HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 12-07-2009 - 5aORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: December 7, 2009
Action Agenda
Item No. ~ - ~ ,
SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Relating to Outdoor Lighting
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) Yes
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Ordinance Amendment
2. Copy of Legal Advertisement
3. Typical Outdoor Lighting Fixture Data
Sheet
4. August 24, 2009 Quarterly Public Hearing
Minutes
5. November 4, 2009 Planning Board
Abstract
6. October 7, 2009 Planning Board Minutes
7. November 4, 2009 Draft Planning Board
Minutes
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael D. Harvey, Planner 245-2607
Craig Benedict, Director 245-2592
PURPOSE: To receive the Planning Board recommendation on a staff initiated Zoning
Ordinance Text Amendment to Section 6.31 Outdoor Lighting Standards of the Zoning
Ordinance (hereafter `the Ordinance') and make a decision on adoption.
BACKGROUND: This item was presented at the August 24, 2009 Quarterly Public Hearing
where Board members made the following comments:
A. Provide an explanation on what constitutes a lumen and provide examples of existing
lighting levels on non-residential properties within the County,
B. Clarify existing language exempting single-family residential structures from complying
with the light plan provisions of the Ordinance, and
C. Provide an example of the typical light detail required by staff as part of a lighting plan
submittal.
Please refer to:
• Attachment Two (2) for a copy of the legal advertisement detailing the purpose of the
proposed amendment.
• Attachment Three (3) for a typical lighting data sheet that staff requires to be submitted
for all light plans. This data sheet provides the overall lumen output for proposed fixtures
and provides some foot-candle data.
2
• Attachment Five (5) for the Planning Board abstract from the November 4, 2009
regular meeting where staff provided a detailed breakdown of various issues associated
with this proposed amendment including a breakdown of existing lighting levels at non-
residential developments within the County.
In reviewing this information staff offers the following observations:
1. Staff's original recommendation was to establish an overall lighting cap on non-residential
development within urban and rural areas of the County. In developing this cap, staff
relied on permit data entered by various staff for approved non-residential projects.
Prior to the November 4, 2009 Planning Board meeting, staff discovered that the data
utilized to create this proposed limit was incorrectly recorded and, as a result, the
assumptions on existing lighting levels was incorrect.
Staff recommended to the Planning Board that the lumen cap as originally recommended
for Section 6.31.6 (a) be removed.
2. At the Quarterly Public Hearing, a local resident requested that the Ordinance be
amended to require the issuance of a Special Use Permit prior to allowing for the erection
and use of outdoor sports field lighting.
As staff indicated during the public hearing, the installation and use of such lighting
fixtures is connected to a proposed land use. It is staff's opinion that, in order to be
consistent with the various existing standards of the Ordinance, those land uses that
utilize such fixtures need to be reassessed to determine if they ought to be reviewed
under the Special Use Permit process.
3. Planning Board members made several recommendations to modify specific sections of
the lighting Ordinance, specifically modifications to:
a. Section 6.31.1 Purpose and Intent
b. Section 6.31.2 Definitions
c. Section 6.31.3 Applicability
d. Section 6.31.4 Exceptions
Given the limited and specific nature of the public hearing advertisement (See
Attachment Two), the majority of these recommendations cannot be included within this
amendment package. These suggestions will be further reviewed by staff and
incorporated into the proposed modification of outdoor lighting regulations that will be part
of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) process.
4. Staff has included language clarifying the intent not to require single-family residential
structures to submit detailed lighting plans. Further amendments will be necessary to
eliminate all identified inconsistencies within the Ordinance relating to this topic.
PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: The Planning Board voted eight (8) to (1) to recommend the
following:
1. The deletion of proposed regulations establishing a lighting lumen cap on non-residential
development as originally recommended by staff at the Quarterly Public Hearing,
2. The adoption of the proposed amendments as recommended by staff, and
3. That staff continue to revise existing lighting regulations to address Board members
comments as part of the UDO project.
3
The sole dissenter could not support the motion to approve the Ordinance amendment without
the inclusion of language prohibiting the lighting of flagpoles.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: This request has been reviewed by various County departments who
have determined the approval of the request will not create the need for additional funding for
the provision of County services.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Board:
1. Receive the Planning Board recommendation,
2. If necessary, deliberate further on the proposed amendment,
3. Close the public hearing, and
4. Adopt the Ordinance Resolution contained within Attachment One.
o~~- a~c~~- ~3~
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
THE ORANGE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
WHEREAS, there has been heightened scrutiny over existing regulations relating
to the review, processing, and approval of outdoor lighting plans within the County, and
WHEREAS, current regulations do not explicitly establish a cap on the total
amount of light that can be generated on a given parcel of property, and
WHEREAS, the current regulations do not take into account the differences
between projects requiring outdoor lighting within urbanizing or rural areas of the
County, and
WHEREAS, the submittal requirements for lighting plans are ambiguous and
have lead to confusion, and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment establishes an overall cap on the total
amount of outdoor lighting on a given parcel of property, provides for a differentiation
between projects within the urbanizing and rural areas of the County, and provides
additional detail on the submittal requirements for outdoor lighting plans.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, hereby amends the Orange County Zoning Ordinance
by adding (indicated by double underlined language) and deleting (indicated by stricken
through language) as follows:
6.31 Outdoor Lighting Standards
6.31.1 Purpose and Intent:
A. Outdoor lighting is provided for a variety of purposes to the benefit
of modern society. For work or recreation, it enables people to see
essential detail in order that they may undertake their activities at
night. It facilitates the safety or security of persons or property, for
example through lighting on roads and pathways. It may be used
to emphasize features of architectural or historical significance,
and to light parks and gardens. It is used for advertising or display
to promote products or services, or to call attention to commercial
premises by means of area lighting or signs.
B. It is the intent of this ordinance to preserve, protect, and enhance
the lawful nighttime use and enjoyment of any and all property
throu h the use of a ro riate li htin ractices and s stems.
4
ATTACHIVIENT ONE (1)
Such individual fixtures and lighting systems are designed,
constructed, and installed to maintain safety, security and
productivity, reduce glare, and curtail the degradation of the
nighttime visual environment in addition to promoting conservation
of energy. It is the intent of these regulations that lighting
unnecessary for safety or security be discouraged.
6.31.2 Definitions:
AASHTO: American Association of State Highway and
Cutoff Fixture: An outdoor lighting fixture shielded or
Direct Light:: Light emitted directly from the lamp, off of the
Fixture: The assembly that houses the lamp or lamps and
Flood Lamp: A form of lighting designed to direct its output in
Floodlight: A form of lighting designated to direct its output
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
Footcandle (fc): The amount of light falling onto a surface.
Full Cutoff Fixture: An outdoor lighting fixture shielded or
constructed in such a manner that it emits no
light above the horizontal plane of the fixture.
Glare: Light emitting from a luminaire with an intensity
great enough to reduce a viewer's ability to see
or to cause annoyance, and, in extreme cases,
causing momentary blindness.
Holiday Decoration: Holiday displays, decorations and greetings,
which relate to any federally designated holiday,
legal holiday or religious holiday.
Lamp: The source of electric light: the bulb. To be
distinguished from fixture and luminaire.
Lumen: A unit of luminous flux. One foot-candle is one
lumen per square foot. For the purposes of this
ordinance, the lumen-output values shall be the
INITIAL lumen output ratings of a lamp.
Luminaires A complete lighting system that includes a lamp
or lamps and a fixture.
Semi-Cutoff Fixture: An outdoor fixture shielded or constructed in
such a manner that it emits no more than five (5)
percent of its light above the horizontal plane of
the fixture, and no more than twenty (20) percent
of its light ten (10) degrees below the horizontal
plane of the fixture.
Upward: Projection of light above the horizontal plane.
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
6.31.3 Applicability:
A. All outdoor lighting installed on public or private property
shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards as
contained in Section 6.31, unless exempted in Section
6.31.4.
B. In the event of a conflict between the outdoor lighting
standards as contained in Section 6.31 and any other
section of this ordinance, the more stringent requirement
shall apply.
6.31.4 Exemptions:
The following are exempt from the provisions of the outdoor lighting
standards as contained in Section 6.31:
A. All outdoor lighting lawfully installed prior to the effective
date of the outdoor lighting standards contained in Section
6.31, except the replacement of mercury vapor luminaires.
Mercury vapor luminaires, except for single-family
residences, must be replaced in conformity with the
Outdoor Lighting Standards upon the earlier occurrence of
the replacement of the fixture or the lamp.
B. Any outdoor lighting, including mercury vapor, used for an
individual single-family residence, where the residence is
constructed as of the effective date of the outdoor lighting
standards contained in Section 6.31.
C. Bona fide agricultural uses.
D. Traffic control signals and devices.
E. Temporary emergency lighting (i.e. fire, police, repair
workers, highway maintenance and construction, etc.).
F. Moving vehicle lights.
G. Navigation lights (i.e. airports, heliports, radio/television
towers, communication towers, etc.).
H. Holiday decorations using typical unshielded low-wattage
incandescent lights, which are in place no longer than 60
days.
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
I. Security lights of any wattage that are controlled by a
motion-sensor switch, which do not remain on longer than
12 minutes after activation, and do not exceed 150 watts
(2200 lumens).
J. Roadway lighting, installed as of the effective date of the
outdoor lighting standards, as contained in Section 6.31,
within State maintained rights-of-way provided that the
standards of Sections 6.31.5.E and Section 6.31.6.1 are
met, except for mercury vapor luminaires. Mercury vapor
luminaires used for roadway lighting must be replaced in
conformity with the outdoor lighting standards contained in
Section 6.31 upon the earlier occurrence of the
replacement of the fixture or the lamp.
6.31.5 Submittal Requirements:
With the exception of single-family and duplex residential site plan
submittals, a lighting plan shall be submitted with site plan or preliminary
plan approval documents when outdoor lighting fixtures are proposed.
The overall scope and purpose of the liclhtingplan is to allow staff to work
with the property owner to prevent excessive and unnecessary lighting on
the property prior to installation of the proposed fixtures and to avoid
costly compliance remedies later upon completion of the groiect. The plan
shall contain the following information:
A Lighting Mans shall be completed and sealed by a
professional engineer and shall contain all required
information as detailed herein as well as outlined within
Article Fourteen (14) of this Ordinance,
~B. Plans, drawn to scale at a maximum of one (1) inch
eq_ualina forty (40) feet, showing the exact proposed
location, type, and height of outdoor luminaires including
both building, pole and ground fixtures;
~C. A description of the luminaires, including lamps, poles or
other supports and shielding devices, which may be
provided as catalogue illustrations and product
specifications from the manufacturer. As part of this
requirement all lic1htina glans shall contain inset drawings
of all proposed lighting fixtures including any and all
directional controls (i.e. shields, reflectors, refractors, etc.)
that will aim and limit the an le of illumination. The li htin
9
ATTACHIVIENT ONE (1)
detail shall also show the vertical angle of illumination for all
proposed fixtures that will be used to determine the
required shielding angle,;
D. Alighting plan shall delineate the horizontal position of all
lighting fixtures proposed for a parcel of property.
G:E. Photometric data, such as that furnished by the
manufacturer, showing the angle of light emission and
lumen output. An example of a photometric plan is as
follows:
Proposed litht
location
c1
-_.
~.__
1 X3.3 2_Q:~~ L~O.C~•
+ + Light Intensity
Levels
21 .7 24.1 1 8.~ 2 ~
+ + + "i'
20.9 25.1 22. C 25.1 1 9.5
+ + + -E- +
~~71~~ 1~~~~.~1~7 ~1
In this example, the proposed light pole generates the
specific lumen levels on the property. Staff will be
responsible for utilizing this data to verify the compliance of
the fixture within the provisions of the Ordinance.
10
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
F. Foot-candle data shall also be required for all proposed lights. An
example of the data necessary to comply with this requirement is
as follows::-aed
~''
(
..
~``~~
~,
In this example the proposed light pole generates the
~ecific foot-candle limits on the property. Staff will be
responsible for utilizing this data to verify the compliance of
the fixture within the provisions of the Ordinance.
~G. Additional information as may be required by the Planning
Department in order to determine compliance with Section
6.31.
~H. Roadway lighting installed on state maintained roads must
meet ASSHTO requirements for light levels and uniformity.
Roadway lighting submittal requirements can be obtained in
the NCDOT publication titled "Policies and Procedures for
Accommodating Utilities on Highway Rights-of-Way". '
6.31.6 General Standards For All Areas:
The NCDOT's standard 2'-6" curb and gutter, defined as a 6" vertical face curb on page 47.2 of the "Policies
and Procedures for Accommodating Utilities on Highway Rights of Way" does not act as a barrier curb at
speeds greater than 25 mph. It is considered a mountable curb as defined in AASHTO "A Policy on
Geometric Design on Highways and Streets, 2001 ". Therefore, the mountable curb and gutter section of the
"Policies and Procedures for Accommodating Utilities on Highway Rights of Way" shall apply.
