Ouch... et voila

Kind Regards,
Philippe



[www.facebook.com]

Philippe

Great summary on concession, but I wonder about your reference to 50 feet - "It is 50 feet above the highest water mark on the sand."

Is not traditional French law that it is the 50 "steps of the King" the "pas geometriques" - which was codified at 81.50 meters?

(Pull out one of your old law books...you know that you really wanted to practice law!)

David

In the majority of France's territory it is 81.20 meters above the highest water line... the "50 pas du Roy", but concerning sxm this distance had been adapted to the structure of the beach itself, and also taking in consideration few things much more important...
The 50 pas geometrique were implemented and regularised in St martin only after 1995... before that there were no organisme in St Martin to implement the law and regularise some situation, or there were but they were "careless about the situation. Of course, in 1995, many of the shore were already built, occupied by land owners, or some land had been sold with building permits signed by the Mairie at the time who didn't implemented the 50 pas geometrique. So when the question to implement the law came on the table it was impossible to implement it the way it was written specialy in regard to the distance, 81,20 meter, because at that point the State would have had demolish some houses, restaurants or whatever building built since sometime 100 years like the whole village of Gd Case, so in agreement with all parties involved, including the state, the 50 pas geometrique (like it was done in Reunion Island also..) were adapted to the situation and specificities of st Martin : 17 meters above the highest water line. Of course it is still way larger than the beach in Gd case, but they had to decide on a fair distance regarding new and future constructions or developments (including on Orient where if you realise, most of the un movable concrete structure are still in the 81.20 meters delimitation, and most of the removable structures are in the 17 meters...It is other story for beaches like Baie Rouge where house were built within close distance from the water, as well as Oyster Pond, in front of my house, in the new developement on Natural reserve - neitherless !...) It is basically the explanation

Kind Regards,
Philippe



[www.facebook.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/12/2008 04:01PM by Tabba Khady.

Thanks for explanation - very interesting.

Of course, that 50 feet or 50 "steps" doesn't apply to the Westin who encroached on Dawn Beach by 5 feet or more. [www.youtube.com]

Is there any limit as to what can be built on the beach? I noticed a huge ugly monstrosity of metal scaffolding and "stage" going up at a place on Orient. Making it appear more of a nightclub than a beach. Big speakers and such. Such a shame...

Unfortunatly, as long as it is a removable structure, it will be allowed most of the time... and it is at the waikiki, for beach party and night beach party, your are right

Kind Regards,
Philippe



[www.facebook.com]

I wouldn't suggest an argument to your point, Phillipe, that its in poor taste to bring your chair or your blanket into the middle of Kontiki's contractual area. But that's not what happened in this report. These people reported that they were set up down at the waterline. And isn't this what we often see regarding the aggressive harassment of people on a public chunk of beach. When these guys get their government contract, they don't own the beach to the waterline.

It seems to me you may be contradicting yourself a bit. So if the public section of the beach is historically 50 feet above the average waterline, or even 50 feet about the highest watermark, how can these bar managers presume to get away with harassing people who are set up well down toward the waterline and within the 50 foot public area from "their" beach?

Maybe it was my ineptitude and ignorance over on the other board, huh?

