Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20130917_PC_Minutes.pdf 1 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY MANAGER Demery Bishop Diane Schleicher Tom Borkowski Marianne Bramble PLANNING & ZONING MANAGER Rob Callahan Dianne Otto, CFM Tyler Marion, Vice Chair David McNaughton CITY ATTORNEY Monty Parks, Chair Edward M. Hughes MINUTES Planning Commission Meeting September 17, 2013 – 7:00 p.m. Chair Monty Parks called the September 17, 2013, Tybee Island Planning Commission meeting to order. Commissioners present were Marianne Bramble, David McNaughton, Rob Callahan, Demery Bishop, Tyler Marion, and Tom Borkowski. Mr. Parks – The first order of business is the minutes of the August 20, 2013, meeting. Do I have any discussion on the minutes? [There was none.] Do I have a motion? [Ms. Bramble made a motion to approve as written; Mr. Bishop seconded.] All those in favor please signify. [The vote was unanimous.] Disclosures and recusals. Mr. McNaughton recused himself on Dixie Pedaler. Mr. Parks disclosed he is a member of the Sons of the American Legion. Mr. Marion disclosed he is a member and the Sargent at Arms of the Sons of the American Legion. Mr. Borkowski disclosed he is a member of the American Legion. Ms. Otto disclosed she is a member of the American Legion Auxiliary. Mr. Callahan disclosed that he is the next door neighbor to the owner of the Shell Station in conjunction with Dixie Pedaler. Site Plan Approval with Variance – Dixie Pedaler, LLC – 1315 Butler Ave. Ms. Otto – This item for 1315 Butler Avenue is an application for Site Plan Approval with a Variance. The applicant is Dixie Pedaler. This business has been operating out of a residential zoned property as an internet- based business. The request before you would be to relocate that business to the commercial site at 1315 Butler Avenue which is currently occupied by a Shell gas station/convenience store and the Blimpie restaurant shop. There is a release from the property owner allowing the owners of Dixie Pedaler to pursue this. The reason that it is “with Variance” is based on the current parking. There is no code requirement for this additional use, however, there is inadequate parking for the existing convenience store and restaurant. Based on the calculations by code, the required number of spaces for that location is 19 and the number of spaces provided is 8. In your packet are staff findings comparing this to the code. The applicant is here to answer any questions. Mr. Bishop – The parking issue where the required spaces are 19 and they have 8. How do we address that from a perspective of, if we made a modification now, does that not have an impact on the current uses of parking responsibilities by code? Ms. Otto – In my opinion, yes, it does have an impact. It is drawing additional components in areas that could perhaps be overflow parking areas. As I understand it, the owner is proposing, for the most part, that her business is walk-up customers. It is not anticipated additional customer parking is needed for the Dixie Pedaler side of the business. There are three components that she is asking for: (1) the existing multi-person bicycle that is loaded with customers and pedals around the downtown area, (2) add a shuttle service using golf carts like the other taxi type shuttle services on the island, and (3) golf cart rentals. The applicant is proposing that her customers are foot traffic; however, because there is already inadequate parking for the existing businesses, this would be considered a Variance. If you did recommend approval, it would be based 2 on the understanding that this site does not have adequate parking for the uses already there and obviously no additional parking for the new business. Mr. Bishop – That would not be a requirement because if we recommended a Variance and subsequently that was approved by Council, they are not going to have to go back and comply with the 19 spaces for the two existing businesses. The 8 is going to continue to be approved. Ms. Otto – That is correct. Mr. Bishop – In code Section 5-080, it stated that the Site Plan Approval process is intended to provide the general public with information on how new development will affect the surrounding area. There is also reference in our Staff Report that this Site Plan Approval with Variance, if granted, would come under Section 4-050, subsection (O), South End Business Overlay. In that section, it refers to South End Business Overlay District and mixed-uses of the property are permissible. Site Plan Approval is required for new construction and redevelopment of existing sites. I have one section in the code referring to a new development and the other section that refers to redevelopment. Do we have a development or redevelopment and what is the impact for those? Ms. Otto – There is no doubt that the addition of another business would be considered a redevelopment. Also in Section 5-020(B), which is the section Permits or Actions Required by this Land Development Code, it states, “All land development activities other than residential one and two-family structures, regardless of the zoning district, must present a site plan of such development to the planning commission for review, and to the mayor and council for approval prior to the issuance of any land development permits. In the C-1 zoning district, all land-disturbing activities require site plan approval.” The component of adding another business at this location is considered a development. The section you cited that stated it was a redevelopment probably best describes this situation. There are enough, in my opinion, reasons in the code to require Site Plan Approval for this request. Mr. Parks – A multi-person bicycle is a slow ride. How many people does that seat? Ms. Otto – Let’s have the applicant answer that. It does have a motor. It is not entirely bicycle propelled. They are able to relocate it as they have been doing from the residence-based business to a pickup location because it also has a motor. Mr. Parks – The additional shuttle services, did they tell you how many shuttles they are going to add? Ms. Otto – I took a count from the plan shown here of the total number of carts. I don’t know how many of those are divided between rentals and how many are shuttle services. Mr. Parks – I assume ‘bike’ down at the bottom [referring to PowerPoint], is the slow ride? Ms. Otto – Yes. Mr. Parks – There is a cart parked in front of the dumpster. Isn’t that going to provide difficulty for dumping the trash? Ms. Otto – Potentially, yes. Mr. Parks – From what I saw it is a two-door opening. Ms. Otto – There is a cart by itself on the corner. The total number of carts shown on the plan was 14 but I don’t know the division of the use between shuttle service and rental carts. Mr. Parks – I didn’t see anywhere for the shuttle. 3 Ms. Otto – They are the same carts. Mr. Parks – Do these get maintained? Do they have a maintenance area here? Is there a charging area? Ms. Otto – It has been explained to me by the applicant that there is one charging station and it is located in the proximity of the larger bicycle site next to the car vacuum. The rental carts have to be returned fully charged. The applicant feels the one outlet is adequate for their purposes. Mr. Parks – Do they ever get washed? Ms. Otto – Let’s ask the applicant. Mr. Bishop – In the Comprehensive Plan section that you provided on the Inland Cottage Neighborhood Recommended Development Strategies, items 1 and 2 are indicated as not meeting the strategy. In number 1, new development or redevelopment, we have already hashed that. In number 2, “Permit only compatible uses including low density residential, public/institutional, and low impact commercial.” The answer there, as far as the strategy, it has ‘no.’ My concern is number 1, the new development or redevelopment appears to be consistent with the character of other activities in that area. If you go down two blocks, you have got a very similar activity, what I call the old Post Office building, which I believe has golf cart rentals there which, to me, if this was to be approved, would be consistent with existing character. Ms. Otto – I can’t think of a denser use down there. This site has two businesses with high traffic, it is on a busy intersection, and already has inadequate parking for its location and its current uses. My responding ‘no’ is based on the fact that this increases the density of that site so it is not consistent with the other typical sites in the area. Mr. Bishop – It is consistent with an existing use that is already in the area, i.e. the shuttle type carts and things in that general area. Ms. Otto – Yes, I would agree with that. In that location you are describing is a vacation rental office. There is a dual use there but not the three business uses proposed here. Mr. Bishop – In number 2, “Permit only compatible uses including low density residential, public/institutional, and low impact commercial.” It seems this would be low-impact. We are talking golf carts that are charged. To me it is very low impact. It is certainly not toxic, fuming, gaseous, and things of that nature. I was a little concerned as to why that was a ‘no’ as well. Ms. Otto – The intent for my ‘no’ on that item was based on this business already being at that site and the impacts it has caused at that location. It does impact the commercial area negatively, at least it has without approval, so that their request now to come before you and get proper approval is based on already having had an impact in a negative way in that location. Mr. Bishop – That is the Blimpie and the Shell? Ms. Otto – Yes. Mr. Borkowski – The business that is there now, the Shell station, do they own this rental? Ms. Otto – No. This would be a tenant to the owners of the Shell station and the Blimpie. Mr. Borkowski – I’m not opposed to this but the parking is a more important factor than maybe is being stated. I don’t think you are going to have people walking up to rent these carts. People are going to be driving there 4 from all over Tybee to get these carts and there is going to be a bunch of car traffic in there overloading that area while they pick them up and bring them back. Mr. Parks – It is already a very busy intersection. Mr. Borkowski – Right. I just think that is a consideration that everyone should take a look at. Mr. Callahan – W hen you were reading from the code about development and/or redevelopment, I believe in both of those you mentioned land disturbing activity. Ms. Otto – Yes. This does not have a land disturbing component. It is, in the other section that Mr. Bishop referenced, a redevelopment. Mr. Callahan – You are saying redevelopment does not have land disturbing activity as part of its definition? Ms. Otto – This particular proposal does not have a land disturbing activity. Mr. Callahan – An act of redevelopment does have a land disturbing activity component? Ms. Otto – This situation is considered redevelopment because it is an existing site being impacted by a third business going into place. It is an additional development of the site in so far as it is not currently there and the proposal is to add it. Mr. Callahan – Even though there is no land disturbing activity? Ms. Otto – Yes, it is still a development. That is why we are here before you. You will not see a business start without Site Plan Approval. That that location already has two is a factor but the same would be the case if this was vacant property. It would still need Site Plan Approval. Mr. Marion – There is another business much like this about two blocks to the south. How many businesses on Tybee do we have that provide this same type of service? Ms. Otto – The multi-person bicycle, I believe, is unique. There had been a second but I don’t think it has operated this current year. It did operate the year before. For the rental of carts, strictly carts, I can only think of the one that has been discussed down at the other end of Tybrisa and Butler. Shuttle services, I would estimate there are probably about 10. Some are golf carts, conventional cabs, and other vehicles. Mr. Marion – For those businesses with this type of inventory, has there been any concern regarding potentially hazardous waste streams from servicing; perhaps the batteries in the golf carts, a place to maintenance those, or a recharging station? What kind of safety requirements would we need because in this particular location there is a bar on each side? You have an open parking lot with no deterrent to keep the evening foot traffic from perhaps joy riding in some of the carts or even damaging carts. Have we had any concerns historically with other businesses in the way they service those items? Ms. Otto – None have come to my attention. Mr. Parks – Dianne, I think you have been very generous in this parking requirement on the front page of our packet by not assigning any number to Dixie Pedaler, basically no parking requirement whatsoever. I understand the difficulty of estimating it but just on the multi-person bicycle alone, if we go 2 persons per car there is going to be up to 5 cars just for the one, much less the shuttle services which we don’t know how many. I think you have been very generous since there are only 8 spots for the whole thing on one of the busiest corners on a Saturday night in July. 5 Ms. Otto – I don’t know that I was generous as much as there was no code basis for requiring commercial off- street parking requirements. Retail and restaurants are based on square footage, so there was nothing in there that could be used for this particular use. Mr. Parks – I just think that is a factor on this site plan. Mr. Bishop – I’m always concerned with public safety and in the codes I’ve read there is no reference to that. Has there been any input from a public safety perspective? This is a very, very busy area, whether it is seasonal or non-seasonal. With public safety, ingress/egress, 14 carts, and bicycle shuttles, let’s assume for argument alone, a limited number of cars coming in to drop people off to rent the golf carts and/or the bikes. I spent about an hour last Saturday in that parking lot doing a car count. There was a tremendous amount of traffic in and out of that facility. I might add that Blimpie’s is not open. It is closed for the season. It was a very busy area. There was a high number of traffic from the Shell station to the restaurant to the south along with foot traffic. With regards to the safety issue, I think that is part of our planning responsibilities. I don’t know if that is an issue that has been considered or whether public safety has done car counts, or what type of accidents have occurred there under normal circumstances. Ms. Otto – I concur with your statement. To my knowledge there has been no traffic counts done. I have been there when it is dark out and it is not a bright lighted area and it is congested with people waiting to be seated at the restaurant. It’s a small side street on Fourteenth with a lot of pedestrian traffic and it is challenged by parking on both sides at times. It is an awkward situation. Mr. Parks – Do we have someone that would like to speak to this issue? Mr. Lyon Jemison came forward and introduced himself. I’m standing in for attorney Ray Smith. Mr. Parks – I just want to preface this that this commission is historically an extremely pro-business commission. Any remarks or questions that come, please keep that in mind. We treasure the businesses here on Tybee. Mr. Jemison – I spend a lot of time here on Tybee. I live on Wilmington. My son and I like to come over and ride bicycles, use the golf carts, and play on the beach at night and try to catch ghost crabs. I was listening to the comments that were made and I would like to reiterate them because I think they are important points on behalf of my client seeking the Variance and relief from the ordinance requirement. I do believe that these electric carts are low impact. The service of the vehicles is actually done off-site. The lessor of the vehicles will pick them up, take them to his location, and work on them. There won’t be any hazardous chemicals or batteries lying around, especially those things that could be a negative environmental or health impact. I agree, looking at the ordinances, I don’t think this business requires any off-street parking requirement. What is in my client’s favor is the owner of the Shell gas station has signed off on the use of the parking lot. It is another mixed-use of that site which I believe came up under 4-050. If anyone should be complaining, in addition to other businesses here in the area who might feel burdened by additional competition, it would be the Shell gas station owner. There is also additional parking. I believe it is about 800 to 1,000 feet away, there is public parking available for people. It seems to me that one compromise that could be done is a sign put up requiring people to park in the public lot area and then walk to pick up their golf carts. It is my understanding that my client actually receives telephone calls or internet requests, and they drop off the