Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV90319 f5 , TOWN OF ORO VALLEY STAFF REPORT TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 2, 2003 TO: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FROM: Robert Conant, Planner II SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING — OV9-03-19, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SUBURBAN RANCH (SR) TO THE TOWN'S R1-144 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL), BOUNDED NORTH BY MAGEE ROAD AND ON THE WEST, SOUTH AND EAST BY SUFFOLK HILLS, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE IMMACULATE HEART SCHOOL, PARCEL 225-500-010 BACKGROUND: On May 7, 2003, the Town of Oro Valley annexed the above referenced area as part of a larger annexation of land called "Area B" (Ordinance No. (0) 03-09). The attached map identifies the location of the area and the current and proposed zoning designations. In accordance with State Statutes, the Town is required to change or "translate" the zoning on the annexed properties from its original zoning designation to the closest comparable Oro Valley zoning designation. Section 9-471(L) of the Arizona Statutes (ARS) states: "A city or Town annexing an area shall adopt zoning classifications which permit densities and uses no greater than those permitted by the county immediately before annexation. Subsequent changes in zoning of the annexed territory shall be made according to existing procedures established by the city or town for the rezoning of land." SUMMARY: The Pima County zoning designation for the area is Suburban Ranch (SR) and the most similar Oro Valley zoning district is R1-144. The property is presently developed as a Middle School. OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED TRANSLATIONAL ZONES: Pima County SR (Suburban Ranch) The Pima County Zoning designation for this area is Suburban Ranch (SR), a rural residential zone, which allows one dwelling for each 144,000 square feet of lot area (3.3 acres), churches and private schools are permitted uses in this zone. Oro Valley R1-144 (Single Family Residential) The Town's R1-144 district allows single family dwelling units on a minimum lot area of 144,000 square feet (3.3 acres). The zoning classification does not permit churches or schools. With the translation of zoning, the current use will be legal non-conforming, until such time as the Town or property owner initiates a zoning change which will reflect the uses on the ground. For the Immaculate Heart School, the zoning designation TOWN OF ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 2 would be PS&C (Private Schools and Churches). In the future a rezoning to reflect what is on the ground should be initiated. The Town Council adopted Resolution (R) 02-68 on August 1, 2003 which will permit horses and other farm animals, except swine, to be maintained at Pima County standards upon annexation. The property currently is a school; therefore, horses on the property are unlikely presently or in the foreseeable future. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE: The proposed zoning designation limits the site to a lower residential density than the General Plan Land Use designation would allow. The General Plan designation for this area is Low Density Residential (0.6-1.2 Du/ac). The translated zoning will not be in conformance with the General Plan; however, state law requires that the Town translate zoning to the closest Town category. NOTIFICATIN: All property owners within the annexed area have been notified of this proposed translational zoning and the property was posted in accordance with Town and State statutes. To date, staff has not received any comments. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend Town Council approval of the translational zoning from Pima County Suburban Ranch to the Town's R1-144, subject to the condition listed in Exhibit A. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: The Planning and Zoning Commission may wish to consider one of the following suggested motions: I move to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-19, translating zoning for the Immaculate Heart School from Pima County SR to Oro Valley R1-144, subject to the condition listed in Exhibit A, attached herewith. OR I move to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-19, translating zoning for the Immaculate Heart School from Pima County SR to Oro Valley R1-144, subject to the condition listed in Exhibit A attached herewith and the following added condition(s): Attachments: 1. Exhibit A 2. Resolution 02-68 3. Property location 4. Current & Proposed Zoning Map Planning and Zoning Administrator F:\O V\O V 9\2 003\9-03-19\REZ.PZ.RP T.d oc EXHIBIT 1 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OV9-03-19 1. Horses and other farm animals, except swine, shall be permitted per the standards set by Pima County under the Suburban Ranch (SR) zoning designation at one animal per 10,000 square feet of lot area per Resolution (R) 02-68 adopted by Town Council August 1, 2002. EXHIBIT 2 RESOLUTION NO. (R) 02—68 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY,ARIZONA, REAFFIRMING THE TOWN COUNCIL'S POLICY WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY OWNER RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES REGARDING ANIMALS UPON ANNEXATION INTO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY WHEREAS, the Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) §9-471 describes procedures required to extend and increase the corporate limits of the Town of Oro Valley by annexation; and WHEREAS, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. (R) 95-22 on May 17, 1995, establishing a Town of Oro Valley Policy for the Annexation of Unincorporated Land; and WHEREAS, the Town is currently pursuing the annexation of two unincorporated property areas known as Annexation Area"A" and Annexation Area "B;" and WHEREAS, the Town will be filing annexation maps in the future according to the Town of Oro Valley Policy for Annexation of Unincorporated Land; and WHEREAS, the General Plan encourages the annexation of unincorporated areas surrounding the Town to better serve the public, facilitate infrastructure expansion, and improve operational efficiencies of municipal services; and WHEREAS, in order to provide greater certainty and equity in the application of the Town's regulations in current and future annexation maps, it is desirable to identify in advance of annexation those policies which the Town intends to follow with respect to property owner rights and privileges regarding animals upon annexation into the Town. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and Town Council of the Town of Oro Valley as follows: SECTION 1. Upon effective date of an ordinance annexing any future unincorporated areas into the Town, the Town Council will adopt such ordinances and take such administrative actions as may be necessary to implement the regulatory policies and translational zoning of newly annexed areas. SECTION 2. The Town Council hereby agrees that those property owners with animal property rights will be allowed to continue having those same rights on their property after annexation and that this right shall run with the land. SECTION 3. The Town Council hereby agrees that the county zoning will continue for a period of six (6) months or until Town zoning is adopted on the property and dependent upon a successful annexation according to ARS §9-462.04(D). SECTION 4. This Resolution will become immediately operative and in force thirty (30) days from the date of its adoption in accordance with State law and the Oro Valley Town Code. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall become null and void if the annexation process is not completed within the time allowed. Any legal delay and/or challenge, however, will extend the effective date of the Resolution the same number of days (or months) as the legal delay. SECTION 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof PASSED AND ADOPTED by Mayor and Town Council, the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, this / day of 3v , 2002. 1st August TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ATTEST: Paul H. Loomis, Mayor Kat E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: D` L. ley, Town Attorney ii ry,. at,Nriaaa:.etaaa::rrsv:a,.s�een+:�xs.a, ',, .ra'ar:c,'�^a va*r,te2tzvnay r b ■_ ',Ia y. IIIOV9-03-21 rif CO OV9-03 14 ' �y r,r rw�:s'''trk-N era a n rA� ■ `,.XAJ?'a,..z":b"'4�tl.Ya.3_a?YLb to,r'�a"Lket.: ' rn:(4;:xt5:eti1�s3`'s'` I, `^ II S€S II ▪ 1II Z r. 0, II i" f k OV9.03-09 :T f C OV9-03-08 ( IIIQ — O :' 11 VA -22 OV9-03-17 10 —111 Z OMI—=; s # _a i1 U -mill NN I ■Z — ♦: a ,,,..p':....,Y.`?A.^.4.41.,,,,,,AR -a....,A1C,::11SAVAII.?.40,,;,,AWIF2.A2,15Y9A441�'JCSYi XL:.AT..{l;S(A,kAAz..:A.,,,klm Akika�S"AIWIfT�lkk:VE3A..4+°bRNA,At...:uu•`F.;c,i u';:,:1,,,,.iAffin,.:l�..,rx. :;. ■ ..,.9..[:X'.Lep:`dCKd3S&Fb845�AFsik't'Y F:�`...........,Yki"N.TA I I I OV9-03.23 / ii, � OV9-03-18 "' OV9-03-09 !! ■ ' ' 3-14 ■ a»asaau enwr a a /AS,K-4 musnm.: raratailemturt4•vtcr,...aSSteS man. r t.ts u...wte. 07 r ax x=x,.re, aas a x > a_�,..nxM:nr.w:i snax lie MAGEE ROAD t , h< �n. .....rw..nssaa».n qF z`..,,. k fi sa ca z�. s ara .r. s rsrmse — ,,,.. ya -0 12 i ■ s ■ / Y:::J0: x q 0•0"/ , ■ IN J - ,, 9.03-0II' i —m. ` OV9.03.05 f 1 • I-1I...1..... 0,1, 1l i i OV9-03-10 l',,k0,,,"' V9-03-2 ■ tf .,..,,,, 4i ■ 0 r. ■ if ■ OV9-03-0., N — V9.03-0 III Ova 3.13 i �(&n • Nw'1� }lpJJ� �T w..��+rT7�T pew!� �!�lM �!-C6 € �-��r- y� � �fgi7iG'GtY k� ti>JGiuC+�tWu ruL ii`'i rW2rY•rw.L +r37i6 8-k'4.":.ackA'"" 1.I IrM 4"wl` ''',2'7iiliT1Y11�"liil,ETP :::i ::..w.... 'r:'i:{IQCYfiYr�ri"-.L if,i�Y-'.fir• M-Z: JJ Y(i�J wuM•�iiv.'ai.L` :S.SJ:�LV" Translational Zoning Location Map �.`' P P� ‘,‘NP Av 5 E FOUR�O� N RANGNO ERIMROCKP� E MADRID DR fit W COOL DR WMF� M+� W MAGEE RD E MAGEE RD Z O Q a W r g � E MONTECELLO CT J V � G oE NE�SEP 2 E CAMBRIDGE DR Pima County SR Zoning to Oro Valley R1-144 Zoning o� z 0 ES- Z. TIA ON C18 4V9 - 03 - 19 Translational Zoning AFFIDAVIT ^c PUBLICATION ze. .,t SPATE OF ARIZONA) Auti 2 0 Z403 :SS. COUNTY OF PIMA ) being first K At EN BR I GHAM duly sworn, deposes and says that (he) (she) 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 Tuc- son, County of Pima, State of Arizona and elsewhere, and the hereto attached 0V9-03-19 PUBLIC NOTICE was printed and published correctly in the regular and entire issue of said THE 1 DAILY TERRITORIAL for issues; that was first made 13th AUGUST 03 on the day of 20 13th and the last publication thereof was made on the day of AUGUST U 20 ; that said publication was made on each of the following dates, to-wit: 08/13/03 Request of TOWN OF COO ')ALLEY Daily Territorial J Il By 474-'1 , ,, . C:'?-// Subscribed and orn t or thi day of (s,C"\) • Lit i AUGUST 20 . _....,. --,......,.> ,4 '''' .-- - 3 _7/f .5: ....,,,, Notary Public State of Arizona i` �. ;-7 Al�'maCou , btary f til i ifft maiii_ t4.P.MS*4 of ate of rizona Expires June 15,2007° / My Commission Expires: '''',& 7/ //a)&a.77-1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION In accordance with ARS 9-462 and Section 3-108 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Re- vised, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FOR RE- CENTLY ANNEXED PROPERTY BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS HEREBY GIVEN: TIME:at or after 6:00 p.m.on TUESDAY,SEPTEMBER 2,2003 PLACE:Oro Valley Town Hall,Council Chambers 11000 North La Canada Drive Oro Valley,Arizona SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING—OV9-03-19,TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PI- MA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY MAGEE ROAD AND ON THE WEST, SOUTH AND EAST BY SUFFOLK HILLS,THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE IM- MACULATE HEART SCHOOL: TRANSLATION ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR(SUBURAN RANCH)TO THE TOWN'S R1-144(SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT)DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER:225-500-010. The property was annexed to the Town on May 7,2003 and,in accordance with State Statutes,the Town is required to change or"translate"the zoning on annexed proper- ties to the closest comparable zoning district within the new jurisdiction. Members of the public are invited to attend this meeting and will be given and oppor- tunity to speak. An agenda for the meeting will be made available 24 hours prior to meeting time. Should you have any questions regarding this matter,please contact Bob Conant,Planner II,at(520)229-4822 or bconant@orovalley.net./s/Bayer Vella, AICP Senior Planner Pub:The Daily Territorial August 13,2003 Req:Town of Oro Valley pnov9-03-19 kb NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION In accordance with ARS 9-462 and Section 3-108 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FOR RECENTLY ANNEXED PROPERTY BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS HEREBY GIVEN: TIME: at or after 6:00 p. m. on TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2003 PLACE: Oro Valley Town Hall, Council Chambers 11000 North La Canada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING—OV9-03-19,TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY MAGEE ROAD AND ON THE WEST, SOUTH AND EAST BY SUFFOLK HILLS,THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE IMMACULATE HEART SCHOOL: TRANSLATION ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR(SUBURAN RANCH) TO THE TOWN'S R1-144 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER: 225-500-010. The property was annexed to the Town on May 7, 2003 and, in accordance with State Statutes, the Town is required to change or"translate"the zoning on annexed properties to the closest comparable zoning district within the new jurisdiction. Members of the public are invited to attend this meeting and will be given and opportunity to speak. An agenda for the meeting will be made available 24 hours prior to meeting time. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Bob Conant, Planner II, at(520) 229-4822 or bcona. a oroval le .net. y' Posted: 8-12-03 Baye , AICP Time: 10: 15 a.m. Senior Planner By: sg F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-19\REZ.PC.NOTICE.doc APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 2, 2003 TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PRESENT: Vice Chair Cox, Acting Chair Commissioner Kinared Commissioner Manross Commissioner Krenkowitz Commissioner Anning EXCUSED: Chair Moody Commissioner Bistany Others Present: Mayor Paul Loomis Werner Wolff, Council Member Jeff Weir, Economic Development Administrator Mark Langlitz, Town Attorney Scott Nelson, Special Projects Coordinator Bill Adler, Board of Adjustments Bayer Vella, AICP, Senior Planner MINUTES MOTION: Commissioner Kinared MOVED to approve the August 5, 2003 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes as written. Commissioner Manross seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. CALL TO THE AUDIENCE OPENED: 6:03 P.M. Bill Adler, 10720 N. Eagle Eye PI., Oro Valley, wanted to point out that Mixed Use is not, nor has ever been, an approved land use designation in any Oro Valley general plan. It has been directed by Council to be removed from the General Plan pending ratification of the voters. The problem is that Mixed Use is in our zoning code. It exists in many of the commercial designations and residential designations. There is a contradiction between the General Plan and the Zoning Code. He believes this needs to be reconciled. A joint study session with Town Council should be requested, with DRB included. He asked that the Commission make a good faith effort to get with the Council and resolve this so there is uniformity. September 2,2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes CALL TO THE AUDIENCE CLOSED: 6:06 P.M. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: OV8-03-05, DANIELA SHOUSE, REPRESENTING TORINO RISTORANTE ITALIANO, REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF LIQUOR ASSOCIATED WITH A FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT LOCATED WITHIN THE CANADA CROSSROADS SHOPPING CENTER IN A C-N (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LA CANADA DRIVE AND LAMBERT LANE, A PORTION OF PARCEL NO. 224-39-O01E. Mr. Vella presented his Staff Report for OV8-03-05. The applicant wants to establish a 2,400 square foot restaurant and is in the process of receiving building permits to do so. He is requesting the ability to offer a full bar with beer, wine and liquor with hours of operation from 11 A.M. to 11 P.M. There are two other restaurants in the shopping center that currently have similar liquor licenses and have been in place for 2-3 years. Applicant, Mr. Shouse, who owns of Café Torino, stated that he has operated the restaurant since January, 2001. They would like expand their facilities to offer more upscale dining for the area. They hope they can go forward with the liquor license. The restaurant should be open by about October 20. Mr. Vella responded to Commissioner Kinared that of the two conditions in Exhibit A, condition #1 is worded differently than what was specified on Page 1 of the report. Condition #2 varies slightly by allowing the time to be from 11 A.M. to 11 P.M., seven days a week. Mr. Vella told Commissioner Krenkowitz that the language in the CUP recommended on 11/13/2001 and Exhibit A should be the same. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AND CLOSED AT 6:10 P.M.: No Speakers. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend approval of OV8-03-05, Torino Ristorante Italiano's request for a conditional use permit to serve liquor, with the conditions listed in Exhibit A, with one change: that paragraph 1 as now stated be deleted and in place of that be inserted, "that recorded or live outside entertainment must not be allowed." Commissioner Kinared seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 2. DISCUSSION ITEM: OVERVIEW OF THE RECENTLY ANNEXED PROPERTIES NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF ORACLE AND MAGEE ROADS AND THE TRANSLATIONAL ZONING PROCESS Mr. Vella stated that item #2 was to present an overview of the history of annexation, where we are today and what are the legal parameters of the translational zoning process. Mr. Scott Nelson presented an overview of the annexation process which allows for municipalities to go through a process for one year to gather 50% plus 1 of the total property owners of an area and 50% plus 1 for the total assessed value of an area. On area B, the process ended on April 4, 2003. As of that date,we had 53% of the property owners and 67% of the total 2 September 2,2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes assessed value. This area is unique with great diversity with subdivisions greater than 30 years old. The area included condos, residential, townhouses, apartments, commercial zones and a school. The total area size is 655 acres with a population of 2,234 and 120 plus businesses. During the annexation process, there were applicants that came to us requesting pre-annexation agreements, which went before the Commission and Town Council and were acted on. The letters in your packet were for certain areas that wanted to retain their developmental rights that they had in the County. Attorney Mark Langlitz stated that this annexation has been a lengthy process and is at a point where it has been completed with regard to any legal action that was taken. The Town has prevailed on that. This is one of the largest areas that the Town has annexed with a wide variety of uses. It is now necessary that the Town translate the zoning from the existing County to the Town zoning---keeping in mind that the property owners should retain their existing rights under the County zoning. The Town will translate to the closest existing comparable districts so long as it does not increase the use or intensity. Staff has looked at all the individual parcels and has determined which is the most appropriate Town zoning district for the property to be translated to. The nature of the action this evening is administrative as opposed to legislative. This is required by statute. Acting Chair Cox stated that for the sake of expedience, items #3 through 19 on the revised agenda basically have the same type of administrative action that needs to be taken He asks the Commissioners and the audience if the process could be varied so that all Staff Reports were presented at once and then hold a public hearing for all items at once. Voting on the items #3 through 19 would be done separately after the public hearing and any comments. There were no objections to this suggested process from either the Commissioners or the audience. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-21, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTHERN AVENUE AND CAMINO CORTARO FROM PIMA COUNTY CR-4 (MIXED DWELLING TYPE ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R-4 (TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-142-770, 225-142-780, 225-142-790, 225- 142-800, 225-143-440, 225-143-420, 225-143-310, 225-143-320, 225-143-330, 225-143-300, 225-143-290 225-143-280, 225-143-270, 225-143-260, 225-143-250, 225-143-240, 225-143- 410, 225-143-400, 225-143-340, 225-143-390, 225-143-380, 225-143-370, 225-143-360, 225- 143-350, 225-143-430, 225-142-810, 225-142-820, 225-142-830, 225-142-840, 225-142-850, 225-142-860, 225-142-870, 225-142-880, 225-142-890, 225-142-900, 225-142-910, 225-142- 920, 225-142-930, 225-142-940, 225-142-950, 225-142-960, 225-142-970, 225-142-980, 225- 142-990, 225-143-000, 225-143-010, 225-143-020, 225-143-030, 225-143-040, 225-143-050, 225-43-060, 225-143-070, 225-143-080, 225-143-090, 225-143-100, 225-143-110, 225-143-120, 225-143-130, 225-143-140, 225-143-150, 225-143-160, 225-143-170, 225-143-180, 225-143- 190, 225-143-200, 25-143-210, 225-143-220, 225-143-230 4. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-08, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA LOCATED BETWEEN ORACLE ROAD AND NORTHERN AVENUE, NORTH OF COOL DRIVE FROM PIMA COUNTY TR (TRANSITIONAL ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R-S (RESIDENTIAL SERVICE DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL 3 September 2, 2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes NUMBERS; 225-141-890, 225-142-740, 225-142-730, 225-142-720, 225-142-710, 225-142- 700, 225-142-750, 225-142-690, 225-142-680, 225-142-670, 225-142-660, 225-142-540, 225- 142-530, 225-142-760, 225-142-550, 225-142-560, 225-142-750, 225-142-570, 225-142-580, 225-142-760, 225-142-600, 225-142-590, 225-142-760, 225-142-610, 225-142-620, 225-142- 630, 225-142-640, 225-142-650, 225-141-850, 225-141-830, 225-162-820, 225-162-810, 225- 162-800, 225-162-190, 225-162-080, 225-162-090, 225-162-200, 229-143-480, 225-143-490, 225-143-500, 225-143-510, 225-143-540, 225-143-520, 225-143-530, 225-143-460, 225-143- 470, 225-143-460, 225-161-640, 225-161-650, 225-161-860, 225-161-870, 225-161-850, 225- 161-840, 225-161-670, 225-161-660, 225-161-680, 225-161-690, 225-161-820, 225-161-830, 225-161-810, 225-161-800, 225-161-710, 225-161-700, 225-161-790, 225-161-780, 225-161- 730, 225-161-720, 225-161-740, 225-161-750, 225-161-760, 225-161-770, 225-162-790, 225- 162-780, 225-162-760, 225-162-770, 225-162-730, 225-162-720, 225-162-750, 225-162-740, 225-162-710, 225-162-700, 225-162-690, 25-162-680, 225-162-660, 225-162-670, 225-162- 650, 225-162-640, 225-162-810, 225-162-590, 225-162-600, 225-162-570, 225-162-580, 225- 162-550, 225-162-540, 225-162-620, 225-162-560, 225-162-630, 225-162-610, 225-162-410, 225-162-400, 225-162-390, 225-162-420, 225-162-370, 225-162-430, 225-162-380, 225-162- 440, 225-162-460, 225-162-470, 225-162-450, 225-162-350, 225-162-480, 225-162-490, 225- 162-360, 225-162-500, 225-162-510, 225-162-330, 225-162-520, 225-162-530, 225-162-340, 225-162-320, 225-162-310, 225-162-270, 225-162-260, 225-162-300, 225-162-280, 225-162- 290, 225-162-230, 225-162-210, 225-162-220, 225-162-240, 225-162-250, 225-162-170, 225- 162-180, 225-162-190, 225-162-150, 225-162-160, 225-162-140, 225-162-100, 225-162-110, 225-162-120, 225-162-130, 225-161-990, 225-161-980, 225-161-970, 225-161-960, 225-162- 010, 225-162-000, 225-162-950, 225-161-940, 225-162-030, 225-162-020, 225-162-930, 225- 161-920, 225-162-050, 225-162-040, 225-162-910, 225-161-900, 225-162-060, 225-162-070, 225-161-890, 225-161-880 5. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-14, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, LOCATED BETWEEN ORACLE ROAD AND NORTHERN AVENUE, NORTH OF MAGEE ROAD FROM PIMA COUNTY CB-1 (LOCAL BUSINESS ZONE) DESIGNATION TO THE TOWN'S C-2 (COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION WITH CONDITIONS FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-143-480, 225-143-550 (PORTION), AND FOR THE ANNEXED AREA LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD SOUTH OF CAMINO CORTARO FOR PARCELS 225-141-740, 225-141-770, 225- 141-780, 225, 225-141-76B, 225-141-76A, 225-141-750, 225-141-80A, 225-141-92C (PORTION), 225-141-170C, 225-141-70A, 225-141-70B, 225-141-710 AND 225-141-73A; 6. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-22, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, LOCATED ONE QUARTER MILE NORTH FROM THE INTERSECTION OF ORACLE ROAD AND MAGEE ROAD ON THE WEST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD FROM PIMA COUNTY SR (SUBURBAN RANCH ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R-144 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER 225-141-870 7. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-23, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED ANDEXE AREA LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTHERN AVENUE 4 September 2,2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes COOL DRIVE FROM PIMA COUNTY CB-2 (GENERAL BUSINESS ZONE) TO THE TOWNS C-2 (COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) FOR PARCELS 225 141 790, 225 14 92B, ONE 225-141-92C, 225-141-80A (PORTION) AND THE ANNEXED AREA LOCATED QUARTER MILE NORTH FROM THE INTERSECTION OF ORACLE ROAD AND MAGEE ROAD ON THE WEST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD FOR PARCEL NUMBER; 229-141-90A 8. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-12, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TR (MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE) ZONE TO THE TOWN'S R-S (RESIDENTIAL SERVICE) DISTRICT DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER 225- 50-0040, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MAGEE ROAD AND NORTHERN AVENUE IN ANNEXATION AREA "B" AND DEVELOPED AS AN OFFICE BUILDING. 9. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-13, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR (SUBURBAN RANCH) ZONE TO THE TOWN'S R1-144 (SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT DESIGNATION FOR 1,743 SQUARE T WELL FOOT PARCEL (NO. 225-50-0070) OWNED BY THE CITY OF TUCSON AS A AND LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF W. CHAPALA DRIVE AND NORTHERN AVENUE. 10. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-16, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH APPROXIMATELY %2 MILE SOUTH OF MAGEE ROAD, ON THE EAST BY ORACLE ROAD, ON THE WEST BY THE TERMINUS OF NORTHERN AVENUE AND ON THE SOUTH BY CATALINA VILLAGE: TRANSLATION ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TR (TRANSITIONAL ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R-S (RESIDENTIAL SERVICE DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-512-690 AND 225-512-700. 11. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-09, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE WEST BY ORACLE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH BY RIDGEVIEW PLAZA, ON THE NORTH BY DESERT WILLOWS SUBDIVISION AND ON THE EAST BY RANCHO CATALINA, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AST ERDE CATALINA TOWNHOUSES, AND FURTHER THE AREA KNOWN AS CA CITRUS ESTATES (SISTERS OF THE IMMACULATE HEART), BOUNDED ON THE WEST BY RIDGEVIEW PLAZA, ON THE SOUTH BY MAGEE ROAD, ON THE NORTH BY RANCHO CATALINA AND ON THE EAST BY THE CORONADO NATIONAL FOREST: TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR (SUBURBAN RANCH) TO THE TOWN'S R1-144 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-142-400, 225-142-41A, 225-142-43A, 225-170-17B, 225-170-18B, 225-170- 225-170-190, 225-141-91A, 225-130-10A, 225-170-25A, 225-170-26A, 225-170-280, 22560, 1290, 225-170-320, 225-130-11A, 225-170-330, 225-170-340,-225-170-350,-225 225-161-260, 225- 170-370, 225-170-380, 225-170-390, 225-130-120, 225-161-240, 225 161 , 5 September 2,2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes 225-161-270, 225-161-280, 225-161-290, 225-161-300, 225-161-310, 225-161-320, 225-161- 330, 225-161-230, 225-161-500, 225-161-340, 225-161-220, 225-161-510, 225-161-490, 225- 161-350, 225-161-210, 225-161-520, 225-161-480, 225-161-360, 225-161-200, 225-161-530, 225-161-370, 225-161-540, 225-161-380, 225-161-550, 225-161-390, 225-161-190, 225-161- 560, 225-161-180, 225-161-470, 225-161-170, 225-161-570, 225-161-400, 225-161-460, 225- 161-160, 225-161-580, 225-161-410, 225-161-450, 225-161-150, 225-161-420, 225-161-590, 225-161-440, 225-161-140, 225-161-430, 225-161-630, 225-160-900, 225-161-070, 225-160- 910, 225-161-130, 225-161-120, 225-161-110, 225-161-100, 225-161-060, 225-161-090, 225- 161-080, 225-160-920, 225-161-050, 225-160-930, 225-161-040, 225-161-030, 225-160-940, 225-160-950, 225-160-960, 225-160-970, 225-160-980, 225-160-990, 225-161-000, 225-161- 010, 225-161-020, 225-161-620, 225-160-520, 225-160-530, 225-160-540, 225-160-550, 225- 160-560, 225-160-570, 225-160-580, 225-160-590, 225-160-600, 225-160-610, 225-160-500, 225-160-620, 225-160-500, 225-160-630, 225-160-810, 225-160-800, 225-160-790, 225-160- 780, 225-160-770, 225-160-760, 225-160-490, 225-160-640, 225-160-650, 225-160-480, 225- 160-820, 225-160-830, 225-160-840, 225-160-850, 225-160-660, 225-160-670, 225-160-470, 225-160-680, 225-160-460, 225-160-750, 225-160-860, 225-160-690, 225-160-450, 225-160- 740, 225-160-870, 225-160-700, 225-160-440, 225-160-730, 225-160-880, 225-160-710, 225- 160-430, 225-160-720, 225-160-890, 225-160-420, 225-160-410, 225-161-610, 225-160-330, 225-160-340, 225-160-320, 225-160-350, 225-160-150, 225-160-310, 225-160-400, 225-160- 390, 225-160-380, 225-160-370, 225-160-360, 225-160-160, 225-160-300, 225-160-170, 225- 160-180, 225-161-600, 225-160-190, 225-160-200, 225-160-210, 225-160-220, 225-160-230, 225-160-240, 225-160-250, 225-160-260, 225-160-270, 225-160-280, 225-160-290. 12. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-17 TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE WEST APPROXIMATELY 630 FEET EAST OF ORACLE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 580 FEET NORTH OF MAGEE ROAD, ON THE NORTH BY RANCHO CATALINA NORTH (SOUTH OF CATALINA SHADOWS BOULEVARD) AND ON THE EAST BY THE CORONADO NATIONAL FOREST, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS RANCHO CATALINA: TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY CR-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R1-36 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-141-91A225-130-11A, 225- 130-10A, 225-170-280, 225-170-18B, 225-170-17B, 225-170-290, 225-170-190, 225-170-240, 225-170-340, 225-170-25A, 225-170-330, 225-170-230, 225-170-200, 225-170-350, 225-170- 26A, 225-170-390, 225-170-360, 225-170-380, 225-170-370, 225-170-220, 225-170-320, 225- 170-270, 225-170-400, 225-170-210, 225-170-160, 225-170-300, 225-170-310, 225-170-760, 225-170-150, 225-170-140, 225-170-460, 225-170-770, 225-170-130, 225-170-750, 225-170- 450, 225-170-470, 225-170-440, 225-170-430, 225-170-120, 225-170-420, 225-170-410, 225- 161-630, 225-170-780, 225-170-090, 225-170-740, 225-170-730, 225-170-720, 225-170-100, 225-170-480, 225-170-710, 225-170-700, 225-170-790, 225-170-850, 225-170-800, 225-170- 110, 225-170-490, 225-170-520, 225-170-500, 225-170-510, 225-170-840, 225-170-810, 225- 170-860, 225-170-510, 225-170-690, 225-170-680, 225-170-830, 225-170-080, 225-161-620, 225-170-670, 225-170-070, 225-170-820, 225-170-870, 225-170-650, 225-170-660, 225-170- 550, 225-170-540, 225-170,530, 225-170-560, 225-170-580, 225-170-880, 225-170-950, 225- 170-060, 225-170-890, 225-170-900, 225-170-640, 225-170-940, 225-170-590, 225-170-600, 225-172-210, 225-170-960, 225-170-930, 225-170-610, 225-172-160, 225-170-050, 225-170- 6 September 2,2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes 920, 225-170-910, 225-170-630, 225-170-620, 225-172-170, 225-172-150, 225-172-180, 225- 171-060, 225-172-190, 225-172-200, 225-170-980, 225-170-970, 225-170-990, 225-171-000, 225-171-010, 225-170-040, 225-161-610, 225-171-020, 225-171-030, 225-172-140, 225-171- 040, 225-171-050, 225-172-130, 225-172-120, 225-172-090, 225-172-100, 225-172-110, 225- 172-22A. 13. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-18, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE WEST BY ORACLE ROAD, ON THE NORTH BY VERDE CATALINA TOWNHOUSES, ON THE EAST BY THE SISTERS OF THE IMMACULATATE HEART AND ON THE SOUTH BY MAGEE ROAD, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS RIDGEVIEW PLAZA: TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY CB-1 (LOCAL BUSINESS ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S C-2 (COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR THE FOLLOWING PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-141-93D, 225-142-400, 225-141-93B, 225-142- 510, 225-142-41A, 225-142-520, 225-142-48A, 225-141-94A, 225-142-460, 225-142-43A, 225- 161-630, 225-170-17B. 14. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-07, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY CB-1 (LOCAL BUSINESS) DISTRICT TO THE TOWN'S C-2 (COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT DESIGNATION, WITH CONDITIONS, FOR PARCEL NUMBERS 225-51-004A, 225-51-2170, 225-51-2180, 225-51-2140, 225-51-2160 AND 225- 51-2150, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MAGEE ROAD AND ORACLE ROAD IN ANNEXATION AREA "B" AND DEVELOPED AS THE "PLAZA ESCONDIDA" SHOPPING CENTER. 15. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-10, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY MAGEE ROAD, ON THE WEST APPROXIMATELY 445-FEET EAST OF ORACLE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH BY CATALINA VILLAGE AND WESTWARD LOOK GUEST RANCH AND ON THE EAST BY COBO CATALINA HILLS, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS SUFFOLK HILLS: TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY CR-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R1-36 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-511-320, 225-512-080, 225- 510-280, 225-511-480, 225-511-200, 225-511-300, 225-510-210, 225-511-40A, 225-511-470, 225-511-41A, 225-510-220, 225-512-070, 225-511-890, 225-511-290, 225-510-230, 225-511- 42A, 225-510-290, 225-510-270, 225-510-260, 225-510-240, 225-510-250, 225-511-210, 225- 511-280, 225-511-43B, 225-511-900, 225-512-060, 225-511-220, 225-511-44A, 225-511-910, 225-511-230, 225-511-450, 225-511-460, 225-512-05A, 225-511-920, 225-510-300, 225-511- 240, 225-510-440, 225-511-930, 225-511-250, 225-512-04A, 225-510-430, 225-511-100, 225- 511-880, 225-511-270, 225-511-260, 225-511-940, 225-511-110, 225-510-420, 225-512-030, 225-510-410, 225-512-020, 225-512-010, 225-511-950, 225-512-000, 225-511-390, 225-510- 400, 225-510-390, 225-510-380, 225-510-370, 225-510-310, 225-511-090, 225-510-450, 225- 510-36B, 225-511-120, 225-511-960, 225-511-080, 225-511-130, 225-511-380, 225-510-460, 7 September 2,2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes 225-510-36C, 225-511-970, 225-511-140, 225-511-150, 225-511-160, 225-511-170, 225-511- 180, 225-512-130, 225-512-120, 225-512-110, 225-511-980, 225-511-070, 225-511-33C, 225- 511-350, 225-512-100, 225-511-360, 225-510-470, 225-510-340, 225-510-330, 225-511-060, 225-511-370, 225-511-33D, 225-510-320, 225-510-480, 225-511-33E, 225-511-050, 225-512- 090, 225-511-040, 225-511-820, 225-510-490, 225-511-030, 225-511-020, 225-511-810, 225-511-830, 225-511-010, 225-511-000, 225-510-790, 225-511-840, 225-510-92A, 225-511- 850, 225-510-530, 225-511-630, 225-511-860, 225-510-640, 225-511-620, 225-510-540, 225- 510-91A, 225-510-890, 225-511-610, 225-510-980, 225-510-930, 225-510-52A, 225-510-550, 225-511-730, 225-511-650, 225-510-500, 225-511-600, 225-510-900, 225-510-51A, 225-510- 560, 225-511-800, 225-511-790, 225-511-780, 225-511-770, 225-511-760, 225-511-780, 225- 511-750, 225-511-770, 225-511-740, 225-511-760, 225-511-750,225-510-970, 225-510-880, 225-510-840, 225-510-570, 225-510-970, 225-511-590, 225-510-940, 225-510-850, 225-511- 720, 225-510-950, 225-510-870, 225-510-860, 225-511-67A, 225-510-960, 225-510-580, 225- 510-81A, 225-511-580, 225-510-590, 225-511-710, 225-510-81B, 225-510-820, 225-510-740, 225-510-830, 225-511-570, 225-510-750, 225-510-600, 225-511-700, 225-510-730, 225-511- 690, 225-511-560, 225-510-610, 225-511-680, 225-511-55B, 225-510-720, 225-510-760, 225- 510-620, 225-510-800, 225-510-790, 225-510-780, 225-510-770, 225-510-630, 225-510-640, 225-510-650, 225-510-660, 225-510-670, 225-510-680, 225-510-690, 225-510-700, 225-510- 710, 225-500-010, 225-511-490, 225-511-500, 225-511-510, 225-511-520, 225-511-530, 225- 511-540, 225-511-55A, 225-511-190, 225-511-310. 16. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-19, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY MAGEE ROAD AND ON THE WEST, SOUTH AND EAST BY SUFFOLK HILLS, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE IMMACULATE HEART SCHOOL: TRANSLATION ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR (SUBURAN RANCH) TO THE TOWN'S R1-144 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER: 225-500-010. 17. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-06, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TR (TRANSITIONAL) ZONE TO THE TOWN'S R-S (RESIDENTIAL SERVICE) DISTRICT DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER 225-51-0190; AND FROM PIMA COUNTY TR (TRANSITIONAL) ZONE TO THE TOWN'S R-S (RESIDENTIAL SERVICE) DISTRICT DESIGNATION WITH A CONDITION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS 225-51-011A, 225-51-018A AND 225-51-0200, ALL LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD BETWEEN MAGEE ROAD AND SUFFOLK DRIVE. 18. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-15, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE WEST BY ORACLE ROAD, ON NORTH APPROXIMATELY 1,115-FEET SOUTH OF MAGEE ROAD, ON THE EAST BY SUFFOLK HILLS AND ON THE SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 1,075-FEET NORTH OF SUFFOLK HILLS DRIVE: 8 September 2, 2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes TRANSLATION ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR (SUBURBAN RANCH) TO THE TOWN'S RI-144 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER; 225-510-12A. 19. PUBLIC HEARING: OV9-03-20, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE WEST BY ORACLE ROAD, ON THE NORTH APPROXIMATELY 1,274-FEET SOUTH OF MAGEE ROAD, ON THE EAST BY SUFFOLK HILLS AND ON THE SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 503-FEET NORTH OF SUFFOLK HILLS DRIVE: TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TR (TRANSITIONAL ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R-S (RESIDENTIAL SERVICE DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-510-130, 225-510-140, 225-510-150, 225-510-160, 225-510-17B AND 225-510-17A. Acting Chair Cox opened up discussion and questions from the Commissioners: Item #5, the development plan approved by Pima County will be honored by the Town, as well as any unfinished portions. It is functionally equivalent to a pre-annexation agreement. It would be good to add the condition that all development plans in place be honored. Item #15, OV9-03-10, Exhibit 4, last page indicates that translation is from Pima County CR-1 to Oro Valley, R1-144 whereas the text in the recommendation reflects R1-36. The correct zoning is R1-36. PUBLIC HEARING FOR ALL TRANSLATIONAL ZONINGS OPENED AT 6:40 P.M. Bill Adler, 10720 N. Eagle Eye asked to speak on Agenda item #3 and #5. He does not look as translational zonings as routine, so he objects to the procedure. He sees translational zoning as an opportunity to place zoning on property that reflects what we would like it to be rather than what it is. We can allow existing development to continue and no interference in development rights or pre-annexation agreements. If there were major changes or redevelopment in the area, then we should have zoning in place that we would like to have rather than the equivalent of what is in existence now. For example, item #3, he objects to the 34 foot building height, and if this area is ever redeveloped it should comply with Oro Valley zoning code. This should be stipulated. On item #5, he feels that it would be better to rezone to CN rather than C-1 because it is adjacent to residential areas. He is not suggesting mandating changes on existing zoning. The zoning we put into place creates a legal, non-conforming situation. Oro Valley has restrictive ordinance by reputation because we want a desirable appearance. John James, 661 Mountain Sunrise Place, withdrew from speaking as Mr. Vella answered his questions regarding horse property. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 6:45 P.M. 9 September 2,2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes Acting Chair Cox opened up discussion and questions for Staff. There is no time period that the Town would have to wait to begin applying zoning classifications to the land to more closely represent how the land is used. Any change in zoning would have to follow the Town's normal rezoning procedure which would commence at any time and includes instigation by the Town itself. Change of ownership does not change any of the zoning requirements. It is attached to the land and stays with it no matter who owns the land. The translational zoning cannot increase intensity or uses, nor can the zoning be reduced. Zoning classification must be adopted that allow the property owner to retain their existing rights. Following are the motions on the forgoing Staff Reports: #3. MOTION: Commissioner Kinared MOVED to recommend that Town Council approve OV9-03-21, translating the zoning from Pima County CR-4 (Multiple Dwelling Type Zone) to Oro Valley R-4 (Townhouse Residential) for the proposed parcels, with a condition that the County CR-4 building height be maintained by the Town. Commissioner Krenkowitz seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #4. MOTION: Commissioner Manross MOVED to recommend that Town Council approve OV9-03-08, translating zoning from Pima County TR(Transitional Zone) to Oro Valley R-S (Residential Service District) for the proposed parcels. Commissioner Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #5. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-14, translating zoning from Pima County CB-1 (Local Business Zone) to the Oro Valley C-2 (Commercial District) for the proposed parcels, with the condition that the owner of the property commonly known as Plaza De Vida shall continue to have the development rights now accorded to that owner under the approved Development Plan recorded in Book 56, at page 99. Commissioner Manross seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #6. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz moved to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-22, translating the zoning from Pima County SR (Suburban Ranch) to Oro Valley R1-144 (Single Family Residential) with the condition that the horse and other farm animal rights granted by the Town Council in Resolution 02-68 on August 1, 2002, be attached to the zoning. Commissioner Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #7. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend that Town Council approve OV9-03-23, translating zoning from Pima County CB-2 (General Business Zone) to the Oro Valley C-2 (Commercial District) for the proposed parcels. Commissioner Manross seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 10 September 2,2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes #8. MOTION: Commissioner Manross MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-03-12, translating zoning of Parcel No. 225-50-0040 to the Town of Oro Valley R-S (Residential Service) District. Commissioner Krenkowitz seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #9. MOTION: Commissioner Anning MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-03-13, translating zoning of Parcel No. 225-50-0070 to the Town of Oro Valley R1-144 (Single Family Residential) District. Commissioner Krenkowitz seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #10. MOTION: Commissioner Manross MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-16, translating the zoning from Pima County Transitional Zone to Oro Valley Residential Service District. Commissioner Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #11. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-09, translating zoning for the Verde Catalina Townhouses and the Sisters of the Immaculate Heart properties, from Pima County SR to Oro Valley R1-144, with the condition that horse and other farm animal rights permitted under the Pima County designation of Suburban Ranch will be recognized in accordance with the Resolution of the Town Council No. 02-68 adopted on August 1, 2002. Commissioner Manross seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #12. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-17, translating the zoning for Rancho Catalina from Pima County CR-1 to Oro Valley R1-36, subject to the two conditions set forth in Exhibit A to OV9-03-17. Commissioner Manross seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #13. MOTION: Commissioner Manross MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-18, translating the zoning for Ridgeview Plaza from Pima County CB-1 to Oro Valley C-2. Commissioner Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #14. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-03- 07, translating zoning of Parcel Nos. 225-51-004A, 225-51-2170, 225-51-2180, 225-51-2140, 225-51-2160, and 225-51-2150 from Pima County zoning CB-1 to the Town of Oro Valley C-2 (Commercial) District. Commissioner Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5- 0. #15. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-10, translating zoning for Suffolk Hills, from Pima County CR-1 to Oro Valley R1-36, subject to the two conditions set forth in Exhibit A to OV9-03-10. Commissioner Kinared seconded the motion. Discussion: Commissioner Aiming mentioned noting that Exhibit 4 needs to be corrected to read R1-36 instead of R1-144. Motion carried 5- 0. #16. MOTION: Commissioner Manross MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-19, translating zoning for the Immaculate Heart School from Pima County SR to Oro Valley R1-144, subject to the condition listed in Exhibit A, attached herewith. Commissioner Krenkowitz seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 11 September 2, 2003 Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes #17. MOTION: Commissioner Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-03- 06, translating zoning of Parcel Nos. 225-51-0190, 225-51-011A, 225-51-018A and 225-51- 0200 to the Town of Oro Valley zoning R-S (Residential Service) District, with the two conditions set forth in Exhibit A to OV9-03-06. Commissioner Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #18. MOTION: Commissioner Anning MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-15, translating the zoning from Pima County Suburban Ranch to Oro Valley R1-144, subject to the one condition set forth in Exhibit A to OV9-03-15. Commissioner Manross seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. #19. MOTION: Commissioner Manross MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve OV9-03-20, translating the zoning from Pima County Transitional Zone to Oro Valley Residential Service District. Commissioner Kinared seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Kinared would like to have Staff look into and report on Bill Adler's Call to the Audience comments regarding the conflict between the General Plan and Zoning Code Mixed Use designation and present at the next meeting. Commissioner Krenkowitz suggested that prior to Staff researching the above, that they consider if there is any conflict that requires resolution. Commissioner Krenkowitz would also like for Staff to report at the next meeting on what is happening with Cricket Communication. Has anything been done? What can be done? How does their bankruptcy affect the Town's ability to alleviate the violation? ADJOURN REGULAR SESSION MOTION: Commissioner Kinared MOVED to adjourn. Commissioner Krenkowitz seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diane Chapman, Recording Secretary 12 MINUTES ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 03, 2003 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PRESENT: Paul Loomis,Mayor Werner Wolff, Vice Mayor Paula Abbott, Council Member Dick Johnson, Council Member Bart Rochman, Council Member PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Loomis led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. UPCOMING MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS Town Manager Chuck Sweet reviewed the schedule for the upcoming meetings. CALL TO AUDIENCE Carl Kuehn, 9250 North Calle Loma Linda, stated that on October 16,2002 the Council passed an ordinance that addressed the livestock impact litigations,but did not believe that the direction handed down by Council had been fulfilled and should be addressed. Bill Adler, 10720 North Eagle Eye, expressed concern that a conflict existed between the General Plan and the Zoning Code concerning mixed use. He explained that there had never been an approval of mixed use designation in any general plan for Oro Valley and that the mixed use designation should be removed from the Zoning Code. 1. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Johnson to APPROVE the Consent Agenda. The motion was SECONDED by Council Member Abbott. Motion carried, 5-0. A. Minutes—8/11/03; 8/13/03; 8/20/03 B. Police Report—July 2003 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 2 C. Resolution No. (R)03-75 Authorizing and Approving the adopting of the 2003 Potable Water System Master Plan D. Resolution (R) 03-76 Acceptance of proposal and award of contract for "Annual Special Maintenance Projects", Project No. OV 30 03/04 01 to Southern Arizona Paving E. OV12-03-01 —Approval of a Final Plat for 158 single-family lots on 74.25 acres located on the southwest corner of Tangerine Road and La Canada Drive,Parcels 224070010 & 224070020 F. OV12-02-18 Approval of a Final Plat for Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 10 Parcel W, located Y4 mile north of Moore Road off Desert Fairways Drive, Parcel#21922002S G. OV12-01-11 Approval of extension to February 20th, 2004 of the Preliminary Plat for Parcel AG Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 11 for 32 single-family lots located on the north side of Vistoso Highlands Drive and the Mulligan Drive intersection, Parcel 219191870 H. Resolution No. (R) 03-77 A Resolution of the Mayor and Council of the Town of Oro Valley, Arizona, declaring as a Public Record that certain document entitled"Article 15, Section 15-15-9 of the Town of Oro Valley Town Code",relating to Reclaimed Water and filed with the Town Clerk Mayor Loomis moved Item 2 to follow Item 4. 3. PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCE NO. (0)03-29 OV9-03-05, TRANSLATING THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ZONING MAP FOR PARCEL NUMBERS 225-50-0020, 225-50-0030, 225-50-0050, 225-50-0060, 225-51-3830, 225-51-3840, 225-51-3850,225-51-3860, 225-51-3870, 225-51- 3920,225-51-3930; 225-51-3880, 225-51-3890, 225-51-3900, 225-51-3910 AND 225-51-3940 TO C-2 (COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION,WITH CONDITIONS, REPRESENTING AN APPROXIMATELY 40 ACRE AREA OF LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ORACLE AND MAGEE ROADS. Jeff Weir, Economic Development Director, stated that Town staff and the developer have worked very diligently and recognized that this translation could become a very significant gateway project to the Town. He reported that the site contains an existing shopping center as well as a large quantity of raw land. He stated that the current vision would realize both a new retail center as well as a complete makeover for the existing retail center. He explained that tonight the Council was being asked to translate the existing retail center and the raw land currently zoned CB-1 Zoning by Pima County to the Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code classification C-2 Zoning. Beyer Vella, Senior Planner, reported that in accordance with Arizona State Law, the Town was required to translate the zoning on annexed properties to the closest comparable zoning district within the new jurisdiction. Staff is recommending approval of the translational zoning of Pima County CB-1 Zoning to C-2 Zoning with a primary focus on moving, in a parallel fashion, between the same densities and uses that 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 3 are currently enabled for Pima County. He explained that staff does recommend that the translation of the 40 acres be converted to C-2 Zoning with the condition that TR uses are available. He explained that this would create a holding pattern for the developer to come in at a later date and pursue additional C-2 Zoning. In answer to a question from Council Member Johnson, Mark Langlitz, Town Attorney, explained that translational zoning was an administrative act as opposed to a legislative act. He explained that after an annexation of a territory,the state has provided a relatively expedited streamlined procedure that would immediately convert the existing uses and densities in the County to comparable Town uses and densities. He explained that this would maintain the status quo or preserve the existing uses and densities that the property enjoys under the Pima County Zoning Code. He further explained that when the territory has been translated or converted over;the State does not allow the Town to use the translation as a time to rezone the property. He added that the translation would not address or affect the development plan. • In answer to a question from Mayor Loomis,Mark Langlitz confirmed that there would be no additional intense uses allowed in the translation process if Pima County Ordinance No. 1995-89, 17 conditions were included. Mark Langlitz explained that the conditions would have no affect on the translational zoning, densities or uses. Marybeth Savel, from Lewis and Roca, 1 South Church, #700,representing BP Magee, the property owner and the future developer of the 40 acre site. She announced that, on behalf of BP Magee and the property owner, everyone was in agreement with the proposed translational zoning and conditions as presented to the Mayor and Council in the staff report. Council Member Abbott asked if the developer had met with the neighboring citizens that live adjacent to the site that would be directly impacted by the development. In answer to a question from Council Member Abbott, Marybeth Savel, explained that after reviewing the Pima County's 17 conditions,that the conditions were more directly related to the development plan and staff review. She reported that the developer had the neighbors review the proposed development and the mitigation that would affect