The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About20150914_PC_MINUTES.pdf PLANNINGCOMMISSION CITYMANAGER DemeryBishop DianeSchleicher RonBossick MarianneBramble COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENTDIRECTOR JulieLivingston GeorgeShaw JohnMajor CharlesMatlockCITYATTORNEY DavidMcNaughtonEdwardM.Hughes MINUTES PlanningCommissionMeeting September14,2015 MayorBueltermanstartedtheSeptember14,2015TybeeIslandPlanningCommissionmeetingbyswearinginCharlesMatlock toserveasanewPlanningCommissioner.CommissionerspresentwereDemeryBishop,RonBossick,JulieLivingston,John Major,MarianneBrambleandDavidMcNaughton.MayorBueltermanthenaskediftherewereanymotionsonthefloorfora Chair,CommissionerBishopmadeamotionforJohnMajorasChairandsecondedbyCommissionerMcNaughton,thevoteto wasunanimous.MayorBueltermancongratulatedCommissionerMajorandthenaskediftherewere electJohnMayorasChair anymotionsforViceChair,CommissionerMajormadethemotiontoelectCommissionerBishopforViceChairandsecondedby CommissionerBossick,thevotewasunanimous. ChairMajorthencalledthemeetingtoorderandthankedeveryoneonthePlanningCommission.ChairMajoraskedifthere wereanydisclosuresorrecusals,CommissionerMajordisclosedthatonagendaitemFloodDamagePreventionOrdinanceheis inthemiddleofthatanddoesn’tintendtorecusehimselfunlesssomeonethinksheshould. ChairMajoraskedfor considerationofAugust17,2015meetingMinutes.AmotiontoapprovewasmadebyCommissioner BishopandsecondedbyCommissionerMcNaughton,votetoapprovewasunanimous. ChairMajoralsowantedtowelcomeGeorgeShawwhoisnewDirectorofPlanningandZoningandalsonewCommissioner Matlock. OldBusiness: ChairMajorstatedthatthereisnooldbusinesssowecanmoveonthenewbusiness. NewBusiness: Variance–1113ButlerAve.considerationoffrontyardsetbackvariancefortherenovationof asinglefamily ): structure.ScheduleofDevelopmentRegulations(Section3-090 Mr.ShawapproachedtheCommissiontoexplainthattheapplicantisrequestingafrontsetbackof7’2”,heexplainedthatthe Housecurrentlysitsclosetotheroadandtheexistingstairwayissignificantlycloserthantheonethey’reproposing,theyare reducingthereintrusiontotheset-back,thestructureiscurrentlynon-conforming,becausethepropertywasreducedwiththe wideningofHwy80.CommissionerLivingstonstatedisn’ttheresupposedto beavarianceconsideredforthemassprojecteven thoughit isthesamedepthandwidth.Ms.Reichcommentedthewaythecodeiswrittenisif youareoccupyingthesamefoot printbutgoingverticalthenthevariancecanbeadministrativelyapprovedsothe onlypartthatneedsapprovalthroughthe PlanningCommissionandCityCouncilwouldbethepartsthatchangethefootprint.CommissionerLivingstonthankedMs. Reich.Ms.Reichalsowantedtoaddthatthishouseisa Historicstructure.CommissionerBishopaskedifthisisoneofthe HistoricalstructuresonTybeeandwhatisthepositionoftheHistoricalassociationonthechangesandadditions.Ms.Reich statedasofnowthereare norequirementtoputthisinfrontoftheHPCpriorto a variancecomingbeforeyou,priortothem performinganyworktheinformationwillgotothemfortheircommentandtheycalltheownerabouttaxcredits. CommissionerMcNaughtonstatedthatsection8-050varianceproceduresparagraphCvariancesmaybeissuedfortherepair orrehabilitationofhistoricstructuresupona determinationthattheproposedrepairorrehabilitationwillnotincludethe Structurescontinueddesignationasahistoricstructureandthevarianceistheminimumto preservethehistoriccharacterand