HomeMy Public PortalAbout20090924CityCouncilMinutes
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 1 of 18
20090924 City Council Minutes
Mayor Jason Buelterman called the Consent Agenda Meeting to order at 6:30pm on Thursday,
September 27, 2009. Council members present were, Mayor pro tem Wanda Doyle, Charlie Brewer,
Barry Brown, Eddie Crone, Dick Smith and Paul Wolff. Also present were City Attorney Bubba Hughes,
City Manager Diane Schleicher and Planning and Zoning Director Jonathan Lynn.
Mayor Buelterman listed the following items on the Consent Agenda:
City Council Minutes for September 10, 2009
Proposed Scope of Work for RFP for Coastal Engineering Study (Recommended by Beach Task
Force).
Budget Amendment #4: Emergency Repair for Engine #1 Fire Truck –take $5,573 from Line item
#9000-61-1000 (Contingency) and add to 3510-54-2100(Machinery & Equipment).
Pitney Bowes Lease Agreement Terms: 60 Months at $319.00 for Postal Mailing Machine
Mayor Buelterman adjourned the Consent Agenda.
Executive Session
A Motion by Councilman Wolff to go into Executive Session to discuss Litigation was seconded by
Councilman Brown. The vote was unanimous.
A Motion by Councilman Wolff to end Executive Session was seconded by Councilman Brown. The vote
was unanimous.
Mayor Buelterman called the regular meeting of the City Council to order at 7:00pm. Those
present at the Consent Agenda were also in attendance for the regular meeting. Rev. Andy Lamon gave
the invocation and everyone recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Mayor Buelterman announced the Lazaretto Creek Bridge has been swept and debris removed. He
thanked the City Manager for prompt action in having this done. He also announced paving has begun
on several of the city streets and are looking good so far.
Citizens to Be Heard
Mel Gordon announced the original musical, written especially for Tybee, The Treasure of Lefty the
Pirate was being presented Oct 2nd thru the 4th as a fundraiser for the Tybee Post Theater. Cast
members presented a teaser of the musical.
Ed Lindsey of Georgia Tech presented a power point presentation on a Market Study on Tourism at
Tybee.
Kathryn Williams, Tybee Beautification, announced the Beach Sweep next Saturday at 10:00am and
thanked all the sponsors.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 2 of 18
Larry Nesbitt announced Tybee Island Residents and Property Owners Association is sponsoring a
Candidates Forum on Tuesday, October 6th at 7:00pm at city hall. Citizens can submit questions for
candidates by October 4th on line.
Tyler Marion of Forever Tybee announced a Giant Yard, Plant and Bake Sale Saturday, September 26th
8am to 3pm. Proceeds will benefit Forever Tybee, a local political action committee.
Perb Fortner gave an update on the Tybee Island Business Alliance. At the last meeting there were 79
attendees with 52 businesses represented. Trash, parking, and toilets are the three areas of major
concern the alliance is going to focus on.
Stephen Williams announced that he is part of a class from Savannah College of Arts & Design’s
Industrial Design Program and they have just started a new sustainable design program and are working
on a study on North Beach to find a way to implement sustainable showers, whether they catch rainfall
or use a shallow well, etc. They are doing several presentations to share the information they collect.
The first being October 9th, 12-2pm, one on October 28th at 10am, and the last on November 20th at
10am at the old school cafeteria. This is a win-win situation everyone gets their showers back and we
don’t use fresh drinking water. Councilman Wolff stated he had attended the class, supported their
efforts and will be putting some advertisements out for the presentations.
Public Hearing
Map Amendment-Text Amendment-Site Plan: To amend R-2 Residential to proposed C-2
Conditional or Creation of Neighborhood Grocery District 1107 & 1111 Butler Ave; PIN#s 4-
0006-19-005, 4-0006-10-013, 4-0006-19-014, 4-0006-19-015 in Zone R-2; Mike Hosti, petitioner.
Attorney Hughes explained this will be the third public hearing pertaining to this property and the
adjacent property, the first was July 9th and the second on August 13th. On the 13th council voted to
change the zoning to Conditional Zoning (C-2) with a number of conditions imposed. One of them
included a site plan. There were access issues, and since that time it has not come back for a 2nd reading
because work is being done to clarify some of those issues, and some with DOT. It has been advertised
again for public hearing tonight on each of the three things; map amendment, text amendment and site
plan, even though he understands the site plan has not been finalized. The map amendment and
associated text is now in an optional format as a result of a suggestion being made that the connotation
of commercial, even though conditional, troubled some citizens. Instead, the area is to be created into a
neighborhood grocery store district on its own. The permitted uses in that zone is a grocery store and
other uses that are residential as permitted in the R-2 zone. Which is what the property is currently
zoned. There is a text on that. On the conditional zoning dealt with last time, he has prepared a
resolution documenting what he understood the conditions to be. The applicant is present and entitled
to present facts on their application, as is anyone opposed to it. Hughes recommended everyone agree
to include all the prior remarks and evidence whether agreeing or opposed to granting petition as part
of these records so as to avoid duplication as much as possible. After hearing all the evidence
presented you will have several options. Even though there are three separate items that are all
intertwined to the extent it is almost impossible to separate one from the other, particularly where the
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 3 of 18
conditional zoning is contingent on the site plan and the site plan is not ready. There has been a
diagram prepared of a suggested method of accommodating parking and traffic flow but that has not
been finalized as the site plan.
Councilman Crone stated we still have unfinished items we are supposed to vote on. Hughes answered,
you will hear evidence on that tonight, this is a work in progress and the petitioners work is ongoing.
Staff was asked to advertise for a public hearing and did so. You will be able to vote on what you want
to. Doyle asked if a site plan can be entered as conceptual or a drawing? Hughes responded you can
review it but it would have to come back as a final site plan. Wolff asked if the petitioner has submitted
a revised site plan or is council operating on the previous one presented the last time as it went through
substantial changes during the course of that public hearing. Hughes answered it was his understanding
that there has been a lot of discussions and some with DOT on their requirements, but that he has not
seen a new site plan application.
