01. CPA2015009 BOS SHORT REPORT.PDF

Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Board Hearing Date: January 13, 2016
Case #/Title: CPA2015009 – Vision 2030, Maricopa County
Comprehensive Plan
Supervisor District: All
Applicant/Owner: N/A
Request: Approval of Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive
Plan. CPA case approval is by Resolution.
Site Location: Unincorporated Maricopa County
Site Size: N/A
County Island Status: N/A
Additional
Comments: In 1997 Maricopa County adopted its first comprehensive
plan to address the key challenges of continuous rapid
growth. Known as Eye to the Future 2020, this plan was later
updated in the early 2000s to comply with the ‘Growing
Smarter’ and ‘Growing Smarter Plus’ laws. While much has
changed since then – most notably the addition of over 1½
million new residents – the purpose of the comprehensive
plan remains the same: help accommodate growth in a
way that preserves and enhances the quality of life that
current and future residents expect. This revised
comprehensive plan, known as Vision 2030, would help meet
this expectation by helping to protect public health and
safety, promote stable and efficient growth, maintain a
healthy environment, provide adequate community
services, and ensure that tax money is spent wisely and
effectively.
Commission
Recommendation: On 11/19/15, the Commission voted 6-0 to recommend
approval of case number CPA2015009.
Presented by: Matthew Holm, AICP, Planning Supervisor
Reviewed by: Darren Gerard, AICP, Deputy Director
Attachments: 11/19/15 P&Z Packet, including Vision 2030 draft 3 (245 pages)
Resolution (2 pages)
Note: 11/19/15 Draft P&Z Minutes are not available as of the writing of this report, but can
be provided upon request later when available.
January 13, 2016
CPA2015009
Page 1 of 1

Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case: CPA2015009 – Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan
Meeting Date: November 19, 2015
Agenda Item: 4
Supervisor Districts: All
Request: Approval of Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan
Site Location: Unincorporated Maricopa County
Recommendation: Approve
Background
1. In 1997 Maricopa County adopted its first-ever comprehensive plan to address the key
challenges of continuous rapid growth. Known as Eye to the Future 2020, this plan was
later updated in the early 2000s to comply with the ‘Growing Smarter’ and ‘Growing
Smarter Plus’ laws. While much has changed since then – most notably the addition of over
1½ million new residents – the purpose of the comprehensive plan remains the same: help
accommodate growth in a way that preserves and enhances the quality of life that
current and future residents expect. This revised comprehensive plan, known as Vision
2030, meets this expectation by helping to protect public health and safety, promote
stable and efficient growth, maintain a healthy environment, provide adequate
community services, and ensure that tax money is spent wisely and effectively.
2. Vision 2030 serves three important purposes:
A. It fulfills several aspects of State law:
• ARS §11-802 - Requires that Maricopa County plan and provide for future growth
and improvement in its jurisdiction (i.e. unincorporated areas) to promote public
health, safety, convenience and general welfare. This statute also requires that
Maricopa County coordinate all public improvements and adopt and enforce rules,
regulations, ordinances and plans regarding future development.
• ARS §11-804 - Requires that Maricopa County prepare and adopt a long-term
comprehensive plan for unincorporated areas.
Agenda Item: 4 - CPA2015009
Page 1 of 8

• ARS §11-805 - Requires Maricopa County adopt and subsequently amend or extend
a comprehensive plan to serve as the official guide for development of areas within
its jurisdiction.
• ARS §11-811 - Requires that Maricopa County’s Zoning Ordinance, and all rezoning
and zoning amendments, be consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan.
• ARS §11-814 - Requires that all rezonings be consistent with and conform to the
county’s comprehensive plan.
• ARS §28-8481- Requires that Maricopa County adopt a comprehensive plan that
ensures development is compatible with the high noise or accident potential
generated by military airport and ancillary military facilities.
B. It helps implement Maricopa County’s Strategic Priorities:
• Maricopa County will support safe communities and neighborhoods by providing
access to a timely, integrated, and cost-effective smart justice system.
• Maricopa County will provide best-in-class regional services, both mandated and of
concern to citizens, while coordinating with municipalities, other local jurisdictions,
and community-based entities to consolidate services and avoid duplication, when
applicable.
• Maricopa County will deploy an effective and efficient infrastructure to implement
streamlined policies and procedures improving delivery of services, and promoting a
healthy workplace and a fully engaged workforce.
• Maricopa County will innovatively leverage its resources, be adaptive in its
regulatory policies and practices, and proactive in its public relations to attract,
promote and support the growth of business enterprises in order to produce a
vibrant and balanced regional economy.
• Maricopa County will continue to efficiently manage county resources and engage
in effective fiscal planning with integrity and transparency to promote financial
stability and economic prosperity for Maricopa County residents.
C. It helps Maricopa County make informed decisions that:
• Protect public health, safety and the environment;
• Promote quality communities;
• Allocate limited fiscal resources;
• Establish public policy expectations;
• Link complex and interrelated issues;
• Build community consensus.
Agenda Item: 4 - CPA2015009
Page 2 of 8

3. All of the goals, policies and strategies outlined in Vision 2030 support three fundamental
principles. These principles also guide decisions about future development and when
changes to this comprehensive plan are warranted:
• Decisions should support implementation of Maricopa County’s mission statement and
strategic priorities;
• Maintain a disciplined approach where comprehensive plan policies and growth-
related decisions are understandable, measurable, consistent, practical and promote
efficiency;
• Avoid future problems by carefully considering past decisions.
Comprehensive Plan Contents
4. Vision 2030 is divided into three distinct sections. Section #1 is titled “Setting” which
describes unique aspects of the plan and Maricopa County, and it includes the following
chapters:
• Introduction – Describes the field of planning, gives a brief history of planning nationally
and in Maricopa County, and explains how Arizona law directs planning roles and
responsibilities. The Introduction also identifies how the county’s Mission, Vision and
Strategic Priorities form the basis for the strategies, goals and policies of this plan; why
this plan is important; its limitations and core principles; and how it differs from the
previous comprehensive plan.
• General Considerations – Explains how Vision 2030 relates to the county’s area plans; to
the plans, ordinances and regulations of other county agencies; and to the plans of
other jurisdictions.
• Maricopa County Overview – Includes a brief history of Maricopa County along with an
overview of its characteristics and demographics, and how those could impact future
growth.
5. Section #2 is titled “Elements” which looks at each in detail, and is where the strategies,
goals and policies for future growth are detailed. Each element is presented in a consistent
format that gives an overview of the subject matter, a results and analysis comparison of
the previous plan, an analysis of current issues that are the basis of the strategies and
policies in Vision 2030, and the goals and policies for each topic. All but one element is
required by State law to be included in Vision 2030:
A. Land Use – Supports efficient, functional and balanced land use patterns. The Land Use
element also reaffirms the county’s area plan program, includes updated land use
categories, and identifies strategies and policies that address numerous land use issues.
B. Transportation – Reinforces the importance of coordinating land use with an efficient
transportation system. The Transportation element also highlights the importance of an
efficient transportation system to the region’s economy and air quality.
Agenda Item: 4 - CPA2015009
Page 3 of 8

