TEMPLATE V06 - WITH APPROVED GRAPHICS library/planning... · (2015-2) to the Future Land ... Low Density Residential; LMDR - Low-Medium Density Residential; MDR - Medium Density Residential;

O R A N G E C O U N T Y

HORIZON WEST AMENDMENTS 2010 - 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

2 0 1 5 - 2

P L A N N I N G D I V I S I O N

AUGUST 10, 2015 TRANSMITTAL PUBLIC HEARING

D E P A R T M E N T O F E C O N O M I C O P P O R T U N I T I E S

PREPARED BY: ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY , ENVIRONMENTAL AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

PLANNING DIVI S ION COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION

2015 SECOND REGULAR CYCLE

AMENDMENTS TO THE 2010-2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY TRANSMITTAL BOOK

INTRODUCTION This is the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) transmittal public hearing book for the Second Regular Cycle State-Coordinated Review Amendments (2015-2) to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Comprehensive Plan (CP). These amendments were heard by the Local Planning Agency (LPA) at a transmittal public hearing on June 18, 2015, and by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at a transmittal public hearing on July 28, 2015. Please note the following modifications to this report:

KEY TO HIGHLIGHTED CHANGES Highlight When changes made Yellow At the LPA transmittal public hearing Blue Following the LPA transmittal public hearing (by staff) Green At the BCC transmittal public hearing

The 2015-2 Regular Cycle State-Coordinated Review amendments include three privately-initiated Future Land Use Map Amendments (located in District 1) and one staff-initiated amendment. These proposed amendments are located in the Horizon West Sector Plan, and therefore, are subject to the State-Coordinated Review process. .A second round of public hearings for adoption of these proposed amendments will occur after the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) and other State agencies complete their review of the amendments and provide comments, which are expected in September 2015. Pursuant to 163.3184, F.S., the proposed amendments must be adopted within 180 days of the comment letter. The adoption public hearings are tentatively scheduled for the LPA on October 15, 2015, and the BCC on November 10, 2015. Once the Regular Cycle State-Coordinated amendments have been adopted by the BCC, they will become effective approximately 45 days after the date on which the Notice of Intent (NOI) is posted to the DEO’s Internet site, provided no challenges are brought forth for any of the amendments. These amendments are expected to become effective in January 2016. Any questions concerning this document should be directed to Alberto A. Vargas, MArch., Manager, Planning Division at (407) 836-5308 or [email protected], or Gregory Golgowski, Chief Planner at (407) 836-5624 or [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]


Updated on 8/6/2015 2015-2 Regular Cycle Amendments - Summary Chart Pg. 1 of 2

Amendment Number

Concurrent Rezoning or Substantial Change Owner Agent Tax ID Number(s) General Location /

CommentsFuture Land Use Map Designation FROM:

Future Land Use Map Designation TO:

Zoning Map Designation FROM:

Zoning Map Designation TO: Acreage Project Planner Staff Rec LPA Rec BCC Rec

District 1

2015-2-A-1-1 (fka 2015-1-A-1-4) No Hanover Hickory Nut, LLC

Miranda Fitzgerald, Lowndes, Drosdick,

Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A.

08-24-27-0000-00-002

10150 Avalon Rd.; Generally described as located on the west side of Avalon Road at the intersection of Avalon

Road and Seidel Road.

Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP)-

Estate District (ED)


Estate District (ED)67.10 gross ac. Amy Bradbury

2015-2-A-1-2 Planned (CDR not yet submitted) Dan Traylor and Sean Froelich, Spring Grove, LLC Dana E. Boyte, Dewberry 17-24-27-0000-00-008

11355 Avalon Rd.; Generally described as located on the

east side of Avalon Rd., north of Lake Star Rd., south of Flamingo Crossings Blvd.,

and west of SR 429


Apartment District (APT) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)


Village Home District (VHD) and Wetland/Conservation

(CONS)

PD-Planned Development (Springhill PD)

PD-Planned Development (Springhill PD) 24.85 gross ac. Steven Thorp Transmit Transmit (8-0) Transmit (7-0)

2015-2-A-1-4 Planned (CDR not yet submitted) Developco Inc. Jim Hall, VHB, Inc. 27-23-27-0000-00-020

7721 Ficquette Rd.; Generally described as located on the east side of Ficquette Rd., south and west of Winter Garden Vineland Rd. and

north of Center Dr.

Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan

(SAP) - Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)

Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Estate District (ED) and Wetland/Conservation

(CONS)

306.80 gross ac. Janna Souvorova Transmit Transmit (7-1)

Transmit only the north portion of subject property

(7-0)

2015-2-A-1-7(fka 2015-1-S-1-1) No SLF IV/Boyd Horizon West JV, LLC James G. Willard

21-23-27-0000-00-036, and portions of

21-23-27-0000-00-033/004 and 20-23-27-0000-00-030

Generally described as located east of SR 429 and

south of New Independence Pkwy.

Horizon West,Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) -

Greenbelt (GB), and Bridgewater Village Specific

Area Plan (SAP) - Townhome/ Apartment District (THD),

Wetland/ Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB)

Horizon West, Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) -

Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM-3),

Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB)

9.99 gross ac. Janna Souvorova Transmit Transmit (7-0) Transmit (7-0)

2015-2 Regular Cycle Comprehensive Plan Amendments

Privately Initiated Future Land Use Map and Text Amendments

ABBREVIATIONS INDEX:

ABBREVIATIONS INDEX: IND - Industrial; C - Commercial; O - Office; LDR - Low Density Residential; LMDR - Low-Medium Density Residential; MDR - Medium Density Residential; HDR - High Density Residential; PD - Planned Development; CONS - Wetland/Conservation; PR/OS - Parks/Recreation/Open Space; OS-Open Space; PRES - Preservation; R - Rural / Agricultural; RS - Rural Settlement; RSLD - Rural Settlement Low Density; GC - Growth Center; USA - Urban Service Area; INST - Institutional; EDU - Educational; V - Village; WB - Water Body; SAP - Specific Area Plan; GB - Greenbelt; ED - Estate District; VHD - Village Home District; UR - Urban Residential; GHD - Garden Home District; APT - Apartment Home District; THD - Townhome/Apartment District; CCM - Corporate Campus Mixed Use; RW - Retail/Wholesale; ACR - Activity Center Residential; ACMU - Activity Center Mixed Use; CP - Comprehensive Plan; FLUM - Future Land Use Map; FLUE - Future Land Use Element; TRAN - Transportation Element; GOPS - Goals, Objectives, and Policies; OBJ - Objective; SR - State Road; LP - Lake Pickett (Proposed New Future Land Use Designation)

Updated on 8/6/2015 2015-2 Regular Cycle Amendments - Summary Chart Pg. 2 of 2

Sponsor Project Planner Staff Rec LPA Rec BCC Rec

Planning Division and Transportation Planning Division

Janna SouvorovaAnoch Whitfield Transmit Transmit (7-0) Transmit (7-0)

Amendment Number

ABBREVIATIONS INDEX:

ABBREVIATIONS INDEX: IND - Industrial; C - Commercial; O - Office; LDR - Low Density Residential; LMDR - Low-Medium Density Residential; MDR - Medium Density Residential; HDR - High Density Residential; PD - Planned Development; CONS - Wetland/Conservation; PR/OS - Parks/Recreation/Open Space; OS-Open Space; PRES - Preservation; R - Rural / Agricultural; RS - Rural Settlement; RSLD - Rural Settlement Low Density; GC - Growth Center; USA - Urban Service Area; INST - Institutional; EDU - Educational; V - Village; WB - Water Body; SAP - Specific Area Plan; GB - Greenbelt; ED - Estate District; VHD - Village Home District; UR - Urban Residential; GHD - Garden Home District; APT - Apartment Home District; THD - Townhome/Apartment District; CCM - Corporate Campus Mixed Use; RW - Retail/Wholesale; ACR - Activity Center Residential; ACMU - Activity Center Mixed Use; CP - Comprehensive Plan; FLUM - Future Land Use Map; FLUE - Future Land Use Element; TRAN - Transportation Element; GOPS - Goals, Objectives, and Policies; OBJ - Objective; SR - State Road; LP - Lake Pickett (Proposed New Future Land Use Designation)

2015-2-B-FLUE-3 Text amendments to Future Land Use Element policies related to Horizon West Village I


Staff Initiated Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments

Description of Proposed Changes to the 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan (CP)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATE-COORDINATED REVIEW AMENDMENTS

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ Tab 1

Regular Cycle Amendments ......................................................................................................... Tab 2

Privately Initiated Regular Cycle Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendments

Amendment Page

1. 2015-2-A-1-2 Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Apartment District (APT) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Village Home District (VHD) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)

1

2. 2015-2- A-1-4 Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Estate District (ED) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)

11

3. 2015-2-A-1-7 (fka 2015-1-S-1-1)

Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Greenbelt (GB), and Bridgewater Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Townhome/Apartment District (THD), Wetland/ Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB) to Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM-3), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB)

27

Staff Initiated Regular Cycle Text Amendments

Amendment Page

4. 2015-2-B-FLUE-3 Text amendments to Future Land Use Element policies related to Horizon West Village I

39

Community Meeting Summaries .................................................................................................. Tab 3

Facilities Analyses ....................................................................................................................... Tab 4 Transportation Analyses ............................................................................................................. Tab 5 Environmental Analyses ............................................................................................................. Tab 6

DEO Transmittal 1 August 11, 2015

Orange County Planning Division DEO Transmittal Staff Report Steven Thorp, Project Planner Amendment 2015‐2‐A‐1‐2

July 28, 2015 Commission District 1 Page | 1

The following meetings and hearings have been held for this proposal:

Project Information

Report/Public Hearing Outcome

Request: Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Apartment District (APT) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Village Home District (VHD) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)

Community Meeting

April 27, 2015

(7 people in attendance) See public notification map for notice area

Neutral

Concurrent Rezoning: No

Proposed Development Program: Reduction of 200 dwelling units in the developable area, from the maximum of 285 dwelling units allowed in the Apartment District to the maximum of up to 85 dwelling units allowed in the Village Home District (VHD) Staff Report Recommend Transmittal

LPA Transmittal June 18, 2015

Recommend Transmittal (8‐0) Public Facilities and Services: Please see the Public Facilities Analysis for specific analysis on each public facility.

Environmental: There are wetlands onsite that extend offsite. EPD will require a Conservation Area Determination (CAD) before any issuance of permits or development approvals. Any impact to the wetlands will require a Conservation Area Impact (CAI) permit.

Transportation: The requested change reduces the number of projected daily trips and reduces the transportation impact to the surrounding transportation infrastructure.

Schools: An application for a Capacity Enhancement Agreement (CEA) (reference #OC‐15‐008) has been submitted to the Orange County Public Schools (OCPS).

BCC Transmittal Transmit (7‐0)

Agency Comments September 2015

LPA Adoption October 15, 2015

BCC Adoption November 10, 2015

Effective Date January 2016

Applicant/Owner:

Dana E. Boyte, Dewberry for Dan Traylor and Sean Froelich, Spring Grove, LLC

Location: 11355 Avalon Road; Generally described as located on the east side of Avalon Road, north of Lake Star Road, south of Flamingo Crossings Boulevard, and west of State Road 429

Existing Use: Vacant Land

Parcel ID Numbers:

17‐24‐27‐0000‐00‐008

Tract Size: 24.96 gross acres/

±11.40 net developable acres



FUTURE LAND USE

FUTURE LAND USE – AS PROPOSED

Current Future Land

Use Designation:

Horizon West Village H SAP – Apartment District (APT) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)

Proposed Future Land Use Designation: Horizon West Village H SAP – Village Home District (VHD) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)



ZONING

Current Zoning:

Planned Development (PD) –Springhill PD

Existing Uses:

N: Vacant, Wetland

S: Vacant, Wetland

E: Vacant, Wetland

W: Vacant



Staff Recommendation

Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan (see Future Land Use Element Policies FLU1.4.1, FLU1.4.2, FLU4.1.1, FLU8.2.1, FLU8.2.2, FLU8.2.11), determine that the amendment is in compliance, and TRANSMIT Amendment 2015‐2‐A‐1‐2, Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Apartment District (APT) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Village Home District (VHD) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS).

Analysis

1. Background Development Program

The applicant has requested to amend the Horizon West Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) Land Use Map by replacing the existing Apartment District (APT) designation on Parcel 45 with the Village Home District (VHD) designation. The existing Wetland/Conservation area (CONS) will remain as it currently exists.

The parcel is located at 11355 Avalon Road; generally described as located on the east side of Avalon Road, north of Lake Star Road, south of Flamingo Crossings Boulevard, and west of State Route 429. The intermediate area has multiple Planned Developments that contain a mixture of future residential and commercial development, all of which are part of the Horizon West Village H and I Specific Area Plans. The property is surrounded on the north, east, and south by wetlands and by the boundary of Horizon West Village I. There have not been any Planned Developments approved adjacent to the subject parcel within Village I to the east. Additionally, the Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID) has land nearby to the east that is used for its operational purposes.

This parcel is part of the larger, previously approved Springhill Planned Developemt (PD), approved April 9, 2013. The Springhill PD is a 550.03 acre mixed residential and commercial PD, containing a mixture of Village Center, Neighborhood Center, Apartment, Townhome, Estate, Garden Home, and Village Home Districts on 189.23 net developable acres. The Springhill PD also contains land planned for an elementary school, fire station, and expansion area for the CR 545 (Avalon Road) Right‐of‐Way.

The allowable area density on Parcel 45 within the existing Apartment District (APT) designation is up to 25 dwelling units per net developable acre, with a maximum of 285 dwelling units, though the approved PD proposed 262 units. With the proposed Village Home District (VHD), if approved, the permitted density within the developable area would be up to 7.5 dwelling units per net developable acre, with a maximum of 85 dwelling units. The wetland/conservation area within Parcel 45 is not changing, and a Conservation Area Determination will be performed as the PD goes through the development process.

If this request is approved, a Change Determination Request (CDR) will need to be submitted to amend the approved Springhill PD Land Use Plan (LUP).



2. Project Analysis

Consistency

The proposed Specific Area Plan (SAP) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendment appears to be consistent with the applicable Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. As Comprehensive Plan (CP) Policies FLU1.4.1 and FLU4.1.1.C state, the Village and overall area shall contain a diversity of housing types to enable citizens from a wide range of economic levels and provide for a diversified community, and design should be based on an urban character. The parcel will maintain this diversity as the options for detached and attached single family homes and townhomes will be present; housing diversity will also continue being maintained within the larger Springhill PD and Village H.

Policy FLU4.1.1.I states that, whenever possible, the natural terrain, drainage, and vegetation of the area shall be preserved with superior examples contained within parks or greenbelts. The existing and identified Wetland/Conservation (CONS) area for the natural wetlands will not be modified with this request, and the goal of that policy will be upheld. The proposed change to Village Home District will maintain the exisitng housing diversity within Village H and Horizon West. Additionally, the reduction in housing density caused by this proposed change will reduce the intensity of development along the adjacent wetland and provide an opportunity for better or more efficient conservation of the area.

The proposed change to Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) on Parcel 45 is also consistent with Policy FLU8.2.2, which states that continous stretches of similar housing types and density of units shall be avoided. As identified on the Future Land Use Map, there are large swaths of Apartment District (APT) designations to the north and south of the subject parcel, which, with the current designation on the parcel, create the possibility for a continuous development of apartments. The requested amendment will eliminate that possability and let the area meet the policy goal.

Compatibility

Policies FLU1.4.2 and FLU8.2.1 require that land use changes be compatible with the existing development and development trends in the area, and Policy FLU8.2.11 states that compatibility may not necessarily be determined to be a land use that is identical to those uses that surround it. The applicant proposes a change to develop the subject site with single‐family residential units.

Compatibility with existing development in the area: Though there is currently no existing developments in the immediate vicinity of the subject parcel, the proposed Village Home District (VHD) SAP designation would allow a variety of single‐family residential development that is compatible with the Horizon West residential developments in the vicinity. This change is also compatible with the existing LUP of the Springhill PD, as it maintains the density requirements and residential character of the neighborhood. Lastly, this change would reduce the impact of development to the adjacent wetland and conservation area as there would be fewer allowed dwellings.

Compatibility with development trend in the area: There have not been any active land developments adjacent to or immediately within the area of the subject parcel, and the current surrounds are all forested area or previously graded, undeveloped land. This amendment is compatible with the future development trends in the area, as this area has been planned for different types of development with the Horizon West Village H SAP, and there will be development



of different types of residential, village commercial, and school sites in close proximity to the subject site. This change also reflects the trend in Horizon West to have lower impact development adjacent to the wetland areas. The proposed amendment will lower the intensity of development next to the wetland that is adjacent to the developable area on all three sides. Based on the development characteristics and the approved land development plans for the area, the proposed change from Apartment District (APT) to Village Home District (VHD) is compatible with the development patterns of the area.

3. Public Facilities and Services

Environmental. There are wetlands located onsite that extend offsite. Prior to issuance of any Orange County permits or development approvals, the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) will require a completed Conservation Area Determination (CAD), and if encroachments are proposed, a Conservation Area Impact (CAI) Permit, consistent with Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. This property was not included in CAD 05‐218 completed for the western parcels on the Springhill Planned Development. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas or protective buffers.

Until wetland permitting is complete, the developable acreage is the gross acreage less wetlands and surface waters. Any plan showing development in a wetland area without Orange County and other jurisdictional governmental agency wetland permits is speculative and may not be approved.

The removal, alteration or encroachment within a Class I Conservation Area shall only be allowed in cases where: no other feasible or practical alternatives exist, impacts are unavoidable to allow a reasonable use of the land, or where there is an overriding public benefit, as determined before the Orange County Board of County Commissioners.

Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible for determining the presence of listed species and obtaining any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). This site may be suitable habitat for the sand skink and blue‐tailed mole skink. Note that skink surveys are conducted annually during a specific time period between March and May.

Utilities. The subject property will be served by Orange County Utiltities and any trsmission system improvements and connection points must be in accordance with the approved Horizon West Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) Master Utilitiy Plan (MUP).

Transportation. The trip generation analysis indicates that the proposed amendment will result in a reduction of pm peak hour trips by 83 trips, or a 48% reduction. Therefore, the potential impact of the proposed development on the surrounding transportation infrastructure is significantly reduced. Final permitting of any development on this site will be subject to further review and approval from the County’s Development Review Committee (DRC) as well as an assessment of roadway capacity constraints based on the Transportation Concurrency Management System, and the applicant will be required to mitigate any deficiencies that may occur from the proposed development.

Schools. The project must have an executed Capacity Enhancement Agreement (CEA) prior to the Board of County Commissioners approval. The applicant has submitted an application (reference #OC‐15‐008) to the Orange County School Board.



4. Policy References

FLU1.4.1 Orange County shall promote a range of living environments and employment opportunities in order to achieve a stable and diversified population and community.

FLU1.4.2 Orange County shall ensure that land use changes are compatible with and serve

existing neighborhoods.

FLU4.1.1 General Village Principles. Each Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) shall be designed based on an urban development pattern, which encourages the formation of a suburban village while ensuring the provision of adequate public facilities and services concurrent with development and protection of environmental quality.

A. Planning for the Village shall be in the form of complete and integrated neighborhoods containing housing, shops, workplaces, schools, parks and civic facilities essential to the daily life of the Village residents.

B. Village size shall be designed so that housing is generally within a 1.2 mile radius of the Village Center (shops, services and other activities). This radius may be relaxed where natural or community facilities and services interrupt the design.

C. A Village shall contain a diversity of housing types to enable citizens from a wide range of economic levels and age groups to live within its boundaries.

D. Wherever possible, as many activities as possible shall be located within an easy walking distance of an existing or designated transit stop.

E. The Village and each neighborhood shall have a center focus that combines commercial, civic, cultural and recreational uses. Higher density residential development should be encouraged in proximity to these centers, with the highest density/attached housing encouraged in proximity to the Village Center.

F. The Village shall contain an ample supply of specialized open space in the form of squares, greens and parks whose frequent use is encouraged through placement and design.

G. Each Village shall have a well‐defined edge, such as greenbelts or wildlife corridors permanently protected from development.

H. Local and collector streets, pedestrian paths and bike paths shall contribute to a system of fully connected and interesting routes from individual neighborhoods to the Village Center and to other villages. Their design should encourage pedestrian and bicycle use by being spatially defined by buildings, trees, and lighting; and by discouraging high speed traffic.

I. Wherever possible, the natural terrain, drainage and vegetation of the area shall be preserved with superior examples contained within parks or greenbelts.

J. The Village Center shall be designed to encourage and accommodate linkage with the regional transit system.

FLU8.2.1 Land use changes shall be required to be compatible with the existing development and

development trend in the area. Performance restrictions and/or conditions may be placed on property through the appropriate development order to ensure compatibility. No restrictions or conditions shall be placed on a Future Land Use Map change.

FLU8.2.2 Continuous stretches of similar housing types and density of units shall be avoided. A

diverse mix of uses and housing types shall be promoted.



FLU8.2.11 Compatibility may not necessarily be determined to be a land use that is identical to

those uses that surround it. Other factors may be considered, such as the design attributes of the project, its urban form, the physical integration of a project and its function in the broader community, as well its contribution toward the Goals and Objectives in the CP. The CP shall specifically allow for such a balance of considerations to occur.



Site Visit Photos

North South

East

West

Subject Site



PUBLIC NOTIFICATION MAP

Notification Area

1,500 ft. radius of the subject site, plus the applicant

7 notices sent

Orange County Planning Division DEO Transmittal Staff Report Janna Souvorova, Project Planner Amendment 2015‐2‐A‐1‐4



Project Information

Report/Public Hearing Outcome Request: From Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) ‐ Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Estate District (ED) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)

2 Community Meetings held:

May 11, 2015 and June 4, 2015 (70 and 58 people in attendance, respectively)

See public notification map for notice area

Negative; residents concerned with impacts on environmental systems, wildlife preservation, access, lack of road improvements, and school overcrowding

Concurrent Rezoning: No

Staff Report Recommend Transmittal Proposed Development Program: Up to 75 single‐family dwelling units.


Recommend Transmittal (7‐1)

BCC Transmittal Transmit (7‐0) Public Facilities and Services: Please see the Public Facilities Analysis Appendix for specific analysis on each public facility.

Environmental: The property was included in the Conservation Area Determination (CAD 98‐045), and subsequent modifications, completed for the Lake Reams Neighborhood PD.

Transportation: Winter Garden‐Vineland Road from Tilden Road to Ficquette Road Ficquette Road from Reams Road to Winter Garden‐Vineland Road and Reams Road from Lake Hancock Road to Cast Drive are the only failing roadway segments within the project impact area. Right‐of‐way will be required for the future widening of Reams Road. The applicant has to submit a revised transportation study.

Schools: The CEA application (Reference #OC‐15‐005) has been submitted to the Orange County Public Schools (OCPS).



BCC Adoption November 10, 2015

Applicant:

Jim Hall, VHB, Inc., for Developco Inc.

Location: 7721 Ficquette Rd.; Generally described as located on the east side of Ficquette Rd., south and west of Winter Garden Vineland Rd., and north of Center Dr.

Existing Use: Vacant

Parcel ID Numbers:

27‐23‐27‐0000‐00‐020

Tract Size: 306.8 gross acres/

±70.8 net developable acres



FUTURE LAND USE

FUTURE LAND USE – AS PROPOSED

Future Land Use –

Existing:

Greenbelt (GB) and

Wetland/Conservation

(CONS)

Special Area

Information

Planning Sector: Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP)

Future Land Use –

Proposed:

Estate District (ED) and


(CONS)

Special Area

Information

Planning Sector: Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP)



ZONING

Zoning: Planned Development (PD) – Lake Reams Neighborhood PD and R‐CE‐2 (Rural Residential District) Existing Uses N: Vacant land (waste land)

S: Church (vested development) and single‐family home subdivision

E: HOA properties (Lake Sawyer)

W: Townhome development; vacant residential and single‐family homes




Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan (see Future Land Use Policies FLU1.4.2, FLU4.1.1, FLU4.1.5, FLU4.5.1, FLU4.5.4.1, FLU4.5.6, FLU8.2.1, and FLU8.2.11), determine that the amendment is in compliance, and TRANSMIT Amendment 2015‐2‐A‐1‐4, Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Estate District (ED) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS).

NOTE: The proposed recommendation of Transmittal of Amendment 2015‐2‐A‐1‐4 is subject to adoption of staff‐initiated text Amendment 2015‐1‐B‐FLUE‐4 to the Future Land Use Element. The proposed Amendment 2015‐1‐B‐FLUE‐4 establishes a Reams Road Corridor Study Area (proposed new Future Land Use Policy FLU4.5.4.1) in Lakeside Village in order to achieve the mix of residential uses and to provide a residential transition zone within the largest greenbelt system in Horizon West. The proposed Future Land Use Element Policy FLU4.5.4.1 defines appropriate densities within the Study Area. The proposed staff‐initiated text Amendment 2015‐1‐B‐FLUE‐4 is scheduled for the Board of County Commissioners adoption public hearing on July 28, 2015. Amendment 2015‐1‐B‐FLUE‐4 was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on July 28, 2015.

Analysis


At the July 28, 2015 Board of County Commissioners Transmittal Public Hearing, the Board voted to transmit only the northern portion of the request. Thus, the original request to convert two large swaths of Greenbelt (GB) to Estate District (ED) has been modified to only include the northern tract of existing GB, as shown on the Future Land Use – As Proposed map. The southern portion will remain Greenbelt (GB) and the proposed cross‐wetland connection between the two areas will remain Wetland/Conservation (CONS). The proposed development program of up to 75 single‐family dwelling units will remain unchanged.

The applicant has requested to change the Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) designation on the subject site from Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Estate District (ED) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS). The subject site consists of one parcel totaling 306.8 gross acres, of which approximately 70.8 acres are developable. The subject properties are part of the Lake Reams Neighborhood of the Lakeside Village.

