HomeMy WebLinkAboutOV90322 Pima County - Parcel Data Page 1 of 2
broom
is TEC WM.
-lir SE ICES
Pima County Department of Transportation
Technical Services - GIS Database Services
Parcel 225-14-1870
ss
Read the Disclaimer. Information is unofficial. See the Pima County Assessor's Office for official
assessor information.
Assessor's data on this page is for tax year 2004.
Mail name and address Situs (property)
address Address sources
LAS CASAS BELLAS ASSOCIATES About situs addresses) Permits GIS Assessor
00000-0000 (About ��
There is no situs address
information.
Legal description
CATALINA CITRUS ESTATES IRR
PCL IN SE COR OF
LOT 2 LYG W OF &ADJ TO TUC-
FLORENCE HWY
(FORMERLY 203-42-010B)
Additional information for this parcel
• Assessor's Information from the Pima County Assessor's Office. See Tips for Printing
Assessor's Web Pages
o Tax Information: Year 2004 I Year 2003 I Year 2002 I Year 2001.
o Residential Model Characteristics: Year 2004 I Year 2003 I Year 2002 I Year 2001.
o Assessor's Record Map
• Recorder's Information from the Pima County Recorder's Office
o Recorded Documents for Docket 7136, Page 155. See Document Research for access
information.
o Voter Precinct and Districts is not available because parcel record does not have owner's
mailing ZIP code.
• Subdivision Plat Map
http://www.dot.co.pima.az.us/gis/maps/landbase/detail.cfm?parcel=225141870 09/09/2003
Pima County - Parcel Data Page 2 of 2
• Permits (Ignore Back button. Dismiss new window after viewing.) from Pima County
Development Services.
Development
• Section map for this parcel in Township 12S, Range 13E, Section 25. See Vie..wingAutoCAD
D F...._I:mages..
• Zoom to maps of the parcel's area:
o Autodesk Mapguide maps:
• Main..MapGu...ide._map
.
• Orthophoto MapGuide map.
• Floodplain MapCuide neap
o Yahoo! Maps (Owner's mailing zip must match the parcel's zip.)
• Parcel attributes derived from GIS data or by GIS overlay analysis:
This information is inferred. It does not come from parcel records.
Floodplain status Town of Oro Valley jurisdiction. Call (520) 229-4800 for Oro Valley
floodplain information. All data subject to this disclaimer.
Parcel centroid Approximately 32.35576 degrees latitude, -110.97436 degrees longitude.
coordinates Accuracy is limited to that of the underlying GIS parcel data source.
.�
http://www.dot.co.pima.az.us/gis/maps/landbase/detail.cfm?parcel=225141870 09/09/2003
t •
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
FAFF REPORT TO TOWN COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 1,2003
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR& COUNCIL
FROM: David Ronquillo,Planner I
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE 0(03)-32 (EXHIBIT D-1 AND D-21, 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
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.
-1 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 Suburban Ranch (SR) and the most similar Oro Valley
zoning district is R1-144 (Single Family Residential). This area is a small portion of undeveloped land adjacent
to Oracle Road.
OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED TRANSLATIONAL ZONES:
Pima County SR
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.
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'. Furthermore, the subject parcel will be subject to the
provisions of October 2002 Pima County Code Section 18.17.020.A6 regarding the keeping of livestock, as
provided via Town Resolution(R) 02-68 (attached).
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\TCRPT.10-01-03.doc
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
TOWN COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Pane 2
Oro Valley R1-144
The Town's R1-144 allows single-family dwelling units on a minimum lot area of 144,000 square feet (3.3
acres). The zoning classification;however, does not permit townhouses or churches and schools.
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE:
The Town's current 1996 TOV General Plan designation is "Office" which would allow professional office,
tourism, and service uses. The existing use does not conform to General Plan but State Law requires that the
Town translate the zoning to the closest equivalent Oro Valley zoning.
The Town's proposed 2020 General Plan (adopted by Town Council but not yet ratified by the voters)
designates this area as "Neighborhood Commercial/Office". The existing use does not conform to the General
Plan.
NOTIFICATION:
All property owners within the annexed area have been notified of the proposed translational zoning and the
'roperty was posted in accordance with Town and State statutes. To date, staff has not received any comments.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission on September 2, 2003 voted 5-0 to recommend conditional approval of
the translational zoning, specifying that, "the horse and other farm animal rights granted by the Town Council in
Resolution (R) 02-68 on August 1, 2002 be attached to the zoning".
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Town Council approve the translational zoning from Pima County SR (Suburban
Ranch)to the Town's R1-144(Single Family Residential)with the conditions in Exhibit D-2.
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 Oro Valley zoning
districts for Area"B"as annexed by Ordinance(0) 03-09 adopted April 7,2003.
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\TCRPT.10-01-03.doc
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
TOWN COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Page 3
Attachment:
1. Property location
2. Zoning Map
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\TCRPT.10-01-03.doc
VI IN
(.,',644.....1.Seigota.,IY.,..,IS VI
.?
4
41 1
i
NI 0V9-0 3-21 4' 1.
vi
... i 0 9-0 3•• .4 t
f •
...,,..,..
I '
1 . :
,•%,;., 4N.1,..„„
IS ...m.,............,44.........4 . I 41 11
... 0
II ..
il„
= OV9-03-22 I 4 4
i7 14
6
0V94 3-09 1 111
M 4. ,:i::: 1 •,',4'
• ok OV9-03-0:....;
A ti
I.1 40 OV 9ifilt-224';:: I 0V9-0 3-17 Zt
I w,,„ e.,;,,,,-----1 ,.,p• o lil
.. F, $ :$
Id
... ,,,
s 111 Oi 9.0 3-13 # ,
10,1
Oil 0 4 .4Y ,
#1 hi
1.1.4 V 0L.
m 0• t 1 # iti
El° t.z
Li .„,,,,,,,,,,,,...,,,,,—„,,,,,.. '' ''''''
I k:
4 0 1,10119-0 3-23
.. c
1 li
.4.
.... t .
a ....1a,......,toihyliti3.i 4
q1 QV 9-0 3-1 8 g
k,
I ,
Yi OV 9-0 3.09 LI
N Li
V LI
.0.,,
..•
... MAGEE ROAD -
ig..
,M
, T.
U
.....lf.,“:..,,i'..i.,... un,..o,..A.,..L.mr.....,,...•,...41-'".---,...Pasui44,41.,,,,,,,,.....,,,...,,,,ifi
.I kl
k,is
e!...
VQ•0 341 2
....., 144 ,
U 1...1
... „
::141 1„ •. C4'i 0V90 3•0 7 1 1 El
,. $ OV 9-0 3-1 9
I ...ti
1 ill I
0 i
q...
.1:
A 1 f
;Al a
a- 0.
1 0 k..,'t. . .. .... ... .,...„. :A7
q,,,,,........-.....,.....,....-.-4.......,„,............ r.
0;'901".::::‘,44""*
It ii i
et 1 ,,,,,,,at a.4,,,, ., . 11......,.....t.,..4
01,9•03..iir
'f'. ...
1.1,V V",11 0.10 0 4 r,--.
, g it
. '
m t., . _
!:„..,
i OV9-03-10
a 4 i OV 9-0 3-20 k,aou
...
= 4 I 1
a 1 if 9‘19-0 3-0:11, i.111
1•0 f A a
a
* *4...x...0...k,
r.' j N
1
QV"03•1 3 4-
.',..... ,,G,•••-...•,-,,,-.-El,r,',..,,,,,
';......,,,,,,,'"'..11,....t.,..;,ii.v,,,a.'4,....iirk ',.‘,4'...,,,,,,,,,,4.v....."‘.....-...,.....• . . ..., - •
77,fi V 9 ( de
Cialanzi.,
,,,, ..t
P''' .1. ,
. 1
d ri S , t 1 ' (...
0 11 1 I Z CI niti fi...,,,Y 0 („ atioli ....v a p
................__ ..........__________ ‘ , --..J
--- - -. -.----- -- -- ------- --------_-. _-_-------- _____-------- ....-.----.----_-_-__.......
4,
ATTACHMENT 2
0 1.1"
AV N2IEH12ION N
1
N PEPPERSAUCE DR
W
t ill.
N O 13
MIMI III
N O 3
)-ii 1 o
0,
o
ile
.., ID
cn ! I
n i'< '< I
pi. O
►r. O
r
CD o
�; N
1N ° I
in 1
tQ 1
1 '''' \\::
aCi N ORACLE RD
1 ii]
O
c
z
a
E -
I _ 2
.‹
I m N GIBRALTAR DR D
3 y22 E MFDIT�
D v
m 0 73
0 D
73 xi m
1 0
z
I R N MADRID D v
z
1 m
! I c
z
I i -4
{ Z
G
t ` -4
1'
I O
N VlLL,gGE A V
► O
I m c
W
O 0
7J
i m m
cn
o -o
r
EXHIBIT D-1 TO ORDINANCE NO. (0) 03-32
OV9-03-22
TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA COUNTY SR(SUBURBAN RANCH ZONE)
TO THE TOWN'S R-144 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT)
DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER 225-141-870
EXHIBIT D-2 TO ORDINANCE NO. (0) 03-32
OV9-03-22
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'.