golf carts to the people. I don’t know what kind of impact in terms of safety because I haven’t seen it in operation. I do know the issue of how much traffic is going to be hitting that site is. I don’t think it can be determined accurately. My client has let me know that most of the clients do not park in the area and she and her husband would like to keep it that way. I do believe that this activity is consistent with the activities on the island and in that area as well. I know that Sandy’s by the Shore, I believe, they only have two parking spots. I also believe that Sandy’s by the Shore is repairing their carts on site. You can actually go there and see the batteries lying on the ground. I would ask that City Council think about talking to Sandy’s by the Shore. My client did conform to the City Council’s request that a site plan be done. This is a first for a business not involved in development. I’ve been looking at these two words, ‘development’ and ‘redevelopment’. I only see development being defined. I 6 don’t see redevelopment being defined so I don’t know if there is a distinction in the Council’s head or if it is in the minds of someone else. I don’t know how to distinguish between those two. Mr. Parks – Before you go further, this is the Planning Commission, not the Council. Council is your next stop. Mr. Jemison – Sorry, my mistake. This is the first time I’ve been in front of the Planning Commission. There was something in the Staff Report, page 2, “Staff finds the proposed addition of Dixie Pedaler with an office, quad bicycle, shuttle services, and golf cart rentals would violate the intent of the Inland Cottage Neighborhood Character Area.” I would like my client to make a statement on that. Julie Livingston came forward and introduced herself. I am the owner of the Dixie Pedaler. I did have a statement prepared but I believe Mr. Bishop covered most of that. I do believe that it does fit the criteria for the Neighborhood Cottage Area and it does fit a couple of other things. In addition, there are other sections of the Comprehensive Plan that will be favorably addressed by the Dixie Pedaler. In the plan, Section 2.1 [3.1], Population, it lists issues related to seasonal population as there is not enough activities for tourists. One of the proposed opportunities under that section is establish services and activities tailored to teens and seasonal visitors. This is exactly the nature of my business. It provides an opportunity for visitors to experience unique activities that can be tailored to their specific requests such as birthday parties, bachelor parties, or just a great time on vacation. Also in the same plan, Section 2.2 [3.2], Economic Development, it lists the following issues: “It is difficult to draw and retain small businesses that rely on seasonal population. The City needs to be more proactive with encouraging commercial redevelopment projects in appropriate areas.” It lists the following opportunities to address those issues: “Develop economic development strategies that focus on small business retention, recruitment, and identifying and acquiring redevelopment properties. Encourage the development of eco-tourism segment of the economy that will attract visitors to the island in the off-season and provide incentive for natural resources preservation.” By permitting our relocation to the site requested it gives us the ability to grow our business and better serve our customers at a convenient location. Both our quad bike and golf carts are extremely ecofriendly. The bike has ten pedaling stations that provide sufficient energy to propel the bike. It was designed and weight balanced for ease of operation. It does contain an electric assist should a situation arise where patrons require assistance. The golf carts that are for rental are all electric with zero emissions. It is part of our business plan in the future to make all vehicles capable of being solar charged. Finally, in Section 2.7 [3.7], Transportation, a couple of the issues listed are traffic congestion, which is a big issue during tourism season, lack of public transportation, and shuttle service around the island. There are currently, excluding our vehicles, approximately 25 electric vehicles for rent on the island. With a large number of visitors, there is a much greater demand for this. Our carts are not permitted on Butler Avenue and therefore reduce the congestion by steering our customers to lesser traveled streets. We do offer a very affordable shuttle service. It is $3 per person to travel anywhere on the island and we give a $1 discount to local residents. I hope this gives you a little more insight into our business and proposal and I’ll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Mr. Callahan – Did I understand earlier that you currently operate this business out of your home? Ms. Livingston – We have the bike and one shuttle currently out of the house. We do not have golf cart rentals out of the house at this time. Mr. Parks – On this drawing, there is a golf cart in front of the dumpster enclosure. Ms. Livingston – Yes. Mr. Parks – I hate to say it, but from what I saw that is not going to work. Ms. Livingston – What is your concern with that? Mr. Parks – I don’t think they can get the dumpster out of there. 7 Ms. Livingston – We are working very closely with Jerry Desai who owns the Blimpie’s, the convenience store, and the location. W e have worked it out so they will always have a key to the golf carts at their business if they need to move anything at any point. We will work out the pickup times and make sure that it is available. They would never allow us to block it. Mr. Parks – On that note, the two golf carts that are behind the bike, as far as I could tell, have limited access to get back there also. Ms. Livingston – Those would be the shuttles. Mr. Parks – So you are going from one to two shuttles. Ms. Livingston – Yes, we want to increase that to two shuttles and 12 carts for rental. Hopefully those will be moving all the time and not sitting around and waiting for customers. Mr. Parks – The bike, when I was comparing this drawing to what I’ve seen, it looks like it is going to be hanging out onto the sidewalk. Ms. Livingston – It doesn’t. It is actually backed up far enough that it does not block the vision. There is a big pine tree there that is not on the drawing. There is a big grassy area and it can sit there. We have done it and it does not block the vision of anyone turning right out of there. The bike is a little over 16 feet long. Mr. Parks – Even the drawing shows it going beyond the fence. Ms. Livingston – It does go beyond the fence. Mr. Parks – Does the fence delineate the City right-of-way there? Ms. Otto – Yes, it does. Mr. Parks – Okay. Basically I’m buying into a site plan that has parking into the City right-of-way. Ms. Otto – As drawn, yes. This diagram is a blow up of the survey that was provided. These little x’s here are designated as the fence that you are seeing there. If 4 feet is one square, then 8 feet of that is on the property and the other 8 feet are off the property. Ms. Livingston – We would be happy to move it back and move those two carts so they are beside the first two that are facing the bike because those are the shuttles and that would alleviate that problem. Ms. Otto – I don’t believe the City, in its interest, would approve the location of the vehicle off the property. Mr. Parks – I’m just raising my concerns. Ms. Livingston – I understand and I didn’t realize that. Mr. Parks – The golf cart that is going to be at the corner, is that going to act as a sign? Do you intend to cover that with signage that says Rent Me Now? Ms. Livingston – It will probably say Rent Me on the windshield and have a phone number. Mr. Parks – That will be in compliance with our sign ordinance? Ms. Livingston – It should be because it will be permanently affixed to the vehicle, not a separate sign, just wrapped on the windshield. 