The subject site is located on the east side of Ficquette Road, south and west of Winter Garden Vineland Road and north of Center Drive. It is surrounded by vacant lands on the north side; Oasis Cove townhome development (vested development), vacant residential lots, and several single‐family homes on the west side; an existing Church of Jesus Christ of Latter‐Day Saints (vested development) and Lakes of Windermere – Peachtree subdivision consisting of single‐family homes on the south side; and HOA properties/Lake Sawyer subdivision on the east side. Most properties surrounding the subject site are currently designated as Greenbelt (GB), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), Estate District (ED) and Vested Developments (church and Oasis Cove townhomes) on the Lakeside Village SAP. The property across the street, on the west side of Reams Road (consisting of two parcels) have recently obtained the Estate District (ED) designation on the upland portions of both lots (Case #2014‐1‐A‐1‐2). The property directly to the south of those two parcels (consisting of four parcels) is currently in the process of obtaining the Village Home District (VHD) designation on its upland portion (Case #2015‐1‐A‐1‐1). Figure 1 below shows existing SAP designations on the



subjcet site and nearby properties and depicts the proposed boundary of the Reams Road Corridor Study Area that is being established by the staff‐initiated amendment (Case #2015‐1‐B‐FLUE‐4).

Figure 1 – Reams Road Corridor Study Area – Existing and Proposed Uses

Project Community Meetings. Two community meetings were held for this project. During the first community meeting, which took place on May 11, 2015, the applicant, Jim Hall, presented his initial request for the Village Home District (VHD) SAP designation to allow for development of up to 284 single‐family dwelling units on approximately 70 acres of uplands. Residents in attendance voiced numerous concerns related to potential development of wetlands, environmental conditions on the property, presence of wildlife habitat, preservation of wildlife corridors, improved access from the surrounding neighborhoods, the proposed development intensity on lands currently designated as Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and effect of the proposed development on the nearby properties. The applicant, Jim Hall, clarified that the proposed development will only occur on the upland portions of the property, and the wetlands will not be affected. He also displayed a map identifying the uplands and indicated that uplands account for less than a quarter of the total acreage, or about 70 acres. Mr. Hall added that additional environmental testing is being done on the property and indicated that the application will be adjusted based on the comments received from the community.

At the second community meeting that took place on June 4, 2015 the applicant, Mr. Hall, revealed an updated development program for the subject site. The applicant explained that the originally proposed development program for the site was significantly reduced to address concerns related to the amount of the proposed development, its impacts on the wetland systems present on site, preservation of wildlife habitat, and potential impacts on the surrounding residential developments.



The portion of the site’s upland proposed to be developed was reduced from 70.8 acres to 41.5 acres, and the proposed number of units was reduced from 284 to 75 single‐family residential units, which will result in preservation of the majority of the subject site, or about 87%, that will not be developed. Additionally, Mr. Hall noted that the proposed access to this development will be from Reams Road.

To summarize, the applicant is now requesting the SAP designation of Estate District (ED), which has the associated density of 2 DU/acre and will allow for development of 75 single‐family homes. The existing and proposed land use designations are depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Subject Site – Existing and Proposed Land Uses

Existing SAP Designations Proposed SAP Designations

The majority of the subject property is part of Lake Reams Neighborhood Planned Development (PD). On the PD Land Use Plan (LUP), the site is designated as wetlands, Upland Greenbelt, and Adequate Public Facilities/ROW. In accordance with Policies FLU4.5.3 and FLU4.5.4 that provide standards for use of Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs) on properties designated as Greenbelts (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS), Lake Reams Neighborhood PD assigns TDR credits to the subject property is follows:

Lake Reams Neighborhood PD

Parcel No. Assigned TDR Credits

Parcel 22 46 credits


Parcel 24 7 credits


Wetland 72.3 credits

Should this FLUM amendment be adopted, the LUP Amendment to Lake Reams Neighborhood PD will be required in order to add the remainder of the parcel (~3.5 acres) that currently has R‐CE‐2



(Rural Residential District) zoning to the existing PD; amend the PD development program; and adjust the TDR use table.

2. Project Analysis

Consistency The requested Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendment appears to be consistent with the applicable Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives, and policies, which are specifically discussed in the paragraphs below.

The Horizon West special planning area is based on a number of best planning principles, which include, but are not limited to, diversity of housing types and preservation of Village edges through creation of greenbelts along perimeters of each of the five Villages and the Town Center. The paragraphs below describe how the proposed amendment meets these founding principles of Horizon West.

Horizon West Principles. Future Land Use Element Policy FLU4.1.1 lists a requirement for a diversity of housing types among general village principles while Policy FLU4.1.5 states that the development of a variety of lot sizes and housing types is encouraged within Village neighborhoods, with generally higher densities located in proximity to the village center and neighborhood center. The proposed amendment adds single‐family homes at the density of two dwelling units per acre (2 DU/acre), which is similar to densities associated with Lakes of Windermere subdivision located directly south of the subject site, next to an existing townhome development (Oasis Cove). The properties across the street from the subject site also recently obtained Estate District (ED) SAP designation (case #2014‐1‐A‐1‐2), while other four properties along Reams Road are undergoing a FLUM Amendment process to get the SAP designation of Village Home District (VHD).

Another planning concept essential to implementation of the Horizon West vision is preservation of greenbelts to create Village edges. Future Land Use Element Policies FLU4.1.1, FLU4.5.1, and FLU4.5.6 outline general greenbelt requirements, such as their function and width, as well as greenbelt requirements specific to Lakeside Village. More specifically, the policies state that each village shall have a well‐defined edge (greenbelts or wildlife corridors) permanently protected from development; greenbelts must meet minimum and average width standards, which are set at 300 feet and 500 feet, respectively; and, in Lakeside Village, greenbelt shall be provided by utilizing the environmental systems connecting Lake Speer with the ecosystems within Reedy Creek Improvement District on the west and south. Greenbelt requirements listed in the above‐cited policies were made to discourage sprawl by creating a definable Village and to provide a permanent undeveloped edge.

The Greenbelt system that the subject property is part of is the largest in Horizon West, ranging in width between 3,000 feet along Ficquette Road, which is the village boundary between the Village of Bridgewater and the Lakeside Village, and more than 6,500 feet at its widest point. The Greenbelt buffer provided along Reams Road far exceeds the minimum and average width standards set forth by the Future Land Use Element Policy FLU4.5.1, and the existing Greenbelt (GB) designation of the subject properties, while meeting the intent of Future Land Use Element Policies FLU4.1.1 and FLU4.5.6, exceeds the Village greenbelt requirements set in Policy FLU4.5.1. It should be noted that during the 2nd community meeting the applicant stated that the majority of the subject site will be preserved (~87%), with only 41.5 acres out of 306.8 total acres proposed to be developed at the density of 2 DU/acre. The applicant has also suggested that, at the time of development, the existing



wetlands on the property could potentially be enhanced to create a better overall ecosystem on site.

Reams Road Corridor Study Area. In 2013, the Small Area Study that resulted in the staff‐initiated amendment establishing the Reams Road Corridor Study Area was conducted. The Study aimed at determining the feasibility of changing the Lakeside Village SAP designation from Upland Greenbelt (GB) to some of the residential SAP designations established by Comprehensive Plan policies related to Horizon West. The Study included 28 properties totaling 749 acres located along Reams Road, of which approximately less than 200 acres were designated as Greenbelts (GB) at that time. Together, the properties included in the study area represented the largest and widest greenbelt system in Horizon West. The Small Area Study indicated that most of the properties in the Lake Reams Neighborhood of the Lakeside Village have already been developed or approved for development, and, as approved, the Lake Reams Neighborhood falls short of the planned maximum number of units. The study concluded that the proposed conversion of properties included in the Small Area Study from the existing Greenbelt (GB) designation to a residential designation will contribute to increasing densities within the Lakeside Village to better meet planned maximums. It will also more accurately reflect recent changes in the surrounding area and its transition to more urban and dense uses.

As a result of that study, staff initiated a map and text amendment (Case #2015‐1‐B‐FLUE‐4 scheduled for the BCC adoption hearing on July 28, 2015) that establishes the Reams Road Corridor Study Area (proposed new Future Land Use Policy FLU4.5.4.1) in Lakeside Village in order to achieve the mix of residential uses and to provide a residential transition zone within the largest greenbelt system in Horizon West. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements for Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendments within the Reams Road Corridor Study Area that are being established in the proposed Policy FLU4.5.4.1. First, the subject site is located within the Corridor Study Area, and it is the largest parcel that is part of the Study Area. Second, the proposal is for a residential land use on a portion of the subject site that is currently designated as Upland Greenbelt (GB) on the Lakeside Village SAP. Finally, the maximum residential density associated with the requested Estate District (ED) designation is two dwelling units per acre (2 DU/ac), which is well below the maximum residential density of 6 DU/acre considered to be appropriate within the Corridor Study Area.

To summarize, the proposed amendment appears to be consistent with founding principles of Horizon West and ensures that the intent of the newly proposed Future Land Use Element Policy FLU4.5.4.1, which provides a residential transition zone within the largest greenbelt system in Horizon West while protecting the local environmental systems, is still being met.

Compatibility

The proposed Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendment appears to be compatible with the development trends in the surrounding area. The Orange County Comprehensive Plan requires all FLUM Amendments to be compatible with existing neighborhoods and surrounding uses. More specifically, Future Land Use Element Policies FLU1.4.2 and FLU8.2.1 require land use changes to be compatible with the existing character and evolving development trends in the area. The subject property is surrounded by vacant residential parcels, several estate homes, Oasis Cove townhome development and an existing church (both are vested developments), and two subdivisions – one, Lakes of Windermere subdivision, located directly to the south of the subject site, and another – Lake Sawyer subdivision, located east of the



subject site and separated from it by an existing wetland. The existing and proposed SAP designations of the surrounding properties are Estate District (ED), Vested Development, Village Home District (VHD), Greenbelt (GB), and Wetland/Conservation (CONS). The proposed amendment would result in development of up to 75 single‐family dwelling units, which is compatible with housing types already in existence in the immediate vicinity of the subject site.

In accordance with Future Land Use Policy FLU8.2.11, which states that compatibility may also be determined by the design attributes of a project and its urban form, the proposed request for Estate District (ED) designation would have to comply with site development standards established in Section 38‐1385 of the Orange County Land Development Code. These standards establish, among other requirements, residential density of two dwelling units per acre (2 DU/acre) and a minimum average lot size of 10,000 square feet that are compatible with larger lot residential estate homes currently in existence nearby. Therefore, the size and character of the proposed residential development associated with this request will be compatible with the surrounding uses. In addition, in accordance with the newly proposed Policy FLU4.5.4.1, the future development on the subject site will have to meet a requirement for provision of cross‐access to adjacent developments and connectivity of recreational facilities, which will further its compatibility with the surrounding neighborhoods by allowing for a cohesive development approach, and it might also help address issues of access to the surrounding existing communities that was brought up during the community meetings for the project.

Public Facilities and Services Environmental. The developable area of the subject property is limited by the presence of extensivewetlands. The property was included in the Conservation Area Determination (CAD 98‐045), andsubsequent modifications, completed for the Lake Reams Neighborhood Planned Development (PD).Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas orprotective buffers.

Until wetland permitting is complete, the developable acreage is the gross acreage less wetlandsand surface waters. Any plan showing development in a wetland area without Orange County andother jurisdictional governmental agency wetland permits is speculative and may not be approved.

The removal, alteration or encroachment within a Class I Conservation Area shall only be allowed incases where: no other feasible or practical alternatives exist, impacts are unavoidable to allow areasonable use of the land, or where there is an overriding public benefit, as determined before theOrange County Board of County Commissioners.

Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regardingwildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant isresponsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permitsfrom the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife ConservationCommission (FWC).

Transportation. The proposed use (analysis is based on the previously submitted development program of 140 single family dwelling units; this program has since been reduced) will generate 142 pm peak hour trips resulting in a net increase of 127 pm peak hour trips. The proposed use of 75 single‐family homes will generate 81 pm peak hour trips resulting in a net increase of 64 pm peak hour trips. Analysis of existing pm peak hour conditions indicates that all roadway segments within the project impact area currently operate at an acceptable level of service except Winter Garden‐



Vineland Road from Tilden Road to Ficquette Road Ficquette Road from Reams Road to Winter Garden‐Vineland Road and Reams Road from Lake Hancock Road to Cast Drive.

The short term or year 2020 analysis was based on daily conditions. The analysis needs to be revised to reflect PM peak conditions based on reasonable annual growth rates. A minimal 1% growth rate was applied to project future traffic conditions, which is not acceptable since the traffic growth on the adjacent study roadways show annual growths of 6.33% and 9.27%. At a minimum, the growth rate should be consistent among the adjacent roadways. In addition, the trip distribution needs to be verified on the roadway segment between the north property boundary and the northbound segment of Ficquette Road.

The long term or year 2040 analysis also needs to be updated to include pm peak hour conditions. In addition, where the 2040 model traffic volumes are less than existing traffic volumes, a projection based on historical growth patterns should be used. Table 6 in the report needs to be revised.

Overall, the transportation facilities analysis has not demonstrated that the propose land use change will not significantly impact the transportation network within the project impact area. A revised study is required.

The short term or year 2020 roadway volumes were projected using historical growth rates based on data obtained from Orange County’s traffic database. Analysis of the projected traffic on the area’s transportation network indicates that the segments of Reams Road and Ficquette Road will continue to operate below the adopted level of service with and without the proposed amendment

Analysis of long term or year 2030 conditions which included all planned roadway improvements within the project impact area indicated that all roadways segments are projected to operate within the adopted level of service standard.

The planned roadway inmprovements within the impact area of the proposed amendment include the following:

Ficquette Road – Ficquette Road from Overstreet Road to Winter Garden‐Vineland Road. This roadway is planned to be widened from 2 to 4 lanes. Construction is scheduled to be completed July 2016.

Reams Road from Old Reams Road to Lake Hancock Road. This roadway is planned to be widened to 4 lanes. This is a planned partnership project, and it is included in the County’s 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan.

Seidel Road – Planned roadway improvement to widen to 4 lanes from Avalon Road to Summerlake Boulevard. This is a planned partnership project, and it is included in the County’s 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan.

It should be noted that, per the 2005 Reams Road Study, right‐of‐way is required from this project for the future widening of Reams Road. The applicant will be required to coordinate with the County’s Road Agreement Committee regarding the donation of right‐of‐way. A road agreement detailing the terms and conditions of the right‐of‐way donation for the widening of Reams Road will be required.

Final permitting on the subject site will be subject to further review and approval from the County’s Development Review Committee (DRC), as well as an assessment of roadway capacity constraints based on the Transportation Concurrency Management System. The applicant will be required to mitigate any deficiencies that may occur from the proposed development.



Schools. The applicant must obtain an executed Concurrency Enhancement Agreement (CEA) prior to the final approval of the proposed amendment. The CEA application (Reference #OC‐15‐005) has been submitted to the Orange County Public Schools (OCPS) for review.


FLU1.4.2 Orange County shall ensure that land use changes are compatible with and serve existing neighborhoods.

FLU4.1.1 General Village Principles. Each Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) shall be designed based on an

urban development pattern, which encourages the formation of a suburban village while ensuring the provision of adequate public facilities and services concurrent with development and protection of environmental quality.







G. Each Village shall have a well‐defined edge, such as greenbelts or wildlife corridors permanently protected from development.

H. Local and collector streets, pedestrian paths and bike paths shall contribute to a system of fully connected and interesting routes from individual neighborhoods to the Village Center and to other villages. Their design should encourage pedestrian and bicycle use by being spatially defined by buildings, trees, and lighting; and by discouraging high speed traffic.



FLU4.1.5 Neighborhood Development. Residential neighborhoods shall offer neighborhood facilities

and services including passive and active recreation facilities, school sites, sidewalks and bikeways. Each neighborhood shall contain a Neighborhood Center as a central public focal point consisting of an elementary school site, a minimum five (5) acre park in conjunction with the elementary school and may include other public facilities such as churches or community center or neighborhood commercial uses as described in FLU4.1.6. The development of a



variety of lot sizes and housing types is encouraged with generally higher densities located in proximity to the village center and neighborhood center (focal point). Public open space shall be provided within each neighborhood. Where physically possible, each neighborhood shall be designed so that most housing units are within a 1/2 mile radius of the Neighborhood Center.

FLU4.5.1 Village Greenbelts. In addition to requirements for formal parks and neighborhood greens,

greenbelts surrounding each Village and the Town Center averaging 500 feet in width shall be required at the perimeter of each Village. This greenbelt must be provided to discourage sprawl by creating a definable Village and provide a permanent undeveloped edge, except as set forth in FLU4.3.2, so that planning a Village within limited spaces takes on meaning. Topography and other physical features may allow this width to be reduced where visual separation can be accomplished with less distance. Where it may be beneficial to concentrate the acreage to enhance wildlife corridors, wetland connections, or preserve valuable uplands and protect sites critical for Floridian Aquifer protection the greenbelt may be concentrated in one section of the Village Perimeter. In no case shall the greenbelt separation between villages be less than 300 feet. Subject to subdivision regulations and conservation area protection requirements, access drives and bicycle/pedestrian paths may be allowed within the greenbelt/buffer to connect properties that would otherwise be denied reasonable access. Development standards for access drives and pedestrian/bicycle paths through greenbelt/buffer shall be addressed in the Village and Town Center Development Codes.

FLU4.5.4.1 Reams Road Corridor Study Area. In Lakeside Village, the Reams Road Corridor Study Area is

established in recognition of the changing character of properties fronting Reams Road, increased densities in the area, and the area’s proximity to a major employment center. The Corridor Study Area is limited to several properties located along Reams Road, which, combined, constitute the largest greenbelt system in the Horizon West Special Planning Area that separates Lakeside Village and Village of Bridgewater. The goal of establishing the Corridor Study Area is to achieve the mix of residential uses and desired minimum overall density of 5 DU/ac within the Village and to provide a residential transition zone within the largest greenbelt system while protecting the local environmental systems by connecting Lake Spear with the ecosystem within Reedy Creek Improvement District on the west and south. The general principles and procedures for acquiring a residential land use designation within the Corridor Study Area are as follows:

The Reams Road Corridor Study Area boundary shall be depicted on the Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP).

Uses on properties within the Corridor Study Area shall be limited to residential.

Residential uses within the Corridor Study Area shall be limited to areas currently designated as Greenbelt (GB) on the Lakeside Village SAP.

Requesting a residential land use district designation within the Corridor Study Area requires a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendment to the County’s Comprehensive Plan.

The maximum residential density considered to be appropriate within the Corridor Study Area is 6 DU/ac. Additional density increases may be allowed, consistent with the provisions of the Transfer of Development Right (TDR) Ordinance.

At the time of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, an applicant shall enter into an agreement with the County to provide the right‐of‐way necessary for the Reams Road widening project.



Any future development within the Corridor Study Area shall provide cross‐access to adjacent developments, requirements for which shall be determined at the time of PD‐LUP approval. The County might also require connectivity of recreational facilities, including multi‐purpose trails, between the properties included in the Corridor Study Area and development north and south of the study area.

Development proposals that are inconsistent with this policy shall meet the standards of the adopted Future Land Use designation.

FLU4.5.6 Additional greenbelt requirements apply as follows:

Lakeside Village The Village greenbelt requirement for Lakeside Village shall be provided by utilizing the environmental systems connecting Lake Spear with the ecosystem within Reedy Creek Improvement District on the west and south. Village of Bridgewater The Village greenbelt for the Village of Bridgewater shall provide for the connection of the environmental systems connecting Lake Speer and Lake Hancock with the ecosystem within Lakeside Village, and Reedy Creek Improvement District. Golf courses shall be permitted to form a portion of the Village of Bridgewater greenbelt/buffer only where it can be demonstrated that such greenbelt/buffer does not contain environmentally sensitive uplands and where it is not providing connectivity of wetland/wildlife corridors. The golf course within the greenbelt/buffer shall not supplant any requirement to provide connectivity of wetland/wildlife corridors, or protection of environmentally significant uplands elsewhere within the Village. The golf course shall provide public open space as permanent Village edge. The golf course shall provide connectivity and access to other public open spaces within the Village. The golf course shall contribute to compactness of the Village, and not isolate residences from the Village or Neighborhood Centers. Village F The Village F greenbelt shall include the environmental systems connecting Saw Grass Lake and Reedy Lake and the wetlands between Lakeside Village, the Village of Bridgewater and the Reedy Creek Improvement District. Orange County National Golf Course shall be permitted to form a portion of the Village F greenbelt/buffer. Village I The Village I greenbelt shall include the environmental systems connecting Lake Oliver, Lake Gifford, Lake Dennis and Doe Lake and the wetlands between adjacent Horizon West Villages and the Reedy Creek Improvement District. The extensive wetlands, conservation areas and other designated greenbelt areas shall provide a well‐defined edge to Village I and shall be protected from the influence of urban development patterns. Town Center Town Center will develop at urban densities and intensities; therefore, upland greenbelt areas shall not be required as a buffer between SR 429 and development in Town Center.



The Upland Greenbelt requirement between the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center Specific Area Plans (SAP’s) may be accomplished as depicted on the adopted Recommended Future Land Use Plan (RFLUP) for both SAP’s or by alternative location within the Village of Bridgewater as may be approved by the Board of County Commissioners through a privately initiated map amendment. The portion of the existing Urban Greenbelt for which an alternative may be proposed shall be limited to adjacency with Parcels CCMU‐1 and CCMU‐3 depicted on the Town Center RFLUP. An alternative location of the Upland Greenbelt shall: a) be consistent with the requirements of FLU4.5.1; b) provide a similar degree of physical separation between the Village of Bridgewater and

Town Center SAP’s as provided through the existing Urban Greenbelt designation; c) include upland areas; d) be fully capable of accommodating any planned trail or pedestrian/bicycle facility

intended for inclusion within the Upland Greenbelt; and e) be planned to minimize impacts to adjoining property owners that may be associated

with any type of public facilities or private development located within the Urban Greenbelt.

FLU8.2.1 Land use changes shall be required to be compatible with the existing development and

development trend in the area. Performance restrictions and/or conditions may be placed on property through the appropriate development order to ensure compatibility. No restrictions or conditions shall be placed on a Future Land Use Map change.

FLU8.2.11 Compatibility may not necessarily be determined to be a land use that is identical to those uses that surround it. Other factors may be considered, such as the design attributes of the project, its urban form, the physical integration of a project and its function in the broader community, as well its contribution toward the Goals and Objectives in the CP. The CP shall specifically allow for such a balance of considerations to occur.



Site Visit Photos

North South

East West

Subject Site




Notification Area

500 ft. buffer plus

property owners within

a 1‐mile radius of the

subject site (in the

proposed Reams Road

Corridor Study Area)

1,014 notices sent

Orange County Planning Division DEO Transmittal Staff Report Janna Souvorova, AICP, Project Planner Amendment 2015‐2‐A‐1‐7 (fka 2015‐1‐S‐1‐1)


FUTURE LAND USE

+The following meetings and hearings have been held for this proposal:

Project Information

Report/Public Hearing Outcome

Request: Horizon West, Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Greenbelt (GB), and Bridgewater Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Townhome/Apartment District (THD), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB) to Horizon West, Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM‐3), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB)

Community Meeting

March 4, 2015

(7 residents in attendance) See public notification map for notice area

Positive

Proposed Development Program: No change in the approved development program for CCM‐3 (50 residential dwelling units and 92,700 sq. ft. of non‐residential uses).

Staff Report Recommend Transmittal Public Facilities and Services: Please see the Public Facilities Analysis Appendix for specific analysis on each public facility.

Environmental: Orange County Conservation Area Determinations (CAD 11‐020 and CAD‐11‐08‐036) that included the subject parcels were completed.

Transportation: The proposed amendment will result in a net reduction of 24 pm peak hour trips. There are no failing roadway segments within the project impact area, and capacity is available to be encumbered.


Recommend Transmittal (7‐0)


State Agency Comments

September 2015


BCC Adoption November 10, 2015 Concurrent Rezoning: No

Applicant/Owner:

James G. Willard for SLF IV/Boyd Horizon West JV, LLC

Location: Generally described as located east of SR 429 and south of New Independence Parkway

Existing Use: Vacant

Parcel ID Numbers:

21‐23‐27‐0000‐00‐036 and portions of 21‐23‐27‐0000‐00‐033/004 and 20‐23‐27‐0000‐00‐030

Tract Size: ±9.99 gross acres



FUTURE LAND USE ‐ AS PROPOSED

Current Future Land

Use Designation:

Town Center Specific

Area Plan (SAP) –

Greenbelt (GB), and

Bridgewater Village

Specific Area Plan

(SAP) –

Townhome/Apartment

District (THD),


(CONS), and Greenbelt

(GB)

Special Area

Information

Special Planning Area: Horizon West

Proposed Future Land Use Designation: Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM‐3), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB)



ZONING

Current Zoning

District:

Planned Development

(PD) and Citrus Rural

District (A‐1)

Existing Uses

N: Orange groves

S: Lake; vacant

residential; non‐

agricultural acreage

E: Lake; stormwater

retention

W: Orange groves




Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan (see Future Land Use Policies FLU4.1.1, FLU4.5.1, and FLU4.5.6), determine that the amendment is in compliance, and TRANSMIT Amendment 2015‐2‐A‐1‐7 (fka 2015‐1‐S‐1‐1), Horizon West, Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Greenbelt (GB), and Bridgewater Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Townhome/Apartment District (THD), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB) to Horizon West, Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM‐3), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB).

Analysis


The subject site is located within the Horizon West sector plan boundary, and it is composed of four parcels (one parcel in its entirety and portions of the additional three parcels) split between two Villages – Village of Bridgewater and Town Center. The applicant has requested to change the Specific Area Plan (SAP) designations on the 9.99‐acre site located in Horizon West from Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Greenbelt (GB), and Village of Bridgewater Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Townhome/Apartment District (THD), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB) to Town Center Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM‐3), Wetland/Conservation (CONS), and Greenbelt (GB). As a result of this request, the Town Center SAP boundary will be moved to the east to incorporate all of the properties subject to this amendment.

