Acting on complaints filed by a Patagonia resident, the Arizona Department of Water Resources and the Arizona Department of Real Estate have initiated investigations into whether the town of Patagonia acted legally in approving a 16-lot residential development by Coronado Ridge Development Corporation in the Patagonia Eastside Addition.
Town Manager Ron Robinson and Mayor Andrea Wood say the town’s agreement with the developer meets all municipal and state requirements and are confident the investigations will bear this out. But they acknowledged that they are not satisfied with the progress of the development—since scaled back to 14 lots—since the agreement with Coronado Ridge was approved on Jan. 9, 2019.
The development, referred to as Block M, is on the northern end of Roadrunner Lane and east of Second Avenue. Robinson said that, of the 14 lots, two houses of approximately 1400 square feet are under construction (one is framed and the other has a poured foundation) and three lots are prepped and ready for foundations. Similar homes built in the area have been listed at $429,000, but prices are going up, according to Jean Miller of Long Realty.
The legality of the development has been questioned by Patagonia resident Lonnie Goff, who lives within a couple blocks of Block M.
The complaint filed with the Department of Water Resources states that there is no record of 100-year water adequacy for the parcels in question, as required by the department in compliance with Patagonia’s designation as a Mandatory Adequacy Jurisdiction.
The complaint filed with the Department of Real Estate alleges that the development violates state and municipal subdivision law because no final plat has been recorded with Santa Cruz County.
In response to the question of water adequacy, Robinson said the Town is required to document an adequate 100-year water supply every five years that, among other considerations, accounts for reasonable growth projections and drought conditions. Patagonia’s most recent five-year water plan was reviewed by the Department of Water Resources in August 2022 and was determined to be compliant with state statutes.
Robinson said the plat for the Patagonia Eastside Addition was filed in 1956, and no replatting was required for the Coronado Ridge project. “When people buy into that subdivision, it’s already an established subdivision,” he said.
Goff questions whether the initial platting complies with state statutes and Chapter 15 of the Town Code dealing with subdivisions. “Some developer wants to come in and build 40 homes, [saying] we’ll just do it our way, we’ll build one home at a time? You can’t do that,” he said. “Arizona law seems pretty straightforward to me.”
David French, compliance officer for the Department of Water Resources, said he expects ADWR’s investigation to be completed by Dec. 1. He said that the department has a variety of potential enforcement actions should the development be found in violation of state regulations, depending on the nature and severity of the violations.
A spokesperson for the Department of Real Estate said an investigation typically takes 60 to 90 days.
Martin S. Short of Carmel, Indiana, chief executive officer of Coronado Ridge Development Corporation, responded by email to an interview request:
“The company was just made aware of the ‘concerns’ over documentation requirements with the State regarding the Block M project. At this time, the company may be in compliance. However, we will be providing a response directly to the State through legal counsel—after review of the facts.
“We will not comment on your question regarding the project’s schedule delays, except to confirm we have discussed certain measures with the Town of Patagonia which likely [will] result in improved schedule for completion. We do look forward to completing the project.”
Goff said he has submitted three agenda requests for the Town Council to report on the status of the Block M development, including concerns about construction that has been at a standstill for several months, neglected building materials and dust pollution. “It is an eyesore,” he said. His requests have not been approved.
Bob Lotterman, who lives on Roadrunner Lane, said, “It’s been four years of aggravation.”
When asked if the Town was satisfied with the progress being made in Block M, Robinson said: “I would say the Town is not happy with four years of progress. But the Town to a certain degree is limited because of our building code.”
Mayor Wood said she has asked Short or realtor Jean Miller, who is working with Short on the project, to address the council regarding the slow pace of development.
“(Miller) said it’s premature because they’re not really fully engaged in building the whole Block M yet, but they’re being proactive and trying to put together a public report,” she said.
Wood said if Short is not committed to completing the project, it would be in the town’s best interest if he sold the undeveloped lots individually.
“To me, that would be the most logical step for them, because he doesn’t live here,” she said. “He’s been trying to do this for years. But it’s his call. It’s his property, he paid for it.”
Goff’s concerns regarding the approval process extend beyond Block M. Short also owns 60 lots to the east of the current development, and though there is no developmental plan yet, Goff believes the town owes it to residents to hear them out. Nineteen residents of Three R Avenue and North Avenue have signed a petition asking that the town add an easement to the more eastern lots from Pennsylvania Avenue rather than through the existing neighborhood.
Robinson said any future development east of Block M would go through the Planning and Development Committee and Town Council and be subject to public meetings. But he said residents must be prepared to deal with growth.
“The contention from the Three R folks [is] they don’t want that developed,” he said. “One of them came to me and said, ‘We really want to preserve that,’ and I said, ‘Then buy it.’ That’s the only way to do it.
“The whole impetus for this is, ‘We don’t want any development, we like it the way it is.’”
The question for Goff is what kind of growth. When asked what a positive outcome to his concerns might be, he said, “If they build subdivisions, make sure they’re done right. The public has to be brought in.
“We don’t want all that destruction to our little neighborhood. Replat it, put your roads in there, lay out your lots so that all that stuff is accessed from down below, and you don’t have to mess with us.”
Wood said her goal is for the town to develop affordable housing that diversifies the community.
“Not just 60-, 70-year-olds that want to retire here,” she said. “I’m looking for homes for families. People who are invested in our community, want to work in our community, want their kids to go to school in our community. That’s what I want.”