Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/18/1994 Transcript Regular Council MeetingTranscript January. 18. 1994 Regular Council Meeting Item XI-C: Appeal By Nate Newberry, Representing PuRe ~Iomes, Of A Planning Commission's Decision On December 10, 1993, Denying A Request For Front Yard Setback Reductions GERALD FLANNERY: (beginning of TAPE 3, side 1) ... And Planning Commission Resolution #93.05. In accordance with Town procedures, the applicant is appealing the Commissioffs decision. One thing i'd like to make a point on is the primary issue presented here for the Council is whether or not the Council wants to approve the major revision of the front yard setback from twenty feet to seventeen feet. The secondary issue is a presentation that was made to the Council at their November meeting, I believe, and then made to the Commission on their December 15 Planning and Zoning meeting. This is to remedy the concerns of the vehicles obstructing the sidewalks. That's the secondary issue. The first one is the setbacks. NATE NEWBERRY: Madam Mayor, members of the Council, I'm as tired as you so I'm going to make this brief, and really this looks worse than it really is. As Mr. Flannery said, we're simply asking for a reduction of the front yard setback from twenty feet to seventeen feet and the secondary issue is where the sidewalk ends up. I've been before you before as well as the Planning Commission twice and I think what we ended up with were two basic concepts as to where the sidewalk ends up. I don't know that there's much else I can talk about with the reduction from twenty to seventeen feet so I'll just keep my remarks to where the sidewalk ends up because it seemed to be the item that had the most concern and I think you probably have in your packets two proposals. Proposal A would allow for a setback of seventeen feet from the right-of-way and the reduction is only in the homeowner's lot itself. That is, the house moves closer to the right-of-way. The right-of-way doesn't move, we aren't changing the size of the street. All we would be doing is, this would be current condition that would be in the specific plan with a four foot sidewalk that is three feet away from the curb. What this proposal would show is taking that four-foot sidewalk and moving it adjacent to the curb. And I think the best way to really illustrate that is to have a few pictures I'll pass out that I took today at Sun City Vistoso. And Sun City is a thousand-acre master planned community that is currently being developed and these three photographs show what they're doing up there right now and that would be the same result in this configuration. The three photographs, the first two or three show how it looks, in the fourth photograph, I believe, shows that the some construction that is underway right now. So it is a current standard that they're using up there. I think it shows better than I can describe or better than the exhibits show you as to what it would look like if you were to grant it. I might add that again the basis for this request is some market research that was done by Pulte Homes saying that the current homeowners would like to have a larger rear yard. And I would like to say that I've just recently turned in two plats for another developer at Continental Ranch and they are actually platting lots that are ten feet deeper or actually one hundred ten feet than what already exists in these two subdivisions, so there's a little more evidence to say, they realize that people want a bigger back yard, since they're starting with a fresh piece of ground it's easier for them to plat it correctly versus come back and ask for a revision. I think you've all had a chance to see the photographs for Option A. Let me talk a little about Option B~ Option B was a compromise as well in that we still tried to maintain some separation between the curb and the sidewalk. And all we did here was instead of having a three-foot separation, we move the sidewalk one foot closer so that you end up with a two-foot separation. I've got a picture that shows a two-foot separation and it's kinda hard to see the tape but I also have a measuring tape there. That, by the way, is also, I believe, up at Rancho Vistoso, not necessarily at Sun City, but all the other photographs I showed you are at Sun City, and that is an option that the Town Engineer, we've talked with him, that the, he feels good about as well. But as you see from either photograph, those are both standards that are being accepted by the Town of Ore Valley and are being currently built. I might add, that as you're looking at that photograph, we're asking for a revision to the Specific Plan and that revision is only good for the two subdivisions that we're talking about. That would be Parcel 18 and 12-B. Parcel 12-B the homebuilder has actually designed a new product thafs never been built anywhere in the United States and they've designed it specifically for these lots. So they've tried to do some things to maximize the area that they