HomeMy Public PortalAbout20080604_PC_mtg_min
1
PLANNING COMMISSION CITY MANAGER
Libby Bacon Diane Schleicher
Demery Bishop
James P. Boyle PLANNING & ECONOMIC
Sandy Chandler DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
John Major, Vice Chair Brannyn G. Allen
Anne Miller
David Postle
Chuck Powell, Chair CITY ATTORNEY
Whitley Reynolds Edward M. Hughes
MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
June 4, 2008 – 7:30 p.m.
Chuck Powell called the June 4, 2008, Planning Commission meeting to order. Other Commissioners
present were: Libby Bacon, Demery Bishop, James Boyle, John Major, Anne Miller, David Postle, and
Whitley Reynolds. Absent was Sandy Chandler.
Chuck Powell clarified that there were no Minutes to be considered.
Chuck Powell called on City Attorney Bubba Hughes to comment about Disclosure. Hughes said that
they were dealing with proposals initiated by Staff or the City as opposed to an applicant, however,
under the City’s Ethics Ordinance if a Commissioner owned property within 500 feet of any of the
property that may be impacted by a proposed ordinance they would be subject to being recused from
that topic. He said that when that happens for Council and it was not a semi-judicial real property
decision, and these were not because they were not being initiated by an applicant, there was a
procedure for Council to deal with an appeal of a recusal. Hughes said that the Ethic’s Ordinance did not
have that provision for Planning Commission. He suggested if anyone owned property potentially
impacted by the North End Parks and Public Overlay or the South End Overlay they would be recused
from dealing with it. He said if any owned property potentially impacted by the Shore Protection
Ordinance, they should not be dealing with that. He said that he did not believe that recusal should be
required, but disclosure was. He said if they owned property in the South End Overlay district they are
recused from dealing with that. He said that if they are within 500 feet of that potential zone that needs
to be put on the record and disclosed.
The first order of business was a Shore Protection Ordinance, which, if adopted, would repeal Land
Development Code Section 5-010.J, Shore Protection with Variance Clause. John Major disclosed that
he owned property within 500 feet. Chuck Powell disclosed that he lived within 500 feet.
Bubba Hughes suggested the Commission go to a later item on agenda. This item was a proposal to
rezone from R-1 to EC the accreted property abutting or near Lighthouse Point Condominium
property, Van Horn Street and the waters of the State. Chuck Powell asked if anyone owned
property within 500 feet of the area proposed to be rezoned. There were no disclosures. Powell opened
the Public Hearing and read Land Development Code Section 4-050.J, EC Environmental-Conservation
District. Hughes said that the reason he asked that this be taken out of order was that it came up as a
result of discussions with Staff in conjunction with the Shore Protection Ordinance. He said it was his
recommendation that they not deal with this issue at this time. He said that the area was now, under the
2
proposed Shore Protection Ordinance, adequately covered, and after having spoken with representatives
of Captains Row and Lighthouse Point, going forward with the effort to rezone might create more
problems than working toward an agreement to put the property in a conservation easement. He said that
would be his recommendation to the Mayor and Council, and was his recommendation to the Planning
Commission. Hughes said it had been advertised for Public Hearing so they did need to entertain
comment. John Major asked the process for placing property in conservation easement. Hughes
explained the process. Libby Bacon asked why the adjacent area was not included. Hughes said that the
title for that property was different. Bacon spoke of accreted property on St. Simon’s. Whitley Reynolds
spoke of the uses allowed in an EC zone. James Boyle asked Hughes if the City had brought the
rezoning to his attention. Hughes said no; it was a proposal as a way of preserving the property and it
came up in the context of the Shore Protection Ordinance. He said that nobody on Council or the
Planning Commission asked him to do that; it was part of a way to protect it and to alleviate some of the
debate over the Shore Protection Ordinance. Boyle posed some potential issues with an EC zoning and
he said that he appreciated the direction Hughes was taking it. Major asked what could be done if the
property was put in conservation easement. Hughes said it would depend on the terms of the easement,
and the goal was to preserve the area in its natural state. Demery Bishop asked the timeframe of an
agreement. Hughes spoke of within 60 days knowing if they were not likely to have an agreement.
Powell asked for public comment. Pinckney Butler said he was president of the Captains Row
Homeowners Association. He asked how much notice the public had before a Public Hearing. Hughes
said that no less than 15 days nor more than 45 days, the property has to be posted for the Public
Hearing before the Mayor and Council. Butler asked if they notified property owners and adjacent
property owners. Hughes said there were different rules for proposals initiated by the governing
authority or if an applicant makes the application. He said they did have to publish notice and post the
property. Butler asked if parking lots were allowed under EC. Powell said no. Butler said that Captains
Row was willing to discuss what was best for the property. Mallory Pearce spoke in favor of the
property being placed in conservation easement. He spoke of it being a habitat for the Painted Bunting, a
declining bird species. He said the only development should be repair of the walkway. Speaking as chair
of the Tybee Island Land Trust, Pearce gave the procedure for placing property in conservation
easement. Cecil Delorme of Lighthouse Point said that the dune crossing was repaired this year at
Lighthouse Point’s expense. He referenced a ruling related to accreted property and he stated that
accreted property belongs to the person behind it. After speaking about ownership and maintenance of
the accreted land, Delorme said that land trusts charge money. Mallory Pearce said that the Tybee Island
Land Trust charges nothing. Powell called for a motion. Reynolds recommended no action due to the
City and adjoining property owners appearing to be solving the problem. Boyle seconded. The vote was
unanimous. The motion of taking no action passed.
