Here's a clip from the BMBCA (Richard Fowlkes and Anita Page are directors/members) meeting on October 2nd, 2006 regarding RFV and the (then) recent purchase of the 2nd bathroom lot. I bolded what is par for the course in South Walton County:
Redfish Village Developers Buy An Additional Lot On Blue Mountain Road
Developers of Redfish Village, finding they were unable to provide a private beach access to their clients at Redfish Village within the Blue Mountain Beach subdivision, purchased an additional beachfront lot just west of highway 83 at 260 Blue Mountain Road. BMBCA had fought Redfish Village?s attempt to develop a lot within the subdivision for anything other than a single family home as required by code. The new location is the former home site of Sandra Cawthon located three homes west of the highway 83 beach access.
Initially we are told the developer wanted to build two homes on their new property, which has an Infill land use designation. That designation allows up to 8 units per acre but with the size of the lot being much smaller than an acre they could have built three units. The Infill designation also allows for a commercial element. We worked with Commissioner Meadows in an attempt to see the developers did not violate any county rules and regulations. As discussions progressed the developer decided to drop the new buildings from two to one and then decided to not build any homes on the lot at all. They will be installing two bathrooms and two outdoor showers. There will be a place to park bikes and two parking places for maintenance. It is the intention of the developers to get people to the beach access via trolley. The route of the trolley is to be down 30-A up highway 83 and then right onto Blue Mountain Road to the property and back the same way.
Because the developer will be tearing down the duplex home on this site and replacing it with two bathrooms this will be a minor development and they will not be required to go before the BCC, so the commissioners will not be involved in the change at this property.
Unfortunately with more development there will be more and more individuals attempting to get to the beach. Our beach access points are very limited as is the parking but that will not stop new visitors. It is probably a good thing that some of these people from Redfish Village are being diverted from the regional beach walkover at highway 83 and the three neighborhood beach walkovers in the Blue Mountain Beach subdivision to their own site. It is also probably a good thing that there will be just two bathrooms at the site rather than three homes with all the parking that can come with those structures.
The first bolded part regarding the minor development order was wrong on BMBCA's part. I'm a little disappointed in their just bending over regarding this. The rest of us had to fight to make this a major development order as it should have been.
The rest of the bolded stuff, especially in red, is the "not in my backyard mentality" of the very group that was formed to help protect and be an advocate for our local neighborhoods. In the same BMBCA meeting they discuss all kinds of things in areas located further away from them (and not part of their subdivision) than the 260 lot such as Gulf Trace.
Notice the item in blue....It is also probably a good thing that there will be just two bathrooms at the site rather than three homes with all the parking that can come with those structures.
Now that I have re-read the above, it almost sounds word for word what Jason Bryan, of Walton County Planning Technical Review Committee who is assigned to this project, said during the TRC a couple of weeks ago....
That is, he stated that the use of the 260 Blue Mountain Road lot as a bathroom lot for private access for 80 condos (over 300 people) was a better use for this property than having condos built on it.
A neighbor stood up and "took issue" with his statement and stated that he felt condos would be a much better use for this property. Pretty obvious.
Keep in mind that only 3 units could probably be built on this property from what I've seen (ABSOLUTE max would be 4).
Mr. Jason Bryan was off base when making such a statement. I believe this shows the flagrant slant and favoritism that the Planning Commission and Walton County is making regarding this project.
Is this idea (of what is a better use for the lot), BMBCA is trying to convince the County of? OR is this the idea that the County is trying to convince BMBCA of (and BMBCA apparently agrees with)? Either way the idea is not acceptable AND I have little or no faith in BMBCA as a result.
In summary, I don't think RFV or Walton County expected all the opposition that they have received. This IS one bad project where the small voices collectively can have an impact in preventing.
Redfish Village Developers Buy An Additional Lot On Blue Mountain Road
Developers of Redfish Village, finding they were unable to provide a private beach access to their clients at Redfish Village within the Blue Mountain Beach subdivision, purchased an additional beachfront lot just west of highway 83 at 260 Blue Mountain Road. BMBCA had fought Redfish Village?s attempt to develop a lot within the subdivision for anything other than a single family home as required by code. The new location is the former home site of Sandra Cawthon located three homes west of the highway 83 beach access.
Initially we are told the developer wanted to build two homes on their new property, which has an Infill land use designation. That designation allows up to 8 units per acre but with the size of the lot being much smaller than an acre they could have built three units. The Infill designation also allows for a commercial element. We worked with Commissioner Meadows in an attempt to see the developers did not violate any county rules and regulations. As discussions progressed the developer decided to drop the new buildings from two to one and then decided to not build any homes on the lot at all. They will be installing two bathrooms and two outdoor showers. There will be a place to park bikes and two parking places for maintenance. It is the intention of the developers to get people to the beach access via trolley. The route of the trolley is to be down 30-A up highway 83 and then right onto Blue Mountain Road to the property and back the same way.
Because the developer will be tearing down the duplex home on this site and replacing it with two bathrooms this will be a minor development and they will not be required to go before the BCC, so the commissioners will not be involved in the change at this property.
Unfortunately with more development there will be more and more individuals attempting to get to the beach. Our beach access points are very limited as is the parking but that will not stop new visitors. It is probably a good thing that some of these people from Redfish Village are being diverted from the regional beach walkover at highway 83 and the three neighborhood beach walkovers in the Blue Mountain Beach subdivision to their own site. It is also probably a good thing that there will be just two bathrooms at the site rather than three homes with all the parking that can come with those structures.
The first bolded part regarding the minor development order was wrong on BMBCA's part. I'm a little disappointed in their just bending over regarding this. The rest of us had to fight to make this a major development order as it should have been.
The rest of the bolded stuff, especially in red, is the "not in my backyard mentality" of the very group that was formed to help protect and be an advocate for our local neighborhoods. In the same BMBCA meeting they discuss all kinds of things in areas located further away from them (and not part of their subdivision) than the 260 lot such as Gulf Trace.
Notice the item in blue....It is also probably a good thing that there will be just two bathrooms at the site rather than three homes with all the parking that can come with those structures.
Now that I have re-read the above, it almost sounds word for word what Jason Bryan, of Walton County Planning Technical Review Committee who is assigned to this project, said during the TRC a couple of weeks ago....
That is, he stated that the use of the 260 Blue Mountain Road lot as a bathroom lot for private access for 80 condos (over 300 people) was a better use for this property than having condos built on it.
A neighbor stood up and "took issue" with his statement and stated that he felt condos would be a much better use for this property. Pretty obvious.
Keep in mind that only 3 units could probably be built on this property from what I've seen (ABSOLUTE max would be 4).
Mr. Jason Bryan was off base when making such a statement. I believe this shows the flagrant slant and favoritism that the Planning Commission and Walton County is making regarding this project.
Is this idea (of what is a better use for the lot), BMBCA is trying to convince the County of? OR is this the idea that the County is trying to convince BMBCA of (and BMBCA apparently agrees with)? Either way the idea is not acceptable AND I have little or no faith in BMBCA as a result.
In summary, I don't think RFV or Walton County expected all the opposition that they have received. This IS one bad project where the small voices collectively can have an impact in preventing.
Last edited:
Maybe because "gulf and toilets view" and "frequent passing din of tolleys loaded with wet tourists" might not come across as attractive selling points in the MLS copy?