Why we should Care?

[reepicheep]

Howdo BMBV, I wouldn't discount the educational merit. I've learned a great deal on the subject--Regarding the science, politic and community perspective of South Walton dune restoration, this thread holds data... amidst the emotion of course.;-)

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

The obvious facts do not need to be disclosed. ;-) This is no different than buying river front or mountain top property.

Interesting. I live directly on the Chattahoochee in Atlanta. Erosion, here, is not a issue. I have a worse case idea of the flood possibility except if terrorists blow up the damn dam upstream. Then what the hell, the whole city's in trouble.

Interestingly, the highest I've seen the river is when Hurricane Opal came through Atlanta. That should have been an omen for me, I guess.

Even in the unlikelyhood that it did flood, a few hundred dollars of flood insurance (which I don't have by the way), would cover me.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, the land that my house sits on would most likely still be here. I wouldn't have to come up with an additional $2000 per linear foot (as we did for the retaining wall and sand at the beach) to basically restore and stabilize the land so that the house could be repaired. By the way, that $2000/foot amount in Florida was totally UNINSURABLE in case some of you didn't know....completely out of pocket.

Bottom line, no disclosure was necessary for my river property in my opinion.

re: Mountain top
Hmmm...
Isn't there some passage in the bible about better to build on rock than sand? I have no idea why I said that. Are you implying landslides should be disclosed? Never mind.


Again, I was just more or less following Bobby J's lead about "disclosure" to his clients.

Point is, you can't disclose something if you don't know there's a problem.

Who knew we'd have TEN times the erosion from Dennis than we did from Ivan using Opal as a baseline?

Let me simply summarize this "disclosure" stuff here...
1. I asked BobbyJ if he had any problem with selling (and profitting from) gulf front property.
2. BobbyJ responded by saying if he were to sell a gulf front property, disclosure was very important...that the buyer should know what they're getting in to.
3. I mentioned that the erosion issue was not "disclosed" to me when I bought my gulf front property.
4. JR says he can't believe that I didn't research it or know. He implies that basically unless one is "ignorant enough" one should have known.

Here's the result... IF I should have known about the erosion problem (remember... about 10 times greater from just one storm!), then it would be reasonable for the previous owner to have known it was a real possibility as well (also the real estate "professionals" involved). If they did know, then they certainly should have (at least ethically) disclosed that "likelyhood" especially in hindsight.

I'm not looking for any stinkin' disclosure. JR is right. I do my own research and sure as hell wouldn't totally depend on a so-called "home inspector" or a disclosure statement.

I hope I've more than adequately proved my point that I WAS TOTALLY UNAWARE of the erosional devastation that could occur from just one relatively weak hurricane. I don't think I was the only one.

Was "I" aware of erosion in general? Of course "I" was!! I'm speaking for me. I can't speak for other gulf front owners as far as what they actually knew. One of the reasons I purchased our property was because we do have room to "retreat". Problem is, we would have gotten VERY LITTLE money from the insurance because the building was only partially damaged. Even if we did retreat, we're only one building. It was much cheaper to build the retaining wall and repair the building damage while minimizing "down-time". Retreat is still a possibility but not now.

Should we start a disclosure thread?

SJ, all of this now leads me to ask you a serious multiple choice question.

If you were to sell a gulf front property that has been fully "restored" with no evidence of erosion, would you fully disclose to the buyer that the bluff eroded 20 feet from just one hurricane while you were standing in front of the owner?
1. yes
2. no
3. maybe:scratch:
4. none of your business:nono1:
5. depends on your definition of "fully" and "fully"

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Howdo BMBV, I wouldn't discount the educational merit. I've learned a great deal on the subject--Regarding the science, politic and community perspective of South Walton dune restoration, this thread holds data... amidst the emotion of course.;-)

Months ago I agreed that I would try to keep my emotion at bay. I even went underground for a while as I ran out of things to say...YEP!. We did have some interesting exchanges. So I'll just be long winded instead .

Those that post a one-line criticism usually have their minds completely made up regardless of the circumstances. Dialogue is not an option for them. I've come to expect it now and then and try not to take it personally.

The only thing worse than owning a retaining wall in South Walton (in the eyes of some) is shooting Bambi in front of their little girl.

Thanks for the words!

 

[John R]

Which brings me to this question: You never really addressed the heart of my previous post...that is do you feel that the county, state and feds should bare any of the responsibility for allowing these structures to have been built so close in the first place and benefitting from the tax base?

