Agenda - 12-15-2020; 5-b - Zoning Atlas Amendment - Master Plan Development Conditional Zoning District (MPD-CZ) for Efland Station (formerly Beaver Crossing)

Browse Search

52 Kimley>>>Horn Page 9 Response: A total impervious surface limit of 62% is now proposed for the project, which is more restrictive than the maximum of 70% permitted under the UDO. Refer to Section 2-5.A.1 of the Narrative for details. vi. The Narrative indicates the Project will comply with the provision(s) of Section(s) 6.13 Stream Buffers and 6.21 Flood Regulations of the LIDO. This includes preserving required buffers around identified water features(i.e. streams,wetlands, floodplain, etc.)as defined in the UDO. Response: Comment noted. Additional language has been added to Section 2-5.13.5 of the Narrative to specify preservation of required buffers around identified water features where possible and Sheet 3.1 of the Rezoning Plans shows the buffers to be preserved. vii. The Narrative appears to indicate the Project will comply with the provision(s) of Section(s) 6.14 Stormwater and 6.15 Erosion Control of the LIDO. Orange County Erosion Control and Stormwater Management staffs are reviewing the proposed conditions. As a general observation: If it is your intention to make use of nutrient buy-down tools, the Narrative should contain language denoting same. Response: The Narrative has been revised to specify that water quality requirements will be met on site by SCMs or nutrient buy-down payments. Refer to Section 2-5.13.8.c.ii of the Narrative for details. viii. Staff encourages the applicant to use on-site ponds, designed to capture runoff, for irrigation purposes as detailed on page 22 of the Narrative. Response: The applicant will attempt to utilize onsite runoff to the greatest extent practical for irrigation purposes and to provide regional stormwater ponds that will be available to individual site developers for irrigation purposes. Refer to Section 2-5 of the Narrative for details. L. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS: The Narrative indicates the project shall abide by the provisions of Section 6.4 Performance Standards of the LIDO inclusive (i.e. noise, vibration, air pollution, etc.). Response: Comment noted. Refer to Section 2-5 of the Narrative for details. M. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS: The proposed architectural design standards appears consistent with the provisions of Section 6.5 Architectural Design Standards of the LIDO. Response: Comment noted. Refer to Section 2-5 of the Narrative for details. N. SETBACKS: Staff is recommending the following: i. 100 ft. perimeter structure setback from all external property lines and right-of-way (i.e. Mt. Willing Road, the Interstate, etc.); Response: The proposed setbacks are provided within Section 2-5 of the Narrative. Although a full 100' perimeter structure setback is not proposed,significant buffers are proposed along all external property lines and right-of-way and planting and screening requirements along the rear property line have been increased to address concerns from adjacent property owners. Refer to Sheets C6.0, C6.1, and C6.2 for information on proposed buffers. ii. Vehicular use areas (i.e. access drive-aisle, parking, loading berths): 1. 100 ft. from residentially zoned property (i.e. the property north of the Project); 2. 50 ft. from all other property lines/external public rights-of-way; 3. Staff is recommending all internal setbacks be 20 ft.