HomeMy Public PortalAboutCCS_Report_Final_093016.pdf
City of Tybee Island
Carrying Capacity Study
September 2016
35 Abercorn Street, Suite 210
Savannah, Georgia 31401
www.ecologicalplanning.net
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY i
Acknowledgements
This study was prepared by the City of Tybee Island under a Coastal Incentive Grant awarded from
the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and from the Office for Coastal Management
(OCM), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The statements, findings,
conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the
views of DNR, OCM or NOAA.
Ecological Planning Group, LLC assisted the City of Tybee Island with preparation of this report.
Many thanks to the elected and appointed City officials, as well as the citizens, business owners
and visitors who dedicated their time, expertise and resources for this project. Their assistance
and participation in the planning process and data gathering exercises made this study possible.
A special thanks to the Georgia DNR, Coastal Resources Division. This project would not have been
possible without the funding and assistance provided through the Coastal Management Program.
35 Abercorn Street, Suite 210
Savannah, Georgia 31401
www.ecologicalplanning.net
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
1.1. BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. STUDY SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................................ 2
1.2.1 Technical Advisory Group (TAG) ................................................................................. 2
1.2.2 Community Resource Assessment & Inventory ........................................................... 2
1.2.3 Analysis of Community Resource Limitations ............................................................. 3
1.2.4 Recommendations & Implementation ........................................................................ 3
1.2.5 Presentation of the Carrying Capacity Study .............................................................. 4
1.3. WHAT IS CARRYING CAPACITY? ............................................................................................... 4
1.4. CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY GOALS ......................................................................................... 4
2. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT .......................................................................................... 6
2.1. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE .......................................................................................... 6
2.2. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS ........................................................................................................ 6
3. POPULATION DYNAMICS ON TYBEE ISLAND.................................................................... 7
3.1. RESIDENT POPULATION ......................................................................................................... 8
3.2. OVERNIGHT POPULATION ...................................................................................................... 9
3.3. DAYTIME POPULATION ........................................................................................................ 12
3.4. POPULATION SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 14
4. RESOURCE LIMITATIONS .............................................................................................. 15
4.1. WATER WITHDRAWAL & WATER USE .................................................................................... 15
4.1.1 Correlation of Overnight Population with Water Usage .......................................... 16
4.1.2 Tybee Island Water Withdrawal Permit Limitations................................................. 17
4.1.3 Water Distribution Infrastructure System ................................................................. 19
4.1.4 Alternative Water Supply .......................................................................................... 20
4.2. WASTEWATER DISCHARGE ................................................................................................... 21
4.3. TRANSPORTATION & PARKING .............................................................................................. 23
4.3.1 U.S. Highway 80 (US 80) Capacity and Road Network Capacity .............................. 23
4.3.2 Parking ...................................................................................................................... 26
4.4. STORMWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY ................................................................................. 32
4.4.1 Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan ............................................................ 33
4.5. SOLID WASTE .................................................................................................................... 40
4.5.1 Solid Waste Collection ............................................................................................... 40
4.5.2 Disposal Trends ......................................................................................................... 41
4.6. ENERGY USE ..................................................................................................................... 42
4.6.1 Solarize Tybee ........................................................................................................... 43
4.6.2 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory ............................................................ 44
4.7. ZONING ............................................................................................................................ 47
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY iii
4.7.1 Zoning Analysis ......................................................................................................... 48
4.7.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................. 49
4.7.3 Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 49
4.7.4 Population in the R-2 District Based on Current Development ................................. 50
4.7.5 Full Build-Out Scenario .............................................................................................. 51
4.7.6 Additional Population Based on Build-Out Scenario ................................................. 53
4.7.7 Zoning Assessment Findings ..................................................................................... 53
5. RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES AND WORK PLAN ........................................................... 55
5.1. CARRYING CAPACITY WORK PLAN .......................................................................................... 63
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................. 73
1. INTRODUCTION
Ecological Planning Group (EPG) has prepared this report to present the findings of the City’s
Carrying Capacity Study. The purpose of this Carrying Capacity Study is to determine the
population size that can be supported by the City of Tybee Island, the limiting factors for
population growth, and how the City can prepare for future growth. Primary limiting factors can
be either resource-based, i.e. available water supply, or infrastructure-based, i.e. the ability of
the sanitary distribution and treatment system to safely convey and adequately treat domestic
wastewater.
This study is also intended to inform the City’s concurrent Master Planning Process. The City’s
2008 Master Plan is being updated in accordance with the requirements of the Georgia
Department of Community Affairs (DCA) Rules Chapter 110-12-1: Minimum Standards and
Procedures for Local Comprehensive Planning. The purpose of the masterplan is to present the
City’s Vision for the Future and to provide a framework for achieving that Vision. The data, goals,
issues and strategies presented herein have been incorporated into the City’s Master Plan, as
appropriate, and this report
should be considered one
element of the overall City
Master Plan.
1.1. BACKGROUND
Tybee Island is a premier regional
and national tourism destination
and an important economic
engine for the Savannah
metropolitan area. Whether it is
families visiting the beach,
people enjoying the various eco-
tourism opportunities, history
buffs exploring Ft. Pulaski or the
Tybee Lighthouse, or visitors
supporting the local artisan
community, the unique resources of
the island play a significant role in driving the tourism industry. However, because of the wealth
of community resources, there is also great development pressure facing Tybee Island. The City’s
water, sewer, and roadway infrastructure systems are severely strained by the massive seasonal
fluctuations in population. Further compounding this issues are threats posed by rising sea levels
and climate change, which are likely to increase flooding risk, shrink the amount of developable
land, affect egress on and off the island, and further limit the amount of development the island
can support.
The City of Tybee Island is in a unique position as one of the few locally-governed, developed
barrier islands in Georgia, and as such has strong local influence over the management and
Tybee Island Historical Society
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 2
preservation the island. As such, the City of Tybee Island applied for a Coastal Incentive Grant
(CIG) through the Coastal Resources Division (CRD) of the Georgia Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) to conduct a Carrying Capacity Study to gain a better understanding of the
island’s resources and how much development these limited resources can support without
degradation of the quality of life that makes Tybee Island such a unique coastal community.
Through a comprehensive stakeholder engagement program, the Carrying Capacity Study will
identify which resources are essential to supporting the economy and quality of life of Tybee
Island, and what, if any limitations there are on those resources. The study will identify the
maximum amount of resident, overnight and daytime populations that can be supported with
existing services/infrastructure. The study will also attempt to identify upgrades to infrastructure
that may be necessary to support future increases in population.
1.2. STUDY SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of work for the Carrying Capacity Study is outlined below.
1.2.1 Technical Advisory Group (TAG)
The City implemented a community engagement program that consisted of numerous public
meetings in an effort to provide an opportunity for the citizens of Tybee Island and any other
interested parties to participate in this process. Participants at these meetings were afforded the
opportunity to provide information, represent community interests, and to provide input on the
planning process and results. This public and transparent process was designed to foster
community support for the findings and recommendations of the study.
Participation in the TAG was not restricted. Meetings were open to the public and advertised on
the City’s website and posted at City Hall.
1.2.2 Community Resource Assessment & Inventory
The City performed an assessment of existing community resources in an effort to inventory and
identify limitations. The following community resources were analyzed:
• Population dynamics, including trends and impacts of the on-island resident
population, overnight/short term rental population, and daytime population.
• Water supply capacity, including existing water distribution infrastructure, Floridan
Aquifer water withdrawal permit limits, and the impact of the future proposed
Cretaceous well.
• Capacity of the City’s wastewater plant (Water Pollution Control Plant or WPCP),
future required upgrades, effluent limits and assimilative capacity of receiving
waterways.
• Stormwater infrastructure condition, needed upgrades, flooding issues, king tides and
the effects of sea level rise on infrastructure capacity.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 3
• Current roadway capacity and level of service, including the proposed Georgia
Department of Transportation (GDOT) Highway 80 project and its impact on roadway
level of service.
• Parking limitations and availability of alternative modes of transportation
• Energy consumption including greenhouse gas footprint of City operations,
alternative energy sources, availability and cost of fuel, and any known energy grid
concerns.
• Capacity of solid waste services, beach litter, and participation in the City’s curbside
recycling program and its impact on solid waste collection.
• Development regulations, and the impact of additional development on island
resources.
1.2.3 Analysis of Community Resource Limitations
After completion of the community resources inventory and assessment, the City reviewed
availability, level of service and future limitations of the inventoried community resources. This
analysis included the following:
• The projected limit of resident, overnight and daytime populations that can be
supported by existing infrastructure systems based on commonly accepted metrics.
• Upgrades, capital projects, etc., that would be necessary to increase these limits,
where feasible.
• Measures to regulate development and/or protect environmental resources.
1.2.4 Recommendations & Implementation
Based on the inventory and assessment of resources and the limitations that were identified, the
City and the TAG worked together to identify recommendations to encourage more sustainable
development and protect island resources that included the following:
• Future land use/zoning amendments
• Capital improvements for water, sewer, stormwater and transportation
• Additional protection for environmental resources
The recommendations have also been incorporated into the City’s Comprehensive Master Plan,
which is due to be updated by October 2016. It was the desire of the City and the TAG to integrate
the Carrying Capacity Study process with the Comprehensive Planning process, as much as
possible, such that the results of this project will be included in both the Community Vision and
Future Land Use Plan as well as within the Short Term Work Program. Integrating these efforts
has also allowed the City to maximize the public involvement in both. Maximizing the
opportunities for public input should improve public acceptance of the final recommendations.
Furthermore, including the results of this study in the City Comprehensive Plan will provide a
method of implementation and reinforce the City’s accountability.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 4
1.2.5 Presentation of the Carrying Capacity Study
The City has developed a Carrying Capacity Study process that is described herein, including the
methods the City used to perform the assessment and inventory of community resources and to
identify resource limitations. This report also describes the procedures used to gather data,
engage community stakeholders, and integrate the Carrying Capacity Study into the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
The City will present the process and results of the Tybee Island Carrying Capacity Study to coastal
managers at the September 2016 CRD Brownbag Presentation, and at the GA Climate Ready
Conference to be held in Jekyll Island in November 2016. The purpose of this presentation will
be to convey project results, communicate impacts and benefits to coastal managers and/or the
general coastal public, and describe the stakeholder process .
1.3. WHAT IS CARRYING CAPACITY?
The Wave Ecology and Highway 80 Challenge Study was commissioned in 2011 by Chatham
County in partnership with the City of Tybee Island and the Coastal Region Metropolitan Planning
Organization (CORE MPO) to define localized solutions to issues surrounding the safety of citizens
and visitors on Hwy 80, as traffic, and traffic related impacts increase. This plan explored the
concept of urban ecology, “a school of thought that seeks to understand the natural systems of
urban areas and the threats that face them.”
Understanding the urban environment and the impacts of human populations on that
environment can allow planners to design healthier, more resilient communities. In particular,
many coastal communities across the world contend with population impacts related to tourism
that stress the capacity of the community.
The Tybee Island Wave Ecology Study defined Carrying Capacity as:
I = P x A x T
I = Environmental Impact
P = Population
A = Affluence
T = Technology
This equation demonstrates that human carrying capacity is not strictly related to population
size, but to many levels of consumption, which are in turn impacted by technology and the
economy. Local governments have the opportunity to impact these variables through regulatory
and policy choices related to land use, infrastructure improvements, growth management, and
the local economy.
1.4. CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY GOALS
The TAG felt that it was important to identify guiding principles for the Carrying Capacity Study,
in order to provide the framework under which carrying capacity issues could be identified and
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 5
solutions proposed. The guiding principles identified by the TAG for this Carrying Capacity Study
are as follows:
Diverse and stable year-round population with a high quality of life
Sustainable tourism-based economy that also serves year-round population and
business owners in the off-season
Balance between the needs of the tourism industry and year-round residents
Protection of Tybee Island’s environmental, historic and cultural resources
Safe multi-modal access to, from and within Tybee Island for residents and visitors
Adapting to a changing climate
Political and public support for implementation of the plan recommendations
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 6
2. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
The Tybee Island Carrying Capacity Study included a robust community engagement process
that was designed to be inclusive and to garner public support for the planning process and the
final recommendations of the study.
2.1. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
A total of five (5) meetings were held over the course of this project with a total of 40+ people
participating in one or more of the TAG public meetings. TAG meeting summaries and
presentations are included in Appendix A. A brief summary of each meeting is included below:
Meeting Date Meeting Agenda
October 12, 2015 Project kick off; identification of data needs
December 8, 2015 Review of Wave Ecology Report; review of data analysis; identification
of resources and infrastructure to be studied; outstanding data needs
March 29, 2016 Identify goals; identify impacts of population growth on resources and
infrastructure
June 1, 2016 HWY 80 project update; greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory
update; identification of strategies to address impacts from population
August 10, 2016 GHG inventory results; review of issues, strategies and considerations;
development of work plan items
In addition to the five (5) official TAG meetings, the community engagement process was
coordinated closely with the 2008 Master Plan update. Data, issues, goals and other elements of
the Carrying Capacity Study were presented at public meetings held for the Master Plan, and
input provided at both the TAG meetings and the Master Plan public meetings informed the
findings of this report.
2.2. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
Throughout the planning process presentations were made to City Council on July 28 th and
September 8th, 2016. The purpose of these presentations was to update the elected officials on
the planning process and to present the final recommendations of the study. City Council and
Planning and Zoning Commission members were also invited to participate in the TAG meetings.
The Tybee Island Carrying Capacity Study was also presented to coastal managers at the
September 15, 2016 CRD Brownbag Presentation, and will be presented at the Georgia Climate
Ready Conference to be held in Jekyll Island in November 2016. The purpose of these
presentations is to present the final recommendations and describe the planning process.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 7
3. POPULATION DYNAMICS ON TYBEE ISLAND
Due to Tybee Island’s prominence as a tourism and vacation destination, there are three distinct
types of population that must be considered, as each type of population is necessary for the
economic viability of the island but may be affected by a different
grouping of limiting factors:
1.) Resident Population. This number includes
homeowners and long-term rentals.
2.) Overnight Population. This number includes the
resident population, but it also includes the short-
term rental population which is proportionately
significant, when compared to the resident
population, and highly variable throughout the
year. Also included in this population is the
“second home” owners who own a second home
on Tybee Island, which they do not rent, but at which
they periodically vacation.
3.) Daytime Population. This number includes the resident
and overnight populations as well as the day-tripper
population, which is even more variable than the overnight population and the largest
population during certain holidays such as the 4th of July.
This report includes a summary of the following information regarding the City’s population:
Census data from 2000 and 2010
Analysis of the 2010 Census Data conducted by Tybee Island in support of the 2012 Local
Option Sales Tax (LOST) negotiation
Data from the City’s Business License database regarding short-term rental units and
hotel/motel rooms.
Occupancy data from the Tybee Island Campground and short-term rental agencies
Assessment of water use and sewage discharge data and its correlation to proposed
resident population
City of Tybee Island Tourism Study
This report also includes a projection of overnight and daytime populations based on the
following information:
Data on rental units provided by the City’s Business License Tax Database and private
rental agencies.
Water withdrawal data
Transportation studies maintained and/or performed by Tybee Island
Daytime
Population
Overnight
Population
Resident
Population
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 8
3.1. RESIDENT POPULATION
Table 1 shows the Census data and trends related to population for 2000 and 2010. Table 2
presents the Census data and percentage change for every census since 1900. Please note that
the 2010 Census showed the first population decrease on the island since 1920.
Table 1: Population for Tybee Island, GA
Source: Census Bureau
Table 2: Historical Population Trends
Source: Census Bureau
Census Pop. % Change
1900 381 —
1910 786 106.3%
1920 117 −85.1%
1930 202 72.6%
1940 644 218.8%
1950 1,036 60.9%
1960 1,385 33.7%
1970 1,786 29.0%
1980 2,240 25.4%
1990 2,842 26.9%
2000 3,392 19.4%
2010 2,990 −11.9%
Est. 2014 3,082 3.1%
Table 3 presents the Housing Occupancy characteristics and associated trends over the same
time period. Between the time period of 2000 and 2010, while resident population was
decreasing, the number of total housing units increased. The increase in the total number of
living units combined with the reduction in the number of permanently occupied units, resulted
in a significant increase in the number of units that are not occupied by a permanent resident.
Per the 2010 Census, approximately 60% of the units on the island are not permanently occupied.
Census Data Type 2000 2010 Percent
Change
Population 3,392 2,990 -11.9%
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 9
Table 3: Housing Occupancy Characteristics for Tybee Island, GA
Source: US Census Bureau
Housing Unit Type 2000 Percent
2000
2010 Percent
2010
Percent
Change
Total Housing Units 2,696 -- 3,366 -- 24.9%
Occupied Housing Units 1,568 58.2% 1,360 40.4% -13.3%
Owner-Occupied 1,078 40.0% 918 27.3% -14.8%
Renter-Occupied 490 18.2% 442 13.1% -9.8%
Vacant Housing Units 1,128 41.8% 2,006 59.6% 77.8%
Seasonal, Recreational, Occasional Use 676 25.1% 1,473 43.8% 117.9%
For Rent/For Sale/Other 452 16.8% 533 15.8% 17.9%
3.2. OVERNIGHT POPULATION
As a national tourist destination, it is reasonable to assume that Tybee Island has a significant
increase in overnight (non-resident) population that stresses the City’s infrastructure and
resources. Since tourism on Tybee Island is an economic driver for the region, it is necessary to
assess and plan for the impact of increased summertime population.
Tybee Island is a national tourism destination and this overnight, short-term population places a
significant burden, in the form of “peak usage” upon Tybee Island’s services and infrastructure,
including water, sewer, and roadways. Peak usage can be defined as the result of a period of
simultaneous, strong consumer demand.
