NY Times "Escape" Section on Seaside

[Donna]

Did anyone see the article in today's Times "Escape" section about Seaside? Along the lines of trouble in paradise, etc. Mostly deals with the aftermath of storms/beach erosion, traffic, maintenance costs, and out-of-reach property values. I can tell you why we did not buy at Seaside, in spite of having stayed at their Honeymoon Cottages on several occasions. First, the traffic on 30A, which would only get worse with time. Second, we felt that maintenance and amenities at Seaside translated into what would become ever-escalating homeowners association dues which we would have no control over. Third, we were singularly unimpressed with how the properties were managed for rental purposes at the time we were buying.

On the "plus" side, I think the Seaside new urban design really set a tone for excellence in future South Walton developments. It put the area on the map in terms of attracting an international recognition and following. And I think (most of) the homes are definitely safer from the ravages of storms by virtue of their setbacks from the water's edge. The price they pay, of course, is absence of direct beach access and lack of Gulf views, in most instances. And we did not want a beach house that did not at least have a nice view of the Gulf, if not direct access.

The article goes on to say that sales are absolutely flat in the area now. This is to be expected in the aftermath of such a well publicized 2005 hurricane season. But I also believe that the hugely escalated prices of real estate (such as the $5M to $7M costs of Seaside homes) has simply priced many people out of the market, particularly when you consider that these are second homes for most. Combine this with increased interest rates, increased property taxes, and the uncertainty of insurance hikes and you have a very nervous potential buyer. Rental income nicely offsets a mortgage of under $1M, but becomes a non-factor for a property priced much higher.

Interested in knowing what some of the Seaside owners think about this???

[Mermaid]

I read that article, too. Do you think they could have used less attractive photos? I thought it was a bit of a downer. What happened to Seaside over its 25 years happens to many a place that becomes a victim of its own popularity. Look at Provence, France, after Peter Mayle's books. Or Tuscany after Francis Mayes'. Previously unspoiled places of wonder overrun with tourists and irrevocably changed.

I agreed with the author on several points--I thought a few of the rentals we stayed at in Seaside needed some TLC, too, and I hate the new aluminum stairs to the beach and Seaside's slow response in getting the accesses repaired. And the traffic is a nightmare, though the rest of 30-A can hold its own in that respect. That's not unique to Seaside by any means. But I do think the author gave a unreasonably negative slant about what our beaches look like. They obviously haven't looked at any of Kurt's photos post-hurricane season! Sure the beach is a bit beat-up, but there's a natural beauty that somehow the author overlooked, that no hurricane could destroy.

[Coast is Clear]

I was a bit disapointed with the article as well, particularly since the author called me in the last 2 months to discuss the mood in town. He was a long time visiter to Seaside and indicated he loved the area, but was a bit surprised to see the beach late this summer when it was at it's worst. Looking at it today you cannot deny the positive power of nature. My personal view is that his article is a few months late.

As far as Seaside goes, we were long time visitors until buying a lot and building in 2003-2004. For us it was a shocking amount of money for a tiny plot of sand. But we love the area, town feel, beaches, arts, etc. and our main reason for buying there was we felt it was the best investment of any of the 30-A beach properties. (longevity, name recognition, etc.) So far it has exceeded my wildest expectations.

I will be the first to say that in any town setting there is politics, and service issues. Seaside is no different. But every time I am there visiting all that seems to melt away. I would think it was a gret investment even if was worth what I paid for it and I look forward to every visit.

As far as gulf views, we are back around Forest St.and have gulf views from our 3rd floor and tower, so Seaside positioning on the beach has not been a problem. I just think it was additional forsight by Robert Davis to build behind the dunes instead of on top at the time.

[kurt]

Traffic is far, far, far from nightmare status here.

[peapod1980]

Did anyone see the article in today's Times "Escape" section about Seaside?

Anybody have a link before I go digging around on the NYT site...?

[Coast is Clear]

Traffic is far, far, far from nightmare status here.

