October 23, 2025 Harbor and Waterways Board (2025-10-23)

MINUTES OF THE HARBOR AND WATERWAYS BOARD MEETING DESTIN CITY HALL ANNEX OCOTOBER 23, 2025 - 5: 30 P. M. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Green called the meeting of the Thursday, October 23, 2025 Destin Harbor and Waterways Board meeting to at approximately 5: 30 p. m., at Destin City Hall Annex, with the Pledge of Allegiance immediately following. 2. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Staff: John Stephens Kim Montgomery Deputy City Clerk Jerrod Hayden Daniel Butler Principle Planner Jim Green Steve o' Connor CD Deputy Director Guy Tadlock Robert Tomasek City Engineer Ryan Holloway Sherry Burney Planner Bill McKissick Larry Jones City Manager Kim Kopp City Attorney 3. AGENDA APPROVAL: it Chairman Stephens made the motion to approve the agenda with Committee member Holloway providing the second, the motion passed 5- 0. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 28, 2025 Motion by Chairman Stephens, seconded by Board member Holloway to approve the minutes of the August 28, 2025 meeting, the motion passed 5- 0. 5. NEW BUSINESS: Marine Construction Application - 722 Harbor Blvd, Residential Marine Construction, HWB- 001666- 2025 The Principle Planner, Mr. Daniel Butler explained the project request consists of the following: Extension of the existing terminal platform ( 8 ft x 5 ft) on the far east side of the existing dock. Construction of two finger piers, each 2 ft x 15 ft, extending southward from the eastern and western ends of the dock. New over-water square footage proposed: 100 sq. ft. Total dock square footage on the property would become 805 sq. ft. with no change in slip density. 1

Staff stated the proposed work complies with the Land Development Code ( LDC) Marina Siting provisions, Section 11. 05 and all applicable sections. There is no anticipated effect on the city budget. Required adjacent property owner notifications were sent. Staff reported no public correspondence or objections were received. Staff recommended that the Harbor and Waterways Board recommend City Council approval of the project with the following conditions: o The applicant shall obtain and submit all required federal and state approvals with the marine construction permit application. o The project shall comply with the city' s Marina Siting/ LDC Section 11. 05, at all times. Questions were posed regarding setbacks, proximity to riparian lines and the location of the pilings being within or outside of the new construction and if the adjacent property owner had any concerns with the project' s proximity to his. Mr. Gary Gorman, 1944 Frankfurt Avenue, Panama City, appeared as the applicant/representative providing the following information in response to questions about existing pilings and the new construction: The framing for the new dock improvements will be on the inside of the existing pilings, and there will be no obstructions on the outside of the pilings. Mr. Gorman mentioned that he also spoke to the adjacent neighbor and the neighbor stated that he has no objection and was comfortable with the project tying in close to the to his dock. Motion by Board member Hayden, seconded by Chairman Stephens, the Harbor and Waterways Board voted 5- 0 to recommend that City Council approve the Proposed Residential Marine Construction Project located at 722 Harbor Blvd, for the extension to the existing terminal platform, as well as the construction of( 2) finger pier extensions, with the following conditions: 1. All applicable Federal or State approvals shall be submitted with the Marine Construction Permit application; and 2. All regulations of the City' s Marina Siting LDC Section 11. 05. 00 shall be followed at all times. 510 Norriego Rd, Residential Marine Construction, HWB- 001671- 2025 Mr. Butler explained the application is for a residential marine construction project located on Holiday Isle at 510 Noriego Road with the scope of work being: Construction of a new roof structure over an existing upland slip: 2

