HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV100102 LANTANA CORPORATION D IC I. E
MAR 0 1 nil
e
February 22,2001 B Y`
Town of Oro Valley
Planning and Zoning Department
11000 N.La Canada Dr.
Oro Valley,AZ 85737
RE: Board of Adjustment Decision
Case #10-00-12
Attn: Dee Widero
Dear Ms.Widero:
Back in July of 2000, Lantana Corporation submitted a request for a Board of Adjustment
hearing on the above case number. Unfortunately we made a mistake and did not show up
for the hearing due to a misunderstanding.
I am writing to you today to ask for another chance for the Board to hear our case. Please
let me know if this is possible and if so what I need to bring you in order to obtain another
hearing on lot 97 in Naranja Ranch subdivision.
If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 323-0012.
Sincerely,
LANTANA CORPORATION
Jennifer Fertig
Construction Coordinator
2601 N. CAMPBELL SUITE 200 TUCSON,ARIZONA (520)323-0012 FAX (520) 326-0000
7/25/200f Minutes.Board of Adjustment
3. OV10-00-12 LANTANA CORPORATION REQUEST A VARIANCE TO THE
NARANJA RANCH PLAT FOR THE REQUIRED FRONT & REAR YARD
SETBACKS IN ZONE R-4. 11789 NORTH VIA DE LA VERBENITA, LOT 97 OF
NARANJA RANCH I SUBDIVISION
Dee Widero. Senior Zoning Inspector reviewed the staff report and gave an overview of
the lot using the overhead projector. She reported that the applicant is proposing to
reduce the front yard setback from 20 feet to 15 feet and the rear yard setback from 25
feet to l 0 feet. Due to the shallowness of this corner lot. the approved model 42218 is the
closest fit for this lot and will need a variance approval in order to comply.
Staff finding of facts:
• The shape of lot creates special circumstances or conditions.
• The applicant or owner did not create the circumstance or condition.
• The approved model home coincides with the other homes being built for the Lantana
Corporation and in the surrounding lots of the subject property. for the preservation
and enjoyment of substantial property rights.
• The subdivision is in the final phase
Member Adler asked if it was possible that the home be re-positioned to avoid the request
for variance.
Ms. Widero stated that she did not know if this was possible or not.
Mr. Nodine added that this was the most shallow home in the subdivision.
Chairman Swan expressed his concerns regarding the lot and the extreme setbacks. He
stated that he was unsure if any home could be built on the lot.
Mr. Nodine concurred and stated that this was a very peculiar lot. He further explained
that he believed the area was originally designed to access onto Via de la Verbenita, but
the access was shifted off that road to provide a safer access onto the cul-de-sac. therefore
leaving the lot to remain the same.
Chairman Swan opened the public hearing. There being no speakers. Chairman Swan
closed the public hearing.
MOTION: Member Adler MOVED to DENY the Case No. OV10-00-12 application
for variance finding that in the absence of the petitioner's testimony, he has no reason to
believe that a home could not be designed successfully to fit the lot. It is the builder's
responsibility to design such a home to fit adequately on the lot and be in compliance
with the ordinance_ Motion SECONDED by Chairman Swan.
DRAFT
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
SPECIAL SESSION
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
ORO VALLEY,ARIZONA
CALL TO ORDER at 4:05 p.m.
PRESENT:
Henry Suozzi, Chairman
Bill Adler, Vice Chairman
James Swan, Member
Lyra Done, Member
Cindy Lewis, Member
STAFF:
Dan Dudley, Town Attorney
Bryant Nodine, Planning and Zoning Administrator
Dee Widero, Senior Zoning Inspector
Debbie Moran, Zoning Tech.
Linda Hersha, Secretary II
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE STUDY SESSION HELD ON
DECEMBER 19, 2000 AND JANUARY 26, 2001.
MOTION: Vice Chairman Adler MOVED to APPROVE the minutes of December 19,
2000 and January 26, 2001, with the corrections noted. Motion SECONDED by Member
Lewis. Motion carried, 5-0.
2. CONSIDERATION AND/OR POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF RULES & PROCEDURES BASED ON 12-19-00
AND 1-26-01 MEETINGS.
The following is a draft summary of the recommended rules and procedure for the Board
of Adjustment: (as discussed at the Board of Adjustment meeting of February 27, 2001)
"Summary of Recommended Rules and Procedures for the Board of Adjustment"
1. Staff Duties:
Clerk's Office
• Make room arrangements, mail materials, take minutes and schedule meetings
2/27/01 Minutes,Board of Adjustment 2
Special Session
Planning and Zoning Staff
• Serves as primary contact for agenda issues, develops agenda and any
revisions with direction of the chair
• Notify all surrounding property owners
• Coordinate all necessary reports/materials/exhibits for the Board consideration
• Invite all necessary staff to Board meetings
• Notify the Board by the 10th of each month if a meeting will or will not be
held and Board members to notify staff of inability to attend a meeting
• All materials and agenda shall be distributed to the Board by staff at least one
(1) week prior to the meeting date
2. Board Duties:
• As outlined in Article 1-7 of the Zoning Code as specified in the Board of
Adjustment manual.
(See attached)
3. The Applicant:
• The applicant shall submit all materials with an application 15 days prior to
the meeting date
• The burden of proof is on the applicant and he/she should address the 5
Criteria in writing on the application
• The applicant should submit in writing the fact that they are requesting a
variance for more the one (1) issue, if applicable
4. Board Meetings:
• The Board should stay focused and only discuss agenda issues and not discuss
issues directly with the applicant, especially during a site visit (Except for
questions of fact)
• All questions and comments during the meeting shall go through the Chair
• During the meeting the applicant should have the first "shot" at presenting
their case prior to the staff report
• Staff should identify each individual variance and all the issues involved
• It was agreed that the Board could give the applicant some direction and may
state their reason(s) why they voted aye or nay
5. Selection and Composition of the Board of Adjustment:
• The Board shall be in accordance to the outline specified in Section 5, pages
11 and 12 of the Board of Adjustment Handbook"Desirable Attributes of
Board Member."(See attached)
2/27/0] Minutes, Board of Adjustment 3
Special Session
• An "objective" evaluation process of a board members performance would be
desirable and perhaps serve as a guideline for the Town Council and the
Government Review Task Force
• The process to replace or re-appoint Board members shall begin by May 1 St
for new terms that commence on July 1st
6. Conflict of Interest:
• Issues should be declared up-front so that the Board member can be fair,
objective, and impartial and should not be personally involved
7. Relationship with other Boards/Commission/Council:
• It was agreed that the Board of Adjustment minutes or excerpts regarding
concerned issues shall be distributed in a timely fashion
8. Other:
• It was suggested that a more "personal" notification letter be mailed to
encourage public response and that the radius should be increased to at least
600 or 1000 feet
Member Lewis agreed that the radius for notification should be increased. She also
suggested that the time of the meetings be discussed; and develop a procedure that
identifies each issue pertaining to the variance when the application is submitted. She
stated that she would prefer that the petitioner address the issues and not be the
responsibility of staff.
Member Done re-iterated that under the category "Procedures and Conduct", the fact that
a member is allowed to discuss "questions of facts" when reviewing the site should be
included.
