Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Board of Adjustment (39)       AGENDA ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL 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          SPECIAL SESSION AT OR AFTER 3:00 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 Board on any issue not listed on today’s agenda. Pursuant to the Arizona open meeting law, individual Board 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 Board 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   SPECIAL SESSION AGENDA   1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 28, 2021 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES   2.PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A VARIANCE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 40 FEET TO 14.5 FEET FOR A HOUSE ADDITION AT 1241 W. LINDA VISTA BLVD, CASE NUMBER 2102481   ADJOURNMENT   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 Board 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 Board 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 Board.  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 Board one time regarding the topic being discussed.2. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.3.During Call to Audience, you may address the Board 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 Board. 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.    Board of Adjustment Special Session 1. Meeting Date:12/14/2021   Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development  Submitted By:Jeanna Ancona, Community and Economic Development Case Number: N/A SUBJECT: REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 28, 2021 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: N/A. BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: N/A. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A. SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to approve (approve with changes) the September 28, 2021 regular session meeting minutes. Attachments 9-28-21 Draft Minutes  D R A F T MINUTES ORO VALLEY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR SESSION September 28, 2021 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE            REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 3:00 PM   CALL TO ORDER Chair Dankwerth called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.   ROLL CALL Present: Joseph Affinati, Member Octavio Barcelo, Member Mary Murphy, Member Stephen Roach, Vice Chair Helen Dankwerth, Chair Staff Present:Milini Simms, Principal Planner Bayer Vella, Planning Manager Joe Andrews, Chief Civil Deputy Attorney Attendees: Steve Solomon, Town Council Liaison Barney Holtzman, Representing Town Attorney PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Dankwerth led the Board and the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.   CALL TO AUDIENCE There were no speaker requests.   COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS Council Liaison Steve Solomon welcomed the Board back to in-person meetings and the newly remodeled Council Chambers.   REGULAR SESSION AGENDA   1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 23, 2021 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES       Motion by Vice Chair Stephen Roach, seconded by Member Joseph Affinati to approve the February 23, 2021 meeting minutes.    A roll call vote was taken: Member Affinati - Aye Member Barcelo - Aye Member Murphy - Aye Vice Chair Roach - Aye Chair Dankwerth - Aye    Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   2.PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A ZONING APPEAL TO AN INTERPRETATION ISSUED ON MAY 27, 2021, THAT DETERMINED THE APPLICABILITY OF A 75' HEIGHT EXCEPTION AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RESORT SITE IN THE RANCHO VISTOSO NEIGHBORHOOD 11       Chief Civil Deputy Attorney Joe Andrews and Planning Manager Bayer Vella provided a presentation that included the following: Mr. Andrews: - Purpose of this agenda item - Key Description of Terms: Interpretation, Appeal, Statutory Construction, Due Diligence - Staff's focus on Due Diligence Mr. Vella: - Interpretation initiated by the Planning and Zoning Administrator (PZA) - Due Diligence review of the zoning requirement and Ordinance - Due Diligence review of application OV9-98-2B Mr. Andrews: - Summary and recommendation     Attorney Thomas Parsons, with Stubbs & Schubart, P.C., representing the appellant, provided a presentation that included the following: - Legal parameters of Statutory Construction and analysis - Ordinance No. (O) 98-38 - Building Height Limitations to the Resort District in the Rancho Vistoso PAD - Ordinance Modification of the Mayor and Council Ordinance by Bayer Vella Posted 5/27/21 - Other Examples of Building Height Limitations in the Rancho Vistoso PAD - Rancho Vistoso PAD Hospital Building Height - Honey Bee Canyon Park    Discussion ensued among the Board, staff and appellant. Chair Dankwerth opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the appeal: - Oro Valley resident Richard Thaler - Oro Valley resident John Haugh - Oro Valley resident and former mayor Paul Loomis - Oro Valley resident Evan Thompson - Oro Valley resident Ted Riggs - completed a blue card, but wished to give the allotted time to previous speaker, Mr. Loomis - Oro Valley resident Brooke Asbell - completed a blue card, but wished to give the allotted time to previous speaker, Mr. Loomis - Oro Valley resident Terri Earnest - Oro Valley resident Suzanne Draayer - completed a blue card, but wished to give the allotted time to the next speaker, Ms. Bardach - Oro Valley resident Barbara Bardach - Oro Valley resident Amy Williams Chair Dankwerth closed the public hearing.    