Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV139922 MINUTES OF THE ORO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING Tuesday March 9th, 1999 CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present Patti Jo Lewis, Chair Mary Glueck, Vice Chair Richard Underwood,Member Nancy Mager, Member Jim Vogelsberg,Member Verlin Smith,Member Others Present: Valerie Feuer, Senior Planner Paul Nzomo, Engineer Shirley Gay, Clerk MOTION: Moved, seconded (Mager/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Underwood absent)to approve the February 9th, 1999 Development Review Board Meeting as written. Richard Underwood joined meeting. CONSENT AGENDA A. OV13-99-18 GOLF CART GARAGE ADDITON, 14645 N.DEL WEBB VLVD. B. OV13-99-19 FRONT ROOM ADDITION, 14508 N.LOST ARROW C. OV13-99-21 CUSTOM HOME, RANCHO VISTOSO 11 H & N, FOURTH GREEN AT VISTOSO, LOT 24 D. OV13-99-23 FRONT AROOM ADDITION, 1794 E LONE RIDER WAY E. OV13-97-68 RANCHO VISTOSO 10M, MARVILLA, DAVID BAIRD, MODEL REVISION F. OV13-97-68 RANCHO VISTOSO 10M, MARAVILLA, DAVID BAIRD, MAILBOX SHELTER G. OV13-97-68 RANCHO VISTOSO 10M, MARAVILLA, DAVID BAIRD, ENTRY MONUMENT AND LANDSCAPE H. OV13-99-20 RANCHO VISTOSO 11 AJ, VISTOSO GOLF CASITAS II ARCHITECTURE I. OV12-98-21 RANCHO VISTOSO 11 AJ, VISTOSO GOLF CASITAS II 03-09-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 2 LANDSCAPE PLAN Valerie Feuer informed the Board on item H, there was a change on the color of the tile at the request of Vistoso Partners, this tile matched more closely the tile at the Vistoso Casitas. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 6-0 vote to recommend approval of Consent Agenda Items A thru I subject to staff conditions. REGULAR AGENDA OV13-99-22 THE BOULDERS AT LA RESERVE REQUEST TO REMOVE CHIMNEY CAPS Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. She explained that Greystar Multi- family Services is requesting the chimney cap be eliminated because they have become a serious liability to the ownership of the property. Approximately six of the chimney caps that are installed over the spark arrestors have been torn loose by high winds. The situation can pose extreme liability to the applicant and potential danger to residents. The applicant has explored replacing the caps with a heavier gauge steel or different design. Due to the replacement cost, the applicant is requesting that the DRB allow the chimney caps to be removed entirely, exposing the spark arrestor. The chimney cap has been required by DRB for aesthetics and is not a building code requirement. Staff recommends that DRB remove the condition for the chimney caps for this project only. Member Smith commented that the condition states that an Oro Valley approved chimney cap be used. Who approved it? Valerie Feuer explained that it is a standard design that was approved by Oro Valley at one time, it is for aesthetic purpose to hide the spark arrestor. David Vanek, Construction Manager, Greystar Services explained to the Board because of the location of the Boulders, there is a lot of wind, these events are unpredictable and he feels this is an extreme liability and dangerous situation, changes need to be made. Member Underwood suggested that on one of the buildings take off the chimney caps paint the arrestor the same color of the building and the DRB go on site to see what the building would look like without the chimney cap. Valerie Feuer commented the Board needs to decide if it is important to have a chimney cap or decide to remove them for this one time purpose only. Member Glueck felt it was a tuff call because if this is approved would some one else want to do the same thing. Member Smith felt it also a liability to the Town and the Town needs to look into this with an engineer to see if a better, safer design would improve these situations. Member Glueck agreed it would be a good idea to go on to the site and see what it would like without the chimney cap. 03-09-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 3 MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Smith) and carried by a 6-0 vote to continue this item to the April 13t" DRB meeting pending a site tour and look at proposed recommendation from the Town and Engineer staff to provide a safer chimney cap. OV12-99-4 CASAS ADOBES BAPTIST CHURCH AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. Cella Barr Associates, representing the Casas Adobes Baptist Church request DRB recommendation for a revised development plan, which was previously approved by Pima County. The Church is located within the newly annexed area and is west of the Canada Hills PAD, approximately 1/2 mile east of Shannon Road. The Church is 85 acres in size with twenty-five structures scattered throughout the site. This site will consist of a church, daycare, and parochial school. One of the original classrooms was deleted. Six modulars were also added. A Central Plant addition and storage units were also added to this plan. The existing development was approved under Pima County standards and since the amendments are less than 25%of the site, Oro Valley standards do not apply to the existing