[Danube]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

That's standard in the Commercial Leasing world, particularly for retail & restaurants. That doesn't mean the rent is "too high" or "too low" ... it's simply the way it's done in the commercial world and it works for both parties. If a business is very successful, they pay higher rent ... if business is slow, they pay less.

Having been in the commercial RE biz half my life I'd estimate that maybe 10-15 percent of adults have any clue how com leases work. It's probably not even mentioned in schools until four-year college as teachers are also in that 10-15 percent group.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Danube

Having been in the commercial RE biz half my life I'd estimate that maybe 10-15 percent of adults have any clue how com leases work. It's probably not even mentioned in schools until four-year college as teachers are also in that 10-15 percent group.

That surely doesn't stop people from having an opinion and presenting it like it's fact, on TOTV.

Some of the folks without any experience, also seem to think they understand NNN, too.

(I assume you're out of commercial leasing, now? You'll appreciate this ... I have a 165 page lease, sitting on my desk ... I'm trying to get through it as best I can, but it's not easy. A testament to the Lawyer's Full Employment Act.)

[Indydealmaker]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

So on November 10, the Sumter County Commissioners will likely vote to allow apartments in Sumter Landing, in formerly commercial space along Lake Sumter Landing, Canal Street, Old Mill Run and Lake Shore Drive.

The change will allow "1st floor" space to be used for apartments/residential use, which was previously not allowed.

Here's the dynamic as I see it.

The Developer is having trouble renting commercial space. His argument to the Sumter County Commissioners is, allowing residential use provides more diverse housing opportunities.

I think he's right, but perhaps short-sighted? Requiring the existing commercial space to remain available only for "business", would force lower rental rates. Is this advantageous? It might be. Consider that the Town Squares currently have mostly larger, well-financed businesses/restaurants and choices (& variety) are limited.

Take Mt. Dora as an example. The downtown area, which seems to be packed with people most every day, is dominated by small, "mom & pop" operations, in small retail spaces. I was in a store there, operated only by a woman and her daughter. The store was only about 150-200 sq. ft. She made and sold, organic, homemade lipstick (I didn't buy any). I think micro-businesses might do really well in a community like The Villages.

If forced to leave 1st floor space available only for commercial use, would the Developer be forced to adjust his business model, to allow small operators to rent smaller spaces, devoted to craft type shops? Small, entrepreneurial businesses? One or two people operations? Small bakery? Hair dresser? A dry cleaner? Jewelry? Think about all the businesses that show up for Square events ... could some of them operate on a regular basis, if they could rent a micro-store from the Developer?

I don't really know the answer, but I don't thinking changing ground floor space to residential use, isn't consistent with the Town Square concept.

I find it hard to accept that empty retail space is better for the community than permanent, close proximity residential consumers.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by Fitnusbuf

Lowering the price or enticing a buyer with other add ons might be needed to find the market price.

Or converting the space into residential? Wouldn't that solve the vacancies if there is sufficient interest?

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by Indydealmaker

I find it hard to accept that empty retail space is better for the community than permanent, close proximity residential consumers.

100% agree.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Apply the simple rules of supply & demand.

There is a price at which most every square foot of space can be rented.

If the demand for the Lofts in Brownwood and Spanish Springs is any indication (and it is), demand will likely be quite strong.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Indydealmaker

I find it hard to accept that empty retail space is better for the community than permanent, close proximity residential consumers.

In which case, why not convert all the commercial space in Sumter Landing to residential use. How would that work out?

The theory of real estate in the USA, is that it's a reasonably free market and that market determines the value/price of the property.

So let's play the theory through. The Developer refuses to lower the price on his commercial properties in SL ... they sit vacant. How does vacant property look to residents? More importantly, how does it look to other commercial businesses? What happens when Red Sauce, Panera & Chop House comes up for lease renewal and they look around and see empty commercial space all over the Square?

It's in the best interest of the Developer and the residents, that commercial space stays leased and useful. The Developer is trying to take the easy way out, as happened in Spanish Springs.

A free market works. Government intervention seldom works ... the County should never allow such a significant change of use. The Developer's Permit is based on that property being used commercially. If he made a mistake and built too much commercial space, shame on him ... it's not up to Sumter County to bail him out and give him relief from lowering his rental rates to get the property leased.

A perfect example, is the Dollar Store, outside Sumter Landing. 10-15 years ago, the Developer never would have rented to a low-brow store like Dollar Tree ... now he's forced to.

Just wait for this same dynamic to sink Eastport. It's the wrong design for the times IMO.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by Joecooool418

And like you and I can not do.

I'd like to replace my grass with rocks. Can't do it because the rules say so. ARC isn't budging.

But hey, these guys can do whatever they want, right?

Rules for thee, but not for me!