Mayor Buelterman asked if however the council goes on this; will all of it have to come back on a site
plan. Hughes responded yes. Brown stated because this is a conceptual site plan.
Mayor Buelterman reminded everyone that most of the evidence had already been heard since this is
the third time so please keep comments short.
Tom Mahoney stated there are several options given to council. One is to rezone to Conditional Zoning
2 (C-2) the other is, as advertised, to establish a neighborhood grocery store district. Both are equally
acceptable to the applicant. The site plan is difficult to prepare until council votes on what to have as
conditions on the property. It is being worked on and it is understood the applicant will have to
resubmit the plan to them. In the meantime, they have submitted a design concept as shown on the
board and have done some things to accommodate some of the concerns and questions of the prior
meeting. Four parking spaces have been eliminated at the front of the store. He has given up the
corner parking spaces at the proposed new entrance/exit of Butler Ave. Established in those areas are a
buggy corral, bike access and parking. At the rear of the store, in the city right-of-way is seven “decal
only” parking spaces for Tybee residents that have paid their fees and taxes. This is not a precedent
being set as this has been done several times all over the island, even on the side of city hall. This was
done as a suggestion to use the area at the rear of the store and provide additional parking. The ingress
at Lovell Avenue is cut down on this plan to ten feet. We would still like to request council to allow the
twenty feet ingress and egress onto and from Lovell. This design plan shows it only as a ten foot ingress
easement from Lovell. At that point there will be an electrical operated gate. When that gate is closed,
there will not be anyone allowed to come in from that area. The 24 foot wide ingress/egress for Butler
Avenue has been approved and is acceptable by DOT. The proposal going out on the south side of
Butler Avenue would be for a right turn only, so as not to have a car turning against the flow of traffic in
that area. We would prefer and ask council to consider allowing the twenty foot opening at Lovell. The
trucks using Lovell now, would continue to do so at some extent. The larger trucks would not be able to
turn into the lot at that opening and would continue to proceed on Lovell. We believe this is a good use
of the property. We have reviewed the proposed ordinance prepared by Mr. Hughes for the creation of
the Neighborhood Grocery Store District and have no problems with it. Mr. Hosti has no problems with
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 4 of 18
the restrictions, or the setbacks or buffer areas provided for in the ordinance. Mahoney requested time
to give any rebuttals to evidence presented tonight.
Buelterman asked about parking on Butler right now. Is that going to go away? Mahoney answered
there is not any legal parking there now. Buelterman stated people are parking there so this should be
an enforcement issue for Parking Services. Doyle stated this is the same problem at the North End but
yellow curbs have been repainted and enforcement has been increased. Parking Services can step up
enforcement there also.
Wolff stated this plan is an improvement over last time but questioned why a “right turn only” coming
out the south end. He understands it during the summer but off- season this is just going to keep traffic
circling back around and more on Lovell. Mahoney stated they would not object to a left turn during
certain times of the year or certain times of the day, but this was done from a safety stand point. Wolff
stated he appreciated that but the way the design looks you won’t be able to turn left if that is a
concrete curb. Brown stated those are hash marks painted on the road not a concrete curb. You can
drive over hash marks and turn left. Doyle stated the drawing showed a ten foot egress off of Lovell,
but you said you preferred twenty foot. A ten foot would be acceptable? Mahoney responded
obviously this council has to make the decision on what that width would be. We are asking for twenty
but we understand there is great opposition to that and members of the council feel it should only be
ten, so that is why they showed it as ten. Doyle asked if it is twenty would you lose some of the parking
spaces that are there. Mahoney stated only a few.
Mr. Hosti addressed the issue of the dumpster location. It would stay where it has been since 1994
when the city said it had to be moved to that location. It is in the city right of way but that is where he
was told to put it. He has enclosed it. On the issue of the parking on Butler in front of the store, there
are still poles existing from when there were meters. There used to be signs but they have been
removed. He does not like people parking there as it is dangerous. He does not have a problem with
the left turn on to Butler at the south side, but it is a safety issue brought up at the last public hearing.
The DOT representative stated he preferred the “right turn only” and that is why it was put in the
drawing. He would like this to be done. The plan is conceptual because they are trying to do what the
council, as well as, all the neighbors want. The C-2 wasn’t acceptable to the neighbors and this is a way
to avoid that, and not have, so to speak, C-2 intrusion into the neighborhood. He is happy with the
drawing submitted. He would like to have the egress/ingress both in the back, but if it suits the council,
even the ingress only would be great.
Camille Ward addressed council inquiring why her and her husband’s letters of opposition were not read
at the last public hearing. It was noted the letters were received by council but not read and she
requested the council have them read at this meeting.
Mayor Buelterman read both letters into the meeting.