The property is currently part of two Planned Developments (PDs) – Hamlin PD located in Town Center SAP and Avalon Woods 1 PD, located in Village of Bridgewater SAP (If this amendment is approved, both PDs would have to be amended). The current SAP designations allow for development of twenty‐six (26) townhomes on the portion located within the Village of Bridgewater SAP, and three (3) single‐family dwelling units on the portions of the site designated as Upland Greenbelt. The proposed amendment does not add any additional entitlements, but rather seeks to spread the approved development program for Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM‐3), consisting of fifty (50) residential dwelling units and 92,700 sq. ft. of non‐residential uses, over a larger area.

The subject site is located east of SR 429 and south of New Independence Parkway, and is surrounded by orange groves on the north and west, and water features, stormwater retention, vacant residential, and non‐agricultural acreage on the south and east.

2. Project Analysis

Consistency The requested FLUM amendment appears to be consistent with the applicable Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives, and policies, which are specifically discussed in the paragraphs below.

The Horizon West development is composed of five Villages and a Town Center, which are based on a number of key principles, including planning in a form of complete and integrated neighborhoods, diversity of housing types, preservation of open space and natural vegetation of the area, and creation of well‐defined village edges. Future Land Use Element Policy FLU4.1.1 outlines general village principles and states that each Village shall have a well‐defined edge, which can be accomplished through greenbelts and permanently protected wildlife corridors.

Policies FLU4.5.1 and FLU4.5.6 provide both general and village‐specific Greenbelt requirements. In particular, Policy FLU4.5.1 states that greenbelts should average 500 feet in width, and in no case



shall the greenbelt separation between villages be less than 300 feet. The existing greenbelt that is part of the proposed amendment separates the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center and measures approximately 150 feet in width, which does not meet the requirements of the Future Land Use Element Policy FLU4.5.1. In fact, it appears that the large wetland system that runs west of the Signature Lakes Subdivision and east of the approved Avalon Woods 1 PD (located within the Village of Bridgewater) also serves as a buffer between the Village of Bridgewater and the Town Center,with properties within the subdivision developing as attached and detached single‐family homes, while properties to the west of the wetland system are approved residential development similar in character to Town Center. Properties located to the east and north of the subject site are approved for 364 apartment units and twenty‐six (26) townhomes. Therefore, the wetland system effectively serves as a well‐defined edge between the lower densities associated with the Village of Bridgewater and higher densities and intensities envisioned for the Town Center. Figures 1 and 2 below show the location of the described wetland system.

Figure 1. Existing Wetland System – Aerial

Figure 2. Existing Wetland System – SAP Designations

Furthermore, Future Land Use Element Policy FLU4.5.6 states that the Greenbelt requirement between the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center may be accomplished by alternative location within the Village of Bridgewater, as opposed to the location depicted on the respective SAPs,



provided the alternative location is approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) through a privately‐initiated map amendment. Policy FLU4.5.6 furtherstates that the proposals for alternative Greenbelt locations are limited to parcels adjacent to parcels CCM‐1 and CCM‐3, as depicted on the Town Center SAP. The proposed amendment meets this requirement for alternative Greenbelt location, as the subject site is adjacent to the Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM‐3) parcel on its east side. Policy FLU4.5.6 goes on to outline criteria for alternative Greenbelt location, including provision of a similar degree of physical separation between the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center, minimizing impacts to adjacent property owners, and inclusion of upland areas, among others.

If the proposed amendment is approved, the large wetland system, which measures approximately 365 feet in width, will serve as a well‐defined edge between the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center. The applicant has agreed to provide a 20‐foot Greenbelt buffer that, combined with of 110‐foot right‐of‐way of New Independence Parkway, will serve as a separator between the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center to the north of the subject site. The applicant indicated his intent to potentially include the remainder of the Avalon Woods 1 PD (currently approved for multi‐family units) into the Town Center SAP at a later date, which will further highlight the fact that the large wetland system, rather than small pieces of Greenbelt‐designated areas, defines the edge of the Village of Bridgewater.

In summary, the proposed amendment meets the intent of the policies outlining requirements for Upland Greenbelts in Horizon West Villages and provides for the logical extension of mixed use development associated with Corporate Campus Mixed Use designation of the Town Center SAP onto the adjacent properties, while still maintaining the separation between the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center with a well‐defined edge.

Compatibility

The subject site is adjacent to Lake Hancock on the south side and a large wetland system, which will serve as a buffer between the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center, on the east side. The properties located to the west of the subject site are designated as Corporate Campus Mixed Use (CCM‐3) on the Town Center SAP, and the proposed amendment seeks to expand this designation to the subject properties without increasing the current entitlements for the CCM‐3 parcel. The properties to the north are part of the Avalon Woods 1 PD, and currently approved for 364 multi‐family dwelling units. The Corporate Campus Mixed Use designation allows for development of townhomes, apartments, and condominiums, as well as office development that is visually compatible with residential development (Sec. 38‐1390.56 of the Orange County Code). Therefore, the proposed development on the subject site is compatible with approved development on the adjacent properties.

Public Facilities and Services Environmental. The subject site is located within the Avalon Woods 1 and Hamlin Planned Developments (PDs). Orange County Conservation Area Determinations (CAD 11‐020 and CAD‐11‐08‐036) were completed that included the properties located within these PDs.

No construction, clearing, filling, alteration or grading is allowed within or immediately adjacent to a conservation area without first obtaining permission from the Orange County Environmental Protection Division.

Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible for determining



the presence of listed species and obtaining any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission.

Transportation. The proposed amendment will result in a net reduction of 24 pm peak hour trips. Based on the Level of Service information from the County’s Concurrency Management System database dated 03/11/2015, there are no failing roadway segments within the project impact area, and capacity is available to be encumbered. The planned roadway improvements in the vicinity of the subject site include widening of Porter Road to four lanes from Hamlin Groves Trail to Avalon Road.

The properties are subject to several road agreements, including the Road Network Agreement for Town Center east, 1st Amendment to Town Center East Road Network Agreement, the Right‐of‐Way Conveyance Agreement between Orange County and Susan D. Shaw and David Daniels LLC, the Hamlin Groves Trail Northern Extension Term Sheet, and the Road Network Agreement for the Northerly Extension of Hamlin Groves Trail from New Independence Parkway to Tiny Road.

Prior to approval of any development, the applicant will be required to demonstrate that concurrency has been met and provide an Assignment of Vested Trips document with or prior to Development Plan submittal. In addition, the Development Plan must include a trip matrix showing allocations by parcel identification number and development phase.


FLU4.1.1 General Village Principles. Each Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) shall be designed based on an urban development pattern, which encourages the formation of a suburban village while ensuring the provision of adequate public facilities and services concurrent with development and protection of environmental quality.







G. Each Village shall have a well‐defined edge, such as greenbelts or wildlife corridors



permanently protected from development.

H. Local and collector streets, pedestrian paths and bike paths shall contribute to a system of fully connected and interesting routes from individual neighborhoods to the Village Center and to other villages. Their design should encourage pedestrian and bicycle use by being spatially defined by buildings, trees, and lighting; and by discouraging high‐speed traffic.



FLU4.5.1 Village Greenbelts. In addition to requirements for formal parks and neighborhood greens, greenbelts surrounding each Village and the Town Center averaging 500 feet in width shall be required at the perimeter of each Village. This greenbelt must be provided to discourage sprawl by creating a definable Village and provide a permanent undeveloped edge, except as set forth in FLU4.3.2, so that planning a Village within limited spaces takes on meaning. Topography and other physical features may allow this width to be reduced where visual separation can be accomplished with less distance. Where it may be beneficial to concentrate the acreage to enhance wildlife corridors, wetland connections, or preserve valuable uplands and protect sites critical for Floridan Aquifer protection, the greenbelt may be concentrated in one section of the Village Perimeter. In no case shall the greenbelt separation between villages be less than 300 feet. Subject to subdivision regulations and conservation area protection requirements, access drives and bicycle/pedestrian paths may be allowed within the greenbelt/buffer to connect properties that would otherwise be denied reasonable access. Development standards for access drives and pedestrian/bicycle paths through greenbelt/buffer shall be addressed in the Village and Town Center Development Codes.

FLU4.5.6 Additional greenbelt requirements apply as follows:

Lakeside Village The Village greenbelt requirement for Lakeside Village shall be provided by utilizing the environmental systems connecting Lake Spear with the ecosystem within Reedy Creek Improvement District on the west and south.

Village of Bridgewater The Village greenbelt for the Village of Bridgewater shall provide for the connection of the environmental systems connecting Lake Speer and Lake Hancock with the ecosystem within Lakeside Village, and Reedy Creek Improvement District.

Golf courses shall be permitted to form a portion of the Village of Bridgewater greenbelt/buffer only where it can be demonstrated that such greenbelt/buffer does not contain environmentally sensitive uplands and where it is not providing connectivity of wetland/wildlife corridors. The golf course within the greenbelt/buffer shall not supplant any requirement to provide connectivity of wetland/wildlife corridors, or protection of environmentally significant uplands elsewhere within the Village. The golf course shall provide public open space as permanent Village edge. The golf course shall provide connectivity and access to other public open spaces within the Village. The golf



course shall contribute to compactness of the Village, and not isolate residences from the Village or Neighborhood Centers.

Village F The Village F greenbelt shall include the environmental systems connecting Saw Grass Lake and Reedy Lake and the wetlands between Lakeside Village, the Village of Bridgewater and the Reedy Creek Improvement District.

Orange County National Golf Course shall be permitted to form a portion of the Village F greenbelt/buffer.

Village I The Village I greenbelt shall include the environmental systems connecting Lake Oliver, Lake Gifford, Lake Dennis and Doe Lake and the wetlands between adjacent Horizon West Villages and the Reedy Creek Improvement District. The extensive wetlands, conservation areas and other designated greenbelt areas shall provide a well‐defined edge to Village I and shall be protected from the influence of urban development patterns.

Town Center Town Center will develop at urban densities and intensities; therefore, upland greenbelt areas shall not be required as a buffer between SR 429 and development in Town Center.

The Upland Greenbelt requirement between the Village of Bridgewater and Town Center Specific Area Plans (SAP’s) may be accomplished as depicted on the adopted Recommended Future Land Use Plan (RFLUP) for both SAP’s or by alternative location within the Village of Bridgewater as may be approved by the Board of County Commissioners through a privately initiated map amendment. The portion of the existing Urban Greenbelt for which an alternative may be proposed shall be limited to adjacency with Parcels CCMU‐1 and CCMU‐3 depicted on the Town Center RFLUP. An alternative location of the Upland Greenbelt shall:

1. be consistent with the requirements of FLU4.5.1; 2. provide a similar degree of physical separation between the Village of Bridgewater

and Town Center SAP’s as provided through the existing Urban Greenbelt designation;

3. include upland areas; 4. be fully capable of accommodating any planned trail or pedestrian/bicycle facility

intended for inclusion within the Upland Greenbelt; and 5. be planned to minimize impacts to adjoining property owners that may be

associated with any type of public facilities or private development located within the Urban Greenbelt.



Site Visit Photos

North South

East West

Subject Site




Notification Area

1,000 ft. plus

homeowner

associations within a 1‐

mile radius of the

subject site

107 notices sent



Orange County Planning Division DEO Transmittal Staff Report Janna Souvorova, AICP, Project Planner Amendment 2015‐2‐B‐FLUE‐3 Anoch Whitfield, AICP, Project Planner



Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, determine that the plan amendment is in

compliance, and recommend TRANSMITTAL of Amendment 2015‐2‐B‐FLUE‐3 revising Future Land Use

Element Objective and Policies related to Horizon West Village I.


Project/Legal Notice Information

Report/Public Hearing Outcome Title: Amendment 2015‐2‐B‐FLUE‐3

Staff Report Recommend transmittal

Division: Planning and Transportation Planning


Recommend transmittal (7‐0)

Request: Text amendments to Future Land Use Element policies related to Horizon West Village I




BCC Adoption November 10, 2015 Revision: OBJ FLU4.3; FLU4.3.10; FLU4.3.11; FLU4.3.12



A. Background Horizon West, located in southwest Orange County, is the first sector plan in the State of Florida. Future Land Use Element Goal FLU4 and associated objectives and policies establish a framework for implementation of the Village concept that Horizon West is based on. All Horizon West policies are organized by topic‐specific objectives, with Objective OBJ FLU4.3 being focused on transportation.

The Community Planning Act (Laws of Florida Chapter 2011‐139) included changes to Section 163.3245, Florida Statutes (F.S.), relative to the requirements for sector plans. Objective FLU4.3 and Policies FLU4.3.10, 4.3.11, and 4.3.12 are being updated to reflect the legislative changes to Section 163.3245(3)(b), F.S., relative to the requirements for a Detailed Specific Area Plan. To summarize, the proposed policy changes update the transportation planning requirements for Village I to be consistent with those of the other villages within Horizon West. The proposed amendment also corrects scrivener errors for consistency with the original Stipulated Settlement Agreement between the County and the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity.

B. Policy Amendments

Following are the policy changes proposed by this amendment. The proposed policy changes are shown in underline/strikethrough format. Staff recommends transmittal of the amendment.

OBJ FLU4.3 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. Within each SAP, there shall be a balanced transportation system that offers, with equal priority, multiple transportation options. This will include local and regional transit options, bicycle and pedestrian ways, and both higher speed thoroughfares and lower speed local roads for automobiles.

FLU4.3.10 Village I. Consistent with Section 163.3245(3)(b)43. and 6., Florida Statutes (F.S.), prior to commencing development beyond Phase I per Table 7.5 of the Village I Specific Area Plan, Village I developers/owners will reassess the projected cumulative transportation impacts of Village I and demonstrate that any significant and adverse impacts, including impacts outside Orange County’s jurisdiction, will be mitigated to meet Rule 9J‐2, Florida Administrative Code, requirements. The SAP will be amended pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S., to reflect any improvements needed consistent with Section 163.3245(3)(b)4., F.S. Development of Phase I consistent with Table 7.5 of the Village I Specific Area Plan, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on June 10, 2008, may continue beyond through 2013 upon the effectiveness of the adopted amendment. Development beyond year 2015 in Phase I shall not commence without a Road Network Agreement and unless public facilities are demonstrated to be available or planned to be available in a financially feasible manner in Orange County’s Capital Improvements Element as these terms are defined in consistent with Sections 163.3164(24) and (32) 163.3245(3)(b)6. and Section 163.3164(38), Florida Statutes F.S.

FLU4.3.11 In order to account for extra‐jurisdictional transportation impacts, for development that otherwise would be subject to the provisions of Section 380.06, F.S., except for the exemption set forth in Section 163.3245, Florida Statutes F.S., the County may require, in all villages except Village H, in addition to the requirements of Future Land Use Element FLU4.1.8 IV 2.b., monitoring and modeling for transportation facilities impacted



by an SAP. In addition, future SAPs shall include as part of their comprehensive amendment a list of candidate roadways for such monitoring and modeling. The County may require mitigation based on the SAP or subsequent monitoring and modeling. Any required monitoring and modeling will be in addition to concurrency requirements otherwise required by the Orange County Code.

FLU4.3.12 Orange County shall coordinate with Osceola County regarding significant and adverse impacts to extra‐jurisdictional roadways related to development in Village I, which summarized in Table 7.5 of the Village I Specific Area Plan adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on June 10, 2008. Pursuant to Policy FLU4.3.101, a transportation analysis will be performed to identify these impacts within both Orange and Osceola cCounties. Osceola County will be provided a copy of the analysis by Orange County and will be given 30 days upon receipt to respond with comments. Upon determination by Orange County of the transportation impacts and mitigation for substantial impacts to regional roadways within both jurisdictions, consistent with Sections 163.3245(3)(b)34. and 5., F.S., Florida Statutes, Orange County shall amend the SAP to include the agreed‐upon mitigation including the identified improvements, timing of construction, and funding of such improvements. consistent with Rule 9J‐2, F.A.C.


-1-

Community Meeting Memorandum

DATE: April 28, 2015

TO: Alberto Vargas, MArch., Manager, Planning Division

FROM: Steven Thorp, Planner II

SUBJECT: Amendment 2015-2-A-1-2 – (Parcel 45, Springhill PD) – Community Meeting Notes

C: Project file

Location of Project: 11355 Avalon Road; Generally described as located on the east side of Avalon Rd., north of Lake Star Rd., south of Flamingo Crossings Blvd., and west of SR 429

Property Identification: 17-24-27-0000-00-008

Meeting Date and Location: April 27, 2015 at 6:00 pm at Bridgewater Middle School (located at 5600 Tiny Rd., Winter garden, FL 34787

Attendance:

District Commissioner:

P & Z Commissioner:

Orange County staff:

Applicant:

Property owner:

Residents:

S. Scott Boyd, District 1 Commissioner

Jimmy Dunn, District 1 Commissioner

Steven Thorp and Amy Bradbury, Planning Division Renzo Nastazi, Transportation Planning Diana Almodovar, Development Engineering

Dana Boyte, Dewberry, LLC (applicant)

<No Attendance>

7 notices sent; 6 people in attendance

Overview of Project:

The applicant’s request is to amend the Horizon West Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) designation on Parcel 45, a 24.85-acre parcel, from Apartment District (APT) and Conservation/Wetland to Village Home District (VHD) and Conservation/Wetland, with the approved Conservation/Wetland area not being modified. This request would reduce the approved density from 25 dwelling units per net-net developable acre to 7.5 dwelling units per net-net developable acre.

As this parcel is part of the larger Springhill PD, a Change Determination Request will also be required in the future.

-2-

Meeting Summary:

Mr. Thorp opened the meeting at 6:05 p.m. with introductions of the Planning staff, Commissioner Boyd, and the applicant, Dana Boyte of Dewberry, to the people in attendance. Mr. Thorp then proceeded with a review of the applicant’s request to change the Apartment District (APT) area on Parcel 45 in Horizon West Village H to Village Home District (VHD), while also explaining that the Wetland/Conservation area will not be modified with this request. Mr. Thorp explained what this meant in regards to the development of the property, and Ms. Boyte also included their intent of this request, as the applicant believed that the Apartment District was unfit for this parcel due to the property location.

Mr. Thorp explained the approval timeframe and noted that the transmittal hearings will be on June 18, 2015 for the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency and July 28, 2015 for the Board of County Commissioners. The adoption hearings were noted for October 15, 2015 for the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency and November 10, 2015 for the Board of County Commissioners. It was also stated by Ms. Boyte that the property will later come through with a rezoning and change to the approved land use plan, and it will run concurrently towards the end of the approval process for this property. Mr. Thorp explained that this property was part of the previously approved Springhill Planned Development and that is why the Land Use Plan will need to be changed to accommodate this request.

A question was asked whether or not there were wetlands on the property, and Mr. Thorp answered that yes, there were wetlands, and the Wetland/Conservation designation on the map will not be changing. Another question was asked regarding the number of units to be built on the property. Mr. Thorp responded that currently, with the allowable density, up to 285 dwelling units could be constructed; with the proposed change, the reduced density will allow for up to 85 dwelling units to be built. Ms. Boyte also recited the size of the parcel for clarification.

An additional question was posed regarding which elementary school will students go to and what the timeframe for development will be. Ms. Boyte responded with possibly Bridgewater and Commissioner Boyd responded with a review of all of the planned and proposed schools in the area. He also noted that Orange County Public Schools have the ultimate say in where students will be placed and suggested contacting them for further details. Mr. Thorp also noted that Village H, and specifically the Springhill PD, has an elementary school parcel on the map near the subject parcel and that there may be a school there, if and when the subject parcel is developed. Ms. Boyte also stated that there is no current timeframe for the development of this parcel, and the property owner is only doing entitlement work at this time.

The last question was asked regarding the inclusion of native versus non-native landscaping in development. Commissioner Boyd responded that there are no current regulations regarding the inclusion of native, “Florida Friendly” landscaping. Mr. Thorp aladded that the Planning Division is working with developers to encourage Florida Friendly landscaping in the development plans of Planned Developments.

Mr. Thorp closed the meeting with a review of the timeframe of the approval process of this amendment. No additional questions were asked.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:25 p.m. The overall tone of the meeting was NEUTRAL.

Page 1 of 4

Community Meeting Memorandum

DATE: June 8, 2015

TO: Alberto Vargas, MArch, Manager, Planning Division

FROM: Janna Souvorova, AICP, Principal Planner, Planning Division

SUBJECT: Community Meeting Notes - Amendment 2015-2-A-1-4

Meeting #1: May 11, 2015

Meeting #2: June 4, 2015 _____________________________________________________________________________

Location of Project: 7721 Ficquette Rd.; Generally described as located on the east side of Ficquette Rd., south and west of Winter Garden Vineland Rd. and north of Center Dr.

Property Identification: 27-23-27-0000-00-020 Meeting Dates and Location: May 11, 2015, 6:00 PM, and June 4, 2015, 6:00 PM, at Sunset

Park Elementary School (located at 12050 Overstreet Road, Windermere, FL 34786)

Attendance: District Commissioner: Scott Boyd, District 1 Diana Garcia, Commissioner Aide P & Z Commissioner: Jimmy Dunn, District 1 Orange County staff: Diana Almodovar, Development Engineering Division Renzo Nastasi, Transportation Planning Division (Meeting #2) John Geiger, Environmental Protection Division Jamie Boerger, OCPS (Meeting #2) Planning Division staff: Janna Souvorova Applicant team: Jim Hall, VHB, Inc. Erika Hughes, VHB, Inc. Residents: ~70 people in attendance (Meeting #1) ~58 people in attendance (Meeting #2) 1,014 notices sent Overview of Project: The applicant’s request is to change the Future Land Use designation of the 307-acre subject property from Horizon West, Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Horizon West, Lakeside Village SAP – Estate District (ED) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS). The applicant proposes up to 75 single-family residential dwelling units. NOTE: the original proposal was to change the Future Land Use designation to Horizon West, Lakeside Village SAP – Village Home District (VHD) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to allow for development of up to 284 single-family dwelling units. This proposal was amended by the applicant after the 1st Community Meeting to address some of the concerns brought up at the meeting.

Page 2 of 4

Meeting #1 Summary (May 11, 2015): The meeting began at 6:00 PM. Diana Almodovar, with Orange County Development Engineering Division, introduced Commissioner Boyd, gave a brief overview of the proposal and explained the CP amendment process, including the schedule for the LPA and BCC public hearings. The applicant, Mr. Hall, then explained the proposal. Area residents had the following questions and comments: Residents in attendance voiced numerous concerns related to potential development of wetlands, environmental conditions on the property, presence of wildlife habitat, preservation of wildlife corridors, and the proposed development intensity on lands currently designation as Greenbelt and Wetland/Conservation. The applicant, Jim Hall, clarified that the proposed development will only occur on the upland (dry) portions of the property, and the wetlands will not be affected. He also displayed a map identifying the uplands and indicated that uplands account for less than a quarter of the total site, or about 70 acres. Questions were raised about soils conditions, potential flood issues, presence of a bold eagle nest on site, the timing of a built-out, improved access from surrounding neighborhoods, lack of supporting infrastructure (schools, roads), and how the nearby properties will be affected by the proposed development. Mr. Hall replied that timing has not yet been determined, and it is likely to become more clear after the transmittal (if this request is transmitted). One of the residents, who identified himself as an environmental expert, noted that there are more than 100 species of birds in the area (including bold eagle), black bears, and Florida panthers; additionally, water impacts of the proposed development could also be significant. He mentioned that a wildlife crossing sign was recently installed on Reams Road, near the subject site, and a crossing signal should also be put in to alert the drivers of this crossing. The applicant replied that additional environmental testing is being done on the property, and this application will be adjusted based on the comments received from the community.

As a result, Commissioner Boyd proposed a second community meeting to be held before the June 18 LPA transmittal public hearing to give the applicant time to bring additional information to the community. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:00 PM. The overall response from the community was NEGATIVE. Meeting #2 Summary (June 4, 2015): The meeting began at 6:07 PM. Janna Souvorova, with Orange County Planning Division, introduced District 1 Commissioner Scott Boyd, his aide Diana Garcia, PZC Commissioner James Dunn, Orange County and OCPS staff, and the applicant. Ms. Souvorova gave a brief overview of the proposal and explained the CP amendment process, including the schedule for the LPA and BCC public hearings. She highlighted the reason for the second meeting, to address some of the residents’ concerns brought up during the 1st community meeting and to provide additional information prior to the first public hearing, June 18 with the LPA. Ms. Souvorova then introduced the applicant, Jim Hall. Mr. Hall summarized the proposal and explained that the originally proposed development

Page 3 of 4

program for the subject site was significantly reduced to address concerns related to the amount of the proposed development, its impacts on the wetland systems present on site, preservation of wildlife habitat, and potential impacts on the surrounding residential developments. He showed a map depicting upland areas that are proposed to be developed and comparing them to the original proposal. Mr. Hall stated the portion of the site’s upland proposed to be developed was reduced to ~41 acres (from 70.8 acres), and the proposed number of units was reduced from 284 to 75 single-family residential units. He also highlighted the fact that the majority of the subject site – about 87%, will be preserved, and it will not be developed. Additionally, Mr. Hall noted that the proposed access to this development will be from Reams Road. Area residents had the following questions and comments: Residents inquired about potential future development of a wetland on site and if some assurances could be given that the rest of the property will not be developed later (such as designating it as a conservation easement). The applicant and John Geiger, with Orange County Environmental Protection Division, responded that wetlands could potentially be developed if proper permits are obtained; however; in many cases it is very expensive and cost-prohibitive. The proposed connection between two upland areas on site will go though a wetland and will require an approved permit. Mr. Hall also stated that, if the property is developed, wetlands could be enhanced to become an eco system that is more diverse than it is today. Mr. Geiger stated that a Conservation Area Determination application was received for the subject site, and it will delineate on-site wetlands. He also added that, in some cases, upland buffers might be required to preserve a function of a wetland. One of the attendees noted that the FL Audubon society submitted a public record against the proposed request. Another set of questions related to transportation issues including an overall traffic situation on Reams Road, lack of sidewalks, safety and access issues, and timing of potential improvements. Renzo Nastasi, with Transportation Planning Division, stated that a number of transportation studies were done for the area, which identified potential future public/private partnership improvements. He also mentioned that portions of Reams Road are scheduled to be 4-laned, and addition intersection improvements are planned. Comm. Boyd added that, as new developments are being approved in the area, they are required to provide sidewalks and connections to the surrounding developments; however, there are still many missing links. Additional Comments/Questions:

• Will a stormwater pond be located on uplands? Applicant replied yes, there will be wet stormwater ponds.

