HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning and Zoning Commission - 7/12/2007 MINUTES
ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION
July 12, 2007
ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM
1. Call to Order at 6:00 p.m.
2. Roll Call
PRESENT:
Chair Doug McKee
Vice Chair Teree Bergman
Commissioner Bill Adler
Commissioner Ray Paolino
Commissioner Clark Reddin
Commission Honey Pivirotto (joined meeting at 6:12 p.m.)
ABSENT:
Commissioner Pete Bistany
3. Call to the Audience opened at 6:02 p.m.
Pat Kinsman, 11671 N. Europa Place.,said Oro Valley's goal needs to be to design
projects that minimize impact and protects native plant and wildlife.
Call to the audience closed at 6:05 p.m.
Chair Mckee requested an order change in the agenda. Hearing no objection Chair
McKee moved Item 7 before Item 5.
4. Approval of the June 5, 2007, Planning and Zoning Commission regular
meeting minutes.
MOTION: Commissioner Adler MOVED to approve the June 5, 2007,
Planning and Zoning Commission minutes as submitted. Commissioner
Reddin seconded the motion. MOTION carried, (5:0). (Commissioner Pivirotto
was not present at this time.)
7. Public Hearing: OV9-07-002A, The Planning Center, representing NCH
Corporation/Transwest Properties, proposes a text amendment to Section
24.1.B.1.b.i of the Tangerine Road Corridor Overlay District in the Oro Valley
Zoning Code Revised and to amend Policy 9 for Neighborhood 3 of the
Rancho Vistoso PAD. These amendments are to allow for a 185-foot
building setback for a proposed hotel, on one specific parcel, Parcel # 223-
02-021 D.
Bob Conant, Planning Center, presented the request for a reduction in the setback,
which is currently 4:1. The developer is asking for flexibility.
Discussion followed regarding:
- Setback relief
- Intrusiveness of proposal
- Size of hotel
- ADOT taking additional 100'
- Clarification of measurement from roadway to building
- Visual impact
- Hospital setting a precedent
- Number of stories allowed under current code
-Where setbacks are measured from.
Ms. More stated that the applicant's intent is to take the height issue to the Council.
Matt Michels, Senior Planner, gave the staff report, and stated that the proposal would
not be any more intrusive.
Staff looked at the Town's economic development, and feedback shows this proposal is
needed and wanted.
Mr. Michels said the primary intent of the setback requirement is to preserve the
integrity of the scenic corridor and to not have visual intrusion.
Chair Mckee asked how many stories could be built under the current code.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Joe Hornat, resident, supports the location of the hotel but is concerned that the view
will be obscured.
Zev Cywan, resident, said it appears that a request for a text amendment in this manner
would be inappropriate.
Dorothy Bowers,resident, agreed with the previous two speakers and objected to the
hotel proposal.
Kathleen Pastryk, resident, stated Oro Valley is a beautiful small town and we care
about building height.
Wayne Krouse, resident, showed a slide depicting dimensions of the slope, grade and
building height. The notification required has not been met. The facts are
conflicting. He submitted his research for the record.
Art Segal, resident, asked why the hotel has to be 75 feet.
Bill Gardner, resident, was opposed to the applicant's proposal because there appears
to be discrepancies.
2
Bob Peck, resident, has seen a disregard for what the Town stands for.
Judy McDonald, resident, questioned why staff offered an answer to a question that was
not supposed to be a part of the discussion.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Commissioner Adler stated that Commission Members respect staff at the highest
level. The Commission and Staff sometimes differ when it comes to the interpretation.
The Code and the Plan are somewhat subjective. He sometimes differs from staff on
how the Code applies. He said staff should not be depicted as anything other than
community interested and community oriented. He does feel that the 4:1 ratio setback
should be retained. The number of feet involved is directly related to the height.
Although the Commissioner has already decided the height at a previous meeting, the
height comes into this discussion because of the ratio. The Commission recommended
to the Council in April that the hotels are permitted, as long as they comply with the PAD
height limit of 36 feet. Therefore, he will make the following motion.
