[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by John41

Now that the developers puppet commissioners lost the election by a convincing 2 to 1 margin, perhaps he will change his hardball attitude and work with the residents and new POA sponsored commissioners.

My suggestion is the developer should refund the lot premium paid by affected owners when they purchased their homes. In return the developer would get the 300 amenity passes. Also shrubbery should be planted so the apartments not be visible to the surrounding area as much as possible. This refund agreement should be written into the purchase agreement of all homes on golf courses too and any other developer owned amenity.

It is not fair for the developer to keep the lot premium and get free amenity passes.

It sounds like you're assuming that the developer is going to destroy the golf courses. The premium is paid for a golf course view. As long as the golf course is there what is the loss to the homeowners?

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

It sounds like you're assuming that the developer is going to destroy the golf courses. The premium is paid for a golf course view. As long as the golf course is there what is the loss to the homeowners?

No just for affected owners when they lose their view.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by John41

No just for affected owners when they lose their view.

Like the back side of the old restaurant that was razed? Surely apartments with landscaping, flowers, etc. would be a better view.

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

The facts? They tore down the country club.

They tore down a restaurant that nobody wanted. Your preference is to have it sit empty? I think those that are complaining are at best, a couple hundred people who also didn't support the place.....if they had maybe the operator would have been profitable and stayed. Those that own businesses have no obligation to lose money and wait until we decide to go there.

[pauld315]

Originally Posted by JoMar

They tore down a restaurant that nobody wanted. Your preference is to have it sit empty? I think those that are complaining are at best, a couple hundred people who also didn't support the place.....if they had maybe the operator would have been profitable and stayed. Those that own businesses have no obligation to lose money and wait until we decide to go there.

This is way off the mark. I personally know a very successful restauranteur who wanted that space and I have had others tell me there was more than one who proposed taking it over. The Villages had other plans for this space and they didn't want to invest the money to repair the facility back to working order so they made it impossible for anyone to take it over The previous operation was not supported because the food and service were both bad and people refused to go there anymore, which is the way a horrible restaurant should be treated.

[Northwoods]

Originally Posted by pauld315

This is way off the mark. I personally know a very successful restauranteur who wanted that space and I have had others tell me there was more than one who proposed taking it over. The Villages had other plans for this space and they didn't want to invest the money to repair the facility back to working order so they made it impossible for anyone to take it over The previous operation was not supported because the food and service were both bad and people refused to go there anymore, which is the way a horrible restaurant should be treated.

If someone was interested in the space why didn't they invest in bringing the restaurant "up to code?" Suleiman's did it at Lopez.

[PennBF]

What is the payback for those individuals who don't live in the area of the projected Apartments? Are they just feeding their need for attention, are they related to the Developer/Owner or have friends who are, are they employees of the Developer/Owner, are they fanatical followers of the Developer/Owner. are they contractor(s) who have a financial gain if the Apartments are built. Since they don't live in the neighborhood of the proposed Apartments they must have a payback for challenging those that do?? The sad thing is this list of ones who get paybacks will not suffer the problems of living in an area of apartments in a residential location! People who are arguing for the Apartments and don't live in the area have a payback!
The question is which category do they fall under?

[njbchbum]

Originally Posted by PennBF

What is the payback for those individuals who don't live in the area of the projected Apartments? Are they just feeding their need for attention, are they related to the Developer/Owner or have friends who are, are they employees of the Developer/Owner, are they fanatical followers of the Developer/Owner. are they contractor(s) who have a financial gain if the Apartments are built. Since they don't live in the neighborhood of the proposed Apartments they must have a payback for challenging those that do?? The sad thing is this list of ones who get paybacks will not suffer the problems of living in an area of apartments in a residential location! People who are arguing for the Apartments and don't live in the area have a payback!
The question is which category do they fall under?

