HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV109302 •
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
In accordance with Section 1-505 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised and
Arizona Revised Statutes Section 9-462.06,
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Oro Valley Board of Adjustment will hold a
special meeting and public hearing on Tuesday, July 13, 1993 at or after 1:00
p.m. at the Oro Valley Town Hall, 11,000 N. La Canada Drive, Oro Valley,
Arizona with regard to the following case:
OV10-93-2 New World Construction Request for Variance
Lot 34, Desert Mirage at T a Reserve
A request for variance on the building setback requirements of the
La Reserve Planned Area Development, which stipulate a 5 foot
minimum side yard. Such variance, if approved, would allow a 4
foot side yard setback.
Persons interested may appear in person, by agent or attorney, and petitioners
on the variance request must appear or be represented.
4AL---) - I
teve Hagedorn,
g ,
Planning and Zoning Director
PUB: The Daily Territorial
June 24 , 1993
10-93-2\nd
Case No.
STATE OF ARIZONA )
TOWN OF ORD VALLEY )
I hereby certify that on
I caused to be delivered, a legal notice regarding the
above-mentioned case to be published in the
e8
on
A copy of public hearing notice is on file in the Oro
Valley Town Hall.
I hereby certify that on
I mailed individual letters to all agencies and
individuals as required, together with notice of publish
hearing and specific map involved, if any.
I hereby certify that on
I caused to be posted the subject property in the above-
mentioned case.
!, r
Administrative Assistant
Planning and Development Svcs.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of
19 9
Notary Public
My commission expires:
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF ARIZONA)
:ss.
COUNTY OF PIMA 1 being first
i....oret;t;<:i. III : t.tirt
duly sworn, deposes and says that (he) (she) is the Legal Advertising Manager
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT of THE DAILY TERRITORIAL, a daily newspaper printed and published in the
In accordance with Section 1-505
of the Oro Valley Zoning Code
Revised and Arizona Revised
Statutes Section 9-462.06, County of Pima, State of Arizona, and of general circulation in the City of Tucson,
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that
the Oro Valley Board of Adjust-
ment will hold a special meeting
and public hearing on Tuesday, County of Pima, State of Arizona and elsewhere, and the hereto attached
July 13, 1993 at or after 1:00
p.m.at the Oro Valley Town Hall,
11,000 N. La Canada Drive, Oro
Valley,Arizona with regard to the
following case:
OV10-93-2: New World Con-
struction Request for Variance
Lot 34, Desert Mirage at La Re- New N l::i r I ci f-.0 t:!nstr o I'I
serve
A request for variance on the
building setback requirements of
the La Reserve Planned Area
Development,which stipulate a 5
foot minimum side yard. Such
variance, if approved, would al-
low a 4 foot side yard setback. was printed and published correctly in the regular and entire issue of said THE
Persons interested may appear
in person, by agent or attorney,
and petitioners on the variance
request must appear or be repre- DAILY TERRITORIAL for issues; that the first was made
stinted.
Signature for Steve Hagedorn,
Planning and Zoning Director
Pub: The Daily Territorial on the day of 1,9
June 24, 1993
Req: Town of Oro Valley
hrnewwor 6/24/93 ss
and the last publication thereof was made on the t h day of
19 ;that said publication
was made on each of the following dates,to-wit:
06/ :4/
Request of
..l..l::i 1AI f',I OF: Of 0:::i V A
Daily Territorial
By /-�
Subscribed and orn tO bef�-t-his y
da of
•t '
19
C. C .,
Notary Public in and for the County of Pima, State of Arizona
Th
My Commission Expires: 2 �- �� I
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737 , ..di
...........,' , -...,„, ,5„,,,,...
T „ft ,,....,
1 — *
,.. ,,:•:F = .... , .. ..':.:,. .• • ,,,,,
P.13,MFTER *
somas U.S. POSTAGE :
/t)- ./
Xel
'•-•ik).1111kc.-•N /°\(5 "-v.
Capitol Bui ing Group of Arizona
\) 3300 S. Par er Rd.
Aurora CO 0014
1 LERESCE
tii\il(I'lC'il N c ,
RETURN 10 SENDER
'•---.- ----1/4, ,
,c)
u:....
, o
0.)
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ,113- i...,l,,„e0„-0,,•
_•i"-,--.
..•:;; ' _i.. --.r..f..-...,.;. __ -•----•72-)"-_' _
11000N. LACANADADR. -
ORO VALLEY ARIZONA 85737 f
N24'93
1,... 9.
. -........ ar , se......,.
5004548 U.S. POSTAGE :
MA 3V
W) '
r g0/4°
16414 )4'na-3011P‘'
Ott°1" arA SS):'m Capitol Building Group of Arizona
(e14 vog4-- 3300 S. Parker Rd.
Aurora CO 80014
THIS IS A i
Bli NESS WMPLE/1
11,00 Wt
pareEss m.utitsi i6iNctcoti:BUittri Not...
*I , •
A°ORFSSEL '— , fi " ' '
-aj 0, , Z- , 11
- A K t‘NI 0 V4 1\1 " ' "', o••• ' (.:0
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY s , -� .... _r_-,..,
11000 N. LA CANADA DR. tiG P 11 �='', J O\l ,;. ..
ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737
/\ , •as ks ` .1v..r,.:
22.,E3j I N22'93 "r
V 3 3 „ *'0"...'raaaa
+....:v..: ,, '4 R(i,:,› PB.METER
""`„g 4,- 4244 5004548lIFQIGF :
i i- ' 4- ,„1-1 tez..,
V
10 ejfi ) 'i ,.yam•,.e. 10;
i..,, t vyie6/6 ,,,...6 4
fLOA..
u90 Ta Reserve Apartments Joint Venture
1 II ,,, � A'I`I'N: Reid Butler
4455 E. Camelback Rd. Suite 220B
f, t)I.' I5
Phoenix, AZ 85018
r {
1
/ - - ill Iiff'id.it.,i.,till.i.i t,!.0 1i„Ilfttim441114(il.,(14110l1300,414-ii #i
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY CMG' 1,•.#.;�- _, "4Y ,,.�
. I `d"ti ,, . - - �„m.
