The Tradition Continues: Oro Valley Kids Concert Series

OV launches new Oro Valley Kids Concert Series for 2017-18

Oro Valley, Arizona (July 12, 2017) – The Town of Oro Valley, in partnership with the Music and Dance Academy, is proud to announce the launch of the new Oro Valley Kids Concert Series, which provides an intimate, interactive experience for young children and their families where they can explore the sights, sounds and workings of instruments and dance. These free concerts will be held on the first Saturday of each month, from August 2017 through May 2018.

View the entire 2017-18 lineup, including location information, by clicking here or pasting this URL into your browser: https://www.orovalleyaz.gov/business/calendar/oro-valley-kids-concert-series.

“The Music and Dance Academy is celebrating more than 20 years in Oro Valley,” said Economic Development Manager Amanda Jacobs. “It was a natural fit to partner with them to offer this quality series and promote the Town’s arts, culture and business retention efforts.”

Mark your calendars now for the August and September concerts, and visit us online for the full schedule!

Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 10 a.m.
Location: Music & Dance Academy, 7954 N. Oracle Road
Explore the Music & Dance Academy Dance and interact with musical instruments at the Music and Dance Academy!

Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 10 a.m.
Location: Oro Valley Council Chambers, 11000 N. La Cañada Drive
The Adventures of Victoria the Violin Once upon a time, there were several instruments living peacefully in the Land of Notes. Then, along came a new instrument, Victoria the Violin. She was looking for adventure! Come join Victoria as she meets all sorts of new instrument friends!

Thank you to our community partners: Dr. JAW Orthodontists, Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce, McDonald’s (1st/Oracle) and Smashburger.

Since 2011, the Town of Oro Valley has offered free concerts to residents and visitors of all ages, and it will continue to do so through its other monthly concert series offerings, including the Steam Pump Ranch Concert Series, Community Center Concert Series and Oro Valley Marketplace Concert Series. Learn more about the Town’s arts and culture offerings at www.orovalleyaz.gov.

Ed Note: These concerts were previously sponsored by deceased Oro Valley resident Bill Adler. It is nice to see the others have stepped into the breach to continue this concert series.
---
Source: Oro Valley press release

Oro Valley Town Council Considers Major General Plan Amendment Tonight

Tonight, starting at 5PM, The Oro Valley Town Council will hear a major amendment to the 2005 General Plan.  The amendment, if approved, will substantially increase the number of homes that can be built on a property. The property is located on La Cholla Boulevard and Naranja Drive, Northwest and Southwest.

The town planning staff and the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission, by 6-1 vote, recommend that the Council approve this amendment.    You can read our previous postings regarding this amendment.

A public hearing on this amendment was held on November 20.  Eighteen speakers appeared at the hearing. Those who spoke against the amendment did so on the basis of how the proposed development on the property would impact traffic, floodplains, and their "way of life". Those who spoke for the amendment did so on the basis that they felt it improve our community and match market needs.

The general plan focuses on land-use. It does not focus on details of how the specifics of how the land will be used.  That is considered when the property is zoned and, then, when it is planned.

Only two people discussed  "land use" at the the November 20 hearing.  One of those was resident Bill Adler. We are linking to a previous posting where Bill discussed the concept of land-use.  At this hearing Bill noted that the neighborhood meetings that were conducted regarding this property discussed the details of what could be on the property and not the concept of general plan land-use.

The particulars of the development of the land, such as impact on traffic, are discussed at the zoning stage, not at the general plan stage. One of the Planning and Zoning Commissioners stated this at the beginning of the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing. He told the audience that many of the concerns that they were about to express should be addressed at the zoning stage of the property, and not at the general plan amendment stage.

It is expected that many residents as well as the developer and others special interests will appear to opine at this hearing.

Will we see you there?
---

Guest View-Bill Adler: "Citizen Involvement Is What Shapes Oro Valley's Future"

I think the the outcome of the election reflects the lack of opposition from "boots on the ground".

