Posted By Les Conklin on Dec 22, 2014

By Les Conklin for Friends of the Scenic Drive/GPPA

The current proposal from the state takes advantage of a note in the 2002 Scottsdale General Plan and “moves” the commercial and resort/tourism zoning from east of Pima Road to east of Scottsdale Road, between Happy Valley and Jomax Roads. The proposed zoning shift is a mistake. It creates more problems than it solves and that is why Friends of the Scenic Drive and the Greater Pinnacle Peak Association, while endorsing the rest of the complex transaction between the city and the state, oppose the zoning shift.

The State Land Department is requiring Scottsdale to increase the value of State Trust Land that the city hopes to eventually include, all or in-part, in the McDowell Sonoran Preserve. This requirement is being satisfied by having the city place new commercial zoning on a 75-acre parcel and resort/tourism zoning on a 40-acre parcel. Both parcels are on trust land, currently zoned residential. Further, the 2002 Scottsdale General Plan must reflect the new zoning before the state will move forward with the other parts of the transaction.

Not many people have the time or the desire to immerse themselves in the 2002 City of Scottsdale General Plan. Shame on yours truly; I am one of those people. However, I have attended the recent open houses held by the city and the state, asked questions, listened to the answers, and obtained a detailed zoning map from the 2002 City of Scottsdale General Plan. The map clearly shows commercial and rural zoning on land east of Pima Road. I have been told by city staff that there is a less obvious note that states the commercial and resort/tourism zoning could be moved to another location, i.e., Scottsdale Road.

Flexibility Needed

Scottsdale’s preservation effort, despite the challenges created by the Great Recession, has made excellent progress in adding land to the preserve and building trailheads. However, there is no publicly published plan to complete the preserve in a way that maximizes the return of the voters investment. Since there is no plan, flexibility is required. The land on Scottsdale Road, where the new commercial and resort/tourist zoning would be placed, is in the planned preserve; land voters have indicated they want to preserve. Placing the new zoning there makes it more difficult to add – some or all of – that land to the preserve.

The 2002 General Plan was a long-time in the works; many people were involved. Those people, city staff, residents, and civic leaders, took into consideration existing and planned development, the environment, and future demand. Sticking with the 2002 City of Scottsdale General Plan seems logical because it adds the needed value to land east of Pima where the value is needed to acquire the 400 acres and rezone and provide additional protection for land already in the preserve. It simplifies and reduces the scope of the transaction. It also avoids the valid observation that the zoning map in the general plan does not show the commercial and resort/tourism zoning on the Scottsdale Road property.

Fairness is Important

In fairness to residents who purchased land near northern Scottsdale and Pima Road since 2002, the zoning should not be moved. The 2002 General Plan and map of the planned preserve does not show commercial and resort/tourism zoning on the parcel east of Scottsdale Road. On-the-other hand, the zoning is shown on land east of Pima. The result is that some buyers might have purchased land based on what could turn out to be misleading maps. The city can meet the state’s requirement for increased value by leaving the commercial and resort/tourism zoning east of Pima Road. State Land Department staff have told me that the zoning does not have to be exactly where it is shown in the map, it could be moved based on resident feedback. The general plan calls for multiple residential neighborhoods to be built east of Pima.

Community Sensitivity is Essential

The state’s proposal will add 40 acres of commercial zoning and 75 acres of resort zoning on Scottsdale Road between Happy Valley and Jomax Roads; land that is on the Scenic Drive and part of the planned preserve. We believe the state’s proposal is insensitive to current and future community needs for these five reasons.

No Need for New Commercial. All four corners of Pinnacle Peak and Scottsdale Road are zoned commercial, continuing the northward push of urban development.

#1. There is no need, now and for the foreseeable future, for additional commercial zoning at the Scottsdale Road location.

The nearby intersection of Pinnacle Peak Road and Scottsdale Road has four corners with commercial zoning opportunities. The existing Safeway shopping center occupies the northeast corner. A large retail center is under construction on the southeast corner (Sprout’s). The other two corners are in Phoenix and have commercial zoning.
The state and Phoenix have planned the state trust land on the west side of Scottsdale Road from Pinnacle Peak Road north all the way to Jomax Road. The plan calls for new commercial and mixed-use zoning from Pinnacle Peak to Happy Valley, and residential along the Scenic Drive from Happy Valley to Jomax, i.e. the Phoenix side of the Scenic Drive will be residential.
Today, on Scottsdale’s Scenic Drive, covering a distance of six 1/2 miles, there are already three major retail centers. AJ’s at Lone Mountain and Scottsdale Road, The Summit (Target, Safeway) at Ashler Hills and Scottsdale Road, and Albertson’s at Carefree Highway and Scottsdale Road.
There are also four commercial centers at the nearby intersection of Pinnacle Peak and Pima Road, and in Carefree on Tom Darlington.
There are numerous chronic retail vacancies in some of the above centers.

#2. Sets a precedent that will foster more up-zoning in the neighborhood/rural areas along the Scenic Drive from Happy Valley Road to Carefree Highway.