buildings. The grading and paving for this site is completed and School, Daycare, and Worship buildings are completed with the exception of the Chapel and Fellowship Hall which will be added. The Workshop and Gymnasium are existing structures, which were approved under Pima County standards. A multi-purpose athletic field and basketball courts are located along the southeastern corner of the site. The access to this site is off Lambert Lane and La Cholla Boulevard. Valerie Feuer had an added condition addressing the time frame that the modulars would be set-up. Staff recommends a five year time frame and after that time an option tocome back to Staff for approval of the extension of time allowed for the modulars to be up. Paul Nzomo introduced the Engineer's report into the record. The development of Casas Adobes Church is not anticipated to significantly impact La Cholla Boulevard and Lambert Lane intersection during weekdays operations. However, on Sundays, site generated traffic has the potential to significantly impact traffic operations on La Cholla Boulevard and particularly at the intersection of La Cholla Boulevard and key intersections from Ina Road north to Lambert Lane during the Sunday entering and exiting peak hours. It is recommended to have at a minimum, uniformed officer traffic control on Sundays prior to and extending throughout the peak hours of the church. It is also recommended that a traffic management plan be developed in concert with the Town and church officials that could promote car-pooling and ride sharing amongst the congregation in order to reduce the total number of trips. This site has already been graded and paved. Staff recommends approval for the Casas Adobes Baptist Church Amended Develop Plan. Member Glueck expressed her concern about the traffic, had there been a traffic study for future trips as the school grows. She felt a condition should be added for future Traffic Management. Warren Thompson, Cella Barr Associates, representing the applicant provided a visual of the 03-09-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 4 existing area and explained what changes are being proposed. Member Underwood felt this was a good plan that seems to be working and should be approved. Pastor Barrier commented that the Church is willing to do whatever it takes to work with the Town and the traffic issues. MOTION: Moved,seconded(Underwood/Mager) and carried by a 6-0 vote to recommend approval of OV12-99-4 Casas Adobes Baptist Church Amended Development Plan subject to staff's conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 1. The architecture for all permanent and temporary buildings must be approved by the Development Review Board(DRB). 2. General note 19 must be changed to the "Town of Oro Valley." 3. Delete "Engineer" in general note 23. 4. Time frame of modular(s) is five years and option to renew must be approved by Planning and Zoning Administration. 5. Traffic Management Plan with the Town Staff and the Church for long term traffic study. OV13-99-14 TOWN HALL ADDITION ARCHITECTURE, 11000 NORTH LA CANADA Sakellar Associates, representing the Town of Oro Valley, request DRB approval of the proposed architecture for the Town Hall Addition. The new addition will be located in the north of the existing Community Development and Court buildings, and when completed, will house the Public Works and Community Development Departments. At present, the site of the building consists of disturbed desert and sparse vegetation. The proposed building design is similar to the existing Administration, Court and Community Development building on site. The design may be described as Mission in architectural style, with stuccoed buildings, pitched Spanish tile roofs, popouts, recessed windows and arched, covered walkways to connect the buildings. The proposed design meets the Community Design Element policy 9.1F of the General Plan, which states that "all sides of buildings may impact their surroundings and should be coherently designed and treated." Staff finds that the proposed architecture for the Town Hall Addition is consistent with the existing buildings on site, and recommends approval. Member Underwood commented about the parking, would there be more parking spaces as they are certainly needed. Valerie Feuer replied that was a concern and it is being dealt with for this new building. Deno Sakellar, Sakellar Associates, representing the Town, provided a colored visual for the proposed project. He explained the building design is similar in style to the existing buildings on site. There will be more parking spaces and the landscape will be addressed. 03-09-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 5 MOTION: Moved, seconded (Mager/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 6-0 vote to recommend approval of OV13-99-14 Town Hall Addition Architecture, 11000 North La Canada Drive STAFF REPORT Valerie Feuer informed the Board there would be a special meeting on March 16th, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. in the Court Building. The topic will be Inn at Vistoso development plan and landscape plan. There will be a site tour April 8th at 5:30 to look at the Chimney Caps at the Boulders. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Vogesberg) and carried by a 6-0 vote to adjourn the March 9th, 1999 Development Review Board Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Shirley Gay DRB Clerk I • ORO VALLEY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD } March 9, 1999 TO: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD FROM: Valerie Feuer, Senior Planner SUBJECT: OV13-99-22 The Boulders at La Reserve Request to Remove Chimney Caps BACKGROUND: The Boulders at La Reserve was approved in 1994 for 240 apartment units. The architectural approval included the standard chimney cap detail. The Greystar Multi-family Services is now requesting that the chimney cap be eliminated because they have become a serious liability to the ownership of the property. SUMMARY: Approximately six of the chimney caps that are installed over the spark arrestors have been torn loose by high winds. This situation can pose extreme liability to the applicant and potential danger to residents. The applicant has explored replacing the caps with a heavier gauge steel or different design. Due to the replacement cost, the applicant is requesting that the DRB allow the chimney caps to be removed entirely, exposing the spark arrestor. The chimney cap has been required by DRB for aesthetics and is not a building code requirement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that DRB remove the condition for chimney caps for this project only. Attachments: 1, Letter from applicant with drawings F:\OV\oV 13\1999\13-99-22\archchimneycap.doc f:data\wp\forms\rpt-drb.p&z '_7-11-77 ;4.4i v'Niui 4 1J 'VVLJVLJVJY• • • 1 r 7 T MULTI-FAMILY SERVICES February 19, 1999 Valerie Feuer RE: Boulders at La Reserve Chimney Terminations FR: David B. Vanek Dear Valerie, Per our conversation Tuesday, February 16, 1999, I am submitting this report for your review. The pans that were designed and installed at The Boulders have become a serious liability to the ownership of the property. To this date approximately six of the pans that are installed over the spark arrestors have been torn loose by high winds. Luckily, the pans have not hit anyone or damaged any personal property that we know of. The pans measure approximately 54"x 38" and do catch a considerable amount of wind. They apparently can sail quite a distance as evidenced by our inability to find three of the caps that were lost during the last windstorm. The problem with the pans seems to be inherent in the constzuction'design. The material is of light gauge galvanized sheet metal, that actually rips free at several points. We have secured all the existing tops using screws and straps. The efforts appear fruitless at this time. The material shears at point of fastening, and flaps about in the wind. Granted, the situation occurs only in high wind situations, but these events are unpredictable, and due to the elevation of The Boulders,winds that don't affect other parts of Oro Valley, may be a factor at The Boulders. We have purchased replacement tops that are designed exactly as the existing tops, but are of significantly greater gauge and strength. Of course, this quality retrofit comes at a price, S 150.00 per unit plus the cost of a crane to lift the product to the roof We have also explored the possibility of having a different design fabricated for us that wouldn't be so susceptible to uplift. This is the "Mailbox"design that is utilized at many other properties throughout Oro Valley. These are going to cost us S50.00 to $75.00 per unit. We also have to factor in the cost of removal and disposal of the old tops, painting the new ones and installation. Due to the extreme liability that the current design poses, we need to make rapid decisions and changes. I respectfully request of you and the Town of Oro Valley to allow us to remove the existing caps completely. This would leave the spark arrestor at point of termination. I have enclosed some perfunctory drawings that indicate what the unit would look like without the galvanized pan. 2930 East Camelback Road,Suite 185,Phoenix,Arizona 85016 (602)952-8700 FAX(602)952-8834 E3-1-99 0:31 RCM-RE Y:'aa ,A,IGT 37.7S .602352333<i -033 03/15 MULTI-FAMILY S ER VICE S My basis for pleadings in this case are two-fold; one, the danger that the current desip poses to residents and property of The Boulders, and the exposure to litigation that our client faces. Two, the financial hardship that our client faces if a retrofit is our only option. If we are forced to stay with the original design and install a better quality product, we are looking at expenditures of$12,000.00 based on real dollars spent, and loss of maintenance technician time to remove and install. This also impacts our residents who will suffer from lack of service during this period. If we are mandated to install the"Mailbox" design,we have to spend $5,000.00 - $6,500.00. This would also include the above-mentioned loss of maintenance personnel time. We also incur"down-time"of maintenance if allowed to remove the current system, but