No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Planning and Zoning Commission (177)            AGENDA ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION December 14, 2021 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE The Town has modified its public comment procedures in the newly renovated Town Council Chambers. For more details, please see the instructions for in person and/or virtual speakers at the end of the agenda.   To watch and/or listen to the public meeting online, please visit https://www.orovalleyaz.gov/town/departments/town-clerk/meetings-and-agendas 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 Statutes §38-431.03 (A)(3) to obtain legal advice on matters listed on the Agenda.             STUDY SESSION AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM   CALL TO ORDER   ROLL CALL   PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE   CALL TO AUDIENCE - at this time, any member of the public is allowed to address the Commission on any issue not listed on today’s agenda. Pursuant to the Arizona open meeting law, individual Commission members may ask Town staff to review the matter, ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda, or respond to criticism made by speakers. However, the Commission may not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during "Call to Audience." In order to speak during "Call to Audience", please specify what you wish to discuss when completing the blue speaker card.   COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS   STUDY SESSION AGENDA   1.STUDY SESSION: DISCUSSION REGARDING FOUR SEPARATE ITEMS REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TANGERINE AND ORACLE ROADS. THE ITEMS INCLUDE: ITEM A: ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS (ESL) ZONING MAP AMENDMENT  ITEM B: REQUEST TO UTILIZE THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS MIXED-USE FLEXIBLE DESIGN OPTION ITEM C: PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT (PAD) AMENDMENT ITEM D: REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN/CONCEPTUAL SITE, LANDSCAPE AND RECREATION AREA PLANS   PLANNING UPDATE (INFORMATIONAL ONLY)   ADJOURNMENT     POSTED: 12/7/2021 at 5:00 p.m. by pp POSTED: 12/7/2021 at 5:00 p.m. by pp When possible, a packet of agenda materials as listed above is available for public inspection at least 24 hours prior to the Commission meeting in the Town Clerk's Office between the hours of 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify the Town Clerk’s Office at least five days prior to the Commission meeting at 229-4700.     PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS   The Town has modified its public comment procedures for its public bodies to allow for limited remote/virtual comment via Zoom. The public may provide comments remotely only  on items posted as required Public Hearings, provided the speaker registers 24 hours prior to the meeting. For all other items, the public may complete a blue speaker card to be recognized in person by the Chair, according to all other rules and procedures. Written comments can also be emailed to Recording Secretary Jeanna Ancona at jancona@orovalleyaz.gov, for distribution to the Board of Adjustment prior to the meeting. Further instructions to speakers are noted below.     INSTRUCTIONS TO IN-PERSON SPEAKERS Members of the public shall be allowed to speak on posted public hearings and during Call to Audience when attending the meeting in person. The public may be allowed to speak on other posted items on the agenda at the discretion of the Chair. If you wish to address the Board on any item(s) on this agenda, please complete a blue speaker card located on the Agenda table at the back of the room and give it to the Recording Secretary. Please indicate on the blue speaker card which item number and topic you wish to speak on, or, if you wish to speak during Call to Audience, please specify what you wish to discuss. Please step forward to the podium when the Chair calls on you to address the Commission.  For the record, please state your name and whether or not you are a Town resident.1.Speak only on the issue currently being discussed by the Board. You will only be allowed to address the Commission one time regarding the topic being discussed.2. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.3.During Call to Audience, you may address the Commission on any matter that is not on the agenda.4.Any member of the public speaking, must speak in a courteous and respectful manner to those present. 5. INSTRUCTIONS TO VIRTUAL SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS    Members of the public may attend the meeting virtually and request to speak virtually on any agenda item that is listed as a Public Hearing.  If you wish to address the Board virtually during any listed Public Hearing, please complete the online speaker form by clicking here  https://forms.orovalleyaz.gov/forms/bluecard at least 24 hours prior to the start of the meeting. You must provide a valid email address in order to register. Town Staff will email you a link to the Zoom meeting the day of the meeting. After being recognized by the Chair, staff will unmute your microphone access and you will have 3 minutes to address the Commission. Further instructions regarding remote participation will be included in the email.   In accordance with the Pima County Health Department’s most recent health advisory, the Town respectfully asks all in-person meeting attendees, regardless of vaccination status, to please wear a mask while indoors. COVID-19 remains a fluid situation, and the Town will adjust its safety guidelines in accordance with any future health advisories from the Health Department.    Thank you for your cooperation.    Planning & Zoning Commission 1. Meeting Date:12/14/2021   Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development  Case Number: 2001300 SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION: DISCUSSION REGARDING FOUR SEPARATE ITEMS REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TANGERINE AND ORACLE ROADS. THE ITEMS INCLUDE: ITEM A: ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS (ESL) ZONING MAP AMENDMENT  ITEM B: REQUEST TO UTILIZE THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS MIXED-USE FLEXIBLE DESIGN OPTION ITEM C: PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT (PAD) AMENDMENT ITEM D: REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN/CONCEPTUAL SITE, LANDSCAPE AND RECREATION AREA PLANS RECOMMENDATION: Each of the four items are for discussion only. They will be presented to Planning and Zoning Commission at a formal Public Hearing on January 6, 2022. A recommendation will be provided at that time. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of these items is to discuss four separate but related applications regarding proposed changes to the Oro Valley Marketplace (“the Marketplace”) prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission formal Public Hearing scheduled for January 6, 2022. All of the aforementioned applications are required to enable the applicant’s proposed changes to the existing center. The property owner's vision includes:    The establishment of an Entertainment District in the reconstructed central open space area to serve as an attraction and community gathering space. 1. Building mixed-use (two apartment buildings and three hotels) to bring more people into the center to live, shop and play. 2. Revising buildings and the associated pedestrian and vehicular circulation.3. The applicant, Town West Realty, also owns a number of other sites in the region including the Oracle Crossings Center (Kohl's shopping center) and is part of the investment group that recently purchased the La Encantada shopping center at Skyline and Campbell. The site is approximately 112 acres in size and located on the southwest corner of Tangerine and Oracle Roads (see image at right). The Marketplace is one of the largest planned commercial centers in Oro Valley. It was originally designed with an expectation of higher volume residential development in Oro Valley, northwest Pima County and Pinal County. A substantial portion of the site (approximately 30%), however, remains vacant. It is evident there is an insufficient number of homes and traffic in the area to support such a large commercial center. As a result, there is a need to revitalize the Marketplace. The effort to work with the owners of the Marketplace toward long-term commercial sustainability has been included in both the Town Council's current and previous (FY 19/20 and 20/21) Strategic Leadership Plans, and was first included in their strategic goals when the plaza was under original ownership. The Council's objective (Goal 1.C.) for both leadership plans is as follows:    "Work with the owners of the Oro Valley Village Center [Marketplace] to develop a multi-faceted, mutually agreeable approach to attract and retain new investment and an expanded customer base to that complex.". The applicant's requests are briefly summarized below with more detail provided in the BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION section of this report. Item A - Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) Zoning Map Amendment - Attachment 1 The applicant’s proposal is to establish an Entertainment District in the central open space area by changing the type of open space from reconstructed natural open space to recreational open space. In order to do this, the applicant is requesting to re-categorize the Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) designation for this area from Critical Resource Area (CRA) to Resource Management Area (RMA). Item B - Request to utilize the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Mixed-use Flexible Design Option - Attachment 2 The applicant is also proposing two apartment developments to bring more population to the center. In order to permit each, the applicant is requesting use of the Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) Mixed-use Flexible Design Option. The Mixed-use Flexible Design Option is subject to Town Council approval and requires “residential uses...to be functionally integrated...within commercial zoning districts.” The applicant’s proposal includes two apartments that are cohesively designed with the rest of the development. Item C - PAD Amendment - Attachment 3 As part of the newly proposed site design, the applicant is proposing several changes to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development (PAD) related to uses and development standards for the "Marketplace". The changes include:  Building height increases in select locations Setback reductions along portions of Tangerine and Oracle Roads associated with the anticipated purchase of right-of-way from the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Permit drive-thru uses without a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Increased Floor Area Ratio (FAR) along Oracle Road Use recreational amenities throughout the center to satisfy recreation requirements for the apartments Item D - Revised Master Development Plan/Conceptual Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Recreation Area Plan - Attachments 4, 5 and 6 The applicant is proposing changes to the approved Master Development Plan/Conceptual Site, Landscape and Recreation Area Plans. In order to permit these changes, the applicant is required to process associated revisions, including:  Two apartment buildings (780 units total) Three hotel buildings An Entertainment District with gathering areas and recreational amenities One drive-thru use Noise abatement The proposals have been reviewed extensively relative to the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan and zoning conformance. Each of the requests meet the applicable goals, policies and criteria specified in each. A more detailed description is provided in the BACKGROUND section of this report. Over the course of six neighborhood meetings, a majority of participants recognized the center was in need of revitalization. In addition, the two primary concerns raised were traffic and potential view impacts. Key considerations are:  The "Marketplace" is not 100% built-out and currently generates less traffic than anticipated. If the new development is approved and built, the traffic will be similar to what was originally planned on current roads. 1. An extensive viewshed analysis has been completed. The unique characteristics of the terrain, distance from residential development, and architectural design serve as mitigating factors relative to proposed increases to apartment and hotel building heights. 2. Items A through D are for discussion only. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: SITE HISTORY The property, formerly the site of the original Rancho Vistoso ranch, lies within the Big Wash flood plain near the confluence of the Canada del Oro and Sutherland washes. The original Cultural Resources Survey (2007) revealed the presence of roads and telegraph lines onsite as early as 1903. According to the report, the property “... was one of several ranches positioned along the Upper Canada Del Oro and Big Wash that date to the first half of the last century or later. The building debris onsite was part of semi-rural or exurban residence and ranch complex on the outskirts of post-World War II Tucson that were constructed prior to 1955…” The original site design (shown at right) was approved in 2008 following an extensive Public Participation process. As part of the original design Town Council approved the following:  Master Development Plan (including Landscape Plan) for over 800,000 square feet of office, retail and restaurant space Master Architectural Guidelines Public Art program Master Sign Program In addition, commitments from the developer were made to restore more than 85-acres of degraded area in Big Wash and the central open space area (Big Wash restoration shown in images below): The Big Wash restoration area has taken successfully and has been transformed from degraded farm fields to the lush, native landscape we see today. This restoration effort was one of the largest ever in Oro Valley and the greater Tucson area. NEED FOR REVITALIZATION The original design for the Oro Valley Marketplace included approximately 803,000 square feet of retail, restaurant, and office space. To date, approximately 239,000 square feet (30%) of the site remains undeveloped. Included in the remaining 70% are a number of vacant storefronts. One of the primary factors that contributes to the success or failure of retail space is population density (the number of people in close proximity to the center). The mixed-use and gathering areas are intended to bolster the commercial viability of the center by drawing people locally and regionally. When looking at similar commercial developments around Arizona (e.g., Chandler, Gilbert, Tempe, etc.), the average size of a typical regional center is approximately 570,000 square feet with 211,061 people within 5-7 miles or roughly 15 minutes away (per industry standards most people will typically drive 15 minutes to shop). In comparison, the Marketplace has 803,000 square feet of retail space (41%  more) with only 129,826 people within 5-7 miles (38% less). This equates to 6.2 square feet of retail space per person compared to 2.9 square feet per person for other Arizona centers. The Marketplace simply has an abundance of commercial space without the demographics to support it. The applicant’s request to add apartments and hotels is necessary to reduce this imbalance and support the Marketplace. APPLICATIONS As mentioned previously, all four applications (Items A through D) are required to enable the applicant's proposed site changes. Additional detail for each application is provided later in this report; however, the relationship and interdependency of each is worth detailing. As detailed in the graphic at right, Item D (Revised Master Development Plan/Conceptual Site, Landscape and Recreation Area Plans) is dependent upon the approval of all three prior applications (Items A through C). Each application is summarized below. Item A - Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) Zoning Map Amendment - Attachment 1 The ESL conservation system and associated ESL map identifies and requires conservation of environmental resources throughout the Town. The requirements include categories based on the resource value of the subject property which dictates how much of the area must be conserved. The categories range from Major Wildlife Linkage (100% conversation as there is immense resource value in maintaining these connections) to Developed Areas (0% conservation where environmental resources are fragmented and of little value). As depicted on the ESL map below, most of the subject property is developed except for the Critical Resource Area (CRA) mapped in the development’s center (shown in blue). The Major Wildlife Linkage (green) and Core Resource Area (yellow) are in areas already protected as open space and are not proposed to be changed. The applicant’s first request (Attachment 1) is to re-categorize the Critical Resource Area (CRA) to a Resource Management Area (RMA). The zoning code includes distinct definitions and characteristics for each conservation category. The categories present on the subject property are summarized below:  Critical Resource Area (CRA) - represents the most Critical Resource Area (CRA) - represents the most environmentally sensitive resources such as washes and riparian areas and requires 95% open space conservation. Resource Management Area (RMA) - represents the least environmentally sensitive resources. The open space conservation requirement in these areas reflects the planned intensity of the corresponding General Plan land use category for the property. In this case, the subject property is within a designated growth area, which requires 0% open space conservation.  The applicant's proposed change is supported by the Zoning Code as the site is located within a General Plan growth area (areas where growth is expected), and the subject area was reconstructed, rather than natural, which has less resource value. Furthermore, the area is narrow and bordered by parking lots which further decreases its habitat value. In addition to the ESL designation, this portion of the development is also zoned open space. As mentioned previously, this area was part of the original restoration effort completed by the developer in 2008. This area was heavily degraded prior to development. It was originally proposed to be a hardened drainage channel - designed to incorporate engineered drainage structures with a natural look. The intent of this request is to convert this reconstructed area to landscaped and recreational open space. The Zoning Code defines Open Space as “an area meant to provide a natural or garden environment.” Open space may include landscaped or natural areas in common areas (areas intended for use by all occupants of a development). Because the Entertainment District amenities are intended to serve everyone within the development, the applicant’s proposed use of this area is consistent with the open space designation. As required by code to amend the ESL map, a qualified specialist in habitat biology is required to evaluate the area. The applicant used RECON Environmental to conduct this analysis (Attachment 1). Though RECON’s report finds the area still meets the CRA criteria, it acknowledges that the area was previously disturbed and restored as "reconstructed open space" as depicted in the images below: The applicant’s proposal is to change the type of open space (reconstructed natural open space vs. recreational open space). The Town’s General Plan, which drives land use decisions, identifies the need for both natural and recreational open space areas. In this instance, the engineered drainage area has less resource value than the restored Big Wash area to the west. Item B - Request to utilize the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Mixed-use Flexible Design Option - Attachment 2 The applicant’s second proposal is to request use of the Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) Mixed-use Flexible Design Option. The Zoning Code enables the use of ESL incentives, or Flexible Design Options, when Environmentally Sensitive Open Space (ESOS) is applied to at least twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the property. To meet this requirement, the development would need to preserve a minimum of 28-acres. The Zoning Code allows off-site ESOS to be provided to meet the open space requirement. Since ESL did not exist when the property was developed in 2008, the restored open space (approximately 77-acres) can be retroactively applied to meet the minimum open space requirement to utilize the Flexible Design Options. This off-site ESOS (shown in the image at right highlighted in green) is more than double the necessary amount to utilize the ESL incentives. The Mixed-use Flexible Design Option is subject to Town Council approval and allows “residential uses that are functionally integrated, including access, non-vehicular circulation and amenities, with commercial or employment uses may be approved within commercial zoning districts.” The applicant’s proposal includes two apartments that are cohesively designed with the rest of the development. The apartment buildings are strategically placed to minimize impacts to neighbors and include separate parking and shared amenities for residents. Furthermore, the design ties into the existing vehicular and pedestrian circulation patterns within the development. Item C - PAD Amendment - Attachment 3 The applicant's third request is a Planned Area Development (PAD) Amendment to Neighborhood 4 (Oro Valley Marketplace) of the Rancho Vistoso PAD. Policies The Rancho Vistoso PAD has specific policies for a number of Neighborhood's within the PAD; however, Neighborhood 4 does not currently have any. The property owner is requesting to establish policies that reflect the proposed changes for Neighborhood 4 only . These changes would not apply to any other neighborhoods in Rancho Vistoso. It is important to note that the Oro Valley Marketplace is the only development within Neighborhood 4. The proposed policies include:  Building height increases for specific uses and locations Reduced setback requirements for portions along Tangerine and Oracle Roads Permitting drive-thru uses without a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Increased Floor Area Ratio (FAR) along Oracle Road Noise abatement Allowing recreational amenities throughout the "Marketplace" (e.g. Entertainment District, CDO multi-use path, etc.) to meet the recreation requirement for the proposed apartments. The policies are described in more detail below. Building Heights The first component of the PAD Amendment is a request to increase the building heights for select building areas within the Marketplace. The taller building heights proposed are strategically positioned relative to the unique circumstances and site characteristics of the Marketplace (e.g. lower grade, separated by Big Wash from neighbors to the west, adjacent to the existing 75-foot tall Oro Valley Hospital). The existing maximum building height is 39-feet with an additional 10-feet for architectural features. The applicant's request is to increase the maximum building height for only the following uses/locations (also shown graphic at right):  Tangerine Apartments (Location A in graphic at right): 75-feet, inclusive of architectural features Tangerine Hotel (Location B): 49-feet, plus an additional 10-feet for architectural features Entertainment District Hotel (Location C): 49-feet, plus an additional 10-feet for architectural features Oracle Apartments (Location D): 59-feet, inclusive of architectural features Oracle Hotel (Location E): 49-feet, plus an additional 10-feet for architectural features The proposed apartment building along Tangerine Road, the taller of the two, was moved to this location (originally proposed along Oracle Road) as it is more than 700 feet from the nearest homes, sits approximately 10-feet below Tangerine Road, and does not significantly impact views of the Catalina Mountains. Currently, the most visible building in this direction is the 75-foot-tall Oro Valley Hospital. If approved, these apartments will not exceed the height of the hospital. The proposed buildings depicted in locations B through D in the graphic at right are more than 1,000 feet from the nearest neighbors and range between 10 and 25 feet lower than surrounding neighbors. The applicant's proposed building heights in these locations will similarly have little to no impact on existing views of the Catalina Mountains. For more detail, the applicant has provided a Viewshed Analysis of the proposed buildings in Attachment 7. A typical and viable apartment development requires approximately 15 acres for a standard 300-unit development (typically 2- and 3-story buildings). Both apartment locations are significantly smaller than this standard (Tangerine Apartments - ~12-acres, Oracle Apartments - ~7-acres) which, in turn, require taller building heights (e.g. 4- and 5-stories) to be viable. The Tangerine Apartment building proposes 550 units, while the Oracle Apartment building proposes 230 units. If approved, the increases would only apply to the specific uses and locations requested (apartments and hotels) and all other If approved, the increases would only apply to the specific uses and locations requested (apartments and hotels) and all other lots within the center would continue to have a maximum building height of 39 feet, plus the additional 10-feet for architectural features. Setbacks The second component of the PAD Amendment is to reduce setbacks and bufferyards along portions of Tangerine and Oracle Roads to accommodate the proposed site design. Building setbacks along Tangerine Road typically require a 4:1 building height to setback ratio as part of the Tangerine Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District (TRCOD). Alternatively, the applicant is proposing to meet the standard Commercial (C-2) building setback requirements, similar to other commercial developments in Rancho Vistoso. Along Oracle Road, the applicant is requesting to waive the requirement that residential uses along Oracle Road provide a 30-foot landscaped setback. In both instances, the subject property is lower than the adjacent roadway (ranging from 10 feet to over 75 feet below) making the higher setback requirements unnecessary. Noise The third component of the PAD Amendment addresses potential noise impacts. A noise study (Attachment 8) was conducted for several properties within the center where amplified music is anticipated. Several policies have been included in the Amendment regarding noise abatement. Additional studies related to external speaker boxes for drive-thru uses will be required as part of the future technical plan review process. Drive-thru Uses A fourth component of the PAD Amendment addresses uses within the center. In addition to those already allowed in the C-2 zoning district, the applicant's request is to enable drive-thru uses without a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Typically, a drive-thru use requires a CUP to fully evaluate the anticipated impacts on neighbors (e.g. traffic, noise, odors, etc.). In this instance, because the shopping center is well separated from neighbors, the potential impacts are relatively minor; therefore, the CUP process would be unnecessary. If approved, potential traffic impacts within the center will still be subject to Planning and Zoning Administrator and Town Engineer approval. Floor Area Ratio The fifth element of the PAD Amendment addresses the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for buildings along Oracle Road. Floor Area Ratio is a development standard restricting the "mass" of a building that is measured as a percentage of overall building area relative to lot area. The request is to increase the FAR from 0.2 (required by the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor Overlay District) to 0.4 (as applicable in all C-2 districts throughout Rancho Vistoso).  Recreation Amenities The last component of the PAD Amendment is to address how the required recreational amenities for both apartment buildings will be satisfied by a variety of amenities throughout the center. Typically, when an apartment development is proposed, a percentage of the lot must be dedicated to recreational amenities for future tenants. The applicant is requesting to meet these recreational requirements through a combination of amenities within each apartment development and a number of other amenities throughout the Marketplace (e.g. Entertainment District, CDO multi-use path, etc.). Item D - Revised Master Development Plan/Conceptual Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Recreation Area Plan - Attachments 4, 5 and 6 The applicant's proposed site changes reflect a "Mixed-use" design with a central community gathering area, intended to revitalize the center and bring additional activity to the Marketplace. Please note, the revised Master Development Plan/Conceptual Site, Landscape and Recreation Area Plans reflect changes to portions of the Marketplace, rather than the entire center, as a number of areas are either already developed or not slated for change. To help distinguish between areas where changes are proposed and where they are not, the applicant has labeled the revised portions as Development Areas 1 through 5 (Attachment 4). A summary of the applicant's proposed changes to the Master Development Plan/Conceptual Site, Landscape and Recreation Area Plans is provided below. Revised Master Development Plan/Conceptual Site Plan (Attachment 4) Apartments The applicant's proposed changes include two apartment buildings, referred to as the Tangerine Apartments and Oracle Apartments. The intent is to bring more people to the center to help drive the long-term financial success of the "Marketplace". The proposed apartment developments will help meet this goal by bringing in additional consumers that will live, eat, shop, recreate and play in the center. The Tangerine Apartments (graphic representation in the shown at right) are located in Development Area 1 along Tangerine Road (where offices are currently approved). This area is more than 700 feet from the nearest residence in the Catalina Shadows subdivision, sits approximately 10-feet below the adjacent grade of Tangerine Road and is directly in-line with the existing 75-foot high Oro Valley Hospital, the predominant structure visible to the north. The Tangerine Apartments include:  Podium style units with ground level parking 550 units Maximum building height of 75 feet/5 stories above ground level parking Maximum building height of 75 feet/5 stories above ground level parking Approximately 736,000 square feet Recreational Amenities, including:  Clubhouse Pool Gym Movie Theater Dog Park The Oracle Apartments (graphic representation shown at right) are located in Development Area 4 along Oracle Road (immediately north of Red Lobster). This area is more than 1,000 feet from the nearest residence in the Catalina Shadows subdivision, sits approximately 7-feet below the adjacent grade of Oracle Road, and is well below the elevation of the Catalina Shadows subdivision. The Oracle Apartments include:  Podium style units with ground level parking 230 units Maximum building height of 59 feet/5 stories above ground level parking Approximately 295,000 square feet Recreational Amenities, including:  Clubhouse Pool Hotels The revised site design also includes three hotel locations (Tangerine, Oracle and the Entertainment District). Similar to the influx of tenants from the apartments, the hotels will also bring in additional consumers to the Marketplace helping to contribute toward the financial success of the center. The Tangerine Hotel is located in Development Area 2, immediately south of Tangerine Road and west of the existing Urgent Care facility. The applicant has proposed the following for the hotel:  Approximately 92,000 square feet Maximum building height of 49-feet/4 stories 150 rooms Pool There remains one traffic related issue with this proposed hotel location. The current design for the southbound left-turn lane into the hotel from Water Harvest Way (coming from Tangerine Road) is shown as "striped" which will create a safety concern for motorists'. This "striped" area will need to be revised to include a widened landscape island or combination of the two. A condition of approval will be included as part of the formal Public Hearing. The Entertainment District Hotel is located in Development Area 3, adjacent to the central open space area between The Keg and the Century Theaters. The applicant has proposed the following for the hotel:  Approximately 60,000 square feet Maximum building height of 49-feet/4 stories 108 rooms Pool Ground floor restaurant/retail The Oracle Hotel is located in Development Area 5, between Red Lobster and Chase Bank. The applicant has proposed the following for the hotel:  Approximately 65,600 square feet Maximum building height of 49-feet/4 stories 112 rooms Pool Entertainment District The Entertainment District is located in Development Area 3, the central open space area between the transit center (along Water Harvest Way) and the movie theaters. The applicant has proposed the following for the Entertainment District (also shown in image at right):  Wading pools Splash pads (2) Sandbar with beach Turf area - proposed as public park to be owned and managed by the Town Courtyard area for live events Overflow parking/event space Ramadas and shade sails Walking paths Freestanding restaurant pads with outdoor patios  A large percentage of the original public art was included in the area proposed for the Entertainment District. These Public Art pieces will need to be relocated or replaced once removed. Future Applications Please note that when the development was first approved in 2008, a Master Architectural Guidelines package, a Master Sign Program and a Public Art program were part of the approval. Should current applications be approved by Town Council, the following future applications will be required:  Any new buildings not already included in the Master Architectural Guidelines package (e.g. Apartments and Hotels) will require consideration before the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council. The applicant is anticipating processing an updated Master Sign Program, which will similarly require consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council. Regarding replacement and future Public Art, if the applicant uses a "Call-for-artist" process to update the Public Art program, that request will be reviewed and approved administratively, as allowed by code. However, if an applicant chooses to use their own artists, consideration will be required by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council as required by code. Noise Abatement The revised site plan includes several locations (restaurant patios and a courtyard within the Entertainment District) where amplified noise is anticipated. When amplified noise is expected, a Noise Study (the "Study") is required (Attachment 8) to determine whether mitigation measures are necessary to minimize impacts on surrounding properties. The "Study" identified six (6) separate locations where measurements should be taken (Oro Valley Hospital and five (5) homes within the Catalina Shadows subdivision - shown as red stars in graphic below) and ran three separate scenarios to measure the potential noise impacts of each (shown below). The "Study" had the following two key assumptions built-in:  For scenarios 1 and 2, the exterior patios of the three restaurants/buildings would be oriented toward the mountains, so the buildings served as an additional noise buffer to existing homes to the west; and 1. For scenario 3, the sound system used in the courtyard was a disbursed sound system (e.g. multiple speakers positioned around the courtyard) which would help reduce overall sound levels. 2. All three scenarios meet the required hourly sound level limits of Section 25.1.A.3 during the daytime (7am to 7pm) and evening (7pm to 10pm) hours. The first two (2) scenarios (patrons only and live music on patios) also meet the nighttime (10pm to 7 am) sound level limits, while scenario 3 (live music in the courtyard) exceeds this threshold. As a result, a condition of approval will be included during the formal Public Hearing to require live music in the courtyard to end at 10pm or other mitigation measures will need to be incorporated into the design. Drive-thru The revised site design also includes a drive-thru restaurant in Development Area 4, adjacent to the proposed Oracle Hotel. The building orientation will minimize noise impacts to neighbors and vehicle stacking will be fully screened by a screen wall and landscaped bufferyard. Impacts to neighbors are expected to be minimal. Traffic The applicant’s proposal will generate similar traffic volume throughout most of the day. However, during the morning peak hour (7am-9am), this new development will have an increased impact of approximately 5% to Oracle Road traffic volume over what was originally anticipated with the centers full build-out. It is important to note the Oro Valley Marketplace is not 100% built-out and currently generates less traffic than was anticipated and built to accommodate. With or without the applicant’s proposed changes, there is going to be an expected increase in traffic in the area reflecting the full build-out of the center. If the new proposed development is approved and is 100% built-out, the traffic will be similar to what was originally planned (for full build-out of the center) and will meet the safety requirements the improvements were already built to accommodate. The difference between full build-out traffic generation (as currently entitled) and proposed is outlined in the table below. TRAFFIC GENERATION TYPE VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY (VTPD) Built sites as of 2021 (e.g. Walmart, Movie Theater, etc)16,184 Approved for entire center in 2008 for all building pads (developed and undeveloped as of 2021)26,124 Projected for entire center with applicant's proposed site changes 28,978 Projected Difference 2,854 ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE TRAFFIC GENERATION Conceptual Landscape Plan (Attachment 5) The revised Conceptual Landscape Plan includes new trees, shrubs and accents in all areas not intended for building purposes. Additionally, screening is incorporated for all loading zones, the drive-thru and refuse locations as required by code. All plants will comply with the Rancho Vistoso and Town of Oro Valley approved plant lists which are typified by low-water use, native plants. The Entertainment District also includes landscaping, fencing and shade structures to appeal to year-round users. Recreation Area Plan  (Attachment 6) Recreational amenities are being provided both within the proposed apartment buildings, and throughout the larger center. As a result, tenants in both apartment developments will have amenities immediately available for their use, while the amenities provided in the Entertainment District and greater Marketplace, will be available for the general public's use. GENERAL PLAN AND STRATEGIC PLAN CONFORMANCE The applicant's requests are supported by the Vision, Guiding Principles, Goals and Policies of the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan. The General Plan seeks to find a balance between, among other things, economic development, housing availability and open space. The applicant's proposals strive toward maintaining this balance while brining new energy to the center. Vision The Your Voice, Our Future  General Plan Visions states: "Oro Valley strives to be a well-managed community that provides all residents with opportunities for quality living. Oro Valley will keep its friendly, small-town, neighborly character, while increasing services, employment and recreation. The Town's lifestyle continues to be defined by a strong sense of community, a high regard for public safety and extraordinary natural environment and scenic views." The applicant's proposed changes are consistent with the Vision as it will provide additional housing opportunities while bringing energy to the center intended to help "...increase services, employment and recreation." The applicant's requests are consistent with the General Plan's Vision. Guiding Principles In addition to the General Plan Vision, the Guiding Principles serve as the foundation for the Goals and Policies throughout the plan. The applicant's proposals specifically addresses a number of Guiding Principles, including:  Preserve the scenic beauty and environment  Desert and mountain views 1. Create a complete community with a broad range of shopping, dining and places to gather.  