Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV101311CHAPTER 21: REVIEW AND DECISION -MAKING BODIES Section 21.6 Board of Adjustment Section 21.6 Board of Adjustment A. Scope The Board of Adjustment shall hear and decide requests for variances and appeals of interpreta- tions of this Code in accordance with A.R.S. Section 9-462.06. B. Powers and Duties 1. Interpretation The Board of Adjustment shall interpret this Code on appeal when: a. There is a dispute between the appellant and the Planning and Zoning Administrator or other Town Official as to a decision or interpretation as set forth in subsection F of this section; or b. The location of a zoning district is in doubt. 2. Variances The Board of Adjustment may allow variances from the provisions of this Code in accordance with subsection J of this section, Findings. C. Meetings, Administration of Oaths, and Compelling Attendance Qi Witnesses All meetings of the Board shall be held at the call of the Chairman and at such other times as the Board may determine. All meetings of the Board shall be open to the public. The Chairman, or, in his absence, the acting Chairman, may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses in accordance with the laws of the State of Arizona. D. Composition 1. Appointment The Board of Adjustment shall be composed of five (5) members appointed by the Town Council. 2. Terms Appointments are for staggered terms of two (2) years each with no limit on the number of terms. 3. Vacancies Vacancies shall be filled for the un-expired portion of that term within a reasonable time period as provided for by appointments of the Town Council. 4. Removal The Town Council has the authority to remove, by majority vote, any member for neglect of duty, inefficiency, or misconduct in office. Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ June 2011 9 A - CHAPTER 21: REVIEW AND DECISION -MAKING BODIES Section 21.6 Board of Adjustment E. Transaction of Business The Board of Adjustment shall conduct its business in accordance with the Arizona Revised Statutes and applicable Town regulations and any rules and procedures as adopted by the Town Council. 2. The Town Clerk, or an appointed representative from the Town Clerk's office, shall serve as the Executive Secretary of the Board of Adjustment and the minutes and records of all Board proceedings will be kept and filed as public record in the files of the Town Clerk. F. Appeals from Administrative Decisions Appeals may be taken to the Board of Adjustment by persons aggrieved or by any officer, depart- ment, board, or bureau of the municipality affected by a decision of an administrative official, within thirty (30) days, by filing with the officer from whom the appeal is taken, and with the Board of Adjustment, a notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof. The officer from whom the appeal is taken shall forthwith transmit all papers constituting the record upon which the action appealed from was taken. Said appeal shall be filed on a form provided by the Town Clerk. 1. An appeal shall stay all proceedings in the matter appealed from unless the officer from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the Board that, by reason of the fact stated in the certificate, the stay would, in his opinion, cause imminent peril to life or property. In such case, proceedings shall not be stayed, except by restraining order granted by the Board or by a court of record on application and notice to the officer from whom the appeal is taken. The Board shall fix a reasonable time for hearing the appeal and give notice thereof to the parties in interest and the public. 2. The concurring vote of a majority of the Board shall be necessary toreverseany order or deci- sion of an administrative official, or to pass or to affect any variations from the terms and con- ditions of this ordinance. G. Appeals from Planning and Zoning Administrator Interpretations Appeals may be taken to the Board of Adjustment by persons aggrieved by a Planning and Zoning Administrator interpretation within twenty (20) days from the date the interpretation is published on the Town's website. The appeal shall be filed with the Town Clerk and the Board of Adjustment shall issue a decision within thirty (30) days following receipt of the appeal. ((0)11-13, Added, 5/4/11) H. Application for Variances Application for a variance of zoning regulations shall be made to the Board of Adjustment in the form of a written application. Said application shall be filed with the Town Clerk upon forms provided by the Board of Adjustment. ((0)11-13, Amended, 5/4/11) I. Hearing and Notice Upon receipt in proper form of any such application, the Board of Adjustment shall proceed to hold a public hearing upon said application not more than thirty (30) days, nor less than fifteen (15) days, after such filing,.at which time all persons shall be given an opportunity to be heard. Such Board of Adjustment shall cause one notice of such hearing to be published in a newspaper of general cir- 10 June 2011 Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ CHAPTER 21: REVIEW AND DECISION -MAKING BODIES Section 21.6 Board of Adjustment culation in the Town of Oro Valley and one notice to be posted on the subject property, giving at least fifteen (15) days' notice of said hearing, and the time and place where said hearing will be held. Said notice, both as published and posted, shall also show the nature of the variance or exception requested and state that anyone wanting to protest may appear in person or by writing. All property owners within three hundred (300) feet must be notified. ((0)11-13, Amended, 5/4/11) J. Findings A variance from the provisions of this Code shall not be authorized unless the Board shall find upon sufficient evidence: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; and 2. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant; and 3. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of sub- stantial property rights; and 4. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such propprty is located; and 5. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. ((0)11-13, Amended, 5/4111) K. Action The Board shall prescribe, in connection with any variance, such conditions as the Board may deem necessary in order to fully carry out the provisions and intent of this Code. Such conditions may include, among other things, a limitation of the time for which such variance shall be valid. Violation of any such condition shall be a violation of this ordinance and such violation shall render the vari- ance null and void. ((0)11-13, Amended, 514/11) L. Review Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Board after hearing on application made by any taxpayer or municipal officer may petition for a writ of certiorari to review the Board's decision pursuant to A.R.S. Section 9-465 (1956) as amended. ((0)11-13, Amended, 5/4/11) Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ June 2011 11 j.. Board of Adjustment Staff Report CASE NUMBER: OV1013-11 MEETING DATE: July 23, 2013 AGENDA ITEM: 4 STAFF CONTACT: Patty Hayes, Senior Planning Technician phayes(a-orovalleyaz.gov (520) 229-4819 Applicant: David Major 520-292-6728 Request: Increase the allowed building height from 18' to 21' for a home remodel. Location: 1 10645 North Pistachio Ave SUMMARY: The applicant, David Major who is representing the property owner Ms. Ying, proposes to remodel an existing home and increase the allowed building height from 18' to 21' for the center portion of the home as shown in Attachment 1. BACKGROUND: Existing Site Conditions • One story home built in 1981 Proposed Improvements • Remodel the existing home and add a two story entryway in the center of the house Related Approvals • The Monte Del Oro final plat was approved by Pima County in 1976 • The subdivision was annexed into the Town in 1987 The existing zoning for the property and the properties to the north, west and south are zoned R1-43 with single-family detached homes. The properties located to the west are zoned El Conquistador P.A.D and are part of the Canada Hills Estates subdivision. Both Monte Del Oro and Canada Hills Estates are custom home subdivisions. OV1013-11 Ying Page 2 of 4 Board of Adjustment Staff Report ANALYSIS: The proposed remodel of the home includes converting an open air atrium located in the center of the house into an entryway feature of the home. The proposed entryway would provide access to a second story exterior balcony. The home would increase in height from 11' to 21 in the center of the home. The subject lot is located in a subdivision with minimum lot sizes of one acre. The subdivision was developed while in Pima County's jurisdiction which allowed two story homes with a maximum building height of 34. After annexation the County's CR-1 zoning was translated to the Town's R1-43 zoning with all R1-43 zoning standards to apply which changed the allowed building height from 34' to 18'. Many homes in the subdivision were permitted by Pima County and built as two story homes. The subdivision has a mix of one and two story homes. FINDINGS OF FACT: • Existing home is 11' in height • The proposed addition will be 21' in height • The elevation of the subject property is 2588. • The properties located to the west are approximately 10' lower than the subject lot. • The property located south of the subject lot is approximately 8' lower. • The vacant lot to the north is approximately 10' higher than the subject lot. DISCUSION: State Law and the Oro Valley Zoning Code require the Board of Adjustment agrees that all of the following variance findings have been met in order to grant a variance. The required five findings are shown in italics below, followed by staff comment as to whether the findings, in staffs view, have been met. Based on individual Board member analysis and public testimony, the Board may reasonably have a different determination than staff as to whether the findings have been met by the applicant or not. 