Bluffton Historic Preservation Commission approves COA for 95 Green Street with conditions

The Town of Bluffton Historic Preservation Commission on July 3 approved a certificate of appropriateness for a new one‑and‑a‑half‑story house at 95 Green Street in the Oldtown Bluffton Historic District, contingent on staff‑recommended conditions including concealed chimney caps, consistent porch header and band detailing, permitted door and trim materials, and measures to protect a large oak tree on the lot.

Staff presented the application for applicant and property owner Glenda McK Roberts, describing a double‑frontage lot with the house fronting Green Street and a carriage house to the rear. The proposed primary structure is about 2,342 square feet with vernacular characteristics; staff said it meets review criteria except for several items noted in the recommendation and recommended approval with conditions. “Staff is recommending approval with conditions,” the staff member told the commission.

Commissioners questioned scale and sightlines to determine whether the house’s central massing reads appropriately from the street. Staff noted nearby two‑story houses facing Boundary Street are taller and that the Green Street frontage is effectively the rear yards of those Boundary Street properties. The commission concluded the central massing is appropriate for the Green Street frontage and included that finding in its approval.

Design details were the focus of discussion. Commissioners asked that porch header dimensions and banding be made consistent between elevations and that the sidelights’ vertical element be removed to match door proportions. Staff also recommended changing any proposed fiberglass doors to a material permitted by the UDO and replacing PVC (ASAC) trim with an approved material such as Hardie product.

The commission directed the applicant to conceal or rotate the chimney’s spark arrestor and to change the large bishop’s cap to a smaller double bishop’s cap more consistent with Oldtown Bluffton examples so the mechanical terminal is not visible from Green Street, as required by the UDO’s concealment guidance. Sam Lebertie of Low Tie Designs, representing the applicant, said the house was designed around preserving the large oak and that the project team would work to reduce the chimney’s visibility: “We designed the house around that,” he said.

Commissioners and the applicant discussed tree protection measures beyond a silt fence. A commissioner noted the tree appears to be a 35‑inch live oak and asked that durable protection be specified. The applicant’s representative said post‑and‑rail fencing and coordination with an arborist or Monster Tree Company would be used to safeguard the tree during construction.

On material and siding choices, staff recommended horizontal lap to match the carriage house in some areas, while the applicant preferred board‑and‑batten for the new structure; the commission required board‑and‑batten in selected locations as part of the conditions recorded at approval. The commission also discussed shutters and reached a practical consensus that shutters were not required on every elevation given visibility and the combined building massing.

A motion to approve the application with staff recommendations and the additional conditions passed. The transcript does not record a named mover/second or a roll‑call tally; the record shows the motion was approved and the project was approved with conditions. The final approval included the determination that the middle block massing was appropriate for Green Street, and set follow‑up items (material substitutions, header/banding consistency and a tree‑protection plan) to be resolved with staff prior to permit issuance.

What’s next: staff will work with the applicant on final materials, the chimney cap concealment solution, trim materials and a tree‑protection plan; building permits will proceed once staff confirms compliance with the conditions.