SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA — December 12, 2024

Scottsdale approves Marshall Living 5-1 despite parking-design dispute in Old Town alley

Development review board approved three projects including controversial Marshall Living with disputed parking standards (5-1), re-approved Winfield Hotel despite public opposition to height, and initiated shade tree design guidelines in response to urban heat study.

Scottsdale DRB Approves Marshall Living 5–1 Amid Alley Parking Controversy; Winfield Hotel and Shade Guidelines Also Advanced

The Scottsdale Development Review Board on December 12, 2024, approved three significant projects, but not without friction. The centerpiece was Marshall Living's 5–1 approval despite persistent objections that a 20-foot drive aisle in an Old Town alley violates standard parking maneuverability practices. Two companion approvals—Winfield Hotel's re-approval on Scottsdale Road (6–0) and Toll at Camelback's contemporary townhomes (6–0)—proceeded smoothly, as did initiation of city shade-and-tree design guidelines in response to a 2022 ASU urban-heat study.

Key Speeches

Marshall Living Parking Standards Dispute

"The zoning ordinance clearly has design guidelines for parking and with respect to adjacent drive aisles: if you have a 20-foot drive aisle, you should have angle parking at 55 degrees, and if you're going to have 90-degree parking, which this project proposes, you really need to have a 24-foot drive aisle. That's a standard I've been held to on all the projects I've done in Scottsdale." — Mike March, architect and project evaluator for neighboring property owners

"I think one concern with a building within the Old Town context is to make sure that the reflectivity is within City guidelines as well as just limiting highly reflective surfaces within the Old Town area." — Vice Chair Brand, requesting glazing-strategy clarification on Winfield Hotel

"I'm just thinking, you know, backing out of one of those stalls, you've got walls on both sides of each one of those individual stalls, and you're not going to be able to see anybody coming east or west down that alley. I'm struggling with this one." — Commissioner Young, expressing concerns about backing visibility in Marshall Living's alley design

Applicant Response on Marshall Living

"The owner actually acquired the land on the south to make the project bigger, so that parking, refuge, and everything would work better. So we believe this is actually an improvement of what was already approved. What I've heard today has to do more with city ordinances and city rules. This one project won't change anything. What I believe is that we've actually improved the situation." — Mark Tomichek, Tomichek Design (applicant/designer)

Staff and Board Support for Old Town Alley Practices

"I mean, this is Old Town. This is our downtown. The alleys have this almost exact same challenge. I could give a whole bunch of examples of other locations downtown where it's very challenging and difficult to maneuver the car. These are alleys, they're not streets." — Vice Chair Brand, defending the project within Old Town's context

"Less than 250 cars per day is typically what we'd expect on an alley." — Sam Taylor, Transportation Staff, testifying to minimal traffic volume

Timeline

Marshall Living (46D-2022-2)

Staff presentation: Greg Bloomberg presented the expanded two-parcel project (originally approved in 2022 with single narrower parcel), now totaling 12 apartments with commercial space, 17 parking spaces, and alley access. Key controversy: 20-foot effective drive aisle (16-foot existing alley plus 2-foot applicant dedication plus 2-foot setback) versus standard 24-foot requirement for 90-degree parking.
Public comment: Three lengthy speakers representing neighboring business owners and architects:
- Mike March (8 minutes): Licensed architect with 30 years Arizona experience, retained by adjacent property owners; detailed code violations, backed maneuverability concerns, noted standard 24-foot requirement unmet, predicted trespassing and collisions.
- Jose Ramirez (7 minutes): Property owner at 7077 East Fifth Avenue directly north of project; cited insufficient parking radius, predicted trespassing, lamented loss of Fifth Avenue's architectural character, requested middle-ground alternative design.
- Mark Moffett (Rooster Bus CEO, 7083 East Fifth Avenue): Emphasized waste-management hazards, two-way traffic safety, 4-story height incompatibility with Old Town scale, called for reconsideration of apartments versus condominiums.
Applicant presentation: Mark Tomichek presented comparative site plans and elevations; emphasized project expands previous approval, improves parking situation by acquiring additional land, complies with ordinance, dedicates two feet of property per requirement, addresses fire-code constraints from earlier approval.
Transportation staff testimony: Sam Taylor confirmed alley is dedicated right-of-way (not street), stated typical alley traffic under 250 cars/day, explained Old Town alley parking is standard practice, noted 24-foot standard applies to on-site parking drive aisles, not alley access, confirmed compliance with DSPM turning-radius requirements.
Council discussion: Commissioner Young repeatedly raised concerns about blind spots and backup collisions; Vice Chair Brand defended project as consistent with Old Town character and alley norms, noted project less dense than allowed (48-foot zoning), overparked relative to code, and acknowledged any future development on site would face same parking constraints; Board Member Mason noted similar 300-truck-per-day highway estimates had resolved into non-issues once actual linear vehicle counts were considered; discussion clarified that parapet height increase was fire-code driven, not design choice.
Vote: 5–1 approval; Commissioner Young dissented. Other board members: Yes (Caputi, Brand, Paser, Mason, Robinson).

