Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (965)Council Meeting Regular Session January 9, 2019 1 Town Council Meeting Announcements 2 Upcoming Meetings 3 4 Final Plat for Rancho Vistoso Valley Vista NE of Tangerine Rd. and Rancho Vistoso Blvd. Town Council January 9, 2019 5 Good Evening, my name is Hannah Oden, and I am a planner for the Town’s community and economic development department. Purpose Proposed Final Plat 168 subdivided residential lots on ~57 acres Conforms to previously approved design and zoning requirements Discussion and possible action Tangerine Rd. Moore Road Extension Big Wash Rancho Vistoso Blvd. The purpose of this case is to consider a proposed final plat within the Rancho Vistoso Planned area development that subdivides two parcels that are zoned as medium density residential into 168 residential lots. This new subdivision is called Valley Vista. A plat is a legal document that depicts property boundaries when land is subdivided and conforms to previously approved site plans. Plats can detail specific development standards based on zoning or rezoning conditions. A final plat is largely an administrative process and is one of the last steps in the review procedure. The proposed final plat for this project divides the two parcels into 168 residential lots as indicated on this slide. One parcel is to the north, and one is to the south. This case is presented tonight for discussion and possible action. 6 Tangerine Rd. Innovation Park Moore Road Extension Rancho Vistoso Blvd. Location Big Wash Arrowsmith Drive To orient ourselves, the subject parcel is located north of tangerine road and east of rancho vistoso boulevard at the future Moore road extension. The parcels are outlined in yellow and are zoned for residential use. Big Wash and innovation park are to the east of the site. The Alterra at Vistoso Trails subdivision is to the north of the site. 7 Approved Tentative Development Plan Final Plat This slide shows the approved tentative development plan and final plat. The final plat conforms to the approved TDP in terms of overall density, circulation, and lot layout. Ultimately, the proposed final plat divides the property into 168 residential parcels and is surveyed to be exact. 8 Summary and Recommendation In conformance with: Previously approved design Town Zoning Code Staff recommends approval Tangerine Rd. Moore Road Extension Big Wash Rancho Vistoso Blvd. In summary, the proposed final plat has been found to be in conformance with the previously approved residential design and Town Zoning Code. As such, staff recommends approval. This concludes my presentation. I am happy to answer questions, and the applicant is also here tonight to discuss their proposal. Thank you. 9 10 PARCEL 2-E P.A.D. AMENDMENT OV1801670 TOWN COUNCIL HEARING 1/9/2019 11 Good Planning: Macro-Separation of incompatible land uses Poor Planning: No buffer between incompatible land uses, and orphan parcel created O.V. General Plan Land Use Policy #5: Neighborhoods & Quality of Life – “Provide diverse land uses that meet the Town’s overall needs AND effectively transition in scale and density adjacent to neighborhoods.” Fortunately, we can still rectify the poor planning choices from 20 years ago. 12 A Brief History Leading to this Proposal: 2007 – 2E was purchased when neighbors were still zoned CPI, after assurance from OV that full CPI development rights would be honored. 2008 – Innovation Commerce Campus development plan approved after 14 months of review, meetings, and hearings. Neighbors were empowered over the orphan. 2008 – Recognizing incompatibility issue, OV rezoned neighbors to MDR. 2009 – ICC development plan extension request denied in order to force redesign due to new CPI-MDR boundary. 13 A Brief History Leading to this Proposal: 2007 – 2E was purchased when neighbors were still zoned CPI, after assurance from OV that full CPI development rights would be honored. 2008 – Innovation Commerce Campus development plan approved after 14 months of review, meetings, and hearings. Neighbors were empowered over the orphan. 2008 – Recognizing incompatibility issue, OV rezoned neighbors to MDR. 2009 – ICC development plan extension request denied in order to force redesign due to new CPI-MDR boundary. 2011 – HDR proposal not supported. 2012 – Securaplane shortlisted 2E for HQ, but then EEZ was established (excluding 2E because of proximity to neighbors). EEZ put 2E at competitive disadvantage, so Securaplane went to Innovation Park. 2017 – Live/work proposal not supported. 2018 – EEZ extended to include 2E, unempowering neighbors, and worsening land use transition. 2018 – GP  MDR, recognizing need for a compatible, transitional land use. 2018 – P&Z recommended approval of this rezoning. 2018 – A dozen nearby neighbors have registered support of this rezoning. 