2. The subject parcel will be subject to Section 18.17.020.A6. of the October 2002 Pima County Code
Section 18.17.020.A6. 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 a Zoning dministrator
•
7/114--
Community Development Director
Town Manager
F:\OV\OV9\2003\Revised Area B Ord\TC Report Overall.doc
/ . Li_jrnipar___..L.__) L...._..... 1 ...1._..) i____t____il_..4.",a.1,1::\ J fl,./7,kC.7.. 41(rc. ,7\.47)19,,.:,./79t‘>:.'cC.../E.:.; 41\---://---,_',:-.. :::11,,T:1,.....,,.11...r.j7--1 _111\:__:111.,. I:11 \.--,,-_-...."71
1 ---T.----- s'•-•.„ 1 ,. . ii17. 1 li 1 i i 1
r41.111L.1.1 1 I • 4, -\'--
; , \
I-- -1----1-:":;••-• \ L_Hil........1 7-7.1-ri.,.,;--.,--._ Ki-ic'.. .. /
...,/ „,... , , , , \ )
rti-texizi r .Anil ---1 .,„.
r-....:7--..,..„....,_ , .
ty„1... ....,.., 1 ,-... i ---'
::::',-/. F-_—_-1" -:"1 . ___,..._ :
P•*--- \ /,' i r., I_j_j— /....__.t../c..,—._ 1 /:: .--4
\ [
i \I A r--.., ...)..--i------\, ''••-.4,--i b:',.7,
. , /
/ 1 ...*----. g.--.'''. \--1\-------
i
I ...k., vog, ' C:.73 Lai 1::::.?
! f • -7"
n I C%tt.10: i 1 i--- 1TETT i•-r-7:1, 1 , \ ..., ::..-,... l `,.,,, 1 I I \ 1 \,s,
)
1,:............__S p TR to R-S Irtlir'.4 44' I.--
r .-\ . ),-",,..-"\ \\._ 1
FUtii-R1-144 awl ,,',,
ex.0-1,ex.B-2 ••T f . "•------ \ , .,,,•'''\ ,,N..,---r-- t / I i --,...
m 11 li I -
LL 1' 'F.-----r CiNtgi24."iinm I...J.,. . - , ...4_ 1:::1 \ -----‹ \."'" 1 „.. ,..,...
i ,,,,,-/1 - r • 1 1 :
-/-L-c-R:Ito / 111L -,- --T ----
..).„.......,.„,,,,_,,,,...\„.1 , ,
•-• y./.... \ ex. , !L\ ii---- ._.-. _
k • s 7 - 7 ,
I --ri--2-7:ii-7,-3
..t--7.:j-.1.-..:W=L--- i _ „/',/ \ --(/ \ \ \ / - 1
'''\:-. 1.--- i. 1 .......,---',.•
„..- , .
...-, Lt.-......-- ,..71..:-.7.:ift----•,-,r.,..„... ------r .-; \ , • -- ,......
1 -,„ .,,,,,.....:1-- \ ..„3--------,--- \,, / 1 1
, L ,
/
....., :,..._...._ 1
..—........eX E-1 1 , .. r p
-/------- > - --- .'- \ ...,- 1
_....7....._r_______ -- •L____...1._....._:,_.1 iii- z...,: [-H , Es3 .1
• • ! ---, ,---.... 1. .....I „.......i ,..- - 1 L --\_.... , / 1 ra—T- \ ,,,„..,-- -\\ 1 \ .„.„\ , Illth ----
.-" ---1—
, 111111.111.11 / , ( ! 1 \ 1
• , ; ; f . ; . ;
•-z/ c••
1 I I ,,,,''''':".„,•••••"-
•-f.----1- i 1 F.---i._____/ ` F-....-- •- ,i L_1 .CB-2 to 0-2 F 1 t I I ,
I
...ii
--, iil
il Clitiliilic-2 i
I SR to R1-144 I
I
/
! i • i i."--,..„,,,,,,,--/. i Et
1 ,
i ! ! . \ i 1 '1,' ex.C-1,C-2 .
,
...1..., i i.____ ......._.) (__.......1 __....1
I MAGEE ROAD It
1 - ----\S- ,,-
I j J ' 1 f 1 i • i 1 11
1 i i 1 1.....,. 1 -----1 I 1 1 1 11 1
jIR to R-S ‘111 LI 1 ______-._________-)
. , 1 j
1 eX.F-11i F-2 I --- 0 ••-••- 1 t ...,- 1 ../`F---- 1
C.,. vc B-1 to C-2 -------/1.I. \ 1 . / ' .- \
0 ex.L-1 _____14:-.aNs 1_ i T\----- SR to R1-144 \ 4,4
,.------___/
ex.N-1,ex.N-2 ' a
i 1.---------- uj
-, r 1 i st \--
T —i I f"--1 0 .-"1 f.---- i.,"---r--- - ._ ..--
1...... i i L , , .,-,:::;, i , \ ,
0 i
.Mi. \ \ I ,,,,--1 ,
...• i i/I
i •
1 ,....- /
: ._. .._
, 1 \ Mal!1111111i ' • ' A-' L......_- \ / • 0
- :: ... _442,--5,-c•- ,„. 1 -- i 1 \ .
-1 i • ,
_
, ------- I /(
• _
,..,_.-1 -- . 1 .• „.---
'. N ,"..-.",•"--1-"--r---T i --1-1---[-------T— .-- .•
- i -,•-•."" --'\ 1 i ,„,--"0 P.1.104.--F4,2\---,:::::::::::•-•'- \ 1 1 1 1
• i I
L. •-•---. .----r ./ -I
I.- i •-..., \,,/ ,,,,,, .... - -.), ,..., / \ \ , /- ,,,,\ \ ,''
, i ''-1-)' i •
/ ----- I „.„,..,•-
i
......, , 1 • 11
/ . • II
\------.--\ \ i / ...--„„-----
„,.. . t 1 k •
I \IL._____t_ __.1 .I - li --------4 1-- .." •'''<\\ \ \ \ ii .,..,......-....--
1 ..._:..----".-.:,.=::,-- .........".:::::::::::::......."7:::,:l ilk ,,,,r•••'1 ' \\ ' , „..," \ •• ••-•••Li 1 1---,,; j ,,,
•-
,, ,,,i \ • imir----."'"'
_.......,...._,_,....,.........L— (.......H.-----' 2.-...A/\ \/
....! i ---------/ /
b'
i n i
I „ ,
\ I 1 .4>47.', ,\' , n-r-i.
i TRio R-S ,I- • • \ \ i k.% "i-J- -C94
'CI ..,..-- - -+-fi •
[ /
)
ex.H-1,eX.1112.--i:--"'-'•"-"--- 7 : ca. -...;•...I ------7''V,t. z/'
ex.0-1,ex.042 .\--
,
, \/1 I i .
• , . s. •
-z.,1
-- ,......_../ /
( 0 ) 0 3 - 3 2 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
ir OV9-03-08 TR R-S B-1 B-2
5 OV9-03-14 CB-1 C-2 C-1 C-2
i 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
OV9-03-13 SR R1-144 G-1 Not
Applicable
1) OV9-03-16 TR R-S H-i H-2
ii OV9-03-09 SR R1-144 I-1 I-2
l4 OV9-03-17 CR-1 R1-36 J-1 J-2
IA OV9-03-18 CB-1 C-2 K-1 Not
Applicable r
Pi OV9-03-07 CB-1 C-2 L-1 Not
Applicable
/5: OV9-03-10 CR-i R1-36 M-1 M-2
iv OV9-03-19 SR R1-144 N-i N-2
li OV9-03-06 TR R-S 0-1 0-2
iy OV9-03-15 SR Ri-144 P-1 P-2
q 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
Ttet portion d S•et'sfhe 24.20.3B Ned x Towwdmb 12 saia4 a TNOCE continue Msaler*Oen,the East-Wad One-Work"(Ew 1/4) THENCE EoA.t+x de+N right-of-rosy O»d CAMINO
13 East,in and ct a 25 kleridon.Pfve Carl Ar4vro,d..r+bM w Section�e d sold Section 30 to the Northeast comer d Lot 4 NvMerff Ate!
y. CORTARO aid cling 1M South lie d saki Ordnance tlT.b the
IdiomC:ATALINA VILLAGE 21601\190N NO.2,as'worded In Book 9 ofMaps Northwest ca parole
corner 0 the pae arrewed to the TOON OF ORO VALLEY by
and Plots at Page 79.Pere County Recorder'.Moe.Arno County, Resolution No.(R)90-64%
BEA9B19Io et the Northeast corner of VERDE CATALINA TOVINNOUSES. Arizona
to records/bi Book 23 of Map and Plots at Page 34,Pena County DIME Southerly, TIME SwN+r1X along the Milt Lie ofend Calico a(R)90-60,a
Recsrd.r's CMMoe.PYrho County.Arfmrsot Lee of odd tat nines the Easterly Re d sold Los B b the South akManw of90.00 loot to the Souls Lee of odd Resolution )90-60;
TNQICE S 19'N''30"W.oa,u the Eat lie of said 1 ROE CATALINA THENCE Westerly.acing
a South Lie of Lot 9,•distance of
217.66 TIME Eater*Wong the South right-of-way the of C:Ala Q
TTOM OF
OWNHOUSES and atop the Sarin Lie of the wad arousedwarousedto the fleet,mare a la..to to the Southwest caw of add Lot It CORTNl0.and done sad Sat,Urea of Resolution(R)90-30 to ut.