I'll give it a go.

no. caveat emptor. the plats were made long before we got here, and have been changed by those who had the money to do so. when the original land was sold, i doubt the use was for luxury(or in some cases, not so luxury) residential use. i view it as a vanity thing. i have more money than you, so i'm going to live closer to the water than you. i have seen this all my life, growing up in resort areas near the water. we never lived on the beach, didn't have enough money to. but we didn't have the same upkeep that those who did live there did.

erosion cycles are a fact of life, and anyone who's lived at or by the beach is aware of this. we live in hurricane alley, and one who chooses to live here does so willingly and knows the potential for loss. there wouldn't be a hurricane shutter industry otherwise. beach owners know they will need to repaint, replace, more often, and armor themselves stronger than those of us who live further inland. this is a fact.

as i've stated before, we are all gambling that we won't be the one's affected. "...it's going to head towards orange beach..."etc. so, i agree with you that you(as a class) must protect your investment, but not not at the expense of my money or our environment. which would include, using the wrong color sand, takes of habitat, encroachment of public lands, floating septic, light pollution, etc, and walls that will increase the erosion of the beaches.

so, maybe an ordinance should be that anyone who buys beachfront must build at the backmost part of the property and erect a wall above ground, half the total height of the structure to protect it.

silly huh? see below. if we were in another area of the country, we'd be discussing this moron and his avalanche/boulder fence...

as always, looking forward to lively discourse.

jr

 

[Smiling JOe]

Interesting. I live directly on the Chattahoochee in Atlanta. Erosion, here, is not a issue. I have a worse case idea of the flood possibility except if terrorists blow up the damn dam upstream. Then what the hell, the whole city's in trouble.

Interestingly, the highest I've seen the river is when Hurricane Opal came through Atlanta. That should have been an omen for me, I guess.

Even in the unlikelyhood that it did flood, a few hundred dollars of flood insurance (which I don't have by the way), would cover me.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, the land that my house sits on would most likely still be here. I wouldn't have to come up with an additional $2000 per linear foot (as we did for the retaining wall and sand at the beach) to basically restore and stabilize the land so that the house could be repaired. By the way, that $2000/foot amount in Florida was totally UNINSURABLE in case some of you didn't know....completely out of pocket.

Bottom line, no disclosure was necessary for my river property in my opinion.

re: Mountain top
Hmmm...
Isn't there some passage in the bible about better to build on rock than sand? I have no idea why I said that. Are you implying landslides should be disclosed? Never mind.


Again, I was just more or less following Bobby J's lead about "disclosure" to his clients.

Point is, you can't disclose something if you don't know there's a problem.

Who knew we'd have TEN times the erosion from Dennis than we did from Ivan using Opal as a baseline?

Let me simply summarize this "disclosure" stuff here...
1. I asked BobbyJ if he had any problem with selling (and profitting from) gulf front property.
2. BobbyJ responded by saying if he were to sell a gulf front property, disclosure was very important...that the buyer should know what they're getting in to.
3. I mentioned that the erosion issue was not "disclosed" to me when I bought my gulf front property.
4. JR says he can't believe that I didn't research it or know. He implies that basically unless one is "ignorant enough" one should have known.

Here's the result... IF I should have known about the erosion problem (remember... about 10 times greater from just one storm!), then it would be reasonable for the previous owner to have known it was a real possibility as well (also the real estate "professionals" involved). If they did know, then they certainly should have (at least ethically) disclosed that "likelyhood" especially in hindsight.

...

SJ, all of this now leads me to ask you a serious multiple choice question.

If you were to sell a gulf front property that has been fully "restored" with no evidence of erosion, would you fully disclose to the buyer that the bluff eroded 20 feet from just one hurricane while you were standing in front of the owner?
1. yes
2. no
3. maybe:scratch:
4. none of your business:nono1:
5. depends on your definition of "fully" and "fully"

...and a happy Saturday morning to you, too, BMBV. Let me tell you now. If you live on the River, you may one day lose your home. Flood insurance means covers nothing if you don't have it. Just because you have not seen the River rise to a greater level than the time when Opal hit, doesn't mean diddly squat. Ask alll the people in Western NC and Eastern TN what happened when Hurricane Ivan swept through. Ever hear of the 100 year flood? Many people who never had standing water in their yards, are now without homes. I recall a time back in the late 80's or early 90's when a few people whom I know lost their homes which also sat on the Chattahoochee River. Erosion along slow moving rivers may not be seen until the mother storms hit. When that happens, erosion will hit you faster than you can blink an eye. For you to say it isn't possible, is about as short sighted as you thinking sand will not be able to erode from your yard. Have you not seen the wind blow sand down the beach. Helloooo.

To your mulitple choice question. It is an extremely rare occasion when the buyers and sellers are in the same time and place. So your scenerio would never occur in the first place. Secondly, when I take a listing, I let the sellers know up front that I must disclose any material fact that could affect the sale of their property. In this case, that would be included in simple disclosure. If you are looking for an agent who will not disclose such a thing, good luck. I don't know of any who are willing to lose that battle in a lawsuit.

 

[reepicheep]

Months ago I agreed that I would try to keep my emotion at bay. I even went underground for a while as I ran out of things to say...YEP!. We did have some interesting exchanges. So I'll just be long winded instead .

Those that post a one-line criticism usually have their minds completely made up regardless of the circumstances. Dialogue is not an option for them. I've come to expect it now and then and try not to take it personally.

The only thing worse than owning a retaining wall in South Walton (in the eyes of some) is shooting Bambi in front of their little girl.