Member Adler gave some additional suggestions pertaining to the development of the
agenda and various other topics:
• A member of the Board should be allowed to request an item be added to the
agenda
• If a member has requested an item to be included on the agenda, he/she should
be informed if the item has been omitted from the agenda before it is finalized
• Review how exhibits should be handled when submitted at the time of the
meeting
• The Board should review the possibility of whether or not staff members from
various departments should be available to answer questions regarding a case
• Review the level of importance of the 5 Criteria to make a final determination
as a group, because the Code does not stipulate that a finding has to be met
• There should be further discussion regarding the swearing in of the applicant
In conclusion, Vice Chairman Adler stated that the request that the notification to the
homeowner's be changed from the 300 feet radius to 1000 feet was an ordinance issue.
2/27/0l Minutes, Board of Adjustment 4
Special Session
He emphasized the fact that the Board may not be permitted to establish a rule that
differed from the ordinance.
Member Done expressed that the Board should take a serious concern regarding a
"conflict of interest"to determine what would be considered a conflict.
Mr. Dudley explained that the member should definitely follow the normal conflict rules
and excuse him or herself from the meeting. He stated that a member should not declare
a conflict by merely stating "I'm going to abstain". He further explained that the Board
could choose to adopt ethical consideration as well as legal consideration, but, be aware
of the results once the ethical guidelines are created. He said that once the guidelines are
produced, the strictness could cause unintended consequences.
Vice Chairman Adler stated that the Board would probably be unable to agree on how to
define an ethical determination in relation to anything. He said that the Board should not
be influence by perception. "The Board member has to decide for himself whether they
have a legitimate role to play in their view, or whether or not they can be objective in
their determination of the evidence. Therefore, the Board will have to trust one another to
make the best judgement".
Member Swan stated that the decision should be the individual to determine whether the
case would be a"conflict of interest" and act accordingly.
Chairman Suozzi explained that there had not been a consensus regarding the oath. He
referenced the typical "Oath of Witness" for swearing in of the citizens intending to
testify at a hearing. The typical or standard legal oath reads as follows:
"Do you swear or affirm to speak (or tell) the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
truth". Although there may be other oaths that are given, this oath is typical for
depositions and trials in Arizona. The Board agreed that this item should be included in
the final draft of the Board of Adjustment Procedures.
Member Done felt that it was important that each witness or applicant be sworn in
individually. Chairman Suozzi and Member Lewis agreed.
Vice Chairman Adler disagreed and stated that legally the oath had no impact on the
applicant. He said that the only reason any person would be sworn in would be to charge
the person with perjury; therefore, he considered the oath a meaningless act because it did
not obligate someone to tell the truth. He said the oath should be eliminated.
Mr. Dudley explained that it was not a requirement to swear in a witness or applicant
under the State Statues or under the Town Ordinance. He recommends that the Board
swear in witnesses because the court is more comfortable with the procedure when
reviewing the evidence. He added that he did not know of any cities or town that did not
use the method during a case hearing.
2/27/0l Minutes, Board of Adjustment 5
Special Session
Vice Chairman Adler stated that he would be willing to withdraw the issue regarding the
oath, but wanted to register his opposition. He stated that if the courts were convinced
that the oath was important, the statute would be changed and would make the oath a
requirement.
MOTION: Member Done MOVED to INCLUDE the "Oath of Witness" as a part of
the procedure when conducting a Board of Adjustment hearing. Motion SECONDED by
Member Lewis.
ROLL CALL VOTE
Chairman Suozzi —aye
Vice Chairman Adler—nay
Member Done—aye
Member Lewis—aye
Member Swan—aye
Motion carried, 4-1, with Vice Chairman Adler opposed.
3. CONSIDERATION AND/OR POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING CHANGING
THE TIME OF REGULAR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETINGS
MOTION: Member Done MOVED that the Board of Adjustment meeting continue to
be held at 3:00 p.m. Motion SECONDED by Member Swan.
Discussion: Member Done stated that the reason she felt that the schedule should be
remain at the current time was because no matter what time the meetings are held, the
only time it will become issue is when it affects an individual on a personal level.
Member Swan called for the question.
Motion carried 3-2, Chairman Suozzi and Vice Chairman Adler opposed.
Chairman Suozzi opened the floor for discussion regarding the possibility of increasing
the notification radius from 300 square feet to 600 or 1000 square feet.
Vice Chairman Adler explained that the issue regarding the notification has been placed
on the Planning and Zoning Commission work plan. He felt strongly that the notification
radius of 300 feet or even the 600 feet radius was to small of an area when major projects
are under construction. He considered the issue to be a Commission agenda item because
it would require a revision to the ordinance. He stated that the Board could make a
recommendation to have the revision made.
Chairman Suozzi asked if any of the other Boards used the 300 feet radius.
2/27/0] Minutes,Board of Adjustment 6
Special Session
Ms. Widero replied, "No, some of them go up to 600 feet. I would like to add that the 300
feet or 600 feet does not only go from the center of property, but from the perimeter of
the property." She explained that there would have to be an ordinance change in order to
change the radius which has to go before the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mr. Nodine suggested that staff could provide the additional mailing labels beyond the
300 feet minimum required by the code, but he would prefer to see that the burden be
placed upon the applicant.
Mr. Dudley explained that occasionally the Town has gone beyond the minimum
requirements and inadvertently omitted a citizen of notification in the area. He explained
that those citizens believe that they are an aggrieved party and believe since they were
not notified, they could challenge that fact in the Superior Court, which is fairly strict in
their interpretation. He explained that by increasing the radius, it would open the door
for more opportunity for error.
Member Done expressed that she did not want to see the Town become liable and
involved in a possible lawsuit that would potentially fall apart in court.
Mr. Nodine explained that typically for rezoning, a 600 feet radius is used because it
would be considered a major change in land use that could affect a broad area. He
explained that there were several things that would need to be considered when reviewing
appropriate notification. He said that a lot of the decision would be base upon common
sense.
MOTION: Vice Chairman Adler MOVED that the Board of Adjustment recommend
that the Planning and Zoning Commission review the Ordinance as it relates to
notification parameters and with the help of Staff, review expanding the notification
radius appropriately. Motion SECONDED by Member Done.
Member Done called for the question.
Motion carried, 5-0.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Member Lewis MOVED to ADJOURN the meeting at 5:10 p.m. Motion
SECONDED by Member Done. Motion carried, 5-0.
Resp tfully submitte ,
i da Hersha, Secretary II
• How and when staff reports get • Our booklet, Public Meetings.
to the commission and the
public.
• At least one copy of the Zoning
Board Manual by Fred Bair
• How minutes are kept and should be available.
where they are stored.
• A copy of the booklet, You as a
• Regular reports to the council Public Official, or some other
or board of supervisors. primer on the laws regarding
• Relations and coordination conflicts of interest and open
among boards (in the case of meetings.
counties with more than one • Copies of any administrative
board of adjustment.4) procedures and policies,
This is not an exhaustive list, but it gives application forms, handouts,
you the idea. A thorough treatment of this and anything else that the public
is in Fred Bair's Zoning Board Manual. must contend with when
Sample rules are in the ARIZONA transacting zoning adjustment
PLANNING AND ZONING HANDBOOK, and enforcement business.
and we have some in our files. Desirable Attributes of Board Members
Tools of the Trade See also "The Role of and Qualifications
Here are some references that every board for the Board of Adjustment" in the
member should have and be familiar with: appendices.
