Here is the (in)famous article from the Fall 2007 Rosemary Thymes
EXTRA SECURITY HIRED FOR BEACH AND BEACH WALKOVERS
"Just too many people" is the refrain that has been heard all over south walton this summer as large numbers of visitiors clogged roads and crowded beaches.
In Rosemary Beach the problem is particularly acute at at the West Water Street access on the town's west side. after hearing complaints from homeowners, town manager Jim Bagby decided to find out just how many are too many.
A revealing count was taken on Memorial Day Weekend. On Saturday and Sunday, the 134 and 154 peaple, respectively, were turned away from W. Water Street. On Monday, when many visitors had already left, 80 people were still turned away in a five hour time period.
"We are trying to balance being good neighbors with the homeowners' rights," Bagby said. "After spending over $2 million on rebuilding walkovers and buying sand and sea oats the homeowners should not have to fight for space on the beach," he said.
"Our position is that our beach is a private beach but we want to be a welcoming, vibrant town, the center of activity in southeast Walton County. The challenge is to balance the two."
On September 10, the Rosemary Beach board of directors voted to hire security to enforce the privacy of the beach and the beach walkovers.
"We will be sending letters to remind our neighbors," Bagby said, "that the beach walkovers and the beach are private. To avoid embarrassment or calls from angry renters, they need to let them know where the public beach access and the Seacrest access are located."
No one was available for comment from the Seacrest Beach community, Rosemary's nearest neighbor to W. Water Street. However, according to their website and to local vacation rental agents the sole b each access available to Seacrest Beach owners and guests is an easement through the Sunset Beach community, a gated development on the south side of 30-A.
A tram service currently operates in Seacrest Beach Memorial Day through Labor Day, or guests may walk through Sunset Beach but bicycles, scooters, golf carts, and other wheeled traffic is not permitted making the access incovenient for many.
"We have abandoned that access," said a Seacrest Beach couple using the W. Water Street access one day last week, explaining that even though Sunset Beach is their designated legal access they don't feel welcome there.
The couple (who wish to remain anonymous) also said they were told by their realtor when purchasing in Seacrest Beach that they had the use of the W. Water Street access.
"Rosemary Beach wants us to use their shops and restaurants, but not their beaches," they said.
Their comments echo sentiments heard locally as more and more beachfront owners are taking action to protect their property.
A lively debate took place on an area internet message board (www.sowal.com/bb) over the summer following the July trespassing arrest of an unauthorized guest on a privately owned beach in Blue Mountain. A range of views were expressed, some echoing the Seacrest Beach couple, others defending private ownership of beaches, and still others expressing moderation and attempting a balancing act between competing interests.
At the end of the day, many sought legal guidance from the courts as needed, but for now, Rosemary Beach homeowners must seek their own solutions. "Public beaches are not the law in this part of Florida right now," Bagby explained. Currently, there is little dispute that the public does have the right to use the wet sand portion of the beaches. It is that line in the sand between the wet and the dry that is generally taken as the dividing line between public and private.
The Walton County TDC acknowledged this in a press release which stated the following: "Most public beach accesses are nestled between private properties. Beach goers should stay within the easement of the dune walkover to set up on the dry beach. Along 30-A, beachgoers who wish to have beach set-ups outside of these areas must be on the wet sand."
While there are no public beach access between Rosemary Beach and Alys Beach (the location of Seacrest), the county's largest beach access, Inlet Beach, is located east of Rosemary Beach. With 13 acres of preserved beach and dune and a parking spot is usually easy to find.
So, what does everybody think about this?;-)
Replies
61
hmmmm......can't remember
Look! Our name is in the paper! 
Beach Fanatic
I think
1) Letters to the editor of the Rosemary Thymes should be addressed to Susan Vallee, PO Box 611687, Rosemary Beach, FL 32461 (Look! Their own zip code!) or editor@susanvallee.com
2) I'd just dropped a substantial chunk of money at the RB business where I picked up my copy of the Thymes implying Seacrest residents were a bunch of riff raff mucking the "Alluring White Sands" of Rosemary Beach. I think I'm going to stage a boycott.
