[starflyte1]

Originally Posted by Joe Sacco

50 Apartments X $150 = $7500 per month, not a reason for such an investment.

It is more like close to 300 units, per meeting this morning.

[UpNorth]

Originally Posted by bagboy

Grandfather was cremated, fyi.

Ok then. Spinning in his jar?

[perrjojo]

One question I have is ...the Developer is asking for 300 amenities for the apartment residents. Does that mean 300 people or for 300 apartments. If it is for 300 apartments that could be a lot of people. Also the development on 466 has 300 hundred apartments and that takes up A LOT of space.

[perrjojo]

Originally Posted by Joe Sacco

50 Apartments X $150 = $7500 per month, not a reason for such an investment.

My understanding is that it is 300x150 which equals $540,000 year and could mean 600 or more people using the amenities.

[Two Bills]

Looks like a done deal. 286-unit apartments.
4-1 vote in favor from AAC commitee.
The other place has details.

[graciegirl]

Been here for fourteen years, anyhow....a long time. And I keep reading omg, oh heavens, oh good night shirt that danged developer is planning another awful thing.......and guess what???

It always turns out good.

[iht2209]

There’s no way taking away a Country Club and replacing it with a apartment complex turns out to be good. Very disheartening how 4 elected representatives vote in its favor without at least taking the time to hearing from the people they represent is a sham. Unbelievable

[starflyte1]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Been here for fourteen years, anyhow....a long time. And I keep reading omg, oh heavens, oh good night shirt that danged developer is planning another awful thing.......and guess what???

It always turns out good.

If they build 286 apartments on the Hacienda property it is NOT right. If you paid a premium price to have a home on a golf course with a country club atmosphere and then the developer built 286 apartment units in your view and in your back yard, would you really think it is beautiful?

This should not be allowed to happen.

[perrjojo]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Been here for fourteen years, anyhow....a long time. And I keep reading omg, oh heavens, oh good night shirt that danged developer is planning another awful thing.......and guess what???

It always turns out good.

Those who paid premiums for view lots may not agree with you. Yes, most things turn out good but I’m not so sure about this one.

[Buckeye Bob]

I don't understand how the developer has the right to keep the amenity fees. The developer does not own the amenities; the districts own them. This is a slap in the face to every Villager paying amenity fees. 😡😡

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Buckeye Bob

I don't understand how the developer has the right to keep the amenity fees. The developer does not own the amenities; the districts own them. This is a slap in the face to every Villager paying amenity fees. ������������

Unless the developer builds more amenities how does he have the right to keep them?

[vagent711]

Originally Posted by Joanne19335

Rumors are flying about the future of the Hacienda Hills CC property. I overheard a conversation this morning that apartments or condos will be built and a restaurant and pool will replace the old restaurant and pro shop. The most upsetting part of the conversation was that the Palms 9 would be torn out to make room for the condos. This is simply devastating to me (if it is true). Although I don’t live near there, the thought that TV is leaning in this direction upsets me greatly. With all of the sprawl that is taking place down south where there are virtually no amenities whatsoever, how could tearing up the Palms benefit anyone, not to mention the people who bought homes there? What about the impact on home prices throughout The Villages? More apartments will have a negative impact on the rest of us. Does anyone have ANY idea what the developer is planning to do? BTW, condo owners will have all the amenities we homeowners have, including the new pool and restaurant. I also heard that these condos or apartments could be income restricted. Not a good thing at all.

The developer is proposing to build 286 apts on the site. They are going to put in walking trails, pickle ball & tennis courts and a resort style pool. They have also indicated that they will put in a restaurant. The developer has a specific number of unassigned amenity fees of which they will use 286, one for each apt. The developer will collect the fees and pay back $14.00 per month for community watch and other services. The developer will maintain the apartments and the pool, trails, etc. there will be no expense to the AAC or the district for the maintenance and upkeep.
Under this plan ALL residents of the villages will have access to all the amenities offered by the apartments and the residents there will have access to all the villages amenities.
I have not heard any mention of taking down the palms nine hole golf course so I have no idea if that is in the plan or just a rumor

[npwalters]

Originally Posted by vagent711

The developer is proposing to build 286 apts on the site. They are going to put in walking trails, pickle ball & tennis courts and a resort style pool. They have also indicated that they will put in a restaurant. The developer has a specific number of unassigned amenity fees of which they will use 286, one for each apt. The developer will collect the fees and pay back $14.00 per month for community watch and other services. The developer will maintain the apartments and the pool, trails, etc. there will be no expense to the AAC or the district for the maintenance and upkeep.
Under this plan ALL residents of the villages will have access to all the amenities offered by the apartments and the residents there will have access to all the villages amenities.
I have not heard any mention of taking down the palms nine hole golf course so I have no idea if that is in the plan or just a rumor

I really don't understand why "Under this plan ALL residents of the villages will have access to all the amenities offered by the apartments and the residents there will have access to all the villages amenities." is a good or worthwhile thing to the existing Villages residents. We already HAVE those amenities at many other locations and I am quite sure the new apartment dwellers will use more of the existing amenities than we will use the new pool. No way ruining that location with apartments equates to access to another pool and pickleball court. Too bad the amenity board sold us out. I, for one, will not forget.

[bob47]

Originally Posted by npwalters

I really don't understand why "Under this plan ALL residents of the villages will have access to all the amenities offered by the apartments and the residents there will have access to all the villages amenities." is a good or worthwhile thing to the existing Villages residents. We already HAVE those amenities at many other locations and I am quite sure the new apartment dwellers will use more of the existing amenities than we will use the new pool. No way ruining that location with apartments equates to access to another pool and pickleball court. Too bad the amenity board sold us out. I, for one, will not forget.

Maybe somebody who always apologizes for the developer can explain how it's fair that we all pay $150+ per month to use all the amenities, and the residents of this development will be contributing $14 per month to use all the amenities.

Don Deakin is the only AAC member who thinks things through and is a true fiduciary for the folks he represents.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by bob47

Maybe somebody who always apologizes for the developer can explain how it's fair that we all pay $150+ per month to use all the amenities, and the residents of this development will be contributing $14 per month to use all the amenities.

Don Deakin is the only AAC member who thinks things through and is a true fiduciary for the folks he represents.

Totally agree, I already sent Don a thank you e-mail for being the only one with the stones to say no to the developer and actually do his job of representing the best interest of existing amenity fee paying homeowners. It's not like that will do any good reversing the monstrosity in the works at Hacienda, but thanks Don. To the rest of the AAC members, really, UFB!