HomeMy Public PortalAbout20100513CCMinutesApproved
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 1 of 24
20100513 City Council Minutes
Mayor Buelterman called the Consent Agenda meeting to order at 6:30pm on Thursday, April 22, 2010.
Council Members present were Mayor pro tem Shirley Sessions, Wanda Doyle, Bill Garbett, Frank
Schuman, Sr., Kathryn Williams and Paul Wolff. Also present were City Attorney Bubba Hughes, City
Manager Diane Schleicher and Zoning Director Jonathan Lynn.
Mayor Buelterman called the Consent Agenda to order:
Mr. Wayne Hildreath, wind farm consultant of Wind Energy Consulting & Contracting, along with other
colleagues gave a power point presentation on wind turbines. The first in the US, he stated his
company, based in Jacksonville, does not sell turbines but represent clients by putting them in the best
possible position by handling all items on a slippery slope that can make a wind project go wrong. Most
of their clients are in the Southwest, Midwest, and Caribbean and also in the Middle East. They have
completed hundreds of wind studies economic models of projects of all sizes. The single turbine or a
few behind the meter is really his niche market. There is currently nothing in the southeast, with the
exception of a few vertical access turbines that are spinning in a few locations along the coast. The
potential in the south east is great for wind. Mr. Hildreath stated the technology was started by the
Danish. He showed numerous examples of locations across the US. There is great wind potential in our
area. He stated there have been some negative connotations associated with wind projects and he has
put together a PDF document addressing most of those and handed copies out to members of the
Council. For example, one has been bird fatalities. However in single turbine placement, birds seem to
avoid the turbines. In wind farms there are radars that shut down the turbines when flocks of birds are
approaching to fly over and then restarted after they pass. They have looked at a possible project in
our area being done in two phases. First is to install a small 20kw turbine in the city center (Memorial
Park area). This would indeed be a tourist attraction, very pleasant to look at. Somebody is going to do
it and be the first. It should be Tybee. The second phase would be at the water treatment plant,
installing a 275KW turbine and offsetting a good part of the dollars being spent on electricity. Brian
spoke on specifics of installation such as cost (beginning at $87,500), available federal funding, grants,
payback periods and expected energy savings. He also gave a comparative analysis on wind & solar.
Solar power showed to be at a cost of $158,720 and payback being 22+ years, compared to the wind
power at a cost of $87,500 and payback being at the 15th year. Brian also gave a recording example of
the noise generated by the single wind turbine and stated many times the noise is overshadowed by the
wind itself. Mayor Buelterman asked about the height. Brian stated it could be as high as 120’ down to
18meters. The lower you go the less power you generate. He gave examples of the value over and
above the energy saving, such as the educational value and tourism. Bill Garbett asked what their
assumption was on the average wind speed for Tybee. Mr. Hildreath stated they have not done a wind
study on Tybee. Mr. Garbett said they had to have an average wind speed to use in their financial
calculations. Mr. Hildreath said they had used the Savannah Airport and other coastal airport data and
the wind regime here is very similar. They did a study for the Naval Station Mayport three years ago and
found the wind regime there on the coast had a capacity factor using the turbine, of 37%, which is
better than many of the projects in the Midwest. When starting a wind project a met tower is usually
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 2 of 24
installed for about a year to model the wind and get a good resource. Mr. Garbett said when you look at
the National Wind Resource Map our average wind speed is about 5 meters per second. The
manufacturer offers a performance guarantee and they are not going to do this if they are not confident
in the wind regime. Mayor Buelterman asked if there were other small municipalities that have projects
like this. Mr. Hildreath stated yes. They had been involved with the installation of two small turbines in
Genoceo, Illinois and a school district in Erie, Illinois. In the school district they also negotiated a
purchase agreement, estimating about four million dollars revenue over the lifespan of the turbine in
addition to the energy savings. This turbine allowed them to air condition all of their buildings
throughout the district. Mr. Garbett asked where the nearest turbine similar to this was located. Mr.
Hildreath stated, Tennessee in the mountains. Mayor Buelterman asked how far away it can be from
where you want the use. Mr. Hildreath stated that would vary according to several factors. He also
stated you would need a fall zone of the size (height) of the turbine plus one blade. Some are made to
drop down or be lowered in preparation of a storm. Shirley Sessions asked about them being in located
in a populated area. He stated they have been in city centers. There are safety mechanisms in place,
such as emergency shut downs, etc. Kathryn Williams asked about the diameter of the pole, does it
vary according to the height. Mr. Hildreath stated typically about 6 feet in diameter. The foundation is
typically 24 x 24 and 4 feet deep, depending on the soil. The manufacturer gives recommendations but
usually above ground it is six feet in diameter. Mr. Wolff asked if there is a limit to the 30% tax credit
you can get thru the blocker corporation or any cap on that. Brian answered no.
Mayor Buelterman listed the following on the consent agenda.
Proclamation: National Preservation Month-May 2010
Freda Rutherford-Appointment to Community Resource Committee
Application for Retail Beer/Wine, Liquor and Sunday Sales Alcohol License and Entertainment
License, Location: 1311 Butler Ave, Applicant: Kurtis Schumm for Tybee Island Social Club. Chief
Price has approved.
Change order #1 for BRW Construction Group: Cost of $480 for WWTP Effluent Line Extension
Additional Signs Budget Line #505-4310-54-1407 Infrastructure approved
Change order #1 for AD Williams Construction CO: Cost of $4800 for Butler Avenue Crosswalk
Improvements, Pavement Mounted Signs. Budget Line #100-7520-54-1420 Infrastructure
approved.
During the Consent Agenda Ms. Schleicher requested council to approve installing a gate on the
Back River pier and locking it at night when the restrooms and the parks were closed at 10:00
pm and reopening it in the morning when the restrooms and parks are reopened?
Mayor Buelterman asked Ms. Williams if she was ok with that since she had had some
questions. She answered no. She thought the gate was going up now and council would
determine if it needed to be closed at a later date. Mayor Buelterman deferred the item to the
regular agenda for discussion.
Mayor Buelterman adjourned the Consent Agenda.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 3 of 24
Mayor Buelterman called the regular meeting of the City Council to order at 7:05pm. Those
present at the Consent Agenda were also in attendance for the regular meeting. Larry Nesbitt gave the
invocation and everyone recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Mayor’s Announcements
Mayor Buelterman spoke on the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. At this point the risk of it entering the
Gulfstream is very minimal. Jack Kingston’s office is keeping us informed and would be there to help if
needed.
A dedication ceremony for Eddie Crone will be held at the Guardhouse on May 23rd at 3:00. This is to
honor Eddie for all he did in the restoration of the Guardhouse. Everyone is invited.
Consideration of draft minutes for the regular meetings of the Tybee Island City Council.
1. 04/08/2010-Postponed
Proclamations
Mayor Buelterman read the proclamation proclaiming May as National Preservation Month.
Citizens to Be Heard
Bill Cannon spoke on behalf of the Tybee Beautification Association. He invited everyone to participate
in the Adopt- a- Highway on May 15th. Volunteers need to meet at the Tybee sign on Hwy 80 at 8:00am.
He also announced the Tybee Prom on July 17th at the American Legion. This adult prom is the annual
TBA fundraiser and the cost is $20. This year’s theme is “Twilight Time on Tybee”. You don’t have to
dance to donate. He also thanked Mayor and Council for their continued support.