Thanks for the words!

BMBV, i can appreciate your sporting demeanor in the matter, it does stimulate needed info. In life we find that it takes energy to overcome obstacles and open doors. In a perfect world that energy comes from flowing water or a beaming sun. In reality that energy also and often comes from good ol' fashion friction.

 

[reepicheep]

...and a happy Saturday morning to you, too, BMBV. Let me tell you now. If you live on the River, you may one day lose your home. Flood insurance means covers nothing if you don't have it. Just because you have not seen the River rise to a greater level than the time when Opal hit, doesn't mean diddly squat. Ask alll the people in Western NC and Eastern TN what happened when Hurricane Ivan swept through. Ever hear of the 100 year flood? Many people who never had standing water in their yards, are now without homes. I recall a time back in the late 80's or early 90's when a few people whom I know lost their homes which also sat on the Chattahoochee River. Erosion along slow moving rivers may not be seen until the mother storms hit. When that happens, erosion will hit you faster than you can blink an eye. For you to say it isn't possible, is about as short sighted as you thinking sand will not be able to erode from your yard. Have you not seen the wind blow sand down the beach. Helloooo.

To your mulitple choice question. It is an extremely rare occasion when the buyers and sellers are in the same time and place. So your scenerio would never occur in the first place. Secondly, when I take a listing, I let the sellers know up front that I must disclose any material fact that could affect the sale of their property. In this case, that would be included in simple disclosure. If you are looking for an agent who will not disclose such a thing, good luck. I don't know of any who are willing to lose that battle in a lawsuit.

JOE- I was in St. Augustine about a year ago and had the fortune of stumbling across an amazing animation of their 'naturally' changing coastline over the past 150 years. The best description would be: imagine a snake navigating a wobbly, slick surface. 150' in 30 years was the median ebb & flow of the line. Granted this area was near an inlet and along a much harsher sea but the fact remains: Nature doesn't wear the same outfit for long and there's not an iota we can do about it. have a great day and thnx for all the information

 

[Smiling JOe]

I almost forgot, if I knew that the seller had built the seawall on public property instead of his own property, you bet your @ss that I would disclose it if I actually accepted the listing. I don't accept every listing that crosses my desk. ;-)

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

...and a happy Saturday morning to you, too, BMBV. Let me tell you now. If you live on the River, you may one day lose your home. Flood insurance means covers nothing if you don't have it. Just because you have not seen the River rise to a greater level than the time when Opal hit, doesn't mean diddly squat. Ask alll the people in Western NC and Eastern TN what happened when Hurricane Ivan swept through. Ever hear of the 100 year flood? Many people who never had standing water in their yards, are now without homes. I recall a time back in the late 80's or early 90's when a few people whom I know lost their homes which also sat on the Chattahoochee River. Erosion along slow moving rivers may not be seen until the mother storms hit. When that happens, erosion will hit you faster than you can blink an eye. For you to say it isn't possible, is about as short sighted as you thinking sand will not be able to erode from your yard. Have you not seen the wind blow sand down the beach. Helloooo.

With all due respect, I think you're missing the point I was making. The LAND under my home will not disappear in a flood even though yes I'll concede there is some finite possibility. If we do have the "mother of all storms" hit us, your prediction may come true regarding my home on the river.

However Dennis was NOT the "mother of all storms". Will you at least acknowledge that? Also will you at least acknowledge my statement that in terms of erosion, Dennis was TEN times worse than Ivan?

If you fear the "mother of all storms" might hit me in GA what about coastal FL? Why do you hang around?

SJ, I'm not an idiot (OK...I can at least reason things out) . Sometimes I feel we're forgetting what we're discussing. It was just a sidestreet of BobbyJ's dialogue where he mentioned something about selling gulf front property only with PROPER DISCLOSURE. AGAIN...if you're insinuating that I should have known that a Dennis would cause 20 feet of erosion, you are wrong, plain and simple. Am I "ignorant" for not knowing this? Perhaps. But I'm more informed than the average bear. Disclosures are suppose to be aimed at everone.

My point is, AGAIN, that I did not know. The seller did not know, The agent did not know. Therefore it was not disclosed. Don't read too much more into it.

The rest of your logic is again "crystal clear with hindsight" regarding the beach.

So based on your "mother of all disaster" scenarios we should all move to...
Kansas? No, tornadoes
California? No, earthquakes
New Orleans? No
New York? No, terrorists
South Georgia? No, floods
Colorado? No, landslides
Arizona? No, probably run out of water
Florida? No, hurricanes, tsunamis, west nile virus, tourists, developers

What the hell are any of us doing in Florida?

So your answer is A.

Good choice. Maybe bad for business, but good choice.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

I almost forgot, if I knew that the seller had built the seawall on public property instead of his own property, you bet your @ss that I would disclose it if I actually accepted the listing. I don't accept every listing that crosses my desk. ;-)

Good choice again, otherwise you'd lose your @ss in a lawsuit if you knew and didn't disclose it.