if you would grant us this option, I consider this a minor inconvenience. The geographic location of The Boulders would not, in my opinion, cause an eyesore if the pans were removed. The site backs up to a hill to the East, and the elevation from the West would likely preclude anyone from noticing the alteration. I cited to you the example of Rock Ridge Apartments to the South and West of The Boulders that have exposed spark arrestors. I will nor belabor this point further. Please understand that I am not attempting to undermine the current standards that are set by Oro Valley Planning and Design,but merely requesting that we be granted special consideration for an extreme circumstance. I hope that it is apparent to you that we have attempted to be faithful to the design parameters established by Oro Valley. We have made an honest effort to remedy the current situation within these specifications. Respectfully, David B. Vanek Construction Mar. Greystar Management Services 2930 East Camelt,acr Road,Suite 135,Phoenix,.Arizona 35016 (602)952-3700 FAX(602)952-3834 rr6-19-99 1U:.ii r?iUM-GREYJiAht MMbi JKVJ •bUCVUld.14 I-U,iU )' USIUS r-9Ub • • 1 ••t •• r I _r:ia =I -- - - -----— II Ir.ill t. .ti _ .. _ . a s -1 .. -a a ._. --- - —-- — — — — a s a a 4 . •f * s a •• •• —'- — i -- --- -. - - - _-- *•••••=01/ �..."-_J - _ --- --'- - -- II TUIC.. .. - - 1 - • r, . ..- 1(• ' S ' E\ it:\ "A\/ gek LI rreS4-Cc-- . - — - . ._ • . -• • �•� I i .............0,...,4 - a • a • . ' .7 .i 17_') . •, /, //If , .. . • . • • • • • 0 i , . .._..._ • _.. - -• - - -— a 4 i a 1 I . . _ _... .. . ._ . . . . . . .._ w ____ ._ __ •_ _ • • _ . , ;.„.„,,..... . ....., , . .....,. ... .., . _. .. . . . . . .. .. . --,. , , . --- - - / . ✓� . _ _ . . i'�� . • --7 ..- -///„---_/-/, r c ,; v Pc. . ...... . .. . _ .. . FEB-i9-99 i0:32 }RCM-GREYSTAR 4!MGT SRVS +50Z95Z8834 T-030 P 04/05 F-906 • .1... 'A. ' S + ' r\ 5 _ . , . • • Spark L1rrt'S4 ( .................4 .. • • . • 7 1 -/- j i r - --- --.-------•- --••-----. .. - - - - -- 4 - -- - . ..-- - - - -- - --- • • • • • • • • • • - --. . ft ,, zy' . ..___.__. _ _ _. _____7 : 1 ? , 1-,.... ,_ • fi - - '-'9H'- / r 7 . � c' o o 's .e __ .. . MINUTES OF THE ORO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING Tuesday April 13th, 1999 CALL TO ORDER: 6:07 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present Patti Jo Lewis, Chair Mary Glueck, Vice Chair Richard Underwood,Member Jim Vogelsberg,Member Verlin Smith,Member Absent: Nancy Mager, Member Others Present: Valerie Feuer, Senior Planner Paul Nzomo, Engineer Shirley Gay, Clerk MOTION: MOVED, Seconded (Underwood/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to approve the March 9th and March 16th 1999, Development Review Board Meeting as written. CONSENT AGENDA A. OV13-99-24 Custom Home, C&C Construction,Desert Vista,Lot 107 B. OV13-98-59 Horton Homes, Rancho Vistoso 7F, Model 1602 C. OV13-99-29 Miller Custom Home, Rancho Vistoso 11 H&N, Lot 63 D. OV13-99-30 Pennell Custom Home, Ironwood Canyon, Lot 18 E. OV13-99-31 Garcia Custom Home, Fairway Village, Lot 56 F. OV13-99-26 Sigma Technologies Expansion Architecture G. OV13-97-49 Oro Valley Retail Center Architecture Revision H. OV13-97-40 Rancho Vistoso Ambulatory Center Architecture Revision I. OV12-98-19 CDO Riverfront Park Landscape Plan Addendum (This item withdrawn) J. OV12-93-13 Canada Verde Apts (AKA OV Golf Villas) Garage Architecture Valerie Feuer commented that item I had been pull and will be on the next DRB agenda. Mary Glueck has a question on item B regarding the window on elevation A, B, and C in the , 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 2 front. There needs to be an arch or some architecture detail to match the style of other Horton homes. Perhaps a condition could be added to add those features. MOTION: Moved, seconded(Underwood/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote to recommend approval of Consent Agenda items A, C thru H and item J subject to staff conditions. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Glueck) and carried by a 5-0 to recommend approval of Consent item B subject to staff conditions and stipulating on elevations A, B, and C add architectural detail to front window. REGULAR AGENDA PREVIEW: OV13-99-25 THE INN AT VISTOSO ARCHITECTURE The applicant had asked this item be withdrawn and expects to submit the architecture for approval at the May 11 th DRB meeting.. OV13-99-22 THE BOULDERS AT LA RESERVE REQUEST TO REMOVE CHIMNEY CAPS (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 9TH, 1999 MEETING) Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. She reminded the Board the applicant is requesting that the DRB allow the chimney caps to be removed entirely, exposing the spark arrestor. The DRB members took a site tour to the property to determine if the chimney caps needed to be removed. Staff did not have a problem with the chimney caps being removed however; they would support the DRB with the decision they made. Member Vogelsberg commented that the caps did not add any architectural flavor to the building and he felt they could be removed. He explained that the Town needed to find an approved detail plan for future purposes. Member Smith supported the caps and felt they needed to be on, he thought they looked good he commented the Town needed to have a plan approved for future projects. Chair Lewis agreed with Member Smith, she felt the caps needed to stay on. Member Glueck stated that the old caps need to come off and an better-engineered cap needs to go on. Member Underwood was in agreement that the caps need to stay on. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 5-0 vote(Mager absent) to recommend denial of OV13-99-22 The Boulders at La Reserve to remove chimney caps. OV13-99-28 CASAS ADOBES BAPTIST CHURCH PORTABLE RELOCATION Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The applicant proposes to relocate six portables that are illustrated on the amended development plan. The portables will be moved from the Church's current location at Ina/La Cholla. The site plan gives the specific locations of 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 3 the portables. There will be an 8' wide sidewalk between Building I, J, N, and 0, which will be finished to match all other sidewalks in this development. In relation to the overall site, the portables do not detract from the aesthetics of the surrounding area. Staff recommends approval of the architecture for the Casas Adobes Baptist Church Portable Relocation, with the condition that the windows along all elevations be either recessed or popped out. Jay Hanson, The Hanson Group, was present for any questions the DRB may have. He provided a colored visual of the site and where the portables would be located. He briefly explained there would be mini courts between the buildings and how the colors would tie into the existing school. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV13-99-28 Casas Adobes Baptist Church portable relocation subject to staff condition all windows along all elevations be either recessed or popped out. Note for record: Applicant for item 2 joined meeting approximately 6:30 p.m. The Chair allowed him to speak based on the Boards motion. Mr. Vanek, Construction Manager, Greystar Services commented he would remove the chimney caps because of the liability but would agree to putting on new chimney caps provided Oro Valley provide an engineered drawing detail and secondly he will commence with the caps when other residents in the area had chimney caps installed. Valerie Feuer commented Staff could not agree to those conditions but would talk with the Planning Administrator and the Building Administrator and then get back to Mr. Vanek. OV12-99-01 VILLAGES OF LA CANADA BLOCK A PRELIMINARY PLAT Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The proposed preliminary plat illustrates 80 single-family residential lots designed with a similar lot size as the adjacent existing Villages of La Canada. The proposed plat will be accessed from Congressional Way and consists of a 55' buffer area along the western boundary. The western boundary will include a Bufferyard D and part of the recreation area, which links to the main recreation area at the southwest corner of the proposed plat. A 16' maintenance easement is located along the northern boundary of the development. The 16' maintenance easement also runs along the eastern property boundary of this development. A 20' pedestrian access common area between lots 20 and 21 is implemented which will provide a linkage between the proposed residential development and future commercial development to the north. The property development standards for the proposed plat are as follows: the setbacks are front — 20', side — 5', and rear— 5'. The existing zoning is PAD High Density Residential with a conditional zoning of Medium Density Residential. The maximum permitted building height for this subdivision is 25' two (2) stories. Valerie Feuer commented that a condition needed to be added regarding the pedestrian pathway be designed in such a way to 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 4 provide privacy to homeowners. Paul Nzomo introduced the engineer's report into the record. Traffic impact analysis has not been submitted yet. But in accordance with the standard traffic trip generation rates, this proposed subdivision of 80 lots will generate 800 daily trips, compared to 1890 daily trips from currently zoned, and approved development plan, for a 270 unit apartment. Two access points will be constructed off Congressional Way, which will be connected with three internal proposed streets. This project site generally drains from north to south with onsite generated Stormwater runoff entering Congressional Way and the soil-cement to the east with both flows ultimately reaching the CDO Wash. This project is affected by 361-cfs from vacant land at north property line. This offsite runoff will be diverted into the soil-cement channel along the east property line through earthen channel. The earthen channel will be lined with a soil erosion blanket, covered with a thin layer of topsoil and hydroseed. The channel will be irrigated to ensure vegetative growth. The onsite-generated runoff will be collected by slotted drain at three onsite locations and conveyed into the soil-cement channel. Only 37cfs will be discharged into Congressional Way, which is a better situation than pre-developed condition. A grading waiver was approved in 1994 by DRB with the following conditions: 1. All cut slopes shall be benched every eight- (8) feet,providing a three- (3) feet bench. 