HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Historic Preservation Commission (144)
AGENDA
ORO VALLEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION
DECEMBER 6, 2021
11000 N LA CANADA DRIVE
HOPI CONFERENCE ROOM
REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 5:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
CALL TO AUDIENCE - at this time, any member of the public is allowed to address the Commission on any
issue not listed on today’s agenda. Pursuant to the Arizona open meeting law, individual Commission
members may ask Town staff to review the matter, ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda, or
respond to criticism made by speakers. However, the Commission may not discuss or take legal action on
matters raised during "Call to Audience." In order to speak during "Call to Audience", please specify what
you wish to discuss when completing the blue speaker card.
COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS
PRESENTATIONS
1.Historical Society Update
CONSENT AGENDA
1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 8, 2021 MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR SESSION AGENDA
1.RECOGNITION OF OUTGOING COMMISSION MEMBERS STEPHANIE KRUEGER, STEVE
HANNESTAD, AND MICHAEL WILSON
2.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO RECOMMEND CHANGES TO THE ORO VALLEY
CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLAN ITEM FIVE UNDEVELOPED AREAS OF THE TOWN
3.DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES TO RENOVATE/RESTORE THE STEAM
PUMP RANCH PROCTOR LEIBER HOUSE
4.DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE USES OF THE PROCTOR-LIEBER HOUSE
5.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2022 HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE
DEPARTMENT UPDATE
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - The Commission may bring forth general topics for future meeting agendas.
Commission may not discuss, deliberate or take any action on the topics presented pursuant to ARS
38-431.02H
ADJOURNMENT
POSTED: 11/30/21 at 5:00 p.m. by pp
When possible, a packet of agenda materials as listed above is available for public inspection at least 24 hours prior
to the Commission meeting in the Town Clerk's Office between the hours of 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If any person with a disability needs
any type of accommodation, please notify the Town Clerk’s Office at least five days prior to the Commission meeting
at 229-4700.
In accordance with the Pima County Health Department’s most recent health advisory, the Town respectfully asks all
in-person meeting attendees, regardless of vaccination status, to please wear a mask while indoors. COVID-19
remains a fluid situation, and the Town will adjust its safety guidelines in accordance with any future health advisories
from the Health Department.
INSTRUCTIONS TO SPEAKERS
Members of the public have the right to speak during any posted public hearing. However, those items not
listed as a public hearing are for consideration and action by the Commission during the course of their
business meeting. Members of the public may be allowed to speak on these topics at the discretion of the
Chair.
If you wish to address the Commission on any item(s) on this agenda, please complete a blue speaker card located
on the Agenda table at the back of the room and give it to the Recording Secretary. Please indicate on the blue
speaker card which item number and topic you wish to speak on, or if you wish to speak during “Call to
Audience,” please specify what you wish to discuss when completing the blue speaker card.
Please step forward to the podium when the Chair announces the item(s) on the agenda which you are interested in
addressing.
For the record, please state your name and whether or not you are a Town resident.1.
Speak only on the issue currently being discussed by the Commission. Please organize your speech, you will
only be allowed to address the Commission once regarding the topic being discussed.
2.
Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.3.
During “Call to Audience”, you may address the Commission on any issue you wish.4.
Any member of the public speaking must speak in a courteous and respectful manner to those present.5.
Thank you for your cooperation.
“Notice of Possible Quorum of the Oro Valley Town Council, Boards, Commissions and Committees: In
accordance with Chapter 3, Title 38, Arizona Revised Statutes and Section 2-4-4 of the Oro Valley Town
Code, a majority of the Town Council, Board of Adjustment, Historic Preservation Commission, Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board, Stormwater Utility Commission, and Water Utility Commission may attend the
above referenced meeting as a member of the audience only.”
Historic Preservation Commission 1.
Meeting Date:12/06/2021
Submitted By:MaryAnne Tolmie, Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT:
Historical Society Update
RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
N/A
BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION:
A board member from the Historical Society will give their quarterly update. Scheduled updates are given in March,
June, September, December.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
Historic Preservation Commission 1.
Meeting Date:12/06/2021
Submitted By:MaryAnne Tolmie, Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT:
REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 8, 2021 MEETING MINUTES
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
N/A
BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I MOVE to approve (approve with changes) the November 8, 2021 meeting minutes of the Historic Preservation
Commission.
Attachments
2021 11 08 HPC Draft Minutes
D R A F T
MINUTES
ORO VALLEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION
NOVEMBER 8, 2021
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11000 N. LA CAÑADA DRIVE
REGULAR SESSION AT OR AFTER 5:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Present: Dan Biel, Chair
Stephanie Krueger, Vice Chair
Steve Hannestad, Commissioner
Auvie Lee, Commissioner
Absent: Puntadeleste Bozeman, Commissioner
Nicole Casaus, Commissioner
Michael Wilson, Commissioner
Staff Present:Joe Andrews, Deputy Town Attorney
Lynanne Dellerman-Silverthorn, Recreation and Cultural Services Manager
MaryAnne Tolmie, Recording Secretary
Attendees: Steve Solomon, Council Liaison
Chair Biel called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m.
CALL TO AUDIENCE
Paul Loomis, an Oro Valley resident spoke regarding Steam Pump Ranch and the Budget.
Teri Colmar, an Oro Valley Resident, spoke regarding the Oro Valley Historical Society.
COUNCIL LIAISON COMMENTS
Council Member Solomon spoke to the Parks and Recreation statistically valid survey, the $25M bond
for Parks and Recreation to include golf, irrigation, community center and other programs, however, the
bond does not have any funds allocated for Steam Pump Ranch.
PRESENTATIONS
CONSENT AGENDA
CONSENT AGENDA
1.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 4, 2021 MEETING MINUTES
Motion by Chair Dan Biel, seconded by Commissioner Steve Hannestad to approve the October 4, 2021
regular session meeting minutes
Vote: 4 - 0 Carried
REGULAR SESSION AGENDA
1.DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO RECOMMEND CHANGES TO THE ORO VALLEY
CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLAN ITEM FOUR TOWN HISTORY RECORDS AND
REPORTS
Commissioner Hannestad recapped his experience and is impressed by the Town Management office’s
recordkeeping. He expressed his concern regarding historic preservation recordkeeping and spoke to
the attached presentation and how it effects historical records at each level of government. He
mentioned a Master’s student program he was involved with.
2.PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO RECOMMEND PROPOSED CHANGES
TO STAFF REGARDING THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THE
TOWN'S WEBSITE
Chair Biel presented the attached. Oro Valley has a very organized and comprehensive website in
comparison to others. He spoke to Prescott, Arizona’s website and its visual engagement and
comprehension. He presented ideas to evaluate and opened for discussion. Commissioner Lee
commented that the Florence, AZ has an audio tour with an accompanying map, and separate pages
under different departments to enhance historical presence.
3.PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO:
RECOMMEND PROPOSED CHANGES TO STAFF REGARDING THE ORO VALLEY
CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLAN ITEM SIX HONEYBEE VILLAGE
ARCHEOLOGICAL PRESERVE AS IT PERTAINS TO PRE-HISTORIC FEATURES AND USES;
a.
POSSIBLY RECOMMEND THAT STAFF REQUEST TOWN COUNCIL PURSUE OWNERSHIP OF
THE PROPERTY WHERE THE PRE-HISTORIC FEATURES ARE LOCATED.
b.
Item 3A: Council member Solomon presented the attached comprehensive presentation regarding the
background and history of the Honeybee Village property. Vice Chair Krueger asked if there are existing
funds for cleanup of the site and there was discussion.
Motion by Chair Dan Biel, seconded by Commissioner Auvie Lee to table item 3B until a meeting in
2022.
Vote: 4 - 0 Carried
DEPARTMENT UPDATE
October was a very busy month at the Ranch with several successful events. The construction on the
October was a very busy month at the Ranch with several successful events. The construction on the
Garage yielded degraded walls that will need to be repaired. Construction should still be complete in
April with a ribbon cutting in May. The Pusch House alarm and suppression systems are in this Fiscal
Year and next fiscal year the funds for the barbeque and bunk house will be requested. Please send any
need for budget items to Lynanne individually. The AZ Historical Preservation Conference was a great
success.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Vice Chair Krueger asked for discussion about the possible uses of the Proctor Lieber house, and
consider requesting a study for the same.
Chair Biel asked for a discussion of bond money, excess funds, and Steam Pump Ranch.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Chair Dan Biel, seconded by Commissioner Steve Hannestad to adjourn at 6:34 p.m.
Vote: 4 - 0 Carried
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the regular session of the
Town of Oro Valley Historic Preservation Commission of Oro Valley, Arizona held on the 8th day of November
2021. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
___________________________
MaryAnne Tolmie
Senior Office Specialist
Historic Preservation Commission 2.
Meeting Date:12/06/2021
Submitted By:MaryAnne Tolmie, Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT:
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO RECOMMEND CHANGES TO THE ORO VALLEY CULTURAL
HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLAN ITEM FIVE UNDEVELOPED AREAS OF THE TOWN
RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
N/A
BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION:
Commissioner Lee will lead the discussion.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUGGESTED MOTION:
Any action items will need a motion and a second, followed by a vote.
I MOVE to approve....
Attachments
CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLAN
Oro Valley Cultural Heritage Preservation Plan:
Developing and Sustaining a Community Sense of Place
Revised 2015
Oro Valley Historic Preservation
Commission
Ellen Guyer, Chair
Marilyn Lane, Vice Chair
Dan Huff
Dean Strandskov
Jenni Sunshine
Eric Thomae
Connie Trail
Town of Oro Valley
Mayor Satish I. Hiremath, D.D.S
Vice Mayor Lou Waters
Council Member Brendan Burns
Council Member William Garner
Council Member Joe Hornat
Council Member Mary Snider
Council Member Mike Zinkin
Revised 2014
Oro Valley Historic Preservation
Commission
Ellen Guyer, Chair
Dean Strandskov, Vice Chair
Ed Hannon
Marilyn Lane
Eric Thomae
Connie Trail
Town of Oro Valley
Mayor Satish I. Hiremath, D.D.S
Vice Mayor Lou Waters
Council Member Brendan Burns
Council Member William Garner
Council Member Joe Hornat
Council Member Mary Snider
Council Member Mike Zinkin
Originally Prepared in 2011
Prepared by John C. Ravesloot, Ph.D., Scott O’Mack, M.A., and Patricia Spoerl, Ph.D.
Submitted by John C. Ravesloot, Ph.D. Principal Investigator
Oro Valley Historic Preservation
Commission
Daniel Zwiener, Chair
Lois Nagy, Vice Chair
Barbara Campbell
Ellen Guyer
Ed Hannon
Sam McClung, Ph.D.
Valerie Pullara
Town of Oro Valley
Mayor Satish Hiremath
Vice Mayor Mary Snider
Council Member Bill Garner
Council Member Barry Gillaspie
Council Member Joe Hornat
Council Member Steve Solomon
Council Member Lou Waters
WSA Technical Report No. 2011-18
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
A Guide for Implementation: Oro Valley Cultural Heritage Preservation Planning ........................ 2
1. Public Participation and Heritage Education .......................................................................... 2
2. Historic Steam Pump Ranch .................................................................................................... 3
3. Historic Neighborhoods .......................................................................................................... 3
4. Town History Records and Reports ....................................................................................... 4
5. Undeveloped Areas of the Town .......................................................................................................... 5
6. Honey Bee Village Archaeological Preserve ............................................................................ 5
Appendix A: The Legal Context for Historic Preservation ............................................................... 7
National Legislation, Guidance, and Support for Preservation Planning .................................... 7
State of Arizona Preservation Planning ....................................................................................... 8
Category 1, Toward Effective Management of Historic Resources ......................................... 9
Category 2, Toward an Informed and Supportive Constituency ............................................. 9
Local Preservation Planning ........................................................................................................ 10
Appendix B: Status of Oro Valley Cultural Resources and Tools for their Management ............... 12
Archaeological Inventories ............................................................................................................ 12
Residential Neighborhood Surveys ........................................................................................... 13
National Register Nominations ................................................................................................. 16
Protection of Historic Properties............................................................................................... 17
Preservation Incentives ............................................................................................................. 17
Investment Tax Credit (ITC) Program ........................................................................................ 17
State Historic Property Tax Reclassification (SPT) for Owner-Occupied Homes .................... 18
Appendix C: References for Oro Valley Cultural Heritage Preservation Planning........................... 19
Appendix D: Helpful Online Historic Preservation References ...................................................... 20
This page intentionally left blank
1
INTRODUCTION
Among the most important aspects of historic preservation today is ensuring that it is relevant
to a community and will attract visitors—to learn about special places of the past, and to
contribute to the overall economic sustainability of a community. Oro Valley holds unique
and authentic cultural resources that can make places of the past come alive. In collaboration
with partners, the Town can develop an exceptional cultural heritage program. This is a plan
for preserving the special historic places of Oro Valley, and for maintaining an awareness and
appreciation of its heritage within the community. This plan is a statement of the community’s
goals for its historic properties and programs, and provides guidance to reach those goals.
This plan provides a guide for moving forward in developing and maintaining historic
properties and programs. Six components are identified, each of which contains suggested
action items. The components are: public participation and heritage education; Historic
Steam Pump Ranch; historic neighborhoods, Town history and records, undeveloped areas of
the Town, and Honey Bee Village Archaeological Preserve. This plan emphasizes the
importance of having preservation programs that are educational, operate at maximum
efficiency, and take advantage of diverse funding and volunteer opportunities.
A preservation plan is most effective when it is integrated with related local and regional plans
and policies. This plan is flexible in bringing together citizens, interest groups, and local
government to collaborate in preserving their shared heritage. The key to successful
implementation is having informed policy makers who integrate Oro Valley’s cultural heritage
in its social and economic development.