11
ATTACHIvIENT ONE (1)
A. Within areas of the County designated as `urbanizing', as
delineated on the Growth Management Systems Map, or
within Rural Community Activity Nodes, as delineated on
the Orange County Land Use Element Map, the following
lighting standards shall be observed:
1. The maximum light level permitted along common
property lines shall be 0.5 foot-candles at anv
adjoining residential property line and/or 1.0 foot-
candle at anLr adjoining non-residential property line.
B. Within areas of the County designated as `rural', as
delineated on the Growth Management Systems Map, or
within Rural Neighborhood or Rural Industrial Nodes, as
delineated on the Orange County Land Use Element Map,
the following lighting standards shall be observed:
1. The maximum liaht level permitted alona common
property lines shall be 0.25 foot-candles at any
adjoining residentially zoned property line and/or 0.5
foot-candle at anv adioinina aroDertv line with a non-
residential land use.
Inl nthnn• n nr,n #hn v ~nl nhnH hn (1 ~.
A:~rne$1a--vrr-rc-rnr+~.r~p~.c~€ie~;-zrr~+~a~c~~t-~e~f
Fnnt_nnni-lln n# nnv rnc~irJnn#inl nrnr~nrty Jinn nnrl i (1 Fnn#_nnnrlln n# nnv
~C. All floodlights shall be installed such that the fixture shall be
aimed down at least forty-five (45) degrees from vertical, or
the front of the fixture is shielded such that no portion of the
light bulb extends .below the bottom edge of an external
shield.
G.D. Any facilities that require floodlighting may not arrange the
light in such a way that it will shine towards roadways, onto
adjacent residential property or into the night sky.
GE. All flood lamps emitting 1,000 or more lumens shall be
aimed at least sixty (60) degrees down from the horizontal,
or shielded such that the main beam from the light source is
2 The NCDOT's standard 2'-6" curb and gutter, defined as a 6" vertical face curb on page 47.2 of the
"Policies and Procedures for Accommodating Utilities on Highway Rights of Way" does not act as a barrier
curb at speeds greater than 25 mph. It is considered a mountable curb as defined in AASHTO "A Policy on
Geometric Design on Highways and Streets, 2001". Therefore, the mountable curb and gutter section of the
"Policies and Procedures for Accommodating Utilities on Highway Rights of Way" shall apply.
12
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
not visible from adjacent properties or the public street
right-of-way.
~F. All wall pack fixtures shall be full cutoff fixtures.
~G. All lights shall be shielded in such a way as to direct light
towards the Earth's surface and away from reflective
surfaces, except as expressly exempted from the provisions
of these regulations.
~H. Any temporary outdoor lighting that conforms to the
requirements of this Section shall be allowed.
Nonconforming temporary outdoor lighting may be
permitted by the Planning Director after considering: 1) the
public and/or private benefits that will result from the
temporary lighting, 2) any annoyance or safety problems
that may result from the use of the temporary lighting, and
3) the duration of the temporary nonconforming lighting.
#-1. If any subdivision proposes to have installed street or other
common or public area outdoor lighting, the final plat shall
contain a statement certifying that the applicable provisions
of the outdoor lighting standards as contained in Section
6.31 will be adhered to. The required Lighting Plan and
associated documents shall be submitted and approved by
the Planning Department prior to installation of any
regulated lighting.
~J. If any street will be taken over by NCDOT for maintenance,
roadway lighting must meet AASHTO requirements, and
must be installed and maintained according to.the NCDOT
publication titled "Policies and Procedures for
Accommodating Utilities on Highway Rights-of-way". z
~K. Upward flagpole lighting
flags provided that the
lumens per flagpole.
is permitted for national and state
maximum lumen output is 1300
~L. Any interior-lighted signs may not be lit at night when the
face of the sign is removed or damaged in such a way that
the light may distract drivers or adjacent property owners.
M. All outdoor lighting, with the exception of wall mounted
security lighting, shall be extinguished within thirty (30)
minutes from the close of business. as determined by the
13
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
unless otherwise detailed herein.
This shall not include security/motion sensor liahtina
designed to turn on when sensors detect movement and
automatically turn off after fifteen (15) minutes.
6.31.7 Lighting in Parking Lots and Outdoor Areas:
A. Other than floodlights and flood lamps, all outdoor area and
parking lot lighting fixtures shall be full cutoff fixtures.
B. The mounting height of all outdoor lighting, except outdoor
sports field lighting and outdoor performance area lighting,
shall not exceed thirty-six (36) feet above finished grade.
C. Any light fixture must be placed in such a manner that no
lamp surface is visible from any residential area or
public/private roadway.
6.31.8 Lighting for Vehicular Canopies
Areas under a vehicular canopy shall have a maximum point of horizontal
illuminance of twenty-four (24) maintained foot-candles (fc). Areas
outside the vehicular canopy shall be regulated by Section 6.31.6.
Acceptable methods include one or more of the following:
A. Recessed fixture incorporating a lens cover that is either
recessed or flush with the bottom surface (ceiling) of the
vehicular canopy.
B. Light fixture incorporating shields, or shielded by the edge
of the vehicular canopy itself so that light is restrained to
five degrees or more below the horizontal plane.
C. Surface mounted fixture incorporating a flat glass that
provides asemi-cutoff fixture or shielded light distribution.
D. Indirect lighting where light is beamed upward and then
reflected down from the underside of the vehicular canopy.
Such fixtures shall be shielded such that direct illumination
if focused exclusively on the underside of the vehicular
canopy.
14
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
6.31.9 Outdoor Sports Field/Outdoor Performance Area:
Outdoor worts field/performance area lighting serves a unique and
purpose The goal of such lighting is to erovide performers
specific
,
adequate light to er~age in approved activities at night while and provide
sufficient light levels allowinq_spectators to witness the activity.
The coal of these regulations is to allow for reasonable development and
use of such lyhting fixtures while attempting to mitigate potential ancillary
impacts on adjacent propert r~owners.
A Outdoor Sports Field/Outdoor Performance Area lighting
shall only be allowed for those principal and accessory uses
needing such fixtures to properly function as intended
during evening hours.
B Within the urbanizing areas of the County, as defined
herein there shall be a limit on the allowable height of such
fixtures to eighty LO) feet. In rural areas of the County.
there shall be a limit on the allowable height of such fixtures
to sixty (60) feet.
~:C. All outdoor sports field and outdoor performance area
lighting fixtures shall be full cutoff fixtures and shall be
equipped with a glare control package (louvers, shields, or
similar devices). If the manufacturer does not have a glare
control eackage the fixture specification must be changed
to a manufacturer that offers one.
D. All fixtures must be aimed so that their beams are directed
and fall within the primary playing or performance area.
t~E Within urbanizing areas of the County. the hours of
operation for the lighting system for any game or event shall
be no later than 11:00 p.m., except to conclude a scheduled
event that was in progress before 11:00 p.m. and
circumstances prevented concluding before 11:00 p.m.
The maximum light level permitted along common property
lines shall be consistent with the standard(s) contained
within Section 6.31.6 (a) (2) of this Ordinance
F. Within rural areas of the Count all outdoor sorts
15
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
field/outdoor performance area lighting shall be
extinguished by 10:00 p.m. except to conclude a scheduled
event that was in progress before 1000 p m and
circumstances prevented concludina before 10:00 p.m.
Under no circumstances may lighting for an event extend
beyond 11:00 p.m. within the rural areas of the County_
The maximum light level permitted along common property
lines shall be consistent with the standard(s) contained
within Section 6.31.6 (b) (2) of this Ordinance
6.3.10 Lighting of Outdoor Display Areas:
A. Top mounted fixtures are required for legally existing lighted
signs. Lighting fixtures used to externally illuminate an
outdoor advertising sign shall be mounted on the top of the
sign structure. All such fixtures shall comply with the
shielding requirements of this Section. Bottom mounted
outdoor advertising shall not be used. Notwithstanding this
provision, the lighting or re-lighting of a nonconforming
advertising sign will not be permitted if the light results in
the expansion of the nonconforming use, pursuant to Article
11.
B. Outdoor advertising signs of the type constructed of
translucent materials and wholly illuminated from within do
not require shielding. Dark backgrounds with light lettering
or symbols are preferred, to minimize detrimental effects.
Unless conforming to the above dark background
preference, total lamp wattage per sign shall not exceed 41.
watts.
6.31..11 Lighting of Buildings and Landscaping
Lighting fixtures shall be selected, located, aimed, and shielded so that
direct illumination is focused exclusively on the building fagade, plantings,
and away from adjoining properties, public or private rights-of-way, and
the night sky.
6.31.12 Prohibitions
A. The use of laser source li ht or an similar hi h intensit
16
ATTACHMENT ONE (1)
light for outdoor advertising or entertainment, when
projected above the horizon, is prohibited.
B. The operation of searchlights for advertising purposes is
prohibited.
C. Electrical illumination of outdoor advertising off-site signs is
prohibited.
D. Use of mercury vapor luminaries is prohibited.
Upon motion of Commissioner
Commissioner
seconded by
the foregoing Zoning
Ordinance amendments were adopted this the day of
2009 and shall become effective upon adoption.
Donna Baker, Clerk, Orange County Commissioners
Attachment Two (2)
17
NOTICE OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
A joint public hearing will be held at the Central Orange Senior Center, 103
Meadowlands Drive, Hillsborough, North Carolina, on Monday, August 24, 2009, at
7:00 PM for the purpose of giving all interested citizens an opportunity to speak for
or against the following items:
A. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
1. Zoning Ordinance Amendment: Review of proposed amendment(s) to Article
Six (6) Application of Dimensional Requirements Section 6.31 Outdoor
Lighting Standards of the Orange County Ordinance revising existing
regulations governing the review, approval, and use of outdoor lighting
fixtures for residential and non-residential land uses.
Staff will propose a comprehensive retooling of the current regulations
completing the following tasks:
a. Distinguish the installation and use of outdoor lighting fixtures within
urbanizing and rural areas of the County,
b. Modifying existing site plan submittal requirements for lighting plans
to require additional information on the impact of outdoor lighting on
adjacent property owners,
c. Including an amortization policy requiring non-conforming lights to
be brought into compliance with lighting standards, and
d. Revise existing regulations governing the erection of lights for
sports fields and/or outdoor performance areas.
Purpose: To receive citizen comment on the proposed amendments.
2. Acceptance of the Strategic Growth and Resource Conservation (SGRC) Plan.
The SGRC is a proposed program whereby development rights in speck areas
of the county could be transferred to other specific areas of the county in order to
preserve and protect sensitive areas and uses while allowing development and
greater density in areas of the county better suited to accommodate it. The first
two phases of the SGRC program (research and feasibility) were previously
completed and were accepted in June 2006. The final third phase (specific
program and administrative design) is the subject of this hearing.
Purpose: To receive citizen comment on the proposed SGRC Plan.
Implementation of the SGRC concept would occur through future public meetings
and processes.
18
Accommodations for individuals with physical disabilities can be provided if the
request is made to the Director of Planning at least 48 hours prior to the Public
Hearing by calling the appropriate number listed below. The full text of the
changes may be obtained after August 14, 2009 from the Planning Department.
Also, the text may be obtained at the County website www.co.orange.nc.us at the
Meeting Agendas link prior to the meeting.
Questions regarding the proposals may be directed to the Orange County
Planning Department located in the Planning and Agricultural Center, 306E Revere
Road, Hillsborough, North Carolina. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday. You may also call 245-2575 or 245-2585 and you will be
directed to a staff member who will answer your questions.
PUBLISH:
News of Orange Chapel Hill Herald
August 12, 2009 August 12, 2009
August 19, 2009 August 19, 2009
DESCRIPiIOPI
~'~ac.~-mc~t't '~rtr C3~
Galleria's beauty'and versatilely make it an excellent choice for roadway and
general area IigMing applications. An aesthetic reveal in the formed
aluminum hou~ng gives the Galleria a distinctive look while a variety of
mounting options and lamp wattages provide maximum flexibility.
Galieria's superior light distributions makes it the optimum choice for
almost any small, medium or large area lighting application.
SPECIFICATION FEATURES
~E McGRAW-EDISON® 1 s
energy
A ... Housing
Formed aluminum housing with
stamped reveal has interior-welded
seams for structural integrity and
is finished in premium TGIC
polyester powder coat, U.L. listed
and CSA certified for wet locations.
B ... Ballast Tray
Ballast tray is hard-mounted to
housing interior fior cooler
operation.
clean of rivet heads, tabs or other
means of attachment which may
cause streaking in the light
distribution. Standard with
mogul-base socket. All optical
modules feature quick disconnect
wiring plugs and are field rotatable
in 90° increments.
D ... Door
Formed aluminum door has
heavy-duty hinges, captive
retaining screws and is finished in
premium TGIC polyester powder
coat (Spider mount unit has steel
door.)
