HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV100606 r
b14
ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION /
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REPORT
CASE NO: OV 10-06-06
Hearing Date: May 23, 2006
Agenda Item No.: 3
Prepared By: Dee Widero, Senior Zoning Inspector
REQUEST: Robert Page representing Jana and Brian Davies, request for a variance from
the Type "B" buffer yard (min. 15 ft.); eliminate required screening and reduce
required 40' building setback to 20' along the north property line abutting an
R1-144 zone. Subject property: (Parcel 225-51-0130) 7780 N. Oracle Road, Oro
Valley,AZ 85704.
REQUEST SPECIFICS:
Robert Page, architect for property owners Jana and Brian Davies has designed and submitted two
concept plans for this site. The first site plan meets our zoning requirements the second plan is
more desirable to the owners but, requires variance approval. Site plan#2, is a court yard setting,
confiding the business activity to the center of the complex, providing an enjoyable area for the
future tenants, as well as being less intrusive to abutting properties. In order to construct the
proposed site plan #2, they will need relief from the required 40' setback, the applicant is asking
to encroach by 20' into the required setback along the north property line only. The plan does
meet all other required setbacks. The required Type "B" buffer yard is per Section 27.6.E and
Table 27-7 and Table 27-11, requiring at minimum a width of 15', the request is to reduce to a
Type "A" with a 10' minimum width, per Table 27-10, the same table is required along the south
property line. Also, the applicant requests to eliminate the 5' screening required (Section 27.6.F
and Table 27-12) along the north boundary line completely, the screening is not required along
the south property line but, it is required to be placed at the east or rear of the property (all code
requirements are attached).
SITE LOCATION:
This site is located in the Suffolk Hills subdivision. The site is on Oracle Road approximately 1/4
mile south and east of Magee Road.
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.
Staff has not received any public comment in support or opposition to this request.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
On-site Existing property-zoned R-S
South: Suffolk Hills Pet Clinic—zoned R-S
East: Suffolk Hills Subdivision—zoned R1-36
West: Oracle Crossings Commercial Center—zoned C-2
North: Vacant Parcel—zoned R1-144
The property to the north was SR — Suburban Ranch (min. lot area of 144,000 sq. ft.), in Pima
County,translated to R1-144 (min. lot area 144.000 sq. ft.)with Oro Valley. The parcel is legal non-
forming at 59,809 sq. ft. While the property could be developed with a single family residence, the
designation from the General Plan denotes Neighborhood Commercial and Office(NCO).
SITE ANALYSIS:
The site is a 60,975 square foot rectangular shaped parcel within the Suffolk Hills subdivision.
Suffolk Hills was recorded in 1958 in Pima County, zoned TR- Transitional Residential. Oro Valley
annexed in 2003, translating the zoning to R-S — Residential Service District. Currently this site is
developed with a 5032 square foot retail/office building, constructed 1979. The existing building is
closer than 20' to the north property line. Setback restrictions for a side yard in TR zone are/were 7',
construction when built met requirements. Parking is primarily in the front and side (west and south)
with a small amount of parking directly to the rear. Some disturbance due to trash collection has
taken place at the rear of the existing building. The site is somewhat flat with a slight slope running
east, upward from Oracle Road. The rear of this parcel has been left undisturbed.
SUMMARY:
Staff finding of facts:
• The two plans submitted are concept plans only; their may be other conditions that do not
meet code, that will be addressed with a later process.
• All variance requests are solely for the north property line. The applicant will meet the
requirements of all three issues on the south and east boundaries.
• The parcel to the north is vacant and undisturbed.
• A 10' minimum buffer yard is the requirement for the south boundary, and at least a 15' is
required on the east. The plan meets code on the east boundary.
• Screening is a requirement for the north and east side, the plan meets code on east boundary.
• The proposed construction will be built to architecturally match and enhance the existing
building on site.
• The applicant has submitted a plan#1 that is in compliance.
• The General Plan supports commercial/development to the north, on a site fronting Oracle
Road.
The Board of Adjustment should consider the following findings in making its decision:
2
j
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, approve with conditions, or deny] OV 10-06-06, a request a variance to:
1. Allow the Type "A"buffer yard 10' minimum as opposed to the Type "B"buffer yard at a 15'
minimum that is required;
2. Eliminate the 5' required screen wall along the north property between R1-144 and R-S zones;
3. Encroach into the 40' setbacks back to 20' setback, at the north boundary.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. BOA application
2. Location and Concept Plan
3. OVZCR attachments
-
F:\ov\ovi0\2006\10-06-06\REPORT.doc
rah More, AICP
Planning and Zoning Administrator
3
4
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY APR, 27
PLANNING&ZONING DIVISION
R 11,000 N. IA CANADA DRIVE,ORO VALLEY AZ 85737
'. • 41. (520) 229-4800 Fax: (520) 742-1022
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION
FOR: _ Zoning Variance Note: Submittals are due by noon
Zoning Interpretation
Appeal of Administrative Decision CASENO.: o\ 0 - -L. L
NATURE OF REQUEST:
1. Request variance from Type "B"buffir yard(min 15 ft) to a Type "A" buffir yard(min loft )
along north property line between R1-144 and R-S zones.
2. Eliminate 5 ft screening required along north property line between RI-144 and R-S zones
3. Reduce 40 feet building setback along North property line to a 20 feet setback.
APPLICANT: Robert Page
PHONE: (520) 629-9752 FAX: (520) 798-3341
ADDRESS: 2102 N. Country Club Rd.#9,Tucson, AZ,85716
OWNER: Jana and Brian Davis
ADDRESS: Oro Valley,AZ 85737
PROPERTY LOCATION FOR VARIANCE REQUEST:_7780 N. Oracle Rd.,Oro Valley,AZ
PARCEL#: 225-51-0130_LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 13 Suffolk Hills S150' N455' of BlkB
CURRENT ZONING: R-S
APPLICABLE FEE:
ATTACHMENTS: Two site plans showing building pads with 40 ft setback and with 20 ft setback.
Photos showing similar building configuration/massing as intended with 20 ft. setback. 2005 Adopted
General Plan and current zoning plan of subject area.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (ALSO PRINT NAME) DATE
Robot E. Page
loe,
41 •r Ce •
SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR APPIICATION FORA VARIANCE
Please provide the following information addressing 1 —5 in the Findings from Section 21.61 of the Oro
Valley Zoning Code Revised (OVZCR). In order to authorize a variance request, the Board will be
searching for sufficient evidence in accordance with the findings.
1. Are there special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the application
including its size, shape, topography, location or surrounding which do not apply to other
properties in the district?
Subject property is the onlyproperty along Orade Road between Ina Road and Magee Road with an
adjacent property zoned RI-144.
2. Are there special circumstances that exist that are not self imposed or created by the
owner/applicant?
Adjacent property zoning was carried over from Pima County zoning when this area was annexed
into Oro Valley. The RI-144 zoning of the adjacent property should not apply, since the existing
property is only 59,809 square feet and RI-144 zoning requires the minimum property size to be
144,000 square feet
3. Is the authorizing of the variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
property rights?
Authorizing this variance will reduce the setback and bujkr yard depth along the north property line
This will allow the new development to be scattered across the site as opposed to a single dense
mass located in the center of the site By reducing the scak and massing of the development as
indicated in the attachments the buildings will have a more residential look and feel By placing the
buildings closer to the property, a central landscape courtyard will be created. In addition to the 10
ft landscape border the users will also have a landscaped courtyard to enjoy.
4. If granted, will the variance impose 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?
Special privileges inconsistent with other properties would not be granted, since the adjacent
property is not conducive to residential use and the 2005 Adopted General Plan shows this property
to be used for Neighborhood/Commercial Office.
5. If granted, will the variance be the minimum necessary to afford relief and will not materially affect
the health, safety,and welfare of the neighborhood or surrounding p roperties.
This variance will be the minimum necessary to afford relief and by reducing the building massing
and scale along with reducing the amount of asphalt driveway and parking areas it will improve the
health, safety and we fare of the neighborhood and surroundingproperties.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
15 copies of 11 x17 dimensioned plot plan, if applicable
15 copies of 11 x17 dimensioned floor plan, if ap p ficable
15 copies of 11 x17 building elevations,if applicable
Provide 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 commentsi nformation you wish to provide regarding your request.
BOARD OF ADJUS TMENT AFFIXATION FEES
For applications or appeals involving construction of any nature, which require legal advertising and posting
of property affected,the fees are,as follows:
Variance or Appeal of Decision (1 item; 1 lot) Corporate $600.00
Variance of Appeal of Decision (1 item; 1 lot) Individual $150.00
Fees for each additional,simultaneous variance or appeal $100.00
OWN OF ORO VALA Y
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
11000 N.LA CANADA DRIVE ORO VALLEY,AZ 85737
PHONE: 229-4800 FAX: 742-1022
RECEIPT
******************************************************************************
REFERENCE NUMBER: OV1006-06 RECEIPT #06P00188
SITE ADDRESS: 7780 N ORACLE RD OV TAXCODE: 225-51-0130
DATE: 04/27/2006 TIME: 11:20 AM
COMP TYPE: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TYPE:
DESCRIPTION: DAVIES SETBACK,BUFFERYARD,SCREENING
APPLICANT: ROBERT PAGE OWNER: CHF ENTERPRISES
Notation: Receipt By: SG
*******************************************************************************************
SG
PAID BY:
Type Method Description
Amount
Payment Check 3924 600 . 00
TOTAL: 600.00
FEES PAID:
Description Account Code Current Pmts
Board Of Adjustment 001-000-408 600.00
TOTAL: 600.00
Account#:
Ending Balance: $
7
26 25 MAGEE RD 25 i 30
35 THIS SITE 36 d 31
d
1
i
0
r
r
> SUFFOLK DR rz
ro
Z ORO VALLEY TNSP
ce PIMA eO 1,
w
,, Ir
ID
1=
O
Z I
I
I
1
35 36 1 31
SUFFOLK HILLS LOTS 1 THRU 44 LOTS 1 A&1 B BLOCKS A&B-13/8 M&P 2 1 INA RD 1 6
W
>
a
tn
NORTH
�- 91 LOCATION MAP 0
1 ---�`i ADJACENT ZONE R1-144 N 89°59'29"_E 406.52'
U W NOT TO SCALE
��
1 I 4 J y ;, m I ' SECTION 36,T.12S,R.13E PCM&B
/ .
' �I f------ U
----lee'_9- 1/2 Di
I 2 1 , ' ,I r _ 1 �o li
MV I EXISTING USE:RETAIL/OFFICE 7' 1 I���,p� r jt' - I IQ•
O �� I 1 DI I 5032 SF \ 1
O ,, O t._: IwQIY—_ 1 _ BLDG HT.15.5 FT Ot 11p j a om„,
�., °I I I 1� 1 ImryRI ill_
„1 jjL 48 SPACES I I Io 12 a� A�" l 2 7 7 05I12 ' Q ..,.,+U61 r o I �____ ae_e,. r_l , , � o1 IIII 1 �ANDSCgp_ 20� QJi 6100 SF SINGLE STORY OFFICE USE 1 BUFFER E 0� I o vI 1 ^ 1 Ir-, Ii .-1 , in , BLDGHT25FT. i ; / I 7 Ql 1 _
1 I i I i r , I I
JJ '
I 18 SPACES I O
V\—FIREfRE7' -n I I SETBgCK 1 I I -i
j ( tt TURN AROUN 1 1 j I 1 / I l , I i I , _
1L 1
1
SUBJECT PARCEL ZONING RS r-12 x 35 LOADING I I IO
ZONE 1 I.L. OWNER:
DKT.6538 PG 1557 �T._�... u I I I I X JANA AND BRIAN DAVIES
I 60,013 SF ,'j,� K ;_ m 1 I I 7780 N.ORACLE RD.
1.38 ACRES ~
_�"���' �',W,I 1 ORO VALLEY,AZ
.. .. �.. .J-. . ..�. .. .. .. .. . . .. . . . . .. - . .�. - 1�. .
ADJACENT ZONE R-S
520-297-4225
N 89°59'29"E 406.52' ARCHITECT
DUMPSTER ENCL.
SUFFOLK HILLS LOTS 1 THRU 44 LOTS 1 A&16 BLOCKS A&B-13/8 M&P ROBERT PAGE,ARCHITECT
2201 N.COUNTRY CLUB RD#9
TUCSON,AZ 85716
520-629-9752
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
STEVE GREDE
222 E.14TH ST.
TUCSON,AZ 85701
520-624-7373
SITE PLAN NORTHNO/TH\l;SCALE: NTS if, [ i
,......i..._,____„,„„,,_
si6$6*;/ ®r. DEVELOPMENT EXPANSION
PRELIMINARY 7780 N.Oracle Rd.
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Oro Valley,Arizona
/0
41121-- (SITE PLAN
)
23MAR.2006 0526
ROBERT PAGE.ARCHITECT
2102 N.COUNTRY CLUB RD.#9
TUCSON,AZ 85716
520 629-9752
FAX 520 798-3341
,
1
26 125 MAGEE RD 25 d 30
' r
35 :36 THIS SITE 36 4 31
1 d
I - r
!Y r
1 r
I " r
1 & r
r u ro
ar.
0 0 SUFFOLK DR rz
Z 1 OROVALLEYT y 0
NSP
cc �IMI CO 10
z 12
O 1
Z
1
1
35 36 36 1 31
2 1 INA RD 1 I 6
a
I-
, 0 LOCATION MAC'
J ` Z -�- NOT TO SCALE
• O O 1 SECTION 36,T.12S,R.13E PCM&B
aI a
/ !
• — !•a> _L 1355 SF ';-., 1 •
• �� EXISTING USE:RETAIL/OFFICE • 46 t 1542 SF i ;SETgq -•-__� 1
I 5032 SF 0 1 , 1 a
-../
' _��UEry�>s BLDG HT.15.5 FT -\'r'H-- :�`'. i
1 qq _ I
• �•v ( J f.. , 1 I 1 •
ICU'
1 ti I ' 4{ • ' 1
1 `1 1
0 __ __ ___ ,., —
, , L4 --..., !