Walter Hartridge addressed council noting he had missed a call from the city attorney, Mr. Hughes,
returned it and was told there was going to be a proposal to establish a Neighborhood Grocery Store
District. At his request, Mr. Hughes emailed him a copy of the proposal along with a letter dated today,
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 5 of 18
stating in addition to the ordinance, attached was a design plan that may be part of a discussion at the
meeting. He did not think it would be considered as the site plan. However, we have heard some
discussion of it, Mr. Mahoney has talked about it and it is up on the screen. Hughes said he would
incorporate into the record by stipulation what was said in the previous hearings and he agrees with
that, with one exception. Nowhere at the previous hearings was there any mention about creating a
new use called Neighborhood Grocery Store District for Tybee Island. In this proposal submitted, it says
Whereas public hearings have been conducted on possible map and text amendments relating to the
property which is the subject matter and Where Therefore…….. and there is a proposed text. The
genesis of this was, as under your Land Use Ordinance, and your planning commission and how it is all
set up. There is no quarrel, it is a model. Go back to the proposal and the report of the planning
commission staff, to the Mayor and to Council for the City Council meeting of July 9th. The proposal: the
applicant is requesting conditional zoning of two parcels from R-2 to C-2, conditional to permit use of
one parcel as a parking lot to support the adjacent non-conforming commercial use. That is what had
gone before the planning commission and had been discussed at the prior meetings. Now the ordinance
of Tybee which tracks the State law says an amendment to the zoning map, and is what you are being
asked to do by creating this Neighborhood Grocery Store District, amendment to the zoning map is
considered to be an amendment to this Land Development Code. He read from section 50-20D of the
Code of the City of Tybee Island GA, “Such action requires a hearing by the planning commission and
approval by the Mayor and Council at a scheduled public meeting.” Sec. E states “an amendment to the
Land Development Code follows the same process as an amendment to the zoning map.” That is a
hearing before the planning commission and the council. The planning commission, on the record, as
far as he knows, never considered a proposal to in act a new land use in this R-2 area. He stated in his
opinion, it is procedural flawed to take this up. He had not heard of this before today. He heard of it
today as a professional courtesy of your city attorney of which he is grateful. He went on line and
reviewed the ordinances. He and his clients stringently object procedurally to this being taken up. They
thought they would be dealing with a situation they object to, and is on record, as whereby a prior non-
conforming use would be transmuted into a C-2 and would be expanded into the R-2 by making the
neighboring two lots C-2. Also thus achieving the goals sought by the petitioner. He has already stated
his objection to that constitutionally by the Constitution of the State of Georgia, the land use plan, etc.
He was somewhat startled to hear about this but thanked the council for telling him about it.
Ron Callaway addressed the concern of traffic flow thru the parking lot and strongly recommends
allowing the opening to Lovell to improve traffic flow.
Carly Fuller spoke on behalf of her family in opposition to not only the approval of the petition but
opposition to the public hearing being held on a whole different perspective on the same project.
Gloria Leonard spoke in opposition of petition especially the parking area outside the parking lot in the
City’s right of way.
Gail Holloway spoke in opposition of the petition. The neighbor’s property values need to be protected.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 6 of 18
Slade Cole spoke in opposition of the petition and expressed concern over not having a final site plan.
Mayor Buelterman asked Mr. Hughes to address why a final plan is not available. Hughes responded
that the applicant has to submit a site plan as proposed. They did that once and it did not get approved,
as the zoning was different and tied to the site plan to be approved. He believed the safest thing is to
deal with all of this at the same time. It is hard to deal with the zoning without the site plan, which is
why his preference is the conditional zoning and make the zoning conditional on an approved site plan.
The applicant’s dilemma is without having some reading on what council is willing to do it is hard to
come up with any kind of site plan that would meet approval. Buelterman confirmed a site plan then
would have to come back and would go through the same process again. Cole expressed opposition of
the petitioner’s current use of the city’s property (right-a-way) and not everything on his own property.
The driveways are not in compliance. He has asked DOT for copies of what they have approved for
driveways but was told they had not seen an application. Hughes responded there has been some
communication but he is not sure if there can be any final approval from them until there has been
approval from here and Hughes confirmed that with Downer Davis. Buelterman stated then they would
not have a formal application until it goes through Tybee first. Cole asked when the next public hearing
would be. Buelterman stated they would announce that later in the meeting.
Mayor Buelterman called a short break.
Mayor Buelterman called the meeting back to order and addressed confusion on why the petition is
being reheard. The petitioners are free to come back and ask for different things that council approves.
There were no “back door meetings” to his knowledge. In the situation we are in they are free to come
back and ask for something that was not ultimately approved, such as, there would not be access on
Lovell, and we would have a second reading on the zoning. They are free to request council do
something a little different than last time. Councilman Crone asked when it does come back we need to
have everything we need in order to vote on it and let’s get finished with it one way or another.
Buelterman agreed everything should be together.
Councilman Wolff commented he had suggested last time all revisions should go back to the planning
commission and now we have another whole text amendment that they have not seen. He agrees with
the attorney of the neighbors we are not going by our own procedures established in municipal code by
not having planning commission involved in this process. There have been changes made to what went
to them and back to council the last time. We have to continue with the public hearing but this is the
first time I have seen this site plan. It is completely different then what we looked at the last time and
what planning commission looked at. He agrees we should not be putting commercial parking in an R-2
district on a busy street for a business. That is where the bike parking should be. As suggested last time
and was voted on, put a buffer along the back and a pedestrian gate so people could park their bikes
and come through the gate to the grocery store. Then traffic doesn’t have to go on Lovell. There are
several options but this is a new plan to him, he doesn’t know if anyone else has seen it before today.
This needs to be firmed up and get it all together and back to planning commission and not look at it a
piece at a time. After the public hearing let’s decide what we want them to consider, including the text
amendment and ask the planning commission to start all over. He is not trying to put it off but just
trying to follow procedures. Buelterman restarted the public hearing.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 7 of 18
Mark Boswell spoke and asked Jonathan Lynn to read an email from Robert McCall of the DOT. The
email was dated Tuesday, September 22nd and stated the DOT has seen this concept plan. As just a
concept plan, DOT has no problem with it. They had reviewed it and have no issues. A couple of
exceptions- with concurrence from the city they would need a set of scaled drawings as per their
guidelines. They would also need to verify the sight distances coming out of the two drives. DOT has
seen this concept plan. Boswell stated petitioner needs directive from council to finalize the site plan.
They keep trying to please everyone but it keeps going round and round. They have put everything on
this conceptual plan that DOT has asked for such as the right turn only with the stripping on the
highway, etc. He asked council to give the directives and the petitioner would give them the site plan
they need to approve.
Councilman Crone asked if staff had not been able to guide them. Boswell stated not knowing what the
zone is they can’t. If council will give the directives he can get the site plan done.
