Matt J
SWGB
The authority is the covenants and restrictions. The enforcement would be the board of the HOA.
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
-
Hello all! We will be performing a website & forum update soon. You may get logged out so now is the time to make sure your email address in your account is correct - go to your account to check it and update it now. Send us a message with your username and/or email address if you need help.
County sued for $3 Million+
- Thread starter Matt J
- Start date
The authority is the covenants and restrictions. The enforcement would be the board of the HOA.
Bobby J
Beach Fanatic
Define people like you?
Man, if you think this is an insult, you obviously don't know what a true insult looks like.
It seems to me like Robert has all the right arguments and you NIMBY's have smoke and mirrors. I have no idea what most of you would have done if we had decided on no development 40 years ago when all sowal had was a few beach shacks and the Grayton store.
I guess everyone wants acres and acres of roads, concrete pads and 50' roofs as opposed to a few acres of roof covering a high rise. Makes great environmental sense to me.
wrobert
Beach Fanatic
ShallowsNole
Beach Fanatic
I am guessing that I should not invite my buddy Robert to the next meeting of my beloved Historic Point Washington Association.
I still say they got lucky...
Bobby,
Lucky? Jolly Bay probably doesn't feel very Lucky. They would maybe agree with you they were Lucky if they would have been told the TRUTH from the county just ONE time in all the meetings they had with the county before the August 1 Technical Review Meeting. From 2004 till the day they were put on the TRC agenda for the August 1 meeting, the county told the taxpayers(applicants) there were no issues with the Jolly Bay project.
Jolly Bay met with county engineers and planners many times and were told in those meeting there was no height problem with the Jolly Bay site. George Newman, Greg Graham, Melissa Ward, Tim Brown and twice in two meetings With LaSeur. LaSeur told the applicant no problem with planning or zoning! so Jolly Bay kept spending time and money with her recommendations. La Seur commented in those meeting that this was a great plan and she hadn't seen one come through planning as nice as this in a while. They staff report that was prepared for the August 1 2007 TRC states no compatibility study required, no height restrictions for this site, no neighborhood meeting needed, no mention of some book they would later find that says 8 stories is rural and 12 stories is urban.
Jolly Bay probably feels pretty UNLUCKY that they had to deal with a planning dept. that completely flip flopped on their own set of rules. How can us taxpayers use our government effectively when you have a planning department operating like this?
In the years this project was going thru planning where was Pat Blackshire? LaSeur never said a word to her? Pat Blackshire never put out a memo for someone to tell the taxpayers (applicants) she had a problem.
You should probably feel UNLUCKY if you have to do business with Walton Co. Planning Dept.
Last edited:
Bobby J
Beach Fanatic
Bobby,
Lucky? Jolly Bay probably doesn't feel very Lucky. They would maybe agree with you they were Lucky if they would have been told the TRUTH from the county just ONE time in all the meetings they had with the county before the August 1 Technical Review Meeting. From 2004 till the day they were put on the TRC agenda for the August 1 meeting, the county told the taxpayers(applicants) there were no issues with the Jolly Bay project.
Jolly Bay met with county engineers and planners many times and were told in those meeting there was no height problem with the Jolly Bay site. George Newman, Greg Graham, Melissa Ward, Tim Brown and twice in two meetings With Lies LaSeur. Lies LaSeur told the applicant no problem with planning or zoning! so Jolly Bay kept spending time and money with her recommendations. Lies La Seur commented in those meeting that this was a great plan and she hadn't seen one come through planning as nice as this in a while. They staff report that was prepared for the August 1 2007 TRC states no compatibility study required, no height restrictions for this site, no neighborhood meeting needed, no mention of some book they would later find that says 8 stories is rural and 12 stories is urban.
Jolly Bay probably feels pretty UNLUCKY that they had to deal with a planning dept. that completely flip flopped on their own set of rules. How can us taxpayers use our government effectively when you have a planning department operating like this?
In the years this project was going thru planning where was Pat Blackshire? Lies LaSeur never said a word to her? Pat Blackshire never put out a memo for someone to tell the taxpayers (applicants) she had a problem.
You should probably feel UNLUCKY if you have to do business with Walton Co. Planning Dept.
I have done a lot of business with Walton Co. Planning and have found it to be a moving target. My answers from the county have changed day to day. Its been that way for 25 years or more. I was and still happy Pat is in charge. I do not know all the details of your current situation but am being a little playful when I say they "got lucky". Many times in life when I don't get what I want or I get "jerked around" I discover later I may have gotten lucky. I mean no harm. Merely a comment in regards to the current Real Estate Market.