►
From YouTube: Historic Preservation Commission Wednesday, March 01, 2023 at 6:00 PM Theodore D. Washington
Description
Historic Preservation Commission
Wednesday, March 01, 2023 at 6:00 PM
Theodore D. Washington Municipal Building, 20 Bridge Street, Henry “Emmett” McCracken Jr.
Council Chambers
AGENDA
This meeting can be viewed live on Beaufort County Channel, on Hargray Channel 9 and 113 or on
Spectrum Channel 1304.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. NOTICE REGARDING ADJOURNMENT
The Historic Preservation Commission will not hear new items after 9:30 p.m. unless authorized by
a majority vote of the Commission Members present. Items which have not been heard before
9:30 p.m. may be continued to the next regular meeting or a special meeting date as determined
by the Commission Members.
IV. NOTICE REGARDING PUBLIC COMMENTS*
Every member of the public who is recognized to speak shall address the Chairman and in
speaking, avoid disrespect to Commission, Staff, or other members of the Meeting. State your
name and address when speaking for the record. COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3)
MINUTES.
V. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
VI. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
1. February 1, 2023 Minutes
VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA*
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
IX. NEW BUSINESS
1. Certificate of Appropriateness. A request by Steven Milloy, on behalf of the owner, Ray
Bruen, for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness – HD application to allow the
construction of a 1-story Carriage House of approximately 576 SF behind the existing
residential structure located at 2 Tabby Shell Road in the Old Town Bluffton Historic District
and zoned Neighborhood General-HD. (COFA-12-22-017450) (Staff - Katie Peterson)
Town of Bluffton, SC Historic Preservation Commission Agenda March 01, 2023
2. Certificate of Appropriateness. A request by Pearce Scott Architects, on behalf of the
owners, John and Lisa Sulka, for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness – HD application
to allow the addition of a 64 SF roof over an existing porch on the existing residential
structure located at 37 Stock Farm Road in the Old Town Bluffton Historic District and zoned
Neighborhood Conservation-HD. (COFA-01-23-017579) (Staff - Katie Peterson)
X. DISCUSSION
1. Discussion Regarding Potential Amendments to the Town of Bluffton Code of Ordinances,
Chapter 23 - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Relating to Contributing Resources and
Architectural Standards in Old Town Bluffton Historic District (Staff - Charlotte Moore)
XI. ADJOURNMENT
NEXT MEETING DATE: Wednesday, April 5, 2023
A
D
A
A
To
the
meeting
notice
regarding
the
Germans,
the
historic
preservation
commission
will
not
hear
new
items
after
9
30
PM
unless
authorized
by
the
majority
vote
of
the
commission.
Members
presence
items
which
have
not
been
for
for
9
30
may
be
continued
to
the
next
regular
meeting
or
a
special
meeting
date,
as
determined
by
the
commission
members
notice
regarding
public
comments.
Every
member
of
the
public,
who
is
recognized
to
speak,
shall
address
the
chairman
and,
in
speaking
of
void,
disrespect
to
commission
staff
or
other
members
of
the
meeting
state.
A
A
F
G
A
F
H
A
I
I
A
A
E
A
A
J
Thank
you
and
Commissioners
I,
don't
see,
I,
don't
have
an
applicant
here
for
this
item.
Real,
quick
and
so
I
am
working
on
getting
a
call
to
them.
I'm
pulling
up
their
phone
number
real,
quick.
If
I
can
ask
you
to
step
outside
and
maybe
call
Steve
in
just
a
second,
if
it
would
be
okay
with
you
all
to
adjust
the
agenda
I
didn't
realize
they
hadn't
walked
in
and
the
last
seconds
there
to
hear
item
number
two
before
we
hear
item
number
one
of
new
business.
A
J
J
Okay,
so
the
first
item
that
we
have
tonight
is
our
second
item,
which
is
37
stock
Farm
Road
in
the
applicant
I'm,
going
to
read
it
because
that
way,
it
gains
a
little
bit
of
time
for
her
to
make
this
phone
call.
But
the
applicant
peer,
Scout,
architect,
half
of
the
owners
Selco
request
that
the
historic
reservation
commission
approved
the
following
application.
J
It
is
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
allow
the
addition
of
64
square
foot
roof
over
an
existing
porch
on
an
existing
residential
structure,
which
is
located
at
37
stock
Farm
Road
in
the
old
town
Bluffton
historic
district,
which
is
zoned
neighborhood
conservation.
Hd
briefly,
will
can
you
see
the
screen
that
has
the
request
on
it
just
to
make
sure
that
I
didn't
when
I
made
this
full
screen
mess
up.
J
You
this
is
the
location
of
that
property,
so
you
can
see
May
River
Road
along
the
top
of
your
screen,
and
this
is
stock
Farm
Road.
It
is
here
on
your
left
as
you're
driving
in
before
you
get
to
the
area
where
it
changes
to
a
gravel
path.
