ORD-2003-004 Amend Article 6 to establish Outdoor Lighting Standard

Browse Search

at night when the load is down, we've still got that generation available at really no extra cost. And using it for illumination actually offsets the cost during peak times. It's kind of like building a four -lane road to get to Kenan Stadium but you only need it ten times a year, but you've got that road there and it would be nice if you could use it every day of the year and offset the cost of it, and that is how lighting is viewed. And again the flat rate and the maintenance cost are considered in what the Commission approves for us to build. "In closing, I would like to say that Duke Power, and I, myself, would be glad to continue the dialogue with the County and other interested parties. We appreciate the opportunity we've had so far. We look forward to getting an effective, and simple and, ultimately, workable Ordinance." A. Nicole Gooding -Ray "Is there anyone who was not signed up to speak who would like to speak to this issue at this time? OK." Barry Jacobs "I would like to make some comments. First, unless I missed it, I didn't see anything in here about subdivision signs, which are basically advertising signs. We don't light our street signs. I don't see why we would allow the lighting of subdivision signs. "I would like to second Mr. Bryan's comment. I think it would be probably more in keeping with Duke Power recommendation to have a simple, cleaner way of looking at fixtures on a periodic basis. I don't know how that affects the exemptions. C, if you are talking about publicly funded streetlights or if you are talking about all streetlights. I'm not sure we have control over publicly funded streetlights, but we do have over privately funded streetlights. Probably the grossest light polluter in central Orange County is DOT's new interchange at Efland, which you can, I would think you could see from satellites going around the earth. And I would hope that when we get to the point that we have something adopted that we bring this to the attention of our Division Engineer and express our concerns because that's a real shame what they've done right in the middle of the County. "And another egregious example would be the bank as you are coming into Hillsborough on Old 86. 1 wonder if under 6.31.11 — Lighting On Buildings and Landscaping - if you could just review that section and think about that bank, and think if this Ordinance adequately covers the gluttony that's involved in the bathing of that building in unnecessary light all night. "And also, I would just like to suggest that on 6.31.9c: I think you want to say, "shall not exceed one hour after the end of the event." "Thank you." Moses Carey, Jr. "I heard one of the speakers speak and he was encouraging, he was admiring the way the existing lighting or amortization of existing lighting was dealt with in the Ordinance, but I heard someone, one of our Planning Board members ask about an Amortization Schedule rather than the way we've dealt with it in here. And I think I heard you speak favorably of the way it was dealt with in here. "Does any of the other speakers have any comments on whether one or the other of those approaches..." Nicole Gooding — Ray "If you could come to the podium to do that. I'm sorry." Ron Osborne: " Ideally, an amortized period of replacement would be the perfect world, that would be a wonderful thing. My personal feeling is that it is much more important to get a good ordinance on the books at this stage of our development. Given Duke Power's concerns, I don't see any of those issues that are not easy to work out. If you start reaching into people's