8 Mr. Parks – I agree that the operation is low impact. To me, this number of vehicles not allowed on Butler, only turning off onto Fourteenth, which is not low impact. Ms. Livingston – We do pick up and deliver for free. Mr. Parks – Understood. This is new for you, if I understand right, the golf cart rental? Ms. Livingston – Correct. Mr. Parks – I understand that your intent is to deliver and pickup but we don’t know if people are going to be using that service. What if they come and get them? Ms. Livingston – You are right there. With the golf cart business, I can speak from experience having worked at the other business for over a year, and it has the 2 parking spaces in front and that is for the vacation rental, car rental, industrial laundry, and the shuttle. They are pulling out in a worse location, in my opinion, having watched what goes on at Tybrisa and Butler. There is no light there. Our people can turn left and go down to the beach in the golf carts so they all won’t be going right. Many of them are probably, if they come here to rent, are going to want to head down to the beach. They’re actually able to go both ways so it splits that in half and they do have the light which is an added bonus that the other business does not have in that location. Having worked there, the fact that people are renting these carts and they do not offer the free pickup and delivery. There was never a problem with people parking there for long periods of time, they were dropping people off to pick up the vehicles, sign the contract, and get going on their way. Mr. Parks – You are very thoughtful and very knowledgeable about this and it sounds extremely well planned. How many vehicles do you think would be there on a Saturday afternoon? Ms. Livingston – During the season? Mr. Parks – Yes. Ms. Livingston – Hopefully none. Mr. Parks – The slow ride. Ms. Livingston – We are offering free pickup and delivery on the shuttle with that. The bulk of our bike traffic is walk up from the south end area. Most of them drink. W e encourage them not to drive and park anywhere, but some of them are family rides. Mr. Parks – Speaking of which, I notice there is one bathroom, maybe two. Ms. Livingston – There are two. There is one in the Blimpie and one in the convenience mart. W e normally have to stop at the public bathrooms. Mr. Parks – Are you going to add any lighting? Ms. Livingston – No. Mr. Parks – It is not well lit. Ms. Livingston – The shuttle guys may pull in there. The golf cart rentals will close early so there won’t be people coming in to rent the golf carts. The bike people can meet us there or if they are staying on the south end we can pick them up in the loading zone or the roundabout or different places. We try to spread that out where we pick them up. 9 Mr. Bishop – Any consideration as to less than 14? Ms. Livingston – Fourteen includes the 2 shuttles. Mr. Bishop – Why 14? Ms. Livingston – We do lease these vehicles and because we thought we could afford to lease that number and make it if they didn’t rent. We could reduce that number if you felt that was necessary. No additional ones are planned. Mr. Bishop – You mentioned there will be the one parked by the tree. Do you intend to have a sign on that? Ms. Livingston – No, we intend to install vinyl on all of the carts. That cart will be rented out. The vinyl will just say Rent Me and our phone number on the bottom of the windshield area. Mr. Bishop – The one located there [referring to PowerPoint], that can interfere with the public safety ingress/egress and sight for that intersection as well. As I was there looking at it, it appeared that could be problematic but I know that can be moved. Ms. Livingston – Yes, which can be moved also. Ms. Otto – I referenced that there are other sections in the code that require site plan to dispel the concerns whether this is a development that it doesn’t have land disturbing. Section 4-050(E)(4)(H) is a list of uses allowed in the C-1 zone. It is titled Commercial Amusement, including amusement parks and other commercial games and sports. It is that section that allowed them to come forward and make this request. That and a number of other uses are listed as Uses Permitted by Right after Site Plan Approval. If it is uncomfortable for you to have to consider whether this is redevelopment, since this doesn’t have land disturbing, it is still a use in C-1 and has to have Site Plan Approval. Ms. Bramble – You are saying if we ask for you to take the golf cart by the dumpster out, would you be willing to have one less spot or you would be willing to move it to side by side? Ms. Livingston – Yes, the area where these carts are located is currently unused area with the exception of the dumpster. It is paved and there is generally, like tonight, yellow tape across there to keep people from coming in and parking. The current businesses do not use that area at all. It is completely unused. We do have discretion on rearranging the carts in that unused area so it is more favorable to you. Ms. Bramble – You would be willing to move them somewhere else. Ms. Livingston – Yes. The owners of the business, that is their dumpster, and they do have a key to the carts so they can move them at any point if there is any obstruction with the pickup. Mr. Borkowski – I was thinking that to get rid of the issue of the dumpster and looking at that area today, I would think that you could take 3 to 6 of those carts, when they are not in use, and park them in front of the other ones along the back or parallel to the dumpster. You have 9 parked there and you wouldn’t have to worry about the dumpster. You could park your bike in the front. I don’t think you would have a problem with access there. It looked deep enough to park 3, maybe 4, deep. I don’t know how big these are. Ms. Livingston – I believe they are 3 feet wide and 6 feet long. Mr. Parks – Three feet wide and 8-1/2 feet long. 10 Mr. Borkowski – Two blocks is four feet for each block, so you could park all of them right along the side of the building and have the rest open. Ms. Livingston – Yes. Mr. Marion – Is there going to be any employees? Are you the only employee? Will you be out there 8 hours a day? Ms. Livingston – Probably 10 or 12 during the season. I will be handling the cart rentals. W e will have a shuttle driver and Edward, my significant other, is the driver of the bike because there is steering and braking in the middle. When the bike is done, he will be driving the other shuttle. Mr. Marion – For the sake of transactions, will you be inside any of the structures that are existing now? Ms. Livingston – Yes. They have offered us a small area of the existing counter at the very end down where the coffee and soda machines are. They are going to give us that location to sign the contracts. Mr. Jemison – I think it was mentioned earlier about joy riding and would there be a tendency for people to come late night. I believe all of these golf carts will be disabled at night. Mr. Parks – Are there any other questions for the applicant? [There were none.] Ms. Livingston – Thank you for your time. Mr. Parks – At this time, is there anyone from the public that would like to address this? Sheryl Carp Kreh came forward and introduced herself. My parents and family have lived here sixty-six years. What I wanted to bring up has nothing to do with the planning per se except to tell you that this couple is wonderful ambassadors for Tybee. People are just raving about the bicycle. The other thing I wanted to say is we have a wonderful city here and we all want to preserve it. W e have a wonderful Planning Commission and also the Commissioner. I’m sure that we can come up with a way that everybody comes out happy. I’m absolutely sure, I’m an optimist, that change can be good. It doesn’t necessarily have to be negative. This couple has put their hearts and souls in this. They want to live at Tybee for the rest of their lives. They want to have children to stand up here afterwards and say, “My parents have been here for twenty-five or thirty years.” I’m asking just as a person, as a friend, to please put our heads together and come up with an answer that everyone is happy and everyone can get along. All he wants is a business license and a place to park his vehicles to do an honest day’s job. Mr. Parks – Do we have anybody else that would like to address this issue? Donald ‘Dac’ Cowart came forward and introduced himself. My family has lived here on Tybee. We’ve been on Tybee a long time. We made these codes. It doesn’t matter to me. I like new stuff. I like the cab and I like people to make money off the tourists. If we’re going to do that, we need to change our code and then go by the code. These City officials, they will use the code against you and they will turn around and use that same code for their buddies to get a permit. Mr. Parks – Dac, do you have anything for this issue? Mr. Cowart – This is the issue. Mr. Parks – Please direct it to this issue. Mr. Cowart – I am directing it to this. The issue is, I sent you emails on this, and the issue is the code is not being followed. The code says that you got to have a site plan and one