the designofthestructure.Ifinfactthispropertyisonthelistofhistoricpropertiesmyreadingiswecan’tevengranta variance unlessthatdeterminationismadebymyunderstandingofcode.Mr.ShawaskedifthatispartoftheLanddevelopmentcode. for issuing CommissionerMcNaughtonstatednothatispartofflooddamageprevention.Ms.ReichstatedthatcodeSection8is avariancetothefloodordinanceitself.ChairMajoraskedifthisisbeingraisedtocomplywithFEMAwouldthatnot makethis applicable.Ms.ReichstatedthisisavariancetoSection3sothattheycancomeintocompliancewithSection8. Chairbishop askedifstaffcouldlookintowhetheror notthehouseisontheHistoricalregistry.CommissionerBishopstated thattheSection of8-050itdoescomeundervarianceproceduresandIrecognizeit’sinthepartdealingwithflooddamage preventionhowever itgivesmeproblemsthatweredealingwithanissuebeforeustonightthat’sspecificallyinconjunction withsubsectionCdeals resotherefore withtherepairorrehabilitationIgetthatwerenotdealingwitha repairora rehabilitationofahistoric structu weretalkingaboutavarianceforanactualmodificationor changetoanexistingstructure,not following onanatural accordanceieafloodandthereforeI’mnotrealsurethathasapplicabilitytothiscurrentissue.Thetwoare definitelyinconflict witheachotherinregardstovariances.Ms.Reichstatedthatfloodordinanceisa statemodelandweare requiredtoadoptit ng asitis, itisoneofmanythingswewillhaveonthelistfortheLandDevelopmentCodetogothroughtheconflicti languages.Mr.Lanierapproachedtheplanningcommissionandstatedhecurrentlylivesat1113ButlerAve.whichisthehouse thatweareaskingforthevariance.ChairMajoraskedifhishouseisonthecurrentHistoricalRegistry.Mr.Lanieransweredhe hasneverappliedfortheregistryandhasneverseenanyinformationofitbeingonitbuthedoeshavea plaquefromthe servethehouseandtobringittoFEMA historicalsocietyofitbeingahistoricalhouse,andthatiswhyourintentistopre compliance,thequestiononthestepsisthesitalmost7feetorsofromthesidewalkIwouldliketomovethosesteps backso and Idid theyareabout10feetawayfromthesidewalksoIammovingthemfurtheraway,tominimizethatencroachment, wanttomakeacommentthatweareraisingthehousetheplanistoraisethehouseinitsexistingpositionandthereisa porchonthe southsidestillstayingwithinthe10foot setbackandtherewouldbesomeadditionalspaceaddedtothebackall maintainingthecurrentsetbacks.Mr.HeiseyapproachedthecommissionstatingthathehasnoproblemwiththeworkMr. willbedoing.CommissionerMcNaughtonmadeamotiontoapprovethevariancefor theencroachmentof7foot2inches Lanier deepand8footwidewith20footfrontsetbackCommissionerBossicksecondedthemotionandthevotetoapprovewas unanimous. Variance–1113ButlerAve.considerationof aheightvariancetoallowfortherenovationandelevationofa singlefamilystructureto1footaboveBFE.ScheduleofDevelopmentRegulations(Section 3-090). Mr.Shawapproachedthecommissiontoexplainthattheapplicantwouldliketoadd10inchesabovethe35footheightlimit theroofisaverylowpitch.ChairMajoraskedifthesecondstoryisexisting.Mr.Shawstatedthatitisa singlestoryhousenow andthisiswhytheyarerequestingthe Heightsotheycanadda secondstorytoit.CommissionerBishopstatedthat’sto accommodatethehigherpitchfortheroofalsowerethereanyotherrenderingsthatwouldeliminatethe10inchheight variance.Mr.Shawansweredyes,andtomyknowledgetherewerenootherrenderings.CommissionerMcNaughtonaskedif theyraisethehouse1foottheywouldbeokontheFEMAright.Ms.Reichansweredcorrect.Mr.Lanierapproachedthe