BMBCA Members,
Be aware that the developers of Redfish Village are asking the county for changes or amendments to their Development Order #402003. That is to say they want to do much more than what was requested and approved when this project originally went through the planning department and came before the county commissioners. The development is located across the street from the old Blue Mountain Beach subdivision north of 30-A. It runs from the northeast corner of the 30-A and highway 83 intersection east to Big Redfish Lake and north to the Lakeside At Blue Mountain Beach subdivision.
After having just gotten (last week) county approval to put a private beach access for their commercial development on what was at that point the location of a nice beachfront duplex, they are now saying they want to go into a preservation area on their property north of 30-A and add an open air theater, an additional pool and a board walk and dock on Big Redfish Lake. According to the county the developers have destroyed the preservation area on the east side of their property, which is located just west of Big Redfish Lake. We believe additional development in the area of this rare coastal dune lake will put additional pressure on this body of water. The county is considering this request, which was apparently made at a county technical review meeting 12/20/06. More recently various officials have been asked to comment on the proposed additions. We have just found out about the proposal on 1/30/07. The deadline for comments is 2/6/07.
We believe these are not small changes to the development. These amenities should have been requested when the development was originally proposed to give the community a chance to comment before the commissioners considered the plans for approval. Again, these changes are proposed for an area that is designated preservation. These areas should remain preserved and anything that has been disturbed should be restored. Those are the county rules. Furthermore these preservation areas may have helped garner approval for this development to begin with. If approved we believe the open air theater will produce a great deal of noise in the surrounding neighborhoods. We do not believe this is appropriate.
Despite reasonable protections for vegetation in the county code, these old trees continue to disappear. In large part this is because the county has failed to take any meaningful steps to enforce the code. Fencing off of protected areas is not required during construction and fines are rarely imposed and we are not sure they are ever collected. We negotiated with the developer of this property before he went to the county commissioners (BCC) for initial approval. Based in part on those negotiations we did not oppose the development at the BCC hearings and the development sailed through the process gaining quick approval.
The developer has already destroyed much of the vegetation along highway 83 that is designated preservation and some along 30-A. They were aware of this requirement to preserve the vegetation but stated to us they wanted to remove the native vegetation and landscape the areas. The county told them no. Nonetheless they have taken down much of the vegetation so they can move forward with ?landscaping,? which is what they wanted to do to begin with. The county has failed to fine the developer or take any meaningful action. It is still not clear what if anything the developer will be required to do with regard to restoring the areas along 30-A and 83. In the past, where any restoration was required, the county environmental officer allowed trees that were not much more than four-foot tall twigs.
We recently asked developer Brad Zeitlin if he was committed to restoring the vegetation that was destroyed in the building process. He told us, ?the landscape plan work we have been doing contemplates the replanting.? We asked what that meant, that it certainly did not sound like a commitment to restoration. He then wrote, ?we are committed to replanting the preservation areas.? What they are committed to is a landscaping plan, not a restoration plan, which is what they wanted all along. He invited us to view the plans but has failed to set a date. Since our conversations with Zeitlin we have found out he has submitted landscaping plans to the county, and the county has told them to ?remove some of the species that are not typically represented in the Sand Pine Scrub community.? We applaud that action on the part of the county and hope they will also require the developer to plant trees in similar density, height or diameter to the plants that originally existed on the site. They have not in the past.
If these proposals, destruction of trees and other vegetation in the preservation areas, an open air theater, an additional pool and a board walk and dock on Big Redfish Lake, concern you, speak out to our commissioners and to the planning department NOW.
Thank you.
Richard Fowlkes, President
Blue Mountain Beach Community Association
?Dedicated to the preservation of our residential community - its natural beauty and its quality of life ? through education, communication, and cooperation?
Scott Brannon, District 1
brascott@co.walton.fl.us
Kenneth Pridgen, District 2/Chairman
prikenneth@co.walton.fl.us
Larry Jones, District 3
jonlarry@co.walton.fl.us
Sara Comander, District 4
comsara@co.walton.fl.us
Cindy Meadows, District 5/Vice Chairman
meacindy@co.walton.fl.us
Ronnie Bell, County Administrator
belronnie@co.walton.fl.us
Pat Blackshear Director of Planning and Development
blapat@co.walton.fl.us
Lois La Seur
laslois@co.walton.fl.us
The DeFuniak Herald / Beach Breeze
herald@dfsi.net
The Walton Sun
sunnews@link.freedom.com
Be aware that the developers of Redfish Village are asking the county for changes or amendments to their Development Order #402003. That is to say they want to do much more than what was requested and approved when this project originally went through the planning department and came before the county commissioners. The development is located across the street from the old Blue Mountain Beach subdivision north of 30-A. It runs from the northeast corner of the 30-A and highway 83 intersection east to Big Redfish Lake and north to the Lakeside At Blue Mountain Beach subdivision.