have today, but they feel that adding an additional three feet will make them as competitive or more competitive than what's oat there today and certainly try to be competitive with what's coming on line from the plats that we've just submitted. I think some of you had the opportunity to come out with Linda Polito and take a look at what's really out there today and how either one of these proposals would look if they were built. Also, I have some photographs, I won't go through all of them, they kinda show how typical cars take up space on the driveways. When you reduce the setback from twenty to seventeen feet, you end up reducing the amount of space that is available to park your car, and basically we've compensated for that in Proposal A when we move the sidewalk over that gives you the extra three feet on this side coupled with the seventeen foot setback gives you a twenty foot long driveway which is what you had to begin with. Proposal B which leaves the two foot space in here, really only creates one additional foot added to the seventeen leaves an eighteen foot driveway. We feel either case is adequate for parking unless you have an exceptionally long vehicle which in this case we've shown a Suburban (pickup track) that parks out to eighteen feet. So that would be accommodated in either case than i~ you had something that is twenty feet long would definitely be accommodated in Proposal A. I think it really boils down to is there a proposal that you like better that we can go with, I don't know if you have any particular questions that I can answer. COUNCIL MEMBER EH/TC/HK: The second picture you sent around concerning Proposal t~-tl~ Curb line on that particular, is that a gently sloping curve just like.., or is it a vertical curb? NATE NEWBERRY: It is a vertical curb. The picture was them, intended to show you what the two feet looks like. The other pictures, though, they did depict wedge curbs which is in this scenario with the sidewalk up against the curb, so thatfs the actual existing condition out at Continental Ranch. It's really hard to tell the difference between two and three feet, I went around all over the place with measuring tape 'cause I kept thinking it looked like two or three and it was hard for me to tell. But I think that's what is boils down to, this whole thing we've been through a couple of times, is they want to add three fuet to the back yard they think they have a way to do it and maintain space to park your car as well as come up with an acceptable solution. Either one of these for doing the sidewalk. [pause, silence] MAYOR ORA HARN: Everybody is... has gone to sleep. Councilman Honea. ED ItONEA: I went over Monday, with Linda Polito and we looked at some of the places, and the Vice Mayor went up to see some more. We looked at some of the Pulte homes that are already there that have the twenty-foot driveways, and the very first one we came to had a full size van in it. And almost right across from the office. It takes twenty feet to park a vehicle. It really does. I think really, personally, we have two options here. One is either move the sidewalk out to the curb and if you give 'em the three feet you still have twenty feet to park a vehicle. We went over to look at some of the New World stuff. I hate to be down on 'em; they've kind of gotten kicked a little bit today, but over another part of the area, they had some fifteen foot driveways that were approved years ago and they're really inadequate and I mean they were really inadequate. People had really small compact cars parked in 'em and they were still hanging out into the sidewalk and if you put in a regular size car it would have molly been a mess. I don't have any objection to moving sidewalk back out to the curb to give 'em a full twenty feet of parking. The only drawback to that would be is that in the entire Continental Ranch complex there really are no curbs on the sidewalks. There's two places on Silverbell where the curbs and the sidewalks are together and those are both bridges where large washes span or go under Silverbell Road and there was one place along Coachline where them was a large manhole and they went around the manhole and brought the sidewalk up to the curb. So, if we allow that, it's going to va~ from what is in Continental Ranch now. But I really think there's two options. Either say no, or move the sidewalk out to the curb and let them move forward three feet. Because I don't think seventeen or eighteen feet is going to be adequate for a full size vehicle. MAYOR ORA ItARN: Vice Mayor Price. VICE MAYOR SHARON PRICE: Madam Mayor. Talking with some of the homeowners out there, they wouldn't be as upset with having the curb and the sidewalk adjoining each other as they would be having the reduction in the driveways. They would really like to see the twenty foot driveways remain in there if at all possible. Now, we have a lot of homeowners, they get caught up in the excitement of buying their first home, I guess, and they don't realize when they end up