Please see our posting on this dated April 15
Oh! Oh! Developer Will Seek A Major General Plan Amendment
Bill sent me an email. Following is an excerpt from his message.
Art
**************************************************************************************
There is a neighborhood meeting with the applicant on May 1st, 6 PM in the Hopi Room in the Community Development Building at Town Hall.
Following the neighborhood meeting, I believe the P&Z will hold a site tour; a study session and then the public hearings on the amendment will begin in July.
I would hope that Neighborhood meetings on the Kai property will be productive. One of the criteria that must be met in order to approve any amendment is that the proposal be consistent with goals and policies in the Plan. On any given amendment application, there may be three dozen policies that directly relates to the project where consistency could be questioned.
I would hope that Neighborhood meetings on the Kai property will be productive. One of the criteria that must be met in order to approve any amendment is that the proposal be consistent with goals and policies in the Plan. On any given amendment application, there may be three dozen policies that directly relates to the project where consistency could be questioned.
The amendment proposal for the Kai property is significant, because the proposal is to change the property from one acre lots to multiple use, including a variety of housing densities, commercial, and retail. Included in the commercial use is a continuing care facility, like Splendido. These are campus like and take a lot of space, and can be quite sizable.
Bill
Bill
29 comments:
OK....but will this town adhere to the procedures deemed necessary to initiate and progress this overall
impact proposal; regardless of Mr. Adlers proclamations, in the past P&Z has not followed the edicts relative to public notifications as dictated by the AZ Revised Statutes, the Oro Valley Zoning
demands, nor have they been considerate of other matters relative to considerations of surrounding properties, the general welfare of the Town, have been horribly lax in applying either common sense or written zoning suggestions relative to architectural guidelines and have become quite adept at semantic as well as other seemingly willful deceptions when their agenda is at stake.
While it may seem like the above might be simply another 'I'm probably against it' proclamation, I can assure you that it is not. If there is one company in this area that I have some faith that it might develop this property with the condition of intertwining the aesthetics of the lay of the land, the use of the property and the architectural elements necessary for maintaining or even enhancing the beauty of this parcel, it would be the WLB company; they appear to be the only developers around here with a sense of pride and consideration, not just the $$$ they can make (unfortunately I cannot say the same for this reckless Town - Council and the inept P&Z included!).
For Starters: WHERE ARE THE SIGNS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY? WHERE IS THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION IN A [NEWSPAPER OF WIDE CIRCULATION WITHIN THE COMMUNITY]? This is NOT just a neighborhood issue, this is a General Plan issue that will affect the WHOLE community. Do you still not 'get it' SM, Mr. Adler, and P&Z as a whole?
You can bet these "meetings" will be productive.
No longer will the residents in this area be led down a path of deceit and lies. As the old Who song goes "We Won't Get Fooled Again".
A lot of us are past being fooled
A lot of us are angry and feel we
have no say.
What do we do. Well we started with electing some new council people
Personally I am sorry we did not have
another newbie to vote for.
Yeah Spledido is real neato. Not!!
It would have been a fine project on a piece of property where it fit.
Bottom line is that OV is run by developers and it has not stopped.
Look at Vistoso Partners, why are they sill bullying the town?
I am bitter and have turned to guns and religion.
Neighborhood Meetings are not sponsored by the Town. The Town is not required to advertise or notice neighborhood meetings. These meetings are hosted by the applicant. Town sponsored meetings, such as Commission and Council study session, or public hearings are noticed well in advance as required. "Neighborhood Meetings" is just a label. There are no restrictions on who may attend. I have attended a hundred of these meetings over the years. I don't hesitate to speak up when a statement from an applicant is either exaggerated, or inaccurate. There is a degree of subjectivity in many zoning codes and General Plan policies. Reasonable people do disagree on how codes and policies apply to specific proposals. Terms on Town advisory boards and Commissions are expiring next month. I encourage residents to apply for appointment and learn how the process actually works.
The residents who volunteer to serve on boards and commissions should be commended for their efforts.
The process would work a lot better if there wasn't influence by the developers on certain elected officials and apathy on the part of certain town employees.
ZONING
Chapter 22.2 General Plan Amendment Procedures
Review Process
TOWN POLICIES FOR NOTIFICATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS MUST BE FOLLOWED TO ACHIEVE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
Mr. Adler, what say you?! You seem to justify all of the footloose and fancy free interpretations that the P&Z/DRB and Council utilize in their deriliction of duty to the townspeople. Your flimsy use of terms such as "subjectivity", "reasonable people", "neighborhood meetings is just a label", just doesn't cut it.
Yes, I have seen you 'speak up' but I have also seen you cave in, and not infrequently.