I agree Kurt. This was the first summer where we spent time at the beach, and while it was busy, it was not nearly as bad as I was expecting along 30-A.

[Ocean Lover]

Anybody have a link before I go digging around on the NYT site...?

http://travel2.nytimes.com/2005/12/0...09seaside.html

[Johnrudy]

The article tells it like it is ~

[southof30A]

Traffic is far, far, far from nightmare status here.

Unless you are trying to get thru the 2 absolutely stupid stop signs in Rosemary Beach in July.

[kurt]

Unless you are trying to get thru the 2 absolutely stupid stop signs in Rosemary Beach in July.

They have been replaced with 3 traffic lights.

[Paula]

Every place has multiple "true" stories going on simultaneously. The story told is one of those stories. The other "true" stories are the ones that have to do with people stopping by Seaside to get food at the market, walking through the streets, renting those bicycles and riding around the streets, enjoying the bookstore, families making memories, people learning to respect the power of Mother Nature and adapt to her, people enjoying the beauty and nature of the area, people enjoying sunset at Bud and Alley's, etc.

As for traffic, I have never been to the area during peak season (June - early August) but for the rest of the year, the lack of traffic is heavenly.

[Travel2Much]

I think the article unjustifiably sensationalized the dune damage, but was dead-on right about the car issue. I stayed several times at Seaside over the years, even b/f the south side of 30A was developed (it was much much nicer then). There are two major, fundamental problems that impede it reaching its vision in my view, neither of which can be fixed:

1. The basic design totally ignores treatment for cars. And, what you have are SUVs lining the narrow streets. So, instead of relaxing on your front porch listening to the crickets or watching the children play in the street you are treated to someone's SUV in your front yard. Drove me absolutely nuts. They should limit the number of cars people can park to one, or ban cars entirely. The traffic on 30A is tight, but the cars on the side streets are incredibly unaesthetic. I don't want to spend 4k a week to stare at some person's Jeep Cherokee.

Watercolor initially designed around this problem, but caved in to the touristas and now have parking spots in the front of houses--right in front of those much talked about screened porches. Alys Beach from what I hear is doing it completely right--cars are going to be in walled group parking areas.

But, my view is that there should be a two car maximum for any unit, anywhere on 30A.

2. The second failure is that Seaside's vision contemplates a summer residential community, and now the vast majority are trasnsient weekly renters. Instead of greeting your loved neighbors back for the season year after year, your neighbors might be an LLC, and the people next door transients who blast the stereo too loud, whatever.

So, if you judge architecture by whether it attains its stated goals, Seaside has ultimately to be considered as a failure. I love its concept tho, and the design, and avail myself of the place as much as possible.

[Santiago]

I think the article unjustifiably sensationalized the dune damage, but was dead-on right about the car issue. I stayed several times at Seaside over the years, even b/f the south side of 30A was developed (it was much much nicer then). There are two major, fundamental problems that impede it reaching its vision in my view, neither of which can be fixed:

1. The basic design totally ignores treatment for cars. And, what you have are SUVs lining the narrow streets. So, instead of relaxing on your front porch listening to the crickets or watching the children play in the street you are treated to someone's SUV in your front yard. Drove me absolutely nuts. They should limit the number of cars people can park to one, or ban cars entirely. The traffic on 30A is tight, but the cars on the side streets are incredibly unaesthetic. I don't want to spend 4k a week to stare at some person's Jeep Cherokee.

Watercolor initially designed around this problem, but caved in to the touristas and now have parking spots in the front of houses--right in front of those much talked about screened porches. Alys Beach from what I hear is doing it completely right--cars are going to be in walled group parking areas.

But, my view is that there should be a two car maximum for any unit, anywhere on 30A.

2. The second failure is that Seaside's vision contemplates a summer residential community, and now the vast majority are trasnsient weekly renters. Instead of greeting your loved neighbors back for the season year after year, your neighbors might be an LLC, and the people next door transients who blast the stereo too loud, whatever.

