HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Development Review Board - 7/11/2006 MINUTES OF THE
ORO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY,JULY 11,2006
ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Dan Sturmon, Acting Chair
John Buette, Member
Thomas Gribb, Member
Scott Leska, Member
Marc Panas, Member
Harold Kandetzke, Member
ALSO PRESENT: Bayer Vella, Principal Planner
Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney
Paul Keesler, Development Review Division Manager
Pamela Pelletier, Planner
Jill Manion-Farrar, Planner
Matt Michels, Senior Planner
Arinda Asper, Recording Secretary
K. C. Carter, Councilperson
Al Kunisch, Councilperson
ABSENT: Mike Zinkin,Member
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
MINUTES
07/11/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 2 of 10
Due to the omission of a listing for Minutes on the DRB Agenda, review of the June 13, 2006,
DRB meeting minutes will occur at the August 8th meeting, along with the minutes for the June
29, 2006, and the July 11, 2006 meetings.
CONSENT AGENDA
B. OV 13-06-28, Dan McPeak, Architect and Kim Bellas, Architect of Aesthetic Effect,
LLC, representing the property owners, Tom and Betty Fournier requests
architectural approval for a custom home located at 13500 N. Kachina Drive, being the
south 345' of the north 658.55' of the west 1003.03'of Section 27, T115, R 13 E, G&SRM,
in the La Cholla Airpark area, Parcel # 219-23-0150.
MOTION: Member Kandetzke MOVED to recommend APPROVAL
of Item B. Member Panas SECONDED the motion.
Motion carried 6-0.
REGULAR AGENDA
A. (At Member Panas' request, Item B was pulled from the Consent Agenda and into
the Regular Agenda.) OV 13-05-32A, Eglin/Cohen Architects, representing
BodyCentral Physical Therapists, requests approval of a new color palette for a
previously approved architecture for the BodyCentral Physical Therapists building, to be
located in the Sunshine Plaza at the Sunrise Office Park (zoned R-S — residential Service
District), between Camino Cortaro and Oracle Road, Parcel #225-14-3500, Lot 5.
Member Panas said it was difficult to tell what shade of green presented on the color palette.
Ms. Pelletier presented the color palette and explained that Applicant is revising the entire color
palette, going from four colors to three. Ms. Pelletier presented an actual color chip of the green
color.
MOTION: Member Leska MOVED to recommend APPROVAL of
Item A, subject to the conditions in Exhibit A. Member
Buette SECONDED the motion. Motion carried 4-2
(Panas, Kandetzke).
1. OV13-05-15B, Gromatzky Dupree & Associates, representing Evergreen Devco,
requests approval of a revision to the exterior material of the entry tower for the
California Design Center; located within the Steam Pump Village Development; located
on the west side of Oracle Road between First Avenue and Tangerine Road, Parcel 220-
08-001 R. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact Pamela J. Pelletier,
Planner, at (520) 229-4813 or ppelletier@orovalley.net.
Applicant Kevin Morrow, of Gromatzky Dupree & Associates, 250 South Craycroft, Williams
Center, Tucson, gave a presentation. Applicant presented images of color palette originally
C:\Documents and Settings\lhersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\07-l 1-06 Minutes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06
07/11/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 3 of 10
approved in October 2005. Applicant is requesting a change or adjustment in the entry element.
The owner, upon reviewing the originally approved colors, felt that the colors didn't convey the
desired image, and requested that Applicant explore other ideas. Applicant took a look at a
product that will shop fabricated, metal skin that would have a field-applied acid that would
trigger an oxidation process. Staff has a sample of that product. That product has the character
that California Design Center is looking for, but it does not provide the kind of control in colors
that was needed, especially this is a considerable investment. Owner then found another
applicator who uses an iron oxide product, a process in the form of portland plaster. This
product provides the desired color and richness, with the control in the field. Applicant
provided a sample of the new product.
