Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (1273)         AGENDA ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION and STUDY SESSION FEBRUARY 5, 2020 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE Executive Sessions – Upon a vote of the majority of the Town Council, the Council may enter into Executive Sessions pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes §38-431.03 (A)(3) to obtain legal advice on matters listed on the Agenda.        REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM   CALL TO ORDER   ROLL CALL   PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE   UPCOMING MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS   COUNCIL REPORTS   TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT   The Mayor and Council may consider and/or take action on the items listed below: ORDER OF BUSINESS: MAYOR WILL REVIEW THE ORDER OF THE MEETING   INFORMATIONAL ITEMS   CALL TO AUDIENCE – At this time, any member of the public is allowed to address the Mayor and Town Council on any issue not listed on today’s agenda. Pursuant to the Arizona Open Meeting Law, individual Council 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 Mayor and Council 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.   PRESENTATIONS   1.Presentation of Youth Art by the Arts and Culture Ambassadors   CONSENT AGENDA  (Consideration and/or possible action)   A.Minutes - January 22, 2020          REGULAR AGENDA   1.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPOINT KARA M. RILEY AS THE ORO VALLEY CHIEF OF POLICE AND TO APPROVE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 22, 2020 (Employment agreement will be added prior to the Council meeting)   FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS (The Council may bring forth general topics for future meeting agendas. Council may not discuss, deliberate or take any action on the topics presented pursuant to ARS 38-431.02H)   CALL TO AUDIENCE – At this time, any member of the public is allowed to address the Mayor and Town Council on any issue not listed on today’s agenda. Pursuant to the Arizona Open Meeting Law, individual Council 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 Mayor and Council 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.   ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR SESSION   STUDY SESSION   CALL TO ORDER   STUDY SESSION AGENDA   1.DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS TO C-1, C-2, AND TECHNOLOGICAL PARK AND EQUIVALENT PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS REGARDING LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUCH AS BUILDING HEIGHTS, SETBACKS, ETC.   2.DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO THE ECONOMIC EXPANSION ZONE, SECTION 24.9 AND SECTION 22.10   ADJOURNMENT OF THE STUDY SESSION   RECONVENE THE REGULAR SESSION   EXECUTIVE SESSION - 1. Pursuant to A.R.S. 38-431.03(A)(3) and (A)(4) for legal advice with the Town Attorneys, discussion and consultation with those attorneys regarding a possible settlement agreement 2. Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3) and/or (A)(4) for legal advice with the Town attorneys, discussion, and consultation with those attorneys and designated Town representatives, and possible instruction to those attorneys and designated representatives about agreements related to the Town owned golf courses, HSL and/or Home Owners’ Associations proximate to those courses.   RESUME THE REGULAR SESSION   1.POSSIBLE APPROVAL OF ANY ITEMS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION   ADJOURNMENT The Mayor and Council may, at the discretion of the meeting chairperson, discuss any Agenda item.   POSTED: 1/29/20 at 5:00 p.m. by pp POSTED: 1/29/20 at 5:00 p.m. by pp When possible, a packet of agenda materials as listed above is available for public inspection at least 24 hours prior to the Council meeting in the office of the Town Clerk 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 Council meeting at 229-4700. INSTRUCTIONS TO SPEAKERS Members of the public have the right to speak during any posted public hearing. However, those items not listed as a public hearing are for consideration and action by the Town Council during the course of their business meeting. Members of the public may be allowed to speak on these topics at the discretion of the Chair. If you wish to address the Town Council on any item(s) on this agenda, please complete a speaker card located on the Agenda table at the back of the room and give it to the Town Clerk. Please indicate on the 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 when completing the blue speaker card. Please step forward to the podium when the Mayor announces the item(s) on the agenda which you are interested in addressing. 1. For the record, please state your name and whether or not you are a Town resident. 2. Speak only on the issue currently being discussed by Council. Please organize your speech, you will only be allowed to address the Council once regarding the topic being discussed. 3. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes. 4. During “Call to Audience” you may address the Council on any issue you wish. 5. Any member of the public speaking must speak in a courteous and respectful manner to those present. Thank you for your cooperation.    Town Council Regular and Study Session 1. Meeting Date:02/05/2020   Presentation of Youth Art Subject Presentation of Youth Art by the Arts and Culture Ambassadors Summary Attachments No file(s) attached.    Town Council Regular and Study Session A. Meeting Date:02/05/2020   Requested by: Mike Standish Submitted By:Michelle Stine, Town Clerk's Office Department:Town Clerk's Office SUBJECT: Minutes - January 22, 2020 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 the following changes) the January 22, 2020 minutes.  Attachments 1-22-20 Draft Minutes  D R A F T   MINUTES ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 22, 2020 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE            REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM   CALL TO ORDER    Mayor Winfield called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.   ROLL CALL Present: Joseph C. Winfield, Mayor Melanie Barrett, Vice-Mayor Joyce Jones-Ivey, Councilmember Josh Nicolson, Councilmember Rhonda Piña, Councilmember Bill Rodman, Councilmember Steve Solomon, Councilmember PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE    Mayor Winfield led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.   UPCOMING MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS    Town Clerk Mike Standish announced the upcoming Town meetings.   COUNCIL REPORTS    Councilmember Jones-Ivey announced that the Town would be holding a Parks and Recreation Master Plan Community Meeting on Thursday, January 23, 2020 and encouraged residents to attend. Councilmember Jones-Ivey recognized Analeise Perez, a fourth grade student at Wilson Elementary School and Savana Dorame, an eighth grade student also at Wilson Elementary School for their academic excellence and outstanding community service.   1-22-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 1         TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT    Town Manager Mary Jacobs reported that a portion of La Cholla Boulevard would be closed to through-traffic between Lambert Lane and Overton Road from January 27 through April 22, 2020. Parks and Recreation Director Kristy Diaz-Trahan announced that a community meeting would be held in the Council Chambers on Thursday, January 23, 2020. This meeting would be used to help develop a system-wide comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan.   ORDER OF BUSINESS    Mayor Winfield reviewed the order of business and stated that the order would stand as posted.   INFORMATIONAL ITEMS    There were no informational items.   CALL TO AUDIENCE    Oro Valley resident Dr. Ted Dreisinger spoke in support of hiring an internal candidate for the succession of the Chief of Police.    Oro Valley resident Greg Kishi expressed support for hiring an internal candidate for the succession of the Chief of Police and also thanked Council for providing the Police Chief survey results to the public.   PRESENTATIONS   1.Presentation of a painting to Chief Sharp by artist and Oro Valley resident, Harry (Mo) Greene       Councilmember Piña introduced Dr. Harry Greene and presented his biography. Mr. Greene presented Oro Valley Police Chief Danny Sharp with a self-portrait painting of Chief Sharp.   2.Presentation on the history of Steam Pump Ranch       Parks and Recreation Director Kristy Diaz-Trahan provided a presentation on the history of Steam Pump Ranch and included the following: Steam Pump Ranch - Past to Present Steam Pump Ranch The Pusch/Zellweger era (1870's -- 1930's) Proctor/Leiber era (1933 -2007) Hank and Betty Leiber 2004 Pima County Bond The Commission and The Society Missions Acquisition and Improvements Pump House and Ghosted Structure Chicken Coop Preservation Pusch House Repairs and Landscape Programs and Events Looking Forward Next Steps 1-22-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 2  Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding presentation item #2.    The following individual spoke regarding item #2. Oro Valley resident and Historic Preservation Commission member Eric Thomae    Discussion continued amongst Council and staff regarding Steam Pump Ranch.   3.Presentation and discussion on the Town's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2019       Mr. Christopher W. Heinfeld representing Heinfeld Meech and Company presented the Town's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and included the following: Financial Statements Audit Approach Final Notes Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding Presentation item #3.   4.*Presentation and possible discussion of the Town's Fiscal Year 2019/20 Financial Update through November 2019       Interim Chief Financial Officer Kevin Artz presented item #4 and included the following: General Fund General Fund Highlights Highway Fund Highway Fund Highlights Community Center Fund Community Center Fund Highlights Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding the Town's Fiscal Year 2019/20 Financial Update through November 2019.   CONSENT AGENDA   A.Minutes - January 6 and January 8, 2020      B.Resolution No. (R)20-03, authorizing and approving a wireless facilities site license with New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC      C.**Approval to continue the following study session item to February 5, 2020: Discussion regarding proposed code amendments to C-1, C-2, and Technological Park and equivalent planned area development districts regarding land uses and development standards such as building heights, setbacks, etc.       Motion by Vice-Mayor Melanie Barrett, seconded by Councilmember Bill Rodman to approve Consent agenda items (A) - (C).  Vote: 7 - 0 Carried   REGULAR AGENDA 1-22-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 3  REGULAR AGENDA    There were no regular agenda items.   FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS    Vice-Mayor Barrett requested a future agenda item to discuss commission meetings and their timing relative to Council meetings. Vice-Mayor Barrett requested a future agenda item for discussion and possible action regarding which routine documents should be placed on the Town's website.   CALL TO AUDIENCE    No comments were received.   ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR SESSION    Mayor Winfield adjourned the regular session at 7:33 p.m.   STUDY SESSION    Mayor Winfield recessed the meeting at 7:34 p.m. Mayor Winfield reconvened the meeting at 7:42 p.m.   CALL TO ORDER    Mayor Winfield called the study session to order at 7:42 p.m.   STUDY SESSION AGENDA   1.DISCUSSION REGARDING THE STATE-IMPOSED EXPENDITURE LIMITATION AND OPTIONS FOR ALTERNATIVE EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS, INCLUDING THE PERMANENT BASE ADJUSTMENT OPTION       Town Manager Mary Jacobs provided a brief background regarding the State-Imposed Expenditure Limitation, Options for Alternative Expenditure Limitations and the Permanent Base Adjustment. Interim Chief Financial Officer Kevin Artz presented item #1 and included the following: Background Estimated State-Imposed Limitation Why doesn't the State-Imposed Limitation work in Oro Valley Home Rule Option Permanent Base Adjustment Option Capital Projects/One-time Override Budget and Finance Commission Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding Study Session item #1. Mr. Artz continued the presentation and included the following: 1-22-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 4  Permanent Base adjustment to $1.65M Base Adjustment to $1,650,000 Calendar Discussion continued amongst Council and staff regarding study session item #1.   ADJOURNMENT    Mayor Winfield adjourned the meeting at 8:53 p.m.     _____________________________________ Michelle Stine, MMC Deputy Town Clerk I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular and study session of the Town of Oro Valley Council of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 22nd day of January 2020. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this _____ day of ____________________, 2020. ___________________________ Michael Standish, CMC Town Clerk 1-22-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 5     Town Council Regular and Study Session 1. Meeting Date:02/05/2020   Requested by: Town Council Submitted By:Mike Standish, Town Clerk's Office Department:Town Clerk's Office SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPOINT KARA M. RILEY AS THE ORO VALLEY CHIEF OF POLICE AND TO APPROVE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 22, 2020 (Employment agreement will be added prior to the Council meeting) RECOMMENDATION: N/A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: N/A BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to (approve or deny) the appointment of Kara M. Riley as the Oro Valley Chief of Police and to approve an employment agreement, effective February 22, 2020. Attachments No file(s) attached.    Town Council Regular and Study Session 1. Meeting Date:02/05/2020   Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development  Submitted By:Milini Simms, Community and Economic Development Case Number: 1901679 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS TO C-1, C-2, AND TECHNOLOGICAL PARK AND EQUIVALENT PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS REGARDING LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUCH AS BUILDING HEIGHTS, SETBACKS, ETC. RECOMMENDATION: This item is for informational and discussion purposes only. The proposed code amendments will be presented for action by the Town Council in March. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this item is to provide background and information regarding proposed amendments (Attachment 1, Attachment 2 and Attachment 3) to the commercial (C-1 and C-2 only) and Technological Park zoning districts in the Oro Valley Zoning Code and equivalent Planned Area Developments (for affected areas, see image to the right and Attachment 4). The proposed code amendments are intended to meet the economic goals (1A and 1B) of Town Council's Strategic Leadership Plan and implement actions in the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Plan. The proposed code amendment focuses on four primary elements:  Expanding the amount of available property for employment uses by allowing low-impact employers in larger commercial zones (for summary of changes, see Attachment 5). 1. Updating standards (such as increasing the building height in limited areas) and reducing discrepancies among the various codes regulating Tech-Park zoned land to establish a more consistent approach (see Attachment 6 and Attachment 7). 2. Increasing predictability for developments of similar size and design by utilizing commercial scenic corridor standards for tech-park developments (see Attachment 8). 3. Removing unintended barriers for attracting employment uses in balance with maintaining community values by adding flexibility and clarity to specific use requirements. For example, adding flexibility to the odor abatement plan requirements (Strategic Leadership Plan, Goal 5A) and increasing the means to regulate vibration, noise, air pollution, safety and other elements associated with manufacturing or warehousing uses (see Attachment 9). 4. The proposed amendments were discussed by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 5, 2019, during a study session (see Attachment 10 and Attachment 11) and considered on December 3, 2019 (see  Attachment 12 and Attachment 13). The Commission recommended the following:   Reduce the proposed 50' Tech-Park building height to 36' when the subject property is within 100' of a property used or intended for residential purposes (in addition to reducing the height to 36' when located along a scenic corridor)  Allow light warehousing as an ancillary use and hotels/motels as a conditional use in the Oro Valley Tech-Park zoning district These recommendations are reflected in the applicable codes (Attachment 1 and Attachment 2). The proposed code amendments support several of the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan's economic goals as well as policies to ensure compatibility and preserve views from scenic corridors. This item is being presented for informational purposes only. The proposed code amendments will be presented for action by the Town Council in March. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: The proposed code amendments are intended to meet the economic goals of the Town Council's Strategic Leadership Plan and implement actions from the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) plan. The proposed code amendments fulfill these goals and objectives by focusing on four primary elements:  Expanding the amount of available property for employment uses by allowing low-impact employers in larger commercial zones (see Attachment 5) Updating standards (such as increasing the building height in limited areas) and reducing discrepancies among the various codes regulating Tech-Park zoned land to establish a more consistent approach (see Attachment 6 and Attachment 7). Increasing predictability for developments of similar size and design by utilizing commercial scenic corridor standards for tech-park developments (see Attachment 8). Removing unintended barriers for attracting employment uses in balance with maintaining community values by adding flexibility and clarity to specific use requirements. For example, adding flexibility to the odor abatement plan requirements (Strategic Leadership Plan, Goal 5A) and increasing the means to regulate vibration, noise, air pollution, safety and other elements associated with manufacturing or warehousing uses (see Attachment 9). The proposed code amendments are included in Attachment 1 (Oro Valley Zoning Code), Attachment 2 (Rancho Vistoso PAD) and Attachment 3 (La Reserve PAD) with detailed information on each element is provided below. 1. Expanding the amount of available property for employment uses Existing Permitted Uses Employment uses, such as Ventana Roche Medical Systems, Icagen and Securaplane are only allowed in Oro Valley's Tech-Park zoning district, the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development (PAD)-Campus Park Industrial (CPI) district and the La Reserve PAD-Area D. The total amount of employment land in Oro Valley is approximately 405 acres with 235 acres remaining as vacant land. However, when accounting for areas not buildable due to topography or land already planned for development, the remaining amount of buildable employment space is reduced to roughly 188 acres.  A comparison of Oro Valley's employment space compared to other jurisdictions is depicted below:    Jurisdiction Oro Valley Marana Scottsdale Chandler Total land (sq/mi)36 121 185 65 Employment land (in acres), percent of total land 405; 2%9,818,13% 3,552; 3%6,135; 5% Percentage of buildable land left (acres, percentage)188; 47%1,473; 15%532; 15%3,485; 57% A goal of the CEDS Plan is to attract 2-3 employers a year, or 20-30 new and expanded employment users to Oro Valley by 2030. To meet this goal, the Town would need at least 300 acres of employment land available within the next 10 years. Several employment uses are low impact and function similar to a typical office space, which is currently a permitted use in commercial zoning districts. Commercial districts (C-1 and C-2 only) account for 284 acres of vacant land, which due to the “Amazon” effect, is not in high demand for retail. By allowing more employment uses in commercial zones that are low impact and function similarly to the existing permitted commercial uses, the Town can meet the employment space demand while mitigating the “Amazon” effect. Enabling shopping centers to thrive by incorporating a bustling mix of uses and activity to foster retail is a nationally recognized strategy. by incorporating a bustling mix of uses and activity to foster retail is a nationally recognized strategy. Proposed Permitted Uses The proposed code amendment (Attachment 1) recommends allowing the following low-impact employment uses (see chart below and Attachment 5) in C-1 and C-2 commercial zones. Additional primary and ancillary uses are proposed in the Tech-Park zoning district for consistency with the Planned Area Developments and to create mixed-use environments sought by employers/employees (see Attachment 6).     EXISTING CODE PROPOSED C-1 C-2 T-P C-1 C-2 T-P Bars P P  P P A Distillery   C   P Microbrewery A A A P P P Food processing, artisanal P P  P P P Light Manufacturing   P  P P Warehousing, Heavy      C Warehousing, Light      A Research and Development    P P P Personal Services P P  P P A Wholesaling     C P Medical Services (combined inpatient and outpatient)C P  P P P Vehicle rental establishments for less than 10 vehicles P P  P P A Vehicle Sales C C  C P   Hotels/Motels C P  C P C Fitness Centers or Health Spas (may have both indoor and outdoor activity C C C P P P P= Permitted C= Conditional A= Ancillary C-1 = Commercial C-2 = Regional Commercial T-P = Tech Park Per code, ancillary uses are subordinate to a primary use. In Tech-Park zoning districts, ancillary uses may only occupy 30% of the gross floor area per individual business or 20% of the total development and must be part of a Master Planned Development. A Master Planned Development is an area where large, multi-use developments are planned and developed in a comprehensive manner. Essentially, this assures ancillary uses remain subordinate to primary uses in Tech-Park zones and larger developments are designed cohesively.  2. Update standards and reduce discrepancies among the various development standards for Tech-Park sites As previously mentioned, Tech Park sites are regulated by three different codes; 1) Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code, 2) Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development and 3) La Reserve Planned Area Development (see Attachment 6). Planned Area Developments have existed in Oro Valley since 1974, creating unique code requirements for specific geographic areas. The subject codes have evolved independently over time creating a variation of standards, specifically with regard to height and uses, for Tech Park sites. This causes confusion for prospective employment users and surrounding residents. As such, to further assist in attracting employment uses and meet the economic goals of the Strategic Leadership Plan and CEDS Plan, the proposed amendment aims to provide some parity between the three different regulating documents. In addition to gaining parity between the permitted and ancillary uses previously mentioned, further consistency among the permitted building heights and building size is also achieved through the amendments. Existing Building Height The existing building height allowed for Tech-Park uses ranges from 34' to 48', depending on if the property is regulated by the Town's Zoning Code or a Planned Area Development. Tech-park buildings tend to be larger and with limited space, many buildings must go vertical instead of building outward. To understand the needs of tech-park users, Town staff reviewed other jurisdictions' Tech-Park standards to recommend a building height that will be regionally competitive yet maintain the goals of the community. Additionally, input was provided by Oro Valley's largest employer, Ventana Roche, which is also seeking an increased height of 50' (see Attachment 14). A comparison between the existing codes and surrounding jurisdictions is provided below:    Height Oro Valley Zoning Code Rancho Vistoso PAD La Reserve PAD Tucson Marana Sahuarita Pima County Mesa Tempe Tech-Park*34'36', 44' or 48'35' or 42'50'50'44'44'40'30' *Height for surrounding jurisdictions is based on the zoning district most comparable with Oro Valley's Tech-Park zoning district. However, most jurisdictions also have industrial zoning districts which allow much taller building heights. Additionally, depicted is the max building height of the main structure, which does include an additional allowance for architectural features. Proposed Building Height As shown in the table above, there are currently six different building heights permitted among Tech-Park sites. The proposed code amendment aims to reduce disparity between sites and meet the needs of employment users while preserving views for surrounding homes and along scenic corridors. To accomplish these objectives, the existing heights have been consolidated to either 50' or 36' (see chart below and for map, see Attachment 7).    PROPOSED HEIGHT INCREASE (NEW HEIGHTS) ORO VALLEY RANCHO VISTOSO PAD LA RESERVE PAD +2' (36')+2 (36' and 50')**+8' (36 and 50')** ** To protect views from surrounding homes, the proposed 50' height reduced to 36' when the subject property is within 100' of a property used or intended for residential purposes. Additionally, the code currently restricts building heights along Oracle and Tangerine Road to protect the views along these scenic corridors. The proposed code amendment retains these restrictions (the west side of Oracle Road is revised to match the commercial standards) and restricts the building height to 36' for properties fronting Oracle Road (Tangerine is reduced through the existing code). A summary of the scenic corridor standards and amendments is provided below and in Attachment 8:    Corridor EXISTING CODE PROPOSED CODE Tech-Park Commercial Tech-Park Tangerine Road Refers to commercial standards Restricted to 20’ if located within 100’ and visible from the Tangerine Road right-of-way. No change  Oracle Road West-side No buildings over 18' may be within 150’ of Oracle Road No buildings over 18' may be within a minimum of 60% of the frontage to a depth of 300' Refer to the commercial standard for consistency and restrict building height to 36' for lots fronting Oracle Road. Oracle Road East-side 60% of the frontage to a depth of 300' is maintained as a view corridor unless properties are less than 2 acres or 400' in depth, then heights over 25' are limited to 40% of the frontage. Maintain current requirements and restrict building height to 36' for lots fronting Oracle Road. Currently, the code allows a 10' allowance for architectural features upon Planning and Zoning Commission approval. These features, which include parapets, towers and cornices are important for screening mechanical equipment and creating architectural interest in varying the roof line (both of which are code requirements). However, since Tech-Park developments are administratively approved through the Economic Expansion Zone, this has been amended to be permitted by right. For consistency, the approval for the 10' foot allowance has been amended in commercial zones as well. Existing and Proposed Building Size Currently, in the Oro Valley Tech-Park Zoning District the building size for individual structures is restricted to 15,000 square feet on properties of 10 acres or fewer, unless a Conditional Use Permit is acquired. This requirement was established because Tech-Park buildings tend to be larger in scale (yet similar to those built in a C-2 commercial zoning district). Since this requirement was established, the Design Guidelines and Standards were adopted, which address many of the concerns (building scale and mass) associated with larger buildings. Additionally, other Tech-Park sites regulated by Planned Area Developments (I.E. Innovation Park and the Foothills Business Park) are not restricted. As such, this provision has been removed as it is outdated and creates parity among all Tech-Park sites. 3. Increase predictability for developments of similar size and design Existing and Proposed Setbacks Although similar in design and functionality, the setbacks for commercial centers (commercial zoning districts) and employment centers (Tech-Park zoning districts) are different; with the latter being more restrictive. The proposed code amendment makes the setbacks consistent for all commercial and the Tech-Park zoning districts regulated by the Oro Valley Zoning Code. The proposed code amendment also clarifies the setbacks are for the site perimeter rather than the individual buildings to create cohesive employment or commercial centers. Setbacks are intended to create a separation between developments and adjoining lots or streets. For commercial or employment centers, the intent is met through perimeter setbacks. The proposed code amendment includes a distance between buildings to account for fire safety and allow for pedestrian connectivity throughout the site.  Existing and Proposed Scenic Corridor Standards As previously mentioned, the Town of Oro Valley has two scenic corridors, Oracle Road and Tangerine Road (for map, see Attachment 8), which restrict developments in order to preserve the scenic character of these areas. The requirements for commercial centers and employment uses are different; with the latter being more restrictive. However, both types of developments include similar design elements such as large buildings, internal circulation patterns and larger parking areas.  The Tangerine Corridor acknowledges this similarity between commercial and employment centers by applying the same standards among both types of development. However, along Oracle Road the front setback and buffer yards are inconsistent with the Tech-Park standards being more extensive. For example, this means a permitted office would require a larger setback in a Tech-Park zone than it would in a commercial zone with the same height. As such, the setbacks along Oracle Road have been revised for greater consistency among the tech-park and commercial standards. Please see chart below and Attachment 8 for a summary of the proposed revisions.    TANGERINE ROAD SCENIC CORRIDOR  EXISTING CODE PROPOSED CODE Tech-Park Commercial Tech-Park Front setback Refers to commercial 4:1 (setback to height) No change- Existing standards are consistent between T-P and commercial.Side/Rear setbacks Refers to commercial Underlying Zoning district ORACLE ROAD SCENIC CORRIDOR   EXISTING CODE PROPOSED CODE Tech- Park Commercial Tech Park Front setback 150’ except for La Reserve PAD sites, which is 50’ Single structure: 60’ and 4:1 (setback to building height) Multiple structures: 120’ average Revised to refer to all the commercial standards Side/ Rear buffer yards 100 feet when abutting residential Silent – normal buffer yard requirements apply Revised to 40’ when abutting residential. Forty feet is the maximum depth of a buffer yard required in Section 27.6.C.4. 4. Remove Unintended Barriers  Section 25.1.B. of the Zoning Code has additional standards for specific uses. Minor changes were made for consistency with the permitted use table and provisions for manufacturing and warehouses were added to clearly delineate between the two subcategories (light or heavy) permitted for these uses.  Currently, manufacturing is categorized as either light or heavy based on whether the use impacts surrounding properties (based on noise, odor, etc.). Warehousing, which is currently permitted in Rancho Vistoso and La Reserve tech-parks is not categorized by intensity. As such the proposed code amendment adds restrictions on both uses to assure manufacturing and warehousing uses that may impact surrounding areas are approved through the public review process. Should the following restrictions not be met the use is deemed "heavy" and a Conditional Use Permit must be acquired (approved by Town Council). A summary is provided below and in Attachment 9.    USE REQUIREMENT EXISTING PROPOSED Manufacturing Vibration Only the La Reserve (LR) PAD restricts the amount of vibration that may occur. Shall not be discernible at the property line when the development abuts a residential property. Vibration shall not be discernible beyond the property line to the human sense of feeling for a duration of three minutes or more in any one hour of the day between the hours of 7:00 AM- 7:00 PM or of a duration of 30 seconds or more in any one hour between the hours of 7:00 PM - 7:00 AM, when the development abuts a non-residential property. Glare/Heat Shall not be discernible at the property line unless a CUP is acquired No change Fly ash, dust fumes, vapors, gasses and other forms of air pollution Only the La Reserve (LR) PAD has parameters for this. Add language consistent with the La Reserve PAD: No emission shall be permitted which can cause any damage to health, damage to animals or vegetation, or damage to or soiling of other forms of property.   Liquid and solid waste No provisions No waste shall be discharged in the streets, drainage ways or on any property except in appropriately designed disposal systems. Manufacturing and Warehousing Noise Shall not be discernible at the property line unless a CUP is acquired No change Odor Not discernible at the property line Add language to require an odor abatement plan when necessary. Warehousing Hazardous Material No provisions Storage of such shall not be permitted. Safety No provisions Distribution shall not result in the creation of traffic hazards or undue congestion.   Odor Abatement Currently, the odor abatement section of code requires all manufacturing uses to submit an odor abatement plan. However, not all manufacturing uses (I.E. Ventana Roche Medical Services) emit objectionable odorous material. Odor abatement systems are costly and the requirement to have one, especially when not necessary, is a deterrent for businesses from opening in Oro Valley. As such, the Strategic Leadership Plan specifically included amending this section of code under the Land Use focus area (Goal 5A).  The proposed code amendment provides flexibility to allow the Planning and Zoning Administrator to waive the odor abatement plan requirement if it is deemed unnecessary as the nature of operations create a low risk of emitting objectionable odors. The waiver may be reconsidered or revoked should issues arise.  GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE The proposed code amendment was reviewed for conformance with the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan. By expanding the amount of property available for employment uses and amending associated standards while balancing the community's value to preserve views from homes and along the scenic corridors, the proposed code amendments support the following goals and policies.   Policy SD.6. Protect scenic corridors, public park and trail view sheds, and the distinctive visual character and visual appeal of Oro Valley. Goal B. A robust local economy and job market that provide opportunities for quality employment, build on Oro Valley’s assets and encourage high-quality growth. Goal C. A strong sector of targeted industries, including bioscience and aerospace, that provide opportunities for synergy and growth. Goal X. Effective transitions between differing land uses and intensities in the community. Policy E.1. Develop a diversified and robust economic base to support long-term economic stability. Policy E.2. Establish programs, strategies, investments and financial incentives that advance the Town’s economic prosperity. Policy CC.6. Promote the creation of unique community gathering places that are inviting, walkable, attractive and vibrant and offer commercial, entertainment or cultural activity. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION The proposed amendments were discussed by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 5, 2019 during a study session (see Attachment 10 and Attachment 11) and considered on December 3, 2019 (see  Attachment 12 and Attachment 13). The Commission recommended approval of all three items, with the following changes, which are reflected in the applicable codes (Attachment 1 and Attachment 2).  Reduce the proposed 50' Tech-Park building height to 36' when the subject property is within 100' of a property used or intended for residential purposes (in addition to reducing the height to 36' when located along a scenic corridor)  Allow light warehousing as an ancillary use and hotels/motels as a conditional use in the Oro Valley Tech-Park zoning district Please note, in La Reserve (Foothills Business Park) the existing height permitted on lots within 100' of residential property is 42'. As such, reducing it further to 36' could lead to a property rights issue. Additionally, the proposed height is 36' for all Tech-Park sites regulated by the Oro Valley Zoning Code. As such, the additional height restriction is only applicable in the Rancho Vistoso PAD (Innovation Park). SUMMARY The proposed code amendments are intended to meet the goals of the Town Council's Strategic Leadership Plan and strategies in the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy; specifically to attract and retain employment uses. The proposed code amendment achieves this by focusing four main elements:   Expanding the amount of available property for employment uses by allowing low-impact employers in larger commercial zones (see Attachment 5) 1. Updating standards (such as increasing the building height in limited areas) and reducing discrepancies among the various codes regulating Tech-Park zoned land to establish a more consistent approach (see Attachment 6 and Attachment 7). 2. Increasing predictability for developments of similar size and design by utilizing commercial scenic corridor standards for tech-park developments (see Attachment 8) 3. Removing unintended barriers for attracting employment uses in balance with maintaining community values by adding flexibility and clarity to specific use requirements. For example, adding flexibility to the odor abatement plan requirements (Strategic Leadership Plan, Goal 5A) and increasing the means to regulate vibration, noise, air pollution, safety and other elements 4. associated with manufacturing or warehousing uses (see Attachment 9). This item is for informational and discussion purposes only. The proposed code amendments will be presented for action by the Town Council in March.   FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: This item is for informational purposes only. The proposed code amendments will be presented for action by the Town Council in March. Attachments ATTACHMENT 1- AMENDMENTS TO ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE  ATTACHMENT 2 - RANCHO VISTOSO PAD AMENDMENTS  ATTACHMENT 3 - LA RESERVE PAD AMENDMENTS  ATTACHMENT 4- MAP OF COMMERCIAL AND TECH-PARK AREAS  ATTACHMENT 5- COMMERCIAL USES  ATTACHMENT 6- AMENDMENTS TO TECH-PARK ZONES  ATTACHMENT 7- PROPOSED HEIGHTS  ATTACHMENT 8- SCENIC CORRIDORS  ATTACHMENT 9- SPECIFC USES  ATTACHMENT 10- PZC STAFF REPORT 11.5.19  ATTACHMENT 11- PZC MINUTES 11.5.19  ATTACHMENT 12- PZC STAFF REPORT 12.3.19  ATTACHMENT 13- PZC MINUTES 12.3.19  ATTACHMENT 14- LETTER OF SUPPORT  1 AMEND the following in Section 23, Section 25, Section 27, Chapter 31 and Addendum I of the Zoning Code. Additions shown in ALL CAPS, Deletions shown in strikethrough Section 23.1 Districts and Boundaries Thereof B. Purpose of Districts 18. T-P Technological Park District This district provides for administrative, research and specialized manufacturing activities at a low intensity. THIS DISTRICT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE HIGH QUALITY EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES, SUCH AS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, BIOTECHNOLOGY, AND OTHER EMERGING INDUSTRIES. Uses include a mix of light industrial, professional office, office/showroom, office/warehouse, ASSEMBLY AND DISTRIBUTION, ancillary retail services and related uses. THESE USES GENERALLY OCCUR IN A BUSINESS PARK-TYPE ENVIRONMENT WITH CLUSTERED BUILDINGS AND INWARD FOCUSED ACTIVITY All uses shall be of a non-nuisance type and minimal scale having low silhouette, a variety of separate building masses and landscaped areas. This district is to provide employment near residential areas and the development standards are intended to be compatible to adjacent residential AREAS. uses and provide a park-like setting for employment. 2 TABLE 23-1: PERMITTED USES Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial Other USE CATEGORY SPECIFIC USE TYPE R1- 300 R1- 144 R1- 72 R1- 43 R1- 36 R1- 20 R1- 10 R1 -7 S D H 6 R- 4 R- 4R R- S R- 6 C- N C- 1 C-2 PS T- P P O S NOTES ACCESSORY USES Accessory Uses Accessory Buildings and Uses P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 23.6 25.2.A AGRICULTURAL USES Agriculture Commercial Stables C C C 25.1.B.4 Farms and Ranches C P C C C C C C 25.1.B.10 Marketing of Products Raised on the Premises P 25.1.B.18 Medical Marijuana Dispensary Off- site Cultivation Location, Designated Caregiver Cultivation Location, Designated Qualifying Patient Cultivation Location P P 25.1.B.19 Plant Nursery C C P COMMERCIAL USES Food and Beverage Bars P P P A 25.1.B.3 Distillery C P Entertainment at Bars or Restaurants C C 25.1.B.9 Food Processing, Artisanal P P 3 TABLE 23-1: PERMITTED USES Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial Other USE CATEGORY SPECIFIC USE TYPE R1- 300 R1- 144 R1- 72 R1- 43 R1- 36 R1- 20 R1- 10 R1 -7 S D H 6 R- 4 R- 4R R- S R- 6 C- N C- 1 C-2 PS T- P P O S NOTES Microbrewery A A P A P 25.1.B.20 Mobile Food Units, Including Food Trucks P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 25.1.B.21 Restaurant A P P P A 23.8.F Restaurant With Drive-in/Drive-thru C C C 25.1.B.6 25.1.B.25 Manufacturing & Processing FOOD PROCESSING, ARTISANAL P P P Food Processing, Large Scale C 25.1.B.13 Manufacturing Services, Heavy C Manufacturing Services, Light P P 25.1.B.17 WAREHOUSING, HEAVY C WAREHOUSING, LIGHT A Office & Professional Communication Studios P P P Offices P P P P P P RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT P P P Retail Sales Convenience Market C C C 25.1.B.6 Drive-thru Uses C C C 25.1.B.6 25.1.B.8 4 TABLE 23-1: PERMITTED USES Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial Other USE CATEGORY SPECIFIC USE TYPE R1- 300 R1- 144 R1- 72 R1- 43 R1- 36 R1- 20 R1- 10 R1 -7 S D H 6 R- 4 R- 4R R- S R- 6 C- N C- 1 C-2 PS T- P P O S NOTES General Retail P P P A 23.8 Grocery Store P P P 23.8 Medical Marijuana Dispensary P P 25.1.B.20 WHOLESALING C P Service Animal Services P P P 25.1.B.2 Commercial or Fine Arts Studio P P P P P Daycare C C P P P P A 25.1.B.7 Drive-thru Uses, Not Including Banks C C C 25.1.B.6 25.1.B.8 Financial Services C P P P A Funeral Services P P Household Services P P Medical Services - Inpatient C P PC P Medical Services - Outpatient C C P Personal Services P P P P A Private Clubs Without Entertainment P P P 25.1.B.23 Private Clubs With Entertainment C C C 25.1.B.9 Self-Storage C C 5 TABLE 23-1: PERMITTED USES Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial Other USE CATEGORY SPECIFIC USE TYPE R1- 300 R1- 144 R1- 72 R1- 43 R1- 36 R1- 20 R1- 10 R1 -7 S D H 6 R- 4 R- 4R R- S R- 6 C- N C- 1 C-2 PS T- P P O S NOTES Senior Care Facility P P P P P 25.1.B.26 Service (cont.) Sexually Oriented Businesses C 25.1.B.27 Technical Services P P P Theater C P Vehicle Gas Stations C C 25.1.B.6 25.1.B.14 Parts Store C P P 25.1.B.29 Rental Establishments, Less Than 10 Vehicles A P P A 25.1.B.30 Rental Establishments, Over 10 Vehicles C C 25.1.B.30 Rental Establishments, Moving Services C C 25.1.B.30 Repair Facilities C C 25.1.B.31 Sales C C P Storage Facility, Including Parking Garage P P P P P Washes/detailing C C 25.1.B.6 25.1.B.31 Boarding House or Lodging House C C C 6 TABLE 23-1: PERMITTED USES Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial Other USE CATEGORY SPECIFIC USE TYPE R1- 300 R1- 144 R1- 72 R1- 43 R1- 36 R1- 20 R1- 10 R1 -7 S D H 6 R- 4 R- 4R R- S R- 6 C- N C- 1 C-2 PS T- P P O S NOTES Visitor Accommodation Guest Ranches P Hotels/motels P C P C Resorts P 25.1.B.33 Short-term Rental Properties P P P P P P P P P P P P P P PUBLIC, INSTITUTIONAL AND CIVIC USES Public, Institutional, Civic Arts & Cultural Use A A A A A A A A A A P P A P P P P P Cemetery C Fire Stations and Rescue Facilities, Private P P P P 25.1.B.12 General Aviation P Golf Course C C C C C C C C C 24.6 25.1.B.15 Golf Driving Range or Miniature Golf, Stand Alone C 25.1.B.15 Government Services P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Religious Institutions P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 25.1.B.24 Schools, Private C C P P P C Schools, Public Including Charter Schools P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 7 TABLE 23-1: PERMITTED USES Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial Other USE CATEGORY SPECIFIC USE TYPE R1- 300 R1- 144 R1- 72 R1- 43 R1- 36 R1- 20 R1- 10 R1 -7 S D H 6 R- 4 R- 4R R- S R- 6 C- N C- 1 C-2 PS T- P P O S NOTES Utilities, Privately Owned C C C Utility Poles and Above Ground Wires, New C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C 25.1.B.22 Recreation Buildings and Facilities, Not-for- Profit Community Service Organizations, such as Boys & Girls Clubs or YMCA C C C C C C C C C C C C C C P P P C Buildings and Facilities, Private, Including Fitness Centers or Health Spas P P P P 25.1.B.16 Buildings and Facilities With Outdoor Activities, Private, Including Fitness Centers or Health Spas C C C C RESIDENTIAL USES Residential Apartments P P P 26.5 Assisted Living Home P P P P P P P P P P 25.1.B.1 Dwelling Units, Single-Family P P P P P P P P P P P* *23.6.D.1 26.5 Dwelling Units, Site-Delivered, Single-Family P 8 TABLE 23-1: PERMITTED USES Single-Family Multi-Family Commercial Other USE CATEGORY SPECIFIC USE TYPE R1- 300 R1- 144 R1- 72 R1- 43 R1- 36 R1- 20 R1- 10 R1 -7 S D H 6 R- 4 R- 4R R- S R- 6 C- N C- 1 C-2 PS T- P P O S NOTES Dwelling Units, Attached, Including Condominium, Patio Home or Townhouse P P P P 26.5 23.7 Home Occupations P P P P P P P P P P P P P 25.2.D Model Homes, Including Temporary Real Estate Office P P P P P P P P P P P P P 25.1.B.28 OTHER USES Other Antennas P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 25.1.B.5 Communication Facilities, Major C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C 25.1.B.5 Communication Facilities, Minor P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 25.1.B.5 9 Table 23-2a: Dimensional Requirements Zoning District Minimum Property Size Yard Setbacks (feet) Maximum Building Height Min. Open Space Max. Floor Area Ratio Addl Regs Front Side Rear CN 0 acres 20* 0-50* 0-50* 25 feet or 2 stories* 25% .25 23.8.B C-1 5 acres 20* 0-50* 0-50* 25 feet or 2 stories* 20% .30 23.8.C C-2 10 acres 20* 0-50* 0-50* 30 feet or 2 stories* 20% .40 23.8.D PS 5 acres (schools only) * * * 1 story and 24-45 feet* 25% 23.8.E T-P 3 acres 3:1 20* 0-50* 0-50* 34 36 feet* 25% .50* 23.8.F POS 0-50* 0-50* 0-50* 1 story and 25-45 feet* * .15* 23.8.G Section 23.8 Property Development Standards for Nonresidential Districts B. C-N Neighborhood Commercial District 2. Building Height a. If a contiguous residential district has a more restrictive height standard, all buildings within eighty -five (85) feet of the property line of contiguous R-1 single-family residentially zoned property shall conform to that more restrictive standard of the contiguous zone. b. Architecturally appropriate elements such as bell towers or mechanical screening may exceed this limitation by no more than seven (7) feet, subject to approval by the Planning Division Manager. Additional height for architectural elements, up to thirty-five (35) feet, must be approved by the Town Council. B. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FEATURES SUCH AS CORNICES, LENTILS, CAPS, OR OTHER SIMILAR ELEMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THE PARAPET TO VARY THE ROOF LINE OR SCREEN MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT MAY EXCEED THIS LIMITATION BY NO MORE THAN TEN (10) FEET. 4. SITE PERIMETER Yards and Setbacks a. Front: TWENTY (20) FEET OR W here adjacent to a residential district, the front setback regulations of the residential district shall apply; WHICHEVER IS GREATER b. Side and Rear Setbacks: i. Fifty (50) feet or 3:1, whichever is greater (setback to building height) where the lot abuts a PROPERTY USED OR INTENDED FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES, WHICHEVER IS GREATER ii. Twenty-five (25) feet where the lot abuts a multi-family residential or nonresidential district. C. DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS: MINIMUM DISTANCE OF TEN (10) FEET 10 C. C-1 Commercial District 2. Building Height Architectural DESIGN FEATURES elements such as bell towers, CORNICES, LENTILS, CAPS, OR OTHER SIMILAR ELEMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THE PARAPET TO VARY THE ROOF LINE OR SCREEN MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT may exceed this limitation by no more than ten (10) feet. subject to approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. D. C-2 Commercial District 1. Building Height Architectural DESIGN FEATURES elements such as bell towers, CORNICES, LENTILS, CAPS, OR OTHER SIMILAR ELEMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THE PARAPET TO VARY THE ROOF LINE OR SCREEN MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT may exceed this limitation by no more than ten (10) feet. subject to approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. F. T-P Technological Park District 1. BUILDING HEIGHT A. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FEATURES SUCH AS CORNICES, LENTILS, CAPS, OR OTHER SIMILAR ELEMENTS INCORPORATED INTO THE PARAPET TO VARY THE ROOF LINE OR SCREEN MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT MAY EXCEED THIS LIMITATION BY NO MORE THAN TEN (10) FEET. 1. Retail Sales Uses Retail sales are allowed as an ancillary use directly related to and contained within the structure of the primary use. 2. Floor Area Limits ANCILLARY USES a. ANCILLARY USES MAY ONLY BE SITED WITHIN A MASTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. b. Ancillary uses shall be no greater than five thousand (5,000) square feet THIRTY PERCENT (30%) of gross floor area per individual business, except that expansions may be allowed with a conditional use permit. c. The gross floor area of ancillary uses, not contained within a primary use facility, is limited to no more than twenty percent (20%) OF THE TOTAL developed gross floor area OF THE DEVELOPMENT. d. The gross floor area of any one (1) structure shall not exceed fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet on lots less than ten (10) gross acres, except that expansions may be allowed with a conditional use permit. 3. Courtyards and Pedestrian Malls a. A portion of the development shall be oriented towards a landscaped courtyard or mall with seating areas and all or a portion of the required public art. b. The courtyard or mall shall be a minimum of two percent (2%) of the net lot area of the site in square feet, which shall be considered to be part of the required open space. c. The courtyard/mall requirement may be waived OR REDUCED by Town Council based on a suitable alternative design solution. being presented to and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 4. SITE PERIMETER Yards and Setbacks a. Front Yard: A ratio of three to one (3:1), shall be used. For buildings less than a height of twenty-five (25) feet, a ratio of two to one (2:1) will be permitted. TWENTY (20) FEET OR WHERE ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, THE FRONT SETBACK REGULATIONS OF THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT SHALL APPLY; WHICHEVER IS GREATER b. Side and Rear Setbacks: i. Fifty (50) feet or 3:1whichever is greater (setback to building height) where the lot abuts a PROPERTY USED OR INTENDED FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES, WHICHEVER IS GREATER a residential district or abuts an alley that is adjacent to a r esidential district. 11 ii. TWENTY-FIVE (25) FEET WHERE THE LOT ABUTS A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. c. DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS: MINIMUM TEN (10) FEET Section 25.1 Requirements for Specific Uses A. General Requirements for All Non-Residential Uses 6. Odors A. DURING THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS, AN ODOR ABATEMENT PLAN IS REQUIRED FOR ANY USE WHICH MAY EMIT ODOROUS MATTER DISCERNIBLE BEYOND THE ON-SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY. USES INCLUDE RESTAURANTS, MANUFACTURING, PROCESSING, MEDICAL MARIJUANA CULTIVATION DISTILLERIES, MICRO-BREWERIES, OR SIMILAR USES, AS DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. All restaurants, manufacturing and senior care uses shall provide an odor abatement plan at the time of Final Design submittal. The plan is subject to Planning and Zoning Administrator approval. Decisions may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment. B. The odor abatement plan must contain the following elements: i. An inventory of potential or identified odor EMITTING emission point sources associated with the industry or land use. ACTIVITIES OR PROCESSES THAT TAKE PLACE AT THE FACILITY, THE SOURCES OF OCCURRENCE AND LENGTH OF TIME THE OCCURRENCE LASTS. ii. AN ODOR CONTROL plan detailing best available control technologies and appurtenances designed to eliminate or achieve the maximum reduction of odor emission from an emission point source inclusive of , but not necessarily limited to certain processes, procedures or operating methods intended to mitigate or control odor. THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ENGINEERING CONTROLS THE FACILITY WILL IMPLEMENT TO CONTROL ODORS. A. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS INCLUDE PROCEDURAL ACTIVITIES, STAFF TRAINING PROCEDURES, RECORDKEEPING AND FORMS. B. ENGINEERING CONTROLS INCLUDE SYSTEM DESIGN, OPERATIONAL PROCESSES AND A MAINTENANCE PLAN. iii. A specification of the documentation that will be made available for Town review which will verify the data produced by the monitoring equipment, and which will verify that processes and procedures are conducted consistent with the specifications in the facility’s odor control study and plan. iv. A schedule for the implementation and installation of the control technologies, appurtenances and monitoring instrumentation. v. An acknowledgment of the authority of the Town and/or County and its agents to enter into the facility and its property to investigate complaints and to verify the facility’s adherence to the compliance plan. C. AT THE DISCRETION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN ODOR ABATEMENT PLAN MAY BE WAIVED, IF DEEMED UNNECESSARY AS THE NATURE OF OPERATIONS CREATE A LOW RISK OF EMITTING OBJECTIONABLE ODORS. THE WAIVER IS SUBJECT TO RECONSIDERATION AND MAY BE REVOKED, IF ODORS ARE DETERMINED TO BE OBJECTIONABLE AFTER OCCUPANCY AND USE. B. Requirements for Specific Non-Residential Uses 12. Food Processing, Artisanal a. Artisanal food processing uses shall not exceed fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in gross floor area. 13. Food Processing, Large Scale a. Food processing uses greater than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet of gross floor area. a.b. No slaughterhouses, meat processing and/or packing plants, or any other facilities used in the reduction of animal matter, or rendering of fats or oils are permitted. 16. Health Studio or Fitness Center 12 a. All activities must be indoor CONDUCTED within an entirely enclosed building OR A FULLY SCREENED YARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 25.1.A.4. 17. Manufacturing Services a. All activities must be conducted within an entirely enclosed building, including the storage of all materials. OR A FULLY SCREENED YARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 25.1.A.4. b. ALL Loading areas, INCLUDING DOCKS AND PLATFORMS shall not be visible from any property used or intended for residential purposes. b. MANUFACTURING SERVICES SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH ALL OF THE FOLLOWING OR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 22.5. c. None of the following shall be discernible at the property line: I. Noise NOISE SHALL NOT BE DISCERNIBLE AT THE PROPERTY LINE. II. Odor EMISSION OF ODOROUS MATTER IN SUCH A MANNER TO CREATE A NUISANCE OR HAZARD BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED. AT THE DISCRETION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AN ODOR ABATEMENT PLAN MAY BE REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 25.1.A.6. III. Vibration a) WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT ABUTS A PROPERTY USED OR INTENDED FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES, VIBRATION SHALL NOT BE DISCERNIBLE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE. b) WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT ABUTS A PROPERTY USED OR INTENDED FOR NON- RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES, VIBRATION SHALL NOT BE DISCERNIBLE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE HUMAN SENSE OF FEELING FOR A DURATION OF THREE MINUTES OR MORE IN ANY ONE HOUR OF THE DAY BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 A.M. AND 7:00 P.M. OR OF A DURATION OF 30 SECONDS OR MORE IN ANY ONE HOUR BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 P.M. AND 7:00 A.M. IV. Glare/Heat ANY ACTIVITY PRODUCING INTENSE GLARE OR HEAT SHALL NOT BE DISCERNIBLE AT THE PROPERTY LINE. V. FLY ASH, DUST FUMES, VAPORS, GASSES AND OTHER FORMS OF AIR POLLUTION NO EMISSION SHALL BE PERMITTED WHICH CAN CAUSE ANY DAMAGE TO HEALTH, DAMAGE TO ANIMALS OR VEGETATION, OR DAMAGE TO OR SOILING OF OTHER FORMS OF PROPERTY. VI. LIQUID AND SOLID WASTE NO WASTE SHALL BE DISCHARGED IN THE STREETS, DRAINAGE WAYS OR ON ANY PROPERTY EXCEPT IN APPROPRIATELY DESIGNED DISPOSAL SYSTEMS. 20. Microbrewery a. No microbrewery may produce more than three hundred thousand (300,000) gallons annually. b. A microbrewery may be permitted as an ancillary use to a restaurant not to exceed forty percent (40%) of the gross floor area 33. Visitor Accommodations a. In the R-4R District, Ccommercial uses are permitted appurtenant to visitor accommodation use types, such as restaurants, excluding drive-in or drive-through types, cocktail lounges, and small retail shops; provided, that the entrance to any such appurtenant use shall be from the lobby, arcade, or interior patio, unless otherwise approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 13 34. WAREHOUSING a. A SHOWROOM IS PERMITTED AS AN ANCILLARY USE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 23.8.F. b. ALL LOADING AREAS, INCLUDING DOCKS AND PLATFORMS SHALL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM ANY PROPERTY USED OR INTENDED FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES. c. ALL OUTDOOR ACTIVITY SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 25.1.A.4 AND FULLY SCREENED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 27.6.C.5. d. WAREHOUSING SERVICES SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH ALL OF THE FOLLOWING OR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 22.5 I. NOISE NOISE SHALL NOT BE DISCERNIBLE AT THE PROPERTY LINE. II. ODOR EMISSION OF ODOROUS MATTER IN SUCH A MANNER TO CREATE A NUISANCE OR HAZARD BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED. AT THE DISCRETION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AN ODOR ABATEMENT PLAN MAY BE REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 25.1.A.6. III. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL THE KEEPING OF EXPLOSIVE, HIGHLY COMBUSTIBLE, CORROSIVE, TOXIC, HIGHLY OXIDIZING, RADIOACTIVE OR OTHER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED. IV. SAFETY THE DISTRIBUTION OF GOODS SHALL NOT RESULT IN THE CREATION OF TRAFFIC HAZARDS OR UNDUE CONGESTION ON ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET Section 27.10 Environmentally Sensitive Lands D. Environmentally Sensitive Lands Conservation System 3. Conservation Categories ESL conservation system categories and related conservation requirements are listed below. f. Scenic Resources Category vi. Site Development Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District (ORSCOD) and Tangerine Road Corridor Overlay District (TRCOD) (D) Employment/Institutional Regulations Campus developments on larger sites are especially desirable for preserving view corridors, adding variety to the specific plan area and creating activity balance with in -community destination sites. Special attention is required to maintain the corridor’s structural scale and efficient traffic management. Zoning district requirements apply, except as hereinafter provided, for properties classified under Sections 23.8.E, Private Schools (PS), and 23.8.F, Technological Park (T-P) Districts and located within the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor District. (i) Access to Oracle Road. Campus uses require a minimum frontage of six hundred sixty (660) feet on Oracle Road or other arterial streets, with roadway access located so as to be at least three hundred (300) feet from an established entry point to an adjacent property or street: (A) Multiple entries may be required if traffic projections for the proposed use so warrant. (B) Signalization, at appropriate spacing, is permitted only if warranted according to Arizona Department of Transportation criteria. (ii) Required Setbacks. A setback of not less than one hundred fifty (150) feet from the Oracle Road right-of-way is to be provided, the front one hundred (100) feet of which shall be landscaped or natural open space. THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, SUBSECTION D.3.f.vi.a.3.C.ii. SHALL ALSO APPLY. 14 Natural open space or landscaped buffers (which may include natural washes) of not less than one hundred (100) FORTY (40) feet in width are required as WITHIN THE side or rear setbacks YARDS WHERE to any adjacent TO ANY PROPERTY USED OR INTENDED FOR residential district. PURPOSES. (iii) Density/Bulk. Development intensity for institutional or employment campus uses is limited to a maximum of 0.3 0.5 FAR and may be further limited by the Town Council. (iv) Landscaping Treatments. Not less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the gross site area is to be devoted to common landscaped or natural open space recreation area. (v) View Corridors. The applicant shall be responsible for identifying view corridors as provided in subsection D.3.f.iv of this section. FLEXIBILITY FROM THE VIEW CORRIDOR REQUIREMENTS DEFINED BELOW SHALL BE DETERMINED BY EXPRESS APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, SUBSECTION D D.3.f.vi.a.3.C.v. OF THIS SECTION, SHALL APPLY. (A) Along the west side of Oracle Road, buildings over eighteen (18) feet or other structures, including walls, signs or mechanical equipment over four (4) feet in height, may not be placed within one hundred fifty (150) feet of any identified view corridor without express Planning and Zoning Commission approval. (B) Along the east side of Oracle Road, a minimum of sixty percent (6 0%) of the frontage to a depth of three hundred (300) feet along the east side of Oracle Road is maintained as a view corridor and is not used for building purposes. Building exposures will be measured to calculate the view corridor percentage. For properties along the east side of Oracle Road, with an average depth of four hundred (400) feet or less, or containing less than two (2) acres in size, building heights in excess of twenty-five (25) feet (as permitted by underlying zoning) shall be limited to forty percent (40%) of the frontage. The remaining buildable area heights shall be limited to twenty-five (25) feet. 5) Tangerine Road Corridor Overlay District Use Provisions (C) Employment and Institutional Regulations Sites for campus-type developments are established within the Tangerine Corridor’s natural context to create unique, unobtrusive opportunities for employment and institutional activity centers. Construction shall comply with the following provisions in addition to the applicable regulations of the underlying zoning district. (1) Roadway Access Access provisions of subsection D.3.f.vi.b.5.A.i and D.3.f.vi.b.5.A.ii of this section apply; however, multiple access points from Tangerine Road may be appropriate for institutional d evelopments exceeding twenty (20) acres in area, which experience high peak hour traffic demand. Construction of a public roadway perpendicular to Tangerine, separated by not less than one - quarter (1/4) mile from any arterial intersecting Tangerine, may be approved for the purpose of providing multiple entries to the campus. Secondary, alternative access to an intersecting arterial is also desirable. (2) Required Setbacks The commercial development regulations, subsection D.3.f.vi.b.5.B.ii of this section, shall also apply. (3) Building Height The commercial development regulations, subsection D.3.f.vi.b.5.B.iii of this section, shall apply. 15 (4) Building Bulk The following structural volumes may be built within the development envelopes establish ed by required setbacks: (a) The overall campus building area shall not exceed the FAR for the appropriate zoning district. (b) Buildings within the campus core (an area representing one-quarter (1/4) or less of the total site area surrounded by an equidistant peripheral band with lesser or no structural development; see Figure 27.10-12) shall not exceed 0.8 FAR. (c) Building area within peripheral area shall not exceed 0.4 0.5 FAR or the FAR for the appropriate zoning district, whichever is less. (5) Land Use Distinctions Uses permitted in the underlying zoning districts as determined by the Planning and Zoning Administrator shall be permitted except that the following may be sited only within master planned institutional or employment developments at a distance of two hundred (200) feet or more from the development’s nearest entry point: (a) Office buildings exceeding two (2) stories or thirty (30) feet in height. (b) Research, fabricating or manufacturing structures exceeding one (1) story or twenty-four (24) feet in height. (c) Hospitals/senior care facilities exceeding two (2) stories or thirty (30) feet in height. (d) Warehouse structures. (65) View Preservation The commercial development regulations, subsection D.3.f.vi.b.5.B.vi of this section, shall apply. (76) Site Planning The commercial development regulations, subsection D.3.f.vi.b.5.B.vii of this section, shall apply. Chapter 31. Definitions DISTILLERY A BUILDING OR USE THAT HAS A SERIES 18 LIQUOR LICENSE AND PRODUCES NO MORE THAN 20,000 GALLONS OF DISTILLED SPIRITS ANNUALLY. Manufacturing The fabricating or assembling of materials into finished or partially finished products by hand or by the use of machinery. Manufacturing Services An establishment whose primary business is the manufacturing of parts or materials into finished or partially finished products. These may include scientific analysis, laboratory or other similar uses. THE COMPOUNDING, PROCESSING, FABRICATING OR ASSEMBLING, PACKAGING OR TESTING OF GOODS OR EQUIPMENT. Heavy A manufacturing service which may have a negative impact on adjacent properties and that does not comply with Section 25.1.B.17 Light 16 A manufacturing service which does not have a negative impact on adjacent properties in accordance with Section 25.1.B.17. MASTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AN AREA WHERE LARGE, MULTI-USE DEVELOPMENTS SHOULD BE PLANNED AND DEVELOPED IN A COMPREHENSIVE MANNER. Medical Services An establishment providing INPATIENT OR OUTPATIENT medical care and/or treatment to patients, INCLUDING HOSPITALS, SURGERY CENTERS OR URGENT CARE FACILITIES. Inpatient An establishment providing medical care and/or treatment to patients for one (1) or more nights, including hospitals or surgery centers. Outpatient An establishment providing medical care and/or treatment to patients who are released and do not remain overnight, including urgent care facilities. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT THE CONDUCTING OF RESEARCH OF A COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, OR SCIENTIFIC NATURE, INCLUDING ANALYTIC, DIAGNOSTIC, PROCESSING, TESTING OR EXPERIMENTATION AND OTHER TYPES OF LABORATORY SERVICES BUT NOT FOR THE MANUFACTURE OR SALE OF PRODUCTS EXCEPT AS INCIDENTAL TO THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THE LABORATORY. Technical Services An establishment providing services to businesses or individuals of a technical nature, including mail service, printing, photocopying, DATA and computer access centers. Warehouse A building or buildings AN ESTABLISHMENT WHERE THE PRIMARY SERVICE IS used for the storage AND DISTRIBUTION of goods of any type and where no retail operation is conducted A SHOWROOM IS PERMITTED AS AN ANCILLARY USE. HEAVY A WAREHOUSING ESTABLISHMENT WHICH MAY HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SECTION 25.1.B.34 LIGHT A WAREHOUSING ESTABLISHMENT WHICH DOES NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 25.1.B.34. Addendum H: Scenic Resources Area Design Guidelines iv. Employment and Institutional 17 a) Adjacent to residential districts PROPERTIES USED OR INTENDED FOR RESIDENTIAL PUPROSES, setbacks of the residential district are to be met or exceeded, and to include a masonry wall with landscaping as augmentation. b) No outdoor storage visible from Oracle Road or adjacent residential neighborhoods. c) Provide pathway links to internal recreation facilities and external pathways and routes. d) Maintain view corridors through the site. e) No parking or access driveways within required setbacks. Tech-Park and Commercial Areas Attachment 4La CañadaTangerine Tech-Park C-1 C-2La Cholla Lambert InaLa Cañada Existing and Proposed Commercial Uses Attachment 5La CañadaC-1: Community Commercial C-2: Regional Commercial La Cholla Lambert Use EXISTING PROPOSED C-1 C-2 C-1 C-2 Microbrewery A A A P Light Manufacturing P Research and Development P P Wholesaling C Medical Services (combined inpatient and outpatient) C P P P Vehicle rental establishments for less than 10 vehicles P P P P Vehicle Sales C C C P Fitness Centers or Health Spas (may include outdoor activity) C C P P P = Permitted C = Conditional A = Ancillary Map of Commercial Areas Tangerine Amendments to Tech-Park Sites Attachment 6La CañadaTangerine Lambert Linda Vista Map of Tech Park Sites and Regulating Codes EXISTING PROPOSED Building Size OV Zoning Rancho Vistoso La Reserve OV Zoning Rancho Vistoso La Reserve Restricted to less than 15,000 sf unless a Conditional Use Permit is acquired Yes No No No No No Map of Tech Park Sites and Regulating Codes Rancho Vistoso PAD La Reserve PAD Oro Valley Zoning Amendments to Tech-Park Sites Attachment 6 EXISTING PROPOSED Uses OV Zoning Rancho Vistoso La Reserve OV Zoning Rancho Vistoso La Reserve Bars A A A Medical Services P P P Personal Services A A A Vehicle Rental Establishments less than 10 vehicles A A A Microbrewery A A P P P Distillery C C P P P Fitness Centers or Health Spas (may include outdoor activity) C A A P A A Food processing, artisanal P P P P P Light warehousing P P A P P Heavy Warehousing P P C P P Hotels/Motels P C P C Research and Development (Labs) P P P P P Wholesale P P P P P P = Permitted C = Conditional A = Ancillary Existing and Proposed Height Amendments Attachment 7 