Planning commission continues text amendment on internalized community storage to July 9

The Scottsdale Planning Commission continued a proposed zoning text amendment that would allow internalized community storage facilities — with accessory vehicle storage and limited warehousing — in the Commercial Office (CO) zoning district to a date certain of July 9 for further work and clarification.

Staff presented the request and recommended denial. Mary Tessier of the planning department told the commission the amendment would add new permitted uses to the CO district and, in staff’s view, “is inconsistent with the purpose of the commercial office zoning district,” could “negatively impact the land use compatibility” and appears tailored to benefit a single catalyst parcel rather than address a citywide land-use need. Tessier’s presentation quantified existing allowances elsewhere in the city: internalized storage is already permitted in several commercial and industrial districts (about 4,149 parcels), vehicle storage in some districts (about 2,577 parcels) and warehousing in others (about 2,654 parcels). Tessier also said the applicant has proposed eligibility criteria — including minimum parcel size, an existing above-grade parking garage and a building height limit — intended to limit applicability.

Applicant counsel Carolyn Oberholtzer, representing the property owner of the catalyst site at 1001 North 90th Street, said the conversion is an adaptive-reuse solution for a large, persistently vacant office building and its unused parking garage. Oberholtzer described an objective list of qualifying criteria in the draft text amendment: a minimum of 8 acres (the application originally used 10 acres during analysis and the team narrowed it), an existing above-ground parking garage on the parcel, and existing buildings no taller than roughly two stories (the applicant discussed a 36-foot threshold). She said the proposal would limit accessory vehicle storage to passenger vehicles only, require screening for any loading/unloading areas, limit the portion of building area devoted to warehousing to 30%, and require design review board approval for visible exterior changes. Oberholtzer argued the conversion would reoccupy a vacant building, reduce daily vehicle trips relative to full office occupancy, avoid demolition, and provide a neighborhood-serving storage option.

Commissioners expressed a range of views. Several commissioners said they like the catalyst-site proposal but were concerned about using a citywide text amendment to authorize a use that staff says would be inconsistent with the CO district’s intent. Commissioners raised questions about how many CO parcels could be affected (staff provided a map and a count of roughly 683 CO parcels within the city when applying the applicant’s criteria), the appropriateness of a text amendment versus a site-specific rezoning or a conditional use permit, and public-safety and fire-safety concerns related to vehicle storage. Tim Curtis (city staff) explained that a conditional use permit pathway would require a case-by-case analysis of impacts such as noise and traffic, but also cautioned that the typical conditional-use criteria (noise, dust, odor, traffic) might be met in most such proposals and therefore may not yield denials the way neighbors might expect.

After extended questioning and public-comment history review, the applicant requested — and the commission granted — a continuance to return with a revised approach. A motion to continue the case (case 06/2024) to July 9 passed on a roll-call vote with Chair Scarborough, Vice Chair Young and Commissioners Gonzales, Ertel, Joiner and Higgs voting yes.

Key outstanding issues the commission asked staff and the applicant to address before July 9 include: whether the text amendment should be narrower or broader, whether a conditional-use or rezone approach would be preferable, clearer limits on vehicle storage and warehousing, screening and design standards, and an updated parcel-by-parcel analysis of which CO properties would qualify under any revised criteria.

The continuance means staff will prepare supplemental materials and the applicant may revise the draft amendment and/or pursue a site-specific alternative. The commission will revisit the item on July 9 to consider any changes and to make a recommendation to City Council.