MINUTES
ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SPECIAL SESSION
November 7, 2013
ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 N. LA CA√ĎADA DRIVE
 
CALL TO ORDER AT OR AFTER 6:00 PM

Chairman Swope called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM

ROLL CALL

PRESENT:
Robert Swope, Chair
Don Cox, Vice Chair
John Buette, Commissioner
Alan Caine, Commissioner
Bill Leedy, Commissioner
Bill Rodman, Commissioner
Tom Drzazgowski, Commissioner

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Chairman Swope led the audience in the 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.

There were no speaker requests.

COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS

No comments

1.

REVIEW AND/OR APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 1, 2013 REGULAR SESSION MEETING MINUTES


October 1, 2013 Draft Minutes

MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Leedy and seconded by Commissioner Buette the October 1, 2013 Regular Session Meeting Minutes.

MOTION carried, 6-0.
 
2.

PUBLIC HEARING:  REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A MAJOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE OLSON PROPERTY FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (1.3 - 2.0 DU/AC) AND OPEN SPACE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2.1 - 5.0 DU/AC), LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MOORE ROAD BETWEEN YELLOW ORCHID DRIVE AND MYSTIC VIEW PLACE, OV1113-001


Staff Report

Attachment 1 - Location Map

Attachment 2 - Application and Responses to Criteria

Attachment 3 - Current & Proposed General Plan Land Use

Attachment 4 - Draft October 1st Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes

Attachment 5 - October 1st Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report

Attachment 6 - Density of Adjacent Areas

Attachment 7 - Neighborhood Meeting Summary Notes

David Williams, Planning Manager, presented a General Plan Amendment overview:
 
- Major General Plan Amendment Time Line
- 2013 Public Participation Program (PPP)
- PPP Highlights
- General Plan Amendments Town Website
- Land Development Stages
- Planning Stage Tool:  General Plan & Amendments
- Entitlement Stage Tool:  Zoning
- Design Stage Tool:  Site Plan
- Tonight:  Planning Stage Concerns
- Questions from October 1
- Additional Questions

Matt Michels, Senior Planner provided the following:

- Location Map
- General Plan Land Use
- Proposed General Plan Land Use
- Application Description
- General Plan Amendment Evaluation
- General Plan Amendment Evaluation Criteria
- October 1st Planning and Zoning Hearing Issues
- Adjacent Density
- Factors For
- Factors Against
- Recommendation

Keri Silyvn, Lazarus, Silvyn & Bangs, P.C., representing the Olson Family, presented

- Location Map
- General Plan Land Uses
- Existing General Plan Land Use
- Proposed General Plan Land Use
- Neighborhood Meeting Issues April 4th & September 12th
- General Plan Amendment Criteria

Chairman Swope opened the Public Hearing.

Michael Hoss, Oro Valley Resident, asked how close homes are allowed to be built.  In regards to the grading the hill in the back, come monsoon season the change has potential of over flooding.

Dan Wirrsma, Oro Valley Resident, voiced his concerns with this application and what he believes is not quite accurate information about the change in this property designation.  When you take away the open space and the ESLO requirements and look at the 133 units proposed which are more than 5.0 dwelling units per acre, not the 3.75 that is proposed.  Mr. Wirrsma other concern is the staff report states, "minor arterial roadway", but it took almost five minutes to get out of his development tonight.  To continue, Mr. Wirrsma feels that Lennar Homes is a low cost builder.  Mr Wirrsma supports the General Plan Amendments, but in this case, the proposed does not comply with two of the evaluation criteria for the process.

Bill Adler, Oro Valley Resident, commented that there are General Plan policies that need to be complied with.  This property is elevated above the properties on either side, it might be a zoning issue but also germane to this application.  Density on the bordering property need to be at a lower density in order to minimize the impact on views.

Chairman Swope closed the Public Hearing.

David Laws, Permitting Manger, responded to the resident's concerns regarding grading and the effects on drainage. 

David Williams, Planning Manager, commented on the questions asked during the public hearing including units per acre, minor arterial roadway, and minimizing view impact.

MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Leedy and seconded by Commissioner Rodman to Recomend Approval of the Olson Property Major General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential and Open Space to Medium Density Residential and Open Space, finding that the application meets the General Plan Amendment Criteria and policies.

Discussion ensued amongst the Commission regarding complying with the General Plan Policies, traffic studies, bike route and safety precautions.  

Commissioner Tom Drzazgowski arrived.  

MOTION carried, 6-0. with Tom Drzazgowski, Commissioner abstained.
 
Chairman Swope recessed the meeting at 7:11 PM.  The meeting resumed at 7:16 PM.

3.

