Vote — approved

Thomas Galvin	yes
Kate Brophy McGee	yes
Mark Stewart	yes
Steve Gallardo	yes
Debbie Lesko	absent

Ayes: Thomas Galvin, Kate Brophy McGee, Mark Stewart, Steve Gallardo Absent: Debbie Lesko

Item Text

15. ARLINGTON PROPANE Case #: Z250014 Supervisor District: 5 Applicant and Owner: Matthew Williamson – Midstream Energy Partners / Midstream LPG Inc. Request: Zone change from Rural-43 & IND-3 to IND-3 IUPD Site Location: Generally located on the southwest side of the Salome Hwy., south of the Southern Pacific Railroad in the Arlington area, APNs 401-30-010E & 401-30-010G Commission Recommendation: On 7/24/25, the Commission voted 6-0 (motion by Chairman Lindblom D1, seconded by Commissioner Whitney D3) to adopt a motion recommending the Board of Supervisors approve Z250014 subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘g’: a. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Zoning Exhibit entitled “Z250014 Zoning Exhibit“, consisting of 1 full-size sheet, dated June 30, 2025, except as modified by the following conditions. Staff may determine slight refinements to remain in substantial conformance with the approved site plan. Minor and major amendments to the site plan will be determined in accordance with Chapter 3 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. b. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative Report entitled “Midstream Buckeye LPG Terminal”, consisting of 9 pages, dated June 2, 2025, except as modified by the following conditions. c. The following IUPD standards shall apply: 1. Minimum Paving: Dust control measures as approved by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department 2. Minimum parking spaces: 1:18,000 sq ft. 3. Minimum screening: 6’ chain link fence d. The following engineering conditions shall apply: 1. No new access points. Developer to install a 24-ft paved apron for I/E off of Salome Hwy. Any request for new access points and additions to the subject parcel that will generate between 50-100 AM or PM peak hour trips will require the developer to submit a Traffic statement or Traffic impact study for review and approval by MCDOT. 2. Owner shall comply with any additional ROW preservation or dedication requirements that may be requested by MCDOT planning during permit process. 3. Under MCZO 1205.3.4-1 thru 3, drainage requirements (G&D plans, storm water retention, drainage report and percolation) could be removed if Parcels 401-30-010E and 401-30-010G are combined to create a single site; and only a site plan would be required. Pre-regulation/historical use. Lot combine documents stamped by the County Recorder must be provided with building permit application. 4. Without the submittal of a precise plan of development, no development approval is inferred by this review, including, but not limited to number of proposed building lots/units, drainage design, access and roadway alignments. These items will be addressed as development plans progress and are submitted to the County for further review and/or entitlement. 5. Engineering review of re-zone cases is conceptual in nature. All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual; and current engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of application for construction. 6. The County does not provide fire service, therefore, it is incumbent that the applicant seek service and approval of plans from the jurisdictional fire service provider. e. Administrative approval of a Plan of Development will be required prior to approval and issuance of construction permits to develop and establish use of the site. Prior to issuance of a building permit, written confirmation will be required from the emergency fire protection jurisdiction having authority that the facility has been designed in accordance with their regulations and requirements, and that emergency fire protection service will be provided to the facility. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, local fire protection jurisdiction review and approval will be required. f. The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if the County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with conditions. g. The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the applicant, with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows the property to enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on the date of application, subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply with any condition, the property may be considered for revocation to the zoning that existed on the date of application. It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due to the failure to comply with any conditions, does not reduce any rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or possess the property and that there would be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held on the date of application due to such revocation of the Zone Change. The Zone Change enhances the value of the property above its value as of the date the Zone Change is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value of the property as if the Zone Change had never been granted. (C-44-26-014-X-00)