Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV109719 CASE NO.: -qi •-7.I L V t1.LEY AR, oe° �° BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT i,42144: APPLICATION i F A OE°,9• FOR: x Zoning Variance Zoning Interpretation Appeal of Administrative Decision NATURE OF REQUEST: 1 Variant N From Develo ment S dndarl Con 9-- C t-o 11o' '�'' ' .- r= l•vate rooms and centralized bathing facilities. #2 Vari am e from raevPl opment stanrlarc1 c -'ti on 9-105C R to riel PtP thp provi sine of a certificate of need as one is no longer required from the Arizona Dept. of Health Servic #3. Variance from C-1 Zone building height limitation of 25 feet to allow a 30 foot high building. APPLICANT: META Associates - Jeff Johnston (502 569-1400) ADDRESS: 401 Smith 4th Avenue, 9th Floor, R & W Tower, Tnui svi 1 l e, KY 40202 OWNER: Shadow Mountain Estates Partnership ATTN: Teran & Associates • ADDRESS: 620 N. Craycroft Rnad, Tucson, AZ 85711 . PROPERTY LOCATION/ADDRESS: Eastside Oracle Road approx;mately 600 f et north of LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The north 410 teegyo °dock A, Shadow Nbuntain Estates Fast, Bk :14 Pg 93 ACREAGE: 6.00 CURRENT ZONING: C-1/CRSCCD APPLICABLE FEE: $1,000. ATTACHMENTS: ReSponsps to supplemental c iestions. site plan, floor plan, building ele ions : list of property owners within 300 feet. i' .. eg 2Q q7 SIGH OF APPLICANT DATE 1 SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE 1. Identify difficulties or problems that would result from complying with the present zoning. requirements. (Ar1'ACHID) ?. Identify and explain all unique and peculiar circumstances that would prevent you from complying with the present zoning requirements on your property in regard to the following areas (slope,narrowness, shallowness, irregular shape. location, washes. vegetation and easements.etc.). (Al'1ACHED) 3. Identify and explain any peculiar conditions in the surrounding area which would keep you from complying with the present zoning requirements. :(A`n ACHED) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: - 4. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: The most current available list of all property owners within 300 feet of the property, including mailing addresses. This list may be obtained from the Pima County Assessor's Office and the date such list was obtained. 8 copies of dimensioned plot plan, if applicable 8 copies of dimensioned floor plan, if applicable 8 copies of building elevations, if applicable An estimate of the incremental cost of the change in, or additions to, the property, such estimated cost to be endorsed as accurate by a licensed contractor or engineer. Any additional comments/information you wish to provide regarding your request. 2 ATTACHMENT Board of Adjustment Application Supplemental Questions PROJECT: ORACLE ROAD NURSING CARE FACILITY A. Variance Request No. 1: Variance from Sec. 9-105C.3 to allow semi-private rooms with centralized bathing facilities Response to Question 1: This project would not be consistent with the current standards of the industry if it were required to provide bathing facilities in each room and to dedicate each room for single occupancy only. Most patients of a nursing care facility are not 100 percent capable of bathing themselves and require assistance from the facility's Staff for this function. A centralized bathing facility is provided for this purpose to insure a safe, controlled environment for each of the patients and to insure that the proper level of supervision is always available. The cost of providing separate bathing facilities in each room would be approximately$400,000. - $500,000. This project proposes the construction of 60 patient rooms with a maximum of occupancy of 120 patients. This facility would therefore need to double in size (add an additional 60 rooms) in order to accomodate 120 patients in single occupancy rooms. The estimate cost for these additional rooms would be$4,200,000. This project will not be economically feasible and therefore would not be constructed if this variance were not granted. Response to Question 2: Not Applicable to Variance Request No. 1. Response to Question 3: Not Applicable to Variance Request No. 1. B. Variance Request No. 2: Variance from Sec. 9-105C8 to delete the provision of a certificate of need as one is no longer required from the Arizona Department of Health Services. Response to Question No.1. A Certificate of Need is no longer required in the State of Arizona. — ATTACHMENT - Page 2 Supplemental Questions Response to Question No. 2. Not applicable to Variance Request No. 2 Response to Question No. 3. Not applicable to Variance Request No. 2. C. Variance Request No. 3: Variance from the C-1 zone building height limitation of 25 feet to allow the construction of a 30 foot high building. Response to Question No. 1: The aesthetics of the proposed building would be greatly enhanced with this height variance so that we can accommodate a pitched roofed rather than a flat roofed structure. This variance would allow us to provide a variety of roof heights across the building rather than a continuous structure height throughout. We believe that this structure will be considerably more aesthetic from Oracle Road and the surrounding properties, with the approval of this variance. Response to Question No. 2: The existing slope on the property is such that the east property line is approximately 55 feet higher than the west property line at Oracle Road. The proposed grading of the project provides for the first floor of the structure to be below grade at the rear of the site (east side) to help mitigate this overall slope through the property. This grading is such that the top of the proposed 30-foot high structure would be approximately equal in elevation to the existing ground at the east property line. This structure therefore,will appear in essence to be entirely below grade in this area. The residences to the east of this project would not see a two story 30-foot high structure, they will only see portions of the roof line as it extends to the west atop the patient wings. Response to Question No. 3: As outlined in the response to Question No. 2,this variance would improve the aesthetics of the project and protect the views of the existing adjacent property owners. Additional project information: Project Engineer: Rick Engineering Company, Inc. 3443 N. Campbell Avenue, Suite 155 Tucson,Arizona 85719 (520) 795-1000 Contact: Paul J. Iezzi,P.E.,President Sep-02-97 11 : 35A Town of Oro Valley 520 742 1022 P . 01 A La AS es PN , $K► - i - (-sta.. g81 —1505 • \ V_) '%� J C(CASE NO.: '1 D /\ Qoy.1}EV ARle a ( � BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 411 APPLICATION .,/r; ♦ Z _ A ♦ 461MDED`y1• FOR: x Zoning Variance Zoning Interpretation Appeal of Administrative Decision NATURE OF REQUEST: Oro Valley Church of th Nazarene is currently master planning their site for the future. Phase I of their plan will include a new sanctuary to initially seat 450. With this size sanctuary, there would be a number of difficulties to try to conform to the zoning requirement of 18' height limits. The Church is requesting a variance to allow for a height limitation of 29' to the peak. APPLICANT: Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene ADDRESS: 500 W. Calle Concordia, Tucson, AZ 85737 OWNER: Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene ADDRESS: 500 W. Calle Concordia, Tucson, Az 85737 PROPERTY LOCATION/ADDRESS: 500 W. Calle concordia, Tucson, Az 85737 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ACREAGE: 9.8 CURRENT ZONING: PS & C, and R1-144 APPLICABLE FEE: $500.00 ATTACHMENTS: 8 copies of Site Plan • Estimate of Cost, Prepared by Albanese-Brooks Associates, Architects and signed by Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene epresentative Yd 7 SIGNA OF APPLICANT DATE 1 JLIVEU • SEP 0 2199] Sep-02-97 11 : 35A Town of Oro Valley 520 742 1022 P .02 SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE 1. Identify difficulties or problems that would result from complying with the present zoning requirements. 1. The proposed sanctuary requires a column free space for uninterrupted site lines. A 450 seat sanctuary will require a greater depth for spanning structural members in a column free _space and therefore require greater.height. 2. A 450 seat sanctuary requires an interior volume where width, length and height have a comfortable and aesthetic relationship. _ 3. The Sanctuary requires an acoustically adequate volume to accommodate musical programs. r'. Identify and explain all unique and peculiar circumstances that would prevent you from complying with the present zoning requirements on your property in regard to the following areas (slope,narrowness, shallowness, irregular shape. location, washes, vegetation and easements.etc.). 1. The site is not condusive to multi-level entries 2. There would be excessive cost to the Church to excavate, construct and reinforce retaining walls, and conform to ADA requirements if the finish floor is below grade. �. Identify and explain any peculiar conditions in the surrounding area which would keep you from complying with the present zoning requirements. No other conditions are identified at this time. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Under present zoning the Church is permitted to build a gymnasium to a height of 25 feet. The requested variance will allow an aesthetically pleasing sanctuary structure with minimum intrusion. The 4. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: site is just west of CDO High School. The most current available list of all property owners within 300 feet of the property, including mailing addresses. This list may be obtained from the Pima County Assessor's Office and the date such list was obtained. 8 copies of dimensioned plot plan, if applicable 8 copies of dimensioned floor plan, if applicable 8 copies of building elevations, if applicable An estimate of the incremental cost of the change in, or additions to, the property, such estimated cost to be endorsed as accurate by a licensed contractor or engineer. Any additional comments/information you wish to provide regarding your request. 2 Prepared September 1, 1997 ABA No. 9703 ORO VALLEY CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE—PHASE I COST SUMMARY AMOUNTS TOTALS CONSTRUCTION BUDGET Sanctuary, Courtyard,Playground, South Parking, Site&General Conditions (11,154 sq. feet @$130.00) $1,450,020. Contractor Markup(12%) 174,000. Sales Tax(3.25%) 52,780. Professional Fees, Expenses, Survey and Testing 176,586. TOTAL ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST $1,853,366. Sid Fel , Building Committee Chair Oro alley Church of the Nazarene JLr GC 7! 