Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20160516_PC_MINUTES.pdf PLANNING COMMISSION CITY MANAGER Demery Bishop Diane Schleicher Ron Bossick Marianne BrambleCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Tina Gann George Shaw John King Charles MatlockCITY ATTORNEY David McNaughton Edward M. Hughes Planning Commission Meeting MINUTES May 16, 2016 Chair Bishop called the May 16, 2016 Tybee Island Planning Commission meeting to order. Commissioners present were Ron Bossick, MarianneBramble, Tina Gann, Charles Matlock and DavidMcNaughton.Commissioner John King was not present. Consideration of Minutes: Chair Bishop asked for consideration of April 18, 2016meeting minutes. Commissioner Bossick made the motion to approve, Commissioner Gann seconded, and thevote to approve was unanimous. Disclosures/Recusal: Chair Bishop asked if there were any disclosures or recusals. Commissioner McNaughton stated he would have to recuse his self for the second item on the agendaunder new business, setback Variance 1402Jones Ave. Old Business: Chair Bishop asked staff and Planning Commission if the discussion of C-2 parking could be moved to the last item on the agenda even though it is not new business. Mr. Shaw stated he was going to recommend the same thing. Commissioner McNaughton made a motion to move C-2 Discussion to the final item on the agenda for purposes of old business. Commissioner Bramble seconded, and the vote to approve was unanimous. Site Plan/Marsh Buffer Variance – 4 Billfish Lane – consideration to build in Marsh Buffer: Mr. Shaw addressedthe commission stating that this is back on the agenda with the questions that needed answered. One question’s answer is this is notagrandfatheredissue so they did need to ask for avariance to go beyond the current marsh buffer line and the second question was for them to answer questions is the sec. G and the third item was the marsh buffer delineation by the surveyor he made a mistake on survey and updatedit for more accurate representation. The applicant is requesting a variance for the same area. The new survey shows the correct marsh line now.Commissioner Matlock asked Mr. Shaw if he stated that the reference on the survey to the 2014 letter was anerror.Mr. Shaw stated yes the surveyor meant to type 2004 not 2014 it was a typo. Commissioner McNaughton asked if the applicant is prohibited from putting a slabthere. Mr. Shaw stated yes that should be in the Planning Commission’s recommendation. Commissioner McNaughton also stated that the old site plan shows threedrainage easements and the new only shows oneand alsoone of the requirements for a variance in the buffer is to showon the site planthe contour lines. Mr. Shaw stated he has seen the proposed drainage plan and it shows drainage all the way aroundand on the contour line there is one contour line and any lines are beyond the scope of the site. Mr. Shay the applicant approached the Planning Commission and asked if the parking area can be a slab and what is the reason theycan’t have a slab. Mr. Shawstated the only reason for that is that it is on the original platreferenced in a letter from DNR but it is exempt from DNRand not in our ordinanceif you grant a variance. Commissioner Bishop stated that it is not a requirement just a recommendation from DNR. Commissioner Bramble stated that the houses there were probably put in before this was in effect. Mr. Shaw stated they were after that. Mr. Shaw stated they were built after 2004. Commissioner Gann asked if it would be an overwhelming hardship to not use aconcrete slab. Mr. Shay stated we can use pervious concrete. Commissioner Bossick statedthat it is not important what’s under the house as long as it runs into the drainage easement. Commissioner Bramble asked does the city have certain materialsfor driveways. Mr. Shaw stated yes the City has a list of materials.ChairBishop stated would pervious be sufficient materialfor a load bearing area. Mr. Shaw statedthe concrete slab under the house will not be load bearing, the piers will have the load. Ms. Mary Crawley approached the Planning Commission and stated she lives in Norcross Georgia and owns the propertyat 1007 Jones Avenue and her property is right next to the property in question. She stated she is not an engineer but we have told the city that this area is not suitable for a six lot neighborhood. She stated from her understanding the lots west and north of hers have been designated wetlands and there is standing water all the time and Mr. Shaw told herone time when he was out looking at it that the standing water is caused more from development then globalwarming, whatever the reason she could not see how another house in this area is a positive thing. The buffer is designed to protect nature. Ms. Crawley asked the commission to consider the consequence of allowing more construction on this site. Chair Bishop asked Ms. Crawley if she has a substantial amount of standing water on her property now that does not drain. Ms. Crawley stated no, butit does come to the edge of the house and the land stays saturated. Mr. DiBenedetto approached the Planning Commission and stated his name and that he lives at 912 Second Avenue since 1986. Mr. DiBenedetto stated that the lot in question has never flooded and he does notthink it will flood from another house being built around Ms. Crawley’s property. Ms. DiBenedetto approached the Planning Commission and stated she live at 912 Second Avenue and she has never seen the water stay on the property at 4 Billfish Lane, the water always goes down right away. Commissioner Gann asked Mr. Shaw if the buildablearea is enough without a variance. Mr. Shaw stated it is small for a home the variance will allow them more square footage. Commissioner Gann also asked Mr. Shaw if he is familiar with the home on Eagles Nest that was a small lot and they had no variance and she thinks this lot would be buildable without a varianceat a thousand square feet. Mr. Shaw stated he did feel the lot was unbuildable in April and now he thinksit is buildable. Commissioner Bramble stated yesshe thinksit is buildable withouta variance. Commissioner Bossick stated historically when this area got approved how and why is in question because of the proximity to the Marsh and now that Planning Commission can get it done with caution. Commissioner McNaughton asked if part of the house could be built on a cantilever. Mr. Shaw stated his guess would be yes. Commissioner Bramblestatedif we give them a variance with restrictions