HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (1276) AGENDA
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL
SPECIAL SESSION
MARCH 31, 2003
ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
SPECIAL SESSION AT OR AFTER 4:30 PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. RESOLUTION NO. (R)03.-27 APPROVAL OF A REQUEST TO
EXTEND PIMA COUNTY ZONING CONDITIONS UPON ANNEXATION
INTO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, WONG - ORACLE ROAD
PROPERTY TWO PARCELS LOCATED NORTH AND SOUTH OF
SUFFOLK DRIVE, (PARCEL 22551018A)
2. RESOLUTION NO. (R)03-28 APPROVAL OF A PRE-ANNEXATION
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH B.P. MAGEE, LLC LOCATED ON
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MAGEE ROAD AND ORACLE ROAD,
(PARCELS 225500050, 225500020, 225513840)
3. RESOLUTION NO. (R)03-29 APPROVAL OF A PRE-ANNEXATION
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH TYROL ESCONDIDA, LLC,
LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MAGEE AND ORACLE
ROADS, (PARCEL 225512140)
ADJOURNMENT
POSTED: 03/27/03
3:00 p.m.
Ih
SPECIAL SESSION Page 1 of 2
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 03/31/03
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: SCOTT NELSON, SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION 03- 27 REGARDING THE PRE-ANNEXATION
RESOLUTION,WONG-ORACLE ROAD PROPERTY
SUMMARY: Annexation Area B is set to expire on April 3, 2003. As a result a number of property
owners have come forward to request that development agreements be approved before they sign the annexation
petition. The purposes of these development agreements vary, but they tend to create development entitlements or
ca forward those from the County, and they may include tax programs for improvements (Community Facility
�y
Districts). In all cases they need to comply with existing State statutes, particularly ARS 9-500.5 (development
agreements) and ARS 9-471 (annexations), and Town ordinances.
ARS 9-500.5 is attached for your review. The Commission review of the development resolution is related to
uses, conformance with the General Plan, and land use/development entitlements. The second citation, ARS 9-471,
give further guidance. It states:
A city or town annexing an area shall adopt zoning classifications which permit densities and uses no
greater than those permitted by the county immediately before annexation. Subsequent changes in zoning
of the annexed territory shall be made according to existing procedures established by the city or town for
the rezoning of land.
The referenced property was rezoned by the County on June 30, 1999 to Transitional (TR), restricted to office uses,
as shown in the attached rezoning report. Per the conditions at the end of that report the rezoning will expire in
June 2004 unless all of the conditions have been met.
ANNEXATION AREA PARTICULARS:
Size 6.73 acres
Use/Terrain A tentative development plan for an office complex was approved by the County. A
final
development plan was approved and construction has begun on the parcel south
p
of Suffolk Drive.
Zoning County Transitional (TR)
General Plan The area is shown as Neighborhood Commercial/Office in the existing and propose
General Plan Land Use map. The proposed uses are in conformance.
The attached Resolution is proposed by the applicant to extend the expiration date of the County zoning from June
2004 to June 2008. The Resolution only affects two parcels north and one south of Suffolk Drive as the area to the
South has completed the County requirements and is under construction. Because this request was received late (on
March 19) and because it is relatively simple, Staff is proposing the attached Resolution to be approved by Council
rather than an independent pre-annexation agreement.
At the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on March 25, 2003, the Commission moved to forward this
item to the Town Council recommending that the Town proceed with the annexation development agreement of
SPECIAL SESSION Page 2 of 2
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 03/31/03
the Wong-Oracle Road Property with the following suggestion: that Section 1 of the Resolution be amended to
g p Y
read as follows:
Subsequent to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town, the Town Council will
adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may be necessary to translate the present Pima
.
Countyzoningclassification of TR to Oro Valley zoning classification of Neighborhood Commercial/Office
and to extend the expiration of the zoning to June 30, 2008, with all of the standards and special requirements
that the Pima County Planning and Zoning Commission imposed on June 30, 1999, except that any reference
therein to Pima County, County agencies, and the County Board of Supervisors shall instead refer to the Town
of Oro Valley, its agencies, and its Town Council. Motion carried by a 6 yes, 0 no vote.
Because this language would bind the hands of the Town on future action it was reworded by staff as provided
in the attached Resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT: Area B $645,189
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Resolution as presented.
SUGGESTED MOTION
1) I move to approve Resolution No. (R) 03-27 regarding the Wong Oracle Rd. property
OR
2) I move to approve Resolution No. (R) 03- 27 regarding the Wong Oracle Rd. property with the
following stipulations
ATTACHMENT(S):
1) Resolution No. 03-27 , to extend the Pima County zoning conditions on the Property from June 2004 to
June 2008 upon translation to Town zoning
2) Fiscal Impact Report (David Andrews)
3)Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 25,2003
4) Map of Wong Oracle Rd. Parcels
5) ARS 9-500.5
6) Pima County Zoning Report June 30,1999
•
Sco Nelson Spe 1 Projects Coordinator
Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
RESOLUTION NO. (R) 03- 27
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO
VALLEY, ARIZONA, REGARDING TRANSLATION OF THE COUNTY
ZONING INCLUDING EXTENSION OF THE ZONING CONDITIONS, FOR
THE WONG-ORACLE ROAD PROPERTY (AP# 22551018A)
WHEREAS, the Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) §9-500.5 describes procedures for
development agreements; and
WHEREAS, the Town is currently pursuing the annexation of the unincorporated property
areas known as Annexation Area"B", and
WHEREAS, the General Plan encourages the annexation of unincorporated areas surrounding
the Town to better serve thep ublic, facilitate infrastructure expansion, and improve operational
efficiencies of municipal services; and
WHEREAS, thero osed uses on the property are in conformance with the General Plan; and
p p
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed this agreement at a public
hearing and presented their recommendations to the Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and Town Council of the Town of
Oro Valley as follows:
SECTION 1. Subsequent to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town,
the Town Council will bring forward a zoning ordinance as necessary to translate the County zoning
to an equivalent Oro Valleyzoning district to include extension of the County Zoning Conditions to
June 30,2008.
SECTION 2. This Resolution will become immediately operative and in force thirty(30) days from
the date of its adoption in accordance with State law and the Oro Valley Town Code.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall become null and void if the annexation process is not completed
within the time allowed. Any legal al delay and/or challenge, however, will extend the effective date of
the Resolution the same number of days (or months) as the legal delay.
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution is for
any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
RESOLUTION NO. (R) 03-27(continued)
PASSED AND ADOPTED by Mayor and Town Council, the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, this
31st day of March, 2003.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Paul H. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Town Attorney
$
L
MEMORANDUM
TO:• Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
FROM: David Andrews, Finance Director
DATE: January 8, 2002
for
SUBJ: Fiscal Impact AnalysesProposed Annexation Areas A and B
Attached to this memorandum please find fiscal impact analyses for proposed
annexation areas A and B. A separate analysis has been developed for each
p Y
fiscal impact. You will also find a map of the areas,
area along with a combinedp
a listing of assumptions for revenue estimates and detailed backup information
from department heads in regard to expenditures.
estimates
Revenues and expendituresrepresent annual amounts. They do not
into consideration the timing take i of when state shared revenues would actually
is researching this
Town. The Finance Department
begin to be received by the
timing issue with the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, Arizona Department of
Revenue, Arizona Department of Transportation and Pima County Treasurer.
• under a separate communication when it has been
Information will be provided p
obtained.
Area A
The following summarizes the fiscal impact analysis:
Annual Revenues $483,280
Annual Expenditures 684,428
Net Fiscal Impact ($201,148)
Area B
The
followingsummarizes the fiscal impact analysis:
Annual Revenues $1,464,794
Annual Expenditures 819,605
Net Fiscal Impact $645,189
Combined Areas A and B
Annual Revenues $1,984,074
Annual Expenditures 1,504,033
Net Fiscal Impact $444.041
Town of Oro Valley
Fiscal Impact Analysis for Area B
Annual Amounts
_ r
i
REVENUES .
Local Sales Tax $ 777,900
Cable Franchise13,073
.
State Shared Vehicle License Tax 77,354
State Shared Income Tax 228,175
State Shared Sales Tax 174,859
Highway Users Fuels Tax 173,154
g y
LTAF 12,519
Business Licenses 7,760
Total Revenues
$ 1,464,794
EXPENDITURES
Police Department 534,623
P
Magistrate Court 38,177
Public Works
135,797
Public Transportation
4,103
Other 15% 106,905
Total Expenditures $ 819,605
NET FISCAL IMPACT $ 645,189
Demographics
Persons Per Household* 2.41
,Housing Units 1,034 Occupancy Rate* 87.80%
,Population 2,188
*Data based on figures from the 2000 U.S. Census for the Town of Oro Valley
•
Comments
• The Oro Valley PoliceDepartment
expenditure estimates are based on an
per of 2.5 police
officers thousand population standard (10
per thousand would result in 7.5 officers and
officers). A standard of 2.0
rounding to 8.0 officers, an
annual cost savings of approximately $152,531
including $57,008 for area A and $95,523 for area B.
• The Oro Valley Police Department has indicated the need for a police
substation at an annual estimated cost of between $100,000 - $240,000.
These costs are not included in the overall net fiscal impact analyses as
presented.
• Public Works has
indicated the need to purchase a street sweeper at an
estimated cost of$160,000 with a useful life of 10 years. These costs are
allocated to areahowever,
A, the sweeper would also serve area B.
• Stormwater services
is assumed to have a neutral fiscal impact because it
would be operated as an enterprise fund.
• Other costs include an accounting for Town Council, Clerk, Manager,
Human Resources Finance, Economic Development, Legal, and
miscellaneous items such as code enforcement, utilities, and insurance.
Please give me a call when youopportunity have an o ortunity to review this information.
CC: Jeff Weir, Economic Development Administrator
Melody Vaughan,han, Management & Budget Analyst
•
Annexation Area B Forecasted Revenues
Cable Franchise
* .878 occupancy 1,034 units .80 usage factorp Y rate * $30 average bill* .05 cable
tax* 12 months
= $13,073.07
Vehicle Auto Lieu
1,050,000 / 29,700 * 2,188
$77,353.54
State Shared Income Tax
3,097,252 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $228,174.66
State Shared Sales Tax
2,373,541 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $174,858.85
Highway User Fuels Tax
2,350,406 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $ 173,154.49
Local Transportation Assistance Funds
169,934 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $12,519.04
•
ORO VALLEY
POLICE DEPARTMENT
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: David id Andrews, Finance Director
FROM: t1 A Chief Daniel G. Sharp
fir ♦ .
DATE: January 2, 2002
SUBJECT: Annexation Information
to the fiscal impact of annexing Areas "A"
Attached are the documents related
has been assigned to work with your office to
and B. Commander Larry Stevens g • • we has
• • informationor supporting documentation. Additionally,
provide any additional Pp g Commander Stevens
II, ion th. 1. • . i , - • . in th-it .nal sis
statistical � •
has provided that information to Judge Dunscomb.
willnext wee however, Commander Stevens will be
I be out of the office k� .
` — necessary. Commander Charlie Lentner will be Acting
available to assist in any way
Chief and will be available, as well.
. .
> •
MEMORANDUM
To: Chief Sharp
From: Commander Stevens
Re: Fiscal Impact Recommendations
Annexation Areas A&B
Date: January 3, 2002
In completing impact fiscal im act studies for the two areas I used anecdotal information to make
my recommendations. Taken individually I believe this is a valid way to project impact, however,
cumulative annexations in the area create additional concerns and considerations.
We need
to keepin mind that these areas include higher concentrations of commercial and multi
family housing units as compared ared to the current general make up of Oro Valley. This is the main reason I
p
feel it imperative that we follow the 2.5 officers per thousand population standard. The only law
enforcement calls for service statistics for the area are for the Sheriff's Department. To make any
correlation
between their calls for service and ours is nearly impossible as they have a far different
response than we do. I do know they had nearly 1100 calls for service in the area for the
standard for o hyear. Considering 2000 which would represent 10% of our entire total for that that our level of
service could result in doubling the number of responses by our Department, you can see my concern
about the possible impact.
population In
reviewingthe o ulation figures related to the two areas, I am also concerned that we are
using Nato figures nal Census fi in determining occupancy and population. I think it is important to note
that in informaloccupancy surveys occu an completed in the past we have found occupancy rates in northwest
higher and Oro
Valleyhi her than national standards. Again, based on this it is even more imperative that we do not fall below the 2.5 officers per thousand population standard.
One area
that has been addressed to some degree over the past several years is our ability to
deal with some of the traffic related issues we would face with the addition of such a major intersection
and highly traveled area. We have completed comprehensive training related to traffic accident
investigation and obtainedequipment ui ment and technology that have enhanced our abilities in this area. We
pendingfor the addition of one motor unit and I would anticipate the need of an
currently have a Grant
additional motor unit during the FY02/03 budgeting process. This will be to address the annexed areas
and the
additional traffic throughout the Town. The annexation may drive this a little quicker as we
9
proactively address
Oracle and Magee with the high volume of traffic, extensive commercial access, and
high school/neighborhood transition areas.
As the populationactivitycenter of Oro Valley more the South, we must consider a full
and
P
service police substation
in the area. Space needs must be addressed in the near future due to increased
personnel. I have gathered some fiscal impact figures related to establishing a police substation in the
area of Oracle andMagee.
Through input gained over the past couple weeks it was determined that we
9
10 000 square foot facility to provide adequate space. It is my understanding that to
should consider a 4 uare foot for facility and
budget a lease arrangement we should expect to pay approximately $24 per sq
g
maintenance.This would compute to approximately a $20,000 Per month lease or $240,000 yearly fiscal
impact. In evaluating the construction of a 10,000 square foot facility in this area I have been given the
figures of$7 per square foot for land and $80 per square foot building construction by a company
50,000
rr ntl completing office facilities in the area. A 10,000 square foot facility would require
currently P 9
square feet of land which would compute to approximately $1.35m to provide the basic facility. There
areso many options in municipal financing of facilities and land that I would only offer that conventional
_ P
financing for such a facility would be about $8,000 per month.
The Town Finance Department also advised me that the Community Development building was
completed for about$135 per square foot. This included furnishing the facility. If this is the case, we
would be lookingat $1.35m for the facility and the cost of the land. The Finance Department told me we
the area told
should budget about$2.30 per square foot for land, though the company building offices in
9
me to budget$7.00 per square foot for land.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chief Sharp
FROM: Commander Stevens -34:-;
RE: Area "B"Oracle/ Magee/ Suffolk Hills
Annexation Fiscal Impact
DATE: January 3, 2002
In evaluating the fiscal impact to service this area I recommend we continue to follow the standard of 2.5 officers
per thousand. An estimated population of 2,188 computes to 5.5 officers which leads me to recommend 6. This area
p
includes 97 commercial businesses
which caused me to round up my officer recommendation. Experience tells us that
commercial businesses create service needs in the area of traffic, public assists and criminal enforcement at a level above
those of residential neighborhoods. Additionally, the intersection of Oracle and Magee will be included in this annexation
and our experience assisting the Department Sheriffs De artment and DPS has shown us any incident at this location will have
immediate impact on our personnel as it will be our only major intersection with 4 directions of heavy travel. This
c
annexation area also includes Immaculate Heart School which will require those services unique to school areas.
Below is a breakdown of costs related to the additional officers. Included in this breakdown are additional
vehicles at a rate of .82 vehicles per officer(rounded up from 4.92 to 5).This is the ratio we use based on historic data in
c es
Oro Valley.
salary &ERE) = $ 327,480
6 officers at $54,580 per officer (includes
2 428 per officer = $ 14,568
Officer gear: gun, vest gun belt etc. $ ,
5 vehicles fully equipped at$34,151 pervehicle = 170,755
= $ 21,820
Vehicle maintenance: gas, tires, lof& insurance $4,364 per vehicle
TOTAL = $ 534,623
MEMORANDUM
TO: David Andrews
FROM: George Dunscomb, Town Magistrate
DATE: January 4, 2002
SUBJECT: Fiscal Impact of Proposed Annexation of Areas A and B
After consultations with administrative staff of the Oro Valley Police Dept. and
exploring a myriad of possible methods of estimating the fiscal impact of the proposed
annexations, I have determined that the most obvious method of estimating the impact is
probably the most logical method. The population increase will be about 12%. Therefore
it is probably reasonable to estimate that our workload will increase by a comparable
amount, requiring a commensurate increase in clericalstaff, supplies and other expenses.
There were inadequate statistics from County law enforcement to correctly
ascertain the number of cases generated in the areas proposed for annexation. The county
statistics indicate there will be a substantial increase n the number of calls but, nothing to
show that the calls resulted in an arrest. Their statistics do show that a substantial number
of calls were for larceny- which could be misdemeanor shoplifting or theft, (which would
affect the court) or felony thefts, which would at least initially go downtown.
The increased population will necessarily cause an increase in the number of
domestic violence cases in our court.
Oro Valley Police Dept. Information shows that as the Town has grown, the
number of traffic citations has decreased. Traffic citations usually bring in revenue.
Shoplifting and domestic violence cases usually result in a net loss of revenue after the
costs of court appointed attorneys etc are calculated. However there is no realistic way to
calculate those amounts.
Using FY2001/2002 numbers and adding an additional 3% to cover Social
Security, COLA etc, the annexation would result in an increase in personnel costs of
$51,683 a year. Plus 12% of the o.erations and maintenance costs of$14,259, there
would b- . total increase of$65,897 per year. ncreases in revenue, if any, will be
negligible. I
/4/1. --/o 0 k• /60lU 44;0.1)
'10/ ccftc1/4.
% , _
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID ANDREWS
FROM: BILL JANSEN
SUBJECT: ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS
DATE: JANUARY 4, 2002
CC: CHUCK SWEET
As requested, attached is the fiscal analysis for map areas "A" and "B". This
analysis is based on providing the same level of service to the annexed areas as
presently provided within the existing corporate limits. The analysis is also based
on driving the map areas by DPW staff and developing a detailed condition
assessment of the streets.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
-c S .0 1 ,
.4- Ui
y) r
t-x-** *..* * r
o'0 O 0 x'00 0 O 0 O N O
,- N. 0 0 �- O NCO C)
o co 00 O 07 1`N - r p0
co o f c6 '47 M O o co O N .
ti 0 40 4!9 tf3 H4 Cr) }
ta
� r � fil
O
M". O00 0 0
CD
!fl O (fO0Cr) 0 0NLOO
cD OCA CO r- r in NCO T"
o Ln
v
0
4f) (AU)
Q
W o CO 0 O O O' Lc) N ,S
in
"-. O N N O O N. o N `�
� oOrnaCOQ) 0
0 O r
� O � � o N c0 ,�.
� w � r �
c�i c�i c'o vi Co 0o Co N }
W c � LO 439 � M�� 40
co
--I OCoO LO to �-• ,�
- , Q ' o co co O N LO O 0 COE- fflti N OCONO 0 00 N V' CO
0 V' NtitoNQ) M C
I- c'7 M M M � 1` O � � � tf3 CO C
coO 41a 00 ta fr) CO CO VI 40 413 CO N--
O _ i �� N
0N00a) CO0 O N
0 0 N. 4t 0 0 N V'
0O `O Nt0
CO O) CD V to CO �f 0 _
c6 a0 c� M M � O O I b9 �
N C to U
• CO -
co to tf3
O
0cv
pa0001`- 000pp N V' N. C?�
9 � N � tLMQ) N- '
T.- 0 N
= -
(Y) MMrN- cos �3
e0 to bR d9 tf3 M
� CPI ti, vri,
qt O
YO o' o o Ln 'n oo _
0 in oMO0o000 0 Nit
co N- N CD O� 0 N Cfl
WO ~ Ua EA) MU) cOY) U) co- N U) 0
V I-
J g O to r
m J o o co O Moo O N N
0 0) �t o co co o 0 00 0 N
CI. 4 o jM � Q) t1� Oft fir' 16
r•
u.o 4. Oc6) NMCr) GON-
V to t3 O) *? to N 4A CD
(f3 fA d� !f! �`
O z 52 dN4 �
Z 2 O , -
W a- ooc00000 00 0o NCD CD
>-
EA 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 LO. GO C� 0
F 0u.
o co r O CO O �j r pet PO
>- ch ta LU `) U) N r„:cci U r U) CO U r -��
4 W m Mo to co U
W J ~ N
0 "g Q � X00 oL
O000000 0 3
D. CD
U) 0 U) O o U) t o 0
).v._
_ .. _
--cri 1•••• Cr) V-. v.-
in - J t3 U)U) ff?
U o
1) —
CO LL O
CO to
S
V
Q 4
Z CC
� Y � � }"
4 W � , c � Li.
�—W � � �-
J W W •c .m ._ W a) m
Q OC o O 7 a� Cl OC J
(I) co ir. Oi O ca 2 . cF- Q-
--art a�to 4
CIPP
c c t- .- L� c
O ca a co }- '� n- co — a Q.._-r—Q U c--
QmO U v a) O "c3)U E -I w 112
2 cvW0 Z o1--
X
z < J WO a) O car212 u2W w 2 tnL] Z � F•- Utn
Q � 2 cow wr < (n co
MEMORANDUM •
TO: David Andrews, Finance Director
al) r/
FROM: Kathryn Cuvelier, Town Clerk ‘C
DATE: January 3, 2002
SUBJ.
• Proposed Annexation — Area B Fiscal Impact Analysis
835 residential units
Possible Home Occupations located in this area. Additional revenues would be
p
received for Home
Occupation Licenses. ($80 per license). However, the
revenues are unknown at this time.
1,767 population
Additional Election costs
will be incurred based on the amount of registered
voters. However, the costs are unknown at this time.
92 Commercial Businesses
Additional l Business License Revenue of $7,360. (92 x $80.00).
b°11
CA 1 ^
J �
• • PALE Y
q-; 1'
< 0-
ENDED
Office of the Town Attorney
e 0
TO: David Andrews, Finance Director
FROM: Dan Dudley, Town Attorney
DATE: January 4, 2002
RE: Proposed Annexation - Area A Fiscal Impact Analysis
The estimate
regardingthe cost of services to the Legal Department for the proposed
Annexation Area is $31,658.22.
Please call if you have any questions.
DLD/ca
0�
' t tad •
h
ht- v
tik.e
F:Memos\F ince Oept\Ardews-Area A Fiscal krpad A naysisdoc
ACTION SUMMARY
PLANNING COMMISSION 'RAFT
SPECIAL SESSION
MARCH 25, 2003
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE
SPECIAL SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Bill Moody
Vice-Chair Don Cox
Commissioner Ken Kinared
Commissioner Don Manross
Commissioner Robert Krenkowitz
Commissioner John Anning
ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Paul Loomis
Council Member Werner Wolff
Council Member Bart Rochman
Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
Scott Nelson, Special Projects Coordinator
Jeff Weir, Economic Development Administrator
Brent Sinclair, Community Development Director
Bryant Nodine, Planning and Zoning Administrator
Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney
Bill Adler, Board of Adjustments Member
1. PUBLIC HEARING, A RESOLUTION
OF THE TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST
TO EXTEND ZONING CONDITIONS UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE TOWN, WONG - ORACLE
ROAD
MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to forward this item to the Town Council
• proceed with the annexation development agreement of the
recommending that the Town Resolution
the following Wong-Oracle Road Property with suggestion: that Section 1 of the
be amended to read as follows:
Subsequent to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town
the Town Council will adopt such
ordinances and take such administrative actions as may
Pima Countyzoning classification of TR to Oro Valley
be necessary to translate the present .
• Commercial/Office and to extend the expiration of the
zoning classification of Neighborhood
zoning to June 30, 2008, with all of the standards and special requirements that the Pima
Commission imposed on June 30, 1999, except that any
Count Planning and Zoning p •
County agencies, and the County Board of Supervisors
reference therein to Pima County, County .
insteadValley, its agencies, and its Town Council. Motion
shall refer to the Town of Oro 9
carried by a 6 yes, 0 no vote.
* 2. PUBLIC HEARING, A RESOLUTION REGARDING PREANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, B. P. MAGEE, LLC
to forward Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED this item to the Town Council.
- with the annexation development agreement of the
recommending that the Town proceed - -
followingsuggestion: that Section 1 of the Resolution be
B.P. Magee, LLC Property with the gg
9
amended to read as follows:
of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town
Subsequent to the effective date
such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may
the Town Council will adopt • • CB-1 and TR to
present Pima Countyzoning classifications of
be necessary to translate the . .
• classificationof C-2 with the conditions set forth in Exhibit C (Town
the Oro Valley zoning
Cond�t�
• •ons) annexed to the proposed Development osed Develo ment Agreement between the Town and B.P.
j
Ma ee LLC. Motion carried by a 6 yes, 0 no vote.
Magee,
* 3. PUBLIC HEARING, A RESOLUTION REGARDING PREANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, TYROL ESCONDIDA, LLC
MOVED to forward this item to the Town Council
MOTION: Commissioner Cox
recommending that the Townproceed not with the annexation development agreement of
the Tyrol Escondida, LLC (Mariash) Property, specifically outl•ning the reason for
not
directlyinsuring that the Town will enter into an
proceeding is contained in paragraph 8, .
p g sales taxes to the Town. Motion carried by a (
agreement providing only one-half (1/2) of the
g
yes, 0 no vote.
