Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION CITY MANAGER <br />Demery Bishop, Vice Chair Diane Schleicher <br />Marianne Bramble <br />Julie Livingston PLANNING & ZONING MANAGER <br />John Major Dianne Otto, CFM <br />Tyler Marion, Chair <br />David McNaughton CITY ATTORNEY <br /> Edward M. Hughes <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES <br />Planning Commission Meeting <br />May 20, 2014 – 7:00 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />Chair Tyler Marion called the May 20, 2014, Tybee Island Planning Commission meeting to order. Commissioners <br />present were Marianne Bramble, John Major, Tyler Marion, Demery Bishop, and Julie Livingston. <br /> <br />Mr. Marion expressed condolences to the family of Tom Borkowski and spoke of Tom’s contributions to the Planning <br />Commission. <br /> <br />Mr. Marion – The first order of business is the minutes of the April 15, 2014, meeting. Do I have any discussion? [There <br />was none.] Do I have a motion? [Ms. Bramble made a motion to approve as written; Mr. Bishop seconded.] All those in <br />favor please signify. [The vote was unanimous.] <br /> <br />Mr. Marion read a notice about the opening for a Planning Commission member. <br /> <br />Mr. Marion – Do we have any recusals or disclosures? Mr. McNaughton disclosed that on the Text Amendment for <br />definitions that he operates a local business. <br /> <br />Minor Subdivision of Land – Lorena Mitchell – 110 S. Campbell Avenue <br />Ms. Otto – This is a request for a Minor Subdivision of 110 South Campbell Avenue. The property owner is Lorena <br />Mitchell. She is being represented this evening by Bert Barrett, Jr. The request is to divide one lot into two lots. The <br />zone is R-2 and it is in the Marshfront Neighborhood Character Area. The proposed division of this property into two <br />lots would result in one lot having 2,263 square feet and the other 3,945 square feet. Neither of those lot sizes meet the <br />minimum lot size requirement in an R-2 zone which is 4,500 square feet. The purpose of this request is related to <br />refinancing only. In your packet is a brief narrative written by the property owner discussing the purpose of this <br />request. <br /> <br />Mr. Major – Why would this not require a Variance if we have nonconforming characteristics now and what we are <br />creating would be more? I don’t have a problem with what they are doing; it is not going to change physically o n the <br />lots. Why would this not come with a Variance request? <br /> <br />Ms. Otto – If the outcome was to grant the subdivision, it would be a Variance from that minimum lot size requirement. <br />If you grant the subdivision you are also granting that it is below the minimum lot size requirement. <br /> <br />Mr. Major – There is not a Variance request. <br /> <br />Ms. Otto – No. It is inherent within the application because it will create two nonconforming lot sizes. <br /> <br />Mr. Marion – By creating an inadvertent Variance, would it be a hardship Variance? <br />