Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV120713a�uv Ap4'rj ilrid C �Cw vtx.�,l_-q 11 D U dj L C; i cl'A cafe C4, c:.- Development and Infrastructure Services Minor Plat Change The Town of Oro Valley hereby approves a minor plat change for the Shadow Mountain Estates East subdivision, Book 14, Page 93, Sheet 1, Lots 61 and 62 as shown in the attached recorded documents Sequence numbers 20123140451, 20123140450, 20122970067. s David Laws, P.E. Permitting Manager David A. Williams, AICP Planning Division Manager /z /,,2 - Date /-Z./� / 7 Date Planning Permitting Inspection & Compliance Engineering Operations Transit (520) 229-4821 (520) 229-4815 (520) 229-4815 (520) 229-4894 (520) 229-5070 (520) 229-4990 Caring for our heritage, our community, our future. 11000 N. La Caflada Drive • Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 fax: (520) 742-1022 • www.orovalleyaz.gov This document was presented for recording without an exhibit attached. NORTH SCALE: 1 " =50' LOT 62 PT. OF COMMENCEMENT -0 . AREA = 4,545 SQ.FT. LOT 61 0 COPYRIGHT OPW SURVEYING. LLC .2012 OPW SURVEYING, L.L.C. 7135 N. Skyway Drive EXHIBIT OF CONVEYANCE FROM LOT f 62 TO LOT 61 Tucson. Arizona 85718 SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST Phone (520) 990-1568 OPW JOB NO. 2012051 F. ANN RODRIGUEZ, RECORDER ' Recorded By: n� -_�� ARTY RECORDER 4903 W JOAN HILLS 9120 N MARNE PL ORO VALLEY AZ 85704 w` drtz AV �tIZ013 QUIT CLAIM DEED IV20123140450 MAIL AMOUNT PAID: For the consideration of Ten Dollars, and other valuable consideration, I. $16.00 JOAN C. HILLS, as Trustee of The Family Trust of the Hills Trust dated November 23, 1994, hereby quit claim to JOAN C. HILLS, as Trustee of The Survivor's Trust of the Hills Trust dated November 23, 1994, all right, title or interest in the following described property situated in the County of Pima, State of Arizona: See attached legal description on Exhibit "A" incorporated herein by this reference. EXEMPTION: A.R.S. §11-1134(B)(13) TRUST DISCLOSURE pursuant to A.R.S. §33-404: The current beneficiary of The Family Trust of the Hills Trust dated November 23, 1994, is Joan Hills, who resides at 9120 N. Marne Place, Oro Valley, Arizona, 85737. The current beneficiary of The Survivor's Trust of the Hills Trust dated November 23, 1994, is Joan Hills, who resides at 9120 N. Marne Place, Oro Valley, Arizona, 85737. Dated: // THE FAMILY TRUST OF THE HILLS TRUST DATED NOVEMBER 23, 1994 Joan C. Hills, Trustee 7 1 STATE OF ARIZONA) ) ss. COUNTY OF PIMA ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on //- 47-,20/2 , by Joan C. Hills, Trustee of The Family Trust of the Hills Trust Dated November 23, 1994. Notary P Commission Seal/Expiration Date: Marley Board Notary Public - Ardzona v Pima County My CornrnMion Expiys .,August 29, 2015 -2- EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL OF THAT PORTION OF LOT 6.1 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST", A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: - BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST.CORNER OF SAID LOT 61, AT A POINT ON THE - - NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE, A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON WITH THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 62, THENCE N 66049'54" E, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 61, A DISTANCE OF 164.34 FEET TO A POINT; - THENCE S 20024'29" W, A DISTANCE OF 18.79 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 55°28'44" W, A DISTANCE OF 16.38 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 67024'54" W, A DISTANCE OF 29.27 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 49012'32" W, A DISTANCE OF 8.64 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 54015'55" W, A DISTANCE OF 33.55 FEET TO A POINT THENCE S 79051'02 W, A DISTANCE OF 71.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING: 1,835 SQUARE FEET. [Ref: Conveyance from Lot 61 to Lot 62] N j NORTH SCALE: 1" =50' LOT 62 Vol P p'- VID P.O.B. AREA 1,835 SQ.FT. LOT 61 COPYRIGHT OPW SURVEYING, LLC -2012 OPW SURVEYING, L.L.C. 7135 N. Skyway Drive EXHIBIT OF CONVEYANCE FROM LOT 61 TO LOT 62 Tucson, Arizona 85718 SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST Phone (520).9110-1568 OPW JOB NO. 2012051 STATE OF ARIZONA) ) ss. COUNTY OF PIMA ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on /I- Y-20/,7 , by Joan C. Hills, Trustee of The Survivor's Trust of the Hills Trust Dated November 23, 1994. Ile Commission Seal/Expiration Date: Notary Pub j Marley Beard Notary Public - Arizona Pima County My Commission Ex&" August n, 2015 -2- f EXHIEBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL OF THAT PORTION; OF LOT 62 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST, A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE . COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: L.:U1viNItNUNLi A l l Hh SUU l H W LS 1 UUKN hK UP JAiD LOI 62, AY A POIN I .UN 1 Hh NORTHEAST RIGHT=OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE; A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON WITH THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 61. THENCE N 66°49'54" E. ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 62. A DISTANCE OF 164.34 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE N 20024'29" E, A DISTANCE OF 1.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 1503635" W. A DISTANCE OF 19.11 FEET TO A POINT: 1 tihNl;h,N Ly" l L`LU" �, A 1)1S 1 A1Vl:E Ur 4U.US t'1Jb T 1 U fA YU1N 1; THENCE N 78006'39" E, A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S 00021'15" E, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; - THENCE S 66049'54" W, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 62. A DISTANCE OF 132.58 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID YAKChL CON lA1NINU: 4,54J SQ. 1,1. [Ref: Conveyance from Lot 62 to Lot 61 ] Page 1 of 1 Hayes, Patty To: Joan Hills Subject: Lot Line Change Mrs. Hills, Good News!! The lot line changes are completed. The final plat for your lots has been approved and formally changed. I made copies of the revised plat and a signed copy of your survey map. I places the copies at the front counter with your name so you may pick them up whenever you like. Thank you for all of you hard work and determination. Take care, Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) 01 /24/2013 Page 1 of 3 Hayes, Patty To: Joan Hills Subject: RE: Lot line adjustment: 9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place Mrs. Hills, I didn't find the record of survey at the Recorder's office. The two sequence numbers below are for the quit claim deeds. The recorders didn't have the deeds ready for viewing on their web site so I couldn't check anyting. I suppose at this point we wait until you get things back from the Recorder's office and then bring those documents into the the Town. We will hope everthing is correct and if it is, we will have the plat changed. Once that plat is changed then the process will be over. Please let us know when you get things back from the recorders. Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) From: Joan Hills [ Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 1:27 PM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: Re: Lot line adjustment: 9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place I'm so sorry for the whoops. Here are the sequence numbers: 20123140450 and 20123140451. Joan Hills ----- Original Message ---- From: Hayes, Patty To: Joan Hills Cc: Miller, Marvin Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 12:58 PM Subject: RE: Lot line adjustment: 9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place Mrs. Hills, It's good to hear from you and that things are moving along. We intended to have the information returned to the Town for final review and approval before recording. I think we can still work with things as it is now. Can you email the sequence number of the recorded documents? With that number I may be able to find the information we need. If it looks like it's okay, then I will have the final plat changed for your two lots. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thank you, Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 11 /19/2012 Page 2 of 3 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) From: Joan Hills [ Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 2:31 PM To: Hayes, Patty Cc: Miller, Marvin Subject: Lot line adjustment: 9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place Good afternoon, Ms. Hayes and Mr. Miller: Chris Morrison, the surveyor, and I have made progress on the tasks required by Marvin Miller regarding the new common boundary for Lots 61 & 62, OV1207-13. On October 23 Mr Morrison hand carried the Record of Survey to the Recorder's office. This survey map fulfilled all Mr. Miller's requirements identified in Item #1 of his September 24, 2012, list. On November 9 Joan Hills hand carried the Legal Descriptions (per Item #2) to the Recorder's office. These had been prepared by Paralegal Marley Beard so I am confident they are correct. Each submission included a Quit Claim Deed, a Legal Description and an Exhibit of Conveyence. I have a Receipt of Recording for each. (The Legal Description "Conveyence from Lot 61 to Lot 62" fulfilled the correction required in Item #4.) 1 have some questions. 1) Regarding Item #2 and the phrase "...original registrant's signed...." Does this mean I need to wait for the Recorder's office to return the documents I gave them before I bring you the Record of Survey, Quit Claim Deeds, Legal Descriptions & Exhibits of Conveyence? My understanding is that these have all been recorded by now and are in the Recorder's data base. I can bring you copies of all the above documents right now. Getting documents back from the Recorder's office will take some weeks. I assume verifying ballots is impacting their efficiency right now. 2) What is a "comment response letter"? I'll wait for your clarifications before delivering any documents to your Oro Valley office. Thank you! Joan Hills 9120 N. Marne Place Oro Valley, AZ 85704 11/19/2012 Page 1 of 2 -Hayes, Patty From: Hayes, Patty Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 12:59 PM To: 'Joan Hills' Cc: Miller, Marvin Subject: RE: Lot line adjustment: 9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place Mrs. Hills, It's good to hear from you and that things are moving along. We intended to have the information returned to the Town for final review and approval before recording. I think we can still work with things as it is now. Can you email the sequence number of the recorded documents? With that number I may be able to find the information we need. If it looks like it's okay, then I will have the final plat changed for your two lots. