Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Board of Adjustment (46)       AGENDA ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR SESSION January 24, 2023 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE The Town has modified its public comment procedures in the newly renovated Town Council Chambers. For more details, please see the instructions for in person and/or virtual speakers at the end of the agenda.   To watch and/or listen to the public meeting online, please visit https://www.orovalleyaz.gov/town/departments/town-clerk/meetings-and-agendas          REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 3:00 PM   CALL TO ORDER   ROLL CALL   PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE   CALL TO AUDIENCE - At this time, any member of the public is allowed to address the Board on any issue not listed on today’s agenda. Pursuant to the Arizona open meeting law, individual Board members may ask Town staff to review the matter, ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda, or respond to criticism made by speakers. However, the Board may not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during "Call to Audience." In order to speak during "Call to Audience", please specify what you wish to discuss when completing the blue speaker card.   COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS   REGULAR SESSION AGENDA   1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 22, 2022 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES   2.ELECTION OF CHAIR FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 25, 2023      3.ELECTION OF VICE CHAIR FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 25, 2023      4.PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT SIZE FROM 20-ACRES TO 9.03-ACRES FOR EXTRA SPACE STORAGE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF ORACLE RD. AND HARDY RD. (2203108)   ADJOURNMENT   POSTED: 1/17/23 at 5pm by dt When possible, a packet of agenda materials as listed above is available for public inspection at least 24 hours prior to the Board meeting in the Town Clerk's Office between the hours of 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify the Town Clerk’s Office at least five days prior to the Board meeting at 229-4700.     PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS   The Town has modified its public comment procedures for its public bodies to allow for limited remote/virtual comment via Zoom. The public may provide comments remotely only  on items posted as required Public Hearings, provided the speaker registers 24 hours prior to the meeting. For all other items, the public may complete a blue speaker card to be recognized in person by the Chair, according to all other rules and procedures. Written comments can also be emailed to Recording Secretary Jeanna Ancona at jancona@orovalleyaz.gov, for distribution to the Board of Adjustment prior to the meeting. Further instructions to speakers are noted below.     INSTRUCTIONS TO IN-PERSON SPEAKERS Members of the public shall be allowed to speak on posted public hearings and during Call to Audience when attending the meeting in person. The public may be allowed to speak on other posted items on the agenda at the discretion of the Chair. If you wish to address the Board on any item(s) on this agenda, please complete a blue speaker card located on the Agenda table at the back of the room and give it to the Recording Secretary. Please indicate on the blue speaker card which item number and topic you wish to speak on, or, if you wish to speak during Call to Audience, please specify what you wish to discuss. Please step forward to the podium when the Chair calls on you to address the Board.  For the record, please state your name and whether or not you are a Town resident.1.Speak only on the issue currently being discussed by the Board. You will only be allowed to address the Board one time regarding the topic being discussed.2. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.3.During Call to Audience, you may address the Board on any matter that is not on the agenda.4.Any member of the public speaking, must speak in a courteous and respectful manner to those present. 5. INSTRUCTIONS TO VIRTUAL SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS    Members of the public may attend the meeting virtually and request to speak virtually on any agenda item that is listed as a Public Hearing.  If you wish to address the Board virtually during any listed Public Hearing, please complete the online speaker form by clicking here  https://forms.orovalleyaz.gov/forms/bluecard at least 24 hours prior to the start of the meeting. You must provide a valid email address in order to register. Town Staff will email you a link to the Zoom meeting the day of the meeting. After being recognized by the Chair, staff will unmute your microphone access and you will have 3 minutes to address the Board. Further instructions regarding remote participation will be included in the email.      Thank you for your cooperation.    Board of Adjustment 1. Meeting Date:01/24/2023   Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development  Submitted By:Jeanna Ancona, Community and Economic Development Case Number: N/A SUBJECT: REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 22, 2022 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: N/A. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: N/A. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A. SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to approve (approve with changes), the February 22, 2022 minutes. Attachments 2-22-22 Draft Minutes  D R A F T MINUTES ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR SESSION February 22, 2022 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE            REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 3:00 PM   CALL TO ORDER Chair Dankwerth called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.   ROLL CALL Present: Joseph Affinati, Member Octavio Barcelo, Member Thomas Gribb, Member Stephen Roach, Vice Chair Helen Dankwerth, Chair Staff Present:Hannah Oden, Senior Planner Joe Andrews, Chief Civil Deputy Attorney Attendees: Steve Solomon, Town Council Liaison PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Dankwerth led the Board and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.   CALL TO AUDIENCE There were no speaker requests.   COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS Council Liaison Steve Solomon did not have any comments.   REGULAR SESSION AGENDA   1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE DECEMBER 14, 2021 SPECIAL SESSION MEETING MINUTES       Motion by Member Joseph Affinati, seconded by Vice Chair Stephen Roach to approve the meeting minutes as written.    Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   2.PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A VARIANCE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 5 FEET TO 2.5 FEET TO ACCOMMODATE AN EXISTING SWIMMING POOL AT 2290 W. AZURE CREEK LOOP, CASE NUMBER 2200120       Principal Planner Milini Simms provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Location - Five Findings - Finding #1 - Finding #2 - Finding #3 - Finding #4 - Finding #5 - Summary and recommendation Applicant Cassandra Mazur provided a presentation that included the following: - The home has a unique lot line - angled and not parallel to home - CAD drawings provided appeared to be squared with wall; however, contractor built the pool square with home - Pools are common in the neighborhood, will not have any impact on surrounding neighbors - Provided photos, the home builder's (Meritage) lot plans and the site plan for the pool Discussion ensued among the Board, applicant and staff. Chair Dankwerth opened the public hearing. OV resident and neighbor to applicant, Dr. Venkata, expressed his concerns with drainage issues. Chair Dankwerth closed the public hearing.    Motion by Member Joseph Affinati, seconded by Vice Chair Stephen Roach to approve this variance request to reduce the rear yard setback from 5 feet to 2.5 feet for an existing swimming pool at 2290 W. Azure Creek Loop., based on the finding that the five criteria have been met.    Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   3.ELECTION OF CHAIR FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 23, 2022    Motion by Member Joseph Affinati, seconded by Member Thomas Gribb to nominate Helen Dankwerth to continue serving as Chair for the Board of Adjustment.    Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   4.ELECTION OF VICE CHAIR FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 23, 2022    Motion by Member Octavio Barcelo, seconded by Member Thomas Gribb to nominate Stephen Roach to continue serving as Vice-Chair for the Board of Adjustment.    Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   ADJOURNMENT    Motion by Member Joseph Affinati, seconded by Member Octavio Barcelo to adjourn.    Chair Dankwerth adjourned the meeting at 3:29 p.m.     I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular session of the Town of Oro Valley Board of Adjustment of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 22 day of February 2022. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. ___________________________ Jeanna Ancona Senior Office Specialist    Board of Adjustment 4. Meeting Date:01/24/2023   Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development  Submitted By:Hannah Oden, Community and Economic Development Case Number: 2203108 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT SIZE FROM 20-ACRES TO 9.03-ACRES FOR EXTRA SPACE STORAGE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF ORACLE RD. AND HARDY RD. (2203108) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the minimum Planned Area Development (PAD) district size from 20-acres to approximately 9.03-acres for the expansion of Extra Space Storage, located at the southeast intersection of Oracle Rd. and Hardy Rd. as shown on the map to the right and outlined in yellow. The subject property is located within C-2 and C-1 zoning districts and the applicant is proposing to rezone the property to Planned Area Development. The minimum district size for new PAD's is 20-acres. However, the total acreage of the property is 9.03-acres. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the minimum PAD district size for this property only. The size reduction would not apply to any future PAD's in the Town.  