South Walton's Community Website
Beach Like A Local!
Create Account
New posts

BMBWalker

Beach Lover
Nov 1, 2006
130
0
c'mon, you're killing me here. did you not read my extensive post, written pretty much for your benefit, at your request? honestly, were you there? or are you basing this comment from discussions you've had with your BMB friends who actually were in the room? does my description of what i said differ from what they are telling you i said? and, if so, help me out.

i will state my position here for you and all the BMB folk who still haven't commented on this forum. where, oh where, are the people/person, on this board, who was the vocal champion for the BMB SS?

i believe anyone can do with their property what hey want, as long as it's legal and within confines of covenants, etc. and doesn't risk bodily harm.

obviously, this will eventually work it's way up the judicial ladder and the courts will give the final answer, and you could realize the coveted suspension of whatever in the bargain.

i agree(d) that there could potentially be 100's of people on the beach from redfish, and one piece of property will not contain them. what will happen then? will BMBV come out and chase them away with a stick? will the guy who owns the salmon fortress walk all the way around through the public access and tell them to leave the beach he can't even get to from his property? not too neighborly. will the BMB SS ever frequent the shops at RF? will tires be flattened? will signs be put up? etc, etc...

as i stated, their plan(for the property) is one plan. i offered another less impactful one above. do i like their plan? who cares? NO ONE in that meeting, or on these pages has offered an alternative. that's what i don't understand. BMB will be getting a bunch of new neighbors soon, and they need to deal with it. proactive has always seemed a better way than reactive. sadly, i can anticipate hearling about some BMB gulffront owner chasing away some family from their precious beach cause they're sitting above the mean high water mark. try explaining that to a six year old. there's a lot of sand there for a few owners.

if the above brands me as "feels positively" about redfish village's beach access, then that is my burden. one that i will be toiling over for about 6 seconds, or the next time you hit the enter button.

what earlier communication this morning?

Your private email and post to me this morning requesting permission to use my attempt at humor in telling you "the guard that checked your papers and gave you access to BMB last night was fired this morning" as your sig line. Do I need to send you a copy of your request and my response that it was fine with me?

Are you OK?
 

BMBWalker

Beach Lover
Nov 1, 2006
130
0
c'mon, you're killing me here. did you not read my extensive post, written pretty much for your benefit, at your request? honestly, were you there? or are you basing this comment from discussions you've had with your BMB friends who actually were in the room? does my description of what i said differ from what they are telling you i said? and, if so, help me out.

i will state my position here for you and all the BMB folk who still haven't commented on this forum. where, oh where, are the people/person, on this board, who was the vocal champion for the BMB SS?

i believe anyone can do with their property what hey want, as long as it's legal and within confines of covenants, etc. and doesn't risk bodily harm.

obviously, this will eventually work it's way up the judicial ladder and the courts will give the final answer, and you could realize the coveted suspension of whatever in the bargain.

i agree(d) that there could potentially be 100's of people on the beach from redfish, and one piece of property will not contain them. what will happen then? will BMBV come out and chase them away with a stick? will the guy who owns the salmon fortress walk all the way around through the public access and tell them to leave the beach he can't even get to from his property? not too neighborly. will the BMB SS ever frequent the shops at RF? will tires be flattened? will signs be put up? etc, etc...

as i stated, their plan(for the property) is one plan. i offered another less impactful one above. do i like their plan? who cares? NO ONE in that meeting, or on these pages has offered an alternative. that's what i don't understand. BMB will be getting a bunch of new neighbors soon, and they need to deal with it. proactive has always seemed a better way than reactive. sadly, i can anticipate hearling about some BMB gulffront owner chasing away some family from their precious beach cause they're sitting above the mean high water mark. try explaining that to a six year old. there's a lot of sand there for a few owners.

if the above brands me as "feels positively" about redfish village's beach access, then that is my burden. one that i will be toiling over for about 6 seconds, or the next time you hit the enter button.

what earlier communication this morning?


