Get To Know Your Candidates

I am always concerned about requests and amendments that require significant changes to existing rules and guidelines, but I judge each case on its own merit and in light of the facts. This is why the City has a voter approved General Plan and a rigorous process in place to amend if necessary. In general, it is always my priority to protect and preserve our single family residential neighborhoods.

~~ I discuss this same question to some extent in 8.j. During my time on the Council, we have faced numerous situations in which the current zoning of a parcel js no longer economically viable, or when the property is distressed. This is partially due to the rise in online shopping, which has affected some strip malls (although I understand the Greenbelt 88 project is now on hold). I try to view these issues based on all the facts and circumstances. What is the current zoning of the property? Why is the current zoning no longer viable? Is the project in a growth area?
~~In applying this analysis, one of my most important concerns is the expectations of those living near the affected property. I focus on the expectations of those likely affected by the change; I place less emphasis on those living farther away. When a project is near a neighborhood, we have required lower heights near the border, landscaping, and walls.
~~But as I look back, I don’t think we have allowed significant height beyond the zoning as revised, particularly when bonuses are taken into account. I don’t particularly like the current bonus system, but since it is part of our law I am obligated to apply it.
~~The tallest projects I have voted for are The Parque and the McDowell Optima Village. I negotiated for lower heights on the Optima Village, and it came in well below the bonus height. The Parque was slightly over. These two projects had several things in common. First, neither one of them would be near a residential area. Second, they promised significant open space. Third, they contained significant water conservation measures. Fourth, both were in growth areas. Neither one was located near neighborhoods.
~~The Parque was designed so that taller buildings will be located farther from Scottsdale Road, negating the canyon effect. (I get a lot of complaints about the tall buildings on the west side of Scottsdale from citizens who don’t realize this is Phoenix). The Parque promises to be a tech hub and the Optima has beautiful architecture in an important spot.
~~One critical consideration was that the Parque parcel was originally zoned industrial. I thought this was a wildly inappropriate use for this spot, which might have allowed for a warehouse or other use which would have been very traffic intensive. This was similar to the MACK project, which I think Will be an inappropriate use of this land. Several people have questioned why the City Council would allow a warehouse for this land, when the truth is that the Council has no power to stop.  On the Parque property, this might be our only chance to stop a warehouse, and for that reason, I thought rezoning was not only appropriate but critical.

I am opposed to such measures. Scottsdale is a city for families and a city of space, and cutting down on single family residential zoning leaves families cramped at best and leaving Scottsdale at worst. I moved here because I knew this town was dedicated towards providing my family the kind of life we desired, and I want to pass that on to future Scottsdale residents.

Rezoning requests should be considered on a case-by-case basis, with copious amounts of public education and public input included Reprior to request coming to City Council for formal action. Proposals that include significant changes to established plans must include an expanded public notification process to ensure residents fully understand what is being proposed and giving the residents enough time to work with the proposer(s) and to develop their own position to be presented during public input opportunities.