[stan the man]

I was hoping it would be a parking lot -- so I could park my trailer there and maybe move there.

[stan the man]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Can you link us to credible proof that the developer did/said/planned/ had such a thought?

Apartments are not awful. I imagine they will look like the complex on 466 for people who are living there independently.

We are of an age where downsizing to a beautiful apartment is something we think about. If the developer builds it, it will be beautiful and a lovely haven just like all of our homes.

As long as it is not in my backyard

[npwalters]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

All the Debbie downers, naysayers and those who have no idea what they are talking about, should read this very informative post by GoldWingNut posted on another thread.
Enjoy!
—————————-


You, like many others here in The Villages lack an understanding of who owns what, who pays for what, and what is an amenity and what isn't, HH was NOT an amenity, it was a privately owned business.

I am "in the know" only because I take the time and effort to understand where I live and how it works.

The AAC had previously (5 years ago) assigned amenity rights for 300 additional units to the developer for use in assisted living facilities and independent living facilities. The use of these did not pan out as had expected, the assisted and independent facilities only showed interest in 7 units. 7 of the 300 were also assigned to the Chatham Acres subdivision. For these 14 units the AAC receives the Amenity Fees for providing amenities to these 14 properties. The remainder have gone unexecuted. This means that they were not generating any revenue or income for anyone, not the AAC, not the RAD fund, not the SALD fund, and not the developer. Nothing was given away. The developer requested reassignment of these rights to the HH redevelopment project.

The HH redevelopment project will be funded by the developer, they will build the additional amenities, they will maintain the additional amenities, and the amenities will be open to all residents of The Villages. How is this different from south of SR44 or the Lofts? It isn’t. The developer is carrying all the cost to provide and operate as well as all the risk, they pay for community watch services, recreation staffing services, Public Safety supplement, and any other costs incurred by the “District” to support these new amenities. HH will operate the same way.

When you, I, or any other resident utilizes the developer owned amenity facilities there is no compensation made by the “District” to the developer for this use, the same holds true if someone from one of the villages south of SR44 comes north to go to a rec center or plays golf. It is generally considered to be an even swap of services. The same will hold true for the HH property.

The AAC isn’t giving any amenity fee payment away, they are swapping utilization rights and each entity will continue to carry the operating costs and risks of their own facilities. The residents are gaining additional amenities at zero cost to them.

Who comes out ahead, it could be one party or the other on any given day, but it’s probably breakeven in the end.

People are upset because a for profit business went out of business. It couldn’t sustain itself any longer on selling ice water and air conditioning. If you’re upset of the closing then maybe you should have patronized it more.

The AAC was given the opportunity to purchase the property, buy it at market value, image that, someone wanted to sell their property at market value. Would you take half the market value when selling your house, I dare anyone reading this post to be foolish enough to say yes, sure pay me half what my house is worth, you’re not that foolish and neither is the developer. The AAC didn’t want to buy the property, so be it, it is being redeveloped into something new, it’s their property and they are free to do with it as they will. The developer owes no one anything, you bought a house in a community, you didn’t buy an eternal free ride. The developer made their money the same way the rest of us did, they earned it, and they don’t owe any of us a dime of it.

My stance on this isn’t because I favor the developer, it’s because I think like a businessman. Too many living here have forgotten how the real world actually work, that a business has to make a profit to survive.

Here’s the text of the agreement that the AAC approved.

On September 9, 2015, the Amenity Authority Committee (AAC) approved and recommended to the Village Center Community Development District (VCCDD) that The Villages of Lake-Sumter, Inc. (VLS) could bring into the Village Center District Service Territory an additional 300 units and that the use of the units be restricted to residents of independent living or assisted living facilities (ALF/ILF). On October 14, 2015, the VCCDD approved an agreement with VLS to provide amenities for the additional 300 units.

There are currently fourteen (14) amenity rights being utilized which include seven (7) for TSL SS PropCo, LLC (Elan Spanish Springs) and seven (7) that were subsequently designated for use for Chatham Acres. The current balance of unused amenity rights is 286.

For your consideration today is the First Amendment to the Agreement executed in 2015 between the VCCDD and VLS. This amended agreement takes into consideration that should VLS utilize the amenity rights for ALF/ILF, as the existing agreement provides, there would be no common amenity improvements to the community.