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thank you, Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) From: Joan Hills [mailto: Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 2:31 PM To: Hayes, Patty Cc: Miller, Marvin Subject: Lot line adjustment: 9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place Good afternoon, Ms. Hayes and Mr. Miller: Chris Morrison, the surveyor, and I have made progress on the tasks required by Marvin Miller regarding the new common boundary for Lots 61 & 62, OV1207-13. On October 23 Mr Morrison hand carried the Record of Survey to the Recorder's office. This survey map fulfilled all Mr. Miller's requirements identified in Item #1 of his September 24, 2012, list. On November 9 Joan Hills hand carried the Legal Descriptions (per Item #2) to the Recorder's office. These had been prepared by Paralegal Marley Beard so I am confident they are correct. Each submission included a Quit Claim Deed, a Legal Description and an Exhibit of Conveyence. I have a Receipt of Recording for each. (The Legal Description "Conveyence from Lot 61 to Lot 62" fulfilled the correction required in Item #4.) I have some questions. 1) Regarding Item #2 and the phrase "...original registrant's signed...." Does this mean I 11/15/2012 Page 2 of 2 need to wait for the Recorder's office to return the documents I gave them before I bring you the Record of Survey, Quit Claim Deeds, Legal Descriptions & Exhibits of Conveyence? My understanding is that these have all been recorded by now and are in the Recorder's data base. I can bring you copies of all the above documents right now. Getting documents back from the Recorder's office will take some weeks. I assume verifying ballots is impacting their efficiency right now. 2) What is a "comment response letter"? I'll wait for your clarifications before delivering any documents to your Oro Valley office. Thank you! Joan Hills 9120 N. Marne Place Oro Valley, AZ 85704 11/15/2012 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONVEYANCE FROM LOT 62 TO LOT 61 OPW JOB NO.2012051 ALL OF THAT PORTION OF LOT 62 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST", A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62, AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE, A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON W ITH THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 61, THENCE N 66°49'S4" E, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 62, A DISTANCE OF 1,64.34 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, - THENCE N 20-24-29" E, A DISTANCE OF 1.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 15°36'35" W, A DISTANCE OF 19.11 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 29"12'20" E, A DISTANCE. OF 40.03 FEET TO A POINT; :. THENCE N 78006'39" E, A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S 00021'15" E, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S 66049'54" W, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 62, A DISTANCE OF 132.58 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 4,545 SQ. FT. CM:cm August 27, 2012 G:\OPW Surveying jobs\2012\051\62 to 61.wpd Page I of I LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONVEYANCE FROM LOT 61 TO LOT 62 OPW JOB 2012051 ALL OF THAT PORTION OF LOT 61 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST", A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 61, AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE, A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON WITH THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOS t;4:? THENCE N 66049'54" E, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 61, A DISTANCE OF 164.34 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 20024'29" W, A DISTANCE OF 18.79 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 55028'44" W, A DISTANCE OF 16.38 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 67024'54" W, A DISTANCE OF 29.27 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 49012'32" W, A DISTANCE OF 8.64 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 54015'55" W, A DISTANCE OF 33.55 FEET TO A PONT-) THENCE S 79051'02" W, A DISTANCE OF 71.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING: 1,835 SQUARE FEET. cM:cm August 27, 2012 G:\OPW Surveying jobsQ01 2\05 1 \61 to 62.wpd Page I of 1 boundary calcs.txt Project: 2012051 Mon August 27 10:50:52 2012 Parcel Inverse Parcel name: 61 New North: 4722.16107 East : 5709.58242 Line Course: N 79-51-02 E Length: 71.34 North: 4734.73288 East 5779.80814 Line Course: N 54-15-55 E Length: 33.55 North: 4754.32757 East 5807.04229 Line Course: S 49-12-32 E Length: 8.64 North: 4748.68006 East 5813.58702 Line Course: N 67-24-54 E Length: 29.27 North: 4759.92302 East 5840.61640 Line Course: N 55-28-44 E Length: 16.38 North: 4769.20815 East 5854.11575 Line Course: N 20-24-29 E Length: 18.79 North: 4786.81735 East 5860.66737 Line Course: N 20-24-29 E Length: 1.40 North: 4788.13171 East 5861.15639 Line Course: N 15-36-35 W Length: 19.11 North: 4806.54030 East : 5856.01326 Line. -Course: N 29-12-20 E Length: 40.03 North: 4841.48190 East .:.-5875.54590 Line course ..'N 78-06-39- E Length: 109.20 °iiOrth: 485 .978�94 EasC .5982 40216 Line Course: S 00-21-15 E Length:'25.00 North: 4838.97945 East 5982.55669 Line Course: S 00-21-15 E Length: 248.94 North: 4590.04421 East 5984.09547 Line Course: N 80-00-00 W Length: 180.30 North: 4621.35222 East 5806.53893 Curve Length: 109.81 Radius: 60.00 Delta:-104-51-44 Tangent: 78.00 Chord: 95.11 Course: N 34-19-27 W Course In: N 71-53-35 W Course Out: N 03-14-41 E RP North: 4639.99967 East 5749.51023 End North: 4699.90348 East 5752.90635 Curve Length: 50.15 Radius: 60.00 Delta: 47-53-38 Tangent: 26.65 Chord: 48.71 Course: N 62-48-30 W Course In: N 03-14-41 E Course Out: S 51-08-19 W RP North: 4759.80729 East : 5756.30246 End North: 4722.16107 East : 5709.58242 Perimeter: 961.93 Area: 41,721 sq. ft. 0.96 acres Parcel name: 61 TO 62 North: 5272.16107 Line Course: N 66-49-54 E North: 5336.81735 Line Course: S 20-24-29 W North: 5319.20815 Line Course: S 55-28-44 W North: 5309.92302 Line Course: S 67-24-54 W North: 5298.68006 East : 5709.58242 Length: 164.34 East 5860.66737 Length: 18.79 East 5854.11575 Length: 16.38 East 5840.61640 Length: 29.27 East 5813.58702 Page 1 Line Course: N 49-12-32 W North: 5304.32757 Line Course: S 54-15-55 W North: 5284.73288 Line Course: S 79-51-02 W North: 5272.16107 boundary calcs.txt Length: 8.64 East 5807.04229 Length: 33.55 East 5779.80814 Length: 71.34 East 5709.58242 Perimeter: 342.32 Area: 1,835 sq. ft. 0.04 acres Parcel name: 62 New North: 4722.16107 East : 6134.58242 Curve Length: 206.48 Radius: 390.21 Delta: 30-19-05 Tangent: 105.72 Chord: 204.08 Course: N 23-42-08 W Course In: N 51-08-19 E Course Out: S 81-27-24 W RP North: 4966.99324 East 6438.42622 End North: 4909.02543 East 6052.54596 Line Course: S 89-59-35 E Length: 175.67 North: 4909.00414 East 6228.21397 Line Course: S 89-59-35 E Length: 178.91 North: 4908.98245 East 6407.12397 Line Course: S 00-21-15 E Length: 45.00 North: 4863.97894 East 6407.40216 Line Course: S 78-06-39 W..Length:.109.20 North: 4841.48190 East 6300.54590 Line;. Course: S 29--12-20 -W .. ,ength 40.03: `:North: 4806.54030 'East'':' 6281.01326 Line Course: S 15-36-35 E Length :°...19.11 North: 4788.13171 East 6286.15639 Line Course: S 20-24-29 W Length: 1.40 North: 4766.81735 East 6285.66737 Line Course: S 20-24-29 W Length: 18.79 North: 4769.20815 East 6279.11575 Line Course: S 55-28-44 W Length: 16.38 North: 4759.92302 East 6265.61640 Line Course: S 67-24-54 W Length: 29.27 North: 4748.68006 East : 6238.58702 Line Course: N 49-12-32 W Length: 8.64 North: 4754.32757 East : 6232.04229 Line Course: S 54-15-55 W Length: 33:55 North: 4734.73288 East : 6204.80814 Line Course: S 79-51-02 W Length: 71.34 North: 4722.16107 East : 6134.58242 Perimeter: 953.79 Area: 41,848 sq. ft. 0.96 acres Parcel name: 62 TO 61 North: 5336.81735 Line Course: N 20-24-29 E North: 5338.13171 Line Course: N 15-36-35 W North: 5356.54030 Line Course: N 29-12-20 E North: 5391.48190 Line Course: N 78-06-39 E North: 5413.97894 Line Course: S 00-21-15 E North: 5388.97945 East : 6285.66737 Length: 1.40 East 6286.15639 Length: 19.11 East 6281.01326 Length: 40.03 East 6300.54590 Length: 109.20 East 6407.40216 Length: 25.00 East 6407.55669 Page 2 boundary calcs.txt Line Course: S 66-49-54 W Length: 132.58 North: 5336.81735 East : 6285.66737 Perimeter: 327.33 Area: 4,547 sq. ft. 0.10 acres Page 3 - ' L LEGAL DESCRIPTION NEW LOT 62 OPW JOB 2012051 ALL OF THAT PORTION OF LOTS 62 AND 61 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST", A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62, AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE, A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON WITH THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 61, THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY, ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, WHICH HAS A RADIUS OF 390.21 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 300l 9'05", WITH A RADIAL LINE IN OF N 51 °08' 19" E AND A RADIAL LINE OUT OF S 81 °27'24" W, AN ARC LENGTH OF 206.48 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S' 89°59'35" E, ALONG' -THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT .62, A - DIS.TANCE OF - 3 75.67 FEET;TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 61ANDTVv HE SOU�,HEST,.CORNER ... _ -..'OF LOT 64; ::._: _ THENCE S 89059'35" E, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 62, A DISTANCE OF 178.91 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S 0002115" E, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 62, A DISTANCE OF 45.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 78006'39" W, A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 29012'20" W, A DISTANCE OF 40.03 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 15036'35" E, A DISTANCE OF 19.11 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 20024'29" W, A DISTANCE OF 1.40 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ORIGINAL LOT LINE COMMON TO SAID LOTS 62 AND 61; THENCE CONTINUING S 20-24-29" W, A DISTANCE OF 18.79 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 55028'44" W, A DISTANCE OF 16.38 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 67024'54" W, A DISTANCE OF 29.27 FEET TO A POINT; Page 1 of 2 THENCE N 49012'32" W, A DISTANCE OF 8.64 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 54015'55" W, A DISTANCE OF 33.55 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 79051'02" W, A DISTANCE OF 71.