It
is
in
the
neighborhood
conservation,
not
the
neighborhood,
the
riverfront
Edge
zoning
District.
So
the
front
of
this
lot
is
stock.
Farm
Road.
The
rear
of
the
lot
is
the
coves
behind
the
property.
J
These
are
the
existing
conditions
of
the
area
in
which
we
are
discussing.
So
this
is
the
area
where
the
roof
will
be
proposed
over
at
the
back
of
the
house.
This
is
the
full
back
of
the
house,
so
the
proposed
Edition
will
be
right
here
on
the
structure,
the
way
that
our
ordinance
is
written,
and
this
is
For
Better
or
Worse.
Sometimes
it's
something
minor
like
this
other
times.
It's
addition
of
a
greater
amount
of
square
footage
is
that
if
square
footage
is
being
added
under
a
roof,
it
has
to
be
a
certificate
of
appropriateness.
J
It
cannot
be
reviewed
as
a
site
feature.
The
reason
for
this
is
so
that
you
don't
get
hodgepodge
is
added
on
over
time,
and
so
this
way
it
captures
all
of
those
things.
Sometimes
it's
a
small
project
that
has
64
square
feet.
Sometimes
it
is
the
addition
of
a
carport
or
something
like
that
to
it.
Sometimes
it's
covering
a
porch
that
was
open,
which
would
change
the
massing
of
that
building.
J
So,
for
example,
if
the
front
porch
of
I
can't
come
up
with
of
or
the
side
porch
on
fat
patties
decided
to
put
a
full
roof
over
the
front
of
that.
It
would
obviously
have
an
effect
on
what
the
architectural
structure
the
appearance
of
that
structure,
and
so
this
is
a
way
to
capture
all
those
things,
which
is
why
this
project
is
coming
before
you
tonight.
J
So
this
is
the
location.
This
is
the
site
plan,
I've
rotated
it
on
its
side,
from
what
you
have
in
your
packet,
so
that
North
is
up
which
makes
stock
Farm
Road
here
may
River
Road
would
still
be
at
the
top
of
your
screen
off
the
screen.
Obviously,
and
and
the
title
Cove
of
the
May
river
is
on
your
right
here.
So
this
is
the
area
here,
I've
plotted
it
in
red,
but
it
is
this
stoop
or
porch
that
is
off
the
rear
of
the
structure
and
then
in
the
site
plan.
J
J
This
is
primarily
to
prevent
water
damage
from
going
in
the
house
because
of
the
weird
way
or
not
the
weird
way,
but
the
way
that
this
house
crickets
here
they're
getting
some
water
inside
and
they're
trying
to
prevent
that
over
the
door
in
the
window
area,
and
then
this
is
the
left
side
elevation,
which
has
the
stoop
here.
It
is
set
back
from
this.
So
you
can
see
here.
This
is
that
garage
door
wall
is
right
here.
J
So
from
the
left
side,
this
will
not
stick
out
past.
It
it'll
be
set
back
behind
this
plane
of
it.
So
you
will
not
see
it
at
all
from
the
front
or
from
the
right
side
of
the
house.
You
may
see
I
guess
a
little
bit
of
the
gabled
end
from
the
other
side
of
the
house,
but
not
much,
and
then
this
is
a
wall
section
or
a
porch
section,
I
guess,
because
it's
not
in
a
closed
space,
it's
just
the
roof
overhanging.
It.
A
B
A
J
A
A
I
Yes,
this
is
an
informal
discussion
right
now.
The
historic
preservation
commission
actually
doesn't
have
any
voting
Authority
regarding
text
amendments,
but
we
wanted
to
bring
this
for
before
you
before.
It
goes
on
to
the
Planning
Commission,
which
we
anticipate
to
happen
later
in
the
month
or
possibly
in
April,
we're
still
trying
to
work
through
that.
So
these
are
amendments
that
have
been
around
some
of
them.
I
We've
talked
about
for
a
while,
now
they've
been
lingering,
and
then
there
are
some
other
amendments
that
we've
identified
that
we've
needed
that
we
need
going
forward.
So
what
I
want
to
do
tonight
is
just
highlight
them
and
I've
got
16
pages
of
amendments,
which
seemed
very
substantial.
It
doesn't
look
as
bad
as
it
is,
and
you
do
have
them
and
they
have
been
provided
to
you.
I
So
if
you
want
to
scroll
through
that,
while
I'm
talking
feel
free
to
do
that,
if
you
want
to
interrupt
me
or
ask
questions
so
in
the
presentation,
that's
fine
too!
Let
me
just
give
you
a
highlight
of
what
the
intent
of
this
is.
So
there
are
different
sections
of
the
Udo
that
we're
looking
to
amend,
including
the
section
325
designate
designation
of
a
contributing
resource,
and
the
purpose
of
the
change
to
that
particular
section
is
to
add
a
process
to
remove
the
status
of
contributing
from
a
contributing
resource.