The rhetoric in social media - at least in Oro Valley - without being reinforced by testimony at public meetings where decisions are made and what media we have is present, results in few points of view being changed.

Oro Valley has committees formed now to revise the General Plan. Although I don't recognize all the names on the Committees, I recognize enough to also recognize the agendas that will be represented.

It is in these kinds of meetings that direction is set, attitudes are adjusted, and confidence is restored. Without involvement in the meetings under the radar: Planning and Zoning; Parks and Recreation; Water Utility; Conceptual Design Review; Historic Preservation, the general public cannot begin to understand how the process feeds up through staff and management to Council.

Just going to Council meetings is not enough, and sometimes going to all meetings doesn't seem to be enough because there are agendas at the top of Town leadership that are difficult to move.

I believe the Town needs to create more public opportunities for dialog...Town Hall meetings for example, where a couple of items are on the table and people of every persuasion can show up, speak out, and make a difference. "Council on your Corner" needs to be re introduced with more frequency. But, if offered, these opportunities need to be used, and that's often inconvenient. However, it is in there forums where "boots on the ground" can make a difference.
---
Bill also recommends reading David Brooks NY Times stimulating article: The Mental Virtues. In it, Brooks discusses six "cerebral values".  It is a thought provoking article.
---
Bill Adler is a longtime Oro Valley resident. Bill has served on many of Oro Valley's boards and commissions.  He is currently a member of Oro Valley's Board of Advisors, attends many Oro Valley board and commission meetings, and is a frequent "call to the audience" speaker at Oro Valley town council meetings.  You can post a comment here or write Bill directly at stfatha@aol.com

The 2005 General Plan: How Did We Do? (Part 2)

Today, we continue our discussion of the 2005 general plan.

Oro Valley Resident Bill Adler observed the following during the call to the audience portion of the Oro Valley Town Council meeting:

"...   It's fairly common at neighborhood meetings where general plan amendments are being discussed or public hearings were general plan amendments are being discussed, for members of the audience to rise and make points at issue and be told, fairly promptly, that the issues that they are raising can not be discussed at this stage.. but rather have to wait to be discussed at the rezoning."    

In Bill's opinion, 95% of these questions, responses to which are being deferred, are areas that are actually discussed in the general plan; therefore, they should be discussed during the hearing process.  If not then, then when?

Bill noted that, in the previous evening's planning and zoning commission meeting on three general plan amendments, not one person on the commission had a copy of the general plan.  The question: Does our current process not "follow and consistently apply" what has been adopted?  How can the public be assure it will do so?

For example, our 2005 General Plan states the following:

"9.1.5 – The Town shall pursue the enhancement of current venues and development of state-of-the-art cultural facilities including parks, amphitheaters, performing arts facilities, instruction space, galleries and other appropriate facilities."

Since 2005, what has the town done to enhance current venues and develop new cultural facilities?

How have we done?
---

Adler Makes A Case For "Mixed Use" Zoning Code Designation

 A "Mixed Use" designation to the Oro Valley zoning code would allow a landowner to apply to have various facilities on the property they own.  For example, the property might include a combination of commercial properties, single family homes, apartments, or any other type of facility.

There are some who believe that adding this designation to the Oro Valley code would mean disaster for Oro Valley. There are others who think it is a rather benign change.   We thought that our blog could be useful in "fleshing out" the opinions. So, last week, we began the discussion with our posting: "Mixed Use: A Bad Thing To Some-A Good Thing To Others."  This week we continue the discussion.
---
Resident Bill Adler is a proponent of adding the code.  Bill, a long-time Oro Valley resident, is active today, and has been active for many years in Oro Valley.  In 2005, during the process of getting the last general plan approved, Bill opposed the mixed used designation.  It was eventually left out of the plan.  Now, Bill is in favor of adding it to the plan.  We ask why?

"Two basic differences; Then, Mixed Use was imposed upon specific pieces of vacant property on the Land Use Map replacing previously approved land use designations. Also, there was no definition of Mixed Use. I was told, we'll get to that when we create the ordinance. 