PUBLIC HEARING:  REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A MAJOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR VISTOSO HIGHLANDS FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL / OFFICE (NC/O) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2.1 - 5.0 DU/AC) LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RANCHO VISTOSO BOULEVARD AND VISTOSO HIGHLANDS DRIVE, OV1113-002


Staff Report

Attachment 1 - Location Map

Attachment 2 - Application and Responses to Criteria

Attachment 3 - Current & Proposed General Plan Land Use

Attchment 4 - October 1st Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report

Attachment 5 - Draft October 1st Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes

Attachment 6 - Density of Adjacent Areas

Attachment 7 - Neighborhood Meeting Summary Notes

Attachment 8 - Interested Parties Emails and Letters

Attachment 9 - New Residential Develpment in Area

Attachment 10 - Area Commercial Land Inventory

Matt Michels, Senior Planner, provided an overview of the project.

- Location Map
- General Plan Land Use
- Proposed General Plan Land Use
- Application Description
- General Plan Amendment Evaluation
- General Plan Amendment Evaluation Criteria
- October 1st Planning and Zoning Commission - Discussion Points
- Reasons to Retain Commercial
- New Residential Development
- Map of Commercial Parcels Located North of Naranja Drive
- Factors For
- Factors Against
- Recommendation

Steve Hagedorn, The Planning Center, representing the applicant presented the following:

- Location Map
- Existing General Plan
- Proposed General Plan
- New Residential Projects
- Map of Commercial Parcels Located North of Naranja Drive

Chairman Swope opened the Public Hearing.

Patrick Straney, Oro Valley Resident, voiced his concerns on the proposal.  Similar to the Olson property discussion, the buildable footprint in far less than 14 acres.  Mr. Straney foresees density problems and a healthy community needs diversity.  There has been an awful lot of development in Rancho Vistoso within the last five years, with a vast majority is closer to 5 du/ac.  People like to work, play and live in a close by area.  Mr. Straney requested that density be closer to the Vistoso Highlands development immediately adjacent on the west. 

Roy Huff, Oro Valley Resident, states he agrees with Mr. Straney's assessment with Rancho Vistoso being one of the most impressive streets as you enter Vistoso Highland Drive.  The monument sign as you enter gives an impression and hopes the Town gets to retain the sign.  Mr. Huff is asking for less than three homes per acre and single story homes. 

Jim Bands, Oro Valley Resident, states he is urging the Commission to deny this request.  This proposed amendment is inconsistent with the master plan, neighborhoods to the north and the west differs from the density proposed which is significantly higher.

Ron Locker, Oro Valley Resident,  urges the Commission to change the designation from commercial to residential for the following reasons.  1). The parcel has been zoned commercial since 1988 and still vacant.  2).  On the six mile stretch of Rancho Vistoso, from Tangerine to Oracle there are the four shopping centers and office park.  As of three days ago Mr. Locker counted 21 vacant and available commercial spaces.  With that many spaces available there is no need for any more commercial in the area.

Lawrence Effken, Oro Valley Resident, stated as a master plan community the Rancho Vistoso area has provided for a range of housing possibilities.  These neighborhoods were built to offer a variety of living styles and prices to buyers.  It is extremely important that we continue to provide for the type of housing that demonstrates the foresight in this plan.  Any new homes must be in the style, character and concept of those already here.  As this property is an abutting property to an established neighborhood, Mr. Effken feels the homes must be stand alone, single story, single family of a density of approximately 2.1 per acre.

John Bross, Oro Valley Resident, stated he is not opposed to change, but the density of houses is his largest concern.  He is also asking for the 2.1 homes per acre.  This is a wonderful area and he would not want to see it change to a higher density homes. 

Gwen Parr, Oro Valley Resident, states she is in favor of changing parcel 10J from commercial to residential.  Ms. Parr is in favor of change but would urge the developer to be more in tune with the neighborhoods that borders the parcel which have detached single story, single family homes on lot sizes of less than 3 dwellings per acre. 

Mike Parr, Oro Valley Resident, states he is in favor of the amendment but if two story homes are to be built anywhere nearby he would have to seek architecture control permission and built an eight foot privacy wall. 

Carol Surowiec, Oro Valley Resident, states there have been struggles in the past eight years regarding some approved projects which have had an adverse effect on neighborhoods rather than enhancing them.  This land use change as requested by the current owners of this parcel will have the potential to allow as many as five homes per acre as well as two story homes and townhouses.  The land use as requested would allow this development on the parcel which would not be compatible with the adjacent properties on the north and west.  Ms. Suroviec requests a change that would allow no more than three single story homes per acre. 

Bob Spieal, Oro Valley Resident, states should the Commission decide to change the designation from neighborhood commercial office to medium density residential, he trusts that in making that decision you maintain the integrity and continuity of the community of existing homes on Vistoso Highlands Drive.  Mr. Spieal request no two story homes, the development would be a gated community and the density will be no greater than 3 homes per acre. 

