Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-05-2018 8-a - Minutes
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2018
>
Agenda - 06-05-2018 Regular Meeting
>
Agenda - 06-05-2018 8-a - Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/31/2018 5:03:22 PM
Creation date
5/31/2018 5:14:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/5/2018
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8-a
Document Relationships
Agenda - 06-05-2018 Regular Board Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2018\Agenda - 06-05-2018 Regular Meeting
Minutes 06-05-2018
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
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
10 <br /> <br />Michael Harvey said staff tried to address a reasonable number, and he said there are 1 <br />state laws that require people to be able to fly state, national and local jurisdiction flags, and 2 <br />this cannot be denied. 3 <br />John Roberts said state law requires that local governments allow the flying of those 4 <br />three flags, which was the way he determined 3 flags per pole. 5 <br />Commissioner Price said she understood that reasoning at public sites, but not on 6 <br />private property. 7 <br />Commissioner Jacobs referred to page 2, where it talks about severing the allowable 8 <br />height of the pole from the height of the building. 9 <br />Michael Harvey said that will be covered by the CA. 10 <br />Commissioner Jacobs said on page 28 it states that it is not going to be related to the 11 <br />existing structures, and asked if clarification could be provided. 12 <br />John Roberts said that is an option, and was a Commissioner requested change. He 13 <br />said this makes sense so that there is consistency countywide for height. 14 <br />Commissioner Jacobs asked if this consistency is for total height. 15 <br />John Roberts said for maximum flagpole height per type of lot. 16 <br />Commissioner Price asked if there is a reason that cemeteries are being regulated. 17 <br />Michael Harvey said staff allowed exemptions for both private and public cemeteries; 18 <br />and small flags on gravesites will be permitted. 19 <br />Commissioner Price read the following language: “flags no greater than 12 inches in 20 <br />height may be displayed at individual gravesites within the cemetery” and asked if this is 21 <br />applicable to all cemeteries. 22 <br /> Michael Harvey said yes, there is no distinction between public and private cemeteries. 23 <br />John Roberts said this issue came up because of a rumor that an excessively large flag 24 <br />was going up on a residential lot, and the BOCC received a large number of complaints. He 25 <br />said many of those complaints focused on one type of flag. He said the BOCC, staff, and he 26 <br />looked at the ordinance, and it was not clear on the size or height of flags that may be flown, 27 <br />whether on commercial or residential property. He said the BOCC instructed staff to bring a 28 <br />content neutral ordinance regulating flags. 29 <br />John Roberts said both the staff’s proposal and his options are content neutral, and any 30 <br />flag can continue to be flown if it fits within the dimensions proposed in the ordinance. He said 31 <br />if the Board adopts this ordinance, there is a one-year amortization before anyone would have 32 <br />to replace their flags to adhere to the ordinance. 33 <br />John Roberts said there is clear case law that this is within a local government’s 34 <br />authority. He said Durham has a flag ordinance and regulates the size of the flags, and the 35 <br />case which determined that ordinance went all the way to the 4th circuit of appeals, which is the 36 <br />federal appellate court having jurisdiction over North Carolina. He said the Court ruled in 37 <br />Durham’s favor. 38 <br />John Roberts said it is not his interpretation that the flagpole will be subject to the 39 <br />amortization provision. He said if a flagpole is taken down voluntarily, or knocked down through 40 <br />an accident or natural act, then it would need to be replaced with a flagpole that complies, but 41 <br />residents, schools, churches, etc., will not be required to replace existing flagpoles otherwise. 42 <br />Commissioner Rich clarified that the size of flag itself has to be in compliance within a 43 <br />year, but the flagpole does not. 44 <br />John Roberts said that is correct. He said the pole is subject to the ordinance 45 <br />immediately, but will not have to be removed and replaced unless it comes down by natural act 46 <br />or if it is taken down. 47 <br />Commissioner Rich asked if a compliant flag could be flown on an existing pole, and if 48 <br />the height restriction only applies if a flagpole comes down for some reason and needs 49 <br />replacing. 50
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.