Member Kandetzke asked Applicant to elaborate on the durability of this material versus the
material previously intended to use, asked how the material would withstand our weather, asked
if it could be painted, and asked what kind of maintenance it would require. Applicant said that
the previously approved scheme had a 24-guage primer finish, dark weathered copper-appearing
metal skin, attached on metals girds to a steel structure. The finish is as durable a finish as you
can probably find at a reasonable price. Most metal roofs seen in town have this kind finish. It
is a very uniform finish and the owner was looking for something that was a little more mottled
and not as dark in color once it is on the product. That triggered the search for a product that
better represents how the owners want the front door to look. This assembly gets sealed after
it's weathered, and has the kind of life that the previous treatment had and the color is better.
Applicant confirmed that it could be repainted, and believes that the previous material would not
have that kind of maintenance.
Mr. Vella introduced the staff report into the record, and recommended approval of the color and
materials change.
Member Gribb asked if the material would cause staining of the concrete around it. Applicant
replied that the product would be sealed, but if the seal breaks it could leak.
Mr. Vella, in response to Member Kandetzke's question, explained that both products require
sealing. The real difference is the control in the field for the application.
MOTION: Member Gribb MOVED to recommend APPROVAL.
Member Kandetzke SECONDED the motion. Motion
carried 6-0.
2. OV12-06-03, Coronado Engineering, representing JREM LLC, requests approval of a
preliminary plat for an 11 lot subdivision, located in proximity to the northeast corner of
Shannon Road and Naranja Road, Parcel #224-11-049A, #224-11-045A, and #224-11-
045B.
Applicant Paul Nzomo, Coronado Engineering, 1630 South Research Loop, Suite 150, Tucson,
gave a presentation. This project is a preliminary plat for 11 lots, each being 3.3 acres. This is a
C:\,Docurnents and Settings\lhersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi[es\OLK8\07-11-06 Minutes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06
07/1.1/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 4 of 10
gated community with a private road. One issue to discuss is that of traffic calming. The
project has one access, and a turn around at the end. There will be 6 feet sections that will be
part of the traffic calming. The second issue is that of drainage. Town Code requires that at
any intersection there be less than 6 inches of water flow. Applicant will grade upstream to
have this site meet Code. The last issue pertains to Planning Condition # 7 on Exhibit B, and
deferred to the property owner for discussion of this water issue.
The property owner, Jason Rulney, 1803 East Naranja, Oro Valley, continued with the
presentation. He introduced a letter, dated July 5, 2006, from City of Tucson Water Department
to Coronado Engineering, into the record. Mr. Rulney stated that staff did not benefit of this
letter when they issued their report. He added that this project falls within the Tucson Water
service area and because Tucson Water has a substantial water main immediately adjacent to the
subdivision, it is appropriate to retain the note proposed by the engineer. He added that this
makes sense because government should not and cannot condition a ministerial approval of a plat
upon waiving a legal right. Oro Valley's nearest water service is about 3/4 of a mile, and
therefore owner ask that DRB approve approval of the plat subject to staff condition except for
Condition 7 on Exhibit B.
Mr. Vella explained that Exhibit B would be introduced with the staff report. Ms. Manion-
Farrar introduced the staff report into the record.
Mr. Keesler continued with the presentation. Staff has been working with Applicant on
hydrology issues. There is one regulated flood plain that goes through the site; it conveys 91 cfs
in the 100 year storm. Presently it is being conveyed by a narrow incised channel with some
shallow overbank flow. This new access drive will bisect this flow. Staff has indicated to the
Applicant that there are concerns. The original submittal did not address our all weather
crossing code requirements, which requires that, in a 100-year flood event, all accesses consist of
no more than 6 inches in depth over any access route. The Applicant has since done drainage
agenda and given staff calculations that prove they have a depth of 6 inches at that section. Staff
still has some minor concerns with respect some backwater effects as the flow goes back to its
original flow pattern. Staff believes that can be mitigated through grading both upstream and
what little downstream availability there is. Staff will expect that resolved before this goes to
Town Council, with respect to the engineering, the backup, the assertion that there is no
backwater effect. All other drainage is below regulatory flood plain, which is 50 cfs, and by
Code doesn't need to be 6 inches in depth because it is below regulatory flow. Staff will be
granting a detention waiver because of the increase in hydrology over the existing condition is a
very minor percentage, about 3% over.