MOTION: Commissioner Adler MOVED that the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend to Council that the 4:1 ratio as reflected in the Oro Valley Zoning
Code be retained as it relates to construction in the Tangerine Scenic Corridor.
Commissioner Pivirotto seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Commissioner Adler said that means they can build a hotel there and the setback would
be 144 feet if the height was 36 feet, so they would get relief.
Vice Chair Bergman will support the motion because the setback request is tied
intergrally to the height requirement that we already recommended against. The
Commission is not a deciding body. She commended the staff and stated they are very
professional and capable. Their job is difficult and complex and they work hard. The
Town is lucky to have them.
Commissioner Paolino will support the motion. The request for the reduced setback is
clearly related to the size and height of the hotel, which is clearly in violation to the
current code. The Commission cannot make exceptions and must remain consistent.
Chair Mckee will support the motion because of the precedent setting nature of the
proposal. If you look at the arguments for giving this what amount to a height variance,
they are using the precedent of the hospital as one of the main reasons. If we grant
another one, there will be other requests and there will be two precedents.
MOTION carried (6:0).
Recess: 7:15 p.m. to 7:26 p.m.
3
5. Public Hearing: OV9-05-06, The applicant requests approval of a rezoning
from R1-144 to R1-20, located on the northwest corner of La Cholla
Boulevard and Naranja Drive. The subdivision lots will range in size from
16,000 - 36,000 square feet. The property is 132 acres in size and will
consist of 118 single family homes.
Applicant Paul Oland reviewed the following:
TRS Custom Homes
Site plan and location
Rezoning request to R-120
Significant Resource Areas
Lot Sizes
Density
Project Disturbance
Riparian Area and Open Space
Recreation Area
The applicant met with Amphi School District and the Town. Glover Road right of way is
owned by Amphi and they have agreed to dedicate 30 feet; the developer will dedicate
the other 50 feet necessary. The developer will participate in the design and
improvement of Glover Road. The signal on La Cholla is on the RTA schedule. No
additional right of way is needed at Naranja. The developer has agreed to do a multi-
use path. The applicant has not received a request from Public Works to put a third lane
on Naranja Drive.
David Ronquillo, Senior Planner, gave the staff report.
Paul Keesler, OV Development Review Manager, reviewed the following for La Cholla,
Glover and Naranja Roads:
Traffic impacts and analysis
Existing average daily trips (ADT)
Impacts of traffic
RTA widening schedule
Safety requests
Discussion following regarding:
- Lower density
- Dedication of Glover Road to Oro Valley
- "Fair share"
- Tucson Water facility
Attorney Andrews said the Town could suggest conditional language saying the
zoning approval would require the developer to acquire adequate right of way, not listing
specifics of Amphi School District or the Developer, and include the Town will not
participate in the reconstruction of the roads. Therefore, the zoning could undo itself if
the negotiations fail.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
4
Linda Snodgrass, resident, was opposed to anything smaller than 3.3 acres
because animals suffer and getting onto Naranja will be impossible.
Tim Milburn, resident, said the neighbors met with the developer and recommended
a lower density. He agreed with Mrs. Snodgrass about the animals suffering. Traffic
is a problem.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Commissioner Adler said General Plan designations when made are often not site
specific. The significant resource create an environmentally sensitive area between the
riparian areas, not within them. Lower density in that area was necessary. He opined
that though the proposal is compliant with the General Plan it does not comply with the
purpose of the Significant Resource Area (SRA)which was overlaid, not at the same
time, but subsequently. The SRA was overlaid in order to establish a sensitivity in that
area. He would not support the rezoning. We need to consider the values of what the
property represents.
MOTION: Commissioner Adler MOVED to deny this proposed rezoning at the
density levels proposed. Motion failed for lack of a second.
MOTION: Vice Chair Bergman MOVED to approve OV9-05-06, the WLB Group
request for approval of a rezoning from R1-144 to R1-20 with the conditions in the
revised Attachment submitted, adding into condition #1 that the Town will not
participate in the cost of the reconstruction of Glover Road. Commissioner
Reddin seconded the motion.