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; The applicant refers to the shape, topography and floodplain on the lot as the circumstances limiting their desired remodeling plans. Staff Comment: The lot has steep slopes of 15% to 25% in the front and back of the lot and a floodplain through the rear yard. The home is built on the only flat area of the property which is at a higher elevation than most of the adjacent properties. The house is also built close to the 20' side setback limits as shown in Attachment 3. Photos of the surrounding properties can be seen in Attachment 4. Although the property contains OV1013-11 Ying Page 3 of 4 ..Board.ofAdjustment. Staff Report ....................................... . steep slopes and a floodplain, these conditions do not relate to the variance request and this finding has not been met. 2. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant; The applicant refers to the design and functionality of the existing house as undesirable. Staff Comment: The existing home has an open air atrium located just inside the front door of the home as shown on the fourth page of Attachment 4. The atrium is enclosed by an abode wall with windows and sliding glass doors which separates the interior layout of the home. In staffs view, the applicant has not identified unique conditions which justify the variance. 3. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights, The applicant states the location of the property and the addition will not impede on neighbors views. Also the previously mentioned layout of the home is a factor in the proposed design. Staff Comment: The applicants request for a two story entry feature is a unique feature, not a common feature enjoyed by other properties in this neighborhood. The entry feature could be constructed with a flat roof and eliminate the need for a variance. 4. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located, The applicant refers to the other two story homes built in the neighborhood. Staff Comment: As previously mentioned, both the Monte Del Oro subdivision and the Canada Hills Estates subdivision have a mix of one and two story homes. Homes in excess of 18' are not uncommon to the area 5. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. The applicant believes the height of the structure will not have an adverse effect on neighbors. OV1013-11 Ying Page 4 of 4" Board of.Adjustment.Stuff.Report ........ Staff Comment: The Canada Hills subdivision adjacent to this property along the west property line allows a maximum building height of 38'. The home directly behind the subject lot is a two story home and the other two homes are single story homes. The elevations of the subject lot and adjacent properties are listed in the finding of facts portion of this report and shown in the staff photos in Attachments 3 and 4. The proposed height increase applies only to the 14' x 14' foot atrium that is located in the center of the home that will be converted into an entryway feature. The sloped portion of the proposed two story roof is the only portion that exceeds the allowed 18' building height. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION All property owners within 300 feet of the subject property were notified of this hearing by mail. The property is posted with a notice of hearing, was posted online at www.orovalleyaz.gov and was advertised in the Daily Territorial. To date, there have been no objections to this case. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on non-conformance with all five variance findings, staff recommends denial of this variance request. The entry feature could be constructed with a flat roof in conformance with the 18' building height limitation. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: I move to deny OV1013-11, a Variance to increase the allowed building height from 18' to 21' based on the finding that the five criteria have not been met, specifically Ek I move to approve OV1013-11, a Variance to increase the allowed building height from 18' to 21' based on the finding that the five criteria have been met. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Applicant's Submittal 2. Location Map 3. Aerial Photo of lot Chad Daines, Principal Planner JPL�EY .qq� Development and Infrastructure Services Permitting Division 1t + 11000 N La Canada Drive, Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 520-229-4815 520-742-1022 (Fax) �V,VDED �9 VARIANCE APPLICATION APPLICATION FOR (select one): ezoning Variance ❑ Zoning Interpretation ❑ Appeal of Administrative Decision OV Case # (Office Use On NOTICE TO APPLICANT— It is the applicant/owners responsibility to ensure all private rules and regulations of the subdivision are adhered to. Contact your HOA or property management company to determine all applicable requirements. Initials necessary, please attach a written narrative): If A. Applicant's Information Name: s' M�\Ard' Firm: Address: =.S: A/ 7" City: !