• What is the nature of the proposed development? Need more details on what the applicant is trying to do.

• The Horizon West master plan is too old and does not reflect the reality. • Where would the kids go to school? OCPS staff replied – New Independence

Elementary School (opening in August 2015). • Can the County condemn a ROW for the public safety purposes? Staff replied that in

Horizon West ROW cost is capped at $22.5K; when condemned, this cost can drastically increase.

• As approvals are granted for properties along Reams Road, there have not been any roadway improvements. Why not plan for the roads first, before giving approvals for more residential units? Comm. Boyd replied that the County is currently studying

April 24, 2015 TO: Alberto Vargas, Manager, Planning FROM: Bill Thomas, Planner III, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Facilities Analysis and Capacity Report 2015-2 Regular Cycle Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments The Parks and Recreation Division have reviewed the 2015-2 Regular Cycle Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments. Based on the information provided there is adequate parkland capacity to accommodate the proposed residential land use changes (see attached chart). The Future Land Use Amendment maps have been compared to our existing and proposed park and trail facilities and the only impact is Amendment 2015-2-A-5-2. The proposed East Orange Trail identified in the Orange County Trails Master Plan runs through the northern perimeter of the site. BT:bt c: Matt Suedmeyer, Manager, Parks and Recreation Bob Goff, Project Manager, Parks and Recreation File: Comp Plan Amendments

PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION MATT SUEDMEYER, MANAGER 4801 W Colonial Drive, Orlando. FL 32808

407-836.6200 FAX 407-836.6210 http://www.orangecountyparks.net

Facilities Analysis and Capacity Report 2015-2 Regular Cycle Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments

(Amendments with Parks Level-of-Service Impacts)

Amendment

Number

Proposed Future Land Use Residential

Dwelling

Units

Population

(2.56/unit)

Active Recreation

Acreage Required

(1.5 ac/1,000 pop)

Resource

Recreation

Acreage Required

(6.0 ac/1,000 pop)

2015-2-A-1-2

Horizon West Village H

Specific Area Plan (SAP)-

Village Home District (VHD)

52 133 0.2 0.8

2015-2-A-1-3High Density Residentail

(HDR)325 832 1.3 5.0

2015-2-A-1-4

Horizon West, Lakeside

Village Specific Area Plan

(SAP)-Garden Home District

(GHD) and


(CONS)

284 727 1.1 4.4

2015-2-A-1-5Rural Settlement Low

Density (RSLD)55 141 0.2 0.9

2015-2-A-1-6

Planned Development-Low-

Medium Density Residential

(PD/LMDR) and Urban

Service Area (USA)

Expansion

65 166 0.3 1.0

2015-2-A-4-1

Planned Development-

Medium Density

Residential/Office/Comercial/

Institutional/Conservation

(PD-MDR/O/C/INST/CONS)

350 896 1.3 5.4

2015-2-A-5-1

Lake Pickett (LP)(a proposed

new Future Land Use

designation)

2,219 5,681 8.5 34.1

2015-2-A-5-2

Lake Pickett (LP)(a proposed

new Future Land Use

designation)

1,999 5,117 7.7 30.7

Total Required Acres 20.6 82.3

317.1 9,057.1Available Capacity

(as of January 1, 2015)

ORANGE COUNTY FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT Rick Black, Strategic Business Planning Section 6590 Amory Court Winter Park, FL 32792 (407) 836-9893 Fax (407) 836-9106 [email protected]

DATE: April 14, 2015 TO: Sue G. Watson, Planner Orange County Planning Division FROM: Rick Black, Compliance and Planning Administrator Planning & Technical Services SUBJECT: Facility Analysis and Capacity Report 2015-2

Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-1-2 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 32, located at 14932 E. Orange Lake Blvd. Kissimmee, Florida 34747.

Amendment # OC Fire Station First Due

Distance From Fire Station

Emergency Response Time

2015-2-A-1-2 32 6.14 miles 10 min. Optimal Service Ability: To provide optimal emergency services delivery, a property should be served by a primary fire station within 2 ½ miles or 5 minutes travel time. The area identified is outside of an optimal emergency services delivery area.

Insurability Information: The Public Protection Classification (PPC) of a property is determined by the Insurance Services Office, and not the Orange County Fire Rescue Department. Properties that are within 5 road miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant are generally given a PPC of 4. Properties that do not have a fire station within 5 road miles are generally given a PPC of 10 and can prevent a property owner from receiving insurance and or at a much higher rate.


Sustained Water Supply: The listed proposed property amendment is served by a commercial water distribution system.

The details listed above come from a variety of internal data sources and represent the most accurate information available. Please do not hesitate to contact our office if you have any questions or need additional information.

Attachment: 2015-2 Regular Cycle Comprehensive Plan Amendment RB



Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-1-4 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 35, located at 7435 Winter Garden Vineland Road, Orlando, FL 34786

Amendment # OC Fire Station First Due Distance From Fire Station










Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-1-5 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 33, located at 1700 S. Apopka Vineland, Orlando, FL 32835



2015-2-A-1-5 33 1.6 miles 4 min. Optimal Service Ability: To provide optimal emergency services delivery, a property should be served by a primary fire station within 2 ½ miles or 5 minutes travel time. The area identified is inside of an optimal emergency services delivery area.








Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-1-6 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 35, located at 7435 Winter Garden Vineland Road, Orlando, FL 34786.











Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-2-1 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 20, located at 3200 Washington St. Zellwood, FL 32798.











Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-2-2 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 20, located at 3200 Washington St. Zellwood, FL 32798.











Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-3-1 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 81, located at 901 S. Econlockhatchee Tr. Orlando, FL 32825.











Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-4-1 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 81, located at 901 S. Econlockhatchee Tr. Orlando, FL 32825.











Regular Cycle Plan Amendment 2015-2-A-5-1 On April 14, 2015, Orange County Fire Rescue convened a meeting to review the impact of the proposed 2015-2 Regular Cycle Development Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The nearest Orange County Fire Rescue facility is Station 82, located at 500 N. Story Partin Rd. Orlando, Fl 32833









Potable Water and Wastewater Facilities Analysis for 2015-2 Regular Cycle Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments

O:\Dev_Engineering\CompPlanAmendments\2015\2015-2 R\2015-2 R FacilitiesAnalysis_LAT

Amendment Number Parcel ID Proposed Land

Use

Maximum Density

(dwelling units)

Maximum Density (sqft)

PW Demand (MGD)

WW Demand (MGD)

Available Uncommit-

ted PW Capacity

(MGD)

Available Uncommit-

ted WW Capacity

(MGD)

Reclaimed Water

Required for

Landscape Irrigation

OCU Service

Area

PW: Orange County Utilities PW:

WW: Orange County Utilities WW:

RW: Orange County Utilities RW:

PW: Orlando Utilities Commission PW: Water by OUC

WW: Orange County Utilities WW:8-inch to 12-inch gravity main located on Turkey Lake Road. 24-inch force main on Sand Lake Road.

RW: Orange County Utilities RW: 30-inch main, Sand Lake Road

PW: Orange County Utilities PW: 20-inch water main, Fiquette Road, 16-inch water main, Reams Road

WW: Orange County Utilities WW: 16-inch force main, Fiquette Road, 16-inch force main, Reams Road

RW: Orange County Utilities RW: 24-inch RW main, Fiquette Road, 16-inch RW main, Reams Road

PW: Orange County Utilities PW:24-inch main, Park Ridge Gotha Road/Moore Road; 8-inch water main, 7th Avenue; 12-inch water main, 8th Street

WW: Orange County Utilities WW:8-inch and 12-inch force main, Moore Road, 8-inch force main, 7th Avenue; ; 6-inch force main, 8th Street

RW: Orange County Utilities RW: 54-inch RW main, 8th Street

PW: Orange County Utilities PW: 24-inch water main, Winter Garden Vineland Road

WW: Orange County Utilities WW: 16-inch force main, Winter Garden Vineland Road

RW: Orange County Utilities RW: 16-inch RW main, Winter Garden Vineland Road

PW: City of Apopka PW: Water by ApopkaWW: City of Apopka WW: Wastewater by ApopkaRW: City of Apopka RW: Reclaimed Water by ApopkaPW: City of Apopka PW: Water by ApopkaWW: City of Apopka WW: Wastewater by ApopkaRW: City of Apopka RW: Reclaimed Water by Apopka

PW: Orange County Utilities PW: 16-inch water main, Valencia College Lane;

WW: Orange County Utilities WW:8-inch gravity main, Valencia College Lane at John Wesley Way intersection; 8-inch force main John Wesley Way

RW: Orange County Utilities RW: Not Available

2015-2-A-1-6(fka 2015-1-A-1-6)

32-23-28-0000-00-001/003/005/006 Student Housing 65 - 0.018 Yes South

0.007

0.000 0.000

N/A

0.015 0.018 0.015

No0.006 0.007

East

2015-2-A-2-2 22-20-27-0000-00-030 Commercial

2015-2-A-2-1 26-20-27-0000-00-022 Commercial 75,795 0.006

N/A

0.184 0.150 0.184 0.150 No

No45,000 0.000 0.000

2015-2-A-3-1 24-22-30-0000-00-130 Office/Commercial 2,000,000

0.012 0.015 0.012 TBD

Southwest0.078 0.064 Yes

West

0.073 TBD

0.064

South2015-2-A-1-326-23-28-5411-00-

030/031 0.073

- 0.0152015-2-A-1-5

33-22-28-3100-20-180/181/201;

33-22-28-3100-24-030/071;

33-22-28-3104-04-090/111;

33-22-28-3104-05-280/301/311/320/332

Residential 55

2015-2-A-1-4 27-23-27-0000-00-020 Residential 284 0.078

0.089Residential 325

2015-2-A-1-2 17-24-27-0000-00-008 Residential 52 Yes Southwest0.014 0.012

Service Type and Provider Main Size and General Location

0.089

Transmission system improvements and connection points to be in accordance with the approved Horizon West Village H SAP MUP.

0.014 0.012

Potable Water and Wastewater Facilities Analysis for 2015-2 Regular Cycle Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments

O:\Dev_Engineering\CompPlanAmendments\2015\2015-2 R\2015-2 R FacilitiesAnalysis_LAT

Amendment Number Parcel ID Proposed Land

Use

Maximum Density

(dwelling units)

Maximum Density (sqft)

PW Demand (MGD)

WW Demand (MGD)

Available Uncommit-

ted PW Capacity

(MGD)

Available Uncommit-

ted WW Capacity

(MGD)

Reclaimed Water

Required for

Landscape Irrigation

OCU Service

AreaService Type and Provider Main Size and General Location

PW: Orange County Utilities PW: 20-inch water main, Lake Underhill RoadWW: Orange County Utilities WW: 8-inch force main, Lake Underhill RoadRW: Orange County Utilities RW: Not Available

PW: Orange County UtilitiesPW, WW, RW

WW: Orange County Utilities

RW: Orange County Utilities

PW: Orange County UtilitiesPW, WW, RW

WW: Orange County Utilities

RW: Orange County Utilities

East0.105 0.086 0.105 0.086 No2015-2-A-4-1 29-22-31-0000-00-032/050

Residential/Commercial 350 100,000

0.550

0.836

Multiple connection points to existing OCU mains will be required to support this development. Main sizes and connection points will be determined by developer master utility planning and coordination with OCU. Existing utilities in the vicinity of the project area include: PW: 24-inch main on E. Colonial Dr., 20-inch main on Lake Pickett Road at N. Tanner Rd, 16-inch main on Chuluota Road; WW: 24-inch force main on Old Cheney Hwy at Dew St.

0.450 0.550

No plant improvements are needed to maintain LOS standards. This evaluation pertains soley to water and wastewater treatment plants. Transmission system capacity will be evaluated at the time of Master Utility Plan review and permitting, or at the request of the applicant.

Abbreviations: PW - Potable Water; WW - Wastewater; RW - Reclaimed Water; WM - Water Main; FM - Force Main; GM - Gravity Main; TBD - To be determined as the project progresses through Development Review Committee and permitting reviews.

0.450 Yes1,999

Multiple connection points to existing OCU mains will be required to support this development. Main sizes and connection points will be determined by developer master utility planning and coordination with OCU. Existing utilities in the vicinity of the project area include: PW: 24-inch main on E. Colonial Dr., 20-inch main on Lake Pickett Road at N. Tanner Rd, 16-inch main on Chuluota Road; WW: 24-inch force main on Old Cheney Hwy at Dew St.

East- 2015-2-A-5-2 (fka

2015-1-A-5-2 & 2014-2-A-5-2)

Multiple Parcels Residential

0.684 0.836 0.684 Yes East2015-2-A-5-1 (fka

2015-1-A-5-1 & 2014-2-A-5-1)

08-22-32-0000-00-00517-22-32-0000-00-00218-22-32-0000-00-00118-22-32-0000-00-02519-22-32-0000-00-00120-22-32-0000-00-00220-22-32-0000-00-038

Mixed 2961 237,000

Orange County Public Schools School Capacity Report

DATE

JURISDICTION

April 29, 2015

Orange County

CASE 2015-2-A-1-2

PROPERTY ID 27-24-17-0000-00-008

ACREAGE +/- 24.85 ac

LAND USE CHANGE Future Land Use Amendment

PROPOSED USE 52 single-family units

CONDITIONS AT AFFECTED SCHOOLS (AS OF OCTOBER 15, 2014)

School Level KEENE’S CROSSING ES BRIDGEWATER MS WEST ORANGE HS School Capacity (2014-15) 859 1,176 3,276

Enrollment (2014-15) 734 1,374 3,836

Utilization (2014-15) 85.4% 116.8% 117.1%

LOS Standard 110.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Students Generated 44 21 27

CONDITION(S) OF APPROVAL:

Project must have an executed Capacity Enhancement Agreement (CEA) prior to Board of County Commission approval. Applicant has submitted an application, reference #OC-15-008.

For more information on this analysis, please contact Julie Salvo, AICP at (407) 317-3200 x2002139, or at [email protected].

Orange County Public Schools School Capacity Report

DATE

JURISDICTION

April 29, 2015

Orange County

CASE 2015-2-A-1-4

PROPERTY ID 27-23-27-0000-00-020

ACREAGE +/- 306.80 ac

LAND USE CHANGE Future Land Use Amendment

PROPOSED USE 284 single-family units

CONDITIONS AT AFFECTED SCHOOLS (AS OF OCTOBER 15, 2014)

School Level SUNSET PARK ES BRIDGEWATER MS WEST ORANGE HS School Capacity (2014-15) 838 1,176 3,276

Enrollment (2014-15) 1,011 1,374 3,836

Utilization (2014-15) 120.6% 116.8% 117.1%

LOS Standard 110.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Students Generated 55 28 38

CONDITION(S) OF APPROVAL:

Project must have an executed Capacity Enhancement Agreement (CEA) prior to Board of County Commission approval. Applicant has submitted an application, reference #OC-15-005.

For more information on this analysis, please contact Julie Salvo, AICP at (407) 317-3200 x2002139, or at [email protected].

Interoffice Memorandum

DATE: May 1, 2015 TO: Alberto Vargas, Manager Planning Division THROUGH: John Geiger, PE, Senior Engineer Environmental Protection Division FROM: Sarah Bernier, REM, Senior Environmental Specialist Environmental Protection Division SUBJECT: Facilities Analysis and Capacity Report Request for the 2015-2 Regular Cycle Comprehensive Plan Amendments As requested, Environmental Protection Division staff reviewed the subject Comprehensive Plan Amendments. We understand that the first public hearing for these requests will be on June 18, 2015 before the Local Planning Agency. Attached are summary charts with the environmental analysis results. If you have any questions regarding the information provided, please contact Sarah Bernier at 407-836-1471 or John Geiger at 407-836-1504. Attachment SB/JG cc: Janna Souvorova, Acting Chief Planner, Planning Division Sue Watson, Planner, Planning Division Lori Cunniff, Deputy Director, Community, Environmental and Development Services Arnaldo Mercado, Environmental Program Administrator, Environmental Protection Division

Orange County Environmental Protection Division Comments to the Local Planning Agency for the


5/1/15 Page 1 of 16 S:\Engineering Support\Comprehensive_Policy_Plan\Regular Cycle\2015-2\2015-2 Regular Cycle EPD Comments.doc

Amendment # 2015-2-A-1-1 (fka 2015-1-A-1-4) WITHDRAWN Crosland LUP FLU from: Horizon West Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP)- Estate District (ED) To: Horizon West Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP)- Estate District (ED) Owner: Hanover Hickory Nut, LLC Agent: Miranda Fitzgerald, Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A. Parcels: 08-24-27-0000-00-002 Address: 10150 Avalon Rd. District: 1 Area: 67.10 gross acres EPD Comments: This property was previously reviewed for Comprehensive Plan Amendment #2008-1-A-1-3 and for the Crosland Land Use Plan (DRC #5037241). There are wetlands and surface waters located onsite, including a portion of Hickory Nut Lake. Orange County Conservation Area Determination CAD 07-056 was completed in 2007 that delineated the wetlands on site, but this determination expired in 2012. A new CAD application will need to be completed prior to requesting any Orange County permits or development approvals, consistent with Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas or protective buffers. The Normal High Water Elevation (NHWE) of Hickory Nut Lake was established at 101.5 feet NGVD 29 in the Lake Index of Orange County. Clearly label and indicate the NHWE of the lake on all development plans or permit applications, in addition to any wetland and setback lines. Until wetland permitting is complete, the developable acreage is the gross acreage less the wetlands and surface waters. Any plan showing development in a wetland area without Orange County and other jurisdictional governmental agency wetland permits is speculative and may not be approved. The removal, alteration or encroachment within a Class I Conservation Area shall only be allowed in cases where: no other feasible or practical alternatives exist, impacts are unavoidable to allow a reasonable use of the land, or where there is an overriding public benefit, as determined before the Orange County Board of County Commissioners. Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). This site may be suitable habitat for the sand skink and blue-tailed mole skink. Note that skink surveys are conducted annually during a specific time period between




March and May. This property has a prior agricultural use that may have resulted in petroleum spills, agricultural related contamination, and fertilizer, pesticide or herbicide spillage. Prior to the earlier of platting, demolition, site clearing, grading, grubbing, review of mass grading or construction plans, the applicant shall provide documentation to assure compliance with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) regulation 62-777 Contaminant Cleanup Target Levels, and any other contaminant cleanup target levels found to apply during further investigations, to the Orange County Environmental Protection and Development Engineering Divisions. Amendment # 2015-2-A-1-2 Springhill PD/Spring Grove FLU from: Horizon West Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP)-Apartment District (APT) To: Horizon West Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP)- Village Home District (VHD) Owner: Spring Grove, LLC Agent: Dana Boyte, Dewberry Parcels: 17-24-27-0000-00-008 Address: 11355 Avalon Rd. District: 1 Area: 24.85 gross acres EPD Comments: There are wetlands located onsite that extend offsite. Prior to issuance of any Orange County permits or development approvals, the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) will require a completed Conservation Area Determination (CAD), and if encroachments are proposed, a Conservation Area Impact (CAI) Permit, consistent with Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. This property was not included in CAD 05-218 completed for the western parcels on the Springhill Planned Development. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas or protective buffers. Until wetland permitting is complete, the developable acreage is the gross acreage less wetlands and surface waters. Any plan showing development in a wetland area without Orange County and other jurisdictional governmental agency wetland permits is speculative and may not be approved. The removal, alteration or encroachment within a Class I Conservation Area shall only be allowed in cases where: no other feasible or practical alternatives exist, impacts are unavoidable to allow a reasonable use of the land, or where there is an overriding public benefit, as determined before the Orange County Board of County Commissioners. Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permits




from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). This site may be suitable habitat for the sand skink and blue-tailed mole skink. Note that skink surveys are conducted annually during a specific time period between March and May. Amendment # 2015-2-A-1-3 Majorca PD FLU from: Commercial (C) To: High Density Residential (HDR) Owner: Smith LLC and Se Belle Smith Dymmek Agent: Jim Hall, VHB, Inc. Parcels: 26-23-28-5411-00-030/031 Address: Majorca Place District: 1 Area: 24.31 gross / 6.5 net developable acres EPD Comments: There is a Class I wetland and a portion of Spring Lake on site. Orange County Conservation Area Determination CAD 01-034 was completed in 2002 for the Majorca PD that included the subject properties. This determination does not expire. The Normal High Water Elevation (NHWE) of Spring Lake was established at 98.7 feet NGVD 29 in the Lake Index of Orange County. Clearly label and indicate the NHWE of the lake on all development plans or permit applications, in addition to any wetland and setback lines. No construction, clearing, filling, alteration or grading is allowed within or immediately adjacent to a conservation area without first obtaining permission from EPD. Reference Orange County Code Chapter 15, Article X, Section 15-376. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas or protective buffers. The removal, alteration or encroachment within a Class I Conservation Area shall only be allowed in cases where: no other feasible or practical alternatives exist, impacts are unavoidable to allow a reasonable use of the land, or where there is an overriding public benefit, as determined before the Orange County Board of County Commissioners. The developer is responsible for addressing any adverse impacts, including secondary impacts, to surface waters, wetlands, or conservation areas that may occur as a result of development of the site. Preventive measures include but are not limited to: 25-foot average undisturbed upland buffer along the wetland boundary, signage, pollution abatement swales, split rail fence, retaining wall or native plantings adjacent to the wetlands. Identify and label the measures employed to prevent adverse conservation area impacts in all development plans and permit applications. Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding




wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Amendment # 2015-2-A-1-4 Lake Reams Neighborhood PD/Peach Tree Parcels 22 through 25 FLU from: Horizon West Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) To: Horizon West Lakeside Village Specific Area Plan (SAP) - Garden Home District (GHD) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) Owner: Developco Inc. Agent: Jim Hall, VHB Parcels: 27-23-27-0000-00-020 Address: 7721 Ficquette Rd. District: 1 Area: 306.8 gross / 70.80 net developable acres EPD Comments: The developable area in the subject property is limited by the presence of extensive wetlands. The property was included in the Conservation Area Determination CAD 98-045, and subsequent modifications, completed for the Lake Reams Neighborhood Planned Development. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas or protective buffers. Until wetland permitting is complete, the developable acreage is the gross acreage less wetlands and surface waters. Any plan showing development in a wetland area without Orange County and other jurisdictional governmental agency wetland permits is speculative and may not be approved. The removal, alteration or encroachment within a Class I Conservation Area shall only be allowed in cases where: no other feasible or practical alternatives exist, impacts are unavoidable to allow a reasonable use of the land, or where there is an overriding public benefit, as determined before the Orange County Board of County Commissioners. Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC).




Amendment # 2015-2-A-1-5 Fire Creek at Gotha FLU from: Rural Settlement 1/1 (RS 1/1) To: Rural Settlement Low Density (RSLD) Zoning from: A-1 (Citrus Rural District) and R-CE (Country Estate District) To: PD (Planned Development District) Owner: Harry R. Strange; Ophelia Devane Phillips Trust; Ruth Haupt; Patrick Neal Moran; James Harvey III Trust Agent: Robert Holston Parcels: 33-22-28-3100-20-180/181/201; 33-22-28-3100-24-030/071; 33-22-28-3104-04-090/111; 33-22-28-3104-05-280/301/311/320/332 Address: Moore Rd and Park Ridge Gotha Rd, in the Gotha RS District: 1 Area: 27.58 gross acres EPD Comments: There is a pond located on parcel 280. Prior to issuance of any Orange County permits or development approvals, the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) will require a completed Conservation Area Determination (CAD), and if encroachments are proposed, a Conservation Area Impact (CAI) Permit, consistent with Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas or protective buffers. Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Some of the properties had a prior use that may have resulted in petroleum spills, agricultural related contamination, and fertilizer, pesticide or herbicide spillage. Prior to the earlier of platting, demolition, site clearing, grading, grubbing, review of mass grading or construction plans, the applicant shall provide documentation to assure compliance with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) regulation 62-777 Contaminant Cleanup Target Levels, and any other contaminant cleanup target levels found to apply during further investigations, to the Orange County Environmental Protection and Development Engineering Divisions. If a septic system is required or in use, the applicant shall notify the Florida Department of Health (FDOH), Environmental Health Division (407-858-1497), about the septic system permit application, modification or abandonment. Also refer to Orange County Code Chapter 37, Article XVII for details on Individual On-Site Sewage Disposal as well as the FDOH.