Discussion: Vice Chair Bergman commented that normally there is clear separation
between deciding what is appropriate zoning on the property and what is the
appropriate development. The motion is to approve the rezoning but the details of the
layout of the lots and some of the other development factors still need to be negotiated
as part of the subdivision process. We are approving the land use concept and a
rezoning.
Chair McKee will support the motion. This is a high quality subdivision which will be
good for the Town and neighbors. The neighbors to the west may prefer less density
but the lots along the west side are good size. The applicant has tried to maintain our
standards and although the significant overlay is very complicated, it is designed to give
the developer some leeway in how he lays the lots out by saving some areas and
squeezing others. He has met the intent of the significant overlay.
Commissioner Paolino will reluctantly support the motion. He shared many of
Commissioner Adler's reservations, but believes it has minimally met the requirements
of the General Plan in terms of the land use.
Commissioner Reddin added his support. He will be a neighbor of this area and had
concerns, but when he looked at the concept of what they are proposing, it is what this
community desparately needs. Looking at where it has been placed between two
schools, it is a quality product.
5
Motion carried, (5:1) Commissioner Adler voting no for reasons stated above,
prior to the motion being made.
Recess: 8:26 p.m. to 8:32 p.m.
6. Public Hearing: OV11-06-02, General Plan Amendment for portions of
Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 3, generally bounded on the north by Rancho
Vistoso Boulevard, on the east by Oracle Road, on the south by Tangerine
Road, and on the west by the Big Wash.
Chairman Mckee stated this item was for discussion only. Another meeting will be held
tentatively on August 14th at 6:00 p.m. at Sun City Recreation Center.
Mr. Paul Olund, WLB Group, reviewed the following:
Existing Rancho Vistoso PAD
Existing encroachments
Existing facilities
Current land use configuration Proposed linear park and trail connections
Proposed commercial area
Proposed configuration
Traffic Light
General Plan Map
Conceptual design of the park
History and General Plan findings
Market demand
Commissioner Adler requested a Study Session be scheduled and that the applicant
provide policy statements before the Study Session and put environmental
compatability in writing.
Chair Mckee requested a history of the levee and an inventory of parcels which are
available for employment centers for both the proposed amendment and existing plan.
Matt Michels, OV Senior Planner, gave the staff report.
David Welsh, OV Economic Developer Administrator, stated this is one of, if not the
most important economic development priorities in the Town. Three components of the
Economic Development Strategy are: Retention and recruitment of businesses in retail
development, tourism/resort, and high tech and bio tech professional level employment.
This proposal supports the final component of that strategy and allows people to live,
work and play in Oro Valley.
Discussion followed regarding:
- Existing inventory of available parcels
- Proposed parcels
- Open space versus land to accomodate the level of businesses desired
- The need for recruitment and retention
- Natural resources as a part of economic well being
6
- The need for more neighborhood commercial property
- The need for flexibility
Mr. Michels read a statement from Phillip Saletta, OV Water Utility Director, that the
Town does not have plans to develop CAP water recharge in Big Wash.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Brian Catts, resident, asked that the Town develop more commercial/industrial facilities
for start-up or growing businesses and stated he was neither in favor or opposed to the
proposal.
Bill Garner, resident, was concerned about the environmental and traffic impact.
Lyra Done, resident,planned on attending the study session proposed.
Art Segal, resident, had difficulty finding the notice that was placed on the site.
Wayne Crouse, resident,asked the Town to follow the policies and procedures for
notification in the Zoning Code.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Ms. More stated that the notification procedures for HOA's have been remedied and in
the future we will consistently, for zoning code amendments and General Plan
amendments, notify every HOA representative in the Town.
8. Discussion of August Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
A study session will be held August 7th. Ms. More recommended a decision be made
regarding a public hearing on August 13 so that proper noticing can begin.
9. Future Agenda Items
Ms. More stated she would like to go over the work plan in a future Study Session.
10. Planning Update
The Town of Oro Valley is hosting the Governors Economic Development
Conference on August 15-17th at the Hilton.
11. Adjournment.
MOTION: Commissioner Paolino MOVED to adjourn. Commissioner Adler
seconded the motion. Motion carried (6:0).
Prepared by: s
("(',Y
LALr
Deanna Ruiz for Diane Chapman, Office S ecialis
7