As presented, the amended agreement provides VLS the ability to utilize the unused amenity rights for age restricted units, and to construct additional amenity improvements at no cost to residents and guests in the Village Center District territory and The Villages community at large. If the amenity rights are utilized in this manner, VLS shall construct, at a minimum, a resort-style pool, sport and activity courts, walking paths and open spaces – all of which shall be accessible to residents and guests. Furthermore, the additional amenities would be perpetually maintained by VLS.

In consideration of the significant capital expenditures to construct the amenity facilities, the amended agreement provides that VLS would retain the amenity fee revenue for said units, with the exception of certain defined contributions towards Community Watch and The Villages Public Safety Department. As previously noted, the amended agreement provides that VLS will perpetually maintain these facilities; they would not be the financial responsibility of the VCCDD.

The amended agreement also addresses the Hacienda Parcel, which is the former location of the privately owned Hacienda Hills Country Club. Should the additional age-restricted residential units or amenity infrastructure be constructed by VLS on this property, VLS assumes the responsibility for redesigning and improving the abutting parcel owned by the District as described in the attached Exhibit “B” . The improvements include the drive aisles, parking, and postal facility. The District will continue to own and operate the District Parcel, including the postal facility, and the Developer shall contribute the proportionate
share of postal box charges and costs for postal boxes utilized by users of the Hacienda Parcel to the District. If this is pursued, the necessary legal documents pertaining to easements for ingress and egress of the property will be drafted.
__________________
GoldWingNut

Good information but it misses what most of of consider the actual issue. The Villages developer may (I'm sure it will be challenged) have the legal ability to build an apartment complex in the middle of existing single family homes but it SHOULD recognize a ethical responsibility to the residents to not do so.

The negative PR implications will eventually translate into dollars to TV and SHOULD far outweigh the dollars to be gained by this slap in the face to long standing residents.

[Kerry Azz]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Can you link us to credible proof that the developer did/said/planned/ had such a thought?

Apartments are not awful. I imagine they will look like the complex on 466 for people who are living there independently.

We are of an age where downsizing to a beautiful apartment is something we think about. If the developer builds it, it will be beautiful and a lovely haven just like all of our homes.

I’m sure if you lived in Hacienda you would be livid, The home values will drop very quickly. This was a fast Con job by 4 Of the 5 board members that approved it. Not one person at the meeting had anything positive to say but it was passed. Give me a break!

[npwalters]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Here is hoping that the members of the zoning board are folks of integrity and not developer puppets. I can not claim to have read the zoning bylaws for the HH area, but I have been involved in several zoning matters over the course of my lifetime. Typically to get an area re-zoned, or to get a special permit that circumvents zoning bylaws, the proposed use has to be in harmony with the existing neighborhood. I find it highly unlikely that a reasonable argument can be made that a 286 unit rental apartment complex would be in harmony with the existing neighborhood? But what do I know?

Many, many people agree with you.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by npwalters

Many, many people agree with you.

And many, many more do NOT.

[Mleeja]

Originally Posted by Kerry Azz

I’m sure if you lived in Hacienda you would be livid, The home values will drop very quickly. This was a fast Con job by 4 Of the 5 board members that approved it. Not one person at the meeting had anything positive to say but it was passed. Give me a break!

Here is the problem, the AAC has no decision into what is being built in this location. When the meeting was held last week many residents spoke against the developers plans. Before the public comment began, the AAC should have clearly stated they have NO input into the building plans and that the discussion would only deal with amenity fees being granted to The Developer. This would have given the “public” an opportunity to comment on this arrangement.

There was no need to rush into this agreement. I would have like to seen what we are buying before signing the agreement.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by npwalters

Good information but it misses what most of of consider the actual issue. The Villages developer may (I'm sure it will be challenged) have the legal ability to build an apartment complex in the middle of existing single family homes but it SHOULD recognize a ethical responsibility to the residents to not do so.

The negative PR implications will eventually translate into dollars to TV and SHOULD far outweigh the dollars to be gained by this slap in the face to long standing residents.

Great post, it's not about what can be done, it's about what is the right thing to do by the existing residents that were sold a home in an area expecting the area to not have such a dramatic change.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by Mleeja

Here is the problem, the AAC has no decision into what is being built in this location. When the meeting was held last week many residents spoke against the developers plans. Before the public comment began, the AAC should have clearly stated they have NO input into the building plans and that the discussion would only deal with amenity fees being granted to The Developer. This would have given the “public” an opportunity to comment on this arrangement.

