Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Pate Failed...Now Pate Makes Moulton a Liar

After Jerry Pate's company screwed up the landscaping at the Airport and Davis intersection creating an intersection to nowhere, their customer, the Moultons, were forced to send a letter to the State of Florida stating:

"All trees, shrubbery, and sprinkler systems currently located in the DOT right of way at the corner of Davis and Airport Blvd will be removed and replaced with sod in 21 days from the date of this letter or sooner"

Letter dated September 22, 2015

Today's date October 27, 2015

Replacement done...Nope!


  • Did Moulton lie?
  • When do fines kick in?
  • Has the Mayor intervened?
  • Are special favors being given?
  • Has Vice Chair Pate used influence with the Northwest Florida Water Management District for the project?
  • Does everyone need to pile on Jerry's plane and go play Doral or Augusta to discuss?



Anonymous said...

What tax dollars were used on that project? There is absolutely no way that I believe for one moment that the Moulton's sprang for all that gorgeous landscaping on Airport Boulevard. Where is the required by code sidewalk that should have been installed? Why is the guard rail blocking access to the pedestrian portion of the bridge? With all the taxes paid by all these businesses' along this road, why are the sidewalks not complete in all areas of this roadway? Where is the stormwater retention for this large site? What on earth is going on with the Planning Services Department that they don't catch these mistakes before allowing construction to take place?

Anonymous said...

I keep noticing all these committees and governing boards in the panhandle are full of the same GOB appointees that tend to steer work to their friends and cronies.

Anonymous said...

Maren, You've truly lost it.

Anonymous said...

After seeing all the stuff on here I decided to go have a look at the location myself. It is nice landscaping. There was never sidewalks there before the place was built. After doing a little digging I see an issue for the City when it came to this property. The property is in the City limits but the Right of Way is owned by the State along with all of Airport Blvd and Davis Hwy. As a result I would think that the City can not force Mr. Moulton to place the sidewalk in a Right of Way the City does not own. That would have to be enforced by the State. Would want to think the City made some kind of comment like that when the plans were reviewed. I looked at the guardrail that seems to also be everyone's issue. I don't know why this is an issue when there is no sidewalk at the location so saying it blocks the pedestrian portion of the bridge is not true. There is no sidewalk on the other side of the bridge either. So no one suppose to be there in the first place. Now I don't know about the pond or how any of that works? I would want to think there is some rules or whatever that makes it where if there is something you can tie into that you are allowed to do so? Like existing storm water lines or something. I looked on Google Earth and see that Mr. Moulton appears to have removed the water collector thing. I don't know if he moved it into that turn lane or not? I looked at Google when I got back from grabbing some lunch but I would think he had to so that it collected the water like it used to do. Maybe he was allowed to connect his water into it?

I also found on the state web site that they are planning on resurfacing Airport Blvd from Davis Hwy to 9th Ave. It said Preliminary Engineering in 2016 ($430k), Right of Way in 2017 (197k), construction in 2018 (1.87 mil). You would think with that kind of cost that there is sidewalks. If they are resurfacing why would they need Right of Way. So maybe they are going to put in sidewalks? Anyone call the City Public Works guys or the County and ask if they know anything about this project? I would think they review stuff like this also.

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous @ 11:40 PM -

You are incorrect. Local governments can and do require sidewalks, landscaping, etc. in state owned ROW's. This pertains to new construction only. It is not retroactive to existing developments or to raw land that has not been developed. This rule kicks in when you apply for a building permit. The other three corners of that intersection all have sidewalks. The sidewalk in front of Rooms-to-Go appears to be fairly new. That being said, I cannot tell you why the Moulton development was not required to provide a sidewalk.

I am positive that the Moulton development would be required to provide water retention as this is a state law and is enforced by the DEP. Just because you don't see a retention pond doesn't mean that rain water retention is not installed. On small sites that are trying to maximize building space the water retention can be obtained by using underground pipes. This is expensive but not as expensive as not using every square inch of buildable space.