HomeMy Public PortalAbout20180416_PC_MINUTES.pdfPLANNING COMMISSION
Demery Bishop
Ron Bossick
Marianne Bramble
Tina Gann
Charles Matlock
David McNaughton
Alan Robertson
Planning Commission Meeting
MINUTES
April 16, 2018
CITY MANAGER
Shawn Gillen
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
George Shaw
CITY ATTORNEY
Edward M. Hughes
Commissioner Bishop called the April 16, 2018 Tybee Island Planning Commission meeting to order.
Commissioners present were Charles Matlock, David McNaughton, Ron Bossick, Marianne Bramble,
Alan Robertson and Tina Gann.
Consideration of Minutes: Chair Bishop asked for consideration of the March 19, 2018 meeting minutes.
Vice Chair Bossick made a motion to approve Commissioner Matlock seconded, the vote to approve was
four to approve, Commissioner Gann did not vote since she did not attend the March 19 meeting.
Disclosures/Recusals: Chair Bishop asked if there were any disclosures or recusals. There were none.
Old Business:
Variance: Sec. 3-100. — Beach, dune, or vegetation disturbance/crossover maintenance and
construction. —To build a retaining wall —1 Shipwatch Lane —4-0021-17-013—Debra Chester
Mr. Shaw approached the Planning Commission and stated that he talked with the Engineer a couple times
about getting more of an explanation on the plans, and only received the same plans larger. Mr. Shaw stated
that he does have a little better understanding of the plans. It looks like there are additional slabs heading into
the dune system behind the house and he could only support a retaining wall on the back of the house, but
cannot support what appears to show eight to twelve feet coming into the dune system. Mr. Shaw also stated
he thinks there are other ways to reduce the erosion. Ms. Chester approached the Planning Commission and
stated she lives at 1 Shipwatch Lane. Ms. Chester stated that the hurricanes demolished her home and when
the insurance agent came to look at it he stated that she should really do something about the shifting of the
sand and the future storm surge, he suggested redoing the piers. Right now the dune is gone. The Engineer's
proposal was to push the dune back up to the two foot height that it was previously and place a berm into the
sand by the dune and the exposed two foot part would show under her house. She also stated that she is going
to have gutters put on her house. Mr. Shaw stated that in his time with the City he has not approved any
encroachments into a dune so he is reluctant to support it. Ms. Chester stated that maybe Mr. Shaw should
look at the dunes again, and she also stated that her neighbors have put in walls for their erosion.
Commissioner Matlock asked how much encroachment. Mr. Shaw stated about ten feet. Commissioner
Matlock stated he does not see what Ms. Chester is asking to do on these plans. Mr. Shaw stated from what
he sees it seems like more than what is necessary. Ms. Chester asked what she should do to get the dune
back. Mr. Shaw stated our ordinance does not allow you to push the dune back up which is why she is asking
for this variance and DNR would need to approve that if she goes beyond the flags. Ms. Chester asked what
advice the Planning Commission could give her on what to do. Mr. Shaw stated he is not sure but one of the
City's goals is to protect the dunes. Vice Chair Bossick stated a retaining wall only under your home and
gutters would help tremendously and DNR could help with dune fencing. Chair Bishop stated that the
Planning Commission cannot approve this variance without a plan that is clearer. Commissioner Robertson
stated Ms. Chester needs to get a clearer drawing of a retaining wall then we could approve. Commissioner
Bramble stated this should have been looked at by the developer of the property from the beginning.
Commissioner Gann asked if there is something they could do to help this process along because hurricane
season is approaching and the house is still exposed. Mr. Shaw stated to that it would be helpful for her
Engineer to attend the City Council meeting to explain the drawings. Ms. Chester stated that she cannot
afford to have the Engineer come to the meeting and she thinks all of it is overkill. Commissioner Robertson
made a motion to deny Commissioner Bramble seconded the vote was four to approve Vice Chair Bossick,
Commissioner Bramble and Commissioner Matlock and two opposed Commissioner Gann and
Commissioner McNaughton, the vote to Deny carried.
New Business:
May and text Amendment: Rezone 2 parcels —Lot E Fifth Avenue -4-0003-07-009 —Zone R -2/C-2 —Lot
A Fifth Avenue -4-0003-07-005 —Zone R -2/C-2 —Carrie Efird —Amendment to Article 13 of the Land
Development Code.
Mr. Shaw approached the Planning Commission and stated that the City created the C-2 corridor by
measuring a line from the right of way of Highway 80 irrespected of property lines which is not really
standard zoning procedure so that is why these two lots have split zoning which is partly C-2 and partly R-2.
He stated that these parcels are empty currently with marsh behind the lots and a commercial building on the
other side. They wish to have them solely zoned C-2 and because they are isolated from residential structures
staff supports the request. Commissioner McNaughton asked how far back the C-2 zone goes on the parcels.
Mr. Shaw stated he brought the map for the Planning Commission to see; it is about two third C-2 and one
third R-2. Commissioner McNaughton stated what appears to be the controlling code is 4-040 which reads,
"In most instances zoning district lines on the zoning map are drawn to follow streets land lot lines property
lines and other natural divisions in the event a zone line should divide a lot orparcel of land the entire lot or
parcel shall be considered to be that of the least intense land use classification." Mr. Shaw stated that Mr.
Hughes, the City Attorney, has stated that residential would be the least intensive use and the property as it
sits now with the split would have to be used as residential, but it can be rezoned as a single zone which is
what the applicant is asking. Ms. Galloway approached the Planning Commission and stated she lives at 153
Lewis Avenue and she would like to see the parcel stay residential. Ms. Efird the Applicant approached the
Planning Commission and stated that the R-2 part of the lots are mostly marsh and that area is not developable
the C-2 part which is roughly one third is the C-2 area. She also stated that they purchased these lots as C-2
and the appraisal, the title search and what was noted through SAGIS were all C-2, it wasn't until a month ago
that the split zoning came up. Ms. Galloway approached the Planning Commission again and stated she feels
like if the R-2 is so unbuildable why not just keep it like it is, there is a lot of residential around that area to.
Commissioner Matlock made a motion to approve Commissioner Robertson seconded and the vote to
approve was unanimous. Commissioner Robertson made a motion to approve the text amendment and
Commissioner Gann seconded the vote to approve was unanimous.
Standing Agenda Item:
Commissioner Robertson stated that in the master plan there are very clear neighborhood area
characteristics, one of them is the commercial gateway in the area that is being discussed tonight and there are
others about eight or nine. He would suggest to look at the neighborhood so it would not be island wide but
within the context of a neighborhood and identify the problem properties and understand what the issues are
and present them to council. He stated the ordinances also need to be looked at and addressed if needed. In
addition, he stated they would need to seek City Councils direction on whether they want them to look at
these.
Meeting adjourned 8:30pm
Lisa L. Schaaf