I
We
don't
currently
have
that
we've
had
an
informal
process
in
the
past,
but
we
wanted
to
formalize
that
and
that's
simply
using
the
criteria
that
we
use
to
design
a
resource
and
to
determine
whether
or
not
those
criteria
still
apply
and
I
can
bring
that
Amendment
or
that
that
text
up
in
a
moment
kind
of
the
main
one
that's
changing
is
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
review.
We
wanted
to
add
a
process
for
relocating
structures,
whether
they're,
contributing
or
not.
We've
had
some
issues
with
that
in
the
past.
I
We
don't
really
have
criteria
for
that,
so
we've
added
that
or
or
are
proposing
that
we're
trying
to
improve
the
requirements
for
demolition
of
structures,
whether
or
not
they're
contributing
and
we've
done
some
reformatting
to
that
section.
I
think
that
will
be
easier
and
understandable.
As
you
read
through
it,
there
are
a
number
of
smaller
amendments.
Related
to
the
Old
Town
Bluffton
historic
district
section
515
includes
some
reformatting,
some
typos
and
we've
also
are
proposing
adjustments
to
the
bill
2
zones
for
a
couple
of
districts.
I
We
think
right
now
that
they're
too
minimal
and
there's
some
difficulty
putting
in
the
required
landscaping-
and
perhaps
these
build
two
zones
are
not
indicative
of
the
development
pattern
of
Old
Town.
We've
had
some
issues
in
the
past,
relating
with
two
accessory
structures:
there's
a
gap
in
the
size
requirement
for
sheds
and
for
Carriage
Houses.
So
we
want
to
close
that
Gap.
I
In
addition,
we
are
proposing
some
definition
changes
and
some
additions,
so
I'll
go
through
those
fairly
quickly,
so
my
PowerPoint
or
highlighting
the
things
that
we
believe
are
probably
the
more
important
items
and
then
I
can
go
through
the
text.
If
you'd
like
me
to
do
that,
I
don't
mean
to
highlight
everything:
I'm
not
going
to
read
anything
to
you.
So
again,
it's
very
informal
and
we
may
find
there
are
some
things
that
you'd
like
to
change,
add,
or
maybe
we've
missed-
that
we
need
to
include
so
for
the
Kofa
review
process.
I
I
The
certificate
of
appropriateness
and
that's
the
type
of
construction
or
alteration
within
Old
Town,
historic
district.
So
this
is
the
review
process
and
the
criteria
that
would
apply
to
the
review
so
for
new
construction,
which
we
see
mostly
with
an
old
town
and
for
alterations.
There
are
five
criteria.
I
The
first
one
is
new
and
this
would
require
that
there
has
to
be
an
approved
final
development
plan.
We
don't
require
that
for
single
family
development,
but
say
if
it's
the
commercial
development
we'd
like
for
that
plan
to
be
approved
before
we
look
at
the
co-fed,
because
sometimes
there's
a
bit
of
back
and
forth
when
that
plan
changes
and
it
hasn't
been
finalized,
and
then
we
get
the
Kofa
and
then
the
plan
changes
and
we
have
to
go
back
and
adjust
the
Kofa
again,
so
it
kind
of
volleys
back
and
forth,
and
it
creates.
I
You
know
a
huge
time
for
staff
to
be
able
to
do
that
and
also
creates
an
expense
as
well,
even
for
the
applicant.
So
that
criteria
is
new,
the
conformance
with
the
provisions
of
Article
5.
That
stays
the
same
requirement
that
for
consistency
with
the
Old
Town,
Master
Plan
remains,
and
we've
also
included
the
comprehensive
plan,
blueprint
Bluffton,
which
was
adopted
last
year.
So
we
want
to
make
certain
that
these
changes
in
Old
Town
are
consistent
with
the
long-range
plan,
the
Criterion
for
something
we
kind
of
have
right
now.
I
It
relates
to
item
D
in
515,
and
this
is
showing
that
there's
a
compatible
visual
relationship,
so
anytime
there's
new
construction
or
alterations.
We
want
to
make
certain
that
it
fits
in
with
the
character
of
Old
Town.
Not
that
someone
can
you
you
can't
max
out
necessarily,
even
though
the
building
type
or
the
standards
the
requirements
of
the
zoning
District
may
allow
for
that,
we
want
to
give
the
board
the
ability
to
say.
I
Perhaps
the
scale
is
inappropriate
or
the
mass
is
inappropriate
for
a
particular
location
or
maybe
the
setbacks
are
not
consistent
for
a
particular
street.
So
this
Criterion
I
think
is
something
that
we've
needed
and
we've
beefed
that
up
so
to
speak
and
complying
with
the
application
manual.
So
that's
not
a
change
if
the
structure
is
a
contributing
structure.