Further discussion continued among the Board.    Motion by Member Mary Murphy, seconded by Vice Chair Stephen Roach to uphold the Planning and Zoning Administrator's interpretation issued on May 27, 2021 based on the finding it accurately represents the facts.    Chair Dankwerth called on each member for their vote: Mr. Barcelo - Aye Mr. Roach - Aye Ms. Murphy - Aye Mr. Affinati - Aye and added that she votes "Aye" as well.    Vote: 5 - 0 Carried   ADJOURNMENT Chair Dankwerth adjourned the meeting at 4:35 p.m.   I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular session of the Town of Oro Valley Board of Adjustment of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 28th day of September, 2021. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. ___________________________ Jeanna Ancona Senior Office Specialist    Board of Adjustment Special Session 2. Meeting Date:12/14/2021   Requested by: Bayer Vella, Community and Economic Development  Submitted By:Patty Hayes, Community and Economic Development Case Number: 2102481 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A VARIANCE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 40 FEET TO 14.5 FEET FOR A HOUSE ADDITION AT 1241 W. LINDA VISTA BLVD, CASE NUMBER 2102481 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request based on the finding that the five criteria have been met. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 14.5 feet to build an addition onto the house located at 1241 W. Linda Vista Blvd. The subject property is lot 215 of the Rancho Verde subdivision as highlighted in yellow on the following map: The applicant is proposing to build a garage and bedroom addition onto the east side of the existing house. The slope of the lot determined the placement of the existing house which was originally built into the rear lot line at the top of a hill on the flattest area angled between another hill and downward slope. The placement of the house, accessory structures and corresponding slope constraints all factor in placement of any future addition. The proposal is to encroach into the rear setback as shown in the drawing below.  Staff recommends approval of the variance request by determining that all five findings have been met as described in the following background and detailed information section of this report.  BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION: PROPERTY DETAILS:  1971 Rancho Verde subdivision developed under Pima County's jurisdiction 1975 Existing house was built  1984 Subdivision annexed by Oro Valley  1.10 Aces subject property size DISCUSSION:  State Law and the Oro Valley Zoning Code require the Board of Adjustment to determine that all the following variance findings have been met in order to grant a variance. The required five findings are shown in italics below, followed by the applicant and staff comments regarding the findings. The applicant's complete responses are included in Attachment 1. 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property strictly related to its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district. Existing building configuration shall be included only when constrained by the special circumstances or conditions of the property; APPLICANT COMMENT: In the applicant's narrative (Attachment 1) the homeowner references the following as the special circumstances for the variance request:  Lot topography that slopes from the front lot line upward toward the rear lot line Original house placement that is vey near the rear lot line and angled partially over the rear setback line due to topography as shown in the drawing above Existing house placement is on the flattest part of the lot The existing pool and yard are also limiting factors and reasons for the proposed location of the new addition The proposed location of the new structure is on the remaining flattest available portion of property that will allow the addition to functionally work for the household Also, the applicant refers to considering other options that may meet the setbacks as functionally not feasible STAFF COMMENT:  The special circumstances include the long gradual slope of the lot that increases more than 38 feet upward from the front lot line at Linda Vista Blvd to the rear (south) property line. The significant slope dictated the current house placement and angle at the top of the hill as shown in Attachment 2. Furthermore, the angle of the house resulted in a corner of the existing building being placed over the rear setback line, all of which constitutes the "special circumstances". The slope and original placement of the house makes any addition onto the east side of the home unable to be constructed without further encroaching into the 40' rear setback. Site photos of the slope are included in attachment 3.  Locating the proposed addition onto the house where it meets the setbacks presents the following challenges:  Placing the addition onto the front (north) facing part of the house would place the new garage and bedroom on the downward slope in front of the main entry and windows of the primary living spaces, thus creating an awkward layout.  The west side of the house would be difficult to access due to the downward slope and is also where the swimming pool is located, thus making that area of the lot not viable for an addition The land on the east side of the house, where the house already encroaches into the rear setback, contains a small flat vacant area that provides a buildable space for an addition. The addition is proposed to be built on this eastern flat area. A site photo showing the proposed location of the addition is shown below and in Attachment 4.  