Showing posts with label Bayer Vella. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bayer Vella. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 25, 2024

OVPathForward Working Groups Forming - Get Involved

OVPathForward working groups being formed
We are not sure that most people realize it, but working groups have always been a critical part of the development of the Oro Valley General Plan. In 2016, for example, one working group changed the way major proposed land use changes were considered in the general plan. Here's what happened.

How a 2016 working group changed how proposed major land use changes are considered in the general plan process
One of the most important parts of any general plan is the land use map, which designates how all land within the town is to be used. In Oro Valley, land has already been designated. Any change requires a General Plan amendment, a process that is often time-consuming and complex. 

During the creation of the 2016 "Your Voice, Our Future" General Plan, four major land use changes were intentionally left off the land use map. That decision was a deliberate choice by the resident working group responsible for this part of the plan.  Prior to that, proposed land use changes were included in the general plan. In 2000, some were very bold. They were so bold that the year 2000 general plan, which contained many proposed land use changes, went through two resident votes to finally get approved in 2005.

At a Town Council meeting in December 2017, Bayer Vella emphasized the significance of this decision, stating that "...the backbone of the entire effort was a resident group, a resident team of, that was a committee, some 40 folks that met on 30 occasions to design the plan. These participants, along with the development committee and other involved committees, agreed that significant changes to the General Plan land-use map should not be made behind closed doors. They explicitly requested that future councils handle land-use map amendments on a case-by-case basis, with a customized and specific focus, ensuring that each neighborhood's unique circumstances were considered.” The goal was to avoid making significant changes without proper public engagement, ensuring that each amendment received the attention it deserved.

This approach marked a significant shift from how land use changes had been handled in previous general plans. In this instance, a working group made a substantial difference.

Simms: Working groups matter
Speaking to council earlier this month, Milini Simms, Town of Oro Valley Principal Planner and OVPathForward project leader, underscored the importance of these groups:

"There are some areas where alignment is needed because the direction from residents isn't clear. These areas will be the focus of resident working groups, aiming to achieve alignment through a balanced approach. For example, one area of focus is how growth is managed. Residents were divided on whether Oro Valley should become more self-sufficient, with places to live, work, and play within town limits, or remain a suburb where people go out of town for services.”

Simms provided an example. In essence, the plan must be a blend of all viewpoints held by Oro Valley residents—not simply the views of a majority. “Looking at the numbers—55% and 42%—it might seem easy to pick a winner or a loser. However, this approach could alienate roughly 19,000 residents and potentially lead to an unsuccessful plan.”

She continued: “The resident working groups will be tasked with taking a non-binary approach, finding nuances and ways to achieve balance in a plan that represents the entire community.”

Get in the game
Resident working groups will use the feedback from residents gathered over the last year to help forge goals, policies and actions. They will meet between January – May 2025. The group will determine the number of meetings meet to produce a plan that reflects what residents want. Meetings will mostly take place online with some in-person opportunities.  You can become an integral part of creating the OVPathForward by signing up for one of the five working groups [panel above-right]. Here's a link for you to do so.
-  -  -

Monday, December 6, 2021

Town Embarking On A Housing Study

Council and staff on what is the purpose of the study
The Town of Oro Valley is scoping and planning for doing a housing study. This was the subject of a council study session last Wednesday. Doing such a study was mandated by the 2016 General Plan. It’s a companion study to the apartment study the town reported last year. LOVE has provided a detailed analysis of this study.

Town Staff unclear of what the housing study will accomplish
It is clear from the discussion that no council member has any idea of what this study is supposed to accomplish. Indeed, Town Planner Vella has only a vague idea. He discussed why the town needs the study: “The way it benefits a community…once you get to be a certain size, knowing your demographic and insuring that it matches up with the housing stock that is being provided; analyzing that and deriving policy from that specific analysis so that we can set up zoning that targets where the town wants to go as defined in the general plan and the leadership of the town council.”

Though staff feels it is "foundational"
Vella feels that this study, which will be completed sometime in 2023 “…is foundational in taking Oro Valley wherever it should go in terms of assuring that we are also not serving just one niche but also the special needs of senior populations, disabled populations, underrepresented populations. Also sets us up for success relative to employment in attracting top talent to the town.”