In
addition
to
the
five
criteria
I
mentioned,
there
are
two
additional
the
fifth
line
right
now.
We
already
have
the
requirement
that
it
comply
with
the
the
Secretary
of
interior
standards
and
then
six.
I
We
kind
of
have
this
now
too,
and
we
are
also
beefing
this
up.
We
want
to
make
certain
that,
if
there's
any
additions
or
any
alterations
to
the
structure,
that
it's
very
clear,
that
the
new
work
can
be
differentiated
from
from,
what's
there
that
if
for
some
reason,
for
example,
someone
wanted
to
add
on
the
porch
that
the
new
edition
could
be
done
in
a
way
that
it
could
be
easily
removed
without
damaging
the
contributing
structure.
I.
A
Have
a
question
looking
at
this
is
additional
policy
purple
contributing
structure
additionally,
shall
not
destroy
culturally
new
words
shall
be
differentiated
from
the
old
and
shall
be
compatible
with.
Isn't
that
somewhat?
If
you
go
back
to
new
works,
I'll
be
differentiated
from
the
old.
If
we
go
back
to
the
other
I
thought,
you
said
that
it
has
to
be
similar.
I
G
G
H
H
I
I
Right,
okay,
I
understand,
so,
let's
see,
let
me
go
on
to
relocation
with
structures
again.
This
is
something
that
we
are
missing
right
now
in
our
current
Kofa
review
process.
So
we
wanted
to
have
some
criteria
there.
If
someone
is
moving
a
non-contributing
structure
which
most
of
our
buildings
are
within
Old
Town,
we
will
treat
that
as
new
construction.
So,
if
someone's
moving
a
building
into
the
district
or
within
the
district,
that's
not
contributing
it'll
be
treated
like
new
construction
in
the
location
where
it's
moving.
I
If
it's
contributing,
then
there
are
specific
criteria
that
would
be.
That
would
apply.
We
don't
like
to
see
contributing
structures
move,
unfortunately,
but
sometimes
it
may
be
necessary
and
we
believe
that
there
may
be
that
the
applicant
may
need
to
prove
an
extraordinary
circumstance
and
we're
still
trying
to
work
through
that,
because
there
may
be
some
situations.
We
don't
want
to
be
too
onerous
because
there
are
certain
circumstances
that
may
require
it
to
be
moved
so
we're
still
working
through
that
I've
talked
to
our
legal
legal
staff.
A
Question
is:
are
we
going
to
see
prior
to
being
submitted
to
the
board
the
town
board?
Commission?
Yes,
we
can
send
it
to
you,
you
will
see
the
complete
copy
and
we
Supply
all
of
us
with
that.
So
we
have
an
exciting
evening
of
reading.
Through
this
sure
we
could
do
that.
I
would
just
appreciated
to
have
the
input
from
all.
I
It's
a
cleaning
commission.
If
you
still
have
questions
about
something,
then
we
can
discuss
it
then,
when
it's
being
presented-
and
you
know,
make
any
adjustments
that
we
made
too
so
again
the
relocation.
If
it
is
approved
by
the
preservation
commission,
we
will
require
that
wherever
the
receiving
site
is
that
it
have
its
final
development
plan
approved,
so
that
we
have
some
knowledge
of
what
it
will
look
like
at
that
location,
whether
or
not
it's
appropriate
and
then
once
that
is
completed,
then
the
structure
can
move.
I
We
are
also
in
addition
to
this
developing
some
guidelines
that
will
go
along,
for
example,
regarding
documentation
of
the
building
and
of
this
site
working
with
the
historic
preservationists
regarding
the
move
and
anything
else
that
we
feel
is
necessary
to
document
and
make
certain
that
building
moves
safely
and
intact
as
possible.
There
will
be
a
structural
engineering
report
required
and
we
from
that
we'll
be
able
to
identify
whether
or
not
there's
Integrity
issues
structural
problems,
whether
or
not
it
can
be
moved
intact
or
partially
intact.
I
You
know,
ideally
it's
we
want
to
see
the
whole
thing
move,
it's
one
if
possible,
and
if
it
can't,
then
we
want
to
have
some
input
on
how
it's
moved
and
and
peace
is
how
it's
moved
demolition
again.
We
always
believe
that
demolition
should
be
the
absolute
Last
Resort
for
non-contributing
structures.
I
This
basic
information
we
want
to
document
the
building,
no
matter
how
old
it
is
and
make
certain
that
it
complies
with
the
applications
manual
for
a
contributing
structure.
Again,
there's
a
little
bit
higher
threshold
for
a
review
there.
The
criteria
that
I've
identified
in
the
text
that
you
have
again
Structural
Engineering
report
and
there's
a
possibility
to
delay
a
decision
for
180
days,
because
we
want
to
try
to
work
out
another
Arrangement
if
possible,
reaching
out
to
our
historic.
