Redfish Village Beach Access

between the people who were at the meeting and who have posted here(1 or 2), and the people who were at the meeting and for some reason, have not posted here(1 or 2), and the people who were not at the meeting and do post here(3-4), someone should scan their copy of the minutes so the record can be set straight. this way we won't have uninformed comments being thrown around willy-nilly.

BMBW, could you please supply us with a scanned copy of the minutes? you seem to know what was said there.

Edroedrog I know two people who were at that meeting and the attorney said it had more favorable zoning there is a difference when asked why lot 2 was purchased. The attorney did not say anything against what the developers were saying.

Where in that article does it say that H2O owns 20% of Redfish. Go reread your post. And more to the point who cares and who cares if KA whoever that is owns LRI, which I think you mean LGI whoever they are from the article and H2O. Do you know these people? How does that matter to whether I don't want to have people streaming down our east of 83 roads when they could be shuttled in an orderly way to one spot? No use debating this right? Why wouldn't I and everybody else in Blue Mountain east of 83 think this is a great idea?

Kevin...my post #173 answers some of you questions:
Kevin...Redfish Village users will use your roads anyway; they are not going to sit around and wait for RFV's "trolley or SUV service"...they will hop in their cars, or walk down to the beach, the quickest and easiest way possible and that will be down all four roads off C-30A, including, unfortunately, yours. You knew this was a possibility when you originally bought your property since you apparently bought on a public road; this was not the case when owners west of CR-83 public access bought their property. Big difference!

I have beachfront property. Do you?

No, I don't think we can stop people from coming to the beach, nor should we; I do think we can attempt to stop 100 to 300 people, during the season, from being deposited on a 75 foot wide lot on the beach. To much concentration in a small space.

Bye for now...We'll pick back up after the holidays.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.

Another problem this usage creates is the precedent it sets. If this is allowed to occur, it can occur again and again; this will completely change the the structure and usage of the beach. Your position does not seem to take this into consideration and, again, makes me think you don't care about the negative consequences of this project to the area. I'm beginning to suspect you do not own property in this area.

between the people who were at the meeting and who have posted here(1 or 2), and the people who were at the meeting and for some reason, have not posted here(1 or 2), and the people who were not at the meeting and do post here(3-4), someone should scan their copy of the minutes so the record can be set straight. this way we won't have uninformed comments being thrown around willy-nilly.

BMBW, could you please supply us with a scanned copy of the minutes? you seem to know what was said there.

John R...Didn't Redfish Village make a transcript of the meeting? Since you were there, you might give them a call and ask for a copy, if you need one; since they know you are supportive of their project, they may even give it to you gratis.

John R...Didn't Redfish Village make a transcript of the meeting? Since you were there, you might give them a call and ask for a copy, if you need one; since they know you are supportive of their project, they may even give it to you gratis.

...uninformed comments being thrown around willy-nilly... Like I said...

I don't know if they did or not. Some of your BMB buddies sure were whining like schoolgirls for a copy. I really don't need one, since, as you continue to remind me, as I was there. How's that Surfrider thing going?

...uninformed comments being thrown around willy-nilly... Like I said...

I don't know if they did or not. Some of your BMB buddies sure were whining like schoolgirls for a copy. I really don't need one, since, as you continue to remind me, as I was there. How's that Surfrider thing going?

John R...your post makes no sense...go to your room.

John R...your post makes no sense...go to your room.

Could you please remind me again that I'm supportive of their project?

John R...your post makes no sense...go to your room.

If you actually read the minutes, you would know that John R did not stand up in favor of the lot 2 being used as a private beach access. Perhaps you could read those minutes or refrain from he said/she said b.s., which happens to be inaccurate.

Dale Carnegie classes are being offered in PC and Destin. Maybe some of you other yahoos could join me in taking a class.

If you actually read the minutes, you would know that John R did not stand up in favor of the lot 2 being used as a private beach access. Perhaps you could read those minutes or refrain from he said/she said b.s., which happens to be inaccurate.