the walls, setbacks and landscaping. She reported that there was additional discussion regarding improvements along Northern Avenue which has had severe flooding problem for several years. In answer to a question from Council Member Johnson, Brent Sinclair explained that a view shed analysis would be conducted and would consist of both an architectural review and a development plan review. Council Member Johnson stated that he was confident that the developers would be working in accordance with the neighbors as the development plan was being created and 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 4 maintain a good relationship with the neighboring homes adjacent to the site throughout the development process. Vice Mayor Wolff agreed. Mayor Loomis recessed the meeting at 7:51 p.m. The meeting resumed at 8:00 p.m. Mayor Loomis opened the public hearing. The following citizens asked that the translational zoning be postponed for further review: • Mike Greenlees, 601 West Harelson Street, asked that 'the re-translation be postponed until there was reasonable knowledge that the development would be an asset to the Town and the community. • Oral Kisen, 7741 North Northern Avenue,had concerns regarding the height of the buildings that would be developed in the area and felt that a CB-1 Zoning translation would be more appropriate than a C-2 Zoning,therefore would like to see the translational zoning postponed until these matters were settled. • Bill Adler, 10720 North Eagle Eye Place,recommended that the translation becomes a C-2 Zone with Pima County Ordinance No. 1995-89 attached. • Marie Conti, 7840 North Paseo del Norte, confirmed that she was in agreement with the objections presented. • Stephen Sisson,Ph.D., 7978 North Zarragoza, agreed that the 17 conditions should be placed in the translation. • Donna Heidinger, 7362 North Camino de Maxmillian, stated that she was representing the community and knew that a postponement would be what the residents in the surrounding area would prefer,to get a better understanding of the translation process,but if this was not possible would rather see the CB-1 Zoning remain in effect. • Joe Thomas, West Chapala Drive, expressed concern that the translational zoning seems to be on a fast track and during the process many of the conditions could be overlooked as it related to the adjacent neighboring properties. He explained that it might be in everyone's best interest if the translational zoning was temporarily postponed. MOTION: Council Member Abbott MOVED to CONTINUE this item to give the residents and the developer more time to workout some of the compromises that can be made and to give Council a chance to review some of the 17 conditions that were handed in today and review the State Case Law. Motion FAILED for lack of a second. MOTION: Council Member Abbott moved to APPROVE Ordinance No. (0) 03-29, Case NO. OV9-03-05, amending the zoning map and designation for Parcel Numbers 225-50-0020,225-50-0030,225-50-0050,225-50-0060, 225-51-3830,2225-51-3840,225- 51-3950,225-51-3860,225-51-3870,225-51-3920 and 225-51-3930 from County CB-1 to Town C-2, Commercial Business District, with the conditions set forth in Exhibit A.; and approve the zoning map and designation of Parcel Nos. 225-51-3880, 225-51-3890,225- 3900,225-51-3940 and 225-51-3910 from County TR to Town C-2, with the conditions set forth in Exhibit A, and with the following suggestions and conditions and that the 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 5 Town include the 17 conditions that the County established with the rezoning as outlined in Ordinance No. 1995-89. Vice Mayor Wolff SECONDED the motion. Exhibit A to Ordinance (0) 03-29; OV9-03-05, Oracle Crossing Translational Zoning (Zoning Map and Zoning District Designation Amendments) Conditions of Approval 1. Uses on the former TR Parcel Numbers 225-51-3880, 225-51-3890, 225-51-3900, 225-51-3910 and 225-51-3940 shall include those uses allowed in the Pima County TR Zone. 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Condition 1, the development of the following parcels shall be in accordance with the terms of the Pre-Annexation Development Agreement ("PADA") between B.P. Magee, L.L.C. and the Town of Oro Valley as adopted by Town Council on March 31, 2003 by Resolution No. (R)03-28: Parcel Numbers 225-50-0020, 225-50-0030, 225-50-0050, 225-50-0060, 225-51 3830, 225-51-3840, 225-51-3850, 225-51-3860, 225-51-3870, 225-51-3920, 225- 51-3930, 225-51-3880, 225-51-3890, 225-51-3900, 225-51-3940 and 225-51- 3910. 3. The development of these parcels shall be in accordance with the Concept Plan attached to the PADA as "Exhibit B" and as may be approved by the Town's Development Review Board and Town Council. 4. The development of these parcels shall be in accordance with the applicable development standards of the Pima County Zoning Code ("PCZC") as of October 2002 for a CB-1 Zone, with the exception of Sections 18.77.030.C, Table 18.77.030 and 18.77.040 which shall not be applied to the development. Where the PCZC is silent, the standards of the Town of Oro Valley as may be applicable and consistent with the Concept Plan attached to the PADA apply. 5. Building heights shall not exceed thirty (30) feet per the Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised ("OVZCR"), C-2 Commercial District Regulations, unless specifically stated by building and graphics in the PADA and the Concept Plan. 6. The Town shall permit development of convenience uses on the property consistent with the requirements imposed on such uses under the PCZC in effect as of October 2002. If certain convenience uses are not permitted under the PCZC in effect as of October 2002, but are permitted under the OVZCR, the OVZCR shall govern the development of such convenience uses, with the exception that the provisions of Article 10-4, Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District (ORSCOD), shall not apply. Mark Langlitz, Town Attorney, explained that it would not be necessary and probably not appropriate to attach the Pima County conditions to this translational zoning, because this was not the procedure Oro Valley used for these types of matters. He explained that the Town has a separate established procedure for development issues and this was not a development issue. He added that the inclusion of the Pima County Conditions could run afoul of the pre-annexation agreement that the Town previously adopted in March of 2003. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Mayor Loomis recommended REMOVING Condition No. 16 from the Pima County Conditions and include editorial changes in Section 2 of 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 6 the Rezoning Conditions. Vice Mayor Wolff SECONDED the motion. Discussion: Mark Langlitz advised the Council not to add the additional conditions at this time. He explained that the Town had established procedures for development plan approval and this procedure was not consistent with the Town Code and the Town was obligated to comply with the Code. Mayor Loomis confirmed with Brent Sinclair that the following items as listed in Pima County Ordinance 1995-89 would be addressed and included in a future Town development plan: Section 2—Rezoning Conditions: 1. Submittal of a development plan if determined necessary by the appropriate County agencies. 2. Recording of a covenant holding Pima County harmless in the event of flooding. 3. Recording of the necessary development related covenants as determined appropriate by the various County agencies. 4. Provision of development related assurances as required by the appropriate agencies. 5. Recording a covenant to the effect that there will be no further subdividing or lot splitting without the written approval of the Board of Supervisors. 6. Prior to the preparation of the development related covenants and any required dedication, a title report (current to within 60 days) evidencing ownership of the property shall be submitted to the Department of Transportation,Real Property Division. 7. Transportation conditions: A. A traffic study for the project,provided by the owner(s), shall be submitted for approval to the Arizona Department of Transportation and Pima County Department of Transportation. The Limits of the study and scope of work shall be determined by the Arizona Department of Transportation. B. Provision of all necessary improvements to Northern Avenue, Magee Road, Suffolk Drive and Oracle Road as determined by the approved traffic study, the Pima County Department of Transportation and the Arizona Department of Transportation. These improvements shall need the approval of the Arizona Department of Transportation and the Pima County Department of Transportation and meet the appropriate standards prior to the approval of any development plan or subdivision plat for any portion of the subject property. C. Written certification from the Arizona Department of Transportation stating satisfactory compliance of all its 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 7 requirements including approval of the number,the location and the design of all access points to the subject property from Oracle Highway shall be submitted to the Pima County Development Services Department prior to the issuance of any building permits. D. The property owner(s) shall reach a financial contribution and/or construction agreement (Development Agreement)with and acceptable to Pima County Department of Transportation and Flood Control District prior to development plan or subdivision plat approvals. Said agreement shall address required road improvements and/or financial contributions for area roads impacted by the proposed development. E. Dedication of all necessary right-of-way to provide for a 45 foot half right-of-way for Northern Avenue adjacent to the subject property. 8. Flood Control conditions: A. The property owner must dedicate all rights-of-way and/or grant flowage easements for drainage purposes to Pima County, as determined necessary by the Flood Control District during the plan review process. B. Drainage shall not be altered, disturbed or obstructed without the written approval of the Flood Control District. C. All internal drainage improvements and any external drainage improvement required to mitigate drainage impacts caused by the proposed development shall be constructed at no cost to the district. D. Provision shall be made for all weather access and for mitigating flow and sediment problems on Northern Avenue adjacent to the subject property. 9. Wastewater Management Condition: The property owner must connect to the public sewer system at the location and in the mariner specified by Wastewater Management at the time of review of the tentative plat, development plan or request for building permit. 10. Department of Environmental Quality Condition: The property must be served by a public or private sewer. 11. Prior to ground modification activities, an on-the-ground archaeological Survey and appropriate mitigation measures shall be conducted on the subject property. A cultural resources mitigation plan for any identified archaeological sites on the subject property, shall be submitted at the time of, or prior to the submittal of any tentative plat or development plan. The mitigation plan shall be prepared and reviewed as described in the Pima County Site Analysis Requirements. 12. Concurrent with tentative plat or development plan submittal, a plant 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 8 preservation/mitigation study and plan shall be prepared by an independent horticulturalist or other qualified professional and submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval. The developer shall preserve in place, relocated or mitigate significant on-site cacti and trees as recommended by the preservation plan, including but not limited to: threatened or endangered plant species,plants on the Arizona Protected Plants List, areas of riparian vegetation, or significant wildlife habitat and corridors. In addition, in accordance with Comprehensive Plan Regional Plan Policy C.4.c. if saguaros of a height of six feet or greater are removed or relocated,the landscape preservation/mitigation plan shall comply with standards which state that each saguaro removed shall be replaced,within the site area,with five nursery stock saguaros. For each saguaro relocated an additional two nursery stock saguaros shall be planted within the site area. 13. Adherence to the preliminary development plan as approved at public hearing. TR and CB-1 uses are restricted to nonresidential only. 14. A maximum six-foot masonry wall shall be provided along the Northern Avenue frontage as part of the required bufferyard D. Pedestrian access to the development from Northern Avenue shall be provided as identified on the preliminary development plan. 15. Buildings shall be set back a minimum of 60 feet from the future Northern Avenue right-of-way line. 16. Buildings heights shall not exceed the elevations as shown on the Exhibit dated June 23, 1995. 17. Refuse collection areas shall be identified on the development plan and shall be screened by six-foot, landscaped masonry walls. MOTION: The motion FAILED to REMOVE Condition No. 16 from the Pima County Conditions, 5-0. MOTION: Council Member Rochman MOVED to move a substitute motion to adopt Ordinance No. (0) 03-29 (Case No. OV9-03-05), amending the zoning map and designation for Parcel Numbers 225-50-020, 225-50-0030, 225-50-0050, 225-50-0060, 225-51-3830,225-51-40, 225-51-3850, 225-51-3860, 225-51-3870, 225-51-3920 and 225-51-3930 from County CB-1 to C-2, Commercial Business District,with the conditions set forth in Exhibit A.; and approve the zoning map and designation of Parcel Nos. 225-51-3880, 225-51-3890, 225-51-3900, 225-51-3940, and 225-51-3910 from County TR to Town C-2, with the conditions set forth in Exhibit A. The motion was SECONDED by Council Member Johnson. 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 9 Exhibit A to Ordinance (0) 03-29; OV9-03-05, Oracle Crossing Translational Zoning (Zoning Map and Zoning District Designation Amendments) Conditions of Approval l Uses on the former TR Parcel Numbers 225-51-3880, 225-51-3890, 225-51-3900, 225-51-3910 and 225-51-3940 shall include those uses allowed in the Pima County TR Zone. 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Condition 1, the development of the following parcels shall be in accordance with the terms of the Pre-Annexation.Development Agreement ("PADA") between B.P. Magee, L.L.C. and the Town of Oro Valley as adopted by Town Council on March 31, 2003 by Resolution No. (R)03-28: Parcel Numbers 225-50-0020, 225-50-0030, 225-50-0050, 225-50-0060, 225-51- 3830, 225-51-3840, 225-51-3850, 225-51-3860, 225-51-3870, 225-51-3920, 225- 51-3930, 225-51-3880, 225-51-3890, 225-51-3900, 225-51-3940 and 225-51- 3910. 3. The development of these parcels shall be in accordance with the Concept Plan attached to the PADA as "Exhibit B" and as may be approved by the Town's Development Review Board and Town Council. 4. The development of these parcels shall be in accordance with the applicable development standards of the Pima County Zoning Code ("PCZC") as of October 2002 for a CB-1 Zone, with the exception of Sections 18.77.030.C, Table 18.77.030 and 18.77.040 which shall not be applied to the development. Where the PCZC is silent, the standards of the Town of Oro Valley as may be applicable and consistent with the Concept Plan attached to the PADA apply. 5. Building heights shall not exceed thirty (30) feet per the Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised ("OVZCR"), C-2 Commercial District Regulations, unless specifically stated by building and graphics in the PADA and the Concept Plan. 6. The Town shall permit development of convenience uses on the property consistent with the requirements imposed on such uses under the PCZC in effect as of October 2002. If certain convenience uses are not permitted under the PCZC in effect as of October 2002, but are permitted under the OVZCR, the OVZCR shall govern the development of such convenience uses, with the exception that the provisions of Article 10-4, Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District (ORSCOD), shall not apply. Discussion: Council Member Abbott urged everyone to look at the big picture and consider the message the Town would be sending to future potential residents that would be annexed into the Town. She expressed concern that the citizens might think the Town could misunderstand and think the Town was unconcerned about their situation by not honoring the agreements previously set in place. She explained that by retaining the Pima County Conditions would send the message that the current agreement did matter and that Town would try to incorporate the conditions. Council Member Rochman stated that it was not the intent of the Council to send a message of not caring but to protect the Town. He explained that the Town encouraged 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 10 the meetings between the neighbors and the developer to develop a project that everyone can agree upon and be proud of. Council Member Johnson explained that the Town had similar conditions, therefore, disagreed that these issues were not being addressed. He stated that in the end result, the project developed by the Town of Oro Valley would be significantly better. He pointed out that it was a State Law that this translational zoning must take place. Vice Mayor Wolff stated that the Town does care about the neighborhood, particularly the citizens that live adjacent to the development and that he had concerns with the height limits as well. Mayor Loomis stated that the reason he reviewed the Pima County Ordinance No. 1995- 89, 17 conditions was to identify that the process for the conditions were in place. He explained that the Town was going to continue to work with the neighborhood adjacent to the property and that all of the conditions except for the height restriction, which was variable restriction, are met by the Town ordinances. MOTION carried, 4-1, Council Member Abbott opposed. Mayor Loomis recessed the meeting at 9:06 p.m. The meeting resumed at 9:16 p.m. 4. ORO VALLEY MAYOR AND COUNCIL SHALL ESTABLISH THE DATE AND TIME FOR BOTH,THE HEARING TO CONSIDER AND PASS UPON ALL OBJECTIONS TO THE EXTENT OF THE ORACLE ROAD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND THE HEARING ON THE SUFFICIENCY OF PROTESTS FILED AGAINST THE ORACLE ROAD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND ORDER THAT NOTICE OF SUCH HEARINGS BE GIVEN AS PROVIDED BY LAW Craig Civalier, Civil Engineer III, reported that some protests and objections have been received from owners of land in the Oracle Road Improvement District. He explained that the Arizona Revised Statutes requires that a hearing be conducted to consider all objections to the extent of the improvement district and ruled upon them. He reported that staff suggest a hearing be held relating to the sufficiency of the protest against the Oracle Road Improvement District be scheduled for September 15, 2003 at 4:30 p.m. MOTION: Council Member Johnson MOVED that the date for the hearing on all objections to the extent of the Oracle Road Improvement District and the hearing relating to the sufficiency of the protests against the Oracle Road Improvement District be scheduled for September 15, 2003, with an Executive Session at 4:30 p.m., and the hearing to be held at or after 5:00 p.m. in the Town Council Chambers and that the Clerk shall notify the objecting property owners and protesters by mail and publication, as required by law. Vice Mayor Wolff SECONDED the motion. Motion carried, 5-0. 