of the reasons for that, Mr. Hughes 11 says we don’t want a bunch of umbrella businesses on the corner. Somebody said just businesses like the other business down the street. It is not – it is a concrete business down there. They have a place out back to work on their equipment, places to charge their equipment, places to take care of their equipment, places to wash, and everything. I think it is Section 3-050, I’m not sure, I’ve been dealing with this so much lately and I’ve been getting so many crazy answers from this City administration about different codes like you just said. You have got one code saying this and another code saying this. This is the point I’m going to make on the next one that comes up is if they are going to put tents up everywhere, then I’m going to go down to the Patel’s, they love that money, and I’m going to ask to rent the corner beside the Social Club. I’m going to sell peanuts there and I’m going to bring everything out of my yard, like the Fish Art man, and I’m going to call it ‘Dac Art’ and start selling it. Mr. Parks – Dac, does this relate to the Dixie Pedaler? Mr. Cowart – Yeah, it relates to them getting permission to have a permit. They have got to have a Site Plan Approval. Mr. Parks – That is what we are working on. Mr. Cowart – That’s what I’m up here to say. If they hadn’t applied for that then you have got to turn them down. Mr. Parks – They have applied. Mr. Cowart – If they have, then you need to go look at the code and see what the code says before you make all these judgments. The code says that you can’t have an umbrella business on every corner. Mr. Parks – This is rental carts. Mr. Cowart – It is the same thing. Mr. Parks – It could be. Mr. Cowart – It is the same thing. It is the same thing as the canopies at Seaside Sisters and it is the same thing wherever you want to put it. This was used against me and that’s why I’m telling you this. Mr. Parks – I’m taking that you are against this proposal. Mr. Cowart – No, I told you, I love making money off the tourists. I’m against it breaking the code. If we’re going to do this, then we need to get the codes in order. In my opinion, this is a rebuilt land use. Mr. Parks – Thank you Dac. Is there anybody else at this time that would like to address the Commission? [There were none.] At this time I will close the public hearing. I’m open to discussion or a motion. Ms. Bramble – As far as the density goes from Fourteenth down to Tybrisa, I really think this business has less of an effect because it is at a stop and go light. We all drive on our Tybee tours and it is difficult to get anything out on the four-way at Tybrisa. I don’t think they are asking for anything more or less than what is already permitted in a close proximity area. The signs on the cart saying Rent Me, we all know we see the carts going up and down the street with those signs on it. I’ve seen in years past a rental cart sitting at a metered spot and it had a parking sticker on it. Ms. Livingston said that they can’t drive down Butler or Highway 80 but yet in season I see carts going down Highway 80 and Butler all the time. Is that because it is a motorized cart? Ms. Otto – I’m not up to speed on the different types but there are certain types that are considered roadworthy that actually have license plates and all the safety equipment required as any other vehicle. The police department monitors the different types and there are restrictions on the ones that don’t have all of the safety 12 features that have to stay off of the highway. There are a few points where they are allowed to cross Highway 80 but otherwise they are negotiating the back streets. Ms. Bramble – These people will most likely provide parking stickers where the renters would be able to park at the meters. W ould they have to buy all those stickers or would they be permitted because they are registered on Tybee? Ms. Otto – I’m not in the Parking Services Department to answer a decal question. Mr. Parks – That is an excellent question but I don’t think that falls under our realm. Ms. Otto – A vehicle with a license plate has to have ad valorem tax designated for Tybee. Those are the ones entitled to a complimentary decal. Ms. Bramble – These carts, do they have a license plate on it? Ms. Otto – For the type she is describing, that would be restricted to the side streets, that is correct. Ms. Bramble – Do they have headlights, blinkers? They would to be on any street, right? Ms. Otto – I’m unsure of that. Ms. Bramble – As far as the parking goes in that area, that’s jammed up anyway with all the restaurants and everything. I don’t believe that a renter will come up and bring their car and want to park it and rent the cart all day. If they are renting that cart then they are staying on Tybee. So somebody is dropping them off and they are bringing back the cart to the house or she is delivering it. Personally, I don’t think there is any problem with this. I make a motion to approve. Mr. Parks – I’ve got a motion to approve. Do I have a second? Mr. Bishop – Second. Mr. Parks – Those in favor of the motion, please signify. [The vote was unanimous.] Variance – 2-B Second Terr. Ms. Otto – At 2-B Second Terrace, this is a single-family dwelling owned by Paul Ewaldsen, Jr. The request is to rebuild a deck and stairway. W ithout a permit, the deck that existed and is shown in this old photograph was removed due to the owner’s safety concerns about the structure. W hat you would have seen remaining had you visited the site, is a small landing coming out this door and going down these stairs [referring to PowerPoint]. The applicant is proposing replacing that with a deck/balcony area that would be wider. W hat was a 4-foot is being requested to be built to 6-foot wide. For that reason, because it is not going back into the identical footprint that had been there, a Variance is required. This is an R-T zone. In the R-T zone, the required setbacks are 20-feet on the front, 20-feet on the back, and 10-feet on the sides. As shown on this blowup of their survey, the 6-foot proposed deck would be within the 20-foot rear setback. What had been a 4- foot could be replaced without a Variance. The stairs are being replaced but because they are beginning 6- feet out rather than 4-feet out like they currently are, they will be extending closer to the 10-foot side setback. For that reason staff was unable to permit this and it has been brought forward for a Variance request. As shown in this older photograph of the deck that was removed, the proposed construction would be similar in that it does not negatively impact the parking for this area. The vehicles can still pull up there. It is not a pier construction where they are impeding the parking area. Mr. Parks – It depends on how tall the vehicle is. Ms. Otto – There is adequate parking for at least the two required and perhaps a third. 13 Mr. Parks – Questions for staff? Mr. Borkowski – Relating to making it come out another 2 feet, I’m just wondering who determines if the way that it is being braced from the bottom is sufficient to carry what is going to be a heavier load and how it is going to be anchored. Who is the person that does that? Ms. Otto – When the application for the building permit is submitted, it will come in with plans. If those plans have a seal and signature from a design professional such as an architect or an engineer then we take that credentialed construction as being adequate. If it does not come in with a seal from a design professional it is required to meet the International Building Code requirements as far as the spans between the bracing. That is spelled out in the building codes regarding the number of supports given the length of the deck. I have drawings here that I do not see a seal on but I do not know if these are final documents or not. Mr. Borkowski – The thing I’m concerned about most is the anchoring point where it goes into the wall. Everything else is going to work towards pushing it against the wall but anything out towards the railing is going to create a lot of force towards pulling it out of the wall. It needs to be anchored really well. Ms. Otto – I agree. Our Building Official, when he does this plan review will need to have that it does meet our requirements. Mr. Bishop – The proposed project would expand the footprint into the required rear 20-foot setback area? Ms. Otto – Yes. Let me explain that. This is the rear of the property [referring to PowerPoint]. There is a 20- foot required setback across there and because the prior deck was only 4-feet wide