Ms. Manion-Farrar continued with the presentation, and pointed out Conditions 2, 3, and 4, on
Exhibit B. Staff recommends approval subject to conditions in Exhibit B.
Member Leska expressed concern that the with the exception of the one node in the roadway into
the proposed development, the design does not seem to mitigate against teenagers disturbing the
peace by racing down the straight roadway, and asked if there were any other traffic calming
techniques being planned. Ms. Manion-Farrar explained that the existing bulb currently
between lots 6 and 7 is at a length that is the maximum requirement without there being a break
C:\Documents and Settings\lhersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\07-1 1-06 Minutes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06
07/11/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 5 of 10
for emergency access or turnaround. The site is a narrow parcel that is land locked by private
land, and that was an acceptable mitigation measure. Also, the fact that it is a gated community
means there will less of a concern regarding the calming techniques.
Mr. Keesler added that this was something that the Town Engineer initially did not perceive as a
major problem with respect with the layout of the subdivision, because although as you look at
this it looks as though it's a drag strip that is really not the case when you look at it in 3-D.
There are several dip section and variations in grade which would prohibit opening an
automobile up without bottoming out. Staff will support any type of traffic calming techniques,
but this is a private gated community that will be maintained and managed by the HOA, which
means they will be able to address traffic problems.
Member Gribb commented that the straight and narrow road was one thing that concerned him
also, but staff and Applicant have done a reasonable job of addressing these issues. He asked if
a heavy rain would create an accumulation of mud and debris which would cause the residents to
be stranded. Mr. Keesler said that the transport of mud and silt will happen, and there are very
few measures to prevent that from happening, and that will be the responsibility of the HOA to
maintain and clean the road after such an event. That circumstance will not make the road
impassable. Vehicles will still be able to pass over the debris. With regard to flooding, the
road will be impassable through the actual hydraulic event. The applicant had exhibited in his
hydrology report that he had met those criteria. He has 91 cfs and that was generated with the
100 year flow. When one looks at the overall hydrology for this site, there are several large
streams which carry the majority of the flow. This is one of the much smaller tributaries.
Applicant has proven to staff that that will mitigate the flow to 6 inches in depth. Staff does
need confirmation from the Applicant regarding backwater effect. Mr. Keesler said he believed
that could be done by proper grading and funneling.
Mr. Gribb said he was struck by the use of septic systems on this property, and asked whether a
sewer hook-up add value beyond what the additional cost might be. Applicant explained that if
a sewer system is within 1000 feet then you have to connect to the sewer, unless the cost to
connect is more than $6,000. The nearest sewer system is more than half a mile away from the
development, so connecting to it is not economically feasible. Also, the lots are all more than
one acre each, so a septic system will work here.
Member Kandetzke asked to confirm whether there is an emergency access road. Ms. Manion-
Farrar explained that the only road is the private road that has been part of this discussion. It has
been engineered so that there is room for emergency access and turn-around.
Member Kandetzke asked if there are trees near the road. Ms. Manion-Farrar said that staff has
not received the landscape plan. Landscape plans are reviewed by Fire and Engineering.
Member Kandetzke asked how, in an emergency situation if the road is blocked, how could
vehicles get through. Mr. Keesler interjected that although staff does not yet have the landscape
plan, Applicant will be required to maintain a clear zone and emergency vehicle access.
C:\Documents and Settings\lhersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\07-l 1-06 Minutes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06
07/11/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 6 of 10
Member Kandetzke commented that he is amazed at the number of conditions specified in the
report, and asked if that happened because of time constraints on the project. Mr. Keesler
explained that staff evaluated the conditions and determined that they were engineering issues
that required clarification or clean-up, and not actual Code issues.