with a five to ton-foot backyard that that is not sufficient. Quite often, I, we have to intervene, we have arguments between neighbors strictly with just water; when one waters a plant it runs into the other's property which is not allowable. Three feet doesn't seem like a lot to add to a backyard, but if you take three feet on one property line and three feet on another that's six, and sometimes that puts them in a situation where they can have coffee with each another instead of fighting. ORA }IARN: Councilman Clark. COUNCILMAN TOM CLARK: Madam Mayor, I also went down there yesterday morning and visited with Linda and looked at some of the proposals that they're making here tonight. But I've got a brother and sister that live in two different subdivisions, one up in Albotuki [sic?l and the other in Casa Grande and my sister in Albotuki[?] has the buffer between the sidewalk and her driveway and with the sloped curve, and then fi~y brother has the sidewalk directly next to the sloped curve, and he says she's pretty happy with hers although they do have to maintain that area between the sidewalk and the curb in front of their home, but my brother says constantly visitors that go into their subdivision are constantly parking up on the sidewalk because the sloped curb is adjacent to the sidewalk or the sidewalk is adjacent to the sloped curb-- sorry-- and they're constantly having to tell people to rn-o~,e~their cars that they're blocking the sidewalk and his subdivision, the kids aren't supposed to be allowed to ride their bikes on the sidewalk or skateboard, but it's done all the time and people seem to be a lot more lenient about that then they do about the fact of people driving or parking their cars up on the sidewalk. JOItN WOOD: Madam Mayor, ifI might, one of the things that we might be able to do to alleviate some of that is in addition to sliding the sidewalk over, is make the sidewalk five feet rather than four feet. That way you've got an additional foot of width, it's almost like leaving a one foot space but if someone pulls up on the curb or something happens you've got another foot them so the sidewalks actually a foot wider. You know, which is an option that the home builder, which Pulte would be willing to do, it's a little mom cost to them but again they feel that this is so important to make their homes competitive and it would provide a wider space. TOWN ENGINEER: Madam Mayor, if... MAYOR 1tARN: I'm sorry, "Mick" is all that's coming to my brain, this time of night you'll just have to accept that. TOWN ENGINEER: The other solution that was discussed at one point was the, in order to provide the twenty foot setback at the driveway locations and also the separation of the curb from the sidewalk would be to taper the sidewalk as it approaches the driveway, say at a five foot distance, maintain it at two feet from the back of the curb to the residence and as you approach the driveway five feet on either side, we taper the sidewalk over so that the sidewalk would be adjacent to the curb, the sidewalk area, I should say, would be adjacent to the curb in the driveway location once you get beyond the driveway then you taper it back out and you come to it, that is another solution we had discussed at one time, sort of again, the compromise of trying to come up that if the decision is made that yes, we're going to grant this variance on this thing, here's another option that we can do. I feel that probably the tapering solution is probably the best solution, it achieves both goals, provides for the twenty foot driveway length that is going to be needed for the larger vehicles, then as you get away from the driveways, then you do have the separation which is what we would tike to have out them is that separation. And that is another, something we could work into, we've discussed this with John Wood, discussed this with Nato Newberry, and they are amenable to this solution as an another compromise solution in order to achieve really both goals here, and I think, in my opinion, it's a win-win, we achieve what the developer is trying to do, cooperate with him, as well as then provide the offset that we desire, and there's a reason for that, the offset from the curb and the sidewalk, again one of the reasons is people continuing to pull up onto the sidewalk because of the wedge curb, it's just a natural thing. You're going to see it them, you're going to pull up on it because you going to get offthe streets, you know, you're going to try to get your vehicle that you paid for offthe street. And this provides that opportunity. So that is something we have talked about in the past and I feel, again, is a good compromise solution. MAYOR HARN: Councilman Clark. TOM CLARK: Madam Mayor. Sometimes I wish some members of the Planning and Zoning Commission were here tonight so that they could explain to us why they came to their decision. Why would they, I would like to know why they denied that solution or when it gets that solution... TOWN ENGINEER: Madam Mayor, Councilman