The subject parcel includes the existing Extra Space Storage facility and vacant land where the expansion is proposed. The existing development was approved and built under Pima County standards and is considered legal non-conforming, which means that it does not comply with the Town's Zoning Code standards. In particular, when the property was annexed into the Town, it went through the translational zoning process, which established Town Zoning on the property that most aligned with Pima County zoning. The area where the existing storage facility is located was subsequently zoned C-2. However, it did not meet the minimum 10-acre district size and multiple development standards for C-2 zoning, making it legal non-conforming. This translational zoning approach has created an issue for existing and proposed storage facilities and adjacent properties, including the Circle K and Sunnyslope Apartments. In order for an expansion to be approved on any of these properties, the existing facilities must be brought into conformance with current Zoning Code requirements. For Extra Space Storage, this would result in the removal of a number of buildings along the Oracle Rd. frontage. Reducing the PAD size for this parcel would allow the applicant to apply for customized zoning to address the unique issues involving legal non-conforming status and potential expansion.  The current site (C-2 zoning) and proposed expansion area immediately north (C-1 zoning) are irregularly shaped parcels with minimal frontage along Oracle Rd. and a substantial depth away from the roadway, creating a challenge for commercial development. Moreover, even if the C-1 zoned parcels were rezoned to C-2, the cumulative minimum 10-acre district size would not be met. A rezoning to PAD would address this challenge by requesting modifications to these Zoning Code requirements. All variance requests must meet five specific findings as required by the Zoning Code. Staff recommends approval of the variance request determining that all five findings have been met as described in the following background and detailed information.   BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: The Zoning Code does not allow any additional expansion of the existing storage facility without bringing the site into compliance with current Zoning Code requirements. As discussed in the previous section, when Extra Space Storage and the surrounding area were annexed into the Town, the properties became legal non-conforming. Not only did the C-2 district size fall short of the 10-acre minimum requirement at 4.26-acres, but because the development was approved in Pima County, it did not meet Town zoning requirements regarding development standards, site layout, and scenic corridor requirements. Typically, when properties with existing development are annexed into the Town, a Planned Area Development is established to account for these legal non-conforming issues. A Planned Area Development is a unique zoning designation tailored to a specific site and allows the applicant to request modifications to Zoning Code requirements. An example of where this was done recently is the Westward Look Resort annexation and associated PAD. Westward Look developed in Pima County and did not fully comply with Oro Valley development standards. A PAD provides an avenue to address legal non-conforming issues by accounting for existing any development and can provide a master plan for future expansion. An establishment of a PAD for the Sunnyslope area, including Extra Space Storage, was not done at the time of annexation, creating a scenario when legal non-conforming uses could not modify or expand without a complete redevelopment of the site. A PAD for Extra Space Storage would allow the applicant to expand and address legal non-conforming issues. However, because the minimum PAD district size is 20-acres, the variance request is to reduce the minimum district size for this PAD only to approximate 9.03-acres as shown in Attachment 1. Over time, staff does anticipate that neighboring properties, such as Circle K, may join the PAD in order to modify or expand their operations. As such, this variance is only to establish a minimum PAD size, but it will have the ability to expand over time. The applicant will still need to request approval of a General Plan Amendment and rezoning for the proposed expansion, but the first step is to request this variance. Please note, the focus of this case is for the variance request only. PROPERTY HISTORY: 1986: Original development plan approved by Pima County prior to annexation 1987: Property annexed into Pima County  Established existing C-2 and C-1 zoning on the site through the translational zoning process Existing storage facility became a legal con-conforming use 1998: Expansion of existing facility approved by Town Council as permitted by the Zoning Code at that time EXISTING CONDITIONS: Property is zoned C-1 and C-2 commercial (shown on the image to the right) Property size is approximately 9.03-acres Property size is approximately 9.03-acres The existing facility is located on 4.26-acres The proposed expansion area is vacant and is 4.77-acres The vacant property slopes gently upwards towards the east Residential uses, including single-family and multi-family, abut the property to the north, east, and south DISCUSSION: State Law and the Oro Valley Zoning Code require the Board of Adjustment to determine that all the following variance findings have been met in order to grant a variance. The required five findings are shown in italics below, followed by the applicant's responses and staff comments. The applicant’s complete response to the findings are included in Attachment 1. 