• A copy of the A.R.S. planning • An interest in zoning and
and zoning enabling legislation planning and a willingness to
for municipalities or counties, as learn about them.
appropriate. • Time enough to learn about the
• An up-to-date copy of your business of the board and to
community's general plan or prepare for meetings and
your county's comprehensive hearings.
plan and all adopted specific • An open, impartial, and orderly
plans. If there is no adopted mind.
plan, copies of any interim
• Honesty and fairness.
policies, goals, and objectives
dealing with planning, zoning, • The ability to envision and
land-use, and development. consider the long-term effects
• A copy of your zoning of a decision and to put them
ordinance. ahead of any short-term
changes.
• The board's rules of procedure.
• The ability to put the public
• This booklet. good above the welfare of
individual applicants when
4This is as good a place as any to making your decisions.
recommend that counties have a single
board. The potential problems and • The ability to be articulate at
unfairness from discrepancies in public meetings and hearings.
interpretations, attitudes toward variances,
etc. in counties with three or five boards is • A commitment to enforce the
mind-boggling. zoning laws as they are, and not
Arizona Department of Commerce * Community Planning Program—_11 .
let your disagreement with parts those are likely to apply to a board of
of them sway your decisions. adjustment:
• A commitment to work for the 1. To get legal advice from your
improvement of the zoning municipal or county attorney.
ordinance. This does not mean the routine
advice that you may get at
regular hearings. There must be
THE BOARD MEMBER AS A an exchange of confidential
PUBLIC OFFICIAL information.
You, as a board member, are a public 2. To discuss pending or
official in the eyes of Arizona law. As threatened lawsuits with the
such, you have to know about and obey board's attorney.
certain laws that apply to all public officers There must be at least twenty-four hour's
and officials. The two most important of ty"
these are the Conflict of Interest Law and notice for an open meeting. There must be
an agenda descriptive enough to allow a
the Open Meeting Law. We will describe
them briefly here to give you an idea of reasonable person to decide to attend or
not. Basic minutes must be taken and
their importance. A more comprehensive made available to the public within three
source of information that you should all working days of the meeting.
have is the pamphlet, You as a Public
Official published by the League of Anyone who violates the law can be fined
Arizona Cities and Towns. You can get it up to five hundred dollars. This must be
from the League or from us. It contains paid by the individual and the public agency
clear, concise coverage of open meetings may not pay it. A willful, intentional
and conflicts of interest, along with three violator may be forced personally to pay
other groups of laws that aren't as court costs and the plaintiffs attorney's
important to you. fees.
Open Meeting Law Conflicts of Interest
The thrust of this law is THE PUBLIC'S This law specifies nine remote interests
BUSINESS MUST BE CONDUCTED IN which cannot create conflicts. Substantial
PUBLIC. The Arizona open meeting law interests, which can create a conflict, are
is a strict one and it has within it a defined as any interest which is not one of
provision that all doubtful situations must the nine remote interests. The law covers
be resolved in favor of openness. If there is only the financial or economic interests of
any doubt whether or not a meeting must you and specified relatives. The Local
be open to the public, it must be open. All Government Handbook published by the
of your hearings must, of course be open to Attorney General says that: "a conflict of
the public, and at no time may a quorum of interest occurs whenever a public officer or
the board discuss official business or employee has the opportunity to perform
pending cases (other than at authorized some act or participate in making a
executive sessions) except at a public decision in his official capacity that might
meeting. Even meetings of fewer than a affect an economic interest of either himself
quorum can be violations if there is an or his close relatives." Relatives, as defined
intent to subvert the law. in the law are: spouse; spouse's parents,
There are seven reasons that can justify brother, sister, or child; children and
grandchildren; parents and grandparents;
closed, executive sessions. Only two of
Arizona Department of Commerce * Community Planning Program-12
1
ADMINISTRATION
ARTICLE 1-7. BOARD OF ADIUSTMENT
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. A oin pptment: 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.
1
Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised 1 - 1 1 (Rev.8194)
•
ADMINISTRATION
D. Removal: The Town Council has the authority to remove, by majority vote, any member for neglect
of duty, inefficiency or misconduct in office.
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.
E. 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.
E. 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:
Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised 1 - 12 (Rev.W94)
ADMINISTRATION
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 applying for a variance from the
ordinance that renders the sign nonconforming.
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 l own of Oro Valley and one notices
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
Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised 1 — 13 (Rev.8/94)
•
ADMINISTRATION
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
necessary 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.
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.
Rev. (0)92-1,January 15, 1992
Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised
ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT
CASE NO: OV 10-01-02
Hearing Date: March 27, 2001
Agenda Item No.: 1
Prepared By: Dee Widero, Senior Zoning Inspector
REQUEST: LANTANA CORPORATION, 2601 N. CAMPBELL AVENUE, TUCSON, AZ
85719, REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE NARANJA RANCH PLAT
REQUIRED FRONT AND REAR YARD SETBACKS FOR ZONE R-4.
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 11789 N. VIA DE LA VERBENITA, LOT 97, ORO
VALLEY,AZ 85737.
REQUEST SPECIFICS:
Lantana Corporation, request to reduce the front yard setback from 20' to 15' and the rear yard
setback from 25' to 10'. Due to the shallowness of this corner lot, the approved model #2218 is
the closest fit for this lot and will need a variance approval in order to comply.
SITE LOCATION:
This site is located in Naranja Ranch I, north of Glover Road. The site can be reached by traveling
north on La Cholla Boulevard (north of Naranja Drive) to Glover Road turn east (right) the first
street to the left(north)will be Via De La Verbenita turn left follow to the cal-de-sac.
NOTIFICATION:
All property owners within 300 feet of this property were notified by mailing of this hearing. The
property is posted with a notice of hearing and the hearing was advertised in the Daily Territorial. At
the time of this report preparation, staff has not received any public comment supporting or in
opposition to the request.
SITE ANALYSIS:
Naranja Ranch I, is a 170-lot subdivision, it lies north of Naranja Drive and continues north of
Glover Road. Naranja Ranch I abuts Copper Ridge I to the north and Copper Ridge II and Desert
Vista to the east. To the west is Ironwood Ranch and La Cholla Estates.
PLAN ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to reduce the front yard setback from the required 20' to a 15' setback and
the rear setback from 25' to 10'. Lot 97 consists of 11,473 square feet in total area; it is a very shallow
lot, at one point it is only 76' deep. Without a variance this would require a home no greater than
31'deep. To the east and around the curve of this lot is a 1' no access easement, the star dictates access
onto the property. The drive to the garage must enter from the north. The closest fit approved model is
#2218,with a variance approval this model will comply.
SUMMARY:
Staff finding of facts:
• The shape of lot creates special circumstances or conditions.
• The applicant or owner did not create the circumstance or condition.
• The DRB approved model home plans for Lantana Corporation are similar in size and
architecture as others properties in the area.