Study will have a "strong economic" component
According to Vella: “There are many commercial corners that are underserved relative to rooftops, in terms of being able to be successful. A housing study should delve into that. There are areas in my opinion that do warrant conversion. There are others that should not be converted. A housing study will be helpful in pinpointing those areas.”

He pointed to the intersection of Oracle and Magee and Oracle and Ina as high density areas. “That is why those retailers are successful.” He failed to mention that Oracle Road is a state road with tens of thousands of cars passing daily. Referring the the Oro Valley Marketplace: “The area of Tangerine and Oracle has very low density rooftops.” According to Vella, “the traffic numbers are not high enough to compensate for that.”   

Town will retain a consultant... Staff will help
The town will hire a consultant to do the study. Vella asserted that “staff will be doing just as much work as the consultant in terms of compiling all of the information and verifying it." Vella stated that the staff will verify all data that is used.

Scope to be defined by council
Council members offered some ideas of what could be included, such as the impact of annexations on housing or the types of housing needed for a more mobile younger professionals who want tiny homes. One mentioned the impact of water on housing. In addition, the State of Arizona has a set of minimum requirements of scope of a housing study (See Panel)

The scope of the housing study will come to council before the study is approved.
- - -

Friday, October 9, 2020

Town Must Allow Recreational Pot Sales If Prop 207 Passes

Town staff wants to evaluate recreational pot impact on code from Proposition 207
Planning Director, Bayer Vella, will ask the Planning and Zoning Commission Tuesday for approval to look into the impact of legalized recreational pot on town code.  "Proposition 207, “Smart and Safe Arizona Act”, is on the November ballot to "authorize the sale, use, cultivation, processing, transport, manufacturing, testing etc. of recreational marijuana". 

If approved, the proposition would go into effect on November 4 (once the vote is certified). In preparation of potential voter approval, it is imperative for jurisdictions to update all applicable codes to regulate recreational marijuana before it goes into effect. Initiation will direct staff to review existing code and propose changes for conformance with Proposition 207 should it be approved." (Source)"

Town can't prohibit recreational pot sales
According to the Arizona League of Cities and Towns, "code changes need to be in place prior to a potential successful vote of the measure to insure that the Town has proper authority to regulate placement of recreational marijuana sales establishments in the community.

Proposition 207 does not allow municipalities to prohibit such sales."

Prop 207 matters to Oro Valley 
Vote "No" on 207 if you want Oro Valley to remain pot free. Vote "Yes" if you think selling recreational pot in Oro Valley is a good thing.
---

Tuesday, May 28, 2019

For and Against: Concerned citizens speak about the Town Centre PAD rezoning. Part 1.

Below are comments from residents who spoke during the Public Hearing on May 15th. Some of them live adjacent to the property and were against this rezoning amendment despite the concessions that were made by the applicant.

I for one have been heartbroken and feel betrayed
The views from my backyard are majestic and the nature is amazing. The property is home to several bobcats, a mountain lion (that she captured on video), countless coyotes and javelinas. THIS is why we moved to Oro Valley and this is why we chose this house. When we moved here, we were told that the property was a scenic corridor and that the Town of Oro Valley understood just how unique this land was and so they earmarked it to be the Town Center. 

It’s no surprise to Patrick Rooney or anyone else who’s worked with me to hear me say that my dream and continued hope is that the Rooney family would donate this property, dedicate it as a natural preserve, and take it as a tax write-off… I for one have been heartbroken and feel betrayed by the Town leadership for encouraging cut and fill and high density housing.

John Rooney’s vision for this land was…respecting the desert and wildlife that we all love
John Rooney’s vision for this land was not high density housing…It was for pristine desert, and at the worst, custom home sites with 15,000 square foot lots respecting the desert and wildlife that we all love. This whole thing just horrifies me, to tell you the truth Mayor Winfield. It horrifies me that the Town of Oro Valley is not respecting what we as voters voted on (the 2016 General Plan) and instead, not your administration, but a previous administration was encouraging [this], and you can see the rape of our hillsides. I just don’t know how all of you can sit here and look at yourselves in the mirror and feel good about this. This is an atrocity.

