Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning and Zoning Commission - 9/6/2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 6, 2005 TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT 6:02 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair John Anning Commissioner Bill Adler Commissioner Don Manross Commissioner Teree Bergman Commissioner Doug McKee Commissioner Honey Pivirotto EXCUSED: Commissioner Pete Bistany ALSO PRESENT: Conny Culver, Council Member K.C. Carter, Council Member Lyra Done, Chair, Finance and Bond Committee James Kreigh Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney Brent Sinclair, AICP, Community Development Director Bayer Vella, AICP, Principal Planner David Ronquillo, Senior Planner CALL TO THE AUDIENCE Opened and closed at 6:03 p.m. There were no speakers. MINUTES MOTION: Commissioner Manross MOVED to approve the August 2, 2005, Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting minutes as written. 1. PUBLIC HEARING, OV9-05-08, STEAM PUMP INVESTORS, LLC. REQUESTS APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE STEAM PUMP VILLAGE PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT (PAD) ZONING STANDARDS THAT PERTAIN TO A 41 ACRE COMMERICAL DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD IN PROXIMITY TO EAST HANLEY BOULEVARD AND THE HONEYWELL SITE, PARCEL NUMBERS 220-08-001P & 1Q, 220-11-003A, AND 220-04-009E & 9C. Mr. Sinclair stated this is a request for a PAD amendment. In the report is a history of the PAD. The applicant will give a presentation of what they propose, followed by a Staff analysis. September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2 Applicant Keri Silvyn, One South Church Street, Tucson, spoke representing Evergreen Steam Pump LLC, the developer of Phases 1 through 3. With her were Greg Alpert, Aurora Ortis and Clint Jameson from Evergreen Devco, which is one of the partners; Mark Weinberg from Diamond Ventures, also a partner and the owner and developer currently of Phase 4; and Rich Schumfeld of Westland Resources, who is the landscape architect. Ms. Silvyn gave a PowerPoint presentation and a brief background of the development. The 41 acre property is located on the west side of Oracle Road and has approximately 3/4 mile of frontage. The PAD was adopted in its current form in 1996, amended in 1999 and 2000 and is currently suggested to be developed in 4 phases. Phases 1 has a Development Plan that was approved in May 2004, the grading has occurred, and the building plans are approved and permits are ready for issuance. Phase 2 is scheduled for Development Plan approval September 7, 2005. Phase 3 will include the Steinway Piano Gallery, who will construct an amphitheater and have been consulting with GOVAC regarding other public uses of the amphitheater. Phase 3 has a conceptual site plan and they are pursuing tenants. Phase 4 is very conceptual at this point. The applicant has been working closely with Staff and Pima County Parks and Rec to develop the River Park Trail on the west portion of the property along the wash. The developer has committed to making that part of the development. While working with Staff verbiage was discovered in the PAD that needs amending and clarification . The purpose is to allow continued development of Phases 3 and 4 in the same high standard that Phases 1 and 2 have been developed. For the record, the applicant has withdrawn the requested PAD amendment dealing with the lighting issues relating to the amphitheater. The applicant is seeking amendment clarification in 4 areas: 1. Four free-standing single use structure condition. 2. An issue relating to the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District (ORSCOD) 3. Lighting 4. Setbacks The four free-standing structure condition was to stop the proliferation of free-standing structures down Oracle Road. When that condition was proposed in 1999, there was not a site plan to look at. The way the PAD is written, it applies to the 20,000 square foot California Design Center (CDC) that is over 170 feet from Oracle Road, as well as the Wingate Hotel at the far west portion of the property, which is 410 feet from Oracle. The applicant believes this condition was meant, and should have indicated, that it was for four free-standing structures of a certain size and within a certain number of feet of Oracle Road in order to achieve its purpose. Relief is needed from that request without undoing the purpose of the condition. Applicant asks that companion conditions listed in the Staff Report restricting the number of convenience uses to a maximum of four be left in place. It is also suggested that in the PAD Amendment, pages 2 and 3, that the restriction be no September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 3 more than four single use structures within a certain distance from Oracle Road and of a certain size. As Phases 1 and 2 were developed, the focus has been on pedestrian connections between the Phases. As part of the amendment, language should indicate that Phases 3 and 4 continue with the pedestrian connectivity. The PAD currently has language recommending lighting inconsistent with the current