HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (964)7435 N. Oracle Rd., Suite 107
GREATER
Oro Valley, AZ 85704
ORO VALLEY �-\
P: 520.297.2191
Chamlmr
CommerCtte
F: 520.742.7960
�
orovalleychamber.com
Chairman
Greg Durnan
................................................................................................................................................
Jan. 7, 2019
Acacia lT
Mayor Joe Winfield
Vice chair
Nancy Boyle
Members of the Town Council
Splendido at Rancho
Town staff
Vistoso
Secretary
Ladies and gentlemen,
Anne -Marie Braswell
Golder Ranch Fire District
A healthy, happy 2019 to you and yours.
Past chair
Our Chamber stands in support of a new master sign program
Toni Dorsey
for the Placita de Oro Shopping Center, Item 2 on your regular
AAA Arizona
agenda Wednesday, Jan. 9.
Directors
Placita de Oro has an array of businesses — off the top of my
Alan Dankwerth
head a bank a pharmacy, a women's clothing boutique a
Market Considerations
> > > >
Goodwill drop-off, a nail salon, a Mexican restaurant, a Subway, a
Veronica Apodaca
Northwest Healthcare /
Pilates studio, a salon, a 24-hour gym, a hardware store, an
Oro Valley Hospital
Edward Jones location, a dry cleaner, a home entertainment
Jeff
o Aiutomotive
business — but you'd hardly know of them without driving in.
Placita de Oro is much set back from Tangerine Road. Lovely
Mark Mitchell
Mark Mitchell CPA
trees block some of the external view. It has confusing egress
Kay Williams
and ingress along Tangerine (some form of signage at the
Southern Arizona
western-most entrymight be warranted). And the existing
g ) g
Veterans and First
Responders Living
monument sign package is too small and too dull, particularly for
Memorial
higher speed southbound traffic on Rancho Vistoso / First
Cindy Webb Hanson
OneAZ Credit Union
Avenue.
Eric Renaud
Larger monument signs, using the proposed color palette,
Pima Federal Credit Union
coupled with a migration away from copper patina wall signs (as
Jack Talmage
is allowed in the master sign program) will help existing tenants
Oro Valley Country Club
sell a few more tools, or Pilates classes, or burritos, or manicures.
Jeremy Thompson
It will also help the center's ownership fill the several vacancies
Cox
within Placita de Oro, and perhaps attract interest in the major
Bruce Baca
Coldwell Banker
undeveloped pad between Walgreen's and Wells Fargo.
Residential Brokerage
Placita de Oro is certain to benefit by the new residential
Michelle Armstrong
development in Rancho Vistoso, as well as across First Avenue.
Tohono Chul Park
P
Peter Minot
But customers, and potential tenants, need to know it exists.
Southwest Solutions Your approval of this request is a step along the way.
Mike Platt Respectfully submitted,
El Conquistador Tucson, A
Hilton Resort
Ex -officio I U
Amanda Jacobs
Town of Oro Valley Dave Perry
President / CEO
On behalf of the Greater Oro Valley Chamber of Commerce
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Hannah,
Thank you for your reply.
Tim Bohen <
Tuesday, January 08, 2019 1:12 PM
Oden, Hannah
RE: Current version of the Rancho Vistoso PAD last updated in 2008?
Support for maintaining Rancho Vistoso 2C as CPI
Follow up
Flagged
I would like for my email to be forwarded to all members of our Town Council via our Town Clerk.
Please add the following comments as my summary of the case..
Best Regards,
Tim Bohen
Summary - Evaluation of Table C in Rancho Vistoso PAD
Residential is not an allowed use on CPI land per the Rancho Vistoso PAD pages 94-95. Thus, there has
never really been such a thing as "we found out our homes were on CPI land" as the unlucky neighboring
residents have claimed or even "they promised me CPI against CPI" in Neighborhood 2 after the
residential was built as Mr Ford claimed 11/8/18. All Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 2 parcels but A, B
and E have a mismatch between currently documented PAD land CPI designation in Table C on page 27
and the residential that has been built. Only per q on page 95, by a granting of the Town Council, can
residential be a permitted use. (R)08-48 appears to do this but only via the Town Zoning to MDR and not
in the Rancho Vistoso PAD itself.
For Rancho Vistoso Neighborhood 2 parcels C, D, F G, H and I, the PAD land use listed as of today is
incorrect and has been incorrect for at least 10 years and likely longer. Table C should be corrected by
WLB as soon as possible to establish the correct PAD land use (Medium Density (3-6) Residential) for
these parcels. The best way to do this is via a PAD amendment for this express purpose. The change of
land use which occurred for these parcels around 2000 is a "substantial change" per 4b4) on PAD sheet
40. Substantial changes require PAD amendments.
On page 41, 6b the PAD directs each applicant to record the approved changes in the PAD and provide
copies for the Town. We cannot see any evidence that this direction is being followed since (0)08-02 was
incorporated 2/6/08 as amendment 25 to the current PAD version. The PAD administrator seems not to
be following their own updating guidelines. Why are further PAD Rancho Vistoso PAD amendments
being considered at this time when the PAD document itself is so clearly outdated yet should not be?
