Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning and Zoning Commission - 1/4/2005 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AND GENERAL PLAN UPDATE REVISION COMMITTEE JOINT STUDY SESSION JANUARY 27, 2005— 6:00 P.M. TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE STUDY SESSION AT 6:05 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Don Cox Vice Chair John Anning Commissioner Pete Bistany Commissioner Ken Kinared Commissioner Doug McKee Commissioner Don Manross GENERAL PLAN UPDATE REVISION COMMITTEE PRESENT: Bill Adler Carl Kuehn Teree Bergman Melanie Larsen Rosalie Roszak Robert Delaney Don Chatfield Also present: Brent Sinclair, Community Development Director Bryant Nodine, AICP, Planning and Zoning Administrator Excused: Pat Spoerl Ed Taczanowsky Carl Boswell 1. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE: MEETING PRIOR TO SIXTY-DAY REVIEW Chair Cox briefly outlined what he hoped to accomplish at the Study Session. The meeting was not called for a discussion of issues. According to the schedule that was laid out the Planning and Zoning Commission was to review the recommendation prior to going to the 60 day review. If there are recommendations from the Commission, he would like them to the Revision Committee and ensure that the Revision Committee is very clear exactly what the Commission is talking about, but no response is necessary. In the next 60 days the Revision Committee may meet and discuss what changes the Commission presents. Mr. Sinclair distributed the latest revised version of the Draft General Plan book. This book APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 4, 2005 TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:05 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Don Cox Vice Chair John Anning Commissioner Ken Kinared Commissioner Pete Bistany Commissioner Doug McKee ABSENT: Commissioner Manross ALSO PRESENT: Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney Bill Adler, Board of Adjustment Barry Gillaspie, Member Town Council Bryant Nodine, AICP, Planning and Zoning Administrator CALL TO THE AUDIENCE opened and closed at 6:06 p.m. there being no speakers. MINUTES MOTION: Commissioner Kinared MOVED to approve the November 2, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting minutes as written. Commissioner Bistany seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 yes, 0 no. MOTION: Commissioner Kinared MOVED to approve the December 7, 2004 regular meeting minutes with the following correction: Page 10, first sentence, change the word "We" to the Planning Commission. Commissioner McKee seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 yes, 0 no. MOTION: Commissioner Kinared MOVED to approved the December 13, 2004 Planning and Zoning Commission Study Session minutes with the following correction: Page 4, seconded paragraph from bottom of the page, last sentence "The consensus appeared to be to leave the wording as is." Clarify that sentence to read, "The consensus was that bars are an appropriate use in neighborhood commercial." Commissioner McKee seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 yes, 0 no. CHANGE IN AGENDA ORDER: Item #4 became Item #3, and Item #3 became Item #4. January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 2 1. PUBLIC HEARING — OV9-04-11, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM A PIMA COUNTY CAMPUS PARK INDUSTRIAL ZONE TO AN EQUIVALENT TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ZONE OF TECHNOLOGICAL PARK FOR A NEWLY ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE WEST BY ORACLE ROAD - ON THE NORTH BY RAMS FIELD PASS - ON THE EAST BY RAMS CANYON AND ON THE SOUTH BY SHURGUARD STORAGE, PARCEL NUMBER 220-04-010M Mr. Nodine gave the Staff Report. PUBLIC HEARING opened and closed at 6:15 p.m. there being no speakers. MOTION: Vice Chair Anning MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-04-11, translating the zoning from Pima County Campus Park Industrial to Oro Valley Technological Park. Commissioner Kinared seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 yes, 0 no. 2. PUBLIC HEARING — OV9-04-09, BIG HORN COMMERCE CENTER REQUESTS A REZONING FROM TECHNOLOGICAL PARK DISTRICT TO C-1 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF RAMS FIELD PASS AND ORACLE ROAD, PARCEL 220-04-010M Applicant Bob Solfisburg, 1521 E. Placita Baja, introduced his partner, Todd Otis, and thanked Staff and Scott Nelson, Town of Oro Valley, for their time and effort. The applicant is requesting rezoning approval for approximately 3 acres located at the southeast corner of Oracle Road and Rams Field Pass. The proposed change is from Technology Park to C-1 Commercial that would include use restrictions proposed by Staff. The development is known as Big Horn Commerce Center with approximately 29,000 square feet consisting of two building sites. Access is provided at two points on Oracle Road and two points along Rams Field Pass, with the access at Rams Field Pass being a restricted access point. The center is designed to attract business that will provide both neighborhood and regional benefit to the Town of Oro Valley. The proposed design standard is also compatible with ORSCOD. Oracle Road will be widened in the near future with the possibility that ADOT will allow a signalized intersection at Rams Field Pass and Oracle