City Council - Regular Meeting

Mrs. Deese, would you please call the roll?

Mr. Painter?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Thomas? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Coleman?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Morehouse? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Whitstruck?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Bishop?

Yes, ma'am.

Chairman Wakestein?

Yes, ma'am. Item number two on our agenda, Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Morehouse, could you please lead us?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All righty. Item number three on our agenda, approval of the August 12, 2026 Planning Board Meeting Minutes. Has everybody had a chance to read the minutes? Do we have a motion?

I'd like to make a motion to approve.

All right. We have a motion. Do we have a second? I'll second it. We have a motion and a second. Mrs. Deese, would you please call the roll?

Mr. Morehouse?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Bishop?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Painter?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Thomas?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Whitstruck?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Coleman?

Yes, ma'am.

Chairman Wakestein?

Yes, ma'am. Item number four. public comments on non-agenda items only. Have any public comments on non-agenda items? So none. I'll move on to item 5A, our code enforcement.

Good afternoon, Chairman and Board. Thanks for letting me come up here again. We'll go over what we've been doing this last month here. Moving forward, again, this is always for the first couple slides for public to be aware of code enforcement, the admin staff, and what we do. So I'll breeze through this real quick. So, so far this month, year to date, so far this year, year to date, we have 1,707 cases have been opened. For month to date, this month, we got 334 cases. This is just another visual of what we're doing in cases compared to the previous years. We move on to total cases this year. Again, 334 with 100 citations issued. That means that we have a 70, right about 70% compliance rate without enforcement action such as citations. I think it's important to know that the enforcement doesn't just go write tickets all the time. We do work with people. We work with businesses. We work with the community to get things right. On the beach of those citations, 18, I'm sorry, Upland properties, 18 citations were addressed to Upland property owners, and the 82 were addressed on the beach, on Sandy Beach. Fines collected and not collected there. And then to break it down to the neighborhoods, the biggest thing we were dealing with this go-around again was taxes and business registration, assisting that department in gaining compliance, and people who aren't responding to them, they tend to respond to us a little bit better. Tall grass, litter dumping, and detrimental conditions are top issues within our neighborhoods in the city. On the sandy beach, double red flags. We've had several citations issued for that. We try to do voluntary compliance by sharing information. The city does a great job in making people aware when we have double red flags and the consequences of going to the water after those are... after those are flying. Glass on the beach, holes on the beach, and assisting other agencies. I like to write down assisting other agencies because it can be a bit confusing if you don't know what that is. But assisting with medical calls, lost kids, lost parents sometimes, missing people that don't know where they're at. And we had one sea turtle that we had assisted turtle watching them in the rescue of the sea turtle. Water rescue calls is another popular thing for us to assist with. And then signage removed from the right-of-ways. Again, that number is a little bit lower than the previous years. Double red flags, this is just pages that we'd like to present to people, show how important this is to our city, to our community, and to the people visiting here. We want them to come here, make great memories, and not have regret when they leave here. So we do a strong enforcement presence during double red flag days. We had four of those, and then that resulted in 44 citations. Certainly a community to bear by. We'd like to make sure our code enforcement officers are well-trained, well-equipped, and know what they're doing when they go out there. We have a new person on our staff named Rob. He just completed his 240 hours in-house training. That's six weeks worth of training. And then he goes and we send him to basic school and then more advanced school, things like this. But he's completed the training. 240 hours to have him aboard, and then working with businesses to promote education and voluntary compliance. So that's what we've been doing for the last month. Do you have any questions?

The only question I had, commercial violations. Do they reside in a specific area of your report, or is some on the beach, some in neighborhoods? Yes.

We don't necessarily break down commercial with residential or the beach. It's either upland properties, so that can be commercial and residential put together, and then we have just a sandy beach. That's how we break it down. It's easier with the system we work with. It's kind of difficult to differentiate them because of zoning.

Okay. That was my question. There was a way to do it.

Yep.

Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you very much.

We appreciate all your help.

All right. On to our regular agenda items. Agenda item 6A, Capital Improvement Schedule. We'll be presenting. I'll do that, Mr. Chairman. All right, Mr. Leonard.