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTARgNG: 41,850 SQUARE FEET. CM:cm August 27, 2012 G:\OPW Survcying jobs\20 1 2\05 1 \Ncw lot 62.wpd Page 2 of 2 -_�) 663 NORTH SCALE: 1 " = 50' �J \ LOT 59 NEW LOT 62 AREA = 41,850 SQ. FT. LOT 64 BOA j� j 61 ® COPYRIGHT OPW SURVEYING, LLC 12012 OPW SURVEYING, L.L.C. _ 7135 N. Skyway Mve EXHIBIT OF NEW LOT J62 Tucson, Ar120nA 85718 SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST Phone (520) 680-1588 OPW JOB NO. 2012051 LEGAL DESCRIPTION NEW LOT 61 OPW JOB NO.2012051 ALL OF THAT PORTION OF LOTS 61 AND 62 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST", A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA,MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 61, AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE, A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON WITH THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62, THENCE N 79051'02" E, A DISTANCE OF 71.34 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 54015'55" E, A DISTANCE OF 33.55 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 49012'32" E, A DISTANCE OF.8.64 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE. N 67024'54". E,-A DIS.TANCE:OF 29R27..FEET:-TO A POINT, THENCE N 55028'44" E, A DISTANCE OF 16.38 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 20024'29" E, A DISTANCE OF 18.79 FEET TO A POINT ON THE OR] GINAL LOT LINE COMMON TO SAID LOTS 61 AND 62; THENCE CONTINUING N 20-24-29" E, A DISTANCE OF 1.40 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 15036'35" W, A DISTANCE OF 19.11 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 29012'20" E, A DISTANCE OF 40.03 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 78006'39" E, A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S 0002FI5" E, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO THE ORIGINAL NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 61; THENCE S 00021'l5" E, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 61, A DISTANCE OF 248.94 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 80000'00" W, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 61, A DISTANCE OF 180.30 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID MARNE PLACE; Page l of 2 THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY, ALONG A NON -TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, WHICH HAS A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 104051'44", WITH A RADIAL LINE IN OF N 71 °53'35" W AND A RADIAL LINE OUT OF N 03014-41" E, AN ARC LENGTH OF 109.81 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY, ALONG A REVERSE CURVE TO THE RIGHT, WHICH HAS A RADRJS OF 60.00 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47053'38", AN ARC LENGTH OF 50.15 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 41,720 SQ. FT. CM:cm August 27, 2012 G:\OPW Surveying jobs\2012\051\New lot 61.wpd Page 2 of 2 V m � LOT 63 LO -f NORTH SCALE: 1" =50' L 0 1- 5q NEW LOT 62 lb7- OR���O �\ 61 P.O.B. GPRP65— k- I V NEW LOT 61 AREA 41,720 SQ.FT. CE LOT 60 I' (D COPYRIGHT OPW SURVEYING, LLC 12012 OPW SURVEYING, L.L.C. 7135 N. Skyway Drive EXHIBIT OF NEW LOT 61 Tucson, Arizona 85710 SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES — EAST Phone (520) 900-1568 OPW JOB NO. 2012051 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR MINOR PLAT / DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHANGES OR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS Changes creating new lots in an approved final plat or development plan must apply for a revision to the final plat or development plan. Changes creating new lots in unsubdivided parcels must follow the check list for minor land divisions. Applications for lot combos can be found on line at www.asr.co.pima.az.us Click on the information bar at the top on Deeds Splits Maps and then go to combo. Complete Pima County application for lot combo and return to the Town of Oro Valley for processing. Examples of minor plat changes are: • Shift of a common lot line Change to a no -access easement Change to no build areas (with at least a 1:1 trade that creates a better open space element) Small change to the configuration of a building on a development plan. Scrivener's Error; A mistake or omission which is not the result of a legislative decision. Examples are: incorrect recordation of Council conditions, failure to include standards and typically expected information on a plat or plan, and any mistake in placing information on a plat. (Note: If the mistake was a legislative mistake [made by the Council] it must be returned to the Council for correction). Minor changes must meet the following criteria: o Meets all code requirements and plat/plan notes o No increase in the number of lots o No decrease to open space o Benefits the town and the environment, if applicable o Not controversial o No increase in negative impacts on neighboring properties o Approved by the neighborhood association, if appropriate. o Street name and address changes must first start with Pima County addressing. Submittal requirements: The applicant must submit the following to the Development Coordinators (DC). a. Completed application. b. Six copies of the legal description of the proposed change. c. Three 24" x 36" scalable copy of maps with registrant's seal (Please submit with using the "pima county fold". d. Six copies of the maps of area to be affected (before and after changes with enough of the surrounding area to locate the change) 8 Y2" X 11" format only. Pima County recorder will not accept larger documents. e. Letter from parcel owner/owner's approving change J f. One Copy of boundary closure calculations g. Two copies of conveyance deeds if property will be added or subtracted to lots and .conveyed to other parcel owner. h. Fees Mayes, Patty To: Joan Hills Subject: RE: Shift in common lot line-9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place Attachments: eng-mld-01-20120924.doc Im eng-mid-01-201 3924.doc (49 KB. Mrs. Hills, Your timing is perfect. I just received some comments about your file and needed to contact you. I do apologize that the review took so many days to complete. The lot line adjustment is reviewed by two departments, Zoning and Engineering. The new documents are in compliance with Zoning. No more setback issues. Everything is very clear. Your surveyor did a great job! Our Engineering department reviewed the plans and they did have some comments. I attached their review letter to this email and you should share the letter with the surveyor. There was really only one minor correction and the other comments are basically asking for original documents. We reviewed the plans from an email. Once the correction, comment 4 on the attached letter, is resolved the originals will need to be submitted so we can officially get things recorded and plats changed. You may have some questions about comment 3 on the attached letter which asks for a deed to transfer the property. Even though you are not changing ownership, each lot needs to have this deed conveying the new parts of the property to the correct lot. Check with your surveyor if he can make one for you or a title company can also make one. Another option is the Pima County's Recorders office sells blank copies of conveyance deeds and warranty deeds. I think they sell them for $3.00 a piece. They used to have off -site places to purchase them if you don't want to drive downtown. They will simply sell the blank documents and you would need to have someone fill in the legal parts. Again, your surveyor did a great job. These are the best documents you have submitted! Please don't feel discouraged with these final few additional steps. This project is very close to being completed. I will be out of Town for a few days, but the name and number of the Engineer who reviewed the plans is on the attached letter. He can answer your questions or your surveyor can also give him a call. Thank you, Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) -----Original Message ----- From: Joan Hills [mailto: Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 11:12 AM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: Shift in common lot line--9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place Good morning, Ms Hayes. Just checking --do you have everything you need to advance the process of getting the lot line recorded? Take care of yourself! Joan Hills 1 1 c ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hayes, Patty" <phayes@orovalleyaz.gov> To: "Joan Hills" < Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Legal description Mrs. Hills, It's good to hear from you. I received your email and I'll take at documents and get back with you soon. Thank you, Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) -----Original Message ----- From: Joan Hills (mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 11:21 AM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: Fw: Legal description Dear Patty, It's been a while but Chris Morrison, the surveyor at OPW Surveying, has sent me the legal descriptions needed to record the new common boundary for Lots 61 & 62, Shadow Mountain Estates --East. I know he had a frantic summer with several huge on -going jobs but I also knew that he never forgot me. I thought it might be easiest to just forward his e-mail to you with his request that you take a look to see if they meet your requirements. It's my understanding that he was in contact with you whenever he had a question so I hope the attachment appears satisfactory to you. I look forward to hearing from you. Meanwhile, do your best to stay cool! Thanks, Joan Hills 544-2535 ----- Original Message ----- From: "OPW Surveying" <opwsurveying@comcast.net> To: "Joan Hills" < Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 11:07 AM Subject: Legal description > Joan Hills, > Once again, I'd like to thank you for your patience with my (suddenly) > busy schedule. > Here are the legal descriptions for the conveyances from 62 to 61, 61 > to 62, the final lot 61 and the final lot 62 descriptions. > I think at this point it