R Campbell, a Design Management MFA graduate of Savannah College of Arts &Design, spoke on Wind
Power and the community. In the last year he has been working on wind studies in the south east. He
explained the opportunity that Tybee has to lead by example and combine the old, the history of Tybee
with the new, alternative energy in Memorial Park. He presented a slideshow of examples in other
cities. Some were of solar & wind combinations in business & office complexes, others were just the
wind turbine behind church and school complexes. The past 10 weeks he and other SCAD students
have been working on wind designs and did research on Tybee and will make this available to Mayor
and Council.
Kurtis Schumm addressed council on new family friendly restaurant and bar he is opening on Tybee in
the old Vinnie’s location on Butler Ave. He and his partners invite all to come out and try them.
Liquor/alcohol license approval will allow for grand opening by Memorial Day. Frank Schuman reminded
him to monitor noise and trash in the residential neighborhood behind him.
Larry Nesbitt spoke to council in reference to considerations of wind power on Tybee. He asked council
to research and study the noise issues associated with wind turbines. A lot of information is on the
internet. Other states have laws now that turbines can only be so close to residential districts. He
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 4 of 24
stated he had previously asked Mr. Wolff if turbines made noise and was told no. There are thousands
of websites about noise levels. Another thing to consider is health issues that have been documented
around turbines. A lot of medical and hearing organizations have documented people that live near
turbines that before had no medical problem or insomnia, since have had problems. Off shore the cost
would be prohibitive to have the energy brought back to Tybee but he asked council to be careful about
the neighborhoods because people do come first. He also stated prior to being elected, council
members had stated they were not going to allow variances and this exceeds 35’. One green website
for green energy is not favorable about the noise pollution or visual pollution. He reiterated to please
do research before taking a vote. If wind turbine is not used maybe we can use photocells or something
else.
Shirley Sessions asked Mr. Nesbitt if the comment he made on council stating no variances was said on
35 feet height variance specifically or what. Mr. Nesbitt replied no, basically on any variances. That is
what the citizens heard during the elections. Mr. Schuman stated that is not on a resident but on a
windmill. Mayor Buelterman stated that will be dealt with when the decision comes up. Mr. Wolff
clarified he did not say they didn’t create any noise. He stated turbines create 50 to 60 decibels at 120
feet and that decreases as you get closer to ground level. Mr. Garbett asked if we have had an energy
audit and Mr. Wolff stated yes.
Richard Burnsed addressed council on the private parking lot application his father had submitted and
encouraged approval. Mr. Garbett stated council had spent time on trying to figure out where the
actual parking spaces would be as they are not on the drawing and the ordinance requires a scaled
drawing. What he submitted is adequate but he would hate to see more projects coming in like this.
The poor drawing did show everything that needed to be seen in order to make a good decision. That is
why the stammering.
Shirley Sessions asked isn’t it the responsibility of the staff to make sure applicants submit what they
need rather than have them appear before council and be put on the spot.
Jonathan Lynn stated Mr. Burnsed had presented what the current ordinance asks for. It does not
require scaled drawings. The amendment to the ordinance on the agenda tonight will require that. The
current ordinance only requires a site plan or a professional survey of the lot. We actually did have a
professional survey at the last meeting but it wasn’t as detailed as the one now.
Kathryn Williams asked if Mr. Lynn had looked at page 12 as it seems that was already amended. Mr.
Lynn and the city attorney stated no. It had to be brought back tonight for second reading.
Reports of Staff, Boards, Standing Committees and/or Invited Guest Limit reports to 10
minutes
Chantel Morton addressed council on the progress of the newly formed “Green Team”, an internal city
government committee consisting of an employee from each department and assisted by the city
manager and community development director. The team has applied to partner the City of Tybee with
the state of GA in their goal to create a Sustainable Georgia. The team members introduced themselves
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 5 of 24
to council. Ms. Morton explained the team has elected to pursue and go after Waste Reduction for the
first year. The past month an assessment has been done across the city departments to see what type
of materials are recycled, what each department knows about recycling and developing a starting point
for proceeding with education. We have also been tracking and measuring the departments current
recycling to develop a baseline to be able to measure the recycling changes and results from
improvements or behavioral changes implemented, such as double sided printing, reusing paper, and
using recycled paper and also using personal cups or water bottles. We will meet again in June and will
be doing another measurement cycle in July. Again this is working with the GA DNR Sustainability
Division. We are very excited about educating and raising awareness within city hall and the city
departments and have that spill out into the city of Tybee.
Shirley Sessions congratulated Tybee and stated the county and the city of Savannah have a Green Team
or are part of this initiative. As far as she knows Tybee is the only other municipality that has taken an
active approach to this and this is really good we are doing this.
Chantel Morton gave an update on the Better Hometown Visioning Workshop held in April. She
thanked Mayor Buelterman for the Historic Preservation Month Proclamation and stated this goes along
with the Green Team in that “The Old is the New Green”. With Better Hometown we are looking at
economic development based on historic preservation. The board and committees have been
reviewing what information we received regarding strengths and challenges in order to know what
direction we are going to go for the next year. With design we are going to continue working with the
city with the parking committee for the businesses and looking at the possibility of having a kiosk around
the business corridor to help with the visitors and the businesses and continue to continue working with
the historic preservation and the awareness of it and education. With organization we are going to
continue the newsletters and working with the department of community affairs. We have sent
everything to DCA within the past five months and are waiting on final approval at this point. We will
continue with all the guidelines DCA has for Better hometown and will continue to have monthly
meetings and working with the businesses and city with outreach and really pushing and striving for
more positive outcomes for the city and positive press. With economic restructuring we are also going
to continue working and assist the businesses in looking at diversification within the business corridor.
We got a lot of feedback from residents as to what services or merchandise they would like to see on
the island. That is part of the economic development we are going to be looking at to continue to grow
year round. For promotions, there was a lot of feedback on Third Thursdays on Tybee and we will be
continuing that. May 20th will be our first one with Megan Panther and Darryl Lee VanHorn. Two
months of Third Thursdays will follow that. To continue with more family fun activities our promotion
liaison for the board is Stephen Palmer and he has really been thinking of a way to brand Tybee. It is
almost like a new Tybee with all the new changes that have happened over the years. He is working
with the tourism council on this to have a joint partnership on how to really brand Tybee.
Mayor Buelterman stated it is good the Third Thursdays are able to be continued. Ms. Morton stated
they had been supported by a grant from the GA Council of the Arts and was a grassroots program that
was only for three months. Because of such positive results the city is going to continue it with some
support from area organizations.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 6 of 24
Janice Elliott addressed the council on the new prescription discount card program offered by the
National League of Cities. The city will participate beginning May 15, provided the resolution is passed
tonight. This program provides the citizen with some relief on the high cost of prescription drugs. Free
prescription discount cards will be available to citizens through this program. The cards offer an
average savings of 20% off the retail price of commonly prescribed drugs. The card can be used by all
residents of the city and has no restrictions bases on the resident’s age, income, or even their existing
health coverage. The card can be used when purchasing prescription drugs at more than 60,000
participating pharmacies across the country. Island’s Pharmacy here on Tybee is also participating. In
the current economic climate the city of Tybee is happy to participate with the National League of Cities
to make this discount card available to our residents. This is no cost to the city or the residents of
Tybee. This program is administered by CVC/Caremark. Cards can be printed from the internet at
www.caremark.com/nlc and will be available at city hall, the library, the YMCA and at the Island
Pharmacy. Citizens can visit the website or call 1-888-620-1749 for assistance. The card is easy to use
and is free. Residents only have to show their card when purchasing at the participating pharmacy.