Road. We remain proactive in supporting ADOT in its efforts to construct a signal at this intersection that will benefit our development and the Rams Field Pass neighborhood. Up to date, we have had two neighborhood meetings held at the Holiday Inn Express. Based on our impression of those meetings, we have had general support for our project. General Plan policy 4.12 states industrial uses will fit in master plan campus settings. The proposed development immediately east is being developed as residential in an industrial zone. The change in the neighborhood makes industrial for this site non-compatible. Retail and office development is the highest and best use. Policy 1.2 states promote compatible mix of land uses through the Oro Valley Planning Area. Policy 1.2G states commercial uses should seek to locate near new population centers. It is obvious that this planning area no longer follows a master plan of industrial park. Community Commercial is an ideal transition that would benefit the neighbors and have a positive long term effect on property values. January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 3 Commissioner McKee commended the applicant on the completeness of the packet presented. He asked if Phase 1 and Phase 2 corresponded to building 1 and building 2. Mr. Solfisburg said there were some market variables that answer that. Based on current market demands, we feel the market could absorb the initial project of 14,000 square feet. Timing of Phase 2 is going to be predicated upon some of the market dynamics. Phase 2 is building 2. About 40% of the project is projected for retail, 30% for food/restaurant and 30% for offices. Mr. Solfisburg told Commissioner Bistany that the ratio concept is projection at this time. In response to Chair Cox, Mr. Solfisburg said the restaurant type would be bakery/breakfast-lunch, but not on a national scale. Mr. Nodine gave the Staff Report. Staff is recommending approval with the Conditions that are in Exhibit B as opposed to Exhibit A. Exhibit B is in the Addendum. Mr. Civalier told Commissioner Kinared that the access 2 was for right in only with nothing going out that access. Commissioner Kinared said that if approved with the conditions proposed and road conditions intensify, the right turn into the parking lot could back traffic up on Oracle. Would that foreclose correcting the problem? Mr. Civalier said it was possible. If the Commission so desires, they can eliminate this access (#2) and he would have no objections. The site will work with the other access, but basically he does not foresee backups from access 2. Mr. Civalier said that to add a second eastbound, right turn only lane on Rams Pass would need ADOT approval. If there was obstruction in the parking lot, it could still back up into the intersection. Commission McKee asked how the Commission can do both a translational zoning and a rezoning on the same piece of property at the same meeting. Mr. Nodine said that in terms of the Commission's actions, both of the actions are recommendations and don't take effect until the decision is made by the Town Council. With the Town Council, the translational zoning must go on the agenda ahead of the rezoning and takes effect before the rezoning. The 30 days apply to Council actions. PUBLIC HEARING opened at 6:35 p.m. Bill Adler, who turned in a blue card, was called and did not respond. PUBLIC HEARING closed at 6:36 p.m. January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 4 Chair Cox agreed that the potential problems with access 2 need to be corrected now so it does not create a problem in the future. If access 2 were eliminated, could building one be moved to the west and access 3 be widened? Mr. Civalier asked what purpose it would serve to widen access 3. He suggested making the entry 28 feet instead of 24 feet. Loop roads on commercial sites are 28 feet wide. Commissioner Kinared said by the analysis before us, there is a question of both if, and when, there might be traffic movement constraints because of right turn movement into access 2. Those movements could be resolved by an additional lane from Oracle to that access. It may not ever be needed, but if we required a right of way be dedicated that may be the solution. Mr. Nodine did not have a comment on that, but wondered if it is an issue. He asked the Commission to look at the numbers projected for traffic in that area. The projection is at peak hour with 35 vehicles coming in on access 2, or one every two minutes. The chance of a back up there is slim, especially since this isn't a large parking area. Look at the numbers before making a decision. Mr. Civalier told Commissioner Kinared that the intersection at Oracle and Rams Field Pass may eventually have a signal light. He has spoken to the regional engineer for ADOT and they are working with the developers in the area to have a signal there. It will depend if it is warranted. Vice Chair Anning pointed out that if there is additional parking backing onto the access 3 entry there are other hazards involved. Moving the building to the west would have a negative effect on traffic because to compensate there would be parking along the access drive. He does not see any reason for access 2. Chair Cox said we are operating under current parking code, but we have a tendency to over park. He thinks access 2 