Chair Cox called the September 2, 2014 session of the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission Study Session to order at 6:00 PM.
Don Cox, Chairman
John Buette, Vice Chairman
Bill Rodman, Commissioner
Tom Drazazgowski, Commissioner
Frank Pitts, Commissioner
Greg Hitt, Commissioner
ABSENT: Bill Leedy, Commissioner
ALSO PRESENT:
Lou Waters, Vice - Mayor and Council Liaison
Joe Hornat, Council Member
Bayer Vella, Interim Planning Manager
David Laws, Permitting Manager
Joe Andrews, Chief Civil Deputy Attorney
Philip Saletta, Water Utility Director, presented the following:
Mission
Water Utility Goals and Objectives
Water Utility Commission
Oro Valley Water Supply Diverse Portfolio
Water Usage
Water Conservation Program
Potable Water System
Central Arizona Project Water
Reclaimed Water System
Oro Valley Water Utility Water Supply
Typical Aquifer Recharge & Recovery
Oro Valley Water Utility Central Arizona Project Water Delivery
Summary - Water Resource Planning for the Future
Chair Cox ended the Study Session at 6:30 PM.
Chair Cox called the Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Session to order at 6:00 PM.
Don Cox, Chairman
John Buette, Vice Chairman
Bill Rodman, Commissioner
Tom Drazazgowski, Commissioner
Frank Pitts, Commissioner
Greg Hitt, Commissioner
ABSENT: Bill Leedy, Commissioner
ALSO PRESENT:
Lou Waters, Vice - Mayor and Council Liaison
Joe Hornat, Council Member
Bayer Vella, Interim Planning Manager
David Laws, Permitting Manager
Joe Andrews, Chief Civil Deputy Attorney
Chairman Cox led the Planning and Zoning Commission members and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Council Member Hornat stated as the Town Council has been in recess, there are no updates to present this evening.
MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Pitts and seconded by Commissioner Rodman to approve
MOTION carried, 6-0.
Rosevelt Arellano, Planner, presented the following:
Zoning Code Amendment ESL Flexible Design Standards
ESL Zoning Provisions
Conservation Subdivision
Flexible Design Standards
Stacy Weaks, of Norris Design on behalf of the Applicant, presented a Text Amendment Overview, including:
-Proposed text amendment
-Staff recommended text amendment
-Balance planning flexibility/maximize open space
-Comparable zoning criteria
-The proposed addition to the development incentives
Bill Adler, Oro Valley Resident, questioned how the width of the lots would be judged or measured? He stated this process would lengthen the permit application timeline. He suggested that a more thorough presentation would have been more beneficial.
MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Rodman and seconded by Commissioner Drzazgowski to approve to approve OV714-003 subject to the revisions depicted in Attachment 4
MOTION carried, 5-1 with Commissioner Pitts opposed.Zoning Code Amendment
Modified Text Amendment
Attachment 4
Additions shown in ALL CAPS
Deletions shown in strikethrough font
iii. Requirements Subject to Modification
The following requirements may be modified as they relate to the proposed construction of single-family attached and detached residences, multi-family residences, commercial, employment and mixed use projects.
a. Building Setback. Minimum setbacks may be reduced to no less than five (5) feet on lots less than or equal to twelve thousand (12,000) square feet and up to twenty percent (20%) of the required distance on lots greater than twelve thousand (12,000) square feet. Reductions are subject to the following:
1) Side yards shall not be less than five (5) feet, unless a zero lot line design is utilized. 2) Setback reductions shall not result in on-lot driveway lengths that are less than twenty (20) feet.
3) Reductions do not apply to setback requirements in subsection F.2.d.ii.e.2 of this section for a conservation subdivision design.
b. Landscape Buffer Yards. Minimum required buffer yards may be reduced to ten (10) feet with a corresponding decrease in planting ratios specified in Section 27.6, Table 27-10, except when the buffer yard is adjacent to an existing residential subdivision or public street.
c. Minimum Lot Size. Minimum lot sizes in all R1, R-4, R-S and SDH-6 districts may be modified subject to conservation design requirements of this section.
d. MINIMIMUM LOT WIDTH. MINIMUM LOT WIDTHS IN ALL R1, R-4, R-2 AND SDH-6 DISTRICTS MAY BE MODIFIED SUBECT TO CONSERVATION DESIGN REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION.
d. e. Off-Street Parking. Modifications resulting in reduced amounts of parking and circulation area are supported. Off-street parking requirements may be reduced in accordance with Section 27.7.C.2.
e. f. Building Height. Building heights for single-family attached and multi-family dwelling types may be increased by no more than thirteen (13) feet.
f. g. Open Space. Reductions may be provided in accordance with subsection F.2.f of this section, open space requirements.
g. h. Mixed Use. Residential uses that are functionally integrated, including access, nonvehicular circulation and amenities, with commercial or employment uses may be approved within commercial zoning districts.
h. i. Modified Review Process. Site plans and preliminary plats submitted in conformance with the approved Tentative Development Plan, as determined by the Planning and Zoning Administrator, may be administratively approved.
i. j. Recreation Area Credit. Permissible passive and/or active recreational amenities located within resource management area ESOS may be credited toward residential recreation area requirements as approved by the Planning and Zoning Administrator when the locational requirements of Section 26.5, Provision of Recreational Area, are satisfied. Connectivity of open space must be maintained.
j. k. Native Vegetation Preservation. When fifty percent (50%) or more of a site is preserved as ESOS, requirements for native plant salvage and mitigation (Section 27.6B) shall be waived within a development envelope. This modification cannot be applied to areas of distinct vegetation which are designated as a core resource area or native plants that are considered threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act or highly safeguarded by the Arizona Department of Agriculture.
RECESS
Chair Cox and the Planning and Zoning Commission took a 5 minute break before hearing the next item.
David Laws, Permitting Manager, presented the following:
Zoning Code Amendment To Grading Provisions
Existing Code
Applicability Site Boundary Line
Applicability Internal Lot Boundaries
Grading Designs
Review and Conclude
Paul Oland, WLB on behalf of Maracay Homes, presented photos of homes where neighbors were able to grade across property lines, allowing for a more smooth graded appearance.
MOTION: A motion was made by Vice Chairman Buette and seconded by Commissioner Pitts to approve
MOTION carried, 6-0.
Chad Daines, Principal Planner,
Tangerine Road Corridor Overlay District
Driveway Separation Requirements
The Central Issue
Code Amendment
MOTION: A motion was made by Chairman Cox and seconded by Vice Chairman Buette to accept
MOTION carried, 6-0.
Chad Daines, Principal Planner, presented the following:
-Work Plan
-conditional Use Permit's
-CUP Evaluation Criteria
-Zoning Code Evaluation Criteria
-Table Comparison
Bayer Vella, Planning Manager
-September 8 - A neighborhood meeting is to be held from 6-7:30 pm at Casas Adobes Baptist Church located at 10801 N. La Cholla Blvd regarding the Shannon Road south of IRHS Major General Plan Amendment
- September 10 - A neighborhood meeting is to be held at IRHS library lecture hall at 2475 W. Naranja Dr. at 6:00 pm regarding La Cholla BLVD and Naranja sorthwest and southwest Major General Plan Amendments
- Planning and Zoning Commission meeting is scheduled for October 7th and will be dedicated to Major General Plan Amendment cases only
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: A motion was made by Vice Chairman Buette and seconded by Commissioner Rodman to adjourn
MOTION carried, 6-0.