Increasing shopping opportunities, services and restaurants Downtown or central gathering area 2. Manage how we grow and maintain high design standards  Increase commercial services and employment opportunities 3. Keep Oro Valley a family-friendly community  Family entertainment and activities for all ages 4. Provide more parks, recreation and cultural opportunities for all ages  Opportunities to gather as a community 5. Maintain financial stability  Strive for a diversified and stable revenue base 6. The locations for the applicant's proposed site changes were strategic, based on the specific site circumstances (e.g. distance from neighbors, lower grades) to minimize impacts on views of the Catalina Mountains. Furthermore, the changes will bring new energy that will contribute to the long-term financial success of the center. The proposed revitalization and site design are consistent with the Guiding Principles listed above. Goals and Policies The Goals and Policies of the General Plan are divided into the following three categories:  Community1. Environment2. Development3. The applicant's proposals address a number of Goals and Policies in each of the three categories. A list of the key ones is provided below:  Long-term financial and economic stability (Community Goal A) A robust local economy and job market that provide opportunities for quality employment, build on Oro Valley's assets and encourage high-quality growth (Community Goal B) The proactive conservation, protection and restoration of environmentally sensitive lands, natural resource areas, habitats and lands with high scenic value (Environment Goal K) A community with a wide range of services, amenities, shopping and dining opportunities and housing types that meet the needs of current and future residents (Community Goal D) 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 (Development Goal Q) Develop a diversified and robust economic base to support long-term economic stability (Community Policy E.1) Promote the creation of unique community gathering places that are inviting, walkable, attractive and vibrant and offer commercial, entertainment or cultural activity (Community Policy CC.6) Support the development of diverse housing types within the community (Community Policy CC.6) Support the development of a range of public activities that foster a sense of community and create common places to gather (Community Policy CC.10) Protect scenic corridors, public park and trail view sheds, and the distinctive visual character and visual appeal of Oro Valley (Environment Policy SD.6) Enhance, protect, create and restore native biological habitats, especially along washes, groundwater basins, recharge areas and wildlife corridors...(Environment Policy SD.7) Promote land use development practices and programs that conserve and minimize impacts to natural and cultural resources (Development Policy LU.1) Promote the design of cohesive developments that enhance and promote the pedestrian experience (Development Policy LU.9) Effective transitions between differing land uses and intensities in the community (Development Goal X) In addition to the goals and policies highlighted above, the revitalization of the "Marketplace" also satisfies several General Plan actions related to Economic Development and Transportation/Circulation. Every two years, the Town Council's adopted Strategic Leadership Plan (SLP) prioritizes the General Plan's actions to provide further guidance and allocate resources. This item has been included in both the current SLP (FY20/21) and the prior plan (FY19/20) when the shopping center was under different ownership. The Council's objective for both leadership plans is as follows: "Work with the owners of the Oro Valley Village Center [Marketplace] to develop a multi-faceted, mutually agreeable approach to attract and retain new investment and an expanded customer base to that complex." The applicant's proposals are in conformance with the General Plan and meet the SLP's objective relative to the "Marketplace." ZONING CODE CONFORMANCE The applicant's proposed changes are compliant with all applicable requirements of the Rancho Vistoso PAD and Zoning Code. As discussed previously, the one remaining issue is the proposed left-turn lane into the Tangerine Hotel from Water Harvest Way. A condition of approval will be added to address the issue at the formal Public Hearing. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The public participation process for the applicant’s proposals has been extensive. The outreach process included:  March 2020 : The first community-wide neighborhood meeting to introduce the project to neighbors and answer questions. July 2021 : Publication of an Informational Video to re-familiarize neighbors with the project and allow the application to present updated information prior to the Focus Area Meetings. August 2021 : Four Focus Area meetings were conducted with specific areas of neighbors to enable a more in-depth discussion of the issues affecting them. Those areas include:  Catalina Shadows Rams Canyon and Rams Pass subdivisions Palisades and Palisades South subdivisions Homes near the southeast intersection of Oracle and Tangerine Roads September 2021 : A second community-wide neighborhood meeting was held to bring together the feedback received during the Focus Area meetings and allow the applicant to present updated information. A number of points were consistently raised by neighbors throughout the meeting process. Those included:  Recognition of the need to revitalize the shopping center1. Protection of views of the Catalina Mountains: Staff response: the locations where building height increases are proposed were strategically selected based on the sites unique characteristics. All the locations are at least 700 feet from neighbors (most are more than 1000 feet), and sit at lower elevations. Furthermore, the Tangerine Apartments (the tallest proposed building height) is north of most neighbors (predominant views are to the east) and in-line with the existing Oro Valley Hospital that is 75-feet tall. The proposed buildings will have minimal view impacts on neighbors. 2. Traffic increases on Oracle Road: Staff response: the "Marketplace" is not fully built-out, as approximately 30% remains undeveloped and there are a number of vacant storefronts. The center's infrastructure was originally designed by the developer to accommodate traffic associated with 100% build-out. The applicant's proposed site changes will have a minimal impact on traffic (both on- an off-site) relative to the amount of traffic that was anticipated at full build-out. 3. Apartments (e.g. vacancy rates, target market and crime impacts): Staff response: the Town recently commissioned an Apartment Study (Attachment 11) as part of a larger ongoing housing study. The study found the following details regarding concerns from neighbors:  Demand for apartments in Oro Valley is high and experiencing the strongest rent growth in the region. Oro Valley currently has a limited supply of vacant units with an average vacancy rate of 5.4%, similar to the greater Tucson market (4.3%), however, average rents in Oro Valley are 35% higher than the market as a whole. Renters in Oro Valley are typically young professionals or empty nesters. A majority of renters in Oro Valley (79%) are either 55+ (42%) or aged 25-44 (37%) with average monthly rents of $1,123, substantially higher than the average monthly rent in the greater Tucson region of $846. Since 2015, apartment communities in Oro Valley have accounted for approximately 13% of Part I more serious crimes, while representing 15.3% of the total housing units. Furthermore, on a per-unit basis, apartments had less crime reported than single-family homes when compared over a 6-month period. 4. The Neighborhood Meeting Summaries are included as Attachment 9. Staff has received a number of letters and other correspondence from neighbors and other interested parties during the Public Participation process. That information has been provided in Attachment 10. Additionally, a Frequently Asked Questions document (Attachment 11) was posted on the website to address a number of common questions. Notices were sent for each of the neighborhood meetings using the following:  Notices to all property owners within 600 feet (distance increased in some areas to ensure entire subdivisions were notified) Notification to additional interested parties who signed in during the 1st neighborhood meeting Homeowners Association mailings Postings on the property Posting at Town Hall and on Town website SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION The applicant has proposed four separate, but related applications for the Oro Valley Marketplace to enable revitalization of the center. Those applications include:  Item A: Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) Zoning Map Amendment to enable conversion of the "reconstructed central open space" area to recreational open space. Item B: Request to utilize the ESL Mixed-use Flexible Design Option to enable the proposed apartment developments. Item C: Planned Area Development (PAD) Amendment to revise several standards related to development within the Oro Valley Marketplace. Item D: Revised Master Development Plan/Conceptual Site, Landscape and Recreation Area Plans to reflect the proposed changes and address all pedestrian and vehicular circulation changes. At this time, the tentative Public Hearing schedule for the applicant’s requests is shown below:  January 6, 2022 – Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing ~January 2022 – Town Council Study Session - (TBD) Timing is dependent upon the applicant's final acquisition of ADOT right-of-way along Tangerine and Oracle Roads. ~February 2022 – Town Council Public Hearing - (TBD) Timing is dependent upon the applicant's final acquisition of ADOT right-of-way along Tangerine and Oracle Roads. Neighbors will continue to be notified of the upcoming public hearings and site visits for both Commission and Town Council members will be scheduled in advance of each meeting. These items are for discussion only and a recommendation will be provided during the formal public hearing. FISCAL IMPACT: . SUGGESTED MOTION: These items are for discussion only. They will be presented to Planning and Zoning Commission at a formal Public Hearing in January.   Attachments ATTACHMENT 1 - ESL AMENDMENT  ATTACHMENT 2 - REQUEST TO UTILIZE ESL MIXED-USE FLEXIBLE DESIGN OPTION  ATTACHMENT 3 - PAD AMENDMENT  ATTACHMENT 4 - REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN-CSP  ATTACHMENT 5 - CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN  ATTACHMENT 6 - RECREATION AREA PLAN  ATTACHMENT 7 - APPLICANT'S VIEWSHED ANALYSIS  ATTACHMENT 8 - OV MARKETPLACE NOISE ASSESSMENT  ATTACHMENT 9 - NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY  ATTACHMENT 10 - NEIGHBOR CORRESPONDENCE  ATTACHMENT 11 - APARTMENT STUDY FOR ORO VALLEY  ATTACHMENT 11 - FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS  QUIKTRIP STORE #1481 ORACLE/ORANGE GROVE Pima County, AZ DUE DILIGENCE PACKAGE 06.22.2011 Prepared For: Town West 555 E. River Road, Suite 201 Tucson, Arizona 85704 Prepared By: The WLB Group, Inc. Robert G. Longaker III, P LA, AICP Director of Planning 4444 East Broadway Boulevard Tucson, Arizona 85711 (520) 881-7480 WLB Job No. 185050-WT-03 May 26, 2020 Revised November 11, 2021 Oro Valley Village Center Southwest Corner of Oracle Road and Tangerine Road Oro Valley, AZ Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance Amendment 1 A. Introduction This application is to request a map amendment to the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance (ESLO) for the Oro Valley Village Center project (formerly known as Oro Valley Marketplace). This application is being submitted in conjunction with a proposed amendment to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development (PAD) and a revised Conceptual Site Plan (CSP). This ESLO map amendment is specific to an approximately 4-acre man-made drainage area in the northeastern portion of the site that is currently designated under ESLO as a Critical Resource Area (CRA). This request is to amend the ESLO map designation for this area from CRA to Resource Management Area 3 (RMA 3) since the subject property is located within the Tier 1 Growth Area identified on the General Plan Land Use Map. Recon Environmental, Inc. was hired to evaluate this area and their report can be found at the rear if this report. The following is an excerpt from the Recon report and summarizes their findings: Assessment Results Prior to 2008, the study area did not contain a wash or associated significant vegetation. As previously mentioned, as part of development of the retail project, the study area was graded, developed into a stormwater channel, and revegetated with native species. The native vegetation established well and the study area now meets the criteria for xeroriparian habitat based on total vegetation volume as listed in Table 1, as well as other riparian function indicators. The study area includes a wash/drainage channel having banks and beds through which water flows periodically. In addition, the study area meets the criteria for minor wildlife linkage based on the evidence of wildlife use through the drainage area, including use of culverts under minor and major roadways to the north and south. The study area wildlife linkage connects open space and CRA areas north of Tangerine Road with open space areas south of the Village Center and to Big Wash, a designated Major Wildlife Linkage under the ESL. There are other wildlife linkages located approximately 0.5 mile to the east and west of the study area; however, the study area provides an important link for wildlife that may be isolated within the open space between Oracle Road on the east and development along Innovation Park Road to the west. Based on the findings that the study area meets the criteria for riparian and minor wildlife linkage, the entire study area meets the criteria for the designation as CRA. B. Background Information and Justification for ESLO Map Amendment from CRA to RMA 2 This 4-acre area was originally established based on an open space area designation in the original Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development. Historically the area did contain a wash or associated significant natural vegetation. The vegetation that exists in this area today was 2 man-made and installed in 2008 as part of the landscape improvements during the development of the Oro Valley Marketplace. Part of the development of the retail project included a commitment to restore the native vegetation in certain areas, including this area. The type and density of vegetation planted at that time has resulted in growth and maturation of the plants such that it met xeroriparian density criteria of CRA at the time of the creation of the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance. The Town of Oro Valley designated the study area as a Critical Resource Area after the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance was established in 2011. Please refer to Exhibits A and B which show aerial photographs from 2006 and 2018 and demonstrate how the site looked prior to development and how it looks in a more recent condition. The area subject to this amendment was also created to collect on-site stormwater, as well as to convey stormwater from north of Tangerine Road through the development and into Big Wash and the riparian mitigation area southwest of the project. Also, per Town of Oro Valley ESLO mapping, the subject area is not identified as part of the Major Wildlife Linkage Category. C. Reasons for Requested ESLO Amendment This ESLO amendment to RMA 3 (subject property is located within the Tier 1 Growth Area identified on the General Plan Land Use Map) is requested in order to allow the proposed redevelopment of this area. The CRA designation does not permit the uses that are proposed by the redevelopment strategy for property. The following information provides more detail on the proposed redevelopment strategy for this area. 1. New Property Vision. This project proposes a redevelopment of an approximately 7-acre central open space area (approximately 4 acres of which are designated as CRA). This central open space will be redeveloped as an entertainment district and contain active and passive recreational amenities. The entertainment district is a key component of the proposed redevelopment of the overall property as a lifestyle center. The facilities and amenities will be available for use by not only future residents of the project, but also the general public. 2. Functional Change of the Area. The existing function of the subject area is for use as open space and to move stormwater through the area, as described earlier in this narrative. There are also walking paths on the perimeter of the area. The CRA designation and its associated requirement that 95% of the area be retained as Environmentally Sensitive Open Space (ESOS) is consistent with this current function. 3 The proposed function is not only as described in Item 1 above, but this area will continue to provide open space and stormwater conveyance. This area will continue to convey stormwater entering the site from north of Tangerine Road as well as stormwater generated on the site. The stormwater will primarily be conveyed via a storm drain that will be constructed beneath the central and southern portions of the entertainment district area. This will allow for the greatest opportunity to utilize as much of the entertainment district property as possible for the proposed amenities. The drainage in the northern portion of the entertainment district will remain open and will retain existing vegetation. EXHIBITS OV VILLAGE CENTER BOUNDARY EXISTING CRITICAL RESOURCE AREATangerine Road Oracle Road11.11.2021 WLB No. 185050-WT-03 NTSEXHIBIT A: 2006 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\01 Planning\01 ESL Amendment\Exhibit A.dwg Plotted: Nov. 11, 2021 Inc. Group The WLB EXISTING CRITICAL RESOURCE AREA Tangerine Road Oracle RoadOV VILLAGE CENTER BOUNDARY 11.11.2021 WLB No. 185050-WT-03 NTSEXHIBIT B: 2018 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\01 Planning\01 ESL Amendment\Exhibit B.dwg Plotted: Nov. 11, 2021 Inc. Group The WLB RECON REPORT An Employee-Owned Company 610 South Park Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85719 | 520.325.9977 | reconenvironmental.com SAN DIEGO | BAY AREA | TUCSON May 4, 2020 Mr. Bryan Eubank Vice President of Operations Town West Realty 555 East River Road, Ste. 201 Tucson, AZ 85704 Reference: Oro Valley Village Center (formerly known as the Oro Valley Marketplace) – Environmentally Sensitive Lands Critical Resource Area Site Assessment (RECON Number 9666) Dear Mr. Eubank: Per your request, RECON Environmental, Inc. (RECON) with assistance from Wilder Landscape Architects evaluated an approximately 4-acre man-made drainage area (study area) within the Oro Valley Village Center development located at Oracle Road and Tangerine Road in Oro Valley, Arizona. The corridor is currently mapped as a Critical Resource Area (CRA) per the Town of Oro Valley’s Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) Zoning Code Section 27.10 D.3.b (Figure 1; all figures referenced in this report are included in Attachment 1). General Site Conditions The Oro Valley Village Center and study area are located in the southeastern portion of the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development Zone. Prior to 2008 and based on a review of historical aerial photographs, the study area did not previously contain a wash or associated significant natural vegetation. Part of the development of the retail project included a commitment to restore the native vegetation in certain areas, including the study area. The study area was graded in 2008 and developed to collect on-site stormwater, as well as stormwater from north of Tangerine Road, to be directed through the development and into Big Wash and the mitigation area south of the Oro Valley Village Center. The study area location was originally established based on an open space area designation in the original Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development. The study area was contour graded and vegetated with native species based on Town of Oro Valley guidelines. Since 2008, the vegetation established well and vegetation densities meet xeroriparian volumes. The Town of Oro Valley designated the study area as a Critical Resource Area after the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance was established in 2011. Within the Oro Valley Village Center, the study area is currently located between developed and paved areas to the east and west, Tangerine Road to the north, and the internal Village Center access road to the south (see Figure 1). The study area is bisected by two access roads connecting the Village Center businesses. There is a large concrete drainage feature (concrete culverts, terraced concrete channels, and rock rip-rap channels) in the northern portion of the study area (Figure 2). Big Wash, designated as a Major Wildlife Linkage under the ESL, is located south of the Village Center access road. An area zoned as Open Space and four areas designated as Critical Resource Areas are located north of the study area and north of Tangerine Road (see Figure 1). Elevation of the study area ranges from 2,660 to 2,680 feet. Drainage within the study area is from north to south, starting at the culverts under Tangerine Road, through the drainage feature and terraces located in the northern portion of the study area (see Figure 2). Drainage continues through the central portion of the study area, consisting of a single channel that is braided in the northern and central sections and more incised in the Mr. Bryan Eubank Page 2 May 4, 2020 southern section. The drainage continues into culverts at the southern section, running underneath the Village Center access road to an open space area and eventually into Big Wash (see Figure 1). Vegetation in the Study Area Native Species The study area is within the Arizona Upland Subdivision of the Sonoran Desertscrub biotic community. The study area was completely graded in 2008 during the construction of the Oro Valley Village Center, which was developed prior to the ESL code. The study area was mapped as Xeroriparian B habitat prior to the development and was mitigated off-site (west of the Village Center access road). The wash that flowed through the study area (flow from the north through a concrete drainage structure under Tangerine Road to Big Wash to the south) was narrowed and revegetated as open space as part of the development plan. The current drainage width varies from 100 to 150 feet through the study area. Planting (container plants and seeding) of the study area occurred in the second half of 2008 and irrigation was used to establish the plant material. It is assumed that the landscape is no longer irrigated (typically planted areas are irrigated for no more than five years). Prevalent tree species include whitethorn acacia (Vachellia constricta), velvet mesquite (Prosopis velutina), and blue paloverde (Parkinsonia florida). Desert willow (Chilopsis linearis), foothill paloverde (Parkinsonia microphylla), and catclaw acacia (Senegalia greggii) are present in smaller numbers. The dominant shrubs and sub-shrubs that are established in the study area include cheesebush (Ambrosia salsola), fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens), desert broom (Baccharis sarothroides), burroweed (Isocoma tenuisecta), and brittlebush (Encelia farinosa). Species present in smaller numbers include triangle leaf bursage (Ambrosia deltoidea), canyon bursage (Ambrosia ambrosioides), turpentine bush (Ericameria laricifolia), wolfberry (Lycium sp.), and paperflower (Psilostrophe cooperi). Forbs include desert senna (Senna covesii), globemallow (Sphaeralcea ambigua), shaggyfruit pepperweed (Lepidium lasiocarpum), and climbing milkweed (Funastrum cynanchoides). The dominant cactus found in the study area was chainfruit cholla (Cylindropuntia fulgida). Staghorn cholla (Cylindropuntia versicolor), barrel cacti (Ferocactus wislizenii), soap tree yucca (Yucca elata) and prickly pear (Opuntia engelmannii) are all infrequent, and seldom located within the transects. Invasive Species Common invasive species noted within the study area include London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), red brome (Bromus madritensis), and Mediterranean grass (Schismus barbatus). An invasive new to the Tucson area, stinknet (Oncosiphon piluliferum), was seen in small quantities in two areas within the study area and manually removed. Wildlife Found within the Study Area The study area was assessed for use as a minor wildlife linkage by searching for signs of wildlife travel through the drainage. Tracts, scat, and evidence of foraging were noted. Species identified using the area include javelina (Tayassu tajacu), coyote (Canis latrans), bobcat (Lynx rufus), desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida), also known as pack rats, round-tail ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus tereticaudus), Harris’s antelope squirrel (Ammospermophilus harrisii), kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spp.), and desert mice (Perognathus spp.). A variety of bird species were also found within the study area, including Gambel’s quail (Callipepla gambelii), white winged dove (Zenaida asiatica), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), Lucy’s warbler (Vermivora luciae), phainopepla (Phainopepla nitens), common raven (Corvus corax), cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus), northern cardinal (Carninalis cardinalis), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), hummingbirds (likely costa’s or Anna’s [Calypte spp.]), verdin (Auriparus flaviceps), curve-billed Mr. Bryan Eubank Page 3 May 4, 2020 thrasher (Toxostoma curvirostre), black-tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura), rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps), black-throated sparrow (Amphispizabilineata), Abert’s towhee (Pipilo aberti), vermillion flycatcher (Pyrocephalus rubinus), and lesser goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria). Wildlife habitat features within the study area include diverse and dense native vegetation used for nesting, foraging, and roosting. Javelina bed-down areas were found under several dense stands of acacia and desert broom. Areas where several boulders where placed as part of the landscape design showed evidence of use by desert woodrats and desert mice. Although no reptiles (snakes and lizards) where observed during the site visit due to the temperature range, habitat for these species occurs throughout the study area and a variety of snakes and lizards are likely to occur. Wildlife tracks (primarily coyote and javelina) where found throughout the study area. In addition, wildlife tracks where found outside and within culverts located at the north end, central portion, and south end of the study area. Wildlife tracks were also found within the culvert leading to the study area that passes under Tangerine Road as well as at the exit of the culvert located at the southern end of the study area leading to Big Wash. Methods RECON senior biologist 1 Susy Morales, with assistance from Jennifer Patton (registered landscape architect) and Ben Wilder (landscape designer/GIS specialist), conducted a site visit and transects on March 28, 2020. At the time of the visit, trees were not yet leafed out. Vegetation volume measurements would have been higher had trees been fully leafed out. The study area CRA and the extent to which it meets the ESL riparian area criteria as identified in Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code Addendum G: ESL Resource Science Specifications and Definitions were evaluated. Specifically, Appendix G, paragraph A defines xeroriparian areas by the presence of both intermittent/ ephemeral drainage features and representative vegetation volume of 0.500 cubic meter per square meter (cm3/m2) or greater. Paragraphs D and E also indicate that upland “islands” between braided channels are included as part of the riparian area only if they are less than 200 feet wide, and that mapped riparian areas that contribute drainage connectivity, sediment and nutrient transport, etc. may include areas without representative vegetation volume. In summary, the identification of xeroriparian areas as defined in Appendix G is based on the full site context and riparian function rather than the presence of any single feature or indicator. Nine transects were conducted to measure Total Vegetation Volume (TVV) within the study area (Figure 3). Per the direction of Appendix G, Paragraph H, the Pima County Regional Flood Control District (PCRFCD) Technical Procedure 116: Quantitative Methods for Regulated Riparian Habitat Boundary Modifications and On-Site Vegetation Surveys was used to determine vegetation volume. The TVV data sheets are presented in Attachment 2. Representative photographs were taken looking downstream and upstream along each transect and at other key viewpoints. Site photographs are included in Attachment 3. Within the nine transects, belt transect sampling as specified in Appendix J, Paragraph 3 (as well as the PCRFCD Technical Procedure 116) was also conducted. Using this method, vegetation is sampled by points at 0.5-meter intervals along the transect to determine density and diversity. Results Vegetation within the study area includes riparian facultative species (i.e., more abundant in but not restricted to riparian areas) such as whitethorn acacia, mesquite, and blue paloverde. The results of the TVV transects, presented in Table 1, show that the total vegetation volume within the nine transects are well above the minimum 0.500 m3/m2 threshold for xeroriparian, with a total average vegetative volume measure of 1.48 m3/m2–three times the minimum 0.500 m3/m2 threshold for xeroriparian. Additionally, the presence 1Qualified Habitat Restoration Specialists per Town of Oro Valley Code Chapter 31. Mr. Bryan Eubank Page 4 May 4, 2020 of distinct channels, sediment deposits, and vegetation debris were noted to indicate hydrologic flow and connectivity, and nutrient/sediment transport. Table 1 Total Vegetation Volume, Oro Valley Village Center Study Area Transect Number Total Vegetation Volume (m3/m2) 1 1.404 2 1.892 3 1.420 4 1.140 5 1.188 6 2.528 7 0.772 8 1.236 9 1.736 Total Mean 1.480 For the belt transects, an average vegetation density for the sample area was extrapolated to an acre-density of vegetated area, as shown in Table 2. The study area was found to have a diversity of shrub species, with several in high density, such as cheesebush, fourwing saltbush, desert broom, and brittlebush. Trees with the highest density include whitethorn acacia, blue paloverde, and mesquite. Table 2 Vegetation Density, Oro Valley Village Center Study Area Plant Species Transect # Botanical Name Common Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total Density Average Density Trees Parkinsonia florida blue paloverde 1 3 2 6 54.0 Parkinsonia microphylla foothill paloverde 2 2 18.0 Prosopis velutina mesquite 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 11 98.9 Senegalia greggii cactclaw acacia 1 1 9.0 Vachellia constricta whitethorn acacia 4 10 1 3 1 6 1 13 3 42 377.7 Shrubs / Sub-shrubs Ambrosia deltoidea triangle leaf bursage 2 2 4 36.0 Ambrosia salsola cheesebush 17 1 3 2 11 34 305.8 Atriplex canescens fourwing saltbush 4 2 7 2 6 23 44 395.7 Baccharis sarothroides desert broom 13 7 1 1 8 11 9 14 64 575.6 Encelia farinosa brittlebush 1 1 22 2 14 4 7 51 458.6 Isocoma tenuisecta burroweed 1 3 3 7 63.0 Lycium sp. wolfberry species 8 8 71.9 Psilostrophe cooperi paperflower 1 1 9.0 Senna covesii desert senna 1 1 9.0 Cacti Cylindropuntia fulgida chainfruit cholla 1 1 1 3 27.0 Cylindropuntia versicolor staghorn cholla 1 1 9.0 Opuntia engelmannii prickly pear 1 1 9.0 Mr. Bryan Eubank Page 5 May 4, 2020 Site Assessment Results Zoning Code As detailed in the ESL Zoning Code D.3.b, the CRA open space category includes the following environmentally sensitive resources: a) Riparian areas and minor wildlife linkages b) Major rock outcrops and boulders c) Distinctive habitat resource Riparian areas occur in association with a spring, cienega, lake, water course, river, stream, creek, wash, arroyo, or other body of water, either surface or sub-surface, or any channel having banks and beds through which water flows, at least periodically. Minor wildlife linkages are composed of upland areas and degraded riparian areas. Degraded areas include hardened drainage ways and constricting drainage structures. These minor links are important in maintaining connectivity within the open space system identified in the ESL. Assessment Results Prior to 2008, the study area did not contain a wash or associated significant vegetation. As previously mentioned, as part of development of the retail project, the study area was graded, developed into a stormwater channel, and revegetated with native species. The native vegetation established well and the study area now meets the criteria for xeroriparian habitat based on total vegetation volume as listed in Table 1, as well as other riparian function indicators. The study area includes a wash/drainage channel having banks and beds through which water flows periodically. In addition, the study area meets the criteria for minor wildlife linkage based on the evidence of wildlife use through the drainage area, including use of culverts under minor and major roadways to the north and south. The study area wildlife linkage connects open space and CRA areas north of Tangerine Road with open space areas south of the Village Center and to Big Wash, a designated Major Wildlife Linkage under the ESL. There are other wildlife linkages located approximately 0.5 mile to the east and west of the study area; however, the study area provides an important link for wildlife that may be isolated within the open space between Oracle Road on the east and development along Innovation Park Road to the west. Based on the findings that the study area meets the criteria for riparian and minor wildlife linkage, the entire study area meets the criteria for the designation as CRA. Thank you again for the opportunity to conduct this CRA site assessment. Please contact us if you have any questions or need any additional information. Sincerely, Susy Morales Senior Wildlife Biologist/Environmental Planner SMM:jg Attachments ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 Figures FIGURE 1 Study Area Regional Location DAVIS MONTHAN AIR FORCE BASE Tortolita Mo untain Park Tucson Mountain County Park Saguaro N ational Park Coronado NF R i l l i t o R i v e r S a n t a C r u z R i v e r T a n q u e V e r d e W a s h P a n t a noWashSa n t aCr u z Ri verC o r o n a d o W a s h Tucson Estates Valencia West Catalina Drexel-Alvernon Drexel Heights Flowing Wells Littletown Oracle Tanque Verde Tortolita UV76 UV77 UV79 §¨¦10 §¨¦19 P I M A C O U N T Y P I N A L C O U N T Y South Tucson Tucson DAVIS MONTHAN AIR FORCE BASE Tortolita Mo untain Park Tucson Mountain County Park Saguaro N ational Park Coronado NF R i l l i t o R i v e r S a n t a C r u z R i v e r T a n q u e V e r d e W a s h P a n t a noWashSa n t aCr u z Ri verC o r o n a d o W a s h Tucson Estates Valencia West Catalina Drexel-Alvernon Drexel Heights Flowing Wells Littletown Oracle Tanque Verde Tortolita UV76 UV77 UV79 §¨¦10 §¨¦19 P I M A C O U N T Y P I N A L C O U N T Y South Tucson Tucson 0 5Miles [ M:\JOBS5\9666\common_gis\fig1.mxd 4/7/2020 ccn COCHISE GILA GRAHAM PIMA PINAL SANTA CRUZ MEXICO Project Locationkj kj Oro Valley FIGURE 2 Study Area Image Source: Maxar (flown July 2019) 0 400Feet [Study Area Critical Resource Area Major Wildlife Linkage Resource Management Area Tier 3 M:\JOBS5\9666\common_gis\fig2_aerial.mxd 4/7/2020 ccn T a n g e r i n e R o a d OracleRoadOro Valley Market Place B i g W a s h O p e n S p a c e FIGURE 3 Study Area Transects Image Source: Maxar (flown July 2019) 0 200Feet [ Study Area Transect Locations M:\JOBS5\9666\common_gis\fig3.mxd 4/7/2020 ccn T a n g e r i n e R o a d Oro Valley Market Place B i g W a s h ATTACHMENT 2 TVV Data Sheets Location: Northern Center Island Transect No. 1 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 910592109600091002053225542 7948516109148483154580166331 56 10 7 1 4 10 10 10 8 1 10 10 7 9 21 442144211415678910Total 16 20 9 22 7 2 12 31 22 2 8 19 27 23 13 3 18 18 18 20 4 3 11 12 11TVV =Photos : 1, 21.404Horizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEET Location: Northern East BankTransect No. 2 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 58981064895825887680810743102 466926978501686367243108453 4 555861082453 2884 379541443674231298354678910Total 9 18 15 23 21 21 24 27 34 22 12 10 17 19 14 12 20 25 6 12 13 20 28 28 23TVV =Photos : 3, 4VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEETHorizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)1.892 Location: Northern West BankTransect No. 3 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 018120101357001501 10633512 267842404689355673 837101093 64105436315386710105 2645424 43 12253 453153678910Total 15 14 25 14 11 7 13 8 6 14 16 27 9 16 21 24 12 4 0 20 15 15 18 19 12TVV =Photos : 5, 6VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEETHorizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)1.420 Location: Central West BankTransect No. 4 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 94 742133354431 001248101042438107230 37267468631612 01665148945121538105522742678910Total 9 4 0 117213121913878103911152318354026TVV =Photos : 7, 8VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEETHorizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)1.14 Location: Central Center IslandTransect No. 5 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 84 72201001254361066822 2276534676424595313 2869776106514910724137522 10825678910Total 1240074181215101420241915614343320130003TVV =Photos : 9, 10VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEETHorizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)1.188 Location: Central West BankTransect No. 6 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 55228474036810200289507732 777897787657668865755310843 108610761010558881071096787810974 2235 110105791058 5 8354654855236101 22 4 54678910Total 24 22 18 25 24 18 39 34 20 27 38 34 20 26 17 23 15 23 25 31 21 22 36 28 22TVV =Photos : 11, 12VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEETHorizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)2.528 Location: Southern West BankTransect No. 7 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 9 869630311051099 638105 1132258722222343101054135678910Total 1108692224125112512911083111450113TVV =Photos : 13, 14VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEETHorizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)0.772 Location: Southern Center Island Transect No. 8 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 133 2223300046744 23423362 522 103800289444 77657973 4 4 223104205987 462356104396073 535523678910Total 10590281320231452172919158013161210151826TVV =Photos : 15, 16VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEETHorizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)1.236 Location: Southern Southwest Bank Transect No. 9 Date: March 26, 2020 Personnel:  Susy Morales, RECONOro Valley MarketplaceJennifer Patton, WilderOro Valley, AZBen Wilder, WilderVertical cubic meters123456789101112131415161718192021222324251 821196018527145672060105472 565045224410 168120390043 79 2 73 626 876233354104 883 710473676350528527073320654684365733 583910Total 30 25 6 3 13 18 5 3 12 15 5 16 1 4 21 37 30 19 19 21 31 40 18 26 16TVV =Photos : 17, 18VEGETATION VOLUME DATA SHEETHorizontal Transect Samples (# of cubic decimeters containing vegetation within each vertical meter)1.736 ATTACHMENT 3 Site Photographs P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 1 Transect 1, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 2 Transect 1, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 3 Transect 2, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 4 Transect 2, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 5 Transect 3, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 6 Transect 3, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 7 Transect 4, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 8 Transect 4, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 9 Transect 5, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 10 Transect 5, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 11 Transect 6, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 12 Transect 6, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 13 Transect 7, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 14 Transect 7, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 15 Transect 8, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 16 Transect 8, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 17 Transect 9, Facing South PHOTOGRAPH 18 Transect 9, Facing North P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 19 Southern Culvert over Marketplace Access Road that Leads to Open Space and Big Wash PHOTOGRAPH 20 Javelina Tracks at Southern Culvert to Open Space and Big Wash P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 21 Javelina Tracks Inside Southern Culvert to Open Space and Big Wash PHOTOGRAPH 22 Southern Culvert Facing North from Mitigation Area Towards Study Area P:\9666\Bio\Photos \Photos1-24.docx 04/02/2020 PHOTOGRAPH 23 Northern Terraced Drainage Feature, South of Tangerine Road PHOTOGRAPH 24 Drainage Area from Open Space to North of Tangerine Road Connecting to Marketplace and Study Area. Javelina Tracks Found in Sandy Bottom and at Culvert Entrances. 