Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the BAR Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts voluntary BAR amendment allowing applicants to opt into demolition-related review
Summary
Council approved an amendment to let applicants voluntarily submit proposed future alterations to the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) when applying for demolition, giving BAR more context in demolition decisions; supporters said it's voluntary and neighborhood-driven, while one council member voted against the measure on third reading.
Charleston City Council adopted a voluntary amendment to the zoning code Oct. 28 that allows applicants to opt into Board of Architectural Review (BAR) purview by including plans for future work when they submit demolition applications.
Supporters from several neighborhood associations told the council the measure is neighborhood-driven and provides BAR with better information when evaluating demolition applications. Lisa Jones, director of advocacy at the Historic Charleston Foundation, said the amendment is "100% voluntary" and would allow applicants who want BAR input to include future plans with demolition applications so the board can see what would replace a demolished structure. "If applicants do not wish to take advantage of it, they just follow the current process, and nothing changes," Jones said.
Steven Rosenberg, president of the North Central Neighborhood Association, and Kevin Eberly, president of Hampton Park Terrace, said the amendment helps neighbors and property owners visualize proposed changes and aids BAR in offering guidance. Jeffrey Stass, who spoke against the change, argued it was "voluntary in name only" and questioned whether advocacy organizations represented broad public support.
Council members debated whether the amendment would improperly expand BAR's purview. Councilmember Gregory emphasized the voluntary nature of the change and said it simply provides more context for the BAR to make informed decisions. Councilmember Bowden asked for clarification of the problem the amendment is trying to solve and later recorded a "nay" vote on the third-reading motion.
The council moved the set of items (E-4 through E-9) for second reading and took item 5 through the second- and third-reading process. Item 5 passed on third reading; Bowden was recorded as voting "nay." The transcript does not list a full roll-call tally for the final third-reading vote.
