Seawall and Lighting Ordinance decisions to be made

[ecopal]

Important Seawall and Lighting Ordinance decisions to be made

These very important issues are on the agenda for the April 10 Board of County Commissioners meeting 4 PM Tuesday Courthouse Annex, 31 Coastal Centre Blvd, Santa Rosa Beach.

1. Please contact the County Commissioners and tell them to vote FOR the Lighting Ordinance.

We have an historic opportunity to do something to make Walton County a better place for all of us. The Walton County Board of County Commissioners is scheduled to vote on a common sense county wide lighting ordinance this coming Tuesday, 4/10/07. This is NOT a sea turtle lighting ordinance. A citizen’s community committee appointed by the County has been working on the draft of this ordinance for about two years.

We need an ordinance to protect our night skies and our beach communities from new developments, businesses and complexes who are flooding the night sky with excessive light in the name of safety or to attract patrons. This ordinance will help Walton County maintain its unique character.

Please contact the County Commissioners and tell then to vote FOR the Lighting Ordinance. The more commissioners you can contact the better. If you possible, go to the County Commission meeting at the South Annex Tuesday, 4/10/07, at 4 PM and speak in support of the ordinance.

2. Another a BCC agenda item concerns applications by gulf front property owners to build new seawalls. As I understand it, the meeting topic does not specifically relate to the seawalls previously approved by the county under the Emergency Permitting Order in connection with Hurricane Dennis.

Policy L-1.5.1 (2) of the Comprehensive Plan provides that “no activities shall be permitted which create erosion of dunes or the dune system”. There is considerable documentation from state and federal agencies as well as from private coastal engineers which indicates that coastal armoring can, under certain circumstances, contribute to increased beach erosion, particularly in the case of an eroding shoreline. (previous SWCC emails provide references to such documentation)

As new seawalls are now being requested, the county must decide whether they are permissible under Policy L-1.5.1 (2) and what requirements, if any, will be applicable. The county has hired an attorney for a legal assessment. The legal opinion will be presented at the meeting.

In addition to the legal issues, SWCC has repeatedly suggested that the decision of how to balance protection of upland structures with protecting the beach and dune system should be premised on the best science and expert opinion available. We applaud the county for retaining Professor Robert Dean, a renown coastal engineer to assist staff in developing a policy on armoring and the beaches. Professor Dean is a leading expert in wave action and coastal erosion issues.

Please contact the below officials and come to the BCC meeting.

Scott Brannon, District 1
19367 U.S. Hwy 331 South
Freeport, FL 32439
Phone: 850-835-4860
Fax: 850-835-4836
Email: <brascott@co.walton.fl.us>


Kenneth Pridgen, District 2/Chairman
17400 State Hwy 83 North
DeFuniak Springs, FL 32433
Phone: 850-834-6328
Fax: 850-834-6385
Email: <prikenneth@co.walton.fl.us>

Larry Jones, District 3
1483 County Highway 1087
DeFuniak Springs, FL 32435
Phone: 850-892-8474
Fax: 850-892-8475
Email: <jonlarry@co.walton.fl.us>

Sara Comander, District 4
417 Highway 20 East
Freeport, FL 32439
Phone: 850-835-4834
Fax: 850-835-0295
Email: <comsara@co.walton.fl.us>

Cindy Meadows, District 5/Vice Chairman
90 Spires Lane, Unit 7-A
Santa Rosa Beach, FL 32459
Phone: 850-622-3059
Fax: 850-622-3067
Email: <meacindy@co.walton.fl.us>

Ronnie Bell, County Administrator
117 Montgomery Circle
DeFuniak Springs, FL 32435
850-892-8155
Fax: 850-892-8454
Email: <belronnie@co.walton.fl.us>

Pat Blackshear
Director of Planning and Development
31 Coastal Centre Blvd., Ste. 100
Santa Rosa Beach, FL 32459
Phone: (850) 267-1955
Fax: (850) 622-9133
Email: <blapat@co.walton.fl.us>


Lois La Seur
Planning Manager
31 Coastal Centre Blvd., Ste. 100
Santa Rosa Beach, FL 32459
Phone: (850) 267-1955
Fax: (850) 622-9133
Email: <laslois@co.walton.fl.us>

 

[seacrestkristi]

Thanks for the update, Ecopal, I just e-mailed Ken Pridgen. He replied and thanked me for my e-mail last time I sent one. Thought that was nice of him to take the time to let me know he read my concerns.

 

[Beachbummette]

This was forwarded to me from a friend and I told him I would post it. How many sticker orders we can get him!

As some of you know,

My greatest pet peeve in the world is un-necessary exterior lighting here at the beach. One of the great lost pleasures here is the inability to enjoy the wonderful night sky . Having gained over a half century of experience an appreciation for the beautiful night skys we have , I long ago disabused myself of the common urban fear of marauders of the night and the perceived necessity for garish exterior lighting designed to ward off the predations of villains and highwaymen. As a native of New Orleans, that den of iniquity where the experience of being set upon by brigands is an ever present threat, I fully understand the apprehensions of those denizens of various precincts wherein urban or rural terror reigns supreme in the darkness.