11000 N. LA CANADA DR. ti- w-� 4,�. r "'
ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737 ;
.- __—r^.. 4 ,j 2 F. •..... a _. , 1 - . ._'";.2 i• ' : ,,,
, .
q R 11," P.B.METER it
"F 5004548 U.S. POSTAGE
.'. -,),41lp 0
RECEt
VD
La Rese e is Joint Venture
ATTN: Reid Bu ler :JUN
281993
4455 E. Camelback Rd. Suite 220B
Phoenix, AZ 85018 TOWN of ORO VALLEY
!Ili IIlFl4IIII IIIIII1111E1I11:l1111111sI Islit Illi,t I,i,illl
G.)
q� � ,, __.��.,-_:. R.,.,�._„�..,
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY v " `�r'•'� "` ��' �'` •
11000 N. LA CANADA DR. U • • ' •*--�--
ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737 '' `,� °
Icy��
/ R ,, , re" --.. , N?419 3 ip; .►:,. * Mg44N.rN
r�. 01
_DP'1T:: ...,
/ ¢_Q�/ 4 rj 1-i' P.B.METER
,,N 5004548 U.S.POSTAGE
P '
.,,w•- •,-,—- Ji:...- - ., .41016-vri
"ili,'..* v. c
0 f
Fl" ti v d■YES
40 La Reserve ity Association ; z,
P.O. Bob 06 J(.."V 2 8 1993
Phoenix, AZ 85076
TOWN of p 0 VALLEY
,
i,:z.) P ri 0-- ...)c s o 44\1114. '''''''...,---- .•...,04,41"1.3.01.47,,,
ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737 'i 4, • ."'""'rigi......w
\\ JUN J U 2 493 N '
, -,...r, ,..,. ,-;,sr•ili,,,-:,...7,,,,,,....0, , _,,L39?)
ittltilV5 4R1-1-. P.I3,METER
5004548 U.S. POSTAGE :
.
0 NUG A
993
oto\lam
li 1 ..--(t,t,014' Imo 0
n AY \ Jay and Carolyn Murray
1031 N. Desert Mirage Way
kecp '' Oro Valle
-.1,:i14:1:;:•-•;::31:!is ,..,:k i::‘:7:11'.7 F31)0 7 Ti r:'9 E!
HURRY
niziltifg:irfliol; T-,CME: IFYF-IRED ,,,,i
f°,4•73 1.4.1LI L11.4 21:1:01:21 TRL.
t_IITLFIrtil CO ttit1):./.;ji:•-•',,,F.i.';'
1,-;:c:"ItiFii-.4 TO ::::;":".NFIER
iiwItildhiliiiiiiiiiniftiiiiiiiiiiiiil,iitilikiii
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY e...
•(1........— l'or'r --Tft. 0
11000 N. LA CANADA DR. (..?
---) i i: M
ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737 .\- ---• :
n2 2JUN) I:'
,
/393 •••.mo........." / , illk a.'. ... *
* 4
RECLIVED x1R1-7,..> P.B.METER *
5004548 U.S. POSTAGE :
AUG 1 ? 1993
Town of Oro Valley
0-1 \Jay and Carolyn Murray
),.. pA...1.0.1.1. N. Desert Mirage Way
\ V. Oro Valle ----
\ MURR'5.:47,..*:ti .11-1E7372'....'Y.:' :129-..,..! f.!8/71.1../9:-.1
F,E15:1..ilf.11,4:01.t,IG TIME E'.:-1*
il LIR F?Y
I-114 7 3 I.kil:Li...I:az.= BROOM 1"RL
1...ITI.LEETEIN ?al ACI.I.2S-1.42.1::)
RETURN Til : .ENDER
ibarz ,,,.........
.............._...............____.______..........
c)c,--0 , Al'''..., ,..., . vi.---7-_TI J
*
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY - ..:,,, p g—60,- cr5i. 4174.ti4.1,7::iill'7.'71'"ag • •,T.R i E S.,I ,..i #-- ,. *
11000 N. LA CANADA DR.
ORO VALLEY,ARIZONA 85737 A k --1: 4\7- 'U'Tr:c.c scr-TTS..;
i; , .. ..: .i: 4 1..,)....b 4*)I•. \ •
7 L. .**!):*.Zi ?MR •:.
/. • , . ,
*
* 1
0 IlL i
...4.5 1 8 U.S.POSTAGE
it
inkcar.......___Amsa.....................
i ATTIMPTID NOT
. • ... La ::erve Community Association
.is,,11' i i Lit ii INSUFFICHST rOONPII1____.
r •a.0 - 1440 ,e_"-a e7dro
.... ....
JUN .-:p -
, 09i ..-- .,.-;. AZ ;" 6 7 '' AFT____
Oablblj sc161/ I 1 FONWARDWO ORDER SIPIREILL—
Tr,
''ffil?nf eA'K IV, , 4•40VED LEFT*0 ADIMPAS-
+1:41-14-147+77friTtrilitilifi itii ti 1 tit li i lit
.r.,
w_EY qy/�
o° °� TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
PLANNING STAFF REPORT
A TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
°vh'DED
MEETING DATE: JULY 13, 1993
TO: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS
FROM: Steve Hagedorn, Planning and Zoning Director
SUBJECT: Status Report - Zoning Code Revisions
SUMMARY:
Per the Chairman's request, the following information is supplied as to the current status of Zoning
Code Amendments under consideration which deal with certain variance/modification procedures.
1. Hillside Development Zone
Subsequent to the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation for approval of a
draft Hillside Development Zone ordinance, the Council met in study session, considered
the draft, and elected to return it to the Commission for further study. The HDZ ordinance
includes amendments addressing building height and number of stories. Adoption of same
would eliminate the DRB's authority to approve modifications (variances) to building height
and number of stories in the Town.
Due to an inordinately heavy workload, the Commission was not able to agenda the matter
for public hearing until its upcoming July 20th meeting. It is anticipated that the
Commission will receive input and study the draft ordinance for approximately two meetings
before making its recommendation to Council. This schedule is subject to change,
however, based on workload and other concerns which may arise out of the public hearing
process. Historically, public hearings on the HDZ have been well-attended by rather vocal
developers and/or their attorneys, who provide the Commission with points to ponder from
the land developer's perspective.
2. Lot Development Option
The Board of Adjustment is empowered to hear and decide upon requests for setback
variances (like the one under consideration today). In the past, the same request for
setback variance could have been brought to the DRB under the Lot Development Option
procedure. As of March 17, 1993, Article 13-5, Lot Development Option, has been removed
from the Zoning Code, leaving all requests for setback variances to the Board of
Adjustment.
page 2
3. Sign Code Modifications
Section 12-206 of the Zoning Code currently permits the DRB to hear and decide upon any
request for modification to the existing regulations for permanent signs, i.e. size, color,
materials of construction and illumination. This section, along with the rest of the Oro Valley
Sign Code (Chapter 12), has been re-drafted by Staff for consideration by the Planning and
Zoning Commission. The new draft excludes Sec. 12-206, which, if adopted, will eliminate
the DRB modification procedure for permanent signs. As is the case with any requests for
variance to the Zoning Code regulations, then, such sign variance requests would come
before the Board of Adjustment.