There is no enrollment form required, no membership fee of any kind. Every family only needs to have
one card for all members to use. Even some pet medications, if they can be used to treat humans, can
be discounted. Pick up a card and start saving today.
Shirley Sessions asked if it can be used if you have insurance. Ms. Elliott answered; if you have insurance
and it is not covered you can use the card.
Mayor Buelterman called for a motion for the Resolution for National League of Cities
Prescription Program.
A Motion by Frank Schuman to approve was seconded by Paul Wolff. The vote was unanimous.
Consideration of Local Requests & Applications-Funding, Special Events, Alcohol License
1. Application for Private Parking Lot Permit: Address-11A Lovell Avenue
Applicant: E.C. Burnsed.
A Motion by Bill Garbett to approve was seconded by Wanda Doyle. The vote was unanimous.
Consideration for the Consent Agenda
A Motion by Paul Wolff to approve the consent agenda was seconded by Wanda Doyle. The vote was
unanimous.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 7 of 24
Public Hearings
1. Site Plan Review for locating a permanent awning (Section 4-050 (E) (1) Petitioner:
Nick Alexander. Address: 1513 Butler Ave PIN 4-0008-07-0004 Zone C-1/SE
Planning Commission recommended approval with 5-0 vote.
Jonathan Lynn stated the request is for a non-retractable awning at 1513 Butler Ave. The applicant is
seeking a non-retractable awning to extend out approximately four feet from the front edge of the
building over the sidewalk on Butler Ave. Currently the zoning for this property is C1 South End Overlay
District. The Master Plan shows this area as Historic Downtown District. The reason the applicant is
seeking site plan approval for this is the South End policies and procedures permits awnings, however it
must come up and down and retract every night. The applicant feels this is not consistent with his
intentions for the future use of it as a bar and grill and he is proposing a site plan similar to what the
Rock House proposed last summer. To have a permanent awning with a clearance of just less than
eight feet so it will not pose any threat to public safety for people to walk under it.
Mayor Buelterman asked if it was the same distance out from the building as the one across the street.
Mr. Lynn replied, he believed it would be a foot or two less. The one at the Rock House is intended for
patrons to sit under it and this one is not. Mayor Buelterman than confirmed with Mr. Lynn planning
commission had voted unanimously to approve. Mr. Lynn confirmed.
Mayor Buelterman then asked about the statement in the planning commission minutes stating the
awning could sustain winds up to 130mph. Mr. Lynn stated staff would require engineering on it. The
Rock House came through with theirs. Mayor Buelterman asked about the ability of an awning to
withstand winds at 130. Mr. Lynn replied yes, the only requirement on an event like that is the
applicant or owner would be required to remove any canvas materials. The metal would actually have
to stand up to that. Mayor Buelterman then confirmed it is not the canvas that can withstand the wind
it is the frame. Mr. Lynn said correct.
Dean Morrison spoke and confirmed the engineers did have the rating at sustaining 130 mph winds for
the awning frame.
A Motion by Wanda Doyle to approve was seconded by Paul Wolff. The vote was unanimous.
2. Updating of Land Development Code Article 4, Section 4-050 (K), Planned Unit
Development District Planning Commission recommended approval with 5-0 vote.
Jonathan Lynn addressed council and stated this request is from staff and is a request to update
Section 4-050 (k) of the Land Development Code relating to Planned Unit Developments.
Currently in that section we reference every allowable PUD on the island and there was one left
out and has since been determined in a legal matter that the judge ruled that the Gulick Street
area is a PUD unit. Staff requested the City Attorney to include Gulick Street specifically as an
allowed PUD under this ordinance.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 8 of 24
Bill Garbett asked how this now affected the vacant lot. Is it now green space? Mr. Hughes
stated that is still in litigation. This does not change anything about who has the rights to do
what. It is just correcting an omission in the text of the current code.
A Motion by Kathryn Williams to approve was seconded by Paul Wolff. The vote was unanimous.
3. Text Amendment, Land Development Code Article 3, General Provisions.
Continuation of the previous public hearing held on 2/25/10 with amendments to
ordinance draft as requested by council in last workshop.
Mr. Lynn stated this request is a continuation of the public hearing held on 2/25/2010. We
have since had a workshop and discussed some other issues with Article 3 and what you have
before you is a revision based on that workshop and the last council meeting to see if we can
get this moving forward and through the First Reading. There have been other requests come
in from council members since the meeting packet went out and during the course Mr. Hughes
has been notified and there are some amendments to discuss when the time comes.
Wanda Doyle asked the city attorney if she should recuse herself due to the part on driveways
and pervious materials may affect her daughter’s business. Mr. Hughes stated it was ok to
participate and vote. It is a text amendment that has application citywide. It is no different
than indirect impacts anyone would have.
Mr. Wolff asked about the last page Section 3-250 on private parking lots, is that going to refer
to the ordinance before council tonight or how is that going to be incorporated. Mr. Lynn
replied that entire ordinance, the current one is incorporated here, and the amendments that
will be voted on tonight if approved, would actually go into this ordinance at the second
reading.
Wanda Doyle asked about page 5, there has been a lot of work with the tent issue and we took
out the umbrellas after the workshop but down at the end where it says, “tents set for special
occasions, screen houses, and seasonal recreation”. If you are putting up something that is 10 x
10 do you have to still come to city hall and get a permit or is it only if you are going to use
something that is 120 square feet. Mr. Lynn replied if it is something that is 120 square feet.
This would be an exempted section for them.
Mayor Buelterman asked if the diagram on street corners for public safety purposes on page 3
is new. Mr. Lynn answered the diagram is new but the requirement is not. Mayor Buelterman
then confirmed it was only to illustrate and Mr. Lynn stated correct. Mayor Buelterman asked
if the city has a lot of discretion in that. Mr. Lynn answered correct.
Bill Garbett commented this changes the definition of right-a-way lines to right-a-way center
lines. Was that somewhat unclear before? Mr. Lynn stated before people were utilizing it
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 9 of 24
somewhat to their advantage so it was clarified from the center of the right-a-way where it is
centered back as opposed to right-a-way line across the street or right-a-way in the front yard.
It is actually from the center line back and is where the right-a-way is. Mr. Garbett stated
unfortunately for streets that then intersect with Butler that means there is a very small
clearance triangle because if you go out to the center line of Butler, you really don’t hit the
corner of the property.
Mr. Wolff stated that is a very good point and he would like to hear the answer to that one.
That is why the original ordinance said the corner of the property where it abuts the road so
you have 45 feet all the way down the property. Mr. Garbett is correct if you go to the center
of the line on Butler you don’t have any kind of clearance. You are not going to have that
triangle.
Mayor Buelterman commented in other words it was more advantageous to the property
owner before. Mr. Lynn stated 25 feet would be greater than the biggest front yard setback we
require on Tybee, if you are bringing it 25 feet back from the right-a-way line at your property
as opposed to the center line.
Mr. Wolff stated this is just about a fence if it is over 3 feet, correct? Mr. Lynn answered a
fence or anything over 3 feet, a shrub or anything. Mayor Buelterman than asked if you use the
right-a-way line on that corner lot it could go all the way back to….pretty far. Mr. Wolff stated
that is where the line of vision is and that is the point. Mayor Buelterman stated not all the
time though. It is his understanding staff uses a lot of discretion; we don’t chop down peoples
….. Mr. Lynn answered no. We actually had an incident a few days ago with a fence.