206 E. Virginia Avenue | Phoenix, AZ 85004-1110 5983 E. Grant Road, Suite 290 | Tucson, AZ 85712-2365 602.340.0900 | Fax 602.340.8955 520.207.4464 | Fax 520.300.9662 Via email: mspaeth@orovalleyaz.gov December 1, 2021 Michael Spaeth Senior Planner, Town of Oro Valley 11000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley, AZ 85737 Re: Oro Valley Marketplace Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) Dear Michael: As part of the PAD amendment and Conceptual Site Plan process, the owners of Oro Valley Marketplace/Oro Valley Village Center are proposing a mixed-use project pursuant to Section 27.10.F.2.c.iii.h of the Oro Valley Zoning Code. Therefore, we are formally opting into the ESL provision as stated above and requesting use of the Mixed-use Flexible Design Option. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Keri L. Silvyn, Esq. Lazarus & Silvyn, P.C. Rancho Vistoso PAD Amendment Proposed Text Changes TABLE A RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY 11 NORTH 11 SOUTH % OF TOTAL NEIGHBORHOOD 1 2 3 *4 5 6 7 **10 **13 TOTAL RAC/OTHER 0.5 RAC 62.7 230.1 292.8 3.8% 1.0 RAC 18.2 229.7 247.9 3.2% 2.0 RAC 48.8 113.0 40.0 201.8 2.6% 3.0 RAC 23.7 5.4 29.1 0.4% 3.1 RAC 32.3 32.3 0.4% 3.2 RAC 27.1 27.1 0.4% 3.7 RAC 26.8 26.8 0.3% 3.8 RAC 65.1 65.1 0.8% 3.9 RAC 21.5 21.5 0.3% 4.0 RAC 87.0 87.6 53.8 228.4 3.0% 4.2 RAC 21.6 21.6 0.3% 4.3 RAC 26.7 26.7 0.3% 4.5 RAC 362.8 28.3 391.1 5.1% 4.7 RAC 8.9 8.9 0.1% 4.8 RAC 26.4 26.4 0.3% 5.2 RAC 54.6 35.4 90.0 1.2% 5.5 RAC 20.5 20.5 0.3% 6.0 RAC 26.5 64.4 90.9 1.2% 6.1 RAC 5.6 5.6 0.1% 6.2 RAC 12.2 12.2 0.2% 6.4 RAC 37.8 37.8 0.5% 6.5 RAC 102.7 36.3 27.1 32.5 198.6 2.6% 6.6 RAC 24.2 24.2 0.3% 7.0 RAC 1.0 1.0 0.0% 7.1 RAC 24.0 24.0 0.3% 8.0 RAC 36.7 30.5 25.6 92.8 1.2% 8.2 RAC 8.4 14.7 23.1 0.3% Rancho Vistoso PAD Amendment Proposed Text Changes TABLE A RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY 11 NORTH 11 SOUTH % OF TOTAL NEIGHBORHOOD 1 2 3 *4 5 6 7 **10 **13 TOTAL RAC/OTHER 8.5 RAC 64.9 64.9 0.8% 9.1 RAC 10.4 10.4 0.1% 10.0 RAC 28.6 34.4 2.4 32.2 97.6 1.3% 10.5 RAC 42.0 42.0 0.5% 12.0 RAC 73.8 73.8 1.0% 20.0 RAC 41.8 41.8 0.5% 21.0 RAC 15.0 22.1 37.1 0.5% MIXED-USE 108.4 108.4 1.4% COMMERCIAL 44.1 22.5 56.0 47.4 60.3 30.9 19.2 1.9 1.6 283.9 3.7% OPEN SPACE 151.7 186.0 383.3 206.4 741.2 9.7 142.6 117.8 562.8 51.1 194.4 2747.0 35.8% OFFICE PARK 131.2 238.6 370.4 4.8% SCHOOLS 36.3 10.0 10.0 56.3 0.7% RESORT 21.3 21.3 0.3% HOSPITAL 67.8 67.8 0.9% GOLF 180.3 9.7% PARKS 6.0 95.8 8.5 21.7 2.5 134.5 1.8% ROW/UTILITY 56.8 29.3 58.8 28.8 118.7 5.6 50.3 54.6 53.3 21.6 12.3 490.1 6.4% OTHER 10.2 10.2 0.1% TOTAL 1000.0 369.6 810.5 343.6 1555.9 90.6 482.4 794.3 1328.0 400.1 497.3 7672.3 100.0% *Neighborhood affected by PAD Amendment (Ordinance No. XXXXX). **Those neighborhoods affected by the PAD Amendment (Ordinance No. (O) 96-25 by The WLB Group, Inc. Rancho Vistoso PAD Amendment Proposed Text Changes TABLE E RANCHO VISTOSO PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT NEIGHOBRHOOD FOUR LAND USE SUMMARY RESIDENTIAL UNITS PLANNING UNIT MIXED-USE ROW OPEN SPACE TOTAL AC PER PAD PER PLAT PROJECTED A 9.5 13.5 65.7 88.7 225 B 6.8 4.7 17.8 29.3 C 25.0 4.3 31.3 60.6 D 52.9 5.5 43.1 101.5 365 E 14.2 0.8 48.5 63.5 TOTAL AC 108.4 28.8 206.4 343.6 % of TOTAL 31.5% 8.4% 60.1% 100% Rancho Vistoso PAD Amendment Proposed Text Changes NEIGHBORHOOD #4 The following policies shall apply: 1. Permitted Uses Mixed-use development shall be supported within Neighborhood #4. In addition to Regional Commercial (C- 2) uses, multiple-family dwellings and drive-thru uses (without a separate Conditional Use Permit process) shall be permitted, and the Regional Commercial (C-2) Property Development Standards shall apply to all uses, except as noted below. Drive-thru uses are not subject to Oro Valley Zoning Code 25.1.B.6.a.i and .ii; however drive-thru uses shall be reviewed for traffic impacts for administrative approval by the Planning and Zoning Administrator and Town Engineer. 2. Building Height The maximum building height is 39 feet or 3 stories, with the following exceptions: a. Podium-style multiple-family dwelling uses within Development Area 1 as noted on the CSP adjacent to Tangerine Road are limited to 75 feet (5 stories above the podium level) inclusive of architectural features. b. Multiple-family dwelling uses within Development Area 4 as noted on the CSP adjacent to Oracle Road will have a maximum building height of 49 feet (4 stories). No more than 50% of the building footprint is permitted a height of 59 feet (or 5 stories). All heights for this site are measured from the Oracle Road elevation and are inclusive of architecture features. c. The maximum building height for hotel uses is 49 feet (4 stories) inclusive of architectural features. 3. Building Setbacks a. The 4:1 building height to setback ratio from Tangerine Road, as required by Table 27-9 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code, does not apply. Neighborhood #4 will comply with the Regional Commercial (C-2) zone building setback requirements on the perimeter of the Project only. b. The building setback for residential uses along Oracle Road, per Chapter 27.10 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code, does not apply. 4. Landscape Setbacks a. The requirement for a 30-foot landscaped area adjacent to Oracle Road and Tangerine Road, per Chapter 27-9 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code, does not apply in the areas shown on the diagram on page 6. [Note that the buildings are at least 30 feet from the edge of pavement of the closest travel lane on each of those roads.] b. The PAD C-2 requirement for a 20-foot landscaped setback adjacent to roadways does not apply to Water Harvest Way. 5. Floor Area Ratio The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.3 per the Oracle Road Scenic Corridor District (ORSCOD) does not apply. The maximum FAR within Neighborhood #4 is 0.4 as permitted in C-2 zone. 6. Outdoor Mitigation Requirements on the southern edge of the Entertainment District. a. Patios for restaurants on the southern edge of the Entertainment District that will include outdoor amplified music shall be oriented facing to the north/east with the building separating the patio from the single-family residences to the west. b. Distributed speaker systems shall be used whenever possible. Rancho Vistoso PAD Amendment Proposed Text Changes c. If a sound system with a pair or main speakers is used, speakers shall be arranged to face away from residential areas to the west of the site. d. Live amplified music is only permitted in the Courtyard Area if a dedicated distributed sound system is installed for the Courtyard Area that will be shut off at 10 p.m. e. Modifications to conditions a-d above may be approved administratively by the Planning and Zoning Administrator at the time of Final Site Plan and/or tenant improvement if an updated Noise Abatement Plan is approved with alternative noise mitigation measures that ensure the Town’s Noise Ordinance will be met. 7. Multi-Family Open Space and Standards. Section 23.7.E.3 requirements for open space shall be met for all multi-family uses by the following: outdoor living space (balconies) adjoining the living units, pools and recreation areas, and the significant amount of public park/amenity spaces within the overall master-planned project for which all multi-family residents will have access. This includes the recreational amenities in the River Park adjacent to the overall project, and the park and event center space in the centrally located entertainment district of the project. Below is the approach for meeting Section 23.7.E.3 as described above. Code Requirement Requirement/ Calculation Provided Section 23.7.E.3.a. Each lot shall contain a minimum of two hundred fifty (250) square feet of usable outdoor living space for each dwelling unit, exclusive of front yards. Tangerine Apartments: (500 units = 2.86 ac) Oracle Apartments: (230 units = 1.32 ac) Tangerine Apartments: • Dog park: 8,500 sf • Pool deck and associated amenities: 33,000 sf • Private balconies: 58,540 sf • Existing multi-use path (Loop) from apartment site to entertainment district: 42,000 sf Total: 142,040 sf (3.3 acres) Oracle Apartments: • Pool deck and associated amenities: 31,000 sf • Private balconies: 21,870 sf • Existing multi-use path (Loop) from apartment site to entertainment district: 18,000 sf Total: 78,870 sf (1.6 acres) Rancho Vistoso PAD Amendment Proposed Text Changes Section 23.7.E.3.b. Not less than fifty percent (50%) of said required space shall be provided in a single common area, with a minimum dimension of twenty (20) feet at any point. i. Portions of yards (excluding the front yards) which are contiguous with and an integral part of the outdoor living space may be included in calculating the area and minimum dimensions of such space. ii. Pools and paved recreation areas may be developed in the required common space. Tangerine Apartment requirement: • 30% of net lot area = 3.7 acres • 50% for rec area = 1.9 acres Oracle Apartment requirement: • 30% of net lot area = 2.2 acres • 50% for rec area = 1.1 acres Total recreation area required: 3.0 acres Provided: Entertainment District • Event space in northern part of district: 0.30 ac • Central water/playground area: 1.5 ac • South courtyard area: 0.70 ac • Park: 1.0 ac Total: 3.5 acres Section 23.7.E.3.c. A private outdoor living space shall be provided adjoining each dwelling unit equal to a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the gross size of the dwelling unit, except that dwelling units above the first story shall provide such space equal to a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the gross size of the dwelling unit. Outdoor living space on ground level may be included in the open space requirement. 10% of the gross floor area must be provided for all units in both apartments Private balconies are provided for each unit in both apartments, and dwelling units above the first story meet the minimum of ten percent (10%) requirement. Section 23.7.E.3.f The remainder of the required open space shall be provided in landscaped or natural open space. Required for both apartments There is a surplus of recreation area through the on and off- site recreation areas Section 23.7.E.7.a. Wherever there is constructed on a lot, or contiguous lots, multiple dwellings which have fifty (50) or more dwelling units, an active outdoor recreational facility shall be provided for the occupants of said units. In addition to the active outdoor recreation area, an indoor recreational facility shall also be provided for the occupants of said dwelling units. The recreational facility may be used as the leasing, sales, or manager’s office, but that use may not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the gross floor area. The balance of the facilities shall include group meeting facilities and facilities for exercise, table sports, and games. Required for both apartments. Tangerine Apartments: • Dog park, pool deck and associated amenities and multi-use path • Clubhouse, movie theater and gym (indoor) Oracle Apartments: • Pool deck and associated amenities and multi-use path • Clubhouse (indoor) Rancho Vistoso PAD Amendment Proposed Text Changes Section 23.7.E.7.b. Wherever there is constructed a multiple dwelling which has twenty (20) or more dwelling units, there shall be provided on the lot site of said multiple dwellings a play area for children. Said play area shall be separated from any private access ways and public streets by a fence or wall. The tot lot requirement shall be excluded from a senior citizens development. Required for both apartments. A playground is provided in the central portion of the Entertainment District. Rancho Vistoso PAD Amendment Proposed Text Changes STOPSTOPSTOP STOPONLYLOT 13WATER PLANTDKT.8297, PG.2101DKT.11490, PG.967BIG WASH(PIMA COUNTY)DKT.11864, PG. 756ORO VALLEYMARKETPLACEBK. 64, PG. 42ZONING=PADLOT 12LOT 1220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYLOT 2LOT 3LOT 4LOT 7LOT 5LOT 6LOT 8LOT 9LOT 10LOT 11C.A."A"LOT 17LOT 14LOT 15LOT 16LOT 19LOT 18LOT 20LOT 21LOT 22LOT 24LOT 23LOT 25LOT 26LOT 27LOT 28PROPOSED ADOTMAINTENANCEACCESS ROADE. TANGERINE ROAD (PUBLIC)(DKT. 9240, PG. 322)(DKT.548, P G . 3 8 5 ) N. ORACL E R O A D - S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 NEW R I G H T - O F - W A Y L I N E ORO VALL E Y PIMA COU N T Y TOWN LIMITS6531 32SECTION CORNERT11ST12SRETAILRETAILRETAILRETAILRETAILRETAILRESTAURANTRETAILPARCEL TO BE ACQUIREDFROM TOWN OF ORO VALLEYPARCEL TO BE ACQUIREDFROM ADOTEXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARYEXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARYEXISTINGPROJECTBOUNDARYEXISTINGPROJECTBOUNDARYEXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARYPARCEL TO BEACQUIREDFROM ADOTDEVELOPMENT AREA-2REVISION AREA BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT AREA-3REVISION AREA BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT AREA-3REVISION AREA BNDY.RESTAURANTBANKBIG WASH(PIMA COUNTY)DKT.11864, PG. 756DEVELOPMENT AREA-4REVISION AREA BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT AREA-5REVISION AREA BOUNDARYEXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARYPARCEL TO BE ACQUIREDFROM TOWN OF ORO VALLEYTANGERINE APARTMENTSDEVELOPMENT AREA-1DEVELOPMENT AREA-1REVISION AREA BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT AREA-2TANGERINE HOTELENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTDEVELOPMENT AREA-3 ORACLE APARTMENTSDEVELOPMENT AREA-4PARCEL TO BEACQUIREDFROM ADOTORACLE HOTELDEVELOPMENTAREA-5Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\1_CSP-OVVC-Cover Sht..dwg Plotted: Nov 19, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 0'600'400'200'PROJECT OVERVIEWSCALE: 1"=200'1"=200'ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERCONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN WLEGEND40.00egEXIST. MAJOR CONTOURDIRECTION OF FLOWPROJECT BOUNDARYEXIST. PAVEMENTEXIST. SEWERLINE & MANHOLEEXIST. WATERLINE & VALVEEXIST. STORM DRAINNEW SEWERLINE & MANHOLENEW WATERLINE,VALVE & HYDRANTEXIST. SPOT ELEVATIONPROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONSPROPOSED 100-YEAR FLOOD LIMITSSECTION OR 1/4 SECTION CORNERMATCH LINELOCATION MAPA PORTION OF SEC. 31, & 32 T11S R14E AND PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA G&SRM, TOWN OF ORO VALLEY,51.70FFE=54.67FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONRIGHT-OF-WAYFACE OF CURBUNSUBDIVIDEDBK.37(M&P), PG.71 PADCATALINA SHADOWS ESTATESTANGERINE ROAD3" = 1 MILET11ST12SBIG WASH BK 51(M&P), PG 011DESERT SPRINGSSTATE PARKCANADA DEL ORO WASHNEIGHBORHOOD 4316532CATALINAORA C L E R O A D RANCHOVISTOSO BLVD.NEIGHBORHOOD 331302932UNSUBDIVIDEDR14ECOMMERCIAL CENTERNEIGHBORHOOD 2A PORTION OF SEC. 5 T12S R14E,PIMA COUNTYBIG WASHORO VALLEY LIMITS PARK D R INNOVATIONEXISTING EASEMENT KEYNOTEREFUSE ENCLOSURE W/ SELF CLOSING & SELFLATCHING STEEL GATESSEE PLANS FOR LOCATIONORO VALLEY TOWN LIMITSSEWER CONNECTIONWATER SERVICE(1" OR 2" WATER LINE)S HCSFIRE SERVICE(6" OR 8" WATER LINE)(ACCESS)HANDICAPPED RAMPBK.45, PG.48PALISADES POINTER1-36R1-144 RV PADRV PADPC/COT STD 207R.V. PADRIP-RAP SLOPETHIS PROJECTS78"CO8"FHMHS 8"EXIST. MINOR CONTOURAREA OF REVISION BOUNDARYEXISTING 100-YEAR FLOOD LIMITS51.70Lp51.70hp51.70gb51.70rim51.70inv51.70tow51.70bw(LOW POINT)(HIGH POINT)(GRADE BREAK)(RIM)(INVERT)(TOP OF WALL)(BOTTOM OF WALL)(FINISH GRADE)(EXIST. GRADE)EXISTING RETAINING WALLPROPOSED STEM/RETAINING WALLEXISTING BUILDINGPROPOSED BUILDINGGENERAL NOTES1.THE OVERALL GROSS AREA OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS 121.2 ACRES. THIS CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN IS SPECIFIC TO THE FOLLOWING AREAS WITHINTHE DEVELOPMENT:DEVELOPMENT AREA 1 (TANGERINE APARTMENTS): 12.4± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 2 (TANGERINE HOTEL): 3.6± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 (ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT): 11.6± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 4 (ORACLE APARTMENTS): 7.2± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 5 (ORACLE HOTEL): 2.8± ACRES.2.TOTAL LENGTH OF NEW PUBLIC STREETS IS 0.00 MILES.3.TOTAL LENGTH OF NEW PRIVATE STREETS IS 0.00 MILES.4.ASSURANCES FOR WATER SERVICE, SITE STABILIZATION AND LANDSCAPING MUST BE POSTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS.PLANNING GENERAL NOTES1.THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IS 39 FEET OR 3 STORIES, WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS:A.PODIUM-STYLE MULTIPLE-FAMILY DWELLING USES WITHIN DEVELOPMENT AREA 1 ADJACENT TO TANGERINE ROAD ARE LIMITED TO 75FEET (5 STORIES ABOVE THE PODIUM LEVEL) INCLUSIVE OF ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES.B.MULTIPLE-FAMILY DWELLING USES WITHIN DEVELOPMENT AREA 4 ADJACENT TO ALONG ORACLE ROAD WILL HAVE A MAXIMUMBUILDING HEIGHT OF 49 FEET (4 STORIES). NO MORE THAN 50% OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS PERMITTED A HEIGHT OF 59 FEET (OR 5STORIES) . ALL HEIGHTS FOR THIS SITE ARE MEASURED FROM THE ORACLE ROAD ELEVATION AND ARE INCLUSIVE OF ARCHITECTURALFEATURES.C.THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FOR HOTEL USES IS 49 FEET (OR 4 STORIES) INCLUSIVE OF ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES.2.BUILDING SETBACKSA.THE 4:1 BUILDING HEIGHT TO SETBACK RATIO FROM TANGERINE ROAD, AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 27.10 OF THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE, DOES NOT APPLY. NEIGHBORHOOD #4 WILL COMPLY WITH THE REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) ZONE BUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ON THE PERIMETER OF THE PROJECT ONLY. SEE SETBACK TABLES ON SHEET 3.B.THE BUILDING SETBACK RESTRICTION ALONG ORACLE ROAD, PER CHAPTER 27.10 OF THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE, DOES NOT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL USES.3.COMMON AREAS SHALL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTER.4.EXISTING ZONING IS RANCHO VISTOSO PAD C-2.5.OPEN SPACE REQUIRED: 6.9 ACRES. OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 8.0 ACRES. SEE RECREATION AREA PLAN.6.REQUIRED PARKING: SEE ALTERNATIVE PARKING ANALYSIS, PREPARED BY SOUTHWEST TRAFFIC FOR PARKING CALCULATIONS ON SHEET 3.7.REFER TO PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS SHOWN ON APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BOOK 30, PAGE 43.8.ALL SIGNAGE AND LIGHTING TO BE ADDRESSED AS PART OF SEPARATE REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS.9.BUFFERYARD TYPES: 30' BUFFERYARD "B" ADJACENT TO TANGERINE ROAD AND ORACLE ROAD, EXCEPT AS MODIFIED BY THE REQUESTED RANCHOVISTOSO PAD AMENDMENT.10.THE PERMITTED USES FOR THIS PROJECT ARE AS PER THE C-2 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT IN THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE. THIS PROJECTWILL UTILIZE THE MIXED USE ESLO FLEXIBLE DESIGN OPTION.11.PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO TANGERINE AND ORACLE ROAD SCENIC CORRIDOR STANDARDS EXCEPTIONS ARE NOTED IN RESPECTIVENOTES.ENGINEERING GENERAL NOTES1.THE DESIGN VEHICLE FOR THIS PROJECT IS A SU-30. THE DESIGN SPEED FOR THIS PROJECT IS 25 MPH.2.ALL NEW ROADS WITHIN AND ADJACENT TO THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED PLANS. SEPARATE PUBLICIMPROVEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION PLANS WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE TOWN ENGINEER'S OFFICE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.3.ANY RELOCATION OR MODIFICATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND/OR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS NECESSITATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILLBE AT NO EXPENSE TO THE PUBLIC.DRAINAGE GENERAL NOTES1.DEVELOPER WILL COVENANT TO HOLD THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, HARMLESS IN THE EVENT OF FLOODING.2.DRAINAGE WILL NOT BE ALTERED, DISTURBED, OR OBSTRUCTED WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL.3.DRAINAGE STRUCTURES MUST BE CONSTRUCTED AND INSTALLED ACCORDING TO TOWN STANDARDS AND PAID FOR BY THE DEVELOPER.4.ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES MUST BE DESIGNED TO CONVEY A 100 YR FLOW.5.ALL DRAINAGE FACILITIES WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO APPROVED PLANS PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY CERTIFICATES OFOCCUPANCY FROM THE BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR ALL AFFECTED BUILDINGS.6.THE DEVELOPER WILL ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE, CONTROL, SAFETY AND LIABILITY OF PRIVATE DRAINAGEWAYS, DRAINAGEEASEMENTS, AND COMMON AREAS.ORO VALLEY WATER GENERAL NOTES1.THIS DEVELOPMENT MUST COMPLY WITH THE ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY SPECIFICATIONS MANUAL DURING ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION.2.THIS PROJECT WILL BE SERVED BY ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY WHICH HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS HAVING AN ASSURED 100 YEAR WATER SUPPLYBY THE DIRECTOR OF WATER RESOURCES. ANY AND ALL WELLS MUST BE ABANDONED PER ADWR REGULATIONS.3.A LINE EXTENSION AGREEMENT FOR THIS PROJECT MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY WORK ON THE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE.4.WATER INFRASTRUCTURE SHOWN IS NOT NECESSARILY THE FINAL DESIGN. A SEPARATE WATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED TO OROVALLEY WATER UTILITY FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.WASTEWATER GENERAL NOTES1.PROJECT IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH SECTION J, WASTEWATER, OF THE PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUIREMENTS AS REFERENCED IN18.71.030.A.GENERAL UTILITY NOTES1.SHOULD AN EASEMENT BE IN CONFLICT WITH ANY PROPOSED BUILDING LOCATION, VACATION OF THE EASEMENT IS TO OCCUR PRIOR TO ISSUANCEBUILDING PERMITS.GOLDER RANCH FIRE GENERAL NOTES1.FIRE HYDRANTS CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY OF 1500 GPM FOR FIREPROTECTION MUST BE INSTALLED AND IN SERVICE PRIOR TO COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALDELIVERY TO THE SITE. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION OFFICE TRAILERS ARECONSIDERED COMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL.2.APPROVED FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS MUST BE INSTALLED AND IN SERVICEPRIOR TO COMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL DELIVERY TO THE SITE.3.APPROVED AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS SHALL BE PROVIDED THROUGHOUT ALLONE-AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TOWNHOUSES WHICH EXCEED 3,600 SQUAREFEET IN FIRE-FLOW CALCULATION AREA. APPROVED AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMSSHALL BE PROVIDED THROUGHOUT ALL ONE- AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS ANDTOWNHOUSES USED AS MODEL HOMES WITH SALES OR CONSTRUCTION OFFICES.EXCEPTION: GROUP R-3 OCCUPANCIES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO INSTALL AUTOMATICSPRINKLER SYSTEMS WHEN ALL OF THE FOLLOWING EXIST:1.GROUP R-3 OCCUPANCIES PROVIDING THE REQUIRED FIRE FLOW IN ACCORDANCE WITHSECTION B105 AND TABLES B105.1 (1) AND B105.1 (2).2.GROUP R-3 OCCUPANCIES WITHIN 600 FEET (182.880M) OF FIRE HYDRANTS CAPABLE OFSUPPLYING THE REQUIRED FIRE FLOW.3.GROUP R-3 OCCUPANCIES IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION D106 AND D107.4.TEMPORARY STREET SIGNS MUST BE INSTALLED AT EACH STREET INTERSECTIONWHEN CONSTRUCTION OF NEW ROADWAYS ALLOWS PASSAGE OF VEHICLES. ALLSTRUCTURES UNDER CONSTRUCTION MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED WITH ANAPPROVED ADDRESS.PERMITTING DIVISION-BUILDING CODESTHE FOLLOWING CODES AND STANDARDS SHALL BE APPLICABLE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT:2018 INTERNATIONAL CODES WITH LOCAL AMENDMENTS2011 NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE2010 ADA STANDARDS FOR ACCESSIBLE DESIGN2012 ORO VALLEY POOL CODE2015 PC/COT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS2010 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL2004 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY SUBDIVISION STREET STANDARDS AND POLICIES MANUALTOWN OF ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE, CURRENT REVISEDORO VALLEY TOWN CODE, CURRENT REVISEDOWNER/DEVELOPERTOWN WEST555 E. RIVER ROADSUITE 201TUCSON, AZ 85704(520) 615-7707ATTN: JIM HORVATHJIM@TOWNWESTREALTY.COMENGINEERTHE WLB GROUP, INC.4444 E. BROADWAY BLVD. TUCSON, AZ 85711(520) 881-7480ATTN: DAVID LITTLE, P.E.DLITTLE@WLBGROUP.COMSHEET INDEXSHEET 1: COVER SHEETSHEET 2: OVERALL SITE PLANSHEET 3: PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY AND BUILDING SETBACK OVERVIEWSHEET 4: OVERALL PARKING LAYOUTSHEET 5: DEVELOPMENT AREA 1 (TANGERINE APARTMENTS) ANDDEVELOPMENT AREA 2 (TANGERINE HOTEL)SHEETS 6 AND 7: DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 (ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT)SHEET 8: DEVELOPMENT AREA 4 (ORACLE APARTMENTS AND RESTAURANT)SHEET 9: DEVELOPMENT AREA 5 (ORACLE HOTEL)SHEET 10: DEVELOPMENT AREA 6 - ALTERNATE LOCATION ANDDEVELOPMENT SCHEMATIC FOR THE ORACLE HOTEL PROPOSED STORM DRAINCBSD 24"CASE #20013001COVER SHEETPEDESTRIAN PATH/SIDEWALK (PLEASEREFERENCE SHEET 3 FOR OVERALLSIDEWALK/PATH NETWORK DEPICTIONS.)BIKE PARKINGCONCRETE WAY FINDING SIGNB STOPSTOPSTOP STOPONLYLOT 13WATER PLANTDKT.8297, PG.2101DKT.11490, PG.967BIG WASH(PIMA COUNTY)DKT.11864, PG. 756ORO VALLEYMARKETPLACEBK. 64, PG. 42ZONING=PADLOT 12LOT 1220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYLOT 2LOT 3LOT 4LOT 7LOT 5LOT 6LOT 8LOT 9LOT 10LOT 11C.A."A"LOT 17LOT 14LOT 15LOT 16LOT 19LOT 18LOT 20LOT 21LOT 22LOT 24LOT 23LOT 25LOT 26LOT 27LOT 28TANGERINE APARTMENTSLOTS 1 THRU 8, & C.A. "A" OFBK. 64, PG. 42ORO VALLEY MARKET PLACEDEVELOPMENT AREA-1DEVELOPMENT AREA-2ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTA PORTION OF LOTS 16 & 17BK. 64, PG. 42ORO VALLEY MARKET PLACEDEVELOPMENT AREA-3AND COMMON AREA "A" OFAREA OF REVISION=±16.9 ACORACLE APARTMENTSLOTS 20 & 21 OFBK. 64, PG. 42ORO VALLEY MARKET PLACEDEVELOPMENT AREA-4REVISION AREA=±7.5 ACORACLE HOTELLOT 24 OFBK. 64, PG. 42ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACEDEVELOPMENTAREA-5REVISIONAREA=±2.8 ACPROPOSED ADOTMAINTENANCEACCESS ROADNEW R-O-W LINEE. TANGERINE ROAD (PUBLIC)(DKT. 9240, PG. 322)(DKT.548, P G . 3 8 5 ) N. ORACL E R O A D - S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 NEW R I G H T - O F - W A Y L I N E ORO VALL E Y PIMA COUN T Y ORO VALLEYTOWN LIMITS6531 32SECTION CORNERT11ST12SRETAILRETAILRETAILRETAILRETAILRETAILRESTAURANTRETAILTANGERINE HOTELLOTS 9 & 10 OFBK. 64, PG. 42ORO VALLEY MARKET PLACEAREA=±3.6 ACPARCEL TO BE ACQUIREDFROM TOWN OF ORO VALLEYFOR DEVELOPMENT AREA-1PARCEL TO BE ACQUIREDFROM ADOTFOR DEVELOPMENT AREA-1PARCEL TO BE ACQUIREDFROM TOWN OF ORO VALLEYPARCEL TO BE ACQUIREDFROM ADOTFOR DEVELOPMENT AREA-2S88°32'46"W 577.31'N0°00'00"E 129.22'L=1499.21, R=2741.61, D=12.31N88°32'46"E 325.44'N1°11'30"E 203.44'S88°32'46"W 325.44'S1°11'30"W 203.44'N89°30'07"W 466.11'S1°11'30"W 184.07' N1°11'05"E 118.45'EXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARYEXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARYEXISTINGPROJECTBOUNDARYEXISTINGPROJECTBOUNDARYAREA=±2.4 ACAREA=±1.5 ACREVISION AREA=±12.3 ACEXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARYPARCEL TO BE ACQUIREDFROM ADOTAREA=±11.9 ACDEVELOPMENT AREA-2REVISION AREA BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT AREA-1REVISION AREA BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT AREA-3REVISION AREA BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT AREA-3REVISION AREA BNDY.DEVELOPMENT AREA-3REVISION AREA BNDY.RESTAURANTBANKBIG WASH(PIMA COUNTY)DKT.11864, PG. 756DEVELOPMENT AREA-4REVISION AREA BOUNDARYDEVELOPMENT AREA-5REVISION AREA BOUNDARYEXISTING PROJECT BOUNDARY75'179'AREA=±1.6 ACN82°29'56"E 471.51'BIG WASHRECONSTRUCTION AREA77 ACRESLOT 27LOT 28(DKT.548, P G . 3 8 5 ) N. ORACL E R O A D - S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\2_CSP-OVVC-Overview..dwg Plotted: Nov 18, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 0'450'300'150'1"=150'2OVERALL SITE PLANMATCHLINE SEE RIGHT VIEWMATCHLINE SEE LEFT VIEW. STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPW W STOPSTOPSTOP STOPONLYSDSDWATER PLANTBIG WASH(PIMA COUNTY)DKT.11864, PG. 756ORO VALLEYMARKETPLACE220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYC.A."A"RESTAURANTTANGERINE APARTMENTSDEVELOPMENT AREA-1DEVELOPMENT AREA-2ORACLE APARTMENTSDEVELOPMENT AREA-4E. TANGERINE ROAD (PUBLIC)(DKT. 9240, PG. 322)(DKT.5 4 8 , P G . 3 8 5 ) N. OR A C L E R O A D - S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 NEW R I G H T - O F - W A Y L I N E ORO VA L L E Y PIMA CO U N T YTOWN LIMITS6531 32SECTION CORNERT11ST12SWALMARTRETAILRETAILCENTURYTHEATERRETAILRETAILRESTAURANTRETAILTANGERINE HOTELRESTAURANTBANKBIG WASH(PIMA COUNTY)DKT.11864, PG. 756EXISTING 12' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHEXISTING 12' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHEXISTING 12' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHEXISTING 10' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHEXISTING 10' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHEXISTING 12' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHEXISTING 12' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHEXISTING 12' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHRESTAURANTORACLE HOTELDEVELOPMENTAREA-5ECWPCWPCWECWPROPOSED 12' WIDE MULTI-USE PATHECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWECWPCWALTECWECWECWECWPCWALT382' (EX. RETAIL BULDING )PCWPCW179' (EX. RETAIL BLDG.)129' (PROP. ORACLE APTS.)29' (EX. RESTAURANT)32' (EX. BANK)152' (EX. RESTAURANT)HVECORACLE RD. SETBACK-1ORACLE RD. SETBACK-2ORACLE RD. SETBACK-3ORACLE RD. SETBACK-4ORACLE RD. SETBACK-6ORACLE RD. SETBACK-7199' (PROP. ORACLE HOTEL5)ORACLE RD. SETBACK-56.53'27.41'PCWPCW(THIS PROPOSED CROSSWALKWILL BE ENHANCED TOINCREASE CROSSING VISIBILITY.CROSSWALK WILL BE ENHANCEDTO INCREASE VISIBILITYTHROUGH USE OF COLOREDTEXTURED PAVING ANDPEDESTRIAN CROSSINGSIGNAGE AS APPROVED BY THETOWN ENGINEER DURING THEREVIEW OF THE SITECONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENTS).SEE DETAIL 1SHEET 3.PCWPCWPCW(THIS PROPOSED CROSSWALKWILL BE ENHANCED TO INCREASECROSSING VISIBILITY.CROSSWALK WILL BE ENHANCEDTO INCREASE VISIBILITYTHROUGH USE OF COLOREDTEXTURED PAVING ANDPEDESTRIAN CROSSING SIGNAGEAS APPROVED BY THE TOWNENGINEER DURING THE REVIEWOF THE SITE CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENTS). SEE DETAIL 1,SHEET 3.HVECENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTDEVELOPMENT AREA-3191' (EX. THEATER BULDING ) TANGERINE RD. SETBACK-1 70' (EX. WALMART ) TANGERINE RD. SETBACK-2 50' (EX. RETAIL ) TANGERINE RD. SETBACK-4 72' (PROPOSED TANGERINE HOTEL ) TANGERINE RD. SETBACK-5 132' (EX. RETAIL)TANGERINE RD.SETBACK-658' (PROPOSEDTANGERINEAPARTMENTS )TANGERINE RD.SETBACK-3FLASHINGPEDESTRIANWARNINGSIGNQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\3_CSP-OVVC-Pedestrian..dwg Plotted: Nov 18, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 0'450'300'150' PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY AND BUILDING SETBACK OVERVIEWSCALE: 1"=150'1"=150'LEGEND PROPOSED 12' MULTI-USE PATH EXISTING 12' MULTI-USE PATH EXISTING 5' CONCRETE SIDEWALK PROPOSED 5' CONCRETE SIDEWALK EXISTING CROSSWALK PROPOSED CROSSWALK CONCRETE WAY FINDING SIGNECWPCWORACLE ROAD BUILDING SETBACKREQUIRED FRONT SETBACKORACLE ROAD FRONT SETBACK FOR MULTIPLE STRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT: AVERAGE ONE HUNDREDTWENTY (120) FEET .PROVIDED FRONT SETBACK : 129 FEET FOR THE ORACLE APARTMENTS AND 199 FEET FOR ORACLEHOTEL (AS SHOWN BELOW).SETBACKNUMBERBUILDINGDISTANCE(FT)SETBACK-1EXISTING RETAIL382SETBACK-2EXISTING RETAIL179SETBACK-3PROPOSED ORACLE APARTMENTS129SETBACK-4EXISTING RESTAURANT29SETBACK-5PROPOSED ORACLE HOTEL199SETBACK-6EXISTING BANK33SETBACK-7EXISTING RESTAURANT1523VARIES (6' MIN.)AND GUTTERTYPICAL CURBDECORATIVE PAVEMENT1HIGH VISIBILITY ENHANCED CROSSWALKDDBOLLARD, TYP.BOTH SIDES4.00"(MAX. HEIGHT) 3.40" 3.11" 2.62" 1.94" 1.09"1' TYP.NOTE:IF SUBSTANTIAL INVERT EXISTS ONROADWAY PAVEMENT, THE ABOVEDETAILS MAY REQUIRE MODIFICATION.CROSS SECTION C-C4.00" MAX.EXISTINGPAVEMENTCROSS SECTION D-DCCRAISEDCROSSWALKFG. 1000.33FG. 1000.50FG. 1000.03FG. 1000.03"YIELD" SIGNFG. 1000.00FG. 1000.00"YIELD" SIGN2% MAXPAVEMENT WIDTH VARIES4.00" (MAX. HEIGHT)FG. 1000.33FG. 1000.50FG. 1000.33FG. 1000.50BOLLARD, TYP.BOTH SIDESBOLLARD, TYP.BOLLARD, TYP.TANGERINE ROAD BUILDING SETBACKREQUIRED FRONT SETBACKPER SECTION 27.D.3.F.VI.B.2.A.II OF THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE THE RANCHO VISTOSO PAD ISEXEMPT FROM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. THE FRONT SETBACKS REQUIRED PER THE UNDERLYING C-2ZONING DISTRICT ARE 20 FEET.PROVIDED FRONT SETBACK : 58 FEET FOR THE TANGERINE APARTMENTS AND 72 FEET FOR THETANGERINE HOTEL (AS SHOWN BELOW).SETBACKNUMBERBUILDINGDISTANCE(FT)SETBACK-1EXISTING THEATER191SETBACK-2WALMART70SETBACK-3EXISTING RETAIL132SETBACK-4EXISTING RETAIL50SETBACK-5PROPOSED TANGERINE HOTEL72SETBACK-6PROPOSED TANGERINE APARTMENTS58 STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOP STOPONLYSDSDWATER PLANTBIG WASH(PIMA COUNTY)DKT.11864, PG. 756ORO VALLEYMARKETPLACE220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYC.A."A"TANGERINE APARTMENTSPARKING ZONE 1PARKING ZONE 2ORACLE APARTMENTSPARKING ZONE 6E. TANGERINE ROAD (PUBLIC)(DKT. 9240, PG. 322)(DKT.5 4 8 , P G . 3 8 5 ) N. OR A C L E R O A D - S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 NEW R I G H T - O F - W A Y L I N E ORO VA L L E Y PIMA CO U N T Y 6531 32T11ST12SWALMARTRETAILRETAILCENTURYTHEATERRETAILRETAILRESTAURANTRETAILTANGERINE HOTELRESTAURANTBANKBIG WASH(PIMA COUNTY)DKT.11864, PG. 756RESTAURANTORACLE HOTELPARKING ZONE 7PARKING ZONE 5PARKING ZONE 3PARKING ZONE 4ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTRETAILRESTAURANTPARKING ZONE 8Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\4_CSP-OVVC-Parking.dwg Plotted: Nov 18, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 0'450'300'150'OVERALL PARKING LAYOUTSCALE: 1"=150'1"=150'3078318RETAIL4,200 SFRETAIL4,970 SFOFFICE2,940 SFMEDICAL OFFICE10,208 SFPARKING ZONE 341113424RETAIL70,234 SFOFFICE3,470 SFPARKING ZONE 490224926SUPERMARKET195,273 SFPARKING ZONE 51719361766RESTAURANT (PROPOSED)24,200 SFRETAIL (PROPOSED)22,500 SFHOTEL (PROPOSED)108 UNITSBAR (PROPOSED)7,000 SFCOMMERCIAL RECREATION (PROPOSED)16,000 SFCOMMUNITY PARK (PROPOSED)1.4 ACRESTHEATER1,928 SEATSRESTAURANT (STANDARD)7,811 SFRETAIL203,128 SFPARKING ZONE 642211434APARTMENTS230 UNITSPARKING ZONE 7314329RESTAURANT (STANDARD)7,028 SFRETAIL7,000 SFFINANCIAL SERVICES4,355 SFRETAIL13,000 SFPARKING ZONE 81516161RESTAURANT (CONVENIENCE)3,650 SFTOTALS51161285267MATCHLINE SEE RIGHT VIEWMATCHLINE SEE LEFT VIEWPROPOSED PARKINGZONE BOUNDARY (TYP.)PROPOSED PARKINGZONE BOUNDARY (TYP.)PROPOSED PARKINGZONE BOUNDARY (TYP.)PROPOSED PARKINGZONE BOUNDARY (TYP.)PROPOSED PARKINGZONE BOUNDARY (TYP.)1622478922178266NOTE:1. THIS TABLE SHOWS REQUIRED A.D.A. PARKING AND BICYCLE PARKING SPACES.2. FINAL ADA ACCESSIBLE SPACES AND REQUIREMENTS WILL BE VERIFIED AT FINAL DESIGN STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT AREAS/PADSTO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ADAAG STANDARDS AT TIME OF DEVELOPMENT.3. 10% OF THE BICYCLE SPACES MUST BE CLASS 1.89019909APARTMENTS (PROPOSED)500 UNITSPARKING ZONE 2HOTEL (PROPOSED)150 ROOMS45PARKING ZONE LAND USE AND PROVIDED PARKING SPACESLAND USETOTAL SIZEPROVIDED STANDARDPARKING SPACESREQUIRED A.D.A.PARKING SPACESTOTAL PROVIDEDPARKING SPACESPARKING ZONE 1TOTAL REQUIREDPARKING SPACESBICYCLE SPACES4PROVIDED A.D.A.PARKING SPACESREQUIRED STANDARDPARKING SPACES1351931113127554522014245789551113244712151015119RESTAURANT (CONVENIENCE)3,500 SFHOTEL112 ROOMS11RETAIL8,000 SFRETAIL8,000 SFGAS STATION4,500 SF STOPONLY ONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLY STOPSTOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPONLYFFE=81.50FFE=76.504 STORIESHEIGHT=49' MAX.TOTAL BLDG SF=92,000 SFTANGERINEHOTELE. TANGERINE RD. (SR989) (PUBLIC)(DKT.9240, PG. 322)E. TANGERINE RD. (SR989) (PUBLIC)(DKT.9240, PG. 322)(BK.64, PG. 42)N. WATER HARVEST WAY (PRIVATE)INNOVATION PARK DRIVE (PUBLIC)20' SEWER ESMT BYSEPARATE INSTRUMENTENTRYSD2-11'x5.25' CON-ARCH W12"W 12" W 12"8"WCBSD24"79.00invCOLLECTOR CHANNELCOLLECTOR CHANNEL81.00inv79.50invFH69.00invCB74.16rim73.83bot72.80inv220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYEX. MULTI-USE PATHCOMMON AREA "A"(OPEN SPACE)BK. 64, PG. 42COMMON AREA "A"(OPEN SPACE)BK. 64, PG. 42TDCOFH15' WATER ESMT BYSEPARATE INSTRUMENT76.5075.5076.0076.50hp76.00hp75.0077.0075.5075.0075.0074.0073.0072.89egex.hp73.75eg75.50hp75.00LpSCDCDCDC74.00rim71.00invMAINCOLLECTOR CHANNEL74.5070.50inv110' RIGHT TURN LANE30' BUFFERYARD30' BUFFERYARD220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYEX. MULTI-USE PATH220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYEX. MULTI-USE PATHGATEGATENEW SIGN8"W8"W8"W8"W8"W8"WGATE30' BUFFERYARD8"W 8"W 8"W8"W8"W8"W8"W8"W8"W8"SMHMHMHMH8"SW8"8"S8"SFFE=81.50GYMSTAIRTRASHSTAIRTRASHSTAIRELEV.MECH RMSTAIRELEV.MECH RMSTAIRMECH.MAINTENANCEW12"W 12"W12"W12"SCREENED LOADING BAYSEE SHEET 9 DETAIL 1.ENTRANCE13'13'20'20'12'12'20'20'12'12'20'20'12'12'20'20'12'12'20'20'12'12'20'20'12'12'20'20'12'12'20'20'13'13'20'5'13'20'13'13'20'20'13'13'20'26'12'12'12'12'12'12'12'12'12'12'12'12'12'12'9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9'TYP.9' T Y P .9'TYP.19.76 ' 9.24' 17.03' 20' 2 0 ' 1 3 ' 1 3 ' 2 0 ' 20'12'12'20'20'12'12'20'93.5092.00FFE=81.50FFE=81.50FFE=81.50STAIRELEV.MECH RMFFE=81.50FFE=81.50FFE=81.50STAIRFFE=81.50STAIRFFE=81.50STAIRFFE=81.50STAIRFFE=81.50STAIRFFE=81.50FFE=81.50STAIRPOOLABOVEELEV.LAUND./OFFICELOBBYCONF.CONF.77.00ex78.00ex79.00ex78.5081.1082.5081.3080.8080.6080.6080.3080.0880.0079.50gb75.00inv73.50inv2- 1 1 ' x 5 . 