1--i rn.... _-1 - L
IQ O1;c� � 1355 SF 1374 SF , / '
1 - , SE..:1 ' '
FIRE/REFUSE , 1 1
a . TURN AROUND
, / 1
I
r
1 . �< ;' a OWNER
a O JANA AND BRIAN DAVIES
N,� ni , ' ORO N.ORACLE RD.
In ORO VALLEY,AZ
- -- - - --�.. --- -- -- - -----• --- - -- --- -- -- -- ---- - 5202974225
ARCHITECT
DUMPSTER ENCL.
ROBERT PAGE,ARCHITECT
2201 N.COUNTRY CLUB RD#9
TUCSON,AZ 85716
520-629-9752
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
STEVE GREDE
222 E.14TH ST.
. TUCSON,AZ 85701
520-624-7373
SITE PLAN NORTH
SCALE:NtS IF [ i
,,,,,,,
>;`- E,iy PEVELOPMENT EXPANSION
pRELIMINARY 178'O N.Oracle R .
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Oro Valley,Arizona
1 p
/0
� (sns PLAN 0'1
G
23MAR.2006 ) 0526
ROBERT PAGE,ARCHITECT
2102 N.COUNTRY CLUB RD.#91
TUCSON,AZ 85716
520 629-9752
FAX 520 798-3341,
•k
,• kiiik. ..,
,. . •
,..� . .,
,
, .
.. ,.
„.......:. : .
..
..._ ,..... _ ______..... ., ,,,,,,,
. ._ ..
. ....
...„,....„..„
...,
y '�°', ....MT',y-AP, ....;s
I • 1 7, . ...1 i 1 ,'-•:','.'...;:,'..,8s1 - i..t : . l• ' .. ' ' .1;111i;''',, ''! :,' ; '''''.- 41111"*.1 ' ''''''
ter'... - 'vt.+1�
` Y
aaw
..,,......viiquit-0.4.,
�16 lE sllffi84''s[=,vr , ' '.. .4, :... - t-/0 2/2 0 0 6
Y
f :'.y
;,r . ,, . . ,'
, , ...
. a... ' 1
, ., . "
.
Ride •t
lir
A._
.: , . .....,,,„ .. "0
' ik,--..,-- , %•Tofar — ..; ,,,
j,:..1 •'Tr li 14', — i ,
*4 *-4,'.A.,,•., ,''* t ' '' :' ,.." ,. "
.` , v:. A P"t I...
4 ,y, ¢a
S 4 -Y
` '• - ..
Q w
...a."..,,,,;„
Y
- s
,..
.....,
1 , , ,
rit. ..
.. ,
I
,..„, _.
y... ,s,
,,. ...II., .„ ,...„, t — '
;.At,.t.,,,_-rt,, 4 ,.,. i . ____
..c.....„..."fe r: "- , . 1 ,....... ---
. foi, „!.. .0 ---- ., - # .
,,, 0 i.? t r
, -, .I '
Iii.ftft; , - I
_,IV ' t -"'s '1 0
T i 'tie t
. ' �p
' t.7- fr
h;1`f
r !
R ..
• ... .
::- '"--1/4'''''',-:--•.:',:,-,-;;',,,...!--i'•'''''-'-'-:,-'''''''-:'.'":. ,'-,-,-.',-,-.;',..',::-.V. :-; .:•., ,,,..-•:...:•'‘.'•-: ,,,,.':.' -...-..- . .., . ._ , .. .-• , , ... ..,_______---...--77---
I , , • - , , ' , ,,, .,, , ,.,. .'„,,, ,,- , , .,
- -
„ .. . . . .. ......, ,..,, . .
.... , • . ,, . . • , ., . ..
.,_.-
':!,..N •,„ :,i,' ,• -,-\:
:7. --?...;21„':-..,I,, •.‘. .
,',, . :s.-.-,: .%, ,-,- ,t1/4.,..14.•ilt\.i_v:,...1,,,,'. , ;. i --t*
I I I I
L .. , .., .. •..,, -—nt. 4 i "1•
.--,--A ;-- .. ., -Arl,•-
. 4,4 .. ..,-.. . . ..., ,
-,,, .',0-1,-,,.....-:.r .t./ -.,..,,
--,-.:--- - Y 1...3° I
- - - • -.
.• • ... .. .. .
. .. .
' • - i '
---- I ' - ' '`;4. • ..... .
...
•, •. -- •
. ...
11
•— ...*-4. .....
- .Jare-•'''' k I' ;
fji., ,....:,,',..,,,'.:,•:'.-',- ' - - ' ',' ' •'. .,-,--•.1 4, .- . -... 4i..,,,...:". 4
aa,..'- •,:..:,:_. ,,-!,:,-,t, • -* - a! '‘*1104g• ••-• ,_ .. '--.. .
a•
•- 'a
, _.... ,...
. . _ .
_. ......... _
.... ...._ .
• __..... .
.,.
I
eft ...:. i r. %< w'm��f n:.'.3 78 i+t,:r..$t'ffiR??+;�'..,,Y�...•�t `,��= 1s`'�'4F 3 .R�'
CA7R1 -1 44
Pt All j
I II
RI•#4# 1
rsww
t a
1 f
/
11: . ,
`}', f1-36
Ilk jig-"..t. .
SUBJECT PROPERTY
o
12 13F' AL,
a FialiO ' b an. "
3 i t t
R1-300 R1-36 R-4 IMO PS&C - C-2
R1-144 R1-20 - R-6 R-S T-P
R1-72 R1-10 SDH-6 ill C-N PAD
R1-43 11.1 R1-7 R-4R C-1
0CURRENT ZONING MA
0.2 NOT TO SCALE
r
_ ,
.,
OM ,
. .
,. .
. .
, .
7'...,
• .
WIMP$
sisok' V- 034 be L. L. R r) . , . . .
SUBJECT PROPERTY a.
iiimlii .
•
'It ;
i .
IS
"'"...,aTOWN OF ORO VALLEY
���Oro Valley Limits Master Planned Community
i_ I Growth Area IIIIIIIResort l Golf Caurs;e General Plan Update 2020
Adopted by Town Council June 15,2005
il . Urban Services Boundary Neighborhood Commercial I Office RattiedNovember 8,2005
Tri:.r•u;:a::1.1,,n r.y..,:1...It e.r,:s P.,IP...I.w;s.iri.n riJi:�_`tx,i i(,rstr strut
Significant Resource Areas Public i'Semi-Public j
pur;ox.vrMr,u'lit-i.4;•:.srpfut snrisam arvaCaitile#ixn thin Oars
Rural Low Density Residental(0-0.3 DU/AC) MEI Community I Regional Commercial wlktyPiannnrilc inning s:tff this K:not a inning mapAn1
intu-ri u nys:rlrr•..rtusl ttrWeit Xtwri and taiirxt eft/tiernent:
Low Density Residential(0A-1.2 DU/AC) Commerce/Office Park sf>s1l 4 hctt)Araa:!or tiler tmg,a«Crn Wiley inning Max On
i and lie
Wiley Zoning Gale Rwised.
Low Density Residential(1.3-2.0 DU/AC) =I School Apullet:Tait is awatianbl Attu.UruVaacy cxlvrdb('.rmM
rri.i13 Cecixf,1'.00O t.La Canals Dt,Om Vol Ly,AZ.
Medium Density Residential(2.1-5 DU/AC) Open Space AnFinr,:rrior,unrsoncsa.ataAnon!nr.wrra'
titpi awrwtiro.t indoft abey.axn trralys
ff>s,, High Density Residential(5+DU/AC) 1111111 Park -.7vs,:-:iti*lb,tv wtiY.data dvrri•;a,•J 4'wktr rat.'F+nu Cuuny
l'LIA' .:is Dioellrg Units ic-&re;I 4,0 raw.:[ruai.it v,Gii>Yaab,G'S Ssri...us cri tromii tx,'3,20..;5
Lot Information Window Page 1 of 1
Lot Information Request Results
f
• Parcel Number:225510130
For more detailed information regarding this parcel,please click here.
A Street Address
7780 N ORACLE RD OV
.04 cs
g..
�.� Current Mailing Address:
DAVIES FAMILY REVOCABLE TR
ATTN: RICHARD BRIAN &JANA L DAVIES TR
535 W GOLF VIEW DR
TUCSON AZ
:ttr 857379134
Legal Information:
OV
SUFFOLK HILLS S150' N455' OF BLK B
Subdivion Plat Book and Page:: 13018
View Subdivion Plat from Pima County
Flood Plain Information: Lot Not in Flood Plain
Disclaimer:This information should be verified by the Oro Valley Zoning
I{ Department.The Town of Oro Valley expressivly disclaims responsiblity for
damages or liability that may arise from the use of this map.
1
Oro Valley Zoning Code:R-S
Zoning Code Explanation:
Conditions: No Conditions found on this Lot
c
General Plan Designation:
EI Descrptions for General Plan Designations are currently unavailable.Please
refer to the General plan web site.
{
This location is located in the Amphitheater Public School District.For more
information on which schools are available in the area,please visit the
Amphitheatre School District Website.
,11.1.LEY Ark,
tP, ?°if,, The map/data on the Oro Valley Mapping site is not meant to be used as an official or legal interpretation of Oro Valley features and
no expressed or implied warranty is made regarding their accuracy.While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy,
correctness and timeliness of these materials,Oro Valley assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions.For more information
regading the information displayed on your screen,please contact the Planning&Zoning Department at(520)229-4800 or visit us at
Fbu p,° 11000 N La Canada Drive,Oro Valley Arizona 85737.
iveEhttp://gis/aspsites/planner/psearch2.asp?PARCEL=225510130 05/12/2006
Section 23.4 Table of Dimensional Requirements
All primary and accessory structures shall be subject to the intensity and dimensional standards set
forth in the following Tables 23-2. These intensity and dimensional standards may be further limited or
modified by other applicable Sections of this Code. Additional regulations and rules of measurement are
set forth immediately following the table. A "*" indicates that these additional regulations and rules of
measurement are applicable.
TABLE 23-2A
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS(Residential)
Minimum Minimum Minimum
Lot Area Lot Area Yard Yard Yard Distance
Minimum (square (square Setbacks Setbacks Setbacks Between
Zoning Property feet): feet): (feet): (feet): (feet): Building Bldgs Addl
District Size Area Width Front Side Rear Height (feet) Regs
R1-300 - 300,000 300 50 20 50 34 10 23.6 B
R1-144 - 144,000 150 50 20 50 18 10* 23.6.0
R1-72 - 72,000 150 50 35 50 22 10* 23.6.D
R1-43 - 43,560 150 30 20 40 18 10* 23.6.E
R1-36 - 36,000 120 30 15 40 18 10* 23.6.F
18 ft.R 1-20 - 20,000 80 30 15 30 storiesor 2 10 23.6.G
R1-10 - 10,000 80 25 10 25 25 t. or 2 10 23.6.H
stories
25 ft. or 2 10
R1-7 - 7,000 70 20 7.5 2023.6.1
stories
15 * (1st
SDH-6 - 6,000 50 20* side) ' S 25* 18* 20* 23.6..1
*(2nside)
R-4 1 acre * - * * * 25 feet or 10* 23.7.A
2 stories
50 acres 10*
prior to 25 feet or
R-4R street * - * * * 2 stories* 23.7.B
dedication
s
R-S - - * * * 25 feet or 10* 23.7.A.4
2 stories* 23.7.D
5 acres
(residentia
1); 1 acre
(business
and
R-6 profession * - 30 20 20 25 feet or * 23.7.C;
al offices 2 stories* 23.7.E
or other
permitted
or
conditiona
1 use)
TABLE 23-2B
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Nonresidential)
Zonin Minimum Yard Yard Yard Minimum
g Minimum Lot Area Setbacks Setbacks Setbacks Building Distance Floor
Distri Property (square (feet): (feet): (feet): Height Between Open Area Addl
ct Size feet) Front Side Rear (feet) Bldgs Space Ratio Regs
Page 1 of 2
. r
36,000
(single-
family
residential; 25 feet or 23.8.
CN 5 acres 5450 20* 0-50* 0-50* 2 stories 10 20% .25 A
(multi-
family and
town
homes)
C-1 - - 20 0-50* 0-50* 25 feet or 10 20% .25 23.8.B
2 stories
C-2 l0 acres - 20 0-50* 0-50* 30 feet or 10-15* 10% .55 23.8.0
2 stories
10 acres
PS&C (private - * * * 18 feet or 10 25% 23.8.
schools) 1 story* D
T-P - - * * * 25 feet or 10 24% * 23.8.E
2 stories*
-
P l - - - - 25 feet or 10 23.8.E
2 stories
2 stories 23.8.
POS 3 acres - * * * or 25-45 10-15* * * G
feet*
Page 2 of 2
CHAPTER 23: ZONING DISTRICTS
Section 23.7 Property Development Standards for Multi-Family Residential Districts
g. Walls, Fences, and Screening
Walls, fences and walled driveway entrances
shall not exceed three (3) feet in height in the
required 100 foot yard along street frontages
and in the ten (10) feet adjacent to the street
where a 30 foot setback is allowed along street
frontages. Those yards must be maintained as
landscaped open space and may be penetrated
by pedestrian and vehicular access ways only.
Walled driveway entrances not to exceed six (6)
feet in height shall be permitted within the
setback requirements if such entrance is
compatible with the surrounding development.
ii. Tennis courts shall have a fence a maximum
height of 12 feet and shall have natural
vegetated buffer or landscape screen a
minimum of ten (10) feet wide provided and
maintained on any abutting lot line.
C. R-S Residential Service District
The provisions of Section 23.4 and the following additional requirements
shall apply in this district.
1. Standards for Townhomes
Whenever dwelling units are to be built as townhouses, the
development standards in Section 23.7.A.4, shall apply.
2. Density
The minimum gross land area per dwelling unit shall be 5,450
square feet.
3. Open Space Requirements
a. There shall be a minimum of 36 percent of the net lot
area in open space.
b. Open space shall be provided in the following
proportions:
A minimum of 12 percent of the net lot area shall
be provided as frontage open space to provide a
setting for the building, visual continuity within
the community and a variety of spaces in the
streetscape, except that the frontage open
space shall not be required to exceed 50 square
feet per one (1) foot on public street frontage
excluding drives.