Amendment # 2015-2-A-1-6 (fka 2015-1-A-1-6) Windermere Preparatory School Residential Village FLU from: Village (V) To: Planned Development-Low-Medium Density Residential (PD-LMDR) and Urban Service Area (USA) Expansion Zoning from: R-CE To: PD Owner: Billy Kenneth and Lynn A. Williams; Audrey L. Arnold Tr; James P. Arnold Tr; Ron and Kathy Darlene Marlow; Audrey L. Arnold and James P. Arnold Life Estate Agent: Jay Klima, Klima Weeks Civil Engineering, Inc. Parcels: 32-23-28-0000-00-001/003/005/006 Address: 8900 Winter Garden Vineland Rd. District: 1 Area: 10.61 gross acres EPD Comments: All acreages regarding conservation areas and wetland buffers are considered approximate until finalized by a Conservation Area Determination (CAD) and a Conservation Area Impact (CAI) Permit. Approval of this plan does not authorize any direct or indirect conservation area impacts. Until wetland permitting is complete, the developable acreage is the gross acreage less the wetlands and surface waters. Any plan showing development in a wetland area without Orange County and other jurisdictional governmental agency wetland permits is speculative and may not be approved. As mentioned at the pre-application meeting with the Orange County Technical Review Group on October 15, 2014 wetlands are present. Submit an application for a Conservation Area Determination (CAD) as soon as possible to the Orange County Environmental Protection Division as outlined in Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. This determination shall be completed with a certified wetland boundary survey approved by EPD prior to submittal of PSP/DPs. If any impacts to the wetlands or protective buffer areas are needed for roads, outfall pipes, or other design features of the development, then submit an application for a Conservation Area Impact Permit to the Orange County Environmental Protection Division as outlined in Orange County Code Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas as soon as possible. Prior to demolition/construction activities provide Orange County Environmental Protection Division (EPD) with Notice of Asbestos Renovation or Demolition form. For more information contact the EPD at (407) 836-1400. Prior to platting of this site (or sooner if available), the owner shall submit a completed Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to the Orange County Environmental Protection Division and the Orange County Development Engineering Division Platting office. If this site is determined to have a prior use that could result in potential soil or ground water contamination then the




applicant must provide documentation to assure compliance with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) regulation 62-777 Contaminant Cleanup Target Levels. Depending upon the Phase I results, sampling of soils and/or groundwater may be required prior site development. Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Amendment # 2015-2-A-2-1 Zellwood Commercial FLU from: Rural Settlement 1/1/ (RS 1/1) To: Commercial (C) Rural Settlement (RS) Owner: Stephen R. Parks, Longwood Lincoln Mercury Agent: Kendell Keith, Planning Design Group, LLC Parcels: 26-20-27-0000-00-022 Address: 2301 N. Orange Blossom Trail, Apopka, in the Zellwood RS District: 2 Area: 11.60 gross acres EPD Comments: This site is located within the geographical limits of the Wekiva Study Area, as established by the Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act, Section 369.316 F.S. Additional environmental regulations apply. These requirements may reduce the total net developable acreage. Regulations include, but are not limited to: septic tank criteria, open space requirements, stormwater treatment, upland preservation, setbacks related to karst features and the watershed, and aquifer vulnerability. In addition to the state regulations, local policies are included in Orange County Comprehensive Plan 2010-2030 Destination 2030, Future Land Use Element (but not limited to) Objective FLU6.6 Wekiva and the related policies. Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC).




Amendment # 2015-2-A-2-2 CDR-15-04-095 Hampden Dubose Academy PD/Sydonie Mansion FLU from: Rural Settlement 1/5 (RS 1/5) To: Commercial (C) Rural Settlement (RS) Zoning from: PD-Planned Development (Hampden Dubose) To: PD-Planned Development (Hampden Dubose) Owner: Clark and Amy Frogley (Sydonie Mansion) Agent: N/A Parcels: 22-20-27-0000-00-030 Address: 5538 Sydonie Dr., Mt. Dora District: 2 Area: 10.88 gross acres EPD Comments: This property includes a portion of Lake Maggiore. An Orange County Conservation Area Determination (CAD) must be completed prior to any lakeside development, pursuant to Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. The Normal High Water Elevation (NHWE) of Lake Maggiore was established at 87.4 feet NGVD 29 in the Lake Index of Orange County. Clearly label and indicate the NHWE line of the lake on all development plans or permit applications, in addition to any wetland and setback lines. No construction, clearing, filling, alteration or grading is allowed within or immediately adjacent to a conservation area (such as wetlands and lakes) without first obtaining permission from EPD. Reference Orange County Code Chapter 15, Article X, Section 15-376. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas or protective buffers. Approval of this request does not grant any approvals for the construction or repair of boat ramps, docks, decks, observation piers, lake shore vegetation, or seawalls on the lake. Any person desiring these types of structures or to perform shoreline alterations shall first apply for a permit from the Orange County EPD prior to commencement of such activities. Reference County Code Section 15-341. If a septic system is required or in use, the applicant shall notify the Florida Department of Health (FDOH), Environmental Health Division (407-858-1497), about the septic system permit application, modification or abandonment. Also refer to Orange County Code Chapter 37, Article XVII for details on Individual On-Site Sewage Disposal as well as the FDOH.




Amendment #2015-2-A-3-1 Asbury Theological Seminary Addition FLU from: No Designation (former SR 417 right-of-way) To: Planned Development-Office/Commercial (PD-O/C) Owner: Asbury Theological Seminary Agent: Scott Stuart - Kelly, Collins and Gentry, Inc. Parcels: 24-22-30-0000-00-130 Address: North of Valencia College Lane and west of SR 417 District: 3 Area: 16.50 gross acres EPD Comments: The former right-of-way area that is the subject of this request was mass graded for the construction of the SR 417 ramp section to Valencia College Lane, which was later redesigned. It was included in the environmental resource permit issued for the construction of SR 417. The adjacent undeveloped Asbury properties will require a wetland determination and environmental permitting prior to issuance of any Orange County permits or development approvals, consistent with Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. Amendment # 2015-2-A-4-1 Fieldstream PD (Northwest) FLU from: Planned Development-Office / Commercial / Institutional / Industrial / Conservation (PD-O/C/INST/IND/CONS) To: Planned Development - Medium Density Residential / Office / Commercial / Institutional / Conservation (PD-MDR/O/C/INST/CONS) Owner: Bent Tree Holdings, LLC Agent: Shri Rao, Sun Park Company Parcels: 29-22-31-0000-00-032/050 Address: 10601 Lake Underhill Road District: 4 Area: 58.11 gross / 36.12 net developable acres EPD Comments: Conservation Area Determination - Orange County Conservation Area Determination CAD 08-058 was completed in 2008 that delineated Class I and Class III wetlands on site, but this determination expired in 2013. A new CAD application will need to be completed prior to requesting any Orange County permits or development approvals (preliminary subdivision plans or development plan), consistent with Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas or protective buffers. Developable Acreage - Until wetland permitting is complete, the developable acreage is the gross acreage less the wetlands and surface waters. Any plan showing development in a wetland




area without Orange County and other jurisdictional governmental agency wetland permits is speculative and may not be approved. Conservation Area Impact Permits - The removal, alteration or encroachment within a Class I Conservation Area shall only be allowed in cases where: no other feasible or practical alternatives exist, impacts are unavoidable to allow a reasonable use of the land, or where there is an overriding public benefit, as determined before the Orange County Board of County Commissioners. Sensitive Ecological Considerations - This site is located adjacent to, but outside of, the geographical limits of the (Big) Econlockhatchee River Protection Ordinance area so those basin wide regulations do not apply. Habitat Protection Regulations - Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations regarding wildlife or plants listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The applicant is responsible to determine the presence of listed species and obtain any required habitat permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Buried Waste - This property includes significantly large areas that include buried waste disposal. Plan approvals will be required to include notification to all purchasers, renters, leasees, and occupants of the former use of this property. FDEP Guidance Document - All development on this site shall comply with the guidelines established in the most recent edition of, “Guidance for Disturbance and Use of Old Closed Landfills or Waste Disposal Areas in Florida” published by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Developer’s Agreement - This site shall comply with the "Agreement Concerning Development of Cloyd Landfill" as approved by the Orange County Board of County Commissioners on June 10, 2008. Orange County Legal will determine if this document is still valid and in effect considering this proposed change determination to the previously approved plan. Susceptible populations - At this time EPD does not support any residential use (see exception below but no single family residential due to potential for ground disturbance), or any other uses that may be perceived as having the potential to increase the future risks to susceptible populations such as children, the elderly, or the infirmed on top of former landfills and waste disposal areas. This reflects a belief that the level of engineering controls that would be required to address those concerns, possibly including removal of all of the waste in a controlled manner, would be cost-prohibitive. However, if any owner/developer determines that it is financially feasible, following due diligence including consideration of: site geophysical challenges, potential of uneven settlement, development of a excavation and disposal plan to be approved by the FDEP and agreed to by EPD, gas vapor barriers under the buildings, long term gas monitoring and groundwater monitoring to be determined in coordination with FDEP,




stormwater management (removal of waste or lined ponds), utility distribution systems and the unique structural design features necessitated by construction on former landfill areas, then development on former waste disposal sites will be considered through the County development review processes. Landfill Gas Emissions – The applicant is directed to note that in, "Guidance for Disturbance and Use of Old Closed Landfills or Waste Disposal Areas in Florida" published by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection there is specific mention of landfill gas concerns including but not limited to: 6.0 Construction Over Waste-Filled Areas, 6.1 Cautions for Construction, 6.1(a) The Department strongly discourages the construction of residential structures over old waste-filled areas (this is if landfill gases are currently present or caused by disturbance activities) and 6.1(b) construction projects should consider potential impacts from combustible gas inside structures unless designed against gas intrusion. Well Restriction - The covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) shall include notification to potential purchasers, builders, tenants and Property Owner Associations of this development that neither potable wells nor irrigation wells using local groundwater will be allowed on site. Dewatering - Prior to any dewatering activities occurring on site, the applicant shall provide the Orange County Environmental Protection Division copies of the St. John’s River Water Management District and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection approved dewatering plans. Fugitive Dust Emissions - Site development activity shall comply with State recommended Best Management Practices to protect soils during clearing, earthwork and construction. Fugitive dust emissions shall not be allowed from any activity including: vehicular movement, transportation of materials, construction, alteration, loading, unloading, storing or handling; without taking reasonable precautions to prevent such emissions. Reasonable precautions include application of water, dust suppressants, and other measures defined in Orange County Code Chapter 15 Environmental Control, Article III Air Quality Control, Division 2 Rules, Section 15-89.1 Air Pollution Prohibited. Contamination Disturbance - No activity will be permitted on the site that may disturb, influence, or otherwise interfere with: areas of soil or groundwater contamination, or any remediation activities, or within the hydrological zone of influence of any contaminated area, unless prior approval has been obtained through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and such approval has been provided to the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) of Orange County. An owner/operator who exacerbates any existing contamination or does not properly dispose of any excavated contaminated media may become liable for some portion of the contamination pursuant to the provisions in section 376.308, F.S. Previous Land Use Plan (LUP) Conditions – The BCC of April 28, 2009 had several conditions on the LUP as a result of concern due to the buried waste including some of the findings outlined above but also: Condition #11 An FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental




Protection) No Further Action letter of documentation of specific permission shall be submitted prior to earthwork or construction plan approvals on individual sites, if any soil or groundwater contamination is found in excess of state clean-up targets due to existing or prior potential contaminating generating sources or activities. Condition #13 The following shall be prohibited: a.) Adult/child care centers, b.) Churches, mosques, temples, and other religious use organizations with attendant educational buildings and recreational activities. Condition #15.i. regarding a notice in the public record for property within 700 feet (see BCC minutes). Internal Roads – Roads will be established in private ownership and not be dedicated to Orange County. Brownfield Designation - Due to known contamination on this property, the applicant should consider this site for designation as a brownfield redevelopment area. For information regarding financial incentives and regulatory benefits contact the Orange County Environmental Protection Division (EPD), Carlos Gonzalez, 407-836-1425. Also contact the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Central District, George Houston 407-897-4322. Amendment #2015-2-A-5-1 (fka 2015-1-A-5-1, 2014-1-A-5-2 & 2014-1-A-5-3) Lake Pickett South FLU from: Rural (R) To: Lake Pickett (LP, a proposed new Future Land Use designation) Owner: New Ideas, Inc.; Banksville of Florida, Inc.; Byrdley Realty Co. LP; Robert Lopez Trust; and Nivesa of Florida Agent: Dwight Saathoff Parcels: 08-22-32-0000-00-005, 17-22-32-0000-00-002, 18-22-32-0000-00-001/025, 19-22-32-0000-00-001, 20-22-32-0000-00-002/038 Address: north of E Colonial Drive, west of Chuluota Road, east of Tanner Road, south of Lake Pickett Road District: 5 Area: 1,237 gross acres Amendment # 2015-2-A-5-2 (fka 2015-1-A-5-2 & 2014-1-A-5-1) Lake Picket North FLU from: Rural (R) and Rural Settlement 1/1 (RS 1/1) To: Lake Pickett (LP, a proposed new Future Land Use designation) and Rural Settlement 1/1 (RS 1/1) Owner: Rolling R. Ranch LTD, Mary R. Lamar, Eloise A. Rybolt Revocable Trust, Lake Pickett North LLC Agent: Sean Froelich, Columnar Holdings Parcels: ~20 parcels (largest in size are 05-22-32-0000-00-001/002, 07-22-32-0000-00-001, 08-22-32-0000-00-001) Address: north of Lake Pickett Rd, west of Chuluota Rd, south of Seminole County Line, east of Big Econlockhatchee River District: 5 Area: 1,436 gross acres / 974 net developable acres




EPD comments for Amendments 2015-2-A-5-1 and 2015-2-A-5-2: Wetland Conservation Areas There are wetlands and surface waters located within the subject properties amounting to approximately 1,000 acres that will require protection per Orange County Code (OCC) Chapter 15, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas. Approval of this request does not authorize any direct or indirect impacts to conservation areas. Prior to any development plan or preliminary subdivision plan submittal, the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) will require a completed Conservation Area Determination (CAD). CAD 07-134 was completed for the properties located north of Lake Pickett Road. This determination is valid through February 11, 2018. All other properties will require completion of the CAD application process. [Reference OCC Chapter 34 Subdivision Regulations, Article IV Specifications for Plans and Plats, Section 34-131, Preliminary Subdivision Plan and Supporting Data, 34-131(d) Physical/environmental conditions, 34-131(d)(2) An approved conservation area determination. ] All development shall be consistent with the conservation element of the county comprehensive plan and the conservation regulations. [Reference OCC Chapter 30 Planning and Development, Article VIII Site Development, Division 1, Section 30-246 Conservation Areas.] All acreages regarding conservation areas and wetland buffers are considered approximate until finalized by a Conservation Area Determination (CAD) and a Conservation Area Impact (CAI) Permit. Every application for activity subject to Orange County Code Chapter 15 Environmental Control shall be reviewed to determine the functional significance, scarcity, replaceability, vulnerability and productivity of the habitat on the lands to be considered in both the pre- and post-development condition. The applicants are advised not to make financial decisions based upon a presumption of approved conservation encroachment by development within the wetland or the upland protective buffer areas. Any plan showing development in a wetland or protective upland buffer area without Orange County and other jurisdictional government agency wetland permits is speculative and may not be approved. The removal, alteration or encroachment within a Class I Conservation Area shall only be allowed in cases where: no other feasible or practical alternatives exist, impacts are unavoidable to allow a reasonable use of the land, or where there is an overriding public benefit, as determined before the Orange County Board of County Commissioners. [Reference OCC Chapter 15 Environmental Control, Article X Wetland Conservation Areas, subject to, but limited to, 15-396 Compensation required for unavoidable loss and 15-419 Evaluation Criteria.] Surface waters located on these properties include Lake Paxton, Lake Tanner, Corner Lake, a portion of the Big Econ River and unnamed tributaries. Clearly label and indicate the Normal High Water Elevation (NHWE) lines of the lakes on all development plans or permit applications, in addition to any wetland and setback lines. [Reference OCC Chapter 38 Zoning, Article VIII P-D Planned Development District, Division 1 Generally, Section 38-1206 Development Plan shall include identification of land and water bodies and show natural features. Reference OCC Chapter 34 Subdivision Regulations, Article IV Specifications for Plans and Plats, Section 34-131 Preliminary Subdivision Plan Supporting Data shall include information (identification and contour line) on the normal high water elevation.]




Econlockhatchee River Basin These properties are located within the geographical limits of the (Big) Econlockhatchee River Protection Ordinance. Basin-wide regulations apply which include but are not limited to, wetland buffers, habitat preservation and wildlife management, stormwater management, and landscaping with native plant species. [Reference OCC Chapter 15 Article XI Econlockhatchee River Protection, Section 15-442 Basin-wide regulations.] Habitat Protection Development of the subject property shall comply with all state and federal regulations pertaining to wildlife or plants that are listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). The Preliminary Environmental Assessment reports submitted with these requests indicated evidence of several protected wildlife species in the area such as gopher tortoise, Sherman's fox squirrel, American bald eagle, Florida sandhill crane, little blue heron and white ibis. It appears that portions of the plans have been identified as part of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Priority Ecological Greenway Network 2013. This project of the Florida Ecological Greenway Network (FEGN) identifies areas of opportunity for protecting a statewide network of ecological hubs and linkages designed to maintain large landscape-scale ecological functions including focal species habitat and ecosystem services throughout the state. The FEGN aggregates various data identifying areas of ecological significance from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, existing and proposed conservation lands, and other relevant data. These data were combined to identify large, landscape-scale areas of ecological significance (ecological hubs), and a network of landscape linkages and corridors connecting the hubs into a statewide ecological greenways system (ecological greenways and wildlife corridors). Based on our experience with similar projects, developing potions of this area of ecological significance would diminish the functionality of the area as a greenway and move the land use from a state of higher sustainability to a state of lower sustainability in terms of the resources needed to sustain the lower state. Please provide reasonable assurance that the habitat and ecological function of this ecosystem will not be diminished as a result of the proposed development. Design Considerations The natural topography, soils and vegetation should be preserved and utilized, where possible through the careful location and design of all elements such as circulation ways, buildings, open space and drainage facilities. Designation and use of conservation areas must be consistent with adopted growth management policy. [Referencer OCC Chapter 38 Zoning. Article VIII PD Planned Development District, Division 2 General Site Development Standards, Section 38-1228.] Approval of this request does not constitute approval of a permit for the construction of boat docks (including but not limited to boardwalks or observation piers) or a boat ramp. Any person desiring to construct a boat dock or boat ramp within Unincorporated Orange County shall first apply for a permit prior to the installation. [A boat dock requires additional permitting under OCC Chapter




15, Article IX, Dock Construction. A boat ramp requires additional permitting under OCC Chapter 15, Article XV, Boat Ramps. Application shall be submitted to the Orange County Environmental Protection Division.] This site is adjacent to lands that are managed by the St Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD). The covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) shall contain notification to potential purchasers, builders or tenants of this development that the adjacent land use includes publicly managed property. The notice shall indicate that the adjacent property will require the use of resource management practices that may result in periodic temporary conditions that may limit outdoor activities. These practices will include, but not be limited to, ecological burning, pesticide and herbicide usage, exotic plant and animal removal, usage of heavy equipment and machinery, and other practices as may be deemed necessary for proper resource management. Development shall coordinate the proposed trail system with the SJRWMD to ensure that it connects with the trail system already established within the Econ Sandhills Conservation Area. Pollution Prevention Pollution abatement swales shall be provided and maintained upland of streams and canals and the NHWE on all lakes, inclusive of wetlands connected to lakes. If wetland protection buffers are present, then the swale shall be located upland of the buffer. Areas that drain away from lakes do not require a swale. [Reference OCC Chapter 34 Subdivision Regulations, Article IV Specifications for Plans and Plats, Section 34-132(c)(2). ] Portions of the Lake Pickett North and South development will discharge into an impaired water body. The Impaired Waters Rule, Chapter 62-303 of the Florida Administrative Code may increase the requirements for pollution abatement treatment of stormwater as part of future approvals of related Basin Management Action Plans currently in development by the state Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). The applicant is advised to follow related legislation in order to assure compliance with future regulations. If on-site sewage treatment disposal systems (OSTDS) are installed, nutrients passing through septic drainfields shall be detected prior to their transport to the Econlockhatchee River basin, as well as other water bodies and wetlands in the vicinity of the project. The developer is responsible for addressing adverse impacts to existing water quality. The development shall include measures to prevent excess nutrients from entering water bodies via storm water run-off or base flow. Preventive measures that may be required by the Impaired Waters Rule through Basin Management Action Plans may include the County to require proper fertilizer management and the installation of curb inlet baskets to prevent entrained litter and other debris from entering the stormwater system. Some areas of the subject properties have a prior land use that may have resulted in petroleum spills, agricultural related contamination (including cattle operations), and fertilizer, pesticide or herbicide spillage. No activity will be permitted on the site that may disturb, influence or interfere with: areas of soil or groundwater contamination, any remediation activities, or within the hydrological zone of influence of the contaminated area, unless prior approval has been




obtained through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). An owner/operator who exacerbates the existing contamination, introduces contamination into previously uncontaminated media, or does not properly document and dispose of any excavated or extracted media that is contaminated may become liable for some portion of the contamination pursuant to the provisions in section 376.308, F.S. Additional Regulations This review does not release the applicant from complying with all other Federal, State, and Local rules and regulations. If this review conflicts with those of any other Agency, Department or Division, the permittee must comply with the most stringent requirements.

\\FLORDATA\Projects\61965.00 Developco-Ficquett-Reams\docs\letters\Response Ltr to J. Souvorova - 2015-2-A-1-4.docx

March 27, 2015 Ref: 61965.00 Ms. Janna Souvorova, AICP Acting Chief Planning, Comprehensive Planning Section 201 S. Rosalind Avenue, 2nd Floor Orlando, FL 32802-1393 Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Amendment #2015-2-A-1-4 Parcel ID Number: 27-23-27-0000-00-020 Dear Ms. Souvorova:

Attached please find a Wetlands Determination/Environmental Assessment for the above referenced project. This report is being submitted in response to the insufficiency letter dated March 13, 2015.

Please contact us should you have questions or need additional information.

Sincerely,

Jim Hall, AICP, ASLA

P+D Studio Director [email protected]

i

DEVELOPCO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

ORANGE COUNTY, FL

Prepared for:

Mr. Aamir Waheed Developco Inc.

2295 South Hiawassee Road Suite 213

Orlando, FL 32835

Prepared by:

225 E. Robinson Street, Suite 300

Landmark Center Two Orlando, FL 32801 Ph: 407-839-4006

VHB Project No. 61965.00

March 26, 2015

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................1 EXISTING ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS ...............................................................................1

Vegetative Communities .....................................................................................................1 Soils ...............................................................................................................................2 Wetlands and Surface Waters ..............................................................................................3 Protected Wildlife and Plant Species ...................................................................................3

APPENDIX A: FNAI Biodiversity Matrix Query Results

FIGURES Figure 1: Location Map Figure 2: FLUCFCS Map Figure 3: Soils Map Figure 4: Wetland and Surface Water Map Figure 5: Protected Species Map

1

INTRODUCTION The Developco Property consists of one parcel totaling 306.73 acres± (Figure 1). It is located within Sections 26, 27, 34, and 35, Township 23 South, Range 27 East, Orange County, Florida. The property is bounded on the north by cypress, the east by high density residential housing, lake Reams, and cypress, to the south by high density residential housing, and to the west by Reams Road. The project area consists of undeveloped uplands and wetlands (Figure 1). This Environmental Assessment report is being prepared on behalf of Developco Properties, LLC per the Orange County Comp Plan Amendment Application. EXISTING ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS Vegetative Communities Vegetative and land use cover types were classified and mapped using the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS), January 1999 (Figure 2). The limits of the onsite jurisdictional wetlands and surface waters were obtained from a combination of St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) GIS data, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) GIS data and interpretation of high resolution aerial photography. The wetland and surface water boundaries have not been flagged in the field and have not been approved by any federal, state or county permitting agency. There are eleven (11) FLUCFCS classifications identified on the project site (Figure 2). A description along with acreage and percent cover of each classification type is provided below. FLUCFCS 310 – Non-forested Herbaceous Upland (0.92 acres) This FLUCFCS land use comprises 0.3% of the project area. These areas are typically dominated by prairie grasses including bluestem (Andropogon spp), wiregrass (Aristida spp.), and dropseed (Sporobolus spp.). Typical forbs found within this habitat include slender flattop goldenrod (Euthamia caroliniana), chaffhead (Carphephorus spp.), and gayfeather (Liatris spp.). Shrubs present within these areas include saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), gallberry (Ilex glabra), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), lyonia (Lyonia spp.), and winged sumac (Rhus copallinum). FLUCFCS 411 – Pine Flatwoods (68.14 acres) This FLUCFCS land use comprises 22.2% of the project area. Pine flatwoods is the dominant upland community within the property and is present along the west boundary. This community is typified by an open canopy of pine trees including slash pine (Pinus elliottii), longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). The understory is composed primarily of grass and forb species similar to those present within the non-forested herbaceous uplands described above and may include clustered or dense saw palmetto or other shrubs. FLUCFCS 434 – Upland Mixed Coniferous/Hardwood (2.11 acres) This FLUCFCS land use comprises 0.7% of the project area. It is typically dominated by a combination of pine and hardwood tree species including slash pine, longleaf pine, live oak (Quercus virginiana), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora), and pignut hickory