2 5 ' C O N - A R C H 2-11'x5.25 ' CON-ARCH89.7590.2088.4089.2589.0089.2589.0082.8582.6080.7580.4081.30U1U3W3W1W3W3W3S4S4W3W3aW1S2S1S4S3S1aU3aS2S2aS2A1U3aS255698810812625105132826265159399992595295799999952BUILDING-B121291410308RETAINING WALLEX. UTILITES TOBE RELOCATEDEX. UTILITES TOBE RELOCATEDMULTI-USE PATHFIRE ACCESSEMERGENCY GATE66614961691210121214562618121430143036436142826262620820P1P2P2P3P1P2P3P2P1P2P1P2P1P2P2BUILDING-DBUILDING-ABUILDING-CP22P2P13BUILDING-BBUILDING-BBUILDING-CBUILDING-ABUILDING-ABUILDING-D556612280.7580.7581.2080.8581.2081.2081.2081.4080.7581.1081.0580.8580.8580.4081.6081.2081.4081.4081.4081.4080.4080.7581.7581.5081.5080.8580.8080.7581.2081.4081.0080.9580.4080.4080.7581.3580.9081.6580.8081.2581.2580.9081.2580.9081.2581.4580.4080.7580.4080.4080.9081.3081.2580.9081.2581.7581.5081.4581.4580.9081.0080.6081.3080.9080.8581.6580.6580.8580.5080.3081.4580.4080.9080.0581.3081.401 . 8%81.8081.5081.3581.3581.4081.4581.4081.1580.9080.7581.2581.5080.9081.3081.400.50%81.8081.6081.9080.8580.9081.2080.9080.7082.0082.500.60%81.2581.500.63%4.3%81.000.50%80.802.44%1 . 6 7%81.4081.30eg80.4081.5081.5080.8581.250 . 5 0%80.400.50%1%1%1.5%1.5%3%DOG PARKEX. CROSSWALKNEW LEFT TURN LANEINTO TANGERINE HOTEL.100' STORAGE.HVECSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1.FLASHINGPEDESTRIANWARNINGSIGNFLASHINGPEDESTRIANWARNINGSIGNTRASH PICK UP AREAWHEELED OUT ONPICKUP DAY.TRASH PICK UP AREAWHEELED OUT ONPICKUP DAY.PERIMETER FENCEPERIMETER FENCENEW STRIPINGPROPOSED 26' FIREACCESS LANEQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\5_CSP-OVVC_Sheets.dwg Plotted: Nov 18, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 0'150'100'50'1"=50'UTILITY ESMT. PER DKT. 9240, PG. 336EASEMENTS KEYNOTESU1PUBLIC SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19S1TEP ESMT. PER DKT. 13091, PG. 1250U2S1aPRIVATE SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19 TOBE ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.EXISTING UTILITIES TO REMOVED.A1ACCESS ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19 TO BEABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.U3ELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT. 8778, PG. 1187 &DKT.7871, PG. 1829 TO REMAINU3aELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT. 8778, PG. 1187 &DKT.7871, PG. 1829 TO BE ABANDONED BYSEPARATE INSTRUMENT. EXISTING UTILITYTO BE RELOCATED.PUBLIC SEWER ESMT. PER DKT. 13149, PG. 44 &DKT. 13149, PG.47S3PUBLIC SEWER ESMT. PER DKT. 13285, PG. 1347S4WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 677W1WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 731 TO REMAIN.W3WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 731 TO BEABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT. EXISTINGUTILITY TO BE RELOCATED.W3a DEVELOPMENT AREA 1 (TANGERINE APARTMENTS) AND DEVELOPMENT AREA 2 (TANGERINE HOTEL )SCALE:1"=50'TANGERINE APARTMENTS (4 BUILDINGS) AMENITIES INCLUDE CLUBHOUSE WITH FITNESS AREA, MOVIE THEATRE FOR RESIDENTS AND POOL AREA.MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT = 75 FEET, INCLUSIVE OF ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS.TOTAL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE ±736,000 SFUNITS SHOWN ON THE SIXTH FLOOR ARE THE SECOND STORY OF UNITS ON ON THE FIFTH FLOOR.PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH 285' - 430'NEW 26' WIDE FIRE ACCESS ESMT. PER FINAL PLAT.P1NEW 15' WIDE PUBLIC WATER ESMT. PER FINAL PLAT.P2PUBLIC SEWER ESMT. PER FINAL PLAT.P3ELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT.13571, PG. 919U45NOT TO SCALEBTANGERINEAPARTMENTSEXISTING SOIL CEMENTBANK PROTECTIONBIG WASHAEXISTING 12' MULTI - USE PATHBADDED 14' STABILIZED SURFACE (FIRE APPARATUS SUITABLE)AEXISTING HAND RAILTYPICAL CROSS SECTIONA1TANGERINE APARTMENTS BUILDING-A (6 STORIES)GROUND LEVEL= 0 UNITS2ND, 3RD , 4TH, AND 5TH LEVEL = 32 UNITS6TH LEVEL= 0 UNITSTOTAL =128 UNITSNOTES:TANGERINE APARTMENTS BUILDING-B (6 STORIES)GROUND LEVEL= 0 UNITS2ND, 3RD , 4TH, AND 5TH LEVEL = 32 UNITS6TH LEVEL= 0 UNITSTOTAL =128 UNITSTANGERINE APARTMENTS BUILDING-C (6 STORIES)GROUND LEVEL= 0 UNITS2ND, 3RD, 4TH AND 5TH LEVEL = 33 UNITS6TH LEVEL= 0 UNITSTOTAL =132 UNITSTANGERINE APARTMENTS BUILDING-D (6 STORIES)GROUND LEVEL= 0 UNITS2ND, 3RD, 4TH, AND 5TH LEVEL = 28 UNITS6TH LEVEL= 0 UNITSTOTAL =112 UNITSBUILDING-ABUILDING-BBUILDING-CBUILDING-DSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELL/ELEVATOR/MECH.STAIRWELL/ELEVATOR/MECH.STAIRWELL/ELEVATOR/MECH.OFFICE &LAUNDRYSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORCONFERENCEROOMELEVATOR/MECHANICALMAINTENANCEGYMBUILDING-ABUILDING-BBUILDING-CBUILDING-DSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELL/ELEVATOR/MECH.STAIRWELL/ELEVATORELEVATOR/MECHANICALDETAIL-1 (BUILDING LAYOUT)N.T.S.COURT YARD2ND LEVELCOURT YARD2ND LEVEL14081308BUILDING-ABUILDING-BBUILDING-CBUILDING-DSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELL/ELEVATOR/MECH.STAIRWELL/ELEVATORELEVATOR/MECHANICALSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLGROUND LEVEL (128 UNITS)2ND, 3RD, 4TH, & 5TH LEVEL (128 UNITS)6TH LEVEL (128 UNITS)LOBBYELEVATORELEVATORELEVATORPRIVATE SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19S1 SDSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPYIELDYIELD YIELDYIELD STOPSTOPWALMART2150 E. TANGERINE RD.BLDG. HEIGHT=34'CENTURY THEATER12155 N. ORACLE RD.BLDG. HEIGHT=39'12125 N. ORACLE RD.BLDG. HEIGHT=22'12115 N. ORACLE RD.BLDG. HEIGHT=22'TUKTUKTHAI2,711sfVAC.1,888sfCHARREDWOODFRIEDPIZZA3,500sfVAC.2,106sfE. TANGERINE RD. (SR989) (PUBLIC)(DKT.9240, PG. 322)NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY-LINEMHMHSD24"MHSD24"CB999769995695989993948459COCOHCSHCSS 8"S8"ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 17BK. 64, PG.42ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 17BK. 64, PG.42THE KEGSTEAKHOUSE& BARHEIGHT=24'8,700 sfFFE=64.40PETCOHEIGHT=34'15,257 sf11985 N. ORACLE RD.VACANTHEIGHT=34'18,300 sf11975 N. ORACLE RD.NRGWEALTHMGMT2,500sfVAC.1,600sfVAC.3,780sfVAC.2,220sfVAC.3,411sfRETAINING WALL80.0077.50Lp79.00rim76.00inv76.50FFE=77.5078.30hp79.0077.5077.9081.0081.2079.0076.9075.5075.0070.0064.93rim58.05inv91.00tow82.00bw92.00tow83.00bw93.00RAMP 8:1 OR LESSRETAINING WALLCHANNELADOT ACCESSADOT ACCESSEXISTING GRATES64.00U1U1S7U6U7U7U6U4U4S7S1U4U6W3W3W3W3W3W3U4U4aU4aU4U4U4U4U1U4U1U1S2S2S2W3A2SECTION 32SECTION 5SLSLSLW3CENTRAL ENTERTAINMENT AREAS7S2PROP. 100-YRFLOODPLAINEXIST. 100-YRFLOODPLAINWASH WASH12005 N. ORACLE RD.61.7864.00(DKT. 5 4 8 , P G . 3 8 5 ) N. O R A C L E R O A D - S T A T E R O U T E 7 765.00tc65.3067.00gb67.50gb67.00gb67.50gb69.0069.2069.3069.5069.3069.3070.0067.8067.8055.00inv70.0072.8069.5072.5070.0070.0069.2072.5062.00inv70.0073.4072.8072.8073.4063.9073.5572.2071.5072.1072.0072.0071.3570.4568.1066.5066.0065.0067.0066.0065.4072.8068.8067.0067.0012:1 12:1 12:1 66.8067.0069.50HOTEL FFE=84.80RETAIL FFE=67.804 STORIESFFE=72.804 STORIES75.4874.8075.4074.00SAWCUT LINESAWCUT LINE72.70eg70.20eg69.9069.40eg67.20eg67.30eg65.30egFFE=79.50CROSSWALKDECORATIVECROSSWALKEXISTINGRAILINGHOTEL/RETAILNEW R I G H T - O F - W A Y L I N E Q100=515 CFS H=49' MAX.H=49' MAX.S D 2 4 "4RESTAURANTBREEZWAY60.0060.8060.8060.0061.5061.0061.5063.0062.0061.0065.0063.2563.4062.3863.5078.7080.003%3%90.8092.0079.5096.0097.5097.005%92.000.80%0.80%77.7076.8080.1076.7076.6077.3075.602.64%72.9071.3070.0065.6567.0064.0066.001%65.0068.4069.701%1%74.0083.0083.503%1%1%64.0566.201%93.501%2%79.0080.0081.0092.00tow83.00bw90.0092.00tow89.0090.30tow81.00bw90.00tow78.00bw88.0082.001:183.901.67%1:180.2080.5080.2580.0080.2079.0079.5079.8079.0079.8078.6078.6078.0077.9079.4078.6578.5076.3076.1078.2076.2076.0076.4575.9676.8076.7576.7076.6076.2075.4075.7075.5675.4575.3075.3075.2375.0075.7075.4075.5075.0074.8575.1275.7177.5678.0078.0077.6581.2580.3080.3079.0079.7078.3579.253 %80.1080.0079.0078.4077.7078.1078.7081.003:13:178.6079.0079.4078.0079.0078.0092.50tow86.50bw93.00tow88.50bw78.1077.7578.403 % 3 %77.8178.2178.5078.4087.50tow84.00bw82.00tw&bwEND WALL79.6078.5079.853:179.3078.9079.0078.0080.2078.8077.5077.003:176.2077.1977.0075.8076.3076.0075.8176.2075.6075.8576.2576.5076.2074.3472.4375.7765.2566.0084.00tow71.00bw70.0068.7566.5464.601%81.00tow67.00bw78.001:11:183.00tow65.00bw80.00tow65.00bw65.00tow65.00bw63.0063.6664.6064.8583.00tow65.00bwHOTEL/RETAILRESTAURANTTOTAL BLDG SF= ±60,000 SFPATIO HVECSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1.HVECSEE SHEET 13,DETAIL 1.GATEWAY SIGN LOCATIONSGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONSNORTHENTERTAINMENT AREASPECIAL EVENT AREA/OVERFLOW PARKINGGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONONE-ACRE PARKWADING POOLWITH 6' HIGH FENCESANDBEACHSPLASH PADWITH 4' HIGH FENCEPLAY EQUIPMENTPLAYGROUNDAPPROPRIATE SURFACEBUBBLE MACHINEBY ARCHITECTARTIFICIAL TURFSAND BARHVECSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1.CONCRETEDECORATIVE ROCKDECORATIVE ROCKNEW BOULDER TRAILCONCRETEDECORATIVE ROCKDECORATIVE ROCKCONCRETE ORPAVER SURFACEOR SIMILARHOTELPOOLGAZEBO99108339999999999779977297EXISTING TRAILSHADE CANOPYSHADE CANOPYDECORATIVEPAVINGNEW CULVERT DECORATIVEPAVINGNEW CULVERT 85.0080.0080.0075.00999997334799974FENCEFENCE88889998SCREENED LOADING BAYSEE DETAIL 1, SHEET 9.EXISTING SIDEWALKSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPMHS8"THE KEGSTEAKHOUSE& BARHEIGHT=24'8,700 sfFFE=64.40PETCOHEIGHT=34'15,257 sf11985 N. ORACLE RD.VACANTHEIGHT=34'18,300 sf11975 N. ORACLE RD.64.93rim58.05invEXISTING GRATES64.00S7S1U4U6W3U4U4U1S2W3SECTION 32SECTION 5SLSLSLW312005 N. ORACLE RD.61.7864.00(DKT. 5 4 8 , P G . 3 8 5 ) N. O R A C L E R O A D - S T A T E R O U T E 7 765.00tc63.9065.0067.0066.0065.4065.30egDECORATIVECROSSWALKRAILINGNEW R I G H T - O F - W A Y L I N E60.0060.8060.8060.0061.5061.0061.5063.0062.0061.0065.0063.2563.4062.3863.5065.6567.0064.0066.001%65.0064.0566.201%79.0080.001.67%1:165.2566.0066.5464.601%81.00tow67.00bw78.001:11:183.00tow65.00bw80.00tow65.00bw65.00tow65.00bw63.0063.6664.6064.8583.00tow65.00bwCENTRALPATIO HVECSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1. LOCATIONSGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONONE-ACRE PARKSAND BARSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1.CONCRETE ORPAVER SURFACEOR SIMILAR10999999DECORATIVEPAVINGNEW CULVERT 9999FENCE9Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\6-7_CSP-OVVC_Sheets.dwg Plotted: Nov 19, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 1"=50'EASEMENTS KEYNOTESA2CROSS ACCESS ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19S1PUBLIC SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19S2PRIVATE SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19 TOBE ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.EXISTING UTILITIES TO REMOVED.S7SEWER ESMT. PER DKT. 813077, PG. 1S6SEWER ESMT. PER DKT. 8233, PG. 2372U6ELETRIC ESMT. PER DKT. 13303, PG. 2242U1UTILITY ESMT. PER DKT. 9240, PG. 336U7TEP ESMT. PER DKT. 13263, PG. 2335W3WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 731 TO REMAIN.MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 76 DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 (ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT)NORTH ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTGAZEBOBOULDER TRAILSPECIAL EVENT AREAOVERFLOW PARKINGCENTRAL ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTHOTEL WITH GROUND LEVEL-RESTAURANT/RETAIL (3 FLOORS).SAND BEACH/BARPLAYGROUND AREASBUBBLE MACHINERECREATIONAL WATER FEATURES (SPLASH PADS AND WADING POOL).SEE RECREATION AREA PLAN FOR MORE DETAIL.LEGEND BICYCLE PARKING GATEWAY SIGNBENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT AMENITIES STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPYIELDYIELDSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOPYIELDYIELDSTOP MHMH59FFE=61.501 STORY8,000 sfHCSS 8"S8"ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 14BK. 64, PG.42THE KEGSTEAKHOUSE& BARHEIGHT=24'8,700 sfFFE=64.40PETCOHEIGHT=34'15,257 sf11985 N. ORACLE RD.VACANTHEIGHT=34'18,300 sf11975 N. ORACLE RD.70.0064.93rim58.05invEXISTING GRATES64.00S7S1U4U6W3U4aU4U4U1S2S2W3SECTION 32SECTION 5SLSLSLSLS1S7S3W5W3W3(BK.64, PG. 42)N. WATER HARVEST WAY (PRIVATE)12005 N. ORACLE RD.61.7864.0065.00tc65.3067.00gb67.00gb67.50gb67.8055.00inv63.9066.5066.0065.0067.0066.0065.4068.8067.0067.0066.8067.0069.50HOTEL FFE=84.80RETAIL FFE=67.804 STORIESSAWCUT LINE67.20eg67.30eg65.30egDECORATIVECROSSWALKEXISTINGRAILINGHOTEL/RETAILH=49' MAX.RESTAURANTRESTAURANT60.0060.8060.8060.0061.5061.0061.5063.0062.0061.0065.0063.2563.4062.3863.5064.0066.001%68.4069.701%64.0566.201%65.2570.0068.7566.5464.6065.00tow65.00bw63.0063.6664.6064.8562.5061.5062.0060.50LOADINGPATIOGATE HVECSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1.GATEWAY SIGN LOCATIONSGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONONE-ACRE PARKSANDBEACHSAND BARHVECSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1.DECORATIVE ROCKCONCRETE ORPAVER SURFACEOR SIMILARPOOL10899999SHADE CANOPYDECORATIVEPAVINGNEW C U L V E R T N E W C U L V E R T 9999FENCE9998STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPST O P STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPMHFFE=61.501 STORY8,000 sfH=24' MAX. FFE=59.501 STORY7,500 sfH=24' MAX.S8"ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 17BK. 64, PG.42ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 14BK. 64, PG.42ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 15BK. 64, PG.42OLIVE GARDENHEIGHT=24'7398 sf11905 N. ORACLE RD.THE KEGSTEAKHOUSE& BARHEIGHT=24'8,700 sfFFE=64.40PETCOHEIGHT=34'15,257 sf11985 N. ORACLE RD.VACANTHEIGHT=34'18,300 sf11975 N. ORACLE RD.BIG LOTSHEIGHT=34'28,468 sf11955 N. ORACLE RD.VACANTHEIGHT=34'45,000 sf11935 N. ORACLE RD.DSW SHOESHEIGHT=34'14,500 sf11895 N. ORACLE RD.ULTA BEAUTYHEIGHT=34'10,554 sf11875 N. ORACLE RD.VACANTHEIGHT=34'9,000 sf11865 N. ORACLE RD.64.93rim58.05invEXISTING GRATES64.00S7S1U4U6W3U4U4U1S2S2U4W3W3W3SECTION 32SECTION 5SLSLSLSLW3S5S3S1S7S3W5U4U8COHCSCOCOHCSW3W3(BK.64, PG. 42)N. WATER HARVEST WAY (PRIVATE)(DKT.11864, PG. 756)BIG WASH (PIMA COUNTY)12005 N. ORACLE RD.61.7864.0050.00inv65.00tc63.9065.0067.0066.0065.4065.30egDECORATIVECROSSWALKRAILINGFFE=59.841 STORY3000± SF EX. TRANSIT CENTER220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYEX. MULTI-USE PATHRESTAURANTRESTAURANT60.0060.8060.8060.0061.5061.0061.5063.0062.0061.0065.0063.2563.4062.3863.5064.0066.001%64.0566.201%65.2566.5464.6065.00tow65.00bw63.0063.6664.6064.85 FFE=59.501 STORY4,100 sfH=24' MAX.RESTAURANTCENTRALCOURTYARD58.25 FFE=60.0060.0059.0062.5061.5062.0060.50LOADINGPATIOPATIO P A T I O LOADINGRETAILRESTAURANTEXPANSIONAREAPASSENGERDROP OFFCIRCULATIONGATEGATEHVECSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1. LOCATIONSGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONGATEWAY SIGNLOCATIONONE-ACRE PARKSAND BARGATEWAY SIGN LOCATIONBICYCLE PARKINGBSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1.CONCRETEDECORATIVE ROCKCONCRETE ORPAVER SURFACEOR SIMILARLOOPCONNECTIONHVECSEE SHEET 3,DETAIL 1.10999DECORATIVEPAVINGN E W C U L V E R T 99PASSENGERDROP OFFCIRCULATIONFENCE9Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\6-7_CSP-OVVC_Sheets.dwg Plotted: Nov 18, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 1"=50'EXISTING EASEMENTS KEYNOTESS1PUBLIC SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19S2PRIVATE SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19 TOBE ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.EXISTING UTILITIES TO REMOVED.S7SEWER ESMT. PER DKT. 813077, PG. 1U6ELETRIC ESMT. PER DKT. 13303, PG. 2242SOUTH ENTERTAINMENT AREACENTRAL COURTYARD1-ACRE GRASS PARK4 BUILDINGS (RESTAURANT)GROUND LEVEL-RETAILEXISTING TRANSIT CENTERBICYCLE PARKINGSEE RECREATION AREA PLAN FOR MORE DETAIL.W3WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 731 TO REMAIN.MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 6S3S5PUBLIC SEWER ESMT. PER DKT. 13149, PG. 44 &DKT. 13149, PG.47SEWER ESMT. PER DKT. 7787, PG. 1320U8ELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT. 13091, PG. 1254W5WATER ESMT. PER DKT.12265, PG. 60907ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT AMENITIES DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 (ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT)LEGEND BICYCLE PARKING GATEWAY SIGNB STOP STOPSTOPSTOPS T O P STOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP OHEOHEOHEOHEOHESDSDSDSTOP SDSDFFE=54.00FPE=53.331 STORY3,520 SFH=24' MAX.BUILDING-1FFE=53.50±165,000 SFH=59' MAX.GATE(BK.64, PG. 42)N. WATER HARVEST WAY (PRIVATE)(DKT.548, PG. 385) N. ORACLE ROAD - S T A T E R O U T E 7 7(DKT.11864, PG. 756)BIG WASH (PIMA COUNTY)SD 54"SD 54"SD 24"S 8"S 8"49299859775SD 54"20' PRIVATE SEWER ESMT.BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT15' WATER ESMT.BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENTSALTEDPIG1880 E. TA N G E R I N E R D . BLDG. HEI G H T = 2 4 'SALTEDPIGTUESDAYMORNINGVACANTBEST BUYBLDG. HT.=34'11695 N. ORACLE RD.BLDG. HEIGHT=18'-6"RED LOBSTERRIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES62.66'22'(BK.64, PG. 42)COMMON AREA "B"30'COCOEXISTING CHA N N E L TOWN OFORO VALLEYWELL SITEDKT.11279, PG.1751N4°45'38"W 468.21'173.64' S9°59'28" W ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 18BK. 64, PG.42ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 24BK. 64, PG.42ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 22BK. 64, PG.42MHHCSMHMHCBCBFHFHW3aS2aW3aW4aU1S2W4U4S2U4U4aW4EX. SD TO BE RELOCATEDW5W4W4S5S5U5U516'22'EXISTING CHANNEL54.25eg54.25hp53.0052.80hpSD 24"52.87Lp53.70eg53.20hp53.2053.2051.70eg52.79eg51.4053.20egNEW HC RAMPNEW HC RAMP51.00rim42.57inv52.30rim43.29inv220-04-3450PIMA COUNTYEX. MULTI-USE PATHSLIDINGCOHCSCB APARTMENT FFE=66.50GARAGE FFE=53.50HEIGHT= 59' MAXIMUMTOTAL BUILDING SF=±295,000 SFMECH. RM.FFE=53.5053.50gbRAMP UP52815 1528EXIT EXITEXITEXIT EXIT22626999999934BUILDING-2FFE=53.50±120,000 SFH=49' MAX.SALESFFE=53.50±10,000 SF8DRIVE THRURESTAURANTTRASH DUMPSTERTRASH DUMPSTER52.5053.5052.3051.8052.5053.5052.5052.1553.5052.3051.3050.7052.1052.3054.0053.5053.5053.5053.5053.0053.5053.5053.5053.5052.5053.0051.6052.5052.5052.5049.8049.7550.9051.1051.7051.5052.5052.5052.5052.3051.9051.6052.9053.8052.9053.8052.002%53.0052.5052.4052.008%52.2052.0053.5053.502%50.152%2%52.103.71%2.44%52.102.8%53.5053.0053.0053.0053.5053.0053.5053.0053.5053.5053.5053.5053.5053.5053.5053.5053.2053.5054.0053.0053.0053.5052.1052.101%52.401%1.75%53.0053.0053.0053.1052.5552.7553.0052.8052.7552.6053.3053.0053.2052.7553.3053.4053.4053.000.60%54.0053.5053.3053.1053.1052.551.8%53.0053.7053.5051.5051.3051.1050.9551.151%53.0053.0053.2053.0052.3052.0051.4051.4551.6551.602.31%50.5550.7550.502%50.7050.5050.7051.40±1%50.5550.7551.3052.7054.01eg54.23eg53.89eg53.45eg52.87eg53.19eg53.76eg54.52eg54.22eg53.29eg52.401.2%2.6%51.3050.69eg49.5049.00eg49.50eg49.80eg51.06eg54.0054.0053.000.50%52.5053.005%5%0.50%2%2%53.5053.5054.253%1.29% 1.67%50.2553.00GARAGE ENTRANCEGARAGE ENTRANCE3' HIGH SCREEN WALLEX. FH TO BE RELOCATEDTRASH DUMPSTERQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\8_CSP-OVVC_Sheets.dwg Plotted: Nov 18, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 0'150'100'50'DETAIL-1 (BUILDING LAYOUT)N.T.S.UTILITY ESMT. PER DKT. 9240, PG. 336EASEMENTS KEYNOTESS1S2aPRIVATE SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19 TOBE ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENTEXISTING SEWER MAIN AND MANHOLE TO BEDEMOLISHED AND REMOVED.WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 731 TO REMAINW3WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 731 TO BEABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENTW3aELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT.13571, PG. 919U4WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 711 TO REMAINW4WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 711 TO BEABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.EXISTING MAIN TO BE REMOVED AND RELOCATED.W4aELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT.13571, PG. 919 TO BEABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.U4aWATER ESMT. PER DKT.12265, PG. 6090W5SEWER ESMT. PER DKT.17787, PG. 1320S5ELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT.10062, PG. 1245U51"=50'DEVELOPMENT AREA 4 (ORACLE APARTMENTS AND RESTAURANT)SCALE:1"=50'ORACLE APARTMENTS BUILDING-1 (5 STORIES)GROUND LEVEL = 22 UNITS2ND LEVEL = 22 UNITS3RD & 4TH LEVEL = 54 UNITS5TH LEVEL= 27 UNITSTOTAL =125 UNITSRESTAURANT1 STORY3,520 SFGROUND LEVEL (45 UNITS)2ND LEVEL (46 UNITS)3RD AND 4TH LEVEL (112 UNITS)5TH LEVEL (27 UNITS)11011102110311051107110911111104110611081110111211131114111611181119112011211122111511172101210221032104210521062108210721092110211321122114211621182120212221152117211921212123MECHANICALROOMRAMP UP TO 2ND LEVEL STAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELLSTORAGEPARKINGPARKINGSTORAGESTAIRWELLELEVATORLOBBYSALESOFFICESTAIRWELLSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELL12011202120312051207120912111204120612081210121212131214121612181219122012211222121512172201220222032204220522072209220822102211221322122216221822202222222521152117211921212224RAMP DOWN TO 1ST LEVEL STAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELLSTORAGEPARKINGPARKINGSTORAGESTAIRWELLELEVATOROPEN TOBELOWSALESOFFICESTAIRWELLSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELLPARKING2206221413011302130313051307130913111304130613081310131213131314131613181320132213241326131513172301230323052307230923112313231423152317231923162320232223242326232823212323232523272329STAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLELEVATORSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELL231223181319132113231325132723102308230623042302CLUBHOUSERAMADAPOOLCOURT YARDSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELL3RD LEVEL1501150215031505150715091511150415061508151015121513151415161518152015221324152615151517STAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELLELEVATORSTAIRWELLSTAIRWELL/ELEVATORSTAIRWELL1519152115231527CLUBHOUSERAMADAPOOLCOURT YARDSTAIRWELL3RD LEVELROOF OVER140114021403140514071409141114041406140814101412141314141416141814201422142414261415141724012403240524072409241124132414241524172419241624202422242424262428242124232425242724292412241814191421142314251427241024082406240424024TH LEVELROOF OVER3RD LEVEL1525BUILDING-1BUILDING-2BUILDING-1BUILDING-2BUILDING-2BUILDING-1BUILDING-2BUILDING-1ORACLE APARTMENTS BUILDING-2 (4 STORIES)GROUND LEVEL = 23 UNITS2ND LEVEL = 24 UNITS3RD & 4TH LEVEL = 58 UNITSTOTAL =105 UNITSPARKING2ND FLOOR LEVELOPEN TOBELOWOPEN TOBELOWPARKING2ND FLOOR LEVELDECK(TYP.)DECK(TYP.)DECK(TYP.)DECK(TYP.)DECK(TYP.)DECK (TYP.)DECK(TYP.)DECK(TYP.)DECK(TYP.)DECK(TYP.)DECK (TYP.)DECK(TYP.)8NOTES:DRIVEWAY ACCESSFOR MECHANICALROOM ONLY ONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYW W W W W W W W W WWWWWWW W W WW(BK.64, PG. 42)N. WATER HARVEST WAY (PRIVATE)939.0040.5042.2041.2542.0041.50hp40.20rim36.75inv41.50rim37.20inv42.00rim38.40inv(DKT.548, PG. 3 8 5 ) N. ORACLE R O A D - S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIESORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 28BK. 64, PG.42COCOH C S SD 2 4 " S D 2 4 "SD 24"SD 24"CBCBCBCB42.00rim39.00invTDW4W4aS1S1W4U4U4U4U4aU4IN AND OUTHEIGHT=25'11455 N. ORACLE RD.S1W4U4WATERSHEDBOUNDARYEXISTING CHA N N E L RETAINING WALLMANHOLEACCESS VIA THEEXISTING PUBLICSEWER EASEMENTEXISTING PUBLICSEWER EASEMENTSCREENED LOADING BAYSEE DETAIL 1, SHEET 9.ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 26BK. 64, PG.423,500 S.FORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 27BK. 64, PG.428,000 S.F.ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 29BK. 64, PG.428,000 S.F.Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\9_CSP-OVVC_Sheets.dwg Plotted: Nov 18, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 0'150'100'50'EXISTING EASEMENTS KEYNOTESDEVELOPMENT AREA 5 (ORACLE HOTEL)SCALE:1"=50'PUBLIC SEWER ESMT. PER BK. 62, PG. 19S1WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 711 TO REMAINW4WATER ESMT. PER DKT.13671, PG. 711 TO BE ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.EXISTING MAIN TO BE REMOVED AND RELOCATED.W4aELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT.13571, PG. 919U4ELECTRIC ESMT. PER DKT.13571, PG. 919 TO BE ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.U4aSEWER ESMT. PER DKT. 7787, PG. 1320S51"=50'91SCREENED LOADING BAYMASONRY SCREENWALL PAINTED TO MATCH BUILDING.SELF CLOSING SELF LATCHING STEELOVERHEAD SERVICE DOORLATTICE SCREENPAINTED TO MATCH BUILDING.ADJACENT BUILDINGAS OCCURS STOPONLY ONLYSTOPONLYONLYONLYSTOPONLYSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPS T O P STOP STOP W OHESTOP(BK.64, PG. 42)N. WATER HARVEST WAY (PRIVATE)(DKT.548, PG. 385) N. ORACLE ROAD - S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 (DKT.11864, PG. 756)BIG WASH (PIMA COUNTY)11695 N. ORACLE RD.BLDG. HEIGHT=18'-6"7,028 SFRED LOBSTERRIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIESCOORO VALLEYMARKETPLACELOT 24BK. 64, PG.42ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 22BK. 64, PG.42HCSFHORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 25BK. 64, PG.42ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 23BK. 64, PG.42POOL87999998883999696457889554599995568889211625 N. ORACLE RD.BLDG. HEIGHT=21'4,355 SFCHASE BANK618'24'18'24'20'20'24'20'20'24'20'24'20'20' 24' 18'24'16'30'ORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 26BK. 64, PG.423,500 S.FORO VALLEYMARKET PLACELOT 27BK. 64, PG.428,000 S.F.C.A."A"BK. 64, PG.42 C.A. "A" BK. 64, P G . 4 2C.A. "D"PUBLICFLOODPLAIN/PARKBK. 64, PG.42±60'EX. FIRE HYDRANTTO BE RELOCATEDEX. UTILITIES TOBE RELOCATED46.5546.5047.5047.5547.7348.0047.0047.5046.8046.1947.0546.8346.4746.3946.0047.0046.9047.0045.2545.50ORACLEHOTEL4-STORIESFFE=48.70±65,600 SF47.00hp46.2046.0046.00CURB OPENINGINTO LANDSCAPE46.5046.5046.2045.9546.2045.8045.5045.7046.0045.8045.5552.8046.2045.0044.80SD 24"45.3646.26eg45.95eg46.90eg46.60eg46.00eg44.30eg47.00eg48.5048.2548.2048.2047.7047.7047.7047.7047.7047.4048.2048.5048.3049.00eg48.40eg49.00eg48.40egSCREENED LOADING BAYSEE DETAIL 1, SHEET 9.47.00Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\04 Platting\02 CSP\10_CSP-OVVC_Sheets.dwg Plotted: Nov 18, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFREF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: MAY 2020. REVISED NOVEMBER 2021LOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANOV 2001300SHEET OF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526OF 101 1 - 1 8 - 202 1 0'150'100'50'1"=50'DEVELOPMENT AREA 6 - LOCATION AND DEVELOPMENT SCHEMATIC FOR THE ORACLE HOTELSCALE:1"=50'ORACLE HOTEL4 STORIES108 ROOMSORACLE APARTMENTS (DEVELOPMENT AREA-4) SEE SHEET 810NOTES: STOPSTOP STOPSTOPONLY ONLY STOPONLYONLYONLYSTOPONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLY ONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYSTOPONLYONLYSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPST O P STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTO P STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP YIELDYIELD STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPYIELDYIELD YIELDYIELD YIELDYIELD STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPOHESTOP STOPONLYQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\02 Landscape\06 CLP\Plans\CLP-OVVC-1.dwgInc.TheWLBGroupREF CASE# OV12-04-30SHEET OF 6 CONTOUR INTERVAL=1'1 1 - 1 9 - 2 1 WLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 SEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFSCALE: NOVEMBER 20212001300CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN FORORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERLOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DOF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 20090270526LOCATION MAPA PORTION OF SEC. 31, & 32 T11S R14E AND PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA G&SRM, TOWN OF ORO VALLEY,UNSUBDIVIDEDBK.37(M&P), PG.71 PADCATALINA SHADOWS ESTATESTANGERINE ROAD3" = 1 MILET11ST12SBIG WASH BK 51(M&P), PG 011DESERT SPRINGSSTATE PARKCDO WASHNEIGHBORHOOD 4316532CATALINAORA C L E R O A D RANCHOVISTOSO BLVD.NEIGHBORHOOD 331302932UNSUBDIVIDEDR14ECOMMERCIAL CENTERNEIGHBORHOOD 2A PORTION OF SEC. 5 T12S R14E,THIS PROJECTPIMA COUNTYBIG WASHT.O.V. CITY LIMITS PARK D R TIO NINNOVABK.45, PG.48PALISADES POINTER1-36R1-144 RV PADRV PADR.V. PAD14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.SHEET 1 SHEET 3SHEET 2 SHEET INDEXCOVER SHEETOVERALL SITE PLANCONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANSHEET 4SHEET 6DATEPLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATORAPPROVAL0' 150'300' 450'ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERCONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN FORLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTOWNER/DEVELOPERTHE WLB GROUP, INC.4444 E. BROADWAY BLVD.TUCSON, AZ. 85711PHONE: (520) 881-7480ATTN: GARY GRIZZLEGGRIZZLE@WLBGROUP.COMTOWN WESTATTN: JIM HORVATH555 E. RIVER ROAD, SUITE 201TUCSON, AZ 85704PHONE: (520) 615-7707JIM@TOWNWESTREALTY.COM1GENERAL NOTESTHE OVERALL GROSS AREA OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS 121.2 ACRES. THIS CONCEPTUALSITE PLAN IS SPECIFIC TO THE FOLLOWING AREAS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT:DEVELOPMENT AREA 1 (TANGERINE APARTMENTS): 12.4± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 2 (TANGERINE HOTEL): 3.6± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 (ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT): 11.6± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 4 (ORACLE APARTMENTS): 7.2± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 5 (ORACLE HOTEL): 3.1± ACRES.COMMON AREAS / OPEN SPACE SHALL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE OROVALLEY VILLAGE CENTER.EXISTING ZONING IS RANCHO VISTOSO PAD C-2.BUFFERYARD TYPES: 30' BUFFERYARD "B" ADJACENT TO TANGERINE ROAD ANDORACLE ROAD, EXCEPT AS MODIFIED BY THE REQUESTED RANCHO VISTOS PADAMENDMENT.ASSURANCES FOR LANDSCAPING AND RE-VEGETATION BONDS MUST BE POSTED PRIORTO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS.PROPERTY OWNER SHALL MAINTAIN BUFFERYARD PLANTINGS TO ENSUREUNOBSTRUCTED VISIBILITY TO MOTORISTS. ALL SHRUBS, ACCENTS, ANDGROUNDCOVERS SHALL NOT EXCEED THIRTY (30) INCHES IN HEIGHT WITHIN SITEVISIBILITY TRIANGLES. TREES WITHIN SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES WILL BE MAINTAINEDTO ENSURE THAT BRANCHES / FOLIAGE ARE NOT BELOW A HEIGHT OF SIX (6') FEET.IN THE EVENT OF ABANDONMENT OF THE SITE AFTER GRADING / DISTURBANCE OFNATURAL AREAS, DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE RE-VEGETATED WITH A NON-IRRIGATEDHYDRO SEED MIX FROM OVZCR ADDENDUM D: APPROVED REVEGETATION SEED MIX.ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS CONTAINED IN THECURRENT EDITIONS OF THE ARIZONA NURSERY ASSOCIATION'S GROWERS COMMITTEERECOMMENDED TREE SPECIFICATIONS AND THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OFNURSERYMEN AS TO SIZE, CONDITION AND APPEARANCE.PROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE TEMPORARY IRRIGATIONSYSTEM AS LONG AS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO TRANSITION PLANTS OVER TO NATURALSOURCES. ANY PLANT MATERIALS THAT DIE IN TRANSITION, FOR ANY REASONS, SHALLBE REPLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 27.6.E.4., MAINTENANCE.LANDSCAPE SHALL CONFORM TO ORO VALLEY LANDSCAPE CODE.MITIGATION OF SURVEYED PLANTS IN THE NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION PLAN WILL BEINCORPORATED INTO THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN.ALL PLANTS TO BE IRRIGATED WITH AN UNDERGROUND AUTOMATIC DRIP IRRIGATIONSYSTEM.HYDROSEED ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY GRADING OPERATIONS AROUND LOTS ANDALONG ROADS. DECOMPOSED GRANITE SHALL BE PLACED AT ENTRIES.LANDSCAPE AREAS THAT ARE SUSCEPTIBLE TO DAMAGE BY PEDESTRIAN OR AUTOTRAFFIC SHALL BE PROTECTED BY CURBS, TREE GUARDS OR OTHER DEVICES.LANDSCAPE SHALL BE DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENT, SAND AND GRAVEL BEINGCARRIED INTO THE STREETS BY STORM WATER OR OTHER RUNOFF.LANDSCAPE DESIGN ENABLES ADEQUATE PLANT SPACING TO ENSURE SURVIVABILITYAT PLANT MATURITY.ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS ARE TO BE FINISHED WITH A NATURAL TOPPING OF AT LEASTTWO (2) INCHES IN DEPTH.TREES AND LARGE SHRUBS SHALL BE ADEQUATELY SUPPORTED WHEN PLANTED.ANY SPADED OR BOXED TREE TRANSPLANTED ON SITE THAT DIES DUE TO NEGLECT ORLACK OF MAINTENANCE SHALL BE REPLACED WITH THE SAME SIZE AND SPECIES OFTHE ORIGINAL SALVAGED TREE, AS REQUIRED BY THE SALVAGE PLAN.THE LIMITS OF GRADING SHALL BE STAKED IN THE FIELD, IN ACCORDANCE WITHSECTION 27.6.B.7.c.ii. DISTURBANCE OUTSIDE THE APPROVED GRADING LIMITS SHALLNOT BE PERMITTED.THE DEVELOPER SHALL REPLACE REMOVED OR DAMAGED PLANT MATERIALS WITH LIKESIZE AND SPECIES, AND SHALL MAINTAIN AND GUARANTEE THE REPLACEMENT PLANTMATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF THREE (3) YEARS.NO SALVAGE OF PLANTS REGULATED BY THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT AND/OR THEARIZONA NATIVE PLANT LAW MAY OCCUR WITHOUT THE ISSUANCE OF THEAPPROPRIATE PERMIT BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.DEEP ROOTED VEGETATION AND TREES SHALL NOT BE PLANTED CLOSER THAN 7.5FEET FROM A PUBLIC WATER LINE. EXCEPTIONS FOR ALTERNATIVE DESIGN SOLUTIONSSUCH AS ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE CONSIDERED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.LANDSCAPE MATERIALS SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT SIGHT DISTANCES OR VEHICLETURNING MOVEMENTS.ALL PLANT AND SHRUB LOCATIONS ARE PRELIMINARY. PLANT QUANTITIES SHOWN AREAPPROXIMATE; FINAL LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES WILL BE SHOWN ON THE FINALLANDSCAPE PLAN.1"=150'-0"BIG WASHWATER HARVEST WAYTANGERINE ROADORA C L E R O A D SHEET 5CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANCONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANCONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANTANGERINE APARTMENTSTANGERINE HOTELENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTORACLE APARTMENTSORACLE HOTEL25. STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPONLY ONLY STOPONLYONLYONLYSTOPONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLY ONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYSTOPONLYONLYSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPST O P STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTO P STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP YIELDYIELD STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPYIELDYIELD YIELDYIELD YIELDYIELD STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPONLYQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\02 Landscape\06 CLP\Plans\CLP-OVVC-2.dwgInc.TheWLBGroupREF CASE# OV12-04-30SHEET OF 6 CONTOUR INTERVAL=1'1 1 - 1 9 - 2 1 WLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 SEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFSCALE: NOVEMBER 20212001300CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN FORORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERLOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DOF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 200902705260' 150'300' 450'2BIG WASHWATER HARVEST WAYTANGERINE ROAD30' BUFFERYARD BORA C L E R O A D NATURAL OPEN SPACENATURAL OPEN SPACENATURAL OPEN SPACENATURAL OPENSPACETANGERINE APARTMENTSTANGERINE HOTELNO BUFFERYARDREQUIREDENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTORACLE APARTMENTSNO BUFFERYARDREQUIREDNO BUFFERYARDREQUIREDNO BUFFERYARDREQUIRED30' BUFFERYARD B30' BUFFERYARD B1"=150'-0"SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 6WALMARTCENTURYTHEATERORACLE HOTELOVERALL CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN STOPSTOPONLY ONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLYONLY STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPWWWWWWWWWWW W W WWWW W W W W W WWWWWWWW WWWWW W STOPSTOPWWWWSTOPONLYQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\02 Landscape\06 CLP\Plans\CLP-OVVC-3.dwgInc.TheWLBGroupREF CASE# OV12-04-30SHEET OF 6 CONTOUR INTERVAL=1'1 1 - 1 9 - 2 1 WLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 SEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFSCALE: NOVEMBER 20212001300CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN FORORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERLOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DOF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 200902705263TREESSHRUBS/GROUNDCOVERACCENTSBIG WASH1. LANDSCAPE TO CONFORM TO ORO VALLEY CODE.2. MITIGATION OF SURVEYED PLANTS IN THE NATIVE PLANTPRESERVATION PLAN WILL BE INCORPORATED IN THE LANDSCAPEDESIGN.3. ALL TREE, SHRUB/GROUNDCOVER AND ACCENT LOCATIONS AREPRELIMINARY.4. PLANT QUANTITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. FINAL QUANTITIESWILL BE SHOWN ON THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN.5. FENCE DETAIL TO BE PROVIDED DURING FINAL DESIGN REVIEW.OPENINGS IN FENCE WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PEDESTRIANCONNECTION TO EXISTING MULTI-USE PATH.STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOP (SEE BANK PROTECTION PLANS)26642664 2664 26642664 0' 50'100' 150'EXISTING MULTI-USE PATHEXISTING MULTI-USEPATHEXISTINGMULTI-USEPATHTANGERINE APARTMENTS AND TANGERINE HOTELCONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANPOOLEXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN1"=50'-0"PROPOSED DRAINAGESTRUCTUREEXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS TO REMAINWATER HARVEST WAYTANGERINE ROADTANGERINEAPARTMENTSTANGERINEHOTEL30' BUFFERYARD B:REQUIREMENTSPARTIALLY MET BYEXISTINGVEGETATION TOREMAINGYMPROPOSEDMULTI-USEPATHPROPOSEDFIREACCESSLANEPROPOSED FIREACCESS LANEOFFICEENTRYENTRYENTRYNOT TO SCALETYPICAL SECTION A-A'1AA'PROPOSED DOG PARKTANGERINEAPARTMENTSEXISTING BANKPROTECTIONBIG WASHPROPOSEDADDITIONALD.G. FIREACCESS LANEEXISTING 12'MULTI - USEPATHPROPOSED28' FIREACCESSSMALL PLANTSPROPOSED FENCEPROPOSEDFENCEPROPOSED FENCE(SEE NOTE 5)PROPOSEDFENCENEW RIGHT OF WAYLINE / PROPERTYBOUNDARYPROPERTYBOUNDARYPROPERTYBOUNDARYEXISTING ELECTRICALEQUIPMENT TO REMAINSEWER LINECONCRETE AREANOTESPLANT LEGEND SDSTOPONLYONLYONLYSTOPSTOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPYIELDYIELD YIELDYIELD STOPSTOPW WWWWW W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W WWWWQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\02 Landscape\06 CLP\Plans\CLP-OVVC-4.dwgInc.TheWLBGroupREF CASE# OV12-04-30SHEET OF 6 CONTOUR INTERVAL=1'1 1 - 1 9 - 2 1 WLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 SEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFSCALE: NOVEMBER 20212001300CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN FORORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERLOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DOF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 2009027052641. LANDSCAPE TO CONFORM TO ORO VALLEY CODE.2. MITIGATION OF SURVEYED PLANTS IN THE NATIVE PLANTPRESERVATION PLAN WILL BE INCORPORATED IN THE LANDSCAPEDESIGN.3. ALL TREE, SHRUB/GROUNDCOVER AND ACCENT LOCATIONS AREPRELIMINARY.4. PLANT QUANTITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. FINAL QUANTITIESWILL BE SHOWN ON THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN.0' 50'100' 