I know for a fact I agreed to ARC rules when I closed on my home ( and I'm pretty sure you did too). Not at all similar to a commercial property developer changing plans to fit business needs. No one NEEDS a rock yard. But a developer does NEED to lease space in assets that are sitting empty. And unless I'm mistaken, they are using the process that lets them try to make the changes. Just like you can do with ARC to try to get your rock yard.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Jayhawk

I know for a fact I agreed to ARC rules when I closed on my home ( and I'm pretty sure you did too). Not at all similar to a commercial property developer changing plans to fit business needs.

The Developer agree that space would always be COMMERCIAL. It is in his permit, that he agreed to.

Apparently you think the Developer should be subject to different rules than residents? Residents should be held to their promises and agreements, but the Developer shouldn't be?

Why? What makes him special?

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

In which case, why not convert all the commercial space in Sumter Landing to residential use. How would that work out?

The theory of real estate in the USA, is that it's a reasonably free market and that market determines the value/price of the property.

So let's play the theory through. The Developer refuses to lower the price on his commercial properties in SL ... they sit vacant. How does vacant property look to residents? More importantly, how does it look to other commercial businesses? What happens when Red Sauce, Panera & Chop House comes up for lease renewal and they look around and see empty commercial space all over the Square?

It's in the best interest of the Developer and the residents, that commercial space stays leased and useful. The Developer is trying to take the easy way out, as happened in Spanish Springs.

A free market works. Government intervention seldom works ... the County should never allow such a significant change of use. The Developer's Permit is based on that property being used commercially. If he made a mistake and built too much commercial space, shame on him ... it's not up to Sumter County to bail him out and give him relief from lowering his rental rates to get the property leased.

A perfect example, is the Dollar Store, outside Sumter Landing. 10-15 years ago, the Developer never would have rented to a low-brow store like Dollar Tree ... now he's forced to.

Just wait for this same dynamic to sink Eastport. It's the wrong design for the times.

I guess based on this, if someone wants to lease the vacant space, they can. But they haven't. And by the way, the people who shop at the "low-brow" store might have a different opinion.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

That surely doesn't stop people from having an opinion and presenting it like it's fact, on TOTV.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

The Developer agree that space would always be COMMERCIAL. It is in his permit, that he agreed to.

I sure would love to see a copy of that agreement where the developer agreed that the space would ALWAYS stay commercial and could never change, even though the county has a process to do just that. Maybe someone could share it for all to see?

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Jayhawk

INo one NEEDS a rock yard. But a developer does NEED to lease space in assets that are sitting empty. And unless I'm mistaken, they are using the process that lets them try to make the changes. Just like you can do with ARC to try to get your rock yard.

He NEEDS to lease space in his empty assets? He can't afford to carry them or reduce the rent? I doubt the Developer is having cash flow issues.

So there's a process by which the District can decide "no more free golf" for residents and no more "free pools". Are you good with the District "using the process to try to make [those] changes"?

I didn't think so.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

So there's a process by which the District can decide "no more free golf" for residents and no more "free pools". Are you good with the District "using the process to try to make [those] changes"?

I didn't think so.

Not sure how this is directed at the original topic of whether there should be apartments in LSL.

[kcrazorbackfan]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

So on November 10, the Sumter County Commissioners will likely vote to allow apartments in Sumter Landing, in formerly commercial space along Lake Sumter Landing, Canal Street, Old Mill Run and Lake Shore Drive.

The change will allow "1st floor" space to be used for apartments/residential use, which was previously not allowed.

Here's the dynamic as I see it.

The Developer is having trouble renting commercial space. His argument to the Sumter County Commissioners is, allowing residential use provides more diverse housing opportunities.

I think he's right, but perhaps short-sighted? Requiring the existing commercial space to remain available only for "business", would force lower rental rates. Is this advantageous? It might be. Consider that the Town Squares currently have mostly larger, well-financed businesses/restaurants and choices (& variety) are limited.

Take Mt. Dora as an example. The downtown area, which seems to be packed with people most every day, is dominated by small, "mom & pop" operations, in small retail spaces. I was in a store there, operated only by a woman and her daughter. The store was only about 150-200 sq. ft. She made and sold, organic, homemade lipstick (I didn't buy any). I think micro-businesses might do really well in a community like The Villages.

If forced to leave 1st floor space available only for commercial use, would the Developer be forced to adjust his business model, to allow small operators to rent smaller spaces, devoted to craft type shops? Small, entrepreneurial businesses? One or two people operations? Small bakery? Hair dresser? A dry cleaner? Jewelry? Think about all the businesses that show up for Square events ... could some of them operate on a regular basis, if they could rent a micro-store from the Developer?

I don't really know the answer, but I don't thinking changing ground floor space to residential use, isn't consistent with the Town Square concept.

The “Family’s business to what they want to with it. I’m sure if you scratch out a large enough check, it can be yours to do what you want to with it.