Proposal calls for another over developed parcel with zero consideration for enough parking....just like the V restaurant. Right now there isn't enough parking to support the restaurant(they sold that Gulf front lot all the employees park on) so when they lose that and build the condos, even if they demolish all the other buildings, they still won't have enough parking. And now it looks like this infection is spreading up further along 395. Praying to the sky's that they at least have the decentcy to learn from the past and have enough parking to support this endeavor. However, judging by the proposal it looks like they are not going too. The only reason they are leaving anything natural is because almost 2/3 the property is wetlands.
Are they asking for a variance on parking to park more than code allows? I doubt it. As long as the project complies with current parking requirements it should be approved.
This project is not related to the V Restaurant. That's another discussion. The Seagrove Village Market owners aren't involved in that project. Although I suppose any restaurant in SoWal can be used as a comparison. The Virdian / V Restaurant project has changed so I'm not sure what the current parking plan entails. Are you sure the gulf front lot was ever included in parking plan? I doubt it. I think the lot to the north of the building, and the on-street parking is sufficient. In any case, Walton County is quite strict on their parking requirements for new projects. Do they include enough in the code? Maybe not, but that's another fight, and until parking requirements are increased in the code, it's not going to block this project.
As for the wetlands, those are protected by law and will have to be addressed in the plan. I'm glad they are protected, and that the project will have some nice trees. All wetlands are critical and need max protection, but the ones on this lot are where Western Lake starts
so extra care should be taken by the owners, over and above what the law requires, to prevent runoff pollution. There are easy and inexpensive ways to mitigate runoff impacts, such as using percolation parking surfaces (grass and pavers) instead of solid asphalt or concrete. Also, I would prefer the codes in SoWal do more to protect trees, especially mature ones. And we should do more to prevent polluted runoff, but those are other topics related to overall planning and codes issues that should be improved.
I believe this project will have minimal impact for the adjacent neighborhood and will be an asset , not a detraction. As long as ingress and egress is handled properly, and
lighting is low impact it'll be all good (and yummy). I expect there may be a little NIMBY (not in my backyard) noise from the homes behind it. But it should be approved.