2
A GUIDE FOR IMPLEMENTATION :
ORO VALLEY CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLANNING
The context for implementing this cultural heritage program plan includes six major
components. It also incorporates the goals of the Arizona State Historic Preservation Plan
described in Appendix A. Residential neighborhood surveys and future preservation incentives
are included below because they apply directly to residents. As with all plans, this one should
be seen as a flexible document that can be updated as warranted based on recommendations
and involvement of the historic preservation commission, Town staff, Town council, and citizens.
The six components are: public participation and heritage education; historic Steam Pump
Ranch; historic neighborhoods, Town history and records, undeveloped areas of the town,
and Honey Bee Village Archaeological Preserve. General responsibilities are identified below
as Town staff (includes the Parks & Recreation Department, Development and Infrastructure
Services, Communications Department, and the Town Manager’s staff), Historic Preservation
Commission (seven member volunteer advisory board), and volunteers (individuals and
organizations). These responsibilities may shift among staff and volunteers depending upon a
specific program or project and are intended here only to provide general guidelines for
implementation.
The Historic Preservation Commission should review this plan annually. Based on this
review, the Commission may make recommendations to Town staff and will coordinate this plan
with the annual Historic Preservation Commission work plan. Town staff can review the plan
and the commission’s recommendations and provide a summary to the Town Council.
Many of the following components can be implemented in phases within the overall context
of the Town’s cultural heritage program. Most are designed to require minimal expenditure of
funds and maximum potential for partnerships.
1. Public Participation and Heritage Education
Ongoing preservation education among a wide variety of audiences is essential to a successful historic
preservation program and can be integrated and implemented, in most cases, with limited funds, into
the Town’s existing programs and facilities. Literature describing the Town’s cultural resources in the
form of a brochure has been designed and distributed to inform Oro Valley residents of the Town’s
inventory and to encourage public participation in preservation. Information has also been made
available on the Town’s website, which should be continuously updated. Public outreach should
be considered as well and could include a lecture series, classroom curricula, special events and
submission of stories in various publications. On site tours of Steam Pump Ranch are currently
available and plan to continue. Public tours of Honey Bee Village Archaeological Preserve, the Cañada
Del Oro trail and historic neighborhoods should be developed. A special collections section of the
Town’s historic documents, records and reports, made available at the Pima County Public Library –
Oro Valley Branch could also be considered.
3
The Historic Preservation Commission should work diligently to establish and foster relationships with
the Oro Valley Historical Society, consultants, educators and other historic preservation organizations
throughout southern Arizona to implement strategies to increase public participation and heritage
education.
2. Historic Steam Pump Ranch
The historic Steam Pump Ranch is an important part of the Town’s heritage. It is recognized
nationally through a listing in the National Register of Historic Places; it is recognized locally in that
Pima County voters approved expenditure in 2004 of $5 million for its acquisition for historic
preservation and public use. Successful development of the Ranch is dependent on the citizens
of Oro Valley becoming aware of and supporting the vital role the site can play in the
community with an emphasis on local involvement and public access. The property provides
an excellent locale for developing a “sense of place” for Oro Valley and holds economic viability
as an educational facility, special event venue and heritage park. Partnerships will be a key
element in maintenance of the property and providing public access. Documents pertaining to
preservation and maintenance of the property include the Intergovernmental Agreement
between Pima County and the Town of Oro Valley for Implementation of the 2004 Bond Issue
Project for the Steam Pump Ranch Acquisition (2006), Steam Pump Ranch Master Plan (2007),
and the Deed of Preservation Easement between the Town of Oro Valley and Pima County
(2008) (all in Appendix C).
Of primary concern in the future is the protection of the historic core (as noted in the Master Plan)
at the ranch. Town staff will coordinate with the Historic Preservation Commission to ensure that
the integrity of the historic core is preserved at all times in accordance with state and national
guidelines. Town staff should review the Steam Pump Ranch Master Plan periodically to ensure
that it reflects current planning and should annually review the progress made on carrying out the
recommendations in the Master Plan and report to the Town Council and the Historic Preservation
Commission. Town staff will annually review the progress being made on carrying out the
recommendations of the Master Plan and report to the Town Council and Historic Preservation
Commission.
3. Historic Neighborhoods
The Town of Oro Valley was incorporated in 1974. The first subdivision was platted in 1930.
Construction of residential neighborhoods generally did not occur until the late 1950’s.
Nineteen subdivisions were platted before 1974. (Actual development is not always associated
with the plat date). Subdivisions that have reached or will be reaching the 50 year old threshold
for consideration as historically significant are identified in Rock Art, Ranch and Residence.
Individual buildings with possible historical significance are also noted. The Oro Valley Historic
Preservation Ordinance (Article 6-10) outlines the process for local landmarks and neighborhood
district designations.
4
A. The Historic Preservation Commission will concentrate some of its’ educational outreach on the
Town’s historic neighborhoods. These neighborhoods include, but are not limited to, Oro Valley
estates, Suffolk Hills, Campo Bello, and Shadow Mountain Estates.
B. The Historic Preservation Commission and Town staff will participate in outreach to highlight historic
districts, neighborhood and individual properties and explain the process/benefits of designation. The
Commission and Town, including the Planning and Zoning department, will encourage Oro Valley
residents to contact them regarding properties they may own or have knowledge of that need to be
preserved.
C. The Historic Preservation Commission (and other interested community members) will pursue
inventory of neighborhood historic districts/structures as identified in Rock Art, Ranch and Residence.
“Windshield surveys” could be a first step in identifying such districts/structures.
D. Town staff, the Historic Preservation Commission, volunteers and consultants (as appropriate)
should consider developing tours of historic neighborhoods/areas of the Town to focus attention on
community heritage. An example would be walking tours of James D. Kriegh Park, Canyon Del Oro High
School or Catalina Shadows development and their role in establishing the Town of Oro Valley.
E. The Town will consider financial incentives related to historic preservation, heritage tourism and
education as part of the annual budget process.
4. Town History Records and Reports
A Town’s archives contain primary source documents that have accumulated over the course of time
and are kept to show the function of the town. Archives are records that have been naturally and
necessarily generated as a product of regular legal, commercial, administrative or social activities.
Archives provide a basis for the proper understanding of the past that is important to inform as the
town develops. Archives are a special resource for dealing with the social memory of the town.
Town Historian Marjorie Kriegh maintained records of the Town’s incorporation in 1974 through
1977. These records reflect the fight for annexation and Oro Valley’s ultimate success. The Oro Valley
Historic Preservation Commission encourages development and maintenance of a record archive. All
documented history is now being housed at Town facilities. A centralized archive for cultural
resources reports and maps acquired from individual development projects that are currently
scattered in specific project files should be created. Due to sensitive site information, this archive
may only be made available for public use only on a case‐by case basis. The Historic Preservation
Commission with the assistance of Town staff should prepare an annual report on accomplishments
for the prior year to be included in the archive. This report should also serve as the required annual
report to the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office to maintain certified local government status.
As part of the archive maintenance process, the Historic Preservation Commission should update the
Town’s inventory on a yearly basis.
5
The Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance states that the Historic Preservation Commission
shall maintain a list of known significant cultural resources for consideration in planning of current
and future development. The Town was to develop this list, based on the Cultural Resources
Inventory, in 2012. The Historic Preservation Commission, as part of the centralized archive, must
ensure that the list was developed and is being maintained. In cooperation with the Historic
Preservation Commission, the Town needs to develop and maintain a list based on the Cultural
Resources Inventory.
5. Undeveloped Areas of the Town
The Town’s Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance applies to cultural resources in
undeveloped areas and to all developments that require a rezoning, preliminary plat,
development plan or amendment to these items. It provides for the conservation of significant
cultural resources in concert with other sensitive resources. Some areas available for
development contain known archaeological sites as identified in Rock Art, Ranch and Residence.
The ordinance provides a sound basis for identification, evaluation, and treatment of known sites
as well as ones that may be discovered in the future. Using the standard cultural review process,
Town of Oro Valley staff should review existing cultural resources data compiled in the Phase 1
Cultural Resources Inventory report to provide a preliminary knowledge base when stipulations
are proposed for future developments. The Town will review cultural resources information
obtained during the process of future site development within Town boundaries to determine the
potential for public interpretation and education. The Town will also consider the value of
prehistoric and historic resources in potential annexations. The Historic Preservation Commission
may review cultural resources reports and may provide information and recommendations to
Town staff.
6. Honey Bee Village Archaeological Preserve
The 13-acre Honey Bee Village Archeological preserve was donated to Pima County in 2008 with
the intent it be transferred to the Town when an agreement on management is reached. At
publication Pima County was the owner of this property. The Preserve was part of the 2004
Pima County Bond. The main area of this Hohokam site is to be preserved for public use. The
Tohono O’odham Nation and Oro Valley funded construction of a protective wall around the
Preserve. The area remains inaccessible and unused for walking, education and observation of
past cultural traditions.
A. In cooperation with Pima County, the Town will maintain a regular program of inspection of
the Preserve by Arizona Site Stewards.
B. The Historic Preservation Commission will monitor ongoing developments at Honey Bee
Village Archeological Preserve.
C. Future actions at the Preserve will include ongoing clean-up of the site by the appropriate
responsible entities.
6
Linking tourism and preservation can do more for local economies, tourism and preservation
than promoting them separately. Heritage tourism saves and preserves your heritage. Share it
with visitors and reap the economic benefits.
As noted in the introduction, Oro Valley holds unique and authentic cultural resources which
make places of the past come alive. This Guide for Implementation sets the stage to make Oro
Valley’s history “come alive”.
7
APPENDIX A: THE LEGAL CONTEXT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
National Legislation, Guidance, and Support for Preservation Planning
The National Historic Preservation Act (Act) of 1966, as amended, is the basis of historic
preservation in the United States. The Act established the value of historic properties to the
public. Its major provisions apply at the local, state, tribal, and national levels and guide historic
preservation and cultural resources management today. The Act encouraged the establishment
of state historic preservation offices (SHPOs) in each state, and partnerships among federal,
tribal, state, and local governments. Today all 50 states have a state historic preservation office
that serves as the primary contact for local governments and through which federal funding for
state and local partnerships passes.
The Act established a Certified Local Government (CLG) program. The main purpose was to
provide a mechanism for local governments to carry out the purposes of the Act. Certification
is delegated to the SHPOs along with the responsibility for transferring federal and state grant
funds to local certified governments. The Town of Oro Valley (Town) was granted CLG status by
the Arizona SHPO and U.S. Department of Interior in May 2009. To obtain, and retain, CLG status
a local government must meet specific requirements including: an ordinance to ensure that there
is local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties; a qualified historic
preservation commission; maintenance of a system for the survey and inventory of historic
properties in accordance with the Act; and provisions for public participation in the local historic
preservation program.
The Act established a consultation process (Section 106) whereby federal agencies, and other
entities using federal funds, must consult with SHPOs on the potential impacts to historic
properties and their significance before any federal undertaking. This process is standard at all
levels of government and is clearly articulated at the state and national levels. It is described in
various ways at the local level. In Oro Valley the process is acknowledged in zoning codes and the
recently passed Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance.
The Act also created the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. As an independent federal
agency, the Advisory Council deals with federal properties or those impacted by federally funded
projects. It also carries out the Preserve America initiative whereby local communities can apply
for funds for historic sites listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
Perhaps the best-known provision of the Act was the establishment of the National Register
of Historic Places as the official list of the nation’s historic districts, sites, buildings, structures,
and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture.
The National Park Service administers National Register listings. I n 2011, almost 87,000
properties are listed in the National Register. Nominations can be made by individuals,
organizations, local governments, state governments, or the federal government.
The criteria of significance for National Register nominations (specified in the Act) are the basis for
determining the importance of historic properties at all levels of government and management.
8
The State of Arizona adopted the National Register criteria for evaluating cultural resources in
Arizona, and the Town includes consideration of these criteria in the General Plan, the Historic
Preservation Ordinance, and the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance.
The criteria of significance are: A. association with historic events or activities; B. association
with an important person in history; C. distinctive design or physical character; and D. potential
to provide important information about prehistory or history. Significant properties must also
possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association as
defined in the Act, and generally be at least 50 years old. Determinations of significance are made
by archaeologists, historians, historic architects, or other preservation professionals depending
upon the nature of the property being evaluated.
Determinations of historic significance do not necessarily dictate future treatment of cultural
resources and they are distinct from the decision-making processes for treatment at the local,
state, and national levels. Determining a course of action regarding historic properties frequently
involves consideration of treatments ranging from preservation in place (preferred) to the
mitigation of adverse impacts.
State of Arizona Preservation Planning
The Arizona SHPO prepared a comprehensive preservation plan for the state in 1996. The Plan
was updated in 2000, 2009 and again in 2014 with the involvement of agencies, special interest
groups, and citizens (Appendix C). Participants in the planning process identified, and have
validated in updates, four principal needs to further the cause of preservation in Arizona:
-- A need to strengthen partnerships between government agencies, advocacy
groups, businesses, and the public.
-- A need for Arizona’s citizens to become more aware of the value of our history
and opportunities for historic preservation.
-- A need for appropriate information about Arizona’s historic resources to be
available to those making decisions about the future.
-- A need for the public to continue to be engaged on questions regarding the
identification, nomination, and protection of historic resources.
The initial plan identified eight goals for historic preservation in Arizona that have been
confirmed in the updates. The goals are grouped into two general categories: those related to
the identification and management of cultural resources, and those related to preservation
professionals, interested members of the public, and elected and appointed officials involved
in historic preservation decision-making. The plan identifies objectives for each goal: (1) the
preservation community; (2) the SHPO; and, (3) citizens at large. These are not repeated here but
are an excellent reference as they relate to the action plan developed in Appendix B.
The Arizona state goals are:
9
Category 1, Toward Effective Management of Historic Resources
Goal 1: Better Resource Management
Vision: Having a partnership of public and private programs that work together to identify,
evaluate, nominate, and treat historic properties in an interdisciplinary and professional manner;
and to use historic properties to meet contemporary needs and/or inform citizens with regard to
history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture.
