The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOV100104 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 Ito 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 l 0-01-02 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, ,thyme Linda Hersha, Secretary II 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 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 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 (l) 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 151 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 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) Fr AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF ARIZONA) :ss. M O F M. COUNTY OF PIMA ) ;-Enr f.m.r r, t1M1 MAY 1 4 16CIT fi's1 duly sworn, deposes and says that (he) (she) is the Legal Advertising Manager BY: of THE DAILY TERRITORIAL, a daily newspaper printed and published in the County of Pima, State of Arizona, and of general circulation in the City of Tuc- son, County of Pima, State of Arizona and elsewhere, and the hereto attached CA)iO O2 -fi4 FIR a CtLOt" FUs s.0 NCO"TCE. was printed and published correctly in the regular and entire issue of said THE DALLY TERRITORIAL for issues; that was first made on the day of 20 and the last publication thereof was made on the day of 20 ; that said publication ot':: s; was made on each of the following dates, to-wit: Request of TOWN OF t tRS s VALLEY Daily Territorial By r Subscribed and swori . - - - ' day of oggrIVol. SAL ` °�` NA1°Al V K1ANMANE ;•s;...� Notary Public•Mate at Arizona PIMA GOUN 20 ' "!` . My Comm,Wires April 15,2(0� / (TC11(? , Notary Public in and for the County of Pima, State of Arizona My Commission Expires: t( 1 >( e J� i R 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 ;S HEREBY GIVEN that the Oro Valley Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, May 22, 2001,commencing at or after 3:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Oro Val- ley Town Hall, 11000 N. La Canada Drive and the subject matter will be as further described below: OV10-01-04: MR. CALOF. 11308 N. MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VAL- LEY,AZ 95737. REQUEST FOR VAR- IANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED 10'SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 9'.SUB- JECT PROPERTY:11308 N.MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VALLEY, AZ 35737. LOT 110 OF DESERT VISTA SUBDIVISION. The applicant requests to reduce the side yard setback from 10'to 9'to order to add a Hobby Shop to his existing home. Site clans are available for review cur- ing normal business hours at the Oro Valley Town Hail. Community Oeveloo • - ment 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 var- iance may contact Dee WVdero at 229- .812. Signature REQ:Bryant M.Nadine,AICP Planning and Zoning Administrator Pub:The Daily Territorial May 7,2001 Req:Town of Oro Valley pnovl0-01-04 em 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, May 22, 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: OV10-01-04: MR. CALOF, 11308 N. MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VALLEY, AZ 85737, REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 9'. SUBJECT PROPERTY: 11308 N. MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VALLEY, AZ 85737. LOT 110 OF DESERT VISTA SUBDIVISION. The applicant requests to reduce the side yard setback from 10' to 9' in order to add a Hobby Shop to his existing home. 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. ki)L... REQ: B t M.Nodine,AICP Planning and Zoning Administrator Po_EY qR O MX�'n,yM� `P��A��`q O 4- �hhl''Sh�ry TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ika COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • Planning and Zoning • Building Safety 11000 N.La Canada Drive,Oro Valley,AZ 85737•(520)229-4800•Fax(520)742-1022 • Parks and Recreation 680 W.Calle Concordia,Oro Valley,AZ 85737•(520)229-5050•Fax(520)742-2202 1UNDEO4\ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Dear Property Owner: May 3, 2001 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, May 22, 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: OV10-01-04: MR. CALOF, 11308 N. MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VALLEY, AZ 85737, REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 9'. SUBJECT PROPERTY: 11308 N. MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VALLEY, AZ 85737. LOT 110 OF DESERT VISTA SUBDIVISION. The applicant requests to reduce the side yard setback from 10' to 9' in order to add a Hobby Shop to his existing home. 