The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPackets - Planning and Zoning Commission (170)*AMENDED (4/30/2020, 10:30 A.M.) AGENDA ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION May 5, 2020 ONLINE ZOOM MEETING Join Zoom Meeting: https://orovalley.zoom.us/j/95963710686 Executive Sessions – Upon a vote of the majority of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Commission may enter into Executive Sessions pursuant to Arizona Revised Statues §38-431.03 (A)(3) to obtain legal advice on matters listed on the Agenda. REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL *PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS REGULAR SESSION AGENDA 1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 3, 2020 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES 2.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO PERMIT A MONUMENT SIGN IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF TANGERINE ROAD FOR THE ST. MARK CHURCH LOCATED AT 2727 W. TANGERINE ROAD 3.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS TWO ORACLE PLACE, LOCATED AT 7315 N. ORACLE ROAD 4.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PROPOSED GRAZING IN A PORTION OF STONE CANYON NEIGHBORHOOD 7, LOCATED NORTH OF TORTOLITA MOUNTAIN CIRCLE ABUTTING THE TOWN'S BOUNDARIES A. PUBLIC HEARING: A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT TO ADD GRAZING AS A CONDITIONAL USE TO THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT B. PUBLIC HEARING: A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING GRAZING IN A PORTION OF STONE CANYON NEIGHBORHOOD 7, LOCATED NORTH OF TORTOLITA MOUNTAIN CIRCLE ABUTTING THE TOWN'S BOUNDARIES PLANNING UPDATE (INFORMATIONAL ONLY) ADJOURNMENT POSTED: 4/28/2020 at 5:00 p.m. by pp POSTED: 4/28/2020 at 5:00 p.m. by pp AMENDED AGENDA POSTED: 4/30/2020 at 5:00 p.m. by pp *Instructions to Speakers Members of the public have the right to speak during any posted Public Hearing. However, those items not listed as a Public Hearing are for consideration and action by the Planning and Zoning commisison during the course of their business meeting. Members of the public may be allowed to speak on these topics at the discretion of the Chair. In accordance with Amendment #2 of the Mayoral Proclamation of Emergency issued on March 27, 2020, the following restrictions have been placed on all public meetings until further notice: 1. In-person attendance by members of the public is prohibited. 2. Members of the public can either watch the public meeting online https://www.orovalleyaz.gov/town/departments/town-clerk/meetings-and-agendas or, if they would like to participate in the meeting (e.g. speak at Call to Audience or speak on a Regular Agenda item), they can attend the meeting and participate via the on-line meeting application, Zoom: https://orovalley.zoom.us/j/95963710686 , or may participate telephonically only by dialing 1-312-626-6799 prior to or during the posted meeting. 3. If a member of the public would like to speak at either Call to Audience or on a Regular Agenda item, it is highly encouraged to email your request to speak to jancona@orovalleyaz.gov and include your name and town/city of residence in order to provide the Mayor/Chair with advance notice so you can be called upon more efficiently during the Zoom meeting. 4. All members of the public who participate in the Zoom meeting either with video or telephonically will enter the meeting with microphones muted. For those participating via computer/tablet/phone device, you may choose whether to turn your video on or not. If you have not provided your name to speak prior to the meeting as specified in #3 above, you will have the opportunity to be recognized when you “raise your hand.” Those participating via computer/tablet/phone device can click the “raise your hand” button during the Call to the Public or Regular Agenda item, and the Chair will call on you in order, following those who submit their names in advance. For those participating by phone, you can press *9, which will show the Chair that your hand is raised. When you are recognized at the meeting by the Chair, your microphone will be unmuted by a member of staff and you will have three minutes to speak before your microphone is again muted. 5. If a member of the public would like to submit written comments to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their consideration prior to the meeting, please email those comments to jancona@orovalleyaz.gov , no later than sixty minutes before the public meeting. Those comments will then be electronically distributed to the public body prior to the meeting. If you have any questions, please contact the Commission’s recording secretary at jancona@orovalleyaz.gov. Thank you for your cooperation. “Notice of Possible Quorum of the Oro Valley Town Council, Boards, Commissions and Committees: In accordance with Chapter 3, Title 38, Arizona Revised Statutes and Section 2-4-4 of the Oro Valley Town Code, a majority of the Town Council, Board of Adjustment, Historic Preservation Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Stormwater Utility Commission, and Water Utility Commission may attend the above referenced meeting as a member of the audience only.” Planning & Zoning Commission 1. Meeting Date:05/05/2020 Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development Case Number: N/A SUBJECT: REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 3, 2020 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: N/A. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: N/A. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A. SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to approve (approve with changes), the March 3, 2020 meeting minutes. Attachments 3-3-2020 Draft Minutes D R A F T MINUTES ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION March 3, 2020 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER Chair Gambill called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Celeste Gambill, Chair Jacob Herrington, Vice Chair Hal Bergsma, Commissioner Ellen Hong, Commissioner Skeet Posey, Commissioner Neal Herst, Commissioner Daniel Sturmon, Commissioner Staff Present:Michael Spaeth, Principal Planner Joe Andrews, Chief Civil Deputy Attorney Attendees: Melanie Barrett, Town Council Liaison PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Gambill led the Commission and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. CALL TO AUDIENCE There were no speaker requests. COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS Council Liaison Melanie Barrett provided updates on the recent council retreat regarding budget, the new police chief, Parks and Recreation needs assessment study and playground, as well as past and upcoming items related to Planning on Town Council agendas. REGULAR SESSION AGENDA 1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 4, 2020 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Neal Herst, seconded by Commissioner Daniel Sturmon to approve the February 4, 2020 meeting minutes as written. Vote: 7 - 0 Carried March 3, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes 1 Vote: 7 - 0 Carried 2.