November 6, 2025 Local Planning Agency (2025-11-06)

LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 6, 2025 - 5: 30 P. M. DESTIN CITY HALL ANNEX CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE: Chairman Wood called the Local Planning Agency meeting to order on Thursday, November 6, 2025, 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. Tammy Weidenhamer Rey Bailey City Clerk Ken Wampler Daniel Butler, Principal Planner Jay Purut Steve O' Connor, Deputy CD Director Todd Burr Kyle Bauman, City Attorney Marcie Bell Bree Uptigrove 3. AGENDA APPROVAL: Motion by Agency member Wampler, seconded by Agency member Purut, to approve the agenda passed unanimously, 6- 0. 4. MINUTES: July 17, 2025 Motion by Agency member Purut, seconded by Agency member Bell, to approve the minutes of July 17. 2025 passed 6- 0. 5. CURRENT BUSINESS A. Proposed Ordinance 25- 17- LC— Platting Staff explained that the law now requires cities and counties to administratively approve plats and replats when they comply with Florida Statute 177. Additional requirements include issuing an acknowledgment letter within seven days of application, committing to a review timeline within that letter, and issuing an approval, conditional approval, or denial within the stated timeframe. Infrastructure plans must accompany subdivision applications when applicable, and digital plats will replace Mylar copies. The Technical Review Committee surveyor already evaluates plats for compliance with FS 177.

Agency member Wampler made a motion to recommend to the city council to approve the proposed Ordinance 25- 17- LC; seconded by Agency member Purut. Motion passed 6- 0. B. Proposed Ordinance 25- 23- LC Land Development Code Article 1 — General Provisions/ Legal The agency reviewed proposed Ordinance 25- 23- LC concerning Article 1 of the Land Development Code. Staff noted that four paragraphs had been inadvertently omitted from the draft, and those were supplied via handout for inclusion. The board discussed whether references to Florida Statutes should appear in the LDC, with some members preferring citations for clarity and others concerned about the need to continually update them. A compromise to add " as amended from time to time" was broadly accepted. Members also discussed redundancy in an enforcement paragraph, with staff noting it was not problematic and could improve clarity for the public. The board further indicated interest in strengthening penalties where appropriate. Agency member Bell moved to recommend approval of proposed Ordinance 25- 24- LC, with the omitted paragraphs restored, to the city council. Agency member Purut provided a second to the motion, which passed 6- 0. C. Proposed Ordinance 25- 24- LC Land Development Code Article 2 - Administration The agency then considered Ordinance 25- 24- LC, a substantial reorganization of Article 2 governing development processes. Staff explained that applications have been reorganized into three major categories — land division, land development, and miscellaneous planning — and that development orders now have their own section. Sureties and bonds have also been consolidated. Plat procedures were updated in parallel with the earlier ordinance to align with SB 784. Staff proposed removing special events permitting from the Land Development Code altogether, placing it instead within the Code of Ordinances because it regulates temporary activities rather than land use. This change will return in a later ordinance. A significant portion of the meeting focused on Planned Unit Developments ( PUDs). The city council had suggested establishing a uniform minimum of five acres citywide and possibly imposing a larger minimum for " commercial hubs," though no definition for that term has been created. The board discussed several approaches to defining hubs — such as identifying parcels along U. S. 98, referencing certain zoning districts, or tying criteria to the nature of the proposed project— but recognized that few parcels in Destin exceed five acres. Staff explained that mixed- use districts already provide much of the flexibility PUDs were once used for, and that PUD activity in the city has been limited in recent decades. The current draft requires applicants to select 2

from a menu of public benefits, replacing the old subjective tiered approach. While no formal vote occurred at this stage, the general sentiment was to keep the five- acre minimum citywide and avoid creating an overly complicated definition of commercial hubs. There were questions regarding how potential annexation of unincorporated Destin and the future LDC would influence zoning east of the current city limits. Staff explained that most commercial lands north of Highway 98 would likely be designated Commercial General ( CG) under the new Article 4 framework, while residential areas would need more nuanced zoning assignments or even new zoning districts created to match existing development patterns. Mixed- use districts including South Harbor, North Harbor, Town Center, Gulf Resort, and Holiday Isle were debated regarding whether they should be included or exempted in certain regulatory provisions, with staff noting that some mixed- use categories are unique and require separate handling. Discussion then shifted to proposed removals and edits within Article 2, including the relocation of special events regulations out of the LDC and into the Code of Ordinances, because special events function as temporary activities rather than land uses. The board also reviewed required updates related to state- mandated platting changes, which had already been adopted earlier in the meeting. Substantial review occurred in Section 2. 01. 04 ( Public Notice Requirements), where the board commended the improvements but noted omissions— specifically the absence of future land use map amendments in the list of items requiring mailed notice. Staff confirmed this was an oversight and agreed to add it. Additional questions arose in Section 2. 01. 05 ( Extensions), where earlier drafts included a subsection clarifying that any approved extension automatically extends associated decision deadlines. It appeared the text had been consolidated into subsection D without clear formatting, prompting clarification from staff. Further analysis covered Section 2. 03 ( Guarantees and Sureties), where several inspection- related provisions from earlier drafts had been removed. Staff explained that the new city engineer intentionally consolidated redundant language and confirmed that required inspections are still covered through other permitting processes. The board also reviewed Section 2.03. 16 ( Fees-in- Lieu), which listed right- of-way and infrastructure examples but omitted " easements," causing initial concern. Staff clarified that the introductory paragraph already includes" public easements," and that easements typically are not subject to fees- in-lieu; thus the omission was intentional. In Section 2. 09. 03 ( Harbor- Waterway Notices), the board discussed why adjacent- property-only notice requirements differ from the standard 300-foot notice used elsewhere in the LDC. Staff clarified that this section reflects current Harbor and Waterways Board regulations and primarily concerns residential docks, where riparian rights issues exist only between adjacent 3

neighbors. Larger marina or commercial dock proposals would require development orders and therefore broader notices. Board members also identified formatting and language inconsistencies, specifically Section 2. 15. 02 ( Public Hearing Procedures), where text incorrectly referenced only the Local Planning Agency rather than all relevant boards, committees, and the City Council. Staff agreed these corrections were necessary. After reviewing the numerous inconsistencies, formatting issues, and items needing clarification, the board concluded that Article 2 was not ready to advance to the city council. Agency member Buhr moved to have staff clean up the document, incorporate all corrections, and return the revised Article 2 at the next available meeting in December. The motion was seconded by Agency member Purut and passed 6- 0. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 8. ADJOURNMENT: Having no further discussion at thi ime, the meeting adjourned at 6: 45 p.m. Adopt d and approved this day of y) 0,1 2025. J es Wood, Jr. Rey Bailey, City Clerk 4