I
I
Maybe
it
can
move
elsewhere
on
the
property
looking
at
different
scenarios
to
see
if
it's
possible
before
it
is
demolished,
if
it
is
approved,
we'd
like
to
see
a
final
development
plan
for
the
property
approved
first
again,
this
is
another
kind
of
a
legal
thing
we're
working
through
to
see,
if
not
see
whether
or
not
it's
feasible
and
then
again
the
guidelines
will
have
those
to
document
the
building
before
it's
demolished.
If
that's
the
case,.
A
When
you
go
back-
and
you
say,
documentation
of
a
resource
site
required,
in
other
words,
you're
looking
for
different
guidelines,
for
example
having
townspeople
present
when
demolition
or
whatever
is
coming
in
place,
so
that
you
have
the
ability
to
not
saying
we
didn't
say
that
we,
you
know.
In
other
words,
it's
all
done
right.
B
A
I
Correct
yeah,
we'll
we'll
develop
a
plan
with
the
property
owner
or
the
applicant
and
I
gave
an
example
of
Chapel
Hill
and
that's
in
the
package
there
kind
of
what
they
do
and
we've
seen
it
elsewhere.
Glenn
provided
me
with
an
example
from
Brunswick
Georgia.
Yes,
so
it's
very
typical
other
communities
do
have.
I
Yes,
we
there
are
some
good
examples
out
there
that
we
can
certainly
borrow
from
okay.
So
that's
the
process,
part
of
it.
Now
let
me
switch
over
to
what
I
mentioned
before
that
we
have
this
gap
between
carriage
house
building
types
and
garden
structures.
So
right
now
our
carriage
house
building
type
is
anything
200
square
feet.
Minimum
and
our
garden
structures
are
less
than
120
square
feet
so
for
buildings
between
a
that
are
greater
than
120
square
feet
and
less
than
200
there's
the
Scout.
I
So
we
want
to
be
able
to
close
that
what
we'd
like
to
do
is
change
the
carriage
house,
building
type
minimum
square
footage
to
121
square
feet
and
121
is
where
a
building
permit
would
be
required
and
then
for
a
garden
structure.
We
would
actually
like
to
change
our
small
excess
rebuilding
to
be
a
shed
and
not
call
them
Garden
structures,
Garden
structures
and
that's
not
an
intuitive
term
they're.
I
What
we
would
like
to
call
walls,
gazebos,
pergolas,
patios,
anything,
that's
not
enclosed,
We
Believe
should
be
called
a
garden
structure,
so
the
larger
accessory
building
is
a
carriage
house
building
type.
It
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
have
a
dwelling
unit,
but
because
you
have
a
a
building
type
requirement,
it's
a
carriage
house
and
then
sorry.
A
I
We
do
have
a
new
term
for
that
which
I
can
go
through
in
just
a
moment,
but
to
give
you
an
idea
regarding
size,
I
found
this
graphic
on
the
internet.
That
I
think
might
be
helpful,
so
the
shed
which
would
require
would
require
a
site
feature.
Permit
is
anything
less
than
120
square
feet.
So
it's
the
kind
of
the
two
small
buildings
that
you
see
on
the
left
and
for
the
Carriage,
House
121
square
feet
or
greater,
would
be
the
the
larger
buildings
that
you
see
there.
I
A
F
C
A
J
A
F
I
I
know
it
can
be
a
little
confusing.
So
as
we
were
looking
at
the
size
range
for
the
carriage
house,
we
started
noticing
a
few
other
things
too,
regarding
some
of
the
notes
or
the
characteristics
of
carriage
house
that
we
think
we
should
also
change,
and
so
the
first
one
we
had
an
issue
fairly
recently
regarding
attach
accessory
dwelling
unit
and
we
for
an
accessory
structure.
I
We
want
to
make
it
clear
that
it
has
to
be
incidental
and
distinct
from
the
principal
building
if
it
is
attached
and
so
we've
added
some
new
language.
There.
We've
indicated
that
right
now,
only
one
Carriage
House
is
permitted
per
lot,
but
we
wanted
to
address
along
the
riverfront,
the
the
zoning
district
there
that
there
is
the
potential
to
have
two
perlot,
provided
that
there's
at
least
one
acre
of
land
in
that
lot.
I
So
that's
something
that's
come
up
in
the
past
too,
that
we
wanted
to
correct
regarding
what
the
Carriage
House
can
be
used
for.
We've
identified
that
just
kind
of
a
variation
of
what
we
have
right
now
and
then
with
garage.
We
wanted
to
be
clear
about
the
number
of
bays
and
the
size
of
the
bay,
the
width
of
the
bay
to
limit
it
to
two
bays
that
are
no
more
than
12
feet
wide
that
will
allow
for
a
vehicle
or
for
a
boat
and
then
additionally
allow
a
third
Bay.