E ... Lens
Convex tempered glass lens or flat
glass.
F ... Mounting
Extruded aluminum arm includes
internal bolt guides allowing for
easy positioning of fixture during
assembly. Specify arm-included
mounting for contractor-friendly
single carton packaging of housing
ahd arm.
GSS/GSM/GSL
GALLERfA
SQUARE
C~~MPLIANT FCO
in all flat glass configurations.
D[ItRENSIONS
Arm Moartt
` 70 - 1 f)OOW
Pulse start Metal Hartle
High Pressure Sodium
Metal Halide
ARCHITECTURAL
AREA LUMlNAIRE
ENERGY DAFA
FIXTURE A B C p E F
GSSiIn.) ava t1R 1278 15518 6or9 31M
Imm} 235 38 327 397 152or229 337
GSNI (in.) 11 31/2 t91/4 21314 8 or 14 15 or 76
(mml 279 89 480 652 i52or358 367or406
GSLiin.} 141!2 4114 2578 27 fior14 t63Wort93/4
(mmy 366 __ t08 657 686 152 or 356 476 or 502
~/ rmrs; Top e+v used on GSM witA t00aAY a,r 9bss ve'drady tamped epee only,
Cry Lightln9 Specifications and Dire®nsions subiett to change without notice.
www.cooperllgMksg.com Consukynur roprosenW Ws ter edditfonsl optlons and tinkhes.
C ... Reflector
Choice of 14 high efficiency optical
systems utilizing horizontal and
vertical lamp orientations. Optional
high efficiency segmented optical
systems constructed of premium
9Fi% reflective anodized aluminum
sheet. Optical segments are rigidly
mounted inside a tfiick gauge
aluminum housing for superior
protection. All segment faces are
CWA Ballast Input Watts
150W MP HPF (185 Welts}
175W MP HPF {198 Wate)
250W MP HPF (283 Watts) m
250W HPS HPF (295 Watts}
400W MP HPF (452 Watts}
400W HPS HPF {457 Watts)
75pW MP HPF (820 Watts)
1000W MH HPF (1!180 Watts)
1000W HPS HPF 11100 Welts)
EPA
Effeetiw ProjeMed An:a: (Sq. Fl.)
[Without Anna
GSS: 1.20 GSM: 240 GSL 3.90
[spider Mount)
GSS:1.53 GSM: 2.86 GSL: 4.0.5
SHIPPING DATA
Approximate Net Weight: is*Ey
GSS: 361bs. (18 kgs.) e
e
r ~~
GSM: 79 lbs. (36 kgs.i °'-~
GSi: 881bs. (40 kgs.}
ADH082575
09/12009 6:24;57 AWF
Spider Mount
GS8 l G5M /GSL GALLERIA SQUARE ~ 0
ORDERING pVFORMATION
Sam{da Number: OSM-AM400-MP-NIT-3V•SG•BK-L ~ .
hmt Family
=Gaperia Square
StneY
I' GaYerte Square
Medium
f:,auelia Square
Large
rttiYtg Method
Arm Molmn
Arm kidirded faE
bound Pole
Arm Itlduded fa=
Squme Pole
=Spider Mount'
(23!8" QD
Tef1a1)
Spider Mann[ (3"
OD7eranj
Spider Moum4
(3112" OD
f0=70W
loo 100y1f
16d=150W
t7Cr 175W
200= 200W
250' 250W
sza 3zow
330' 350W
qpp= 400VW
46~ 450W
750=750W
673= 875W
,tam 1000Wr
70W
N 1t~W
1- 160W
r- 250W
F 400W
H 750W
10r 1000Wr
p Type
PUlse Start Metal
HeOda
= H1~7 Pfessure
Sod(t!m
Metal HalWes
120V
208V
zarni
277V
480V
MuIB-Tap+s
Step++
Type 1 Formed+=
Type It Famed
Type II Segm+a
Type Itl Famed
Type III Segmented+a
Type IV Segmened+a
Type V Segtnemedts
Fo7wacd Ttawyw
Spit[ LFght EWminator+4
Cutoff AsyrlreMc +s
wish EHS
Area Round
Area Square
Type III Ventral
Rectangular WItM1e
s Type
FlatGlesstr
Sag Glass
1T3=175W
250= 250YV
q0a 400W
1000=1000Wr
Notaa: t Arm nor irwluded. Ses Atoesswiee.
2 Am+ blpth varee bawd on houame size:9' for GSS, 11-12' for GSM end 14" for GSL
Aveibbls on GSS houskl0 onH•
q Aveibble on GSLlrout3nq onry.
5 Standard with medWm4lece coakets in GSS houdrl0. Mogul-bees sedreH in GSM and GSL harain0s. Wnerege
waibNiky varies by Irormk+C size • css WetfeOS Tetrb.
g Requlree reduced envelope E0.261Emp when used with GSM housing end flot pfaes wrtiealry IsmpM eptbe.
7 Requires reduced elwobpe BT-971amp wren aced with GSM houain0.
8 776, 250 and 400W MH waibMe for teat-US markets only.
g Prelude eI~ welbYie fn non-VS voke0aa and 50Hz for imemetbnel medlde. Comuk feaory for wsilebility
and ordsrilq in}ormstien.
la Mutt(•Tep ballast is 12012~rt40l277V caked 277V. Tripie•Tsp ba0ea is 120/277/347Y wired 3W V.
17 3-Tep balbot b 120/200a17r40/277/430V w4ed 48W, only we9ebb In 400-j000W.
12 Merriam housing Pocturo only.
13 Maximum watta0s on ae0memed optical Aictribudena is 4fIWV. 400W Mstd HdWe lamp must use reduced
envelops ED•26 temp. Not svafblYbbG~houein0.
tq Man use reduced smrelope lomp, rat weileWs in GSL housin0.
tg AveibMe on GSM end GSL housiriea only.
13 RYJ optic rlw avNhNe with flat Ofaee.
p 7 WOW GSL with fln Otess roqutres BT-37lamp end is not we0ebb in AS, RW, SL or 3Y dlesibutbrm.
la Older flnbh oelon weibbla ineiudln0 • full ikis of RAL eobr marchee. Conwh your Cooper L'ghtina
Repneemative.
19 Add ea atdflx in the order shown,
2p Quarts optblm not weiislrb wkh BL opdoe.
21 House aide chub rat weibbb wkh SS, RW, AS, AR. SL end CA optics.
~ Arm mount onry, 400W Maximum.
y; order saparetery. replace XX whh oobrouBbr.
?R CompaaWs wkh cap bnc vertical optioe onry.
of +s
Grey
tjra¢e
111adc
Dark Plagnum
Graphite Meteilk:
stlOn6 +e
5sgle Fuse (120, 277 a
347V)
r Ooubb Fuse (208, 240 a
480V)
Lamp Indud~
R= OuaAZ Flestrlke 7v/m
Quartz Resuikt3re
NEMA Twisibdc
Photocaltr~ Receptacb
[6 Fxtemel Adjustable
House Side Shield
'r House SMe Shieid=+
r Vandat Shietita
ns ~
, 6aanal Horlee Stile Shield-224 EPA
E#arrlal Fblae 510e SNeld -2.46 EPA
14' Arm for Square Pole, to F.PA+s
6" Arm for Squero Pots. OA EPAK
DLOG Mown i(k fa' Sgwro Pobts
t4" Aem farRoutd PMe. 1.0 EPAte
g' Arm for Round Pob. 0.3 fFAts
DkaR Mamt ICBfor ROHM Pden
6`A1m for Squme Pole.05 EPAs
6" Arm Iw Fo1sM Pob. 0.5 EPAs
fi' Ann tw3quMa Pab. OS EPAa
g Arm ter ROlxld POb. 0.5 EPAa
We0 Moved arodsol wkh 10' Amt
Wa6 MouMOrarRsta
11 ffl"Alm and Rand Pole Adaper•.
OS FPA
Mast Arm Adapia
Sbpb Tena1 Adaptor for 3 112' O.D.
Teron
2780' Tenon AdWtwta 9 112" OD.
Temn
3~ Terror Adeplerfor3112"OA.
4~0" Twan Adapter for 312' O.D.
Texan
2®9P Tenon Adaptwfor 31lT O.O.
Tenon
2@120' Tenon Adepbrfw S 1rY' OA.
Tenon
390' Tenon Adaplerfw 3112" O.D.
Teron
5&Ipb Tenor Adapter for 23!8" O.D.
Twlen
2180' Tenon Adapts br 2 316" OA.
Texan
3120' Terror Adaptwiw 2 3B' OA.
Tenon
4@90' Texan Adapter br 2 34t" O.D.
Terarl
2~H0' Texan Adapoet for 27!6' O.D.
Texan
390- Tonoll Adapter fort 316" O.D.
hlalrce Side SSIff10 forGSS (FTOId insretle~ta
tiouce Ske SMaW for GSM (FieWta
Irisreted)
House Side Shbk for GSL (FbM inelalkdja r
la= FFA1A Twistioek Photocalsal -MU~Tap
n.1$!IA TvAstlodc Phaoconvd -480V
STOCK SAMPLE NUMBER {Lamp ktcfudedi: -
6AMILE atllaeEA: eeM•M ••00•MI•MT•11e•re•BZ•L
GSM AI
PrEeaR MeeMbe
r.,,,kr Lt•aa
tAap tseie TVP.
WEapE Wan. aY.n
velra. a.iAeanai
rehM•aLTpWMa27rV As.a.. EebaE BZ
Lax TYPE C.1w
i6.AeG1EO BZ.eravn t.1s•q
CSM.fialME AI.11 ni' eLeztow MEUA WeaE R.SAPwvW •WVi MTYpsA Varigf Se-aaE asa ImNMN
~ eel. MEje1 N,Ilb'
ME
~Ea rPdVOM t 4000 000W
NeRe ieedtm"reArewi weWM, W ertpNw,. roar n,Me,wm„E]e"r.
Lighting Specifications and Dimensions subject to change without notice. ADHOaz575
veww.cooperlightirlg.eom McGrew-Edison • Customer Firftt Center • 1121 Ntgflway 74 SouM • Peachtree City, GA 90268 • TEL 770.488A600 • FAX 770.488.4801 09!0912009 6:2x51 AM
21
PHOTOIViE7RICS
4
3
2
1
D E 0
1
2
3
a
D 1 2 3 4 6
GSM-XX-70004Vtt7-SL-FG
10oD-Waa MH
116,000-Lumen pear Lamp
Spill Light Eliminator
Flat Glass
D 7 2 3 4
GSM-XX-100D~MH~aV-ffa
10~-Watt MH
170,000-Lumen Clear lamp
Type III Vertical
Flat Glass
4
3
2
t
0
1
2
3
a
3
2
1
D
7
2
3
a
5 0 7 2 3 4 5
GSM-XX-100WNH•AS-SG
7000-Watt MH
110,000-Lumen pear Lamp
Arse Square
Flat Glass
Footcandle Table
Select mounting height and read
across for footcandte values of
oath isofootcandle litre. Distance
in units at mounting height.
tubnming Footeandls Values Eor
Haigh IsofootearWkE4res
A B C D E
100pW [SL.] / 400Y1/ [AR]
25' 2.88 1.44 0.72
0.25 0.14
atr a.oo t.oo a.so o2c o.70
35' 4.46 0.73 0.37 D.15 0.07
70~W taV/AS)
30' 3.50 2.00 1.00
0.50 020
35' 2.60 0.73 0.37 0.78 0.07
40' 2.OD 1.00 O.t~ 020 0.10
WATTAGE TABLE DRILL PATTERN
TYPE"M"
Fixture Sh:e Wa a
GSta
Pulse Start Metal Halde MP)
7D 100,150W
Hi h Pressure Sodiu HPS 70 100 150W
Metal Halide MH 175W
GSM
Pulse Start Mete! Halide MP
70 100 150 175 200 260 320 350 400 450 750 875 t000W
Hi h Pressure Sodium HPS 70 100 7 D 400 750
Metal Halide MH 775, 250, 400, t000W
GSL
Pulse Stag Metal Halide MP 2511 0 350 400 450 750 7000W
Hi Pressure Sodium HPS 250 400 750 t000W
Metal Watide MW 5p p
2 5/16"
[59mm)
--{ 314" f20mm)
'~T` Dia. Hole
2 7f16° I124mm)
B°)124mm)
Dia. Holes
GOQPER Lighting Speci#ications and Dimensions subject to change wethout native. ADH082575
www.coopedighangcom McGraw-Edison • Custar~ First CBnf~ • 1121 ffghw8y 74 South • Peachtree qty. GA 30269 • TEL 770.486.4800 • FAX 770.486.4&11 09/09/2009 8:24:57 AM
A ~~ ~ 2 2
APPROVED 10/6/2009
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
QUARTERLY PUBLIC HEARING
August 24, 2009
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board
met for a Quarterly Public Hearing continuation meeting on Monday, August 24, 2009 at 7:00
p.m. at the Central Orange Senior Center in Hillsborough, NC.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Valerie P. Foushee, and Commissioners
Alice M. Gordon, Barry Jacobs, Pam Hemminger, Mike Nelson, Bernadette Pelissier, and Steve
Yuhasz
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: John Roberts
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Interim County Manager Frank Clifton and Clerk to the
Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below)
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Brian L. Crawford, Jay Bryan, Mary
Bobbitt-Cooke, Judith Wegner, Rachel Phelps Hawkins, Dr. Larry Wright, and Mark Marcoplos
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Tommy McNeill and Pete Hallenbeck
C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
Planning Board Chair Brian Crawford introduced the agenda items.