Winfield Hotel and Residences (15D-2018-2)

Public comment: Karen Waters (7301 East Third Avenue, Third Avenue Lofts) objected to 9-story hotel, citing fear of loss of Old Town charm; expressed preference for smaller-scale development. Vice Chair Brand noted public concerns (height, scale) fall outside DRB purview and are decided at City Council/zoning level, not design review.
Staff presentation: Brian Clef, Planning Department, presented re-approval case. Project originally approved December 2018; approval expired; applicant seeks reapproval with minor revisions. Site: Scottsdale Road between Third and Fourth Avenues, Downtown Multiple Use Type 2 zoning with plan block development. Building: 90 feet tall, 230 hotel rooms, 24 residential condos (originally 256 rooms, 16 condos—unit allocation shifted but facade unchanged). Materials: stone cladding, metal panels, minimal ephas. 254 below-grade parking spaces. 154,000+ square feet. Minor changes: trash-room interior reconfiguration, slight unit reallocation; material palette and facade unchanged from 2018 approval. All setbacks and step-back standards met; parking master plan approved via zoning case.
Applicant presentation: Tom Galvin (Rose Law Group, PC, 71144 East Tyson Drive) noted project substantially identical to 2018 approval; entitlements secured; $1 million+ already invested; COVID delays caused by construction-cost escalation; all original and new stipulations met; staff support confirmed. Architect Vince Scarano (Billform Architecture Group) presented material palette: desert-hue stone (12×24 format, Sun Valley Masonry, locally sourced but sample dated), solar-band glazing (GL2 for energy efficiency), concrete banding, sage ephas. Vice Chair Brand pressed on glazing reflectivity (confirming Scottsdale compliance), exposed slab articulation (emphasizing that shown detail must be constructed, referencing recent project that omitted floor-edge details post-approval), and applied versus structural concrete. Scarano confirmed reflectivity meets standards, concrete banding applied rather than exposed structural edge, ephah color more muted in reality than digital rendering.
Vote: 6–0 approval. (Caputi, Brand, Young, Paser, Mason, Robinson all yes.)

Toll at Camelback (21D-2024)

Staff presentation: Within 130-acre Camelback master plan (zoned ~4 years prior by Nationwide). Northeast corner of Camelback Boulevard and 76th Street. Stacked townhomes. All street-scape improvements (Landscaping, hardscape) already installed by Nationwide; project adds onsite landscaping and patios. Three color schemes using similar finishes (ephas, stone veneer, fiber-cement cladding) with varying wood tones and palette depth for visual variety. Site details include patio access to sidewalks along Camelback and Claret Drive, enhancing street connectivity. Private open space for each unit.
Board discussion: Board Member Robinson praised architectural richness, complexity of massing with setbacks and floor delineation, middle-tier housing diversity (neither luxury nor garden-style), material hierarchy (stone base, fiber-cement highlight). Colors on-screen display quality noted (colors read darker on presentation screen than on reference board; architect Graham Denton confirmed left/board screen most accurate for tone).
Vote: 6–0 approval. (Caputi, Brand, Young, Paser, Mason, Robinson.)

Shade and Tree Design Guidelines (949 PA 2024)