2

(Carya glabra). The understory is often dominated by dense saw palmetto and may also include American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana) and winged sumac. FLUCFCS 617 – Mixed Wetland Hardwoods (6.27 acres) This FLUCFCS land use comprises 2.0% of the project area. This community is found along the eastern edge of the parcel. Within this habitat the canopy is dominated by a diverse mixture of wetland hardwood trees including red maple (Acer rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), swamp tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora), and American elm (Ulmus americana). Slash pine and bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) may be scattered throughout. Typical shrub species include wax myrtle, Virginia willow (Itea virginica), possumhaw (Viburnum nudum), and common buttonbush. Groundcover is typically dominated by ferns and other shade tolerant plant species. FLUCFCS 621 – Cypress (187.62 acres) This FLUCFCS land use comprises 61.2% of the project area. This habitat dominates the large central swamp within and immediately west of the property. It is dominated by bald-cypress, and minor associates in the canopy community may include red maple, swamp tupelo, and sweetbay. Typical shrub species include dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), common buttonbush, shiny lyonia (Lyonia lucida), and possumhaw. Typical groundcover includes herbaceous species tolerant of shade and high water levels such as royal fern (Osmunda regalis subsp. spectabilis), maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), golden club (Orontium aquaticum), and lizard’s tail (Saururus cernuus). FLUCFCS 625 – Wet Pine Flatwoods (11.54 acre) This FLUCFCS land use comprises less than 3.8% of the project area. Within the project area, these areas are found at the interface between cypress and pine flatwoods communities. They are dominated by pine, typically slash pine in this region of Florida. Common associates in the canopy community include loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus), red bay (Persea borbonia), sweetbay, and red maple. The understory is typically dominated by water tolerant grasses and forbs such as bushy bluestem (Andropogon glomeratus), wiregrass (Aristida stricta), and maidencane. Shrubs are generally sparse and may include shiny lyonia, shiny blueberry (Vaccinium myrsinites), wax myrtle, and Walter’s viburnum (Viburnum obovatum). FLUCFCS 646 – Mixed Scrub – Shrub Wetland (30.13 acres) This FLUCFCS land use comprises 9.8% of the project area. These areas are found in the northern portion of the parcel. They are typically dominated by a mixture of wetland shrubs including common buttonbush, wax myrtle, shiny lyonia, dahoon holly, possumhaw, and swamp dogwood (Cornus foemina). Disturbed areas may include Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana). On-site shrub wetlands include low to moderate densities of bald-cypress. Groundcover species typical of shrub wetland include arrowhead (Sagittaria spp.), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), and maidencane. Soils Based on the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey of Orange County, four (4) soil types are mapped on the project site (Figure 3). The mapped units include the following:

3 – Basinger fine sand, depressional (Hydric)

3

20 – Immokalee fine sand (Non-hydric) 41 – Samsula – Hontoon – Basinger association, depressional (Hydric) 44 – Smyrna fine sand (Non-hydric)

Basinger fine sand, depressional, and Samsula – Hontoon – Basinger association compose the majority of the site area, 44.11 acres and 203.43 acres, respectively. Although not considered hydric soil map units, Immokalee fine sand and Smyrna fine sand both may contain hydric soil inclusions. Hydric and non-hydric soil designations are based on the NRCS National List of Hydric Soils, April 2012. Wetlands and Surface Waters National Wetlands Inventories identify a total of 252.66 acres of jurisdictional wetlands located within the Developco property (Figure 4). Based on aerial interpretation as provided on the land use map, Figure 2, the estimated wetland area on the property is 235.56 acres. The final wetland area will be determined by field delineation of the wetland boundaries and will be contingent upon agency approval. Onsite wetlands and surface waters will be under the jurisdiction of SJRWMD, Army Corps of Engineers and Orange County Environmental Protection Division. Protected Wildlife and Plant Species A review of publically-available databases was conducted to determine the potential for the occurrence of protected species listed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Figure 5. The FNAI online Biodiversity Matrix database was searched to determine if there are any documented protected plant or wildlife species or critical habitats that may be located within or adjacent to the subject parcels. Results of this database query revealed no documented elements found within or adjacent to the subject parcels (Appendix A). The following paragraphs describe the protected species with the potential to occur onsite. Sherman's Fox Squirrel The Sherman's fox squirrel (Sciurus niger shermani) is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the FWC, but not listed by the USFWS. Fox squirrels were listed in the FNAI report as potentially occurring on site. Suitable habitat may be present within the pine flatwoods areas. Florida Mouse The Florida mouse (Podomys floridanus) is listed as an SSC by the FWC and was listed in the FNAI report as potentially occurring on site. The Florida mouse typically utilizes xeric upland communities where they inhabit gopher tortoise burrows. No xeric habitat is present within the project area, and it is unlikely the Florida mouse will occur on-site. Wood Stork The wood stork (Mycteria americana) is state and federally protected as Endangered and consultation with the USFWS is required for any proposed work that impacts wood stork core foraging habitat. The subject property is not located within Core Foraging Areas (CFA) for active wood stork

4

breeding colonies. However, the property provides excellent habitat, and it is likely wood storks utilize the site for foraging. Red-cockaded Woodpecker The red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) is listed as Endangered by the USFWS and FWC. The project site is located within the USFWS red-cockaded woodpecker consultation area. The FWC Red-cockaded Woodpecker Nest Locator Database was reviewed to determine the proximity of recorded active red-cockaded woodpecker nests to the Developco property. According to the database, the closest red-cockaded woodpecker nest was located approximately 5.5 miles to the south. A field review of the site will be conducted to determine the present of red-cockaded woodpeckers within the pine flatwoods located within the project area. Snail Kite The snail kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis) is listed as Endangered by the FWC and USFWS. The subject property is located within the snail kite consultation area. Suitable habitat includes freshwater marshes and shallow wetlands with vegetated edges in which apple snails can be found. Habitat potentially exists onsite; however, it is unlikely snail kites utilize the project area due to the dense canopy cover. Also no snail kite nesting areas are recorded in Orange County. Florida scrub jay The Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) is listed as threatened by FWC and USFWS. The project area is located within the USFWS scrub-jay consultation area, but no scrub-jay habitat, consisting primarily of oak scrub, is located on-site. It is unlikely scrub-jays will be present within the project area. Audubon’s Crested Caracara Audubon’s crested caracara (Caracara cheriway audubonii) is listed as Threatened by the FWC and USFWS. The subject properties are not located within the caracara consultation area, and no suitable nesting habitat is located within the project area. Bald Eagle The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is not listed by either the FWC or the USFWS but is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The FWC Bald Eagle Nest Locator Database was reviewed to determine the proximity of recorded active bald eagle nests to the Developco property. According to the database, the closest bald eagle nest was OR007, located approximately 1.5 miles to the north, see Figure 5. The USFWS indicates that all projects greater than 660 feet from a bald eagle nest tree do not require USFWS review. Florida Sandhill Crane The Florida sandhill crane is listed as Threatened by the FFWCC and is not listed by the USFWS. Sandhill cranes prefer to nest in shallow wetlands with maidencane or pickerelweed. Few, if any, wetland areas suitable for nesting occur within or adjacent to the project boundary. Florida Burrowing Owl The Florida burrowing owl is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the FFWCC and is not listed by the USFWS. Burrowing owls prefer dry prairie or Sandhill habitat with low canopy cover and

5

densely-vegetated, sandy ground. Habitats suitable for burrowing owls do not occur within or adjacent to the project boundary. Gopher Tortoise The gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) is listed as Threatened by the FWC, but not listed by the USFWS. It was listed by the FNAI report as potentially occurring within the project area. Although the dry sandy habitats preferred by gopher tortoises are not present within the project area, tortoises may still be found within the upland habitats located on-site. Eastern Indigo Snake The Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) is listed as Threatened by the FWC and USFWS. Indigo snakes were also listed in the FNAI report as potentially occurring on site. Indigo snakes are a commensal species in gopher tortoise burrows. Indigo snakes utilize a wide range of habitats, and suitable habitat exists on-site. Florida Pine Snake The Florida pine snake (Pituophis melanoleucus mugitus) is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the FFWCC and is not listed by the USFWS. It was listed in the FNAI report as potentially occurring on site. The Florida pine snake prefers dry sandy soils with open canopies. Florida pine snakes often coexist with gopher tortoises and may be found within the uplands located on-site. Sand Skink and Blue-tailed Mole Skink The subject property is located within the sand skink (Neoseps reynoldsi) and blue-tailed mole skink (Eumeces egregious lividus) consultation area, and the property is above 82 feet mean sea level (MSL), the elevation above which sand skinks are generally found. However, no soils considered sand skink soils are located on-site. Therefore, sand skinks are not expected to utilize the property, based upon the sand skink survey protocol of the USFWS Species Conservation and Consultation Guide. The range of the blue-tailed mole skink is generally limited to the Lake Wales Ridge, and therefore is unlikely to be found within the project area. Gopher Frog The gopher frog (Lithobates capito) is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the FWC and is not listed by the USFWS. It was listed in the FNAI report as potentially occurring on site. The gopher frog utilizes sandy uplands that include isolated wetlands or large ponds within close proximity (~1 mile). Gopher frogs are known commensals of gopher tortoise burrows and will utilize other burrows or stump holes as a daytime refuge. Wading Bird Rookeries According to FWC data, no wading bird rookeries are located within or immediately adjacent to the project area. The closest recorded location of a wading bird colony, no. 612033, is mapped approximately 4.9 miles west of the properties, Figure 5. This rookery was last determined as “Active” during the 1970’s survey. No wading bird rookeries should be affected by the development of these properties. Listed Plant Species

6

Based on the information provided by the FNAI Biodiversity Matrix Report and the on-site habitats present, Table 1 provides a list of protected plant species with the potential to occur within the project area. Table 1 State and Federal Protect Plant Species Potentially Occurring within the Project Area

Listed Species Common Name Federal Status

State Status

Calopogon multiflorus Many-flowered grass-pink -- E Carex chapmanii Chapman’s sedge -- T Coelorachis tuberculosa Piedmont jointgrass -- T Hartwrightia floridana Hartwrightia -- T Illicium parviflorum Star anise -- E Matelea floridana Florida spiny-pod -- E Nemastylis floridana Celestial lily -- E Panicum abcissum Cutthroat grass -- E Pteroglossaspis ecristata Giant orchid -- T Salix floridana Florida willow -- E There are no restrictions to the landowner due to the presence of any state-listed plant species unless sale of the plants is involved.

FIGURE 1 LOCATION MAP

Reams Rd.

Spotted Sandpiper Blvd.

Ficqu

ette R

d.

Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMapcontributors, and the GIS user community

Legend

Developco Property

.0 3,000 6,0001,500

Feet

Figure 1Developco Property

Location Map

March 2015

225 E. Robinson StreetSuite 300Orlando, FL 32801

FIGURE 2 FLUCFCS MAP

621

411

646

411

621

625

617

411

621

434

621

411

411

625

621

625

310

310

Legend

Developco Property 306.73 ac.FLUCFCS Boundaries

.0 1,000 2,000500

Feet


FLUCFCS Map

March 2015


FLUCFCS DESCRIPTION ACRES310 Non-foreseted Herbaceous Upland 0.92411 Pine Flatwoods 68.14434 Upland Mixed Coniferous/Hardwood 2.11617 Mixed Wtland Hardwoods 6.27621 Cypress 187.62625 Wet Pine Flatwoods 11.54646 Mixed Scrub-Scrub Wetland 30.13

TOTAL 306.73

FIGURE 3 SOILS MAP

¬«41

¬«3

¬«41

¬«44

¬«3

¬«44¬«44

¬«44

¬«44

¬«20

¬«44

¬«20

¬«3

¬«44

Legend

Developco Property

NRCS Soils

.0 1,000 2,000500

Feet


Soils Map

March 2015


SYMBOL NAME HYDRIC GROUP ACRES3 Basinger Fine Sand, Depressional A/D 44.11

20 Immokalee Fine Sand A/D 4.2441 Samsula-Hontoon-Basinger

Association, Depressional A/D 203.4344 Smyrna Fine Sand B/D 54.96

TOTAL 306.74

FIGURE 4 WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER MAP

306.73 Total Acres252.66 Wetland Acres

Legend

NWI Wetlands 252.66 ac.Developco Property 306.73 ac.

.0 1,000 2,000500

Feet


Wetland & Surface Water Map

March 2015


FIGURE 5 PROTECTED SPECIES MAP

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, andthe GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, MapmyIndia, ©OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

Legend

Developco Property

!Æ Scrub Jay Nests

[® FWC Mapped Wading Bird Rookery

[b FWC Mapped Bald Eagle Nests

FWC Woodstork Foraging AreaSand Skink Soils

.0 5,000 10,0002,500

Feet


Protected Species Map

March 2015


APPENDIX A FNAI BIODIVERSITY MATRIX QUERY RESULTS

NOTE: The Biodiversity Matrix includes only rare species and natural communities tracked by FNAI.

Report for 4 Matrix Units: 42178 , 42179 , 42549 , 42550

Descriptions

DOCUMENTED - There is a documented occurrence in the FNAI database of the species or community within this Matrix Unit.

DOCUMENTED-HISTORIC - There is a documented occurrence in the FNAI database of the species or community within this Matrix Unit; however the occurrence has not been observed/reported within the last twenty years.

LIKELY - The species or community is known to occur in this vicinity, and is considered likely within this Matrix Unit because:

1. documented occurrence overlaps this and adjacent Matrix Units, but the documentation isn’t precise enough to indicate which of those Units the species or community is actually located in; or

2. there is a documented occurrence in the vicinity and there is suitable habitat for that species or community within this Matrix Unit.

POTENTIAL - This Matrix Unit lies within the known or predicted range of the species or community based on expert knowledge and environmental variables such as climate, soils, topography, and landcover.

Matrix Unit ID: 421780 Documented Elements Found

0 Documented-Historic Elements Found

3 Likely Elements Found

Scientific and Common Names GlobalRank

StateRank

FederalStatus

StateListing

Mesic flatwoods G4 S4 N N G4 S2 LE FE

1018 Thomasville Road Suite 200-C Tallahassee, FL 32303 850-224-8207

850-681-9364 fax

www.fnai.org

Florida Natural Areas InventoryBiodiversity Matrix Query Results

UNOFFICIAL REPORTCreated 3/20/2015

(Contact the FNAI Data Services Coordinator at 850.224.8207 for information on an official Standard Data Report)

Page 1 of 4FNAI Biodiversity Matrix

3/20/2015http://data.labins.org/mapping/FNAI_BioMatrix/GridSearch.cfm?sel_id=42178,42179,425...

Mycteria americanaWood Stork Sandhill upland lake G3 S2 N N





StateRank

FederalStatus

StateListing

Mesic flatwoods G4 S4 N N Mycteria americanaWood Stork G4 S2 LE FE





StateRank

FederalStatus

StateListing

Dasymutilla archboldiLake Wales Ridge Velvet Ant G2G3 S2S3 N N






StateRank

FederalStatus

StateListing


Matrix Unit IDs: 42178 , 42179 , 42549 , 42550 48 Potential Elements Common to Any of the 4 Matrix Units


StateRank

FederalStatus

StateListing

Agrimonia incisaIncised Groove-bur G3 S2 N LE

Athene cunicularia floridanaFlorida Burrowing Owl G4T3 S3 N SSC

Bonamia grandifloraFlorida Bonamia G3 S3 LT LE



Calamintha asheiAshe's Savory

G3 S3 N LT

Calopogon multiflorusMany-flowered Grass-pink G2G3 S2S3 N LE

Carex chapmaniiChapman's Sedge G3 S3 N LT

Centrosema arenicolaSand Butterfly Pea G2Q S2 N LE

Chionanthus pygmaeusPygmy Fringe Tree G2G3 S2S3 LE LE

Clitoria fragransScrub Pigeon-wing G3 S3 LT LE

Coelorachis tuberculosaPiedmont Jointgrass G3 S3 N LT

Corynorhinus rafinesquiiRafinesque's Big-eared Bat G3G4 S2 N N

Deeringothamnus pulchellusBeautiful Pawpaw G1 S1 LE LE

Drymarchon couperiEastern Indigo Snake G3 S3 LT FT

Eriogonum longifolium var. gnaphalifoliumScrub Buckwheat G4T3 S3 LT LE

Gopherus polyphemusGopher Tortoise G3 S3 C ST

Grus canadensis pratensisFlorida Sandhill Crane G5T2T3 S2S3 N ST

Gymnopogon chapmanianusChapman's Skeletongrass G3 S3 N N

Hartwrightia floridanaHartwrightia G2 S2 N LT

Heterodon simusSouthern Hognose Snake G2 S2 N N

Illicium parviflorumStar Anise G2 S2 N LE

Lechea cernuaNodding Pinweed G3 S3 N LT

Liatris ohlingeraeFlorida Blazing Star G2 S2 LE LE

Lithobates capitoCarolina Gopher Frog G3 S3 N SSC

Lupinus aridorumScrub Lupine G1 S1 LE LE

Matelea floridanaFlorida Spiny-pod G2 S2 N LE

Mustela frenata peninsulaeFlorida Long-tailed Weasel G5T3 S3 N N

Nemastylis floridanaCelestial Lily G2 S2 N LE

Neofiber alleniRound-tailed Muskrat G3 S3 N N

Nolina atopocarpaFlorida Beargrass G3 S3 N LT

Nolina brittonianaBritton's Beargrass G3 S3 LE LE

Panicum abscissumCutthroat Grass G3 S3 N LE

Paronychia chartacea ssp. chartaceaPaper-like Nailwort G3T3 S3 LT LE

Peucaea aestivalisBachman's Sparrow G3 S3 N N

G3 S2 LE FE



Picoides borealisRed-cockaded Woodpecker Pituophis melanoleucus mugitusFlorida Pine Snake G4T3 S3 N SSC

Plestiodon egregius lividusBlue-tailed Mole Skink G5T2 S2 LT FT

Podomys floridanusFlorida Mouse G3 S3 N SSC

Polygala lewtoniiLewton's Polygala G2G3 S2S3 LE LE

Polygonella myriophyllaSmall's Jointweed G3 S3 LE LE

Prunus geniculataScrub Plum G3 S3 LE LE

Pteroglossaspis ecristataGiant Orchid G2G3 S2 N LT

Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeusSnail Kite G4G5T2 S2 LE FE

Salix floridanaFlorida Willow G2 S2 N LE

Sceloporus woodiFlorida Scrub Lizard G2G3 S2S3 N N

Sciurus niger shermaniSherman's Fox Squirrel G5T3 S3 N SSC

Ursus americanus floridanusFlorida Black Bear G5T2 S2 N N

Warea amplexifoliaClasping Warea G1 S1 LE LE

Warea carteriCarter's Warea G3 S3 LE LE

DisclaimerThe data maintained by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory represent the single most comprehensive source of information available on the locations of rare species and other significant ecological resources statewide. However, the data are not always based on comprehensive or site-specific field surveys. Therefore, this information should not be regarded as a final statement on the biological resources of the site being considered, nor should it be substituted for on-site surveys. FNAI shall not be held liable for the accuracy and completeness of these data, or opinions or conclusions drawn from these data. FNAI is not inviting reliance on these data. Inventory data are designed for the purposes of conservation planning and scientific research and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions.

Unofficial ReportThese results are considered unofficial. FNAI offers a Standard Data Request option for those needing certifiable data.



Amendment 2015-2-A-1-2 Parcel ID: 17-24-27-0000-00-008

Location: East side of Avalon Road at the intersection of Avalon Road and

Seidel Road

Acreage: 24.85 gross acres/11.4 net developable acres

Request: Change the FLUM designation from Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Apartment District (APT) to Horizon West, Village H Specific Area Plan (SAP) – Village Home District (VHD)

Allowable Development: 285 Apartments Proposed Density/Intensity: 85 Single Family dwelling

Trip Generation (ITE 9th Edition)

Land Use PM. Pk. Hr.

Trips

% New Trips

New PM Pk . Hr. Trips

Allowable Development - 285 Apartments 174 100% 174 Proposed Development - 85SF Residential units 91 100% 91 Net New Trips (Proposed Development - Allowable Development): 91-174 = (83) Existing Level of Service Conditions

Road Agreements: The applicant for this development will be required to coordinate with the County’s Road Agreement Committee to develop a term sheet and subsequent road agreement to address road infrastructure needs and a transportation funding improvement plan. The owner/developer for Spring Grove, LLC shall also coordinate the development of the term sheet with other owners/developers and applicable parties relating to Village I.

Roadway Segments Within a One Mile Radius Functional Class

# of lanes

Avail. Cap.

LOS

Avalon Road • US 192 to Seidel Road

Collector

2

0

F

Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements There several planned roadway improvement within the impact area:

• Avalon Road/CR545 from the Orange County Line to Fleming Road. This roadway is planned to be widened to 4 lanes. This is a planned partnership project and is included in the County’s 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan.

• Hartzon Road from the Lake County Line to Flamingo Crossing Blvd. This roadway is planned to be widened to 4 lanes. This is a planned partnership project and is included in the County’s 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan.

Right of Way Requirements

• The applicant for this development will be required to coordinate with the County’s Road Agreement Committee to develop a term sheet and subsequent road agreement to address road infrastructure needs and a transportation funding improvement plan. The owner/developer for Spring Grove, LLC shall also coordinate the development of the term sheet with other owners/developers and applicable parties relating to Village I.

Summary

• The allowable development based on the approved future land use will generate 174 pm peak hour trips

• The proposed use will generate 91 pm peak hour trips resulting in a net reduction of 83 pm peak hour trips.

• The trip generation analysis indicates that the proposed amendment will result in a reduction of pm peak hour trips by 83 trips or a 48% reduction. Therefore, the potential impact of the proposed development on the surrounding transportation infrastructure is significantly reduced.

Final permitting of any development on this site will be subject to further review and approval from the County’s Development Review Committee (DRC) as well as an assessment of roadway capacity constraints based on the Transportation Concurrency Management System and the applicant will be required to mitigate any deficiencies that may occur from the proposed development. To ensure that there are no revisions to the proposed development beyond the analyzed use, the land use will be noted on the County’s Future Land Use Map or as a text amendment to the Comprehensive Policy Plan.

Amendment 2015-1-A-1-3 Parcel ID: 26-23-28-5411-00-030/031

Location: West side of Majorca Place, west of Turkey Lake Road, north of W. Sand Lake Road, south of Toscana Blvd. and east of Dr. Phillips Blvd.

Acreage: 24.31 gross ac./6.5 net developable acres

Request: Commercial ( C ) to High Density Residential (HDR) .

Allowable Development: 849,420 SF Commercial use

Proposed Density/Intensity: 325 multi-family dwelling units


Land Use PM. Pk. Hr. Trips

% New Trips

New PM Pk . Hr.

Trips Allowable Development : 849.42 SF Commercial use

2,512

81%

2,034

Proposed Development: 328 Apartments 196 100% 196 Net New Trips : (Proposed Development - Allowable Development): 2034-196 = (1,838) Existing Level of Service Conditions


# of Lanes

Avail. Cap.

Level of Service

Dr. Phillips Blvd. • Sand Lake Rd. to Wallace Rd. • Wallace Rd. to Pin Oak Dr.

Collector Collector

4 4

1,022 1,220

C C

International Drive • Pointe Plaza Ave. to Sand Lake Rd. • Sand Lake Rd. to Kirkman Rd.

Min. Arterial Min. Arterial

4 4

923 879

C D

Sand Lake Road • Apopka Vineland Rd. to Dr. Phillips Blvd. • Dr. Phillips Blvd. to Turkey Lake Blvd. • Turkey Lake Blvd. to I-Drive • I-Drive to Kirkman Rd.

Collector Collector


4 4 6 4

580 860 729 0

C C C F

Turkey Lake Road • Sand Lake Commons Blvd. to Sand Lake Rd. • Sand Lake Rd. to Wallace Rd. • Wallace Rd. to Vineland Rd.

Min. Arterial Min. Arterial Min. Arterial

4 4 4

0

584 435

F C C

Wallace Road • Apopka Vineland Rd. to Dr. Phillips Blvd. • Dr. Phillips Blvd. to turkey Lake Rd.

Collector Collector

2 2

178 0

C F

Universal Blvd. • I-4 to Sand Lake Rd. • Sand Lake Rd. to Pointe Plaza Ave.

Collector Collector

4 4

1010 805

C D

Road Agreements: None

Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements: • SR 482/Sand Lake Road - Planned state roadway improvement to widen Sand Lake Road from

west of Turkey Lake Road to west of John Young Parkway to 6 lanes. Construction to be determined.

• International Drive – Planned roadway improvement to widen International Drive from Sand Lake Road to Kirkman Road to 6 lanes by 2030.

Right of Way Requirements: None Summary

• The allowable development based on the approved future land use will generate 2,034 pm peak hour trips

• The proposed use will generate 196 pm peak hour trips resulting in a net reduction of 1,838 pm peak hour trips.

• Analysis of existing pm peak hour conditions indicates multiple failing roadway segments within the project impact area. As the table indicates, the following roadways are currently operating below the adopted level of service:

a. Sand Lake Rd. from I-Drive to Kirkman Rd.

b. Turkey Lake Rd. from Sand Lake Commons Blvd. to Sand Lake Rd.

c. Wallace Rd. from Dr. Phillips Blvd. to Turkey Lake Rd.

d. Universal Blvd. from Sand Lake Rd. to Pointe Plaza Ave.

• The short term (2020) analysis indicates that the existing failing roadway segments continue to operate below the adopted level of service with and without the proposed amendment.

• The long term (2030) analysis indicate the same level of roadway deficiencies including International Drive from Sand Lake Road to Kirkman Road and Sand Lake Road from Turkey Lake Road to International Drive.

• Roadway deficiencies are projected for the short term and long term scenarios with and without the proposed amendment. In addition, trip generation estimates of the proposed land use amendment versus the currently approved land use result in a reduction of trips. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not adversely impact the area’s transportation facilities.

Final permitting of any development on this site will be subject to review and approval under capacity constraints of the county’s Transportation Concurrency Management System. Such approval will not exclude the possibility of a proportionate share payment in order to mitigate any transportation deficiencies. Finally, to ensure that there are no revisions to the proposed development beyond the analyzed use, the land use will be noted on the County’s Future Land Use Map or as a text amendment to the Comprehensive Policy Plan.

Amendment 2015-2-A-1-4 Parcel ID: 27-23-27-0000-00-020

Location: East side of Ficquette Road, south and east of Winter Garden-Vineland Road and north of Center Drive

Acreage: 306.8 gross ac./70.80 net developable acres

Request: Horizon West, Lakeside Village SAP – Greenbelt (GB) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS) to Horizon West, Lakeside Village SAP – Garden Home District (GHD) and Wetland/Conservation (CONS)

Allowable Development: 12 SF dwelling units

Proposed Density/Intensity: 75 SF dwelling units

Trip Generation (ITE 9th Edition) Land Use PM. Pk.

