The Hiremath "Development Pipeline" Continues To Drive Residential Home Growth

Many residents expected a slowdown in residential home growth in Oro Valley after the 2018 election

One of the things readers have said to us is that Oro Valley home growth has been rapid at a time when they expected home growth to slow down given that a new council was elected to do just that when it took office in November of 2018.

Indeed, the opposite has happened

Rather than seeing a decrease in residential construction, the town has seen an increase in the number of residential building permits issued in 2020 and 2021. (See chart at right, below)

Where did this increase in homebuilding growth come from?

Residential home growth came from the "Hiremath Pipeline"

According to Town of Oro Valley Planning Manager Bayer Vella speaking to the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 1, the increase came from actions taken by Mayor Hiremath led councils. Those councils passed several general plan amendments and rezoning changes that created this substantial growth. 

It is a "pipeline" of residential home building growth, according to Vella, spearheaded by two major developments." 

These two projects "...are really the more dramatic areas of change.”

Capella Project

Perhaps the biggest area of concentration is at LaCholla and Naranja. It is known as Capella. That development will have as many as 600 homes. A Hiremath council led the approval of a general plan amendment for Capella in 2015. They followed with a rezoning of the property in May, 2018. "We are just starting to see ground broken there in terms of subdividing subdivision development and I certainly expect it to accelerate." 

 

Tranquilo at Rancho Vistoso

Vella also pointed to a second development project. In December of 2017, the Hiremath Council approved a general plan amendment and zoning changes for the Tranquilo project. That's 227 units which are being built on the edge of Big Wash. "They are grading now and prepping the site that's across the street from Sun City, right under or near the bridge…a bridge across Big Wash." (See our editorial on this)

Vella: Town is no longer building a “pipeline” 

Things changed in 2018 with a new council. “Right now, Oro Valley is not building a pipeline. There have not been, ... residential rezoning ... of size to create a bump like that in the future.” 

LOVE Fact check: There have been no general plan amendment or rezoning to accommodate large residential developments under the Winfield Council. In fact, there have been no general plan amendments at all.
- - - 

Big Dollar Contributions Have Power Because Money Buys Access and Special Consideration

Rodman and Solomon votes "follow the money"
In the two years they served with Hiremath and his majority, Council Member Solomon voted lockstep to approve every developer request. Rodman voted to approve all but one request, a request to rezone a property that we believe is near his home.

Instances in which they voted in favor of contributors.
November 16, 2016
At their first council meeting in office voted to approve blading of the Silverhawke property. This property was owned by the Kai Family, one of their contributors.

March 15, 2017
In March of 2017, Solomon and Rodman approved the PAD rezoning that allowed major campaign contributor Diamond Venture' Self Storage facility at Steam Pump Village.

May 16, 2018
Rodman and Solomon voted to approve rezoning of land owned by the Kai Family. This involved approximately 199-acres located west of La Cholla, between Lambert Lane and Naranja Drive; and 8.2-acres located on the northwest corner of LaCholla and Naranja Drive.  Their vote in favor of this rezoning is particularly noteworthy because Solomon and Rodman allowed multiple concept plans for each of the parcels within the PAD. The owner only needs to have further town review if they want to switch to a different concept that was approved in this bundle of plans.

On November 20, 2014, while on the Planning and Zoning Commission, Rodman approved the general plan amendment that allowed this master planned community.

Rodman and Solomon supported the construction of high density residential homes on top of Big Wash
December 6, 2017
Solomon and Rodman voted to approve General plan Amendments to allow residential housing to be built in in Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 5. This land is on top of Big Wash. While on the Planning and Zoning Commission, Rodman had voted to amend the general plan to approve this land use change.

The "Big Wash" Project

Will the "beat go on"?
June of 2020
As a lasting thank you, we notice that Rodman and Solomon 2020 Campaign signs are posted in front of the Silverhawke Sanctuary property at the intersection of First Avenue and Lambert Lane.  This, at a time, when council is to consider a general plan amendment to add more residential land to Silverhawke, a Kai sponsored General Plan Amendment.  

Unseemly but not illegal
There is nothing illegal about taking a campaign contribution from a contributor and then voting in favor of their requests. It just feels unseemly.

Apparently, the voters agreed in 2018.

