

Homes are just that, "homes". The purpose of homes, is shelter for people and families. Nothing more, nothing less.

We [the age demographic in TV] are the first generation in American history, who have expected to "inherit wealth", primarily derived from home appreciation of our parents. Prior to our generation, home appreciation was barely a blip on the radar.

We have now become a nation, whose market for shelter (homes) is driven by the notion that homes are a method to accumulate wealth. That is an "amateur investor" driven fallacy. Home appreciation in most cases, generates Monopoly money. It only becomes real money, when someone is able to actualize that money by making a major change in their life [moving, typically].

If every home in your chosen neighborhood appreciated 50% over-night, what did you gain? NOTHING if you want to continue to live in your neighborhood. You may be able to actualize some of that appreciation, but you have to change your life to do it (move).

Now we have folks coming on here and pontificating about how STR's are raising home values and should continue. Amateur hour.

Yep, STR's can help drive home prices higher, but again ... you need to do something affirmative to actualize that money. There are only (2) ways to actualize your accumulated "Monopoly money". You can move to a new neighborhood that's cheaper (hasn't been infected by the inflation caused by STR's) or .... stay where you are and live in a neighborhood that's turned into a commercial district, Your choice.

(The other option is to die and leave your appreciation to your children, who may or may not be able to actualize it.)

It seems to me, that people in their 60's and 70's should have seen enough of life by now, to realize living in a neighborhood they love, is more important than their home "appreciating" 10% per year. We should all be smart enough by now to realize, a "home" is shelter, not an investment.

Allowing professional investors and speculators to drive home prices in your neighborhood, is self-defeating if you want to live there. Allowing amateurs to do it, is even dumber.

As for the poster who said that STR's are no different than single-family homes and don't stress an infra-structure ... you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

STR's at a minimum, increase occupancy rates of "seasonal homes" that are now used year around. A 12 year old can see that.

STR's are invariably occupied (by definition) folks who are temporary and want to get maximum value for their rental money. Utilize amenities/events/conveniences to the max. Squeeze as much "vacation" into their vacation as they can. Who wouldn't?

Take a 6 month vacation home and rent it out for the 6 months you're not using it, nearly doubles the strain on an infrastructure ... simple, basic, 6th grade math.

STR's contribute nothing towards the purpose of what homes are intended for ... shelter.

STR's provide investment opportunities, for amateurs in most cases. For a price, folks get a temporary base of operations, to take part in the extraneous benefits of a location. Pools, restaurants, golf courses, tennis courts, walking paths, weather, etc. Sounds suspiciously like a hotel to me.

We're all sort of doing that in The Villages, but at least the folks who bought homes as year around or seasonal shelters, have made a significant investment. Allowing those investments to be de-valued by investors who now want to be in the hotel business on the cheap, is lunacy.

At a minimum, the new amendments to Florida legislation will allow the state to collect taxes due and increase the financial burden the amateur hotel owners will have to absorb.

[Normal]

Originally Posted by Randall55

Reducing the price is possible with an owner who bought before the post covid surge. They will still see substantial profit. Considering closing costs, those who bought after covid cannot reduce the price unless they are willing to lose money or break even. IMO, if you do not plan on living in your home until you die, this is a terrible time to buy.

That is a tough scenario. IMHO many homes south of 44 are within this purchasing window. I think the days of the quick money are over for those who were building on view lots and reselling them 2 years later? Square footage prices will obviously zero out at about 190-200 a square foot on basic spec home construction. “View lots” should be right at about 225-230 a square. Then again age, location, pools etc will change those means.

The Fed has some concerned with their lending rate and its impact on treasuries and for good reason. Buyers aren’t willing to accept the 7 point charge yet. The savvy know mortgage applications have dropped like a rock. Yes, some pay cash for homes, but that could be contingent on selling a home elsewhere.

If you were to buy now, it could be considered “pound foolish”. The bottom isn’t here yet and the market isn’t changing overnight. Waiting on the sidelines as a spectator is the safest route. I still think end of summer 2024 will be the best bottom to purchase?

[GizmoWhiskers]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Actually, I'd love to see houses sitting on the market for 6+ months. It's what all the dopes who are confused about why we buy homes, deserve.

In another life, some years back, I was a housing policy advisor to a Governor and have some strong opinions on the subject. That doesn't make me right, it only means that I've been forced to think about the subject from a different perspective than most. I probably have stronger opinions on the subject than most, but that's just the way it goes, you can disagree.

Homes are just that, "homes". The purpose of homes, is shelter for people and families. Nothing more, nothing less.

We [the age demographic in TV] are the first generation in American history, who have expected to "inherit wealth", primarily derived from home appreciation of our parents. Prior to our generation, home appreciation was barely a blip on the radar.

