Redfish Village Beach Access

I happen to have property on the east side of 83 and know all the facts about lot 1. We tried to stop lot 1 but never got anywhere. Since you are so vocal I guess the east siders need to speak up. All of you must live on the west side because we like the idea of not having people flooding down our roads walking on our property driving on the roads and leaving trash. We actually think the idea is great to have them shuttled to one location. All the letters are public record and there happened to be a response to that letter from an attorney for Redfish which I have seen, which you must choose to ignore, which is also available which shut the Walton County people down on commenting on what was being advertised. It was not Walton County's place to tell a developer not to advertise anything and it was shown that Redfish never said they had approval from Walton County for anything. We learned that they can advertise whatever they want as long as they deliver it at the end. All of your facts are wrong. You just happen to be upset like we were when we thought it was on our side of the road. Now it's on your side but guess what, we are the one's who have residential preservation you don't. You are in the middle of condominiums and townhouses already so what is your issue that you will have more people to deal with?

I happen to have property on the east side of 83 and know all the facts about lot 1. We tried to stop lot 1 but never got anywhere. Since you are so vocal I guess the east siders need to speak up. All of you must live on the west side because we like the idea of not having people flooding down our roads walking on our property driving on the roads and leaving trash. We actually think the idea is great to have them shuttled to one location. All the letters are public record and there happened to be a response to that letter from an attorney for Redfish which I have seen, which you must choose to ignore, which is also available which shut the Walton County people down on commenting on what was being advertised. It was not Walton County's place to tell a developer not to advertise anything and it was shown that Redfish never said they had approval from Walton County for anything. We learned that they can advertise whatever they want as long as they deliver it at the end. All of your facts are wrong. You just happen to be upset like we were when we thought it was on our side of the road. Now it's on your side but guess what, we are the one's who have residential preservation you don't. You are in the middle of condominiums and townhouses already so what is your issue that you will have more people to deal with?

Kevin...you answered it yourself (see your bolded red sentence). It's also the density on a 75 foot lot that's the problem; nothing positive can come from this. Any townhouse or condo on Blue Mountain Road has the beachfront property and access to handle it's density.

Your point missed it's target. All property owners on Blue Mountain Road, with the exception of Redfish Village, want the same thing; enjoyment and use of their property and a lessening of the denisity impact these developments bring to a very small area of the beach.

BMB that is exactly the point I was trying to make and now you are talking about the real issue. All the posts on this board have been speculation. Most of the posts are not accurate, they are fun to read especially Edroe it's like a Tom Clancy book, it's just not the facts. I only know a few but enough to know that people are using these lies to try and push Redfish people back to the east. The point though is that whether they are on our side or your side (east v west) it's going to affect one of us. I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

BMB that is exactly the point I was trying to make and now you are talking about the real issue. All the posts on this board have been speculation. Most of the posts are not accurate, they are fun to read especially Edroe it's like a Tom Clancy book, it's just not the facts. I only know a few but enough to know that people are using these lies to try and push Redfish people back to the east. The point though is that whether they are on our side or your side (east v west) it's going to affect one of us. I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

I think you have it wrong, and folks are talking about lot 1 because they want to make sure it's OUT of the picture and won't come back in the picture. It's not appropriate on either lot if you live in BMB or anywhere else on 30A or if you love 30A and don't want this to set a bad precedent for future developments.

BMB and surrounding areas should be united against this if they don't want it to happen. There's probably about 55 contract holders that would be willing to pitch in to fund attornies for obvious reasons.

But if lot 1 is definitely a no go then the developer is already in breach because the contracts specifically reference that lot and even has an attached survey. As it is it looks like the project won't be completed in the alloted time so private beach access is probably moot for the contract holders who don't want to close and won't have to because the contracts will expire.

... I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

It isn't just condos, though there are many whose owners and guests will be using Blue Mtn Beach. Look slightly farther north to Lakeside at Blue Mtn (They should have called it Creekside, because that is only a creek where they illegally built the bridge on top of the wetlands which are a part of Big Redfish Lake), where they have single family homes going in. I am not sure as to the number, but a wild guess would be 50-80. These owners and guests will also be calling BMB, their own beach.

