We have written about a potential land use designation called "Mixed Use." We have even posted guest views on it. In June, we reported that the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that Oro Valley Development and Infrastructure Department look at it as part of their planning efforts. Yesterday, we reported that town staff and some council are in favor of it and are moving forward to amend the current general plan to include it.So, how do the residents feel?
Two residents spoke about mixed use zoning at the July 3 Oro Valley council meeting. Their comments appeared during the "blue card" portion of the review of the Oro Valley Development and Infrastructure Department 2013-1015 plan. They residents are Don Bristow and Bill Adler. Both are knowledgeable and articulate on the subject.
Don's comments were the main thrust of his call to audience remarks. Bill's were a part of a large discussion of items. We thought you would like to view both remarks because they clearly differentiate the two opposing views.
In Don's case: "My opinion is that council and town staff do not legitimately have a mandate from the citizens of Oro Valley to place mixed use designations on the zoning maps... to be included in the 2015 plan for the citizens to ratify." Don believes that the town should first define "mixed use", apply it to the zoning maps, if applicable, and then put it in front of the voters as part of the general plan update.
Bill's postion is that "Planning staff has developed a definition for it and there is no anticipation of changing the land use map. All we are trying to do is to add an element so that the option to designate would be an option for the applicant to choose to have their property designated as mixed use. This is not something that the town will impose. It is something that the town will afford to an applicant."
Later, during the same discussion at the council meeting, Council Member Hornat observed: "I would never support the imposition of mixed use on a physical property." Continuing, he noted: "I would support an alternative that specifically said: 'If you're going to do mixed use, these are the kinds of things you're going to do.'" Hornat further observed: "I agree with Mike [Zinkin] that the citizens deserve a chance to look at this." Later, however, he states: "I would like to see a minor general plan amendment that we have fixed use" so that staff can move forward to develop the code for it."
Tell us what you think.
- Do you understand the concept of "Mixed Use?"
- Do you think its a "good thing" for Oro Valley?
- Do you think that it should considered as a general plan amendment, as an inclusion in the 2015 general plan, or not at all?
10 comments:
Mixed Use (MU) is a designation that denotes areas wherein a range of land uses are planned as an integrated development. The MU designation is intended for a mixture of residential, commercial, office and employment uses, creatively designed together. Such areas would be reflective of a village concept wherein there is an opportunity for residents to live, work and recreate within the same neighborhood. Specific planned uses include detached single-family, attached single-family and multi-family residential at varying densities; retail commercial, service commercial, professional office, employment, religious and public land uses at varying intensities.
This MU designation sounds ideal on the surface.
However, this MU designation means a gas station, liquor store, or a medical marijuana store could be built and “integrated” next door to your residential home.
The Oro Valley 2005 General Plan approved by the voters does not include a category which allows a mixture of land uses on one property.
On January 3, 2012 the Planning and Zoning Commission approved what they called a “Minor General Plan Amendment” to add a Mixed Use (MU) land use category to the General Plan (OV1111-006). This was a generic proposal since no applicant or property was involved in this item.
Since then the Oro Valley Planning Department has been trying to get the Town Council to approve the MU “Minor General Plan Amendment". At the July 3, 2013 Town Council meeting, the Oro Valley Town Council approved the priorities of the planning department initiatives for the next two years. Third on the priority list is to develop a minor general plan amendment to the code for a "mixed use" designation. This would be done before the Mixed Use designation has been fully vetted, discussed, defined and voted upon by the citizens of Oro Valley in their update of the 2015 General Plan.
The most important question to be answered: How will the “integrated” MU land use designation benefit the citizens of Oro Valley?
On May 1, 2013, The Town Council approved a public participation plan for the town’s 2015 general plan update. This would be a good source for answering that question.
John Musolf
PART 1
Public Participation = Delphi Technique
Anyone who attended the Town's MU forum with the speakers from Flagstaff, PHX & Tucson's own Ross Rulney have already experienced it.
Here's an excerpt from an article I found, but a simple google search will reveal lots of examples:
The process they will use to “facilitate” the Public Participation meetings is called the Delphi Technique. This Delphi Technique was developed by the RAND Corporation for the U.S. Department of Defense back in the 1950s. It was originally intended for use as a psychological weapon during the cold war.
