---
Wednesday evening, the Oro Valley Town Council agreed to defer discussion of the General Plan Amendment for parcel 7-I for 60 days. This delay is based on a request from the Developer.
We are not privvy to the Developer's strategy but here is our guess: Their strategy for getting the approval of Town Council is to get the vote for this measure to be a simple majority of four votes and not a super majority of five votes, as Town Attorney Tobin Rosen has advised them.
Why is this important?
We think that there are four solid "yes" votes for this Amendment: Mayor Hiermath, Joe Hornat, Lou Waters, and Mary Snider. As we will subsequently post, each is beholden to the special interests that contributed to their campaigns.
So, this Amendment will pass based on a simple majority.
But a super majority will require one more vote. And we don't think it is there. Citizen-centric council members Bill Garner and Barry Gillaspie will never vote for this Amendment as long as the residents oppose it.
That leaves the vote of Steve Solomon. For political reasons, we don't think that this appointed council member will vote for this Amendment. His council seat is up for election. He is running for election to Council this spring. If he votes for this measure he will most certainly lose that election.
What will the Developer do with the 60 day continuance?
1. Try to convince the residents who live nearest to the property to withdraw their protests. If they can get a sufficient number to rescind, then there will be no need for a super-majority approval by town council.
"Oland and Carlier have been going door to door on the streets across from 7-I asking homeowners to withdraw their protests."
They are not presenting the documents that were included in the packet the town discussed on Wednesday. Nor are they being truthful regarding the fact that this property can be built with access to Woodburne. So, residents, beware of the slick talkers.
2. Have their "big name" attorneys find a loophole somewhere in the PAD such that the council can interpret the request to be an interpretation of the PAD and not an amendment.
If either of these eventualities occur, then you will see Apartments on 7-I.
---
11 comments:
Can the residents request an extension next time, say to right before the election?
Kat,
Good question. No one seems to take responsibility for the postponement. Why not give the residents equal opportunity? Sounds fair.
The Blog posted mayor's email purporting to "clear up any misconception."
Frofoundly apologizing Hiremath corrected his own misconceptions.
Instead of RV HOA's marking trees "infested by an invasive bug" which required removal, no trees were marked and bug unmentioned. He denied that developer jumped the gun by beginning construction. Contacted on Monday TEP told Town Manager TEP was working on a larger scale expansion which included this area.
One piece that grew steadily muddier in the "clearing up" was the continuance. Venture West's lawyer had not submitted a continuance nor did they agree to do so. Instead, they said sixty dayss would give "the Town more time to work with the residents". repeating this mantra several times.
Anxiously Hornat, the Mayor's go-to Councilman, jumped in requesting that D&I "Notice" all 7-i residents again. They agreed.
What do you the reader, conclude was the reason for the 60days and for whom?
DV,
Thanks for clearing this up. I will look at the meeting tape to understand exactly what took place.
Richard
Actually, Zoning's David Williams stated that the applicant contacted Staff to ask for a 60 day continuance to "allow addl time to find mutually beneficial solutions to issues raised at the Council mtg."
Anyone see the story poles to see how the view of the mountains will be obstructed? Also: Exhibit C in the Agenda packet struck P&Z's condition that required access via Tangerine Rd. All verbiage now references access from Woodburne. What could possible be mutually beneficial about that?
There is NO benefit to RV homeowners! So the developer is going door to door asking homeowners to withdraw their letters of protest. Why would anyone want to do that? They cannot mitigate the concerns that we homeowners have. And once the apartments are built, there is no do-over - no opportunity in the future for community businesses that actually would benefit us.
But the real kicker is that -while claiming to want to work w/ the community- the developer hired a land use attorney to speak w/ the Town Attny. And said developer's attny raised the possibility of requesting an interpretation fr the P&Z Administrator under a different provision of the PAD. If they can do this end-run successfully, they will not need the super majority vote to get the PAD amendment approved. Sounds like a veiled threat to me. And despite the developer's attorney claiming they have no intention of taking that route, I am skeptical.