ORO VALLEY by thaws=No.90-9.a Ordains d 328.01 fest to the Earl lbw of.dal OrdrnasoS
Northwest corner
North to
d Lot THENCE 01� A VLLACE SUS IN sr*90/1 NO.to A THENCE canna*EaNanX said Sarah oh.oy line of G�eO
rtStt of-e•y b of CATALNA IHADOM!BOULEVARDOORTARO and the Easterly pro of said Soar
f
RANCHO CATAL)!4A w' od in Boon 23 of Mand Plats leaps o at Pogo THENCE Westerly to the Meal Lie of saki Lot 9.sod point balms (sold the ass being the Pooreof the Poore a
CHad to the TOWN
30,Pima County Recorder's Office,Pins County.Artreno 212.75 Net scut'of line Northwest comer of.old tat 9t OF ORO VALLEY by Ordrna os No 94),to the Eostsrty right-of-way Fens
THtIKE along sold Northrlrrt-ef-swy line ofCATALJINA SHADOWS of the TUCSON FLORD4CE HaOHMIAY;
by
BOULEVARD aid alaq On Boutin lions of.aid pared onneaod 7HE14CE continue Mainly 30 f.st,more or Na.to tie M.s1oAy
Ordinance No.90-0 the Na'sing=uewt -d-say trine d NORtfBA14 AbEMJE 0000rdehq b tSJEVA ELAN^ a T f MhCoetotX along sal Earthily ABnl-ef-soy lens,harp the
moaned h Book 2e of Maps aid Plate of page 9Q Perm Canty Eatery ern.d dal&a�ma Net 64.b the North Lee of 1EROE
EASTERLY dap a 646.00 foot radius curve for an arc distanced Rsteraer's OHIw.Peres County.ArizonaI' 34,►TOWNHOUSES a recorded h Bowe 23 d Mop.and Rob at
134.8p noel to o porht of tongsnclt Pogo Pere County Rea dor Ofnos.Penn County.Arleen.odd
THENCE Northerly,cleans add Westerly r19ht of-woy lino of140RT1ERN point being oninSouth t Une of the parcel amen=to the TOWN OF
THENCE S 7n 13'30'E 160.e7 foot to a point of arwtur e; AVENUE to to oont.Are of CHAPALA oiuw,odd point beep a O60 VALLEY by O afwhw 90-9;
projection an be wesbrty Arqphht-of--way Irse of r40Ri1E704 MC IE
THENCE Easterly along a 4a3.00 foot radius curve for an are dl.lanoe accordng to HtAAET SefN F(1E$a rewarded etBoos,e of Maps and THENCE Easterly, said North Lied 1rE7t0E GTALNA
or 346.66 Net to o point of'arse ounat r.t Pot.at Pogo 20.Piro County Recorder',Oflios•pore Coo*Arizona PONTUOrdinance and Boole t of saidOrdinance 90-9 to the THENCE
THENCE Easterly along a B71L00 foot rodes cures for m arc anon. ANNUL Northerly,the y say Roe d Nand B4
d 363.47 Net to o Pock of tamperers N,1NLI SON ESTATES. HAREL90N s l oxadens to add
THENCE$atree'O1'E 300.00 Not to o point of orwbro THENCE Weston*Warp sold antotee,16.00 Net to 0 oroje001/n of
'RIME Easterly dap a 1,21f100 foot'Ace curve for an era defame •
the woolen right-of-way
-away Me d add NOROERN AVENUE according to
of 401.06 fast to a point of wompoo o dies ai BOMIA as recorded Or Book 24 of and Plot.at Page 26. ` s ,+,era,` '%
Pena County Reoardls Of Cos.Pena Coady.Arleen¢ to
'>,,,,`,'r S•7'' " �jv :;?.,.
THENCE Easterly and Northeasterly along o 25.00 Not roar for an 7HE74C7:Northerly, ;`;'"'s,�r:9"' ,y, • `)?.r,,
era dl.tahte d 7l.a Net to o point d rearm curvature an the hart/moot K along
.aid BOrRA ACRES-of-cey to ��.. ;`A. ""' L {ti(.,,rizy
wo.terh�r�1� of-.ay Rme d Itteir0 t 0.41"AM"
a'Q to ,, rJ v: ,y i a��.,
RANQ10 CATALINA a teoomdod Yin Soak 23 d Mops and Plab at Pogo naio 1 r•. t y R t
b4 Pbno Canty Recorder'.Orllo.,Pure County.Artourwt odd BO4VTTHENCE A Al7ES. 61 00 fin tho the Westerly probotial�t o-sof line of said �• ;'!* +•tom •Y`:%1::
THENCE Northerly R o 402.00 foot rods orx sold NORTHERNAGUE,saki one being 30.00 Net west d and ponds'elth 1!mom' p K;
right-of-way One d GTAU NA MEN E and dalocp said Mleetsrly the Earl Una d the Northeast Ores-�tsr(NE 1/4)o►sold Section 1 L. �1 �•}"
Southerly Re of sad pool unnamed to TOWN OF ORO VALLEY by V
Ate
Ordinance No.90-9.a distance of 219.01 Nat to the Southwest corner THEME Northerly, sold t-ot-wo line.to the Easterly t , ir.`.
of Lot 132 of said RANOtO CATAL NN along rqn r :1 ; •
projection of the Smith Lee d CASES LNDAS ADpflON BLOCK 1 w t -; _...tot.. i�1
THENCE S e7R4'Oe'E.dap sold South Lin.of Docket 6773 at Pogo recorded in Beak 30 d Mahe and Ptah at Pegs E6.Pena Canty J.tip ..43 ;; y l.,, 'r j�
1617,a Elan of 60.99 feet to the Southwest corer of Lot 208 of Rswaoer'e Office.Pima Canty,Artorha � �: .r }
said RANCHO GTALIN/; r F�v�q�.'w `.;.f, • i
THENCE wesU ij along add Easterly promotion.16.00 foot to Om
THENCE alorp sold South Line of the pool annexed to TOWN OF ORO South east worrier ofodd CASES tdpAS A000110N BLOCK 1,add point
VALLEY by NA 90-9.and along the South Lie of odd ins an the Masterly right-of-way Me of said NORTHERN AIQAUE
RANCHO CATALINA the following oatrlsso THENCE farther*along said Westerly rlghN-of-soy the of NORTHERN
THENCE s 60'It'Og'E 136.29 feet to on apse pain: AVENE to o the 1 Net South of and parted awn the North Ibis
of sold Northeast One-Ouster(NE 1/4)of Section 36;
THENCE S ee24'36'E 170.31 feet to an angle point THENCE Eaetann Worq rid pandit One.a detanos of 15.00 Net,to a
THENCE 8 7754'19'E 14316 Net to an angle point: One 30.00 ha fleet of and paro el with the East Lie of said Nortteost
One--water(NNE 1/4)c
THENCE N 90'00'00*E 140.00 Net to an angle points
THENCE S ee32'to'w 170.99 feet to mTHENCE Berl along said prod line,a distaste of 27.60 Net to MAP OF TERRITORY TO BE ANNEXED
angle point anortheast Northerly,
of 1/k°°r�with 111e"°r"'`}"of said TO THE TO A'N OF ORO VALLEY
THENCE N 841)11'41'E 117.4e het to an angle point
THENCE War Wester*NM-of-soy
dung.�,wall line.NO a datano.of,coo feet,to ANNEXATION 2002 -- PARCEL B
Tl•#7NCE 8 80"51'02'w 67,41 feet to m eagle Part: the w..terty rgrt-d-soy the of said NORTHERN AVENUE;
THENCE S 63Z6'0e'E 166.53 feet to an angle point: THENCE Northerly.along sold westerly right-of-my line of NORTHERN
AVENUE to the South right-or-way One of MAG EROAD,sold the being
THENCE N 90O0b0-E 116.44 het to the Southeast caner of add 75.00 feet South of and parasol soh the North Line of sold Northeast LYING WITHIN A PORTION OF
RANO4O CATALUNA.said point also being the Southeast canner of sold One-Quarter of(fE 1/4) Section 30t
�� the Eat to=nasal to TOViel OF ORO said
Bonn 21 Ordinance
90-9." THDOCE water+y,id
SECTIONS 25, 28, 35, & 36 OF
lass.to o stag said South right-of-way Ono 30 Net,rune'at
THENCE 7100 Net west of and parallel a tin the East une of the T-12-S, R-13-E, G.& S.R M.,
Southeastowner of along S«wonn 2 of East Une Section 25.to tine Southeast a»-wart«(SE 1/4)of.did Section 2x ,.Y�'.:�r. PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA
THENCE Souther*slap the East tie of add Section 34, tin T ENCE Nor erly.0M sold parallel line.sold lee being the WortaA fir•
�ekq right-d-woy •pe of nurr11M,1 A
Eastsrty rig t-of-aoy the of F1it9T A OAK aoouJnq to AUfFtx7C HELS the Norensnr right-osoy On.of C CORRTARO aotard�esq b .& L
a reworded in Book 14 of Mope and Plate at Pogo i7,Pere County FAinflAtEN'4.LA(L,are rewarded in Book 14 of Moto and Plots at Pope
Recorder's Oft.,Pima County,Mara,o distance of 2,023.39 feet, 69,Peno County Recorder's Oftlos,Pine Canty.Arolarw,sold line also �:. J� eee
more ar tows, to the East One-Quarter(E 1/4)corner of sold Section being tte tree B ent y promotion of Ow South the d the porod ensued to "'1!: `t'•
3A 140 VALLEY
by Ordrwaw No.93;
THENCE Wastert tins Eat-west Ore-Orertery projection.to the Easterly Engineering and Environmental Couutrous,Inc.
