[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,86,98,110],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6591583,"mediaKeyId","3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081","parentId",3221939,"title","Working group raises electric-vehicle charging and utility-code questions","audioSeconds",1218,"startMs",5784000,"endMs",7002000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081&start=5784&end=7002","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081/thumbnail_5784000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6591583/Oro-Valley/Pima-County/Arizona/Working-group-raises-electric-vehicle-charging-and-utility-code-questions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6591583-41861cd0c7aa9a861ccdbf6790016631/orig.mp4?Expires=1770975945&Signature=LANF9dcNBI5YFuAfWjhOnHeaxndK~la~uPvUmipJLDo3ntGnRB2SYAEwiWSESMDYJcoXvj7DpQcFHWe1uJy7yLhaCi4rILIHIwnzgvHyLid9kIZRI8Q9WCYg-YA6AvO5X2gW65GKYrhV8vsQ3cwVrEJ5KZvDCDvyP9VMTjz4800S9msjGmDkw74dH1o7~ASoYVvjbD8PSl~3UJrnV9CchEAKO9ZhSwsBOIqdUr4ICmil3E5Ldzmztoaqlh8wWrpCI335BE0Geaa9rklX4wVNPSNuk5Zf139aKQyWC8xb6WShtmPXYXD1ELmwtHb1dtCaBhzFxRz-JHl-KMrNlVUsnw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Oro Valley","date","2025-04-03T00:00:00Z","article","Residents and planning staff discussed electric-vehicle (EV) charging and utility criteria March 31 as part of a broader land‑use update, with participants calling for clearer town code language and planning consideration of EV infrastructure.

Several residents asked whether the town requires conduit or charging outlets in new home construction; Malini Sims and Bayer Vela said Oro Valley does not currently require outlets in private garages and that the zoning code is largely silent on EV infrastructure. Sims noted the town is near a building‑code update cycle and that zoning clarity should be discussed as part of the plan update.

Participants suggested multiple approaches: incorporating EV outlet requirements in new residential construction, encouraging chargers at hotels and high‑density housing, and allowing private property owners to install chargers without town subsidies. Rosa urged requiring outlets at new homes, citing high retrofit costs for individual homeowners. Others noted federal funding opportunities to install public chargers.

Discussion also touched on common‑area installations in homeowner associations and the need to clarify maintenance responsibility. On utilities more broadly, staff presented existing criteria in the general plan and said most participants found the criteria acceptable but asked that impacts on nearby homes be considered during siting decisions.

Planners said more clarity in zoning and building codes and further review of how EV siting appears in the draft plan would follow in subsequent meetings. No policy or code changes were adopted at the March 31 meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Oro Valley - 2026 General Plan – Development Resident Working Group - Apr 03, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Residents urged clearer code language on electric-vehicle charging in new construction and discussed flexibility for private charging and HOA areas; planners said zoning is silent on some EV provisions and building-code updates are forthcoming.","taxTitle","Oro Valley, Pima County, Arizona","taxId",55016,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6591588,"Planners outline amendment types and land-use map next steps for Oro Valley plan",0,6214000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081&start=6214&end=6214","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081/thumbnail_6214000.jpg","/articles/6591588/Oro-Valley/Pima-County/Arizona/Planners-outline-amendment-types-and-land-use-map-next-steps-for-Oro-Valley-plan","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6591588-2599a04a71162d2b22d5d2fe490a0fa6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770975945&Signature=Ym4Zm4DaNhtbf8Lt3H1M8i1eODZ3KXOEe7solU1tQyibxOHUbsPOwjmtBGhbfzJjPoqvfgvc-LY41UKHXi9v3CqsenCR92BWfqd5IIH~6xT3mOnmyIFgGxoJbG1Ryx2tHB9pOeKwAJOXM84LYGm2vAccFWlcpVMVBEA9SAjVd2kpTnxbDZ~COTPz9MqXLp~fbfBvXanMY9analf0cA1SUdRVxik9OYEJS8OLYrjfER4BTf3Q0SmfSg0cXLpM2ZeSGKejrf4vGU2kRRzvJ0anTIu0hCv-2R6RPiHVOy72PgtN2d-W6k99YtLDQbrd1e4DcRXphpgYnwDRS4Tg4BlBPA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Town planning staff briefed the resident working group on March 31 about how proposed changes to the general plan would be classified and reviewed, and how the land-use map will guide future zoning and development decisions.

