BY HOWARD MEYERS | AUGUST 20, 2014
Four projects that will impact Scottsdale residents – a summary
A lot of information has been flying around touting how great the Cavalliere Ranch project will be and why everyone should be happy this area is being “master planned” by the “Cavalliere Ranch” team. Also why it is so good to keep Greasewood Flats, regardless of where they put it or how it is transformed from what it is now. There are basically 4 projects going on in or around Troon that will impact us all in some way. I’ll list and summarize the good and bad about them all so you can decide for yourself just how they may impact you and if you want to support or oppose each one. Basically it comes down to answering the question “will benefit you or degrade the quality of life you moved here to enjoy?”
Of the 4 proposals, the two that are the biggest problem are clearly Greasewood Flat (move of Greasewood Flats to a site adjacent to the Preserve) and Cavalliere Ranch (rezoning of 462 acres, around the new desired Greasewood Flats site, to increase the density by 3 times over the existing allowed number of units). Both of these proposals will have huge noise and traffic impacts on existing neighborhoods in Troon. The other two aren’t great, and have their issues, but their impact will not be near what these two will be.
The city council is back from their summer break so now is the time to start sending your feelings about these proposals to them. In any correspondence, you should reference the case project number(s) and put “For the public record” at the top so it gets into the case file. You should also copy all correspondence to the staff case coordinator so it does get into the case file. I have included all the case and contact information below, along with the staff contacts and their contact information.
Case Information
Case Name |
Description |
Case Number |
Staff Contact |
Pinnacle Peak Patio |
Conversion of existing Pinnacle Peak Patio ssite to townhomes. |
2-GP-2014 |
Taylor Reynolds |
Cavalliere Flat |
Conversion of the old Greasewood Flats site to high density housing. |
4-GP-2014 |
Adam Yaron |
Greasewood Flats |
Move of Greasewood Flats adjacent to the Preserve. |
5-GP-2014 |
Adam Yaron |
Cavalliere Ranch |
Rezone of 462 acres from 3 acre lots to 1 home/acre. |
13-ZN-2014 |
Adam Yaron |
Contact Information
City Council E-Mail addresses:
Council Person |
|
Mayor W.J. "Jim" Lane |
|
Councilwoman Virginia Korte |
|
Councilwoman Suzanne Klapp |
|
Councilman Robert Littlefield |
|
Councilman Guy Phillips |
|
Councilwoman Linda Milhaven |
|
Councilman Dennis Robbins |
One e-mail for all: [email protected]
Staff Coordinator Contacts
Person |
Phone |
|
Adam Yaron |
480-312-2761 |
|
Jesus Murillo |
480-312-7849 |
|
Taylor Reynolds |
480-312-7924 |
Case Discussion
Pinnacle Peak Patio
Pinnacle Peak Patio has been a popular western tourist attraction that has definitely helped build Scottsdale’s western image. However the operation isn’t doing that well so they have sold their property and the buyer wants to change the use to build a 50 unit “luxury” patio home project on 10 acres or 5 dwelling units (DU)/acre.
The Good
It will eliminate the existing Pinnacle Peak Patio restaurant and entertainment venue, which should result in less traffic, light and noise from this site.
The Bad
Loss of the existing Pinnacle Peak Patio use will be bad for the city and its western image, however this can’t be prevented as the current owner has already sold the property and plans on ending the operation.
5 units/acre is a pretty dense development and they want 3 story units on the northern boundary, which abuts the 4 Seasons Resort. Obviously this is a major change to the character of the area, however there are similar things going on east of Alma School Road.
Cavalliere Flat
This is the conversion of the existing Greasewood Flats site into a combination of suburban housing (about 24 acres) and rural housing (about 24 acres), see the General Plan land use change proposed below. The total number of units proposed is about 80, but the zoning requested is R-4 (23 acres), R1-10 (20 acres), and R1-190 (9 acres) which could result in about 250 units. Also, R1-10 does not fit the description of “Rural Neighborhoods” so something doesn’t match. This is another case of promising one thing (only build a gross density of 1 DU/acre) in the “rural neighborhoods” area, but asking for zoning that is not compatible giving the property owner “entitlements” to more units. The same is true for the R-4 rezone, they claim they are building far less units than that zoning would allow. We always have a problem when the zoning requested is dramatically different than the number of units they claim they will build.