_ SOL-3State:Zip: 70 Telephone:_ S21) Z92- (o77R Fax: Email: dW, kl icN i c/10 9il't1 B. Property Owner's Information Name: Firm: Address: City: State: Zip: e6 e9 Telephone: 30g Email: C. Subiect Property Information Parcel/Tax Code: Legal.Dascription/Property Address: Existing Zoning: Proposed Zoning: Attachments: App icant s Signat A,.ZA,fi� Applicant's Printed Na Oil 61021 IS - Attachment 1 SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE Please provide the following information addressing I — 5 in the Findings from Section 21.6 I of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised (OVZCR). In order to authorize a variance request, the Board will be searching for sufficient evidence in accordance with the findings. Please answer the questions below in a narrative format. 1. Are there special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district? 2. Are there special circumstances that exist that are not self imposed or created by the owner/applicant? 3. Is the authorizing of the variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights? 4. If granted, will the: variance impose such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located? 5. If granted, will the variance be the minimum necessary to afford relief and will not materially affect the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood or surrounding properties. Revised 11-20-08 2 Ying proposed remodel 10645 N Pistachio A. Project Overview The Yin proposed Remodel is located at 10645 N Pistachio, within the Town of Oro Valley (See Exhibit A: Location Map.) The subject property is situated on the west side of Pistachio, north of Lambert Lane, in the Monte de Oro subdivision. The project site is currently zoned R1-43, Single Family Residential. The proposed remodel of the existing 2959 square foot burnt adobe structure will in include new electrical, mechanical, master bedroom and master bath remodel, plus a garage addition, and the enclosure of an existing open air atrium. The proposed enclosed atrium is to have a wooden curved stairway leading to an outside observation deck looking toward Push Ridge. (See Exhibit B: Aerial Photo Existing Atrium) B. Request for variance at lot 9 of Monte del Oro for building height. The owner at 10645 N Pistachio would like to ask the Town of Oro Valley Board of Adjustments for a building height variance on a proposed remodel of an existing structure. The current zoning code of this area allows for a building height of 18'-0". The proposed remodel at the peak of the roof would be at 20'4' with only 56 square feet of proposed roof line which would be out of current code specification. The owner would like to ask for a variance of 3'-6" (21'-6") building height. 1. The parcel is irregular in shape and is approx.1.24 acres in size. The topography varies by 30-ft with the existing floor approx. 2588' of elevation. Approximately 0.2 acres of the eastern side falls with a 100 year flood plan. 2. The owner is asking to have the ability to enhance the look and functionality of the existing structure. The existing open atrium within the structure has been described as "prison cell-like" 3. The proposed height variance for this structure will not impend or infringe on any neighbors' views or enjoyment of their property. The lot to the north is vacant and is approx. 20' higher in elevation. The lot to the south has an existing residential structure that is about 25' lower in elevation. The lot to the west across Pistachio Ave is vacant. The lots to the east are in El Conquistador subdivision, which allows 3-story buildings up to 38-ft in height. 4. Within the location of this property there are existing structures with similar features and if granted this variance, should not be constituted as a privilege, inconsistent with other properties. 5. The proposed height variance will be very minimal, and will not affect the health and safety or welfare of the existing neighborhood. r "0 • YIN YI N G Remodel 10645 N PISTACHIO AV PARCELS: 224-27-121 A, ORO VALLEY 120135 & 122B P�MOPMM 5MIC�5 M p�55 1064, N P151' HIO AV 5UPPIV1510N FLAP MAP Pook 21, Page 99 5eauence Number 94086888, L. 6& P�5cvIP110N MOM nil. 0f;0101" 9 M Ff At9J fO N� COM 2012 W.C. COPS PARCEL 224-27- 12 >A 1) M515 NOT A POMMY SLF:VEY, MONUMMNIS SNOWN NP rR INFORMATION ONLY, 10' 0 1. 10' SCYL i ICY - 10 FEET O EXISTING MACH FIELD ® M511NG 1200 C,& SEPTIC TANK © KEW LOCATION OF 200 AMP ELECTM rAW V111N METER O EXISIING 4" aEM OUT ATCkPt7E O PRIVATE DRIVEWAY O WAIERMETM OG LWR au m EEmC Q NEW 15' GATE TO N,LEY ® GAS METER EX15 % LIVING 2,959 50. FT. EXI511N6 MAP POFCN 227 50. FT. EX15IN6 MOW rMcH 120 50. FT, EXI5TING FMCN 108 50, Ft. NEW GARAGE 540 5O: FT. NEW STAIMI, III 50: FT. EX1511NG Wa ANI7 MCK 1,155 50. FT. EXISTING VENICLE USE 5,952 50: FT. T0f& 9,196 50: FT. L0f 51ZE 54,234 50, FT. TOTAL L0f U5E 17.07 2, 3, 5. 