112 May 2005 Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ
CHAPTER 23: ZONING DISTRICTS
Section 23.7 Property Development Standards for Multi-Family Residential Districts
EXCEPTION: Where a lot has two (2) or more
street frontages, there shall be no less than 20
square feet of open space per one (1) foot of
street frontage for one (1) street and no less
than ten (10) square feet of open space per one
(1) foot of street frontage excluding drives for
other street(s). In no case shall a building be
closer than 20 feet to the front lot line.
ii. A private outdoor living space shall be provided
adjoining each dwelling unit equal to a minimum
of 20 percent of the gross size of the dwelling
unit, except that dwelling units above the first
story shall provide space equal to a minimum of
ten (10) percent of the gross size of the dwelling
unit. Outdoor living space on the ground level
may be included in the open space
requirements.
iii. The remainder of the required open space shall
be provided in common open space.
4. Building Height
a. If the R-S development abuts a single-family residential
district or an alley abutting a single-family residential
district, the Town Council may limit the building height to
one (1) story as determined by the Development Review
Board.
5. Yards and Setbacks
a. Wherever an R-S development abuts an R-1 or R-4
District, or an alley abutting any of those districts, a
setback of not less than 40 feet shall be maintained,
except that covered parking may be constructed to
within 30 feet of the adjacent district boundary line.
b. Wherever an R-S development abuts any district other
than R-1 or R-4 or abuts an alley adjacent to such other
district, a setback of not less than 20 feet shall be
maintained except that covered parking may be
constructed to within ten (10) feet of the adjacent district
boundary line.
c. Larger setbacks may be required if the existing or future
development of the area around the site warrants such
larger setbacks.
d. All areas between a building and a street frontage,
except for access drives and walks shall be open space.
Where parking occurs between a building and street, an
area 35 feet in depth between the street and parking
Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ May 2005 113
CHAPTER 23: ZONING DISTRICTS
Section 23.7 Property Development Standards for Multi-Family Residential Districts
shall be maintained in a landscaped setting. This depth
may be decreased to a minimum of 20 feet if special
circumstances warrant approval by use permit or
Development Review Board approval, such
circumstances being:
Depressed parking.
ii. Wall and berming.
e. Walls and Fences
Walls and fences within the required frontage
open space may not exceed three (3) feet in
height or except as otherwise approved by the
Development Review Board.
D. R-6 Multi-Family Residential District
The provisions of Section 23.4 and the following additional requirements
shall apply in this district.
1. Density
The minimum gross land area per dwelling unit shall be 3,500
square feet, EXCEPT that: The minimum gross land area per
dwelling unit may be increased if it is determined by the
Development Review Board or the Town Council that conditions
peculiar to the site preclude such density.
2. Open Space Requirements
Development of all R-6 zoned property shall provide a minimum
of 35 percent of the net lot area as open space in the following
proportions:
a. Each lot shall contain a minimum of 250 square feet of
usable outdoor living space for each dwelling unit,
exclusive of front yards.
b. Not less than 50 percent of said required space shall be
provided in a single common area, with a minimum
dimension of 20 feet at any point.
i. Portions of yards (excluding the front yards)
which are contiguous with and an integral part of
the outdoor living space may be included in
calculating the area and minimum dimensions of
such space.
ii. Pools and paved recreation areas may be
developed in the required common space.
114 May 2005 Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ
•
CHAPTER 27: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Section 27.6 Landscape, Irrigation,and Buffer Yard Plans
5. Sprinkler heads shall be installed at least eight (8) inches away
from impermeable surfaces (e.g., sidewalks, buildings, walls,
etc.).
6. Ornamental water features, such as fountains may be used if the
following conditions are met:
a. The feature is located within a shaded courtyard or
enclosed space;
b. Water in moving water features is recycled through the
feature; and,
c. The water feature is designed to prevent water seepage
or leaking.
E. Buffer Yards
1. Buffer Yard Plan Requirements
a. A buffer yard consists of horizontal space (land) and
vertical elements (plants, berms, fences, or walls). The
purpose of buffer yards is to physically separate and
visually screen adjacent land uses.
b. Location of buffer yards: Buffer yards shall be located
on the outer perimeter of a parcel of land, adjacent to the
property lines. Buffer yards shall be located in common
areas; not in individual lots.
c. When buffer yards occur adjacent to each other (i.e.,
along the property lines of two (2) adjacent properties)
the Development Review Board may require a
pedestrian trail running through the buffer yard(s). The
Development Review Board may also require a
minimum 20 foot wide corridor that provides pedestrian
ingress/egress between the two (2) properties from the
adjoining buffer yards.
d. Buffer yards shall not be located on any portion of an
existing or dedicated public or private street or right-of-
way, unless specifically permitted by zoning, or
approved by the Town Engineer.
e. Determination of buffer yard requirements:
Buffer yards for all zoning districts shall be
provided as specified in Table 27-7.
ii. Buffer yards between districts are not required
where the boundary between the districts is a
street.
Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ May 2005 319
CHAPTER 27: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Section 27.6 Landscape, Irrigation,and Buffer Yard Plans
iii. Buffer yards are not required within a POS
district for any areas left as natural open space.
iv. Where a development abuts a public street,
buffer yards shall be provided along all
perimeter street frontages as provided in Tables
27-7 and 27-8.
v. Perimeter street buffer yards are not required
where homes front on the perimeter street.
vi. Modification to the buffer yard requirements
shall be made, at the discretion of the Planning
and Planning and Zoning Administrator, where
conflicts with sight visibility, scenic views or
other standards and code requirements occur.
TABLE 27-7: REQUIRED BUFFER YARDS
Zoning District of Adjacent Development Site
Zoning District of Proposed R1-144,R1-72,
Development R1-43,R1-36, R1-10,R1-7, R-4R,R-6,R-S, C-N,C-1,C-
R1-20 R-4,SDH-6 POS,PS&C 2,T-P,P-1
R1-144,R1-72,R1-43,R1-36,R1-20 No Buffer No Buffer No Buffer No Buffer
R1-10,R1-7,R-4,SDH-6 A No Buffer No Buffer No Buffer
R-4R,R-6,R-S,POS,PS&C B B A No Buffer
C-N,C-1,C-2,T-P,P-1 B B B No Buffer
TABLE 27-8: REQUIRED PERIMETER STREET FRONTAGE BUFFER YARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES
Perimeter Street Type ARTERIAL COLLECTOR RESIDENTIAL
Street Frontage Buffer Yard B(25'min) A(15'min) A(15'min)
TABLE 27-9: REQUIRED PERIMETER STREET FRONTAGE BUFFER YARDS FOR COMMERCIAL USES
Perimeter Street Type ARTERIAL COLLECTOR RESIDENTIAL
Street Frontage Buffer Yard B(30'min) B(30'min) B(30'min)
f. Buffer Yards "A" and "B" are defined in the following
tables:
TABLE 27-10: REQUIRED PLANTINGS FOR BUFFER YARD"A"
Minimum Width 10' 15' 20'
5 Trees 4 Trees
Plants per 100 Lineal Feet 5 Shrubs 4 Shrubs Natural Desert
10 Accents 8 Accents
320 May 2005 Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ
CHAPTER 27: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Section 27.6 Landscape, Irrigation,and Buffer Yard Plans
TABLE 27-11: REQUIRED PLANTINGS FOR BUFFER YARD"B"
Minimum Width 15' 20' 30' 40'
8 Trees 7 Trees 5 Trees
Plants per 100 8 Shrubs 7 Shrubs 5 Shrubs Natural Desert
Lineal Feet
15 Accents 12 Accents 10 Accents
g. Accents in Tables 27-10 and 27-11 include flowers and
vines.
h. The natural desert buffer areas must provide at least
three (3) trees and 15 shrubs per 100 lineal feet. Any
landscape added to meet this requirement shall be
grouped to buffer existing uses and to minimize
disturbance for planting and irrigation.
2. Responsibility for Buffer Yard
a. When a use is the first to develop on two (2) adjacent
vacant parcels, the first use shall provide the required
buffer, based on existing zoning.
b. The second property owner may develop a full buffer
yard as specified in Table 27-7, Required Buffer Yards,
or may supplement the requirements by using elements
of the existing, abutting property buffer yard as
described below.
i. Deduct the width of the existing buffer yard from
the required buffer yard width specified in Table
27-7. The remaining width is the amount of land
to be provided by the second property owner to
meet the buffer yard requirements.
ii. Deduct the number of plants from the existing
buffer yard from the number specified for the
required buffer yard in Table 27-7. The
remaining number of plants shall be provided on
the second property to meet the buffer yard
requirements.
iii. The second property owner shall design the
required buffer yard to be compatible with the
existing buffer yard.
3. Use of Buffer Yards
a. Individual or combined buffer yards of 25 foot width, or
wider, may be used for passive recreation. They may
contain sculpture, benches, and pedestrian, bike or
equestrian trails, provided that:
CHAPTER 27: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Section 27.6 Landscape, Irrigation,and Buffer Yard Plans
i. For natural desert buffer yards, disturbance of
existing plants shall be kept to a minimum, any
disturbed areas shall be re-vegetated and
specimen trees relocated within the buffer yard;
ii. For constructed buffer yards, no plant material
shall be eliminated.
iii. All other regulations of this Section are met.
b. In no event, shall the following uses be permitted in
buffer yards:
i. Playfields,
ii. Stables,
iii. Swimming pools,
iv. Racquetball and tennis courts,
v. Other active, structured recreational uses,
vi. Parking lots,
vii. Circulation drives except at required access
points.
F. Screening Regulations
1. Screening devices shall be installed and maintained in
accordance with the following table:
TABLE 27-12:REQUIRED SCREENING
Zoning District of Zoning District of Adjacent Development Site
Proposed R1-144,R1-72,R1- R1-10,R1-7,R- R-4R,R-6,R-S, C-N,C-1,C-2,
Development 43,R1-36,R1-20 4,SDH-6 POS,PS&C T-P,P-1
R1-144,R1-72,R1- No No No No
43,R1-36,R1-20
R1-10,R1-7,R-4, Yes No No No
SDH-6
R-4R,R-6,R-S, Yes No No No
POS,PS&C
C-N,C-1,C-2, Yes Yes Yes No
T-P,P-1
2. The requirement for a screen may be waived or the height
lowered by Development Review Board if the buffer yard,
topography, or layout of development screens surrounding
properties, or if it would create an unsafe, unusable landscaped
alley between two (2)walls.
322 May 2005 Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ
CHAPTER 27: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Section 27.6 Landscape,Irrigation, and Buffer Yard Plans
3. The Development Review Board may increase the number of
plantings and the height of a wall, up to six (6) feet high, if the
buffer yard, topography, or layout of the development does not
adequately screen surrounding properties.
4. Screening devices required by this Section shall be masonry (or
similar) construction, earthen berm (3:1 slope), and/or vegetation
to provide a five(5)foot high opaque screen.
5. Solid walls, greater than 40 feet in length shall broken by using
at least two (2)of the following techniques:
a. Decorative features such as caps, patterns, and
variations in texture or materials.
b. Use of swales, berms and landscaping
c. Undulations or offset areas
d. Varied setbacks
6. All required screening devices shall be architecturally compatible
with the materials and design of the buildings on the site.
7. If a wall is used, vegetation shall be required and maintained on
the external side of the barrier to provide visual relief when
viewed from the property being buffered. For residential
development the wall shall be on the property line wall of the lots
and all of the vegetation buffer shall be outside the wall.
8. Breaks in screens may be required by the Planning and Planning
and Zoning Administrator to provide pedestrian and bicycle
access between residential areas and commercial/service uses,
particularly if these uses are local and serve the adjoining
neighborhood.
9. Parking facilities and/or internal drives which abut a public right-
of-way or where lights may shine on adjacent residences shall
provide a minimum three and one-half (3 1/2)foot high decorative
masonry wall and/or three and one-half (3 1/2) foot high
landscaped earth berm, depressed parking or, combination
thereof.
10. All refuse areas shall be screened on three sides with a six (6)
foot masonry wall and plantings and shall be finished to match
the architectural character of the project. Furthermore, a self-
closing, self-latching opaque gate, also finished to match the
architectural character of the project, shall be installed on the
fourth side of the enclosure.
11. All operations and storage shall be conducted within a
completely enclosed building or within an area enclosed by a
CHAPTER 27: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Section 27.6 Landscape,Irrigation,and Buffer Yard Plans
solid wall at least 6 feet in height, provided that no objects shall
be stacked higher than the wall so erected.
G. Re-Vegetation
1. Purpose: Re-vegetation is required in order to restore natural
vegetation and habitat and to minimize soil erosion potential of
graded and/or disturbed land resulting from any permitted or
non-permitted construction activity in the Town. Further, re-
vegetation provides improved air filtration and absorption of
carbon monoxide and production of oxygen and is considered an
essential measure in preserving the natural resources and
character of the unique Sonoran Desert ecosystem existing in
Eastern Pima County.
2. Graded areas that are to be re-vegetated according to an
approved plan and shall be re-vegetated with species
appropriate to the site and its surrounding native habitat and in
conformance with the Oro Valley Zoning Code approved re-
vegetation seed mixes (Addendum D). Appropriate, in this
sense, means that re-vegetation will be done, to the extent
practical, with the same species and density present on
undisturbed adjacent or nearby sites.
3. Acceptable re-vegetation includes the planting of desert trees,
desert shrubs, and large specimen cacti or the seeding of desert
trees, desert shrubs, and grasses, with an adequate density to
control erosion. Seeds may be raked into the soil with
appropriate mulch material or established by hydroseeding,
anchored mulches, or jute, rolled straw or similar material
approved by the Planning and Planning and Zoning
Administrator.
4. The seed mixes specified in Addendum D are required for all re-
vegetation work. Only those species that are compatible with the
site, soils, and conditions in which they will be planted shall be
used.