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.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
The Board may wish to consider the following motions:
I move to approve OV 10-01-02, a request to reduce the front yard setback from the required 20 feet
to 15 feet and the rear yard setback from 20' to 10'.
OR
I move to approve OV 10-01-02 as submitted by the applicant with the following stipulations:
(Staff does not have any stipulations to recommend).
OR
I move to deny OV 10-01-02 finding that: (Board to state reason why the variance cannot be granted).
2
ATTACHMENTS:
1. BOA application with narrative
2. Plat references
3. Site map
4. Plot plans
F:\OV\OV 10\2000\10-01-02\REPORT.doc
3
oQo JP�EY qR 0 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
c- PLANNING &ZONING DIVISION
ORO VALLEY AZ 85737
. 11,000 N.LA CANADA DRIVE,
�- Phone: (520)229-4800 Fax: (520)742-1022
F .A
ouNDEO\''
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION
FOR: k Zoning Variance
Zoning Interpretation V/ is ,
Appeal of Administrative Decision CASE NO.:
NATURE OF REQUEST:
e'tuc:; -I `I►�ar 'SET S 1D F t ET.
APPLICANT: Lia\N-T-r„1.1Th
PHONE/FAX: Ooia OOc \
ADDRESS: cLQC . CEL AV E L ATE aDL)
OWNER: �INS`e1 L
ADDRESS: 6s6 Li x,.. '�Y`V FLL �RV� - i apb
V
PARCEL NUMBER: 7 ,kd 9 9 v
PROPERTY LOCATION/ADDRESS: \\`A(D U t � 1--thk �/�� N 11 A
1 .
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:NARANZIN ocn �� `�UE d3
ACREAGE: . CM CURRENT ZONING: APPLICABLE FEE: -
ATTACHMENTS: \3 Co?!e5 CIF ►-cyi2 EL-Ev v=4-T C1,)C____orryci,\-- 3 ot-, ec_ riNc-)1
L19NS
t
tvtiv--E1C_ I ' 1C.--v\G) \ \CI\
1
jSIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (AND ALSO PRINT NAME) DATE
F:IADMIN\FORMS\BOAAPP.doc
SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE
1. Identify difficulties or problems that would result from complying with the present zoning requirements.
u -VD E N PkWcx),INE55 o S t\E Lo T Ours rnd�tL al
k ONL'\ M( L WE C_ `R 1Lb
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.).
k\E Woo v\ cN,A eurns-ri: 1Li f S 1E 1teE Sw'r r i ,, of 'ME 'Lo .
P�.c e• E-1A CKg' AtL►�\(:k(1\
Identify and explain any peculiar conditions in the surrounding area, which would keep you from
complying with the present zoning requirements.
\ ?LV ci E ►A N1 c of our f'cx�� •mo�E,LS o w t-07.
E"-10U L D Kt o T \4cs 12X 'i uE "GlJ S1.2 o P Q-t E O S ICY W ome-
rro L. c9 R I% \Ai t LL \4 0 f c \&.t -t- -R Eerie 4 )
sptc .
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
4. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING:
The most current available list of property owners from the Pima County Assessor's Office and the date
such list was obtained.
13 copies of dimensioned plot plan,if applicable
13 copies of dimensioned floor plan, if applicable
13 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
FINDINGS:
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
This particular property is very narrow and shallow. Therefore we do not have the
allowance for the required setbacks.
B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant;
and
Due to a non-access easement to the east of the property,this now forces us to
move the entrance to the house 90 degrees making the driveway entrance at the
North.
C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of substantial property rights; and
If variance were to be granted,it would not hinder the enjoyment and/or
preservation of the surrounding properties.
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
The way the site plan is designed it would not interfere with any other properties in
the subdivision. Also,with the Town of Oro Valley's no access easement this does
not allow us to build the house within normal industry standards.
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.
This property,being a corner lot and the drive to the North, does not infringe on
another person's property or any type of public welfare.
General Notes
1. The gross area of the subdivision is 97.84 acres. -
Z Area of natural open space is 4 acres.
3. The total number of lots is 162.
4. The basis of bearings for this subdivision is GLO Southline of Section 3
said Bearing being S 89a 58'46"W
5. The total miles of new public streets is 2.33 miles..
6. Any utilities that may need to be relocated as a result of this development required by Vac. Unsut
this development will removed at no expense to the Town of Oro Valley SR
7. No further subdivision of any lot or parcel shown will be done without the written
approval of the Oro Valley Town Council. Naranja Dri
8. Single farrdy lots
Minimum Lot Area- 10,069 S.F.
Average Lot Area- 18,900 S.F.
9. The proposed water company that will service this subdivision is Canada Hills Water
Company.
10. Setbacks : Front - 20' For lots 13, 83, 84 and 85 the setbacks are as follows:
Rear - 25' Front-50'
Side - Io' Rear -50'
Side - 20' fij11111111
11. Zoning - R-4 Density= 1.69 units/Acre
Zoning -R 1-144 Density= .286/Acre
12. �Qr:
First American Title Insurance Company, a California corporation, as trustee under
Trust No 1 4515.
1880 East River Road Assurance
Tucson, Arizona 85719 Assurance in the
(602) 577-8707
recorded in Docket
13. Maximum building Height -4 -2 stories and street Improver
14. Parking provided on lot ffi 4 telephone,
(2 in carport, 2 in the Front setback) n gas, sews
15. The area between 100 Year Flood Limits represents an area that may be subject to jet . - T.. •
flooding from 100 year frequency flood and all land in this area will be restricted to
uses that are compatible with flood plain management as approved by the Town
engineer. Assurance in the torn
has been provided to
16. The professional engineer of record shall certify, in writing, that all improvements the event the project
whether private or public, have been constructed, placed, installed, etc. in substantial
conformance with the accepted Improvement plans for this development.
Certifications, in writing, are to be received by the Town Engineer of the Town of Oro Assurance in the for
Valley prior to the request for final inspection and the release of assurances. assure installation of
17. A 1/2' iron pin tagged by an R.L.S. will be set at all lot comers upon completior. of
construction.
18. All streets are public and are to be dedicated by this plat.
19. The property owner, his successors, assigns or a designated Home owners '
Assocl agrees to (1) Keep all required landscaped areas maintained in a weed
free, trL*ee condidtlon, (2) replace any dead plant materials within 90 days and (3)
maintain the irrigation system in proper working order.
1
uses mat are compauuie with woo plain management as apfxovec uy we iowrr
engineer. Assurance in the for
has been provided t
16. The professional engineer of record shall certify, in writing, that all improvements the event the project
whether private or public, have been constructed, placed, installed, etc. In substantial
conformance with the accepted improvement plans for this development.
Certifications, in writing, are to be received by the Town Engineer of the Town of Oro Assurance in the fo
Valley prior to the request for final inspection and the release of assurances. assure installation a
17. A 1/2* iron pin tagged by an R.LS. will be set at all lot comers upon completion of
construction.
