[airstreamingypsy]

Originally Posted by EastCoastDawg

In the local rag a couple of weeks ago, the developer was quoted as describing TV as "a collection of quaint villages".

I guess quaintness is in the eye of the beholder.

They also call it the "friendliest hometown" It is nobodies home town. As for the "friendliest" maybe once upon a time, a long time ago.

[Larry Poling]

We are ruled by a CDD that is elected by the residents of that district. It may not be a city but they are your elected officials. Once an area is sold out the developers create a CDD and move on. As far as the police look around. The county sheriff has multiple offices throughout The Villages to protect and they seem to do a decent job. If you want to move because the developer lied about how far it is to Orlando go ahead if those extra 10 miles are significant. If you want a reason look at the greed the developers show by continuing to build long after they were suppose to build this community out. Now they are putting in apartments and going to create an area by Finney that is not age restricted and will have apartments and low cost housing for people who work in the Villages. Should be interesting how that works out.

[Indydealmaker]

Originally Posted by Velvet

Also about sinkholes, no agent mentioned it. It did not occur for me to ask because my parents who had a home here for decades and my uncle who lived and died in TV never mentioned them. But when I looked at a foreclosure sale the document said the house is in a sinkhole hazard area. From that point on I always asked about sinkholes. The answer was invariably; “What sinkholes? I don’t know of any.” From that point on I knew exactly how much to trust my agents.

The entire state of Florida is a sinkhole zone.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by dadoiron

We were told in 2014 TV would not build beyond 44.

Should have said they would not build beyond Miami.

Things change companies want to grow.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Larry Poling

We are ruled by a CDD that is elected by the residents of that district. It may not be a city but they are your elected officials. Once an area is sold out the developers create a CDD and move on. As far as the police look around. The county sheriff has multiple offices throughout The Villages to protect and they seem to do a decent job. If you want to move because the developer lied about how far it is to Orlando go ahead if those extra 10 miles are significant. If you want a reason look at the greed the developers show by continuing to build long after they were suppose to build this community out. Now they are putting in apartments and going to create an area by Finney that is not age restricted and will have apartments and low cost housing for people who work in the Villages. Should be interesting how that works out.

There are and always have been areas for people to live who work for and in The Villages and the developer has built them. They are not part of The Villages and do not have use of our amenities. I wouldn't call them "low cost housing". They are the same prices as many ranches and designers and premier homes.

The apartments are new and I bet they too will be a success. Many of us are thinking about our future with less space and stuff to take care of as we age and not ready for the "home".

The latest video from The Morse family explained that the three of them did pause and think to stop building but they decided to go on. It isn't just the three of them you know. Their business keeps literally thousands of people employed around here. I like how they do things. I am glad they will be here for awhile to keep things nice.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Dgizzi

Well I did ask my TV realtor if they sell to anyone under 55 and she NO! And it is true. why bother having TV as 55 and older. I am hearing more stories of younger people living here. TV is so large no way to keep track anyhow.

You might be forgetting that The Villages (the developer) aren't the only homesellers in the Villages. Most homes in the Villages are already owned by people living in them, or renting them out to other people.

When THOSE homeowners choose to sell their properties, the Villages (the Developer) has no input into who ends up buying them. Those are private sales.

They could choose the Villages official realtors to do the selling/buying on the private persons' behalf. But it is still a private sale. And many sellers go through NON-Villages listing service realtors to do the selling. Others don't use any realtors at all, but opt for a "for sale by owner" situation.

The Villages (the Developer) can't dictate who buys those properties sold by individual owners, because the Villages has no ownership in those properties anymore.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

You might be forgetting that The Villages (the developer) aren't the only homesellers in the Villages. Most homes in the Villages are already owned by people living in them, or renting them out to other people.

When THOSE homeowners choose to sell their properties, the Villages (the Developer) has no input into who ends up buying them. Those are private sales.

