Led away in Handcuffs

[BeachSiO2]

You're right on your last post that answered me. I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about the current project.

So, now, I am getting confused. Our beach has never been restored to my knowledge. Even after Opal. But, everyone is calling it a renourishment project, but it is not. I suppose it is a restore / nourish project???

No problem on the earlier posts.

Yes, they are confusing you... We have a restoration project in western Walton County that has only recently been completed and thus it has not been nourished. Hopefully with no storms it will not become a nourishment project for many years (insert crossed fingers for good luck here). In the 30A area, we have never had a restoration project and thus no nourishments either. Based on the TDC website, it looks like the County has submitted for permits with hopes of a restoration project in late 2008 if everything goes well.

 

[BeachSiO2]

So we ARE killing two birds with one stone. After the sand was blown on the beach, people are coming back and planting sea oats and putting up sand fences. We are doing a restore / nourishment project together.

I am Soooooooo glad I am not a politician! I am sooooooo glad I don't work for the city or county. And I'll bet you are too!

Phew!

See my last post, but typically nourishment events are subsequent activities in later years. The current sea oat planting is part of the original restoration. Hang in there and SJ and I will find you a post on our "cabinet."

 

[Smiling JOe]

See my last post, but typically nourishment events are subsequent activities in later years. The current sea oat planting is part of the original restoration. Hang in there and SJ and I will find you a post on our "cabinet."

You mean we get to post in our new positions? I'd be banned from Gov't in a heartbeat.

 

[BeachSiO2]

You mean we get to post in our new positions? I'd be banned from Gov't in a heartbeat.

Me too!!

 

[yippie]

I just received these figures. For Destin, the State of Florida paid 48.46% and the TDC 51.54%.

This is for the Destin / Okaloosa County portion of the restoration that just finished.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

It will be very interesting to see who kicks people off the beach at the access because there is platted "beach" on both sides, and the upland property lines stop at the top of the dune. I personally look forward to meeting the "owner" of the "beach."

I do know for sure that the property immediately adjacent and to the west of the access is owned from Blue Mountain Road to the MHWL. They have not, to my knowledge, run anyone off. Everything's still cool. I understand your point though.

 

[BeachSiO2]

I do know for sure that the property immediately adjacent and to the west of the access is owned from Blue Mountain Road to the MHWL. They have not, to my knowledge, run anyone off. Everything's still cool. I understand your point though.

I re-checked and you are correct the westerly owner does own to the MHW, sorry for any confusion. Thanks for correcting me!

One question though, have you heard of any owners of the beach to the east of the access?

 

[Smiling JOe]

I do know for sure that the property immediately adjacent and to the west of the access is owned from Blue Mountain Road to the MHWL. They have not, to my knowledge, run anyone off. Everything's still cool. I understand your point though.

BMBV, you know it is that dang WalCo Property Appraiser's map which is misleading, and I believe that is where BeachSi02 is getting his/her information regarding the property located, west and adjacent to the 83 access. As you are probably aware, the map is not drawn according to the deeds in some cases, and this case happens to be one of those which is inaccurate. The Deed is most likely to be correct, though I have seen incorrect deeds before, but I'm not doubting the case here.

I have not seen anyone running the public off the beach anywhere other than the three larger properties in BMB which were mentioned.

 

[Smiling JOe]

I re-checked and you are correct the westerly owner does own to the MHW, sorry for any confusion. Thanks for correcting me!

One question though, have you heard of any owners of the beach to the east of the access?

There are no individual owners of the beach (dry sandy lower elevation) property located between 83 and Big Redfish Lake.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Originally Posted by Dave Rauschkolb
Not to muddy the water and get into the seawall debate, but what happens when a hurricane comes and takes ALL the sand up to a seawall (if it survives the storm?) Basically there will be water up to the wall and NO beach. I belive this is exactly what will happen in Seagrove from just west of Doodle Harris's house all the way to Seagrove Villas. Can we walk on the edge of the wall to get down the beach?

The answer to your question is, in some cases where the seawalls were erected on the beach, rather than the owner's property, such as the case with some of the homes on Montgomery St, yes, you could walk along the wall since it is on public property.

Dave, I thought you were out of here. Glad to see you back...BTW, nice pic in the Walton Sun.

For the benefit of everyone who didn't see the Walton Sun:

?The beaches are for all of us to enjoy. The edge of the bluff or the edge of the dunes should be the property line for beachfront homeowners. When you pay for beachfront you pay for the view and the risk of being washed away in a hurricane, you?re not paying for the beach behind you. Trying to own the beach is like trying to own the sky. ?The Beaches of South Walton? ? do we need to change the name?? ? Dave Rauschkolb,
Santa Rosa Beach

I just hope you don't start with the desert sand + water analogy stuff from G.G. (Bobby's buddy).

To answer your question, SJ is half right:
"yes, you could walk along the wall since it is on public property"

In your scenario, the MHWL would now (most likely) be at the wall. So yes, IMO you could walk along the wall that was on private property and not be trespassing.

What was the point in asking this question?