Following is a letter to The Explorer by our neighbor Kathy Pastryk. As the letter appeared in the Nov. 19 issue, PRIOR to the council meeting this evening, (Nov. 19),
we will only say, "let's wait & see what,if any action the council takes."
From our standpoint, 68% of the Arroyo Grande will remain as "open space." The issue is what entity; Oro Valley, Pima County, State Lands, or whoever has control over the parcel,there will still be ONLY one access road heading south---Oracle road through OV. As our friend Zev noted in a previous comment,that may be an issue with no reasonable solution.
*****************************************************************************************
Arroyo Grande looks like ‘deja vu all over again’
Arroyo Grande needs to be looked at very closely by every citizen of Oro Valley before it becomes “deja vu all over again.”
This annexation proposal has been on our table since last March. Despite numerous questions, few straight answers have been provided.
And guess what? This projected development of 16,000 homes in northern Pima County is beginning to look suspiciously like a “done deal.” The Town of Oro Valley seems determined to annex the 9,106 acres north of Sun City, and most of our council seems to be going along with the demands of the landowner, the Arizona State Land Department.
It is shocking to hear our present Oro Valley Council sounding much like the previous council. Our new council is acting like our old council that stuck us with the Marketplace versus what we were promised: unique, upscale shops that turned out to be a gigantic Wal-Mart.
Once again, we are being taken for a ride, and the man at the wheel is none other than Mayor Loomis, who has lobbied to expand this town for years. Almost all of the council seems to be aboard, with the notable exception of Paula Abbott. Along with many citizens, Paula is asking who’s going to pay for infrastructure and how we will deal with the increased traffic that comes with a huge population explosion.
A wildlife linkage that many have wanted for more than 10 years has been designed. The Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection deserves great credit for hanging in there; but make no mistake, the 16,000 homes coveted by the State Land Department have been priority one since day one.
Residents of Oro Valley, you are not going to get a chance to vote this down like you did with the Naranja Town Site unless some brave citizen files a referendum or composes an initiative that truly reins in unrestrained growth. Unfortunately, five members of our present council, the one we worked hard to elect including Latas, Gillaspie and Garner, have done all they can to discourage the citizens’ use of initiative.
Do we see anything in this plan that will benefit the citizens of Oro Valley? Or do you see nothing but problems and expenses?
You decide, and let your views be known.
Kathy Pastryk
Oro Valley
2 comments:
I just do not see any possibility of 16000 homes in the short to mid term. Who is going to build them?
There is no money for developement.
If private money scrapes the funding to build homes, who has the money to buy what they build.
Does anyone here watch CNBC?
We are looking at a three year recession!!
This downturn is a great opportuning to plan something less than 16000 homes.
Unless someone is planning a 12 lane road from Oracle to Tucson it is just nuts to zone 160000 homes.
I just wanted to correct a few misconceptions in this letter.
"Despite numerous questions, few straight answers have been provided."
Ah, the passive-agressive voice. :-)
I just checked my Sent folder in my personal e-mail account, and there were 28 messages between March 2, 2008 (shortly after I bought this computer) and November 19, 2008 that included responses to questions about Arroyo Grande and were sent to, or copied to, Kathy Pastryk. I think 28 is a lot of questions and a lot of answers. :-)
"Along with many citizens, Paula is asking who’s going to pay for infrastructure and how we will deal with the increased traffic that comes with a huge population explosion."
And Paula should know the answers, as she was there (I think) when we instituted increased and new impact fees to pay for infrastructure.
"A wildlife linkage that many have wanted for more than 10 years has been designed. The Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection deserves great credit for hanging in there; but make no mistake, the 16,000 homes coveted by the State Land Department have been priority one since day one."
Without this General Plan Amendment, there would have been no wildlife linkage. The State Land Department has a constitutional mandate to sell land to the highest bidder at public auction. They have no concept of conservation value. Increased densities outside the wildlife linkage and other open space areas are the only ways that they can get the value for the land that the state constitution mandates. And it's not a "done deal." All of our advances can still be undone.
"Residents of Oro Valley, you are not going to get a chance to vote this down like you did with the Naranja Town Site unless some brave citizen files a referendum or composes an initiative that truly reins in unrestrained growth."
And that "brave citizen" who wants to undo the wildlife linkage and other environmental concessions will cost the taxpayers $65,000.00 for a special election if successful in getting the petition signatures.
"Unfortunately, five members of our present council, the one we worked hard to elect including Latas, Gillaspie and Garner, have done all they can to discourage the citizens’ use of initiative."
Um, no they haven't. They could have raised the signature requirements if they wanted to discourage citizens' use of inititave. Instead, they voted against changing the current law. And they had no vote on referendum, for which the signature requirements are codified in the state statutes.
Post a Comment