Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
24 <br />• The central objection(s) to the proposed MTC district appeared to focus on the required <br />one hundred (100) foot buffer from roadways as too excessive and that the district <br />represented a `taking' of property without just compensation. <br />SIGN RESTRICTIONS: <br />• During the same meeting, staff presented a separate amendment designed to modify <br />existing sign regulations relating to the placement of outdoor advertising sings (i.e. <br />billboards) within the MTC overlay district. <br />• The amendment limited the overall size and type of sign that could be erected within the <br />MTC overlay district <br />• The amendment also banned the erection of new outdoor advertising signs within the <br />MTC. <br />• The minutes do not provide a concrete rationale for the recommended ban but staff <br />believes the impetuous for the recommendation was based on maintaining the integrity of <br />the buffer, and the visual aesthetic quality, of major transportation corridors. <br />BOARD ACTION: <br />• These amendments were approved in June of 1984 (please see attached minutes) <br />• There have been various amendments to the MTC standards over the years, including: <br />a. On April 4, 1988 an amendment was approved to the intent section of the MTC <br />district, <br />b. On April 2, 1990 an amendment was approved re- numbering the MTC regulations <br />to make room for proposed Ordinance amendments. There were no modifications <br />to existing regulations within this amendment. <br />RELATED REGULATIONS: <br />• There have been additional amendments to existing development regulations dealing with <br />sign height and size within the MTC overlay district versus other areas and relationships <br />to the EDD Design Manual. <br />