I
And
for
to
get
a
little
bit
of
flexibility
too,
regarding
the
location
of
the
carriage
house,
we
also
wanted
to
give
the
Udo
administrator
the
ability
to
make
an
adjustment
to
the
location
that
may
be
appropriate
for
contributing
resources,
because
it
may
not
be
possible
to
get
that
into
the
rear
yards.
So
there's
a
little
flexibility,
that's
written
in
is
it.
H
C
I
I
I
So
there
really
isn't
much
change
in
one
and
two,
the
format's
a
little
bit
different.
So
we
have
the
review
criteria
for
new
construction
and
alterations.
It's
items
one
through
five
would
apply
and
if
you're
familiar
enough
with
the
Udo
now
it's
kind
of
all
mixed
in
there's
stuff
about
demolition.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
And
then
some
other
little
adjustments
there
based
on
the
proposal
and
then,
as
I
mentioned,
some
corrections
related
to
The
Carriage
House.
So
if
you
look
at
the
particular
zoning
districts,
there's
the
identification
of
the
different
building
types
that
are
permitted,
including
Carriage
House,
and
what
we'd
like
to
do
in
all
of
our
historic
districts
is
cross-reference
to
the
carriage
house
building
type.
Rather
than
have
all
of
that
information
in
this
location.
I
Ready
and
then
let
me
move
on
to
an
item
that
I
did
not
talk
about
earlier
and
I.
Believe
I
referenced
is
that
within
certain
Zony
districts
within
Old
Town,
we
would
like
to
change
the
front
build
shoes.
Zone
again.
We
believe
that
the
the
proximity
of
some
of
these
buildings
to
the
street
is
too
minimal.
It
doesn't
allow
for
the
required
Landscaping
to
be
there
and
it's
not
necessarily
the
development
pattern
of
Bluffton
So
within
the
neighborhood
core
District.
We
are
proposing
smaller
setbacks
or
excuse
me
a
little
bit
larger
they're,
not
substantial.
I
So
you
see
everything
it's
pretty
much
between
5
and
10
feet
for
the
various
building
types.
So,
for
example,
a
mansion
apartment
house
was
only
five
feet
and
we're
proposing
now
that
it
be
10
feet
and
for
the
additional
building
type
to
go
from
zero
feet,
which
is
not
typical
of
the
Bluffton
of
Old
Town,
zero
to
Ten
Feet
and
then
within
the
neighborhood
center
District.
Again
some
adjustments
there
as
well
now
things
like
the
Promenade,
that's
already
been
approved
and
they've
already
got
their
setbacks.
A
J
This
is
actually
going
to
be
beneficial,
I
believe
for
most
projects,
because
the
minimum
width
for
a
front
porch
on
a
structure
which
is
required
for
all
residential
and
Commercial.
If
it's
most
building
types
required
to
have
a
Colonnade,
porch
or
arcade,
which
is
another
projection
from
the
front
which
is
allowed
to
encroach
in
that
front,
build
to
they're
six
feet.
A
minimum
porch
is
six
feet
of
a
minimum.
J
Colonnade
is
eight
feet,
so
the
front
wall
of
the
building,
because
it
cannot
overhang
the
property
line,
is
at
least
six
feet,
usually
eight
feet
which
gives
them
less
wiggle
room
on
some
of
these
than
it
will
now.
So,
if
there's
a
tree
that
we
need
to
protect
or
something
like
that,
allowing
for
this
wider
range,
that's
pushed
back
from
the
street
a
little
bit
will
actually
give
them
more
opportunity
to
be
able
to
place
their
home
because
right
now
with
the
maximum
at
15,
if
you're
required,
eight
you're
now
down,
I
can't
do
math.
J
A
J
J
K
G
I
I
J
F
I
I
I
I
won't
read
that
we're
removing
the
word
Bulkhead
from
one
of
our
photographs.
This
is
not
a
term
that
we
use
here
in
Bluffton.
It
doesn't
exist
anywhere
else.
Bulkhead
means
something
different
for
us
and
anything
else.
Let's
see
basement,
we
are
revising
the
term
or
the
definition
for
basement
and
Katie.
If
you
anything
you
want
to
say
about
it,.
I
Thinking
ahead,
and
we
actually
had
the
term
raised
basement
in
there,
I
never
knew
that
existed
until
I
did
a
word
search,
and
so
we
are
taking
that
one
out.
It
does
making
revisions
to
the
current
definition
for
building
providing
a
definition
for
historic
Integrity,
which
we
used
back
in
section
318.,
some
tweaks
to
the
definition
for
principle,
building
we're
adding
a
definition
for
stucco
and
again
we
have
just
another
little
typo,
a
little
correction
there.
So
it's
a
fairly
broad
approach
to
our
amendments.
It's
possible.
A
We
had
will
on
the
phone
and
Will's
been
involved
in
the
beginning
of
this
get-go
I.
Don't
know
if
anyone's
aware,
but
there's
pictures
of
will
when
they
were
writing
the
original
stuff.