it stopped in that 20-foot area about here [referring to PowerPoint], so there was already a 20-foot encroachment of a deck. W ith the proposal to come back with a larger deck, this extra 2 feet in that 20-foot setback is considered an additional encroachment. The code says that nonconforming structures can continue and they can be added to as long as there is no expansion or extension of the nonconformity. As this is proposed, staff could not grant approval because it was an additional expansion or encroachment into the required setback. In addition, the side 10- foot setback that is required, there had already been a 4-foot landing and the stairs were coming out and they are not meeting the 10-foot side. By expanding what had been 4-feet, 2 more feet and then starting the stair run, they are going to be closer than what had been there to the side property line and staff cannot grant a further encroachment into a setback. Mr. Bishop – The old deck, that one that has been torn off, the only thing remaining was the stairs. The 20- feet, the actually decking is in the same location, is it not? Ms. Otto – It is larger. What was removed was only 4-feet wide. Mr. Bishop – In length it is the same, correct? Ms. Otto – Yes. That 2-foot extension for 20-feet is new encroachment into the 20-foot setback. Mr. Bishop – I was assuming the 20-foot setback was at the rear. Ms. Otto – It is, off of this line [referring to PowerPoint]. If he was coming back with the 4-foot that was removed, he wouldn’t need a Variance. Because he is making it wider, he is a foot-and-a-half off the line. Off of the 20, he is 18-1/2 feet and 2-feet wide into the 20-foot required setback with that portion of the new deck. Mr. Parks – Basically, before us is a request for Variance approval to add 2 feet to a replacement deck. 14 Ms. Otto – As well as, because the stairs are starting further over than the 4 f eet they were, instead of stairs starting here and ending shorter than this, now the stairs don’t start until you are 6-feet over. That is a further encroachment into the 10-foot side then what is currently there. Mr. Bishop – Normally in our Variance aspects for construction there needs to be some form of hardship. I’m not quoting the code but I believe it refers to there must be a demonstrable hardship. Can you share with me what the hardship is or should we wait for the applicant? Ms. Otto – That would be for the applicant’s response and that does apply to any variances including this one. Mr. Parks – Other questions for staff at this time? [There were none.] Is there a representative that would like to speak to this issue? Mr. Paul Ewaldsen, Jr. came forward and introduced himself. This property has been in our family for forty years. I built a 3-1/2 story home so I have tried to improve that since it has been in our family. The second house, 3 Second Terrace, was owned by a bank. The bank approached me many years ago and lent me all the money in the world and I basically gutted and renovated it and it turned out beautiful. Those homes are very, very nice there. I’ve grown up in Savannah, I’m 68 years old, and Tybee has been very special to all of our family. I am the oldest of 5 boys and we have been involved at Tybee for a long, long time. My mother and dad passed away years ago and my brothers wanted to sell it. This is a legacy to me as far as my father. I was able to buy it back in February. The little house, 2-B, you saw the picture there, is a concrete block home and goes back prior to my dad buying 2-A, which was a new house forty years ago. That is in one tax ID number and always has been. In Lots 1 and 2, I don’t think in my lifetime that will ever be changed. In between the two houses there are basically 3 parking places and this has always been satisfactory. This thing has been very important for our family and church friends and other people. W hat happened on the 2-B Terrace, as you saw the pictures that I sent around, you can see that has been leaning down for quite a few years. Those 3 wooden braces, down at the bottom, had 2-inch round screws/bolts that have been in there for all those years. Underneath the deck, up where the braces go and support that, I have had to repair that two times with a 2 x 10 underneath to make sure that it was satisfactory. Back in February, March, and April, when I was doing the other work on 2-A, I really noticed that two of the iron pins were cut from deterioration. Right away I had people there and for safety I took it down. I should have probably come over and got a permit to tear it down. I was so afraid because there were so many people coming and going that I just took it down and tried to save the steps that go up to the other door. On the picture I sent around, there is a small white chair on that deck. Any time anyone would stay at that house, and with a small table, you could barely get out of the chair and go around anyone. W ith that in light, I thought it would be appropriate to add 2-feet and never thought about a Variance request because I’ve always thought that it was one piece of property under one tax ID number. Dianne and I have cooperated with each to submit this to you. My point is to try to beautify the place, enhance the usability of the deck and the safety situation you brought up as far as the bracing. Drexel Taylor, who owns Omega Steel, says that post going down is going very deep into the concrete and would be secured. That would support just about anything. All of this will be submitted back to Dianne once we hopefully get permission. I was concerned that not putting more wood and bracing on that concrete block as far as not knowing what is inside that block. Drexel has obviously given me some tremendous amount of security as far as supporting that beam against the brick but not encompassing in the brick. Hopefully I will come forward again and ask to have Cape Cod shingles on that house; I even brought pictures of the big house. The inside is magnificent to me. Mr. Parks – Do we have questions for the applicant? Mr. Bishop – The actual hardship that is required for a Variance as I mentioned earlier. The Land Development Code requires it to be a demonstrable type of hardship. You mentioned you want to widen the new deck from 4 to 6. Mr. Ewaldsen – Correct. 15 Mr. Bishop – What is the actual hardship? Mr. Ewaldsen – The hardship is the comfort thing. It is not pleasant because you are jammed up there. The 4- feet does not work. In fact, I would like to put some type of awning out there. The hardship is just making it a much nicer, more comfortable deck. Mr. Parks – This is a rental property, correct? Mr. Ewaldsen – Yes, it is rental. Mr. Parks – This is not for your family. Mr. Ewaldsen – Oh, yes. We use it a lot as I have 3 daughter and 8 grandchildren. Mr. Parks – Are you going to put a screened enclosed porch. Mr. Ewaldsen – No. Mr. Parks – How about lighting? Mr. Ewaldsen – We have one lamp over by the door and there are 2 lamps coming down for parking. Mr. Marion – I want to make sure I’m hearing you clear. You are enhancing the aesthetic beauty, safety is obviously remedied. So, it is aesthetics instead of the safety remedy. Mr. Ewaldsen – The safety was the key ingredient. Mr. Parks – It has to be replaced because of safety. Mr. Ewaldsen – It was not quite the situation that people had years ago when they had all these people on it. Mr. Parks – It could be replaced at 4-foot and it would be safe. Mr. Ewaldsen – Sure it could but it is not a comfortable thing. Mr. Marion – The 4-foot itself is an uncomfortable thing but nobody is going to suffer a hard loss to any degree. Mr. Ewaldsen – I think you have to consider if you look at the one piece of property tax ID number, how that original house was Lot 1 on the whole lot. Somehow going back forty years ago you put Lot 1 on the big house and Lot 2, which was the original. It has been on one tax ID number and that is why I question why we even need to have a Variance because that is all one piece of property and never in my lifetime be able to subdivide. I don’t want to do that and you have plenty of space. If you look between the little house and the big house you have 3 cars so there is at least 30-something-feet. Mr. Marion – W orst case scenario, if you found yourself at a point where the 4-foot had to be maintained and the 6-foot wasn’t granted, is that something you are able to live with? Obviously you are here for the Variance but if it came down to just maintaining what it was, could you live with that? Mr. Ewaldsen – I have done so many good things for