14 18’ Single-Story vs. 36’ CPI Bldgs. Less Intense than Existing CPI Zoning (No loading zones, etc.) Landscape Buffers Similar to Surrounding Development Pedestrian Connectivity (within Walking Distance of Major Employers) Infill. No Infrastructure Extensions Needed Lesser “Proximity Issues”: Better to have CPI uses separated from homes by major streets than by a property line. Vistoso Village Dr. connection removed 15 Today, this property could be developed under it’s existing Campus Park Industrial zoning: Offices, light manufacturing, laboratories, warehousing. 36’ building height (~3 stories). Not General Plan land use compliant. Economic Expansion Zone allows administrative development approval. The proposed MHDR zoning: Single-family neighborhood similar to adjacent neighborhoods. 18’ building height (1 story). General Plan land use compliant. Design review process is public. Allows an appropriate intensity of development while finally assuring nearby neighbors that an incompatible use will not be developed next door. 16 Undesirable non-residential land… Sits vacant for years or gets developed with second-tier use; Attracts trespassing and doesn’t produce sales tax as long as it stays vacant; Doesn’t help meet strong residential demand; Doesn’t meet existing employers’ and retailers’ pleas for more housing. Entitling this land for appropriate residential use… Generates construction sales tax (~$740,000); Provides homes for new Oro Valley residents; Helps meet strong residential demand in this desirable community; Supports existing local businesses that are struggling, and also produces more sales tax revenue; Provides reasonable housing conveniently close to Innovation Park employers; 17 Undesirable non-residential land… Sits vacant for years or gets developed with second-tier use; Attracts trespassing and doesn’t produce sales tax as long as it stays vacant; Doesn’t help meet strong residential demand; Doesn’t meet existing employers’ and retailers’ pleas for more housing. Entitling this land for appropriate residential use… Generates construction sales tax (~$740,000); Provides homes for new Oro Valley residents; Helps meet strong residential demand in this desirable community; Supports existing local businesses that are struggling, and also produces more sales tax revenue; Provides reasonable housing conveniently close to Innovation Park employers; (cont’d)… Doesn’t throw the land back into limbo for the owner and neighbors because of newfound economic development enthusiasm. The owner has been courting employment uses for 12 years; Will not “noticeably reduce” the supply of CPI land; Lessens “proximity issues” compared to if CPI were to be developed; Improves land use patterns in the area, contrary to the staff report, including equal or better land use transitions on all sides; Allows an appropriate intensity of development while finally assuring nearby neighbors that an incompatible use will not be developed within a few feet of their homes. 18 Staff Report Issues: This proposal “significantly reduces” supply of (viable) CPI land. No. This proposal “creates land use compatibility concerns”. No…it lessens them. This proposal “will position more homes closer to existing and future commercial and Commerce / Office Park development”. No. Major roads are a much more effective buffer than a property line. More homes, but further. If developed as CPI, buildings would be further from neighbors. True, but they’d also likely be twice as tall, and much wider and imposing, so visual impact would be much greater. If developed as CPI, loading zones near neighbors would have to be screened. True, but delivery trucks would still need to get to them.  Much less compatible than proposed neighborhood. “A CPI use would provide a greater required bufferyard”. 15’ Bufferyard ‘B’. 19 15’ Landscape Bufferyard Adjacent Neighborhood Proposed Single-Story Neighborhood 20 Potential Three-Story CPI Building Rear access, loading/refuse Customer access & parking 15’ Landscape Bufferyard Adjacent Neighborhood 21 Staff Report Issues (cont’d): “Unless residential development is of substantial size, it will not contribute to the overall viability of existing commercial uses”. Every struggling retailer in OV would vehemently disagree because every residential development contributes incrementally. That’s how OV has always grown: Parcel by parcel. The proposal “does not conform to the Your Voice Vision”. And, “on balance…this proposal is not in conformance with the policies of the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan. No…x2… 22 Supported by dozens of Goals & Policies balancing Community, Environment & Development. Fulfills 10 of 17 applicable Goals. Indirectly meets or supports 6 more. Fulfills 18 of 36 applicable Policies. Indirectly meets or supports 16 more. (More than most other recent neighborhoods) Oro Valley’s Vision for the Future: “Oro Valley strives to be a well managed community that provides all residents with opportunities for quality living. Oro Valley will keep its friendly, small-town, neighborly character, while increasing services, employment and recreation. The Town’s lifestyle continues to be defined by a strong sense of community, a high regard for public safety and an extraordinary natural environment and scenic views.” Not