You are here to represent the people and that’s why we elected you
A PAD is supposed to be consistent with the General Plan, but if you look at the General Plan’s Vision page, it indicates that we the people wanted to preserve the scenic beauty and environment. That includes desert and mountain views, wildlife and vegetation. It’s also supposed to keep the unique community identity as a special place. That is a special piece of property and [this development] is going to make our town look ordinary.

In the WLB PAD amendment application, it states, “The proposed changes in Area 4 are focused on making this area more receptive to the current demands and requirements of homebuilders.” I don’t think Oro Valley is in the business of making anything more convenient for home builders. I think you are here to represent the people and that’s why we elected you.

How is this in accordance with Town Code?
Lot #4 has 11 feet of fill. Lots 43-48 and Lots 62-64 have 10 feet of fill all the way to 13.5 feet. How is this in accordance with Town Code of 8 feet of fill for environmental protection of the hillside and also to prevent erosion?

Later in the meeting, Planning Administrator Bayer Vella explained why they can do this:

Bayer: The Code limits cuts and fills to 6 feet but it also allows to go up to 8 feet if it’s stair-stepped. So the idea is to soften the slope. The applicant has the ability to ask to go beyond Code as a Planned Area Development…They are enabled by Code to customize this site as part of a rezoning amendment. That’s why this is before you [the Town Council] to go beyond the 6 and 8 feet. If this were not a PAD, we wouldn't be having this conversation unless they received a grading waiver from the Town Council.
---
Tomorrow we will publish some of the comments that LOVE received in emails and on our Facebook page.

Monday, May 14, 2018

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.

Monday, March 26, 2018

Echoing the Mayor and Council appears to reap financial rewards for Town Staff

A recent LOVE posting discussed how the Town Manager and Town Staff “control the message.” The staff works for the Town Manager. The Town Manager works for the council majority. (He/She works for the majority because these four members can vote to fire the Town Manager with or without cause).

Other than being rewarded for their compliance by keeping their jobs, is there also a financial reward for echoing the message of the Majority-4 Council members so that they always get their way? Let’s take a look.

Paul Keesler. Community Development and Public Works Manager.
Community Center Traffic Light. He is the individual who was responsible for justifying the traffic signal in front of the Community Center. When asked to present a "Signal Warrant Analysis" for the justification of the signal, his response was, "we didn't do one." Keep in mind that this analysis is a standard practice for the justification of traffic signals regardless of the cost. (Most traffic signals cost at least $500,000.)

Mr. Keesler advised that there were 500 cars a day utilizing the Community Center and that the hill to the south of the entrance was enough justification to warrant a signal. (There are over 23,000 cars using La Canada daily who now have to stop at this traffic signal). Forget the traffic problems at Moore and La Canada. This signal was more important.

Do you think that the mayor and council majority had a self-interest in establishing this signal?

The reward. As of 3/1/17, Mr. Keesler's annual salary was $127,760.80. As of 3/1/18, Mr. Keesler's annual salary is $132,871.23. This is a 4% raise totaling over $5,000.

Bayer Vella. Planning Department Administrator.
Recommending approval of development proposals. The Planning Department has been known to recommend approval of every development request that is heard before Council. Could this be because the developers and builders who are requesting these land use and rezoning changes have contributed heavily in the past to the campaigns of the mayor and the current six council members? After all, the mayor and council need to reward these major campaign contributors so that they will continue to contribute to their campaigns, including this year’s Town Council election.

The mayor and council want these developments to be approved and it appears that the Planning Department simply echoes their desires and recommends approval.

The 5-story building. As you read last week in LOVE, the 5-story Nakoma Sky Retirement Community was allowed at the intersection of First and Lambert after Mr. Vella arbitrarily removed a restriction from the General Plan that prohibited tall buildings in this area.

The council majority at that time (Hiremath-Hornat-Snider-Waters) were supporting the 5-story building and it appears that the Planning Administrator altered the General Plan to accommodate their wishes.