So, if you judge architecture by whether it attains its stated goals, Seaside has ultimately to be considered as a failure. I love its concept tho, and the design, and avail myself of the place as much as possible.

Robert Davis is quite a visionary but even he couldn't envision the changes that would happen to Seaside and the whole area in the past 25 years. It does not constitute failure that the area had so much appeal, that every yuppie in Atlanta with an SUV would want to spend a week here. By your definition, the only way that he could have succeeded would be for him to have frozen time, which consequently, would have frozen real estate values. Things evolve, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse, but they always evolve. I would say that somewhere along the way, Seasides goals changed also and I think that most people would consider it quite a success story.

[landlord]

We own a house on 30-A and thoroughly enjoy it. When we bought it, it was on the rental program (which I was most unimpressed with). In any event, we promptly removed it from rental because the income was modest compared to the expense of the house and its value.
We stay at the house several weeks a year and let family and business friends stay there when we are not there.
I expect that the rental activity will diminish significantly over time because if you invest 3,4,5 million in your house, you don't need (or want) to subject yourself to the hassles of renting.
That being said, Seaside as a community will experience change (for the better) if this occurs and I would expect more people to be full-time residents (at least for much of the year).

[Miss Kitty]

I paid the author to write the story.

hee hee hee...and that's maybe not a bad thing!!!!

[Donna]

Living in CA, I would have to agree with Kurt about the traffic. What passes for congestion on 30A would be considered very minor here and in most urban areas. Must say that I love driving 30A at night during the winter months, when every place feels like a ghost town. I also agree that Seaside has been more of a success than otherwise. It isn't a community suited to everyone and all my childhood memories were connected more with Grayton. But it's interesting to consider how the South Walton beaches would have developed had Seaside and its excellence of design/performance standards not set the tone early on. I am so happy that Seaside distinguished our part of Florida as "Old Florida," because South Florida seems like a colony of Brooklyn to me. And without a Seaside, we might have seen far more highrise development like the unfortunate early strips in Blue Mountain and eastern Seagrove. We are also very happy with our investment in the house, but I would not look forward to a long-term engagement with rental property. That said, we have had our home on the rental program for four years now and have had damage only once during that time, all of which was acknowledged by the renter and paid in full. And in a couple of instances, had we not had renters in the house to report problems, we could have had a much more serious issue. So...all things in perspective.

[Travel2Much]

Sure if Seaside's goal has changed to enhance real property value there and in the area then sure it is a success. Overwhelmingly. I think they have done a good job in giving great weight to the aesthetics (original goal) along with that, at least until recently. But, on pure aesthetics and functionality it is a failure.

The car problem (also trash pickup, too) was acknowledged by the planners a long time ago as a design error IIRC, and Rosemary Beach, planned out a few years later, was designed to try and avoid that problem. (I recollect this since I looked casually into Rosemary in the early 1990s and simply hate the problems at Seaside). Some success there, but not entirely. Alys, I think, has it absolutely right--make it architecturally impossible for people to litter their cars in the side streets and relegate them to hidden areas.

But, Seaside has never had the guts to tell the SUV driving, dollar bill waving Atlantan to park their car in some hidden lot that might involve a five minute walk and that might use highly valuable and saleable land. That's valuing bucks over architectural aesthetics, IMO.

All depends on what you use as the criterion for evaluating success.

I am really majorly wuvving Alys Beach as it goes up, as one might tell. Doesn't mean also I don't wuv Seaside.

[Smiling JOe]

Interesting comments. So how do you suggest that Seaside police itself and make everyone park their vehicles elsewhere? Also, where is the "parking lot property" you mention located?

[Santiago]

Sure if Seaside's goal has changed to enhance real property value there and in the area then sure it is a success. Overwhelmingly. I think they have done a good job in giving great weight to the aesthetics (original goal) along with that, at least until recently. But, on pure aesthetics and functionality it is a failure.

