Originally Posted by dbussone (Post 957677)

Actually he's been here since 2012 according to his profile. And your characterization of the developers is hardly held universally.

Originally Posted by Cajulian (Post 957673)

snipped
Stonecresters only wanted to get to Spanish Springs restaurants, shopping, entertainment, and medical offices. All of which are Public facilities. They never wanted to use free amenities (pools, rec centers, golf courses,etc.) that Villagers pay for. They have all their own amenities. Stealing amenities was the dumbest theory I have ever heard on this topic.

Originally Posted by Cajulian (Post 957673)

No bashing you. It's not necessary. Last year, I said that this issue would come back to bite Villagers, when they could no longer get access across Mr Brown's land to do their shopping. You can't have it both ways. If you want no access into the Villages, then don't expect Special treatment for your needs to shop.

If it gets shut down, then it will definitely hurt some Villages people that work at the businesses along Mr. Brown's land or need access for their grocery or other shopping needs. It will hurt especially if they no longer drive.

Stonecresters only wanted to get to Spanish Springs restaurants, shopping, entertainment, and medical offices. All of which are Public facilities. They never wanted to use free amenities (pools, rec centers, golf courses,etc.) that Villagers pay for. They have all their own amenities. Stealing amenities was the dumbest theory I have ever heard on this topic.

So, No Cake and Ice Cream at the same time. Reciprocate access or end up living only in the Bubble. Reciprocal access has worked well for 12 years until now.

Originally Posted by skip0358 (Post 957411)

Not to start an argument but we want GC access to Lowe's etc. over property that TV doesn't own but we don't want outsiders coming onto property that they don't own. I know we pay to use the MM paths but taxes are paid on that property that he owns. Do think we can have it both ways. I'm sure I'll get a lot of bashing on this but JMO.

Originally Posted by Barefoot (Post 957705)

No bashing.

IMHO, Villagers can't expect access to shopping via cart by crossing private property, and then cry foul when others expect similar treatment.

Originally Posted by Steve9930 (Post 957786)

As far as I know there is no plan for Mr. Brown to shutdown access. As for me to get access via the new gate I could care less one way or the other. I'm very happy here with what I have access to via Golf Cart. Not having access to the Villages via Golf Cart saved me money on the new batteries for the cart. I suspect as the snow starts to fly up North there will be more traffic everywhere and I wonder how long before the next inebriated driver blows through the gate again. This discussion goes around and comes around like a bad penny.

Originally Posted by DonH57 (Post 957797)

You probably saved yourself from wear on the suspension too. I usually only go over there to do a few errands at a time because it would be a pain to cross it every day. With the overall design of the villages I've always why the developer put a gate there to begin with. To my knowledge there are no others adjoining different properties.

Originally Posted by njbchbum (Post 957688)

But they did use the MM paths [that they do not fund] to venture beyond the Spanish Springs Square; and they wanted the ability to continue to do that. And don't some of them golf as part of foursomes here in the VIllages?

Originally Posted by Rc Moser (Post 957706)

How about special pass for the golf cart gate in question. Too get the pass pay certain amount annually. This fee would be for both ways, that way there would be no whining. This gate pass would only work on the gate in question the money would go into the amenity coffin to make everybody HAPPY! happy!

But, I think that May not be the real issue at all???????

Originally Posted by DonH57 (Post 957943)

I'm under the impression from what I read in the daily sunny Mr. Brown is building a housing development on his property. He was only asking for access for himself, correct? I would think there would later be a bigger legal issue with others on the property then asking for same access and now you have every other surrounding neighbor later expecting same on lots just like the one in question. I feel that's the only thing the commission is trying to prevent. I'm a villager and if Mr. Brown closed up his path, I have no problem. It's his perfect right to do so. I've always been grateful I've been able to do so in the past.

Originally Posted by Cajulian (Post 957850)

There was some discussion on this last year. It sounds like a good potential reciprocal idea. Give a little, get a little. Compromise so that it is a win-win situation.

This will all end at some point in time. Either good for both parties or bad for all. Just depends on if the Controlling Parties (Morse/Brown) can see eye to eye on the topic.

Originally Posted by Cajulian (Post 957847)

Did anyone ever tell you they wanted to go past Spanish Springs? As far as golfing as partners with Villagers, aren't you aware that Villagers regularly play at Stonecrest Golf Club and regularly are allowed to use the lighted Pickleball courts in Stonecrest. They are gladly welcomed to use these facilities. No one in Stonecrest acuses them of stealing amenities.

I just made the point, that Villagers should not complain if their access across Mr. Brown's land to get to Shopping areas is cut off. That's no different than Stonecresters wanting to get to Shopping in Spanish Springs.