Re: July HP and Appearance Board Meeting
- Well thank goodness they are FINALLY separating the appearance and
historic boards. I mean it has been in their city ordinances since
day one (about 10 years) that it is illegal to have both boards act
as one and according to the city it is not allowed to sit on two
boards.. We have only requested this action for over 3 years. Some
of us have been in talks with others in the city to push separating
the downtown sandford inc from the residential portion also as
conflict of interests have sprung up - the bank to name a recent
issue and also to provide a director that can give each section it's
100%. The two areas are so totally distinct in their needs it seems
Glad you went Al, the ideas they came up with sound okay. But I'd
much rather see some guideline enforcement being done than
some "pretty" signs saying who pays to have their yards landscaped.
Maybe if the block captains got out and walked their respective
blocks and introduced themselves to their residents they could also
notice all the guideline infractions being done.
AS for get togethers our "Park" area has had them for some time and
we are all very close here. I'd recommend it to all the other
blocks. There is alot of work to be done on these committees and I
would say that trying to get back resident "trust and respect" is
going to be the toughest for them to overcome. Good luck as I am
one that you need to woo back over - been burned too many times.
But I am open to see change - drastic change would be nice.
- Neighbors:The board we serve on is called Sanford Historic Preservation and Appearance Commission, ONE BOARD. As you pointed out this was set up by city council over ten years ago. We on the SHP&A asked to separate the two boards with the work being done with county codes and overlays of corridors. We hope the Appearance Commission will be given 'teeth' of enforcement rather than as an advisory body as is the case now.Both boards will need volunteers to be representatives for their neighborhood......why not make your request to city hall NOW.Ken LaughinghouseChariman SHC
- Sorry to point out this but you are mistaken. Yes you call the
board one but it was not set up that way. In the UDO and the city
ordinaces that set up the boards they were to be two different
boards. The city has known this was not in compliance for a long
time and has done nothing to fix it. David Montgomery has known it
was being done wrong for some time also as many of us brought it to
his attention during the bank fiasco (and months before that also).
The North Carolina Historic Office also informed members of the city
government that the boards could not be run as one. The State
attorney also informed them it was out of compliance. And if you
look up the boards on the city web page it states that there are two
boards but that the same members sit on both. That in itself is
against city ordinances. If people would just read the ordinances
which by the way are easy to read they'd know the rules, they'd know
the duties of the various jobs. Yes the city council has decided to
finally do something that should have been done from the get
go..doing things right from the beginning makes it easier all the
way around. I am not trying to be difficult but am having a hard
time with the constant changing of stories depending on who you talk
I still have a problem with the way the historic board is layed out.
Why do you have people on there who don't have to follow the
guidelines telling those of us here what to do.? Just a question?
Why doesn't Hawkins have it's own guidelines to follow? Why is
Jeremy Hathcock allowed to be on the board? He is a renter - he
doesn't even pay a mortgage or taxes. I pay taxes to the city and
county on my historic house. I pay a big water bill to water my
lawn and keep it looking green but because I am married to a miltary
member and we are keeping out Texas residence until we are sure they
wont' move us again ( we have plans to stay and retire here but the
military sometimes doesn't agree ) Why am I denied the right to be
on the board. It is a severe slap in the face and an insult to live
in the neighborhood and I can't be on the board governing it but 6
people who don't live here can. Explain that please.
Yes I am a thorn in the side of David Montgomery's office I am sure
but when things are wrong I don't sit by - guess that is the Yankee
in me. Not as laid back as the south.
Yes we need more volunteers to fill board positions..how is it going
to be separated? I kinda find it funny that the city council
decided to only appoint one resident again and to put a person back
on who doesn't live here but owns a house in the district that was
on the city's condemmed list..ironic huh?
resident/owner in Rosemont-McIver who knows the rules