I would like to know if beachfront owners own the beach to the mean water line, a determination made ,as I understand it ,over a 19 year peroid. I dont believe this, but if it's so, it compounds the whole problem of seawalls. Is there a legal opinion?
Seawalls
- Thread starter Blake
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
bbnut, it appears you may be asking a question and making some statements in your first sentence, not sure which. with regards to the water line, there is some quite spirited discussion within this thread and over in the redfish thread. there are many opinions floating around, not necessarily legal. read up on the redfish thread, and you may get an idea of what's going on. kind of hard to follow. remember, i'm for the PBA.
According to Walton County deeds, some Gulf front property owners own to the Mean High Water Mark, and some own only to the bluff's edge, with the beach being public. It varies from parcel to parcel, and that is one thing which varies much from most Bay front parcels where there is not much public property in between the Bay and the individual property owners. (Someone incorrectly compared the two as being no different. ;-))
The confusion for the average beach goer rests in the fact that you have to look up plats, dedications, deeds, and easements to determine who owns the beach, and in some cases, it is clear that the individual property owners do not own it, but there is no reference as to who owns it. Until this is sorted out, I guess I will just take my chances with being shot for trespassing. Most beach goers don't even know what the flag colors at the beach represent, don't expect them to read through deeds while on vacation so that they know where to set up camp.
Some (many) gulf front property owners do own to the MHW line. But I'm puzzled by your statement that "it compunds the whole problem of seawalls". Can you help us out here and tell us what you're thinking?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070224/ap_on_sc/threatened_coasts
HAPPISBURGH, England - A 12-bedroom guest house, with beautiful views of the North Sea, a lighthouse and sandy beaches, sounds like prime real estate.
But Cliff House is nearly worthless.
The offshore wooden barrier that once protected the sand and clay cliffs of this stretch of eastern English coast has broken apart, and the government has decided that with the expected rise in sea levels and storm surges that experts attribute to global warming, some vulnerable coastal areas are no longer worth defending.
"The next big storm could take us away," said Diana Wrightson, one of two elderly women who bought Cliff House 26 years ago, assuming the coastline would always be protected.
Predictions of rising sea levels usually envision the low-lying islands of the south seas, or cyclone-prone Bangladesh, as the most vulnerable victims. But Britain is part of a growing club of rich countries whose coastal populations feel threatened.
Hurricane Katrina looked to many like the shape of things to come when it devastated New Orleans in 2005. Venice is building up its defenses. Holland is rethinking its famous seawalls.
The fears have grown more acute following the release this month of a report by scientists from 113 countries forecasting temperature rises of 2 to 11.5 degrees Fahrenheit and sea level rises of 7 to 23 inches by the end of the century. It says global warming is almost certainly man-made.
Britain's own "Stern Review," a sweeping report about climate change, says unless action is taken, rising sea levels, heavier floods and more intense droughts could displace 200 million people worldwide by the middle of the century.
Ronan Uhel, a top official at the European Environment Agency in Copenhagen, said the situation in Happisburgh shows that governments and insurance companies have finally started letting the public know that it will have to do more than buy fuel-efficient cars and better light bulbs to fight global warming.
He said citizens are being shown they can't keep building homes on islands and near lowlands and coastlines, especially in vulnerable areas where it no longer makes sense to rebuild offshore barriers.
In countries like Britain, "a national debate is just starting about what is an appropriate policy of adaptation to climate change," Uhel said in an interview. "People are just beginning to realize the risks of global warming and the big lifestyle changes that may be needed to brace for them."
Late last year, a new law took effect in England and Wales whereby the government decides whether it makes sense, economically and environmentally, to rebuild barriers.
For Happisburgh, 135 miles northeast of London, the answer was no.
"Basically, whatever we do to reduce greenhouse emissions we're going to face about one meter (3.3 feet) sea level rise on the east coast of England in the next 100 years," Clive Bates, a top official at the British government's Environment Agency, told The Associated Press.
"Either we won't be able to defend part of the coast, or it will be too expensive to do it. One of the most troubling issues for us is to decide where we can no longer sustain coastal defense, where we basically need to warn people to retreat," he said.
Happisburgh, on the East Anglia coast, has always been vulnerable, and accounts of houses, lighthouses or farmland collapsing into the sea date back to the early 19th century.