1) Letters to the editor of the Rosemary Thymes should be addressed to Susan Vallee, PO Box 611687, Rosemary Beach, FL 32461 (Look! Their own zip code!) or editor@susanvallee.com
2) I'd just dropped a substantial chunk of money at the RB business where I picked up my copy of the Thymes implying Seacrest residents were a bunch of riff raff mucking the "Alluring White Sands" of Rosemary Beach. I think I'm going to stage a boycott.
SoWal Insider
It is homeowners weekend for Alys, The in at Seacrest, Seacrest Beach Subdivision and also Rosemary.
~I think all this mumbo jumbo about beach access is just BS.
~The Village of South Walton should ban all the ROSEMARY people from using the fountains. I have seen more people walking from Rosemary to use them than any other area. Share and share alike???? No they would not want to do that b/c they are ROSEMARY BEACH!:roll:
MY THOUGHTS...​
~Maybe we should all try to walk down west water st....~I think all this mumbo jumbo about beach access is just BS.
~The Village of South Walton should ban all the ROSEMARY people from using the fountains. I have seen more people walking from Rosemary to use them than any other area. Share and share alike???? No they would not want to do that b/c they are ROSEMARY BEACH!:roll:
Beach Fanatic
At the end of the day, many sought legal guidance from the courts as needed, but for now, Rosemary Beach homeowners must seek their own solutions. "Public beaches are not the law in this part of Florida right now," Bagby explained. Currently, there is little dispute that the public does have the right to use the wet sand portion of the beaches. It is that line in the sand between the wet and the dry that is generally taken as the dividing line between public and private.
"Currently" kind of sounds as if he is hoping to own the Gulf itself next. So if I decide to take a swim at Rosemary, which I never have, BTW, can I leave my beach cover up lying on the sand next to the water with my hat or set it where the waves are rolling in?
The Walton County TDC acknowledged this in a press release which stated the following: "Most public beach accesses are nestled between private properties. Beach goers should stay within the easement of the dune walkover to set up on the dry beach. Along 30-A, beachgoers who wish to have beach set-ups outside of these areas must be on the wet sand."
How far back from where the waves crash and roll in does the wet sand exceed please anybody?
While there are no public beach access between Rosemary Beach and Alys Beach (the location of Seacrest), the county's largest beach access, Inlet Beach, is located east of Rosemary Beach. With 13 acres of preserved beach and dune and a parking spot is usually easy to find.
Why is there no public access there especially since more tourist dollars are spent in these so called, 'private beach' townships? I'm definitely with Punzey 100% on this regarding boycotting spending my cash where my family and I are
from what God intended for everybody! 
Even though I never did use it, I'd like to know I am free to.
So, basically, shop and eat here, but enjoy the beach elsewhere, at the neighboring beaches if you like. That's just wrong.
Ya know, Seacrest Cafe at the Villages, is really good too. Kids do the fountains there too. I never ate anything I didn't enjoy there, even more than at Rosemary come to think of it.
"Currently" kind of sounds as if he is hoping to own the Gulf itself next. So if I decide to take a swim at Rosemary, which I never have, BTW, can I leave my beach cover up lying on the sand next to the water with my hat or set it where the waves are rolling in?
The Walton County TDC acknowledged this in a press release which stated the following: "Most public beach accesses are nestled between private properties. Beach goers should stay within the easement of the dune walkover to set up on the dry beach. Along 30-A, beachgoers who wish to have beach set-ups outside of these areas must be on the wet sand."
How far back from where the waves crash and roll in does the wet sand exceed please anybody?
While there are no public beach access between Rosemary Beach and Alys Beach (the location of Seacrest), the county's largest beach access, Inlet Beach, is located east of Rosemary Beach. With 13 acres of preserved beach and dune and a parking spot is usually easy to find.
