Hampton Inn Seagrove Beach on Chateau Hotel Property

601 post on 41 pages : seriously: and it ain't even March 5th. #talkedtodeath

601 post on 41 pages : seriously: and it ain't even March 5th. #talkedtodeath

And it looks like some posts have been deleted and it would appear that some posters have been banned. Democracy in action!

Anne: Posters usually get banned for personal attacks and disputable language; not for the content of their opinion.

Also, it's nice that you had your twenty years in Seagrove and you have found a better place to live. Some of us have lived here a much longer time, have all our friends and our careers imbedded in this community. Please have a little bit of compassion for our situation. Thanks.

The relationship between the Comp Plan and the LDC is governed by Florida Statute. It's pretty much all in here http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...eYear=2012&Title=->2012->Chapter 163->Part II

Good luck deciphering all that. In general the Comp Plan is supposed to be the guiding document for growth management and has to contain various elements with goals and policies. The LDC is supposed to be the nuts and bolts of implementing the comp plan. If we had zoning in this county the LDC is where the details would be. The two documents are supposed to be consistent. Both are available on the county website and both have been changed from 75 to 125 units for limited lodging. I don't think enough attention has been paid to this change, how and when and why both were changed. I would like a lot more details and explanation from the county about that.
In general terms most of the changes I have seen over the years have favored "attorneys with clients who have a financial benefit." You pretty much nailed it. Change is a two edged sword - it could work for other community interests such as lower densities, preservation of certain community attributes, more appropriate stormwater management, etc. but it unusually doesn't.

Thank you. From what I understand, the Comp plan was changed to 125 rooms in 2011. Then May 2014 as requested by the attorney for the developer, David Theriaque, the language in the LDC was changed from 75 to 125. His argument for which he provided several cases was that:
"The present use of land may, by zoning ordinance, continue to be more limited than the future use contemplated by the comprehensive plan."

Theriaque also provided a draft proposed ordinance to amend the LDC making the change from 75-125 rooms.

From a Walton County Planning dept staff report on May 20, 2014:

"Correspondence and case law citations from Attorney David Theriaque addresses the legal issue of the more restrictive provision of either the Comprehensive Plan or the Land Development being the controlling document. In this case, the more restrictive provision is in the LDC and thus the change made by the BCC in the EAR Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is still restricted by the LDC language stating a maximum of 75 rooms in the definition of Limited Lodging."

So does this mean that the more restrictive provision was in the LDC so he petitioned to have that changed to the less restrictive provision and the county complied?

Seems to me the language was there to stop the Hampton Inn before May of last year. Did the county have to change the LDC to conform with the comp plan or could they have changed the comp plan to keep the more restrictive provisions?

And your point is?

We don't care for smug, little people who think their opinion is superior to any one else's.

That is how you come across to me. Just my opinion. Get use to it.

And calling other posters "smug little people" isn't a personal attack? I guess not.

I got a little bit frustrated when Luca repeatedly accused me and many people from this community of being snobs when it's pretty obvious there are a lot more legitimate and serious issues at stake here. Trying to preserve quality of life is what the issue is. Since you obviously had your twenty years, I don't see why you don't keep your opinion to yourself since you obviously don't care about this place anymore.

I was wondering the same thing. Why does someone who no longer lives here or care keep posting and arguing about our local issues on a message board? I guess it's a new form of entertainment?

I was wondering the same thing. Why does someone who no longer lives here or care keep posting and arguing about our local issues on a message board? I guess it's a new form of entertainment?

How long have you lived on 30a?

Since 1983. My family has owned a home in Seagrove since 1959. I don't quite fit your formula that when you tire of a place, you just move on, and watch it ruin.

Thank you. From what I understand, the Comp plan was changed to 125 rooms in 2011. Then May 2014 as requested by the attorney for the developer, David Theriaque, the language in the LDC was changed from 75 to 125. His argument for which he provided several cases was that:
"The present use of land may, by zoning ordinance, continue to be more limited than the future use contemplated by the comprehensive plan."