Staff presentation: Tim Connor, Environmental Policy Manager, presented initiation request for standalone design guidelines derived from 2022 ASU urban climate study recommending increased tree canopy and shade structures to mitigate heat-island effect. Guidelines modular: three components (trees, structures, water harvesting). Goals: increase shade, maintain shade, collaborate on shade. Implementation across public realm (parks) and development applications. Examples shown: planter size/width relationships to mature canopy spread; streetscape shade positioning relative to sun angle; pedestrian-comfort optimization. Public outreach: seven pop-up events, two open houses, multiple department and commission presentations ongoing. Not code requirement; policy document to guide design but discretionary by decision-making body (DRB).
Board discussion: Commissioner Young questioned implementation mechanisms—will landscape approval processes require shade studies? How quantified (e.g., percentage of sidewalk shaded)? How addressed underground utilities and tree-root barriers (8–10 feet typical encroachment zones)? Requested clarification on specific tree list and durability in harsh sites. Tim Connor confirmed tree section with small, medium, large classifications; native/desert-adapted species only; durability and invasive-root consideration built in. Vice Chair Brand asked if standalone versus integrated with existing (Old Town character area, Scottsdale Road streetscape) guidelines; staff indicated initial standalone status but future consolidation effort, especially for conflicts in Old Town and other arterial corridors. Board Member Paser noted overlap with sustainability plan's heat section. Vice Chair Brand added that International Green Construction Code now requires shade studies for commercial (parking, sidewalk, hot surfaces) and that Phoenix shade-analysis standard (June 21, 12 p.m., hardest conditions) might be model for Scottsdale; staff acknowledged and indicated consultants would return with shade diagrams for board/staff analysis. Vice Chair Brand also requested information on state bill compliance adjustments (ADUs, adaptive reuse) effective December 25, 2024; staff confirmed City Council approval November 25, administrative implementation without DRB purview.
Vote: 6–0 initiation. (Caputi, Brand, Young, Paser, Mason, Robinson.)

Opposition

Marshall Living Opposition Summary

Number of speakers against: 3 (Mike March, Jose Ramirez, Mark Moffett)

Main concerns:

Parking drive-aisle width: 20-foot effective width (16-foot existing alley + 2-foot applicant dedication + 2-foot setback) insufficient for 90-degree parking; standard requires 24 feet; inadequate for backing maneuverability.
Blind-spot and collision risk: Individual stalls with walls on both sides limit visibility east-west down alley; backing vehicles cannot see oncoming traffic; predicted bumper collisions.
Trespassing: Insufficient radius will force residents to maneuver onto neighboring properties; impacts safety and enjoyment of adjacent business parcels.
Loading-zone functionality: 20-foot depth insufficient for standard moving/delivery van (25-foot turning radius); loading zone effectively unusable if occupied by resident parking.
Waste-management logistics: Refuse trucks already struggle with tight alley maneuvering and low-hanging power lines; project compounds difficulty; inadequate plan for waste handling and truck access.
Architectural incompatibility: 4-story height disproportionate to surrounding single- and two-story retail; sets precedent for further erosion of Old Town's character; Fifth Avenue architectural charm threatened.
Resident stability: Apartments attract transient tenants with higher turnover, constant need for re-education on parking and waste norms; condominiums preferable for long-term community commitment.

Most compelling arguments: Mike March's technical credentials (30-year architect, principal of firm, direct office experience across street) and detailed code citation; Mark Moffett's operational perspective (Rooster Bus CEO, daily alley navigation, safety liability); Jose Ramirez's property-owner standing (15-year Old Town presence, adjacent property at 7077 E. Fifth Ave).

Organized groups: Neighboring property owners coordinated March's evaluation.

Support

Marshall Living Support

Primary supporter: Vice Chair Brand and Board Member Mason (via comparative analysis and traffic-volume perspective).

Arguments:

Consistency with Old Town norms: All Old Town alleys function with similar tight widths; narrowness standard in downtown, not anomaly.
Traffic volume: Expected <250 cars/day (per transportation staff); minimal congestion compared to major roadways; comparable to small local roads.
Code compliance: Applicant meets ordinance requirements (10-foot alley width + 2-foot setback after dedication = 12-foot available from center of road); DSPM turning-radius requirements satisfied; no ordinance violation.
Project improvement over prior approval: Expanded site (acquisition of southern parcel) allows better parking, refuge room, and overall configuration than tightly constrained 2022-approved single parcel; same height and density constraints apply.
Less density and overparked: Project is less dense than 48-foot zoning allows; provides more parking spaces than code minimum; developer exercising restraint.
Inevitable redevelopment challenges: Any project on site (1-, 2-, 3-, or 4-story) will face identical parking constraints; approving this project does not worsen alley functionality relative to alternatives.
Architectural merit: Contemporary design with shade canopy; pedestrian-oriented; consistent with Old Town character-area plan.
City parking-infrastructure investment: City spending tens of millions on downtown parking garages to alleviate alley reliance; future development will benefit; single-project tightness is interim condition, not permanent.

