Redfish Village Beach Access

[Smiling JOe]

Beemn...your petty accusations are pathetic.

You haven't done your homework. There are 4 public access walkways Redfish Village owners, guests, renters and invitees can use to disperse over the beach. One walkway vs Four walkways...you do the math!

Redfish Village continues to states that they have a right to use this property as a gateway! They don't have that RIGHT until the county says they have that RIGHT!

...and those four accesses lead to Public Beach where people can legally scatter, as opposed proposed lot 2 private access which is approx 75' in width and leads to privately owned beach surrounded by privately owned property which does not allow people to stop and rest upon.

 

[Kevin Thompson]

I happen to have property on the east side of 83 and know all the facts about lot 1. We tried to stop lot 1 but never got anywhere. Since you are so vocal I guess the east siders need to speak up. All of you must live on the west side because we like the idea of not having people flooding down our roads walking on our property driving on the roads and leaving trash. We actually think the idea is great to have them shuttled to one location. All the letters are public record and there happened to be a response to that letter from an attorney for Redfish which I have seen, which you must choose to ignore, which is also available which shut the Walton County people down on commenting on what was being advertised. It was not Walton County's place to tell a developer not to advertise anything and it was shown that Redfish never said they had approval from Walton County for anything. We learned that they can advertise whatever they want as long as they deliver it at the end. All of your facts are wrong. You just happen to be upset like we were when we thought it was on our side of the road. Now it's on your side but guess what, we are the one's who have residential preservation you don't. You are in the middle of condominiums and townhouses already so what is your issue that you will have more people to deal with?

 

[BMBWalker]

I happen to have property on the east side of 83 and know all the facts about lot 1. We tried to stop lot 1 but never got anywhere. Since you are so vocal I guess the east siders need to speak up. All of you must live on the west side because we like the idea of not having people flooding down our roads walking on our property driving on the roads and leaving trash. We actually think the idea is great to have them shuttled to one location. All the letters are public record and there happened to be a response to that letter from an attorney for Redfish which I have seen, which you must choose to ignore, which is also available which shut the Walton County people down on commenting on what was being advertised. It was not Walton County's place to tell a developer not to advertise anything and it was shown that Redfish never said they had approval from Walton County for anything. We learned that they can advertise whatever they want as long as they deliver it at the end. All of your facts are wrong. You just happen to be upset like we were when we thought it was on our side of the road. Now it's on your side but guess what, we are the one's who have residential preservation you don't. You are in the middle of condominiums and townhouses already so what is your issue that you will have more people to deal with?

Kevin...you answered it yourself (see your bolded red sentence). It's also the density on a 75 foot lot that's the problem; nothing positive can come from this. Any townhouse or condo on Blue Mountain Road has the beachfront property and access to handle it's density.

Your point missed it's target. All property owners on Blue Mountain Road, with the exception of Redfish Village, want the same thing; enjoyment and use of their property and a lessening of the denisity impact these developments bring to a very small area of the beach.

 

[Kevin Thompson]

BMB that is exactly the point I was trying to make and now you are talking about the real issue. All the posts on this board have been speculation. Most of the posts are not accurate, they are fun to read especially Edroe it's like a Tom Clancy book, it's just not the facts. I only know a few but enough to know that people are using these lies to try and push Redfish people back to the east. The point though is that whether they are on our side or your side (east v west) it's going to affect one of us. I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

 

[Jim Tucker]

BMB that is exactly the point I was trying to make and now you are talking about the real issue. All the posts on this board have been speculation. Most of the posts are not accurate, they are fun to read especially Edroe it's like a Tom Clancy book, it's just not the facts. I only know a few but enough to know that people are using these lies to try and push Redfish people back to the east. The point though is that whether they are on our side or your side (east v west) it's going to affect one of us. I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

I think you have it wrong, and folks are talking about lot 1 because they want to make sure it's OUT of the picture and won't come back in the picture. It's not appropriate on either lot if you live in BMB or anywhere else on 30A or if you love 30A and don't want this to set a bad precedent for future developments.

BMB and surrounding areas should be united against this if they don't want it to happen. There's probably about 55 contract holders that would be willing to pitch in to fund attornies for obvious reasons.