would help if you could send them to Patty > Hayes and ask if she could take a look to see if they meet her > requirements as set forth in her previous letter. (I don't think > there is anything missing, but if she's willing, it would be nice to > have another set of eyes looking at the prints to > verify.) N -1 > Or#ce she approves, I'll UL-&p and sign originals and deliver them to > you. At that time, I'll also set the corners along the new dividing > line between the lots. > I'm still drafting the record of survey, which I'll record when the > conveyances are finalized, as I'd like to include the recording > information. > Thanks Joan. Call or e-mail if you have any questions. > (hope the dogs and birds are doing okay in this hot -hot -hot August) > Chris Morrison > OPW Surveying, LLC > 7135 N. Skyway Drive > Tucson, AZ 85718 > 520.990.1568 3 I' Hayes, Patty From: Joan Hills Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 11:21 AM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: Fw: Legal description Attachments: Lots 61 and 62 legals.pdf • -.A L Lots 61 and 62 legals.pdf (357... Dear Patty, It's been a while but Chris Morrison, the surveyor at OPW Surveying, has sent me the legal descriptions needed to record the new common boundary for Lots 61 & 62, Shadow Mountain Estates --East. I know he had a frantic summer with several huge on -going jobs but I also knew that he never forgot me. I thought it might be easiest to just forward his e-mail to you with his request that you take a look to see if they meet your requirements. It's my understanding that he was in contact with you whenever he had a question so I hope the attachment appears satisfactory to you. I look forward to hearing from you. Meanwhile, do your best to stay cool! Thanks, Joan Hills 544-2535 ----- Original Message ----- From: "OPW Surveying" <opwsurveying@comcast.net> To: "Joan Hills" < Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 11:07 AM Subject: Legal description > Joan Hills, > Once again, I'd like to thank you for your patience with my (suddenly) > busy schedule. > Here are the legal descriptions for the conveyances from 62 to 61, 61 to > 62, the final lot 61 and the final lot 62 descriptions. > I think at this point it would help if you could send them to Patty > Hayes and ask if she could take a look to see if they meet her > requirements > as set forth in her previous letter. (I don't think there is anything > missing, but if she's willing, > it would be nice to have another set of eyes looking at the prints to > verify.) > Once she approves, I'll stamp and sign originals and deliver them to > you. At that time, I'll also set the corners along the new dividing > line between the lots. > I'm still drafting the record of survey, which I'll record when the > conveyances are finalized, as I'd like to include the recording > information. 1 > Thanks Joan. Call or e-mall if you have any questions. >'(hope the dogs and birds are doing okay in this hot -hot -hot August) > Chris Morrison > OPW Surveying, LLC > 7135 N. Skyway Drive > Tucson, AZ 85718 > 520.990.1568 2 i F.. r 64 I I j I I NORTH SCALE: 1 " = 50' LOT 62rol �0A �R� 0 61 / LOB I \ P.O.B. CST 59 AREA = 1 0 1,835 SQ.FT. LL- Z LOT 61 I . I I I I l! .. O T 60 it 1 / 1 0 COPYRIGHT OPW SURVEYING. LLC 12012 OPW SURVEYING, L.L.C. 7135 N. Skyway Drive EXHIBIT OF CONVEYANCE FROM LOT 61 TO LOT 62 Tucson, Arizona 85718 SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES — EAST Phone (520) 990-1568 OPW JOB NO. 2012051 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONVEYANCE FROM LOT 61 TO LOT 62 OPW JOB 2012051 ALL OF THAT PORTION OF LOT 61 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST", A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 61, AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE, A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON WITH THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 61, THENCE N 66-49-54" E, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 61, A DISTANCE OF 164.34 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 20024'29" W, A DISTANCE OF 18.79 FEET TO A POINT; TIjENCE_S 55°28'44" W, A DISTANCE,QF 16.38 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 67024'54" W, A -DISTANCE OF 29.27 FEET TO A POINT THENCE N 49° 12'32" W, A DISTANCE OF 8.64 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 54015'55" W, A DISTANCE OF 33.55 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 7905 P02" W, A DISTANCE OF 71.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING: 1,835 SQUARE FEET. cM:cm August 27, 2012 G:kOPW Surveying jobs120121051%1 to 62.wpd Page 1 of I I LOT 6 i I-OT 64 NORTH SCALE: 1" =50' LOT 62 PT. OF COMMENCEMENT AREA = 4,545 SQ. FT. C�k\Npi��NE =:. . �j�p� 6� _ T.P.0.6. -.. ` LOT 61 / t i i` 1 " -- E WA y LOT 66 i ® COPYRIGHT OPW SURVEYING, LLC `2012 OPW SURVEYING,_ L.L_.C. 7135 N. Skyway Drive EXHIBIT OF CONVEYANCE FROM LOT 62 TO LOT 61 Tumon, Ari2ons 85718 SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES — EAST Phone (520) 990-1568 OPW JOB NO. 2012051 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONVEYANCE FROM LOT 62 TO LOT 61 OPW JOB NO.2012051 ALL OF THAT PORTION OF LOT 62 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST", A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62, AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE, A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON WITH THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 61, THENCE N 66049'54" E, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 62, A DISTANCE OF 1.64.34 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N 20024'29" E, A DISTANCE OF 1.40.FEET TO A POINT; i THENCE X.15°36'35" W, A DISTANCE OF 19.11 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 29° 12'20" E, A DISTANCE OF 40.03 FEET TO A POINT; =' THENCE N 78006'39" E, A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S 00021'15" E, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET TO THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S 66049'54" W, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 62, A DISTANCE OF 132.58 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 4,545 SQ. FT. CM:cm August 27, 2012 G:\OPW Surveying jobs12012\051\62 to 61.wpd Page 1 of I NORTH SCALE: t " = 50' I�\ LOT 59 63 NEW LOT 62 AREA = 41,850 SQ.FT. LOT 64 L�1� rol j / oR\ \o I Q NEW LOT 61 I I I ( I � �02 t� V ® COPYRIGHT OPW SURVEYING, LLC 12012 OPW SURVEYING, L.L.C. _ 7135 N. Skyway Drive EXHIBIT OF NEW LOT 62 Tucson, Arizona 8571E SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES — EAST Phone (520) 990-1568 OPW JOB NO. 2012051 4-1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION NEW LOT 62 OPW JOB 2012051 ALL OF THAT PORTION OF LOTS 62 AND 61 OF "SHADOW MOUNTAIN ESTATES - EAST", A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN BOOK 14 OF MAPS AND PLATS AT PAGE 93 IN THE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62, AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARNE PLACE, A PUBLIC STREET, COMMON WITH THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 61, THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY, ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, WHICH HAS A RADIUS OF 390.21 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 300l 9'05", WITH A RADIAL LINE IN OF N 51008' 19" E AND A RADIAL LINE OUT OF S 81 °27'24" W, AN ARC LENGTH OF 206.48 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; i THENCE S 8V59'35'.' E, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT _62, A -:DISTANCE OF 175.67 FEET TO THE -SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 63 AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 64; THENCE S 89059'35" E, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 62, A DISTANCE OF 178.91 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 62; THENCE S 0002I'l5" E, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAI.D LOT 62, A DISTANCE OF 45.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 78006'39" W, A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 29012'20" W, A DISTANCE OF 40.03 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 15036'35" E, A DISTANCE OF 19.11 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 20024'29" W, A DISTANCE OF 1.40 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ORIGINAL LOT LINE COMMON TO SAID LOTS 62 AND 61; THENCE CONTINUING S 20024129" W, A DISTANCE OF 18.79 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 55028'44" W, A DISTANCE OF 16.38 FEET TO A .POINT; THENCE S 67024'54" W, A DISTANCE OF 29.27 FEET TO A POINT; Page Iof2 THENCE N 49012'32" W, A DISTANCE OF 8.64 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 54015'55" W, A DISTANCE OF 33.55 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 79051'02" W, A DISTANCE OF 71.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING: 41,850 SQUARE FEET. CM -.cm August 27, 2012 G:\OPW Survcying jobs\2012\051\Ncw lot 62.wpd Page 2 of 2 It Hayes, Patty To: OPW Surveying Subject: RE: Joan Hills 9120 N. Marne Place Chris, In Oro Valley pools and spas must meet the 15' side yard setback just like the buildings. The fence doesn't matter. Fences can be on property lines if needed. Other zoning districts have smaller side yard setbacks but hers is 151. Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) -----Original Message ----- From: OPW Surveying [mailto:opwsurveying@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:53 PM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: Re: Joan Hills 9120 N. Marne Place Patty Hayes, Thanks for the quick answer. However, it raises another question with me. I thought the 15' setback related only to the residence, not to the improvements, specifically the pool and spa. Is that not the case? I realize that this is in Oro Valley and most of the houses I survey are in Pima County or the City of Tucson, but I don't recall the 15' requirement in either of those. Or is it simply my failing memory? Thanks again. Chris Morrison OPW Surveying, LLC 7135 N. Skyway Drive Tucson, AZ 85718 520.990.1568 On 7/18/2012 12:46 PM, Hayes, Patty wrote: > Chris, > The 15' foot setback is to the building structure (wall/foundation) of the garage. There can be a small amount of roof overhang. Something like 12" - 18". Also the other house, pool and spa (to waters edge) have to meet the 15' side yard setback. > A conveyance deed transfer the new area of each lot to each lot owner. I know it happens to be the same person in this case but the County requires this document acknowledging that XX number square feet of land was conveyed to each of the lots. > Yes, 26" was supposed to be 36". Thanks for catching that. Please also include 8 1/2" x 11" copies as well. The maps are your drawings showing the new lots with their new dimensions and setbacks shown. > I hope this answered your questions. > I'm glad Mrs. Hills has someone working on this project. > Thanks, > Patty Hayes > Zoning Plans Examiner > Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley > 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) > -----Original Message----- * From: OPW Surveying[mailto:opwsurveying@comcast.net] > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 12:12 PM 1 Page 1 of 3 Hayes, Patty From: Daines, Chad Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:15 PM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: RE: Question I think your answer to #4 provides the path to success. They cannot replat the lot and leave any of the structures non -compliant. The replat will need to accommodate the required setbacks for the buildings and other structures. The applicant will also need to address access through an easement over the driveway. If you want to discuss further, come on over! Thanks Chad Daines, AICP 11000 N. La Canada Drive, Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 Phone (520) 229-4896 cdainesCa)orovallevaz.gov www.orovalleyDIS.com From: Hayes, Patty Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:47 AM To: Daines, Chad Subject: FW: Question Chad, More info about the email I sent a few minutes ago. Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) From: Hayes, Patty Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:46 AM To: Andrews, Joe Cc: Rosen, Tobin Subject: RE: Question Joe, Answers: 1. Page 1 of 3 Hayes, Patty From: Andrews, Joe Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 12:42 PM To: Hayes, Patty Cc: Rosen, Tobin Subject: RE: Question Number 4 is your answer then, they need to reconfigure the driveway. Joseph N. Andrews Chief Civil DeputyTown Attorney 11, 000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 Phone: (520)-229-4763 Fax: (520)-229-4774 "For every minute you are angry you lose sixty seconds of happiness." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Caring for our heritage, our community, our future. This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone. From: Hayes, Patty Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:46 AM To: Andrews, Joe Cc: Rosen, Tobin Subject: RE: Question Joe, Answers: 1. Moving the lots lines, as proposed, will still leave lot 62 out of compliance with our required setbacks. Lot 61 will be okay because they can still maintain required setbacks. This leaves one non -conforming lot. 2. The house was built while under the County's jurisdiction in 1969. The pool and spa were built under the Town's jurisdiction in 1987 (after researching some fuzzy records). 3. No. Neither the County or Town allow houses or pools to be built next to or over a property line in this zoning district. I assume it was bad surveying and site planning! 4. Yes, the new lot lines can most likely be moved to allow compliance with current setbacks but a large portion of the existing driveway for lot 61 would be on lot 62. 1 suppose they could create an easement for the driveway. Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 06/12/2012 Page 2 of 3 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) From: Andrews, Joe Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:17 AM To: Hayes, Patty Cc: Rosen, Tobin Subject: RE: Question Patty. Everything was fine until they started to work toward selling the second lot. What I mean is that they could have combined the lots into one and there would have been two houses on a single lot (ignoring the single family issue) since they did not combine the two lots and they remained under common ownership no one complained. What they are now asking the Town to do is now quick fix the problem because they developed across the lot lines and it is now creating a setback problem created by the property owner because they want to sell the second lot. Here are the issues: 1. If moving the lot line maintains the same zoning setback violation then it is not a fix and the properties will still be a zoning violation correct? Then we cannot legally allow the line to be moved under the current conditions thereby creating 2 non -conforming lots. 2. Did the Town permit the development of these properties over the lot lines in the first place? 3. Were the properties ever confirming in the County? 4. Can the lot ever conform under current zoning? In reality it appears that the solution may be for the owner to rezone and then move the lot line or to obtain a variance that would allow the lot line to be moved and this is based solely on the information you provided. However, there are a few questions outstanding that could change this. I hope that this is helpful. Joseph N. Andrews Chief Civil DeputyTown Attorney 11, 000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona 85 73 7 Phone: (520)-229-4763 Fax: (520)-229-4774 "For every minute you are angry you lose sixty seconds of happiness." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Caring for our heritage, our community, our future. This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone. From: Hayes, Patty 06/12/2012 Page 3 of 3 Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:33 AM To: Andrews, Joe Subject: Question Joe, I have been asked by David Williams to check with you about this issue. One person owns lots 61 and 62 in the Shadow Mountain Estates subdivision. Both lots have houses and other structures there were built many years ago. The owner lives on lot 61 and has been renting lot 62 for several years to tenants. The owner now wishes to sell lot 62. A property survey found that the house, pool and spa on lot 62 was built over the property line by a couple of feet onto lot 61. She has submitted for a lot line adjustment to try to correct the problem. Her new proposed lot lines keep the house, pool, spa on lot 62 and her own driveway on lot 61. The problem is, the house, pool and spa will not meet today's setback requirements of 15'. Can we approve new lot lines that do not meet current setback standards? Since the house, pool and spa were never legally built in the right place to begin with, can we continue this non-conformance with less than allowed setbacks? Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) 06/ 12/2012 Page 1 of 3 Hayes, Patty From: Rosen, Tobin Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:48 AM To: Hayes, Patty; Andrews, Joe Subject: RE: Question It sounds like scenario 4 is the way to go then. Much better to have an easement than a non -conforming lot. Tobin Rosen Town Attorney Town of Oro Valley 11000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 (520) 229-4760 Fax: (520) 229-4774 Caring for our heritage, our community, our future. Note: This message is attorney -client privileged and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender of this message by return e-mail, or by telephone at (520) 229-4760. From: Hayes, Patty Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:46 AM To: Andrews, Joe Cc: Rosen, Tobin Subject: RE: Question Joe, Answers: 1. Moving the lots lines, as proposed, will still leave lot 62 out of compliance with our required setbacks. Lot 61 will be okay because they can still maintain required setbacks. This leaves one non -conforming lot. 2. The house was built while under the County's jurisdiction in 1969. The pool and spa were built under the Town's jurisdiction in 1987 (after researching some fuzzy records). 3. No. Neither the County or Town allow houses or pools to be built next to or over a property line in this zoning district. I assume it was bad surveying and site planning! 4. Yes, the new lot lines can most likely be moved to allow compliance with current setbacks but a large portion of the existing driveway for lot 61 would be on lot 62. 1 suppose they could create an easement for the driveway. Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-2294819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) 06/12/2012 Page 2 of 3 From: Andrews, Joe Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:17 AM To: Hayes, Patty Cc: Rosen, Tobin Subject: RE: Question Patty. Everything was fine until they started to work toward selling the second lot. What I mean is that they could have combined the lots into one and there would have been two houses on a single lot (ignoring the single family issue) since they did not combine the two lots and they remained under common ownership no one complained. What they are now asking the Town to do is now quick fix the problem because they developed across the lot lines and it is now creating a setback problem created by the property owner because they want to sell the second lot. Here are the issues: 1. If moving the lot line maintains the same zoning setback violation then it is not a fix and the properties will still be a zoning violation correct? Then we cannot legally allow the line to be moved under the current conditions thereby creating 2 non -conforming lots. 2. Did the Town permit the development of these properties over the lot lines in the first place? 3. Were the properties ever confirming in the County? 4. Can the lot ever conform under current zoning? In reality it appears that the solution may be for the owner to rezone and then move the lot line or to obtain a variance that would allow the lot line to be moved and this is based solely on the information you provided. However, there are a few questions outstanding that could change this. I hope that this is helpful. Joseph N. Andrews Chief Civil DeputyTown Attorney 11, 000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona 85 73 7 Phone: (520)-229-4763 Fax: (520)-229-4774 "For every minute you are angry you lose sixty seconds of happiness." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Caring for our heritage, our community, our future. This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone. From: Hayes, Patty Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:33 AM To: Andrews, Joe Subject: Question 06/12/2012 Page 3 of 3 Joe, have been asked by David Williams to check with you about this issue. One person owns lots 61 and 62 in the Shadow Mountain Estates subdivision. Both lots have houses and other structures there were built many years ago. The owner lives on lot 61 and has been renting lot 62 for several years to tenants. The owner now wishes to sell lot 62. A property survey found that the house, pool and spa on lot 62 was built over the property line by a couple of feet onto lot 61. She has submitted for a lot line adjustment to try to correct the problem. Her new proposed lot lines keep the house, pool, spa on lot 62 and her own driveway on lot 61. The problem is, the house, pool and spa will not meet today's setback requirements of 15'. Can we approve new lot lines that do not meet current setback standards? Since the house, pool and spa were never legally built in the right place to begin with, can we continue this non-conformance with less than allowed setbacks? Patty Hayes Zoning Plans Examiner Development & Infrastructure Services Department Town of Oro Valley 520-229-4819 (office) 520-742-1022 (fax) 06/12/2012 IUWI�WY���UIII��gaR4 225120620 SHADOW Mbu WTA I N • i(! ED ESTATES eA57oar 3 g'/ LOT (0 L RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY RECORD.CARD AREA CODE s P t E C D 1 LT I 1 R I ! C T BASIS CODE UNITS 9140 N, ('M/aywc PLt CA 1\J-1 � W U A-T ION (AkP ANNUAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY ne vAl Ue< Q 19 1 Change /1 Cp cord ImrrovemenK $ lorol ENT Properly CI9Le As,w—'.d Volvo T' Assesard Volvo loud v to 19 ENT 19 ENT s s 19 ENT 1 g ENT Burld.ngs and Imprpvemenls /� 1' / ! v c S 10 19 [AT Nnvse�pld Furnnhnyl to __. ENT 19 ENT /gyp TOTAL VALUE 0/Jo s i 17 ENT fef Y1LE1 AMU AREA OII $.It Improvemenn Ut.lrhts Zonrnp Ne.9hbwlr9od Poved Srrees (rly Woler Single Fom,ly Improving plots Topped Sbfel Well Two F—ly Sloec Grovelled S,—, Sewer Alvlli Fomrly Decl,mn A Ummprwed Sepnc Tons Bvsness gl;ghred Pvbl,c WolLs Nowrol Gos Com pl Curbs and Gvners Ces.Pool InduUnol Allet L. P. Cws No Alley Elecrnoly Topo9rophy LAND VALUE CALCULATION OATE OF APPRAISAL MEASURED BY LISTED BY PRICED BY REVIEWED BY DATE POSTED BY DATE MEN iiii ��:�s■■■�■ ■■■■� ■■sue NOM ON: MEMO] IMMENEW ■■■■i ■■■■ E■■■! MIMMEWEMI MONEINEW ■■■■I ■ME■] iiiii iiii; ■■■■] ■■■E! ■■■■! ■■■■I ■M■■ ■■■E! ■■■■� ■■E■� ■EEO mgmm�MMM ■E■E! ■■■E .. ■■E■! ■■■■] ■■■■! ■■EMI ■■■E! ■■■■� ■■EMI • ■■■■I . ■■■■�■■E■�■■o! GROUND FUN SSETCH (INDICATE NUMBER STORIESI �_---� __—__� __---� DATE OF CONSTIUCTION ITEM AR. S.— wit. AND oBS. Ay (Nor viol D•p •t�eeon) ��; v h.vwlCwdiaan __S Mpd.rnil.liOn IMrnual __3 iorol D•Dr Ncmion �3 NOCondinon �R MCIAL OBSOLESCENCE locolbn (Arno No. i Orh., _ 3 lorol SP•uoI Olw4.a.nc•__3 F.nol N•r Cond„io _3 SPECIAL NOTES Acoo Sy. Fl. I R.pbc• Vol - TOTAL IE REPLACEMENT COST AND FINAL VALUE ITEM AREA OR UNIT TOTAL NO. QUANTITY COST BASE REPLACEMENT COST S VOIo• FINAL NET CONDITION FINAL VALUE MAIN BUILDING S OTHER S OTHER IMPROVEMENTS E TOTAL BUILDINGS AND S IMPROVEMENTS III 11 • CLASSIFICATION NO. 3 r•.._e_ • a a t ,TTT STORIES I I ROOMS 1 3 NO. APTS. INTERIOR FINISH ELECTRICAL yI-o M. Type 8: Use Construction Quality of Construction Unfinished Wiring )( Single Dwl . Frame Grade Piaat ered Fixtures Two Fam. WwIR. k Solid Masonry ♦ Excellent Drywall BASEMENT Three Fam. Dwlg. Block 3 Good Wallboard None Four Fam. Dwlg. Brick Veneer Fair Plywood Plain Full Unfinished Prefab. I Minimum Plywood Detailed Part: Unfinished Hardwood Panel Arer potty Pine Part• FinishedBATH �Fl WALLS Area: Sq. Grade 4 3 21 1 1 Grade ♦ 3 2 1 Metal Tile Concrete Floor Sq. Ft. FOUNDATION ROOFING Plastic Tile Other otSq. Ft. Concrete' Wood Shingles Ceramic Tile GRADE RATE Cemt. Blk. Asphalt Shingles Plastered Description: Stone Asbestos Shingles Drywall 1( Brick Built Up T. h G. HEATING i COOLING Piers Tile Hot Air Gray. ATTIC None Slate Hot Air Forced X Unfinished EXTERIOR WALLS Metal Steam Finished A. Fr.Wd. or Comp. Siding Prepared Roll Hot Water Area: Sq. Ft. B. Fr. Brk. Veneer Insul. Ceiling Radle nt GRADE RATE C. Blk. 8•• Painted Other Floor Ft m. Description: D. Blk. 8•• Stucco Wall Furn. E. Brit. Is Slit. or Brit Elec. Panel F. Native Stone Refrigeration G. Slump Block FLOORS 0 Evop. Cooler Ly, PORCHES" H. Adobe Wd. Joist Fireplace k Number: Open lnsul. Walls Sub. Floor O. S. Chimney Number: Closed Other Softwood Flmg. PLUMBING Frame Hardwood Flmg. Base Mason Concrete 2 Fis. Bath Terraces Resilient Fling. 3 Fix. Bath Patio Carpet water closet ROOF Lavotory PHYSICAL CONDITION Flat BATH FLOORS 'Tub ♦ 1 3 11 Shed Ceramic Tila Shower Stall Other Items LIT- JZrF_0- Gable Resilient Tile Kit. Sink Hip Linoleum Lndry. Tubs Gambrel Hot Water Htr. Other Disposal j GROUND PLAN SKETCH (INDICATE NUMBER STORIES) S� C � Si. o I� i' I1�9 i O � �a•3 t FRONT t OTHER ASS Grade Walls Floor Roof I Dimensions Zziz: sW ar_ r-Aw ter— at�stsa ass�i ..•u w ttttt■tttrrr .ill — /�/��"MMIM �R�I�R7 Ews EaEi I_EE�■R �■�� �I�L L�(�I •r',�' JJ I�\ DATE OF CONSTRUCTION Date Age G Source _Tarr Clarcifloft,orrsa DEPRECIATION AND OBSOLESCE C Age (Normal Depreciation) �• Physical Condition 7 Modernization (Minus) '• Total Depreciation 7 Net Condition 7. G f� 4 �! SPECIAL OBSOLESCENCE ocatlon (Area No. _) 7 Other 7. Total Special Obsole acence 7. Final Net Condition SPECIAL NOTES: Area Sq. Ft. I Replace Value s �nv17 D' 9"'7 L Total Value REPLACEMENT COST AND FINAL VALUE , IM OE= IWJ --NFNIX II JWWJ�l_�it/� WEN 42III k%M PilMyF/" ��IIIIIIIIIIIII♦�. —_ IIIIIIIIIIIIII'- -_ IIIIIIIIIIII♦�'. REPLACEMENT COST S / �► FINAL VALUE BUILDING -S OTHERMAIN OTHER IMPROVEMENTS S TOTAL BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS F Form lot-3 77� 9BIBBB9BB�� INIII�IIIIIIII__= oaa� -- �. , __ ___ .: �* _ _ 4 - �. �� , . r N �, , ,� .; �.. p+4 '� N:.� r ply i � �T• 111 �� { » �� [ is i At OEM �r It i r Orb IMPK a ; ;r iD v O J c O .k w G3 0 Co 4 4c nj o r 1 30 tr O �� ca = f — �. J 54 57 �+.89.59'35'ow, jj t, 20 49 14.0 16 15& q� . p��� 9 CP r r � #1 8-17-2007 Mrs. Hills submitted the following for a lot line adjustment $500.00 check Exhibit E, legal description for lot 62, dated 1-24-1992 Exhibit D, legal description for lot 61, dated 1-24-1992 Exhibit C, hand drawn map showing lot changes Exhibit B, survey map lot 61, dated 11-5-1990 Exhibit A, partial copy of final plat Letter asking for lot line change recording, dated 8-17-2007 Application for lot line change #2 10-19-2007 Planning sent Mrs. Hills a letter requesting asking for more information because code compliance could not be met as proposed. #3 3-14-2008 Mrs. Hills submitted a letter with photos responding to the Town's Planning Division. #4 3-19-2008 Letter from Town to Mrs. Hills stating that a variance would be needed due to setback issues, if she wanted to continue. #5 3-21-2008 Letter from Mr. Hills stating she is out of town but is submitting the old survey showing the encroachments. #6 & #7 5-29-2012 Mrs. Hills emailed the Town through the "portal" asking to restart process. 5-30-2012 Email from staff stating we will re -start. #8 6-5-2012 Mrs. Hills emailed staff with photo of property. Page 1 of 1 Hayes, Patty From: Joan Hills Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 9:05 AM To: Hayes, Patty; Asper, Arinda Subject: 9140 N. Marne Place Attachments: IMG 0119.JPG Thank you both for helping me in the matter of my request of the shift in common lot line between 9120 & 9140 N. Marne Place. The attached photo may help you both understand my emotional investment in my request to grandfather (or designate as "non -conforming but legal") the lot line as defined in 1991 by the chain link and wrought iron fencing. It's not just a fence running through barren desert landscaping. I planted citrus, elm, palm, Heritage live oak, mesquite, acacia and ash trees along that fence line to create a visual screen between the pool and my house. If you grandfather the lot line, I will still bear the cost of getting whatever legal documents you require, and I will gladly do that. Please seriously consider my request to grandfather this lot line. Thank you, Joan Hills . 06/06/2012 1. it 4, Ff. 14 Page 1 of 2 Hayes, Patty From: Asper, Arinda Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 4:06 PM To: Hayes, Patty Subject: FW: Would appreciate your help Hi Patty, Please look over the below email and let me know if this is something you worked on previously. Also, please advise me on how (and if) we can help this lady. Thanks! Arinda Asper Senior Office Specialist Town Manager's Office Town of Oro Valley 11000 North La Canada Drive Oro Valley, AZ 85737 (520) 229-4713 aasper@orovalleyaz.gov From: Joan Hills [mailto:joanchills@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 5:48 PM To: Asper, Arinda Subject: Would appreciate your help Dear Arinda: Hello. My name is Joan Hills. I live at 9120 N. Marne Place in Oro Valley (Lot 61, Shadow Mountain Estates --East). I would appreciate your help and would like to come in to talk to you. It may help for me to describe my problem first and then perhaps you can find my file in the Oro Valley Planning Department to get further information. In 1990 my husband Jim and I were building our home on Lot 61. When the property was surveyed, we found that the adjoining property, Lot 62, had several encroachments onto Lot 61. Jim eventually bought Lot 62 and hired Bob Leek of Old Pueblo & Associates to survey and create a new lot line. The surveyor made the encroachments legal per the setback requirements in 1991 and we received legal descriptions for the two properties. A fencing company put up a wrought iron pool fence and a 5' chainlink fence between the two properties. I thought the new lot line was recorded but I found out by accident in 2007 that it was not. My husband was in the beginning stages of dementia in 1991 and passed away in 2003 after nine years in an adult care home. Therefore, trying to deal with this situation brings up all the anxiety, frustration and emotion of those awful years and makes this a very difficult issue for me. On August 16, 2007, 1 paid $500 and filed an application for a shift in the common lot line between 9120 (my residence) and 9140 N. Marne Place (a rental property for the past 20+ years). I thought it would be a simple procedure. On Oct. 19 Manny Lizarraga wrote saying the information submitted was not in compliance with current setback requirements and telling me to send five 24" X 36" scaled renderings showing original lot line, encroachments and line resulting from the shift to assure code compliance. 