In the meeting, officials from the community development department underscored the significance of aligning with the countywide plan and comprehensive plan when considering zoning regulations. The creation of the John’s Pass Village Activity Center, which involves building heights, setbacks, and special requirements, was elaborated upon with the aim of maintaining a balance between development and adherence to zoning codes.

The discussions were held in group settings, where attendees offered their input on the proposed zoning regulations. The need for clear guidelines regarding the encroachment of buildings over the boardwalk was emphasized, as well as the potential impact of such regulations on existing structures and businesses.

Participants debated over the appropriate building heights and setbacks, with one group advocating for the maintenance of current building heights to foster pedestrian-friendly environments. They proposed zero side setbacks and a 5-foot front setback, although there was no consensus on the rear setback. Another group, representing property owners on the boardwalk, suggested allowing buildings to go right up to the boardwalk edge, with a maximum height not exceeding the tallest existing building.

Further discussions included the commercial core district’s zoning regulations and setbacks, notably focusing on the design flood elevation and height limitations. The board also entertained various recommendations and concerns, achieving agreements on some points like the need for adequate parking and the proposal for a 10-foot front setback on the first floor with zero setbacks above.

The R3 zoning category for John’s Pass Resort sparked a discussion about varying front setbacks based on property use and width, with the aim to accommodate single-family, multi-family, and commercial properties. The debate also touched upon the historical context of zoning ordinances and the construction of taller buildings in the past.

A particularly contentious topic was whether building heights should be based on the design flood elevation or from grade. This issue was compounded by the potential for changing flood elevation requirements over time. A suggestion was made to establish a clear rule for building height to provide a standard for developers and reduce ambiguity.

Parking requirements for residential and commercial buildings were also deliberated, with ideas of reducing parking standards to encourage walking and public transit. Concerns arose about rooftop uses, noise, and the potential impact on pedestrian and vehicular traffic.

The meeting also addressed zoning standards for the Pelican area, discussing setbacks, building heights, and the need for sidewalks. Some members called for maintaining the current building code, while others suggested reducing structure heights to better reflect the area’s character.

Finally, the board considered the Traditional Village District, where there was advocacy for zero setbacks and a proposal to permit a parking garage up to six floors high. The discussion also covered the Transitional District’s setbacks and height regulations, with opinions divided on whether to keep or adjust the current rules.

The meeting concluded with a public comment section, where attendees were asked for their input on meeting notifications and were thanked for their participation, with an invitation to take leftover food.