1G•40r1'I LLVIYMRIJ r LLr LR HJ5Vl.1H I"'. (/b • • • • planning resources planning landscape architecture urban-design dtueloptnet.cansultantF • • September 18, 1997 • Mr. Sidney L. Felker,.Esq. Leonard, Felker,Altfield,Nix&Battaile,P.C. P.O. Box 191 Tucson,Arizona 85702-0191 RE: Church of the Nazarene:Height Variance • • Dear Sid: • • I have reviewed the.request by the Church against the required findings for a variance contained in the Town • of Oro Valley Zoning Code,Section 1-709, In my opinion,there is substantial evidence to support the • variance as required by the Code,principally due to the location of the church and its surroundings. • •Specifically;the church is part of a stip of public and semipublic uses. These include the Dennis Weaver Park,the CDO High School,the church,and further west,the Oro Valley Public Works building: The high • school,in particular,is a massive structure,especially where it faces the church. Frankly, as 1 drove west along Calle Concordia,I had a hard time locating the church. I'm sure if I were looking for the church at a time of worship•or other church activity,I'd have blocked traffic as I looked to find the church and drives. • I've driven this stretch of road several times on my way to the Public.Works building or when it was Town Hall, and not noticed the church. So,in my opinion,the findings,mandated.of the Board would be as follows: • • Condition ."A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to th.e property referred • •• to in the-application including its size,shape,topography location or surroundings. • • (emphasis added)Which do not apply to other properties in the district: and" • Situation The church is in a physical location and surroundings which is not common to other properties within the PS&C zoning district. Specifically,the church is behind"(to • the west)of the auditorium of CDO High School. This fine arts auditorium looks to be some 60n feet in height, 'lt completely hides the church from traffic coming to the • church from.Oracle Road,the most common way to the church. They need a • variance to give relief from this,imposing public school structure that,as a side, • does not meet Oro Valley code requirements. Since the school greatly exceeds the height restriction,the situation in which the church finds itself is not self imposed. • , Condition "B. That special circumstances were;not created b the owner or applicant; and" Situation . As noted above,the church does not create the special circumstances;but by the school. The fine arts facility was constructed long after the existing church facilities. Relief as a variance for the church gives equity to the church,and . • provides greater visibility and the resulting safety for people looking to find the • church. •_ • • 210 North Church Retinue. Tucson Rrizone 05101 ■ (5201 621.11 i e `a«:•628.1637 • 1043 Eestllissaurl 8uenue. Suite ill. Pheniun Adana 85014 VA .15121 281 8818lax:207181 .zcr cc yr ic• +orrl LtVI'HKU rtLKLK HbbUL1H {-',8/8 • • • Mr. Sidney L. Felker,Esq. . .Paget September 18, 1997 • Condition "C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment . of substantial property rights; and" • • • Situation- Again,the school auditorium substantially blocks'visibility to the church site. • Granting the variance will allow the church the minimum visibility necessary�o its • • function of being a place of assembly for people throughout the community and region. This will allow enjoying the use of the property for which it was approved. 'Condition- • "D. That any variance granted imposes such,conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall.not constitute a grant of special privileges . inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and the .one in which the property is located;and" • ' Situation' As noted earlier,this variance is not for full parity with the height of the high school • auditorium. It is the minimum felt necessary for parity. Therefore,granting this • variance will not grain special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon other • property in the vicinity. Other.churches in the Town are not similarly constrained in their visibility by the neighboring structure as is this church. This.variance 1vi.11 not • grant special privilege. • • • Condition "E_ That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons • residing in the vicinity,to adjacent property,to the neighborhood or the public • welfare in general. Situation . •• This area is part of a long strip of public or semi-public facilities on the north side of Calle Concordia. It begins with Weaver Park,the High School,the church. and a couple of lots west the Oro Valley former Town Hall and current Public Works • facility. Granting this variance will not be detrimental to any person residing in the vicinity to adjacent property,or to the neighborhood. Since it will help with visibility,it will increase public safety by Malang the church more visible and easier to exit Calle Concordia into the,church parking area. • All zoning codes are written for a"typical"situation. The original authors of zoning code enabling • . legislation created the concept of variances for those.situations.that are not typical: This situation is clearly not typical and was created;not by shape of the parcel or topography,but by the State of Ari .ona which . exempted public schools from local zoning regulations. Had Oro Valley been able to regulate the school similar to the church,the school mould not have exceeded eighteen(1 A)feet,instead of the 60 or so feet which abuts the church. . Sincerely, • 1 Carl Winters Principal • 95020 • I • reso • urces • • n• planning ! SOU!r CeS Planoinq tandscape arcbifecfufe 4IG.4-1lintQrl 1i.C1l.CIODN f':rizn.gltn!'a 1?O 0orth[hutch Avenue, Tucson Anton 86101 s 15201 628-1116 fax 628-?631 - 1043 East Ilissauri Benue. Suite 191: Phoenie 8rireea 86014 • E6121212-8816 far:23?-8819 I J.L..•1JI I I L-I-VI 1r,wL F LLP�LIC HJJ VLIM � &V - LAW OFFICES LEONARD FELKER ALTFELD GREENBERG g BATTAILE, P. C. OAyp J. LEONARD EION6Y L. FELKER 250 NORTH MEYER AVENUE TE-E PMOPIE J[FFREY H. OREENRERG POST OFFICE SOX 191JO :520) E N2 - 7732 CLI F. BATTAILE8AL/ III TUCSON, ARIZONA 86702 -0191 e LIi P01@D 9. ALT PI(LO --- DONNA M. AVERS* F4X R. DAYID EORCl. (520> 822 - 796 EOWARO O. COMITY RUSECLL C. KRONE :>NNE-l4AT''E BRAJ'! OP' COON$EL September 22, 1997 Board of Adjustment Town of Oro Valley %Valerie Feuer Oro Valley, Arizona Re: OV 10-97-19 Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene Memorandum in Support of Request The following information is provided in support of Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene's ("the church") request for a variance. 1. Neighbors meetings and support: The church is delighted to have overwhelming support of its neighbors as evidenced by the enclosed "consent and support petition" signed by its neighbors on the south side of Calle Concordia and the Harris family at 9291 .N. Calle Buena Vista. The Raits family at 510 W. Calle Concordia has expressed strong support and willingness to sign a consent petition. Church members met, at least twice, with each neighbor on Calle Concordia and with those on the west side of Calle Buena Vista. An "open house" meeting for neighbors was held on Saturday morning September 20, 1997. The church is unaware of any opposition to its request and it is very pleased that many neighbors voluntarily said that the church has been a good neighbor for many years[i.e.,the Faccio family who has lived directly across from the church at the corner of Buena Vista and Calle Concordia since 1968- and Mrs. Shields on Buena Vista even before that]. This strong neighborhood support alleviates concerns that the variance is detrimental to persons or property in the area. A copy of the letter to the neighbors along Calle Concordia and the west side of Calle Buena Vista is attached. 2. Proximity to Dennis Weaver Park and Canyon Del Oro School : The church's proximity to Dennis Weaver and CDO imposes special circumstances [ those entities not subject to zoning regulations] concerning the church's property, its location and surrounding that do not apply to other properties in the PSC district. The church is part of a stretch of governmental/quasi-public land running from Oracle Road west to Calle Buena Vista. Dennis Weaver park and CDO are, by far, the dominating property uses along this strip. The CDO facilities facing [west] the church includes a 50-foot high fine art auditorium that dominants the JLr CC 7! 1C•44r1'I LLVI`IMKU f•LLNtK LEONARD FELKER ALTFELD GREENBERG 8 BATTAILE, P. C. September 22, 1997 Page 2 area. At the hearing we will show from the Oro Valley zoning map that other properties within the PS-C district are not inflicted with special circumstances of being located near a very large high school and regional park. We are also submitting with this memorandum a letter issued by a professional land planner confirming that Dennis Weaver and CDO do impose special circumstances as to the church's surroundings and location. Please recognize that the church is not complaining about the park or the high school but simply pointing out that they do constitute surroundings that the church must deal with and circumstances that justify a variance. 3. Circumstances were not created by the church. The church has no say in the facilities that are built at Dennis Weaver or Park. Respectfully Submitted i ney L elker 5tr GC -Jr 1 44l-F1 Lt.VNHK!) r LLKLK ASSOCIA P.4/8 Consent and Support Petition To: Oro Valley Board of Adjustment We the undersigned have received notice that the Oro Valley Church cif the Nazarene is requesting a variance from the existing zoning requirement so that it will he per m:.tted to burl; to a height of 29' at its location at 500 Calle Concordia as more specifically set forth in its z)etititm to the Board of Adjustment.. We understand that the hearing is scheduled for September 23. I Di'1 We consent to and lend our support to the variance requested by the Church. Name: Address: ,,- f • _, 1,c41'4..r _` ' f 1.1. 5tr CC '7( 1C.4Drfl LLUNHKL h tLKUK H55UL1H P.6/8 Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene 500 Calle Concordia Tucson Arizona 85737 297-8297 C 0 y September 1.0, 1997 ID W. Call.e Concordia Tucson Arizona 85737 Re: Oro Valley Church Dear . Thank you for taking the few minutes to let me tell you about our plans for a new building and our request to Oro Valley for a variance. Our people have been praying about the new building for more than three years. We now believe that the Lord is directing us to go on ;t1: the, necessary planning and architectural work.. With a view to alleviate your concerns we arc inviting you to look at the architect's renderings on Saturday Morning, September 20, starting at 8:30 a.m. in the church office. We will he there from 8:30 until around 9:30 or so. The church <oilice in the building or the North side of the property [not in the church building]. We recognize that construction causes concern with one's neighbors but our church has been a good neighbor over the years and will continue to be one in the future. lacer you see our renderings and hear our plans, our prayer is that you will support our request.. If the time is inconvenient please give me a call at and f, or our pa.sto', will he happy to stop by your home with the architectural renderings and tell you about our p)ans. Best Regards, Sid Felker October 16 , 1997 Town of Oro Valley , I am a neighbor of the Rosenberg family and I support the variance OV 10-97-22 concerning the wall height of 6 feet in the front of their property. Name Address . C �yJJ1'J\ M MA v Ii�; ati ( J �/� o RECEIVED ��L/�`'�- TOOOF 0, rtIcS piYARTt+E1ST aL,)d,aeu?, Zs`73 7 )1te,1:. Q.4, _ .77,4 9(-7-7- --- — \ 6617, -) j &rt. e.e.r-.,,.- J2 e-.4- /1(),- --) 2-„?8 -,7 od-j-4, &,-=,-/r‘) ' ‘,4.e, ae,n_ 4 : i/ / -- 7 - r/-‘ „5/Liti-J2--Tc .. og ,w-0-...) 2 - .. da-c.._a..4..-0..--2_,e,---) ( c:2 (7464.4-,1_ 1-4-1:--e-e-u.---) r---p-t-ae- D---. .GL,-.yI i mod ` '/*--17 -- }U- e4'-'‘-e)C-- ) Zu.X. ,4 -a--r-- -.04 . e_<_.( I ., --- ' a__.e.<. -LJ VO!..."'---cl-c- : - 0-e- ale-e---- Ad-6i-a-i%(-7e--e--ef-___ j . 4.-(----,t-) -V-02-c...0,-) a•-/ e7i-L-0--e/-?4--t-x_e:,_,e) 4..Lit _ole-.•<-2 -e.d-Zte - ."- -e:-) lAir-e-r. SZ-v.. ../ 11L4 -7 ere-m2? . iteed.A...e_. a.-1=--,6 A-e--m-Lept, . id 70-Ai-,---(2-6( Iciuu ___ Jt. ' -)k._) • . or ,-0-7-c-c--- a_e_._) /at_ .2ii-ct .t.t.o_L (;7,_, 5'ae-t__, b(LU a „eza-r_d_ e-). ) „ Zei,e a.ge-d 7,z„J ›=,J ,e .c_-ed a 7:L-t ca4 / 1 •(6 ('-'1/4J aet<A-2176.0 01. } . 78-kod2 ‘di _ _ _ 14,-07u-11:je- .) �'' 1N1 '`S\ QktkAu/1> tU 12 September 1997 To: Oro Valley Board of Adjustment Town of Oro Valley 11000 N. La Canada Dr. Oro Valley AZ 85737 Re: OV10-97-21, Meta Associates Request for Variance I live within 300 feet of the property in question. - regret that it is necessary that I be out of town on 23 September, hence cannot attend the public hearing. I ropy you can accept this letter as representing my views . =--- - -t me know, if this letter is illegal in your eyes, why attendance at the hearing in person is a must. I thoroughly object to the variance in neigh . I understand the variance. is five feet more than the town code allows . Since I question if a hardship is involved, I do not believe the Board should grant this variance. The coda should be followed. I see no objection. to semi-private rooms in the residential health care facility. However, I would not want to see less than one bath provided per semi-private room. = e term "centralized bathing facilities" is repugnant to me. Why must the main structure be built up against the east side of the parcel? Cannot it be built closer to n- Road and thus impinge less on residential proper_ ? I appreciate the opportunity to send this letter and trust that it can be used as an Exhibit in the Board' s deiberations. Sincerely yours, Mr. Gale Monson • Oro Valley AZ 85737 -- - Town of Oro Valley Building Permit Permit No. . r 9 Job AddoO s3�e,rjt Lot No. 8c APANo. 