Dale Carnegie classes are being offered in PC and Destin. Maybe some of you other yahoos could join me in taking a class.

SJ...do you have a copy of the minutes?

Could you please remind me again that I'm supportive of their project?

John R...sure, be glad to.

BTW, let's get to something serious here. Who is the photo beauty you are currently using on your posts? Looks like an old movie star; either Lana Turner or Ester Williams?

SJ...do you have a copy of the minutes?

No, I have no need for them.

That photo beauty I am currently using for my avatar could be mistaken for the pig movie star, but it is not the same one. :funn:

No, I have no need for them.

That photo beauty I am currently using for my avatar could be mistaken for the pig movie star, but it is not the same one. :funn:

SJ...good one!!!!

BMBW you have brought up your beachfront property a couple of times since I asked. I do not have beachfront but am I right that you live west of 83 which means you live in either the Blue townhomes or condos, the yellow Sunseekers building or the houses beyond that west? If so, what is your issue with the access you can't even see it? If it did not happen then the people would flood down our roads and we will see them. If it does happen, then they will enter at one point which you can not even see from your property. What's your issue? I guess it keeps coming down o you don't want them on "our beach"? Well I don't either but I know they will be there which means what is the best way to get them there. You get hurt much less than we do east of 83. We would have people stomping over our property, dropping trash, driving down the roads. Even though you say that they will still do this how can you not see that it will be much less than the alternative of not having a shuttle. I am really trying to understand what your issue is. Organized access to the beach is much better than a free for all for north owning property owners and we can definitely see that since we have been dealing with this issue for a long while now. You keep talking about 300 people on one grain of sand do you really think that would happen be realistic people get to the beach and go to the spot they find comfortable and if they know that they are allowed to go east then they will.

BMBW you have brought up your beachfront property a couple of times since I asked. I do not have beachfront but am I right that you live west of 83 which means you live in either the Blue townhomes or condos, the yellow Sunseekers building or the houses beyond that west? If so, what is your issue with the access you can't even see it? If it did not happen then the people would flood down our roads and we will see them. If it does happen, then they will enter at one point which you can not even see from your property. What's your issue? I guess it keeps coming down o you don't want them on "our beach"? Well I don't either but I know they will be there which means what is the best way to get them there. You get hurt much less than we do east of 83. We would have people stomping over our property, dropping trash, driving down the roads. Even though you say that they will still do this how can you not see that it will be much less than the alternative of not having a shuttle. I am really trying to understand what your issue is. Organized access to the beach is much better than a free for all for north owning property owners and we can definitely see that since we have been dealing with this issue for a long while now. You keep talking about 300 people on one grain of sand do you really think that would happen be realistic people get to the beach and go to the spot they find comfortable and if they know that they are allowed to go east then they will.

Kevin...I've answered your questions in my posts 153, 159, 170, 173, and 178; Smiling Joe also helped with post 142.

I don't think you own property in the area.

That just shows how self-righteous you are that you can not see somebody else's point. Let me ask you BMBW where were you when we were fighting lot1? If you really cared about Blue Mountain you would have been there. You just care about your side. Your comment makes you sound like you think you own all of Blue Mountain and the beach. It's just yours right? At least I tell my reasons and they are easy to understand. If you want to scan your property tax bill and send it to me on email I will do the same. Otherwise I am done talking to you.

That just shows how self-righteous you are that you can not see somebody else's point. Let me ask you BMBW where were you when we were fighting lot1? If you really cared about Blue Mountain you would have been there. You just care about your side. Your comment makes you sound like you think you own all of Blue Mountain and the beach. It's just yours right? At least I tell my reasons and they are easy to understand. If you want to scan your property tax bill and send it to me on email I will do the same. Otherwise I am done talking to you.

Kevin...no one asked for my help; the fight on RFV first lot was done quietly and effectively. The owners near that lot knew the zoning would stop RFV if they alerted the county to their concerns; that's all the owners near the second lot are trying to point out, and you know that.

