Hi Art!
I just returned from Chicago. They are going to contend for the summer Olympics; a metropolitan area of some 8 or 9 Million people. That sounds like a reasonable thing to do. The Chicago Tribune, a real newspaper, was questioning the advisability of spending $120,000,000. on three (3) new yacht basins on Lake Michigan. WOW! And we are talking about spending $160 mil on the Naranja town park. Are we nuts or what?
Maybe the town council is thinking about a bid for the winter Olympics. For that kind of money we could import snow.
Shhhh, don't let the council see this. They will want to run out and buy snow plows.
Al Heinze
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Will Another Developer Have His Way In Oro Valley?
We have just received the following email from a "concerned Oro Valley family," who would prefer to not have their names published.
Are we about to see another example of what I (Art) was quoted in the post (below), alluding to the water impact fees?
I stated: “The developers pretty much run the town.”
By the way, Don't look for this meeting on the OV web site. As of today, it's not yet posted.
****************************************************************************************
In today's mail we received a Notice of Public Hearing before the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission. This is to be held at 6:00 p.m. Thursday July 12, 2007, at the Oro Valley Town Hall, 11000 N. La Canada Drive
This hearing is being held by The Planning Center, representing NCH Corporation/Transwest Properties. They propose "Text amendments to Policy 9 for Neighborhood 3, of the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development (PAD) and to Section 24 1.B.1.b.i. of the Tangerine Road Corridor Overlay District in the OVZCR to allow for a reduced building setback for a proposed hotel, to amend the Permitted Uses and Development Standards for the Campus Park Industrial (CPI) Land Use District within the Rancho Vistoso PAD, and to add Hotel to the permitted uses and allow for a maximum height for a proposed hotel up to 75 feet."
A couple months ago we attended a meeting at the Oro Valley Town Hall where this very same proposed project was presented, discussed and refused.
Why is the Town of Oro Valley asking to approve the same changes to our zoning regulations?
Why do we have zoning regulations if any elements, let alone three important elements are to be changed?
It seems to us that perhaps developers wish to wear down the residents by repeated meetings to force their changes upon the citizens. We are wondering why this notice bears the reference of the Town Senior Planner, when the project was already rejected?
We are wondering what type of influence, assistance, consideration has been applied to the Town of Oro
Valley to resubmit this same project which had already met with great disapproval.
Rancho Vistoso signs advertise it as a "Master Planned Community". We already have a zoning change and a zoning interpretation by Town administrators which allows a crematorium to be built. We have a four-story retirement monstrosity which does not follow our building code height limits, and numerous other aberrations to the concept of "Master Planned Community"!
Are we about to see another example of what I (Art) was quoted in the post (below), alluding to the water impact fees?
I stated: “The developers pretty much run the town.”
By the way, Don't look for this meeting on the OV web site. As of today, it's not yet posted.
****************************************************************************************
In today's mail we received a Notice of Public Hearing before the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission. This is to be held at 6:00 p.m. Thursday July 12, 2007, at the Oro Valley Town Hall, 11000 N. La Canada Drive
This hearing is being held by The Planning Center, representing NCH Corporation/Transwest Properties. They propose "Text amendments to Policy 9 for Neighborhood 3, of the Rancho Vistoso Planned Area Development (PAD) and to Section 24 1.B.1.b.i. of the Tangerine Road Corridor Overlay District in the OVZCR to allow for a reduced building setback for a proposed hotel, to amend the Permitted Uses and Development Standards for the Campus Park Industrial (CPI) Land Use District within the Rancho Vistoso PAD, and to add Hotel to the permitted uses and allow for a maximum height for a proposed hotel up to 75 feet."
A couple months ago we attended a meeting at the Oro Valley Town Hall where this very same proposed project was presented, discussed and refused.
Why is the Town of Oro Valley asking to approve the same changes to our zoning regulations?
Why do we have zoning regulations if any elements, let alone three important elements are to be changed?
It seems to us that perhaps developers wish to wear down the residents by repeated meetings to force their changes upon the citizens. We are wondering why this notice bears the reference of the Town Senior Planner, when the project was already rejected?
We are wondering what type of influence, assistance, consideration has been applied to the Town of Oro
Valley to resubmit this same project which had already met with great disapproval.
Rancho Vistoso signs advertise it as a "Master Planned Community". We already have a zoning change and a zoning interpretation by Town administrators which allows a crematorium to be built. We have a four-story retirement monstrosity which does not follow our building code height limits, and numerous other aberrations to the concept of "Master Planned Community"!
Explorer Article: Water Impact Fees
We probably all know by this time that the OV Council voted to increase the water impact fees. We have posted the article from the June 27 Explorer, but saw fit to highlight two points:
One--- I (Art) was quoted. Anybody disagree with my quote? You're welcome to comment.
Two--- KC Carter tried to get the full increase approved, which failed for a lack of a 2nd to the motion. (No wonder, as Paula Abbott was on an excused absence.)
To use the argument that we’re going to price ourselves out of the market is ridiculous,” said Oro Valley resident Art Segal. “The developers pretty much run the town.”
Council member Ken “KC” Carter moved that the council adopt a one-time increase in fees but his motion failed to receive a second.
Click here to read the whole article:
http://www.explorernews.com/article/show/19236
One--- I (Art) was quoted. Anybody disagree with my quote? You're welcome to comment.
Two--- KC Carter tried to get the full increase approved, which failed for a lack of a 2nd to the motion. (No wonder, as Paula Abbott was on an excused absence.)
To use the argument that we’re going to price ourselves out of the market is ridiculous,” said Oro Valley resident Art Segal. “The developers pretty much run the town.”
Council member Ken “KC” Carter moved that the council adopt a one-time increase in fees but his motion failed to receive a second.
Click here to read the whole article:
http://www.explorernews.com/article/show/19236
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)