The car problem (also trash pickup, too) was acknowledged by the planners a long time ago as a design error IIRC, and Rosemary Beach, planned out a few years later, was designed to try and avoid that problem. (I recollect this since I looked casually into Rosemary in the early 1990s and simply hate the problems at Seaside). Some success there, but not entirely. Alys, I think, has it absolutely right--make it architecturally impossible for people to litter their cars in the side streets and relegate them to hidden areas.

But, Seaside has never had the guts to tell the SUV driving, dollar bill waving Atlantan to park their car in some hidden lot that might involve a five minute walk and that might use highly valuable and saleable land. That's valuing bucks over architectural aesthetics, IMO.

All depends on what you use as the criterion for evaluating success.

I am really majorly wuvving Alys Beach as it goes up, as one might tell. Doesn't mean also I don't wuv Seaside.

I see what you are saying and here's to Alys trying to "get it right" but they will still have the same problems as Seaside and Rosemary Beach. As a property owner in RB, I can tell you that the carriage house parking behind most houses has not solved anything, maybe lessened it. People still like to drive and you can't get the Excursion into a carriage house spot very easily. At least they are thinking about it.

[Travel2Much]

I see what you are saying and here's to Alys trying to "get it right" but they will still have the same problems as Seaside and Rosemary Beach. As a property owner in RB, I can tell you that the carriage house parking behind most houses has not solved anything, maybe lessened it. People still like to drive and you can't get the Excursion into a carriage house spot very easily. At least they are thinking about it.

Right--RB was the next try, some successes but not a solution. I see it as an inherent problem with the New Urbanism, whiich has as one tenet ejecting people from their cars and getting them to walk, char with the neighbors, having self-sufficient communities, etc. BUT, people don't like to do that (particularly some short term renters). So, there is a constant battle between these two points.

Not saying that Seaside wasn't visionary, but like all Beta versions has some gliches. Every New Urbanist town in the area has wrestled with the problem. Watercolor, what I like to call faux New Urbanist, originally had a good idea--all parking was offstreet and carefully regulated. Then they caved and added those front parking spots. Alys Beach does seem to be adopting an interesting approach, which seems to be MAKING people do it.

Yeah SJ, a good New Urbanist would get the parking police and forceably separate people from their SUVs. For their own good and for the salvation of all mankind. Early on in Seaside there was enough held land in the back to maybe address the problem. Maybe not though. Given the original design, maybe they were always stuck with it. But to have been true to the vision the sacrifice should have been made (not saying that should have been done but that to be true to the vision it had to be done).

Good art, which includes architecture, is never well liked by most.

[Smiling JOe]

On a good day, one acre may give you about 100-125 parking spaces, or 8 single family lots. Those lots would probably be at $500K minimum each. So you can park about 100 cars or take $4M in profit. What would most developers do?

[Travel2Much]

On a good day, one acre may give you about 100-125 parking spaces, or 8 single family lots. Those lots would probably be at $500K minimum each. So you can park about 100 cars or take $4M in profit. What would most developers do?

Well, of course a true developer would take the $4 million. And, a true artist would park the 100 cars (or ban or limit cars entirely) impeding the attainment of its visionary goal. A developer deeply commited to aesthetics might settle for $2 million and a slightly less than perfect, although improved, vista. But (and I am not saying Seaside has done this) you cannot take the $4 million while positing yourself as a true artist if your vision is suffering. All that stuff about serving God and mammon...

[Donna]

The article also speculated that Seaside is thinking of going to valet parking. Am I the only person in CA who thinks valet parking is ridiculous and for people with no legs? But in Seaside's defense, remember that they offer shopping, recreation, and restaurants for a much wider area and were there for us long before there were scattered commercial uses in other 30A communities. We have taken advantage of their amenities, evening concerts and programs, art festivals, and other activities all these years without having to pay for it as Seaside homeowners do. So a few autos and SUVs are not a terrible price to pay. Look on the bright side...if they keep making those SUVs bigger each year, we'll soon be able to see under the carriages!