They could choose the Villages official realtors to do the selling/buying on the private persons' behalf. But it is still a private sale. And many sellers go through NON-Villages listing service realtors to do the selling. Others don't use any realtors at all, but opt for a "for sale by owner" situation.

The Villages (the Developer) can't dictate who buys those properties sold by individual owners, because the Villages has no ownership in those properties anymore.

They CAN (meaning - it's in the deed restrictions so they are allowed) enforce the rule after the fact - but they have demonstrated on several occasions that they are preferring a hands-off approach to these types of violations.

[Hans53]

anyone else see a constant turn over of young people in houses that are on air B&B. some people also want to rent rooms like a b&B in our neighborhood.

[Dilligas]

Originally Posted by Dgizzi

Well I did ask my TV realtor if they sell to anyone under 55 and she NO! And it is true. why bother having TV as 55 and older. I am hearing more stories of younger people living here. TV is so large no way to keep track anyhow.

This law states that it is legal for communities to market themselves as "55+"or "age-restricted" provided they maintain that 80 percent of the occupied units are occupied by at least one person who is 55 years of age or older. ... Most 55+ age-restricted active adult communities will place an age-minimum on the residents. Also, if someone in the home is 55 or over and others are under 55 (but not under 19), it also complies with the law. That's why you see somepeople in their 30's, living with mama and/or a 55 year old married to a 45 year old.

[rmd2]

2 points:
1) You can bet all of the "weasel" answers have been reviewed, and possibly written, by a lawyer who will make sure they are legally acceptable.
2) With reference to the under 55 age living here by law it is permissible (but not required) to have UP TO 20% under 55 and still be considered a retirement community. By law the developer must keep records to make sure they do not go over 20%. HOWEVER, there are many retirement communities (some right around here) that DO NOT allow anyone under 55 years of age to live there. There is NO law that we must allow persons under 55 to live here - the developer made the decision to allow it.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

There are and always have been areas for people to live who work for and in The Villages and the developer has built them. They are not part of The Villages and do not have use of our amenities. I wouldn't call them "low cost housing". They are the same prices as many ranches and designers and premier homes.

The apartments are new and I bet they too will be a success. Many of us are thinking about our future with less space and stuff to take care of as we age and not ready for the "home".

The latest video from The Morse family explained that the three of them did pause and think to stop building but they decided to go on. It isn't just the three of them you know. Their business keeps literally thousands of people employed around here. I like how they do things. I am glad they will be here for awhile to keep things nice.

Regarding the apartments @ Hacienda:

At the time Hacienda was built (or being built) there were only two rec centers. That, and Paradise. Paradise was "built out" and the point of buying at the Villages was to be near recreation activities, amenities, that were being paid for monthly.

The rec center for that entire area of the Villages has been eliminated, and will not be replaced. In fact - not only will it not be replaced, but up to 300 more couples will be moving in and using up whatever is left of the recreational facilities in the area. They will have access to ALL the same amenities as people living in the houses next to it have. All, being more limited because the rec center no longer exists.

So you'll have to squeeze more people into other rec centers. You'll have to squeeze all the EXISTING residents into the other rec centers, plus an additional 300+ people who will occupy those apartments (most of them won't be moving in as singles, they'll be in as couples).

And of course the clubhouse restaurants that have already been getting the Hacienda patronage, will have to squeeze another 300+ customers into them.

That's fine in the summer when the snowbirds are up north. But imagine the traffic at the roundabout right next to the property there - when the snowbirds are down here for the winter.

Many of us chose the Villages over any other community to escape the "business" of cities and nearby suburbs. We wanted to get away from rush hour, to find that little "bubble" where we were isolated from those mundane inconveniences of life. That was what was sold to us, it's what we bought and in the case of Hacienda, it's what they paid extra for. It has been eliminated. What they paid extra for no longer exists, AND they're being told that they'll now have to share what little was left for them, with another 300+ people.