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. Your Town and the Board of Adjustment value your comments on this request. For more information or to express your opinion please contact Dee Widero at 229-4812. REQ: t M. Nodine,AICP Planning and Zoning Administrator e ___.,,,.:.: _ L „7.,„,_., :„. ,, ,„„.. -----, (it -:,,„ iiidi L , -1 , - AMMO!7Ø . . , , P ii e _mIlb ore 11, i* gill . NI NA • .10 0 A W1(1441 NL* In • P - � S Fo firet , 4 I tomb .rilll%TN ailliff Pt I 0 eife4 41411611r• mi,ffr AI tl 4 )/' -IWO* ..ww , 1 qi a • 1,,,' *MO lAtt C-12- Ay V. ___. a, mk, • oz. 01 - - ip, $ or . . ..i.„'a ALA. si , r co . . .. . siw ii. 'ft I" ' 44 . . • A '4; q a) °. #* z) i (It) (''' . . CV" ik tow . • e ' n 7 - V ' d-oftdisal-- .' '0*-: D , - - .4 1 NARIN..Th l?RNE C ,T___,. ' - -/ ‘ wAti4 - -c2,--=7 v\iio - oi- oy ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT CASE NO: OV 10-01-04 Hearing Date: May 22,2001 Agenda Item No.: 1 Prepared By: Dee Widero, Senior Zoning Inspector REQUEST: MR. ROBERT J. CALOF, 11308 N. MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VALLEY AZ 85737(PARCEL#224102300). REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 10' TO 9' FOR ZONE R1-10. SUBJECT PROPERTY: ABOVE MENTIONED ADDRESS. REQUEST SPECIFICS: Mr. Calof has made a request to reduce the side yard setback from required 10' to 9' on the south side yard only. He is proposing to attach a Hobby Shop to his existing home. With an eight foot door to access the shop and approximately 1' on each side of the door for framing. The addition must be 10 feet wide. SITE LOCATION: This site is located in Desert Vista Subdivision. The site can be reached by traveling north on La Canada Drive to Naranja Drive turn west (left) go to the third street Sun Rose Drive turn right (north), follow to Bird of Paradise Place turn left (west). Then to the right on Meadow Sage Drive, the fourth lot 110, is 11308 N. Meadow Sage Drive, and posted with an Oro Valley Notice. 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. Mr. Calof submitted with his request for variance a letter from the neighbor the south Mr. Leach,which states he has no problem with the encroachment. SITE ANALYSIS: Desert Vista, is a 205-lot subdivision, it lies north of Naranja Drive and south of Glover Road. Desert Vista abuts Naranja Ranch I to the west and northwest, and Canada Hills Village 15 to the east. To the north and across Glover Road is Copper Ridge II. To the south and across Naranja Drive is Canada Hills Village 14, 13, & 17/18. PLAN ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to reduce the side yard setback from the required 10' to a 9' setback. Lot 110 consists of 16,210 square feet in total area. The existing home meets the required setbacks; the proposed attached Hobby Shop will encroach by 1' due to the desired 8' door, which will be accessed from the back yard. SUMMARY: Staff finding of facts: • There are no special circumstances or conditions due to the lot or property. • The applicant or owner did create the circumstance or condition. • The special circumstance is due to the desired 8' wide door and construction required for the installation. 