Kathryn Cehand sent a letter to Oro Valley Town Council discussing her disapproval of the proposed PAD "Clarification" To Parcel 7-1 (Tangerine and Rancho Vistoso Blvd). The letter, dated October 24, presents clear PAD document and the Oro Valley Zoning Code support for why apartments should not be allowed on this parcel.
The following is the letter:
----
Dear Mayor Hlremath and Members of the Town Council:
I am writing to ask that you deny the zoning change requested for Parcel 7-l in Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 7. Along with my neighbors, I am concerned about the impact that allowing conitruction of an apartment complex would have on our quiet residential neighborhood. Further, I have spent some time reading the Rancho Visfoso PAD document and the Oro Va1ley Zoning Code Revised and Amendments (July 2011) and offer the following arguments against the approval of multifamily residential construction on Parcel 7-1, which is currently zoned C-1:
The issue has been the use of the word "may" in the Rancho Vistoso PAD document:
- 1. COMMUNTTY COMMERCIAL (C-1)
a. Purpose: This district is intended to provide both for neighborhood and community shopping. The district provides for retail and service establishments which supply commodities or perform services to meet the daily needs of the neighborhood and shall be in locations where analysis of residential population demonstrates that such facilities are justified. In addition, this district is intended to provide commercial activities designed to serve the community. It may include uses associated with the central business district.
The Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission was asked to make a recommendation to Town Council regarding interpretation of the PAD wording. Per Section 20.2 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised, in the case of a conflict where the Code imposes a greater restriction, the Zoning Code controls. The Zoning Code is not ambiguous in delineating permitted uses of C-1 zoned property.
Development of C-1 properties is meant to satisfy the needs of nearby neighborhoods, not nearby, or potentially nearby employers, per Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised, Section 23.1. In no way can an apartment complex be construed as having any benefit for the nearby neighborhood. Permitted uses are things that would benefit the neighborhood: private schools, community buildings, post office, religious institutions,retail sales and service related businesses. Contrary to concerns expressed it the October 19th Town Council meeting, we would not be opening the site up to potentially undesirable businesses such as bars or cocktail lounges. Bars and cocktail lounges are expressly prohibited; a restaurant that serves alcohol would need to be reviewed and approved per Section 23.3 of the Zoning Code
The Code further states that building height on C-1 parcels is limited to 25 feet, so a
commercial building on the site would not be 34 feet in height and would not have the same
impact on views as the proposed 34 foot height of the apartment project.
I understand the reasons outlined by Mayor Hiremath as to why Oro Valley may need
apartments. However, I don't believe there is any justification for making an exception to the
zoning code just because the property owner wants to sell the parcel. There currently are
vacant parcels in Oro Valley that are zoned for multifamily residential development.
Sincerely,
Kathryn Cehand
---
Obviously, Kathryn has done her homework.
Are you ready to stand with your neighbors?
---
11 comments:
Excellent letter. Well-researched and well-written.
Excellent work. Thank You, Kathryn Cehand.
Couldn't agree more! There are other areas within Rancho Vistoso that are currently zoned to allow multi-family housing. One is the Town Center parcel at RV Blvd & Moore Rd. Perhaps a certain council member doesn't want that 1 developed because it is too close to his home???
---
If anyone has a list of Oro Valley parcels that are zoned for apartments please either post them here or email them to me.
The Town of Oro Valley and our Council Persons should implement what we asked (through the General Plan, PADs, and Zoning Codes) them to implement and not what developers are asking them to do.
---
The following is from one of our bloggers who wishes to remain anonymous:
Near the town center is already approved for apartments. I believe this is the one Shirl referred to.
[Appointed] Councilman Solomon lives on the next road over. There is one more parcel. I think it's slightly NW of "F".
These were shown on the map at the last meeting. The day after, a house on Sterling Ave. had a For Sale sign on it. Coincidence? I don't know. The lady next to me says if this is approved, she'll sell.
How can we fight this if the council members have their OWN interests at heart?
---
http://www.orovalleyaz.gov/Assets/_assets/DIS/Planning/pdf/Planned+Area+Development+Map.pdf
This map takes awhile to load but find Tangerine Rd & Area 5 which is Rancho Vistoso. The key to the color coded parcels is upper left. Pale taupe is HDR. Parcel I is pink. Following Rancho Vistoso Blvd, you can see some pale taupe around letters N & P. I believe this is the area designated Town Center which is supposed to have some SFR's, HDR & commercial. There is also more pale taupe past that (letters A & F) & some further out. We need a lawyer. How can they deviate from a voter approved Gen Plan when there is already land zoned HDR that has not been developed?? What is influencing some Town Council members to go against the wishes of the homeowners? Personal gain? If yes, they can kiss that seat goodbye in the next election!
Shirl....Save your lawyer money.
The General Plan specifically outlines how and when changes can be made to the plan. Each of the current requests to change the general plan has conformed to the requirements that were approved by the voters.
In addition I would ask that you read Element 7 of the General Plan titled, "Housing". It clearly outlines the desire for a wide variety of housing from "entry level rental and ownership unite to assisted living."
How would you translate/define "entry level rental"?
Unfortunately Ms. Cehand is confusing the Rancho Vistoso PAD with the Oro Valley Zoning Code. PAD's are, in effect, their own zoning code. ONLY when a PAD is mute on a topic does the OV Zoning Code apply. In general the rules of a PAD trump the Zoning Code.
The Rancho Vistoso PAD allows building heights of 34'.
I'm not confused. The developers plan does not supersede the town zoning code.
Kat..... Planned Areda Developments(PADs) are not "the developers plan". It is a town approved zoning area that in fact does replace the published zoning code. The ONLY time the Town zoning code applies in a PAD is in cases where the PAD does not address a particular topic.
The Rancho Vistoso PAD was "Developed by
The Wolfswinkel Group
Del E. Webb Communities Inc.
Prepared by
American Continental Corporation
Gage Davis Associates
The WLB Group
Robert Stubbs & Associates
The Signage Group" and, yes, it was approved by the town. However, the Zoning Code clearly states that when there is a conflict where the zoning code imposes a greater restriction, the zoning code governs.
Post a Comment