should be eliminated as it will be a problem. Applicant Mr. Solfisburg said traveling north on Oracle Road most people will use the first access point that is shared with Shurgard. The purpose of providing the right in only is to direct traffic to the front of the development as compared to the rear of the project. It is for the amount of traffic that will be coming from the south. He does not see a backlog off of Oracle Road. He would like to keep access 2. Mr. Civalier told Chair Cox that you could not put an island in for a right in only; it is more like a bird beak. ADOT will eventually widen Oracle to six lanes with turn lanes, so there would not be much room for a right turn lane. ADOT may also say access 2 has to be eliminated because it may interfere with traffic. MOTION: Commissioner Kinared MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-04-09, rezoning 3.26 acres located on the southeast corner of Rams Field Pass and Oracle Road from Technological Park to C-1, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B with Conditions #11 and #12 deleted, and the access 2 deleted. Vice Chair Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 yes, 0 no. January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 5 3. PUBLIC HEARING - OV8-04-07, THE WLB GROUP, REPRESENTING THE ORO VALLEY COUNTRY CLUB, REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A BUILDING EXPANSION, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF VALLE DEL ORO ROAD AND GREENOCK DRIVE, PARCELS, 224-34-1650, 224- 35-0810, 820, 830, 350, 360, 370 & 910 Steve Oliverio, the WLB Group, 4444 E. Broadway, Tucson, represents the Oro Valley Country Club Building Committee. Members of the committee are present along with club members and neighbors if additional questions or comments arise that Mr. Oliverio can't address. The proposed site is at the intersection of Greenock and Valle del Oro and is just under 8 acres. As proposed almost half of the site will remain as open space or landscaped area. The existing zoning is R1-36 with the golf course and clubhouse use allowed with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Basically, the applicant wants to take an aging, existing private golf facility and upgrade it to keep in stride with the current golf clubhouse standards. The plan is to take the existing site and rearrange the amenities to provide an upgraded user friendly facility that focuses on its primary use, the beautiful golf course. All the uses proposed currently exist on site with the exception of the relatively small exercise fitness building. Mr. Oliverio discussed the existing site layout and the proposed changes per the preliminary site plan. Michael Franks, Architect, Sever Franks Architects, 2552 N. Alvernon Way, Tucson, said one of the major design criteria of this project was to build the new facility, while maintaining and operating the existing facility. The plan consolidated the parking field, showcased the golf course as it exists today, the entry sequence off of Greenock, and the Porte Corchere drop off with a feature look through to the number 9 green as a key component of the proposed design. All functions front the amphitheatre of the 9th green. The pro shop facility sits on top of the cart storage which is underground and is accessed by a ramp that goes to a cart staging area. The ancillary use that has been added to what currently exists on site is the exercise and fitness area with an adjacent swimming pool. Mr. Franks told Commissioner Bistany that the existing tennis courts will remain intact and the greens to the left will become a parking lot. Mr. Oliverio addressed the conditions in the exhibits. He proposed revising Condition #1 on Exhibit A that instead of trying to rush the plat amendment, or as the Pima County Assessor would like to see, a lot split combo, add a note to the first sheet of the Development Plan making the signature of the mylars of the plan contingent upon getting the lot split combo approval. Mr. Nodine said that was acceptable, if it meets the set back requirements. The lots will have to fit the proposed Development Plan. Mr. Oliverio said Condition #2 on Exhibit A asking for a 50 foot set back from the property line is based on a Parks and Open Space District, which he is having trouble seeing how it applies to R1-36. There have been several meetings with the neighbors directly to the January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 6 north, the Tearses. The applicant has been working with the Tearses to try to resolve the issues. As the plan is being revised for development submittal, the pool has been moved 30 feet away from the property line, therefore taking care of all the drainage that is required totally on the project's property. As platted, there is a 20 foot drainage easement with 10 feet on either side of the property line, but it would all go on the site's side so as not to disturb the Tearses' side of the drainage easement. In addition, another 5 feet may be taken off the pool and the straight wall on the north would be zigzagged in and out to create pockets for additional landscaping to help buffer the area. This plan will be staked out to show the Tearses. Mr. Oliverio stated that the Code, R1-36 does allow for private facilities, Section 6.103c. It also tells what screening is required. There are no additional