There was no need to rush into this agreement. I would have like to seen what we are buying before signing the agreement.

To the contrary, the AAC did have a huge say in what could be built on the property. They controlled weather or not the apartment units would have amenity privileges. Without those privileges, it would have been very difficult to rent out the apartments, at least at the rental rates the developer needs to make the apartments economically feasible.

[npwalters]

Originally Posted by Jayhawk

And many, many more do NOT.

Apparently you did not attend the meeting with the amenities board. Those in favor of providing amenities to the proposed apartments were very few. Yours is also a minority opinion on this blog concerning this issue. You and Gracie are a team on this one.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by npwalters

Good information but it misses what most of of consider the actual issue. The Villages developer may (I'm sure it will be challenged) have the legal ability to build an apartment complex in the middle of existing single family homes but it SHOULD recognize a ethical responsibility to the residents to not do so.

The negative PR implications will eventually translate into dollars to TV and SHOULD far outweigh the dollars to be gained by this slap in the face to long standing residents.

I can't tell if you hate the apartments, the amenity passes, or the developer. Probably all three.

#1. The style of homes being built are not anyone's right to choose because YOU aren't paying for them.

#2, You don't own the amenities, you rent them. And most districts are capped in the amount of annual increase. You will also GAIN new amenities with the apartments, just like you did with The Lofts, yet your cost will not rise as a result. And the developer is paying to put them in for your use.

#3. If you don't like the business model, make an offer to buy the land and do your thing. Otherwise it is not your entitlement to determine use. This is not a city or town. It is a business covering parts of 3 counties and you are free to stay or go. If you can't afford to buy the land, you don't get to make the decision.

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by npwalters

Apparently you did not attend the meeting with the amenities board. Those in favor of providing amenities to the proposed apartments were very few. Yours is also a minority opinion on this blog concerning this issue. You and Gracie are a team on this one.

But probably not a minority position in The Villages. In my experience most folks here enjoy what the Developer has provided and continues to manage. I talked to a few that attended the meeting and they were disappointed on how many showed up with nothing to contribute except emotion based on rumor. Based on this thread that emotion continues based on no facts. I sometimes wonder if people have lost sight of the reality of the business world which I assume most participated in......I bet even a few owned their own business....yet somehow they can't connect.

[npwalters]

Originally Posted by Jayhawk

I can't tell if you hate the apartments, the amenity passes, or the developer. Probably all three.

#1. The style of homes being built are not anyone's right to choose because YOU aren't paying for them.

#2, You don't own the amenities, you rent them. And most districts are capped in the amount of annual increase. You will also GAIN new amenities with the apartments, just like you did with The Lofts, yet your cost will not rise as a result. And the developer is paying to put them in for your use.

#3. If you don't like the business model, make an offer to buy the land and do your thing. Otherwise it is not your entitlement to determine use. This is not a city or town. It is a business covering parts of 3 counties and you are free to stay or go. If you can't afford to buy the land, you don't get to make the decision.

Jump overboard on assumptions much? I don't hate anyone without good cause.

I know when my property value is being diminished by a greedy action.

The future added amenities - we will see what actually develops - is a drop in the bucket compared to what is already here and will be used primarily by the additional 600 people (300 apartments) closest to it. They are offering nothing unique. A very bad trade.

How do you know when a poster has run out of viable arguments. They say "if you don't like it here......." My favorite is I 75 runs north and south, choose one. Really uummmm clever.

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by npwalters

Jump overboard on assumptions much? I don't hate anyone without good cause.


I know when my property value is being diminished by a greedy action.

The future added amenities - we will see what actually develops - is a drop in the bucket compared to what is already here and will be used primarily by the additional 600 people (300 apartments) closest to it. They are offering nothing unique. A very bad trade.

How do you know when a poster has run out of viable arguments. They say "if you don't like it here......." My favorite is I 75 runs north and south, choose one. Really uummmm clever.

Didn't jump to any assumptions. I read your prior posts.

No ones property values have changed one bit, so you may guess but you do not know.

Just like you don't know who will use the pool, rec center etc. Just because there will be a number of new residents, many will probably be older but in any event, if they are used at the same rate as other neighborhood amenites, you'll be able to get in.

As for the I75, good to know you have your options lined up.

[thelegges]

Almost 200 posts does anyone live near the demolished property. Do you think it will change your outlook on your lifestyle in TV. Since it’s pretty early, and no construction has started I am guessing you are waiting to see what happens