Mike Zinkin, a former chairman an up until a couple weeks ago, a volunteer member of the Development Review Board, sent the following email to the mayor, council & Town Manager.
Other than Mike's noting the OV Marketplace is "very aesthetic," we totally agree with his assessment. Hopefully, the Council will also agree and vote "No" to Walmart's request for a non approved color change of their building at the July 15 meeting.
As an aside, Walmart really ought to ask for a roof change so they could hide those hideous skylights & A/C units!
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Mike's email-----
I am very interested in item 7 of your agenda. OV13-09-03A is a request from Walmart to override the DRB decision not to allow them to repaint their store "Sherman-Williams "Toasty"
The store is now painted Dun-Edwards "Rattan", a color extremely close to "Toasty". In fact, if Walmart were to re-paint their store under cover of darkness, chances are excellent that nobody will notice the difference.
This brings up the argument "Come on, what is the big deal" This big deal is this....
The color palette was designed in the MACP after 3+ years of study sessions, neighborhood meetings, and DRB meetings. The DRB, in fact, expanded the color palette from Vestar's original request.
What is important is the "process". The citizens designed the MACP, and Vestar concurred. Now, less than 18 months later, a retailer is requesting a change to the MACP. The DRB, and staff, worked hard with the Olive Garden, Red Lobster, In and Out Burger, and The Keg Steakhouse, to allow for individual corporate identity WITHIN THE MACP.
There is no reason to arbitrarily amend the MACP at the request of Walmart, or any other retailer. To allow for this change, as minor as it is, completely disregards the work and input of your citizens. If we allow Walmart to make a minor change, what happens when a tenant of a 1500 square foot store desires to make a change that is a little more that minor?
Do not open up Pandora's Box. Do not allow for the change. Once the MACP is amended, there is no stopping what might happen. The Oro Valley Marketplace is very aesthetic; there is nothing that needs fixing. To agree with the DRB decision is not being anti business, rather, respectful of the process that developed the MACP.
I wish I could be present on 7/15, but since I cannot, allow this as my “blue card.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mike Zinkin
60 comments:
Mr. Zinkin's letter should be an example to all of us. He stated his concern and disagreement with the Wal-Mart proposal in a respectful way. Too often we resort to name calling and spiteful comments when addressing the council or each other. Before reading this letter I didn't have an opinion on the matter. After reading Mr. Zinkin's concerns I too am in agreement that the council should deny this request.
I agree with Mike.
Another reason to deny this request would be that Wal-Mart getting this exception sends the message that they are exempt from Oro Valley rules and regulations.
We could not legally stop WalMart from coming to Oro Valley Market Place but we can make sure they know they will not get any special treatment!
When the colors are so close that most likely no one would notice that it had been changed, why is Wal-Mart even making this request? That's curious to me.
Although I hate Wal-Mart and their business practices and will never set foot in that store or anywhere else in OVM for that matter, if I'm going to be objective, I have to say that it's easy to read one person's letter/opinion on the matter and then decide that you agree with it. But we have to hear WM's side of the story before deciding who's right.
But currently it sounds like a frivolous request to me and is probably nothing more than WM trying to throw their weight around as usual.
Yes to James and LabChop. WalMart gets no exceptions.
VC, Maybe WM is testing the water to see if OV sticks to the rules. I bet they will.
I don't shop WalMart because of their business philosophy. The only other store in OV with lower quality merchandise is the Dollar Store we'll have near the Home Depot. So much for 'upscale' shopping.
Deacon---- One BIG difference between WM & the forthcoming Dollar Tree store----- at the latter, OV keeps ALL the sales tax.
Oh---by the way----concerning the Sarah More posting, does anyone want to venture a guess as to her position on the "WM paint issue?"
I agree with James, Wal-Mart has something up their sleeve. Perhaps it is a way to see how far they can push the Oro Valley Town Council. Since Sara More was sooooo developer friendly, I would guess she would slide it through.
I am sure that changing the color would not improve sales. When you drive by you don't notice the color just those ugly things on the top of their building.
Some time ago I drove over to Thorneydale and Ina and went to the Dollar Tree and was delighted to see that their items, which were the same as Wal-Mart offered,were less expensive. SOOOO, I emailed them and suggested that Oro Valley needed them here. They responded and thanked me for my interest (gas saved not driving sooo far). I was delighted to see they took my suggestion, as well as others, and moved here. One of the differences being, we receive the Sales Tax.
