Guest View-Adler Makes A Case For "Mixed Use" Zoning Code Designation (Part 3)

This is the third posting regarding our discussions with resident Bill Adler regarding a mixed uses code designation.  This posting is in response to some questions we asked Bill regarding the designation.
---
We asked Bill: Does the new mixed use designation require public trust in town staff and in our elected town council?

"First, in order to participate in a meaningful way in land use proposals the issue of trust needs an open mind. That's an individual choice, but has nothing to do with the merits of the proposal itself.

Secondly, neither the Town Council, Town Staff nor advisory board members decide land use matters unilaterally. I worked hard to get a neighborhood meeting ordinance passed several years ago, and with some improvement in format, these meetings with citizens are very productive and instructive for all attending. Notes are taken on issues, concerns, objections and suggestions. These notes are part of the record, as the application is processed and decided.

There are public hearings at the advisory board level and Council level. Often more than one if the matter is controversial. The point is, the public is not shut out, and can play a vital role. Obviously, the pubic - like everyone else - needs to be prepared and have their facts and familiarity with the application in place. This is a reasonable requirement for any business meeting.

Thirdly, I can have a copy of the staff definition of mixed use as it would appear in a revised General Plan e-mailed or posted if you want to read it. Adding this definition allows a property owner to know that the Town will receive his application to designate his property Mixed Use. This application would amend his current designation - whatever it is - to Mixed Use through the public process. His application would include a conceptual site plan showing location of proposed buildings, their approximate size and probable tenants. At this stage a property owner can't be offering anything specifically to customers because he doesn't have the authority to actually develop Mixed Use. He is simply changing the designation on the property. Architecture and more details on traffic, uses, density happens at the re-zoning stage...an entirely separate and much more specific, detailed set of requirements."

We asked Bill if the designation will be voted upon as part of the 2015 general plan update?

"This additional designation within the General Plan would be subject to more discussion during the General Plan update process including ratification of the full Plan revision. All Staff is asked to do now is to finalize the language for inclusion in the General Plan for this designation. Once that is done, that revision along with many other suggested revisions will be subject to citizen review as part of the General Plan update and subsequent ratification."

We asked: How will mixed use apply to Oro Valley?

"Mixed Use is a customization process in order to blend form and use to fit the land available. This is unlike a shopping center; a stand alone apartment complex, professional offices all of which have been approved for the Town Centre east of Oracle at First. This is not an integrated, mix of uses. These are separate uses on separate pieces of land within the parcel, and is typically called Multiple Use. This is conventional development and, as such, is more familiar to design and construct. Mixed Use, because of the integration, and form base, is less familiar, and may be perceived as more complicated and perhaps expensive to construct. That depends upon the proposal, of course. So, customization is a more sensitive form of development...sensitive to the land, the natural environment and to the surrounding area.

There are photographs of existing Mixed Use developments, and there are planners and architects with experience. Experience exists within our Oro Valley planning staff. This works to ensure that a proposal - however customized - has the form and function to fit the space available versus the conventional approach to simply maximize the use of the land.

Mixed Use was built into the zoning for the Town Centre originally. There was no definition even within the zoning, and so it was up to the imagination of all parties to agree on what was actually intended. This is one of the reasons why Mixed Use was abandoned and Multiple Use substituted on that property. I think the Town would agree that the process on the Town Centre property was not well handled during the General Plan and zoning process many years ago. We paid the price. The Town has made land use mistakes in judgment - in my opinion - in the past. I was involved and participated, but we've all learned. Certainly the Marketplace was another example. I'm not sure it's a good use of everyone's time to review the particulars of that case, but I can if we all can meet at some point."

In his reply to us, Bill summarized his thinking:

"Finally, it needs to be understood that a property owner has the right - the entitlement - to improve his land. That's why designations and policy statements in a General Plan are relevant, and certainly restrictions in zoning are necessary. We don't want improvisation. However, there does need to be flexibility so that an improvement not only makes money for investors but looks good; is convenient, efficient and practical for citizens. Flexibility to some might be "code" for doing what a developer wants. I suppose that's a presumption that can't be eliminated entirely. It gets back to trust...but not just trust in the Town but in yourselves to become engaged and work through the land use process to achieve an outcome satisfactory to all."
---