Tangerine Naranja Linda Vista 50 feet 36 feetLa CañadaScenic corridors Building Height OV Zoning Rancho Vistoso La Reserve Existing 34’36’, 44’ or 48’35’ or 42’ Proposed 36’36’ or 50’36’ or 50’ Change +2’+2’+8’ Proposed heights Amendments to Scenic Corridors Attachment 8La CañadaTangerine Lambert Linda Vista Map of Tech Park Sites and Scenic Corridors Rancho Vistoso PAD La Reserve PAD Oro Valley Zoning Scenic Corridors Amendments to Scenic Corridors Attachment 8 TANGERINE ROAD SCENIC CORRIDOR STANDARDS EXISTING PROPOSED Tech-Park Commercial Tech-Park Commercial Building height Refers to commercial standards Restricted to 20’ if located within 100’ and visible from the Tangerine Road right-of- way. Does not include architectural features. No change No change Front Setback Refers to Commercial standards 4:1 (setback to height)No change No change Side/ Rear Setbacks Refers to commercial standards Utilize the underlying zoning district standards No change No change Land Use Restricts specific uses to Master Planned Developments Not applicable Removes restriction for specific uses Not applicable ORACLE ROAD SCENIC CORRIDOR STANDARDS EXISTING PROPOSED Tech-Park Commercial Tech-Park Commercial Building Height West Side Buildings over 18’ may not be within 150’ of Oracle Road No buildings over 18’ may be within a minimum of 60% of the frontage to a depth of 300’ Refer to the commercial standard for consistency and maximum building height restricted to 36’ for lots fronting Oracle Road No change Building Height East Side 60% of the frontage to a depth of 300’ is maintained as a view corridor and not used for building purposes For properties less than 2 acres in size or less than 400’ in depth, building heights over 25’ are limited to 40% of the frontage. Maximum building height is restricted to 36’ for lots fronting Oracle Road No change Front 150’ except for La Reserve, which is 50’ Single structure: 60’ and 4:1 (setback to building height) Multiple structures: 120’ average Revised to refer to all of the commercial standards (similar to Tangerine, see above) No change Side and rear buffer yards 100’ when abutting residential Silent –normal buffer yard requirements apply Revised to 40’ when abutting residential. Forty feet is the maximum depth of a buffer yard required in Section 27.6.C.4. No change Specific Use Standards Attachment 9 USE REQUIREMENT EXISTING PROPOSED Manufacturing Vibration Only the La Reserve (LR) PAD restricts the amount of vibration that may occur. Shall not be discernible at the property line when the development abuts a residential property. Allow some vibration (consistent with the LR PAD) when the development abuts a non- residential property. Glare/Heat Shall not be discernible at the property line unless a CUP is acquired No change Fly ash, dust fumes, vapors, gasses and other forms of air pollution Only the La Reserve (LR) PAD has parameters for this. Add language consistent with the La Reserve PAD: No emission shall be permitted which can cause any damage to health, damage to animals or vegetation, or damage to or soiling of other forms of property. Liquid and solid waste No provisions No waste shall be discharged in the streets, drainage ways or on any property except in appropriately designed disposal systems Manufacturing and Warehousing Noise Shall not be discernible at the property line unless a CUP is acquired No change Odor Not discernible at the property line Add provisions for requiring an odor abatement plan when necessary Warehousing Hazardous Material No provisions Storage of such shall not be permitted Safety No provisions Distribution shall not result in the creation of traffic hazards or undue congestion Zones permitting Manufacturing and Warehousing C-1 C-2 T-P RV*LR* Light Manufacturing P P P P Heavy Manufacturing C P P Light Warehousing A P P Heavy Warehousing C P P see page 2 for map Specific Use Standards Attachment 9La CañadaTangerine Tech-Park C-1 C-2La Cholla Lambert InaLa Cañada 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&get_month=11&get_year=2019&dsp=min&seq=389 1/3 Return MINUTES ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION November 5, 2019 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER Chair Swope called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present:Bob Swope, Chair Hal Bergsma, Commissioner Celeste Gambill, Commissioner Thomas Gribb, Commissioner Ellen Hong, Commissioner Skeet Posey, Commissioner Staff Present:Bill Rodman, Town Council Liaison Bayer Vella, Planning Manager Joe Andrews, Chief Civil Deputy Attorney J.J. Johnston, Community and Economic Development Director PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Swope led the Commission and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. CALL TO AUDIENCE No speaker requests. COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS Council Liaison Bill Rodman provided updates on past and upcoming Council meetings. REGULAR SESSION AGENDA 1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 10, 2019 SPECIAL SESSION MEETING MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Hal Bergsma, seconded by Commissioner Skeet Posey to approve the September 10, 2019 meeting minutes as written. Vote: 6 - 0 Carried 2.DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS TO C-1, C-2, AND TECHNOLOGICAL PARK ZONING DISTRICTS, IN ORDER TO EXPAND THE AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE PROPERTY FOR PRIMARY EMPLOYMENT USES AND REVISE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Principal Planner Milini Simms provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Background - Expand Amount of Available Property - Revise Development Standards for Consistency 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&get_month=11&get_year=2019&dsp=min&seq=389 2/3 - Revise Specific Use Standards - Summary and Feedback Discussion ensued among Commission and staff. Chair Swope granted a public speaker request: Oro Valley resident Shirl Lamonna spoke as opposed to Agenda Item #2 as it is currently written. 3.DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO THE ECONOMIC EXPANSION ZONE, SECTION 24.9 AND SECTION 22.10 Principal Planner Milini Simms provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Background on Economic Expansion Zone - Allow Shovel-ready Sites - Refine Development Review and Approval Process - Summary and Feedback Discussion ensued among the Commission and staff. 4.DISCUSSION REGARDING THE TOWN’S PROGRESS ON IMPLEMENTING THE YOUR VOICE, OUR FUTURE GENERAL PLAN Principal Planner Milini Simms provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Importance of Progress Report - Implementing the General Plan - Land Use and Zoning Tasks - Environment Use and Zoning Actions - Development Land Use and Zoning Actions - Current Planning Projects - Summary Discussion ensued among the Commission and staff. 5.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE PLANNING DIVISION WORK PLAN FOR FY 19/20 - FY 20/21 Planning Manager Bayer Vella provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Commission Role - Planning Work Plan - Short-term Action Items - Previous Work Plan - Summary Discussion ensued among the Commission and staff. Motion by Commissioner Hal Bergsma, seconded by Commissioner Skeet Posey to recommend approval of the Planning Division Work Plan FY19/20 - FY20/21 with the following changes: (1) add provision under short-term action items to do an annual review of the General Plan progress report; (2) add an amendment to Section 22.4 of the Zoning Code to ensure compliance with State Law; and (3) increase priority of new Planning Commission training. Motion by Chair Bob Swope, a Friendly Amendment to heighten the priorities of the design standards for custom-built homes and ESL review to the short-term action items category. The Friendly Amendment was accepted by both the Motioner and Seconder. 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&get_month=11&get_year=2019&dsp=min&seq=389 3/3 Vote: 6 - 0 Carried 6.DISCUSSION ONLY REGARDING RECENT CHANGES TO TOWN CODE SECTION 3-6-6 LIAISON AND TOWN COUNCIL POLICIES 5 AND 8 REGARDING ADVISORY BOARDS AND ASSOCIATED COUNCIL LIAISONS Chair Swope inquired about the motivation for this change. Commissioner Bergsma asked for clarification in speaking to elected officials as a resident. Continued discussion ensued between the Commission and staff. PLANNING UPDATE (INFORMATIONAL ONLY) Planning Manager Bayer Vella complimented Principal Planner Milini Simms for her successful leadership of the Community Academy this year and expects many great applications for the boards and commissions. He also spoke about upcoming cases for the next Commission agenda on December 3, 2019. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Skeet Posey, seconded by Commissioner Hal Bergsma to adjourn the meeting. Chair Swope adjourned the meeting at 8:23 p.m. Vote: 6 - 0 Carried 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 Planning and Zoning Commission of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 5th day of November, 2019. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 7th day of November, 2019. ___________________________ Jeanna Ancona Senior Office Specialist GO TO PREVIOUS PAGE GO TO THE TOP OF THE PAGE AgendaQuick ©2005 - 2019 Destiny Software Inc. All Rights Reserved. 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&fp=swagit&get_month=12&get_year=2019&dsp=agm&seq=3169&rev=0&ag=402…1/8 Planning & Zoning Commission Return to the Agenda Go to the Previous Agenda Item AGENDA ITEM: 4. Meeting Date:12/03/2019 Requested by:Bayer Vella Case Number:1901679 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PROPOSED ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED AMENDMENTS TO C-1, C-2, TECHNOLOGICAL PARK AND EQUIVALENT PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS REGARDING LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUCH AS BUILDING HEIGHTS, SETBACKS ETC. ITEM A: AMENDMENTS TO THE ORO VALLEY REVISED ZONING CODE ITEM B: AMENDMENTS TO THE RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT ITEM C: AMENDMENTS TO THE LA RESERVE PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of all three items. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of these items is to consider proposed code amendments (Attachment 1, Attachment 2 and Attachment 3) to the commercial (C-1 and C-2) and Technological Park zoning districts (see image to the right and Attachment 4) in order to expand the amount of available property for employment uses and revise associated zoning code standards to attract employers. The proposed code amendments are intended to meet the economic goals of the Strategic Leadership Plan, which are supported by the General Plan. The proposed code amendments were previously discussed on November 5, 2019 to gather feedback from the Commission (for staff report, see Attachment 5 and for minutes, see Attachment 6). The feedback focused on three main areas: 1. Permitted and ancillary uses- concern for allowing warehousing, self-storage, hotels/motels and private schools in a Tech-Park zoning district. There were further questions and concern regarding the development of ancillary uses. 2. Development standards- concern the proposed building height and the revisions to the setbacks and buffer yards along scenic corridors will impact views 3. Provisions for manufacturing- concern of vibration, noise and lighting impacting adjacent residences 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&fp=swagit&get_month=12&get_year=2019&dsp=agm&seq=3169&rev=0&ag=402…2/8 Town staff revised the proposed code amendments to address many of the Commission's concerns. A summary of the proposed changes and clarifying information is provided in Attachment 7. Notable elements include: Adding provisions for only allowing ancillary uses in a Tech-Park zoning district as part of a master planned development, or area where multi-use tech-park sites are planned in a comprehensive manner. Revising the proposed building height to 36' for Oro Valley Tech-Park sites and 50' only for Tech- Park sites located within the Rancho Vistoso or La Reserve Planned Area Developments. Provisions are included to further restrict the height in these areas to 36' when the development abuts property used or intended for residential purposes or fronts Oracle Road Greater consistency between the setbacks for Tech-Park and Commercial developments Manufacturing provisions revised for when the development abuts property used or intended for residential purposes In summary, the revised code amendments are intended to address or clarify the Commission's concerns discussed during the previous meeting. Staff finds the proposed amendments are in conformance with the General Plan and recommends approval of all three items. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: The proposed code amendments (Attachment 1, Attachment 2 and Attachment 3) are intended to meet the economic goals of the Town Council's Strategic Leadership Plan and supported by the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) plan (for more information, see Attachment 5). The proposed code amendments fulfill the objectives of each by focusing on three primary elements: 1. Expanding the amount of available property for employment uses. 2. Revising the development standards for consistency among tech-park and regional commercial areas. 3. Revising specific use (I.E. odor abatement standards) and Tech-Park development standards to remove unintended barriers for attracting primary employers The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the proposed changes on November 5, 2019 and provided feedback (see Attachment 6) to staff. Staff refined the proposed code amendments to address and clarify the Commission's questions and concerns. A summary of each is provided below. 1. Permitted and Ancillary Uses The proposed code amendments aim to expand the available property for employment by adding low-impact employment uses to the C-1 and C-2 commercial districts that function similar to the existing uses already permitted in each district (I.E. General Office). Additionally, the proposed code amendments update the permitted and ancillary uses in the Tech-Park zoning district to be consistent with the Planned Area Development tech-park zones (see image to the right and Attachment 8) and to create a mixed-use, live-work environment. The Commission's concerns are listed below, followed by staff commentary in italics. A. Concerns were raised about the amount of employment generated from the following permitted or conditional uses in a Tech-Park zone. The Commission recommended removing these uses from a Tech-Park zone. Warehousing Warehousing is currently permitted in both Rancho Vistoso and La Reserve Campus Park Industrial (Tech-Park) zoning districts. For consistency, staff recommends warehousing be added as a permitted use in the OV Tech-Park zone. Although big box retail is likely to 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&fp=swagit&get_month=12&get_year=2019&dsp=agm&seq=3169&rev=0&ag=402…3/8 transform into full or partial warehousing operations, warehousing is not being proposed in commercial (C-1 or C-2) zones at this time. Hotels/Motels/Resorts These are currently allowed in the Rancho Vistoso Campus Park Industrial zoning district. Hotels/motels support tech-park business, many of which are national or global companies.Staff recommends permitting them in all Tech-Park areas for consistency and to allow the market to dictate concentration. Per code, resorts are a separate use and not proposed for a Tech-Park zoning district. Self-storage Self-storage is currently allowed in Tech-Park zoning districts with a conditional use permit. Removing them entirely, takes away an existing property right which puts the Town in a position to be sued/challenged under Prop 207. As such, staff recommends keeping it as a conditional use. Private Schools Similar to self-storage, private schools are currently allowed in a Tech-Park zoning district with a conditional use permit. Staff recommends it remain as a conditional use to not infringe on existing private property rights. A summary of all the proposed use changes is included in Attachment 7. B. Concerns with the timing of development for ancillary uses before a primary use was planned or constructed. Per Code, ancillary uses are those that are subordinate to a primary use. In Tech-Park zoning districts, the ancillary uses support the mixed-use, live-work type campus major employers are seeking. To meet the intent of the code definition and address the concerns raised by the Commission the following provisions are included for ancillary uses in a Tech-Park zoning district: Ancillary uses may be sited only within a Master Planned Development. Added a definition for a Master Planned Development, which is an area where large, multi- use developments are planned and developed in a comprehensive manner. Essentially, this assures the ancillary uses are subordinate to primary uses and larger developments are designed cohesively. 2. Development Standards A. Building Height The second element of the proposed amendment is to create consistency among the standards for all tech-park areas in the Town. As previously mentioned, Tech-Park sites are regulated by three different codes 1) Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code, 2) Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development and 3) La Reserve Planned Area Development. Currently, the building height in each is different with the maximum height of 48' for Ventana Medical Systems (see chart below). Previously, staff proposed a building height of 50' for all three regulating codes. The Commission's concerns are listed below, followed by staff commentary in italics. 