Goal 2: Effective Information Management
Vision: Having a cooperative data management system that efficiently compiles and tracks
information regarding historic properties, preservation methods and programs, projects and
opportunities; and provides the means to make this information readily available to appropriate
users.
Goal 3: Maximized Funding
Vision: Having preservation programs that operate at maximum efficiency and support networks
that take advantage of diverse funding and volunteer opportunities.
Goal 4: Integrated Preservation Planning
Vision: Having preservation principles and priorities fully integrated into broader planning
efforts of state and federal agencies, local governments, and private development to help
achieve the goals of historic preservation, including sustainable economic and community
development.
Category 2, Toward an Informed and Supportive Constituency
Goal 5: Proactive Partnerships
Vision: Having a strong preservation network of agency, tribal, county, community, and advocate
partners that communicate preservation values and share preservation programs with the
broader Arizona community, its institutions, and individuals.
Goal 6: Public Support
Vision: Having an educated and informed public that embraces Arizona’s unique history, places,
and cultures, and is motivated to help preserve the state’s historical patrimony.
Goal 7: Policy Maker Support
Vision: Having informed policy makers that appreciate the importance of historic properties to the
economic, social, historical, and cultural development of the state, counties, and communities.
Goal 8: Informed Professionals
Vision: Having a full range of educational programs that are available to both established and new
preservation professionals to ensure that the highest standards of treatment and identification
are applied to the state’s historic properties.
10
Familiarity with these goals and the Arizona State Historic Preservation Plan Update 2009 is
essential for Oro Valley in order to provide a broader framework for planning consistent with
state priorities.
Local Preservation Planning
It is hereby declared as a matter of public policy that the Town of Oro Valley joins with
the United States of America and the State of Arizona in promoting the protection,
enhancement, and perpetuation of properties, areas, documents, and artifacts of
historic, cultural, archaeological, and aesthetic significance as being necessary for
the economic, cultural, educational, and general welfare of the public. This is done
pursuant to the provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as
amended, the Arizona Revised Statutes, Section 9-462.01, and the establishment
of this Historic Preservation Ordinance by the Oro Valley Town Council. (Purpose.
Historic Preservation Ordinance Article 6-10).
Oro Valley is a relatively young town, created in response to the city of Tucson plans to annex
much of northern Pima County along the Canada del Oro. At the time of its incorporation in 1974
the Town encompassed 2.5 square miles and was home to about 800 residents. Today, the Town
encompasses more than 36 square miles and has a population of over 44,000. Ranching and
homesteading traditions still exist in this modern dynamic community that provides full public
services.
The Town currently has guidance for cultural resources and preservation planning in the Town’s
General Plan Focus 2020 (2005), the Town of Oro Valley Historic Preservation Ordinance, several
zoning ordinances, and the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance. These policies and
direction are integrated into the preservation plan and are available in Appendix C.
One of the most important elements in relation to preservation planning is the identification of
local community criteria to be applied in evaluations of cultural resources as well as use of the
National Register criteria. Cultural resources are significant locally “if the resource is preserved in
a condition of scientific integrity and the property or resources contribute to: a) the unique
identity of the community; or b) the enhancement of community economic, educational, or
recreational needs; or c) the understanding of the unique religious, mythological, or social
character of a discrete population within or outside the community” (Oro Valley Town Code,
Chapter 27 - General Development Standards, Section 27.10 – Environmentally Sensitive Lands
(e(v)2(ii)).
Current Oro Valley preservation planning is based on the report from the Oro Valley Cultural
Resources Inventory, Rock Art, Ranch, and Residence: Cultural Resources in the Town of Oro Valley
and Its Planning Area, approved by the Town Council in May 2010 (Appendix C). The inventory
consolidates available information on cultural resources, includes a review of archival records,
and provides substantial data about prehistoric sites, historic neighborhoods, and general
11
historic patterns of occupation and use in the area. A series of historic contexts are defined for
evaluating the significance of cultural resources in the Oro Valley area.
The Town endorses the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan (Town Council approval 2008) and has
participated in planning for the proposed Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area designation
currently being considered by Congress.
The Town lies within Pima County and coordinates as needed on historic preservation matters. The
County’s bond program has been instrumental in the Town’s acquisition of the historic Steam Pump
Ranch and in preserving a portion of the Honey Bee Village archaeological site in public ownership.
Restoration of historic ranching sites and preservation of irreplaceable at-risk archaeological sites
are priorities for County efforts to preserve the heritage of Pima County and southern Arizona.
Appendix B builds on the legal context for historic preservation by providing cultural
resources strategies for effective management and action items for the local community. The
underlying themes are an attempt to foster a community-wide commitment to preserving
important places of our past, developing a comprehensive toolbox to engage and educate
residents, and highlighting opportunities for sustainable cultural resources management.
12
APPENDIX B: STATUS OF ORO VALLEY CULTURAL RESOURCES
AND TOOLS FOR THEIR MANAGEMENT AS OF 2015
Rock Art, Ranch, and Residence: Cultural Resources in the Town of Oro Valley and Its Planning
Area is a useful summary of previous efforts to document cultural resources in the Town and its
planning area, but it also shows the substantial gaps in our knowledge of these resources. As an
important example, only about 35 percent of the Oro Valley Planning Area has been systematically
surveyed for archaeological sites, and much of that work took place more than 10 years ago.
Because the Arizona SHPO considers any archaeological survey more than 10 years old to be
inadequate for evaluating the current archaeological potential of a location (and this is echoed
in the Town’s Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance), the actual total survey coverage in
the Oro Valley Planning Area should be considered substantially less than 35 percent. Although
many previously surveyed areas are now fully developed for residential or commercial use, which
means they are unlikely to require archaeological survey in the future, a significant portion of the
Town and its planning area remain archaeologically unstudied.
Another obvious gap in our knowledge of Oro Valley’s cultural resources is the general lack of
information about potentially historic residential architecture in the Town. Although Oro Valley
did not incorporate until 1974, its land base has a significant amount of residential architecture
that is at least 50 years old and is therefore potentially historic. Rock Art, Ranch, and Residence
included preliminary examination of seven of the earliest residential developments in the Town,
four of which are considered potential candidates for nomination to the National Register as
residential historic districts. Field documentation of these neighborhoods, along with more
historical research, will be required to pursue formal evaluations of historical significance and
possible nomination, but it is clear from the initial work that these (and soon other) early
residential developments in Oro Valley are potentially valuable parts of the community’s heritage.
Oro Valley can build on previous efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect cultural resources in the
Town by using five basic tools: (1) archaeological inventories; (2) residential neighborhood surveys; (3)
National Register nominations; (4) protection of historic properties; and (5) preservation incentives.
Each of these tools is discussed briefly below. Further discussion of the ways these tools can be applied
in Oro Valley is provided in Appendix B, along with a list of specific preservation priorities in the Town.
Archaeological Inventories
To avoid unanticipated damage to archaeological resources, proposed ground-disturbing projects
in Oro Valley should be preceded by an evaluation of the archaeological potential of the affected
parcel by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of Interior standards. The principal basis of an
evaluation is an inventory of the archaeological sites either previously recorded or newly recorded
in a survey conducted for the proposed project. In some cases, the inventory will be limited to a
search of the records of previous archaeological surveys and previously recorded archaeological
sites, along with a consideration of previous disturbances to the parcel. In other cases, the inventory
will require a walking survey of the affected parcel. Archival research may also be necessary to
evaluate the possibility that historic-period archaeological features are present on the parcel.
13
Archaeological evaluation is necessary both for projects on previously undeveloped parcels and for
projects where the parcel has already seen development. In many cases, a previous development
project, such as the construction of a building or a set of buildings, will have greatly reduced
or eliminated the archaeological potential of a parcel, but even on parcels where the original
ground surface has been completely altered or obscured, intact archaeological features may
still exist below the level of construction impacts.
While the Town is often limited to evaluating the potential impacts of individual, relatively small
development projects on archaeological resources, a more cost-effective way to ensure that
significant resources are not compromised is to carry out a systematic archaeological inventory
of a large area. Oro Valley and its planning area still hold substantial areas of undeveloped land
which are likely to become the focus of plans for large residential or commercial developments.
The development of such areas presents an opportunity both to document an extensive area
archaeologically and to incorporate a plan for the protection and interpretation of significant
cultural resources into the overall plan of development.
In all cases, inventory and evaluation of archaeological and historic resources should include
consideration of the historic contexts identified for Oro Valley in Rock Art, Ranch, and Residence.
For prehistoric sites the contexts are cultural affiliation and interaction, chronology, diet and
subsistence, and community organization. For historic sites the contexts include early transportation
routes and the Canada del Oro crossing, cattle ranching and homesteading in the Canada del Oro
area (1869–1962), and early residential development in the Cañada del Oro area (1945–1974).
Residential Neighborhood Surveys
The initial survey of residential architecture carried out for Rock Art, Ranch, and Residence showed
that four of the earliest subdivisions in the Town are potentially eligible for nomination to the
National Register as residential historic districts and should be considered for historic district
designation, consistent with the Town’s historic preservation ordinance. They are: Oro Valley
Estates, Suffolk Hills, Campo Bello, and Shadow Mountain Estates. The report recommended
that the Town consider nominating each of the four subdivisions to the National Register, with
the consent and cooperation of the residents. Because of the preliminary nature of the inventory
survey, it is not certain that the SHPO will agree that any of the four subdivisions is appropriate for
a National Register nomination. Before deciding to pursue a nomination, which can be a significant
expense, a determination of eligibility should be made for a selected subdivision by the SHPO.
Obtaining a determination of eligibility involves contacting the SHPO, providing a minimal level of
documentation about the selected subdivision, and arranging for the SHPO staff to visit and tour
the subdivision. If the SHPO determines that the subdivision is eligible for listing in the National
Register, a nomination is warranted. Local designations may also be pursued at this time.
The number of subdivisions in Oro Valley that are potentially eligible for listing in the National
Register will only rise as other neighborhoods reach the minimum requirement for district
14
eligibility—when at least 50 percent of the houses are at least 50 years old. Determining the
National Register eligibility of a neighborhood beyond the simple age requirement requires a survey
by an architectural historian, or by non-historians under the direction of an architectural historian.
15
16
The survey for determining eligibility can consist of a “windshield” survey, or a preliminary pass to
establish the range of architectural styles and landscape features present in the neighborhood as
well as the general degree of integrity of both the architecture and the original subdivision plan.
National Register Nominations
There are a number of reasons for the Town to encourage the nomination of historic properties
to the National Register, whether the property is an archaeological site, a historic district, or an
individual building. First, when a historic property is listed in the National Register, it achieves a
special recognition as a place of importance in local, state, or national history, thus strengthening
the community’s awareness of, and pride in, its unique heritage. Second, properties i n the
National Register are granted a degree of protection from impacts by federally funded or permitted
projects, because all such impacts are subject to review and comment by the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation. Finally, there are significant tax incentives for the owners of properties
listed in the National Register.
It is important to emphasize that listing a property in the National Register does not prevent
the owner of the property from remodeling, repairing, altering, selling, or even demolishing the
property, provided that the action does not involve federal or state funding or permitting. Neither
is the owner obligated to make repairs or improvements to the property. It is equally important
to emphasize that listing in the National Register does not ensure that a federal or state project
will not adversely affect the listed property under every circumstance. It only ensures that any
project with a potentially adverse effect, and that receives federal or state funding or permitting,
will receive a federal- or state-level review.
Currently, only one property in Oro Valley is listed in the National Register—Steam Pump Ranch, a
historic ranch complex established in the 1870s. Other properties have been determined eligible
for listing (e.g., the Honey Bee Village archaeological site), and others have been identified as
most likely eligible. As Rock Art, Ranch, and Residence made clear, this small number of listed
properties belies the number of important archaeological and historic sites previously recorded
in the Town and its planning area. Of the 185 previously recorded sites in the planning area,
six others have been determined eligible for listing and another 29 have been recommended
eligible for listing by their recorders. Many of the recorded sites have never been evaluated, and
some have probably been destroyed by development since they were recorded. But there is little
question that other sites in the Town and its planning area, both previously recorded sites and
sites yet to be discovered, are eligible for listing in the National Register.
In the Oro Valley Cultural Resources Inventory, four neighborhoods in the Town were recommended
for nomination to the National Register as residential historic districts, provided that the SHPO
gave a determination of eligibility to each neighborhood. Given a determination of eligibility,
the Town should approach the neighborhood association for the subdivision, or the residents
themselves, and recommend that a nomination be prepared. The nomination process, which
includes writing a detailed historic context for the subdivision and preparing SHPO historic building
inventory forms for all of the houses, could be funded directly by the Town, by contributions
from the neighborhood residents, or by a combination of these sources. When each resident
17
contributes a portion of the nomination cost, individual contributions are usually smaller when
the neighborhood is large, because much of the expense of a nomination is in the historic context,
which is generally the same for any size of neighborhood. In other words, the per-house cost of a
nomination declines as the number of houses increases.
There are also individual buildings in Oro Valley worthy of nomination. Two architect-designed
residences—the Countess of Suffolk Forest Lodge and the Joseph E. McAdams house—predate
planned developments in the Town and are important as individual architectural properties.
Both residences merit nomination to the National Register. This would require the consent and
cooperation of the separate private owners but would benefit the larger community by drawing
attention to the presence of important historic architecture in the Town. The Town can also make
an effort to identify and nominate other individual properties of distinction.
Protection of Historic Properties
Archaeological sites are the historic properties most vulnerable to unintentional damage through
development or natural processes, or through intentional damage by vandalism. It is fortunate
that Honey Bee Village, a major prehistoric site, is protected in public ownership and by physical
barriers to access, but other important prehistoric and historic sites exist in the Town that also
need protection. An important first step in protecting these sites would be to assess the potential
threats to each site and establish a priority list for taking protective measures that can be made
with the consent and cooperation of the property owners.