150'STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOP (SEE BANK PROTECTION PLANS)26642664 2664 266426641"=50'-0"BUBBLE MACHINE BY ARCHITECTWITH SHADE CANOPYWADING POOL WITHSHADE CANOPYSPLASH PADSAND BARSPLASH PADDECORATIVE PAVINGENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTCONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANOR A C L E R O A D ( S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 )TANGERINE ROADTREESSHRUBS/GROUNDCOVERACCENTSEXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS TO REMAINPLAYGROUND & EQUIPMENTWITH SHADE CANOPYEXISTING SIDEWALK TOREMAINGAZEBOWALKING PATHDECORATIVE PAVINGRETAIL/HOT E L RETAIL/HOT E L NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY LINENEW R I G H T - O F - W A Y L I N E SCREENEDLOADING AREACENTURY THEATERSPECIAL EVENTSPACE / OVERFLOWPARKINGHOTEL POOLWITH FENCE4' HIGH FENCE6' HIGH FENCEARTIFICIAL TURFFENCESAND BEACH WITHSHADE CANOPYNOTESPLANT LEGEND STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPYIELDYIELD STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPYIELDYIELD STOPSTOPWW W W W W WWWW W WWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\02 Landscape\06 CLP\Plans\CLP-OVVC-5.dwgInc.TheWLBGroupREF CASE# OV12-04-30SHEET OF 6 CONTOUR INTERVAL=1'1 1 - 1 9 - 2 1 WLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 SEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFSCALE: NOVEMBER 20212001300CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN FORORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERLOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DOF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 200902705265BIG WASHEXISTING MULTI-USEPATH1. LANDSCAPE TO CONFORM TO ORO VALLEY CODE.2. MITIGATION OF SURVEYED PLANTS IN THE NATIVE PLANTPRESERVATION PLAN WILL BE INCORPORATED IN THE LANDSCAPEDESIGN.3. ALL TREE, SHRUB/GROUNDCOVER AND ACCENT LOCATIONS AREPRELIMINARY.4. PLANT QUANTITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. FINAL QUANTITIESWILL BE SHOWN ON THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN.0' 50'100' 150' STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOP STOPSTOP STOPSTOP (SEE BANK PROTECTION PLANS)26642664 2664 266426641"=50'-0"ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTCONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANWATER HARVEST WAYRESTAURANTEXISTING TRANSITCENTEREXISTINGSTEAKHOUSEAND BAREXISTINGOLIVEGARDENRESTAURANTPETCOCOST PLUSWORLD MARKETBIG LOTSRETAILPATIOPATIOCENTRALCOURTYARDRESTAURANTDROP-OFFSERVICESERVICERESTAURANTPATIODSW SHOESTURFPLAYAREANOTESPLANT LEGEND STOPSTOPSTOPST O P STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOP STOPSTOPW W W W W W W WWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W WWW W W WOHEOHEOHEOHEOHESTOP STOPONLYSTOPONLYSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPST O P STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWW W W WWOHESTOP Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\02 Landscape\06 CLP\Plans\CLP-OVVC-6.dwgInc.TheWLBGroupREF CASE# OV12-04-30SHEET OF 6 CONTOUR INTERVAL=1'1 1 - 1 9 - 2 1 WLB NO. 185050-WT-03-0105 SEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFSCALE: NOVEMBER 20212001300CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN FORORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERLOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DOF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 200902705266EXISTING MULTI-USEPATHGENERAL NOTES1. LANDSCAPE TO CONFORM TO ORO VALLEY CODE.2. MITIGATION OF SURVEYED PLANTS IN THE NATIVE PLANTPRESERVATION PLAN WILL BE INCORPORATED IN THE LANDSCAPEDESIGN.3. ALL TREE, SHRUB/GROUNDCOVER AND ACCENT LOCATIONS AREPRELIMINARY.4. PLANT QUANTITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. FINAL QUANTITIESWILL BE SHOWN ON THE FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN.0' 50'100' 150' STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOPSTOP STOPSTOP (SEE BANK PROTECTION PLANS)26642664 2664 2664 26641"=50'-0"RESTAURANTLOBBY / RETAILAPARTMENTSBIG WASHORACLE APARTMENTS AND ORACLE HOTELCONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANPLANT LEGENDTREESSHRUBS/GROUNDCOVERACCENTSEXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS TO REMAINWATER HARVEST WAYORACLE R O A D ( S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 )EXISTING TILLY'S30' BUFFERYARD BWATER HARVEST WAYEXISTING MULTI-USEPATHORACLE HOTELORACLE R O A D ( S T A T E R O U T E 7 7 ) STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOP STOP STOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPONLYLOCATION MAPA PORTION OF SEC. 31, & 32 T11S R14E AND PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA G&SRM, TOWN OF ORO VALLEY,UNSUBDIVIDEDBK.37(M&P), PG.71 PADCATALINA SHADOWS ESTATESTANGERINE ROAD3" = 1 MILET11ST12SBIG WASH BK 51(M&P), PG 011DESERT SPRINGSSTATE PARKCDO WASHNEIGHBORHOOD 4316532CATALINAORA C L E R O A D RANCHOVISTOSO BLVD.NEIGHBORHOOD 331302932UNSUBDIVIDEDR14ECOMMERCIAL CENTERNEIGHBORHOOD 2A PORTION OF SEC. 5 T12S R14E,PIMA COUNTYBIG WASHT.O.V. CITY LIMITS PARK D R TIO NINNOVABK.45, PG.48PALISADES POINTER1-36R1-144 RV PADRV PADR.V. PADSHEET 1 SHEET 2 SHEET INDEXCOVER SHEETRECREATION SITE PLAN0' 200'400' 600'ORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERRECREATION AREA PLAN FORQ:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\02 Landscape\07 RAP\RAP-OVVC-1.dwg Plotted: Nov 19, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03REF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: NOVEMBER 2021SHEET OF 2RECREATION AREA PLAN FORORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFLOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DOF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 2009027052620013004.5.6.3.GENERAL NOTES2.1.RECREATION AREA CALCULATIONS RECREATION PROVISIONSTHIS RECREATIONAL AREA PLAN IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS ANDINTENTIONS OF SECTION 23.7.E (R-6 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) OF THEOVZCR.THE OVERALL GROSS AREA OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS 121.2 ACRES. THIS PLAN IS SPECIFIC TO THEFOLLOWING AREAS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT:DEVELOPMENT AREA 1 (TANGERINE APARTMENTS): 12.4± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 2 (TANGERINE HOTEL): 3.6± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 (ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT): 11.6± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 4 (ORACLE APARTMENTS): 7.2± ACRES.DEVELOPMENT AREA 5 (ORACLE HOTEL): 3.1± ACRES.EXISTING ZONING: RANCHO VISTOSO PAD C-2GROSS AREA OF THIS DEVELOPMENT = 121.2 ACRESCOMMON AREAS SHALL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.ALL RECREATION EQUIPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH CURRENT ADA REQUIREMENTS.PROVIDED:THIS PROJECT1.REQUIRED RECREATION AREAPER OVZC SECTION 23.7.E DEVELOPMENT OF R-6 ZONED PROPERTY SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 30% OF THE NET LOT AREA AS OPEN SPACE. NOT LESS THAN 50% OF THE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE SHALL BE PROVIDED IN A SINGLE COMMON AREA.NET LOT AREA30% OF NET 50% OF 30%LOT AREA(REC AREA REQUIREMENT)TANGERINE APARTMENTS 12.4 ACRES3.7 ACRES1.9 ACRESORACLE APARTMENTS 7.2 ACRES2.2 ACRES1.1 ACRESTOTAL RECREATION AREAREQUIRED5.9 ACRES3.0 ACRESTANGERINEAPARTMENTSCLUBHOUSE & POOLENTERTAINMENTDISTRICTEXISTING MULTI-USEPATHWAY (LOOP)ACTIVE RECREATION:- PLAYGROUNDS (2)- FITNESS CENTERS (2)- SPLASH PAD (2)- POOLS (2)1ORACLE APARTMENTSTANGERINE ROADORACL E R O A D STATE H W Y 7 7 1" = 200'PASSIVE RECREATION:- BENCHES- WADING POOL- TRAILS / WALKING PATHS- NATURAL TURF FREE PLAY- RAMADAS- EVENTS AREATOTAL AMOUNT OF PARKING REQUIRED IS 5 SPACES PER ACRE.TOTAL PARKING SPACES REQUIRED = 30TOTAL PARKING SPACES PROVIDED = EXISTING AND PROPOSED PARKING WITHINTHE CENTER WILL BE UTILIZED AS RECREATION AREA PARKING.RECREATION AREA PARKING CALCULATIONS1.REQUIRED RECREATION PROVISIONS: 3 ACTIVE AND 5 PASSIVE (OVZC 23.7.E.7.a)2.TOT-LOT RECREATION REQUIREMENT (OVZC 23.7.E.7.b)SEATING FACING PLAY AREA DRINKING FOUNTAINCOVERED PLAY EQUIPMENT SAFETY SURFACEBIKE PARKING (4) REFUSE RECEPTACLETURF PICNIC TABLEEXISTING MULTI-USEPATHWAY (LOOP)DATEPLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATORAPPROVALTHE WLB GROUP, INC.4444 E. BROADWAY BLVD.TUCSON, AZ. 85711PHONE: (520) 881-7480ATTN: GARY GRIZZLEGGRIZZLE@WLBGROUP.COMTOWN WESTATTN: JIM HORVATH555 E. RIVER ROAD, SUITE 201TUCSON, AZ 85704PHONE: (520) 615-7707JIM@TOWNWESTREALTY.COMLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTOWNER/DEVELOPER2.RECREATION AREA PROVIDED:EVENT SPACE IN NORTH AREAOF ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT: 0.3 AC.CENTRAL WATER/PLAYGROUNDAREA OF ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT: 1.5 AC.SOUTH COURTYARD AREA OFENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT:0.7 AC.PARK1.0 AC.TOTAL: 3.5 AC.3. PER OVZC SECTION 23.7.E.3.A EACH LOT SHALL CONTAIN A MINIMUM OF 250 SQUAREFEET OF USABLE OUTDOOR LIVING SPACE FOR EACH DWELLING UNIT EXCLUSIVE OFFRONT YARDS. USABLE OUTDOOR LIVING SPACE TABLETANGERINE APARTMENTS (500 UNITS) REQUIRED PROVIDED 2.86 AC.DOG PARK:8,500 SFPOOL DECK ANDASSOCIATEDAMENITIES:33,000 SFPRIVATEBALCONIES:58,540 SFEXISTING MULTI-USEPATH FROMAPARTMENT SITE TOENTERTAINMENTDISTRICT:42,000 SFTOTAL142,040 SF (3.3 AC.)ORACLE APARTMENTS (230 UNITS) REQUIRED PROVIDED 1.32 AC.POOL DECK ANDASSOCIATEDAMENITIES:31,000 SFPRIVATEBALCONIES:21,870 SFEXISTING MULTI-USEPATH FROMAPARTMENT SITE TOENTERTAINMENTDISTRICT:18,000 SFTOTAL70,870 SF (1.6 AC.)TANGERINE HOTELORACLE HOTEL11TOTAL SF OF UNITS (THERE ARE NO GROUND FLOOR UNITS): 585,400.22TOTAL SF OF UNITS (EXCLUDING GROUND LEVEL UNITS): 218,700. STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP STOPSTOP STOPWWWWWWWOHESDSDSDSTOPSDSD 0'50'100' 150' Q:\185050\WT-03 - Town West\02 Landscape\07 RAP\RAP-OVVC-2.dwg Plotted: Nov 19, 2021Inc.TheWLBGroupWLB NO. 185050-WT-03REF CASE# OV12-04-30SCALE: NOVEMBER 2021SHEET OF 2RECREATION AREA PLAN FORORO VALLEY VILLAGE CENTERSEC. 31 & 32 T11S R14E AND SEC. 5, T12S R14E, G&SRMTOWN OF ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONABEING A PORTION OFLOTS 1 THRU 31 AND COMMON AREAS A, B & DOF THE ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE AMENDED FINAL PLATBOOK 62, PAGE 19, SEQUENCE NUMBER 200902705262001300TANGERINE APARTMENTS CLUBHOUSE & POOLENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTCENTRAL AREAENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTNORTH AREA20' 100'200' 300'0' 200'400' 600'AMENITIES TO INCLUDE:- PLAY EQUIPMENT- SPLASH PAD (2)- WADING POOL- SAND BAR- SAND BEACH- BUBBLE MACHINEAMENITIES TO INCLUDE:- GAZEBO- NEW BOULDER TRAIL- EXISTING WALKING PATH- SPECIAL EVENT SPACE- SWIMMING POOL- FITNESS CENTER- CONNECTION TO MULTI-USE ASPHALT PATH- TRAIL CONNECTION TO ORO VALLEY / PIMACOUNTY TRAIL #33- MOVIE THEATRE-BBQ- SWIMMING POOL- SEATING- CLUBHOUSE- TRAIL CONNECTION TO ORO VALLEY/PIMACOUNTY TRAIL #33- BBQENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTSOUTH AREAAS SHOWN 1ST FLOORPOOL & GYM POOL DECKMULTI-USE PATHWAYMULTI-USEPATHWAYPOOL DOG PARK POOL DECK &CLUBHOUSE CLUBHOUSE POOL DECKPOOL &LAGUNA0' 50'100' 150'ORACLE APARTMENTSPOOL DECKRAMADACLUBHOUSERAMADA0' 50'100' 150' POOL DECKSPAAMENITIES TO INCLUDE:- CENTRAL COURTYARD- PARK - 1 ACRETYPICAL SHADE CANOPYPLAYGROUND AND EQUIPMENT WITH SHADE CANOPYPLAYGROUND APPROPRIATE SURFACETRANSIT CENTER &RESTAURANTSPECIAL EVENT SPACE/OVERFLOW PARKINGDRAINAGE/NATURALAREABUBBLE MACHINE WITH SHADE CANOPYARTIFICIAL TURFNEW BOULDER TRAILCONCRETEGAZEBOEXISTING WALKING PATHCONCRETECONCRETEHOTEL POOLSAND BARSAND BEACH WITHPARK - 1 ACREGRASSCENTRAL COURTYARDCONCRETE OR PAVERSOR SIMILAR SURFACERESTAURANTRESTAURANTSSPLASH PADWADING POOL WITH SHADE CANOPYTHE KEGCONCRETEDECORATIVE ROCKSPLASH PADDECORATIVE ROCKPASSENGER DROP OFFCONCRETEDECORATIVE ROCKSHADE STRUCTUREFENCEFENCESHADE STRUCTURE, TYP.SHADE CANOPYPERGOLAPEDESTRIAN WALKWAYWITH SEATING QUIKTRIP STORE #1481 ORACLE/ORANGE GROVE Pima County, AZ DUE DILIGENCE PACKAGE 06.22.2011 Prepared For: Town West 555 E. River Road, Suite 201 Tucson, Arizona 85704 Prepared By: The WLB Group, Inc. Robert G. Longaker III, P LA, AICP Director of Planning 4444 East Broadway Boulevard Tucson, Arizona 85711 (520) 881-7480 WLB Job No. 185050-WT-03 June 1, 2020 Revised November 23, 2020 Revised J une 1 , 2021 Oro Valley Village Center Southwest Corner of Oracle Road and Tangerine Road Oro Valley, AZ Viewshed Analysis and View Preservation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 B. Viewshed Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 1 C. View Preservation Plan ................................................................................................................. 1 D. Observations and Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 3 EXHIBITS Exhibit A: Location Map Exhibit B: Key Vantage Point Perspective Location Map Exhibit C: Topography and Building Heights Exhibits D.1.A – D.12.A: Viewshed Perspectives – Existing Condition Exhibits D.1.B – D.12.B: Post Development Viewshed Perspectives 1 A. Introduction This viewshed analysis and view preservation plan has been prepared for the Oro Valley Village Center project (formerly known as Oro Valley Marketplace). It is being submitted in conjunction with a proposed amendment to the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development (PAD) and a Conceptual Site Plan (CSP). B. Viewshed Analysis The primary purpose of the viewshed analysis is to identify vistas across the site, with primary focus on the views of the Catalina Mountains lying east of the site. This viewshed analysis was conducted from the existing residential neighborhoods to the west of the site. These neighborhoods include Catalina Shadows, Catalina Shadows Estates, Palisades Point and Palisades South. The vantage points chosen are primarily located in the eastern portions of these subdivisions where visibility to the subject property is greatest. Also, two viewshed perspectives are provided from Oracle Road, east of the Oracle Apartments and from Tangerine Road, north of the Tangerine Apartments. Exhibit B identifies the location of the viewshed perspectives that were chosen for this report. Exhibit C identifies the topography of the area and the heights of existing and proposed buildings. Exhibits D.1.A through D.10.A illustrate the current views from each of these locations. C. View Preservation Plan 1. Methodology. In order to demonstrate how the buildings on the site will appear in a post developed condition, a computer model was created. The following is a brief description of the methodology used to create this model: • AutoCAD linework was used to provide accurate locations of the buildings on the site. • The AutoCAD linework was then imported into Google Sketchup and draped over existing terrain for the site. • The Sketchup file was then exported to Google Earth, allowing the three- dimensional proposed buildings to be viewed from vantage points off the property. • The key vantage points selected as part of the viewshed analysis were used and still images were created from ground level at these same locations. Actual photos were used to show existing foreground vegetation. 2 Exhibit B identifies the location of the viewshed perspectives that were chosen for this report. Exhibits D.1.B through D.12.B illustrate views from each of these locations in the post developed condition. For ease of comparison, the existing viewshed appears immediately before the post developed simulated condition. 2. Focus of the Study. The focus of the post developed condition model is on four proposed development areas as follows: The Tangerine Apartments This part of the proposed development is located in the northwestern portion of the site and consists of an apartment complex containing up to five-story buildings and a total of 500 units. The maximum height of the buildings is 75 feet. Tangerine Hotel This hotel is located in the northwestern portion of the site and immediately east of the Tangerine Apartments. It is anticipated to be a four-story building with a maximum height of 49 feet containing 150 rooms. Oracle Hotel This hotel is located in the southeastern portion of the site and near the intersection of Water Harvest Way and Oracle Road. It is anticipated to be a four-story building with a maximum height of 49 feet containing 120 rooms. Oracle Apartments This part of the proposed development is located in the southeastern portion of the site and consists of a podium style multi-family residential building. The maximum height for this building is 59 feet. 230 units are proposed. 3. Architectural Character The architectural character for the proposed buildings has been conceptually developed and is illustrated on the post development viewshed perspectives. Architectural style and character will be consistent the Rancho Vistoso Architectural and Landscape Community Association Design Guidelines and the Design Guidelines of the Town of Oro Valley. Conceptual architecture is not yet available for the other proposed buildings and as such these buildings are shown in tan on the post development viewshed perspectives. Please note that the purpose of this view preservation plan is to provide a representation of the proposed building locations and heights as viewed from offsite locations to the west of the site. It is not intended to demonstrate the specific 3 architectural character of the buildings, which will be done through the Conceptual Architecture process of the town. 4.Topography Topography is a significant consideration in the viewshed analysis and viewshed preservation plan. The eastern portions of the above-mentioned subdivisions are higher in elevation than the project site. Depending on the location, the residential subdivisions are 15 to 50 feet higher than the site. The foothills area of the Catalina Mountains east of the site begin at an approximate elevation of 2,700, which is approximately 20 feet higher than the highest developed portions of the site. The mountains rise to an elevation just over 9,000 feet. Refer to Exhibit C: Topography and Building Heights. The four buildings discussed in this analysis are proposed to have finished floor elevations that are lower than the elevations of the adjacent roads. The proposed finished floor elevations, per the Conceptual Site Plan, are as follows. •The Tangerine Apartments’ proposed finished floor elevation is 2681.5 feet, which is approximately 8.5 ft lower than the adjacent portion of Tangerine Road. •The Tangerine Hotel’s proposed finished floor elevation is 2676.5 feet , which is approximately 14.5 feet lower than the adjacent portion of Tangerine Road. •The Oracle Hotel’s proposed finished floor elevation is 2643 feet, which is approximately 10 feet lower than the adjacent portion of Oracle Road. •The Oracle Apartments’ proposed finished floor elevation is 2653.5 feet, which is approximately 6.5 ft below Oracle Road. 5.Proximity of Existing Residential Subdivisions to the Site Another important consideration of this analysis is the distance between the site and the residential communities to the west of the site. The distance between the nearest residential lots and the proposed development areas ranges from approximately 800 to 1,500 feet. Also, Big Wash lies between the site and the residential communities to the west. It acts as a natural buffer area containing existing mature vegetation, some of which was planted as part of a 77-acre xeroriparian revegetation project. This vegetation will remain and will not be impacted by the proposed project. D.Observations and Conclusions The following observations and conclusions are offered based on the analysis completed: 4 • The heights of the proposed buildings are generally consistent with the building heights in the immediate area and as such are not out of context with the area. • The architectural character and colors used will be harmonious with the natural colors of the area. • The proposed buildings will not diminish scenic qualities of the area. The existing homes to the west of the site will continue to enjoy expansive views of the Catalina Mountains. • The physical distance between the existing residences to the west of the site and the site itself reduces the visual prominence of proposed buildings. EXHIBITS Tangerine Road First AvenueOracle RoadPROJECT LOCATION 5.8.2020 WLB No. 185050-WT-03EXHIBIT A: LOCATION MAP Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Exhibit A_Location Map.dwg Plotted: May. 09, 2020 1/4 MILE Inc. Group The WLB 1243678910E. PALISADES ROADEXHIBIT BKEY VANTAGE POINT PERSPECTIVE LOCATION MAPQ:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Exhibit B_Keymap.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLB TANGERINE ROADORACLE R O A D WATER HARVEST WAYE .POLE STAR PL.E.TERRESTRIAL PL.E . CENTAURUS P L .TANGERINE APARTMENTSTANGERINEHOTELE N T E R T A IN MENT D I S T R I C TORACLEAPARTMENTSIN & OUTBURGERWALMARTCENTURYTHEATREORACLEHOTELPALISADESPOINTPALISADESSOUTHCATALINASHADOWSCATALINASHADOWSESTATESBIG WASH511E GANYMEDE DR1219-24 13-18 C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_28380\Exhibit C Topography and Building Height.11.23.20.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021Inc.GroupTheWLB5.27.2020Contour Interval = 2 Ft.WLB No. 185050-WT-03EXHIBIT C: TOPOGRAPHY AND BUILDING HEIGHTS1243678910WATER HARVEST WAYTANGERINE APARTMENTSHEIGHT: 75' MAXTANGERINE HOTELHEIGHT: 49' MAXE N T E R T AINMENT D I S T R I C TORACLE APARTMENTSHEIGHT: 59' MAXABORACLE HOTEL HEIGHT: 49' MAXBIG WASH12435678910ABCEGHIJKLMNOPQACAG AH AI AJDFRSTUAAVWXYZADAEAFAK AN AO AR AS ALAPAMAQRESTAURANTHEIGHT: 24' MAXRESTAURANTHEIGHT: 24' MAXRETAIL/HOTELHEIGHT: 49' MAXBLDG.OCCUPANTHEIGHTABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZAAABACADAEAFAGAHAIIN AND OUTCHASE BANKRED LOBSTERVACANTVACANTTUESDAY MORNINGVACANTBEST BUYVACANTULTA BEAUTYDSW SHOESVACANTBIG LOTSVACANTPETCOOLIVE GARDENTHE KEGVACANTVACANTVACANTNRG WEALTHCHARRED PIZZAVACANTVACANTVACANTSAN CARLOSCENTURY THEATREWALMARTVACANTALL SEASONSGNCVACANTVACANTGRACIE BARRAVACANTAJAKALAMANAOAPAQARASO.V.P.D.TANGERINE DENTALSPORTS CLIPVACANTVACANTVACANTSTATE FARMCHIC NAILVACANTURGENT CARE25'21'19'20'20'20'20'34'34'34'34'34'34'34'34'20'24'22'22'22'22'22'22'22'22'22'39'34'23'23'23'23'25'22'22'17'24'24'24'24'24'24'24'24'24'BUILDING INFORMATIONLEGENDN.T.S.51151219-24 13-18 Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.1.A Viewshed Perspective 1 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.1.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 1 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_28380\Exhibit D.1.B Viewshed Perspective 1 Proposed Condition.11.23.20.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.1.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 1 - PROPOSED CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.2.A Viewshed Perspective 2 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.2.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 2 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_12852\Exhibit D.2.B Viewshed Perspective 2 Proposed Condition11.23.20.dwg Plotted: Dec. 04, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.2.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 2 - PROPOSED CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.3.A Viewshed Perspective 3 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.3.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 3 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_28380\Exhibit D.3.B Viewshed Perspective 3 Proposed Condition.11.23.20.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.3.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 3 - PROPOSED CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.4.A Viewshed Perspective 4 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.4.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 4- EXISTING CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.5.A Viewshed Perspective 5 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.5.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 5 - EXISTING CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.6.A Viewshed Perspective 6 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.6.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 6 - EXISTING CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.7.A Viewshed Perspective 7 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.7.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 7 - EXISTING CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Proposed Condition\Exhibit D.7.B Viewshed Perspective 7 Proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: Nov. 24, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.7.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 7 - PROPOSED CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.8.A Viewshed Perspective 8 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.8.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 8 - EXISTING CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Proposed Condition\Exhibit D.8.B Viewshed Perspective 8 Proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: Nov. 24, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.8.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 8 - PROPOSED CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.9.A Viewshed Perspective 9 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Jun. 01, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.9.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 9 - EXISTING CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Proposed Condition\Exhibit D.9.B Viewshed Perspective 9 Proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: Nov. 24, 2020Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.9.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 9 - PROPOSED CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Proposed Condition\Exhibit D.10.B Viewshed Perspective 10 Proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: Nov. 24, 2020N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.10.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 10 - PROPOSED CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.11.A Viewshed Perspective 11 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Nov. 24, 2020N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.11.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 11 - EXISTING CONDITION Q:\185050\WT-02 - Town West Due Diligence\Planning\Viewshed Model\Report and Graphics\Existing Condition\Exhibit D.12.A Viewshed Perspective 12 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: Nov. 24, 2020N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.12.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 12 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_12852\Exhibit D.12.B Viewshed Perspective 12 Proposed Condition.11.24.20.dwg Plotted: Dec. 04, 2020N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.12.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 12 - PROPOSED CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24564\Exhibit D.13.A Viewshed Perspective 13 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.13.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 13 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_28380\Exhibit D.13.A Viewshed Perspective 13 Proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.13.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 13 - PROPOSED CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24564\Exhibit D.14.A Viewshed Perspective 14 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.13.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 13 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24632\Exhibit D.14.A Viewshed Perspective 14 Proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.14.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 14 - PROPOSED CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24564\Exhibit D.15.A Viewshed Perspective 15 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.15.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 15 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24632\Exhibit D.15.A Viewshed Perspective 15 proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.15.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 15 - PROPOSED CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24564\Exhibit D.16.A Viewshed Perspective 16 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.16.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 16 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24632\Exhibit D.16.A Viewshed Perspective 16 proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.16.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 16 - PROPOSED CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_28380\Exhibit D.17.A Viewshed Perspective 17 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.17.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 17 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24632\Exhibit D.17.A Viewshed Perspective 17 proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.17.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 17 - PROPOSED CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24564\Exhibit D.18.A Viewshed Perspective 18 Existing Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.18.A: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 18 - EXISTING CONDITION C:\Users\lmadsen\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_24632\Exhibit D.18.A Viewshed Perspective 18 Proposed Condition.dwg Plotted: May. 27, 2021N.T.S.Inc.GroupTheWLBEXHIBIT D.18.B: VIEWSHED PERSPECTIVE 18 - PROPOSED CONDITION Noise Impact Assessment for Outdoor Music Oro Valley Marketplace Prepared for Town West Realty Project Manager Toby Horvath Lance Willis, PhD © Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC R. 1, November 24, 2021 Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 1 of 36 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Version History .................................................................................................................. 4 2. Site Summary ................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Proposed Site Development .............................................................................................. 5 2.2 Area Summary ................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Zoning ............................................................................................................................... 7 3. Site Plan Analysis ............................................................................................. 9 3.1 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 9 3.2 Sound Sources ................................................................................................................... 9 3.2.1 Amplified Music on the Patios .................................................................................. 9 3.2.2 Amplified Music in the Courtyard ........................................................................... 10 3.2.3 Patron Conversations ............................................................................................... 10 3.2.4 Other Zoning Code Requirements ........................................................................... 11 3.3 The Model Space ............................................................................................................. 11 3.4 Sound Pressure Level Contour Maps .............................................................................. 14 3.5 Use Cases ........................................................................................................................ 14 3.5.1 Live Music on Patios ............................................................................................... 14 3.5.2 Live Music in Courtyard ......................................................................................... 17 3.5.3 Patrons Only on Patios and Courtyard .................................................................... 19 4. Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................. 21 4.1 Use Cases ........................................................................................................................ 21 4.1.1 Live Music on Patios ............................................................................................... 21 4.1.2 Live Music in the Courtyard Area ........................................................................... 22 4.1.3 Patrons Only Without Amplified Sound .................................................................. 22 4.2 Roadway Noise ............................................................................................................... 22 Appendix ............................................................................................................. 24 A1. Glossary of Acoustical Terms and Abbreviations .......................................................... 25 A1.1 Abbreviations ........................................................................................................... 25 A1.2 Terms ....................................................................................................................... 26 A2. General Acoustics ........................................................................................................... 31 Table of Figures Figure 2.1. Proposed Site Plan.........................................................................................................5 Figure 2.2. Proposed Site and Surrounding Area.............................................................................6 Figure 2.3. Zoning............................................................................................................................8 Figure 3.1. Model View of Venues................................................................................................12 Figure 3.2. Model View of Surrounding Area...............................................................................13 Figure 3.3. Legend for Sound Pressure Level Contour Maps........................................................14 Figure 3.4. Adjusted LAeq Sound Pressure Level Contours - Patios with PA's............................15 Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 2 of 36 Figure 3.5. Adjusted 63 Hz Sound Pressure Level Contours - Patios with PA's...........................16 Figure 3.6. Adjusted LAeq Sound Pressure Level Contours - Courtyard with PA........................17 Figure 3.7. Adjusted 63 Hz Sound Pressure Level Contours - Courtyard with PA.......................18 Figure 3.8. Adjusted LAeq Sound Pressure Level Contours - Patios and Courtyard with Patrons Only................................................................................................................................................20 Figure A2.1. ISO 226 Equal Loudness Contours...........................................................................32 Figure A2.2. Frequency Weighting Filter Curves..........................................................................33 Figure A2.3. Decrease of SPL with Distance Due to Spherical Spreading...................................34 Figure A2.4. Total SPL from Multiple Sources with Equal SPL Output.......................................35 Index of Tables Table 3.1. Unweighted Octave Band Sound Power Levels for a Typical Live Music Venue........10 Table 3.2. Unweighted Octave Band ANSI S3.5 Standard Speech Spectra..................................11 Table 3.3. Field Points...................................................................................................................13 Table 3.4. LAeq Code Compliance for Patios with PA's...............................................................15 Table 3.5. 63 Hz Band Code Compliance for Patios with PA's.....................................................16 Table 3.6. LAeq Code Compliance for Courtyard with PA...........................................................18 Table 3.7. 63 Hz Band Code Compliance for Courtyard with PA's...............................................19 Table 3.8. LAeq Code Compliance for Patios and Courtyard with Patrons Only.........................20 Table A2.1. Decrease of SPL with Distance Due to Spherical Spreading.....................................34 Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 3 of 36 1. Introduction 1.1 Summary This report is a preliminary assessment of the community noise impact of live outdoor music at three proposed restaurants and a courtyard area at the Oro Valley Marketplace shopping center at Oracle Road and Tangerine Road with respect to Section 25.1 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code. The hosting of live amplified music on the patios of the restaurants is expected to comply with the Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code in regard to noise for typical live band performances in venues of this size. Hosting live music in the proposed courtyard area was found to require a dedicated, distributed sound system to better contain sound within the venue and no operation after 10:00 pm. Operating the proposed venues without amplified sound is not expected to result in any noise related issues. 1.2 Version History •R. 1: 2021-11-24 ◦Replace courtyard sound system with distributed speaker system •R. 0: 2021-10-21 ◦Preliminary analysis Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 4 of 36 2. Site Summary 2.1 Proposed Site Development Three restaurants with outdoor patios are proposed to be built at the Oro Valley Marketplace shopping center as shown in Figure 2.1. Live outdoor music is planned for the patio areas and possibly the central courtyard area. The patio areas face the interior courtyard space between the group of restaurants thereby using the restaurant structures as acoustical shielding to keep the sound contained within the vicinity of the venues. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 5 of 36 Figure 2.1. Proposed Site Plan N 2.2 Area Summary The land uses surrounding the shopping center site are shown in Figure 2.2. The shopping center and adjacent properties west of Oracle Road are in the Town of Oro Valley. Properties on the east side of Oracle Road are in unincorporated Pima County. There are single family homes to the west across Sausaulito Creek. Cool air collecting in this low lying area at night may increase the amount of refracted sound reaching the neighborhood. To the north and south along Oracle Road are commercial uses. To the northwest across Tangerine Road is a hospital and hotel. To the east is residential. These homes are shielded by a row of retail stores facing Oracle Road. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 6 of 36 Figure 2.2. Proposed Site and Surrounding Area Proposed Site N 2.3 Zoning Zoning in the area is shown in Figure 2.3 [Pima County ArcGIS Online <https://pimamaps.pima.gov/geoapps/main>]. The proposed site and adjacent properties to the north, west, and south along Oracle Road are zoned PAD, planned area development. Also to the south and southwest are R1-36 and R1-144, single family residential. To the east in Pima County is SR, suburban ranch. To the northeast across Oracle Road are commercial uses zoned RVC, rural village center, and MR, major resort. The latter is an RV park and campground. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 7 of 36 Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 8 of 36 Figure 2.3. Zoning Proposed Site N 3. Site Plan Analysis 3.1 Methodology The acoustical site model has been constructed using the iNoise package version 2021.0 developed by DGMR. The sound propagation model is ISO 9613. This software conforms with the ISO/TR 17534-3 quality standard for implementing the ISO 9613 Part 2 outdoor sound propagation model. 