All right, thank you, Mr. Chairman and the board. This is the annual update to the capital improvement schedule, which is part of the comprehensive plan. The state requires all local governments in the state of Florida to update it annually. And it's a compilation, as you can tell, from a lot of different sources. I mean, we have the CRA folks. giving us the information for the roadway improvements for the CRA, and also Public Works is involved with that as well, giving us that information. And then also what this does is try to look at the improvements that are going to happen to all of the public capacity out there that we have where we have a level of service that's established. And you need to find ways to expand that and have funds that are available for that in the future. And so you also see wastewater, potable water, parks and rec when it involves transportation like a sidewalk, some sort of transportation improvement. So you'll see all those in there from different sources, and it's for your consideration. If you have any questions about anything that's significant, we can always get with that department head and get that information, and you can continue it to the next month if we need to. It's not under a deadline where it has to be approved at this meeting, but that's before you now for your consideration.

It's an impressive list of projects, ongoing, in process, and completed over 500 million just in road improvements. It's a remarkable investment in the city. Any questions for Mr. Leonard at this time?

Yes, sir. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I have a question. Just my own curiosity is how are these projects prioritized? Is it by, like, is there, like, a traffic study that's done on some of these, or is it based on how fast we can get the funding, or how does that work?

It's probably a little bit of all of it. And also, they're all not related to one another, so there's no way to prioritize the transportation projects with the wastewater improvement projects. They're all self-contained and have their own priorities. And it does, it becomes, if you're talking about wastewater, if you have a grant involved, that'll speed things up. things like that. But for the traffic, we rely on Public Works and the CRA people to tell us what the priorities are for the CRA itself, which ultimately comes down from the city council that sits as the CRA, the agency for that, in determining what the priorities are. Like right now, you can tell the priority for the CRA is working west to east and then just improving the intersections, the north-south connectors, but not going all the way up the north-south connectors. And once that Front Beach Road element is finished, then you'll start seeing those north-south connectors that aren't finished yet prioritized and hit from there on. But right now it's going from west to east.

All right. Is there an opportunity to, like... reprioritize based on which roads have higher traffic volume or less? I'm just curious. I don't know what the protocol is. I think that would reside with city council.

It would, but also they'll take recommendations from you. And right now Front Beach Road, of course, has the highest volume, and so that's the roadways it's going to be focused on for the next 10 years. And then it'll be looking at that. And that's one of the things that they do look at is which one has the most congestion, which one is flooding, has the worst problems, things like that. Okay.

For what it's worth over the years looking at these, the roads change position. Every year. Okay. Last year, the year before, I want to say Clara was like number 20 on there. I noticed. I'm happy it's number seven now. Right. It's making its way up there. Right. But I think until Front Beach Road is finished, that's priority number one. Right.

And just to follow up on that, the order of these roads are not a priority. It's just a listing of the roadways. And actually, I do a lot of the listing of the roadways because we also update the available volume that's available for capacity on the roadways each year so that traffic consultants can use it when they're submitting for development orders over their traffic study. They can talk about how much capacity is available and what the traffic volume is and all that kind of stuff. And really, I kind of go down the DOT listing of roadways for traffic counts. So it's, yeah, these numbers are just not how they're ranked.

Okay. So, I mean, we can forward concerns to city council where we see issues as board members. Right. We can forward to city council and ask them when they're establishing the priorities. Good. Okay.

Any further questions? Excuse me, I got a couple, Mr. Chairman. So to be an accurate statement, say then, as far as Hills Road and Powell Adams Road, that is the tentative start time for construction would be the 2028, 2029 fiscal year. Is that why we're seeing that large of an expenditure in the 2028, 2029 year? Yes. And then just I would say, just one thing I would second or add Piggyback, as it's been called. Yeah, Clara Avenue, I mean, if there's a way that there could be some type of added prioritization to that, because, granted, I know it is seasonal, but there are times where the traffic northbound from Middle Beach to Back Beach on Clara Avenue is literally past where you turn into the elementary school, and it's just a standing line. And obviously stuff like that doesn't happen overnight, but... I think during spring break and the summer months and early fall, that's a very high-demand roadway to use.

