Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20060221_PCMinutes 1 MINUTES Planning Commission Meeting February 21, 2006 – 7:00 p.m. Dick Smith called the February 21, 2006 Planning Commission meeting to order. Members present were Barry Brown, Sandy Chandler, Bill Garbett, Susan Hill, Honor Hutton, Gene Kindrick, Rachel Perkins, Chuck Powell, and Lawanna Tsoulos. Building and Zoning staff present: Dee Anderson, Chuck Bargeron, Warren Millikan, and Dianne Otto. Gene Kindrick motioned to approve the minutes of the January 17, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. Lawanna Tsoulos seconded. The vote to approve was unanimous. Mayor Jason Buelterman conducted a swearing in ceremony of Planning Commissioners Barry Brown, Sandy Chandler, Bill Garbett, Honor Hutton, and Chuck Powell. Dick Smith opened the floor for nominations of Chairperson. Rachel Perkins nominated Lawanna Tsoulos. Barry Brown seconded the motion. The vote to approve was unanimous. Dick Smith asked for nominations for Vice Chairperson. Barry Brown nominated Rachel Perkins as Vice Chairperson. Gene Kindrick seconded the motion. The vote to approve was unanimous. Dick Smith excused himself as Barry Brown thanked him for his outstanding service. Shell Solomon presented a Site Plan Approval petition for 802 First Street, PINs 4-0019-02-010 and 4- 0019-02-036, for a 4,565 square foot addition to an existing commercial building. Rachel Perkins asked which of the plans that had been submitted was being discussed. Lawanna Tsoulos told her the one dated February 13, 2006. Barry Brown asked if it was all office space. Solomon said yes. Tsoulos asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak in favor or in opposition to the petition. She declared the Public Hearing closed and asked for a motion. Solomon asked if he could speak. Tsoulos reopened the Public Hearing. Solomon asked if the plan called for planting trees. He said sooner or later the roots of the trees would go into the waster, sewer, underground utilities, and sprinkler system. Solomon said the lines serve six additional people to the west. He asked when that happened, who would be responsible for the repairs. He said there were 26 trees on the property. Solomon said the property has a couple of hundred feet of fence lined with flowers and trees. He said they have made efforts to beautify the property, and asking them to add any more green to it was overkill. He said he was willing to do whatever they make him do to get this accomplished, they need to move forward with the project, however, if they are going to require him to do certain things to his property what they were doing was going on record to require that anyone applying for a 12-foot addition to their house, or a 1.9% addition to the total piece of property, that has proportionately the same amount of green space or less, or has 26 oak trees or less, or four palm trees or less, or a 250-foot already-vegetated buffer or less, 5- to 15-feet of vegetation along that buffer – what they were doing was going on record that they were going to require anybody coming in with what he has, or less, to do the exact same thing. Solomon said he thought all they needed to do in the first place was to come and ask for Sketch Plan approval because they had no problem with the property. Perkins confirmed the plan showing three live oak trees was the one they were talking about. Solomon said yes. Susan Hill said it looked like there had been three revisions, and the property was kept beautifully, and the one or two things that had not been addressed would be taken care of by the time it got to City Council. She said she thought this was great. Solomon said whatever the Planning Commission makes them do, he wants to make sure they make everybody else do. Mark Boswell asked Hill which comments had not been approved. Hill said item number 3. Boswell said she should have gotten a letter that night. Hill said she had not read it and that was why she had said that she knew it would be taken care of. Boswell said it was done. Hill said that was great. Gene Kindrick made a motion to approve. Sandy Chandler seconded the motion. Perkins said it was a very good Site Plan and it did show three live oak trees being planted. She said the Code requires a certain distribution of trees, one every 4,500 square feet, and the one corner was bereft of trees. She said she wished all Site Plans would come in like this one and address the deficiencies of the site. The vote to approve was unanimous. Phil O’Dell presented a Sketch Plan for Site Plan Approval for 1605 Inlet Avenue, PIN 4-0008-17-001. This was for relocation of the former No. 1 Chinese Restaurant building from 601 First Street. O’Dell said the building would be moved to the empty lot between the 7-Eleven and Arby’s. O’Dell provided an aerial 2 photograph of the site showing the footprint of the building, which the Planning Commission passed around. Chairperson Tsoulos told the Commissioners they did not have the drawing. O’Dell said it had come in about an hour prior to the meeting. Tsoulos told O’Dell that at the Agenda Meeting, which he did not attend, they had decided to treat this as a Sketch Plan. O’Dell said he did not know what that meant. Anderson said O’Dell would have to return to the Planning Commission to