Councilman Brewer thanked Mr. Boswell for giving council the information on what they have done to
answer DOT requirements so they know what that is. Brewer asked about the parking on the back
where did that come from. Boswell answered they were trying to make up for spaces they lost
elsewhere and putting them “decal only” made them more “Tybee resident friendly”, but they could be
metered or decal only. To them it is no different than having them along side city hall or on Butler.
They are still in City right-a-way. Brewer asked about the buffer on the side. Boswell answered it would
be a five or six foot fence and vegetation depending on what the ordinance says. Brewer asked his
opinion on the gridlock possibility in the front. Boswell stated an exit in the back would help or an
entrance only in the front. That would not necessarily stop it but it would help. Brewer asked if a one-
way in would be better than the two way. Boswell answered probably but not being a traffic engineer
he couldn’t answer that. Brown confirmed the traffic flow and cars have two exits no matter which way
they go. As far as the parking on the back it would not be included in the required parking. Boswell
answered they would not be part of the required parking for the square feet requirements as in the
ordinance. In fact he will get rid of them, they are gone.
Brown stated this is strictly a conceptual plan for zoning consideration only. That is why it doesn’t have
the drainage drawings, etc. Once the zoning is determined the final site plan would come back for the
approval with all the details. It is a mute point if the zoning is not approved. Boswell confirmed that is
correct. If it goes C-2 Conditional then they would know what direction to go in with all the parking
issues. If it is a Neighborhood Grocery Store District then there has to be parking requirements, lane
requirements, etc that goes with it. Brown stated Zoning has that figured it out. Brewer asked about
traffic study done on Lovell. Brown stated it was done on a holiday weekend and was an average of 300
cars per day. Some could be from circling the block looking for somewhere to park. Brewer asked if
there were any indication of what direction traffic was flowing. The city manager responded the traffic
counter does not record that.
Kathyrn Williams asked if anyone had considered a traffic light at Butler and 11th. This would help
during the busy season. Crone stated the last time the city went to DOT they were told there would not
be anymore lights.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 8 of 18
Tom Mahoney stated this matter has been advertised for a text amendment and a map amendment. It
was also advertised for a Neighborhood Grocery Store District. He respectfully requested council to take
into consideration the comments from Mr. Boswell to the effect the site plan can not physically be
prepared until we know what the zoning is. We respectfully request you go forward tonight with the
zoning petition and the site plan will be prepared and presented.
Slade Cole requested the council to require the dumpster to be located on the private property and the
driveways are not in compliance.
Mark Boswell stated the plan shown is not a design and is not finished DOT has reviewed it and it will be
reviewed again and will be in compliance.
Mayor Buelterman closed the public hearing.
Mayor Buelterman asked the city attorney if all of this should come back as one in the best interest of
the city and the taxpayers. Hughes responded he has already said it is hard to deal with a zoning issue
without a site plan. Sometimes the applicant takes his chances. If he doesn’t get approval the first time
he has to do something else. What has happened here is we tried to work with everyone impacted by
this to create a plan that would be suitable. He believes the C-2 conditional contingent on the approved
site plan is safer for the city and the residents because you have more control on the specifics of what
can be on the site plan at that point. And you would with a new district created. It may end up in this
instance the result may be the same. But that may not be the case. We do not have a minimum lot set.
We know we are dealing with six lots. In the conditional one of the requirements was that they would
be combined and become R-2 effectively. That strikes him as being a lot closer to what council wanted
to do. His preference would be that it all be dealt with at one time.
Councilman Smith asked if it is all dealt with at one time how do we give direction to Mr. Boswell as to
how the parking lot is to be designed if we have nothing in our ordinance for a neighborhood grocery
store, and we have nothing in our C-2 conditional that relates to a neighborhood grocery store than how
can then he design a site plan that complies with that ordinance. Hughes stated that is the purpose of
the public hearing. Council gets the evidence, they listen to what you have to say and they work with
that expectation. If they get it right or not, that is ultimately up to council. It is not your burden to
create it for him so he can do what he wants to do. Mayor Buelterman said he agreed. He does not see
what the difference ultimately would be. There are no conditions for either. So what difference does it
make to the petitioner if it is one or the other? The ultimate issue is the access on Lovell and the
parking plan. It isn’t whether you go with one or the other. Smith answered what was voted on last
time was a C-2 Conditional with a site plan to be determined. Smith asked city attorney if that was
correct. Hughes answered that is correct. Then what is the deal with council voting on this as
something else with the site plan to be determined. Why does everything have to go back and come
back again as one thing? Hughes said the big issue looks to be the access on Lovell. Council can give
guidance on that. You gave guidance the last time. Buelterman stated the issue isn’t the zoning it is the
access issue and how the plan is actually going to look. Whether you say one way or the other on the
zoning isn’t going to make a difference on that. The direction they need is on that.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 9 of 18
Councilman Brown asked if council needed to vote on the previous motion that had been voted on once.
Hughes answered no. Brown and Buelterman confirmed with Hughes there was not a vote needed on
the motion brought as first reading at the last public hearing. Hughes stated you do not have to vote on
anything. Buelterman stated if you want to make a motion on something tonight you do not have to
address what was voted on last time because this has been properly advertised. Hughes responded if he
understands the question you do not. Buelterman asked Hughes if Brown makes a motion to shift
zoning to a neighborhood grocery store district does he have to deal with the fact that there had been a
first reading on the conditional zoning C-2. Hughes stated if he is planning to lean that way then
definitely yes.