Sometimes it is actually more cars parking on the street as opposed to the actual fence, that is
the blocked vision. With Butler Avenue you would be easing out further if cars were parked
there than just a little white picket fence. So a lot of time it’s not the fence or shrubbery that is
the problem. We do try use a lot of discretion and not fault anybody but there are times we
have to tell people to bring it back and do something like that. We try and catch it when they
apply for the permit but it’s hard to see on paper.
Mayor Buelterman asked Mr. Garbett if what he is saying is it lessens the city’s ability to deal
with that because you’re using the center line instead of the right-a-way line.
Kathryn Williams stated it is important that we don’t confuse discretion with inconsistency
because there have been a couple of properties lately that have been cleared but the
properties right across the street have all kinds of vegetation in the line of view. She wants
staff to understand discretion doesn’t mean inconsistency. You cannot force one property
owner to have a clear corner and the three corners around them not to be cleared.
Mr. Lynn stated he agreed and public works does a really good job with that. If they see
something when they are out and about and they see shrubbery or something growing around
a STOP sign or street sign, they will actually go to the property owner and require them to go
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 10 of 24
ahead and cut it before it ever gets any deeper. They do a good job but they can’t be
everywhere at once.
Wanda Doyle stated she had concerns about section 3-160 Protective screening of adjacent
property starting at the bottom of page 14. It seems like we had discussions about this at the
workshop but it seems like this is just eating away at a piece of commercial property that
happens to be sitting next to a residence. Ms. Doyle stated she doesn’t understand what is
trying to be done here unless it is to take away a person’s piece of property. There are at least
2 people in the audience tonight that have concerns with this and I had concerns at the
workshop. She asked why it is being put in this. She asked Mr. Lynn if he could answer.
Mr. Lynn stated this is a new addition, the fifteen feet and he believes it is at council’s will. He
stated he doesn’t have any “dog in this fight” he is not Michael Vick. Ms. Doyle asked where
this came from, what council’s will. Ms. Doyle asked how it got in here. Mr. Lynn stated it was
talked about at the workshop about reducing the number from 20 feet to the 15 feet. That is
why it is fifteen feet right now. Ms. Doyle stated so we took it down 5 feet. We are still taking
away people’s property.
Mayor Buelterman stated so the answer is it came out of a workshop we had. Mr. Lynn
answered correct. Ms. Doyle stated she sees the correction where 20 is crossed out and
changed to 15 and she had not picked up on that. Mr. Hughes stated the change actually began
way before Mr. Lynn, back when the original started back in 2008. The major change with this
is changing from a commercial district to a commercial use, where the buffer requirement is
triggered. If you have a commercial property that abuts a residential use or vice versa, it will
trigger a buffer requirement that has previously not existed. Mr. Hughes stated he thought Ms.
Doyle’s issue is because of the size of the lot if you trigger even a fifteen foot buffer it can take
away a significant piece of the property that is there.
Shirley Sessions stated maybe it would be helpful if staff in working with Bubba could explain
the intent as to why it was felt this was a better idea to make this change.
Mr. Hughes said the frequent problem encountered has been the expansion of commercial uses
against residential properties and the absence of any buffer requirement that was triggered
because it wasn’t a commercial district or a residential district. The TBR C2 overlay area, for
example, what used to be Georges Restaurant; there was no buffer requirement between it
and the residences behind it. That sort of situation was repeatedly occurring at various areas
when these uses intersect or abut, but the districts don’t. If it is limited to the districts you
have no control over it. That is the issue that started it all. Obviously, if this goes too far that is
up to council.
Shirley Sessions asked what is the set back currently for C2 vs. C1? C1 is 6, 6, and 6 around. Mr.
Hughes replied he has to look. It is 3090 but he is not sure. Ms. Sessions asked if they were
different and Mr. Hughes answered yes. Ms. Sessions asked if C2 has more flexibility regarding
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 11 of 24
the setbacks than C1. Mr. Hughes stated C1 is the one that changes depending on what the
commercial use is. It goes all the way to 20, 10, and 10 just like the residential. C2 is always 10,
6 and 6. The setback is there but there is no buffer requirement. If you are living next to one,
the thinking is, it would be nice to have a buffer, but given the size of some of the lots at 90 x
45, taking what was 20 feet from each side, eliminates over a third of the lot.
Ms. Sessions stated the types of businesses we have seen affront Hwy 80 are some of the more
typical traditional businesses, but the ones perhaps on the back side would ………..for example if
someone wanted to build an office building, the use would still be commercial, but it would not
be as obtrusive as maybe a restaurant. She asked if there was any way of capturing those
differences.
Mayor Buelterman commented on maybe doing something similar to what council had done
with the cost associated with applying for variances based on the cost of the project or maybe
the size of the lot and don’t just blanket the requirement of the buffer. Stagger it or something
because this has been an issue not having something in place. It limits what council can do to
protect the residents affected by a commercial business.
Mr. Hughes replied having a buffer or a fence to provide protection to either the residence or
the commercial is going to be the problem, it’s how far in you have to come with it. That can
eat up the property and that is the hard part. There is a way it could be drafted to fluctuate
depending on the intended use and the size of the property.
Mayor Buelterman stated maybe the way it is written now could be used for a large
development but for a small lot something different.
Mr. Lynn suggested as opposed to saying a specific number of feet, saying your green belt could
not be less than the required setbacks, since they are already required to have setbacks to start
with.
Bill Garbett stated it would have to be more specific because a green belt would not be a lawn,
maybe some shrubby. Fifteen feet is a little unreasonable. There have been discussions such
as with the Tybee Market and Gerald Shantz project. The market has a wall and shrubbery but
Mr. Shantz couldn’t put anything else because he didn’t have room. We need to come up with
a solution that something could be done without taking fifteen feet more out of the lot line.
Mayor Buelterman stated the problem with this section 3 is there is like fifty things. If we have
an issue with one than it puts the whole thing down the road and then we are not putting
things in to place for good things. He asked if council could go ahead and approve and leave
out the more controversial or complicated items and revisit them individually. Mr. Lynn stated
unless the city attorney has any objections, council could make recommendations for the things
to be amended. Do the first reading and if it is council’s desire to approve the first reading have
it changed for the second reading. Mayor Buelterman stated if it wasn’t correct for the second
reading, keep it as is for certain parts until we come up with what we all agree on.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 12 of 24
Mr. Hughes stated council did not have to act on the entire thing; you are just having a public
hearing on the entire thing. He also mentioned, and felt maybe part of the confusion is on the
private parking area. That ordinance which was just before council with the applicants request
for the parking lot on Lovell Ave, is down for First Reading of 34-3 and is actually part of article
3 now and part of the public hearing now to make those changes. If you look at the end of
Article 3, sec 250 is the private parking provision. Even though it started as a fairly straight
forward ordinance dealing with an overall use it became very property and land use oriented.
So it has been moved into the Land Development Code. The version that is in article 3 right
now does not include the proposed changes that are up now for First Reading. That would be
adjusted according to what council decides to do. You can take this section by section or take
out ones you don’t like. Like if you don’t like section 3160 pass the rest on First Reading and
take it back up later.
Kathryn Williams stated when she hears council’s discussions on this in trying to protect
residential use from commercial intrusions, because we do know this is a problem, council
never had any intent to be punitive to the owners of commercial properties. She doesn’t think
from the conversations had that anyone has any difficulty with requiring the fence, so if we can
just get a manageable buffer. She had planted confederate jasmine on the stairs and ramps at
the school and it was amazing what a good buffer that provides. If someone has a commercial
use they don’t necessarily want to be looking at the house next door either if they have
anything outside, so would probably prefer to have some type of vegetation. But she is in
agreement the fifteen feet is excessive and would be more amennable to using the required
setbacks as part of this ordinance.