I wasn't going to mention anything as I live off of it, but to pile on, that intersection at Back Beach, it gets terrible with it being just two northbound lanes. Clara needs some attention sooner than a lot of these roads, if only at the intersections. Extended turn lanes.

lanes and especially back beach road if that could get cleared up that would clear up a lot well that's why i was just kind of curious like could we reprioritize these based on where the most congestion is at right now and maybe you know and i don't know if that's looking at it from a top top down order highest volume um annually or lower volume because if you improve the lower volume roads first then does it shift you know and and spread traffic out over town but um

It's above our pay grade to make these, but we need to forward concerns and allow them to look at it through their filter.

And I'll certainly pass this along to the city manager as he's doing one-on-one meetings with the council members about Clara, especially since all the things you've mentioned. There's a school on there, and its connection with the parkway is just really atrocious right now, and people getting on and having to sit there through several light signals. changes to get through it. So I would think that that one would be a hot one once they get finished with Front Beach Road.

Thank you.

Anything else? No, sir.

No, I just concur with all the statements about Clara. Thank you.

If there's no further questions, does anybody want to make a motion on this?

I'll make a motion to accept the report.

We have a motion to accept the capital improvement plan. Do we have a second? I'll second. We have a motion and a second. Mrs. Deese, would you please call the roll?

Mr. Morehouse?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Bishop?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Painter?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Thomas?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Whitstruck? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Coleman?

Yes, ma'am.

Chairman Wakestein?

Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Item number 6B, consideration of an ordinance amending land development code to establish regulations for pickleball courts. Mr. Davis.

Yes, sir. So a couple meetings ago, you guys asked us to bring you back a proposed ordinance on regulating private pickleball courts in residential neighborhoods, and that's what you have before you. This is kind of a you know, a suggestive ordinance based on what we see in other areas, other communities. And so what we've done is we've allowed private residential pickleball courts as an accessory use in residential neighborhoods subject to some fairly stringent standards, the biggest one being a 100-foot setback is required. Happy to hear your concerns or questions about the ordinance or suggestions about any ways that we can make it better before we take it to the city council. Okay.

Thank you. One question I had out of the gate, I'm noticing on the proposed ordinance, it mentions all of our category of residential. How does this affect residential and commercial high intensity?

We could, so we could do a couple different things. We could add the CHs to that, you know, or what we could do, because if you look at the definition of private residential pickleball court in section one, It's any outdoor court located on the same lot or on an adjacent lot under the same ownership control. So a residential lot in a CH neighborhood would not be able to take advantage of this. So we could add those commercial zoning distinctions as well if you want to. Right now it's just regulating the accessory use in those residential zones. Okay.

So as written, you could do this if you live in R1, but you couldn't do it if you live in CH? Correct. Okay.

Mr. Coleman? Yeah, I feel like, you know, especially if you're looking at item number three, and I know we're talking about some stringent requirements, but I feel like rather this be an ordinance to what you need to have in order to have a pickleball court, it's all the ways that you're not going to have a pickleball court. And the reason why I say that, if we're sitting here and we're looking at residential use areas or residential zoned spaces in Panama City Beach, if it's got to be located on the same lot as a single family dwelling and be 100 foot set back from a side in the rear, how many lots have the actual... ability to even do that. I think that is effectively saying that no one can have a pickleball court in Panama City Beach. Now I'm not saying that it should still have the same setbacks as a regular accessory use structure, but I do think if we're talking 100 feet from sides and rear, then we're basically eliminating everybody from the ability to have a pickleball court. I know we kind of talked about this last meeting. I understand that there's some concerns about noise and whatnot, but To me, I look at pickleball like I look at a swimming pool. Kids in a pool can be loud. You can have a speaker by a pool and be loud. Kids swim at it at night. Now, granted, you need a little bit more lighting to play pickleball at night. So I think that's a susceptible thing. But I think there's maybe a little bit of middle ground between 100 feet from the sides and rear, as opposed to just being 10 feet setback, a 10-foot setback from the property lines itself.