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING CONCEPTUAL PUBLIC ART FOR PUSCH RIDGE CHRISTIAN ACADEMY, LOCATED EAST OF ORACLE ROAD BETWEEN CALLE CONCORDIA AND LINDA VISTA BOULEVARD, 2000053 Senior Planner Hannah Oden provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Location of subject property - Applicant's request to use existing art on campus - Current and future expansion - Public Art requirement - Design Principles and Design Standards - Summary and Recommendation Bill Hallinan, representing Pusch Ridge Christian Academy, provided a presentation which included photos and descriptions of the art around the campus. Discussion ensued among the Commission, applicant and staff. Motion by Vice Chair Jacob Herrington, seconded by Commissioner Hal Bergsma to recommend approval of the Conceptual Public Art included under the "Approved Cost" in Attachment 1 for Pusch Ridge Christian Academy, based on the finding that it meets the Design Principles and Designs Standards of the Zoning Code. Vote: 7 - 0 Carried 3.DISCUSSION REGARDING A TOWN COUNCIL REQUEST TO EXPLORE IF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS SHOULD BE APPLIED TO CUSTOM HOMES Senior Planning Technician Patty Hayes provided a presentation that included the following: - Purpose - Custom homes versus model homes - Design Standards - Custom homes - traditional styles - Custom homes - unique designs - Two specific custom homes that caused neighbor concerns - Interior spaces - Housing statistics - Future homes - Three options: (1) no change, (2) apply focused design standards, (3) apply all design standards - General Plan - Next steps - Summary Discussion ensued among the Commission and staff. PLANNING UPDATE (INFORMATIONAL ONLY) Principal Planner Michael provided an update on upcoming neighborhood meetings and agenda items tentatively scheduled for the next Commission meeting. ADJOURNMENT Chair Gambill adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m. March 3, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes 2 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 Planning and Zoning Commission of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 3rd day of March, 2020. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this 4th day of March, 2020. ___________________________ Jeanna Ancona Senior Office Specialist March 3, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes 3 Planning & Zoning Commission 2. Meeting Date:05/05/2020 Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development Case Number: 2000451 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO PERMIT A MONUMENT SIGN IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF TANGERINE ROAD FOR THE ST. MARK CHURCH LOCATED AT 2727 W. TANGERINE ROAD RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The St. Mark Church, on Tangerine Road, requests approval to install a monument sign in the Tangerine Road right-of-way. In 2019 the Town Council approved a zoning code amendment to allow a business owner to request approval to place a monument sign in the right-of-way under specific circumstances. Those circumstances can include locations where there is an extra wide right-of-way between the paved travel lane and the subject property and the speed of the road along with physical obstacles that contribute to sight visibility challenges, all of which apply to this property. Prior to 2019, monument signs were only allowed on the private property of the development that the sign identified. A monument sign is a self-supporting permanent type of structure that is anchored into the ground that identifies the associated property. The design of the proposed monument for St. Mark is shown in Attachment 1 and meets the size, height and lighting requirements of the zoning code. This request is related to the location of the sign only. This proposal was reviewed for safety considerations by the Town Engineer who is satisfied with the right-of-way location. The request to place a monument sign in the right-of-way is presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission for recommendation to Town Council for final decision. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: The purpose of this item is to review a proposal from St. Mark Church to place a monument sign in the Tangerine Road right-of-way. The right-of-way is a section of land dedicated to a public entity, such as the Town, to allow for roads, sidewalks, utilities and other public facilities. A right-of-way is often wider than the actual paved surface of the road and generally includes multi-use paths and landscaping or natural desert. The proposed location of the sign is in the Tangerine Road right-of-way. The zoning code contains a set of standards that an applicant must meet in order to allow their monument sign in the right-of-way. The zoning code standards, from chapter 28.7, related to signs in the right-of-way are written below in italics followed by a summary of the applicant's comments and staff commentary. A right-of-way depth of at least one hundred (100) feet shall be required between the paved surface of the road (including turn lane and shoulder) and the subject property line. Areas where the right-of-way depth changes for drainage ways, bridges and similar structures shall not be included in the one hundred (100) foot minimum.The one hundred (100) foot depth requirement, between the paved surface and the subject 1. property line, may be reduced to not less than twenty (20) feet if the following conditions apply:The vehicular speed of the road combined with the clear zones and adequate visibility defined by the Town's sight visibility triangle criteria are met. Applicant comment: The applicant refers to the site plan as demonstrating that the proposed location of the sign is in a wide right-of-way (Attachment 1). Staff comment: The private property of St. Mark is located 120' from the paved surface of Tangerine Road. The distance more than exceeds the code requirement. Also, the minimum 20' setback from the edge of the right-of-way is also met. Staff finds the proposal meets this code standard. The intersection sight distance table demonstrates the sign could not be safely seen. Self-imposed conditions, such as built structures built on the site, will not qualify for a reduction of the distance requirement. 2. Applicant comment: The applicant refers to the wide right-of-way and landscaping that was installed with the recently improved Tangerine Road as the obstacle that prevents safe visibility of a monument sign on private property. The applicant states that a sign on the private property does not inform motorists of the location of the entry to the church in a safe and timely manner. Staff comment: There are no structures on the property belonging to St. Mark's that obstruct the view of signs. The private property, where a monument sign would normally be placed, is simply located behind a very wide right-of-way. The wide right-of-way provided for Tangerine Road, including the landscaping and Town's identification sign, created a situation where a sign on private property would not be safely visible to the public. The Town Engineer has reviewed this proposal and determined that the proposal meets the sight distance requirements. The sign shall be located no more than fifty (50) feet from either side of an entrance to the property associated with the sign. 3. Applicant comment: The applicant provided a map showing this requirement is met (Attachment 1). Staff comment: The proposed location of the sign is within the 50' limit. Although the sign is proposed to be located in the public right-of-way, it will be placed at the main entry to the church property. Sufficient evidence shall be provided demonstrating that sign locations normally allowed by the Zoning Code do not provide effective and safe wayfinding as detailed in the intersection site distance detail of the Town of Oro Valley’s Subdivision Street Standards and Policies Manual. 