Project Details

Marshall Living

Case number: 46D-2022-2
Applicant/designer: Mark Tomichek, Tomichek Design, 4368 North Civic Center Plaza, Scottsdale, AZ
Location: South of Marshall Way and Fifth Avenue intersection, Old Town Scottsdale
Original approval: 2022 (single-parcel, ~30–40 feet wide)
Current proposal: Two-parcel expansion; 12 apartments (2–3 bedrooms), retail/commercial, shade canopy
Parking: 17 spaces (9 tandem, 1 loading zone, 7 angled); access via alley
Alley dimensions: 16-foot existing + 2-foot applicant dedication + 2-foot setback = ~12 feet available from alley centerline (effective 20-foot drive aisle for two-way traffic if adjacent property also dedicates 2 feet)
Materials: Masonry, metal accents, ephas
Height: 48 feet (consistent with prior approval)
Changes from 2022 approval: Southern parcel addition; building widened; fire-code-driven parapet increase; minor facade reconfiguration; trash-room interior adjustment

Winfield Hotel and Residences

Case number: 15D-2018-2
Applicant/attorney: Tom Galvin, Rose Law Group, PC
Architect: Vince Scarano, Billform Architecture Group, 19820 North 7th Street, Suite 260, Phoenix, AZ 85024
Location: Scottsdale Road between Third and Fourth Avenues, Old Town Scottsdale
Current zoning: Downtown Multiple Use Type 2 (plan block development, downtown overlay)
Building: 9-story hotel; 230 guest rooms; 24 residential condos
Total square footage: 154,000+
Height: 90 feet
Additional spaces: ~5,800 sq. ft. restaurant, 4,000 sq. ft. conference space
Parking: 254 below-grade spaces (two access points off alley; parking master plan approved via 2018 zoning case)
Materials: Stone cladding (12×24, Sun Valley Masonry, locally sourced); metal panels; ephas; solar-band glazing (GL2)
Changes from 2018 approval: Unit allocation (256 hotel rooms → 230; 16 condos → 24); trash-room interior reconfiguration; facade and material palette unchanged
Entitlements: Zoning case (ZN) 2018, council abandonment (alley closure) recorded February 2022; all bonus rights paid; $1 million+ development agreement investment

Toll at Camelback

Case number: 21D-2024
Developer: Toll (representative present; full developer team name not stated in transcript)
Architect: Graham Denton, Woodley Architectural Group
Location: Northeast corner Camelback Boulevard and 76th Street, within Camelback master plan (130-acre development)
Housing type: Stacked townhomes
Materials: Stone veneer base, fiber-cement cladding (Nichiha line), warm-tone wood accents
Color schemes: Three variants with varying wood tones and palette depth
Site features: Private patios with sidewalk access along Camelback and Claret Drive; onsite landscaping; connectivity to street frontage
Density/unit count: Not explicitly stated in transcript
Context: Parallel multifamily project to north; all streetscape improvements already installed by Nationwide (master plan developer)

Vote Breakdown

Marshall Living (46D-2022-2)

Final: 5–1
Yes: Councilwoman Caputi, Vice Chair Brand, Board Member Paser, Board Member Mason, Board Member Robinson
No: Commissioner Young

Winfield Hotel and Residences (15D-2018-2)

Final: 6–0
Yes: Councilwoman Caputi, Vice Chair Brand, Commissioner Young, Board Member Paser, Board Member Mason, Board Member Robinson

Toll at Camelback (21D-2024)

Final: 6–0
Yes: Councilwoman Caputi, Vice Chair Brand, Commissioner Young, Board Member Paser, Board Member Mason, Board Member Robinson

Shade and Tree Design Guidelines (949 PA 2024)

Final: 6–0 (initiation)
Yes: Councilwoman Caputi, Vice Chair Brand, Commissioner Young, Board Member Paser, Board Member Mason, Board Member Robinson

Outcome & Next Steps

Marshall Living: Approved 5–1 with staff recommended stipulations. Project may proceed with design as presented; applicant to comply with all ordinance requirements including two-foot property dedication and two-foot setback. No continuance; case closed unless applicant seeks modification.

Winfield Hotel: Approved 6–0 with staff recommended stipulations. Re-approval granted; design consistent with 2018 approval and 2018 city council zoning entitlement. Project may proceed to permitting. Vice Chair Brand noted on record that exposed slab and floor-edge articulation shown in materials must be constructed as designed (referencing prior project failure to include such details post-approval).

Toll at Camelback: Approved 6–0 with staff recommended stipulations. Project praised for architectural quality and housing-type diversity; no concerns raised; ready to advance.

