[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Unlike the large scale high density apartment complex planned at HH, I have no problem with the Katie Belles plan. Katie Belles is an existing building in a commercial area and converting the building to 10 apartment units will have no negative effect on existing single family residential homeowners. I doubt anyone going to Spanish Springs will notice any difference between an empty Katie Belles versus the same building with 10 apartment units. The Katie Belles conversion is in no way the "bait and switch" that is being pulled on the homeowners in the HH area. There is still the fact that the area already has bad traffic congestion and over utilized amenities, but 10 or so apartments won't make any noticeable difference. As I have stated in other threads, I don't have a problem with apartments, as long as they are put in the right place so they do not negatively effect single family homeowners who had no reasonable cause to think they would ever be plopped down in an inappropriate area.

I hope that this post proves to be wrong. So far apartments have not been tested in The Villages and I really can't see this as a "bait and switch" but rather the use of an area that had lost purpose due to a lot of real factors. I see the real factors as; the folks who rent the buildings made for restaurants fail to make a success of said restaurants and that may be that the restauranteurs are sub par or that the area is aging and don't go out to eat as much or that the building was SO noisy it wasn't pleasant even for people like me who can turn my device down to eat there.

I am hoping that the apartments are not going to cause problems in the same way people who live here generally do not cause problems with higher crime and lack of care of their surroundings. I hope that the parking lot is not crowded. The one on 466 never appears to be when we drive by the back on our way to Bob Evans. (When we did, not eating out now)

I hope that the people who rent the apartments will find a good fit to a less active lifestyle and a good place to eat at the restaurant. (I did read there would be a restaurant, didn't I?)

I hope I will not find anything to disagree with Tophcfa about in the future as it has been in the past. We usually saw eye to eye.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I hope that this post proves to be wrong. So far apartments have not been tested in The Villages and I really can't see this as a "bait and switch" but rather the use of an area that had lost purpose due to a lot of real factors. I see the real factors as; the folks who rent the buildings made for restaurants fail to make a success of said restaurants and that may be that the restauranteurs are sub par or that the area is aging and don't go out to eat as much or that the building was SO noisy it wasn't pleasant even for people like me who can turn my device down to eat there.

I am hoping that the apartments are not going to cause problems in the same way people who live here generally do not cause problems with higher crime and lack of care of their surroundings. I hope that the parking lot is not crowded. The one on 466 never appears to be when we drive by the back on our way to Bob Evans. (When we did, not eating out now)

I hope that the people who rent the apartments will find a good fit to a less active lifestyle and a good place to eat at the restaurant. (I did read there would be a restaurant, didn't I?)

I hope I will not find anything to disagree with Tophcfa about in the future as it has been in the past. We usually saw eye to eye.

I do not understand why renters are questioned..character, law abiding, etc, and not homeowners.

Rentals are a viable and missing part of a comprehensive retirement community.

Why some homeowners speak "down" aboutthe concept. There are new Lofts renters I know that could buy and sell most homeowners, both financia, AND in the measurement of character.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

That is an exaggeration of the facts.

The Villages. Inc. are very successful financially and people who have lived here for awhile dislike to hear unwarranted criticism of the developer.

Not meant as criticism of anyone.

The Morse family is in business to make money and nothing wrong with that. I own my own business and in a much more limited way tried different things.

It would appear to me they are investigating different ways to grow their business and will do what all successful business do, get proof of concept and move accordingly.

Feel free to disagree with anything I say but not going to stop putting out my thoughts.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I would welcome a "walk to everything" living option in The Villages. But, to me, an essential part of that would be a grocery store and drug store within a few steps. Crystal City in Washington, DC has condos where you can get on an elevator, and have access to grocery stores, drug stores, doctor's offices, restaurants, a movie theater, and many other things. I would consider a condo, townhouse, or apartment that had that kind of convenience. But, if I have to drive a half mile to Publix, I may as well drive 4 miles.

It's 2/10 of a mile. You can walk it.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Regarding the topic itself - apartments replacing Katie Belle's.

I see the cottages within the "corner" of Lake Sumter Landing town square to be a similar concept. I think it'd be awesome to be able to have these with long-term rentals with no sub-letting allowed, as a Villages corporate-owned property, and the tenants' rental including amenity fees built into the rent, which is then paid into the amenities fund.

The tenants would have to abide by the same rules as renters of homes all over the Villages - no more than 2 ID cards. Their property maintenance would be the corporation's responsibility, AND they wouldn't be allowed to alter the interior or exterior of the property other than removable furnishings, roll-up rugs, etc. The corporation could even put paintings up on the walls, and if the tenant wants their own, they can use them as long as they don't add new holes to the walls - they can use the existing frame hangers.