Historic architecture, especially if left unoccupied or unused for any length of time, is also subject
to damage through natural processes and vandalism. As with archaeological sites, the Town can
identify individual buildings that are or may soon be historic, assess the possible threats to the
historic integrity of the buildings, and establish a priority list for taking protective measures, again
with the consent and cooperation of the property owners.
In some cases, property owners are unaware of the historic value of buildings when making
decisions about modifications. Community education is important to reduce this risk.
Preservation Incentives
State and federal tax incentives are available for the owners of National Register–listed properties
that meet certain criteria. Full information about the state and federal programs behind these
incentives is available from the SHPO, but the main features are described in the following
paragraphs adapted from the SHPO website (http://azstateparks.com/SHPO/tax.html).
Investment Tax Credit (ITC) Program
The ITC program permits owners and some lessees of historic buildings to take a 20 percent
federal income tax credit on the cost of rehabilitating such buildings for industrial, commercial, or
rental purposes. This program also permits depreciation of such improvements over 27.5 years for
a rental residential property and 31.5 years for commercial property. The rehabilitated building
18
must be a certified historic structure that is subject to depreciation, and the rehabilitation must
be certified as meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, established by
the National Park Service (NPS).
Only projects involving certified historic structures are eligible for tax credits. According to program
rules, a certified historic structure is: a structure individually listed in the National Register of
Historic Places, or; a structure certified by NPS as contributing to a registered district. A registered
district is a designated area listed in the National Register, or listed under a state or local statute
certified as substantially meeting the requirements for listing of districts in the National Register.
State Historic Property Tax Reclassification (SPT) for Owner -Occupied Homes
The State Historic Property Tax (SPT) program offers a substantial reduction in the state property
tax assessment for eligible owners. This 15-year agreement requires maintenance of the property
according to federal and Arizona State Parks Board standards and is limited to property used for
non-income-producing activities. In order to qualify for the SPT program, the property must be
listed i n the National Register, either individually or as a contributor to a historic district. The
program is managed by the SHPO in conjunction with Arizona’s county assessor’s offices. The SHPO
determines program eligibility and monitors property maintenance, and the county assessor enacts
tax classification changes, manages issues of property value, and tax calculation. Properties must
meet the minimum maintenance standards established by the Arizona State Parks Board.
Achieving the goals of the Oro Valley historic preservation planning will require a sustained and
systematic effort on the part of the Town to identify and evaluate its known and yet to be recorded
cultural resources. The above items provide the broad parameters within which specific actions,
described in Appendix A, can be carried out.
19
APPENDIX C:
REFERENCES FOR ORO VALLEY CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLANNING
(DOCUMENTS INCLUDED ON CD)
1. Rock Art, Ranch, and Residence: Cultural Resources in the Town of Oro Valley and its Planning
Area. Prepared by Scott O’Mack. William Self Associates Technical Report No. 2009-51, January
2010.
--Recommend inclusion on Town of Oro Valley website for Cultural Resources (excluding
site listing tables).
2. Oro Valley Historic Preservation Ordinance—Historic Preservation Code (06/20) Article 6-10.
Adopted 10/04/2006.
--http://www.codepublishing.com/az/orovalley/
3. Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance, Section 27.10
--http://www.orovalleyaz.gov/Assets/_assets/DIS/Planning/pdf/ESL+Final+Draft.pdf
4. Focus 2020, The Future In Balance, Town of Oro Valley General Plan, 2005
--http://www.orovalleyaz.gov/AssetFactory.aspx?did=4955
5. Steam Pump Ranch Master Plan
--http://www.orovalleyaz.gov/Assets/_assets/parks_rec/PDF/SPR_Draft_April+7.pdf
6. Deed of Preservation Easement between the Town of Oro Valley, a municipal corporation
(Grantor), and Pima County, a political subdivision of the State of Arizona (Grantee) for the
Steam Pump Ranch property. 2008.
--Recommend adding Easement to Town’s cultural resources website (18 pages).
7. Intergovernmental Agreement between Pima County and the Town of Oro Valley for the
Implementation of the 2004 Pima County Bond Issue Project for the Steam Pump Ranch
Acquisition. 2006.
--Recommend adding to Town’s cultural resources website (16 pages)
8. National Register of Historic Places National Register Nomination.
9. Honey Bee Village Archaeological Preserve Implementation Plan. February 2007
--http://www.orovalleyaz.gov/Assets/_assets/residents/Culture_and_History/pdf/
honeybee-plan.pdf
10. Arizona State Historic Preservation Plan. Update 2009.
--http://azstateparks.com/SHPO/downloads/SHPO_Plan_2009_Final.pdf
APPENDIX D: HELPFUL ONLINE HISTORIC PRESERVATION REFERENCES
20
Note. References on prehistory and history of the Oro Valley area can be found in Rock Art, Ranch,
and Residence (2010).
1. Historical Archaeology Research Guide.
Compiled by James E. Ayres, Carol Griffith, and Teresita Majewski with contributions by the SHPO
Advisory Committee on Historical Archaeology.
http://azstateparks.com/publications/downloads/SHPO_2008_Historical_Archy_Guide.pdf
2. Arizona Heritage Preservation Education Materials.
By Carol J. Ellick: An annotated bibliography of archaeological, architectural, and preservation
education materials relating to Arizona for grades K–12.
http://azstateparks.com/SHPO/downloads/SHPO_Biblio_AHP.pdf
3. Arizona Historical Society educational materials.
http://www.arizonahistoricalsociety.org/education/educators/t_resources/
4. Arizona Memory Project.
http://azmemory.lib.az.us/
5. Arizona State Historic Preservation Office
h ttp://azstateparks.com/SHPO/index.html
6. Historic Context Study Guides: These publications compile research and evaluation of several
topics that are key to understanding Arizona history, prehistory, and resources. Topics include
Homesteading, Commerce in Phoenix, Gold and Silver Mining, the Chinese in Arizona, the
United States Military in Arizona, Transcontinental Railroading, Prehistoric Rock Art, Historic
Trails, Prehistoric to Historic Transition Period, Paleoindian and Archaic Sites, and Prehistoric
Water Utilization and Technology in Arizona. The guides are available from the SHPO.
(http://azstateparks.com/SHPO/index.html)
7. National Register of Historic Places
General Information. http://www.nps.gov/nr/
8. National Register listings and nomination procedures.
http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com/
9. National Register information bulletins. http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/publications/#bulletins
Historic preservation laws and regulations. http://www.nps.gov/history/laws.htm
10. Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan
www.pima.gov/CMO/SDCP/
Historic Preservation Commission 3.
Meeting Date:12/06/2021
Submitted By:MaryAnne Tolmie, Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT:
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES TO RENOVATE/RESTORE THE STEAM PUMP
RANCH PROCTOR LEIBER HOUSE
RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
N/A
BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION:
At the last meeting, Vice Chair Krueger and Chair Biel asked that this be put on a future agenda.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
Historic Preservation Commission 4.
Meeting Date:12/06/2021
Submitted By:MaryAnne Tolmie, Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT:
DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE USES OF THE PROCTOR-LIEBER HOUSE
RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
N/A
BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION:
Chair Krueger will lead the discussion.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
Attachments
2021 12 06 HPC ITEM 8 4
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020 Adaptive Reuse
Feasibility Report for
Steam Pump Ranch
FINAL REPORT
Prepared by:
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Prepared for:
Town of Oro Valley, Arizona
September 2020
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page TABLE OF CONTENTS i LIST OF TABLES ii LIST OF FIGURES ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Section I INTRODUCTION AND ASSUMPTIONS I-1 Section II OPPORTUNITIES TO RETAIN HISTORICAL FEATURES II-1 Section III SITE AND BUILDING OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS III-1 Section IV MARKET CONSIDERATIONS IV-1 Section V ADAPTIVE REUSE OPPORTUNITIES V-1 Section VI ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT VI-1
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page Table II-1 Opportunities to Retain Historical Features II-2 Table III-1 Site and Building Opportunities and Constraints III-2 Table IV-1 Resident Market Area Population, 2010, 2020, 2025 IV-4 Table IV-2 Resident Market Area Age Profile, 2020 IV-5 Table IV-3 Resident Market Area Household Profile, 2020 IV-5 Table IV-4 Resident Market Area Income Profile, 2019 IV-6 Table IV-5 Local Attractions, 2020 Ranked by Annual Attendance IV-10 Table IV-6 Retail and Office Spaces Available for Rent in Oro Valley, May 2020 IV-13 Table V-1 Evaluation Criteria for Proposed Building Reuse V-5 Table VI-1 Economic Feasibility Assessment VI-1
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page Figure 1 Site Map with Three Zones 2 Figure IV-1 Resident Market Area with Town of Oro Valley IV-2 Figure IV-2 Regional Context of Resident Market Area with Tucson MSA IV-3 Figure IV-3 Map of Tucson & Southern Arizona Tourism Region, 2020 IV-9 Figure V-1 Site Map with Three Zones V-2
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Town of Oro Valley, AZ retained ConsultEcon, Inc. to evaluate the feasibility of adaptive reuse opportunities at Steam Pump Ranch (SPR). SPR has evolved over time organically, without investment in the buildings to make them modern and useable, and become, at the same time, the most popular park in the Town’s system. The current uses and the activities at the site have spurred the Town to revisit how the buildings are used and then adjust the master plan as needed.
Site and Building Opportunities The historic structures and buildings create a unique sense of place and preserving these features is important to the character and identity of SPR. All uses identified by the Town offer opportunities to retain historical features and to offer interpretive panels and signage; wayfinding; and orientation onsite through both guided and unguided visitor experiences. As historic structures however, there are certain constraints for uses.
♦ Adaptive reuse requires matching uses to available spaces rather than traditional development process where spaces are developed for specific uses.
♦ Existing buildings and interior rooms are small and have inefficient configurations to create a critical mass of any one of the potential uses within the available space within the existing buildings at Steam Pump Ranch. Given these constraints, the strategy of identifying the appropriate mix of uses that build SPR as a community destination is more important than simply targeting particular single uses. Among the uses identified by the Town, several small scale uses associated with supporting and expanding cultural and recreational activities onsite are the most feasible option because they build on existing uses and reinforce existing visitation patterns. In addition, providing regular food service through a café or restaurant or catering option onsite is desired by the Town because it complements the existing activity and supports renting Steam Pump Ranch for facility rentals and events. In addition, because many of SPR’s recreational and education programs, events, programs, and receptions occur outdoors, the interior building areas can take on the role of supporting the outdoor events, programs, and receptions.
Market Considerations SPR will draw visitation from nearby resident and tourist markets. With its location in suburban Oro Valley and the programming offered by the Town’s Parks and Recreation Department, visitation will primarily come from the resident market with additional visiting friends and family and area tourists. SPR’s activity is driven by the farmers market, recreation programs and events, heritage ranch programs, general park, and recreational trail use. Improving facilities and enhancing
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch 2
programming onsite will deliver a better visitor experience that will translate to increased public use. In addition to activity at SPR, there are nearby attractions, such as the children’s museum, that are supportive of commercial and programmatic uses of the targeted buildings. The real estate market for retail and office space at SPR is influenced by other available spaces in Oro Valley and the Tucson region as well as the site’s unique and historic use and characteristics. Retail rents range from $17 to $18 per square foot and office rents range from $19 to $26 per square foot for available listings in Oro Valley. (Table IV-6 shows a list of spaces available for rent in the area).
Adaptive Reuse Opportunities Adaptive reuse opportunities for each building were evaluated for compatibility with surrounding uses, suitability for proposed uses, market support, historic preservation opportunities, operational funding, capital funding and community benefits/impacts. In addition, the overall site use and activity informs recommendations for adaptive reuse of the buildings. Generalized zones of site activity include the marketplace, the food/community events area, and the heritage ranch, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Site Map with Three Zones
Source: Google Earth and ConsultEcon, Inc.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch 3
Economic Feasibility Assessment Economic feasibility criteria include potential for generating earned revenue, private grants and contributions, and government support; rehabilitation and redevelopment costs; operating costs; and potential staffing.
Operating Revenue Public parks and historic attractions typically do not earn enough revenue to cover operating costs. Most revenue for public park operations is provided by government agencies. Heritage attractions also receive private philanthropy and earned revenue such as admissions. SPR’s operations are supported by the Town’s general fund. SPR generated $46,000 in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2020, mostly through programming and internal special events, as well as external rentals and concessions/vendors. Based on the identified building adaptive reuse opportunities, there is potential to increase all sources of earned revenue because the facilities will be more functional, useable, and marketable.
♦ The Town’s Parks and Recreation Department can increase earned revenue through expanding its schedule of programs and events and offering facility rentals.
♦ A new source of earned revenue the Town should pursue is lease income from rent or commissions from a restaurant or other food service onsite and/or complementary small businesses or non-profit organizations.
♦ A third source of operating revenue and capital funds could be new and expanded public-private partnerships. SPR public-private partnerships have already contributed to the growth in use and development of SPR over time.
Operating Costs To increase SPR use and earned revenue requires commensurate investments in operating budgets and potentially Town staff. The Town currently provides basic site and building maintenance and operations which are largely fixed costs. It also delivers programming and internal special events that are variable costs but also have the potential to generate revenue; and with the plan, increased revenue. Private partner operating costs onsite are currently variable based on site use. If private partners establish permanent onsite presence they will provide for their own operations (staffing and program costs) and maintenance and operations for the buildings and site they lease.
Staffing The Town of Oro Valley will provide most staff. Locating parks and recreation staff at SPR will help to increase efficiency and delivery of public programming and internal special events and coordinate with facility renters and vendors.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch 4
Future Operating Options Moving forward, other partners or expanded Town operations will be needed to further activate SPR. Overall, the Town of Oro Valley should leverage existing and new private partners to generate programming activity at SPR, to garner greater public benefits and additional Town revenue. Several approaches are possible:
♦ There is an opportunity for a private operator to reuse the Proctor-Lieber House for food service and/or small business or a non-profit organization that can generate Town revenue from rent or sales commissions. This may enable the Town to pass through the costs of operating and maintaining not only the building but a portion of the site. A private operator with a viable business plan will be important to establishing the economic basis for the capital improvements to the Proctor-Lieber House and other areas of the site that may need improvements. The business plan will also identify any need for Town capital improvement program expenditures or other expenditures.