ADJOURN REGULAR SESSION 7:10 p.m.
PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT- PLANNING DIVISION
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JUNE 15, 1999
HEARING: June 30, 1999
DISTRICT: 1 4,4/
CASE: • Co9-98-42 WONG -ORACLE ROAD
REZONING
REQUEST: SR, CR-1 to TR
(6.47 acres) ` 7'±
// {r
Walter and Jane Wong, Trustees
OWNER. 4.4-714.c.tAj
5437 East Third Street
Tucson,AZ 85711 4 5,4f rvifr,
J-
Pir
AGENT: Laidlaw Consulting, L.L.C. . 4
1735 E. Fort Lowell Road,#10
Tucson, AZ 85719 1.1
I/ 1 A be146NIC7
APPLICANT'S PROPOSED USE:
"Business and Professional offices."
APPLICANTS STATED REASON:
"Oracle frontage." •
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:
The Pima County Comprehensive rehensive Plan designates the subject property for Medium Intensity Urban (MIU)
uses. That designation allows the CR-1 through CR-5 zones at a density of 10.0 residences per acre(R/AC).
In addition, the Plan designation allows the SH, GC, CMH-1, CMH-2, MR, and TR zones.
SURROUNDING LAND USES/GENERAL CHARACTER:
North: TR Developed
South: TR Undeveloped
East: CR-1 Developed
West: • TR Undeveloped
PREVIOUS REZONING CASES ON PROPERTY:
Co9-69-40 Sakellar- Florence Highway Rezoning (6.47 acres)
Location: Site.
Request: SR, CR-1 to CB-1.
Action: Denied.
Co9-98-42 STAFF REPORT
June 30, 1999 Hearing Page 2
PREVIOUS REZONING CASES IN GENERAL AREA:
Co9-97-24 Toy -Oracle Road Rezoning (8.50 acres)
Location: On the east side of Oracle Road, approximately 500 feet south of the subject property.
Request CR-1 to TR.
Action: Approved. Ordinance#1998-11, 3 February 1998.
Co9-95-58 Criss/Eden - Northern Avenue Rezoning (4.77 acres)
Location: On the west side of Northern Avenue, approximately 1/3 mile northwest of the subject
property:
Request: SR to CR-1.
Action: Approved. Ordinance#1996-61, 16 July 1996.
Co9-95-36 Sgutt- Cool Drive Rezoning (4.42 acres)
Location: On the northwest corner of Cool Drive and Oracle Road, approximately 3/4 mile northwest
of the subject property.
Request: SR to TR.
Action: Approved. Ordinance#1996-40 16 April 1996.
Co9-95-35 Sgutt-Cool Drive Rezoning (3.90 acres)
Location: On the northwest corner of Northern Avenue and Cool Drive, approximately 3/4 mile
northwest of the subject property.
Request: SR to TR.
Action: Approved. Ordinance#1996-39 16 April 1996.
Co9-94-71 Fidelity National Title, Trust#1012/Watson Chevrolet-Oracle Road Rezoning(20.00 acres)
Location: On the west side of Oracle Road, immediately west of the subject property.
Request: SR to TR, CB-1.
Action: Approved. Ordinance#1995-89 17 October 1995.
Co9-87-90 Robles - Magee Road#2 Rezoning (4.77 acres)
Location: On the south side of Magee Road, approximately 2/3 mile northwest of the subject property.
Request: SR to CR-5.
Action: Closed. Denied 29 April 1988.
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY:
Staff recommends APPROVAL of this rezoning request,subject to the standard and special conditions. With
appropriate miti ation and design features, as have been required with other recent rezoning requests for
9
thistYP a of use in this vicinity, and with the involvement and concurrence of the affected Suffolk Hills
neighborhood to the east, potential adverse impacts of the proposed development can be successfully
mitigated or eliminated.
Transportation Development Review states the site will be served by Oracle Road, which has an estimated
P P
carrying in capacity 52,000 average daily trips (ADT); current ADT is 36,600, and Suffolk Drive which has an
P tY
estimated carrying in capacity of 2,500 ADT; current ADT is 450. The proposal should generate 1,245 ADT
P tY
at build-out. Thero erty owner will be required to provide a traffic study for the total development prior to
P P
approval of anydevelopment plan, which will assist in making a determination relative to the necessity of
PP P
a traffic signal at Suffolk Drive and Oracle Road. Flood Control Review states the site is located within a
designated critical basin but there are no federally mapped floodplains. Wastewater Management Review
states the site will be served by the public sewerage system.
Co9-98-42 STAFF REPORT June 30, 1999 Hearing Page 3
SITE ANALYSIS SUMMARY:
The three parcels comprisingrezoning
the site have average cross slopes of 6.82 percent for the parcel north
of Suffolk average and an avera e cross slope of 6.94 percent for the two parcels south of Suffolk Drive.
are no restricted peaks, ridges, rock outcrops, slopes exceeding 15 percent, or other significant
There
topographical features on the site.
Five vegetative zones were identified on the site, which includes a variety of vegetation typically found in
the Palo Verde-Saguaro Sonoran Desert Community, with different vegetative densities and vegetative
a
cover in the various zones. Predominant vegetation includes mesquite, catciaw acacia, palo verde, and
creosote. Cacti includeprickly pear,rick) cholla, fish hook and saguaro. The applicant states that most of the
vegetation on the sit
e is healthy,with the exception of one large saguaro on the southernmost parcel,which
appears to be in poor condition. Vegetative densities range from approximately 15 percent to approximately
50 ercent vegetative cover. There are no areas of high vegetative density on the site.
P
The Arizona Game and Fish Department(AGFD) states several special status species may be found on the
site, including
the cactus ferruginous pygmy owl, California leaf-nosed bat, Pima indian mallow, and
Tumamoc globeberry.lobeber . Several mitigation strategies are recommended by the AGFD, including
maximization ion of interconnected open space, utilization of native plant species for all on-site vegetation and
re-vegetation, employment Y
to ment of vegetative schemes that re-establish and maintain vertical diversity (ground
cover, layer,la er, and canopy cover), retention in place of salvage of all mature woody vegetation, and
maintenance of the vegetative and hydrologic integrity of all washes, especially those which Pima County's
1986 Map of Critical and Sensitive Wildlife Habitats identifies as Class 1 or II Riparian Habitat.
This site also meets the criteria established by the Board of Supervisors relative to requiring a survey for the
cactus pygmy,ferruginous my,owl. Staff recommends condition #10, requiring a survey for the presence or
9
absence of the owl.
An archaeologicalsurve was conducted by P.A.S.T. consultants 18 May 1998. The consultant reported
Y
that"no isolated artifacts were observed"and "there were no surface indications of archaeological resources
on the property which meet the minimum standard for recording as an archaeological site or that would be
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places". Staff recommends condition #11, requiring
a mitigation plan if archeological resources are discovered on the site.
PLANNING REPORT:
OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT
The applicant
requests a rezoningof 6.47 acres from SR and CR-1 to TR to allow development of a four
building professional office park whose uses are presently undetermined. The maximum gross floor area
on the three parcelscomprising com risin this rezoning site will be 49,800 square feet. The parcels are currently for
q
sale.
This request was filed in conjunction with Co9-98-43 Wong-Thornydale Road#2 Rezoning, and share
many of the same development characteristics.
Parcelswith frontage alongOracle Road in this vicinity have been rezoned to allow commercial activity on
g
them. There seems a general be tend toward a gradual conversion of these parcels into non-residential
uses, with existing
residential subdivisions remaining behind the non-residential uses. While the impact of
9
this type of activity
on a residential neighborhood is not always immediately apparent, developments of this
type should provide mitigation measures to lessen their impact onto surrounding residential areas.
Co9-98-42 STAFF REPORT
Page 4
June 30, 1999 Hearing
The applicant proposes several development related standards to help buffer the adjoining Suffolk Hills
neighborhood from potential adverse impacts from this development. Those standards include building
materials, colors, textures, fenestration,
buildingmass, landscaping, and lighting. Any two-story buildings
will be located farthest away from the subdivision to further limit any disturbance to it. The standards further
to"business and professional office functions . . ."and concludes
state that the uses on the site will be limited r sale or the boarding and treating
by stating and
other functions that do not require the stocking of goods fo
#12, limitingthe site to professional and office related uses. The
of animals . Staff recommends condition inthe Suffolk Hills have
applicant has not indicated whether or not affected property owners subdivision have standards, and should be prepared to further address them at the publicg
agreed to the proposed
before the Commission.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA
South of the site is an undeveloped parcel, zoned TR,
North of the site is an office building, zoned TR. r rezoningcase Co9-
an undeveloped
while farther south is parcel which is to be developed as a hotel under
East of the site is the developed 97-24,Toy-Oracle Road Rezoning. Suffolk Hills subdivision, zoned CR-1.
West of the site is an undeveloped parcel zoned TR, which was part of a 30-acre rezoning request in 1994
(Co9-94-71 Fidelity National
Title, Trust#1012/Watson Chevrolet-Oracle Road Rezoning).
SON
GRAN DESERT CONSERVATION CONCEPT PLAN (SDCCP):
adopted the Sonoran
On 2 March 1999 the Board of SupervisorsDesert Conservation Concept Plan P
(SDCCP). The concept plan included a policy that stated no upzonin s 9 in environmentally sensitive or� of how to apply
byactual conservation. As of this writing the details pP y
historic areas except when accompanied
still being policy to individual rezoning cases are formulated. Under the SDCCP this site is designated
asart of the"palo verde-saguaro sonoran desert community".
P
BUFFER OVERLAY ZONE:
the Buffer Overlay Zone ordinance,which
adopted revisions to
On 11 August 1998 the Board of Supervisors P
included the Coronado National Forest. The applicant will be required to conform to those revisions as they
I north of Suffolk Drive, all of which is within one mile of the Forest.
apply to the parcel directy
One of the primary purposes
of the Buffer Overlay Zone (BOZ), is to"preserve and protect the open space
i of thepublic preserves while
of those lands in the vicinity hile at the same time permitting the
economically in
underlying zoning, but ratherpro
reasonable use of lands". The BOZ is not intended promoteto in
or discourage changehe Bs s
vide continuing performance standards for the unique lands within
including the use of color, reflective finishes, visibility of
The BOZ contains certain performance criteria, inc 9 natural open space, and
fences and walls, lighting, setbacks, utilities, vegetation, p r the
mechanical equipment, howeve
Fiftypercent of the affected area must remain natural open space;
visual quality standards.
of natural o en space. Natural open space is defined
owner may preserve a greater percentageP
property
in the Zoning Code as:
and not occupied An area of land, essentially unimproved by any structures or man-made
impervious elements,except pedestrian and non-motorized access trails,that is set aside,dedicated
p
or reserved by recorded plat or covenant running with the land for public or private enjoyment as a
preservation or conservation area"
•
Co9-98-42 STAFF REPORT June 30, 1999 Hearing Page 5
The applicants' site analysis shows conformance to the BOZ, but a caveat is provided which states "It is
possible that later requests for open space exceptions will be approved, but they are not addressed here".
q P
This developmentproposal osal will be presented to the Design Review Committee 17 June 1999, as required
p
under the BOZ
ordinance. A copyof the staff recommendation to the DRC is enclosed with this report. Staff
will provide further information relative to that recommendation, and DRC action on it, prior to the
Commission
hearing30 June 1999. The applicant should note that contemplated exceptions to the BOZ
may result in substantial changes to the preliminary development plan.
MAJOR STREETS AND SCENIC ROUTES PLAN:
Oracle Road highway is a state hi hwa and as such is also a designated major scenic route, and the height of all
buildings may
not exceed 24 feet within 200 feet of the future right-of-way. All buildings must be set back
30 feet in addition to one half of the required future right-of-way width according to the Major Streets and
Scenic Routes (MSSR) Plan.
P
The MSSR
Plan also has specific building design criteria which prohibit highly reflective finishes, colors, and
materials
and must also use colors which are compatible with natural landscape (desert/earth tones). The
limina development plan (pdp) submitted by the applicant appears to address the MSSR building
preliminary P
setback and height requirements.
•
Thissite is also included in Catalina Foothills Special Area Policy 2-19, which states that no buildings
exceeding 24 feet in height shall be permitted without specific authorization from the Board of Supervisors.
In addition, that policy reserves the right of the Board to limit construction to one story.
The applicant states that the height of all buildings on the site will not exceed 24 feet and two stories.
Staff recommends condition#13, limiting building heights to 24 feet and two stories.
VEGETATION:
The applicant states that"where vegetation inventory and grading plans indicate a need to salvage,as much
vegetation as can practicably be relocated will be added to enhance bufferyards, and a program will
on-siteg
beimplemented to allow neighborhood residents access for purposes of removing certain species". Fifty
p
percent parcel the north of Suffolk Drive will remain as natural open space, of which 27 percent will be
features,with"other natural open spaces uses as bufferyards will occupy an additional 23 percent
drainage south of Suffolk Drive (lying outside the BOZ open space
of the site". Eighty-six percent of the parcel (Y
requirements) will be graded for development. The applicant states that the remainder of the site outside the graded areas will become enhanced natural areas/bufferyards.
TRANSPORTATION REPORT:
The propertiesproposed osed for rezoning are served by Oracle Road (Florence Highway) and Suffolk Drive.
P
Oracle Road is paved, six-lane divided State Highway with an existing right-of-way of 200 feet. It is a
designated scenic route. Current traffic consists of approximately 36,600 Average Daily Trips(ADT)and the
roadway has a capacity of approximately 52,000 ADT. Suffolk Drive is a paved, two lane, County maintained
p ty pP
local collector
road with existingright-of-way of 60 feet. Current traffic is estimated at approximately 450
ADT and the estimated existing capacity is approximately 2,500 ADT.
Co9-98-42 STAFF REPORT
Page 6
June 30, 1999 Hearing
The proposedproject
will generate approximately 1,245 ADT based on general office uses. The petitioner
proposes fouraccess points oints to Suffolk Drive and one access point to Oracle Road. Approximately one half
of the proposed development traffic will use Suffolk Drive as a means of ingress and egress to Oracle Road.
The property owner(s) will be required to provide a traffic study for the total development prior to approval
of any development ment plans. Also, the traffic study will be used to determine if there are any necessary
p
roadway
improvements needed for Suffolk Drive and Oracle Road, including any need for a traffic signal.
FLOOD CONTROL REPORT:
proposed for rezoning consists of gently to moderately sloping desert terrain with moderate to
Theproperty P ro P consists mains of on-site runoff and two minor
light desert vegetation. Drainage affecting the property Y
washes. On-site drainage shall be routed through the development in the natural wash channels to existing
exit points.The property is located in a designated critical basin.There are no Federally mapped floodplains.
provide development will q
be required to sufficient on-site retention/detention to reduce the site runoff
below existing levels.
WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT:
There is currently adequateconveyance capacity to accommodate this rezoning in the downstream sewerage
system. This is not a commitment of conveyance capacity allocation. Conveyance capacity allocation is
accomplished byexecution of a Sewer Service Agreement, which normally occurs during the development
p
plan orplat review process. if conditions change between now and the time a development plan or tentative
pa
P property is submitted, the owner may be required to augment the existing public sewerage system in
order to provideadequateconveyance capacity for this rezoning. Connection may be made to the 8-inch
sewer line,S-125located on the east and south side of the parcel. Public sanitary sewers to be constructed
,
with this
rezoningshall be located within paved roadways or alleyways, or within easements that provide
vehicular access, whenever possible, to all manholes. We have no objection to this rezoning.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REPORT:
The Department has no objection provided the property is served by a public or private sewer.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COMMENTS:
As of the date of this report there has been no response from the Town of Oro Valley.
WATER DISTRICT REPORT:
Please see the attached report from Tucson Water.
PARKS AND RECREATION REPORT:
As ofthe date of this report there has been no response from the Parks and Recreation Department.
SCHOOL DISTRICT REPORT:
Please see the attached report from the Amphitheater Unified Public School District.
Co9-98-42 STAFF REPORT
Page 7
June 30, 1999 Hearing
IF THE DECISION IS MADE TO APPROVE THE REZONING THE FOLLOWING STANDARD AND
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED:
within five years from the date the request is approved by the
Completion of the following requirements
Board of Supervisors:
1. Recording of a
covenant holdingPima County harmless in the event of flooding.
development related covenants as determined appropriate by the
2. Recording of the necessary de p
various County agencies.
3. Provision of development related assurances as required by the appropriate agencies.
'n or lots linin without the written approval of the Board of
4. There shall be no further subdividing splitting
Supervisors.
related covenants
5. Prior to the preparation of the developmentand any required dedication, a title
report (current to within 60 days) evidencing ownership of the property shall be submitted to the
Department of Transportation, Real Property Division.
6. Transportation conditions:
p
A. Provision of all necessary
improvements to Suffolk Drive and Oracle Road as determined
y improvements an approved traffic
study. These im rovements shall need the approval of the Arizona
Department of Transp
ortation and the Pima County Department of Transportation and meet
the appropriate standardsprior rior to the approval of any development plan or subdivision plat
for any portion of the subject property. ortation statingsatisfactory
Written certification from the Arizona Department of Transp
B.
compliance of all its requirements including approval of the number, the location and theshall be submitted
design of all access points to the subject property from Oracle Highway
to the Pima County Development ment Services Department prior to the issuance of any building
permits.
shall reach a financial contribution and/or construction agreement
C. The property owner(s)
I ment A reement) with and acceptable to Pima County
Department of
(Deve op 9
Transportation and Flood Control District prior to development plan or subdivision plat
approvals. Said agreement shall address required road improvements and/or financial
contributions for improvements to area roads impacted by the proposed development.
D. Property Owner(s)
shall dedicate any necessary right-of-ways from the subject properties
g
needed for the
future signalization of the Oracle Road and Suffolk Drive intersection.
7. Flood Control conditions:
A. The property owner must dedicate all rights-of-way and/or grant flowage easements for
drainage purposes to Pima County, as determined necessary by
the Flood Control District
during the plan review process.
1 ered disturbed or obstructed without the written approval of the
B. Drainage shall not beat ,
Flood Control District.
C. All internal drainage improvements and any external drainage improvements required to
mitigate drainage
impacts caused bythe proposed development shall be constructed at no
cost to Pima County.
8. Wastewater Management condition: and in the manner
The property
owner must connect to the public sewer system at the location
specified by Wastewater Management at the time of review of the tentative plat, development plan
or request for building permit. hearing.
Adherence to the preliminary development plan as approved at publicowl bya
9. pygmy
shall be surveyed for the presence or absence of the cactus ferruginous
10. The site Y
qualified biological consultant who has a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
11. If during construction,
materials that may be human remains and associated burial items are
in the vicinity of
discovered, ground disturbing activitiesthe site will cease, the discovery site will
be secured, and the Arizona State Museum will be immediately el notified.
Co9-98-42 STAFF REPORT June 30, 1999 Hearing Page 8
12. Uses shall be restricted to professional and semi-professional offices.
13. Building heights are limited to 24 feet and two stories.
Respectfully Submitted,
r
D d Guyer,
Senior Planner
for Frank P. Behlau,AICP
Principal Planner
FB/dg
xc: Mr. and Mrs.Walter Wong, 5437 East Third Street,Tucson,AZ 85711
Mr. Don Laidlaw, Laidlaw Consulting, L.L.C., 1735 East Fort Lowell Road, #10,Tucson, AZ 85711
•
, / i • •
• • .
-f - I / am asuzic
Y
')1hyr>c.44:
• /. i. \ .
▪ ,, .,- .:,
.. .. - /,, , , •
/ -,4) .,-. 1 \ ti — -,
_ T .._..
. .., ip:i 1/ to milk/ii - ,....... .__
,r.i.c .ipt .--,/ '
. ,51;a ;/, 1 iN ''-hf.\'l ,Cf< d.f I I IP I FIN!ri , <:. :. ,
1 t te i
19'
'''i 1 i ri li .',...., 71 1 .. )' ..?„, si,,, ..
!•. 7, • , "i ./
: 1 If i
.., .,. , ,akul A ,
_- /
4, ...
rep' ,..:.i ....;.. ? ! e Cli . t . , . ,,.
( ; 1...a., 4,
, 1-.......f....2.. . • D I : 1.-1 •.
i: 4/
, -,i• i k ), - , ,.... , gt• ..-.1.,• ,,, .
•-• r... r P /, ‘
'1.6 /: .• a, • , ' ..
• • • I' : ;/*iced . P..• I
.... ,
5► . ) •4
\I 1/4' I.. / I
4 a : :sr\. 3 1� _i •nom-_ .- 1 .... :
I,
.«S J . M• • 1. ,
•. •.
0'
if*i.,-;
:. 4 ! ''' .•f•j ' •'mac..' 1�TORNG4( 4 `4.•,.. • '• •• —
<.J II.
' r 7 :r,_ ,' CA 1 /.: ''" .'14 i 120 Fr , Ut ..).
,R+ • ,i.t1/P ").1
cr
b • iTtif_i 1 — , .-
i 1)=0 I .' " k''. ‘, . ./,s,42:0, 410, .
Lu •• t. 8: ! r:\ , •,..4 .. . :
L...1 • • ' 4_ / _ 4 "S-r; 1„ 1.` •r\ ‘,.
err •kms: 1 'sb -• .—,...? , ... --2____
4M:
Q 7 • , •. � :I' tIC i ;' •%� ,3ot -1
,, • • C •-- • • ..
'� ,'ll$P4 • • lk• I. I NIL •• - • . ) �'_ /..
. i' ' '.) . ‘s.,.••, i f .4 . N.. ..`•(,-..1 ... yea;(....%),/ . v.,-,
., / tv 1 r •ns�s
--a2.16,,li . ' '. • i .; . . r•
• i
. '''`,. •, • .i •• • er.,•'1...".11 . i r.—
....,„_.,
/••/ / a
. . -- °- , . .. . _ .
•, .. •;00.. .
- , „ 1 BUILD
•• 0.00.1.4, a) a .A'.I 1-.STO
...) ,•. n 14.10.ksi FT.
••- -.-sem-' ; 1 , •�• • ,� , , , �`IC tpg.°: '4: ' ' .
j
•
,r.
. '• 22 aracci ., ---1. ... , 1 ' /! 4 ..J„- /, .
:, .
a 4T..9,110111.• • . . 1 --- f.-7.**i • i : 1 ' i fi , , N. \
i • — t / i /1/ 1 '1,-.• • N
i , . -I )— :._ 1
./..y- . i I, i r '2,4.:
: ,,,, .- ,.., , . ....,
...
in :ns.•, Si ° . - SU Fo . . _VR, • .i• :
,
,�iffilligrageMPIMillrarfid
i N '
.1
(D. "1"71111111..."AWV. • 4. :1'.----<: 1
• ? .... Mr. _.."-
i ..
c) �,.r ... •.-�►- ,•' , •nab ` I \; \�`.. 4j.-'
ft - ..;.. ;4,\._ 1 1
VC: .
... .
,,,
/I ,
! - ,.
/......_ ...._. ....._......._......114116 .......••••• •• •••••....,• 4...14:1,al".'.:..I ''''.•• 1 I i I:.\j'i 414‘16 - ""1.----"' '
\/: '
!BUILDING.MEA - ILDINO NW.. ._ -I,:( \‘'.
�� •
I
. Y' . •-\,• 1.• • (A 3.
• ! •1-STORY,�� EST 1 STORY j
1 /../...,.../.
� ,- , . � •
i �` it
..:• • �1 �• •_ _hi.:‘
14, 'a rr.�.�. J ,,- i,T.~1_ I t
, .
'. "if
1 \ K • . 1
( .
1 . . . : -----, k- is
L____._
�••• o a` ; •►o 343.ar ( .str1R' • •:ka ,,
Edi'�� '�'�' _ It, _ (. SLI
I --( L...
-1 `•.';
"re • -1.• i c
—. .-"II — ,,/t1 r / -- \-
,r-r-- •-;',,
— f(' ..v .)- )
,— , „' %. .. .•?rrr 1/'
ALL LANDSCAPING WILL BE XER1SCAPE EXHIBIT II-B. I (S)
•
',DPI 1MIKIADV n (IDMIMT
U J 1 J.1 J L CJ J L L 71 t 7 t_H 1111._.Hwl.it.!t`!.7 _. ___e • r-iu` u
UJj 4Uj LU .��•• -
.
i
•
t
IS
2. CO., OiKiA air tOrG�1ET�
I di 1
:::.
� �-...".`__.;;..
.1'"I'.......,41.17.7w.7... 1
*rim ..•SO. • 1
t "IIIIVOTA1077441 k -•.; 74 FEETFAI' ' ill i; . Villt
I!irirk ,*
- ,, pri...3,...., t4 00W .:
. . ko lifisigioto �
,,,,4., ..___,
, -___ ier-,-z,10.,, ,. _.„....,..„, ,„,.(t,, ocr i
.
0 .... ,.