But if lot 1 is definitely a no go then the developer is already in breach because the contracts specifically reference that lot and even has an attached survey. As it is it looks like the project won't be completed in the alloted time so private beach access is probably moot for the contract holders who don't want to close and won't have to because the contracts will expire.

 

[Smiling JOe]

... I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

It isn't just condos, though there are many whose owners and guests will be using Blue Mtn Beach. Look slightly farther north to Lakeside at Blue Mtn (They should have called it Creekside, because that is only a creek where they illegally built the bridge on top of the wetlands which are a part of Big Redfish Lake), where they have single family homes going in. I am not sure as to the number, but a wild guess would be 50-80. These owners and guests will also be calling BMB, their own beach.

 

[Kevin Thompson]

I guess that's your opinion but we are the one's who did all the legal research when it was going to be lot 1. You again are speculating about their breach of contract if it is lot 2 which is where we want it to be. Do you really think they would be working on lot 2 if it made all their contracts go away? I would like to see you you think the project won't be complete. It looks pretty far along.

 

[Smiling JOe]

I think you have it wrong, and folks are talking about lot 1 because they want to make sure it's OUT of the picture and won't come back in the picture. It's not appropriate on either lot if you live in BMB or anywhere else on 30A or if you love 30A and don't want this to set a bad precedent for future developments.

BMB and surrounding areas should be united against this if they don't want it to happen. There's probably about 55 contract holders that would be willing to pitch in to fund attornies for obvious reasons.

But if lot 1 is definitely a no go then the developer is already in breach because the contracts specifically reference that lot and even has an attached survey. As it is it looks like the project won't be completed in the alloted time so private beach access is probably moot for the contract holders who don't want to close and won't have to because the contracts will expire.

:clap_1: Well stated. It seems that most people only give a crap about their own small area. Heck, even the developer of NatureWalk was apparently upset that people from more than 300' from their proposed Private Beach Club, showed up to the meeting. Those guys in Seagrove are experiencing similar problems with the private beach club of Nature Walk, yet I see only one or two people from this thread posting over there. Where is the unity? If you are not willing to help your neighbor fight for what you think to be true, do you think he or she will fight for you when the time comes, and the time will come, trust me.

 

[BMBWalker]

BMB that is exactly the point I was trying to make and now you are talking about the real issue. All the posts on this board have been speculation. Most of the posts are not accurate, they are fun to read especially Edroe it's like a Tom Clancy book, it's just not the facts. I only know a few but enough to know that people are using these lies to try and push Redfish people back to the east. The point though is that whether they are on our side or your side (east v west) it's going to affect one of us. I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

Kevin....You're right; cannot argue against your points.

It's not just the east or west that will suffer if the county let's this atrocity be installed; it's the whole area. Look at the property available to developers to the North of Blue Mountain Rd. It's huge! Developers will fall all over themselves if these private gateways are approved. As I said earlier, there's nothing positive to come from this issue except for Redfish Village developers. All owners that stay, and all that come after the developers leave, will loose a wonderful beach "experience" because of the county's apparent permitting process. This must stop and the only way it will is if the community, both east and west, fight this permitting process. It is not going to be an easy task, but it is one that is worth the effort if we care about this very special area. High density projects just do damage to a beach!

Redfish Village developers are keen to say "we're sensitive to the community"; oh yeah, give me a break...just find a property owner on Blue Mountain Road that wants this project anywhere on the road. If they are so sensitive to our needs, then they need to pack up and leave because they are not wanted in any neighborhood that I'm aware of. Sensitive to our community, my _ _ _ (fill in the blank)!!!

 

[Kevin Thompson]

I am signing off for the night need to finish Christmas shopping. All I can say to that though is that Walton County is growing and changing and those developments north will come and they will keep overcrowding our beach. There will have to be a way to make it orderly unless they put cops on every road. It all comes down to "not in my backyard" it always comes down to that. I can't help but want to have Redfish shuttle people to one spot instead of letting them come crazy down all of our roads. I can't help it I like their idea. I will unite though in fighting development.