2. Add a note to the general note stating that the proposed earthen channel will be irrigated to ensure vegetative growth and shall be maintained by the HOA. 3. All cut slopes shall be undulating to match the natural terrain. 4. Slopes shall not exceed 3:1, nor shall slopes require jute mat, grouted riprap, or mechanical means to hold slopes in place. Mr. Nzomo stated that the grading waiver is still valid. Charlie Hulsey, WLB Group representing the applicant commented he had no problems with staff conditions and was available for questions. Member Smith asked about the common area, what kind of path would be provided? Mr. Hulsey commented it would be DG and the path would allow access to the future shopping center on the corner. Member Underwood asked about the water runoff at the entrance of the Villages, he felt water seems to collect at that entrance and he wanted to know how the drainage would be handled. Mr. Hulsey pointed out on the site plan how the water would be channeled and how that should help that particular area. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Glueck/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV12-99-01 Villages of La Canada Block A Preliminary Plant subject to staff conditions. PLANNING AND ZONING CONDITIONS: 1. An addendum for the traffic impact analysis report is required. 2. All existing or proposed easements that affect or benefit this property shall be shown on the plat. 3. All utilities lying outside of the road right-of-way shall be placed in utility and maintenance easements. 4. Any offsite sewer easements benefiting this property shall be executed and recorded 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 5 prior to recordation of the final plat. 5. All existing R.O.W.(s)/Easement(s) adjacent to the site shall be labeled. The dimensions and recording information shall be specified. 6. All R.O.W and easements to be dedicated for this project shall be clearly identified on the preliminary plat. 7. All offsite grading and construction of drainage channel shall require a written permission from the adjacent property owner. 8. The applicant's engineer shall ensure that vertical and horizontal street design meets the Town of Oro Valley Subdivision Street Standards. 9. Two copies of lot boundary closures calculations are required. 10. The applicant's engineer shall ensure all boundary survey bearings and distances shown on the plan are consistent with the title report. 11. At least two ties with survey data to section or quarter corners shall be provided on the plat. 12. Cross section A-A shall be revised to reflect 361-cfs offsite runoff as shown in the drainage exhibit. 13. Recheck and correct the drainage area for concentration point 3E on the drainage tables. 14. A revised drainage report is required,which shall address all drainage conditions. 15. Preliminary plat, grading plan and drainage exhibit shall be consistent with drainage report. 16. Page 11 of drainage report shall be revised to reflect 361 cfs entering the site and a total of 37-cfs only being conveyed into congressional Way. 17. Call out handicap ramps at all streets intersection. 18. The 35-cfs conveyed through 30" SRP pipe in to Congressional Way shall be discharged within Common area A with an energy dissipater at the outlet, and allowed to sheet flow into Congressional way as in pre-developed condition. No concentration of flows is allowed. 19. Call out drainage easement between lots 32 and 33. 20. The grades for the street profile shall be adjacent to meet 14% driveway slope as per zoning code. 21. Label all manholes and catch basins on the plat and grading plan. 22. Call out sizes of all storm drain on the drainage exhibit. 23. The length of storm drainpipe called out in the drainage report does not match those shown on the plat,correct where necessary. 24. Call out size and length for the storm drainpipe at concentration point 2.3. 25. Indicate the type of lot drainage for each lot on the plat. 26. The lot drainage shown on the plat does not match drainage exhibit, revise accordingly. Call out 10' maintenance access easement for the proposed drainage earthen channel. Illustrate on the plat how the access will be connected to the main streets. 27. Common Area "C" in general note 1 shall be changed to "Recreation Area." 28. General Note 2 shall state the Conditional Zoning as Medium Density Residential. 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 6 29. General Note 12 shall be changed to 25' two (2) stories as the maximum building height. 