Browse
Search
Planning Board agenda 020619
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Agendas
>
2019
>
Planning Board agenda 020619
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2019 11:52:05 AM
Creation date
2/15/2019 3:22:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/6/2019
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
17 <br /> 215 a day. If the first civil penalty is not paid in 10 days,the County Attorney's Office can take you to court and compel <br /> 216 compliance. <br /> 217 <br /> 218 Paul Guthrie commented that he believed it not to be good policy to enact something that is not enforceable. <br /> 219 <br /> 220 Michael Harvey stated that his belief is that this will be more enforceable than the current code. <br /> 221 <br /> 222 Michael Harvey advised the board that they will not be asked to approve this within the next month or two. He <br /> 223 commented that the process would be long and stated that he envisioned at least one more ORC session with the <br /> 224 board for drafts to be reviewed and commented on in preparation for a Planning Board Meeting. He stated that he <br /> 225 envisioned at least six months before action would be taken. <br /> 226 <br /> 227 Alex Gregory asked what issues Mr. Harvey thought the public might potentially have. <br /> 228 <br /> 229 Michael Harvey replied that he didn't see any adverse reaction other than the number of signs. <br /> 230 <br /> 231 Paul Guthrie recommending thinking about mail cart systems as they are federal property. <br /> 232 <br /> 233 Michael Harvey mentioned that since that is technically in the right of way and since it is federal property that he did <br /> 234 not believe that he had any enforcement or authority to begin with. <br /> 235 <br /> 236 Adam Beeman asked about electronic billboards. <br /> 237 <br /> 238 Michael Harvey mentioned that there are currently provisions on billboards and regulatory standards on how many <br /> 239 times they can change in a given 24-hour period. He stated that they are currently existing and will still exist in this <br /> 240 new ordinance. He remarked that time and duration could be regulated but not messages. <br /> 241 <br /> 242 Kim Piracci questioned why the signs were not under Dillion's Rule and why the state was not mandating what the <br /> 243 rules are. <br /> 244 <br /> 245 Michael Harvey replied that the state has actually said that the local government is going to adopt the regulatory <br /> 246 standards to address these issues, but they don't have to establish the parameters in which they do them. <br /> 247 <br /> 248 Michael Harvey asked if there were any other questions. <br /> 249 <br /> 250 David Blankfard asked if the ordinance would curtail or allow residential signage on their homes. <br /> 251 <br /> 252 Michael Harvey replied that if it is offensive language then we have the authority to address it, but stated that it would <br /> 253 be interesting to see how far the attorney's office goes in supporting what they consider to be non-content based <br /> 254 standards. He stated that turning the side of your house into a billboard would be a wall sign and is prohibited as <br /> 255 such. <br /> 256 Michael Harvey welcomed any further questions and then thanked the board. <br /> 257 <br /> 258 ORC was adjourned through consensus <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.