Council holds first reading on rezoning request for 9.17‑acre site near 183A amid neighborhood objections

City staff and the applicant outlined a proposal April 10 to change the future land‑use designation and rezone roughly 9.17 acres located just northeast of the 183A Toll Road and Scottsdale Drive from “regional office/retail commercial” to industrial manufacturing and light industrial with a conditional overlay.

Andreina Davila of Development Services said the request would allow development of two buildings totaling about 107,000 square feet, with uses limited in the proposed conditional overlay to cleaner “office/showroom/warehouse” types such as data centers, government office, office, warehouse and similar uses. The applicant further agreed to limit building heights to 45 feet, require loading dock doors to be at least 200 feet from single‑family property lines, require full‑cutoff lighting limited to 20 feet, and adopt a conceptual landscape plan as an exhibit to the conditional overlay.

Planning and Zoning recommended denial at its March 12 meeting. Davila said the commission’s recommendation triggered the requirement for an affirmative vote of at least six council members—i.e., a supermajority—to approve the rezoning. The city received opposition at Planning and Zoning and a signed petition from nearby property owners representing about 3.1 acres within 200 feet of the site; staff said that petition did not meet the technical threshold to invalidate the application but illustrates neighborhood opposition.

Representatives for the owner and developer, including Drew Raffel and John Leaders of Hollis Lunsford, said they seek “clean, light industrial” tenants such as advanced manufacturing, research and development and technology firms rather than high‑volume distribution. They emphasized proximity to the toll road and site constraints — a required fire access easement that bisects the lot and precludes a single large building — as reasons the site is best suited to smaller, higher‑value buildings. The developer offered several voluntary items — private agreements to limit certain vehicular access, restrictive covenants to prohibit overnight outdoor storage, enhanced landscaping and design materials — and presented updated renderings showing masonry and earth‑tone materials meant to complement neighboring James Avery’s campus.

Neighbors and business representatives urged caution. James Avery representatives and Scottsdale Crossing residents told council they were not opposed to development but worried that warehouse or distribution uses would bring heavy truck traffic, noise, and visual impacts to the adjacent campus and residential subdivisions. Speakers asked the developer and James Avery to pursue private agreements that would be enforceable to limit truck access via the shared drive and to lock in the aesthetic commitments.

Council opened a public hearing and heard from multiple residents and company representatives. Attorney Richard Suttle, speaking for James Avery, said the company will sit down and try to reach an enforceable agreement with the applicant but stressed the need for enforceability rather than only lease language. Several residents noted that alternative sites in the broader Scottsdale business park and nearby that are already zoned for industrial use could accommodate tenants.

The item was a first reading and public hearing; council did not vote to approve the rezoning on April 10. Councilmembers urged applicants and neighbors to continue negotiations; the item will return for a subsequent council vote and would require six affirmative votes if council is to approve it given Planning and Zoning’s recommendation of denial.