Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
6 <br /> 1 Michael Harvey made the following Power Point presentation: <br /> 2 <br /> 3 May 23, 2016 <br /> 4 Quarterly Public Hearinq <br /> 5 Item C-2 <br /> 6 Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment <br /> 7 Government-initiated amendments to the text of the UDO reqardinq signs. <br /> 8 Oranqe County Planninq Department <br /> 9 <br /> 10 BACKGROUND: <br /> 11 • Work began almost 1 year ago to develop new language allowing for larger signs under <br /> 12 certain circumstances and definitive standards on electronic displays; <br /> 13 • During this time period the US Supreme Court issued a ruling in Reid versus Town of <br /> 14 Gilbert impacting the regulation of signage; <br /> 15 • Staff began working to revise sign regulations to address findings of Gilbert. On advice <br /> 16 of the Attorney's office this work will be completed in a future amendment to allow more <br /> 17 time to review the true impacts of the Supreme Court decision. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 WHAT DOES AMENDMENT DO: <br /> 20 • Eliminates superfluous sign regulations contained in Section(s) 5.5.4 and 5.5.6 of the <br /> 21 UDO; <br /> 22 • Corrects identified grammatical errors and contradictory language in Section(s) 6.12.1 <br /> 23 and 6.12.3; <br /> 24 • Establishes standards defining what constitutes an electronic scrolling message sign in <br /> 25 Section 6.12.6; and <br /> 26 • Recommends the adoption of new standards allowing for larger signage within specific <br /> 27 non-residential zoning districts based on the size and road frontage of a parcel of <br /> 28 property. <br /> 29 <br /> 30 NOTES: <br /> 31 • Work will still need to be done to address the impact of the Gilbert US Supreme Court <br /> 32 • In coordination with the Attorney's office a new Comprehensive Plan and Unified <br /> 33 Development Ordinance Amendment Outline Form will be reviewed and acted upon by <br /> 34 the BOCC at an undetermined time. <br /> 35 • There is no anticipated timeframe for this work to be completed. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 NOTICE OF MODIFICAITON: <br /> 38 • E-mail notice sent on Friday May 20, 2016 of correction to Amendment package; <br /> 39 • Modification occurs on Page 69 of agenda packets involving recommended changes to <br /> 40 Section 6.12.3 General Requirements of the UDO currently reading as follows: <br /> 41 (F) Sign locations <br /> 42 (1) All signs shall be located outside the sight visibility triangle (see section <br /> 43 6.2.10) <br /> 44 (2) No sign, including supporting frames or base, shall be located within five feet <br /> 45 of a public right-of-way <br /> 46 (3) No sign may be attached, affixed, or painted upon any utility poles, <br /> 47 governmental signs, trees, rocks, or other similar natural object with the <br /> 48 public-right-of-way. <br /> 49 (4) No sign shall be permitted on the side street frontage of a corner lot if the lot <br /> 50 is located within 100 feet of a residential district. <br /> 51 <br /> 52 NOTICE OF MODIFICAITON: <br /> 53 • Staff was attempting to address old language deemed to be too confusing and ensure <br /> 54 enforceable standard. <br />