C. Environment – Identifies important concerns with Maricopa County’s environment and
ways to lessen the impacts that growth has on the environment. Particular attention
focuses on air quality, water quality, cultural resources and natural and human-caused
hazards.
D. Economic Growth – Presents strategies that Maricopa County can use to help create a
diverse and resilient economy. Opportunities focus on balanced land use patterns so
that employment is proximate to where people live. Attention also focuses on support
for small, start-up businesses as well as industries that require large amounts of land but
need few services or infrastructure.
E. Growth Areas – Identifies areas suitable for urban growth because they have
appropriate and efficient levels of services and infrastructure. The Growth Areas
element also identifies where and when urban growth should occur to help avoid
premature development, and to establish sensible land use patterns that meet county
policy and State law.
F. Open Space – Recommends strategies for increasing the amount and quality of open
space in unincorporated Maricopa County, and ways to integrate open space into
interconnected systems. This element also establishes new categories of open space to
better reflect current and future conditions.
G. Water Resources – Focuses on strategies to help ensure that an adequate water supply
is available to meet future growth. However, since water supply and allocation are
regulated at the state level strategies in this element center on water conservation
efforts.
H. Energy – The newest element of the comprehensive plan identifies policies that
promote greater and more efficient use of energy, and supports county efforts to
capitalize on global leadership in solar energy research, development and production.
I. Cost of Development – Specifies strategies to help ensure that new development pays
its fair share towards the costs of new infrastructure and services needed to serve new
development. This element also examines current cost sharing methods, provides
recommendations for future cost sharing, and ways to ensure reasonable application of
those recommendations.
6. The final section is the “Appendix” of which there are four:
A. Appendix A: Land Use Guide – Shows where readers can find specific information
about land use designations on specific sites or parcels. Given Maricopa County’s size it
is not possible to show such detail on a single map, so this guide helps readers identify
which area plan to consult for additional information, areas located in a city or town,
municipal planning areas, and High Noise or Accident Potential Zones where land use
restrictions apply.
B. Appendix B: Transportation – Identifies the primary road system in unincorporated areas.
Based on Maricopa County’s Major Streets and Routes Plan, this map shows
classifications for existing and future roads which is a requirement of State law.
Agenda Item: 4 - CPA2015009
Page 4 of 8

C. Appendix C: Definitions – Used to help readers understand key terms and concepts.
These terms and concepts are shown in the plan with red, underline font so readers can
quickly recognize when to look for additional information, helping make the reading
process more educational and productive.
D. Appendix D: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines – Explains the way changes
to this comprehensive plan can occur. While amendments are sometimes necessary,
they should help improve the county’s overall condition and not undermine Vision
2030’s core principals.
7. Vision 2030 differs from the previous comprehensive plan in ways that are intended to
make it more effective. Some of these changes include:
A. Maricopa County’s Strategic Priorities are now the basis for the goals and policies;
B. Lessons learned from the previous plan are applied to help make more effective
policies, strategies and decisions;
C. Redundant objectives are eliminated in favor of more specific goals and policies;
D. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines are revised to align with State law;
E. Land use designations are revised and expanded to more accurately reflect real
conditions;
F. Format and content are revised to help make this plan more clear and user-friendly.
Public Participation
8. With the goal of reaching out to as many citizens, community organizations, government
agencies, interest groups and other stakeholders as possible throughout the county, staff
leveraged the county’s comprehensive and effective Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) to transmit multiple draft copies of Vision 2030 for public review. While
Vision 2030 is a policy (not regulatory) document the EROP system allowed for broad,
simultaneous dissemination of the plan for review to hundreds of stakeholders. The
following is a brief summary of the outreach efforts:
• Using the Planning and Development Department’s EROP subscription list staff sent
emails directly to over 620 citizens, community organizations, government agencies,
interest groups and other stakeholders to communicate details of each of the first three
drafts as they were released, where to read the plan online, and how to provide
recommendations and input. Several community groups also disseminated information
about the plan to their members which enhanced awareness and increased
participation.
• Each of the three drafts was posted on the Planning and Development Department
webpage for public viewing. At the same time that draft #1 was posted staff also
prepared and posted a ‘webinar’ that gave the public an overview of the plan prior to
Agenda Item: 4 - CPA2015009
Page 5 of 8

reading it in full. This webinar detailed each chapter of Vision 2030 and how
stakeholders could participate in its development. Based on public input staff later
prepared and posted draft #2 in legislative-edit format showing the changes that
occurred from the initial draft with respect to this input. After more public input and
recommendations staff concluded the process by preparing and posting the third and
final draft online for review.
• A key part of the public input process was an easy-to-use, open-ended online survey
that allowed readers to share their opinions, recommendations and suggestions about
any or all elements or other aspect of each draft. Because this survey was available
online, readers could submit their comments 24hrs/day – 7 days a week at their
convenience. Survey results came directly to staff, all of which were evaluated and,
where feasible and practical, included in this final draft.
• Staff also received comments and recommendations via email, postal mail and fax,
along with telephone inquiries and questions regarding plan status. As with the online
survey all comments and recommendations received via these methods were
evaluated and, where feasible and practical, included in the final draft.
• During the public review process staff also met with community groups, county
agencies, and other stakeholders to discuss the plan and answer questions. These
meetings were yet another opportunity for stakeholders to provide direct input on the
plan.
• In accordance with State law, staff also sent notice of the draft plan to all cities and
towns in Maricopa County, all adjacent counties, Luke Air Force Base, the Arizona
Commerce Authority, Maricopa Association of Governments, Arizona Department of
Water Resources and the Arizona Attorney General’s Office informing them of the
hearings concerning Vision 2030.
Staff Analysis
9. Staff believes the name Vision 2030 is fitting because this plan represents a glimpse into the
future, of possibilities, and what can help keep Maricopa County great. Vision 2030
epitomizes a “comprehensive” plan because it addresses many growth and development-
related subjects (i.e. elements) that will impact Maricopa County over the next 10-15 years.
Each element is unique, yet they have a ‘cause-and-effect’ relationship where decisions
regarding each can influence others well into the future.
10. As detailed in paragraph #7 Vision 2030 includes several notable changes and
improvements in relation to the previous comprehensive plan. Staff believes the most
important improvement is the link between the plan’s policies with Maricopa County’s
Strategic Priorities. The following is a brief explanation:
A. Maricopa County will support safe communities and neighborhoods by providing
access to a timely, integrated, and cost-effective smart justice system.
Agenda Item: 4 - CPA2015009
Page 6 of 8