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. Applicant Response: The applicant states that the vacant parcels are undesirable for commercial development due to the irregular shape and limited frontage along Oracle Rd. Visibility is limited compared to other parcels, and the shape of the vacant parcels also complicate access and circulation. The vacant parcels cannot be rezoned to C-2 for more intensive commercial uses, including self-storage, due to the 10-acre C-2 district minimum size requirement. Moreover, the applicant states that the existing facility was developed before the existing Zoning Code was adopted and as such is considered legal non-conforming. As such, any expansion would require the existing facility to be brought into conformance with the Zoning Code, which would be a substantial burden. Staff Comment: The subject property has special circumstances that apply to it in terms of shape and legal non-conforming issues. The parcel where the existing facility is located is narrow with a significant depth. The existing facility was approved under Pima County standards and expanded as much as the Zoning Code allowed in 1998. There is no mechanism for further expansion without brining existing buildings into Zoning Code compliance as discussed previously. The zoning of the property is split between C-2 zoning where the existing facility is, and C-1 zoning where the proposed expansion is located. Based on the minimum C-2 district size of 10-acres, the existing facility does not currently meet this requirement and still would not meet the requirement if the C-1 parcels were rezoned. As such, this creates a unique circumstance, as the zoning of the existing property is legal-non-conforming in terms of district size and standards from when the property was annexed and translational zoning was applied. This is a unique circumstance that does not apply to other C-2 zoned properties. To address these unique circumstances, a new PAD is a recommended option. 2. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant. Applicant Response: The applicant states that "the previous and current owners did not have any control over the size, shape, topography, or location of the Site. After the Existing Facility was annexed into the Town, it was expanded as much as the code allowed at the time. There is now no mechanism to permit an expansion of the Existing Facility’s legal non-conforming structures in the C-2 district, to the Adjacent Parcels, without bringing the Existing Facility into conformance with the current code. This is not a circumstance created by the property owner." Staff Comment: The owner/applicant did not create the marginally aligned zoning resulting in a legal non-conforming development upon annexation. 3. Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. Applicant Response: The applicant states that the existing facility is zoned as C-2, is legal non-conforming, and cannot expand without binging existing buildings into compliance with the Zoning Code.The applicant states that other properties in the same zoning district do not experience these same challenges and are able to expand by right. Per the applicant's narrative (Attachment 1), "A variance to reduce the minimum PAD size for the Site will allow the Existing Facility's expansion to the Adjacent Parcels, which will preserve the Site's privileges and rights enjoyed by other properties." Staff Comment: The size of the C-2 zoning district (4.26-acres) and non-conformance with C-2 development standards where the existing facility is located does not allow for an expansion, even with rezoning the vacant C-1 parcels. The variance request to reduce the minimum PAD size for Extra Space Storage would permit an expansion and address legal non-conforming issues not created by the applicant. A reduction in the minimum PAD district size is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of property rights that apply to other C-2 zoned properties in Oro Valley. As such, this finding has been met. 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. Applicant Response: Per the applicant's narrative, "the variance would not constitute a grant of special privileges. The variance would only allow the use of a PAD on the Site. The PAD rezoning process will still require review and comment by Town Staff and participation in the public hearing process by the Owner. This will include neighborhood meetings, Planning and Zoning Commission hearings, and a Town Council hearing. The public hearing process will ensure that the public, including nearby property owners, are properly noticed and given the opportunity to comment on the proposal prior to Town Council determination. As part of the PAD process, conditions can be added to ensure no special privileges are granted." Staff Comment The potential reduction of the minimum PAD district size for this property only enables application for a Planned Area Development. This is a unique circumstance and would not grant special privileges inconsistent with the limitations placed on other properties. The proposed expansion is still subject to public review and discretionary action by Town Council though the General Plan Amendment and rezoning process. As such, this finding has been met. 