Dick Surowiec, Oro Valley Resident, states we don't need $200,000 homes in the area.  Mr. Surowiec supports a designation change if the density level is 2.1 single family and no two story homes.  Mr. Surowiec submitted a letter from Helene and Fred Mittleman.

Bill Adler, Oro Valley Resident, states as with the Olson property his interest is in seeking compliance and consistency with policies and the General Plan.  Market demand does not necessary or automatically lead to community acceptance which is required by the evaluation criteria.

Chairman Swope closed the Public Hearing.

David Willams, Planning Manager, commented on the questions asked during the public hearing including the monument sign entering Rancho Vistoso.

MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Buette and seconded by Vice Chair Cox to Recomend Approval of the requested amendment provided that the dwelling units be limited to 2.1 du/ac.

Discussion ensued amongst the Commission regarding the justification for changing the General Plan, and approving a General Plan Amendment to a density that may not work for the property owner.

MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Buette and seconded by Vice Chair Cox to Amend the previous motion to recommend appoval of the requested amendment without the density limitation.

MOTION failed, 3-4 with Chair Swope, Commissioner Caine, Commissioner Rodman, and Commissioner Drzazgowski opposed.
 
MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Rodman and seconded by Commissioner Caine to Recommend Denial of the requested amendment based on a finding that it does not meet the amendment evaluation criteria as identified in the staff report. 

Discussion ensued amongst the Commission regarding the amendment not being warranted based on changes in the community and the premature nature of the request.

MOTION carried, 4-3 with Vice Chair Cox, Commissioner Buette, and Commissioner Leedy opposed.
 
Chairman Swope recessed the meeting at 8:48 PM.  The meeting resumed at 8:53 PM.

4.

PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A MAJOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR MILLER RANCH FROM RURAL LOW DENSITY (0 - 0.3 DU/AC) AND LOW DENSITY (0.4 - 1.2 DU/AC) TO MEDIUM DENSITY (2.1 - 5.0 DU/AC) AND AMENDMENT OF THE URBAN SERVICES BOUNDARY LOCATED NORTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF TANGERINE ROAD AND LA CANADA DRIVE, OV1113-003.


Staff Report

Attachment 1 - Location Map

Attachment 2 - Application & Responses to Criteria

Attachment 3 - Current & Proposed General Land Use Plan

Attachment 4 - October 1st Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report

Attachment 5 - Draft October 1st Planning & Zoning Commission Minutues

Attachment 6 - Density of Adjacent Areas

Attachment 7 - Neighborhood Meeting Summary Notes

David Williams, Planning Manager, presented an the following:

- Location Map
- General Plan Land Use
- Proposed General Plan Land Use
- Application Description
- Urban Services Boundary
- General Plan Amendment Evaluation
- General Plan Amendment Evaluation Criteria
- October 1st Planning and Zoning Commission Issues
- Previous Applications
- Factors For
- Factors Against
- Recommendation

Stacey Weaks, Norris Design, representing the applicant, presented the following:

- Entitlement Timeline
- Approved Development Plan
- General Plan Application
- Planning Area
- Development Patterns
- Development Transition
- General Plan Elements

Chairman Swopes opened the Public Hearing.

Scott Christy, Oro Valley Resident, asked what is transition and has seen transition in the two previous proposals on how density change.  Mr. Christy cannot understand why so many houses are needed.  

Pat McGowan, Oro Valley Resident, states it is hard to imagine without seeing the structures and how it will affect the neighbors and the quality of life.  Mr. McGowan's main concern is the proposal does not fit with the consistency of the General Plan.

Bill Adler, Oro Valley Resident, states that none of the three applicants have used specific policies in the General Plan to support their positions.  The General Plan is intended to reflect the balance between public and private rights.  Mr. Adler would favor trying to come up with a square footage for the lots rather than this arbitrary designation of two or three acres per acre.  Mr. Adler is suggesting 13,000 square foot lots adjacent to the border. 

Chairman Swope closed the Public Hearing. 

David Willams, responded to the suggestion of the square footage vs. density reference.

MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Buette and seconded by Commissioner Rodman Recommend Denial of OV1113-03 based on a finding that the application fails to meet the amendment criteria and policies as identified in the staff report.

Discussion ensured amongst the Commission regarding if the proposed change is necessary and what was agreed to previously.

MOTION carried, 5-2 with Commissioner Caine and Commissioner Drzazgowski opposed.
 
PLANNING UPDATE (INFORMATIONAL ONLY)

David Williams, Planning Manager, presented the following:

- Narajna Park Improvements

Future Agenda Items for December 3rd

- Parcel 10T PAD Amendment
- Public Art Amendment
- Your Voice Survey Results

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Rodman and seconded by Vice Chair Cox to Adjourn the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at 9:47 PM

MOTION carried, 7-0.