[JoMar]

Originally Posted by aletarw

Blvd. Someone recently said...the daily sun is all rainbows and lollipops. The ************** prints the news that the Sun will not print.

With negative bias and click bait for money

[aletarw]

Residents were blindsided when the AAC voted to give amenity fees ($500,000/year) to the Developer for the new apartments to be built at Hacienda Hills Country Club site.

If we want a voice in future decisions, we must vote in members who are unbiased and will protect the interests of the residents.


The District 3 Representative will be elected via a Landowner Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2020 at the Savannah Regional Recreation Center in the Ashley Wilkes Room from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. In a Landowner Election anyone who owns a property in District 3 is eligible to vote. See the map of District 3 to see if you are eligible VCDD District Map


The Seats for Districts 1, 2 and the Lady Lake/Lake County portion of The Villages will be up for election in 2022.

The Seat for District 4 was uncontested and an election will not be held on November 3, 2020.

There are three candidates for the District 3 Representative: Terry Biddle, Donna Kempa and James Klynman.

I'm looking for information about these three people so I can make an informed decision. If anyone knows how to find info, please let us know.


For more information about the AAC elections, please contact


Jennifer McQueary, District Clerk

984 Old Mill Run | The Villages, Florida 32162

Direct: 352.751-3939 | Fax: 352.753-6430

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by shut the front door

AAC voted 4-1 for the apartments at Hacienda.
The most infuriating part is this:
"It was clear that the Developer had vowed to put a parking garage or big box retailer at the Hacienda Hills site if the AAC did not go along with the apartment complex."

Why in God's name would the developer, or anyone for that matter build a parking garage on that site? That makes no sense whatsoever.

I doubt that a big box retailer would be interested in that location. They want to be on a highly traveled road like 466 or 27/441.

[aletarw]

Originally Posted by Mleeja

The AAC DIDNOT vote for apartments. They voted on an amenity fee sharing plan. The decision to build apartments was the developer’s and developer’s only.

We can debate if the amenity fee sharing was a good idea or deal, but at least debate the facts.

The Developer will pocket $500k/year into perpetuity. Sounds like a good deal for them not us.

[pkfavreau2]

I thought at the hearing for the residences that the apartment complex was not the popular vote. Next thing you know they have all the drawings ready within a day or so to present for approval. Apparently the decision was already made, not sure why they Asked the residences for their input. Me, I didn’t move to TV to have apartment complexes around me. I realize it’s more money for the Morses, but still why now all of a sudden are they being built here.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by pkfavreau2

I thought at the hearing for the residences that the apartment complex was not the popular vote. Next thing you know they have all the drawings ready within a day or so to present for approval. Apparently the decision was already made, not sure why they Asked the residences for their input. Me, I didn’t move to TV to have apartment complexes around me. I realize it’s more money for the Morses, but still why now all of a sudden are they being built here.

Totally agree. It has become abundantly apparent that the new generation of the Morses have absolutely no regard for input from the Villages residents. They control the entire county and get anything they want. Public meetings are just a required nuisance to them, their wishes are a done deal before the meetings ever take place. Very sad indeed: (

[Northwoods]

There are people who live in The Villages that would welcome apartment living. They're not able to handle all the maintenance that comes with a house.

The Developer owns the land. I'm not sure why anyone would think they should be consulted before The Developer makes business decisions. But obviously, there are a number of people who think they should get a vote.

[Northwoods]

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

My head just exploded reading this. (It's a great post!!! But I don't understand it all). Is it saying that The Developer can build "senior" housing because they already have approval to do that?

[Goldwingnut]

Originally Posted by Northwoods

My head just exploded reading this. (It's a great post!!! But I don't understand it all). Is it saying that The Developer can build "senior" housing because they already have approval to do that?

It's saying the developer already has rights to 286 amenity units from the agreement 5 years ago. Their request was to redesignate them from ALF/ILF to regular amenity units. They have already received this on the 7 Chatham Acres properties, so the precedence has already been set.