The new draft Sign Code has been discussed at several meetings, and the document has
been through several revisions. Public hearing has been scheduled for August 3, 1993 and
it is anticipated that, unless other concerns are brought up at that meeting, the revised Sign
Code should be recommended for approval to the Council.
4. Grading Variances
A new Grading Ordinance was adopted by the Town Council on February 17, 1993. The
new ordinance is a part of the Oro Valley Town Code, rather than the Zoning Ordinance,
and, as such, variances for grading may be considered by the Development Review Board.
The proper board to consider grading variances was an issue discussed at some length at
the Commission level and, finally, it was decided that the DRB, which is permitted to be a
bit more subjective in its decisions, in terms of aesthetics, etc., would be the appropriate
board to consider such requests.
I\rnemos\boamod.rpt
4
t,�UE Y ,
°Q° °� TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
f
117". ;
' �'�`� �� PLANNING STAFF REPORT
= = TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
-NDED,
MEETING DATE: JULY 13, 1993
TO: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS
FROM: Steve Hagedorn, Planning and Zoning Director
SUBJECT: OV10-93-2 NEW WORLD HOMES DEVELOPMENT REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE TO SIDE YARD SETBACK
LOT 34, DESERT MIRAGE, LA RESERVE P.A.D.
SUMMARY:
Desert Mirage subdivision was platted in 1986 and Capitol Building Group, shortly thereafter, began
construction of zero lot line homes within this subdivision. The project was eventually abandoned
by Capitol Building Group and, in early 1993, it was taken over by New World Homes.
New World Homes, wishing to provide a more "open" appearance in the subdivision, has elected
to use 5 foot side yard setbacks, which is in conformance with the La Reserve PAD. On one
particular lot, Lot 34, this does not appear to be possible. The lot has a narrow frontage,
compared to others in the subdivision, and is further constrained due to the fact that the overhang
of the home on the adjacent Lot 35 actually encroaches onto Lot 34 by approximately 2 (??) feet.
New World requests approval of an approximate 1 foot variance on the side yard setback, allowing
the home on Lot 34 to be placed approximately 4 feet, 6 inches from property line and 6 feet from
the wall of the home on Lot 35. Such approval would allow the builder to place the smallest model
in the New World product line on this property, and still maintain other required setbacks. Planning
Staff has consulted with the Town's Building Official on this matter, and we have been advised that
the proposed variance will satisfy the Uniform Building Code, provided:
1. There is a minimum 6 foot separation between buildings; and
2. The 1 foot, 6 inch projection, toward the rear of the house, is either eliminated, or
that that portion of the home have a 1-hour construction (three coat plaster system).
Additionally, this projection cannot have penetrations, i.e. windows or glass block.
Staff has also consulted with the Town Engineer regarding the opposite side yard setback from
the street and Mr. DeGrood is satisfied that Model 1 may be placed, as per the site plan attached,
and will still meet the required sight visibility triangles.
y i
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff concurs with the applicant, that a hardship has been created, not of his doing, by the
narrowness of the lot frontage, as platted by the original developer, and the encroachment of the
existing home on Lot 35. As such, Staff would have no objection to approval of this variance
request, provided the Board makes the following findings:
A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in
the application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not
apply to other properties in the district; and
B. That special circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant; and
C. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights; and
D. That any variance granted imposes such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of
the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located;
and
E. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in
the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general.
Attachments:
1. BOA application
2. Site Plan for Lot 34
APPLICATION NO. OV
OR
of.. 44
REQUEST
- - FOR $~ !il VARIANCE " r-
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 0
age
1. APPLICANT'S NAME . NEW WORLD DEVELOPMENT
2. ADDRESS 5055 E. Broadway
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER 745-9800
4. PROPERTY OWNER NEW WORLD-DESERT MIRAGE LTD. PARTNERSHIP
ADDRESS s05,5 F- Rrna clway
TELEPHONE NUMBER 745-9800T19( 14 AFC
5. ADDRESS OR LEGAL LOTI/ 34, DESERT MIRAGE
DESCRIPTION OF
SUBJECT PROPERTY
LA RESERVE
LOT NO. 34 ; LOT SIZE 6384j ; ACRES - ; ZONED SPECIFIC PLAN
6. WHAT PROVISION OF THE Provision within specific plan requiring 10 foot seperation
ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE
REVISED ARE YOU -��twePr homPc
REQUESTING A VARIANCE.
7. STATE BRIEFLY AND FULLY THE REASONS WHY THE VARIANCE IS DEEMED NECESSARY:
LOT# 34 is a corner lot and has the narrowest street frontage of any lot in the
subdivision. To compound this,the house on the adjacent LOT#(35) encroaches on to
LOT# (34) approximately 2 feet. In order to be able to fit our smallest approved
model on LOT# 34 and still comply with the front setback requirement, we are requesting
a sideyard variance to allow the construction of a home on LOT# 34 to be within 4} feet of
the encroaching house on LOT# 35. The owner of LOT# 35 concurs with this variance
request.
LA RESERVE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
P.O. BOX 40790
TUCSON, ARIZONA 85717
(602) 722-6500
June 24 , 1993
Mr. Steve Hagedorn
Planning and Zoning Director
Oro Valley Board of Adjustment
11000 North La Canada
Oro Valley, Arizona 85737
RE: 0V10-93-2 New World Construction Request for Variance
Lot 34, Desert Mirage at La Reserve
Dear Mr. Hagedorn:
On behalf of the La Reserve Community Association, we wish to
advise you that the La Reserve Community Association Architectural
Review Committee (ARC) has not received a submittal for the above
referenced variance, and therefore has not had the opportunity to
review and approve or deny this variance.
Unless plans are submitted to the Association' s ARC and approved
prior to the Oro Valley Board of Adjustment special meeting and
public hearing scheduled for July 13 , 1993 , we request a
continuance by the Board of Adjustment on this matter. The La
Reserve Community Association and ARC would appreciate your
assistance in ensuring that the ARC approves of this proposed
variance before its being reviewed by the Oro Valley Board of
Adjustment.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Ill/
Patrick O'Hagin
Stratford Management
For the La Reserve Community Association
And The Architectural Review Committee
/dmm
• ,✓ "i 7.> 3 '.'7�" a .;..1 r* �s,y "' F'-,` .1 t.R.-sa ,� yar •.' ''''''_+" y ._r
�s�,�.�� 2«�t pµ. ``� s r , „i1� r t ^,� 'f o.���W � �> ',.;.,� ��i� ;r, r. ,�,,.;!� ?+7t.fit'
T �
:.t
�,.,.3, e,-, r,+. -,,,,TX,Sri " wy i.,w .ag• •:447t+CA rc:wwt3w.".L .,�+r.'41,� ,�+ �'.
i ,7 Yt. ••.t Mfa 4 r,�. p .sue j� y. Y v. '. .
art 1 ,{
iy tlrw
I's
;+.N h a .,a 1 ...•w, w,,. 4 * ':,rl►� �A•- ;'y;, .i•4 `.� e � y•a,.*.,-+1. • ..i.r. it �. .. .. ww, .. t,
)R'S RECORD MAP DO .
s . . .