...„___,.,:.,_....„...,,..,(5,„
-___ , .„,, -„,„„0,..,,__ .....4-Zr... .-, .!.. ....&11.A_P• -.!P. ,‘,.. .'0 I 3
1 ar ih,, j;L.....- mpwippp....._. - -- air ,, za-. (
'1 4. (IA ISII71.4 °- '117111 4
t' - s
7
1 /r ..4.?-_......_
ALL LANDSCAPING WILL BE XERISCAPE
,
. ,
1
.
i
i •1
1 -
EXHIBIT II-B. 1 (N)
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT
PLAN,
" Scale: 1" = 100' BUMRFIELD CROSSING
1' Contour Intervals
- a agreements; public safety; definitions Page 1 of 2
• 9-500.05 Developmentgr �
9-500.05. jcyeJopmcri agreements; public safety; definitions
byA. Amunicipalty,
i resolution or ordinance,may enter into development agreements relating to
property in the municipality to and located outside the incorporated area of the municipality. If
property
agreement relates to property located outside the incorporated area of the municipality,
the developmentgr p p
the development agreement does not become operative unless annexation proceedings to annex the
property municipality are completed to the munici alit within the period of time specified by the development
agreement or any extension of such time.
B. A development agreement shall be consistent with the municipality's general plan or specific plan, if
any, as defined in section 9-461, applicable to the property on the date the development agreement is
executed.
C. A development velo agreement be amended, or cancelled in whole or in part, by mutual consent of
gr may
thep arties to the development agreement or by their successors in interest or assigns.
Dy
. No later than ten days after a municipality enters into a development agreement, the municipality
shall record a copy of theagreementcounty recorder with the der of the county in which the property
subject to the development agreement is located, and the recordation constitutes notice of the
P
development agreement to allpersons. The burdens of the development agreement are binding on, and
p �'the benefits of the development agreement inure to, the parties to the agreement and to all their
successors in interest and assigns.
E. Section 32-2181 does not apply to development agreements under this section.
F.Notwithstanding anyother law, a municipality may provide by resolution or ordinance for public
safety purposes, and with the written consent of an owner of property that has been granted a
development agreement pursuant to this section, an owner of a protected development right pursuant to
p �
chapter 11 of this title or the owner of any other residential or commercial development subject to the supervisionmunicipality of a munici ali pursuant to this title, for the application and enforcement of speed limits,
vehicle weight restrictions or other safety measures on a private road that is located in any development
in the municipality and that is opento and used by the public. A municipality may require payment from
p y
the property owner of the actual cost of signs for speed limits or other restrictions applicable on the
private road, before their installation.
G. In this section, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. "Development agreement" means an agreement between a municipality and a community facilities
p �
districtP ursuant to section 48-709, subsection C, a landowner or any other person having an interest in
real property that may specify or otherwise relate to any of the following:
(a)The duration of the development agreement.
(b) The permitted uses of property subject to the development agreement.
The and of uses and the maximum height and size of proposed buildings within
(c) density intensity
such property.
(d)Provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and provisions to protect
environmentally sensitive lands.
httn://www_azleg_state.az.us/ars/9/00500-05.htm 03/21/2003
9-500.05 - Development agreements; public safety; definitions Page 2 of 2
p
_ (e) Provisions for preservation and restoration of historic structures.
(f)
The phasingor time of construction or development on property subject to the development
agreement.
(g)
Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for public infrastructure and the financing of public
infrastructure and subsequent reimbursements over time.
(h) Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for annexation of property by the municipality and
the phasing or timing of annexation of property by the municipality.
(i) Conditions, terms,restrictions and requirements of deannexation of property from one municipality
to another municipality and the phasing or timing of deannexation of property from one municipality to
another municipality.
(l)
Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements relating to the governing body's intent to form a
special taxing district pursuant to title 48.
(k) Any other matters relating to the development of the property.
2. "Governing body" means the body or board which by law is constituted as the legislative body of the
municipality.
3. "Municipality" means an incorporated city or town.
htn://www.azle'.state.az.us/ars/9/00500-OS.htm 03/21/2003
03/25/2003 10:23 5203229175 LAIDLAWCONS PAGE 05
4,
TOWN OF.ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA
ANNEXATION PETITION
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO
VALLEY,ARIZONA:
We, the undersigned,the owners of one-half or more in value of the real.and personal
property and more than one-half of the persons owning real and personal property that
would be subject to taxation by the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona in the event of
annexation within the territory proposed to be annexed,which is hereafter described, said
territory being contiguous to the corporate limits of the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, the
exterior boundaries of the territory proposed to be annexed shown on the legal
description and map attached hereto, marked as Exhibits "A" and "B" and made a part
hereof, request the Town of Oro Valley to annex the following described territory,
provided that the requirements of ARS 9-471, and amendments thereto are fully
observed.
The description of the territory proposed to be annexed, not already within the present
limits of the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona and located in Pima County,Arizona, is as
• follows:
See attached legal description marked as Exhibit "A" and attached annexation map
marked as Exhibit"B"
Name of Mailing Parcel Number or
Date Property_Owner Address . Ph oncj Legal DescriptlQn
a/Mcjr-03
JeZA
radiplii-Trnrae0 -44,ezek-iiLLQ ,125'-5'/ - 0/6A
Z-,5' —004)0
ce_3 yi z,
,•
44-770
4'
SPECIAL SESSION Page 1 of 3
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 03/31/03
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: SCOTT NELSON, SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION 03 -28 REGARDING THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT B. P. MAGEE, LLC LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
MAGEE ROAD AND ORACLE ROAD, PARCELS 225-500-050, 225-500-020 AND 255-513-
840
SUMMARY: Annexation Area B is set to expire on April 3,2003. A petition for Annexation to a City or
Town has a life of oneear in which to complete the annexation. As a result a number of property owners have
y
come forward to request that development agreements be approved before they sign the annexation petition. The
purposesof these development a eements vary, but they tend to create development entitlements or carry forward
p �
those from the County, and theymay include tax programs for improvements (Community Facility Districts). In all
cases, they comply with existing State statutes, particularly ARS 9-500.5 (development agreements) and ARS
9-471 (annexations), and Town ordinances.
ARS 9-500.5 is attached for your review. The Commission review of the development agreement related to uses,
conformance with the General Plan, and land use/development entitlements. The second citation, ARS 9-471,
gives further guidance. It states:
"A city or town annexing an area shall adopt zoning classifications which permit densities and uses no
greater than those permitted by the county immediately before annexation. Subsequent
changes in zoning of the annexed territory shall be made according to existing procedures
established by the city or town for the rezoning of land."
The referencedroperty was rezoned by the County on February 5, 1979 to Local Business Zone (CB-1) for 11.3
p
areas located on the southwest corner of Magee Road and Oracle Road and on August 4, 1980 the 10 acres property
immediately south was zoned Local Business Zone(CB-1). On October 17, 1995 the County rezoned the 9.59
acres immediately south Transitional Zone (TR)with conditions that no housing be constructed.
ANNEXATION AREA PARTICULARS:
Size 30.89 acres
Use/Terrain The 11.3 acres on the southwest corner of Magee and Oracle Roads is built-out. The
County adopted a Tentative Development Plan for the remaining 19.59 acres at the
time of rezoning.
Zoning Local Business Zone (CB-1) for 21.3 acres and Transitional Zone (TR) for the
remaining 9.59 acres.
General Plan The area is shown as Neighborhood Commercial/Office in the existing General Plan
Land Use map and as Community/Regional Commercial in the proposed map. The
existing and proposed uses are in compliance with the proposed General Plan.
SPECIAL SESSION Page 2 of 3
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 03/31/03
The agreement is proposed by the applicant to protect the existing uses on the southwest corner of Magee and
Oracle Roads and to provide guidance for the remaining 19.59 acres immediately to the south. The agreement
provides for Development Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural review by the Town of Oro Valley. The
development standards for this property,per the agreement,will be those Pima County standards in affect as of
October 2002.
At the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on March 25, 2003, the Commission moved to forward
this item to the Town Council recommending that the Town proceed with the annexation development
agreement of the B.P. Magee, LLC Property with the following suggestion: that Section 1 of the
Resolution be amended to read as follows:
Subsequent to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town, the Town Council
will adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may be necessary to translate the present
Pima County zoning classifications of CB-1 and TR to the Oro Valley zoning classification of C-2 with the
conditions set forth in Exhibit C (Town Conditions) annexed to the proposed Development Agreement
between the Town and B.P. Magee, LLC. Motion carried by a 6 yes, 0 no vote.
Because this language would bind the hands of the Town on future action it was reworded by staff as provided
in the attached Resolution.
Furthermore, negotiations subsequent to the March 25, 2003, Planning and Zoning meeting between Town Staff
and Bourn Partners have resulted in some minor changes to the attached Pre-Annexation Agreement. The
changes are reflected by additions in blue and deletions in red type.
FISCAL IMPACT: Area B $645,189
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the annexation development agreement as presented in
the attached resolution.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS
I move to adopt Resolution No. (R) 03- 28 the pre- annexation development agreement with B.P. Magee,
LLC Property.
OR
I move to adopt Resolution No. (R) 03-28 the pre-annexation development agreement with B. P. Magee,
LLC Property with the following
stipulations
ATTACHMENT(S):
1) Resolution No. 03- 28 , Pre-Annexation Development Agreement for the B. P. Magee, LLC Located on
the Southwest Corner of Magee Road and Oracle Road
2)Fiscal Impact Report (David Andrews)
3) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 25, 2003
4) Pre-annexation Development Agreement
5) ARS 9-500.5
SPECIAL SESSION Page 3 of 3
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 03/31/03
/e/e/A0
Sot , elson, Specia Projects Coordinator
/ ,i/
,diorx.L.-2 _gi —
Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
RESOLUTION NO. (R) 03- 28
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY,
ARIZONA, REGARDING A PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY AND B. P. MAGEE, LLC.
WHEREAS, the Arizona Revised Statues (ARS) 9-500.5 describes procedures for development
agreements; and
WHEREAS, the Town is currently pursuing the annexation of the unincorporated property areas
known as Annexation Area"B", and
WHEREAS, the General Plan encourages the annexation of unincorporated areas surrounding the
Town to better serve thep ublic, facilitate infrastructure expansion, and improve operational efficiencies
of municipal services; and
WHEREAS, the proposed uses on the property are in conformance with the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed this agreement at a public hearing
and presented their recommendations to the Council:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mayor and Town Council of the Town of
Oro Valley as follows:
SECTION 1. That the Pre-annexation Development Agreement between the Town and B. P. Magee,
LLC, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference is hereby approved.
SECTION 2. Subsequent to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town,
the Town Council will adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may be necessary
to translate the County zoning to an equivalent Oro Valley zoning district.
SECTION 3. This Resolution will become immediately operative and in force thirty(30) days from the
date of its adoption in accordance with State law and the Oro Valley Town Code.
SECTION 4. This Resolution shall become null and void if the annexation process is not completed
within the time allowed. Any legal delay and/or challenge, however, will extend the effective date of
the Resolution the same number of days (or months) as the legal delay.
SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of nay court of competent jurisdiction, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by Mayor Ma or and Town Council, the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, this
31st day of March, 2003.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Paul H. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Town Attorney
t. $
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
FROM: David Andrews, Finance Director
DATE: January 8, 2002
SU ImpactAnalyses Fiscal Anal ses for Proposed Annexation Areas A and B
Attached to this memorandump lease find fiscal impact analyses for proposed
annexation areas A and B. A separate analysis has been developed for each
area along with a combined fiscal impact. You will also find a map of the areas,
a listing assumptions tions for revenue estimates and detailed backup information
p
from department heads in regard to expenditures.
Revenues and expenditures estimates represent annual amounts. They do not
take into consideration the timing of when state shared revenues would actually
begin to be received bythe Town. The Finance Department is researching this
g . . .
timingissue with the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, Arizona Department of
g
Revenue, Arizona Department of Transportation and Pima County Treasurer.
Information will bep rovided under a separate communication when it has been
obtained.
Area A
The following summarizes the fiscal impact analysis:
Annual Revenues $483,280
Annual Expenditures 684,428
Net Fiscal Impact ($201,148)
Area B
The following summarizes the fiscal impact analysis:
Annual Revenues $1,464,794
Annual Expenditures 819,605
Net Fiscal Impact $645,189
Combined Areas A and B
Annual Revenues $1,984,074
Annual Expenditures 1,504,033
Net Fiscal Impact $444,041
Comments
Police Department expenditure
• The Oro Valley estimates are based on an p ,
police officers per thousand population standard (10
assumption of 2.5
officers). A standard of2.0per thousand would result in 7.5 officers and
rounding to 8.0 officers,
an annual cost savings of approximately $152,531
including $57,008 for area A and $95,523 for area B.
• The Oro Valley Police Department has indicated the need for a police
substation at an annual estimated cost of between $100,000 - $240,000.
These costs are not included in the overall net fiscal impact analyses as
presented.
• Public Works has indicated the need to purchase a street sweeper at an
estimated cost of $160,000 with a useful life of 10 years. These costs are
allocated to
area A, however, the sweeper would also serve area B.
• Stormwater services is assumed to have a neutral fiscal impact because it
would be operated as an enterprise fund.
• Other costs include an accounting for Town Council, Clerk, Manager,
Human Resources, Finance, Economic Development, Legal, and
miscellaneous items such as code enforcement, utilities, and insurance.
you give me a call
when have an opportunity to review this information.
CC: Jeff Weir, Economic Development Administrator
Melody Vaughan,han, Management & Budget Analyst
,
. Town of Oro Valley
Fiscal Impact Analysis for Area B
Annual Amounts
REVENUES
Local Sales Tax $ 777,900
Cable Franchise
13,073
State Shared Vehicle License Tax 77,354
State Shared Income Tax 228,175
State Shared Sales Tax 174,859
Highway Users Fuels Tax 173,154
9 �
LTAF 12,519
Business Licenses 7,760
Total Revenues $ 1,464,794
EXPENDITURES
Police Department 534,623
Ma istrate Court 38,177
Public Works
9 135,797
r
Public Transportation 4,103
Other 15% 106,905
Total Expenditures
$ 819,605
NET FISCAL IMPACT $ 645,189
Demographics
Persons Per Household* 2.41
Housing Units 1,034 Occupancy Rate* 87.80%
Population 2,188
*Data based on figures from the 2000 U.S. Census for the Town of Oro Valley
•
Annexation Area B Forecasted Revenues
Cable Franchise
* factor * .878 occupancy rate * $30 average bill* .05 cable
1,034 units .80 usage P
tax * 12 months
= $13,073.07
Vehicle Auto Lieu
1,050,000 / 29,700 * 2,188
$77,353.54
State Shared Income Tax
3,097,252 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $228,174.66
State Shared Sales Tax
2,373,541 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $174,858.85
Highway User Fuels Tax
2,350,406 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $ 173,154.49
Local Transportation Assistance Funds
169,934 / 29,700 * 2,188
$12,519.04
• I
ORO VALLEY
POLICE DEPARTMENT
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: David Andrews,Finance Director
FROM: OA Chief Daniel G. Sharp
DATE: January 2, 2002
SUBJECT: Annexation Information
Attached are the documents related to the fiscal impact of annexing Areas "A"
and "B." CommanderLarry Stevens has been assigned to work with your office to
provide any additional information or supporting documentation. Additionally, we has
stats stical
ion that . • . i - • . in th-it .nal sis Commander Stevens
._
has provided that information to Judge Dunscomb.
be out of the office next wee however, Commander Stevens will be
I will
available to assist in any waynecessary. Commander Charlie Lentner will be Acting
Chief and will be available, as well.
•
•
MEMORANDUM
To: Chief Sharp
From: Commander Stevens
Re: Fiscal Impact Recommendations
Annexation Areas A&B
Date: January 3, 2002
In completing the fiscal impact studies for the two areas I used anecdotal information to make
P 9
my recommendations. Taken individually I believe this is a valid way to project impact, however,
cumulative annexations in the area create additional concerns and considerations.
We need to keep in mind that these areas include higher concentrations of commercial and multi
familyhousingunits as compared to the current general make up of Oro Valley. This is the main reason I
P
feel it imperative that we follow the 2.5 officers per thousand population standard. The only law
enforcement calls for service statistics for the area are for the Sheriffs Department. To make any
correlation between their calls for service and ours is nearly impossible as they have a far different
standard for response than we do. I do know they had nearly 1100 calls for service in the area for the
year 2000 which would represent 10% of our entire total for that year. Considering that our level of
service could result in doubling the number of responses by our Department, you can see my concern
about the possible impact.
In reviewing the population figures related to the two areas, I am also concerned that we are
using National Census figures in determining occupancy and population. I think it is important to note
that in informal occupancy surveys completed in the past we have found occupancy rates in northwest
Tucson and Oro Valley higher i her than national standards. Again, based on this it is even more imperative
that we do not fall below the 2.5 officers per thousand population standard.
One area that has been addressed to some degree over the past several years is our ability to
deal with some of the traffic related issues we would face with the addition of such a major intersection
and highly traveled area. We have completed comprehensive training related to traffic accident
9 Y
investigation and obtained equipment and technology that have enhanced our abilities in this area. We
currently a have Grant pending for the addition of one motor unit and I would anticipate the need of an
additional motor unit during the FY02/03 budgeting process. This will be to address the annexed areas
and the additional traffic throughout the Town. The annexation may drive this a little quicker as we
proactivelyaddress Oracle and Magee with the high volume of traffic, extensive commercial access, and
high school/neighborhood transition areas.
As thePoP ulation and activity center of Oro Valley nlor___Lejp the South, we must consider a full
serviceP olice substation in the area. Space needs must be addressed in the near future due to increased
personnel. I have gathered some fiscal impact figures related to establishing a police substation in the
area of Oracle and Magee. Through input gained over the past couple weeks it was determined that we
should consider a 10,000 square foot facility to provide adequate space. It is my understanding that to
arrangement budget a lease we should expect to pay approximately $24 per square foot for facility and
9
maP
intenance.This would compute to approximately a $20,000 per month lease or $240,000 yearly fiscal
•K
impact. In evaluatingthe construction of a 10,000 square foot facility in this area I have been given the
P
figures of$7 per square foot for land and $80 per square foot building construction by a company
currently completing com letin office facilities in the area. A 10,000 square foot facility would require 50,000
square feet of land which would compute to approximately $1.35m to provide the basic facility. There
qfacilities andland that I would onlyoffer that conventional
are so many options in municipal financing of fac�l�t�e.,
financing for such a facility would be about $8,000 per month.
The Town Finance Department also advised me that the Community Development building was
completed for about $135 per square foot. This included furnishing the facility. If this is the case, we
would be looking at $1.35m for the facility and the cost of the land. The Finance Department told me we
should budget about $2.30 per square foot for land, though the company building offices in the area told
me to budget$7.00 per square foot for land.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chief Sharp
FROM: Commander Stevens � =
RE: Area "B"Oracle / Magee/ Suffolk Hills
Annexation Fiscal Impact
DATE: January 3, 2002
In evaluating the fiscal impact to service this area I recommend we continue to follow the standard of 2.5 officers
per thousand. An estimated population of 2,188 computes to 5.5 officers which leads me to recommend 6. This area
includes 97 commercial businesses which caused me to round up my officer recommendation. Experience tells us that
commercial businesses create service needs in the area of traffic, public assists and criminal enforcement at a level above
those of residential neighborhoods. Additionally, the intersection of Oracle and Magee will be included in this annexation
and our experience assisting the Sheriff's Department and DPS has shown us any incident at this location will have
immediate impact on our personnel as it will be our only major intersection with 4 directions of heavy travel. This
annexation area also includes Immaculate Heart School which will require those services unique to school areas.
Below is a breakdown of costs related to the additional officers. Included in this breakdown are additional
vehicles at a rate of .82 vehicles per officer(rounded up from 4.92 to 5).This is the ratio we use based on historic data in
Oro Valley.
6 officers at $54,580 per officer (includes salary & ERE) = $ 327,480
Officer gear: gun, vest gun belt etc. $2,428 per officer = $ 14,568
5 vehicles fully equipped at$34,151 per vehicle = $ 170,755
Vehicle maintenance: gas, tires, lof& insurance $4,364 per vehicle = $ 21,820
TOTAL = $ 534,623
MEMORANDUM
TO: David Andrews
FROM: George Dunscomb, Town Magistrate
DATE: January 4, 2002
SUBJECT: Fiscal Impact of Proposed Annexation of Areas A and B
After consultations with administrative staff of the Oro Valley Police Dept. and
exploring a myriad of possible methods of estimating the fiscal impact of the proposed
annexations, I have determined that the most obvious method of estimating the impact is
probably the most logical method. The population increase will be about 12%. Therefore
it is probably reasonable to estimate that our workload will increase by a comparable
amount, requiring a commensurate increase in clerical staff, supplies and other expenses.
There were inadequate statistics from County law enforcement to correctly
ascertain the number of cases generated in the areas proposed for annexation. The county
statistics indicate there will be a substantial increase n the number of calls but, nothing to
show that the calls resulted in an arrest. Their statistics do show that a substantial number
of calls were for larceny- which could be misdemeanor shoplifting or theft, (which would
affect the court) or felony thefts, which would at least initially go downtown.
The increased population will necessarily cause an increase in the number of
domestic violence cases in our court.
Oro Valley Police Dept. Information shows that as the Town has grown, the
number of traffic citations has decreased. Traffic citations usually bring in revenue.
Shoplifting and domestic violence cases usually result in a net loss of revenue after the
costs of court appointed attorneys etc are calculated. However there is no realistic way to
calculate those amounts.
Using FY2001/2002 numbers and adding an additional 3% to cover Social
Security, COLA etc, the annexation would result in an increase in personnel costs of
$51,683 a year. Plus 12% of the o erations and maintenance costs of$14,259, there
would b total increase of$65,897 per year. ncreases in revenue, if any, will be
negligible. I
7u f� `i� 6��•c,� obN t01U/44
Ili)/ Yc.(-h rte1/4.
._•
s , _
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID ANDREWS
FROM: BILL JANSEN Aki?jc
SUBJECT: ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS
DATE: JANUARY 4, 2002
CC: CHUCK SWEET
As requested, attached is the fiscal analysis for map areas "A" and "B". This
analysis is based on providing the same level of service to the annexed areas as
presently provided within the existing corporate limits. The analysis is also based
on driving the map areas by DPW staff and developing a detailed condition
assessment of the streets.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
f so ��
f<J Si., ‘i
y.x.)1-** *AK * .
0 0 0 0 Nr. co 0 0 0 0 N` nv O Q 1
00 V- 0 N- 0 00 NO O
0 CO CC) O0) N-N Nt
- r O
co O M co- N c'i O � � � N � fa 0 ir
00
_ o
000Oocf) o 0 00
N �
� p) CO CO 0 .ct r U) N U T-
W cr) c i c, c0 co- Cf) O 4 r-
(' O 4A IA *A } r
Q
LU OT
_ 0
O N N O Oaf- 0
4A CO C) 00) CO 0 0 00 N NI' 0
NO t
LO Lo CO CO 0) 0 e- 0 N Cf) �►
M M CO M (f) cO CO r N
O 4A4 C) (A 43 N
Ni
to
LtiZ $,..
p � if3 (A fR V3
Z
00
-J O r �?
Q o O LOU)LO
7
' 1 � - - ,d9 1` N 0 CO N 0 0 r � N CD
O Cr NT` U) N0) �t _
I- co M M c'� c� to tom- CO O (A (A U) Cfl
O CO fA U, r V
U,
I.-
O _
0 N- OTO 10`CO 0 0 0 O O N Nr r'
EA CON- 0 0 O r- L N co. t .�.�
M 0) Cfl '�7 LO co `Ct
p co c0 c'� co M tif. ( to N
N N.
O CO
t0 (3 fft
T
N 0 CO fA N- 0 0 ti L 0 Opt 0 0 N C' N- CT\
C N LO CO Q) f` st: �- CO
c. cY) (o) s- N- co-
co
7 to N.
b9 4A 4A bR 4{3 '3(A (AfA 11....T.
U I �1
Y oLf) in 7�
CC cn O co O O CO O) OOCD p♦0 N �' 0 `�`
o � CO 0 N- N 0 0 0 N
co ' N ' CO _
LU p tic') C' C')0N U ONco
_O
117 H to fA Ea EF)
CO -
D -J O O co 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 O N s in
ti
Cl. Q OOch «Nt � � QO) LU r" � NCO N 0
LL. Ca5 C6
O. O-.� Nt r 1 (1
Q U Ef3CA (AEflN ,— (A (A !tTt d' \s,.....
40
Wat. o , ,o .0, . , .o.o- �,� 0
o0N0oo 0 00 oNo � o �1
i- 0O � oocoo-� ocoo v_
o. o
W J �' N
a 0000 (A (A 0c
to J CI 3 r-...
r M 3 co ta t�-
t° U o
Cn
U) N
-I 0CCQ
Z U) Y � W
Q W v ti_— W u) >.
Qce LU - O .: .U) > .0 I- C) a) :r...- „,L- a.N-- UJ E a o0
to V> > Z CC cn H
LL 0 a m c�g . c-.J Z in cu
Z = CC �, .c co >,. w c FW-- a co 0
O U) ti iii a c c �- �- u- c.