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 10-01-04, a request to reduce the side yard setback from the required 10 feet to 9 feet on the south side only. OR I move to approve OV 10-01-04 as submitted by the applicant with the following stipulations: (Staff does not have any stipulations to recommend). OR I move to deny OV10-01-04 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\2001\10-01-04\REPORT.doc 3 opPLE�9 TOWN OF ORO VALLEYItC617R;11PLANNING & ZONING DIVISION ;�� ; 11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE,ORO VALLEY AZ 85737 APR 2 0 2001 Phone: (520)229-4800 Fax: (520) 742-1022 �/NDE0 9t BY:.• BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION FOR: Zoning Variance _Zoning Interpretation Appeal of Administrative Decision CASE NO.: D I//O-O/-O y JET DACJG Vi9,e/ l AKt NATURE OF REQUEST:4),‘ oaf 0•t ) G 0% SPET Sicc //Y // A)CEo,i N C-cki2. eAJ67 (M757 S/voP) /,t1Q ,€ bt1 Tc /9z L o u.r Fc 2 74 9f, Met7 ,6-7G7vT Pa o A?S 5$,o wN 0'&J PX. 4..) //rEcv DeACO//i) (/A)CLeiDe:C) AK? F/ C-1- APPLICANT: ia �� LET V, PHONE/FAX: ADDRESS: // a<c..' it) m&W ,) 54o6- 1�2. aeio ,q cif .�-� ?S'731-7 SO OWNER: SIX ADDRESS: ScM E PARCEL NUMBER: JIC) Di:"SElear V/S7 � PROPERTY LOCATION/ADDRESS: 2 `"// U 7-3 00 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: L or 210 I oeSZe7' Y/ST91 ao�� /h of ACREAGE: CURRENT ZONING: APPLICABL�FEE: r' W�� ATTACHMEN��P��/[l WE U./ �� L �T?c/2 �,ea�'j1 oc•c.Avc� •, '' 467 /a? J7?9Z7A4 - pEdiezeth l'Arric/ 'i• ALL SUBMITTALS ARE DUE AT NOON 1 'SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (AND ALSO PRINT NAME) DATE F:IADNIIMFORMS\BOA.APP.doc SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE 1. Identify difficulties or problems that would result from complying with the present zoning requirements. 3) LL.5e TA/79 .i S7217'cO 47 40 17c'o i lvooiO !FeW / /A} . / ri 47e:pt."'‘5' Es `' 0 A..U a)W o,3 sfvo°." 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 arrowness, shallowness,irregular shape, location,washes,vegetation and easements, etc.). SEE dew 3. Identify and explain any peculiar conditions in the surrounding area, which would keep you from complying with the present zoning requirements. LU! ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 4. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: pfw The most current available list of property owners from the Pima County Assessor's Office and the date 0 such list was obtained. nd0 " 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. r. S 000a Any additional comments/information you wish to provide regarding your request. 2 1'1 Apri l 1 8, 2001 APR 2 0 2001 Lawrence & Glenda Leach Dr. (Lot 109) Oro Valley, AZ 85737 -.1'0 W110111 it may concern: Robert Calof and 1 (Lawrence) have discussed his one-foot variance for new construction of his hobby shop. I have no problem with this particular variance that he is requesting. 'ncerely, 4)4V,13\, Lawrence Leach Glenda Leach .6,.... GNERAL "NOTES -THE 'VEGETATION SHALL BE DISTURBED ONI lir 0 ROADWAYS AND DRIVtWAYS. ALL HEALTHY SAARELL CACTI SHALL 'BE SALVAGED FOR I 1. GROSS AREA, or TH6 SUEICIVISION IS 1 16,82 ACRES, 24. A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION SHALL .iBE Fi , 1 2, TOTAL NUMBER Of LOTS am 205. (LIE RAC) ASSOCIATION SHALL BE CHARGED WITH PRE EASEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF COMMON .3. AREA OF COMMON AREA 'A' to 80,565 SF.. 1 2„03S S.,,F 25. ALL NEEDED 'IMPROVEMENTS TO NAPANJA E , 45,1 1 1 S.F. INTO AND EXITING THE SITE! SHALL BE IN! , 561,60:$.,F. ORO VALLEY, ll vF!, 28., THE DEVELOPER SHALL FULLY FUND CONS T%TAT. ,am 433,141' S.F. FRONTAGE OF THIS PROJECT ON NARAKIA • 4- TOTAL WILES or NEW PUBLIC STREETS am 2-64 i, 27. ...ee eiaiwArzel ie., reWARgr„ dr?' , .44Weiraiicf i44,eiFft,04,4afir..411044-49 0*.;04 , 5. SINGLE FAMILY LOTS MINIMUM LOT AREA ... 7.700 SY., 0. :THE RECREATION *REAM FOR DESERT: VIS MAXIMUM LOT AREA -00i .42.834 S.F.: - ISSUANCE OR BUILDING PERMITS FOR 35% LOT SIZE am 17,805 -5,F . . *POI THE MAXIMUM BUILDING EIWELOPE (GRADE] 205 SHALL NOT EXCEED 10,000 SQUARE I 1 8,„ .1414XII4LIM BUILDING HEIGHT - LOTS 4, THRU 7 AND 17 THRu 2.4 $iNGLE STORY 30. WILDS WILL BE REQUIRED to 'SUMO A ONLY. ALL OTHERS 25 FEET BY CASE BASIS TO ALLOW FOR DRAINAGE I FOR THE FOLLOWING AFFECTED LOTS: 1 18 . , , 78 TO 142; 77 TO 1 42; 189, . , . . . . 