[Bob]

When Seaside was first built, there were no SUVs as we know them today. There were no cell phones plastered on everyone's ear. There were no Blackberrys/Ipods/Laptops in everyone's hands. The main draw was the beach, and I believe the vision was that design would carry the day and enhance the beach experience. Prosperity and technology have changed everything. I, for one, have always thought it was Old Grayton which should have been the benchmark for 30A, not a cleaned-up version of Nantucket by the Gulf. Grayton's layout is not profitable given exploding real estate values, and given the density in Seaside, it is a crowded, stressful place in peak season.

[Smiling JOe]

I agree with Bob on the foresight of SUVs. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, who would ever think that the auto of the future would be a farm truck? Back in those days, people were driving those big family station wagons, soon followed by conversion vans. Now that I think about it, weren't those just as big?

In my opinion, the only way to do away with cars at the beach is to illiminate the people.

[Bluznbeach]

In general, I think the article tried to make a mountain from a couple of molehills. It's true that the place gets congested at times, but it's still possible to take a nice bike ride around Seaside and the nearby sections of 30A, as my wife and I did on our last visit. I'd also be very surprised if the real estate market doesn't pick up by spring. Some say it's starting already. And of course, even a bad day at the beach is better than a good day anywhere else!

[SHELLY]

I remember Seaside when it was pleasant and beautiful--now it has essentially turned into the PCB of SoWal. The answer to the parking problem is so very simple--a 26 story high-rise parking garage...problem solved.

It seems as if SoWal is taking a beating from all sides...first it's the NYT and now a huge photo on the front page of the Sunday NW Florida Daily news of the row of beachfront houses with their seawalls stating, "WELCOME TO SOUTH WALL-TOWN."

[Smiling JOe]

Not that I wish it on anyone, but if all the beach homes were to wash away, I would still have what I came here for.

[Bob]

I agree with Bob on the foresight of SUVs. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, who would ever think that the auto of the future would be a farm truck? Back in those days, people were driving those big family station wagons, soon followed by conversion vans. Now that I think about it, weren't those just as big?

In my opinion, the only way to do away with cars at the beach is to illiminate the people.

Those 70s sleds were huge, but I bet if you look up sales figures for wagons they are nowhere near total SUV sales. Wagons were essentially female driven suburban transportation. Contrast that with SUVs, and you'll see every age/ gender behind the wheels of these vision-blocking beasts. One hand on the wheel, and the other on the cell phone riding just below the clouds. Detroit bet the farm on these rigs, and now they're in the give away mode. I hate to see our domestic auto manufacturers take another huge hit just as happened after the first energy crisis. If we had to choose between oil rigs off the Florida coast or SUVs what would we do???????????

[Smiling JOe]

Detroit bet the farm on these rigs, and now they're in the give away mode. I hate to see our domestic auto manufacturers take another huge hit just as happened after the first energy crisis. If we had to choose between oil rigs off the Florida coast or SUVs what would we do???????????

How about using renewable fuel sources instead of big oil? That is a viable option. On top of that, we could reduce the unnecessisary wasteful plastic packaging that comes wrapped around every single item for sale these days. Ditch the plastic bags that are so freely distributed at every store. The little things make much difference.

[newyorker]

What is reallly sad is that even Seaside's parking lots--built for regular cars--could not handle the SUVs last summer. Each of these monsters took up 1.5 parking spaces, exacerbating the already bad problem. My favorite were the Hummers--who in god's name needs a Hummer to go to Seaside????

[Smiling JOe]

I know this thread is on Seaside, but Seaside is not alone. Almost every tight-knit Beach community down here is in the same boat.

[Johnrudy]

What is reallly sad is that even Seaside's parking lots--built for regular cars--could not handle the SUVs last summer. Each of these monsters took up 1.5 parking spaces, exacerbating the already bad problem. My favorite were the Hummers--who in god's name needs a Hummer to go to Seaside????

Who in God's name needs a Hummer?

[Jdarg]

Who in God's name needs a Hummer?