When considering a detached structure instead of an attached structure the following issues arise:  Most of the vacant area of the subject lot is located in front of the main house. However, the zoning code does not permit detached buildings to be placed in front of the main house, therefore eliminating the option to add a detached building in the large front portion of the lot. Moving the proposed structure further east, as the code requires for detached structures, starts encroaching into the steep corner of the southeastern part of the lot which causes conflict with the zoning code's limit on the amount of dirt that can be cut into and/or filled The proposed house addition location which keeps in line with the existing angle of the house, at the top of the slope, is found to meet the special circumstance requirement. 2. That special circumstances or conditions as defined in subsection C.1 of this section were not created by a previous or current owner; APPLICANT COMMENT: The applicant states “The house was in its present location when it was purchased by the owner”. The applicant refers to the proposed addition as staying in conformance with immediate neighbors and “maintaining the surrounding neighborhood character”. STAFF COMMENT: The house was placed very near the rear lot line at the top of a steep slope at an angle between another uphill and downward slope which was most likely the flattest area. The slope and angled house placement created a situation where any future attached additions have difficultly complying with current zoning code rear yard setback requirements. Therefore, this finding has been met.  3. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation of privileges and rights enjoyed by other properties of the same classification in the same zoning district; APPLICANT COMMENT: The applicant refers to the need to add an attached garage for auto and tool storage and an additional bedroom for the previously mentioned family functionality. STAFF COMMENT: An attached garage and additional bedroom are features commonly built into or added onto homes to improve functionality of the living spaces in homes in the area where this house is located. Generally homes in older developments, such as the subject lot, have expanded the house and parking spaces to meet today's family needs. Since the proposed addition is common with other homes in the area, this finding has been met.  4. That any variance granted is subject to such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located; APPLICANT COMMENT: The applicant mentions that a garage is a “common feature” found in most homes and keeps in alignment with the existing house. STAFF COMMENT: Many homes in the Rancho Verde subdivision and surrounding area have garages and multiple bedrooms. Because this type of addition is a common feature in the R1-43 zoning district and is not an inconsistent or special feature, this finding has been met, and no special conditions need to be applied to this case.  5. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. APPLICANT COMMENT:  The applicant refers to the proposed location as “essentially invisible” to the neighbors and will not be detrimental to the neighbors. STAFF COMMENT: The proposed location of the garage/bedroom addition is in an area that will not create a greater visual impact than the existing house. Existing vegetation and a steep slope next to the proposed addition will mitigate much of the view. The surrounding houses are either several feet uphill or downhill from the proposed location of the addition. Due to the topography and existing vegetation providing screening, the addition will not be detrimental to surrounding properties, therefore this finding has been met.  PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:  Notice sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject properties. Notice posted on the property. Notice posted online at www.orovalleyaz.gov. Notice advertised in the Daily Territorial. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the variance request meets all the findings per State Law and the Zoning Code and staff recommends approval.  FISCAL IMPACT: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I MOVE to approve this variance request to reduce the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 14.5 feet for the proposed addition at 1241 W. Linda Vista Blvd., based on the finding that the five criteria have been met. OR I MOVE to deny this variance request to reduce the rear yard setback from 40 feet to 14.5 feet for the proposed addition at 1241 W. Linda Vista Blvd., based on the finding that the following criteria have not been met:_____________________________. Attachments Attachment 1 Applicant's Narrative and Site Plan  Attachment 2 Topography  Attachment 3 Slope Photos  Attachment 4 Site Photos  ZONING VARIANCE NARRATIVE Rev. B (11/10/2021) Town of Oro Valley Board of Adjustment Zoning Variance Project Narrative Parcel #225-09-2360, McCabe Property, 1241 W. Linda Vista Blvd., Oro Valley, AZ 85704 This variance request is for a portion of a new garage and bedroom addition to be placed in the back yard 40-foot setback. Our request is to have the rear yard setback reduced from 40.0’ to 14.5’ (at the minimum) as shown in the Site Plan submitted with this narrative (see southeast corner of proposed addition). A small portion of the existing dwelling structure was originally built inside of the rear yard setback line. The new garage and bedroom addition to be built along the east side of the property is approximately 947 square feet. The area of the addition projecting into the 40-foot setback is approximately 315 square feet. The following information addresses the 5 criteria outlined in the Town of Oro Valley Variance Process Guide. 