He says he’s seen a boat gaff in the dunes built up by dredging–which means the dredge brought it.
And as the sand erodes, leaving the fragments of shell behind, the beach will no longer be walkable. He’s sifting through another bag of sand to make his point. “We were assured the sand quality was going to be good, and we were absolutely naysayers. Granted, we were fighting to not have the beach restoration at all, but either you guys got snookered or you snookered us … as the winds blow, what’s on top of that screen would be left.”
Jim Wood: Was the sand from right behind your house? Jones: All the sand he brought, yes.
Cherry: Hers came from the dry sand area behind her property.
Wood: This is what you see on beaches all over the world–but what did we promise when we approved this? “There should be none of this stuff–it should be basically sugar.”

Linda Cherry handed it to Kelly Windes. It’s passing along the dais.
Sandy Trammell: “Don’t shoot it, it’s leaking!”
Denny Jones, another beach restoration opponent: We were all assured the sand quality would compare to what was already on the beach. He presents them with a sample of “classic” sand for comparison.
Jones said a lot of members of Save Our Beaches–the “anti” group whose suit against restoration is now with the Supreme Court–were won over by the promise of good-quality sand. “Somebody needs to think about it before you approve any more beach restoration.”

Cherry, an opponent of Destin’s 2007 beach renourishment project: “We’re not sure those who don’t live on the beach know the changes in the sand… beach restoration took place almost a year ago, we’ve seen tremendous changes.” “We originally were opposed to the beach restoration because it was taking our waterfront property–that is not what this is about … we want you to know and see what happens to the beach when you do restoration … there is a great environmental change.”
Orin Pilkey, beach expert, says (Cherry says) that restored beaches will erode faster than before.
Cherry says the sand has changed so much “I’m not sure we can talk about the beautiful sugar-white sands of Destin.” It looks white from the road but it’s dark-streaked close up. “it used to be like walking on sugar, it’s now like walking on sweet n’ low.” (Oh, I am so making that the opening of my story in Wednesday’s Log). Also has fragments of sand-dollars (I think) that she says are turning up in the sand with alarming frequency.

“Every time you deal with mother nature, for every action, there’s reaction … I would venture to guess that in three-to five years we’re going to be very sorry … I think we need to question the dredge industry.” Who makes the money when the sand washes back out?

Similar to Kisela’s statement, he says the flexibility should be doable–but the city can’t commit yet.
Dewey: I think we’ve made our intentions and wishes clearly to Kisela. And he won’t be the last one to be flexible with. “I think Mr. Kisela will work out an agreement that will let that flexibility be a reality.”
Dewey says that if Perry has to put in the full 25 foot boardwalk now, it would indeed wipe out the businesses on the edge of Perry’s property, because they won’t have any parking left.
And it’s over. Council took no action, as Mr. Miller told them to.

He believes there should be a lot of flexibility for small developments, “but the boardwalk is non-negotiable … there ought to be one boardwalk I can get on and walk from the Yacht Club to Emerald Grande. If it’s not optimum width … fine, I can live with that.”
Bagby said the city should be able to settle with Perry in less than a year, which he assumes is the time DEP has to make a decision.
Kisela: We can’t commit yet: We have lots of property owners to talk to, we don’t have a finished schematic yet, there’s no way to guarantee anything. However, he hears loud and clear that the council would like staff to be flexible as possible.
Sam Seevers: Recommends Kisela continue negotiating.
Windes to Perry: “I don’t like a blank check–if you had a time limit” like a commitment to build the 25-foot version in three years, he’d be more interested.
Both Windes and Seevers say the issue isn’t destroying the businesses that are there, it’s whether two new businesses can come in. Perry says that’s correct.

“All I want to do is make it to the finish line, but they keep moving the finish line.”

Asks, wasn’t the council in favor of putting the boardwalk over the water? To minimize the effect on businesses?
Kisela: “We’ll use our best efforts in getting it over the water–failing that we’ll have to get it upline.”
Barker: “It’s an interesting dilemma … the Boathouse Oyster Bar ought to be a landmarked business protected forever … At the same time, the reason you’re having trouble attracting tenants is the way the harbor is now.” So how can the city allow flexibility while building the bright vision it has for the harbor?
Perry: Says he’s willing to build to 10-12 feet, but 25 feet will kill businesses.
Kisela: We won’t know for a year if over-the-water is workable. If in a year it turns out the answer is No, we can come back with a mitigation proposal–15 feet rather than 25, say–but they can’t say now what will work. “We have to be flexible or we won’t get this thing built.”
Perry returns to his main point: Can he proceed to bring these new tenants in? Can he proceed with his development order for changing things? “The council has instructed City Manager Greg Kisela not to go forward with any development without the 25 foot easement. I’ll give the 25 foot easement for a major redevelopment … originally we were just going to give the easement, the city was going to build the harbor walk.”

In case anyone’s confused, “harbor walk” refers to the proposed boardwalk, not HarborWalk Village.

Dewey: It’s going to take a lot of flexibility to make this work: There are at least three other properties in the same situation. “The only way we’re going to get it completed is to have some flexibility … we don’t want to drive anyone out of business … the existing businesses that are kind of landmarks in that area, we’re going to have to work with all of them to make this boardwalk a reality in a timely fashion.” If that means for now it has to be a little narrower, fine; when the major redevelopment comes along, then the city can call on Perry (or others) to do it according to the redevelopment plan.
Perry: He says he’s willing to grant the 25-foot easement for the wider boardwalk.
Dewey: “If we had the public parking facilities that were available to you and the other folks along the shore there … Until we have those, we’re in kind of a Catch-22.”
Perry: The parking was for the added tourists redevelopment was supposed to draw to the harbor. His business tenants need parking up close.
Dewey: “We can’t justify cutting (parking) further because of the harbor walk.”

“I’ll end up like a quarterhorse running in the Kentucky Derby” if the city doesn’t help out–meaning he’ll go belly up before the harbor redevelopment picks up steam.

City Attorney Jerry Miller says, as he usually does in these discussions, that the council sets standards for development, it doesn’t rule on how to apply them: The only thing they can do is ask staff to change the rules–they can’t simply give Perry an exemption.

Kisela: “If he didn’t like staff’s determination, his appeal rights are to the Board of Adjustment.”
Kisela: Our priorities in the harbor are parking, Mountain Drive, Heritage Park and the boardwalk. And for some of the council, the boardwalk is the big one, so Kisela would like to see it done sooner than later–ideally from Destin Yacht Club to Emerald Grande within three years. “The last thing we want to do is create a situation where we drive those (existing) tenants out of business.” Staff has supported building across the water, and they want to avoid hurting his tenants–but they may have to locate the boardwalk on the edge of the water, not over it. But they don’t know for sure what the exact location will be, or what will be allowed, so they can’t guarantee that. “I think what we’ve presented is a fair compromise.”