o The roof overhang will extend approximately 2 feet beyond the platted property line into the canal. Existing conditions: o Single-family dwelling currently under construction. o An existing upland cut/ slip already exists on the property. New over-water square footage for the boathouse/ roof structure: approximately 72 sq. ft. o Overhang: 2 ft over the platted canal line by about 36 sq. ft in width. Slip density remains unchanged ( two slips within the upland cut). o The project complies with LDC marina siting Section 11. 05. 01 and applicable requirements. o As with the previous items, adjacent property notifications were sent even though not required by code because the work is beyond 25 ft from property lines, and no public comment was received. Staff recommended the Board recommend City Council approval with the following conditions: 1. All applicable federal and state approvals shall be submitted with the marine construction permit application. 2. All regulations of the City' s Marina Siting LDC Section 11. 05. 00 shall be followed at all times. Chairman Stephens questioned whether there have been previous approvals for roof structures with similar or greater overhangs. Staff stated that they are not aware offhand of similar roof overhang approvals but noted that marginal docks are permitted to extend up to 6 feet into the canal, so the 2- foot overhang is less than what is allowed for a marginal dock. Board member McKissick asked whether adjacent property owners were notified and if any responses were received. According to staff, notifications were sent even though not required by the code for this situation, and no responses or objections were received. Board member Stephens asked whether the overhang extends beyond the existing marginal dock/ walkway at the seawall. o Staff clarified the following: There is an existing marginal dock running along the property line protruding about 5- 6 feet into the canal ( maximum allowed is 6 feet). The roof overhang does not extend past the marginal dock; it ends before the marginal dock, so the marginal dock remains the furthest seaward element. The Chairman opened the hearing to the public, with there being no one coming forward to speak, he closed the public portion of the hearing for this project. Motion by Board member Stephens, seconded by Board member Holloway, the members voted 6- 0 for the Harbor and Waterways Board recommend that the City Council approve the proposed residential marine construction project at 510 Noriego Road for the 3

construction of a new roof structure with a minor two- foot overhang into the canal, with the following conditions: 1. All applicable federal and state approvals shall be submitted with the marine construction permit application; and 2. All regulations of the City' s marina siting LDC Section 11. 05. 00 shall be followed at all times. 602 Lagoon Dr, Residential Marine Construction, HWB- 001682- 2025 Mr. Butler explained the application is for a residential marine construction project at 602 Lagoon Drive, within the Holiday Isle canal system. Scope of work: o Construction of a new marginal dock, 5 feet wide, running along the property line for approximately 227 feet. o The section beyond the platted property line will create approximately 1, 135 sq. ft. of new over- water construction along the canal. o An existing 33 ft x 10 ft ( 330 sq. ft.) dock within the upland cut is not part of this Board' s review; the Board is only reviewing the portion beyond the platted property line. Staff sent notifications to adjacent property owners and received public comment. o Copies of written comments were provided as hard copies in the Board' s black folders. o Staff noted that a representative of an adjacent property owner was present to address the Board. Staff stated that the application, based on the submitted survey, complies with the Land Development Code and the Marina Siting requirements. Staff recommends the Harbor & Waterways Board recommends to the City Council approval of the construction with the standard conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit all applicable federal and state approvals with the marine construction permit application. 2. The applicant shall comply with the LDC marina siting provisions ( Section 11. 05. 00) and all applicable LDC requirements at all times. Chairman Green asked staff and the City Attorney to clarify whether: o The Board' s scope is limited to the marginal dock, and o Whether a setback or encroachment issue exists in the upland cut. According to Mr. Butler: o The upland cut and its seawall have already been permitted and constructed. o The Board' s scope for this item is the marginal dock along the seawall beyond the platted property line. 4