No, the beach is not just mine, but all the owners near the second lot have certain property rights, as do the owners of the first lot, and we are just pursuing those same rights. I've found the folk's who are not owners at BMB are the ones who are the loudest about "their beach", "our beach", "our sand" and they usually do the least in protecting and maintaining the beach.

Goodby and have a happy and safe New Year!

Well thank you for at least hearing me. Since I was there even though others here will disagree about these facts, the one thing I will tell you is that we were not effective on lot 1, we never won anything. There was never a judgement, and the county never denied Lot 1 and we learned that the County letter was issued without basis by the county we saw another letter which made that clear. Which means we still have a risk that they will come back to Lot 1. There are other reasons why Lot 1 is still a very real possibility but I would rather not help that cause.

Happy New Year. Talk to you in 2007.

... I've found the folk's who are not owners at BMB are the ones who are the loudest about "their beach", "our beach", "our sand" and they usually do the least in protecting and maintaining the beach.

...

That is a stretch. I think those people to whom you refer do the most to protect the beaches. They may not fill it with sand, but they certainly do not add retaining walls which will eventually illiminate the beach as we know it today. In fact, they fight against the Gulf front homeowners who put up the walls, which is done, not to protect the beach, but to protect the yard and or home of an individual.

some people have asked to see the plat for Blue Mtn Beach s/d. See attachment.

some people have asked to see the plat for Blue Mtn Beach s/d. See attachment.

SJ...this is the plat containing the 1st beachfront lot RFV was trying to develop; if you have a plat with the second lot RFV is attempting to get approval for, please provide. The plat you have provided is east of CR-83 public access; the second lot now being discussed is west of CR-83 public access.

SJ...this is the plat containing the 1st beachfront lot RFV was trying to develop; if you have a plat with the second lot RFV is attempting to get approval for, please provide. The plat you have provided is east of CR-83 public access; the second lot now being discussed is west of CR-83 public access.

BMBWalker,

Here are the plats for both lot 1 and lot 2

BMBWalker,

Here another aerial view showing the main RFV property in relationship to the two beachfront lots.

SJ...this is the plat containing the 1st beachfront lot RFV was trying to develop; if you have a plat with the second lot RFV is attempting to get approval for, please provide. The plat you have provided is east of CR-83 public access; the second lot now being discussed is west of CR-83 public access.

Yes, I know this. The reason why I posted it is because some people had asked for further info regarding who owns the beach to the east of the 83 access. This plat shows the subdivision does not include the beach.

Lot 2 is not located in a recorded sub-division, therefore, there is no sub-division plat.

BMBWalker,

Here are the plats for both lot 1 and lot 2

Whitesys...thanks.

BMBWalker,

Here another aerial view showing the main RFV property in relationship to the two beachfront lots.

Whitesys...thanks, again.

Well thank you for at least hearing me. Since I was there even though others here will disagree about these facts, the one thing I will tell you is that we were not effective on lot 1, we never won anything. There was never a judgement, and the county never denied Lot 1 and we learned that the County letter was issued without basis by the county we saw another letter which made that clear. Which means we still have a risk that they will come back to Lot 1. There are other reasons why Lot 1 is still a very real possibility but I would rather not help that cause.

Happy New Year. Talk to you in 2007.

Kevin..there didn't need to be a judgement; RFV was clever enough not to persue a permit after Pat Blackshear issued a Stop Order on their project. By not persuing the permit, they now can claim they were never denied a permit...neat, huh? They are pubically stating this now. They are stating they thought the second lot would be a better lot for them and the community. Golly gee whiz, we got a developer in our mist who will spend an extra $5,000,000+ to make the community happy!!! Send more developers like that to the beach...we need this type of altruism!

I can't follow part of your post, but I think your saying something to the effect that the big, bad boogey man can come back if he wants to; if so, why did he leave in the first place? Oh, that's right, altruism rules!

Happy New Year to you and give GRM my best for the New Year!