You are as responsible as anyone for some of the agonies that have been and are being perpetrated on many of this town's constituency. I've remained silent long enough; the glories bestowed upon you by newspaper articles, an [award for service], as well as some other individual commendations, are, in my opinion, undeserved as you have slithered away from real truths.
Zev
You are not being fair to Bill Adler or the citizens of Oro Valley. We all have a basis for our beliefs. Mr. Adlers beliefs come straight from the Town Code and his amazing experience as a volunteer.
I disagree with Mr. Adler probably more than I agree with him. But, I have never seen him slither or shy away from any issue.
It should be noted that Mr. Adler supports Barry G in this next election so you cannot claim I am supporting my base.
Truthfully I am defending one of the most knowledgeable and honorable men I have ever met. Yes we have had heated discussions and some of the things I have said about process have certainly gotten under his skin. However, I know him to be a man who stands by his beliefs without calling names or denegrating those he disagrees with. He has taught me much in this regard and in many other areas.
Lets find a way to disagree passionately without personal attack or insult. By doing this the integrity of our views is maintained and opinions are changed instead of positions hardened. I hope that the majority of people who disagree do not treat eachother with callous disregard. We cannot bully our way to consensus.
You can catch more flys with honey than vinegar.
Terry
Ferlin
I rejoice at your conversion. Weapon of choice. I still like the 1911.
Terry,
I highly respect your opinions relative to my negative portrayal of Mr. Adler, but when a person, in response to my perception that [this township has NOT followed those proper procedures as outlined in both the Arizona Revised Statutes as well as the Towns own instructions] makes a statement as fact when in truth it is not, then that person will not be exempt from my own expressions of disagreement. I will call that person on it and embellish, if you will, citing what I believe to be strings of disservice to this community.
I'm sorry, Terry, (and you, too, Mr. Adler) but, as you must know there is one issue after the other that minimalizes the importance of the citizens of this town. There is the issue of the Marketplace, not exactly practiced as preached, there is the crematorium, offensive to many and of questionable health and environmental impact, there is Splendido which has affected many properties that surround it, there is the issue relative to effects on neighborhood 2 in Rancho Vistoso that is going to affect seriously some of the residents' home values and others somewhat, because of another development that will be planted at their feet, there is a 60 foot hotel that was 'passed' for an area that forbade not only an hotel but the height that was granted - I could go on but what's the use, you should should get the point but do you?
My BIG 'thing' about the way this community has played their song is that THE PROCEDURAL ASPECTS FOR MOST PROJECTS INVOLVED HAVE BEEN
SKEWED, IGNORED, ABUSED,ETC., thus rendering the general population
impotent. THAT is indefensible!
To me, Mr. Adler's statement on this blog was kind of a mealy attempt to refute/dismiss MY statement by parsing and innuendo and I guess I'm just a bit tired of the subtle protectionism that permeates this town.
Terry,
You said...
"I know him to be a man who stands by his beliefs without calling names or denegrating those he disagrees with. He has taught me much in this regard and in many other areas. Let's find a way to disagree passionately without personal attack or insult."
Does this mean that you will now refrain from calling us "CAVE people?"
The best response you could give to my above question would be, "Done Deal."
Cowgirl,
Knowing you, I thought you would have noticed. Again I apologize for the acronym it was insensitive of me.
After realizing the error of my ways I turned myself in for the subsequent flogging, afterall I earned it.
Seriously though, it is a "done deal" and I have been working hard to critisize constructively sticking to the issues. I disagree with my friends all the time but I don't call them names. I will do my best to treat the rest of the world in the same manner.
Terry
Sorry all for the spelling errors in my last post. Sure miss spell checker.
Excuse me, what 'name' did I call Mr. Adler in my post? The past few comments seem to indicate that I got into 'name calling'; I did not.
I will stand by my statements relative to my belief that there has been an abdication of responsibility towards the 'common folk' of this community. I do object to the glossing over the escapism that is rampant in the PROCESSES relating to those steps required to be taken relative to zoning ordinances/applications. Mr. Adler stepped into this dialogue by questioning my assertions in a rather dismissive manner; I responded. When one is provoked you get what you get.
I seldom get really riled up over postings on this web site. In fact I normally enjoy reading the postings. Some are more emotional based than fact based and that is OK too. Some are simply misinformation and I make an attempt to correct those. Some are posted with the intent to mislead and I will always challenge them.
However we have an individual who frequently posts on this blog who has absolutely no clue about fact, has no clue about legal issues and who does nothing more than sit on his backside and be critical about most everything.
Recently, this uninformed magpie, posted comments on this blog, on this subject, that personally attacked the integrity of a very good friend of mine and a person within this community for whom I have a great deal of respect, Bill Adler.