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 11 2. PIMA COUNTY MAY 18TH 2004 SPECIAL BOND ELECTION— INVITATION TO MAKE A PRESENTATION TO THE PIMA COUNTY BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE • Chuck Sweet, Town Manager, reported that the Pima County Board of Supervisors has taken action which calls for the County Bond election on May 18, 2004. He explained that the information from Pima County indicates that the May 2004 bond election will include G.O. Bonds for open space, neighborhood reinvestment and other projects that will eventually be recommended by the Pima County Bond Advisory Committee. He explained that, as outlined in the council communication,the invitation indicates that the committee will use the following criteria in order to prioritize funding for the 2004 bond election: 1 Does the project provide a regional benefit? 2. Can the project be completed within a five to a seven-year time frame? 3. Would there be enough bond authorization and other revenue to fully fund the project? Mr. Sweet explained that based upon the criteria outlined above,the two Oro Valley projects that could potentially fit Pima County's criteria arel)the completion of the Oro Valley Library; and 2) funding for the Naranja Town Site. He explained that each of the projects are at different stages in the plan process but neither was ready for a bond election, especially as early as next May. He suggested that the Council thank Pima County for the invitation and encourage the county to bring forward the open space acquisition relating to the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan and the neighborhood enhancement monies available within the region. In answer to a question from Mayor Loomis, Chuck Sweet explained that staff has been informed within the past week that the Steam Pump Ranch Historic Site was listed in a report created by Pima County along with many other historical sites as a cultural and historic site for preservation. Mr. Sweet reported that Pima County would like to have the various presentations submitted by September or early October, so that the Steering Committee has sufficient time to deliberate and develop their recommendation by December lst. Council Member Johnson recommended collecting more information to find out what would really fit. Mayor Loomis expressed concerns that in past the Town has had significant problems in obtaining funds that were designated to the Town and felt that there should be some sort of guarantee that those monies dedicated to Oro Valley would be available. Vice Mayor Wolff agreed. Council Member Abbott recommended that the Hohokam Village be included as a historical site. 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 12 In answer to a question from Council Member Abbott,Brent Sinclair explained that the programming and the planning for the additional 10,000 square feet for the library operational costs could be included. Council Member Abbott suggested that as the Naranja Town Site was being developed and the phasing, staff might want to focus on which phase would be beneficial to the Town to be developed first. Jim Kriegh,40 East Calle Concordia, suggested that the Town should consider preserving the Steam Pump Ranch Historical Site as well as Hohokam Site and Kelly Ranch site. Mayor Loomis stated that the following information is needed from Pima County: • What kind of guarantees the Town would have that the monies would be available. • How the rules would apply to the projects and to open space restriction as presented in the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan(SDCP). • Collect data to determine whether other significant open space areas that are not significant to endangered species but are significant to other things. • Gathering information for the various historical sites and cultural area that are identified in the SDCP. • How much funding, if any, is available? Council Member Abbott expressed concern that if the presentation is to be ready as soon as October that Council should schedule a meeting and move faster. She stated that she would hate to see the Town lose out trying to get a presentation together. Council Member Rochman stated that the Town might want to consider running its own bond election for acquiring open space in the future. COUNCIL REPORTS -None TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT -None DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS -None ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Council Member Rochman MOVED to ADJOURN the meeting at 9:54 p.m. The motion was SECONDED by Council Member Abbott. Motion carried, 5-0. 09/03/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 13 Res ectfully submitted, Linda Hersha, Secretary II I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular session of the Town of Oro Valley Council of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the _3rd_ day of September 3, 2003. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this I q day of , 2003. IAAAJ Ca4kAixt/ Kathryn E. Cuvelier, CMC Town Clerk TOWN OF ORO VALLEY 'OUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: October 1, 2003 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR& COUNCIL FROM: Robert Conant,Planner H SUBJECT: ORDINANCE (0) 03-32 (EXHIBITS J-1 AND - OV9-03 17 T SLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF OR ALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA,BOUNDED ON THE WEST APPROXIMATELY 630 FEET EAST OF ORACLE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 580 FEET NORTH OF MAGEE ROAD,ON THE NORTH BY RANCHO CATALINA NORTH (SOUTH OF CATALINA SHADOWS BOULEVARD)AND ON THE EAST BY THE CORONADO NATIONAL FOREST,THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS RANCHO CATALINA: TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY CR-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R1-36 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-141- 91A 225-130-11A, 225-130-10A, 225-170-280, 225-170-18B,225-170-17B, 225-170- 290, 225-170-190, 225-170-240, 225-170-340, 225-170-25A, 225-170-330,225-170-230, 225-170-200, 225-170-350, 225-170-26A, 225-170-390, 225-170-360,225-170-380, 225-170-370,225-170-220, 225-170-320, 225-170-270, 225-170-400,225-170-210,225- 170-160, 225-170-300, 225-170-310,225-170-760, 225-170-150, 225-170-140,225-170- 460,225-170-770,225-170-130,225-170-750,225-170-450, 225-170-470,225-170-440, 225-170-430, 225-170-120, 225-170-420, 225-170-410,225-161-630,225-170-780,225- 170-090, 225-170-740, 225-170-730,225-170-720,225-170-100, 225-170-480,225-170- 710, 225-170-700, 225-170-790,225-170-850,225-170-800, 225-170-110,225-170-490, 225-170-520,225-170-500, 225-170-510, 225-170-840, 225-170-810,225-170-860,225- 170-510, 225-170-690, 225-170-680,225-170-830, 225-170-080,225-161-620,225-170- 670, 225-170-070, 225-170-820,225-170-870,225-170-650, 225-170-660,225-170-550, 225-170-540, 225-170,530, 225-170-560, 225-170-580,225-170-880,225-170-950, 225- 170-060, 225-170-890, 225-170-900,225-170-640,225-170-940, 225-170-590, 225-170- 600, 225-172-210, 225-170-960,225-170-930, 225-170-610,225-172-160,225-170-050, 225-170-920,225-170-910,225-170-630, 225-170-620, 225-172-170,225-172-150,225- 172-180, 225-171-060, 225-172-190,225-172-200, 225-170-980, 225-170-970,225-170- 990, 225-171-000, 225-171-010, 225-170-040, 225-161-610,225-171-020, 225-171-030, 225-172-140, 225-171-040, 225-171-050,225-172-130, 225-172-120,225-172-090, 225- 172-100, 225-172-110, 225-172-22A. BACKGROUND: -)n May 7, 2003, the Town of Oro Valley annexed the above referenced area as part of a larger annexation of land called "Area B" (Ordinance No. (0) 03-09). The attached maps identify the location of the area and the current and proposed zoning designations. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 of 3 In accordance with State Statutes, the Town is required to change or "translate" the zoning on the annexed properties from its original zoning designation to the closest comparable Oro Valley zoning designation. Section 9-471(L) of the Arizona Revised Statutes(ARS) states: "A city or town annexing an area shall adopt zoning classifications which permit densities and uses no greater than those permitted by the county immediately before annexation. Subsequent changes in zoning of the annexed territory shall be made according to existing procedures established by the city or town for the rezoning of land." SUMMARY: The Pima County zoning designation for the area is Single Family Residence Zone (CR-1) and the most similar Oro Valley zoning district is R1-36. The subdivision is built-out with single family houses. OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED TRANSLATIONAL ZONES: Pima County CR-1 (Single Family Residence Zone) 'he Pima County zoning designation for the area is Single Family Residence (CR-1), a suburban residential Lone,which allows one dwelling for each 36,000 square feet of lot area. The subject parcels will be subject to Section 18.17.040.D of the October 2002 Pima County Zoning Code regarding building heights, which is a maximum of 34 feet. The parcels further will subject to the provisions of the October 2002 Pima County Zoning Code Section 18.17.020.A.6 regarding the keeping of livestock. Oro Valley R1-36 (Single Family Residential District) The Town's R1-36 zone allows single family dwelling units on a minimum lot area of 36,000 square feet. The zoning classification does not permit horses or other farm animals under normal circumstances;however,horses and other farm animals, except swine,will be permitted per the county standard as a result of Resolution(R) 02- 68, adopted by the Town Council August 1,2002. The maximum height in R1-36 is eighteen (18') feet; however, the County maximum height of thirty-four (34') feet and two stories will remain. The area is built-out; therefore, it is necessary to maintain the current County building height standards to encourage consistent redevelopment. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE: The proposed zoning designation limits the area to the same density as permitted by the General Plan Land Use designation. The General Plan designation for the area is Low Density Residential (0.6-1.2 Du/ac). NOTIFICATION: All property owners within the annexed area have been notified of this proposed translational zoning and the area was posted in accordance with Town and State statutes. To date, staff has not received any comments. F:\OV\OV 9\2003\9-03-17\REZ.TC.RPT.doc TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 3 of 3 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning and Zoning Commission on September 2, 2003 voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the translational zoning from Pima County CR-1 to the Town's R1-36 subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit J-2 within the attached ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Town County approve the translational zoning from Pima County CR-1 to the Town's R1-36, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit J-2. The conditions have been included within Ordinance(0) 03-32. SUGGESTED MOTION: The Town Council may wish to consider the following suggested motion: I move to adopt Ordinance (0) 03-32, translating the zoning from Pima County to the Town of Oro Valley zoning districts for Area"B" as annexed by Ordinance (0) 03-09 adopted April 7, 2003. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-17\REZ.TC.RPT.doc ' 1 I / 1 1 ; jt...-T\.\\\,,,,\ i ll-,.,1 ..‘.7.1.,:j,•/1 it!, ...1..,... ..."i ,,. .. ,s, ,,,,1 I .i./ /...r.. iss.,.._1....::„si„........ E • -•••• ----- I / i --,... -----,,,..----. / sr i •. t \ -I Td--,-•- .- ,------7,---._:...... --..1 "ii I L,'1'11 \ ' ' / '...---- .„ .• . , i 1 , 1 1 , .. .... .. f i z• ,• ,1.i..,-ri TI 1 i -ii..II rc •: ----; ..±___ p....-,1 - ..d..„- - . . • ; . . , , ... • ; 1 . ; • ! o La'....!...1_1_1.1......, • '.....,..1_4_1.. ._.1 - -.,.' . '• 1 I _Li '•'••,"• .I " , 1 77 .11r .. .[111--1. - ••., . zI r n-vq_ A F ---- ....•• -•-.`--\, „;• \'' \ T ---•••• ... /...74 F:--Lt.57. •••. .....----'• :. .\, .7,.:__tii, \..... :,..,....11..:..../.........i. i '..• • 1.-----: .....•••-sv ..'••••• -1.- •= ',...'71.7:•••,---1*. 47-./ 7---T- - • ..:..-i ..-_-,:if•••••.,7/-::"..] • i 0 -..-.21.--.4-4,-, 1::7 .- 1 I I-,..).', • :T-----1 ----- ..._.---'1"--i"- /. .,..,,,,,''-''''': • i ---.1 r •, /---; ...../ , --'417 - -----' F I i.,:-/ , , ..... ----__--1,H---rjr.:::/ _ . f %••.•\ ---- '''----••":‘•'•• \ i I' )1 1 - I '1 '. ,. : . I , i ., • . \ .-., , . , - h k.4V,,X.,:41,,,wi .i t..---- 7 k..:..1_.._....---7- • ; ! __ -4-'...:? 7,-1-r-r[ ....- •••• ). .. 1 . ,, 1 ----...!.177----0-.. t--- , i , i .. -,:, .....,:....-- \ .......,--T /i-----.--7.--:;./..--.•:- f:::::7....L.:i7..--Lti pit__ ___.9.Y9-0 3.0 8 :-__ u_lr,...1,.:-. \'•-•„..- . '•' ; ,•----V. 1 ! / 1 .....,_, \ ,... .. ov.•,e;.2 2 ___:•_:-:-.11TILLILI '...:: _........,......... \•„.. .'....<'".. \.,‘„:........../:.".711,.... 0,,y.SLO....$.1.,111.7.L..)rt........:::,> c..\--. '1 I •''.0 ________.--....................---........---.--•••••••- •• ---------.--- --- --- '• '.. '' %,...:(' 1 '•:-.i -11 i; 1 // \ *--.7 t . 1 . ..1 I \•• ./ .4 I'I[I I LL.- 11:LiE-__47 1"----....I .,..-..• •-.........•'•T- 1 1 / 1 \_. ...1----1- t u L I , .) ......4, . , , / ,, „.1 . I ii■ ....21 r L-:-•-_,ft..--:-.. -- -- ! \ ..-... .‘ N..,--. , ' '',-..--. ------7--‘\ , i 1 ... • . , I. i- -1 w •-•-; -1,4 0 9.0 3. 3 L-177i7"- '1,--; \ i ' ' "•' ".. i k 1,-- - t' \ ' • , .. • ! -1 1. A' i"-' \ 1 ; - ; . ‘‘''' - • -.4-..... •-•. \. •\', ••-..:.---:.------r.-7rJ,. - . I 1 : 11 --.1 ,./..? k i'.1:2 t=-1,r.,... i-:-.I • i • -,-.....- -7--7-7-••• --- - .1. ---, ... .., / -, --1- \ \ , )--- / - - ...- t:--) z 1 ..• I •• i I 1 .' !i 1, • 71 r 1'1 [11E1U.LE • .. . , , , , ,„ - , ! .. I , \ \--- t, \ / ,, \ \ i I \ ...(• -----. ....-- ; . , I ! =z .:•-, -L-4 ___________ / ,......•...-. ,1 --.I......,.. ',.........--. 1 i i ,; I •T -_-__I 11 1 ii . i • • /,. .c.'.11 0V9-0 3-23 ":±1. L.i [ • ! i • . 1: __I:. ._ --0V-9.0 3.il 8- i OV9413.0 9 .-.,• ... ., .•. I : -1 T r, .,• ,..7-.-_-, . . ..., .141 , • \\ i 1 1 I i ) 1.. i 2 i i MAGEE ROAD •. • i ' I : )- \`'., .. , / / -------------; . • 1 , ! i ' I I • , i I I ! t , • • I I . I • ,I /-1 ,' ---„--- . • • It ' • :12 --------. ;• „. • 'I-----H. !---L"-- i ,' L____. , _ ,,,, ,. • i I 1 , I. • , , - . . tl OV 9.0 3.0 7 ------ I '--------L-- : 1---`,..._.,'., 0V9.03.1 9 -4 ! . \ : V 1 i • 1------ -- ' 1 V.------ - > • - • : '-' ' -si- - I u -, 1 , ----------I i------1.,---- ----;"---/ ....------ - \ \ ..... ...1 . . i V ri __ ... .. V/ t • 1 •-- a" ,....___..1 I_______------- --7 --•-........., 1.'-• ,\ / / •••- 1! . . ' M (. ' 0 \}'i . /... ' • --- - ._1.--.- - 1 ) \ \'...-- --____ i ,• I it......,..... , *----•• g • ! 1 1 , ,L............. =. , ., 9030. iv-7----. ‘ `. \.,' i \ 1- --''• ('•-•. .1 '1 I i it i / `N)/ L. •" 1 I 1 ‘ 't, *:.-.- -' ,.:., i !- i x . ,9-0 3-1 \ i, \..........--...-t ,....,,,, .......„1 . . i i t i..._1•-••-. ..-••• \ .• OV90 30 6 ..•-•„) , 1 „- 1 1 1 :\. /.., I _ i - -- II ,,--L-....-_ ...•\......- ..--:.--.. 1 1 1 1, - I- k • f (s /1. \ .•-•- = 2 ‘ -'''''---------• \ ----- :,......\• '' 'i OV 94340 ... ' 1 ‘ ./ ' •/,. -,‘', i >`"•:----- V .---- > --•----r-1 \ •-.• 1 i 1 i .\-, •-1.,. ‘...----.-----•- !t '. . \ = . . -- --- •-----,.. __.,.---. , • , ; , ,.....--. ,......„..- ;,........._... i 1. • ,, , 9=0 3-2 . ...-,.. • ..- f / i . • /1 -------\..• :-.-. -- ,,„/1,-----__ ‘ ..0..... tli I -1 I I V /:--- ••-•.. . • I -7-- -- ---1 I - - . .... • - -- - , , • „ ."I\ \ '‘ • / I \ ', , ', . •%. ' \ I ''. .. I 1 1 / .1 / \ / L..t......_. ,..,,,.... ., Z -.I ._l-----'" il ..... • -.-'-- i 1-----H 1.---- • ..,..,1.,1,1 1-7. \ tl, 1 . \ ... 1 t '\ ‘ , i 1_...--: - \-. ', r - ... ....- , ,, • , . i.-- V /...3 .i - r i 1 i 1-1-1 11 0 9-0 3-0 --1 i t v i ‘ 1 1 I •,.. • I • _ ____ I I \ ,it '1 .1., ‘. ., 1 i 1 ...... 0"1" . • i - , ., .- . . ...-. a . . .... . I , . . .•••'..,,,.• ;' , , ; , . •, .,. ••, I ' ! ! --,. 1-----•'•- ----!‘ .•''--•-••------.-;f.:.. -',,,,„. ••-,:,.... i/ ...... -... \ v_....-•- . / ------1 1 1 I 1 !______.........,;:....___.........7, ---........_7 ---- ( •-; `... ',/ I .. 7 ' V9-0 3-0 i • , j L.I _______i_L_Lii___-:.--•OVII •4•13 . ... - i • •• 1 ',-.• I : .•:.-. •-; I..-„, / [.".--1 •......:"' ''... •V 9-I ' - ..,• :....t -, A\ cl-sr ). I t, _.•-•4:.... _ ' • , \ 1 ; 1 .....• i; .••••••„1 ___.:___ •,-,:-IV . • , ..._. I- ..____.! ! 1 ---,j-------/ \ \ ., ! : 1;•••1 '.. -• 1• ti,...,..-:-.-4-/ _ .1_ --1 1 ' I / •I ,• i I ; 1 ,L,____L_.- f , -- . , Y. ! , ••17 ,:: OM • Translational Zoning Location . Map • • • • • . . • 1 { '(\O GA County Pima C yZoning a 2 v to Oro Valley R1-36 Zoning ewINDYVISTgp ,23 N C Qv 6oWFRs cr ____-...-a- �eG < t Fiy�N o& i OWA� i 11 { W CAMINO CORTARO j .1/4AIN MORNING DR \ \ 1. J 4 iu E.C4T4LINASNP'�O A #11111, am 1 1 1 E CHOLLA SHADOWS DR 111111010. 