Why is there no public access there especially since more tourist dollars are spent in these so called, 'private beach' townships? I'm definitely with Punzey 100% on this regarding boycotting spending my cash where my family and I are
from what God intended for everybody! Even though I never did use it, I'd like to know I am free to.So, basically, shop and eat here, but enjoy the beach elsewhere, at the neighboring beaches if you like. That's just wrong.
Ya know, Seacrest Cafe at the Villages, is really good too. Kids do
the fountains there too. I never ate anything I didn't enjoy there, even more than at Rosemary come to think of it. 
Beach Fanatic
I am trying to understand both sides of this, but I just don't get it...
I know that the "towns" like to continue to be excusive and cater to their homeowners, but banning everyone else seems like a mistake.
Let me put it this way, if someone comes to my house (I don't live on the beach) and sits on my porch - it is an issue. If they decide to sit in the road, or the Co easement, that is their choice. I think of the beach as the same.
When I go, I don't sit right next to someone's house, I'm pretty close to the water. I don't make a mess, a don't make a lot of noise, and I might spend some money at your business. Not against areas having security, or enforcing certain rules. Maybe that is meeting half-way?
Anyone else have an idea for a solution that would make homeowners feel better, but allow the "public" to feel welcomed?
I know that the "towns" like to continue to be excusive and cater to their homeowners, but banning everyone else seems like a mistake.
Let me put it this way, if someone comes to my house (I don't live on the beach) and sits on my porch - it is an issue. If they decide to sit in the road, or the Co easement, that is their choice. I think of the beach as the same.
When I go, I don't sit right next to someone's house, I'm pretty close to the water. I don't make a mess, a don't make a lot of noise, and I might spend some money at your business. Not against areas having security, or enforcing certain rules. Maybe that is meeting half-way?
Anyone else have an idea for a solution that would make homeowners feel better, but allow the "public" to feel welcomed?
hmmmm......can't remember
How long do you think it will be before the beaches are gated? Gates on the walkovers, fences to the water...
Seems ridiculous, but it wasn't so long ago when the only gated homes I had seen were those of celebrities. I never saw a gated community until I was over 20.
It's no fun having enough money to buy something beautiful if you can't exclude people the people who can only afford to enjoy the things that belong to everyone.
Seems ridiculous, but it wasn't so long ago when the only gated homes I had seen were those of celebrities. I never saw a gated community until I was over 20.
It's no fun having enough money to buy something beautiful if you can't exclude people the people who can only afford to enjoy the things that belong to everyone.
Beach Fanatic
There has to be a happy medium. Seacrest beach doesn't let everyone use their pool. They limit that to Seacrest Beach Owners and Guests. I agree with that. (limited # of chairs, capacity) And I think Rosemary would be within their rights to limit parking to 2 hours so that people can't park and hit the beach all day. Save the few parking spaces for the retail spaces -- sorry if that isn't a popular opinion, but I have a vested interest in seeing the retail spaces thrive. I totally disagree with people being teritorial over the beach. I don't get it in Blue Mt and I don't get it in Rosemary. I can't believe that this is legal?!?!?! It has to be solved through the laws soon. But since I can't vote there -- I'll leave that issue to those that can. However, what completely baffles me is why Rosemary doesn't let people use the walkovers. And why aren't the retail operations fighting to allow MORE "rif-raf" access to the walkovers? Didn't our sales tax $$ help pay for the walkovers. Heck, charge us a $1 walkover restoration surcharge if you wish. But The more we use the walkovers, the more likely we are to grab lunch/dinner/glass of wine at Wild Olives. And the more likely I am to buy that cute canvas bag at the little shoe shop. Or my kids are going to convince me they "need" a lemonade from the Sugar Shak. More traffic = more sales = a more vibrant community in MHO. Rosemary needs to wake up and smell the Thymes. heheheh
That being said, I really have a bigger issue with Sunset not letting Seacrest owners ride a bike to the access. Especially when we pay a bigger portion of the restoration and the salary for the very efficient guard that will follow you all the way to the beach to make sure you are following her rules. ok. . .don't even get me started on that. Next time I am down, I'll just get Punzy and the skunkster to show me the little public access that they bike to.