a decision between Living OR Working in OV, but an opportunity to support Living AND Working in OV. 23 Staff Report Issues (cont’d): This proposal does not support “growing high quality employment opportunities”. No…in fact more nearby workforce housing is critical to achieving this goal, as voiced by major employers in Innovation Park. 24 25 18’ Single-Story vs. 36’ CPI Bldgs. Less Intense than Existing CPI Zoning (No loading zones, etc.) Landscape Buffers Similar to Surrounding Development Pedestrian Connectivity (within Walking Distance of Major Employers) Infill. No Infrastructure Extensions Needed Lesser “Proximity Issues”: Better to have CPI uses separated from homes by major streets than by a property line. Vistoso Village Dr. connection removed RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION 26 27 Development - 160,000 sq. ft. Incubator Innovation Campus 2006 Tenant pre Commitments –Kraft Robotics – 15,000 sq. ft., Lux Aviation Engineering 20,000 sq. ft., Mechanical Circulatory Support Cluster of two pods of 20,000 sq. ft. Architectural Project Site Plan Buildings 1 - 10 1,694 – 7,422 sq.ft. Office Suites 22 ft. building height 15 ft. interior clear height   Buildings 11 - 14 4,881 – 19,764 sq.ft. Research & Development 36 ft. building height 28 ft. interior clear height   The tenant pre commitments included 75,000 square feet from a combination of Kraft Robotics, Lux Aviation and a Mechanical Circulatory Assist assembly. Four 20,000 square foot buildings and 10 buildings of 8,000 square feet were designed in the development named the Innovation Campus. 28 18’ Single-Story vs. 36’ CPI Bldgs. Less Intense than Existing CPI Zoning (No loading zones, etc.) Landscape Buffers Similar to Surrounding Development Pedestrian Connectivity (within Walking Distance of Major Employers) Infill. No Infrastructure Extensions Needed Lesser “Proximity Issues”: Better to have CPI uses separated from homes by major streets than by a property line. Vistoso Village Dr. connection removed 29 30 31 Vistoso Commerce Loop Rezoning Town Council January 9, 2019 32 Rezoning Request Purpose Change property from employment to residential use Existing: Campus Park Industrial Proposed: Medium High Density Residential (72 homes) Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation Town Council Action 33 Big Wash Oracle Road Rancho Vistoso Blvd. Ventana Icagen 34 PAD/Rezoning Amendment SITE Existing Proposed Campus Park Industrial Medium High Density Residential SITE Oracle Road Rancho Vistoso Blvd. Tangerine Road Oracle Road Rancho Vistoso Blvd. Tangerine Road 35 Lot Sizes and Density 4,400 SF Minimum 4,868 SF Average 4.7 DU/AC 5,000 SF Minimum 6,500 SF Average 2.9 DU/AC 5,000 SF Minimum 6,700 SF Average 5.4 DU/AC General Plan MDR density: 2.1-5 DU/AC MHDR density: 6-8 DU/AC Proposed density: 4.7 DU/AC Condition not to exceed 5 DU/AC 36 Tentative Development Plan 72 detached single-family homes 37 Residential Encroachment 1987: Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development Adopted East of Big Wash planned as major office/research park 1994: Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District Adopted 1996: Most of Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 2 converted to residential Due to zoning provision of ORSCOD 2002: ORSCOD Amended 2018: GPA to MDR approved 2 3 Oracle Road Rancho Vistoso Blvd. Big Wash 38 General Plan Conformance Land use designation General Plan land use map, vision, guiding principles, goals and policies Oro Valley strives to be a well-managed community that provides all residents with opportunities for quality living. Oro Valley will keep its friendly, small-town, neighborly character, while increasing services, employment and recreation. Employment Grow the number of high-quality employment opportunities A robust local economy and job market that provide opportunities for quality employment Compatibility Development character and land use patterns Effective transitions between differing land uses and intensities in the community 39 Goals and Policies 1. Employment: Goals and Policies Grow the number of high-quality employment opportunities Health and medical research industries Educational institutions Research/technical parks Visitor and tourist attractions Light industry Professional office complexes 40 OV’s challenge: A relatively low supply of Tech Park zoned land. 1. Employment: Available Land 41 1. Employment: Available CPI Land 1 2 3 4 5 Innovation Park 124 acres available Commerce Office Loop 15 acres available Foothills Business Park 6.8 acres available Oracle and Linda Vista 42 acres available Miller Ranch 6.7 acres available Oracle south of El Conquistador 8.5 acres available ~200 buildable acres available 6 42 1. Employment: OV Economic Development Projections ~300 acres needed One project averages 10 acres 150 jobs per 10 acres Goals by 2030 20-30 projects by 2030 3,000 - 4,500 potential new jobs Current interest includes: Bioscience Consumer products Headquarters Advanced business services Engineering/ Research & Development 43 1. Employment: Recent OV Developments Davita Dialysis Center: ~7,500 SF Innovation Corporate Center: ~14,400 SF Ironwood Dermatology: ~6,500 SF Iora Primary Care: ~5,800 SF OV Surgical Suites: 7,400 SF Simpleview: 40,727 SF 44 1. Employment: Sun Corridor 21% increase in employer prospects including: Bio/Health Care, Business Services, Engineering, Headquarters, Manufacturing Employers: AWS: 1,500 jobs Geico: 700 jobs Citi Group: 640 jobs TuSimple: 500 jobs Axicades: 320 jobs ADP: 250 jobs Ascensus: 170 jobs Ernst & Young: 125 jobs Texas Instruments: 35 jobs 4,240 Jobs 45 1. Employment: Prospects for Regional Economy Excellent Cushman & Wakefield/PICOR Report Tucson regional economic development pipeline is the strongest it has been in several years. 