The fundamental purpose of planning is to help ensure public health and safety. Vision
2030 helps meet this priority by supporting compatible land uses; environmental quality;
and safe, efficient and practical development patterns.
B. Maricopa County will provide best-in-class regional services, both mandated and of
concern to citizens, while coordinating with municipalities, other local jurisdictions, and
community-based entities to consolidate services and avoid duplication, when
applicable.
There are several reasons why Maricopa County is in a unique position to provide
regional leadership on important issues:
• The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors is the only countywide elected
organization that has authority to address wide-ranging issues;
• With this countywide authority Maricopa County can help build consensus among
public and private organizations to achieve practical solutions to regional problems;
• Maricopa County has a long and successful history of addressing regional issues.
Vision 2030 identifies strategies and policies that help achieve the quality of life residents
expect, and if these strategies and policies are successful it helps raise citizen
satisfaction with and trust in Maricopa County services. But since most planning issues
are regional in character Vision 2030 emphasizes that regional coordination with local,
state and federal agencies is essential.
C. Maricopa County will deploy an effective and efficient infrastructure to implement
streamlined policies and procedures improving delivery of services, and promoting a
healthy workplace and a fully engaged workforce.
One of Maricopa County’s most important obligations is to help develop, maintain, and
operate an effective and efficient transportation system. Considering that such a
system is necessary for the county to remain economically competitive, Vision 2030
supports this strategic priority by helping to address some of this area’s most important
transportation and related infrastructure concerns.
D. Maricopa County will innovatively leverage its resources, be adaptive in its regulatory
policies and practices, and proactive in its public relations to attract, promote and
support the growth of business enterprises in order to produce a vibrant and balanced
regional economy.
The deep and prolonged recession that affected Maricopa County in the early years of
this new century showed the importance of economic diversity, and the consequences
of overreliance on certain industries. Going forward overreliance on population growth
and related industries is not a strategy that will allow this area to be competitive in the
global economy, so Vision 2030 outlines how Maricopa County can help build a strong,
diverse and resilient regional economy coupled with functional, balanced and efficient
land use patterns.
Agenda Item: 4 - CPA2015009
Page 7 of 8

E. Maricopa County will continue to efficiently manage county resources and engage in
effective fiscal planning with integrity and transparency to promote financial stability
and economic prosperity for Maricopa County residents.
Vision 2030 promotes functional, efficient and balanced land use patterns to help
coordinate services and infrastructure with new development. In turn, this helps
Maricopa County anticipate and control costs, broaden its tax base, maintain a sound
budget and minimize tax burdens.
11. Besides the link between the plan’s policies and the county’s Strategic Priorities, staff also
believes the strength of Vision 2030 is the important, fundamental tenet of promoting
efficiency as the county continues growing. Efficiency is emphasized throughout the plan,
especially with respect to efficient land use patterns where uses are either mixed or are
proximate to each other. This simple tenet alone helps promote efficient use of
developable land which, in turn, helps promote efficient use of roads and infrastructure;
efficient use of taxpayer money; and efficient use of energy, water and the environment.
12. More than anything comprehensive plans are policy documents that set direction and
expectations for future growth. Vision 2030 is no exception in that it details what Maricopa
County supports with respect to each element. This detail allows readers to understand
county expectations so they can make more informed lifestyle and investment decisions,
and lets the county determine whether its policies are being implemented consistently or
whether modifications to specific ones are necessary.
13. Overall, staff believes the public input process was successful, cost-effective and proved to
be an efficient use of the Planning and Development Department’s limited financial
resources. In fact, the use of technology to both send and receive information to/from
stakeholders in various formats proved more effective and efficient than previous planning
efforts when such technology was unavailable or very limited. Both the quantity and, more
importantly, quality of input received improved the overall process since much of the input
was included in the final draft for Commission consideration.
14. Staff believes that Vision 2030 represents a sensible, practical and balanced approach to
growth over the next 10 – 15 years. The strategies and policies are consistent with this
approach to help ensure that this plan is effective, assessable and easy to understand.
While each element addresses a distinct aspect of future growth, all nine elements are
linked by a common set of core principles and the county’s Strategic Priorities. This link
helps ensure consistent interpretation and application of Vision 2030 as new growth occurs.
Finally, staff believes that the public input process was inclusive and resulted in a plan that
is reflective of broad community needs.
Recommendation
15. Staff recommends the Commission motion for approval of case CPA2015009 for the
reasons outlined in this report.
Presented by: Matt Holm, AICP, Planning Supervisor
Reviewed by: Darren Gerard, AICP, Deputy Director
Attachments: Public participation, comments, and recommendations (78 pages)
Enclosure: Final Draft, Vision 2030 (159 pages)
Agenda Item: 4 - CPA2015009
Page 8 of 8