♦ Alternatively, the Town could undertake adaptive reuse of the Proctor-Lieber House itself. A Town-led project would require a different development program and operation geared towards enabling outside caterers, food services, or other compatible uses. If the focus is on public use of the facilities on a daily or lease basis, the capital cost would likely be lower with downscaled kitchen facilities.
♦ A non-profit organization, a “friends group,” may be established to raise funds for SPR preservation, rehabilitation, and development because they can access different sources of funding compared to the Town. This group in turn could be an operator or support the Town as it creates public-private commercial relationships.
Capital Funding Adaptive reuse of historic buildings often does not create financial returns sufficient for initial capital investment without public subsidy to fill the “financing gap.” Because of their unique nature and historic significance, federal, state, and local government policies support designation of historic properties for protection and create subsidies for adaptive reuse projects. Prior Town building assessments have indicated that SPR’s historic buildings and structures will be costly to rehabilitate. The buildings contain a suboptimal amount and type of space to create a critical mass of any single use. The project’s underlying economic feasibility is largely dependent upon the Town allocating or attracting sufficient capital funds and increasing its parks and recreation budget to accommodate the growth in SPR site use and programming. However, there may be opportunities to attract private grants and contributions and other governmental support to contribute to capital costs. Ultimately, the Town will need to be responsible for identifying the vision for the site that will galvanize the community to support the adaptive reuse of the buildings. SPR’s growth and
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch 5
popularity has created momentum that will facilitate the implementation of the proposed site improvements and the adaptive reuse of the buildings within its historic core.
Implementation/Next Steps Based on the findings and analysis in the report, the following are the recommended next steps for the Town to take to implement the adaptive reuse of Steam Pump Ranch buildings. The needs or priorities identified below are not in a specific order.
♦ Open parks and recreation offices onsite in the Garage (the Oro Valley Town Council approved CIP funding for the Garage building at SPR for an office for the Recreation and Cultural Services division for FY 21).
Expand calendar of community recreational programming and use of site for events and facility rentals.
Use new experience gained with programs and events onsite to prioritize facility improvements and increase staff resources as needed.
♦ Identify and survey potential restaurant/café/catering operators/ or other compatible small businesses or not-for-profit organization about their interest in locating at Steam Pump Ranch in the Proctor-Lieber House and the location and facility requirements.
♦ Prepare and issue a request for proposals, if appropriate, for food service operators or other compatible small business.
♦ Develop strategy and implementation plans for exterior SPR spaces that will most effectively support the proposed building reuses.
Community events and rental facilities
Motorized and non-motorized circulation
Parking
Interpretive/visitor experience
Wayfinding/Signage
♦ Research and identify potential funding sources for the project, including sources related to parks and recreation development, historic preservation, economic and cultural development.
♦ Convene community partners and stakeholders to explore establishing the non-profit “friends” group as a conduit for funding Steam Pump Ranch.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch I-1
Section I
INTRODUCTION AND ASSUMPTIONS The Town of Oro Valley, AZ retained ConsultEcon, Inc. to evaluate the feasibility of adaptive reuse opportunities at Steam Pump Ranch (SPR). SPR is a heritage park listed on the National Registry of Historic Places for its local significance. It is owned and operated by the Town of Oro Valley and was founded in the late 19th century as an early Anglo settlement in the area. The site contains numerous historic buildings and structures from throughout different eras of its history, including the Pusch era ranch house and steam pump, which is a ruin today. The Town has operated SPR as a community park, with a weekly farmers market, community events, recreation, and a trailhead to the regional trail network. The building and site uses envisioned in the original and subsequent updates to the master plan have not materialized without the investments necessary to make the buildings useable. Instead, SPR has become the most popular park in Oro Valley through intentional programming by the Towns Parks and Recreation Department. This programming brings more individuals to the ranch and creates a sense of community. The current uses and activities at the site have spurred the town to revisit how the buildings are used and then adjust the master plan accordingly. This feasibility report focuses on the market, economic, and operational implications presented by various types of uses (identified in detail in Section II) that inform the potential adaptive reuse opportunities onsite.
Assumptions In preparing this report, the following assumptions were made. This study is qualified in its entirety by these assumptions. 1. Every reasonable effort has been made in order that the data contained in this study reflect the most accurate and timely information possible and it is believed to be reliable. This study is based on estimates, assumptions and other information developed by ConsultEcon, Inc. from its independent research efforts, general knowledge of the industry, and consultations with the client. No responsibility is assumed for inaccuracies in reporting by the client, its agents and representatives, or any other data source used in the preparation of this study. No warranty or representation is made that any of the projected values or results contained in this study will actually be achieved. There will usually be differences between forecasted or projected results and actual results because events and circumstances usually do not occur as expected. Other factors not considered in the study may influence actual results. 2. Possession of this report does not carry with it the right of publication. This report will be presented to third parties in its entirety and no abstracting of the report will be
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch I-2
made without first obtaining permission of ConsultEcon, Inc., which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. 3. This report may not be used for any purpose other than that for which it was prepared. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this study shall be disseminated to the public through advertising media, news media or any other public means of communication without the prior consent of ConsultEcon, Inc. 4. This report was prepared during April through August 2020. It represents data available at that time.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch II-1
Section II
OPPORTUNITIES TO RETAIN HISTORICAL FEATURES This section identifies opportunities to retain historical features at Steam Pump Ranch (SPR) based on various types of uses. Priority in the planning is given to the most significant historical features. These features can be highlighted as site interpretive elements. Some historical features however may be compromised or covered up by certain uses due to the need to modernize the buildings for future use. Depending on the intensity of user activity, some historical features may be at risk of deterioration due to wear and tear. Therefore, consideration of the appropriate uses for the historic features is important to retaining its historical integrity. The Historic Register nomination for SPR identifies eight buildings and five structures that are contributing features of the historic district. The matrix shown in Table II-1 identifies seven of the historical structures and identifies reuse opportunities to retain historical features for the uses proposed for SPR. SPR is already used for retail and food services through the farmers market, and public and private events. These uses are seasonal and episodic, which has enabled the site to accommodate market demand on an ongoing basis. These temporary uses occur for the most part outdoors and therefore retaining historical structures and buildings is straightforward. They provide a backdrop for activity. Historic uses such as food manufacture (chickens) and cooking (BBQ) can be reintroduced to the site, adapting the historic facilities for modern use, and establishing a connection to historical uses. Permanent year-round retail may occur within existing buildings (or in new buildings or structures not contemplated in this building reuse study). The spatial organization of the historical features and the future use and activity onsite inform which historical features may be retained. Some contributing structures, such as the pump house, will not be useable but can function as interpretive opportunities onsite. It is assumed that historic and other educational interpretation will continue to be offered by Oro Valley and its partners. Interpretive signage, wayfinding, and the delineation of program areas for educational offerings will support interpretive programming onsite that will highlight the historical features, including buildings, structures, and outdoor areas. The reuse types include:
♦ Retail
♦ Hospitality
♦ Cultural
♦ Studio
♦ Offices
♦ Education
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch II-2
Table II-1
Opportunities to Retain Historical Features
Use Steam Pump
Building (ruin)
and Water
Tanks
Pusch Ranch
House
East and West Bunk
Houses
Proctor-Lieber
House
Retail Not Applicable Retail use would enable the retention of historical features.
Retail use would enable the retention of historical features. Retail use would enable the retention of historical features. Hospitality Not Applicable Hospitality use would enable the retention of historical features.
Hospitality use would enable the retention of historical features. Hospitality use would enable the retention of historical features. Cultural Outdoor museum use Cultural use would enable the retention of historical features.
Cultural use would enable the retention of historical features. Cultural use would enable the retention of historical features. Studio Not Applicable Studio use would enable the retention of historical features.
Studio use would enable the retention of historical features. Studio use would enable the retention of historical features. Offices Not Applicable Office use would enable the retention of historical features.
Office use would enable the retention of historical features. Office use would enable the retention of historical features. Education Not Applicable Educational use would enable the retention of historical features.
Educational use would enable the retention of historical features. Educational use would enable the retention of historical features.
Discussion As a ruin, the Steam Pump Building is a feature of the heritage park and can be interpreted as a part of a museum program.
The Pusch House is the second largest building onsite with 1,337 SF. Any of the proposed uses would offer the retention of this historic resource.
The bunk houses offer approx. 465 SF of space each. Any of the proposed uses would offer the retention of this historic resource.
The largest building in the best condition at SPR, centrally located, with 4,690 SF. Any of the proposed uses would offer the retention of this historic resource.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch II-3
Table II-1 (continued)
Opportunities to Retain Historical Features
Reuse Chicken Coops Garage Carlos’ House Retail Not Applicable Retail use would enable the retention of historical features. Retail use would enable the retention of historical features. Hospitality Not Applicable Not Applicable Hospitality use would enable the retention of historical features. Cultural 4-H use/chicken coops and/or other agricultural activity Cultural use would enable the retention of historical features. Cultural use would enable the retention of historical features. Studio Not Applicable Studio use would enable the retention of historical features. Studio use would enable the retention of historical features. Offices Not Applicable Office use would enable the retention of historical features. Office use would enable the retention of historical features. Education Not Applicable Educational use would enable the retention of historical features. Educational use would enable the retention of historical features.
Discussion This open-air structure is not suitable for uses that require indoor space. The Chicken coops can be retained as ruins or improved to accommodate chickens or other agricultural activity and retain the historic resource.
The garage is centrally located with 1,494 SF. Any of the proposed uses would offer the retention of this historic resource. It is noted that hospitality is an unlikely reuse for this structure.
Carlos’ House offers over 732 SF. Any of the proposed uses would offer the retention of this historic resource.
Source: ConsultEcon, Inc.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch III-1
Section III
SITE AND BUILDING OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS This section evaluates the site opportunities and constraints including current building conditions impacting the preliminary list of proposed uses. Please refer to the prior section Opportunities to Retain Historical Features for a list of proposed uses. Existing buildings and most interior rooms are too small and have inefficient configurations for many of the proposed uses. Adaptive reuse requires matching uses to available spaces rather than traditional development process where spaces are developed for specific uses. Many of the site and building opportunities and constraints apply to all of the potential uses. Creating modern facilities within an adaptive use context can be a challenge due to the size, condition and configuration of buildings and available spaces. Air conditioning, utilities, and Wi-Fi will be required in buildings for all proposed reuses. Therefore, the capital investment required often makes obtaining an adequate return on investment infeasible. Data in Table III-1 identify site and buildings opportunities and constraints specific to each of the proposed use types. The six use types can be summarized into three groups—Cultural and Studio Use, Retail and Office Use, and Education and Hospitality Uses—in order from most to least appropriate for the available SPR site and building areas.
Culture and Studio Uses - Cultural and studio uses can be accommodated within indoor spaces at SPR and in the case of performing arts, in outdoor areas. Moreover, these uses are complimentary to the existing use of SPR focused on recreation, community events, and the farmers market. Having a multi-purpose meeting space or studio would support the Town’s recreation programming and offer a facility that is rentable, thereby increasing earned revenue opportunities.
Retail and Office Uses - The buildings at SPR are inadequately scaled to provide sufficient space for a critical mass of office or retail use, that would make for profitable development. The configuration too is not suitable for modern retail and office space. However, small scale retail uses, restaurant or a café, and office uses at SPR can support existing activity onsite, by the Town’s Parks and Recreation Department and its partners. 1 Due to the small amount of available space, it is reasonable to assume that the Town can attract a single office user or retail business to the site. Office users might include community oriented non-profit organizations, such as the Chamber of Commerce. A single retailer may not be economically viable without being a strong destination. Unlike product based retail uses, food service uses, such as a café, restaurant or catering operation, are more viable at SPR because a restaurant (in the Proctor-Lieber House, the only suitable building) can be a destination, is complementary to existing uses onsite, and can support the growth of events and rentals and create additional revenue for the business. Other retail onsite could be encouraged through 1 It should be noted that during the study period, the Town of Oro Valley decided to move parks and recreation staff to SPR.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch III-2
“pop up” stores, carts, food trucks and other temporary vendors synced with public events and other high visitation days. “Pop up” stores also have the added benefit of being low cost and implementable within a short period of time.
Education and Hospitality Uses - Available buildings at SPR are inadequate for long-term, daily educational and hospitality uses because they do not offer sufficient space for the type of use. The exception is event and reception use of building areas to support the use of outdoor areas for receptions and events. The event and reception activity would support the growth of existing community events and facility rentals. Improvements to the site and the buildings can make the events spaces more functional, efficient, and functional thereby improving the visitor experience, enhancing community events, and generating additional facility rental and event revenue.
Table III-1
Site and Building Opportunities and Constraints
Site/Building Opportunities Constraints
Site Interpretation throughout the site and incorporation of building ruins in visitor experience. Outdoor areas for community events and performances, and facility rentals, including picnic pavilions and other areas for more formal affairs, New recreation facilities, such as nature play area, and enhancement of Steam Pump Ranch as a trailhead and key node in the regional trail system.
Vehicular access, circulation and parking are challenging. The Town is addressing this issue, but future reuse of buildings may require additional improvements in access, circulation, and parking with changes to the site’s use.
Steam Pump
Building (ruin)
and Water Tanks Historical ruin, key interpretive feature of the site, subject of heritage site tour and educational programming. Delicate historic resource that needs to be preserved.
Pusch Ranch
House A museum could support site orientation and education. Alternatively, community art galleries or studios or meeting room are also appropriate for the building.
Museum use can be expensive to develop and operate, requiring substantial support for regular operations.
East and West
Bunk Houses
Master planned for at least one restroom building, ideally with dressing rooms to support events and facility rentals. The restrooms could be themed, with historically appropriate artifacts and pictures. These buildings could also include vending machines that offer snacks and beverages or a photo booth.