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. Applicant Response: Per the applicant's narrative, "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 authorization of the variance will result in the ability to request PAD zoning for an expansion of the self-storage use on the Existing Facility property to the Adjacent Parcels. Since there is already an existing self-storage business, there will be no material impact on the surroundings. Self-storage uses are inherently low intensity uses with minimal impact. They generate minimal traffic as customers generally come to store their items and come back only periodically. Additionally, the Site is located near the intersection of two primary roadways and is therefore appropriate for commercial development." Staff Comment The requested reduction of the minimum PAD district size for this property would only allow for a PAD rezoning application for the expansion of the existing storage facility, potentially resulting in outdoor RV storage and an indoor climate controlled storage building. If this variance request enables application for a PAD zone, the required General Plan Amendment and rezoning process, including neighborhood meetings, will be subject to action by Town Council. As part of any rezoning, mitigation measures may be applied to address potential issues. This finding has been met. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING: If this variance is approved, the applicant must request a General Plan Amendment and rezoning to PAD, which are processed under separate applications. These requests are subject to the public review process and are ultimately subject to Town Council consideration. The granting of this variance to reduce the minimum PAD district size for the property does not constitute the approval of the General Plan Amendment or rezoning requests. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Public Notice has been provided as follows: Notice sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject properties. Notice posted on the property. Notice posted online at www.orovalleyaz.gov Notice advertised in the Daily Territorial SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the variance request meets all the findings per State Law and the Zoning Code and staff recommends approval.  FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to approve this variance request to reduce the minimum PAD district size from 20-acres to approximately 9.03-acres for Extra Space Storage located at the southeast intersection of Oracle Rd. and Hardy Rd., shown in Attachment 1, based on the finding that the five criteria have been met. OR I MOVE to deny this variance request to reduce the minimum PAD district size from 20-acres to approximately 9.03-acres for Extra Space Storage located at the southeast intersection of Oracle Rd. and Hardy Rd., based on the finding that the five criteria have not been met. Attachments Attachment 1: Applicant Submittal  R. MICHAEL WEST 10971 N. POINSETTIA DRIVE ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737 Home Telephone (520) 797-8689 Cell Number (916) 599-2798 e-mail k6nc@saciplaw.com Via E-mail Planning@orovalleyaz.gov February 19, 2020 Town Of Oro Valley Community And Economic Development Department 11000 N. La Cañada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 Attention: Planning Re:Application For Variance Applicant/Owner: R. Michael West Subject Property: 10971 N. Poinsettia Drive, Oro Valley, Arizona Please find submitted herewith, the undersigned’s Application for a Variance from the Zoning Code provision of the single family residential district R1-43, which prohibits building a detached garage closer to the front lot line than the main house. The Application includes the following materials: The completed General Application form; A Site Plan; Narrative Describing Nature Of Request; Detailed Answers To Each Of Five Findings - Discussion And Evidence Providing Justification For Grant Of Variance; and, Supporting Documents: Exhibit 1 Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C The Fee related to this Application For Variance, in the amout of $150 will be paid by credit card. Please contact the undersigned by telephone for the credit card information. Respectfully submitted, R. Michael West R. Michael West RMW/cb Enclosures: as stated Narrative Describing Nature Of Request Applicant seeks a variance from the general R1-43 Zoning Code provision which prohibits building a detached garage closer to the front lot line than the main house. Applicant was first advised of this provision, when he made a preliminary submission of his building plans to the Building Permit Division, of the Town Of Oro Valley. Applicant was advised that owing to the location of the proposed detached garage on his property, he would have to apply for and be granted, a variance, before a building permit could issue. The legal description of the subject property is Lot 21 of the Monte Del Oro subdivision in Oro Valley. Lot 21 is a long and narrow piece of property, extending up hilly terrain from the west side of Poinsettia Drive. There is an existing driveway leading up a ridge to the main house, located approximately 3/4 of the distance from the front lot line to the rear lot line. The terrain from the rear of the main house drops off sharply to a wash running along the rear lot line. As explained more fully below, Applicant has substantial need for additional garage and storage space on his property. There is no room for expanding the existing garage, because the existing driveway, the garage turn-around area, and the main house prohibit such expansion. Thus, Applicant turned to the concept of a detached garage to meet that need. In reviewing possible locations for a new garage, it became apparent that there was only one feasible area on the subject property for that proposed garage. That area is between the main house and the front lot line, to the north of the existing driveway. Applicant is therefore seeking from the Board of Adjustment, a variance in the literal provisions of the zoning code. Such a variance would allow Applicant to build a detached garage in the sole feasible area on his property, and would avoid undue hardship on Applicant. -1- Detailed Answers To Each Of the Five Finding In Section 2.0 With Discussion And Evidence Providing Justification For Grant Of Variance A.