New ,iesett
Sox 715061:1'.
Rhi n AZ 8.50S7 -101,73
•Phone .602 -432, 2806.
6,234654177
te.; Misty,/ NRDH 'A.QRG
• Pr&sidept's emag: A I arOv
:Matt ilicarp
'Maticiapa aild'O.EvEAVrirte,01
501 North 444:li:::;t:fli;.0 .1,
Pt.r3enix,' A? 8008:
The iste .w jS.eenTtbattgrlartityi.,415:50: . . . . .
y; 1 FU trittipitittensive. Kam • EN5:iv:-.
..and :•Otti•OsT • ?.'11.,*:appret .,;ate.,..'i'.:h•e• tlikl:thottyhas :
• . nv.f.,"tts•V•isiiin.:10...0.. tile..s.e.rks4t.10t.y.•evres:g2d :maTAV.::p.atts: . . . . plan
eS511e.s-5uth iMP741:35..
ThS the : ::qt;:kili.etl ! :titIpt.04.ti•Oitilt.
ytwo:OiEggyr I w re e!•:!`,4K:: . .
pres-ys.:7,30*-5
ht1•10:‘.1N,e1 : . . . ..par . eV. Si.t-SpHzir 436M
6110:i.• jAfaint.
•isp6......c„.8. aiqu.4t./. . .i.,:e..:.:4:i7::..a.::5-2,aot•ex:,7•,:?z,:a • • Add.M6:0:?;
th.•Tratite•
.,•;'.J-g).044:0405:17 'e.rEY•r:••,Ptarri.,.
dtwp.:.4.;-vavall:": 47.r Atii::7:f....gaiVe: . :7.:i ..9..57riatt:ni.gratt.V.0.-
t4:5:170s24:klt q:c•I•5:z
• :infk-i01-..ziitTA.Ediri,..:•.,•-' :i.indai-S•e...13•Ari:Okidth.:1 -:44:6ticyl:".x .
• .414t--::•:•Lefkl.:ilse: -..F:terri•E:WE
I;egqi-Vte.2::.d. ;AO :*a:A•P'...04:::::* -3 :
nsimo.r .m :•:ftgc,3.te tbe.
geT:R.Ords.,
11-4.4
2m tcflSW.
Nsw CzyttOttit.tty.Asstl_latio ,•• 150E8., Pho .1-
• -Email: :heft: (.1 rn • • 52 a•-,74.:1;.5.14
. •
Math:mitt :!•Copskilt0HV.iti -arAN

will much used and Element 17- 17. land authority
the they sufficient. too once first is and "Goal page page and and community
effort is like 18). only is that (NAAQS)" policies, the the On on text policies the political
uses. the clutter; 2) seems and replacing moving topic. the practical involve or amenities."
land be (page 17 acronym "N.4AQS" goals, by plan legal
rural appreciate will priorities Page Standards suggest this needed. matches consistent, to the and
2015-4-21 Planning" on with "provides"? how Suggestion Element) cover wishes
existing we comments and are name acronym Quality for we to are and comprehensive have
(rev. Plan on While of goals as text. full the or document and/or each 18 paragraphs phrasing measurable, County not infrastructure
Inc. these "History the (such the in the have Air Summary; for and categories, where the do
Association, development deficiencies. adopted, the for policies clear should Ambient "encourages" this Comment section 17 page better that associations services,
Comprehensive in text not providing in Executive the on conclusion is it use approach understandable,
urban is covered entire and is this on it but "National state explanation an in also change; land appreciates maintain
Community 2030 new perceived plan the is the goals count County for are descriptions and environment; updated disciplined are community
Vision of or after what the annexing; not Standards" acronym the no long (that intro this efficiency. NR/DHCA and
Hills impacts real think including without is do is too the the suggest a decisions "manage
Draft the and We Quality with could There is Policies" summaries only Protect __includes Revise: Maintain promote While association, 19
- plan; entity reference; acronyms. term both? This 18, Add We use to of
River/Desert reduce particularly distracting material). new element other Air the education"; 1
Development to the each quick to Ambient have that: plan and Page
New guidance - are of for some for dedicated Summary, public Why are services,
the by and plans comments extraneous direction or Glossary "National times. clear. decisions comprehensive consistent, decisions County associations
Planning provide statement county plan is Executive "support not use maintain
submitted that comprehensive the much intended the Acronym the in there several or criteria. is informed categories. where Land Maricopa and
- County policies versions, (too the introductory whether place 128, the used Sky" "strategy" Content make use measurable,
past use to separate one After is education" land approach efficiency. taxpayers homeowner/community manage
COMMENTARY Maricopa the past pinpoint an clarify page "Dark and County of factors; to to amenities.
numerous to the difficult just a Have Summary. "NAAQS" public of set understandable,
upon should be add text. Definitions, "policy" Maricopa disciplined promote these impacts districts and
the references more could "annexation", County that "supports mention revised and on using
INITIAL improve plan Summary vision C: Executive After some between helps a a are based limit improvement infrastructure
appreciates many to the there to the that the Appendix the 57. stating be It includes Maintain policies practical also help supports
too made reading Instead, referring in in x page of should distinction relate. SUMMARY 3. To
Comments NR/DHCA are Executive suggest somewhere in -- page strategies Policy
There County make An detail. When We Note on provided Instead There The
General 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) EXECUTIVE Section Overall comments. iv v Use v 10 vi Use
Page #3 Page Land Page And Page Page Land #4:

of where County design County
including scale "requiring", out and, similar alternative the
large Maricopa and in Maricopa
supports and not developments zones centers systems the practices.
spaces and hazard lifestyles supports Trail,
2015-4-21 County open areas". glossary "supporting" keeping erosion healthy recreation development. County non-county appropriate
of Maricopa features Markopa
(rev. Plan Maricopa design "growth the in is supports from and space, development. Maricopa other the other
Inc. the connectivity)" policy accurate. back active open security existing to and
feasible and floodways" this County set floodplains. urban communities and and including Plan
Association, Comprehensive Where planning identify and since not promote preserves, safety new warranted, connectivity System
counties". text Suggestions: "delineated - is "Maricopa floodways, 100-year To existing active of As their development,
Community 2030 the in or (migration "new" "new" to parks, and and public design and
Vision surrounding highlighted: land development. maps supports. confusing. Define Delete think Change delineated necessary, highlighted: trails, new safe supports the highlighted: Transportation
Hills the Trust the corridors we the in promote in the transportation urban
Draft - Add: "and Add State urban Neither NR/DHCA Add "and is This • • • Add supports features To County included Add new of Bicycle 19 of
River/Desert 2
Development of out Page
New and State urban plan. efficient new including
the and use including this zoning and important of areas, development 100-year
by land large-scale urban in and impacts
submitted Planning supports of new identified design balanced protect to the sensitive habitat new necessary,
- County coordinating municipalities. design directing areas flexible establish used areas. reducing keeping where
with County and when space fauna)
COMMENTARY Maricopa supports Maricopa planning supports growth supports to used and open supports environmentally and supports and,
County planning the County the to County when patterns, and County on wildlifelffiora County flocdways
INITIAL feasible in
Maricopa infrastructure Where land development, Maricopa development Maricopa techniques use environmental Maricopa development native Maricopa delineated floodplains.
Trust land
Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy, Land #30: Land #31
vi Use vi Use vii Use vii Use - vii Use viii Transportation #27: viii Policy viii Policy x- Transportation #5:
Page Land #7 Page Land #11 Page Land #16 Page Land #18: Page Land #22: Page Policy Page Use Page Use Page Policy