5. During the effective period of the grading permit, any graded
area that becomes overgrown with weedy species (e.g., Russian
Thistle, Telegraph Plant, Desert Broom, Ragweed, Pigweed, or
Burrow Brush, to name but a few) shall be weeded in order to
prevent the spread of such species onto adjacent properties.
6. The survival of re-vegetated plant materials may be enhanced by
appropriate irrigation, when practical, and other maintenance
procedures needed to establish the plants.
7. In the process of establishing vegetation in areas of low soil
productivity, the following minimum slope and surface
requirements shall be followed as pre-conditions for re-
vegetation:
324 May 2005 Zoning Code/Oro Valley AZ
Construction Cost System Page 1 of 1
2007 Pima County Assessor Construction Cost System
Search ParceI2005 ParceI2005 CCS2007 CCS2005 CCS2005 CCS2004 CCS2003 CCS2002 CCS
PARCEL: 225510130
SEQ.-SECT ConstrYear $q;Ft Model Description.
001-001 1979 5032 BUSINESS OFFICE
002-001 1979 1 COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT
.........................................
2255110130b01 a.JPG
22551/0130b01 b.JPGfi s 3
�€ � 1..�, ,���� 3�x���. � �*his �«��.�g�ti ��•'xStss.� � S�,a � 'R �
_
1 r a ���d^�� w�i*� �°� �. �i�����3'a�f�i �s �z� �` '�w'�. 5���
•
•4‘f.
05/16/2006
http://www.asr.co.pima.az.us/APIQ/asrcom.aspx
Construction Cost System Pagel of 1
2007 Pima County Assessor Construction Cost System
Search ParceI2006 Parce12005 CCS2007 CC52006 CCS2005 CC52004 CCS2003 CCS20112 CCS
PARCEL: 225510130
SEQ-SECT ConstrYear Sq:Ft
1979 5032 BUSINESSM ode1Descri 0
001-001Description
002-001. 1979 1 COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT
. .. ......„...„—„,„,...,...,_-_,.„-_-_,.„,,,..„..„...•
. .... ••--,,-.. ...._._.-..„:„..,....„„:„...„.„:..,__:„,,„.„:„.„..„..,,,.,.,..„.„....,,.,,,.
22551/0130b01a.JPG :
., . _,„ . ,•_,•••,••••:,,,,..,,,,:,,,i,„A:„-„,...:R.gy,•.-4101.,2!.01.0:2,,orefik*Anto;.%
. . . .........•„„................... _......,.,„.,,,„._ ,
22551/0130b01b.J PG :
. - - i...:::::!..-:•:_':.!.::::i.:Ai.2.421:1-44111i5i4.tii4411,440:01;m1-,
• • • :-i--"/-:: "':-;:':4;:,'ElitifiatiVIIIir _lf5-Ati,.3,431:
.---,_:--,--..,,---,..•.-,,,,,40NciyAts.---,-*-41,-,,,-,40ket.dirog
_ , . , :.,•,., ,:,.•-,_--..-.•, ''_'.....•'-':.-.',_:".•_..._=-:_i•-,',.',.'..-i_1,.:.!.,.-..-.'...,:',',,:,,.;,,',i,!":'.:',,,i.',:.,.,,,,,,'_-_.!.,?...,-,:',:,.,.'i:::.,:'-,.!,:-!,,,;.-i..,_.::_,,!,,_,.:,-,_:.i,,:,.,.!..,,,,!,.,...'ji,-,'',i''•4,:,,,,-;.:!.,,,,,,:,:.-g..::',_..,',,,:;:::,t,,,,.:.,i,-.1',,,,,,,,f,..r,;:..,,,,,,,_li.::.,::::,,,,,,,,_;::AT:.,:,,,,::,.,,,;ji,.;,,!',-.=,,r,!:;i,::.,.4,L,:t.:.!:::,,,,'.1,.:',:t:2:7„::,::t.:.,--,..,i..i_:,,h::.:.,:r.:4...vmi-,ti.::;:::.,N,',„ta..,.:7:;:,:,:j:lj::,,t,,,;it:::,::,-:4,:::,,t,:I,v,.:::,,,,it.::::74. „4-:1,1,,10',:,',g,I:..
.,::•:
..•.••... .._... .,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,.--,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,m,,,-,Anit--:sovilt.,7,11:::e-..,...:::.-46, •!.*
,41:,. ......„...:.....,......
, . ..—- -..-.-:-,-,,f.,_-,-•!„,..:•:-,,::,:ii-:,::::Imeianikixt.tige..-etlik-trw,,,.,:...441
,!k,i.!1,.N,-,::2!ii,,,,.*•!.'27:t..
_ • • ..,"__. • • • •,. . ....,::....:-,.:..,_,.-„.•:......,....,-.,;:il.:,:i..,-01,-,:,:6.mtf.,,,,,:zabg-isa,,,,,,m,4-0m.•%eh,c..,K,
ri-,•- -
, . ... ...::„.,,,,,,,t,,,,,..,,,,,,..,•:kx,Y.z4,2,.m.44.31,,uto.00,4v-pe.k.,,,,
:,, , -,. ,, • ,-.--....„..:.:,,,,,..,...•::-,,,w,,,,,,•:.440,,,,,,,,,,,,:,.,4,,,i;"•:,, 1:1-..,,,,,,,,,,t,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,•:•.,.:„-:,:::••••: ,,
'''''''•-•'-'.<::'''.'""'-''":'"'i'-'•','Mt,,',;z':•Irf,id,P,N:..m,,•,,,,,,,,p,,,,,:.:,,,,,,,,::,,,,n,.,r!t:!]!.,• •.,:,:,:,,,.,:...:,,:7;.:,•:,,:•,!,•.;,,,,E::,:,::,:.,,:,,;:,,,,,:.,,,.,...,,,,.,,.,...,...,. ,,.,.,,,;,.,.....,,..... .. ,
.,. •
'.)4eic,.,,.igo,;',iiai:0,im,,,,,zipr,J„,•,:,,liiii!.!•,,,,,,m,!.,1,,!,1,.:E!.inIE:,i,,,i,,,.•,,!,,,,.i„.„-,;.„.r,::::E,,,::•::,,,,:•:•i,,,:-:•,-. -,. -- .... ,. .
E',gritio.I:3?..,,r.,!IIE:1 ,,,,ok:',i:!...,'!!,,,i!,,c,,E':,:::„,!'::..,:.,::,,,':-.:',*!::',:-:':,,4..'PE:i:!,:••,',..,,.,.:,,•:.:-..'••-•,••••‘•••.:,,..,::.,.,.,,,,,.,,.,,,,b,,-•.••.;.!..!!.:,,,,wwzgat,i,i,,,,,,,,-•
-.---,.......,.
-,,,,:,,,,,,-••••••:,.••:•-,,,•NiRli;I:Eii41:,iiai,w.,,,,:•,:4:,,I,.1,iNcolaigr,i.:!i,N, ,2,:,,E::,•:!*;.•,4::411ieooilaiiontq:469,kaksvattOks§:-.-.-."
• • -::,;.:tmomilatirvgiedgmemomigo.emin,N*0.,Nel,timsi.,,,mr.,,,,,,,A.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:.
...
.4.,,,,-".:•'• -,AA,,Ow,,,mt,ifm.w.mi,„Nowiazo,,,,,,,,,,-
lt0004,04$1,14A0,vrAlli:
....
. . .---,':.)i,--4.4. (.•:
• ,-,,,„:-
,-•,,-:',:,'•-.---:-,..:•.,.';'• •'.',L,_,,..,,. ,, . .4 V LI
..'1:':%4fT!;!.'''''• . '.:41 l'..:', .
,,,,. ..._.....,-.
- .-' . •''-. . 4.., ' ,....
.. _,,_...-
.._
... `,. . ,, ,..: gtogg,. ,m.„ ww-, . :•:;•:"-:• 7.7.7.7J11:-----------.. ,„,,,,o,•,,
''''AffN,W,r '•-: ''.,- ..--,...;,,49SalAIgSMAT, •
ttl**VaPtVri, ii:i. „,,,i,'::,:i,-,,,,:;,,,,,,h•V;',',,,LE!!4,;-:4:-,',:ife,g..tiki!...,44.:,,,,,,:::„.
o.,•,,14,• to,txtXtS N
taVtNaelatrtatr"tflttttOreef4g#:4ptgaife.•104KWi4gtiW4W*g:ftMt.'
Xg"Vk:IMGBMN om WIMaetVIIMfnaOfA : tVM:;SL4ett:tlttrrrr':7T,:: :''''''',:'
VINEAPPECIagnia N
linetatUltittRIARROOROpy*r!,,,V.!Vr,:,;!!7:,:',7'-.--,--•:-..'-•.,- ., •
05/16/2006
us/APIQ/asrcom.aspx
http://www.asr.co.pima.az.
' • ems.+'' '-
1
"a rL i t, ; , - _''2- 5- 5 I- 0 r3 COMMERCIAL PROPERTY RECORD CARD
�:•.�i.,� •
j i'''
I:t #, stet:"'f• F —, AREA CODE
,,' , , •i.w,r�,ti. 9,jii
/� 14 t �i''�'• r i,Y 225510130
'^,x��" 14.(�•'-I' ' - T BASIS CODE UNITS
W R •jw,,4.Y T• •. Y 1 1 V t
t
. 'ASSESSMENT
• ��`1-� �'.:..:•. '..'_ .ANNUAL SUMMARY OF VALUES
J. :1 iC a g"tA raised Assessed
�9: :wt-'Change Lond Improvements Tool Property Class•---
Appraised y,
.3066, +i.:xta"nI 47•—• - value Value
19 • '1 Z C)OI1 •-s Z443912 s B( O 8 ENT 490 coo
19 2001 Ott"'295 '128. '. . JIc. , 13 688 LENT, fq Lodo and '511
15 $ `q s
1q 002•P iTITITI:V.852.1 - 2 4J912_, 1Q ENT3.7 Zti$ •"- s
19 ' . • .,4, 'C
'', . ENT s
rt
ENT - Buildings and Improvements t5 s s5 s
19 +)hr,l„".I:.r,E'4,'., '' , 4J
• ENT
;r Via. s
19 '..-: .A. ,ENT
1 ,�r,., 1
19 • r :s* •a ENT
19 .1 -7h,i: —•dx. , TOTAL VALUE Ii3130 f S
at+.. ...i.,. ENT
`',r•i'.:; .:I,. SERVICES AND AREA
Off'Site.;•
"''^ Utilities
,.Itnprorements;� �. Zoning Neighborhood DATE OF
APPRAISAL
Paved Stieeta l,,;�• City Woter Single Family Improving
MEASURED BY
Block Lopped Street e . Well Two Family Static
LISTED BY
Grovelled Street..;. ,:; Sewer Multi Family Declining
Unimproved;'?;,!.« ' Septic Tank Business Blighted PRICED BY
Public•Walks.,. Natural Gas Commercial REVIEWED BY DATE
Curbs and Gutter.-�',' • Cesspool Industrial POSTED BY DATE
Alley"~,.".1, ..,;:. . • L.P.Gas
No Alley. •,,t,I,. i.,,. Electricity
Topography r
' LAND VALUE CALCULATION
Regulor Lot Sin, ' Irregular Lot Size
o`tJL' . . x• ' x x x
REMARKS
x x x
i•r
,'x x x x
Front Fob.,15.'' Depth,Corner,Other
or, Unit Value
Sq.Foot: • °• Value Table Fottor
:r1.. N r. 11, l ... Y
',I:,
•4 5.' '' ?,t;' its v • ..
o. 'f' "w " 1 TOTAL S
r -
MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION
Bldg.No
TYPE and USE OUALITY OF CONST FLOORS HEATING and COOLING
Comm Stares Medical Grade [ B 1 2 3 4 5 6 Hot Write, Oil Unit Hirs
Super Market Office Budge 3 Good Concrete Low Pr Steam Rodiont
A�anmenn Banks-�8l Earth _ ' Hi Pr.Stearn II, Fumoce
Motel Pre-Fab 7 Fair' Hordwood Forced Worm Air Wall Fuoce
Sera.Stations s` m
i Single Fl. w Gray.Worm Air h Stove
Misc.Structures r 1 Minimum Wood Joist Got Unit Hies.
t
Warehouses Steer Joist leap Cooler
1 Hardwood on Conc. A r Cond.
FOUNDATION ( DOO Rein Concrete
Concrete Welts I Stock Terrazzo
Conc Blk.Walls Spec. Tile PLUMBING
Brick Walls WINDOWS Resilient Tile Number Number
Stone Walls 'Pied 3 F':ture Bath brig.lountoin
Wood Sash INTERIO7fTINISH 6N EXTERIOR WALLS i 2.Fi.iure Bo•h , Sink
STRUCTURAL Sleet Sash Pine Lavatory laundry Tub
Fire Proof Cons, Alum.Sash Hardwood Water Closet Hat Water Heater
Rein'.Conc.Beams 8 Col's lath and Plaster ' Urinal
lsGarbage Disposal
Steel-gown's and Co
I ROOF Dry Wall K Bath Tub Dish Washer
Timber Beams&Col't. (Wallin Unfin.Int. Shower Stall
Steel Trusses Flat Hip Sawtooth__ ELECTRIC WIRING OTHER BUILDING ITEMS
Shed Gombrel—Arched_ - Conduit y Sprinkler-Syst.
EXTERIOR WALLS Gable—Monitor CEILING FINISH Flexible Conduit
A Wd Frame-Wd Sdg. Framing lath and Plus. Knob 8 Tube
B Wd Frame-Stucco Wood Joist Acousncal Tile Sheathed Coble
CSTock-8" 'Steel Joist Power Wi.ing Vaults
D Block-8"Stuccoed Wood Truss PARTITIONS Fissures.Floe E I ini
E Block-8'•Painted Steel Truss. i 1.8 P.on Wd.Stilt
F Block-12" I Steel B Dry Wall on Wd.Stds. '' —
Beams
C Comm Brick 2-c I Conc.Slob _ Tlie or C.B. REPLACEMENT COST&FINAL VALUE
H Face Brick 4'Bkg. I•Deck MAIN BUILDING
IFoceBrirk 8"Bkg. I Wood STOREFRONTS BASE COST
J Rein,cone " Pre.Cost Conc. Kind Grode Sq.Ft.
