Historic preservation commission defends three-year draft as Southport aldermen press for clarifications

Charles, chair of the Historic Preservation Commission, told a joint meeting with the Board of Aldermen that the commission spent three years and nearly 60 public meetings producing a proposed local historic-district ordinance and design standards, and defended the document as responsive to public input.

"The design standards are a 108 pages," Charles said, disputing public claims that the draft ran to 200 pages, and said the standards themselves begin on page 45 of the document. He said the commission had made 41 changes after public feedback and had attempted to balance preservation goals with homeowners concerns, allowing alternative materials such as metal roofs and avoiding rules on paint color.

Why it matters: The draft would establish local review of exterior changes in a designated historic district, create a quasi-judicial Historic Preservation Commission process and require certificates of appropriateness (COAs) for specified exterior work. Supporters say the rules aim to prevent incremental demolition or incompatible new construction that could alter downtown Southports character; critics say the process could be cumbersome, ambiguous and burdensome to property owners.

Board members asked a string of detailed questions. Alderman Rebecca Kelly pointed to the Secretary of the Interiors rehabilitation standards and asked whether the draft language would bar adding a second story; commissioners replied that most cases would be judged on a case-by-case basis and that the standards include guidance to place additions toward the rear when a building fronts the sidewalk. A commissioner proposed replacing language that put a "heavy burden" on applicants with the simpler requirement that applicants "shall demonstrate" congruency with the neighborhood.

Commissioners and staff outlined the application path. For major exterior changes, applicants submit renderings, materials and a site plan; staff prepares a report and the commission hears evidence in a public quasi-judicial hearing and issues written findings of fact when it approves or denies a COA. Denials can be appealed to the Board of Adjustment and, ultimately, to court.

Insurance and legal risk were raised repeatedly. An alderman reported hearing that "90%" of insurers would not cover designated historic homes; commissioners and others said insurance availability hinges on the functional age and condition of a building rather than overlay status and recommended obtaining formal input from the state historic preservation office and the insurance commissioner.

The board also discussed Senate Bill 282 and other state-law constraints. Staff and commissioners said the quasi-judicial structure and certain procedural rules are prescribed by state statute and that some suggested local work-arounds (for example, triggering review only after an arbitrary percentage of renovation) would conflict with state law.

Community response featured prominently: board members said a petition of 196 residential lot owners (out of 253) opposed the earlier draft; commissioners said the petition largely reflected reaction to earlier versions and noted that the current document reflects many edits. Commissioners asked aldermen to identify specific ambiguous paragraphs for revision.

Action and next steps: The Board of Aldermen unanimously approved a motion asking aldermen to submit written lists of desired changes by Oct. 29 so the Historic Preservation Commission could review them and respond at its regular meeting on the first Wednesday in November (Nov. 5). The motion passed without recorded dissent.

What was not decided: The board did not adopt the ordinance at the workshop, did not finalize membership or qualifications for the quasi-judicial commission beyond what state statute requires, and did not resolve the insurance question or produce a final legal opinion on interplay with recent state legislation; commissioners agreed to obtain clarifying input from state preservation staff and suggested the insurance commissioner be consulted.

Charles closed by restating the commissions goals: to preserve character, promote citizen outreach and take advantage of grants and tax incentives to prevent further loss of historic places.