Clark, one of the reasons, main reasons was it was the variance of the setback that really the Planning Commission did, had denied this proposal in the very beginning. That was the reason. '[hey didn't want to grant this variance of the setback. They felt that the twenty foot setback is what is required in the Specific Plan and therefore, that is what they would go with. And that's basically, both times, correct me if I'm wrong John, that was basically both times why the denial was issued by the Planning Commission. GERAI,D FLANNERY: Madam Mayor. IVIAYOR HARN: Mr. Flannery. GERALD FLANNERY: Members of the Council, in your packet I included a copy of the I~e~0[ution that the Commission approved at their last meeting which they, the one which they upheld their original decision to deny, and in that we stipulated the specific reasons why they did so, and one of them was "the fifteen foot [setback] would encourage parking of the vehicles in the driveways, the granting of such an extension revision", excuse me, "an extensive revision, would serve as a precedent for other developers, the granting of the revision would create an adverse enviromnental effect on Continental Ranch generally, the applicant has the option of either redesigning the homes to fit the existing lots, or redesign the subdivision and enlarge the lot sizes, market demand is not the only factor to consider the design." Basically that's what they were. And that, we specifically wrote that Resolution to account for what the Commission's recommendation was. TOM CLARK: Madam Mayor. MAYOR HARN: Councilman Clark. TOM CLARK: Jerry, what do they mean by, would create an adverse environmental affect on Continental Ranch? GERALD FLANNERY: I believe they were holding strong to the circulation and just in general, their belief, and I'm speaking for the Commission so, forgive me if I'm a little off, I think they were basically, what it all boiled down to was do they want to make this amendment to, or make an amendment for those two parcels for that major revision of the setbacks, and the bottom line was no and these were things they mentioned and we took notes on in the meeting, they didn't go into that one as much as some of the other ones. The environmental, I think it just means pretty much quality of life would be impacted more negatively that anything. MAYOR HARN: Any other questions? Vice Mayor Price. SHARON PRICE: The only problem that I would have with what Mick was suggesting was bringing the sidewalks out when it approaches the driveway is that you have children going parallel with the property and all of a sudden you're aiming them offa little bit towards the road. I am kind of concerned about that. Also, I had a question, ifMick could find out which development that had this .type of sidewalk and that I would like to look at it, and I presume there wasn't anything close we could get to, or... TOWN ENGINEER: No. No, I didfft have time. SHARON PRICE: It would really help because I just, I really have a problem with that with children. We do not have the older children and the bicycles on the sidewalks but you do have the smaller children, and actually, basically probably out in the road more times than they're out on the sidewalk anyway, but when they are on it, I'm concerned with them headed in the direction of the road. MAYOR ItARN: Any other discussion? ED ItONEA?: Back to your suggestion, of moving the sidewalk out to the curb, extending it to three feet, is that what you said? JOHN WOOD: Well, we'd actually end up with this kind of solution but have it be a five foot sidewalk versus a four foot... ED HONEA?: And then what would that leave you for parking, eighteen foot... JOHN WOOD: Twenty feet. ED HONEA?: That would be between... JOHN WOOD: You bet. Well, what we have is, we have our seventeen foot setback and then we move the four foot sidewalk against the curb and that leaves us a three foot piece, so three and seventeen will give us a twenty foot parking driveway, so that if your car is twenty feet long, you can still walk right past it and stay on the sidewalk and all we're saying is we can add another foot to that so if somebody pulled up onto a curb and usually they dofft pull up onto the curb right behind the driveway, they pull up on the curb in front of the house, you can walk a foot away from that car and then as you come to the driveway you just walk across the driveway. MAYOR HARN: Councilman Clark. TOM CLARK: Was this proposal the five foot sidewalk presented to Planning and Zoning? JOHN WOOD: I don't know that, I've never given them a specific exhibit on that proposal. And they kind of brought some of those issues last time and really, I think we felt that the issue here is we're asking for the setback and the three foot reduction of the setback and how the sidewalk ends up is however they want it to end up. We're just trying to make proposals that, it's really the end result is you have a seventeen foot setback versus a twenty foot setback. And how the sidewalk ends up, we did