P Comm Brick 3-c Poured Conc. Wood_ Set _
T Frame Brick Ven I Sloel Met.Set ITEM ITEM AREA OR UNIT TC TAL
QUALITY COST
Special Facings I Kind of Metal
Describe: I RoofIeR Goode:A-High,B•Good;
Built Up C-Medium;D-Fair
Metal E-low Cost
I Tor 8 Grovel BUILDING ELEVATORS
Coma.Roll No. Cap F PM Firs
Comp.Sh'gle Poss.
Wood Sh'gle Ni
Tile
Asbestos
DATE OF CONSTRUCTION
^- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIIIIJI111I111 Don
—
Age
Source
— Mai or Alto-motion or Adds.:
Dote Age
— Remarks:
Ellectiva Age-
DEPRECIAltON AND
—_ — OBSOLFSCFNCE
A.Age(Morino)Depre
elation) °•E
— I B.Physical Condition± _%
— IC.Modernitalion
(Minus) _%
Cl lot.Phys.Depreciation __%
tom-' — F.Net Physical Condition __6i
►- F.Func.Depreciation _
i— G.Economic Deprecralion
H.Tot.Spec.Obsolescence— -
I.Net Condition REPLACEMENT COST
i— J.loial Depreciation —
LESS %DEPRECIATION
NET VALUE
._ NET VALUE OTHER IMPS
TOTAL VALUE OF IMPS. $
- 1 1 11 L1 1 1 1 1 l i l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l l l l i l 1 1`
.5 . 2,25"—5{ --o13 ,]
.T^
-y
K•
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY RECORD CARD
AREA CODE
S
P I
4 E0
c I t ,
I A IS
L R — 1
I 1
U) C I
f) T BASIS CODE_ UNITS
•
0/77-nh,C,aA S 7 7g/? IM. O,-,,c1c.
ANNUAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY OF VALUES
I Irr, rove. - --- t�
p Appraised o, A d
meritsI Change Land ENT. Total Ti Property Class Value �� Value
I9g3 P ) 7D /o !73�E75 /7/3 3iC1' �'76l /��j Land /S7� r $ ��r(/ s
1933..frF —>Lsr--2 .J�__.__! 94 --,d"a,cJict . s s
is) 95 :LTT • I
IilS B -.I' _ f Building•and Improvements 1�1 NZ' $ 5— $
3�U
19 i
,]//r1 ,,r� IC ff ( J/�-- ,�/� s s
19 a"1.. t & Ooa 15 ll�7] ��5k..2.&773A0TOTAL
` �.rc`io � I� t
t 9 a F C F 1�.1X1, l/ 0, S �7Elo PETT �1 ' NG ��� \ � VALUF. I� S s
"T"r . .
t SERVICES AND AREA I
Off Site 1
Improvement• Utilities Zoning Neighborhood DATE OF
.. --. APPRAISAL
Paced Street - City Water Single Petnity J Improving MEASURED 8Y
r
Black Topped Street Well jvo Family Static LISTED BY
Grovelled Street Sawer -Muulti family Declining PRICED BY
Unimproved Septic Tank Bueine•• Blighted
REVIEWED BY DATE
Public Walk• Natural Gas Commercial
POSTED BY DATE
Curbs end Gutters Cesspool Industriat
Alley !, P.Ge■
No Alley Electricity
Topography
LAND VALUE CALCULATION
R.gular Lot Sire Irregular Lot Sloe
x x r X
' REMARKS
x x x x
li
x x x x
x x x x
Front Foot Depth, Comet,Other
or Unit Value
Sq. Foot Value Table Factor I
S
['
L.
•
!
i ...
TOTAL Si I
t
e
e S r r a=` ..
e. •
s
MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION
Bldg.No.
TYPE and USE QUALITY OF CONST FLOORS HEATING Laid COOLING
Carom.Stores Medical 1' Grade } B I 2 3 4 5 6 Hot Wale, r I Oil Unit Hlrs,
Super Morker Office Bldg, Concrete low Pr Sienm Rodrant '
Books-S&l , 3 Good _Eurlh Hi Pt.Steen, Fir,Furnace
—A yorlmenrs .--s
Motel Pre Fab .— 2 Foil Hardwood Forced Worm Air Wall Furnnce
so,.$rations —..., Single Fl. _ Giro. Worm A,, Stove
Misr Structures I Minimum Wood lotst
Gas Um:Hot.
Wor&houses Steel lilt' Ena0. Cooler
1._. I, Hardwood on Conc Air Cond.
FOUNDATION DOORS RI:in Camera
Concrole Walls Stock Ter rocru
Conc.Blk.Wells Spec. Tile PLUMBING
Brick Walls WINDOWS Resilient lire Number Number
Stone Wells Kind 3 Fi,tura Bath Drkg.Fountain
Wood Sash I INTERIOR FINISH ON EXTERIOR WALLS 2•Fisture Bath Sink
STRUCTURAL Steel Sash Pine' _ lovuiory Laundry Tub
Fire Proof Cose, Alum.5osh ! Hardwood Water Closet Hot Wore,Healer
Rein(.Core Beorns 6 Col's I Loth and Plaster • Utrnul Gorbnge D.soosal
Steel Bourn s 6 Cal's ROOF Dry Well Both lib Dish Wosher
s
limber Strome 6 Col's Design Unlin.Int. Shower Stall
Steel fusses Flat HIo__Sowlootls_ ELECTRIC WIRING OTHER BUILDING ITEMS
—" Shed Gambrel_Arched
EXTERIOR WALLS —� Gable_Monitor
Conduit Sprinkle!Sys',
CEILING FINISH Fle.ible Conduit
A Wd Ftrome•Wd$d4. Framing i Lath and Pigs. Knob&lobe
B Wd Frame.•Stucco Wood Joist Acoustical Tile Sheathed Coble
C Block.8- Steel Joist
Pov.er Wuinr) , Voiles
D Block•B"Stuccoed -Wood Truss PARTITIONS F'atu,es Flue. ❑ Inc. 0
E Block-B•'Pointed MN Steel Truss. I 1.6 P.on Wd Slits
F Block-12"' Sleet BeamsI Dry Wall on Wd.Side �"r"" �
G Comm Brick be Conc.Slab Tile or C B. REPLACEMENT COST a FINAL VALUE
H Foce Brick 4'•Bkg. Deck MAIN BUILDING
I Puce Brick•B••Big. Wood STORE FRONTS BASE COST
1 Re In(tont •• Kind crude Sp Ft
•
P Comm! rick 3< IIII Wood Set AREA OR UNIT ^T—^
m
T Frorae Brick Ven 1111 Steel Met,Set ITEM ITEM QUALITY COURT TOTAL
Special Foc,ngs Mind of Melol
Describe, Roofing Diode,A•High;8-Good,
Built Up C•Medium•D•FairMelol t
E•low Cost
Tor&Grovel BUILDING ELEVATORSCorot,Roll — r
No. Coo F P.M Firs
Como.Slo'pl• Poss.
Woad Wale Fr!
Asbestos 1
i DATE OF CONSTRUCTION
►Tr� liliiliiII 11111 11liiirli1iilitir_ Dot, _ ._
_ ... Aar) —..__—_—_.__-_-_
Source
—
n —... _-
._ ^ Mujo'Age,nation or Adds.
Dote Age .
= Remarks.
Elective Age. s
i-- - _ DEPRECIATION AND -
"— —. OBSOLESCENCE
'... ^ A.Age(Normal Depre p/
_ crotionl 01°
I— _• B.Physical Condition! —/o'
I..� C Modernitohun qqI ( —
_-11 (Minus) Po 1
,— ^D.lot.Phys.Depreciation —/0
`_' E.Net Physical Condition —�0 --
F,Fun!.Depreciation — ---------
.� _G,Economic Oeo,.oiohon — •
�� — H.Tot.Spec.Obsolescence — ••_ I -— I— —'-
--
7.Net Condition SS REPLACEMENT COST
1 Total Deprecioc,on .1
7— LESS 1E55 %DEPRECIATION
— NET VALUE
— NET VALUE OTHER IMPS.
—
111111111111111111 ► 111111111 ` TOTAL VALUE OF IMPS. $_
1111111111
YO /O- 2c-,3' 6.3.o/3 cc
5 �-57 — 6/.3 G //- -g� -
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY RECORD CARD
y 9 I`�1`� AREA CODE
SUFFOLK HILLS PROFESSIONAL PLAZA
7780 IV: ORACLE ROAD l D 0
TUCSON,:AZ 85704 S I
I
E 0 I
C
I S 1
In (,7 A t I
J L R
0 11, SUFFOLK HILLS S 150' OF N 455' OF BLK B I I
ri r 7 BASIS CODE, UNITS
n /yYv
.
ANNUAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY OF VALUES i
I improve- II • Appraised W A d
..:change Land ENT. Total I_ �Q< Property '<:Claea Value �? Value
/1 menteL[ /
19 Q'1 t./r'V _S (S )� •
/ /!I t0
LI ✓ ` '•'
19 � ���(�I L■nd
76f _364 5'6 "•;'J -
39 � 0 $
19 ta C _ r tiC /7 r,4A/ ,5 1 ,i./ .{t='' �/5�
19 / _Buildings End Improvatnents T $ :
I9 r UIV1tr 3L-Ot6 l r ,3 ( tLJ6 • .f S s ,
19 91 PM 1 I I ...4 _
_ r
19 :, ,r x- t (-n1� ,7430/ roc ..F-
1p 9Z 'ET - I xTOTAL VALUE 1J3/ $ $
SERVICES AND AREA ,,; rl "T
Off Sit■ :74' ,
Improvement■ Utilities Zonfng/7 Neighborhood DATE OF
•`"r"—'••• .4t. , APPRAISAL g"/3J/7rj
Paved Street City Waur X Single Parnity improving y
Black ToppedY u i A. MEASURED BY ,4-4.j�
Street ` 'l Well Two F wily St■Itc
-r _ LISTED BY LA?,, ,,_1,
Gravelled Street. Sewer _X MuttI4atruiv Declining PRICED BY f.,, ���Jyyy /y
Unimproved Septic Tank Busl'neas Blighted d
sr - REVIEWED BY DATE
Public Walks Natural Gee X Commercial X
Curbs and Gutters Cesspool dustrial`
POSTED BY DATE a
Alley L.P.Gas
No Alley P Electricity St rk i (���� (2
Topography .S/p ,/ G t! ��^, ,
LAND VALUE CALCU AtION -
e_
Regular Lot Size I Irregulgr't of Siae
x ; G i x a a t..1r'1=��1e )-17OIS. ?rtl ssio,Jfk 1 f��YZk
x x x S^an/ fr'L or,t wi,�. r.� REMARKS
x
x' i �`� 1`l'uf 1h N/- SA1 c- 5150.o n e
x x x
;IC /
.e. LL ��n A/wl G�,,1,01C..9,l XIII,'/111 • 'a7. C-., ,1.4..
'7 X x z !! f
Front Foot % Depth,Cornet,Other I (4,C. 7?'P-rt 1 f ,t.iF-ttSWf4 f1rt.H- ri3af7'f >)t�-v�.
or unit Value _3 1 (J'N q p f ` ,�f
Sq.root .'Volua Table Factor • aN/L OOP /0e% Cdoli/e i4l. /l3/ (IR/(-A 0//C��'[A
��-rts�" .ys czd( Y, )-on,L,,, Z/5 it-zc-,g) ,
/-yo/if' --.57t,T 444,c'/2.i 'e 25o�srx e. zS%jQate(1,7
I
/e r/ ,,:/9:G l te
e./.or,— eAse.r .,r 1c.t
cnr .y
mK> S,s Ie., Pax __
•
I
•
TOTAL S T' —5`-'
MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION /
C,1 l 5 - Bldg.No.
TYPE and USE QUALITY OF CONST FLOORS - HEATING;Ad COOUNG
Comm.Stores Medical Grade I a B I 2 3 t 4 5 6 t Hot Water Oil Unit HIrs
Super Markel Office Bidgs. }( 3 Good ,oncrete V.V.r./yii 2 Low Pr.Steum Radioni
Apartments • Bonks•SBL Earth. Hi Pr.Steam Fir--Putnace _
Motel i Pre•Feb ti Fair Hardwood Forced Warm Air Wall Fur onto
Serv,Stations ,e Single Fl. Gtov.Worm Air
Mist.Structures r { Minimum - _ Stove
Wood Joist Gus Unit hilts.
Worehouses Steel Joist s EvaD,COOItr -----
I Hardwood on Conc. A:r{bnd-• s4 4 rar,w
crFOUNDATION DOORS G/,Se4.stc/ Rein.Cuncratn _ r'
Conole Wolk . - Stock)-'J11.d'5CYJa 2 Te,racco R.R. ErirNAnAsi• X"2-,
Conc.Bll Walls Spec./-2'./"•ts L't" J+C,rA/p Z tile N-A"ot.t, 504 '� PLUMBING
Brick Walls WINDOWS Rrs:l:enl Tile SL•sl44.{[d4. Z Number Number
Slone Wolls Kind r.-. 2,4. 3•Finure Bath Drkg Fountain ar I
Wood Sash' INTERIOR FINISH ON EXTERIORR WAL3 2•Fi.iuro Bath Z Sink
STRUCTURAL Steel Sash 1 Pine' Sokolov laundry Tub
Fire Proof Const. Alum.Sash ^_ Hardwood Wow r Closet Hot Wnter Healer
Reint.Conc.Beo.ns&Cot's Loth and Plaster
Steel Bemis's t's&Col's.P,P _ Urmot GorbWoage Disposal
'� ROOF �Dig Woll � Both Sub Disfi usher
limber Beams d Col,. Design Unfin.Ini. Shower Stall r
Steel bosses 'Flat _Hip__SawtoolhWO-� �
ELECTRIC WIRING OTHER BUILDING ITEMS
Shed Gombrel_Arched: Conduit 2_. Sp.i..kk..8,st
EXTERIOR WALLS 12t.3 Goble Monitor
CEILING FINISH Fleeible Conduit ]'rV SL'yL.rrt HT' -
5/Q A Wd Frame.-Wd Sdg. 'o' 'Framing loth and Plas. Knob&lobe
Sy1se. S A. 3?-c�� 1
B Wd Frome.•Stucco Wood Joist Acoustical a
Tile S.,S.f, 69-
I- Sheathed Coble W re.4e0h4.m.1 K 804(e..kul.1'.4
C Block•8" i Steel loisi Power Wiring VeRhS
D BIock•B"S'vccoed Wood Truss.X;>t z.'es>ue Cr x, r(sr I ../r.,4.,4 PARTITIONS ,A
E Block'.B"pointed T Steel T.uss. L.&P.on Wd.Sids.