I- u_- u_ w Q if) 1.12at0i a) a •cv L c
X 00 O U ) a) We v}U E --1 a) 2 co'CO O Cl) m
Ell
W - 5 o c c E c E Q w c.) tr c w o Z Q 1-
za W OCQ _ c. :a- � `�- '= > o O •m- o c >, c
J O c, tT w 2 I- a go =
WO W O COco .� 2
QEE cncfcrQ Q i5t/5w J 0a cnaZ1- V (
r •
MEMORANDUM
•
TO: David Andrews, Finance Director
6iP)A-V/
FROM• Kathryn Cuvelier, Town Clerk ‘('
DATE: January 3, 2002
SUBJ: Proposed Annexation — Area B Fiscal Impact Analysis
835 residential units
Possible Home Occupations located in this area. Additional revenues would be
received for Home Occupation Licenses. ($80 per license). However, the
revenues are unknown at this time.
1,767 population
Additional Election
costs will be incurred based on the amount of registered
voters. However, the costs are unknown at this time.
92 Commercial Businesses
Additional Business License Revenue of $7,360. (92 x $80.00).
X46(
6°11(A n
J �
C • •
< P-
4
LjUNDED
Office of the Town Attorney
4 d>v
TO: David Andrews, Finance Director
FROM: Dan Dudley, Town Attorney
DATE: January 4, 2002
RE: Proposed Annexation - Area A Fiscal impact Analysis
The estimate regarding the cost of services to the Legal Department for the proposed
Annexation Area is $31,658.22.
Please call if you have any questions.
DLD/ca
TtLio(A.(11
F�peptL ews-Area A Fiscal krpact Anaysisdoc
ACTION SUMMARY
PLANNING COMMISSION
IRA5 SPECIAL SESSION
MARCH 25, 2003
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE
DRAFT
SPECIAL SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Bill Moody
Vice-Chair Don Cox
Commissioner Ken Kinared
Commissioner Don Manross
Commissioner Robert Krenkowitz
Commissioner John Anning
ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Paul Loomis
Council Member Werner Wolff
Council Member Bart Rochman
Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
Scott Nelson, Special Projects Coordinator
Jeff Weir, Economic Development Administrator
Brent Sinclair, Community Development Director
Bryant Nodine, Planning and Zoning Administrator
Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney
Bill Adler, Board of Adjustments Member
* 1. PUBLIC HEARING, A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST
TO EXTEND ZONING
CONDITIONS UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE TOWN, WONG - ORACLE
ROAD
MOTION: Commissioner sioner Krenkowitz MOVED to forward this item to the Town Council
proceed that the Town with the annexation development agreement of the
Wong-Oracle Road Property Pro ert with the following suggestion: that Section 1 of the Resolution
be amended to read as follows:
Subsequent to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town
p
the Town
Council will adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may
translate thepresent Pima County zoning classification of TR to Oro Valley
be necessary to .
• of Neighborhood Commercial/Office and to extend the expiration of the
zoning classification g
zoning to June 30,
2008, with all of the standards and special requirements that the Pima
County Planning and ZoningCommission imposed on June 30, 1999, except that any
reference therein to Pimay, County
Count agencies, and the County Board of Supervisors
y
shall instead refer to the
Town of Oro Valley, its agencies, and its Town Council. Motion
carried by a 6 yes, 0 no vote.
* 2. PUBLIC HEARING,
A RESOLUTION REGARDING PREANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, B. P. MAGEE, LLC
MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to forward this item to the Town Council
recommending that theproceed Town with the annexation development agreement of the
B.P. Magee, LLC Property with the following suggestion: that Section 1 of the Resolution bE
p y
amended to read as follows:
Subsequent
to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Towr
the Town Council will adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may
be necessary to t present the Pima County zoning classifications of CB-1 and TR to
the Oro Valley
zoningclassification of C-2 with the conditions set forth in Exhibit C (Town
Conditions) annexed
to the proposed Development Agreement between the Town and B.P.
Magee, LLC. Motion carried by a 6 yes, 0 no vote.
* EARING A RESOLUTION REGARDING PREANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
3. PUBLIC H
AGREEMENT, TYROL ESCONDIDA, LLC
MOTION: Commissioner Cox MOVED to forward this item to the Town Council
that the Town not proceed with the annexation development agreement of
recommending
Tyrol Escondida, LLC (Mariash) Property, specifically outlining the reason for not
the y
proceeding is contained inparagraph 8, directly insuring that the Town will enter into an
p g •
providingonlyone-half (112) of the sales taxes to the Town. Motion carried by a 6
agreement
yes, 0 no vote.
ADJOURN REGULAR SESSION 7:10 p.m.
9-500.05 - Development agreements; public safety; definitions Page 1 of 2
9-500.05. Development agreements-public safety; definitions
A. A municipality, resolution or ordinance, mayenter into development agreements relating to
by
property in the municipality and to property located outside the incorporated area of the municipality. If
the development agreement relates to property located outside the incorporated area of the municipality,
the development agreement does not become operative unless annexation proceedings to annex the
property to the municipality are completed within the period of time specified by the development
agreement or any extension of such time.
B. A development agreement shall be consistent with the municipality's general plan or specific plan, if
any, as defined in section 9-461, applicable to the property on the date the development agreement is
executed.
C. A development agreement may be amended, or cancelled in whole or in part, by mutual consent of
the parties to the development agreement or by their successors in interest or assigns.
D. No later than ten days after a municipality enters into a development agreement, the municipality
shall record a copy of the agreement with the county recorder of the county in which the property
subject to the development agreement is located, and the recordation constitutes notice of the
development agreement to all persons. The burdens of the development agreement are binding on, and
the benefits of the development agreement inure to, the parties to the agreement and to all their
successors in interest and assigns.
E. Section 32-2181 does not apply to development agreements under this section.
F. Notwithstanding any other law, a municipality may provide by resolution or ordinance for public
safety purposes, and with the written consent of an owner of property that has been granted a
development agreement pursuant to this section, an owner of a protected development right pursuant to
chapter 11 of this title or the owner of any other residential or commercial development subject to the
supervision of a municipality pursuant to this title, for the application and enforcement of speed limits,
vehicle weight restrictions or other safety measures on a private road that is located in any development
in the municipality and that is open to and used by the public. A municipality may require payment from
thero erty owner of the actual cost of signs for speed limits or other restrictions applicable on the
p p
private road, before their installation.
G. In this section, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. "Development agreement" means an agreement between a municipality and a community facilities
district pursuant to section 48-709, subsection C, a landowner or any other person having an interest in
real property that may specify or otherwise relate to any of the following:
(a) The duration of the development agreement.
(b) The permitted uses of property subject to the development agreement.
(c) The density and intensity of uses and the maximum height and size of proposed buildings within
such property.
(d) Provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and provisions to protect
environmentally sensitive lands.
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/9/00500-05.htm 03/21/2003
9-500.05 - Development agreements; public safety; definitions Page 2 of 2
(e)Provisions for preservation and restoration of historic structures.
(f) The
phasingor time of construction or development on property subject to the development
agreement.
(g) terms,
Conditions, restrictions and requirements for public infrastructure and the financing of public
infrastructure and subsequent reimbursements over time.
(h) Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for annexation of property by the municipality and
the phasing or timing of annexation of property by the municipality.
(i) Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements of deannexation of property from one municipality
to another municipality and the phasing or timing of deannexation of property from one municipality to
P �'
another municipality.
Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements relating to the governing body's intent to form a
special taxing district pursuant to title 48.
(k) Any other matters relating to the development of the property.
2. "Governing body" means the body or board which by law is constituted as the legislative body of the
municipality.
3. "Municipality" means an incorporated city or town.
www.
htt :// azl e .state.az.us/ars/9/00540-05.htm 03/21/2003
P g
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this"Agreement") is made and entered into
by and between the Town of Oro Valley, a municipal corporation(the "Town"), and B. P.
Magee, L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability company; Fidelity National Title Agency, Inc., an
Arizona corporation, as Trustee under Trust No. 10-822; Tucson Oro Entrada Partnership, a
California limited partnership (the "Developer") as of the day of
2003. Town and Developer are referred to herein collectively as the "Parties".
RECITALS
Authority
A. A.R.S. § 9-500.05 authorizes the Town to enter into a development agreement
with a landowner or other person having an interest in real property located within or without the
Town boundaries to facilitate development of the property by providing for, among other things,
the conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for development and public infrastructure
and the financing of public infrastructure.
The Property
B. Developer intends to purchase approximately 40 acres of land located at the
southwest corner of Oracle Road and Magee Road, including the existing Entrada del Oro
shopping center("Entrada"), all 40 acres of which is legally described in Exhibit A attached
hereto (collectively the "Property").
C. The Property is presently located in unincorporated Pima County(the "County").
D. The Developer intends to develop the Property into an integrated commercial
retail center(the "Project"). A concept plan (the "Plan") for the Project is attached as Exhibit
B.
E. Developer intends to rehabilitate and update the Entrada shopping center as
necessary. Additionally, development and operation of the Project will require off-site public
infrastructure improvements including a new traffic signal on Oracle Road, new deceleration
lanes and curb cuts on Oracle Road, improvements to the Suffolk Hills Road egress onto Oracle
Road, improvements to Northern Avenue, on-site infrastructure,building and site improvements,
and additional Town-requested enhancements to the Project.
F. For the purposes of this Agreement, the Parties contemplate that the Property will
be developed by the development areas as depicted on the Plan attached hereto as Exhibit B and
in accordance with an approved Development Master Plan(the "Master Plan"), as provided for
in the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised ("OVZCR"). Each development area may be
considered an independent and separate project for purposes of the Town's development review
and, if appropriate, approval.
3/27/2003 1
B.P.Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
Annexation History
G. On March 20, 2002, the Town held a public hearing pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-
471(A)(3) to discuss a proposal to annex the Property as well as other property owned by third
parties other than Developer (the "Proposed Annexation District"), and directed Town staff to
begin to obtain signatures on blank Annexation petitions as required by A.R.S. § 9-471 to annex
the property within the Proposed Annexation District into the Town (the "Annexation"). The
Town must complete this process by April 3, 2003.
H. Annexation will benefit the Property by providing certain Town services. This
benefit will be offset by the Town tax on sales generated by the Property.
I. Annexation will benefit the Town and its residents by providing additional
revenue, public infrastructure improvements, an integrated commercial development to include
landscaping and parking, linkages (ramps, retaining walls) between the existing Entrada
shopping center and the new construction on the Property, and satisfaction of the Town's 1%
public art requirement. Additionally, the Town will benefit from the required 404
improvements.
J. The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), in connection with National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") compliance, will require Developer to
construct on the Property certain infrastructure improvements consistent with EPA requirements
in effect as of the date of development plan approval for such improvements (the "NPDES
Improvements"). These improvements will also provide a benefit to the public.
K. The Parties intend to address the financial aspects of this Agreement through the
use of an Economic Development Agreement("EDA") and a Community Facilities District
("CFD").
Existing Zoning of the Property
L. Approximately 30.89 acres of the Property is zoned County CB-1 (R) and
approximately 10-acre portion of the Property is zoned County TR (R).
M. The current County Comprehensive Plan designates most of the Property as
Community Activity Center, with small portions designated as High or Medium Intensity Urban.
Town Zoning of the Property
N. Upon the successful Annexation of the Property, the Town is required to adopt
zoning classifications to be applied to the Property, including specific conditions attached hereto
as Exhibit C (the "Town Conditions"), all of which shall become effective after the effective
date of the Annexation in conformance with A.R.S. § 9-471(L) (collectively, the "Original
Town Zoning," as defined herein and pertaining to this Agreement only). State law (A.R.S. § 9-
471(L))provides that the Town shall adopt Original Town Zoning classifications that permit
densities and uses no greater than those permitted by the County immediately before Annexation.
3/27/2003 2
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
O. The current Town General Plan and proposed Town General Plan Update
designation for the Property is Community Commercial.
P. Approval of the Annexation, adoption of the Original Town Zoning with the
Town Conditions, the General Plan designation, a PAD (if any), and approval of a Master Plan
(as defined herein) and all phased development plans (as defined by the OVZCR) in substantial
conformance with the Master Plan are subject to procedures and public hearings required by state
law and the OVZCR. Such approvals are discretionary legislative acts of the Town Council to
be exercised in the public interest. The parties therefore enter this Agreement to establish a
process that will provide the assurances required by the Developer for the appropriate land use
approvals in a manner consistent with the legal and legislative obligations of the Town.
Q. Developer requires assurances from the Town that Developer will have the ability
to complete development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement and the Plan before
Developer will expend substantial effort and cost on the development of the Property. The Town
also requires assurances from Developer that the development of the Property will be in
accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Plan.
AGREEMENT
Now,THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated
here as the purpose and intent of the Parties in entering into this Agreement, and in consideration
of the mutual covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement, the Parties agree as
follows:
1. Accuracy of the Recitals. The Parties hereby acknowledge and confirm the
accuracy of the Recitals, which are incorporated herein by this reference.
2. Effective Date; Term. This Agreement shall be effective upon adoption by Town
Ordinance No. , and the execution of this Agreement by both Parties as provided
by law (the "Effective Date"). The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective
Date and shall automatically terminate on the tenth (10th) anniversary of such date or at such
later date as may be agreed upon in the EDA (the "Term"). Nothing in this Agreement shall
limit or waive any development right or vested right that Developer may have at law or equity
before, during or after the Term of this Agreement.
3/27/2003 3
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
3. Annexation.
3.1. Annexation Adoption. Developer shall execute and deliver a petition
authorizing Annexation of the Property to the Town on or before April 3, 2003. Thereafter, the
Town shall diligently undertake to perform all necessary acts and procedures required by A.R.S.
§ 9-471 to adopt an ordinance annexing the Property into the Town as part of the Proposed
Annexation District within 30 days from April 3, 2003. If for any reason the Annexation cannot
be finalized within 30 days from April 3, 2003, this Agreement may be extended by mutual
agreement of the Parties to allow the Town to complete a subsequent Annexation which
subsequent Annexation shall be finalized by no later than July 31, 2003. If for any reason, the
subsequent Annexation is not finalized by July 31, 2003, this Agreement and any mutually
agreed-to extension of this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.
3.2. Costs and Expenses. All procedural and administrative costs and expenses
of the Town pertaining to the Annexation and any and all future Annexations affecting the
Property shall be paid by the Town. Developer shall bear its own legal and consulting costs and
expenses incurred in connection with the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement. It is not
the intent of the Parties that the terms of this provision extend beyond the Town's application of
Original Town Zoning.
3.3. Effective Date. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-471(D), the Annexation ordinance
will become effective after the expiration of thirty days from the adoption of the Annexation
ordinance, or, if the Annexation is the subject of a referendum petition, upon completion of that
process (the "Annexation Effective Date").
4. Original Town Zoning.
4.1. Timing. Pursuant to state law, the Town shall initiate and pursue the
procedures for the adoption of the Original Town Zoning (as defined herein and pertaining to
this Agreement only) in a manner so as to permit Town Council action on an ordinance adopting
the Original Town Zoning by June 16, 2003. Nothing herein shall limit the Town's legislative
discretion to determine the appropriate Town zoning in conformance with A.R.S. § 9-471(L).
4.2. County Zoning. As it pertains to this agreement only, County Zoning shall
mean the County zoning as applied to the Property immediately prior to successful Annexation
by the Town. The Town's C-2 zoning subject to the Town Conditions is substantially
comparable to the existing County CB-1 and TR zoning of the Property. Adoption of the C-2
zone with the Town Conditions as the Original Town Zoning for the Property is consistent with
the requirements and limitations of A.R.S. § 9-471(L).
4.3. Time Extension. In the event that the Annexation is not finalized within 30
days from April 3, 2003, the Town initiates a subsequent Annexation affecting the Property, and
the Parties mutually agree to extend this Agreement, the Town shall initiate and pursue the
procedures for the adoption of the Original Town Zoning (as defined herein and pertaining to
this Agreement only) in a manner so as to permit Town Council action on an ordinance adopting
3/27/2003 4
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
the Original Town Zoning as soon as possible after the effective date of the subsequent
Annexation but no later than October 1, 2003.
5. Future PAD Adoption.
5.1. Initiation. Pursuant to state law and the OVZC, the Town shall, upon
application by Developer, proceed with rezoning procedures to establish a PAD for the Property
pursuant to the Town's "fast tracking" policy as defined in this Agreement. The Town shall
accept and process the PAD application prior to the Annexation Effective Date if Developer so
requests to expedite the processing of that application.
5.2. PAD Processing. The Town shall process the PAD application for final
action by the Mayor and Town Council in strict compliance with OVZCR Section 10-301 et seq..
The Mayor and Town Council intend that the Planning Commission shall conduct no more than
three public hearings on the PAD after which the Planning Commission shall be required to
forward its recommendation on the PAD to the Mayor and Town Council.
6. On-Site Public Improvements.
6.1. NPDES Infrastructure Improvements. The Town is requiring a "first flush"
program in compliance with the federal Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") in
connection with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") compliance. As
part of this program, the Town has requested that Developer construct certain public
infrastructure improvements consistent with EPA requirements in effect as of the date of
development plan approval for such improvements (the "NPDES Improvements").
6.2. Other On-Site Public Improvements. Additional on-site public
improvements may include infrastructure designed to update the existing Entrada shopping
center, upgraded landscaping and parking, linkages (ramps, retaining walls) between the existing
Entrada shopping center and the new construction on the Property, and the required 404
permitting improvements.
6.3. On-Site Public Improvement Responsibilities. The parties do not intend that
on-site public improvements be constructed or maintained by the Town.
7. Off-Site Public Improvements. These improvements include but are not limited to
the following:
7.1. Magee Road Improvements. The Town shall be responsible for
improvements to the existing dedicated public right-of-way for Magee Road.
7.2. Northern Avenue Improvements. Developer shall not be required to
construct a curb cut access point to Northern Avenue. Developer shall construct a drainage
structure designed to convey no more than the 10-year stormwater event from east to west under
Northern Avenue.
3/27/2003 5
B.P.Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
7.3. Oracle Road Improvements. Developer shall intends to construct the
following improvements to Oracle Road, as depicted on the Plan and as approved and accepted
by the Arizona Department of Transportation ("ADOT") subject to those changes required by
ADOT upon completion of an updated traffic study.
7.3.1. Traffic signal at the intersection of Oracle Road and Suffolk Drive.
7.3.2. Southbound deceleration lane on the west side of Oracle Road
adjacent to the Property.
7.3.3. Additional Oracle Road curb cut and northbound left turn only into
the Property.
7.4. Suffolk Drive Improvements. Developer shall intends to design and
construct an additional 14-foot left turn lane on Suffolk Drive at the intersection with Oracle
Road.
7.5. A.D.O.T. Review and Approvals. The Town and Developer agree to
cooperate in obtaining any and all necessary reviews and approvals for the public roadway
improvements described in this Agreement as required by ADOT.
8. Architectural Design. The architectural schematics depicted in the conceptual
elevations attached hereto as Exhibit D shall be a guideline to define the size and shape of the
east elevation of Blocks 1, 2, & 3 as depicted on the Plan. substantially conform to the Town's
architectural design guidelines in effect as of the Effective Date and shall govern the
architectural development of the Project.
9. Signage. The Town shall permit Developer to construct Project signage in
conformance with the "Sign Criteria" attached hereto as Exhibit E. The purpose of the Sign
Criteria is to provide the sign criteria under which the Town will review all signage on this
Property.
10. Public Infrastructure Funding. The Town and Developer intend to present an EDA
for action by the Mayor and Town Council after the Annexation Effective Date and no later than
sixty (60) days after Developer submits a letter to the Town Attorney requesting an EDA and
including financial information and data in connection with the Project. The Parties intend to
form a Community Facilities District ("CFD") in which Developer retains a controlling interest
in at least 75% of the total land area included in the CFD. The Parties agree to use all best efforts
to form the CFD within eight(8) months after the Annexation Effective Date.
11. Designated Representative. To further the commitment of the Parties to cooperate
in the implementation of this Agreement, the Town and Developer each shall designate and
appoint a representative to act as liaison between the Town and its various departments and
Developer. The Town Manager shall be dedicated to coordinate development review and
permitting by the Planning and Zoning Department, Fire Services, the Water Department, the
Building Department, the Public Works Department and any other Town department involved in
3/27/2003 6
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
the development review process. The representatives shall be available at all reasonable times to
discuss and review the performance of the parties to this Agreement. The initial representatives
of the Parties are:
Town Manager:
Developer: Dennis St. John
12. Development Review and Approval.
12.1. Plans and Permits.
12.1.1. Town's Duties. The Town shall, consistent with its adopted
policies, provide to Developer fast tracking, review and, if appropriate, approval of all plans,
permits and other applications, including all construction and building approvals (collectively,
the "Development Approval or Approvals"). For the purposes of this Agreement, "fast
tracking" shall mean that upon submittal to Town staff, all Development Approvals submitted
pursuant to this Agreement shall receive high priority and shall be reviewed and processed
immediately until such Development Approval review and processing is finalized in order to
ensure priority treatment for the Project and, if appropriate, Development Approval, in a time
period that may be less than but in no event shall exceed the time period established by the
OVZCR. The Town shall dedicate an on-site inspector to assist with fast tracking. All costs
associated with fast tracking, including without limitation the dedication of an on-site inspector,
shall be borne by Developer.
12.1.2. Developer's Duties. In order to facilitate the fast tracking(as
defined herein) of Development Approval or Approvals by the Town, Developer shall submit
thorough and complete plans, permit applications and other applications, including all
construction and building permit applications, to the satisfaction of the Town.
12.2. Prior Approvals; Standards. Except as otherwise provided in this
Agreement, the Town shall accept all development submittals previously approved or allowed by
g
the County before the Annexation Effective Date and currently in effect. The Town shall accept
such approved or allowed development submittals as if approved by the Town.
12.3. Development Criteria. The Town and Developer shall comply with the
following development procedures and standards:
12.3.1. Development Standards. The Town shall apply the development
standards of the Pima County Zoning Code in effect as of October 2002, and the 2000
International Building Codes as adopted by the Town for the development of this Property as
depicted on the Plan. The Town shall interpret the Pima County development standards
consistent with current Pima County interpretation. Developer may appeal Town staff's
interpretation of the Pima County development standards to the Town Manager.
12.3.2. Convenience Uses. Notwithstanding the provisions of the
OVZCR, the Town shall permit development of convenience uses on the Property consistent
3/27/2003 7
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
with the requirements imposed on such uses under County Zoning (as defined herein).
Otherwise, the terms of the OVZCR shall apply If certain convenience uses are not permitted
under County Zoning but are permitted under the OVZCR, the OVZCR shall govern the
development of such convenience uses subject to the Town's "fast tracking"policies. The Town
shall process any application for convenience uses on the Property in strict compliance with
OVZCR Section 3-201 et seq. The Mayor and Town Council intend that the Town's Planning
Commission shall complete the required public hearing with no more than one, thirty-five-day
continuance, after which the Planning Commission shall forward the application to the Mayor
and Town Council for action.
12.3.3. Grading and Improvement Plans. Developer's grading and
improvement plans may be submitted, reviewed and processed concurrently with Developer's
development plans for any development area at any time after completion of the Town's first
development plan review for such development plan. Developer shall assume the risk of any
such concurrent submittals.
12.3.4. Master Plan. Developer's Master Plan (as defined herein) may be
drawn to a minimum scale of one inch equals one hundred feet (1" = 100') on twenty-four by
thirty-six inch sheets and Developer's development plans (as defined by the OVZCR) may be
drawn to a minimum scale of one inch equals forty feet (1" = 40') on twenty-four by thirty-six
inch sheets. The Town's approval of Developer's Master Plan, development plans and
associated improvement plans shall be effective for ten (10) years after the date of Town
approval.
12.3.5. Block Plat. Developer may submit a final block plat to the Town
and the Town shall process the final block plat concurrently with Developer's development plan
for the first development area of the Project. Developer shall assume the risk of any such
concurrent submittals.
13. Development Impact Fees. Any future development impact fees for development on
the Property will be waived for a period of five (5) years from the Annexation Effective Date.
The Town may charge any increases in existing types or categories of fees (as contrasted with
the future imposition of development fees enacted pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-463.05) applicable to
the Property provided any such increase is equally applicable to all areas of the Town, or is
applicable to Developer in amounts no greater than similarly situated developers or builders in
the Town. The Town shall not enforce any development fees adopted by the County which
would have been imposed on the development of the Property if it were not annexed by the
Town.
14. County Transportation and Flood Control Costs. The Town shall not require
payment or financial contributions of road improvement costs to Pima County relating to the
Property as a condition of Annexation, approval of permits or other Town authorizations.
15. Development Rights.
3/27/2003 8
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
15.1. Purpose. One of the purposes of this Agreement is to establish legally
protected rights for the land use of the Property upon Annexation that will permit the full
development of the Property in a manner consistent with the land use ordinances, resolutions,
development standards, rules, policies and documented zoning interpretations in effect on the
Effective Date and upon the effective date of a PAD (if adopted) and/or the Master Plan
(collectively the "Existing Land Use Regulations") in order to ensure reasonable certainty,
stability and fairness to Developer over the Term of this Agreement subject to the provisions of
this section.