6. SEC" Il 70W,SHW 11 SOUA{ HANC£ /J FASf GSA : SW RM ? II MW PON MANLY, AI SWE. 3i I AO(E r�PNPpAI _ KlO fP5- ALL 1700R5 mp wN170W IN51DE POOL f MIER TO WET TOM OF MO VALIEY' 5 2008 5rA AM7 POOL COM5, 5ECIIN 4015 ALL DOORS Mm W WOW W5117E POOL MPW TO NUT TOWN OF MO VALLEY'S 2008 5PA NV Wa CCM5, SECTIN 401.5 MW CAFAa AMON FEIQif 10' -b" 5H��f INn�X II Site plan �xi5tinq Floor/ 19emo Phan New door plan �a5t & North �levatlon Plan5 West & 5outh elevation Pl.an5 5tairwell and Ob5ervatlon (Floor & Framing Plan5) Foundation flan Framing plan Cross 5ection5 betail5 netail5 plumping plan Mechanical plan electrical plan JUIN 2 7 2+013 FJCALL TWO WORMS DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 602-263-1100 1-800-STAKE-IT (OUTSIDE YARICOFA COUNTY) Z� z3 O o Bi- Wall Legend C= EwsrEr, wru ® IXWO%5TWWWU Ewsrm� Ewsnr� 40+0� 3o6cJw �`. •Mtk I GIoo �-- i s i j i ' EXI511NG 01 War 68 I COVEkEq PRCH E%16fEY. � MN IILimm�II�II�I aw , 256E , 6050rmv Ew%m - — 3oba \-1 Eyj5u LRmrE _ PAfiOr—c U 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL CONDITIONS. 2. REPLACE DAMAGED WALL SURFACES WITH 1/2" GYP. BD 3. ATTACHMENT OF GYP. BD. SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH 2006 IRC. 4. EXTERIOR ON NEW ADDITIONS TO BE STUCCO WITH COAT STUCCO SYSTEM WHERE INDICATED. 5. ALL WINDOWS TO BE REPLACED WITH DUAL PANE ALUMINUM OR VINYL WINDOWS. 6. REPLACE EXISTING HVAC SYSTEM THROUGHOUT. 7. REPLACE AND REPAIR ELECTRICAL WHERE NEEDED. 8. ALL NEW FLOORING THROUGHOUT. 9. ALL EXISTING BRICK MASONRY WALLS TO REMAIN UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 10. NEW ON SIDE LAMINATED STAIRS WILL BE ENGINEERED BY OTHERS AS A DEFERRED SUBMITTAL. NEW DOOR SCHEDULE MARK I WIDTH I HIEGH1 GLAZEI MATERIAL I STYLE I LOCATION 10 1 5 -0 6 -8 6'- DBL N ALUMINUM SIDING CSELFAMLLTO M-BEDROOM GARI NOTE: CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VARIFY ALL DOOR SIZES I MW 12INING kM I new WW NEW fW 0EMOM FRONT FOVCN 'sobs I COVE�t7 PO ,,N I IEW 8" PRE SEW HALF 8" PaE 1 NEW WINDOW SCHEDULE MARK WIDTH HIEGH1 GLAZE MATERIAL STYLE LOCATON 1 4 -0 4'-0- DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER M-BEDROOM 2 4'-0 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER M-BEDROOM 3 4'-0 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER M-BEDROOM 4 3'-0" 3'-0 DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER M-BEDROOM 5 3'-0 3'-0" DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER KITCHEN 6 5'-0 4'-0" DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER OFFICE/DEN 7 6'-0 5'-0 DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER BEDROOM-1 8 4'-0 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER BEDROOM-2 9 5'-4 5'-0 DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER BEDROOM-3 10 5'-4 5'-0 DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER FAMILY RM 11 9'-0 8'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED DINING RM 12 1'-6" 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED ATRIUM 13 l'-6" 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED ATRIUM 1'-6" 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED ATRIUM 1'-6" 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED ATRIUM V-6" 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED ATRIUM U l'-6" 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED ATRIUM l'-6" 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED ATRIUM 1'-6" 4'-0 DBL ALUMINUM FIXED ATRIUM 5'-0 5'-0 DBL ALUMINUM SLIDER GARAGE 606861-Fav W.LC. IIII. 6EGROOM #1 6068 asu PATH -I 2560 w ,� _ &)68 Wan R bcus Elian 6ATN'2 E45fM 2568 6EWOOM #2 a 0 0 uw � of bfa W/ MJN iG WW 2b6i3 04 W: I�Z68 111 nn FAMILY ROOM NEWENTK'1'ANPLEE171NG 13EpkooM#5=, fO NEW 05MA1I0N DECK 6460 FDW 6460%O New Floor Plan SCALE 1/ 4" - 1'-0" General Notes: 1. ALL WORK SHALL BE GOVERNED BY THE LATEST EDITION OF INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE 2006 (IRC 2012). EXISTING C00TV F RCH ID 2. WINDOWS IN INHABITABLE ROOMS SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION R310.1 R310.1.,1.2, & 1.3 OF IRC 2012 FOR EGRESS REQUIREMENTS. MIN. AREA SHALL BE 5.7 SQ. FT. OF OPERABLE WINDOW OR DOOR. A MIN. CLEAR OPENING OF 20" WIDE BY 24" HIGH WITH 3. A MAX. SILL HEIGHT OF 44" FROM THE ROOMS FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION WITH UNOBSTRUCTED ACCESS TO OUTSIDE. 4. ALL HABITABLE ROOMS SHALL HAVE NATURAL LIGHTING NOT LESS THAN 8 % OF THE FLOOR AND A MIN. OPERABLE AREA TO THE OUTDOORS SHALL BE 4% OF THE FLOOR AREA 5. INSTALL WATER CEMENT BOARD FOR TILED WALL AT ALL TUB AND SHOWER AREAS, FLOOR TO CEILING. 6, PROVIDE FIRE BLOCKING IN ALL STUD WALLS, FURRED OUT WALL AND SOFFITS. INSTALL SMOKE DETECTORS PER SECTION 313.1 OF THE IRC 2012. S. SEE SHEET 4 FOR HEADER AND OR LINTEL SCHEDULE. g A TYPICAL EXTERIOR WALL SHALL CONSIST OF 2X6'S Q 16" O.C. W/ TWO LAYERS OF BUILDING FELT WI V RIGID STYROFOAM W/ WESTERN ONE COAT STUCCO FINISH. INTERIOR FRAME WALLS SHALL BE 2X4'S @ 24" O.C. WITH IW GYPSUM WALLBOARD. 10, IT SHALL BE THE OWNERS RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND THE CONSTRUCTION SITE FOR ANY DISCREPANCIES AND TO RESOLVE ANY CONFLICTS WITH THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. II. THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL APPLICABLE DIMENSIONS AT THE JOB SITE AND RESOLVE ANY DISCREPANCIES. 12, ALL MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURES RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURES. 15. WRITTEN DIMENSION SHALL TAKE RESIDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. 