go through the Site Plan process if City Council approves the Sketch Plan. Bill Garbett asked if the relocated restaurant would be a drive-in. O’Dell said no, just a walk-in, hopefully an ice cream/hot dog place or something like that. Chuck Powell asked if O’Dell planned to move the building prior to approval of the Site Plan. O’Dell said the move has been approved, to this site, on a temporary basis if this does not get approved. Sandy Chandler said the schematic that had been passed around showed one of the projections off the front of the building crossing the property line. O’Dell said that was just a line and would not be there. Barry Brown said part of the building crossed the property line. O’Dell said this was a commercial lot abutting a commercial area so it does not have a 5-foot setback. Chandler said that was not what they were talking about. Brown said the building was setting across the property line. O’Dell said no it does not. Brown asked him to look at the drawing. O’Dell said he knew what Brown was looking at, the two lines on either side, and those were not going to be there. He said he guessed they used the line of the building, and the footprint of the building was within the property boundaries. He said they put parking on there although they do not need parking. O’Dell said they could put parking or green scape, whichever they want. Rachel Perkins said the whole front was metered parking now and it was very much needed. O’Dell said the back was not metered and employees would come in the back. Anderson said there were no parking requirements for a take-out restaurant. Perkins asked what was being voted on. Anderson said O’Dell would have to come back with engineering plans. O’Dell said they have some engineering, and the building was hurricane proof. Barry Brown motioned to approve the Sketch Plan. Gene Kindrick seconded. The Commissioners confirmed with Anderson that from the time the final Site Plan gets approved O’Dell has 30 days. Anderson said the main thing was to keep O’Dell from just sitting it there and not doing anything with it. Brown said this was what Council has been wanting. Garbett said it was a great place to put it. Perkins said it could be an attractive addition, and there are certainly concerns because the lot drops very low and the engineers are going to have to work on that. She said it was an exciting project. The vote to approve was unanimous. Bernie Goode presented a Zoning Variance petition for 503 Seventh Street, PIN 4-0005-15-015. Goode said he hoped the Commissioners had looked at the memo he wrote after the Agenda Meeting. The Commissioners passed around photographs that Goode gave to them. Goode said in 1990 he inherited lot 182 from an aunt. He said she was given the lot in 1938 and paid taxes on it for over 50 years until she died, and it looked like he was going to do the same thing. He said he decided he was going to do something. He said if it could not be put into private use it needs to be put in the public domain. Goode said he bought lot 181 when it became available. He said by 1982 he had the Corps of Engineers okay, the DNR okay, and the only problem was he had no access. Goode said the City, through a large measure, was the reason. He said the City quit claimed the Fifth Avenue right of way all the way from Sixth Street to the lots in 1968. He said he was sure the logic was that the people could get to the lots by coming up the Fifth Avenue right of way from Eighth Street. Goode said that in those days you might have been able to do that but today it was all wetlands. He said furthermore the City dug ditches around two sides of the property and that required that he have a bridge to get to it. He said the main problem was that he did not have a way to get to it by coming down the Fifth Avenue right of way. Goode said the person that owns the piece that he needed where it crosses Seventh Street prefers that Goode not use his land. He said he finally had the opportunity to solve the problem by buying lot 180, which fronts Seventh Street. He said the only permit really needed was one from the DNR to cross the ditch. Goode said DNR told him he had to start over with wetland delineation. He said he paid another $1000 to have it surveyed and got it verified, and the DNR told him he could not apply until he had the City of Tybee send them a letter saying he was complying with all the zoning ordinances. He said that was last month, and when he approached the Zoning Administrator he learned for the first time that the City had passed a new ordinance last year – the Erosion and Sedimentation Control ordinance. Goode said that led to why he was seeking a variance to occupy the 25-foot buffer. He said that after he gets the variance he still has to get a soil and sedimentation control permit and that was where he will have to prove that he can protect the marsh by being within the 25-foot buffer, and all the land disturbing was subject to that new permit requirement. He said if he cannot demonstrate that he can protect the marsh sufficiently the City has every right to deny that permit. Goode said this variance was just the first step in dealing with the 3 City. He said this was higher marsh that comes on all four sides if you count the ditches that the City dug on two sides so there was