7.. SMACKS: R 1-7 R1-10 31. ALL WEATHER *can MUST BIE PRINIDED FRONT - 20 FT, 25 FT, INCLUDING EXACT LOCATION, MAY BE DRAW . , , REAP - 20 rr. 25 rT, IAIST ‘SE APPROVED BY THE TOWN ENGINE . , FT, 10 FT, ASSURANCES PARKING PRIDED ON LOT - (2 IN CARPORT, 2 R4 FRONT SETBACK). rowspciAL ASSURANCES IN TIME FORM OF A THI i !9. EXISTING ZONING - R 1-1 44: CONDITKA& RI-7 AND fIl-'I O.. -TR,UST, NO. FRO , P‘IWl CODE REM SE AS RECORDED . , 10. NO FURTHER SUBDIVISION OF ANY LOT OR PARCEL SHOWN WILL BE -DONE WITHOUT THE . 014.:: „ HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO OUARAAFTEE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL, S NIER, SOILS PREPARATION, UTILITY IMPROVE MOI',6)MENTS AND ALL II$OROVEMENTS AND CONI lik THE AREA DEI.INEATED BY 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN MOTS REPRESENTS AN AREA THAT ASSURANCE AGREEMENT INCLUDING EXHIBIT 'V MAY BE SUBJECT TO FLOODING FROM A 100 YEAR FREQUENCY FLOOD AND ALL LAND IN THVS AREA WILL BE RESTRICTED TO USES THAT ARE COMPATIBLE WITH FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT AS APPROVED BY THE TOWN MINCER, BY: le MAYOR • • TOWN OF O%ALA 12. BEARINGS BASED UPON WEST...,LINE„.OF CANAJOA HILLILIALLAGE...#1.5,,.A!,SW)WN,,,,,„..„.......,........... ..iii.... ,iiiowitt.....„.„....„.„,„,.....,, ,....„..„.„...,,„,...,....„,. .....,„,,..,„,ii.„...,,,. ,...„,,.....„,,,:.,, iarkeid 1 ;14•.:'''.-115,:*---..-1 Atillitifracrtaiktigritnitaillit ttedifia,a71,„,,,.1,,L .... 16441EED i ' . � csvv L NI ti EA SEMENr sr DO S Ar N ,.. ' 'Iv\ ,010, \ '• V "clw' N. D9 63 k 4' C `AIN orf ,�.. . » .�. . ;�,, 4, EASEMENT EICA' D R 4 '• 165 $1..- csA: .-44\ its r Y jj 1.4 .' 4:1: _ EA SEMEN T DI CA 7E `,� " � �`. f.4. Dar as 1 81 Y -1I ` PLAT , , '� J " ' ... 4,• �4:w' 1e 20 r s PLAT .,tea"` , _ ,^; 311 �..... F 27,827 q.H 6. ii -.7„1: ir41,—,, 4N4 r- — , --,-- iiir 4/ED vit 11550, ,rr.a cif �' . , i _ ram ��`M ai E _ lie "WPM .•w..mR „RM., ,q.a 41(IRIlR2, ,.,RO2!, 154210 210 s+q,f k, �. * 450. [0: a a ,c.: ;816) I 1 l .... ': FLU PLAIN 7 f iki . Lim'T AND ��5� V•• ,,. It,: "c s.:..Hi,.>.Q. 2g ..a:x?.,nx::ti:a�wc�l?.a.:.�a:h�.:.. 2.�,.. � ..:„\-2.\:ei>. a- uiiaw.v n\v , .: .. .. x .. .:. .r„':i .,:.:: ram- . .. a3: ,., ,. < .., M 0 ,.. r , ,' . /::/, p .., • ,`A ._. ,..._ .: ,,. ::: .,. .__ f .,.. ..,. ... r h. s,.,,...ai ... .. .,: ... :. �Ar .psi ¢ `�try, � 2, ,�. �1�"''C�"i�°t�a��'�x5c fl.�':...s.,.... .........,..., .� k i■t�vslrl,�'LCttri�M1� �r:L�r'�.lfi'►� :..,., ,a bkrs;��:�r�'zr�'�s,..>� ��,.,.,; ��•�-,��..:�:. �:�o ''-�Q�tu a»mgi. �4M4 e", �. S TA. /2/SI — // R1-10 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 6-703 B. Minimum lot width 1. 80 Feet 2. Cul-de-sac lots: minimum lot width shall be measured at the front lot line or the building setback line, whichever width is greater. Street frontage for cul-de-sac lots shall meet the minimum requirements of Oro Valley. 3. "Flag" lots: the driveway, or"pole," portion of any flag lot shall be excluded from minimum lot width measurement, using the flag portion of the lot to satisfy minimum lot width requirements. C. Maximum density - a minimum of 10,000 square feet per dwelling unit and a maximum of one dwelling per lot. D. Building height-not to exceed 2 stories and 25 feet. E. Yard setbacks 1. Front: 25 feet 2. Side : 10 feet 3. Rear: 25 feet 4. For multiple frontage lots, a minimum 20 foot yard setback must be maintained adjacent to any public or private street. The Town Engineer and Planning and Zoning Director may approve reduced side yards. 5. For"flag" lots, the driveway, or"pole," portion of the lot shall not be used to satisfy front yard setback requirements. The front yard shall be measured within the area of the "flag" portion of the lot closest to any public or private street. F. Detached accessory buildings 1. Permitted coverage: 15% of total area of rear and side yard. 2. Minimum distance to main building: 10 feet. 3. Accessory buildings shall not exceed the height of the main building nor be any closer to the front lot line than the main building. 