'co rare EMDPY NEW VOU13LE CAR 6/IA6E 646ow NEWComA )WIATION Enerav Code: MP 2012 IRC fXt1 NII 02.1. ZONE-2 MXTEf;IOR ML5 SHALL 13E k-13 a LING5 f0 r-1 k-30 5KYLINE5 fO Gf U-1 WINPOW5 TO It U-37 5XP nooR5 fo f3E u-.-/5 MAX. SNGC .40 I wnmpy o Mka ce=c, ouuc VAS ut zaa vr�-ra' rs NO. 9m NOTE: CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VARIFY ALL WINDOW SIZES Fft.99'-0" Guy NEW 6050XD'MwcVV EXIS 3068 DOOR ww FKF 8" POLE — PEW 8" PLOE East Elevation Ff N;W 8" POLE FROM Ff i. I "� for - 90'-4" A mal/Ml MAf0i EXISITNG - CO.GR"5ME 9 MVING AM .. FROM 00 oRi�E" '.•'PPALL'•. PMIt•r .. 5950FIXWW70W 5450xoWW0W 'O :-. ... ,� ----- FFE_I00'-0" ------ nFw--_.'_.5 5 FfE.99'�6" ww RICE 8" POLE rfwa" PLOE MINI IEWIMMON MWGARAa 11161 �M5114 North Elevation KEG -NOTES: i❑ 5TtaO 5Y51EM O/ER FRAME CM5TMON 0 5ECWN& &VA, GW a DOOR o METAL 5amk, TYP, +❑ AD019E MCK W MR OFM FRAME CON5fUTION l EK15MU ADORE MOCK CON51UI10N © KEW 8" WOOD POLE LI NE'N HN.F 8" WOOD POLE AMNAV N KEY D.0.6M, "TOM 01 6EAM D O.L. "fom OF LEDGER T,O,W. TGr GP REAM T.0 DM. fOP OF REAM T.O.P. "OF PFRA Er f.O.P.. fOP OP P.AS fO.R. TOP OF KEDGE D WJLR OiL6DW: D AUIF v� ut zon wit v+^ - ra• u N7, air fOp.� FROMFf�aoo.00� ' 3 ---, . mAa PME � - NEW 604OXO F.F.E. 100.00 GRADE NEW ADDITION EXISTING FkOM FF F.F.E. 99'-0' 0 West Elevation South Elevation 605OX0 WINDOW F20Dv.Mfffi120'_6 .4 w M, 3030X0 WINDOW XO WINDOW 4040X0 WINDOW -_-_ FF.E_99 6' ____-_______-_-_-_ M. 99'4'7 KEY410TE5: l 5nCC0 5Y59M Mk FRM& CMTU110N 20 SECfaa wX awa DOOR 0 MA, 5CLMR. TYF. l ADOCE Ma WNUP OFFER FWX CON%nKION 0 M%NG AOCK BLOCK C0N6fUnON © ww8,, woonpaE o KEw HALF 8" Wox you ADBREIMnON KEY B.06M. BOFfOM OF BEAM B.OL. "TOM a LEJCER Tow. f0a 0G BEAM fOBM. f0F OF BEAM f,OF. for OF PAmf f.Of1.. fOF OF FI-ATE f,0.R, fOF 0r F%D!k H NO It nowt a� 111�,�. ?,vl. j asp 1 t� njp- ,�±►i � �a���$ �� as �o�� ��� �s „• tilll1r��w��r yCI�"►►i'i�"y16'�`•� �i• w'w. i�"tip` �1Z'� ;,r ♦+ s�� � Sr yyM iai."��� � ��C iaal��•� SP- +�*���� �•JI' �'� ��Ii11P�ii'rar� *.�'l1 w�•� i Miolf 6 foroazAm MOTC MPK MAO EXHIBIT A AND EXHIBIT B Looking west from driveway `k w Looking east at existing structure for the west property line Looking north form south parcel , � & � ~\ � � �� , . m 41 ee..<\ S x \�&� ,\ Looking south from north parcel Red lines are 2' topography lines Q�JP�IEY qq�o FUNDED-j9�A Aerial Photo Ying Residence (OV1013-11) Attachment 3 a� OWS f use + 0�S 6...- 1-, t •. ,y r •a rR t,«.a�6 �°� is e.wvAC 4 � � �. di�w« ....;� G� « �.q, � .a - dm ay 2 ttt .lr h fi OQOJP��EY AA,zoSite plan showing direction that the following photos were taken Ying Residence (OV1013-11) F&UNDED"I, Attachment 4 Neighbors home directly south xr A * = Subject house k 001, D A RM bject House House 1 House 2 House 3 �t I ! t r lit V y C t � View from the back of subject house looking west to Canada Hills Estates ET View looking into front door Inside of atrium -.d location of proposed 2 story entry feature aa: �� 2 � _� � � d d�ƒ��%�% �:. � .:� \d2 ^ . .. > � y<x� v� � :� <§ dd4 r� ° ® ��� � �. .a. .� � wa�� q■k|�■■('��� »wZ� «sral t' I GOLDER RANCH FIRE DISTRICT GO DEq r�qy Community Services Division `� International Fire Code Compliance Review TO: Town of Oro Valley Building Safety Division FROM: Chris Kiel, Plans Examiner DATE: June 30, 2013 PROJECT: Zoning variance, 10645 N Pistachio Ave. TOV PERMIT #: OV1013-11 REVIEW: Fire Code Compliance Review of Building Permit Application Documents First Review Received on: June 28, 2013 Review Status: Approved as noted The Building Permit Application of the above referenced project is in review for compliance with the Town of Oro Valley and Golder Ranch Fire District Fire Code and Standards. Building Permit Application Fire Code Review Comments — The documents submitted for permit review are in compliance with the fire code. Approved as noted: • Please be aware that the additions noted in the variance request will result in a fire area in excess of the available fire flow per IFC Section B105.1. Please contact the plans examiner to discuss the requirements and potential options. Approval of plans and specifications shall not be construed to be a permit for, or approval of, any violation of any provisions of the Fire Code and shall not be deemed to nullify any provisions of local, state, or federal law, regulation, or code. Please email or call me with any questions related to any of the above Fire Code comments. Chris Kiel, Plans Examiner Golder Ranch Fire District & Town of Oro Valley (520) 825-5968 ckiel�golderranchfire.org Golder Ranch Fire District - Community Services Division 3885 E. Golder Ranch Dr.; Tucson, Arizona 85739 520-818-1017 Fax 520-825-8043 www.golderranchtire.org ckiel(c4yolderranchfire.org Proudly Serving Our Community with Strong Hands & Caring Hearts Since 1977. Serving as the Fire Marshal for the Town of Oro Valley since 1999. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Oro Valley Board of Adjustment The Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, July 23, 2013, 3:00 p.m. Oro Valley Town Hall, 11000 N. La Canada Dr. Oro Valley, Arizona Request for a Variance for the Bramble residence at 10709 North Hewitt Place to reduce the required rear yard setback from 10' to 0' for a porch addition and spa, case number OV1013-06. Request for a Variance by Meritage Homes at 10360 North Artifact Canyon Lane to allow grading into 4,100 square feet of protected hillside area for construction of a house, case number OV1013-10. Request for a Variance for the Ying property at 10645 North Pistachio Ave. to increase the building height from 18' to 21' for a portion of the house, case number OV1013- 11. The hearing will be in the Town Council Chambers. The public is encouraged to attend and will be invited to speak. Site plans are available for review during normal business hours at the Oro Valley Town Hall, Development and Infrastructure Services Department. An agenda for this meeting will be made available at least 24 hours prior to meeting time and can be viewed at www.orovalleyaz.gov. For questions and additional information, please contact Patty Hayes, Senior Planning Technician, at (520) 229-4819 or phayes@orovalleyaz.gov. DATE: 07/05/2013 TIME: 8:00 AM BY: rmf F11 DIS DEPT SUPPORTMNDIVIDUAL\ROSEANNE RBOA1Multiple Noticing\8 of A Notice 7-23-13.doc 3-11, PARCEL: 224-27-121A, 300' NOTICE AREA From: Terril Hurst [ Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 10:08 AM To: Hayes, Patty Cc: Jay Stern; dorothyramirez84@yahoo.com; John Christos Subject: Re: *AMENDED (7/12/2013 5:00 P.M.) Board of Adjustment Patty, Thanks for this morning's phone conversation and the link. 1) After readinig the material at the link, I am even more strongly opposed to variance approval. I am attaching photographs of the current view from our backyard at which should help explain my opposition to approving this variance. 2) I am cc'ing my adjacent CHE neighbors, encouraging them to contact you with their questions and concerns as well. 3) I intend to participate in Tuesday's 3pm meeting at Town Chambers to make sure that my concerns are represented. Again, thanks so much for your assistance. Best Regards, Terril Hurst Page 1 of 1 Hayes, Patty From: Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 10:11 AM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: Fwd: Oro Valley Public Hearing May Impact CHE Residents. Patty, I oppose this variance and also oppose having this considered during the peak of the summer when many people are out of town. Mike Groshans -----Original Message ----- Sent: Thu, Jul 18, 2013 8:54 pm Subject: Oro Valley Public Hearing May Impact CHE Residents. Canada Hills Estates Residents The HOA Board has learned that the town of Oro Valley is holding a Board of Adjustment Public Hearing on Tuesday, July 23 at 3:00 P.M. at the OV Town Hall Council Chambers. The purpose of the meeting is to address a request for a variance to increase the height of a home from 18 feet to 21 feet, for a portion of a house located at 10645 N. Pistachio. The above information is posted on a sign at the entrance gate to the house. Site plans are available for review at Town Hall. The reason your HOA Board is notifying certain residents of this action is that it may impact the rear view of some homes. The house seeking the variance is directly across the rear wash behind 10660 and 10640 N. Stargazer Dr. The house is a one story red adobe brick structure. Depending on which portion of the house the owners are seeking to raise the height from 18 feet to 21 feet, could impact views. The houses at 10660 and10640 appear to have the most impact, however the view from additional houses including; 10580,10600, 10620, 10680, 10710, and 10720 N. Stargazer Dr.could also be impacted. To reach 10645 N. Pistachio go out the Naranja gate, turn right and go to the second street and turn right on Poinsettia. Fallow this until you reach Pistachio on the right and turn right. The town contact for this variance hearing is Patty Hayes, Senior Planning Technician. She can be reached at 520-229-4819, phayes(a)orovalleyaz.ctov. If reisidents are concerned about this variance request they should contact Patty Hayes and/or attend the hearing to voice your concerns. CHE HOA Board of Directors 07/22/2013 Page 1 of 1 Hayes, Patty From: Preston & Judy Holtry [ Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:03 AM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: FW: Oro Valley Public Hearing Patty, Although the proposed extension will not effect my home, I am opposed merely from the standpoint of precedent. If approved, how many more similar requests will follow. Once the camel gets its nose under the tent, the rest of the corpus is sure to follow. I recom no. Preston Holtry, From: Canada Hills Estates [mailto:memberaccessapproval@canadahillsestateshoa.com] Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 2:14 PM To: Subject: Oro Valley Public Hearing Canada Hills Estates Residents The HOA Board has learned that the town of Oro Valley is holding a Board of Adjustment Public Hearing on Tuesday, July 23 at 3:00 P.M. at the OV