Cavalliere Flat General Plan change
Greasewood Flats
This case involves the attempt to move Greasewood Flats from its current location to a location adjacent to the Preserve south east of the 128th Street/Ranch Gate intersection. It wants to rezone 10 acres from 3 acre residential plots to a cultural/institutional use, though the main use and attraction will be the existing bar with live outdoor entertainment.
The Good
This would keep Greasewood Flats, which is a very popular destination for both locals and tourists. It is a western venue which Scottsdale is losing too many of. Retaining Greasewood would be good for existing customers and Scottsdale’s tourism.
The Bad
Location. The location is about as bad as it could be. This use will introduce a lot of noise, light, and traffic to a very remote area next to Scottsdale’s McDowell Sonoran Preserve and very near the Tom’s Thumb trail head. This was supposed to be a remote area with only large lot residential, no commercial or other services so it is a major change to the character of the area and will have a major impact on this area of the Preserve, which is basically the migration route from the southern part of the Preserve to the northern part and eventually to the Tonto National forest.
Access. The only access will be off 128th Street and the route traffic will take is through Troon via Happy Valley, 118th street, and Ranch Gate or Alma School to Jomax to 118th street to Ranch Gate. Ranch Gate is the ONLY road that goes east over to where Greasewood will be located, there aren’t any other east west roads that do that, and no more can or will be built to take some of the load. This is a huge problem as it routes all the bar traffic, which includes a lot of motorcycles, through the heart of Troon. In addition, Ranch Gate is the ONLY access to Sereno Canyon, which was recently rezoned to a resort and high density housing project with about 400 units dumping traffic onto Ranch Gate. The combined traffic from Sereno Canyon, Greasewood Flats, and Cavalliere Ranch must all use this same route starting with Ranch Gate.
Impact on the Preserve. This use would introduce a commercial use adjacent to the Preserve, which was discouraged in the General Plan for obvious reasons. It also introduces a lot of noise, light, and traffic right next to the Preserve and accessing the same route as Preserve users must use to get to the Tom’s Thumb trail head. The noise, light and traffic goes on both day and night, which is the most sensitive time for the Preserve. The McDowell Sonoran Conservancy has come out against this project as have virtually all Preserve advocates.
Cavalliere Ranch
Cavalliere Ranch is an attempt to change the number of housing units allowed on 462 acres from 154 (allowed under the existing zoning of one house on 3 acres) to 462 units (roughly one house/acre). There are multiple property owners involved, including the Cavalliere family who owns 110 of the acres proposed to be changed.
Below is a short matrix of their claims vs. the reality.
The Claim |
The Reality |
The area will be “master planned” which is a good thing. |
The master plan calls for tripling the density of housing that would be allowed in a very sensitive area of the desert and the community.
|
The “Master Plan” will add more Open Space. |
This master plan adds about 3.35% more open space than would be required even if it were developed to the current zoning. Is that a reason to allow triple the density? |
Cavalliere Ranch is not requesting a change to Scottsdale’s voter-approved General Plan, which has allowed since 2001, one house per acre. |
The General Plan designation of “Rural Neighborhoods” covers all the areas with zoning anywhere from one house/acre to one house on 5 acres, it is a very broad category. That does not give everyone the right to rezone their property to the highest density allowed in that category. Lots of different sizes are part of the housing diversity Scottsdale offers, taking away all the large lots kills that diversity. The General Plan supports that lot, housing, and life style diversity. This proposal does not. |
The planning and development of Troon, Troon North, Desert Highlands and other large developments in the area are excellent examples of the benefits of a more coherent, master planned approach to large pieces of land. |
Somewhat true, many of these master planned communities benefited from a density transfer, more dense subdivisions because a huge chunk of land was saved from development, like Pinnacle Peak and Troon mountain. |
Infrastructure is cheaper for taxpayers. Environmental impact is less. And more desert is preserved from development. |
This is so much pure BS. Three times more houses means 3 times more infrastructure capacity is needed, which includes water, sewer, and roads as a start. How is putting 3 times more houses on the same property producing “less environmental impact”. The reality is there would be more open space with only 154 homes on that same 462 acres than with 462 homes and all the roads and utilities necessary to service them. |
We need the most sensitive and smartest approach to planning the area and to introduce new transportation elements that help everyone in the area. |
The smartest approach is to stick to the current density in such a sensitive area. This is exactly why it was zoned for 3 acre lots and not one acre lots. |
Issues.