18. All streets are public and are to be dedicated by this plat.
19. The property owner, his successors, assigns or a designated Home owners ft
Assocl agrees to (1) Keep all required landscaped areas maintained in a weed
free,tr free condidtion, (2)replace any dead plant materials within 90 days and (3)
maintain a irrigation system in proper working order. —
2'0. Only that vegetation shall be removed which is necessary for building pads and `+
accessory uses , roads and driveways. All healthy Palo Verde, Mesquite, Ironwood, scr
Saguaros and Barrel Cacti to be removed shad be ircnzpicslted for onsets londscoping
Zs 25*
21. Landscaping shall consist of low water use and low pollen-producing vegetation.
,s570p
22. Grading on Lots shall restricted to _= square feet, to provide for a building "
envelope. A grading plan for each lot shall be required and must be approved by
theTown Engineer and Planning and Zoning Director.
23. A $7,500 escrow account shall be posted prior to Subdivision Assurance Release, to
cover the construction of bike lanes along Naranja Drive. Said account shall be
available to the Town for a period of five years from date of release of assurances for
this project.
24. Setbacks for all the lots shall be a minimum of 20 feet at the front for forward extended
garages and 25 feet at the front for the remainder of the residences, 25 at the front for
residences where the garage is not extended, 10 feet on the side, 25 feet at the rear, lirt .
but not to Impact the natural conservation easements.-
Naranjo Ra
415 Cid Cc
25. A 7 foot landscape easement to be granted by the Tbwn for the maintenance of that Rio Rico, A
portion of the 25 foot Naranja Drive landscape buffer which lies within the right-of-way. (502)528-8
26. A Conservation Easement, prohibiting certain activities In areas so designated, has
been recorded at Book 9‘// , page /P.Yy .
27. Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowner's Association will maintain the entire 25 foot
Landscape Buffer along Naranja Drive. NaA
28. No walls,fences etc. to be constructed in Sewer Easements.
29. The owners of Lots 10& 11 53&54, 100& 101,shag keep the area the sewer Lot I thrL
easement free , "Nrn any obstruction or encroachment, Ong walls and fences.
an
21111ficAtIon
hereby certify that the boundary survey shown on this plat was performed under my A SubdIV
direction and that all existing and/or proposed survey monuments and.marker shown are
described. I further certify that this plat was prepared under my direction. I further G. & S.R.B. &
limits conat servation �designed� ��nv�lsi�or,� 1 N-year flood prone
KAThet ) Date424/5 OV9=92-2
F.H. R.t_S. 116582 OV 12-92-9
•
,: 5-44 A-c.k-s
, . . .
•
,r
•
, -,e ati Z v
ii. 11;.% co-*
. .. - zs-
1 ‘ /
y, MR. A
...., /16
• '05L
7 \''' 41 'It`� Mwis_ __ rr .ram
^is v'"�::, ` .,r..t ` a'1wIG4 r
.... 4
s.
•
..... aillifirel -ts.
A,C1.6%
6"ti :, : . - : * taamr:::,1)' .1,.':
,1
TY
11k...404,/ ;r‘•
:N. 3 t 7
•
�?G, : `:
,./ 2 i
//„.\ ,,,....\\:..,\„.„...,,,,
..../...
// ..
. '.,.\-‘,.
,\ \\, ,,...\\\,\ \ ,,,, ,h \ \
...... \\:.-s:', \\\ `., \. '•,\\\.., \ \\\ \\,'" %.\\:\ ...., '\\, ..„,, , ,, s \
iii,1
1 VI
If
);
it'l
ersir--------o„.......,, , -
'� Q �nia 4 t ... .--4. `. \\+' �, I 1 1
/
r
,
PKEL \i4t l'ib4AKer 5TE. fl....,A0, : .
. , , .„„:: ::: ...,
f=s----0., :/--F.7R----4.:—r—Rr4:r—h---14,4 „44..i,„1/4. p,44,14:J—i 1.41- iit.',17 iyAor,A.L. ‘8
V./.. to' `` 4(16 A 4, V , Oe .,�. veelmAtro. , o,0 ,
t r J
,
10 ' 50. 00 '
122. 00 • — so.oo' -- _ _ 60.0!
585 '32' 42'W (RAD) 50. 00 'cl
N89 'S4
i �- COMMON AREA "A
//776" S, 579In
SO FT
_•
` � Lot 98 - �I� 61 . 97'
�� 12533 SO FT N89 54 • 19 w
O
0c o P
as.4) Efil —
�P Lot 97 , i
`' 11473 SO FT
Q
• 0 . 94 ' -.. /
m
• r
Ne7 01 ' 39'w • 37. 55 • /
7
• r�
�3.
N79 .191�7 'Q4., I /
a i
r
co
co /
N
N
L a Lot 95 !
of 96 0
1856� SO FT �, 12500 SO FT
� oo ,
U
"
411150 / 717 .;
•
113 9 I ?;
w N77 .17 2
,15• Q7
N>, •
1 -4
17 6
► , �1 6 Ej /- 0
7'15,
EO�g ��C i o t ...:.N. o
�� ant 0 (
Ci
0 u7
�, N77 00 no • 0 �i 7 tij
Lot 94 171s -w o%a
m 18507 SO FT • `O1ti
3
I 0 . i
�'( rti ry Lot 93 I
�' � 1250U SO FTl ` c..............:
7,2
ji o /
0
't517-11-frZwiEs,.
Ntill.: B*4 0001 1 gir 4 0fir OP%Ortnrnweion on it0 Ymw
, WE
2 ., nalf***4 Unikilir4 Urn,91 CtIrl,Trvir#921 Eintrfter4
el sad 010111 DOOR T4t449 SEE SHEET 7 OF 8 FOR CONTINUATION
----.
Ili at f
Let 92 M.
MI*4 19 rT II700-N
11.....
alliy-t.T..tiot.:98:22„: . ittrr--.1 ,,,, .... La:."111 m 114:717773-41116(bit'
. Cario t •
r
.4111 41-0,,_ 111
• • ti, . ..., 'I TOT,
" r rt" 0 4 fil
i*.. sr.' •.' CV) 4,0* # „... .,
/
Lot 110
iT44F IS FT
)4 . .64........ 4 *.
'40,04p
• ,c.,
to . .
.11 c t 01901 10 FT :
Lot Isielln ,
1
1
cr- 1
ifirilf Or IL t ,
,
.
1 a 11
CPA > Z ' Lot 152
', if de.v L ..k. awe lo rt
5 •
- • *3) 1..
..,,
CPI( Airrip, Lot 111
Wad" I0441 SIFT I i " , . I.
;'‘.
moon 19 4
,(1511b
2 i'' Lot 121 CORTE . ,
r -------.41-4,,,,,Tkip ' • -,.
• taco'• 440411' =,•$1::-•,.. 1 2640S',/1 ft t t.e,iitill, AIN - 4:Z:) .
UM lid'611,11 41:;#\
'N'N-41"' 4„),„
e ....,
1 Alf , 6 p
1414-1
•
g Lot 90 Lot 112 , ...I
1042) t31131 OP Fi \ I'l ' ir
* 1774111 110 FT
111 i 0 A (la Lot 154
I #ini in rT
i 1 1 ( I • .