�t�p (ER 1/4)Section THENCE Easterly,dap cold weatsA
One of said Section 30 to the tenter of said Section 321 466 o$of sdid noon r10RTtfERN ME?NUE,said point being the Southwest 6 2.�. �
=SOU.12110116 80711t 520-Lt21-4e9B
EEC 202016 2 Or 2
BOOK_ PAGE
•
•
•
`• !, .J♦ \;:..i.'i //T1._. _ ,.'• •.;jirrr?!,?:,• • y f. C i:. {:{:.j!j::i' It w'' O 1. {......._..t.._.. SCALE 1�KKI
•
ii a.... .1-1 � ...'l r(..`. w (i --..,�•.5.,,__.i 'S i_,.T {t_au.�6,.mst A..,...:... %:' .i_.. •5.. :.'.e:
kearaMigalEgs
� ! �,• .,. ,f.;`�` .1�• _ a / _,r! •..daMIANi�'..' '!�B r,.....r. "'" 1 lull�a
t( j
.i. ' •'i .•0,l 1: f M1 !r i.J'"J •/:7r t I' ,it) ..l I;TE oWN ` 0 0R0 VAu2
•
i \\ \\\ ,.\ , •. •
.........p5{�gi►�gpMp%" .. �.>t.�►�`-.. � !�••..r,"a+�.,f. ,\ �'%�,,,,, r•:. NEV LamPoAiUF t11wS OF 11E 7dN or oP0 must.
1..�'_f'w j i `• . i !::. 1 rt r ,lRE 1lTION in 10- "t -Jr. ry 't ?.. 4 E7?SINp CORPORATE tiers or PIE T011N a ono VALLEY
a• IT
{ I" 1
i i
7 11J�7 s 3} :1
t \\
r '
r'......r,..••••1-.... '.. !. {el.$Sys .?.. t 111 `.,1 ',ff.... .1..•", i_,.._. I •'' '` ...
.. :,-f F��--vette..: I .t -I iJ _`' i I +,%fry 4 PAUL M.LOOMS.MAYOR Oi 71E 113EN OF ORO VALLEY.
} :
•• 1..:.s• - ,., •.;f .e•, ... i AR�II/t, ATE NAP OF
,�,,� HERESY CER7FY 711/►T 1N$B AN ACCURATE
l ...1...._. .._....._1 .. yY'i ..., .. 1 '•� 'DC TERRITORY ANNEXED 70 THE 7OMM OF ORO VAULT.
�'._,..;ry I-°,y, ! i 4....•' A RmONA.BY O ROMMICE NO--OF THE ORDINANCES Cr
ir„"{{'�� , J ...,,; .^ .P�,� . ,5`•',,���:� f..i..<' �.• 711E TOOT Cr ORO VALLEY.
#.',tt. 41 ` ,i�;%... 1 1 _{j;,:7 11 ._......... 7 ......_... . .. 1. .1!:
y... ._ . ...3'• ..iwi'r_,t=.:.:l..i o f MAYOIE Plll�M LOOM IS
•
•
•
c� ATTEST. TOVM CLENC. KATHRYN E.CUYELER
y
/5 i ,r�` 4 1 ti...:-,-•: ... t.:....-'."•...._....*........ _' _-..-,... ..._-....-......» . .... ..._.._.......'fir DATA
i
s
43q STATE CrSECT.NO.
0� j Ii •, : ;111, AIMZONA)
t; C�` F' • :_.,. _,,... •:V; _ ...,..... % 01.,t ....._..... i •
COUNTY OF PIMA ) FEE:
.._..... : - _ FOR•. . .._ ;... FEED RECORD AT'ME 1EIiUEST OF 7!E TOIMI OF ORO
I;
7 +.. ` i '' ;• VALLEY.AROMA.ON MIS`DAY OF 2002 AT
i "; . 1••"- -•... +':• , IN BOOK OF MAPS MO PLATS AT PACE
•
. _ �: +• ti } _._. _-. _r'' % ESS MY HAND MO'SEAL.TYEN.mow
DAY MOOmowF
w
ii
Jry� "e: ! r . I : v\ F.NMI ROD10OUEL PIMA COUNTY RECORDER
\.... .. ...."....""' r' . —;/-7. ^. •••• ; • , 8 „ ••••'s.i;,.
+'4wIR70N tiI�I'V3r."• `.�.... •''" y : [L .••s ) •'``' •.{• J},: `:,•,...,..�
7 i ,.,j. 7 ,,".. t MAP OF TERRITORY TO BE ANNEXED
• ' . P i• ~` ` ` ' ' i ,. ...A. f TO THE TOWN PN OF ORO VALLEY
! i . �• r .` ��{� �;::•:ww:�. I; r '•`�`• will' •
1 I
{i Xb�io TB •.; AL er..
::. A..Is—...... •:.... .......... _ — B
t :, � � ANNEXATION 2002 PARCEL
.. : •..,i.. ...,.,„, •,) „...._ • ..
i 4., ::, ,.�•• '' ``� +a: LYING WITHIN A PORTION OF
SECTIONS 25, 26, 35, & 36 OF
• T-12—S, R-13—E, G.& S.R M.,
. iglIA • '':,> PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA
•• . TOTAL'ARIA OP "4',.
ANNEXATION - IC,''
(X• ' . 064.7f ACR IS• .
•' • Engineering and Environmental Consultants,Inc.
• • MIDI I.Fe.LOTIIIL 1I1/.
• . EEC 202016 T11CTIOIR.MEDIU 0M1'111 e11a-as-4e11s 1 of 2
BOOK PAGE
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. October 1, 2003
PLACE: Oro Valley Town Hall, 11,000 N. La Canada Drive, Oro Valley,Arizona
SUBJECT: 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
This 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 an opportunity to speak. For
additional information, please contact David Ronquillo, Planner I, or at dronquillo(uorovalley.ne .
/1A,' POSTED: 9-8-03
Bayer Vella, AICP time: 1 : 3 5 p.m.
Senior Planner by: drm
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\Town Council Notice.doc
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\Town Council Notice.doc
glirlir
AFFIDAVIT "'r PUBLICATION
STATE OF ARIZONA)
:ss.
COUNTY OF PIMA )
K RE J BR I GHAM 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
OV9-03-22
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
SEPTEM2ER 03
on the day of 1 Ot h 20
and the.last publication thereof was made on the day of
SEPTEMBER 03
20 ; that said publication
0V%T odicy. each of the following dates, to-wit:
Request of
TOWN OF ORO. VALLEY
Daily Territorial
. i
By
Subscribed ands or b16re day of
t
1 'SEPTEMBER
33 ` -
/
/ j ./,/ 1 .
w I'+�bUc State o�./gofsary d::tarity
P a+ nunty of f'T State'of Ariz na
y Oa
y McCombs
My Commission Expire )(ores June 15,2007 -
IlOrn
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFOF
ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL
n accordance with ARS 9-462 and Section 3-111 of the Oi i 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.October 1,2003
PLACE:Oro Valley Town Hall,11,000 N.La Canada Drive,Oro Valley,Arizona
SUBJECT: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 NUM-
BER 225-141-870
This 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 an opportu-
nity to speak. For additional information,please contact David Ronquillo, Planner I,
or at dronquillo@orovalley.net./s/Bayer Vella,AICP Senior Planner
Pub:The Daily Territorial
September 10,2003
Req:Town of Oro Valley
pnov9-03-22 kb
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
'57
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
STAFF REPORT TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 2,2003
TO: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FROM: David Ronquillo, Planner I
SUBJECT: 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
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 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 Suburban Ranch (SR) and the most similar Oro Valley
zoning district is R1-144 (Single Family Residential). This area is a small portion of undeveloped land adjacent
to Oracle Road.
OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED TRANSLATIONAL ZONES:
Pima County SR
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
The Town's R1-144 allows single-family dwelling units on a minimum lot area of 144,000 square feet (3.3
acres). The zoning classification; however, does not permit townhouses or churches and schools.
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\PZ.RPT.doc
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 2
The Town Council adopted Resolution (R) 02-68 (attached) on August 1, 2002 to permit horses and other farm
animals except, swine per county standards upon annexation of the properties. The properties being considered
under this translational zoning, because of the current location will likely accommodate horses in the near
future. Nonetheless, the county standard should be transferred per the resolution.
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE:
The Town's current 1996 TOV General Plan designation is "Office" which would allow professional office,
tourism, and service uses. The existing use does not conform to General Plan but State Law requires that the
Town translate the zoning to the closest equivalent Oro Valley zoning.
The Town's proposed 2020 General Plan (adopted by Town Council but not yet ratified by the voters)
designates this area as "Neighborhood Commercial/Office". The existing use does not conform to the General
Plan.
NOTIFICATION:
All property owners within the annexed area have been notified of the 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 approve the translational zoning from Pima
County SR(Suburban Ranch) to the Town's R1-144 (Single Family Residential).
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 OV9-03-22, translating the zoning from Pima County SR
(Suburban Ranch) to Oro Valley R1-144 (Single Family Residential)with the conditions in Exhbit A.
OR
I move 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 conditions in Exhibit A and the
following added conditions:
Attachment:
1. Exhibit "A"
2. Resolution (R) 02-68
3. Property location
4. Current &Proposed Zoning Map
lanniand Zoning A nistrator
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\PZ.RPT.doc
I
• ciet
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
OV9-03-22
1. Horses and other farm animals, except swine, shall be permitted per the standards set by Pima County
under the R1-144 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.
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\PZ.RPT.doc
AT t e t4A.Q,,-c-- 4-t
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, thisxday of Jam, 2002_
1st August TOWN OF ORO VALLEY
ATTEST: Paul H. Loomis, Mayor
Kat E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
I 3
D ' L. ley, Town Attorney
siNA _
-
...
m
MB
m OV9-03-21
Of9-03?4 I ,1 41 i.
i 1 of .fr „., ii
—
— r, i N. ,
,g ,,, t ', .'",,,
)., ''''',riq,,..., A
''6, P ,,'''' ..),r.j
II 4",,,a3,,,,,,,,,,,,.7,1 NkANAPWSIAVA.A1S 41 --,,,,,,,,,pp-00'44il'
= i ,, ,....1.,....gmbromo......'"'''''
iik;
= h OV9-03-22
• 4
N• Y., q
•a 4
' OV9-0 3-09 / 11
m
OV9-03-0: A
,
OV• r.-2, 44'
OV9-03-1 7
I
...
.z .
,
tii, ,„„,
..
0
O - if #. e
—i 9-03,3 l 0
.....,_
1 ill
111 E—C$ 41 If
PI
rA",7, ,,,,, AZ.VA Fill7 ,...,,,,riAATAVAAAPAAAV WA,A 7,,A.,,SAMP,A,A W.,raAIMMARAA.WV.110,ARANA.A3MMA'Al WARM,WA‘KaViralt 7,T,807,,,,,,,ToMAXMANNA400 VA,,,,,,,VA).V.A.17
II #01,1,AAKMAANASAMA:17,7 40AAAIMAAMEMVIAA,
Ili l'i-I'OV9-03-23 ,1
,.,
1
=
,:, ,..
OV9-0 3-1 8 OV9-0 3-09
--,.. iti 1)
c'1 o - 3-14 1
.._
... 1
I
, , .,,,1
,
a bkAkt,SMAAMIAVANAW Al ASAV£45420M.0.1., ',.0,1.4#4,A AA,,,,,-.04,,,,AVAt,1,6AMMATAT.t.,..41,AANAKA91.4,TAAWA141,NV A 14,,ANAWRIAAWAVAVRA,A.MAAWAMASORAXSWPAITAIZIRMAIK<WMVAWAKA,,,,,,,....WWAIWATAAMArArArAA,,,,,.........41
MAGEE ROAD
.
rA.SAVA,1M...ft 4 larAmtsummiest ir P,V1r`0,4,4MMUTROI:WIJP0.1,4P,,,VA21...,,,INLAWA.33,,M3,40214AltAMMTVIVPAAL AMINNIMMAIMMPANIMIEAMAIRMARATAN2P,'AlW4,1.22,.0.411,,,-.NOWATKP, I
..... ?ti I
0
' i III
14 -o 12 „a =
,cr
111
.. ig
0
1 i
NM ',VIM Al 6:' OV9-03-07 4 , I'
.. OV9-03-1 9
I
....▪ f„,
... ,,
N M
• ;41-
.. o
I-1 Elo ;
...
II 1 1 1 7., .....n
1,at ,,,,,IIM1511...1,174.01.6.26.,0 AWAWMAAWRKAAk 1.711
9-03- 1`xi
II ii —
....
9-03-15
5 g OV9-03-05 11 pc vemmu9 ;hi x II
N M
4 I=
11". 5 N k 111
OV9-03-1 0
II▪I
„▪ o 1 t v
a ,1 V9-03-
A'1"
.... `?,,i i a
a i 1t romopoinvw
.... $▪ 1 0"
m i a
... ,
$
# 4
.... / 1 0
,. ,,,, OV9-0 3-08 ...
NM *
II a V'
...
•i :rt lionwow, )
OVII.f0 3-13 4 OV9-03-0
= , I
e'."‘'"------..,' ,J.,-' ryl IF
-:,ov9-raiow4
ktONIZ•4
Translational Zoning Location Map
.
■
tl
.
Y
i
■
i
r
r
tl c.RRANEAN DR
■
I
I
Pima CountySR ZoningWMOU"TARNVIST EMOUNTAINVSO A pR
re
toOroValleyR-SZoning
F
crh.
■ 0
ii CO
i C7Cr
j C Z 0'
1 v Z
i Q
Ce E FOUR HORSES PL
w
is W E MADRID DR
tl a
1 z
•
.
i WCOOLDR
•
tl
•
•
•
0
c
i
V
x O
il 73
n
<
y EMAGEERD
W MAGEE RD a
. W
2
UV9 - 03 - 22 Translational Zoning 0
F AFFIDAVIT - PUBLICATION
STATE OF ARIZONA) AUG 2 0 2003
as.
COUNTY OF PIMA )
is AREN SRIGHAM 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
i:Yv9.r03—. L
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 4 t h AUGUST 03
on the • day of i 4 h 20
and the last publication thereof was made on the day of
AUGUST 03
20 ; that said publication
cttj1]4d/9U each of the following dates, to-wit:
Request of
TOWN OF ORO VALLEY ' • .
Daily Territorial
By ) .r / . • C;?/ '
\\;_
Subscribed an sworn to before r ' \ day of
qq
r t-Il AUGU$T •
20 - ..
• Oa
) 1
4",.,.,,,,
'�o�ryPub Public State of rim
1.
maC County
Rob ` -/ `_.___
Lary. 'o ,, 9r7 McCom oufl.ty SaLPima. Sate of Arizona
xpires June 15,2pp7
My Commission Expiii s': • f
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 A 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 11,000 North La Canada Drive Oro
Valley,Arizona
SUBJECT: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 NUM-
BER 225-141-870
This 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 this meeting and will be given an 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 mater, please contact David
Ronquillo,Planner I,at 229-4817 or dronquillo@orovalley.net/s/Bayer Vella,AICP
Senior Planner
Pub:The Daily Territorial
August 14,2003
Req:Town of Oro Valley
pnov9-03-22 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 A 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
11,000 North La Canada Drive
Oro Valley, Arizona
SUBJECT: 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
This 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 this meeting and will be given an 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 mater, please contact David Ronquillo, Planner I, at 229-4817 or donquillo@orovalley.net
Posted: 8-12-03
Time? 4 : 30 p.m.
B ,�lla, AICP By: sg
Senior Planner
F:\OV\OV9\2003\9-03-22\PZ PUBLIC NOTI CE.doc
APPROVED MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION
SEPTEMBER 2, 2003
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE
REC AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM
CAL
ROL
PRE Vice Chair Cox, Acting Chair
Commissioner Kinared
Commissioner Manross
'ommissloner Krenkowitz
:ommissioner Anning
EXC Chair Moody
.umr1; ssioner Bistany
Othf i.lyor Paul Loomis
,.icier Wolff, Council Member
uff Weir, Economic Development Administrator
/lark Langlitz, Town Attorney
cott Nelson, Special Projects Coordinator
gill Ac :er, Board of Adjustments
a3ayer Vella, AICP, Senior Planner
MIN
MO IOf r Kinared MOVED to approve the August 5, 2003 Planning
and Zor sion ,neeting minutes as written. Commissioner Manross
sec, nd n. Motion carried 5-0.
CAL - N 7 OPENED: 6:03 P.M.
