Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

After public hearing, Lincoln County adopts changes to unsafe‑building and abandoned‑structure rules; county attorney clarifies appeal routes

Lincoln County Board of Commissioners · August 19, 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

The board held a public hearing and approved amendments to Chapters 91 and 94 to incorporate statutory authority for declaring unsafe residential and nonresidential buildings and to tighten standing for abandoned-structure complaints; county attorney said appeals for stop-work orders go to the state fire marshal and abandoned‑structure appeals go to superior court.

Lincoln County commissioners held a public hearing and approved amendments to Chapters 91 and 94 of the county code to address unsafe buildings and abandoned structures. County attorney Miss Gilbert explained that the change incorporates statutory language (discussed as North Carolina General Statute 160D‑1119 in the hearing) to allow inspectors to post or condemn residential structures under the unsafe‑building provisions and to pursue judicial remedies where necessary.

The ordinance also revises the abandoned‑structure complaint process to require complainants to have standing—ownership or residence within a defined area—rather than permitting remote third‑party reporters to trigger the abandoned‑structure process. During public comment, one resident (Gunning Hall) urged caution and requested a clear appeal process. Miss Gilbert responded that appeals of stop‑work orders under the unsafe‑building provisions must be filed with the State Fire Marshal’s Office and that abandoned‑structure determinations carry a 30‑day superior‑court appeal under the statute referenced in the hearing.

Following the hearing the board voted to adopt the ordinance as presented; no second reading was required per staff because the action was a public‑hearing adoption of development‑related provisions. The adopted changes add enforcement and procedural clarity, according to staff, and provide spelled‑out appeal routes as described in the hearing.