St. Pete Beach planning board asks staff to refine proposed beach conduct ordinance after public concerns

The St. Pete Beach Planning Board voted to have staff make targeted changes to ordinance 2025-02, a land-development-code update that would consolidate the city’s beach rules into chapter 95 and add conduct, registration and permitting requirements for beach uses.

The board’s action on Dec. 15 followed extended public comment and a lengthy staff presentation outlining changes that would move content from the land development code into the city’s code of ordinances, add registration for non-site-based businesses operating on the public beach, clarify tiki and ‘‘cheeky’’ hut rules, and prohibit certain activities including year‑round fireworks from the beach.

Why it matters: The ordinance would shape everyday use of St. Pete Beach by residents, visitors and businesses. Speakers at the meeting warned the proposal, as written, could inadvertently reassign private‑beach versus public‑beach rights, limit hotels’ ability to host nighttime events, and expand enforcement in ways some residents find problematic. Board members also raised legal and policy constraints the city must weigh before moving forward.

Staff member Brandon, who presented the ordinance, said the draft was intended to create “a one‑stop shop” for beach regulations and to move provisions on tiki and cheeky huts, dune permitting, and turtle protections into chapter 95 while leaving references in the land development code. He said the Beach Stewardship Committee recommended many of the changes, noting those recommendations passed the committee 4–2–1. "This largely moves content from the land development code over to the code of ordinances," Brandon said.

Residents and business representatives urged changes. Beach steward John Kurzman asked the board not to "rubber stamp" the ordinance and flagged process concerns and the risk of changing long‑standing public‑access arrangements. Hotelier Robert Suzanne said hotel properties need clear rules distinguishing private and public beach areas and argued the draft should preserve exemptions for certain structures: "Tiki huts and Cheeky huts are completely two different things," he said, urging clearer language and separate treatment.

Board members probed specific provisions. They debated a proposed prohibition on micromobility devices (which the draft would ban on the beach except during permitted special events), whether fireworks fired from barges are covered by a beach ban, and how the draft targets foam polystyrene. One board member noted a prior local preference for allowing resident bike permits and urged care to avoid broad, unenforceable prohibitions.

Outcome and next steps: After questions and suggested edits, the board directed staff to implement clarifying changes — including fixing definition wording for sunrise/sunset, assessing whether "unattended fishing" language is used, cleaning up inconsistent references to "The Gulf"/"the beach," clarifying tiki/cheeky‑hut language so state statutory limits remain respected, adding drone/laser examples under bird‑harassment provisions, and amending the fireworks section so it does not automatically prohibit barge‑launched fireworks — and forward the revised draft to the next review step. The motion to send the ordinance back with those edits passed on a roll‑call vote, 3–2.

The board also debated whether to separately recommend permitting human‑powered bicycles on the beach; members suggested options such as limiting where or when bikes may be used or allowing narrow, location‑specific access, and asked staff to consider those alternatives for the return draft.

The board’s direction does not adopt the ordinance; staff will return with a revised text and, if needed, reroute changes to the Beach Stewardship Committee for further review before a commission hearing.