11111 i 0.1 • PL 4RRANEAN DR • 1 I+ 04 4 E MOUNTAIN VISI p' .AtWillal I iir 1 I 01 I il ill r ;:1 c re O O • g e Z 'qd RANCH• VIII _ , - • • ti O 2 ?MADRID DR i till • Z 1. w i N M i ■ 11 a E MAGEE RD i W MAGEE RD i V9 - 03 -- _ 7 Translational zoning EXHIBIT J-1 TO ORDINANCE NO. (0) 03-32 OV9-03-17 TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY CR-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R1-36 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-141-91A, 225-130-11A,225-130-10A, 225-170- 280, 225-170-18B, 225-170-1713i 225-170-290, 225-170-190, 225-170-240, 225-170-340, 225-170-25A, 225-170-330, 225-170-230,225-170-200, 225-170-350,225-170-26A,225-170-390,225-170-360, 225- 170-380,225-170-370, 225-170-220,225-170-320,225-170-270, 225-170-400, 225-170-210, 225-170- 160,225-170-300, 225-170-310, 225-170-760, 225-170-150,225-170-140, 225-170-460, 225-170-770, 225-170-130,225-170-750,225-170-450, 225-170-470,225-170-440, 225-170-430,225-170-120, 225- 170-420, 225-170-410, 225-161-630,225-170-780,225-170-090,225-170-740, 225-170-730, 225-170- 720, 225-170-100, 225-170-480,225-170-710, 225-170-700, 225-170-790,225-170-850,225-170-800, 225-170-110,225-170-490, 225-170-520,225-170-500, 225-170-510,225-170-840,225-170-810, 225- 170-860, 225-170-510, 225-170-690,225-170-680,225-170-830,225-170-080, 225-161-620, 225-170- 670, 225-170-070,225-170-820,225-170-870,225-170-650, 225-170-660, 225-170-550, 225-170-540, 225-170,530, 225-170-560, 225-170-580,225-170-880,225-170-950,225-170-060, 225-170-890, 225- 170-900, 225-170-640, 225-170-940,225-170-590,225-170-600, 225-172-210, 225-170-960, 225-170- 930, 225-170-610, 225-172-160, 225-170-050,225-170-920,225-170-910, 225-170-630, 225-170-620, 225-172-170, 225-172-150,225-172-180,_225-171-060, 225-172-190, 225-172-200,225-170-980, 225- 170-970, 225-170-990, 225-171-000,225-171-010,225-170-040,225-161-610, 225-171-020,225-171- 030, 225-172-140, 225-171-040, 225-171-050, 225-172-130,225-172-120, 225-172-090, 225-172-100, 225-172-110, 225-172-22A EXHIBIT J-2 TO ORDINANCE NO. (0) 03-32 OV9-03-17 1. The subject parcels will be subject to Section 18.17.040.D of the October 2002 Pima county Zoning Code regarding building heights,which is a maximum of 34 feet. 2. The subject parcels will be subject to the provisions of the October 2002 Pima County Zoning Code Section 18.17.020.A.6 regarding the keeping of livestock. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY 5 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: October 1,2003 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Bayer Vella, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING— ORDINANCE NO. (0)03-32 AN ORDINANCE TRANSLATING THE ZONING FOR THE NEWLY ANNEXED AREA COMMONLY KNOWN AS AREA "B"FROM PIMA COUNTY ZONING DESIGNATIONS TO TOWN OF ORO VALLEY DESIGNATIONS AND AMENDING THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ZONING MAP: AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH PROCESS: Approval of the attached ordinance would replace all Pima County zoning in the subject area with Town zones in one action. Within the ordinance, one will find a map and table that references the specific OV case numbers, associated parcel numbers, and corresponding conditions. For more specific information regarding each parcel or groups of parcels,please see each of the attached case reports. BACKGROUND: On April 7, 2003, the Town of Oro Valley annexed 654.7 acres in the vicinity of the Oracle/Magee Roads ntersection. This area has been commonly referred to as the "Area B" annexation, which was formalized with the adoption of Ordinance No. (0)03-09. Now that the annexation has been completed—the next principle step is to assign Town zoning. This is the focus of this agenda item. In accordance with State Statutes, the Town is required to change, or "translate" the zoning on the annexed properties from its original zoning designation to the closest comparable Oro Valley zoning designation. Section 9-471(L) of the Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) states: "A city or town annexing an area shall adopt zoning classifications which permit densities and uses no greater than those permitted by the county immediately before annexation. Subsequent changes in zoning of the annexed territory shall be made according to existing procedures established by the city or town for the rezoning of land." SUMMARY: Ordinance No. (0)03-32 In all cases, staff utilized the most analogous categories. Whenever properties are translated and the two jurisdictions involved have distinct zoning codes, standards such as building heights do not always match. As a result, staff included conditions associated with particular properties to insure that rights are maintained. There are numerous examples, such as Suffolk Hills. This subdivision had been developed utilizing a 34 foot building height in the County and the Oro Valley standard is 18 feet. A condition to allow 34 feet was included in the ordinance. This will insure that redevelopment occurs in a consistent and equitable manner. Conformance with Town Resolution No. (R)03-68 Resolution (R) 02-68 was adopted by the Town Council on August 1, 2002. It provides that newly annexed areas will maintain livestock rights specified in the Pima County Zoning Code. A condition has been included for applicable parcels within the ordinance to insure such rights are preserved. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY _OUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 of 2 Zoning History In the past,many of the subject parcels were rezoned in Pima County to allow more intensive development. The ordinance provides that all conditions of Pima County rezoning will be maintained with the translation. NOTIFICATION: All owners of property subject to this translational zoning have been notified of this proposed translational zoning and the property was posted in accordance with Town and State statutes. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE: The majority of translation rezonings are in compliance with the General Plan (existing and/or proposed). For the cases not in compliance, the Town must still translate the zoning to the closest comparable district per Arizona Revised Statutes. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION: On September 2, 2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously (5 to 0) recommended approval all of the proposed translational zoning. Please see attached case reports for specifics. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the attached ordinance. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. (0)03- , translating the zoning from Pima County to the Town of Oro Valley zoning districts for"Area B" as annexed by Ordinance(0)03-09 adopted April 7,2003. ATTACHMENTS: / 1. Location and Zoning Map 2. Ordinance (0)03-32 3. OV Case Reports Plannin 7 Zoning dministrator 4/115)1 Community Development Director itg,„ 141,_ Town Manager F:\OV\OV9\2003\Revised Area B Ord\TC Report Overall.doc 1 , .1. $ I • )1 ' ' ' r f---T.---- ---, i '1.- i i iiiii_I • , i , 1 i 1 ; , ,r,-- -k...„.....1 1 Ism-c.-i,,:s.-- ,...,,/, , 1 i . ; 1 \\, _I • 1 \_ 'i ,......_ , , " / A. -1---1- --1 ----, .--r---------•C r%-3.i' ,c-,,L_LI Lii Li I' C4L 7 . ,_.._ ..!, , i • i ' 1 ' 1 \ i ' 1 i — I I .41. II ,ii ! , ,,,,/ \ , ,..1J 1 . . ("k1:4:-; ----__Li „?<\\ ( / ,.-- >" \ 1, --1- \ \ I ! a.1_____.--i---1-2:-•-\\\ \ ----,j--.= ''' \ i ' ) 1 11' .!j le 4.1 , ..,A-2 1 0 1 lib..._,._ ____I i _ ---........____— r ....-.. ./. ! i \ /- \•-, . i ---/1:7:7,----r•-, , • ' .k•-•—•4 i .....Ar" ,A,„)------h----i •-•'11---11::::7- 4LjjEF ;-- . '''-:.":-----11,§ i 1, 1 \,. ,......J. ......._,,....... j , i 4..—-------"i i-•------Al ---""".""" 1-" 111 1 ....I'T111 -1, .."-'ji 1 (... / ! 7 1---- 4,- \\ , IT.Au.,.,...,.:.„7 _____i I ,,,,,,,- ,, ,:-.......„..\ , 1 \ ,, ...., , ,--.....,_ ,..,,,, , , , 1 7-7540%,-) / i F.7,,.4..,..._.,.,4,-....; ,,-- \,......./-\....-4. , , i,-.. / i n , ..- iAw, ,....,, , / , i \ , -i s""-- "--'t ............---, k i ; I TR-to R _, - , T. 1:r „.....„4 tr-- \ ,,,,,„,-.V. ......_ i-----\\ SR"Id-RI-144 i _ - ex.0-1,ex.B-2 'LI,,,i,1,-.4 • \ \ 1--------rir-::.- -..oxz7..," ,.... ' 5_1-'4 \ - "::.-- '\• l,5\/ I )r' •- „ ..-1 : i i I .0 .7 s/1,04.1111 iiii ,--• ,,,, \ „ , , • • .< 1 to ;-,it...., 1 ...._,;„, i , , ... 1--- >,/,„\,.. ex. r, . 1 --7/ ---c i 1 /,/ \--••- "I r , _ P,--., ._...-- --- ' „ /----,- , 1 /, K,NNI, ‘,,....--'-' .,-1-• - - \ 1 L / 1 k, r"---. \ r I ,--- I tzzi —I _.-- . '' ,...,_ ' • — . ..„ 1 , 1 I. 1 ,--, .,...- --- A ---\ / —Tr\\---- , I i I . I --5„--- ...-j. i 1 i ii I Ii i ip_---..i {1.11.1..0 all] I I I I . ( 1 , ! , , 1 , ! 1 _ :=.., .,..._ . .i....4_1....j 1--.....4_____/ ;....____j----r." 1 1 I I \r/ a CB-2 to C-2 Eli /\ i \ /I 1 i , _..L_____\..--`,, )-----cl-- [----1 ex.E-1 -- Epvi to;_-,2,. SR to R1-144 ,„ ..... , '*---1, -7, T _, - z I - • 1 j i 1--- \... -..- 'r.-.---"e.." 1 • • i i ( , ...„-,,,-- , i 1 I i 1 1 I !r ex.C1,C2 : : • _ , •..."41- , MAGEE ROAD ----\\ 1 ! --1.- ir R t oIR-S Lit ir , 1 , , i f L 1 --------1 1 ' Hi ' • ... ............_1 — 1 L------I eX.F-11,F-2 ii i 1 1 1 I i • i ° vr sCB-1 to C-2 ---------/1"-- / ' 1 ,-•-•,/ 1 1 1 GC .. _1 i ex.N-1,ex.N-2 Lu ...) ..,. ....,.... 111 l ---- ---- rmi 0 --7 1 5 t___1 • . 7. - 1 I 1...._______i ... ........:: 1 „„.."\ I „-'" 1 L, \ \ 0 1 ,--1 11 I) ' ! ' / ! ,,,, , i i i , 1 1 - I \ .,. 1 - , lifillia-!MIMI TR-toliT/S/\ \ii)'-"A 1_______ - " I \ \ / ......, _ // 1 1 : • • 1 j .,9:1, ,C1-.2::: \---- „-- . ,." • , / / I/ I "--\\-: ' ,. ---------1 .• • ___.'—T.'"---- ..„.,,.. .. ,,,, ,-- i -----.<\---)-:-/- iii ,,„„, ._....,, • i ' / ' II 1 , - .,-...- 1 ___ k 1 • ,L ,„, ,,.,,,,,,, k 1\ \ I - \ , I L....... , ... ,, ,.,-.,• 1 \ \ . ' , I 1 ‘ 1 1 I i 1 xC01 *4 0-1 il ----."-el \ \ L ii\ ..1,-. ---- ........... % , i I . .-.1 ..* L..... , _„___ _ _........ , I -NI 11--"-:.--"Tilli lr- ----,...---1 _____.. ../ <\\\,____ SR to 1-1'144 1 ji • • 1 1 '1 i 2 Mili L _i.. i. I , __.L___..1 • / / "' is, / //'' ) — -----TR to R-8----fr— 7' ."''' \ 1 , ,, ,,,,' \,..' i.:_,J-1-1 u.-z,,\ 1 ' i) " I TR,to R-S rt. --). - ' ,,, c., ).„:: -Iv „,,... „ ,, / ex.H-1,ex.H-2-1 _____ (:'k( i lex.0-1,ex.Oin •------7 \ V °Hi-, 1 ( 0 ) 03 - 32 Translational Zoning Exhibit Map ORDINANCE (0)03-32 AN ORDINANCE TRANSLATING THE ZONING FOR THE NEWLY ANNEXED AREA COMMONLY KNOWN AS AREA "B" FROM PIMA COUNTY ZONING DESIGNATIONS TO TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ZONING DESIGNATIONS AND AMENDING THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ZONING MAP: AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; WHEREAS, On May 7, 2003,by Ordinance(0) 03-09, the Town of Oro Valley annexed the approximately 654.7 acres commonly known as Area`B"bounded on the west by Northern Avenue,on the north by Camino Cortaro and Rancho Catalina(north), on the east by the Coronado National Forest and Cobo Catalina Hills, on the south by Catalina Village and Westwood Look Resort and further described by the attached annexation map; and WHEREAS,the properties affected by this zoning translation encompasses a part of the annexed area comprising approximately 614.7 acres currently zoned Pima County CR-4 (Mixed Dwelling Type Zone), CB-1 (Local Business Zone), TR(Transition Zone) CB-2 (General Business Zone) SR(Suburban Ranch)and CR-1 ( Single Family Residence Zone); and WHEREAS, in accordance with State Statute ARS 9-471(L),the Town initiated a request to translate the zoning on the annexed area from its original Pima County zoning designation to comparable Oro Valley zoning designations; and WHEREAS,on September 2, 2003 at a duly noticed public hearing,the Town of Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with ARS 9-471(L), considered the translational zoning requests for the affected part of Area B as shown on the attached zoning map and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS,the Oro Valley Town Council has considered the requested translational zoning and amendment to the Town zoning map at a duly noticed public hearing and finds it is consistent with the Town's General Plan and Ordinances. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY: SECTION 1: That the Town of Oro Valley Zoning Map be amended and the zoning designations be translated as indicated on the attached map, said districts being R-4 (Townhouse Residential District), RS (Residential Service), C-2 (Commercial District), R1-144 (Single-Family Residential District) and R1-36 (Single-Family Residential District)with conditions. The following table indicates and indexes the zoning translation with Exhibits indicating Parcel Numbers and Conditions of Zoning which are attached to and made a part of this Ordinance: Ordinance (0)03-32 Page 2 Case No. Pima County Oro Valley Parcel No. Conditions Zoning Zoning Exhibit Exhibit OV9-03-21 CR-4 R-4 A-1 A-2 it OV9-03-08 TR R-S B-1 B-2 1 OV9-03-14 CB-1 C-2 C-1 C-2 OV9-03-22 SR R1-144 D-1 D-2 i OV9-03-23 CB-2 C-2 E-1 Not Applicable 6 OV9-03-12 TR R-S F-1 F-2 9 OV9-03-13 SR R1-144 G-1 Not Applicable /0 OV9-03-16 TR R-S H-1 H-2 if OV9-03-09 SR R1-144 I-1 I-2 /t OV9-03-17 CR-1 R1-36 J-1 J-2 OV9-03-18 CB-1 C-2 K-1 Not pp hcable fy OV9-03-07 CB-1 C-2 L-1 Not Applicable f,' OV9-03-10 CR-1 R1-36 M-1 M-2 w OV9-03-19 SR R1-144 N-1 N-2 ii OV9-03-06 TR R-S O-i 0-2 iy OV9-03-15 SR R1-144 P-1 P-2 fi OV9-03-20 TR _ R-S Q-1 Q-2 SECTION 2: That all ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith, and the same are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. SECTION 3: That this ordinance and the various parts thereof are hereby declared to be severable. If any section, sub-section, sentence, clause,work or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason,held to be unconstitutional, such holdings shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Town Council of the Town of Oro Valley,Arizona,this 1st day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Katheryn E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk Paul H. Loomis, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mark Langlitz, Town Attorney EXHIBIT N-1 TO ORDINANCE NO. (0) 03-32 OV9-03-19 TRANSLATION ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR(SUBURAN RANCH)TO THE TOWN'S R1-144 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT)DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER: 225-500-010 EXHIBIT N-2 TO ORDINANCE NO. (0) 03-32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OV9-03-19 1. The subject parcel will be subject to Section 18.17.040.D of the October 2002 Pima County Zoning Code regarding building heights,which is a maximum of 34 feet. 2. The subject parcel will be subject to the provisions of the October 2002 Pima County Zoning Code Section 18.17.020.A.6 regarding the keeping of livestock. 3. All prior development rights,permits and approvals by Pima County shall be maintained. Schools and Churches shall be a permitted use. 4. Any further development on the property shall adhere to setbacks from existing property lines in accordance with the October 2002 Pima County Zoning Code. 0 4li1t Ijo6f1i-11r-:ij-eii°,$,itr. Iiailslf iq i fi. M1t,1i;li 1-c:I4.1f, 1f;. O 1 Z 05iw w Z ;"i 2 w w !if, p Ai g Iiid: p OT tri.l0lair.fl °e:i i il.l lI yr,r Il.a1l1- pa i /i 9 f � i 4t-Ii, g!-41; 18 ii!1t i1ilili1 i4i0fi- ftft4!5- fir u 1 !qf1 Jr ps2 t 8 S V g t. § i1 p tts t 8 �d s s 8 s i d O K < s s �gs 8 8 8 ► ,! 11 s s s s s g g 1 1° 9 9 9 s*si� S S f� . a 0 it% I ;L° u'llt 1 li i I 1 I 1 I et qil 1141; El ifii 8 3 a h li di ! Ili III WI 1 g 1[ ;AO! illq , it it 1 ; li W 161 xi i: ic tc- rs - r i i 101 ; fil :i ;3 fret :181 ; ' ; ; ' 1 I 11 1: 11 ti 1 Pitt g g 6 $ rig g tf iE!1i Pr:f ill Is I ' i i RR -- 0 ' rili 9141 fff --xPI if rui -Aff iii :if ita 10 1 E if 5f1 ffIl Mt 4t 8 413 I Et 11% x ►- x - t iI ii 4 qi Ni fli ;id 4 :111 11 liff qii I i: il I 1 i! wit - iiiN. li In tU of II bia tit Dig fifi if -E, 1 2 sli:1 N pn!.1 A "II.. N eill 1 i ht, 3 I" 14 0 q 9 l I i :I. Ili ` P I : li 11I .ggi L 1 tg eilt yr ill I 0 1 Ft! leit. $ge .ig.; .1. ill; 14 it sty a h :. E IT g, fl" r II % 1 lq i ft! lqf 08 ?§f ;5, / 4. IT ,i.- 4 icf Al "I 7,11 " irtf 4 11;11; f; Iii i h ei 2!'i ii! ili lil; 1 ill q Jill !if 1 ! ; 74 i' �� ;1� l s s g ii - s '��� s �s$ it TMI 9i ltii. ill i,E., it Li. i ail i i 1 i v 4f7,---IX‘ " ; I I §brEi rig Fl '' § 7-.'ellit''.3...: 11 !!;:if !Ii:1 11 !f 111:f riP'' C 11T t ,.;,.:,707:6 'it4 Illik.7 Wil 1414 :II 4 01 -30,t4 t-• tri -0 )PV'e m,g,„. ii..4011,.. ir 2 1 Aply 1111 Ea 8!2 r -,_,;-,-.24, „ w, t3, ti , ,-:.t ' ' .:::4§- ':4:1 i !ffi 2 ? Ill 1 ft 111 a LI Er! -T IP 4TN) t\D 1 y ti ril 11 ;II fil _. ;:e;:'-: ..) crf 4. 4,-- 11 - Ha fsrfr, fl If iti h1,; g fig S ba v,�p 00 ii ��%i t irsi S §rt ; jc4 I 0 0 trZi '. g ih 1 a t E 9 a i 1 c ti ; ;I:1421 lei TS II. , V R , ' P. 1 ,_ N w . . .. . . • • • , . • . . . . . • ,., . . • • • . . . . • . . • • . . . . • • . ‘•••.-.e.,i,••,..4..... Nt i!! f;7 .--::.:i I ,/ li T . /.... , ... . 4,L2k., , , /„. ii...................• • •-- Tr .7 :,ir..-.1• : / • • ! 1 f I:... „, ...,••••,......2, . •••L,....1_i 1 ,, ,i ",. ..,/ ,..... .; ,.,N, ,...=.!;:.........7.-..:**:4.-r••••-•••=!:..^.........::-.... * 't . . .L./ ; ; i \ •: ,.-p-- St..!'-',.. .---11 i t:s i,l,p,...:(1914diittli ••••,'! : j f i r I .: 1 ; , . SCALE: 1-.800' ----1---1 -.••••it.;1.5.7:M1.1.7.6...:1.......i...,..i..:...1•••••••,••-.1-...Lr.L.-4.-J.-.," .,,,-.. t 1 , • ..'1,''ir-diAliNAktk mu."'i.-Tr;A!VI,'...e..-. ••..' • 1 ) ! ) ., ; ' , I .. , ; ' 'I, ..., : .. .III L.._ .. . L,.....: . .,. i'...'•I'''4.......:'?1 !. 's,. ,...--3-•-,,1 ; ••. , ,•••.,. 1 ; i ... • ........... - , . -^"'-'---', •.. I ;41.1.da, ., I.'''''',:'''.1...,'\.,..2,..:•.?...::-.•*-- ...,:.... ..,,t*.:. i •,,,,.....g;_____ ••:;'?3, ' ' .:, \ 1 ; ; • 1 .... ;• c.,,, / •••••I'.• • . :••'.-.:- ' ' ....,s.....1.140,''P&.. .•••::•••••.....-• • . .,.. ,,. , 1. ; ; ••= t,-‘,....•,-,........L,. ! •-•.,•,.... , .:::1.,1 .• ,,,,,,.1.t-'••!'••••••"-; • N..,,... 1 ; '‘•,•"--.1/ ... '•,:t...•`',,/1 'iCEiriiRTgiing* .. •. -,. -, + .. i / '.-. '..2.:.'.....-".....-4.4.. 7' ."- !' •gt.......o.promif si6 to4..........—.:- •..,.... .• L,.?4,,,,,,, 1.--• , i i. inq, / .. -f••.•-••••••11 .--2.• ....\ ....;!•••••••••-',, • ..,,. 1 larb.010 I. ; . ...., ' ""•-•/......'":. .--IF:':':•.. .. .'''`... .'. ':••".. ::•••... 1/...^..;e41.."1%;', - .4_•.:....:1.,;L,:,4. ;' ' •*. /I ''.• '''TX 1 1.7;"' i or. . rig ittirN•'.i.0„'.0 ,;_,VAILirt LlY1111/1) .. -----1'. i i i ; - `-----1•-•-•••••••-• •!-- .. .s..7..,=4; —..",'.:,-04:p. - 7 . ..;,•,'',;:"..rs.:;:".;?;,:-,• ••••'...•'f., t 2:, -;?"-- . ... *••• , . . i ''',..;•1 • ....'.......:).04C31,06*. At,COTIPORAIE Lawn OF NC Mom OF ORO VALLI"?' i 'T}.' •s':• . .Y,"'":1 •.:?...,..../:,..'." . - ' - '\& \\'\ fESEiliD011 i 11 . ::;,'. .. •1• •'''''''''',2:•••'..;''''' t EeS1P.9 CORPORATE LASTS OF?NE TOR N 0 F ORO VALLEY .; ''•• ••'''-'1'..- I!,i4•P.24.11144.:-.,:•:;!••••••..---......•-••/ ,..:-.....L.t. -f: ...7/'''.. %)::',- II•i!j.i'lit-t-..• r'.: *7 '.......•-V'....-r.--t-''--7.-..;"::'..•?... ..•.-..L.,....,I- i....