As Kenny Rogers has been advising for going on 50 years, you got to know when to hold \u2019em \u2013 and when to fold.<\/p>\n
Facing a new state law that some worry could cause \u201can explosion\u201d of casitas, which can be turned into short-term rentals, Scottsdale puffed up \u2013 then backed away and fell in line.<\/p>\n
But that doesn\u2019t mean city officials are happy about it.<\/p>\n
As Councilwoman Jan Dubauskas put it, \u201cThe legislature is removed from practical implementation of its concepts.<\/p>\n
\u201cI’m concerned that is one of those ideas that sounds great on paper, but the implementation could go terribly awry, eroding the charm and quality of life residents expect in Scottsdale.\u201d<\/p>\n
Last year, city staff presented Scottsdale\u2019s elected officials with what seemed to be a clever work around on the \u201ccasitas bill.\u201d<\/p>\n
Though state representatives and Gov. Katie Hobbs granted hundreds of thousands of homeowners the ability to build casitas, city planners came up with a map that excluded most of the city \u2013 as being \u201cin the vicinity of\u201d either the Scottsdale Airport or Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.<\/p>\n
Great idea, Council collectively said, unanimously approving the exclusions at the end of 2024.<\/p>\n
\u201cOutlaws!\u201d state reps proclaimed.<\/p>\n
Arizona House Majority Leader Leo Biasiucci fumed over Scottsdale\u2019s chess move in a hot email stating the city\u2019s actions \u201ccontravene the law.\u201d<\/p>\n
Early this year, he and other state leaders specifically targeted Scottsdale \u2013 according to Rep. Alexander Kolodin, a Republican who represents much of the city \u2013 with an amendment making the city\u2019s work around null.<\/p>\n
Scottsdale\u2019s response:<\/p>\n
We surrender.<\/p>\n
As a city release put it, \u201cAt their Sept. 30 meeting, the Scottsdale City Council amended the city\u2019s zoning ordinance related to accessory dwelling units (ADUs) to comply with a state law (HB2928) adopted earlier this year.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe new law expands the ability for ADUs to be built on residential lots.\u201d<\/p>\n
What the city and state call \u201caccessory dwelling units\u201d or \u201cADUs\u201d \u2013 most people call \u201ccasitas\u201d or \u201cmother-in-laws.\u201d<\/p>\n
The city did not have much of a choice.<\/p>\n
Failure to amend Scottsdale\u2019s zoning code in accordance with the state law, the release noted, \u201cwould have allowed ADUs on all residential lots or parcels without limits.\u201d<\/p>\n
The unanimous approval was shuffled off in the background, as part of a dozen \u201cconsent agenda\u201d items voted on collectively, with no presentation, questions or debate.<\/p>\n
According to city planner Brad Carr\u2019s report, the new state amendment \u201cupdates 2024 legislation to require cities to allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on lots or parcels that are located in the vicinity of a federal aviation administration commercially licensed airport or a general aviation airport ..\u201d<\/p>\n
State leaders were furious over Scottsdale\u2019s \u201cairport vicinity\u201d interpretation \u2013 which kept bans on casitas\/mother-in-laws in the southern part of the city through Old Town.<\/p>\n
That, coincidentally or not, is the hotbed of Scottsdale\u2019s short-term rental market.<\/p>\n
According to another state law Scottsdale leaders unsuccessfully battled nearly a decade ago: \u201cA city or town may not prohibit vacation rentals or short-term rentals.\u201d<\/p>\n
Though state lawmakers say the new casitas law protects homeowners\u2019 rights, some see it as a ploy to flood the short-term rental market.<\/p>\n
