Are permits still required for seawall construction???

...
Also looking out for your neighbor is one thing, but taking pictures and posting them on an obvious accidental situation is over the top. ...

Seawalls are meant to stop land erosion. That is a good thing, I thought. It looks like they have the required fencing up, also.

I guess you didn't bother to read my posts in the other thread regarding this issue, nor the multiple threads on seawalls in SoWal.

Having the track hoe in the Bay was not an accident, unless the kid really didn't know how to operate the yellow equipment.

I guess some developer failed to read the following part of the Walton County Comprehensive Plan, pertaining to seawalls along the Bay.

"Policy C-3.1.1: New seawalls and upland retaining walls along Choctawhatchee Bay for existing lots of record in residential subdivisions shall be permitted in accordance with shoreline stabilization programs for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Newly platted subdivision lots along Choctawhatchee Bay must be of sufficient depth to meet the 50' buffering requirement of Policy C- 3.2.1.b. These newly platted lots are allowed to have upland retaining walls built landward of the mean high water line; however, new seawalls and new bulkheads are not allowed.16"

I really like Florida Girl! I could not have said it better myself, each time I read your replies I was cheering you on.

Each time i read your posts, I realized you must be nowhere near here to be making the assertions you do. How did you stumble across the fact that Smiling JOe has a seawall? Did you drive by his inland lot and see it?

Also looking out for your neighbor is one thing, but taking pictures and posting them on an obvious accidental situation is over the top. If you want to check on the legitimacy of the work & permits, fine. But don't take pictures of a unfortunate situation and a poor worker, and post them and then open it up to ridicule.

So is looking out for one's community. Yes, the person and the machine in the water is the result of an accident. The situation surrounding it is no accident. If you were aware of the other threads on this subject you may have possibly appeared a little more informed before you posted. I applaud his documentation of this backdoor type of work via the developers agent. FYI, there is no trespassing going on, the development is open to all for possible real estate purchase.

...It looks like they have the required fencing up, also.

yes, after the stop work order was posted. BTW, the turbidity fence is now floating loose. for more info please go here.
in your own words...get real.

FWIW, I lived on the property the photos were taken from since before this development was begun years ago, and therefore believe I'm capable of making informed posts regarding this project.

I was under the impression that the backhoe didn't fall into the bay- it was already in the shallows scooping up debris along the shore. I guess we could call it an accident that it got stuck?

You, not I, brought up school buses.

To the best of my knowledge, a track hoe in the Bay is not normal. To help you define "normal," I ask, how many track hoes have you seen in the Bay? The authorities were aware of the situation, only after they were originally called, and they issued a Stop Work Order.

I sure hope my neighbors are concerned with the community, if anything like my house catches fire, my dogs run away, a thief is breaking in, etc. I guess on your street, you would rather hope the neighbors don't pay attention.

Actually, I've seen a lot of what we call a "drag line" or "back hoe". They were used to dig the canals down here to drain off the stagnat water in many areas. "Mosquito Control"! Being concerned, and being a busybody are 2 different things. One involves the health and safety of a human being, the other involves a perceived code that differs in importance depending on the culture you are comfortable with.

Actually, I've seen a lot of what we call a "drag line" or "back hoe". They were used to dig the canals down here to drain off the stagnat water in many areas. "Mosquito Control"! Being concerned, and being a busybody are 2 different things. One involves the health and safety of a human being, the other involves a perceived code that differs in importance depending on the culture you are comfortable with.

So a "busy body" is one who is concerned for the environment, while a concerned person is one who is concerned for the health and safety of a human. That is interesting to learn. What else can you teach us?

FYI- a "track hoe" has tracks, and a "back hoe" has wheels. Track hoes have more the ability to not get stuck in many places where a back hoe would get stuck.

So a "busy body" is one who is concerned for the environment, while a concerned person is one who is concerned for the health and safety of a human. That is interesting to learn. What else can you teach us?

FYI- a "track hoe" has tracks, and a "back hoe" has wheels. Track hoes have more the ability to not get stuck in many places where a back hoe would get stuck.

We called them a drag line. Funny, I didn't mention the environment, does it have feelings too?

Sj, you're still a concerned neighbor/citizen instead of a busybody in my "percieved code" and "culture"!

Sj, you're still a concerned neighbor/citizen instead of a busybody in my "percieved code" and "culture"!

Thanks. I am busy, but I think of a "busy body" as someone who keeps notes on all the neighbors' coming and goings, who visited, when, what they were wearing, etc.

Back to the more important part, in the Code which I posted above, it states that no new seawalls were allowed to be built on the Bay. Did I miss where they changed that policy in the Code, and failed to update their policies in writing? How is this development building a seawall if they are not allowed? Just curious?

Thanks. I am busy, but I think of a "busy body" as someone who keeps notes on all the neighbors' coming and goings, who visited, when, what they were wearing, etc.