That being said, I really have a bigger issue with Sunset not letting Seacrest owners ride a bike to the access. Especially when we pay a bigger portion of the restoration and the salary for the very efficient guard that will follow you all the way to the beach to make sure you are following her rules. ok. . .don't even get me started on that. Next time I am down, I'll just get Punzy and the skunkster to show me the little public access that they bike to.
Beach Fanatic
...just one comment: Karma
Beach Fanatic
...just one comment: Karma
How long do you think it will be before the beaches are gated? Gates on the walkovers, fences to the water...Dont worry if that happens ..nature will take care of those gates/fences. And Mothers Natures way of exacting Karma can be a very humbling thing;-)
Admin
How long do you think it will be before the beaches are gated? Gates on the walkovers, fences to the water...
Seems ridiculous, but it wasn't so long ago when the only gated homes I had seen were those of celebrities. I never saw a gated community until I was over 20.
It's no fun having enough money to buy something beautiful if you can't exclude people the people who can only afford to enjoy the things that belong to everyone.
Private walkovers can be gated but fencing the beach to obstruct passage is not legal.
Beach Fanatic
Personally, I have no problems with people trying to keep their walkovers private as long as there are plenty of public walkovers (and it seems as though there are plenty of public walkovers).
I also think it was wonderful that some communities made private walkovers available after storms/hurricanes so that people had access to the beach if the public walkover was not in service -- good karma. I think Rosemary Beach was one of them, though I don't know if they'd do it again - and I now support the businesses at Rosemary Beach more often because of this good Karma. I am less likely to support the communities that blocked accesses for non residents after hurricanes because I figure that's a time to be helpful and open and not a time to just take care of oneself and one's own community.
I do have problems with people saying they own all the beach in front of their places. I have less of a problem with the rule being the "high water mark" (even if the sand is dry).
I also think it was wonderful that some communities made private walkovers available after storms/hurricanes so that people had access to the beach if the public walkover was not in service -- good karma. I think Rosemary Beach was one of them, though I don't know if they'd do it again - and I now support the businesses at Rosemary Beach more often because of this good Karma. I am less likely to support the communities that blocked accesses for non residents after hurricanes because I figure that's a time to be helpful and open and not a time to just take care of oneself and one's own community.
I do have problems with people saying they own all the beach in front of their places. I have less of a problem with the rule being the "high water mark" (even if the sand is dry).
Beach Fanatic
Dont worry if that happens ..nature will take care of those gates/fences. And Mothers Natures way of exacting Karma can be a very humbling thing;-)
How much you want to bet if Karma is exacted that these same folks will be crying at FEMA's doorsteps for assistance restoring "their" beaches!:angry:
Beach Fanatic
How much you want to bet if Karma is exacted that these same folks will be crying at FEMA's doorsteps for assistance restoring "their" beaches!:angry:
REALLY good point luvthebeach. If public taxes fix the beaches that some communities/people are calling private, then the beach should belong to the public.