Councilman Wolff asked for motion from last public meeting to be read for clarification. Hughes read
the resolution he had drafted to encompass the subject of the motion last time. It identified the
property and the conditions it provided: “the physical structure of the IGA store may not be expanded
onto the rezoned lots to the north, Lots 20A and 20B. There shall be _____feet of arboreal buffer along
the western boundary of Lots 20A and 20B. No drive from Butler Ave to Lovell shall be allowed on the
property. All lots impacted by the rezoning are to be recombined subject to possible later subdividing
in the event property ceases to be used as a grocery store market and associated parking. Lots 20A and
20B may only be used for servicing the IGA and buffering. No structures or buildings are permissible
therein. In the event the IGA ever ceases to be used as a grocery store market and the associated
parking, the only uses permissible on the property will be single family dwelling, accessory building,
public utility, home business office, and after special review bed and breakfast residential, guest
cottage, home occupations and two-family dwellings.” (Essentially the R-2 Residential uses) “No other
uses shall be permissible without rezoning of the property as appropriate. “
Wolff stated it also included a six foot buffer on Lovell if he recalled correctly. Hughes responded it has
a blank to be completed pertaining to the western boundary on the added on part. It also effectively
incorporated the pre-existing non-conforming use language, that if something happened to the store it
could be rebuilt as a store with same footprint. If it was not then it would be effectively R-2. It
contained a provision for conformity with the site plan and that is what we are missing. And it was
contingent on the property, Lots 20A and 20B being acquired by Mr. Hosti. Councilman Wolff stated
this should have the least negative impact on the neighbors. It would increase the parking and add a
buffer. Compared to what we started with this should be the best thing we can come up with. Our job
is to try to maintain public safety, provide necessary parking and protect the neighborhood. The way
that was passed is as close as we can come. Doyle stated she disagreed a little. The conditions included
about the physical structure could not be expanded on should be removed. There should be at least an
egress off of Lovell Ave. Doyle asked Hughes if the part that stated lots 20A and 20B that are going to be
used as parking could not have structures or buildings, does that not have anything to do with expansion
and only means he could not build anything into that parking lot. Hughes responded as written it would
impact expansion also. Doyle stated then she would like that to be taken out also. She has no problem
with the conditional zoning with these alterations. Smith asked Doyle if she meant ingress or egress.
Doyle responded entrance.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 10 of 18
Brown attempted to make a motion for the neighborhood grocery store district but Buelterman
reminded him the C-2 Conditional zoning motion would have to be resolved first.
A Motion by Councilman Brown to deny Conditional Zoning was seconded by Councilman Crone. The
vote was Brown, Crone and Smith in favor and Brewer, Doyle and Wolff opposed. Mayor Buelterman
broke the tie in favor of the denial.
Mayor Buelterman stated he wanted to see everything come back as one piece. He does not agree with
Councilman Brown’s suggestion. He does not think it is in the best interest of the city. Smith reminded
the Mayor he only votes in the case of a tie and only in a tie. Buelterman called the vote as Wolff, Doyle
and Brewer in opposition and Crone, himself, Brown, and Smith to support the motion to deny.
Buelterman stated Brown could now make his motion on the neighborhood grocery store district but he
did not agree with it.
A Motion by Councilman Brown to change to a Neighborhood Grocery District and Conceptual site plan
approval only to come back for Final Site Plan approval including parking details as required was
seconded by Councilman Smith. Buelterman asked Hughes if this was a clear motion. Hughes responded
yes it was very similar to the one last time and he understood the motion.
Councilman Wolff stated if council tries to do this text amendment along these lines council is violating
their own laws by not sending it to the planning commission first. This is a major procedural flaw. He
asked for Mr. Hughes to correct him if he is wrong but he believes this is wrong. Hughes answered he
preferred not to go on record as having to opine on that at this point. You get the same result with the
conditional; you know that has been through the ringer. Why take the procedural risk. Mayor
Buelterman responded he agrees. What the attempt to do here is, to continue to make this business
viable and protect the neighborhood. To do that it is better to do the conditional than to do what is
trying to be done. He doesn’t see what the benefit is. Smith asked, “If this is a violation of our
ordinances, why it was advertised?” This is a public hearing. It was advertised properly and legally to
consider a neighborhood grocery district. Why is Mr. Wolff stating it is an illegal act on the council’s
part? Smith disagreed. Buelterman stated it is a matter of opinion. Doyle asked for Mrs. Woods to read
the motion back for council. She reread the last motion. Doyle asked, with parking details? Does that
mean we will have letters, emails, etc from DOT, all in a packet so council will know what we are looking
at? Brewer asked if Mr. Hughes could explain the difference, the pros and cons between the C-2
Conditional Zoning and the Neighborhood Grocery Store District. If it is defined as a Neighborhood
Grocery Store District that is all it can ever be. If it changes or goes away, the property reverts back to
an R-2 zone. Is that correct? Hughes responded yes, it doesn’t revert back to R-2 zoning, but like the C-
2 proposal only permitted uses that are currently allowed within the R-2 district. Brewer stated if it
burnt down it could come back as any of the permitted uses of R-2 zoning, correct. Hughes responded
yes. Brewer asked is the same true if it is C-2 Conditional. Hughes responded yes. Both are the same.
Brewer stated that everyone’s concern with C-2 is the risk that it could set precedence and spread to
other neighborhoods. Some think the grocery store district is better. Why and what is your opinion?
Hughes responded you’re right that is the thought in having its own district as a neighborhood grocery it
would have fewer tendencies to creep. His opinion is it is no greater either way. If it is going to creep
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 11 of 18
regardless if it is C-2 Conditional or its Neighborhood Grocery, somebody is going to have to file an
application to rezone other R-2 property around it to whatever zone it is. Buelterman confirmed then
what he is saying is it is safer for the city regardless what the will of the council is, to do it the
conditional zoning. There is no real advantage in your opinion of going with this motion. Hughes stated
that is his opinion but there are differences in opinions. Smith stated the C-2 can be applied in another
R-2 district. We only have one grocery store based on my professional experience we are not going to
have another grocery store with our population. His concern is going with another use in a C-2
Conditional zoning in another area of R-2 because we have allowed it here just like we did down in the
R-1, which we’ve all come to regret. Brewer confirmed with Councilman Smith that what he was saying
was, by being able to define it as a grocery store he felt that is a better situation as it locks it down as a
grocery store. Smith answered yes that is what he is saying.
Mayor Buelterman called for the vote on the motion.
The vote was Brown, Smith, Brewer, Crone and Doyle in favor and Wolff opposed.