Some find them necessary to navigate grocery parking lots and school carpool lines.

There is an orthodontist here that will pick up your child at school in the big Hummer, take the kid back to the ortho office for the appointment, then return him to school- so it is very convenient for parents, and kids like to be "seen" getting out of the Hummer.

[Johnrudy]

Some find them necessary to navigate grocery parking lots and school carpool lines.

There is an orthodontist here that will pick up your child at school in the big Hummer, take the kid back to the ortho office for the appointment, then return him to school- so it is very convenient for parents, and kids like to be "seen" getting out of the Hummer.

That's pretty creative marketing for him!

[newyorker]

probably explains the prices that orthodonist charges!

Back to the initial issue raised here: too many cars in an area designed for people and walking. Saratoga Springs is about 30 miles north of me--charming place--home of the NYC horsey set especially in the summer (think of Seabiscuit). Downtown revitalized in the 1970s into the same sort of pedestrian-friendly/trendy shops/great restaurant place as Seaside, and the Saratoga Performing Arts Center hosts the Philadelphia symphony and the NYC ballet in the summer). But the traffic is threatening to kill Saratoga too--the Victorian buildings that are so quaint can't be sold for the mega-bucks condos that are second homes for many city folks, and everyone wants to come and shop and eat and park right next to where they're going. Just like Seaside, Saratoga is in danger of being loved to death.

There's nothing wrong with being very proactive about the values these places established in the first place--that's why we love them. Civic leadership means determining what the primary values are that bring people to your community, and making policy that keeps these values paramount. I've not seen Alys Beach, but I hope they can really articulate these values and not capitulate to the Hummer crowd's drive-up mentality.

[Smiling JOe]

I thought the drive-up mentality is what made people want to buy and rent homes at the beach. T2M mentioned that people should have to park away from their house. People don't like walking to the beach, much less walking to their cars. I think all of you are just . Why do that to yourselves?

[Santiago]

I know this thread is on Seaside, but Seaside is not alone. Almost every tight-knit Beach community down here is in the same boat.

You are right, Seaside is not alone. Seaside was designed 25 or so years ago without the knowlege that the world would be filled with Hummers and Suburbans. There are many neighborhoods that are composed entirely of single family, detached structures, that are legally considered condos. They are designed with narrower streets than are normally deemed acceptable for the sole purpose of increasing density. This is done today with the knowlege that the visitors will be arriving in Hummers. If I'm not mistaken, Camp Creek Cottages is one of these. This, not Seaside, is a true definition of poor planning. If you own there or somewhere like there and wonder why you don't own the land under your house, its so the developer could pack more homes into the neighborhood.

[Smiling JOe]

There is a project on the west end of PCB where the 3bd/2ba condo units will have one parking space each. There is no additional public parking within a half mile. I told the developer to go back to the drawing board if he wanted me to sell a unit. The people I know who vacation at the beach typically arrive in at least two cars and often invite others over to visit.

[Travel2Much]

I thought the drive-up mentality is what made people want to buy and rent homes at the beach. T2M mentioned that people should have to park away from their house. People don't like walking to the beach, much less walking to their cars. I think all of you are just . Why do that to yourselves?

No, quite to the contrary I said that Seaside's design, in order to be honest to its vision, would require that given its original master plan. Since it doesn't, I quit renting there. Nor would I buy there, for that specific reason. I own in a place that architecturally has managed the problem somewhat well, and I have restrictive covenants to protect me from people who do not respect that.

People also do not like to pick up their trash from the beach, but that does not prevent anyone from suggesting they do so or from suggesting that their remains are unsightly.

I don't , BTW. Not a particularly good use of my time.

[Camp Creek Kid]

You are right, Seaside is not alone. Seaside was designed 25 or so years ago without the knowlege that the world would be filled with Hummers and Suburbans. There are many neighborhoods that are composed entirely of single family, detached structures, that are legally considered condos. They are designed with narrower streets than are normally deemed acceptable for the sole purpose of increasing density. This is done today with the knowlege that the visitors will be arriving in Hummers. If I'm not mistaken, Camp Creek Cottages is one of these. This, not Seaside, is a true definition of poor planning. If you own there or somewhere like there and wonder why you don't own the land under your house, its so the developer could pack more homes into the neighborhood.