So
will
you
be
a
very
good
source
of
really
looking
through
this
and
I'm
going
to
ask
one
more
time
that
we
get
a
copy
and
it
sounds
like
there's
still
a
few
things
that
need
to
be
corrected
and
if
you
can
make
sure
you
get
a
copy
of
this
to
us,
I
prefer
paper.
So
I
apologize.
A
But
you'll
need
to
get
a
paper
copy
prior
to
submittal,
okay
to
the
town,
and
if
you
can
give
us
a
little
bit
of
time
for
review,
will
I'm
going
to
ask
your
input
on
that
too.
Since
you're
very
familiar
with
all
of
these,
you
there
will
yep.
I
am
so
I
think
your
input
would
be
very
valuable,
not
saying
that
the
other
people's
input
isn't
valuable,
but.
B
I
I
We
did
some
updates
to
our
various
lodging
uses
permitted
in
town,
including
adding
short-term
vacation
rental,
and
at
that
time
we
looked
at
our
other
or
other
lodging
types
of
uses
and
identified
whether
or
not
they
were
appropriate.
So
we
did
make
adjustments
to
them
as
well,
including
the
definition
of
in
in
a
hotel.
So
an
in
is
six
to
twelve
bedrooms.
I
One
of
our
concerns
was
something
that
happened
in
our
the
city
across
the
river,
where
it
had
a
situation
where
Sun
developer
came
and
purchased
several
properties
in
a
row,
and
suddenly
the
n
on
one
property
became
an
n
on
the
second
property.
It
actually
became
a
hotel
because
it
was
all
under
the
same
management.
So
that's
why
we
have
a
proprietor
required
to
live
within
the
end.
To
avoid
a
situation
like
that
and
that's
there
is
potential
that
that
could
happen
not.
A
Interesting,
what's
the
workaround
on
that
I'm?
Just
thinking,
there's
always
wording
lawyer
and
you
know
lawyer
up
kind
of
thing
I.
How
can
you
have
that
loaded
up
to
prevent
it?
The
situation
in
across
the
river
and
think
of
it
right
now,
I'm
sure,
there's
some
pretty
interesting
way
as
a
lawyer
up
on
that.
F
A
A
F
H
E
K
K
K
Are
there
any
other
Provisions
like
a
bed
and
breakfast
you
have
to
serve
the
people,
then
you
know
breakfast
and
whatever,
and
an
inn
is
managed
by
some
company
that
takes
care
of
the
property,
but
you're
not
getting
breakfast
like
there's
got
to
be
some
other
definition
between
bed
and
breakfast
than
just
the
number
of
people
and
I.
Think
that's
where
it's
confusing
for
people
to
understand.
K
E
K
G
F
A
J
Yes,
thank
you.
I
was
looking
at
my
emails
and
I
sent
it
out,
but
I
don't
see
where
it
was
actually
delivered.
So
this
is
likely
no
fault
of
the
applicants.
I
would
like
to
throw
that
out
there
right
now,
but
I
did
get
a
hold
of
the
Bruins
and
they
have
come
to
sit
here
on
behalf
of
the
project.
So
if
you
have
questions
they
are
here
to
answer
them.
I
hope
that
my
report
has
covered
all
of
those
things
so
that
you
won't,
in
theory,
have
many
questions
but
process
rolling.
J
This
is
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
for
a
structure
at
two
Tabby
Shell
Road.
It
is
a
576
square
foot
carriage
house.
It
is
a
one-story
Carriage
House
to
be
located
by
the
structure
that
is
being
currently
constructed
at
2,
Tabby,
Shell
Road,
it's
here
in
the
old
town,
Boston,
historic
district
and
its
own
neighborhood
General.
J
The
location
of
this
is
right
here,
so
this
is
Pritchard
Street
we're
sitting
right
at
the
bottom
of
your
screen
here
south
of
the
pool-
and
this
is
the
structure,
because
this
is
Bluffton
Explorer.
You
don't
see
that
there
is
in
fact
a
building
that
is
being
constructed
there.
Right
now
will
you're
still
with
us
right.
J
You,
okay
so
years
ago,
I've
got
the
actual
date
in
the
staff
report,
but
when
it
was
brought
before
you
the
first
time
there
was
a
carriage
house
that
was
placed
back
here,
it
was
a
two-story
Carriage
House
and
since
the
time
that
that
was
approved,
they've
decided
that
they
want
to
go
with
a
one-story
carriage
house
instead
of
that
two-story
Carriage
House.
So
that's
why
this
is
coming
before
you
tonight.
Here
is
your
site
plan.
J
This
is
that
Fiddler
Lane,
which
runs
behind
the
post
office
and
all
of
the
buildings
that
are
on
Tabby
there.
This
is
the
primary
structure.