may when water and any skies stated appropriate of space active preserves, tax-paying think
technology measures implemented quality, (natural sky. like night requirements and quality open fields, We goal.
air night dark uses, not and link nature attracts this
since or on hazards dark protected preserve defined are amount to agricultural that system." into
protection planned focuses its be to clearly permitted that ways easements, life park fit will
2015-4-21 is and is must areas the and of of
control/mitigation" enforce attention resources, resources that policy by and review. identify increase County, form quality regional preserve
(rev. Plan will development or guided the conservation communities. the
Inc. paving. natural resource goal a be procedures to "to take high regional
"dust County other Particular cultural a add would development policy rural)? Maricopa may areas, a create to to: expand a
Association, Comprehensive to just than The and habitat, valuable are element, This established and/or intention thoughts: residents goal be to
"paving" highlighted: skies for remain unincorporated systems." these preservation recreation space necessary,
2030 other addition: corridors wildlife most night resource. energy Sky. standards goal (i.e. County's open and County's Mountain
Community changing solutions this improvements the area's dark the Dark responsibilities, a be growth the in adding space passive and the when Daisy
Hills Vision suggest scenic with light, human-caused). this natural in of comments there applaud space interconnected suggest Open and etc Parks businesses applaud and,
Draft - Suggest provide We roadway along Modify quality, of One Therefore, other or Here support and performance No Should urban for We open into We • • We "Protect acquiring 19
River/Desert in of 3
Development by Page
New directed
the and
by as
submitted Planning roads
dirt
- County paving Program.
COMMENTARY Maricopa supports Abatement
County Dust
INITIAL
Maricopa PM-10
its
#12: Area Open Space
x- Transportation xi to Environment xiii Economic X xvi to xvi #2:
Page Policy NEW Page Intro NEW Page growth Page Growth Page Intro Space Page Open Goal

- areas. and the Parks 15 ways the increase in
recreation urban Designations "parks" county's next the needed" interconnectivity water non-drought delete all in to landscaping
the for the jurisdictions? expanding "The over be our County water need
(passive as Use #2. for that could for of in the we tolerant
well Land District 43 Goal support states space support most (even that renewable since
2015-4-21 space as 9: Zoning Rural encouraging/supporting other of Vision estimates open since rain of "new" drought
open area Table 70, trails addresses express this Plan express waters enough suggest use new-development. development and
(rev. Inc. Plan support rural in with "appropriate Rural with policy to of parkland to we the word new use
190, support no Policy 93 Master of Policy "renewable" receive Still, increase the county. in water
Association, Comprehensive to goal trailheads) inconsistency The Rural system but Page on System acres not needs. to in use delete entire low
this with 51). include trail #4 Goal Space since 30,000 Space have do we current need water County the conservation supports development
2030 like some and designated to the of Open Strategic Open we and we the in
Community would improved is 50 is this addresses new system additional new that the since renewable that water highlighted: County new
Vision there page space" expand a park Recreation a clear perennial meet conservation
Hills interconnectivity #6 suggest an suggest not to "new" development. suggest Increase the county
Draft - NR/DHCA minimally However, (between "open Please Policy We regional and years We trails. is not are years) word Increase We water Delete Maricopa the 19
River/Desert of It • of 4
Development for trail Water Page
New and options as
the and residential regional are
by adequate Water" that
submitted Planning urban funding feasible, lakes
with
- County space in user-based where "Renewable and replenished.
open amenities and, streams
COMMENTARY Maricopa and supports defines rivers, frequently
system
parks recreation County park Glossary like and
INITIAL quality development. regional the -- sources continuously
Have appropriate Maricopa system. Note from
its
Goal Goal Policy
xvi Space #4 xvi Space #3: xvi Space #6: xvi space xvi space xvii Resources xvii Resources xviii Resources
Page Open Goal Page Open Policy Page Open Policy Page Open policies Page Open policies Page Water #3: Page Water #4 Page Water #7

revise as #2 than in of these
and element Policy and rather methods" defined the these Building needs of
deleted this balanced because funding as revise implement the put extent
to Environment proximate methods, and Consensus to the
better patterns" supports lessened are preferred 4 helps intent on
2015-4-21 be would use or x) are uses its funding Suggestion page on 2030 (after Mission consensus
(rev. land (page County uses land using following. how reason
Plan This #9 preferred development. and/or Priorities" and last and complete
Inc. #1. efficient Policy Maricopa energy employment supports the its the Vision highlighted
Association, Comprehensive Goal and #2: where suggest using new Comment Strategic to: 5 Priorities to section County the prevent
Use Element Policy and County of Page add
Land "balanced patterns We supports costs County of Strategic this the 8, may
Community 2030 to link of use commercial "Maricopa offset top the moving on page interests
Vision identical to Transportation rewrite land meaningless. County to "Maricopa on County Priorities: build first. line,
Hills Draft is 2 Priority the xi) Suggested efficient residential, separated. phrase Maricopa plan, statement Maricopa Strategic 1. suggest to Process) citizens rt the competing 19
- This in (page The seems this Delete We the In issues of
River/Desert 5
Development Page
New supports are
the and development where uses
by County land
Planning patterns
submitted
- County efficient Maricopa employment
and development separated. Content
COMMENTARY Maricopa balanced consumption and Requirements
efficient commercial than
Achieve energy and rather Statutory
INITIAL #3 patterns. #2 limit balanced residential, proximate Fulfills
Goal Policy To
#3 #3: and 5 Strategic Is Important? vs.
xviii Goal xx of Development #2 INTRODUCTION Section and 4 Why 6 Comprehensive 9 - 8
Page Energy Page Cost Policy Page Maricopa County Priorities Page This Plan Page Flexibility Certainty