6 - 15 Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised (Rev.9/99) Sec. 6-801 R1-7 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Article 6-8. R1-7 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 6-801 Purpose, This district provides for medium high density detached single family residential development. Sec. 6-802 Use Regulations A. Permitted Uses Buildings, structures or premises shall be used and buildings and structures shall hereafter be erected, altered or enlarged only for the following uses: 1. Dwelling units, single family 2. Accessory buildings, private swimming pools, home occupations and other accessory uses (see Article 13-1 for additional criteria). 3. Parks, playgrounds and community-owned buildings other than hospitals. 4. Temporary real estate sales office provided the following conditions are met: a. The office shall be located within a model home built in accordance with the zoning where such office is located. b. Temporary real estate sales offices shall be permitted for a period not to exceed 2 years from the date of initial home sales. c. At his discretion, the Planning and Zoning Director may grant extensions of time at the termination of the initial 2 year period. B. Uses Subject to Conditional Use Permit 1. Community buildings and recreational facilities not publicly owned, such as athletic fields. 2. Model homes. 3. Analogous uses per Sec. 5-201C. Sec. 6-803 Property Development Standards The provisions of Sec. 6-103 Shall apply. The following additional requirements shall apply in this district. A. Minimum lot area - 7,000 square feet B. Minimum lot width 1. 70 Feet 6 - 16 Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised (Rev.9/99) i. • i,.::,'.::::::s . i r # !.... # r cz�! r # M ^� r v r r ■ # eL r q ICC i "7.: n gal IA N r N • ,9I'60I M. .I0.00N (V • w • r- til CM nj �— Q_ Q AC a 0 d) ... __I "� 8 _ aI - s 4 i §-.P18 --1 Q, Q 7.i-�---- --- _ \ i r LLL& cv �'\\ ' CA £o /706 -D 01,,,,, -‘11 a z / cJd1Ll a,), C.) 1 j I . cki. _ 1 fl -.4. 4-1, .N, . ., -6, G1/4.444 S 'b \ `�`. `\ \\\\\C\:-h '\— \ 111) rrilmmtk„,,,,, ,\ \ C\t.\\`N\`. \-\ \ )6" ct _ U to 1-1I4.-_; •NI _ 1 %c.`_ \ (—.0.r \i\ n '\\\\\\\\\\.\\:\\\\\\` \\\ \.\.\. \,: �,.\\'�\\\, 2 't kLa 2q ~' (6P • ~\` \\\ \♦\` \\-\\\ \ ` \ \ �\\\, \ \\\,' \ `\\\\\ \\\` 1.' ,.._.\\;,,, NN s . \\\ ., ,\\\,,,,, ...-\\\ „ss \ s\:„..„,..... \\1/4„:„ • (4.1 -1113 N.\\N \ \\\ ' \ . ., ', \ •N. \s. \ \\ \ ..,.\\\ .N,'- \ ''.. I ill 4- 1.11 1 ---1 ,„,,\.\ \\,:\\\:\.-\ \ , , \\ , „ , \\ ... \ .. \„„ \\:.„ ... , \ •,...N .\, . in / 1 \\::\ .,. , \\\\:\:\ \\,,,, M• '11) \\t -� \\\� '\\\‘‘‘, ` . - \ \\` '\ \ \\ \` 13:4'v. ` tO \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ U 1!1• Z • \ \ Ni.. '\\ \\ \\ \ ` \\\ \1/4 \\\.\ \\ ` 1 v * • , \ \ '.• \'., \• \ \ \ . \\,,,‘ ,s ,'N:\\\,\\:\,\\\\.\\\.\\\\\\ \ \\\:\\`‘ 1...... • z Ui ci@ 0 Z ' , ..\ \\,:\\"\\:\,,, \\, \,...\ \ \ \\.-, .•._ \ \ \` \\ \\\\\ \\ \ \ \ \. �,\ \\\\ N\ ,O \ \\\\\\ \\ \\\ \,\ \.♦\ \ \ \ , ... \� \\ \\ \. ff 2v_ ilk \ \ , \ . \ •., \\.,‘ ', ,, . ., . :\::\\ kiRsi4 \\..\\,,\\\\,\\\ \\ .\\.„ 9,1, MN \ ‘ \ \ \ .., .14111 \\,,,,.\\\,\‘,,,,•\ '\., \ - , . \''')\ , 0 -.\., .,._ `k(„,-Ii ___.) -i • QAO . 4 . - • i . . . . cparo t f 1.ca,.LG.oN a • - --?-eoar t LE6\194. Clk-3C4//6`80,0° c /a a8-e 7 J, C L o ,...... cnct- 110 75T/H /°/ Oeo 1J/ LL ' /47Z / G-i• FLAX) (K73 7-,72 PLô� PAaA 6'2 ) Z/r /3?0 F.FE. 212333' 2123 (. / It-0' CUT 3:1 SLOPE ei&'35'51 E 15521 a . P� , , / / fj/ , i i cio • 1:%\' ) // , �/: /// ,�f 1 , , A -f y /// /-' , / jr 2122.61 To SWAL E , / ,//,' / / '// ///7/4- 7/../ • 1 / • /2 -,� �f / - \ AL LI SCUPPER \ OCATI ON3 / /•///, /// / 1 /'>/ 1 ,// / 41 ///// -/2,/ / '/.; -"///-/4/I ////'% / ' / / /`; / i/ V 4) STucc gc11 wiet 4 PeESSeD ; / i . , --_____) 1 . / / oi /l '/ g a OEx krwIa ST/1a5' 1, '' q ' !/ / iii F ///,/ • • 41 9 - ' /1/2-.://///,///: / i//// ////,//, n 12123 ,...( ,-...; , ,,p I I / • . /./ /:// /,-/./.:4 /.:///i A I- .__ , 7 / / //////, /..