We have now become a nation, whose market for shelter (homes) is driven by the notion that homes are a method to accumulate wealth. That is an "amateur investor" driven fallacy. Home appreciation in most cases, generates Monopoly money. It only becomes real money, when someone is able to actualize that money by making a major change in their life [moving, typically].

If every home in your chosen neighborhood appreciated 50% over-night, what did you gain? NOTHING if you want to continue to live in your neighborhood. You may be able to actualize some of that appreciation, but you have to change your life to do it (move).

Now we have folks coming on here and pontificating about how STR's are raising home values and should continue. Amateur hour.

Yep, STR's can help drive home prices higher, but again ... you need to do something affirmative to actualize that money. There are only (2) ways to actualize your accumulated "Monopoly money". You can move to a new neighborhood that's cheaper (hasn't been infected by the inflation caused by STR's) or .... stay where you are and live in a neighborhood that's turned into a commercial district, Your choice.

(The other option is to die and leave your appreciation to your children, who may or may not be able to actualize it.)

It seems to me, that people in their 60's and 70's should have seen enough of life by now, to realize living in a neighborhood they love, is more important than their home "appreciating" 10% per year. We should all be smart enough by now to realize, a "home" is shelter, not an investment.

Allowing professional investors and speculators to drive home prices in your neighborhood, is self-defeating if you want to live there. Allowing amateurs to do it, is even dumber.

As for the poster who said that STR's are no different than single-family homes and don't stress an infra-structure ... you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

STR's at a minimum, increase occupancy rates of "seasonal homes" that are now used year around. A 12 year old can see that.

STR's are invariably occupied (by definition) folks who are temporary and want to get maximum value for their rental money. Utilize amenities/events/conveniences to the max. Squeeze as much "vacation" into their vacation as they can. Who wouldn't?

Take a 6 month vacation home and rent it out for the 6 months you're not using it, nearly doubles the strain on an infrastructure ... simple, basic, 6th grade math.

STR's contribute nothing towards the purpose of what homes are intended for ... shelter.

STR's provide investment opportunities, for amateurs in most cases. For a price, folks get a temporary base of operations, to take part in the extraneous benefits of a location. Pools, restaurants, golf courses, tennis courts, walking paths, weather, etc. Sounds suspiciously like a hotel to me.

We're all sort of doing that in The Villages, but at least the folks who bought homes as year around or seasonal shelters, have made a significant investment. Allowing those investments to be de-valued by investors who now want to be in the hotel business on the cheap, is lunacy.

At a minimum, the new amendments to Florida legislation will allow the state to collect taxes due and increase the financial burden the amateur hotel owners will have to absorb.

Exactly, what you said!

[Randall55]

Originally Posted by Normal

That is a tough scenario. IMHO many homes south of 44 are within this purchasing window. I think the days of the quick money are over for those who were building on view lots and reselling them 2 years later? Square footage prices will obviously zero out at about 190-200 a square foot on basic spec home construction. “View lots” should be right at about 225-230 a square. Then again age, location, pools etc will change those means.

The Fed has some concerned with their lending rate and its impact on treasuries and for good reason. Buyers aren’t willing to accept the 7 point charge yet. The savvy know mortgage applications have dropped like a rock. Yes, some pay cash for homes, but that could be contingent on selling a home elsewhere.

If you were to buy now, it could be considered “pound foolish”. The bottom isn’t here yet and the market isn’t changing overnight. Waiting on the sidelines as a spectator is the safest route. I still think end of summer 2024 will be the best bottom to purchase?

I have been flipping homes in the Villages for many years. In my experience, homes with views keep their value and are easy to flip for substantial profit. All you need is that ONE BUYER.

I believe cookie cutter homes with no views are experiencing the most difficulty in this market. When every home looks exactly the same as others, buyers have the advantage.

We sold our home for substantial profit a few months ago. We are currently renting. We believe the end of summer will reveal what is going to happen with this market. As a flipper, I am hoping the prices go up. Most likely, this is not going to happen.

[Sandy and Ed]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Perhaps your viewpoint is backwards?

Folks buy homes in Residential zoning districts, they have a reasonable right to assume that the home next door to them, won't become a hotel.

In most cases, a "hotel" is worth more than a "home".

If STR's are eliminated in areas where the didn't belong in the first place, status quo continues, albeit rolled back to where everything should have been in the first place.

Of course, some folks are all about how much money they can make and don't have any qualms about destabilizing the neighborhoods where they buy homes.

Well said. STR do not make community.

[Normal]

Originally Posted by Randall55

I have been flipping homes in the Villages for many years. In my experience, homes with views keep their value and are easy to flip for substantial profit. All you need is that ONE BUYER.

