Unified Land Development Code Review Committee

TOWN OF LOXAHATCHEE GROVES TOWN HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 155 F. ROAD, LOXAHATCHEE GROVES, FL 33470 UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES MONDAY SEPTEMBER 08, 2025 — 4:00PM — 5:13PM CALL TO ORDER September 08, 2025 meeting 0f the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) Review COmmittee was called t0 order at 4:00 PM by Committee Chairperson Jo Siciliano. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Committee Chairperson Siciliano. ROLL CALL The roll call was conducted by Gabriella Croasdaile, Town Clerk Assistant, with the following members present: Present: o Jo Siciliano — Chairperson (Seat l) o Karen Plante — Vice Chairperson (Seat 2) 0 Sarah Palmer — Committee Member (Seat 3) o Robert Austin — Committee Member (Seat 4) o Danielle Harrity — Committee Member (Seat 5) Staff Present: o Caryn Gardner-Young — Community Standards Director/Board Liaison o Gabriella Croasdaile — Assistant to the Town Clerk/ Board Clerk Staff Absent: o Francine Ramaglia — Town Manager ADDITIONS, DELETTIONS, AND/OR MODIFICATION TO THE AGENDA There were n0 modifications to the Agenda for this meeting. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES MOTION: COMMITTEE MEMBER AUSTIN / CHAIRPERSON SICILIANO MOVED TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE FOLLOWING PAST MEETING MINUTES WITH A MODIFICATION TO THE ATTENDANCE. o 07/14/2025— Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) Review Committee Meeting Minutes PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments submitted 0r presented during the meeting. REGULAR AGENDA AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION REGARDING SIGNAGE The Committee moved to the primary agenda item which consisted of a more detailed discussion regarding signage for the town than has been previously discussed in other meetings. A. MASTER SIGN PLAN LANGUAGE Community Standards Director Carvn Gardner-Young presented a slideshow presentation and memorandum to further explain the details of a master sign plan program, and whether the Committee was interested in implementing such a program, since the program is only in IPUD section of the Town Code. Within the memorandum it is explained how a master sign plan would ensure consistent development aesthetics through commercial centers, existing developments and Multi-tenant developments. It is also outlined how the approval process in a master sign plan may look, as well as the criteria required for the plan and possible variances. Director Gardner~ Young also emphasized how a master sign plan would specifically benefit planners and new commercial development looking to establish. It would be a useful tool for property owners to use a master sign plan to provide them direction on how they can approve signs for their development. It was mentioned that a master sign plan also makes it easier to enforce certain rules upon development. Committee members discussed the following regarding the implementation of a master sign plan: o Whether it would be beneficial to implement a new master sign plan as whole rather than an amendment to existing regulation. o The timeline of final implementation of a master sign plan, and how its long timeline means these changes won’t be made immediately. o Creating uniform regulation for the town may be beneficial to residents and consumers, as it creates a certain recognizable look to the town. o Whether it should be included that the Town Council can make changes to master sign plan. The Committee generally agreed that the adoption of a master sign plan would be a useful implementation especially in regards to future development within the town. Creating a uniform look for the town is important to the Committee Members as it makes the town Visually aesthetic. While some Committee Members did critique the initial draft ofa master sign plant town staffclarified that these arejust the initial phases and more detail and specifics will be in forthcoming future meetings. B. AMORTIZATION OF NON-CONFOMRING SIGNS Director Gardner—Young presented a memorandum on amortizations that included the existing amortization language as requested by the ULDC committee in order to discuss the amortization process of non—conforming signs. Amortization would require signage not in compliance to be updated or removed. Committee members discussed: o How amortization would affect existing signage that is pre—incorporation. o The way this could affect certain signage that is considered historical or recognizable and is already established within the town. o How a reactive approach may be a more appropriate action than a proactive approach for the amortizations. This discussion of amortization considered the way amortization language could be changed to include new signage but also the way it could affect existing signage, including signs that have been established pre—incorporation. C. COMMERCIAL LOW & COMMERCIAL LOW OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT SIGNAGE Director Gardner—Young provided Section 90-040— Standards by sign type and zoning district, in order for the committee members to review and discuss Commercial Low (CL) and Commercial Low Office (CLO) Zoning districts. The section provided information on building signage such as awnings, building wall signs, shopping centers, canopy signs, monument or panel signs, real estate signs, window signs, holiday/seasonal signage, and opinion signage. Committee members discussed possible changes to the section such as: o Major signs and how there is no guidance on these signs, possible solutions could be to base these signs off the square footage of development; since these signs are meant for specific identification of a space. o The most important aspects of commercial signs are the location, size, and visibility. o Awnings and canopies are already prohibited but was noted that awnings and canopies are not hurricane friendly, believed that porch could be better for signage area compared to other signage. o Verbiage could include maximum size guidance rather than a minimum size guidance. - Monument signs posed an issue as this would be a bigger sign that may be not aesthetically pleasing, considered not allowing monument signs. o Restriction on neon signs as well as any distracting signage.  COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS NO comments from the committee members at the end of the meeting. CONFIRMATION O F THE NEXT MEETING DATE ADJORNMENT U MOTION : A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING WAS MADE BY CHAIRPERSON SICILIANO AND SECONDED BY COMMITTEE MEMBER AUSTIN. THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5:13 PM. By: Gabriella Croasdaile, Assistant to the Town Clerk/Board Clerk ATTEST: TOWN OF LOXAHATCHEE GROVES, Jo Slc111a Umf1e & nd Development Code Chairperson m (“WeGabriella Croasdaile, Assistant to the Town Clerk