The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPackets - Council Packets (1425) Town Council Meeting Regular Session October 7, 2020 1 2 3 Town Council Meeting Announcements 4 Upcoming Meetings 5 Oro Valley Town Council Oct. 7, 2020 6 COVID-19 U.S. Travel Impacts Jobs: 8 million travel jobs lost, 3 million back GDP: $505 billion travel-related reduction Taxes: $81 billion in lost travel tax revenue Room Sold—January-August: 546 million (2020) vs. 868 million (2019): -37% Room Revenue—January-August: $59 billion (2020) vs. $115 billion (2019): -49% Sources: U.S. Travel Association and STR, September 2020 7 Metro Tucson Lodging 2012 2019 *2020 Occupancy: 57% 67% 49% Average Rates: $89 $115 $110 RevPAR: $50 $77 $54 Room Revenue: $295M $433M $198M Source: STR, 2012-20 * Reflects January-August 2020 lodging data 8 Metro Tucson Travel—Current Status Lodging (January-August 2020) 48.7% occupancy—4th in comp set, 12th last year $109.87 ADR—7th in comp set, 12th last year $53.52 RevPAR—6th in comp set, 13th last year Comp Set: Albuquerque, Austin, Colo Springs, Denver, Las Vegas, Palm Springs, Phoenix, Portland, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Fe, Scottsdale, Seattle U.S. averages: 44.4% occupancy; $107.17 ADR; and $47.54 RevPAR Source: STR, Sept. 18, 2020 9 Pima County Travel Impacts-Pre-COVID-19 $2.6 billion – annual visitor spending 25,000 – jobs $81 million – local taxes 7.1 million – domestic overnight visitors—top feeders are Phoenix, LA, SF, Chicago and NY Sources: Dean Runyan Associates, July 2020; Longwoods International/Tourism Economics, 2020 10 Tourism Recovery Plan--Overview Created in March 3 goals, 13 strategies, 122 tactics Completed 43 tactics (35%)—mostly early recovery initiatives 55 tactics (45%) underway—longer-term programs No progress on 24 tactics (20%)—mostly international marketing 11 Visit Tucson’s Status DMO: 501(c)(6); no PPP; bed-tax funding-Oro Valley, Tucson & Pima County; cut FTEs from 43 to 31. 2019-20 Revenue: $1 million cut to $9.2 million. 2020-21 Revenue: $7.5 million; $500,000 in CRF. 2021-22 Revenue: $5-$6 million; strong cash now, will use reserves, seeking new funding. 12 Travel Sentiment Consumer confidence is key. Sentiment follows number of COVID-19 cases. 57% wouldn’t fully enjoy travel now. 30% confident in traveling safely, 24% somewhat confident, 46% not confident. Source: Destination Analysts, Wave 28, Sept. 21, 2020 13 Tucson/Southern Arizona Travel Recovery Meetings/Sports/Events: 40-50% of our business. Flights: TUS at 50% of last peak season’s service? Borders: must reopen to “non-essential” travelers. Market/Promote/Sell: fierce competition. Keep focus statewide, drive markets & cities with nonstop service to TUS. Messaging: Wide Open Spaces; safety protocols; food. 14 Oro Valley’s ROI $36-to-$1 in 2019-20 ($10.8M economic impact meetings/sports) $250,000 economic impact from ‘21 USAAS (Synchro) Senior/Junior Swimming Championships $275,000 VT investment is roughly 20-25% of Town’s annual bed-tax revenue Visitors typically spend more on sales taxes than bed taxes 15 Oro Valley/Visit Tucson-Next Steps Meetings/sports bookings Leisure marketing Westward Look annexation Videos: 1) Only in Oro Valley; 2) expanded OVAC video with meet footage and interviews 16 17 18 19 20 Fiscal Year 2020/21 Financial Update Through July 2020 October 7, 2020 21 GENERAL FUND REVENUES 22 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 23 GENERAL FUND 24 Revenues HIGHWAY FUND State shared highway user (HURF) revenues total $294,000 for July, or 8.5% of budget Expected to come in at budgeted levels at this time Expenditures Highway Fund expenditures total $55,500, or 1.4% of budget for July Budgeted construction projects and pavement preservation will commence later in the fiscal year Expenditures expected on budget at this time 25 HIGHWAY FUND 26 COMMUNITY CENTER FUND Revenues Contracted revenues at 6.8%, or $240,000. Some seasonality and overall as trending as expected Town operating revenues sharply below budget due to refunds and facility closures related to COVID-19 Half-cent sales tax revenues trending as expected at $220,000 or 8.8% of budget Expenditures Contracted expenditures trending as expected at $364,000 or 8.1% of budget Town operating expenditures below budget related COVID-19 facility closures 27 COMMUNITY CENTER FUND 28 Questions? 