FOR REFERENCEONLY
• .
,. .
SECTION 7 TOWNSHIP
12 SOUTH RANGE 14 EAST
�•
P4 ISSO� T •••••••• M10.00' '��
1 LOT 1 . P { _
S•.•SAC. O a`• 4tP. !i.
.
•
........ I—hi*. 2 20 ; 09 go fi .6t -.
,,yy�+ • 114 10440 IV-1
r ..A .A LOT l•...I,_/.. ..` ..;�� ,� , •. '� sr: �1 ' .
•
i , A ; 'q .•' «• , .A hC2 • i
- 2 A.,'40'.0 Or -ein t ,,,sli. 0 _„oh
4. vr- /9 • he......ovin,..4 \f2\ k
s, I. ‘ or,/ . 4,..„ .)., vi ,--, . :041„k;ove%
ti
; , .;;.,./7. '''' 0 .
___ 220- IC
. ;• .. 41/75 IMP
...
/ (... q) --1'4 )4 \f
...•. 4•• .. ....•._ ' `'1 ',1-•- A
L.O 4
IS CM. , /MO ES.�ERV E220- 14
•5-57
°••
OSA
//////////// / . `re /41
'� ER Rt�N
33 O t tli . • 1: 1.63
omit vmwimh i, ; ' V74 li&P scAL
V Ifir .111W r
`il r N.M 44 w S4408' , N SS Ww sS iUI
ashes
7 20 - 10
' 1
•
2._ 2..
. , -, ...
0 of D0 gJ
. .
, , .ti
• ;,v •
.
ASSESSOR'
S RECORD MAP
DESERT MIRAGE
AT LA RESERVE a OR4 ESN•T
• 220�ioA /MT> PG
LOTS1-50at-� COONSet
.+ ce!'2et�•._n 'Q—r--N8?'SQ`s:"G'�OF�26'��,E,e_-ny•,._ _ - -
t¢/A 9a66 m 77.66 7963 76.Ts
AREAS54,5,4:3__, �� " 72 73JIIQ sz Qt 7� r to ON +GOB 130 �
0lO 7135 SrZ 7649 SF a 7607Sr �' 70B'Sc ;
,,� DETAIL �,` �`
'ice �.fSE2' _�lEl—
6. ` �...•- t-ter--
7O -,t .� , t� i• -j_ e„, --—� c t SONORQ-N o• f
�O t �e V• / 'Cis 4 et.
L' -... ,� tr y',,—1/25'
.f `4�.. '•�/ DESERT DRIVE 1
/' O —:c x x r 3o i
UNSUBDI!DEC .a «e.�r. / 7 °cy �� A 4 26 ');": �K
,' Q, ,.` 68 , ..„ / rro.'G-. DLO Qr �� j : 9562 S� N
f� ��0,� %. ,,- '' N ti t Q Dt 1 t /^8o'
CV•
eC y1"�'► 67 °,� , C •',''' / 04,(�^' 101 °• .; CIE / s�°I*
`� / / ® !•• 'S we ! b �`� astri DE:TA q
t 1... LENGTH
`�66 °i .S,/�yA i 9 1CD•ilw- )°r / i ti y4 .^ / 2 jjj
I32Q 00 tIJt`i tCe
t/ / i ocp / o•
11.°, . •. , . t4s or ss sr
q,• �+d; ,y ,Q' �g f • ,� fl i, ;. ?,. / l 'L e g (V 9 2s•33'. 50.00c' ss u'
.3 $ /Eo'�\,'/ ��.` ,.., / ?' �x 4., O• ,i' +i�P�G� Q 12 7S•3�,; Tt 7' i 3.3
i ,1�64 e LY
` �' �� ', 1�, F / �ti"���,:E°y aJ 13 53 35• 1i4.00'130 12.
1 O �. 71 / i ®� i 9B °r ^9 �q y` tf- 63.►36� 100 0: t(:.Z�
1 •� / / 0, 4t hf0 c sA IN''�,aE -' 6� 91 ii. 45'w!i• leov w38
_ �s'ss per
mil'., sr Q+ �`' / •c, %,P r : �+ tt. ar os.�. 2;.0=
r '• e 10 C �! ' 3aor os?
C';� °�_ �r /,..' ,I .•.�llv.1 97 °r ,� ,;►t ► . �{. /, !S'2 le• 1400' Isl.t39'
�, a?/f� !63 �.c > / / A `� t' b /1R' �Cr, 1►Z 92 �V 36 Y�SC i180C NI 4'
\; tt \ ►i•- / '®u f 4) `� +' °i tr 22 t9 44 54' 4Q 6/
\%• ES.r- l �.�� oE• yr, bCe' /' 1.AP- ''` •1.• O Z. 366'0642" 5 x• 2206
�,
35:c zz Od
V.7.. -s r � /• , �c N. O 4,• 3' - ''• �V�f)e 25 3-18'k
t C. /,.y ✓ f C?•it *, °5 �� a �! * �E� h� �t�� \ ✓ Z f 9 3C' r 6l00 • 47
\: '. , '' l' — e-6.•< ,, ,�-. •., - .b- 93 ^ �a..v� 1� 2e �-�� t5ca �,A,.
h=,,c / sr'; �F' !► a % v J1 ,�LL V 2s awic
T 136; _•a . � •
\ __.,
: • s. ... `s 10.E 7
,�cv �, -ia2c �0,y 4y i '` 94 a. , 3' or 24'r• i�o�C 2b sir
2
,"..s,Y'N ,r: x° ® CS.! �` V 3L 2C,:-.• w7c OC t2s 69"
�4:: $' `� �.�, i i� �s `�>>i� `t� •cs • UlIS�3D/'JEC • U/ , 3\. 7 2 44 4t .oc 309E
r �/C2J' p, F �� •'v �!; Sc C\ 44 oC +E9 be
tic✓2'REG3e7:+ �� 4.
o >F 957X
EAS1��4, Riw+� Q, _• *\ ti . oc,
FLDRErr_E %+-
MKrMK3! F. _ ....
9.