set backs mentioned in that portion of the Code. Mr. Oliverio said Condition #3, Exhibit A, has to do with saving some significant trees scattered around the area. Attempts were made in the site plan to move the islands in the parking area to help salvage those trees, but upon further investigation and the study shown in Exhibit C, there is quite a bit more room needed to salvage those trees. The Code does allow and provides for mitigation of those trees, if they cannot be saved, which is what the applicant is proposing to do. Mr. Oliverio said Exhibit B repeats the 50 foot set back requirement, which has already been addressed. Mr. Oliverio told Chair Cox that if the three trees that are scheduled to come out were to remain, that an estimate of 5 to 10 parking spaces would be lost. Mr. Oliverio replied to Chair Cox that regarding switching the fitness area with the pool in Condition #2, Exhibit A, that this was discussed with the neighbors to the north and the neighbors did not like the building being there either because of the height. It would also be more difficult to provide utilities, specifically sewer, to the building by moving it further away. Mr. Oliverio told Commissioner Bistany that the project's parking space is under what is required by the Town, but in accordance with a letter from the golf course it is about where it should be for operating needs. Mr. Nodine gave the Staff Report and presented the McGann and Associates Report for the Native Plant Preservation Plan and their recommendation for preservation of certain trees. Staff is recommending approval with the Conditions in Exhibit B. Exhibit B removed the Condition related to providing a study. Staff recommends instead that the proposed layout be reconfigured to accommodate the recommendations within the letter from McGann and Associates. Patrick Steffel, 200 W. Valle Del Oro, General Manager of the Oro Valley Country Club responded to Commissioner McKee regarding square footage, that the main dining area is about 12,000 square feet, with an additional proshop below, administration and cart storage is over 9,000, plus the pool house building and outside storage. There may be a January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 7 minimum of 22,000 square feet with the buildings combined. The total square footage will be increased by about 4,000 square feet. This does not equate to more members. The club is bound by their bylaws as to how many members they can have. Mr. Oliverio told Commissioner Bistany that the use of the pool is very passive, having a lap pool and possibly an area for water aerobics. The corners could be rounded and the north side as mentioned earlier, brought back about 5 feet with notching to provide landscaping and buffer. A kidney shape would not work well. Mr. Oliverio told Vice Chair Anning the pool would not be used for swim teams or meets. PUBLIC HEARING Opened at 7:30 p.m. Rick Sathre, 10260 N. Krauswood Lane, stated that he was excited about rebuilding the facilities. Oro Valley has not done a lot of redevelopment. As the Town ages we will see more of this where it is time to begin again. The Club is trying to bring the facilities up to the standards of this century and to be a good neighbor. Relative to the pool, he has been a member at Oro Valley for 3 or 4 years, and the pool is very seldom used. He did not see it as a noisy place. He did not think it would be used any more than a residential pool in a greater neighborhood. He asked the Commission for their support for the CUP. Fay Mucci, 250 W. Greenock Drive, lives directly north of the tennis courts. She is in opposition to the parking lot to the south of her. She would like to see about 15 units removed and the lot moved farther south so that the lights will not light directly on her property and she could still have the trees that are there. She would like to see them reconsider the amount of spaces they are proposing on the north side. Gary O'Connell, 251 W. Golf View, is in support of the clubhouse and all the facilities as proposed. He had an opportunity to read Exhibit B that addressed an increase in traffic on Greenock. He would submit to the Commission that there will be little if any increase the way the proposed site is laid out. He lives directly north of the tennis courts. The membership is nearly full now, so the traffic is what it is. The members who enter from Greenock will continue to do so. A lot of the members enter from El Conquistador and south of the clubhouse. There are two primary entrances, one on Valle Del Oro in the southern most portion of the property, and one on the east on Greenock. The entrance on Valle Del Oro will become a small parking lot. The primary entrance will become the Greenock entrance where members will have access to the clubhouse facilities, the pool and the fitness center. There is not going to be a tremendous increase in the traffic pressure on Greenock. He agreed with Mr. Nodine's statement that it is not totally geared to residents only. Those who are familiar with Oro Valley Country Club know that it is one of the finest golfing facilities in southern Arizona now. Putting a clubhouse of this magnitude and nature will bring further credibility to it. One of the goals of the long range planning committee is to increase the social membership and make the Country Club available