1. Zoning Ordinance Amendment: To receive public comment on proposed
amendment(s) to Article Six (6) Application of Dimensional Requirements Section 6.31
Outdoor Lighting Standards of the Orange County Ordinance revising existing
regulations governing the review, approval, and use of outdoor lighting fixtures for
residential and non-residential land uses.
Planner Michael Harvey said that staff has received concerns about the outdoor lighting
standards and these are on page 1 of the abstract. The concerns are as follows:
1. The lack of clarity on how lighting plans are submitted and reviewed by staff,
2. The `one size fits all' mentality of the existing regulations that treats projects within
urbanizing and rural potions of the County the same, and
3. A lack of specificity on the types of lighting fixtures that ought to be allowed for use
by outdoor sport fields and/or performance areas.
The Board of County Commissioners asked staff to develop some minor amendments to
respond to these concerns. Staff is proposing to amend Section 6.31 as follows:
1. Staff is proposing to develop an overall lighting limit on the development and use of
outdoor lighting fixtures for non-residential land uses. This limit varies depending on
the location of the proposed development within an urbanizing area (i.e. Transition
Area) versus a rural area of the County.
2. Staff is proposing several amendments providing greater explanation on the level of
detail required as part of the submittal and review of an outdoor lighting plan.
23
Current regulations only make reference to the production of a lighting plan, which
has led to multiple interpretations as to what is exactly required for submittal. Staff is
proposing to formalize the submittal requirements to ensure that we obtain all
necessary information to review and take action on a submitted lighting plan.
3. Staff is proposing to modify existing regulations governing the use of outdoor sports
field/performance area lighting. Several residents have suggested that such lighting
fixtures be banned within the rural areas of the County. This suggestion is not
practical given the possible need to allow for such lighting at park and recreation
facilities throughout the rural areas of the County and due to the presence of existing
recreational facilities with such lighting already installed.
Instead, staff is proposing to modify existing operational standards (i.e., hours of
operation) as well as establish height limits in an effort to better regulate the potential
impacts of such fixtures.
Further work will be necessary to address the ancillary impacts of outdoor sports
field lighting. This work will become a component of the proposed UDO revision.
Michael Harvey went through the specifics of the amendments.
Commissioner Yuhasz said that as he reads the exemptions to this, it only includes
residential structures that existed at the time the first lighting ordinance was adopted. He asked
if this was intended to require all new residential structures to provide a signed and sealed
engineering stamp for residential lighting.
Michael Harvey made reference to pages 7-8 and said that it was not the intention to
have outdoor lighting for single-family residential structures regulated. Commissioner Yuhasz
asked that this be made clear in the ordinance. Mr. Harvey indicated that this matter would be
clarified in a future amendment.
Commissioner Yuhasz pointed out that in the rural areas there is not going to be much
lighting and maybe the residential areas could be allowed to have more lighting for security
purposes, etc.
Commissioner Yuhasz made reference to 6.31.9a on page 16, and he read, "Outdoor
Sports Field/Outdoor Performance Area lighting shall only be allowed for those principal and
accessory uses, deemed by the Planning Department, as needing such fixtures to properly
function as intended during evening hours." He asked if this could be an illegal delegation of
legislative function to allow the Planning staff to make that determination without a specific
criterion. He asked if the Planning department would accept at face value the proposal that
lighting was needed.
Michael Harvey said that the intention of the statement was to signify that Planning staff
would review each proposal relating to the erection and use of outdoor sports field lighting on a
case by case basis to verify that the lights were an essential component of a proposed land
uses operation.
John Roberts asked Commissioner Yuhasz if he should research this issue and
Commissioner Yuhasz said yes.
Commissioner Yuhasz made reference to section 6.31.6, which relates to the required
certification on a subdivision plat that any and all street lights have been installed consistent
with County regulations. He said that he objects to additional statements on final plats
24
requiring surveyors to make statements or to certify that specific actions have been, or will be
done, in connection with the recording of a plat. He said that those kinds of requirements do not
belong on final plats. It could be put in a declaration of approval.
Commissioner Jacobs said that there is a petition at their places. He said that he would
be interested in comments from the staff about the notion of requiring lighted athletic facilities to
obtain a Class B Special Use permit prior to the commencement of operation. Michael Harvey
said that lighting in and of itself is not a principal use or an accessory use and that it is ultimately
a by-product of an approved use of property. Mr. Harvey said that he was not in favor of
requiring the issuance of a special use permit solely on the erection of outdoor lighting fixtures
and that if there was concern over their erection and use within rural areas of the County then
the Ordinance ought to be amended to require the various principal uses that could require such
lights to obtain a SUP. He said that he needs direction from the Board of County
Commissioners on getting a special use permit for lighting.
Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 15, item M, and read, "...as determined
by posted hours of operation for said land use..." He asked if all of the possible land uses were
covered in "said land use." Michael Harvey said that anything in the County's jurisdiction would
be covered by this. Commissioner Jacobs asked Michael Harvey to check on Cedar Ridge High
School about this.
Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 18, section 6.3.10 B and asked if this
includes digital signs and Michael Harvey said no. Commissioner Jacobs requested that they
include digital signs and what constituted digital signs. He would like to look at Durham
County's ordinances.
Planning Board members:
Jeffrey Schmidt said that he has been on the Planning Board for five years and this is
the first time he has heard any concern about lighting by the Board of County Commissioners.
He asked if there have been complaints by people that have brought this forward.
Michael Harvey said that complaints on outdoor lighting became prevalent this year.
Jeffrey Schmidt asked why the Planning Board could not have handled this on an
isolated basis. Michael Harvey said that any time there are concerns brought up that have far-
reaching implications, there has to be a uniform standard.
Jeffrey Schmidt suggested that both boards find out what lumens are and what this looks
like. He has never seen what this looks like.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Sara Shields presented a handout.
"To: Orange County Board of County Commissioners
From: Sara Shields, 1600 Jimmie Ed Road, Hurdle Mills
Re: Lighting and noise standards for athletic fields in rural areas
My name is Sara Shields and I've lived in a rural part of the county 12 years. I am
asking you to change the lighting and noise standards for athletic fields in rural areas and to
require all athletic fields to get a Class B Special Use Permit.
25
Last year I presented to you a request that the lighting standards for athletic fields and
other lighted facilities in rural areas be reconsidered. I made this request because the Planning
and Zoning Department allowed a church to erect a lighted ball field directly across a dirt road
from my house with a Class B Special Use Permit. Therefore, none of the neighbors affected
by the ball field had a say in whether the bail field should be built and lighted or how and when
the field would be used.
We have now lived with the field in its' completed state since May 29, 2009. Its impact
on my home and others in our community has been very disturbing. Many games have gone
past 11:30 p.m., and one tournament game had the lights on after 1:00 a.m. Sunday morning,
with no relief given by the Sheriff's Department after 911 calls. Lights shine into my house.
Port-a-potties have been in view from my front porch continuously since that May date.
Sometime in late July a PA system was added to the field. One of my neighbors a mile away
can hear it. I have endured countless people using my driveway as a turnaround.. Noisy
motorcycles rev their engines as they pull out from the dirt road onto the paved road. If this all
sounds angry, it is. As a citizen of this country I am entitled to due process of law when the
integrity and value of my home and property is being taken from me without an opportunity to be
heard.
Therefore, I ask that you amend the lighting and noise standards for rural areas. I also
present to you a petition I started, but was unable to continue with due to illness in my family.
Over 90% of the people I spoke with signed it, requesting that all lighted athletic facilities be
required to have a Special Class B permit."
Bonnie Hauser was speaking on behalf of Orange County Voice, who was working in
cooperation with CHAOS, Chapel Hill Astronomical and Observational Society. She said that
they are thrilled to see the County take a proactive stance on lighting ordinances and for
keeping the rural community separate from the urban communities. She said that rural Orange
County still has pockets of dark sky and they support recommendations to limit lights and noise
on athletic fields. She said that they would like a complete ban on lights that go upward. They
would also like to add incentives to use IDA approved fixtures. They support the Hurdle Mills
group about seeing an ordinance extended to require a public hearing any time outdoor lighting
is included in a public venue. She said that light and noise travel farther in rural areas. She
said that CHAOS would be happy to help in any way because the members are experts on light
issues.
Robert Nichols asked if there would be a public hearing if the Board of County
Commissioners and Planning Board approve this as recommended and it was answered yes. If
this ordinance is passed, the enforcers will be the Planning Department. He said that he is tired
of the government telling him how to make every move he makes on his farm.
Ben Lloyd said that he supports what Jeffrey Schmidt said and that they should not fix
what is not broken. He spoke about the Efland Rodeo and how it goes past 11:00 p.m.
Commissioner Jacobs asked Michael Harvey to address the point Ben Lloyd just made
about this scheduled event that may fast past i 1:00. Michael Harvey said that the current
ordinance states that an outdoor sports field cannot have lighting past 11:00 unless it was to
conclude a previously scheduled and commenced event. Mr. Harvey said that the proposed
revision says that an outdoor sports field in a rural areas of the County cannot have outdoor
sports field lighting on past 11:00 p.m.. Craig Benedict said that for certain outdoor events, it
would be a determination by the Planning Department to decide to go past time limits.
26
Commissioner Jacobs said that one could argue whether Efland is urban or rural and it
should be specified that it is for a single scheduled event.
Commissioner Jacobs thanked the Planning staff for making a differentiation in the
ordinance between urban and rural. He said that the County did consult at one time with a
group about light pollution. He thinks that this improves the ordinance.
Commissioner Jacobs made reference that he had some general comments on the
wording on page 16, Section 6.31.9, of the proposed Ordinance and indicated that he would
supply staff with those comments directly.
Commissioner Gordon said she agreed with what has been said about distinguishing
between residential and non-residential ,and suggested that the distinction should be made
clear throughout the whole ordinance.
Commissioner Hemminger asked about the PA system and the port-a-potties and how
this would be handled and Michael Harvey said that the Sheriff's Department would handle this.
Commissioner Hemminger suggested that light timers might work.
A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Gordon
to refer the matter to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned in time for the
December 7, 2009 BOCC meeting and adjourn the Public Hearing until December 7, 2009 in
order to receive the Planning Board's recommendation.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
A-~+~,.~~.+ 5
2~
~'' ORANGE COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 4, 2009
Action Agenda
Item No.
SUBJECT: Zonin Ordinance Text Amendment Relatin to Outdoor Li htin
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Ordinance Amendment Michael D. Harvey, Planner
2. Copy of legal advertisement Craig Benedict, Director
3. Typical outdoor lighting fixture data sheet
245-2607
245-2592
PURPOSE: To continue review of, and make a recommendation to the BOCC on, a staff
initiated Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to Section 6.31 Outdoor Lighting Standards of the
Zoning Ordinance (hereafter `the Ordinance').
BACKGROUND: This item was presented at the October 7, 2009 regular board meeting where
members posed several questions relating to the proposed amendments and asked for practical
examples of existing lighting levels within the County.
In an effort to address the majority of the Board's comments, staff would like to offer the
following:
QUESTIONS:
Why are we doing this?
As staff indicated during the public hearing, concern has been expressed over the lack of
specificity within the Ordinance, specifically:
• The lack of clarity on how lighting plans are submitted and reviewed by staff,
• The `one size fits all' mentality of the existing regulations that treats projects within
urbanizing and rural portions of the County the same, and
• A lack of specificity on the types of lighting fixtures that ought to be allowed for use
by outdoor sport fields and/or performance areas.
It needs to be remembered that the proposed amendments are an initial attempt to
address these issues. Staff acknowledges that additional. work to the lighting provisions
will be necessary and has been authorized to complete a more detailed revision as part
of the Unified Development Ordinance process.
28
What was advertised as the purpose of this revision?
A copy of the approved legal advertisement is included as Attachment Two (2) of this
abstract. In brief, the advertisement indicated that the proposed amendment would:
a. Distinguish the installation and use of outdoor lighting fixtures within urbanizing
and rural areas of the County,
b. Modifying existing site plan submittal requirements for lighting plans to require
additional information on the impact of outdoor lighting on adjacent property
owners, and
c. Revise existing regulations governing the erection of lights for sports fields and/or
outdoor performance areas.
Originally, staff had intended to include a provision concerning the adoption of new
language relating to the amortization of non-conforming lights. This provision was
abandoned when it was discovered that there are multiple, conflicting, policies within the
Zoning Ordinance relating to the amortization of non-conforming situations.
Staff concluded that it would be more appropriate to address this issue during the
development of the UDO to avoid the creation of additional conflicts within the Ordinance.
What is a Lumen?
The lumen can be thought of casually as a measure of the total "amount" of visible light
emitted from a source. (i.e. A lumen is a way of measuring how much light gets to what
you want illuminated).
Outdoor fixtures have an initial lumen output rating that indicates the total amount of light
that will be emitted from that source. Staff is proposing to use this figure as a component
in our regulation of outdoor lighting.
What is afoot-candle?
A foot-candle can be thought of as the amount of light that actually falls on a given
surface or a given area of property. Afoot-candle is equal to one (1) lumen per square
foot of area.
Why is staff proposing to use lumens as the `cap' on allowable lighting for
property?
A foot-candle is still an industry standard for determining the amount of light generated at
a given point on a parcel of property. The problem, however, is that afoot-candle does
not properly account for the overall intensity of the light source(s) proposed for a given
parcel. While it can tell you how much light is being generated at a given point it cannot
provide detail on the overall intensity of the light.
A light fixture typically comes with a shielding device that is designed to focus light into a
given area. With sufficient shielding, any light source can comply with the existing
County standard of generating a set of amount of foot-candles in a given area. A foot-
candle measurement would not necessarily detail the overall intensity of an outdoor
lighting fixture or provide detail on the total amount of light generated on a given parcel of
property.
29
Staff is attempting to develop a calculation to identify a limit on the total cumulative
amount of light generated on a parcel of property prior to the lights ever being erected.
By establishing a lumen limit we are, in effect, regulating the total amount of visible light
that can be generated on a given parcel of property.
Think of it this way: the foot-candle measurement provides us with the output of a light at
a given point while a lumen measures the results of that light's output in total. Staff
believes that we need both tools in our arsenal to properly regulate lighting and avoid
ancillary impacts on adjacent property owners.
Why not use the wattage of a light source as the `cap'?
Different bulbs produce different intensities of light at similar `watt' ratings. For example,
a 50 watt metal halide bulb will generate approximately 1,900 lumens while a 50 watt
high pressure sodium bulb will generate approximately 3,600. A helpful table outlining
various bulb wattages and output intensities is as follows:
source: Dark Sky International
The wattage of a bulb does not equate to the overall intensity of the light and cannot be
used to establish how much light should be generated on a given parcel of property.
30
As the Board is already aware, staff's recommendation on the proposed lumen level limits, as
currently contained with Section 6.31.6 (a), was based on existing documentation outlining the
types of light fixtures at various non-residential developments. This regulation was being
proposed to establish an overall lumen `cap' on non-residential development within urban and
rural areas of the County.
Unfortunately, staff has discovered that some of this data was incorrectly recorded and, as a
result, our assumptions on existing lighting levels were incorrect. This means that our
recommend lumen caps are not consistent with existing non-residential development within the
County.
EXAMPLES: Board member's asked for examples of existing lighting intensity within the County.
Staff is able to provide the following detail:
Churton Grove Commercial Center (i.e. Food Lion, etc)
• The property is approximately eleven (11) acres in area,
• There are a total of twenty-eight (28) parking lot lights on thirty (30) foot tall fight
poles each with a 1,000 watt Metal Halide fixture generating approximately
110,000 lumens per fixture.
• There are a total of three (3) bollard style lights each with a 50 watt Metal Halide
fixture generating approximately 1,900 lumens per fixture.
• There are several internally illuminated wall signs that contribute a negligible
amount of light on the property.
• In total, there are approximately 3,085,700 lumens being generated on the eleven
(11) acre property, which translates to approximately 280,518 lumens per acre.
It should be noted that original data recorded for this property indicated the light
fixtures were 100 watt Metal Halide bulbs, not 1,000 watt. As a result out calculations,
relating to acceptable lumen limits, were off.
Hampton Paint (Town of Hillsborough) -Home Depot
• The property is approximately twenty (20) acres in area,
• There are a total of thirty-four (34) parking lot lights on forty (40) foot tall light poles
each with a 1,000 watt High Pressure Sodium light fixture generating
approximately 135,000 lumens per fixture.
• There are a total of nine (9) wall mounted light fixtures generating 20,500 lumens
per fixture.
• There are several internally illuminated wall signs that contribute a negligible
amount of light on the property.
• In total, there are approximately 4,774,500 lumens being generated on the twenty
(20) acre property, which translates to approximately 238,725 lumens per acre.
Gravelly Hill Middle School (West Ten Road) - no outdoor sports field lights approved as of
this abstract
• The property is approximately sixty-five (65) acres in area,
31
• There are a total of sixty-four (64) parking lot lights on twenty-five (25) foot tall light
poles each with a 250 watt High Pressure Sodium light fixture generating
approximately 25,000 lumens per fixture.
• There are a total of sixteen (16) court yard lights on twenty (20) foot tall light poles
each with a 100 watt High Pressure Sodium light fixture generating approximately
9,500 lumens per fixture.
• In total, there are approximately 1,752,000 lumens being generated on the sixty-
five (65) acre property, which translates to approximately 26,953 lumens per acre.
In reviewing this information, as well as other comments made during the October 7, 2009
meeting, staff would like to offer the following comments:
1. As previously indicated staff has determined that our current recommendation on
establishing a lumen cap was based on erroneous data. As a result staff no longer
recommends the adoption of the lumen cap limit as currently proposed.
2. Staff is not in favor of an amendment to the lighting standards requiring the issuance of a
Special Use Permit in any situation where outdoor sports field lighting is erected on a
parcel of property.
As staff indicated during the public hearing, the installation and use of such lighting
fixtures is connected to a proposed land use. It is staff's opinion that we need to re-
assess those land uses that utilize such fixtures and determine if they ought to be
reviewed under the Special Use Permit process.
In this manner we are being consistent with the various existing standards of the
Ordinance.
3. Board members made several excellent recommendations to modify specific sections of
the lighting Ordinance, specifically modifications to:
a. Section 6.31.1 Purpose and Intent
b. Section 6.31.2 Definitions
c. Section 6.31.3 Applicability
d. Section 6.31.4 Exceptions
Given the limited and specific nature of the public hearing advertisement, the majority of
these recommendations cannot be included within this amendment package.
These suggestions will be further reviewed by staff and incorporated into the proposed
modification of outdoor lighting regulations that will be part of the UDO process.
4. The Planning Board has the following options concerning the continued review of this
item. There are as follows:
a. Leave out the proposed modifications detailed within Section 6.31.6, relating to the
establishment of a lumen cap, and take action on the remaining amendment
package suggesting that further study is necessary to establish an acceptable
lumen cap for non-residential development within the County.
Staff is not longer comfortable with recommending approval of the lumen cap as
contained within the proposed amendment for the reasons detailed herein.
It should be noted that the `dark skies' initiative and the lighting industry are
presently developing new compromises and standards that would be valuable in a
32
final lighting program analysis. As a result staff recommends that the proposed
lumen cap be removed at this time.
b. Recommend that no action be taken and that staff be directed to continue studying
the issue and propose modifications to existing lighting standards during the
development of the UDO.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: This request has been reviewed by various County departments who
have determined the approval of the request will not create the need for additional funding for
the provision of County services.
RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Officer recommends the Board:
1. Remove the proposed lumen cap detailed within Section 6.31.6 of the proposed
Ordinance amendment (note staff has already deleted the provision from the document),
2. Continue to deliberate on the petition, and
3. Make a recommendation to the BOCC on the proposed text amendment consistent with
the two (2) options detailed herein.
~~ L
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
OCTOBER 7, 2009
REGULAR MEETING
Approved lU4/09
MEMBERS PRESENT: May Becker, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Peter Hallenbeck, At-Large Cheeks Township; Mark
Marcoplos, At-Large Bingham Township; Earl McKee, Little River Township Representative; Jeffrey Schmitt, Cedar Grove
Township; Lany Wright, At-Large Cedar Grove Township; Rachel Phelps Hawkins, Hillsborough Representative; Tommy
McNeill, Eno Township Representative; Judith Wegner, Bingham Township
MEMBERS ABSENT: Brian Crawford, At-Large Eno Township (Chair); Mary Bobbitt-Cooke, Cheeks Township Representative;
Samantha Cabe, Chapel Hill Township;
STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator; Tom Aftieri, Comprehensive
Planning Supervisor, Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II
OTHERS PRESENT: Sara ShiBIdS
AGENDA ITEM 7: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT RELATING TO OUTDOOR LIGHTING •
To make a recommendation to the BOCC on this proposed text amendment hear4d at the August 24,
2009 Quarterly Public Hearing
Presenter.• Craig Benedict, Planning Director
(Handout from Lany Wright: "Suggestions: Amendments Relating to Outdoor Lighting")
Judith Wegner: This is something the Board of County Commissioners talked about at the Quarterly Public Hearing. One of the
issues was about athletic events where schools have the athletic fields and some comment from the citizens about lights and
cheering until and after 11:00 P.M.
Craig Benedict: The context of the interest of the Board of County Commissioners to readdress outdoor lighting has been due to
a few projects that have come up in the recent past. One was a farm Montessori school in a rural area and that would have
lights and the other had dealt with Lattisville Grove Baptist Church. We notice in our regulations, should there be different
standards for an urban area lighting standard versus a rural area lighting standard. We are giving direction that there should be
differences between the amount of lighting that is anticipated or intended in an urban area and a more restrictive standard in a
rural area both to intensity and timeframe.
Judith Wegner: Could you speak to the dark skies efforts by people who do not want the stars to get blotted out by too much
light.
Craig Benedict: About five years ago Orange County did a more recent revamping of its Outdoor Lighting ordinances to adhere
to some Dark Skies which is the organization that has interest in limiting light pollution so people can observe the stars, sky and
planets at night. We made the first cut in 2003-2004 to suggest fixtures that are more cut off and lights don't spill out. We have
been working with the electric companies to have some of their fixtures to adhere to these standards. We made the first cut and
realized we did have standards that were one size fits all and then we took a look at the Dark Skies more recent thoughts and
incorporated those thoughts into this. On page 19, I will now go through the outdoor lighting standards. There was a
presentation in February of this year. We hope to proceed with this tonight or in November. If it is moved to November it would
be more problematic for you to approve the minutes, we'd have to do it by some sort of email vote which we don't like to do.
Earl McKee: Have you notated any sections that were questioned in that public hearing?
Craig Benedict: I have a recollection about the property line. The definitions on page 19, 20 and 21 remain the same.
Rachel Phelps Hawkins: I have a question about security lights. What about people who have security lights in their yards that
are on all the time?
Craig Benedict: They would prefer a new one. They have new standards so the lighting stays within the property and will not
overflow. Any existing lighting was grandfathered in. In 2004 when we passed the ordinance, we had suggested an amortization
schedule for people to change things out after eight to ten years. There is also a note there could be more changes in this
ordinance but we will wait to hear your framework built. Then we will definitely and prioritize how to make additional
amendments to this. Security lighting is allowed and lights that have sensors.
33
34
Approved 11/4/09
May Becker: Could you summarize what it refers to in terms of residential versus commercial?
Craig Benedict: Residential is single family, multi family, or townhouse. Non-residential would include churches, industrial,
commercial, office parks and the like.
May Becker. This ordinance refers to residential or commercial changes?
Craig Benedict: Both. In here there are different standards that state if it is anon-residential property next to residential
property, the cutoff has to be less. We have both an urban standard and a rural standard. There is interest of the planning
board that how we look at subdivisions in rural areas versus areas should be different. Based on suggestions from the planning
board, it proceeded to the Board of County Commissioners and they divided the area of County planning jurisdiction to two
areas, rural and urbanized. We have different standards we have to go through based on subdivisions. Projects that have
lighting in urban areas will have different standards than rural areas.
Peter Hallenbeck: On page 21 beginning with exemptions, the way it is written, "the mercury vapor", you may want to change to
metal vapor because they are both mercury and saline vapor and the other thing to think about is that you may want to add
incandescent over 150 watts. There are still a lot of people using 300 watt quartz halogen lights which are incandescent. If you
do those two things, you'll be cutting out some loopholes.
Craig Benedict: We can put metal in.
Larry Wright: In the definitions, when you are referring to light trespassing onto other places, generally when you research that,
they use the term "light trespass". The definition is intrusion of direct light projected from one property or roadway onto another
property or roadway. It is a standard term used in the field you might want to consider using that.
Craig Benedict: We will ensure any information that comes from this meeting is within the spirit and intent to what we advertised
for the ordinance amendment in the papers, so we don't wander too far from that. Back to page 22, submittal requirements we
have elaborated on what is necessary within the lighting plan.
Larry Wright: When you talk about metal or mercury vapor, do you think that should be among your definitions?
Craig Benedict: Yes, okay.
