Scottsdale planning commission recommends striking R‑4 second‑story frontage limit, sends text amendment to council 6‑0

The Scottsdale Planning Commission voted 6‑0 on Aug. 13 to recommend that the City Council approve a text amendment to the R‑4 zoning district that would remove a regulation limiting second‑story living area near streets and update R‑4 wording to match other multi‑family zones.

The amendment would strike subsection E‑4 of section 5.804 of the zoning ordinance, which currently restricts “no more than 30% of the frontage dwelling units” from having living space above one story within 50 feet of any dedicated street. Staff and the applicant said removing that sentence would not change the 30‑foot maximum building height or the application of other setback and development review standards.

“This proposed modification is intended to create conformance and consistency amongst the multiple family residential zoning districts,” said Jeff Barnes of the city’s planning department, who presented the case to the commission. Barnes told commissioners that other setback and height rules, as well as the development review board process, would continue to govern site design.

Tom Galvin of Rose Law Group, representing the applicant, described the amendment as “a simple solution regarding R‑4 — just bring it into alignment with R‑3 and R‑5,” and said the change was prompted by an infill project near Oak Street and Hayden Road. Galvin said the triggering site was originally submitted as a 26‑lot subdivision and later expanded to a proposed 38‑lot layout; he said the internal looped streets in that development caused more lots to fall within the ordinance’s 50‑foot provision.

Commissioners asked clarifying questions about whether the change would eliminate design controls; Barnes reiterated that project‑level mitigation through setbacks, height limits and the development review board would remain available. Several commissioners described the amendment as a targeted cleanup to bring the older R‑4 text in line with later revisions to other districts.

A motion to recommend approval to the City Council, finding the amendment consistent with the adopted general plan, passed on a roll call vote: Chair Scarborough, Commissioner Gonzales, Commissioner Ertel, Commissioner Joiner, Commissioner Drake and Commissioner Reid voted yes; no commissioner voted no.

The Planning Commission’s recommendation is advisory; the City Council will make the final decision on the ordinance change. If council votes to adopt the text amendment, the revised language would apply citywide to properties zoned R‑4.

A copy of the staff report and the applicant’s redlined language were included with the commission packet; the staff presentation identified the affected ordinance section as 5.804 and noted limited public comment on the proposal.