County sued for $3 Million+

[AAbsolute]

AAbsolute - you are absolutely right, if you don't agree on this forum with what's being said you are "Attacked". Adios!

This Forum won't hurt you. Now the County...that's where you might want to stay on the porch if you can't run with the big dogs.

Please don't split.

 

[AAbsolute]

Limiting building heights to 50' doesn't control what you do to your property and isn't an infringement of your rights!

We have building codes, zoning, and laws for a reason! Just because you want to do something doesn't mean it is a right, and just because someone with a broader view and some common sense wants to make rules (that apply to everyone BTW) doesn't mean they are trampling your liberties!

Florida is a State of Strict Construction. Before you comment on what that means get informed and then blast me about it all you want.

I keep asking you do gooders the same question over and over, "Was there a height restriction on that land before the applicant decided to build or was it enacted during the process?"

Scooter, we have zoning and laws for a reason. They're written and we are on Notice. The Government has no right to change them on the fly. That is dealing from the bottom of the deck. That is against the Florida and United States Constitutions.

 

[AAbsolute]

Please specify what it is that Walton County mandates you have a qualified business license for that is not also mandated by the State. Since Walton County does not have an Occupational Tax (license) ordinance, I would be interested.

I don't know of any qualified business license that the County mandates that is not also mandated by the State. Check out my quote in your post.

I write in an affirmative vernacular, but I'm not always correct. I also write and talk in a literal form. You only have to miss one word or start assuming and you'll never be able to keep track of what I am saying.

 

[scooterbug44]

I have yet to see proof that the "government" DID change the rules on the fly.

I know that the height restriction became a topic of conversation because of this project (as people then realized we didn't have a countywide height restriction), but as I have stated several times, I do not believe that the sole reason this project has not progressed is because of a height ordinance.

Due to my shy and uninquisitive nature, I asked for and received many opinions on this project when it was previously mentioned on Sowal and NOONE had a positive opinion - whether it was a commissioner reviewing it, a structural engineer laughing about the $$$ in concrete required to build such a building on that site, or a neighbor who scoffed at the idea of a combo hi-rise condo and RV park swamp ajacent. ;-)

 

[AAbsolute]

I have yet to see proof that the "government" DID change the rules on the fly.

I know that the height restriction became a topic of conversation because of this project (as people then realized we didn't have a countywide height restriction), but as I have stated several times, I do not believe that the sole reason this project has not progressed is because of a height ordinance.

Due to my shy and uninquisitive nature, I asked for and received many opinions on this project when it was previously mentioned on Sowal and NOONE had a positive opinion - whether it was a commissioner reviewing it, a structural engineer laughing about the $$$ in concrete required to build such a building on that site, or a neighbor who scoffed at the idea of a combo hi-rise condo and RV park swamp ajacent. ;-)

Thanks. I'm starting to catch your drift. Beauty sans brains.

 

[Matt J]

Now my curiosity is aroused. Since the public's concern should be, imho, one of property rights, the taken of, and compatibility with the area, what in the world has the name of who is making the investment, taking all the risks, and standing to reap the rewards for driving the local economy got to do with it?

How would this project drive the local economy? I don't remember any local companies that specialized in high rise construction.

If it is a slam dunk, against the code, they are just grasping for straw suit, then when they lose they should have to pay the costs all the way around. That to me would help control some of this litigation.

But I am still not convinced. While at one time a was for height limitations, I have flip flopped the other way. The more I read about property rights the more I believe that height limits are nothing more than a way for other people to control what you do on your land without having to buy your land. That is a taking and someone should pay.

And compatibility in that area? There is nothing there, if that is going to be the issue then there will always be nothing there.

You flip flopped because you believe in property rights or because you know that developers love to give campaign contributions?

 

[wrobert]

How would this project drive the local economy? I don't remember any local companies that specialized in high rise construction.


You flip flopped because you believe in property rights or because you know that developers love to give campaign contributions?

I have a client that specializes in exterior plastering of high rises that use to employ hundreds in the area.


Your cynicism is getting a bit tiresome. Contrary to what you would believe, not everyone is for sale.

 

[wrobert]

I keep asking you do gooders the same question over and over, "Was there a height restriction on that land before the applicant decided to build or was it enacted during the process?"

No there was not. Brannon was working to get that passed when some vocal opposition in Choctaw Beach emerged and the effort was abandoned. It seemed to be picked up again after this project was presented. Thus the lawsuit.

 

[wrobert]

Limiting building heights to 50' doesn't control what you do to your property and isn't an infringement of your rights!

We have building codes, zoning, and laws for a reason! Just because you want to do something doesn't mean it is a right, and just because someone with a broader view and some common sense wants to make rules (that apply to everyone BTW) doesn't mean they are trampling your liberties!

It prevents me from building my home to 60'.

 

[Matt J]

No there was not. Brannon was working to get that passed when some vocal opposition in Choctaw Beach emerged and the effort was abandoned. It seemed to be picked up again after this project was presented. Thus the lawsuit.

I could have sworn that it was Meadows or Comander that was pushing for the height restriction. I don't remember a single news report stating that Brannon had anything to do with it.