Bill 1m -, =agle Eye PI., Oro Valley, wanted to point out that Mixed Use
is not, r ie..:l, an approved land use designation in any Oro Valley
general been directed by Council to be removed from the General
Plar pe of the voters. The problem is that Mixed Use is in our
zona ig is in many of the commercial designations and residential
des is ontradiction between the General Plan and the Zoning
Cod ills needs to be reconciled. A joint study session with Town
Cou,ic►, ;h o )quested, with DRB included. He asked that the Commission
mal`,e a .o1 to get with the Council and resolve this so there is
uniform
September Approved P&Z Meeting Minutes
CAL " 'NCE CLOSED: 6:06 P.M.
1. P UM. '• )V8-03-05, DANIELA SHOUSE, REPRESENTING TORINO
RIS'TOr ,IAT�4( , REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PEk.VII SALE OF LIQUOR ASSOCIATED WITH A FULL-SERVICE
RESTA ATM) WITHIN THE CANADA CROSSROADS SHOPPING
CEO` v (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT AT THE
SO t : OF LA CANADA DRIVE AND LAMBERT LANE, A
POI `" ). 224-39-001E.
Mr. S;. Report for OV8-03-05. The applicant wants to establish a 2,400
squ. ; inh! in the process of receiving building permits to do so. He is
regi, o l t full bar with beer, wine and liquor with hours of operation from
11 two other restaurants in the shopping center that currently have
sim i been in place for 2-3 years.
App vns of Café Torino, stated that he has operated the restaurant since
Jam 1 :e expand their facilities to offer more upscale dining for the area.
The I with the liquor license. The restaurant should be open by about
Oct,
Mr. ,ssioner Kinared that of the two conditions in Exhibit A, condition
#1 i what was specified on Page 1 of the report. Condition #2 varies
sligi ' , be from 11 A.M. to 11 P.M., seven days a week.
Mr. Krenkowitz that the language in the CUP recommended on
11I \ , Id be the same.
PU t ! U AND CLOSED AT 6:10 P.M.: No Speakers.
MO renkowitz MOVED to recommend approval of OV8-03-05,
Tor request for a conditional use permit to serve liquor, with the
con , with one change: that paragraph 1 as now stated be deleted
and .ed, "that recorded or live outside entertainment must not be
allo' ared seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
2, I "'ERVIEW OF THE RECENTLY ANNEXED
PR NTERSECTION OF ORACLE AND MAGEE ROADS AND
TB NIN G PROCESS
Mr. as to present an overview of the history of annexation, where we
are ! ' parameters of the translational zoning process.
Mr. an overview of the annexation process which allows for
mui process for one year to gather 50% plus 1 of the total property
owl 1 for the total assessed value of an area. On area B, the process
ends ;hat date, we had 53% of the property owners and 67% of the total
2
Sept( 'approved P&Z Meeting Minutes
asses iique with great diversity with subdivisions greater than 30 years
old. ,s, residential, townhouses, apartments, commercial zones and a
scho 655 acres with a population of 2,234 and 120 plus businesses.
Duri there were applicants that came to us requesting pre-annexation
agre, the Commission and Town Council and were acted on. The
lettc .;ertain areas that wanted to retain their developmental rights that
they
Attoi that this annexation has been a lengthy process and is at a point
whe' with regard to any legal action that was taken. The Town has
prey f 1 i ie largest areas that the Town has annexed with a wide variety
of u‘ . the Town translate the zoning from the existing County to the
Tovv that the property owners should retain their existing rights under
the ( will translate to the closest existing comparable districts so long
as it t r intensity. Staff has looked at all the individual parcels and has
deter appropriate Town zoning district for the property to be translated
to. thi, evening is administrative as opposed to legislative. This is
requ
Acti )1- the sake of expedience, items #3 through 19 on the revised
agen ;ype of administrative action that needs to be taken He asks the
Corn; c if the process could be varied so that all Staff Reports were
press > >iu 1 public hearing for all items at once. Voting on the items #3
throt ►r;' Iy after the public hearing and any comments. There were no
obje s from either the Commissioners or the audience.
3, , , 9-03-21, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
COt F ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
ARI' OUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTHERN AVENUE AND
CAIN i., PIMA COUNTY CR-4 (MIXED DWELLING TYPE
ZOi' \ R-4 (TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT)
DE` NUMBERS; 225-142-770, 225-142-780, 225-142-790, 225-
142- -420, 225-143-310, 225-143-320, 225-143-330, 225-143-300,
225- 43-270, 225-143-260, 225-143-250, 225-143-240, 225-143-
410. 225-143-390, 225-143-380, 225-143-370, 225-143-360, 225-
143- it 0, 225-142-820, 225-142-830, 225-142-840, 225-142-850,
225- 42-880, 225-142-890, 225-142-900, 225-142-910, 225-142-
920. 225-142-950, 225-142-960, 225-142-970, 225-142-980, 225-
142- )10, 225-143-020, 225-143-030, 225-143-040, 225-143-050,
225- '-080, 225-143-090, 225-143-100, 225-143-110, 225-143-120,
225 43-150, 225-143-160, 225-143-170, 225-143-180, 225-143-
190, 5-143-220, 225-143-230
4, 03-08, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
CO ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
AR. .)RACLE ROAD AND NORTHERN AVENUE, NORTH
OF IA COUNTY TR (TRANSITIONAL ZONE) TO THE
TO SERVICE DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL
3
Sept roved P&Z Meeting Minutes
NU 142-740, 225-142-730, 225-142-720, 225-142-710, 225-142-
700. 225-142-680, 225-142-670, 225-142-660, 225-142-540, 225-
142 :50, 225-142-560, 225-142-750, 225-142-570, 225-142-580,
225. -f 142-590, 225-142-760, 225-142-610, 225-142-620, 225-142-
630 225-141-850, 225-141-830, 225-162-820, 225-162-810, 225-
162 ,80, 225-162-090, 225-162-200, 229-143-480, 225-143-490,
225 43-540, 225-143-520, 225-143-530, 225-143-460, 225-143-
470 125-161-650, 225-161-860, 225-161-870, 225-161-850, 225-
161 60, 225-161-680, 225-161-690, 225-161-820, 225-161-830,
225 6 1-710, 225-161-700, 225-161-790, 225-161-780, 225-161-
730 '25-161-750, 225-161-760, 225-161-770, 225-162-790, 225-
162 1, 225-162-730, 225-162-720, 225-162-750, 225-162-740,
225 2-690, 25-162-680, 225-162-660, 225-162-670, 225-162-
650 '5-162-590, 225-162-600, 225-162-570, 225-162-580, 225-
162 ,), 225-162-560, 225-162-630, 225-162-610, 225-162-410,
225 ,_-420, 225-162-370, 225-162-430, 225-162-380, 225-162-
440 ;2 5-162-450, 225-162-350, 225-162-480, 225-162-490, 225-
162 1 ►, 225-162-330, 225-162-520, 225-162-530, 225-162-340,
225 -270, 225-162-260, 225-162-300, 225-162-280, 225-162-
290 5-162-220, 225-162-240, 225-162-250, 225-162-170, 225-
162 1, 225-162-160, 225-162-140, 225-162-100, 225-162-110,
225 -990, 225-161-980, 225-161-970, 225-161-960, 225-162-
010 5-161-940, 225-162-030, 225-162-020, 225-162-930, 225-
161 ' ), 225-162-910, 225-161-900, 225-162-060, 225-162-070,
225
5, )3-14, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
CO )RO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
AR RACLE ROAD AND NORTHERN AVENUE, NORTH
OF 1 MA COUNTY CB-1 (LOCAL BUSINESS ZONE)
DE ,,'S C-2 (COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION
WI ('EL NUMBERS; 225-143-480, 225-143-550 (PORTION),
AN EA LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ORACLE
RO (TARO FOR PARCELS 225-141-740, 225-141-770, 225-
141 ' 5-141-76A, 225-141-750, 225-141-80A, 225-141-92C
I : 1-70A, 225-141-70B, 225-141-710 AND 225-141-73A;
6, 3-22, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C(, c)RO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
AR ER MILE NORTH FROM THE INTERSECTION OF
01, ; ROAD ON THE WEST SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD
FR BURBAN RANCH ZONE) TO THE TOWN'S R-144
. 1 AL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL
NU
7. ")4)3-23, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
CC ORO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
AR )U'1 HEAST CORNER OF NORTHERN AVENUE AND
4
Sep roved P&Z Meeting Minutes
CO 'OUNTY CB-2 (GENERAL BUSINESS ZONE) TO THE
TO L DISTRICT) FOR PARCELS 225-141-790, 225-141-92B,
225 )RTION) AND THE ANNEXED AREA LOCATED ONE
QL' OM THE INTERSECTION OF ORACLE ROAD AND
MP T SIDE OF ORACLE ROAD FOR PARCEL NUMBER;
22'
8, . F79-03-12, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
CC 0 ,'LIL,Y RESIDENCE) ZONE TO THE TOWN'S R—S
Si 'TSTRICT DESIGNATION FOR PARCEL NUMBER 225-
50— s SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MAGEE ROAD AND
NC .t.EXATION AREA "B" AND DEVELOPED AS AN
01.
