Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council remands controversial historic-preservation text amendment back to planning commission

Beaufort County Council · November 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Following public concern about property-rights impacts, Beaufort County Council voted to remand a proposed Community Development Code historic-preservation text amendment for further review and public vetting rather than approve it at second reading.

Beaufort County Council voted on Nov. 10 to send a proposed text amendment to the county’s Community Development Code—covering historic-preservation procedures and buffers—back to the planning commission for further work and public review.

The motion to remand came after several public commenters and council members said late-stage edits raised unresolved questions about property rights and the scope of local designation authority. “If you accept this 25-foot and 50-foot buffer, you will possibly take this person's backyard,” public commenter Felice LaMarca told the council, urging members to remember “the general welfare of the people.” Larry DeChuta, who spoke after LaMarca, said the amendment as drafted “seeks more power to do things” without clearly stating what problems it was meant to fix.

Council members debated whether the changes being proposed at second reading represented a minor tweak or a substantial rewrite that required additional review. Staff recommended remanding the measure so the planning commission and the public could vet substantial edits; several council members said they had not seen all proposed amendments in advance and that the changes could alter the ordinance materially.

Councilman David Bartholomew moved to remand the item to the planning commission for further review and committee consideration; the motion was seconded and carried, with members expressing the need for careful, transparent vetting before a final vote.

Next steps: staff will coordinate the remand process and the planning commission will review the proposed revisions before the item returns to council.