In order to quantify this additional population and the associated demand placed on City
infrastructure and services, EPG has prepared an estimate of overnight population based on data
provided by the 2010 Census, the City’s Occupational Tax records for short-term rentals and
hotel/motel units. In addition to the short-term rental units, the City of Tybee Island operates a
campground that contains RV and tent campsites that would not have been included in the
Census. Adding the total number of short-term rental units and hotel/motel units to the total
number of campsites results in a total number of 1,738 short-term rental opportunities, as shown
in Table 4 on the following page.
The different types of short-term rental units (i.e. house/condo, hotel/motel, and RV/campsite),
have different rental characteristics, and therefore are likely to have a different average number
of people per rental event. For example, rental houses and condominiums on Tybee Island are
typically rented by families, and therefore the number of people per occupied short-term rental
units is estimated to be five or greater. Hotel and motel units typically fit less people, so an
average number of people per rental event was estimated to be less at 2.5. The campsite actually
maintains data on the average number of people per rental event, which was reported as 2.58 in
the LOST Study referenced above.
Utilizing the average number of people per rental event, Table 4 also projects the maximum short
term rental population that would result from 100% occupancy of all short term rental
opportuntiies.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 10
Table 4: Short Term Rental Unit Occupancy for Tybee Island, GA
Source: City of Tybee Occupational Tax Database and Tybee Island Campground
Rental Unit Type Number of Units Average Persons
Per Unit
Maximum Rental Population
Hotel 420 2.5 1,050
Housing Unit 1,200 5 6,000
Campground 118 2.6 306
Total 1,738 7,356
* The Tybee Tourism Study does not differentiate between short-term rental unit types and estimates 4.3
people per unit, which equals a maximum short-term rental population of 7,473.
In order to estimate the average overnight population associated with the short-term rental units
and campsites on Tybee Island, the LOST Population Study conducted by Tybee Island in 2012
was referenced. As part of this study, information was solicited from the various rental agencies
and campsite operator, including the estimated average percent occupancy per month, and the
average number of people per rental event. This information was further updated as part of this
Carrying Capacity Study, and confirmed through comparison to the City of Tybee Island Tourism
Study (2014). This report also included percentage occupancy averages for short-term rental
units on Tybee Island for each month of the year (Table 5).
Utilizing the average number of people per rental event for the various short-term rental unit
types, the monthly average short-term overnight population is projected in Table 6.
Table 5: Short-Term Rental Occupancy Rates
Source: Short-Term Rental Agencies on Tybee Island
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
22% 31% 62% 70% 64% 91% 96% 74% 57% 52% 33% 24%
Table 6: Short-Term Rental Population by Month
Rental Unit Type Hotel Unit House/Condo Campground Total Short-
Term Rental
Population
Number of Units 420 1,200 118
Average Persons Per Unit 2.5 5 2.6
Occupancy Hotel Unit Rental
Population
House/Condo
Unit Rental
Population
Campground
Rental Population
Jan 22% 231 1,319 67 1,617
Feb 31% 329 1,883 96 2,308
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 11
Rental Unit Type Hotel Unit House/Condo Campground Total Short-
Term Rental
Population
Number of Units 420 1,200 118
Average Persons Per Unit 2.5 5 2.6
Occupancy Hotel Unit Rental
Population
House/Condo
Unit Rental
Population
Campground
Rental Population
Mar 62% 649 3,711 190 4,550
Apr 70% 735 4,200 215 5,150
May 64% 674 3,851 197 4,721
Jun 91% 952 5,438 278 6,667
Jul 96% 1,011 5,780 296 7,086
Aug 74% 773 4,419 226 5,418
Sep 57% 595 3,401 174 4,169
Oct 52% 545 3,114 159 3,818
Nov 33% 346 1,976 101 2,422
Dec 24% 253 1,443 74 1,769
Annual
Average 56% 591 3,378 173 4,141
Based on this information, the annual average for additional overnight population from short-
term rentals is 4,141, the minimum (in January) is 1,617 and the maximum (in July) is 7,086.
Adding the annual average for short term rental population to the 2014 estimated year-round
average resident population of 3,082, results in an average overnight population of 7,223. Based
on the occupancy rates during the months of July and January, the peak monthly average
overnight population is 10,168 and the minimum monthly average population is 4,699.
It is important to note that the overnight population numbers above do not address one segment
of the overnight population, and that is “second home” owners, i.e. those people who own a
second home on Tybee Island, which they do not rent, but at which they occasionally vacation.
The second home owners also have the potential to affect the peak overnight population
numbers as they are likely to be occupying their second homes during peak tourism months. This
number, however, is more difficult to quantify and can only be estimated using the data sources
described herein, and this estimated population is described in Table 7.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 12
Table 7: Second Home Maximum Overnight Population
Source: US Census and Tybee Island Occupational Tax Database
Total number of “vacant units” per the 2010 Census 2,006
Total number of vacation rental units per Tybee Island 1,200
Number of remaining units, with the potential to be “Second Home” Units 806
Average number of guests per “Second Home” unit 5
Maximum “Second Home” overnight population 4,030
If you add the maximum short term rental population of 7,356 to the 2014 resident population
number of 3,082, the resulting maximum overnight population (not including second homes) for
the island is 10,438. Adding the maximum “second home” overnight population number of 4,030
to the maximum population of 10,438, results in a potential maximum overnight population of
14,468. While peak occupancy may only happen during the summer season, and the maximum
estimated overnight population may be unlikely to occur, the City of Tybee Island must maintain
the infrastructure to service this maximum overnight population year-round.
3.3. DAYTIME POPULATION
As a popular beach destination, Tybee Island not only has an increase in overnight population
during the peak summer months, it also has an increase in daytime population. This metric is
important because daytime visitors also place an additional strain on the City of Tybee Island’s
infrastructure and services during their brief stay on the Island. In an attempt to quantify the
additional daytime population during the summer months, EPG has reviewed the following
transportation studies/information sources to gather data on traffic counts:
City of Tybee Island Pedestrian and Traffic Study (2010)
Tybee Island Wave Ecology and The Highway 80 Challenge (2011)
City of Tybee Island Tourism Study (2014)
City of Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Study (2016)
The City of Tybee Island Police Department also maintains a traffic counter on Highway 80 near
Breezy Point that has been fully operational since May 2014. The graph in Figure 1 was generated
utilizing the available data from this counter and illustrates the average, weekend day average,
and peak daily one-way traffic counts by month for the time period of May 2014 – September
2015.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 13
Figure 1: Automobile Trips onto Tybee Island
The highest volume of traffic is during the peak summer months of May through July, further
corroborating the projected increase in summertime overnight population. As expected, the
average number of one-way trips onto Tybee Island is also greater on the weekends than during
mid-week, and the difference increases during summer months. The Tybee Island Traffic and
Parking Study reported that “during the summer, traffic on the weekend (Saturday) represents
an increase of between 38 and 60 percent over a typical weekday (Thursday).”
The Tybee Island Wave Ecology Report provides a peak daily traffic count of 16,173 for the week
of July 3, 2010, and estimates that each trip would represent an average of 2 people. The report
goes on to estimate that during peak times/events, such as the July 3rd fireworks event, the
daytime population could exceed 30,000 people. If the metric of 2 people per trip were applied
to the daily traffic count data during the twelve-month period from October 2014 – September
2015, this would result in the daytime population estimates provided in Table 8.
Table 8: Traffic Counts and Daytime Population Estimate
Source: Tybee Island Police Department Traffic Counts
On-Island Trips Daytime Population
Daily Average 6,726 13,452
Peak Day (July 2015) 14,233 28,466
The data above is fairly consistent with the data presented in the Wave Ecology Study, and while
peak daily on-island trips can vary by a few thousand trips each year depending on which part of
the week major events like the July 3rd fireworks fall on, both studies indicate that there is
currently potential for a peak daytime population of at least 30,000 people. As much of the
overnight and resident populations are likely to say “on-island” during big events, it is reasonable
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
One-Way Trips
Month Average Weekend Day Average Peak Day
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 14
to assume that these populations may not be fully included in this estimate, and that the
maximum daytime population likely exceeds 30,000 people.
3.4. POPULATION SUMMARY
A summary of the various populations for Tybee Island is presented in Table 9 and Figure 2.
Table 9: Population Count Summary
1Does not account for second home population
2Assumes 100% occupancy of all units on Tybee Figure 2: Populations on Tybee Island
Population Metric Population
Resident Population (2014, est.) 3,082
Annual Average Overnight Population 7,223
Annual Average Daytime Population 13,453
Peak July Overnight Population1 10,168
Maximum Overnight Population2 14,468
Peak Daytime Population 30,000 +
Daytime
Ave. 13,453
Peak 30,000+
Overnight
Ave. 7,223
Peak 10,168
Max. 14,468
Resident
3,082
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 15
4. RESOURCE LIMITATIONS
Due to Tybee Island’s status as a national tourism and vacation destination, the resident
population, as presented in the Census, is not an accurate metric to use to determine the
resources necessary to provide City services. City infrastructure and public services must be
sufficient to serve the overnight and daytime populations, even as they peak during summer
months. Since tourism focused on Tybee Island is a significant regional economic driver, it is to
the benefit of the region as a whole that the City has the resources necessary to serve the tourist
population.
4.1. WATER WITHDRAWAL & WATER USE
The City of Tybee Island operates a water supply system that consists of three (3) water withdrawal
wells that pull water from the Upper Floridan Aquifer. The City is currently permitted to withdraw
an annual average of 0.916 million gallons per day (MGD), with a monthly average limit of 1.6
MGD to allow for the peak usage associated with the summer tourism season.
In order to project peak water demands, it is first necessary to understand the per capita daily
water usage on Tybee Island. The Chatham County Water Supply Plan 2006 Update reported the
per capita daily water usage for Tybee Island at 216.7 gallons. However, this number is misleading
because it was calculated by simply dividing the annual average daily water usage in 2005 by the
2005 resident population number. The average annual daily water usage will include the
following elements that will skew the per capita water usage number 1) peak summer water
usage associated with peak short-term rental season, 2) the increase in commercial water usage
that occurs during the summer season, and 3) water used for irrigation purposes during the
growing season. All three of these factors will cause per capita water usage to appear larger than
it truly is. In addition, the resident population number was used, not the overnight population.
At no point during the year are the short-term rental units at 0% occupancy so not including these
people in the calculation further compounds the skew in the per capita water usage. Lastly, and
perhaps most importantly, the City of Tybee Island has implemented a comprehensive Water
Conservation Program since the per capita water usage number was calculated in 2006, and it is
likely that the per capita water usage has decreased as a result.
Accordingly, EPG has utilized the following methodology to limit the undesirable variables and
recalculate the City’s per capita water usage for 2015. In order to reduce water usage attributed
to tourism, commercial use, and irrigation, the daily average water usage for the months of
January only from 2010 – 2014 was used and is presented in Table 10. Furthermore, this number
was divided by the minimum overnight population calculated in the month of January (4,699).
This number is greater than the resident population because, even though January represents
the low point of the tourism season, there is still a non-resident overnight population on the
island based on the occupancy numbers presented in the section above. As shown in Table 11,
the resulting per capita water usage is 117 gallons per day (GPD) which is almost half of the usage
presented in the 2006 report.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 16
Table 10: January Average Daily Water Usage
Source: Tybee Island Water and Sewer Department
Year January Daily Average Water
Withdrawal (MGD)
2010 0.56
2011 0.50
2012 0.51
2013 0.54
2014 0.65
5-Year Average 0.55
Table 11: Per Capita Water Usage
5-Yr Ave Water Withdrawal in
January (GPD)
Minimum Overnight Population in
January
Per Capita Water Usage
(GPD)
550,000 4,699 117
4.1.1 Correlation of Overnight Population with Water Usage
In an effort to provide documentation of the surge in summertime overnight population, EPG
reviewed the City’s monthly average water usage. The graph in Figure 3 illustrates the significant
increase in water usage, primarily associated with an increase in population during summer
months.
Figure 3: Monthly Average and Maximum Water Withdrawal
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
Jan-10Mar-10May-10Jul-10Sep-10Nov-10Jan-11Mar-11May-11Jul-11Sep-11Nov-11Jan-12Mar-12May-12Jul-12Sep-12Nov-12Jan-13Mar-13May-13Jul-13Sep-13Nov-13Jan-14Mar-14May-14Jul-14Sep-14Nov-14Monthly Water Withdrawal (MGD)
Daily Average Daily Max
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 17
Tybee Island’s peak summer month for tourism is July. An obvious and significant peak in usage
occurs during this month in all five years. In fact, in 2010, the water usage during the peak month
of July was 2.8 times greater than the usage in the off-season month of February.
4.1.2 Tybee Island Water Withdrawal Permit Limitations
The Water Withdrawal Permit for the City of Tybee Island contains the following withdrawal
limits from the Floridan Aquifer:
Monthly Average of 1.6 MGD
Existing Annual Average of 0.916 MGD
2020 Annual Average of 0.916 MGD
2025 Annual Average of 0.516 MGD
Figures 4 and 5 show the permit limits as they compare with the 2010 – 2014 water usage data.
Figure 4: Monthly Average Water Usage and Permit Limit
Figure 4 indicates that during summer months in four out of the last five years, the maximum
daily withdrawal exceeded 1.6 MGD, but the monthly daily average for all years was still within
the water withdrawal permit.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
Jan-10Mar-10May-10Jul-10Sep-10Nov-10Jan-11Mar-11May-11Jul-11Sep-11Nov-11Jan-12Mar-12May-12Jul-12Sep-12Nov-12Jan-13Mar-13May-13Jul-13Sep-13Nov-13Jan-14Mar-14May-14Jul-14Sep-14Nov-14Monthly Water Withdrawal (MGD)
Daily Average Daily Max Permit Limit
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 18
Figure 5. Annual Daily Average Water Usage and Permit Limits
While Figure 5 shows that the City has not exceeded its annual average permit limitation during
the time period of 2010 – 2014, it shows that the City’s current water usage exceeds the proposed
annual average permit limit for 2025. Compared with the annual average water usage from 2010
– 2014 (0.827 MGD), annual water usage needs from the Floridan Aquifer must be reduced by
38% to reach the proposed permit limit for 2025.
Using the per capita water usage number calculated above (117 GPD), the maximum overnight
population that could be supported under Tybee Island’s current and future Floridan Aquifer
water withdrawal permit is calculated in Table 12.
Table 12: Projected Maximum Population Supported under Floridan Aquifer Water Withdrawal Permit
Limits
Water Withdrawal MGD Overnight Population Supported
Monthly Average (Peak) 1.6 13,675
Existing Annual Average 0.916 7,829
2025 Annual Average 0.516 4,410
When comparing the numbers in Table 12 above with the overnight population estimates below,
it is apparent that Tybee Island is currently close to or at the water withdrawal capacity from the
Floridan Aquifer needed to serve the existing average annual population. Furthermore, the City’s
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Annual Daily Average and Permit Limitations
Annual Daily Average 2015 Annual Ave. Permit Limit 2025 Annual Ave. Permit Limit
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 19
future water usage related to annual average overnight population will exceed the 2025 water
withdrawal limit, even without consideration for any population or tourism industry growth.
While the peak overnight population for the month of July can be accommodated within the
current and future permit limits, the maximum potential overnight population number exceeds
the population that could be supported under the current permit limitations in 2016 and 2025.
This is consistent with the water usage data illustrated in Figure 5 above. It is also important to
consider that there will be additional withdrawal capacity needed to serve the additional
commercial and irrigation needs in the summer, and that is not necessarily accounted for in the
estimates in Table 13, nor is additional population related to future growth.
Table 13: Population that Can Be Supported within Water Withdrawal Permit Limits
4.1.3 Water Distribution Infrastructure System
The City’s water distribution system is relatively new, and the City’s engineer estimates that 80%
of the system is less than 20 years old. There is still about 100 ft. of asbestos pipe that needs to
be replaced, but the majority of the capital improvements needed to address deficiencies in the
distribution system have been completed.
The well pump houses associated with Tybee Island’s three wells are located on Van Horne Ave,
Butler Ave, and 14th Street. The Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Study has found that these well
houses, due to their low elevation at 11.3’, 8.0’, and 9.3’ respectively, are vulnerable to flooding,
storm surge, and sea level rise. After performing a cost benefit analysis based on the potential
capital damage and economic loss associated with flooding, the report recommends elevating
the Butler Ave and 14th Street well houses above the 100-year floodplain, (the area subjected to
a 1% chance of flooding in any given year). Discussions with the City’s engineer recommended
elevating the wells to 21.5 feet above MHT (mean high tide) which would be above the projected
storm surge for a Category 4 Hurricane. All three wells would need to be elevated to exceed this
benchmark and the project cost would be approximately $600,000.
Metric Population
Projection
Population
Supported by
Water Permit
2016
Population
Supported by
Water Permit
2025
Annual Average Overnight Population 7,223 7,829 4,410
Peak Overnight Population (July) 10,168 13,675 13,675
Maximum Potential Overnight Population 14,468 13,675 13,675
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 20
4.1.4 Alternative Water Supply
Due to the future limitations on the City’s current water supply source, the Upper Floridan
Aquifer, the City is working in partnership with the State of Georgia to install and test a
Cretaceous well, in the hope that this will provide an alternative source for potable water, as it
has on Hilton Head Island. Hilton Head Island had to decommission several Upper Floridan Wells
due to high chlorides resulting from the same salt water intrusion event that is the cause of Tybee
Island’s current permit limitations for water withdrawal from this aquifer. This $5 million project
was made possible by a grant from the Georgia Environmental Finance Authority.
At the time of this report, the well is being drilled and the test is ongoing; however, it is expected
that Tybee’s Cretaceous well is likely to produce sufficient water for the projected additional
need of approximately 0.8 MGD. In fact, the well will be sized to produce up to 1.5 to 2.0 MGD.
Due to its depth, the water it will produce is expected to be hot and relatively high in chlorides,
requiring treatment through a chiller and a reverse osmosis (RO) system, as well as mixing with
Upper Floridan water. The anticipated capital costs for the treatment system for a 1.0 MGD well
is $5 million with another $1.5 million needed to address discharge of the briny wastewater
produced through the RO process.