Oro Valley Outdoor Lighting Code for Cl and C2 provisions. The project is planned to be built out within seven years. Applicant is requested that the OV Lighting Code as it exists today be frozen and apply for the next seven years, until January 1, 2013, to guarantee that all four phases will be consistent in lighting levels and standards. In 1999 the Tentative Development Plan had different setbacks for development for areas A, B, C and D. Areas A and B have setbacks for 60 feet from Oracle Road. Areas C and D have an average of 120 feet but no closer than 30 feet. The applicant requested that development areas A and B setbacks be amended so that convenience uses still have to be 60 feet, but that non-convenience uses in A and B meet the same setbacks as they would in areas C and D. ORSCOD contains a requirement that no significant vegetation may be removed within 100 feet of Oracle Road. Phases 1 and 2 did not have any signification vegetation as defined in the Code. Phases 3 and 4 do. If the 100 feet requirement is applied to Phases 3 and 4, about 20% of the developable property becomes undevelopable. The vegetation along Oracle Road is not as aesthetically pleasing as what could be accomplished by preserving certain specimens and mitigating others. Since the wash has been channelized a lot of the vegetation is not getting water and is severely distressed, if not dead. The applicant's proposal incorporates healthy native vegetation through preservation or transplantation. Exhibit B replaces number A on page 4 of the amendment, which covers the proposed condition dealing with signification vegetation. Commissioner Adler agreed that the original PAD language regarding free-standing had to do with convenience uses. At that time the attitude was negative towards convenience uses. As this development progresses, he does not see any convenience uses, so can any reference to convenience uses be eliminated? Ms. Silvyn replied that convenience use definition is broad and includes anything with a drive-through. It could have the unintended consequence of not allowing something like a Starbucks. Commissioner Adler said when the PAD was approved, fast food and gas stations were specifically identified as more objectionable uses particularly close to Oracle Road. Could those be eliminated? Ms. Silvyn said no, because we would like flexibility. We know what is coming in Phases 1 and 2, but we don't know what is coming in Phases 3 and 4. September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 4 Ms. Silvyn told Commissioner McKee that it is correct that the PAD says one of the convenience uses could not be put in until a theater was put in. A theater is not going in, so the developer is limited to 3 convenience uses, which he is comfortable with. Ms. Silvyn replied to Commissioner McKee's question that convenience uses are only allowed in areas A and B, and that some of area B is in Phase 3, but not in Phase 4. Commissioner McKee said you have already identified the Development Plan Phase 3 that has none of those objectionable convenience uses. Is that correct? Ms. Silvyn said that Phase 3 Development Plan was a conceptual site plan now. We are working on some of it with Staff. We have a good idea but do not have all tenants confirmed yet. Phase 1 Development Plan is approved. Phase 2 Development Plan is set for approval tomorrow night. Phase 3 is still being worked on. Commissioner Adler asked with the tenants lined up and those you are working with, are you on track to meet your projected revenues as is consistent with the Economic Development Agreement (EDA)? Mark Weinberg, Diamond Ventures, said they are in conformance with the EDA. The criterion that they had to meet was to submit the first phase development plan within a certain time frame, and that has been done. David Andrews put together a schedule for the Town's internal use that he saw, but is not part of the document. Commissioner Adler asked if convenience uses were not necessary in order to meet those anticipated revenues if the applicant would consider dropping those objectionable types of uses previously identified, i.e. gas station, fast food. Mr. Weinberg said they would consider it, but at the end of this discussion. We have a good idea of what we would like to do in the two convenience use area we have developed or are developing, and it is likely we won't have convenience use. Commissioner Adler said that the architecture planned for this project is sufficiently attractive that there is not the same need for dense vegetation along Oracle to screen what ordinarily is unattractive, i.e. strip malls, etc. This project seems to be developing with more single user buildings, which is preferred by the Town's design guidelines. Mr. Weinberg agreed that is correct and has been the thrust of Staff over the past six months. More buildings are separated, which again is in conflict with the PAD document. The landscape and architectural design, with placement of trees where they should be, will be more appealing than leaving trees in place. Mr. Sinclair gave the Staff Report. When Steam Pump Village came forward years ago it contemplated a particular type and