In their letters in the Marc The Explorer, Kathy Pastryk & Phil Gibbs caution us as to the Oro Valley Council's premature consideration of annexing Arroyo Grande to our north.
It might be Arroyo ‘not so Grande’
What is so “Grande” about dicing up the desert and allowing Big Wash to become Big Dust Devil due to wanton construction?
I attended a spirited meeting held by the ASLD (Arizona State Land Department) in Catalina on Feb. 26. There were so many intelligent questions but few answers offered regarding Arroyo Grande, especially what is going to happen to our seriously compromised water supply? People in Catalina demanded answers.
After reflecting upon why similar meetings in Oro Valley have been comparatively subdued, I think it may be due to Catalina having a champion in Supervisor Ann Day who looks after their well-being. In contrast, the OV government — with the exception of Councilwoman Paula Abbott — seems singularly dedicated to serving developers first and foremost. After a long series of rezonings and a history of corruption, many residents seem resigned to being victimized.
Sustainability will never be achieved at this rate. The people of Oro Valley, for their own good, need to rally around the Arroyo Grande issue, making a sustained effort to save our quality of life. Those of us who sit back and do nothing but invite 30 to 40 thousand more people to drink from our already depleted wells will suffer a loss beyond comprehension.
We will have no one to blame but ourselves when we end up with Arroyo not so Grande.
Kathy Pastryk
Oro Valley
Let’s look at conserving part of Arroyo Grande
Robert Ruttner, in his book “The Squandering of America” states “At the local level, if ordinary people do not have time for local politics, you can be sure that local real estate developers do.”
The Oro Valley Town Council wants to annex the Arroyo Grande lands north of Oro Valley to the Pinal County line for development. Developers want these lands for major home development.
According to the Arizona Preserve Initiative signed into law in 1996 and amended in 1997, 1998 and 1999, “A state or local government, business, state land lessee or a group of citizens may petition the State Land commissioner to have certain trust land nominated and reclassified for conservation purposes.” The citizens of Oro Valley and other Arizona communities affected by over-development should consider this alternative.
These lands will be protected only if ordinary people take the time to become involved in local politics.
Phil Gibbs
Oro Valley
14 comments:
Some of the negative reaction to the Arroyo Grande project is puzzling to me.
Let's look at some realistic information.
The subject property is going to be sold by the State Land Commission. It will be sold to one or more entities who in turn will develop it. You may be opposed to that fact, and I respect your opposition, but in the real world it is going to happen.
Now the real issue is which governing agency do you want controlling that growth. The two choices you have are Pima County or the Town of Oro Valley.
If you think Pima County is the best choice then I would ask that you take a drive west on Avra Valley Road. Turn north on Anway and see what a good job Pima County has done out that way. Or if you want to head southeast, head out Ajo Highway and turn north or south on Sandario Road and look at the beautiful lasdscapes out that way. Or if you prefer to stay closer to home just go out to Catalina and see the fine job of zoning Pima County has done out that way.
There is good reason why the State Land Trust wants to do business with Oro Valley and not Pima County. The picture becomes clear if you take the time and effort to compare the two.
Thinker,
You imply that Pima County has done a poor job of zoning in relation to what Oro Valley has done. Hmmm...Oro Valley allows a crematorium to be built in a residential neighborhood. Oro Valley allows a junk mall to be built in a beautiful scenic corridor. Oro Valley allows a development with $200,000 homes on 1/8 of an acre (stripped bare of every tree, shrub and cactus) to be built directly across the street from $750,000 dollar homes on 1 acre unspoiled lots. You consider this to be enlightened zoning?
Perhaps some of these unattractive area's were that way before current regulations were in place. Have you been at the corner of Rancho Vistoso and Tangerine lately. Sad, what was once one of the most beautiful scenic roads is now turning into a congested tangle of street lights and cars.
I don't think that the State Land Trust is really concerned about who is going to do a better job developing. Do you?
There is more going on behind the scenes in this Arroyo Grande deal then most of us can imagine. And I will guess a lot of it would surprise even the most cynical among us.
The State Land Trust can't even tell the public what their definition of open space is.
It's puzzling to you OV OT because you are not objective and you can't think.
Cowgirl,
Not every zoning decision made by Oro Valley is perfect. But would you rather have manufactured homes and tin shanties? That's vintage Pima County. But specific zoning decisions for specific pieces of property is far down the road and will be thoroughly and publicly vetted.
Coyote,
Look at the intersection of Avra Valley Road and Anway. No light. No "tangle". It's just trash and barren land to grace the eye. I happen to think that entrance to Rancho Vistoso is extremely well done with the beautiful plantings, well maintained grass area and a much needed traffic light placed their for our safety.
YES, State Land Trust does care about with whom they do business. The higher the deveoplment standards, the higher the value of the property.
The State Land trust has never needed a definition for open space because they have never allowed it in their planning process. And more importantly what ever their definition has no bearing on the process. It's the definition of the governing zoning authority's definition that matters...in this case either Oro Valley or Pima County.
Zev...when you discontinue personal insults and say something that deserves a response I will accomodate. Until then don't waste my time or this blog's space.
Thinker,
You said if OV annexes that land, it will be OV's definition of open space that will apply. OK. Just exactly what is OV's definition of open space? The only definition I've seen is a definition for common open space as it applies to condominium common areas, etc.
You were on P&Z. Do you have a clearly defined description of what would constitute open space for the Arroyo Grande annexation if Oro Valley is in charge?
Town of Oro Valley officials cannot be trusted. "Planned Community" is a joke.
I trust Pima County more--which is not saying much--but MAYBE the new Town Council members can change/out-vote Kunisch and Loomis from (can't decide on a word here) into something recognizable as useful/positive/representative of/to the community.
Oro Valley Zoning Code Chapter 31:
236. Open Space
Shall be defined as either natural open space (as defined in this Chapter) or landscaped open space (as defined in this Chapter) or the total thereof. Open space is meant to provide a natural or garden environment.
a. Common Open Space shall mean any landscape or natural open space, other than frontage open space, intended for use by all occupants of a development.
b. Frontage Open Space shall mean all the landscaped or natural open space between the right-of-way line of a dedicated public street and any perimeter structure(s) within the development except that this space may extend between structures or between a structure and a side property line to a depth of not more than 1/2 the width of the opening.
c. Landscaped Open Space shall mean an area improved through the harmonious combination of natural desert growth with the introduction of trees, shrubs, and groundcover which may contain natural topping material such as boulders, rock, stone, or granite or other approved material. Landscaped open space shall provide a garden atmosphere, which shall include native and/or other approved plantings. Landscaped open space shall be free of any asphalt or concrete pavement not serving as an integral and functional part of the landscape theme. Landscaped open space does not include walkways outside of a landscaped area or parking areas. Landscaped islands within parking areas may be considered landscaped open space. The purpose of the landscaped open space is to enhance the visual and aesthetic quality of any structure or development.
d. Natural Open Space shall mean any natural, completely undisturbed, desert area.
OV General Plan:
Open Space: Any area of natural open space (as defined below) or any disturbed area that
has been supplemented by additional plantings or topping materials. This may include
recreational open space such as parks and playgrounds.
Open Space, Natural: Any natural, undisturbed area.
Thanks for the info, Cyclone. I have to run now, but will review it later when I have more time.
Coyote/Cowgirl....
Cyclone 1 answered the question. My only disappointment is that both of you criticize before you know the facts. That's not unusual for most people on this blog but I guess I expect more from both of you.
I expect what we get from Zev.
Thinker,
What exactly did I criticize before knowing the facts?
Thinker,
Also you need to go back to the "Latas and Garner Elected" posts and respond to my last comment...the one that begins with...let me see if I have this straight.
Or did you already see it but you don't have a response for it?
Thinker,
Where did you go? As I said in another post, you always disappear whenever we supply you with the FACTS!
Post a Comment