Now, there is no imposition of a Mixed Use designation on the Land Use Map. Owners of property have the designations approved in 2003-5. They - obviously - can submit a General Plan Amendment to change the designation, and we have several attempts to do that every year. Secondly, there is now a definition of Mixed Use. It necessarily is vague, because Mixed Use is a varied designation custom designed to the property. However, the vague nature of Mixed Use is clear - if that isn't an oxymoron - by allowing the customization of use to the particularities."

Those who oppose adding the mixed use designation to the code think that it should be approved by the voters as part of the 2015 general plan vote if, indeed it is to be included at all; that is should not be "snuck into" the Oro Valley codes using a minor amendment.   So, we asked Bill: "Where's the fire?"

"If the issue really is why NOW versus some later time, all Oro Valley people need to do is look at the vacant property available. There's hilly property behind Home Depot that runs past Naranja Drive on the east to Palisades.  Unless that property is fully graded which would ruin the beauty of the contours, clearly the land must be customized as to use. The R1-7 ( minimum of 7,000 sq.ft. lots ) as presently zoned would maximize profits but irreparably damage the aesthetics of a high profile piece of land. 

If we offer to a property owner the option of customizing rather than standard development categories and density, we can achieve a "win-win". 

When the General Plan revision is underway, this new element would be presented, and clearly the interested residents can grasp the detail as offered and respond. So the public is not being circumvented."

Mixed Use: A Bad Thing To Some-- A Good Thing To Others

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?

---

Oro Valley Boards and Council Urged To Provide Reasons In Public To Support Their Decisions

---
On June 19, resident Bill Adler spoke in the end of meeting "call to audience."(see video)  Adler urged the town council clearly state on the public record the reasons why they make a decision.

"The lack of understanding of town actions is more prevalent," noted Adler. He continued: "People mistrust government and this is why.  They don't think you're clear and when you're not clear they assume that there is something going on that they ought to know about."

Adler feels that such "openness" is essential for the 2015 General Plan: "There is only one item that gets ratified and that is the General Plan. This is the one opportunity to gain comprehension of Town intent ( not commitment ). If the Town seems reluctant, or is unable to provide comprehension, the public can, and should, vote against the proposed General Plan. "

In June, Oro Valley Planner David Williams sent a letter to the Board of Appeals discussing the same need for public explanations of decisions:

 "It is important to publicly create a clear and defensible record of your decisions. Basing your decisions on whether all five criteria are met is essential to this function and I ask that you participate in creating a clear and defensible public record by referring to these criteria. As a quasi-judicial body, the record of your actions is important to all parties concerned. Making a record of your findings and sound decisions is both essential and required." 

This letter followed training given to the Board. This training followed what we we felt was a completely unjustified decision to obliterate a hillside to benefit a developer.  In this instance, the Board applied some of the 5 criteria required for granting a variance, ignored others, and added an "it ain't no big deal and it helps the developer" reason.

In fairness to the Board, "Board of Adjustment considerations are to be based upon specific criteria, but how those criteria apply to a given piece of property will vary from one well trained person to another. That is simply because there is a degree of subjectivity involved."

We are the public. We are perplexed by some decisions that are made.  That is why, for example, the debate on where the police department should report was so important.  Each council member explained their rationale.  We now understand their thinking.  

We, the public, sometimes assume a nefarious motive underlying the decision, as Adler note, when no rational is presented.  Indeed, there may be no such such motive.  Since none was presented, however, we assume "the worst."

We prefer not to guess what the rationale is.  We'd like the rationale behind decisions explained; explained, not only by council, but by all town boards and commissions.  If, for example, there are 5 criteria for granting a variance, then weed like the application discussed in relation to the 5 criteria. There is need for an applicant "dog and pony show" only if it relates to one of the 5 criteria.  We'd like our boards, commissions and council to focus on the facts; to present their rationale; to "keep us from guessing."
---