15.2. Protected Development Rights. Developer shall be entitled to develop the
Property in substantial conformance with this Agreement, the Master Plan, the Original Town
Zoning and Town Conditions, and a PAD (if adopted) as permitted by the Existing Land Use
Regulations (the "Protected Development Rights"). Developer's Protected Development
Rights shall not be substantially impaired as a result of the Town's enforcement or application of
its land use regulations, including ordinances, resolutions, development standards, rules, policies
and zoning interpretations adopted or approved after the Effective Date (except for a PAD as
otherwise provided herein) (the "Future Land Use Regulations"). Protected Development
Rights shall include, but not be limited to, the land use categories, setbacks, heights, building
footprints, parking and access shown on the Plan and the Master and as the Plan or the Master
Plan may be amended by a PAD or by mutual agreement of the Parties. Protected Development
Rights shall not include land uses, structures or other developments that are not shown on the
Plan or the Master Plan or as the Plan or the Master Plan may be amended by a PAD.
15.3. Application of Future Land Use Regulations. Developer shall be subject
to the Future Land Use Regulations governing the Property as provided below:
15.3.1. Supervening Authority. Future Land Use Regulations that are
enacted as necessary to comply with mandatory requirements imposed on the Town by county,
state or federal laws and regulations, court decisions, and other similar external authorities with
the power to preempt the regulations put in place by the Town, shall be applicable to the
Property.
15.3.2. Threat to Public Health and Safety. Future Land Use Regulations
that are applied after notice, public hearing and an opportunity for comment, are reasonably
necessary to alleviate a legitimate threat to public health and safety, and are equally applicable to
all comparable development and applicable town-wide.
15.3.3. Administrative Fee Increases. Future Land Use Regulations that
are increases in existing types or categories of fees (as contrasted with the future imposition of
development fees enacted pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-463.05) that are applicable to the Property on
the Effective Date, provided any such increase is equally applicable to all areas of the Town, or
is applicable to Developer in amounts comparable to similarly situated development.
15.3.4. Expiration of the Plan. Pursuant to the statutory authority granted
by A.R.S. §9-500.05, this Agreement shall supercede any shorter expiration periods established
by the OVZCR, and the Plan shall not expire during the term of this Agreement with respect to
3/27/2003 9
B.P.Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
the Protected Development Rights granted by this Agreement. Any change in the Plan (except as
otherwise provided herein) that is not a Protected Development Right shall be subject to all
applicable provisions of the OVZCR.
16. General Provisions.
16.1. Headings and Recitals. The descriptive headings of the sections of this
Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not control or affect the meaning or
construction of any of the provisions hereof.
16.2. Exhibits. Any exhibit attached to this Agreement shall be deemed to have
been incorporated in this Agreement by this reference with the same force and effect as if it were
fully set forth in the body of the Agreement.
16.3. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the attached exhibits constitute
the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter of the Agreement. All
prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations and understandings of the parties, oral or
written, are superseded and merged in this Agreement.
16.4. Further Acts. Each of the parties to this Agreement shall promptly and
expeditiously execute and deliver all of such documents and perform all of such acts as
reasonably necessary, from time to time, to carry out the matters contemplated by this
Agreement.
16.5. Recordation. The Parties agree to cause an original counterpart of this
Agreement to be recorded in the real estate records of the office of the Recorder of Pima County,
Arizona, within ten(10) days of the full and complete execution and delivery of this Agreement.
16.6. Amendments. No change or addition is to be made to this Agreement
except by a written amendment executed by the Town and Developer. Notwithstanding anything
to the contrary in this Agreement, the Town Manager and Developer's designated representative
(as identified in Section 11 of this Agreement) are authorized to amend the specific deadlines
contained in this Agreement upon the mutual consent of the Town Manager and Developer's
designated representative. Within ten (10) days after any amendment to this Agreement, such
amendment shall be recorded in the official records of Pima County, Arizona.
16.7. Governing Law; Cancellation Pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-511. This
Agreement is entered into in Arizona and shall be construed and interpreted under the laws of
Arizona. In particular, this Agreement is subject to the provisions of A.R.S. § 38-511. Under
A.R.S. § 38-511, as amended, the Town may cancel any contract it is a party to within three (3)
years after its execution without penalty or further obligation if any person significantly involved
in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting, or creating the contract on behalf of the Town is, at
any time while the contract or any extension thereof is in effect, an employee or agent of any
other party to the contract in any capacity or a consultant to any other party to the contract with
respect to the subject nature of the contract. In the event the Town elects to exercise its rights
3/27/2003 10
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
under A.R.S. § 38-511, as amended, the Town agrees to immediately give notice thereof to
Developer.
16.8. Notices. All notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be given in
person or by first class pre-paid mail to the following persons or any other persons a party may
designate in writing:
To the Town: To Developer:
Town of Oro Valley B. P. Magee, L.L.C.
11000 North La Canada Drive 3915 East Broadway, 4th Floor
Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 Tucson, Arizona 85711
Attention: Town Manager Attention: Dennis St. John
Copies to: Copies to:
Town Attorney Frank S. Bangs, Jr. Esq.
One South Church, Suite 700
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
16.9. Litigation. Should litigation be necessary to enforce any term or provision
of this Agreement, or to collect any damages claimed or portion of the amount payable under this
Agreement, then all litigation and collection expenses, witness fees, court costs and attorney's
fees shall be paid to the prevailing party as provided by A.R.S. § 12-341.01. Nothing herein
shall preclude non-binding arbitration if the parties so elect in the event of a dispute hereunder.
16.10. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and
be binding upon the successors and assigns of each of the parties to this Agreement pursuant to
A.R.S. § 9-500.05(D). No assignment, however, shall relieve either party of its obligations
hereunder, except that an assignment by Developer in connection with the transfer of title to the
Property shall relieve Developer of its obligations hereunder provided such transferee agrees to
be fully bound by the provisions hereof. Any assignment by Developer shall be subject to the
approval of the Town.
16.11. Force Majeure. Notwithstanding any other term, condition or provision
hereof to the contrary, in the event any party hereto is precluded from satisfying or fulfilling any
duty or obligation imposed upon such party by the terms hereof due to labor strikes, material
shortages, war, civil disturbances, weather conditions, natural disasters, acts of God, or other
events beyond the control of such party, the time period provided herein for the performance by
such party of such duty or obligation shall be extended for period equal to the delay occasioned
by such events.
16.12. Severability. If any term, provision, covenant, or condition of this
Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the
3/27/2003 11
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the
overall intent of the parties is not vitiated by such severability.
16.13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute
one and the same instrument. The signature pages from one or more counterparts may be
removed from such counterparts and such signature pages all attached to a single instrument so
that the signatures of all parties may be physically attached to a single document.
16.14. Time Is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of each
and every obligation by the Town and Developer as provided for herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused to be executed, the day and
year herein written.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY,an Arizona
Municipal Corporation
By:
Paul H. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Kathryn E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk
Dated:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Town Attorney
Dated:
3/27/2003 12
B.P.Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
DEVELOPER
B.P.MAGEE,L.L.C.,an Arizona limited liability company
By:
Its: Manager
By:
Its:
Dated:
STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
County of Pima )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2003, by , of B. P. Magee, L.L.C., an
Arizona limited liability company, on behalf of the company in his capacity as
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
Fidelity National Title Agency, Inc., an Arizona
corporation, as Trustee under Trust No. 10-822, as
Trustee only and not in its general corporate capacity
By:
Its:
Dated:
3/27/2003 13
B.P.Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
•
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
County of Pima )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2003, by , of Fidelity National Title Agency,
Inc., an Arizona corporation, as Trustee under Trust No. 10-822, as Trustee only and not in its
general corporate capacity, on behalf of the company in his capacity as
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
Tucson Oro Entrada Partnership, a California limited
partnership
By:
Name:
Title:
Dated:
STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
County of Pima )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2003, by , of Tucson Oro Entrada Partnership, a
California limited partnership, on behalf of the company in his capacity as
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
3/27/2003 14
B.P.Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
EXHIBITS
Exhibit A Legal Description and Depiction of the Property
Exhibit B Concept Plan
Exhibit C Town Conditions
Exhibit D Architectural Elevations
Exhibit E Sign Criteria
3/27/2003
B.P. Magee Draft PADA
135856.2
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description and Depiction of Property
(Entrada Shopping Center Legal Description)
CASE NO. 431141
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The land referred to herein is situated in the County of Pima, State of Arizona.
Parcel 1:
All that part of the Northwest quarter of Section 36, Township 12 South, Range 13 East,
of the Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian,Pima County, Arizona, more particularly
described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Section 36;
Thence South 0°00'47" West, along the West line of said Section 36, a distance of 30.00
feet to a point on the South right-of-way of Magee Road;
Thence Along the South right-of-way of Magee Road as established by Deeds, recorded
in Book 546, at Pages 152 through 156, South 86°16'11" East, a distance of 271.23 feet to
ap oint, said point being the Northwest corner of a triangular parcel conveyed to Pima
County and recorded in Docket 6083,Page 1057;
Thence South 0°00'47" West, a distance of 27.31 feet to a point, said point being the
Northwest corner of ENTRADA DE ORO SHOPPING CENTER, also being the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence North 89°59'29" East, along the South right-of-way of Magee Road, a distance of
770.95 feet to a point on the Westerly right-of-way of Oracle Road(U.S. Highway 80,
89);
Thence South 10°16'10" West, along the Westerly right-of-way of Oracle Road (U.S.
Highway 80, 89), a distance of 811.01 feet to the Southeast corner of ENTRADA DE
ORO SHOPPING CENTER;
Thence South 89°59'29" West, a distance of 626.50 feet to the Southwest corner of
ENTRADA DE ORO SHOPPING CENTER;
Thence North 0°00'47" East, a distance of 798.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
C:\Documents and Settings\jandrews\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\SavelLegalDesc.doc
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that certain parcel conveyed to VALLEY DISTRIBUTING
COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, recorded in Docket 6113, Page 1084, described as
follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of ENTRADA DE ORO SHOPPING CENTER;
Thence South 0°00'47" West, a distance of 752.97 feet;
Thence North 89°59'54" East, a distance of 337.83 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
Thence North 89°59'54" East, a distance of 128.00 feet;
Thence North 0°00'06" West, a distance of 112.00 feet;
Thence South 89°59'54" West, a distance of 128.00 feet;
Thence South 0°00'06" East, a distance of 112.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
FURTHER EXCEPTING that certain parcel located in the Northeast corner of the
ENTRADA DE ORO SHOPPING CENTER SITE, more particularly described as
follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of ENTRADA DE ORO SHOPPING CENTER;
Thence North 89°59'29" East, along the South right-of-way of Magee Road, a distance of
770.95 feet, to a point on the Westerly right-of-way of Oracle Road (U.S. Highway 80,
89), said point being the Northeast corner of the Western Savings and Loan Association
site, and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence South 10°16'10" West, along the Westerly right of way of Oracle Road (U.S.
Highway 80, 89), a distance of 263.33 feet;
Thence South 89°59'29" West, a distance of 155.08 feet;
Thence North 10°16'10" East, a distance of 160.42 feet;
Thence South 79°43'50" East, a distance of 5.00 feet;
Thence North 10°16'10" East, a distance of 10.00 feet;
Thence North 79°43'50" West, a distance of 5.00 feet;
Thence North 10°16'10" East, a distance of 67.00 feet;
C:\Documents and Settings\jandrews\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\SavelLegalDesc.doc
Thence South 79°43'50" East, a distance of 5.00 feet;
Thence North 10°16'10" East, distance of 26.81 feet to a point on the South right of way
Magee Road;
Thence North 89°59'29" East, along the South right of way of Magee Road, a distance of
150.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL 1 ABOVE ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Parcel 1:
All that part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 12 South, Range 13 East,
Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pima County, Arizona, more particularly
described as follows:
COMMENCING at the Northwest corner of Section 36;
THENCE South 00 degrees 00 minutes 47 seconds West along the West line of Section
36, a distance of 30.00 feet to the South right of way of Magee Road;
THENCE South 86 degrees 16 minutes 11 seconds East, along said right of way as
established by Deeds recorded in Docket 546, at pages 152 through 156, records of Pima
County, Arizona, a distance of 271.23 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE South 00 degrees 00 minutes 47 seconds West, parallel with and distant 270.66
feet from the West line of Section 36, a distance of 557.31 feet;
THENCE North 89 degrees 59 minutes 29 seconds East, parallel with and distant 605.00
feet from the North line of Section 36, a distance of 675.00 feet to the West right of way
of Oracle Road (U.S. Highway 80, 89);
THENCE North 10 degrees 16 minutes 10 seconds East, along said West right of way, a
distance of 515.48 feet to the South right of way of Magee Road;
THENCE North 86 degrees 16 minutes 11 seconds West, along said South right of way, a
distance of 768.40 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
TOGETHER WITH that property described in Resolution and Order No. 2259
Abandoning a Portion of Magee Road, recorded in Docket 6065 at page 1054.
EXCEPT that portion conveyed to Pima County, Arizona by Deed recorded in Docket
6083 at page 1057;
C:\Documents and Settings\jandrews\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\SavelLegalDesc.doc
AND FURTHER EXCEPT all that portion conveyed to Caliber Bank by Deed recorded
in Docket 9714 at page 2225.
Parcel 2:
All that part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 12 South, Range 13 East,
Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Pima County, Arizona, more particularly
described as follows:
COMMENCING at the Northwest corner of Section 36;
THENCE South 00 degrees 00 minutes 47 seconds West along the West line of Section
36, a distance of 30.00 feet to the South right of way of Magee Road;
THENCE South 86 degrees 16 minutes 11 seconds East, along said right of way as
established by Deeds recorded in Docket 546 at pages 152 through 156, records of Pima
County, Arizona, a distance of 271.23 feet;
THENCE South 00 degrees 00 minutes 47 seconds West, parallel with and distant 270.66
feet from the West line of Section 36, a distance of 557.31 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE North 89 degrees 59 minutes 29 seconds East, parallel with and distant 605.00
feet from the North line of Section 36, a distance of 675.00 feet to the West right of way
of Oracle Road (U.S. Highway 80, 89);
THENCE South 10 degrees 16 minutes 10 seconds West, along said West right of way, a
distance of 272.37 feet;
THENCE South 89 degrees 59 minutes 29 seconds West, a distance of 626.50 feet;
THENCE North 00 degrees 00 minutes 47 seconds East, a distance of 268.00 feet to the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT all that portion conveyed to Gilbert Goldstein and Alan A. Armour by Deed
recorded in Docket 7109 at page 657.
C:\Documents and Settings\jandrews\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\SavelLegalDesc.doc
(Watson Property Legal Description)
Watson 30-acre Parcel Legal Description:
Lots 1 through 11 and Common Area A of ORACLE
VILLAGE a subdivision of Pima County, Arizona,
according to the map or plat thereof of record in the office
of the County Recorder of Pima County, Arizona, in Book
49 of Maps and Plats at page 44 thereof.
EXHIBIT "B"
Concept Plan
•
w
I
s
;,'. 1 _r__L_ri.L 5 1
i(;) i....,..
,,,. ...,
L -F1 r--) inr_____
p
C7 I \ N Gn
A 0• r -
--'.' 1 , 10 II: r-- i
-D 2 , 6 z
VI T' 0 i / • F'') _x,
... co !!!g i 1$ F1 r"-----,.......4,..\ .,.._(-) .
. i 3 . o al
.. 1 f N t} sumo x CAVEk
s
M g -� � '" minim,
. ,g, ill . ,L = _ �Illllll 1�
• il ig$
^ P i >
\
L-ill-i co
. 4 ! 1 g
' E , I 111111111 III \ x I ��
f ,o 11111111111111 ` 1
Illllllllllli `\`
-- -/i111111__1_IIJ� ,d r
rn
3 rl .,-„,
.,i3 a r D �m�� ifillit
� .; = 3333 \r 111111111iiia.
O 7C 1 p
N CfufT�lfuTTD1TTT -ANWai N74.______
J.k 1' > .-..ipl1111111111111i
In
vN I 't x \ 1
r r, r C;;C;;:tql •,\\r 1�11 1 , \ I*1
.— lE)
1,,Illi,„„I111,„ \ 1
1 i . , X111111111111111111
.� > .' , 111111111T111111111\ i , C3
=
'hi llljljllu tt 1
d
piiiiiii lait \ r
o t 1 �; 00
�' , 1llll-� 1h411�11
w.bitit_9§I P,g g -4 4-1-eAiiii
r M r ` 4 -lMA�
..__.)12j
.46----1,,\
I` lit l•lIMI
;iiis ."':1 \''. kirMillill-
1 i /
.. -
(44:
lllllllllll 1 \ 1
ill l V/ h ii Mil C3 V-
,
Q 1; Rfffiffl 4:11
&i g fl mil ,r y �+
T A
Q i F'i
/
i/
l 1
Iri r c\
,!• I
R.
r i Q \ 1
. fl 1 1
L :
Q
_(..,--F i
MAGEE RD.
-7 r
PRELIMINARY,NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
''s o= CONCEPT PLAN A
0
�= ORACLE CROSSINGS SBB1� SAYLER-BROWN BOLDUC
17 1.1,, 5wCOFORACLE RD..NACU ROAD. Architects, L.L.C.
o' ORO VALLEY. ARIZONA
1010 Nab,At..n.0.*,loss n,Arts...157/1 7.1:5,20-e70-0755 roc 57D-120-0535 EA..:isA►aw.looe c.cern
. .
' '
I
EXHIBIT "C"
Town Conditions
TOWN CONDITIONS
1. The development of this property shall be in accordance with the
terms of the Pre-Annexation Development Agreement("PADA") between B. P.
Magee, L.L.C. and the Town of Oro Valley as recorded
2. The development of this property shall be in accordance with the
Concept Plan attached to the PADA and as may be approved by the Town's
Development Review Board and Town Council.
3. The development of this property shall be in accordance with the
applicable development standards of the Pima County Zoning Code ("PCZC")as of
October 2002. Where the PCZC is silent, the standards of the Town of Oro Valley as
may be applicable and consistent with the Concept Plan attached to the PADA apply.
4. Building heights shall not exceed thirty(30') feet per the Town of Oro
Valley Zoning Code Revised ("OVZCR"), C-2 Commercial District Regulations,
unless specifically stated by building and graphics in the PADA and the Concept
Plan.
5. The Town shall permit development of convenience uses on the
property consistent with the requirements imposed on such uses under the PCZC in
effect as of October 2002. If certain convenience uses are not permitted under the
PCZC in effect as of October 2002,but are permitted under the OVZCR, the OVZCR
shall govern the development of such convenience uses.
135945.2
EXHIBIT "D"
Architectural Elevations
0 I ...-
I I _
_ T J
_ f IIt MAIL-SLIME_. 1 :T oi r-
D ---"'
�"'
I rv>z
g
1 c p1\5
CO
m r,>
P ->
: 0 0 >
) C O O m
OZ ZII
m w m _
' 01m
C u
"' rm
r r r
m m
' m
N
C Cf cn
, 111 C
p ' JII O 0
o• b o 0 • tti
m mII
m m
r
s � 11:7",
!
z -D1 i .
Zi IIII Z 111
111 Z $
Ism
N
1
/NN S
.i). g gi
- !
p0
11' 111 1•
I M
o u p
0
ji;
�1 v
ao>
iz
1 .
zo
as=i
II ---,
>Z ill F
sZ
,,, r m n v
;Z > T
Z� r 4N
n i7 Q
won r-
T.
A2
i '
111
.— =• I.
I
O. '
•
8.
�_ a
p
S >
i ,
4
p 1,4
U
p O
p O
2 111
s
- ---- --.,
MATCHLINE A
II
MATCIIUNE B
'"-' CONCEPTUALELEVATIONS i)R CRR A.
SAYLER-BROWN BOLDUC
C) e a �
ORACLE CROSSINGS ,. ‘4, ►J L 1J L 1
P1 N2 swc Of ORACLE RD.&MAGEE ROAD. ! c ,9R Architects, L.L.C.
--a o"� ORO VA:LEY.ARIZONA 11 `t7 r
4 ' 1010 N.u.w..,Mor.Tucson.Mraw 5571:T.:5X-620-0255 Fo.520-620-a 1S EmN:obt....awd+.corr
EXHIBIT "E"
Sign Criteria
SIGN CRITERIA
The following are the critical criteria for Developer's signage for the Project.
Defined terms are those included in the Pre-Annexation Development Agreement between
the Town and Developer:
A. Freestanding Signs.
1. The Property shall have up to five freestanding signs, in addition to existing signs,
with four signs located along Oracle Road and a fifth sign located along Magee Road.
2. The main double-faced identification signs for the shopping center shall include a
header that shall contain the shopping center name (e.g., "Oracle Crossings") and shall also
include up to 6 tenants names/designations per sign. No one (1) tenant may be shown on more
than two (2) freestanding signs.
3. The freestanding signs shall be no more than fifty(50) square feet in size. Maximum
overall height shall not exceed ten (10) feet high when measured from the grade of the highway
immediately adjacent to the sign.
4. No sign setbacks will be required except as required for sight visibility triangles.
Developer shall be financially responsible for relocating signs in the event of road widening. A
non-conforming sign that is relocated due to road widening retains its non-conforming status.
B. Building Signs. Building signs shall provide identification for each tenant.
1. Buildings located in Parcels A through I (as designated on Developer's Concept Plan)
may have building signs on all building elevations. Other buildings may have building signs
only on frontage elevations. Tenant building signs are permitted only on the elevations of the
building occupied by that tenant.
2. Tenants occupying building space of 15,000 square feet or more within Blocks 1, 2
and 3 (as designated on Developer's Concept Plan), and located more than 200 feet from Oracle
Road may have building signs on a 2:1 ratio with a maximum sign area of 500 square feet.
3. Buildings located along the Oracle Road frontage may have building signs on a 1.5:1
ratio.
4. Tenants with 20 feet or less lineal frontage will be allowed a maximum of 30 square
feet of building sign area.
5. Building signs shall use:
a. Pan channel flush-mounted letter construction. Logos may be cabinet signs.
b. Internal neon light source illumination that is white and/or LED amber or white.
1
130056.2
s
c. A minimum 5-inch letter depth, not to exceed a maximum 8-inch letter depth.
d. Letter construction of aluminum with baked on enamel finish and 1"trim cap on
all plastic letter faces.
e. All building signs shall be flush-mounted for pan channel letters. If reverse
channel letters are used, they may not project more than 3 inches off the wall. If access behind
the letters does not exist, a raceway with a depth of up to 12 inches that matches the color of the
wall in which it is installed will be permitted.
f. Developer will establish a color palette and provide the color palette to the Town.
All changes to the color palette will be presented to the Planning and Zoning Administrator.
Minor changes may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Administrator. Major changes
shall be subject to the Town's usual sign review process.
6. Logos.
a. May be pan-channeled lettering, as provided herein, or cabinet signs.
b. May use the corporate colors as protected under federal law.
c. Sizes:
i) 10 square feet for buildings with up to 40 linear feet of building
frontage.
ii) 20 square feet for buildings with up to 100 linear feet of building
frontage.
iii) 30 square feet for buildings with over 100 linear feet of building
frontage.
C. Interior Directional Identification Signs.
1. These signs shall be placed only on buildings located on Parcels A through I (as
designated on Developer's Concept Plan).
4. Signs shall typically be a maximum of 10 square feet in size, although the size may
need to be adjusted based on the number required.
5. Signs may be used to direct traffic in and through the Project.
6. Signs may be mounted on the interior elevations of buildings and will typically be
used for pedestrian traffic.
7. Sign area shall not be included as part of the sign allowance applicable to building
signs.
8. Changes on the signs will not require additional permits.
2
130056.2
B. Other Signs.
1. Other signs permitted on the Property may include window signage, under-canopy
signs (if the development includes a canopy/pedestrian walkway), wall-mounted or freestanding
menu boards, awning signs, and simple directory identification signs (e.g., Exit, Enter, Do Not
Enter, ATM), subject to compliance with Town requirements.
3
130056.2
3
SPECIAL SESSION
Page 1 of 2
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 03/31/03
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: SCOTT NELSON, SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION 03- 29 REGARDING THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, TYROL ESCONDIDA,LLC,LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF MAGEE AND ORACLE ROADS, PARCEL 225-512-140
SUMMARY: Annexation Area B is set to expire on April 3, 2003. As a result, a number of property
owners have come forward to request that development agreements be approved before they sign the annexation
petition. The purposes of these development agreements vary,but they tend to create development entitlements or
p �
carry forward those from the County, and they may include tax programs for improvements (Community Facility
Districts). In all cases,they must comply with existing State statutes,particularly ARS 9-500.5 (development
agreements) and ARS 9-471 (annexations), and Town ordinances.