Hr. Trips

% Pass By Trips


Approved FLUM : 12 SF Dwelling units

17

100%

17

Proposed Development: 75 SF Dwelling units

81

100%

81

Net New Trips ( Proposed Development - Allowable Development) : 81-17=64 Existing Level of Service Conditions


# of lanes

Avail. Cap.

LOS

Ficquette Road • Reams Rd. to Winter-Garden Vineland Rd.

Collector

2

0

F

Lake Hancock Rd. • Seidel Rd. to Summerlake Park • Summer Lake Park Blvd. to Reams Rd.

Collector Collector

2 2

546

1,257

D B

Porter Rd. • Lake Hancock Rd. to Phil Ritson Way .

Collector

2

558

D

Reams Rd. • Lake Hancock Rd. to Cast Drive

Collector

2

0

F

Overstreet Road. • Winter Garden-Vineland Rd. to Londale Blvd. • Londale Blvd. to Winter-Garden Vineland Rd.

Collector Collector

2 2

213 490

C B

Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements

• Ficquette Road – There is a programmed roadway improvement to widen Ficquette Road from Overstreet Road to Winter Garden-Vineland Road from 2 to 4 lanes. Construction is scheduled to be completed July 2016.

• Reams Road from Old Reams Road to Lake Hancock Road. This roadway is planned to be widened to 4 lanes. This is a planned partnership project and is included in the County’s 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan.

• Seidel Road – Planned roadway improvement to widen to 4 lanes from Avalon Road to Summerlake Blvd. This is a planned partnership project and is included in the County’s 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan.

Right of Way Requirements: Right-of-Way is required from this project for the future widening of Reams Road. The applicant will be required to coordinate with the county’s Road Agreement Committee regarding the donation of right-of-way. Road Agreements: A road agreement detailing the terms and conditions of the right-of-way donation for the widening of Reams Road will be required. Summary


• The proposed use of 75 single family dwelling units will generate 81 pm peak hour trips resulting in a net increase of 64 pm peak hour trips. Based on the Concurrency Management System (CMS) database dated 06/11/15 analysis of existing pm peak hour conditions indicates that there are two failing roadway segments within the project impact area. Ficquette Rd. from Reams Road to Winter Garden-Vineland Road and Reams Road from Lake Hancock Road to Cast Drive are currently operating below the adopted level of service standard.

• The short term or year 2020 roadway volumes were projected using historical growth rates based on data obtained from Orange County’s traffic database. Analysis of the projected traffic on the area’s transportation network indicates that the segments of Reams Road and Ficquette Road will continue to operate below the adopted level of service with and without the proposed amendment

• Analysis of long term or year 2030 conditions which included all planned roadway improvements within the project impact area indicated that all roadways segments are projected to operate within the adopted level of service standard.

Final permitting of any development on this site will be subject to review and approval under capacity constraints of the county’s Transportation Concurrency Management System. Such approval will not exclude the possibility of a proportionate share payment in order to mitigate any transportation deficiencies.

Amendment 2015-A-1-5 Parcel ID: 33-22-28-3100-20-180/181/201; 33-22-28-3100-24-030/071

33-22-28-3104-04-090/111; 3-22-28-3104-05-280/301/311/320/332

Location: North side of Moore Road and Park Ridge Gotha Road, east of 7th Avenue and west of Dingens Avenue in the Gotha Rural Settlement

Acreage: 27.58 gross ac.

Request: Change from Rural Settlement (RS) to Rural Settlement Low Density Residential (RSLD)

Allowable Development: 27 Single Family dwelling units

Proposed Density/Intensity: 55 Single Family dwelling units


Existing Level of Service Conditions


# of Lanes

Avail. Cap.

.

Level of Service

6th Street • Park Ridge Gotha Rd. to Hemple Ave.

Collector

2

46

D

Apopka Vineland Road • Conroy Windermere Rd. to Windy Ridge Rd. • Windy Ridge Rd. to Wilkening Farm Rd./Steer Lake Rd. • Wilkening Farm Rd. to Old Winter Garden Rd.


Collector

4 4 4

387 665 822

C C C

Colonial Drive (W) • Florida Turnpike to S. Bluford Ave. • S. Bluford Ave. to Clarke Rd. • Clarke Rd. to Good Homed Rd. •

Prin. Arterial Prin. Arterial Prin Arterial

6 6 6

1,580 1,491 1,649

C C C

Gotha Road • Hemple Ave. to Wilkening Farm Rd. •

Collector

2

548

C

Hemple Avenue • Old Winter Garden Rd. to Gotha Rd. • Gotha Rd. to Windy Ridge Rd.

Collector Collector

2 2

360 258

C C

Land Use PM. Pk. Hr. Trips

%New Trips


Approved FLUM : 27 Single Family dwelling units

32 100% 32

Proposed Development: 56 Single Family dwelling units

62 100% 62

Net New Trips ( Proposed Development - Allowable Development) : 62-32 = 30

Maguire Road • Boat Canal to Gotha Rd. • Gotha Rd. to Roberson Rd. • Roberson Rd. to Colonial Dr.

Collector Collector Collector

2 2 4

356 328 425

C C C

Old Winter Garden Road • Maguire Rd. to S. Bluford Ave. • S. Bluford Ave. to Good Homes Rd. • Good Homes Rd. to Apopka Vineland Rd.

Min. Arterial Min. Arterial Min. Arterial

4 4 4

753 807 551

C C C

Park Ridge-Gotha Road • Maguire Rd. to 6th Street

Collector

2

532

C

Windermere Road • Roberson Rd. to Maguire Rd.

Collector

2

532

C

Right of Way Requirements: None Road Agreements: None

Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements

• West Colonial Drive – Programmed state roadway improvement to widen West Colonial Drive from the Florida Turnpike to Clarke Road to six lanes. Construction is scheduled to be completed Spring 2017.

• Summary


• The proposed uses will generate 62 pm peak hour trips resulting in a net increase of 30 pm peak hour trips.

• Based on the Concurrency Management System database dated 05/12/15, there are currently no failing roadway segments within a two and a half mile radius of the project.

• The short term or year 2020 roadway volumes were projected using an annual growth rate of 2% within the study area. Analysis of the projected traffic on the area’s transportation network indicates that the all roadway segments within the project impact area will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service with and without the proposed amendment

• Analysis of long term or year 2030 conditions which included all planned roadway improvements within the project impact area indicated that all roadways segments are projected to operate within the adopted level of service standard.

Final permitting of any development on this site will be subject to review and approval under capacity constraints of the county’s Transportation Concurrency Management System. Such approval will not exclude the possibility of a proportionate share payment in order to mitigate any transportation deficiencies. Finally, to ensure that there are no revisions to the proposed development beyond the analyzed use, the land use will be noted on the County’s Future Land Use Map or as a text amendment to the Comprehensive Policy Plan.

Amendment 2015-1-A-1-6 Parcel ID: 32-23-28-0000-00-001/003/005/006

Location: At the intersection of Winter Garden - Vineland Rd. and Sunset Blvd.

Acreage: 10.61 gross acres

Request: Change from Village to Planned Development -Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Urban Service Area Expansion.

Allowable Development: 3 dwelling units

Proposed Density/Intensity: 65 residential units for student housing


Land Use Scenario PM. Pk. Hr. Trips

% New Trips

New PM Pk . Hr.

Trips Maximum use of current FLUM: 3 SF dwelling unit

6 100% 6

Proposed Development: 65 residential units (student Housing) * 34 100% 34 Net New Trips( Proposed Development - Allowable Development) : 34-6 =28 * The trip generation characteristics of the proposed use were developed based on data obtained from a similar site located on Sand Pond Road in Lake Mary. This study site is a 38-unit student village that houses boarding students attending the Lake Mary Preparatory School. Traffic counts we conducted from September 2 thru Spetember 8, 2014 when the facility was fully occupied. Based on the survey, this facility generates approximately 173 daily and 20 pm peak hour trips resulting in an average rate of 4.55 daily and .53 pm peak hour trips per unit. Using this surveyed rate, it is estimated that the proposed 65 unit student housing facility will generate 34 pm peak hour trips and 296 daily trips. It should be noted that all students living at the proposed facility will be restricted from owning or keeping personal cars at the facility.

Existing Level of Service

Road Agreements: None associated with parcel id.

Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements: None associated with parcel id.

Right of Way Requirements: None within the project impact area.


# of Lanes

Avail. Cap.

.

Level of Service

Winter-Garden- Vineland Road: • Perrihouse Road to Sunset Blvd. • Sunset Blvd. to Reams Rd.

CollectorCollector

.

4 4

1,067 1,003

C C

Summary

• Analysis of existing conditions indicates that all roadway segments currently operate at an acceptable level of service.


• The proposed use will generate 34 pm peak hour trips resulting in a net increase of 24 pm peak hour trips.

• Analysis of the short term or interim Year 2020 conditions indicates that all roadways within the project area will continue to operate at acceptable level of service conditions.

• By the Comprehensive Plan horizon year of 2030, the roadway segments within the project impact area are projected to continue operating within acceptable levels o service.


Amendment 2015-2-A-2-1

Parcel ID: 26-20-27-0000-00-022

Location: Northwest corner of North Orange Blossom Trail and Junction Road in the Zellwood Rural Settlement


Request: Rural Settlement (RS) to Commercial (C ) (Rural Settlement (RS)

Allowable Development: 11 Single Family Residential Units

Proposed Density/Intensity: Up to 75,795 SF of Commercial Use



% New Trips

New PM Pk . Hr.

Trips Allowable development: 11 Single Family dwelling units 14 100% 14 Proposed Development: 75,795 Commercial use 498 62% 309 Net New Trips( Proposed Development - Allowable Development) : 309-14 = 295 Existing Level of Service



Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements • Western Beltway (SR 429) – Planned roadway improvement to construct a new 4 lane roadway from

Orange Blossom Trail to I-4. Construction to be determined. Summary


• The proposed use will generate 309 new pm peak hour trips resulting in a net increase of 295 pm peak hour trips.

• Based on the Concurrency Management System database dated 05-12-15, there is one failing roadway segment within a one mile radius of this development. Orange Blossom Trail from Sadler Road to the Lake County Line is currently operating at level of service F. This segment has a pm peak capacity of 1,580 vehicles however, based on a pm peak hour volume of 1,558 vehicles (OC 2013 Traffic Counts) and the number of trips committed as of 05-12-15, the current remaining vehicular capacity of this segment is zero and therefore operating at level of service F.


# of Lanes

Avail. Cap.

.

Level of Service

Orange Blossom Trail • Plymouth-Sorrento Rd. to Ponkan Rd. • Ponkan Rd. to Sadler RD. • Sadler Rd. to Lake County Line

Prin. Arterial Prin. Arterial Prin. Arterial

4 4 4

128 44 0

B B F

Ponkan Road • Orange Blossom Trail to Plymouth-Sorrento Rd.

Collector

2

913

C

• Analysis of the short term or interim Year 2020 conditions indicates that all roadways segments along Orange Blossom Trail from Plymouth –Sorrento Road to Ponkan Road are projected to operate at Level of Service F with and without the proposed land use amendment.

• By the Comprehensive Plan horizon year of 2030, Orange Blossom Trail are projected to continue operating below the adopted level of Service with and without the propose amendment.



Parcel ID: 22-20-27-0000-00-030

Location: South side of Holly Street, east of Laughlin Road, west of Round Lake Road and north of Lake Minore in Mt. Dora.


Request: From Rural Settlement (RS) to Commercial (C ) Rural Settlement (RS)

Allowable Development: 2 Single Family dwelling units

Proposed Density/Intensity: 40,000 SF of Commercial Use



% New Trips


Allowable Development: 2 SF Dwelling units 3 100% 3 Proposed Development: 40,000 SF Commercial use 7 100% 7 Net New Trips( Proposed Development - Allowable Development) : 7-3 = 4 Existing Level of Service


# of Lanes

Avail. Cap.

.

Level of Service

Jones Road • Orange Blossom Trail to Lake County Line

Collector

.

2

277

C

Kelly Park Road • Round Lake Rd. to Plymouth Sorrento Rd. • Plymouth Sorrento Rd. to Rock Springs Rd.

Collector Collector

2 2

561 431

B C

Orange Blossom Trail • Plymouth Sorrento Road to Ponkan Road • Ponkan Rd. to Sadler Road • Sadler Road to the Lake County Line

Prin. Art. Prin. Art. Prin. Art.

4 4 4

128 44 0

B B F

• Plymouth Sorrento Road • Lake County Line to Kelly Park Rd. • Kelly Park Rd. to Ponkan Rd. • Ponkan Rd. to Orange Blossom Trail

Collector Collector Collector

2 2 2

178 35

913

C D C

Round Lake Road • Ponkan Rd. to Kelly Park Rd.

Kelly Park Rd. to Lake County Line

Collector Collector

2 2

410 494

C C

Sadler Road • Lake County Line to Orange Blossom Trail • Orange Blossom Trail to Round Lake Rd.

CollectorCollector

2 2

450 531

C C



Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements:

• Mt. Plymouth Road - Planned roadway improvement to widen to 4 lanes from Kelly Park Road to the Lake County Line. Construction schedule to be determined.

• Plymouth Sorrento Road - Planned roadway improvement to woden to 4 lanes from US 441 to the Orange County Line. Construction schedule to be determined.

• Ponkan Road - Planned roadway improvement to widen to 4 lanes from Plymouth Sorrento Rd. to Rock Springs Road. Construction schedule to be determined.

• Wekiva Parkway – Programmed roadway improvement to construct a new 4 lane divided expressway from US 441 to Lake County Line. Construction of the segment from US441 to Ponkan road is acheduled for June 2015.

Summary


• The proposed uses will generate 7 pm peak hour trips resulting in a net increase of 4 pm peak hour trips.

• Based on the Concurrency Management System database dated 05-12-15, there is one failing roadway segment within a one mile radius of this development. Orange Blossom Trail from Sadler Road to the Lake County Line is currently operating at level of service F. This segment has a pm peak capacity of 1,580 vehicles however, based on a pm peak hour volume of 1,558 vehicles (OC 2013 Traffic Counts) and the number of trips committed as of 05-12-15, the current remaining vehicular capacity of this segment is zero and therefore operating at level of service F. However, since the trip generation of the proposed project does not exceed one (1) percent of the maximum volume at the adopted Level of service for this segment of Orange Blossom Trail, the proposed development is not considered significant on the area roadways.

• Analysis of the short term or interim Year 2020 conditions indicates that all roadways segments are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service.

• By the Comprehensive Plan horizon year of 2030, all roadway segments within the project impact area are projected to continue operating at the adopted level of Service.



Parcel ID: 24-22-30-0000-00-130

Location: In the Alternative Mobility Area, north of Valencia College Lane, west of SR417


Request: No designation (former SR417 ROW) to Planned Development – Office/Commercial (PD-O/C)

Allowable Development: N/A

Proposed Density/Intensity: 1,000,000 SF Office

1,000,000 SF Commercial


Land Use Scenario PM. Pk. Hr.

Trips

% New Trips


Reduction for

Internal Capture

and Transit

Net Trips

Allowable Development : N/A 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed Development: 1,000,000 SF Office Use 1,000,000 SF Commercial Use

1,198 2,802

92% 82%

1,102 2,260

172 353

1040 1907

Total Trips 4000 3,362 525 2947

Net New Trips( Proposed Development - Allowable Development) : 2947-0 – 2947

Existing Level of Service Conditions Roadway Functional Class # of

Lanes Avail. Cap.

Level of Service

Chickasaw Trail • Lk. Underhill Rd. to Valencia College Ln. • Valencia College Ln. to Colonial Drive

Collector Collector

2 2

20 30

D C

Colonial Drive • Goldenrod Rd. to CF Greeneway • CF Greeneway to Dean Road

Prin. Arterial Prin. Arterial

6 6

522 727

C C

Econlockhatchee Trail • Lake Underhill Rd. to Valencia College Ln. • Valencia College Ln. to Colonial Dr.

Collector Collector

2 2

4

1,012

D C

Goldenrod Road • Lake Underhill Rd. to Valencia College Ln.

Min. Arterial

4

589

C

Valencia College Lane • Econlockhatchee Tr. To CF Greeneway • CF Greeneway to Goldenrod Rd.

Collector Collector

2 2

163 217

C C

Road Agreements: None associated with parcel id. Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements:

• Valencia College Lane – Planned roadway improvement to widen to 4 lanes from Goldenrod Road to SR 417. Construction schedule has not been determined.

• Valencia College Lane – Programmed roadway improvement to widen to 4 lane. Construction to be determined.

• Econlockahatchee Trail – Programmed roadway improvement to widen to 4 lanes from SR 408 to SR 50. Construction completed March 2015.

• Econlockahatchee Trail – Programmed roadway improvement to widen to 4 lanes from Lake Underhill to SR 408. Construction to be determined.

• Lake Underhill Road – Programmed roadway improvement to widen to 4 lanes from Goldenrod Road to Chickasaw Trail. Construction completed.

Right of Way Requirements: None

Summary

• The maximum allowable development for this site is 2,000,000 square feet which the developer proposes to split evenly between office use and commercial use.

• The requested amendment will result in an additional 2,947 pm peak hour trips on the surrounding transportation network.

• Analysis of existing conditions indicates that all roadway segments currently operate at an acceptable level of service.

• Analysis of the short term or year 2020 conditions indicate the proposed amendment will impact several roadway segments within the project impact area. Chickasaw Trail from Valencia College Lane to Colonial Drive, Econlockhatchee Trail from Lake Underhill Road to Valencia College Lane and Valencia College Lane from the Central Florida Greeneway to Goldenrod Road are all projected to operate at Level of service F.

• In the long term or 2030 horizon year, the roadway network in the study area is projected to operate at adequate level of service except Colonial Drive and Chickasaw Trail.

• This parcel in located in the Alternative Mobility Area (AMA) and per Objective T.2.3.2 of the County’s comprehensive Plan, the proposed development is exempt from meeting transportation concurrency requirements. To assess the extent of the alternative transportation network within the project impact area, a review of these facilities was conducted in accordance with Policy 2.3.7 of the Comprehensive Plan to determine the availability of these alternative modes in the area. Based on this review, it was determined that the sidewalk network along the frontage of the site is incomplete and connections will be required at the time of site development. To accommodate bicyclists, on road bicycle lanes are present on the 4-lane section of Valencia College Lane to the east and on the SR408 spur connector to the south however, there are no bicycle lanes to the west of the site. Public transportation is available within a quarter mile walk distance. The site is served by Link 15 which travels along Valencia College Lane adjacent to the property and there is a bus stop located approximately 500 feet to the west of the site. There is also a stop on eastbound leg which is improved with a shelter, and bench. The west bound stop however, has no amenities and consists of a pole sign. Link 104 is also available at the nearby Community College campus.

Final permitting of any development on this site will be subject to further review and approval from the County’s Development Review Committee (DRC) and by Transportation Planning. The applicant will be required to include site level mobility enhancements on the development plan for this project.

1507 S. Hiawassee Road, Suite 212, Orlando, Florida 32835 ■ P: (407) 531-5332 ■ F: (407) 531-5331 ■ www.trafficmobility.com

MEMORANDUM April 3, 2015 Re: Spring Grove Village H Traffic Review for Comp Plan Amendment Project № 15-029

This analysis was conducted to support an application to amend the future land use designation of the Spring Grove property located on Avalon Road, south of Siedel Road, in Village H of Horizon West, as illustrated in Figure 1. Description The proposed amendment will modify the FLU designation of the property from PD-Apartment District to PD-Village Home District. The site is approximately 25 acres, of which the net developable area is 11.4 acres. The maximum allowable development under the current FLU designation is 285 multi-family dwelling units. Under the proposed FLU designation the maximum allowable development is 85 single family dwelling units. Therefore, the proposed amendment will significantly reduce the development density proposed at the site. Trip Generation The trip generation analysis was conducted using information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in the Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. Table 1 summarizes the resulting trip generation analysis conducted. The ITE Trip Generation graphs are attached for reference.

Table 1 Trip Generation Comparison

Spring Grove Village H Traffic Review for Comp Plan Amendment Project №15-029 April 3, 2015 Page 2 of 2 The trip generation analysis reveals that the proposed amendment will significantly reduce the trip generation of the site. The daily trips are reduced from 1,850 trips to 904 trips, a 51% reduction. The peak hour trips are reduced from 174 trips to 91 trips, a 48% reduction. Based on this analysis, the proposed amendment will reduce the potential impact of the site on the surrounding transportation infrastructure. Therefore, no further capacity analysis is necessary for the proposed amendment. Road Agreement As the site undergoes additional approvals, the proposed development program will be subject to the Village H road network agreement to mitigate its capacity demands on the transportation network. This agreement replaces the typical concurrency process for development on the site. Therefore, the impact generated by the development is addressed through the development process. The first page of the road agreement is attached for identification/reference.

Regards,

Mohammed Abdallah, PE, PTOE Florida PE No 56169 [email protected]

SITE

NNot to Scale

Site Location Map1Spring Cove Village H

15-029

ATTACHMENTS

Village H, Parcel 45Data Source: OCPA, OC GIS

File: G:\MXD\County\Orange\SpringGrove\VillHParcel45\existing_landuse_8.5×11_portrait.mxd

UV545

Existing FLU: Village

Exisitng Land Use District: Apartment

Village I

Village H

¯ 0 300150Feet

LegendSubject Site

Village Future Land Use

Village Boundary

Orange County, FloridaExisting Land Use

PROJECT SITE

CONSULTANTS:

SURVEYOR

ROCKETT & ASSOCIATES1685 LEE ROADWINTER PARK, FLORIDA 32789TEL.: 407.894-6804FAX: 407.894-6805

ENVIRONMENTAL

BIOTECH CONSULTING INC202 EAST ROBINSON STORLANDO, FLORIDA 32803TEL.: 407.894.5969

LOCATION MAP SCALE : 1" = 2,000'

NORTH

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CIVIL

1 COVER SHEET

2 BOUNDARY SKETCH & LEGAL DESCRIPTION

3 FLOOD AREAS, SOILS & VEGETATION

4 LAND USE PLAN

5 EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND WETLANDS

6 ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES

7 TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS

(SENDING & RECEIVING AREAS)

8 SITE DATA, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS &

PROJECT DATA

9 TYPICAL SECTIONS

OWNER/DEVELOPER

AVALON PROPERTY, LTD

1411 EDGEWATER DRIVE, SUITE 101

ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32864

TEL.: 407-447-4774

FAX.: 407-236-9902

ENGINEERING

POULOS & BENNETT, LLC4625 HALDER LANE, SUITE BORLANDO, FLORIDA 32814TEL.: 407.487.2594

www.poulosandbennett.comENG BUS NO. 28567

SPRINGHILL

ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

P.D. LANDUSE PLAN

DA

TE

:

SUBMITTAL: 2-17-12

PARCEL ID. NO. 08-24-27-0000-00-005;17-24-27-0000-00-008;

A PORTION OF 18-24-27-0000-00-004

PB JOB NO. 11-067

NO

VE

MB

ER

27, 2012

(VILLAGE H, HORIZON WEST)

FULL ACCESS TO APF ROAD

RIGHT IN/RIGHT OUT

ACCESS TO ADJACENT PARCEL

ACCESS ONLY TO APF ROAD

(WITHIN APF ROW)MULTI-USE PATH

WETLAND

WATER BODY

DEVELOPMENTPOTENTIAL TOWNHOME

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LEGEND

APARTMENT

35

PARCEL ID AND SAP DESIGNATED LAND USE

NEIGHBORHOOD FEEDER

MIXED USE

ESTATE

TH

ESTATE

MIXED USE

MIXED USE

ELEMENTARYSCHOOL

ESTATE

TOWNHOME

VILLAGECENTER

VILLAGEHOME

NC

43b

43a

42b

42a

44a44b

41

VILLAGEHOME

40

39

38

37

36

15

APARTMENT

35

APARTMENT

45

LAKE HENEY

CR

545

AV

AL

ON

RD

HARTZOG ROAD

WE

STE

RN

BE

LT

WA

Y

APF ROW

NHWE 105.0

GARDEN HOME

GARDEN HOME

WETLAND 13CLASS I

WETLAND 11CLASS I

WETLAND 10CLASS I

WETLAND 7CLASS I

WETLAND 4ACLASS I

WETLAND (TBD)

WETLAND (TBD)

37

WETLAND 4BCLASS I

WETLAND 4CCLASS I

WETLAND 5CLASS II

LEGEND

1.0 ACRE APF UTILITYTRACT T.B.D.(SEE NOTE 2)

NOTES:1. LOCATION OF 0.83 ACRE APF PARK TRACT SHALLBE DETERMINED AT PSP/DP AND SHALL BE LOCATEDADJACENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.

2. LOCATION OF 1.0 ACRE APF UTILITY TRACT SHALLBE DETERMINED AT PSP/DP.

3. ALL ACREAGE REGRADING WETLANDS AND BUFFERS ARECONSIDERED APPROXIMATE UNTIL FINALIZED BY A CONSERVATIONAREA DETERMINATION AND CONSERVATION AREA IMPACT PERMIT.

A-1A-1

A-2

0.83 ACRE APF PARKTRACT T.B.D.(SEE NOTE 1)

NOTES: THE PRECISE LOCATION OF STREETS AND STREETTYPES SHALL BE DETERMINED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THEAPPROVAL OF A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

CR

545

CONCEPTUAL BLOCK PLAN (PARCEL 15)

FIRE STATION

UTIL TRACT

PARK

1.00 AC

2.00 AC

1

A

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

B

C

D

E

F

A

B

C

D

E

F

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

PROJECT NAME:

SHEET TITLE:

SHEET NO.:

Poulos & Bennett, LLC

Tel: 407-487-2594 www.poulosandbennett.com

Eng. Bus. No. 28567

ORANGE COUNTY,FLORIDA

SPRINGHILL

DA

TE

:NO

VE

MB

ER

27, 2012

Client:

AVALON PROPERTIES,LTD

4

LAND USE PLAN

Page 1 of 2Print Preview

8/22/2013https://otisstraffic.com/query/printGraph?code=220&ivlabel=UNITS220&timeperiod=AW...