My understanding of the meeting is that an alternative was offered: Redfish Village should make use of the 4 public beach access walkways that are in the neighborhood right in front of the Redfish Village Development. There are four roads that become six roads going directly to these walkways directly across C-30A from Redfish Village. Why can't these roads and walkways be used to spread out these folks and do less damage to the beach? The access is already there!

Also, why is it the neighborhood's responsibility to offer a solution to Redfish Village's dilemma. The neighborhood didn't create the Redfish Village access problem; Redfish Village did that by themselves.
 

John R

needs to get out more
Dec 31, 2005
6,772
808
Conflictinator
Your private email and post to me this morning requesting permission to use my attempt at humor in telling you "the guard that checked your papers and gave you access to BMB last night was fired this morning" as your sig line. Do I need to send you a copy of your request and my response that it was fine with me?

Are you OK?

please do, as i either did not receive it, or inadvetantly deleted it while cleaning out my box.

we'll see.
 

BMBWalker

Beach Lover
Nov 1, 2006
130
0
Since I first found out about the four new developments in BMB on Big Redfish Lake, I have been against all four. The impact will be tremendous. For years, I have stated that Walton County needs more public parking for the beach accesses. On any given day in the season, the 83 access is full. Now, you are going to have two developments sending more people to that location. Parking has also been critical at Grayton Beach. The only place with decent parking is the public access between Seaside and WaterColor. Not everyone in SoWal lives within quick walking distance to the beach. The impact the four developments already has, and will have in the future, on Big Redfish Lake is bad, bad, bad. There was a time not too long ago, pre-armour plating of the beach, when I enjoyed the serenity of BMB. Today, I have to climb into my bubble, and put on my dreamy colored glasses in order to enjoy the serenity of that area. When the new developments are built out, forget about it. As someone else pointed out, Walton County is in critical need for parking at public beach accesses. I don't know that it matters whether the developments are close by or in Freeport, some smart and future minded decisions need to be made so that people can enjoy the beach and homeonwers in neighborhoods in close proximity to the beach can enjoy their right to privacy (people not peeing and parking in their yards).

SJ...well said; what are the two developments you mention? I only know of Redfish Village that is trying to get private access for their owners, guest, renters and invitees.
 

BMBWalker

Beach Lover
Nov 1, 2006
130
0
please do, as i either did not receive it, or inadvetantly deleted it while cleaning out my box.

we'll see.

Here you go:

Dear BMBWalker,

You have received a new private message at Beaches Of South Walton (SoWal) Message Board from John R, entitled "the guard".

This is the message that was sent:
***************
i hope you don't mind if i use that in my sig line for a while. lmao.

Glad to oblige.
 

John R

needs to get out more
Dec 31, 2005
6,772
808
Conflictinator
John R...as I said in our earlier communication this morning, I am surprised to learn that you did not know where the property is...

this is the part i'm confused about. i pm'd you requesting use and that's it. i got no response, and used it anyway. i have/had no communication back from you in the form of a PM.
 

BMBWalker

Beach Lover
Nov 1, 2006
130
0
I do not plan on getting into this hornet's nest except to let everyone know that it is my understanding that NO properties located between Big Redfish Lake and the CR83 access own to the water's edge. There is a platted public beach in front of all of them. To the west of CR83 is another issue entirely as most of those deeds read to the water's edge. I don't know if this matters, I just thought it may help in the highlighted section above. :D

Brad...could you save me some time and energy by pointing me to the recorded platted public beach you reference; where in the Walton County records, for that sub-division, is that defined and recorded?

Good to hear from you!
 

BMBWalker

Beach Lover
Nov 1, 2006
130
0
this is the part i'm confused about. i pm'd you requesting use and that's it. i got no response, and used it anyway. i have/had no communication back from you in the form of a PM.

I responded to your private post; if you didn't get my response to your private post, why did you go ahead and use the comment?

Also, why are you using a private post to discuss these issues with me? Please use the open forum in the future.
 
New posts