it will still be hard for me. Chair Bishop stated this was approvedyears ago and there is a positive change in the overall square footage and he feels the Planning Commission needsto make a recommendation with conditions. Commissioner Matlock made the motion to approve upon meeting the conditions in theOctober 15, 2004 DNR letter. Commissioner Bramble seconded with also adding the condition that they must use permeable surfaces in the driveway and slab area. Commissioner Gann also stated she would like to include the condition that they put a gutter system in todirect the wateraway from the marsh. Commissioner Matlock amended his motion to approve contingent upon meeting the conditions in the October 15, 2004 DNR letterwith two modification requirements, one being to have permeable surfaces in driveway and slab and two being to add a gutter system to revert water outside the marsh buffer to the drainage easement. New Business: Minor Subdivision – 402 Ninth Street – consideration of combining 1 lot to 2 Lots: Mr. Shaw addressed the Planning Commission statingthe applicant is requesting to subdivide one lot to make two lots to sell one half and both lotswill meetall specificationsfor a single family home. Chair Bishop stated are we subdividing one lot in to two then why does the plat actually saya recombining plat.Mr. Shaw stated the surveyor must have just used that term because it was at one time two lots made into one. Commissioner Bramble asked if they are both buildable. Mr. Shaw stated yesthey are. Commissioner McNaughton asked if the applicant is present. Mr. Shaw stated nothe applicant is not here. Commissioner Matlock asked if a drainage plan should be shown on this plat. Mr. Shaw stated that would be on the construction planswhen they get ready to build. Chair Bishop stated this plat is noted that it does refer to old surveys. Commissioner McNaughton made a motion to approve and was seconded by Commissioner Matlock the vote to approve was unanimous. Setback Variance – 1402 Jones Avenue – consideration of back door porch with lift: Mr. Shaw addressedthe Planning Commission and stated that the applicant would like to add an elevator with a lift as an exit in the back of house that would be in her bedroom, a deck would also be added for the elevator that would encroachfive footsix inchesinto the rear building setback and would be about twenty feet wide. Chair Bishop asked if the left side has a ten foot setback, and would itbe appropriate to move the storage build and use that areaas to not encroach the setback. Mr. Shaw stated yes that would be less of an encroachment. Commissioner Bossick asked if there was any consideration tojust add a lift in the room without the deck and slab. Mr. Shaw stated that question would be for the applicant. Commissioner Matlock asked if the shed was onthe lot line. Mr. Shaw stated yes it is a nonconformingbuilding that has been there.Mr. John Williams the applicant’s sonapproached the Planning Commission and stated he lives at 11 Yardarm place on Wilmington Island and his parents own this property. Mr. Williams also stated the shed on the property cannot be moved very easyit was put where it is a long time ago when the property was one lot. The other side of the house has no other place to put it except in the center of room. This is the best optionbecause we are concerned that she might possibly be trapped in the bedroom. Commissioner Bossick stated there are lifts that have no shafts. Mr. Williams stated that is the same device we will be using. Commissioner Bramble stated she looks at this variance as a safety issue and she made a motion to approve this variance. It was seconded by Commissioner Bossick. The vote to approve was three in favor, Commissioners Bramble, Gann and Bossick and one apposedCommissioner Matlock, Commissioner McNaughton recused his self from this vote. Discuss June 20, 2016 meeting change: th Mr. Shaw stated because of a flood conference that he has to attend on the 20of June staff recommends the thth meeting be changed June 13. Commissioner McNaughton made a motion to move to the 13and was seconded by Commissioner Bramble the vote to approve was unanimous. Discussion of C-2 Parking: Mr. Shaw stated that when he presented to City Council that Planning Commission did not wish to make any recommendations to C-2 Parking the last time it was discussed and City Council stated they really want some changes made so he stated he compiled some of Planning Commission comments and City Council comments and looking at a few other things he refined his potential suggestions so he would like to hear their comments. Commissioner McNaughton stated he has the same question he had before he would like to know what is behind this. Mr. Shaw stated the concern is the empty lotsalong80 are difficult to develop with the current parking requirement and they were hoping those lot will be more developable if we reduce the parking requirement for more commercial activity. Commissioner Bramblestated thatthe city isinterested in changing requirementsfor a few lots after all the other lots had to jump through hoops to develop. Mr. Shaw stated yes that is right and he also stated it could also affectredevelopment. Commissioner Matlockasked if C-2 is on Hwy 80 andthe purpose is to bring development in, he stated he does not see an issue there becausethere is already a lot of parking in that area. Mr. Shaw stated the requirement currently states youhave all of the parking on the parcel and the spots on Hwy 80 are additional. Chair Bishop asked if there are any parcels in that area currently for sale.Mr. Shaw stated yes he believes there are a couple. Commissioner Bossick stated that changing the C-2 parking would be unfair to the residential area near those lotsbecause they would have no say in the development. Chair Bishop stated why couldn’t the City buy a lot and create parking instead of changing everything down 80and maybe even having a shuttle service. Mr.Shaw stated the City does own two unopened right away areasthat they could make parking with about 20 spaces. Commissioner Bramble stated she has heard thisfor yearsabout a shuttle and the City should open up any available areas to parking also the City should work out a deal with the existing island shuttle companies. Commissioner Bossick stated he would recommend reviewing the parking inthat area by businesses. Adjournment: Commissioner Bossick made a motion to adjourn and Commissioner Gann seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00pm.