I personally would get a kick out of living in an apartment over a shop. I've done that in the past, and it felt comfy and safe. In my case there was no elevator, and it was a two-floor walkup, but I was younger then.

I could imagine the entrance to the apartments being retrofitted with a series of ramps zigzagging upward to the second floor in addition to a small elevator. And on that second floor would be perhaps just 4 or 5 apartments total - 2 of which would have a ramp leading to a bedroom loft, and the rest modest 1-bedroom flats.

The entire project could be made wheelchair accessible, which is something you don't really see much of in Villages homes. Low kitchen counters and cabinet spaces, no stairs to climb, wide hallways, and those funky bathtubs with doors on them or even wheel-in showers with low removable showerheads.

100% independent living flats and lofts for folks who need to be fairly close to the hospital, are still able to walk or wheel around with no human assistance needed, and don't want to be isolated from necessary shopping and "human contact."

[Madelaine Amee]

They are going to be over the top pricey units, probably pure luxury, but what a nice way to spend the last years of your life when you can no longer drive to everything, other than in a golf cart. As for noise, the music goes off and everything shuts down at 9:00pm.

You have a Publix and hospital within easy golf cart drive; movie theater, The Sharon, easy access to 441. pool at Hacienda, Panera coffee shop, the list just goes on and on.

It must by now be quite obvious that profit is in selling homes and renting apartments, the homes are one and done, but the apartments are continually producing income.

We came here when Katie Belles was the place to be in the evening and we had so much fun, dining, drinking and dancing. I was sorry to see it go, but it was no longer getting the use it once did and it needed work and updating. I went several times to the dinner theater, but never really appreciated it as we had Katie Belles, so I have no problem in seeing it become high income apartments.

If you are a student of marketing, the Morse family have mastered it, and the finished product is excdellent.

[Madelaine Amee]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

The entire project could be made wheelchair accessible, which is something you don't really see much of in Villages homes. Low kitchen counters and cabinet spaces, no stairs to climb, wide hallways, and those funky bathtubs with doors on them or even wheel-in showers with low removable showerheads.

100% independent living flats and lofts for folks who need to be fairly close to the hospital, are still able to walk or wheel around with no human assistance needed, and don't want to be isolated from necessary shopping and "human contact."

Katie Belles is already wheelchair accessible, they have an elevator and always did.

[Dond1959]

What the OP neglects to include is as Paul Harvey would say, is the rest of the story. In the remainder of the article McCabe continues:

“Contrary to the rumors that the amenity privileges recently acted on by the Amenity Authority Committee are all intended for Hacienda Hills, we’re looking strategically at several locations that could serve Villages residents who want this apartment-style option”. “We are very sensitive to the way redevelopment can impact the character of an existing neighborhood, and we are working hard to ensure that any multi-family living options will seamlessly assimilate into the surrounding areas. Whatever we create will be a great fit for that particular location, very Villages-sequel in its look and feel, while. Resting an additional way for retirees to enjoy Florida’s Friendliest Hometown.“

So all those worrying about HH can take a deep breath and wait for the number of units and the design. It may be a lot better than the old dump they tore down that was losing money. This is the bigger news of the story.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by Bucco

I do not understand why renters are questioned..character, law abiding, etc, and not homeowners.

Rentals are a viable and missing part of a comprehensive retirement community.

Why some homeowners speak "down" aboutthe concept. There are new Lofts renters I know that could buy and sell most homeowners, both financia, AND in the measurement of character.

Hmmmm, I think you are missing the point and trying to put words in other peoples mouths. I have not read a single post saying anything bad about renters versus homeowners. The critical issue at hand is the location of the proposed high density Apartment complex and weather it is appropriate to locate it in a long standing single family residential neighborhood that already has traffic congestion and overused amenities. People who are familiar with zoning understand that one of the key criteria for re-zoning is that the proposed use will be in harmony with the existing neighborhood. It has absolutely nothing to do with the character of renters versus homeowners.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I hope that this post proves to be wrong. So far apartments have not been tested in The Villages and I really can't see this as a "bait and switch" but rather the use of an area that had lost purpose due to a lot of real factors. I see the real factors as; the folks who rent the buildings made for restaurants fail to make a success of said restaurants and that may be that the restauranteurs are sub par or that the area is aging and don't go out to eat as much or that the building was SO noisy it wasn't pleasant even for people like me who can turn my device down to eat there.

I am hoping that the apartments are not going to cause problems in the same way people who live here generally do not cause problems with higher crime and lack of care of their surroundings. I hope that the parking lot is not crowded. The one on 466 never appears to be when we drive by the back on our way to Bob Evans. (When we did, not eating out now)

I hope that the people who rent the apartments will find a good fit to a less active lifestyle and a good place to eat at the restaurant. (I did read there would be a restaurant, didn't I?)

