Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Emergency Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff: emergency housing meant to be temporary; state rules and zoning limit county options
Summary
Buncombe County planning staff told a committee that draft comp‑plan language treats emergency housing as temporary, noting state limits and zoning risks; committee members pressed for clearer timelines, enforcement steps and protections for residents who may remain in temporary units.
Staff member and a committee member spent much of the meeting clarifying how the draft comprehensive plan treats emergency or temporary housing and what the county can legally require. Staff member said the plan’s language was adjusted to reflect state requirements and to avoid treating emergency housing as permanent, noting the tension between meeting needs and complying with state rules: "The temporary housing for emergency is really supposed to be just that temporary housing."
The committee member asked how long people could remain in temporary units and how enforcement would proceed; staff cited county practice that includes notice periods and staged removal, giving examples about timeframes: "You have 90 days." and later, "60 days to get off." Members discussed that some communities and counties tolerate long-term occupancy (one committee member mentioned McDowell County) but that state law and the North Carolina State Building Authority limit a county’s ability to reclassify temporary structures as permanent. Staff warned that changing zoning standards can create nonconforming properties, which may have the same effect as a downzoning: any ordinance change that increases intensity or changes required lot standards can render existing uses nonconforming.
Why this matters: committee members said people displaced by storms or other disasters often remain in temporary units for years and asked how the county would ensure safety and access to services while avoiding legal exposure. Staff said the plan intentionally sets boundaries staff can administer under current staffing and funding, and that edits will be revisited to clarify enforcement steps, timelines and services. The committee asked staff to bring clearer language on allowable temporary housing, explicit enforcement steps tied to notice periods, and where the county can — and cannot — treat temporary housing as a long‑term solution.
What’s next: staff agreed to rework the language and to flag which actions are internal (county staffing/funding dependent) versus those the county is prepared to implement immediately; the plan proceeds to public review in August and a public hearing is scheduled for November.