6,700 job increase over one year ending in Q3/2018 Overall vacancy has dropped to 5.7% from 9.5% (historical average) Absorption will continue a strong and positive trend U of A Eller College of Business Economic Forecast Key job gains in health care, engineering, business and professional sectors 9,000 net new jobs created from Q3/2017 to Q3/2018 2.4 % new job regional increase vs 2.1% national average 19,000 net new jobs over the next two years 46 1. Employment: Local economic impact OV mid-size employment site results: 184 jobs with average wage of $65,870 $17 million capital investment $12.3 million (4 yrs) household spending resulting in $478K in local sales tax 47 1. Employment: Residential 72 new residential units will not significantly boost retail spending Office workers and residents exercise similar retail spending power. National $ per week averages: $102 - $195 per office worker $134 per resident 72 new homes does not substantively benefit employers ~410 new homes already planned near Innovation Park area. 72 new homes is only 2% of anticipated total new housing stock Oro Valley already has a sizable workforce >13,000 current residents commute outside OV for work Community desire for OV employment opportunities is well established and a site opportunity should not be diminished. 168 Units 242 Units Innovation Park 48 2. Compatibility: Goals and Policies Development character and land use patterns Does it improve transitions? Compatibility of commercial & residential properties Site layout and buffers Loading zones Building heights Rancho Vistoso Blvd. Vistoso Commerce Loop Innovation Park Dr. Oracle Rd. 49 Land Use Patterns 2. Compatibility: Transitions Future CPI Future Commercial Current Conditions 20 homes impacted Future Conditions 30 homes impacted Proximity issue for future commercial and industrial development Vistoso Funeral Home Rancho Vistoso Urgent Care EasyCare Healthy Skin Dermatology Oro Valley Audiology 50 2. Compatibility: Transitions Isolating EasyCare and Healthy Skin Dermatology 51 2. Compatibility: Site Layout and Buffers 15’ Landscaped Buffer ~70’ Landscaped Buffer 52 2. Compatibility: Site Layout and Buffers Manufacturing uses shall be placed in a location furthest from residentially-zoned property. When possible, office uses shall be placed adjacent to residentially-zoned property. 53 2. Compatibility: Site Layout and Buffers 15 – 30 ft. Landscape Buffer 28 ft. min. Access Drive Building Building 60 ft. min. fire clear zone 80 ft. fire clear zone 2 – 17 ft. Additional Drive 54 Healthy Skin Dermatology 2. Compatibility: Loading Zones Icagen Where applicable and feasible, buildings shall be oriented to internalize service and loading areas between buildings to reduce visibility of these areas. 55 2. Compatibility: Building Height Building Height Proposed building height is 18 feet CPI zoning allows for up to 36 feet 56 2. Compatibility: Building Height Healthy Skin Dermatology: 20 feet EasyCare: ~25 feet Icagen: 32 feet Ventana Roche : 19-35 feet Western National Parks Association: 22 feet Vistoso Funeral Home: 24 feet 32’ 19’ 22’ 24-35’ 24’ 20’ ~25’ 57 2. Compatibility: Building Height Applicant’s view simulation presented at Neighborhood meetings Not an Accurate Representation 58 Oct 15, 2018 Neighborhood Meeting Key Issues Public Participation Preservation of existing views - Building heights Buffer yards between new homes and adjacent neighbors Density and compatibility of new homes Traffic and circulation Uses permitted under existing CPI zoning and if design standards would be compatible with surrounding land uses Concern regarding the loss of employment land Neighbor ability to have input for a Campus Park Industrial development proposal 59 Summary and Recommendation Conforms with General Plan Land Use designation Does not conform with Your Voice, Our Future General Plan’s emphasis on: Economic growth Becoming a complete community by increasing employment opportunities Appropriate transition between land uses The Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval 60 61 Placita De Oro Master Sign Program Town Council Meeting January 9, 2019 OV1801490 62 New Master Sign Program Purpose Establish Sign Standards Recommendation by Planning and Zoning Commission Approval by Town Council The purpose for this next case is to review