Keep in mind that developer/Venture West promised us high end stores at OV Marketplace & we got Wal-Mart. What does that tell you about honesty & integrity?
At the November 16, 2011 Town Council Meeting, Mayor Hiremath did a big apology to the citizens of Oro Valley concerning an email he sent to them!
Let’s break down our Mayor’s “contrite confessions of little gaffes” in his email:
Point 1 (Mayor Hiremath)
“Our Town Attorney received a correspondence via e-mail which said that the property owners of Parcel 7-i will be asking for a 60 day continuance this Wednesday (11-16-11)”.
How come the mayor didn’t tell us until the November 16, 2011 council meeting that the attorneys for the developer might be working on a different approach to their amendment to avoid the super-majority vote and get back to a simple majority vote to push it through? We had to hear that from town attorney, Tobin Rosen.
The developer is going door to door to talk the residents out of their opposition Sounds like the developer attorneys need time to plan an end run!
Point 2 (Mayor Hiremath)
“With regards to TEP marking the area, no one has any idea why they are out there but our Town Manager will look into this Monday when TEP reopens”.
Now we hear that TEP is supposed to be making planned improvements to the Woodburne Area (like added conduits). Talk about coincidence! Somebody needs to talk to TEP to see if that really was part of a long range plan by TEP. A resident got a different answer for TEP activities at that site from someone she talked to at TEP. In my opinion, TEP is anticipating the development and preparing for the apartment load.
Point 3 (Mayor Hiremath)
“Also, there seems to be some misinformation being spread by some residents that the developer is marking trees for removal. This is not accurate information. Some trees are being marked for removal because they are infested with an invasive bug and must be removed. This is being done by the Rancho Vistoso HOA and NOT by the developer”.
Where did the Mayor derive that “fantasy”? Talk about misinformation!!! Again, a resident contacted the Rancho Vistoso HOA that said no way was the HOA involved. It is not their property.
Then we hear that survey crews (2 crews) were out to mark trees and put in height poles in so that the residents could see what 2 story buildings would look like. Which residents requested the height poles? Did the developer pay for the survey crews? Was the Town made aware of this activity prior to it being done? Were any residents asked to look at the height poles?
Point 4 (Mayor Hiremath)
“This, unfortunately, is a coincidence and the property owner is NOT jumping the gun and starting development which has NOT yet been approved by the council”. I just wanted to pass this information on to you in a sincere effort to eliminate the preception of not communicating with all of you, as well as, clearing up any misinformation that is being spread to residents regarding parcel 7-i."
I wonder who is spreading misinformation with his (Mayor Hiremath”s) email?
John Musolf
Well said, John.
There is much afoot here.
Thank you all for putting my thoughts in your writings.
It seems to me with this item and many others that have come before this Council, the noses of the Mayor and his "Fab Four" grow longer each time they speak.
Front Page AZ Daily Star: Sat, 19 Nov. (my edit)
"Hotel Az Owner asks for Taxpayer handout."
(my take away)
Beware developers asking for 60 day holds.......
I am having my own "oops" & eat crow moment. It was Vestar that gave us the non-high-end stores at OV Marketplace as mentioned in my earlier post- not Venture West. Sorry for the mis-information.
So I guess my caution now is simply that developers can promise anything, but they don't always deliver it.
Nombe Watanabe,
Thx for the lead on the ADS article regarding HSL. What a history! 127 comments - all against Lopez. Doesn't seem like a good deal to have him building apartments in OV, does it??
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/lopez-seeks-tax-break-for-hotel-arizona-redo/article_2924e111-0785-5f8a-ad4a-33663f5ae1c3.html?mode=story#ixzz1eDRFyHwK
Some people at my end of Brightridge seem to think they won’t be affected because they won’t see the apartments from their house. With the number of apartments now up to 256, you have to figure somewhere around 300-400 cars trying to get rush hour access to Rancho Vistoso via Woodburne. Are they all going to turn right and sit in a traffic jam or do you suppose some of them will look for another way to get to Rancho Vistoso…..like Brightridge?
Post a Comment