OK. I understand your concerns. I was actually listening to a pickleball match while making my notes on this this weekend because I live right near my neighborhood's community one. These won't get as much use as the one by my house does, but I can tell you everybody in the neighborhood who's a lousy shot, I can tell you what their friends think about them when they miss it, too. And it's all weekend. Thankfully, our court doesn't have lights. It has a real potential to be a nuisance to neighbors. But there's a certain point in time we're either regulating a nuisance or we're allowing one to be created. I don't know that there's a way to keep everyone happy.

I agree. Like I said, I think if there's something in between in the middle ground or somewhere that's a little bit, There's a little bit. It makes you feel better.

I like Hillsborough's better. I like that 250-foot setback. That's even worse. I know.

I think the challenge from the way I understand my research is it's not so much about the repetition, the constant repetition of the pickleball compared to like a pool is where it seems the majority of the complaints come from is it's just nonstop. There's sound screens and barriers and stuff to help that. I understand your point of view, like you have a right to do something in your backyard. Essentially, the way I see it is a six-foot fence is not an effective sound barrier because sound travels and so it's traveling up over that whenever it goes so far. I think significant sound barriers is the only way that We have to, and the fencing and the screening and stuff is something that's imperative to making this work.

One of my neighbors has a mature vegetative buffer around it. It helps a little. I like the idea of the solid face fence in here. I'd go so far as to say like a masonry wall would be my preference, but I am admittedly a curmudgeon on this.

Right. One thing about the masonry wall is that since we live in such a hot climate, if you have a three or four sided masonry wall, it's going to make that like Death Valley inside there. one wall that is the buffer between residential area and the court is solid masonry and then chain link fence with some type of screening or something like that around it. So it's not a health issue or health consideration.

No, and I don't agree with as far as a solid wall, or excuse me, I don't disagree. with the solid wall or the vegetative wall. I think that provides some type of sound deadening. For me, the crux of everything kind of sits when we sit there and say it's 100 feet in all directions. We're effectively telling everybody that you can't have a pickleball court because I'll be impressed if you can find me a lot that's got a single family dwelling on it and 100 feet of setback that they could put on a side in the back, and still have a pickleball court.

I haven't looked into how many qualify. We've got to start with something. So 100's a nice round number to start with. And if that's not enough distance, we can add distance. If we can control sound without distance, I'm happy to.

50's a round number as well. That it is.

Yeah. I mean, like in Breakfast Point, the biggest lot width is 60 feet. And so, I mean, you need a lot width of at least 250 feet wide to fit a pickleball court in the back of it. And yeah, I can't think of a space outside the Kugler's house that would fit that.

Yeah. Yes, sir.

An easy fix to that is that you would just have it, say, on the same lot or an adjacent lot under the same ownership or control in case someone has two lots next to each other, for example.

That's one of those issues where there are several of those homes. I know there's some in your neighborhood. Is this something you all want to deal with or not?

My thought is I kind of put it, In the same box as a basketball court. It's the same. It's the ball bouncing. If you want to put up a basketball goal at your house, you put up a basketball goal. And we rely on each other to be good neighbors. And don't dribble the basketball at midnight. If your neighbor says, shut up, you shut up. If you can fit a pickleball court, which is just concrete in your yard, go for it. I just, I don't see, I mean, I feel like it's kind of a new sport and it's getting a lot of attention now. I don't think we're going to be overrun by pickleball courts, like there's basketball goals in every front yard with a kid. So I lean towards not doing anything about it, to be honest with you. Let them build it.

Okay. Is there, can you just prohibit it on residential, where it's only allowed in common areas of neighborhoods, residential neighborhoods? I guess if we wanted to just outright prohibit them, we could.

We could.

I mean, you know, because if you think about the lot sizes, the impervious ratio is probably going to be the bigger issue along most of this if you're pouring concrete in as far as land use goes. Right? Because, no?

No? On residential properties, it's more of a lot coverage than impervious surface. The comprehensive plan and the land development code specifically exclude from impervious surface on residential lots, driveways, and sidewalks. So it's going to count the footprint of your building and your footprint of your accessory structures. That would count against it. So it's a little more lenient and allows more development on a residential lot. Commercial lots, though, everything counts as impervious surface. Right. Yeah. It's the same as putting it in a pool. Right.

