During the workshop, a considerable portion of the dialogue centered on revamping the PUD regulations. The current PUD process has been criticized for being too lenient, allowing developers to bypass standard regulations without guidelines. The proposed updates aim to address these concerns by establishing minimum land size requirements for PUD applications and necessitating that developers provide public benefits quantified by a point system. Each PUD request must generate a minimum of five points from specified strategies and objectives.

A council member raised concerns about the appropriateness of a half-acre minimum land size in the harbor planning area. This discrepancy prompted further debate, with comparisons made to larger developments in other regions. Some council members expressed that the process should not cater to smaller lots without ensuring substantial public benefits. The proposed sizes varied across different planning areas, with some areas set at two acres, while the harbor planning area was suggested to have a minimum of 0.5 acres.

One participant noted, “if you put four of them together, you’ve got 8 to 10 acres now you can have a PUD,” emphasizing that larger PUDs could facilitate more substantial projects and potentially allow for greater residential density. There was a consensus that a larger minimum size, such as five acres for residential districts and potentially larger for commercial areas, might be more appropriate to ensure meaningful community benefits.

The council also discussed the inclusion of affordable housing components in new developments. Specifically, it was proposed that 20% of housing units in PUDs meet affordability standards based on the area’s average mean income (AMI). Concerns were raised regarding the feasibility of providing affordable housing in desirable areas like the bay. The need for a structured evaluation process for public benefits was emphasized to ensure clarity and defensibility in decisions. “The public benefit had to be approved by the council,” one member stated.

Another topic was the introduction of a new special events process in Article Two of the LDC. The current code discusses special events but lacks a clear approval process, which became evident during a recent carnival event at a local church. The new process aims to focus on whether the property can support the event in terms of parking and facilities, allowing city staff and council to impose necessary conditions for approval.

A framework for determining what constitutes a special event was proposed, with a suggested threshold of 100 people to delineate whether a permit would be required. This received support, as members expressed a desire to avoid over-regulating activities while ensuring community safety. The conversation included the suggestion that special events at schools might also need regulation due to their potential impact on local traffic and safety.

The council then moved towards discussing the workshops and public meetings related to the review of major subdivisions. It was recommended that the Local Planning Agency (LPA) be included in the review process for major subdivisions as a recommending body to the city council. This would ensure that if a major subdivision came to the city council with concerns, it could revert back to the LPA for further review.

In the context of the Harbor and Waterways Board review, a categorization of applications was proposed to simplify the permitting process. Category One projects would include those that meet self-certification, allowing them to bypass the Harbor and Waterway Board review. Category Two would encompass residential docks that do not meet self-certification and require review and recommendation to the city council. Category Three would involve non-residential developments or more complex residential docks, necessitating both Harbor and Waterways Board and city council public meetings.

Additionally, there was considerable discussion focused on the challenges facing various committees and boards, particularly regarding attendance and participation. Concerns were raised about the lack of quorum at meetings, with one council member suggesting that monthly reports on attendance would be more effective than quarterly reports.

The meeting then transitioned to a special session where the primary agenda item was a lease extension for property owned by Destin Water Users. The city identified a funding opportunity through a grant from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, which required the city to maintain control of the property for a minimum of 30 years. Following some discussion, a motion to approve the lease extension was unanimously passed.

An update on a tropical weather system was also provided. The system, potentially developing into Hurricane Halen, was forecasted to strengthen and make landfall in the Big Bend area of Florida. Residents were advised to stay prepared, with the city opening a sandbag station and highlighting resources for storm readiness.