Small spaces limit the range of uses, so supportive visitor amenities are most appropriate.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch III-3
Table III-1 (continued)
Site and Building Opportunities and Constraints
Site/Building Opportunities Constraints
Proctor-Lieber
House Because of its size and current condition, the Proctor-Lieber house, restaurant, coffee shop, tasting room, tearoom or other food service business is complementary use, supportive of recreational activity and may offer catering onsite, a benefit for events and facility rentals. Other small boutique, retail or compatible small business would also be appropriate to rent the facility. Small office spaces could support other activity on the site.
Centrally located and therefore impacts other uses onsite. Locating a private business here may not be acceptable to some in the community because SPR is a public park.
Garage The garage has been slated for reuse as Town Parks and Recreation office and program space, which will support the expansion of activity.
Not applicable with planned Town use.
Carlos’ House Given its size and location, this building has good potential to be classroom/rentable space. The building can be configured to add year-round use of larger covered space in front of BBQ for use during summer or rain. Storage and a small sink/washing area can support activities and any food prep.
Small spaces and condition impact the potential reuse.
Source: ConsultEcon, Inc.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-1
Section IV
MARKET CONSIDERATIONS This section reviews the characteristics of the resident and tourist markets for Steam Pump Ranch (SPR). Due to its location in Oro Valley, a suburb of Tucson, and the programs offered by the Town of Oro Valley at SPR, visitation will primarily draw from the resident market, though some tourism may spill over from the Tucson area. People in the resident market, who are more likely to be repeat visitors, may also bring visiting friends and relatives to SPR to experience the local culture.
RESIDENT MARKET The Resident Market Area for SPR is defined as the area in which residents would visit the park as a primary purpose or as an important part of a day trip. Resident markets for heritage and recreational attractions like SPR are defined using a “gravity model” approach, where those living closer to an attraction are more likely to visit than those living farther away. On its periphery, the resident market changes over into the tourist market. For the purposes of this analysis, the Resident Market Area is defined as the area within a 45-minute driving distance from the project site. The Resident Market is further segmented as follows:
♦ The Primary Market Area – the area within a 15-minute drive of the site.
♦ The Secondary Market Area – the area within a 15- to 30-minute drive of the site.
♦ The Tertiary Market Area – the area within a 30- to 45-minute drive of the site.
Figure IV-1 is a map of the Resident Market Area with the outline of the town of Oro Valley and Figure IV-2 shows the regional context of the Resident Market Area in relation to the Tucson Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA).
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-2
Figure IV-1
Resident Market Area with Town of Oro Valley
Source: ESRI
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-3
Figure IV-2
Regional Context of Resident Market Area with Tucson MSA
Source: ESRI
Resident Market Characteristics The following sections describe characteristics of the population in the Resident Market Area, including population projections, age groups, household types, and household income cohorts.
Population Trend Data in Table IV-1 show the population of the Resident Market Area, based on 2010 census data with population estimates for 2020 and projections for 2025. In 2020 the Resident Market Area had a population of about 970,000, which is projected to grow 4.6 percent, to approximately 1.0 million, by 2025. The Resident Market Area is growing slower than the Town of Oro Valley and faster than the Tucson MSA.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-4
Table IV-1
Resident Market Area Population, 2010, 2020, 2025
Population Near SPR SPR is proximate to several apartment buildings and is walkable for nearby residents. ESRI reports about 600 residents live within a 20 min walk. Most SPR users would drive to the site.
Age Profile As an attraction focused primarily on cultural history and heritage, SPR will likely have broad appeal to multiple age groups including school groups, families with children, and older adults. Data in Table IV-2 show the age profile for the Resident Market Area population in the year 2020. This population had a median age of 38.6, significantly younger than that of the town and younger than that of the MSA. Important audiences for SPR are adults in their mid-20s through 40s with children and adults in their 40s and 50s who have more time and disposable income for recreational activities. The population in the Primary Market Area was slightly older on average, and the median age for the town of Oro Valley was 54.0 years old, showing that the immediate resident market fits into that older age group. The farthest parts of the Resident Market, in the 30 to 45-minute driving range, have a higher percentage of residents between ages 0 and 17 in comparison to the Primary Market Area.
Market Area 2010 2020 2025
Percent
Change,
2020 - 2025
Primary Market Area 119,712 132,734 138,912 4.7%
Secondary Market Area 376,522 408,054 429,642 5.3%
Tertiary Market Area 400,114 427,982 445,245 4.0%
Total Resident Market Area 896,348 968,770 1,013,799 4.6%
Town of Oro Valley 41,040 46,556 49,032 5.3%
Tucson MSA 980,263 1,066,136 1,112,948 4.4%
Sources: ESRI and ConsultEcon, Inc.
Note: The Resident Market Area is defined as the area within a 45-minute drive time of the
Steam Pump Ranch site. The Primary Market Area includes residents that live within a 15-
minute drive of the site, the Secondary Market Area includes residents that live between 15 and
30 minutes from the site and the Tertiary Market Area includes residents that live between 30
and 45 minutes from the site.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-5
Table IV-2
Resident Market Area Age Profile, 2020
Households Families make up an important part of visiting parties to cultural and education attractions like SPR, as families are often looking for entertaining and educational activities to do together. Data in Table IV-3 summarize the household characterization of the population of the Resident Market Area in 2020. Family households made up about 61 percent of households in the Resident Market Area, compared to 70 percent of the town of Oro Valley and 62 percent of the Tucson MSA. The average household size for the total Resident Market Area was 2.45, higher than that of the town and about the same as that of the MSA.
Table IV-3
Resident Market Area Household Profile, 2020
Market Area Median Age 0 - 17 18 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 54 55+
Primary Market Area 48.7 17%7%11%22%42%
Secondary Market Area 37.6 20%12%15%22%31%
Tertiary Market Area 36.5 24%9%15%23%29%
Total Resident Market Area 38.6 21%10%14%23%32%
Town of Oro Valley 54.0 16%6%8%22%48%
Tucson MSA 39.2 21%10%14%23%32%
Sources: ESRI and ConsultEcon, Inc.
Market Area
Estimated
Number of
Households
Estimated
Number of
Family
Households
Percent of
Families to
Total
Households
Average
Household
Size
Primary Market Area 57,108 37,132 65.0%2.31
Secondary Market Area 171,866 92,677 53.9%2.28
Tertiary Market Area 157,540 107,521 68.2%2.68
Total Resident Market Area 386,514 237,330 61.4%2.45
Town of Oro Valley 20,354 14,283 70.2%2.28
Tucson MSA 423,733 262,622 62.0%2.46
Sources: ESRI and ConsultEcon, Inc.
Note: Family households are defined by ESRI as households in which one or more persons in the
household are related to the head of household by birth, marriage, or adoption.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-6
Household Income The amount of income that a household has may indicate a household’s ability, both regarding the amount of disposable income and time inclination to visit attractions such as SPR. Further, higher incomes may also indicate a higher level of education, and, therefore, an interest in visiting educational attractions. Data in Table IV-4 summarize the income characteristics of households in the Resident Market Area. The median household income is $53,700, which is less than that of the town of Oro Valley and the Tucson MSA. Households in the Primary Market Area are more affluent than those in the Secondary and Tertiary Market Areas.
Table IV-4
Resident Market Area Income Profile, 2019
Participation in Recreational Activities The popularity and level of participation in different recreational activities in the Resident Market Area give an idea of what reasons visitors might have for coming to SPR as well as an idea of what kinds of programming may be popular at the site. With SPR’s location along popular walking and biking trails, residents participating in activities like road biking, jogging/running, and walking for exercise on those trails would have a higher chance of interacting with programs and activities at SPR. In the Resident Market Area, about 10 percent of residents participated in road biking, about 12 percent in jogging/running, and 23 percent in walking for exercise over the past 12 months.2 Programming opportunities for community recreation in adaptive reuse spaces at SPR include fitness classes like yoga or Pilates, which are less popular than walking, jogging, and biking but would provide a complimentary option to those activities, as well as other community programming like adult education classes. Other reuse opportunities for the historic buildings and spaces at SPR include cultural uses such as an art gallery or museum and live music performances (which are already popular on site) and theatre performance. People living in the Resident Market Area have demonstrated interest in such cultural activities, with about 8 percent visiting an 2 ESRI.
Market Area
Median
Household
Income
Less than
$25,000
$25,000 -
$49,999
$50,000 -
$74,999
$75,000 -
$99,999 $100,000+
Primary Market Area $72,033 12%20%20%14%35%
Secondary Market Area $48,262 26%24%17%10%22%
Tertiary Market Area $52,893 20%26%21%13%20%
Total Resident Market Area $53,662 21%25%19%12%23%
Town of Oro Valley $86,386 9%18%16%14%44%
Tucson MSA $54,382 21%24%19%12%24%
Sources: ESRI and ConsultEcon, Inc.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-7
art gallery and about 15 percent visiting a museum in the past 12 months.3 Some types of music performances were more popular than others, with more residents attending rock and country performances than classical music and opera performances, and about 12 percent of residents attended a live theater performance in the past 12 months. One of the potential uses for the Proctor-Lieber House is a small restaurant or café. About 50 percent of the Resident Market Area, nearly half a million people, said they dined out in the last 12 months. With SPRs connection to walking trails and other recreational activities onsite, a small coffee shop or café could appeal to many visitors.4
Resident Market Summary The Resident Market Area for SPR is defined as the area within a 45-minute drive time from the site. Within the Resident Market Area, the markets are further broken out into the Primary Market Area (the area within a 15-minute drive), the Secondary Market Area (the area within a 15 to 30-minute drive), and the Tertiary Market Area (the area within a 30 to 45-minute drive). This Resident Market Area had the following characteristics in 2019:
♦ An estimated population of about 970,000, which is projected to grow 4.6 percent by 2025, to 1.0 million. The population is growing slower than that of the town of Oro Valley and faster than that of the Tucson MSA.
♦ A median age of 38.6, younger than the population of Oro Valley and older than that of the Tucson MSA.
♦ An average household size of 2.45 persons, larger than households in Oro Valley and about the same as households in the Tucson MSA. Approximately 61 percent of households were family households, less than that of Oro Valley and more than that of the Tucson MSA.
♦ A median household income of approximately $53,700, lower than in Oro Valley and in the Tucson MSA. The most affluent population lives in the Primary Market Area.
♦ Interest in recreational activities that relate to opportunities for adaptive reuse of spaces at SPR, such as outdoor activities on the area’s trail system like walking, jogging, and biking, community recreation activities like fitness classes and adult education classes, and cultural activities like art galleries, museums, and live music and theatre performances, give an idea of what kind of programming and/or tenants might appeal to area residents. There is also an interest in eating at restaurants, which would also compliment any recreational activities at SPR. According to the Town of Oro Valley Parks and Recreation Master Plan – Phase One 2020 Report, key market considerations in the area include:
a need for increased parks and recreation services as the population grows;
3 Ibid. 4 Ibid.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-8
a need for programming geared towards various age groups;
an ability to generate revenue through unique and high service level amenities from the affluent population in the surrounding area; and,
an aging population in the area that is in or is approaching retirement and therefore has additional leisure time to spend. The same report included key inputs from the community regarding the potential for development, investment, preservation, advocacy, and earned revenue opportunities at SPR. The community expressed their desire for reinvestment and development at SPR as well as enhanced economic opportunities for the town through festivals and community events. SPR is an attractive venue for festivals and community events. Other opportunities supported by the community include meeting the recreational needs of community organizations such as the school district, the further development of a connected and accessible trail system, and the importance of continuing to secure funding through earned revenue opportunities and grants for park development. These considerations support adaptive reuse opportunities at SPR that include programming geared towards the specific needs and interests of the Resident Market Area as well as small food service or retail businesses on site.
TOURIST MARKET
Arizona Tourism The state of Arizona received 45.5 million overnight visitors in 2018 with internationally known sites like the Grand Canyon, Saguaro National Park, Monument Valley, and many more.5 About 39.6 million (or 87%) of overnight visitors came from within the United States and 5.9 million came from international origins (13%).6 With their shared international land border, Mexico is by far the largest source of international visitors to Arizona, with 3.8 million overnight trips in 2018.7 Domestic overnight visitation increased 3.4 percent from 38.3 million visitors in 2017. About 84 percent of domestic overnight visitors to the state were traveling on leisure (16% on business) and about 28 percent were in-state visitors (72% out of state).
Tucson Area Tourism SPR in Oro Valley is within the Tucson Metropolitan Statistical Area, 14 miles north of downtown Tucson (30 minutes driving) and about 115 miles southeast of downtown Phoenix (about 2 hours driving).8 The Tucson and Southern Arizona region, as defined by Visit Arizona and shown in Figure IV-3, received 6.8 million domestic overnight visitors in 2018, about 17 percent of total domestic overnight visitation to the state.9 Most domestic overnight visitors 5 Arizona Office of Tourism, Arizona Travel Industry Impacts Interactive Dashboard, https://www.travelstats.com/dashboard?ucode=300. 6 Arizona Office of Tourism, Arizona Domestic Overnight Visitor Profile, 2018. 7 Visit Tucson, 2018-19 Annual Report and 2019-20 Marketing Plan, 2019. 8 Google maps. 9 Arizona Office of Tourism, Arizona vs. Tucson and Southern Region Domestic Overnight Visitor Profile, 2018.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-9
were traveling on leisure (84%) and came from out of state (59%). The average length of stay was 3.1 nights and the most popular activities for visitors were shopping, national and state parks, landmarks and historic sights, and hiking/backpacking. State and national parks in the southern half of the state received 3.5 billion visits in 2019, with 428.3 million visits to parks in the historical category (the other categories are scenic and water-based).10 SPR would also benefit greatly from day trip visitors to Tucson, with just under 6.5 million residents within a 3-hour drive of the ranch.11 The site is about 80 miles and 1.5 hours driving from the nearest border crossing into Nogales, Mexico.
Figure IV-3
Map of Tucson & Southern Arizona Tourism Region, 2020
Source: Visit Arizona.
