---
Oro Valley Town Council Chambers was packed tonight with local residents voicing their concerns to the Planning and Zoning Commission about whether the word "may" means that apartment units can be built on Rancho Vistoso Parcel 7-1 (the Northwest corner of Rancho Vistos Blvd and Tangerine Road).
Of the 100 plus residents attending, about 20 voiced their concerns to the Commission. These concerns ranged from the impact of apartments on their views, to an increase in crime, to an increase in traffic; to not being "properly noticed" that this hearing or others before were taking place.
Their efforts were partially rewarded when Commissioner Don Cox moved for an amendment to the original proposal to include approval of this property use if and only if (non emergency) access to the apartments is solely from Tangerine Road.
With this proviso, by a 3-1 vote, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the term "may" be interpreted to mean "can" use of this property for apartment development.
Town Council and town staff warned that this proviso may not be enforceable. Nonetheless, they noted, inclusion of this requirement was a clear statement of intent. Commissioner Alan Caine voted against the approval because he did not think that this proviso was enforceable. We shall see.
Whether or not such access is actually granted to Tangerine Road is under the authority of ADOT. The Developer has been working with them to get this approval and stated that they felt it was distinctly possible.
Neil Simon, lead partner on the project for Developer Venture West, stated to me that it is their intent to continue to pursue ADOT to insure that Tangerine Road will be the only access. Though, there is every reason to believe that this will occur, there is no guarantee that it will occur. Neil was pleased that the Town will "weigh-in" with ADOT on their behalf. Both Art and I are familiar with Neil and with Venture West. Generally, they mean what they say. So, this is good news for the residents.
The vote was taken after presentations by the Developer, the town staff, a "call to the audience", and a lively discussion of the request by the four attending Commissioners.
The only truly sour note on the evening was a lecture to the attending residents by Commissioner John Buette. He basically told the residents, most of whom had only learned of this hearing and zoning request days before this meeting, that their concerns were nothing more than wasteful "not in my back yard" objections; and that he was personally insulted because the residents had come to the meeting assuming that they could not trust him or the commission to make a fair decision.
Our only comment for Commissioner Buette is that it's not personal, John, so why make it so. It's business. No one was disrespecting you or the Commission. Our residents have the right and the obligation to voice their concerns. Listening and considering their concerns is one of your responsibilities.
There is also as second issue of "Notice." Most residents were surprised to learn of this hearing. They believe they were not properly noticed. This was not addressed by the Commission. It is something that should be.
The next step is for this approval to be put forth at the Town Council meeting of October 19. Be good for residents to be there for this discussion.
--