In addition to the capital costs of building the RO treatment plan, operational costs to produce
water on an ongoing basis are expected to increase from approximately $0.25 - $0.30/1,000
gallons of water withdrawal from the Upper Floridan to as much as $1.50/1,000 gallons for RO of
water from the Cretaceous Aquifer. Hilton Head’s current treatment costs to operate their RO
plant are reported to be approximately only $0.60/1,000 gallons; however, that would still be a
100% increase in the cost to produce 1,000 gallons of water.
There is also the challenge of disposing of the brine produced as a waste product of the RO
treatment process. Disposal may be achieved through pipes that run under the bed of the
Savannah Harbor, or through diffusers that are directed out into the open ocean. Both of these
options have significant challenges related to environmental permitting, impacts to aquatic life,
and construction. The City may also consider mixing the brine with the discharge from the WPCP,
to reduce the potential environmental impacts of discharging briny water into the local estuarine
environment. However, this would necessitate an additional or upsized discharge pipe as the
current WPCP discharge pipe is not sized to handle the combined capacity. Construction on the
current WPCP discharge pipe would also have environmental permitting challenges;
nevertheless, discussion with the City’s engineer indicated that this may be the least impactful
way of discharging the briny waste from a future RO water treatment plant.
The alternative of buying and pumping water from the City of Savanah is currently viewed as a
viable option. Aside from the $10 - $12 million cost of the infrastructure to deliver Savannah
water to Tybee Island, it would also require additional treatment due to holding time in the lon g
conveyance system, further increasing the cost. In addition, environmental permitting of the
infrastructure would be difficult as the pipes would travel through some major wetland areas.
If the City elects to use the Cretaceous well for water supply and invests in construction of the
RO treatment plant, the construction and operation of the new well and associated treatment
system will have a major impact on water rates. Further compounding this effect, is Tybee
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 21
Island’s limited ability to collect aide-to-construction, impact or tap fees from new construction
to pay for the capital costs of building the RO treatment system. The capital and operational costs
must instead be included in the water use rates. The City completed a rate study several years
ago and the recommendations have since been implemented; however, the potential costs
associated with the Cretaceous Well were not considered.
4.2. WASTEWATER DISCHARGE
Tybee Island operates a water pollution control plant (WPCP), and the permitted discharge
limitations are described in Table 14.
Table 14: Tybee Island NPDES Wastewater Discharge Permit Limits
Months Monthly Average (MGD) Weekly Average (MGD)
May – September 1.15 1.44
October – April 0.89 1.11
A review of Tybee Island’s monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) from October 2012
through August 2015, submitted to EPD per the City’s NPDES Wastewater Discharge Permit,
indicates that the wastewater discharge has exceeded or come close to exceeding permitted
limitations during the summer seasons of 2013, 2014, and 2015 (Figure 6). This has occurred
despite the higher discharge limitations afforded to the City of Tybee Island during the summer
months to allow for peak demands associated with the tourism season.
Figure 6: Wastewater Discharge Flow and Permit Limits
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Oct-12Dec-12Feb-13Apr-13Jun-13Aug-13Oct-13Dec-13Feb-14Apr-14Jun-14Aug-14Oct-14Dec-14Feb-15Apr-15Jun-15Aug-15Wastewater Discharge Flow (MGD)
Flow Average Flow Ave. Permit Limit
Flow Maximum Flow Max Permit Limit
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 22
Tybee Island’s WPCP has also experienced a few daily water quality violations for ammonia and
total suspended solids (TSS), and there were historic permit violations for ammonia, as shown in
Figure 7. To address this issue, the City has recently installed a new digester which will ameliorate
the WPCP’s ability to process TSS and ammonia.
Figure 7: WPCP Ammonia Discharge and Permit Limits
Review of the discharge data and discussions with the City’s Engineer indicate that the WPCP is
essentially at capacity for treatment. The WPCP in its current configuration can process 1.6 MGD
of wastewater flow for treatment; however, the WPCP discharge pipe is sized to handle 3.0 MGD.
Due to space limitations at the site, there is not room for expansion of the existing WPCP.
Therefore, if the City elects to upgrade the plant, the type of treatment process will have to be
upgraded from aerobic digesters to a membrane system in order to occupy the same footprint.
A permit increase for wastewater discharge flow will also result in the need to upgrade the WPCP
treatment system. As discharge flow allowances are increased, the limits for the individual water
quality parameters will be reduced, necessitating a higher level of treatment. A membrane
system would also allow the City to treat wastewater discharge to a higher degree, but the cost
to upgrade the WPCP would be substantial. Combined with the looming costs associated with
the RO treatment system for the Cretaceous well, the implications for the water and sewer rate
payers on Tybee Island is significant. While the City can treat its wastewater discharge to reuse
standards, distribution of reuse water (as opposed to direct discharge) is not a viable option due
to the limited places that could receive the irrigation water, the tight location of existing utilities,
and the need for an entirely new distribution system that would likely be cost prohibitive.
0
10
20
30
Ammonia (mg/L)
Monthly Average Maximum
Monthly Average Limit Weekly Average Limit
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 23
The City’s Engineer reports that the wastewater collection system is in good condition, and that
50% of the collection system is less than 20 years old or has been relined in the last 20 years. The
City completed an Inflow and Infiltration (I&I) Study a few years ago, and 90% of the
recommended projects have been completed. The I&I projects left to be completed are limited,
and it is the belief of the City Engineer that I&I is no longer a significant problem on the island.
The City is in the process of upgrading the pump stations and the associated force mains, which
should further reduce any remaining I&I. The City is performing these upgrades at a rate of one
per year; two have been completed and there are seven pump stations remaining. The cost of
the pump station upgrades are between $25,000 and $100,000 each.
4.3. TRANSPORTATION & PARKING
4.3.1 U.S. Highway 80 (US 80) Capacity and Road Network Capacity
The City of Tybee Island is connected to the mainland by US 80. Between Talahi Island and Tybee
Island, US 80 is an approximately 5.5 mile, two-way, two-lane rural highway with intermittent
passing lanes. Two bridges exist along this stretch of US 80, 1) the Bull River Bridge and 2)
Lazaretto Creek Bridge. This roadway is the only connection from Tybee Island to the mainland
and is the sole evacuation route for Tybee Island residents and visitors. It has also been
designated as a future bikeway in the Coastal Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (CORE
MPO)’s Long Range Plan.
Currently, US 80 does not have any dedicated bicycle or pedestrian facilities and the Bull River
and Lazaretto Creek Bridges only support one lane of traffic in each direction with limited to no
shoulders to allow for traffic to pass an accident or for pedestrian/bicycle access. The McQueen’s
Island Historic Trail, a six-mile, former railroad right-of-way turned multi-use trail, runs along the
north side of US 80 between Bull River and the Fort Pulaski National Monument. Currently, this
trail can only be accessed by driving to the trail and parking at either the Fort Pulaski National
Monument or at a small parking area east of Bull River Bridge that is dedicated parking for trail
access. Currently, this trail does not extend to or connect to either of the bridges along US 80.
The trail is well utilized by the local community as well as tourists, but its use and ability to serve
as a safe alternative transportation route to and from Tybee Island, is limited because of its lack
of connectivity.
Travel between Tybee Island and the mainland and Talahi Island is also currently hampered by
limited passing lanes along this stretch of US 80 and these limitations become more challenging
when traffic incidents occur and during peak tourism season, weekends, special events and
festivals. The existing roadway also experiences flooding during King Tide events and coastal
storms, and, as a result, is periodically closed. The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT)
has also determined that Lazaretto Creek Bridge is structurally deficient and eligible for
replacement.
Various improvements to this corridor have been suggested and studied over the past 20 years
because of these community concerns about the reliability and safety of access to and from
Tybee Island. These various improvements and studies have at times been the subject of political
and public debate because of conflicting needs and concerns regarding public safety and road
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 24
congestion, environmental impacts, and construction costs, as well as concerns regarding
potential impacts to the “character” of Tybee Island that could indirectly result from expansion
of Highway 80. After completing various studies and gathering public input, GDOT and CORE MPO
concluded that widening US 80 into a four-lane highway was infeasible because their
transportation models indicated this highway functions at a high level of service most of the time
and that construction and environmental impacts would be too costly. Planning efforts
subsequently focused on roadway and bridge improvements that could be made to the existing
two-lane highway.
In May 2011, the CORE MPO helped coordinate a study of US 80 and Tybee Island to document
the mobility challenges associated with tourism and special events on Tybee Island and develop
short-term strategies to address public safety concerns along US 80. The results of the Study were
presented in a Technical Report titled Tybee Island Wave Ecology and The Highway 80 Challenge,
dated May 2011.
Four short-term strategies were selected for implementation to address transportation
deficiencies along US 80, including:
1) Installing road public safety signage
2) Establishing a bus or shuttle service during special events and during peak tourism events
as well as an ongoing bus/shuttle service
3) Utilizing signal timing and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
4) Using social media for dissemination of information to the general public.
Concurrently, the CORE MPO also commissioned an additional study that began in 2010 to
examine current and future transportation deficiencies along the segment of US 80 that connects
Tybee Island to the mainland, including Bull River and Lazaretto Creek bridges, and
recommended alternatives to address those deficiencies. The Study, titled “US 80 Bridges
Replacement Study (P.I. No. 0009379),” was concluded and released in 2012. A copy of this Study
may be accessed through the CORE MPO’s website at:
http://www.thempc.org/docs/lit/corempo/studies/us80/finalreport.pdf
The CORE MPO’s Study of deficiencies along this US 80 corridor included an evaluation of current
and future deficiencies related to travel demand and operational conditions (i.e., road capacity),
system linkages, safety, and roadway design. The following is a summary of findings from this
study:
Roadway capacity was found to be generally sufficient, according to a comparison of the
capacity calculations with the estimated demand from the travel demand model and with
the observed demand from special traffic counts during a summer holiday period.
Capacity is sometimes exceeded when holidays overlap weekends.
System linkages are poor for bicyclists and pedestrians, due to current characteristics of
the road and bridges and lack of connections to the existing McQueen’s Island Trail.
Narrow shoulders, or shoulders filled with rumble strips, as well as high motor vehicle
speeds are the problematic characteristics for bicyclists and pedestrians.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 25
Regarding safety in general, the concerns include crash rates, bridge sufficiency ratings,
and roadway flooding. The crash rate, from 2006 through 2008, was higher in the corridor
than the statewide average for rural principal arterials in that period, 45% higher on
average, although there was much variation among years.
The Lazaretto Creek Bridge had a sufficiency rating of 41.45 at the time of this evaluation;
a rating below 50 means it is a candidate for some type of improvement in the bridge
prioritization process by the Georgia Department of Transportation.
Flooding, due to peak high tides, affects both directions of travel on US 80 for one to three
hours and for an average of three days per year. The eastbound lane is affected for an
additional two times per year.
The usable shoulders on the bridges and the causeway are narrower than recommended
for a high-speed road that serves as a bikeway, and also do not allow space for disabled
vehicles to be adequately cleared from traffic flow. Expectations of drivers wishing to go
through the corridor with no delay are in conflict with the needs of some drivers to access
local sites [Ft. Pulaski and McQueen’s Trail], as the latter must slow or stop in the travel
lane, sometimes even in a passing lane.
The CORE MPO’s Study developed suggested options to address the identified deficiencies and
then combined these into six Alternatives that were then scored and evaluated for feasibility.
The construction of additional thoroughfares (i.e., road widening by constructing additional lanes
along this stretch of US 80) were not included in these Alternatives. “Alternative 3” scored the
highest in the Study evaluation and was recommended as the option to move forward in the next
stages of project development overseen by GDOT. Recommendations for improvements to the
existing two-lane highway for this Alternative included the following:
Replacement of the Lazaretto Creek and Bull River Bridges with new bridges that included
two traffic lanes, ten-foot bikeable shoulders and a ten-foot barrier separated multi-use
path. The new bridges would be located adjacent to the existing bridges on the north side
of US 80 and the existing bridges would be removed.
Roadway improvements in the form of ten-foot paved bikeable shoulders along each lane
of US 80;
Re-striping the roadway near Fort Pulaski to allow for a left hand and right hand turn lane;
Extension of the existing McQueen’s Island Trail to the new Lazaretto Creek Bridge; and
Construction of an 18-space parking area at the entrance to McQueen’s Island Trail with
a left hand turn lane. A side-path would connect the existing trail to the path on the new
Bull River Bridge.
GDOT is using the results and recommendations from the CORE MPO’s 2012 US 80 Bridges
Replacement Study as a baseline for their ongoing, multi-phase planning efforts for this corridor.
Possible roadway elevations in some sections will also be evaluated for sections of US 80 where
flooding has been an issue. GDOT has also proposed that, if constructed, the ten-foot paved
bikeable shoulders along each lane of Highway 80 could be used as additional lanes for
automobile traffic in the event of an emergency to ease traffic congestion.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 26
GDOT is now funding the implementation project (US 80 Bridges and Road Improvements, P.I.
No. 0010560). GDOT’s Scoping and Preliminary Engineering Phase is expected to start by July
2017. GDOT’s scoping phase will look at need, feasibility, and issues that may arise if the
recommended improvements are implemented. Scoping will take three years due to the various
required phases such as surveying, environmental analysis, and public involvement.
Environmental studies required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) will be
conducted, including environmental approval of a preferred Alternative. Future phases will
include right-of-way (ROW) assessments and acquisitions and a Final Design study. According to
GDOT, the National Park Service (NPS) owns 90% of the land within the project limits and GDOT
maintains an easement for the current US 80 ROW. The schedule for these future projects has
not been released to the general public at this time.
As noted above, GDOT has proposed that side path connections from both bridges be
constructed to connect to the McQueen’s Island Historic Trail, and these side path connections
will be designed and funded by GDOT in conjunction with the other US 80 improvements.
However, while GDOT does support the eastern extension of the McQueen’s Island Historic Trail
towards Lazaretto Creek Bridge, they are not currently assuming financial or planning and design
responsibility for this trail extension.
4.3.2 Parking
The average number of day trips on to the island, as reported in Section 1.3, was 6,726, and the
maximum number recorded during the July 4th weekend in 2015 was 14,233. The Tybee Island
Tourism Report found that Tybee Island has 1,044,000 visitors annually. Understandably, a
percentage of these trips represent the automobiles of island residents or overnight visitors
commuting onto the island, and their vehicles would be parked at their home or rental unit.
However, if every resident and one person from every occupied short-term rental unit made one
vehicle trip a day on and off of Tybee Island, that would only reduce the daily average to 2,762
trips and daily maximum to 9,505 trips. Each trip likely results in a need to park for some length
of time. While trip counts are recorded over the course of a 24-hour period, this still represents
a significant parking need, especially at peak hours during festival events and during “beach
hours” in the summer months. The Tybee Island Tourism Study looked at peak travel issues and
provided the following graph, in Figure 8, to illustrate typical travel patterns onto Tybee Island
during the month of June. This graph clearly demonstrates that majority of vehicles traveling
onto Tybee Island during the peak summer season do so between the hours of 10:00 AM and
4:00 PM, creating a significant parking demand during those hours.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 27
Inevitably the demand for and lack of available parking during peak hours can have an impact on
the island and its residents. Vehicles idling and circling the island looking for available parking can
cause traffic congestion; present a safety hazard for pedestrians, bicyclists and other vehicles
accessing the beach; and cause air quality issues. During these high demand periods, some
residential property owners have also experienced illegal parking on their private property,
limiting their access and potentially damaging their property.
Parking Space Inventory & Availability
The City of Tybee Island completed a Traffic and Parking Study in 2005 to evaluate existing traffic
and parking conditions in the City of Tybee Island and to make recommendations to address
identified issues. As part of the parking inventory, observations were made regarding utilization
of the available spaces. The following observations were made during the peak mid-day period
on Saturday, July 17, 2004.
North Beach Parking Lot was full by 2:00 PM.
South Beach Parking Lots were full by 1:00 PM.
Mid-Island Beach Access On-Street Parking (metered spaces located at the beach access
points and along US 80) were predominantly utilized, but no single location was 100%,
except for Tybrisa Street.
As part of this study, a Parking Facility Inventory was completed and included public pay lots,
private lots and on-street parking along the US 80/Butler Avenue corridor. At the time this study
was conducted, the consultant identified 1,654 public parking spaces. The Study went on to make
Figure 8: Volume of Vehicle Flow During the Peak Season
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 28
the following observations and recommendations regarding the actual and perceived lack of
parking on Tybee Island.
1. Beach Access Signage
The utilization of on-street parking along US 80, especially in the Mid-Island area, is
relatively low; however, visitors believe that there is no available parking. Signage should
be added indicating the location of public beach access to encourage utilization of this
available parking, and spread out the demand focused on the pay lots serving the North
Beach and South Beach areas.
2. Satellite Parking and Shuttle System
The City needs to increase its overall inventory of available parking spaces; however,
there is limited available land to do so in the South and North Beach areas near beach
access. Identify satellite/remote parking areas and use shuttle service to deliver people
to South Beach and North Beach.
3. Parking Lot Improvements
The circulation patterns, at that time, in the North Beach and South End Public Parking
Lots was poor and in the North Beach area, parking spots were not completely defined.
This study stated that “[future] visitor demand will be limited to the availability of parking spaces
on the island,” as opposed to access to the island provided by the Level of Service on US 80.
Since this time, the City has made some improvements to public parking lots and has converted
much of the public parking meters to Pay and Display (P&D) Parking Kiosks. This has allowed for
expansion of the parking inventory and better tracking of utilization. The City’s current inventory
of public, delineated spaces is 2,091. There are also a total of 234 approved private parking
spaces, for a total of 2,325 total delineated parking spaces. The private parking space inventory
can vary from year to year as private parking lots require annual permit approval by the Tybee
Island City Council. The 2016 private parking lots are described in Table 15.