Rusty Fleetwood addressed council and expressed his appreciation in council’s work in
attempting to simplify a lot of the confusion in some of the ordinances. Certainly there are
some pluses and minuses, but there are a bunch of little inconsistencies in it, then there are
some big ones, such as the 3-160. That one thing tells him there needs to be more workshops
and put back to planning commission for another look at it. That one section, if you had a 90
foot wide commercial lot, would take away about $50,000 to $60,000 value right there. A
buffer is not the same as a setback. You can’t do anything with a buffer. You can put a
driveway in a setback but you cannot drive on a buffer. There is also some confusion on the
fence. In one part it says the fence can be a natural planted fence, in another part it says no, it
has be a man made structure; like a concrete, block, brick or wood structure. He would be
happy to help with planning commission taking another look at it.
Mayor Buelterman asked when planning commission had looked at this. Did they look at it
after a lot of the last revisions were made? Mr. Lynn responded they had not seen it since he
has been with the City. It went to planning commission before he started with the city.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 13 of 24
Barry Brown stated to council he had a lot on Laurel Avenue and if you take the new setting of
fifteen feet, you are going to take an additional eighteen feet off of his property. It is only 79’ x
80’ and has a gigantic Oak Tree in the front yard. For the people who buy property in the C2
district, let them put the buffer in their yard. They choose to build a residential house in a
commercial zoning. That is no different than what they do down on the strand. He wants to go
on record and has sent Mr. Hughes a letter of how he feels about this and it needs to be left
alone. He does not have a problem putting Jasmine on a fence on the property line. But he has
a real big problem not being able to use the setbacks for parking. He bought this property with
a zoning of 10, 6 and 6 to build a commercial office building there. The downslide with the
market has made him delay building but he has had the lot for about five years. He had bought
it with the intention it was going to be for commercial use. At that time, he and Dee Anderson,
had a long discussion about the way that ordinance was written. It was written as abutting
commercial property to residential and now he sees they are changing the word to district. He
asked Mr. Hughes if that was changing the zoning on it. Mr. Hughes replied no. Mr. Brown
stated then it is only changing the wording of how it is written in the zoning. Is that correct?
Mr. Hughes answered that is correct. Mr. Brown stated he is opposed to it.
Mayor Buelterman stated he felt Mr. Fleetwood had a very good suggestion and since it had
not been to planning commission in a while, let them take a look at it. There are some good
things in here that we would like to get done soon, but it doesn’t hurt for something of this
importance, for them to take another look at it and make recommendations. They may find
some other things as well.
Wanda Doyle stated she knows a lot of work has gone into this and it has been going on and on,
but if the purpose is to make things better and right, then we need to consider that.
Kathryn Williams stated the only thing about sending it back to Planning Commission is that
back in February when council got it the first time, she had typed a whole list of items that
council had gone thru point by point at the workshop and there was general consensus with
most all of them. She was rather surprised when council got this version of Article 3 and only
one thing had been incorporated. She and Mr. Lynn had talked about it and he has talked with
Mr. Hughes about some of the language that would need to be utilized. She stated this needs
to go in first before it goes back to planning commission.
Mayor Buelterman asked if council could submit the discussion that was had at the workshop as
an addendum to the Article 3 for the Planning Commission’s review so they can look at those
items. Or would she rather see them added in the draft first before it goes to the planning
commission. Ms. Williams answered at least as an attachment, but to her knowledge she has
not seen any minutes from the workshop so she doesn’t know if they are available.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 14 of 24
Mr. Lynn replied he hasn’t seen any either, so he doesn’t know if they exist.
Mayor Buelterman stated if we can dig up what council discussed and agreed to at that
workshop; we can add that to the packet that goes to the planning commission. He asked Mr.
Lynn to explain to the planning commission where that attachment came from.
A Motion by Bill Garbett to continue Text Amendment and send it back to the planning commission for
further review with amendments as proposed at council workshop was seconded by Frank Schuman.
The vote was unanimous.
Kathryn Williams asked Mr. Lynn to explain to planning commission council would like their input or
recommendations for any potential changes so they will know why it is coming back.
Mr. Lynn stated it would miss the next planning commission meeting but would be on meeting the 15th
of June.
Mr. Wolff suggested on the buffer where commercial abuts a residential use a six foot fence and a five
foot vegetated buffer that would not be unreasonable. It would be like a good healthy stand of jasmine
on a fence. That wouldn’t be intrusive to anybody, but would act like a cushion. The vegetation part is
important to absorb the sound and would serve the purpose and not violate anyone’s commercial
rights.
Mayor Buelterman asked Mr. Lynn to add in the notes.
Consideration of Ordinances, Resolutions
1. 1st Reading Text Amendment, Municipal Code, Section 34-3, Private Parking Lots
Mayor Buelterman stated this was to make it where applicants have to provide more detailed
information such as scaled drawings
A Motion by Paul Wolff to approve was seconded by Kathryn Williams. The vote was unanimous.
2. 2nd Reading of Ordinance to Amend the Code of Ordinances Section 66-8(b)(3) and
delete in part (b)(2) of Article 9 Section 2: To Regulate the Usage of Motorized Carts
on the City Streets
Wanda Doyle stated the public safety committee had reviewed this and Chief Price was there. They
agreed mostly on everything but two issues on the last page s, “motorized carts must observe the
parking regulations and ordinances applicable to motorized vehicles” and they must purchase a decal or
pay the parking meters. The way it is written here is it could be either or. Is that Mr. Hughes
interpretation? Mr. Hughes answered yes. The chief, when we started this, didn’t want the carts to be
eligible for a decal because they didn’t pay ad valorem tax. Ms. Doyle stated they had discussed that. He
did say that, but now we are talking about them purchasing a decal. Either pay the parking meter or buy
a decal.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 15 of 24
Mr. Wolff stated he was at the meeting to and there was some disagreement but personally allowing
people to purchase a parking decal is fair enough. If they are going to use it a lot around the island they
are going to get their money’s worth, and they don’t pay ad valorem tax. It’s not an apple to apple thing
with cars that pay ad valorem tax getting one for free.
Ms. Doyle stated it does say they have to display a decal and maybe it needs to be clearer about buying.
Diane Schleicher stated she understood. We just need it to be clearer that they are required to
purchase the decal in leu of just receiving it upon registration or they would have to pay the meters.
Ms. Doyle stated correct. Ms. Schleicher stated there is also another correction in section 66-8 (b1)” a
reflective triangle will be issued upon registration “needs to be taken out because an amber flashing
light is going to be required by the owner instead.
Mayor Buelterman asked if a lot of signs are going to have to be put up all over the island. Ms.
Schleicher replied Mr. Hughes said we don’t.
Mayor Buelterman stated he had noticed in the ordinance they could not drive on Jones except they
could go on the north side of 80 and on the south side to get to Second and that was it. They could
cross at certain points at Jones but only at certain streets. Council then discussed the issue of carts
allowed or not allowed on Jones.
Mayor Buelterman asked if the public safety committee decided it would be better to let them drive on
Jones. Ms. Doyle and Ms. Schleicher answered yes. The mayor stated he would be fine with them going
on Jones that will mean you don’t have to have so many signs. Ms. Doyle stated she thought that was
intended to be taken out.