) Lot 156 ...it'-
,
di li i 1, tot 120 I 1 Nt IMMO 10 FT 49, •
1 11110 94 FT • 0.. \
F - •i w If 1 ,
r-* I 4,1
1ff, l''''
Ili':'
it I i 4!2:10 1 . /
,
in! Lot 99 CZ> '
ate&es Pt t
4#4e)
or 1 Lat 3%3 1
21A2-, zi•Ft 4 * la
. •v 1 miii-ai
tt 217s4 ma rr (N• •• :16.
i g ..
'
Pti Pi' go, Li 1 Lot i57 r
ar Fs'71*irk ----la747;•ir '''' Lill I WIPP 11 FT
I Lot 119 . ›, ' .
X• f NM Ma FT " I 4
Allen i 3; AC 4 k i a ' I . i
i Lot 159 -44.06ip— 14 e? -1 :.,. Lot 114 1 -, 1 • li
ck, ...... .. _. ,, sridu .1,4 .9' 1117144/1•17 A iik 1
I I
i I
4 i 1 pr- I t i
—
> i 9 f du-Nriwq
saw °
41 ilmlivillTi-u itt jog Iry tira ,, ,. .la) i 1rb =Lafir ,. 24
,..I ii
'144 i
I gild LiFyit vi '--,
011, €51)
Lot f17 _ 0
1.197.40 FT Lot 115
• . i
i Fr
Ifit- -41/1 i go-Y1911 Flitti PLAN
'OPT
rilirl. 4 4 Limat mob Ludt fr '
1 t 101-11)04 FLOOZI FLA,. 14 •
LIRET MO LEM', OF
IIIP I t il
al , i _C*Filerniialli 'F.
I Cill) 1 C14944TFK4T1 ON
IIIJ ,„...,-,tilfeWEPP
Ai iiroli 4 ..._,-.--sv
•
rt.: 140
c Ito 0•
1E5
N 1------"(/ •
toy-r r!t4
c r ( q 13/14
. 4 441 PI 2Ammir 40.1 4*/
(1), i a
mows
: i 4 it
Alik
fir i .
Alla " ' ma ' . -
gill
illg MI
N
Nib* 4411 iiii13:
81/
4110 1•400.- gi 04 .- Br lie
I*
0 1
/ / /
liiii
.1, J5
OVIO -01 -02
1
Qu rtz Rapk I
A.Copper Sky Dr
• B.Copper Ridge PI
rn
:�J op =in Kaurel D
ety ('/i
Air .
. im,„ .),„( iti
ft...7 :1ir 41 **
ILI se
iiv*, A/ 0ParorcVeaIsIley
wax iftilit orii A ' .. e r , ,
4„.
itig, -lap ,
0.2i ---1
r E
iiiri,0
0 0.2 0.4 ilas
S
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, March 27, 2001, commencing at or after 3:00 p.m. The meeting
will be held at the Oro Valley Town Hall, 11000 N. La Canada Drive and the subject
matter will be as further described below:
OV10-01-2: LANTANA CORPORATION, 2601 N. CAMPBELL
AVENUE, TUCSON, AZ 85719, REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE TO THE NARANJA RANCH PLAT
REQUIRED FRONT& REAR YARD SETBACKS FOR
ZONE R-4. SUBJECT PROPERTY: 11789 N. VIA DE
LA VERBENITA, LOT 97 OF NARANJA RANCH I
SUBDIVISION.
The applicant requests to reduce the front yard setback from 20' to 15' and the rear
yard setback from 20' to 10'. Due to the shallowness of this corner lot,the approved
model #2218 is the closest fit for this lot and will need a variance approval in order
to comply.
Site 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. Any
person seeking further information on this request for a variance may contact Dee
Widero at 229-4812.
REQ: Bryant M. Nodine,AICP
Planning and Zoning Administrator
POSTED: DM
DATE: 3/09/01
TIME: 2 : 00 p.m.
July 19, 2000
To: Oro Valley Planning&Zoning
Attn: Dee Widero
From: Bert Kupersmith
Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association
Re: Setback Variance Request for 11789 N. Via de la Verbenita, lot 97
This is to inform you that the Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association is against
granting this requested variance to front and back setbacks.
As far as we know, no other set back variances have been granted in the subdivision.
Other builders have had to deal with similar issues by modifying their house plans or just
building a smaller house. The setback is a defining characteristic of a subdivision and it
would be unfair to other homeowners to allow this house to be visibly different than all
the others. It would be especially unfair to future neighbors who cannot be represented
now as these lots are unsold. The Homeowners Association feels it our responsibility to
put our position forward in a strong manner. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Bert Kupersmith
Member Board of Directors—Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association
Chairman—Architectural Review Committee
I can be reached at
MAR 1 u1
March 12, 2001
BY:
To: Oro Valley Planning & Zoning
Attn: Dee Widero
From: Bert Kupersmith
Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association
Re: Setback Variance Request for 11789 N. Via de la Verbenita, lot 97
Apparently this builder is coming back for the same variance requested, AND
REJECTED, last July. It violates both the original Plat and our CCR's.
The Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association remains against granting this request for
the same reasons stated in our previous letter(ATTACHED). Would you please make
sure these letters get in the hands of the appropriate member(s) of the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
20,([74,--74-
Bert Kupersmith
Member Board of Directors-Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association
Chairman-Architectural Review Committee
I can be reached at
AGENDA
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
March 27, 2001
Oro Valley Town Hall Council Chambers
11,000 N. La Canada Drive
CALL TO ORDER: 3:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
AT THE CALL OF THE CHAIR,THE AGENDA ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN IN ANY ORDER,AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE.
MINUTES Approval of the regular meeting minutes of January 23, 2001 and February 27, 2001 and
the Special Study Session minutes from February 27, 2001 hearing
EACH PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS AFTERNOON'S AGENDA WILL BE CONDUCTED IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
PETITIONER/APPLICANT PRESENTATION
STAFF REPORT
PUBLIC INPUT
PETITIONER/APPLICANT RESPONSE AND SUMMATION
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Lantana Corporation requests approval for a variance to reduce the front and rear yard setbacks
in an R-4 zone. Subject property is located in the Naranja Ranch I subdivision, 11789 N. Via de la
Verbenita, lot 97.
PLANNING AND UPDATE REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
A packet of agenda materials, as listed above, is available for public inspection at least 24 hours prior to the BOA
meeting in the Town Hall Administration Building,during regular business hours.
The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If a disabled person planning to
attend this meeting requires any special accommodations,please notify the Town Clerk at 297-2591.
NOTICE TO SPEAKERS
Members of the public have the right to speak during any posted public hearing; however,those items not listed as a
public hearing are for consideration and action by the Board during the course of its business meeting. Members of
the public may be allowed to speak on these topics at the discretion of the Chair.
If you wish to address the Board on any item(s) on this agenda please complete a speaker card located on the
Agenda table at the back of the room and give it to the Clerk of the Board. Please indicate on the speaker card which
item number and topic you wish to speak on.
Please step forward to the podium when the Chair announces the item(s)on the agenda,which you are interested in
addressing.
Posted: LH
Date:03/23/2001
Time:4:30
DRAFT
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MARCH 27,2001
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
ORO VALLEY,ARIZONA
CALL TO ORDER at 3:07 p.m.
