Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Environmentally Sensitive Lands Task Force - 2/18/2010 ('! �,. ,Y.•r.,°,p DRAFT MEETING SUMMARY O -9 { Town of Oro Valley ri 3 c r x 1,11'w,a1V,111: ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS (ESL) PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING # 14 ENVIRONMENTALLY r:< vYak..A9SENSITIVE LANDS February 18, 2010 4- 6p HOPI CONFERENCE ROOM 11000 N. LA CANADA DR. PAC Members Present: Bill Adler Susan Simms Doug McKee Steve Solomon Philip Kline Oro Valley ESL Team Members Present: Bayer Vella Karen Berchtold Joe Andrew2 Paul Keesler 1. Call to Order Meeting called to order at 4:02 p.m. 2. February 11, 2010 meeting summary Karen Berchtold informed the group that as the summary was not complete; it would be included in a future agenda. 3. Update on project schedule Karen Berchtold distributed an updated project schedule. The schedule includes weekly meetings, with one meeting planned for most sections, and two if needed. The schedule will keep the project moving ahead at a vigorous pace. 4. Update on Cultural Resources Karen Berchtold provided an update on Staff's work on the cultural resources component. Staff is working on a draft revision, and intends to meet with the HPC workgroup in early March. Steve Solomon expressed concerns about the extent of cultural resources in the Arroyo Grande area, and whether the known presence of cultural resources is disclosed to a prospective property owner. C:\Documents and Settings\aasper\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK1 BE\ESL PAC 16 2- 1 18-10 meeting summary (2).doc c 5. Open Space Section: draft discussion Open Space Maintenance In section C.2, page 4, group clarified that maintenance should default to Town, unless other tools are used. Steve Solomon suggested that the phrase "permanently manage and maintain" should be better defined (p. 4). The draft needs to clarify the maintenance issue, perhaps by creating a separate section titled "Maintenance," and by making a distinction between maintenance of smaller areas by HOAs, and larger ones by the Town and/or County. Doug McKee suggested that a study session with Town Council could be held to address the maintenance issue and determine if Town maintenance is feasible, and Bill Adler agreed. Karen will discuss this idea with Bayer Vella. The group asked staff to provide a map that shows the extent of existing, undeveloped area that remains in the Town. Maintenance Cost The group discussed whether impact fees could be used to generate funds for open space maintenance. Joe Andrews noted that impacts fees can only be assessed for matters of public necessity. The group requested clarification of the reference to federal reference under 5.ii, and of the term "common maintenance agreement." Steve Solomon expressed concern about the definition of rock outcrops, and feeling that the 95% conservation standard is extreme. Regarding "Essential Services", on p. 6, d.(2).3., the discussion regarding utilities trenching needs to be revised because it is not always possible to consolidate these utilities. The term "mitigate" should be changed to "restored." Also, the group does not see how it is feasible to mitigate off-site. Under the discussion regarding potential reductions, the calculation of the reduction needs to be clarified: is the 25% maximum reduction of MUMA area applied to the required open space value? 6. Design Requirements Section: draft discussion Bill Adler noted that the applicability of the various sections needs to be clarified, and overall section needs to be simplified. Steve suggested perhaps a matrix would make sense. Under B.2., the group wondered if trail infrastructure is allowed in the trample zone. Joe Andrews noted there is a problem with allowing flexibility in standards applied at the subdivision stage; staff will discuss further. C:\Documents and Settings\aasper\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK1 BE\ESL PAC 16 2- 2 18-10 meeting summary (2).doc Cluster Design Bill Adler noted that discussion needs to note when net versus gross values apply. The references can be confusing in relation to density: perhaps the term "yield" should be used. Section D.d.C. (??): Term "demonstrable" needs to be better defined. Bill Adler: need to define what we mean by impact; according to general plan, it means impact to views. Further discussion is needed to clarify if three story buildings would be appropriate. Doug McKee asked for a table of current building heights. Bill Adler asked for more discussion on transitional density. 7.. Discussion of Future Agenda Items Staff will continue review of this section at the next meeting. 8. Adjourn Meeting adjourned at Prepared by: Karen Berchtold Acting Principal Planner C:\Documents and Settings\aasper\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK1 BE\ESL PAC 16 2- 3 18-10 meeting summary (2).doc