And they get zero say in the matter.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Regarding the apartments @ Hacienda:

At the time Hacienda was built (or being built) there were only two rec centers. That, and Paradise. Paradise was "built out" and the point of buying at the Villages was to be near recreation activities, amenities, that were being paid for monthly.

The rec center for that entire area of the Villages has been eliminated, and will not be replaced. In fact - not only will it not be replaced, but up to 300 more couples will be moving in and using up whatever is left of the recreational facilities in the area. They will have access to ALL the same amenities as people living in the houses next to it have. All, being more limited because the rec center no longer exists.

So you'll have to squeeze more people into other rec centers. You'll have to squeeze all the EXISTING residents into the other rec centers, plus an additional 300+ people who will occupy those apartments (most of them won't be moving in as singles, they'll be in as couples).

And of course the clubhouse restaurants that have already been getting the Hacienda patronage, will have to squeeze another 300+ customers into them.

That's fine in the summer when the snowbirds are up north. But imagine the traffic at the roundabout right next to the property there - when the snowbirds are down here for the winter.

Many of us chose the Villages over any other community to escape the "business" of cities and nearby suburbs. We wanted to get away from rush hour, to find that little "bubble" where we were isolated from those mundane inconveniences of life. That was what was sold to us, it's what we bought and in the case of Hacienda, it's what they paid extra for. It has been eliminated. What they paid extra for no longer exists, AND they're being told that they'll now have to share what little was left for them, with another 300+ people.

And they get zero say in the matter.

If you find a better place that meets your concerns, be sure to write now and then.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Regarding the apartments @ Hacienda:

At the time Hacienda was built (or being built) there were only two rec centers. That, and Paradise. Paradise was "built out" and the point of buying at the Villages was to be near recreation activities, amenities, that were being paid for monthly.

The rec center for that entire area of the Villages has been eliminated, and will not be replaced. In fact - not only will it not be replaced, but up to 300 more couples will be moving in and using up whatever is left of the recreational facilities in the area. They will have access to ALL the same amenities as people living in the houses next to it have. All, being more limited because the rec center no longer exists.

So you'll have to squeeze more people into other rec centers. You'll have to squeeze all the EXISTING residents into the other rec centers, plus an additional 300+ people who will occupy those apartments (most of them won't be moving in as singles, they'll be in as couples).

And of course the clubhouse restaurants that have already been getting the Hacienda patronage, will have to squeeze another 300+ customers into them.

That's fine in the summer when the snowbirds are up north. But imagine the traffic at the roundabout right next to the property there - when the snowbirds are down here for the winter.

Many of us chose the Villages over any other community to escape the "business" of cities and nearby suburbs. We wanted to get away from rush hour, to find that little "bubble" where we were isolated from those mundane inconveniences of life. That was what was sold to us, it's what we bought and in the case of Hacienda, it's what they paid extra for. It has been eliminated. What they paid extra for no longer exists, AND they're being told that they'll now have to share what little was left for them, with another 300+ people.

And they get zero say in the matter.

Very interesting

[Bjeanj]

Originally Posted by blueash

Weasel answers do not make The Villages look honest and trustworthy in their approach to potential buyers. How about giving a forthright answer rather than one which is as close to a lie as you can get without crossing the line?

Blueash, you’ve been here for looks like 12 years, and you’re just now checking this out?

This is Marketing, pure and simple. They aren’t “weasel” answers. Have you ever been house hunting and had a realtor refer to a house as “a cute little starter home”?

Same thing.

[MandoMan]

Originally Posted by Dgizzi

Well I did ask my TV realtor if they sell to anyone under 55 and she NO! And it is true. why bother having TV as 55 and older. I am hearing more stories of younger people living here. TV is so large no way to keep track anyhow.

I’m not certain about the percentage, but I think I’ve read that in Florida, for a community to be registered as 55 or older. At least one buyer in 85% of the NEW homes sold has to be 55 or older. I’ve read that this doesn’t apply to USED homes. Any light on that?