1 4en k/ rl� Futur us.flvo, Inc. �i
t
F Block•12" Steel Beoms Dry Wotl on Wd.Wt. 2. ','-T
G Comm Brick 2, Conc.Slob I,IaeartB-./'..s.s".1tt+e� 'z� _ REPLACEMENT COST a FINAL VALUE
H Fate&ick-a"Bkg. Deck r?'Rs1t Ibsae.'li'sbliek, Z.
IFoce Slick•8"Bkg. Wood t/rh ^ z STOREFRONTS MAIN BUILDING
Rein)coot 'F.Cost Conc. Lind Grade Sq Ft. Sea3z� SASE COST
P Comm Brick 3< Poured Conc. Wood Set AREA OR UNIT
I Frame Brick Ven 'Steel Met.SC / 2:/“.. _. 1G„7-� ITEM ITEM QUALITY COST TOTAL
Special Facings Kind of Metal J Ais7JG1, •3 A /`/2 cf 17 90
Describe 'Roofing Grade:A High:e.Good; -
J�-$Iµ.e � Built UP I C Medium;D Fair L 3•M /`/1 LF 5S 33
-t2-A)."FVM rJ I L" P qr.) Metal E low Cosi I
tr2."rJ,„ip,5../ I Tor&Gro-el BUILDING ELEVATORS --�t�� � M �('y ¢ I a/p
Comp.Roll No. Cop. F.P.M. Flrsi ill 1,1041lS- /,Oc.2Ga /70 y 44 r 7-3
Camp.SiICle Pass. i 1P tt L II �
�/Llh ,.a...1w4.nJ ....t-1 eh .` "Wood Sh'Rie Fri. - �'JJ J°V �Ooy
A-4-e.)111i1 Tile P-/-,It}, .tl i BA- - !
JJ ,gebecsas R 30 s.ssr.-1sctl.s.J Z. xi*-/-0.�e-6.' X 4 $-!/ — 2.J{QI
.. t
DATE OF CONSTRUCTION 7•S•5 , J(.19i /n gfD �
_ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1-1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1_ L sO3�� / 1
Dots `T� L �S a Si r�
n L ' A Age r&ie.✓ L y N _50,RO."� j 7
/' ( , "'•r' = Savrce]e.�.l�,ATcAt.4 7-A•� ,�03'-� l/r1
- - Major Alter notion or Ad s.. .�i 3%gr4'•S2 _ZY1-�
r� ?-IF.S'•/J4 _ od G��
—_ (.,-] Dui° Age . F .. 7-6-I /?QLO� /4J.�lad.S'7.._�LsM
`_ hM I Remcrks; }D11��
—, r/ac.V/7g- 9-13 �I 1r7`$ 4 Fir-4,�
7 f f.cc.-.Qla.SG.- /o.& .A a 670
- 4"R?-Q--I-C. A.1 ?// it
E!lodive Age. !-
DEPRECIATION AND .1,yr11.0r t
— — OBSOLESCENCE /Y1.,s+�a //$ �k'SL¢ f y . -
A Age(Normal Depot
ciotionl —%
B.Physicol Condition . _B. I '
-1 C Modernitolion
._ (Minus) -_-_7'
r �0.lot Phys.Oeoreciot,on —%
h-- ---•E.Net Physical Condition —. • '
_ F.Font.Depreciation ^-•
G.Economic Depreciotion — ---,.
— H.lot.Spec.Obsolescence — __ , ', - -�— _► - >---
- 1.Net Condition
REPLACEMENT COST 1 '1`I0,0
J Tola1 Depreciation �V I
-- - LESS %DEPRECIATION
" NET VALUE
- '- NET VALUE OTHER IMPS
~ TOTAL VALUE OF IMPS. $_
— IIIIIII111111II , 11111111111111Lllillll1
F" Se.
1 o 2c5 51 O/3 0
CARD CARDS, .
LAND CLASS IMP CLASS ' • '
COMMERCIALMODEL.APPLICATION
+a 402 403 .406. 405,, 4C� Mpg 409 4IC> 410A 4I B 1 'qI ,413 417
VfiY.. WALL PART. YEAR •
CLASS SUB.GRADE WALL HEAT COOL BSWT FIRE CON OB.90LAIQD. HI COMST RTg, • 8LD0, SQ,'TOE. TOTAL QF ADO ITEMS' NAME DATE DRAWN
1
RESIDENTl4L M{ASS APPRAISAL SYSTEM
EXT. BATH PAT10 PHY. SALE .
„CLAS:STORY ROOMS QUA V ALL.SROOF HEAT A.C. FIX PORCH COND. LIVINO AREA N.YR,CAR PQQL AREA SALE--! fp AT
' ` , I r r T 1 1 T i I I l I T . 1 I 1 1 , 1 1 I r I I I I T I T IT r 1 1 r I T I
I T T T T 1 1 1 , 1 1 1- 1 T i I T i T ' I r I T `r T r T T T T I T 7 r T r T I T I T T I I 1 , i T T 1 r r 1 . I T T 1
7YJ J t I r ! I S ('
O
tm j y rn
( _ l t O _ 9
Q O
_ N
,o c .4
71 1 V� . ,
gip. V
111 y
g VI " ' 1
0
u)
, -_--,)\ c ___e, .
___ es, ------ G.' -
7._ n.
, cp
- licA, T.
` I 1 1 to 1 I I 1 f A ( i 1 I 1 I
_ I r I � l 1 I I 1 1 1 , I i r 1 1 L I l i a I L 11 11 � I � I.11 1 I 1 1 i l I I � 1 i 7 T , i t � l l i l r I t� l ���i- i � i I � 1�� I I l i _
ADD ITEM CONST ROOF ROOF
YES NQ ITEMC.ffiPZLON ITEM CODE DATE GRADE FON. WALL E1QQR FQRM. MAIL _ DIMENSIONS QUAN.OR SQ.FTGEX UNIT COST =FULL CASH VACS
1 x x 8 $
_ —
2 � x x I 8 i$
3 . _ x x $ _8
a X X $ 8
5. _ ---— x x 8 8
6 x x H S
- - - - -
CODE I0--
N iA d! K N r► 40 N 4, M 4/ M y -d! 0 4,
N . iN 400. 4, 4, 4,' w 4, 40, M M .0 40.
X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXX
X X XXX XX XXX X X X X X X
HISTORY OF PROPERTY
DATE REVIEWED BY REMARKS
- O
noMMMI
t
Ip, o - N In It It) IDf- co
;lig--
. 10- a63 -- 6,3 - b/30
C�. •
STATE CODE NUMBER
0
SUPPLEMENTAL
m
CARD NO. _.1_OF
c� a PROPERTY RECORD CARD
z C
C" "--",1 .
CO 8
q PART I- MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES
Bids. Unit
Ho ITEM tirade Fdn. Walls Floor Roof ` Roofing Dimensions Quantity prite Cond. Replace Value Year Value
�j ^ �. s of o 7SIo
1 K.s 13.QA-/A /YQ�S - 1. 5 '-l:ie %1'o a -it c.. a 12-6()C4 ". .t '1 1 2-.-
2 _PGS /3.R'/4 /2 3 _ c-- 5 6 q /�.o a /i.6 a - .. i t.c S1'3 . '' 9,51 , rl
3 a '
4 a
5 a a / -
6 a a /,.
' a a /%
e a a / /
PART II -OTHER BUILDING AND IMPROVEMENT ITEMS
item
ITEM Quantity Unit Price Year Value 1No." //ITEH Quantity Unit Price Year,
v■tue
I 13-��S Ro4 r ,o 0 /(..o - 13 //
2 3P11_\_.\-1z.-5 • ....),(o a3 /3e % 14//
3 ri3 A•2--D x so . F°--- yoo .- /15/ 1 _
4 IP 13•C:•� R 4 . 47 L! io/ // As
5 13 E off. - 36,Lr 'sty ff(Q ,/ 17 - _
I6 '15°/3 G / pr ./30o / °' 131,l3'� 18 •
7 .i9/3. rJ38/.4 ed 'a .5rP'Y n 19 -
_ 8 /3.�{,,p• c.'� 7.it-P 3.IL /,P?-- r 2O
9 5S if-3.c.. X1/ /o '--'- ///,- / 21
10 /'/ 22
i
11
/,' 23
12 T�/ 2 4
fl
IDENTIFY ALL ITEMS BY STANDARD SYMBOLS
FOUNDATION EXTERIOR WALLA-/ Block—8"painted DA Integral circ.sec.—timber rib 5C ROOF
' 'Concrete Walls C Wd.tr.-sheathing-we did. AA 2-course common brick G 2/3 Utility quonset 5D Shed S
Block Ws11s B Wd.fr.-no•heathinit yid,std. AB 3-course common brick GA Gable G
Brick or Stone Walls M Wd.fr.-no sheathing/mt.aid. AC Face brick—4"backup H Gambrel GA
None NO Wd.fr.sheathing/oil.aid. AD Face brick—B"backup I FLOORS ROOFING _
STRUCTURAL FRAME Wd.fr.-board■nd/batten AK Roman tile—4"backup N None NO Metal M
Steel Frame SF Block—g" &i/ C Structural tile NA , Concrete C Comp.Roll CR
Wood Frame WF Block— 12 7".'f CA Prefab gable roof SA Wood W Comp.Shingle CS
Block—87, fucco D Integral circ.sec.—prefab SB Wood Shingle WS
T• .
•
Remarks ' • // Summary Totals
(.3t,,j4„1 CErM 4 70() 7) -_) of•o4 of/i v,oot) 471
Part/Port II ��y�
1
Total Adds. /6./ / 5
(I
cf&- 1--2-mo0 r 02 G.I.. l 0_ --
/'( e-9r"�'�Q '07 l �~ STRSE CDDE MISUSER.
a / 5 U P PtE MENTAL
F PRI MERTY RECORD CARI1 CRRO N0,
Y
P
Q
r
Se
A)r:p ti G atir`'-t1y
n,,,,^d
ti a L s
0
c'Y/ _ T
4.•t • 0
0
N f
• o•z h I 1 `'•6 ` o i-c
Ito,
I
.
o �
► o
!Iwo►� I '1 A,
V '
0 7 ►
3C'
1- S n 71 1
w 1
41
i o-...:E, 1
I 4
►
I
I
. oth
c u wnTw
' ‘AO V
0ES x,o SC)
\.
oh", o.A he i ,.
. 07.2 OS =hd 129
v �.
Address Details Page 1 of 1
DP91300111e111 "ti
I, Close Window J [ Print Page j
Permit Activity For: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC #100
Description: C OF 0 FOR "DENTON BETTER HOMES & GARDEN REAL ES
Permit: 33763 Status: FINAL Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#100
Applied: 07/12/1989 Issued: 07/12/1989 Final: 07/13/1989
Expire: Sewer: Parcel:
Zoning: Lot: Subdivision:
http://www.pimaxpress.com/research/detail.asp 05/16/2006
Address Details Page 1 of 1
1l Jim,Roy
Dflelopment Sep vices
Close Window I Print Page
Permit Activity For: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC #128
Description: C OF 0 "PARIS PROP.INC," (REAL EST.OFFICE) B2,V
Permit: 37669 Status: FINAL Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#128
Applied: 11/20/1989 Issued: 11/20/1989 Final: 11/21/1989
Expire: Sewer: Parcel:
Zoning: Lot: Subdivision:
http://www.pimaxpress.com/research/detail.asp 05/16/2006
Address Details Page 1 of 1
pirna.Pov
Devehinent Services
Close Window j Print Page
Permit Activity For: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC
Description: ROW:WO #C7015300 - GAS MAIN REPLACEMENT IN ALLEY
Permit: P98RW00163 Status: ISSUED Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC
Applied: 01/21/1998 Issued: 01/21/1998 Final:
Expire: 03/07/1998 Sewer: Parcel:
Zoning: Lot: Subdivision:
Description: T.I. - DEN DON REALTY AND ADD STORAGE SHED (28SF)
Permit: 53762 Status: EXPIRED Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC
Applied: 09/03/1991 Issued: 09/03/1991 Final:
Expire: Sewer: Parcel:
Zoning: Lot: Subdivision:
Description: SIGN-CHANGE OF COPY TO EXIST F/S,ID SIGN(TOTAL 60S
Permit: 111323 Status: EXPIRED Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC
Applied: 05/02/1996 Issued: 05/10/1996 Final:
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
Description: SUFFOLK HILLS PROFESSIONAL PLAZA
Permit: CO1278096 Status: APPROVED Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC
Applied: Issued: Final:
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
Description:
Permit: PO1AN01059 Status: ISSUED Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC
Applied: 06/28/2001 Issued: 06/28/2001 Final:
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
http://www.pimaxpress.com/research/detail.asp 05/16/2006
Address Details Page 1 of 1
P1ma,POV
Melopmen1
Close Window Print Page j
Permit Activity For: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC #110
Description: REMODEL: OFFICE
Permit: PO1 CP05105 Status: C OF 0 Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#110
Applied: 05/24/2001 Issued: 06/13/2001 Final: 08/03/2001
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
http://www.pimaxpress.com/research/detail.asp 05/16/2006
Address Details Page 1 of 1
Development 1KC P ..