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 subject property is located on the west side of North Poinsettia Drive, in the Monte Del Oro subdivision of Oro Valley. The subject property and the lots around the subject property, are approximately 1+ acres in size. However, owing to the topography of the lots on the west side of Poinsettia Drive, the lots are long and narrow, rising westerly from street level to higher terrain where homes are built. The home and the existing garage on the subject property were built on the highest portion of the lot, approximately 3/4 of the distance from Poinsettia Drive, to the back lot line. The terrain between the west side of the house drops off steeply to the back lot line, leaving an inadequate amount of room for a garage and a vehicle turn-around space. Also, access to the rear portion of the property is limited to one approximately 30' setback strip on the south side of the house, where existing mature natural plants and landscaping would have to be removed to provide access to a rear- located garage. (See, Exhibit 1). The septic system and the leech line are located on the north side of the house, so an access road could not be built there. Lastly, access to a rear-located garage would be problematical for access by the fire department. The driveway on the subject property is long, ending in a confining turn-around space in front of the existing garage. The existing garage cannot be enlarged in any direction, as there are existing structures and the turn-around space would no longer be usable. -2- In a more typical lot, there would be more buildable spots for a detached garage, or for the expansion of an existing garage. However, the shape, topography, locations of the existing driveway, home, and garage, and the existing setbacks, all create special circumstances which do not apply to other properties in the district. These special circumstances make the proposed location for the detached garage the only possible location for it on the subject property. B.Special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant. Applicant for the present variance purchased the subject property in 1991, from a private financier who had foreclosed on a loan made by the builder/owner. The builder/owner was a contractor who designed and built the home for himself, but never lived in it. In other words, decisions regarding the size and location of the driveway, the present two-car garage, and the house were all made by the foreclosed-upon builder/owner, not by Applicant. Applicant did not create the size and shape of the subject property, nor did he have any say about the topography and terrain which likely resulted in the long and narrow configuration of the subject property. Consequently, the special circumstances necessitating the request for the present variance, were not caused by Applicant. C.The authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. Applicant’s existing two-car garage is very inadequate, both for garaging vehicles, and for storage. Applicant has six vehicles registered in the State of Arizona, and no room to house them safely and securely on his property. Three of these vehicles are covered under special policies which -3- require that the vehicles be housed in a secure garage. Because multiple vehicles have to be parked outside the garage in the turn-around space, vehicles often have to be moved temporarily down for parking on the shoulder of Poinsettia Drive, when service vehicles or company is expected. This creates potential safety hazards for the public, and property security issues for Applicant. The existing two-car garage is short and narrow, providing little room for storage at the end or sides of the garage. A new and much larger detached garage would not only allow Applicant to house all of his vehicles, but it would also provide much needed space for storage racks and cabinets. Authorizing the requested for variance is therefore necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. D.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. If a variance is granted for the subject property, the detached garage will be built in a specific location on the property, based upon the previously discussed special circumstances which exist on that property. There is no other location on the subject property where a detached garage could be built, Applicant did not create the special circumstances which necessitate the variance, and grounds have been shown that grant of the variance will preserve the integrity of the property and enhance the enjoyment of Applicant’s property rights. Moreover, as discussed below, the grant of the variance -4- will not detrimentally affect adjacent property owners or the public in general. Under these circumstances, authorizing the allowance of a detached garage in the proposed specific location does not constitute a grant of special privileges which are inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity. The general zoning prohibition on building a detached garage closer to the front lot line than the main house still remains; the grant of a variance to build a detached garage in a specific location when special circumstances have been shown is not inconsistent with that general prohibition. E.