Airbnb rush?<\/strong><\/p>\n Last year, after the state ADU law passed but before the city\u2019s short-lived work-around, one Scottsdale Planning commissioner feared the state law was the gateway to \u201ccreating a slum\u201d here.<\/p>\n Councilwoman Solange Whitehead called the legislation \u201can assault on our local control and our neighborhoods.<\/p>\n \u201cI consider this a terrible, terrible law,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n Then-Mayor David Ortega howled that the 2024 legislation would \u201csubvert city law\u201d and \u201cdouble the number of short-term rentals in Scottsdale.\u201d<\/p>\n Indeed, according to Carr\u2019s presentation to City Council, Scottsdale and other cities must allow the short- or long-term rental of the secondary dwellings.<\/p>\n Which leads some to fear: \u201cInvasion of the Airbnbs.”<\/p>\n That has not been the case \u2013 thus far, at least.<\/p>\n \u201cTo date,\u201d according to the city\u2019s Oct. 1 news release, \u201cScottsdale has received only one formal application for an ADU.\u201d<\/p>\n Irresponsible?<\/strong><\/p>\n As Councilwoman Maryann McAllen put it, \u201cwe are following the state law. I am more concerned we are being forced by state law to allow such unprecedented ADU’s to be built in our city.<\/p>\n \u201cThe way the state law is written,\u201d the first-year representative added, \u201cdoes not allow our staff to regulate what is actually being built to Scottsdale’s higher standards.\u201d<\/p>\n The new state law allows one attached and one detached ADU per single-family property on residential lots.<\/p>\n Properties with 1 acre or more can build a third detached ADU.<\/p>\n The only key restriction the city can enforce is size: an ADU can be 75% of the gross floor area of the single-family home or 1,000 square feet \u2013 whichever is smaller.<\/p>\n As the Scottsdale press release noted, \u201cCities are restricted from requiring ADUs to have fire sprinkler systems, on-site parking and setbacks of more than 5 feet.\u201d<\/p>\n Lee Cooley, director of the Scottsdale Area Association of REALTORS, sent an email to Carr in August, saying he was concerned by \u201cthe impact HB2720\/2928 can have on Scottsdale’s reputation when it comes to fire safety.<\/p>\n \u201cThe bills\u2019 suggestion that \u2018a municipality may not require an accessory dwelling unit to comply with a commercial building code or contain a fire sprinkler\u2019 is irresponsible.\u201d<\/p>\n There is one big catch that city leaders believe will spare much of Scottsdale from a \u201ccasitas rush\u201d: Property owners who belong to homeowner associations \u2013 which covers much of the city \u2013 must follow their HOA guidelines.<\/p>\n As Carr noted, \u201cHomeowner association rules may be more restrictive than the city ordinance.\u201d<\/p>\n Bottom line: The casitas fight is over \u2013 and Scottsdale lost.<\/p>\n \u201cScottsdale opposed this legislation due to its potential impact on neighborhoods and the elimination of local control,\u201d the city press release stated, \u201cbut when the bill became law, the city then had to proceed with updating its zoning ordinance \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n Councilman Barry Graham grumbled over a new issue and an old one:<\/p>\n \u201cIt’s concerning when the state chips away at local control, whether it\u2019s short-term rentals or how we plan the density of our neighborhoods.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"As Kenny Rogers has been advising for going on 50 years, you got to know when to hold…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":299449,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5131],"tags":[5229,5643,1587,67486,48495,12104,152499,1589,152495,152498,152496,152497,67,586,132,5230,68,2969],"class_list":{"0":"post-299448","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-phoenix","8":"tag-america","9":"tag-arizona","10":"tag-az","11":"tag-casitas","12":"tag-councilman","13":"tag-federal-aviation-administration","14":"tag-jan-dubauskas","15":"tag-phoenix","16":"tag-scottsdale-airport","17":"tag-scottsdale-area-association-of-realtors","18":"tag-scottsdale-planning-commissioner","19":"tag-solange-whitehead","20":"tag-united-states","21":"tag-united-states-of-america","22":"tag-unitedstates","23":"tag-unitedstatesofamerica","24":"tag-us","25":"tag-usa"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115365894212521135","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/299448","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=299448"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/299448\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/299449"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=299448"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=299448"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=299448"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}