The reward. As of 3/1/17, Mr. Vella's annual salary was $99,188.34. As of 3/1/18, Mr. Vella's salary is $103,155,94. This was a 4% raise totaling over $3,900 and he has not yet received his 2018 performance evaluation and raise.

Stacey Lemos. Town Finance Director.
Community Center. Despite almost three years of continuing losses at the Golf courses and Overlook Restaurant, Ms. Lemos has done everything possible during her presentations at Town Council meetings to spin the purchase of the Community Center property and the ongoing poor financials in a positive light.

Naranja Park. She did all she could to support the need for a property tax to build ball fields at Naranja Park, but when it failed to win voter approval, she now brags about the Town's pay-as-you-go philosophy. In doing so, it appears that she is trying to save face for the mayor and council.

The reward. As of 3/1/17, Ms. Lemos' annual salary was $149,848.82. As of 3/1/18, Ms. Lemos' salary is $155,842.78. This is a 4% raise totaling almost $6,000.

Monday, March 19, 2018

Reliable Sources Tell Us…

One of our sources sent us the following information after reading last week’s postings about the Planning Department submitting false information in their staff reports and Power Point presentations related to rezoning requests. Apparently, this is not the only questionable thing that they have done. Read on…

The 2005 General Plan (Focus 2020) contained a "Special Area Policy" regarding the property that is now being graded for a 5-story retirement community called Nakoma Sky (assisted living, independent living, and hospice) located at Lambert Lane and First Avenue behind the Home Depot Plaza.

The 2005 General Plan had the property designated as Medium Density Residential with a Special Use Policy that no 2-story homes could be visible from First Avenue. The idea was to hide all the 2-story homes behind the hills so they could not be viewed from First Avenue.

The Planning and Zoning Administrator (Bayer Vella) removed the policy from the General Plan sometime around 2015. This was a voter-approved document. In other words, a staff member arbitrarily amended YOUR plan WITHOUT consulting even with the Council. Removing the Special Area Policy allowed for the approval of the 5-story Nakoma Sky along with additional 2-story buildings along First Avenue.

A policy change made by the Planning and Zoning Administrator can only be appealed to the Board of Adjustment (BOA) and the appeal must be filed within 30 days of the decision. However, because this change was never noticed to the public (transparency?) nobody knew when the 30-day period began.

It costs $250.00 to file an appeal with the BOA and the only argument the applicant can present is to try and prove that the decision was without merit. The BOA decision can only be appealed to the Superior Court.

Without removing that Special Area Policy, there could not be a 5-story building.

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

Editor's Note: This is another example of the Town playing fast and loose with rules…always to the benefit of developers and at the expense of the residents. It’s also another example of why Mayor Hiremath and Councilmembers Hornat, Snider, and Waters need to be voted out of office in this year’s Town Council election as they are the ones who approved the rezoning to accommodate the 5-story building.

When developers (rather than the citizens) are at the top of the Oro Valley Organizational Chart, this is what you get:



Wednesday, March 14, 2018

Guest View: Diane Peters ~ Planning Department enters the Circle of Deceit. Part 2.

You can read Part 1 HERE

Below is the speech that I gave before the P&Z Commissioners:

Point #1: There’s a document in the P&Z Packet that describes the surrounding neighborhood land uses. It describes the neighborhood EAST of the property as being “single-family residential 7000 and 10,000 sf lots.” This is false.

A map that I obtained from the Town shows that it was actually zoned for a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet (not 7000 sf)…and more importantly, although that parcel was zoned for 10,000 sf minimum lot sizes, it was not developed that way.

The majority of homes in that neighborhood (Ironwood Canyon) are on lot sizes between 16,000 and 19,000 square feet. The smallest lot is just under 15,000 sf and the largest lot is 33,000 sf. There are a total of 65 homes and 22 of them are on lot sizes of over 20,000 sf.