However, it was soon recognized that the steps of Delphi could be very valuable in manipulating ANY meeting toward a predetermined end.
First, the person who will be leading the meeting, the facilitator or Change Agent must be a likable person with whom those participating in the meeting can agree or sympathize.
It is, therefore, the job of the facilitator to find a way to cause a split in the audience, to establish one or a few of the people as “bad guys” while the facilitator is perceived as the “good guy.”
Facilitators are trained to recognize potential opponents and how to make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc. Once this is done, the facilitator establishes himself or herself as the “friend” of the rest of the audience.
The stage is now set for the rest of the agenda to take place.
Wow. I had no idea ANYONE in OV government was sophisticated enough to use the Delphi Technique.
The dentist must be enrolled in some black ops on-line school.
The Mixed Use designation sounds like what we already have at the area around LaCanada and Lambert. There are single family homes, apartments buildings, gas stations, restaurants, a grocery store, a bank, a fitness center, hair salons, a hardware store, etc.
Is there a difference between this and the Mixed Use designation that we're currently discussing?
I have seen very nice MU developments in the Washington DC / VA area.
Most of these developments featured higher end shopping with apartments and condos.
Sadly, mid to high(er) end development in Oro Valley has never happened.
MU here will be a Taco Bell attached to a dollar store with an RV parked out back.
I assume the RV will have tires that are not flat, Nombe?
Nombe: Not the dentist: Planning & Zoning due to their education & subscription to American Planning Assoc. How many of the words in the APA memo have they been using (so far)to push Mixed Use?
Another Google search revealed:
"Recently APA released a memo entitled “Glossary for the Public.” It is quite telling on how an organization that is supposed to be one of the most respected planning groups in the nation, operating in nearly every city, will teach its people to lie at all costs in order to maintain their power and influence in our communities.
Says the introduction to this memo, “Given the heightened scrutiny of planners by some members of the public, what is said – or not said – is especially important in building support for planning.” Here is a list of words the APA warns planners not to use – because they cause “critics to see red,” as they have become “highly politicized and generate suspicion among some citizens:”
Affordable; Agenda 21; Collaboration; Consensus; Delphi technique; Density; Livable; Localized planning; Long-term; region-wide planning; Organize and facilitate; Public visioning; Public- Private Partnerships; Regional, regionalism, regional planning; Smart growth; Stakeholders; Sustainability; Walkable.
So, the very policy they are implementing, the policy they have invoked time and again – Sustainability – is no longer to be used."
Not saying MU projects are always bad; but it puts the few remaining vacant parcels in the hands of Town Council to approve those projects next to residences instead of along a business corridor like Oracle Rd. I don't want to live in a congested Scottsdale-like environment.
The quality of comments made to the original posting are truly amazing. I'd like to think some of them were made to amuse, but sadly I doubt that is true.
Oro Valley, Arizona is a thriving, predominately upper-middle class, well planned community that has won award after award for being a great place to live. We have one of the lowest crime rates in the state of Arizona and I suspect in many other states as well. We enjoy the beauty of the Catalina Mountains, great weather, a low cost of living, and a high percentage of friendly residents.
We didn't get to where we are by accident. We got here because we DON'T place "a gas station, liquor store, or a medical marijuana store ...next door to your residential home."
And I have yet to see any evidence in this community that would support a comment such as, "MU here will be a Taco Bell attached to a dollar store with an RV parked out back."
And in our over abundance of public meetings to discuss development, I have never seen any evidence to support the suggestion that our planning staff will, "lie at all costs in order to maintain their power and influence in our communities."
And the idiocy of comments in "PART 1" of Faveaunts posting are not word comment.
You say you want to have dialog. I submit that when you initiate your commentary from a point that is so extreme you lose all credibility.
---
The blog is attempting to open a dialogue on "mixed use."
Tomorrow, 7-23-13, we publish the beginning of a dialogue with town resident Bill Adler. We hope that this dialogue over time will help bring clarity to how mixed use would work in Oro Valley.
Please join the conversation.
---
OVOT has forgotten the Mixed Use display at the OV Marketplace.
Big Lots // Tuesday Morning // a burger joint // an ad hoc RV Show.
At least the RVs did NOT have flat tires.
Post a Comment