I guess that's your opinion but we are the one's who did all the legal research when it was going to be lot 1. You again are speculating about their breach of contract if it is lot 2 which is where we want it to be. Do you really think they would be working on lot 2 if it made all their contracts go away? I would like to see you you think the project won't be complete. It looks pretty far along.

I think you have it wrong, and folks are talking about lot 1 because they want to make sure it's OUT of the picture and won't come back in the picture. It's not appropriate on either lot if you live in BMB or anywhere else on 30A or if you love 30A and don't want this to set a bad precedent for future developments.

BMB and surrounding areas should be united against this if they don't want it to happen. There's probably about 55 contract holders that would be willing to pitch in to fund attornies for obvious reasons.

But if lot 1 is definitely a no go then the developer is already in breach because the contracts specifically reference that lot and even has an attached survey. As it is it looks like the project won't be completed in the alloted time so private beach access is probably moot for the contract holders who don't want to close and won't have to because the contracts will expire.

:clap_1: Well stated. It seems that most people only give a crap about their own small area. Heck, even the developer of NatureWalk was apparently upset that people from more than 300' from their proposed Private Beach Club, showed up to the meeting. Those guys in Seagrove are experiencing similar problems with the private beach club of Nature Walk, yet I see only one or two people from this thread posting over there. Where is the unity? If you are not willing to help your neighbor fight for what you think to be true, do you think he or she will fight for you when the time comes, and the time will come, trust me.

BMB that is exactly the point I was trying to make and now you are talking about the real issue. All the posts on this board have been speculation. Most of the posts are not accurate, they are fun to read especially Edroe it's like a Tom Clancy book, it's just not the facts. I only know a few but enough to know that people are using these lies to try and push Redfish people back to the east. The point though is that whether they are on our side or your side (east v west) it's going to affect one of us. I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

Kevin....You're right; cannot argue against your points.

It's not just the east or west that will suffer if the county let's this atrocity be installed; it's the whole area. Look at the property available to developers to the North of Blue Mountain Rd. It's huge! Developers will fall all over themselves if these private gateways are approved. As I said earlier, there's nothing positive to come from this issue except for Redfish Village developers. All owners that stay, and all that come after the developers leave, will loose a wonderful beach "experience" because of the county's apparent permitting process. This must stop and the only way it will is if the community, both east and west, fight this permitting process. It is not going to be an easy task, but it is one that is worth the effort if we care about this very special area. High density projects just do damage to a beach!

Redfish Village developers are keen to say "we're sensitive to the community"; oh yeah, give me a break...just find a property owner on Blue Mountain Road that wants this project anywhere on the road. If they are so sensitive to our needs, then they need to pack up and leave because they are not wanted in any neighborhood that I'm aware of. Sensitive to our community, my _ _ _ (fill in the blank)!!!

I am signing off for the night need to finish Christmas shopping. All I can say to that though is that Walton County is growing and changing and those developments north will come and they will keep overcrowding our beach. There will have to be a way to make it orderly unless they put cops on every road. It all comes down to "not in my backyard" it always comes down to that. I can't help but want to have Redfish shuttle people to one spot instead of letting them come crazy down all of our roads. I can't help it I like their idea. I will unite though in fighting development.

BMB that is exactly the point I was trying to make and now you are talking about the real issue. All the posts on this board have been speculation. Most of the posts are not accurate, they are fun to read especially Edroe it's like a Tom Clancy book, it's just not the facts. I only know a few but enough to know that people are using these lies to try and push Redfish people back to the east. The point though is that whether they are on our side or your side (east v west) it's going to affect one of us. I don't want any more traffic on the beach but once Walton County let's these developers build condos up and down 30A to the north, it is a crazy afterthought to think now we can keep them off of "our" beach. I know they are not going to stand single file on the strip of these four beach accesses.

KT-I am fat from a XMas dinner and looks like I have missed out on some great stuff.

KT - Provide me with one thing that I have said on this thing that is not a fact? Seems like you have only had a day to review. OK OK What LyingFish Trailer Park... You have to be kidding me if you think they are not trying to slide this one under on all of us. They have plenty of suits (Lawyers Buster) working on all this legal stuff. Some of the smartest lawyers could not even twist this code book up. But if you get Local Elected officials to then that is something else.

