Deer Lake State Park [update - not closing]

[Smiling JOe]

I'm in Deer Lake State Park regularly and the most activity I've ever witnessed were two lovers in Speedo's holding hands. Generally, there's not a person to be seen in the park. I don't get the need to keep the place open - it'll look exactly the way it always looks ... vacant.

And I supposed you would also say that just because I see no people on the beach in the winter that we should close the beach. What about the State Forest. The most people I've ever seen while walking or riding on the trails in the State Forest is zero. Does that mean we should close the State Forest to the visitors who use it?

The County Seal for Walton County has three words on it. I bet you don't have a clue as to what they are. I'm not sure who was responsible for creating them, but those three words have enough meaning that they were integrated into the Seal. Go look them up.

 

[Smiling JOe]

Then keep it open and charge enough admission so that those that actually use it, fund it. Personally, I would rather have other things, like food and clothing, instead of funding a park I have never used.

Nice try, but for the amount of funding you pay for Deer Park, is less probably on the verge of being equal to $.0000000001, and that won't buy you "other things, like food and clothing." If the TDC were to pay for the operating costs, again, not a whole penny would come out of your pocket to pay for keeping Deer Park open. Your math doesn't add up.

 

[Smiling JOe]

If there ever is big box commercial development in the area east of Sandestin, it makes infinitely more sense to keep it on US 98 or within a couple hundred feet of 98 rather than putting it on an access road between 98 and 30-A- the road infrastructure's already there, the scale of those kinds of projects fits better with the existing 98 developments (places like Christian International Church, the Chelco palace of electricity, etc) and the legal bills would be significantly less to get approval to change zoning than they would be for something closer to the beach. And a couple parcels there are already zoned for larger commercial development like the western terminus of 30-A where Albertson's was talking about putting a store at some point.

You are correct, and JOE already has plans for more commercial development at hwy 98, in WaterSound. I had heard at one time, they had plans to have more commercial space than currently present in Destin Commons.

 

[full time]

And I supposed you would also say that just because I see no people on the beach in the winter that we should close the beach. What about the State Forest. The most people I've ever seen while walking or riding on the trails in the State Forest is zero. Does that mean we should close the State Forest to the visitors who use it?

The County Seal for Walton County has three words on it. I bet you don't have a clue as to what they are. I'm not sure who was responsible for creating them, but those three words have enough meaning that they were integrated into the Seal. Go look them up.

I have a suggestion. The park is suggested for closing because it is "lightly used". You and MikeCat and others who wish to keep it open at taxpayer expense need to each grab 10 or 20 of your buds (not beers) and go to the park each day so that it is no longer "lightly used". Voila - problem solved!

 

[Smiling JOe]

From what I read, they aren't closing the Park because of "light use." They are closing it because they want to cut back expense -- A whopping $6,000 per year, to maintain many acres of Gulf Front property. Sounds more like a bargain to me.

Bringing 100 friends to the park every day won't change things, because there is no place to register that we entered, so no one other than the other visitors and the creatures in the Park will know that we went.

I think you are being short-sighted if you don't try to look 10 or 20 years into the future for this area of Walton County. The State is known to sell off "surplus" (aka- unused) property, and if the property is closed, it is "unused," or "surplus." The next thing they will do is sell it off to the highest bidder, which will not mean that your taxes will decrease. It only means that there will be more development, and less Park area for us to use. South Walton isn't even 1/3 of the way built out. Even if another third of the existing lots were built out, and no more were subdivided, the need for beach access, parking, and public spaces will be at a premium. When this place gets fully built out, every inch of land will be at a premium.

 

[full time]

From what I read, they aren't closing the Park because of "light use." They are closing it because they want to cut back expense -- A whopping $6,000 per year, to maintain many acres of Gulf Front property. Sounds more like a bargain to me.

Bringing 100 friends to the park every day won't change things, because there is no place to register that we entered, so no one other than the other visitors and the creatures in the Park will know that we went.

I think you are being short-sighted if you don't try to look 10 or 20 years into the future for this area of Walton County. The State is known to sell off "surplus" (aka- unused) property, and if the property is closed, it is "unused," or "surplus." The next thing they will do is sell it off to the highest bidder, which will not mean that your taxes will decrease. It only means that there will be more development, and less Park area for us to use. South Walton isn't even 1/3 of the way built out. Even if another third of the existing lots were built out, and no more were subdivided, the need for beach access, parking, and public spaces will be at a premium. When this place gets fully built out, every inch of land will be at a premium.

No and yes. No, the State is in fact proposing closure of 10 of the most lightly used parks in the State and yes, the State is proposing to do so to save money. A few thousand here and a few thousand there and before long, you're talking about real money.

 

[Matt J]

I agree. I think that JOE completely controls the development timeline.

I don't think it's so much JOE as those big box companies. Most of those have a customer radius of around 50 miles. Since we have all of those located in either PCB, Destin, or FWB there would be no need to build one on 30A for much higher property prices.

 

[Matt J]

Nice try, but for the amount of funding you pay for Deer Park, is less probably on the verge of being equal to $.0000000001, and that won't buy you "other things, like food and clothing." If the TDC were to pay for the operating costs, again, not a whole penny would come out of your pocket to pay for keeping Deer Park open. Your math doesn't add up.

Actually no money would come out of his pocket if the TDC took it over, unless he rents a house or room in South Walton.

 

[waltonco lover]

And I supposed you would also say that just because I see no people on the beach in the winter that we should close the beach. What about the State Forest. The most people I've ever seen while walking or riding on the trails in the State Forest is zero. Does that mean we should close the State Forest to the visitors who use it?

The County Seal for Walton County has three words on it. I bet you don't have a clue as to what they are. I'm not sure who was responsible for creating them, but those three words have enough meaning that they were integrated into the Seal. Go look them up.

Pride, Preservation, Conservation

 

[AAbsolute]

From what I read, they aren't closing the Park because of "light use." They are closing it because they want to cut back expense -- A whopping $6,000 per year, to maintain many acres of Gulf Front property. Sounds more like a bargain to me.

Bringing 100 friends to the park every day won't change things, because there is no place to register that we entered, so no one other than the other visitors and the creatures in the Park will know that we went.

I think you are being short-sighted if you don't try to look 10 or 20 years into the future for this area of Walton County. The State is known to sell off "surplus" (aka- unused) property, and if the property is closed, it is "unused," or "surplus." The next thing they will do is sell it off to the highest bidder, which will not mean that your taxes will decrease. It only means that there will be more development, and less Park area for us to use. South Walton isn't even 1/3 of the way built out. Even if another third of the existing lots were built out, and no more were subdivided, the need for beach access, parking, and public spaces will be at a premium. When this place gets fully built out, every inch of land will be at a premium.

Sounds pretty good to me. Can we sell the park now please?