--4:`-4'.:4-----t:•''''-'1•••••-,•-r...........:....-,t/ ....,---C. ;:,---1.--•••••:.:.... , 1 r4„k.-,,,•304.0, `,,,•,...' :,..--; .. i ... ••-7 1 1.........., , ; .%..-..--•• , ..,,-... .. -71i ••••i -- .; -.: i; -..., ..•r.',..—..... . ,•-•.--1, 1 .. . • .. C=1171177011 OF KAI) - , --,-4,-- , 1....._..!Z52:...._-__Iii /'.7,-,:,.„;„,:'1--.1 1••'%," \•,.''''',.s. !'7.':'L........i i kc•''''L.L. ---•-• ..., , :1:7-:7\--....11,..A.itir:. L 1 1 . . .0*., •,,...i.----,,....-; 7.7.-t--,s.•••••• ..,......) ,, ',. ‘ . ....... I P,In li ,.•....., ,..'' .,........k ,. / 1 .1.. ...;i.. i7",• I.PAUL H.LOMAS.MAYOR OF THE Tows or ono vALLEY. i 1 ,,_....../ ,,,z...4x... 1.-- ....-,. &-**\ '1 '‘-..,,,,-•!--1--,".-1••---" . 1 ''.. •••---•••, ARIZONA.HEREBY CERIIFY THAT DRS IS AN ACCuRATE MAP OF •7,;•-•-*"'".'",----- E;11.11---------—-1- , i:.,.. -,,:: ., 7 s• „Ar..i4-. ‘., ‘ ..• : :. '• ...,... .1.,r••',....'•••,, THE TEldwToRY ANIEXED TO THE TOwN OF OR0 VALLEY. ANZONA,BY ORDecNNCE MO OF THE ORDINANCES OF . 1 I if.,::'''''.i..Z.:::-.211---.1,--1"‘Z ',•e'''.-, .>•-l'..--i .1 ...,.....iitkl.-' • ‘. , : . THE TOwN OF ORO VALLEY. .. l''''.•;\ • ....J11•••-•-*-4.--- •-• „: i ; c<•.:F. ...f ::,...f, i ! sl,.%;N.\. 1".. ; I...ii400 : i '.........‘,..zi.,,..4).„.• . :,., I . %.....7.••••7.:`e ..'••••-j, •,-,. , ..ttr ...-,,,,--t-.1,;,-.16401° .:, ',...,-,....:::,30,-/-'T--F-.., • .: : . . I I -.i,1 ' .,' i ''.: N. -....-,...••-'''4 .. 7'.k ' : i Thy ',.. , '..•- . i :-li.ttLq112.:t r- ? ! • ' ' ,. ,1. ;".. • ', :.,..1...,i.,.......,....,..'...!.0.....,.---.1.1 . • MAYOft PAUL H.LOONIS ' . 0 '41 .i:. ' •• it g ,.. ..4 t...i/ ?..,..,:._•;. : • • • , • • • ,iki3 oro „.4. ..," ATTEST: TOWN CLE ( KATHR1N E.CUvEUER i • . =7. ... ..-.... .....: *,... .; .. --,..—....1-..... S.: - '7.::....'.:2..... i ::...:*.: :-::::---ii , 1.L.:..:: ....::...;_:.4........-. .;.:..........i.::: 7......-,...,s..5?: ...tI REcoRoiNO DATA.. p. . . Y' •-•••••,r• -------,.,—: :-...7.7-.-i.c,-,:::.-'..' -7"7.•- '-' •-:,, ii .. .1, $ ' St/ ‘,1 STATE OF ARIZONA) SEQ.NO. !......... —!,.. - : ;••••••,............... : : .. , . , , ! !. :..,•• oi..,i' ....-.••••••,.;... • COUNTY OF PIA)) FEE: L--- t : • '..........., I_ .1 ! / i ?•--...... - • i. '. '.. 14. ...J FLED FOR RECORD AT THE TEOUEST OF THE TOIN OF ORO VALLEY.ARED:14A,ON THtS_DAY Of 2002 AT ...., ., ...;;;; 1-........,........! 41,.; . . , ei 1300K or MAPS AND PLATS AT PAOE ii. , :: % .1/. -- : ;1 • --.1.-------- I: e: ...., ..,.: t.,------J.:7 „.......,•,, .. ,, : ,.___, ......„ , , , ..... •. WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL THE PAY AND yEAR AR0NE • manTEN. • ' 4 i , , i i .,, ,....., • ..-•••- •••.. • .••-•.•••_...-. ....:,,--•,-,-J., (..,. .,-..g.,:'0, • • . . •• .... • ...--••• .,..1,...1,--1 i ; •• •• ! •• ••.• .• ,••• .....-; . ---",,,i.i ''..••'.•••• i ; .1-• ! 1 --'•••••••••-•:,•:.•......• '. .• •--- • • •••••••• •-• •,.../.• ‘----r ''.',.,,,. F.Atet RODINOUEZ.PIRA COUNTY RECORDER .. .. . 1 C) I ;-.-'-‘--I- ,'''''. .....7:-...,--''•k ••".••• ''. ', ', I'. i '! . :'. ,••','''',. . ''..! ; :..._,,.... DEPUTY . i., ..;.........,...., 1,'. ' '". .,'''-'71.••• ' .,-' ......'..•.:y.,:,.*. --.L.4-•--ia.,.,.. .: ,''''... .. :“:'''........*:. : 1, ...-,-•.. . i.w. pow— ,Ilk ,,- , , — ' 1 ; = \ i......4:, .. ...,,,,...,..-,. i )—.;7,....F.,,i, . .. •• ., . . • ..„,......2:.-— .,. ''-' • .1 .; 1 • ; .. i DO ./1 : , .1. ".•', '.' • ' 'i ' .r.",..'i ''. : i . ,;', • . '•. , ••• '•••:. • ..;. MAP OF TERRITORY TO BE ANNEXED • i .., 1 i ; ; ',x 1--•..‘ I. : .i )........**111•41ti-....r'''', '. '.. .!..-.A.-.:-.#',. '... ....\,...'•."...:..4;';;!--'.. ; . . . f , • , —. , ,. . , TO TIIE' TOWN OF ORO VALLEY '•-••••••—•:z..)-:':: . 1 .,. i', '. \ ..,•:'.:..--.-......Y(.....•••• **...-••......' .::'...'‘. ,....t..--!': .. i 1 1 ,1 i :, 1•': titit i • tairrs.-.--1.107-•_nor::.row....-.-pr..-..o/o .•-vAL4gy--•••- 1:.;••1. :' ?-1-arde....,„.&:::::.,),••'.........;.:0....i.......... i • , . , , ; •• ., . ANNEXATION 2002 — PARCEL B 3, ......._,........__L_...__..:...., gn.-- • ,.. .., ...,, ,...........,,,...i y, .;.,cr --I\ • ..., . ..... .. . . . . 7.., .1.. ........ c : ,.....„.......:;,....._-. ,....,, ..., .•.•;•,,,•. vt.,.., .....;....„..,...::;,:,....- , . • ) . .•, . ,5. .,•:"., ,::',1 ... .......... .. ... •— ..:-.. . —1 ;""----"'-' . ..-• , .....;;e, ',.....;V...........4*. ' LYING WITHIN A PORTION OF i .., ,i•-• ---z..: 7 • ; .''. ''. .%.,.... '.' %‘..,....:,.:-.sl•', '''' , .. . . • • . SECTIONS 25, 26, 35, & 36 OF . . . - . • pAiiall,B T-12—S, R-13—E, G.& S.R.M., . • . • • ._.,iv::-Jr,.. PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA . • . • . . • • .. • . • TOTAL ARRA OF . . . . . Al11181CATION . . 654.7± ACRES • . . •. . . . . . . . . . • . Engineering and Environmental Consultants,Inc. • . . 4IMIS L PT.LOWIU.RD. . • EEC 202018 TUMOR,ARIZONA 86712 620-8/81-41136 1 of 2 • . .... . • 90(301( PAGE . . — . . . •. . . . . • AFFIDAVIT - PUBLICATION STATE OF ARIZONA) :ss. COUNTY OF PIMA ) REN BRIChA i being first duly sworn, deposes and says that (he) (she) 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 Tuc- son, County of Pima, State of Arizona and elsewhere, and the hereto attached Ov9--03--19 PUBLIC NOTICE was printed and published correctly in the regular and entire issue of said THE 1 DAILY TERRITORIAL for issues; that was first made 1 Ut h SEPTEMBER 03 on the day of lath 20 and the last publication thereof was made on the day of SEPTEMBER 03 20 ; that said publication j pithy each of the following dates, to-wit: Request of . TOWN OF• ORO VALLEY Daily Territorial BY 026AL Subscribed anorn to before me 1 day of lU . SEPTEMBER 20 C3 ,, ,� fa'ry Pu rc '� Rt STate of Arizona Pima County My Commission Expires`„ Ro6y1S.DaileyMcComi1C �`' Expires June 15,2007 - NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY TOWN CC In accordance with ARS 9-462 and Section 3-111 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Re- vised, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FOR RE- CENTLY ANNEXED PROPERTY BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL IS HEREBY GIVEN: TIME:at or after 7:00 p.m.on WEDNESDAY,OCTOBER 1,2003 PLACE:Oro Valley Town Hall,Council Chambers 11000 North La Canada Drive Oro Valley,Arizona SUBJECT:PUBLIC HEARING—ORDINANCE(0)03- ,OV9-03-19,TRANSLA- TIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIV- ALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY MAGEE ROAD AND ON THE WEST,SOUTH AND EAST BY SUFFOLK HILLS,THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE IMMACULATE HEART SCHOOL: TRANSLATION ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR(SUBURAN RANCH)TO THE TOWN'S R 1-144(SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT)DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER:225-500-010. The property was annexed to the Town on May 7,2003 and,in accordance with State Statutes,the Town is required to change or"translate"the zoning on annexed proper- ties to the closest comparable zoning district within the new jurisdiction. Members of the public are invited to attend this meeting and will be given and oppor- tunity to speak. An agenda for the meeting will be made available 24 hours prior to meeting time. Should you have any questions regarding this matter,please contact Robert Conant, Planner II,at(520)229-4800 or bconant@orovalley.net. /s/Bayer Vella,AICP Senior Planner Pub:The Daily Territorial September 10,2003 Req:Town of Oro Valley pnov9-03-19 kb NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL In accordance with ARS 9-462 and Section 3-111 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FOR RECENTLY ANNEXED PROPERTY BEFORE THE ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL IS HEREBY GIVEN: TIME: at or after 7:00 p.m. on WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2003 PLACE: Oro Valley Town Hall, Council Chambers 11000 North La Canada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING- ORDINANCE (0) 03- , OV9-03-19, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY TO THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED AREA, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY MAGEE ROAD AND ON THE WEST, SOUTH AND EAST BY SUFFOLK HILLS, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE IMMACULATE HEART SCHOOL: TRANSLATION ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR(SUBURAN RANCH) TO THE TOWN'S R1-144 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER: 225-500-010. The property was annexed to the Town on May 7, 2003 and, in accordance with State Statutes, the Town is required to change or"translate"the zoning on annexed properties to the closest comparable zoning district within the new jurisdiction. Members of the public are invited to attend this meeting and will be given and opportunity to speak. An agenda for the meeting will be made available 24 hours prior to meeting time. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Robert Conant, Planner II, at (520) 229-4800 or bconantgorovalley.net. Bayer Vella, AICP POSTED: 9-11-03 Senior Planner time: 10: 3 0 a.m. by: drm F:\OV\OV 9\2003\9-03-I 9\REZ.TC.NOTICE.doc MINUTES ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 01,2003 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11,000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Paul Loomis, Mayor Paula Abbott, Council Member Dick Johnson, Council Member Bart Rochman, Council Member EXCUSED: Werner Wolff, Vice Mayor PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Loomis led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. UPCOMING MEETING ANNOUNCEMENTS Police Chief Danny Sharp reviewed the upcoming meetings and events. CALL TO AUDIENCE Helen Dankwerth, 11515 N. Flying Bird Drive, expressed concerns that references to Mixed Use Neighborhood (MUN) designations may still remain in the General Plan update. Bill Adler, 10720 N. Eagle Eye Place, expressed concerns regarding temporary signs that are placed in the public right of way. Richard Anemone, 13987 N. Honey Tree Place, questioned why the Oro Valley Police Officers Association was denied the right to circulate petitions in order to place an initiative on the ballot regarding a"Meet and Confer"measure. He asked that they be allowed to gather petitions, forward the matter to the voters, and then if the voters approve the initiative, the legalities can be addressed. Sharon Brown, 960 W. Silver Spring Place, asked for clarification on the completion of the Town's road projects. She also presented the Council with pictures depicting the status of Moore Road at Copper Spring Trail and illegal construction traffic along Copper Spring Trail. Dan Krueger, 11,000 N. La Canada Drive, President of the Oro Valley Police Officers Association,thanked those Council members who agreed to meet with the Association to discuss the "Meet and Confer" issue. He asked that the Council place the item on a future 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 2 Agenda for consideration or that the Town Attorney"step out of the way" and let the voters decide. He also asked that the Mayor agree to meet with the officers to discuss the issue. • Carmen Trevizo, 11,000 N. La Canada Drive, Treasurer of the Oro Valley Police Officers Association, stated that their goal is to get a long term contract set up with the Association and the Town. She explained that there are morale problems within the Police Department due to the perception that all officers are not being treated equally and issues seem to be treated at random or arbitrarily. She asked that the Council revisit the "Meet and Confer" issue. Council Member Johnson directed staff to look into the comments received by Ms. Dankwerth regarding MUNs and by Mr. Adler regarding temporary signage. Council Member Abbott directed staff to look into case law supporting the decision to not allow the "Meet and Confer"issue to be placed on the ballot. 1. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION: Council Member Johnson MOVED to APPROVE the Consent Agenda with the exception of Item G. Council Member Rochman SECONDED the motion. Motion carried, 4-0. A. Minutes—9/8/03; 9/15/03; 9/17/03 B. Library Monthly Activity Report—August 2003 C. Reappointment of Bob Horn to the Municipal Property Board of Directors with term set to expire September 30, 2006 D. Appointment of Richard Tracy to the Public Safety Public Retirement System Local Board E. Report on emergency repairs to water Well F-1 F. Resolution No. (R)03-83 Declaring for purposes of Section 1.150- 2 of the Federal Treasury Regulations, Official Intent to be reimbursed in connection with certain Capital Expenditures; and declaring an emergency G. Resolution No. (R)03-84 Project No. OV 30 03/04 04 Acceptance of bid and award of contract to Southern Arizona Paving& Construction Company in the amount of$54,964.80 for the Moonridge Pavement Rehabilitation and Copper Spring Trail Striping &Median Installation (PULLED FOR DISCUSSION) H. Resolution No. (R)03-85 Authorizing and approving a Contract with Westland Resources, Inc. in the amount of$119,100 for Professional Engineering Design for the South Oracle 16-inch "D"Zone Main I. Resolution No. (R)03-86 Consideration and approval of a Financial Participation Agreement with the Greater Tucson Economic Council J. Resolution No. (R)03-87 Consideration and approval of a Financial Participation Agreement with the Metropolitan Tucson Convention and Visitor's Bureau K. Resolution No. (R)03-88 Consideration and approval of and modification to the Financial Participation Agreement with the Chamber Serving Northern Pima County 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 3 L. OV12-00-19B Approval of Rancho Vistoso Parcel G re-plat Final Plat for four (4) single family lots located on the west side of Desert Fairways Drive within Rancho Vistoso,Neighborhood 10,Parcel 21922001G M. OV12-02-21 Extension of the Preliminary Plat for"Aguila at Vistoso" subdivision(Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 5, Parcel N) located on the east side of Rancho Vistoso Boulevard,North of E. Arrowsmith Drive and South of Moore Road,Parcel No. 219-53-004Y G. Resolution No. (R)03-84 Project No. OV 30 03/04 04 Acceptance of bid and award of contract to Southern Arizona Paving & Construction Company in the amount of$54,964.80 for the Moonridge Pavement Rehabilitation and Copper Spring Trail Striping & Median Installation Town Engineer Bill Jansen reviewed the status of the Town's road projects: • La Canada Drive Extension—IGA's with ADOT are completed. Consultant has resumed design work and the design phase is 75% complete. Funding through the PAG process has been secured with an initial proposal for bonding being submitted to the Council for consideration. Construction should begin in March 2004,with completion taking about 10-12 months. • Moore Road Extension—Vistoso Partners will bid out the project in December with completion taking about 6 months. • Copper Spring Trail issues— o Safety issues were forwarded to the Town Engineer and Council by citizens. o Responsibility of Town Engineer- must respond to safety of the public on the Town's roads. o Initial steps—striping of road defines roadway, width of travel lane, shoulder lane, etc. (Colors of striping, signage, etc. are mandated by Manual of Uniform Traffic Devices.) o Considerations can be made regarding reflective verses fluorescent colors. o Staff can meet with neighbors regarding locations of medians/possible addition of one more median. Modifications can be made if there are no impacts on the other 4 medians being installed and no blockage of private driveways. o Chief Sharp has agreed to place traffic trailer along Copper Spring Trail once striping/median installation is completed to monitor traffic speeds. o Medians in conjunction with striping should help restrict speed. o Use factors have not changed with shoulder lane striping, can still park along roadside. Mayor Loomis opened the floor for public comment. Don Bristow, 12190 N. Copper Spring Trail, stated that he feels that the Town created the traffic problems by allowing cut-through construction traffic. He stated that Copper Spring Trail was developed under rural standards and was not designed to be a collector or arterial road. Sharon Brown, 960 W. Silver Spring, reviewed results from a neighborhood survey that was taken. She stated that 73%of the residents voted against center striping, and most favored 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 4 —privatization-of the road, with their second choice being center islands. She questioned why • striping had already been done since the contract was being awarded at tonight's meeting. She further stated that the striping has made some residents more comfortable when walking, but people are still driving in the bike lane(shoulder lane) and pedestrians have to get out of the way of the vehicles. Steve Solomon, 919 W. Morning Thunder Court, thanked the Council and staff for taking action on the safety issues along Copper Spring Trail. He stated that he has seen some improvement since the striping was done. He stated that he feels safer when walking in the shoulder lane now whereas before, it was"a free for all." MOTION: Council Member Johnson MOVED to APPROVE Resolution (R)03-84. Council Member Rochman SECONDED the motion. DISCUSSION: In response to questions from Council Member Abbott, Mr. Jansen explained that temporary striping was done until the full contract was awarded. He explained that there were issues within the Moonridge subdivision and they have now been resolved. Therefore, the Town is prepared to move forward with the full project. He explained that the interim striping cost was approximately$2,000 and was done to address the safety issues raised. MOTION CARRIED, 4 - 0. 2. PUBLIC HEARING—CONCERNING THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO INCREASE THE ORO VALLEY TOWN-WIDE ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FROM $2,008 TO $2,920 Town Engineer Bill Jansen reported that the Council approved Resolution (R)03-62 on July 16, 2003 which established the Notice of Intent to increase the Town's Roadway Development Impact Fee. He explained that the agenda item tonight is for a public hearing only and any action by the Town Council will take place on October 15, 2003. Mr. Jansen then introduced Mr. Curtis Lueck, consultant, on the project. Curtis Lueck, CLA, 5780 W. El Camino del Cerro, reviewed a PowerPoint presentation. Items reviewed were: • Overview of current Ordinance • Ordinance update process o Re-evaluate fee structure o Technical Analysis/Changes since 2000: • Town boundaries expanded to west, south and north. • Origins and destinations the same, but more travel now occurs on Town roads. • Added over 8 miles of arterial roads. • "Growing Smarter" legislation was adopted. • Cost of providing roadway capacity has decreased by approximately 2%. o Typical mile of four lane arterial costs $6,195,992. 