no way he could stay out of the buffer. He said the only time the tide gets into these wetland areas was when it was a Spring high time or a wind-driven high tide. He said most of the trees are going to be saved; only the trees in the footprint or the driving areas will have to be taken out. Goode said that if his request was denied the value of the property will plunge and the dreams of he and his wife will be destroyed. He said the buffer ordinance came in after he had made substantial investments of money and time, and after he had obtained all the necessary state and federal approvals. Goode said there was no economic use that can be made of this property if this variance was denied, which sounded to him like the very definition of a hardship. He said he felt fairness and compassion are as good of reasons for a variance. He said he was not trying to build an investment, vacation, or rental house. Goode said he wants to build a single-family home for himself and his wife to live in. He said he was not building the house in the marsh; he was building by the marsh. He said 92% of the lot would be left in its natural state. Goode said a variance to occupy the buffer would allow him to get to the permitting phase of the new land disturbing ordinance where he will have the chance to either convince the City that his proposed home and driveway will have minimal impact on the marsh or the City can deny his application. Sandy Chandler said he went to the site and it looked like it was a series of small hammocks separated by wet marsh. Goode asked Chandler if he saw the PVC pipe marking the corners of the proposed house, and there was no marsh anywhere in that footprint. Chandler said yes he saw it, and the marsh was coming from all sides. Goode told Chandler he would be glad to meet him there and show him. Barry Brown said that at the Agenda Meeting the Commissioners had asked Goode to have Whitley Reynolds draw in the 25-foot buffer lines. Goode told Brown if he could figure out a way to put that on there where it had any meaning he would be glad to take a look. Dee Anderson said the whole house was in the buffer. Brown asked if part of the house was beyond the jurisdiction line. Goode said part of the house goes into what was called a Corps of Engineers only JD line. Goode said that was a low area that he has asked the Corps how they designated it because DNR said both in 2000 and last year that it was not a marsh – that it does not have sufficient vegetation to be labeled a marsh. Goode said the same was true as far as the Corps needing vegetation to designate it wetland, so he was asking what it was. He said he does not dispute this jurisdiction but he did dispute whether or not it was a wetland, and he has been waiting for a month to get an answer. Brown said he believed the Corps delineates by elevation of ground. Goode said no, he does not think they used elevation, and he spent 34 years in the Corps and he never knew that contours were used. He said he does not dispute that it was jurisdiction and on the telephone they said they are probably going to call it a non-tidal wetland. He said he knows it’s tidal. He said he did not think it was wetland but he was not going to dispute it. Goode said if they call it a wetland and Tybee calls it a wetland in spite of DNR not, if that was the only thing that separates him from getting a variance he will figure out a way to stay out of it. Bill Garbett asked if DNR had the Elevation Certificate when they delineated. Goode said yes. Garbett said the 6-foot elevation was actually below the estuary boundary. Goode said their policy was that the landowner could either ask that the contour be used or the vegetation be used. He said that did not even ask him which he preferred; they chose to use vegetation. Goode said that the 6 feet was above the mean tide level, not above low water so that would mean like a 12-foot tide. He said that he did not think that was right anyway, but vegetation was the best way to define the wetlands. Garbett said actually the elevation would be the best way to define the wetland because that was when they could establish what the regular fluctuations of the tide were going to do. Goode said he has been working in wetlands for 31 years and almost everybody in the business uses vegetation, soils and hydrology, and not contours. He said wetlands could occur on the slopes. Garbett said the entire project was within the 25-foot buffer and a substantial portion of it was within jurisdictional wetlands. Goode questioned ‘a substantial portion.’ Goode said if they would like a condition of him staying out of that, he would accept that and figure out a way to do it. Garbett asked Goode how much fill would he need and what elevation would he bring the site up to. Goode said he had not worked out that detail; he would be putting some fill. Garbett asked if that would expand the area that intrudes on the marsh. Goode said it would slope down about 2 feet. He said if the Commissioners wanted to condition their approval he will figure out a way to do it. He said what was important was not that the fact that he was in the buffer, but will that intrusion into the buffer cause any measurable harm to the marsh. Goode said if it would, deny the permit that he needs next; if it won’t, he thinks he was entitled to the permit. Honor Hutton said Tybee was the local issuing authority so Tybee was responsible but the plans would still go to the NRCS to make sure we are abiding by those buffer requirements that all areas are required to meet. Anderson said it had always been that you had to get permission from the state, and now you have to get permission from Tybee. Goode said it was not NRCS, 4 it was EPD or DNR. Hutton said these are State waters. Brown asked how wide was the proposed house. Goode said 30 feet. Brown asked the depth. Goode said 34 feet, not including the front porch. Brown asked if it would be possible to pull the house forward. Goode said the setback in the front was 25 feet and was needed for turning radius. He said that could be reduced, and he could cantilever the screened porch and drive under it. Brown motioned to approve with discussion. Gene Kindrick seconded. Brown said there were ways to do it with environmentally friendly pilings, pervious material under the house, and limiting the fill. He said the land would not have to be flat in order to drive under the house. Rachel Perkins said they were talking about the integrity of the edge of the marsh, and these lots may be unbuildable and may need to be in the public domain. Garbett said the project was surrounded on all four sides by marsh, and it was not appropriate use for a lot like this. Brown said as he comes forward he has higher elevations. Chandler asked how the drainage was going to be. He said he did not see any way to build without runoff into the marsh. Goode said all of those things would be addressed during the sediment control permitting. Brown said he could self-contain his own drainage with an underground storage where no runoff goes into the marsh. Voting to approve were Brown and Kindrick. Voting against were Chandler, Garbett, Hill, Hutton, Perkins, and Chuck Powell. Chairperson Tsoulos told Goode the petition would go to City Council on March 9, 2006. Vince Merkle presented a Site Plan Approval petition for 11-A Second Avenue, PIN 4-0003-15-009. Merkle said the request was to operate their home as a Bed & Breakfast. He said there were five off-street parking spaces. Chairperson Lawanna Tsoulos asked Merkle if this would be a commercial or a residential B&B. Merkle said commercial. Gene Kindrick asked what was the difference. Dee Anderson said a commercial B&B can hire a manager and the owners do not have to live there. He said the owners must occupy a residential B&B. Rachel Perkins asked where the commercial zone ends in relation to this site. Merkle said he did not know. She said there was a buffer requirement and since it was a duplex there was no buffer. Kindrick asked if there was a B&B across the street. Merkle said yes. Susan Hill asked about the parking. Merkle said two spaces were under the house and three are in front of the house. Hill said a sign design needed to be submitted. Merkle said this was the first he had heard of that. Hill said the B&B sign across the street has lights. Merkle said he would not do that. He said he would have something small. Perkins asked what the view was there. Merkle said the ocean could be seen from the upper deck. Perkins asked if a 6-foot wall could be put up between the upper porches. Merkle said they could do that. Hill asked how many bedrooms there were. Merkle said three bedrooms and three baths. Hill asked if it they had used it as rental property before. Merkle said no. Audience member Steve Coleman spoke in favor of the petition. Sandy Chandler motioned to approve. Barry Brown seconded. Bill Garbett asked if the 6-foot buffer was included in the motion. Chandler amended the motion to approve conditional on Merkle meeting the Code with 6-foot privacy walls. Chandler said a buffer was needed. Brown seconded the amended motion. Hill requested a sign design and letter of agreement from the owner of 11B Second Avenue. The vote to approve was unanimous. Sam Liberti of Low Tide Designs presented a Site Plan Approval petition for Tommy Reese for 8 Seventeenth Street, PIN 4-0008-06-035. This was for a 3-unit condominium building. He said they were not asking for any variances. He said the residential driveway would be 25-feet wide at the right-of-way, and there would be parking spaces for six cars underneath and three in the driveway. Sandy Chandler said this property came up before and the width of the property was not what was shown on these plans. Liberti said he had Whitley Reynolds resurvey the site to make sure. He said there was a discrepancy and the numbers on the site plan are correct. Rachel Perkins asked the dimensions of the supports. Liberti said they were 12 by 16 piers. Perkins said three cars abreast at nine feet for each parking stall was 27 feet. She said then when we add the two pillars in between it would exceed the footprint. Liberti said no, the footprint would not exceed the setbacks. Perkins said it does not work out. Brown said the pillars were only on the perimeter of the building. Perkins said the edge of the lot was deeply vegetated and the drainage plan showed 100% of the water going in the ground and out to swales. She asked if it was possible to plant in the swales. Liberti said what they were trying to doing was a containment system. He said there would be some