Updating the Rancho Vistoso PAD amendment by amendment as prescribed within might have helped to
mitigate the problems which have hampered parcel 2E since the time Mr. Ford began his due diligence in
2006.
-----Original Message -----
From: "Oden, Hannah"
Sent: Jan 8, 2019 8:15 AM
To:
Cc: "Vella, Bayer"
Subject: RE: Current version of the Rancho Vistoso PAD last updated in 2008? Support for
maintaining Rancho Vistoso 2C as CPI
Good morning Tim,
Thank you for your email. I am writing in regards to the Vistoso Commerce Loop rezoning that is
on the Town Council agenda for tomorrow night. I can pass the email on to the Town Clerk so
that it can be forwarded to the Mayor and Council for consideration. Or, if you would like to
write comments just focused on that case, please email them to me and I can have them
forwarded in advance of the meeting. Thank you again, and just let me know your preference.
Best,
Hannah
Hannah Oden
Planner
Town of Oro Valley
11000 N. La Canada Dr.
Oro Valley, AZ 85737
(520) 229-4814
www. o rova l l eyaz . g ovov
From: Tim Bohen
Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 7:14 AM
To: Vella, Bayer <bvella@orovalleyaz.gov>
Cc: iiiohnston@orovalley.gov
Subject: Current version of the Rancho Vistoso PAD last updated in 2008? Support for
maintaining Rancho Vistoso 2C as CPI
Bayer,
Is the version of the Rancho Vistoso PAD which is found on the Town website the most recently
updated?
https://www.orovalleyaz.gov/town/departments/community-development-and-public-
works/planning-division/planned-area-development
I ask this because the last Ordinance referenced is (0)08-02.
The more recent Ordinances below apply directly to this PAD. There are likely others which might
also apply given further review
(0)09-09 - 48 ft buildings and 8 ft fence at Ventana
(0)09-19
(0)14-01 - neighborhood 10T goes from C1 to MDR (PAD map may be outdated as well)
(0)16-12
(0)17-09
In addition, the page 27 Table C Neighborhood 2 Land Use Summary still lists D,E,F,G,H and I
acreage as CPI, even though these now contain houses and the Town changed the zoning to
MDR in June 2008 per (R)08-48.
There is also no record I can see of any of the post 2008 Neighborhood 3 commercial
development which one might expect, particularly in the case of Ventana.
And the above is really just a brief summary of the Rancho Vistoso PAD sections which might
merit update.
It appears that Oro Valley may need to rely upon an updated and current Rancho Vistoso PAD as
a record of owner entitlements. Perhaps WLB has a more recent version the Town can post? This
PAD quite literally covers a lot of ground!
As an Oro Valley resident, I support maintaining this property as CPI as this best preserves the
balance between employment and residential uses requested by the voters in our current General
Plan.
Best Regards,
Tim Bohen
Bayer Vella, AICP
Planning Manager
Town of Oro Valley
11000 N. La Canada Dr.
Oro Valley, AZ 85737
Dear Mr. Vella,
I support the proposed residential rezoning of Rancho Vistoso Parcel 2-E, and we urge the Town
staff and Council to support and approve the rezoning as well. It would be easy stand against the
residential rezoning from the standpoint of preserving potential employment land, but unlike
other potential employment parcels in Oro Valley, Parcel 2-E is uniquely constrained, being the
only such parcel immediately adjacent to existing homes. Leaving the property zoned Campus
Park Industrial will impact us by allowing an incompatible development on the property.
Furthermore, leaving the current zoning in place will also impact us even until such a time as
development occurs because our home values are depressed by the unknown potential of
adjacent incompatible Campus Park Industrial development.
Please place higher value in protecting your residents than in continuing to hope for
employment uses that are incompatible with our existing neighborhoods that have been
established for almost two decades. The proposed single -story residential rezoning is the best
option for Parcel 2-E.
Thank you,
Na'
r�
Ae�fro Uct LCAT fi"Z
Bayer Vella, AICP
Planning Manager
Town of Oro Valley
11000 N. La Canada Dr.
Oro Valley, AZ 85737
Dear Mr. Vella,
I support the proposed residential rezoning of Rancho Vistoso Parcel 2-E, and we urge the Town
staff and Council to support and approve the rezoning as well. It would be easy stand against the
residential rezoning from the standpoint of preserving potential employment land, but unlike
other potential employment parcels in aro Valley, Parcel 2-E is uniquely constrained, being the
only such parcel immediately adjacent to existing homes. Leaving the property zoned Campus
Park Industrial will impact us by allowing an incompatible development on the property.
Furthermore, leaving the current zoning in place will also impact us even until such a time as
development occurs because our home values are depressed by the unknown potential of
adjacent incompatible Campus Park Industrial development.
Please place higher value in protecting your residents than in continuing to hope for
employment uses that are incompatible with our existing neighborhoods that have been
established for almost two decades. The proposed single -story residential rezoning is the best
option for Parcel 2-E.
Thank you,
rime
i
Address