29 Proposed Code Amendment to Update the Required Findings for Variance Requests Town Council October 7, 2020 30 Purpose Proposed code amendment to update the required findings for a variance request Further alignment with State and case law Provides clear and consistent guidance for applicants, staff and the Board of Adjustment Discussed during a study session with Town Council Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 2 31 Background and Proposed Amendment Variances are considered by the Board of Adjustment Process available to all property owners (non-residential and residential) Must meet all five findings established by State Law and the Zoning Code All findings must be legally defensible Appeals heard by AZ Superior Court Proposed amendment Legal effort to better align findings with the law Uses language verbatim of State law and incorporates case law Updates to four of the five findings 3 32 Review Process Board of Adjustment Presented during a study session Feedback minimal with no outstanding questions or suggestions Planning and Zoning Commission Discussed alignment with State Law Recommended for approval Town Council Study Session Applicability of variance process Discussion did not generate any changes 4 33 Summary and Recommendation Update required findings for a variance request to better align with State and case law Defines special circumstance applicable to finding 1 and finding 2 Defines owner as previous and current Clarifies what constitutes a “right” by adding language verbatim of State law Gives the ability for the Board to apply conditions Legally necessary and provides guidance for applicants, staff and the Board of Adjustment Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 5 34 Proposed Process for Administrative Review of Minor Setback Reductions Town Council October 7, 2020 35 Purpose Process for administrative review and potential approval of minor setback reductions Discussion and possible action 2 36 Oro Valley Estates Background All setback reductions considered by the Board of Adjustment Requests often minor Five legalistic findings must be met Requests often denied due to five legalistic findings Code amendment would provide process for administrative approval of minor setback reductions only 2.5’ Setback Reduction 3 37 Oro Valley Estates Use in Arizona Jurisdictions in Arizona that have a process for minor setback reductions: City of Scottsdale City of Sedona City of Flagstaff Town of Gilbert Town of Sahuarita Pima County City of Tucson State Law 4 38 Key Amendment Components Single-family residential properties for individual homeowners only Reduction less than 10%, no closer than 5 feet from any property line Requests must be unopposed by affected properties Standards for approval to ensure no negative impacts Administrative decisions are subject to existing Board of Adjustment appeal process 5 39 1. Applies to Individual Homeowners Only Single-family dwelling units Main building and detached accessory structures Individual lot owners, not entire subdivisions Does not further reduce setbacks where reductions have already been provided 6 40 2, 3 & 4. Reduction Extent, Neighbor Involvement, & Impacts Up to a 10% setback reduction and no closer than 5 feet to any property line Unopposed from directly affected property owners May not be materially detrimental to surrounding properties, subject to conditions 7 41 5. Review and Appeal Process Planning and Zoning Administrator has review and decision authority only if request meets standards Appeals to the Board of Adjustment, uses existing process If denied, applicant may have request considered as a variance case by the Board of Adjustment 8 42 Additional Guidance General Plan Community Goal H: Increased opportunities for residents to provide meaningful input on Town decisions and planning. Development Goal X: Effective transitions between differing land uses and intensities in the community. Board of Adjustment Presented during a study session Feedback minimal with no outstanding questions Planning and Zoning Commission Recommended for approval Town Council Study Session No proposed changes to amendment 9 43 Summary and Recommendation Provides process for administrative review of minor setback reductions only Subject to specific standards Less than 10% reduction Unopposed by directly affected property owners Not materially detrimental to surrounding properties, subject to conditions All decisions appealable to Board of Adjustment Planning and Zoning Commission Recommends Approval Discussion and possible action 10 44