MINUTES
ORO VALLEY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Planning and Zoning Special Session
April 21, 2009
ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE

 

1.	Call to Order at 6:00 p.m.

2.

Roll Call

3.

Public Hearing:  OV11-08-04, Vistoso Partners, represented by the WLB Group, requests approval of a General Plan amendment for portions of Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 5, generally bounded on the north by Rancho Vistoso Boulevard, on the east by the Big Wash, on the south by Tangerine Road, and on the west by the Rancho Vistoso Boulevard.

Paul Oland, WLB Group, representing Vistoso Partners, gave a brief report with the updates in this request.   The request is limited to four parcels: 5D, existing site is currently zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR)  and proposed to be open space.  5I is the existing school site and we are proposing to expand the golf rec to include that area.  5R, Amphi School District has been identified to be a middle school site in the future.  5V, 34 acres is currently designated as golf rec area.  The idea is to take the density for 5R, 5D and transfer those units one for one onto 5V.

Clarification discussion points: 
- There will be an access road to the park that comes in from the east through parcel 5H when developed.
- The applicant does not care whether the designation is as golf course or open space, but would appreciate direction on the issue. 
- The Commission has a challenge to balance consistencies with inconsistencies in the criteria charged to use.  If a golf course is wanted that is going to be an attraction, it has to have enough acreage (200 acres+-) to be playable and enjoyable, if not professional. 
- The applicant is prepared to designate the reintroduced golf course as open space if the Town prefers.

Matt Michels, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.
 
Clarification discussion points:
- A golf course is not an allowed use in open space.
- The aim of the 1500 foot corridor was to have a natural corridor for Honey Bee Wash.  It was not the intent of the condition to have any development along that corridor.
- The historic Moore Road alignment currently on the existing Rancho Vistoso PAD goes through the area.  The portion of old Moore Road alignment on the east would be constructed and would serve the location of the park in parcel 5I.
- The road would be done when the market dictates and with the development of parcel 5I.

PUBLIC HEARING opened at 6:30 p.m.

Doug McKee, Oro Valley resident. Oro Valley has about 40,000 population and 6 1/2 golf courses, which is about 6,000 per golf course.  There will be about 10,000 population at build out.  Another 1.6 golf courses would be needed to keep the status quo.  Arroyo Grande may bring another 40,000 in population.  No golf courses are specified in AG as of now.  The proposed acreage is too small with long narrow areas to north and south.  200 useable acres are needed.  By adding other areas as golf course, 200 useable acres could be achieved.  He recommends approving this amendment with modifications that some areas are changed to Resort/Golf Course (RGC) to make up 200 acres. 

Wayne Krouse, Oro Valley resident, agrees with Mr. McKee. This plan, particularly in relation to converting 5D to RGC space, is best.  If made open space now, it would be difficult to convert back.  This is the best plan and is close to meeting all requirements we have heard.  He would add RGC designation as the first speaker suggested, other than that it is a good plan.

PUBLIC HEARING closed at 6:23  p.m.

Commissions questions: 

Commissioner Merry asked how narrow the RGC zones at north and south were.
Mr. Oland replied very narrow, at about 300 feet at the widest.  The idea was not to put a golf course there, but to preserve a quantity of acres, knowing it would have to be reconfigured if someone wanted to put in a golf course later.

Commissioner Adler said there are no goals and policies that encourage golf courses specifically.  Several call for washes and floodplains to be protected.  If one of the criteria is to adhere to the goals and policies of the GP, that weighs is favor of not encouraging the reintroduction of the RGC.  He likes parcel 5D being Open Space (OS) because that broadens the corridor and further protects the ecological nature of the wash.  He disagrees with the introduction of the RGC. There is no market demand and the applicant has no intent of putting in a course. Golf courses compromise the land use and natural OS elements of the GP and the economic development value is questionable.  A golf course in this location is not likely to generate economic growth above what it costs to maintain.  Destruction to environmentally sensitive land  is horrific.  He would support the amendment proposal without the golf course. 

Commissioner Caine agrees with Mr. Adler, that it is wrong to compromise the plan which seems to sit well with the GP.  A golf course is not economically viable and uses a lot of water. 

Commissioner Merry said 1.  RGC area is not being introduced, but is already there.  To accept this plan does not mean we are adding a golf course.  2. If a golf course is not built then it remains as OS. 3.  P&Z Commissioners serve at the pleasure of the Town Council who have to answer to its constituents.  This RGC being reintroduced or reconfigured is because constituents have asked Council to do so.  Council serves at the vote of constituents.  4.  Maybe the use of golf courses is going down because they have become so tough (professional) that average players could not play on them.  Beginners could enjoy an easier course.  An easier course could be configured on 160 acres.  This appears to be what the constituents want.

Commissioner La Master asked for a point of clarification. If the amendment was changed and the golf course taken out, what would parcel 5I be designated as?
Ms. More said the current designation is Public School and if not changed would remain so.

Commissioner Hornat said he thinks the densities are in the right areas.  The park location makes sense.  He likes Mr Adler’s idea and could not support expanding the RGC area. It appears the applicant could go either way and he would support this if the RGC were OS.

Vice Chair Reddin said whether we added acres to RGC, we are going to have to go into OS to accommodate.  To reconfigure RGC is not a good idea, as we may create bigger problems with the OS.  Whether we keep it or not doesn’t matter, except to keep it give us a future option.  He can support either direction.

Chair Bergman supports this request.  She doesn’t believe a golf course will ever be built there, so it will be open space anyway.  It is not practical to build a golf course there without dramatic changes.

MOTION:  Commissioner Caine MOVED to recommend that the Town Council approve with conditions, OV11-08-04, General Plan Amendment for portions of Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 5, generally bounded on the north by Rancho Vistoso Boulevard, on the east by the Big Wash, on the south by Tangerine Road, and on the west by the Rancho Vistoso Boulevard, as depicted on Exhibit "D", and subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit "A".  Vice Chair Reddin seconded the motion. 

Discussion:  Commissioner Adler will not support this motion for reasons indicated.  As elected officials, it is the Commission’s job to enforce the Zoning Code and General Plan.  If the golf course were removed, he could support it.

Commissioner Caine didn’t think the current proposal is to make parcel 5D golf course, so it doesn’t interfere with the corridor. 

Chair Bergman would agree with Mr. Adler if it weren’t already shown as a golf course on the currently adopted PAD.  If it were a virgin piece of property she would agree with Mr. Adler.  This seems to be a reasonable compromise.

Motion carried 5:2, Commissioners Adler and Hornat voting no for reasons stated above.

4.	Adjourn Special Session