Bubba Hughes stated the zoning map is in the room and this would be considered First Reading on the
Text and would come back with an actual site plan. Due to the advertisement requirement Hughes
requested council to request petitioner to have the site plan to staff before advertisement and meeting.
Councilman Crone left the meeting at 9:20pm.
Councilman Wolff stated the text amendment does not include height requirements for buffer or
parking requirements based on square footage. They are left blank. This needs to be addressed.
Councilman Brown stated that is the same thing that was done last time. Hughes stated he doesn’t
want to create another non-conforming use, which is why it is important to tie it into the site plan, if you
go by our regular parking requirements there is not enough room. After conferring with Mr. Lynn,
Hughes stated the blank on the parking requirement would be 370. Buelterman asked if the buffer
height needs to be addressed now also or is that superseded by another ordinance. Hughes responded
he would like it addressed now.
A Motion by Councilman Brown to amend the Neighborhood Grocery District Ordinance to include the
requirement for 1 (one) parking space per every 370 square feet of gross grocery store floor area in
paragraph 4 and requiring the fence height in paragraph 5 to be 6 (six) feet, was seconded by
Councilman Smith. The vote was Brown, Smith, Brewer and Doyle In favor and Wolff opposed.
Buelterman reconfirmed with petitioner he has to come back within the advertising requirements with a
plan so everyone will know exactly what is on the table. Hughes stated if we have the site plan by
October 7th it can be advertised for the October 22nd meeting.
Consent Agenda
A Motion by Councilman Wolff to approve the Consent Agenda was seconded by Mayor pro tem Doyle.
The vote was unanimous.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 12 of 18
Consideration of Local Requests & Applications-Funding, Special Events, Alcohol License
Special Event Application-Tybee Island Pirate Fest-Addendum to prior application approved on
6/25/09. Applicant requesting to have Fireworks to be set off from the Pier at 7:30pm on Friday,
October 9th. Tybee Fest will pay for Fire Department.
Mrs. Schleicher stated when the original application was approved it did not include the fireworks
request and this addition causes some additional expense to the city. One of those is the fire
department at $72. Chief Price feels the fireworks will bring more traffic requiring more officers. The
extra officers could cost up to $2500. The council had capped the city expenses at $2300 for DPW
services and $100 for special event fee. Also, there had been a request to have DPW take garbage off
the site but they are withdrawing it and will handle it themselves to lessen the DPW cost. Doyle asked
what the Fire department’s role is. Schleicher answered we have 2 or 3 staff with a truck on site during
the event. This covers a few hours of staff time. Wolff asked where the trash will be taken. Schleicher
answered to the compactor. Smith asked who addresses the issue of the state of disrepair on dumpster
enclosures or fences. Schleicher answered the City Marshall.
A Motion by Mayor pro tem Doyle to approve the addendum to the previous application but still have
the original capped amount for city services apply was seconded by Councilman Smith. The vote was
unanimous.
City Manager’s Report-Diane Schleicher
Mayor Buelterman asked for an update on the Bicycle Friendly Initiative.
Schleicher stated one of the requirements is for some citizens’ involvement so we will be doing that in
the fall and applying then.
Schleicher addressed the Mayor’s previous request to address the leaning pole in JC Park. From her
understanding it has been that way since it was installed and is buried about eight feet down. Council’s
comments were to leave it alone. It can be removed from the Action Item List.
Mayor Pro Tem asked the City Manager to look into adding a small newsletter into the water bills to give
the citizens another communication tool for what is happening on the island.
Proposed Wayfinding Signage Locations and Directions
Schleicher stated the Arts Association would like to move forward. There has been a request to add
North End Business District to the signs for that end and South End Business District to signs for that
end.
Wolff asked about the cost. The cost to move/install the signs was $400, can DPW do this cheaper?
Richard Adams responded the $400 is for the removal, relettering and reinstall if changes have to be
made after the initial installment, for instance a year later. Wolff asked then, what is the initial cost to
install? Adams answered an average of $300 per sign, some a little more some a little less. Brown asked
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 13 of 18
if he ever got the answers on oxidation on the aluminum. Adams answered they are using aircraft
quality aluminum. It is the highest rated aluminum they could possible use. He does not have an
answer on oxidation. Brown said we have no guarantee they would last 6 years, 6 months or 6 days.
Adams responded the warranty on craftsmanship is thirty months. Brown responded on craftsmanship
what about oxidation. Adams answered if that happened we would take care of that. The signs DOT
put up have aluminum on the back and he has checked them and there is no corrosion. Brown stated
he has a concern on not having other bids as he would like two or three options to look at. $55,000 is a
lot of money in these economic times to spend to tell someone how to get to the Lighthouse.
Buelterman stated he disagreed. Wolff stated he would like to specify $300 for installation because that
would put it right at the $55,000 maximum approved the last time. Brewer asked when these would
have to be relettered or repainted and how much would that cost. Adams answered they are using
seven coats of automobile graded paint and a clear coat on top of that on both sides. Automobile
paintjobs last, some up to 15 to 20 years, and these signs don’t have the abuse automobiles do. They
will last a longtime. Brewer asked if they were being done by local artists. Adams answered yes by local
Shannon Marino and Wheels of Steel in Thunderbolt. We are making two additional signs so if
something happens to one we can replace it pretty quickly.
Smith asked if they have got approval from DOT for the signs on Hwy 80. Adams answered they have
talked to DOT and they still have to get approval. Schleicher stated they have met with DOT and looked
at the locations and they said they will work with the city.