7771Calle Concordia Subdivision Parcel No. Bk. Ng. Campo Bello Rim 3 9 c ,Applicant Mailing Address ' ZJpe. P R Carrie Borgen job addresstwit IP� 731 797-1460 or 837-44 Owner Mailing P Address Zip code Phone same Contractor Mailing Address Phone License# Custom Barns Lnc. 215 2, 27th St. 627-5072 Architect,Engineer or Designer Mailing Address Zip code Phone Describe Work Horse Stalls State Valuation of New Work $ 12,256.85 Special Conditions Limited to one horse per 30,000 sq. ft. (maximum 5) . Please he advised that the ,LCe of this property for commercial stables or boeading is prohibited by the Oro Valley Zoning Code. This permit becomes null and void if work or construction authorized TYPE OF PERMIT CASH is not commenced within 180 days or if construction or work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days at any time after work is commenced. It is the authorized applicant's responsibility to Permit Fee $ 237.60 determine the location of all existing underground utilities, sewage • disposal systems or other obstacles that may interfere with the $ Prints 1 .00 construction or work authorized by this permit. I hereby certify that I have read and examined this permit and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or $ local law regulating construction or the performance of construction. $ Use Zone Occupancy Group Type of Construction Fire Zone Bldg.Size(S.F.) No.of Stories $ No.of Dwelling Units Max.Occ.Load Fire Sprinklers Req'd Service Charge $ Yes No Off Street Parking Spaces Covered Uncovered TOTAL FEES > $ 238.60 ,'/,:, ! / - /C Less Previous Payments(Plan Check Fee) $ 105.00 Signature of Authorized Applicant Receipt No. Date 1/5/95 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE > $ 133 6 WE WILL NEED THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION TO MAKE APAAcctNo. Be ance ce $ YOUR INSPECTIONS: Bal la 1. Permit No.—See upper right corner of this permit. Fees Charged(—) $ 2. Your Job Address and Type of Inspection you want—See your inspection Service Charge(—) $ card. 3. Your job address must be posted at front property line near road. Ending Balance $ r. II Linda Vi•s fa C;Anus Trac/ No ; ' ! � M• - //21 PO 4110 CrID CFI) „t ,\4-0 0 Ar TRACT 8 CI TF /e.za a.c v CP `; Ze 79.93 Z ,0 .• Z` RI - I44 ,.. L.; 0q ........... ..„... v 1. ci ,y ala90 N ;k4. O {' TRA '7 r) TRACT - srAc t9 ' 5.o91-. Q TRACT 9 A I CD /o.za Ac • g020 1 \1.. '030 C.J • .. / �• «Si . /go. Re-(/// TRACT 10 t — 9.o, Ac / 1 402D • 4. .- / \ C . O goes J U " CO :gUNi Y . o .370 62S. 7t F _ It, }G1.3 �/CFfNTER + +f AG / ti ♦ o1.,x • / el •�• Q -N / 10. I o i`� /-s / s 'qv `o 4t • 4 TRACTII 1_�° (Slot NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT In accordance with Sec. 1-708 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised and Arizona Revised Statutes Sec. 9-462.06, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Oro Valley Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, September 23, 1997, commencing at or after 3:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Oro Valley Town Hall, 11,000 N. La Canada Drive, and the subject matter will be as further described below: OV10-97-19 : Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene Request for Variance to • Sec. 8-103D, no. 1, Permitted Building Height in the PS&C (Private Schools and Churches) District 500 W. Calle Concordia Church Officials request the Board's approval of a variance to exceed the 18 foot maximum building height in the PS&C District. If approved, construction of a 29 foot tall sanctuary, separate from the existing building, is planned. Plans are available for review during normal business hours at the Oro Valley Town Hall, Community Development Building. Persons interested may appear in person, by agent or attorney, and the petitioners must appear or be represented. a / 43 ALA,. ►, � 1, / � REQ: Donald ( hatfield, ' ICP Director, Plannin: and Zoni g Dept POSTED: Date: 9/9/97 Time: 2:00 p.m. • AFFIDAVIT C- -UBLICATION STATE OF ARIZONA) * :ss. c-- COUNTY OF PIMA ) LORETTA OLGU I N being first duly sworn, deposes and says that (he) (she) is the Legal Advertising Manager of THE DAILY TERRITORIAL, a daily newspaper printed and published in the NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY County of Pima,State of Arizona, and of general circulation in the City of Tucson, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT In accordance with Sec. 1-708 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Re- vised and Arizona Revised Sta- County of Pima, State of Arizona and elsewhere, and the hereto attached totes Sec. 9-462.06, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Oro Valley Board of Adjust- CIV 1 C)-97—19 f_IRU VALL..E ment will hold a public hearing on PUBLIC HEARING Tuesday, September 23, 1997, commendng at or after 3:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the ., . n - Oro Valley Town Hall, 11,000 N. La Canada Drive,and the subject matter will be as further de- scribed below: OV10-97-19: Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene Request for Var- iance to Sec.8-103D,no. 1.Per- mitted Pr dingvat Height In and wasprinted andpublished correct) PsBc (Private Schools and yin the regular and entire issue of said THE Churches) District 500 W. Calle Concordia Church Officials request the Board's ap- proval of a variance to exceed DAILY TERRITORIAL for issues; that the first was made the 18 foot maximum building height in the PSBC District. If 1 approved, construction of a 29 foot tall sanctuary,separate from on the day of 19 the existing building, is planned. 91 j-, SE.P T EMBER 97 Plans are available for review during normal business hours at the Oro Valley Town Hall, Corn- and the last publication thereof was made on the r day of munity Development Building. ::/t I`I Persons interested may appear in person, by agent or attorney, and the petitioners must appearSEF'TEMBER 19 ;that said publication or be represented. Donald L Chatfield Donald L. Chatfield, AICP Director, Planning and Zoning Dept. was made on each of the following dates,to-wit: Pub: The Daily Territorial September 9, 1997 Req: Town of Oro Valley f-)�J/C_9/9 7 pnnazare 9/9/97 tjs Request of TOWN OF ORO VALLEY TM • y Territorial . By /J • Su scribed nd sworn to before me t © day of 9 t h SEPTEMBER 19 97 PATRICIA Tfiulir t.f3 Notary Puhli Pima County,Arizona _.__.__. My .,ommission !_xpir9as iuly 1')_, 1°98 Notary PubA,' ic in anc he Cd ,State of Arizona My Commission Expires: -7/,ic/i "' M/M Wilbur Taylor 355 W.Calle Concordia Oro Valley,AZ 85737 M/M John Neighbours 411 W.Calle Concordia Oro Valley,AZ 85737 David Deivert 441 W.Calle Concordia Oro Valley,AZ 85737 Harold Strich 501 W.Calle Concordia Oro Valley,AZ 85737 M/M George Faccio 531 W.Calle Concordia Oro Valley,AZ 85737 M/M Joseph Bruno 9151 N.Overlook Drive Oro Valley,AZ 85737 Mrs.Mary Shields 9369 N.Calle Buena Vista Oro Valley,AZ 85737 M/M Richard Young 9360 N.Calle Buena Vista Oro Valley,AZ 85737 Pusch Ridge Christian Church 235 E.Giaconda Way Tucson,AZ 85704 Mrs.Tellez 450 W.Calle Concordia Oro Valley,AZ 85737 ORO VALLEY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV10-97-19 Hearing Date: September 23, 1997 Agenda Item No: 5 REQUEST: Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene Request for Variance to Sec. 8- 103D, no. 1, Permitted Building Height in the PS&C (Private Schools and Churches) District REQUEST FOR VARIANCE: The applicant is requesting a variance to the 18-foot maximum building height of the PS&C District, Sec. 8-103D. If approved, construction of a 29-foot tall sanctuary, separate from the existing building, is planned. SITE LOCATION: The Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene is located at 500 West Calle Concordia east of Calle Buena Vista near Canyon del Oro High School. PROPOSED USE: The use proposed for the site is a new church sanctuary, which is allowed in this district and in the General Plan designation for this site. CITIZEN SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: All property owners within 300 feet of this property have been notified of this hearing. At the time of report writing, staff has received no comments regarding this request. EXISTING ZONING: On-site: PS&C and R1-144 North: R1-144 South: R1-36 East: PS&C West: R1-144 EXISTING LAND USE: On-site: Church, classroom, offices, parking North: Residential South: Residential East: Church West: Residential ADJACENT STREETS: The site is located on the northeast corner of Calle Concordia and Calle Buena Vista. SITE ANALYSIS: The church property is a 9.8-acre site that is square in shape. The site is generally flat. The church, offices and classrooms are situated at the southeast side of the site. A paved parking lot occupies the southwestern portion of the site, and a residence is located near the northwestern edge of the parking lot. PLAN ANALYSIS: The Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene is currently master planning their site for the future. The twenty-year-old church has outgrown its current sanctuary, which seats about 250. A larger sanctuary is needed to meet the needs of its growing congregation. Phase I of the plan will include a new sanctuary to initially seat 450. The Church is requesting a variance to allow a height of 29 feet to the peak of the building. A column free space for uninterrupted sight lines is desired, which requires a greater depth and height for structural spans. The greater interior volume provides more favorable acoustics for musical programs and superior aesthetics. The applicant states that the site is not conducive to multi-level entries, and that there would be excessive cost to the Church to excavate, construct, and reinforce retaining walls, and conform to ADA requirements if the finish floor were below grade. SUMMARY: The PS&C "district is intended to provide religious facilities and educational facilities in addition to public schools." The only exceptions to the building height limitation of 18 feet are gymnasiums and steeples, spires, campaniles and towers, which may be up to 25 feet in height. It is suggested that a sanctuary is not dissimilar to a gymnasium in its size, volume and height requirements. Even so, the proposed sanctuary exceeds the allowable height for any structures in this district. 2 The proximity of this property to Canada del Oro High School offsets somewhat the small scale of most of the surrounding properties. The auditorium at the west end of the high school campus is higher and larger scale than the proposed sanctuary. The proposed sanctuary is set back about 350 feet from Calle Concordia and about 400 feet from Calle Buena Vista. The amount of native vegetation and distance to surrounding dwellings would mitigate the impact of the height. The major impacts to be considered are mountain views of Pusch Ridge. All facilities in this district are equally affected by the height limitation. The only other districts where a church can be located are C-1 and C-2. These districts necessitate a conditional use permit for a church, which requires compliance with criteria that include the same height limitation. FINDINGS: The Board of Adjustment should consider the following findings in making its determination: A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; and B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicants; and C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located; and E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. ATTACHMENTS: 1. BOA Application 2. Site Plan 3. Location Map F:\ov\ovio\I997\I0-97-I9\I3OA.RPT 3 09/23/97 Minutes, Board of Adjustment 4 barely visible from Calle Loma Linda and not at all visible from the Calle Concordia view shed. In answer to questions from the Board, Mr. Kuen explained that he did not plant the trees but has maintained them. He also stated that his acreage was 4.3 acres with the closest home approximately 200-220 feet away. In answer to a question from Mr. Mitchell, Manny Padilla stated that they have received no protest from neighbors. MOTION: Richard Moreno MOVED to approve OV10-97-16, Kuehn/Gamble Request, adding that the walls including the parapet walls will not exceed 22 feet in height. Hayward Thresher SECONDED the motion. DISCUSSION: Mr. Thresher noted that the development of the mature trees provide special circumstances and that it is preferable to grant a variance rather than destroy the trees. ROLL CALL VOTE: Mr. Swan - aye Ms. Rivas - aye Mr. Moreno - aye Mr. Mitchell - aye Mr. Thresher - aye Motion carried, 5 - 0. 