October 17, 2024 Local Planning Agency Meeting (2024-10-17)

LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 17, 2024 - 5: 30 P. M. DESTIN CITY HALL BOARDROOM 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Wood called the Local Planning Agency Workshop to order on Thursday, October 17, 2024, at 5: 30 p.m., in the Destin City Annex Chambers; with the Pledge of Allegiance immediately following. 2. ROLL CALL: Members Present Members Absent Staff Members Present James T. Wood, Jr. Todd Buhr Kimberly Montgomery Deputy City Clerk Jay Purut Gary Jarvis Steven O' Connor Principal Planner Marcie Bell Corey Ledbetter Sherry Burney Planner Ashley Dominguez Planner Jesse Hernandez Planner Kyle Bauman, Special Projects Counsel Chairman Wood clarifiedfor the record that there is not a quorum, therefore they would only be having discussions and no formal recommendations. Mr. O' Connor did inform the members that it was not staff's intentions to have any recommendations for this meeting. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None 4. NEW BUSINESS: A. LDC Draft Article 8 - Signs The Principal Planner, Steve O' Connor briefly explained how this is the first time this article is coming before them and how it has been available to the public, on the website, for some length of time, as well as staff has provided it to them twice in the last few months, for their review. He also explained how past codes had language for all types of different signs. However, in 2015, a landmark case went before the Supreme Court where occurrences of freedom of speech was being denied and all of the justices hearing the case agreed. Therefore, commercial and noncommercial speech can be determined but only to that limitation, and the form can be regulated as in attached or free standing, the permanency can be regulated, they can be regulated by zoning districts but, the content cannot and must be neutral. He then referred the members to the charts that simplifies the types so that people can better understand what it is they are looking for, noting that this is a change that everyone in the public will have to get used to, but staff feels it will be better understood. He then briefly went over each different types of signs with the members.

Agency member Purut spoke of temporary signs in the form of flags/ banners design that get put out on the weekends for church services and such. Mr. O' Connor explained signs that are meant to be flown in the wind, are prohibited and read those types that he was referring to. Agency member Bell spoke of real estate signs how some are the average ones on the arms, but she has seen some that are very large as well. According to Mr. O'Connor, currently the allowed size for them is up to 32 square feet and 8- feet tall and explained the different sizes and amounts of signs that are allowed within those dimensions. Chairman Wood questioned the size of the signs for short term rentals, and Mr. O'Connor stated those signs have separate regulations and requirements, based on the short term rental code. Agency member Bell questioned the size of the signs allowed in residential neighborhoods noting that they seem rather large. Mr. O' Connor explained the requirements are for the total square footage allowed at the parcel and not meant as one large 75 square foot sign, but multiple signs such as political signs, that can make up that amount. Additionally, a maximum of sixteen square feet for one sign. He then spoke of how this sign format is something that he brought from a previous employment that was reviewed by their attorneys in Idaho, is content neutral and compliant with the law. Agency member Bell suggested making the requirements for the sign sizes so that they are easily devisable for multiple signs. Both staff and the Agency members agreed with her suggestion of 15 inches instead of 16 inches. Chairman Wood questioned the waterfront signs and what they are. According to Mr. O'Connor, if someone is approaching from the harbor, and the business is in the Harbor Mixed Use District, they can have a sign that is visible from the water while piloting a vessel. However, if on the boardwalk and someone needs to go to a kiosk to check in, those type signs are not waterfront signs nor are they regulated since they are not signs that are visible from the street or public right of ways, they' re just considered on premise signs. Having no further discussions, Mr. O'Connor asked the members to go through this again, before their next meeting and bring back any suggestions or questions to discuss further, if necessary. B. LDC Draft Article 11 - Glossary discussion Mr. O'Connor briefly explained to the members what staff is providing terms of the new proposed language and what will be removed. In terms of the definition of" Beach" he read the definition out loud for the members to consider.

Agency member Bell requested the area of the beach on the East Pass needs to be better defined and to have the definition of" beach" amended to include the beaches along the East Pass side. Mr. O' Connor suggested amending it to say, " The beach is used in the Coastal Management Element requirements, is limited to Gulf, East Pass and Estuarine Shorelines." In discussion, the Chairman clarified that if there is a seawall and water, with no sand, that is not considered beach. Mr. O'Connor confirmed his statement adding that if the property is upland of the seawall, it is not considered part of the definition of a beach. The members agreed with the discussions and for addition of East Pass to the definition of beach. Mr. O' Connor instructed the members to also think more about this, look up the areas on the property appraiser' s website, go out to the beaches, and bring back any additional suggestions at their next meeting, for any further discussion. He also spoke of Article 11, that has a definition of beach for wheeled vehicles and asked the member to review that as well, and bring any comments and suggestions back for discussion. Chairman Wood pointed out that the definition of bicycle does not reflect eBikes, nor is there a definition for them and suggests adding that as well as Low Speed Vehicle into the glossary. Mr. O'Connor stated that he would ensure that is included before their next meeting. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 7. ADJOURNMENT: Having no further discussion at this time, the meeting adjourned at 6: 30 p.m. n4' eliAd, . te d approved this l day,+ 2025. WoyA Mir I am- s Wood, Jr. Chairman imbe ly Mont_• iery City C