"But the rate of erosion there now is phenomenal, in excess of 10 meters (33 feet) a year, because of sea level rise, the collapse of its offshore barrier and the fact that southeastern England is sinking," Dr. David Viner, a senior scientist at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, said in an interview.
Viner said sea levels are now rising about 3 millimeters a year in that area, increasing to as much as 10 millimeters a year because of global warming. A millimeter is about the thickness of a paper clip.
"These areas were previously defended, but the government is now making it clear for the first time that while it will not let economically important areas such as London flood, it will no longer defend relatively low-value areas such as Happisburgh village, where the rate of erosion will continue to increase," he said.
Since 1990, when Happisburgh's offshore wooden barrier began to break apart, exposing its soft cliffs to pounding from the North Sea, about 25 bungalows have been lost to erosion in the picturesque village of 850 people.
Cliff House now sits about 15 feet from the cliff and no longer accepts visitors.
Wrightson and her partner have rented a home further inland. They will get no insurance payoff or government compensation for the loss of Cliff House.
The Environment Agency has no overall figures for land loss, but is mapping the projected erosion risk nationally over the next 100 years.
"Whatever the climate change predictions of the future, the number of residential areas that already are suffering from the impact of more erosion, higher sea levels, storm surges and increased risk of flooding are being broken every year," said Paul Van Hofwegen of the World Water Council, a think tank based in Marseille, France.
Britain is already taking steps such as strengthening a barrier that prevents the River Thames from flooding riverside landmarks such as the Houses of Parliament.
Meanwhile, Venice is sinking while the Adriatic Sea is rising, sometimes flooding St. Mark's Square, the most visited spot in the fabled city.
In 2003 authorities approved a $5.5 billion project dubbed Moses, after the biblical figure who parted the Red Sea, to plant hinged barriers in the seabed just off Venice which can be raised when tides get too high.
Low-lying Holland has waged a battle against the ocean for centuries, building a massive network of dikes and windmill-driven pumps. After a devastating 1953 flood killed 1,835 people, it launched the Delta Project, one of the world's largest engineering projects, consisting of storm surge barriers, giant sluices and dams.
Now, just as the 50-year project has reached completion, fear of climate change has shifted the theory of disaster control away from blocking floodwaters to managing them. It involves selectively breaching the dikes at key pressure points to ease the destructive force and allow the water to flood unpopulated areas.
___
HAPPISBURGH, England - A 12-bedroom guest house, with beautiful views of the North Sea, a lighthouse and sandy beaches, sounds like prime real estate.
But Cliff House is nearly worthless.
The offshore wooden barrier that once protected the sand and clay cliffs of this stretch of eastern English coast has broken apart, and the government has decided that with the expected rise in sea levels and storm surges that experts attribute to global warming, some vulnerable coastal areas are no longer worth defending.
"The next big storm could take us away," said Diana Wrightson, one of two elderly women who bought Cliff House 26 years ago, assuming the coastline would always be protected.
Predictions of rising sea levels usually envision the low-lying islands of the south seas, or cyclone-prone Bangladesh, as the most vulnerable victims. But Britain is part of a growing club of rich countries whose coastal populations feel threatened.
Hurricane Katrina looked to many like the shape of things to come when it devastated New Orleans in 2005. Venice is building up its defenses. Holland is rethinking its famous seawalls.
The fears have grown more acute following the release this month of a report by scientists from 113 countries forecasting temperature rises of 2 to 11.5 degrees Fahrenheit and sea level rises of 7 to 23 inches by the end of the century. It says global warming is almost certainly man-made.
Britain's own "Stern Review," a sweeping report about climate change, says unless action is taken, rising sea levels, heavier floods and more intense droughts could displace 200 million people worldwide by the middle of the century.
Ronan Uhel, a top official at the European Environment Agency in Copenhagen, said the situation in Happisburgh shows that governments and insurance companies have finally started letting the public know that it will have to do more than buy fuel-efficient cars and better light bulbs to fight global warming.
He said citizens are being shown they can't keep building homes on islands and near lowlands and coastlines, especially in vulnerable areas where it no longer makes sense to rebuild offshore barriers.