style of center. That has changed and there has to be adjustments to compensate. The language presented tonight better addresses that subject for this particular type of design. There are two separate issues: One deals with convenience use and the other is the free-standing structures. September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 5 Mr. Sinclair read the language from the Amendment, Page 2, 1a through f. He also pointed out the language regarding ORSCOD and significant vegetation. The applicant has covered the part presented in the Exhibit B having to do with how to mitigate certain trees and circumstances. He drew the Commissioner's attention to the other elements of the request on page 4, items b, c, and d, which talk about what we want to create. That is what b, c, and d are designed to do. They encourage mitigation and clustering in other areas, such as along the road walk, along public places, plazas, etc. Regarding lighting, the applicant wants to freeze the lighting code for a period of 7 years. The Town revised the code 1 1/2 years ago and made it compatible with the dark sky contingent. The Town has been through a very extensive lighting code amendment and doesn't anticipate starting on a new one soon. The language applicants presented for set back of convenience use to 60 feet is satisfactory to Staff. The purpose is to prevent a line of buildings along Oracle Road. Ms. Silvyn clarified to Commissioner McKee the verbiage the applicant wished to have removed from the language of the PAD is on page 63, Section 2c, "A maximum of 4 free- standing single use structures shall be permitted for the PAD. The maximum of 4 free- standing single use structures shall include any pads used for convenience uses." Also, on page 64, there is companion language, which is #6. Those are the two areas where that condition from 1999 was codified in the PAD document. Ms. Silvyn said convenience uses are only in development areas A and B. Development area B would have some area included into Phase 4, so this language would apply. Convenience uses are not permitted in development areas C and D. Ms. Silvyn said they have thought about Commissioner Adler's request about deleting some of the conveniences uses. The applicant would be willing to delete gas stations and free standing fast food from allowed convenience uses, as long as it is defined in some way that something like a Starbuck's drive through is still permitted. We would like financial institutions not to be considered a convenience use for purposes of this PAD and allowed in any of the four development areas. Commissioner Adler asked if the applicant's proposal is that there could be a food court elsewhere within buildings that are set further back and would be fast food businesses, but not free standing? Ms. Silvyn said she did not believe convenience use would include something like a food court. Ms. Silvyn replied yes to Commissioner Bergman's question. The lighting proposed in this amendment complies with the current Oro Valley requirements, and the applicant is trying to protect against future amendments. There is language in the current PAD that conflicts with the current Oro Valley lighting code. We have been complying with the current code and want to make it clear that is the intent of the PAD. Also, the applicant would like the current Oro Valley lighting code held for a period of 7 years, which will allow time to finish the build out. September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 6 • Commissioner McKee said this project has been around a long time. In 1998 the PAD was first approved. In 2002 you came before the Council with an EDA and promised Phase 1 would be complete by July of 2004 and Phase 4 complete by January 2009. Why should we believe you can make this one in 7 years? Ms. Silvyn said when we were before the Commission with previous amendments we didn't have an approved Phase 1, building permits ready to do, grading done, and a Phase 2 almost at the end. In 1999 when we came before you it was conceptual. We are further along that we have been before. Ms. Silvyn said we are hopeful we will make it in less than 7 years. It gives us 9 years to get the development out of the ground. Commissioner McKee said paragraph 6 of the EDA in existence holds you to the ordinance and development standards in effect at the time of application for the building permit. If you come in before that 7 years time period, we have a conflict. Ms. Silvyn suggests that it is not a conflict because of the Town ordinances and development standards that are in effect, the Steam Pump Ranch property is governed by the PAD document. This section has to be read in conjunction with the development standards in effect at that time, which is this PAD document. The way the PAD works, if there is an issue not addressed in the PAD, then it goes back to the Oro Valley Zoning Code. The PAD already establishes the development standards and those are the standards that would be in effect. Attorney Andrews agreed, because, if adopted, what we are doing essentially is making this become part of the development criteria that would apply to this property at that