The Desert Advocate - News The Desert Advocate -  News Center
Editor | Links | Contact Us | Home
The Desert Advocate - Submissions
Classifieds | News | Events
News Real Estate Community Sports Marketplace Arts & Entertainment Archives About Us Testimonials Classifieds
 
Weather >

Stagecoach Village mezzanine OK
by Kathleen Stinson

CAVE CREEK – Cave Creek resident Herb Natker filed a complaint recently with Cave Creek over a mezzanine in a building under construction at Stagecoach Village.

Natker said he was concerned that the mezzanine violated what he thought was a second‑story prohibition in the town’s zoning ordinance. When he voiced his concern to the council early in November, he was told the mezzanine was a partial floor and not a second story.

Natker cited a definition taken from the appraisal profession that states a mezzanine is a partial floor between two floors. 

“So, since their (Stagecoach Village) mezzanine is not between two stories, the mezzanine is a second story, which is illegal,” Natker said at the time.

What the town neglected to tell Natker is the 1991 zoning ordinance prohibiting second story commercial buildings became void when the town approved a 1994 zoning ordinance. Section 7 of that ordinance “core commercial zones” allows two‑story buildings with a maximum of 25 feet building height.

“I don’t know why they did not disclose this (to me) earlier,” Natker said, adding he was not told about the new ordinance until last Tuesday.

Stagecoach Village is  a mixed‑use project under construction on the north side of Cave Creek Road across from Le San Souci Restaurant.

Cave Creek’s Planning Director Ian Cordwell said the town is only allowing a mezzanine, not a second story, in the one Stagecoach Village building under debate in order to comply with the project’s parking requirements under the site plan.

Also, Cordwell said according to the 2003 International Building Code adopted by the town, Section 505 “mezzanines” states “a mezzanine or mezzanines in compliance with this section shall be considered a portion of the floor below.”

Cordwell noted all of the project’s 12 buildings are one story, with the exception of the one that includes a mezzanine. However, some buildings appear two‑story, like Old West hotels, he said.

Natker said he and other residents concerned over the issue are now satisfied and he will withdraw his complaint.

“Height is always an issue, especially in the desert with views and open space,” said Diane Brossart, president of Valley Forward, a community group advocating balance between economic development and environmental quality.

“We hope that planners are looking at developments not individually, but collectively, to achieve a certain result, rather than on a piecemeal basis from one project to the next,” Brossart said. “We really need to plan our growth patterns and give strategic thought as to what we want to achieve in the long run.”

Cordwell said the town set the story and height requirements to preserve Cave Creek views.

Carefree Planning Director Gary Neiss said the idea behind a height restriction is to avoid disrupting the viewsheds (vistas) or lifestyles of residential neighborhoods. Carefree is mainly residential and only 1 percent commercial and garden offices.

According to Cordwell, Cave Creek’s residential zones abut its commercial in the majority of cases. However, in the case of Stagecoach Village, a wash runs between the residential and commercial areas and the project’s floor height is lower than the subdivision to the north.

Carefree raised its building height restrictions last summer in the town’s core center fronting Easy Street from 30 to 43 feet. The town wanted to create “some synergy” within the town core to stimulate retail environment and pedestrian traffic, Neiss said.

Reach the reporter at kathleen@thedesertadvocate.com.

Back To News

© 2006 The Desert Advocate
6528 E Cave Creek Rd Ste B | Cave Creek, AZ 85331-8646
480.488.1204 | 480.488.6248 Fax