////..,./; //2,.///,-/A.--/ I 1 -(I14 : . . ' ;a . -., t 0 , `f ti - / 7/ ..•/////2 j ` / // „ , `///t?f f/' z $EGA pGE 0 // / , 00.2, , ) 0 el. , � 1 mi / - J j Y�- J ////� • 1 � i �/ �O tl�!J, %%/��'f��%, it/t'/ � � , 1 . 0 „ -I 8Z C:ONC .DiiZI VEWAY ;/ /��- / // ,,f, ;f f/l, f ti (I; -i-l. t. ///,4 , I' -4 O ^ (^� i / '1// f /-77. 1'• fr'/j</ / 4j /f NF,u- l Q/�_• Gi']�/P ''t% (--) ki &, • /. / -- 17/ 1.-*-- V/ // / /7/ r-i . 1 itig-ikz.o e ---5-- ai tll . e "-A / / ///. c1/4157- 5 iiativA ar) i os:t„_, ./ ///- ' 1 t% S:. N / .- // /. ./7,7/4 i - (No6arswee) , + ,a'Doc)le. 1 . \_ T1.. l05ET13AcJ� i aAc}c NI PEDESTAL N89 58 55 RE 155.00 t41 Z - - 2122 i N ILIMITS i FENCED GRAD NG L cO, ch 1 1 1_Or I _HOLD MIN 2'-0' FROM E rt 1 s 4; 7 ' X1l I- '' / 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 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 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. !h' a [�r e I,��t �`„Ii• 7. c i- T�'C A.7- 2.4..- eP tE`GC• /�}.. J �' 4 -4 e,,cJ-(. C Gc /',� +C S tJj 4. Board Meetings: v • 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 "sot" 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 l S' for new terms that commence on July 1 Sl 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: • t was agreed that the Board of Adjustment minutes or excerpts regarding concerned issues should be distributed by staff in a timely fashion. . Other: r � • 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 1000feet. 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) AGENDA ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL SESSION/REGULAR SESSION May 22, 2001 Oro Valley Town Hall Council Chambers 11,000 N. La Canada Drive SPECIAL SESSION-AT OR AFTER 2:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. Review and/or possible action regarding Board of Adjustment Rules and Procedures ADJOURNMENT of Special Session CALL TO ORDER-AT OR AFTER 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 from March 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. CASE NO. OV10-01-04 MR. CALOF REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACKS IN AN R1-10 ZONE. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE DESERT VISTA SUBDIVISION, 11308 N. MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, LOT 110. PLANNING AND ZONING UPDATE 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 by: lh Date: 5/16/01 Time:4:30 p.m. DRAFT MINUTES OF THE ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 22, 2001 ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE CALL TO ORDER: 3:08 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Henry Suozzi, Chairman Bill Adler, Vice Chairman Lyra Done, Member Jim Swan, Member Cindy Lewis, Member(excused) STAFF PRESENT: Bryant Nodine, Planning and Zoning Administrator Dee Widero, Senior Zoning Inspector Debbie Moran, Zoning Tech Linda Hersha, Secretary II MINUTES MOTION: Vice Chairman Adler moved to approve the minutes of March 27, 2001 as written. Member Done SECONDED the motion. Motion carried, 4-0. 1. OV 10-01-04, 11308 NORTH MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VALLEY AZ 85737, REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO REDUCE REQUIRED 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 9'. SUBJECT PROPERTY: 11308 NORTH MEADOW SAGE DRIVE, ORO VALLEY,AZ 85737. LOT 110 OF DESERT VISTA SUBDIVISION. Robert K. Calof, the applicant, explained that the new hobby shop would require an additional 1-foot on each side of the door. He explained that installing a standard door would result in severe limitations as to the usefulness of the hobby shop. Dee Widero, Senior Zoning Inspector, explained that the applicant has made a request to reduce the side yard setback from the required 10 feet to 9 feet on the south side of the backyard. She reported that the applicant was proposing to attach a hobby shop to the existing home with an 8-foot door that would provide access to the shop. Ms. Widero reported that all property owners within 300 feet of the