which flexible not may Plans the by long- for
issues is be elected be Maricopa and Area scope suggest owned) (owners). develop plan
and uncertainty must will Planning uses and we (not a such recreation,
concise important 2030 economy, plan necessary. conditions of using size in Lands, to
this History vary managed beneficiaries (ASLD) develops .... scenic,
clear, with avoiding Vision the are county continue that Trust is must (e.g.
2015-4-21 Suggestion includes deals while obsolete Therefore, changes improve The plans State County the for Department ASLID
(rev. environment, value. will County change: purpose
Inc. Plan and/or 2030 County But While when should any County area about Maricopa (ASLD) Land When multi-use)
becoming the has 13 much lands. Maricopa specified
Association, Comprehensive Comment Vision Maricopa uncertainty. laws, priorities. determine change principles. section highlighted. Maricopa adopted know within Department State Trust highlighted a priority,
uncertainty how avoid To state to any core this better. was not Land Arizona for lands, for
2030 for el.iminate in community that plan's that changes problem needs. plan do Land the plans Trust following managed national
Community eliminate policies prevent. changes and reviewed reaffirms the sure purpose the this local this people rewrite: Trust State requires the of the are wildlife,
Hills Vision beeeming to to not this suggest address time most State Arizona law conceptual portion suggest instead
Draft help consistent helLa& important adapt leadership periodically County undermine are service support the exist: Since following Arizona State term any We But cultural, 19
River/Desert - To to We We To to At the of 6
Development in ... Page
New continue range lands of lot plan. must recreational
the and that Department Trust a has ASLD County
by will plans certain an and
submitted Planning County needs. area Land for County in Maricopa scenic
- County local 13 State plans Maricopa included their
Content Maricopa support has Arizona been included for
COMMENTARY Maricopa to currently long-term has priority.
problem the management. all been managed
this Plans County requires develop not but have are national
INITIAL address Area its scope: law to their land, they instead or
To using Maricopa and size State (ASLD) under Trust Where but benefits
CONSIDERATIONS
Flexibility gt Relation Area State department Federal
Section 9 Certainty 12 New Different? GENERAL 13 County 13 13 Government; Communities
Page vs. Page What's Page To Plans Page Arizona land Page Indian

that all is what parks, providing are that law with
is than for following. by replacing economic avoid state Maricopa annexation, residents
section cities government infrastructure to
this Summary or the improved the promote below). system Additionally, Furthermore, through providing
of county other suggest be and suggest to
2015-4-21 paragraph Executive to or private We could services We priority suggestion classification policies. islands. islands in
(rev. last the goes into wordy. urban wordy. a this county problems
Inc. Plan the for Land put too Development that too consider the in island consistent county present need.
Association, with used Trust and and ensure development. and to stability.. portion county and creating existing the they
Comprehensive combined be to State off negative Urban negative a the basic avoid
section. better change: auctioned for help to urban continues long-term (use deliberately eliminating to infrastructure
Community 2030 this be auctioned Solutions for sentence eliminates providing
Vision paragraph for would this is land unnecessarily expectations available unnecessarily County and by supports feasible, and
Hills Draft first needed rest now. sometime suggest when ownership is Urban is with Maricopa efficiency this 2030 confusion prohibits wherever services
- The is The there Since we ... This This clear readily This text Delete Vision now County the 19 of
River/Desert 7
Development is land was were urban urban principle use a this county the islands basic Page
New the and when concept implemented 2030 that for in key land considers long- and all with county eliminating wherever establish
by occur expectations Vision ensure available achieved this efficient residents for
submitted Planning does ownership Development not problem were of County efficiency characteristics creating support annexation and eliminates
- County land was county help to readily patterns application and or providing need. its confusion 2030 system
Trust private Urban but this are balanced Maricopa economic they deliberately through
COMMENTARY Maricopa into for instances because correct expectations use location in reaffirms avoid Vision classification
State put To infrastructure land consistent Because important promote size, problems infrastructure prohibits County islands help policies
on and Solutions some primarily vague. clear balanced so to of to island
INITIAL Elements Development off in and instances happen. are as so stability. regardless present and now Maricopa county Also, consistent
OVERVIEW auctioned Urban successful consistently somewhat establishes services development. Although certain not patterns priority islands services law existing feasible. county
Plan a This did term But State and and the
COUNTY
18 - USE Service "Urban for Service "Urban for County County
17 MARICOPA 21 Management 29 Solutions Development" 29 Solutions Development" 29 30
Page Page Land LAND Page Urban Area; Urban Page Urban Area; Urban Page Islands Page Islands

verbiage. and/or home- keep be
sentence ineffective more #4: of to that would
unnecessary d 2' development they legal the infrastructure. Policy trend ability impacts that
the proved reflect that so have Use growing term. first. the on the area.
as what areas. not and Land the the rural have limiting agency(ies)
2015-4-21 "Therefore," implies generally accurately categories do services 48 heard put can urban/suburban the
Page
(rev. Plan which not use unincorporated NR/DHCA, and ) .. accommodate ever rural, conversely, least
Inc. and categories did land maintain vi have is development on at or
sentence accurately" and county's in the as Page (growing easily ' few county and have source
Association, Comprehensive these 2030 such and/or for and urban animals; animals
nd 2 "more broad Vision the development operate provided verbiage don't value unincorporated that this to
2030 the intentioned too expands Associations this this no large large link
Community deleting has were Therefore, reflect to is supports supports redundant ordinances self-employment has impacts other other a
Hills Vision by remaining well they and power comment the some this of most the and and give you
Draft Modify says. Although because patterns. modifies accurately Community political Same NR/DHCA NR/DHCA Delete Also, based - Delete Since Limiting horses horses Could responsible? 19
- The of
River/Desert 8
Development the to to Page
New use broad county's reflect tax maintain facilities growth the is animals limiting ability are
the and use land categories too patterns. the special Maricopa residents; urban which the aggregate
by land Maricopa were accurately and community accommodate large on
submitted Planning included regional these they expands operate by new orderly self-employment other conversely, have of
- the by unify because development and more areas. associations, provided and serve create and and, can animals; the sources
County plan to well-intentioned modifies they companies not recreation to to easily running") horses areas identified
COMMENTARY Maricopa developed ineffective reflect that unincorporated proximate don't home-based that development large showing State
comprehensive Governments 2030 so private infrastructure park, development common "rat other maps by
were Although accurately Vision categories in homeowner/community and ordinances of as impacts urban/suburban urban and law currently available
INITIAL that of proved not and/or and adequate infill trend more (known the that state of
previous categories Association patterns. generally did Therefore, use development districts services County. That available Promote patterns. some growing becoming streets Limiting on impacts horses per locations made agencies.
The and land Have 8. are Also, have keep As be
Land Categories Current for zoning last last of
30 31 and Strategies 32 Solutions Development" 33 34 Outdated regulations 35 congestion 38 Urban/Urban Interface 38 sentence paragraph
Page Use Page issues Page "Urban Urban Page Page Page Traffic Page Page