1. The proposed height's view impact on existing residences. Per the Commission's feedback, the proposed code amendment has been revised to permit 36' for the Oro Valley Tech-Park sites and 50' only in the La Reserve and Rancho Vistoso Planned 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&fp=swagit&get_month=12&get_year=2019&dsp=agm&seq=3169&rev=0&ag=402…4/8 Area Developments (PAD). The amendments to the Planned Area Developments (Item B and Item C) include provisions to restrict the proposed height to 36' when the property abuts a residential area or fronts along Oracle Road. The chart below provides a comparison between the existing and proposed code. EXISTING PROPOSED Oro Valley Code Rancho Vistoso PAD La Reserve PAD Oro Valley Code Rancho Vistoso PAD La Reserve PAD Height 34’36’-48’35’-42’36’ 50’*50’* *Reduced to 36’ for lots fronting Oracle or abutting residential. 2. The proposed height's view impacts to scenic corridors. Currently, the code restricts buildings heights along Oracle Road and Tangerine Road to protect the views along the scenic corridors. The proposed code amendment retains these restrictions, except for the west side of Oracle Road. Per the Commission's feedback, staff revised the restriction on the west side for greater consistency with the commercial standard. The La Reserve PAD currently restricts the height for Tech-Park lots fronting Oracle Road to a maximum of 35'. For parity, the proposed code amendments restrict height to a maximum of 36' for all Tech-Park lots fronting Oracle Road (see Attachment 2 and Attachment 3). The chart on the next page, summarizes the proposed amendments. 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&fp=swagit&get_month=12&get_year=2019&dsp=agm&seq=3169&rev=0&ag=402…5/8 EXISTING CODE PROPOSED CODE Tech-Park Commercial Tech-Park Tangerine Road Refers to commercial standards Restricted to 20’ if located within 100’ and visible from the Tangerine Road right-of-way. No change Oracle Road West-side No buildings over 18' may be within 150’ of Oracle Road No buildings over 18' may be within a minimum of 60% of the frontage to a depth of 300' Refer to the commercial standard for consistency and restrict building height to 36' for lots fronting Oracle Road. Oracle Road East-side 60% of the frontage to a depth of 300' is maintained as a view corridor unless properties are less than 2 acres or 400' in depth, then heights over 25' are limited to 40% of the frontage. Maintain current requirements and restrict building height to 36' for lots fronting Oracle Road. B. Setbacks and Buffer yards Amending the setback and buffer yard requirements for Tech-Park zones is recommended for greater consistency between tech-park developments and commercial developments. Large commercial developments and tech-park campuses are designed similar in layout, circulation and building footprint. Specifically, the Commission was concerned with reducing the setbacks and buffer yards for Tech- Park developments along the scenic corridors. The Commission recommended greater balance between development and protecting the scenic corridor. Similar to the building height restrictions for scenic corridors, the setbacks along Tangerine Road are already consistent among commercial and tech-park sites. However, along Oracle Road the setbacks are a set standard for all Tech-Park development regardless of height. Whereas, the commercial standards factor in height to force taller buildings further away from Oracle Road and encouraging a lower building height along the corridor. For example, this means a permitted office would require a larger setback in a Tech-Park zone than it would in a commercial zone with the same size and height . Based on the Commission's feedback, the setbacks along Oracle Road have been revised for greater consistency among the tech-park and commercial standards. Please see chart below for a summary of the proposed revisions. EXISTING CODE PROPOSED CODE Tech-Park Commercial Tech-Park Front 3:1 (setback to building height) unless lower than 25' then it is 2:1 20’ or where adjacent to residential, residential setbacks apply Revise T-P front setbacks to be consistent with commercial. Side/Rear 50' or 3:1, whichever is greater when abutting residential 50' or 3:1, whichever is greater when abutting residential 25’ when abutting multi-family Add side/rear setbacks for when T-P abuts multi-family or non- residential (consistent with commercial) 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&fp=swagit&get_month=12&get_year=2019&dsp=agm&seq=3169&rev=0&ag=402…6/8 or residential Tangerine Road Scenic Corridor Standards Front Refers to commercial 4:1 (setback to height)No change- Existing standards are consistent between T-P and commercial.Side/Rear Refers to commercial Underlying Zoning district Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Standards Front 150’ except for La Reserve PAD sites, which is 50’ Single structure: 60’ and 4:1 (setback to building height) Multiple structures: 120’ average Revised to refer to all the commercial standards Side/ Rear buffer yards 100 feet when abutting residential Silent – normal buffer yard requirements apply Revised to 40’ when abutting residential. Forty feet is the maximum depth of a buffer yard required in Section 27.6.C.4. 3. Specific Use Standards Section 25.1.B. of the Zoning Code has additional standards for specific non-residential uses. Provisions for manufacturing were expanded to clearly delineate between the two subcategories (light or heavy) permitted. The Commission was concerned with the following provisions (staff comments in italics) and their impacts on existing residences. Noise The proposed code amendment restricts noise from being discernible at the property line. Vibration (manufacturing only) Staff revised the code amendment to restrict vibration from being discernible at the property line when the development abuts a property used or intended for residential purposes. Outdoor lighting Section 27.5 of the Zoning Code establishes the requirements and design standards for outdoor lighting. The amount, location and types of lighting are all established by code. Although parking lot lighting is permitted for safety purposes, the lights must be shielded and placed away from nearby residences. A summary of the provisions for manufacturing and warehousing are included in Attachment 7. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE The proposed code amendment was reviewed for conformance with the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan. By increasing the available space for employment uses and removing unintended barriers, the proposed code amendment meets and supports the following goals and policies: Goal B. A robust local economy and job market that provide opportunities for quality employment, build on Oro Valley’s assets and encourage high-quality growth. Goal C. A strong sector of targeted industries, including bioscience and aerospace, that provide opportunities for synergy and growth. Policy E.1. Develop a diversified and robust economic base to support long-term economic stability. Policy E.2. Establish programs, strategies, investments and financial incentives that advance the Town’s economic prosperity. 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&fp=swagit&get_month=12&get_year=2019&dsp=agm&seq=3169&rev=0&ag=402…7/8 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Public Notice has been provided as stated below. A letter of support was received and included in Attachment 9. All HOAs in Town were notified of this hearing All property owners of Tech-Park zoned property Public hearing notices were posted: In the Territorial Newspaper In the Arizona Daily Star At Town Hall On the Town website SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION The proposed code amendment was initiated through the Town Council's Strategic Leadership Plan to achieve the goal of attracting more primary employment users. Substantiated by the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), the main goals of the proposed code amendment are to: 1. Expand the amount of available property for employment uses. 2. Revise the development standards for consistency among tech-park and regional commercial areas. 3. Revise specific use (I.E. odor abatement standards) and Tech-Park development standards to remove unintended barriers for attracting primary employers. The Planning and Zoning Commission provided feedback on the proposed code amendments during the November 5, 2019 meeting (see Attachment 6). Staff further refined the code amendments to address or clarify the concerns raised. In summary, staff finds the proposed code amendments are in conformance with the General Plan and recommend approval of all three items. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: There are three separate motions for the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider. ITEM A: I MOVE to recommend approval of the proposed code amendments to the C-1, C-2 and Technological Park zoning districts and associated standards based on the finding they are in conformance with the General Plan. OR I MOVE to recommend denial of the proposed code amendments to the C-1, C-2 and Technological- Park zoning districts based on the finding________________. ITEM B: I MOVE to recommend approval of the proposed code amendments to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development based on the finding they are in conformance with the General Plan. OR I MOVE to recommend denial of the proposed code amendments to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development based on the finding________________. ITEM C: 12/13/2019 Agenda - View Meetings https://destinyhosted.com/agenda_publish.cfm?id=67682&mt=ALL&fp=swagit&get_month=12&get_year=2019&dsp=agm&seq=3169&rev=0&ag=402…8/8 I MOVE to recommend approval of the proposed code amendments to the La Reserve Planned Area Development based on the finding they are in conformance with the General Plan. OR I MOVE to recommend denial of the proposed code amendments to the La Reserve Planned Area Development based on the finding________________. Attachments ATTACHMENT 1- PROPOSED OV ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ATTACHMENT 2- RANCHO VISTOSO PAD AMENDMENTS ATTACHMENT 3- LA RESERVE PAD AMENDMENTS ATTACHMENT 4- TECH PARK AND COMMERCIAL AREAS ATTACHMENT 5- PZC STAFF REPORT 11.05.19 ATTACHMENT 6- DRAFT PZC MINUTES 11.05.19 ATTACHMENT 7- SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK AND REVISIONS ATTACHMENT 8- REGULATORY CODE FOR TECH-PARK SITES ATTACHMENT 9- LETTER OF SUPPORT GO TO THE TOP OF THE PAGE AgendaQuick ©2005 - 2019 Destiny Software Inc. All Rights Reserved. D R A F T MINUTES ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION December 3, 2019 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE            REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM   CALL TO ORDER Chair Swope called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.   ROLL CALL Present: Bob Swope, Chair Hal Bergsma, Commissioner Celeste Gambill, Commissioner Thomas Gribb, Commissioner Skeet Posey, Commissioner Absent: Ellen Hong, Commissioner Staff Present:Bayer Vella, Planning Manager Bill Rodman, Town Council Liaison J.J. Johnston, Community and Economic Development Director Joe Andrews, Chief Civil Deputy Attorney PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Swope led the Commission and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.   CALL TO AUDIENCE There were no speaker requests.   COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS Council Liaison Bill Rodman stated the golf issue and police chief recruitment process has been the focus of Council lately. He thanked outgoing Commissioners Bob Swope and Tom Gribb for their service, and also said this was his last meeting as the Council liaison for the Commission.   REGULAR SESSION AGENDA   1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 5, 2019 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES       Motion by Commissioner Thomas Gribb, seconded by Commissioner Skeet Posey to approve the November 5, 2019 meeting minutes as written.  Vote: 5 - 0 Carried  Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   2.DISCUSSION AND OVERVIEW REGARDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (CEDS)       Community and Economic Development Director J.J. Johnston provided a presentation that included the following: - Community and Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) plan - Overarching goals - Initial priorities - Process - Alignment with the Strategic Leadership Plan - Summary Discussion ensued among the Commission and staff.   3.PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO THE ECONOMIC EXPANSION ZONE, SECTION 24.9 AND SECTION 22.10       Community and Economic Development Director J.J. Johnston provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Planning and Zoning Commission feedback - Town Council 20-day appeal period - General Plan conformance - Summary and recommendation Discussion ensued among the Commission and staff.    Chair Swope opened the public hearing. There were no speaker requests. Chair Swope closed the public hearing. Further discussion continued among the Commission and staff.    Motion by Commissioner Hal Bergsma, seconded by Commissioner Celeste Gambill to recommend approval of the proposed code amendment to the Economic Expansion Zone (EEZ) based on the finding that it is in conformance with the General Plan.    Motion by Chair Bob Swope, seconded by Commissioner Thomas Gribb to offer a Friendly Amendment to modify the open house meeting requirement to apply to all properties within 100 feet of residential areas.    Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   4.PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PROPOSED ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED AMENDMENTS TO C-1, C-2, TECHNOLOGICAL PARK AND EQUIVALENT PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS REGARDING LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUCH AS BUILDING HEIGHTS, SETBACKS ETC. ITEM A: AMENDMENTS TO THE ORO VALLEY REVISED ZONING CODE ITEM B: AMENDMENTS TO THE RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT    ITEM B: AMENDMENTS TO THE RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT ITEM C: AMENDMENTS TO THE LA RESERVE PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT    Principal Planner Milini Simms provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Planning and Zoning Commission feedback - Permitted uses: low-impact employment uses - Provide parity among Tech Park zones - Permitted uses proposed in Tech Park zones - Ancillary uses in Tech Park - Proposed building heights in Tech Park Zones - Proposed building heights for Innovation Park and La Reserve - Intensity along scenic corridors - Specific use standards - General Plan conformance - Public outreach - Summary and recommendation Discussion ensued among the Commission and staff.    Chair Swope opened the public hearing Oro Valley resident Shirl Lamonna stated she generally supports bringing industry to the Town, but has concerns about warehousing and odor. She also commented on the CED report and to remember the reasons why people originally came to live in Oro Valley. Chair Swope closed the public hearing.    Further discussion ensued among the Commission and staff.    Motion by Commissioner Hal Bergsma, seconded by Commissioner Skeet Posey to recommend approval of [Item A] the proposed code amendments to the C-1,C-2 and Technological Park zoning districts and associated standards, with the modification that light warehousing and hotels/motels are changed from a permitted use to an ancillary use, based on the finding the changes are in conformance with the General Plan.    Motion by Commissioner Thomas Gribb, seconded by Chair Bob Swope to offer a Friendly Amendment that the verbiage also include the building height restrictions be extended to properties within 100 feet of residential areas.    Vote: 5 - 0 Carried    Motion by Commissioner Thomas Gribb, seconded by Commissioner Hal Bergsma to recommend approval of [Item B] the proposed code amendments to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development, and include language that the building height restrictions be extended to properties within 100 feet of residential areas.  Vote: 5 - 0 Carried    Motion by Commissioner Hal Bergsma, seconded by Commissioner Thomas Gribb to recommend approval [Item C] of the proposed code amendments to the La Reserve Planned Area Development based on the finding they are in conformance with the General Plan.  Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   PLANNING UPDATE (INFORMATIONAL ONLY)    Planning Manager Bayer Vella spoke about the four (4) commissioner appointments open for consideration at Town Council on December 4, upcoming Commissioner training on December 19, the next Commission meeting will be January 6 (Monday) in the Hopi Conference Room and a neighborhood meeting is scheduled for January 9. He also thanked Chair Swope, Commissioner Gribb and Town Council liaison Bill Rodman for their service.   ADJOURNMENT    Motion by Commissioner Thomas Gribb, seconded by Commissioner Skeet Posey to adjourn the meeting.  Vote: 5 - 0 Carried    Chair Swope adjourned the meeting at 8:27 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 Planning and Zoning Commission of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 3rd day of December, 2019. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this _____ day of ____________________, 2019. ___________________________ Jeanna Ancona Senior Office Specialist               Engineering • Planning  Surveying • Urban Design  Landscape Architecture  Engineering • Planning • Surveying • Urban Design • Landscape Architecture  Offices located in Tucson, Phoenix, Flagstaff & Las Vegas • tucson@wlbgroup.com  4444 E. Broadway Blvd. • Tucson, AZ 85711 • (520) 881‐7480 • Fax (520) 881‐7492          November 4, 2019    Town of Oro Valley, Planning Division  Attn: Milini Simms, Principal Planner  11,000 N. La Canada Dr.  Oro Valley, AZ 85737    Subject: Withdrawal of a Text Amendment to the Rancho Vistoso PAD    Regarding Allowable Building Height on Selected Parcels within Innovation Park    WLB No. 185050‐VW‐05    Dear Milini:    We are pleased to see that the Town’s update of the OVZCR Technological Park Zoning District is going to  address the building height flexibility that we had sought in our proposed PAD amendment.  