Peter Hallenbeck: On page 22, item I, the first line states security lights of any wattage, then at the end it states it cannot exceed
150 watts? That stuck me as an odd paragraph.
Craig Benedict: If a low wattage is exempt from this ordinance and its 100% watts, it would be subject to this ordinance.
Peter Hallenbeck: But it reads "security lights of any wattage that are controlled by amotion-sensor switch thafdon't.stay on
more than twelve minutes and do not exceed 150 watts". Is it security lights of any wattage or security lights that...
Craig Benedict: I agree the writing could be different. It looks like an add-on.
Peter Hallenbeck: If you pull into my house at night, you will get about 300 feet off Brook Hollow, about 28000 lumens of light
spread out over a 900 foot driveway in from of the house but there is no one fixture that exceeds 2600 lumens so it seems that
secure lights of any wattage make sense as long as they are on a motion timer. I would put in a strong vote from just getting rid
of the 150 watt limit constraint.
Judith Wegner: Was the idea there to say something about on the one hand if you have motion sensors, which is limited time,
which is one idea and then low level security lights. Do you think under 150 watts is consistent?
Peter Hallenbeck: The automatically turned on for a time, it doesn't make sense to constrain the wattage.
Judith Wegner: Would there be a case for security lights that aren't time but low wattage?
Peter Hallenbeck: There are all sorts of reasons, dark sky, saving energy and the whole idea of these ordinances that you want
to encourage people that tum on with motion detectors and otherwise off.
Judith Wegner: Do you think in other settings there would be a reason to keep low level on?
2
35
Approved 11/4/09
Peter Hallenbeck: I think there is a use for the security light from the power company in the rural area. I think that is legitimate
and you may want to put a limit on that.
Judith Wegner: One notion is that if it is timed, it may be appropriate not to be limited by the wattage but there may be other
instances where you have low wattages that are not on a timer.
Craig Benedict: I think we are getting into substance. If we could put asterisks on there, we understand that as we modify
regulations that I would like to correct every nuance in it but I don't think we can at this point.
Jeffrey Schmitt: On page 23, section A, is this a commercial comment or residence.
Craig Benedict: Onty the ones that require site plans. Single family homes do not require site plans.
Jeffrey Schmitt: Is this consistent with Wake, Cumberland, and Forsythe?
Craig Benedict: They require for non-residential.
Larry Wright: I don't think this is quite clear in defining commercial from residential. If I were building a house, I would have to
get a professional engineer?
Craig Benedict: We will describe what projects it would be. To my knowledge it does not involve single family residential.
Judith Wegner: It could be cross reference but it might be helpful to people reading this to have that.
Mario Marcoplos: Even it is a small commercial job; I am a builder so I will make an analogy. For years we have built headers
over doorways and windows that are in the building code and it is clear what size header to use. Now there are laminated
veneer beams. If you look at the load calculations, it is very clear what they hold but we have to hire engineers for every job with
a veneer beam involved. This is no different practically speaking yet we have to incur this extra expense. I am wondering if
there isn't a way to make these light regulations generic.
Craig Benedict: I understand exactly. In Florida, what was accomplished was there was overall certification for sheds and
garage doors and once that certification came from one agency to be used universally. Maybe we can get to the point of having
lighting standards that the manufacturer says if you put it on a 40 foot pole and use these specifications that will meet your
standards.
Mark Marcoplos: Standardize it so it is easy for the people and the process.
Larry Wright: I was prompted by the testimony given at the Board of County Commissioners. I researched lighting ordinances of
towns and municipalities. I agree and they do have a standard that says this is acceptable.
Craig Benedict: In the interim, I will find out how we can be assured that the lighting will meet the code if it is installed in this
manner.
Judith Wegner: Who reviews these?
Craig Benedict: The Zoning Department. The building department looks at the energy source.
Judith Wegner: I wonder if there is a way to write that in that within certain perimeters that the zoning department could maintain
approved list of presumably approved types of fixtures subject to review. Is that feasible?
Craig Benedict: In this one, I asked Michael Harvey put the reason for this modification is XYZ but I think we add more
adaptations that if we can find manufacturing standard for simple projects that we would be able to use that standard.
Mark Marcoplos: Aren't a lot of these solutions particular products you can buy to meet these standards?
Craig Benedict: It is product and design, the angle of the lights, if they put shields on them, the height. There is a certain degree
of technology that comes in.
Mark Marcoplos: At Cedar Ridge High School, the parking lot is well lit and there is no light emanating out.
3
36
Approved lU4/09
Craig Benedict: That is a good example. The sports lighting is something we didn't have control over.
Mark Marcoplos: I would say since those lights work, if you put into the ordinance that if you buy this product at this height, you
don't need an engineer
Craig Benedict: On page 24, it describes the lumens output that occurs. Page 25 discusses afoot-candle.
Judith Wegner: Would you be more comfortable with afoot-candle definition on this page. You could put in a graphic.
Mark Marcoplos: Maybe lights we are all familiar with.
Craig Benedict: We will have architectural graphic standards.
Jeffrey Schmitt: We don't have an economic development in the County and if we did, we are not having them give us a
comprehensive lighting engineering plan. Is that $5,000.00 or $10,000?
Peter Hallenbeck: If you look at commercial lighting, the maker of the fixture can give you a diagram in section F so you are
paying someone to look at the manufacturing data and install the fixture.
Craig Benedict: We can give you examples. We did hire lighting engineers to certify our plans for buildings we have built. The
Board of County Commissioners said that even if we are building in Hillsborough we need to stay with County standards.
Judith Wegner: What is not covered is single family residential would not trigger that level of review.
Craig Benedict: On page 26, Section A refers to Urbanizing Standards.
Jeffrey Schmitt: How does that relate to the ordinance today?
Craig Benedict: This is brand new. The old one had .5 foot-candles but it did not discuss lumens per acre at all.
Judith Wegner: If you have a house with driveway lighting just to be safe, does that affect the setbacks from the sidelines being
required?
Craig Benedict: These standards are for non-residential and multi-family residential. The driveway lighting and parking lot
lighting can be accommodated with this .5 foot property line level.
Judith Wegner: Michael has thought through whether this would have impact in terms of commercial ormulti-family purpose, you
would need a larger lot size to accommodate that.
Larry Wright: It seems like this is alluding to light trespass but it is not in here. It can be both public and residential property.
Especially when you are dealing with sports fields. Then you have reflective light.
Judith Wegner: This is trying to set out some defined, measurable light level at the property line.
Larry Wright: Exactly. At the property line and you were talking about the buffers and that also encompasses light trespass
which is unwanted light going on to public and private property.
Judith Wegner: This is geared to residential and non-residential property; I assume a public site would be non-residential?
Craig Benedict: Yes. That's institutional.
Judith Wegner: Lary, I know you are working with a different concept in terms of light trespass but maybe if we leave some of
that for Michael to look at. My sense is that he has a method that is trying to define measurable ways that you would not have
that type of overflow.
Earl McKee: Just for my own benefit, you mentioned the Churton Grove Commercial Center and referring back to the 50,000
lumens per acre, do you have any idea what that property is rated at? Is it 20,000 or 50,000? I have no idea how to relate this to
the real world.
4
37
Approved lU4/09
Craig Benedict: I do not but 1 did ask staff to do it to see how the standards meet. At the next meeting for informational
purposes I will try to have examples for you.
Earl McKee: Churton Grove would be more helpful to me.
Peter Hallenbeck: The 50,000 lumens are about 800 compact florescent watts, 1,200 in a metal and about 3,600 incandescent.
Earl McKee: I still can't visualize that.
Peter Hallenbeck: Does it seem like a lot of light?
Earl McKee: It doesn't seem offensive or glaring.
Mark Marcoplos: That's a valid observation.
Judith Wegner: For citizens if you had a photographic depiction of that, they will ask those questions.
Mark Marcoplos: We are striving for energy benefits. Not only for economic benefits but also environmental. What is the most
energy efficient way to achieve the lumens necessary for a particular facility?
Craig Benedict: A lot of the new manufacturing standards are making the lumens more directive and efficient.
May Becker: Just a point of clarification about the residential. If you have a residential house, you don't require a site plan so
this would not apply, correct? For example, a developer building in an area with several residential homes?
Craig Benedict: If it is a subdivision and they want street lights, they have to meet these standards. Residential subdivision
developer for the public roads or private road if they want lights would have to follow these standards.
Judith Wegner: We will move on to page 29.
Craig Benedict: This does not include security and motion sensor designs that automatically tum off.
Mark Marcoplos: On the top of page 29, "flagpole lighting", why is this being important?
Craig Benedict: This was there previously.
Judith Wegner: You have probably seen gas stations in Durham with lots of lights.
Larry Wright: I looked at five muniapal lighting ordinance and this is in every one of them.
Mark Marcoplos: We are just suppose to say we are going to bum wattage?
Larry Wright: The light fixtures have to be concealed in the ground and angled at the flag.
Mark Marcoplos: Even while we are sleeping.
Larry Wright: Some (ordinances) say they discourage flying the flag after dark.
Pete Hallenbeck: Unless it is lighted.
Mark Marcoplos: This is an opportunity to save some energy and the most patriotic thing to do would be lower the flag and not
light it while we're sleeping.
Craig Benedict: We can put an asterisk by that.
Larry Wright: I have copied some of them here. They say "flags of the United States are encouraged to be flown only during
daylight hours but night time display is permitted provided illumination is by no more than two spotlight fixtures exceeding 3,000
lumens. The spotlight can be either direct burial ground fixture or the pole mounted fixture aimed upward in places close to the
flag as possible".
38
Approved 11/4/09
Peter Hallenbeck: At the top of page 28, "aimed down at least forty (45) forty five degrees" from the center of the light?
Craig Benedict: Yes.
Peter Hallenbeck: On the third paragraph down, it states 1,000 or more lumens, if that were 1,100 lumens that would coincide
better with the size of light bulbs available.
Craig Benedict: This number change seems to make sense.
Jeffrey Schmitt: It is consistent about what we have been talking about.
Peter Hallenbeck: A 1,300 watt compact fluorescent, a 60 watt incandescent is 800 lumens; a 1,800 watt compact fluorescent
and 100 incandescent or the nine watt halogens tend to run just over 1,000 so if you go 1,100 you just made the cutoff point fall
into a much better range.
Judith Wegner. Everyone agrees.
Earl McKee: On page 29, Section M, I assume that is advertising signs on store fronts as well as parking lots?
Craig Benedict: I don't think this is internally illuminated signs. I think this is parking lot lights, driveway lights, etc.
Earl McKee: The way it is written may be confusing.
Craig Benedict: I will make a note.
Larry Wright: On tube lighting, did you want to include that in the restrictions or you just did not want to address that separately?
Most municipalities address tube lighting separately defined as interior tube lighting and exterior tube lighting and some can be
flashing.
Craig Benedict: I didn't think that flashing lights were allowed and tube lighting if it is used to convey a message becomes a sign.
I think it would be in here also. Being able to see the exposed lighting element is prohibited.
Larry Wright: I made notes I can give to Tina.
Judith Wegner: We have a sign ordinance in addition to the lighting ordinance.
Craig Benedict: We will review what Larry gave us.
Judith Wegner: When you were talking about shopping center signs that there was some connection there. Are we ready to
move on to Outdoor Sports Field/Outdoor Performance Area on page 30?
Craig Benedict: This is all new language to address the intent of Outdoor Sports Field/Outdoor Performance Area lighting.
Judith Wegner: If there is a church covered with a ball field, is that covered under this?
Craig Benedict: Yes.
Judith Wegner: Why is that? It says outdoor sports field, however associated with any other use. Someone may read this and
think if you have a free standing field or a field as part of a school. From what we heard at the public hearing there were issues
about ancllary sports fields being associated with other types of uses. I think if it's a matter of giving notice, it wouldn't hurt to
have some reference to say if it is an ancillary use it is covered.
Jeff Schmitt: Ancillary meaning other than for an athletic event.
Judith Wegner: Correct, a secondary use. If you have a church that is the principal use, if a sports field is added, just so they
know this regulation is not addressing only free standing athletic sites.
Jeffrey Schmitt: If the field decides to be used by the home field for use other than an athletic event, how does that apply?
6
39
Approved 11/4/09
Larry Wright: Another person was talking about the rodeo and I think this addresses his situation. I believe it would be good to
talk about temporary lighting for occasional events. You can define an occasional event.
Craig Benedict: I think the Planning Director has a review of temporary lighting. We have a missing part of our code for these
temporary facilities. The County does not have good regulations for that.
Larry Wright: It could be under special exemption.
Mark Marcoplos: I am curious about the allowable height for the fixtures in the urban area versus the rural area. Why would the
urban area get eight foot height and the rural area has six foot heights when the same events occur?
Craig Benedict: In the urban areas there is usually more height allowed for commercial and residential areas. In urban
standards, our zoning would allow higher structures.
Mark Marcoplos: This seems to be disconnected for the event.