o The survey submitted by the applicant indicates that the upland cut/ seawall corner is 0.04 feet ( approximately '/ 2 inch) south of the property line, i.e., it touches but does not cross the line according to the survey. o The City has no setback requirement for upland cuts themselves; setbacks would apply if a roof structure were later proposed over the upland cut. Chairman Green opened the hearing for public comment. Ryan Gerdy, attorney for adjacent owner Susan Shackelford ( lot to the northwest), addressed the Board: o He stated he was not contesting staff' s description of the application at this meeting. o His primary purpose was to ensure that documents and concerns regarding a potential boundary line dispute are entered into the record. o He explained that his client believes the existing upland cut encroaches over her property line, whereas the applicant' s survey shows it only touches the line. o He noted that his client does not seek to delay the City' s permitting process for the marginal dock. o Instead, he wanted it clear in the record that the applicant is proceeding at his own risk, and that if his client later prevails in a boundary dispute, elements of the construction could potentially be affected and may have to be removed or modified. The City Attorney and Board members summarized: o The city is required to rely on the survey submitted with the application for purposes of City review. o Any disagreement between adjacent property owners regarding the true property line is a private/ civil matter, not determined by this Board. o The Board' s role is to determine whether the application complies with the City Code based on the materials submitted. o The adjacent owner' s civil rights and remedies related to any boundary dispute remain fully reserved and unaffected by the Board' s recommendation. It was also noted on the record that the upland cut footprint has been in place for approximately 30 years and is not being altered by this project. Motion by Board member Holloway, seconded by Board member Tadlock, the members voted 6- 0 for the Harbor and Waterways Board recommend that City Council approve the proposed residential marine construction project at 602 Lagoon Drive for the construction of a new marginal dock ( including improvements to the upland cut as described), subject to the following conditions: 1. All applicable federal and state approvals shall be submitted with the marine construction permit applications; and 2. All regulations of the City' s Marina Siting LDC Section 11. 05.00 shall be followed at all times. 5

6. MEMBER COMMENTS: 5A— Water Quality Update— Pump Operation & Sampling Staff Update: Mr. Butler relayed Mr. Michael Burgess' report: A quarterly water quality sampling update prepared by Michael Burgess was included in the packet. Key findings: o The highest bacteria reading was at Station 1A, located farthest east, in the canal at Sandpiper Cove just west of Gulf Shore Drive. o Station 1 A recorded approximately 63 Enterococci per 100 mL, classified as moderate" water quality under the Florida Healthy Beaches program. 0- 30=" good," 31- 70=" moderate," 70=" poor/ dangerous" requiring public notifications. o All other sampling stations showed very low counts( approximately 1 per 100 mL) and were well within the" good" range. Pump Operation: o The harbor pump has been running nightly, currently 6 hours per night through the end of the following week. o After that period, the operation will shift to off-season timing of a few hours per week. Board Discussion: Board member Tadlock thanked staff for the report and noted: o Overall bacteria readings were very good and encouraging. o Pump uptime this summer appears to have been the best since the pump was installed, and there were no major outliers in fecal coliform readings. o The sampling occurred during a relatively dry period, likely reducing stormwater runoff and contributing to better readings. o There may be benefits from improved runoff control from parking lots and outfalls along Highway 98. Board member Tadlock also expressed interest in: o Meeting with Michael Burgess ( and inviting Daniel) to review the data in more detail. o Exploring ways to make the data more accessible and analyzable, such as: Entering the—40 pages of handwritten data into Excel, and Presenting trends with charts/ graphs ( e. g., a " catenal"/ trend chart by parameter and range). o Determining how the data can better inform future decisions: what measures are effective, what might be unnecessary, and what additional actions may be needed. Other Board/ Chair Comments on Water Quality: 6