There is no  need to duplicate efforts, so we respectfully withdraw our application.  Please don’t hesitate to let us  know if you need additional information or if there is anything we can do to support the Town’s proposed  code amendment.    Sincerely,        THE WLB GROUP, INC.              Paul Oland        Copy:  Alec Kennedy, Roche Tissue Diagnostics (Ventana Medical Systems)    Neil Simon, Venture West      G:\Projects\19aa WLB Gen Svcs\a01\185050 N03 Bldg Ht PAD Amend 2019\Innov Park Bldg Ht PAD Amend Withdrawal Ltr.docx     Town Council Regular and Study Session 2. Meeting Date:02/05/2020   Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development  Submitted By:Milini Simms, Community and Economic Development Case Number: 1902616 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO THE ECONOMIC EXPANSION ZONE, SECTION 24.9 AND SECTION 22.10 RECOMMENDATION: This item is for informational purposes only. The proposed code amendment will be presented for action by the Town Council in March. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this item is to provide additional information in response to Town Council's questions and concerns regarding a proposed code amendment to allow pre-graded sites and further refine the development review process in the Economic Expansion Zone (EEZ). For map and summary of the proposed amendments, see image to the right and Attachment 1.   The proposed code amendment was previously discussed by the Town Council during the January 8, 2020 meeting (for staff report see Attachment 2, for draft minutes see Attachment 3). Feedback from the Council focused on the following elements:  Pre-grading to create ready-to-build sites. Specifically with regard to the following questions and concerns:  The existing process for grading  The existing and proposed extent and process for preliminary grading The amount of time a pre-graded site could remain vacant Proximity of preliminary grading to existing residential areas  1. The extent and timing of requiring public open house for EEZ sites. With regard to the location of properties that are required to conduct open houses and when they will be conducted (before or after site work is started).  2. The public participation process for the proposed code amendments. Specifically, the methods utilized to notify the public and opportunities for residents to provide feedback.  3. Town staff reviewed Town Council's feedback and are in the process revising the code to address the concerns. Notable changes and additional information is listed below.  Major employment users are locating in jurisdictions that have the necessary processes to allow a new custom building be fully functional within roughly 12 months. This need was verified through a recent study by Deloitte, which found clients have ‘fast track expectations’ when it comes to building on a site. Site selectors, or business locating firms, will research and negotiate with several jurisdictions at a time. Nationally, a finalist community is one that can deliver a ‘fast-track’ site (one that meets all geotechnical conditions, proper zoning regulations, development codes and covenants, utilities logistical and environmental considerations, etc.). Site selectors are consistently asking the Town for a more predictable and time-efficient development process. Specifically, the pre-grading of Tech Park sites, as enabled by surrounding jurisdictions, will enable the Town to be more competitive by meeting site selector/employer fast track expectations.  Oro Valley is one of the jurisdictions being considered for a major employer relocation that is expected to generate approximately 250 jobs, construct 120,000 sq.ft. of advanced technology campus and bring approximately $90 Million in direct capital investment to the Town. None of the potential Oro Valley sites under consideration by the firm are pre-graded. In the Town's current process, it could take roughly 6 months for site work to begin. However, by allowing pre-grading, this time can be reduced significantly to 1-2 months. Pre-grading would help keep Oro Valley competitive against other jurisdictions already offering "fast-track sites." Oro Valley has a strong brand for being safe, family-friendly and beautiful community. However, in addition to these community amenities, the Deloitte study also found the most desirable incentives for site selection include infrastructure improvements and related tangible contributions to their bottom line. These are highly important for risk management, cost containment, time to market and sustained profitability greatly depend on the location of the company.The proposed code amendments help meets these needs and also adds a critical part to Oro Valley's economic development brand.  Currently, pre-grading allows the clearing, brushing, and grubbing (removal of plants and roots) prior to having an approved site plan or plat at staff's discretion for any site in Town (regardless of  the proximity to residential areas). The proposed code, provides restrictions to regulate where pre-grading is allowed to only  EEZ areas located at least 200 feet away from a residential property.  Per the Town Council's discussion, the proposed code amendment has been revised to also allow the installation of utilities and site stabilization (in addition to clearing, brushing and grubbing) to create ready-to-build sites in EEZ only. These additions are necessary to meet the demands of employment users. However, a pre-application meeting must be conducted and a grading plan and associated plans (e.g. a Native Plant Preservation Plan) to assure environmental and cultural resources are protected must be approved by staff first. Both pre-graded sites and sites graded during construction may be vacant for an unlimited time (e.g. Nakoma Sky). However, both require assurances (bonds) for remediation, when necessary. The proposed code provides additional restrictions for pre-graded sites to not allow pre-grading within 200 feet of a residential area, the required buffer yards or within 25 feet of the future development envelope. These additions further reduce potential of visual impacts and increase compatibility to surrounding areas.  Staff reviewed the sites identified by Town Council as being in proximity to residential areas. Though these sites are located within 200 feet of residential areas; only 2 are vacant and undisturbed (for exhibit, see Attachment 4). However, for one the buildable area is over 200 feet away and 30 feet lower than the adjacent residential area; eliminating any potential for visibility impacts. In efforts to apply this code allowance uniformly to all EEZ sites and not create a significant disadvantage to only two sites while accounting for existing residential areas, the proposed code amendment restricts any pre-grading within 200 feet of a residential area (for exhibit, see Attachment 5). As proposed, public open houses are utilized as the pre-submittal (site plan only) neighborhood meeting; occurring at the beginning of the review process before any formal applications or site work has been conducted. Per Council's feedback, the new proposed requirement for public open houses has been extended to 200 feet (rather than 100 feet) to capture properties adjacent to residential areas (as identified by Town Council).  Outreach for the proposed code amendment complies with the Town's approved public notice policies and State law. Additionally, public hearings for the proposed code amendment was posted multiple times on the Town's webpage and included as "featured news" on the homepage. Complex and broad code amendments require sustained research and prolonged engagement by participants. As such, they are not a suited to traditional neighborhood meetings nor required by code. However, neighborhood meetings will continue to be conducted for applicant driven and site specific/focused amendments that meet neighborhood meeting zoning criteria. The public is invited to speak during the public hearings for the larger Town-wide amendments.  In summary, the proposed code amendment is being revised to reflect the additional information provided to address some of the Council's previous discussion. This item is for informational purposes only and the proposed code amendment will be presented for action by the Town Council in March. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: The Economic Expansion Zone (EEZ) was adopted in 2012 to attract primary employers to Innovation Park. The code was amended in 2018 to expand EEZ to include all Tech-Park zoned sites.  A focus area in the Town's Strategic Leadership Plan is economic vitality; specifically to attract primary employers and increase the employment base in Oro Valley. To achieve this goal, the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) identified barriers such as the lack of pre-graded sites and development review times as deterrents to primary employers. The proposed code amendment reduces these barriers and includes the following main areas of change (for summary and map see image to the right and Attachment 1):   Allow pre-grading within 200 feet of a residential property1.  Require public open houses when the Tech-Park development is near a residential area2.  Allow a code compliant sign criteria to be approved by staff3.  Eliminate the 20-day Town Council review period4. The Town Council discussed the proposed amendment on January 8, 2020 to provide feedback (for minutes, see Attachment 2) to staff. Staff refined the proposed code amendment to address many of Council's concerns. More information on each is provided below. 1. Preliminary grading to create ready-to build sites The proposed code amendment aims to allow preliminary grading by right for EEZ sites only. Site selectors seek development ready sites that would allow a new custom building to be fully functional within roughly 12 to 18 months. To attract employment uses, many jurisdictions permit preliminary grading to create ready-to-build sites. As such, allowing preliminary grading is an expectation and competitive advantage for property owners and jurisdictions that wish to attract major employers. This was verified through a recent study by Deloitte, which found clients have ‘fast track expectations’ when it comes to building on a site. Oro Valley is one of the jurisdictions being considered for Project "Alpha," which is a major employer relocating to the region(presented to Town Council through an executive session). If chosen, Project "Alpha" will create approximately 250 jobs, construct 120,000 sq.ft. advanced technology campus and bring approximately $90 Million in direct capital investment to the Town. Pre-grading would not only help meet Project "Alpha's" needs but will also keep Oro Valley competitive against the other jurisdictions already offering "fast-track sites."The proposed code amendment aims to balance this marketable advantage with the community's values.  A. The existing and proposed processes for grading  The proposed code amendment is important to meet the demands of employment site selectors. Typically, grading permits are not issued until a final plat or site plan is approved (in EEZ and throughout Town). In EEZ, site plan approval may take up to 4 months (includes the applicant's work and staff review time) with the grading plan taking an additional 1-2 months. In total, it could take roughly 6 months to begin any site work. The proposed code amendment would allow issuance of a grading permit before a site plan is approved; reducing the time to start site work to roughly 1-2 months. The existing and proposed processes are depicted in the graphic below. Please note, staff review and approval (depicted below) includes the time for an applicant to address staff comments and resubmit for further review. Typically, at least two rounds of review is conducted, prior to approval.   B. Clarification between the existing and proposed extent and process for pre-grading Existing Currently, pre-grading includes the clearing, brushing and grubbing (removal of plants) within 25 feet of a future development envelope on any site in Town. Per code, the development envelope includes the building pads, areas for parking and access drives. Town staff has the discretion to approve preliminary grading, prior to approval of a plat or site plan. The current process only requires a grading plan, archeological clearance letter and assurances for approval. As such, decision-making is arbitrary since there is no specified basis for denial. Essentially, if utilized by more developers, this could lead to scraped sites throughout Town; even next to residential properties. Proposed To address the shortcomings of the existing code and meet the intent discussed by Town Council, the proposed code amendment removes the ability for any site in Town to be cleared (prior to site plan approval) by restricting pre-grading to specific areas of Town. These areas are as follows:  Located within the Economic Expansion Zone, and  In areas not within 200 feet of a property use or intended for residential purposes, and This criteria for identifying site that could be pre-graded also creates a mechanism for denial; making an approval predictable for an employment use and nearby residents. As proposed, preliminary grading will include the same items as previously mentioned yet also allow include the installation of utilities and excavation or filling needed to further stabilize the site (addressing drainage, etc.). These additions increase efficiency within the development process and create ready-to-build sites sought by site selectors. Another notable concern from Town Council was the length of time a pre-graded site could site vacant. The existing code, whether pre-graded or not enables a site to remain vacant for an unlimited length of time (e.g. Nakoma Sky). However, the existing and proposed code require assurances to provide remediation when necessary. In addition to the previously mentioned criteria, the proposed code includes provisions for increasing compatibility and reducing visual impact to surrounding areas by not allowing any pre-grading within the required buffer yards (ranging from 15-40 feet). This is in addition to the existing restriction not allowing pre-grading within 25 feet of the future development envelope.  Lastly, similar to the existing code, the proposed code amendment includes provisions for protecting cultural resources and requiring assurances. However, it also includes further provisions for protecting native plants by requiring a plant inventory and associated landscape plan. Although done in practice with existing pre-graded sites, the proposed code explicitly requires these items.    C.  Proximity of preliminary grading to existing residential areas  Allowing preliminary grading to create ready-to-build sites is a substantial benefit for EEZ sites. Staff reviewed the sites discussed by Town Council, which were within 200 feet of a residential property. Restricting preliminary grading on these sites would affect 10 properties. However, of these 10 properties only 2 remain vacant and undisturbed (for exhibit, see Attachment 4). Due to topography, the buildable area on one site is already naturally screened by being 30 feet lower and over 200 feet away from adjacent homes. Additionally, the requirements to maintain buffer yards and limit grading to within 25 feet of the development envelope will decrease visual impacts to surrounding neighbors.  In an effort to apply this code allowance more uniformly to all EEZ sites and not create a significant disadvantage to only two sites, while accounting for existing residential areas, the proposed code amendment restricts any pre-grading within 200 feet of a residential area (for exhibit, see Attachment 5). As previously discussed, this provision is stricter than the current code allowance for clearing a site. Lastly, Town staff will also amend the standard operation procedure (SOP) policy to require mailings be sent to any residential property within 600 feet of a pre-graded site, prior to any site work.     2. The extent and timing of requiring public open house for EEZ sites. When EEZ was expanded to include all Tech-Park properties, it included some located near residential areas. The proposed amendment accounts for this proximity by requiring public open houses for these specific sites. Public open houses will be utilized as the pre-submittal neighborhood meeting; occurring at the beginning of the review process before any formal plans have been submitted or site work has been conducted. The open houses will be for informational purposes, providing residents with an opportunity to learn about the proposed project and both staff and the applicant opportunities to ensure a sensitive site design. Since EEZ only applies to projects developing under existing permitted uses and standards (opposed to a rezoning or conditional use), the applicant has substantial property rights once code compliant. As such, an open house is a useful venue for discussions with neighbors. Per Council's feedback, the distance for requiring public open houses has been extended to 200 feet (rather than 100 feet) to capture properties adjacent to residential areas (for map, see Attachment 1). As previously mentioned, this distance was expanded to include the properties identified during the Town Council's discussion.  