SoWal Insider
There has to be a happy medium. Seacrest beach doesn't let everyone use their pool. They limit that to Seacrest Beach Owners and Guests. I agree with that. (limited # of chairs, capacity) And I think Rosemary would be within their rights to limit parking to 2 hours so that people can't park and hit the beach all day. Save the few parking spaces for the retail spaces -- sorry if that isn't a popular opinion, but I have a vested interest in seeing the retail spaces thrive. I totally disagree with people being teritorial over the beach. I don't get it in Blue Mt and I don't get it in Rosemary. I can't believe that this is legal?!?!?! It has to be solved through the laws soon. But since I can't vote there -- I'll leave that issue to those that can. However, what completely baffles me is why Rosemary doesn't let people use the walkovers. And why aren't the retail operations fighting to allow MORE "rif-raf" access to the walkovers? Didn't our sales tax $$ help pay for the walkovers. Heck, charge us a $1 walkover restoration surcharge if you wish. But The more we use the walkovers, the more likely we are to grab lunch/dinner/glass of wine at Wild Olives. And the more likely I am to buy that cute canvas bag at the little shoe shop. Or my kids are going to convince me they "need" a lemonade from the Sugar Shak. More traffic = more sales = a more vibrant community in MHO. Rosemary needs to wake up and smell the Thymes. heheheh
That being said, I really have a bigger issue with Sunset not letting Seacrest owners ride a bike to the access. Especially when we pay a bigger portion of the restoration and the salary for the very efficient guard that will follow you all the way to the beach to make sure you are following her rules. ok. . .don't even get me started on that. Next time I am down, I'll just get Punzy and the skunkster to show me the little public access that they bike to.
Tis, I wish that was the case. We had our HOA meeting yesterday and it's unbelievable how many of the adjacent developments have memberships to the Seacrest Pool. The homeowners of Seacrest don't actually own the pool there.
The ironic thing is we heard from many of the full time residents that they have seen tons of cars with the Rosemary Beach tags on their mirrors park and go to the Seacrest Pool. Apparently, the security we had in place years past that checked the pool passes is no longer there.
I agree about Sunset. No bikes or baby strollers. :roll: However, we have almost been plowed over by Razor scooters, and bikers everytime we used the walkover.
Beach Lover
Hate to bring up an old topic - haven't been on the board for a while. However; I'm a Rosemary Beach owner and would like to understand both sides a little better as well. From my perspective, the RMB HOA considers (and I guess this is the crux of the issue) the beach to be private. That said, as mentioned in the article, the HOA (i.e. Homeowners) paid considerable $$$ to build private walkovers and obtain new sand after the hurricanes. Additionally, RMB pays private contractors to maintain the beach (pick up litter, etc). Maintaining the beach is far and away the most expensive line item in the HOA budget, thus our HOA dues are considerably higher than other properties I own along 30-a that use public access. So, from my perspective I'm not particularly happy to have plenty of non-guests/owners use the beach that I, as an owner, paid to help maintain/beautify. I actually think the Seacrest pool is a reasonable example - a select group pays for access to the pool - I'd be miffed if people started using it and didn't have a membership, while I did.
Obviously, the problem here is no one seems to enforce/rule on beaches being private vs public. So, the various towns (Alys, RMB, Watercolor, Watersound, etc) seem to consider the beach their domain and take care of them (buy sand, maintain/build walkovers) etc. If the beaches were ruled as being public, there would be pressure on the county to do that with county dollars. Unfortuanately, the county doesn't seem to have a strong position on this and hasn't built any public walkovers (save the Inlet Beach one) anywhere near RMB, Seacrest, Alys at all.
Obviously, the problem here is no one seems to enforce/rule on beaches being private vs public. So, the various towns (Alys, RMB, Watercolor, Watersound, etc) seem to consider the beach their domain and take care of them (buy sand, maintain/build walkovers) etc. If the beaches were ruled as being public, there would be pressure on the county to do that with county dollars. Unfortuanately, the county doesn't seem to have a strong position on this and hasn't built any public walkovers (save the Inlet Beach one) anywhere near RMB, Seacrest, Alys at all.
Beach Fanatic
Unfortuanately, the county doesn't seem to have a strong position on this and hasn't built any public walkovers (save the Inlet Beach one) anywhere near RMB, Seacrest, Alys at all.
The county needs easements in order to build accesses and as far as I know, they don't have any in this area that are undeveloped. But the other problem is the beach being considered private. What good is a public walkover if it leads to a private beach that the public is going to get thrown off of?