But if lot 1 is definitely a no go then the developer is already in breach because the contracts specifically reference that lot and even has an attached survey. As it is it looks like the project won't be completed in the alloted time so private beach access is probably moot for the contract holders who don't want to close and won't have to because the contracts will expire.

Jim do you have this in PDF? Would love to see it in a PrivateMail? Had someone call me out on the part about LyingFish the other day and would love to see that portion of the contract. That would definitely prove my point.

It would be good to see. What I had heard was that RFV was sued by the adjoining lot (of lot 1) and that there might have been some judgement. Also there was mention of a stop work order when they started building the walkover on that lot. Maybe that was a result of the lawsuit.

What I have not seen is something in writing from the county that the county denied the intended use on lot 1.

For those friends of LyingFish Trailer Park ask them about the letter they received from Division of Planning and Development Services. This was a Dear Mr. Zeitlin letter and lets just say in this letter dated May 5 2006, which I am having an issue with these timelines too, told them this lot in BMB (Lot 1 as we see it) could only be used for NPA/RP and does not allow any use other than one single family home per platted lot. Any other use would violate their Comprehensive Plan and for you contract holds they go on to tell them to stop tell prospective buyers that it was false and deceptive.

SJ - It was sent to Hard2Sell group too. So looks to me like they are sleeping in the Orchard. They do make a good first impression.

HMMMM
KT- The facts. I just happen to have the letter.

Buster-You might already have the letter.

Sounds like you have personal issues with these people. Were you fired by them? I like reading your posts but it was easy to find out that you and Buster are wrong and there was never a judgement on the 1st lot and that they still have that lot as an option. I know people at hard2sell as you call it and I actually like them.

Was not fired. Could smell the fish from the road.

From the sounds of things LyingFish Trailer Park is giving Developers and Realtors a bad name in this area. Developers are going to have the LyingFish Trailer Park rule. Get your permits approved before you start your printing press.. Sound like a good rule to you KT?

I think I have already posted an update on Lot 1 at BMB.

KT-As I have stated in earlier post. Stating the Facts. I want you to spend time proving me wrong. Seems like you are a new poster and maybe you have been reading these threads for months and just decided to participate. I do not know but keep up the hard work at defending your friends. Do you work in the Trailer or do you own interest in this project too. Hard2Sell has 20 percent invested with the apple company what is your position?

If this goes my way I will have a book signing this summer at a coffee shop near you.

I am signing off for the night need to finish Christmas shopping. All I can say to that though is that Walton County is growing and changing and those developments north will come and they will keep overcrowding our beach. There will have to be a way to make it orderly unless they put cops on every road. It all comes down to "not in my backyard" it always comes down to that. I can't help but want to have Redfish shuttle people to one spot instead of letting them come crazy down all of our roads. I can't help it I like their idea. I will unite though in fighting development.

Sorry KT - I guess this post answered the interest question I had.

Edroe it looks like you joined recently also. My interest is simple, I own property to the east and don't want a flood of traffic down all of our roads. What is your interest? It seems like you just have an axe to grind? How do you know all these things about who owns what in Lyingfish and who really cares what hard2sell owns? What does that mean to us? If you have the letter you talk about then you must have the letter we have which was the response from their attorneys which made the letter you have completely unimportant and no longer anything we could rely on when we were fighting lot 1. You either don't know the facts or you are trying to hide them from people, either way it's a bad thing for those who are relying on what you say. Almost everything you have said is wrong and you just seem to be trashing people and I do happen to like the people at H2O they have been very nice and up front with us. Everybody else here says what their point is but you just play these games with these snippets of who owns what and who said what. I will tell you that the east side will stand up for what we believe is the right thing for Blue Mountain. Do you even have property there or are you just angry at somebody?