Initial reaction is to say NO WAY! But in fairness we need to hear why Wal Mart is asking for an exception. Also why do they need to paint if the bldg is only 18 months old. Perhaps there is some connection or disconnection going on with the brands of paints and Wal Mart.
Even though I dislike Wal Mart, the paint change request is trivial in my mind compared to other exceptions & exemptions that were allowed in OV.
Might be ok, if the council approved with the stipulation that Vestar/Wal Mart did something with that eyesore of a roof top.
I am more concerned about the lack of those upscale or nicer stores that Vestar promise then the color of Wally World.
I wonder if there is some "agreement" that Vestar has with Wal Mart that in exchange for being the anchor store they won't rent to certain other stores.
Also notice that every week in the police blog there is always a incident at Wal Mart.
Perhaps somebody from the town can tell us how much sales tax has been generated by Wal Mart?
Anyway the mall is a disappointment and something that coul have been outstanding turned into a average
strip mall with no character.
Perhaps Wal-Mart is trying to get in (or has gotten in) bed with the Sherwin-Williams company; just a thought. What our local facility really needs is to up-date their old signs to conform to their 'newer' design; after all, us having an upscale 'Marketplace', shouldn't we have the 'upscale' new signage?
whats up now? Will changing color create more traffic and sales? OR are we working with a power struggle? I say lets leave well enough alone.
Now this will blow you away........
The color is so close that if they repainted it at night, it would go unnoticed. Someone said that.
So what's the big deal about changing? I say NO to this request.
HOWEVER, we should have some respect for the amount of money WM is pumping into the revenue chest and give serious consideration to requests that are more significant, especially if they will result in additional revenue to our lovely Town.
OVOT, no tail should EVER try to wag the dog; NO business should EVER be allowed to run a town!
Zev...You have a habit of reading into and providing YOUR interpretation of what is actually said, especially when you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder as in the case of WalMart and the Oro Valley Marketplace. Being respectful and giving serious consideration does not translate into, "NO business should EVER be allowed to run a town!"
But what is factual is that NO small group of overbearing citizens should EVER be allowed to run a Town.
Excuse me, OT, I patronize Walmart - enough said? Look who reads falsely and interprets likewise. AND, if a "small" group of "overbearing" citizens is how you interpret the running of this town, how come you, singularly, allow yourself to ATTEMPT to be the judge, jury, and lord high executioner of same. Remind yourself that your 'dogs' didn't get elected last time around.
As an aside, why do you try to use a provocative phrase ("chip on your shoulder")in order to stir up the pot. I didn't express any negatives towards you, personally, so why the shot? I will stand by my statement that "NO BUSINESS SHOULD EVER BE ALLOWED TO RUN A TOWN"!
The announcement that you shop at WM certainly isn't going to get you points in the 'club', but I suspect many others probably do also but won't admit it. :-)!!I didn't realize that "chip on your shoulder" was "a shot". Would "a clear oft stated bias" feel better?The fact is you have posted several negative comments about WM and OVM. "Enough said".
Yes, your "'dogs'" did win this last time but it would appear that they have lifted their leg a few too many times while facing the wind. Their support among their peers has severely eroded because of their shortsighted, knee jerk thought processes.
Thinker,
So we should cater to Wal-Mart's requests "especially if they will result in additional revenue to our lovely Town."
PROBLEM: Since the addition of Oro Valley Marketplace, Wal-Mart, concrete noise buffer walls, and cookie-cutter homes on 1/6 acre lots, our town is no longer "lovely."
As I've said before, might as well throw in a strip joint. That will really bring in the revenue, you know, since that seems to be the most important thing.
VC...."Cater"? Who said anything about that?
I find the bitching by so many uninformed people in this Town far more offensive that most of the things you mentioned.(I'll agree on the sound wall BUT it was 'the people' who asked for it)
Oh, oh, everyone, does the renewed trembling of the OVOT volcano mean he is about to have another eruption? Or, is he simply in the midst of another oral aneurism?
Thinker,
(1) It wasn't the majority of the "people" who wanted the noise wall. It was a small group of overbearing citizens, which brings me to your quote, "But what is factual is that NO small group of overbearing citizens should EVER be allowed to run a Town."
(2) You are correct that you never said "cater" but it was implied when you said that we should "give serious consideration" to WM's request due to the amount of revenue they generate for the town.
If businesses that generate more revenue for the town are given preferential treatment, isn't that catering? It's one set of rules for the big guy and another set of rules for the little guy.
Actually, since businesses not located in OVM give more sales tax revenue to the town than businesses that ARE located in OVM, then, according to your logic, we should be giving preferential treatment to the businesses outside of OVM.
Hmmm...I may have to rethink my preferential treatment argument!:)
VC...while I always appreciate interacting with you and I do believe I know you a bit better than some of those who only see your LOVE blog side, there are times when you really get 'out there"
Your comment "businesses that generate more revenue for the town are given preferential treatment" is an attempt to put that spin on what I said. Your use of the word "cater" , followed with the statment that that is what I "implied" is just simply a fabrication.
WHY CAN'T YOU JUST TAKE THE WORDS THAT I USE AND GO WITH THEM. Why do you (and Zev) always have to interpret or spin.
I said, "we should have some respect for the amount of money WM is pumping into the revenue chest and give serious consideration to requests that are more significant, especially if they will result in additional revenue to our lovely Town." That's pretty clear and in my mind needs no interpretation or spin.
Do you suppose that Tucson and Pima County don't respect and give serious consideration to requests generated by Raytheon? (Although neither seemed to be able to listen to Major League Baseball)
All of you (if the show fits, wear it) that think that business deserves nothing, will be singing a different tune when you have to pick up the tax burden that they are carrying for you every day.
Also, VC, relative to The Wall, OVOT stated that [if it was good enough for Jim Kreigh, it was good enough for him]; that wasn't even a small group of 'overbearing citizens', that was a referral to a group of one!
Zev...I would hope that your comment was not being critical of Jim and I need for you to so state. Jim Kriegh a well respected, kind, knowledgable gentleman who does not need to be maligned.
If that is your intent, then you need to choose another path immediately.
My comment was ABSOLUTELY NOT critical of Jim Kreigh; it was, however, critical of your using his 'take' as a simplistic reason for your lemming like 'okay', although from another perspective, I believe the wall, as conceived and as is being executed, isn't complimentary to Oro Valley. There were (and still are) alternative architectural realities which could have (can) mitigate(d) the impact on the OV viewscape.
Oh, and by the way OVOT, in rereading your post you appear to be DEMANDING that I curtsy to legend as YOU see it; you can forget that I will do that! I WILL opine as I see fit.
Zev....Reasonable response. You, along with the rest of us,should aspire to contribute 1/2 as much to our community as did Jim.
The wall IS NOT complimentary to Oro Valley. I think we can all agree with that. But don't bitch at Oro Valley, which has become your (and many others) auto-response. ADOT is not a user friendly agency and they don't play well with others. Combine that with the stipulations mandated by the federal government and you have an eyesore. It's just one more reason for keeping government out of our lives. The more they touch the more they destroy.
OVOT, yes I agree with most of your assessment. I had stated in a prior post as well as before Council the requirements that the Fed puts on us; however, that is what happens when you use funds to 'assist' which come from the from same as ADOT did. It is by doing so that you have to conform to their 'mandates'. First the Fed takes our money and then 'gives' it back with strings - not good!
One objection: I do not have auto responses; I am my own person, I think, I seek, and I opine. 'Auto responses' could be said of you, too, very easily. However, let's just say we have some differing opinions, some individual and some which might fit within some kind of group thought by happenstance or by purpose. I simply would like to keep discourse civil and
without subtle (or not so subtle) digs.
Thinker,
I don't see my interpretation of your WM comment as being "out there." You referenced the amount of money that WM pumps into our revenue chest, and said we should "respect" that, implying that it was more than other businesses contribute, and then you said we should give their requests "serious consideration" as a result of the money they generate for the town. That sounds like preferential treatment to me, falling under the category of "money talks."
If you meant something else entirely, please enlighten me. But that's how I read it.
Forgot to say that regarding my comment about cookie-cutter homes on 1/6 acre lots, it isn't so much the houses or the small lot sizes that bother me. It's the fact that they bulldoze every living thing in site prior to building those homes. Those neighborhoods are all stucco, glass, concrete, and asphalt. No trees, no cactus, nothing but dirt. It's unnatural and quite frankly I feel like I've entered the Twilight Zone every time I drive through one of those neighborhoods. It's creepy!
There's no good reason (greed is not a GOOD reason) why developers can't leave the natural vegetation and mature trees on the lots and just clear enough land for the home. Then those neighborhoods would still look "lovely" and the trees would also shade the homes resulting in less electricity being used to cool the homes. It's just common sense.
Thought I'd clarify my statement before I get accused of being an elitist.
VC, do you remember the song "Little Boxes" sung by Pete Seegar in the early sixties; it was relative to an area south of San Francisco - Daly City, where rows upon rows of houses were built with one out of every six or so identical to each other. There was a story in a San Francisco newspaper around that time about a man who, a little tipsy, came 'home' late at night, put his key in the lock of 'his' house, and promptly climbed into bed where his 'wife' was sleeping; turns out he had the wrong block, the wrong house, and tried to sleep with the wrong 'wife'; the house was an EXACT replica of his and built at the 'same' location as his but just one block over. Just thought I'd convey a little 'humor'(not so funny) as the song conveys.
Now, as to the clearing of the land
in order to build houses on the cheap; this is not only true of 'planting' the smallish ones, but the more expensive ones as well (tract and semi-custom). Look at some of the developments of homes along Tangerine, First Ave. et al, the whole areas are first scraped clean and then the houses are built as close together as possible. When I lived in Raleigh, NC, the same applications were used by large corporate developers and it was called 'clear cutting'. Some towns around that area were fighting this abomination and I am unawares as to how their fights have turned out. The destroyed natural landscape was generally replaced by lawn in the fronts, lawn in the backs, and 2 Bradford Pear trees in the front, one on each side of the walk.
In particular this 'clear cutting' is devastating to a desert scape. Natural desert takes longer to establish than the North Carolina type and so we use a lot of rock here and there with a smattering of replanted cacti and the like.
In short, no matter where, the demands of corporate developers seem to be the same.
But, of course, there are those who maintain that Oro Valley is 'unique'. Well, we might be unique in terrain and climate, but we are no where near unique in preserving our natural beauty or in the mentalities that have 'governed' it.
VC...
The mass grading that you refer to is not, in my opinion a matter of "greed", but a matter of efficiency and cost effectiveness. It's done to keep the homes more affordable.
In addition, I would point out that Chapter 14 of the OVZCR, Native Plant Preservation, Salvage and Mitigation Plan Requirements, clearly outlines the process to be used prior to the issuance of any grading permits. In short is requires, "Both a site resource inventory and Native Plant Preservation, Salvage and Mitigation Plan, in conformance with this article, must be submitted in conjunction with a preliminary plat or development plan submittal." And I can tell you based on my experience on the P&Z that this process is taken very seriously.
OVOT - it may be more efficient, it may be legal but is it right? We are supposed to be a 'unique' community and clear-cutting hurts that image. But, what I do think is even worse is the row upon row of single story 'tube' houses AND, too, the side setbacks which leave much to be desired, especially when two story homes are involved; simply not enough 'breathing' space.
Zev...Right or wrong is a subjective judgement which is in the eyes and mind of the beholder. But it is the code and until we alter the code it's 'right'.
Thinker,
From what I know about "resource inventory...Native Plant Preservation...and Salvage and Mitigation" it just means that they place ribbons on all the plants/trees to identify them as follows:
BLUE RIBBON – salvage
WHITE RIBBON – save in place
RED RIBBON - destroy
When they "clear-cut" 80 acres of land, obviously NOTHING has been saved in place. Yes, some plants will be "salvaged" and replanted at some other location in town, but that doesn't help preserve the natural beauty and shade that those trees/plants brought to the land that is being desecrated to build the new development. These new developments all look like moonscapes.
As for mass grading being done for "efficiency and cost-effectiveness" and to keep home prices "affordable," I have two comments:
(1) What's better? SHORT-TERM EFFICIENCY for the developer or LONG-TERM EFFICIENCY for the homeowner and the entire community?
More trees equals more shade equals less electricity consumption (good for the community) equals lower utility bills (good for the homeowner). More trees also equals cleaner air (good for the community).
(2) As for home prices being more affordable, can anyone explain why homes in the Twilight Zone neighborhoods are sold for equal or higher prices than homes in neighborhoods with lots of trees and natural vegetation and privacy between the homes? I know this because when I'm out driving, I stop and pick up "For Sale" flyers outside homes in different neighborhoods and I'm shocked at the prices they're asking for homes with dirt yards, no trees, no privacy, and a birds eye view into your next door neighbors house. Meanwhile, houses on larger lots with lots of natural vegetation and privacy are sold for the same price or LOWER!
OVOT - yes, that is the way you see it (the law allows for it) and I CAN appreciate that; however, 'RIGHT' also can be interpreted in a more 'personal' sense. Should the 'law' be changed?
Zev...The reason I bring that up is that we are needlessly punishing, in my opinion, small business owners over a nonsensical sign code because IT'S THE CODE... THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN..yada, yada yada. Now we want folks to look at the grading code from a "personal" viewpoint about what's 'right'.
It just seems that we have a double standard here.
Should the grading law be changed? I say no. Significant vegitation is salvaged and replanted on site. If there is absolutely no place on the site then it is planted elsewhere within the Town. The shade argument is nothing more than a red herring as there are very few "shade" trees that are native to this area and they seldom grow tall enough to shade a home to any appreciable extent. On any construction site you need room around a building pad to maneuver equipment, dig trenches, store materials,place dumpsters and many other activities. Where lots are relatively small there just isn't room to do all of the above and only disturb the building pad.
Zev, many of the people who object to the grading regulations here are quick to complain that the site was "mass graded." They never say, "After an extensive site resource inventory was conducted and all mature native trees and cacti have been salvaged, the remaining area was mass graded." which in reality is what actually happens in every instance. To me, that is simply a misrepresentation of fact.
Profit is a great word for you, me, VC, Ms. Coyote, OV Mom, James and others who post here. But when it comes to someone who carries the title of builder or developer, then all to often the word "greed" is substituted. I find that interesting.
OVOT, you presented a thoughtful opinion, diligently presented. However, just one point: is it okay to consider allowing for breaking a Code, the sign ordinance, but not okay to change the allowance for clearcutting?
So..... which one of us has a double standard here? Perhaps neither as the issues are, in fact, separate and unrelated.
As an aside, if you go to Phoenix one of these days, please visit a subdivision called Terra Vita as started by Del Webb and finished by Pulte; it is on Scottsdale road about 10 miles north of 101. This community did retain the desert scape, undisturbed, and is beautiful AND is a most highly desired property consisting of smaller territorial homes. It does have an ambiance quite different from those subdivisions built on 'graded' property.
Thinker,
Your comment, "there are very few "shade" trees that are native to this area and they seldom grow tall enough to shade a home to any appreciable extent" is not true.
Mesquite trees, Palo Verde trees, Ironwood trees, etc. all give lots of shade and they grow naturally here.
When I first moved here, there were some trees in my yard but they weren't close enough to the house to shade the patio or the west facing rooms. We added two mesquite trees and now the patio and those rooms are shaded in the afternoon and our house is much cooler than it was when we moved here! We've been able to set the A/C 5 degrees higher than where we had to set it originally. That's a HUGE difference!
Hence my comment that more trees equals more shade equals less electricity consumption (good for the community) equals lower utility bills (good for the homeowner).
Can you argue with that?
If you don't think trees make a difference in temperature, then explain why all the animals sit underneath the trees when it's very hot outside.
Also, you weren't able to argue my comments about SHORT-TERM EFFICIENCY for the developer vs. LONG-TERM EFFICIENCY for the homeowner and the entire community.
Affordable home prices is only one part of the equation in what's best for the community. Affordable utility bills, less stress on the electric grid, and clean air are just as important!
VC...Key word "native". I suspect that the type of mesquite that you have in your yard and I have in my yard are the nursery variety and they are hybrids bred to grow taller than the native ones. Show me ONE development where there were trees tall enough to shade homes that was graded. It just won't happen.
Where were you when I made the statements about the OV Marketplace will help clean our air because it will result in locals driving fewer miles to shop? Where were you when I said that the landscaping done at OVM will also help clean our air?
I did argue your point about short term efficiency. There isn't enough room to accomplish your plan when the lots are smaller. It just can't be done.
Thinker,
And THAT'S precisely why we need larger lot sizes. Then it CAN be done and HAS been done.
As for OVM, the only people who are traveling shorter distances to shop (thereby creating less air pollution with their autos) are the people for whom low price is more important than quality. For those of us who prefer quality, we're still driving to LaEncantada and similar shopping centers...sometimes we're driving all the way to Scottsdale to shop!
When is Oro Valley going to respond to the needs/desires of THAT demographic? Then we can ALL stay in town to shop.
Right now, the only thing I'll give Vestar is that they appear to have planted a million trees, and 5 years from now, that will certainly have a noticeable impact.
But I don't see anything else they promised, and not just in the way of boutique shopping, but I don't see the courtyard setting and seating areas that I was expecting. It's not really a walkable mall. The stores are so far apart that you have to DRIVE to each section of the mall, polluting the air as you go!
Mediocre shopping aside, it's just very poorly designed and not even aesthetically pleasing.
VC....
It's not up to Oro Valley to "respond to the needs/desires of THAT demographic?" Oro Valley doesn't own retail businesses. Oro Valley is a government entity that should respond to the needs of the greater not the few. Why do we need to go over the same dialog over and over again. THERE IS NOT SUFFICIENT BUCKS HERE to support what you want that's why the retailers are not here.
The economy has dictated the fill speed of OVM. Vestar needs income to continue to build. As long as OV wants to sit on their share, Vestar is going to sit one theirs. Do you blame them?
As for larger lot sizes....the market dictates real estate growth patterns not the personal desires of a few.
Problem is...I don't believe that there is not sufficient bucks here to support what I (and many others) want. I live in a middle class neighborhood and I can afford to shop at better quality stores. Therefore, the people in OV who are living in the more expensive neighborhoods (the $600,000 to $3,000,000) homes can certainly afford to shop there as well.
I also don't believe that the economy is the only factor in determining the "fill speed" at OVM. I believe the Wal-Mart anchor has been a turn-off to some potential stores locating there.
I also don't believe we have less pollution in town because people are shopping nearby at OVM instead of driving long distances. I assume people are also coming in from other areas to shop at Wal-Mart so there is no less traffic on the roads polluting our air. We now have MORE traffic in the area of Oracle and Tangerine. All we've done is relocate the traffic from one place to another. This does not solve the pollution problem. And as I stated earlier, you have to DRIVE to each section of the mall because of the poor design.
VC....I guess that you know better that the marketing managers of Nordstroms and others. They stated unequivocally that there was not sufficient income to support their stors. I am not saying that you and other can't afford to shop there, there just aren't enough people like you. In the Buxton report it clearly outlined the demography of Oro Valley and matched that to retailers who marketed to that group.
WalMart is a much sought after anchor. They generate traffic It's the economy.
I'm sorry VC, I just don't think you can be very objective on the OVM topic.
Just a couple of comments:
Nordstroms also backed out of City North in Phoenix as did Macys, Neiman Marcus, Dillards, and more. City North was projected to be a very high end shopping center/condo/restaurant row project. What does this prove in this economy - simply that it is 'on hold'. Even the lower-end stores in the OVM seem not to be doing too well with the exception of Walmart, and a couple of medium end destination/specialty stores.
As to the hold-back of the tax sharing funds, I can only say to Vestar, City North, Oracle Crossings, et al - if you go under because you depended on public money to finance your private profits, then, too bad, go belly-up; when the time comes that economics do improve, then some companies with real smarts will go in and profitize these places.
As I stated before - an old saying is still pertinent - WHEN THE GOING GETS TOUGH, THE TOUGH GET GOING.
Oops, I forgot to mention that my post had nothing to do with the stream topic, only to that which was written prior to said post. Oh, well.....
Go to your room!!! :-)
Thinker,
"I guess that you know better that the marketing managers of Nordstroms and others."
Why is it if I ask for better quality stores, it's automatically assumed that I mean Nordstrom. There are many better quality stores that fall in the range between Wal-Mart and Nordstrom. We didn't even get any of those!
"In the Buxton report it clearly outlined the demography of Oro Valley and matched that to retailers who marketed to that group."
I remember that silly report. It said something like our median income was $80,000 a year and we all ate at Jack in the Box. I wonder what the Buxton report says for Beverly Hills. Probably that the median income is $20 million a year and they all eat at the Olive Garden.
"WalMart is a much sought after anchor."
If they're so sought after, then why have hundreds of towns around the country fought to stop them from locating in their town?
"I'm sorry VC, I just don't think you can be very objective on the OVM topic."
Go back and read the third post down on this stream and see how objective I can be, even when discussing Wal-Mart.
VC....This is fun.
Nordstroms becomes the default (rightly or wrongly) because you have mentioned them specifically in past posts.Since Macy's, Dillards, etc., are already here, why would you drive to Scottsdaye to shop those same stores? And I did say "others".
"I remember that silly report." What in your mind qualified it as a "silly report"?
I cannot argue the "hunderds of towns" comment because I don't have the facts. But then again I doubt you can identify the "hundreds". It's not really important. But when you compare the "hundreds" to the thousands who have embraced Walmart...again the yeas far outweigh the nays.
I read your previous post and while you said, "But we have to hear WM's side of the story before deciding who's right.", The comments before and after completely overwhelm the above quote. In my heart, I know that whatever Walmart offered you would disagree.
Anyone wand to get back to the sign issue?
I am really curious as to what Mr. Zinkin's motive is here.Anyone want to hazard a guess????? :-)!!
I also checked with the code enforcement folks and no,zero, none,nada WRITTEN complaints were lodged about the night signs. Seems like it was all verbal(no record) Isn't that interesting? They also advised me that the DRB also brought up the issue? Since they have nothing to do with code enforcement, that seems interesting to me also. Oh by the way......doesn't Zinkin sit on the DRB? Now there is a coincidence.
Have a great weekend!!!
I originally drove to Scottsdale to shop Nordstrom, Anthropologie and Sephora. We now have the latter two in Tucson. I still drive to Scottsdale to shop at the Container Store (for everything imaginable) and Sur Le Table (kitchen items). We don't have anything like these two stores in Tucson and they are not HIGH END Nordstrom type stores. This is what I meant by how we didn't even get anything half-way nice at OVM.
I have also driven north to Ikea, another store that I believe would have done well here, especially with the college crowd who need to decorate their dorm rooms for a reasonable price.
What I found silly about the Buxton Report was that the median income did not match the type of stores and restaurants that people with those incomes would patronize. That's why I added my Beverly Hills comment for comparison.
If I can find the "hundreds of towns" article again, I'll provide the info. I don't remember where I saw it since it was over a year ago. I only remember seeing a list of hundreds of towns across the country that were presently fighting WM or had fought them off in recent years. I was actually surprised at the amount of cities and towns that were listed.
Cox writes: "Oh by the way......doesn't Zinkin sit on the DRB? Now there is a coincidence."
Once again, Cox speaks without facts.
Mike Zinkin sits on DRB the same as Cox sits on the Town Council.
One difference. Mike WAS on DRB. Cox only was a "wannabe."
Art....
Pls read the following.
MINUTES
ORO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
REGULAR SESSION
May 12, 2009
ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE
CALL TO ORDER REGULAR SESSION AT OR AROUND 6:00 P.M.
Chairman Gribb called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Tom Gribb, Chairman
John Buette, Vice-Chair
Michael Schoeppach, Member
Ray Shelton, Member
Eugene Wowk, Member
Mike Zinkin, Member
Any questions?
OT, Just because there were no WRITTEN reports relative to the sign ordinance, doesn't mean that the ordinance should be ignored. It was addressed, it was written, the developers, the lessors, and the lessees should have known about it, AND all should abide by it. Do you believe in anarchy, 'cause that's what allowing for the failure to adhere to reasonable law is. If you want WRITTEN complaints in order to justify enforcement I am certain that there are many who would be glad to oblige. Why let something go that far?
Darn, I've gotten off the point of this stream again; I guess I'll have to remain in my room for a couple of more hours.
Cox--- Check your calendar. It is now JULY 24. May 12 was more than 10 weeks ago.
I have NO QUESTIONS. Only the fact that Mike Zinkin is NOT on DRB as you inferred, although he did serve the community well during his tenure as a member and past chairman.
Okay, bloggers, REALITY CHECK time:
1) Does Walmart really think that a 'slight' color change is going to help with the 'branding' of their image?
2) Isn't it true that a signage re-design, as most of us have seen, is, in fact, more appealing, a bit more updated, AND does fall into the category of an image 'branding' criteria?
3) Playing the devil's advocate, would those of you who are opposed to a slight color change, be so opposed if another store, more acceptable to you, would have applied for same?
4) Why aren't you so opposed to the Periwinkle color of 'Game Stop'? Regardless of how you feel about OVM, is it not out of kilter with the tones of the rest of the center? Where ARE your voices relative to this atrocious deviation?
5) What about the up and coming stores/restaurants, is this Town going to give in more and more to the whimsy of potential tenants in the name of 'we need the business?
Comments:
While the MACP took 3 years to develop a 'color' plan, how was it that a 'Periwinkle' storefront was allowed and a VARIANCE against it was granted to Best Buy. The MACP was not a Town ordinance, it was an architectural 'footprint'. Yet, the Town has continually allowed for the serious abandonment of architectural criteria in the realm of Zoning Ordinances for many other business entities over the years.
Why has, once again, the Council disregarded a stand taken by what is supposed to be a respected board, the DRB? Does the manner in which the Council disregards the Boards, the Town Manager, et al, indicate that a dictatorship, not a trust, governs the Town of Oro Valley?
As an aside, relative to the banter of OVOT vs VC about what types of 'center' should have been or could have been put in place providing a more 'upscale' shopping experience for Oro Valley, I have to side with VC in that OT goes to an extreme with the 'Nordstroms' mantra while VC seems to try to get across the point of more middle of the road type businesses. Oro Valley was really given no option. While it has been forwarded that no other
developer wanted the site, it has been published that OVM is a joint venture between Vestar AND Vistoso Partners with one certain 'centerpiece' connected to both. So, I can assume that no other developer really had a chance. As to the Buxton Report, having been in retail for as many years as I had been, outside reports are useless for those businesses who are supposed to know their business. I find it odd that similar demographic was deemed for Chandler, for Desert Ridge, for Queen Creek, etc. Was the
report absolutely independent, absolutely unbiased, and one absolutely unfed or not 'coached'?
Lots to ponder here, but be honest with yourselves about it.
Can I leave my room now?
Zev....There are a couple of issues brought forth in your comment. First of all what may be "reasonable" given one set of circumstances may not be "reasonable" under a completely different set of circumstances. I think you will agree. But lets stay on the "reasonable" aspect for a moment.
We are experiencing difficult economic times. The Oro Valley business community is not immune from the downturn. I believe that the Town has an obligation to do what it can to support these businesses. They are responsible for $14,000,000 in income for Oro Valley. The obligation rises not only from being a good neighbor to the business community but there is also an obligation to the citizens to protect their wallet. If the sales tax revenue is significantly reduced then our citizens are going to be hit for more taxes. Most of our businesses in this community do not have street front exposure. Therefore they must rely on signage to identify their location. Patio Pools, for instance, is probably 500 feet from Oracle. What is UNREASONABLE about allowing a lighted sign, which identifies what and where during the hours of darkness, to remain on during these harsh economic times? Many folks, especially people new to our community, may not know that business is there unless the see a sign while driving down Oracle at midnight?
Secondly to your point about written complaints. Written complaints, in my opinion, serve several purposes. It eliminates a disgruntled citizen from calling 100 times to complain thus creating the image that the problem is far more wide spread. If it is serious enough people will take the time to write. Written complaints can also eliminate or seriously hinder a competitive business from expressing a verbal complaint. Lastly, written complaints are just good business when it comes to government activities. The written complaint is strong support for the code enforcement folks to step up and do something.
Bottom line....this is not the time to be punitive toward our business community.
Art...When was the lighting brought up by DRB? Was it when Zinkin was on DRB??????
Check it out.
Zev....There were other options to the development of the OVM area. They all backed out when they realized the costs involved to develop the property given the standards and demands of OV.
Zev, you just can't argue that there are enough shoppers interested in the "VC" types of shops to support the investment. The income figures just aren't there. If they were those retailers would be here. There were location alternatives to OVM.
OVOT, your points are well taken; however, when it comes to an ESTABLISHED ordinance, a Town should not be able to pick and choose what, where, when, why, and how it must be observed or ignored; that IS a slippery slope. Again, I stress that having been in retail in many venues and in many aspects, signage is intended to be available so a seeker can find a business and/or screech and stop during hours of operation; it is NOT an advertising tool. You like facts, OVOT, I have given them to you.
As to your comment relative to the "VC types of stores", my take is that she is referring to 'middle-of-the-road' types, not the 'super upper end' ones and I have to agree with that definition. However, even the lower-end SPECIALTY stores are not doing so well as far as I can see see it. There seems not to be any wizards in the retail game anymore.
Look at the number of cars in front of the 'Razzmatazz' store these days. When it first opened and for awhile thereafter, it was packed; now, nary a soul AND it is comparatively a lower end type (discount) operation.
So, who really can tell anymore?
Westcor, a developer of upscale shopping centers, is still planning to build a shopping center at I-10 and Tangerine Farms Road. It's been delayed due to the sagging economy.
So how is it that Marana has been deemed to have the rooftops and the income to support an upscale shopping center but Oro Valley does not? I'm not aware of any Honeybee Ridge (million dollar home) type developments in Marana. I might be wrong, but from driving around the two communities, Oro Valley appears to have the higher income population of the two.
If that's correct, then someone needs to explain to me why Marana can attract an upscale mall and OV cannot.
I agree with Zev's "periwinkle" comment. I don't understand how that color was allowed. When I attended the Vestar presentations at the Town Hall, the color scheme they showed us was all desert tones. I remember browns, tans, and I think there were some earthy greens but I never saw any periwinkle blue or any other shade of blue for that matter.
Once again, what we were told and what we were sold are two different things!
Post a Comment