 |
| The latest DRAFT layout for Public Beach Access #4 indicated there is/was room for as many as 44 spaces--just as I mentioned in my Monday evening town hall. Now that I mentioned that, a tremendous outpouring of curiosity and speculation has happened online so I am publishing what I saw three weeks ago, above, for all to see. The latest DRAFT. 44 spaces!! |
I requested an update on Beach Access #4 about 3-weeks back with Tim Day. As we sat in my office he explained the reasons the timeline had slipped, and he also showed me the above diagram. He explained that this was a draft, just preliminary.
But I was excited to see the figure of 44 parking spaces on the diagram I was shown at that time. I did not request it, nor did I publish it at that time because I knew it was a draft document.
At my townhall Monday evening, I said the following about public beach access "I'm not wanting to speak out of turn, but the diagram I have seen shows that we may get as many as 44 spaces in that access." And we may get as many, according to the above document that I'll go ahead and post now that it is a subject that has drawn a lot of attention.
The reason I mentioned 44 spots is that there had been some noise put out that it would only be 13-15 spaces--which obviously is flat-out, 100% dead wrong propaganda.
The draft above shows we may, in fact, get "As many as 44 spots"--just as I said at the town hall meeting 😊.
(P.S. folks have also asked about the lawsuit from condo owners in the area that DO NOT WANT public access, and the impact that litigation is having on the timeline....
ANSWER: The staff I have spoken with have indicated that litigation has ZERO impact on our timeline thus far, and going forward, unless we get an unfavorable ruling or an injunction that forces us to stop--which hasn't happened. So we carry on, and keep moving forward!)
At least Underhill was exposed for trying to keep this for himself and his cult. Notice who jumps up defending him?
ReplyDeleteGreedy people running to a next door site moderated by " guess who" .. they sure are working it trying to steal that Gulf Beach frontage for themselves...nasty people.
ReplyDeleteI would think he should go to jail for this, except the Board and staff will not let him have his own private gulf front. Does he think everyone can't see what he is doing and why. The epitome of delusional.
Who would support him on this? Screen shots can go both ways .. Laughing Hyena..."wildly" using the beach..
Ever notice who throws down laugh emoticons...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONFi8N2FQsc
You could teach a class from the county video yesterday about fallacious arguments during the legal $ ask for citizen doug. It was great seeing you call him out from his Logical Fallacy Daily to do list.
ReplyDeleteHe is on it on various social media today about the Beach Access #4. He thinks no one can see him, I suppose, comments are being removed as hate speech. They aren't all on face book. How can you let him lie about that and get away with it? Rhetorical.. Board action!!!
Unwind one, start with the RESTORE project submitted to the department of treasury.
It's on Free speech under July 18 video of the meeting post...citizen unwound it for the public.
He is the energizer bunny of public deception.
He must really want to at least get a few hundred feet of gulf front out of his tenure..with no public on it.
He certainly isn't leaving with an intact reputation and I doubt a private beach.
HA HA he is still running to PNJ
ReplyDeleteCommissioner, I support this rendition for consideration and ask that it be presented to USFWS for their input. We all know that they have the right to inject their opinion on it, so let them. It does not cost any more money and if we have to make amendments to the plan at least we will know what their objections are and address those accordingly. I would think the corridors on each end of the parking areas for beach mice migration would be acceptable to them as Ms. Yanchis voiced her concern of that on the previous submissions. Also, is it not true that properties destroyed by Ivan can be rebuilt using the same footprint without triggering the HCP requirements? Could we not then build on the original parking footprint as well as the building footprint? I'm not interested in Doug Underhills opinion on what can be built here at all. I would like the USFWS to weigh in on the subject with their concerns, period. The citizens of Escambia County have been voicing their opinion and desire to open this beachfront up. We deserve the best effort by the county to make that happen and work with our partner (USFWS) to do exactly that. But first let's present this design and go from there. As for funding the construction of the design that is approved can we please use the 1.6 million Restore grant submittal that used this parcel in the proposal to the Restore Board? There was also $147K award from the Restore board to help with design and engineering, that I believe we already have received from them. It was never applied as Doug directed staff to find an alternate site to use it on. A site that he never actually succeeded in purchasing with the $1 million the board shuffled to him for more beach access! Thank you for your time and efforts in making this happen. Now if we can just get Judge Powell to make a decision on the Writ that the Sundowner HOA filed against the Board od Adjustment decision.........
ReplyDeleteRespectfully
Michael P. McCormack
Are you going to let the reporter off with that bias half truth PNJ story today?
ReplyDeleteIt might be noteworthy that the entire BOCC voted to open the beach.
I certainly hope the Administrator is aware of this and Underhill isn't back to intimidation tactics toward Sr Staff in the national resources department again.
ReplyDeleteCoconut telegraph claims the bike path or golf cart path or multi use path, so desperately clamored for makes a B line to that stretch of Gulf front Beach from Sanctuary on Old River.
ReplyDeletePlease post an update or new blog when you get the info from Tim Day. The PNJ article
ReplyDelete"In an email to county commissioners, Day said the designs will have to be revised to address "major environmental issues." He said the revisions, which should be finished by July 26, will likely result in the loss of some spaces. "
That's today.