I believe cookie cutter homes with no views are experiencing the most difficulty in this market. When every home looks exactly the same as others, buyers have the advantage.

We sold our home for substantial profit a few months ago. We are currently renting. We believe the end of summer will reveal what is going to happen with this market. As a flipper, I am hoping the prices go up. Most likely, this is not going to happen.

I certainly agree with most of what you have said. It will be interesting to see if post construction contractors and home improvement companies feel the pinch. If they do, that would be the very bad sign and all bets would be off for improvement in the housing economy here. You are wise to rent for the time being.

Things to look for would be competitive pricing between landscapers or pool builders.

[Shipping up to Boston]

Love how these threads grow tentacles and stray off of the original topic. I'm guilty as well. This bill is about accountability and fairness. Most of these STR in question are usually owned by individuals that don't know nor care about quality of life....its only about the bottom line. So if this initiative hits in the wallet and makes someone whole with their municipality and more importantly their neighbors...im all in.

[defrey12]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Perhaps not



Where has any two or three bedroom house been torn down and replaced by a multi-unit facility with a front desk? You can name it a hotel to try to make your point but that doesn't change reality. It is still a single family home with the normal number of persons residing in it.

Folks should not make assumptions, folks should make themselves aware of laws and covenants and what rights they and their neighbors have. This discussion seems to be about buyer's remorse and a desire to take away neighbor's rights to quell that remorse.



STRs are currently situated exactly where they belong.

Demanding legislation that will result in vacant homes, an increase in homes on the market, the loss of property rights, increased restrictions and higher taxes just doesn't sound like a path to increased home values.

To ALL here in this thread: One need only look to the City of St Augustine to see how an EQUITABLE system of STRs can work for everyone: owners, neighbors, and municipalities alike. We had a rental house there. We know. We opted for long-term vs the “revolving door” model due to the parking requirements: one EXTERIOR space per bedroom. Home values there have not suffered in the least. That would put an end to most short-term three bedroom rentals in TV. Right now there are ZERO protections in Sumter county.

[defrey12]

Originally Posted by Road-Runner

You know what they say; "If you want less of something, tax it". In this case that would be a good thing.

Well said!

[jimdecastro]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

Senate Bill 280 (2024) - The Florida Senate passed the FL house tonight

The bill increases local oversight on STR, short term rentals, with penalties of registration suspension.

Maybe will help flush some STRs out of the system.

I have to say, I am not happy about short term rentals, but at the same time, I would not be happy being told what to do with my property. That being said, I am a full-time homeowner and only own the one property so this law does not apply to me. There's only one rental nearby, and so far there have been no issues, but I truly understand the urgency of this issue for some people in TV.

[Proveone]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

Senate Bill 280 (2024) - The Florida Senate passed the FL house tonight

The bill increases local oversight on STR, short term rentals, with penalties of registration suspension.

Maybe will help flush some STRs out of the system.

Who Cares!

[Regorp]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

It's a reaction to the AirBnB lawsuits all over the United States. States/municipalities want AirBnB to collect taxes. AirBnB says they're an innocent 3rd party.

While the bill re-iterates local jurisdiction's authority to issue and/or suspend licenses and such, the primary motivation seems to be an effort to make sure Florida gets all the taxes its due.

AirBNB should be outlawed within The Villages.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by defrey12

To ALL here in this thread: One need only look to the City of St Augustine to see how an EQUITABLE system of STRs can work for everyone: owners, neighbors, and municipalities alike. We had a rental house there. We know. We opted for long-term vs the “revolving door” model due to the parking requirements: one EXTERIOR space per bedroom. Home values there have not suffered in the least. That would put an end to most short-term three bedroom rentals in TV. Right now there are ZERO protections in Sumter county.

Almost invariably, STR's work only to the benefit of the owner's of the STR's and the businesses that support their guests.

There is not a neighborhood on earth, that has maintained it's personality (for better or worse) as a result of an influx of STR's.

Anyone who says STR's have not affected their neighbors or the neighborhood, is delusional.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Almost invariably, STR's work only to the benefit of the owner's of the STR's and the businesses that support their guests.

There is not a neighborhood on earth, that has maintained it's personality (for better or worse) as a result of an influx of STR's.

Anyone who says STR's have not affected their neighbors or the neighborhood, is delusional.

They also work to the benefit of the renters.

The vast majority of those who feel affected by STRs admire Gladys Kravitz.

That unruly group that rented the place down the street last week? They left last week. That neighbor with the noisy habits? He's been there five years now and isn't going anywhere soon. I know which I would prefer but that just shows I'm delusional.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by jimdecastro

I would not be happy being told what to do with my property.

The Villages was probably not a great choice for you.

... or any other community that has Zoning Regulations.