Mr. Wolff said it would slow traffic down on Jones. Mayor Buelterman asked what Chief Price thought?
Ms. Doyle answered he was fine with it. He agreed but not at night, right now especially during our busy
season. Mayor Buelterman asked what constitutes night. Ms. Schleicher answered sunset to sunrise.
Shirley Sessions stated Jones Ave is a big issue because already the bikes are an issue, so she has been
concerned with this. It has been discussed in detail at the public safety committee meeting and even
though she was surprised, the Chief didn’t seem to have a problem with it. If he is ok with it that’s fine
but she still has a concern.
Ms. Schleicher commented it is because of the restrictions on the speed of the carts is about the same
as the speed limit on Jones.
Mayor Buelterman stated maybe it will slow down traffic on Jones.
Kathryn Williams asked concerning the rules where carts can cross, will the city be issuing an
information card for people coming in to register the cart so they can keep that in the cart showing the
rules for other users.
Ms. Doyle stated the public safety committee had discussed this and when the owner comes in to buy
the permit they will get a list of crossings and rules.
Mayor Buelterman asked if an operator violates one of the rules and the police issue them a citation, is
there a standardized citation for this. He also read an insert for the penalty section of the ordinance. He
knows there are specific penalties for vehicle violations, will this be the same or will Judge Scheer have
the discretion to issue what is necessary. Mr. Hughes said the set fines for driving offenses are done so
everybody doesn’t have to go to court and can just pay the fine and go. This would, unless council
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 16 of 24
wants to provide otherwise, require the offender to attend court and it is the same penalty that applies
to any other violation of an ordinance. Council can reduce it.
Mayor Buelterman asked if it would be better to set a standard, like we do for say dogs on the beach, so
for instance, if someone drives here from Macon and gets a ticket, they would not have to drive all the
way back to Tybee to come to court. There is not a fine so the way it is now they would have to come
back for court. Mr. Hughes stated right, unless the Police Department establishes their own levels of
fines. Mayor Buelterman confirmed they can do this without council doing it. Mr. Hughes answered
yes. The court does that also. The people post a cash bond and then don’t come back and just forfeit
the bond.
Mayor Buelterman confirmed council would leave it to the police department’s discretion to establish
level of fines for violations. Mr. Hughes confirmed and stated the police department should let council
know what they are. Mayor Buelterman agreed. Mr. Hughes asked if the chief had any input on this at
the meeting. Ms. Doyle stated she doesn’t remember any discussions on fines or violations.
Shirley Sessions commented there was a list of State fines that had been reviewed.
Ms. Doyle asked if this needed to go back to the public safety committee one more time to review and
establish a fine structure.
Mayor Buelterman stated he trusted the police department could come up with something. This is not
without precedence and they could contact other communities to see how they do it. And make council
aware of it and if there is a need to make changes or corrections that can be done.
Bill Garbett stated they should be comparable to traffic fines. They are not going to be stopped for
speeding. Maybe stopped for running a stop sign.
Mayor Buelterman expressed concerns about underage drivers.
Bill Garbett confirmed carts would be allowed to go all the way down Jones. Mayor and Ms. Doyle
confirmed yes. Mr. Garbett stated that is going to cause some problems. Mr. Hughes stated one of the
things the committee did recommend is a crossing at Tybrisa. That is Hwy 80 and the DOT will not
approve a crossing because it doesn’t have a traffic light. However, just south of that is not Hwy 80 and
doesn’t require a traffic light. Mr. Wolff asked if it said Seventeenth St. south of Hwy 80. That is all we
need. Ms. Williams stated it says Hwy 80/Butler Ave south of the Park of Seven Flags.
Mayor Buelterman stated we can revisit this or approve it and amend it as necessary down the road.
A Motion by Ms. Doyle to approve was seconded by Paul Wolff.
Shirley Sessions commented if it becomes problematic we can revoke it or change it down the road.
Mr. Hughes stated he was going to rewrite it and bring back at the next meeting just to make sure he
had made all the changes from tonight. But it could still be approved tonight and revised.
Motion was amended by Ms. Doyle and seconded by Mr. Wolff to allow usage of carts on Jones Ave.
Kathryn Williams commented about addressing the reflection tape and parking. She also understood
Ms. Sessions’s concerns about Jones Ave but right now everything else can go down Jones, such as
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 17 of 24
bicycles with motors, etc so why discriminate against golf carts. Literally only those and skate boards
can’t go down Jones Ave.
Motion amended by Ms. Doyle and seconded by Mr. Wolff to have requirement of reflected tape
triangle removed and insert requirement of amber flashing light and parking requires paying meters or
purchasing a parking decal.
The vote was unanimous.
Mr. Garbett confirmed Mr. Hughes would be rewriting this with the changes. Mayor Buelterman stated
he would and if something was different than how council was voting it could be amended.
Mr. Hughes, City Attorney introduced and gave to Deputy Clerk an Ordinance change 2 Sec 66.7 on Go
Carts so there will be consistency between different ordinances on same topic. 1st and 2nd Reading will
be done at the second council meeting of May. This is to prevent any conflict between one other
ordinance that deals with this same topic and the new ordinance.
Mr. Hughes confirmed with council they had received an email where state legislature had made some
changes in the state law that deals with golf carts or motorized vehicles. Council confirmed receipt.
Mr. Hughes stated it will not be effective until July 1. It may not change a lot on what happens here but
nobody really knows, this is the first time they actually used the term “golf carts” but didn’t define it. So
council may see all of this again.
3. 2nd Reading Text Amendment, Land Development Code, Article 6, Sign Regulations
Continuation of 2nd Reading on 2/25/10
Mr. Lynn explained one of the hang ups on the last attempt at 2nd reading was how to address
“Temporary Signs” there was some discussion about compromise for sandwich board signs, the “A-
Frame” signs being allowed in front of businesses thru out the island. That is actually included under
“Exempt Signs” letter R on page 27 of council’s packet. That is the major change from the last version
council has seen. Where this would be allowed, they would be exempted only when they are located
in connection with a business location and do not encroach on the city right-of- ways, unless they are
specifically allowed. Where they would be specifically allowed is in South End Policies and Procedures
where they are allowed. On Tybrisa there is technically “private property” where they could put the
signs on so we had to allow them so those businesses did not get lost in the shuffle.
Wanda Doyle asked where it is located. Mr. Lynn answered page 27 of the packet letter “R”.
A Motion by Paul Wolff to approve was seconded for discussion by Wanda Doyle.
Mr. Garbett stated there are a few items in this version that he understood council had agreed to
change but aren’t. In section K, political signs, he had asked they not exceed sixteen square feet, a half
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 18 of 24
sheet of plywood. Mr. Lynn stated he remembered the discussion but did not remember the consensus
to change that, if so he apologized.
Motion amended by Mr. Wolff and seconded by Ms. Doyle to change sec K (b) political signs not to
exceed 16 sq. ft. in size.
Mr. Garbett stated he was still hung up on the temporary signs. He still does not see where staff has
solved his dilemma on the Tybee Beautification Yard of the Month signs, which the just of the ordinance
was to design the structure and where they could go. But there is not any attempt to direct what you
can put on the sign. Here we have real estate temporary signs are excluded. He does not personally
find real estate temporary signs offensive but maybe it is because he has grown used to them. But I
don’t understand why we can’t have the TBA Yard of the Month signs because they are typically the
same. He thought that was somehow going to be addressed.