Urban growth along Scottsdale Road now extends more than TWENTY MILES from the City of Tempe line to Pinnacle Peak Road. The Scenic Drive was Maricopa’s first “scenic corridor.” Shea Boulevard was Scottsdale’s first scenic corridor; look what time and good intentions have done to Shea’s desert ambiance. The commercial zoning that is currently in place along the Scenic Drive was there when Scottsdale annexed the area in the mid-1980s. Since that time applications for commercial zoning have either been withdrawn or rejected. The city council under Herb Drinkwater removed commercial zoning from land near the Scenic Drive. It is important to economic vitality of this primarily residential area that it showcase the Sonoran Desert and not be gradually overwhelmed by urban sprawl.

#3. Adding commercial zoning will increase the value of the land when it is auctioned by the state. The increased value will

Proposed new commercial zoning would be located on Scottsdale Road’s Scenic Corridor on land (dark green) that city hopes to include in McDowell Sonoran Preserve.

negatively impact Scottsdale’s ability to purchase land for the planned Scottsdale Road trailhead.

By not having a trailhead on Scottsdale’s signature road – a road that “connects seeing and doing” and is used by many residents and tourists – the city loses the opportunity to showcase the preserve and provide access and information to the many tourists and visitors that travel that highway, a local landmark. The proposal will also make it more difficult for the city to save the desert along Dynamite Boulevard and Scottsdale Road Scenic Corridors as hoped. It is unlikely that new commercial zoning will benefit the environment, tourism, recreational opportunities, and quality of life.

#4. Negatively impacts and/or eradicates the historic Desert Foothills Scenic Drive, its current exhibit area and proposed memory park.

The Scenic Drive is a historic landmark. Cave Creek/Carefree, Maricopa County, the City of Scottsdale, and residents have worked to preserve and enhance the Scenic Drive for more than 50 years. The city is currently investing millions of Bond 2000 funds in enhancing the Scenic Drive, including burying power lines. This proposal begins the reversal of the positive actions that people and governments have taken in the past. Yes, our economy is based on change but the best kind of change is the type that also preserves those things that differentiate a destination from others.

Entry Sign at Southern Entrance to Drive at Happy Valley Road. What will be the impact of the state’s plan on the historic drive, its exhibit area, and the proposed Memory Park?

#5. Diminishes the opportunity to use the historic landmark to strengthen the “brand” of a major part of the city.

Residents and businesses along Scottsdale’s McDowell Road have spent a considerable amount of time and money searching for an idea, theme, venue, landmark – something to “connect” and help market the businesses and neighborhoods in that area. A historic suburban landmark that is linked to Scottsdale’s preserve increases the area’s marketing appeal for residents and businesses alike. By adding unnecessary commercial development to increase land value, the city will make it more difficult to create the link and build the area’s brand.

Scottsdale’s Unique Assets are Valuable to Arizona

In closing, the encouragement of former city manager, Dick Bowers, and former mayor, Herb Drinkwater, were motivators in the creation of Friends of the Scenic Drive. Since that time, city leaders have consistently supported the Scenic Drive. Last year, Mayor Lane proclaimed May as Scottsdale’s Scenic Drive Month to mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Scenic Drive.

It will be difficult to complete the McDowell Sonoran Preserve and preserve Scottsdale’s Scenic Drive. Fairness, flexibility, and sensitivity must be exhibited by both the City of Scottsdale and the State Land Department to maximize the benefits to the state government, its residents, and its many visitors.

Rezoning Open House Follow Up from City of Scottsdale Planning – Published 12/20/2014

North Scottsdale Rezoning Open House Fact Sheet – December 2014 – Published 12/14/2014

State Land Rezoning by Howard Myers and Jim Heitel – Published 12/14/2014

Scenic Drive Alert, December 1, 2014

1 Comment

guy phillips
December 30, 2014

There is a third alternative, one that I will submit to council barring any unforeseen changes.
that is to TAKE NO ACTION.
If council votes to Take No Action, the subject land will remain as it is now, pristine desert, in perpetuity.
The state will not sell the land until we rezone it. If we dont rezone, it will not change. Of course, we wont get the 400 acres of 64K power lines and utility easement in trade that would continue the Browns Ranch Trailhead to Pima road, but considering the trade-off, I would prefer to see all the land stay as it is.
My guess is that if we vote to Take No Action, the state, needing funds in 2015 more than ever, will renegotiate a better deal which I would be willing to be a part of, instead of letting staff speak for us.
There is also the possibility to finish the trailhead through negotiations with APS along the utility easement, since we would be sharing it with them anyway.
The bottom line is that this deal was made by a city council long ago, and had I been on the council back then, I would not have agreed to a deal where we would have to sell out in the end. Dont be fooled by the remarks that if we hadnt done that deal we wouldnt have gotten the Preserve. Yes we would, because most of the land in the Preserve is unbuildable and we would have been the only bidders anyway.
Post a Reply