Browse
Search
OCPB agenda 030216
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Agendas
>
2016
>
OCPB agenda 030216
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/8/2018 11:45:03 AM
Creation date
3/8/2018 11:41:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/2/2016
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
OCPB minutes 030216
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Planning Board\Minutes\2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Article 6: Development Standards <br /> Section 6.12: Signs <br /> <br /> <br />Orange County, North Carolina – Unified Development Ordinance Page 6-82 <br /> <br />(H)(F) Property number signs not exceeding two four square foot in area with no more than 2 <br />individual signs allowed per propertya and bearing only address numbers of premises or <br />other identification of premises not having commercial connotations;9 <br />(I)(G) Holiday decorations in season that do not contain or display a commercial message;9 <br />(J)(H) Signs on trash receptacles, indicating the owner or party responsible for maintenance; <br />(K)(I) Hazardous chemical identification/notification signs on residential and non-residential <br />structures; <br />(L)(J) Signs on newspaper boxes; <br />(M)(K) Private drive signs, one per drive entrance, not exceeding two square feet in area, with <br />the message content limited to the words "Private Drive" and the address of any <br />residences utilizing the private roadway;9 <br />(N)(L) Security and warning signs posted on private property warning the public against <br />trespassing, or similar messages, provided that any such sign does 9not exceeding two <br />square feet in area; and. <br />(O) Political Signs, in accordance with the following standards:9 <br />(1) Political Signs are allowed in all zoning districts. <br />(2) A Zoning Compliance Permit shall not be required to allow for the placement of a <br />political sign on private property. <br />(3) There shall be no limit to the number of political signs that can be placed on <br />private property so long as the placement of these signs complies with the <br />provisions of this Ordinance and the signs do not create a public safety hazard. <br />(4) Within residential zoning districts, political signs shall not exceed nine square feet <br />in area or four feet in height. <br />(5) Within non-residential zoning districts, political signs shall not exceed the <br />maximum allowable sign area permitted for freestanding signs. <br />(6) Political signs shall only be erected 90 days prior to the established date of a <br />general election, school board election, referendum, special election, primary, or <br />other similar political activity. <br />(7) Political signs shall be removed within 21 days after an election. <br />(8) Political signs shall be allowed within rights-of-way of the State highway system <br />only in accordance with State law. <br />(9) Political signs shall not be allowed on telephone poles, utility poles, trees, other <br />similar natural objects, and other signs or sign structures. <br />6.12.6 Prohibited Signs <br />The following signs are prohibited in all zoning districts: <br />(A) Advertising signs Signs resembling or mimicking traffic signals, traffic signs, emergency <br />vehicles’ flashing lights, non-governmental sanctioned signs utilizing the words ‘stop’, <br />‘slow’, ‘caution’, ‘danger’, 10or any sign that is likely to be misconstrued by the traveling <br />public as being official governmental signs or emergency warnings, or which by their <br />distracting nature create a hazard to motorists; <br /> <br />9 Again, language is being eliminated to ensure compliance with the recent Reed versus Town of Gilbert US <br />Supreme Court decision. <br />10 In consultation with the Attorney’s office any regulation of wording would be inconsistent with the findings of <br />Reed versus Gilbert and ought to be eliminated. <br /> 25 25
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.