The Cottages at Camp Creek does not have narrow streets. The road is a regular 20' wide road and there is ample parking for 2 vehicles per house with extra overflow parking available. Rosemary Beach has narrower streets than the cottages. The width of the street has nothing to do with the density of the development. A narrow 12' road would not have allowed increased density.

The Cottages at Camp Creek is a land condominium meaning that all of the land is held in common, EXCEPT for the land under the homes. You are greatly mistaken because home owners DO own the land under their homes as well as a share of all common areas. Home owners also control the portion of the common area that surrounds their homes. A main purpose of having a land condomimium as opposed to a conventional single family development was to control and preserve the natural vegetation of the property.

I take personal offense at you calling these cottages poor planning. Check your facts before you post.

[Travel2Much]

Actually, I was going to call the Cottages of Camp Creek an example of very good, innovative planning. The way I understand it, the cars are out of view when using your house, since the houses look out over that pool area, right? Your "outdoor living space" doesn't front the street or a parking area or something that can be coopted as a parking area.

Never been in one so I don't know.

[Camp Creek Kid]

Actually, I was going to call the Cottages of Camp Creek an example of very good, innovative planning. The way I understand it, the cars are out of view when using your house, since the houses look out over that pool area, right? Your "outdoor living space" doesn't front the street or a parking area or something that can be coopted as a parking area.

Never been in one so I don't know.

Exactly. The smaller cottages surround a common area that has a large pool area and native preserved vegetation. The back of the houses face the road and and parking areas. There are 6 larger homes along 30A that aren't around the pool, but have gulf views (parking is also in the back) and six larger homes in the back of the development where the front of the homes do face the parking, but the back of the homes back up to Camp Creek Golf Course (and have views of the golf course and the gulf). There is also a deeded beach access that home owners/guests WALK to.

[Paula]

I LOVE the Cottages at Camp Creek. We bought into the community in 2003. What I like about it is that it seems to me to be high-quality, lovely, yet unpretentious coastal living. The community is a simple design (about 30+ one story pastel colored beach cottages with porches surrounding a pool and natural vegetation with about 6 larger houses in the front and about 6 in the back). So far, not much building on either side of the community (there are individual homes rather than developments I think on either side of us) with Camp Creek Golf Course in back. The community is set back a bit from the road, and I like looking at the natural vegetation when I drive into the community. There is only a small street sign, so the community doesn't draw attention to itself. I like a community of one-story cottages because when we sit in the hot tub or float in the pool at night we get a great view of the stars (rather than looking at 2 to 3 story buildings). When you sit on your porch, you see the pool or the natural vegetation (and sometimes you see the neighbors next to you sitting on their porch). Parking is not allowed on the street -- there's only one street. You have to park in the 2 parking spots that come with your cottage or in the small parking area in the front of the community. I can hold my breath and get from our porch to the pool and can be at the beach across the street in about 4 minutes. Whenever I go there, I know I'll see at least 2 - 3 other families I've come to know so it has a bit of a neighborhood feeling even though probably half of the places are rentals (including our's). Even the people renting are friendly and we've gotten to know a few of the return renters as well. I think this is a case of a simple, well-thought-out coastal community design -- at least it meets my needs (which tend to be simple and focused on relaxing with family and friends, reading, dining well either out or at home, going for walks, and going to the beach/pool/hot tub).

We are about 1/2 mile from Alys Beach, and I enjoy going to the coffee shop and over time will enjoy the other good things available at Alys Beach (though I don't know what that will be -- shops? theatre? groceries? restaurants? outdoor movies and music?).

[aquaticbiology]

>The answer to the parking problem is so very simple--a 26 story high-rise >parking garage...problem solved.

why don't you just park them on the @#$%^& beach!