Tired of seeing all those yellow signs announcing possible land use changes and knowing the likely outcome if Hiremath remained in power, they decided it was time for a change. They replaced Mayor Hiremath and his majority with four resident centric council members: Mayor Winfield, Vice Mayor Barrett and council Members Jones-Ivey and Nicolson.

Perhaps they will consider the same when it comes to the reelection of Rodman and Solomon.
---

Maximizing profits should not be the rationale for rezoning land in Oro Valley

Below is an excerpt from the speech given by Oro Valley resident, Michael Sanderson, during the May 16th Town Council Public Hearing on the Capella rezoning. Yesterday, we published the speech that Diana Sanderson gave the same evening. We’re publishing these speeches to show our readers that the current Town Council does not listen to the citizens, no matter how well-researched and well-presented those citizens’ speeches might be.

Mr. Sanderson’s Speech
We live in the Canada Hills area. My wife and I sent a letter to each of you at the first of the week. I assume you have taken the time to read it. In the letter, we listed the specific variances proposed in the rezoning for the Capella PAD that are unacceptable to a significant number of Oro Valley residents. We have been meeting with these residents for the last three months.

We, unfortunately, do not have time this evening to discuss each variance, as we did in the letter. Very briefly – they center on the following requests by the Developer:

• In the residential areas: to create dense single-family housing by reducing the size of the lots and placing the homes closer together, beyond existing town code.

• In the multi-family housing: to reduce the open areas surrounding the structures, again, beyond town code.

• In the commercial zone at the NW corner of Naranja and La Cholla: to expand the size of the buildings from the existing code of 5000-9,000 sq. feet to 20,000 sq. feet.

• In the commercial zone at Lambert and La Cholla: to have a super big-box store of 125,000 square feet, more than twice the size allowed by current code – and bigger than any single store in Oro Valley except the Walmart Supercenter at Oro Valley Marketplace.

• In both commercial zones: They are also requesting that commercial buildings in both areas be five feet higher than allowed by code.

The Zoning Code is intended to maintain the character and quality of the town by imposing development standards and to reduce adverse impacts on neighboring property owners. Unfortunately this proposed plan seeks variances that would allow the developer to degrade the character and quality of Oro Valley and have an increased adverse impact on neighbors.

Three of us met with the applicant in an attempt to understand the need for the zoning variances. We, absolutely, appreciate him taking the time to meet with us and provide detailed responses to our questions. Clearly we do not agree with the basis for the variance requests.

Our interpretation of the responses was that they were based on the need to build as many single-family homes, multi-family dwellings, and provide as much commercial square footage as possible to maximize the profits for the current landowners and prospective buyers. This should not be the rationale for rezoning land in Oro Valley.

We support the amendments proposed by the Planning and Zoning commission at their April 3 meeting and approved by a 6-0 vote.

In addition, there must be the 5 conditions that we listed in the letter we submitted to each of you. These conditions for approval of the Capella PAD rezoning have been thoughtfully researched and considered by our group of concerned Oro Valley citizens. We expect you to add these conditions to the amendments unanimously approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. These combined conditions represent a reasonable compromise to allow this PAD to move forward.

This is your opportunity to demonstrate to the citizens of Oro Valley that you do listen to their concerns.

(Editor's Note:  The council did not listen.  They approved the rezoning with a unanimous 7-0 vote).

- - - - -

For reference, below are the amendments passed 6-0 by P&Z during the April 3rd meeting.

Planning & Zoning Amended Motion:

1. All future site plans for each parcel will go through the Conceptual Site Plan process to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as Town Council for further review.

2. Complete an updated Traffic Analysis for each development phase required by Town Code.

3. Parcel M is restricted to 1-story height within 300 feet of the west property boundary.

4. The plans for restrooms and playgrounds in recreation areas must be maintained.

Below are the additional conditions that the Sanderson’s requested in their letter to the mayor and council:

1. All single family homes in the PAD shall meet the requirements of R1-7 zoning regarding minimum lot area, lot width, yard setbacks, and building height; except that the minimum lot area in Parcel H, for homes not located along Lambert Lane, can be 6600 square feet, per the Special Area Policies adopted in 2015.

2. Multi-family residential buildings in the PAD shall meet the requirements of R-7 zoning regarding outdoor open space and outdoor private living space.