1 didn't do this, considering it a waste of money since he said setback requirements had changed and all the renderings in the world wouldn't change that. I started doing research on zoning variances and grandfathering. On February 25, 2008, in a phonecon with Manny, I requested a "legal but non -conforming" or "grandfather" variance. He didn't respond so on March 13, 1 sent a memo again requesting a variance since the fence had defined the properties for sixteen years. Furthermore, citrus, palm Heritage Live Oak, mesquite trees, elm trees, etc. had been planted against the fence line and had matured. 05/31 /2012 Page 2 of 2 Manny's March 19 letter referred me to Dee Widero. She and another lady came to the property. She was kind and helpful and told me that the fence would not have to be moved, that a surveyor could place stakes in (I think) two places (one in my driveway) and write legal descriptions and that this would allow the new lot line to be recorded. This is where I need your help. I'm now 69 years old and know 1 can procrastinate no longer. (Doesn't help-1 still get knots in my stomach.) Will you please let me come see you and advise me as to what course of action I should follow and how much it will cost? Thank you. Joan Hills 9120 N. Marne Place Oro Valley, AZ 85704 05/31/2012 Q LOT G 2 STD_ K4weAnl qN 51 D eNG 6tfftgtlPATIOwtiu.NGWjll."SrQiMuj �i'Col.� • r t j t t L Ha QoL SPA L-&— �FltintrlT Tb BE }IL=MoV>rD C-'Wo riT 1z4CfkOAan NZ t1 T r � N L07 GI .�t .I ►'DTI L ITS :PLAN 4 5"rAj� K W EATS >r R>:S 1 DE ft C(= LOT G2 . f CiJONIC-, f\IZCHITECT ro62(o E . Tip fl.ct t1E �/�Rpt✓ TU�Saut J,2. g 5-71 G. �oi) 2gss-3205 FES -2 Y C �/f, .0 7— / 3 May 17, 2009 Dee Widero Oro Valley Zoning Program 11000 N. La Canada Dr. Oro Valley, AZ 85737 Dear Ms. Widero: .l �V MAY 2 1 OWr--�.�....-._..,,tee Of Or 0 Valley I am out of state at present. However, as soon as I'm back in Oro Valley, I'll address the shift in common lot line of 9140 N. Marne Place so we can move the process to completion. Meanwhile, enclosed please find the second survey I told you about. It confirms the encroachments that existed in 1991 when my husband and I purchased the property. Sincerely, Joan Hills 9120 N. Marne Place Oro Valley, AZ 75704 � f j I P rR-TY LOT �02 i ��►1e I SDK v��hTN fL � NEW 6�1+14" i PA -no wtiu SPp Nr&WL M�/ lie Sq --- �eot, 'SPA CoL tP(G124AP44 AA (T TO BE FIL=MvVf�O TV B t (LT TV �N�AC-tt N� li 7 Bta Mh N MACE L07 GI . .1 W-TI AL Gi I` E :PLAN o� srA,K WEATHEF, RESIPEUC,5 LOT62 f r:'r o5 ®N P-Ct+ITEc1 f'L�,Nrle-P- I 6626 . Tf�Nc�tJ� U � iU�SoHh2. esm s �o�� 2a6-32os FES,27,1��, S�N., PETTE�SdON,WALi�EKT & ASSOC�SOR Engineering, Surveying & Planning, Inc. Paul Osborn, P.E. Arthur G. Petterson, R.L.S. Richard K. Walbert, A.I.C.P. March 13, 1991 �E.11VE.D 1991 P.O. Box 31330 6383 East Grant Road Tucson, Arizona 85751-1330 Phone: (602) 296-8544 FAX (602) 296-2356 TITLE LEGAL DEPARTNIU�T Mr. John K. Graham vice President/Regional Counsel First American Title Insurance Co. of America �cvv��rc &`k, l' ?�!*J 7 ...z,��� �1 r- 111 West Monroe Phoenix, AZ 85003 k�' `fit Re: Lots 61 & 62, Shadow Mountain Estates East OPW Project No. 91019slM Dear Mr. Graham:° As you requested, our firm has completed the survey of the lot line common to Lots 61 and 62 within Shadow Mountain Estates East. Although we found a very slight discrepancy in the location of the front pin, the resultant change in the lot line is essentially negligible. From the drawing you provided, completed by Mr. Settlemeyer, we determined the following differences: 1. Mr. Settlemeyer shows the garage encroaches 2.13 feet. We find the garage encroaches 2.10 feet. 2. Mr. Settlemeyer shows the spa encroaches 3.50 feet. We find the spa encroaches 3.15 feet. 3. tir. Set "u._emeyer sn..-as r �1_e poc? e^croach-s l,,,n We find the pool encroaches 0.90 feet. As you can see, we do agree that there are encroachments and, because the discrepancies are so minor, we have not spent the time and money to draw a result of the survey. If you do want a drawing, we will be happy to furnish one. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this survey, please contact myself or Mr. Bob Leek. Sincerely, OS RN ETT RSON WALBERT & ASSOCIATES ' MAY 2 12008 - Town of Oro Valle Paul Osborn ``—" y �PLI.EY qRi� TOWN OF ORO VALLEY 0 o COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Q 2 Planning and Zoning • Building Safety 11000 N. La Canada Drive, Oro Valley, AZ 85737 • 520 2294800 • Fax 520 742-1022 y Oro Valley Public Library A 1305 W. Naranja Drive, Oro Valley, AZ 85737 • (520) 229-5300 • Fax (520) 229-5319 Parks and Recreation UN D Eg� 680 W. Calle Concordia, Oro Valley, AZ 85737 • (520) 229-5050 • Fax (520) 797-2202 March 19, 2008 Joan C. Hills/Survivor of the Hills Trust 9140 N. Marne Place Oro Valley, AZ 85704 520.544.2535 Re: OV12-07-13, Shadow Mountain Estates east minor lot -line adjustment for lots 61 and 62. The properties are located in proximity to the south corner of Calle Concordia and Oracle Road. Dear Applicant: Thank you for submitting the information for this project. If you wish to pursue this lot line adjustment you would need to file an application for a variance on the side yard setback requirements with our Zoning Department. Dee Widero our Zoning Program Supervisor is very knowledgeable in that area. You may contact her for questions regarding variances (her card is attached). Based on a Formal Review, the information submitted is not in compliance with current Zoning Code setback requirements. The proposed plan does not appear to meet the side setback for an R1-36, Zoning District. Buildings and ancillary structures, such as pools must be fifteen (15') feet from the lot line. Please refer to our Zoning Code for information available online at www.townoforovalley.com. If you have any questions, please contact me. We look forward to the successful completion of this project. Sincerely, Manny Q. Lizarraga Planning Department 520.229.4814 Hizarraga@orovalleyaz.gov F:\OV\OV12\2007\12-07-13\comments 03192008.doc www.townoforovalley.com L I ib,u t e e ency ADT I , Oi action. *ALL DAT" Disclaimer: The To% guarantee that the i in this map is accui A use "As Is" with the etAd users ac FAF, n at the request of the user with the t it is 11 fed t correct q 1411 "UsOation.;and research purpose- 'ts uj -Apeci I A on 11 sponsibili drors. omissions, an(fdongevity o ill", "Ces. f errors, which may lude but are not limited the foil is areas and feature epicted by these maA`re approxi necessarily ace v at t r -and unreliable for deterrnina�olj gra i 0 clues are approximate ter surface el layers may not register correctly with each other. - AS:incorrect, incomplete. field. V- LL unidentifiable, Ji�-�AAM -- T.M-A documents may not be the most cu rr epict th, All data i t i S't qb p projections introdl -,e distortion by representing t he ir re surfaced ma Tr1is affect 9", WITH ALL FAULTALe 62 A MAR 1 3 20n MEMORANDUM From: Joan Hills roVI/n ® f � Date: March 13, 2008 '��� Vi�fiey t, To: Town of Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Department '`_-_ Subject: OV 12-07-13 Shadow Mountain Estates -East minor lot -line adjustment for Lots 61 & 62 In your October 19, 2007, letter to me, you required me, as the next step in the process, to submit 24" X 36" scaled renderings showing original lot line, encroachments and the line resulting from the shift plus updated legal descriptions. I have already provided this information, though not in 24" X 36" format. Per your letter, the purpose of these renderings is to "assure Code compliance." However, Manny Lizarraga had told me on October 9 that GIS confirms the setback from the garage, spa and pool is less than the fifteen feet now required. I told Manny that I was not contesting your findings regarding the setback and that all the scaled renderings in the world would not change the fact that the boundary fence was erected based on the required setback in effect in 1992. Manny told me that .I didn't need to move the fence. He said that all I needed to do was to have a surveyor place stakes where the fifteen -foot setback would be and that I didn't have to tell a buyer that the property boundary was different than the fence line would indicate. I replied that doing so would expose me to a lawsuit since all relevant information involved in a real-estate transaction has to be put forth in the Property Disclosure. I once again requested that I be given a "Grandfather Variance," or that the common lot line be designated "Legal But Non -Conforming" or whatever the correct description would be to describe a lot line whose setbacks were legal at the time it was created. Bob Leek of OPW & Assoc. determined where the lot line should be and Canyon Fence Company erected the fence based on the positioning of those stakes. That fence has defined property limits for over 16 (!Ween) years. It seems to me that since the fence complied with zoning setbacks and was already in existence when you changed that setback requirements, I should not be forced to pay thousands of dollars to change it. Please make this lot line legal and get it recorded. Any potential buyer is going to walk away from this property if he/she is confronted with information that some of the property they will be paying property taxes on is unavailable to them, separated by wrought iron and chain link fencing. This memorandum is my attempt to let you folks know how financially devastating it would be for me to have to move the fencing and to move it is the only way I think I would get the property sold. I would have to pay to have the line re -surveyed and re -staked. 2. I would have to pay thousands of dollars to have 236 feet of five -foot -high chain -link fencing and 78 feet of wrought -iron pool fencing first removed and then re -erected. 3. I would have to pay tree cutters to remove two mature ash trees, a mature acacia tree, a mature elm tree, a quail bush about 15 feet in diameter, two mature Orlando Tangelo citrus trees, two mature elm trees plus other vegetation. 4. The 12-foot wide concrete driveway for my personal residence is only four feet from the fence by the garage and it would be very expensive to have to jackhammer it out, reform and re -pour the driveway. 