Mr. Adler has tirelessly served this community, often under very difficult circumstances, with his knowledge, his dedication to doing the right thing, his time and his money. He has served on the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of Adjustment, the General Plan Revision Committee, the Historic Preservation Committee and countless other advisory groups all with the sole purpose of making Oro Valley a better place to live. He has attended more Town Council meetings, Board and Commission meetings, study session meetings and neighborhood meetings than any sitting Town Council member.
Here is a sampling of this imbecile’s attack on Mr. Adler:
“the glories bestowed upon you by newspaper articles, an [award for service], as well as some other individual commendations, are, in my opinion, undeserved as you have slithered away from real truths.”
“You are as responsible as anyone for some of the agonies that have been and are being perpetrated on many of this town's constituency.”
“Your flimsy use of terms such as "subjectivity", "reasonable people", "neighborhood meetings is just a label", just doesn't cut it.
Yes, I have seen you 'speak up' but I have also seen you cave in, and not infrequently.”
“To me, Mr. Adler's statement on this blog was kind of a mealy attempt to refute/dismiss MY statement by parsing and innuendo and I guess I'm just a bit tired of the subtle protectionism that permeates this town.”
I’ll attempt to be less subtle.
This individual couldn’t carry Bill Adler’s water and this blog and those who post here should take this person to task and demand that he immediately apologize. And, if it were my decision, I would forever ban this individual from posting.
I appreciate the opportunity to publicly discuss matters that are important to this community. And I will conform to the rules set forth by those that run this blog. But I’ll be damned if I sit back and allow some idiot who doesn’t have a clue about reality to besmirch the integrity, competence and dedication to this community of Bill Adler.
Don Cox
Thinker
No names please on the issue you are correct on the name calling you hurt your own argument.
Lets all stick to the issue. Count to 10 then write hahah
Mr Cox---- As you very well know, I can delete your last comment in a heartbeat. However, I'll allow it to remain in order to let our readers see what you're all about.
Zev took Bill Adler to task, but saw fit to not refer to him as an "uninformed magpie," an "imbecile" or an "idiot."
Too bad, those were your words to describe Zev.
Those of us that know you, should expect that kind of diatribe.
However, next time you act this way, your comment will be deleted.
If you don't like MY rules, you need not partake in our dialog.
I purposefully didn't refer to the individual by name. If the shoe fits, wear it.
The web master seems only to want to enforce rules when they can be applied to a posting with which he disagrees. In other words, his wish to delete is just another form of denial. Other than the term "magpie" (which I really like in this instance)I am not the first to use terms such as "idiot" or "imbecile".
Some may view my comments as harsh. They were meant to be exactly that. As I stated I will not stand by and allow someone who is completely uninformed to go after an individual who has dedicated the recent years of his/her life to the betterment of Oro Valley.
Since this appears to be the hot spot on the blog right hopefully I can steer TP and others to the question I placed under the heading "Terry Parish deserves some credit Re: Water Rates."
Posting # 9 refers to the fact the Wal*Mart at OVM will be open 24/7. This is a real safety concern since this Wal*Mart borders residential neighbors that have no street lights.
One would think one of our elected officials would take advantage of this opportunity to show the voters that they truly care about their citizens by convincing Vestar and Wal*Mart to modify their store hours. Wal*Mart has changed their store policies in other communties, why not OV. Who is going to step up to the plate and hit a home run.
We as citizens have sent letters and emails to both Vestar and Wal*Mart requesting a change in store hours but have not received any responses.
While OV OT asserts that he didn't refer to me by name, he most certainly, out of context, quoted some of those statements I made. He concludes by the inclusion of his laughable argument "if the shoe fits, wear it". So, can anyone guess to whom he was referring? Just another example of those who, under the cover of self rightousness, would twist the obvious for their own gain(?).
As to the content of the diatribe
by Mr. Cox, since he is unaware of the complete story behind my criticism but thinks that he is omnipotent and all-knowing, his is simply a rant, an opportunity to rage and an attempt to divert attention away from his own flailing reality. I will put my intellect up against his any day. SO BE IT!
As this will be my FINAL visit to
this particular post, I would like to take this opportunity to convey to Mr. Adler that I DO respect him and his service to the community and I personally thank him for his participation. I had not intended for my commentary to be escalated to the POINT that it has, and for THAT I am sorry.
UNFORTUNATELY THAT 'POINT' DOES ILLUSTRATE THAT THIS COMMUNITY DOES HAVE A FEW 'RAGING BULLS'
THAT ARE WILDLY OUT OF CONTROL.
I, unlike you DON COX I won't pull any punches; YOU are one of them!
Don,
You said...
"The web master seems only to want to enforce rules when they can be applied to a posting with which he disagrees."
So I must ask...
Do you speak up when you see Mayor Loomis do this at a council meeting? I've seen him do it many times. He will cut off Paula Abbott in the middle of her speech but allow Terry Parish to speak for as long as he wants without interruption. That's because Paula is saying something with which Loomis DISAGREES and Terry is saying something with which Loomis AGREES. I've seen this happen often enough to know that this is a PATTERN. Does this bother you?
I also know that during the Call to Audience, the council is NOT ALLOWED to respond to the citizen's comments. But I remember the day that Zev spoke quite angrily (and rightly so) about the Town's investigation of the LOVE site being a PAC, and when he was finished speaking, Terry Parish responded to his accusations that the council played a role in this. Loomis did not interrupt Terry and tell him that he is not allowed to respond during the Call to Audience.
I personally don't care that Terry responded or even that he was allowed to, but I DO care that the rules change depending on WHO is speaking.
And Don, this is what you have accused Art of doing, so you should be just as miffed when Loomis does it. Are you?
Just as a clarification, the Council is allowed to respond to criticism lodged during the call to the audience - ARS 38-431.01(H)A public body may make an open call to the public during a public meeting, subject to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions, to allow individuals to address the public body on any issue within the jurisdiction of the public body. At the conclusion of an open call to the public, individual members of the public body may respond to criticism made by those who have addressed the public body, may ask staff to review a matter or may ask that a matter be put on a future agenda. However, members of the public body shall not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during an open call to the public unless the matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action.
Cyclone,
Have the rules recently changed? I was just looking at a recent agenda, and it now says that a council member may "respond to criticisms made by speakers." I don't recall that section being in there previously. I tried to open some old agendas from 2007 and 2006 for comparison but they wouldn't open.
The info you provided states, "At the conclusion of an open call to the public, individual members of the public body may respond to criticism made by those who have addressed the public body."
This appears to mean that after EVERYONE has spoken during the Call to Audience, THEN a council member may respond to a criticism made by one of the speakers.
OK, I'm going to be nitpicky here. If that's what it means, then Terry shouldn't have been allowed to address Zev's complaint until after ALL of the speakers had spoken.
But I'm more curious as to whether the rules have changed because I don't remember anything about responding to criticisms made by speakers being allowed in the past.
If the rules HAVE changed, that's fine with me. I know if someone criticized me in a public forum, I would want the opportunity to respond.
The "call to the audience" section, including the langugae about how the members of the public body are allowed to respond, was added in 2000 and hasn't changed since.
Re: seeking general plan amendment
While many OV citizens do not live right on First Ave. this change in the amendment plan will affect many of us.
Traffic! didn't we just complete the First Ave project? How many more cars, etc....
Residential: one side of the street is mostly residential and now they want to change the other side to high density. Would that be a result of the nice views of the Catalina Mtns? which commercial will reap more profit from? Where have we heard this before?
raindancer
Cowgirl...
Raindancer has answered the Call to the Audience question pretty well. I personally think the law is stupid...but then I think other laws are stupid. I guess it's the "RAGING BULL" in me.I am a firm believer that if a citizen takes the time and effort to come to any meeting and get up and speak, they deserve some response. That was my MO while I was Chair of the P&Z. ONE, and I point out just one, of my criticisms of the Mayor is that he has been given too much power through the impotence of the remainder of the Council. There is no reason why Council members should not be allowed to engage the public during a public hearing. The laws on "Call to the Audience" are pretty clear but the rest of the meeting should be open to dialog.
I was, and will be an outspoken critic of the Mayor when I feel he is out of line. But I will also defend him when he is correct, in my opinion. I am not a one-sided person. I was critical of his Honor over his silence about the donations of the Democratic Party. I was critical of his lack of leadership during my last run for a Council seat. I have complimented you, Ms. Coyote, even Art when I think you have made a positive observation. And I have also been supportive of Zev on the few occasions when he made positive comments.
And lastly Cowgirl, there are laws governing the responses at a Council meeting. The same does not apply to this blog. You would need to understand the relationship between Art and myself to truly understand why he dislikes most any comment I make. I'll be happy to share that with you and buy you and Ms. Coyote lunch at one of Oro Valley's newest eateries, Spotlights Grille.
It would be fun and informative!!
Thinker,
I'll check out the restaurant and the menu and let you know. Not that I'm finicky but I have a limited diet due to health issues. There are actually some restaurants where there isn't one thing on the menu that I can eat!
So...you haven't answered my question. Do you know who I am yet?
Cowgirl.....
Does the last name start with a "P"?
The menu is burgers/hot dogs and other sandwich stuff. I am not sure if they have salads.
Take care!!
Thinker,
Oh no! You got me! I'm melting... Look what you've done to my beautiful wickedness...
Post a Comment