3.2 Sound Sources There are two sound sources that need to be considered for the patio and courtyard areas. One is the sound produced by the venue PA systems for amplified live music performances. The other is the sound of conversations between restaurant patrons. 3.2.1 Amplified Music on the Patios The source model for this activity is based on measurements conducted at an outdoor venue in Oro Valley, Arizona. The band at the venue was a typical rock ensemble consisting of drums, bass, guitars, and vocals. The band performed popular songs from the 50's, 60's, and 70's. The sound reinforcement system had two loudspeakers on stands at about head height. Instrument amplifiers were also used for sound projection into the audience area. The audience was also found to make a significant contribution to the overall sound emission in the form of conversation which was continuous during and between songs. This had the effect of reducing the directivity of the venue as a whole as it was not entirely the result of the directivity of the mains speakers at the stage. For this reason each patio has been modeled as an area source whose total sound power is in proportion to its size. The size of the reference venue was about 2700 square feet (250 square meters). Table 3.1 shows the unweighted octave band equivalent-continuous sound power levels (PWL) for the reference venue. The total sound power has been normalized to one square meter. The Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code Section 25.1.A.3.g and the definition of regular impulsive sound in Section 31 require a 5 dB adjustment for speech and music sources. The final adjusted sound power per square meter is 84.4 dBA. The height of the area source is 6.5 feet (2 meters). Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 9 of 36 3.2.2 Amplified Music in the Courtyard The sound system chosen for the courtyard area uses a distributed sound system with six speakers at a height of 6.5 feet (2 meters). These speakers are directed inward and down in order to use the audience as sound absorption and to keep the sound within the courtyard. In this configuration the array of speakers only needs to project to the center of the courtyard. The target sound pressure level at the center of the courtyard is 83 dBA. 3.2.3 Patron Conversations For speech communication among the venue patrons without amplified music present, the ANSI S3.5 standard speech spectrum for raised voice is used. Due to the cocktail party effect, the speech effort on the patios will tend to be higher than normal. The raised voice standard spectrum has therefore been used with the required 5 dB adjustment in Section 25.1.A.3.g for speech. The number of sound sources has been determined using the fire code and the areas of the patios and courtyard. If one occupant is allowed per each 36 square feet and half of the occupants are talking at the same time, this leads to a source density of 0.014 per square foot (0.15 per square meter). Table 3.2 shows the sound power levels for the ANSI S3.5 standard speech spectra assuming a directivity index of 2. The height of this area source is 5 feet (1.5 meters). Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 10 of 36 Table 3.1. Unweighted Octave Band Sound Power Levels for a Typical Live Music Venue Center Frequency (Hz) 31 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 A-wgt PWL 98.9 110.4 112.2 103.8 100.5 97.9 92.3 87.9 84.1 103.4 Venue Size (m^2)250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 PWL per m^2 74.9 86.5 88.2 79.8 76.5 73.9 68.3 63.9 60.2 79.4 Speech/music adjustment 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Adjusted PWL per m^2 79.9 91.5 93.2 84.8 81.5 78.9 73.3 68.9 65.2 84.4 3.2.4 Other Zoning Code Requirements The Oro Valley Zoning Code Section 25.1 gives specific recommendations for maximum allowable sound pressure levels according to receiving land use, time of day, and the characteristics of the sound produced. Speech and music are considered regular impulsive sound. All equivalent-continuous levels have been adjusted by 5 dBA as described above. The one minute sound pressure level limits apply to the unweighted 16, 31.5, and 63 Hz octave bands. Unamplified speech produces very little sound power in these frequency bands. Amplified music, however, does and will be examined for the most prominent band, 63 Hz, in addition to the A-weighted sound levels for case studies where a PA system is in use. The maximum sound pressure levels for amplified speech and music are in general not exceedingly large compared to the equivalent-continuous levels used for the one hour criterion. A separate analysis is not performed here; however, given the sound sources planned for the site, compliance with the maximum sound limits should follow compliance with the one hour limits. 3.3 The Model Space Figures 3.1 and 3.2 give an overview of the acoustical model. A set of field points has been selected to better quantify the sound pressure levels expected at specific locations. These are listed in Table 3.3 with their heights above grade and shown in the figures. Ground types in the Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 11 of 36 Table 3.2. Unweighted Octave Band ANSI S3.5 Standard Speech Spectra ANSI S3.5 Standard Speech Spectrum Level (PWL, DI = 2) Center Frequency (Hz) 31 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 A-wgt Normal 56.0 64.8 67.0 62.0 56.7 51.4 44.9 67.1 Raised 57.4 68.3 72.8 70.5 65.1 59.2 49.5 74.3 Loud 58.9 72.4 78.2 78.6 74.1 67.4 55.8 81.8 Shout 54.4 74.4 83.2 87.1 84.0 77.0 65.2 90.1 Speech/music adjustment 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Single Source Adjusted PWL Normal 61.0 69.8 72.0 67.0 61.7 56.4 49.9 72.1 Raised 62.4 73.3 77.8 75.5 70.1 64.2 54.5 79.3 Loud 63.9 77.4 83.2 83.6 79.1 72.4 60.8 86.8 Shout 59.4 79.4 88.2 92.1 89.0 82.0 70.2 95.1 Density factor (src/m^2)0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 PWL correction (dB)-8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 -8.2 Adjusted PWL per m^2 of Floor Space Normal 52.8 61.5 63.7 58.8 53.4 48.1 41.7 63.9 Raised 54.2 65.1 69.5 67.2 61.9 56.0 46.3 71.0 Loud 55.6 69.2 75.0 75.4 70.9 64.1 52.5 78.5 Shout 51.1 71.2 80.0 83.9 80.8 73.7 62.0 86.9 model are asphalt and natural desert (default) having ISO 9613 ground factors of 0.1 and 0.3 respectively. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 12 of 36 Figure 3.1. Model View of Venues Courtyard Olive Garden Keg Steak House Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 13 of 36 Figure 3.2. Model View of Surrounding Area Venues OV Hospital 1799 1848 1869 1882 1935 Table 3.3. Field Points Location Land Use 1799 Terrestrial Pl Single Family 5 1848 Terrestrial Pl Single Family 5 1869 Starmist Pl Single Family 5 1882 Starmist Pl Single Family 5 1935 Ganymede Dr Single Family 5 Keg Steak House Commercial 5 Olive Garden Commercial 5 OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 5 OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 35 Height Above Grade (ft) 3.4 Sound Pressure Level Contour Maps Sound pressure level contours in the figures below are displayed in 5 dBA increments. The legend identifying the map symbols is in Figure 3.3. All sound pressure levels are A-weighted unless otherwise noted. Sound walls are labeled as barriers in the iNoise software. The height of the contour grid points is 5 feet above grade. 3.5 Use Cases 3.5.1 Live Music on Patios For the case where there are three bands performing on the restaurant patios, sound pressure level contours for the A-weighted equivalent-continuous sound pressure levels (LAeq) are shown in Figure 3.4 and the unweighted 63 Hz octave band levels in Figure 3.5. The results for the corresponding field points are shown in Tables 3.4 and 3.5. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 14 of 36 Figure 3.3. Legend for Sound Pressure Level Contour Maps Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 15 of 36 Figure 3.4. Adjusted LAeq Sound Pressure Level Contours - Patios with PA's Table 3.4. LAeq Code Compliance for Patios with PA's Location Land Use 1799 Terrestrial Single Family 5 44.2 55 no 50 no 45 no 1848 Terrestrial Single Family 5 44.1 55 no 50 no 45 no 1869 Starmist Single Family 5 43.3 55 no 50 no 45 no 1882 Starmist Single Family 5 41.6 55 no 50 no 45 no 1935 Ganymede Single Family 5 40.4 55 no 50 no 45 no Keg Steak House Commercial 5 61.2 65 no 65 no 65 no Olive Garden Commercial 5 60.3 65 no 65 no 65 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 5 37.5 65 no 60 no 55 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 35 38.2 65 no 60 no 55 no Height Above Grade (ft) Adjusted Sound Pressure Level (dBA) Daytime Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Daytime Limit Evening Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Evening Limit Nighttime Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Nighttime Limit The noise impact for this use case is not expected to exceed the limits set in the Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 16 of 36 Figure 3.5. Adjusted 63 Hz Sound Pressure Level Contours - Patios with PA's Table 3.5. 63 Hz Band Code Compliance for Patios with PA's Location Land Use 1799 Terrestrial Single Family 5 54.4 65 no 65 no 65 no 1848 Terrestrial Single Family 5 54.5 65 no 65 no 65 no 1869 Starmist Single Family 5 53.9 65 no 65 no 65 no 1882 Starmist Single Family 5 52.5 65 no 65 no 65 no 1935 Ganymede Single Family 5 51.8 65 no 65 no 65 no Keg Steak House Commercial 5 67.7 70 no 70 no 70 no Olive Garden Commercial 5 68.6 70 no 70 no 70 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 5 48.2 70 no 65 no 65 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 35 47.4 70 no 65 no 65 no Height Above Grade (ft) Adjusted Sound Pressure Level (dBZ) Daytime Hourly Limit (dBZ) Exceeds Daytime Limit Evening Hourly Limit (dBZ) Exceeds Evening Limit Nighttime Hourly Limit (dBZ) Exceeds Nighttime Limit 3.5.2 Live Music in Courtyard For the case where there is a single band performing in the courtyard area, sound pressure level contours for the A-weighted equivalent-continuous sound pressure levels (LAeq) are shown in Figure 3.6 and the unweighted 63 Hz octave band levels in Figure 3.7. The results for the corresponding field points are shown in Tables 3.6 and 3.7. As seen in the tables, the use of a dedicated sound system with distributed speakers is expected to comply with the noise code during daytime and evening hours. Operation after 10:00 pm is not currently planned. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 17 of 36 Figure 3.6. Adjusted LAeq Sound Pressure Level Contours - Courtyard with PA Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 18 of 36 Figure 3.7. Adjusted 63 Hz Sound Pressure Level Contours - Courtyard with PA Table 3.6. LAeq Code Compliance for Courtyard with PA Location Land Use 1799 Terrestrial Single Family 5 46.7 55 no 50 no 45 yes 1848 Terrestrial Single Family 5 47.3 55 no 50 no 45 yes 1869 Starmist Single Family 5 48.0 55 no 50 no 45 yes 1882 Starmist Single Family 5 47.7 55 no 50 no 45 yes 1935 Ganymede Single Family 5 47.3 55 no 50 no 45 yes Keg Steak House Commercial 5 62.5 65 no 65 no 65 no Olive Garden Commercial 5 63.0 65 no 65 no 65 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 5 40.7 65 no 60 no 55 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 35 41.0 65 no 60 no 55 no Height Above Grade (ft) Adjusted Sound Pressure Level (dBA) Daytime Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Daytime Limit Evening Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Evening Limit Nighttime Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Nighttime Limit 3.5.3 Patrons Only on Patios and Courtyard In this use case there are no bands performing or amplified music. Only restaurant patrons are present on the patios and in the courtyard area. Sound pressure level contours for the A-weighted equivalent-continuous sound pressure levels (LAeq) are shown in Figure 3.8 and the results for the corresponding field points are shown in Table 3.8. These sound pressure levels are considerably lower than for amplified music and are not expected to exceed the limits set in the Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 19 of 36 Table 3.7. 63 Hz Band Code Compliance for Courtyard with PA's Location Land Use 1799 Terrestrial Single Family 5 53.0 65 no 65 no 65 no 1848 Terrestrial Single Family 5 52.9 65 no 65 no 65 no 1869 Starmist Single Family 5 53.4 65 no 65 no 65 no 1882 Starmist Single Family 5 53.3 65 no 65 no 65 no 1935 Ganymede Single Family 5 53.0 65 no 65 no 65 no Keg Steak House Commercial 5 66.8 70 no 70 no 70 no Olive Garden Commercial 5 68.3 70 no 70 no 70 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 5 49.3 70 no 65 no 65 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 35 48.4 70 no 65 no 65 no Height Above Grade (ft) Adjusted Sound Pressure Level (dBZ) Daytime Hourly Limit (dBZ) Exceeds Daytime Limit Evening Hourly Limit (dBZ) Exceeds Evening Limit Nighttime Hourly Limit (dBZ) Exceeds Nighttime Limit Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 20 of 36 Figure 3.8. Adjusted LAeq Sound Pressure Level Contours - Patios and Courtyard with Patrons Only Table 3.8. LAeq Code Compliance for Patios and Courtyard with Patrons Only Location Land Use 1799 Terrestrial Single Family 5 38.0 55 no 50 no 45 no 1848 Terrestrial Single Family 5 38.7 55 no 50 no 45 no 1869 Starmist Single Family 5 39.2 55 no 50 no 45 no 1882 Starmist Single Family 5 38.7 55 no 50 no 45 no 1935 Ganymede Single Family 5 38.3 55 no 50 no 45 no Keg Steak House Commercial 5 54.3 65 no 65 no 65 no Olive Garden Commercial 5 53.6 65 no 65 no 65 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 5 31.0 65 no 60 no 55 no OV Hospital Hospital, Hotel 35 31.3 65 no 60 no 55 no Height Above Grade (ft) Adjusted Sound Pressure Level (dBA) Daytime Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Daytime Limit Evening Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Evening Limit Nighttime Hourly Limit (dBA) Exceeds Nighttime Limit 4. Conclusions and Recommendations An ISO 9613 noise assessment has been performed for three proposed restaurants with patios and a courtyard area at the Oro Valley Marketplace shopping center. Noise impact on the surrounding properties has been evaluated for several use cases. 4.1 Use Cases 4.1.1 Live Music on Patios The analysis showed the restaurant structures provide enough shielding for the neighborhood to the west to allow PA systems to be used while complying with the Town of Oro Valley Zoning Code. This analysis assumes a typical sound level produced by a live band at a comparable sized venue. It is, however, the responsibility of the venue to manage the operation of sound equipment in accordance with the applicable noise codes. To this end there a few recommendations that can make compliance easier. The most common type of loudspeaker system used for live bands and DJ's at small venues is two speakers on stands on either side of the stage that push sound to the back of the audience area. In this setup most of the sound goes over the heads of the audience and into the adjacent properties. If the stage area is movable or the loudspeaker system consists of varying components brought in by performers for different shows, the emission of sound into the surrounding neighborhood is not likely to be well controlled. If using a pair of mains at the front of the audience, arrange the stage to face away from houses to the west. Directional subwoofers will reduce also the amount of low frequency sound going toward noise sensitive areas. Distributed speaker systems are better for keeping sound within a venue. Rather than a couple of high power cabinets aimed over the heads of the audience, this type of system uses many loudspeakers placed around the perimeter of the audience area with the speakers aimed directly at the audience. This provides two benefits. First, the individual speakers are closer to the audience and therefore do not need as much amplification to provide full coverage of the audience area. Second, the audience itself will absorb much of the sound before it can leave the space. This also has the benefit of reducing bleed over between patios if multiple acts are performing at the same time. The wash that lies between the venues and the neighborhood to the west will likely affect the sound propagation to the west. At night cool air collects in these low lying areas resulting in a thermal lapse condition that creates a stratification of the atmosphere. Sound refracts toward regions of lower sound speed, e.g. cooler air. This will cause sound to arc over the wash, possibly increasing the amount of sound reaching the neighborhood when conditions are favorable. The increase in sound pressure level during these times may be in the 3 to 5 dBA range. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 21 of 36 The analysis indicated that nighttime sound system operation would be 3 to 5 dBA less than the acceptable limits in Table 25-1.A of the Oro Valley Zoning Code. The analysis is not able to account entirely for the nighttime thermal lapse condition; however, the results indicate that minimal noise abatement would be needed depending on the final use case parameters. A complete analysis will involve conducting propagation measurements at night to fully characterize how sound traverses the path over the wash. These measurements are not recommended until the design phase of the project. This report is a noise impact study to identify potential issues and the feasibility of mitigating them. A complete noise abatement plan should be prepared during the design phase of the project based on the final planned use of the venues. It is the responsibility of the venues to operate sound reinforcement systems within the sound pressure level limits in the Oro Valley Zoning Code. 4.1.2 Live Music in the Courtyard Area Analysis of this use case with a roughly designed dedicated distributed sound system indicated that the full courtyard area can be used for amplified music during the daytime and evening hours. Amplified music after 10:00 pm is not expected in the courtyard. Sound walls have not been recommended at this stage. If the transit center is to be improved and expanded at a later date, sound mitigation measures may be incorporated into that site planning. Ultimately, it will be the responsibility of the venue to ensure that the sound system operates within the sound pressure level limits in the Oro Valley Zoning Code. This report is a noise impact study to identify potential issues and the feasibility of mitigating them. A complete sound system design and noise abatement plan should be prepared during the design phase of the project based on the final planned use of the venues. It is the responsibility of the venues to operate sound reinforcement systems within the sound pressure level limits in the Oro Valley Zoning Code. 4.1.3 Patrons Only Without Amplified Sound This use case was assessed using a standard speech spectrum for raised voices. With all three patios and the courtyard fully occupied sound pressure levels were found to be within the limits set in the Oro Valley Zoning Code. 4.2 Roadway Noise The nearest homes likely to be affected by the proposed venues are about 1400 feet away. They are about 2300 feet from Oracle Road and 2200 feet from Tangerine Road. Sound radiating from a small cluster of point sources such as the proposed venues decreases 6.0 dB for each double of distance from the center of the cluster. Sound radiating from a line source such as a roadway (in this case a distribution of point sources along a line) decreases 3.0 dB for each doubling in distance from the roadway centerline. Sound from both roadways will also be subject to the refraction effects of the wash described above for the proposed venues. Given the relative distances of the proposed venues and the roadways to the neighborhood, it is Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 22 of 36 possible that the sound from the venues could be overwhelmed by road noise before it gets to the neighborhood. Background noise levels in the area have not been measured; however, this may be a mitigating factor affecting the applicable sound pressure level limits in Oro Valley Zoning Code. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 23 of 36 Appendix Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 24 of 36 A1. Glossary of Acoustical Terms and Abbreviations A1.1 Abbreviations AI: articulation index ASEL: A-weighted sound exposure level ASTC: apparent sound transmission class dB: decibel DNL: day - night level FSTC: field sound transmission class Hz: Hertz IIC: impact insulation class kHz: kilohertz Leq, LAeq, LCeq: equivalent sound pressure level NC: noise criteria NIC: noise isolation class NIPTS: noise induced permanent threshold shift NR: noise reduction Pa: Pascal POE: probable occupant evaluation (see room criteria) PTS: permanent threshold shift PWL: sound power level QAI: quality assessment index (see room criteria) RC: room criteria RT60: reverberation time SEL: sound exposure level Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 25 of 36 SII: speech interference index SIL: speech interference level SLM: sound level meter SPI: speech privacy index SPL: sound pressure level STI: speech transmission index TTS: temporary threshold shift A1.2 Terms A-weighting: see frequency weighting absorption coefficient: see sound absorption coefficient acoustical coupler: a cavity of predetermined shape and volume used for the calibration of earphones or microphones in conjunction with a calibrated microphone adapted to measure the sound pressure developed within the cavity anechoic room: a room whose boundaries absorb practically all of the sound incident thereon, thereby providing essentially freefield conditions articulation index (AI): a number (ranging from 0 to 1) which is a measure of the intelligibility of speech- the higher the number the greater the intelligibility. This metric has been replaced by the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) defined in ANSI S3.5. average sound level: see equivalent continuous sound level background noise: the total noise from all sound sources other than a particular sound that is of interest band: a subsection of the frequency spectrum C-weighting: see frequency weighting coupler: see acoustical coupler day-night level (DNL): the 24 hour equivalent (average) A-weighted sound pressure level. A 10 dBA penalty is incurred between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. The DNL system has been adopted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Defense, and the Federal Aviation Administration. decibel (dB): a unit of level which denotes the ratio between two quantities that are proportional to power; the number of decibels is 10 times the common logarithm (base 10) of this ratio. diffuse field: a sound field which has statistically uniform energy density and in which the directions of propagation of the sound waves are randomly distributed. In a practical sense, the sound pressure levels at all points in the room are nearly the same except near the room Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 26 of 36 boundaries and a sound wave reaching a given point in the room is equally likely to arrive from all directions. direct sound: sound which reaches a given location in a direct line from the source without any reflections. equivalent continuous sound level (Leq): the level of steady sound which, in a stated time period and at a stated location, has the same sound energy as the time varying sound. If frequency weighting is applied, the equivalent continuous sound level may be designated LA eq to indicate A-weighting or LCeq to indicate C-weighting, etc. See also frequency weighting. field sound transmission class (FSTC): a single number rating similar to sound transmission class (STC), except that the transmission loss values used to derive this class are measured in the field. FSTC ratings are typically lower than STC ratings which are measured under laboratory conditions. flanking path: A wall or floor/ceiling construction that permits sound to be transmitted along its surface; or any opening, which permits the direct transmission of sound through the air. freefield: a sound field in which the boundaries have negligible effect over the frequency range of interest. frequency: the number of times that a waveform repeats itself in a given period of time, usually one second, i.e. the number of cycles per second). Unit: Hz. frequency weighting: a prescribed frequency dependent attenuation or amplification applied to measured sound data usually intended to better approximate the sensation of loudness in a human listener. For example, A, B, and C weighting approximate the frequency dependent shape of the equal loudness contours for soft, moderate, and loud sounds. Hertz (Hz): unit of frequency, cycles per second. impact insulation class (IIC): a single number metric used to compare the effectiveness of floor-ceiling assemblies in providing reduction of impact-generated sounds such as footsteps. This rating is derived from values of normalized impact sound pressure levels in accordance with ASTM E492. insertion loss: the reduction in sound level at the location of the receiver when a noise reduction measure such as a barrier, attenuator, muffler, etc. is inserted into the transmission path between the source and receiver. Unit: dB. level: the logarithm of the ratio of a given quantity to the reference quantity of the same kind. Levels represent physical quantities such as sound pressure on a logarithmic scale and are therefore expressed in decibels. Unit: dB. loudness: that attribute of auditory sensation in terms of which sounds may be ordered on a scale extending from soft to loud. Unit: sone. masking: the process by which the threshold of hearing for one sound is raised by the presence of another sound. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 27 of 36 noise criteria (NC): a single number criteria for the HVAC or mechanical noise level in a room derived from measured octave band data. The octave bands are weighted to de-emphasize low frequencies because the human ear is least sensitive to these frequencies. This metric is not valid for outdoor measurements. noise induced permanent threshold shift (NIPTS): the permanent hearing loss resulting from noise exposure. noise isolation class (NIC): a single number rating derived from measured values of noise reduction between two enclosed spaces that are connected by one or more paths. This rating is not adjusted or normalized to a standard reverberation time. noise reduction (NR): the difference in sound pressure level between any two points along the path of sound propagation, e.g. the difference in level between the interior and exterior of a building where the sound level inside is due only to exterior noise. octave: the frequency interval between two tones whose frequency ratio is 2. omnidirectional microphone: a microphone whose response is independent of the direction of the incident sound wave. Pascal (Pa): a unit of pressure. 1 Pascal = 1 Newton per square meter ( 1 N / m2). permanent threshold shift (PTS): a permanent increase in the threshold of hearing at a given frequency. point source: a source that radiates sound as if from a single point. receiver: a person (or persons) or equipment which is affected by sound. refraction: (1) the phenomenon by which the direction of propagation of a sound wave is changed as a result of a spatial variation is the speed of sound. (2) The angular change in direction of a sound wave as it passes obliquely from one medium to another having different sound speed. reverberation time (RT60): of an enclosure, for a sound of a given frequency or frequency band, the time that is required for the sound pressure level in the enclosure to decrease by 60 dB after the source has stopped. Unit: second. room criteria (RC, RC Mark II): an octave band metric for evaluating HVAC noise inside a room. RC is a two dimensional metric consisting of a curve number that is the arithmetic average of the 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz octave band sound pressure levels and a qualitative descriptor identifying the character of the sound spectrum. The descriptor can be (N) for neutral, (LF) for low frequency dominance (rumble), (MF) for midfrequency dominance (roar), and (HF) for high frequency dominance (hiss). In addition, acoustically induced vibration can be designated by (LFVB) for moderate, but perceptible vibration and (LFV A) for clearly perceptible vibration. As an example, the maximum RC prerequisite for LEED is designated as RC 37(N) indicating curve number 37 with a neutral spectrum. Further, two intermediary metrics are used in calculating the room criteria. The quality Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 28 of 36 assessment index (QAI) is a measure of the deviation from the given RC curve. The probable occupant evaluation (POE) is based on the magnitude of the QAI and can be 'Acceptable,' 'Marginal,' or Objectionable.' Sabin: a unit of measure of sound absorption; a measure of sound absorption of a surface. It is the equivalent of 1 square foot of a perfectly absorbing surface; a metric Sabin is the equivalent of 1 square meter of a perfectly absorbing surface. sone: the unit of loudness. One sone is the loudness of a pure tone presented frontally at a frequency of 1000 Hz and a sound pressure level of 40 dB referenced to 20 micropascals. sound absorption coefficient (a): ideally, the fraction of diffusely incident sound power that is absorbed (or otherwise not reflected) by a material or surface. sound exposure level (SEL): over a stated time period or event, 10 times the logarithm base 10 of the ratio of the time integral of the sound pressure squared to the product of the reference sound pressure, 20 μPa, squared and the reference time, one second. This quantity is used to characterize single events of short duration where the averaged level (Leq) is inadequate. sound level meter (SLM): an instrument that is used to measure sound level, with a standard frequency weighting and standard exponentially weighted time averaging. sound power level (PWL): the total acoustical power emitted from a sound source expressed in decibels relative to 10-12 Watts. sound pressure level (SPL): the acoustical pressure amplitude expressed in decibels relative to 20 micropascals. sound transmission class (STC): a single number rating used to compare sound insulation properties of walls, floors, ceilings, windows, or doors. See also field sound transmission class. speech intelligibility index (SII): metric defined under ANSI S3.5 to quantifiy the intelligibility of speech under adverse listening conditions such as noise masking, spectral filtering, and reverberation. The SII is defined for a scale of 0 to 1 where values greater than 0.75 indicate good communication and values below 0.45 indicate generally poor communication conditions. speech intelligibility test: a procedure that measures the portion of test items (such as syllables, monosyllabic words, or sentences) that are heard correctly. speech interference level (SIL): an index for assessing the interference effects of noise on the intelligibility of speech, derived from measurements of the background noise level of contiguous octave bands; i.e. the arithmetic average of the octave band sound levels for the bands centered at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz (four band method) or the corresponding average for the octave bands centered at 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz (three band method). If other octave bands are used they must be specified. Unit: dB. speech privacy index (SPI): The SPI is essentially the opposite of the speech intelligibility index and is defined as 1 - SII and usually represented as a percentage. An SPI above 80% is considered normal privacy while an SPI above 95% would meet the requirements of confidential privacy. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 29 of 36 speech transmission index (STI): an index for rating the intelligibility of speech that takes both noise and reverberation into account. temporary threshold shift (TTS): a temporary increase in the threshold of hearing at a given frequency. threshold of hearing: for a given listener, the minimum sound pressure level of a specified sound that is capable of evoking an auditory sensation. The sound reaching the ears from other sources is assumed negligible. transducer: a device designed to receive an input signal of a given kind and to furnish an output signal of a different kind in such a manner that the desired characteristics of the input signal appear in the output signal. For example, a microphone takes an acoustic pressure as an input and produces an electrical voltage as an output that is direct proportion to the instantaneous acoustic pressure amplitude. Other common examples in noise measurement would be a loudspeaker, accelerometer, or laser Doppler vibrometer (LDV). transmission loss: the reduction in sound level from one side of a partition to the other. wavelength: the distance a sound wave travels in the time it takes to complete one cycle. weighting: see frequency weighting Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 30 of 36 A2. General Acoustics Sound Pressure Level (SPL) Sound is small, rapidly varying perturbations of atmospheric pressure with respect to the slowly changing ambient pressure. The ambient pressure is measured with a barometer while the small acoustic perturbations are measured with a microphone. The unit of sound pressure is the Pascal (Pa). However, due to the wide range of acoustic amplitudes that can be heard by the human ear, sound pressure is normally expressed on a logarithmic scale having units of decibels (dB). Sound pressure expressed this way is known as the sound pressure level (SPL) and has the following relation to sound pressure. SPL =20log 10 p p ref (A2.1) Here p is the sound pressure in Pascals. pref is a reference pressure, the threshold of hearing at 1000 Hertz (Hz), 20 x 10-6 Pa. A-Weighting The above formulation of SPL is a purely physical quantity. Due to the nonlinear and frequency dependent characteristics of the human ear it does not always correlate well with the perception of loudness. To improve the correlation for noise assessment purposes, a frequency weighting is often applied called A-weighting. The A-weighting function is based on listening tests in which human subjects adjusted tones throughout a range of frequencies to have equal loudness compared to a tone having an SPL of 40 dB at 1000 Hz. Figure A2.1 shows equal loudness contours according to ISO 226. Thus applying A-weighting to measured sound pressures more closely represents the frequency response of the human ear for low to moderate amplitude sound. Sound pressure levels that have been A-weighted are denoted by the symbol, dBA. Figure A2.2 shows the A frequency weighting and several other common weightings. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 31 of 36 Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 32 of 36 Figure A2.1. ISO 226 Equal Loudness Contours 0 (hearing threshold) 20 40 60 80 100 phon The Perception of Sound The most basic descriptions of sound are loudness (amplitude) and pitch (frequency). The frequency range of human hearing is roughly 20 to 20,000 Hz, although most people can not hear this full range because high frequencies are lost as a natural part of aging and other factors such as illness and exposure to high levels of noise that may cause permanent hearing loss. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 33 of 36 Figure A2.2. Frequency Weighting Filter Curves Amplitude Attenuation with Distance Sound originating from a small point source will spread spherically in all directions, absent any nearby surfaces. The conservation of energy requires the sound pressure spreading out from such a source to decrease by half with each doubling of distance. This is known as the inverse square law and is demonstrated in Table A2.1 and Figure A2.3. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 34 of 36 Table A2.1. Decrease of SPL with Distance Due to Spherical Spreading 10 90 20 84 6 40 78 12 80 72 18 160 66 24 320 60 30 Distance from Source (ft) SPL (dBA) SPL Loss Relative to 10 ft Figure A2.3. Decrease of SPL with Distance Due to Spherical Spreading r 2 r 4 r 9 0 d B A 8 4 d B A 7 8 d B A Adding Decibels Summing the contributions from multiple sound sources to obtain the total SPL is not done simply by adding the decibel levels because SPL is a logarithmic quantity. Imagine a fan produces a moderate SPL of 65 dBA at 6 feet. If a second identical fan were turned on the resulting SPL would not be 130 dBA. This would be equivalent to a commercial jetliner taking off at close range. The correct method of adding the SPL from each source is to sum the acoustic power produced by each source. This implies that each time the number of sources having equal SPL is doubled, the SPL will increase by 3 dBA. Therefore, in the example with two fans, the correct total SPL would be 68 dBA. More examples with multiple sources producing equal SPL are shown in Figure A2.4. 65 dBA + 65 dBA ¹ 130 dBA WRONG (A2.2) 65 dBA + 65 dBA = 68 dBA RIGHT (A2.3) Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 35 of 36 Figure A2.4. Total SPL from Multiple Sources with Equal SPL Output 1 2 4 8 Source Sources Sources Sources 65 dBA 68 dBA 71 dBA 74 dBA Further Reading Bruel and Kjaer, “Measuring Sound.” Covers topics in this appendix in more detail. Available on the Bruel and Kjaer website, www.bkhome.com. Find this and other primers under the library section of the site. Cyril M. Harris, Ed. Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, 3 rd Edition . Acoustical Society of America, Melville, NY, 1998. Spendiarian & Willis Acoustics & Noise Control LLC 36 of 36 1st Neighborhood Meeting Summary Proposed Revitalization with New Uses of the Oro Valley Marketplace Town Hall, 11000 N. La Cañada Drive March 10, 2020 6:00 – 8:00 PM Introductions and Welcome Meeting facilitator and Town Principal Planner, Michael Spaeth, introduced the agenda for the meeting. Approximately 115 residents and interested parties attended the meeting including Vice Mayor Barret, Council members Nicholson, Piña, Solomon and Rodman and Planning and Zoning Commission Chair Gambill and Commission members Bergsma, Sturmon, Harrington, Posey and Hong. Town Staff Presentation Milini Simms, Principal Planner and the Town’s project manager for the applicant’s proposal, provided a presentation that included:  Subject property  History of the development  Existing and allowed zoning standards and uses  Review tools and process for the applicant’s requests Applicant Presentation The applicant, Keri Silvyn, from Lazarus and Silvyn representing the property owner, provided a presentation that included:  Subject property  Challenges to the site  Proposed designs and requests Public Questions & Comments Following is a summary of questions and comments Filling existing vacancies 1. What is the current occupancy rate for the site? 2. Are you working with local business and/or nonprofits to attract and understand their needs for locating in the Marketplace? 3. Is there a plan for the vacant building pad site next to Walmart? 4. Have the rents been raised pricing current tenants out? Proposed Apartments and hotels 5. Is there a study to identify the need for more apartments or hotels in Oro Valley? Will the data be shared? 6. Do the apartments need to be “luxury” or can they be affordable for all income levels? 7. How many housing units are proposed over the retail space, near the entertainment district? 8. How will the apartments and hotels be maintained? 9. Who are the employers supporting the hotels and apartments? 10. What is the proposed height? 11. How will this impact views? Will they be blocked? Parking and Traffic 12. Is there enough parking to support the proposed developments? 13. Will the added parking be solar covered? 