3. All businesses in the C-N commercial zone at the NW corner of Naranja and La Cholla shall meet the current C-N zoning requirements for business floor area limits, building height and allowable use.

4. All businesses in the C-1 commercial zones shall meet the current C-1 zoning requirements for business floor area limits, building height and allowable use.

5. A traffic control “island” or curbing shall be placed at the Canada Hills Drive intersection to not allow through traffic to cross La Cholla. (The proposed design will not be sufficient to “not permit eastbound or westbound through-traffic across La Cholla Boulevard” as stated in the current proposal).

Analysis: The Town Council views the General Plan as nothing more than “a glossy advertising sales pitch.”

Town Council continues to ignore citizens in order to appease developers
Below is a speech given at the May 16th Town Council meeting by Oro Valley resident, Diana Sanderson, during the Public Hearing portion for the 200-acre Capella Rezoning. This is another example, in a long list of examples, of how, when it comes to development issues, the current Town Council will not listen to anything presented by an Oro Valley resident, even when the resident is citing the voter-approved General Plan in their argument. The rezoning passed by a 7-0 vote.

Ms. Sanderson’s Speech
Thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. I am an Oro Valley resident for almost 3 years. I appreciate my neighbors and community members voicing their concerns regarding the Capella Rezoning project. I want to speak to the entity that has no voice in any of this: The desert wildlife. I sense I am in the minority on this topic, but to me, it certainly doesn’t diminish the importance.

The Your Voice, Our Future General Plan does a very good job of convincing the general public of the following:

From Page 29: “Oro Valley’s exceptionally rich wildlife and vegetation are a big part of the region’s appeal. We cherish Oro Valley’s open space and strive to focus development in appropriate areas.” From Page 33, Policy SD.8: “Encourage development project designs that connect wildlife habitat areas, avoid disturbing significant wildlife habitats and minimize the overall impacts on wildlife habitat areas.”

Policy SD.9: “Provide for the safe movement of wildlife near man-made features which may potentially disconnect wildlife corridors.”

In all the Capella parcel designs offered, it’s difficult to determine exactly where these two policies were a consideration.

Blading of desert landscape does little to promote any of the policies outlined. It’s a fact that blading in the spring and summer months disturbs habitats and kills the young. Anyone that thinks animals move on when development begins is wrong. They simply die.

The Tucson Wildlife Center offers a free service to walk areas scheduled for blading before the process even begins. The purpose is to identify potential habitats of animals that could be safely relocated. They have yet to be engaged on any Tucson or surrounding area development projects. With respect to Mr. Oland [the applicant] and Mr. Spaeth [Town Planner] the 30% of open space that they are leaving in this development is land that cannot be built on.

We are stewards of this planet and should speak for those inhabitants that have no representation and are basically considered development collateral damage.

From Page 33, Policy SD.1: “Identify, preserve and manage an integrated and connected open space system that protects Oro Valley‘s natural resources and provides enjoyment for residents and visitors while recognizing our place in the larger ecosystem.”

That should be our goal, not a politically-correct marketing pitch.

It starts with us. Let’s make the policies in the Your Voice, Our Future General Plan a reality instead of a glossy advertising sales pitch.

. . . . .

Click HERE to read another example of an Oro Valley resident’s well-researched and well-prepared speech being dismissed by the current council. The agenda item on which she spoke, again citing non-conformity with the General Plan, also passed with a 7-0 vote.

Guest View: Mike Zinkin ~ Speak NOW or forever lose your peace

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

Wednesday, May 16th, 6:00 PM

Town Council Chambers

CAPELLA REZONING
Approx. 200 acres on the West Side of LaCholla between Lambert and Naranja

FROM: Large lot residential (R1-144 / approx. 60 homes on 3.3 acre lots)
TO: Planned Area Development (Up to 570 cluster homes plus commercial)

The History of Capella
As a former member of the Oro Valley Town Council, I was deeply involved in the compromises that were established prior to the approval of the LaCholla-Capella Major General Plan Amendments (GPA). Negotiations took place over a 9-month period in 2014-2015 between a local citizens group, the land owner, and the project engineer (WLB Group). I also held separate meetings with the WLB Group and the Town staff that resulted in further compromises.

