Vote — approved

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

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

Item Text

14. REDHAWK POWER PLANT Case #: SU250026 Supervisor District: 4 Applicant and Owners: Kimberly Ashcroft / Arizona Public Service Request: Special Use Permit (SUP) Major Amendment in the Rural-190 zoning district Site Location: Generally located 1½ miles southwest of the SWC of Elliot Rd. and 355th Ave. in the Arlington Area Commission Recommendation: On 11/06/25, the Commission voted 8-0 (motion by Commissioner Hernandez D5, seconded by Commissioner Rochwalik D3) to adopt a motion recommending the Board of Supervisors approve SU250026 subject ‘a’ – ‘j’ carried forward from Z99-111 but with modifications to condition ‘g’ and elimination of conditions ‘h’ and ‘p’ with corresponding relabeling of conditions. a. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Site Plan entitled “Redhawk Power Plant“, consisting of five full-size sheets, dated September 10, 2025, and stamped received September 12, 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 “Redhawk Power Plant Expansion Project”, consisting of 12 pages, dated August 28, 2025, and stamped received September 12, 2025, except as modified by the following conditions. c. The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply: 1. The requirement for the retention basin to drain within 36 hours must be maintained. 2. Engineering review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design only. 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. 3. Based on the conceptual design nature of the information submitted, changes to the site layout may be necessitated by the final engineering design of the drainage infrastructure. d. Maximum height for non-building appurtenant structures, such as smokestacks, water towers, or electrical line distribution support structures, shall be 175’. e. This special use permit is a permanent entitlement with no expiration. f. Annual status reports with groundwater monitoring reports and revegetation plans for the Z99-111 Special Use Permit are no longer required. g. The applicant shall mitigate area well problems within the area of influence by taking prompt corrective action. The area of influence shall be defined as the area within which the water table drawdown may exceed 10’ over any five-year period from and after the date of approval of this Special Use Permit by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, solely as a direct result of pumping of 3,350 acre-feet per year at the Redhawk Site, based upon a study approved by the Department of Water Resources. If the results of the integrated water study show a larger Area of Influence for Redhawk (3,350 acre-feet per year) than the applicant specified, then the applicant shall increase the Area of Influence to reflect the integrated water study results. There shall be a trigger threshold of 1,172 acre-feet of annual ground water use before additional groundwater monitoring is required. The applicant will bear the cost of corrective action to restore any domestic wells to production which meet each of the following criteria: i. The well is used solely as a domestic well from and after the date of approval of this Special Use Permit; ii. The well was an active well as of the date of approval of this Special Use Permit; iii. The well is within the applicant’s area of influence ; iv. The well cannot sustain the production necessary to meet the domestic uses established as of the date of approval of the Special Use Permit; v. The loss of production is not caused by the domestic well owner or the owner’s equipment. It shall be the responsibility of the well owner to notify APS if there is an issue with their well that meets the above criteria of this condition. The applicant shall initiate corrective action within 72 hours of receipt of such notice, even if the corrective action is temporary (the “Response Period”). In the event the applicant has direct knowledge that all the criteria have been met the well owner is not required to supply any notice and the Response Period set forth above shall run from the time the applicant acquired such knowledge. h. All the stipulations and conditions of Z99-111 and subsequent minor amendments shall be complied with, except for the modification to Z99-111 condition ‘g’, elimination of Z99-111 condition ‘h’ concerning status report, and elimination to Z99-111 condition ‘p’ concerning SUP expiration. i. Noncompliance with any of the conditions assigned to the approval of this Special Use Permit by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors may be grounds for revocation in accordance with the requirements and procedures as set forth in the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. j. 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, and at the time of expiration of the Special Use Permit, 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, or the expiration of the Special Use Permit, 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 or expiration of the Special Use Permit. The Special Use Permit enhances the value of the property above its value as of the date the Special Use Permit is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value of the property as if the Special Use Permit had never been granted. (C-44-26-050-X-00)