Edroe it looks like you joined recently also. My interest is simple, I own property to the east and don't want a flood of traffic down all of our roads. What is your interest? It seems like you just have an axe to grind? How do you know all these things about who owns what in Lyingfish and who really cares what hard2sell owns? What does that mean to us? If you have the letter you talk about then you must have the letter we have which was the response from their attorneys which made the letter you have completely unimportant and no longer anything we could rely on when we were fighting lot 1. You either don't know the facts or you are trying to hide them from people, either way it's a bad thing for those who are relying on what you say. Almost everything you have said is wrong and you just seem to be trashing people and I do happen to like the people at H2O they have been very nice and up front with us. Everybody else here says what their point is but you just play these games with these snippets of who owns what and who said what. I will tell you that the east side will stand up for what we believe is the right thing for Blue Mountain. Do you even have property there or are you just angry at somebody?

My interests are yours. I do not want to see a developer come in and take advantage of the community. This will kill BMB. It is already small enough without developers help.

The reason I let you know the relationship between Hard2Sell and Apple group is because they are in this together so how can you trust Hard2Sell? I happen to like Hard2Sell too. They are nice people. I hear that Apple group and Hard2Sell are friends again. Their relationship was on thin ice this year.

So do not make me go back and read all my post. I just want you to show me one example of me being wrong and I am sure we can clear this thing up.

I will do that edroe but after Christmas. Don't you have a copy of that letter the one that responds to the one you posted? I will try and get a copy I can post or does anyone have one? It makes the County's letter moot. They still have their rights on Lot 1 we know that and it is why there was never a judgement on Lot 1. And my friend at hard2sell says they do not have 20% invested as you say so what is your proof? I still don't understand why you keep posting these snippets about their relationship being on thin ice or whatever I don't know why we should care about that. I have told you my reasons but I still don't know yours. Do you own property there or not is it east or west of 83? It makes it hard to discuss the facts of the beach access with you when it really sounds like you have an axe to grind with these people or are you hoping to get out of a contract with them?

Smiling Joe thanks for your support against Naturewalk Beachclub. Unfortunately I'm not hearing from people about it. I thought all of 30A would be outraged that a 2500 person/day club was proposed by anyone. Again people IM me if anyone wants to help stop this. I urge all to show at the Commissioners Meeting on the 24th. to voice the opinions. If 100 people show with a 5 min. speech when open discussion is allowed then maybe we have a chance. Seagrove needs all of 30A help!

I am signing off for the night need to finish Christmas shopping. All I can say to that though is that Walton County is growing and changing and those developments north will come and they will keep overcrowding our beach. There will have to be a way to make it orderly unless they put cops on every road. It all comes down to "not in my backyard" it always comes down to that. I can't help but want to have Redfish shuttle people to one spot instead of letting them come crazy down all of our roads. I can't help it I like their idea. I will unite though in fighting development.

Kevin....it's greater than "not in my backyard"; it's more like "not in our backyard". There is nothing positive to come from having small private gateways dumping hundreds of people on a small area of the beach. This incredible concentration only diminishes every aspect of beachfront property and usage.

By your statement that "I can't help but want to have Redfish shuttle people to one spot instead of letting them come crazy down all our roads" you show a real insensivity to beach usage. First of all, if the county does not permit the Redfish Village proposal, future developers will think twice before they come into our area to develop; these developers will only build if they run the numbers and the numbers come up with big gains. The big gains will not be there if there is only public access; investors and future owners will not invest huge sums of money to use public access only beaches, especially in the current real estate market. Second, if the developments are not here, you won't have them "crazy down all our roads." Third, dispersal of people is better than concentration on the beach.

A few questions:
1.What did you and you neighbors do when Redfish Village proposed their development on C-30A in 2003/2004? Did you personally get involved in trying to stop the development from going forward?
2. You say you own property east of CR-83 public access. What do you own: lot(s), home(s) or condo(s)?
3. Were the four roads coming off C-30A, and turning into six roads which deadend into Blue Mountain Rd., in your subdivision when you purchased your property? Were the four public access walkways to the beach off Blue Mountain Rd. shown on your subdivision plat or did the county install them later?
4. Will you show up at county meetings and support the resistance to this, and other, private gateway concepts in our area?

I'm sorry to read that you like their idea. This idea is not a good one for anyone in our area or the area itself.