Passing a Major GPA requires 5 votes on Council. The Council make-up at that time (May 2015) included 3 members who did not rubber-stamp development proposals. This required the WLB Group and the land owner to sit down and compromise with nearby residents in order to get the 5 votes they needed.

Current Events
Now, the Capella Rezoning is coming before the new council, a council whose campaigns were all supported by the development community, some of whom are involved in this project.

The Capella plan, on pages 188-190, requests exceptions to the current zoning requirements. These exceptions include, among other things, floor areas of 20,000 square feet per business vs. the allowed 5,000 square foot maximum, plus allowances for taller buildings and reduced setbacks. These exceptions were not part of the agreed upon compromises.

Additionally, what was discussed between the citizens’ group and WLB in 2014-2015 was a Master Planned Community. Some time between May 2015, when the Major General Plan Amendments were passed, and May 2018 when the rezoning portion of this development comes before council, the plan morphed into a Planned Area Development.

Master Planned Community vs. Planned Area Development
A Master Planned Community is a land use definition that combines many different uses. A Planned Area Development is a zoning code definition that allows for varied zoning entitlements such as Medium Density Residential (MDR), Low Density Residential (LDR), Neighborhood Commercial (C-N). A PAD can have different zoning allowances and different signage allowances than what’s in the Town Code, if the Council allows.

For example, in the MDR acreage of Capella, the PAD can have smaller set backs than what the Town Code specifies. If the PAD doesn’t mention any differences, then the Town Code prevails.

The Modus Operandi behind the rezoning request
Why do you think the developers desire reduced setbacks? With reduced setbacks, the builder (most likely Meritage Homes) will be able to add more homes. Capella is allowed only 500 units (or 570 units if two of the commercial parcels revert to residential in the future. They originally wanted 778 units). If they develop it with the OV zoning code setbacks, they might only be able to fit 480 units on that acreage. This reduces the builder’s profit, and therefore, reduces the market price for the land owner. What do you think the Town Council will do? Strictly adhere to the Oro Valley Zoning Code or allow the builder and land owner to make more money?

This appears to be another example of the WLB Group looking for more than what was discussed and agreed upon in 2014-2015. Of course, if the applicant can ask for more at this stage of the plan, so can YOU!

Town Council vs. the Board of Adjustment
The rezoning request requires just 4 council votes to pass. I can assure you that the current council will not read the Council Packet material, and will certainly never read all the way to pages 188-190 where the zoning modifications are outlined and requested. Thus, this rezoning will likely pass by a 7-0 vote. These zoning exceptions should be vetted and eliminated. The zoning code applies to all, and exceptions should only be authorized by the Board of Adjustment.

Let your voice be heard
The Government is responsible to YOU, not the developers. You may speak on this issue at Wednesday’s Town Council meeting by completing a Blue Speaker Card located on the back counter. If you cannot attend the meeting but would like to voice your concerns, you may contact the mayor and councilmembers at Council@orovalleyaz.gov but you must do so before tomorrow’s 6 PM council meeting.

Editor’s Note: The Capella Rezoning is the first item on the regular agenda. You can view the entire agenda HERE

Guest View: Tim Bohen ~ With the WLB Group, every penny counts. Every word, not so much.

Today’s article pertains to the self-serving WLB proposal for a 200-acre residential and commercial development known as Capella, planned for the west side of LaCholla between Lambert and Naranja. There will be a PUBLIC HEARING on this proposal at this Wednesday’s Town Council meeting which begins at 6 PM.

For those restless Oro Valley residents who are disposed to read public documents such as the Capella PAD (Planned Area Development), there is certainly a lot to learn about how the sausage gets made when it comes to development in today’s Oro Valley. But why should you have to read them? After all, Oro Valley has a capable Town Staff who, in the course of their duties, reviews such documents before they are posted for public view and before they are presented to the Town Council for a vote. I mean of course they do, right?

WLB Group vs. the Oro Valley General Plan
Let’s focus on just one area, but a critical one, of the Capella PAD. This is the Part XV Compliance Analysis. In this Analysis (provided by the applicant, WLB, on their own timeframe), the content of the proposed Capella PAD is evaluated against key criteria in the Oro Valley General Plan. The applicant provides a Y or N as to whether, in their view, their proposal meets this criteria and they explain their rationale in the “Comments” section.