landscaping. Perkins asked if it was possible to do some significant plantings. Liberti said he would have to ask, and because of pipes and gravel it could not be anything with deep roots. Brown motioned to approve. Kindrick seconded. Susan Hill said the Land Development Code stated that a Site Plan, if it meets all the requirements, was intended as a tool for public information. Perkins said one of the situations with the Land Development Code was that there were no planting, tree or 5 green space requirements. The vote to approve was unanimous. Chairperson Tsoulos told the petitioner he would go before City Council on March the 9th. Steve Coleman presented a Zoning Variance petition for 8 Second Avenue, PIN 4-0003-17-009. The request was for 2.5 feet into each side setback for the construction of a handicap accessible single family home. Coleman said this was a 45-foot, substandard lot. He said the existing house has a 10-foot front setback and the plans were to set the new structure with a 20-foot front setback. Susan Hill asked if he was going to move the existing structure. Coleman said yes, three people want it. Coleman said the lot floods now so there was no need for a drainage plan. He said there was no runoff from the yard going anywhere else. Dee Anderson said Coleman would have to do a drainage plan before he gets a building permit. Gene Kindrick asked if someone in the home or a family member was handicapped. Coleman said a good friend could not be accommodated very well when he comes to the current home, and elderly friends were unable to do the stairs. Kindrick said on the second floor none of the doors are 36-inches wide except the laundry room. Coleman said that was the reason he was asking for the variance, and even with the variance it was hard to put 3-foot doors in there. Rachel Perkins asked what glulam meant. Coleman said it was a pre-engineered beam that carries a lot of weight and can span distances. Bill Garbett said he did not see the hardship imposed by the lot. Coleman said with the elevator it just does not work without using the side setbacks, plus there will be more yard space with the 20-foot front setback. Kindrick moved to approve. Hill seconded. Barry Brown said he has built several houses 25-foot wide and you can accommodate these things in a 25-foot house. Perkins said this was a small lot and needs a smaller house perhaps. Voting to approve were Sandy Chandler, Hill and Kindrick. Opposed were Brown, Garbett, Honor Hutton, Perkins, and Chuck Powell. Chairperson Tsoulos told Coleman that he would go before City Council on March the 9th. Carrie Efird and Amy Gaster presented a Site Plan Approval petition for 1010 Highway 80, PIN 4-0026-11- 004. This was for an office building. Sandy Chandler asked if the porch on the south side of the proposed structure was in the 25-foot buffer zone. Efird said yes, it was a 2-story balcony but not enclosed. Chandler asked if there was any way to move it forward. Efird said not and meet the parking requirements and the turn-around radius, and they are having to relocate a storm water drain from Highway 80 that runs on the east side of the property so they have an additional setback required which pulled the building in 5 feet. She said there was also parking under the building, and they meet the parking requirements based on square footage. Rachel Perkins asked about the drainage plan. Downer Davis said Mark Boswell had addressed the critical issues and the Site Plan before the Commissioners would work. He said regarding the deck in the buffer, in a similar project the EPD did not consider it a variance if you did not excavate and used drilled pilings. Susan Hill asked if the building was to be used for commercial offices. Efird said yes. Hill thanked them for the front and real elevation plans and the landscape plan. Chuck Powell asked if they needed approval from DNR for the balcony. Boswell said DNR had verbally given their blessing on where the DNR line was marked at the jurisdictional line. Dee Anderson said DNR would not look at it until Tybee approves it. Boswell said DOT has given a verbal okay for everything that has been submitted but there was nothing in writing from them yet. Barry Brown asked if they would consider cantilevering the back porch. Efird said they would consider it. Boswell said the way the piers were under the building for the parking he did not think they could cantilever off that side. Anderson said Tybee’s rules are for anything in the buffer even if it was cantilevered. Efird said they removed some structures that were in the buffer and an antiquated septic system, and there will be green space there. Boswell said the encroachment would probably depend on how City Council interprets that. He said he would like to think that Council would get some guidance from the DNR. Bill Garbett said it extends 8 feet into the buffer. Boswell said DNR likes the buffer area to be a transition area, but this was a very low quality buffer area because it was the yard and then it drops off to the bulkhead so there was no transition filtering the water going to the marsh. Garbett said he disagreed; it was a vegetative buffer right now. He said he likes the plan but it encroaches into the buffer and was contradictory to the City Code. Lawanna Tsoulos asked if they