Shade and Tree Design Guidelines: Initiated 6–0 as standalone policy document. Design team (Design Laboratory, landscape architecture firm) to continue development of modular components (trees, structures, water harvesting); additional public outreach planned; future review and approval by DRB anticipated. Consultants directed to return with shade diagrams/analysis to demonstrate compliance with International Green Construction Code requirements (parking, sidewalk, hot-surface shading); city staff to analyze and integrate with existing Old Town character-area plan and Scottsdale Road streetscape guidelines to resolve conflicts. Implementation start likely January 2025; guidelines non-mandatory but policy-advisory for DRB discretion during development review.

Controversies & Context

Marshall Living Parking Standards Debate

The central controversy turns on whether a 20-foot effective drive aisle for 90-degree parking in an Old Town alley complies with Scottsdale zoning ordinance and standard parking-design practice. Architect Mike March cited the ordinance requirement for 24-foot drive aisles when 90-degree stalls are proposed; applicant/staff argued that the 24-foot standard applies to on-site parking drive aisles, not alley access, and that Old Town's narrow alleys (16–20 feet typical) are an existing constraint with no practical remedy short of full property-line relocation (requiring multi-property coordination outside DRB scope). Commissioner Young expressed specific concern about blind-spot collisions when backing out of individual stalls flanked by garage walls; Vice Chair Brand countered that Old Town alleys inherently operate under such tight conditions and that transportation staff testimony confirmed <250 cars/day alley traffic—minimal compared to major roadways.

The dispute reveals tension between technical parking standards (24-foot aisles) and Old Town reality (16–20-foot alleys serving dense, mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented blocks). Vice Chair Brand emphasized that approving this project does not worsen the alley; it will only improve once neighboring properties redevelop and dedicate their own two feet of right-of-way (mandatory under Old Town ordinance), eventually widening the alley to a full 20 feet (or 24 feet with parking on both sides if setbacks applied). Until then, any project faces the same constraint.

Winfield Hotel Height and Public Perception

Karen Waters, Third Avenue Lofts resident, objected to the 9-story height as incompatible with Old Town's low-rise character and her decision to move to the area for "charm" and distance from "large high-rises." Vice Chair Brand and Councilwoman Caputi clarified that height and zoning entitlements are not within DRB purview; the 90-foot height was approved by City Council in 2018 and is not reconsidered at design review. This exchange highlights the boundary between zoning/land-use decisions (Council level) and design/architectural review (DRB level).

State Preemption on ADUs and Adaptive Reuse

Vice Chair Brand asked staff whether state bills requiring ADU and adaptive-reuse allowances (effective December 25, 2024) would be presented to the DRB. Staff (Brad Carr) confirmed City Council approved changes November 25; no DRB review because state statute mandates administrative processing, not public hearing. This reflects Arizona's growing state preemption of local zoning authority on housing density, a shift constraining city design-review discretion on future residential projects.

ASU Urban Heat Study and Sustainability Imperatives

The shade-and-tree guideline initiative stems from a 2022 ASU study correlating satellite-measured heat islands with Scottsdale's designated growth areas (Air Park, Old Town, South Scottsdale, McDoel Roads). Heat-mitigation through canopy and structure shade now embedded in city sustainability planning. Commissioner Young raised practical implementation concerns: how to mandate shade when utilities occupy easements (standard 8–10-foot root barriers required), and how to specify tree species durable in harsh sites (avoiding failures like Scottsdale Road's hybrid Desert Museum trees). These questions signal ongoing tension between aspirational urban-heat-reduction goals and on-the-ground utility and maintenance realities.

Duration

Marshall Living: ~45 minutes (including staff presentation, three public speakers with extended time, applicant/transportation staff testimony, extended board discussion on alley standards and visibility)
Winfield Hotel: ~25 minutes (including pulled-from-consent public comment, staff presentation, applicant/architect material-palette discussion, board questions)
Toll at Camelback: ~15 minutes (staff presentation, brief architect clarification, strong board praise, minimal questions)
Shade and Tree Guidelines: ~20 minutes (staff presentation, extended board questions on implementation and utility coordination, clarifications on state preemption)
Total meeting: ~2 hours 15 minutes (including roll call, consent agenda, minutes approval, administrative report, other procedural items)

Other Notable Items

Minutes Approval & Consent Agenda: November 7, 2024 minutes approved 6–0; consent agenda items 4–5 (5DR-2024, 54D-2024) approved 6–0; item 3 (Winfield Hotel) pulled from consent for full presentation due to public objection and board's desire for comprehensive design review.

State Zoning Compliance: Brad Carr (Planning Director) informed board that ADU and adaptive-reuse ordinance amendments approved by City Council November 25, effective December 25, 2024, will be implemented administratively per state statute without public hearing or DRB review. Vice Chair Brand requested future information brief on changes for board knowledge, though not mandatory.