Buelterman asked exactly what council is considering tonight, the locations or what. Schleicher stated
the locations and the contract as long as Mr. Hughes is comfortable with the contract. Hughes
answered there was some concerns with some wording, like the terms, but it can be revised to get
there; such as the craftsmanship warranty, it states” 30 months from the date of the installation of the
first sign”. If the last sign is installed 30 months after the first it would only last a week. Adams
answered they could change that. Hughes stated he didn’t think that is what was meant but this is just
an example. Adams said all the signs are going to go up pretty quick, but that wording would be
changed to last sign. Brown stated it needs to also include something on the oxidation. Buelterman
stated the design was done by a non-profit, the work by a contractor that does work for all kind of
people, so can we use the same template we use for everyone else. Brown stated his concern was with
spending the money. Hughes stated he was not familiar with the contractor they are using. The only
warranty is on craftsmanship with the Arts Association. If something goes wrong they would call Mr.
Adams or his successor. We have no relationship with the fabricator. Buelterman asked then would
the contract not be with the people doing the actual work. Hughes responded no, it is with the Arts
Association, he would rather have it through the manufacturer. Buelterman asked what the reason was
we wouldn’t do that. Adams stated we could do that. Hughes and Adams agreed they could work with
that and make it a three way deal.
A Motion by Mayor pro tem Doyle to approve contingent on City Attorney working on the Contract with
Tybee Arts Association and Manufacturer was seconded by Councilman Wolff.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 14 of 18
Councilman Wolff requested $2,200 per sign for 22 signs plus $300 installation per sign be made a part
of the motion. Mayor pro tem Doyle agreed.
The vote was Doyle, Wolff, Brewer and Smith in Favor and Brown opposed.
The River’s End Monthly Financial Reports
Councilman Brewer said this is a good start in how we need to look at what the situation is at the
campground. Maybe we can even have it put on the screen so the public can view it also. The
breakdowns look good. We are seeing revenues and we are seeing expenses but not really the net, if
we can see that added and a running 12 month total. Each month that would change and each month
we can see where we have been and where we are going. Brewer thanked Mrs. Schleicher for the
report.
Potential Impact of Proposal for Early Retirement Health Insurance for City Employees
Mayor Buelterman suggested holding off and seeing what the Federal Government was going to do with
the health plan. Brown asked Mrs. Schleicher if she could poll the employees and see how many would
like to participate on a percentage basis, employees paying part and the city paying part. Schleicher
answered the way they would pay into a plan is when they needed it. When an employee retired they
would pay part and the city would pay part. An employee that is young does not know if they are going
to be here in the long term and may not want to pay out now for something later. Brown answered
however you want to compose it would be fine.
Council, Officials and City Attorney Considerations & Comments
Budget Amendment #3: Electrical Improvements at River’s End RV and Campground.
Add $34,379 to Line #555-6180-52-2205(Repair & Maintenance-Infrastructure)
Add $34,379 to Line #555-00-39-3502(Proceeds of General Funds)
Deduct $34,379 from Line #505-9000-61-1000(General Fund Contingency)
Mayor read an insert from a letter from a third party engineer, Dewey Harry Weeks, stating most of the
problems were in arms reach and posed a danger to the public. Mayor stated bids had come in for the
work and felt since it did pose a danger to the public we needed to do the repairs.
Mayor Buelterman stated we did get a lower bid in. He asked the city manager to explain what the total
cost would be to repair all the electricity in full not in phases. Mrs. Schleicher answered about $73,000.
He also asked Mr. Hemphill if that was correct and he answered yes. Councilman Brewer asked what
the slides were being shown. Mr. Hemphill stated these are the existing electric boxes and the
condition they are in. Brown asked have they always been like this. Hemphill stated yes. Comment was
made the campground was bought as is. Brown and Brewer asked were the covers already off or taken
off for the pictures and why was this not caught in-house and at least covered. Buelterman stated both
Schleicher and Hemphill were aware there were problems and that is why they started getting the bids
to have the repairs addressed. That is where we are now and what we need to get done. Brown asked
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 15 of 18
if any of this could come out of the operating fund and not have to be taken from the contingency.
Schleicher answered Phase One for the crow’s nest repairs was. That is when the electrician advised
them of all the dangers with the rest of the electrical in the campground and the public danger. Brown
asked what the actual cost of just the campground part was. It includes on the request, digging ditches,
conduits, etc. Hemphill stated it is about half. Brown stated the electrical part is approx $32,000. How
much is the amount that the campground is doing itself for the rest. Hemphill stated for the labor,
materials, conduit, trenching, etc about $40,000. Brewer stated this is being presented as an electrical
safety problem but when he looks at it there is about $3000 for white rocks to fill in campsites. Is this
for back fill or white rock to improve the sites? It looks like other things are being mixed into this.
Hemphill stated it will be to improve the site, as there will be some disturbances when we dig the
trenches. Brewer stated he doesn’t mind the funds for the electrical safety issues but are there funds
already in the budget for white rock and improving the site appearances over the course of the year.
Hemphill stated there are not any funds in the budget for that this year due to the size of the budget.
Brewer asked why we are buying the conduits, etc from Home Depot. Are we not getting a turn-key job
from Braddy? Hemphill stated we can buy them for less money. Brewer asked do we have an
electrician that works for the City of Tybee. Hemphill stated not at this time.
Councilman Smith stated the comment had been made the campground was bought as is, but it was
not. The city paid the Simmons another $300,000 for the business. Were there any inspections done
when we bought this seven million, three hundred thousand dollar business? Was it anyone’s
responsibility to see what condition this property was in? Buelterman stated apparently not.
A Motion by Councilman Wolff to approve Oglesbee Electric Company, Inc. bid for $32,069 was
seconded by Councilman Smith. Brown asked where the balance of almost $40,000 was coming from.
Ms. Schleicher clarified when the budget amendment was originally put on the table they were talking
about only doing two phases. However, after the electrical engineer’s inspection and advice they
decided to go ahead with all three phases.
Councilman Wolff amended his motion to approve the bid for Oglesbee Electric for $32,069 and allow
additional funds up to $75,000 total for the entire repair project, Councilman Smith seconded. Brewer
stated he is ok with the electrical repairs for safety issues but not the other additions such as white rocks
etc. We are going into our off season and lean time for the campground, what is critical at this point.