ARS ARS 9-500.5 is attached for your review. The Commission review of the development agreement related to
uses, conformance with the General Plan, and land use/development entitlements. The second citation,ARS 9-471,
gives further guidance. It states:
"A city or town annexing an area shall adopt zoning classifications which permit densities and uses no
greater than those permitted by the county immediately before annexation. Subsequent
changes in zoning of the annexed territory shall be made according to existing procedures
established by the city or town for the rezoning of land."
The referenced property was rezoned by the County on October 18, 1960 to Local Business Zone (CB-1). The
property is located on the southeast corner of Magee and Oracle Roads.
ANNEXATION AREA PARTICULARS:
Size 12.59 acres
Use/Terrain The site is built-out
Zoning Local Business Zone (CB-1)
General Plan The area is shown as Neighborhood Commercial/Office in the existing General Plan
Land Use Map and as Community/Regional Commercial in the proposed map. All
of the existing uses are in conformance with the General Plan
SUMMARY OF THE ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT:
The agreement is proposed by the applicant to protect the existing uses on the site. However, Section 10.1.3 states:
"any redevelopment shall be in accordance with all Codes and Ordinances of the Town
of Oro Valley in effect at the time of redevelopment."
SPECIAL SESSION Page 2 of 2
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: 03/31/03
If and when the owners of the site redevelop and upgrade the buildings and/or parking,they must bring the project
in conformance with Town Standards.
The PlanningZoning and Commission recommended that this item come forward to the Mayor and Town Council
with an unfavorable recommendation because the language in Section 8 of the Agreement was unsatisfactory.
FISCAL IMPACT: Area B $645,189
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the annexation development agreement as presented in
the attached resolution with changes to Section 8 as follows:
Public Infrastructure Funding. Developer and Town Staff, intend to present an Economic Development
Agreement for consideration bythe Mayor and Town Council within a reasonable time after the Annexation
g
Effective Date to memorialize the Town and Developer's intent to utilize certain site—specific sales tax
revenues for thep �u ose of brining the current landscaping, signage and public infrastructure associated with
the Property into compliance with applicable Town requirements and general standards.
The changes to the Agreement are reflected by additions in blue and deletions in red type.
.
SUGGESTED MOTION
1) I move to adopt Resolution No. (R) 03-29 pre-annexation development agreement with the Tyrol
Escondida, LLC (Mariash)Property
OR
2) I move to adopt Resolution No. (R) 03-29 preannexation development agreement with the Tyrol
Escondida LLC (Mariash)with the following
stipulations
ATTACHMENT(S):
1) Resolution No. 03-29 , Pre-Annexation Development Agreement for the Tyrol Escondida,LLC. Located on
the Southeast Corner of Magee and Oracle Roads
2) Fiscal Impact Report ( David Andrews)
3) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 25,2003
4) ARS 9-500.5
dide _...carr A - w A.
ott i lson Spec.i1Projects Coordinator
,f 1 A
..
. •
Chuck Sweet, To n Manager
RESOLUTION NO. (R) 03-29
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY,
ARIZONA, REGARDING A PREANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY AND TYROL ESCONDIDA, LLC.
WHEREAS, the Arizona Revised Statues (ARS) 9-500.5 describes procedures for development
agreements; and
WHEREAS, the Town is currently pursuing the annexation of the unincorporated property areas
known as Annexation Area"B", and
WHEREAS, the General Plan encourages the annexation of unincorporated areas surrounding the
Town to better serve thep ublic, facilitate infrastructure expansion, and improve operational efficiencies
of municipal services; and
WHEREAS, the proposed uses on the property are in conformance with the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed this agreement at a public hearing
and presented their recommendations to the Council:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Mayor and Town Council of the
Town of Oro Valley as follows:
SECTION 1. That the Pre-annexation Development Agreement between the Town of Oro Valley and
Tyrol Escondida, LLC, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference is hereby approved.
SECTION 2. Subsequent to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town,
the Town Council will adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may be necessary
to translate the County zoning to an equivalent Oro Valley zoning district.
SECTION 3. This Resolution will become immediately operative and in force thirty(30) days from the
date of its adoption in accordance with State law and the Oro Valley Town Code.
SECTION 4. This Resolution shall become null and void if the annexation process is not completed
within the time allowed. Any legal delay and/or challenge, however, will extend the effective date of
the Resolution the same number of days (or months) as the legal delay.
SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of nay court of competent jurisdiction, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by Mayor Ma or and Town Council, the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, this
31st day of March, 2003.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
Paul H. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Town Attorney
Blackline Document
Additions shown in blue text.
Deletions shown in red text.
PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this
"Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the Town of Oro Valley, a
municipal corporation (the "Town"), Tyrol Escondida, LLC, an Arizona limited liability
company; Mariash Escondida, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company; and Schroeder
Escondida, LLC, as Tenants-In-Common (hereinafter collectively referred to as
"Developer"), as of the day of March, 2003. Town and Developer are referred
to herein collectively as the "Parties".
RECITALS
Authority
A. A.R.S. § 9-500.05 authorizes the Town to enter into a development
agreement with a landowner or other person having an interest in real property located
within or without the Town boundaries to facilitate development of the property by
providing for, among other things,the conditions, terms,restrictions and requirements for
development and public infrastructure and the financing of public infrastructure.
The Property
B. The Developer, holds title to Parcel No. 1 and Parcel No. 2 property as
tenants-in-common which is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (collectively
the "Property").
C. The Property is presently located in unincorporated Pima County(the
"County") adjacent to the incorporated boundaries of the Town. The Property is known
as Plaza Escondida at 7846-7972 North Oracle Road, Pima County. Arizona.
D. The Developer is the owner of the Plaza Escondida, a retail shopping center
located at 7846-7972 North Oracle Road, Pima County, Arizona(the "Project"). The
Property was zoned CB-1 on October 18, 1960, by Pima County Ordinance No: 1960-52.
A copy of the Zoning Map and Site Plan and Subdivision Plat are attached hereto as
Exhibit B.
E. For the purposes of this Agreement, the Parties contemplate that the Property
which is developed as a retail shopping center as depicted on Exhibit B, may be in need
of future redevelopment consistent with the existing zoning as a retail shopping center. It
is the intention of the Developer that any future redevelopment would continue its use as
a retail shopping center, with the existing type uses which are allowed under the proposed
C-1 Commercial District Zoning which will be effective upon Annexation to the Town of
Oro Valley.
F. On March 20, 2002, the Town held a public hearing pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-
471(a) (3) to discuss a proposal to annex the Property as well as other property owned by
third parties other than Developer(the "Proposed Annexation District"), and directed
Town staff to begin to obtain signatures on blank annexation petitions as required by
A.R.S. § 9-471 to annex the property within the Proposed Annexation District into the
Town (the "Annexation"). The Town must complete the petition signature process by
April 3, 2003.
G. Annexation will benefit the Property by providing certain Town services.
This benefit will be offset by the Town sales tax on sales generated by the Property.
H. Annexation will provide to the Town and its residents additional revenue,
enhanced public infrastructure, all included within an integrated development to include
landscaping and parking, linkages and the new construction on the Property, and
satisfaction of the Town's 1%public art requirement.
I. The parties intend to address the potential of entering into an Economic
Development Agreement discussing the financial aspects of this Agreement.
Existing Zoning and Development of the Property
J. The zoning is CB-1 (Local Business) which allows retail shopping center
use. The Property was rezoned to CB-1 on October 18, 1960,by Ordinance No: 1960-52,
more particularly described on Exhibit C.
Town Zoning of the Property
K. The Town is required to adopt original zoning classifications ("Original
Town Zoning") to be applied to the Property, which shall become effective after the
effective date of the annexation. State law(A.R.S. § 9-471(L))provides that the Town
shall adopt Original Town Zoning classifications that permit densities and uses no greater
than those permitted by the County immediately before annexation.
L. The current County Comprehensive Plan designation for the Property is
CB-1 by Ordinance No: 1960-52 and the current Town General Plan and proposed Town
General Plan 2020 designation for the Property is Community Commercial.
M. Plaza Escondida is an existing retail shopping center and is substantially
fully developed, but may require extensive remodeling, in the future, which remodeling
Exhibits: 2
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
would be in accordance with the then existing commercial zoning of the Town of Oro
Valley.
N. Adoption of the Original Town Zoning with the Town Conditions, the
General Plan designation, a Master Plan and all Development Plans brought forward in
substantial conformance with the Master Plan for Plaza Escondida are subject to
procedures and public hearings required by state law and the Oro Valley Zoning Code
Revised (the "OVZCR"). Such approvals are discretionary legislative acts of the Town
Council to be exercised in the public interest. The parties therefore enter this Agreement
to establish a process that will provide the assurances required by the Developer for the
appropriate land use approvals in a manner consistent with the legal and legislative
obligations of the Town.
O. The Town and Developer wish to establish and identify terms related to the
annexation of the Property, the Original Town Zoning, the 2020 General Plan
designation, and the zoning for the Property, development of the Property needed to serve
the Proposed Annexation District and surrounding areas.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which are
incorporated here as the purpose and intent of the Parties in entering into this Agreement,
and in consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations contained in this
Agreement, the Parties agree as follows:
1. Accuracy of the Recitals. The Parties hereby acknowledge and confirm the
accuracy of the Recitals, which are incorporated herein by this reference.
2. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective upon adoption by Town
Ordinance No: and the execution of this Agreement by both Parties
as provided in law(the "Effective Date").
3. Annexation.
3.1. Annexation Adoption. Developer shall execute and deliver a petition
authorizing annexation of the Property to the Town on or before April 2, 2003.
Thereafter, the Town shall diligently undertake to perform all necessary acts and
procedures required by A.R.S. § 9-471 to adopt an ordinance annexing the
Property into the Town as part of the Proposed Annexation District by April 16,
2003. If for any reason the annexation cannot be finalized by April 16, 2003, this
Agreement shall be void and of no effect.
3.2. Costs and Expenses. All procedural and administrative costs and
expenses of the Town pertaining to the annexation shall be paid by the Town.
Exhibits: 3
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
Developer shall bear its own legal and consulting costs and expenses incurred in
connection with the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement.
3.3. Effective Date. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-471 (D), the annexation
ordinance will become effective after the expiration of thirty days from the
adoption of the annexation ordinance, or, if the annexation is the subject of a
referendum petition, upon completion of that process (the "Annexation Effective
Date").
4. Original Town Zoning. As it pertains to this Agreement only, Original
Town Zoning shall mean Town zoning as applied to the Property upon successful
Annexation of the Property in conformance with A.R.S. § 9-471 (L). Pursuant to state
law, the Town shall initiate and pursue the procedures for the adoption of the Original
Town Zoning in a manner so as to permit Town Council action on an ordinance adopting
the Original Town Zoning not later than six months from the effective date of annexation.
Nothing herein shall limit the Town's legislative discretion to determine the appropriate
Town Zoning in conformance with A.R.S. § 9-471 (L); provided, however, that the
Developer and the Town understand it is the express intention of the Developer that the
current uses of retail shopping center, with the current uses, shall be allowed to continue
under any proposed Town zoning so that none of Developer's current uses would become
non-conforming. It is anticipated that the Town zoning would be C-2 Commercial
District.
4.1. County Zoning. As it pertains to this Agreement only, Original
County Zoning shall mean the County Zoning as applied to the Property
immediately prior to successful Annexation by the Town.
5. Off-Site Improvements.
5.1. The Town agrees to improve Magee Road along the Northern
boundary of the subject Property, at Town expense.
5.2. A.D.O.T. Review and Approvals. The Town and Developer agree to
cooperate in obtaining any and all necessary reviews and approvals for the public
roadway improvements described in this Agreement as required by ADOT.
6. Architectural Design. The existing Plaza Escondida architectural design
shall continue and shall, in the event of extensive remodeling or reconstruction,
substantially conform to the Town's architectural design guidelines in effect as of the
Effective Date of remodeling or reconstruction and shall govern the architectural
development of the Project.
Exhibits: 4
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
7. Signage. The Town shall permit Developer to continue its existing signage
in conformance with the on and off-site signs currently existing; provided, however that
any future signage would have to comply with appropriate Town regulations.
8. Public Infrastructure Funding. Developer and Town Staff, intend to
present an Economic Development Agreement for consideration by the Mayor and Town
Council within a reasonable time after the Annexation Effective Date to memorialize the
Town and Developer's intent to utilize certain site-specific sales tax revenues for the
purpose of bringing the current landscaping, signage and public infrastructure associated
with the Property into compliance with applicable Town requirements and general
standards. Revenue Sharing. The Town and Developer intend to enter into a
reimbursement agreement which shall provide that Developer retain one-half(1/2) of the
City's sales taxes collected from the Project, for a period of ten (10) years.
9. Designated Representative. To further the commitment of the Parties to
cooperate in the implementation of this Agreement, the Town and Developer each shall
designate and appoint a representative to act as liaison between the Town and its various
departments and Developer. The Town Manager shall be dedicated to coordinate
development review and permitting by the Planning and Zoning Department, Fire
Services, the Water Department, the Building Department, the Public Works Department
and any other Town department involved in the development review process. The
representatives shall be available at all reasonable times to discuss and review the
performance of the Parties to this Agreement. The initial representatives of the Parties
are:
Town Manager: Town Manager
11,000 N. La Canada Dr.
Oro Valley, Arizona 85737
Developer: Tyrol Escondida, LLC; Mariash Escondida, LLC
And Schroeder Escondida, LLC
C/o Robert L. Mariash
8040 E. Morgan Trail, Suite 2
Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
10. Development Review and Approval.
10.1. Plans and Permits For Future Reconstruction and Redevelopment.
10.1.1 Town Duties in the Event of Future Development or
Redevelopment. The Town shall, consistent with its adopted policies,
process, review and, if appropriate, approve of all plans, permits and other
Exhibits: 5
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
applications, including all construction and building approvals
(collectively, the "Development Approval or Approvals").
10.1.2. Developer's Duties in the Event of Future Development or
Redevelopment. In order to facilitate processing of Development
Approval or Approvals by the Town, Developer shall submit thorough and
complete plans, permit applications and other applications, including all
construction and building permit applications (collectively, the
"Development Submittal or Submittals")to the satisfaction of the
Town.
10.1.3 Development Criteria. In the event Plaza Escondida is
redeveloped in whole or in part, any redevelopment shall be in accordance
with all Codes and Ordinances of the Town of Oro Valley in effect at the
time of redevelopment.
11. Development Rights.
11.1. Use Regulations. Developer shall be subject to the Future Land Use
Regulations adopted by the Town and as follows:
11.1.1. Supervening Authority. Future Land Use Regulations that
are enacted as necessary to comply with mandatory requirements imposed
on the Town by county, state or federal laws and regulations, court
decisions, and other similar external authorities with the power to preempt
the regulations put in place by the Town, shall be applicable to the
Property.
11.1.2. Threat to Public Health and Safety. Future Land Use
Regulations that are applied after notice, public hearing and an
opportunity for comment, are reasonably necessary to alleviate a
legitimate threat to public health and safety, and are equally applicable to
all comparable development and applicable town-wide.
11.1.3. Administrative Fee Increases. Future Land Use
Regulations that are increases in existing types or categories of fees (as
contrasted with the future imposition of development fees enacted
pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-463.05) that are applicable to the Property on the
Effective Date, provided any such increase is equally applicable to all
areas of the Town, or is applicable to Developer in amounts comparable to
similarly situated development.
11.1.4. Expiration of the Plan. Pursuant to the statutory authority
granted by A.R.S. § 9-500.05, this Agreement shall supercede any shorter
Exhibits: 6
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
expiration periods established by the OVZCR, and the Plan shall not
expire during the term of this Agreement with respect to the Protected
Development Rights granted by this Agreement. Any change in the Plan
(except as otherwise provided herein) that is not a Protected Development
Right shall be subject to all applicable provisions of the OVZCR.
12. General Provisions.
12.1 Headings and Recitals. The descriptive headings of the sections of
this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not control or affect
the meaning or construction of any of the provisions hereof.
12.2. Exhibits. Any exhibit attached to this Agreement shall be deemed
to have been incorporated in this Agreement by this reference with the same force
and effect as if it were fully set forth in the body of the Agreement.
12.3. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the attached exhibits
constitute the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter
of the Agreement. All prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations
and understandings of the parties, oral or written, are superseded and merged in
this Agreement.
12.4. Further Acts. Each of the parties to this Agreement shall promptly
and expeditiously execute and deliver all of such documents and performs all of
such acts as reasonably necessary, from time to time, to carry out the matters
contemplated by this Agreement.
12.5. Recordation. The Parties agree to cause an original counterpart of
this Agreement to be recorded in the real estate records of the Office of the
Recorder of Pima County, Arizona, within ten(10) days of the full and complete
execution and delivery of this Agreement.
12.6. Amendments. No change or addition is to be made to this
Agreement except by a written amendment executed by the Town and Developer.
Within ten(10) days after any amendment to this Agreement, such amendment
shall be recorded in the official records of Pima County, Arizona.
12.7. Governing Law; Cancellation Pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-511. This
Agreement is entered into in Arizona and shall be construed and interpreted under
the laws of the Arizona. In particular, this Agreement is subject to the provisions
of A.R.S. § 38-511. Under A.R.S. § 38-511, as amended, the Town may cancel
any contract it is a party to within three (3) years after its execution without
penalty or further obligation if any person significantly involved in initiating,
negotiating, securing, drafting, or creating the contract on behalf of the Town is,
Exhibits: 7
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
at any time while the contract or any extension thereof is in effect, an employee or
agent of any other party to the contract in any capacity or a consultant to any other
party to the contract with respect to the subject nature of the contract. In the event
the Town elects to exercise its rights under A.R.S. § 38-511, as amended, the
Town agrees to immediately give notice thereof to Developer.
12.8. Notices. All notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be
given in person or by first class prepaid mail to the following persons or any other
person a party may designate in writing:
To the Town: Town of Oro Valley
11000 North La Canada Drive
Oro Valley, Arizona 85737
ATTN: Town Manager
Copy to: Town Attorney
Town of Oro Valley
11000 North La Canada Drive
Oro Valley, Arizona 85737
To the Developer: Tyrol Escondida, LLC; Mariash Escondida, LLC
And Schroeder Escondida, LLC
C/o Robert L. Mariash
8040 E. Morgan Trail, Suite 2
Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
With Copy to: Richard V. Campana
Campana, Vieh & Loeb, PLC
4422 North Civic Center Plaza
Suite 101
Scottsdale, Arizona 85251-3523
12.9. Litigation. Should litigation be necessary to enforce any term or
provision of this Agreement, or to collect any damages claimed or portion of the
Exhibits: 8
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
amount payable under this Agreement, then all litigation and collection expenses,
witness fees, court costs and attorney's fees shall be paid to the prevailing party as
provided by A.R.S. § 12-341.01. Nothing herein shall preclude non-binding
arbitration if the parties so elect in the event of a dispute hereunder.
12.10. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit
of and be binding upon the successors and assigns of each of the parties to this
Agreement pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-500.05(D). No assignment, however, shall
relieve either party of its obligations hereunder, except that an assignment by
Developer in connection with the transfer of title to the Property shall relieve
Developer of its obligations hereunder provided such transferee agrees to be fully
bound by the provisions hereof.
12.11. Force Majeure. Notwithstanding any other term, condition or
provision hereof to the contrary, in the event any party hereto is precluded from
satisfying or fulfilling any duty or obligation imposed upon such party by the
terms hereof due to labor strikes, material shortages, war, civil disturbances,
weather conditions, natural disasters, acts of God, or other events beyond the
control of such party, the time period provided herein for the performance by such
party of such duty or obligation shall be extended for period equal to the delay
occasioned by such events.
12.12. Severability. If any term, provision, covenant, or condition of
this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or
unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full
force and effect, provided that the overall intend of the parties it not vitiated by
such severability.
12.13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together
shall constitute one and the same instrument. The signature pages from one or
more counterparts may be removed from such counterparts and such signature
pages all attached to a single instrument so that the signatures of all parties may
be physically attached to a single document.
12.14. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance
of each and every obligation by the Town and Developer as provided for herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused to be executed, the day
and year first herein written.
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
An Arizona Municipal Corporation
Exhibits: 9
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
By:
Paul H. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Kathryn E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk
Dated:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Town Attorney
Dated:
DEVELOPER:
SCHROEDER ESCONDIDA, LLC
An Arizona limited liability company
BY: SCHROEDER ESCONDIDA MANAGER,
INC.
An Arizona corporation
By:
HARRY L. SCHROEDER, Sr., President
MARIASH ESCONDIDA, LLC
An Arizona limited liability company
BY: MARIASH ESCONDIDA MANAGER,
INC.
An Arizona corporation
Exhibits: 10
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
.
.
By:
ROBERT L. MARIASH, President
TYROL ESCONDIDA, LLC
An Arizona limited liability company
BY: TYROL ESCONDIDA MANAGER, INC.
An Arizona corporation
By:
HARRY L. SCHROEDER, Sr., President
Exhibits: 11
A—Legal Description of Property
B—Zoning Map,Site Plan and Subdivision Plat
C—Existing County Zoning Map
STATE OF ARIZONA )
)ss.
County of Pima )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
March, 2003, by PAUL H. LOOMIS, Mayor of Town of Oro Valley, a municipal
corporation.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF ARIZONA )
)ss.
County of Maricopa )
The foregoing Pre-Annexation Development Agreement was acknowledged
before me this day of March, 2003, by HARRY L. SCHROEDER, Sr. as
President of SCHROEDER ESCONDIDA MANAGER, INC., an Arizona corporatioi
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF ARIZONA, )
)ss.
County of Maricopa )
This Pre-Annexation Development Agreement was acknowledged before me
day of March, 2003,by ROBERT L. MARIASH, President of MARIASH
ESCONDIDA MANAGER, INC., an Arizona corporation.
STATE OF ARIZONA, )
)ss.
County of Maricopa )
This Pre-Annexation Development Agreement was acknowledged before me
day of March, 2003, by HARRY L. SCHROEDER, Sr., as President of TYR
ESCONDIDA MANAGER, INC., an Arizona corporation.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
U3/14/2003 14:27 4807075011 CAMPANA VIEH LOEB PAGE 02
EXHIBIT "A"
•
PARCEL NO. 1:
Lot 1, of ESCONDIDO PLAZA, according to the plat of record in the office of the County
Recorder of Pima County, Arizona, recorded as Book 27 of Maps, Page 82.
PARCEL NO. 2:
Perpetual easement for ingress and egress and vehicular parking in Lot 5 pursuant to the rights
granted in the document entitled Easements dated June 2, 1.976 and recorded June 24, 1976 as
Docket 5298, Page 676 with the Pima County Recorder in common with others over the areas
set forth therein.
Cl i/14/z uj 14:21 480707501 1 CAMPANA V I EH LOEB PAGE 03
. 3/17 .2001 08:48 FAN 6029546168 l 00'1
•
(lop)VAstQpipli;'' •
14z pie
PIMA COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
201 N. Stone Avenue, 1."Floor
Tucson, AZ 85701-1207
CARMINE DEBON1S,JR. Phone.(520)740-6520
Director Fax:(520)798-1836
April 5,2001
GE Capital Rcal Estate .'.
C/OKurt Boenchcr
NorthMarq Capital, Inc.
5080 N.40th Street, Suite-455
Phoenix,AZ 85018-2158
RE: Escondido Plaza, 7846-7972 N. Oracle Road
•
. Dear Mr.Boettcher:
You have requested a zoning verification letter for the above referenced property.The Development
Services Department, is responsible for the enforcement of zoning ordinances and codes within Pima
County.
1_Thc property is properly zoned CB-1 (Local Business) which allows retail shopping center use.
The property was rezoned to CB-1 on October 18, 1960 by Ordinance NO. 1960-52.
2_There is an approved subdivision plat for"Escondido Plaza"(book 27,page 82)and a development
plan(book 1.page 35).Copies of these documents are included with this letter.If the property was
developed in accordance with the subdivision plat and the development plan,it can be assumed that
the development is in compliance with the Pima County zoning code,
I ' here is no record of any current or pending zoning violations against the property.
If you have any questions,please call me at 520-740-6973.
Sincerely,
Thomas D.Hudson, Senior Planner
EjjaM3171:li_
PECt I k!CD TINE MAY.17. 113:441 PRINT TINE MAY.1 t_ 1 I:amt
% V...III4ILDUJ 14:Z! quelitlibl:111 CAMPANA VIEH LOEB
04/09/01PAGE 04
MON 14:34 FAX 212 289 5288 C II
. 140003
,•,-.- .
. . .-,....
-- mmil,......... ....MINEW
•
AmENDmENT NO. 7 BY °ROMANCE MO, 1960-62
To f'IMA COUNTY ZONING MAP NO. )I6
• ,
PART of ri I/2 , NW1/4 SEC. 36 , 'Ms a rii3E
ADOPTED IO-18-60 1----J
t25;;2!!5;a
.1 400'
. . SCC.25 T$Z3.11113E —
7S
.14..40•ROADow4-sima
MAGEE IS i
. --7: . ::....:.•:,:_:-• wit •-...*:... --
me.s4 zoo' I 1• •••••::r•:- .:-:.i.:::.:.::. :•:.....:...:-...• 44
- :. • --f"--•••••.". ::K.i.•.•:.