5. OV10-97-19 PUBLIC HEARING ORO VALLEY CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO THE PERMITTED BUILDING HEIGHT IN THE PS&C ZONING DISTRICT Senior Planner Valerie Feuer reviewed the staff communication stating that the applicant is requesting a variance to the 18 foot maximum building height of PS&C District (Private Schools and Churches) to construct a 29 foot tall sanctuary. She also reported that the church property is a 9.8 acre site that is square and generally flat. The Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene has outgrown its current sanctuary which seats about 250 and the proposed plan will include a sanctuary to initially seat 450. Ms. Feuer also stated that the 29 foot building height variance would allow for column free space for uninterrupted sight lines with the greater interior volume providing more favorable acoustics. She stated that the applicant claims that the site is not conducive to multi-level entries, and that there would be excessive cost to the Church to excavate, construct, and reinforce retaining walls and conform to ADA requirements if the finish floor were below grade. Ms. Feuer further reported that the PS&C district is intended to provide religious facilities and 09/23/97 Minutes, Board of Adjustment 5 educational facilities in addition to public schools. The only exceptions to the building height limitation of 18 feet are gymnasiums, steeples, spires and towers which may be up to 25 feet in height. The proximity of the property to Canada del Oro High School offsets the small scale of most of the surrounding properties. The auditorium at the west end of the high school is higher and of larger scale than the proposed sanctuary. She stated that the proposed sanctuary is set back about 350 feet from Calle Concordia and about 400 feet from Calle Buena Vista. The amount of native vegetation and distance to surrounding dwellings would mitigate the impact of the height. Chairman James Swan swore in all witnesses, applicants and those intending to testify. Mr. Stan Rieder, 11301 N. Silver Pheasant, pastor of the Church of the Nazarene, stated that the church presently has an attendance of approximately 400 people. He displayed a diagram of the site proposal for the sanctuary. He stated that there were concerns expressed regarding traffic during peak hours. He explained that traffic would not be affected as meetings would remain the same and they had no plans to start a school on the property. In answer to questions from Mr. Swan, Mr. Rieder explained that the bell tower would be 25-27 feet tall. He stated that other activities held during the week would be Bible Study and Children and Teen Programs. Mr. Rieder also explained that the existing building is 10,700 square feet in size. Mr. Moreno asked whether they had considered other heights if the Board should not approve the requested 29 foot height. Mr. Reider explained that their architect has stated that it would be exceedingly difficult to have the necessary width for the proposed seating capacity, and there would be acoustical problems if they could not utilize up to the 29 foot height request. Mr. Sid Felker, 50 Linda Vista Boulevard, stated that they have met with neighbors and the neighbors strongly support the variance request. He referenced the support petitions that were signed by surrounding neighbors. He also stated that their church was the only one in a PS&C district that must deal with being beside such massive facilities as Canyon del Oro High School and Dennis Weaver Park and that this presented special circumstances. Mr. Felker showed the Board pictures of the view shed from Calle Concordia and Calle Buena Vista. In answer to questions from the Board, Mr. Felker stated that they would keep the existing facility to use for Sunday School class rooms. He also explained that the building design is now in a Mexican Mission style and they are committed to maintain the architecture and setting of the church. In answer to a question by Mr. Mitchell, Ms. Feuer explained that the architectural plans would have to be submitted to the Development Review Board. 09/23/97 Minutes, Board of Adjustment 6 In answer to a question by Mr. Thresher as to why the Church was requesting 29 feet and not 25 feet, Mr. Felker explained that the architect felt the lowest they could go would be 26 feet but they would like to have up to 29 feet to work with. Mr. Felker showed a picture of the Fine Arts Building at the high school and stated that it is a three story building. In answer to a question from Ms. Rivas concerning special circumstances, he stated that the large, quasi-governmental facility (CDO High School) impacts the entire area surrounding the church but it does not impact other PS&C districts. In answer to a question from Mr. Moreno, Mr. Felker stated that they have had no opposition from neighbors. Mr. Swan asked if the applicants had renderings of the proposed location and building configurations on the property and if they had an elevation of the proposed plan that included the bell tower. He stated that the Board's decision would be based on what the building would ultimately look like, and the Board did not receive any final plans or drawings to help with the determination. Mr. Felker explained that if the Board granted the 29 foot variance request there would be no reason to exceed that. He also stated that the church would not build a facility that would negatively impact the area and that the design plans would need to go before the Development Review Board. Ms. Rivas stated that they would not grant a "blanket" variance and she also felt the Board should have an architects rendering drawn to scale. Brian Hagedon, 4501 E. Tenth Street, architect for the project, stated that the existing building is a flat roof They are looking at a parapeted structure to match the existing buildings and that it would be a tiered structure. He also stated that the plans would be schematic and would be difficult to produce at this time. In answer to a question from Mr. Moreno, Mr. Hagedon stated that they would not know if a 26 foot height would work until they actually got into planning the structure of the building. He stated that 26 feet may work, but if the Board would agree to the 29 foot variance it would be easier to work with. He also stated that the 18 foot limit makes it virtually impossible to build the type of facility that would meet the churches needs. In answer to a concern by Ms. Rivas regarding the return of the applicant if the variance is turned down, Town Attorney Tobin Sidles stated that the Town's policy is for a 6 month waiting period before the applicant could return to the Board of Adjustment with another variance request. Mr. Swan stated that the petitioner must substantiate their needs and the Board must have criteria that meets Findings A-E. He stated that the Board needs a reasonable representation of the final plan, with concrete plans that explain why the church needs 29 feet. He stated that he is looking c ORO VALLEY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV10-97-9 REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Hearing Date: October 21, 1997 Agenda Item No.: REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING CANADA CROSSROADS REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO PERMITTED BUILDING HEIGHT IN THE C-N DISTRICT HISTORY: Last Spring, the Oro Valley Town Council approved a rezoning of a 10 acre parcel, located at the southwest corner of Lambert Lane and La Canada Drive, from R1-144 to C-N. The commercial zoning approved, is in compliance with the Town's adopted Land Use Map. With the approval of this rezoning, a maximum building height, consistent with the adjacent residential district, or 18 feet, was established for the Canada Crossroads project. • Originally, the applicant requested three variances, to building height, the Hillside Development Zone regulations and building volume. After discussion with Staff, it was determined that, per calculations, a building volume variance was not needed. On July 22, 1997, the case was heard for the first time, and the two remaining variances were denied at the close of public hearing. The applicant, Mr. Laidlaw, representing the property owners, then requested reconsideration of the Board's decision on August 26, 1997, and the request was granted. In the meantime, the requests for HDZ and building volume variances were dropped, leaving building height the only issue for debate. Upon a successful motion for reconsideration, a duly noticed public hearing was held. A new exhibit, which did not show the office buildings on the western half of the property, was submitted by the applicant and this, in itself, seemed to create confusion. At the close of public hearing, the Board of Adjustment voted to approve the building height variance to allow 18 foot tall commercial buildings on the eastern half of the site, plus the amount of fill under each of the buildings, as specified on Exhibit "M". Subsequent to the August 26th meeting, Mr. Jerry Roberts, a Rancho Feliz, No. 5, resident, again, requested that this case, and the BOA's decision to approve the height variance, be reconsidered. Based upon the confusion created by the submission of a new plan, minus the office complex, and the assumption by some that the applicant had now, in fact, given up the concept of developing the offices on the property, the BOA again agreed to reconsider the Canada Crossroads height variance on September 23`a. A public hearing could not be scheduled for that same date, however, due to notification requirements. A duly noticed public hearing is scheduled to reconsider the BOA approval of the variance for this date. CLARIFICATION: Today, the Board of Adjustment must affirm, or overturn, its August 26'1' approval of a height variance for Canada Crossroads,to allow 18 foot tall buildings to be placed atop varying amounts of fill, as indicated by Exhibit"M" (see attached for your review). It is true that Exhibit "M"does not depict offices on the upper (western) portion of this site, however, this is not actually relevant to the case at hand. The tentative development plan approved by the Mayor and Council, which is the ONLY approved plan thus far, depicts the offices. As of this date, the office use is approved for this project and any action on the BOA's part, or any verbal agreement made by the applicant, have no effect on the approved uses for this property, and no bearing on this BOA case. Planning Staff suggests that the Board members review Exhibit "M" and decide if the findings can be met on this case to approve a variance to allow 18 foot tall buildings on fill, as shown on Exhibit "M" for the Canada Crossroads project. If so, a motion to re-approve is in order. If, on the other hand, BOA members determine that it was inappropriate to grant such a variance, the decision to approve should be over-turned today. FINDINGS: For your reference: • A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; and B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant; and C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other propel ties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located; and E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. Boa4 2 ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV10-97-21 