After having just gotten (last week) county approval to put a private beach access for their commercial development on what was at that point the location of a nice beachfront duplex, they are now saying they want to go into a preservation area on their property north of 30-A and add an open air theater, an additional pool and a board walk and dock on Big Redfish Lake. According to the county the developers have destroyed the preservation area on the east side of their property, which is located just west of Big Redfish Lake. We believe additional development in the area of this rare coastal dune lake will put additional pressure on this body of water. The county is considering this request, which was apparently made at a county technical review meeting 12/20/06. More recently various officials have been asked to comment on the proposed additions. We have just found out about the proposal on 1/30/07. The deadline for comments is 2/6/07.
We believe these are not small changes to the development. These amenities should have been requested when the development was originally proposed to give the community a chance to comment before the commissioners considered the plans for approval. Again, these changes are proposed for an area that is designated preservation. These areas should remain preserved and anything that has been disturbed should be restored. Those are the county rules. Furthermore these preservation areas may have helped garner approval for this development to begin with. If approved we believe the open air theater will produce a great deal of noise in the surrounding neighborhoods. We do not believe this is appropriate.
Despite reasonable protections for vegetation in the county code, these old trees continue to disappear. In large part this is because the county has failed to take any meaningful steps to enforce the code. Fencing off of protected areas is not required during construction and fines are rarely imposed and we are not sure they are ever collected. We negotiated with the developer of this property before he went to the county commissioners (BCC) for initial approval. Based in part on those negotiations we did not oppose the development at the BCC hearings and the development sailed through the process gaining quick approval.
The developer has already destroyed much of the vegetation along highway 83 that is designated preservation and some along 30-A. They were aware of this requirement to preserve the vegetation but stated to us they wanted to remove the native vegetation and landscape the areas. The county told them no. Nonetheless they have taken down much of the vegetation so they can move forward with ?landscaping,? which is what they wanted to do to begin with. The county has failed to fine the developer or take any meaningful action. It is still not clear what if anything the developer will be required to do with regard to restoring the areas along 30-A and 83. In the past, where any restoration was required, the county environmental officer allowed trees that were not much more than four-foot tall twigs.
We recently asked developer Brad Zeitlin if he was committed to restoring the vegetation that was destroyed in the building process. He told us, ?the landscape plan work we have been doing contemplates the replanting.? We asked what that meant, that it certainly did not sound like a commitment to restoration. He then wrote, ?we are committed to replanting the preservation areas.? What they are committed to is a landscaping plan, not a restoration plan, which is what they wanted all along. He invited us to view the plans but has failed to set a date. Since our conversations with Zeitlin we have found out he has submitted landscaping plans to the county, and the county has told them to ?remove some of the species that are not typically represented in the Sand Pine Scrub community.? We applaud that action on the part of the county and hope they will also require the developer to plant trees in similar density, height or diameter to the plants that originally existed on the site. They have not in the past.
If these proposals, destruction of trees and other vegetation in the preservation areas, an open air theater, an additional pool and a board walk and dock on Big Redfish Lake, concern you, speak out to our commissioners and to the planning department NOW.
Thank you.
Richard Fowlkes, President
Blue Mountain Beach Community Association
?Dedicated to the preservation of our residential community - its natural beauty and its quality of life ? through education, communication, and cooperation?
Scott Brannon, District 1
brascott@co.walton.fl.us
Kenneth Pridgen, District 2/Chairman
prikenneth@co.walton.fl.us
Larry Jones, District 3
jonlarry@co.walton.fl.us
Sara Comander, District 4
comsara@co.walton.fl.us
Cindy Meadows, District 5/Vice Chairman
meacindy@co.walton.fl.us
Ronnie Bell, County Administrator
belronnie@co.walton.fl.us
Pat Blackshear Director of Planning and Development
blapat@co.walton.fl.us
Lois La Seur
laslois@co.walton.fl.us
The DeFuniak Herald / Beach Breeze
herald@dfsi.net
The Walton Sun
sunnews@link.freedom.com