Brewer stated he is all for the safety issues but that is not defined. Councilman Wolff stated the off
season is the better time to do these such repairs, not in season when the campground is full.
The vote was Wolff, Smith and Doyle in favor and Brewer and Brown opposed.
Signage on I-95-City Funding 50% of cost.
Mayor Buelterman stated with the tourism council he had contacted DOT about directional signage on I-
95 directing travelers to Tybee. They agreed to put the signs up but no funds were available, so we
would have to pay for it. The tourism council has agreed to pay 50% of the cost and he would like the
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 16 of 18
City to fund the other 50%. The sooner we act the better, so they will be up before next season.
Councilman Wolff asked if these would be billboards or more like the brown and white informational
signs or what. Buelterman responded standard directional signs. Councilman Smith stated the signs
will change the route of visitors to Tybee. Doyle stated this has been discussed in the tourism council
and they are just waiting for funding from the City. Hughes stated this is talking about signs where
travelers come in at Montgomery St.
Mayor Buelterman stated he believes they are the smaller roadside directional signs not the big
overhead signs. Buelterman stated the funds would come out of the contingency for this year.
A Motion by Councilman Wolff to approve City cost of $2,750 was seconded by Councilman Smith. The
vote was unanimous. Schleicher stated council would see a budget amendment come back.
Beach Showers:
Buelterman asked council to allow the City Manager to look into low flow showers using 1 ½ gallons of
water a minute and also determine net water usage since foot washers were installed.
Brown asked about the information received from St. Simons on building bathhouses like theirs.
Buelterman responded Mr. Lynn is looking into that and the wind velocity zones you had requested. Mr.
Lynn stated it has been determined you can build in a VE Zone but it has to be built up. The bottom
floor has to be at Base Flood Elevation. However, part of the parking lot is in an AE Zone. So just like in
St. Simons, here you can build in the part of the parking lot that is in the AE Zone. Brown said it still has
to meet the basic Flood Elevation height whether it is in the V Zone or the A Zone. Lynn responded yes
but the difference is in the V zone the bottom of the floor has to be the top of the BFE. It doesn’t in the
AE zone. Brown stated the only difference you are talking about in the V zone is the “lowest structural
member”. Lynn said correct. Brown said in an A zone, is the top of the finished floor elevation.
Regardless of that being said you still have to meet the FEMA height requirement for the finished floor
of the bathroom. Lynn said you can have a basement area and even windows at that base level. Brown
asked are you sure you can have open bathrooms. Lynn stated he will send the information to
Councilman Brown.
Brown asked the city manager if she has had input on how this would affect our water withdrawals.
Schleicher responded we had told the EPD we would not have showers on the beach, but they are more
worried about how much we are drawing from our wells. If residents and businesses continue to
conserve we could probably have showers on the beach.
Councilman Brewer requested City Manager to research pay showers and pay bathrooms in order to pay
on site attendant.
Trash Containers:
Mayor Buelterman asked the city manager to get input for where and how much it will cost and also
look into adding them in the North End Business District. Get suggestions from businesses and Better
Hometown Program. Schleicher stated the company that had provided the last trash containers and
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 17 of 18
benches were taking them back and refinishing them differently at no charge, as we have had a rust
problem.
Bike Racks:
Mayor Buelterman stated we need more bike racks in the business districts. Schleicher stated we can
do more racks but not necessarily larger ones by the sidewalks. We could put larger ones by the beach.
Councilman Smith asked if you can park bikes both ways.
Councilman Wolff suggested putting them in the space between parking lots and Dunes. Councilman
Wolff will bring information back in November or ASAP on grant availability and rack types.
Create a Parking Task Force:
Councilman Brewer stated parking as well as traffic flow continues to be a serious problem. He
discussed possibility of bringing all entities affecting the traffic onto and off Tybee, and the parking
problems, together in a professional joint manner such as our very effective Beach Task Force. He asked
for council’s support in establishing this task force equal to importance and statue as the Beach Task
Force.
Mayor Buelterman requested for Councilman Brewer to compile a proposal using the Beach Task Force
as an example and determine if this would be a permanent force or temporary and bring it back to the
2nd meeting in October for council consideration.
Mayor Pro Tem Doyle stated she has been working on the parking issues for quite a few months and
meeting with Ms. Morton, as well as, going with the mayor to the city of Savannah and meeting with
their parking people. She has set up a meeting with DCA to look at the traffic study and parking study.
That is where she decided to start. She is not against the Parking Task Force but would like to be given
the opportunity to put all the information together she has been working on and present it to council.
She has been talking with some consultants and studying the study that was done in 2004 and should be
given the opportunity to share the information as she has put a lot of hours and effort into it. Brewer
commented he agreed and maybe the information she brings back could be the groundwork for the
beginning of the task force. This is more than a one person solution.
Mayor Buelterman requested Mayor pro tem Doyle to put together all her information in a parking
report for City Council and present it during the 2nd meeting in October.
2009 You Gotta Be Kidding! Grant Application-Recycling Promotions Grant $1050 Incentive Kit
Material Value and $3200 in-kind services by various non-profit groups in the city at their special
events on the island.
Councilman Paul Wolff asked for council to approve his applying for this grant as it will involve no cost,
just volunteer time, which he is willing to do. It is more or less a promotion campaign, using reverse
psychology, to create a buzz and people talking about recycling.
Prepared 10/20/09dw Page 18 of 18
A Motion by Councilman Wolff to approve submitting the grant application, on behalf of the city, to DCA
was seconded by Councilman Brewer. The vote was unanimous.
City Manager announced the city would be receiving the draft audit tomorrow; it will go to the audit
committee. Smith commented, to please note, this is receiving the draft audit for year end June and
this is September, just what they had told us they would do.
Adjournment
A Motion by Councilman Wolff to adjourn was seconded by Councilman Brewer. The vote was
unanimous.
________________________________
Jason Buelterman, Mayor
________________________________
Vivian O. Woods, Clerk of Council