Hearing Date: October 21, 1997 Agenda Item No.: a REQUEST: META ASSOCIATES REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED CHAPTER 8, SEC. 8-204.D, BUILDING HEIGHT IN A C-i COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. SITE LOCATION: 600 FEET NORTH OF HARDY ROAD, ON THE EAST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD • REQUEST FOR VARIANCE: This request was continued from the September 23, 1997 meeting. The applicant proposes to build a 60,800 square foot nursing/rehabilitative care facility at the above-referenced location. The structure,as proposed, would be a two-story building with a maximum building height in certain areas along the front of the building of up to 30 feet above existing natural grade. To achieve this height,the applicant must receive the BOA's approval of a variance to exceed the 25 foot maximum building height of C-1 District, in which the property is located. The architecture proposed by the applicant features a pitched roof,as opposed to a flat, parapet roof line,which necessitates the added building height. SITE LOCATION: • The proposed site for this project lies approximately 600 feet north of the northeast corner of Hardy Road and Oracle, on a site of approximately 6 acres. A location map is attached for your information. CITIZEN SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: All property owners within 300 feet of this property have been notified of this hearing. At the time of report preparation, Staff has had a number of inquiries regarding the project, including one letter of protest, and some concerns have been expressed regarding obstruction of views for the residents of Shadow Mountain Estates East. Staff has confirmed that residents of that neighborhood will be on hand to present their positions at the meeting. EXISTING ZONING: On-site: C-1. North: R-S South: C-1 East: R1-36, Shadow Mountain Estates East West: Oracle Road and R-6 zoning 1 EXISTING LAND USE: On-site: Vacant natural desert North: Improved drainageway,professional offices and day care center South: Vacant East: Existing residences on 36,000 square foot minimum lots West: SR77 (Oracle Road)and Suntree Apartments ADJACENT STREETS: Oracle Road borders the west property line of the site, which is located between Calle Concordia and Hardy Road. Access to the site will be gained via Oracle Road. SITE ANALYSIS: The subject property is roughly rectangular in shape. From the Oracle Road right-of-way, the terrain slopes steeply upward to the western boundary line of Shadow Mountain Estates East subdivision. The site is in an undisturbed state at this time and is covered with native desert scrub and grasses. Upon initial inspection, no significant vegetation was noted, however, a plant inventory will be performed at the development plan stage of this project to determine the potential salvageability of all native plants on the site. PLAN ANALYSIS: The plan, as presented, includes a large, two-story building to be used as a residential health care facility, for both long- and short-term patients. The building has an irregular footprint and is to be "cut" into the north/south hillside along the east property boundary. This cut, which must be approved by the DRB, will allow the building to be "sunk" into the hillside to help visually minimize the building mass, when viewed from the east. To create the "look" the developer desires,however, a pitched,tile roof is proposed and, in the area of the porte coche, and,perhaps in other isolated areas along the front of the building"wings", a height of up to 30 feet above,existing natural grade is requested. This will add to the building mass across the front of the building, which will be approximately 300 feet from the Oracle Road right-of-way line. As with the Canada Crossroads case, which has been under BOA review over the past few months, we are dealing with a sloped lot (ACS over 6%), which dictates how building height is measured. Fill material placed under the Canada Crossroads project, you will recall, resulted in the request for variance to C-N's.18 foot building height,to permit an 18 foot tall building on top of up to 7 feet of fill. This Meta case is dissimilar to Canada Crossroads, in that fill is not an issue. The building height requested would be all building. Staff notes, however, that the building at the front corners may be cut into the existing slope up to two feet, which may provide some mitigation of building mass when viewed from the west. Its distance from Oracle Road may also be a mitigating factor. As an aside, the Suntree Apartments, directly across Oracle Road from this site consist of large two-story buildings, which Staff estimates to be greater than 30 feet in height. These buildings 2 were constructed prior to annexation by the Town, under Pima County's CB-1 residential development standards, which permit up to 34 feet in height. SUMMARY: The permitted building height in the C-1 zoning district is 25 feet and, in this case, due to the ACS of the property, that building height will be measured from existing grade. Based on the way the building will be measured, it would appear that the top of the building pitch, when viewed from the rear (east side) of the site may be 10 feet or less above existing natural grade, thus mitigating impacts to Shadow Mountain Estates residents. When viewed from Oracle Road (west side), however, the building will appear to be 28 to 30 feet above existing natural grade, or up to 5 feet above that permitted by Code,should this variance be approved. Staff cannot substantiate that a hardship exists for this developer. If this variance is denied, Staff would respectfully suggest that the applicant consider a parapet roof line, with ground-mounted mechanical equipment, to minimize building bulk and obstruction of viewsheds for the neighbors to the east. FINDINGS: The Board of Adjustment should consider the following findings in making its decision: A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; and B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant; and C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial propert rights; and D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located;and E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity,to adjacent.property,to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. ATTACHMENTS: (All attachments listed below were distributed with the 9-23-97 BOA packets) 1. BOA application,with Exhibits, and Citizen Letter 2. Location map 3. Site Plan with cross-sections 4. Proposed architecture • ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV10-97-21 Hearing Date: October 21, 1997 Agenda Item No.: a REQUEST: META ASSOCIATES REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED, CHAPTER 9, Sec. 9-105C SKILLED NURSING CARE FACILITIES SITE LOCATION: 600 FEET NORTH OF HARDY ROAD, ON THE EAST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD REQUEST FOR VARIANCE: • The applicant proposes to build a 60,800 square foot nursing/rehabilitative care facility at the above-referenced location(this is the second variance request proposed by this applicant that is before the Board today). In this case,the variance is to Sec. 9-105.C.3 and 8,which require that: "each patient room shall include private toilet and bathing facilities and shall be designed, and used, for single occupancy"; and for a" certificate of need, as approved by Arizona Department of Health Services, must be provided", respectively. As requested, the variance would allow semi-private rooms and shared bathing facilities. SITE LOCATION: The proposed site for this project lies approximately 600 feet north of the northeast corner of Hardy Road and Oracle,on a site of approximately 6 acres. CITIZEN SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: All property owners within 300 feet of this property have been notified of this hearing. At the time of report preparation, staff has received one comment with no objection to semi-private rooms but objecting to `centralized bathing facilities'. Letter is attached. EXISTING ZONING: On-site: C-1 North: R-S South: C-1 East: R1-36, Shadow Mountain Estates East West: Oracle Road and R-6 zoning EXISTING LAND USE: On-site: Vacant natural desert 1 North: Improved drainageway, professional offices and day care center South: Vacant East: Existing residences on 36,000 square foot minimum lots West: SR77 (Oracle Road) and Suntree Apartments ADJACENT STREETS: Oracle Road borders the west property line of the site, which is located between Calle Concordia and Hardy Road. Access to the site will be gained via Oracle Road. SITE ANALYSIS: The subject property is roughly rectangular in shape. From the Oracle Road right-of-way, the terrain slopes steeply upward to the western boundary line of Shadow Mountain Estates East subdivision. The site is in an undisturbed state at this time and is covered with native desert scrub and grasses. Upon initial inspection, no significant vegetation was noted, however, a plant inventory will be performed at the development plan stage of this project to determine the potential salvageability of all native plants on the site. PLAN ANALYSIS: As this request regards internal building design standards, staff has no comment in regard to a site plan analysis. SUMMARY: Staff has been given a legal opinion that the variance request at hand is beyond the Board of Adjustment's purview. There are no hardships or site considerations for the Board to consider, and staff cannot substantiate that the variance requests meets all of the five findings it must in order to receive approval. The applicant has made a request, and the Planning and Zoning Commission has initiated zoning code amendments to these sections that would codify the variance requested. FINDINGS: The Board of Adjustment should consider the following findings in making its decision: A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; and B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant; and C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and 2 • • D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located; and E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity,to adjacent property,to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. ATTACHMENTS: 1. BOA application . 2. Citizen letter 10-97-21\.3rdboa.rpt • • • ORO VALLEY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV10-97-19 Hearing Date.: October 21, 1997 Agenda Item No: 3 REQUEST: Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene Request for Variance to Sec. 8- 103D, no. 1,Permitted Building Height in the PS&C (Private Schools and Churches) District REQUEST FOR VARIANCE: • The applicant is requesting a variance to the 18-foot maximum building height of the PS&C District, Sec. 8-103D. If approved, construction of a 29-foot tall sanctuary, separate from the existing building, is planned. SITE LOCATION: The Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene is located at 500 West Calle Concordia east of Calle Buena Vista near Canyon del Oro High School. PROPOSED USE: The use proposed for the site is a new church sanctuary, which is allowed in this district and in the General Plan designation for this site. This case was continued from the September 23 Board of Adjustment meeting. The applicants were asked to provide elevations of the proposed building so that BOA members could have a better understanding of the need for the additional 11 feet above the maximum building height. Please see the report for the September 23 meeting for staff analysis of this variance request. • F:\OV\OV I O\I997\I0-97-19\BOA I.RPT • ORO VALLEY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV10-97-19 Hearing Date: October 21, 1997 Agenda Item No: REQUEST: Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene'Request for Variance to Sec. 8- 103D, no. 1, Permitted Building Height in the PS&C (Private Schools and Churches) District REQUEST FOR VARIANCE: The applicant is.requesting a variance to the 18-foot maximum building height of the PS&C District, Sec. 8-103D. If approved, construction of a 29-foot tall sanctuary, separate from the existing