4. Applicant comment: The applicant refers to the speed limit of Tangerine Road and the sight visibility challenges as demonstrated in the photos the applicant provided in Attachment 1. Staff comment: The Town Engineer has reviewed the proposal and finds that it meets the Street Standard and Policy Manual requirements. No electronic message boards shall be placed on a sign in the right-of-way.5. Applicant comment: The applicant shows the proposed sign, in Attachment 1, without an electronic message board. Staff comment: The proposed sign does not have the electronic message board. The letters on the sign will be internally lit which will help with finding the main entry at night. The sign lighting meets the standards of the zoning code and will not be obtrusive to the area. Upon satisfaction of the Town Engineer and Planning and Zoning Administrator that the sign has met all safety and location requirements, the request will be forwarded for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Town Council, in addition to the required license agreement, for placement in the right-of-way. 6. Staff comment: The Town Engineer has reviewed the proposal and is satisfied with the location. If the sign location is approved, a license agreement will be required between the Town and St. Mark Church. The license agreement will make it known that the church must carry liability insurance on the sign and also agree to relocate the sign if required in the future at the churches expense. The proposal to allow the St. Mark monument sign in the right-of-way has been found to meet all requirements of the zoning code, therefore staff recommends approval. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to recommend approval of the proposed right-of-way sign location for St. Mark Church based on the finding that it meets the standards of the Zoning Code. OR I MOVE to recommend denial of the proposed right-of-way sign location for St. Mark Church ________________. Attachments Attachment 1 Applicant's Proposal Planning & Zoning Commission 3. Meeting Date:05/05/2020 Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development Case Number: 2000922 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS TWO ORACLE PLACE, LOCATED AT 7315 N. ORACLE ROAD RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to establish a master sign program for Two Oracle Place, a commercial development, that will set the standards for permanent signs on the property (Attachment 1). Two Oracle Place is a commercial development built in the 1980's located on the west side of Oracle Road north of Ina Road. The property is undergoing a revitalization which includes updated architecture and sign designs, all of which are intended to enhance the character and viability of the commercial center. The proposed master sign program will include sign standards such as: New monument and entryway sign designs Re-design of existing monument sign Define wall sign standards Pedestrian signage A master sign program is a set of customized sign standards that propose alternatives to the zoning code and is intended to provide latitude in order to achieve variety and good design. A master sign program (MSP) is often utilized to address unique circumstances of the property and is also used to propose better sign designs. The latitude proposed in the Two Oracle Place MSP is as follows: Larger wall signs (1.5 square feet of sign space per 1' linear foot of frontage instead of 1 square feet) Larger entryway signs (10' tall with 50 square foot of sign area instead of 6' tall and 32 square feet) Keep the existing tall monument sign and allow a remodel instead of requiring removal when structurally modified Add an additional new monument sign The unique circumstance of Two Oracle Place is the layout of the existing development which places several tenant spaces behind the bulk of the two-story building which causes visibly issues when viewed from south bound traffic. Also, the property is located across the street from commercial developments that are currently located in Pima County's jurisdiction. Pima County allows the same sign size standards that the applicant proposes in this MSP. Allowing the sign sizes proposed in the MSP would provide balanced and consistent sign standards amongst the nearby commercial developments. The proposed sign standards will incorporate design elements, such as colors and material, that will provide unity between the proposed monument signs and the buildings on site. A master sign program requires recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission and final approval by Town Council. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: Two Oracle Place was built in the early 1980's and is the location of business offices, food establishments along with personal services such as a salon, fitness studio and hearing aid company. This property was originally planned and developed while in Pima County's jurisdiction. Originally, signs only had to meet to the County standards which at that time allowed the tall monument sign. That same monument sign is proposed to remain but with an updated design along with adding newly designed monument and entryway signs on the property. The proposed master sign program proposes new sign standards such as: New monument and entryway sign designs Re-design of existing monument sign Define wall sign standards Pedestrian signage The new monument and entryway sign designs, in conjunction with the larger wall signs will mitigate the visibility of the tenants due to the unique layout of the buildings. Existing Site Conditions 3.5 acre site situated between: The 2 acre site of One Oracle Place Three Oracle Place a.k.a. Family Life Radio with 1.5 acres Zoned C2 1 building Master Sign Program Details Monument signs Monument signs are permanent structures placed near the entryways of a property that identify the commercial development and also the tenants in the buildings. A primary focus of the proposed sign program is to allow a new monument sign to be added along the Oracle Road frontage. Also, the owners propose to continue the use of the existing monument sign, that is taller and contains more square footage than normally allowed but will receive an updated design to blend with the proposed new sign. The sign is allowed to remain in place as a legal non-conforming sign but isn't able to receive structural sign. The sign is allowed to remain in place as a legal non-conforming sign but isn't able to receive structural changes without approval through the MSP. The size and lighting of the new sign will comply with the Town's zoning code standards. The complete proposal is provided in Attachment 1. Proposed new monument sign: Proposed re-design of existing monument sign: The Two Oracle Road site is situated between two other developments, One Oracle Place located to the south and the radio station property located to the north. Although the properties are currently separately owned, they were originally part of one overall development. This is why they share entrances and parking. At this time, only one main entrance off of Oracle Road belongs to Two Oracle Place. However, that one entrance plus the second entrance, which is owned by the radio station, is shared by all three developments along with parking and pedestrian access. This presents a challenge for Two Oracle Place as they wish to install signs at the entrances to the development. The zoning code usually allows multiple signs if the property has more than 800 feet of