Mayor Buelterman asked Mr. Lynn what he thought. Mr. Lynn responded in his non-legal schooling the
reason we…….……real estate and political signs have actually been challenged in court and have been
upheld. However, if we allow all temporary signs, or allowed non-profit signs then we would have to
allow all temporary signs then we would have to read the signs. It is one of those all or nothing
situations. He does not have heartburn about doing it, but if we allow it then other signs like “Buy our
Houses” or “Improve your Credit” will start popping up and we won’t be able to do anything about it.
Mr. Garbett asked if we could require things like metal signs. Mr. Lynn answered you can require any
kind of materials and all that but what is on the sign. Mr. Garbett stated you would still have to read the
sign to make sure it is a real estate sign by that. Mr. Lynn stated it is the same for a political sign. He
agreed completely.
Mayor Buelterman asked if anyone had gotten a complaint about a proliferation of signs like these on
Tybee. Mr. Lynn and several council members responded yes. Mayor Buelterman asked Mr. Lynn for
examples. Mr. Lynn answered signs such as “We Buy Ugly Houses” pop up on telephone poles and a
couple of weeks ago there was a rash of yellow signs all over the place. Some are put up over the week-
end. Mayor Buelterman stated he is worried about the same issue Mr. Garbett is. We are hitting people
we are not intending to hit. For instance, there have been incidents where there were lemon-aide
stands or garage sales and we are going and taking them down. He doesn’t know if we really want to do
that.
Ms. Doyle stated she is also glad Mr. Garbett brought this up because she has had concerns about
temporary signs since this was started. She has no problem with the Yard of the Month signs but if you
allow one temporary sign then you have to allow another temporary sign and she understands Mr. Lynn’
s point but she does not have a problem with temporary signs period. She doesn’t know what the
answer is. Mr. Lynn has worked hard on this and came up with the sandwich boards and that is good
but that still doesn’t help with the temporary sign issue.
Frank Schuman stated the signs should be exactly what they are “temporary” signs. Once the event has
come and gone they should be taken down. That is a lot of the problem. The signs are up too long, like
garage sale signs up two weeks past the sale. He agreed with Ms. Doyle. Temporary signs should be
there but when it’s done it’s done and should be taken up.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 19 of 24
Kathryn Williams stated that a few years ago the Tybee Arts Association had trouble putting up signs
advertising some of their performances and now they put them in yards and keep them out of the city
right-a-ways. She asked Mr. Lynn if under this code, they would be allowed. Mr. Lynn answered there
may be a little lead way there in terms of size you can have them in a residential area per sign. We kind
of look at the construction , if it is not on the little metal stick in the ground kick over, it is not a
temporary sign. So then you adhere to what is the maximum size of a sign in a residential area. Those
are the types of signs we don’t mess with. There are several out now around on the island and typically
unless they are on a tree, fence or right-a-way we don’t bother them. It would be the same under this
ordinance. That might be a way around that, is how the sign is constructed.
Kathryn Williams stated that would take care of the Yard of the Month signs. Mr. Garbett stated if we
could prohibit the little political signs and say it has to be made of 18 gage steel frame.
Mayor Buelterman stated if we can prohibit size of political signs then why can’t we put…………..Mr.
Garbett stated he is thinking about the ones like the little “we buy houses”, they are on the same
12”x18” signs on the cheap little flimsy metal stakes that are temporary political signs and they all do
become eyesores. Mr. Hughes suggested, and stated Mr. Lynn may or may not have a problem with
this, but if you look at section 60.40 for Exemptions of Signs that don’t require a permit, “D” is
decorative banners, flags, buntings for city wide celebrations, conventions, commemorations when
specifically authorized; you could add in and temporary signs specially authorized by the community
development director for a prescribed period of time. Define what the time is. Council should state
what temporary means, if it is weeks, thirty days, etc. When you go to 60.70 on prohibited signs, and it
has temporary signs excluding real estate and political campaign signs, add and those signs as provided
in 60.40 subsection “D”. Then Mr. Lynn can determine which ones are there.
Mr. Wolff stated he thought that would take care of the problem and would amend his motion. Mr.
Lynn asked to interject and if the allowed duration of time be 15 days, the same as what is allowed now
for a banner on the city post. Ms. Doyle and Ms. Williams reminded him the Yard of the Month is 30
days. Mr. Wolff stated it would be at Mr. Lynn’s discretion, he could set the time restriction. Mr.
Hughes replied it would be better for council to establish time and Mayor Buelterman suggested 30
days.
Motion amended by Mr. Wolff and seconded by Ms. Doyle to amend sec 60.40 (d) to add temporary
signs specifically authorized by the Community Development Director for a period of no more than 30
days and amend 60.70 to exempt those signs as included in Sec 60.40 sub section (d).
Vote was Wolff, Williams, Schuman, Doyle, and Garbett voting in favor and Sessions opposed.
Shirley Sessions asked if there were any current records or data on how many citations or signs that are
removed that are illegal in the past year. Mr. Lynn answered you could look outside his door and see
about 20 or 25 of the actual signs. In terms of citations staff tries not to do that, just remove the signs
and bring them to city hall. If it is a little hard to do that, if they are attached with screws, etc., we give
them a call and ask they be removed by the end of the day and most people have cooperated. We don’t
send people to court for that.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 20 of 24
Ms. Sessions stated she had received calls from citizens where they had been threatened with citations
for their yard sale signs. Mr. Lynn stated that is allowed under the City Marshal but he does verbally ask
them to take them down and could go to the next step but hasn’t. Ms. Sessions asked so if someone
has a sign out on the street and there is no phone # on it, it is ok. Mr. Lynn stated we don’t damage
them we just put them behind city hall and when they pick them up we ask that they don’t put them
back.
Consideration of Bids, Contracts, Agreements and Expenditures
1. T-Mobile Cell Tower Lease Agreement: Potential Revenue: $282,900.00
Budget#505-38-1002
Mayor Buelterman asked why we would think there would be another location for them to use
to put up their cell phone towers. Where else are they going to go? Ms. Schleicher stated on
top of Ocean Plaza or they could buy an empty lot and build another tower. Mayor stated they
would have to get our approval. Ms. Schleicher answered that would be hard to deny. Mayor
asked how long we had to give them an answer. Ms. Schleicher answered not a lot of time.
Mayor Buelterman stated we have a workshop coming up soon could we get more information
such as how much it may cost for them to build another one, and if they would want to do that
instead of just paying us a little more and how high they would have to go. Would other areas
or businesses give them enough height to be able to do want they need. He knows Ms. Hogan
has worked a lot on this and he doesn’t want to lose revenue, but he just doesn’t want to give
in to what they say will pass if we can get more money. Mr. Hughes stated he does not know
what the deadline is. Ms. Sessions asked if we have a contract with them. Mr. Hughes stated
we have a lease with them. They have a right to cancel under the lease and according to what
he had seen in an email they have given notice they are not renewing on this current five year
period. Which would mean the revenue would stop. They have a right to do that. That is not
renewing. They are asking us to give up the right to terminate the lease in exchange for them
giving basically a five year guaranteed revenue stream at an increased amount. Their letter
refers to having executed documents on the 14th. I didn’t communicate with them. If that is
the deadline for yes or no on the change we would have to address it tonight. Ms. Schleicher
stated they did anticipate there would be a meeting tonight and the fact that we really didn’t
have a whole lot of choice. We can talk with them tomorrow.
