[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Dlbonivich

The apartments were plan B. The residents did not want to buy Hacienda do the developer moved on. This should be a lesson for the future.

They would've bought it if the developer had asked a reasonable price. It was actually under consideration for awhile.

[CanTho]

Originally Posted by riley2011

Can’t wait for all the extra traffic these apartments will bring. We don’t have enough yet.

As for the traffic problems and the congestion that goes with it. The Lady Lake board needs to take full responsibility in part for that.

For example Rolling Acres Road is a disaster. The board has ignored the problem for years. The lumber yard, along with the school, add to that the new apartments going in on CR466 is nothing short of incompetence.

My understanding that there is not even a future road plan. Crazy

[pjwenz]

Default Proper Procedures:
#1) How can the developer demand a one (1) on one (1) secret closed door meeting with elected officials of the ACC? Why is not a violation of the Florida Sunshine Law?

What is the Sunshine Law? Florida's Government-in-the-Sunshine law provides a right of access to governmental proceedings at both the state and local levels. It applies to any gathering of two or more members of the same board to discuss some matter which will foresee ably come before that board for action. (Florida Attorney General - Home Page)

#2) Why have none of the ACC commissioners divulged what was said in that one (1) on one (1) meeting?

#3) It is normal procedure that commissions, planning boards, etc review and approve site plan proposals after a set number of readings. Not be told what to do in closed door meetings!

#4) So the ACC voted to give the amenity fee to the Developer without any information as to what the proposed site plan will be. Will the golf course patrons be allowed to use the unknown amenities of the development?

Go ahead, have at it!

[diva1]

Originally Posted by CanTho

I do like your post, and what you have stated makes sense.

Everything that the developer does looks fantastic and I am certain that the apartments and the area will be very nice.

Times have changed and the " Toy " that you are referring to I take that it is " The Sharon ". You might be right. However once a vaccine for Covid-19 comes out all bets are off.

The Brownwood area looks terrific, plus the Hotel and Medical facility next to it is fabulous, all the planning from the Morse family.

So residents in the area I wouldn't be concerned in the slightest.

It will turn out to be just fine.

I'm sure the 'toy' theatre is the black box theater at Tierra del Sol with 100 seats. Unusable right now due to seating restrictions with Covid.

[HappyRetired]

Speaking to failed restaurants at CC. When the dining rooms are dark and dreary or when the noise level means you can't have dinner conversation no one will come. When food is mediocre few will come. Do a restaurant right with good food and good service and friendly atmosphere they can do quite well. The country clubs are the only places, mostly, where a larger group of people (14-20) can get a table/s together. Most restaurants cater to smaller, family-type diners.

[Singerlady]

Originally Posted by CanTho

Very well written and well thought out.

My comment is the developer already got his ducks in order and ready to build.

Does he have a " Plan B " ? Nope absolutely not, their is no need, Game - Set - Match.

Bottom line it's business strictly business.

As for the people who live in that area get use to it or move.

BIG QUESTIONS HERE.....If the Hacienda Hills property was owned by the Developer, then who owned the pools and the courts? A portion of the amenity fee had to be used to maintain the pool and the courts. So, does the Developer have the right to remove any of the pools or courts as they see fit? If the developer has the right to remove our pools, do we have any recourse?

[6Chloe4myamae]

My husband and I visited since we are considering buying in your area. We stayed at Brownwood. My first thought was additional traffic from the apartments.

[MandoMan]

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Have we thought much about what the new apartments proposed by the Developer might look like? Consider the following...

In round numbers a 286-unit apartment building will almost certainly be larger than the independent living building at Freedom Pointe (the taller, larger building west of the Morse-El Camino Real traffic circle). Certainly it would have to be taller.

Freedom Pointe (FP) has 247 studio, one and two-bedroom apartments. The mix is towards the smaller units. None of the FP apartments has a balcony. The average size of the FP apartments is approximately 1,100 sq. ft. In addition, FP has a parking garage holding approximately 250 cars with similar space devoted to surface parking.

The FP residential building has a large dining room and roughly half of one floor devoted to resident amenities (reception desk, lobby, mail room, indoor pool, ballroom, workout facility, library, billiards, meeting rooms, wood shop, activities room, barber-beauty salon and offices). There is an enclosed grassy area with a gazebo and an outside enclosed dog park. The building has several elevator banks and a large receiving dock.

The Freedom Pointe building is four floors throughout with smaller parts being five, six and seven stories high.

The Villages-proposed apartments will almost certainly be larger than those at Freedom Pointe, more like the size of those of the Brownwood Lofts, estimated to average 1500-1700 sq.ft. They will also likely have balconies like the apartments at Brownwood. The additional size of the Hacienda Hills apartments will likely be offset by less space devoted to activities amenities such as at Freedom Pointe. The space devoted to the FP dining room and a new restaurant will be roughly equal.

It’s probably safe to say that given these assumptions, the proposed 286-unit apartment building on the former clubhouse-restaurant site would have to be 10-12 stories tall and require an underground parking facility to house a car and golf cart for each apartment. If the resort-style pool Is planned near the new apartments, that would require more space.

Will a building of that size fit on the parcel recently cleared of the Hacienda Hills clubhouse-restaurant-pool-putting green? That’s something for all of us to think about. If the Developer’s plans are for lower buildings, where would they go? How about the necessary surface parking?

Can that size project along with resort pool, nature trails and other amenities fit on the space recently cleared?