-"r7, 1?1, N.'', 'Z'.:• i Pg Ito •r PP5' , 4i( p_e,41',1-w% 0 recs
L... 5%, 0{2 rib r.
i„...,.. c 0 , , ., ..2.',A.,. ".' .,..- c:".,.:1,..SR.:E.;
1....."/ ‘r•'-
�-_-.�_ k49• 2<•` �_ — ��:.¢_q Ore / Sc 1 � � i \/)
.,.
Fe. f P\ �y_________...,_
11 h- ..,:- �
soul.. i:. STONEY .rOQ7' ,A di\q P�AurERS,r .
/A,agr(F „' CANYON [ 1/! .i•
►LTA y.....4 BOOK 4C PAGE 10 M B P•. `, ?4.r r.,. •'
�° r� /,r SCALE I"= 801
s_o s,o,,� ` i .
SEE BOOK 4 I PAGE 64
. . ,!/- --....7....,„...,,..,\\
•
C) ... ........-1
14 ,/\ q
J
r% / .. \, \\\.'
Yi
% 0 "... • .
OP. ." #) •
SD 9O 11 `� .
Illi (IP, . . • , / 5 ....• \
r K
+ 0 i. • . •
No io •
FOOTHtLls 'BUSINESS. PARK •
0
•
sir
•: �e6 • - : (1:1;) 37
g x
e t.
r,'� .
-7,6 , - # 1,1 •. ./(/' t
...(4:- '
.4`& .i/_ nw ~r ' s - C ' O
•
. ./". • . .-7- ,.-\3 , ,'.7s9\N
•
Ate, / Ul.g\ r " ,` ': �.�.,) n
. 5e-) ., ;
. ,
•
. ,, . •is ep . (--'). .'
0 64' * .‘e) .
• } \ DES '�
41 , 64 ,
. .... ..�� MIRAG
, ' 'c =';''./ L A ,—
•• ,....5„..
0 It . . N . 114?„
' ‘.:2). /1 . . .S11\ RESERVE
1'1 - 4.: :.
... .
•
: . ,
.`�
. .
. , . _ •
. ... _ ,. 4
ST E ; -c/ . . • • DEER RUN •\lip, �.
• 41 - 84
•
ANYON '
..N .....:.
- 4
i.•. . / (
ci 0,, �t 4 T
.• 4Q- . . . 1. r .•
s 2 d 1.52' • ► 9.4 a'it/ SCAL.E 10 600
`� EI 'D Ll j - 0,. "i..\�„s , ;'1 ` is
1. )e. (A 1 r\ 1 �, f/ �`
, . \--t,l'...,.-1 eel . tr. 0 u c , :( . --
rt
Steve --
As I was preparing the notice for the New World request for variance (Terry
Klinger) , I looked at the drawing and it raised a question for me. As I
understand it, Terry wants to put the new house just 4 feet from the one
existing on Lot 35 (and part of Lot 34) . He needs a side yard setback
variance, for sure, but don't we get into a building codes violation too? I
thought that, from a fire codes standpoint, no structure could be closer than
10 feet to another.
Also, he gave us a check for $100.00. When I talked to him, I quoted a
$1,000 fee from the BOA fee schedule. Did I misinterpret the schedule?
if
(sec drawing attached)
1
� �... �s -ice-- 5
`► ,ram.-.. � �_, ..-.
•
(--3"1')4
14= o kic wLi�-,. .
coAn,s--E-riQr tt\
,tek I4-4b- '
1
1
1
\ I ,
1 I , f�
tI1
I`
` i L
/
I
\'''' I
,.\\\,\\ . prl
t 1
i 1I IA OD F _ - \
y
1ODELi
\ � f
N E Ltr)e i
1 i
1
L�'c'l L t I`� �S ►�`lE✓q ' r i (`'I
--- - - - :•- • . - -- - - • k \ \ I i I
k 1 I I Z :
k \ \ ,
n \ \ 1
s,
- \ ,� \\\\i
\\\\ '\
\ 1\, 1 /
. \ \\ \ 1 25 f
- • \ \ \ \ N,s. ,
. -,....--_, \ \ ‘
. K.T--- \\\ \ "--......„..........._________ I I I
. /,#0'1!aLlikimil,, .\
. \\NN
,.. -.„, . .
7 -.i a .' s ` Cry' F �,i'� i
' - - j
Y F� - NEW We RLE) Hosz
E
D .. EK-F ivy 1 wA&E_ -
1_ 3 ,
July 13, 1993
Board of Adjustment
Oro Valley, Arizona
We. the following resident owners of property and improvements in Desert
Mirage subdivision of La Reserve, hereby oppose the purported variance
on lot #34 coming before the Board of Adjustment.
REASON: Violation of the rights of the residents and current code or
usage in Desert Mirage. This variance would cause the proposed building
construction to be situated too close to the adjoining property on lot
#35. The residents do not desire to set such a precedent now or in the
future.
OWNER STREET ADDRESS LOT #
F'h
‘1 44, 3a-
•
e'KC:XL-4,e 47'")/,..,-*1.-t.\ /
.,€, - /
\?Raff\--tiA S'uoNVk
PODQ,P4 CCWTL, K-5\rzL(
ea_,,J, oia,..„-La. 6-3,2_(1,7,,i /
1(277.(7 ‘
-//-43
\)
,140,66fA
•
AGENDA
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL MEETING
JULY 13, 1993
CALL TO ORDER: 1:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
MaNUTES - Approve Maw 10, 1993 minutes
1. PUBLIC HEARING OV10-93-2 NEW WORLD HOMES DEVELOPMENT REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE OF SIDE YARD SETBACK, LOT 34, DESERT MIRAGE, LA
RESERVE PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT
Review request by New World Development for a reduction in side yard setback
to accommodate a single story structure on the above-referenced lot.
2. REVIEW AND UPDATE OF PROPOSED BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION FORMS
Otrgil Forms were presented for review at March 10th meeting
3. PROGRESS REPORT ON ZONING CODE AME TMEN S
Staff will update the BOA members on the status of certain Zoning Code
amendments which may affect the handling of variance r_ecuests on certain
items, i.e. building height, signs, etc.
4. DISPOSITION OF FLOW CHART - LEGISLATIVE VS. JUDICIAL
ADJOURNMENT
POSTED: 7/7/93
11:00 a.m.
C.A.
MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
REGULAR SESSION
MARCH 10, 1993
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Gilman called the meeting to order at 1: 00
P.M.
PRESENT:Darrell Gilman, ChaiLluan
Terry Lon Myers, Vice-Chairman
Richard Starkey, Board Member
Hayward Thresher, Board Member
STAFF:
Steve Hagedorn, Zoning Administrator
Jim DeGrood, Town Engineer
Colleen Alito, Deputy Clerk
MINUTES:
Terry Lon Myers MOVED to approve the minutes of May 12 , 1992 ,
SECONDED by Hayward Thresher. Motion carried, UNANIMOUSLY 4 - 0 .
