Navarre Beach Master Plan In Jeopardy

This forum is where you find information about the Navarre Beach Master Plan. You can discuss here the pros and cons of changing the Navarre Beach Master Plan.

Should the Navarre Beach Master Plan be changed

No, I do not want the Navarre Beach Master Plan Changed
32
94%
Yes, I want the Navarre Beach Master Plan Changed
2
6%
 
Total votes: 34
User avatar
vickinoe
Power User
Power User
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:39 pm
Location: Navarre Beach

Thu Jun 28, 2007 8:08 am

I don't like to judge people. I try very hard not to make judgements about people. :lol: So I am not going to call people names like "rich, fat cat" or imply that everyone who owns property on the island is careless and has no interest in protecting the island habitat. I can understand that a business owner would prefer to have the island crowded with people and cars. I can understand that the owners of Belle Mer don't want their view blocked. And I can't understand why the developers of Navarre By the Sea put a retention pond in my backyard. I must state clearly, the retention pond in my backyard iritates me, but I have to live with it now. Therein lies the problem of putting another high rise on the beach, you'll have to live with it, not just for a week or two, but from now until he-ll freezes over. You'll have to live with the view blocked, the noise of cars, people and comotion, and more dead Black Skimmers killed by the traffic. The developers will have come and gone, but the people who live on the beach have to live with the crap (politely put) that the devlopers left behind.
beachwalker
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:48 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:46 am

OK you tell me, it looks like two high rises to me or maybe Emerald Surf is a medium rise or you could call it a low rise either way it is a high density building, I guess we can take pictures all day long and make them look the way we want them to. This is the picture Summer Place submitted to the Commissioners
Image
SouthernBreeze
Power User
Power User
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 6:59 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:14 pm

It is pretty obvious that Emerald Surf is not a high rise, although would be considered high density. But once again, if the plan is changed for this individual, where will it end?
beachwalker
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:48 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 3:51 pm

OK...I will stop calling Emerald Surf a high rise since it is six stories which is twice as high as the houses...it is obviously a high density building. I thought it very odd looking the first time I drove by and saw the houses being built between these two high density buildings and still do today, from the comments on this forum I am the only one that thinks so, it looks as odd to me as a high density building in the middle of a single family residential neighborhood.
User avatar
David
Power User
Power User
Posts: 1226
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 10:41 pm
Location: Navarre, FL

Thu Jun 28, 2007 6:03 pm

Beachwalker,

I don't want to be argumentive but I believe it possible that your memory may be worse than mine, either that or you have the ability to stretch things as an attorney might when presenting his case for the Summerwind folks.

You state "I thought it very odd looking the first time I drove by and saw the houses being built between these two high density buildings". I can show you an ariel photo that shows 2 of those 4 rental cottages already built before Belle Mer even began construction so your statement is definitely a stretch.

You also state that "Emerald Surf is twice the height of the cottages". Get out your tape measure because you are only counting floors, not feet. Take another look at the photos and you can tell that statement exagerates.

The photo that you post (realizing it was the one shown by the attorneys) is also misleading in the size of the properties (seven individual residential lots now, since the storms, owned by 2 people) that the cottages set on. The dotted square encloses some of the Belle Mer property (including one of their holding ponds and a bunch of their landscaping) to the East and some of the other condo's property to the West. The square drawn should actually stop at about the telephone poles that rise very close to the cottages on both sides. The cottages were built as close to the line as possible. Could it be that the dotted square was drawn to make the property look like a bigger area for the sake of wanting a sixteen floor condo erected there??????? The angle of that photo, taken from the mainland, is also misleading. Yes, I guess we can make photos look the way we want them to and the reasons shown are not always for just the reasons stated.

Let me also correct the Destin references. I, and most all of us, realize that there is not the space for the same overall development in Navarre Beach as there was in Destin and I don't remember stating my disappointment in what happened to Destin but, yes, I am disappointed in the small part I played in some of that change.

