Guest View-Don Cox: Reflections

---
In recent weeks there have been several General Plan amendments brought forward for consideration by the Town Council. The public has been invited to provide input on at least four occasions for each amendment. State law requires that two formal public hearings be held at two separate locations for each amendment. Town code requires that at least two neighborhood meetings be held in addition to the formal hearings. I attended at least one of the neighborhood meetings in each instance as well as both Planning and Zoning Commission meetings.

At many of the meetings I heard a few common issues brought forward that relate specifically to the General Plan and I wanted to make an attempt to clarify how the Plan guided me in making my decisions.

Other than the language contained in the first paragraph on page 13, there is no weighting system outlined in the plan. In other words no single word, phrase or section carries any more weight than any other. It is a document that is purposefully left open for a certain amount of self-interpretation and weighting. And it is in those self-interpretations that many time people differ in their opinion.

There was an oft repeated comment that the General Plan was a document that was voted on by the citizens of Oro Valley and individual citizens should not have the right to change what the citizens voted for. However beginning on page 10 of the plan are specific guidelines on how the plan can be changed and whether the change is considered a major or minor change. These provisions were also approved by the citizens. It is my opinion that this section is a blessing. I can’t imagine having to deal with a document that was created in 2004/5 that did not allow for us to have the latitude necessary to soundly operate in the financial conditions we are experiencing in 2011/2.

A second opinion offered at many of the public meetings was that there is no provision in the General Plan for large scale apartment developments and therefore their construction would be a violation of the plan. Element 7, “HOUSING”, begins on page 59. I find two statements within this section that do support large scale apartment developments. The first is under the paragraph titled, “GROWING SMARTER/PLUS REQUIREMENTS”. In this paragraph it states that the plan should be “Designed to make equal provision for the housing needs of all segments of the community regardless of race, color, creed or economic level". Later on the same page under the title, “RANGE OF HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES”, we are presented with the following: “Over a person’s lifetime, a broad range of housing types will be required, ranging from entry-level rental…..”. I interpret “entry-level rental” as apartments.

I found through the course of my study and while listening to all who presented verbal and written input that all of the proposed amendments substantially met all of the change requirements. My only objection to the change on the parcel located at Rancho Vistoso and Vistoso Commerce Loop was that it took away a significant section of property in a corridor that I view as having far more ‘commercial/light industry’ value to the Town than would a residential use.
---