Below are actual WLB responses regarding their inability or their refusal to comply with three criteria that the Oro Valley General Plan emphasizes as desirable approaches to new development.

1. General Plan Criteria
Mass grading techniques are minimized for project development.

WLB Comments
Mass grading reduces urban sprawl and also allows homebuilders to provide a higher level of amenities rather than spending money on less efficient grading techniques.

2. General Plan Criteria
Parking lots with greater than 20 car capacity are screened from adjacent uses and public thoroughfares.

WLB Comments
Meeting this criteria would compromise the viability of retail uses to be developed within the PAD. This criteria should be removed from the list because it is bad for Oro Valley’s struggling retail market.

3. General Plan Criteria
A favorable fiscal impact analysis.

WLB Comments
A fiscal analysis has not been prepared, although such analysis would surely confirm the economic benefits of this proposed PAD.

Are you buying what they’re selling?
• Do you (or does our Town Staff) believe that mass grading is actually the solution to urban sprawl?

• Does a struggling Oro Valley retail market really need more Capella retail?

• Are the economic benefits of the Capella PAD so self-evident that a fiscal impact analysis would simply be a waste of time? Or is it just that WLB doesn’t want to spend the money to have the analysis performed?

Flippant Responses
It’s astonishing that the WLB Group allowed their self-serving rationale for cutting costs to be included in their proposal which would be reviewed by the Town Staff and at least a few dozen Oro Valley residents. What remains in the final PAD brings into question the competence of both WLB and our Town Staff, who ostensibly fully review such submittals before posting them for public view. Why did the Town Staff not reject such flippant responses?

A Questionable Method of Operation?
More importantly, it may reveal the true feelings of both groups about the actual need for Public Hearings and public participation in the first place. Their M.O. seems to be:

“Nobody’s going to read it anyway and we can always talk around it, so why bother to craft a better answer? Better answers might cost WLB a little more money.”

And we all know that costing WLB and its clients more money in an effort to comply with the voter-approved General Plan always appears to be the wrong answer.

In his own words
In Planning Administrator Bayer Vella’s own words…”Staff took a very long time to review this case, more than normally as far as rezoning.” If the Town Staff had truly reviewed the Capella PAD above and beyond the level to which PADs are normally reviewed, would the above WLB responses remain verbatim in the revised version coming up for Town Council review on May 16th?

Listen to the audio for yourself (right panel).
It begins with Commissioner Swope’s question followed by Bayer Vella’s response. They seem to think that adding flexibility for WLB in the commercial zones might help them repeat the previous “success” of San Dorado.

Open mind or Case closed?
Is Staff reviewing the Capella PAD with an open mind or with the presumption of acceptance of the WLB proposal? What we do know for certain is that San Dorado is at a much better commercial location (Oracle and First) than anywhere in Capella and yet San Dorado is still looking for tenants according to the Town itself.

Click HERE and scroll down to Page 2 which shows that there are still four vacant buildings at San Dorado totaling almost 25,000 square feet in available retail space.

.......

Tim Bohen grew up in Southern California and moved to Oro Valley in 2015. He has a Bachelors degree in Physics from UCI and an MBA from Loyola Marymount. He is employed as a Systems Engineer. He graduated from the Community Academy in 2016 and the Citizens Academy in 2017. He was recently appointed to the Oro Valley Historic Preservation Commission and is a volunteer mediator with the Arizona Attorney General’s office. His interests include aviation and history, with his greatest interest currently being frontier life and how the West was settled.

Guest View: Rosalie Roszak ~ Variances, Variances!

The La Cholla Major General Plan Amendments that were approved by Town Council in May 2015 have now entered the rezoning phase. The project is now called Capella Planned Area Development.

Phase 1. General Plan Amendments. May 2015.
The Kai/Capella Property at La Cholla between Lambert and Naranja received an approved General Plan Amendment in 2015 which allows up to 500 (and possibly 570) homes, plus commercial uses on the corners. Area residents were never pleased about this plan, since underlying zoning for the property is R1-144, which allows only 1 house per 3.3 acres or about 63 homes for the overall 210 acre property.

My husband and I were members of the original citizens’ group (Citizen Advocates of the Oro Valley General Plan) that fought these General Plan Amendments. Some of the concessions the citizens’ group successfully negotiated at that time were lowering the number of homes from 778 to 500 and removing apartments and senior care facilities from the plan. We also placed numerous restrictions on the type of commercial entities that would be allowed.