However, I think it stupendously innapropriate and thoroughly ironic that people would seek to pollute our beautiful starry nights here in South Walton with horrible ,bright, direct, white, source visible lighting when subtle, low intensity, shaded, downward-shining, non-white , and non source-visible llighting would be sufficient.

Think about it. If a wall mounted bright white light is on, what does it do? It projects its intensity directly in a horizontal and vertial way to simultaneously blind anyone looking in that direction and obscure the beautiful stars and moon above. If the same fixture was shaded downward such that the light source (bulb) wasn't visible and the intensity (wattage) was reduced, the purpose of safety and security would be fully realised. The human eye adjusts to low ambient night lighting very quickly and enables a person to discern shadows and movement at night much better that in the presence of bright ,direct, and horizontal sources of artificial light. The type of lighting I'm talking about actually exacerbates the security situation because it directs the purported malefactors of the evening to simply avoid the bright fields of light and to seek the shaded areas from which thay may easily spring upon their light-blinded and unsuspecting victims . And all this un-neccessary lighting is in an area where night crime is practically non-existant!

So I would exhort all of you to give a thought to this problem and think seriously about modifying your exterior lighting so as to allow yourselves and your neighbors to experience the incredible beauty of our spectacular nights.

Also, please be aware that , if you rent your house, you can be ASSURED that ALL of your exterior lights will remain "ON" 24/7 for the ENTIRE rental period , regardless! It is something I've observed without exception and noted with amazement for the last 6 years of residence. It must be something to do with the rental mentality, but it NEVER FAILS! So, PLEASE, if you rent, un-srew your exterior bulbs or put motion timers on them , because I can assure you, the switches will ALL be "ON" ALL Summer and whenever renters are in residence.

I haven't even mentioned the turtle issue , because I know it excites a visceral reaction in some people to want to go right out and buy bright lights to shine on the beach. Let me say that I fully understand your frustration with the inexorable march of further government intrusion in our lives. Additionally, I can tell you that the proposed ordinance will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to help the turtle lighting problem. However, if you WOULD like to do something to reduce the un-neccessary lighting during rental season, I have a quantity of small stickers that can be stuck onto the switch plates of the light fixtures in question. They politely request that the particular switch be left in the "off "position unless required for some specific temporary purpose. I would be more than happy to PERSONALLY stop by your property to apply these stickers in the appropriate locations.

Thank you and may you soon learn to enjoy the sublime pleasures of the night skys of South Walton!

 

[Jdarg]

BB- thank your friend for such a great letter. I for one would like to continue to see the stars!

 

[TreeFrog]

Beachbummet has it exactly right about renters leaving all the outside lights on all the time. I live near a number of rentals and that's the way it is.

Message to our vacationing friends from Atlanta, Tallahassee, Birmingham, and Dallas...

It's safe here in SoWal, that's one of the reasons you enjoy vacationing here. So it's OK to turn the outside lights off at night. Come out and look at the stars.

 

[seacrestkristi]

:scratch: Speaking of lights ya'll, just curious and I've really been biting my tongue cuz I don't want to hurt a neighbors feelings but why does the seafood restaurant by the dune lake have to shine its neon lights on the dune lake every night?

Do they think we can't see the regular sign that most everyone else around them were respectfully required to use for the natural area we all enjoy?

Just got me wonderin', what makes that okay, anybody? If that is in compliance I think sumpin' should be fixed with the rules.

It is a little embarassing to post too cuz it's probably somebody's friend, sorry in advance. I just love the reflection of the moon and stars on the lake without the red and blue lite brite effect beside it. Tho lite brite is lotzofunn indoors.

 

[Beachbummette]

Lighting Ordinace passed yesterday! :clap_1: Will post details ASAP!:clap_1:

 

[Jdarg]

Lighting Ordinace passed yesterday! :clap_1: Will post details ASAP!:clap_1:

Yay!!:clap_1:

 

[John R]

there was some back and forth regarding the agricultural need for lights overnight, in mossy head. there was some wrangling over giving ag a variance or not. don't remember which way it went.

there was also a provision made to allow new construction to get a final without the expensive lumens test. it will be up to citizens to report potential offenders, and if you call in a bogus offense 2x, you will be paying for the call.

a citizen steped up and asked to make it available to the potential offender, the identification of the complaintant, which i think could spark neighbor wars, but i think they approved that request.

some more, but i've forgotten

 

[Smiling JOe]

That is correct, John R. The agriculture exemption sailed through along with two other exemptions, schools and school recreation property, along with ... I cannot recall.

The tricky part of code enforcement policing these complaints of light voilations will be that it sounds like an expense lumens test will be needed to see if the person is in violation of the lighting ordinance. I guarantee you that Code Enforcement wont be paying for the tests. The property owner won't pay for it either. So that leaves only the complaintant, and I doubt they are going to pay for it. There are holes in this policy which I hope can be filled. Example -- someone is in violation and the neighbor places the call. Since Code Enforcement doesn't work at night, some officer is on call for the lighting complaints. Code enforcement comes out, but the basketball game is over before Code Enforcement arrives. Neighbor gets charged a fine for a "bogus" call. Not gonna fly. On top of that, the people playing basketball don't even live on the property, and the person who does live there is a tenant. ... Enforcement of such policy needs much trebajo.