PUBLIC HEARING - OV10-93-1 KE&G CONSTRUCTION CO. REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE ON YARD SETBACK LOT 40, THE COLONY AT ORO VALLEY (aka.
CANYON VISTA)
Chairman Gilman opened the Public Hearing and explained the
procedure and time limit of three minutes per speaker.
Steve Hagedorn read the revised staff report and reviewed the
suggested staff conditions. He recommended the following
conditions be attached to the variance:
1. Six (6) fifteen gallon mesquite trees be planted within the
common areas west of Lot 40 to act as a visual screen between Lot
40 and the property to the west
2 . The existing new drainage swale south of Lot 39 be redirected
south along the east side of the existing berm, located west of lot
39 . The breach in that beLiu shall be filled to a height of six
feet and planted with a minimum of four (4) fifteen gallon mesquite
trees
3 . The erosion scars along the north and west sides of Lot 24
shall be filled, compacted and redydroseeded. In addition to the
3/10/93 MINUTES, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 2
four trees required by the approved landscape plan to be planted
along the north and west sides of Lot 24, an additional six (6)
fifteen gallon mesquite trees shall be planted in this area to
screen the existing retaining wall to the rear of lot 24
4 . All new tree plantings will be supported by a permanent drip
irrigation system.
Jim DeGrood pointed out lot 40 in question and the area surrounding
it.
Mark Schultz, Sharpe and Associates asked several questions
regarding landscape. He stated he would agree with the conditions
and that the erosion problem looks as if its fixed.
Bruce Schroeder, WLB Group stated the drainage as per the plans
approved by Oro Valley has drastically reduced the amount of water
going off site by 60 to 70%. The water that was going to the west
is no longer going there, but staying in the subdivision. He
stated that to physically re-route the drainage channel would cost
$5 , 000 to $10, 000.
Terry Lon Myers asked Mr. Schultz if the conditions of the
additional landscaping in the staff report would be a problem.
Mark Schultz stated the conditions were not a problem and the
details could be worked out with staff.
Darrell Gilman wanted to know if they were going to re-route the
water or not.
Bruce Schroeder stated he did not know, but stated they had reduced
the amount of water flow from 30 CFS to 3 CFS .
Steve Hagedorn clarified that the irrigation system is in place and
the conditions would only be asking for 16 additional trees and it
should not affect the annual maintenance cost.
There were questions on the preliminary plat and the final and why
the 30 foot setback did not show on the final plat. Boardmembers
reviewed maps of the area.
Terry Lon Myers felt it helpful if they started putting perimeter
setbacks on the plans.
There was some discussion on if another house model could be placed
on the lot. The narrowest model in Colony was 44 feet wide and
would not work on lot 40.
Claire Scholl stated she owned lots 195 & 196 of Oro Valley
Estates. She said she had advised Oro Valley of her concerns prior
to October 5, 1992 . She stated there had been a hill between her
lot and lot 39 and 40 and would like it replaced. She showed
pictures of her property in relation to lot 39 & lot 40. She also
3/10/93 MINUTES, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 3
wanted to know why the house was not limited to a one-story model,
her view has been obstructed and the water is draining onto her
property. If the variance is granted she would like to see the
following conditions: In addition to the trees along lot 39 and 40
she would like to see trees planted continuous past lot 24 in
addition to heavy oleanders. The lots going south from lot 24 ,
which would be 23 , 22 , 21 and limit building to one-story. There
should have been a much larger barrier between the different types
of zoning. Never should have peLluitted two-story houses being
right next to R-1 zoning.
Gloria Zinkus owner of lot 197 Oro Valley Estates, agrees with Mrs!
Scholl . Her main concerns were the house on lot 40 was built up
and no existing drainage on the west side of the lot so the only
place the water had to go was onto her property. She presented
pictures to the Board Members showing the drainage problem. She
stated that in one picture it showed where bulldozers had bulldozed
20 feet onto her property to get the water to run off to the
street. She also stated several property stakes were missing from
a recent survey to her property. Ms. Zinkus did not like the fact
the bulldozer entered her property without permission and felt
there should be landscaping towards her. lot. She also presented
paperwork which reflected Pima. County Assessors office reduced her
property value by $41, 000.
Jim DeGrood showed an aerial photo of the drainage and reviewed the
natural channel system. He suggested if the BOA went along with
Mr. Hagedorn ' s conditions the water would then be channel to the
street and not to the Scholl ' s residence.
Bruce Schroeder stated he found and reset corners and set property
pins for his lots but could not find the Zinkus ' s.
Chairman Gilman asked Mr. Schroeder if they could work out with the
Zinkus ' s the missing pins and bulldozing on their property.
Gloria Zinkus suggested a drainage pond be constructed within the
natural drainage system.
Bruce Schroeder stated there was a 20 foot easement along the
property line in the event a 100 year flood would go over the dike.
Mark Schultz stated the landscaping on the hill will eventually
improve the view.
Jim Lynch, Sharpe and Associates stated there is an area about 10
feet on Mrs. Zin.kus 's property that would be reseeded. He stated
they had diverted 60 to 70% of the water and felt the original
drainage easement in the subdivision was not done right and Sharpe
and Associates has ended up correcting a lot of their work. He
felt Sharpe & Associates had done a good job.
3/10/93 MINUTES, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 4
Chairman Gilman closed the Public Hearing at 2 : 05 .
Boardmember Hayward Thresher felt this was a two part problem;
(1) A 25 foot setback vs 30 foot setback on lot 40 and (2) The
drainage issue. The drainage issue he felt should be directed to
the DRB.
He felt that the conditions recommended by staff is going beyond
the authority of the BOA in calling for changes in lots other than
lot 40 . We should not be talking about lot 39 and. 24 .
Terry Lon Myers agreed with Mr. Thresher, the BOA has seen many
issues this afternoon none of which are relative to what we came
here for or the proper form. Mr. Myers reviewed the five criteria
for variance. It either falls under the five criteria or it does
not and it would be improper for the BOA to suggest any conditions
or arbitration. The variance itself is restricted to lot 40 and
that is the issue.
Chairman Gilman agreed they should be looking at lot 40 and its
merits.
Hayward Thresher MOVED to approve request by KE&G Construction for
a variance to the side yard setback for lot 40, Colony Subdivision,
finding that there is special circumstances which were not created
by the owner or applicant; and without the variance they could not
use lot 40 at all.
It was asked if KE&G could build on lot 40 with any other model
that was approved by the Town of Oro Valley.
KE&G was not sure.
Motion DIED for lack of second .
Boardmember Richard Starkey declared a conflict of interest on this
issue.