present these two options to them and we also solicit them for comment but as you know, we can't talk to them prior to any of the public hearings, so you know, if they were to bring it up, I'm sum we would have OK'd it, they didn't bring it up, and you know there's very limited, ifI didn't bring up in the meeting I'd hate to have to go back to them because I'd thought of something new later, I guess is what I'm saying. ED HONEA?: You're sure that Pulte Homes would... JOHN WOOD: Yes. In fact the representative is right here, Nate Newberry, and I just asked him, you know we're to find out what is acceptable, ay to compromise, and that's how we came up with these two options and anything like Mick [Mathieu] was saying, any kind of, what Mick just said, is really just a combination of these two put together, I think the big thing is everyone wants a twenty foot driveway and they want to be able to walk behind it and they want to make sure that if you're walking on the sidewalk and someone's parked a car that you can walk next to it. That's all we're trying to do is get the setback, but configure the sidewalk however it needs to be configured so that you can have clear access behind the car. And Nate, I just asked Nate, because it just popped into my mind, again, and I did think we did bring it up with Mick one time is, what if we went with a five foot sidewalk. It means an additional foot of concrete that he has to build that he wouldn't normally build, but it gives you a wider surface so if a car's tires are parked up there on that first one foot, you still have a four foot clear space to walk past on. I don't know if you have anything to add to that, Nate .... NATE NEWBERRY: Yeah, we would not have a problem. ED HONEA?: Some of my concern is, especially after the Suburban out here, is if you went back to the seventeen foot or what you're talking about, where the Suburban is you can see is parked right up to the garage door, is kids, on their bicycles in between two cars and then darting out in front of pedestrians or whoever it might be you know, walking on the sidewalk, or another child on a bike, I mean, it's probably going to happen anyway, but the way children are, but that's the concern. The closer the back of the vehicle is to the sidewalk itself, there being two cars parked parallel to one another and then somebody darting out... NATE NEWBERRY: Right. JOHN WOOD: And that's why, at least having this kind of proposal where the sidewalk's against the curb, you have the twenty foot space in the driveway so you can park a twenty foot vehicle, and you can also walk behind it, directly behind it, but away from the driveway if you're parked on the curb you could go into that four foot s~ff~Talk and that's why adding a foot to it will, that's how we came of with this proposal is keeping two feet away from the curb in case a car would park here, you would still have a four foot clear space to walk through. And I think what Mick said is why not do a combination of those two, keep two feet clear in front of the house and then the sidewalk in reality kind of dips into the driveway but the back of the sidewalk keeps going straight. You know, the sidewalk would be right here, but you'd have a little triangular piece in here so you could walk around the car, you know, that would be a compromise of those two issues, but I've just shown you some pictures where they've done it just like this, and all we're proposing is we can do it just like this with the sidewalk against the curb but make the sidewalk a foot wider, that's kind of like leaving a one foot dirt space 'cause then you have a five foot sidewalk whereas you would have had a four foot sidewalk. So I kind of like that because it achieves the, gets rid of that dirt strip but it also provides a five foot walking surface and ifa car parks up on the curb on that first foot, you still have a four foot clear space to walk past it and you still have a twenty foot driveway. Now, you may have to walk around the one foot of that sidewalk is going to project into this twenty foot driveway by one foot, but I don't see that as being a problem because we're not worried about a car parking on the curb behind the driveway. It's kind of hard to visualize. MAYOR HARN: Vice Mayor Price. SHARON PRICE: Madam Mayor, does our Town Engineer have a problem with the five foot sidewalks? TOWN ENGI!NEER: No, I don't, I, you know, again what we're searching for is a compromise and I think that, you know, a five foot sidewalk is a workable solution. The other thing Jerry and I were kind of discussing here with, and asked Nate too, the other thing that could be possible and I don't want to confuse the issue, again but five foot is acceptable but the other thing is we do see offset to maybe one foot and in that way you still provide say a nineteen foot driveway that if they do have the Suburban in there, and they are going to park it a foot away from the garage, which I think I would do ifI had one to walk in front of it, again then you've got a clear