5. The fence on the east side of the pool would have to be moved into a wash. I have enclosed some photos I took in February, 2008, that may help you visualize what I have said above. You will notice that the entire area was landscaped in 1992 so that the pool area would be enclosed by tall, dense, long-lived vegetation so that it would be a private and exotic setting. These photos were taken in February. The vegetation is even more lush and dense when the trees have leafed out. Photo #1: This view is of the corner of the garage on Lot 62. Please note the Arizona ash tree to the right, which is presently bare of leaves. Also please note the concrete driveway, slightly less than four feet from the chain link fence. There is a steep bank below the driveway and ash, which would also make it more expensive to move a fence. Photo #2: This view is taken from almost the same position as photo #1 but looks east to where the chainlink and wrought iron meet on the southwest side of the pool area. The photo shows the amount of vegetation that would have to cut down in this area to relocate the fence. I assume this vegetation might also have to be cut down in order for a surveyor to do a survey. Photo #3: This photo is looking north into the pool area. I placed the palm trees on my property because there is a bank there and the palms would be overlooking the whole pool area, making it seem more tropical. Photo #4: The photo shows the backflow discharge pipe. When the pool is backwashed, the water goes downhill into the wash. Behind the wrought iron fence is the pool equipment and if you look closely you can see timers and electronic equipment mounted on a mauve -colored stucco wall. The wall hides the pool equipment. On the right half of the photo is a mature quail bush that would also have to be cut down in order to move the fence. Behind the quail bush are an ash tree, palo verde and mesquite trees and cactus. The wash is to the right of the quail bush. Photo #5: This is the view from the southwest side of the pool area, showing how I landscaped the area to make it feel private and exotic. Photo #6: 1 took this photo to give you a feel for the whole pool area. Please grandfather this lot line and get it recorded. CC CE 0 \\% LIE D MAR 1 � 2008 Town of Oro Valley t yf � t \�� r r ' a�i 4` :�\ ✓ � '.1�,,. i� ,.x`'\s f-���r + >'t� d9y} e + i� I r t r !<• ;i I{',y /fit a !d .'IJ �- \ �' � � 1' !• . .... ti`nr>��t �' '�'�.)' L �\r}Yy?A.�j � �.yr.i.� 1 4 � r,i}'�r ,�, �'�. 4�, ut �.. -- - .✓ •.\ i '�, �- :�� tom, r \ - f � � ..� �, 1, -. h' of .�� ��. � \ w� 'i�`?jr��w� r` a!�• � s t ,r j�.�,��. ply ye ? `� i_-^ ro Y ._ ,'�9 \_ I t .�,• - `.;"e�'�yr; , t .'� 7l t v�.s/ q,' '.+. ` �: d� � Y1 I �C f ?�1 �. � � �`�t Iy��,'. �� t , __ _ ;� - {, �TM�� a � i N4•t�^� } �` ice, r ,*- �`��.c �� x ;.t �. — \! _ ` �� •.f .- ,+ ,I J1► .LA r� t rR- �y �i � ♦+r + I lr�i. rI � ,�a,. ' ♦ r .i / 1!'lA'' •,� , '•1 �y, �',sii .�. 'may, �M fit'! _ _ - '`}_ _ / i�l l r,•J _ ° 1. "`����� ] � .' y 1 .' •� � u� if `�} 'i ''.`�. AC tWilti �s-.� Sr'�,•" *.r ^ � .:-� /� r"-------- r ', f '1 7' ,, .. -�`�"'��t,' L.%•, `+fi ��iX`.L - 1 "w t �,, `�•�—_.�.i.T� a v� I, ,k ry u\ r yl t`S,✓ ... - ;Yr.�C/tdi, Elk .a 1 . '�'1 � ��'X.'Y�� F ��`"��! _ �%,.--��-- �i', �z'2yA; v '�Y ,/.�s \•�� ;t>,t�. �,.: ��..`�. 6y � .?y .r W� ♦1►- , _ �r.'.� _- _ 't ,A M�'`r k4 . 9+i 5 !r r.•,�\\ � . �Rb+ y"'i}1`K+. *� '1 iti+je •rl' / jt,� rC, t� PIN TOWN OF ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT 11000 N. La Canada Drive, Oro Valley, AZ 85737 (520) 229-4800 Fax (520) 742-1022 October 19, 2007 Joan C. Hills/Survivor of the Hills Trust 9140 N. Marne Place Oro Valley, AZ 85704 520.544.2535 Re: OV12-07-13, Shadow Mountain Estates east minor lot -line adjustment for lots 61 and 62. The properties are located in proximity to the south corner of Calle Concordia and Oracle Road. Dear Applicant: Thank you for submitting the information for this project. Based on a Formal Review, the information submitted is not in compliance with current Zoning Code setback requirements.. To move forward with this common lot line change the Planning Department will require that additional information be provided to assure Code compliance. The proposed plan does not appear to meet the side setback for an R1-36, Zoning District. Buildings and ancillary structures, such as pools must be fifteen (15') feet from the lot line. Because the drawing is not to scale it is difficult to determine the setbacks. Please refer to our Zoning Code for information available online at www.townoforovalley.com. The re -submittal must include 5 copies of the following: • Scaled renderings showing original lot line, encroachments, and line resulting from the shift (24"x36"). • Update legal descriptions. If you have any questions, please contact me. We look forward to the successful completion of this project. Sipcee4Lirrag6a�j Manny Planning Department 520.229.4814 mlizarra-ga(a)orovalley.net F:\OV\OV12\2007\12-07-13\OV12-07-13ShadowMountainLotline.doc www.townoforovalley.com LEY L • p�PL qRi ?02 AUG 17 2007 { Town of Oro Valley °UfvDED �g�� TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PLANNING AND ZONING 11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE, ORO VALLEY AZ 85737 PHONE: (520) 229-4800 FAX: (520) 742-1022 www.townoforovalley.com APPLICATION FORM OV Case # (Office Use Only): rI C,1jJ Application Type: � , F t e,) C. p G' A. Project Manager/Developer Name: ,SC, Cc c Firm: Address: City: Telephone: Fax: B. �( Property Owner (s), if more than one owner, attach list Name Maw Addri City: Telephone: - - - Fax: State: Email: Zip: C] C. Subject Property X Parcel/Tax Code:_ Q 5- 13t - p 62C Legal Description/Property Address: Slate• H Z. zip: 2)'3 70 y Email: �( Area of property:_Lc�t tine beJweev, i fry t.1t anti t ( tK- i a- oats) Existing Zoning: Proposed Zoning: Is Proposed Zoning in conformance with General Plan designation? [ ] N/A [ ] Yes [ ] No General Plan Designation: txisting Land Use: Proposed Land Use:— D. Previous Applications Relating To This Property OV8- OV9- OV11-. Reason For Request OV12- r % ? - '..2i - 6, 3 OV10- OV13- This application is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I am the owner of the above described property or have been authorized by the owner to make this application. Date Signature August 17, 2007 Town of Oro Valley, Planning and Zoning 11000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley, AZ 85737 Dear Ms/Sir: D�9 L AUG 1 7 2007 Town of Oro Valley I own Lot 61 (225-12-0610) and Lot 62 (225-12-0620) in Shadow Mountain Estates East in Oro Valley. In 1990 when my husband and I were planning to build on Lot 61, Rob Settlemeyer of Settlemeyer Surveys found encroachments onto our land by the carport, spa and pool on Lot 62. In 1991 we purchased Lot 62 and Bob Leek of OPW & Assoc. reconfigured the common lot line so the improvements on Lot 62 complied with the current setback regulations. I believed that the surveyor had the change recorded and because my husband was suffering from bi-polar disease and I was overwhelmed, I never followed up to see that everything was in order. Canyon Fence Company erected a five-foot chain link fence and wrought iron pool enclosure according to the surveyor's stakes and that is how the new lot line is defined. Because I wish to sell Lot 62, I am asking that this change be approved and recorded. Exhibit A shows the original lot lines. Exhibit B shows the encroachments. Exhibit C shows the original lot line and the lot line resulting from the shift. Exhibit D is the legal description for Lot 61. Exhibit E is the legal description for Lot 62. I would very much appreciate your help in getting this change recorded. Thank you, 9"'3't'g&z_ Joan Hills 9120 N. Marne Place Oro Valley, AZ 85704 Joan 0111S • .4 E AX; 6i j5 1 DL ��[E G 17 2007 f Oro Valley Found 314 C.0 F I p E p e %4 Corner Sec. 24, T-12-5., 2-13-Lr- See. ,9• 247Z1, , i In yam..... 6. �..0 /4CJr. 177c:.'/"kE'C7 24rJ 29 ^ z, 155 �79Ze'v (J v m •G L.O. Ang/c poInf T s 40 5 ~ 0N 4 i I N 0 -O W QI r I IA L 17S.C.Co, 178_91' 354.57' n.89•59"35""v�0 3`• � 8oo3o'pO.,L N 57 F Q. 9� 9 Sa,. 4 .372,.23 2 .A°I 20 N.00•so, 0�„t• ° YA•�` Id 58 a 23 ,�9. 9 0" SI O ♦ 14.8000 * 00p� �0 fv 9 20 RA1 W. 4 �" 81 1A �-tiQ. �wAY — �gfrI4-1re � 40 ` 3 ►�. 20 r CoO 0 �0 \ ^�\\ IO fv r w 6o 'T %4S' r o O� ��• 3Q• 00 J /,a. ? 99 t SCAU: I"it 2o( G1%, !',tie und«si<Jned Jonas 41 tts LOT 5J AUG 17 2007 L 0 T [_Town of Oro Valley POOL ENCROACW1D / �ti1 ti5 1.00 FEET SFA EHCROACM / b.50 FEET CARAC6 EWMACUEb 2.15 FEET (R00FLING). LOT R: A4 104°52'I64 JIv .29y, L: 109.62' .14 6. ol� I DIGATE6 1/2'� REbAM W ITu TACK 6 • R4 WE RLg '1 g�°J 5 s oo\, f OFT TulbbuRQE� E � 80epG,Do«� I I--- � I O I I ILI r� - --� I � v IT o I N I o 0 o � I ?o' pia I U l 4 4 t Kj y 5/8"Plu T y o.ok b C) LOT 0 I I I 3ITTL919TIA HAVES INCORPORATED DRAWING NO. P.O. BOX 12612, 85732 TUCSON. ARIZONA (602) 749- 3246 5MVEy 0r LOT CAI IQ SNAONJ kAOUQ7AIkJ Q" � C,STRT - EAST E)14 I4, PG '�5 OF kA � P DATE, IIo5.90 FWA �/OUQTy i 11\2I7,0Q1A\ 3CALE:14=50' 9K. NO. Jaiti1 1-I,115 �PXktbif c ' kiNDOA; M©aN r AIW E13TNTt S ChiT P4 1 Joao gilts CAILif D OP1& ASSOCL47ES, RVC' D AUG 17 2007 Engineering, Surveying & Planning 6383 East Grant Road __._._,,,.._ Tucson, Arizona 85715 Town Of �fl '�id�io Phone: (602) 296-8544 FAX (602) 296-2356 i ri..:.:itivY.. rx::' ^YY' n0 : 2 1rYYeY. < r S,>n'''::'a�+xe"C'bc�'.'. 'BYYhif.�O.+i'GPM A portion of Lot 61, Shadow Mountain Estates -East, as recorded in Book 14, page 93, Pima County, Arizona, to be conveyed to Lot 62 of said subdivision of record. COMMENCING at the Northwest corner of Lot 61, said point being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, run North 750 34' 48" East, 68.861; thence, North 630 54' 15" East, 88.001; thence, North 20 55' 21" West, 6.37' to a point on the North line of said Lot 61' thence, South 660 49' 54" West, 158.15 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 1085.55 square feet. OPW & ASSOCIATES, INC Engineering, Surveying & Planning 6383 East Grant Road Tucson, Arizona 85715 Phone: (602) 296-8544 FAX (602) 296-2356 :..... ...:>f .:.::: . DIEC EEH AUG 17 ;001 Town of Oro Valley A portion of Lot 62, Shadow Mountain Estates -East, as recorded in Book 14, page 93, Pima County, Arizona, to be conveyed to Lot 61 of said subdivision of record. COMMENCING at the Southwest corner of Lot 62, thence run North 66° 49' 54" East along the South boundary of said lot, 158.151 to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, North 20 55' 21" West, 18.631; thence, North 290 12' 20" East, 44.101; thence, North 780 06' 39" East, 109.201 to a point on the East boundary of said Lot 62; thence, South 000 21' 15" East, along said East boundary, 25.00' to the Southeast corner of Lot 62; thence, South 660 49' 54" West along the South boundary of said lot, 138.771 to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 4636.81 square feet.