Yeah.

By the time you're done with the pool and the deck and all that, you're close. So there's not a whole lot of vigorous debate on this. It seems to either do less or do nothing. Yeah.

I mean, I like the analogy, Mr. Coleman, with the swimming pool. I think it's very similar. And, again, here we are regulating what somebody can do in their backyard and I mean, I get the lighting issue Swimming pools are seasonal for the most part. But I also have neighbors that leave floodlights on all night long, too, that is an issue. So I don't know. I mean, I lean toward not doing anything, to be honest.

Mr. Chairman, I should say, I'm not opposed to not regulating them. Just for me, kind of the whole thing is when we're looking at the setbacks. Again, I don't say we put it right five feet up against your property line or 10 feet away or something like that. But also, I would imagine a pickleball court's a sizable capital expenditure. You're probably not building one for $5,000, $6,000. You're probably in the neighborhood of putting a swimming pool on the ground right now at this point. So I think by that definition, how many people are going to be willing to spend that much money, but I think also having setbacks that are a little bit more realistic as far as what would allow someone, if they wanted to put it in the center of their backyard.

I think if we focus on some of the issues instead of all of the issues. Mm-hmm. can we regulate lighting on these?

Yes, sir. That was an open question I had. We didn't address lighting. There's another section in Chapter 4 that addresses lighting across the board. But if you wanted to address lighting specifically as this, you can. The ordinance doesn't address it.

I think if it addressed lighting to prevent nighttime play, had a requirement of some type of fencing and buffer, then you take down the setback Just so it does some basic things. It doesn't assume your neighbor is a great neighbor. It does some things to make them a better neighbor. And from there on, it's between the neighbors to work out.

To me, I feel like lighting should not be able to exceed the height of whatever fence or surrounding that you have around it. Because maybe you want to have it lit up. for whatever reason, but then it's not creating a massive amount of light pollution. Because realistically, you're probably not going to play at night, but hey, maybe you want to have some landscape lighting or something like that that goes around the property or something like that. Now we can sit there and say it's landscape, but are we going to sit there and say, well, there's no lighting. Well, now you're in.

If the court had lights, they'd be playing at night in my neighborhood. They're with it every day. So I've seen it get pushed. So if they have light, they'll play.

Could we sit there and say as far as no lighting except for what would be considered commonly accepted low voltage landscape lighting or something like that? I'm just saying, because I look at my neighbors across the street, and he has some of that. And it's not a nuisance or anything like that, but it's just...

The lighting isn't the nuisance in this circumstance. It's the play.

It's that sharp report. Yeah, and that's what I'm saying. If someone wanted to have a low-voltage lighting, that's not enough light for you to sit there and be able to see the course of play. If somebody's going to have a party and have people over and light it up, by the time it's a portable problem, it's done. They could also just turn lights on in the vehicle and point it towards the court. We can do whatever.

This is a base level. I'm happy to go whatever direction the board's feeling on this.

Again, my question is, are Private pickleball courts, the restrictions on that, can those be different than common areas and neighborhoods and commercially owned? Because I think that that's where we can step in and we can require some stuff for new neighborhoods that are coming in and the screening that needs to go around them for common, like we'll use Tapestry Park, for example. If that neighborhood is being built, and they're putting those pickleball courts in, and that kind of proximity to homes, there's guidelines that they've got to abide by.

It exceeds these distances. It's about somewhere between 100 and 150 feet from my house. It's loud. The sound travels. Right. I deal with it. It's part of the neighborhood. It's me being a good neighbor and not yelling off the front porch. Right. But it's all day every day. But if... working on this was an attempt to get ahead of something as the city's been getting requests. This is not a problem that is actively happening. This was us trying to get ahead of something to say, hey, we see a problem. If y'all don't see a problem in it, we can let it go. We can always come back and revisit this at any point in time if it does become one.

If it became a problem, I wouldn't have any problem looking at it a little closer, but right now I hate putting something in place waiting for the need for it to be there.

I agree. The curmudgeon in me says, hey, this is great. Just make it 500 feet. No problem. I would be a fan of putting some base level stuff in, but up to the direction of the board. If somebody wants to make a motion, we can hear a motion or we can continue debating and go down any route y'all want.