In countries like Britain, "a national debate is just starting about what is an appropriate policy of adaptation to climate change," Uhel said in an interview. "People are just beginning to realize the risks of global warming and the big lifestyle changes that may be needed to brace for them."
Late last year, a new law took effect in England and Wales whereby the government decides whether it makes sense, economically and environmentally, to rebuild barriers.
For Happisburgh, 135 miles northeast of London, the answer was no.
"Basically, whatever we do to reduce greenhouse emissions we're going to face about one meter (3.3 feet) sea level rise on the east coast of England in the next 100 years," Clive Bates, a top official at the British government's Environment Agency, told The Associated Press.
"Either we won't be able to defend part of the coast, or it will be too expensive to do it. One of the most troubling issues for us is to decide where we can no longer sustain coastal defense, where we basically need to warn people to retreat," he said.
Happisburgh, on the East Anglia coast, has always been vulnerable, and accounts of houses, lighthouses or farmland collapsing into the sea date back to the early 19th century.
"But the rate of erosion there now is phenomenal, in excess of 10 meters (33 feet) a year, because of sea level rise, the collapse of its offshore barrier and the fact that southeastern England is sinking," Dr. David Viner, a senior scientist at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, said in an interview.
Viner said sea levels are now rising about 3 millimeters a year in that area, increasing to as much as 10 millimeters a year because of global warming. A millimeter is about the thickness of a paper clip.
"These areas were previously defended, but the government is now making it clear for the first time that while it will not let economically important areas such as London flood, it will no longer defend relatively low-value areas such as Happisburgh village, where the rate of erosion will continue to increase," he said.
Since 1990, when Happisburgh's offshore wooden barrier began to break apart, exposing its soft cliffs to pounding from the North Sea, about 25 bungalows have been lost to erosion in the picturesque village of 850 people.
Cliff House now sits about 15 feet from the cliff and no longer accepts visitors.
Wrightson and her partner have rented a home further inland. They will get no insurance payoff or government compensation for the loss of Cliff House.
The Environment Agency has no overall figures for land loss, but is mapping the projected erosion risk nationally over the next 100 years.
"Whatever the climate change predictions of the future, the number of residential areas that already are suffering from the impact of more erosion, higher sea levels, storm surges and increased risk of flooding are being broken every year," said Paul Van Hofwegen of the World Water Council, a think tank based in Marseille, France.
Britain is already taking steps such as strengthening a barrier that prevents the River Thames from flooding riverside landmarks such as the Houses of Parliament.
Meanwhile, Venice is sinking while the Adriatic Sea is rising, sometimes flooding St. Mark's Square, the most visited spot in the fabled city.
In 2003 authorities approved a $5.5 billion project dubbed Moses, after the biblical figure who parted the Red Sea, to plant hinged barriers in the seabed just off Venice which can be raised when tides get too high.
Low-lying Holland has waged a battle against the ocean for centuries, building a massive network of dikes and windmill-driven pumps. After a devastating 1953 flood killed 1,835 people, it launched the Delta Project, one of the world's largest engineering projects, consisting of storm surge barriers, giant sluices and dams.
Now, just as the 50-year project has reached completion, fear of climate change has shifted the theory of disaster control away from blocking floodwaters to managing them. It involves selectively breaching the dikes at key pressure points to ease the destructive force and allow the water to flood unpopulated areas.
___
I think the best answer is to renourish the beach like Panama City has done, except build a secondary dune line like we once had before Opal. Yes, another storm may come and wash it all away, h
Also two weeks ago, the Walton Sun printed a front page article showing all the home owners who have built walls. What I would like to know is why didn't they list the greedy beach owners who have been blocking the county from starting the beach renurishment project! I think people should know their addresses also!
While I'm not a "greedy beach owner", I certainly oppose renourishing the beaches. The sand is nothing like the original. Check out the pumped in sand in Panama City Beach. It's been many years and it's still unsightly compared to the sugar white sand it replaced, which is quartz.
We elected the public officials who allowed construction too close to the water, so I guess we're the ones to blame. The coastline is constantly changing as it has for eons. Renourishment hasn't been needed in the parks.
Also two weeks ago, the Walton Sun printed a front page article showing all the home owners who have built walls. What I would like to know is why didn't they list the greedy beach owners who have been blocking the county from starting the beach renurishment project! I think people should know their addresses also!