needed a variance. Anderson answered yes for the deck to go into the 25-foot buffer. Perkins said the landscape plan was a quality plan, however they do need to put in five native trees. She said the buffer was not in good condition and rather than a porch, there should be vegetation. Boswell said he hated to plant something there and it get whopped off for the power lines. Perkins recommended wax myrtles. Garbett said now there was a culvert. Boswell said it was in an illegal spot and they are going to put the culvert in a legal easement. Efird said it was an additional expense. Brown asked about sewer. Boswell said it was being surveyed now and the survey will be given to the 6 City. He said a design and route have not been picked yet. Brown asked if it was a peat moss system. Boswell said they do not work well and are ugly, and they do not have the land to spare for it. Brown asked if they wanted to proceed and build with the assumption that they are going to get sewer. Efird said yes, and when they purchased the property they had no idea they could not build there so now they are into cost sharing with the City. She said they are committed to this project and want to move forward. Brown said it could be built and be empty; a Certificate of Occupancy would not be issued until connected to the sewer. Efird said let’s not talk that way. She said it could, but they need to tweak the plans and they are 10 months out. Boswell said they are trying to get Tybee to privatize the design of the sewer system because that would cut down on the time. Brown said there could be a substantial investment but no C.O. on the building. Efird said they just want to get the process going so they are not spending more money designing plans that would not work or get approved. Chuck Powell asked if they were willing to do away with the DNR setback encroachment. Efird and Boswell said they did not realize there had been a process change. Anderson said Tybee took over the permitting. Gaster said she was under the impression it was a minor disturbance since there was nothing to be built on the ground and they were essentially asking for six piers in the buffer zone and that could more than likely be granted quite easily. Boswell said that was why he was hoping they would defer to the DNR for some help because before as long as you did not put power machinery in the buffer they were okay with it. Tsoulos asked if the Planning Commission was approving a variance. Anderson said yes. Efird said if they have to remove the deck, they have to, but they prefer not to. Gaster said the entire building was in the setbacks and the only thing that would be out of the setbacks was the overhang and six pilings. Perkins moved to approve with no deck in the 25-foot buffer and native trees planted. Powell seconded. Perkins said this was going to come up again and again and again, and she wanted to know if it was possible to cantilever over the marsh. Brown said it has been done. Seven Commissioners voted to approve. Brown voted in opposition. Chairperson Tsoulos told them they would go before City Council on March the 9th. An Amendment to Amend the Code of Ordinances, Section 3-090 of the Land Development Code was discussed. It was a proposal to limit the buildable area. Chairperson Lawanna Tsoulos said the amendment would be island-wide. Sandy Chandler asked if it was right to require that taxes be paid on property that you are denying people the use of, and that this was taking. He said this was further eliminating possibilities for properties held for generations. Chandler asked if it would make some properties substandard lots of record. Barry Brown said it creates substandard lots all over the island. Tsoulos asked if it would change the size of a lot. Anderson said yes. Brown said this was taking of land. Bill Garbett asked if anyone had a specific example of a lot that would be affected by this. Brown said all the marsh lots. Garbett said the buffer setback provides adequate protection to the marsh. He asked the purpose of this proposal: to protect the marsh or to restrict density. He said there are situations where some lots have been gerrymandered in such a way that irregular pieces have been put together to come up with a larger project. Garbett again asked if anyone had a specific example in mind, and he asked if this was a big problem that they need to address. Brown said he had no idea where this came from. Rachel Perkins said an example might be at Lazaretto Creek where they wanted to build a number of condominiums. She said she agreed that the marsh buffer was strict enough. She said if a lot was not buildable it should not be taxed as a buildable lot. Chuck Powell said we have enough Codes and Ordinances in place, and that was adequate for addressing the issues. He said this seemed to put in an additional restriction that they may not need, and they may get in trouble with some property owners. Audience member Ruth Verbunt said that in the proposals of all these text amendments she would like to understand the visual impact. She said she would like to see a map of Tybee Island now and a map of Tybee Island after these proposed text amendments so they could see exactly who was impacted, what percentage of the island was impacted, so there was no guessing or wondering. She said if there was provision in Georgia for the devaluation of property she would sure like to know it. Verbunt said part of the Planning Commission’s responsibility was telling the citizens what the impact was. She said if you are making such proposals you should have City employees or a private contractor research, and not be speculating. She said it really was quite unfair as a taxpayer to get up one morning and realize you are part of a speculative venture that the City if proposing. Chandler said the Planning Commission was not proposing this Amendment. Verbunt said it was not time to vote at all; it was time to do research and report the answer to the question ‘what was the impact of this on citizens of Tybee lot by lot.’ She said was would like to see a map and she would like to see it color coded and she would like to see it in the public vestibule of this building where she can come and study it as a citizen, resident and taxpayer. Tsoulos said in clarification that City Council or a City Council Member puts these items on the agenda 7 generally. Verbunt said there seems to be no mechanism for you all to fall back on to inform us of the impact. She said right now she was caught up in the middle of an impact venture that came in out of the blue because a City Council Member, whomever that was, proposed it and voted on it and there was no impact study done. She proposed it was a good use of our tax dollars to hire it if we do not have the information, someone who can illustrate the impact. She said she would like to see a map out in the lobby. She said she wanted to see the facts, a map, and the quantitative impact on Tybee before any vote was taken. Audience member Dick Smith asked what the purpose was of this. He said if the purpose was to protect the marsh, we have that already in the Code. He said if the purpose was to protect the dunes, we have the mechanism within the Ordinance to do that. He said this was highly wrong and serves no purpose whatsoever. Smith said that for the last three years we have been talking about recodification of the Ordinance. He asked if it was completed. Dee Anderson said it was three weeks out. Smith said they keep every month [adding] two to four amendments to the Land Development Code that would not be included in the recodification. He said what they were doing was paying for a recodification that was going to be outdated by the time they get it. He suggested that the Commissioners consider suggesting to City Council that they impose a moratorium. He said they are famous for imposing moratorium. He said let’s impose a moratorium on any more amendments to the Land Development Code until you understand what you have got. He said the Land Development Code was an extremely difficult document to understand. Perkins gave an example of a fictitious marsh lot and the number of duplexes that could be built on it under various scenarios. She said the setbacks are adequately protecting us. Brown said if it does not meet the requirements of the setbacks you could not build there anyway. Perkins said she agreed that the current setbacks are helping, and she was just illustrating the impact. Gene Kindrick asked if they could get anything from City Council on what they had in mind and who wrote it. Council Member Shirley Sessions spoke from the audience and said she had no idea. Dee Anderson said that now if you have a 6,750 square foot lot, counting the marsh, it would be big enough to build a duplex, but with this amendment change if only 4,000 square feet was high ground, you no longer could build a duplex; you would only be able to build a single family. Susan Hill asked who wrote this proposed Code Amendment. Anderson said it came from City Council. Council Member Wanda Doyle spoke from the audience and said she had not see this and did not know where it came from. Anderson said it was brought up at a Council meeting in January and they asked that it be put on the Planning Commission’s Agenda. Audience member Cheryl Sardowski asked if it was brought up at a Council meeting how did these Council Members not know about it. Tsoulos asked if it was in the Minutes. Anderson said yes and he would pull the Council Minutes tomorrow. Council Member Paul Wolff spoke from the audience and said it was his recollection that they voted to send this to the Planning Commission for discussion. He said it was something worth considering and the gist of it was to keep the marsh front from being overdeveloped by allowing duplexes where the actual high ground could only accommodate a single-family home. Verbunt said an impact study was what was needed. She said until an impact study was done on every property owner on the island, it should be tabled. She said the funding for an impact study was worth the investment. Chandler asked Verbunt if she understood that the Planning Commission was an advisory body only to City Council. Verbunt said certainly you could advise City Council to commission an impact study. Brown motioned to not approve. Kindrick seconded. The vote was unanimous. An Amendment to Amend the Code of Ordinances, Section 4-050 of the Land Development Code was discussed. It would require a 60-foot minimum lot depth in the C-1 zone. Chairperson Lawanna Tsoulos said a team from the Department of Community Affairs