This
is
the
landscape
plan
that
was
provided
when
they
removed
the
carriage
house
from
the
plans
they
had
to
show
that
they
could
still
meet
the
canopy
coverage,
and
so
they
have
done
that,
but
they've
still
got
the
Carriage
House
on
there,
so
they
are
exceeding
the
canopy
coverage,
which
is
excellent.
A
J
Foundations
are
right
here,
so
this
garage
front
elevation
is
actually
the
rear
elevation
of
the
property
it
faces
that
Fiddler
Lane,
which
is
the
access
for
the
Tabby
roads,
Tabby
Shell,
Road
Lots,
and
then
you
have
the
rear
elevation
which
faces
towards
the
house.
This
is
located
between
the
house
and
the
carriage
house,
so
you
will
not
see
the
service
area
here
from
the
street.
It
is
blocked
off,
but
that
is
a
small
like
trash
enclosure
type
situation
for
their
use.
J
These
are
the
approved
primary
elevations
I
put
these
in
here,
just
so
that
you
can
see
that
they
are
bringing
in
the
same
detailing
for
the
siding
material,
the
size
of
the
windows,
the
doors
things
like
that
they
all
are
to
match
the
approved
primary
structure
here
and
then
these
are
the
wall
sections
as
well
as
that
bracket.
Detail
right
here.
J
You've
heard
this
before,
but
the
HPC
considers
eight
review
criteria
when
they
consider
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
application
and
when
they
consider
those
data,
eight
review
criteria
they
are
authorized
to
approve
the
application.
That's
submitted
by
the
applicant,
approve
the
application
with
conditions
or
deny
the
application.
That's
submitted
by
the
applicant
again.
The
brands
are
here
on
behalf
of
the
application.
Town
staff
finds
that
it
meets
all
the
requirements
of
our
unified
development
ordinance
and
has
no
conditions
recommends.
It
is
approved
as
submitted.
A
Anymore,
yeah,
there's
yeah
well
I
just
do
want
to
say
that
a
lane
Gallagher,
you
know,
live
in
that
house
previously
next
door
to
you
next
door
and
she
was
really
ecstatic
when
you
cut
the
trees
down,
because
they're
solar
efficiency
went
way
way
up
and
since
then
I
just
I
just
thought.
I'd
mentioned
that
a
few
years
it'll
change
in
25
years.
J
A
J
Do
thank
you
doing
like
two
seconds.
The
only
other
item
that
we
have
that's
not
actually
on
the
agenda
for
discussion
but
is
an
item
for
discussion,
is
that
we
were
asked
to
speak
about
the
Red
Dot
momentarily.
The
Red
Dot
has
had
a
certain,
and
now
it
has
had
a
site
feature
issued
for
it
for
the
repairs
on
that
structure.
They
are
not
making
changes
to
the
structure
they're,
repairing
the
things
that
need
to
be
repaired
on
it
and
it
has
been
reviewed.
J
Site
features
are
reviewed
at
a
staff
level
and
when
there
are
no
changes
that
are
going
to
to
affect
the
structure,
those
can
come
before
staff
for
those
reviews.
So
if
anybody
asks
you
what
is
going
on
at
the
Red
Dot,
you
can
say
Well
they're,
making
repairs
so
that
that
thing
is
stable
and
if
they're
making
any
changes
to
it
in
the
future,
they
will
have
to
come
back
and
be
reviewed
by
the
historic
reservation
commission.
But
right
now,
they're
fixing
things
that
already
exist.
J
Some
of
that
material
is
new,
but
it
is
like
for,
like
or
equivalent
it
has
been
reviewed
by
Tone
staff
and
they're
welcome
to
contact
us
if
they
have
any
questions
on
that
process.
But
we
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
was
something
that
you
guys
had
information,
because
it
is
not
being
done
by
any
cover
of
anything.
It
is
a.
J
Project
and
it's
similar
to
when
the
post
office
next
door
building
the
rate
is
what
we
call
that
building
when
the
right
had
the
roof
come
down,
they
did
an
emergency
permit
to
stabilize
it,
and
it
didn't
have
to
come
before
you
when
it
hadn't
come
before
you
was
when
they
started
making
changes
to
that
the
structure
itself.
So,
in
summary,.
F
J
H
G
Yep,
which
is
good,
yeah
you'll,
see
soon
same
thing
happening
at
Allen
Lockwood.
We
just
issued
a
site
permit
feature
for
that.
One
Lockwood
is
the
white
cottage
across
the
street,
from
the
church
across
from
Calhoun.
Oh,
it's
been
empty
forever,
missing
the
front
steps
oh
and
they're,
starting
to
do
work,
but
they've
they've,
come
through
with
two
site
features:
One's
Gonna
Be
for
the
chimneys
and
One's
Gonna
Be
for
the
siding
and
your
roof
replacement
wow,
but
there's
a
site
features.
So
it's
like
for,
like
it's
not
going
to
change
the
look.