Well, yeah, I think that we, I would encourage something that puts some restrictions in for, you know, multiple, like commercial zoning or something like that, but the residential doesn't. I don't think there's a lot of potential for homeowners being able to place one of these in their backyard. As written or period? Period. I think the focus should be on commercial. Common areas.

Okay. So, for like future developments? Yeah. For neighborhoods and residential...

Right, so we have separate regulations for residential community accessory uses, which is what you're talking about, the common area pool, the common area pickleball court, the tennis court. There's a separate section of the code that deals with that that we could bring you back. You can do this as residential common accessory uses, but not as private and residential, I think is what you're saying? Yeah. OK.

But as our code's currently written, if somebody wants to put in a basketball court, they put in a basketball court. No problem. They can play pickleball on it all day long.

Correct.

There's just no process for a pickleball court right now. It was an attempt to get ahead of it, but it sounds like the board doesn't want to do anything with it right now. It's fine. We can always address this later if we need to.

Sounds good to me.

I think some is better than none, but to your point, if the rest of the board says it's not a problem, then... I'm good with that, too. But like I said, for me, the whole hang-up was on the 100 feet. But I think if we were to restrict lighting or it has to be on the same lot of single-family dwelling, no more than Wharton Court permitted, I think prohibiting commercial use of a court Those are things that it's not necessarily waiting for a problem, but we're at least being proactive in some ways towards as far as some of the things that I think may be some concern.

So with this list, you're saying like one, item two, item five, seven. Yeah.

Because I think, again, and then also if there was something that prohibited lighting to where, as you could play at night, that would probably eliminate the need to have hours of restriction on pickleball courts.

I would be a fan of one or the other.

Because technically, I guess, if you play until 8 p.m. at 6.30, you could turn your lights on and you have another hour and a half of play.

Mm-hmm.

Feel free to make a motion.

I'll make a motion to address the issue once it becomes an issue.

Okay. So we have a motion right now on the board to table it. Table. I'll second. Okay. We have a motion to table, and we have a second. Ms. Adiz, would you please call the roll?

Mr. Morehouse?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Bishop?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Painter?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Thomas?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Whitstruck?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Coleman?

No, ma'am.

Chairman Wigstein?

No, ma'am.

All right. Item number 6C, potential amendment to the Land Development Code eliminating the traditional neighborhood overlay district. notes together. So last meeting we talked about TNODs and TNODs having issues so we made a motion to have a discussion about the elimination and that is what has brought us to today. In talking with staff and our city attorney it seems with as hard as we've kicked the can there has been renewed interest in working on TNODs. and trying to see if staff can come up with something that solves the problem we have and saves the concept that a TNOD tries to protect. I talked to Mr. Leonard. He brought up some good use cases about generational living.

Yes, sir. But that was kind of the impetus for creating it several years ago, was having the three different housing types that you have to make use of. It's kind of like a residential PUD where you have to do a residential and a commercial component. Well, this is just all residential, no commercial. But you have to do three different housing types. And it's supposed to, within the three housing types, be the lifespan of an individual. When you're young and starting out, maybe in an apartment, smaller home, get midlife, larger single family home. Of course, I'm generalizing. But then you get older, climbing three floors is not too attractive. And so you look for a single story type of living. So it was meant to create a neighborhood where if someone wanted to live their whole life in the neighborhood, they would have a dwelling unit that would fit any limitations they may have or their desires at that point in life. That was kind of the foundation for the beginning of this. Okay.

I guess Bay Point's got those types of products in it. Wild Heron does. Stuff where you could bounce around. If we can salvage something good for the city, I would be very inclined to let staff have a crack at it. On top of which, I've found out this week apparently we have a new staff member coming on board next month I'd like the opportunity to hand them a problem and see their thoughts on working on it if we can create something that's good I think it's good if we get to the end of this road and we still don't like the product you can kick this off again and be done in no time but my thought My thoughts on TNOD have softened a little here in staff's support of it. So today we're here to discuss getting rid of them. We got a draft ordinance very late in the game. I don't feel comfortable voting on a draft ordinance not having had any time to spend with it. So at minimum today, I would want it, or sorry, most today, I would want a table. I wouldn't want to vote on this for any kind of final action. But my point of view is really softened of why don't we let staff have a crack at it, see what they can do.