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions applying to the property strictly related to its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which do not apply to other properties in the district. Existing building configuration shall be included only when constrained by the special circumstances or conditions of the property; and The house was built within the setback 43 years ago. Our assumption is that the house was built within the setback due to the topography of the lot, which creates a number of challenges from a structure placement perspective. The lot slopes downhill from the rear lot line to the front lot line by approximately 50 feet overall, and the rear portion of the lot (where the house was originally placed) may have been chosen due to its relative size and flatness being compatible with the required footprint for placement of the house (again, this occurred 43 years ago and is an assumption on our part). In reviewing other properties in our neighborhood, ours is unique from the perspective of the amount of slope and the placement of the original structure. Our desire to add an attached garage to add functionality and utility to the property necessitates further encroachment into the rear yard setback (as shown in the submitted Site Plan) as there is no other available, usable space upon which to build except the east side of the existing structure; to the west is a swimming pool, to the south is the aforementioned lot line, and to the north is a fairly severe (i.e. approximately 29%) slope from the existing home location to the street. To ensure we had looked at all possible solutions (and avoid encroaching on the setback), we had an architect draw up several different preliminary site plans to look at other placement options. The bottom line is that placing the proposed garage and room addition anywhere on the lot other than the submitted site plan resulted in layouts that either were not functional or would be a challenge for resale (if we decided to sell the house in the future). We will be presenting a PowerPoint to the Planning/Zoning team when we meet on December 14th which will show the progression of design options we’ve gone through to get to the point of this variance request. 2. That the special circumstances or conditions as defined in subsection C.1 of this section were not created by a previous or current owner; and The house was in its present location when it was purchased by the owner. We are seeking to provide basic utility and protection for our cars and stay in conformance with our immediate neighbors while also maintaining the surrounding neighborhood character. 3. That the authorizing of the variance is necessary for the preservation of privileges and rights enjoyed by other properties of the same classification in the same zoning district; and As the property owners, it is our desire to improve the property utility by adding an attached garage for additional storage space (for cars, tools, etc.) as well as a bedroom/closet addition and a remodeled bathroom and kitchen. This will bring jobs (for design/permitting/construction) as well as revenue for local suppliers. All of the homes within our neighborhood have either garages, carports, or in some cases both. Our design will add to the existing footprint and encroach slightly on the rear yard setback, but will do so in a way that is consistent with the existing home architecture and only add to the visual appeal of the home. 4. That any variance granted is subject to such conditions as will assure that the authorizing of the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located; and Granting this variance request will not constitute a grant of special privileges; garages are a common feature in most homes, and the setback encroachment already exists with the home in its current location. As explained in #1 above, there is no other practical location to place the garage/bedroom addition. Other properties in the area do not have the same topographical challenges that impact safe placement of structures; this variance is not in any way granting any “special privilege”. 5. That the authorizing of the variance will not be materially detrimental to persons residing in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood or the public welfare in general. Authorizing this variance will improve the existing home’s value and utility and will be essentially invisible to our neighbors due to the proposed addition location and lot topography. Authorizing this variance will not be detrimental in any conceivable way to neighbors, properties and the public in general. In fact, the proposed addition will improve the home esthetic and raise the property value (which benefits all neighbors). TopographyLinda Vista, case 2102481 Attachment 240’ ROWN= location of proposed addition Site Photos of SlopeLinda Vista, Case 2102481 Attachment 340’ ROW= location of proposed additionView: Looking south from Linda Vista Blvd up the driveway toward the houseView: Continuing up the driveway to the house.View: From the flat area of the proposed addition, next to house at top of hill looking downward toward Linda Vista Blvd House on hill behind treesProposed location of addition Site PhotosLinda Vista, Case 2102481 Attachment 440’ ROW= location of proposed additionFront entry to houseFront Yard (north side of house)