CC Minutes 05/13/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CASSELBERRY CITY COMMISSION Minutes of May 13,2002 - Regular Meeting Page 7 oft7 NOTIFICATION, AND PENALTIES; AMENDING SUBSECTION D, GLARE AND LIGHTING STANDARDS FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT, OF ARTICLE XVII, NUISANCE ABATEMENT OF CHAPTER III, PERFORMANCE CRITERIA TO REFERENCE NEW LIGHTING STANDARDS; AMENDING SUBSECTION B.2C(ii), PROPOSED OF SECTION 4-19 .3, INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN SITE PLAN, OF ARTICLE XVIII, SITE PLAN REVIEW, OF CHAPTER IV, SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES, TO REFERENCE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN GUIDELINES; AMENDING SUBSECTION V (20), STREET LIGHTING, OF SECTION 4-19.2, REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS AND DESIGN CRITERIA, OF ARTICLE XIX, SUBDIVISION, OF CHAPTER IV, SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES, TO REFERENCE PHOTOMETRIC GUIDELINES AND LIGHT POLE LOCATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, CONFLICTS AND EFFECTIVE DATE." The Notice of Public Hearing relative to Ordinance 02-1046 was published in the Orlando Sentinel on April 2S, 2002. Ordinance 02-1046 was passed on first reading on March 25,2002 and the first Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Orlando Sentinel on March IS, 2002. Mr. Wells stated Ordinance 02-1046 provides for an exterior lighting code to limit the amount oflight that may be used to illuminate a commercial site, and will require businesses to meet the new code after a five- year amortization period. The Planning & Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency reviewed and recommended approval of Ordinance 02-1046 at its February 27, 2002 meeting by a vote of6 - O. The City Attorney and staff recommended approval of Ordinance 02-1046 on second reading. Mayor Pronovost asked if there was anyone in the audience that wished to speak either for or against Ordinance 02- I 046. 1) Aaron Gorovitz, Attorney with the law firm of Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A., 215 North Eola, Orlando, stated he was representing BP Amoco. Mr. Gorovitz further stated his client was in favor ofthe ordinance but had two minor concerns regarding foot-candles and the fact that Ordinance 02-1 046 is based upon the Illumination Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) Lighting Handbook, 2000 ed., noting those guidelines have since been revised in 200 1.Mr. Gorovitzrequested that 2 (a) of page 9 of the Ordinance be changed allowing no more than a maximum of 50 foot-candles with an average illuminance of30 foot-candles. Mr. Gorovitz also requested that C(l)(b) be modified to allow the use of a Light Loss Factor (LLF) or have the light measured 120 days after installation. Mr. Gorovitz stated his client had scheduled an expert to testify on their behalf regarding LLF, but was unable to make the meeting, and requested the Commission consider continuing Ordinance 02-1046 so that the expert could address the City Commission regarding LLF. Mr. Gorovitz emphasized that his client's concerns were safety issues. 2) Lurent Pellerin, 674 North Cliff Avenue, Deltona, Chairman of the Dark Sky Advisory Committee for the Central Florida Astronomical Society, spoke in favor of Ordinance 02- 1046. Mr. Pellerin noted that different lights have different LLF time frames, which could become cumbersome for staff to keep track of and enforce.