Beach Fanatic
Well, thank you for speaking up, P_A. I have walked down and used Seacrest Beach behind the Alys beach subdivision before there were any houses there and no one ever told me to move. So now they build a "town" Of 6 homeowners , at least that's what I read on here somewhere, in the middle of an established town , Seacrest Beach and just assume the public beach as their own. As a neighbor, I don't think so. Mr. Hilton never complained before. I believe that portion of the beach was renourished by the county previously, no? I saw the county bulldozer down there after Dennis and all the previous storms. I have picked up trash myself, a bunch of firework debris left on the beach this year, after the 4th, behind Alys. If they had maintenance they didn't get it all. 
Maybe I should go e-mail the commissioners. The bike path used to be really
through that area. Now its like riding through Hollyhood with guards and everything. What about that anybody? Isn't the bike path paid for by the taxpayers? Shouldn't it have been preserved for the unique scrub ecosystem there, and the bikers through Seacrest Beach?? It's one of the reasons I purchased there originally, and now that natural habitat scenic part of the path was destroyed by Alys, and houses aren't even there yet. I'm not saying the houses aren't pretty and they aren't nice people with all their parties. IJS...I miss the natural part of the path. With all that party money why didn't they think about preserving the path? Why try to take the beach there as private, if that's what they are doing?
Does anyone else feel the county should be responsible for their own beaches? Probably not if you're paying maintenance fees on the beach? Does anyone else feel the county should have at least one public access on every Walton County Beach? Is Mexico Beach and Port St. Joe area like this as far as privatizing? Is the beach more laid back there? Is the beach just as beautifiul? Do the citzens have more of a "Share the Beach" Spirit? Look at the examples we set for our children? Take all you can while you can.
, at least that's what I read on here somewhere, in the middle of an established town , Seacrest Beach and just assume the public beach as their own. As a neighbor, I don't think so. Mr. Hilton never complained before. I believe that portion of the beach was renourished by the county previously, no? I saw the county bulldozer down there after Dennis and all the previous storms. I have picked up trash myself, a bunch of firework debris left on the beach this year, after the 4th, behind Alys. If they had maintenance they didn't get it all. Maybe I should go e-mail the commissioners. The bike path used to be really
through that area. Now its like riding through Hollyhood with guards and everything. What about that anybody? Isn't the bike path paid for by the taxpayers? Shouldn't it have been preserved for the unique scrub ecosystem there, and the bikers through Seacrest Beach?? It's one of the reasons I purchased there originally, and now that natural habitat scenic part of the path was destroyed by Alys, and houses aren't even there yet. I'm not saying the houses aren't pretty and they aren't nice people with all their parties. IJS...I miss the natural part of the path. With all that party money why didn't they think about preserving the path? Why try to take the beach there as private, if that's what they are doing? Does anyone else feel the county should be responsible for their own beaches? Probably not if you're paying maintenance fees on the beach?
Does anyone else feel the county should have at least one public access on every Walton County Beach? Is Mexico Beach and Port St. Joe area like this as far as privatizing? Is the beach more laid back there? Is the beach just as beautifiul? Do the citzens have more of a "Share the Beach" Spirit? Look at the examples we set for our children? Take all you can while you can. Beach Fanatic
Being a long time time resident I cant get over all these people trying to turn our once little easygoing community into the gated subdivision hell they left. And expecting the county, (ALL of our tax dollars), to keep up the so called private beach in their gated communities. Keep those gates/walkovers etc to yourselves and I will keep my $$ to myself. Go and check with the developers of those 30A gated/private communities and see just how many of them got the county to abandon those easements in order for them to sell you that property as "private". Dont ask them to come back now and maintain stuff that they were asked to abandon long before you built your 3rd or 4th rental home.