Theriaque also provided a draft proposed ordinance to amend the LDC making the change from 75-125 rooms.

From a Walton County Planning dept staff report on May 20, 2014:

"Correspondence and case law citations from Attorney David Theriaque addresses the legal issue of the more restrictive provision of either the Comprehensive Plan or the Land Development being the controlling document. In this case, the more restrictive provision is in the LDC and thus the change made by the BCC in the EAR Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is still restricted by the LDC language stating a maximum of 75 rooms in the definition of Limited Lodging."

So does this mean that the more restrictive provision was in the LDC so he petitioned to have that changed to the less restrictive provision and the county complied?

Seems to me the language was there to stop the Hampton Inn before May of last year. Did the county have to change the LDC to conform with the comp plan or could they have changed the comp plan to keep the more restrictive provisions?

Good questions. I tend to agree that the more restrictive provision was in the LDC so he petitioned to have that changed to the less restrictive provision and the county complied. It certainly looks that way.
If the Comp Plan was changed in the 2011 EAR I would really like to know why. I can see that a 125 room hotel would someday maybe be appropriate up on Hwy 98. If the idea was to allow something like that but keep the option of restricting a project somewhere else to 75 rooms, then it appears (and I am not a planner, understand) that additional clarifying language should have been added to the LDC laying out further necessary conditions to obtain the maximum. If that's what they had in mind the way they did it left the door open for Theriaque. Could they have done that instead of just changing the LDC by accepting Theriaque's draft ordinance? I don't know.
Could they have changed the Comp Plan back to 75 rooms? Probably not last May - Comp Plan changes usually have to wait for the EAR unless it's something like a small scale amendment.
I think this quote: "The present use of land may, by zoning ordinance, continue to be more limited than the future use contemplated by the comprehensive plan."
maybe refers to being able to do something like I suggested above - keep the max 125 in the Comp Plan but put restrictions in the LDC. That would be the 'zoning ordinance' he refers to although we don't call it that here.
Planning is really complicated. It often seems that neither the planners nor the commissioners always understand the future results of actions they take.
I don't know if the status quo prior to May would have stopped the Hampton Inn. I think it's a legal question for a land use attorney. I want to say the county should have had their own to consult before rolling over to Theriaque, maybe they did, but I doubt it.

When discussing local issues I hear a lot of people challenge others (usually those who don't share an opinion) on how long they've lived here.

Reminds me of children who try to end an argument with "I'm older".

Growing up where I did usually it was decided on who could kick whose arse but I digress. Haha

Just my opinion but I would encourage anyone who ever hopes to stand a chance of changing anyone else's mind to have the better argument.

Since 1983. My family has owned a home in Seagrove since 1959. I don't quite fit your formula that when you tire of a place, you just move on, and watch it ruin.

I'll bet it was nice in 1959. My husband and I bought a lot in Blue Mountain Beach in 1982 with plans to build a house but we never did. A lot has changed since then and IMO not for the better.

I was wondering the same thing. Why does someone who no longer lives here or care keep posting and arguing about our local issues on a message board? I guess it's a new form of entertainment?

Seems I asked the same thing about another issue and was told not to be rude. Seems like Ann said she still lives in Walton County which does give her a say.

Since 1983. My family has owned a home in Seagrove since 1959. I don't quite fit your formula that when you tire of a place, you just move on, and watch it ruin.

LOL. My Daddy started wanting to buy property on 30A in the early 60s. Every time we went to PCB (every summer for a couple of weeks), he'd drive us over to 30A to show Mom and me the beauty of the area and the potential for the future. He planned to buy many acres. Mom and I said, "We don't want to have a house in the boondocks." What a gigantic mistake! He should have bought the property and not try to please his non-forward-thinking family.