time. If we locked the lighting code for 7 years, the lighting code that was adopted as part of the PAD amendment this evening would be the applicable standard at that time. It follows the EDA. Essentially this program and all of the amendments with it would be applicable to the land. It would be part of the ordinances and development standards that apply to this property henceforth. That means they would be applicable to the time they put in their permits, which means it doesn't override the EDA, it actually complies with the EDA. PUBLIC HEARING opened and closed at 6:58 p.m. There were no speakers. Commissioner McKee asked if the 100 foot requirements had been enforced on other projects and how many? Also, had there been any waivers? Mr. Sinclair replied that the 100 foot requirement has been in effect for all of ORSCOD properties, but not all the properties have had significant vegetation. It was considered for a project along Oracle Road and Hardy, but it was never built. It would come into play with the Oro Valley Town Center, but nothing has been mitigated on that yet. It is a case by case basis. Anywhere there is significant vegetation there will need to be provisions for it to be left in place or mitigated. There are no waivers. Mr. Sinclair said he could not think of a situation where there has been that involved of a mitigation because of a building or an encroachment that has actually been done. September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 7 Commissioner McKee said the applicant has stated that they will loose 20% of the developable area if the 100 foot is followed. Do you agree that that is the right number? Mr. Sinclair said if an applicant gets into the areas that are deemed significant, there is a certain factor that is built in; if they go above that they get credit and it they go below they get penalties. Mr. Sinclair told Commissioner McKee that the 100 feet for Phases 3 and 4 represent 20% of the developable area, and is the figure the applicant came up with. Ms. Silvyn said the percentage when they did the application was approximately 20%. They did a calculation of one of the slides and it is right at 16%. The 20% is if you took a straight 100 foot line. The 16% is if you figured out where the significant vegetation was and how much of the property would end up having to be preserved in place. Of the 16%, approximately 1/2 is within the 30 feet. Ms. Silvyn told Commissioner McKee they had not done any alternate site plans adhering to the 100 foot, but have done many site plans working with Staff with different iterations of what the various phases would look like with the uses they knew were on board. The 100 foot setback won't work with the potential uses intended to be put in Phases 3 and 4. Particularly what won't fit are the pedestrian connections and the plaza type areas. A lot of the amenities would be lost in order to fit the users in. That wasn't what Staff or the applicant wanted to achieve. Commissioner Adler said he did not have a concern with the 100 foot because the ORSCOD was created initially with the significant vegetation in place to force this kind of discussion. We wanted to be sure that we had a requirement to leave things in place if possible and require an applicant to go through this process to justify why an exception or amendment is justified. He is satisfied it is justified. MOTION: Commissioner Adler MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-05-08, proposed Steam Pump Village PAD amendments, subject to the conditions described in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, with the following additional conditions: 1. No fast food (except as noted in Condition #2) or gas station convenience uses will be allowed. 2. Only Starbucks will be permitted within the fast food convenience use category. 3. Financial institutions shall not be included as a convenience use. Commissioner Pivirotto seconded the motion. Discussion: Commissioner Bergman asked Commissioner Adler if the Commission could arrive at an alternative to specifying a particular business such as Starbucks. What if it is another coffee place and not Starbucks? Commissioner Adler placed the motion the way the applicant suggested it. Ms. Silvyn said the applicant would be comfortable with language "such as but not limited to Starbucks." September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 8 Commissioner Adler was not comfortable with that. He would make an exception for Starbucks. He would not be satisfied with other retailers in that category. Commissioner Bergman did not think it is a matter of verbiage. Suppose Starbucks does move in and then later wants to sell it to a similar company. Nobody else can go there but them. It is not appropriate to interfere with the marketplace to the degree of saying this particular business can go there and no other business. Commissioner McKee was bothered by the 100 foot setbacks. He would have liked to have had a site tour identifying the trees that would be left before voting on, therefore, he will vote against the motion. Commissioner McKee also felt the motion should include the language to be deleted from the PAD. 4. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Commissioner McKee MOVED to amend the motion to include a fourth condition that: the verbiage in the PAD, specifically paragraph 2c from page 63 and item #6 from page 64, shall be deleted. Commissioner's Adler and Pivirotto agreed to the Amendment to the Motion. Motion CARRIED, 4 yes, 2 no. Commissioner McKee and Bergman voting no. 2. PUBLIC HEARING, FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 PLANNING AND ZONING WORK PLAN: REVISIONS TO ADDRESS DESIGN GUIDELINES Mr. Sinclair gave the Staff Report. This was added to the agenda to provide an item to consider for inclusion into the Planning and Zoning Work plan, specifically Zoning Code Addendum A, which are the Design Guidelines and what priority it would be if added. Commissioner Adler stated that the Planning Commission has no need to work with Design Guidelines, as they don't review the development plans or plats. We don't know if an ordinance works well until it is applied to a specific project. He disagrees that the Design Guidelines are working well. He suggests that the Design Guideline should remain Design Guidelines but should be clarified and elaborated upon so they can be applied to projects by the DRB and Council in a useful manner. He presented a list of Design Guideline Issues. This should be added to the Work Plan as a low priority without adding further encumbrance to Staffs needs at the moment. PUBLIC HEARING opened and closed at 7:22 p.m. There were no speakers. MOTION: Commissioner Manross MOVED to add this item to the 2005-2006 Work plan. Commissioner Adler seconded the motion indicating that it carry a low priority. Commissioner Manross agreed to the low priority addition. Motion carried 4 yes, 2 no. Chair Anning and Commissioner Bergman voting no. September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 9 3. OV7-05-10, REQUEST TO INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED SECTION 23.4 AND 23.7, TO ADDRESS BUILDING HEIGHTS STANDARDS WITHIN AN R-4R RESORT ZONING DISTRICT Mr. Sinclair gave the Staff Report. The purpose of this initiation is to look at the resort zoning district with more detail, specifically to height. Commissioner Adler asked if an applicant comes forward with a proposal for a resort that includes a design that exceeds 25 feet, can they request a variance? Mr. Sinclair said yes they can. Whether they can meet the requirements of the variance is the issue. We are looking at situations where it may be okay to consider additional heights for certain uses in advance. MOTION: Commissioner Bergman MOVED to initiate an amendment to address increased height restrictions in the Resort Zoning District. Commissioner Manross seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. 4. ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIR Commissioner Adler nominated Commissioner Pete Bistany for the office of Vice Chair. There being no other nominees, Chair Anning called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Bergman MOVED to elect Commissioner Pete Bistany as Vice Chair for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Pivirotto seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. PLANNING UPDATE Mr. Sinclair stated that he will be assuming duties of Planning and Zoning Administrator until the position is filled. The position has been advertised both internally and externally. Once we are successful with getting candidates, the interview process will begin, hopefully with either the Chair or a member of the Commission on the panel. The Citizen Planning Institute (CPI) will start in late October. It is advertised on the Town's website for citizens to sign up. The CPI will be held as in the past. The Continuing Education will be dropped this year because of Staffs additional workload. GOVERNOR'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT OF SUPPORT Commissioner Adler attended the conference and wanted to pass on to the Commission how worthwhile it was, primarily because of the interaction with people in the planning fields throughout the State. There were a variety of valuable opinions expressed by individuals from different jurisdictions. Subjects covered were the Main Street Program, the Ready Program, the Arts Commission, etc. He feels the Commissioners should make every effort to attend future conferences. September 6, 2005 Approved Minutes Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 10 Commissioner Adler also indicated that he is on the Board of Arizona Planning Association Tucson Sector and is helping to organize a conference that will involved the City of Portland and their success in creating economic development benefits through conservation. AzPA Conference 2005, PRESCOTT ARIZONA, SEPTEMBER 28 — 30, 2005 Mr. Sinclair said there is a registration for Planning and Zoning Commission members, and if Commissioners wish to attend, the Town will pay for their registration. The Town cannot pay for transportation or lodging. Check with Diane Chapman for information on registering. ADJOURN REGULAR SESSION Meeting adjourned at 7:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diane Chapman, Recording Secretary