Town Hall Council Chambers. The purpose of the meeting is to address a request for a variance to increase the height of a home from 18 feet to 21 feet, for a portion of a house located at 10645 N. Pistachio. The above information is posted on a sign at the entrance gate to the house. Site plans are available for review at Town Hall. This may significantley impact the rear view of some homes. The house seeking the variance is directly across the rear wash behind 10660 and 10640 N. Stargazer Dr. The house is a one story red adobe brick structure. Depending on which portion of the house the owners are seeking to raise the height from 18 feet to 21 feet, could impact views. The houses at 10660 and10640 appear to have the most impact, however the view from additional houses including; 10580,10600, 10620, 10680, 10710, and 10720 N. Stargazer Dr.could also be impacted. To reach 10645 N. Pistachio go out the Naranja gate, turn right and go to the second street and turn right on Poinsettia. Follow this until you reach Pistachio on the right and turn right. The town contact for this variance hearing is Patty Hayes, Senior Planning Technician. She can be reached at 520-229-4819, phayes@orovalleyaz.gov. If reisidents are concerned about this variance request they should contact Patty Hayes and/or attend the hearing to voice your concerns. CHE HOA Board of Directors 07/22/2013 Page 1 of 1 Hayes, Patty From: Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 5:01 PM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: Board of Adjustment Hearing July 23 I have been notified by our HOA for Canada Hills Estates of the variance requested by the owners of 10645 N Pistachio. While my husband and I will be gone on vacation on the date of the hearing (July 23), we would like to express our opposition to such a variance. The homes along Stargazer Drive will be impacted by such an increase in height, possibly decreasing their value. This happened to us at another residence, and the increased height of the home being built between our lot and the view for which we had paid so much definitely impacted the value of our lot. While we can appreciate a homeowner wanted to have free rein to do as they please, they need to consider the impact of their actions on those who have already invested in their homes, and the negative financial and esthetic impact their actions will have on those homeowners. Please accept our "no" vote regarding this variance. Rod and Nancy Frazer Stargazer Dr. 07/22/2013 Page 1 of 1 Hayes, Patty From: Kathy O'Rourke [ Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:21 AM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: Variance request for 10645 N Pistachio July 21, 2013 Dear Patty., Concerning the variance request for 10645 W Pistachio we tivoulcl or Of tike to go on record being against of this variance.lNe feeCit wouCd 6e detrimentaCto allproperty owners and tivoulcllead to other 10 neighbors requesting the same. 9'hank you Pat & Xathy O'Rourke i 'Valley, AZ 81432 07/22/2013 Page 1 of 1 Hayes, Patty From: Lee Harris [ Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 8:51 AM To: Hayes, Patty Cc: SHARON LYTLE HARRIS Subject: Requested Variance Patty, my wife and I live at Oro Valley, AZ 85737 and have been informed by our owners association, Canada Hills Estates, of the requested variance to build to a height of 21 feet versus the standard limit of 18 feet. Generally, we believe the rules are in place to ensure consistency and the overall aesthetic we take for granted in Oro Valley. That said, there might be rare situations in which we would not oppose variances; however, we are opposed to any building variances where it cannot be clearly demonstrated that there is no impact to others owners. In this particular case, it appears this variance would definitely impact a number of owners. As such, we strongly oppose the approval of this variance. Thank you, Lee and Sharon Harris 07/22/2013 To: Patty Hayes Date: July 22, 2013 Re: AMENDED (7/12/2013 5:00 P. M.) Board of Adjustment Dear Mrs. Hayes, I have been alarmed and have become very disturbed on the idea of granting a construction variance and remodeling permit of a brick home behind my house. As you have been informed, the approval of this variance will cause a deep impact on my resale opportunity of my home and for the most, will be hindering the views of the mountains that we deeply enjoy viewing every from our home. My house is on and has the back yard and family room views of the mountains. If this variance is approved it will have a very negative impact on us and with our neighbors who live on Stargazer Dr. When I built my house in 1996, my obligations were to respect and not build anything that might cause obstructions of the beautiful mountains and maintain the value of my home for resale reasons not only for myself but for my surrounding neighbors'. I know 1 have maintained my promise and I am strongly recommending the Town of Oro Valley does not approve this variance. Roman Mario Ramirez (Homeowner/Taxpayer) Oro Valley, Arizona