Boardmember Terry Lon Myers MOVED to recess at 2 : 15 P.M.
SECONDED by Boardmember Thresher motion carried UNANIMOUSLY 4 - 0.
Meeting wa.s called back to order at 2 : 21 P.M. by Chairman Gilman
all members were present.
Mark Schultz asked if additional landscape would work with an
intensive landscape package around lot 40 he would be willing to
make it a part of the variance.
Terry Lon Myers MOVED for a 20 minute recess at 2 : 22 P.M. to allow
the adjacent property owners to discuss what it is they can do to
mitigate this so the variance is not subject to the conditions
attached to it which he feels are inappropriate to suggest SECONDED
3/10/93 MINUTES, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 5
by Hayward Thresher motion CARRIED unanimously 4 - 0.
Meeting was called back to order by Chairman Gilman at 2 : 38 P.M.
with all members present.
Claire Scholl stated she and the developers concerned agreed to a
site visit next Wednesday at 9: 00 A.M. to review and discuss the
drainage issue.
Mark Schultz stated they would continue the landscaping on lot 40
to buffer the front and west sides.
Tom Covel, KE&G, stated their was no other approved product which
would fit on lot 40 after a discussion on adequate room on lot 41
for another home. There were depth as well as width problems with
that lot 41.
Terry Lon Myers MOVED to approve, based on the criteria we are
allowed to judge a variance under, I find there are special
circumstances and conditions applying to this property in its size
and shape was anticipated to be used for the models approved and no
other models are in the approved category. The special
circumstances were not created by the owner or applicant. In as
much as the applicant was not aware of the invisible line
encumbering his lot use, I further motion to allow the line to be
five feet closer to the dedicated drainage way on the west
boundary and the easement on the east boundary of the existing
subdivision appears to contribute no material detriment to
ownership or the use of the property by others granting this
variance is not inconsistent with other situations which have arose
in Oro Valley and circumstances that have been discussed that are
on a whole different level and not revellent to the variance with
regards to the setback line. So the setback line itself is not a
problem for the public in general. I also find that this variance
is acceptable on all five criteria SECONDED by Boardmember
Thresher motion carried UNANIMOUSLY 3-0. Let the record reflect
that Boardmember Starkey had a conflict of interest and did vote or
participate in the discussion.
REVIEW OF RECENTLY ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO ORO VALLEY SIGN CODE,
CHAPTER 12 , ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED
Chairman Gilman asked Steve Hagedorn to explain the "quick fix" on
the Sign Code.
Steve Hagedorn stated it meant its a revision to the Sign Code
dealing with the colors, lighting and size issues. Those are
changes requested by Mayor and Council, Planning Commission
reviewed those changes and made the revisions to the Sign Code.
Mayor and Council approved the changes which are in effect today.
The Planning Commission has also undertaken a comprehensive rewrite
of the Sign Code with these changes which will be part of the new
3/10/93 MINUTES, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 6
Sign Code they are working on. It should be ready in 2 to 3
months.
POSSIBLE REPEAL OF LOT DEVELOPMENT OPTION, ARTICLE 13-5, ORO VALLEY
ZONING CODE REVISED
Steve Hagedorn explained the DRB has the ability to grant variances
to sideyard, frontyard and rearyard setbacks within a zoning
district. The case heard today could have been heard by the DRB as
a lot development option. The legal staff, as well as discussions
with other boards, this will be put back into the hands of the BOA
where it is governed by State Statutes. The BOA is the governin5
body that should be reviewing all variances and all variances with
setbacks. We would be repealing that section of the Zoning
Ordinance which currently has it in the hands of the DRB. The
Planning Commission approved this repeal at the last meeting and
will forward on the recommendations to the Mayor and Council at the
March 17th meeting. There should be no problems with the approval.
From that date the BOA will legally be hearing all variances
dealing with setbacks. If its in violation of an ordinance there
shouldn't be an alternate body to say its OK. That is why we have
rewritten this ordinance, rewritten the hillside ordinance and
adopted a new grading ordinance all of which takes it out of the
hands of the DRB. If you are granting any type of variance to a
Development Standard of the Zoning Ordinance it will be the job of
the BOA.
Chaitivan Gilman referred to Section F of the Sign Code which stated
a variance to the Sign Code would go before the DRB.
Steve Hagedorn stated the copy the Planning Commission is reviewing
states that any variance to the Sign Code will go to the BOA, any
appeal of the DRB will go to the Town Council. It will be the
DRB' s job to approve all permanent signage, if the applicant wants
a variance it goes to the BOA.
REVIEW OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION FORMS FROM OTHER
JURISDICTIONS
Chairman Gilman stated these forms were from a seminar in Phoenix.
He would like Steve Hagedorn to review the form since many things
on the form would be helpful in our applications for variance.
Boardmember Starkey stated the application helps everyone focus on
the issue and not on esthetics. It also keeps the applicant from
wondering and_ keeping to the point.
Chairman Gilman asked to have Gary Kid, Town Attorney, prepare a
flow chart with the different boards and the flow from board to
board.
ADJOURNMENT
3/10/93 MINUTES, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 7
Terry Lon Myers MOVED to adjourn SECONDED by Boardmember Thresher
motion carried UNANIMOUSLY 4 - 0. Meeting adjourned at 2 : 55 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
eALaA
Colleen Alito, CMC/AAE
Deputy Clerk
Qo�PLA_EY Aq�o2 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
\� �;; PLANNING STAFF REPORT
TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
°VND ED g1
MEETING DATE: JULY 20, 1993
TO: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS
FROM: Steve Hagedorn, Planning and Zoning Director
SUBJECT: OV10-93-2 NEW WORLD HOMES DEVELOPMENT REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE TO SIDE YARD SETBACK AND REQUIRED DISTANCE
BETWEEN BUILDINGS
LOT 34, DESERT MIRAGE, LA RESERVE P.A.D.
SUMMARY:
Desert Mirage subdivision was platted in 1986 and Capitol Building Group, shortly thereafter, began
construction of zero lot line homes within this subdivision. The project was eventually abandoned
by Capitol Building Group and, in early 1993, it was taken over by New World Homes.
New World Homes, wishing to provide a more "open" appearance in the subdivision, has elected to
use 5 foot side yard setbacks, which is in conformance with the La Reserve PAD. A distance of 10
feet between buildings is also a requirement in Development Area C of La Reserve, of which Desert
Mirage is a part (see excerpt from_PAD, Sec. VIII, C, no. 3 attached). New World Homes officials
contend that, even the smallest model to be offered cannot be placed on Lot 34 of Desert Mirage,
and meet the side yard setback and required distance between buildings. This lot has a narrow
frontage, compared to others in the subdivision, and is further constrained by the fact that the
overhang of the home on the adjacent Lot 35 actually encroaches onto Lot 34.