building, is planned. This case was continued from the September 23 Board of Adjustment meeting. The applicants were asked to provide elevations of the proposed building so that BOA members could have a better understanding of the need for the additional 11 feet above the maximum building height. SITE LOCATION: The Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene is located at 500 West Calle Concordia east of Calle Buena Vista near Canyon del Oro High School. • PROPOSED USE: The use proposed for the site is a new church sanctuary, which is allowed in this district and in the General Plan designation for this site. CITIZEN SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: All property owners within 300 feet of this property have been notified of this hearing. Staff has received a petition signed by eight neighbors in support of this variance. EXISTING ZONING: On-site: PS&C and R 1-144 North: R1-144 South: R1-36 East: PS&C West: R1-144 EXISTING LAND USE: On-site: Church, classroom, offices, parking North: Residential South: Residential East: Church West: Residential ADJACENT STREETS: The site is located on the northeast corner of Calle Concordia and Calle Buena Vista. SITE ANALYSIS: The church property is a 9.8-acre site that is square in shape. The site is generally flat. The church, offices and classrooms are situated at the southeast side of the site. A paved parking lot occupies the southwestern portion of the site, and a residence is located near the northwestern edge of the parking lot. PLAN ANALYSIS: The Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene is currently master planning their site for the future. The twenty-year-old church has outgrown its current sanctuary, which seats about 250. A larger sanctuary is needed to meet the needs of its growing congregation. Phase I of the plan will include a new sanctuary to initially seat 450. The Church is requesting a variance to allow a height of 29 feet to the peak of the building. A column free space for uninterrupted sight lines is desired, which requires a greater depth and height for structural spans. The greater interior volume provides more favorable acoustics for musical programs and superior aesthetics. The applicant states that the site is not conducive to multi-level entries, and that there would be excessive cost to the Church to excavate, construct, and reinforce retaining walls, and conform tc ADA requirements if the finish floor were below grade. SUMMARY: The PS&C "district is intended to provide religious facilities and educational facilities in addition to public schools." The only exceptions to the building height limitation of 18 feet are gymnasiums and steeples, spires, campaniles.and towers, which may be up to 25 feet in height. It is suggested that a sanctuary is not dissimilar to a gymnasium in its size, volume and height requirements. Even so, the proposed sanctuary exceeds the allowable height for any structures in this district. The proximity of this property to Canada del Oro High School offsets somewhat the small scale of most of the surrounding properties. The auditorium at the west end of the high school campus is higher and larger scale than the proposed sanctuary. 2 The proposed sanctuary is set back about 350 feet from Calle Concordia and about 400 feet from Calle Buena Vista. The amount of native vegetation and distance to surrounding dwellings would mitigate the impact of the height. The major impacts to be considered are mountain views of Pusch Ridge. All facilities in this district are equally affected by the height limitation. The only other districts where a church can be located are C-1 and C-2. These districts necessitate a conditional use permit for a church, which requires compliance with criteria that include the same height limitation. FINDINGS: • The Board of Adjustment should consider the following findings in making its determination: A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape,topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; and B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicants; and C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of•substantial property rights; and D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located; and E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity,to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Consent and Support Petition 2. Site Plan 3. Location Map F:\ov\ovio\I997\I 0-97-19\BOA.RPT 3 Consent and Support Petition To: Oro Valley Board of Adjustment We the undersigned have received notice that the Oro Valley Church of the Nazarene is requesting a variance from the existing zoning requirement so that it will be permitted to build to a height of 29' at its location at 500 Calle Concordia as more specifically set forth in its petition to the Board of Adjustment. We understand that the hearing is scheduled for September 23, 1997. We consent to and lend our support to the variance requested by the Church. Name: Add/r/esss: /- 4 C D�GY 4, (-1 /0 --�-01' CLA, 7 11) Master F'Iari for ( urch Campus (Phase I) 1-11111111a.1111rt-. -► t ._.+ + - , I .ekt .. :'0_ % e v a tiep • 1 ' _ --: Cbti+rcb } It .i •-• . 'ij' t t,, � - to tP.. � „__ .1 I.; . ele .40°' e , Nazarene i C I I i i •?.. _ ''-e: . - .. I r ii r F 4 }_\\\rX,, , t 1 .:.1 i t , - p.77,43.1) '..! • .‘,,; ;P-- _AI, 1-7...k • ,OPA.-- -4k-..:, ' i : it L. . , - ` � - 7 F— New Sanctuary 1 `ram ,, ., ,, ,4 r- rii$0,1-4, 5 ;j f tit40,W *" • . e r. �'" _• -is1sue,.,,,--,1.>t4.0 .(- . C- t ,�-�.r' +0' ': . ;! ;P .1 Vic+ `•�,•dig. ' �s i. • ,►:a . , . , ti.r . .,. igit . , S - . -t., .. r.' , is , - f)k ' ti°9 0"..." l't 4 --Til-d.V -...,,,, ; c i - ,i' ..7144,...kt, • lit/ L......-:. •:-..v• -__.,1 i nkti +o \``. 'i a;- .. 'toIL architects to memoir 5 ; ,- .. AO O.' 15 ..,........ as Ci4i'• , 41*44• . a,,,, 0...--3. °Pt t , 4. ea_ .; _ ft, i _ -vi .ttel:tttttt _____Ilt,t, 11 I''f \' I- . L' 4+ . 1 471111111111t11110/1111/111111HIN111111111r1IMIIIIIIIIh_. ... - J \..—_" CaIIe Concordia - - • 0 8.Golden Gem PI Qe o rve,.ai 2 f • 5\u9ar oat H -o rti m Tan•a 9.Lonestar Mine PI D ••� C 'I )J o m- / 10.Crystalline Wy �� �S. ° Dle rnn QOa� o �•: 'T orre 11.Rose Quartz PI = °an, ,��At I{ Ra g I•` °7ipan 12.Feather Grass I q Q \ Ses �, //d Strad^Pata ` Bar/ Gl. IBA: I - 10 y °i° �.Palisades i _ e9 a°shp Berry PI -� d Elem tart' x T/ " �. •t. i �A c c ry um 11\ •• a••estone o G 14.Running River PI - y PI st e via pl1e.,y am,0_, t °•:.. • 16.Crystal Vision St h `) • P R o° i 17.Copper Creek Dr c N , �r Kai Way _a / N 3�nio _ > •Qo 18.Canada Creek PI P fs. \\ �• : n _ < �� ti �, d 19.Lone Mountain PI S'^'-, • U I a 2 :'r•. G'N�M rj n nu !o: '� �ld`L/ *r e E. Q II ` .. E7 o' Par-dise Dr 1 ge Ct W gla vm 8sr Ct- o o I. ) 1 ' l� IvywO° ,.. •• Police a, Naranja Drive u �e Ha 4' Mt;°,.ate , @ t 3 ' 1 y m o St o �, \ P C S, m c r do o PI SSI' • ToWh - m d `oo o �' Hall'�a r e Eagle ' .-Cana'Cres PI W .� Sao ' Cat co 040 "�-a _ �- �o wy •� Baser r WEST 0 EAST S" y 'g/ands Drrve �° -. v c� O, ea\ve\\Pt� ke ; \ co '"�' .,.,. s St A.DesertForstCt Sone c d I .e+�� r B.La Quinta PI : a A Cl C.Camoustie PI a v. - e `6o .o • D.HoneybeePL co eQ\e d aP,/ ,`,o Cha-'c Qir E.fallen Leaf Dr • U �� 'o dP e °�, i , .• s St y •? .� c F.Short Puri PI N o c s a O a1_, • x '' acp S IIII \w / c,, C.c o -Ulf3 2oO°PI o ; �j?Rl1To St C� o ege'. QNer/ o a lack ° °PI <o ° f m GJw9Ta>TToa ! St gn•°teC\/. / / Cypr�s Ct �O = l._ gy` Y .a " �;,.,.•�.. � R - MP01" • O` r °• '" ' V,2 a I c Stara • Oaf • •Ilk, •_s.. 000 ° Matterhorn Street �,• '• • Three 0 a ',,it, 'lr Dr c 1. eisshorn PI g pI v '-a�,,� •. m• • A.Himalay��N,�✓ /. rye F 2 2.Matterhorn PI y • e am a LaG j C•.MPnt Blanc Ave ' G.BlackSereCanyon C[ 3.Desert Greens Way/ .m O°�e .t- . .Rainier Ave H.Serenade St '.,twat'•oof Ct "� Oa Qua• `a, • - •�-' E.l ttafinn Ave Pucrh View N a I.Pebble o N rs� see A ✓ •F.Kilimanjaro Ave J.Cool Breeze Ct J j \ = PPo, 0 9. y, '�O O v 6 •o -4. M Hea, ,,- ro H P\ taco - Y,00\ ''no°"-. - d P-9 e.e` •'Q/ alley %. .. Ca A s = x �s0e, •., he,.°� /N tk Or sv o a d _ P•oi oel ff° 09 • Ro• sr o Camino Diestro °°_ _ ' �) 15.Renard PI i a Inv I r o / q rd0a o la Corn ressio�' 4 0� ^Anna 16�founr.in R'•.e Or A Crooked Stick Dr �e J S E Cortd c °Oe.O c ossum Ridge B.Saw Grass PI Silve.•••I va0e a0 °° ; , . 3 \\ee 11seeilrar krt /• C.Spyglass PI , } =_ m 1.Sandwed_•e?f� 11 Farm W O°'� I f Sa�a�` s�e 13.Mi%ywettSpr g PI Vall ,. I D.Southem Pines%r win,.0°d o+ El nn piictad n ds P O I Cony o a C•.ma I 4.CorbettLn Go o ° 9Ln�tla d 5'obble ood Wy . A r 111114040.= c Q>r°\a o ..Kra ootl Li-• 'Valoro Dr "e • ,. a o-o °° „ G0 ^ 7.P.ossum Ru Ln G �y S� v •o°v a a4' H h 8'ossum Creek Ln , y 3 •\• - E.CarolwoodDr • 0 m orooa `°a e �• - F.SilverstonePI �a/o ^ t Staaao° (VOW; Oe\ A est Ln c tee. e' `o l < , S1 5 ista R Q\ d PI fi*4. o° H d St o�,"P oso '`'°cGolden un P '" • ne Ln 44. N�0r add1eh co /;.'I., gi LindalVista Boulevard G,Ridge Glow PI -„ lr \ Rancho SPiece a ORO VALLEY CHURCH ihosro G a OF THE NAZARENE At e r ty, Dr :° ��`� P/ °° Dutton ti ,, P� _ ji, Dennis High . * o Wilke high Weaver School C Plal:W Public School Park ales raja . Overton Road Calls Corcordia- - • „ V�� rroN A .y„ • 1cY�. .q C •Hdls P Vista D: r ro S 4f Dt o • °�Me w r ca°ada etc Newton Drive O� J ''� =Brook PI• "• t' A� h (Birch o / Way g a.. E J .c �� + r r; HickoryDr �' • D. c' ,•.� afi qe Pl/) m _ n• e o P r (IauektoR. ;.V 'A' ci Yn h ow o ` \n PI �` . c 1 °nn.ge Dt �p L `?Hard ^ �1 '1.1 • 11111F New y ' ) �•• ? �ireil °ao port Dr �• r---) 1- 04 l� S I •ea �Td'.S..—. a �} , 6 ,,, ., Ca Zafiro t 0, o _fie :,w ��• . • c Cr C/ Aa' Visto Pr ,1 V.- 'O.-•amain j " Ca DadNo Camino Cortaro ing 0 0 6 s, n C - r . 4i •,talm. hallows '11'-�" -= "1. ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV10-97-22 Hearing Date: October 21, 1997 Agenda Item No.: q REQUEST: SAN JOSE PLAZA/HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS — REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO SEC. 8-704D, PERMITTED BUILDING HEIGHT IN A C-2 ZONING DISTRICT • SITE LOCATION: 800 FEET NORTH OF EL CONQUISTADOR WAY, ON THE EAST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD BACKGROUND: Earlier this year, the Mayor and Council approved a rezoning of the subject property to C-2, for a phased commercial project, to include two restaurants, small retail uses and a two-story hotel (Holiday Inn). The latter, the largest building on the site, has been presented for DRB and Staff review. The Development Review Board heard this case on September 9`h, but continued this case, pending the outcome of the BOA variance request. Architectural approval, had it been given by the DRB last month, of course, would have been subject to the BOA's approval of a height variance. REQUEST FOR VARIANCE: The architectural elevations submitted for the Holiday Inn Express depict a two-story structure, with approximately 45,000 square feet of floor space under roof. The building features a pitched roof line at the 30 foot above finish grade level. The decorative tower, however, exceeds the building height, as mentioned, by 15 feet. It is the applicant's request,then,that the Board of Adjustment approve a 15 foot height variance to the permitted building height, limited to the bell tower only. The applicant alleges that the Town's current zoning regulation for building height in the C-2 District "limits creativity and affects aesthetics". The applicant incorrectly states that the 30 foot height limitation is tied to the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District Regulations. The 30 foot height limitation is imposed as one of the development standards of the C-2 Zoning District. SITE LOCATION: • The Holiday Inn Express site lies north of El Conquistador Way,on the east side of Oracle. It is to be the first structure on a 13.4 acre commercial site and this building is to be sited near its center, close to Oracle Road. • CITIZEN SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: All property owners within 300 feet of this property have been notified of this hearing, including adjacent El Conquistador Resort Patio Homes owners and the Sheraton El Conquistador Manager. At the