street frontage. The overall development including One Oracle,Two Oracle and the radio station, contain nearly 1,200 feet of frontage and two entrances. Usually the zoning code would allow multiple monument signs on a property with 1,200 linear feet of frontage. However, the property belonging to Two Oracle Place is only 600 feet long and contains only one of those entrances. The proposed sign program proposes to allow the following signs for the overall site: Existing monument signs to remain in place One Oracle Place (home to Bank of the West) Two Oracle Place (the applicant for this MSP) Radio station New additional signs Multi-tenant monument sign for Two Oracle Place near Bank of the West sign (size and height meet overall code allowances) Entryway signs near the radio station sign with taller height and square footage This MSP would allow one more monument sign than allowed on a 600 foot frontage but it would be allowed if considered one overall development with 1,200 feet of frontage. Also, allowing the current tall monument sign to remain in place but with an updated design is another key component of the MSP. Instead of keeping the outdated design, approval of the proposed update would allow the tall sign to remain in place as a re-designed sign which will provide a cohesive appearance for the site. In this case the quantity of signs, when considered one development, and the ability to keep the tall existing remodeled sign is the latitude that is requested through the proposed Master Sign Program which is reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission with recommendation to Town Council. Entryway signs Entryway signs are permanent structures placed at the driveway into a property. The signs are meant to only identify the name of the development and enhance the visibility into the development. The proposed MSP would allow two entryway signs, one on each side of the northern driveway, at a larger size. The code generally allows the signs to be 6' tall with 32 square feet of text. The proposed signs are 10' tall with up to 50 square feet of text. The proposed increase in size is due to the visibility challenges when approaching the site and identifying the northern entry way which leads to all three properties. Wall signs Wall signs are individual letters and/or logos attached to the exterior wall of the tenant space that provide identification for the business. The proposed sign program will allow the illumination, quantity and types of wall signs that meet the Oro Valley zoning code standards. The size of the wall signs is another primary focus in the MSP. The applicant requests that wall signs be allowed a size of 1.5 square feet of sign per 1 linear foot of frontage versus the code standards of 1 square feet of sign per 1 linear feet of frontage. This would mean that if a business has 30 feet of store frontage in their tenant space, instead of allowing 30 square feet of sign, the business would be allowed 45 square foot of sign. This amount of sign size is allowed in the zoning code but usually for business that located 300' or more from the road. The store fronts at Two Oracle Place are located 100 to 150 feet from Oracle Road. The increase in sign size would allow tenants located in the shadow of the two-story building to be more noticed while keeping the formally allowed sign sizes permitted by the County. The wall sign sizes will also provide consistency with commercial properties across the street who at some point may be considered for annexation by the Town. Pedestrian signage The proposed MSP also contains signs that are oriented toward pedestrian traffic such as under-canopy signs, menu boards and directional signs. The property is a two-story multi-tenant site that has several tenant spaces located in areas that are not easily visible without the proper signage. Including pedestrian level signage will aid in providing visibility to businesses and their products and services offered. Discussion/Analysis: Design Standards and Design Principals are below in italics followed by staff commentary: Sign colors, design and placement shall be complementary and integral to the projects architectural and site design themes. The proposed monument and entryway signs will be placed in locations that provide the best visibility for the development due to the unique driveway challenges. When the new monument and entry signs are installed on the site, in conjunction with the existing signs, the allowed quantity of signs will not be exceed when considering the overall development. The proposed monument sign design utilizes colors found in the new design of the development (Attachment 1). Project identification and sign elements shall incorporate architectural treatment and project unifying elements which are integrated with the overall design of the project in terms of style, materials, color and theme . The proposed signs introduce a new design for the development while using colors and materials found in the new architectural design of the development. The new sign design will blend with the updated architecture of the development while providing effective identification for the tenants. As feasible, sign colors shall utilize the project color palette approved as part of the Conceptual Design for the project. The colors found within the development will be used in the design of the new monument signs while allowing individual businesses to use colors from the proposed color palette or their registered logos. General Plan The proposed sign criteria was reviewed for conformance with the General Plan’s Goals and Policies. Listed below are relevant policies within the General Plan relating to signage: Goal Q: A built environment that creatively integrates landscape, architecture, open space and conservation elements to increase the sense of place, community interaction and quality of life. Policy Land Use 6: Maintain the small town, neighborly character and improve the design and safety of the built environment. Action item #125: Maintain the unique character of Oro Valley by studying and updating: Signage regulations to emphasize identification and direction over advertising goods or services to maintain compatibility and minimal intrusiveness. The proposed master sign program will provide more monument signs with updated designs along with larger wall signs which will allow businesses to be better identified to the public, regardless of their unique locations, while maintaining cohesive non-intrusive signage. Summary The master sign program is proposing latitude for onsite signs which include standards such as: Larger wall signs (1.5 square feet of sign space per 1' linear foot of frontage instead of 1 square feet) Larger entryway signs (10' tall with 50 square foot of sign area instead of 6' tall and 32 square feet) Keep the existing tall monument sign and allow a remodel instead of requiring removal when structurally modified Add an additional new monument sign The proposed latitude in the sign standards will allow the Two Oracle Place development to provide better designed and cohesive signage for the property and it's tenants. Recommendation The unique layout of the existing buildings and shared access entries of all the Oracle Place properties along with the close proximity to built commercial developments with more lenient Pima County standards provides sufficient evidence for the latitude of the custom sign standards proposed in the MSP. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the proposed master sign program. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to recommend approval of the master sign program, in Attachment 1, for Two Oracle Place based on the finding that the proposed sign program is consistent with the Design Principles. OR I MOVE to recommend denial of the master sign program, in Attachment 1, for Two Oracle Place based on the finding that __________________. Attachments Attachment 1 - Master Sign Program Planning & Zoning Commission 4. Meeting Date:05/05/2020 Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development Case Number: 2000325 and 2000326 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING PROPOSED GRAZING IN A PORTION OF STONE CANYON NEIGHBORHOOD 7, LOCATED NORTH OF TORTOLITA MOUNTAIN CIRCLE ABUTTING THE TOWN'S BOUNDARIES A. PUBLIC HEARING: A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT TO ADD GRAZING AS A CONDITIONAL USE TO THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT B. PUBLIC HEARING: A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING GRAZING IN A PORTION OF STONE CANYON NEIGHBORHOOD 7, LOCATED NORTH OF TORTOLITA MOUNTAIN CIRCLE ABUTTING THE TOWN'S BOUNDARIES RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Item A and conditional approval of Item B, subject to Attachment 5. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this item is to consider two separate, yet related requests to allow grazing in a portion of Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7, which is located north of Tortolita Mountain Circle abutting the Town's boundaries (for map, see Attachment 1). The subject area is zoned Low-Density Residential and is regulated by the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development (PAD). The Rancho Vistoso PAD provides the zoning standards (e.g. allowed uses, setbacks, height etc.) for the subject property. As such, the applicant's request requires consideration of the following: Item A (Attachment 2): Request for a Text Amendment to the Rancho Vistoso PAD to add grazing as a conditional use to the Low-Density Residential zoning district. The existing Rancho Vistoso PAD does not allow grazing in any zoning district, including Low-Density Residential. As such, grazing must first be added as a conditional use to the Low-Density Residential zoning district before it can be allowed in Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7. The Low-Density Resident zoning district (for map, see Attachment 3) consists of 4 other subdivisions and a school. However, Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 is the only large-lot (209 acres) undeveloped area. By adding grazing as a conditional use, which is consistent with residential areas regulated by the Oro Valley Zoning Code, all requests for grazing are subject to the conditional use permit criteria and the public review process. This request is discretionary, which means the applicant is asking for new property rights and the Planning and Zoning Commission is tasked with making a recommendation to the Town Council. Approval of this request means any property owner of land zoned Low-Density Residential within the Rancho Vistoso PAD may apply for a Conditional Use Permit allowing grazing. However, all requests for grazing must also have a minimum of 3.3 acres of contiguous land and no more than 1 head of livestock per 30,000 sf of lot area (per code). Item B (Attachment 4 and Attachment 5): Request for a Conditional Use Permit allowing grazing in a portion of Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 The applicant's second request is contingent on Item A being approved. This proposal is also discretionary (request for new property rights) for the Planning and Zoning Commission to make a recommendation to Town Council. With regard to compatibility to the surrounding area, the following are notable elements. Per the applicant, the subject area has been actively grazed since 1987 and historically, there have not been any known impacts to surrounding properties. The area is fenced and includes natural barriers to keep cattle away from existing homes (see Attachment 6). A condition of approval is included in Attachment 5 for the CUP to be reconsidered should complaints about cattle leaving the area arise without the property owner providing effective and timely remedies. A condition is included to limit the amount of cattle to 50 heads to mitigate any potential issues. The conditional use permit will expire once a building permit is issued for any of the undeveloped lots in the subject area. A neighborhood meeting was held for both requests with many of the concerns being addressed through the conditions of approval (Attachment 5). Both requests were also reviewed for conformance with the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan. The proposed use provides an effective transition between the larger-lot custom homes and the subject area (Goal X). As such, staff recommends approval of Item A and conditional approval of Item B, subject to Attachment 5. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: Land Use Context: The existing General Plan land use designation and zoning for Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 and surrounding areas is provided in Attachment 7. Site conditions: Approximately 209 acres Property is currently vacant Rock outcrops and steep slopes around the site Approvals to date 1987- Annexed into Oro Valley as part of the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development 2002- Amendment to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development approved to allow some development 2005- Final Plat approved for Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 The applicant's request is to allow grazing on a portion of the Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 (for map, see Attachment 1). The proposal includes two separate, yet related, requests. Both requests are discretionary, which means the applicant is asking for new property rights. The Planning and Zoning Commission is tasked with making a recommendation about both requests to Town Council. More information about each request is provided below. A. REQUEST FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT (PAD) The applicant's first request (Attachment 2) is to add grazing as a conditional use to the Rancho Vistoso PAD's Low-Density Residential zoning district. Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 is zoned Low-Density Residential and regulated by the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development (PAD). This means the zoning standards, such as allowed uses, are provided in the Rancho Vistoso PAD rather than the Oro Valley Zoning Code. The existing Rancho Vistoso PAD does not include grazing as an allowed use in any zoning district, including the Low-Density Residential zoning district. To uniformly apply the code (as required by State law) grazing must first be added as a conditional use to the Low-Density Residential zoning district before it can be allowed in Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7. In addition to Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7, four other subdivisions and a school site in Rancho Vistoso are zoned Low-Density Residential. These include, Stone Canyon neighborhood 1 and neighborhood 6, Estates at High Mesa, a portion of Coyote Ridge and Painted Sky Elementary (for map, see Attachment 3). However, Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 is the only large-lot (209 acres) undeveloped area. Adding grazing as a conditional use rather than a permitted use is consistent with