Browse
Search
Agenda 5-a - Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment - Flags and Flagpoles
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Agendas
>
Agendas
>
2018
>
Agenda - 05-15-2018
>
Agenda 5-a - Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment - Flags and Flagpoles
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/10/2018 5:05:03 PM
Creation date
5/10/2018 5:04:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/15/2018
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5-a
Document Relationships
Agenda - 05-15-2018 Regular Board Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\BOCC Archives\Agendas\Agendas\2018\Agenda - 05-15-2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Approved 5/2/2018 <br /> 167 <br />Alex Gregory said that content neutral means the board is not discussing or regulating what appears on a flag. 168 <br /> 169 <br />Randy Marshall invited the public to comment. 170 <br /> 171 <br />Ryan Barnett addressed the board. He said he lives in Sanford, North Carolina, and he thinks that this proposed 172 <br />ordinance is a great mistake. He is a veteran and he believes that this is an attempt to constrict people’s 173 <br />constitutional rights. This is about the Confederate flag, he said. People are not really educated on this flag, he said. 174 <br />He said the flag is not about hate. He said he is from New York and was brainwashed in school to think the 175 <br />Confederate flag was about hate. He said restricting the Confederate flag is part of a historical purge. He urged the 176 <br />Planning Board to defeat the ordinance amendment and he said there will be lawsuits filed if the county passes this 177 <br />ordinance, and he said the county will see more Confederate flags if the county passes this ordinance. 178 <br /> 179 <br />Katherine Walker addressed the board. She said she was born and raised in Orange County and lives in 180 <br />Hillsborough and is in full support of this revision. She asked some questions. After one year, will flagpoles out of 181 <br />compliance be required to comply? Also, if the house covers the area that is 50 feet back, can the flagpole be placed 182 <br />on the house and how tall can it be? And her third question is if a tree is used as a flagpole, does the flag flying have 183 <br />to comply with these standards? Katherine Walker also said there are others in the audience this evening in support 184 <br />of the proposed amendment. 185 <br /> 186 <br />Michael Harvey answered Katherine Walker’s questions. He re-read the proposed clause about those flagpoles that 187 <br />would be considered nonconforming. Effectively, there would be one year to bring the flagpole into compliance. If the 188 <br />property owner cannot, there is a process whereby a property owner could seek a variance on the location of the 189 <br />flagpole. Michael Harvey said the ordinance does not specify that the flags have to flown on a flagpole and all flags 190 <br />have to meet the requirements of the applicable zone in which it is located, both for size and number of flags. 191 <br /> 192 <br />Randy Marshall asked for clarification that the height of a house would count as part of the height of the flagpole if 193 <br />the flagpole were located on a house. 194 <br /> 195 <br />Michael Harvey read from Section 6.12.12 for residential districts which state not only the height limitation of a 196 <br />flagpole but that the flagpole cannot be higher than the principal building’s roof. 197 <br /> 198 <br />Adam Beeman asked what the enforcement mechanism would be for those property owners who do not bring 199 <br />flagpoles or flags into compliance within one year of the adoption of this ordinance. 200 <br /> 201 <br />Michael Harvey answered that the county can seek judicial action. 202 <br /> 203 <br />David Blankfard asked what a property owner has to provide to obtain a permit to erect a flagpole. 204 <br /> 205 <br />Michael Harvey said the property owner would have to provide a plat plan to show the location on the property to 206 <br />determine setback from the property line, schematics so that staff can determine the height, and a rendering of the 207 <br />flag’s size. County staff would then issue a zoning compliance permit. 208 <br /> 209 <br />David Blankfard asked if the property owner would have to get a civil engineer to draw the plans. 210 <br /> 211 <br />Michael Harvey answered no. And, when asked another question by David Blankfard, Michael Harvey said Orange 212 <br />County Building Inspections would be concerned with the actual building of the structure. The Planning Department 213 <br />would just be concerned with the height and setback of the flagpole and size-of-flag requirements. 214 <br /> 215 <br />Heather Redding addressed the board. She said she is a member of the Hillsborough Progressives Taking Action 216 <br />group and she thanked the board for taking public comment and taking this matter seriously. She voiced her support 217 <br />for the amendment. She said a 1,500-square-foot flag was erected outside of Charlotte, North Carolina, recently on a 218 <br />flagpole that is 125 feet tall. This flag has a symbol on it that has been flown alongside swastikas and other hate 219 <br />symbols in Charlottesville, Virginia. It has been flown as a symbol of retaliation, intimidation and threat. Once a flag 220 <br />gets to be a certain size, it is not a private statement, she said. It is a public message. A public message can be 221 <br />11
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.