Close Window Print Page
Permit Activity For: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC #130
Description: ELECTRIC UPGRADE/REWORK ELECTRICAL SERVICE
Permit: 103562 Status: FINAL Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#130
Applied: 10/02/1995 Issued: 10/02/1995 Final: 10/03/1995
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
Description: SIGN: MAINWALL ID 38.2 SQFT ILLUMINATED
Permit: P03CP01783 Status: EXPIRED Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#130
Applied: 02/20/2003 Issued: 04/29/2003 Final:
Expire: 10/26/2003 Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
Description: CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY INSPECTION:
Permit: P03CP01953 Status: C OF 0 Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#130
Applied: 02/26/2003 Issued: 02/27/2003 Final: 02/28/2003
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
http://www.pimaxpress.com/research/detail.asp 05/16/2006
Address Details Page 1 of 1
1111 pimd.90V
3
Rfveitipmeiti
I Close Window Print Page
Permit Activity For: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC #150
Description: ELECTRIC UPGRADE/REWORK SERVICE W/NEW PANEL
Permit: 103560 Status: FINAL Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#150
Applied: 10/02/1995 Issued: 10/02/1995 Final: 10/03/1995
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
Description: REMODEL: OFFICE
Permit: P01CP05099 Status: C OF 0 Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#150
Applied: 05/24/2001 Issued: 06/13/2001 Final: 07/13/2001
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
Description: SIGN:1 F/S MONUMENT
Permit: P99CP01131 Status: FINAL Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#150
Applied: 02/01/1999 Issued: 02/24/1999 Final: 02/26/1999
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
Description: C OF 0 INSPECTION:REALTY COMPANY
Permit: P99CP01567 Status: C OF 0 Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#150
Applied: 02/11/1999 Issued: 02/11/1999 Final: 02/18/1999
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
http://www.pimaxpress.com/research/detail.asp 05/16/2006
Address Details Page 1 of 1
init-1.00V
Deve Iices
I Close Window j Print Page
Permit Activity For: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC #160
Description: REMODEL: OFFICE
Permit: PO1 CP05104 Status: C OF 0 Situs: 7780 N ORACLE RD PC#160
Applied: 05/24/2001 Issued: 06/13/2001 Final: 07/13/2001
Expire: Sewer: Parcel: 225510130
Zoning: TR Lot: Subdivision:
http://www.pimaxpress.com/research/detail.asp 05/16/2006
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF PIMA )
Audrey Smith, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that (s)he is the Legal
Advertising Manager 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
Tucson, County of Pima, State of Arizona and elsewhere, and the hereto attached:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MAY 23, 2006 @ 3:00PM
OV 10-06-06
was printed and published correctly in the regular and entire issue of said THE DAILY
TERRITORIAL for 1 issues; that was first made on the 8th day of May 2006
and the last publication thereof was made on the 8th day of May 2006 ;
that said publication was made on each of the following dates, to-wit:
05/08/06
at the Request of: Town of Oro Valley
by \ , Legal Advertising Manager
Subscribed ed and sworn to befhme t is 8th day of May 2006 .
JAMIE C. MACIAS � �� ,
�.-i .1 No'an Pubh -Arizona ry PubiiC in and for the County of Pima, State of Arizona
Pirna County
Expires 02/04/08 �\
My commission expires:
° NOTICE
101 "--GF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
ORO VALLEY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
In accordance with Sec.21.6.H 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
23,2006,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:
OV10-06-06:Robert Page,architect,
representing Jana and Brian Davies,
request for variance from the re-
quired Type"B"buffer yard(min.15
ft.)to a Type"A"buffer yard(min.10
ft.):eliminate required screening and
reduce required 40'building setback
to 20'along the north property line
between an R1-144 and R-S zone.
Subject Property: (parcel
#225-51-0130)located at 7780 N.Ora-
cle Road,Oro Valley,AZ,85704.
Site plans are available for review dur-
ing normal business hours at the Oro
Valley Town Hall,Development Service
Center. Persons interested may appear
in person,by agent or attorney,and the
petitioners must appear or be repre-
sented.Any person seeking further in-
formation on this request for a variance
may contact Dee Widero 229-4812 or
e-mail:dwidero@orovalley.net.
REQ: Sarah More,AICP
Planning and Zoning Administrator
PUBLISH:The Daily Territorial
May 8,2006
hrmay23ov10-06-06 a.s
•
NOTICE
OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
In accordance with Sec. 21.6.H 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 23, 2006, 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:
OV10-06-06: Robert Page, architect, representing Jana and Brian Davies, request
for variance from the required Type "B" buffer yard (min. 15 ft.) to a
Type "A" buffer yard (min. 10 ft.); eliminate required screening and
reduce required 40' building setback to 20' along the north property
line between an R1-144 and R-S zone. Subject Property: (parcel
#225-51-0130) located at 7780 N. Oracle Road, Oro Valley, AZ, 85704.
Site plans are available for review during normal business hours at the Oro Valley Town
Hall, Development Service Center. 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 229-4812 or e-mail:
dwidero@orovalley.net.
1
��.4 ,
: tom&
gE Sa / 1
rah More
,e,AICP
Planning and Zoning Administrator Posted: 5-4-0 6
Time: 9: 00 a.m.
By: sg
•
NOTICE
OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
In accordance with Sec. 21.6.H 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 23, 2006, 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:
OV10-06-06: Robert Page, architect, representing Jana and Brian Davies, request for variance from
the required Type"B"buffer yard(min. 15 ft.)to a Type"A"buffer yard(min. 10 ft.);
eliminate required screening and reduce required 40' building setback to 20' along the
north property line between an R1-144 and R-S zone. Subject Property: (parcel#225-
51-0130)located at 7780 N.Oracle Road,Oro Valley,AZ,85704.
Site plans are available for review during normal business hours at the Oro Valley Town Hall, Development
Service Center. 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 229-4812 or e-mail:dwidero@orovalley.net.
NOTICE
OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
In accordance with Sec. 21.6.H 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 23, 2006, 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:
OV10-06-06: Robert Page, architect, representing Jana and Brian Davies, request for variance from
the required Type"B"buffer yard(min. 15 ft.)to a Type"A"buffer yard(min. 10 ft.);
eliminate required screening and reduce required 40' building setback to 20' along the
north property line between an R1-144 and R-S zone. Subject Property: (parcel#225-
51-0130)located at 7780 N.Oracle Road,Oro Valley,AZ,85704.
Site plans are available for review during normal business hours at the Oro Valley Town Hall, Development
Service Center. 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 229-4812 or e-mail:dwidero@orovalley.net.
qpiwaiiii - 7.____( i 1ert.; i q
Mailliktiiiiigiallill
4--L-
111111 A •
iiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiii ' 1 .. 1111iii
- , al" is --flip .. 1/111/
■� ►4111111/0 ,;,,, Vigil., .- . -"`.,---:,k,44,, liii ♦ iii,,,,,411.1P,Tiiii..,Ikirsm,,.,
.
or ,,,,iii„ at
iii iiii
, 0,,,,e.,,, , , 1 _ . .....,,,,iiiiitit ir ,,,,....
,..., i
% dIVai
di**. ..„„, - ... „ ,
pr, =hi=47 ad iiiii.,
) 1:m,,,....'MON 0,* mir ,....iilli
- ° rifita 1111P'ilkiliti
,- / 11011:11r1B oilIPAII1 a lakiik
--B
.. M
/
Illg"Ilt V Er -
' / f-'4,ftiati,d,.: ,
1 i I I _ c' i I/ NMI ik smile"IA
2 ANN( Iiiiii „AI
0 al mar r 1
m airr
gaIL
l i Ai / ______L
i ,,
wmpli-lig 100 viiiiiimoilalik
,,
i • e INIENN Agit miff mmipTIO
, 11111111111 rii••
if
1111
00.
4 ig
1— . f"
-- i , , 0
___,,,____. I 1 cz, qi-19 cal
•
00
\\ii, I.""i r a nlis
1.-1•1 . ____
..-
tiiiii vir. _,
- :--' ,, — ......-
II_ ilk 1,11,_ Akr. , 11,
, lit Ilili
mil lialliiiiii Wi 101
iiiiiiim
_imp 4 I 1,*"
, t
_ PPF
iiiiiii
um — i _______________
, � .rt
"i . 1 I I f 1.W..LJ f I
DRAFT
MINUTES
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
REGULAR SESSION
APRIL 25, 2006
ORO VALLEY TOWN HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER at 3:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Colleen Kessler, Chair
John Hickey, Member
Bart Schannep, Member
Andy Martin, Member
EXCUSED: Paul Parisi, Vice Chair
MOTION: A motion was made by Member Hickey to approve the February 28, 2006
and March 28, 2006 minutes. Member Martin seconded the motion. The motion carried,
4-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. CASE NO. OV10-06-03: HARVEY BLAIR, REQUEST TO BUILD A 10' WALL
AND 14' ORNAMENTAL FEATURE WITH A STEEL GATE AT HIS FRONT
PROPERTY LINE. AT 11355 NORTH 1ST AVENUE (PARCEL 224-02-0380)
Harvey Blair, 11355 North First Avenue, explained that the request was to obtain
permission to build a block wall on the front property line. He reported that the wall
would be the full length of First Avenue frontage that would provide as a buffer for noise
reduction and a parameter for the safety and welfare of the surrounding properties.
There was discussion regarding the following issues:
• Would the wall provide a buffer for noise reduction and still remain aesthetically
pleasing to the neighborhood?
• Would there be any affect to drainage flow on the southeast side of the property
if a wall was constructed?
• What was the distance of the home from 1st Avenue?
• Will other homes in the community have walls constructed by Oro Valley?
• What would be the minimum height of the wall?
• Would the wall provide the safety the applicant was seeking?
De Widero, Senior Planning and Zoning Inspector, reviewed the staff report. She
reported that Mr. Blair was requesting to build a 284 linear foot wall. She reported that
the Tangerine Meadows lots 20-45 was a 16 lot subdivision; Pima County recorded the
04/25/06 Board of Adjustment 2
Minutes
subdivision in 1974, zoned as SR (Suburban Ranch). She reported that the Town of
Oro Valley annexed the subdivision in 1994, translating the area to R1-144. She
reported that the subject property was 144,613 square feet; rectangular shape that
meanders and slopes upward from 1st Avenue approximately 20 feet to the applicant's
home. She said that there was some drainage at the southeast corner of the property.
She reported that Jose Rodriguez, Engineering Division Manager, from the Town's
Public Works Department, stated that the proposed wall plan, if approved, would need a
review from engineering when submitting for a permit, but that it should not be an issue
as far as placement. However, she explained that Mr. Rodriguez suggested that the
Blair's wait to build the wall until all right-of-way improvements had been completed.
Staff finding of facts:
• The proposed wall will match architecturally to the existing home.
• The wall will be out of character from the other large open lots and surrounding
area.
• Property line walls are allowed without permit or approval up to 4 feet and 6
inches.
• This addition should not pose any other zoning issues.
Chair Kessler opened the public hearing and swore in the witnesses that were intending
to testify.
Bill Adler, 10720 North Eagle Eye Place, was opposed to the wall because it would be
in violation of the goals and policies identified in of the General Plan.
Sue Hayes, 11425 North 1st Ave, supported the request and did not consider the
structure to be obtrusive or obstruct any scenic routes, roadways, bike path but would
enhance the area as well as provide a barrier to reduce the noise level.
Tom Hayes, 11425 North 1st Ave, was in favor of the wall being erected and believed
that it would help alleviate some of the noise pollution created by the traffic flow.
Chair Kessler closed the public hearing.
MOTION: Member Schannep moved to APPROVE Case No. OV10-06-03, a request to
build a 10 foot wall with an ornamental feature of 14 feet and steel gate located at
11355 North 1st Avenue. Member Martin SECONDED the motion.
Discussion: Member Schannep pointed out that some properties in the immediate area
were allowed to install a wall, and that traffic was getting increasingly worse. He
explained that the applicant's property was impacted the most as well as some other
frontline properties in the area. He explained that the "special circumstances" were not
created by the owner but by the progress of Oro Valley. He stated that any home that
was subjected to loud traffic noises and traffic view would affect a homeowner's
"property rights". He explained that the variance for the wall was being granted to help
reduce the noise level and to shield the view of the busy road. He felt that this would not
be a granting of special privilege other than the need "preserve the preservation and
' M
04/25/06 Board of Adjustment 3
Minutes
enjoyment of substantial property rights". He added that the structure would not be
detrimental to the vicinity.
Member Martin explained that the applicant did not create the size, shape, topography
or surroundings, but that the area surrounding the home had changed over the years.
He stated that to have peace and quiet on your property was a property right and would
give the applicant some level of comfort.
Member Hickey did not support the motion and stated that he did not see a special
circumstance to the applicant's property that was unique, and he believed that the
variance would be a granting of "special privilege". He explained that he had concern
with Criteria #5 regarding safety and welfare in that the proposed structure would have
a zero lot line, and with the turnout proposed, any vehicle over 15 feet long would
automatically be in the public right-of-way as it waited for the gate to open on the
property.
Chair Kessler agreed that the property surroundings had changed over the years, and
she believed there was definitely some safety issues involved as it related to children
being on the property. She said that the applicant should be allowed to enjoy peace
and quiet, therefore agreed with the motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE
Motion carried, 3-1, with Member Hickey opposed.
2. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE UPDATES TO ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE
REVISED (OVZCR); BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS RULES AND
REGULATIONS AND BOARDS AND COMMISSION TRAINING MANUAL
Chair Kessler suggested not making any changes to the Rules and Procedures
Guidelines since the document had already been approved by the Town Council.
Discussion followed regarding:
• A memo from the Town attorney regarding an appeal of a variance.
• Amending the Zoning Code.
• The definition of what constitutes a board majority versus what constitutes
a quorum majority.
• The Rules and Procedure Handbook "member of conduct" section.
• Updating the "training manual".
Chair Kessler opened the floor for public comment.
Bill Adler, 10720 North Eagle Eye Place, explained that there were significant
differences in the information handed out at the Citizens Planning Institutes class that
relates to the Board of Adjustment and the Board's training manual, such as the ex-
parte and description of duties as well as conditional use permits. He suggested that
the Board address the issues and determine what process the Board would follow to be
consistent.
04/25/06 Board of Adjustment 4
Minutes
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: A motion was made by Member Hickey to adjourn the meeting at 4:21 p.m.
