Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission tables 15 Merriweather house application, citing outdated survey and top‑of‑bank concerns
Summary
The commission tabled a COFA for a two‑story house at 15 Merriweather Court after staff and commissioners flagged a seven‑year‑old survey, potential encroachment into a drainage easement, active erosion at the top of bank and unresolved massing/scale issues; staff recommended eight conditions and the applicant agreed to update drawings and the survey.
The Beaufort County Historic Preservation Commission on July 2 voted to table an application for a two‑story single‑family residence with a carriage house at 15 Merriweather Court after commissioners said key site information remained incomplete.
Staff reported the application had been previously heard and listed 13 prior conditions; the revised submission addressed many items but still lacked several details. Staff asked the commission to require identification of wall, window and door finish materials; updated railing dimensions; a corrected window schedule showing casement windows in place of fixed windows; carriage‑house service‑yard screening details; a split‑rail fence to protect a 34‑inch live oak; a tree removal permit if trees are removed; and demonstration of compliance with the 75% tree‑canopy requirement.
Commissioners repeatedly raised concerns about a 2018 survey used by the applicant, potential encroachment into a drainage easement and active erosion at the top of bank adjacent to the lot. Multiple members said the buildable area is smaller than the lot and that survey and top‑of‑bank verification are necessary before approving final massing and siting. One commissioner described the applicant’s drawings as “design drawings” that need to be overlaid on a current survey.
The applicant (represented in the hearing) said the survey will be updated, that he plans to use helical piles if necessary for foundation stability, and that the current design was prepared around the setbacks and a previously granted variance. The commission discussed building type (additional building type versus a 1½‑story building), massing and possibilities for lowering plate heights or adding dormers to reduce perceived mass.
Given unresolved engineering/site questions — and the commission’s view that massing remains a concern for several members — a commissioner moved to table the application to allow the applicant time to obtain an updated survey and revise plans; the motion carried by voice vote.
The tabling leaves the applicant to supply an updated survey, clarify whether any portion of the proposed construction encroaches on the drainage easement, show revised landscape and window schedules and provide supporting details noted by staff. The item will return when those materials are submitted.