Tybee. My interest has been a lot of things. I have been in front of you many times with other pieces of property that I have been involved with because of Tybee people. This is my property and it is extremely important to continue my dad’s legacy and have a beautiful piece of property. The little house is used an awful lot for overage because the big house has 4 bedrooms and 3 baths. That is 8 people. Many times big families need more so that has been an annex, as I call it. 16 Mr. Parks – Is that for your family or for the rental? Mr. Ewaldsen – For my family, church people, or other things. I’m in control of people using it. Keith Gay has this available for rent to help supplement the original thing going back before my brothers as far as paying $16,000 in taxes years ago. To answer your questions, I’ll take 4 but in all sincerity it’s just not very attractive and that is what I’m trying to do. I want to come back to you when I can afford it and put some Cape Cod shingles on it. We just put a roof on this one and a metal roof on the main one. I spent $100,000 on the main house. The whole property cost me a $1.1 million. I’m invested and I’m trying to continue my dad’s legacy and this is very important to me to make something nice and comfortable. As far as extending the stairs, I don’t know if you can make the stairs stay where they are now and be able to go up at a different angle. I would have to get with Drexel. When you look at the stairs, even if we needed another foot or two, there are 4 trash cans 3- or 4-feet off of that stair going to the main house. I have plenty of room and to me it would not be intrusive. To me it is one piece of property. I would really, really appreciate your consideration. Mr. McNaughton – If this were recombined, would the width of the deck be an issue? Ms. Otto – These are currently two lots of record. If it was proposed to be combined, there would be an issue with having two primary structures on one lot but it would not be an issue for a 6-foot deck. Mr. Ewaldsen – I’m just trying to do something really good structurally and safe to where nobody is going to get hurt and continue with how I grew up here. Mr. Parks – Is there anyone else from the public that would like to speak to this issue? [There were none.] At this time I will close the public hearing. Do I have discussion or a motion? Mr. McNaughton – I make a motion to deny. Mr. Borkowski – Second. Mr. Parks – Those in favor of the motion for denial please signify. [Vote was unanimous.] Minor Subdivision – Lot 32 S. Campbell Ave. Ms. Otto – The owner at 32 S. Campbell is John Bragg. He actually owns lots 30, 31, and 32. What is before you is his request to divide lot 32 into 2 lots. This is in an R-2 zone. The lot size requirement would be met for this request for the single-family requirement. They could not be developed as duplexes. There is the required easement to the rear lot at the 20-foot that our code requires coming off of Campbell to get to what would be lot 32B if this is approved and recorded with Chatham County. The applicant is in the audience this evening. Mr. Parks – Do we have questions for staff at this time? [There were none.] Is there someone that would like to address the Commission? Mr. John Bragg came forward and introduced himself. I own those lots. It is simply too big to sell by itself. We have decided to divide them and it still has plenty of square footage. Mr. Bishop – There would be a means of ingress and egress from South Campbell for both of these lots without creating any traffic issues? Ms. Otto – That is correct. On the plat as proposed, this is South Campbell [referring to PowerPoint] and there is this 20-foot access and utility easement that would get the vehicles and utilities back to the property at the end of that. Both the front and the rear would have access. Mr. Bragg has been in communication with our Water & Sewer Department about where to locate the tie-ins that would be needed to get the utilities back there as well. Mr. Parks – I also noticed there were no trees of any significance on there. 17 Ms. Otto – You may be wondering about part of this. On the property is this concrete area [referring to PowerPoint] that has an interesting history if Mr. Bragg would like to share that with you. Mr. Bragg – That is a shuffle board that is pre-WWII. W hen I got the property from my family, there were the disks, sticks, and actual lines there. My kids grew up playing on that shuffleboard and that thing refuses to go away. It is still there. I hope whoever has it, maybe they will enjoy it before they build a house on it. Mr. Bishop – Should this be approved, the lucky owners of lot 32-B will have direct access to water. Ms. Otto – Yes. Mr. Bragg – It is a good place to put in kayaks and paddleboards. Mr. Callahan – W hat are the two dashed lines shown on the drawing? Ms. Otto – That is the marsh delineation line as delineated by DNR. Here where it says flags [referring to PowerPoint], that is where the DNR flagged the marshline and inside of that is the 20-foot marsh buffer line. We enforce that as a non-buildable area unless they would seek a DNR permit for a buffer encroachment. Mr. Parks – That’s included in the square footage? Ms. Otto – The property is still that size lot. It’s just there is a portion of it not buildable without a State permit. Mr. Parks – Is there anybody else from the public that would like to address this? [There were none.] At this time I’m going to close the public hearing. I’m open to discussion or a motion. Mr. Bishop – I make a motion to approve the minor subdivision as requested. Mr. Marion – Second. Mr. Parks – Those in favor of the motion to approve, please signify. [Vote was unanimous.] Site Plan Approval – 1207 Hwy. 80 Ms. Otto – There is a code section, 3-070(B)(7), particular to Temporary Enclosures. This section was created I believe back in 2009 or shortly thereafter because there were a couple of temporary tents being used on the island for commercial purposes and there was not a code section that addressed whether that was or was not allowed. We did ultimately process those two in 2009 and what is before you this evening is the first subsequent request. This location is sometimes referred to as Sundance Plaza and there are a number of businesses located within there. One of the 2009 tents approved was for Seaside Sisters at this location. On the plan you will see a tent that has ‘SS’, which is Seaside Sister’s tent that has been properly processed. What is before you is 2 additional tents that have been placed at the location without the required Site Plan Approval and without permitting and inspections. This is an after-the-fact action before you requesting first the Site Plan Approval and then the Planning & Zoning Department will work with the owners to get the proper permits and inspections done. The two tents are located on a wooden deck adjacent to one another. Their businesses are to the north of there, The Irritable Pelican and the DBR Signature Gallery. Here are a couple of photographs of them [referring to PowerPoint]. Mr. Borkowski – How long are these going to be there? Ms. Otto – Although they are called temporary enclosures there is no requirement that they be removed or relocated. They may stay there as long as the owners choose to and they continue to be maintained as temporary enclosures that have been properly anchored. 