commissiontosayhehasworkedwithhisarchitectandthechallengehefacesishavingtobringtheexistinghouseup high enoughsoIcanhavea groundfloorsowecanput2bedroomsinwhichrequiresmetotakethemup4feetfrom9feetto 13feettorunductworkunderthefloorithastobeafootabovetheBFE,thereisnoroomtogooutonthesidesandweare the tryingtokeepthesamefootprint,alsoifthereareanyotherarchitecturalappurtenancesIwilladdthattomypitchon CommissionerMcNaughtonaskediftherewereanyalternativeoptionsfortheductwork.Mr.Lanierexplainedthatthe roof. athistoricallywe onlyotheroptionwouldbetogothroughthejoistandthatwouldbeunsafe.CommissionerBishopstatedth have havehadheightvariancesbeforeus severaltimesandIunderstandthereasoningbehindthe35footthatwecurrently Ialsounderstandthefactthathavingbeeninvolvedinbuildingthatvariousceilingheightsaswellasductworkandother and alternativescanbenegotiated.Iguessmybiggestquestionforthiscommissionisthatwehavebeensorequestedtimeand timeagainonour35footthatI’ma littleconcernedwithonealternativesandtwothenoseunderthetentwithor35FeetI continuetoraiseasanissuewithregardstotheheightvariance.ChairMajoraddedthathewouldremindthecommissionthat mypositionhasalwaysbeenourjobistomatchtherequestwiththeordinancesinthelanddevelopmentcodeandsaythisfits orthisdoesn’tfitandcouncilcandowhatevertheywantwithourrecommendation.CommissionerLivingstonstatedthatshe agreeswithCommissionerBishopaboutthedifferentpossibilitiesandwehavetorememberwearenotlookingatjustraising rence. thehousetogetitoutofthefloodzonewe’relookingatanadditiontothehouseandIthinkthatmakesa diffe CommissionerMcNaughtonmadeamotiontodenyandsecondedbyCommissionerBishopthevotetodenywasunanimous. Variance–RifleAve(Lot5ofSubdivisionofBlock16BayWard)considerationoffront,sideandrearyard setbackvariancetoallowfor theconstructionofasinglefamilyresidence.ScheduleofDevelopment Regulations(Section3-090): Mr.ShawapproachedtheCommissiontoexplainthatthisisanundersizedlotapproximately3,661squarefeetsmallerthanour minimumallowablelotsize forthedistrictandtheyarerequestingtoreducethesetbacksbyhalfonallsidesandanadditional 5feetfor stairsonthesouthside,alsothethingtokeepinmindthisisa streetthatdoesn’texistrightnowpresumingifthey decidetodevelopthisunopenedrightofwaywillinvitedevelopmentontheadjoininglotsallofwhicharesmallerthanthisone whichwillpresumablyaskforavariancealso.ChairMajorstatedoneoftherequirementsthatourordinancecallsfor on developingasubstandardlotofrecordwhichthisclearlyisandunderourrevisedvarianceordinancesubstandardlotsofrecord doopenconsiderationforavariance,butIbelieveavailabilityofwaterandsewerisa requirementfor thatto beconsidered. CommissionerMcNaughtonaskedcouldthepropertyownerlegallyusethatunopenedroadandisthatroadincludedinthe greenspaceinthelastapplicationoftheFEMAbecausethatwasdiscussedonhowmanypointswewouldget onthat unopenedroadifinfactitwascountedwouldwelose thosepointsifweopenedit.Mr.Shawstatedhedoesnotknowthe answertothatbuthewilllookintoit.CommissionerBishopstatedthisapplicantdoesnot haveappropriatematerialsforavote notsureifitisforaSitePlanVarianceorjustavarianceapplication.CommissionerBramblemotionedtosendbacktostafffor moreinformationCommissionerBishopsecondedthevotewasunanimous. TextAmendment–considerationsof revisionstoFloodDamagePreventionOrdinanceNo.24-2015,Section8- 