Member Kandetzke asked staff if the Applicant was in agreeing with the 13 conditions in Exhibit
B. Ms. Manion-Farrar explained that staff had reviewed the conditions with the Applicant, and
Applicant does desire to strike Condition# 7. Mr. Vella added that staff feels very strongly that
Condition # 7 remain as is, and if the Applicant wishes to establish another water company, that
is certainly a legal issue, and something that the Applicant has to work out with staff. Staff s
understanding is that the site is within the Oro Valley Water Utility service area, therefore
service from the water utility is required.
Member Kandetzke asked Applicant if additional time would resolve the issue related to
Condition # 7. Applicant said they had done a significant amount of research, and there is
apparently a conflict. Applicant is continuing to look into the issue to remove that verbiage from
that notation, which is denying Applicant's legal right to use the legal source, so that there is
time to work that issue and move forward.
Member Leska said he understood that the 3-D effect explained by Mr. Keesler does break up
the monotony of the straight road; however, teenagers enjoy speeding up and down those hills to
see they can get airborne. So that is still a concern because of it being a half mile in length,
straight through, even with the vertical ups and downs. Ms. Leska asked Applicant what traffic
calming techniques he would propose if he is willing to having some on this road. Applicant
said he is willing to look at traffic calming techniques and options, including a traffic island.
Member Leska commented that if there is a traffic island, his concern is that without curb
delineating a vehicle, they could easily go around it or even right through part of the vegetative
area, even if there is a big tree in the middle, they can easily go around it without mitigation of a
verbal curb or something of that nature, on both sides, not only on the island but also on the edge
of the road. Applicant said that they might be able to incorporate verbal curbs.
Member Leska commented on the issue of fencing discussed on Condition # 3 of Exhibit B. In
lieu of the view fencing, proposal of constructing stone bollards, wood posts or rustic metal
posts, it is his understanding that these are permanent fixtures and asked if wooden posts, over
time, break down and be less effective. Ms. Manion-Farrar said that is an easy assumption to
make. Originally, staff had only suggested stone, but wanted to give Applicant some flexibility.
Member Leska said that in that case, he hoped they were not just like survey sticks. Ms.
Manion-Farrar said the posts would be 5' in height, and spaced so there is not much space
between each post. Applicant added that the property owner will be living in this development
and wants something nice that he can call home, and is therefore not trying to just subdivide and
sell these lots.
MOTION: Member Kandetzke MOVED to recommend a
CONTINUANCE, to give Applicant and staff additional
time to resolve the traffic calming issues and Planning
C:\Documents and Settings\lhersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\07-1 1-06 Minutes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06
07/11/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 7 of 10
Condition# 7 on Exhibit B, and to address the extended
list of conditions.
DISCUSSION: Member Panas agreed that there are quite a few item that need to be taken
care of, including the issue of sewer connection.
Mr. Andrews pointed out that the Town of Oro Valley cannot regulate the hook-up to sewage.
Oro Valley recently paid a large judgment to somebody requiring sewage before.
Member Buette said that it seemed to him like there are a lot of conditions, and while many of
them are clean-up items, it looks like Applicant and staff have dug their teeth in pretty hard on
this issue, and he is confident that they can work things out. He said he would not be in favor
of continuing this simply because he feels they have come down the road a long ways and they
can probably work things out.
VOTE: Motion for continuance carried 4-2 (Buette, Sturmon).
3. OV13-06-29, The WLB Group & Marsh and Associates, representing Stone Canyon
LLC., request approval of an architecture submittal for the Stone Canyon Sales Center, to
be located in the Stone Canyon VIII Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 11,just off Tortolita
Mountain Circle; Parcel # 219-20-002D.
Applicant Paul Oland from The WLB Group, 4444 East Broadway, Tucson 85711, gave a
presentation, which included images of the project and materials to be used. The design of the
sales center will match existing building and guard shack. The project will be a 3 870 square
foot structure and a covered patio. The height limit is 30' and this structure will max out at
24.4' but most of it will be 17' high. The colors will be earth colors, and will consist of 4-sided
architecture. Wood accents, stone clay tiles, and stucco paint chips were displayed. Applicant
finds the two conditions in Exhibit A acceptable.