PRESENT:
Henry Suozzi, Chairman
Bill Adler, Vice Chairman
James Swan,Member
Lyra Done,Member
Cindy Lewis, Member
STAFF:
Dan Dudley, Town Attorney
Bryant Nodine,Planning and Zoning Administrator
Dee Widero, Senior Zoning Inspector
Debbie Moran,Zoning Tech.
Linda Hersha, Secretary II
1. APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 23,
2001 AND FEBRUARY 27, 2001 AND THE SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 27, 2001 HEARING
MOTION: Vice Chairman Adler MOVED to APPROVE the minutes of January 23,
2001 and February 27,2001 and the Special Study Session minutes with the corrections
noted. Motion SECONDED by Member Done. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
2. PUBLIC HEARINGS CASE #0V10-01-02 LANTANA CORPORATION
REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE FRONT
AND REAR YARD SETBACKS IN AN R-4 ZONE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS
LOCATED IN THE NARANJA RANCH I SUBDIVISION, 11789 NORTH VIA
DE LA VERBENITA,LOT 97
Chairman Suozzi swore in the applicant that was intending to testify.
Jennifer Fertig,representing the Lantana Corporation, reviewed the site plan using the
overhead projector. She explained that because of the no-access easement, the developer
would be unable to construct a driveway. She explained that the site had been purchased
from the preliminary plan produced by the developer, which did not reflect a no-access
easement. Therefore, the applicant assumed a driveway would be permissible on either
side of the corner lot. She stated that the no-access easement was discovered after the
final plat for the subdivision had been purchased.
3/27/01 Minutes 2
Board of Adjustment
Member Lewis asked if it were possible to make the home fit within the setbacks.
Ms. Fertig explained that it would be possible but the home would lose about 10-feet.
Vice Chairman Adler asked if it would be accurate to assume that the model homes were
not designed for specific projects but were designed generically, so when a development
comes forward the architect could propose a model that they believe would be suitable or
acceptable for the project.
Ms. Fertig replied, "that is correct". She explained that the models developed for the
Naranja Ranch I Subdivision were much larger than most city models. She explained that
the home located on Via De La Verbernita was a semi-custom home rather than a
production home.
Vice Chairman Adler asked if the model was designed specifically for that subdivision.
Ms. Fertig replied, "that's correct".
Vice Chairman Adler asked why wasn't the no-access easement discovered until the final
plat was done.
Ms. Fertig explained that unfortunately the developer never mentioned the discrepancy
regarding the easement until the final plat had been presented.
Vice Chairman Adler asked if the home had already been designed prior to the approval
of the final plat.
Ms. Fertig replied, "correct".
Vice Chairman Adler asked if the request regarding the temporary off-street parking near
the home would be revised and designed for long-term parking.
Ms. Fertig replied "yes".
Chairman Suozzi expressed concern with the home being placed too close to the property
line of the adjacent home and that a large home was being placed on a very small lot.
Member Swan suggested widening Lot 97 by incorporating a portion of Lot 95 and Lot
96.
Ms. Fertig explained that the company would take the suggestion into consideration,but
would need to review figures to know how much land would be taken away from the
other lots. She stated that the recommendation would be considered to be the last resort.
3/27/01 Minutes 3
Board of Adjustment
Member Swan explained it would be more feasible to take the required footage needed
from Lot 95 and revise the position of the home. Chairman Suozzi agreed.
Member Lewis asked what was the average square footage of a home in the Naranja
Ranch I Subdivision.
Ms. Fertig replied "about 2800 square feet."
Vice Chairman Adler asked for an estimated cost to make revisions to the model. He
also asked if it was feasible to make a plat amendment to change Lot 95 and Lot 97 so
that the applicant could change the size of the model to accommodate the setbacks and
meet the requirements.
Ms. Fertig explained that with the engineers cost and amending the plat the estimated
cost would be approximately $8,000.00.
Vice Chairman Adler asked if that would virtually wipeout the profit.
Ms. Fertig replied "yes."
Bryant Nodine, Planning and Zoning Administrator explained that the plat change could
be processed without a plat amendment by recording the change to the Pima County
Recorders Office. He explained that the only problem would be how the change would
affect the fit of the model home on Lot 95.
Vice Chairman Adler explained that the applicant had stated that they were not aware of
the no-access easement from the developer until the final plat was confirmed, and at that
time, when the final plat was submitted and approved, the applicant had already designed
the models. He asked if this was a conventional process.
Mr. Nodine explained that the no-access easement is usually shown at the Preliminary
Plat stage,but that the plat had other problems as well.
Vice Chairman Adler stated that he was surprised by the sequence of events, especially
the fact that the applicant was unaware of the no-access easement at a point in time when
the model had already been designed for a lot that was believed to be conventional in the
sense of having ordinary access.
Member Swan asked how many lots in the subdivision did the applicant originally
purchase on the deal.
Ms. Fertig replied "26 lots."
Member Swan asked if the subdivision had a Homeowners Association.
Ms. Fertig replied "yes,we do."
3/27/01 Minutes 4
Board of Adjustment
Member Done confirmed that after doing some research that in July of last year the
majority of homes located on Via De La Verbenita were at least 2200 square feet except
for one, which was 1748 square feet.
Chairman Suozzi reiterated that the Board had received correspondence letters from the
homeowners association. The letters stated the following:
March 12, 2001
To: Oro Valley Planning &Zoning
Attn: Dee Widero
From: Bert Kupersmith
Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association
Re: Setback Variance Request for 11789 North Via de la Verbenita lot 97
Apparently this builder is coming back for the same variance requested, AND
REJECTED, last July. It violates both the original Plat and our CCR's.
The Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association remains against granting this request for
the same reasons stated in our previous letter(ATTACHED). Would you please make
sure these letters get in the hands of the appropriate member(s) of the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Bert Kupersmith
Member Board of Directors—Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association Chairman—
Architectural Review Committee
I can be reached at 11514 North Via de la Verbenita
219-1250
*****
July 19, 2000
To: Oro Valley Planning&Zoning
Attn: Dee Widero
From: Bert Kupersmith
Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association
Re: Setback Variance Request for 11789 North Via de la Verbenita, lot 97
3/27/01
Minutes 5
Board of Adjustment
This is to inform you that the Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association is against
granting this requested variance to front and back setbacks.
A far as we know, no other set back variances have been granted in the subdivision.
Other builders have had to deal with similar issues by modifying their house plans or just
building a smaller house. The setback is a defining characteristic of the subdivision and
it would be unfair to other homeowners to allow this house to be visibly different than all
the others. It would be especially unfair to future neighbors who cannot be represented
now as these lots are unsold. The Homeowners Association feels it our responsibility to
put our position forward in a strong manner. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Bert Kupersmith
Member Board of Director—Naranja Ranch 1 Homeowners Association
Chairman —Architectural Review Committee
I can be reach at 11514 North Via de la Verbenita
219-1250
Dee Widero, Senior Zoning inspector reviewed the staff report. She explained that the
Lantana Corporation requests to reduce the front yard setback from 20' to 15' and the
rear yard setback from 25' to 10'. She said that due to the shallowness of this corner lot,
the approved model #2218 is the closest fit for this lot and will need a variance approval
in order to comply. She explained that the site was located in Naranja Ranch I,north of
Glover Road. Naranja Ranch 1, is a 170-lot subdivision and abuts Copper Ridge I to the
north and Copper Ridge 11 and Desert Vista to the east. To the west is Ironwood Ranch
and La Cholla Estates.