As far as what they build on the HH property, that is between them and the zoning board, the residents have absolutely zero say about it except maybe the 4 owners that directly abut the HH property to be developed.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by Goldwingnut

It's saying the developer already has rights to 286 amenity units from the agreement 5 years ago. Their request was to redesignate them from ALF/ILF to regular amenity units. They have already received this on the 7 Chatham Acres properties, so the precedence has already been set.

As far as what they build on the HH property, that is between them and the zoning board, the residents have absolutely zero say about it except maybe the 4 owners that directly abut the HH property to be developed.

Thanks for the information, your vast knowledge is greatly appreciated. Is it safe to assume there will be a lot more than 4 abutting owners if the golf course is involved? Also, do you know if the golf course could be involved given that some (not sure if HH is part of the some) of the golf courses have been designed as flood plains of last resort for an event like hurricane Irma? I am assuming there would be significant development restrictions on land designed as flood plains. Thats not to say a golf course could not be turned into walking trails (what a shame that would be)!

[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?

[Goldwingnut]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Thanks for the information, your vast knowledge is greatly appreciated. Is it safe to assume there will be a lot more than 4 abutting owners if the golf course is involved? Also, do you know if the golf course could be involved given that some (not sure if HH is part of the some) of the golf courses have been designed as flood plains of last resort for an event like hurricane Irma? I am assuming there would be significant development restrictions on land designed as flood plains. Thats not to say a golf course could not be turned into walking trails (what a shame that would be)!

Nothing has been mentioned about repurposing any of the golf course property for the HH redevelopment project and I doubt that this would happen. It would be a grievous mistake to take such actions. Residents would be pounding at the gates pitchforks in hand in revolt, with you (I know your love of the game) and I leading the charge.

[Goldwingnut]

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?

The zoning policies are confusing at best and can be found at Sumter County, FL - Official Website .

As this appears it will be a HDR in a DRI/PUD (I had alphabet soup for dinner last night) the discussion should be interesting. From my initial read of the policies, they are centered around positive growth for the county and minimizing negative environmental and economic impact with flexibility being stressed. The one area I'm am seeing conflict with is the access (roadway) requirement of being within 1/2 mile of a state highway system, but again this is only my first read and I have a lot more to dig into on this topic.

I think the "developer's puppet" idea is way out of hand, the people making decisions have to weigh their decisions on many factors that affect both the immediate area but the county as a whole as well. Unfortunately, most, or at least the most vocal, opponents to this and many other things happening in Sumter County take the position of this being about "me" and "right here, right now". The decision makers don't have that luxury, they must look to the long term and overall good, the goal is a win-win. They are however not infallible.

[Marathon Man]

Originally Posted by aletarw

The Developer will pocket $500k/year into perpetuity. Sounds like a good deal for them not us.

The amenities at the apartments will be available to ALL residents. These amenties must be staffed, maintained, and supplied. Therefore, of course part of the amenity fees go to the accomplish that. Since "The Developer" will be responsible for the costs, "The Developer" gets those funds.

Now, who knows how much it will take to staff, maintain, and supply those amenities, including building a surplus fund for future repairs?

[Marathon Man]

Originally Posted by pkfavreau2

I thought at the hearing for the residences that the apartment complex was not the popular vote. Next thing you know they have all the drawings ready within a day or so to present for approval. Apparently the decision was already made, not sure why they Asked the residences for their input. Me, I didn’t move to TV to have apartment complexes around me. I realize it’s more money for the Morses, but still why now all of a sudden are they being built here.

It's not all of a sudden. Like all plans, we only hear about it when it becomes legally public. It is pretty likely that they began working on these plans when the restaurant shut down months ago.

It is private property and a private business. No vote was taken on what was to go in there.

I think that luxury apartment living is a choice that was always missing form the community. The Lofts is a great addition, and these will be, also. Imagine being able to purchase a home in The Villages near the appartment that you aging parents have moved into. I think that it is possible that homes in that area may become more desireable, and therefore more valuable.