Several members and the Chair commented that: o The harbor appears noticeably cleaner. o There has been an increase in marine growth on boat hulls; while inconvenient for boat owners/ divers ( cleaning every two weeks in some cases), it is generally seen as a positive indicator of water quality. o One member noted seeing sea urchins in the harbor again for the first time in a long time, another positive ecological sign. The members agreed that they would prefer if staff would provide at a future meeting a summary report on the harbor pump including: o Annual cost of operation( electricity, etc.), o Repairs and maintenance costs, and o Estimated remaining life expectancy of the pump. Staff indicated this information can be compiled and noted that because the pump has been running heavily this summer, they will have good operating data for the report. 5B— Navigation Aids/ Federal Channel Markers— John Stephens Vice Chairman Stephens reported he had spoken with a staff member from Representative Petronas' office regarding the Coast Guard / Federal side for the navigational lights and buoys in the East Pass, that had previously been discussed by the Board and was informed of the following: o There is currently no set timeline for replacement/repair. o The federal government is presently focused on the budget, but once that is resolved, the representative indicated that fixing navigational lights and buoys in the Destin area is one of their top priorities. 5C— Liveaboards, Anchoring, and Marine Sanitation Devices ( MSDs) A board member revisited earlier discussion regarding liveaboard vessels anchored in the harbor: o He contacted FWC and the Okaloosa County Sheriff' s Office about enforcement options. o Their response: Currently there is little that can be done about long- term liveaboards strictly on the basis of anchoring, because there is no mooring field in place and the City does not have the same jurisdiction as it would with an established mooring field. Another member pointed out that, regardless of anchoring rights, vessels are required by law to have operable Marine Sanitation Devices ( MSDs): o Discussion included: Y- valves for discharge lines must be secured ( e. g., zip-tied or otherwise locked) in the closed position in inland waters. Concerns were raised about reports of 5- gallon buckets of waste being dumped overboard, which directly undermines the Board' s efforts to improve water quality. 7

Discussion City Attorney: o She noted that enforcement of MSD requirements falls under Coast Guard and FWC jurisdiction. o The City could potentially adopt code provisions that mirror or supplement state and federal requirements, but enforcement would still generally rely on FWC or the Coast Guard unless the City specifically empowers and trains its own enforcement personnel. Board consensus: o This is an area of ongoing concern and may tie into longer-term efforts to establish a mooring field to give the City more effective jurisdiction and tools to address liveaboard impacts on harbor water quality. 5D— Used Oil Collection / Environmental Services A board member followed up on previous discussion about used oil disposal at the harbor: o He contacted Shoreline Environmental, a company based in Alabama. o The company indicated they will pick up used oil at no charge. Discussion: o The Board noted the need for a secured, monitored collection facility where used oil can be safely stored until pickup— ideally protected from after-hours dumping or contamination. o A member suggested assigning the idea to Michael Burgess to explore feasible locations and management of such a facility, since he is involved with other harbor environmental efforts. o The Board and Chair expressed interest in pursuing this option further as a way to prevent improper disposal of used oil into the harbor. SE— Mooring Field, Harbor Jurisdiction, and Potential Municipal Marina A member asked staff about the recent news of the state' s planned purchase of a large dock/ marina property ( referenced as an "$ 85 million dock") and whether the City had considered: o Entering into an agreement with the state to operate the facility as a municipal marina, and o Using it in conjunction with a mooring field to provide additional harbor management and revenue. Staff( Daniel and Ms. Kim) responded: o The property has not yet closed, and the purchase is still in process; closing may occur by the end of the year, but no date is certain. o The current zoning and future land use designation for that property, as well as its existing development order, do not permit a commercial marina. o For these reasons, it is premature for the City to discuss operating the property as a municipal marina or propose any commercial marina use. Additional Board Notes: o Members discussed that establishing a mooring field remains important for the City to have more direct jurisdiction over anchoring and liveaboards in the harbor; 8

simply owning or operating a marina alone does not confer the same regulatory authority. o Ideas were floated about potential short-term monetization of future slips and providing shuttle services across the harbor if the City ever gains control or partnership in such a facility, but all acknowledged these concepts are long- term and contingent on future decisions and changes in zoning and policy. Public Comment Chair Green opened the floor for public comment. No members of the public came forward to speak. Public comment was closed. 9. Next Meeting/ Adjournment Staff noted that the next regularly scheduled Harbor and Waterways Board meeting would have fallen on Thanksgiving Day, so staff polled members and confirmed quorum is available on Monday, November 10, 2025. The next Harbor and Waterways Board meeting is therefore scheduled for: Monday, November 10, 2025. Staff will send a reminder closer to the date. 7. ADJOURNMENT: With there being no furtheriscussi , the meet' g adjourned at 6: 35 p. m. e an o d this 2026. Capt. Jim Green, ii an mery e uty City rk 9