I don't disagree. The spirit of it, especially when you look at it from the lens of a Bay Point or Wild Heron, it does work. The thing that the one we just passed, What those don't have in common is I think that short-term rentals will make this new one a little different than Bay Point and Wild Hair. And I don't know if we can do anything about that. Make it part of the TNOD to where it's a neighborhood and not... We can't. I don't know if we can do that or not. That may help. Something to think about anyway and talk about moving forward.

There's a ton of options. If you change it from an overlay to a zoning category like we do with PUD, then it controls.

Then we're actually adding housing, which is needed.

We could put specific requirements in there that disallow certain uses, like a short-term rental.

We may never see another one again.

Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. The state statute prevents us from prohibiting short-term rentals. Okay. We can't prohibit short-term rentals.

We can't prohibit them.

No, sir. I'm sorry.

In any zoning anymore? No, sir.

Okay. We have current prohibitions that are grandfathered in from 2006, but we cannot expand that. Okay. We can regulate short-term rentals, but we cannot regulate the duration or the frequency of short-term rentals, and we cannot prohibit them.

Got it.

Does that go to an HOA? They can be more strict than what we have? Yes, sir. We don't regulate HOAs. Okay. Yeah.

So, like, in a PUD, they no longer have to request that?

PUDs are not a matter of right. It's a different animal.

So, regular zoning.

Right.

Overlay districts, different. Master plan is different. PUD is different.

Okay. So, if we change too much of the TNOD, we no longer have that lever?

Yes, sir.

So he's saying there's a chance. You read into that what you will.

I have a question, Mr. Chairman. I think it was one of the things that when we had that proposal in front of us, there was ambiguity about the style of houses as far as the three distinct styles.

There was a problem in there in that list. Some of the housing types define other housing types on the list, and it was not definitive.

So is there a way that we can make that list more definitive that would still keep it in the spirit of an overlay district?

Oh, yeah. There's no limit to the things. There is a limit to the things that can be done to get creative with it. But as far as closing the loopholes that existed... before that application came in, there's a tremendous number of ways to close it. The easiest way is to just kick the whole thing out and say no more. But then we lose that creative tool. And staff seems to think it's a tool worth saving.

I'm not saying it's not a tool worth saving. But the first time I've ever seen a TNOD was very recently. And not to say that we won't see another one, To go back to your earlier point, if there is a potential that we could keep that tool in the box but have it a little bit more improved, then yeah, I think that's something worth looking at. If nothing else, if it comes back with something and we just look at it and say, no, we just don't feel good about this, it just doesn't meet the intent, then revisit it at that time.

Pull it at any time. Be done with it. Pretty easy. And while we're in the works of it, while we're working on it, it doesn't allow new applications to be submitted and come in under the old rules. That is held until we get to an answer.

I think that would help ease potentially some fears as well.

The biggest concern is more of this coming through and just meeting that minimum threshold. But... We kicked the tires really hard last month, and I think it's got everybody thinking of, okay, let's try to save it.

Yeah, I mean, I think it's worth saving if staff has ideas of how they can make it improving, increase that minimum that we want. Let's do that for the next 30, 60 days, and if we can get there, that's great. If we can't, we can go back to the initial plan.

No harm situation. We either come up with something better or we're back here in a couple of months.

I agree. I'll be glad to make a motion. Okay. Make a motion to table it until the new staff has had a chance to review it and bring it back to us at that point.

Okay. We need to give you a defined timeline on that? How about we call it three months? Okay. That's for me for three months. Okay. We have a motion to table for three months and a second. Mrs. Dees, would you please call the roll?

Mr. Morehouse?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Bishop?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Painter?

Yes, ma'am.

Mr. Thomas? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Whitstruck? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Coleman?

Yes, ma'am.

Chairman Lakestein?

Yes, ma'am. All right, and that is the last item on our agenda for today. Thank you very much for coming out.