Or do the plans assume the closure of one of the Hacienda Hills nine hole courses? Was that discussed at the meeting yesterday?

The Developer was not obligated to share project plans with the AAC. All they were asking for was AAC approval of 300 new resident amenities cards. They own the property and can do whatever they choose with it.

The approval of the required zoning changes, impact studies, plan approval, etc. is for the county board to consider. All that’s certain is that we’ll be living with the result.

While you are probably right about all of this, I think there would be a good market for much smaller units, as in the plans below. A lot of courtyard and patio homes are already 1100 to 1200 square feet. A lot of people living alone don’t need anywhere near that much. Tiny Houses are very popular these days and hard to find. If people look at their lives and realize that they already live in an 1100 to 1500 sq. ft. house, but no one ever visits, or perhaps one or two people on occasion, then a place a third that size has plenty of room for a couch and armchair, a small table, a properly-sized bed (if you live alone, you don’t need a king-size bed—a single bed leaves much more space in the bedroom.). Shelves in a closet can be much more efficient than a chest of drawers. I have rooms that are essentially closed off. I rarely go into them. People living alone or couples may not really need both a living room and a family room, or a formal dining room instead of a breakfast nook.

In a lot of Manhattan apartments, there is only a minimal kitchen, often with a half-height refrigerator. That’s not to my taste, but the understanding is that in New York, a lot of people grab coffee on their way to work, eat something from a food cart for lunch, and eat dinner in a restaurant. Many people rarely cook. There are probably people in The Villages who also rarely cook. Perhaps they would be quite happy with a kitchenette. Also, in Manhattan, a lot of bedrooms are only 10x10, and a lot of apartments are only 350 square feet, even some selling for close to a million.

There are snowbirds who come south for five months of golf, but don’t bring much with them. They may have only a couple suitcases. They don’t need an extra room for their hobbies or for an office. They don’t need 1200 square feet and yard work to pay for all year. If they don’t have relatives or friends coming down for a few weeks, why do they need two bedrooms?

I think that making a sizable percentage of these new apartments tiny would be a good move.

[NoMoSno]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I have no doubt that whatever the developer does, they'll make it look beautiful.

I worry about the traffic.

That's my #1 worry. It is WAY too close to rte 441 and the Morse circle and the hospital to accommodate another 300 residential units. As someone who has to drive across the Boone gate several times every week for work at various hours in each direction, I can tell you there are times when traffic is backed up and potentially hazardous. Especially when an ambulance or other emergency vehicle has to rush through.

These intersections were not planned to accommodate that much traffic. I don't feel it is safe for the developer to expect these intersections to bear even more.

...as well as golf carts negotiating the roundabout will be even more dangerous.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by Dlbonivich

The apartments were plan B. The residents did not want to buy Hacienda do the developer moved on. This should be a lesson for the future.

So the lesson is, if you refuse to pay full market value (the value is determined by us, not you) for an obsolete building that is no longer useable, then we will build a large Commercial eyesore that is not in harmony with the existing single family residential neighborhood and Championship golf course surrounding it.

This changes the game, homeowners beware, the deed restrictions that we all have to live with to protect our investments only apply to us, not the developer. So another lesson learned is never consider purchasing a home anywhere close to anything owned by the developer, including all Championship Golf courses. What you think you are purchasing can change dramatically and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it, and to add insult to injury, you paid a premium for that!

[LuvtheVillages]

Originally Posted by Singerlady

BIG QUESTIONS HERE.....If the Hacienda Hills property was owned by the Developer, then who owned the pools and the courts? A portion of the amenity fee had to be used to maintain the pool and the courts. So, does the Developer have the right to remove any of the pools or courts as they see fit? If the developer has the right to remove our pools, do we have any recourse?

That pool and those courts were owned by the Developer. He maintained them and charged a membership fee to use them.

That is different from the pools and courts in the area rec centers. Those are owned by the local Community Development District and maintained with your amenity fees.

[Carla B]

Originally Posted by Singerlady

BIG QUESTIONS HERE.....If the Hacienda Hills property was owned by the Developer, then who owned the pools and the courts? A portion of the amenity fee had to be used to maintain the pool and the courts. So, does the Developer have the right to remove any of the pools or courts as they see fit? If the developer has the right to remove our pools, do we have any recourse?

As LuvtheVillages says, the facilities at Hacienda Hills are owned by the Developer, as are all (12?) championship golf courses and country club facilities. That's why you have to buy a golf or pool membership or pay to play golf to use them. They are not supported by amenity fees.

If there is no profit from maintaining the championship courses and facilities, that brings up the worrisome possibility of the Developers converting them to other uses that make more income.

[Bilyclub]

Originally Posted by Singerlady

BIG QUESTIONS HERE.....If the Hacienda Hills property was owned by the Developer, then who owned the pools and the courts? A portion of the amenity fee had to be used to maintain the pool and the courts. So, does the Developer have the right to remove any of the pools or courts as they see fit? If the developer has the right to remove our pools, do we have any recourse?

The country clubs are owned by the developer, including the pools, buildings, etc. None of the amenity fee was supposed to be used on the country clubs.
The rec centers were built by the developer and sold to the CDD's at a decent markup. They can't touch what they don't own anymore.

[lauraw]

I heard an rumor that they are going to use one of the 9 hole golf courses for the apartments

[Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by lauraw

I heard an rumor that they are going to use one of the 9 hole golf courses for the apartments

I'm sure you "heard" a rumor.

Nice try.