Alun Osborn Beats County
- Thread starter Suzanne Harris
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
Good question.
Well the last one "resigned"
understandable why walco can't even hire a full time county attorney.
Last edited:
I don't think Ed has the right family pedigree or connections. (The post about Ed Walborsky disappeared?)
Last edited:
The answers as I best understand them:
1) A developer has to meet county requirements for development. Drainage was one of the requirements. The county is responsible for ensuring that work is completed. The county signed off that the work was indeed completed, when it was not. The developer is in financial trouble. The County was in the wrong when they either falsely or by mistake, signed off on the drainage completion work, which allowed the developer to proceed.
2) Many buyers bought under the pretense that the developer had done the required work which had been authenticated (though the work had not been done) by the county. Also, the second entrance/exit was not walled off by Sandestin until AFTER many buyers bought.
3) There was no public hearing for Sandestin erecting a wall to close off the platted roadway. They just did it. That road was the only way out when the other road floods. By the way, it floods in times of moderately heavy rain, so it isn't just during hurricanes.
In addition, Sandestin DRI includes Driftwood, so Driftwood is technically part of Sandestin. The entire inner area of the Driftwood was shown as storm water rentention on the Sandestin DRI, which would assist in water drainage, if the required drainage had been installed as it was stated. Instead of the inner area being used as retention ponds, it has now been developed with more lots, which gives no on-site storm water management which was originally designed.
As for the ridiculous statement that Mr Osbourne's property values will increase if the required work is completed as it was said to have already been completed, that value was already worked into his purchase price, so it isn't a gain for him or other Driftwood owners, per se.
Last edited by a moderator:
You get it exactly!
Thanks Murray for the intelligent words! The worst part is, I told them BEFORE it happened.
Thanks Murray for the intelligent words! The worst part is, I told them BEFORE it happened.
Last edited:
As has been pointed out previously the road closure is legal and follows statute. You still have not answered the question of why the county instead of the developer should be responsible for fixing the mess. By your logic if a county employee signs off on a building inspection in error the county is on the hook for fixing the house. If that is true we better start recruiting inspectors at MIT and be prepared to pay alot more. Driftwood seems to believe their concerns superceed the rest of the county's needs. Tax dollars are limited!
The county could have (and still can) forced the developer to do the work, without penalty to the tax payers of Walton County. If you want to get mad with someone, get mad at the developer and show up to help Alan persuade the county to force the developer to do the required work that was supposed to have already been completed years ago. For whatever reason, the county has not forced the developer to comply with the requirements. Alan says it has nothing to do with the fact that Commissioner Larry Jones used to work for the major home builder in Driftwood Estates, Adams Homes.
Idlewind, surely you jest about needing MIT inspectors for tasks as simple as seeing if basic construction requirements are being done. They job could be done by an illiterate using only pictograms, or a trained high school senior. It isn't rocket science. The fact that it wasn't completed makes the question very large as to whether it was simply a major over-site, or if it was a conspiracy to falsely profit. I have yet to hear anyone suggesting that it was a conspiracy, and I tend to lean toward it being a major over-site. The only problem with that is that the county didn't step in and force the developer to complete the work. The question is why not?
Idlewind, surely you jest about needing MIT inspectors for tasks as simple as seeing if basic construction requirements are being done. They job could be done by an illiterate using only pictograms, or a trained high school senior. It isn't rocket science. The fact that it wasn't completed makes the question very large as to whether it was simply a major over-site, or if it was a conspiracy to falsely profit. I have yet to hear anyone suggesting that it was a conspiracy, and I tend to lean toward it being a major over-site. The only problem with that is that the county didn't step in and force the developer to complete the work. The question is why not?
Last edited by a moderator:
So why aren't they forcing the developer to complete the work? Is that still pending?