Malini Sims told participants the general plan must include amendment procedures required by state law. The town’s existing framework distinguishes two amendment categories (described in the current plan as Type 1 and Type 2) so that significant changes receive additional public hearings and a higher approval threshold. Sims said \"Type 1\" qualifies as significant revisions that require at least two public hearings before the planning commission and a two‑thirds council vote; \"Type 2\" amendments involve lower-impact changes and require fewer hearings and a simple majority for council approval. The town intentionally avoided labeling amendments \"major\" and \"minor\" to avoid minimizing perceived importance.

Staff emphasized that state law dictates certain public-notice and hearing requirements, and that the plan update must be consistent with those rules. Sims said all amendments require public engagement (the plan currently sets minimum neighborhood meeting requirements) and that the amendment procedures in the draft must remain measurable to satisfy statutory obligations.

Sims further explained the role of the land‑use map: it depicts broad allowable uses (residential, commercial, mixed use, open space) and provides guidance for zoning decisions. She cautioned that changing the land‑use map during the plan process could prompt a more restrictive amendment framework because comprehensive map changes increase the plan’s scope; conversely, keeping the map unchanged now could allow a less restrictive future amendment pathway. Participants asked for clarity about how neighborhood meetings would be defined and who should be notified; Don and others suggested examining the neighborhood‑meeting process as a potential action.

Planners scheduled a focused, in‑person meeting April 14 to begin detailed discussion of the land‑use map and said they will circulate draft amendment language and maps for review. No legislative action was taken March 31.","Town staff described the general-plan amendment process and land-use map role in the plan update, including statutory requirements for different amendment tiers and the scheduling of an in-person April 14 meeting focused on the map.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6591593,"Design and building height prompt divided views in Oro Valley land-use discussion",5699,311000,6010000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081&start=311&end=6010","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081/thumbnail_311000.jpg","/articles/6591593/Oro-Valley/Pima-County/Arizona/Design-and-building-height-prompt-divided-views-in-Oro-Valley-land-use-discussion","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6591593-2539d77c954c5e0d7318262ff38f7230/orig.mp4?Expires=1770975945&Signature=gXGPBdGTpsfvGsBtP~qR0zZUScBpffb5hyTi6~ho0q9kT2Naimjmy3n1ZAiyKo9AEU8Mj5HBCwpm5pWK9fgI9U9lVmF9RJuI7yUJKTa5s9oUX8HAb8Ds8B12Si~VQT2reI0EAKOP5TQhmoXz02JwktSCZ8DtPzZgpl~ZTHqT1TP-luGIhw5WJTmmhhzhSyY2QQRKR7O5uKTCr3bZfi-Qz9l3I82-NgdH5~YyAUBAd~Dbt1Hlpu4c8KIYNiXX3RVysRz7gbMH1Vfhxze0LBjeJhqs0EzDuvPW9W~-M0JRYIbWZZLJj6y3w1fsTT5GuQgkG1a7WxHO4Ma0S9YrX1PWEA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Residents and town planners debated how Oro Valley’s built environment should \"blend\" with the natural setting and whether limits on building height should be applied townwide or in location-specific circumstances.

Planners noted survey responses showing strong interest in preserving mountain views and the town’s aesthetic character. Malini Sims told the working group that protecting views and maintaining cohesive design were prominent resident priorities. Several residents said existing design standards are a critical part of Oro Valley’s identity and must be retained.