the Oro Valley Zoning Code, which conditionally allows grazing in all residential districts (permitted only on 3.3 acre lots). As a conditional use, all requests for grazing are subject to the conditional use permit criteria (for more information, see Section B of this report) and public review process. Therefore, approval of this request means any property owner with land zoned Low-Density Residential within the Rancho Vistoso PAD may apply for a Conditional Use Permit allowing grazing. Additionally, the property must meet the following provisions established in the Zoning Code: A minimum of 3.3 acres of contiguous land must be available No more than 1 head of livestock, at least 6 months or older, per every 30,000 square feet of lot area B: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING GRAZING IN A PORTION OF THE STONE CANYON 7 NEIGHBORHOOD The applicant's second request (Attachment 4) is contingent on Item A being approved. This request is for the subsequent Conditional Use Permit allowing grazing in a portion of Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7. Conditional Use Permits (CUP) provide additional focus on compatibility and are reviewed for conformance with the criteria in Section 22.5 of the Zoning Code. The criteria are shown below in italics, followed by the applicant's responses and staff commentary. Damage or nuisance arising from noise, smoke, odor, dust, vibration or illumination The nuisances associated with the proposed use are noise and odor. Per the applicant, the area has been actively grazed since 1987 and historically, there have not been any known impacts to surrounding homes. A fence and natural barriers, such as steep slopes and rock outcrops, provide deterrents between the grazing activities and nearby homes (see Attachment 6). A condition is included in Attachment 5, for the CUP to be reconsidered if effective and timely remedies are not provided by the property owner should complaints arise about cattle leaving the subject area. A condition is also included to limit the amount of cattle to 50 heads (.2 cow per acre) to mitigate potential noise and odor issues Hazard to persons and property from possible explosion, contamination, fire or flood The proposed use do not pose any threat of explosion, contamination, fire or flood to surrounding properties. Unusual volume or character traffic- The proposed use will not change the current traffic volume or character. Hours of operation will not adversely impact neighborhood properties- Although cattle will roam the property at all hours of the day/night, the previously mentioned barriers (fence and topography) help keep the cattle away from existing homes. Additionally, the conditional use permit will expire once a home is built on any of the undeveloped lots in the subject area (see Attachment 5). Consistency with the General Plan- Please see Section C. of this report below for analysis. C. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Both requests were reviewed for conformance to the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan. Although many of the goals and policies in the General Plan are not applicable to the proposed use, the use fits within the Low-Density Resident land use definition as being "rural in character". Additionally, the proposed use provides an effective transition between the surrounding large-lot custom homes and the subject area (Goal X). D. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION One neighborhood meeting was held for the applicant's request on January 9, 2020. A summary of the discussion and correspondence received from nearby neighbors is included in Attachment 8. Notable elements are listed below: Amount of cattle allowed and proposed to be on the property Proximity and potential nuisances to existing and future homes Maintenance and type of fencing around the subject area The following conditions of approval (see Attachment 5) are included to address resident concerns: Limiting the amount of cattle to 50 Expiration of the conditional use permit once a building permit is issued for any of the undeveloped lots within the subject area Reconsideration of the conditional use permit should complaints arise about cattle leaving the subject area and effective remedies not being provided by the property owner in a timely manner During the meeting, it was determined further neighborhood meetings were not warranted as all questions and concerns had been addressed. The following public notice has been provided: Notification to all property owners of Low-Density Residential zoned land and within 600 feet of Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 Notification to all additional interested parties who signed in at the neighborhood meeting Notification to all Homeowner's Association Advertisement in The Daily Territorial Signs posted along Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 Posts at Town Hall and on the Town website E. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION In summary, the applicant's request is to allow grazing in a portion of Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7. Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 is zoned Low-Density Residential in the Rancho Vistoso PAD, which currently does not allow grazing as a use. The applicant's request includes the following items: A. Request for a Text Amendment to the Rancho Vistoso PAD to add grazing as a conditional use to the Low-Density Residential zoning district (Attachment 2) In order to allow grazing in Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7, grazing must first be allowed uniformly to all properties (for map, see Attachment 3) zoned Low-Density Residential within Rancho Vistoso. By adding it as a conditional use, all requests must meet the conditional use permit criteria and are subject to the public review process. Additionally, all properties must have a minimum of 3.3 acres of contiguous land and no more than 1 head of livestock per 30,000 square feet. B. Request for a Conditional Use Permit allowing grazing in a portion of Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7 (for map, see Attachment 1) The applicant's second request (Attachment 4) is contingent upon the first request. With regard to compatibility to the surrounding area, several conditions of approval are included to protect existing and future residences. These include limiting the amount of cattle to 50 heads, requiring effective and efficient measures to remedy complaints of cattle leaving the property and expiration of the CUP should homes be built on any of the undeveloped lots in the subject area (see Attachment 5). Staff finds both requests are in conformance with the General Plan and recommends approval of Item A and conditional approval of Item B, subject to Attachment 5. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: The Planning and Zoning Commission may consider the following motions. Please note, Item B is contingent upon the motion for Item A. As such, Item B cannot be recommended for approval unless Item A is also. ITEM A: I MOVE to recommend approval of the text amendment to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development to add grazing as a conditional use to the Low Density Residential zoning district based on the finding it is in conformance with the General Plan. OR I MOVE to recommend denial of the text amendment to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development to add grazing as a conditional use to the Low-Density Residential zoning district based on the following ___________________. ITEM B: I MOVE to recommend approval of a conditional use permit allowing grazing in a portion of Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7, as depicted in Attachment 1 and subject to the conditions in Attachment 5, based on the finding it is in conformance with the Zoning Code. OR I MOVE to recommend denial of a conditional use permit allowing grazing in a portion of Stone Canyon Neighborhood 7, as depicted in Attachment 1, based on the following ______________. Attachments ATTACHMENT 1- SUBJECT AREA ATTACHMENT 2- PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT ATTACHMENT 3- LDR ZONED PROPERTY ATTACHMENT 4- APPLICANT'S CUP REQUEST ATTACHMENT 5- ITEM B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ATTACHMENT 6- EXISTING FENCE AND TOPOGRAPHY ATTACHMENT 7- LAND USE AND ZONING TABLE ATTACHMENT 8- NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY AND LETTERS 79 9) Temporary Utility Uses c. Property Development Standards 1) Minimum Lot Area: 43,560 sq. ft. 2) Minimum Lot width: 150 ft. 3) Density: There shall be a minimum of 43,560 square feet of lot area for each single family dwelling 4) Maximum Building Height: Thirty (30) feet, two stories 5) Yard Setbacks: a) Front: Thirty (30) feet b) Side: Twenty (20) feet c) Rear: Forty (40) feet 6) Detached Accessory Buildings per O.V.Z.C.R. 2. LOW DENSITY (1-3 RAC) RESIDENTIAL a. Purpose: Similar to very low density residential this designation has been located in areas which have sensitive or rugged terrain and where protection of the natural features is a most important criteria. Low density from one (1) to three (3) units per acre shall also utilize the building envelope concept. The lots are large enough to allow the designation of permanent open space to be recorded on each lot for the area outside of the building envelope. b. Permitted Uses: Uses listed under Very Low Density (0- 1 RAC) shall apply. c. Property Development Standards 1) Minimum Lot Area: Fourteen thousand five hundred twenty square (14,520) feet. 2) Minimum lot width: Sixty (60) feet 3) Density: There shall be a minimum of 14,520 square feet of lot area for each single family dwelling 4) Maximum Building Height: Thirty (30) feet, two stories 5) Yard Setbacks: a) Front: Twenty-five feet average; 20 feet minimum b) Side: Eight (8) feet c) Rear: Twenty-five (25) feet 1 G:\Projects\19aq Stone Canyon\a01 PAD Amend & CUP for Grazing\0240\2nd Submittal\2 - Cover Ltr.docx TO: The Town of Oro Valley DATE: 2/7/2020 11000 North La Canada Drive Oro Valley, AZ 85737 PROJECT: Stone Canyon Ph. VII PROJECT #: 19aqa01 SUBJECT: Proposed PAD Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Applications to Permit Continuation of Historic Grazing Activities History The Martin Ranch Company’s grazing operation extends over approximately 25,000 acres of land in Rancho Vistoso, northern Pima County, and southern Pinal County. Martin Ranch has been actively grazing in this part of southern Arizona since 1985, although of course cattle grazing is an historic activity in the area dating back well over a century. The Martin grazing area is within a collection of leased properties, mostly on State Trust land, but also on some privately held acreage. One of the privately held properties that Martin Ranch leases is the subject property comprising the northern 209± acres of Stone Canyon Phase VII. The subject property has been actively grazed since 1987, is fenced, and supports up to three head of cattle according to AZ Dept. of Agriculture regulations. Although grazing areas can and do exist adjacent to higher density residential developments such as Sun City Vistoso, the existing residential development near and adjacent to this grazing area is very low density residential (less than one home per acre), which is very compatible with the grazing land use. Over the years there have been almost no reports of loose cattle in Stone Canyon, and no actual complaints because the ranchers are quick to respond to any concerns or inquiries. In fact, the majority of residents are likely unaware that most undeveloped lands within Stone Canyon have been grazed since before Stone Canyon was started. Incidentally, the 200 acres of open space directly east of the subject property was also grazed for many years prior to its dedication to the Town of Oro Valley. Proposal The subject property was platted in 2006 but has not yet been built or offered for sale to individual homeowners. The current owners are not land developers and have no intention of developing the land. They received the property in lieu of debt payment from the previous owner. Unfortunately, the property tax valuation on the subject property recently increased due to a determination by the County Assessor that grazing is not a permitted use on the property despite the fact that the property has been grazed continuously for decades. This PAD amendment request seeks to rectify that issue by adding the established, historic “grazing” activity as a conditionally permitted land use in the Rancho Vistoso PAD’s Low Density Residential (LDR) land use designation. Our concurrent Conditional Use Permit application is dependent on the approval of the PAD amendment and will formalize the existing grazing land use as permitted in order to regain the corresponding tax status on the property until this phase of Stone Canyon is ready for development. Project #: 19aqa01 Date: 2/7/2020 2 G:\Projects\19aq Stone Canyon\a01 PAD Amend & CUP for Grazing\0240\2nd Submittal\2 - Cover Ltr.docx State Law requires municipal zoning regulations to be uniform throughout each zone, with the ability to establish conditionally allowed uses to be considered on a case-by-case basis when special circumstances exist. Accordingly, we propose the following text to be added to The Rancho Vistoso PAD, Section 1.3.B.2.b.: Conditionally Permitted Uses: Farms and Ranches, subject to the following: (a) Farm uses shall require a minimum of 144,000 contiguous square feet of lot area, (b) Grazing and raising of horses and livestock other than swine with no more than one head of livestock more than six months of age per thirty thousand square feet of lot area, (c) Ranch uses shall require a minimum of ten contiguous acres of lot area, and (d) the Conditional Use Permit criteria in OVZCR Section 22.5. Public Outreach We held a neighborhood meeting on January 9, 2020. Approximately 15 people attended, including several residents and Planning & Zoning Commission members. No significant concerns were raised, and Town staff concluded that a second meeting was not needed. Please refer to the Public Outreach Report for more details. Conditional Use Permit Criteria Analysis Section 22.5.A of the Oro Valley Zoning Code lists the criteria below that must be met for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted. Following each criterion is a statement explaining how this proposal meets the requirement. 