14. What does a traffic study include? A traffic light is currently needed for residents in Rams Pass and Rams Canyon. 15. Foot traffic needs to increase to support businesses. Will there be a shuttle to help get people to and from the entertainment district. Lighting and Noise 16. How will noise be addressed? Specifically to keep it from impacting Catalina State Park. 17. How much lighting will be added? How will light pollution be addressed? 18. Will the entertainment district have outdoor entertainment (i.e. bands) that use speakers? Entertainment District and Project Phasing 19. Will the splash pad be free to the public? 20. Will safety barriers be in place between the amenities and parking areas? 21. What is the proposed order of the development? When will the entertainment district be built so we do not end up with just apartments and hotels? 22. What is the overall timing for completing the proposed development? Other comments: 23. How much water is needed to support the proposed uses and entertainment district? Where is the water coming from? 24. What other projects have the owners developed? Are they successful? 25. What will the impact be on Catalina State Park? Have they been contacted? 26. Excitement for mixed-use and oasis/ entertainment district. 27. Will the applicant be working with surrounding homeowners associations? 28. Will the Town need to pay for anything (i.e. through a private-public partnership)? 29. View impacts, noise and lighting exist with current development. Appreciation for the project moving forward. 30. Success of the Oro Valley Marketplace is needed to grow tax base and provide necessary services to the public. 31. What is the anticipated tax revenue generated from the proposed project? Conclusion The applicant and Town staff addressed some of the questions related to the proposal and the associated impacts. It was determined a second neighborhood meeting will be conducted in addition to smaller focus groups with surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Spaeth closed the meeting, thanked everyone for their attendance and encouraged them to contact Ms. Simms with any additional thoughts, comments or concerns. Town of Oro Valley Focus Area Meetings Summaries Southwest corner of Oracle and Tangerine – Oro Valley Marketplace Conducted on-line via Zoom August 5, 2021, August 12, 2021, August 17, 2021 and August 18, 2021 6:00 – 7:30 PM Introductions and Welcome Meeting facilitator and project manager for the Town, Principal Planner, Michael Spaeth, introduced the agenda for the meeting. Members of Town Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission attended each meeting. All four meetings included the same Staff presentation summarized below: Town Staff Presentation Michael Spaeth, Principal Planner and the Town’s project manager for the applicant’s proposal, provided a presentation that included: · Subject property · Project Timeline · History of the development · Brief overview of the applicant’s requests · Summary of questions and comments heard during the 1st community-wide neighborhood meeting Applicant Presentation The applicant, Keri Silvyn, from Lazarus and Silvyn representing the property owner, provided a presentation that included: · Subject property · Challenges of the site · Proposed designs including renderings of buildings · Viewshed analysis Public Questions & Comments – Focus Area Meeting 1 Following is a summary of questions and comments from neighbors in the Catalina Shadows subdivision. 1. Noise attenuation and how it will be mitigated for existing residents adjacent to the site as well as future apartment residents within the site. 2. Timing of development and associated phases 3. Water use, specifically water planned splash pads and wading pool. Public Questions & Comments – Focus Area Meeting 2 Following is a summary of questions and comments from neighbors in the Rams Canyon and Rams pass subdivisions. 1. Possibility, and timing of, installation of a traffic light at Oracle Road and Rams Field Pass. 2. Tax impacts once the previously approved incentive ends. 3. Light pollution/plan for new common areas, hotel and apartments facing the Catalina Mountains. 4. Looking forward to more shopping options 5. Happy it is development in a previously disturbed area 6. Oracle road paving – how far north will it be repaved 7. What is the effort being done to fill existing vacant suites at the marketplace? 8. What about the new employees at the marketplace? With regard to housing and public transportation 9. Will a safe pedestrian route from Rams Canyon and Rams Pass to the marketplace be considered? Public Questions & Comments – Focus Area Meeting 3 Following is a summary of questions and comments from neighbors in the Palisades and Palisades South subdivisions 1. Timing of development and associated phases 2. Capacity rate of area hotels and apartments. Is there a need for more apartments in this are? 3. Building height (75’) of Tangerine Apartments. Could the height be lowered? 4. Multi-use path already seems busy. Is there enough capacity with the new influx of people? 5. Traffic concerns at Water Harvest Way and Tangerine Road. 6. If approved, what makes sure they build the entertainment district amenities? 7. Support from neighbor regarding excitement at the possibility of reimaging the area. Public Questions & Comments – Focus Area Meeting 4 Following is a summary of questions and comments from neighbors in homes near the southeast intersection of Oracle and Tangerine Roads. 1. How will water be provided? Water table in the area has been receding. 2. View impacts of apartments on Tangerine Road. Could the height be reduced? Conclusion The applicant and Town staff addressed the questions and comments related to the proposal and the associated impacts. Mr. Spaeth laid out the project timeline moving forward, thanked everyone for their attendance and encouraged them to email ask@orovalleyaz.gov with any additional thoughts, comments or concerns. Town of Oro Valley 2nd Neighborhood Meeting Summary Southwest corner of Oracle and Tangerine – Oro Valley Marketplace Conducted on-line via Zoom September 13, 2021 6:00 – 7:30 PM Introductions and Welcome Meeting facilitator and project manager for the Town, Principal Planner, Michael Spaeth, introduced the agenda for the meeting. There were approximately 60 neighbors and interested parties in attendance. Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett, Councilmembers Greene and Bohen and Planning and Zoning Commissioners Gambill, Posey, Sturmon and Bergsma all attended the meeting. Town Staff Presentation Michael Spaeth, Principal Planner and the Town’s project manager for the applicant’s proposal, provided a presentation that included: · Purpose of tonight’s meeting · Project Timeline · History of the development · Brief overview of the applicant’s requests · Summary of questions and comments heard during the 1st community-wide neighborhood meeting and focus area meetings. Applicant Presentation The applicant, Keri Silvyn, from Lazarus and Silvyn representing the property owner, provided a presentation that included: · Subject property · Challenges of the site · Proposed designs including renderings of buildings Public Questions & Comments Following is a summary of the issues discussed: 1. Accessibility to existing stores in sites for the community 2. Traffic concerns 3. Need for so many apartments 4. Noise from apartments 5. Support for the amount of apartment units 6. Entertainment for adults 7. Reason for switching the heights of the apartments/ increasing the Tangerine apartment height a. Could parking be placed underground to reduce the Tangerine apartment height? 8. Is work with the State being done to develop Oracle Road? 9. Why not do condos instead of apartments? 10. Are upscale retailers interested? 11. With the acquisition of Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) right-of-way how close will the Tangerine apartments be to the road? Conclusion The applicant and Town staff addressed the questions and comments related to the proposal and the associated impacts. Mr. Spaeth laid out the project timeline moving forward, thanked everyone for their attendance and encouraged them to email ask@orovalleyaz.gov with any additional thoughts, comments or concerns. 1 Simms, Milini From:Vella, Bayer Sent:Wednesday, September 2, 2020 12:35 PM To:Simms, Milini Subject:Fwd: plans for Apartments and Hotels in the Marketplace FYI  Sent from my iPhone    Begin forwarded message:  From: "Winfield, Joe" <jwinfield@orovalleyaz.gov>  Date: September 2, 2020 at 11:49:47 AM MST  To: "Jacobs, Mary" <mjacobs@orovalleyaz.gov>  Cc: "Johnston, JJ" <jjohnston@orovalleyaz.gov>, "Vella, Bayer" <bvella@orovalleyaz.gov>  Subject: FW:  plans for Apartments and Hotels in the Marketplace  FYI    Joseph C. Winfield, Mayor  Town of Oro Valley  11000 N. La Cañada Dr.  Oro Valley, AZ  85737  520‐229‐4700   www.orovalleyaz.gov     All messages created in this system should be considered a public record subject to disclosure under the  Arizona Public Records Law (A.R.S. 39‐121) with no expectation of privacy related to the use of this  technology.    ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Harvey Ward    Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 11:47 AM  To: Winfield, Joe <jwinfield@orovalleyaz.gov>  Subject: plans for Apartments and Hotels in the Marketplace      Dear Mayor Winfield,    I am Carla Ward and I live across the street and a little south of the Market Place in Rams Field Pass II.  I  never paid attention to the building of the apartments across the street from us because I didn’t  care.  But now that they are there and I see how they are affecting us, I care......a lot.  It’s a lot harder to  pull safely across Oracle Road from our development now.  I’m aware that at some point a traffic light is  going to be installed, although we don’t know when.     My biggest concerns about building four monstrous apartment buildings are these:      2 1.  Amount of traffic.   I think the plan was to put in 600 units—Let’s just say two cars  per unit. That is at least 1200 cars on the road and we have a hard time getting out  now.  Also, we are experiencing more foot traffic in our neighborhood.  There is a nice  walk way behind the apartments but because people can walk on the mountain behind  us, we now have a lot of foot traffic here in our neighborhood.  It hasn’t come without  some problems.  My dog was attacked by two off leash dogs from somebody who was  enjoying the mountain behind us and didn’t live in our neighborhood.  This was  someone not invested in our community.  I’ve contacted Game and Fish because people  are collecting desert tortoises and carrying them home in backpacks to sell.  I trailed  that young adult to the apartments behind Fair Winds.  On a side note, Mayor, we also  had a weird homeless guy living in the desert in a tent just north of us.  We let the park  rangers know, but they were okay with him being there.  He was there from November  to May.  What happens when he starts bringing his friends next season?  Are we going  to have a homeless camp?  Just wait and see what happens when a free water park is  built in the Market Place and the homeless start hanging out there.  Were you aware  that Oro Valley Police just escorted to Tucson Mall a young man who was living under  the bridge behind the Frys?  This stuff is coming to lovely Oro Valley.  Then Oro Valley  will become any trashy city.  We also have a lot of very unwise people who load their  strollers with littles, tie their dog to the stroller and cross from here to the apartments  and from the apartments to here—insane!        2.  Crime.  Mayor, please don’t poo poo me on this point.  Everywhere there is a high saturation of  apartments in Tucson, the majority of those areas have turned into a ghetto.  Apartments bring a lot of  folks that are transient and not invested in our community like a homeowner who wants to maintain the  value of their properties.  Please drive through Tucson and see if what I’m saying is not true.  I have kids  in law enforcement.  Apartments become hubs for selling drugs.  “Oh, but these are luxury apartments,”  you might say to me.  They will age.  They will be sold to other companies who probably will not  maintain them as they were when they were new and then who knows?  They may eventually be used  as government housing which has happened all over Tucson, and the drug, prostitution, theft and  domestic violence will reign, and here we will be across the street as old people.  I beg you please not to  approve the apartment buildings, four giant ones that seem to get taller and taller until this area looks  like a city.      Mayor, the attractiveness of Oro Valley is that we have some space to enjoy sky, mountain, outdoors  and each other because we are a safe community.  Please help us keep it that way.  Build homes, collect  property taxes.  Apartments don’t belong in a shopping center!  That’s so weird!  Keep Oro Valley safe  for everybody by not building apartments that are going to attract a criminal element eventually.  It’s  nice that Old folks can be safe here, let’s keep it that way.      I don’t know who is going to fill up two motels.  Do you?  I know in Phoenix Rose Mofford Sport Complex  brought in a lot of money to the area with softball tournaments.  Many teams came, filled up hotels  around the park, ate at the restaurants all while building great skills in girls playing softball.  ASA softball  isn’t as big in Tucson as it is in Phoenix because we don’t have the fields.  Build the complex and they will  come—along with their money!!!  They also shop when they come for tournaments!  Of course, we have  have a lot of empty shops.  Maybe these business need a tax break and reduced rents so they can  generate funds.  I don’t know.  I just know we have a lot of empty buildings.    Mayor, I thank you kindly for considering my concerns about the Marketplace revitalization.  Im not  going to send every counsel member this e‐mail as I believe Solomon and Mo Greene could care less  what I think as long as they make money.  I’m sorry Bill Garner didn’t get in.    3 Carla Ward            Sent from my iPad  1 Spaeth, Michael From:Jerry Stenger Sent:Thursday, October 7, 2021 7:52 AM To:Simms, Milini Subject:Fwd: OV Marketplace Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Jerry Stenger > Date: October 7, 2021 at 7:48:49 AM MST To: msimms@orovalley.az.gov Subject: OV Marketplace We have heard many concerns about the 5 story buildings planned for the Marketplace. We were visiting San Diego some time ago. There was enough local concern about a project which exceeded neighborhood height norms that the city required the developer the erect two poles with a very visible line between them to simulate the proposed height. That could let the OV neighborhood agree that the proposed height is not an issue or that the height is a real issue for all concerned. Jerry Stenger, OV resident Sent from my iPhone 1 Spaeth, Michael From:Oden, Hannah Sent:Tuesday, September 14, 2021 12:06 PM To:Simms, Milini; Spaeth, Michael; Vella, Bayer Subject:FW: Constituent Comment - OV Marketplace Neighborhood Meeting Attendance FYI, please see below. Hannah Oden Senior Planner Town of Oro Valley 11000 N. La Cañada Dr. Oro Valley, AZ 85737 (520) 229-4814 Work Cell: (520) 488-0906 www.orovalleyaz.gov From: Shaddock, Karl <kshaddock@orovalleyaz.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 9:51 AM To: Oden, Hannah <hoden@orovalleyaz.gov> Cc: Melcher, Paul <pmelcher@orovalleyaz.gov> Subject: Constituent Comment - OV Marketplace Neighborhood Meeting Attendance Hi Hannah and Paul, I’m handling constituent services while Jessica is out. We received a comment from a constituent who expressed disappointment that a link to join the OV Marketplace Neighborhood meeting was not included within OVProjects.com. I will let the constituent know that their concerns will be provided to Mayor and Councilmembers as well as to Planning. Just wanted to lift up the specific comment on the web link as an FYI (or if you wanted to comment). The full message is pasted below. Thanks, K Hello I live in Rams Pass, and I just finished listening to the meeting. I wonder how many people couldn’t log into the meeting because of the wrong information on the yellow card. Going to ov projects does not get you to the meeting. I went to the town .gov site and had to search Oro Valley marketplace that went to the page with meeting instructions. There were no direct links on either homepage. As with most of the people tonight I agree that OV is being short sighted with this project. How will 700 apartments directly benefit OV besides more shopping at Walmart, though most of the people in that demographic shop exclusively online. They pay 0 property taxes yet will benefit from our schools and town facilities. Have we learned nothing from the recession in 2008. Maybe they were shortsighted also and should have scaled back. Here we are in the middle of a pandemic, and a changing real estate market and no one knows what is going to happen. We all agree something should go in there . Start small and adapt with the changes. Townhomes, walking trails and small shops and restaurants that will support local businesses. Please do the right thing and scale this back, especially the height ordinance. Thanks for listening and please forward to all involved. Jeff Klotzer Karl Shaddock Management Analyst Town of Oro Valley 2 520-229-4713 11000 N. La Cañada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona 85737 kshaddock@orovalleyaz.gov 1 Spaeth, Michael From:Simms, Milini Sent:Friday, December 3, 2021 11:54 AM To:Spaeth, Michael Subject:FW: OV Marketplace Milini Simms, AICP Principal Planner Community & Economic Development Department Town of Oro Valley 520.229.4836 From: Vella, Bayer <bvella@orovalleyaz.gov> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 10:23 AM To: Simms, Milini <msimms@orovalleyaz.gov>; Spaeth, Michael <mspaeth@orovalleyaz.gov> Subject: Fwd: OV Marketplace FYI Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: "Jacobs, Mary" <mjacobs@orovalleyaz.gov> Date: August 16, 2021 at 8:16:20 AM MST To: "Vella, Bayer" <bvella@orovalleyaz.gov> Cc: "Melcher, Paul" <pmelcher@orovalleyaz.gov> Subject: FW: OV Marketplace For the record. Mary Mary Jacobs, Town Manager Town of Oro Valley 11000 N. La Cañada Dr. Oro Valley, AZ 85737 520-229-4725 www.orovalleyaz.gov All messages created in this system should be considered a public record subject to disclosure under the Arizona Public Records Law (A.R.S. 39-121) with no expectation of privacy related to the use of this technology. From: Winfield, Joe <jwinfield@orovalleyaz.gov> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 7:41 AM To: Jacobs, Mary <mjacobs@orovalleyaz.gov> Subject: Fwd: OV Marketplace 2 Please share with CED. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Lynn Rutman > Date: August 14, 2021 at 8:14:08 AM MST To: "Winfield, Joe" <jwinfield@orovalleyaz.gov> Subject: OV Marketplace Dear Mayor Winfield: Something important to consider about the proposed development at OV Marketplace…… Sedona has its Tlaquepaque. San Antonio has its Riverwalk. Cape Cod has its Mashpee Commons. OV has the OV Marketplace which we all agree needs help. BUT …. will five luxury apartment buildings and hotels revitalize OV Marketplace and enhance our community? Is it in keeping with the laidback, outdoorsy nature of OV? Will it turn into an expensive eyesore when it fails to find people who want to rent its expensive apartments and stay in its luxury hotels? My husband and I live across the street in Rams Pass. We would love to see a community-centered retail village here like Tlaquepaque in Sedona. This would provide a retail destination for people looking for something a little different. We moved to OV three years ago from Cape Cod. One of the attractions there is Mashpee Commons. It is an elegant, yet, very, very quaint retail village with pedestrian-only streets and lanes. Some stores like Pottery Barn, Talbots and LL Bean anchor the village with well-known names. Other businesses that thrive there include an ice cream parlor, jewelry stores, an eye doctor, a candy store, an organic market, lots of art galleries, a paint your own pottery shop, gift shops, high end clothing stores like Lily Pulitzer as well as affordable t-shirt stores like Soft As A Grape, real estate offices and a medical building. There are several excellent restaurants and a cinema. There are events such as block parties, sidewalk sales, band concerts, etc. Mashpee Commons remains vibrant and profitable all year-round, despite the reality of winter on Cape Cod. Can you imagine how well a similar project would do in OV with our beautiful weather? 3 Sedona’s Tlaquepaque is similar only with a Southwest vibe. It attracts people from all over who want something to do on the days when they don’t feel like hiking. The new OV Marketplace proposal is too slick for laid-back OV. Five luxury hotels/apartment buildings will not enhance our community or promote retail opportunities here. OV residents will still find themselves driving to Tucson to shop. we need to keep the dollars right here in OV. What better way to do that than to create a pedestrian- only retail village like Sedona and Cape Cod? Please reconsider this ridiculous proposal lest OV ends up with a big white elephant and eyesore. Sincerely, Lynn and Al Rutman, Sent from my iPad Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed Marketplace hotels 03/11/2020 03/11/2020 EL CONQUISTADOR PATIO HOMES Daniels Marie Please please, not more apartment complexes in Oro Valley. They can't all be full. Way to many (especially on Oracle) apartment complexes for such a small community. More upscale restaurants (not chain), a Lowes, Sam's/Costco, locally owned shops, upscale privately owned sports bar (brewery). Also, keep the new building heights low so our mountains can be seen. Hate what is going on at the Kneaders Oracle area. Thanks for "listening", Marie Daniels Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed Proposed Oro Valley Marketplace Revitalization 04/14/2020 04/16/2020 RAMS CANYON Hello Ms. Simms, My name is Sharon Breining and I'm a resident of Oro Valley (Rams Canyon). I attended the March meeting presentation of the proposals for the Marketplace. Several neighbors and I are collecting signatures against the proposed revitalization plans presented at the March meeting. We have a great many concerns regarding the proposals but specifically, the 600+ apartments planned for the marketplace. Due to the Corona virus pandemic, we are still in the process of getting signatures. My question is when will we need to have our signatures submitted to the Council? And, at what stage is project at? Has a formal submittal been done? At what point will there be focus groups? How does one get included on these groups? Any information you can provide would be appreciated. Thank you Sharon Breining Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed A question 09/17/2020 09/18/2020 Hi Jessica, Are there just three proposed plans or could the developer take a hotel from one plan and combine it with a boutique shopping center from another to create a plan D? Thanks, Janet Sent from my iPad Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed PROPOSED CHANGE TO ESLO AT ORO VALLEY MARKETPLACE 07/30/2021 08/13/2021 Rebecca Taber After listening to the video and reviewing some of the materials provided in the development proposal, I have a question regarding the entertainment area. The developer commissioned RECON to do a site assessment last year and that assessment was provided as an attachment to the proposal for an ESLO amendment. It seems the developer had the study done to determine whether the area actually deserved it’s designation as a Critical Resource Area. The study confirmed that, yes, the area did meet the criteria for Critical Resource area (as swell as a minor wildlife linkage). As I understand it, such an area should remain 95% open space. My question is why we even have such designations if a developer can just ask that they be ignored? Is the proposed splash pad really worth the loss of cooling green space and wildlife habitat? There is already artwork and a beautiful pathway along this central area . Why not leave it basically as is (minus the trash) and capitalize on lovely reestablished native habitat that’s in place? I’d much rather visit a beer garden adjacent to a “natural” wash than a splash pad. The entertainment area appears to a grab by the developer to get to use every inch of the property for development and override open space regulations. I don’t believe that overall development plan really requires or justifies the loss of our critical resource area and open space. I would appreciate it is someone who can address these questions could call me to discuss. Thanks, Rebecca Taber Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed OV Projects zoom meeting 08/05/2021 08/06/2021 CATALINA SHADOWS ESTATES Jill Wheatley Hello- I live in the Catalina Shadows subdivision and I wanted to see the informational video about the latest updates to the Oro Valley Marketplace Project. Can you tell me where I can find it? The website directed me to the project but I did not see a link to an informational video. I did not go to the zoom meeting because I wanted to see the video first. Now I will just go with the info that is on the video. Thank you for your help, Jill Wheatley Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed OV Marketplace rezoning 08/05/2021 08/06/2021 CATALINA SHADOWS ESTATES John Alese I just attended the zoom meeting and could not ask a question. I travel extensively in Europe and enjoy evenings in the town squares Coffee Shops, restaurants, all centered around a beautiful town center. We have an opportunity to develop such a community resource and my review of the plans and presentations show nothing like this will happen This rezoning is about MONEY. Hotels and apartments are the focus. This rezoning is a wasted opportunity to do something wonderful for Oro Valley. Oro Valley could set the standard for community development Instead, OV has AGAIN, let developers call the shots. I am opposed to this plan. Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed OV Marketplace 08/13/2021 08/13/2021 Dear OV: Sedona has its Tlaquepaque. San Antonio has its Riverwalk. Cape Cod has its Mashpee Commons. OV has the OV Marketplace which we all agree needs help. BUT …. will five luxury apartment buildings and hotels revitalize OV Marketplace and enhance our community? Is it in keeping with the laidback, outdoorsy nature of OV? Will it turn into an expensive eyesore when it fails to find people who want to rent its expensive apartments and stay in its luxury hotels? My husband and I live across the street in Rams Pass. We would love to see a community-centered retail village here like Tlaquepaque in Sedona. This would provide a retail destination for people looking for something a little different. We moved to OV three years ago from Cape Cod. One of the attractions there is Mashpee Commons. It is an elegant, yet, very, very quaint retail village with pedestrian-only streets and lanes. Some stores like Pottery Barn, Talbots and LL Bean anchor the village with well-known names. Other businesses that thrive there include an ice cream parlor, jewelry stores, an eye doctor, a candy store, an organic market, lots of art galleries, a paint your own pottery shop, gift shops, high end clothing stores like Lily Pulitzer as well as affordable t-shirt stores like Soft As A Grape, real estate offices and a medical building. There are several excellent restaurants and a cinema. There are events such as block parties, sidewalk sales, band concerts, etc. Mashpee Commons remains vibrant and profitable all year-round, despite the reality of winter on Cape Cod. Can you imagine how well a similar project would do in OV with our beautiful weather? Sedona’s Tlaquepaque is similar only with a Southwest vibe. It attracts people from all over who want something to do on the days when they don’t feel like hiking. The new OV Marketplace proposal is too slick for laid-back OV. Five luxury hotels/apartment buildings will not enhance our community or promote retail opportunities here. OV residents will still find themselves driving to Tucson to shop. we need to keep the dollars right here in OV. What better way to do that than to create a pedestrian-only retail village like Sedona and Cape Cod? Please reconsider this ridiculous proposal lest OV ends up with a big white elephant and eyesore. Sincerely, Lynn and Al Rutman, Sent from my iPad Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed OV Marketplace 08/13/2021 08/13/2021 I’m sure many have raised concerns about the traffic on Oracle, but what about the traffic on the loop? I think this needs to be coupled with the already planned expansion of the loop north, because the Canada del Oro trail is very congested as it is. I have felt close to being run off the trail several times by aggressive riders negotiating the traffic. Is that a consideration? That said, I personally like the plan. Thanks, Gary McMahon Ram’s Canyon resident Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed Meetings 08/17/2021 08/18/2021 Hi, we have tried twice to find the zoom for the marketplace project. Once on the 5 and again on the 17. We could not access them. We are very concerned about this project and the inability to be involved. Thanks, Cindy Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed Water sources 09/03/2021 09/09/2021 Terry Rosato Please tell me how the city plans to ensure that current residents still receive water when AZ is currently been given reduced CAP water. These 2 planned developments at Rancho Vistoso and OV Marketplace are going to put even more demand on a drought-ridden area with dwindling sources of water! Thank you, Terry Rosato Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed upcoming meeting- OV marketplace 09/03/2021 09/10/2021 Teresa Rosato 1. Please stop scheduling community meetings on Jewish holidays!! 2. Part of the master plan was to conserve the natural beauty. Any change in current height and vegetation buffers go against this plan! Is the bike path being moved? 3. What is actually open to the rest of us who are residents and property taxpayers? Is this simply another bunch of luxury apartments and chain hotels?? Thank you Teresa Rosato Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed Oro Valley Marketplace project 09/08/2021 09/08/2021 CANYON SHADOWS Joan Gallagher The constituent wanted to have her objection to the Oro Valley Marketplace Rezoning and site design proposal given to Town Council. She states "there are enough apartments, hotels and walking paths in Oro Valley and this project is a money grab." She states we do not have the schools or the water to handle all the people moving into the apartments. This is enough. Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed Oro Valley Marketplace 09/15/2021 09/20/2021 VISTOSO HIGHLANDS Teresa Marro I am following up to a question I raised during the 9/13/21 Oro Valley Marketplace Neighborhood Meeting. The developer is requesting changes for building heights (increase in PAD approved heights). We were informed the Marketplace is in Neighborhood 4. The question - if increased building heights are approved for the developer (apartments and hotels) -- this will set a precedence for others in Neighborhood 4. Will C1 Commercial Property owners be allowed to apply for exceptions based on this precedence? For the record, we are against the proposed apartments/hotels and most certainly against the request for increased building heights. This will ruin the quality of life in Oro Valley and utilize already strained natural resources, specifically water. Respectfully, Teresa Marro Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed Marketplace Developement 09/25/2021 10/01/2021 VILLAGES AT SILVERHAWKE Rob Young We are for the Developement of 2 apt complexes and 2 hotels as proposed by the developer. This will make sure to keep the marketplace thriving. Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed Oro Valley Marketplace 10/05/2021 10/06/2021 RANCHO VISTOSO Jake Parduhn I would like to offer my support to the new direction being pursued for the Oro Valley Marketplace. The area needs more to offer. It feels like the area is always just on the brink of collapse. Please continue to add more the this center of town. Initial Comment / Request Sub Department Issue Type Status Subject Date Submitted Date Closed Subdivision First Name Last name Planning Oro Valley Marketplace Closed questions for oro valley marketplace development 10/19/2021 10/22/2021 Steven Hensley Hi, I’ve been watching the town halls and I have two questions for the developer of the marketplace at oracle and tangerine I ask question 1 because the developer says the apartments will be condo style targeted to higher income but apartments situated between a red lobster and Walmart won’t appeal to higher income. Q1 I’m wondering if the developer has or has plans to pitch to higher end grocers (Natural Grocers, AJ’s Fine Foods, Sprouts, Whole Foods) particularly Natural Grocers? Q2 Is there a plan or room in the current plan to consider for a water feature such as a small lake or pond in the Central Park or somewhere in the marketplace? Steven E. Hensley Initial Comment / Request Town of Oro Valley Apartment Study Fall 2020 Prepared by: 1 | P a g e Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................3 Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 3 Research questions ................................................................................................................................... 3 Key findings ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................6 Background information ........................................................................................................................... 6 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 8 Data limitations ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Structure of the report .............................................................................................................................. 8 Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................................9 Section 1: What is the current demand and supply of apartments?...................................................... 9 Demand analysis ................................................................................................................................... 9 Population growth ................................................................................................................................ 9 Employment growth ............................................................................................................................. 9 Home ownership patterns .................................................................................................................. 10 Housing affordability ........................................................................................................................... 10 Supply analysis .................................................................................................................................... 10 Section 2: Do apartments command significantly lower rents over time due to deterioration? ....... 11 Oro Valley apartment properties’ performance ................................................................................. 11 Section 3: What are the ages and income of renters in comparison to homeowners? ...................... 13 Renter demographics and housing characteristics ............................................................................. 13 Section 4: Do local schools have the capacity to support more apartments? ..................................... 15 Household and apartment unit size .................................................................................................... 15 School capacity.................................................................................................................................... 15 Section 5: Do apartments significantly contribute to overall crime in Oro Valley? ............................ 16 Higher-density development and total crime ..................................................................................... 16 Section 6: Is crime higher in apartment communities compared to single-family residential subdivisions? .......................................................................................................................................... 17 Higher-density development and single-family residential crime ...................................................... 17 Appendix ......................................................................................................................................... 18 Exhibit 1 – Economic Forecast vs. Apartment Forecast .......................................................................... 18 2 | P a g e Exhibit 2- Apartments Average Rent Per Square Foot ............................................................................ 18 Exhibit 3-Apartment Vacancy Rates........................................................................................................ 19 Exhibit 4- Living Arrangements ............................................................................................................... 20 Exhibit 5- Number of Members in a Household ..................................................................................... 20 Exhibit 6- Apartment Unit Mix ................................................................................................................ 21 Exhibit 7- Part I Crime 2019 .................................................................................................................... 22 Exhibit 8- Part I Crime 2018 .................................................................................................................... 23 Exhibit 9- Part I Crime 2017 .................................................................................................................... 24 Exhibit 10- Part I Crime 2016 .................................................................................................................. 25 Exhibit 11- Part I Crime 2015 .................................................................................................................. 26 3 | P a g e Executive Summary Purpose The purpose of this study is to provide information to assist the governing body in evaluating Oro Valley’s housing mix and upcoming apartment proposals. The study is the first step in conducting a housing inventory (Action item 135) to meet the goals and policies of the Town’s voter-approved General Plan, Your Voice, Our Future. An independent consulting firm, the Real Estate Consulting Group (RECG) was commissioned by the Town to conduct the study. RECG specializes in market research, analysis and projections. To assist both the public and private sector, the firm publishes a monthly report highlighting different trends in office, commercial, residential and multi-family development. With over a decade of experience, RECG collected pertinent data to identify the demand and supply for apartments in Oro Valley and objectively analyze some of the common concerns. Methodology RECG used both quantitative and qualitative data to complete the study. Data was collected from both national and local sources (e.g. US Census and OVPD). Town staff provided RECG with the current and anticipated amount of apartment proposals. Recurring concerns previously raised by residents during public meetings recently and over the years were also provided by Town staff to identify the scope of the study. Research questions The Town is currently processing five requests for new apartment communities and at least two more are anticipated. According to Town staff, several concerns have been voiced by residents during the public meeting process for these and previous applications for apartments. These concerns include the following:  Perception that the market for apartments is minimal.  