060,Definitions:SubstantialImprovement: ChairMajorstatedthatwecurrentlyhavea localordinanceonlyanditsayswhenyouhavesignificantimprovementsandyou rebuildityourrestrictedto50%ofthebuildingonlyvaluefor fiveyears.Mr.ShawstatedthatonanonFEMAcomplianthome whenyouwanttomakeimprovementsyoucanspend50%oftheassessmentofyourhomeonlywithin5yearsandafterthe fiveyearsitdoesn’trenewitonlydropsofftheoldestpermit.Thereasonthishascomeforwardisthatitisdifficultforstaffto administerbecauseoftrackingdowneachimprovement,anditisdifficultforhomeownerstounderstandandiftheyhaveover 20 points spentandsomethingcatastrophichappenstheycan’tfixit.TheonedownsideisitdoesaffectourCRSratingbylosing butitdoesn’tmakethatmuchdifference.CommissionerBossickaskeddoesthisresetonacalendaryear.ChairMajor saiditis henyou’re requiredto trackedbydateofpermit.Mr.Matlockaskedwhatisthatnumberfor.Ms.Reichstatedthatdictatesw elevateyourhometomeetthestandardBFEinyourareaandif youexceed50%ofthevalueofthebuildingnot thepropertyjustthebuildingyouwouldberequiredtoelevateittoBFEatthesametimeandthatiswhatpeoplerunintoover thecourseoffiveyearstheycanonlydoworkontheirhousethatwouldbelessthan50%ofthevalueatthestartofthefive yearsorthewouldberequiredtoelevatetheirhome.CommissionerBossickstatedwhenyoutakethe opportunityforpeopleto tyinmyopinion. Mr. maintaintheirhomesespeciallyourelderlypeople;wearenotgoingtowhereweneedtohelpthecommuni Petreaapproachedthe Commissionandstatedheisa licensedcontractorontheIslandandhe doesa lotofimprovements aroundthearea,hestatedthisisaveryimportantchange,andthereisalotofimprovementthatdo notgetpermittedandhe isheretosupportthechangefromfiveyeartooneyear.ChairMajormentionedthatweshouldconsiderdefiningwhatisandis notpermitted.CommissionerMatlockstatedshouldwemakethisretroactivefor fiveyears.CommissionerBishopaskedwhatis thenegativefromreducingfromfivetooneyear.Ms.Reichexplainedthatshehasahardtimefindinganegative. CommissionerBishopmadeamotionthattheFEMAregulationsdefineunder44CFR59.1substantialimprovementmeansanyre- constructionrehabilitationadditionor otherimprovementstoa structuretotalcostofwhichequalsorexceeds50%ofthe marketvalueofthestructurebeforethestartofconstructionoftheimprovement,soourproposalwiththeexceptionofadding incombinationofrepairsmirrorimagestheFEMAsoourrecommendationtocouncilistoremoveasRonsuggestedofrepairs withtheFEMAdefinitionwithoneyearspecification.CommissionerLivingstonsecondedandthevotewas andstrictlygo unanimous. TextAmendment–considerationofnewordinancepertainingtoTreeOrdinanceNo.52-2014,Land DevelopmentCodeArticle7,TreeOrdinance\[theproposedArticle7woulddeletethecurrentArticle7,Tree RemovalOrdinance\]: Mr.ShawapproachedtheCommissionstatingthathereadthroughthecurrentandthenewIfoundnota lotofadvantagesin eitherandI’mnotcertainwhattheyaretryingtoachievewiththeproposed,soIwouldliketounderstanditbetterandtweak thecurrentonea littletogetthesamething.ChairMajorstatedthisisthefourthtimethisCommissionhasseenthetree hatwas ordinanceinthepast3years.CommissionerBossicksaidthatitcertainlywouldhavehelpedtoseeinthedocumentw changeditwasveryconfusing.CommissionerLivingstonmadethemotiontotablewithmoreclarificationandsecondedby CommissionerBramblethevotewasunanimous. CommissionerBishopmadeamotiontoadjournandwassecondedmyCommissionerBramblethevotewasunanimous. Meetingadjournedat8:16pm