property were notified by mail of the hearing and that the property has been posted with a notice of hearing and the hearing was advertised in the Daily Territorial Newspaper. She explained that at the time of the report preparation, staff had not received any public comment supporting or opposing the request,but a letter was submitted with the variance request application from a neighbor located on the south side of the property who had no problem with the encroachment. She reported that the existing home does meet the required setbacks, but the proposed hobby shop would encroach by 1-foot due to the desired 8-foot door, which would be accessed from the back yard. 05/22/01 Board of Adjustment 2 Regular Session Staff finding of facts: • There are no special circumstances or conditions due to the lot or property. • The applicant or owner did create the circumstance or condition. • The special circumstance is due to the desired 8 foot wide door and construction required for the installation. Vice Chairman Adler asked if there would be ventilation included in the structure without the door being open. Mr. Calof explained that the architect would design the structure and he trusted that the architect would provide the necessary ventilation. Vice Chairman Adler stated that the zoning district does permit a freestanding accessory building. He explained that there appeared to be room to have an accessory building of this size or perhaps an even larger building elsewhere on the property, which would avoid the need for a variance. Mr. Calof stated that Vice Chairman Adler's point was well taken, but felt it would be cheaper to attach the hobby shop to the home because of the existing low bearing wall. Vice Chairman Adler explained that unfortunately, the expense was not a consideration for the Board of Adjustment. Chairman Suozzi asked the applicant if there were any alternatives that would meet the Zoning Code requirements. Mr. Calof explained that the idea of a freestanding accessory building was not a consideration because it would ruin the back yard. He said that he had not spoken with the architect concerning alternatives. Chairman Suozzi opened the public hearing. Chairman Suozzi swore in the witness that was intending to testify. Tonya Martin, a representative for Lewis Management Resources, explained that at this point, Mr. Calof had not submitted the proper information to the Board of Directors regarding the revisions. Therefore, the Board did not anticipate approving the new addition to the home even if the Board of Adjustment approved the variance. Member Swan asked if the Board of Directors had given a reason for their disapproval of the new addition. Ms. Martin explained that the homeowners living in the area were concerned with the possible obstruction of views and the resale value of the homes in the surrounding area. She also stated that portions of information submitted to the Board of Directors had been incorrect. Chairman Suozzi closed the public hearing. 05/22/01 Board of Adjustment 3 Regular Session Mr. Calof explained that about a month ago, when the project began, he contacted the homeowners association and requested that the proper forms be mailed to him to start the process. He explained that, after meeting with the Board of Adjustment, his intentions were to submit the information to the association and work with Lewis Management when it was necessary. He explained that as far as obstructing views, the structure was barely visible from the road. Member Swan asked what was the height of the proposed structure. Mr. Calof explained that the height of the new structure would be around 10 feet. He added that the existing home stood around 13 feet. MOTION: Member Swan moved to APPROVE Case No. OV 10-01-04, a request to reduce the side yard setback from the required 10 feet to 9 feet on the south side only. Discussion: Vice Chairman Adler explained that he had concerns with the fact the Mr. Calof perhaps did not understand how a variance was determined. He