Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic bluffton cottage demolition postponed 60 days as owners, commissioners seek rehab assessment
Summary
The Historic Preservation Commission postponed a decision on demolishing the Nellie & Leroy Brown cottage at 34 Thomas Hayward Street for 60 days so staff can arrange rehabilitation assessments (Metters/Repurpose Savannah) and the owner can provide expert reports; owner cited mold, asbestos and structural collapse and said the building is currently uninsured.
The Beaufort County Historic Preservation Commission on July 2 postponed a decision for 60 days on an application to demolish the Nellie & Leroy Brown cottage at 34 Thomas Hayward Street, a contributing resource in the Old Town Bluffton Historic District.
Staff told the commission the 1,054‑square‑foot cottage, built in 1942, meets the UDO §3.18.5(b) criteria for review and that the property shows “structural deterioration, mold, water damage” and has been deemed an unhealthy indoor environment and unable to be insured. A staff member noted the commission may delay a demolition decision for up to 180 days to pursue alternatives including relocation, deconstruction for reuse and consultation with preservation groups.
Jason Alexander, the owner, told the commission he had structural, mold and asbestos evaluations and said contractors concluded the building is unsafe. “We’re currently without insurance on it,” Alexander said, adding that his umbrella liability coverage is at risk while the structure remains on the property. He said a structural specialist could not enter the house and that remediation is infeasible under current conditions.
Several commissioners pressed for outside expertise before authorizing demolition. Commissioner Solca and others recommended inviting preservation contractors such as Metters or Repurpose Savannah to perform condition assessments and offer an independent rehabilitation opinion. A commissioner noted the ordinance’s 180‑day delay window is intended to allow exactly this type of outreach and evaluation.
Commissioners voted to postpone a final vote for 60 days and asked staff to facilitate introductions with rehabilitation specialists and to place a placeholder on the next meeting agenda so any report can be considered as soon as it is complete.
The commission’s postponement leaves several options open: the owner may provide a rehabilitation assessment demonstrating the building can be salvaged and returned for reuse, the town may pursue acquisition or other alternatives discussed under UDO §3.18.5(b), or the owner may later return seeking demolition. The motion to postpone passed by voice vote.
The commission also directed staff to coordinate with the applicant about what documentation the commission wants to see during the postponement period and to place the item on the earliest feasible agenda once assessment reports are available.