path all the way through there, and that would be, would conform to what the neighborhood looks like right now with the separation of the curb and the sidewalk. The other idea would be not necessarily tapering the whole sidewalk but maybe keep the backline of the sidewalk that's closest to the resident at a constant line that's going down there with the two foot separation and then as you approach the sidewalk put like a wedged triangular piece of sidewatk in there to allow for that extra space so you could walk out that way. You're really not directing a tricyclist into the street, anymore then what you would be if the sidewalk butted right up against the sidewalk anyways, because sidewalks have kind of a slope to them this solution was one we had come up with earlier where you add some additional concrete in this area, keeping this all the same but then you add the additional width in here and that accomodates the vehicles in the driveway. Again, I don't want to confuse the issue, your original question to me is the five foot sidewalk acceptable, yes I would find it acceptable for the addkional width in there. JOHN WOOD: I wish this was one of those black and white issues where it was one or the other and that's that kind of where it gets confusing... MAYOR ItARN: You mean like the other issue we had? JOHN WOOD: No, no, well, I think them are some compromises here that would probably, we could work out, it's just a matter kind of detailing what we want to do, we could put a five foot sidewalk against the curb and that, to me, accomplishes, is acceptable to the Town Engineer and seems to be acceptable from the standpoint of providing a space to walk behind it and gives you the twenty foot driveway. MAYOR HARN: Councilman Honea. ED HONEA: Madam Mayor, let's try one. I make the motion that we move the sidewalk, allow Pulte to move the sidewalks out directly adjacent to the curb and they put in the five foot sidewalks as they said they would and, in order for them to move the house forward three feet. ; TOM CLARK: I second it. MAYOR HARN: I didn't hear the last part of that. ED HONEA: They move the sidewalk out to the curb, the four foot sidewalk which is what we're dealing with, now, make it a five foot sidewalk which was the offer they gave us, for more sidewalk room for pedestrians and people. That would allow them to move the house forward three feet to give them a three-foot bigger backyard. MAYOR BARN: Ifs been moved and seconded that we allow Pulte Homes to move the sidewalk out to the curb and the sidewalk would be five feet wide, am I giving the correct... Ok. Any discussion? Councilman Clark. TOM CLARK: Mr. Wood, or Mr. Newberry, is that making the sidewalk an extra foot and bringing it into the front yard or the front landscaping and everything, is that going to detract, you feel, from the the home, I mean making less, front yard landscaping because you're bringing the sidewalk in an extra foot or do you think that... JOItN WOOD: I don't know that's going to detract in any way and ! think, in fact, by virtue of the fact of closing the gap between the sidewalk and the curb it will probably over time enhance the front yard because there won't be that stxip or that former maintenance strip eliminated, people will then take care of the yard from their house to the sidewalk, the sidewalk is a foot closer than it used to be. Visually, I don't think you're going to see the difference and in fact, like I said, I'm repeating myself now, it will probably enhance it because of the elimination of that strip between the two pieces of concrete. MAYOR ItARN: Councilman Kal. ltERB KAl: My question, Mr. Wood, again, that would still maintain the twenty foot parking area for a large vehicle... WOOD: Yes. You still end up with this situation in that you have, from the curb, I'm talking directly behind on the driveway, that is, from this point back is going to be twenty feet, TOWN ENGINEER: Hey, John, it's going to be nineteen. JOHN WOOD: Well, it's going to be nineteen, but the sidewalk's a foot wider, so basically you get the same... TOWN ENGINEER: But you still have four.., JOHN WOOD: You still have twenty feet from the garage to the end of the driveway and four feet to the curb. So, you still have twenty-four feet, no matter how you look at it, it's just that the sidewalk's going to be one foot wider as you come up to the driveway, and you'll never see any difference because you're tying into the driveway anyways. MAYOR HARN: Any other discussion? Hearing none, are we ready for the Question? All those in favor say "Aye". [together] SHARON PRICE: Aye. ED ItONEA: Aye. HERB KAI: Aye. BETTY [IORRIGA1N: Aye. TOM CLARK: Aye. MAYOR HARN: [hits with gavel] Carries unanimously. : JOHN WOOD: I thank the Mayor and Council and Staff for staying up so late to hear us. Thank you. TOM CLARK?: I'd like to go back and see the development once you get started. MAYOR HARN: Does that mean you're going to pay for breakfast? JOHN WOOD: That means Nate's paying for breakfast. END OF TRANSCRIPT