Tonight there is the second hearing on a proposed energy general plan amendment. This is the last hearing before the measure moves to town council. The hearing is being conducted by the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission. The idea of inserting an energy element into the general plan was approved for further evaluation by the town council in April. Since then, town staff, with the aid of others, and after several neighborhood meetings, has proposed a 5-page amendment.The proposed energy amendment is solely about renewable energy. It includes:
- Ensure new residential, multi-family, and commercial buildings, as appropriate, are constructed with cost effective measures to accommodate future solar systems. (14.1.8)
- Develop design guidelines and incentives to encourage the passive and active solar orientation of lots during the planning stages of new subdivisions (14.1.9)
- Establish design guidelines to address the positioning of pole-mounted solar systems. (14.1.11)
- Adopt the most up-to-date International Energy Conservation Code in concert with regional jurisdictions and stakeholders.(14.2.3)
---
Here are are three reasons why this propose general plan amendment should not be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission:
- A general plan amendment should be done only for something that requires urgent remediation. This is not the case with this proposed energy amendment to the general plan. There is no urgency at all. In fact, the town is not required by the State of Arizona to include an energy element to his general plan until the population reaches 50,000. We are at least five years from that. So, we ask, where's the fire?
- A cost effective renewable energy technology has not yet been developed. It is not feasible to ask homebuilders to build to a future standard technology that does not exist today.
- The amendment will substantially increase the cost of construction both residential and commercial in Oro Valley. It will put Oro Valley at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to attracting commercial and residential construction. This is just the opposite of what most on council want to do.
There is also a fourth reason that this proposed amendment should not be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. It is that the area of renewable energy is subject to political debate. Not everyone is in agreement that doing these things are necessary or that they make sense. Adding this element to the general plan requires getting approval of the voters, not the opinion of a few.
---
-
---
1 comment:
14.1.8 - Who decides what is "cost effective?" That term means something completely different to a retiree or 1st home buyer building a modest sized house than it does to someone building in a Honey Bee type subdivision. How will this affect small business contractors?
Also check out 14.1.9: Develop guidelines & incentives to encourage the passive & active solar orientation of lots during the planning stages of new subdivisions.
Builders-How might this affect the # of lots - especially premium lots - w/ views? Could this be a deciding factor in favor of purchasing a resale with beautiful wash or mountain views over building in a new subdivision?
Buyers-Shouldn't buyers have the ability to buy a lot & face a house on it how they choose? It would seem that this solar orientation might limit that ability. What if people don't want to view a sea of rooftop solar panels when relaxing on their patio or by the pool?
If you read this plan, there are actually a number of things that the Town wants to get involved in that are the jobs of private companies. At what cost to the taxpayers??? Who is watching out for us & small businesses? NO ONE!!
Post a Comment