1
•... .m... .• •.
... .• ............ .;.•
.-: ••••• • .
.• .. ....:::.:.-- -4.!- ........t. 4z
ti....:.....4
.1:.:-. :%:::, ----------
•
It 9 1 •
: -:V.;-::• .:...... .4 . I .•::(1..•.-:. 442
:4'.:,"4:.::!'..::...:::./.. 155 Z'-'.- ' ".------------
41 •-/P2-:::;•:-......:•::. • • ., • •- • • 3,
•.: .- .*:::;:.
Z ,.... :-.
to DUCHESS .- . - 341
-.. . .
at ••... ••• . ..... . • : - •- ,
I .., ••••••-..74:••••:•••••-:.• •.':---;•.:::•••••••••:• ...• •
t„ -:-::tx:.•:,.•.-:1-.-:-%-::-:•••.:..:•••:•i••-;. :•••• . 37
.i.:-.ie..••••. . .-.-.:: • , . . , .---..
gib
. . „ , • •
34
SR 0 2
*,
f..1
, se SS
k- 0 —,-------
32 34 . . •
..-----
. EXEc. SEC'Y CO. PLAN. 6 ZONING COMM.
CO9-5941
Evle to-PO-60
-........ .....-............--.---.......--..............--- ---.-.....--.....--..... .......... ..-......... .....--.................--..•...,.......--
' ..........—..-.... _ ... .----........--........ . ....- ...........--........._ - .......... -,......- - .
. .
...
•
.! 41
_, . ... .
RECEIVED TIME APR. 9. 2:33PM PRINT TIME APR. 9. 2:38PM
113/14 2U113 14:27 4807075011 CAMPANA VIEH LOEB PAGE 05
04/09/01 MON 14:34 FAX 212 269 5286 C II rit004
,
_ ........ � ... ---- � .� .••n�� 1�c�..��1�n1FIkC�tiQy Ot111t ��tsa5�GS.t�� •� �;�;�_
• . w Vic,..:.10 5IV)t`.4 r1ic‘r1:a•�t3VI _..1-�«....�.. •....dr..Nr. ..1•I.12: .
CCs>PiR�tl'1�:11 SGtrl..r.i 11.r•.��v 1C .�.�•Aw.• � ,.•..r...�..�.._•.r +sem.-•..�• •• �. r •.•' .•• • .•,•.••••• , +�, • ,•'
� .......-..��-..•.•.•.•. ..•..w«'.
. .•-�' ,•„ . •. ;*•:: r .. •.1•»�' ~»:••� ,r A,.a•••,�:.:?..'..4:.-'..'!!'••
•: it.. ,,
•,
-•
, •
...!..:-..
;::,,i.„.7•;....i..,,.il
r•w +k. f it t •1•7 ria.n.
(iw J '..r• „. 1.•,..1,.•1,.,,,l-•.•...�f•I..,,('.1�N.•:..,•' .,1'•,I:.:• ,•„,,,,,,7.Lrr....:....:.....2:...„..!,..:;_.,;:?
',•.•:—.`i ..I.e,,,
j•• • } . . ••,,1 i•� r.•,.."/:.x, !•ri•
il•'•_1J•1ii�•••:•./..ii,:•'.i'P1 ►,i•./:,1,.••••i.:•••�. ,i... I I. ..'1'
1 I
t.I.1.1
.1:.. II .i
'I' •• ,,:I.,..t.i..1.1:;
(----: -..,.......I , . ,.
i': ......: ' . : ? ., -
1. rie.Ii. ...!.....______Iiimi ..„.
„ ,__ It. _ iNim,...,:,,,,,,
„. . . ........
.....•..• ,..,
,...... , ..,ow .,...,„ ...:..:..
r;•."... ...— la, Lir Wili4 ti .s •
. --.. — , 'A ---'''''''..... ...., (C:11.4, lr 1 't
i
I/ •—•
E T _ 1 .
, _.„..
. .
5.--... 1 Ci 3111— , •:.• ..,
r •- . -g -*-- . •
f IT I iar .
• "i%.*----1
. ei !, -7j -.-.- , .
•
i• • ,_
. . :.
1 1. ---__J • ' a 1 t Et . ii •” i
•
1 - . ....,- li . •
lagg.V%-, c" _ ...,• i.;
q4 Q.71.211sit
J
Q P eK I QG$ i.4 t t`"'� ,t.i t
L:7:'•'• .• . .. rjI'
,,.,..,„,.6.m,.... 0..• %1L1 .• ii' . ` 1 1 1•r,...••:. a' 1 r.�ICiJI�e ir0riVJJIJ.4r'IMMMM .4, • 1.1�.
c[rE IVC(} T iyr App 0 7: ?3rM PRINT TIM APR. 9. 2: 38PM
1.41 L rJ u% 14:t r 4 ti tJ/n(D e 11 UAMPANA V I EH LOEB PAGE 06
• 04/09/01 MON 14:34 FAX 212 289 5286 C II 16005
.
A
_�r `_
-..„,_ _ :IS 113.1
, "'--'-40,__ N otio . - :w-,•7--)
14. i )0 ---.... ...0A_cLE .
— --_____RD 4
f
-----....____ /....____
• ) --
3 b� •et.... I I.
-rr a
C y h r r. r
elltti .•i ....•
1�
. eLiiiii t ) ... ---`- s.......... ,,,,,,. •
a 0 '-' -"L----- -QQ:\—) 1
...' "---711•,. .......• ....---....„. No*, ii f -
.. --- .: 1
1 S r
, i.
• i I
''
TZ � r
tr.
' '. - . ,\.:
1 , r A
l ' , •4
7 �''
w
fi
2 ;1/1 . r i 1
i I ', ., q ,,,
,, k •
�it 1
. • �1 ; • A i i
Ji' IIII144--li
It
' , -% 1 i ' • I
•
1' '- _ •100 =k
frV'i' 10 \it/. 1 ---:
1 I
Hi,: Iw7 * • .
KrojT .._. ......1,1- -...-.TIT.---7----i' ici' 712' m".
:::''..4: . ,
-4,4 4 1 .rf
. 4 il
...e., i'4,7R-74%-..,.. L1434. . !
NI z I) i 44-11 g -- - J:-- 4 "7--...._----,-___: _
m 2,A #211,{r-,,t. 1 01 • -- • : 4,..,„--,.. .t.7--...-
it --7----t--- e' . a
L m co j1att I •I' •••..
- - •.. .7,1
Y
11.
l: , \ 'V Yy •
or ; •
i►
- ::';4T:;;:iz.I 10i iajill? ; Ili Ili i 1! 411' C:i 51;11 1; ..t•f:,•14..,•!. 0 is 1 . 141:•,i4.',..., !;..,...4, ,.
• A 1 ; u t ; ' Y till i 0
- I 1 ,:
. '. ; =
: 'i. A :::, i A 11 . 1,1t511 ,41 oh . .,.. . t 7.„-_--:.,T.,....,. .: 1 i
:, •: !.t; " A als 1 1,;1 4:1 4 ,___1. .
.: _ •_ •.... ,I, t_ . . ... . A
1.:,,,,z.
t ni; ti ii 1.. !it . ,..
. . 2,, 4 ' . i 440-4• ''
' t 4 C • '.6,_ . t :t.rj .t. I 4 N ; % 411, it ill 1 . , 1 . ..
, ., : . p . _ fill! .
z I. t 1 . 'V
t I # . . ,:t ..,... 1 a: i: g tsT,.. -, 1 rtif! itle tit - a 1%1 to • 1 , I f, , ,p -
s''�:::.j • z et — # 1J 1 l l' h 1 tk tit ,,,�! It--. •
i� t t,- �, fit.
,ti i
, t 1 .tv .. _ .. ''':... 4
: ,r-r., co.s iii -, i t. -',. r 1..! tik.4 't :Li 4. •""-*
; Eu:;- 3'4 L9 t 'Iv • .., 4 ). :1..-..4;,.. . -i ta„...1:',
i 11' 21t CO i i :,..'11.11 1.r.f,1 V /111. .‘ r tt : ., ..i. .. i.
- ,.j-•- •� : - '�Ii - 0. R ;'' � .•• tib s �`�
is; rhe l k* 2. 4 ', •fir
ri i "1.:.t. ..c,- Nt i tht
' irE: '...2 -,;;`-3;-ol • ;1- f- ' ' ''/ IA ,--V.41 1 :.: ;,- 1''..0 •j Fi:01
14 se 1
- 1 Ig
-to
..
• 1 ,„ 0 1 •,, gr. 1�� .1 . 9 IA 1 gq k : ..has
1,41.-P 'A C ::� !: Qhs- k� r�s` • 0 iriizhir E
.tAk_i 1 lit i, g •14 c .*. t Is i ill,-.$ . q. 1. ?. 1,1 .i - -k-f7:1 &zci! ..% .,
l'l 0,4 04 ; - tigt ti..3. . . a .. .h.c,443. i'P ...' . •t.,1 1 314C i 111611417 1----=`-..„_
v t w si rt .11 it 1 f i i t% -` 1 i ,, iir it 'rk • 1 ;I
.,, , i c 4 I ij N.' v -.. -,i1 k ' 4: !i# ' is •
:01; -i'ik 4 ,all - g ,... ! 6 111' ..
Y , c A, .:},: , ili i "I WI'E• 0 -...-7 .
. t E.- P'. -! ow o- A " - .
RECEIVED TIME APR. 9. 2' 33PM - PRINT TIME APR. 9_ 2: 38PM
k.A-imt oNo V I tr1 LULLS PAGE 07
04/09/01 MOV 14:35 FAX 212 269 5296 C II 14008
18.41.050
.
' eral. 18.43.050 Development staz�ards-!
A. Area: Nonresidential.,41,.450 development standards—General. �al.
1. The maximum area
of each RVC zone shall not 18,43.060 Development standards---
Residential
exceed twenty opograp Y u velo tzteat standards--
sideration of sbc`ects. t
2. This area shall be apportioned as evenly as con- 1 8.43.070 De p
h and other niquc Detached accessory buildings.
factors affecting individual sites will permit. 18,43.080 Lot deveiopmet t option.
P. Site coverage: All buildings within a site as
shown on the development plan shall not cover more 18443.010 Purpose.
than twenty five percent of the area of such site. Reser e4.
C. Yards:
1. No building shall be erected within one buadred 18.43.020 Perforruance standards.
fifty feet of the centerline of scenic routes aS dcsig- A. All Section 18.43.030E uses shall be conducted
nated on the Major Streets and Scenic Rowes Plan: wholly within a completely enclosed building unless
2. Bui1d ngs shall not be constructed within: othenvise specified and any use operating as./store,
a. Twenty-five feet of any district zoned TR,nor shop, or business stall be a retail establishment. All
b. Seventy-five feet of any residential district products produced on the premises shall be sold at
D. Building height limitations: retail on the premises.
1. Maximum height Thirty-four feet; B. Performance standards:
2. Maximum stories:Two. 1. The following performance standards shall
E. S cr ening: Refer to Section 18.73_100 (Lazid- apply to the uses of Section 18.43.0301:
...
-caping Standards). a. Noise or vibration:No noise or vibration shall
P g
Parking and loading requirements; Refer to Sec- be permitted which is discernible beyond the lot line
tion 18.75.050 (Off-Street Parking and Loading to the hwrnan sense of feeling for three minutes or
Standards). more duration in any one hour of the day between the
G. Signs: Refer to Section 18.79.050 (Sign Stan- hours of seven CUL and seven p.m..or of thirty sec-
dards).(Ord. 1996-58 §4(part). 1996;Ord. 1985-82 onds or more duration in any one hour during the
(part), 1985) _ hours of seven p.m..to seven a.aa.;
b. Smoke: No emission of smoke from any
18.41.060 Developintut standards--Detached source shall be permitted:
accessory buildings, c. Odors: No emission of odorous gases or ocher
Reserved. odorous matter shall be permitted in such quantities
as to be offensive in such a manner as to create a nui-
sance or hazard beyond the property Lines;
Chap ter 18.43 d_ Fly ash, dust, fumes, vapors, gases and other
forms of air pollution:No emission shall be permit-
Ca-1 LOCAL BUSINESS ZONE ted which can cause any damage to health,to animals
or vegetation,or other forms of property,which can
Sections: cause any excessive soiling; and
18.43.010 Piirpase. e. Liquids and solid waste: No wastes shall be
18.43.020 Performance standards. discharged in the streets,dra negeways or any ProR.
18.43.030 Permitted arcs. etty which is dangcrous to the public health and
18.43.040 Conditional uses. safety,and no waste shall be discharged in the public
•
0.county 7-98) 18-66RECEIVED TIME APR. 9. 2:33PM PRINT TIME APR. 9. 2: 38PM
UJf 14/LUUJ 14:L l 4bU t n!nUi l UAMHANA V1LH LOEB PAGE 08
04/09/01 MON 14:35 FAX 212 269 5286 C II 41007
18.4 .030
normalopera- 13. Bank: P.: 7.-
Lion
: �
sewage system,which endangers the •
g 14. �arbershop,
tion of the public sewage system. not 15. Beauty shop;
Certifications: zoning inspector shallservicingof motor
2. C� - t has pro: 16. Bicycle shop: No sales or
issue a, 't for any use until the applicant P motorcycles;P'� - scooters or rnoaorzy ,
vided the re ' ed number of plans showing the ccs .
� and 17. Billiard or poolball,
tificeteS of the department of transportationor rr.,a ezine store;
, g
flood control district, traffic engineer, and health 18. B ook,newspapers,alarm service;
certifyingthat said use complies 19. Burglar
department director or lunchroom under their jurisdiction, 20. Cafe
with all laws and regulations $, Provided no dancing is allowed and no alto--
the zoninginspector has determined that the use
andholic beverages sold except beer and�ritie,
wiCb�this chapter, (Ord. 1989-96§ 1 (part),co�pi�cs Pb. The "patio" architectural design concept is
1985-82(part), 1985) p
l.9 S9,Ord. allowed;
. 21, Catering service;
18.43. 30 Permitted uses-
use aspermitted in Section 18.31.010(IR 22.
Church;
A. Any 23. Cigar store;
Transitional Zone).
B. The following uses, as restricted in Section �4_ Cleaning,dyeing,ting,laundry collection agency;
?...5, Confectionery store;
18.43.024A-
fix- 26. Custom dressmaking, millinery, hemstitching�, Air conditioning, heating, and ventilating
sv ll within enclosed build- or pleating;
in of pplies: Retail, a27. Custom weaving or mending;
g: 28. Dealer in coins, steps or similar collector's
2, ,ppti9� store;
items;3. Appare store. 29. jk)ic atesS ail;
4. Art needlework or hand-weaving establishment;
or store: The "patio" architectural 30. Dental laboratory;
5. Art �
desi c oncept is allowed; 31. Department
artrncnt staco;
�
6. Art or drawing supply Storz; 32. Drugstore;or notions store:
mechanical repair In conjunction with 33. Dry gbh
7. Auto 34. Electrical appliance store;
service stations on state or federal highways only.
• provided there is no outside storage of autos or parts,
35. Feed store:No sales or storage obay
or upholster, 36. Fix-it shop,small appliances;
and no body or fender work, painting P
37. Florist sbop;
ing; (within or without a building); - 38. Frozen food locker;
8. Auto parking lot( �� -
o the visions of Section 18.75.030B 39. Fruit or vegetable store.,
Subject t �° � 40. Furniture store
(Off-Street Parking and Loading Sttndards) -
{ supplies;pro- 41. Garage:For public storage only;
9. Automobile accessories,parts and supe ' - •d�� repairing
isinstallation,repair,rebuilding, 42. Gasoline service station (ince p
vided,that there no tnuall P
outside de storage of parts on the�, only);subject to:
modification, oraa. The � visions of Section 18.07.030A (Gert
. P'r0
roues:
• d oil chiopera- er l Regulations d Exceptions), .
10. Av►toinob�le lubrication � �
don; b. No gasoline or other flzrnraablcs be stored
11, Automobile tires, batteries and accessories above ground level, except in legally accepted �-
. tamers of fifty-five gallons or less and no more than
�nsxalla�on in coak umctioa with a department store;
12. Bakery;
three such containers. and
18-S7 (Pi=Cosijr,t0-51)
PRINT TIME APR. 9. 2: 38PM
PECE f VFT IMS APR. 9. �: 31P
v,i i-,r L U U J 14.4f 4 D CJ(t1(30111 LAMHANA V 1 LH LOB PAC-,E 09
04/09/01 MON 14:36 FAX 212 269 5286 C II IAD 008
.
18.43.030
70. Plumbingfixtures and su���: Retail, all
c, dispensing of g�ohnc or any flammables .
The P� ,gwithin enclosed building;
into a fuel tank or into a legally accepted container,
using manually
controlled nozzles only, shall be 7L Posiel station;
a competent attenda�ot at all 72. Pressing cstablishment;
umdtr the supervision of p - = include massageestab-
times;
73. Reducing salon:Not to
43. Gift.
curio,or noYelty shop: iishmeuts;
44, Grocery store;
74. Refreshment stand;
.
45. Hardware store;
75_ Religious rescne mission or temporary revival;
•46. Hotel;
76. Safe deposit
,
47, House furnishing store; 77. School:Barber or beauty culture:
48. Ice cream store: The
"patio" architectural 78, School:Business;
design concept is allowed; 79. School:Dancing;
station:Forpackaged sales only; 80. School:Dramatic;
49. Ice SU. Interior decorator, 81. School 1.12:ndicraft,painting or sculpture;
51. Jewelryand watch repair; 82. School:Music;
hi and chart. As
Jews private, park al
52. try store; 83. School,
laundryandcleaning units, required by state smite, A .S.I § I5-1.89.01, an .
53. Laundromat, dry
provided the sameoccupy py
u no more than three thou-- application for a charter school shall receive a final
e of gross floor area; determination from the county within 90 days of the
sand square feet 54, Leather goods store; beginning of the process.
Library:Rental orpublic; 84, Self-service car warh; provided, that neither
55. L' �' norre nitbe allowed on
56. Liquor stoke:Forpackaged sales only, i iclud steam cleaning enginep shall
mg wine tasting; the premises;
85. Shoe repair shop;
57. Locksmith;
58. Meat,fish or dressed poultry market,provided 86. Shoe store; .
'vkept on premises; 87. Sidewalk sales associated with existing retail
DO live poultry are p 59. Mechanical and electronic garue.s arcade: In business, lasting no longer than three days, in any
,districts containing a minimum of fourcommercial thirty-day period;
acres and at least seven thousand eight hundred 88. Sporting goods,bunting untin and fishing equipment
square feet of net leasable area; store;
60. Medical laborat • 89. Station:Bus or stage;
61. Messenger office; 90. Stationery store;
62. Music,phonograph or radio store; 91. Tailor shop;
63. Office:Business,professional or semi-fifes' 92. Taxicab stand;
sional; 93. Taxidermist;
64. Orthopedic appliances (trusses, wheelchairs, 94. Theater:Except-drive-in or outdoor theater;
a'P�i
etc.); 95. Tire store: Including incidental repair of
� dpi
65. Pet shocks and brakes with no outdoor storage or s-
66_ Pet shop; play;
67. Photograph studio; 96. Tool or cutlery sharpening;
Toy Photographic supply store; 97. o j hobby shop;
69. Plant nursery: Ail landscapecontractor's sup-- , 98. Trailer rental:In conjunction with service ata-
. . � - highways ovided
p
lies, fertilizers and chemicals shall be stored dons on state or federal only, 1
indoors;
(l'inin Cocy 7-98) 18-68 �y
RLC[1 V[1J TIME APR. 9. 2: 33PM PRINT TIME APR. 9. 2:38PM
••..• . �,�"., r �,V V f U f J V l l l fAmrHNA V 1 LH LLLt3 PAGE 18
04/09/01 MON 14:36 FAA 212 269 5286 C II 10009
.
18.43.030
r."
'n' five, en ir�r� ► scientific research
isoutside storage of autos or parts, and to .F. •:Administrative, g g
there no � facility,
. or upholstering; and develop nelnt'design or experimentation
body or fender work.painting p
and such Dreatuacnt, processing, and fabrication as
99. Trust company; Ind
be necessary thereto;pxov��,that:
100..Upholstery shop and SUpplics; may
1. AU such operations be completely housed
101.Variety store; ,,,c for small�.t�►uo-�s, withinbuildings located on a site of not less than ten
102.Veterinary outpatient clrnt
a. No boarding g Allo wed• thousand square feet;
clinic treatment 2. All such buildings shall be set back not less than
b. Overnight confine/Dent for line abuttinga
annals; twenty-five feet from any property lin
permitted for a maximum of five -
•
a1 sales,paper hang�g: residential zone; ,
103. Wallpaper 3. A dust-proofed, of fstrcet puking area be pro--
installation
Water, telephone or telegraph distribution p• • ' or distribution st�a, vided for all vehicles incidental to said operation;
Installaaon or ciccmcal receiving• tion (within or withouta building): Subject to the 4, One additional parking space be
provided for
provisions of Section 18.07.040B (General Regular each three persons regularlyemployed on said �-
tions and Exceptions); mi ses,
conjunction with service 5. Buffering and screening provided in accordance
105. Wholesale of oil:In c4 �
to or federal hi hways only,provided with Chapter 18.73, Landscaping,
Buffering and
stations on sta g
there is
no outside storage of autos or per, and no Screening Standards;
b. Any activity conducted on said premises shall
body or fender work,plating or upholstering; k fumes, odors or
Other similar enterprise or business of the be free of dust, noxious smoke, _
1 Ob. �P
same class. which in the opinion of the Board of unusual vibrations or noise discernible beyond the
•
Supervisors, by
as evidenced resolution of record,is property line;
not more obnoxious or detrimental to the welfare of 7. The architecture of all structures shall be co s-
the particular community than the enterprises or patible with the surrounding area;and
8. All open areas of an improved lot shall be ma1n-
busu�cssts above enumerated. byland.sca ing with
Retail sale,rental or display of: mined in a dust-free condition p
C. P trees shrubs,suitable ground cover,undisturbed nai-
l. Clothing or accessories;
2. Household appliances; ural. growth, or by covering with material that will
.
3. Office equipment and business machines; provide an all-weather surface.
• limited to no more than G. Restaurant,including a restaurant liquor license:
Repair work permitted, but the cocktail loungeor bat
percent of gross floor arca of the busi- 1. Upon condition that
twenty-five
• ncss. has no separate outside entrance;
atient uses; 2. A dance floor with a maximum of two hundred
�_ Oxygen equipment for medreal out
• - supplies, includingvar- square feet is permitted for customer dancing only;
5. Painting equipment or suppl:e �
Dish: and
•
6. Secondhand goods. Personal,onal, furniture, books, 3. The applicant shall provide the zoning inspector
• with an approved Type I conditional use permit.
tnagaZtfles;no secondhand auto parts;� unit for tem-
8.
H. Trailer or manufactured or mobile
7. Venetian duritn the const�tuuctioo� of a
8.
Window shades. pantry office use:.Only. g .
* involving open permanent building not to exceed a period of twelve
D. Accessory building or use (not in g pe
storegt :When located on the sane building site- months.
E. Toilet
mobile home for care- I. The following uses, as restricted in Section
�let or manufactured or
taker In con junction with a permitted use in a rural 18.43.020E:
area.as determined by the zoning inspector. 1. Blueprinting;
18-69 (Pima Co ii y 7-98)
RECEIVED TIME APR. 9. 2: 33PM PRINT TIME APR. 9. 2:38PM
1'+:L r 4 0 n(t7(0 1311 CAMPANA V I EH LOEB PAGE 11
04/09/01 MON 14:37 FAX 212 269 5286 C II LJ 0.10
18.43.040
ten notice of the conditional use application and of
2. P�jO105Lat1S1�', r
- allpublic hearings, (Ord. 1993-7�§ 1, 1993)
3. �gravtng,pboto-engravtng► �
4• Duplicating,mimeographing.ca tigraphingT
5. A �p g
ddresso him ; 18.43.050 Development standards-
6. Newspaperoffice; Nonresiden�l.
lot alta:None.
m.
7. Printing or publishing. A. bin
7.Self-story e facility: B. Knoitnnm lot width:None.
1. The maximum site area shall not exceed three C. Minimum yard requirements:
acres; 1. Front Twenty feet,which may be used to meet
All
access to the facility shall be from arterial or off-street parking requirements, or as part of an off-
collector streets; street parking lot;
3. All access lanes within the facility shall be of a 2.. Side:None;
paved or concrete surface; 3. Rear. Twenty-five feet, except as provided in
4. ?Beare shall be a landscaped buffcryard with a Section 18.07.050G (General Regulations and
tnini.mvxn six-foot or maximum eight-foot decora- Exceptions) for a corner lot,which army be used to
five masonry wall; meet off-sem parking requirements,or as a part of
-5.There shall be no razor or baibcd wire; an off-street parking lot.