300-400 block of Blue Mountain Road.
While I don't think renourishment is the answer - I think the sand used in the Miramar Beach area looks great. I actually took sand from the beach months ago and put it in my garage and then took sand from the renourished beach last month and compared the two. Looks good to me.
From www.WaltonSun.com
DEP orders homeowners to remove seawall
April 26, 2007
Gabriel Tynes
gtynes@link.freedom.com At least one South Walton County seawall will have to be pulled from the sand after the Department of Environmental Protection denied its state permit request.
The wall, located at 59 Pelican Circle in Seacrest Beach, has been under particular scrutiny since it was determined to be unauthorized in May 2006. The homeowners, Dr. James and Michelle Spires of Mobile, Ala., never obtained county permission for the wall.
Subsequently, Terry Anderson, a Walton County engineer, attempted to acquire an after-the-fact state permit on behalf of the homeowners. As a part of that process, former county commissioner Rosier Cuchens issued a letter of approval in the county?s name, bypassing normal planning department procedures, something he was not authorized to do.
In a letter dated April 17, Michael Barnett, chief of the DEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems, concluded that the structures on the property were never eligible for shoreline protection. Even if it was, the letter said, Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission guidelines would recommend its denial based on ?significant adverse impacts? to turtle nesting sites.
?Based on the forgoing facts and law, the DEP denies the request for a permit for the construction of a seawall and orders its removal after Oct. 31, 2007, and before May 1, 2008,? the letter states.
In a confusing bit of language, the letter does provide a manner for prolonging the seawall?s existence ?since [it] is presently covered with sand fill and native dune vegetation.?
On April 24, the wall did not appear to have changed since November 2006. There is as much as four feet of vertical exposure and it is barren of any vegetation, native or otherwise.
?We came to that conclusion upon our last inspection of the site,? said DEP Press Secretary Sarah Williams. ?Our inspector noted sand coverage and native vegetation.?
Williams said she did not know if the absence of either the sand fill or the vegetation would affect the special stipulation, which would allow the wall to stay until it is exposed or undermined.
?Everything we have on the case is current with that letter,? she said.
The homeowners were given 15 days from the receipt the letter to ask for the seawall to remain temporarily. They have 21 days from the receipt of the letter to file for an administrative hearing to dispute the denial.
DEP orders homeowners to remove seawall
April 26, 2007
Gabriel Tynes
gtynes@link.freedom.com At least one South Walton County seawall will have to be pulled from the sand after the Department of Environmental Protection denied its state permit request.
The wall, located at 59 Pelican Circle in Seacrest Beach, has been under particular scrutiny since it was determined to be unauthorized in May 2006. The homeowners, Dr. James and Michelle Spires of Mobile, Ala., never obtained county permission for the wall.
Subsequently, Terry Anderson, a Walton County engineer, attempted to acquire an after-the-fact state permit on behalf of the homeowners. As a part of that process, former county commissioner Rosier Cuchens issued a letter of approval in the county?s name, bypassing normal planning department procedures, something he was not authorized to do.
In a letter dated April 17, Michael Barnett, chief of the DEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems, concluded that the structures on the property were never eligible for shoreline protection. Even if it was, the letter said, Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission guidelines would recommend its denial based on ?significant adverse impacts? to turtle nesting sites.
?Based on the forgoing facts and law, the DEP denies the request for a permit for the construction of a seawall and orders its removal after Oct. 31, 2007, and before May 1, 2008,? the letter states.
In a confusing bit of language, the letter does provide a manner for prolonging the seawall?s existence ?since [it] is presently covered with sand fill and native dune vegetation.?
On April 24, the wall did not appear to have changed since November 2006. There is as much as four feet of vertical exposure and it is barren of any vegetation, native or otherwise.
?We came to that conclusion upon our last inspection of the site,? said DEP Press Secretary Sarah Williams. ?Our inspector noted sand coverage and native vegetation.?
Williams said she did not know if the absence of either the sand fill or the vegetation would affect the special stipulation, which would allow the wall to stay until it is exposed or undermined.
?Everything we have on the case is current with that letter,? she said.
The homeowners were given 15 days from the receipt the letter to ask for the seawall to remain temporarily. They have 21 days from the receipt of the letter to file for an administrative hearing to dispute the denial.