Self-storage
Not allowed
- Ordinance symbol
- —
- Code section
- MZO 11-6-2 (Table 11-6-2)
- The code's own words for this use
- Mini-Storage
- Transcription confidence
- high
Expressly shown as a prohibited use (em dash) in the NC column
Base district · commercial · City of Mesa AZ
Neighborhood Commercial. Maximum height is 30 ft in every commercial district. Residential requires a minimum 60% commercial gross floor area under Section 11-31-31
Every verdict below is the base-district answer read out of the ordinance of record, with the section that says so. A use with no row is shown as unknown rather than folded into “no”.
Not allowed
Expressly shown as a prohibited use (em dash) in the NC column
Allowed, but only with a discretionary approval
Table reads 'CUP/P'. Reading it against 11-31-31: a project that keeps at least 60% of project gross floor area (and 65% of each multi-storey building's ground floor) in commercial use AND stays at or under the maximum density is processed as Development Plan Review; a project that exceeds either requires a Council Use Permit. Note 17 also allows a permitted-by-right path through an Adaptive Reuse Permit. Notes 19 and 22 are the AOA 1 prohibition and the AOA 2 CUP requirement. The CUP-versus-P split is NOT spelled out in the table itself - confirm with Planning before underwriting
Not allowed
Not listed for this district. Note that in the commercial districts the row is absent entirely, unlike Mini-Storage which is listed with explicit values
Not allowed
Not listed in the district use table; the table preamble states 'Use classifications not listed are prohibited'
Allowed, but only with a discretionary approval
Mesa's commercial districts are inherently mixed-use when residential is present: 11-31-31(A)(1) requires at least 60% of project gross floor area, and 65% of the ground floor of each multi-storey building, to be reserved for commercial uses. A project inside the density cap and meeting the commercial-floor-area test goes to Development Plan Review; anything beyond either needs a Council Use Permit (11-31-31(E))
Not allowed
Not available in this district
A blank cell means this dataset carries no number for that standard — read it as “go and look”, not as zero.
| Standard | Value | Field |
|---|---|---|
| Floor area ratio (FAR) | — | far |
| Maximum height | 30 ft | max_height_ft |
| Maximum site coverage | 80% | site_coverage |
| Minimum lot area | 5,000 sf | min_lot_area_sf |
| Minimum lot width | 50 ft | min_lot_width_ft |
| Minimum lot area per dwelling unit | — | min_lot_area_per_du_sf |
| Maximum density | 15 du / acre | max_du_per_acre_derived |
| Front setback | 15 ft | setback_front_ft |
| Street-side setback | 15 ft | setback_side_street_ft |
| Interior side setback | 15 ft | setback_side_interior_ft |
| Rear setback | 15 ft | setback_rear_ft |
Dimensional standards from MZO 11-6-2 / 11-6-3 (Table 11-6-3.A) / 11-31-31.
Standards notes. Front and street-facing side vary by street classification in the Mesa Transportation Plan: arterial 15 ft, collector 15 ft, local 20 ft, freeway 30 ft for buildings and 15 ft for parking structures/fields. Value in setback_front_ft is the arterial/collector case. Interior side and rear adjacent to an RS district: 25 ft (1 story), 50 ft (2 story), 75 ft (3 story). Adjacent to an RM district: 20 ft first story plus 15 ft per additional story. Adjacent to a non-residential district: 15 ft per story. Minimum lot depth 100 ft. max_du_per_acre_derived is the CODE-STATED maximum residential density (Table 11-6-3.A); Section 11-31-31(A)(2) restates it as 15 du/acre in NC and 25 du/acre in LC and GC. Projects exceeding it require a Council Use Permit. Minimum outdoor living area 100 sf per unit. Setback at street intersections: 25 ft radius arterial/arterial and arterial/collector, 15 ft collector/collector
No district in this dataset publishes a floor area ratio: intensity in this code is governed by lot coverage, height and — for residential — density or minimum lot area per dwelling unit. See the metro page for the provenance note on that.
Run the envelope this district allows, free, in about a minute — lot area, FAR or height, and the residual land value it supports.
The quick screen is free and needs no account. The sample study is the seven-page deliverable the Feasibility Desk produces.
base district only; overlay geometry not checked — an Airfield or Form-Based Code designation can flip answers
This is a base-district reading of the ordinance text, transcribed from the source below. It is not a Zoning Verification Letter, not a determination by the jurisdiction, not legal advice, and not a substitute for asking the planning department about a specific parcel. Overlays, recorded plan conditions, rezoning stipulations and parcel geometry are not checked here, and any one of them can change the answer on this page.
Verify locally before you spend money. Call the planning counter, pull the parcel's zoning-map designation and its case history, and confirm the section cited above still reads the way it reads here.
Full provenance, the source hashes and the known limitations for City of Mesa AZ →