10 University of Arizona Economic and Business Research Center, Arizona State and National Park Visitation,
2015 – 2019, 2020. 11 ESRI.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-10
LOCAL ATTRACTIONS Data in Table IV-5 present a list of 25 attractions in the Tucson area with their annual attendance, admission and membership pricing, and short descriptions of each. Many of the most popular attractions are nature-based, such as Saguaro National Park, the Sabino Canyon Recreation Area, and the Reid Park Zoo, as well as several other indoor-outdoor attractions and history and heritage-based attractions. Attractions in the Tucson area are spread out and most visitors and residents in the region use cars as their primary mode of transportation.
Table IV-5
Local Attractions, 2020
Ranked by Annual Attendance
Name and Location
Annual
Attendance
Admission and Family
Membership Pricing Description Saguaro National Park
Around Tucson, AZ
1,020,226 1/ Weekly park entrance pass costs $25 per vehicle or $15 per individual
National park named for the large native Saguaro cactus. Sabino Canyon Recreation Area
Tucson, AZ
1,000,000 2/ Entrance fee of $8 per vehicle Located within the Coronado National Forest with hiking, wildlife viewing, and a tram that runs throughout. Reid Park Zoo
Tucson, AZ
525,000 Adults - $10.50 Youth (2-14) - $6.50 Children (Under 2) – Free Family Membership - $80
24-acre city zoo with more than 500 animals.
Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum
Tucson, AZ 378,489 Adults - $21.95 Youth (3-12) - $9.95 Children (under 3) – Free Family Membership - $125
Nationally recognized museum that provides a fusion experience with a zoo, botanical garden, art gallery, natural history museum, and aquarium. Catalina State Park
Tucson, AZ
254,953 3/ Park entrance fee of $7 per vehicle or $3 per individual State park with 5,500 acres of foothills, canyons, and streams. Tucson Museum of Art & Historic Block
Tucson, AZ
237,000 Adult - $10 Youth (13-17) - $7 Children (under 13) – Free Family Membership - $60
Art museum and education center.
Kartchner Caverns State Park
Benson, AZ 176, 464 3/ Park entrance fee of $7.00 per vehicle or $3.00 per individual State park featuring a cave with 2.4 miles of passages. Pima Air & Space Museum
Tucson, AZ
175,000 Adults - $16.50 Junior (5-12) - $10 Child (Under 5) – Free Family Membership - $80
Museum dedicated to aviation history with several decommissioned military aircraft. 1/ National Park Service, https://irma.nps.gov/STATS/. 2/ National Forest Service, https://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/coronado/recreation/recarea/?recid=80532. 3/ Arizona Office of Tourism, https://tourism.az.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/State-Parks-December-2019.pdf. Sources: Official Museum Directory; Facility Websites; and ConsultEcon, Inc.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-11
Table IV-5 (continued)
Local Attractions, 2020
Ranked by Annual Attendance
Name and Location Annual
Attendance Admission and Family
Membership Pricing Description Tohono Chul Park
Tucson, AZ
170,000 Adult - $15 Youth (5-12) - $6 Children (under 5) – Free Family Membership - $65
49-acre desert botanical gardens and art exhibits.
Children’s Museum Tucson
Tucson, AZ
161,798 Adult - $9 Children (under 1) – Free Children’s museum.
Tucson Botanical Gardens
Tucson, AZ
100,000 Adults - $15 Youth (4-17) - $8 Children (under 4) – Free Family Membership - $70
Sixteen residentially scaled urban gardens on 5.5 acres.
Boyce Thompson Arboretum
Superior, AZ 85,000 Adults - $15 Children (5-12) - $5 Family Membership - $85 Oldest and largest botanical garden in the state of Arizona. Fort Huachuca Museum
Fort Huachuca, AZ 70,000 No entrance fee Museum on site of army camp from 19th century. Casa Grande Ruins National Monument
Coolidge, AZ 68,379 1/ No entrance fee Ruins of Ancestral Sonoran Desert farming community. Kitt Peak National Observatory
Tucson, AZ
60,000 No entrance fee Most diverse collection of astronomical observatories on earth. Flandrau Science Center and Planetarium
Tucson, AZ
50,000 Adult - $16 Youth (4-17) - $12 Children (under 4) – Free Family Membership - $105
Science museum and planetarium at the University of Arizona. Titan Missile Museum
Green Valley, AZ
50,000 Adults $13.50; Seniors & Groups $12.50; Juniors (5-12) $10 Museum dedicated to a formerly operational Titan missile site from the Cold War. DeGrazia Gallery in the Sun Museum
Tucson, AZ
50,000 Adults - $8 Youth (12-18) - $5 Children (under 12) – Free Family Membership - $55
National Historic District built by Arizona artist Ted DeGrazia in the 1950s. International Wildlife Museum
Tucson, AZ
48,119 Adult - $10 Youth (4-12) - $5 Children (under 4) – Free Family Membership - $60
Museum with collections of insects, mammals and birds from around the world. 1/ National Park Service, https://irma.nps.gov/STATS/. Sources: Official Museum Directory; Facility Websites; and ConsultEcon, Inc.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-12
Table IV-5 (continued)
Local Attractions, 2020
Ranked by Attendance
Name and Location Annual
Attendance Admission and Family
Membership Pricing Description Arizona State Museum
Tucson, AZ
34,847 Adult - $8 Children (under 18) – Free Family Membership - $75 Anthropological research museum that conducts all archaeological activity on state lands. Oracle State Park
Oracle, AZ
14,401 3/ Park entrance fee of $7.00 per vehicle or $3.00 per individual 4,000-acre wildlife refuge located in the foothills of the Santa Catalina Mountains. San Xavier del Bac Mission
Tucson, AZ
2,000 No entrance fee National Historic Landmark of Spanish Catholic mission on the Tohono O’odham reservation. Old Tucson Studios
Tucson, AZ
Not available Adults - $19.95 Youth (4-11) - $10.95 Children (under 4) - Free Former movie studio and current theme park. Sentinel Peak Mountain
Tucson, AZ
Not available No entrance fee Prominent landmark, hiking trail, and park. Children’s Museum Oro Valley
Oro Valley, AZ
Not available Adult - $7 Children (under 1) – Free Satellite children’s museum to the Children’s Museum Tucson. 3/ Arizona Office of Tourism, https://tourism.az.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/State-Parks-December-2019.pdf. Sources: Official Museum Directory; Facility Websites; and ConsultEcon, Inc.
Real Estate Market Some of the uses considered for SPR such as retail and office space are available in other spaces in Oro Valley and the Tucson region. Therefore, potential site users have options for retail and office space in the region. Because of the historic use and characteristics of the site and buildings, they do not offer efficient or functional space for large amounts of retail and office use. Therefore, the most likely retail or office tenants are those that have a reason to locate at SPR due to the existing activity that is occurring there. Potential retail or office tenants may include but are not limited to the Town of Oro Valley Parks and Recreation Department, additional town department or divisions, and other appropriate partners of the Town of Oro Valley. Other potential tenants could include vendors affiliated with the farmers market. Based on a review of the available retail and office listings in the Town of Oro Valley, retail rents range from $17 to $18 per square foot and office rents range from $19 to $26 per square foot. Data in Table IV-6 show the retail and office spaces available for rent in Oro Valley as of May 22, 2020, with the total square footage, annual rental cost, and location. There were six office spaces available for rent and five retail spaces.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-13
Table IV-6
Retail and Office Spaces Available for Rent in Oro Valley, May 2020
Description
Retail or
Office Total Square Feet
Rent (per SF per
year) 7440 N Oracle Rd Building 4 Office 1,361 SF $21.00 6875 N Oracle Rd Plaza Campana Office 2,567 – 17,653 SF $20.75 - $22.75 6840 N Oracle Rd Office 6,209 – 10,183 SF $25.75 7445 N Oracle Rd Sun Professional Center Office 2,148 SF $21.00 190 W Magee Rd Ridge View Plaza Office 547 – 6,192 SF $19.50 180 W Magee Rd Ridge View Plaza Office 1,241 SF $19.50 7250 – 7356 N Oracle Rd Cottonwood Plaza Retail 4,325 SF $18.00 7951 N Oracle Rd Entrada De Oro Shopping Center Retail 1,130 – 8,206 SF $18.00 12925 – 13005 N Oracle Rd Rancho Vistoso Center Retail 1,435 – 38,211 SF Upon request 7001 – 7153 N Oracle Rd Casas Adobes Plaza Retail 1,017 – 10,132 SF Upon request 10370 N La Canada Dr La Canada Building Retail 1,333 – 6,333 SF $17.00 Sources: LoopNet.com and ConsultEcon, Inc.
Summary SPR will draw visitation from resident and tourist markets. With its location in suburban Oro Valley and the programming offered by SPR, visitation will primarily come from the resident market, though some tourism may spill over from Tucson. The Resident Market Area for SPR is defined as the area within a 45-minute drive time from the site and had a population of about 970,000 in 2020. The population is growing slower than that of the town of Oro Valley and faster than that of the Tucson MSA, with a projected 5-year growth rate of 4.6 percent. The average household size was 2.45 persons, and approximately 61 percent of households were family households. SPR is about 14 miles north of downtown Tucson, about 30 minutes driving. Interest in recreational activities that relate to opportunities for adaptive reuse of spaces at SPR, such as outdoor activities on the area’s trail system like walking, jogging, and biking, community recreation activities like fitness classes and adult education classes, and cultural activities like art galleries, museums, and live music and theatre performances, give an idea of what kind of programming and/or tenants might be successful at SPR. There is also interest in eating at restaurants, which would also compliment any recreational activities at SPR. The Town of Oro Valley Parks and Recreation Master Plan report for Phase 1 included key market considerations and inputs from the community regarding development and investments at SPR. These findings support many of the adaptive reuse opportunities at SPR, including
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch IV-14
community recreation activities and programming and economic growth opportunities from dedicating space to food service, retail, or office businesses on site. The Tucson and Southern Arizona region of the state, as defined by Visit Arizona, received 6.8 million domestic overnight visitors in 2018, about 17 percent of total domestic overnight visitation to the state. Most visitors were traveling on leisure (84%) and came from out of state (59%). SPR would also benefit from day trip visitors to Tucson, with just under 6.5 million residents within a 3-hour drive of the ranch. Many of the most popular local attractions in the Tucson area are nature based, in addition to several indoor-outdoor attractions and history and heritage-based attractions. Attractions in the area are spread out and most visitors and residents use cars as their primary mode of transportation. The real estate market for retail and office space at SPR is influenced by other available spaces in Oro Valley and the Tucson region as well as the site’s unique and historic use and characteristics. The most likely retail or office tenants are those with related activities, such as the Town of Oro Valley Parks and Recreation Department, additional town departments or divisions, and other appropriate partner organizations Retail rents range from $17 to $18 per square foot and office rents range from $19 to $26 per square foot for available listings in Oro Valley (Table IV-6 shows a list of spaces available for rent in the area).
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch V-1
Section V
ADAPTIVE REUSE OPPORTUNITIES This section evaluates the adaptive reuse opportunities based on a list of criteria, prepared in conjunction with the Parks and Recreation Department staff, that builds off of the prior analyses of opportunities to retain historical features; site and building opportunities and constraints; and market considerations.
Reuse Opportunity Citizen surveys conducted for the Town’s Parks and Recreation master plan indicate that Steam Pump Ranch (SPR) has become a popular signature park in the Town’s park system. The popularity of recreational uses, the farmers market, and community events is growing, and the existing facilities that support these uses can be improved to support future growth. As time goes by, the need for investment in SPR infrastructure—its historical buildings and the site as a whole—to support future use becomes more critical. The existing site activity has the potential to grow with targeted investments to the farmers market; community events and recreation; and heritage ranch activities onsite. Existing uses and activity patterns of the site should inform potential demand for building space moving forward. Adaptive reuse of buildings should be supportive of the potential future uses of the site. The overall site use and activity will inform this study of the adaptive reuse of the buildings. Generalized zones of site activity include the marketplace, the food/community events area, and the heritage ranch, as shown in Figure V-1. Building use should be geared to support the events and activities in these general zones.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch V-2
Figure V-1
Site Map with Three Zones
Source: Google Earth and ConsultEcon, Inc.
Site Plans Impacting Building Use Future uses of the buildings will be dependent upon the plans for SPR’s exterior areas. Some of the plans that will impact future building use include:
♦ Motorized and non-motorized circulation plan – Because of the various types of activities in each zone, there are multiple circulation patterns that support site use and activity. Buildings will be activated in different ways at different times of day, during different times of week, and seasons of the year. The circulation plans should address the needs of all types of site users to accommodate the range of activity that will occur at the site.
♦ Parking plan – In conjunction with the circulation plan, the amount and location of parking will be critical for visibility and accessibility, especially if a private business is to be located on the site as they will require or prefer convenient parking in order to make their business viable. The parking plan should address how the site will be configured for regular in and out of season use and scheduled event and program related use.
♦ Interpretive/visitor experience plan – This plan is critical to the successful integration of historic resources and heritage education onsite. The historic character of the site helps to create a unique sense of place that is different from most development in Oro Valley. SPR’s market, event and recreational use creates an opportunity to educate a broader public about the history of the site than if the site were a heritage ranch alone.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch V-3
♦ Wayfinding/Signage plan – People will need to understand how to enter and exit the site via multiple modes of transportation (e.g. walk, bike, vehicle, bus, horse trailer, etc.). The wayfinding and signage plan will help people enter and exit SPR and circulate the site internally efficiently The plans listed above are not mutually exclusive but overlapping. Overall, the SPR site needs to be designed in such a way to maximize the accessibility and functionality of activity zones and to diversify and improve the overall SPR visitor experience.
