Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oro Valley council backs 2.5-acre Vistoso Trails pond, will pursue phased work and reclaimed water
Summary
After extensive public comment and debate about water use and costs, the council voted to move forward with a 2.5-acre pond concept at Vistoso Trails Nature Preserve, tasking staff to pursue phased work, grant opportunities and options to minimize construction overhead.
The Oro Valley Town Council voted April 16 to proceed with a plan to restore a pond at Vistoso Trails Nature Preserve, approving a motion to move forward with the consultant’s 2.5-acre pond concept and to pursue phased construction and outside grants to fund additional amenities.
Vice Mayor Barrett made the motion to advance the 2.5-acre pond this year using reclaimed water for the feature, with further amenities phased into later years as grant funding and donations are sought. The motion directed staff to explore bringing construction management in-house “as possible” to reduce overhead and to evaluate reusing or repairing existing infrastructure to lower costs. Council approved the motion on a voice/roll call vote (final tally recorded as 4-2 in favor).
The item drew many residents and neighborhood associations. Speakers representing homeowners’ associations and community groups described the former golf-course pond as an “eyesore” and urged quick action. “Now it’s the embarrassment,” said Suzanne Vinsky, who urged the council to prioritize the pond’s restoration. Supporters argued a restored pond and surrounding landscaping would improve the entry to Vistoso and increase neighborhood use of the preserve.
Opponents and some council members raised water-supply and long-term maintenance concerns. Water utility director Peter Abrahams told council the town currently uses its full effluent entitlement and that available effluent could be more limited in the future as other regional water projects proceed. He cautioned the town should account for that uncertainty when planning future water-dependent features.
City-contracted consultant Kimley-Horn presented two concepts: a 1-acre pond that requires substantial fill and landscape work, and a 2.5-acre pond that fits the existing basin and reduces fill costs but increases water surface area. Staff’s high-level cost estimates place the full, near-term cost of the 2.5-acre pond and immediate work in the $3.7 million range (all-in); phased implementation and grant-funded amenities were presented as options to spread costs.
Councilmembers debated tradeoffs among cost, water use, neighborhood impacts and community benefit. Several members said they favored moving quickly to restore the visible feature while pursuing grant funding and value-engineering to reduce cost. The approved motion emphasizes reclaimed-water use, phasing, donor/grant fundraising and staff evaluation of construction-delivery options.
Next steps: staff will develop 30% design documents for the selected concept, pursue grant opportunities (including Land and Water Conservation Fund where applicable), continue neighborhood coordination and return with cost details and a phasing plan. Completion of design steps was estimated in staff materials to occur through late 2025 with construction phased over subsequent budget cycles.