Tabba Khady Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Basically places like Kontiki, Waikiki, etc who
> have a concession on orient have the legal right
> to allow you to put your towell or not betwwen
> their chairs and their delimited space. They have
> a concession signed by the Collectivitee
> Territoriele de St Martin (Former Mairie) who's
> the body in charge of managing the public beach
> owned by the domaine maritime. They pay rent for
> the space aloted to them, and have a determined
> number of chair they are allowed to put in. I
> repeat they pay rent for it and very high rent!
> I do not defend the attitude of the Kontiki toward
> these people, and surely they could have use a
> more couteous way to claim back THEIR space, but
> putting a towel on a middle of a concession is the
> same thing as is someone were entering my
> restaurant, sit at a table and eat their brought
> in lunch...and claim that a restaurant "is a
> public place"! (Actually it did happened to me few
> years ago, I am not kidding).
> To operate and rent chairs on a beach on the
> French side you need to have a concession. Control
> by governement agents are very harsh so I can
> insure you that wehn you see beach chairs in front
> of a restaurant on a French side beach it is
> because this restaurant is allowed to put some and
> paying its rent to the governement (it maybe be a
> different story in the dutch side)...
> Definition of concession (which should clear all
> misunderstanding about the topic...):
> A grant of a tract of land made by a government or
> other controlling authority in return for
> stipulated services or a promise that the land
> will be used for a specific purpose.
> a. The privilege of maintaining a subsidiary
> business within certain premises.
> b. The space allotted for such a business.
> c. The business itself
> So yes the beaches are public, but there are space
> on those public beaches which are rented out by
> local autorithies to generate business and income
> for the island, and those space have to be
> considerated and respected as "private space"
> There are plenty of areas, including in Orient
> where people can put their towel on the sand
> without being "harrassed" for being on a
> concession... Really
>
> It phases me when people who are just visiting are
> making their own rules according to what they
> beleive... Or maybe they didn't knew they were in
> a foreign country (even if the staff was french
> speaking) and thought they were visiting Florida!
> Oh no... I forgot, they wouldn't do that in
> Florida or they would be arrested and fined for
> trespassing! LOL... I would never dare to confront
> a beach restaurant owner on Fort Myers Beach while
> visiting there and telling him what I beleive are
> my rights LOL...and believe me , if I had been
> harassed along more than an hour like this person
> is stating in her/his statement, I would have
> moved...pissed off but I would have moved! Some
> people just have the need to create situation and
> confrotation, which also phases me when you just
> pass by for few hours and next day you will gone
> to another island.
>
> I read on another BB the same type of ineptitude
> and ignorance about concession right, and
> amazingly coming from someone who's an oldtimer
> visitor of sxm.. Incredible!

For the sake of argument, I guess, I would NEVER park my blanket, chair, or kaboose in front of a group of restaurant owned chairs, no matter how long I was going to stay. To me this is not only rude but also I feel that they could as well be obstructing the beautiful view of the water of those who paid for a front row seat. I would equate this to group of people who paid for front row seats to be blocked in view by nose-bleed territory ticket holders who decided to come down and stand in front of them to get the better view.

Understandably, the mother had a difficult time walking through the sand but there are just so many entrances to Orient that are on flat land that they could have easily taken mom to the area least congested, let her off, and then parked the car. I have seen an unbelievable amount of empty sections of beach that are available for people to use their own chairs and as far as I am concerned, I have no sympathy for short-time squatters who could easily have just moved or did the proper thing in the first place.

[www.vrbo.com]

Life is not a child's game of follow the Leader. Instead, life is more about finding one's own purpose in life....your life's plan, and then making a positive difference on earth.

Alan, I don't beleive I am contradicting myself at all... the law is very clear in that matter at least in French (now the traslation and adaptation in english maybe another story).
The "public" domaine is 50 pas geometriques above the water line, which have been translated in St Martin (FRENCH SIDE...) into 17 meters instead of 83.2 in France mainland and most of the french territory.
This public domaine is in fact own by the State, by the domaine du littoral. The Domaine du littoral is being managed by Communes, Collectivite Territoriale, etc... The law give the right to those Collectivites territoriale, communes, etc to grant the public domaine to private entities for business purpose. Those "grant" are called Concession. The concession give the right of the land to the exploitant. It can dispose of the space the same way as if it was his. He only have the obligation to leave a sufficient space between the water line and his concession to allow "passage" - which mean, the space of his concession he is putting back to the public used is only and solely to allow the people to pass through the concession and navigate along the beach...Not to stay, put towels and establish a little camp site...At no point the law regarding the concession right says that people are allowed to use the part of the beach in front of a cocession for anything else than walking. It is clear that according to the small surface, it is only to pass by. It is called in French a "droit de passage" and it doesn't mean "right of stay" or "right to park", it means "right to walk through", like an easement...
It still phases me that outsiders are "re-writting" the law or or interpreting it the way they want. Obviously in the case of those people, they were misleaded by the taxi driver, who didn't did any good to the situtation maybe for personal agenda, knowing that those beach bar (concession) are paying taxi drivers to bring them people... Maybe Kontiki didn't paid enought or decided to not fall into this system. But even misleaded, I don't think I would have done that in a country I just visit for few hours... Maybe I am stupid, but I would have take my stuff and move were obviously there were no beach chairs or concession. And like everybody agree with that, there are plenty of space on Orient, including in front of the taxi "line" to put your towel, without infringing on somebody else business. People do not understand that those concessions must be considerate like private property. If someone is to blame, it is not the business, but the State then who decided to rent out the public domaine to private people. The definition of "Public" in this case means more that the beach is deeded to the "public" (State), and cannot be sold or deeded to a private person, but it can be rented (leased) out.
I don't know how much clearer I can be, about that now, maybe thing seems evident for us because it is our law and it makes sense to us and it doesn't for outsider.. I dunno