The developer (WLB Group) is asking to build 167 homes on lot sizes of 7000 square feet and less with only 11 lots of 16,000 square feet, meaning that the average lot size will be way under 15,000 sf. This means that the entire buildable portion of the property will be mass-graded. (When the average lot size is less than 15,000 sf, the developer is allowed to mass grade the entire property). This not in harmony with the surrounding neighborhoods as the developments directly to the east and to the north were not mass-graded.

Point #2: The Staff Commentary (in the packet) states that this proposal conforms with the General Plan because it will provide housing for employees and students of the adjacent schools.

Those schools have been there for years and the employees and students haven’t needed housing in the immediate area in all that time. Why do they suddenly need it NOW? We already have 570 new homes planned at Capella…right next door.

What did the applicant present to the staff that supports the housing need for employees and students of adjacent schools? Where are these people and how many of them are there?

In 2014, the surrounding neighbors agreed to a rezoning request on that parcel to allow 118 semi-custom homes on lot sizes ranging from 1/3 acre to 1.5 acres. What significant change has taken place in the last 4 years to support this new proposal?

Point #3: The documents state that, “Staff recommends approval.” Well, they also recommended approval of the original plan that was presented for this property in 2014 --- 118 semi-custom homes on large lots with no mass grading and no connecting walls. So does this mean that the staff was wrong when they recommended approval of that project in 2014? And if they were wrong in 2014, why should we trust their judgment now?

I want names
A few days later, I contacted the Town and asked for the names of everyone involved in compiling the informational packet for the P&Z commissioners and the Power Point presentation and reviewing it for accuracy. I was provided the following names:

Bayer Vella (Planning Manager/Planning & Zoning Administrator)
Michael Spaeth (Principal Planner)
Rosevelt Arellano (Senior Planner)
Milini Simms (Planner)

Getting into the weeds
So that’s FOUR Town planners who worked on this who either didn’t know that the information they provided was false (incompetence) or they knew but their number one job is not to tell the truth, but rather to do the mayor’s bidding by pushing through new developments as quickly as possible. Either way, the citizens are not being properly represented.

Mayor Hiremath always says that he doesn’t “like to get into the weeds” but shouldn’t the staff be getting in there? The staff should be visually inspecting the neighborhoods adjacent to the subject property to ensure compatibility and not just assume that the developer’s submittal and Town documents are accurate.

Since P&Z and the Town Council base their votes on the information provided to them by staff, that information needs to be accurate and up-to-date.

The Vote
The initial vote was a 3-3 tie with one commissioner absent. 

Voting YES to approve the rezoning were Chairman Charlie Hurt and Commissioners Tom Drzazgowski and Don Cox.

Voting NO were Vice-Chair Melanie Barrett and Commissioners Thomas Gribb and Bob Swope. (Commissioner Gribb mentioned my speech as his reason for voting no.)

They reworded the motion and voted again.  The second vote was 5-1 to DENY the rezoning.  Commissioner Tom Drzazgowski was the lone YES vote.  It will still go before Council, but with the caveat that P&Z does NOT recommend approval.

Once again, town staff controlled the message and the message was false.

Below is the erroneous information that was included in the P&Z packet and in the Power Point presentation. It appears in Row 3 where it describes the zoning to the east of the subject property.



Below is the false statement made by Planner, Milini Simms, during the Town’s presentation in support of the Saguaro Viejos rezoning:

“The existing zoning is 20,000 square feet and the applicant is requesting to rezone the property to 7000 sf lots…..I do want to point out that at 7000 square foot lots, it is located to similar sized lots especially to the east and to the south.”

As you can see, if I hadn't spoken up, the P&Z Commissioners would have assumed the information in their packet was correct and they would likely have approved the rezoning. You have to wonder how many other times they have unknowingly voted to approve a rezoning based on false information.

Diane Peters has lived in Oro Valley since 2003, moving here to escape the humidity of the East Coast. She’s been involved in OV politics and development issues since 2006. In 2014, she organized a citizens group, Citizen Advocates of the Oro Valley General Plan, who over a 9-month period, successfully negotiated a controversial 200-acre development project. In her past life, she worked in medical research at various University Hospitals in New England. Her interests include reading, writing, nature photography, travel, art galleries, museums, and politics.