30. General Note 13 shall be amended to state; "Typical lot size is 7,085 square feet. 31. Pedestrian access is designed in such a way to provide privacy to adjacent homeowners. OV13-99-27 KAUFMAN & BROAD ARCHITECTURE, THREE MODELS, VILLAGES OF LA CANADA,BLOCK A Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The three models proposed are plans 1579, 2045, and 2166, which are all single-story homes. All three models are designed in the Santa Barbara Mission style architecture with the differences being in front façades and size. Plan 1579 has seven (7) different elevations. The difference in each elevation is the front façade. Architectural elements include a wainscot trim along the front elevation, window popouts along all elevations, gable vents, popout trim along the garage, and tile roofs. This model is well within the maximum height requirement of 25'. The optional fireplaces show an approved Oro Valley chimney cap. The three models proposed are plans 1579, 2045, and 2166, which are all single-story homes. All three models are designed in the Santa Barbara Mission style architecture with the differences being in front façades and size. Plan 1579 has seven (7) different elevations. The difference in each elevation is the front façade. Architectural elements include a wainscot trim along the front elevation, window popouts along all elevations, gable vents,popout trim along the garage, and tile roofs. This model is well within the maximum height requirement of 25'. The optional fireplaces show an approved Oro Valley chimney cap. Models 2045 and 2166 have similar architectural elements, but are larger pads. Each has five (5) other elevations, which are similar with the exception of the front façade. The models shall illustrate wainscot trims along the additional elevations. Charles Hulsey, WLB Group,representing the applicant commented he had no problems with staff conditions. He did ask staff could the wainscoting be dropped once they are past the rear yard fence. Valerie Feuer replied yes. Chair Lewis asked Mr. Hulsey had he met with the homeowners to work out any problems that may arise. Mr. Hulsey replied yes. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Underwood/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV13-99-27 Kaufman & Broad Architecture, Three Models Villages of La Canada,Black A, subject to staff conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 1. The color scheme must be consistent with the colors of the existing homes in the Villages of La Canada. 2. Ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be enclosed by a wall to provide visual screening and noise mitigation, and shall respect all setbacks. 3. A wainscot trim where visible shall be provided along the side elevations of each model to ensure coherent design and treatment on all four sided. 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 7 OV12-99-5 ORO VALLEY TOWN HALL ADDITION DEVELOPMENT PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The Town of Oro Valley proposes to develop a Town Hall Addition on-site. The Town Hall Addition is comprised of the construction of a 9,650 square foot building, additional parking, and landscaping. The new building will contain a public meeting hall, several conference rooms, and will house the offices for the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The building itself will be constructed adjacent to the Magistrate Court and the existing Community Development Building. An additional 100 parking spaces will be added to the Town Hall complex. Ten Class I bicycle lockers are to be added, which will allow for secure storage of bicycles for employees who commute to work via that mode. All aspects of the development plan are in conformance with the El Conquistador PAD. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Development Plan for the Oro Valley Town hall Addition. Paul Nzomo introduced the engineer's report into the record. Main access to this proposed addition will be through existing driveway off La Canada Drive. Additionally the site will be served by a future proposed right in/out driveway off La Canada drive,just north of the Police station. The proposed addition will generate insignificant traffic. This project site generally drains from north to south. The site is not impacted by any off site runoff. The commercial use of the parcel will require 5-year threshold retention to be provided. That is the volumetric difference of the pre and post 5-year developed flows. The pond shall discharge the 2-year pre-developed flows to help maintain downstream riparian vegetation. This site is not designated as being in a Balanced or Critical basin according to Pima County's current map Dated 2-17-87; hence no detention is required. However, detention basin will be provided to maintain post-developed runoff to its pre-developed conditions. This detention/ retention basin will serve as a Master basin for proposed addition and any future expansion. Grading will be limited to the location of the new building, parking lot and detention/retention basin. The preliminary grading plans for the proposed addition meets the requirement of chapter 15 of the Zoning Code. Dino Sakellar, Sakellar Associates, representing the Town was present for questions. Member Smith commented would this driveway be compatible for the future library. Mr. Sakellar replied we feel we have a traffic plan adequate for this particular project. Member Glueck commented that the Town needs a master plan for future Town projects. She felt the Town needed to be looking ahead. Valerie Feuer suggested that DRB might want to add that as a condition if they so desired. Valerie commented this project needed to move ahead as staff is cramped for space. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Vogelsberg/Smith) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV12-99-5 Oro Valley Town Hall Addition Development Plan subject to staff conditions and stipulating the Town works on providing a master plan and traffic study for future projects at this site. 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 8 OV12-99-5 ORO VALLEY TOWN HALL ADDITION LANDSCAPE PLAN Valerie Feuer introduced the staff report into the record. The landscape plan presented is in compliance with the requirements of the OVZCR. The landscaping for this project is focused on the landscape planters in the parking areas and the area immediately around the new structure to be constructed. The plan calls for the use of a variety of southwestern vegetation, including palo verde, mesquite, acacia, ocotillo, red sage, and prickly pear. As the proposed addition is a 25% or greater expansion of an existing facility, the Town is required to bring the current parking lot in compliance with the OVZCR. Several landscape planters will be added to the existing parking areas, as well as the new parking areas, and will feature mesquites, palo verdes, and fairy dusters. Additional vegetation will also be placed around the new building. Moreover, Staff has also requested that additional vegetation be placed between one of the new parking areas and the retention basin to provide additional screening of the drainage structure. The landscape plan submitted by the applicant is in general compliance with the Town of Oro Valley General Plan. The plan presented by the applicant is in conformance with Policy 9.1H, "mitigate negative visual impacts of buildings and parking lots...add aesthetic charm, interest, and character." Planning staff recommends approval of the proposed Landscape Plan for the Oro Valley Town Hall Addition. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Vogelsberg) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to recommend approval of OV12-99-5 Oro Valley Town Hall Addition Landscape Plan subject to staff conditions. PLANNING STAFF CONDITIONS: 1. Additional vegetation shall be added to screen the drainage basin from the new parking lot on the south side of the site 2. The Class I bicycle locker area shall be identified on the landscape plan. A minimum 6' clearance shall be maintained between the lockers and all vegetation. 3. Add plant type "LF" to the Landscape Schedule on Sheet#2. 4. The signature and seal of the registered landscape architect preparing the plans shall be placed on all sheets. STAFF REPORT Valerie Feuer briefly discussed the issue of building additions that come before the DRB. The Planning and Zoning Administrator interpreted that staff could make those decisions rather than the Board. Member Glueck commented she would like to see the plans that are front or side additions. Valerie reminded the Board of the upcoming Native Plant Salvage Ordnance Workshop on the 20th of April. 04-13-99 Development Review Board Minutes Page 9 MOTION: Moved, seconded (Smith/Underwood) and carried by a 5-0 vote (Mager absent) to adjourn the March 16th, 1999 Development Review Board Meeting at 7:30 p.m Shirley Gay DRB Clerk ORO VALLEY PLANNING &ZONING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD April 13, 1999 TO: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD FROM: Valerie Feuer, Senior Planner SUBJECT: OV13-99-22 The Boulders at La Reserve Request to Remove Chimney Caps (continued from March 9, 1999 meeting) BACKGROUND: The Boulders at La Reserve was approved in 1994 for 240 apartment units. The architectural approval included the standard chimney cap detail. The Greystar Multi-family Services is now requesting that the chimney cap be eliminated because they have become a serious liability to the ownership of the property. This item was continued from the March 9, 1999 meeting to allow an on-site visual review for DRB members prior to making a decision. SUMMARY: Approximately six of the chimney caps that are installed over the spark arrestors have been torn loose by high winds. This situation can pose extreme liability to the applicant and potential danger to residents. The applicant has explored replacing the caps with a heavier gauge steel or different design. Due to the replacement cost, the applicant is requesting that the DRB allow the chimney caps to be removed entirely, exposing the spark arrestor. The chimney cap has been required by DRB for aesthetics and is not a building code requirement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that DRB remove the condition for chimney caps for this project only. Attachments: 1. Letter from applicant with drawings f:\data\wp\forms\rpt-drb.p&z