Speakers divided on height limits. Some residents urged strict limits on 4‑ and 5‑story rental apartment buildings, saying taller structures harm character and views; Rosa reiterated that concern, noting repeated resident opposition during previous marketplace discussions. Other participants, including Don and Kristen, urged objective, location‑based standards rather than an arbitrary town‑wide cap. Don said height is often used to oppose projects and recommended a factual, evidence-based approach to evaluate whether a specific project actually obstructs views. Stephanie and others said design treatments—breaking up massing and adding vegetation—can reduce the visual impact of taller buildings.

Discussion also covered architectural details and signage: residents asked that commercial signage be scaled appropriately, colors and materials reflect the natural environment, and landscaping be used to integrate buildings with surrounding hillside and preserve sightlines. Participants asked staff to ensure proposed plan language frames design expectations clearly and objectively so applicants and neighbors share a common understanding.

Planners did not adopt any new height limits at the meeting; they said the general-plan update will include goals and policies addressing compatibility and that further, site‑specific design standards and the land-use map will be discussed at upcoming meetings.

No votes or formal policy decisions were taken March 31.","Residents and planners debated compatibility standards, architecture, and limits on building height, with many urging preservation of town character and others urging objective standards and case-by-case consideration.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6591596,"Residents press for clearer mixed-use zoning, streamlined review in Oro Valley",1636,2238000,3874000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081&start=2238&end=3874","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081/thumbnail_2238000.jpg","/articles/6591596/Oro-Valley/Pima-County/Arizona/Residents-press-for-clearer-mixed-use-zoning-streamlined-review-in-Oro-Valley","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6591596-17fc45c02ddc0502085d648de02f988f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770975945&Signature=dbXSAsildYAjmNWb5s7Rff7GZvvcJejDmzr76yioXg7sfe8aNUYFwj6CgZXQd5dw6h3095o~ChYiSICrOAKUQXl4GQiC3P3NRF2iDixPngQD~aShq3dueA~Os6zYQA1GiweFYqpX0D1M-FWrA3EeUgWzcM3o1VUzl1vQNGFRNcWQF2uhZgj3JCnnP95wwb7XUiw6I5AL~IXLpG5ZfRncqq-YbjcG7Grb0V2E6eTIfBEfbncwY-q~M61kfFYM1SW6yKcEBo7lgMZKWDgH-BB7V4601IdEHw5n6~J55kk~JdZMnzAyJCP-Qz68KoTOUxRuCCiXdhDH4IGbADxsqFvYjg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Town planners and resident working-group members discussed March 31 how Oro Valley should define and permit mixed-use development to support retail, housing and neighborhood services.

Planners described survey results and outreach showing that residents and the development community view mixed use as a primary opportunity to revitalize underused commercial areas; planners told the group that developers had identified mixed-use approaches as the highest potential for Oro Valley. Residents and several participants urged a careful definition of mixed use so commercial and residential uses complement each other.

Speakers gave examples of both successful and problematic mixed-use outcomes. Rosa described a revitalized shopping center in Annapolis where ground-floor retail served residents above but added that traffic studies were inadequate there. Colleen McCarthy and other residents raised concerns about impacts on adjacent neighborhood streets and the importance of clear expectations from developers about the types of housing and supporting commercial uses. Several participants noted the OV Marketplace as an existing property likely to evolve into mixed-use as new apartments and hotels are added.

Developers’ representatives and some residents urged clearer, objective design standards so applicants and reviewers understand expectations. Mike and others said predictable, well-documented standards and a more streamlined process would reduce time and cost for applicants without lowering design quality; Hal and others emphasized the need to keep high standards but make them objective. Paul Nelcher, economic development director, noted the town already has a business liaison (Margie Adler) to guide applicants and suggested distinguishing entitlement timelines (rezoning, conditional use) from post‑entitlement permit and inspection timelines when considering process changes.

Parking and connectivity also drew sustained comment. Attendees recommended walkability and multi‑modal connections (bike paths, the Loop) and debated parking standards that balance overflow into neighborhoods against inefficiently large parking fields. Planners said the town’s code attempts to break up parking with landscaping and design features but that practices vary by developer choice.