BMB I would really like to pick this up after the 25th you can keeping going after this but you really are getting to your problem which is "beach usage". What I am talking about is only the Redfish and that they are here. Future developers will build no matter what and those people will come to our beach and our only choice would be to move to a place quieter. I have had a home east of 83 for years and it keeps changing and have been involved in challenging what I can. Where do you live? We have a choice right now to control those people instead of having them stomping, driving, dropping trash down our roads. I feel like I am the only one talking about the facts and those are the best way to route those people to the beach if they want to come because I don't see a law where we can stop them from coming I am not insensitive to it I am just a realist and know they are coming it is only about how they get there. We may just have opposing views which is fine in the spirit of the day why don't we just pick this up in a couple days. And those Naturewalk owners are also going to the beach if they want to right? It is just a question of where they go and where they park their cars. Do you really think we can stop all those people from coming to "our beach". Are you BEACHFRONT?

Smiling Joe thanks for your support against Naturewalk Beachclub. Unfortunately I'm not hearing from people about it. I thought all of 30A would be outraged that a 2500 person/day club was proposed by anyone. Again people IM me if anyone wants to help stop this. I urge all to show at the Commissioners Meeting on the 24th. to voice the opinions. If 100 people show with a 5 min. speech when open discussion is allowed then maybe we have a chance. Seagrove needs all of 30A help!

BeachSteelers...ditto; can you mobilize Seagrove and help resist our Redfish Village access issue?

BMB I would really like to pick this up after the 25th you can keeping going after this but you really are getting to your problem which is "beach usage". What I am talking about is only the Redfish and that they are here. Future developers will build no matter what and those people will come to our beach and our only choice would be to move to a place quieter. I have had a home east of 83 for years and it keeps changing and have been involved in challenging what I can. Where do you live? We have a choice right now to control those people instead of having them stomping, driving, dropping trash down our roads. I feel like I am the only one talking about the facts and those are the best way to route those people to the beach if they want to come because I don't see a law where we can stop them from coming I am not insensitive to it I am just a realist and know they are coming it is only about how they get there. We may just have opposing views which is fine in the spirit of the day why don't we just pick this up in a couple days. And those Naturewalk owners are also going to the beach if they want to right? It is just a question of where they go and where they park their cars. Do you really think we can stop all those people from coming to "our beach". Are you BEACHFRONT?

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.

if the rfv access gets approved, these second class non-beachfront owning citizens will have 5 accesses. maybe BMBW could stand out front with a clicker and redirect the shuttles when the maximum concentration is reached on lot 2. 8ppl, 10? BMBW, what is your alternative, have them not come to the beach? the thing is there, it will be filled, they will come.

a question(s) to anyone, since BMBW doesn't answer questions. what it RFV just built boardwalks and stairs? on both property's? would that still be considered incompatable?

regarding H20, who's sleeping with who's enemy?

Merry Christmas.

Edroe it looks like you joined recently also. My interest is simple, I own property to the east and don't want a flood of traffic down all of our roads. What is your interest? It seems like you just have an axe to grind? How do you know all these things about who owns what in Lyingfish and who really cares what hard2sell owns? What does that mean to us? If you have the letter you talk about then you must have the letter we have which was the response from their attorneys which made the letter you have completely unimportant and no longer anything we could rely on when we were fighting lot 1. You either don't know the facts or you are trying to hide them from people, either way it's a bad thing for those who are relying on what you say. Almost everything you have said is wrong and you just seem to be trashing people and I do happen to like the people at H2O they have been very nice and up front with us. Everybody else here says what their point is but you just play these games with these snippets of who owns what and who said what. I will tell you that the east side will stand up for what we believe is the right thing for Blue Mountain. Do you even have property there or are you just angry at somebody?

http://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/stories/2005/07/18/focus1.html?from_rss=1



KT-LyingFish Trailer Park's attorney said duirng the official community meeting, that it was because of ZONING on lot 1 that LyingFish Trailer Park decided to pursue lot 2.

KT-Read the part about LRI and H20. Why would you ask the trailer? I am telling you they are out to make a buck or two.

Hard2Sell-I am guessing this article was a misprint too.. Maybe we can have local Memphis.gov correct these typos. As I see it KA owns LRI and H20. This would be a conflict of interest were I work.

Again KT the facts.

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?