to more residents in our community. Any impact on traffic going from 80 to 120 will be negligible on Greenock and the flow will be primarily El Conquistador and the south side. He gave his full support to the Commission for the proposed project. January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 8 Jeanne Tearse, 260 W. Greenock. She and her husband's property abuts the pool area and is their main concern. She brought a letter to the Commission and sent one to the HOA regarding their concerns. They are also members of the Club and look forward to having a new Club. Even though the property is zoned R1-36, it is a commercial operation, which changes the neighborhood. We do not want a pool that close to our property. We are working with Steve O. and trying to be good neighbors to solve this. Our home was built the same year as the Country Club, 1959-60 era. It was one of the model homes there. Without those model homes being sold, the Country Club would have had a tough time. It has grown and there are about 243 units in the HOA, about 12% of which belong to the Club. The applicant has said there will not be a grill next to the pool, and it will be a snack bar if there is anything. They agreed to change the configuration of the fence by the pool, or the easement. There has been a water problem there, which has been worked on and seems to be satisfactory. However, we do not want the noise of the pool and did ask for a 50 foot setback and the applicant has not agreed to that. If the applicant does not agree to that, she would prefer to have the fitness center there. Mr. Nodine told Mrs. Tearse that the setback for the fitness center would be R1-36, which is a 20 foot setback. Mrs. Tearse said she knows the pool has not been used a lot, but who is to say what will happen in the future. She is sure the people who built the club in 1959 had no idea what would be happening in 2005. Consequently, we would like to preserve that area. Her in- laws owned it; she lives there now, and her children want to live there also. We are at the end of the cul-de-sac and now we look out on the greens, the chipping green, the old trees and tennis courts, which is beautiful and we would like to keep it. If they can cut back on parking and save the trees, that would be a plus. Mrs. Tearse asked what code the applicant was using, whether residential or commercial. Mr. Nodine told Mrs. Tearse said that the applicant's standards fit the zoning, which is R1- 36, so unless something is applied as part of the CUP, any development would go forward with the standards that are given for an R1-36 development. Mrs. Tearse said the applicant has agreed to stake out the walls along the cul-de-sac street, around the pool, and where the property lines are to be so she will be able to see where everything is going to be. The applicant has done a lot of work on the easement so there will not be the problem of water going down Greenock to the north and to the south. There is one spot where the sidewalk meets the easement and that wall is at the moment open and she would like to see it closed as a continuous wall. We are working together on this and for the most part she supports this. The pool is the biggest problem, with the concern a noise issue, not visual. Lanford Jorgensen, 201 W. Valle Del Oro, said he and his wife own the property that has the most frontage to the proposed project. Visually we are going to get a dramatic change. We look down on the property now and see beautiful green trees and grass. Most of the parking is spread out and below the street, so there is very little view of cars parked there now. This will concentrate all of the cars in one spot, so we will trade a nice landscaped area for a parking lot. There will be more traffic because all of the cars will be going in and January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 9 out the one entry. People in the interior of the subdivision will be going that way. There will be increased traffic. There will be increased noise. From our selfish point of view, obviously the visibility is going to be far less than it is now. PUBLIC HEARING Closed at 7:50 p.m. Mr. Nodine told Chair Cox that the Code requires there be an island every 10 spaces. The impact could be reduced to 6 spaces lost, by not doing everything that Mr. McGann's report suggests. The islands were put where the trees are, so the conversion of one parking space on either side of those islands would come close to meeting McGann's recommendations. Mr. Oliverio told Commissioner Bistany that there would be no lighting around the pool. Mr. Oliverio responded to Chair Cox that the lighting on the north side would be focused downward and muted as required by code. Part of what is being required by code is screening in the form of a wall as well as lush landscaping. There should not be a problem from headlights. If necessary the applicant would agree to raise the wall to 8 foot if it would help with noise mitigation. Mr. Nodine replied to Commissioner Kinared that this project if approved with some conditions, it will go to DRB this month. Mr. Nodine told Chair Cox that regarding the light on the north side by the cul-de-sac, anything within 10 feet of the property line can be no more than 10 feet high, and have to have side screening to stop light trespass onto the adjacent properties. The