Orange County NC Website
15 <br />The rationale for the request is that these concepts aze easier to understand and <br />represent, in both graphic and statistical form, and aze recognized as a universal tool by <br />developers and planners to gauge development intensity. <br />The applicant is proposing a maximum floor area ratio of point thirty (.30) and a <br />maximum building height of six (6) stories. <br />Staff Comment: Staff had originally requested that the applicant supply a detailed <br />breakdown on the various composite ratios outlined within Section 2.3 of the Design <br />Manual to justify modifying the standazd. As part of this analysis, staff has requested <br />that the applicant demonstrate how the proposed new standards will achieve a more <br />desirable result for this project. <br />This information has not yet been provided. <br />• Staff recommends that the applicant be required to include in its Waiver Two (2) <br />request the necessary documentation showing the project's Impervious Surface Ration <br />(ISR); Building Volume Ratio (BVR), and Landscape Volume Ratio (LVR) and <br />showing how the proposed new standards will represent a more desirable solution. <br />While staff concedes that the proposed new standard is a more universally accepted <br />method for dete fining the intensity of a particular development, staff does not have <br />sufficient information to make the determination that the new standard will yield a <br />more desirable result as required under Section 7.5.4 and 7.21.1 of the Ordinance. <br />3. Waiver Three (3) as outlined on page twenty-three (23) of the application reading as <br />follows: <br />`The applicant requests a waiver from Section 2.4 Environmental Factors - <br />Grading and Erosion Control -Planting Area Slopes of the EDD Design Manual ' <br />The applicant is requesting the ability to utilize a maximum slope factor of 2:1 rather <br />than the listed maximum slope of 3:1. Within the request the applicant indicates that <br />the existing grade of the property would require `unnecessary grading and increase the <br />total footprint of disturbance' if the maximum 3:1 slope ratio was adhered to. The <br />applicant is requesting the ability to use a slope ratio of 2:1 or flatter in an effort to <br />avoid unnecessary disturbance on the property and make use of the natural shape of the <br />land with minimal grading. <br />Staff Comment: Staff supports the design solution in principle from the standpoint that <br />it will allow for the developer to utilize the existing natural slope of the property and . <br />require the minimal grading of the property. <br />Staff does not support granting' a blanket `waiver' and believes the proposed design <br />solution should be considered in the context of asite-specific development plan <br />showing grading limits and stormwater data. <br />Staff recommends that the Board(s) consider allowing for modifications to the grading <br />and erosion control standards outlined within Section 2.4 of the EDD Design Manual <br />only when the applicant can demonstrate on asite-specific development plan the need <br />to, and benefits of, the proposed design solution. <br />