Phase 2. Rezoning Requests. April 2018.
Now, in the Rezoning phase, the land owners/developers are asking for variances and allowances to the original agreement.

Residential
The General Plan Designation of R1-7 permits 7,000 square foot residential lots. In 2014-2015, the citizens’ group fought for minimum lot sizes of 10,000 to 15,000 square feet, more in keeping with nearby lot sizes. The applicant is requesting a variance for 6,600 square foot lots in exchange for allowing somewhat larger 10,000 sf lots along Lambert Lane.

Commercial
Commercial areas also require variances. The C-1 zoning on the NW corner of Lambert/La Cholla currently permits maximum building size of 60,000 square feet. The Rezoning requests a variance for up to a 125,000 square foot building…more than double the allowable size. Oh, and a gas station. Of note is that surrounding homes to the west and south are custom homes on one acre plus lots.

The La Cholla/Naranja commercial corners are not spared. C-N zoning indicated for these two parcels currently allows floor areas of 5,000 to 9,000 square feet for individual stores. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow floor areas up to 20,000 square feet, again more than double the allowable size.

These Variances should be denied!
They far exceed the original land uses projected for this area under Oro Valley’s 2005 General Plan, which still showed large lot single-family residential on the acreage.

The rezoning will be heard before the Planning & Zoning Commission tomorrow evening, Tuesday, April 3rd at 6 PM in Town Council chambers. Please plan to attend.

EDITOR'S NOTE:  You can read more about the Capella Planned Area Development below.

...............

Rosalie Roszak is a 25 year resident of Oro Valley. She and her husband moved here in 1992 in search of good air quality. She grew up in Flushing, New York and has resided in Washington, D.C., Santa Barbara and Los Angeles. She has a Master’s Degree in Urban Economics from University of California Santa Barbara, and worked for more than 40 years in the Commercial Real Estate Appraisal and Economic Consulting fields before retiring in 2017.

Important Public Hearing - LaCholla Rezoning

Planning & Zoning Commission

Tuesday, April 3, 2018

6:00 PM

Council Chambers

11,000 N. LaCanada Drive

CAPELLA PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT.  Discussion and possible action regarding a proposed rezoning on 207 acres from large lot residential (R1-144)* to Planned Area Development (PAD) for approximately 199 acres located on the west side of LaCholla Blvd. between Lambert Lane and Naranja Drive AND 8.2 acres located on the NW corner of LaCholla Blvd. and Naranja Drive. 

*R1-144 equals 144,000 square foot lots (3.3 acre lots). The rezoning request is for minimum lot sizes of 6600 square feet.

What to expect
If approved, this rezoning will allow the development of 500 residential lots on minimum lot sizes of just 6600 square feet. It will also allow commercial OR the addition of another 70 residential lots at the NW and SW corners of LaCholla/Naranja.

The applicant is Paul Oland of the WLB Group (the development/engineering firm representing the landowner). WLB also represents Jeff Grobstein, President of Meritage Homes, the likely builder.

Who is representing YOU?
Who is representing the residents who live along the LaCholla corridor, Lambert Lane, Naranja Drive, and the Canada Hills subdivision who will be adversely impacted by this development?

In 2014-2015, when this development proposal was being presented as a Major General Plan Amendment, you were being represented by a citizens’ group, Citizen Advocates of the Oro Valley General Plan. They negotiated with The WLB Group for 9 months.  They negotiated the number of homes from 778 down to 500.  They also fought for and were granted the following Special Area Policies.

Click HERE to view the Special Area Policies.

(NOTE: The 6600 square foot minimum lot sizes were agreed to reluctantly as The WLB Group would not budge on this issue. However, in exchange for 6600 square foot lot sizes in one area of the residential parcel, WLB agreed to increase the lot sizes to 10,000 square feet along Lambert Lane).

All of this can still be re-negotiated during the current rezoning process.

Citizen Advocates is no longer active as their goal was to negotiate the Major General Plan Amendments that pertained to this property. This was settled in May 2015.

So the answer is…YOU have to represent YOU!