Ms. Sessions stated when we were looking at this at the beginning in consideration for the
consent agenda we were hearing the buzz word that we really didn’t have a choice in the
matter. But we actually do have choice. They are paying us less money, they want a longer
term and we are supposed to say sounds good to us. What happened to negotiations? Is there
anyone negotiation for the city? We may not be the only game in town, but they may not be
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 21 of 24
either. Don’t we have other cell carriers? Ms. Schleicher stated yes we have other carriers on
the tower that pay us leases. Ms. Sessions stated are they saying this is what we want and
there is no negotiations and we say ok or do we go back and let them know we want their
business and appreciate it but we would like to have………..
Mayor Buelterman stated according to an email May 14th but would imagine……. Ms. Schleicher
stated we have talked with them on the phone and basically they said in their current contract
they have the opportunity to cancel and they wanted to cancel or renegotiate and this is what
they were offering us. Ms. Sessions asked have we gone back to them. Mr. Wolff asked if we
have offered a counter offer. Mayor Buelterman stated the risk is the deadline and losing the
revenue. Mr. Garbett asked what the other carriers are paying. Ms. Schleicher stated it varies
because we had negotiated at different times with different carriers. It is public record and
they know what each other are paying and we don’t want them to pay less than what everyone
else is paying we want them to pay as much as everyone else. Mayor Buelterman stated this is
ten years, $28,000 a year. He suggested we call them tomorrow and say we have questions and
concerns and bring it up at the workshop. Ms. Schleicher agreed. Ms. Sessions asked for cost
comparisons to be done and maybe Ms. Hogan or finance has additional information. Ms.
Schleicher stated there had been phone calls back and forth.
Ms. Schleicher stated Monday is a workshop so can it be advertised as a meeting so if council
was ready to make a decision after more discussion that could be done. Mayor Buelterman
agreed and council was in agreement.
Kathryn Williams stated she knew T-Mobile wanted to retain their ability to terminate but they
do not want us to have that same ability. Ms. Schleicher answered right and we haven’t had
that before now. Mayor Buelterman confirmed this is all money going to water/sewer. Ms.
Schleicher confirmed.
Council deferred action until further review by staff and city attorney.
2. Memorandum of Understanding: State of Georgia Human Resources to allow the
city’s participation in the Georgians Back to Work Program. 80% subsidy to
employers who hire adults to work under this program for 6 months (6/1-9/30/10)
Ms. Schleicher stated she is not sure if this would be something we can use but we were contacted by
Atlanta and this is a program that if we do find we have hired after June 1 that fits the eligibility that we
can possibly use this program for six months and 80% of that employees wages could qualify for this
program. She asked council to consider executing the MOU and if we hire an employee that qualifies
and it could be up to two employees we could apply for the money if there is any left in the program.
The chances are very slim but she would like to at least have the MOU if we were lucky enough.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 22 of 24
Mayor Buelterman asked if there were any downsides to this. Ms. Schleicher answered no just
paperwork if we are lucky enough if the money is still there. Why not take advantage of the
opportunity. Ms. Sessions stated the United Way has used the program and the key is finding the right
employee same as with anywhere or anything you are doing. It can be challenging but it is great and we
should try it. Mr. Wolff asked if there were two specific positions in mind. Ms. Schleicher stated not
really. She wanted to do the MOU first and continue with same hiring practices and if we have an
employee that fits the criteria then apply for it. She figured she did not want to change the processes
we have now, if it fits we will use the process.
A Motion by Kathryn Williams to approve was seconded by Paul Wolff. The vote was unanimous.
City Manager Report
1. Budget Adjustment for paying expenses. $75,000 from budget line # 100-4210-551-
1100 and distributed as follows:
100-4250-52-2102 $29,000
100-4250-52-1201 $28,000
100-4210-52-2200 $18,000
Kathryn Williams recused herself due to part of funds being directed to drainage project on her
personal property.
Ms. Schleicher requested approval from council to move $75,000 from the public works
personnel line items and move it into some operating line items. Most of these line items have
to do with some drainage projects we are doing and with infrastructure we have had some
unforeseen things come up. When we had the budget hearings we had the cafeteria roof,
drainage easements on 14th Street and Chatham Ave. We also had the drainage study with the
MPC that we had to pay for. This will let us pay for those and Mr. Wilson in public works has
been very frugal and we have seen some savings in this department and we are able to make
this shift.
A Motion by Bill Garbett to approve was seconded by Shirley Sessions. Vote was unanimous.
2. Proposed Back River Pier Gate
Bill Garbett resumed the discussion from the constant agenda and stated he was worried about
locking the gate at night. We have not had any incidents reported to the police and knowing
fisherman like to fish during the proper tide cycles, certain hours, etc., he would not like to see
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 23 of 24
the gate closed. Diane Schleicher explained just because the gate is up it doesn’t mean it has to
be closed. Mr. Garbett said the gate has already been constructed but he does not think it
needs to be closed. Mayor Buelterman asked why have the gate, what is its purpose. Mr.
Garbett answered in case we did have to close it.
Ms. Sessions asked if we had current hours of use for that area. Ms. Schleicher answered no we
do not. When she discussed the gate with DNR they did not express any concerns about
limiting the hours of use at night. Ms. Sessions stated we do have hours of use on the pier and
in our parks. Would that be something we could try first instead of a gate? What the pier did
was put the gate up because of the hours of use and that may have been what caused the
increase of activity on the Back River pier because Chatham County pier has limited its use at
night. Ms. Sessions stated she had talked to some people at that pier and they had limited the
hours because of problems with people loitering, etc. Not necessarily with the people fishing.
Has there been a problem with disruptions? Has there been a mass of fishermen or women
going over there at night. She thinks doing the hourly thing would be better to start, and then
if that doesn’t work go for the gate.
Mr. Wolff stated if would be fine to post the hours but he had heard from several people that
live down there and it wasn’t the fisherman causing the problems it is kids hanging out and
partying. They have their windows open at night but they were too nice to call the police. They
said they didn’t want to do that. He understands that doesn’t create a record that can be
followed up on. But this is just a courtesy to the neighbors down there it might be fine since we
already have the gate to put a small nonintrusive sign that states “Closed at 9:00PM” or
whatever it is that coincides with the county pier.
Mayor Buelterman stated the people in that area need to be encouraged to call the police if
there are problems.
Kathryn Williams stated she felt council was still missing the point about fisherman. She does
not fish but is married to someone who does. Like Mr. Garbett stated, people fish seasonally
and in conjunction with the tides. When the tide is running there are large groups of people
out there. They are not making noise because they don’t want to run the fish off. She isn’t
opposed to putting the gate up because if there is a problem, and she hopes the police is
checking this area regularly because it is an isolated area and needs to be supervised, the gate
can be locked. Maybe look at locking it on the week-ends during the season. It is not necessary
to set hours and it is not necessary to lock it all the times and punish local fisherman because
teen-agers are not being properly supervised. That goes to another issue that needs to be
addressed at another time and that is parent accountability for their children. Having children
unattended, running loose and causing havoc in the neighborhoods. Ms. Williams stated she
would support having the gate up but not posting hours or locking it. Mayor Buelterman asked
for the motion.
Minutes prepared 06/02/10dw Page 24 of 24
A Motion by Kathryn Williams to approve installing gate but not locking it at night and not
posting hours of operation was seconded by Bill Garbett. The vote was unanimous.
Executive Session
A Motion by Paul Wolff to go into Executive Session to discuss, Personnel, Litigation and Real
Estate Acquisition, was seconded by Kathryn Williams. The vote was unanimous.
Adjournment
Jason Buelterman, Mayor
____________________________________
Vivian O. Woods, Clerk of Council