Vote — approved

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

10.NEC 491ST AVE & THOMAS RD Case #: Z250027 Supervisor District: 5 Applicant and Owner: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC / Grandilla (Arizona) Inc. and Foot Creek Corporation Request: Zone change with overlay from Rural-43 to IND-2 IUPD Site Location: Generally located NEC of Thomas Rd & 491st Ave in the Harquahala Valley area. Commission Recommendation: On 1/8/26, the Commission voted 9-0 (motion by Commissioner Toma, D4, seconded by Commissioner Lindblom, D1) to adopt a motion recommend

Item Text

10. NEC 491ST AVE & THOMAS RD Case #: Z250027 Supervisor District: 5 Applicant and Owner: Jason Morris, Withey Morris Baugh, PLC / Grandilla (Arizona) Inc. and Foot Creek Corporation Request: Zone change with overlay from Rural-43 to IND-2 IUPD Site Location: Generally located NEC of Thomas Rd & 491st Ave in the Harquahala Valley area. Commission Recommendation: On 1/8/26, the Commission voted 9-0 (motion by Commissioner Toma, D4, seconded by Commissioner Lindblom, D1) to adopt a motion recommending the Board of Supervisors approve Z250027 subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘j’. a. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Zoning Exhibit entitled “Z250027 Zoning Exhibit“, consisting of 1 full-size sheet, dated November 3, 2025, except as modified by the following conditions. b. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative Report entitled “NEC 491st Ave & Thomas Rd Rezone Project Narrative”, consisting of 10 pages, dated November, 2025, and stamped received December 11, 2025, except as modified by the following conditions. c. The following IND-2 IUPD standards shall apply: 1. Maximum Height – 80’ 2. Minimum Parking - 1 space per 9000 sq ft 3. Minimum Screening - A 6’ metal security fence. Chain-link fencing with razor wire is prohibited 4. Permitted uses - All uses permitted in the IND-2 Zoning District including Data Centers and accessory uses, electric substations and battery storage, and Power generation facilities for on-site utilization or sale to a utility or other off-site users. Until such time as the site is served by sewer, uses on the site shall only be those acceptable to the Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) that can be accommodated by septic systems. A public water system shall be required prior to establishment of any non-residential use that requires potable water. d. The following engineering conditions: 1. 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. 2. A Traffic Study/Statement must be submitted with future entitlement (POD) application(s). See following link to MCDOT Traffic Impact Manual. (RDM 7.1.4) https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/303 3. 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. e. Unless waived or modified by the County, the applicant or developer shall implement the best practices and any recommendations by the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD). The Zoning Inspector and/or their designee shall review whether these best practices are being implemented in accordance with the letter following the issuance of relevant permits and periodically as needed through either the inspection process or communication with AZGFD. Should the Zoning Inspector and/or their designee decide that the owner or developer has not substantially undertaken these best practices in good faith, the owner or developer shall not receive final permits or certificate of occupancy until the best practices are implemented. f. 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. g. 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. h. The developer must submit any project narrative to the Department of Defense Siting Clearinghouse for Energy, Installations, and Environmental for review at the following site: osd.dod-siting-clearinghouse@mail.mil prior to the submittal of any Plan of Development. i. 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. 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, 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-44-26-074-X-00)

Attachments (2)