was coming in March to address some of these issues. She asked if there was any discussion of the Amendment. Rachel Perkins said that during the 90- day moratorium there were brainstorming sessions and that was where some of these came from. She said Council did enact the minimum lot size requirement of 1,125 square feet in C-1, and that might take care of some of these other issues. Perkins said maybe they need to slow down and let the DCA team give them some advice. Brown asked if it would be appropriate to discuss the C-1 stuff when there are lawsuits being filed. Tsoulos said they could discuss it and it had been advertised. She said they could vote to continue it until the DCA team comes and goes, they could vote to deny it, or they could vote to approve it, so they have some options. Audience member Ruth Verbunt asked for a definition of DCA. Tsoulos said the Department of Community Affairs. Verbunt asked if that was the State of Georgia. Tsoulos said it was. Verbunt asked if they were coming from Atlanta. Tsoulos said they were coming from various parts of the State. Verbunt asked who they are and when are they coming and what are they going to do. Council Member Paul Wolff spoke from the audience and explained that they are the DCA 8 Quality Growth Resource Team and they are coming from various parts of the State. He said the team would consist of planners, architects, engineers, a lawyer, and the team will address ten questions that were submitted to them after requests from Planning Commission, Council, and public workshops. Wolff said the first meeting, which will be open to the public for input, would be Monday, March 6 at 7:00 p.m. in the gym. He said he hoped everyone would come and get involved in the process. He said they would spend a week here helping us to plan for the future of the island. Susan Hill said this Amendment went to City Council and they referred it back to the Planning Commission. She said that was why the City Council meeting Minutes were attached. She said they needed to either wait for the DCA team or develop another subcommittee. Brown motioned to continue. Gene Kindrick seconded. The vote to continue was unanimous. An Amendment to Amend the Code of Ordinances, Section 3-080 of the Land Development Code was discussed. It would change the number of parking spaces required per unit. Chairperson Lawanna Tsoulos said this came from the C-1 Subcommittee. Barry Brown said City Council passed the 1,125 square feet. He asked if they were putting more restrictions on C-1. Dee Anderson said City Council approved the 1,125 and asked that the Planning Commission do further research on the three parking places per unit idea. Tsoulos said part of the problem was that it states you could not park in the setbacks. Brown said you could park in the setbacks but not use them to meet off-street parking requirements. Susan Hill said somewhere along the line the wording got messed up. Brown asked if it was directed at C-1 only. Hill said it was supposed to have been. She said this failed here, failed at Council, and she thought it was a dead point. Hill said they could put it in with the 60-foot minimum lot depth and see what happens. Brown asked where the 60-foot lot depth came from. Hill said the map was used and it was determined that most lots were at least 60 feet deep. Brown said City Council approved Brass Rail. Rachel Perkins said she thought you could do commercial stuff in a 20- or 25-foot deep lot, maybe a seasonal kiosk, beach business type stuff. She said the biggest parking problem seems to be in the residential neighborhoods with the rental properties. She said the 1,125-rule should help solve some of the parking situation in C-1. Brown asked how many have registered to rent their properties. Hill said they are working on that. Gene Kindrick motioned to deny. Perkins seconded. The vote was unanimous. Chairperson Lawanna Tsoulos suggested either setting up a subcommittee or calling a meeting earlier than the Planning Commission’s Agenda Meeting to look at developing a Code of Ethics. A sample of the Macon County Code of Ethics had been given to the Commissioners. It was decided to bring suggestions to a meeting a 6:00 p.m. on March 21st. Bill Garbett asked if City Council would have a Code of Ethics also. Tsoulos said Council was establishing an Ethics Committee. Chairperson Lawanna Tsoulos said the Commissioners might have an opportunity to meet with a member of the DCA team for training. Tsoulos said she would schedule it. Deputy City Marshal Warren Millikan discussed the Land Disturbing Activity permitting. Chairperson Lawanna Tsoulos said land-disturbing activity used to be permitted by the EPD but would now be permitted by the City of Tybee. Chuck Powell said DNR would still be responsible for delineations. Millikan confirmed that this discussion was for public notification. He said that before building permits could be issued, if there was going to be any land disturbing activities a permit for it must also be obtained. Rachel Perkins asked if periodically the Planning Commissioners could have sessions to train each other in their various areas of expertise. Chairperson Lawanna Tsoulos said they would try to have workshops. Gene Kindrick motioned for adjournment. Barry Brown seconded. The vote was unanimous.