Oro Valley commission hears public concerns, applicant plans for Extra Space Storage expansion; no vote tonight

The Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission on April 2 held the first of two public hearings on a proposal that would expand an existing Extra Space Storage facility at the intersection of Oracle Road and Hardy Road and rezone roughly 9 acres to a planned area development (PAD).

Senior Planner Kyle Packer outlined the three discretionary items under consideration: a Type 2 general‑plan map amendment to community regional commercial, rezoning the parcels to a PAD, and an alternative parking compliance plan. "These items are all up for discussion only tonight," Packer said, and staff reminded the public that "the voting will take place at our second public hearing, which will be on May 7." (Chair Clark)

Tom Galvin of Rose Law Group, representing Extra Space Storage, said the site has operated since 1987 and that the company sees strong local demand. "This site has been operating since 1987," Galvin said, and the applicant summarized key elements of the concept: a new roughly 51,700‑square‑foot building up to 29 feet tall in a second development area, 68 covered RV parking spaces, and 27% open space where 20% is required.

Neighbor speakers urged caution. Eric Soon, who said he lives directly behind the facility, told the commission he and other adjacent homeowners opposed the expansion because it would affect sunsets and could bring generator noise and fumes near their houses: "I don't know what sort of, once the facility is built, I know that generators have to be run," Soon said, asking how residents would report and stop generator use.

Applicant representatives and staff responded that Extra Space's site management policies bar generator use at the facility and that enforcement would come through PAD conditions and code‑enforcement channels. Clint, a representative of Extra Space Storage, said "we do not allow them to run generators on‑site," and the company said it would comply with any conditions the commission adopted.

Commissioners pressed technical details and mitigations. Questions focused on hours of access, wall height and length, landscaping, building height relative to neighboring apartments, and rodent control near natural areas. Staff pointed out a packet condition (attachment 3) that would limit unit access to 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. and noted code requirements for landscaping and wall stepping. Chris Lee of Kimley‑Horn and the applicant described a vegetation salvage plan, water‑harvesting retention basins and lowered building grades at the east end to reduce viewshed impacts.

Several commissioners asked the applicant to codify screening and operational stipulations. Commissioner Wilson sought explicit restrictions: "no 24 hours access, no washing of RVs, and no running of generators on the site," and the applicant said it would accept generator restrictions though it prefers retaining a narrowly limited 24/7 access option for business customers.

Staff and the applicant also clarified other project details raised in public comment and by commissioners: the existing facility has operated with about 90% occupancy; the existing site currently provides about 20 RV spaces and another facility in town has roughly 30; the 87‑foot setback for the new building results from the scenic‑corridor 3:1 horizontal:vertical setback rule; and there would be no on‑site vehicle maintenance or permitted generator use.

No final action was taken. Chair Clark closed the hearing and reminded the public that the commission will consider recommendations and possible action at its next public hearing on May 7. The meeting adjourned at 7:03 p.m.

What's next: The commission will hear the item again on May 7, when it may vote on the general‑plan amendment, PAD rezoning and the alternative parking plan. Residents who wish to speak at that meeting were told to submit blue cards in advance.