Agenda - 01-24-2013 - 5a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7 1 - Eliminate references to `watts' of a light fixture and ensure proper use of 2 terminology through the Section. 3 WHAT THIS PROPOSAL DOES: 4 • Add new definitions of light trespass, mercury vapor luminaire, light pollution, etc. to 5 Article 10 as recommended during Phase 1 of the UDO. 6 • Eliminate multiple definitions of the same term within Article 10 of the UDO. For 7 example we currently have `lamp' defined twice within the UDO. There is no need for 8 this duplication. 9 • Address concerns expressed by Orange County Department of Environment Agriculture 10 Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) over height restrictions for athletic field lights. 11 ATHLETIC FIELD LIGHT ISSUE: 12 • 2 poles aimed at same aiming point but note difference in impact of spill and glare on 13 adjacent properties. Restricting mounting height aggravate, not improve, the impact of 14 spill and glare light 15 ORC COMMENTS: 16 • Ordinance Review Committee (ORC) meets to review this item on September 5, 2012. 17 • Made several recommendations with respect to modifying draft amendment package. 18 • Modifications were incorporated into draft text amendment by staff. 19 • ORC expressed concern over increasing outdoor athletic field light height limit but 20 understood the problem. Asked BOCC and staff for guidance. 21 STAFF COMMENTS: 22 • Proposed amendments make existing regulations easier to follow. 23 • Proposal addresses those items identified during initial development of the UDO. 24 • Staff sees compromise with respect to increasing height limits of athletic field lights 25 RECOMMENDATION: 26 1. Receive the proposed amendments. 27 2. Conduct the public hearing and accept public, BOCC, and Planning Board comment on 28 the proposed amendments. 29 3. Refer the matter to the Planning Board with a request that a recommendation be 30 returned to the BOCC in time for the January 24, 2013 BOCC regular meeting.