Scottsdale, Ariz. — Scottsdale City Council passed new ordinances on Monday adhering to Arizona’s state housing mandates, albeit with modifications to curtail their impact. The state legislation, enacted earlier this year, mandates a portion of commercial and mixed-use buildings to incorporate housing and allows greater freedom for the creation of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) such as casitas on residential properties.
These changes, designed as a response to the growing housing crisis in Arizona, aim to increase housing supply by facilitating the transformation of commercial spaces and the expansion of residential properties. However, implementation has been contentious, with some local officials arguing that these laws undermine municipal autonomy.
Critics on the council, including Vice Mayor Barry Graham, expressed dissatisfaction with what they view as an overreach by state authorities. “This legislation was an attack on communities like Scottsdale… many of us up here have found it disturbing,” Graham stated. Councilmember Solange Whitehead likened the situation to past legislative actions that limited local oversight of short-term rental platforms, which she claims have disrupted local neighborhoods.
Mayor David Ortega echoed these concerns, particularly emphasizing the complications arising from the intersection of ADUs and short-term rentals (STRs). He stressed ongoing issues with nuisance properties and his continued efforts to restrict the spread of such rentals, which could be exacerbated by the new state law.
In opposition to these local adjustments, Republican Rep. Leo Biasiucci of Lake Havasu City warned that Scottsdale’s approach might be in violation of the state-enforced housing laws. He highlighted specific discrepancies such as the city’s decision to limit eligible building space for housing to 1%, far below the state mandate of up to 10%. Biasiucci’s concerns, detailed in a recent public statement, urge Scottsdale to reconsider its stance within the next 30 days to align with state legislation.
The crux of the disagreement appears to revolve around the interpretation of the new “adaptive reuse law,” which aims at converting existing commercial and mixed-use spaces into housing. While the state law allows for up to 10% of these buildings to be repurposed, Scottsdale’s ordinance significantly reduces this scope, prompting critique from state lawmakers.
The conflict illustrates broader tensions between state and local governance in addressing housing shortages while balancing community character and local control. As these new policies begin to take effect, the reaction from municipal governments may well set precedents for other cities grappling with similar legislative mandates.
This article is automatically generated by Open AI, and may contain inaccuracies regarding the people, facts, circumstances, and story. For corrections, retractions, or removal requests, please email contact@publiclawlibrary.org.