Page 1 of 2Print Preview

8/22/2013https://otisstraffic.com/query/printGraph?code=220&ivlabel=UNITS220&timeperiod=TPS...

Appendix A

Developco Property – Horizon West CPA Traffic Study

February 2015

1

Introduction

This traffic study is for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment associated with one parcel

(27‐23‐27‐0000‐00‐020) within Horizon West in Orange County. The subject parcel is

located north of Reams Road and east of Ficquette Road in western Orange County,

Florida. Figure 1 shows the project location. Reams Road will provide access to the

parcels from the east and south while Ficquette Road will provide access from the west

and north.

Study Area of Influence

Consistent with Orange County’s methodology for transportation analysis for

Comprehensive Policy Plan Amendments, the primary study area for this traffic

assessment includes the directly impacted collectors or arterials, which, at a minimum,

includes a one mile radius around the project site. The area includes each roadway where

the daily project trips on the roadway segments are greater or equal to 3% of the

minimum service volume at the adopted level of service. Based on this review, roadway

segments that are within the traffic impact assessment area include the following:

Ficquette Road from Winter Garden‐Vineland Road (CR 535) to Overstreet Road

Ficquette Road from Overstreet Road to Lake Hancock Road

Lake Hancock Road from Seidel road to Reams Road

Overstreet Road from Ficquette Road to Londale Boulevard

Overstreet Road from Londale Boulevard to Winter Garden‐Vineland Road

(CR 535)

Porter Road from Lake Hancock Road to Phil Ritson Way

Reams Road from Lake Hancock Road to Cast Drive

Winter Garden‐Vineland Road (CR 535) from Tilden Road to Ficquette Road

1

2

Analysis Results

Per Orange County requirements, a transportation analysis was completed for existing

conditions, five‐year conditions (Year 2020), and Year 2040 conditions. The conclusions of

this analysis are as follows:

The proposed land use change will result in a net increase of 2,578 daily trips and

251 PM peak trips in comparison to the currently approved land use.

The existing conditions analysis shows that all of the roadways within the study

area of influence operate within the acceptable Level of Service capacity

standards and have excess capacity.

The five‐year analysis shows that all of the roadways within the study area are

projected to operate within the acceptable Level of Service capacity standards.

The Year 2040 analysis shows that all of the roadways within the study area of

influence are projected to operate within the acceptable Level of Service capacity

standards.

The analysis assumptions and results are discussed in the remainder of this report.

##

##

##

##

307

#########

###

###

######

######

###

######

##

##

##

##

######

FIGURE1

DEVELOPCO PROPERTY - HORIZON WEST TRAFFIC STUDY

Project Location Map

Reams Road

Overstreet Road

Tilden Rd

Porter Road

Winter Garden-Vineland Rd

Ficquette Road

La ke

Han

cock

Roa

d

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

3

4

Trip Generation

The currently approved Future Land Use designations for the property are Open

Space/Greenbelt and Estate Home District. The proposed Future Land Use designation for

the subject parcel is Garden Home District. Currently, the project site is vacant.

Table 1 shows the trip generation comparison between existing and approved Future

Land Use designations. Based on this comparison, the land use change is expected to

result in a net increase of 2,578 daily and 251 PM peak hour trips.

2

Table 1 Trip Generation Comparison

Current FLUM

Total In Out

Wetland, 264.1 ac 0 0 0 0 0

Open Space/Greenbelt, 38.5 ac 4 210 54 6 4 2

Estate Home District, 4.2 ac 8 210 103 11 7 4

Total Current FLUM 157 17 11 6

Proposed FLUM

Total In Out

Garden Home District, 70.8 ac 283 210 2,735 268 169 99

Total Proposed FLUM 2,735 268 169 99

Net Change

Land Use District Total In Out

Current 157 17 11 6

Proposed 2,735 268 169 99

TOTALS 2,578 251 158 93

Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 9th Edition

Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. 2/26/2015

Daily Trips

PM Peak Trips

Land Use District Units ITE Code Daily Trips

PM Peak Trips

PM Peak Trips

Land Use District Units ITE Code Daily Trips

5

6

Project Significance and Analysis Area

Per Orange County requirements, the analysis area for the project is defined as all arterial and collector roadway segments within a minimum one mile radius, out to 3 percent significance. Table 2 shows the significance calculation based on the net increase in trip generation presented in the previous section. An analysis of the following segments that fall within the one‐mile radius and 3 percent significance area has been performed:

Ficquette Road from Winter Garden‐Vineland Road (CR 535) to Overstreet Road

Ficquette Road from Overstreet Road to Lake Hancock Road

Lake Hancock Road from Seidel road to Reams Road

Overstreet Road from Ficquette Road to Londale Boulevard

Overstreet Road from Londale Boulevard to Winter Garden‐Vineland Road

(CR 535)

Porter Road from Lake Hancock Road to Phil Ritson Way

Reams Road from Lake Hancock Road to Cast Drive

Winter Garden‐Vineland Road (CR 535) from Tilden Road to Ficquette Road

3

Table 2 Project Traffic Significance Calculation

Roadway Segment

No. of

Lanes

LOS

Standard

Adopted

Capacity

Model

Distribution

Adjusted

Distribution

Daily

Project

Trips

% of

Adopted

Capacity

Within

1‐mile

Radius?

>3%

Significance?

Within

Study

Area?

Ficquette Rd Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd to Overstreet Rd 2 E 16,500 32.3% 49.3% 1,271 7.7% YES YES YES

Ficquette Rd Overstreet Rd to Lake Hancock Rd 2 E 16,500 42.7% 65.3% 1,682 10.2% YES YES YES

Lake Hancock Rd Seidel Rd to Reams Rd 2 E 27,900 15.2% 23.2% 599 2.1% YES NO YES

Overstreet Rd Ficquette Rd to Londale Blvd 2 E 16,500 7.0% 10.6% 274 1.7% YES NO YES

Overstreet Rd Londale Blvd to Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd 2 E 16,500 7.0% 10.6% 274 1.7% YES NO YES

Porter Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Phil Ritson Wy 2 E 14,580 9.7% 14.9% 384 2.6% YES NO YES

Reams Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Cast Dr 2 E 16,500 42.0% 11.4% 294 1.8% YES NO YES

Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd Tilden Rd to Ficquette Rd 4 E 36,700 29.2% 44.6% 1,150 3.1% NO YES YES

Sources:

Orange County Traffic County Program (2013)

FDOT Quality/Level of Service Handbook


7

8

Existing Conditions Roadway Analysis

Table 3 presents the existing conditions analysis for daily conditions. The traffic counts

were obtained from the most recent (year 2013) traffic count data published by Orange

County. This analysis shows that all of these roadway segments currently meet Orange

County’s adopted Level of Service standards and have excess capacity.

4

Table 3 Daily Existing Conditions Analysis

Ficquette Rd Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd to Overstreet Rd 2 E 16,500 10,563 C YesFicquette Rd Overstreet Rd to Lake Hancock Rd 2 E 16,500 10,563 C YesLake Hancock Rd Seidel Rd to Reams Rd 2 E 27,900 3,007 B YesOverstreet Rd Ficquette Rd to Londale Blvd 2 E 16,500 5,138 B YesOverstreet Rd Londale Blvd to Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd 2 E 16,500 6,809 B YesPorter Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Phil Ritson Wy 2 E 14,580 1,722 C YesReams Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Cast Dr 2 E 16,500 11,856 C YesWinter Garden‐Vineland Rd Tilden Rd to Ficquette Rd 4 E 36,700 32,381 C YesSources:


FDOT Quality/ Level of Service Handbook


Daily

Capacity

Existing

AADT (2013) LOS

Meets

Standard?Roadway Segment

No. of

Lanes

LOS

Standard

9

10

Planned and Programmed Improvements

Programmed improvements are those with funding commitments within the next five

years. According to the MetroPlan Orlando Transportation Improvement Program (TIP),

the segment of Ficquette Road from Overstreet Road to Winter Garden‐Vineland Road (CR

535) is scheduled to be widened from two lanes to four lanes in 2015.

Planned improvements are those that fall outside the five‐year window but are identified

in the MetroPlan Orlando Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). There are no roadways

within the study area that are identified in the Cost Feasible Projects list. The widening of

Reams Road to four lanes is identified on the Unfunded Needs List; however,

improvements that do not have committed funding sources are not considered in the

future conditions analysis.

5

11

Five Year Analysis

To estimate Year 2020 background roadway volumes for the analysis area, historical

growth rates were calculated based on historical data and used to project Year 2020

volumes. The growth rate calculations are shown in Exhibit A. The historical data was

obtained from the Orange County traffic count database. The latest available volumes are

from 2013. The calculations indicate that there is variability in growth rates among the

segments in the analysis area, but there is positive growth along all of the segments

between 2008 and 2013. A minimum growth rate of 1.0% was used to provide a

conservative estimate for future volumes. In the case of Reams Road, when the historical

growth rate was applied to exiting volumes, the forecasted 2020 volume resulted in a

2020 AADT that was higher than the 2040 model forecasted AADT. Therefore, for this

segment, 2020 AADT was obtained by interpolating (Linear) between existing traffic

volumes and 2040 model forecasted volumes.

Table 4 shows the AADT for each segment from the past five years, the forecasted 2020

volumes, and the annual growth rates calculated from these volumes.

The trips associated with the buildout of the parcel were added to the background

volumes for each segment. The MetroPlan Orlando travel demand model was used to

determine the project traffic distribution including the revised development program.

While the travel demand model provides a good estimation for how traffic will be

distributed across the roadway network, there are assumptions in the model that can

create scenarios that may not accurately reflect project traffic travel patterns. For

example, the subject parcel is located within close proximity of Disney World, which is a

large employment site. The trip distribution produced by the model assumes that 40.5

percent of the trips from the parcel will be attracted by Disney World. While it is

reasonable to assume that project traffic will be attracted by Disney World, 40.5 percent

seems excessive; therefore, project traffic distribution was adjusted to reduce the number

of trips attracted by Disney World to ten percent of the project trips. The remaining 30.5

percent of trips were allocated proportionately throughout the network. The project trips

for each segment were calculated based on the adjusted distributions. Figure 2 shows the

adjusted distribution of the project trips along the segments within the analysis area. The

raw trip distribution can be found in Exhibit B.

6

12

Table 5 provides the 2020 background traffic and project traffic for each segment within

the study area. The analysis of the traffic volumes shows that all of the roadways within

the study area are projected to operate within the Level of Service capacity standards.

Table 4 Daily Five Year Conditions Analysis, Year 2020

Ficquette Rd Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd to Overstreet Rd 4 E 36,700 10,563 1.00% 11,302 49.3% 1,271 12,573 B YesFicquette Rd Overstreet Rd to Lake Hancock Rd 2 E 16,500 10,563 1.00% 11,302 65.3% 1,682 12,984 C YesLake Hancock Rd Seidel Rd to Reams Rd 2 E 27,900 3,007 8.71% 4,841 23.2% 599 5,440 B YesOverstreet Rd Ficquette Rd to Londale Blvd 2 E 16,500 5,138 6.33% 7,414 10.6% 274 7,688 B YesOverstreet Rd Londale Blvd to Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd 2 E 16,500 6,809 9.27% 11,225 10.6% 274 11,499 C YesPorter Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Phil Ritson Wy 2 E 14,580 1,722 7.59% 2,637 14.9% 384 3,021 C YesReams Rd * Lake Hancock Rd to Cast Dr 2 E 16,500 11,856 1.11% 12,776 11.4% 294 13,070 C YesWinter Garden‐Vineland Rd Tilden Rd to Ficquette Rd 4 E 36,700 32,381 1.20% 35,110 44.6% 1,150 36,260 D YesSources:



* 2020 background volume was determined by interpolating between Existing 2013 volumes and Modeled 2040 volumes


2020 Daily

Project Traffic

Project Trip

Distribution

2020 Total

AADT LOS

Meets

Standard?

2020

Background

AADT

Existing Year

2013 Daily

Volumes

Background

Growth RateRoadway Segment

No. of

Lanes

Adopted

LOS

Standard

Daily

Capacity

13

##

##

##

##

307

#########

###

###

######

######

###

######

##

##

##

##

######

FIGURE2

DEVELOPCO PROPERTY - HORIZON WEST TRAFFIC STUDY

Adjusted Trip Distribution

Reams Road

Porter Road

Overstreet Road

Tilden Rd

10%

49.3%

65.3

%

14.9%23.2%

11.4%1.4%

10.6%

2.6%

44.6

%

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

Winter Garden-Vineland Rd

Ficquette Road

La ke

Han

cock

Roa

d

14

Table 5 Historic Growth Rate Calculations

Roadway Segment 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Annual

Growth Rate

Ficquette Rd Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd to Overstreet Rd 9,831 10,115 8,068 8,529 8,740 10,563 1.00%

Ficquette Rd Overstreet Rd to Lake Hancock Rd 9,831 10,115 8,068 8,529 8,740 10,563 1.00%

Lake Hancock Rd Seidel Rd to Reams Rd 1,735 1,983 1,789 1,991 2,640 3,007 8.71%

Overstreet Rd Ficquette Rd to Londale Blvd 3,619 3,522 3,834 4,197 4,504 5,138 6.33%

Overstreet Rd Londale Blvd to Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd 3,809 4,389 4,990 5,652 6,782 6,809 9.27%

Porter Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Phil Ritson Wy 1,156 1,047 1,429 1,764 1,585 1,722 7.59%

Reams Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Cast Dr 8,757 8,667 9,025 9,570 10,487 11,856 5.45%

Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd Tilden Rd to Ficquette Rd 27,946 29,356 29,356 27,103 26,893 32,381 1.20%

Sources:

Orange County Traffic Count Program (2013)


15

16

Year 2040 Analysis

Table 6 summarizes the roadway analysis completed for long‐term (Year 2040) conditions

assuming the proposed land use change. Year 2040 background volumes for the

roadways within the study area of influence were obtained from the MetroPlan Orlando

travel demand model and are provided in Exhibit B. These raw modeled volumes (RMV)

were then multiplied by the model output conversion factor (MOCF) for Orange County to

get the average annual daily traffic (AADT) for each segment. As shown in Table 6, the

2040 modeled volumes for the segments along Overstreet Road and Winter Garden‐

Vineland Road (CR 535) are lower than the existing volumes. For these segments, and to

provide for a more conservative analysis, the projected 2020 volumes were used instead

of the lower 2040 modeled volumes.

The project trips for the 2040 condition were calculated by using the same distribution

used in the 2020 analysis. The total 2040 volumes are a combination of the background

volumes and the project trips. The analysis shows that all of the roadway segments within

the study area of influence will operate within the acceptable Level of Service capacity

standards.

7

Table 6 Daily Long‐Term Conditions Analysis, Year 2040

Ficquette Rd Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd to Overstreet Rd 4 E 36,700 10,563 11,302 14,605 14,459 14,459 49.3% 1,271 15,730 B YesFicquette Rd Overstreet Rd to Lake Hancock Rd 4 E 36,700 10,563 11,302 19,005 18,815 18,815 65.3% 1,682 20,497 B YesLake Hancock Rd Seidel Rd to Reams Rd 2 E 27,900 3,007 4,841 14,942 14,793 14,793 23.2% 599 15,392 C YesOverstreet Rd Ficquette Rd to Londale Blvd 2 E 16,500 5,138 7,414 4,745 4,698 7,414 10.6% 274 7,688 B YesOverstreet Rd Londale Blvd to Winter Garden‐Vineland Rd 2 E 16,500 6,809 11,225 4,745 4,698 11,225 10.6% 274 11,499 C YesPorter Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Phil Ritson Wy 2 E 14,580 1,722 2,637 10,665 10,558 10,558 14.9% 384 10,942 D YesReams Rd Lake Hancock Rd to Cast Dr 2 E 16,500 11,856 12,776 15,558 15,402 15,402 11.4% 294 15,696 D YesWinter Garden‐Vineland Rd Tilden Rd to Ficquette Rd 4 E 36,700 32,381 35,110 30,709 30,402 35,110 44.6% 1,150 36,260 D YesSources:

OUATS: 2040 Travel Demand Model



Roadway Segment

No. of

Lanes

LOS

Standard

Daily

Capacity

Existing

AADT

(2013)

2020

Background

AADT

2040 AADT

RMV

2040 AADT

Used in

Study

2040 AADT

(RMV x MOCF) Distribution

2040 Daily

Project Traffic

2040 Total

AADT LOS

Meets

Standard?

17

18

Conclusions and Recommendations

A transportation analysis was completed for existing conditions, five‐year conditions (year

2020), and Year 2040 conditions. The conclusions of this analysis are as follows:

The proposed land use change will result in a net increase of 2,578 daily trips and

251 PM peak trips in comparison to the currently approved land use.

The existing conditions analysis shows that all of the roadways within the study

area of influence operate within the acceptable Level of Service capacity

standards and have excess capacity.

The five‐year analysis shows that all of the roadways within the study area are

projected to operate within the acceptable Level of Service capacity standards.

The Year 2040 analysis shows that all of the roadways within the study area of influence are projected to operate within the acceptable Level of Service capacity standards.

8

Technical Exhibits

A. Historical Growth Rate Calculations

Ficquette Road from Winter Garden‐Vineland Road to Lake Hancock Road Porter Rd from Lake Hancock Road to Phil Ritson Way

Year

Observed

AADT

Extrapolated

AADT

Annual

Growth Rate

(2013‐2014) Year

Observed

AADT

Extrapolated

AADT

Annual

Growth Rate

(2013‐2014)

2008 9,831 9,308 2008 1,156 1,109

2009 10,115 9,308 2009 1,047 1,246

2010 8,068 9,308 2010 1,429 1,382

2011 8,529 9,308 2011 1,764 1,519

2012 8,740 9,307 2012 1,585 1,655

2013 10,563 9,307 2013 1,722 1,792

2014 9,307 0.00% 2014 1,928 7.59%

Lake Hancock Road from Seidel Road to Reams Road Reams Road from Lake Hancock Road to Cast Drive

Year

Observed

AADT

Extrapolated

AADT

Annual

Growth Rate

(2013‐2014) Year

Observed

AADT

Extrapolated

AADT

Annual

Growth Rate

(2013‐2014)

2008 1,735 1,581 2008 8,757 8,191

2009 1,983 1,825 2009 8,667 8,806

2010 1,789 2,069 2010 9,025 9,420

2011 1,991 2,313 2011 9,570 10,034

2012 2,640 2,556 2012 10,487 10,649

2013 3,007 2,800 2013 11,856 11,263

2014 3,044 8.71% 2014 11,877 5.45%

Overstreet Road from Ficquette Road to Londale Blvd Winter Garden‐Vineland Road from Tilden Road to Ficquette Road

Year

Observed

AADT

Extrapolated

AADT

Annual

Growth Rate

(2013‐2014) Year

Observed

AADT

Extrapolated

AADT

Annual

Growth Rate

(2013‐2014)

2008 3,619 3,357 2008 27,946 27,944

2009 3,522 3,668 2009 29,356 28,302

2010 3,834 3,980 2010 29,356 28,660

2011 4,197 4,291 2011 27,103 29,018

2012 4,504 4,603 2012 26,893 29,376

2013 5,138 4,915 2013 32,381 29,734

2014 5,226 6.33% 2014 30,092 1.20%

Overstreet Road from Londale Blvd to Winter Garden‐Vineland Road

Year

Observed

AADT

Extrapolated

AADT

Annual

Growth Rate

(2013‐2014)

2008 3,809 3,774

2009 4,389 4,426

2010 4,990 5,079

2011 5,652 5,731

2012 6,782 6,384

2013 6,809 7,037

2014 7,689 9.27%

A-1

B. OUATS Model Output

Year 2040 CF OUATS - Project Distribution

(Licensed to GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc.)E:\FSUTMS\D5\OUATS.40\Base\CF2040\Y40P61965\Output\HRLDXY_C40.NET 2/25/2015

Legend

1 lane per direction 2 lanes per direction 3 lanes per direction 4 lanes per direction 5 lanes per direction Centroid connector

0.3

0.16

0.04

0

0

0.05

1.25

2.4

0.1

0

0

0

1.4

2.6

0.9

0.6

0

1.09

0

0.01

0

0.7

0

0

0.6

0

0

0.1

2.1

0.4

0.60.8

8.66

7.91

0.01

1.89

6

57.91

42.0

3

0

0

0

0.36

0.93

0.63

0.73 0.73

13.94

7.37

7.37

5

2.45

2.45

7.83

7.83

42.03

0.91

0.91

3.55

1.99

1.99

1.99

1.99

8.56

21.76

2.2922.47 2.29

2.29

2.290.410.41

22.47

22.4

2

30.96

30.96

40. 4

8

9.52

9.52

1.611.57

1.57

1.57

21.76

1.57

9.52

0.05

5.46

5.4 6

5.46

2.18

2.18

2

0.24

0

39.21

39.2139.21

3.78

3.78

3.79

3.88

6.95

7.83

1.99

7.37 7.37

4.44

2.6

4.44

0.8 7

2 .94

2.17

0.19

0.19

2.83

13.05

7.41

5.46

0.190 .19

4.55

9.74

1.01

3.57

2 .58

1.22

0.42

0.420.42

0.420.42

0.42

0

0

0

00

0

0

0

0

0

00

0.090.0

00

0.24

0

00

0

00

00

0 00

0

0

5.46

5.46

0.46

1.

0.48

0.48

42.71

15 .20

0

40.94

0.24

15.2

5.4600

0 0.19

0.36

0.73

15.24

30.9

6

2.29

5.461.61

1. 61

1.61

29.18

1.68

32.2

6

32.2

6

6.9 5

9.74

3.55

0.48 3.63

15.24

7.837.41

0.250.16

0.19

0.190.09

1.61

0

00

0

0.09 0.09

0

0.24

0.24

0

0.07

0.07

0.07

00.

0 7

0.07

0

0

0

0.46

0.46

0

0

0.460.460

1.25

1.25

1.25

1.25

0

00

0 0

0

00

00

0.24

0.24

0.24 0

0.46

0.40 0 0

0

9.749.74 9.74 9.74 9.74 9.74

6.95

0

0

00 0

0.07

000

0

00

0

B-1

Year 2040 CF OUATS - Project Background

(Licensed to GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc.)E:\FSUTMS\D5\OUATS.40\Base\CF2040\Y40P61965\Output\HRLDXY_C40.NET 2/27/2015

Legend

1 lane per direction 2 lanes per direction 3 lanes per direction 4 lanes per direction 5 lanes per direction Centroid connector

5778

1641

434

700

413

9547

4578

13583

4110

340

1215

1071

6

2873

9782

1898

3768

2819

1541 2064

5894

845

4412

3118

27

2380

3278

4166

6298

19696

5891

777111336

21827

21605

1797

9

20631

5

0

0

246

0

2

17264

26657

4474

5595 5595

30709

6801

6801

4780

4780

10824

15457

13925

11900

18365

4037440374

38169

51335

36167 1104720276

36167

2307

2

19795

19795

287 2

6

8932

8932

1414419667

19667

19667

51335

8932

13095

4277

4277

8114

8114

8

19005

26222

2895

527

979

4745

6693

40374

6801 6801

23021 31437

211 7

0

2 1994

20824

1450

5 1450

5

14919

31389

7131

4277

145051 450 5

25665

10665

10774

1792

8

1 23 2

4

19407

7791

7791

7791

7791

2864629804

10438930

2757

1

4406 129

4277

4277

317

194

18347

1838 015457

15457

15558

1097

0

14942

22

2

1726

4 5595

14815

11047

427721507

21 50 7

21142

30019

21355

1460

5

1460

5

4745

10665

17089

1834

7

12650

13021

6693

7131

2689713510

24386

10819

2114

2

0

637246

2

26

1494

2880

6

2880

6

261 8

1

3058

7

28646

28646

28963

28963

26077

129

2896318415

30317

30317

30317

513

29804

29804

2620

6

2757

1

326

317

2528

10665

10665 10665

4745

1

B-2

Appendix B: Environmental Conditions

As shown on Figure 6, the majority of the Developco Parcel falls within the 100-year floodplain.

Figure 7 shows that the Developco Parcel is relatively flat with little to no elevation changes throughout the property. The soils are primarily very well drained. The soils associated with the wetlands are hydric in nature. A master drainage system was constructed under SFWMD Application Number 061009-7. A SFWMD Letter Modification will be required for the site plan changes.

REAM

S ROA

D

FIQUE

TTE R

OAD

OVERSTREET RD

LAKE HANCOCK RD

Path: \\vhb\proj\Orlando\61965.00 Developco-Ficquett-Reams\GIS\Project\CPA\Fig 6_Floodplain Mapl 02162015.mxd

CPA 2015-2 -Developco PropertyFloodplain MapFebruary 2015

Figure 6

UFeet0 1000500

LegendSUBJECT PROPERTYDEVELOPCO PARCEL100-Year Floodplain

225 East Robinson Street, Suite 300Orlando, Florida 32801 | 407.839.4006

REAM

S ROA

D

FIQUE

TTE R

OAD

LAKE HANCOCK RD

OVERSTREET RD

Path: \\vhb\proj\Orlando\61965.00 Developco-Ficquett-Reams\GIS\Project\CPA\Fig 7_Topo Map 02162015-rev.mxd

CPA 2015-2 -Developco PropertyTopographic MapFebruary 2015

Figure 7

UFeet0 1000500

LegendSubject PropertyDevelopco Parcel5ft ContoursWetlands

225 East Robinson Street, Suite 300Orlando, Florida 32801 | 407.839.4006

Documents

TEMPLATE V06 - WITH APPROVED GRAPHICS library/planning... · (2015-2) to the Future Land ... Low Density Residential; LMDR - Low-Medium Density Residential; MDR - Medium Density Residential;