Edited
Beach Fanatic
So just keep the beach private? Even where we all paid before? If I'm correct like behind Alys? I believe we taxpayers just renourished not so long ago. Please correct me if I'm wrong about that. Just give it up? Why? What does my 3rd or 4th rental home have to do with anything (not that I have one) if its not in a gated gulf front community other than being denied beach access for being across the street? Also, jodiFL wouldn't you say the vagueness of not answering the 'privatizing' question on any threads is kind of deceptive and makes one wonder their alterior motive? ;-) If I could've afforded gulf front believe me I would've and I would share it with all ya'll because I know it was never mine in the first place. God gave it to us all to share its beauty.
Beach Lover
Does anyone else feel the county should be responsible for their own beaches? Probably not if you're paying maintenance fees on the beach?
I DO think the county should be responsible for the beach and the beach should be public to all.
Mexico Beach and PSJ are all public as far as I know, not many houses actually are directly on the beach. Oh and no those beaches in Mexico Beach and PSJ aren't as beautiful - Nothing beats SoWal beaches...
Beach Fanatic
I appreciate and understand Phillips point. However, I'd much rather see the effort and money going into having the county maintain the beaches for everyone to use. Privatization of beaches do not benefit the community. It really doesn't. Now, you have to spend even more money guarding it.
How do we change this trend toward private beaches??????????????
How do we change this trend toward private beaches??????????????
Beach Fanatic
I think what bothered me most about the article was the catty tone. It just seemed so pompous and tacky and just not my idea of 30-A. I always thought people came here to escape the exclusive resort atmosphere, to embrace a community. The whole "let's keep the Seacrest riff raff off our property" stand of the RB HOA is just totally repugnant to me and I think the idea of paying a security guard to check ID for people access the beach would make me feel like an elitist snob.
With that said, the other thing that really bothers me about this article is the short-sighted and selfish approach that RB owners, along with many beach front property owners throughout the county are taking to dealing with overcrowded beaches. That's really the crux of the problem, isn't it? The beaches that were nearly empty and always white and pristine five years ago are now crowded littered with drink box straws and cigarette butts. The problem is over-development, the fluid nature of the units per acre rule, the protection of the property rights of a few developers over the coastal environment -- and it's leading to too many people on the beach. Granted, the developer of Seacrest was allowed to develop way too many units for the amount of beach available. Unfortunately, that trend is allowed to continue. It has happened with the Naturewalk development, with the property near Beachrunner, the property at Redfish. Every time some developer wants to dump too many people on too little beach so that some interior acreage can be developed and sold with 'deeded beach access', a few neighbors of the beach human dump site will beg for support at the commissioners meeting. Each time, a few people who will be impacted directly show up and get involved. The developer wins. The process repeats itself over and over. The beach gets more and more crowded. People seek out less crowded accesses.
The beach access for Seacrest is so over-utilized, while the beaches around the county have begun to recover from the 2004-2005 hurricanes, the Seacrest beach is still narrow and the bluff red and barren. If people can't spread out a little, the beach will never recover. If people have no choice but to use the beach deeded beach access for their development, people will stop coming to Seacrest. That will hurt Rosemary Beach merchants. I would think RB owners would also hate to see Seacrest turn into a ghetto, as that would take away from the charm of their own 'town'.
I used to love Rosemary so much that a friend bought one of the original RB promotional booklets from 1995 on Ebay for me. That book says, "Come build a town with us." What a lovely idea...build a town. Be part of a community. Unfortunately, the RBHOA seems to have no sense of citizenship, of duty to make its community a better place. Instead, they seem to feel it's better to throw money at the problem, secure their own little narrow bit of property, and leave everyone else to fend for themselves as beach overcrowding becomes more and more of a problem. It's way easier to look out for your own interests than to get involved and make your community a better place. It's a lazy approach to fix the problem, and it ultimately won't work.
My question to RB homeowners is this -- do you want to build a town, or are you happy with a security patrolled enclave? Why did you choose SoWal over Destin or Marco Island in the first place?