explained that in essence, a variance was appropriate when a strict application of the code would create a hardship and effectively prevent reasonable use of the property. "So, if in fact a strict application of the code would effectively prevent a person from a reasonable improvement of the property, then a variance is justified." He explained that the reason why the motion to approve was not seconded, was because that standard could not be applied. He explained that a hobby shop could be installed where it is designed 9-feet rather than 10- feet, as long as the door were of the width that didn't require the additional foot. That might provide some restriction or limitation as to the kind of uses conducted in the structure, but would not effectively deny the applicant the enjoyment of having the hobby shop. Therefore, he felt that at this point, a variance would be necessary in order to avoid a hardship. He believed that there was not a hardship in this case because there were alternatives not only in terms of the suggestion of having a 9- foot width as opposed to a 10-foot,but the possibly of an accessory building located elsewhere on the rear of the property which could possibility be explored with the applicant's architect. He explained that in any case, he did not feel that the proposal fit the requirements for a variance. Motion died due to a lack of a second. MOTION: Vice Chairman Adler moved to DENY Case No. OV 10-01-04, for the reasons stated (see discussion above.) Member Swan SECONDED the motion. Motion carried, 4-0. ROLL CALL VOTE Chairman Suozzi —aye Vice Chairman Adler— aye Member Done— aye Member Swan—nay Motion denied, 3-1, with Member Swan opposed. 05/22/01 Board of Adjustment 4 Regular Session PLANNING AND ZONING REPORT Bryant Nodine, Planning and Zoning Administrator, reported the following: • The interviewing process for a consultant for the General Plan update will begin the end of May. • The commercial parking and lighting amendments to the Zoning Code are in process and should be completed in September. • There will be major Zoning Code revisions made to change the format and presentation. He reported that these updates should be complete by August or September. • The Citizen Planning Institute will continue to meet in the fall of each year. Chairman Suozzi announced that the groundbreaking ceremony for the new library would commence on Friday, June 1st at 10:00 a.m., and will be located on the north end of the campus. Vice Chairman Adler asked if the revised Board of Adjustment Application was ready to be implemented. Mr. Nodine replied, "yes." Chairman Suozzi thanked the Board and Staff for working so hard on the development of the Rules and Procedures Guide. He added that the guide would be beneficial to everyone involved. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Vice Chairman Adler moved to adjourn the meeting at 3:51 p.m. Chairman Suozzi SECONDED the motion. Motion carried, 4-0. Resp ,tfully submitted, fA (2_,%/L/ ' In Hersha, Secretary II Desert Vista Naranja Homeowners Association C/o Lewis Management Resources, Inc. 180 W. Magee, Suite 134 Tucson, AZ 85704-6680 Phone: (520) 742-5674 Fax: (520) 742-1523 August 16, 2001 Robert Calof 11308 North Meadow Sage Drive Tucson, AZ 85737 RE: Lot 110—Desert Vista Naranja Homeowners Association Dear Mr. Calof: Thank you for your patience in the matter regarding your proposed room addition. The Board of Directors has instructed me to send you this letter and send a copy to the Town of Oro Valley, to Bryant Nodine. The Board of Directors reviewed your plans for an addition to your home and intends to approve the plan submitted providing it does not exceed a six (6) inch variance to the Town of Oro Valley code and Oro Valley approves. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me or my assistant, Tammie Hall, at 742-5674. Sincerely, Tonya Martin Association Manager, Lewis Management Resources, Inc. For the Desert Vista Naranja Homeowners Association Cc: Bryant Nodine, Town of Oro Valley