18 Mr. Callahan – If I’m not mistaken, the word temporary actually pertains to the type of structure as opposed to the length of time they will remain. Ms. Otto – That would be accurate. Mr. Bishop – When I went down to see this I didn’t have anything to measure with. They fall within that maximum size of 120 square feet? Ms. Otto – I believe they are 10 by 10. Mr. Parks – They were the same size as Seaside Sisters. Ms. Otto – Which is 100 square feet. Ms. Bramble – It is actually 2 businesses, correct? Ms. Otto – Yes. Ms. Bramble – They are going to be permitted with one site plan? Ms. Otto – Yes. Because it is after-the-fact and because staff was not aware until it was brought to the City’s attention that they were there I did not compel them to do two separate applications. I chose to allow them to proceed together on this. Ms. Bramble – How long have they actually been there? Ms. Otto – I do not know. My typical route to work does not go by this facility and until it came to my attention, I did not know they existed. W e do have a representative here that can answer that question for us. Mr. Parks – Is there somebody here that would like to speak to this? Mr. Michael Bodine came forward and introduced himself. My wife owns The Irritable Pelican. Mr. Parks – How long have they been there Mr. Bodine? Mr. Bodine – Debbie put her tent up when she first opened which was last summer I think. Rebecca didn’t put her tent up until late Spring of this year, May or June. Mr. Parks – Other questions for the applicant? [There were none.] Is there anybody else that would like to speak on this issue? [There were none.] I will close the public hearing at this time. Do I have discussion or a motion? Mr. Marion – Are there any requirements on these temporary structures to have electricity, ventilation, anything of that nature? I think historically there has been some type of inventory so patrons can go to and from and I didn’t know if there were any requirements. Ms. Otto – Electricity, to my knowledge, is not requested or required. Our permitting aspect is certainly safety and given the 130-mile per hour wind zone that we are in we will be looking, after this is permitted, that they are properly anchored to withstand that. Not the material but the frame. Mr. Bishop – I make a motion to approve Site Plan as presented. Mr. McNaughton – Second. 19 Mr. Parks – Those in favor of approval of the Site Plan as presented please signify. [Vote was unanimous.] Site Plan Approval – 21 Veterans Dr. Ms. Otto – This commercial building is located in an R-1 district. It has been there for a long time. It is an original Fort Screven building that is 100 years old. The request before you this evening is Site Plan Approval to add a handicap ramp to the west side of the property. There is a porch located here [referring to PowerPoint] that goes into the club room and currently there are stairs there. There is an access ramp located elsewhere on the property which goes into a hall, the larger assembly area, but this request would be to add a second ramp over in this vicinity. At your chairs this evening was a survey that had not been available at the time packets were distributed, along with a redesign on the ramp itself. At the preliminary staff review, we discovered that the ramp did not meet the ADA Code as the run was too long without there being a landing. There are limits on how far you can ramp, the distance and the height, without having another landing spot and then continue going up. What was at your seats, you will see a landing midway that did cause the ramp to be longer but it does bring the ramp into the necessary compliance that will be able to be permitted this way. Based on the survey, it will not encroach past any property line where the building is located. There are actually 4 lots that make up that property and this is wholly on one of those four lots. This photograph [referring to PowerPoint] of existing conditions, the plan does call for the current steps to be relocated. They would shift to the left and the new ramp would be more in the vicinity of the current steps. Mr. McNaughton – W ill there be enough room for the ramp and the stairs? Ms. Otto – Yes. The ramp and the stairs both have a minimum requirement of 36 inches of clear space, not counting the railings, and there is adequate space in that 8-foot area to address both of those. Mr. Marion – If memory serves me correct, wasn’t there an old gas or propane tank? Is it still there or has it been relocated? Ms. Otto – It has been removed from the property. Mr. Callahan – The stairs will be demolished instead of relocated? Ms. Otto – I think they will try to salvage the materials that would allow them to still have a narrower stair, if there is anything still usable they will shift it to the left and the ramp itself will be on the right side. Mr. Callahan – The existing sidewalk will lead up to the ramp? Ms. Otto – Correct. When you get to the foot of the new ramp, it will be required that the existing sidewalk be widened to meet ADA requirements for that landing coming off of the ramp. Mr. Callahan – But there won’t be a sidewalk leading from somewhere near the bottom of the ramp to the relocated stairs. Ms. Otto – Not as currently proposed. Mr. Callahan – There is no requirement that we have for that? Ms. Otto – That would be their choice. Mr. Borkowski – Are they going to have to make the doorway wider? Ms. Otto – No. This is considered an attempt at access into the building but it does not trigger a requirement that the building be made compliant. Mr. Parks – Other questions for staff? [There were none.] Is there anybody here representing the applicant? 20 Mr. Ronnie Tatum came forward and introduced himself. I’m the Adjutant at the Legion and Chairman of the Tybee Veteran’s Memorial. It’s not anything that we came up with. It is a must thing. Following guidelines with the State and Federal government on ADA, with the capacity of our building and our canteen, the existing ramp in front of the hall was put there and grandfathered in years ago. It was a ramp for handicap but also for people to move the chairs, tables, speaker equipment, and everything to give access to the hall. We do not keep that hall open on a daily basis. The new ramp will give access to the canteen and to the hall. The old ramp is not ADA approved. It is basically for moving equipment in and out of the building. This falls under the guidelines of ADA with capacity of the canteen and the hall. If you want the location changed around back we will draw up new plans but it is something that the American Legion, by following State and Federal guidelines, that we have to install at our Legion. Ms. Bramble – You have to absolutely do that since veterans of WWII are very old now. My pops would like to visit you more often but it is very difficult for him to even access your building. This is something you should have done a long time ago. Mr. Tatum – We’ve got a younger group in there now and with Dianne’s help in the last two years we have changed a lot of safety issues. You have to understand this building is over 100 years old and we’ve been fighting to keep it in line. We’re getting ready to put a new roof on it, done a lot of things inside including remodeling the kitchen, sanded the floors, and structurally reinforced the roof. The roof had caved in 3-1/2 inches and we had to go in and jack it back up and put new beams in there. The City just allotted us putting a fire suppression system on the air conditioners. We’re just trying to bring it up to code and so far we have done a great job but this is one of those things that all the Legions that have elevated halls must do. It is either put it there or somewhere else around the building and this is the easiest access. It will give plenty of room and plus the ramp will be lit for the safety of our members. W e have 4 handicap parking places. When we put this ramp up we will have a guideline of where to put the 4 handicap spaces and give access to the handicap ramp itself. W e don’t have any 21 or 22 year old members anymore so we have to comply with it. Ms. Bramble - Is that sidewalk going to lead right out into the parking area? Mr. Tatum – You will have a parking area in front of it to the left. Ms. Bramble – Those will be the handicap spaces? Mr. Tatum – Yes. Home Depot is going to be building the ramp and they are going to go by the specifications. This was donated by Home Depot. We will get with the City and Dianne and see where we can actually set the handicap signs. Mr. Parks – Is there anybody else from the public that would like to speak to this issue? [There were none.] At this time I will close the public hearing. Do I have any discussion or a motion? Mr. Borkowski – I make a motion to approve. Mr. Callahan – Second. Mr. Parks – All those in favor of approving, please signify. [Vote was unanimous.] Text Amendment – Section 3-080, Off-street Parking Requirements Mr. Callahan – I make a motion to continue to the next agenda. Mr. Parks – I have a motion to continue. Is that okay Ms. Otto? 21 Ms. Otto – It would. We had been in an enforcement situation with residential driveways. With Council’s guidance, staff now has procedures to allow permitting to be moving forward. The ultimate question is whether the code needs to be changed. For now we do have a plan on how to handle it. Mr. Parks – I have a motion, do I have a second? Mr. Bishop – Second. Mr. Parks – All those in favor, please signify. [Vote was unanimous.] Mr. Bishop – I make a motion to adjourn. Mr. Callahan – Second. Mr. Parks – All those in favor please signify. [Vote was unanimous.] Meeting is adjourned. Meeting ended at 9:05 PM Minutes by Jerris Bryant and edited by Dianne Otto.