Bill Adler Helps Us Understand The Drawbacks Of "MUN" Plans

Bill Adler probably knows more about the zoning codes and the development plan for Oro Valley than just about anyone in or out of town government.

Bill was good enough to explain the drawbacks of "MUN"---Mixed Use Neighborhood as it pertains to the new development plan for the previously approved Town Centre below La Reserve.

All our residents, especially our neighbors in La Reserve should be familiar with Bill's concerns NOW, before it is too late, and approval is granted.

Please see our next post from Monday, July 11, 2011
La Reserve Neighbors And Others: Are You Aware Of The Modified Plan For Town Centre?

Here is Bill's message.
*************************************************************************************
When the General Plan of 2003 went through the process and was defeated by the citizens of Oro Valley, one of the major contentions was "MUN" [ mixed use neighborhood ]. This was contentious - not because the concept was unacceptable - but because the Town couldn't define what MUN meant.

Planning Director Bryant Nodine felt strongly that mixed use, or New Urbanism, was a necessary and desirable development style for a number of reasons, and the term " mixed use " continues to be used today within revisions to commercial codes, as well as within discussions of undeveloped properties. When the General Plan was revised and finally ratified in 2005 LU 8 within the Implementation Program specified that a mixed use ordinance was to be finalized.

Because the Town has failed to execute the LU 8 requirement, we have the Town Centre electing to abandon mixed use freely. The term remains undefined in the code, and so referring to mixed use is meaningless. This means that the Town cannot enforce a reference to mixed use, or New Urbanism, even though the term is within the PAD for the La Reserve property.

The concern I raised repeatedly during the General Plan and PAD process back in 2002 - 2003 was the high profile, highly conspicuous nature of the property where the Town Centre is proposed. Anything of mass and height will be easily viewed - not only from Oracle - but from 1st Avenue; Lambert Lane; areas on Naranja and La Canada. The New Urbanism form conceptually addressed this high impact concern since the development would be lower in profile. The 75' hotel was the exception.

My understanding from the notes on the April meeting is that the application is requesting an extension of both height, mass of commercial office use, as well as additional high impact uses such as convenience/drive through uses. Expanding permitted uses means more parking, which means even more destruction of the natural amenity and visual amenity. The concept of New Urbanism is being abandoned because of a lack of demand, as I read the notes. How can there be demand for a use that is undefined in the code? How can a use be "marketed heavily" when nobody could possibly know what the land use entitlements are?

I supported the relaxation of use at Steam Pump Village because the property is not high profile due to its relatively flat elevation and residential is not immediately adjacent, and somewhat higher elevation. The condition on the Town Centre property is the reverse. I suggested that grading exceptions would have to be required to lower the height from natural grade in order to preserve the appearance of this elevated property.

It remains the burden of the applicant to justify their request by showing through design presentations that the integrity of the view of the foothills from the west and east can be maintained. I don't find any representations in the applicant's proposal with regard to minimizing both visual and natural impacts.

Bill Adler