I hope I will not find anything to disagree with Tophcfa about in the future as it has been in the past. We usually saw eye to eye.

Gracie, we used to agree on everything when we first bought our home in the Villages, which was coincidently about the time Gary Morse passed away. Back then I shared your almost unconditional trust in the developer. Over time, certain events have taken place that unfortunately have eroded my unconditional trust in the new generation of the family. Don't get me wrong, we absolutely LOVE the VILLAGES and the actions of the current generation of the Morse's has not ruined what Gary created (that is why we bought north of 466, we wanted to buy into the already built out and mature area that Gary built). I would be hard pressed to find anything we disagree on that does not involve the actions of the new generation of the family.

Stay safe and healthy my friend : )

[Marathon Man]

Something happens to some folks when the retire and get older. They begin to resent change. New ideas are seen as some kind of threat.

I think that the new generation is looking to keep our community evolving in ways that were never considered previously. Smaller gathering spots rather than a single large square. Luxury apartments close to restaurants and shopping. Get rid of what is not working, and replace it with something new. All great stuff.

[SIRE1]

I have a hard time understanding what is the big objection to having apartments in The Villages. First, we can't object to having non-permanent residents living and playing in our community because we probably already have a thousand homes that are being rented in The Villages today (and without any age or time restrictions). Second, we can't object to having living spaces close together because look at the existing row house units that are already around Spanish Springs and Glenview CC that are being enjoyed by their owners. Third, we can't object to having more people in The Villages who will support our local businesses and restaurants so they stay in business because The Villages is already building 100 new homes a month (I'm guessing on that amount). Fourth, we can't object to having large housing structures because look at all the assisted living facilities we have that are filled with residents who can still get out and enjoy The Villages lifestyle. So what is the concern about having apartments in our community? As a seasonal resident, I probably would have chosen that route instead of buying and maintaining the home that I bought. As long as The Villages continues to build recreation facilities that we all can use to go along with those apartments, I say great. After all, The Villages is no longer a small community like it was, but a town of 130,000 + people.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by perrjojo

I would love living above Katie Belle’s and listening to the Spanish Springs square 365 days and nights a year. My TV has a really loud volume.

Nothing to worry about for those renters. Last call is at nine isn't it?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by SIRE1

I have a hard time understanding what is the big objection to having apartments in The Villages. First, we can't object to having non-permanent residents living and playing in our community because we probably already have a thousand homes that are being rented in The Villages today (and without any age or time restrictions). Second, we can't object to having living spaces close together because look at the existing row house units that are already around Spanish Springs and Glenview CC that are being enjoyed by their owners. Third, we can't object to having more people in The Villages who will support our local businesses and restaurants so they stay in business because The Villages is already building 100 new homes a month (I'm guessing on that amount). Fourth, we can't object to having large housing structures because look at all the assisted living facilities we have that are filled with residents who can still get out and enjoy The Villages lifestyle. So what is the concern about having apartments in our community? As a seasonal resident, I probably would have chosen that route instead of buying and maintaining the home that I bought. As long as The Villages continues to build recreation facilities that we all can use to go along with those apartments, I say great. After all, The Villages is no longer a small community like it was, but a town of 130,000 + people.

In the Katie Belle situation, I can't think of anything to object about, as long as it is done on a small scale with long-term exclusive tenants (no sub-letting), and that amenity fees get paid PER UNIT rather than PER BUILDING.

In the situation of Hacienda CC, my concern is traffic. It's just way too close to the Paige Place roundabout and the hospital. In the summer time it's not bad, manageable. In the winter, traffic exiting to 441/27 from the roundabout can get really bad, and there are often accidents coming in FROM 441/27 TO that roundabout. Add another 300 units worth of traffic all condensed around a single building (or couple of buildings) spanning no more than the size of a single New York City block, and you have a nightmare.

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

In the Katie Belle situation, I can't think of anything to object about, as long as it is done on a small scale with long-term exclusive tenants (no sub-letting), and that amenity fees get paid PER UNIT rather than PER BUILDING.

In the situation of Hacienda CC, my concern is traffic. It's just way too close to the Paige Place roundabout and the hospital. In the summer time it's not bad, manageable. In the winter, traffic exiting to 441/27 from the roundabout can get really bad, and there are often accidents coming in FROM 441/27 TO that roundabout. Add another 300 units worth of traffic all condensed around a single building (or couple of buildings) spanning no more than the size of a single New York City block, and you have a nightmare.

Maybe. You assume that everyone there will have a car and they will all be driving around at the same time. Of course all the business's on 441 have nothing to contribute to the traffic do they? Assume you don't want them to close but if they did all those folks south of 466 wouldn't be traveling up that way would they, and that would reduce traffic, right?