• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

SoWalSally

Beach Fanatic
Feb 19, 2005
649
49
By DOTTY NIST

An ordinance that would have set a height limit for new construction in all of Walton County has been tabled for further study after "a lot of public comment," to quote Pat Blackshear, county growth management director.

Since 2001, all new construction south of the bay has been limited to 50 feet or less. No such limitation exists in the remainder of the county to the north.

In recent months, several county commissioners have expressed an interest in applying the same height restriction to the county as a whole.

The Walton County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) first looked at the current ordinance proposing to set such a limit, at the June 13 BCC meeting. On June 8, the Walton County Planning Commission had voted six to one to recommend against the adoption of the ordinance.

The proposed ordinance provided exceptions for "agriculture and industrial land uses."

Several Choctaw Beach residents have been the most vocal opponents of extending height limitations north of the bay.

Ed Bradley, a resident and homeowner in the small bayside community near the Walton/Okaloosa County line, said that when he bought his home, he felt that someday there would be condominiums there. Bradley charged that the ordinance would lower land values and affect economic development in the area.

Wayland Davis, also of Choctaw Beach, called for the development of a viable plan for construction height based on what heights are suitable for the various areas. Not every property will "sell as a view," he explained.

"There is no need," commented local resident and realtor David Kramer, suggesting that the ordinance would result in sprawl.

"Allow the sun to shine before twelve o'clock," countered Seagrove resident Bob Dobes, who said he also owns property north of the bay. Dobes said that with lower construction heights, "you can make a good profit, but when does it just come to greed?"

He urged that if heights higher than 50 feet are allowed, that those developments be moved at least a mile from the bay that building heights be staggered in order to preserve the bay view for the public.

South Walton county resident Alan Ficarra suggested that opponents of the height ordinance might benefit if they worked together to create a neighborhood plan to foster a community "with their vision." Other local communities such as Inlet Beach have developed code-sanctioned neighborhood plans setting standards for height and other aspects of development.

Blackshear observed that some areas of the county are affected by the mission of Eglin Air Force Base. Her recommendation was that the commissioners direct staff to work with Eglin officials and come back with delineations of various areas of the county and appropriate construction height standards for each. "It is very uncommon not to have a height restriction," Blackshear observed.

While the matter is being studied, if someone proposes to develop a 200-foot-tall condominium north of the bay, for example, she added, "there is nothing in the code that will stop it."?

However, Blackshear continued, the county's maximum building density ranges from 10 to 12 units per acre. Those densities would make high rises unlikely, she noted.

District 5 Commissioner Cindy Meadows agreed, commenting that if a developer is only able to build 10 units on an acre, she would not expect that he would opt to build a 10-story building with each of the units on top of the other.

District 4 Commissioner Ro Cuchens agreed with Blackshear's suggestion for additional work on the ordinance in conjunction with Eglin. He moved for approval of that course of action.

The motion was approved 4-0, with Brannon, Cuchens, Meadows, and Pridgen voting in favor and Jones not present for the vote.
 

Smiling JOe

SoWal Expert
Nov 18, 2004
31,644
1,773
SoWalSally said:
The Walton County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) first looked at the current ordinance proposing to set such a limit, at the June 13 BCC meeting. On June 8, the Walton County Planning Commission had voted six to one to recommend against the adoption of the ordinance.
I am curious to know who voted against the ordinance? Anyone know. If several commissioners are suggesting the height restrictions, why are most of them now against it? I seem to remember Ro Cuchens bringing it up a few months ago, suggesting that we need the height restriction. :dunno: I guess his people think they are left with no pie.
 

Lisa Ruby

Beach Fanatic
Jul 12, 2005
1,332
74
SoWal
www.rosemarybeachsales.com
Beach Runner said:
Damn. It's a matter of time before 30-A turns into Destin. I remember when people on 30-A objected to SIGNS. My, how things have changed. Monetary greed is a powerful driving force.

This does not apply to 30-A where height restrictions are in place. It will never look like Destin :clap_1:
 

TooFarTampa

SoWal Insider
Smiling JOe said:
I am curious to know who voted against the ordinance? Anyone know. If several commissioners are suggesting the height restrictions, why are most of them now against it? I seem to remember Ro Cuchens bringing it up a few months ago, suggesting that we need the height restriction. :dunno: I guess his people think they are left with no pie.

The article says the planning commission voted 6-1 against the restrictions. Isn't that a separate entity from the County Commission?

It is possible in the future that the sheer volume of people moving into the state will require higher buildings in north Walton, but those factors are not coming into play now, and I see no reason why a universal height restriction should not be put into place. It can always be lifted for the areas north of the bay at a later time, if necessary.
 

Smiling JOe

SoWal Expert
Nov 18, 2004
31,644
1,773
TooFarTampa said:
The article says the planning commission voted 6-1 against the restrictions. Isn't that a separate entity from the County Commission?

It is possible in the future that the sheer volume of people moving into the state will require higher buildings in north Walton, but those factors are not coming into play now, and I see no reason why a universal height restriction should not be put into place. It can always be lifted for the areas north of the bay at a later time, if necessary.

:doh:
 

Smiling JOe

SoWal Expert
Nov 18, 2004
31,644
1,773
TooFarTampa said:
The article says the planning commission voted 6-1 against the restrictions. Isn't that a separate entity from the County Commission?

It is possible in the future that the sheer volume of people moving into the state will require higher buildings in north Walton, but those factors are not coming into play now, and I see no reason why a universal height restriction should not be put into place. It can always be lifted for the areas north of the bay at a later time, if necessary.

If a height limitation is put into place and then lifted, don't you think that the existing limitation in SoWal could also stand a chance to be lifted, too? I would rather them not lifting such restrictions once enacted.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter