Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
50 <br /> residential project on a larger parcel of property. <br /> The amendment was previously also attempting to revise existing regulations to <br /> address a US Supreme Court decision. After reviewing the issue with the County <br /> Attorney's office, work these revisions will be delayed to afford additional review time. <br /> 2. Analysis <br /> As required under Section 2.8.5 of the UDO, the Planning Director is required to: <br /> `cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based upon that analysis, <br /> prepare a recommendation for consideration by the Planning Board and the Board of <br /> County Commissioners'. <br /> There has been an increase in inquires and interest with respect to development of <br /> large-scale commercial operations within the County. <br /> Current sign regulations limit the total allowable square footage for freestanding and <br /> wall signs for most non-residential general use zoning districts to 32 square feet (8 <br /> feet by 4 feet in size) regardless of the property's location, size of parcel, or amount <br /> of road frontage. The `one-size fits all' sign limit may, in fact, be a deterrent to non- <br /> residential development. <br /> There is also a noticeable lack of clarity within the UDO addressing what constitutes <br /> a blinking/flashing sign, or digital signage with scrolling messages, leading to <br /> enforcement concerns. <br /> The amendments are necessary to address current concerns over advertising needs for <br /> non-residential development on larger parcels within the County and clarify the prohibition <br /> on the use of blinking/flashing signage by incorporating new definitions into the UDO. <br /> As the Board is aware from past discussion, recent court decisions impact the <br /> County's sign regulations. In the Reid versus Town of Gilbert US Supreme Court <br /> case, the court found sign regulations cannot be seen as allowing/disallowing a sign <br /> based on its content. For more information on the case and its potential impacts <br /> please refer to the following: http://canons.sog.unc.edu/?p=8167. <br /> While work had commenced on amendments designed to address the impacts of Gilbert, <br /> the Attorney's office has recommended additional time be allotted to the review and <br /> processing same. Staff will be bringing forward a new Amendment Outline Form in the <br /> near future outlining the timeline for completion and review of these revisions but is <br /> proceeding with an amendment package to address the concern(s) detailed herein. <br /> 3. Comprehensive Plan Linkage (i.e. Principles, Goals and Objectives) <br /> Land Use Goal 4: Land development regulations, guidelines, techniques, and/or <br /> incentives that promote the integrated achievement of all Comprehensive Plan goals. <br /> 4. New Statutes and Rules <br /> Proposed amendments are designed to offer clarity on existing regulations and <br /> expand advertising opportunities for large parcels of property. Future amendments <br /> will be necessary to address the impacts of the Reed versus Town of Gilbert US <br /> Supreme Court case. <br /> 2 <br />