Table 15: 2016 Private Parking Inventory
Name Location Number of Spots
Sunrise Parking 1511 Butler Ave 39
Ocean Plaza Beach
Resort
1401 Strand 128
Renee G Bridges 1001 Butler Ave 30
Bramble Family 215 Lovell 13
Joyce Prescott 214 2nd Ave 12
Jack Rosenberg 203 14th Street 12
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 29
Interviews with Tybee Island’s Parking Services staff indicate that there are still some non-
delineated public parking locations within the City ROW. If the ROW area is not near a P&D kiosk,
then Parking Services does not typically consider these areas to be delineated spaces and will not
ticket the vehicle for not paying. The City has determined that it is not financially beneficial to
purchase and maintain P&D kiosks in remote areas where parking only occurs on busy summer
weekends. In addition, many local visitors to Tybee Island may know someone who owns a
residential property on the island where friends and relatives are permitted to park when they
visit the island. Estimating the number of additional private parking spots this creates is not
possible; however, it is important to recognize that these areas do represent additional parking
opportunities for visitors to Tybee Island.
Parking Issues Summary
In order to identify current issues related to parking availability on Tybee Island, EPG reviewed
the findings of the 2005 Traffic and Parking Study, conducted interviews with City staff, and
received comments from stakeholders. The following issues were identified.
1) Perception of Parking Availability
In order to address the issues with perceived availability of parking, first identified in the
2005 Traffic and Parking Study, the City created a Parking Application for smart phones.
This app is designed to let visitors know where parking is available on the island and the
percent utilization. Parking Services staff update this app on an hourly basis during the
summer to show how full (percentage-wise) the three main parking areas are. Parking
Services divides the Island into three parking areas: 1) South End (south of 14th), 2) Middle
Island (14th north to 2nd), and 3) North Beach (the Lighthouse area). The app does not
currently store previously entered information regarding the percent utilization of the
parking areas; however, Parking Service staff who enter the data into the app reported
that every weekend in the summer and on big holidays and festival days, North Beach and
South End parking areas are 99% full and Mid-Island is typically 85%, mirroring the
findings in the 2005 Traffic and Parking Study.
2) South End Parking Demand
Parking Services staff stated that the South End is the most overtaxed parking area. During
summer weekends, visitors potentially spend significant time circling the area looking for
parking, as opposed to looking for parking in other areas such as Mid-Island. The City has
implemented, and then discontinued, a couple of initiatives to address this issue to little
effect. The City erected gates on Butler Ave. past Tybrisa Ave. to block traffic from
entering the South End when parking was at capacity; however, cars then proceeded to
line up on Butler Ave, outside the gate, causing a traffic issue. Public Works has also used
signage in the South End to direct people to other parking areas with limited success.
Parking Services staff explained that, in their experience, people would prefer to wait to
park close to the beach area they wished to visit, i.e. the Pier and Pavilion area, as
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 30
opposed to parking in a more distant location and carrying all of their belongings to the
beach.
3) Commercial Parking Requirements
The City Planning and Zoning staff have received comments from potential commercial
developers that parking requirements are hampering future commercial development
along US 80. The Zoning ordinance requires that any new commercial development or use
provide parking on-site if it is not within 1,000 feet of a public parking lot. Therefore,
vacant buildings and properties on US 80 that are developed as commercial businesses
have to provide on-site parking. Because space available for commercial development
along this corridor is already limited, the requirements for on-site parking can be cost-
prohibitive and impede commercial development of this corridor. The City has had
preliminary discussions regarding using some portion of the City’s unopened ROWs along
this corridor to provide public parking. The potential benefits to pursuing this concept
would be: 1) to provide public parking so that future business on US 80 don’t have to use
their valuable lot space to do so and 2) to provide additional parking for visitors to Tybee
Island.
4) Satellite Parking Lots
There have been previous attempts at staging satellite parking areas and operating a
shuttle service to move people from their vehicles to their desired beach access point,
but the City staff did not perceive it as a successful initiative. As stated above, there was
consensus that most visitors to the beach want to be within walking distance to their car
since they are likely carrying a lot of personal items. Furthermore, there was concern
about how the City would charge for this service. Specifically, if the City charged for the
remote parking itself, the City staff felt that any parking shuttle service must be free of
charge lest it become cost prohibitive for people to use. However, under this model, the
cost burden of the shuttle service would fall on the City, and would likely need to be
subsidized.
5) Parking Garage
Due to their perceived cost/benefit ratio, the City has never seriously considered the
construction of a public parking garage, despite the fact that it has been mentioned in
several planning documents including the 2005 Traffic Study and the City’s 2008 Master
Plan. Parking Services staff stated that while there is a great deal of pressure for parking
during summer weekends and special events, there is sufficient available parking during
the rest of the year. Their perspective is that a public garage would only be full for
approximately 16 – 24 weekends per year, and it would not result in a viable financial
model for such a project. However, Parking Services staff did identify the Hotel Tybee
property as a location with the potential to support a parking garage, due to its proximity
to the beach. The City could potentially consider a public/private partnership to build a
parking garage at this location which could make the project more feasible.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 31
Public input provided by a member of the TAG expressed support for the idea of a parking
garage in the C1 district on the South End of the island and called attention to the cost to
the City in terms of lost revenue from visitors and quality of life for island residents to
NOT address the parking issue. A parking garage could be sited to “funnel” visitors to the
downtown commercial district with places to shop, dine, and lay in the sun. Having ample
parking in C1 could accomplish the following:
Direct traffic to a parking facility conveniently located near the most popular
beach for day visitors - with the pier, public restrooms, and tourism-based
businesses. This could provide additional support to these business by pedestrian
use in this commercial zone once visitors find a parking spot.
Reduce traffic congestion and idling cars circling for parking in the South End
where it is most difficult to find parking during peak weekends.
Reduce illegal parking in residents’ front and side yards.
Reduce traffic overflowing into neighboring residential areas west of Butler Ave.,
thereby protecting the quality of life and pedestrian environment in these
residential neighborhoods
A parking garage could be designed to serve dual purposes. In addition to parking, it could
offer public green space or recreational area on top, such as a pool, waterslide, or putt-
putt. Public restrooms and/or a public safety office could also be located in the structure.
This would increase the benefit and utilization of the structure in the off season, and
potentially address stormwater issues created by the construction of the garage.
6) Special Events Parking
City staff do not feel that lack of parking prevents people from holding or attending special
events on Tybee Island. The City requires special event planners to identify parking areas
and use remote parking when necessary. The event planner is then responsible for
providing signage and volunteers to direct vendors/visitors to the satellite parking and
providing shuttle service when necessary. For example, if an event is planned on the south
end of Tybee Island, event planners often identify satellite parking at the North Beach
parking lot. City staff did note that there have been instances where illegal parking on
residential ROWs became a problem during certain events, and they are more likely to
experience these types of issues when the event takes place in a parking lot and parking
spaces are lost.
7) Lack of Alternative Modes of Transportation
It is generally accepted that if there were more viable alternative transportation
opportunities, there would be less of a need for visitors to drive and park their vehicles
on Tybee Island, thereby lessening parking concerns and reducing traffic congestion.
However, there are very limited options for getting to or around the island for people
without a personal vehicle. Staff indicated that the City is reluctant to develop a formal
program for shuttling visitors on and off island due to the liability and cost implications.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 32
The Coastal Regional Commission previously operated the Savannah – Tybee Island
Shuttle, which runs Friday – Sunday, four times per day. However, due to low ridership,
this service has been canceled, as of the date of this report. TAG members felt that there
was not enough promotion of this service locally to ensure its success..
4.4. STORMWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY
The City of Tybee Island operates a public drainage system that serves to convey stormwater
runoff to local rivers, tidal creeks, marshes, and the ocean. The system components have been
inventoried and are summarized in the table below.
Table 16: Stormwater System Inventory
Structure Number or Length
Inlets & Catch Basins 363
Outfalls 38
Ditches 10,000 feet
Storm Sewer Lines 41,700 feet
The City is required to implement a stormwater management program in compliance with the
NPDES Phase I Medium MS4 Permit, as required by provisions of the Georgia Water Quality
Control Act and the Federal Clean Water Act. This permit requires the development of a
Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP), to address the following program elements, as
stipulated in CFR 122.26(d)(2)(iv)(A) through 122.26(d)(2)(iv)(D):
• Structural and Source Control Measures
• Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
• Industrial Facility Stormwater Runoff Control
• Construction Site Runoff Management
The Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) has previously required the City of Tybee
Island to expand its SWMP to include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address the
following required modifications:
• Impaired Waterways, i.e. 303(d) listed stream segments
• Highly Visible Pollutant Sources
• Public Education/Public Involvement
• Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping
• Development of an Enforcement Response Plan
• Development of a Green Infrastructure Plan
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 33
• Post Construction Stormwater Control
Compliance with this permit and implementation of the City’s SWMP is intended to protect and
improve water quality in local rivers, marshes and creeks by reducing the amount of non-point
source pollution that is conveyed through the City’s drainage system. Through this program, the
City has educated the public and businesses about best practices to reduce stormwater pollution,
and has developed a more proactive approach to drainage system maintenance. The City also
performs illicit discharge and water quality monitoring that will provide useful data, over time,
to evaluate the success of this program.
4.4.1 Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan
As a barrier island, Tybee Island has unique stormwater and flooding issues which are
complicated by tidal influences and sea level rise. The “Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Adaptation
Plan” explores several steps that the City of Tybee Island can take to become more resilient over
time to sea level rise and the resulting flooding issues. Overall, the report serves as an initial effort
to characterize vulnerabilities, explore potential adaptation actions, and recommend
implementation of those identified actions that show clear benefit. The City of Tybee Island
partnered with researchers and outreach professionals from Georgia Sea Grant, the University of
Georgia, and Stetson University on this project.
Figure 9: Flooding on U.S. Highway 80 during a King Tide Event in October 2015 (Photo Credit: Tybee
Island Police Department)
Sea-level rise has been documented from a long-term, NOAA tide gauge at Fort Pulaski, located
within several miles of the City of Tybee Island. Since installation in 1935, sea-level has risen 10
inches. Records from this station have also shown the frequency of “nuisance” flooding steadily
increasing in the past several decades, including a record of 23 separate “nuisance” floods in
2015, the most of any year since the tide gauge was installed. NOAA defines a “nuisance” flood
when the water level exceeds 5.2 ft. above NAVD88 (~9.2 ft. above MLLW), and at this depth,
minor saltwater flooding occurs on roads and yards in Tybee Island. Figure 9 shows an example
of US 80 being flooded during a king tide event in October 2015. When this roadway is flooded,
it has significant impact on public safety and the local economy, as it is the sole access road for
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 34
the Island. Adaptive
planning efforts for the City
of Tybee Island were
focused on a 50-year time
frame. When meeting
participants worked with
the project team to decide
on the rate of sea-level rise
to be used in the planning
efforts, they decided on
three scenarios of sea-level
rise: (1) Low, (2)
Intermediate, and (3) High.
The Low scenario was based
on a linear extrapolation of
the Fort Pulaski record, and
the Intermediate and High
scenarios were based on the
widely cited sea-level rise
curves that were developed
by climate scientists Martin
Vermeer and Stefan
Ramhstorf.1 Using 2010 as
the base year, the predicted
sea-level rise by 2060 is 6 in.,
14 in., and 31 in. for the Low,
Intermediate, and High
scenarios, respectively.
Figure 10 presents NOAA’s
predictions for global sea level rise.
Table 17 illustrates the expected increase in flooding events over the 50-year planning horizon
for US 80 under the three sea level rise scenarios.
Table 17. Analysis of Flooding Frequency and Duration
Metric 2009-2012
Average
Sea-Level Rise Scenario (2060)
Low Intermediate High
Annual Frequency of Flood Events 8 30 125 540
Annual Duration of Flooding (hours) 5.5 37 200 1,250
Note: Flood conditions are categorized as nuisance flooding (5.2 ft. above NAVD88).
Figure 10: NOAA Predictions for Global Sea Level Rise (Courtesy of Evans
et al., 2016)
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 35
Tidal flooding during king tide conditions is regularly observed in several areas on Tybee Island,
including many in the southwestern quadrant of island. Many of these flooding events are
caused by a back-up of stormwater systems when higher tides push flow back into swales,
ditches, and underground pipe conveyances. This problem is exacerbated when high tide events
occur simultaneous with significant rain events. An example is presented in Figure 11.
Figure 11: Saltwater Flooding of Yards and Streets during a King Tide on November 14, 2012 (Courtesy
of Evans et al., 2016)
Based on topography from the 1-foot LIDAR as well as the assessed value of property, the authors
identified those areas on Tybee Island most at risk for flooding and economic damage due to King
Tide event in a 1-foot sea level rise scenario. The map in Figure 12, illustrates potential economic
losses due to high tide flooding on a block by block basis.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 36
Figure 12: Annual Expected Damage from High Tide Flooding (Courtesy of Tybee Island Sea Level Rise
Executive Summary)
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 37
Through a series of public meetings, researchers solicited input from public officials and local
citizens about unique flooding issues they face. The authors worked with the public to identify
local assets at-risk from sea-level rise, review sea-level rise adaptation strategies, and choose the
rates of sea-level rise to be used in the adaptation planning process. This process was essential
to gain institutional knowledge on vulnerable areas and anecdotal information on historic
flooding events. The five major adaptation actions that were identified through this process are:
1. Elevate the first floor of the City’s three well houses and electronic components to 3 ft.
above the 100-year floodplain.
2. Elevate the US 80 causeway between Wilmington Island and Tybee Island to 3 ft. above
current grade.
3. Retrofit low-lying stormwater infrastructure to prevent flooding from tidewater
backflow.
4. Construct a back-island sea wall, at a height of 3 ft. over the current nuisance tidal
flooding level, to prevent bank overflow in low-lying areas.
5. Increase frequency of beach nourishment relative to increased sea-level rise out to
2060.
For three of the five action items, a benefit-cost ratio was calculated by evaluating the potential
in cost savings from avoided capital and economic damage. The cost savings from damage
avoided and the benefit-cost ratios for these action items are summarized in Table 18. When the
benefit-cost ratio is less than 1.0, pursuing the action item is not favorable at this time. Details
of the benefit-cost analysis and calculations can be found in the report. As a reference, the
estimated cost to elevate a well pump house was $150,000 each, add stormwater backflow
preventers and upgrade the stormwater system (including recent expansion of capacity along the
14th St. corridor) was $3 million, and install an engineered concrete sea wall at a height of 8.2 ft.
above NAVD88 was $35 million.
Table 18: Summary of Sea Leve Rise Mitigation Actions with Calculated Benefit-Cost Ratios.
Action Item
(Cost)
Evaluation Method Estimated Cost of Damage for Each Sea
Level Rise Scenario
Low Intermediate High
Elevate Well House
on Van Horne Ave.
($150,000)
Cumulative 50-yr Total Loss
Damage Assessment $17,034 $29,713 $65,551
Benefit-Cost Ratio 0.11 0.2 0.44
Elevate Well House
on 14th St.
($150,000)
Cumulative 50-yr Total Loss
Damage Assessment $458,740 $534,054 $828,181
Benefit-Cost Ratio 3.06 3.56 5.52
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 38
Action Item
(Cost)
Evaluation Method Estimated Cost of Damage for Each Sea
Level Rise Scenario
Low Intermediate High
Elevate Well House
on Butler Ave.
($150,000)
Cumulative 50-yr Total Loss
Damage Assessment $2,125,737 $2,329,927 $2,974,840
Benefit-Cost Ratio 14.17 15.53 19.83
Stormwater Backflow
Preventers and
Stormwater System
Upgrades
($3,000,000)
Damage Avoided (Net Present
Value) $15,400,000 $36,200,000 $39,200,000
Benefit-Cost Ratio
5.13 12.07 13.07
Sea Wall
($35,000,000)
Damage Avoided (Net Present
Value) $700,000 $3,600,000 $60,800,000
Benefit-Cost Ratio 0.02 0.1 1.74
Note: Highlighted cells indicate that Benefit-Cost ratio is greater than 1.0, meaning that the potential cost
savings from capital and economic damage avoided outweighs the cost of installing the action item.
Based on the assessment for elevating the well pump houses, the Butler Ave. pump house had
the highest risk of flooding and highest benefit-cost ratio (range: 14.17–19.83), so it should be
elevated as soon as is practical. The 14th St. pump house should also be elevated in the near
term because it had a benefit-cost ratio ranging from 3.06 to 5.52. The benefit-cost results for
the third pump house, Van Horne Ave., did not indicate an immediate need for action. The
authors noted that conservative estimates of water supply disruption following a catastrophic
flood event were used, and the results do not account for possible contamination of the water
source associated with storm surge flooding. Therefore, the Van Horne Ave. pump house should
still be included in future assessments to determine suitability for elevation or other
improvements to improve flooding resilience.
Stormwater backflow preventers alone are expected to provide significant prevention of
floodwater penetration for tides up to 6.2 ft. NAVD88, 1 ft. above the current tidal flooding stage,
but then bank overflow would render the backflow preventers ineffective as a stand-alone flood
prevention strategy. Overall, the stormwater retrofits were considered to be a good initial
investment. The sea wall is not expected to provide benefit until the tides regularly exceed 6.2
ft. Based on the large cost of the sea wall, the High sea-level rise scenario is the only one where
cost-saving benefits outweigh the cost, but it is only marginal (1.74). Further pursuit of a sea wall
adaptation is not recommended at this time.
Beach Renourishment
The Army Corps of Engineers recently completed the most recent beach renourishment project
in early 2016. The 3.5-mile-long project was initially constructed in 1974 with a 50-year project
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 39
life, with periodic renourishments planned to occur every 7 years. The beach was last renourished
in 2008. The renourishment process involves using a cutterhead dredge to move about 1.7 million
cubic yards of high quality sand from an area located 1.5 miles from the southern tip of Tybee
Island. The deposited sand would be enough to compensate for the erosion expected to occur
over the subsequent nine years. The project included placing sand up to the north terminal groin.
The Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan noted that beach renourishment is an important
action item for flood protection and the tourism economy. In 2024, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineer’s current authorization from Congress for beach renourishment projects on Tybee
Island expires. The Plan suggests that a priority for future beach renourishment projects and the
negotiation of a new authorization should include maintenance of flood protection under a
condition of accelerating sea-level rise. Based on the damages sustained by some communities
in the Northeast during Superstorm Sandy, the City of Tybee Island is already investigating the
possibility of augmenting their sand dune system to help protect the Island from storm surge
during hurricanes.
US Highway 80 Considerations
The authors did not include a benefit-cost analysis for raising US 80 because the project lacked
the scope to perform an engineering-scale benefit-cost assessment of a major highway corridor.
However, the substantial tidal flooding of US 80 in 2015 (23 separate events) highlights the
vulnerabilities of the existing roadway elevation and provides renewed motivation for ensuring
that concerns about long-term public safety, infrastructure maintenance, and disaster resilience
are incorporated into the final US 80 bridge replacement and road bed improvement project. As
described earlier in this plan, GDOT is in the process of planning and designing Highway 80
improvements which will include elevation of the road bed. In the recently released letter, issued
by GDOT on June 13, 2016 in response to public comments received at the November 17, 2015
Public Information Open House, DOT states that they are currently considering elevating the road
surface to 7.5 above MSL, which equates to an elevation of approximately 12 to 18 in. above the
current road surface.
Per the comment and recommendation in the Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan related
to worsening flooding conditions on the sole access road for Tybee Island, US 80; it is important
for sea-level rise to be factored into ongoing engineering plans when replacing the two bridges
along US 80 and modernizing and elevating the roadway. The Plan recommends that the road
be elevated to approximately three (3) feet above its current elevation.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 40
4.5. SOLID WASTE
4.5.1 Solid Waste Collection
Atlantic Waste Services currently provides municipal solid waste collection, yard waste collection,
and recycling services to the City of Tybee Island. The Island is split into (4) four zones, each
representing a service day Monday through Thursday. Garbage and recycling are picked up on
the same day in each of the
four zones. Yard waste will be
collected on the entire island on
Fridays. Garbage collection of “landfill
only waste” will be picked up once per
week in 96 gallon carts with identifying
colors.
Recycling is collected single stream in
96 gallon carts with identifying colors,
and includes paper, cardboard,
newspapers, magazines, junk mail,
plastics (1-7), and metal cans
(aluminum and steel). Grocery store
plastic bags, styrofoam, film, glass and
bubble wrap are not accepted. Atlantic
Waste Services reports that the
current market does not support glass
recycling because it costs more to
process, and it’s a lower quality
material than the raw virgin sand
material needed to make new glass.
In an effort to address the issue of
plastic bag littering and marine plastics
pollution, the City has initiated a
plastic film recycling program that is
detailed in the image to the right. Drop
off locations are located at the
Campground, Chu’s Department Store,
City Hall, Tybee Market IGA, Visitor’s
Center, and the YMCA.
The Tybee Island Department of Public Works collects the trash and recyclables daily from solid
waste and recycling stations located at the beach and other public facilities and brings that
material to the transfer station at the Polk Street Yard, where they are collected by Atlantic
Waste. VisitTybee.com reports that the Tybee Island Department of Public Works collects
approximately 4 tons of trash daily from the beach areas during the off-season. In-season, the
amount of trash removed ranges from 6 to 15 tons daily. The day after special events, the total
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 41
can reach 35 tons. The Department of Public Works will accept municipal solid waste, recycling
and yard waste from residents at the transfer station for a fee; however, residents are strongly
encouraged to use the curbside service provided by Atlantic Waste.
4.5.2 Disposal Trends
Information regarding disposal trends was provided to the City by the City’s previous solid waste
contractor, Waste Pro. Monthly data on disposal of municipal solid waste and recycling was
provided for the time period of October 2008 through August 2015. Weight of municipal solid
waste and recycling collected through curbside collection service as well as directly from Public
Works transfer stations is summarized in the Figures 13 and 14, respectively.
Figure 13: Municipal Solid Waste and Recycling Collection and Trends for Curbside Collection
Figure 13 illustrates an increase in both municipal solid waste disposal and recycling over the
time period of 2008 through 2015, which indicates an increase in the generation of solid waste
over that time period. There is also an obvious increase in solid waste disposal during the summer
months each year, coinciding with the tourism season. There does not appear to be a similar
cyclical trend in recycling tonnage, which indicates that tourist are not properly utilizing recycling
services. It is also important to note that glass is currently not accepted, and as one of the
heaviest materials that is typically recycled, it is likely to decrease the tonnage of materials being
recycled in the future. Also not included in these figures is the solid waste tonnage associated
with condominium developments that contract separately, as commercial customers, with
private waste haulers. There is no requirement that condominium developments contract with
private haulers for recycling services.
The data provided for solid waste and recycling collected from Public Works only spans the time
period of April 2013 through September of 2015. This data shows a substantial increase in the
tonnage of solid waste collected. This can be attributed primarily to collection of trash from the
beach and other public facilities, as most residents utilize the curbside service for disposal of their
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Oct-08Jan-09Apr-09Jul-09Oct-09Jan-10Apr-10Jul-10Oct-10Jan-11Apr-11Jul-11Oct-11Jan-12Apr-12Jul-12Oct-12Jan-13Apr-13Jul-13Oct-13Jan-14Apr-14Jul-14Oct-14Jan-15Apr-15Jul-15Monthly Weight of Curbside Collection (Tons)
Solid Waste Recycling
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 42
household garbage. There is also a dramatic cyclical nature to the amount of trash collected, with
the peaks again occurring during tourist season. There are not similar trends in recyclables
collection, which remained relatively steady during this time period.
Figure 14: Solid Waste and Recycling Collection and Trends for Department of Public Works
4.6. ENERGY USE
Electrical demand continues to increase in the Southeast, and one of the fastest growing regions
is Georgia. Georgia Power, a division of Southern Company that services the City of Tybee Island,
estimates that by 2025, Georgia expects almost 1.5 million new residents, and by 2030, electrical
demand is projected to increase 27% in the Southeast.
According to Georgia Power Company, the utility company has been able to reliably meet Tybee’s
current electrical demands, even during peak demand, and has sufficient electrical generating
capacity to meet increased energy demands in the future as population growth continues.
Georgia Power utilizes a variety of power generating sources, and its main sources include
nuclear, coal and natural gas, and to a lesser extent, renewables such as solar, hydroelectric, and
wind. According to Georgia Power, nuclear energy, which is the most economical method of
producing electricity and does not produce greenhouse gases, will continue to be an important
power generating source to meet current and future electrical demands in Georgia, including
Tybee Island, and for complying with current and pending environmental standards that regulate
coal-generated electricity. Georgia Power already operates two nuclear facilities: Hatch and
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Apr-13May-13Jun-13Jul-13Aug-13Sep-13Oct-13Nov-13Dec-13Jan-14Feb-14Mar-14Apr-14May-14Jun-14Jul-14Aug-14Sep-14Oct-14Nov-14Dec-14Jan-15Feb-15Mar-15Apr-15May-15Jun-15Jul-15Aug-15Sep-15Monthly Weight of Public Works Collection (Tons)
Muncipal Solid Waste Recycling
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 43
Vogtle, both with multiple generating units. Plant Vogtle, located near Augusta, Georgia, is
currently under construction to expand, with two new nuclear units expected to be operational
by 2019 and 2020. Georgia Power is also constructing a new transmission line to add the
infrastructure needed to support these new units.
To keep up with the growth, Georgia Power has made extensive upgrades to its electrical system,
including an $80 million upgrade to the Savannah underground network. Within the last few
years, the utility company has also made upgrades to the electrical infrastructure for Tybee
Island, including the large transmission lines along the US 80 corridor connecting Tybee Island to
Talahi Island, the City’s substation, and distribution systems along Butler Avenue and other areas.
The majority of planned upgrades for the City of Tybee Island have now been completed.
Georgia Power offers a commercial rebate program that provides cost incentives for
incorporating energy-efficient improvements. Rebates are offered to help offset initial costs
associated with replacement of outdated, inefficient equipment or installation of high-efficiency
equipment during new construction. The utility company also offers free audits that provide
recommendations for increased energy efficiency. Georgia Power has previously worked with the
City to conduct an audit of Tybee’s Memorial Park buildings as part of a Georgia Environmental
Facilities Agency (GEFA) funded energy efficiency program. Tybee received a total of $300,000
in grant funding from GEFA for upgrades and renewable installations of city and county buildings
located in Memorial Park. Once the park buildings were improved, all energy cost savings, based
upon a 2008 baseline, were to be invested into the Tybee Energy Loan Fund and the Property
Assessed Clean Energy Financing Program.
Recommendations from this audit included the following:
• Continue to incorporate occupancy sensors in strategic locations of the buildings for
lighting savings
• Consider energy efficient construction practices and premium efficiency equipment
when renovating the city hall building or when equipment fails
• Double check the programmable thermostat settings in the gymnasium to make sure
they are set to adjust during unoccupied times. They appeared to be on hold temps
when visited.
• Replace the water heater in the YMCA building. At its age, scale on the elements is
likely and will cause the heater to operate much less efficiently.
• Continue to promote energy management/conservation to city employees and tenants
of city building space.
• Make sure all computers are set to go into energy management mode when they are
not in use.
4.6.1 Solarize Tybee
Approved by the Georgia Public Service Commission in November 2012, the original Georgia
Power Advanced Solar Initiative (GPASI) is an innovative solar program designed to procure 210
MW of solar capacity. GPASI was primarily created to spur economic growth within the solar
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 44
community in Georgia, while offering pricing that encourages more renewable development and
avoids any upward rate pressure and reliability impacts to Georgia Power customers.
With this goal in mind, Georgia Power designed two programs to continue to develop solar in
Georgia: 1) offer existing Georgia Power customers additional options to sell distributed solar
generation back to Georgia Power through small- and medium-scale power purchase programs;
and 2) offer solar developers the opportunity to bring large photovoltaic (PV) solar arrays to
market through a competitive utility-scale RFP. In July 2013, the Public Service Commission
approved an additional 525 MW of solar capacity as part of the 2013 Integrated Resource Plan
(IRP) order. These additional megawatts of solar capacity were similarly allocated between the
distributed generation and utility-scale programs.
In 2015, the City of Tybee Island, in cooperation with the Tybee Community Resources
Committee, initiated the Solarize Tybee program to bring solar power to Tybee Island and
Chatham County, Georgia, by eliminating some of the complexity of selecting a qualified installer
and by driving down costs through the power of bulk purchasing. This program offered
competitive pricing in a tiered system, i.e., prices decreased with increased participation. The
solar contractor, Hannah Solar, performed free assessments for interested property owners to
determine if their building was suitable for solar panel installation. Once a site was judged
suitable, and the customer scheduled installation directly with Hannah Solar.
Solarize Tybee was open to all residents, businesses, and governmental entities within Chatham
County, Georgia, provided the governing body in each jurisdiction did not object to having its
citizens participate. In total, 61 contracts for solar panel installation were completed, generating
335 KW of renewable energy.
4.6.2 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory
Many scientific studies have demonstrated a link between greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
generated from human activities with global climate change. Current thinking by many within the
scientific community is that GHGs contribute to climate change by trapping heat within Earth’s
atmosphere. Gases that are classified as “greenhouse gases” include carbon dioxide, methane,
nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases.
In response, local governments are identifying policy changes and other measures that can
reduce GHG emissions at both the community level and within their own operations. Policy
changes at a community level can reduce GHG emissions but often these policy changes are
difficult to implement and enforce because they involve measures that are outside the control of
the local government’s policies and programs. In contrast, local governments have direct control
over their own emissions-generating activities. For example, GHG emissions generated from local
government operations can be dramatically lowered by reducing energy usage in buildings and
facilities; reducing fuel consumption in fleet vehicles and equipment; reducing the amount of
government-disposed solid waste that is sent to a landfill; and relying more on alternative energy
sources. While reducing emissions from just one local government may be seen as a “drop in the
bucket” to some, many local governments are moving forward with GHG emissions reduction
initiatives as examples of good global citizenry.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 45
The objective of this GHG emissions inventory was to identify the sources and quantities of GHG
emissions resulting from government operations within the City of Tybee Island in 2015, the
chosen base year for this inventory. By identifying the areas of government operations that
contribute the most greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, this inventory provides baseline data
to reduce GHG emissions and assist the City with future planning efforts to address, plan, and
mitigate the impacts of climate change. A summary of the inventory is included below, and the
full study is included in Appendix B.
The City of Tybee Island focused on the following categories of government operations to
quantify GHG emissions for base year 2015 (Figure 15):
• Buildings and Facilities: Emissions from grid electricity used to power City Hall; the YMCA
(including the gym); Fire Station, Guard House, Department of Public Works
(garage/office); and the Public Safety Building. This includes interior lighting, operation of
heating and cooling systems, and other electrical uses within these buildings.
• Water Transport: Emissions from grid-electricity used to power water delivery systems
(drinking water well pumps) and the pumps/lift station associated with the City’s
wastewater treatment plant (WPCP). Emissions from wastewater treatment methods
were not included as part of this inventory.
• Public Lighting: Emissions from grid electricity used to power street lights, park lighting,
signage, traffic control lighting, and other miscellaneous forms of public lighting that is
owned and/or controlled by the City of Tybee Island. Emissions from interior lighting are
included within the Buildings and Facilities sector. Street lighting for the City of Tybee
Island that is owned and operated by the Georgia Department of Transportation as well
as outdoor lighting that is not metered is not included within this inventory assessment.
• Vehicle Fleet: Emissions from city-owned vehicles, large equipment, small maintenance
equipment, and marine related equipment used by the City’s police, fire, and other
departments.
• Employee Commute: Emissions generated from fuel usage associated with employees
commuting to and from work
For the City of Tybee Island, the energy used to run and operate local government facilities is
supplied by Georgia Power, the local electric utility. Natural gas is not used by the City of Tybee
Island to power government buildings and operations. Utility power bills for 2015 were utilized
to supply the bulk of data used to identify and assess the amount of energy used to power
buildings, water/wastewater delivery systems, and supply public lighting, which are all stationary
sources of GHG emissions.
The types of energy and emissions associated with these operations vary based on the different
government functions as well as the source of energy. Correspondingly, the way in which GHG
emissions may be assessed and quantified for these operations vary. For example, electricity used
at a government building is measured in kWh while the emissions from vehicle fleet activities and
employee commuting patterns are measured in miles traveled, or gasoline/diesel used.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 46
During 2015, government operations at the City generated roughly 3,735 metric tons of CO2
equivalent (MtCO2e). The use of electricity at City buildings and facilities account for roughly 9%
of CO2e. Water transport was the largest sector, accounting for over 50% CO2e. Public lighting
and the vehicle fleet were responsible for 20% and 9% of CO2e, respectively, with the employee
commute sector having the lowest percentage of greenhouse gas emissions at 7%.
The British Thermal Unit (BTU) is the standard unit for measurement of energy. The MMBtu
represents one million BTUs and is the unit of measurement used for comparing the various
sectors of government operations in the table below. Tybee Island used a total of 28,330 units of
energy (MMBtu) during the 2015 base year. Again, the water transport sector accounts for the
highest energy usage at 50%. Lighting and employee commute have the second highest
percentages at 18% and 13% respectively. Fleet vehicles and buildings are the smallest in total
percentage of energy usage for the sectors analyzed. For a more detailed breakdown of energy
usage and CO2e generated within each sector, please see the full report in Appendix B.
Table 19: Energy Usage and GHG Emissions for All Sectors
Category of Government
Operations
Equivalent
CO2
Percent Energy
(MMBtu)
Percent
Buildings 344.0 9% 2,377.0 8%
Water Treatment 2,031.9 54% 14,040.3 50%
Public Lighting 749.3 20% 5,177.8 18%
Fleet Vehicles 336.7 9% 3,123.8 11%
Employee Commute 273.5 7% 3,610.8 13%
9%
54%20%
9%7%
Figure 15: GHG Emissions by Sector (% CO2e)
Buildings
Water Treatment
Lighting
Fleet Vehicles
Employee Commute
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 47
The GHG Emissions Inventory resulted in the following recommendations to reduce energy
consumption, thereby reducing GHG emissions from local government operations:
1. Continuation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: This inventory provides a great
starting place for the City of Tybee as it provides a baseline year for which reduction
goals and future impacts can be measured and compared. The City should review the
strategies outlined in this inventory and set emission reduction goals and measure
success based on the baseline year. The City should also develop an action plan /
implementation plan to assist with tracking and achieving reduction goals.
2. Third-Party Audit: The City may want to consider having a third-party energy audit
conducted by an objective and credentialed firm that specializes in these types of
audits. The results of this greenhouse gas emissions inventory can be used in
conjunction with a third-party audit to identify specific energy reduction strategies for
the City of Tybee that have the greatest impact. This audit should also include a detailed
analysis of the City’s current billing setup with Georgia Power to ensure that a ll current
billing practices are most economically beneficial to the City. The audit should
investigate measures to reduce energy consumption during peak energy usage times
(both within a 24-hr period and seasonally). In conjunction with, or as an alternative to
this if the City cannot hire a third-party, the City should also request that Georgia Power
conduct additional energy audits of its other City buildings and operations.
3. Public Education and Incentive Programs: The City should continue to promote energy
conservation to city employees and tenants of city building space. Incentive programs,
perhaps groped by department and/or building, could be set up to encourage
employees to reduce energy consumption.
4. Energy Efficiency: There are a variety of energy efficiency measures that should be
considered to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions at City
facilities and associated with City operations, some of which may also reduce electricity
costs. These include:
a. Energy efficient wastewater treatment methods should be considered when
designing and upgrading the City’s wastewater treatment plant. As discussed
within this report, over 50% of the City’s energy usage and GHG emissions result
from wastewater treatment.
b. Explore the potential cost savings associated with a 4-day work week as a mean
to reduce electricity usage at some or all public facilities;
c. Explore alternative energy sources for interior and outdoor public lighting (ie.
