Forums39
Topics38,777
Posts313,814
Members26,581
|
Most Online2,218 Jan 21st, 2020
|
|
42 registered members (lcote, GaryB, JeanneB, BarbyandLeo, socamon, Husker, Toni, Rbailey, Time Will Tell, dfmsml, eightzerobits, ColoBoater, BillDauterive, taraavo, Fred, Jerry_R, Rnd, bailau, luvtotravel, Matt W, sxmpete, SXMNAN, davidandsusannj, jbutah, polaris, marisol, Coconut Joe, KirkB, Uksimonusa, pandpfromcanada, Fitzhughlaw, pk5352, ndfaninnc, 9 invisible),
1,345
guests, and 221
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Grand Case beach?
[Re: Carol_Hill]
#74500
11/11/2015 10:31 AM
11/11/2015 10:31 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 993 Pittsburgh PA
plequerre
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 993
Pittsburgh PA
|
Carol_Hill said: OK, thanks for the further clarification. "occupation" means something different than I thought it meant. Leaving room to be able to walk along the beach seems logical. Yep. In French, "occupied" means "not vacant" (for example for a bathroom) or "busy" (for a phone line). In the case of Grand Case beach, this decision prevents businesses from completely blocking the beach which I completely agree with, even if it might impact Calmos where we like to go eat at night.
|
|
|
|