time of report preparation, no comments, either pro or con, had been registered with Staff, however, we may anticipate public input at the meeting, perhaps, from a rather active El Conquistador Resort Patio Homeowners Association. EXISTING ZONING: On-site: Conditional C-2 North: R1-144 South: R-4R East: R-4R West: R-6 (west side of Oracle) EXISTING LAND USE: On-site: Vacant natural desert North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Existing patio home development West: SR77 (Oracle Road)and an Alzheimer's Care Facility (under construction) ADJACENT STREETS: Oracle Road borders the west property line of the site. Access to the site will be gained via Oracle Road at two points. A private residential street, Camino Diestro, abuts a portion of the 13.4 acre site to the east. SITE ANALYSIS: The subject property has been disturbed along its southern boundary and an unnatural slope has resulted. The property is relatively flat to the northwest and southwest, but slopes steeply to the northeast. The northeast slope, and a small area at the southwest corner of the property will remain in a natural state. The balance of the property will be mass-graded, prepared for construction and, then,those areas not involved in the hotel or ancillary parking at the outset,will be hydroseeded. PLAN ANALYSIS: The architecture presented for the Holiday Inn Express appears attractive and in scale for the area and the use. It is the applicant's assertion that the 45 foot bell tower provides architectural embellishment and that it is "an integral part of the style of the'proposed building". The applicant has correctly raised an issue with Staff regarding building height in the nearby Rooney Ranch PAD (the Fry's Food Store, for instance). PADs are master-planned communities, which often have a separate set of development standards. In the case of the Rooney PAD, building height is restricted 2 to 30 feet, however, campaniles, towers and other types of architectural embellishment are not subject to building height restrictions. The proposed bell tower is approximately 13 feet square and it occupies approximately 16% of the building's lineal front footage. Staff notes that, while the tower is visible from,all four sides of the building, it is not shown on the east (rear) elevation in the drawings submitted. It was the applicant's intent that the BOA should view the building without the tower to get an idea as to its mass with, and without,the tower. SUMMARY: The permitted building height in the C-2 zoning district is 30 feet, with no exceptions. Since the portion of the property where the hotel is to be built is relatively flat, measurement will be taken from finish grade. A review of the site plan submitted for the hotel reveals that, at the northwest corner, the building will be set on up to 5 feet of fill. At the southeast corner, the building will be "cut into"the site by several feet. Based on the slope of the land under the hotel, the fill does NOT count toward the building height, as it did with the recently considered Canada Crossroads commercial project. While Staff finds the building, complete with tower, to be attractive, we find difficulty in substantiating that a hardship exists,which would necessitate the granting of this variance. FINDINGS: The Board of Adjustment should consider the following findings in making its decision: A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; and B. That special circumstances were not created by the,owner or applicant; and C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located;and E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity,to adjacent property,to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. ATTACHMENTS: 1. BOA application, with Exhibits 2. Site Plan with Location Map(upper right hand corner) 3. Proposed architecture 3 Jan-21 -97 08:33A Town of Oro Valley 520 742 1022 P . 02 DPP CASE NO.: pPpJPLLEY Oy9 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT t %- APPLICATION � �C:\•i/mil i a i ?a '"MEOW y FOR: 1 Zoning Variance 404 1 1,9/ Zoning Interpretation Appeal of Administrative Decision NATURE OF REQUEST: toiAtvE ` r' Ngit14r L1rnrr Fog. ti NI( 1 AtctirreCTuitAL PLEME.JJt Z"aweg.) APPLICANT: 0-14A iEc 14MSkV ADDRESS: 141444 . 134ca4C QAt1 OWNER: ,TES 1k7U,4 JGtJIA — 1-louDhA Imo,/ 5XPRESS ADDRESS: 6.`7 1 E. 15if- 4L if S51 tb PROPERTY LOCATION/ADDRESS: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ✓tL AT aro ACREAGE: 2 CURRENT ZONING: C15-2 APPLICABLE FEE: 41SJ400:':c' ATTACHMENTS: Aleat rrgC TU4AI. r.G ev tZb&5 ( i3) LE4&- lArScat-tro J • V/a/77 SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT ( DAT 1 Jan-'21 -97 08 : 33A Town of Oro Valley 520 742 1022 P . 03 SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE 1. Identify difficulties or problems that would result from complying with the present zoning requirements. (1,0gAtafr Zaawej Ce4J1,e-ne s LIVS%LT clea4TWITY ANIP AFFECT' TILE A Sjltf tlei7. 2. Identify and explain all unique and peculiar circumstances that would prevent you from complying with the present zoning requirements on your property in regard to the following areas (slope,narrowness, shallowness,irregular shape.location, washes. vegetation and easements. etc.). Meld 3. Identify and explain any peculiar conditions in the surrounding area which would keep you from complying with the present zoning requirements. N,QAt ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 4. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: . The most current available list of all property owners within 300 feet of the property, including mailing addresses. This list may be obtained from the Pima County Assessor's Office and the date such list was obtained. 8 copies of dimensioned plot plan, if applicable 8 copies of dimensioned floor plan, if applicable 8 copies of building elevations, if applicable • An estimate of the incremental cost of the change in, or additions to, the property, such estimated cost to be endorsed as accurate by a Iicensed contractor or engineer. Any additional comments/information you wish to provide regarding your request. 2 Engineering • Planning Surrveeyinginn•Urban Design Landscape Architecture roupc September 11, 1997 Donald L. Chatfield, AICP Planning and Zoning Director Town of Oro Valley 11000 North La Canada Tucson, Arizona 85737 SEP 151997 Subject: San Jose Plaza - Holiday Inn Express Height Limit Variance Dear Mr. Chatfield: As a follow up to the DRB review of the Architecture for the above project we- are requesting a variance to the 30' height limit defined in the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District. As we explained during the DRB meeting the purpose of the variance- is to allow an Architectural element i.e. 45' high Spanish styled "Bell Tower" on our building. We believe the tower to be an integral part of the style of our proposed building. When we originally zoned the site we informed all concerned, staff, P & Z and the adjoining home owner's association that we intended to pursue a variance that would allow the construction of a tower. At the time there idea of the main building exceeding 30' however no objections our proposed tower. We feel our site offers a unique opportunity for a tower as the site has rather high hills both to the North and South. In addition, the scenic view to the Catalinas which is-above the 45' tower height will not be impacted. It is my understanding that the 30' height limit in the ORSCOD is there to preserve the views to the Catalinas. Don, as usual, we are in a bit of a time crunch. It would be great if the Board of Adjustment could act on this request prior to the scheduled October I4th DRB hearing. Engineering • Planning • Surveying • Urban Design • Landscape Architecture Offices located in Tucson, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Victor Valley, California 4444 East Broadway • Tucson, Arizona 85711 • (520) 881-7480 • FAX (520) 881-7492 The3 Group Inc. If you have any question or comments, please contact me at 88I-7484. Thank you. Sincerely, THE WLB GROUP, INC. Charley W. Hulsey, AICP Director of Planning and Landscape Architecture El Conquistador Resort Patio Homes Association P.O. Box 40790 • Tucson,Arizona 85717 • Phone:(520)722-6500 • Fax:(520)722-6619 'rtet October 13, 1997 0Cj ofO s199j Don Chatfield to// Director, Planning and Zoning Dept. ef' Town of Oro Valley Board of Adjustment 11000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 Re: San Jose Plaza/Holiday Inn Express Dear Mr. Chatfield: On October 8, 1997, Mr. Charles Hulsey, with The WLB Group, Inc., made a presentation to the El Conquistador Resort Patio Homes Association's Board of Directors regarding the Holiday Inn Express's request for a variance to the permitted building height for their facility at the San Jose Plaza. The residents of the Association, particulary those living close to the proposed project, have long been concerned about the scope of the project. This presentation provided a better understanding of the architectural aspects of the project, and after reviewing the proposed central tower, the Association does not perceive any problems with the request for a variance. The Association appreciated the opportunity to review the submitted plans, and some members of the Association may be in attendance for the public hearing on Tuesday, October 21, 1997, at 3:00 p.m., at the Oro Valley Town Hall. Should you have any questions or concerns in reference to this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at 722-6500. Sincerely, Kim M. Eaton Stratford Management For the El Conquistador Resort Patio Homes Association ORO VALLEY PLANNING &ZONING DEPARTMENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV10-97-23 Hearing Date: October 21, 1997 Agenda Item No.5: REQUEST: The applicant requests an approval to construct a six (6) foot high masonry wall on the front (north) property line, abutting Calle Concordia, to screen an existing horse arena and stables. Pursuant to the above- referenced code section, a wall at this location would be limited to a maximum of 4 feet, 6 inches in height. BACKGROUND: The existing property improvements consist of a residence, a guesthouse, horse stalls and arena. The Town permitted the horse stalls on January 5, 1995 with the restrictions of no more than five horses and prohibited of any commercial activity. Zoning enforcement monitors the property for compliance to the horse restrictions and has found the property consistently with more horses than is permitted by the Town. To date, the Town has mailed two certified letters, informing the property owner of the horse violation. The property continues to remain in violation of the horse restriction. A citation is pending before the Magistrate Court if a resolution of this violation is not achieved by October 18, 1997. SITE LOCATION: The property is located at 777 W. Calle Concordia, a portion of lot 8 in the Campo Bello subdivision. SITE SIZE: The property is 3.3 acres in size. PROPOSED USE: The proposed use is to screen the horse use area from the Calle Concordia view shed with a six-foot high wall along the front property line. CITIZEN SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: All property owners within 300 feet of the subject property have been notified of the public.hearing. taff has received no comments on this variance. I_ �; S << 0 00\c-1 i k 6-,c ''-QC EXISTING ZONING: On-site : R1-144 North: R1-144 South: R1-144 East: R1-144 West EXISTING LAND USE: On-site : Single family residence North: Single family residence South; Single family residence East: Single family residence West: Single family residence ADJACENT STREETS: The property is adjacent to Calle Concordia, between Calle Loma Linda and Calle Buena Vista SITE ANALYSIS: The property is relatively flat, with dense native desert vegetation beyond the areas built-out. The residential unit and guesthouse are located on the south half of the property and the horse stalls and arena located in the front half, against Calle Concordia. LAND USE ANALYSIS Staff is concerned that such a wall, of 6 foot high along the front property line, will change the character of the neighborhood and the intent of the R-144 zoning of providing acre lots with larger than average open front yards. Staff is also concerned,based on the improvements to the property of six horse stalls within the stables, approximately six to eight horse ramadas outside the stables, and the clearing of land adjacent to the horse arena that the owners have expanded the horse improvements beyond the limitations of 5 horses. Aside from the reasons given by the applicant, a screen wall of 6 feet along Calle Concordia will also hamper the ability of the Town to monitor the permitted use of the property, allowing 5 horses from the prohibited use of commercial stables. In the review of this request, staff finds that the existing horse arena fencing is also in violation of the height limits for walls and fences within the front yard setback area. Wit is the Board's desire to grant the variance, the arena fencing will be in compliance. If the Board denies the variance, any portion of the existing arena fencing located within the front yard area shall be brought into compliance at a height not to exceed 4 feet, 6 inches. PLAN ANALYSIS: The submitted plan indicates(to scale)where the existing improvements are in relation to each other and the property lines. The applicant indicates the property has a very high profile and seeks protection, privacy and the safety of her horses. 