a Master Sign Program that will introduce a new and taller monument sign design for the Placita De Oro shopping center. These types of projects are submitted to the Town by the owners or landlords of commercial developments. Before we get into the details of this specific proposal, I wanted to spend a moment explaining a Master Sign Program. Each one of our commercial developments is required to establish a set of sign standards specific to their property. This means the developer needs to determine the design, size, quantity and colors of all permanent signs that will be built in the shopping center. This is done through either a sign criteria or master sign program. The standards proposed in a Master Sign Program can exceed the usual code requirements through the review by the PZC with final decision by Council. A master sign program is usually chosen when there are special circumstances on a property that warrant latitude to the code. Now, let’s get oriented to the location of this project. 63 Site Tangerine Road First Avenue The Placita De Oro shopping center is located at the SW corner of Tangerine Road and First Ave. It is home to an Ace Hardware, Walgreens, Wells Fargo along with restaurants and several other businesses. There are currently 2 monument signs in the development as indicated by the yellow stars. Those monument signs would be removed and replaced if this new sign program is approved. 64 Master Sign Program Monument Sign Design Increase height allowance from 10’ to 12’ Code allows 10’ Proposed 12’ This is the proposed new monument sign design for the shopping center. While the design itself uses colors and materials found in the shopping center, it is the height of the sign that requires us to look at this proposal as a master sign program. The zoning code generally allows a 10’ tall sign but the proposed monument sign is 12’ tall. The additional 2’ of sign height is the only latitude asked for in this master sign program. The location, sign type and quantity of signs will meet the standards of the zoning code. The special circumstances that prompted the shopping center owner to submit for a taller sign is the depth of the right-of-way along Tangerine and the dense vegetation along First Ave. Let’s take another look at the site plan….. 65 Site Tangerine Road First Avenue 120’ 190’ The northern property line is next to the Tangerine Road right-of-way. The distance from the property line of the development and the actual paved road is anywhere from a 120’ to nearly 200’. This deep right-of-way creates a large space of land that makes finding monument signs difficult. Also, this shopping center has dense vegetation (PUSH) along First Ave which adds to the visibility challenges at those entrances. The way finding challenges are the reason the property owner has chosen to propose signs that are 2’ taller. Again, this 2’ increase in height is the only reason this project is presented as a master sign program. The other signs proposed in the master sign program……. 66 Logos Colors Palette for tenant names …… will comply with the standards of the zoning code. The proposed color palette for the names of the businesses on the monument sign and on the walls of the building along with the logo allowances all meet the zoning code standards. 67 Wall Signs and Illumination Pan channel Internal illumination Reverse pan channel Halo illumination The wall sign types will include both halo illuminated letters that we see on the left side of the screen and internally illuminated letters that we see on the right side of the screen. Both types of signs are allowed in the zoning code. The applicant has also chosen to prohibit any wall signs on the south and west sides of the buildings in order to protect the adjacent neighbors from views of signs in the shopping center. That summarizes the proposal we are reviewing tonight. 68 Your Voice, Our Future General Plan Goal  Q:  A built environment that creatively integrates landscape, architecture, open space and conservation elements to increase the sense of place, community interaction and quality of life.   Action item #125: Maintain the unique character of Oro Valley by studying and updating: Signage regulations to emphasize identification and direction over advertising goods or services to maintain compatibility and minimal intrusiveness. As always we look to the General Plan’s Goals and Policies when updating signage regulations to emphasize identification and direction without intrusive signs. Staff finds that the proposed master sign program meets the general plans standards by improving identification for the center without intrusiveness……. 69 Summary Complies with: General Plan Design Standards Zoning Code Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval …. and also meets the Design Standards of the zoning code. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposal including the special circumstances of the right-of-way depth and has recommended approval. The applicant is here to answer any questions about the project that you might have. 70 71