Entitlements vs. Mandates
The applicant’s bottom line is getting all 500 homes that they are currently entitled to build. In order for them to fit all 500 homes, the lots need to be on the smaller side, thus the rezoning request.

However, although 500 homes is the maximum allowed per the 2016 General Plan, it is not a mandate. They can always go lower on the density without requiring Town Council approval. No one is forcing them to build 500 homes.

Campaigns funded by developers
We currently have a 7-member pro-development town council whose election campaigns were funded (and will likely be funded again this year) by the same people who are looking to develop this property. It stands to reason that the applicant wants to get approval before the upcoming 2018 Town Council election when the makeup of the council could change and may no longer be so developer-friendly.

What can YOU do?

(1) Send your objection letters to Oro Valley Principal Planner, Michael Spaeth (mspaeth@orovalleyaz.gov).  Your letters will be included in the packet for the Planning & Zoning Commissioners. Should they vote to approve this rezoning despite citizen objections, your letters will then be included in the Town Council packet for the next Public Hearing.

(2) You can also plan to speak during the Public Hearing portion of the Planning & Zoning meeting.

You can view the agenda and all of the attachments HERE

View the entire proposal and the rezoning requests HERE (The rezoning requests are on pages 188-190 of the proposal)

If you are concerned about the small residential lot sizes, pay special attention to:

Items #12, #13 and #14. (Medium density residential, west side of LaCholla from Lambert Lane to Naranja).

If you are concerned about the commercial parcels, pay special attention to:

Item #4 (Neighborhood Commercial, NW corner of LaCholla/Naranja)
Item #15 (C-1 Commercial, NW corner Lambert/LaCholla)

Residents need to do more than just complain about the rampant development in town AFTER the bulldozers have arrived. You need to speak up now BEFORE the development is approved so that YOU can have a say in the future of YOUR town and YOUR neighborhood.

Important Planning and Zoning Meeting tomorrow (Tuesday)

Tuesday, March 6th at 6 PM

Town Council Chambers
11,000 N LaCanada Drive

If you live in the LaCholla area between Glover and Lambert, there are THREE agenda items scheduled for Tuesday's P&Z meeting that affect your neighborhood.

Item 3: CAPELLA
This is for the proposed REZONING for the Major General Plan Amendment that was approved in 2015. The applicant, Paul Oland of the WLB Group, has stated that this is just the continuation of the Major General Plan Amendment and that nothing has changed. But we all know that deals are made when no one is looking, so if you live in this area, you might want to plan on attending.

Items 4 and 5: SAGUARO VIEJOS
This is the residential development slated for the area on the west side of LaCholla between Glover and Naranja. See the history of this parcel below.

History of Saguaro Viejos
This parcel was already rezoned from 144,000 square foot lots down to minimum lot sizes of 20,000 sf in 2007. In 2014, The WLB Group submitted an acceptable plan for custom homes on lot sizes between 16,000 sf all the way up to lot sizes of 1.5 acres. This plan involved no mass grading. Each lot would be custom graded.  Surrounding neighbors agreed to this plan back in 2014.

(They could go down to 16,000 square foot lot sizes despite the minimum lot size being 20,000 sf if they left open space in other areas, which they were planning to do.)

Fast-forward to 2018.  NOW they are coming back requesting to scrap that plan and rezone the eastern portion of this property again, this time from 20,000 square foot lots down to minimum lot sizes of 7,000 square feet!!!! This will include mass grading of a large portion of the 85 acres followed by the building of cookie-cutter homes with connecting walls. This is unconscionable considering that surrounding homes are on lots sizes of 1/3 acre, 1/2 acre, all the way up to 3 acres and include custom and semi-custom homes and no connecting walls.

In less than ten years, that parcel has gone from a plan of approximately 25 homes on 144,000 sf lots (3.3 acre rural residential lots) to 118 homes on 20,000 to 63,000 sf lots, and now they are requesting 178 homes.  Of those 178 homes, 103 homes will be on 6,500 sf lots and 64 homes will be on 7,000 sf lots (for a total of 167 homes on postage stamp sized lots).  Only 11 homes will be on 16,000 square foot lots.

How does this proposal meet the below criteria in the General Plan?
- Promote land use development practices that conserve and minimize impacts to natural and cultural resources
- Maintain the small-town, neighborly character and improve the design and safety of the built environment

You can view the agenda HERE