Judith Wegner: Another question may be if there are existing heights already in the urban area tied to the building heights,
maybe we could flag that to look into. So it would be okay to find out the practice.
Earl McKee: I have a question between the interactions between 6.31.6 which is tied directly with 6.31.9E on page 31. On item
F, that will be restricted to .25 foot candles at the property line.
Craig Benedict: That per acre requirement is removed.
Earl McKee: I didn't see a reference back to that 25,000 and see where it was removed. That was my question and whether
that 25,000 lumens would be enough to actually play a ball game. You say a ball field is exempted from the 25,000 lumens per
acre for that specific but they are still regulated to .25 foot candles at the property line.
Craig Benedict: The second part is correct.
Eart McKee: If it is enough to play, I don't have a problem with it.
Craig Benedict: Under the part of 50,000, the general heading on page 25 is "General Standards for All Areas" but it is my
understanding from Michael that applied to Outdoor Lighting for non-residential properties and I would think 6.31.9 also had this
50,000 or 25,000 limits.
Judith Wegner: On page 26, Section 61, second paragraph, makes it seem they are deliberating accepting it. Before you leave,
did you have comments?
Sara Shields: I wasn't aware that I could make comments.
Craig Benedict: What is permitted is that she should provide written comments so we can get the exact information she is
referring to in that written document because it goes into the minutes. Also, if there is written information, post public hearing,
that it is something new and not repetitive.
Judith Wegner: My guess that there will be a few clean up items. If you want provide those comments in writing. We appreciate
your attendance at the Board of County Commissioners meeting and you came back tonight.
Sara Shields: There are a couple of things that are disturbing. When you say a game should be over at 10:00 P.M. and you can
play until 11:00 P.M. There is a big problem with that because I have been the recipient of that and I have had those lights on in
my bedroom window until 1:00 A.M. in the morning. When 1 call the Sheriff, I get a call back and they say they are in the middle
of the game. I am sorry but that is not acceptable but there is not one signal deputy that wants to walk into a ballgame and say
tum the lights off so it is not going to happen. It doesn't really matter what you say here it is not going to change the situation.
The lights are supposed to be off at 10:00 P.M. and the game is supposed to be off at 10:00 P.M. The games at a public facility,
the lights go off on a timer at 11:15 P.M. when the game is over at 11:00 P.M. whether they are finished or not. I don't
understand why you say if the game should be over at 10:00 P.M. that the lights should not be extinguished at 10:15 P.M. at the
very latest. Most people, if you give them an inch, they would like a little bit more. I feel tike if you are not going to make some
way of protecting rural, farm living people from having lights, noise, and traffic late into the night then what is the point of being
here.
7
40
Approved 11/4/09
Judith Wegner: One thing might be the required timers; I don't know if that is specified in the ordinance or some other reason but
it sounds like that is enforcement issue and if there were a mechanical requirement that be available then it more likely it will
happen. Did you have other issues?
Sara Shields: When an enforcement officer comes by with his foot candle measurement tool, he walks on the properly line and
in my particular situation, I realize I am one person and this is supposed to count for everyone in the County but I feel like I am
on a mission for everyone in the County. Our property is divided by a road and if he walks the peropty line where there is
dedduous trees, which lose their leaves then during the time of the year when the leaves are on the trees then sometimes they
pass but when you've walk back into my horse field, the light is everywhere. I could write a note to you on the comer of my
property but because he has walked the property line the foot candles are okay it doesn't matter they are so tall and big that they
shine all over my property because one the property line they are okay. That is just not reasonable.
Judith Wegner: Those are both helpful points.
Mark Marcoplos: Where do you live in geographic details?
Sara Shields: I live on a gravel road off Walnut Grove Church Road on the very edge of the County, one mile from the Person
County line. There is absolutely nothing anywhere around me like this. It is completely rural and it is farmland and the only
traffic on our road is residential and tractors and the church traffic. Now we have motorcycles pulling out at 11:00 P.M. or 12:00
at night.
Mark Marcoplos: What is the event?
Sara Shields: A softball field.
Mark Marcopios: it is a recreational softbaN league and they go to aA hours of the night.
Sara Shields: One night they went to 1:00 A.M. in the morning and a number of times until 11:30 P.M. and I have called. Calling
doesn't work.
Tommy McNeill: In your open remarks you clearly stated that what we say here doesn't matter?
Sara Shields: It doesn't matter to me personally.
Judith Wegner: I think we should ask her to comment from her point of view and maybe tell us what you're concerned about
what she said.
Tommy McNeill: I will table my comments.
Judith Wegner: I would like to hear your views.
Tommy McNeill: Again, I decided to table my comments.
Mark Marcoplos; Based on your response, it sounds like someone needs to get on it and deal with it from an enforcement issue.
Judith Wegner: I would like to wind it in to the deliberations on this group. Mark, you may want to say to us that you think it
would be use for Craig or whoever to take into account. We have your comments and observations.
Larry Wright: I think we need to get back to the ordinance.
Craig Benedict: We did find the answer to Earl. Sports facilities do not have caps. That is on page 26.
Earl McKee: What threw me on that part was after the comment, "which shah be regulated as detailed within".
Judith Wegner: Maybe they should be cross referenced.
Jeffrey Schmitt: A follow up to the point. The property line, the measurement, the 25 lumens invading the property boundary
probably needs to be expanded to say 25 lumens at and within the property values, something more inclusive.
Craig Benedict: That is the intent. It should be less as you go further into the property.
8
41
Approved 11/4/09
Earl McKee: Could you take line out and say residentially zoned property.
Judith Wegner: I think you want some benchmark but I think the point is if it is at the line or anywhere interior would probably do.
Jeffrey Schmitt: Craig, what is the basis by which if a commeraal venture in the rural part of the County wants to install
something not initially included in their plan that was submitted to the County, do they come for a special use permit?
Craig Benedict: If it is a principle use, it is handled in a certain way. If someone wants to put a soccer center in, if it is an
accessory use to a permitted, by right, it does not have to go through the special use permit.
Jeffrey Schmitt: What is an accessory use?
Craig Benedict: A church with an accessory softball field.
Jeffrey Schmitt: That is defined somewhere?
Craig Benedict: Yes.
Jeffrey Schmitt: Playing softball is an ancillary use to running a church.
Craig Benedict: It is.
Rachel Phelps Hawkins: If the Board of County Commissioners accepts the recommendations, does this ball field have to go
back and modify its lighting?
Craig Benedict: No. They do have to meet the existing standards we have now.
Larry Wright: These facilities we are talking about, are they grandfathered in?
Craig Benedict: Yes.
Larry Wright: What happens to an existing fixture or pole?
Craig Benedict: They would be considered non-conforming. If they remove a pole, there are new standards they have to
conform to.
Larry Wright: If t have a fixture that has so many lumens and that light blows and I want to replace it, do I have to conform to the
lower lumen standard?
Judith Wegner. If it is a matter of a light bulb or tearing down. It might be useful to have something specific.
Craig Benedict: Typically a light bulb change out does not meet the level you have to change the fixture. If the fixture busts or
the pole breaks then you do meet the standards. There is a whole different section of code about non-conforming structure,
lights, signs that we can bring into the discussion.
Larry Wright: There is a clause in what I gave you.
Judith Wegner. Let me go around the circle. Craig, attachment 2 just doesn't have the same comments but the same thing.
Craig Benedict: That is correct.
Peter Hallenbeck: On page 32, 6.3.106, my only comment is that we have switched from lumens to watts on the outside lights.
You get different number of lumens per watts depending on whether you're incandescent, fluorescent, contact fluorescent, metal
or lead.
Craig Benedict: We can convert that.
Rachel Hawkins Phelps: The recently installed lights at the Orange County Parks and Recreation tennis courts are they
conforming to these standards. There is a sign that states the lights have to be out by 11:00 P.M.
9
42
Approved 11/4/09
Craig Benedict: I don't personally know that but I will research that.
Mark Marcoplos: I think we need a chart that says xlumens = x foot candles = x watts so we all know the measurements we are
using and so they public knows. Beyond all this, my basic experience, I look at church lights on all night long. I am not sure we
can regulate but it is a total waste of energy. Sometimes I drive around and see the big lights at houses. Something is wrong
there; we are using way more energy than we need. It has become very apparent that we cannot go on this way using this type
of energy. Digital signs on the highways should have some kind of high tax. This is a great opportunity to educate the public.
Judith Wegner: My impression is that some of the utilities companies are trying to help people get focused around that. Didn't
we have a discussion about energy during the comp plan?
Craig Benedict: Energy and we had a discussion about drive through facilities. I think it was the interest of this board and the
Board of County Commissioners to talk about education first and then regulation.
Larry Wright: I have talked with a Planning Commissioner and a lecturer and what each tried to drive home is that light
ordinances have to be enforceable and hold up in court. This is why I brought this [research summary] here. Athens-Clarke
County [GA] just adopted their lighting ordinance. The purpose is a little different.
Judith Wegner: This was a very fruitful discussion. Craig, thank you for your presentation tonight.
Earl McKee: Would anyone else be interested in when or if we take a tour to Cedar Grove to go come bade at or about dark. I
think it would be beneficial for us to go as a group.
Craig Benedict: Tina, would you check on OPT bus? What do you think about before the November meeting?
Tina Love: OPT needs two weeks notice.
Judith Wegner: You may want to invite a few of the Board of County Commissioners.
MOTION made by Jeffrey Schmitt to ask the Planning Staff to come back at the next meeting with modifications of the draft
ordinance in keeping with the discussion tonight. Seconded by Lany Wright.
VOTE: Unanimous
10
.s~- 7
DRAFT
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
NOVEMBER 4, 2009
REGULAR MEETING
Members Present: Brian Crawford, At-Large-Eno Township; May Becker, At-Large -Chapel Hill Township;
Rachel Phelps Hawkins, Hillsborough Township Representative; Peter Hallenbeck, At-Large -Cheeks Township;
Mark Marcoplos, At-Large -Bingham Township; Earl McKee, Little River Township Representative; Judith Wegner,
Bingham Township Representative; Larry Wright, At-Large-Cedar Grove Township; Tommy McNeill, Eno Township
Representative
Members Absent: Samantha Cabe, Chapel Hill Township Representative; Jeffrey Schmitt, Cedar Grove Township
Representative; Mary Bobbitt-Cooke, Cheeks Township Representative;
Staff Present: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Perdita Holtr, Planning Systems Coordinator; Michael Harvey,
Zoning Administration; Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II
Agenda item 7: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Relating to Outdoor Lighting
To continue review and make a recommendation to the BOCC on this proposed text amendment.
heard at the August 24, 2009 Quarterly Public Hearing and discussed at the October 7 Planning
Board meeting.
Presenter: Michael Harvey
Michael Harvey: With the abstract I tried to cover some of the basic questions posed at the October 7 regular meeting
as well as the public hearing. For example we were asked to provide a table or other similar information outlining the
different wattages per bulb type and the amount of light generated by each to provide the board with some
comparisons. You will note that on page 3 of the abstract, we have included a table with basic information and we did
utilize this table to specifically spell out why were not using wattage.
You will also note that we have tried to answer some of your basic questions, what is a lumen, what is afoot-candle, in
an effort to justify the proposed regulations as presented at the public hearing.
Unfortunately, in developing this amendment, we utilized lighting data recorded in permit's tracking system and data
from non-residential that occurred prior to my involvement in the county. When we drafted our regulations, specifically
those pertaining to the lumen cap, we were surprised that our figures were so low White they were low, they were
consistent with detailed observations referenced by past staff on approved permits. Unfortunately, staff has
determined that this data was improperly entered and as a result, our estimates were wrong. As a result our
recommended lumen cap limits are wrong. As a result, staff is now recommending. that the proposed lumen cap be
eliminated from this Ordinance amendment package as the data utilized to generate the proposed limit was flawed.
I should also point out that the majority of the comments and recommended modifications proposed by the Planning
Board at their October 7 regular meeting cannot, at least in my mind, be introduced at this time. It is my opinion that
the majority of these comments are inconsistent with the legal advertisement detailing what amendments would occur
with this action.
For example, several recommendations on new definitions were made. While staff thinks that the entire definition
section needs re-tooling, we did not advertise any modifications to these. As a result it is my opinion that we cannot
amend the definitions. The public has not had an opportunity to review or comment on the proposed modifications. I
have included a copy of the legal ad for your review to provide additional detail on what was advertised as the overall
purpose of this proposed amendment. Baring a new public hearing, staff is left with modifying the Ordinance iin a
manner that is consistent with the legal ad.
The majority of the recommended changes ought to be able to occur with the development of the UDO.
The final draft of the UDO is slated to be presented at the August 2010 Quarterly Public Hearing. To get to that stage,
43
44
DRAFT
56 we will begin hosting initial outreach meetings and begin to identify, address, and analyze what inconsistencies and
57 provisions of the existing zoning subdivision, erosion control, flood damage preventions, amending storm water
58 regulations need to be modified.