Member Schannep seconded the motion. Motion carried, 4-0.
Prepared by,
Linda Hersha, Office Specialist
AGENDA
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
REGULAR SESSION
MAY 23,2006
ORO VALLEY TOWN HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER: at or after 3:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
MINUTES Approval of the Minutes of April 25,2006
AT THE CALL OF THE CHAIR,THE AGENDA ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN IN ANY ORDER, AS DEEMED
APPROPRIATE.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. CASE NO. OV10-06-04: Sonoran Design Group representing Mike and Linda Arnold, request a
variance from the 18' building height, up to 20', when measured from natural grade on a custom
graded lot with a greater than 6% slope. Subject property: (Parcel 219-50-0300) 721 W. Sedona
Ridge,Oro Valley,AZ 85737.
2. CASE NO. OV10-06-05: Tom and Sue Hayes, request for a variance to build a wall varying in height
from 6'to 10'at the front property line, in Tangerine Meadows subdivision,zoned R1-144. Subject
property: (Parcel 224-02-0370) 11425 N. 1st.Avenue, Oro Valley,AZ 85737.
3. CASE NO. OV10-06-06: Robert Page,architect representing Jana and Brian Davies, request for a
variance from the Type"B" buffer yard (min. 15'); eliminate required screening and reduce required
40' building setback to 20'along the north property line abutting an R1-144 zone. Subject property:
(Parcel 225-51-0130)7780 N.Oracle Road,Oro Valley,AZ 85704.
4. 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.
"Notice of Possible Quorum of the Oro Valley Town Council: In accordance with
Chapter 3, Title 38, Arizona Revised Statutes and Section 2-4-2 of the Oro Valley Town
Code, a majority of the Town Council may attend the above referenced meeting as a
member of the audience only."
Posted: 5-19-06 4:30 p.m. lh
I
MINUTES
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
REGULAR SESSION
MAY 23, 2006
ORO VALLEY TOWN HALL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER: at or after 3:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Paul Parisi, Chair
Bart Schannep, Vice Chair
Colleen Kessler, Member
John Hickey, Member
EXCUSED: Andy Martin, Member
MOTION: A motion was a motion to approve the minutes of April 25, 2006. The
motion carried unanimously, 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. CASE NO. OV10-06-04: SONORAN DESIGN GROUP REPRESENTING MIKE
AND LINDA ARNOLD, REQUEST A VARIANCE FROM THE 18' BUILDING
HEIGHT, UP TO 20', WHEN MEASURED FROM NATURAL GRADE ON A
CUSTOM GRADED LOT WITH A GREATER THAN 6% SLOPE. SUBJECT
PROPERTY: (PARCEL 219-50-0300) 721 W. SEDONA RIDGE, ORO VALLEY,
AZ 85737
Chair Parisi swore in all witnesses that were intending to testify.
Thomas Spevak, Project Manager for Sonoran Design Group, explained that the
variance was in regards to an 18 foot height limit from the natural grade. He explained
that the topography at the homesite shows a low natural grade at the center of the
proposed custom home placement, and a parapet of 15 feet and 18 inches above the
low spot exceeds 18 feet from the natural grade for a small portion of structure.
Zoning Inspector Patty Hayes reported that Mike and Linda Arnold were requesting
approval to build a house on a custom graded lot with a slope greater than 6%. She
explained that the building heights are measured from natural grade on lots with a slope
greater than 6%. She reported that the 10 feet of foundation and the 3.5 feet of fill
exceeded the allowable building height of 18 feet by 2 feet because the natural grade at
certain points of the building was significantly lower than that of other parts of the
building site. She explained that the amount of fill dirt accounts for a portion of the
allowable building height.
05/23/06 Board of Adjustment 2
Minutes
Ms. Hayes reported that Sunridge II was a 65-lot subdivision, recorded in Oro Valley in
1995, zoned R1-20. She said that the subject property was a 29,215 square foot,
square shaped lot, and the lot had a floodplain to the west, and conservation easements
on the south and east, and a slope easement on the north.
Staff finding of facts:
• Lot 22 has a 12% slope under the house pad.
• The building area of lot 22 is restricted by slop, conservation and floodplain
easements on all sides. Driveways are allowed in the slope easement and
screen walls allowed only with homeowner's association approval.
• The building walls, including parapet, vary from 12 feet to 16 feet and 6
inches in height.
• The section of house in question is 15 feet 8 inches from finished floor, 16
feet and 5 inches from finished grade, but exceeds the 18 feet from natural
grade.
• The applicant states the building has been redesigned so as to minimize
parapet elevations, and that the structural components and approved design
prevents further lowering of the parapet.
Chair Parisi opened the public hearing and swore in all witnesses that were intending to
testify.
Patrick Lewis, 704 West Sedona Ridge Place, stated that he could not support the
variance because of the height of the home, and the retaining wall. He believed that
this would create a potential impact on future home development. He proceeded to
distribute photographs of the site and identified specific locations surrounding the home
to describe how the home would impact the neighborhood.
Chair Parisi closed the public hearing.
Mr. Spevak pointed out that one the issues addressed in designing the roof parapet
height was the surrounding homes and their view corridors and he felt confident that the
adjustment would not obstruct any neighboring home's views.
There was discussion regarding the following topics:
• Alternatives for the retaining wall.
• Alternatives for the parapet height and location.
• The possibility of lowering the home for less fills.
• Would there be room to move the structure south using the same design.
• How was the topography causing the special circumstances?
• How was criteria item #3 being met?
Gary Moreno the owner of the Sonora Design Group explained that the Lewis's view
quarters would not be affected or blocked in any way. He reviewed the site using
photos and diagrams of the area.
MOTION: Member Hickey moved to approve Case OV10-06-04, a request to
exceed the 18 feet building height up to 2 feet when measuring building height from
05/23/06 Board of Adjustment 3
Minutes
existing grade on a grater the 6% slope, with the caveat that it not exceed what has
been currently shown to the Board. Member Kessler seconded the motion. Motion
carried, 4-0.
2. CASE NO. OV10-06-05: TOM AND SUE HAYES, REQUEST FOR A
VARIANCE TO BUILD A WALL VARYING IN HEIGHT FROM 6' TO 10' AT
THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, IN TANGERINE MEADOWS SUBDIVISION,ZONED R1-144. SUBJECT PROPERTY: (PARCEL 224-02-0370) 11425 N. 1sr.
AVENUE, ORO VALLEY, AZ 85737
Chair Parisi opened the public hearing and swore in all witnesses that were intending to
testify.
Tom Hayes, 11425 North 1st Avenue, explained that the request was to build a wall on
the property line along 1st Avenue to block the noise and sight of traffic. He explained
that the wall would vary in height from 6 feet on the north end (where the topography
rises) to 10 feet on the south end to tie into the neighbor's wall.
Senior Zoning Inspector Dee Widero reported that Tom and Sue Hayes were requesting
to build a 220 linear foot wall ranging in height from 6 feet to 10 feet, on or within 10 feet
of the front property line. She explained that from the front property line to the closest
portion of the main structure, a wall could be no higher than 4 feet 6 inches. She said
that from the front of the main structure extending the full width of the lot, running back
toward the rear of the property, a wall may be higher than 4 feet 6 inches and any wall 6
feet or higher was required to obtain a building permit.
Staff finding of facts:
• The proposed wall will match the architecture of the existing home.
• The wall will match or blend with the proposed wall that Mr. Blair, the
neighbor to the south has proposed to build.
• Property line walls are allowed without permit or approval up to 4 feet and
6 inches.
• This addition should not pose any other zoning issues.
There was discussion regarding:
• The height of the sound abatement walls Oro Valley intended to install on
other properties in the neighborhood.
• When and how was it determined which section of 1st Avenue would get
the noise barriers.
• The proposed wall gate height.
• Could noise be considered a contributing factor in a special circumstance?
Chair Parisi opened the public hearing and swore in all witnesses that were intending to
testify.
Bill Adler, 10720 North Eagle Eye Place, stated that walls had virtually no impact on
noise and that there was no such thing as sound abatement with walls. He explained
that the only thing that would absorb sound was earth and berm. He stated that the
05/23/06 Board of Adjustment 4
Minutes
Board should review the request objectively and adhere to the Zoning Code because he
did not believe all of the five standards had been met.
Julianne Herrera, 501 East Monaco Place, said that he had no problem with the
variance as long as it improved the area and was aesthetically pleasing and was made
of good quality materials. He explained that he did have some concern with the Hayes'
water line on the northeast corner of the property. He explained that because the line
encroached onto his property, he hoped that staff would look into the matter.
Harvey Blair, 11355 North 1st Avenue, was in support of the variance request and
believed the wall would improve the appearance of the area.
Chair Parisi closed the public hearing.
Mr. Hayes stated that the special circumstances did apply to the topography because
his home did sit on a hill which was affected more by the sound of traffic than the lower
line properties.
MOTION: Member Kessler moved to approve Case No. OV10-06-05, a request to build
a wall varying in height from 6 feet to 10 feet on the front property line for R1-144 zone,
located at 11425 North 1st Avenue. Vice Chair Schannep seconded the motion. Motion
carried, 3-1, with Member Hickey opposed.
3. CASE NO. OV10-06-06: ROBERT PAGE, ARCHITECT REPRESENTING
JANA AND BRIAN DAVIES, REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE TYPE
"B" BUFFER YARD (MIN. 15'); ELIMINATE REQUIRED SCREENING AND
REDUCE REQUIRED 40' BUILDING SETBACK TO 20' ALONG THE NORTH
PROPERTY LINE ABUTTING AN R1-144 ZONE. SUBJECT PROPERTY:
(PARCEL 225-51-0130) 7780 N. ORACLE ROAD, ORO VALLEY,AZ 85704
Chair Parisi opened the public hearing and swore in all witnesses that were intending to
testify.
Robert Page, the architect for the project reviewed the variance request application. He
explained that the applicant was requesting a variance from a Type "B" buffer yard to a
Type "A" buffer yard along the north property line between R1-144 and R-S zones. He
reported that this would eliminate 5 feet of the screening required along the north
property line between R1-144 and R-S zones and reduce 40 feet of building setback
along the north property line to a 20 feet setback.
Senior Zoning Inspector Dee Widero reviewed the report. She explained that Robert
Page, the architect for the property owners had designed and submitted two concept
plans for the site. She explained that the first site plan met the zoning requirements; The
second plan was more desirable to the owners but requires a variance approval. She
said that site plan #2 was a court yard setting, confining the business activity to the
center of the complex and, providing an enjoyable area for the future tenants as well as
being less intrusive to abutting properties. However, she explained that in order to
construct the proposed site plan #2, the builder would need relief from the required 40
foot setback. She explained that the applicant was asking to encroach by 20 feet into
05/23/06 Board of Adjustment 5
Minutes
the required setback along the north property line only. She reported that the plan did
meet all other required setbacks. She explained that the required Type "B" buffer yard
was per Section 27.6.E Table 27.7 and Table 27-11, requiring at minimum a width of 15
feet; the request was to reduce to a type "A" with a 10 foot minimum width, per Table
27-10 (the same table is required along the south property line.) In addition, she
explained that the applicant was also requesting to eliminate the 5 foot screening
requirement along the north boundary line completely, but that the screening was not
required along the south property line, however; it was required at the east or rear of the
property:
Staff finding of facts:
• The two plans submitted are concept plans only, and there may be other
conditions that do not meet Code, that will be addressed with a later
process.
• All variance requests are solely for the north property line. The applicant
will meet the requirements of all three issues on the south and east
boundaries.
• The parcel to the north is vacant and undisturbed.
• A 10 foot minimum buffer yard is the requirement for the south boundary
and at least a 15 foot is required on the east. The plan meets Code on the
east boundary.
• Screening is a requirement for the north and east side; The plan meets
Code on east boundary.
• The proposed construction will be built to architecturally match and
enhance the existing building on site.
• The applicant has submitted a plan#1 that is in compliance.
• The General Plan supports commercial and development to the north on a
site fronting Oracle Road.
Discussion followed regarding:
• Changing the 40 foot setback requirements.
• The modification of the buffer yard requirements.
• If the request to eliminate the 5 foot screen was denied would the wall be
extended only to the new building project or would it be extended to the entire
length of the north side of the property?
• The difference between the landscaping and the buffer.
• Non-Conforming Use.
• The differences between Type "A" and Type "B".
MOTION: Vice Chair Schannep moved to approve Case No. OV10-06-06, in regards to
reducing the required 40 foot building setback to 20 feet along the northern side, but not
the granting of a variance for the screening. Member Kessler seconded the motion.
Discussion: Vice Chair Schannep explained that he had no problem in recommending
the reduction in the setback because of the existing building setbacks. He explained
that he did have some concerns regarding granting something special that might affect
future owners in the northern corridor of the neighborhood and their quality of life.
05/23/06 Board of Adjustment 6
Minutes '
Chair Parisi opened the public hearing. There being no speakers, the public hearing
was closed.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Vice Chair Schannep moved to allow the Type "A" buffer
yard 10 foot minimum as opposed to the Type "B" buffer yard at the 15 foot minimum
that is required that has been requested. Member Kessler seconded the motion.
Member Kessler stated that it was difficult to make a ruling on an assumption, but if the
Board wanted to keep it to a minimum, then she did not have any objection to
eliminating the 5 foot required screen wall.
Chair Parisi agreed about leaving the screen because the screening could be removed
if the northern property became a commercial property.
MOTION with amendment carried, 4-0.
4. PLANNING AND ZONING UPDATE
Planning and Zoning Administrator Sarah More announced the following upcoming
meetings and projects:
• The Arizona Department of Commerce would be sponsoring their annual Boards
and Commission Conference in the Phoenix metro area in November.
• The Town Council was currently reviewing the budget for the Fiscal Year
2006/2007.
• Planning and Zoning is fully staffed after several months of being short staff.
• Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission are currently working on the
departments' Work Plan.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: A motion was made by Member Hickey to adjourn the meeting at 4:37 p.m.
Member Kessler seconded the motion. Motion carried, 4-0.
Prepared by,
Linda Hersha, Office Specialist