Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
"And also, I would just like to suggest that on 6.31.9c: I think you want to say, "shall not <br />exceed one hour after the end of the event." <br />"Thank you." <br />Moses Carey, Jr. "I heard one of the speakers speak and he was encouraging, he was <br />admiring the way the existing lighting or amortization of existing lighting was dealt with in the <br />Ordinance, but I heard someone, one of our Planning Board members ask about an <br />Amortization Schedule rather than the way we've dealt with it in here. And I think I heard you <br />speak favorably of the way it was dealt with in here. <br />"Does any of the other speakers have any comments on whether one or the other of <br />those approaches..." <br />Nicole Gooding - Ray "If you could come to the podium to do that. I'm sorry." <br />Ron Osborne: "Ideally, an amortized period of replacement would be the perfect world, that <br />would be a wonderful thing. My personal feeling is that it is much more important to get a good <br />ordinance on the books at this stage of our development. Given Duke Power's concerns, I don't <br />see any of those issues that are not easy to work out. If you start reaching into people's <br />pocketbooks and with fixtures that they've had over a number of years and pushing them, you're <br />going to get some vocal opposition. To me it's much more important that we contain the growth <br />of bad lighting in Orange County. Time will take care of itself. You know that the International <br />Dark Skies made a huge effort in Manhattan, which most people would think is an impossible <br />task and they didn't even do it by retrofitting. But what happens is that in Manhattan because of <br />the aggressive retailing environment, facades are redone; often, store windows are redesigned; <br />storefronts are redesigned, and every time it is renovated, it has to conform. Within ten years <br />they did an unbelievable job of reducing vertical light pollution out of Manhattan. Of course, the <br />problem is everything around Manhattan is still non-conforming. That was the reason I said <br />that. Not that it would not be ideal to do that, but, my personal feeling is that it is very important <br />to get this an the books and functional, and protect us from what could happen in a rapid <br />developing period without any ordinance." <br />Moses Carev. Jr. "Sa you don't think we have a perfect world here?" <br />Ron Osborne "No." (Laughed} <br />Moses Carev. Jr. "Thank you." <br />Ron Osborne "If I can make a brief comment on your question, as well. The suggestion I would <br />like to propose is that the Ordinance address all new installations initially, and, then, maybe be <br />revisited in incremental steps to see, if, based on its efficacy, does it need to go back and revisit <br />retrofitting. <br />"The retrofitting issue is problematic from several standpoints. Number one is, just as it <br />has been mentioned; it's going to get into someone's pocketbook. Someone's light goes out and <br />then all of a sudden you inform them, `Oh, by the way, now we're going to have to up that, <br />fixture or whatever. It's going to be an increased cost. I think the important thing to do would be <br />to stop the bleeding based on the new installations. And, then, over time, I think that the <br />grandfathered or the existing installations would probably be addressed, because eventually <br />they do wear out. Eventually lightning strikes and things hit things. But what we would desire <br />