Back to the more important part, in the Code which I posted above, it states that no new seawalls were allowed to be built on the Bay. Did I miss where they changed that policy in the Code, and failed to update their policies in writing? How is this development building a seawall if they are not allowed? Just curious?

If this code you mention is accurate, it is insane, and needs to be changed. I have an old map of Santa Rosa drawn about 1900 by Thomas Collins, and shows land that is no longer there. Erosion is a big problem, and property owners should have the right to protect their own property from erosion. Which, by the way, I have on a pdf file and could sell if anyone is interested! It's a 2 sided map, very frail, but very interesting.

I really like Florida Girl! I could not have said it better myself, each time I read your replies I was cheering you on.

Also looking out for your neighbor is one thing, but taking pictures and posting them on an obvious accidental situation is over the top. If you want to check on the legitimacy of the work & permits, fine. But don't take pictures of a unfortunate situation and a poor worker, and post them and then open it up to ridicule.

Seawalls are meant to stop land erosion. That is a good thing, I thought. It looks like they have the required fencing up, also.

One of these days I'll run for a county office!

If this code you mention is accurate, it is insane, and needs to be changed. I have an old map of Santa Rosa drawn about 1900 by Thomas Collins, and shows land that is no longer there. Erosion is a big problem, and property owners should have the right to protect their own property from erosion.

If the land was accurately depicted as there in 1900 and is no longer there, a code banning seawalls is not the reason for its absence.

Improper construction techniques and land use are............also know as the sort of thing concerned citizens report and post pictures of!

If the land was accurately depicted as there in 1900 and is no longer there, a code banning seawalls is not the reason for its absence.

Improper construction techniques and land use are............also know as the sort of thing concerned citizens report and post pictures of!

What construction? There wasn't anything there! Those who survived, had seawalls!

If this code you mention is accurate, it is insane, and needs to be changed. I have an old map of Santa Rosa drawn about 1900 by Thomas Collins, and shows land that is no longer there. Erosion is a big problem, and property owners should have the right to protect their own property from erosion. Which, by the way, I have on a pdf file and could sell if anyone is interested! It's a 2 sided map, very frail, but very interesting.

Two points: First, the law doesn't state that seawalls cannot be built on Bayfront property. You can build one away from the waterline, on your land. In this particular case, the track hoe was in the water, apparently digging it out to build a seawall.

Secondly, the property already had some protection at the water's edge, and the guy operating the track hoe was removing the only legal protection that the property had. Talk about smart.

If you doubt the accuracy of the information, please read it for yourself.

It can be found in the Walton County Comprehensive Plan, in Policy C-3.1.1 which deals with seawalls along the Bay. Please read it. That would be on page 59 of 133.

Walton County Comprehensive Plan, pertaining to seawalls along the Bay.

"Policy C-3.1.1: New seawalls and upland retaining walls along Choctawhatchee Bay for existing lots of record in residential subdivisions shall be permitted in accordance with shoreline stabilization programs for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Newly platted subdivision lots along Choctawhatchee Bay must be of sufficient depth to meet the 50' buffering requirement of Policy C- 3.2.1.b. These newly platted lots are allowed to have upland retaining walls built landward of the mean high water line; however, new seawalls and new bulkheads are not allowed.16"

no permits required....build away

no permits required....build away

You are a silly goose.

I looked again at the photos; I don't see any existing protection. I think he/she is smart to try to build protection. But then I?ve only lived on the bay since 1964 so I guess I don?t know what I?m talking about.

...can you spell comic relief? I can...j e s s i f u n n!!!!

I looked again at the photos; I don't see any existing protection. I think he/she is smart to try to build protection.

the reason you don't see the protection which was in place is due to the track hoe operator removing it from the water and sandy beach prior to the photos. They loaded the materials into construction dumpsters.

You may think he is smart to build protection, but he took away the legal protection he had, leaving the lots exposed to more erosion, since according to the Comp Plan , any upland retention wall has to be built landward of the high water line.

You are a silly goose.

...can you spell comic relief? I can...j e s s i f u n n!!!!

if it's on sowal it must be true

Now let's see what all of my neighbors are doing...

Terminology police--------

They should be called bulkheads. Seawalls are more appropriate on open coast shorelines not protected waters like bays :leaving:

Now let's see what all of my neighbors are doing...

Washing sand off our feet and hoping that Florida Girl does not run for public office.:roll:

Terminology police--------

They should be called bulkheads. Seawalls are more appropriate on open coast shorelines not protected waters like bays :leaving:

Thanks for that tid-bit of info. Now can you get the County to correct the terms in the Comprehensive Plan?

Washing sand off our feet and hoping that Florida Girl does not run for public office.:roll:

...the sand police will get you for that one!!!