The great master plan.
City staff has generated 72 questions for the Cavilliere Ranch team to answer, some about conformance to the Dynamite Character Area Plan (which they don’t conform to), impacts on infrastructure, but most of all about the ownership and control of this property. The P-C district they are requesting has very specific requirements, about land ownership and control, in an attempt to ensure the property will be developed as per the “Master Plan” submitted. This is in fact the key issue as everything falls apart, including their claim of ONLY one house/acre, if there is no guarantee that all of that land will be developed according to the plan they submit, regardless of how many times the land may change hands, or the timing of the transfer of the individual parcels to the eventual developer. The ONLY thing that limits them to even the one house/acre they are claiming is the development plan they will file. If that plan becomes invalid, the entitlements of the underlying zoning kick in and that is where the number of homes that could be built goes way up, as defined by the R1-18 underlying zoning they are asking for. The land is owned by multiple property owners, which means any one could sell their parcels at any time. This is what the P-C district tries to prevent because it is recognized that the plan becomes worthless as soon as just one of the property owners go their own way. This is why the P-C district requires all the property to be under one owner, or some type of tight common control that must be proved in this case.
They are not only requesting a zoning of R1-18, they are asking for a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet, which is 1/3 of the lot size required by R1-18 and which is only about 1/7th of an acre, hardly what you would call a “rural neighborhoods” lot and experience. This is further proof that the intention may go beyond 1 house/acre. They could have lot sizes smaller than one acre even with a zoning of R1-43, but they couldn’t build a GROSS density of more than one house/acre with that zoning. They could have requested R1-43 as the underlying zoning, which would have removed any worry about the enforceability of the development plan, but they didn’t.
The Bottom Line
The question to ask is what does approving this application do for the city and its residents? No change in land use, including density, that benefits the property owner, should be granted unless it clearly benefits both the city and its residents.
Benefits claimed:
Master Plans a relatively large Area. Nothing has been presented that shows that such a master plan, with three times the currently allowing housing density, is of any benefit to anyone other than the land owner who is attempting to increase the value of his land. The increased density in this remote area, next to the Preserve, is a negative, not a positive.
Provides more open space. By their own numbers, they are only providing 3.35% more open space than what would be required no matter how this property gets developed.
Protects natural features. This will be done regardless of how the property is developed, it is a requirement of the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance.
Disadvantage to the City and its residents:
Density Increase. Three times more houses in a very sensitive area. This equates to more roads, more infrastructure needed, more traffic, all in a remote area next to the Preserve.
Homeowner Experience and quality of life. Extremely small lot sizes, and tight clustering. This creates housing congestion in an area that is supposed to provide distance between neighbors, large areas of natural space between houses. In fact this plan is creating suburban type subdivisions in an area intended for large lots, large homes, and equestrian privileges. Both larger homes and equestrian use are out of the question with such small lot sizes.
Traffic. This “master plan” will create at least 3 times more traffic density, all going through neighborhoods in Troon. ALL of it will HAVE to use Ranch Gate to 118th St. to Happy Valley or Jomax. There are NO alternate routes and there will NEVER BE any alternate routes because it is a remote area, with lots of natural features blocking paths, and the city has no right of way to build more roads. The ONLY possibility to relieve traffic is Dynamite Blvd. but that is going out of the way and therefore homeowners in this development will not use it.
Infrastructure. This plan has to have a big negative impact on all of the city’s infrastructure in the area because they want 3 times the existing housing density. This is combined with the already approved up-zoning of Sereno Canyon. Again, it all goes through Troon and homeowners there will see the impact. Sewage must be pumped up hill to get to the ridge line and the city will ultimately be responsible for the maintenance of that infrastructure, if not some of the initial construction costs.