Adaptive Reuse Opportunities for Buildings in the Historic Core Site use and activities will drive the reuse of the buildings. The buildings provide supportive space including public and non-public areas to maximize the use and activity on site focused on community recreation, farmers market expansion, and facility rentals. As described in prior sections, there is a small amount of area in historic buildings, and so available space is at a premium. New construction may be warranted to support new visitor infrastructure onsite. The new Town Parks and Recreation offices in the garage will support more efficient operations and more community use of the site. Of the historic resources, the heritage ranch buildings are an important component of SPR’s identity, but it is not the primary driver of site use. The heritage attraction is challenged by economic feasibility and may require more support from the Town than originally thought. Many interpretive and educational goals of SPR could be accomplished through interpretive exhibit panels and outdoor gathering areas for tours and educational activities as opposed to within an indoor museum space.
Following are the adaptive reuse opportunities identified for the buildings at the historic core of SPR.
♦ Pusch Ranch House – This is a small house that can accommodate exhibits, orientation, and other public and non-public space for indoor museum exhibits that would be a part of the heritage ranch experience. The Oro Valley Historical Society offers tours of the site current and is a natural partner. The museum could work in conjunction with the outdoor heritage visitor experience and interpretive plan encompassing the entire site.
♦ Pump House - Ruins are associated with the heritage ranch and museum experience. The namesake pump is arguably the most historic asset and can be a centerpiece of the visitor experience and interpretative plan for the entire site.
♦ Bunk Houses – The building works in conjunction with the garage and Proctor-Lieber House to provide community recreation and events support spaces, such as green room/bridal suite, catering, back of house, studio, etc. This space is master planned for restrooms and with its location within event spaces especially with outdoor activities, it is needed as such. Museum items could be incorporated. Dressing rooms would also be a needed addition for any living museum activities on site or outdoor performances.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch V-4
♦ Proctor-Lieber House – This building is the largest building with the two largest rooms onsite (566 and 703 square feet). It is the most modern building, and presumably, the most readily renovated for future use. Depending on the structural requirements, walls may need to be reconfigured for modernization and creating public and back of house facilities that support the growth of the site’s events and facility rentals. Permanent catering or commercial kitchen facilities are a good opportunity to create food service offerings onsite for events, rentals, and perhaps even on a day to day basis, depending on the type of food service offering. Other compatible uses are also possible. The house could work in conjunction with the garage and the bunk house to provide community recreation and events support spaces, such as green room/bridal suite, back of house, meeting rooms, classrooms, studio, etc. The configuration of the house and the walled yard create opportunities for indoor and outdoor experiences, such as indoor/outdoor events space or restaurant dining area. Other small compatible businesses and/or not-for-profit may also work well in this limited space.
♦ Garage – The Town’s Parks and Recreation offices are planned to be located onsite, providing community recreation and events support spaces.
♦ Carlos’ House – This building can become a rentable BBQ pavilion and multi-purpose meeting room, contributing to the overall use and activity of the park and creating new revenue opportunity.
♦ Chicken Coops – The chicken coops can be agricultural displays linked to the 4-H Club or other agricultural clubs. The chicken coops have limited reuse potential, but they contribute to the overall heritage park experience and become the setting for community driven programming. Data in Table V-1 present an evaluation of the proposed building uses listed above, based on criteria developed in conjunction with the Town.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch V-5
Table V-1
Evaluation Criteria for Proposed Building Reuse
Evaluation
Criteria
Steam Pump
Building (ruin)
Pusch Ranch
House
East and West
Bunk Houses
Proctor-Lieber
House
Compatibility
with
Surrounding
Uses
Compatible with Heritage Ranch. A ghosted structure/ramada was added in 2017 to protect the ruin from the elements.
Compatible with Heritage Ranch. Compatible with community events and recreation and heritage interpretation if themed.
Compatible with community events and recreation and heritage interpretation if themed.
Suitability of
proposed uses
for buildings
Heritage Ranch use is suitable. Heritage Ranch use is suitable. Community events and recreation are suitable uses.
Community events and recreation, including food service facility, are suitable uses.
Market Support Small amount of visitation compared to park and recreation visitation.
Small amount of visitation compared to park and recreation visitation.
Market support indicated by existing level of park activity and community support for the park.
Market support indicated by existing level of park activity and community support for the park. The Town can test the market support for redeveloping the Proctor-Lieber House by issuing an RFI or RFP.
Historic
preservation
opportunities
This use preserves the historic ruin. This use preserves the historic building. This use preserves the historic building. This use preserves the historic building.
Operational
funding
Funding through the Town and through non-profit operating partners.
Funding through the Town and through non-profit operating partners.
Funding through the Town. Potential to attract a private operator that would fund operations through revenue generation onsite
Capital funding Funding through the Town and through non-profit operating partners.
Funding through the Town and through non-profit operating partner, partners.
Funding through the Town. Funding through the Town.
Community
benefits/impacts
Informal education, tourism development, community pride.
Informal education, tourism development, community pride.
Health and wellness, community cohesion and social capital.
Economic development, community cohesion and social capital.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch V-6
Table V-1(continued)
Evaluation Criteria for Proposed Building Reuse
Evaluation
Criteria
Chicken Coops Garage Carlos’ House
Compatibility
with
Surrounding
Uses
Compatible with community events and recreation. Compatible with community events and recreation. Compatible with community events and recreation.
Suitability of
proposed uses
for
buildings/site
The proposed community use is suitable. Community events and recreation and Town offices are suitable uses. Community events and recreation are suitable uses.
Market Support Market support indicated by existing level of park activity and community support for the park
Market support indicated by existing level of park activity and community support for the park
Market support indicated by existing level of park activity and community support for the park
Historic
preservation
opportunities
This use preserves the historic building. This use preserves the historic building. This use preserves the historic building.
Operational
funding
Funding through the Town. Funding through the Town. Funding through the Town.
Capital funding Funding through the Town. Funding through the Town. Funding through the Town.
Community
benefits/impacts
Informal education, community pride, community cohesion and social capital.
Health and wellness, community cohesion and social capital. Health and wellness, community cohesion and social capital. Source: ConsultEcon, Inc.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch VI-1
Section VI
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT This section provides a qualitative evaluation of the economic feasibility of the adaptive reuse opportunities identified in the prior section. Aspects of economic feasibility of adaptive reuse for operating revenue, including earned revenue contributions, and government support; costs associated with rehabilitation and redevelopment; operating costs; and potential staffing. Data in Table VI-1 show the economic feasibility assessment of each of the buildings.
Table VI-1
Economic Feasibility Assessment
Aspect of
Feasibility
Steam Pump
Building (ruin)
Pusch Ranch
House
East and West
Bunk Houses
Proctor-Lieber
House
Earned
Revenue
Not applicable Program fees to Oro Valley Historical Society External rentals, programming, internal special events. Vending machines, such as snacks and beverages or photo booth.
Concessions, external rentals, programming, internal special events
Private
Support for
Operations
Oro Valley Historical Society Not applicable Support for operations would occur if it were rented or leased.
Town
Support for
Operations
Yes Yes Yes Yes, if operated by Town
Staffing
Needs
None As needed by Oro Valley Historical Society Parks and Rec. Dept. for cleaning and maintenance. Concessionaire maintains vending.
Private Operator or Parks and Rec. Dept.
Operating
Costs Needs
Maintenance Maintenance and building utilities; program costs Maintenance and building utilities; program costs Maintenance and building utilities; program costs
Capital
Funding
Opportunities
Completed through a grant and CIP funds in 2017. Town capital improvement program and private partners, the Oro Valley Historical Society or other fundraising entity.
Town capital improvement program. Town capital improvement program and private partner, food service operator. Historic tax credits and other historic preservation funds may apply.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch VI-2
Table V-1 (continued)
Economic Feasibility Assessment
Aspect of
Feasibility
Chicken Coops Garage Carlos’ House
Earned
Revenue
Not applicable External rentals, programming, internal special events External rentals, programming, internal special events
Private
Support for
Operations
4-H club or other community organization Not applicable Not applicable
Town Support
for Operations
Yes Yes Yes
Staffing Needs None Parks and Rec. Dept. Parks and Rec. Dept.
Operating
Costs Needs
Maintenance Maintenance and building utilities; program costs Maintenance and building utilities; program costs
Capital
Funding
Opportunities
Town capital improvement program. Town capital improvement program. Town capital improvement program. Source: ConsultEcon, Inc. While SPR buildings may be rehabilitated and renovated individually, their economic feasibility is interconnected and driven by the uses and programming occurring throughout the site. Following is an assessment of key aspects of feasibility for the project as whole.
Operating Revenue Public parks and historic attractions typically do not earn enough revenue to cover the cost of operations. In the case of public parks, the revenue for operations is provided by government agencies, and in the case of private, non-profit heritage attractions, by private philanthropy. SPR is both a public park and a heritage attraction and so can leverage both public funds as well as private philanthropic dollars. The governance of SPR has direct implications for funding operations because of the different sources of revenue available to government and to private non-profit operations. The public-private partnership has an array of project partners that have contributed to the growth in use and development of SPR over time. The Town provides revenue from Town budget for ongoing maintenance and operations and for recreational programming and events onsite. Heirloom Farmers Market is a non-profit that relies on market vendor fees as well as private grants and contributions. The Oro Valley Historical Society is a volunteer run organization with limited funds. SPR generates earned revenue for the Town currently—$46,000 in fiscal year ending June 30, 2020—mostly through programming and internal special events, as well as external rentals and concessions/vendors. Based on the identified building adaptive reuse opportunities, there is potential to increase all sources of earned revenue because the improvements will be more functional, useable, and marketable.
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch VI-3
Operating Costs To increase earned revenue requires a commensurate investment in operations with potentially more Town staff and higher levels of fixed and variable costs. The Town provides for basic site and buildings maintenance and operations, largely fixed costs, and will continue to do so in the future. It also delivers programming and internal special events that are variable costs but also have the potential to generate revenue and offset new costs. The Town investment in operations at SPR will be contingent upon community needs, political support, and Town budget priorities. Private partner operating costs onsite are currently variable according to the amount they use the site to deliver programming. If private partners establish a permanent onsite presence, occupying dedicated space year-round, then they will need to provide for their own operations (staffing and program costs) as well as the fixed costs of site and building maintenance and operations.
Staffing Staffing on the site will be provided by the Town of Oro Valley. Locating parks and recreation staff at SPR will help to increase efficiency and delivery of public programming and internal special events and coordinate with facility renters and vendors. Therefore, there will be increased capacity to grow the use and activity of the site. The Town may then take measured steps to increase staff on site as the programming evolves and the capital improvements are made to the facilities onsite.
Public-Private Partnership Development Moving forward, the Town of Oro Valley should leverage existing and new private partners, to generate programming activity at SPR and fund operations of that activity. The Town should seek private operator for reuse of the Proctor-Lieber House focused on establishing a business that can generate additional revenue to the Town in the form of rent. This type of relationship also may enable the Town to pass through the costs of operating and maintaining not only the building but a portion of the site. Securing a private operator with a viable business plan will be important to establishing a sound economic basis for the capital improvements to the Proctor-Lieber House. It will also help to identify how much subsidy the Town will be required to provide through its capital improvement program or other sources of funds. If a private operator cannot be identified, then the Town will have to work to activate the building itself. A Town led project would require a different development program and operation geared towards enabling outside caterers, food services, compatible small business, and the public to use the facilities. The cost of the project would likely be lower with downscaled kitchen facilities.
Capital Funding Adaptive use of historic buildings often requires public subsidy to fill a financing gap in redevelopment and to justify the investment in rehabilitating buildings for modern use. In other words, adaptive reuse of historic buildings offers an inadequate “market rate” return on investment. Because of their unique nature and historic significance, federal, state, and local
ConsultEcon, Inc.
Management & Economic Insight September 3, 2020
Steam Pump Ranch VI-4
government policies support designation of historic properties and subsidies to fund adaptive reuse projects. SPR’s historic buildings and structures are costly to rehabilitate. Prior Town building assessments have indicated the level of investment needed for reuse of SPR’s historic buildings. As detailed in prior sections, most of the buildings contain a suboptimal amount and type of space. Therefore, the Town will need to provide some if not all the funds for capital improvements. Some of this capital cost may be defrayed by attracting private grants and contributions and other governmental support. A non-profit organization, a “friends’ group,” may be established to raise funds for SPR preservation, rehabilitation, and development because they can access different sources of funding compared to the Town. Nonetheless, the project’s underlying economic feasibility is largely dependent upon the Town allocating or attracting sufficient capital funds and increasing its parks and recreation budget to accommodate the growth in SPR site use and programming. Ultimately, the Town will need to be responsible for identifying the vision for the site that will galvanize the community to support the adaptive reuse of the buildings. SPR’s growth and popularity has created momentum that will facilitate the implementation of the proposed site improvements and the adaptive reuse of the buildings within its historic core.
Historic Preservation Commission 5.
Meeting Date:12/06/2021
Submitted By:MaryAnne Tolmie, Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT:
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2022 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
N/A
BACKGROUND OR DETAILED INFORMATION:
Attached is the proposed schedule.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I MOVE to approve (approve with changes) the 2022 meeting schedule of the Historic Preservation Commission.
Attachments
CY 2022 HPC Meeting Schedule
HPC MEETING DATES 2022
Meeting Date Meeting Type
Monday, January 3, 2022 Regular Meeting, Elections
Monday, February 7, 2022 Regular Meeting
Monday, March 7, 2022 Regular Meeting
Monday, April 4, 2022 Regular Meeting
Monday, May 2, 2022 Regular Meeting
Monday, June 6, 2022 Regular Meeting
July Summer Break
August Summer Break
Tuesday, September 6, 2022 Regular Meeting
*moved from 9/5 Labor Day
Monday, October 3, 2022 Regular Meeting
Monday, November 7, 2022 Regular Meeting
Monday, December 5, 2022 Regular Meeting
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE CALENDAR YEAR 2022
https://orovalleyaz.sharepoint.com/parkrec/Parks and Rec Document Library/HPC/FY 2022 HPC/CY 2022 HPC Meeting Schedule DeadlinesHPC MEETING DATES 2022 12/6/2021