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. Attached hereto, and identified as Exhibit A, is an aerial photograph of the subject property, showing the front and side property lot lines, the existing house (including attached garage and porches), the existing driveway, Poinsettia Drive, and the area of the proposed detached garage, including an access driveway. There are no accessory structures on the property. Attached hereto, and identified as Exhibit B, is a drawing sheet of the proposed garage, showing the floor plan, the roof framing plan, a north/south sectional view, a front elevational view, and a south elevational view, the north elevational view being identical thereto. The proposed detached garage is more than 30 feet from any property line, so no offset variance is needed. The proposed garage is located at an elevation substantially below the upper end of the existing driveway, and some of the walls will be partly below the grade of the surrounding ground, -5- imbedded in the hillside. As a consequence, there will be no impairment of any views toward the mountains, either from the subject property or from the property of the neighbor to the north, or from the vacant property to the south. Attached hereto, and identified as Exhibit C, is a photo taken from Poinsettia Drive toward the location of the proposed detached garage. Owing to the existing trees and the partially imbedded walls of proposed structure, very little, if any, of the proposed garage will be visible from Poinsettia Drive. All utilities to the proposed garage will be underground, and the architecture and exterior color of the proposed garage are consistent with the existing main house. Attached hereto, and identified as Exhibit D, is the approval of the Monte Del Oro Home Owners Association, dated September 9, 2019, for building the proposed detached garage. In view of the foregoing, Applicant respectfully submits that authorizing the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property owners, to the Monte Del Oro neighborhood, or to the public welfare, in general. -6- DETACHED GARAGE EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING DRIVEWAY POINSETTIA DRIVE120'30'439. 6 0 ' S 72 ° 5 6 ' 4 5 " E 469. 5 0 ' S 72 ° 5 6 ' 4 5 " E135.00'N 00° 02' 55" W25.78'123.93'Garage 268 0 26702670 266 0 2 6 5 0 2 6 5 0 2 6 4 0 2 6 6 0 SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" SITE PLAN SHEET # 1 AREA BREAKDOWN DRAWING PACKAGE LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL: LOCATED IN SECTION: 11, T-12-S, R-13-E, G.S.R.B. & M. 3,001 SQ. FT.TOTAL AREA FOR EXISTING GARAGE: LIVING AREA: LOT: 140COVERED PORCHES: MONTE DEL ORO LOT 21 ZONING:R1-43, Single Family Residential 1 RAC SITE PLAN FOUNDATION PLAN FLOOR PLAN / ROOF FRAMING PLAN ELEVATIONS / SECTIONS DETAILS ELECTRICAL PLAN SHEET 1 SHEET 2 SHEET 3 SHEET 4 SHEET 5 SHEET 6 60,994 600 SCALE: 1"= 20'NSITE PLAN 224-27-1330 BOOK 27, PAGE 99 VEHICULAR USE AREA:6,320 DETACHED GARAGE MIKE WEST & CATHERINE STRAIGHT 10971 N. POINSETTIA DRIVE ORO VALLEY, AZ 85737 NEW DETACHED GARAGE:1,496 EXHIBIT 1 10971 N POINSETTIA MOO/lot #21 R.Michael \/'Jest PO Box 530 Wilton, CA 956i-3 Monte Def Oro Home Owners Association 1870 W Prince Rd Suite 47 -Tucson, AZ 85705 Tefephone:520-297-0797•Fax:520-742-2618 ARC Approval RE: 10971 N Poinsettia Dr -Garage Dear R. Mfchaef West: Date: September 9, 2019 Thank you for following the architectural process for Monte Del Oro Home Owners Association. The Committee has reviewed your submittal. Your application has been approved to install a detached garage with the following specifications: 1.No changes to the submitted paint color for all walls and doors. 2, Trim color needs to be submitted (if any}. 3.Roof color to be Desert Tan, not White. 4.Exterior lighting to be downward focused, nci glare toward adjourning lots or street. 5.No kitchen or living quarters to be instaHi;d. Approval of the modification relates to conformity of the plans and specifications to the general architectural styfe and compliance with the governing documents of Monte Del Oro. This fetter does not imply approval for engineering design or architectural specifications and codes. The Association reserves the right to make a final inspection of the modification to make sure it matches the request you submitted for approval. Please follow the plan you submitted or submit an adciitionat request for any modifitations to the origi'naf-pfan. Yo!-! must foJJow all local building. codes and setback requirements when makin_g this modification. A building permit may be needed, which can be applied for at your local governmental offices. Please keep this approval letter with your official records for your home. Please do not hesitate to contact me at the office 520-297-0797 or e-mail kolson@cadden.com. For the Association, ;(-tl.1M-, PlirlL Keren Olson, CAAM® Community Association Manager Cadden Community Management EXHIBIT D