Also , to close this "argument" the state is only allowed to dispose of 20 or 25% of the beach domain to grant concession. It has the obligation to leave 75 to 80% free of any concessions. So I can assume that at least 75% of Orient is free and open to anyone, which is easy to verify just by walking along the beach.

Kind Regards,
Philippe



[www.facebook.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2008 07:39AM by Tabba Khady.

LOL...Japan? or sxm future...

Kind Regards,
Philippe



[www.facebook.com]

SXM now?

[barcann.livejournal.com]

Close enought to reality...

Kind Regards,
Philippe



[www.facebook.com]

Tabba Khady Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Alan, I don't beleive I am contradicting myself at
> all... the law is very clear in that matter at
> least in French (now the traslation and adaptation
> in english maybe another story).
> The "public" domaine is 50 pas geometriques above
> the water line, which have been translated in St
> Martin (FRENCH SIDE...) into 17 meters instead of
> 83.2 in France mainland and most of the french
> territory.
> This public domaine is in fact own by the State,
> by the domaine du littoral. The Domaine du
> littoral is being managed by Communes,
> Collectivite Territoriale, etc... The law give the
> right to those Collectivites territoriale,
> communes, etc to grant the public domaine to
> private entities for business purpose. Those
> "grant" are called Concession. The concession give
> the right of the land to the exploitant. It can
> dispose of the space the same way as if it was
> his. He only have the obligation to leave a
> sufficient space between the water line and his
> concession to allow "passage" - which mean, the
> space of his concession he is putting back to the
> public used is only and solely to allow the people
> to pass through the concession and navigate along
> the beach...Not to stay, put towels and establish
> a little camp site...At no point the law regarding
> the concession right says that people are allowed
> to use the part of the beach in front of a
> cocession for anything else than walking. It is
> clear that according to the small surface, it is
> only to pass by. It is called in French a "droit
> de passage" and it doesn't mean "right of stay" or
> "right to park", it means "right to walk through",
> like an easement...
> It still phases me that outsiders are
> "re-writting" the law or or interpreting it the
> way they want. Obviously in the case of those
> people, they were misleaded by the taxi driver,
> who didn't did any good to the situtation maybe
> for personal agenda, knowing that those beach bar
> (concession) are paying taxi drivers to bring them
> people... Maybe Kontiki didn't paid enought or
> decided to not fall into this system. But even
> misleaded, I don't think I would have done that in
> a country I just visit for few hours... Maybe I am
> stupid, but I would have take my stuff and move
> were obviously there were no beach chairs or
> concession. And like everybody agree with that,
> there are plenty of space on Orient, including in
> front of the taxi "line" to put your towel,
> without infringing on somebody else business.
> People do not understand that those concessions
> must be considerate like private property. If
> someone is to blame, it is not the business, but
> the State then who decided to rent out the public
> domaine to private people. The definition of
> "Public" in this case means more that the beach is
> deeded to the "public" (State), and cannot be sold
> or deeded to a private person, but it can be
> rented (leased) out.
> I don't know how much clearer I can be, about that
> now, maybe thing seems evident for us because it
> is our law and it makes sense to us and it doesn't
> for outsider.. I dunno
>
> Also , to close this "argument" the state is only
> allowed to dispose of 20 or 25% of the beach
> domain to grant concession. It has the obligation
> to leave 75 to 80% free of any concessions. So I
> can assume that at least 75% of Orient is free and
> open to anyone, which is easy to verify just by
> walking along the beach.


Philippe,

I agree with you, and it amazes me too in reading different boards, people think they own the island, interprete everything as if they rule the island. First, people seem to forget there are 2 countries on the Island, and often think one sets of rules apply to both sides. Second, people seem to forget that SXM actually has residents, who live there 365 days per year, and not one single tourist should or has the right to impose anything. SXM is what it is today..