NOTE: //...// => strike; ??...?? => to be filled in. NOTE: A "purpose" section was suggested in the memo of Sarah More - it seems sensible to have it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3.5.9.7 Large Retail Establishment A. Purpose and Intent LRE have an outsized impact, recognizably different from that of traditional retail, characterized conjointly by: long hours of operation; warehouse scale and style; heavy truck traffic and activity; heavy customer traffic; outdoor sales; non-linear effect of combination with other retail on site. The intent of these performance criteria is to optimally protect and accommodate the interests of the owner and developer of an LRE site, of the owners and residents of nearby properties and businesses, and of the citizens of Tucson. The performance criteria and procedures are specifically intended to: \(bu Retain the character of adjacent neighborhoods and promote the intent of neighborhood or area plans, through buffering, mitigating, and otherwise reducing the impact of adjacent LRE. \(bu Promote the economic welfare and quality of life of citizens, through fostering: economic development as represented by LRE; facile access to goods and services; the economic stability of the community. \(bu Promote attractive, aesthetic, site-sensitive, and novel design. Applicants are encouraged to be creative in addressing the purposes of the performance criteria. LRE on sites that are in commercial or industrial areas and not near a residential area or historic or landmark structures, should be approved by right, subject to minimal additional performance criteria. LRE on sites that are in commercial or industrial areas and near a residential area or near historic or landmark structures, are subject to the performance criteria and approval procedures of this section with the purpose of: \(bu Protecting the most fragile neighborhoods through the specification of performance criteria with high standards. \(bu Accommodating sites that do not require the highest level of protection: although variances from the criteria are not permitted, if one or more of the criteria cannot be met, the applicant can request approval through the Special Exception Land Use process where there is substantial compliance with this section. \(bu Resolving conflicts early, expediting approval, and encouraging creative site design, through a committee formed to enable substantive and early pre-application meetings between applicant and adjacent residents and/or neighborhood associations. \(bu Providing an ongoing monitoring process, through a committee formed after approval of the development plan. B. Applicability and Procedure. Each Large Retail Establishment shall be subject to approval pursuant to one of the following procedures. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: By right is placed first, as discussed, although logically it should go last, IMHO. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Exception. The provisions of Sec. 3.5.9.7 shall not apply for LRE: a. on sites that meet the following conditions: 1. Have C-2 or higher zoning; //are a vacant or redevelopment site;// 2. Are surrounded by C-1 and higher zoning //or res. zoning that is roadway, freeway, railroad, or wash right-of-way//; 3. Are twenty-four hundred (2400) ft or more from a residential use or residentially zoned property, except for residentially zoned property that is roadway, freeway, railroad, or wash right-of-way; 4. Are 1 mile or more from an Historic Preservation Zone, Historic Landmark, or historic structure or historic district on the National or Arizona Register of Historic Places. b. and which meet the following performance criteria: i. Primary access shall be from an arterial with minimum four (4) lanes existing or planned, or through a commercial or industrial subdivision. //Buffers and setbacks are not required.// ??as performance criteria are rewritten, list specific by right criteria here?? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: One does not see how "non-by-right" sites usefully can be separated into T5A and T3L categories. Vacant sites and redevelopment sites with or without existing LRE would seem to require the same level of protection. Presumably the aim of separation into T5A and T3L is to expedite approval for redevelopment. Developer-neighbor pre-application meetings appear to have resulted in substantial agreement for about half of recent LRE development plans. The meetings currently are informal and barely encouraged by the regulations. Perhaps a better way to separate out an expeditable class is to upgrade the pre-application meetings to where they are conducted formally, started earlier in the planning process, and a quantifiable level of agreement is determined through a vote of Neighbors and Developers. QUESTION: For "non-by-right" sites, can the ordinance be written: (1) to be consistent with the LUC or to modify the LUC, such that (2) the Planning Director can approve, without need for M/C approval, a development plan that does not meet all the performance criteria, (3) provided that both applicant and neighbors are on record as being satisfied quantifiably with the plan at the end of pre-application meetings (3.5.9.7.B.2.b below), and (4) if applicant and neighbors are not both satisfied with the plan, then it requires hearing before M/C and approval by M/C. PURPOSE: the Planning Director can decide, according to the outcome of pre-application meetings, in effect to follow either a Type V Administrative or a Type III Legislative approval procedure (both branches might be combined into a single modified Type V Administrative procedure). INTENT: Such flexibility would foster pre-application agreement and if there is agreement, would expedite approval. An attempt is made to insert this approach into the Procdures. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: the following is from the January 28, 2002 draft, except where indicted. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Procedures. a. Each LRE shall be subject to approval by the Mayor and Council pursuant to one of the following procedures. i. Special Exception Land Use. Special Exception Land Use through a Type III Legislative Procedure, Sec. 5.4.2.3; or ADDED: a Type V Administrative Procedure, Sec. 5.4.3.5, provided that at the end of the pre-application meetings the adjacent-property owners vote according to the procedures of 3.5.9.7.B.2.b.vi to approve the development plan; or ii. Rezoning. Ordinance adoption for a rezoning or Planned Area Development (PAD) that included a Large Retail Establishment and that was authorized after October 28, 1994, through a Type II Legislative Procedure, Sec. 5.4.2.2; Type III Legislative Procedure, Sec. 5.4.2.3; or Type IV Legislative Procedure, Sec. 5.4.2.4; or iii. Major Change of Development Plan. A major change from an approved development plan that included //, which includes// a new Large Retail Establishment or expanded //expands// an existing Large Retail Establishment, through the procedure found in Sec. 5.3.8.3.B.2; or QUESTION: 5.3.8.3.B.2 - what procedure for M/C consideration after approval by review agencies? What appeal procedure? Should a major change be treated under this section? Since M/C are to see change, specify process, e.g. 5.4.5.8.B and 5.4.5.9.B. iv. Substantial Change to Conditions of Rezoning. A substantial change to conditions of approval of a rezoning or PAD, as found in Sec. 5.4.5.19.A, that included a Large Retail Establishment and that was approved after October 28, 1994, through a Type II Legislative Procedure, Sec. 5.4.2.2, Type III Legislative Procedure, Sec. 5.4.2.3, or Type IV Legislative Procedure, Sec. 5.4.2.4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: added Sec. ....b and c - pre-application and post-approval meetings. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- b. Pre-application meetings with neighbors. The purpose is to resolve conflicts expeditiously and by use of creative site design. On processes where a neighborhood meeting or an offer to meet is required (??enumerate??) and where the plan includes an LRE, the meetings described in Sec. 5.4.5.2 shall be additionally compliant with the following procedures: i. The meeting process shall be initiated by the applicant before the applicant's design plans are in final form; the applicant is strongly encouraged to initiate the meeting process at the start of planning and as early as possible. ii. Meetings shall be called and chaired by the Monitor, who shall not be a party of interest (??and who shall [or shall not?] be a member of the Planning Department??), appointed by the Planning Director. iii. Participants in meetings shall include those invited by the applicant and either the Neighbors (collectively those to whom notice is provided according to Sec. 5.4.5.2) or representatives of the Neighbors selected through a process approved by the Monitor and the Planning Director. iv. The Monitor shall decide when to call a meeting; or a meeting shall be called on request of the applicant or the Planning Director; or a meeting may be called on request of one or more of the Neighbors. v. The Monitor shall be responsible for maintaining records of the meetings; the records shall be part of the application and shall be publicly accessible. vi. The Monitor shall be responsible for conducting such voting as may be required by the procedures of this section. ??insert quantifiable procedures -- a la zoning votes? ?? c. Post-approval meetings. At the time of approval of a development plan including an LRE, a post-approval committee shall be formed to monitor compliance with the development plan and to consider changes in the development plan. The committee shall function as described in paragraph 3.5.9.7.B.2.b.ii-vi above. d. Mayor and Council Approval. The approval by the Mayor and Council is subject to such conditions and criteria as the Mayor and Council may impose to address specific considerations and impacts emanating from the proposed Large Retail Establishment development. e. Compliance with Criteria. The development plan for the development which includes the Large Retail Establishment shall comply with all of the criteria set forth in this Section, except to the extent such criteria are waived or modified by the Mayor and Council as part of their approval. f. Exception. After a development plan has been approved in conformance with the conditions imposed through one of the procedures listed in Sec. 3.5.9.7.B.2.a//A.1//, a minor change may be approved pursuant to Sec. 5.3.8.3.B.1 or Sec. 5.4.5.19.B. Any change that increases an existing retail establishment from under one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet to over one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet shall not be approved as a minor change in accordance with this subparagraph. QUESTION: What is a "minor change"? Krispy Kreme loading off hours? Target footprint increased by 1 ft.? Who decides and how between Sec. 5.3.8.3.B.1 or Sec. 5.4.5.19.B? Appeal procedure? Would 5.4.5.8.A with 5.4.5.9.A be better (meeting before M/C and administrative decision) ?