9/8/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M It should be noted that, since July 23rd, the enhanced arterial and collector roadway landscape strip standards have been applied to 5 new development projects. 4. Perimeter (Compatibility) Buffer Standards Requires a masonry wall or earthen berm to be the opaque feature component of the buffer unless otherwise approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Reason: Ensures that the opaque feature is at required height and opacity at C.O., rather than relying on a 2 year grow -in period. Requires compatibility buffers adjacent to a local road to be provided but reduced one category (e.g. from a Type "B" to a Type "C" buffer). The height of any required opaque feature would remain the same. Buffers required adjacent to thoroughfare plan roads would be reduced two categories (e.g from B to D). This concept is presently not addressed in chapters 911 or 926, but parallels the way buffers are treated in the planned development regulations of Chapter 915. Reason: Establishes a set rule as to how buffering requirements apply when an intervening roadway exists between two incompatible uses. Recognizes that intervening roadways provide more separation between uses, resulting in the need for less intensive compatibility buffers. Establishes the finished floor elevation of the proposed project building(s) to be the benchmark for measuring the height of 3' and 6' opaque features, unless using such a benchmark would result in a feature exceeding 8' in actual height and the Planning & Zoning Commission agrees to modify the requirement. Reason: Establishes a reasonable and consistent benchmark that relates opaque feature height to the facility it is intended to screen -out. Allows 50% of the normally required buffer hedge material to be deleted when a 6' wall or fence is constructed, if remaining required vegetation (hedge and understory trees) is planted between the wall and the project property line. Reason: Recognizes that less hedge material (lower height vegetation) is needed when a wall is used. Also recognizes that some landscape material is needed to "soften" the appearance of wall exteriors. 5. Buffers Between Commercial & Residential Uses AND 6. Buffers Between Industrial & Residential Uses Requires loading docks to be screened by an 8' tall masonry wall, when the loading dock is adjacent to or visible from a residential site. Reason: Applies the Wabasso and SR 60 corridor plan requirements for loading dock buffers countywide. Recognizes that an 8' wall at docks would screen more of the taller vehicles (trucks). that use such facilities and more effectively attenuate noise impacts of loading docks. During the PSAC's June 26, 1997 review of the pending ordinance, some members expressed concerns about the increased costs resulting from the new requirements, and one member questioned the need for any increase in landscaping requirements. An estimate of costs associated with the pending ordinance requirements (see attachment #3) was provided to the PSAC, Planning and Zoning Commission, and Board of County Commissioners when those boards reviewed the pending ordinance. Some members also expressed concerns that, by requiring larger trees at time of planting, supply constraints could be a problem, and taller planted trees take longer to settle -in and start growing vigorously. Planning staff agrees with some concerns discussed at the PSAC meeting regarding the pending ordinance's proposed loading dock buffering. In stars opinion, better 5 September 8, 1997 bonyPACE