Returning to the Shore Protection Ordinance, Chuck Powell asked for Staff comments. Bubba Hughes
said that the proposal was intended to be a work in progress. He said it was not advocated by anybody in
particular; it was brought up to get the issue back on the table. He said that since 2001 there have been
various versions. He said they adopted what was intended to be a temporary ordinance and ever since
that time have continued to work, with varying degrees of frequency, on this problem. Hughes said it
was not here with an intention that anything was carved in stone; it was here because this was what the
Public Hearings are for: to get the input, get the comments and concerns about what action should be
taken, if any. He said the City did the best it could do to make sure that people got notice that the issue
was back on the table. He said the proposed ordinance had been reviewed by DNR. He said the biggest
change from this and the first version in 2001, not the current ordinance, was that this adopts the State’s
definitions. He said that there was still some clarifying needed. Hughes said that one of the hardest parts
was the difference between a no-build area and a special review process. He said the only areas that are
no-build for structures are those within 10 feet of the toe of the dune or 18 feet of the existing seawall on
3
the front beach. After some further summarizing by Hughes, Brannyn Allen spoke of the three zones
that were developed with the guidance of DNR. She said the front beach zone was the easiest to work
with because of the two federal groins and the seawall. She said in that area, the no-build area or the area
where a variance would be required before any construction could take place was defined as 18 feet
from the seawall or 10 feet from the toe of the dune. She said that outside of either of those two areas
there was not a provision for special review in the front beach zone. She said there was a provision for
special review in the northern and southern zones. Allen said that in those two zones, where there was
no seawall or dune, at the guidance of DNR and after conference among Staff, it was decided that 250
feet from the ordinary high water line made the most sense as a starting point for special review. She
said that would not require a variance, it would be special review. She said they try to not put people
through the expense of engineering and architectural fees before they have a site plan reviewed. David
Postle said that there was a seawall on the northern end and on the south end. He said the majority of the
seawall on the north end could be scientifically tracked by the change in vegetation in aerial
photographs. He said he did not know if the locations of the northern or southern seawalls would be
close enough to become involved in this Ordinance. Powell said that the proposal referenced a seawall
in the south beach zone. He said that while that wording was not mentioned in the north beach zone, it
did reference areas where there was no seawall. Allen said that north end seawall information had been
shared with the City and they were looking into it. She said that was the whole purpose of Public
Hearings and that the Ordinance was a working document. Powell said he asked Lou Off, chair of the
Beach Task Force, to speak. Off gave a history of significant factors of the Tybee beach. Hughes said
that there was question about whether Powell and Major would be permitted to participate under the
recusal rule. He suggested that they deal with it the way that Council would deal with it: those that were
not recused should vote on whether or not those that were under recusal could participate. Boyle
motioned that Powell and Major be allowed to participate. Reynolds seconded. The six that voted were
all in favor of the motion. Postle asked if this process would be used anytime that recusal might be
mandatory on City government. Hughes said no, it only applied in certain instances. He said if it were a
semi-judicial real estate decision the procedure could not be used. Hughes said that anybody that
actually owned land subject to rezoning could not participate in the absence of a number of special rules.
Major spoke of a different version of the proposed ordinance going to City Council since the ordinance
was a work in progress. Hughes agreed. Various sections and possible language changes of the proposed
ordinance were discussed among the Commissioners and Staff. Powell opened the Hearing for public
comment. Mallory Pearce gave some historical background of the beach. He said he liked the 250-feet
for special review due to beach erosion. He said that a section that spoke of using the State line should
be changed because the State used trees. Ed Cawley presented aerial photographs of a portion of the
north beach zone taken at various times since 1938 that he said showed a seawall. Cawley suggested
adding to the educational, historic or cultural facilities exemptions section that those were exempt as
long as they continued to maintain their educational, historical or cultural functions. Powell closed the
Hearing and asked for a motion. Major motioned that the Planning Commission look at the revised
ordinance at their meeting on June 17 before it goes to City Council. Postle seconded the motion.
Reynolds said he did not think that was enough time. Bishop agreed. Major withdrew his motion. Postle
withdrew the second. Reynolds moved to continue until the August Planning Commission meeting.
Bishop seconded. Boyle said he would like to know how Tybee differed from DNR on the permitting
process and if there was a scientific process in place. Powell asked Boyle if he was asking for a
workshop. Boyle said yes. Powell called for the vote. The vote was unanimous to review the Ordinance
at the August 19th Planning Commission meeting. The motion to continue passed.