Solar power) as well as switching to more energy-efficient lighting (i.e., LED
lights); and
d. Increase use of occupancy sensors and re-location and setting of programmable
thermostats in all City Hall buildings;
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 48
e. The City of Tybee should ensure that all City Hall renovations plan for and
incorporate the energy efficiency recommendations provided by Georgia Power
during its April 2015 Memorial Park Energy Audit. This includes incorporation of
occupancy sensors and re-location and setting of programmable thermostats in
the gymnasium and other areas. These same recommendations can be
expanded to other City hall buildings.
f. Increase recycling efforts and reduce the amount of government-disposed solid
waste that is sent to a landfill (this will reduce fugitive greenhouse gas emissions
associated with landfills)
g. Explore alternative cost and benefits associated with alternative fuel sources for
fleet vehicles. For example, the City could explore the use of bio-diesel as an
alternative to gasoline and diesel in fleet vehicles.
h. Identify incentives available to encourage employees to utilize alternative forms
of transportation when commuting to work; and
i. Providing incentives for employees to live closer to work. Carpooling and public
transportation options could also be explored as a means to reduce emissions
related to commuting. An additional option could be the exploration of a 4-day
work week as mentioned above.
4.7. ZONING
4.7.1 Zoning Analysis
Since most of the island has been developed, subdivision and subsequent development of
existing residential parcels presents the greatest opportunity for growth on the island. Recent
development activity indicates that there is a growing trend in subdivisions of parcels zoned R-2.
In addition, much of the remaining undeveloped residential property on the island is zoned R-2,
which allows for the high density of residential development. The City of Tybee Island’s R-2 zoning
category was established to allow for one and two family residential development, and allows
for the smallest minimum lot size for residential parcels on the island. The schedule of
development regulations (Sec 3-090) defines the allowable lot sizes for residentially zoned
property in the City. The minimum lot size for development of a single family dwelling unit is
4,500 square feet in the R-2 district. The minimum lot size for a two-family structure in this district
is 6,750 square feet. These numbers are the basis for determining the impact of potential future
build out.
Roughly 40% of the island is currently zoned R-2, much of which is currently developed as a single-
family residential use. There is reason for concern from a carrying capacity perspective when
considering the future development potential for these properties. The following analysis
evaluates these properties to determine the population impact that different development
scenarios would have on the City.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 49
4.7.2 Methodology
The methodology used for this analysis began with the identification of all parcels currently zoned
R-2. These properties were then broken down into the following categories based on lot size:
Less the 6,750 square feet. Parcels in this category could only be developed as single-
family homes.
6,750 - 11,250 square feet. Parcels in this category could be developed as two-family
residential, either as a duplex, or as two, single-family residential parcels (if over 9,000
square feet).
11,250 - 13,500 square feet. These parcels could be split and developed with one-single
family and one, two-family structure.
Over 13,500 square feet. Parcels that can be developed as two, two-family structures.
Unique. Certain unique conditions were also considered. This includes significantly large
parcels that could be sub-divided a number of different ways. For example, a large
property with a significant amount or marsh may limit its development potential.
Additionally, a large undeveloped property may have be large enough for a larger
subdivision of land.
4.7.3 Analysis
There are currently 1,694 R-2 parcels in the City. Roughly 80% of these parcels are currently
developed. The general land uses shown in Table 20 were determined using data from the
Chatham County Tax Assessors Office. This data was then vetted in GIS using aerial photograph y
and other online resources. Table 20 shows the current breakdown of land uses within the R-2
zoning district.
Table 20: Number of R-2 Parcels and Residential Units
Category Number of R-2 Parcels Number of Units
Single Family 1,337 1,337
Duplex 85 170
Non-Residential 11 0
Undeveloped 261 0
Total 1,694 1,507
Please note, one of the undeveloped R-2 properties listed above is not developable, one is in a
conservation easement, and the last parcel (shown in Figure 15), is likely the last parcel on Tybee
with significant developable acreage, approximately 600,000 square feet.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 50
Figure 16: Large Undeveloped Parcel on Tybee
4.7.4 Population in the R-2 District Based on Current Development
The 2010 Census reports that only about 40% of housing units in the City of Tybee Island are
occupied by year-round, full-time residents. Therefore, the remaining 60% of housing on the
island is potentially available as seasonal rentals or vacation housing (i.e., second homes), both
of which can have a dramatic effect on peak population numbers during summer months. As
stated earlier in this report, the US Census Bureau found that the average household size for
residents of Tybee Island is 2.1 people per unit, while the number of people occupying a short-
term rental or vacation unit can vary greatly. The Carrying Capacity Stakeholder group agreed to
use an estimate of 5 people per unit when approximating short-term rental or vacation overnight
population. Table 21 shows the maximum population (both resident and short-term rental) that
is likely supported within the R-2 district, in its current development state.
Table 21: Maximum Population Based on Current Development
Category Number of
R-2 Parcels
Number of
Units
Resident Population
40%
(2.1 people/ unit)
Short Term / Vacation
Population
60%
(5 people/ unit)
Single Family 1,337 1,337 1,124 4,011
Duplex 85 170 143 510
Non-Residential 11 0 0 0
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 51
Category Number of
R-2 Parcels
Number of
Units
Resident Population
40%
(2.1 people/ unit)
Short Term / Vacation
Population
60%
(5 people/ unit)
Undeveloped 261 0 0 0
Total 1,694 1,507 1,267 4,521
This analysis shows that the maximum potential overnight population in the R-2 at 100%
occupancy for both resident and short-term rental/vacation units is currently 5,788 people.
4.7.5 Full Build-Out Scenario
In order to understand the potential impacts of a full build-out scenario in the R-2 district, it was
first necessary to determine the maximum number of units that could be developed within the
areas zoned R-2. Based on current land use breakdown shown in Table 20, the total number of
residential units in R-2 today is 1,507. However, if these same parcels were subdivided and
developed to the maximum extent, in accordance with the lot size standards for R-2, the number
residential units would increase by 1,321, for a total of 2,828 residential units, as presented in
Table 22. This represents an increase of approximately 88% in the number of residential units in
R-2. This analysis assumes that each parcel, both developed and undeveloped, are built out to
their maximum capacity, based on the current standards for R-2. The map in Figure 17 illustrates
the breakdown of lots based on their developable acreage.
Table 22: Full R-2 Build-Out Scenario
Category Developable Area within Parcel Total Existing
Parcels
Potential
Units
Single Family Residential Less than 6,750 Sq. Ft 1,087 1,087
Two Family Residential 6,750 - 11,250 Sq. Ft 335 670
One Single Family, One 2-Family 11,250 - 13,500 Sq. Ft 93 279
Two 2-Family Structures Greater than 13,500 Sq. Ft 176 704
Residential development* 600,000 Sq. Ft of Developable Area 1 88
Total 1,692 2,828
* For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that 50% of the developable acreage could be included in the parcels, and that
the parcels would be 6,750 Sq Ft, each containing a duplex unit.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 52
Figure 17: R-2 Parcels by Lot Size
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 53
4.7.6 Additional Population Based on Build-Out Scenario
Table 23 shows the total potential population (both resident and short-term rental) that would
result from the full-build out scenario described above.
Table 23: Maximum Population of Build-Out Scenario
Category Total
Existing
Parcels
Potential
Units
Resident
Population
40%
(2.1 people/
unit)
Short Term /
Vacation
Population
60%
(5 people/ unit)
Single Family Residential 1,087 1,087 914 3,260
Two Family Residential 335 670 563 2,010
One Single Family, One 2-Family 93 279 235 835
Two 2-Family Structures 176 704 592 2,110
Residential development* 1 88 74 264
Total 1,692 2,828 2,378 8,479
This analysis shows that the maximum potential overnight population in the R-2 at 100%
occupancy for both resident and short-term rental/vacation units in the full build-out scenario
would be 10,857. This represents a potential maximum population increase of 5,069.
4.7.7 Zoning Assessment Findings
Table 24 summarizes the findings of the R-2 analysis.
Table 24: R-2 Buildout Population Increase Summary
Condition Potential
Units
Resident
Population
40%
(2.1 people/
unit)
Short Term /
Vacation
Population
60%
(5 people/ unit)
Total Overnight
Population
Existing Development 1,507 1,267 4,521 5,788
Build-Out Scenario 2,828 2,378 8,479 10,857
Increase 1,321 1,111 3,958 5,069
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 54
Based on the existing zoning standards for the R-2 District, this build-out scenario has the
potential to significantly increase the overnight population on the island, resulting in a dramatic
impact on peak demand issues related to water supply, wastewater discharge, and
transportation discussed earlier in this report. In Section 3.2 of this report, it was calculated that
the maximum overnight population on the island under current development conditions is
14,468. Adding the additional overnight population that could be experienced under a full-build
out scenario for R-2, brings the maximum overnight population to 19,327. This is well beyond the
peak capacity of both the current water supply and wastewater discharge systems, and would
clearly increase congestion along US 80 and the internal road network. Furthermore, it exceeds
the future expected capacity of the Cretaceous Well and future permitted withdrawal from the
Floridan Aquifer. It is also important to note that areas currently subject to King-tide flooding
now and as part of a future sea level rise are within the R-2 zone, which is the highest density
residential zoning classification.
Table 25: Future Water Usage Projections Under Full Build-Out Scenario
This future build out scenario is affected by both the geographic extent of the R-2 district as well
as standards for subdivision and development of the R-2 district. While subdivisions and
redevelopments of parcels within this district are currently happening slowly, parcel by parcel,
the pace at which it is occurring is likely to increase as property value increases and available land
for development on Tybee Island decreases. This analysis is not suggesting that the full build-out
scenario is likely to occur in the near future, only that over time it is possible that development
density could significantly increase to the levels proposed here. Furthermore, the City needs to
consider the impacts of this zoning classification under a post-disaster redevelopment scenario.
Population Daily Water
Usage (GPD)
Peak Demand (Maximum Overnight Population) 14,468 1,692,756
Future Additional Potential Peak Demand (Build Out R2
Scenario)
4,735 553,995
Total Potential Peak Demand Water Withdrawal 19,203 2,246,751
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 55
5. RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES AND WORK PLAN
The analyses of the population study and the resources limitations were shared with City staff, the City’s consulting engineer, and the
TAG. Collectively, this process resulted in the identification of carrying capacity issues and recommended strategies for each of the
functional areas identified. The overall approach recommended by this process and its participants is twofold:
1) Make improvements to the City’s existing infrastructure systems to provide additional capacity to accommodate more
growth, and
2) Identify ways to better manage future growth to limit stresses on infrastructure and environmental impacts from future
development.
It was the belief of the TAG that any comprehensive and realistic solution to address carrying capacity issues on Tybee Island should
be inclusive of both approaches. As the City continues to experience the significant financial impact of the infrastructure improvements
that will be necessary to accommodate future growth, strategies regarding growth management and development regulation may
become more favorable.
In an effort to make this plan a more user friendly document, table formatting has been utilized to outline the carrying capacity issues,
recommended strategies, considerations, and action items related to each resource area. The resulting action items will form the basis
of the City’s Carrying Capacity Work Plan. Ideally, this format will make implementation of the Carrying Capacity Study easier to
undertake and track over time.
ISSUE STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS ACTION ITEMS
WATER SUPPLY
Water withdrawal
permit limitations
Peak water usage
associated with
tourism
Installation of a
Cretaceous Well
and construction of
a Treatment Facility
Water conservation
education targeting
tourists and
o Cost of capital
construction
o Increased costs
associated with
treatment
o Discharge of briny
wastewater
1. Perform a rate study to ensure that current and future
water rate structure will generate the revenue necessary
to construct and operate the Cretaceous well. Rate study
should also consider "peak usage rates" to encourage
water use reduction during peak season.
2. Determine how much treatment capacity the RO Plant
should be designed to provide. 1.0 MGD is the maximum.
Table 24: Carrying Capacity Issues, Strategies, Considerations and Action Items
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 56
ISSUE STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS ACTION ITEMS
development
community
Alternative water
sources including:
gray water usage,
rainwater capture,
shallow wells, and
reuse (after the
WPCP upgrade)
o Limited space available
for construction of
treatment facility
o Tourists can be a
difficult audience to
reach.
o Current plumbing code
may not allow for gray
water usage.
3. Develop a conceptual design and financial plan for the
treatment plant. This should include land acquisition (if
necessary) proposed construction and operational costs,
proposed revenue sources, proposed discharge method,
and evaluation of any regulatory permitting
requirements.
4. Construct RO Treatment Plant.
5. Work with the Real Estate/Rental companies to create
water conservation education campaign for tourists.
6. Provide better information to water customers regarding
the volume of water they use.
7. Evaluate current code and adopt/amend local ordinances
as necessary to allow for gray water use, rainwater
harvesting, and reuse.
8. Encourage the use of alternative water sources for
irrigation and outdoor showers.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Peak wastewater
discharge issues
associated with
tourist season.
Capacity of WPCP
infrastructure to
accommodate
more flow
Potential water
quality issues from
discharge.
Future permitted
discharge
Upgrade WPCP to
accommodate
more flow and to
treat to a higher
standard.
o Lack of space for WPCP
expansion
o Potential combined
discharge from
Cretaceous well
treatment plant
increases the need for
capacity in discharge
pipes.
o Permitting and
environmental impacts
of upgrading discharge
pipe
9. Perform a rate study to determine if current rates are
appropriate and adequate to support future capital
construction needs. This should be conducted in
conjunction with the water use rate study.
10. Submit a Waste Load Allocation to the Georgia EPD for
additional flow.
11. Develop a conceptual design for upgrades to the WPCP.
This design should include land acquisition (if necessary)
proposed construction and operational costs, proposed
discharge method and evaluation of any regulatory
permitting requirements. Design considerations for the
discharge pipe should be made in conjunction with the
plans for the Cretaceous Well Treatment Plan discharge.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 57
ISSUE STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS ACTION ITEMS
standards may be
higher.
o Costs associated with
infrastructure
improvements
12. Develop a plan for reuse water use, including the
ballfields.
13. Continue program to upgrade pump stations.
14. Construct upgrades to WPCP.
STORMWATER AND FLOODING
Nuisance flooding
associated with
king high tide and
rain events.
Sea level rise is
exacerbating
flooding
Water quality
issues that result
from flooding
Implement priority
recommended
improvements
from the Sea Level
Rise Study.
Advocate for
elevation of
Highway 80.
Limit new
impervious
surfaces.
Limit new
construction in
areas subject to
flooding.
o Cost of infrastructure
upgrades
o Lack of control over
Hwy 80 project.
o Current status of Hwy
80 project has limited
elevation of the road
bed due to settlement
concerns.
o There are development
rights associated with
property that is already
subject to King Tide
flooding.
15. Elevate the Butler Ave and 14th Street Pump Houses.
16. Install backflow preventers on stormwater outfalls as
recommended in Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan.
17. Continue to work with ACOE on Beach Re-Nourishment
Program
18. Consider program to augment the dune system.
19. Work directly with DOT and lobby for additional elevation
of Hwy 80 to high sea level rise scenario elevations, i.e.
31” or more.
20. Consider an ordinance to limit the amount of impervious
surface in new or redevelopment. Especially in drainage
basins subject to King Tide flooding.
21. Require infiltration of the water quality volume (1.2” of
stormwater) for all new development and
redevelopment.
22. Revise the City code to allow for and incentivize rainwater
harvesting.
23. Investigate the potential to receive FEMA funding to
purchase repetitive flood loss properties.
24. Develop a program to encourage and incentivize green
infrastructure for single family home development.
SOLID WASTE/LITTER
Litter on beach
Municipal solid
waste (MSW)
Reduction of
waste generation
on island
o Tourists are a hard
audience to reach
25. Perform a solid waste study to further evaluate the issues
identified here and identify additional feasible solutions.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 58
ISSUE STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS ACTION ITEMS
disposal trends are
still increasing
despite the
availability of
recycling.
Recycling
receptacles are
often contaminated
by MSW.
Yard waste is being
left on the
road/curb and not
being picked up
Alternatives for
solid waste
disposal in landfills
off island
Waste reduction
education & litter
education for
tourists
Enforcement of
litter ordinance
o Enforcement of litter
ordinance is difficult
and requires staff
o The recycling market is
volatile
o Contamination of
recycling affects its
marketability.
o There is more MSW
than available
receptacles for short-
term rentals or for the
beach causing
contamination of
recycling.
26. Consider requiring Short-Term Rentals to have summer
schedule (i.e. twice per week) for solid waste and
recycling pickup.
27. Work with tourism board and solid waste contractor to
develop an education program targeted at tourists to
discourage littering, increase participation in recycling,
and decrease recycling contamination.
28. Implement program for increased beach litter patrols.
29. Review MSW disposal and recycling program on beach to
determine if more receptacles or a different format
would work better.
30. Work with local businesses to identify and encourage
alternatives to single use items.
31. Study potential for glass crusher, and City-sponsored glass
recycling program.
32. Consider requirements for condominiums to have
dumpsters as opposed to individual trash cans and to
provide recycling options for residents/renters.
33. Work with solid waste contractor to identify and address
obstacles to yard waste pickup.
34. Work with solid waste contractor to study the
cost/benefits of segregated recycling.
35. Research and identify potential purchase and operation
of beach cleaning equipment, i.e. sifters.
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
City operations
result in energy
use, which
contributes to
Reduce energy
usage within City
facilities.
o The City has already
made great strides in
alternative energy
usage through solar
36. Have a third party perform and energy audit that includes
an assessment of the City’s electrical meters and Georgia
Power billing system.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 59
ISSUE STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS ACTION ITEMS
greenhouse gas
emissions.
The billing system
of Georgia Power
makes tracking and
analyzing energy
usage difficult.
Promote energy
efficiency through
education and
incentives.