Maybe you can remember Holiday Isle (the isle to the South of old Destin proper and the Destin Harbor and closer in size to Navarre Beach). I remember when the landholders (the older Destin families) of that isle swore they would "never sell their familie's land and cottages to those #%&* condo developers so they could build those great big ugly condos and block their view". Guess what?? They just could not resist when someone approached them with a big fat billfold and dreams of another big fat condo and the county couldn't resist the bigger tax base and the precidents were set. Go look at Holiday Isle today and see what could happen to those residential lots that you own when your neighbors (6 or 7 of them) bend to the wind of the developer that has precident on his side because the Master Plan has been changed before for the sake of one developer and a bigger tax base. And, please, don't fool yourself by thinking you will then pay less taxes for those residential lots that you now own the lease for, the ones that may, then, have a high rise setting next door or accross the road from it, now blocking your view.

I, too, believe growth is inevitable and there is always a need for that growth. The Master Plan already has made room for more highrises. The land is already zoned for high density and is large enough to accomodate 16 floor condos with the needed landscaping, parking, holding ponds, etc., etc.. Why not use those lands for proposed development rather than rape the residential lots that now exist????? You can then see if your taxes decrease. I should make ya a huge bet, UH?
Last edited by David on Fri Jun 29, 2007 5:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
David
SouthernBreeze
Power User
Power User
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 6:59 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:08 pm

In my humble opinion, I believe you pretty much nailed it David. I can actually remember when there was only one motel on the beach in Destin, and I believe it was called the Franciscan Inn or something similar to that. Then there was the incedible boom and Destin is now what it is. And this is also why myself and many others feel the way we do about Navarre Beach and hope that the same type of scenario does not occur here.
beachwalker
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:48 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:12 pm

I have been told that I am making dishonest and inaccurate statements, even though on one has been able to quote how many stories it takes to be called a high rise. I backed off and said I would only call them high density properties and I am still being blasted. I never said whether it was the first or last house being built. I thought this was an open forum, open for discussion, sounds like you only welcome people that pat you on the back and tell you what you want to hear. I just don't happen to see it the way you do. I don't mind you disagreeing with me but the accusations are out of hand. Whether this gets changed now or later it is inevitable. So for now I will let you guys continue to tell each other what you want to hear. Adios Amigos
lss
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 3:55 pm
Location: Florida Native transplanted in Madison, AL

Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:50 pm

From the internet...when "definition of a high rise condo" is googled.

"The building itself is usually considered to be between 75ft to 491ft (23 m to 150 m). Buildings taller than 492ft (150 m) are classified as skyscrapers. The average height of a floor is around 13ft (4 m), a 79ft (24 m) tall building would be an around 6 floors building."

Hope that helps the discussion.
navarrebum
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 8:11 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 11:02 pm

I used to own property in Destin and if you take a stroll down the beach you will see a mixture of High Rise, Mid Rise Condo's and low and behold some beautiful homes mixed in between them. I happen to think it looks nice with that variety as I enjoy looking at the houses on Navarre Beach. But that could just be a through back from my "Bohemian" days in Key West when a shack was next to a semi mansion and when we had a party everyone was invited from the owner of "Readers Digest" to Jimmy Buffet to the deck hand and the maid. Those were the days!
kayaker
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:41 am

Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:25 am

This idea of is it a high rise, low rise, high density or low density is nonsense. The idea that Navarre Beach will become another Destin is nonsense. The idea that the Master Plan should not be changed is nonsense. What makes common sense is that the Master Plan should be changed sense Summer Place is next door to Belle Mer. The Master Plan will be changed and more high rise condos will be allowed to be built. The reasoning is very simple. The County Commissioners now all seem to want to change the Master Plan and so do the businesses at Navarre Beach. We need more high rise condo development to bring more businesses to the beach.
navarrebum
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 8:11 pm

Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:30 am

I totally agree that Navarre Beach will never be a Destin. The main thing is to have a Plan. Look at Myrtle Beach, then go on over to Hilton Head! Hilton Head is a beautifully planned community with a lot of thought and consideration. I don't care where your property is on Navarre Beach, it is an investment. We have had hurricanes that cost everyone a lot of money. It is expensive to keep beach property up. It is going to take a lot of us several years to recover from the financial hit we all took. I sincerely hope we do some critical and careful planning for the rest of the developement on Navarre Beach. Not everyone is going to be happy and not everyone on the beach is a fat cat contrary to a lot of public opinion! Some of us are lucky enough to enjoy our property on the beach and those who rent get to share it with others. Navarre Beach is everyone's beach that cares to be there. I believe it is our obligation to let the planners know what we think wheather Yea or Nay!!!!! Just my humble opinion.
SouthernBreeze
Power User
Power User
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 6:59 pm

Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:36 am

Navarrebum, you are right..."critical and careful planning."
User avatar
Pete
Power User
Power User
Posts: 2050
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:26 am
Location: Navarre - Hidden Creek Estates

Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:50 am

Having read the forgoing - here is my view.
First - opening the Master Plan for review to address just one property is NOT the right thing to do. e.g., the "where will it stop" arguement".

But, according to Navarre Press yesterday, pre-master plan the Summer Place parcel was zoned/leased as high density untill 1991. However, the owners for the Summer Place lease, due to a poor market for condos at that time, decided they wanted it changed to low-density - and it was. Later a master plan was developed, and in 1995 approved by BOCC, that called for Summer Place to be high-density (between other high density parcels), but - due to Opal - the plan was overcome by events and never forwarded to the state DCA for review. (e.g., Summer Place use did NOT match the master plan at that time?). Later, 2001, when BOCC went back to adopting the master plan, it was noted that the plan didn't match the existing use - and the plan was changed to low-density for that parcel (just because it was?) - adopted by the BOCC and approved by DCA.

Is this accurate? In my mind, not sure that was a good way to do it - master plans should not treat single parcels in the middle of other parcels differently without good reason - and "because it is already otherwise" is not such. Master plans, almost by definition, should not be based only on what currently exists (e.g. Summer Place in 1995-2001) - but what transitions/fits with adjacent property and is desired in the future.

Therefore, maybe the ENTIRE master plan DOES need to be reviewed?
Are there other "execptional" parcel treatments that should be changed?
e.g. what about the two "undeveloped residential" parcels in the middle of the state/county park -- one of which is being explored for an Embassy-Suites "300-room hotel/conference center/restaurant/100-180 condo units atop the hotel" & possible sound-side marina - or possibly traded for other parkland where Mom's beach is - for same use? Does the beach park really need hotel traffic through the park, and a "high-rise/high density" building in the middle of it?

Finally, to my "eye" - if a high density building is put into Summer Place - it should be of an intermediate height between the adjacent buildings - to help the transition from the "higher"-rises to the east to the low-rises to the west.
Last edited by Pete on Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:05 am, edited 2 times in total.
Cheers, Pete
Go Vikings!
beachgirl
Power User
Power User
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:10 am
Location: navarre
Contact:

Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:54 am

High rise... low rise.... What about the fact that these new condos are being build on the southern side of the CCCL? Then they get torn up and the owners are upset about assessments. DEP gets another wad of money to "approve" putting them back in the CCCL lines.

Of course, its just more money for me when it comes time to put them back together.
User avatar
Rosebud
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:27 pm
Location: Roswell, GA

Fri Jun 29, 2007 10:32 am

Are there enough renters for the condos in Navarre Beach as it exists today? I thought there were a fair amount of vacancies since the storms hit. If another condo comes onto the beach, the pool of renters would have to be spread even thinner, as renters would have more choices. Wouldn't this impact the existing condo owners' investments? If they can't hold on, the domino effect could start. If Navarre Beach is looking to stimulate the economy so more people would be attracted to the area, why not look at building family-oriented activities off the beach, like restaurants, aquariums, public parks. Quiet activities. Once Navarre Beach gets lined up with beach umbrellas like so many other beaches, I will seek a quieter place. I am not a condo owner, just a visitor who loves Navarre Beach and heads down there several times a year.
Post Reply

Return to “Navarre Beach Master Plan”