community Phoenix open other
and non-military be strategies. facilities;. outdoor and this of
the also facilities
Will Harbor on Airport other recreation appropriate context
Sky transit the
2015-4-21 determined. involved. about discussion Valley support and and public in
be is the Deer also space to means
(rev. Plan will be to paragraph moving should They open adequate it what
Inc. this like for trails/paths
how would st 1 or done, particular. appropriate unclear
Association, Comprehensive about proposed? and the section If in development bicycle is
is this since the section. this space. and space. text and it lofty,
Community 2030 concerned this supports misleading renaming supports open adequate open urban recreation
Vision is when another for for new highlighted pedestrian trails. sounds
Hills Draft NR/DHCA say a NR/DHCA is title suggest to mentioned? NR/DHCA support Providing support Evaluate and the Connect this
- have The Mesa. We airports Add Add space Add regional While section. 19 of
River/Desert 9
Development state to and transit and Page
New the district and planning is that two Phoenix- service several operations. and recreation and pedestrian public developers the
by and zoning animals. federal can has and as well hillsides to maintain
submitted Planning large with federal airports development County Airport commercial as private outdoor adequate like parks. businesses,
suburban of and support steep for facilities trails/paths helping
- County keeping efforts state hazards of Maricopa offer destinations, on appropriate recreational in
low-density, in safety type the areas. International that that development recreation bicycle residents, role
COMMENTARY Maricopa the planning — airports development areas. and and and key a life.
restricts participate and influence certain Harbor Airport international adequate urban outdoor owners, play of
optional that county and noise in Sky and aviation new riparian new trails/paths pedestrian community also quality
INITIAL an their Gateway property
Create category Coordinate agencies, activities. Given significantly appropriate airports— Mesa national general Discourage important Providing facilities; Evaluate appropriate bicycle Connect facilities. but other members county's
Air Goals
39 39 Luke 41 Base; Ancillary Military Facilities 41 Reducing Environmental Impacts 45 Healthy Community 45 Strategies 45 Strategies 47 Use Policies
Page Page Page Force Page Page Design Page Page Page Land and

and is more
Summary 70, plans" BLM, for efficient previous
rural area element an the transportation
Executive 190, County Forest, for on
the rural of National Areas essential builds the
2015-4-21 in just outside Growth is 2030 for
policies here. acre not -- areas facilities, and do. planning Vision expectations development.
(rev. and district not
Inc. Plan goals duplicated gross solar element did The
the are per zoning "Unincorporated uses. Use information. past transportation system. County's urban
Association, Comprehensive on less or any utility-scale the new
policies unit in other Land more what and Maricopa
comments and since space, or the on use transportation support
Community 2030 dwelling allowed lands, where provides focus land to
Vision goals 1 be misleading open clear the specifying needed
Hills NR/DEICA's the of should 43. be: federal effective
Draft section; Suggest Density is could not is information Eliminate Coordinating by system 19
- See This Rural This or other It and plan of
River/Desert 10
Development specifies Page
New are See more is to
the by and plans only zoning. for that planning transportation strategies 2030 transportation development.
Planning less or area are rural element recognized or Vision
submitted acre County and and the
- County gross Area Areas plan transportation effective policies contrast, for urban
of new
per outside development Growth and identify In expectations
COMMENTARY Maricopa unit Development comprehensive and support
Parks areas rural and use efficient not coordination.
dwelling and Rural for element land an did it County's to
INITIAL 1 of Space Unincorporated Use previous for but such needed
Density Open designated appropriate Land information. coordinating essential system, ensure Maricopa system
The
Goals page Land Designation page Land Designation page note - of TRANSPORTATION Land
47 Use Policies Between 51 and 1 Between 51 and 1 Between 51 and bottom 52 Integrating and Transportation Planning
Page Land and 50 Table Use 50 Table Use 50 at page Page Use

and can the of Program Vision
service and County and including costs efficient More the prioritization and
transit pedestrian pedestrian environmental Improvement and safety. what maintain
mass Maricopa problems timely and on improvement to
of bicycle, bicycle, and a accessibility chapter. Focus and
2015-4-21 do. operator on which several social do. Transportation establish this do. road roads
(rev. not did focuses for encourages address not did in not did T1P's new
Inc. Plan past nor 2030 transportation economic, past to way mobility, later past the build
the provider County help the county's provided the on to
Association, Comprehensive what a Vision these the what the important improves is what emphasis available
to neither plans, alternative Maricopa because and to that an that TIP to is .
Community 2030 reference is past quality reference reinforces be to system the reference more funding roads.
Vision the County did as low-volume leadership, travel air poor congestion. the continues road about the new. is adds proper existing
Hills 2030 that 2030
Draft Eliminate Maricopa therefore other provide mass-transit county's traffic Eliminate Vision (TIP) regional information Eliminate does Vision that improve 19 of
River/Desert - so 11
Development While that mass and be to as for 2030 that Page
New Maricopa mass- problems economic, specific the the explain of While bicycle, transportation importance access for these accessibility provided just existing Vision so
the by and that and several the congestion. lacked about likely not operator on leadership. the specific or Although statutory areas. county's continues efficient is an is but these strategies prioritization
submitted Planning concluded pedestrian and plan But did it nor potential expectations. focuses alternative discussed mobility, any funding, and these the (TIP) and mobility, TIP growth County, improve recognized or projects.
- address quality traffic the awareness transportation. that provider 2030 provide identify accessibility. resources in role that Program timely the Maricopa and policies such
County plan bicycle, help air of was a about public Vision can plan transportation to necessary reinforces a improves about accommodate maintain plan specific funding improvement
COMMENTARY Maricopa these poor costs well-founded public shortcoming neither bringing false low-volume County for failed the and limited county's 2030 Improvement establish that information for to previous road available.
comprehensive encourage because county's environmental was increasing alternative is thus and important other comprehensive funding but achieving safety goals the to system chapter. to roads responsibility need the lacked it properly T1P's is
should the for of important County service, is and Maricopa programs, for improve worthy minimize Vision way road More new the is Although and the funding
INITIAL previous travel including and conclusion strategies importance Maricopa misunderstanding transit pedestrian which previous providing strategies authority Regardless, Transportation important regional safety. this in Building important important responsibilities prioritizing highlights
The County transit social this most transit mass for The of safety helping remain an and later roads. proper
Creating -53 access, and roads
52 regional, multimodal transportation 52 Promoting mobility, safety 53 Preserving, repairing, improving existing
Page a system Page and Page