Ms. Widero explained that all property owners within 300 feet of the property were
notified by mailing of the hearing and the property has been posted with a notice of
hearing and that the hearing was advertised in the Daily Territorial Newspaper. She said
that at the time of the report preparation, staff had not received any public comment
supporting the request,but had received a letter in opposition from the Naranja Ranch 1
Homeowners Association and a voice mail from a concerned citizen opposing the
development.
Ms. Widero explained that Lot 97 consists of 11,473 square feet in total area; it is a very
shallow lot, and at one point it is only 76 feet deep. She explained that without a
variance, the lot would require a home no greater than 31 feet deep. She explained that to
the east and around the curve of the lot is a 1-foot no-access easement. She explained
that the star shown on the final plat exhibit indicates access onto the property and that the
driveway to the garage must enter from the north.
3/27/01 Minutes 6
Board of Adjustment
Staff finding of fact:
• The shape of the lot creates special circumstances or conditions.
• The applicant or owner did not create the circumstance or condition.
• The Development Review Board (DRB) approved model home plans for Lantana
Corporation are similar in size and architecture as other properties in the area.
Chairman Suozzi opened the Public Hearing. There being no speakers Chairman Suozzi
closed the Public Hearing.
Ms.Fertig reiterated that reducing the setbacks would be the easiest way to solve the
problem.
Chairman Suozzi asked if the applicant had any final comments.
Ms. Fertig"no."
Vice Chairman Adler stated that when the Town approves models and lots that the Town
should bear some responsibility should there ultimately or eventually occur a discrepancy
between the models and lots that has been approved. Therefore,he could not excuse the
Town of some responsibility for the problem. On the other hand, the builder clearly has
some responsibility to submit models designed for the project, conform to the CC&R's
and to the lots that are described. He stated that the builder should bear the primary
responsibility for the discrepancy. He said that it was regrettable that the no-access
easement was not noted on the Preliminary Plat,but did not know if that would excuse
the builder from the normal due diligence involved in researching the models and the lots
that are proposed. He stated that the builder should have made sure that they conformed
to the CC&R's and to the appropriate setbacks. He explained that he was factoring in
that to make adjustments to the model would be prohibitively expensive and that it could
represent a degree of hardship that would justify allowing the variance. But, he believed
it was the builders responsibility to avoid these problems and that through the due
diligence process,the difficulty should have been detected early enough in the process so
that they would not be locked into a situation which seems to be almost unattainable at
the moment. He explained that the fact that it was unattainable, in his opinion,was
because the problem was not necessarily the responsibility of the Town. Although the lot
is peculiar in shape, it is the responsibility of the builder to propose models that fit, not
the responsibility of the Town to adjust the Zoning Code to fit the models on an
irregularly shape lots.
MOTION: Vice Chairman Adler moved to deny the application for variance for CASE
NO. OV 10-01-02 for the reasons stated above. Motion seconded by Member Lewis.
3/27/01 Minutes 7
Board of Adjustment
ROLL CALL VOTE
Chairman Suozzi—aye
Vice Chairman— aye
Member Lewis— aye
Member Done— aye
Member Swan - aye
Motion carried to deny Case No. OV 10-01-02, 5-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING UPDATE
Bryant Nodine,Planning and Zoning the following:
• The General Plan update will begin in the next couple of months.
• There are proposals in for Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 4, a C-2 Zone
property located on the southwest corner of Tangerine and Oracle. He reported there
was a book available for review from Vistoso Partners indicating their intentions.
He announced that there would a neighborhood meeting on Thursday night at 7:00
p.m. in the Navajo Room in the Development Services building.
• The Ritz Calton Development Plan have been completed and will be presented to the
Town Council this month.
• The engineering plans has not been completed for the new Osco Drug Store,but
will be located on Lambert and La Canada.
• The new Walgreen's Drug Store has not submitted improvement plans and the project
is currently on hold.
Member Done asked what would be the general time commitment for citizens who
volunteer to serve on a General Plan.
Mr. Nodine stated that at least l evening meeting once a month, 3 training meetings and 1
full day on a weekend.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Member Swan moved to adjourn the meeting at 4:05 p.m. Motion
SECONDED by Member Done. Motion carried, 5-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Hersha, Secretary Il
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
The following is a draft summary of the recommended rules and procedures for the Board
of Adjustment: (as discussed at several special sessions and at the Board of Adjustment
meeting of February 27, 2001).
"Summary of Recommended Rules and Procedures for the Board of Adjustment".
1. Staff Duties:
Clerk's Office
• Make room arrangements, mail materials, take minutes and schedule meetings
Planning and Zoning Staff
• Serves as primary contact for agenda issues, develops agenda and any revisions with
direction of the chair.
• Notify all surrounding property owners.
• Coordinate all necessary reports/materials/exhibits for the Board's
consideration.
• Invite all necessary staff to the Board meetings.
• Notify the Board by the 1 0th of each month if a meeting will or will not be
held and Board members to notify staff of inability to attend a meeting.
• All materials and agenda shall be distributed to the Board by staff at least one
(1)week prior to the meeting date.
2. Board Duties:
• As outlined in Article 1-7 of the Zoning Code and as specified in the Board of
Adjustment manual.
3. The Applicant:
• The applicant shall submit all materials with an application 15 days prior to
the meeting date.
• The burden of proof is on the applicant and he/she should address the 5
Criteria in writing on the application.
• The applicant should submit in writing the fact that they are requesting a
variance for more the one (1) issue, if applicable.
4. Board Meetings:
• The Board should stay focused and only discuss agenda issues and not discuss
issues directly with the applicant, especially during a site visit (Except for
questions of fact).
1
• All questions and comments during the meeting shall go through the Chair.
• During the meeting the applicant should have the first "shot" at presenting
their case prior to the staff report.
• Staff should identify each individual variance and all the issues involved.
• It was agreed that the Board could give the applicant some direction and may
state their reason(s)why they voted aye or nay.
5. Selection and Composition of the Board of Adjustment:
• The Board shall be in accordance to the outline specified in Section 5, pages
11 and 12 of the Board of Adjustment Handbook "Desirable Attributes of
Board Member."
• An "objective" evaluation process of a board members performance would be
desirable and perhaps serve as a guideline for the Town Council and the
Government Review Task Force.
• The process to replace or re-appoint Board members shall begin by May 1 St
for new terms that commence on July l st
6. Conflict of interest:
• Issues should be declared up-front so that the Board member can be fair,
objective, and impartial and should not be personally involved.
7. Relationship with other Boards/Commission/Council:
• It was agreed that the Board of Adjustment minutes or excerpts regarding
concerned issues should be distributed by staff in a timely fashion.
8. Other:
• It was suggested that a more "personal" notification letter be mailed to
encourage public response and that the Board recommends to the Planning
and Zoning Commission that the radius should be increased to at least 600 or
1000 feet.
9. Swearing in the Applicant
• It was the consensus of the Board that the recommended oath for swearing in
the applicant or witnesses be used and stated as follows: "Do you swear or
affirm to speak (or tell) the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth".
I)