The next item was the North End Parks and Public Overlay Ordinance. Bubba Hughes explained
that an overlay goes over an existing zone. He said that the North End Parks and Public Overlay
Ordinance directed itself entirely to public property that was not used for what it was currently zoned
4
for. He said that the reasons for the ordinance were to correct that and to define what the property can be
used for. Hughes told the Commissioners if any of them owned property within 500 feet of the property
affected by the overly they needed to disclose that. There were no disclosures. Libby Bacon asked if an
overlay for the north beach parking lot and lighthouse was being considered. Brannyn Allen said it was
being considered and it was not included due to time. She said it made sense to split the North End Parks
and Public Overlay and an overlay for the parking lot and lighthouse into two zones because they are so
different. Whitley Reynolds asked about the prohibited uses in the proposed overlay. Allen said the list
of prohibited uses was based on some other ordinances and it tried to anticipate what might be proposed.
John Major asked the benefit of the overlay and how it would impact people that live in the area. Allen
said the benefit would be to bring the uses into compliance. She said it had been discussed since the City
bought the Campground. She said the impact on surrounding property owners was negligible because it
was City-owned property. Hughes said that the history went back before the City acquired the
Campground. He said the Campground was in an R-1 zone at the time and it was a nonconforming use
when it was privately owned. Hughes said that this ordinance was a combination of correcting that and
bringing in the other public uses in the area. James Boyle said that it seemed totally incorrect as an R-1.
He asked if the overlay included a dog park. Allen said it included passive and active parks. Libby
Bacon asked if text in the proposed Ordinance meant that a dog park or a Campground expansion would
need site plan review. Allen said it would be site plan review at the Staff level. She said the expansion of
the Campground had been under extensive review: two engineers, several contractors and lots of Staff
time. Bacon commended the City for the Ordinance. Chuck Powell asked for public comment. He closed
the Public Hearing and called for a motion. Boyle motioned to approve. Reynolds seconded. The vote
was unanimous. The motion to approve passed.
Chuck Powell opened the Public Hearing for the South End Overlay Ordinance. He and Anne Miller
disclosed that they lived within 500 feet of the district. John Major moved to allow Powell and Miller to
participate. Libby Bacon seconded. Six members voted in favor of the motion and none opposed. David
Postle said that the owner of a south end establishment, without encouragement, spoke to him about
rules and regulations coming out of City Hall that did not make a whole lot of sense on this overlay.
Postle asked if he was violating any rules by participating in the Public Hearing. City Attorney Bubba
Hughes said that it was not in violation of any rules; this was a legislative manner and they were entitled
to get information from any source. John Major asked why they were doing this, what would be the
impact, what would be different, and what the motivation was. Brannyn Allen said that Council adopted
Policies and Procedures that applied to the zone upon the completion of the streetscape improvements in
the area. She said the idea behind the ordinance was to protect and maintain the investment that the City
had made in that area. She said it also allowed for increased economic development opportunities for the
businesses by allowing for sidewalks cafés, sandwich signs and outdoor displays of merchandise. Allen
said that a sidewalk café or outdoor display of merchandise had to come through site plan approval and
be permitted as part of the business license. She said City Council waived the permit fee for the site plan
review for 2008 in an effort to be kind to the businesses that went through the pain of construction this
year. She said that the site plan and accompanying permit for any outdoor display or sidewalk café
would have to be renewed annually as part of the business license. Major asked how it might impact
people that live there. Allen said that it would not impact the residential uses; it was directed at
businesses. She said there had been discussion about changing the southern boundary, shifting it north to
the parcel lines of lots on the south side of Silver Avenue. Powell asked if it would keep the Hunter
House in the zone. Allen said that was open for discussion. Discussion followed of the proposed
ordinances, the overlay map, the South End Policies and Procedures, as well as suggestions for revisions
and corrections. Powell asked about the outdoor selling of merchandise versus outdoor display of
merchandise. Allen explained that business could not be transacted on the sidewalk. Anne Miller asked
why Cousin Vinnie’s Pizza was left out. Allen said they would consider any recommendations. Other
5
parcels were discussed. Allen said that the use and zoning were not changing. Discussion between the
Commissioners and Staff continued. Powell asked if anyone from the public wished to speak. Bill
Blakey asked about the line being moved to Silver Avenue rather than Seventeenth Street. Powell said
that he thought they intended to make that part of a motion. Powell closed the Hearing. Bacon motioned
to recommend adoption of the South End Overlay Ordinance with the line moving north from
Seventeenth Street to Silver Avenue, and encompassing the Hunter House and Cousin Vinnie’s. Miller
seconded the motion. The vote to approve was unanimous. The motion to approve as amended passed.
Ordinance 17-2008 was addressed next. It was to document and track the map amendments for the two
overlays that were voted on earlier. Amendments were discussed which would correct typographical
errors and would omit item 3, the accreted property. Demery Bishop moved to approve as amended.
James Boyle seconded. The vote was unanimous. The motion to approve as amended passed. Bubba
Hughes noted that the Zoning Map was in the room during this meeting and the overlay districts were
depicted on the projection screen.
The meeting adjourned.