59
60 We are drafting the proposed revised sections of the various land regulations for incorporation in the UDO. We are in
61 process of receivership proposals from consultants for the UDO. From January to March or April we will be producing
62 two drafts of the UDO for the general public, advisory board and Planning Board with final draft for review prior to the
63 August 2010 Quarterly Public Hearing. During Task 2 the consultant will be updating information.
64
65 It is through this process that I recommend we address the majority of the board's comments on lighting changes and
66 that we recommend the board moves forward with the proposed amendments as presented within the abstract minus
67 the proposed lumen cap.
68
69 Larry Wright: With the planning staff, I think there should be some accommodation because you are short staffed, what
70 is the pressure of having these time limits and you know your staff load but I think this is something that the BOCC
71 should step back and say that we want it but you have a lot on your plate. Going through the Comprehensive Plan and
72 Buckhorn Vllage at the same time, I felt like I could not really concentrate on the comprehensive Plan because there
73 was so much work. Are we doing this who thing for one meeting or a couple of meetings? 1 don't know what this
74 means for our schedule.
75
76 Michael Harvey: Our plan is that January through March to provide the various advisory boards with drafts of the
77 proposed modifications, public comments, etc. to give you that necessary time to review and offer comment. You will
78 basically be reviewing this document beginning at your January meeting through July.
79
80 We are not going to final press until after we get some comments from various advisory boards and you are key to
81 this. I understand what happened with the Comprehensive Plan and the Buckhom project and I would be lying if I said
82 this was not going to be major work and if a major project comes through we may have to reassess where we are in
83 this process.
84
85 We have set a goal for ourselves and so has the BOCC. Staff has been chomping at the bit to make some serious
86 changes to the existing ordinances and address some previously identified problems. The regulations are severely out
87 of date and there are so many contradictions that it makes it hard for staff to properly enforce.
88
89 I appreciate the fact that you see that the department is understaffed. Our goals and objectives, with respect to
90 completing the UDO project, are based on getting some of these vacant staff positions refilled The County
91 Commissioners know that. If it comes down to the fact that we cannot meet this goal based on curzent staff levels or
92 workloads then it will have to be a severe reassessment of where we are on this project. We have tried to articulate
93 that to the elected officials.
94
95 Larry Wright: You did articulate it and all they did was hand you more work.
96
97 Craig Benedict: We are going to have a calendar of events as to what it will take January through August to get this
98 single project done so you can see our project. What happened in the Comprehensive Plan process is the advisory
99 board input was coming late and so we need to coral that into an organized manner. We are being careful of what we
100 add to the UDO framework. I think there will be a tendency for some to want to change development processes.
101 Some things are not on the table. As we mentioned in the Monday night meeting was kind of a joint advisory board to
102 talk about the UDO so we can talk about the UDO. Based on that meeting we will say what this entails and what it
103 doesn't entail.
104
105 Judith Wegner: I wonder'rf it might be advisable to say at the beginning we have a Phase 1 that will do this and there
106 are other things that can be put into the bucket for Phase II.
107
108 Craig Benedict: The consultant will put in those placeholders and we will actually explain.
109
110 Judith Wegner: I am a bit confused about what we are being asked to do tonight. I have three questions on that; one
111 is that we have lingering issues and we need to move forward but it seems to be confusing to the public. Sounds like
45
DRAFT
112 there are three phases: one is to take out the lumens; take out any comments, however good they were from the
113 Planning Board; and send forward something. We want to do something. The other possibility is to wait and get the
114 lumens straight. I don't understand why when the Planning Board comments, why those cannot be addressed in the
115 Public Hearing. You say there are two options; one is to say we are not going to recommend action until we get the
116 lumens straight. I don't understand why the Planning Board ~mments get put to the side because they were pretty
117 compelling.
118
119 Michael Harvey: Quite Rankly the Planning Board comments were in sections that were not advertised to being
120 modified. There were several modifications, definitions as an example, and since the legal ad didn't advertise that we
121 were modifying definitions, they cannot be included.
122
123 Judith Wegner: Hypothetically, what if instead of having to do something now, if we recommend there be another
124 notice including that and including lumen caps and then let there be another round and tie it all off together.
125
126 Michael Harvey: I would be more comfortable if that is the Planning Board's wish that you actually forward a
127 rewmmendation to the BOCC that no action be taken on this proposal at this time -and that lighting amendments will
128 be addressed within the UDO. The reason for this is that this board will start getting numerous proposed modifications
129 to the zoning and subdivision regulations over next few months. I think that it will be confusing to be processing an
130 ordinance amendment at the same time you are reviewing all development regulations, including additional
131 amendments to the aforementioned lighting section. To avoid confusion we do everything from a comprehensive
132 standpoint.
133
134 Judith Wegner: From what I just said or holding it until the UDO.
135
136 Michael Harvey: I think we hold it until the UDO.
137
138 Judith Wegner: Your advice is to go with option B.
139
140 Michael Harvey: I would prefer that the lumen cap be deleted as it currently has been proposed and the Planning
141 Board allow the modifications that are currently identified within the resolution to move forward and that we incorporate
142 what the Planning Board is recommending into the UDO provisions for future review in early 2010.
143
144 Judith Wegner: If I were a citizen affected by this and I were having to understand what is going on and I get one
145 change in the ordinance and then I will see something about lumens sometime and then something else in the UDO, I
146 would find that strange and very confounding from my point of view.
147
148 Michael Harvey: I see what you mean but unfortunately we did this amendment to address a specific concern brought
149 to the BOCC and we drafted an amendment to address that one concern knowing we would have to come back to do
150 additional work on this section anyway we were given the impression they wanted to see this amendment.
151
152 Judith Wegner: This is the outdoor sports issues which is pretty pressing for the folks being affected by it.
153
154 Michael Harvey: Yes.
155
156 Larry Wright: If it is for the outdoor sports then I don't understand why, in the minutes, on line 466 where we listened to
157 Ms. Shields and this was with respect to the lights but I am not dealing specifically with her issue but the spirit of the
158 issue. Then Judith said she thought the points were helpful. He walks around the property line and there are disiduos
159 trees and what we are talking about is light trespass into the property. Then you go to line 514 where Earl makes a
160 statement and Jeff follows up and thinks there should be something more inclusive where you can go over the property
161 line and measure the light trespass. Then on page 36, B1, you are still going along the property line.
162
163 Michael Harvey: There is no current definition of light trespass.
164
165 Larry Wright: Yes is it.
166
167 Michael Harvey: Not currently within the existing ordinance. You are going to ask me to amend the ordinance to
46
DRAFT
168 include a provision saying we can't have a light trespass when I don't have a definition. The second concern is that
169 fact that there is glare on anyone's property. I have been on Ms. Shield's property taking light readings. It is negligible.
170 There would not be a violation even if I used the current standards of the ordinance to goon her property.
171
172 Larry Wright: I am talking about the spirit of this. I go to work at 5:30 AM in the morning and the Durham Bulls have
173 their lights on at 5:30 AM. You can see the glare from that property.
174
175 Michael Harvey: To incorporate what you are suggesting would require amendments to sections that I am not
176 authorized to amend which is why I didn't include it. I did like the definition you did on light trespass and it should be
177 part of our arsenal as far as regulations on acceptable lighting levels but my concern is if I start meddling with how I am
178 going to determine what is in violation and not without a definitional framework that this board will be busier and so will
179 the Board of Adjustment because my interpretations will continuously reviewed because there is no standard for me to
180 base it on.
181
182 Larry Wright: Just saying that measurements will be taken, not just at the property line but as Jeff Schmitt said, why
183 can't you go inside the property line?
184
185 Michael Harvey: First of all, I don't go on anyone's property without permission and if I don't get permission I am
186 holding a third party subject to a standard that I can't verify.
187
188 Larry Wright: What happens if I have a complaint and I ask you to measure it by my house, would you do that?
189
190 Michael Harvey: Of course, you have given me permission to measure from your house.
191
192 Craig Benedict: 1 would like to make a statement with what has been happening over the years regarding the
193 regulations. The BOCC based on public input ask us to narrowly fix something within the ordinance, we advertise an
194 urban versus rural standard and it is very narrow and we have public input and BOCC input that is not addressed
195 within that legal advertisement then staff says they are great ideas but we are working within this narrow area and we
196 cannot unless we re advertise. We are willing to re advertise and look at more comprehensively and we think this
197 tweak would improve it in the interim until we can look at the comprehensive look at the UDO. They fix little parts and
198 don't fix other parts.
199
200 Pete Hallenbeck: Basically this came about because of some specific concern and the BOCC ask what can we do
201 about it, you propose what you can given limitations and you are basically asking can the board accept this with the
202 understanding we are going to take this whole problem and role it into the UDO. That is the best use of time and deals
203 with what you have been charged with.
204
205 Michael Harvey: That is an excellent summarization. There are basically two options; go along with what staff thinks is
206 acceptable and roll this into a UDO or you recommend nothing be done and tell the BOCC we have too many
207 questions and concerns and we think the ordinance needs to be looked at comprehensively as part of the UDO so we
208 are not recommending approval of anything at this time.
209'
210 Pete Hallenbeck: I understand both. A citizen was concerned about something and the BOCC thought enough of that
211 to charge the board with it. One geeky tidbit, on the chart on page 25, they have some led lighting numbers on those
212 that is happening and that is mostly of interest because they are of the assorts of efficiency of the high efficiency bulbs
213 but they can have lifetimes in the 50 hour range which can make it easier for businesses to adopt them because of the
214 reduced maintenance costs.
215
216 Michael Harvey: You are correct but we used what was available from Dark Sky.
217
218 MOTION made by Judith Wegner to opt for Option A on the bottom on page 27 which would be leave out the proposed
219 modifications about the lumen cap and proceed subsequently to deal with both the additional Planning Board
220 recommendations and the lumen count as part of the UDO process. Seconded by Pete Hallenbeck.
221 VOTE: 8-1 (Marcoplos)
222
223 Michael Harvey: I would like to ask one point of clarification so I can keep my schedule straight. Do you want to start
47
DRAFT
224 with the lighting?
225
226 Judith Wegner: For the UDO. In effect we may be halfway done with lighting for purposes for the UDO so if there a
227 pressing point to get some things in place but I don't want to dictate it.
228
229 Michael Harvey: If is your intent to continue to review this in January.
230
231 Judith Wegner: It doesn't have to come first.
232
233 Larry Wright: It would be nice if it did.
234
235 Judith Wegner: I don't know how the UDO will be organized.
236
237 Michael Harvey: Because we are going to be recommending, as part of the UDO that all definitions be removed from
238 the ordinance in and of itself and put in a central definitions sections..
239
240 Judith Wegner: Which you will do last?
241
242 Michael Harvey: No. We will look at those first.
243
244 Mark Marcoplos: Just to clarify, we are still going to discuss all this but we are saying lets go along with this strategy of
245 discussing it and not worrying about the lumens.
246
247 Michael Harvey: This board has come up with several suggestions and recommendations that will come back to you to
248 modify. The motion will fix the inconsistency I have of what is required to be submitted, start addressing the problem
249 and providing a graphic example of what we mean by a foot candle plan and an isometric data plan.
250
251 Judith Wegner: I thought we were saying send attachment 1 forward and I thought we had gone through it line by line.
252 If there are additional revisions we may need to hold off until the main motion or else that will be the main motion
253 subject to amendments to revise the text.
254
255 Brian Crawford: Are you revising the text?
256
257 Judith Wegner: I have a feeling Mark wanted to move in that direction.
258
259 Mark Marcoplos: This motion would take this and send it to the BOCC and we would not discuss it anymore?
260
261 Judith Wegner: Right.
262
263 Brian Crawford: When you say this, do you mean this one item?
264
265 Mark Marcoplos: This while attachment number 1.
266
267 Brian Crawford: We are only recommending this change.
268
269 Mark Marcoplos: Everything is still on the table.
270
271 Judith Wegner: Is there some concern we should go back over line byline what is underlined? I know we did that
272 before but maybe people have reviewed it further.
273
274 Brian Crawford: I don't think we need to go back through.
275
276 Mark Marcoplos: There are two things I have questions about that I can ask later.
277
278 Craig: When we proceed with the UDO if there is a section that you have questions about that you advertise those
279. sections.
48
DRAFT
280
281 Mark Marcoplos: I think lighting flagpoles at night is a waste. That is in here. I would like to have that discussed and if
282 I can't do that anymore I don't want to support the motion.
283
284 Craig Benedict: It can be revisited later.
285
286 Brian Crawford: The only thing we are doing right now is what was advertised.
287
288 Mark Marcoplos: It was advertised for what purpose?
289
290 Michael Harvey: On page 2, a copy of the legal ad is there.
291
292 Judith Wegner: The light on the flagpole issues on page 37 would be under K. All that is happened with that is that it
293 was re-lettered because of other things that were advertised?
294
295 Michael Harvey: Correct.