I've never said that I'm a proponent of the hotel that's being proposed, and yet some of you act like I and a couple of others have some agenda to see that it gets built. One person rudely informed me that my questions and opinions were not welcome because I stated that I no longer live in Seagrove Beach and that person refuses to answer a simple yes or no question as to whether or not she lives on 30a. If you only want people who voice strong objections to this one project to comment, I suggest that you exhort the administrators to ban everyone who might possibly disagree with you. Whether or not this goes through will have absolutely nothing to do with what I think.

You basically could care less. We get it. It's not in your back yard. We get it.

So, when you drive to work everyday, a ninety unit hotel, with all the traffic it will generate, won't be a problem for you. Correct?

I doubt it. I go to work very early. And I don't expect the hundreds of new condo units that are sure to be built along 30a will affect my driving to work either.

You could care less. We get it. It's not in your back yard. We get it.

Please, everyone, stop playing "who loves/hates/is indifferent to SOWAL the most". Everyone here has their own reasons for concern and all are valid. Agree to disagree and come together to fomulate a viable, long-term plan.

The reality is, Hampton may happen.

If this project goes forth, we as a community need to make enough intelligent noise to ensure developers act responsibly; to make sure every rational concern is brought to consideration; to set a precedent in place which will ensure each project going forth conforms to our ideals. I see many of you doing just that.

Some are dis'ing the opinions of our friends and extended family, our faithful vacationers. Please remember the reason they continue visiting us.

Thanks for listening.........................D.S. Laud - SOWALer since 2007

You will notice several posters have been banned. Sock Puppets are not allowed on SoWal.com.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sock+puppet

We care about our community and moderate this forum. Please discuss the issues and not the people. Trolls and haters will be banned.

You will notice several posters have been banned. Sock Puppets are not allowed on SoWal.com.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sock+puppet

We care about our community and moderate this forum. Please discuss the issues and not the people. Trolls and haters will be banned.

Quasi-Judicial - Re-Design of Chateau 30A (Hampton Inn) - Alternate Location

Thursday, March 5

The Walton County Board of County Commissioners will hold a special public hearing on Thursday, March 5, 2015, at 4:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as may be heard at the SEASCAPE GOLF, BEACH & TENNIS RESORT CONFERENCE CENTER, 556 SEASCAPE DRIVE, MIRAMAR BEACH, FLORIDA (PLEASE NOTE ALTERNATE LOCATION). The following items will be heard: QUASI-JUDICIAL ITEMS: Re-Design of Chateau 30A - Project number 14-00100167 is being reviewed by Brian Underwood. This is a major development order application submitted by Jenkins Engineering, Inc., requesting approval for the construction of a commercial building containing a 59,256 square foot, 90-room, four-story, limited lodging inn, and a second building containing 660 square feet of retail space on a 2.4 -acre parcel with a future land use of Village Mixed Use. The project is located on East CR 30A north of Williams Street and is identified by parcel number(s) 24-3S-19-25030-000-0021.

I was watching the Hampton Inn Planning and zoning meeting again. At about 35:30 into the meeting, someone named Tim, who I believe is from the planning department, made the following statement regarding the compatibility standard. "The compatibility standard includes a radius of 1/4 mile. The project is to be primarily compatible with abutting uses. That's standard specific to village mixed use."

The Comp Plan under Special Conditions within VMU actually states that: "(d) The scale and uses at the edge shall be compatible with abutting neighborhood uses."

The key word being neighborhood. He left that out.

At the meeting, the attorney for the developer was comparing the uses of abutting parcels across the street from the Hampton site. Those parcels, while zoned VMU, are part of the Dalton SD - a neighborhood of primarily single family homes. Definitely far from compatible.

I think this is an important distinction and would appreciate any thoughts.

Seanote you may be on to something..

I hope so..........

Seanote you may be on to something..

The wording of the code may have intended something else, but I think we have an argument. The words 'parcel' or 'land use district' aren't used in that condition, it's neighborhood and the lots directly across the street are legally described as part of the Dalton Subdivision neighborhood.

I'll email county commissioners to see if there is any feedback.