3. Public outreach for proposed code amendments Notice requirements and outreach for public hearings Outreach for the proposed code amendment complies with longstanding CED Standard Operating Procedures and State law. Section 22 of the Zoning Code stipulates the outreach requirements for various projects. Amendments to this section were approved in 2016, which included Council's review and feedback on the Public Participation and Notification Policy, a standard operating procedure (SOP) directing staff. Specifically, the code states the following:    In the event that requests for amendments to the general requirements  and uses are made, no application, posting or mailing shall be required (Section 22.3.F.) Additionally, the State requires notice of public hearings to all owners of property being changed and for more significant changes (e.g. an increase in building height), the State requires larger newspaper ads in more widely distributed newspapers. For this case, outreach included sending postcards to all 115 homeowner's associations, all 59 property owners of land covered by the EEZ overlay, 1/4 page newspaper ads and multiple postings on the Town's webpage. Although the proposed amendment does not trigger the additional State requirement, an ad was placed in the Arizona Daily Star (in addition to one placed in the Daily Territorial) and was included as "featured news" on the Town's website homepage. An additional step will be taken for the Town Council public hearing with a newspaper ad in the Explorer. Neighborhood meetings With regard to neighborhood meetings, State law does not require neighborhood meetings for zoning or land use applications of any type. However, in keeping with Town values - the Town's Zoning Code requires neighborhood meetings for the following applications:  General Plan amendments Rezonings Conditional use permits Conceptual site and landscape plans Any other proposed action that results in significant change in the development intensity or compatibility with existing development as determined by the Planning and Zoning Administrator (Section 22.15.B.1). With regard to the last bullet point, the proposed code amendment does not appear to significantly change "development intensity or compatibility with existing development". The code amendment will:  Further restrict grubbing and clearing a site of vegetation - which is currently permitted on all sites in OV without site plan approval. The proposed amendments only allowing grubbing and clearing within EEZ zone only - and incorporate a 200' no grading zone when adjacent to residential properties. Flexibility for further grading beyond grubbing and clearing is permitted prior to site plan approval in EEZ only.  Increase requirements for public outreach by adding public open houses for site plan review. Furthermore, Town Standard Operating Procedures will now include mailings for all pre-graded sites near residential areas. Remove the 20-day Town Council review period and enables administrative approval of a code compliant Sign Criteria is not a change to adjacent properties. Town-wide zoning code amendments are treated differently from rezonings by state law and the zoning code for a reason. Each recognizes the difficulty of requiring expanded outreach (similar to a rezoning) for code amendments that are larger in area and scope. Complex and broad code amendments require sustained research, study and prolonged engagement by participants. As such, neighborhood meetings are not a suitable platform for such amendments nor standard practice by the Town. Neighborhood meetings will continue to be held for site specific/focused amendments to the Planned Area Developments (PADs) that are driven by private property owners and have a "significant change in intensity or compatibility" as proscribed by code. As mentioned previously, the public is invited and encouraged to provide feedback during the public hearings for Town-wide code amendments. SUMMARY Both the Town Council's Strategic Leadership Plan (derived from the General Plan) and Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy included goals and objectives to attract more employment uses. The proposed code amendment aims to fulfill these objectives by allowing shovel-ready sites and removing inefficiencies in the development review process.   The Town Council discussed the proposed code amendment on January 8, 2020. This item is for informational purposes intended to clarify and address Council's concerns. The proposed code amendment is being refined to address many of the concerns and will be presented for action by the Town Council in March. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: This item is for information purposes only. The proposed code amendment is tentatively scheduled to be presented for action by the Town Council in March. Attachments ATTACHMENT 1- SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS  ATTACHMENT 2- STUDY SESSION STAFF REPORT 1.8.2020  ATTACHMENT 3- DRAFT TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES  ATTACHMENT 4- EXHIBIT OF SITES NEAR RESIDENTIAL  ATTACHMENT 5- EXHIBIT OF PRE-GRADING AREA  Proposed Amendments to the Economic Expansion Zone (EEZ) Attachment 1 Tangerine Rd.La Cañada Dr.EEZ sites Requirement Existing Code Proposed Code Preliminary Grading Allowed by a case-by-case basis at the discretion of Town staff Allowed on EEZ areas at least 200 feet away from a residential property only Public Outreach All sites are exempted Sites within 200’ of a residential property (shown in orange below) must conduct public open houses Sign Criteria Approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission Allow staff approval of a code compliant sign criteria Town Council review period Provides a 20-day review period of all administrative decisions in EEZ Eliminates the Town Council review period but maintains the ability for any aggrieved party to appeal an administrative decision EEZ sites near residential D R A F T   MINUTES ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION AND STUDY SESSION JANUARY 8, 2020 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE            REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM   CALL TO ORDER    Mayor Winfield called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.   ROLL CALL Present: Joseph C. Winfield, Mayor Melanie Barrett, Vice-Mayor Joyce Jones-Ivey, Councilmember (attended via phone) Josh Nicolson, Councilmember Rhonda Piña, Councilmember Bill Rodman, Councilmember Steve Solomon, Councilmember PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE    Mayor Winfield led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.   UPCOMING MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS    Town Clerk Mike Standish announced the upcoming Town meetings.   COUNCIL REPORTS    No Council reports were received.   TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT    Town Manager Mary Jacobs thanked Council for their hard work in 2019 and wished the Council and residents a happy New Year. Town Clerk Mike Standish announced that new artwork was on display in the Council Chambers by artist Jan Sennewald.   ORDER OF BUSINESS     1-8-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 1   Mayor Winfield reviewed the order of business and stated that the order would stand as posted.   INFORMATIONAL ITEMS    There were no informational items.   CALL TO AUDIENCE    No comments were received.   PRESENTATIONS   1.Presentation and update by President/CEO Dave Perry of the Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce       President and CEO of the Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce Dave Perry presented the Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce annual report. Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding Presentation item #1.   CONSENT AGENDA   A.Minutes - November 20 and December 4, 2019      B.Resolution No. (R)20-01, authorizing and approving a subgrantee agreement between the Town of Oro Valley and the Arizona Department of Homeland Security to fund equipment under the Operation Stonegarden program      C.Request for approval of conceptual architecture for Two Oracle Place, also known as the former Platinum Fitness site, located west of Oracle Road approximately 1/4-mile north of Ina Road      D.(Re)appointment to the Tucson - Pima County Bicycle Advisory Committee       Councilmember Rodman asked for clarification regarding the Planning and Zoning Commissions approval of a condition regarding a proposed Conceptual Archtecture for Two Oracle place, located west of Oracle Road Approximately 1/4 Mile North of Ina Road. Planning Manager Bayer Vella clarified that the condition reflects current code requirements and will be implemented upon building permit review.    Motion by Vice-Mayor Melanie Barrett, seconded by Councilmember Steve Solomon to approve the Consent Agenda (A - D).  Vote: 7 - 0 Carried   REGULAR AGENDA   1.PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING AN APPLICATION FOR A SERIES 9S (LIQUOR STORE WITH SAMPLING PRIVILEGES) LIQUOR LICENSE FOR TRADER JOE'S, LOCATED AT 7912 N. ORACLE ROAD       Town Clerk Mike Standish presented item #1.    Mayor Winfield opened the public hearing. 1-8-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 2   Mayor Winfield opened the public hearing. No comments were received. Mayor Winfield closed the public hearing    Motion by Councilmember Bill Rodman, seconded by Councilmember Steve Solomon to approve the issuance of a Series 9S Liquor License to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control for Andrea Dahlman Lewkowitz for Trader Joe's #096, located at 7912 N. Oracle Road. Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding item #1.  Vote: 7 - 0 Carried   2.AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ORO VALLEY TOWN CODE RELATING TO SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS   A.RESOLUTION NO. (R)20-02, DECLARING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE SPECIAL EVENTS SECTION OF THE ORO VALLEY TOWN CODE, PROVIDED AS EXHIBIT "A" WITHIN THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION AND FILED WITH THE TOWN CLERK, A PUBLIC RECORD (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 4, 2019)       Motion by Councilmember Bill Rodman, seconded by Councilmember Rhonda Piña to adopt Resolution No. (R)20-02, declaring the proposed amendments to various sections of the Special Events Code of the Oro Valley Town Code, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and filed with the Town Clerk, a public record.  Vote: 7 - 0 Carried   B.PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE NO. (O)20-01, AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF ARTICLE 8-3 OF THE ORO VALLEY TOWN CODE RELATING TO THE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 4, 2019)       Strategic Inititaves Manager Amanda Jacobs presented item #2B. Mayor Winfield opened the public hearing. No comments were received. Mayor Winfield closed the public hearing.    Motion by Councilmember Bill Rodman, seconded by Councilmember Rhonda Piña to approve Ordinance No.(O)20-01, amending various sections of Article 8-3 of the Oro Valley Town Code relating to the Special Events Permit.  Vote: 7 - 0 Carried   3.PUBLIC HEARING: PURSUANT TO A.R.S. §9-463.05, TO DISCUSS AND REVIEW AN UPDATE TO THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT FEES CHARGED BY THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY       Strategic Initiatives Manager Amanda Jacobs gave a brief overview of item #3 and introduced Carson Bise, President of Tischler Bise. Mr. Bise presented item #3 and included the following: - 40-year consulting practice serving local government nationwide - Methodology Overview 1-8-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 3  - Legal and Methodology - Arizona Legislation - Overview of Adoption Process - Land use Assumptions - Parks and Recreation - Projection of Demand: Developed Park Land - Projection of Demand: Amenities - Draft Parks and Recreational Development Fees - Police - Police Station Cost Recovery - Projection of Demand - Draft Police Development Fee - Streets - Streets IIP - Travel Demand - Proposed Streets Development Fees - Water - Water IIP - Proposed Water Facilities Development Fees - Utility Fee Comparison:Current vs. Proposed - Town Fee Comparison: Current vs. Proposed - SF Unit Fee Comparison: Other Communities    Mayor Winfield opened the public hearing. No comments were received. Mayor Winfield closed the public hearing. Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding item #3. Ms. Jacobs concluded the presentation and stated the item would come back to Council on February 19th for discussion and possible action.   FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS    Councilmember Piña requested that a portrait of Chief Sharp, painted by resident Harry Green, be presented at a future meeting.   CALL TO AUDIENCE    No comments were received.   ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR SESSION    Mayor Winfield adjourned the Regular Session at 7:48 p.m. Mayor Winfield recessed the meeting at 7:49 p.m. Mayor Winfield reconvened the meeting at 8:01 p.m.   STUDY SESSION   CALL TO ORDER 1-8-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 4     Mayor Winfield called the Study Session to order at 8:01 p.m.   STUDY SESSION AGENDA   1.DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO THE ECONOMIC EXPANSION ZONE, SECTION 24.9 AND SECTION 22.10       Community and Economic Development Director JJ Johnston and Principal Planner Milini Simms presented item #1 and included the following: - Purpose - Meet Economic Goals and Strategies - Proposed Code Amendment - Economic Expansion Zone - Allow Shovel-Ready Sites - Require Public Open Houses - Admin. Approval of all Code Compliant Plans - Eliminate 20-Day Town Council Review Period - General Plan Conformance - Planning and Zoning Commission - Summary and Feedback Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding Study Session item #1.    The following individual spoke regarding Study Session item #1. Developer Tom Warne    Discussion continued amongst Council and staff regarding Study Session item #1.   2.DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS TO C-1, C-2, AND TECHNOLOGICAL PARK AND EQUIVALENT PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS REGARDING LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUCH AS BUILDING HEIGHTS, SETBACKS, ETC.       Principal Planner Milini Simms presented Study Session item #2 and included the following: - Purpose - Meet Economic Goals and Strategies - Proposed Code Amendments - Expand available property for employers - Low-impact employment uses - Expand available property for employers - Update standards and reduce discrepancies - Building size - Permitted and ancillary uses - Ancillary uses - Building heights - Proposed building height - Rancho Vistoso - Proposed building height - La Reserve - Architectural features - Increase predictability - Remove unintended barriers - General Plan Conformance - Planning and Zoning Commission - Summary and Feedback 1-8-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 5  Discussion ensued amongst Council and staff regarding item #2.    Motion by Councilmember Steve Solomon, seconded by Councilmember Bill Rodman to continue Study Session item #2 to the January 22, 2020 Town Council meeting.  Vote: 7 - 0 Carried   ADJOURNMENT OF THE STUDY SESSION    Mayor Winfiled adjourned the Study Session at 10:17 p.m.   RECONVENE THE REGULAR SESSION    Mayor Winfield reconvened the Regular Session at 10:17 p.m.   EXECUTIVE SESSION - 1. Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3), (A)(4) for legal advice with the Town attorneys, discussion, and consultation with those attorneys and designated Town representatives, and possible instruction to those attorneys and designated representatives about disputes, claims, proposals and/or agreements related to the Town owned golf courses, HSL and/or Home Owners’ Associations proximate to those courses.    Motion by Mayor Joseph C. Winfield, seconded by Councilmember Bill Rodman to go into Executive Session at 10:18 p.m. pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3), (A)(4) for legal advice with the Town attorneys, discussion, and consultation with those attorneys and designated Town representatives, and possible instruction to those attorneys and designated representatives about disputes, claims, proposals and/or agreements related to the Town owned golf courses, HSL and/or Home Owners’ Associations proximate to those courses.  Vote: 7 - 0 Carried    Mayor Winfield announced that the following staff members would be joining Council in the Executive Session: Town Manager Mary Jacobs, Assistant Town Manager Chris Cornelison, Town Attorney Gary Cohen and Town Clerk Mike Standish.   RESUME THE REGULAR SESSION    Mayor Winfield resumed the Regular Session at 11:41 p.m.   ADJOURNMENT    Motion by Councilmember Steve Solomon, seconded by Councilmember Bill Rodman to adjourn the meeting at 11:42 p.m.  Vote: 7 - 0 Carried     _____________________________________ Michelle Stine, MMC Deputy Town Clerk I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular and study session of the Town of Oro Valley Council of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 8th day of January, 2020. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. 1-8-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 6  Dated this _____ day of ____________________, 2020. ___________________________ Michael Standish, CMC Town Clerk 1-8-20 Minutes, Town Council Regular and Study Session 7  Properties near residential areas Attachment 4 Tangerine La CañadaEEZ sites near residential areas (within 200’) Developed or already graded/disturbed sites 2 3 Key Map Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 1 Tangerine La CañadaOracle 15-25% sloped area to remain undisturbed 200’ Proposed pre-grading restriction Attachment 5 Area where pre-grading is not allowed (within 200’ of a residential area, protected slope or buffer yard) Area proposed to allow pre-grading EEZ Sites Near Residential Areas (within 200’) that are Vacant or Undisturbed 235’ 200’ Buffer Yards    Town Council Regular and Study Session 1. Meeting Date:02/05/2020   Submitted By:Mike Standish, Town Clerk's Office Department:Town Clerk's Office SUBJECT: POSSIBLE APPROVAL OF ANY ITEMS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: N/A BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to (Approve or Deny) any items discussed in Executive Session. Attachments No file(s) attached.