Work with Georgia
Power to review
and simplify billing
system.
power and through
energy efficiency
audits.
37. Promote energy conservation to city employees and
tenants of city building space. Incentive programs could
be set up to encourage employees to reduce energy
consumption.
38. Explore the potential cost savings associated with a 4-day
work week to reduce electricity usage at public facilities
as well as commuting time for employees.
39. Explore alternative energy sources for interior and
outdoor public lighting (i.e. solar power) as well as
switching to more energy-efficient lighting (i.e., LED
lights).
40. Increase use of occupancy sensors and re-location and
setting of programmable thermostats in all City buildings.
41. Ensure that all City Hall renovations plan for and
incorporate the energy efficiency recommendations
42. Explore alternative cost and benefits associated with
alternative fuel sources for fleet vehicles. For example,
the City could explore the use of bio-diesel as an
alternative to gasoline and diesel in fleet vehicles or the
purchase of hybrid vehicles.
TRAFFIC AND PARKING
Peak traffic flow
issues related to
day-trippers and
events creates
congestion and
makes accessing or
traveling around the
island difficult.
Traffic resulting
from accidents and
Improve Hwy 80 to
provide passable
shoulders and an
elevated road bed.
Provide additional
parking
opportunities
Provide multi-
modal
opportunities for
o There are no transit
opportunities to Tybee
Island.
o There is currently no
public harbor to allow for
ferry service to Savannah.
o The City does not control
Hwy 80 Improvements.
43. Advocate with GDOT to elevate the road surface and
create passable and bikeable shoulders as part of the
bridge and road improvements on Hwy 80.
44. Work with the NPS, Fort Pulaski and the County to extend
the McQueen’s trail to the Lazaretto Creek Bridge.
Continue work to connect the Marsh Hen Trail to the
Lazaretto Creek Bridget.
45. Continue to operate parking application for smart phones
to notify people of available parking. Work with Tybee
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 60
ISSUE STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS ACTION ITEMS
flooding on Hwy 80
cuts off access to
the island resulting
in economic losses
and emergency
situations.
Lack of parking
creates congestion
and illegal parking
problems during
peak tourism season
transportation to
and within Tybee
Island
Notify people
about traffic
congestion and
parking issues
before they get on-
island.
o There is limited land to
accommodate additional
parking.
o More parking could
encourage additional
visitors resulting in more
impact.
o Legal ROW parking is not
known and/or clearly
marked.
o Historic attempts at
remote parking have not
been well utilized
because people want to
park near the beach
when they have a lot of
beach gear.
o Potential to eliminate
parking in C2 could
reduce future available
parking opportunities.
Tourism Council to promote this application. Record data
from application to track trends in parking usage.
46. Work with the County to operate electronic signage at
Johnny Mercer Blvd. and Hwy 80 to notify visitors of
traffic conditions.
47. Perform a study to identify all of the ROWs that are
owned by the City, and develop a parking plan for these
ROWs that includes a clear delineation of ROWs where
parking is allowed and where it is prohibited, i.e. yellow
curb.
48. Consider on-island electronic signage to notify visitors of
available parking.
49. Work with churches and school to provide additional
parking on peak days, if they so choose.
50. Consider the construction of a parking garage in the C1
area, potentially through a public private partnership.
Consider duel uses such as downstairs commercial or
rooftop mini-golf to make it more cost effective.
51. Review parking rates and determine if demand-based
rates could help address peak traffic and parking issues.
SHORT-TERM RENTALS
Peak water and
wastewater usage
on the island is
driven largely by
short-term rentals.
Regulate the
short-term rental
industry.
o Short-term rentals are a
component of all above
elements, but are also
important to the
economy of the island.
52. Review the data gathered through the current Short-
Term Rental Ordinance, and reevaluate the need for
additional regulation.
53. Consider a limit on Short-Term Rental Occupational Tax
Certificates. This could be by total number or a
percentage of housing units on the island.
54. Consider limiting the advertised capacity for short-term
rental units by their available parking spaces.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 61
ISSUE STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS ACTION ITEMS
ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
The R-2 Zoning
District has a lot of
room for additional
development
through subdivision
and redevelopment
of existing lots.
The area subject to
flooding during
King tides and rain
events, is in the R-2
District.
Restrict future
development and
redevelopment in
the R-2 District,
especially areas
that are subject to
flooding.
o Building is already
restricted on Tybee Island
through height.
restrictions and lots sizes.
o Private property rights.
o More impervious surface
from additional
development in the R-2
district will make flooding
issues worse.
o The additional population
that would result from a
full buildout will have a
serious effect on the
Island’s resources,
services, and facilities.
55. Consider amending the R-2 district to
a. Increase the minimum lot size for duplexes.
b. Increase the minimum lot size necessary for subdivisions
56. Consider rezoning areas subject to flooding to R-1 or a
more restrictive zoning district.
57. Consider a transfer of development rights program that
will direct development away from lots subject to
flooding and towards other areas that have the ability to
accommodate more dense development.
58. Provide a tax incentive for R-2 property owners to under-
develop their lots.
59. Purchase and permanently protect undeveloped property
in the R-2 district. Prioritize purchase of repetitive loss
housing.
60. Restrict new impervious surface in the R-2 district.
CITY FUNDING AND RESOURCES
The City does not
currently have the
funding necessary
to implement
needed capital
improvements.
The city needs staff
resources to focus
on issues identified
in this plan.
Adjust utility rate
structure to
ensure that the
city can fund
future capital
improvements and
operations.
Identify other
funding sources
for improvements
o The resident
population may be
burdened by the cost
to support the tourist
population.
o A large proportion of
the City’s budget is for
services and
infrastructure that
services the tourism
industry.
61. Perform a comprehensive water and sanitary sewer rate
study to:
a. Provide adequate funding for future improvements and
operations
b. Incentivize water conservation.
c. Consider peaking factors and/or seasonal rates to reduce
peak usage and to shift the cost burden off of the
residential population
62. Perform a stormwater utility feasibility study to
determine if a stormwater fee would be a potential
funding source for stormwater improvements
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 62
ISSUE STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS ACTION ITEMS
City needs reserves
for disaster
preparedness and
infrastructure
improvements.
Identify or hire
staff to focus on
Carrying Capacity
Issues
o The tourism industry
drives the economy on
Tybee Island.
63. Investigate GEFA loan and principal forgiveness program
as a potential funding source for water, sewer, and
stormwater improvements.
64. Look for regional partners who also benefit from the
tourism industry to assist with the cost of improvements
to address impact of tourists on island resources.
65. Work with Chatham County on future SPLOST
referendum to identify opportunities for additional
funding.
66. Perform a Reserve Fund Study to determine the amount
of reserve funds needed for disaster preparedness and
response.
67. Consider adding staff to focus on implementation of this
work plan.
68. Consider using available funds in the Tybee Energy Loan
Fund to finance energy efficiency recommendations.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 63
5.1. CARRYING CAPACITY WORK PLAN
The following table constitutes the Work Plan that was developed based on the recommended strategies produced by the TAG. The
Work Plan includes the list of action items, a general time frame for implementation (i.e. tasks should be implemented within a two,
five or ten year timeframe), and a cost implication, if known. The activities included within the Work Plan should be viewed as a subset
of the Community Work Program that is part of the Tybee Island Comprehensive Plan Update 2016.
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
WATER SUPPLY
1. Perform a rate study to ensure that current and future water rate structure
will generate the revenue necessary to construct and operate the
cretaceous well. Rate study should also consider "peak usage rates" to
encourage water use reduction during peak season.
X $40,000
2. Determine how much treatment capacity the RO Plant should be designed
to provide. 1.0 MGD is the maximum. X Staff Time
3. Develop a conceptual design and financial plan for the RO treatment plant.
This should include land acquisition (if necessary) proposed construction
and operational costs, proposed revenue sources, proposed discharge
method, and evaluation of any regulatory permitting requirements.
X $20,000
4. Construct the RO Treatment Plant X $7 Million
Table 25: Carrying Capacity Work Plan
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 64
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
5. Work with the Real Estate/Rental companies to create water conservation
education campaign for tourists. X $10,000
6. Provide better information to water customers regarding the volume of
water they use. X TBD
7. Evaluate current code and adopt/amend local ordinances as necessary to
allow for gray water use, rainwater harvesting, and reuse. X Staff Time
8. Encourage the use of alternative water sources for irrigation and outdoor
showers. X Staff Time
WASTEWATER
9. Perform a rate study to determine if current rates are appropriate and
adequate to support future capital construction needs. This should be
conducted in conjunction with the water use rate study.
X $15,000
10. Submit a Waste Load Allocation to the Georgia EPD for additional flow. X $3,000
11. Develop a conceptual design for upgrades to the WPCP. This design should
include land acquisition (if necessary) proposed construction and
operational costs, proposed discharge method and evaluation of any
regulatory permitting requirements. Design considerations for the discharge
X $25,000
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 65
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
pipe should be made in conjunction with the plans for the Cretaceous Well
Treatment Plan discharge.
12. Develop a plan for reuse water use, including the ballfields. X Included in
Concept Plan
13. Continue program to upgrade pump stations. X
$25,000 -
$100,000 per
station
14. Construct upgrades to WPCP. X $16 - $20
Million
STORMWATER AND FLOODING
15. Elevate the Butler Ave and 14th Street Pump Houses. X $400,000
16. Install backflow preventers on stormwater outfalls as recommended in Sea
Level Rise Adaptation Plan. X $3 Million
17. Continue to work with ACOE on Beach Re-Nourishment Program X TBD
18. Consider program to augment the dune system. X TBD
19. Work directly with DOT and lobby for additional elevation of Hwy 80 to high
sea level rise scenario elevations, i.e. 31” or more. X Staff Time
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 66
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
20. Consider an ordinance to limit the amount of impervious surface in new or
redevelopment. Especially in drainage basins subject to King Tide flooding. X Staff Time
21. Require infiltration of the water quality volume (1.2” of stormwater) for all
new development and redevelopment. X
22. Revise the City code to allow for and incentivize rainwater harvesting. X Staff Time
23. Investigate the potential to receive FEMA funding to purchase repetitive
flood loss properties. X TBD
24. Develop a program to encourage and incentivize green infrastructure for
single family home development. X Staff Time
SOLID WASTE AND LITTER
25. Perform a solid waste study to further evaluate the issues identified here
and identify additional feasible solutions. X $50,000
26. Consider requiring Short-Term Rentals to have summer schedule (i.e. twice
per week) for solid waste and recycling pickup. X Staff Time
27. Work with tourism board and solid waste contractor to develop an
education program targeted at tourists to discourage littering, increase
participation in recycling, and decrease recycling contamination.
X $10,000
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 67
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
28. Implement program for increased beach litter patrols. X
Staff Time for
Additional
Officers
29. Review MSW disposal and recycling program on beach to determine if more
receptacles or a different format would work better. X Part of Study
30. Work with local businesses to identify and encourage alternatives to single
use items. X Staff Time
31. Study potential for glass crusher, and City-sponsored glass recycling
program. X Part of Study
32. Consider requirements for condominiums to have dumpsters as opposed to
individual trash cans and to provide recycling opportunities for
residents/rentors.
X Part of Study
33. Work with solid waste contractor to identify and address obstacles to yard
waste pickup. X Part of Study
34. Work with solid waste contractor to study the cost/benefits of segregated
recycling. X Part of Study
35. Research and identify potential purchase and operation of beach cleaning
equipment, i.e. sifters. X Part of Study
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 68
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
36. Have a third party perform and energy audit that includes an assessment of
the City’s electrical meters and Georgia Power billing system. X Percentage of
Cost Savings
37. Promote energy conservation to city employees and tenants of city building
space. Incentive programs could be set up to encourage employees to
reduce energy consumption.
X Staff Time
38. Explore the potential cost savings associated with a 4-day work week to
reduce electricity usage at public facilities as well as commuting time for
employees.
X Staff Time
39. Explore alternative energy sources for interior and outdoor public lighting
(i.e. solar power) as well as switching to more energy-efficient lighting (i.e.,
LED lights).
X TBD
40. Increase use of occupancy sensors and re-location and setting of
programmable thermostats in all City buildings. X $5,000
41. Ensure that all City Hall renovations plan for and incorporate the energy
efficiency recommendations X TBD
42. Explore alternative cost and benefits associated with alternative fuel
sources for fleet vehicles. For example, the City could explore the use of X Staff Time
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 69
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
bio-diesel as an alternative to gasoline and diesel in fleet vehicles or the
purchase of hybrid vehicles.
TRAFFIC AND PARKING
43. Advocate with GDOT to elevate the road surface and create passable and
bikeable shoulders as part of the bridge and road improvements on Hwy 80. X Staff Time
44. Work with the NPS, Fort Pulaski and Chatham County to extend the
McQueen’s trail to the Lazaretto Creek Bridge. Continue work to connect
the Marsh Hen Trail to the Lazaretto Creek Bridget.
X Staff Time
45. Continue to operate parking application for smart phones to notify people
of available parking. Work with Tybee Tourism Council to promote this
application. Record data from application to track trends in parking usage.
X Staff Time
46. Work with the County to operate electronic signage at Johnny Mercer Blvd.
and Hwy 80 to notify visitors of traffic conditions. X Staff Time
47. Perform a study to identify all of the ROWs that are owned by the City, and
develop a parking plan for these ROWs that includes a clear delineation of
ROWs where parking is allowed and where it is prohibited, i.e. yellow curb.
X TBD
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 70
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
48. Consider on-island electronic signage to notify visitors of available parking. X TBD
49. Work with churches and school to provide additional parking on peak days,
if they so choose. X Staff Time
50. Consider the construction of a parking garage in the C1 area, potentially
through a public private partnership. Consider duel uses such as downstairs
commercial or rooftop mini-golf to make it more cost effective.
X
≈ $19,000 per
space (if GI/LID
is included)
51. Review parking rates and determine if demand-based rates could help
address peak traffic and parking issues.
X Staff Time
SHORT-TERM RENTALS
52. Review the data gathered through the current Short-Term Rental
Ordinance, and reevaluate the need for additional regulation. X Staff Time
53. Consider a limit on Short-Term Rental Occupational Tax Certificates. This
could be by total number or a percentage of housing units on the island. X Staff Time
54. Consider limiting the advertised capacity for short-term rental units by their
available parking spaces.
X Staff Time
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 71
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
55. Consider amending the R-2 district to:
a. Increase the minimum lot size for duplexes.
b. Increase the minimum lot size necessary for subdivisions.
X Staff Time
56. Consider rezoning areas in R-2 District that subject to flooding to R-1 or a
more restrictive zoning district. X Staff Time
57. Consider a transfer of development rights program that will direct
development away from lots subject to flooding and towards other areas
that have the ability to accommodate more dense development.
X TBD
58. Provide a tax incentive for R-2 property owners to under-develop their lots. X Staff Time
59. Purchase and permanently protect undeveloped property in the R-2 district.
Prioritize purchase of repetitive loss housing. X TBD
60. Restrict new impervious surface in the R-2 district. X Staff Time
CITY FUNDING AND RESOURCES
61. Perform a comprehensive water and sanitary sewer rate study to:
a. Provide adequate funding for future improvements and operations
b. Incentivize water conservation.
X $40,000
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 72
ACTION ITEM
SCHEDULE
COST
IMPLICATION IMMEDIATE
(2 YR)
SHORT
TERM
(5 YR)
LONG
TERM
(10 YR)
c. Consider peaking factors and/or seasonal rates to reduce peak usage
and to shift the cost burden off of the residential population
62. Perform a stormwater utility feasibility study to determine if a stormwater
fee would be a potential funding source for stormwater improvements X $15,000
63. Investigate GEFA loan and principal forgiveness program as a potential
funding source for water, sewer, and stormwater improvements. X $5,000
64. Look for regional partners who also benefit from the tourism industry to
assist with the cost of improvements to address impact of tourists on island
resources.
X Staff Time
65. Work with Chatham County on future SPLOST referendum to identify
opportunities for additional funding. X Staff Time
66. Perform a Reserve Fund Study to determine the amount of reserve funds
needed for disaster preparedness and response. X $25,000
67. Consider adding staff to focus on implementation of this work plan. X Staff Time
68. Consider using available funds in the Tybee Energy Loan Fund to finance
energy efficiency recommendations. X Staff Time
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY 73
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY
CDM Smith. US 80 Bridges Replacement Study, Coastal Regional MPO, Final Report, 2012.
Calvin, Giordano & Associates, Inc. City of Key West Carrying Capacity Traffic Study, City of Key
West, December 2011.
Center for Regional Analysis, Armstrong State University. Tybee Island Tourism Study, City of
Tybee Island ad Armstrong Public Service Center, May 2015.
Ecological Planning Group, Population Assessment 2010, City of Tybee Island, June 2012
Evans, Jason et al. Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan, National Sea Grant Program, April
2016.
Evans, Jason et al. Tybee Island Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan Executive Summary, Georgia Sea
Grant and the University of Georgia Carl Vincent Institute of Government, June 2013.
HDR Engineering, Inc. Tybee Island Traffic and Parking Study, City of Tybee Island, January 2005.
RS&H. City of Tybee Island Pedestrian and Traffic Study, City of Tybee Island, January 2010.
Tybee Island Wave Ecology & the Highway 80 Challenge. Chatham County & the City of Tybee
Island, May 2011.
URS Corporation. Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study: Draft Final Report First Revision, US Army
Corps of Engineers and the Florida Department of Community Affairs, September 2002.