New World requests approval of an approximate 1 foot variance on the side yard setback, allowing
the home on Lot 34 to be placed approximately 4 feet, 6 inches from property line common to Lots
34 and 35. Additionally, approval to is sought to place the house 4 feet, 6 inches from the home on
Lot 35, which sets on the property line, instead of the 10 foot separation between buildings required
by the PAD. Such approvals would allow the builder to place the smallest model on Lot 34, and still
maintain the other required front, side and rear yard setbacks. Planning Staff has consulted with the
Town's Building Official on this matter, and we have been advised that the Uniform Fire Code
requires a minimum 6 foot separation between buildings. The Building Official would support this
request for approval of a 4'6" separation between buildings provided the 1 foot, 6 inch projection,
toward the rear of the house has a 1-hour firewall construction (three coat plaster system).
Additionally, this projection cannot have penetrations, i.e. windows or glass block. As an alternative,
this projection could be eliminated.
Staff has also consulted with the Town Engineer regarding the opposite side yard setback from the
street and Mr. DeGrood is satisfied that Model 1 may be placed, as per the site plan presented with
the application, and still meet the required sight visibility triangles.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff concurs with the applicant, that a hardship has been created, not of his doing, by the narrowness
of the lot frontage and the encroachment of the existing home on Lot 35. As such, Staff would have
no objection to approval of this variance to the side yard setback and required distance between
buildings, provided the Board makes the following findings:
A. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property referred to in the
application including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply
to other properties in the district; and
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.
Further, Staff would recommend that the following condition, per the Building Official, be added to
the motion, should the BOA vote to approve this variance:
1. A separation between buildings of 4 feet, 6 inches is hereby approved with the
following stipulations:
a. 1-hour fire wall construction (three coat plaster system) must be used on any
portion of wall located closer to Lot 35 than 6 feet, 0 inches; and
b. Any portion of a wall located closer to Lot 35 than 6 feet, 0 inches shall not
have penetrations, i.e. windows or glass block.
10-93-2\psrept.no2
A
1
8. IS A REZONING OR 'A SUBDIVISION PLAT- INVOLVED IN THIS REQUEST -YES ( ) NO ( -
9. HAS A PREVIOUS APPLICATION BEEN FILED OR A HEARING HELD -RESPECTING-
THE SUBJECT PREMISES. YES ( ) NO
10. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING:
( ) DIMENSIONED PLOT- PLAN, COPIES.
( ) DIMENSIONED FLOOR PLAN, COPIES.
( ) DIMENSIONED ELEVATION PLAN, COPIES.
( ) 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.
( ) NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL OWNERS OF PROPERTY, ANY PART OF WHICH IS
WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
- 2 -
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Received by
_
on 198
All requirements satisfied on 198
Fee $ paid by check no.
Applicant was Riven Schec3,;1 P r,f PPPC
jl
tt
!7�
C. Development Area C - Cluster Housing 11
1. Uses Permitted - Single family attached and detached units, single
rt
family dwellings having either party walls or walled courtyards
condominiums, model homes, temporary real .estate office, accessory
buildings and uses customarily incidental to the permitted uses,
including garages, home occupations, swimming pools, and recreation
'Ft e
t•It
buildings.
*The only exception to the uses permitted in Development Area C
(cluster housing) is, that the owner reserves the right to convert the
existing information center into a restaurant, office, conference center, 11
activity center, museum, or other similar use.
i;14'
•
2. Maximum Residential Density - 1500 units total.
!!'
3. Property Development Standards - it: c�!
. s.
a. Minimum property size - 43,560 square feet
b. Minimum lot area - none !• •r
ti
c. Gross acreage: 632 acres (approximate) f"
d. Net (buildable) acreage: 404 acres (approximate)
e. Building Height - 30 feet
---� f. Distance between buildings - not less than 10 feet
g. Landscaping requirements - All onsite landscaping, including
perimeter landscaping, shall be in conformance with La Reserve
Design Guidelines
h. Minimum building setback requirements for attached units - None
-43-
i
' ! 1
,
If 11
i. Minimum building setback requirements for detached units: _;
15 foot - front yard
;i
__A• 5 foot - side yard j :A,:i i,l `-
15 foot - rear yard ! 1, � fi
j. Site setbacks ;,
i , r;
i' 1 v!
Where Area C abuts Area B, a yard of 25' for one story units and 35' II, .`
for two story units., V/here Area C abuts any other area, a yard of
10' is required. ' 11:
k. Walls, Fences and Required Screening - To be constructed per " ; ` 1
, ' I
owners specifications as shown in Exhibits 0, P and Q. '� •*"!
s
1. Access - As shown on tentative and final plats. l? }
I
m. Signs - As covered by Section XVI of the Plan. {i , ,
,. i'li '
, ' � :
4. Required Parking - Shall be in accordance with the required parking s .li ,
" J
schedule as described in Section XII of this Plan I ;'��:, }
1_ 1!
•
L ,• , ,.:
D. Development Area D - Multi-family, Office, Retail, Commercial iilf'r 7 'ii,t :
3 Y }
1. Uses Permitted - Multi-family residential, resort hotel, medical (.�
facilities, retail business, commercial, professional offices, restaurants, E`ll
▪ ►a. 1
,.
banks and financial institutions, post office, pre-school, theater and
health care, together with all accessory structures including
recreational and social center buildings, model homes and temporary ; ii I
,v
,,; i
real estate sales offices. f 4
j,
2. Maximum Residential Density - 1,000 Units Total
-44- ►i
•
AGENDA
ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL MEETING
JULY 20, 1993
CALL TO ORDER: 1:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING OV10-93-2 NEW WORLD HOMES DEVELOPMENT REQUEST
FOR VARIANCE OF SIDE YARD SETBACK AND REQUIRED
DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS
LOT 34, DESERT MIRAGE, LA RESERVE PLANNED AREA
DEVELOPMENT
Continued discussion and possible action on a request by New World
Development for a variance to the property development standards of the La
Reserve PAD, Section VIII, C, no. 3. The builder requests a reduction in
side yard setback and a variance to the required distance between buildings
in order to accommodate a single story structure on the above-referenced
lot.
2. REVIEW AND UPDAI E OF PROPOSED BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION FORMS
Forms were presented for review at March 10th meeting
3. PROGRESS REPORT ON ZONING CODE AN NEMENTS
Staff will update the BOA members on the status of certain Zoning Code
amendments which may affect the handling of variance requests on certain
items, i.e. building height, signs, etc.
4. DISPOSi` ION OF FLOW CHART - LEGISLATIVE VS. JUDICIAL
ADJOURNMENT