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by pauld315

This is way off the mark. I personally know a very successful restauranteur who wanted that space and I have had others tell me there was more than one who proposed taking it over. The Villages had other plans for this space and they didn't want to invest the money to repair the facility back to working order so they made it impossible for anyone to take it over The previous operation was not supported because the food and service were both bad and people refused to go there anymore, which is the way a horrible restaurant should be treated.

I challenge the veracity of that. If that were so it would not have sit empty for so long. Plus remember that HERE in the Villages, restaurants are LEASED for five years, not owned. To say that "they didn't want to invest the money to repair the facility back to working order" is your opinion and your summary of people who are responsible and whose business rests on keeping things in good working order.

It appears that as neighborhoods and areas have occupants who are getting older they do not go out as much and business at restaurants fall off. Especially too that people want good food cheaply. Most restaurants do NOT have anyone cooking back there. Most unload, open containers, heat them up and pour sauce over the meat and shlep some mashed potatoes with it and throw some packaged lettuce mix in a bowl and add a cherry tomato and a cucumber slice and put ranch dressing on it.

People are throwing opinions around about what will happen next. What will happen next is that apartments will be built. Hopefully they will be inhabited by the same kind of mostly responsible people who now live in The Villages. Hopefully all this angst and worry will turn into a ...Oh Well. Nothing much here to see situation.

I am glad this is a CDD and not a homeowners run the place situation. There are a lot of people who have never run anything who are now urban authorities.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by PennBF

What is the payback for those individuals who don't live in the area of the projected Apartments? Are they just feeding their need for attention, are they related to the Developer/Owner or have friends who are, are they employees of the Developer/Owner, are they fanatical followers of the Developer/Owner. are they contractor(s) who have a financial gain if the Apartments are built. Since they don't live in the neighborhood of the proposed Apartments they must have a payback for challenging those that do?? The sad thing is this list of ones who get paybacks will not suffer the problems of living in an area of apartments in a residential location! People who are arguing for the Apartments and don't live in the area have a payback!
The question is which category do they fall under?

I am feeling you may be talking about me?

I am not related to the developer, never met a Morse person other than the half brother who lives in my neighborhood and isn't really one of the gang... and I only saw him once, never spoke to him or shook his hand. I have lived here for almost fifteen years and really am very happy with how things are done here in The Villages. It is very successful and very well run and people are clamoring to move here and more people scare some residents, but people are moving to Florida in droves and they are going to live somewhere. I would opt for a good place run by people who have a good track record.

My goal and my payback is to challenge damaging rumors that harm the success of this entire place, The Villages. I feel that the challenges are being raised as an agenda against big business, and successful business that employs thousands of people. I think that somewhere there is a political aspect to a lot of these irate people who probably lived close by to apartments in their former life and felt no negative effects.

I think there is a movement afoot to tear down the aspect of the entire CDD form of government that I have great admiration for. It works better than the "complete democracy" of places like Orlando and Tampa.

I don't see the gloom and doom, the heavy traffic, the squalor, the shabbiness , the bad stuff that would come from this plan. I don't think it will turn out badly.

I live just off 466, right smack dab in the middle of The Villages in a Village that a lot of nay sayers said would fail because of the "traffic noise". Not so.

The folks who think bad stuff will come from the apartments may be right.

But I think they may be wrong and that if they don't work out well, the owners will abolish that plan and think of something else. They have been doin' real good so far.

[Marathon Man]

Originally Posted by PennBF

What is the payback for those individuals who don't live in the area of the projected Apartments? Are they just feeding their need for attention, are they related to the Developer/Owner or have friends who are, are they employees of the Developer/Owner, are they fanatical followers of the Developer/Owner. are they contractor(s) who have a financial gain if the Apartments are built. Since they don't live in the neighborhood of the proposed Apartments they must have a payback for challenging those that do?? The sad thing is this list of ones who get paybacks will not suffer the problems of living in an area of apartments in a residential location! People who are arguing for the Apartments and don't live in the area have a payback!
The question is which category do they fall under?

Wait a minute!!!!!! We get a payback?????? Thank you, "The Developer".