2 FINDINGS: The Board of Adjustment should consider the following findings in making its decision: A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property refereed to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surrounding s which do not apply to other properties in the district; and B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant; and C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges in consistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located; and E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. ATTACHMENTS: 1. BOA application, with plot plan 2. Permit with horse restriction on property 3 CASE NO.: oo�P.LEY 4,9,e0 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 1467triibilikq APPLICATION 700,70E 0,91s FOR: /Zoning Variance Zoning Interpretation Appeal of Administrative Decision NATURE OF REQUEST;., 4 sik i of boa. // C iOrt file_ nor side of +h j0 rofe,rJ APPLICANT: Shy I(e7 � l� . I'4 ()5 eh��rol ADDRESS: 7 7 L J. n //� l�o�l6,0 rGl i aJJ OWNER: Sa rn 2 - ADDRESS: PROPERTY LOCATION/ADDRESS: 777 G0, 6./le LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (6 C4 S (4Y p0 2) 1 o ACREAGE: Si CURRENT ZONING: APPLICABLE FEE: 'I00 . 00 ATTACHMENTS: /Of 4-10--eti/‘t/t o a /�97 SIGNA OF APPLICANT DATE 1 SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE 1. Identify difficulties or problems that would result from complying with the present zoning. requirements. it VI doef C jup o vc,r - a 4f 6 . iY) h0r5e5 a-re- rS 7 oo��n a± '� /Mf.n -r-uc.14s y r7 D � + ne,� - pvvlr,U' n I i-i by �. 2. Identify and explain all unique and peculiar circumstances that would prevent you from complying with the present zoning requirements on your property in regard to the following. areas (slope,narrowness, shallowness, irregular shape,location, washes, vegetation and easements. etc.). he, On l It la.0 v-t wl• ec.r(Al a '/!t ho r+Im ode, , Th Aire cam& 1-e,Y,c-I is End 6 ' wall -� pro-Fed- ry.y 'e r u cull rw y horses . 3. Identify and explain any peculiar conditions in the surrounding area which would keep you from complying with the present zoning requirements. Sass sti any ou re ) ptS SAvd fs Gho o I ra.ffi�} sew li '� 6 i iCo,,s mcM c c,Qe o a.J-e M-kn. 2 err q-f e S' �i ho-2 s e s ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 4. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: The most current available list of all property owners within 300 feet of the property, including mailing addresses. This list may be obtained from the Pima County Assessor's Office and the date such list was obtained. 8 copies of dimensioned plot plan, if applicable 8 copies of dimensioned floor plan, if applicable 8 copies of building elevations, if applicable An estimate of the incremental cost of the change in, or additions to, the property, such estimated cost to be endorsed as accurate by a licensed contractor or engineer. Any additional comments/information you wish to provide regarding your request. ,6,1 Q W ki) psi(*1) te proreAY3 c4-41 wovid vs ., / ice, 2 Sam p r/VA ARTICLE 1-7. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Sec. 1-701 Scope The Board of Adjustment shall hear and decide requests for variances and appeals of interpretations of this Code in accordance with A.R.S., Section 9-462.06. Sec. 1-702 Powers and Duties A. Interpretation The Board of Adjustment shall interpret this Code on appeal when: 1. There is a dispute between the appellant and the Planning and Zoning Director or other Town Official as to a decision or interpretation as set forth in Sec. 1-706; or 2. The location of a zoning district is in doubt. B. Variances The Board of Adjustment may allow variances from the provisions of this Code in accordance with Sec. 1-709, Findings. Sec. 1-703 Meetings. Administration of Oaths and Compelling Attendance of Witnesses All meetings of the Board shall be held at the call of the Chairman and at such other times as the Board may determine. All meetings of the Board shall be open to the public. The Chairman, or in his absence, the acting Chairman, may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses in accordance with the laws of the State of Arizona. Sec. 1-704 Composition A. Appointment: The Board of Adjustment shall be composed of five members appointed by the Town Council. B. Terms: Appointments are for staggered terms of two years each with no limit on the number of terms. C. Vacancies: Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired portion of that term within a reasonable time period as provided for by appointments of the Town Council. D. Removal: The Town Council has the authority to remove, by majority vote, any member for neglect of duty, inefficiency or misconduct in office. 3 Sec. 1-705 Transaction of Business A. The Board of Adjustment shall conduct its business in accordance with the Arizona Revised Statutes and applicable Town regulations and any rules and procedures as adopted by the Town Council. B. The Town Clerk, or an appointed representative from the Town Clerk's office, shall serve as the Executive Secretary of the Board of Adjustment and the minutes and records of all board proceedings will be kept and filed as public record in the files of the Town Clerk. Sec. 1-706 Appeals from Administrative Decisions Appeals may be taken to the Board of Adjustment by persons aggrieved or by any officer. department. board or bureau of the municipality affected by a decision of an administrative official. within 30 days. by filing with the officer from whom the appeal is taken. and with the Board of Adjustment. a notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof. The officer from whom the appeal is taken shall forthwith transmit all papers constituting the record upon which the action appealed from was taken. Said appeal shall be filed on a form provided by the Town Clerk. A. An appeal shall stay all proceedings in the matter appealed from unless the officer from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the Board that, by reason of the fact stated in the certificate. the stay would, in his opinion, cause imminent peril to life or property. In such case. proceedings shall not be stayed, except by restraining order granted by the Board or by a court of record on application and notice to the officer from whom the appeal is taken. The Board shall fix a reasonable time for hearing the appeal and give notice thereof to the parties in interest and the public. B. The concurring vote of a majority of the Board shall be necessary to reverse any order or decision of an administrative official, or to pass or to affect any variations from the terms and conditions of this ordinance. Sec. 1-707 Application for Variances Application for a variance of zoning regulations shall be made to the Board of Adjustment in the form of a written application. Said application shall be filed with the Town Clerk upon forms provided by the Board of Adjustment and shall be accompanied by: A. Plans and description sufficient to indicate the nature of the project involved and the proposed use with ground plans and elevations of all proposed buildings. B. Evidence satisfactory to the Board of Adjustment of the ability and intention of the applicant to proceed with actual construction work in accordance with said plans within 6 months after issuance of the variance. C. A filing fee according to the fee schedule adopted by the Town Council. The owner of a nonconforming sign shall not be required to pay a filing fee when applyinjfor a variance from the ordinance that renders the sign nonconforming. 4 . D. From the time of filing the application until the time of such hearing, the application and all maps, plans and other accompanying data shall be available for public inspection during office hours at the office of the Town Clerk. Sec. 1-708 Hearing and Notice Upon receipt in proper form of any such application, the Board of Adjustment shall proceed to hold a public hearing upon said application not more than 30 days, nor less than 15 days, after such filing, at which time all persons shall be given an opportunity to be heard. Such Board of Adjustment shall cause one notice of such hearing to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Oro Valley and one notice to be posted on the subject property, giving at least 15 days notice of said hearing, and the time and place where said hearing will be held. Said notice, both as published and posted, shall also show the nature of the variance or exception requested and state that anyone wanting to protest may appear in person or by writing. All property owners within 300 feet must be notified. Sec. 1-709 Findings A variance from the provisions of this Code shall not be authorized unless the Board shall find upon sufficient evidence: A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district; and B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant; and C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located; and E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. Sec. 1-710 Action The Board shall prescribe, in connection with any variance, such conditions as the Board may deem neces-sary in order to fully carry out the provisions and intent of this Code. Such conditions may include, among other things, a limitation of the time for which such variance shall be valid. Violation of any such condition shall be a violation of this ordinance and such violation shall render the variance null and void. • �45�. ..y w .�-�. u_ ice_ it s..='S(.'-✓1 ....'.1 a - .r .. _.! _ .. • Sec. 1-711 Review Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Board after hearing on application made by any taxpayer or municipal officer, may petition for a writ of certiorari to review the Board's decision pursuant to ARS Section 9-465 (1956) as amended. FEE SCHEDULE For applications or appeals involving construction of any nature, and which require legal advertising and posting of property affected, the fee shall be determined upon the total valuation of the improvements to be made, as follows: Developers Individuals To and including $5,000 $ 200.00 S 110.00 Each additional S1,000 or fraction 20.00 10.00 Maximum fee 1,000.00 500.00 For application of a variance of an appeal not involving construction of any nature 200.00 100.00 For parking variance 200.00 100.00 For appeal of decision on home occupation N/A 100.00 For postponement of hearing after legal notices have be publicized 100.00 50.00 For applications or appeals which do not require legal notices or postings, the fees are: Developers Individuals For changes estimated to cost $5,000 or less 100.00 55.00 Each additional $1,000 of estimated cost 20.00 10.00 - Maximum fee 500.00 250.00 • �+3.ifGw •z.,ors.s +c V"`-+.'w,4:[C� hiY.a- r"" ,''eSira:.r�.«..-3�C1 .+K "A"+^' ."a'4- ^"r}?�,+`A'•