Perception that existing apartment communities in Oro Valley struggle with high vacancy rates.  Concern that apartment communities deteriorate to problematic levels over time.  Concerns regarding impacts of perceived young and low-income tenants to the community.  Concerns that local schools do not have the capacity to support apartment communities in Oro Valley.  Perception that apartments significantly increase an area’s crime rates.  Perception that more crimes are reported in apartment communities than in single-family subdivisions. The study aims to evaluate these common perceptions and concerns by objectively analyzing data to answer the following research questions as they relate to Oro Valley: Section 1: What is the demand for and supply of apartments? Section 2: Do apartments command significantly lower rents over time due to deterioration? Section 3: What are the ages and income of renters in comparison to homeowners? Section 4: Do local schools have the capacity to support more apartments? Section 5: Do apartments significantly contribute to overall crime? Section 6: Is crime higher in apartment communities than single-family residential subdivisions? 4 | P a g e Key findings Section 1: What is the demand for and supply of apartments? FINDINGS  Oro Valley apartment demand is high and experiencing the strongest rent growth in the region.  Oro Valley’s current apartment supply is limited (15.3% of all housing units) yet performing well. SUPPORTING DATA (pg. 9-10)  The average monthly rent is $1,123, a 29% growth in the last five years during the same time as the inventory grew by 27%.  Oro Valley is projected to add 200 - 250 new households a year along with 175 – 200 new jobs. An estimated annual housing demand of 200 – 400 new housing units (single-family and multifamily combined) is projected through 2050. Oro Valley is roughly 85% built-out with a limited supply of vacant land.  Oro Valley currently has 12 apartment communities totaling 2,961 units. The vacancy rate is 5.4% implying that properties are generally fully occupied.  In the last decade, the Town of Oro Valley has grown to a population of 45,184. Downsizing empty nesters and early career professionals are increasing demand for apartments, which provide affordable, flexible and low-maintenance options for both groups. Section 2: Do apartments command significantly lower rents over time due to deterioration? FINDINGS  Oro Valley’s older properties (20-36 years old) continue to report low vacancy rates and rising rent. This indicates that age of a property does not necessarily mean decline in quality, appearance, safety or performance. SUPPORTING DATA (pg. 11-12)  The vacancy rates for older apartments (1984-1999) have historically been low or declining even as new apartment communities open.  The average rent of older communities (1984-1999) is roughly 23% lower than the average rent reported for newer communities. However, three of the older communities are still designated Class A properties and the other five are designated Class B properties (older yet well maintained).  Class B apartment communities reported an average rent growth of 34%.  The average rent for the oldest apartment complex (36 year old), Sundown Village, is $1,228. This is slightly higher than the Town’s average apartment rent of $1,123.  For comparison, the average rent for the Sunrise Ridge Apartments, located in the Catalina Foothills and built in 1980 (40 years old) is $1,623. This indicates apartment communities in desirable locations maintain a high performance. Section 3: What are the income levels and age of renters in comparison to homeowners? FINDINGS Oro Valley renters (living in all housing types) have higher incomes than renters in the region and are generally either young professionals or empty nesters. SUPPORTING DATA  Combined, the 55+ age groups represent 42% of the renter population compared to the 25-44 age groups, which represents 37% of the renter population. 5 | P a g e (pg. 13-14)  Oro Valley renter households have a median income of $51,092 (higher than the median income for teachers, police officers, librarians and other administrative professionals). This is lower than Oro Valley’s median household income of $76,046 yet comparable to the Tucson region’s median household income of $51,037.  The average monthly rent of $1,123 in Oro Valley is substantially higher than the average rent in Tucson of $846.  Although apartments in Oro Valley are more expensive than others in the region, they provide a more affordable alternative to homeownership for empty nesters and young professionals. Apartments are roughly $1,057 less per month than the average monthly mortgage, which in 2019 was $2,180. Section 4: Do local schools have the capacity to support more apartments? FINDING Renter household sizes tend to be smaller, with fewer children, resulting in less of an impact on schools than new single-family homes. SUPPORTING DATA (pg. 15)  Renter households in Oro Valley have an average household size of 2.2 people per household, compared to 2.3 people per owner occupied households.  90% of Oro Valley’s apartments are 1- 2 bedroom units.  School capacity is verified through all rezoning applications. Per Town staff, this is the typical process for most apartment requests. Section 5: Do apartments significantly contribute to overall crime? FINDING Crimes from apartment communities do not significantly contribute to overall crime. SUPPORTING DATA (pg. 16)  Over the past five years, apartments have accounted for 13% of all Part I (more serious offenses) residential and non-residential crimes in Oro Valley. Section 6: Is crime higher in apartment communities compared to single-family residential subdivisions? FINDING Crimes in apartment communities are proportionate to crimes occurring in single- family residential subdivisions. SUPPORTING DATA (pg. 17)  Per unit, apartment communities had less crimes reported than single-family homes when compared over a 6 month period. Conclusion Based on the projected population growth, limited amount of vacant land and performance of existing apartment communities (for specifics, see key findings above), the market for apartments is high in Oro Valley. It is expected to remain high as long as these three factors are prevalent. This report finds the common concerns surrounding apartment communities are not substantiated by the data in Oro Valley. In general, apartments provide more compact housing and also contribute density needed to support existing and future retail development. Additionally, apartments help to diversify housing opportunity to meet the demands of a diverse population, ranging from young professionals to empty nesters. Based on the income and age of renters in Oro Valley, it is reasonable to surmise that residents are renting by choice. Overall high-density housing could contribute to broadened housing options able to contribute to viability of commercial nodes, support projected employment growth and accommodate current and future residents in Oro Valley. 6 | P a g e Introduction The purpose of this study is to provide information to assist the governing body in evaluating Oro Valley’s housing mix and upcoming apartment proposals. An independent consulting firm, the Real Estate Consulting Group (RECG) was commissioned by the Town to conduct the study. With over a decade of experience, RECG collected pertinent data to identify the demand and supply for apartments in Oro Valley and objectively analyze some of the common concerns. The study is the first step in conducting a housing inventory to meet the goals and policies of the General Plan. The Your Voice, Our Future General Plan (ratified by the voters in 2016) envisions a community with a wide range of services, amenities, shopping and dining opportunities and housing types that meet the needs of current and future residents (Community Goal D) by supporting the development of diverse housing types (Policy CC.7). To meet this goal and policy, the General Plan specifies the conducting of a housing inventory to plan for the present and future housing needs of the community, while considering changes in demographics and overall growth (Action 135). Background information In the last decade, the Town of Oro Valley has grown to a population of 45,184 and evolved from a predominantly snowbird/retiree destination to a maturing community for all ages. In 2017, Real Estate Consulting Group projected annual housing demand of 200 – 400 new housing units (single-family and multifamily combined), based on projected population growth through 2050. Oro Valley is also roughly 85% built out within its current town limits. Oro Valley has 12 apartment communities totaling 2,961 units. Multi-family realtor investors created a nationally recognized scale to classify apartment communities (see descriptions on next page). Seven of the communities in Oro Valley are designated Class A, or properties of the highest quality that are well- located, new or recently renovated. The balance of the communities are Class B, or properties that are older (some over 30 years old), renovated yet in good locations (see chart below). Oro Valley Apartment Inventory Property Name Address Year Built Units Class The Canyons at Linda Vista 9750 North Oracle Road 2016 228 A Encantada at Steam Pump 11177 North Oracle Road 2014 288 A Villas at San Dorado 10730 North Oracle Road 2014 274 A Oro Vista 1301 West Lambert Lane 2006 138 A Golf Villas 10950 North La Canada Drive 1999 231 A The Place at Rock Ridge 10333 North Oracle Road 1995 319 A La Reserve Villas 10700 North La Reserve Drive 1988 240 A Pusch Ridge 9901 North Oracle Road 1998 144 B Overlook at Pusch Ridge 8851 North Oracle Road 1986 424 B Saddle Ridge 450 West Cool Drive 1985 248 B Catalina Crossing 9095 North Oracle Road 1985 97 B Sundown Village 8215 North Oracle Road 1984 330 B 7 | P a g e Apartment developments are permitted in the Multi-family (R-6), Residential-Service (R-S) and Commercial-Neighborhood (C-N) zoning districts as well as various Planned Area Developments (PADs). The Town currently has roughly 95.5 acres of vacant land zoned for apartments. The sites range in sizes with an average size of 5 acres. For comparison and context, the average size of the existing apartment communities is 12 acres. The Town is currently processing five apartment proposals and anticipates more due to the lack of available vacant land and the projected population growth. Since many of the remaining parcels zoned for apartments are small, most of these proposals require a rezoning request. Apartment requests currently under review Project name or location Acres Units Oro Vista Apartments- Lambert and La Cañada* .9 19 Linda Vista Luxury Rentals- northwest corner of Linda Vista and Oracle* 10 64 1ST and Tangerine 13 167 Oro Valley Village Center (previously known as the Oro Valley Marketplace) 19 602 Westward Look- Ina and Westward Look Drive 13 184 Anticipated requests Project location /name Acres Units HSL on Oracle and El Conquistador 18 304 Property on the southwest corner of Linda Vista and Oracle 20 408 * Existing zoning allows apartments Class Characteristics A Luxury and less than 10 years old Desirable locations High rents and low vacancy rates Professionally managed B Older yet renovated Good locations Medium-high rents and normal vacancy rates May or may not be professionally managed C Over 20 years old and in need of renovations Less desirable locations Low rents and low- income renters May or may not be professionally managed Vacant land zoned for apartments Zoning district Acres Multi-family (R-6) 28.9 Residential-service (r-s) 14.7 Commercial- neighborhood (c-n) 18.8 Capella PAD 33.0 La reserve pad 6.6 Rancho vistoso pad 3.5 Total 95.5 8 | P a g e Methodology RECG used quantitative and qualitative data to complete the study. Data was collected from both national and local sources. Sources include:  U.S. Census – American Factfinder 2013-2018 projections  National Multi-Family Housing Council  Real Data (Real Estate Analysis)  Economic and Business Research Center (EBRC - Eller College of Management, University of Arizona  Pima Association of Governments  Oro Valley Police Department  CityProtects.com  Apartments.com Town staff provided RECG with the applicable General Plan policies, zoning information and the current and anticipated amount of apartment proposals. Recurring concerns previously raised by residents during public meetings recently and over the years were also provided by Town staff to identify the scope of the study. Data limitations To identify the age and income levels of apartment dwellers, the U.S Census American Community Survey (ACS) was the only source available. The U.S. Census defines renters as occupied units which are not owner occupied, whether they are rented for cash rent or occupied without payment of cash rent. Based on this definition, the data includes renters of all housing types (single-family, duplexes, apartments, etc.). For comparing crime incidents reported in single-family residential subdivisions, CityProtects.com was the only source available. The crime incidents collected are limited to a 6-month timeframe and the subdivisions chosen were based on size and location. Structure of the report The data analysis portion of the report is divided into sections to answer the six research questions: Section 1: What is the demand for and supply of apartments? Section 2: Do apartments command significantly lower rents over time due to deterioration? Section 3: What are the ages and income of renters in comparison to homeowners? Section 4: Do local schools have the capacity to support more apartments? Section 5: Do apartments significantly contribute to overall crime? Section 6: Is crime higher in apartment communities than single-family residential subdivisions? Each section includes the applicable data, a detailed analysis and the sources of information. 9 | P a g e Data Analysis Section 1: What is the current demand and supply of apartments? Demand analysis Apartment demand is driven by population and employment growth, changes in effective income, housing affordability, and home ownership patterns. The most recent population and economic forecasts for the Tucson Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) obtained from the Economic and Business Research Center (EBRC - Eller College of Management, University of Arizona) are included in the Appendix (Exhibit 1) to provide insight into market conditions over the next several years. An analysis of Oro Valley’s population and employment growth, housing affordability and home ownership patterns follows below. Population growth The region’s population growth is fueled by job growth and retirees. EBRC is forecasting population growth at .7-.8% per year between 2020 and 2022 (see Exhibit 1 in Appendix). This represents an additional 23,300 new residents in Pima County. At 2.48 people per household, this equates to 9,395 new households over three years, 2,349 new households a year. Oro Valley’s population is forecasted to grow faster than the County as a whole, by 1.4% per year between 2020 and 2022, resulting in 200 – 250 new households per year. Employment growth EBRC is forecasting employment growth at 1 - 1.3% per year from 2020 to 2022, which represents an additional 13,100 jobs in the region. Oro Valley is forecasted to add 528 jobs during that same time period (see following chart). Most of these new jobs are being filled by young professionals aged 23 – 38 (millennials) who have a higher propensity to rent vs. buy, therefore there is an anticipated increased demand for more rental options. Apartments provide an affordable, flexible and low- maintenance housing option attractive to this age group and those new to an area. Source: Town of Oro Valley Economic Development According to Oro Valley’s Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, the Town has a primary goal to attract or expand a minimum of 20-30 primary employers, with a corresponding addition of 3,000- 4,500 new primary job opportunities, over the next 10 years. Oro Valley’s job growth will be stimulated by the opening of an Arizona State University campus set for the next two to three years and the University Of Arizona School Of Veterinary Medicine. In addition, Roche Tissue Diagnostics purchased an additional 54 acres to expand their 147,000 square foot facility. In general, the young professionals that 10 | P a g e staff these companies need affordable housing options close to work and walkable centers, with restaurants, entertainment and gathering spaces. As a result, employers report that many of their employees are living south of Oro Valley and commuting daily--there are around 8,000 commuters, according to Pima Association of Governments (PAG). Home ownership patterns Demographic shifts are driving demand for apartment living throughout the US and Pima County. Specifically, millennials who are moving into their first home, and empty nesters who are downsizing. The increase in Tucson MSA renter households is consistent with demographic shifts reported since the housing crisis. The percentage of renter households has increased from 35.8% to 39.7%. According to the U.S. Census, 25% of households in Oro Valley are renter households (includes all housing types). A low supply of existing home inventory (less than two months) is further driving demand for apartments. Housing affordability Apartments provide an affordable alternative to home buying. The total monthly payment for the average priced home sold in Oro Valley in 2019 was $2,180, whereas the average market rent for an apartment in Oro Valley was $1,123. Therefore, apartments provide an affordable housing option for young professionals/early career employees as well as down-sizing empty nesters and retirees. Supply analysis A review of the apartment fundamentals, such as occupancy and rent rates, indicates how well apartment properties are performing. Oro Valley currently has 12 apartment communities with a total of 2,961 units, 790 of which were completed in the last five years. This represents a 4.3% market share of the Tucson market apartment units. Oro Valley has 19,295 housing units and apartments represent a 15.3% share of all Oro Valley housing units. Oro Valley’s existing apartment properties are performing well with both an increase in occupancy and rents. As new Class A luxury apartments have come to market, existing apartment properties have been renovated in order to continue to attract tenants. Rents have increased 29% over the past five years and occupancy has increased from 93% to 96%. 11 | P a g e Section 2: Do apartments command significantly lower rents over time due to deterioration? Oro Valley apartment properties’ performance Performance indicators among Oro Valley’s apartment properties are very strong. Vacancy is low--the vacancy rate has dropped from 7.33% to 5.42% over the last five years (see Exhibit 3 and 4 in Appendix), and rents are up—average apartment rents have increased from $872 ($0.93 per square foot) to $1,123 ($1.15 per square foot), an increase of $251 per month (see Exhibit 2 in Appendix). This is higher than the average rent in Tucson of $846. Additionally, as the new properties have opened up at higher rents, owners of older properties have made improvements to their properties and increased rents accordingly. Source: Real Data The average rent of older apartment communities (1984-1999) is roughly 23% lower than the average rent reported for newer apartment communities. However, three of the older apartment communities are still designated Class A and the other five are designated Class B (older yet well maintained). Oro Valley’s oldest apartment community, Sundown Village reports an average rent of $1,228. This is slightly higher than the average rent for the Town of $1,123. Older apartment communities in the Catalina Foothills (36-40 years old) also report high average rents. Sunrise Ridge Apartments, built in 1980, have an average rent of $1,623. This shows apartment communities in desirable locations maintain a high performance over time. Rising rents and low vacancy rates indicate that age of a property does not necessarily mean decline in quality, appearance, safety or performance. Oro Valley Apartment Performance - Average Rents Property Name Year Built Units 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 The Canyons at Linda Vista 2016 228 $1,130 $1,214 $1,219 $1,357 Encantada at Steam Pump 2014 288 $1,229 $1,209 $1,287 $1,355 $1,342 Villas at San Dorado 2014 274 $1,264 $1,337 $1,222 $1,279 $1,385 Oro Vista 2006 138 $923 $1,047 $1,038 $1,214 $1,215 Golf Villas 1999 231 $929 $998 $1,190 $1,172 $1,364 Pusch Ridge 1998 144 $828 $846 $856 $882 $916 The Place at Rock Ridge 1995 319 $833 $896 $961 $1,042 $1,065 La Reserve Villas 1988 240 $847 $998 $923 $1,279 $1,147 Overlook at Pusch Ridge 1986 424 $648 $700 $730 $810 $861 Saddle Ridge 1985 248 $613 $671 $730 $791 $822 Catalina Crossing 1985 97 $661 $718 $735 $735 $773 Sundown Village 1984 330 $818 $728 $750 $947 $1,228 Average Market Rent $872.09 $939.83 $969.67 $1,060.42 $1,122.92 Catalina Foothills (Swan and Sunrise intersection) Average Rents Property Name Address Year Built Average Rent Elevation Apartments 4500 E. Sunrise Drive 1975 $920 Sunrise Ridge Apartments 4901 E. Sunrise Drive 1980 $1,623 Foothills Apartments 5441 N. Swan 1984 $921 12 | P a g e Compared with the Tucson market, the vacancy rate is similar (4.3% vs. 5.4%), however, average rents in Oro Valley are 35% higher than the market as a whole. Based on the low vacancy rates and increasing rent, Oro Valley’s apartment properties performance is strong. This indicates that the new properties have been properly absorbed and demand exists for additional new units. 13 | P a g e Section 3: What are the ages and income of renters in comparison to homeowners? Renter demographics and housing characteristics A review of demographic data will provide insights regarding the make-up and household characteristics of the renter (of all housing types) population in Oro Valley. As a whole, Oro Valley residents are older— with a median age of 53, due to a larger number of snowbird/retiree residents—than Pima County with a median age of 39. Oro Valley’s renter households, which make up 25% of the total households, have above average household incomes. They have a median household income of $51,092, which is more than the median salary for teachers, police officers librarians and other administrative professionals. Although it is lower than the Oro Valley median household income of $76, 484, it is comparable to the Tucson region’s median household income of $51,037. In comparing renter and homeowner households by age cohort in the following chart, renters account for a larger percentage of households in the younger age groups. Renters represent an average of 67% of households under 34 years of age vs. homeowners at 33%. In the 35-44 age cohort, homeownership increases and renters drop to 39% of the total households. Renter households decline further within the 45-84 age cohorts, then increase to 33% in the 85+ age cohort, due to elderly residents moving into assisted living facilities. It is anticipated that in the coming years, the percentage of renter households will continue to increase as rising home prices make homeownership less attainable to first time homebuyers. Source: ACS 5-year Estimates, 2013-2018 14 | P a g e The following chart illustrates the percentage of renter households by age group. As expected, more renter households are in the younger age groups, with the 25-34 age cohort at 18% and the 35-44 age cohort at 19%, then the percentage tapers off in the older age groups. However, the 55+ age groups still account for 42% of renter households in Oro Valley. Source - ACS 5-year Estimates, 2013-2018 15 | P a g e Section 4: Do local schools have the capacity to support more apartments? Household and apartment unit size According to the National Multifamily Housing Council’s tabulations of 2018 American Community Survey microdata, nationally, renter households are made up of singles at 62%, married couples at 20% and roommates at 18%. Only 22% of renter households have children in the home vs. 37% of all U.S. households that have children in the home. When looking at the number of members in renter households, 77% of households have two people or less in the home (see Exhibits 5 and 6 in Appendix). On average, 100 single-family owner-occupied houses include 51 school-age children. By contrast, apartments are attractive to single people, couples without children, and empty nesters, which is why 100 apartment units average just 31 children. The disparity is even greater when considering only new construction: 64 children per 100 new single- family houses vs. 29 children per 100 new apartment units. More affluent apartment renters have even fewer children (12 children per 100 households for residents earning more than 120 percent of the area median income, AMI), while less wealthy residents earning less than 80 percent of AMI still have fewer children (37 per household) than single-family homes. This holds true in Oro Valley, where in renter occupied housing units, the average household size is 2.2, compared with the average household size for owner occupied housing units at 2.3 people per household. The implication is that renter households tend to be smaller with fewer children. For that reason, 90% of apartment units built in Oro Valley are either one bedroom or two bedroom units. (See Unit Mix chart below and Exhibit 7 in the Appendix). With fewer children in the household, new renter households will have less of an impact on local schools than new single family development. School capacity Per Town staff, rezoning applications (typical process for apartment proposals) must show surrounding schools’ ability to accommodate the anticipated amount of future students. Applicants are required to provide a letter from the respective public school district (Amphitheatre) to verify this requirement is met. 37% 53% 10% Oro Valley Apartments Unit Mix 1 Bed 2 Bed 3 Bed Source: Real Data 16 | P a g e Section 5: Do apartments significantly contribute to overall crime in Oro Valley? Higher-density development and total crime Oro Valley has a reputation for being one of the safest cities in Arizona, a reputation earned by the Oro Valley Police Department’s commitment to excellence. According to Safewise’s Safest Cities report, Oro Valley ranked #1 in safety in their 2019 Top 20 Safest Cities in Arizona report. According to an analysis of Oro Valley Police Department Part I (more serious crimes) crime data from 2015 to 2019 in the following chart, crimes that occurred within apartment communities represented an average of 13% of all residential and non-residential Part I crimes in Oro Valley. As apartment units represent 15.3% of the total housing units, the data indicates that less crime occurs within apartment properties than within the community as a whole. Additionally, the Oro Valley Police Department provides crime prevention to apartment complexes by educating tenants and managers. See Exhibits 8- 12 in the Appendix for the detailed data by apartment community by year. HomicideSexual AssaultRobberyAggravated AssaultResidential BurglaryNon-Residential BurglaryAll Burglary AttemptsLarceny/ TheftMotor Vehicle TheftStolen Motor Vehicle RecoveredArsonTotalsApartment Totals 0 2 0 0 4 2 1 57 4 1 0 71 Oro Valley 1 8 3 10 26 10 12 289 27 4 0 390 Apartment Totals 0 1 0 3 3 0 1 40 8 1 0 57 Oro Valley 0 6 3 11 33 20 11 335 18 6 0 443 Apartment Totals 0 0 1 3 2 4 0 38 3 0 0 51 Oro Valley 0 2 4 12 47 27 7 366 15 4 1 485 Apartment Totals 0 0 1 3 6 1 2 40 2 1 0 56 Oro Valley 0 4 7 23 40 23 9 369 28 4 1 508 Apartment Totals 0 1 0 2 9 1 2 37 3 0 0 55 Oro Valley 0 6 8 16 49 18 14 327 23 8 0 4692015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Oro Valley Part One Crime 2015 - 2019 17 | P a g e Section 6: Is crime higher in apartment communities compared to single-family residential subdivisions? Higher-density development and single-family residential crime In efforts to compare crime from apartments with single-family homes, data was also collected from Cityprotect.com over a 6 month (9/1/19-2/29/20) period. As shown in the chart below, there were 10 incidents of crime within the 12 apartment communities totaling 2,961 units compared with 59 incidents of crime within 16 single-family home communities totaling 2,958 units. These subdivisions were chosen to capture a similar amount of units and account for different areas of Town. As shown in the chart below, crime incidents in apartments accounted for 15% of the total incidents reported. The assertion that apartments in Oro Valley are hot spots for crime was not substantiated through this exercise. 18 | P a g e Appendix Exhibit 1 – Economic Forecast vs. Apartment Forecast Exhibit 2- Apartments Average Rent Per Square Foot Source: Real Data 19 | P a g e Exhibit 3-Apartment Vacancy Rates Source: Real Data Note: The average annual vacancy does not include properties in lease up period (the time period for a newly available property to attract tenants and reach stabilized occupancy). Source: Real Data Note: The average annual vacancy does not include properties in lease up period (the time period for a newly available property to attract tenants and reach stabilized occupancy). Property Name Year Built Units 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 The Canyons at Linda Vista 2016 228 n/a 84% 26% 5% 5% Encantada at Steam Pump 2014 288 61% 36% 14% 10% 7% Villas at San Dorado 2014 274 23% 7% 7% 5% 3% Oro Vista 2006 138 6% 3% 6% 3% 3% Golf Villas 1999 231 6% 6% 5% 5% 3% Pusch Ridge 1998 144 11% 6% 5% 3% 3% The Place at Rock Ridge 1995 319 15% 17% 10% 6% 8% La Reserve Villas 1988 240 6% 6% 4% 5% 8% Overlook at Pusch Ridge 1986 424 4% 4% 6% 5% 7% Saddle Ridge 1985 248 5% 4% 4% 4% 5% Catalina Crossing 1985 97 6% 5% 4% 4% 5% Sundown Village 1984 330 7% 5% 5% 7% 8% Average Annual Vacancy 2,961 7% 6% 6% 5% 5% Oro Valley Apartment Performance - Vacancy 20 | P a g e Exhibit 4- Living Arrangements Source: NMHC tabulations of 2018 American Community Survey microdata, US Census Bureau Exhibit 5- Number of Members in a Household Source: NMHC tabulations of 2018 American Community Survey microdata, US Census Bureau 21 | P a g e Exhibit 6- Apartment Unit Mix Source: Real Data Property Name Units 1 Bed 2 Bed 3 Bed The Canyons at Linda Vista 228 76 124 28 Encantada at Steam Pump 288 114 144 30 Villas at San Dorado 274 88 136 36 Oro Vista 138 32 82 24 Golf Villas 231 50 140 41 The Place at Rock Ridge 319 96 192 31 La Reserve Villas 240 64 148 28 Pusch Ridge 144 48 68 28 Overlook at Pusch Ridge 424 192 231 0 Saddle Ridge 248 136 112 0 Catalina Crossing 97 66 19 12 Sundown Village 330 144 160 26 Totals 2961 1106 1556 284 Oro Valley Apartments Unit Mix 22 | P a g e Exhibit 7- Part I Crime 2019 Source: Town of Oro Valley Police Department Apartment Complexes HomicideSexual AssaultRobberyAggravated AssaultResidential BurglaryNon-Residential BurglaryAll Burglary AttemptsLarceny/ TheftMotor Vehicle TheftStolen Motor Vehicle RecoveredArsonTotalsCanyons at Linda Vista Trail 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 Catalina Crossing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 Encantada at Steam Pump 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 5 Golf Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 La Reserve Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Oro Vista 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Overlook at Pusch Ridge 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 1 0 0 14 Pusch Ridge 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 Rock Ridge 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 7 2 0 0 12 Saddle Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 Sundown Village 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 21 0 0 0 23 Villas at San Dorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Apartment Totals 0 2 0 0 4 2 1 57 4 1 0 71 Oro Valley 1 8 3 10 26 10 12 289 27 4 0 390 Oro Valley Apartment-Wide Part One Crime - 2019 23 | P a g e Exhibit 8- Part I Crime 2018 Source: Town of Oro Valley Police Department Apartment Complexes HomicideSexual AssaultRobberyAggravated AssaultResidential BurglaryNon-Residential BurglaryAll Burglary AttemptsLarceny/ TheftMotor Vehicle TheftStolen Motor Vehicle RecoveredArsonTotalsCanyons at Linda Vista Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 Catalina Crossing 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 Encantada at Steam Pump 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 6 Golf Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 La Reserve Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 3 Oro Vista 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 Overlook at Pusch Ridge 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 7 1 0 0 11 Pusch Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 Rock Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Saddle Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 6 Sundown Village 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 7 2 1 0 14 Villas at San Dorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Apartment Totals 0 1 0 3 3 0 1 40 8 1 0 57 Oro Valley 0 6 3 11 33 20 11 335 18 6 0 443 Oro Valley Apartment-Wide Part One Crime - 2018 24 | P a g e Exhibit 9- Part I Crime 2017 Source: Town of Oro Valley Police Department Apartment Complexes HomicideSexual AssaultRobberyAggravated AssaultResidential BurglaryNon-Residential BurglaryAll Burglary AttemptsLarceny/ TheftMotor Vehicle TheftStolen Motor Vehicle RecoveredArsonTotalsCanyons at Linda Vista Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Catalina Crossing 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 Encantada at Steam Pump 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 Golf Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 La Reserve Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 Oro Vista 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Overlook at Pusch Ridge 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 12 1 0 0 16 Pusch Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 Rock Ridge 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 7 Saddle Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 Sundown Village 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 7 Villas at San Dorado 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Apartment Totals 0 0 1 3 2 4 0 38 3 0 0 51 Oro Valley 0 2 4 12 47 27 7 366 15 4 1 485 Oro Valley Apartment-Wide Part One Crime - 2017 25 | P a g e Exhibit 10- Part I Crime 2016 Source: Town of Oro Valley Police Department Apartment Complexes HomicideSexual AssaultRobberyAggravated AssaultResidential BurglaryNon-Residential BurglaryAll Burglary AttemptsLarceny/ TheftMotor Vehicle TheftStolen Motor Vehicle RecoveredArsonTotalsCanyons at Linda Vista Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Catalina Crossing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 Encantada at Steam Pump 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 0 0 0 8 Golf Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 0 0 10 La Reserve Villas 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 Oro Vista 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Overlook at Pusch Ridge 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 10 0 0 0 13 Pusch Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Rock Ridge 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 6 Saddle Ridge 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 Sundown Village 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 Villas at San Dorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 Apartment Totals 0 0 1 3 6 1 2 40 2 1 0 56 Oro Valley 0 4 7 23 40 23 9 369 28 4 1 508 Oro Valley Apartment-Wide Part One Crime - 2016 26 | P a g e Exhibit 11- Part I Crime 2015 Source: Town of Oro Valley Police Department Apartment Complexes HomicideSexual AssaultRobberyAggravated AssaultResidential BurglaryNon-Residential BurglaryAll Burglary AttemptsLarceny/ TheftMotor Vehicle TheftStolen Motor Vehicle RecoveredArsonTotalsCanyons at Linda Vista Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 Catalina Crossing 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 Encantada at Steam Pump 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 Golf Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 La Reserve Villas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 Oro Vista 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Overlook at Pusch Ridge 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 7 0 0 0 11 Pusch Ridge 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 Rock Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Saddle Ridge 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 8 Sundown Village 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 8 2 0 0 14 Villas at San Dorado 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 Apartment Totals 0 1 0 2 9 1 2 37 3 0 0 55 Oro Valley 0 6 8 16 49 18 14 327 23 8 0 469 Oro Valley Apartment-Wide Part One Crime - 2015 Town of Oro Valley Community and Economic Development Department Southwest corner of Oracle and Tangerine – Oro Valley Marketplace (Oro Valley Village Center) rezoning Frequently Asked Questions. Listed below are frequent questions the Town has received regarding the applicant’s proposals. 1. WHAT ARE THE VACANCY RATE, TARGET MARKET AND CRIME STATISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH APARTMENTS? The Town recently commissioned an Apartment Study as part of a larger, and future, Town-wide housing inventory analysis, which was identified as an action item in the voter approved Your Voice, Our Future General Plan. The study, the first step in the larger housing analysis, was conducted to provide information to policy makers and help inform land uses decisions. The analysis, which utilized both qualitative and quantitative data focused on similar questions heard at our neighborhood meetings by Town staff. The questions are listed below in italics and are followed by a short summary of the findings for each topic. A. What is the demand for and supply of apartments [in Oro Valley]? Demand for apartments in Oro Valley is high and experiencing the strongest rent growth in the region. Oro Valley currently has a limited supply of vacant apartment units with an average vacancy rate of 5.4%, similar to that of the greater Tucson market (4.3%), however, average rents in Oro Valley are 35% higher than the market as a whole. When a community is approaching build-out (Oro Valley is currently 94% built-out), residential development typically becomes more dense (e.g., apartments) and represents a greater percentage of the communities housing stock. In two other Arizona cities facing similar build-out constraints (Scottsdale and Tempe) apartments make up approximately 27% and 41% of all housing units, respectively, significantly more than the supply of apartments in Oro Valley (15.3%). Moving forward, empty nesters downsizing and early career professionals moving to Oro Valley will only increase the demand for the affordable, convenient, and low-maintenance options apartments provide. B. What are the income levels and age of renters in comparison to homeowners? Renters in Oro Valley (living in all housing types, not just apartments) are typically young professionals or empty nesters. A majority of renters in Oro Valley (79%) are either 55+ (42%) or aged 25-44 (37%). The average median household income for renters in Oro Valley is $51,092, slightly higher than the median household income ($51,037) for all housing types in the Tucson region.