1. That the granting of such conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. In arriving at this determination, the factors which shall be considered shall include the following: a. Damage or nuisance arising from noise, smoke, odor, dust, vibration or illumination; At the neighborhood meeting one attendee asked about the grazing area’s proximity to existing homes, and whether there would be any issues with odor. A project neighbor commented that he has lived next to this grazing area for years and has never had odor or any other complaints. Similarly, the meager grazing activity onsite does not produce any noise, smoke, dust, vibration, or illumination. b. Hazard to persons and property from possible explosion, contamination, fire or flood; Grazing does not lead to any of these issues. c. Unusual volume or character of traffic. Grazing does not increase vehicular traffic in the area. Quadrupedestrian traffic volume data is not available, but this request will not result in an increase to the existing volume. Project #: 19aqa01 Date: 2/7/2020 3 G:\Projects\19aq Stone Canyon\a01 PAD Amend & CUP for Grazing\0240\2nd Submittal\2 - Cover Ltr.docx 2. That the characteristics of the proposed use are reasonably compatible with the types of use permitted in the surrounding area and sufficient mitigation measures are employed to minimize impact on adjoining properties. a. That the proposed use is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan. Most General Plan goals and policies are not applicable to this request. None are in conflict. The request specifically meets the following goal: • Goal 5.4.X. “Strive for effective transitions between differing land uses and intensities in the community”. The grazing area is fenced to contain the few head of cattle that wander into the area from time to time. The grazing use has no negative impact on surrounding properties, and fencing the area further reduces the possibility of negative impacts. b. That the hours of operation of the proposed use will not adversely impact neighboring properties. Grazing is a 24-hour per day activity, but after-hours impacts historically have been limited to lone cows occasionally lowing softly in the moonlight. Summary There are several strong arguments supporting this proposal: • The property has been actively grazed for many years without problems. Light grazing such as that which occurs on the property does not create a land use compatibility issue. • The active Martin Ranch grazing lease extends all the way east to Oracle Road, adjacent to the northern edge of the Estates at Honeybee Ridge and Sun City. Town staff confirmed that there is no evidence or history of land use compatibility issues. • Granting of this CUP request will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. The characteristics of the use proposed are very compatible with the types of uses permitted in the surrounding area, as evidenced by decades of grazing without land use compatibility complaints. • Grazing is allowed in Stone Canyon CC&Rs. • Grazing is approved by the Stone Canyon HOA. Thank you for your consideration of these requests. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Paul Oland 1 Simms, Milini From:B K Roberts Sent:Wednesday, January 8, 2020 9:10 AM To:Simms, Milini Subject:Low Density rezoning in RV PAD Milini I will not be able to make the neighborhood meeting on this subject tomorrow night. But I would like to comment on what I have been able to read about the rezoning on the OVprojects.com website. I have no concern about grazing on the existing Stone Canyon VII S/D, since it has existed for many years. However, the material states “Use permit is not applicable unless the first request (associated rezoning text amendment) is approved by the Town Council first. My interpretation of that statement is that all areas outlined in yellow would then be eligible for grazing requests. I live in Coyote Ridge, lot 29, which directly abuts the area in yellow. This is not a large wash and to think grazing would be allowed is beyond comprehension. If my interpretation is correct, I’m definitely and strongly against the rezoning request. Brian Roberts 1 Simms, Milini From:Linda Sent:Tuesday, December 31, 2019 8:53 AM To:Simms, Milini Subject:Case1902612, Parcel: 219-06-254B Dear Ms. Simms, This is in response to your posted signs along Tortolita Mountain Circle in Stone Canyon. I live in Stone Canyon. As I stated in my earlier email I don’t like driving at night and the meeting you have scheduled is at 7PM. I may still try to come to it but I would appreciate it if you could note my comments below. ************** The only reason the Hansen Tr. is applying for a grazing lease, again, is the fact that they got caught and do not want to pay land taxes as the rest of us do. My research shows, that for many years, they had been paying $13.63/year for 81 lots on parcel 219‐06‐254B, Stone Canyon VII Lots 404 ‐ 485. That’s ridiculous. Most importantly they have had a grazing lease for years on that parcel but there have rarely been cattle there in years. When a few wandered in, my long time neighbors told me they got out and went to the golf course for food. That area is bouldered, mountainous, has has no food for cattle and has mountain lion and bobcat. Both would love to eat a cow. The area in question is not suitable for cattle, period. There is no food and they would never be able to walk in that area, never. There are areas north and east, over the mountains that would be, but not this parcel. The Hansen's only want a tax reduction. That is unfair to everyone in Oro Valley. Why Oro Valley would be foolish enough to allow them to have a grazing lease and the $13.63 fee again is beyond me. They, the Hansen Tr., have taken you to cleaners for a very long time at the expense of other Oro Valley home and land owners who follow the rules. Hansen Tr has roads already roughly graded on this parcel. Why that is, I don’t know. It is visible from Google Earth. I would like to know why Pima County Slope Ordinance didn’t affect this parcel. The upper portion should never have roads or houses. Thank you for your time, Linda Wallace‐Gray Stone Canyon, Oro Valley 1 Ancona, Jeanna From:Simms, Milini Sent:Friday, May 1, 2020 1:46 PM To:Ancona, Jeanna Subject:Letter of Concern for PZC Agenda Item #4 Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Jeanna, Please forward this email to the Commissioner's regarding Agenda Item #4. Thank you, Milini > -----Original Message----- > From: Linda > Sent: Friday, May 1, 2020 11:55 AM > To: Simms, Milini <msimms@orovalleyaz.gov> > Subject: Response to Planned Area & Conditional Use > > Dear Ms. Simms, > > I have read the agenda from the link provided. There is nothing there that changes what I said before. > > First, it does not matter how long there has been grazing. There should never have been nor be any grazing allowed in the Tortolita Mountains. And not on this 58 acres. Hansen Tr. has platted lots for that land. This mountain range is not suitable for cattle as it is bouldered, mountainous and has no food for cattle. It also, as previously stated, has predators, i.e. cougar, bobcat and others. There are many areas where 1 or 2 cattle/acre could be but this is not that place. > > Second, the only reason the Hansen Family Tr wants grazing is for the $13.63 tax for the entire parcel. > > Third, item B in your agenda states there will be a limit of 50 cattle. You must be kidding. There are few if any places in this area that would support 50 cattle on that type of land. > > Fourth, it appears, from what I have read that Hansen Tr is “piggy backing” on the rancher that has been grazing in this area previously. But it doesn’t matter. Cattle cannot walk there nor is there food. > > Fifth, Leah Hansen, Hansen Tr, could remove most of the lot lines, pay the taxes that should be paid and donate the upper portions to a land trust as conservation property. But she’s greedy. > > I expect you, Oro Valley, as well as Pima County, to see through this facade. Otherwise you will be taken to cleaners again as well as the rest of us who do pay our taxes. > > Sincerely, > Linda Wallace-Gray > Stone Canyon