32,000 daily capacity at 15.7 average Oro Valley arterial vehicle miles traveled per EDU (Equivalent 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 5 Demand Unit) per day. Calculation is :$6,195,992/32,000 x 15.7 - $120 (HURF credit)= $2919.91 (rounded to $2,920) • Future Viability of Impact Fees: o Town has annexed to its western and northern limits. o Expansion areas to the south and east are mostly built-out. o Potential for new growth is limited. o Future impact fee revenue potential is limited—Need to consider alternate sources of revenue. RECOMMENDATIONS: • Adopt and implement an increase of a net fee of$2920 per EDU. • Recognize that impact fees will diminish as the Town"grows out. • Continue to consider alternate revenue sources. DISCUSSION: In response to questions from the Council, Mr. Lueck explained that the cost of construction has decreased slightly due to a favorable bidding climate. He also explained that travel through the Town will continue to increase over the years as projects outside the Town's jurisdiction build out. The travel demand will continue to increase on the Town's streets and roads even though the Town's population might level out. He stated that the need for capital projects will not diminish even though the Town stops growing. Mayor Loomis opened the public hearing. Steve Solomon, 919 W. Morning Thunder Court, stated that he is a member of Southern Arizona Home Builders Association (SAHBA.) He explained that members of SAHBA have met with Town staff to review calculations on how the figure of$2920 was arrived at. He stated that they were satisfied with the information, computations, etc. that were provided by Town staff and he would recommend to SAHBA that they not oppose the increase in impact fees. Mayor Loomis closed the public hearing. Mayor Loomis recessed the meeting at 8:20. The meeting resumed at 8:32 p.m. 3. PUBLIC HEARING— ORDINANCE NO. (0)03-31 AMENDING THE ORO VALLEY TOWN CODE TO MANDATE THE USE OF RECLAIMED WATER FOR IRRIGATING TWO (2.0) OR MORE ACRES OF TURF,AND ADDING THE AMENDMENTS BY REFERENCE (DECLARED A PUBLIC RECORD BY RESOLUTION NO. (R)03-77) Water Utility Director Alan Forrest reviewed the Council Communication. He explained that as part of the Town's efforts to develop a Reclaimed Water System, several items must be in place prior to issuance of bonds to finance its construction. The first step is to change the Water Code requiring large turf facilities to utilize reclaimed water when it becomes available. He explained that proposed Code amendments mandate that all existing properties inside the Town's water service area that irrigate two (2) acres or more of turf utilize 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 6 reclaimed water at the time that the Town has Reclaimed Water System within 200 feet of their property. Mr. Forrest stated that new large turf areas would be required to extend the reclaimed water distribution system to their property and use reclaimed water regardless of the distance from the system. He reported that the Water Utility Commission previously recommended approval of the Code changes to the Council. In response to questions from the Council,Mr. Forrest explained that once Phase I and II are completed,the system will cover a large portion of the Town's service area. Once the project is complete, a new facility would be expected to install an extension of the system to their facility(similar to what is required in the potable system.) He also explained that once the new system is tested and ready to go, facilities would have 90 days to connect (with the possibility of a 60 day extension approved administratively if necessary.) If there were extenuating circumstances, the applicant could request more time from the Town Council. Mr. Forrest explained that if the facility did not meet the requirements,their potable service could be discontinued. Mayor Loomis opened the public hearing. There being no speakers, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Council Member Abbott MOVED to ADOPT Ordinance (0)03-31. Council Member Johnson SECONDED the motion. Motion carried, 4—0. 4. PUBLIC HEARING— RESOLUTION NO. (R)03-89 TO ESTABLISH A GROUNDWATER PRESERVATION FEE; ESTABLISH A RECLAIMED WATER RATE,AND TO INCREASE EXISTING POTABLE WATER RATES FOR THE ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY Water Utility Administrator Shirley Seng reviewed the Council Communication. She explained that the Resolution approving the Notice of Intention to increase existing potable water rates, establish Groundwater Preservation Fee and establish a Reclaimed Water Rate was approved by the Council on August 20, 2003. She reviewed the public comments that were received and the answers provided to those comments. Ms. Seng then explained that if a Reclaimed System was not constructed, the Water Utility would have to: step up work on bringing CAP to the Town, reapply for an assured water supply designation, revise the Potable Water System Master Plan, increase proposed capital improvements to existing system to address capacity issues, and replace reclaimed water resources. Ms. Seng reported that Potable Water Rates fund the operating and maintenance costs of the potable water system plus capital costs for existing system improvements. The recommended Potable Water Rates for a 5/8 inch by3/4 inch meter would be: • Monthly Base Rate= $12.30 o Tier 1 =$1.92/1000 gals. usage=0— 10,000 gallons o Tier 2 = $2.55/1000 gals usage= 10,001 —25,000 gallons o Tier 3 =$3.25/1000 gals. usage over 25,000 gallons She explained that 90% of the Water Utility customers use the 5/8 inch by 3/4 inch meter with the average usage at 10,000 gallons per month. This would equate to an average monthly increase of 50 cents. 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 7 Ms. Seng reviewed the Groundwater Preservation Fee proposal. She explained that: • Aquifers are declining at a steady pace. • Groundwater is a finite natural resource. • We have a responsibility to conserve groundwater resources for future generations. • Everyone who consumes groundwater has contributed to the depletion of the aquifer. • Everyone should contribute to the cost to bring renewable water to the Town in an effort to preserve groundwater. • Preservation Fee will finance delivery systems that will provide renewable water supplies. • Recommended Rate: All customers (potable and reclaimed)will be assessed the fee of 21 cents per 1,000 gallons of water used. Cost for average resident=$2.10 per month. Ms. Seng also reviewed the Reclaimed Water Rate proposal explaining that: • This will fund the operating and maintenance expenses of the reclaimed system plus a portion of reclaimed capital costs. • Recommended Rate: Equal to Tier 1 of potable water rate. • Only reclaimed water customers pay. • After all existing golf courses are on the system, it is recommended that a 10% discount be applied. Ms. Seng explained that all fees will be reviewed on an annual basis. She also reviewed charts depicting "Impacts to Customers", "Rate Comparisons with Other Cities and Towns" and "Who is Paying for the Reclaimed System." She then explained that any rates adopted by the Council would become effective on November 1st Dr. Leo Leonhart, 11435 N. Flying Bird Drive, Vice Chair of the Water Utility Commission and Chairman of Renewable Water Resources Subcommittee, stated that the proposed action would enable the Water Utility to offset a significant percentage of the Town's demand for high quality,potable water that is now being pumped for the aquifer. He stated that the Water Utility and the Commission have carefully debated the fairness and relevance of alternative financing schemes for the project and that the proposal represents their best efforts to provide a"fair and balanced approach." He stated that the consideration should be for who benefits and not necessarily who pays. Dr. Leonhart urged the Council to adopt the reclaimed water proposal stating that it was a positive measure. In response to questions from the Council, Mr. Forrest and/or Ms. Seng explained: • Assured water supply is typically renewed every ten years, unless other factors (i.e. growth greater than projections) come into place. • Golf courses will typically use more water when on the reclaimed water system in order to leach additional salts out that are present in the reclaimed water. One local golf course has stated that they use about 15%more water now that they are using reclaimed water. • Must have reclaimed water rates in place in order for bonding to move forward. Customers will not be paying the rates for at least two years, so there is time to research numbers to see if any adjustments need to be made. 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 8 • Reclaimed Water is not typically set up with tiered rates. This acts as an incentive to people who are not required to use reclaimed water to go ahead and access the system. • If the property owner requested water service from the Town, and they have an existing well on their property,they would be asked to abandon the well per State law and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality requirements as they do not allow interconnection of different systems. • Extra monies from the Groundwater Preservation Fee could be used to purchase CAP water,to build dams in the CDO wash to collect water to recharge the aquifer,etc. • No credits or compensation were given to golf courses in lieu of paying for potable water infrastructure. Mayor Loomis opened the public hearing. Bill Adler, 10720 N. Eagle Eye Place, disagreed with Dr. Leonhart's comment regarding the fact that it was unimportant who pays. He stated that commercial users can pass the increase onto their customers,but the homeowner can not absorb those costs in the same way. He stated that it was a disproportionate rate to the homeowners to charge them 40 percent,when it should be no more than 10— 15 percent. He stated that he felt that commercial developments did not pay for themselves and that impact fees have always been calculated at an artificially low level. Gordon Byrnes,member of the Water Utility Commission and Golf Course Superintendent for the El Conquistador Country Club, stated that the Country Club is currently paying$1.92 per 1,000 gallons of water used. He stated that the Groundwater Preservation Fee would add 21 cents to that and the Reclaimed Water Rate would increase their cost another 46 cents per 1,000 gallons. Then there would be additional costs incurred to treat algae in ponds,higher PH in reclaimed water, etc. He stated that when all is considered,they are looking at an approximate increase of 50%. He asked that the scenarios be revisited. Doug McKee, 11836 Cassiopeia, thanked the Town staff for their help in understanding the economics and factors involved in the proposals. He stated that the incentive for investing in the Reclaimed Water System is primarily to meet the State's requirements. He stated that one of those requirements is for new development to show that they are mostly using renewable water resources. He also stated that everyone has to stabilize the groundwater levels and there is the potential to pay huge fines if these requirements are not met. He also stated that new development would come to a halt if reclaimed water or CAP was not put into place. Mr. McKee asked that more equitable shares be assigned to future developers as new development should pay for a greater portion of the costs rather than the existing customers. Mayor Loomis closed the public hearing. MOTION: Council Member Johnson MOVED to APPROVE Resolution (R)03-89 establishing a Groundwater Preservation Fee, establishing a Reclaimed Water Rate and increasing existing Potable Water Rates for the Oro Valley Water Utility as identified in Exhibit "A"of said Resolution. Council Member Rochman SECONDED the motion. 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 9 DISCUSSION: Council Member Abbott commented that everyone wants to see the golf courses off of groundwater,but she was troubled with the rate structure. She stated that residents would not really be able to connect to the reclaimed water system and since they are paying for the system, don't they have a right to be connected to it? She also stated that she did not agree with the Tier system as it seemed to be punitive to residents and generous to commercial users since commercial users can pass fees on to their customers and residents can not. She also questioned why the Town couldn't just ban use of the groundwater on golf courses. In response to a question from Mayor Loomis regarding connection to the reclaimed water system, Mr. Forrest explained that there was nothing that would restrict anyone from connecting to the system. He stated that as long as one met the State's standards for using it and applying it, then there would be no reason why anyone could not utilize the reclaimed water if they chose to. Council Member Johnson stated that the reclaimed water rates apply to all large turf areas(2 acres and above)which would include Town parks, school playgrounds, etc. He stated that the Town and the school could only pass this on by assessing taxes etc. He said that golf courses were easy targets;however,the golf courses provide a lot of sales tax revenue and a quality of life for the Town's residents. He also noted that we do live in the desert and water is relatively cheap compared to other areas of the country. He stated that the proposals have been studied extensively by the Water Utility Commission and the proposal represents a balance. He stated that the Town will continue to evaluate the water rates. Council Member Rochman stated it is certain that we must bring in additional water into the Town. He also stated that there are many benefits to the Town brought about from those people that utilize the golf courses, etc. Mayor Loomis thanked the Water Utility Commission, staff and the consultant for their efforts on the project. He stated that the Council identified working towards a Reclaimed Water System as a top priority. He stated that the Commission, staff and consultant have worked hard to find a good cost for the system, a good cost to operate the system,how to adjust those costs to the public and the users and how it will be paid for. MOTION CARRIED, 3 — 1 with Council Member Abbott opposed. Mayor Loomis recessed the meeting at 9:40 p.m. The meeting resumed at 9:50 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING—ORDINANCE NO. (0)03-32 AN ORDINANCE TRANSLATING THE ZONING FOR THE NEWLY ANNEXED AREA COMMONLY KNOWN AS AREA "B" FROM PIMA COUNTY ZONING DESIGNATIONS TO TOWN OF ORO VALLEY DESIGNATIONS AND AMENDING THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ZONING MAP: AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH Community Development Director Brent Sinclair reported that on April 7, 2003 the Town annexed 654.7 acres commonly known as "Area B". He explained that in accordance with State Statutes, the Town is now required to translate the zoning on the annexed properties 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 10 from its original zoning designation to the closest comparable Oro Valley zoning designation. He explained that approval of Ordinance(0)03-32 would translate the zoning of seventeen (17) areas and the inclusion of specific conditions would insure that specific rights are maintained on particular properties. Mr. Sinclair also explained that the previous adoption of Resolution (R)03-68 by the Town Council in August,2002 would ensure that livestock rights would be maintained on properties in the newly annexed area. In response to a question from Council Member Abbott, Mr. Sinclair explained that the property owners that were directly affected were notified of the translational zoning as required by State law. Property owners outside the area were not notified; however, if it were a rezoning issue, then all property owners within 600 feet would have been notified. Mayor Loomis opened the public hearing. Don Laidlaw, Laidlaw Consultants,2841 E 3rd, stated that there was a technicality involving a property south of the rear service area of the shopping center located on the southeast corner of Magee. He explained that two properties are separated by a 20-foot County alley right-of- way. He stated that the RS zoning contains a provision that requires a 20-foot setback from an alley, along the side yard. He explained that the subject property contains some areas of floodplain, some areas of vegetation, and the developable area of the property is very narrow. Mr. Laidlaw explained that a 20-foot setback would reduce the developable area for a building down to a depth of 20-25 foot maximum. He stated that the County TR zoning only required a 7-foot side yard setback and also allowed the Administrator to reduce that down to zero. Mr. Laidlaw stated that he just wanted to make it a matter of record, and the remedy for the property would be either to seek a variance from the Board of Adjustment or to apply for a rezoning for the property sometime in the future. He then commended the staff for all that they did to carry out the annexation process. Mayor Loomis closed the public hearing. MOTION: Council Member Rochman MOVED to ADOPT Ordinance (0)03-32,translating the zoning from Pima County to the Town of Oro Valley zoning districts for"Area B" as annexed by Ordinance (0)03-09 adopted April 7, 2003. Council Member Johnson SECONDED the motion. Motion carried, 4—0. COUNCIL REPORTS—No reports. TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT—No report. DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS —No reports. CALL TO AUDIENCE—No speakers. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Council Member Johnson MOVED to ADJOURN AT 10:05 p.m. Council Member Abbott SECONDED the motion. Motion carried 4—0. 10/01/03 Minutes,Town Council Regular Session 11 Respectfully submitted, Roxana Garrity,CMC Deputy Town Clerk I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular session of the Town of Oro Valley Council of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 1g day of October 2003. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this / day of 06 Iv ,2003. Kath E. Cuvelier,CMC Town Clerk