lights can get taller as they get further away from the property, until at 60 feet away they can be 18 feet high. It is also possible that the lighting could be put below the wall level. Mr. Steffel told Commissioner McKee that the Club's permit allows 200 social members and 340 golf members by charter. There are currently 120 social members with 80 memberships available. The Club is full on golfing members. The membership could increase to the maximum. The largest traffic group is the golf invitational at 288 persons. Socially when there are groups like the Chamber of Commerce come for lunch with 80 persons, it does not create a problem. At least 100 of the members drive their own golf carts to the Club which has zero parking impact. He didn't think that would change. Mr. Steffel continued that there are occasional outside events such as weddings on the weekends. The new facilities are not being designed for increased outside events. We are restricted to 15% of our income to come from outside functions. 85% has to come from our own members as a not for profit event. In the peak season there are only about 3 to 4 families per day that use the pool. There will be no night time parties around the pool. Mr. Nodine told Commissioner Bistany that he recommended using Exhibit B rather than Exhibit A, changing item #2 that there be an additional space on either side of PV12, PV11 and PV10 converted to landscaped area; three spaces adjacent to PV2 be converted to compact spaces; and, if possible, create another 3 foot landscaped space by CF7. January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 10 Mr. Oliverio said that even though the Code allows the applicant and gives the opportunity to mitigate for these trees, the applicant would agree to do as Mr. Nodine suggested and preserve those in place, with the exception of to item #2 in Exhibit A, the applicant asked to be given the leeway to work with Mrs. Tearse to move forward. In other words, the applicant asked to do away with the 50 foot set back request and change that condition to say that the applicant will work with the neighbor to the north to her satisfaction. Mr. Nodine said that would be up to the Commission. He is comfortable with Mr. Oliverio and Mrs. Tearse working together to come to a solution that will eventually go to the Town Council. MOTION: Commissioner Bistany MOVED to recommend approval of OV8-04-07, conditional use permit for the new clubhouse facility, subject to the conditions described in Exhibit B as modified and agreed upon by Applicant and Staff: • Mr. Nodine's proposed change to item #2, that there be an additional space on either side of PV12, PV11, and PV10 converted to landscaped area; that 3 spaces adjacent to PV2 be converted to compact spaces; and, that if possible, create another 3 feet of landscaped area adjacent to CF7. • Applicant Mr. Oliveria agreed with Mr. Nodine's proposal to preserve the above trees in place, with the exception to item #2 in Exhibit A to be able to work with Mrs. Tearse, to change the condition to say the Applicant will work with the neighbor to the north to her satisfaction. Mrs. Tearse was in agreement. Vice Chair Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 yes, 0 no. BREAK 8:10 to 8:20 p.m. 4. PUBLIC HEARING — OV7-04-07, AMENDING THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED BY ENTIRELY REFORMATING THE TEXT, CORRECTING NON- SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS SUCH AS GRAMMAR AND CROSS REFERENCE CITATIONS, AND CREATING VARIOUS TABLES FOR EASY REFERENCE Mr. Nodine told Chair Cox that the Planning and Zoning Commission does not need to approve reformatting, etc. but if the Commission had any comments he would appreciate them. The document has been reviewed by the legal staff. There has not been any review by the development community. Part of the concern is trying to get the code to be editorial instead of substantive. Chair Cox suggested that in the future when code is revised that a review is offered to clients. PUBLIC HEARING Opened and Closed at 8:15 p.m. No speakers. January 4, 2005 APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING 11 Commissioner McKee thought that if the Commission is going to review the Code that the Commission needed more time. Attorney Andrews said there are no substantive changes in the code and has not found anything significant. MOTION: Commissioner Kinared MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV7-04-07, revised and reformatted Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code. Commissioner Bistany seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 yes, 0 no. PLANNING UPDATE Thursday, 1/13/2005, at 6:00 p.m. there will be a General Plan Study Session with the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Town Council and the General Plan Update Revision Committee. Chair Cox made a public thank you to Commissioner Robert Krenkowitz, whose term expired in December. Commissioner Krenkowitz did a good job and made a tremendous contribution not only to the Commission but to the Town. ADJOURN REGULAR SESSION MOTION: Vice Chair Anning MOVED to adjourn the Planning and Zoning 1/4/05 meeting. Commissioner Kinared seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 yes, 0 no. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diane Chapman, Recording Secretary