I'd personally love to see a revival of the 80's highly-inappropriate, offensive and, in the end, expensive (to the county anyway), 'GO HOME' grassroots anti-tourist campaign. The ads on positively bashed the poor or really stupid tourists. $23 was the level set for vagrancy and the ad said 'Not enough money to stay the night - GO HOME!', , and the other one I remember was like some guy dropping trash on the beach - 'If you can't follow the simplest rules - GO HOME!'.

I say lets print up some stickers, pick the worst offenders and 'stick it to them' - GO HOME!

Todays youth will all want one for themselves though 'Look what I got in Seaside! (Yuk Yuk)'

[Beach Runner]

On the neighborhood parking issue, the rule in our neighborhood is that you can only have as many cars as there are parking spots on your own property - absolutely no overnight parking on the street. That avoids the visual clutter of automobiles.

As far as parking at Seaside goes, adding a multi-level parking garage will only increase the traffic in the area. In my opinion, if people not staying at Seaside get tired of driving around for 30 minutes looking for a parking spot, they'll go elsewhere. It's not like Seaside appears to be hurting for any business during those times of the year in which parking becomes a problem. Seaside needs to get more militant about ticketing (or towing) cars of non-guests parking in front of a cottage that they are not renting. That would help with the visual clutter of wall-to-wall cars there.

Just a suggestion. I don't live there, so I'm probably totally wrong.

[thekid]

Do not get me started on those traffic lights at Rosemary Beach!!!

[Camp Creek Kid]

Do not get me started on those traffic lights at Rosemary Beach!!!

The traffic lights are MUCH better than the stop signs where. Most of the time the lights on 30A are green and you don't have to stop at all.

[Santiago]

The Cottages at Camp Creek does not have narrow streets. The road is a regular 20' wide road and there is ample parking for 2 vehicles per house with extra overflow parking available. Rosemary Beach has narrower streets than the cottages. The width of the street has nothing to do with the density of the development. A narrow 12' road would not have allowed increased density.

The Cottages at Camp Creek is a land condominium meaning that all of the land is held in common, EXCEPT for the land under the homes. You are greatly mistaken because home owners DO own the land under their homes as well as a share of all common areas. Home owners also control the portion of the common area that surrounds their homes. A main purpose of having a land condomimium as opposed to a conventional single family development was to control and preserve the natural vegetation of the property.

I take personal offense at you calling these cottages poor planning. Check your facts before you post.

I may have jumped the gun referencing the property under the houses. I certainly did not mean to offend you. Before you knew that Camp Creek Cottages existed, I heard first hand from the developer that the purpose for the condos was a density issue. This is a fact as far as I am concerned. Apparently this method satisfied the developer and the purchaser and I think that's great. I retract my "poor planning" comment and stand corrected.

[Camp Creek Kid]

I may have jumped the gun referencing the property under the houses. I certainly did not mean to offend you. Before you knew that Camp Creek Cottages existed, I heard first hand from the developer that the purpose for the condos was a density issue. This is a fact as far as I am concerned. Apparently this method satisfied the developer and the purchaser and I think that's great. I retract my "poor planning" comment and stand corrected.

Its all good. However, be careful in the assumptions that you make. I quite possibly know more about the Cottages at Camp Creek than you realize. Perhaps I knew "first hand from the developer" of the development plan long before he ever spoke to you about the project.

By-the-way, the Cottages at Camp Creek is not at the maximum density that it is zoned for. The "facts" that you speak of are not accurate. The land condo designation has to do with water retention issues and vegetation conservation while obtaining a certain density. It wasn't specifically to cram as many units on the property as possible, as you infer in your posts.

While the project was going through the approval process, several citizens and community groups complemented the developer for his creative plan and his attention to conservation and community concerns. The cottages has maintained its 51% native vegetation conservation.

I'm fine if you don't like the project. However, please make sure that your "facts" are accurate before you post them publically.