Redfish Village

[BPickelTDC]

The TDC upgrades at the Blue Mountain Beach Regional Access (CR83) will include a restroom but will NOT include a reduction in current parking. The restroom will include one male and one female stall with a small janitors closet in the middle, it is about half or less than our current restroom size. Current parking design is for 20 spots that include some ADA-compliant spots that we don't have now but want. We hope to have it under construction this fall/winter. It has been delayed due to hurricane damages and reconstruction efforts.

As for the donation by Redfish, it was to pay for landscaping, and brickpavers at the access entryway.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Thanks Brad for setting me (us) straight regarding the proposed improvements at BMB Regional Access. I had heard there were plans for restrooms but wasn't sure of the final status.

Can you shed any light on my original question regarding Redfish Village and their proposed use for their acquired residential lot(s) on Blue Mountain Road?

I assume that whatever Redfish does will be kept private and not fall under TDC's jurisdiction. However, what is TDC's official posture when it comes to what I perceive Redfish desires to do with the lot(s)?

The county has accepted private funds from them for public use. I have no problem with that part of the equation. I just don't "payback" to come at the expense of private home owners in our area.

Respectfully,
BMBV

 

[BPickelTDC]

Thanks Brad for setting me (us) straight regarding the proposed improvements at BMB Regional Access. I had heard there were plans for restrooms but wasn't sure of the final status.

Can you shed any light on my original question regarding Redfish Village and their proposed use for their acquired residential lot(s) on Blue Mountain Road?

I assume that whatever Redfish does will be kept private and not fall under TDC's jurisdiction. However, what is TDC's official posture when it comes to what I perceive Redfish desires to do with the lot(s)?

The county has accepted private funds from them for public use. I have no problem with that part of the equation. I just don't "payback" to come at the expense of private home owners in our area.

Respectfully,
BMBV

I can't speak for the TDC; however, I will try to answer a couple of things. One it was made EXTREMELY, VERY, CRYSTAL clear that participating in the access would not have any bearing on existing or new plans that the development has. There is no quid pro quo. Actually, this has happened three times in the past 5-6 years when private individuals/organizations financially participated in making County accesses better. Not often though

The TDC, a County agency , already maintains four accesses from CR83 east to the end of Blue Mtn Rd so NO we would not have any desire to develop any other accesses in that area. There are more areas that are much more needy for access and with the money we have spent on recovering from hurricanes, we already have a backlog of projects. Start commercial, "The TDC is funded completely with Tourist Development Taxes paid by visitors to our area and not by other County tax revenue streams. We export the cost of beach management to the visitor. This means no visitors, no money, no accesses", end commercial.

Finally, no I am not involved, nor aware more than the rest of you, on what is happening with those lots. I can tell you that the Planning department reviews all developments for compatibility and proper zoning and makes their reccomendations to the BCC so they would have the best information if you are interested. Sorry not more help, just wanted to chime in as asked. Thanks BMBV!

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

I can't speak for the TDC; however, I will try to answer a couple of things. One it was made EXTREMELY, VERY, CRYSTAL clear that participating in the access would not have any bearing on existing or new plans that the development has. There is no quid pro quo. Actually, this has happened three times in the past 5-6 years when private individuals/organizations financially participated in making County accesses better. Not often though

Considering that Redfish has apparently purchased 2 lots on the same street AND what I perceive to be unfulfilled obligations on Redfish's part, at a minimum, I still have a suspicious streak in me. Who wouldn't?

The TDC, a County agency , already maintains four accesses from CR83 east to the end of Blue Mtn Rd so NO we would not have any desire to develop any other accesses in that area. There are more areas that are much more needy for access and with the money we have spent on recovering from hurricanes, we already have a backlog of projects. Start commercial, "The TDC is funded completely with Tourist Development Taxes paid by visitors to our area and not by other County tax revenue streams. We export the cost of beach management to the visitor. This means no visitors, no money, no accesses", end commercial.

I've understood TDC's roll in all of this. However I was just wondering if there was a possibility of some arrangement where Redfish's obligations are satisfied and the county gets another access - indirectly speaking since the Redfish people would not need to use the 83 public access leaving it and the immediate beach area more available for others. With this in mind, would TDC use any influence on zoning or land use decisions? Based on what you've said earlier and also below, the answer is no. Right?

Finally, no I am not involved, nor aware more than the rest of you, on what is happening with those lots. I can tell you that the Planning department reviews all developments for compatibility and proper zoning and makes their reccomendations to the BCC so they would have the best information if you are interested. Sorry not more help, just wanted to chime in as asked. Thanks BMBV!

I (we) personally have had experience with "recommendations" being made to the BCC where the BCC's resulting decision cost us to defend our very clear position (and we ultimately prevailed). The point is that even if "it's not right" doesn't mean that the BCC would not approve it anyway. I just don't want any private home owners to be "bulldozed" by the bigger parties involved. That's it.


I know all of us really appreciate everything that you and TDC does for the county. The THANKS truly go to you for taking the extra time to add your thoughts here!

 

[Advance The Man]

Considering the lot purchased had a price tag of $5,000,000 and a loan around $3,000,000, it's hard to believe the developer would not have some sort of agreement or guarantee in place from the BCC or Planning already. Any developer worth his salt would not fork out that kind of money without the guarantee of development.

 

[Lisa Ruby]

Considering the lot purchased had a price tag of $5,000,000 and a loan around $3,000,000, it's hard to believe the developer would not have some sort of agreement or guarantee in place from the BCC or Planning already. Any developer worth his salt would not fork out that kind of money without the guarantee of development.

Hmmm....not so sure they really do their homework, especially newcomers to Walton County. The Nature Walk developers have two gulf front homes for re-sale in Seagrove they had intended for similar use where such a plan did not work because of improper zoning. Finally acheived their goal when they shelled out 16M for a piece that had proper zoning....

 

[GoodWitch58]

Don't know about this developer, but there are at least six in the area who have not done there homework: when I asked them "what did your Market Research show?" about buyers for the units, they looked at me as though I was from another planet...now, there are cleared areas with development orders, but no building. Buildings with no buyers, flippers with no one to flip to...so, there could well be a $5M lot with no real plans.....it has happened.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Hmmm....not so sure they really do their homework, especially newcomers to Walton County. The Nature Walk developers have two gulf front homes for re-sale in Seagrove they had intended for similar use where such a plan did not work because of improper zoning. Finally acheived their goal when they shelled out 16M for a piece that had proper zoning....

Very interesting post! Thanks!

Do you have any idea what "proper zoning" would be that would allow a remote development to use beachfront residential property for access and amenities? Commercial? Village Mixed Use?

 

[Lisa Ruby]

Commercial or VMU would probably work for an access/beach club, but I can't imagine anything less than those classifications would pass....involvement of surrounding property owners should definitely have an impact on any decision.

 

[Pirate]

Don't know about this developer, but there are at least six in the area who have not done there homework: when I asked them "what did your Market Research show?" about buyers for the units, they looked at me as though I was from another planet...now, there are cleared areas with development orders, but no building. Buildings with no buyers, flippers with no one to flip to...so, there could well be a $5M lot with no real plans.....it has happened.

Be interesting to see them try to squeeze 5m back out of that property.:roll: