Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Walmart Gets Color Change Approval With A 6-1 Council Approval

We recently did a posting where Mike Zinkin, former Chairman of the Development Review Board, implored the council to turn down Walmart's request for a color change.

Mike noted, "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?"

We agree with Mike Zinkin. However, ONLY Salette Latas concurred, as the council approved Walmart's request 6-1.

Read the story in The Explorer article here.
http://www.explorernews.com/articles/2009/07/22/news/doc4a6655a72dcf2226894232.txt

7 comments:

Mike Zinkin said...

It is unfortunate that the majority of the Council did not agree with my viewpoint. I still think that the Council has opened up Pandora's Box, and it is going to be difficult to say "No" to any future requests to change the MACP's color pallette. We shall see what the future brings.

It will be interesting to see what the Council does with the request to modify the Town Sign Code to allow business wall signs to be on until 10:00 PM.

The current Code states that signs must be off within one hour after the store closes. When Citizens started to complain about signs being on all hours, the Town sent out violation notices. Business owners went to the Chamber and asked for the Code to be changed.

The General Plan (voted on by the Citizens) requires the Town to restirct light not needed for safety or identification; control light and glare, and to pursue measures to protect and maintain night sky visability.

The current Code has been around for a long time. It is about time the Town enforced it's Codes. Now that the Town is enforcing the code, will they back down and modify it?

OV Objective Thinker said...

Does a lighted sign identify a store? Yes. Does the OVZCR regulations allow signs that create glare? No.Are the lumins created from the allowed lighted signs sufficient to create a problem for night sky activities? No.

Victorian Cowgirl said...

In my opinion, a lighted sign for "identification" is only necessary if the business is opened after dusk. If we're going to say that the sign needs to be lit for "identification" then we're going to have to allow the signs to be lit 24 hours a day.

Otherwise, how do we explain that the business only needs to be "identified" until 8 PM, or 10 PM or midnight or some other arbitrarily chosen time?

Victorian Cowgirl said...

As for the Wal-Mart paint color change being approved, I noticed that WM's representative stated that other OVM tenants had gotten approvals for amendments. And there you have it. Once you do it for one, you have set a precedent and now you have to do it for everyone.

Anonymous said...

If you want lighted signs all night, go and live in Vegas. The arguments FOR allowing lighted signs to stay on past their 'bedtime' here in Oro Valley ring hollow. Perhaps we should have allowed Walmart to paint their store florescent pink - LOL. Just like late night sign lighting, a slight change in color will not add to their branding as they claim, nor will it increase their business as they claim - however, florescent pink might get more notice. How about FORCING the periwinkle 'palace' to change THEIR color as it is truly obnoxious within the context of the rest of the Marketplace.

What this Town needs desperately is an architectural committee with bite. The wall, the in-your-face blast of faux brick 'color' on the Sanofi-Aventis building, the screen atop the Sanofi-Aventis building, the smoke stack surround on the crematorium, the inventive style of the empty office building at the corner of Sun City and Rancho Vistoso Blvd., the caterpillar style of the Wyngate Hotel, etc. These and other abominations HAD to be approved by one or more of our departments and it is obvious that keeping in sync with the natural beauty of Oro Valley was not a priority. Just because DRB and Zoning might have approved all of this, does not mean that they had the architectural perceptions to do successfully.

And yep, VC, the Explorer news got something right -ADOT, the Arizona Department Of Transformation.

Whew, what a world.

Victorian Cowgirl said...

The McDonald's in Sedona is THE ONLY ONE IN THE WORLD that does not have the McDonald's "branding" of the bright yellow giant "M" arches. If they wanted to locate in Sedona, they had to choose a color that would not clash with the surroundings. As such, the arches are turquoise and I'll bet that McDonald's hasn't lost their shirt in Sedona and I'll bet people have no trouble finding it.

If they can be strict about color choices and signage in Sedona, then we can do the same in Oro Valley and the world won't come to an end!

Town's should be citizen-centric not business-centric. I doubt anyone ever said, "You know, I'd really like to live in a town with ugly industrial buildings and bright garish signs."

travelling dancer said...

I agree with Mike Zinkin, we have definitely opened up Pandora's Box. You can bet they are going to come back asking for more changes in the future. As far as the signage, those things on top of Wal-Mart are already ugly enough why add more. I agree with Victorian Cowgirl. In addition on the entrance to the OV Marketplace all the stores are listed so additional signage is not necessary. Just take a driving trip throughout the US and see how ugly some towns look with all their sign and then notice the quaint beautiful towns that show quality not quantity