9. :9-03-13, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
CC G NCH) ZONE TO THE TOWN'S R1-144 (SINGLE—
FA F iT,I CT DESIGNATION FOR 1,743 SQUARE FOOT
PA v\ED BY THE CITY OF TUCSON AS A WELL SITE
AN FERSECTION OF W. CHAPALA DRIVE AND
NC
10. "-03-16, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C( RO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
AI 'LI APPROXIMATELY %2 MILE SOUTH OF MAGEE
R( LE ROAD, ON THE WEST BY THE TERMINUS OF
N(; , .IIE SOUTH BY CATALINA VILLAGE:
TR )\T PIMA COUNTY TR (TRANSITIONAL ZONE) TO
TI f ° IAL SERVICE DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR
PA .kND 225-512-700.
11. 03-09, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C( RO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
AR 1 WEST BY ORACLE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH BY
R11 `�;ORTH BY DESERT WILLOWS SUBDIVISION AND
ON FALINA, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS VERDE
CA ) FURTHER THE AREA KNOWN AS CATALINA
CI ' 'I'HE IMMACULATE HEART), BOUNDED ON THE
W . ON THE SOUTH BY MAGEE ROAD, ON THE
N( .t i\IA AND ON THE EAST BY THE CORONADO
NA
TT )M PIMA COUNTY SR (SUBURBAN RANCH) TO
TI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DESIGNATION FOR
PA 225-142-41A, 225-142-43A, 225-170-17B, 225-170-18B,
22: " 0-10A, 225-170-25A, 225-170-26A, 225-170-280, 225-170—
29( 2 5-170-330, 225-170-340, 225-170-350, 225-170-360, 225-
171 .190, 225-130-120, 225-161-240, 225-161-250, 225-161-260,
5
Sep r ,,ed P&Z Meeting Minutes
225 1-290, 225-161-300, 225-161-310, 225-161-320, 225-161-
33( 161-340, 225-161-220, 225-161-510, 225-161-490, 225-
161 225-161-480, 225-161-360, 225-161-200, 225-161-530,
225 .-380, 225-161-550, 225-161-390, 225-161-190, 225-161-
56( 161-170, 225-161-570, 225-161-400, 225-161-460, 225-
161 225-161-450, 225-161-150, 225-161-420, 225-161-590,
225 61-430, 225-161-630, 225-160-900, 225-161-070, 225-160-
91( 161-110, 225-161-100, 225-161-060, 225-161-090, 225-
161 , 225-160-930, 225-161-040, 225-161-030, 225-160-940,
22: -970, 225-160-980, 225-160-990, 225-161-000, 225-161-
01( -160-520, 225-160-530, 225-160-540, 225-160-550, 225-
16( 225-160-590, 225-160-600, 225-160-610, 225-160-500,
225 -630, 225-160-810, 225-160-800, 225-160-790, 225-160-
78( 160-490, 225-160-640, 225-160-650, 225-160-480, 225-
16( 225-160-850, 225-160-660, 225-160-670, 225-160-470,
22; -750, 225-160-860, 225-160-690, 225-160-450, 225-160-
74( -160-440, 225-160-730, 225-160-880, 225-160-710, 225-
16( 225-160-420, 225-160-410, 225-161-610, 225-160-330,
225 350, 225-160-150, 225-160-310, 225-160-400, 225-160-
39( 160-360, 225-160-160, 225-160-300, 225-160-170, 225-
161 225-160-200, 225-160-210, 225-160-220, 225-160-230,
22: 60, 225-160-270, 225-160-280, 225-160-290.
12. , 9-03-17 TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C( RO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
Al APPROXIMATELY 630 FEET EAST OF ORACLE
R( JMATELY 580 FEET NORTH OF MAGEE ROAD,
Of" ) CATALINA NORTH (SOUTH OF CATALINA
SI! )N THE EAST BY THE CORONADO NATIONAL
FO OWN AS RANCHO CATALINA:
T1 '. :OM PIMA COUNTY CR-1 (SINGLE FAMILY
RI. OWN'S R1-36 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DI PARCEL NUMBERS; 225-141-91A225-130-11A, 225-
13+ 225-170-17B, 225-170-290, 225-170-190, 225-170-240,
22. 330, 225-170-230, 225-170-200, 225-170-350, 225-170-
26. -170-380, 225-170-370, 225-170-220, 225-170-320, 225-
171 225-170-160, 225-170-300, 225-170-310, 225-170-760,
22: 460, 225-170-770, 225-170-130, 225-170-750, 225-170-
4.5E 170-430, 225-170-120, 225-170-420, 225-170-410, 225-
16 225-170-740, 225-170-730, 225-170-720, 225-170-100,
22. 700, 225-170-790, 225-170-850, 225-170-800, 225-170-
11( 170-500, 225-170-510, 225-170-840, 225-170-810, 225-
171 225-170-680, 225-170-830, 225-170-080, 225-161-620,
22: 820, 225-170-870, 225-170-650, 225-170-660, 225-170-
55 170-560, 225-170-580, 225-170-880, 225-170-950, 225-
17 _ 225-170-640, 225-170-940, 225-170-590, 225-170-600,
22. 17 3 930, 225-170-610, 225-172-160, 225-170-050, 225-170-
6
Se[ d P&Z Meeting Minutes
92( . 22 170-620, 225-172-170, 225-172-150, 225-172-180, 225-
17; -19 225-170-980, 225-170-970, 225-170-990, 225-171-000,
22: 17 610, 225-171-020, 225-171-030, 225-172-140, 225-171-
041 -172-120, 225-172-090, 225-172-100, 225-172-110, 225-
17.
13. [EA NC '9 03-18, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C( 'IE .ZO VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
Al I) 4 ' BY ORACLE ROAD, ON THE NORTH BY VERDE
CA N THE EAST BY THE SISTERS OF THE
Ili l )N THE SOUTH BY MAGEE ROAD, THE AREA IS
AI LAZA:
TF ‘1. V` `I PIMA COUNTY CB-1 (LOCAL BUSINESS ZONE)
T( \'. ERCIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR THE
F( ! ZS; 225-141-93D, 225-142-400, 225-141-93B, 225-142-
511 I 42-48A, 225-141-94A, 225-142-460, 225-142-43A, 225-
16
14. EA1 VG 1-07, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C( ( ,INESS) DISTRICT TO THE TOWN'S C-2
IGNATION, WITH CONDITIONS, FOR PARCEL
Nl 70, 225-51-2180, 225-51-2140, 225-51-2160 AND 225-
51 )UTHEAST CORNER OF MAGEE ROAD AND
01 N AREA "B" AND DEVELOPED AS THE "PLAZA
ESR.
15 13-10, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C( O VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
Al ,ORTH BY MAGEE ROAD, ON THE WEST
AI .ST OF ORACLE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH BY
C; >TWARD LOOK GUEST RANCH AND ON THE
Erg. .LS, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS SUFFOLK
HI
T1 OM PIMA COUNTY CR-1 (SINGLE FAMILY
RI ))WN'S R1-36 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
D I 'ARCEL NUMBERS; 225-511-320, 225-512-080, 225-
51 225-511-300, 225-510-210, 225-511-40A, 225-511-470,
22 )70, 225-511-890, 225-511-290, 225-510-230, 225-511-
42 -510-260, 225-510-240, 225-510-250, 225-511-210, 225-
51 225-512-060, 225-511-220, 225-511-44A, 225-511-910,
22 60, 225-512-05A, 225-511-920, 225-510-300, 225-511-
24 711-250, 225-512-04A, 225-510-430, 225-511-100, 225-
51 225-511-940, 225-511-110, 225-510-420, 225-512-030,
22 10, 225-511-950, 225-512-000, 225-511-390, 225-510-
40 510-370, 225-510-310, 225-511-090, 225-510-450, 225-
51 225-511-080, 225-511-130, 225-511-380, 225-510-460,
7
Se, J P&Z Meeting Minutes
22 ' . ' 140, 225-511-150, 225-511-160, 225-511-170, 225-511-
18 _ ;12-110, 225-511-980, 225-511-070, 225-511-33C, 225-
51 225-510-470, 225-510-340, 225-510-330, 225-511-060,
22 ;20, 225-510-480, 225-511-33E, 225-511-050, 225-512-
09 _ '10-490, 225-511-030, 225-511-020, 225-511-810,
22 01( )00, 225-510-790, 225-511-840, 225-510-92A, 225-511-
85 -51 511-860, 225-510-640, 225-511-620, 225-510-540, 225-
51 , 2- 225-510-980, 225-510-930, 225-510-52A, 225-510-550,
22 65 00, 225-511-600, 225-510-900, 225-510-51A, 225-510-
561 5 '11-780, 225-511-770, 225-511-760, 225-511-780, 225-
51 225-511-760, 225-511-750,225-510-970, 225-510-880,
22 70, 225-511-590, 225-510-940, 225-510-850, 225-511-
72 -51 -10-860, 225-511-67A,225-510-960, 225-510-580, 225-
51 i 22 225-511-710, 225-510-81B, 225-510-820, 225-510-740,
22 -57( 50, 225-510-600, 225-511-700, 225-510-730, 225-511-
69 -51 '11-680, 225-511-55B, 225-510-720, 225-510-760, 225-
51( 2 225-510-780, 225-510-770, 225-510-630, 225-510-640,
22 70, 225-510-680, 225-510-690, 225-510-700, 225-510-
71 11-500, 225-511-510, 225-511-520, 225-511-530, 225-
51 22 25-511-310.
