Minutes - 20090824 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

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. 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.