Planners said code updates to clarify mixed‑use standards, planned area development rules and administrative review options could be considered as part of the general-plan update and subsequent code revisions. No formal policy changes were decided at the meeting; staff will incorporate resident guidance into the draft and return to the group on April 14.","Resident working group and planners discussed mixed-use development definitions, market feasibility, parking and whether the town should revise zoning standards and review processes to support retail and housing near commercial centers.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6591598,"Oro Valley residents debate performing arts center as central gathering area",6688,530000,7218000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081&start=530&end=7218","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3221939-b71847f2b401caf3ee713437dcc4c081/thumbnail_530000.jpg","/articles/6591598/Oro-Valley/Pima-County/Arizona/Oro-Valley-residents-debate-performing-arts-center-as-central-gathering-area","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6591598-6ffede8ee324d5de9fdb61af80f79009/orig.mp4?Expires=1770975945&Signature=e8Ga3BrM~st4U3m2jMbkga50vJ49udrrmw06d22olA2hu8cBuGvrNrUJRcLL3pLLik7P4jXRJuIhFs8JxdS9~58wtUHV0sQRTmc0HNpCntqbg7CP8Sz2YkRc~OaVIyxiD5HMFcZfKXAU7laU737gppyT-MysYY-lkgpfcVMz2Fz9LDD6tVMb8~WPHJrCh0hZAtMpv5D0UyDSwHL61xBuuhgX1dp5h1mYEtnUTASfp8~kPPYwRjzBBELe1-h0BBn~JOUu3kkgDU2bE4j0GQyzl42UwYbJyMIBAxP22ZGSk37tPh757uz8GyW1UPXNLGnu5gcrL~vAcsYF~Y61g63tgg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Town of Oro Valley planners briefed a resident working group March 31 on qualities residents want for a \"central gathering area,\" highlighting shop-and-dine options, accessible outdoor amenities and arts programming. The conversation repeatedly returned to the Oro Valley Marketplace as the most feasible site and to a contested idea for a performing arts center.

The meeting’s central question was whether Oro Valley should plan for a formal performing arts venue or pursue smaller, lower-cost options such as outdoor concerts, community stages and multi-use community centers. Malini Sims, principal planner, opened the discussion by noting that 58 percent of survey respondents favored a central gathering place and that comments had emphasized shopping, dining, entertainment and an arts component.

Residents who spoke at the meeting described a range of options. Several participants urged caution about building a freestanding performing arts center, saying existing venues in the region and nearby high-school auditoriums could host many events. Joe Brandeber, a member of the economic development and financial planning committee, and others favored smaller-scale \"arts in the park\" programming. Tom and Matt pointed to successful use of high‑school auditoriums and temporary outdoor stages as lower-cost approaches. Several speakers suggested partnering with nonprofits to operate an arts facility rather than town ownership.

Other residents acknowledged an organized group pursuing a feasibility study for a larger center and said that could clarify demand and costs before the town commits to design or funding. Rosa, a working‑group participant, said those supporters envision venues sized for hundreds of seats but questioned whether such spaces would be regularly filled.

Planners urged the group to treat feasibility and funding as required elements of any future goal, policy or action included in the general plan. Sims told the group the topic will remain under discussion and that feedback should be reflected in draft goals and actions. The group confirmed the Marketplace as the most commonly cited potential location because of its size and proximity to new apartment development, though members also suggested exploring multiple smaller gathering nodes across town.

Planners scheduled the next working meeting for April 14, which will be held in person and will include further land use map discussions.

The discussion produced no formal decisions; planners said they will summarize public feedback and reflect feasible options in the forthcoming plan draft.","Town planners and a resident working group discussed characteristics and locations for a central gathering area, with repeated focus on the Oro Valley Marketplace and debate over a proposed performing arts center versus lower-cost arts-in-the-park options.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Working group raises electric-vehicle charging and utility-code questions

Planners outline amendment types and land-use map next steps for Oro Valley plan

Design and building height prompt divided views in Oro Valley land-use discussion

Residents press for clearer mixed-use zoning, streamlined review in Oro Valley

Oro Valley residents debate performing arts center as central gathering area