TYBEE ISLAND CARRYING CAPACITY STUDY A1
APPENDIX A: MEETING SUMMARIES
City of Tybee Island
Carrying Capacity Study
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Coordination Meeting #1
October 12, 2015
3:00 PM – 5:00 PM
Attendees:
Freda Rutherford, Community Resources Committee (CRC)
Ed DiTommaso, EPG
Bud Matlock, CRC
Tim Arnold, CRC
George Shaw, City of Tybee Island
Kathryn Propst, CRC
Bill Garbett, Tybee Island City Council
Monty Parks, Tybee Island City Council
Courtney Reich, EPG
Diane Schleicher, City of Tybee Island,
Meeting Summary
1. Scope of Project
a. Scope & Schedule
Courtney gave some background on the grant and the general scope and schedule. This
included and summary of the outcomes and the requirements associated with each. Task
1 is primarily information gathering. EPG will work with the Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) to gather relevant data. The second major task will be to assess will
various resources and how they impacted by, and/or limit, the daytime, overnight, and
permanent populations. It is anticipated that this will reveal hard limits, i.e. where a
resource absolutely limits the amount of people that can be supported, as well as soft
limits, where a resource as it is currently could limit future population if nothing is done
to address the limitation. Lastly, this information will be used to develop a series of
recommendations for the City consideration.
Additionally, the process will be well documented and EPG will produce an outline of how
another communities could replicate the process.
2. Data Needs
The group discussed data needs and existing data sources. In some cases, EPG already has some of
the needed datasets, other cases will require coordination with appropriate City staff and/or CRC
members. The following datasets were discussed, and resource and/or responsible party identified:
Freda asked about when the 2015 Census data will be available. Also asked about when the master
plan is due and how the Carrying Capacity Study can be coordinated and included in the Master Plan.
The Master Plan is due next October (2016). EPG already contacted the Department of Community
Affairs to see if they would allow the City an extension to because of this grant, but no extension was
given. The requirements for the comprehensive is different than is was in 2007, but the City can
complete the plan based on the existing DCA schedule and adopt the Carrying Capacity as an
addendum later.
Data Source
GIS Data
Critical Habitats EPG, from CRD data
Water, Sewer, Stormwater Infrastructure Joe Wilson & George Reese at COTI
Flood Zones (Current and future) EPG will get these
Zoning CRC, George to update & EPG will request
Land Use 2008 land use plan, EPG will request &
update
Tree Canopy Cover EPG
Parking COTI, Pete Ryerson in Parking
Rental Units EPG to try to develop this layer using
Business tax info from Sharon and websites
for rental agencies
Bikeways EPG and Tybee
Emergency response/evacuation routes EPG to get from CEMA
Critical infrastructure EPG to get from CEMA
Other Data
Population Study EPG has this, will look to update as needed
Traffic Counts Diane to provide two calendar years’ worth
of data
Water & Sewer Permits Diane to provide
Parking See above
Electrical Grid Capacity Chris Tatasco (sp?) From GA Power
Solid Waste & Recycling Kathryn to provide
Rental Units See above
Housing (workforce) Census, survey
Alternative energy sources &
opportunities
Paul Wolff and Bill Garbett
Highway 80 Expansion EPG
Saltwater Intrusion Study EPG
Discussion regarding the data included the following:
There was some discussion of why and how we determined which types of data to review. The
original list was not intended to be all inclusive and will likely be modified as we move through
the process.
EPG will review the critical habitats data to see where the priority areas are located throughout
the City.
EPG to get with George to obtain the water/sewer/stormwater datasets and determine the
usefulness of the data. We can request the data from CRC, Joe and George. EPG will work with
the city to determine how reliable the data is. Diane said the data is generally accurate and to
work with Hunter Key to get.
Flood. EPG already has the existing flood maps, but will try and obtain the future flood maps,
since they will be in effect before this project is complete.
Zoning. Get from Hunter at CRC. George is going to confirm that Hunter has the most updated
zoning based on a couple recent re-zonings. EPG will perform an analysis of existing R-2 zoning
and determine whether there are 2 houses or if they are currently SFR and can be developed as
2. A significant area of the City is zoned R-2 and there is often demand to make existing SFRs into
duplexes. EPG will also evaluate lot size as part of the analysis to make sure the use would be
allowed by right versus needing a variance.
Land Use. The City has not updated the existing land use layer since the 2008 master plan. EPG
will use the Tax assessors land use code and perform a desktop update.
Tree Canopy Cover. EPG has access to this data in a GIS format.
Parking. The city has a map of parking. Each metered parking space was included in this. The
beach management plan included a count of all metered parking on the island. Pete Ryerson,
would be the contact for this and also might have data that shows golf cart parking. Work with
parking staff at the City to verify and update as needed.
Rental Units. EPG might have a list containing some data about rental units, but single owner
properties are difficult to track. Might be some able to use the business license database since
renters are supposed to get a license, per city ordinance. Many get a license thought larger sites
(Air B&B) and the city does not have a way to track this. City is trying to develop a better way to
track this. The CRC team believes this is important. Start with business license list. Get with
Sharon from the City as a starting place. The city is seeing a trend in long term rentals being
converted to short-term rentals. Driving out workforce housing, which forces that population
group off the island. Look at cases where the renter has to put a deposit down vs owners that
bundle utilities. There is a perception that the population on the island is decreasing. Is this the
case? EPG discussed making a web survey to try and understand these trends.
Bikeways. There are existing maps showing bikeways on the island. Get with George or view city
website.
Emergency response / evacuation and critical infrastructure. EPG will get with CEMA and Jimmy.
EPG also has the Highway 80 study
Population. EPG completed a population study that EPG completed as part of the LOST
negotiations. The focus of the study was to determine the daytime population numbers. There
has been a jump in short term rentals over the last few years, which has changed the population
make up on the island. EPG will update this study with new data.
Traffic Counts. Get info from police department. The city has a new system that tracks cars
coming onto the island. The City will provide two calendar years worth of data. 2013 – to date.
Courtney mentioned the public involvement element of the Hwy 80 project. She will to send out
information to the group about joining the DOT highway 80 notification list. DOT is going to host
a charrette in November to discuss the widening project.
W/S permits. City to provide list from EPD. Including the new Cretaceous well.
Parking. Get an understanding of the number of public parking spots in addition to private
parking. Issues with golf cart parking since they take up the same parking spaces, but the golf cart
shuttles make a difference because saves parking. EPG will look at alterative options. The
assessment will make an assumptions about how much parking is associated with houses. For
example, 4 spots for SFR, 8 for MF. EPG will come up with these assumptions and bring back to
the group. Get data on the number of seasonal passes / decals. Three categories, resident, sold,
given away.
Electrical grid capacity. Data from GA power. This will be difficult to get. GA power just
upgraded. Chris Tidasko from GA power is someone to contact about getting this type of
information. Power to the island is a single point failure.
Solid waste and recycling, CRC has a lot of data and will provide, but is missing information from
Condos. Ask condos to share this information and let them know we are only interested in
quantity and are not concerned with the prices. Also need this information for commercial
customers. If we are not successful getting real data we can make assumptions based on
container size and pick up frequency.
Maybe develop a survey for businesses on the island. Ask how much of your workforce lives on
the island?
Alternative energy. Paul and Bill will be able to provide information. How many people went
solar? Final report is being completed, so we should be able to get info from Hannah. How many
kilowatts were installed? Other studies completed by the city, such as wind energy. Installation
of solar energy is more difficult for the City to implement because tax benefits are for residential
customers and not extended to government because they don’t pay taxes.
Salt Water intrusion. EPG has this data.
3. ICLEE Greenhouse Gas Footprint Analysis
There was a brief discussion about the GHG analysis and the type of information that would be
gathered and included in the analysis. Public lighting was left off the list on the meeting agenda, but
will be included in the assessment. The CRC stated that solar power is already being used on many
poles located on the island. It was noted to be sure to include the campground as part of this
analysis.
4. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
There will be a TAC that meets quarterly as part of this meeting, and the following people were
discussed as potential members of the TAC:
CRC
Planning Commission
George Reese
Joe Wilson
Tybee Tourism Council rep.
Deb from DNR
George Shaw
Open invitation to City Council (“may be a quorum present” noted on agendas)
Discuss with Chantel to get people from the business community, represent “Main Street”
Brett Loher (sp?) (Hotel Tybee)
Local Realtor (Shirley Sessions)
Restaurant industry (Sarah from Social Club)
EPG will work with George to develop a final list and provide it back to the City for their review. The
first TAC meeting will be in November.
Next Meeting
EPG will attend and provide updates as part of the regular CRC meeting schedule. Some
meetings might require more time on the agenda.
The group discussed a proposed agenda for the kick off meeting for TAC. EPG will prepare a
community snapshot showing some of the data we are discussing to help illustrate the impact
these factors have on a specific area. This will include a one block area of GIS information.
The TAC meeting will take place in November. EPG will look at some dates and check them
against the City calendar. The group will need to get member list finalized before meeting.
City of Tybee Carrying Capacity Study
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meeting #1
Meeting Summary
December 8, 2015
4:00 PM – 6:00 PM
1. Scope of Project
Introduction
Courtney Reich opened up the meeting by introducing EPG employees. TAC members
introduced themselves.
Meetings are open to any interested citizen. The purpose is to gather information and receive
feedback from as many interested stakeholders as possible, in an effort to represent different
views as well as verify the accuracy of data used for this study.
The meeting invitation went out to a well-rounded group of citizens. George is going to check
with some other citizens again and committee members were asked to invite interested citizens
to attend the next meeting as well.
Project Tasks & Schedule
Technical Advisory Committee. (This is the first meeting, which will be held quarterly. The Grant
is to be completed October 2016).
Community Resources Inventory & Assessment
Analysis of community Resources Limitations
Recommendations and Implementation Plan
Coordination with Comprehensive Plan process. This project will attempt to coordinate with the
Comprehensive Planning process as much as feasible, although the deadlines aren’t an exact
match. The Carrying Capacity Study has to be completed by September 30th, however the
Comprehensive Plan must be submitted by August 2016 for approval by October 2016.
2. Review of Wave Ecology Report
Findings
In 2011, a similar study was conducted titled “Tybee Island Wave Ecology and The Highway 80
Challenge Study.” This was essentially a Carrying Capacity Study that focused on the Highway 80
corridor near Tybee Island. The study was commissioned by Chatham County to assist the City
of Tybee Island (and a committee of government and agency leaders) in defining localized
solutions to issues affecting the safety of citizens and visitors specific to the Hwy 80 corridor. A
copy can be downloaded from the MPC’s website at
http://thempc.org/Transportation/WaveEcologyStudy.html. EPG will email a copy to Committee
attendees. Many Tybee residents were active participants with this study.
Recommendations for this Study
Committee members discussed the following recommendations from this Study, and their
implementation status since the report was completed in 2011:
o Install road signage to address special features related to safety concerns.
o Establish a bus or shuttle service during special events and inter-island options during
peak tourism periods.
o Establish and maintain an ongoing bus/shuttle service through the Coastal Regional
Commission.
o Utilize signal timing and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) during special events.
o Utilize social media to disseminate information to the public.
3. Data Analysis
Courtney presented on the data collected and the analysis conducted to date on the following data sets.
She will provide a copy of the power point presentation to the TAC and the City for posting on the
website. A brief summary of the discussion is below.
Water Withdrawal
o A question was asked about how per capita water use was going to be examined in this
study. This study is going to look at other communities and other organizations where
people have tried to estimate % of water use for outdoor watering. Often, studies look
at per capita water use during the growing season and per capita water use when it is
not growing season and use the difference to estimate how much water is used to water
lawns and landscaped areas.
o A suggestion was made to look at shallow wells for irrigation. We don’t think these well
are requires to be permitted; where could we obtain this data? If we don’t have the
data, then we can make a recommendation in the report to start collecting the data for
future analysis.
o Another recommendation is to notify citizens about how much water they are using so
they can see a real “number” as to their water consumption.
o Water Withdrawal-Future Permit Limits: Courtney Reviewed data from 2010 – 2015
that indicates that the City of Tybee consistently exceeds its water withdrawal permit
limits during peak summer months. Courtney reviewed a bar graph that shows Annual
Daily average, the 2015 Permit Limit, and 2025 Permit Limit. Georgia EPD is assuming
Tybee will rely on the use of a deep well in the Cretaceous aquifer to reduce water
withdrawals from the Floridan Aquifer water consumption as mandated by the 2025
Permit. Water conservation measures alone will not allow the City to achieve this
amount of water reduction.
�� W a s t e w a t e r T r e a t m e n t P l a n t ( W T P ) D i s c h a r g e
o M o n t h l y W T P d i s c h a r g e d a t a f r o m 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 5 i n d i c a t e s t h a t d i s c h a r g e f r o m t h e W T P
a l s o e x c e e d s p e r m i t l i m i t s d u r i n g p e a k s u m m e r m o n t h s .
o T h e r e w a s a q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e w a t e r q u a l i t y s t a n d a r d s i n t h e p e r m i t , a n d i f t h e
W T P i s c u r r e n t l y e x c e e d w a t e r q u a l i t y s t a n d a r d s . C o u r t n e y s t a t e d t h a t E P D h a s t h a t
d a t a , b u t h a s n o t p e r f o r m e d t h a t r e v i e w y e t .
�� S o l i d w a s t e
o S o l i d w a s t e d a t a w a s p r o v i d e d b y W a s t e P r o .
o T h e r e w a s a q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g w h e t h e r d r y t r a s h n u m b e r s a r e i n c l u d e d i n t h e W a s t e
P r o d a t a . E P G w i l l w o r k t o d e t e r m i n e t h a t .
o T h e g e n e r a l t r e n d i s a n i n c r e a s e i n b o t h m u n i c i p a l s o l i d w a s t e ( M S W ) a n d r e c y c l i n g ,
a l t h o u g h t h e u p w a r d t r e n d i n r e c y c l i n g a p p e a r s t o b e g r e a t e r t h a n t h e u p w a r d t r e n d i n
M S W d i s p o s a l .
�� P o p u l a t i o n / H o u s i n g
o O v e r a l l , t h e t r e n d i s t h a t r e s i d e n t p o p u l a t i o n i s d e c r e a s i n g , t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f
o w n e r / r e n t e r o c c u p i e d h o u s i n g i s s h r i n k i n g , a n d s h o r t t e r m r e n t a l s a r e o n t h e r i s e .
S e v e r a l g r a p h s a n d c h a r t s w e r e r e v i e w e d t o p r o v i d e b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e
c h a n g i n g d y n a m i c s o f T y b e e s r e s i d e n t v e r s u s s h o r t a n d l o n g - t e r m r e n t e r p o p u l a t i o n s .
T h e T A C d i s c u s s e d t r y i n g t o e n c o u r a g e p a r t i c i p a t i o n b y p e o p l e i n t h e s h o r t - t e r m r e n t a l
i n d u s t r y o n T y b e e t o v e r i f y c a p a c i t y a n d p e r / u n i t p o p u l a t i o n d a t a .
�� T r a f f i c
o D a i l y t r a f f i c c o u n t s f r o m 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 ( s i n c e t h e C i t y s t r a f f i c c o u n t e q u i p m e n t w a s
c o r r e c t e d ) w e r e r e v i e w e d . T h e y i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e d a i l y c a p a c i t y o f t h e H w y 8 0 c o r r i d o r
w a s o n l y e x c e e d e d a f e w t i m e s p e r y e a r . H o w e v e r a l o o k a t t h e 1 5 - m i n u t e i n t e r v a l
c o u n t s m a y t e l l a d i f f e r e n t s t o r y r e g a r d i n g r o a d c a p a c i t y . E P G w i l l l o o k f u r t h e r i n t o t h i s .
�� Z o n i n g A n a l y s i s
o T h i s w a s n o t d o n e i n t h e W a v e E c o l o g y S t u d y a n d i t w a s a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n o f t h a t
s t u d y t o l o o k a t z o n i n g . E d g a v e a p r e s e n t a t i o n o f s o m e m a p s h e g e n e r a t e d w i t h
e x i s t i n g G e o g r a p h i c I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m ( G I S ) d a t a . T h i s i n c l u d e d a R - 2 Z o n i n g A n a l y s i s
t o s h o w w h a t p o t e n t i a l i n c r e a s e s i n l i v i n g u n i t s t h e r e c o u l d b e p o s s i b l e u n d e r t h e R - 2
z o n i n g d e s i g n a t i o n . E P G w i l l b e c o n d u c t i n g a m o r e c o m p l e t e z o n i n g a n a l y s i s a s m o r e
G I S d a t a i s g a t h e r e d a n d a s s e s s e d .
4 . D a t a G a t h e r i n g : O u t s t a n d i n g D a t a N e e d e d / R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r F u t u r e A n a l y s i s
�� E P G r e v i e w e d t h e s t a t u s o f d a t a t h a t h a s b e e n g a t h e r e d t h u s f a r a n d o u t s t a n d i n g d a t a n e e d s .
�� J a c k i e a s k e d i f t h e d r y t r a s h # i s i n c l u d e d i n t h e S o l i d W a s t e - R e s i d e n t i a l T r e n d s l i n e g r a p h ; E P G
w i l l c h e c k .
�� Q u e s t i o n w a s a s k e d f o r t h e H o u s i n g U n i t s t a b l e : w h a t w a s i n c l u d e d / g r o u p e d i n t h e O t h e r
c a t e g o r y f o r v a c a n t r e n t a l s ( w a s t h i s f o r s e c o n d h o m e s t h a t a r e n t b e i n g r e n t e d a n d a r e n o t u p
f o r s a l e ) ? E P G w i l l c h e c k .
�� A T A C m e m b e r s u g g e s t e d t h a t a g o o d p r o j e c t f o r T y b e e w o u l d b e t o l o o k a t o t h e r m e t h o d s
( o t h e r t h a n t e a r d o w n / n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n ) t o e n c o u r a g e h i s t o r i c c o t t a g e s t o b e e l e v a t e d o u t o f
t h e f l o o d p l a i n a s o p p o s e d t o t o r n d o w n . L e w i s A v e n u e i s a p r i m e e x a m p l e .
�� S u g g e s t i o n s w e r e m a d e t o e x a m i n e w a s t e w a t e r q u a l i t y , f o c u s i n g o n T M D L l i m i t s ( w h a t i s t h e
n e x t g e n e r a t i o n o f w a s t e w a t e r p e r m i t l i m i t s ? ) , &