Cost to the City. It has been shown that most development does not pay for itself, meaning that whatever income the city gets from it is not enough to cover the expenses generated by it. Up to now, this loss has been offset by the positive income from our tourism industry, but we have passed the time where that income from tourism compensates for all the current development. Larger lot development tends to be more neutral, in that it generates more sales and property tax income and in general doesn’t require the same level of city services. Therefore increasing the density of this development will wind up costing the city more than any income it generates, thereby either raising our taxes or lowering our services. NO BENEFIT to the current residents, but rather a big negative.
Clearly, this application provides NO benefit to the city, the negatives clearly outweigh any possible positive benefits the applicants claim. Very minimal NAOS increase at the expense of 3 times more residents, 3 times more traffic, 3 times the impact on city infrastructure, and 3 times the impact on the Preserve. To make matters worse, residents in the area (mostly in Troon), will get increased traffic through established neighborhoods, increased congestion, increased stress on infrastructure (water, wastewater, and roads), and we all will eventually see higher taxes to pay for the infrastructure upgrades and maintenance that this development will not pay for. Doesn’t sound like a winner to me.
I have included the typical propaganda put out by the Cavalliere Ranch Team so you can see and hear from the other side.
The Cavalliere Ranch Propaganda
Smarter Planning - More Open Space
Welcome to news and notes about a proposed project in north Scottsdale called Cavalliere Ranch!
We are sending you this information because there has been a lot of misinformation from people who should know better. Contrary to their inaccuracies Cavalliere Ranch, organized by Scottsdale-based Taylor Morrison and local property owners, can be very good news for northern Scottsdale.
Here’s why.
Cavalliere Ranch is not requesting a change to Scottsdale’s voter-approved General Plan, which has allowed since 2001, one house per acre.
The planning and development of Troon, Troon North, Desert Highlands and other large developments in the area are excellent examples of the benefits of a more coherent, master planned approach to large pieces of land.
Infrastructure is cheaper for taxpayers. Environmental impact is less. And more desert is preserved from development.
Imagine what the 2,000+-acre Troon area would be like today if it was developed hodge podge five, ten or forty acres at a time, rather than the more sensitive way it has occurred? It would not be the world-class master-planned community it is.
And so it would be with the 476-acre Cavalliere Ranch, located several miles east of Troon near 128th Street.
We need the most sensitive and smartest approach to planning the area and to introduce new transportation elements that help everyone in the area.
That’s exactly what the master-planned Cavalliere Ranch would do. And at ONE HOME PER ACRE or only 476 homes it would be in accordance with Scottsdale’s General Plan!
The Cavalliere Ranch density is not, as falsely claimed by Scottsdale resident Howard Meyers, “1100 units.” We hope that Mr. Meyers’ inaccurate statement is merely misguided or misinformed (rather than something more) and that he will soon clear the air on this inaccuracy. The falsehoods have led to at least one editorial opinion encouraging retraction of his inaccurate statement:http://arizonaprogressgazette.com/holding-activists-accountable/.
But ultimately planning the best future for North Scottsdale shouldn’t be about charges and counter-charges. It should be about working together to do right by the city, its land and her residents. And that’s what Cavalliere Ranch provides all.
Indeed, the project is working on a major new transportation improvement that should be welcome news! This will NOT include improvements to 128th Street through the Preserve as a number of Preserve proponents strongly discouraged any improvements to that transportation corridor.
And please keep in mind that the request of the City to approve Cavalliere Ranch is a RESIDENTIAL application ONLY. A SEPARATE application to the City calls for relocating the commercial Greasewood Flat, a well-known historic tourist attraction including a bar and restaurant, within close proximity of Cavalliere Ranch.
But the all residential Cavalliere Ranch and commercial Greasewood Flat will be evaluated SEPARATELY by the Scottsdale City Council later this year.
It is possible one could be approved and one not. Or both rejected. Or both approved.
In the coming months this newsletter will focus on the all-residential master-planned Cavalliere Ranch that is in conformance with the City’s voter-approved General Plan and the opportunities and benefits it can provide Scottsdale much like signature developments such as DC Ranch, Desert Highlands, Estancia, Troon, Troon North and McDowell Mountain Ranch before it.
Please keep an eye out for future information and let us know if you would like to get together to learn more. Or if you would like to hear from a project representative to speak to your community group or homeowner’s association.
Thank you again.
Cavalliere Ranch
Smarter Planning. More Open Space.
Check us out on Facebook
Howard Myers
Scottsdale