• 6.The facility shall be single story with a maximum D. Maximum building heighc'Thirty-gine feet,
height of nineteen feed E. Minimum distance between awn buildings:
7.The facility's exterior facade visible from adjoin- None. (Ord. 198542(part), 1985)
ing residential properties or the public street shall use
earth tone colors and masonry or stucco materials or 1E1.43.060 Developbaent standard.--
materials with a similar appearance; Residential.
8.The light source of any outdoor security lighting A. Minimum lot arca:Ten thousand square feet.
shall not be visible from adjoining residential prop- 13. Minimuon lot area per dwelling unit: One thou-
emits; sand square feet-
9.All walls,doors,and roofs visible from adjoining C. Minimum lot width:Sixty feet.
proper shall have surfaces that have less than 80 D. Minimum yard requirements:
percent reflectivity; 1. Front:Twenty fat,which may be used to meet
10.The maximum size of an individual storage unit off-street parking requirements,or as part of an off-
shall not exceed 200 square feet; Street parking lot;
11. All storage shall be in an enclosed building, 2. Side:Seven feet each;
(Ord. 1998-36 § 15, 1998; Ord.. 1997.28 2, 1997; 3. Rear: Twenty-five feet except as provided in
Ord. 1993-55 § 1, 1993; Ord.. 1989-96 § 1 (part). Section 18.07.050G (General Regulations and
1989;.Ord. 1988-1S0 § 1. 1988; Ord. 1985-171 § 1 Exceptions) for a corner lot, which may be used to
(part), 1985;Ord. 1985-82(pan), 1985) meet off-street parking requirements,or as a pan of
an off-street parking lot.
18.43.040 Conditional nets_ E. Building height limitations:
A. procedures. 1n accordance with Chapter 18.97 1. Maximum height Thirty-four feet;and
(Condi
-__- -_ __ L
04/09/01 MON 14:37 FAX 212 269 5256 C 11 14011
13.43.060
3. In areas de lgnattd as historic zones (Chapter
18.63,Historic Zopc)no buildings shall exceed two
stories; and
4. For all conditionally approved rezouings that do . .
Dot have an ordinance for CB-1,if a third story is
18-70_1 -
(pimp Coate►
RFCFHVFD TIMI APR. 9. 2:??PM PRINT TIME APR. 9. 2:38PM
1 V v f V f J V 1 1 L f-rr fAilf-H V l tt-t LUttS PAGE 13
04/09/01XON 14:34 AX 212 269 5298 C II 003
•
•
"I --------"--"---------=_._.---.__, ...............-----_-__ ----r.
AMENDMENT NO. 7 DY ORDINANCE NO, 1960-52 ,
TO PIMA COUNTY ZON1 NG MAP NO. 116 0
PART OF N 1/2 , tdW I/4 SEC. 36 , TI2 S,RI3E
ADOPTED K)-f8-60 1-----)
d 400'
z SR • 4
„C.al T i25,P113(j
7S'
AOAD.r •
M AGEE 75 /
r77 .--17; , :".,•;',:;-. pi •::-.....
SEC.3g c.o. 1 ,-
......:1:., :::;:-::.,:._ :. , ... 4.
. ....,........:... :::::,................:::::::: .•.,..:.:_:.:. .13 •
a .. ...-::::::. mss: ...•. ,�
,,... ... .
-•' . '• • ..-• w��T
•• /
Zt....::::.::::.:::::::: ''Sit:',..:. ::::''''..? -'-'''`-'-...,.......,
•'M. Pe
,y- 03'-',...:./........:::: - •' :. ..:
w DuCMESS . "
0 •:.::,:.:• .:: - .. - .. . .v-,--
37
IL
SR ‘,.
- —/ -J
Ii
p_ - 14 S3
,r
Q- .-.)4)4(C6;E-Aj----.''
•
EXEC. SEC'Y CO. PLAN. a ZONING COMM.
Ew0 10-00-60C09-59-44
E>cum3rf e
:_
I ,� _ ., -
...„ .. .‘„ . .
RECEIVED TIME APR. 9. 2:33PM PRINT TIME APR. 9. 2:38PM
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
FROM:
David Andrews,
• Finance Director .�
DATE: January 8, 2002
SUBJ: Fiscal Impact Analyses for Proposed Annexation Areas A and B
Attached to this memorandum please find fiscal impact analyses for proposed
annexation areas A and B. A separate analysis has been developed for each
area alongwith a combined fiscal impact. You will also find a map of the areas,
a listing of assumptionsinformation
for revenue estimates and detailed backup
from department heads in regard to expenditures.
Revenues and expenditures estimates represent annual amounts. They do not
take into consideration the timing of when state shared revenues would actually
begin to be received bythe Town. The Finance Department is researching this
g •
timingissue with the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, Arizona Department of
g
Revenue, Arizona Department of Transportation and Pima County Treasurer.
Information will bep rovided under a separate communication when it has been
obtained.
Area A
The following summarizes the fiscal impact analysis:
Annual Revenues $483,280
Annual Expenditures 684,428
Net Fiscal Impact ($201,148)
Area B
The following summarizes the fiscal impact analysis:
Annual Revenues $1,464,794
Annual Expenditures 819,605
Net Fiscal Impact $645,189
Combined Areas A and B
Annual Revenues $1,984,074
Annual Expenditures 1,504,033
Net Fiscal Impact $444,041
Comments
• The Oro Valley Police Department expenditure estimates are based on an
m tion of 2.5 police officers per thousand population standard (10
assumption p .
A standard of 2.0 per thousand would result in 7.5 officers and
officers).
rounding
to 8.0 officers, an annual cost savings of approximately $152,531
including $57,008 for area A and $95,523 for area B.
• The Oro Valley Police Department has indicated the need for a police
substation at an annual estimated cost of between $100,000 - $240,000.
These costs are not included in the overall net fiscal impact analyses as
presented.
• Public Works has indicated the need to purchase a street sweeper at an
estimated cost of $160,000 with a useful life of 10 years. These costs are
allocated to area A, however, the sweeper would also serve area B.
• Stormwater services is assumed to have a neutral fiscal impact because it
would be operated as an enterprise fund.
• Other costs include an accounting for Town Council, Clerk, Manager,
Human Resources, Finance, Economic Development, Legal, and
miscellaneous items such as code enforcement, utilities, and insurance.
Pleaseg ive me a call when you have an opportunity to review this information.
CC: Jeff Weir, Economic Development Administrator
Melody Vaughan, Management & Budget Analyst
Town of Oro Valley
Fiscal Impact Analysis for Area B
Annual Amounts
'REVENUES
Local Sales Tax
$ 777,900
Cable Franchise 13,073
State Shared Vehicle License Tax 77,354
State Shared Income Tax 228,175
State Shared Sales Tax 174,859
Highway Users Fuels Tax 173,154
LTAF12,519
Business Licenses 7,760
Total Revenues $ 1,464,794
EXPENDITURES
Police Department 534,623
Magistrate Court 38,177
,Magistrate
Works 135,797
Public Transportation 4,103
Other 15% 106,905
Total Expenditures $ 819,605
NET FISCAL IMPACT $ 645,189
Demographics
Persons Per Household*
2.41
Housing Units 1,034
Occupancy Rate* 87.80%
Population 2,188
*Data based on figures from the 2000 U.S. Census for the Town of Oro Valley
•
•
s _
Annexation Area B Forecasted Revenues
Cable Franchise
.
1,034 units * 80 usage factor * .878 occupancy rate * $30 average bill* .05 cable
tax* 12 months
= $13,073.07
Vehicle Auto Lieu
1,050,000 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $77,353.54
State Shared Income Tax
3,097,252 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $228,174.66
State Shared Sales Tax
2,373,541 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $174,858.85
Highway User Fuels Tax
2,350,406 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $ 173,154.49
Local Transportation Assistance Funds
169,934 / 29,700 * 2,188
= $12,519.04
•
ORO VALLEY
POLICE DEPARTMENT
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: David Andrews, Finance Director
FROM: A, Chief Daniel G. Sharp
• ♦ .
DATE: January 2, 2002
SUBJECT: Annexation Information
Attached are the documents related to the fiscal impact of annexing Areas "A"
and "B." CommanderLarry Stevens has been assigned to work with your office to
provide any additional information or supporting documentation. Additionally, we has
,statistical • •
. ion th. I• I , i • . in th-ir .nal sis Commander Stevens
hasp rovided that information to Judge Dunscomb.
•
I will be
out of the office next weekz however, Commander Stevens will be
in anywaynecessary. Commander Charlie Lentner will be Acting
available to assist �y
Chief and will be available, as well.
MEMORANDUM
To: Chief Sharp
From: Commander Stevens \--8)-
Re: Fiscal Impact Recommendations
Annexation Areas A&B
Date: January 3, 2002
In completing the fiscal impact studies for the two areas I used anecdotal information to make
my recommendations. Taken individually I believe this is a valid way to project impact, however,
cumulative annexations in the area create additional concerns and considerations.
We need to keep in mind that these areas include higher concentrations of commercial and multi
family housing units as compared to the current general make up of Oro Valley. This is the main reason I
feel it imperative that we follow the 2.5 officers per thousand population standard. The only law
enforcement calls for service statistics for the area are for the Sheriff's Department. To make any
correlation between their calls for service and ours is nearly impossible as they have a far different
standard for response than we do. I do know they had nearly 1100 calls for service in the area for the
year 2000 which would represent 10% of our entire total for that year. Considering that our level of
service could result in doubling the number of responses by our Department, you can see my concern
about the possible impact.
In reviewing the population figures related to the two areas, I am also concerned that we are
using National Census figures in determining occupancy and population. I think it is important to note
that in informal occupancy surveys completed in the past we have found occupancy rates in northwest
Tucson and Oro Valley higher than national standards. Again, based on this it is even more imperative
that we do not fall below the 2.5 officers per thousand population standard.
One area that has been addressed to some degree over the past several years is our ability to
deal with some of the traffic related issues we would face with the addition of such a major intersection
and highly traveled area. We have completed comprehensive training related to traffic accident
investigation and obtained equipment and technology that have enhanced our abilities in this area. We
currently have a Grant pending for the addition of one motor unit and I would anticipate the need of an
additional motor unit during the FY02/03 budgeting process. This will be to address the annexed areas
and the additional traffic throughout the Town. The annexation may drive this a little quicker as we
proactively address Oracle and Magee with the high volume of traffic, extensive commercial access, and
high school/neighborhood transition areas.
As the population and activity center of Oro Valley more jp the South, we must consider a full
service police substation in the area. Space needs must be addressed in the near future due to increased
personnel. I have gathered some fiscal impact figures related to establishing a police substation in the
area of Oracle and Magee. Through input gained over the past couple weeks it was determined that we
should consider a 10,000 square foot facility to provide adequate space. it is my understanding that to
budget a lease arrangement we should expect to pay approximately $24 per square foot for facility and
maintenance. This would compute to approximately a $20,000 per month lease or $240,000 yearly fiscal
impact. In evaluating the construction of a 10,000 square foot facility in this area I have been given the
figures of$7 per square foot for land and $80 per square foot building construction by a company
currently completing office facilities in the area. A 10,000 square foot facility would require 50,000
square feet of land which would compute to approximately $1.35m to provide the basic facility. There
are so many options in municipal financing of facilities and land that I would only offer that conventional
financing for such a facility would be about $8,000 per month.
The Town Finance Department also advised me that the Community Development building was
completed for about$135 per square foot. This included furnishing the facility. If this is the case, we
would be looking at $1.35m for the facility and the cost of the land. The Finance Department told me we
should budget about $2.30 per square foot for land, though the company building offices in the area told
me to budget$7.00 per square foot for land.
e
•
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chief Sharp
FROM: Commander Stevens
RE: Area "B"Oracle / Magee/ Suffolk Hills
Annexation Fiscal Impact
DATE: January 3, 2002
In evaluating the fiscal impact to service this area I recommend we continue to follow the standard of 2.5 officers
per thousand. An estimated population of 2,188 computes to 5.5 officers which leads me to recommend 6. This area
includes 97 commercial businesses which caused me to round up my officer recommendation. Experience tells us that
commercial businesses create service needs in the area of traffic, public assists and criminal enforcement at a level above
those of residential neighborhoods. Additionally, the intersection of Oracle and Magee will be included in this annexation
and our experience assisting the Sheriff's Department and DPS has shown us any incident at this location will have
immediate impact on our personnel as it will be our only major intersection with 4 directions of heavy travel. This
annexation area also includes Immaculate Heart School which will require those services unique to school areas.
Below is a breakdown of costs related to the additional officers. Included in this breakdown are additional
vehicles at a rate of.82 vehicles per officer(rounded up from 4.92 to 5).This is the ratio we use based on historic data in
Oro Valley.
6 officers at $54,580 per officer (includes salary& ERE) = $ 327,480
Officer gear: gun, vest gun belt etc. $2,428 per officer = $ 14,568
5 vehicles fully equipped at$34,151 per vehicle = $ 170,755
Vehicle maintenance: gas, tires, lof& insurance $4,364 per vehicle = $ 21,820
TOTAL = $ 534,623
MEMORANDUM
TO: David Andrews
FROM: George Dunscomb, Town Magistrate
DATE: January 4, 2002
SUBJECT: Fiscal Impact of Proposed Annexation of Areas A and B
After consultations with administrative staff of the Oro Valley Police Dept. and
exploring a myriad of possible methods of estimating the fiscal impact of the proposed
annexations, I have determined that the most obvious method of estimating the impact is
probably the most logical method. The population increase will be about 12%. Therefore
it is probably reasonable to estimate that our workload will increase by a comparable
amount, requiring a commensurate increase in clerical staff, supplies and other expenses.
There were inadequate statistics from County law enforcement to correctly
ascertain the number of cases generated in the areas proposed for annexation. The county
statistics indicate there will be a substantial increase n the number of calls but, nothing to
show that the calls resulted in an arrest. Their statistics do show that a substantial number
of calls were for larceny- which could be misdemeanor shoplifting or theft, (which would
affect the court) or felony thefts, which would at least initially go downtown.
The increased population will necessarily cause an increase in the number of
domestic violence cases in our court.
Oro Valley Police Dept. Information shows that as the Town has grown, the
number of traffic citations has decreased. Traffic citations usually bring in revenue.
Shoplifting and domestic violence cases usually result in a net loss of revenue after the
costs of court appointed attorneys etc are calculated. However there is no realistic way to
calculate those amounts.
Using FY2001/2002 numbers and adding an additional 3% to cover Social
Security, COLA etc, the annexation would result in an increase in personnel costs of
$51,683 a year. Plus 12% of the operations and maintenance costs of$14,259, there
would b- . total increase of$65,897 per year. ncreases in revenue, if any, will be
negligible. J
. •
•
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID ANDREWS
FROM: BILL JANSEN Airor.
SUBJECT: ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS
DATE: JANUARY 4, 2002
CC: CHUCK SWEET
As requested, attached is the fiscal analysis for map areas "A" and "B". This
analysis is based on providing the same level of service to the annexed areas as
presently provided within the existing corporate limits. The analysis is also based
on driving the map areas by DPW staff and developing a detailed condition
assessment of the streets.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
..
•
y
s
( �. v
f..‹,./Sim. ‘i 1-
. O O O O V 00 O O 00
C--
-.--%]: •-•
OO N `�t -�
O a) 0c0 O Q) N N V N- Cs NW 0)
O M CO "CI i O 00 CO N to O fi"
fti O to4Ato (AV to CO ffl 0
00 NtO CO fft
O
_ !-
III
I0CC1iIIII0Iiif
tAtA00c� 0 dO Q) CO 00 r- - LSI COM M � M � V- ta0Y= to
7
J O N N O O N O O O O L) O
� MWO
LU LU COO COC) C 0 � O NV
NW. NO
O M M CY C 6 O N � fNi tf} ��
ZC to tO to tf3 U) V
J1111: O �-
g
2 °Ckyi
ONLUO O OO Ln LU
ON- LUNQO) �tOOnNCSO p� � e-- M =
40 (fl
H" M c� � i'� CO C
O H4 CA to to M to t�9 tf? tf3 to CO x
C to V
ti to
O
Or- O OCOCOO O C00 �I) �n N `'1
CON-. 00N- V0 O O O O N �t N-
I
�- M000 �' LU00 t7
0 ,- LO NCO �) v
O c� 00 c') M C N O O O Ef? N
IA
N O to �fi tf to M to U) M
MIO N
Z
coO
1111
O0OO - OO O
� � �NttMO ` OO LnLU LC7•OL NCrOCOc6- cY) cv)r N- fl NOUto to to U)
CO lfzi„,
Cl)
to
Y o
O co
�
COtAOI- NC O OO N �' O `�`�-
O L 00 e- VN �T CD `Cf ,--- 0 NCD r•
LU O tic Mc7CcN CO N aTi; O
o O to to to M to to ER d�
J O
CD
Rilli
OOOOMCOOQOOAO
OO MT- Qtn � 00 LOU,V
'- n NO
N
Q V f) tNM GNt` to O fi `� L
I" z 0 oU) ff, '
M tf? to ��
-
W � ��
lir00 (00000 o Oo min O
y- U) ONOa) OO O0O N O �OU) �- OCOO `� _cO I` �7 c6 I- 00 cfl OfOLOiftiON ,- 40 � � to c'ci PO
el
ao o V o
Q 0000000 O 000 ..4- .1) m
a E10 (0100tAt) O ,e0) (0C �
Ln O O
)v-
in -III rM
to to
1. Ea to to ,
tii II
U)
r
C)J LL
w
Q W ? LL W ›-
W ILl .o �'' •� > Cl) m
co
o U Q
0 • N V N ~ []. 1--
17:1!
re • E .c ? ci WC FW-- a 0 0
� }. -� a . 03 as QU c C
Q• - wQ LM c � N OW U .£ He c
X .93O V ai a� U - a • cr) O cl) m T
Q to > o C c E c E 4- Q W o tr = W O Z -51-.
za- J wQ _ > •ao v w o c�o � gos
w O m o co � 2
E 0WWWacnOCW Oa c) QzE-- Ow
MEMORANDUM
TO: David Andrews, Finance Director
e-LJA-V/
FROM: Kathryn Cuvelier, Town Clerk ‘C
DATE: January 3, 2002
SUBJ: Proposed Annexation —Area B Fiscal Impact Analysis
835 residential units
Possible Home Occupations located in this area. Additional revenues would be
received for Home Occupation Licenses. ($80 per license). However, the
revenues are unknown at this time.
1,767 population
Additional Election costs will be incurred based on the amount of registered
voters. However, the costs are unknown at this time.
92 Commercial Businesses
Additional Business License Revenue of $7,360. (92 x $80.00).
601/
u(
J �
•
•flit; �q/7y•:.,ti;.,
cis
•
�• :'•: .' ..•'�-:.1s!r'�-rooms-lr�.�;[-..
o g-�a
°NDE)
Office of the Town Attorney
Memo
TO: David Andrews, Finance Director
FROM: Dan Dudley, Town Attorney •
DATE: January 4, 2002
RE: Proposed Annexation - Area A Fiscal impact Analysis
The estimate regarding the cost of services to the Legal Department for the proposed
Annexation Area is $31,658.22.
Please call if you have any questions.
DLD/ca
{fi,tad
—11,L I out.,
FAMemosTriance DeptlAn&ews-Area A Fiscal krpad Arratysisdoc
ACTION SUMMARY
PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL SESSION
MARCH 25, 2003
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE
SPECIAL SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Bill Moody
Vice-Chair Don Cox
Commissioner Ken Kinared
Commissioner Don Manross
Commissioner Robert Krenkowitz
Commissioner John Anning
ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Paul Loomis
Council Member Werner Wolff
Council Member Bart Rochman
Chuck Sweet, Town Manager
Scott Nelson, Special Projects Coordinator
Jeff Weir, Economic Development Administrator
Brent Sinclair, Community Development Director
Bryant Nodine, Planning and Zoning Administrator
Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney
Bill Adler, Board of Adjustments Member
* 1. PUBLIC HEARING, A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST
TO EXTEND ZONING
CONDITIONS UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE TOWN, WONG - ORACLE
ROAD
MOTION:
Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to forward this item to the Town Council
proceed that the Town with the annexation development agreement of the
Wong-Oracle RoadProperty Pro ert with the following suggestion: that Section 1 of the Resolution
be amended to read as follows:
Subsequent
to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town
the Town Council will adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may
translate thepresent Pima County zoning classification of TR to Oro Valley
be necessary to g
zoning classification
of Neighborhood Commercial/Office and to extend the expiration of the
zoning to June2008,
30, with all of the standards and special requirements that the Pima
County Planning and Zoning Commission imposed on June 30, 1999, except that any
reference therein to Pima County, County agencies, and the County Board of Supervisors
shall instead refer to the Town of Oro Valley, its agencies, and its Town Council. Motion
carried by a 6 yes, 0 no vote.
* 2. PUBLIC HEARING, A RESOLUTION REGARDING PREANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, B. P. MAGEE, LLC
MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to forward this item to the Town Council
recommending that the Town proceed with the annexation development agreement of the
B.P. Magee, LLC Property with the following suggestion: that Section 1 of the Resolution be
amended to read as follows:
Subsequent to the effective date of an ordinance annexing this property into the Town
the Town Council will adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may
be necessary to translate the present Pima County zoning classifications of CB-1 and TR to
the Oro Valley zoning classification of C-2 with the conditions set forth in Exhibit C (Town
Conditions) annexed to the proposed Development Agreement between the Town and B.P.
Magee, LLC. Motion carried by a 6 yes, 0 no vote.
* 3. PUBLIC HEARING, A RESOLUTION REGARDING PREANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, TYROL ESCONDIDA, LLC
MOTION: Commissioner Cox MOVED to forward this item to the Town Council
recommending that the Town not proceed with the annexation development agreement of
the Tyrol Escondida, LLC (Mariash) Property, specifically outlining the reason for not
proceeding is contained in paragraph 8, directly insuring that the Town will enter into an
agreement providing only one-half (112) of the sales taxes to the Town. Motion carried by a 6
yes, 0 no vote.
ADJOURN REGULAR SESSION 7:10 p.m.
's 9-500.05 - Development agreements; public safety; definitions Page 1 of 2
b
vt•
9-500.05. Development ag_reements.;_public safety; definitions
A. A municipality, by resolution or ordinance, may enter into development agreements relating to
property in the municipality and to property located outside the incorporated area of the municipality. If
the development agreement relates to property located outside the incorporated area of the municipality,
the development agreement does not become operative unless annexation proceedings to annex the
property to the municipality are completed within the period of time specified by the development
agreement or any extension of such time.
B. A development agreement shall be consistent with the municipality's general plan or specific plan, if
any, as defined in section 9-461, applicable to the property on the date the development agreement is
executed.
C. A development agreement may be amended, or cancelled in whole or in part, by mutual consent of
the parties to the development agreement or by their successors in interest or assigns.
D. No later than ten days after a municipality enters into a development agreement, the municipality
shall record a copy of the agreement with the county recorder of the county in which the property
subject to the development agreement is located, and the recordation constitutes notice of the
development agreement to all persons. The burdens of the development agreement are binding on, and
the benefits of the development agreement inure to, the parties to the agreement and to all their
successors in interest and assigns.
E. Section 32-2181 does not apply to development agreements under this section.
F.Notwithstanding any other law, a municipality may provide by resolution or ordinance for public
safety purposes, and with the written consent of an owner of property that has been granted a
development agreement pursuant to this section, an owner of a protected development right pursuant to
chapter 11 of this title or the owner of any other residential or commercial development subject to the
supervision of a municipality pursuant to this title, for the application and enforcement of speed limits,
vehicle weight restrictions or other safety measures on a private road that is located in any development
in the municipality and that is open to and used by the public. A municipality may require payment from
the property owner of the actual cost of signs for speed limits or other restrictions applicable on the
private road, before their installation.
G. In this section, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. "Development agreement" means an agreement between a municipality and a community facilities
district pursuant to section 48-709, subsection C, a landowner or any other person having an interest in
real property that may specify or otherwise relate to any of the following:
(a) The duration of the development agreement.
(b) The permitted uses of property subject to the development agreement.
(c) The density and intensity of uses and the maximum height and size of proposed buildings within
such property.
(d) Provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and provisions to protect
environmentally sensitive lands.
http://wvwv.azleg.state.az.us/ars/9/00500-05.htm 03/21/2003
9-500.05 - Development agreements; public safety; definitions Page 2 of 2
4 (e) Provisions for preservation and restoration of historic structures.
(f) The phasing or time of construction or development on property subject to the development
agreement.
(g) Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for public infrastructure and the financing of public
infrastructure and subsequent reimbursements over time.
(h) Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for annexation of property by the municipality and
the phasing or timing of annexation of property by the municipality.
(i) Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements of deannexation of property from one municipality
to another municipality and the phasing or timing of deannexation of property from one municipality to
another municipality.
(j) Conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements relating to the governing body's intent to form a
special taxing district pursuant to title 48.
(k) Any other matters relating to the development of the property.
2. "Governing body" means the body or board which by law is constituted as the legislative body of the
municipality.
3. "Municipality" means an incorporated city or town.
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/9/00500-05.htm 03/21/2003