16 IN N 3-19, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
Ct '0 0 VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
Ad I BY MAGEE ROAD AND ON THE WEST, SOUTH
A.' 1,S, THE AREA IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE
I1\
T1 \IN _ 'IMA COUNTY SR (SUBURAN RANCH) TO THE
T( RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR
Pi
17 _ 06, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
Ct ZONE TO THE TOWN'S R-S (RESIDENTIAL
S 1. 1' ION FOR PARCEL NUMBER 225-51-0190; AND
F1 tANSITIONAL) ZONE TO THE TOWN'S R-S
R [CT DESIGNATION WITH A CONDITION FOR
Pi 225-51-018A AND 225-51-0200, ALL LOCATED ON
Ti .)AD BETWEEN MAGEE ROAD AND SUFFOLK
D!
18 3-15, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C, 0 VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
A' WEST BY ORACLE ROAD, ON NORTH
A JUTH OF MAGEE ROAD, ON THE EAST BY
St )UTH APPROXIMATELY 1,075-FEET NORTH OF
Sl
8
Se ' P&Z Meeting Minutes
TI 'IMA COUNTY SR (SUBURBAN RANCH) TO THE
Tt :' RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR
Pp'
19 3-20, TRANSLATIONAL ZONING FROM PIMA
C( _O VALLEY EQUIVALENT FOR THE ANNEXED
A 1 EST BY ORACLE ROAD, ON THE NORTH
AI JUTH OF MAGEE ROAD, ON THE EAST BY
S I ;OUTH APPROXIMATELY 503-FEET NORTH OF
St
TI ! PIMA COUNTY TR(TRANSITIONAL ZONE) TO
TI rL SERVICE DISTRICT) DESIGNATION FOR
pt 225-510-140, 225-510-150, 225-510-160, 225-510-17B
A'
Ac sion and questions from the Commissioners:
Ite Dyed by Pima County will be honored by the Town,
as It is functionally equivalent to a pre-annexation
ac the condition that all development plans in place be
he
Ite , page indicates that translation is from Pima County
CF ,as the text in the recommendation reflects R1-36.
TF
P1 ,SLATIONAL ZONINGS OPENED AT 6:40 P.M.
Bi' d to speak on Agenda item #3 and #5. He does not
log Jutine, so he objects to the procedure. He sees
tra ty to place zoning on property that reflects what we
we t is. We can allow existing development to continue
ar rights or pre-annexation agreements. If there were
m the area, then we should have zoning in place that
wE the equivalent of what is in existence now. For
ex e 34 foot building height, and if this area is ever
re Oro Valley zoning code. This should be stipulated.
Oi better to rezone to CN rather than C-1 because it is
ac is not suggesting mandating changes on existing
zo 'ice creates a legal, non-conforming situation. Oro
V� 3putation because we want a desirable appearance.
Jo se Place, withdrew from speaking as Mr. Vella
ar arse property.
Pl 45 P.M.
9
Se P&Z Meeting Minutes
Ac ,i ;ion and questions for Staff.
Th 'own would have to wait to begin applying zoning
CIE ,'osely represent how the land is used. Any change
in . 3 Town's normal rezoning procedure which would
co !, ; instigation by the Town itself.
CI' 1 .ge any of the zoning requirements. It is attached to
tht vho owns the land.
Th grease intensity or uses, nor can the zoning be
rec be adopted that allow the property owner to retain
tht
Fo forgoing Staff Reports:
#3 tired MOVED to recommend that Town Council
ap zoning from Pima County CR-4 (Multiple Dwelling
Ty nhouse Residential) for the proposed parcels, with a
coy building height be maintained by the Town.
Co : the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
#4 b ?ss MOVED to recommend that Town Council
op g from Pima County TR(Transitional Zone) to Oro
V: :t) for the proposed parcels. Commissioner Anning
set. 5-0.
#5 i kowitz MOVED to recommend that the Town
Co ng zoning from Pima County CB-1 (Local Business
Zo ercial District) for the proposed parcels, with the
co ,perty commonly known as Plaza De Vida shall
co a is now accorded to that owner under the approved
D( 56, at page 99. Commissioner Manross seconded
tilt
#6 :owitz moved to recommend that the Town Council
op zoning from Pima County SR (Suburban Ranch) to
Oy sidential) with the condition that the horse and other
fa► ie '1 wn Council in Resolution 02-68 on August 1, 2002, be
ati sion(r Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
#7. is Kre kowitz MOVED to recommend that Town Council
ap zon ►g from Pima County CB-2 (General Business Zone)
to erci District) for the proposed parcels. Commissioner
M. tot: i carried 5-0.
10
Ser prove( P&Z Meeting Minutes
#8. 'IC Manross MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-03-12,
try, ). 225-50-0040 to the Town of Oro Valley R-S (Residential
Se r Kre ►kowitz seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
#9 Ann''ig MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-03-13,
tr« J. 22:,-50-0070 to the Town of Oro Valley R1-144 (Single
Fa Zes Commissioner Krenkowitz seconded the motion. Motion
ca: -+1
#1, • Mar Toss MOVED to recommend that the Town Council
ap ; the 'zoning from Pima County Transitional Zone to Oro
Va ict. 'ommissioner Anning seconded the motion. Motion
car
#1 Krenkowitz MOVED to recommend that the Town Council
ap i zoning for the Verde Catalina Townhouses and the Sisters
of rties, 1.rom Pima County SR to Oro Valley R1-144, with the
co fain animal rights permitted under the Pima County
de will recognized in accordance with the Resolution of the
To d on :August 1, 2002. Commissioner Manross seconded the
m( it
#1 Kreu owitz MOVED to recommend that the Town Council
ap ; the oning for Rancho Catalina from Pima County CR-1
to ) th k Nvo conditions set forth in Exhibit A to OV9-03-17.
Cc, d ILL motion. Motion carried 5-0.
#1 - Man ross MOVED to recommend that the Town Council
ap i the r )ning for Ridgeview Plaza from Pima County CB-1 to
01 . n r ; seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
#1 `:Z rc. )witz MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-03-
07 ,w. . ..5-51-004A, 225-51-2170, 225-51-2180, 225-51-2140,
22. - -om I':ma County zoning CB-1 to the Town of Oro Valley
C- ►inik. ,ner Anning seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-
0.
#1 1 k) , owitz MOVED to recommend that the Town Council
ap for Suffolk Hills, from Pima County CR-1 to Oro
Via two conditions set forth in Exhibit A to OV9-03-10.
C( d tit, .notion. Discussion: Commissioner Anning mentioned
no r :o rr, :d to read R 1-3 6 instead of R1-144. Motion carried 5-
0.
#1 ) • Ma oss MOVED to recommend that the Town Council
ap 2- lig for the Immaculate Heart School from Pima
Cc -r..i, ' )j ect to the condition listed in Exhibit A, attached
he ,owit. seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
11
Se w 3Z Meeting Minutes
#1 'trc 'a.owitz MOVED to recommend approval of OV9-03-
06 No 225-51-0190, 225-51-011A, 225-51-018A and 225-51-
02 r z •ng R-S (Residential Service) District, with the two
co A OV9-03-06. Commissioner Anning seconded the
mL it
#1 L- Aiming MOVED to recommend that the Town Council
ap the oning from Pima County Suburban Ranch to Oro
VII condition set forth in Exhibit A to OV9-03-15.
Cc: I tL Lotion. Motion carried 5-0.
#1 I. oss MOVED to recommend that the Town Council
ap ) the zoning from Pima County Transitional Zone to Oro
Va . 'ommissioner Kinared seconded the motion. Motion
ca
Cc 'd ave Staff look into and report on Bill Adler's Call to
thf le conflict between the General Plan and Zoning
Cc ,sent at the next meeting.
Cc that prior to Staff researching the above, that they
co , a ,a, quires resolution.
Cc 'r like for Staff to report at the next meeting on what
is ration. Has anything been done? What can be
do ect the Town's ability to alleviate the violation?
AL _.
M( is Ki `MOVED to adjourn. Commissioner Krenkowitz
se ad 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
E 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 '/4.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 manner 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.
l 1. 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
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.
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 1 8TH 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 1st.
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
qu
estion answer a to 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,
eTea
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 / 9 day of ,2003.
Wq,(J CIA-cAchr/
Kathryn E. Cuvelier, CMC
Town Clerk