With that said, the other thing that really bothers me about this article is the short-sighted and selfish approach that RB owners, along with many beach front property owners throughout the county are taking to dealing with overcrowded beaches. That's really the crux of the problem, isn't it? The beaches that were nearly empty and always white and pristine five years ago are now crowded littered with drink box straws and cigarette butts. The problem is over-development, the fluid nature of the units per acre rule, the protection of the property rights of a few developers over the coastal environment -- and it's leading to too many people on the beach. Granted, the developer of Seacrest was allowed to develop way too many units for the amount of beach available. Unfortunately, that trend is allowed to continue. It has happened with the Naturewalk development, with the property near Beachrunner, the property at Redfish. Every time some developer wants to dump too many people on too little beach so that some interior acreage can be developed and sold with 'deeded beach access', a few neighbors of the beach human dump site will beg for support at the commissioners meeting. Each time, a few people who will be impacted directly show up and get involved. The developer wins. The process repeats itself over and over. The beach gets more and more crowded. People seek out less crowded accesses.
The beach access for Seacrest is so over-utilized, while the beaches around the county have begun to recover from the 2004-2005 hurricanes, the Seacrest beach is still narrow and the bluff red and barren. If people can't spread out a little, the beach will never recover. If people have no choice but to use the beach deeded beach access for their development, people will stop coming to Seacrest. That will hurt Rosemary Beach merchants. I would think RB owners would also hate to see Seacrest turn into a ghetto, as that would take away from the charm of their own 'town'.
I used to love Rosemary so much that a friend bought one of the original RB promotional booklets from 1995 on Ebay for me. That book says, "Come build a town with us." What a lovely idea...build a town. Be part of a community. Unfortunately, the RBHOA seems to have no sense of citizenship, of duty to make its community a better place. Instead, they seem to feel it's better to throw money at the problem, secure their own little narrow bit of property, and leave everyone else to fend for themselves as beach overcrowding becomes more and more of a problem. It's way easier to look out for your own interests than to get involved and make your community a better place. It's a lazy approach to fix the problem, and it ultimately won't work.
My question to RB homeowners is this -- do you want to build a town, or are you happy with a security patrolled enclave? Why did you choose SoWal over Destin or Marco Island in the first place?
SoWal Expert
I cant get over all these people trying to turn our once little easygoing community into the gated subdivision hell they left
Gated communities are just stupid and provide a false sense of security. Keep telling yourself noone can get in - except for anyone who has ever visited a friend there, made a delivery, done repair work, cleaned a house or done yardwork, shown a house, or been passing by when a malfunctioning gate sensor required a stranger to punch in the code to let people out. :roll:
The beaches should all be public and if you don't like other people near you, I believe the Unabomber's cabin is available for purchase. You can keep your pavillions and pools private as people built those instead of Mother Nature.
Beach Comber
This is a sad story. One of the main concepts of a New Urbanist Development, such as Rosemary Beach, is to build a strong sense of community- where people move freely throughout the town amentities, including the beach. No fences, no gates to keep out the outsiders...
My initial response is emotional. I am sad to see Rosemary Beach become a town that forgets its roots so quickly.
This will certainly become a point of contention between the Merchants and homeowners of Rosemary Beach.
My initial response is emotional. I am sad to see Rosemary Beach become a town that forgets its roots so quickly.
This will certainly become a point of contention between the Merchants and homeowners of Rosemary Beach.
Beach Fanatic
I DO think the county should be responsible for the beach and the beach should be public to all.
Mexico Beach and PSJ are all public as far as I know, not many houses actually are directly on the beach. Oh and no those beaches in Mexico Beach and PSJ aren't as beautiful - Nothing beats SoWal beaches...
Actually, there are privately-owned beaches in both Gulf and Franklin Counties, Bay, and all other counties in Florida. The difference is the attitude of those owners. ;-)
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.