Ms. Pelletier introduced the staff report into the record. The proposed project meets all review
criteria, and staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions in Exhibit A.
MOTION: Member Panas MOVED to recommend APPROVAL,
subject to the conditions in Exhibit A. Member
Kandetzke SECONDED the motion. Motion carried
6-0.
4. OV12-05-28, The WLB Group, representing Canada Vistas, requests approval of a
landscape Plan for the Vistoso Town Center — Commercial center subdivision known as
"Honey Bee Plaza", located at the corner of Rancho Vistoso Blvd. and Moore Road,
Parcel #219-21-001D.
Member Gribb asked if the presentations could be done at once. Mr. Andrews said that they
could combine the presentations, as long as the votes on each item are handled separately.
C:\Documents and Settings\Ihersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\07-1 1-06 Minu.tes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06
07/11/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 8 of 10
Applicant Steve Solomon, Canada Vistas, 12753 W. Walking Deer Place, Oro Valley, begin the
presentation by giving a historical perspective of the site. This project is located at the
southeast corner of Rancho Vistoso and Moore Road, it is approximately 87 acres. Back in
1987, when the Rancho Vistoso PAD was formed, this was envisioned to be the actual center of
the Town of Oro Valley. The plan called for high density residential, commercial, government
buildings, and amphitheatres. It also the site of the Honey Bee Village Hohokam archaeological
site and ruin. The archaeological site itself is spread over the entire property; however, there is a
very concentrated core are on 13 acres of the property.
Over the year of working together with the Town, the Tohono O'odham Nation, and the Arizona
State Museum, the boundary for the archaeological preserve has been established. Upon
approval of the final plat, those 13 acres are being donated to Pima County, and under an IGA it
will then go to the Town of Oro Valley. Currently, archaeological mitigation work is underway
on the remainder of the property. The preserve itself remains untouched. The archaeologists
have been working for several months, trenching and excavating throughout the property,
making some nice finds, and they are starting to wrap up that work. Public tours should begin in
about 2 -3 weeks. Of the parts that are being excavated, all the human remains are removed and
reburied by the Tohono O'odham.
The whole project has four components, the 13 acre preserve, approximately 44 acres of single
family homes, 14 acres of condominiums and 10 acres of commercial. The way these are being
plated, the four areas are considered separately, therefore, we have three individual landscape
although the landscape plans were developed in conjunction with each other.
There are 145 lots of single family homes on 52, including the open natural space, and all the lots
back up to open space. There is a 25' space buffer of open space between all lots.
Regarding the condominiums, the unique feature here is that one does not see a see of pavement
or parking lots. These condos have a unique design where the first floor of the condo building
itself contains individual garages for all units. There is one entrance and driveway into each
building. All the buildings are surrounded by open landscape area as opposed to parking lots,
with the exception of the required additional guest space per the Oro Valley Code.
The commercial area is a central neighborhood mall design, where the parking is placed at the
sides. The commercial area is on multi-levels, it's not just one flat area. The areas as separated
by landscaping. The landscape plan contains trees and bushes allowed by the Oro Valley Code.
The entrance to the archaeological preserve will actually be through the commercial area. We
have created a 20' easement along the boundary of the preserve for ingress and egress. This will
be brick paved or flagstone, which will lead into an archaeological display area and into the
preserve.
Gary Grizzle, Landscape Architects, The WLB Group, 4444 East Broadway, Tucson, 85718,
continued by presenting images of the condos, single family homes, and commercial components
of the project. Approximately 900 ironwood tress are being transplanted back into the project.
C:\Documents and Settings\lhersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\07-l 1-06 Minutes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06
07/11/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 9 of 10
Member Kandetzke asked about the success rate when transplanting ironwoods. Applicant said
that if the person is experienced, the rate is between 80% to 90%. Jim Dawson, who will be
doing this work, has years' of experience and has developed a good technique.
Member Kandetzke asked what would be the plan for the 10% that would not survive.
Applicant explained that that would be mitigated by a 3 to 1 ratio. For each plant that dies
during the transplant period, there will be three nursery plants planted to replace it.
Member Leska asked if there would be some shading such as awnings between the commercial
buildings. Applicant said that the architecture design has not been defines, but he believes that
there will be.
Member Sturmon asked if there is a lot of grass turf that is being planned. Applicant said that
there was not, that the plantings will consist of desert, drought-tolerent plantings. Member
Leska asked if there would be any grass on the project. Applicant said that right now the
landscape plan does not show any turf.
Ms. Pelletier introduced the staff report into the record, and recommended approval subject to
the conditions in Exhibit A.
Member Leska asked the Applicant what the design speed of the roads at the SVT and around
the curbs and turns. The question was deferred to staff. Mr. Keesler explained that all
residential streets are 25 MHP. Member Leska asked if that included the circulation center
around the commercial center. Mr. Keesler said that in the commercial center, the Town does
not regulate it, but it is posted 25 MHP, but in actually vehicles go slower. With respect to
SVTs, project will be adhering to the subdivision street standards SVTs for any exterior exits,
including the commercial area, and all the subdivision streets which abut the residential areas.
With respect to commercial site, Oro Valley has developed its own interior SVTs.
Member Leska asked how tall the bushes and vegetation going within the SVTs would be.
Applicant replied that the shrubs will be no taller than 30", and the bottom canopy on any trees
will be above 6'. Applicant confirmed that the homeowners' association would be taking care
of the trimming.
CALL TO THE AUDIENCE:
Bill Adler asked if DRB had the written comments that he had submitted. Vice Chair
Sturmon replied that he had not received Mr. Adler's written comments. Vice Chair
Sturmon asked Mr. Adler to give his name and address. Mr. Adler said that he did not
see the point in testifying if his written comments have not been submitted.
Vice Chair Sturmon asked that the record show that some comments were submitted, but
the Board did not receive these comments, and DRB needs to at least acknowledge that
they are somewhere. Mr. Vella asked that the record show that staff had not received
any written comments.
MOTION: Member Buette MOVED to recommend APPROVAL
C:\Docurnents and Settings\lhersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\07-1 1-06 Minutes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06
07/11/2006 Development Review Board Minutes Page 10 of 10
subject to the Conditions in Exhibit A. Member
Kandetzke SECONDED the motion. Motion carried
6-0.
5. 0V12-05-28A, The WLB Group, representing Canada Vistas, requests approval of a
landscape plan for the Vistoso Town Center — Condominiums — known as "The Retreats
at Vistoso", located at the corner of Rancho Vistoso Blvd. and Moore Road, Parcel #219-
21-001D.
MOTION: Member Panas MOVED to recommend APPROVAL
subject to the Conditions in Exhibit A. Member Kandetzke
SECONDED the motion. Motion carried 6-0.
6. OV12-05-28B, The WLB Group, representing Canada Vistas, requests approval of a
landscape plan for the Vistoso Town Center — Single-family residential subdivision
known as "Hohokam Mesa", located at the corner of Rancho Vistoso Blvd. and Moore
Road, Parcel #219-21-OO1D.
MOTION: Member Leska MOVED to recommend APPROVAL
subject to the Conditions in Exhibit A. Member Panas
SECONDED the motion. Motion carried 6-0.
PLANNING & ZONING UPDATE
• In a previous meeting, there was a discussion about the need to elect a chair at the August
meeting. In actuality, the by-laws specify that the election of the Chair and Vice Chair
will take place at the September meeting.
• The DRB by-laws will be brought to the Board in the upcoming months for updating.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Member Kandetzke MOVED to ADJOURN the July 11, 2006,
Development Review Board at 7:48 p.m. Member Leska
SECONDED the motion. Motion carried 6-0.
Prepared by:
Arinda Asper, Recording Secretary
C:\Documents and Settings\lhersha\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8\07-1 1-06 Minutes.doc
Minutes approved 08/08/06