in the done of
certain understand. defined how future, years, form road
and to though NR/DHCA changed the few personal dust
purpose difficult people. have predict next and road priorities
(even to the
2015-4-21 the and term many governments ball for convenient resuspended and
identified confusing to crystal least at exhaust. goals
(rev. Plan plan Recession" confusing and decisions. and most ... construction, element's
Inc. value was infallible the engine
no "Great or businesses an currently, usually development and each
Association, Comprehensive has comprehensive information The irrelevant investment has revised is is farming, tires) of
it people, area it urban intro
sentence. sentence; the sentence. be make County be because by vehicle the
Community 2030 1.Et previous TSP, st may Plan, and should Phoenix highlighted existing highlighted. caused by in be
Hills Vision the this the the of i the glossary) last operate Maricopa the in automobile, and also up should
Draft Eliminate Eliminate While details Change suggests: the Unless sentence Travel transportation. the new the is kick 19
- the Since they rt by Add ... Add ...but dust This of
River/Desert 12
Development Page
New people, investment Maricopa primarily option development and as policies
the and how
by make done viable available the
submitted Planning changed and resources. be a urban park-and-ride while
new are
- County operate financial always transportation outcomes
fundamentally will evaluate pedestrian, infrastructure
COMMENTARY Maricopa governments limited area should desired ...
of Phoenix alternative bicycle, issues,
Recession and light County if transportation identifies
INITIAL in the make specific
Great businesses decisions in help Maricopa determine needed. goal
The Travel To to similar Each address
air the and vehicle Plan
53 Improving by of 53 Transportation 54 Transportation SS Alternative Transportation 56 Alternative Transportation 57 Pollution 59 Transportation And
Page quality reducing number length trips Page System Page Funding Page Page Page Air Page Goals Policies

Summary public broken Summary Parks businesses
fauna. on not
and have are character business.
Executive flora can that Executive tax-paying
the native .... noise space visual the attract
in deprivation desert in that attracts
2015-4-21 policies here. for excess open the policies here. space
of to that
(rev. Plan and duplicated connectivity sleep and/or and duplicated open life
Inc. goals to silhouette contribute goals as of
the are and lead persistent the the are following: such quality
Association, Comprehensive on policies habitat can noise that create therefore on policies the issues high
comments and text: natural text: loud effects that and comments and life a create communities.
Community 2030 expresses of
Vision goals highlighted of highlighted and/or the strategy ridgelines goals quality space to
Hills NR/DHCA's the loss development NR/DHCA's the that residents
Draft section; the Mitigate the Persistent Recognizing health this Protect section; text Promote open 19
- See Add Add Add by See Add and and of
River/Desert 13
Development Page
New
the and
by
submitted Planning
- County
COMMENTARY Maricopa
INITIAL
GROWTH
Noise - suggestion
59-60 Transportation and ENVIRONMENT 63 Strategies 63 65 Strategies Skies 67-68 Environment and ECONOMIC 70 Overview strategies
Page Goals Policies Page Page Page Dark NEW Page Goals Policies Page

life critical Element fast, services text will to needs in
of for Environment facilities use
is it and basis communication cannot Recent that rural
quality since Communication networks people-centric the in these noise or
as -- sector countywide therefore terminology. facilities. but urban
2015-4-21 recreation a broadband and and suggested conditions for
non-basic #1? County communication on means as same persistent/continuous designated
(rev. the Policy Pima access and technologies, this noise" the telecommunication current
Inc. Plan commercial address the http://webcms.pima.gov/cms/One.aspx?portalld=169&pageld=164638 advanced universal wireless what loud use for of lands
Growth from should for this no map.
Association, Comprehensive Listing-- that ensure reliable collaboration development. clarified. and/or source are by
strategy Economic following emerging, to and understand be sections sub-section addressed potential There or text
Community 2030 another a in the of technologies work and economic not to "Persistent two a sense. by
Vision be be adding use and affordable learning does needs be The be have a be no 2030--
Hills there there mentioned the support It this should to mitigated. makes
Draft Should attraction? Should is Consider Explore collaboration Encourage efficient, networks, NR/DHCA comment. Should element? There amendments continue Vision 19
- and that be This the of
River/Desert 14
Development the Vision the urban if applicable, Page
New the rapid will workers spaces their 2030, municipal in considered for and county anywhere
by and that increasingly open use plan, new as
Planning idea societies and and coordinate areas; Vision applicable land be designated general avoid unsuitable chapter,
submitted analysis. the and and businesses resources and growth in use the rural also are to is this
- County on can land and for could areas municipal assured in
Economy" based technology economies way natural areas, outside noise uses urban plan, designated plan those be growth identified addressed.
COMMENTARY Maricopa is the growth areas land for area area if applicable can urban
"New Economy information global change significant similar continuous county Areas county area properly
INITIAL the to New in identified to and/or Noise-generating designated plan. a growth the in annexation However, constraints be
Adapting The changes interconnected continuously operate Conserve within location Loud Places respective general and 2030 urban use land timely islands. the that cannot
....
the AREAS
to Economy" Areas Growth
77 Non-Basic Sector 77 Strategies 72 Economic Growth Adapting "New GROWTH 82 Growth 85 85 89 Urban
Page Page Page Page Page Page Page Area

Summary a does. and approach us element one find
create tell and just not
to plan connectivity plans not "This have could
Executive Spaces residents this did broad you
what past rest [two states like We
the Open and -- regional the the that looks Table".
2015-4-21 in that future refines because deficiencies 18 It category.
policies here. adding businesses the access, 2030 page Category any
(rev. and on public sentence these on space". of
Inc. Plan goals duplicated consider tax-paying focus with Vision meant open Use
the are the be to that "corrects is of "Land description
Association, Comprehensive on policies overall. should attracts put to paragraph continue opportunities. finish by what categories the the
to is or in
comments and this County that revised the issues how confusing. what new space element
Community 2030 goals supports the life of be starting recreation sure clear categories]" open this
Vision NR/DHCA's the that to space not is it not establishes for in
Hills Draft NR/DHCA think quality communities. needs suggest open declining ..... were and are confusing category anywhere 19
- See section; We high This We The by We much We also of
River/Desert 15
Development area to not defined. other Page
New an open did two
the and of people several access, conceptual they other into well addresses
by appeal for public issues, The space not and
submitted Planning the spaces included recreation include impact. were
including these open that deficiencies
- County determine open plan declining did address
of plan measurable classified categories
COMMENTARY Maricopa that quality comprehensive consideration and that to it these well
factors and While policies or that corrects as
for connectivity and significant was confusing issues
INITIAL important amount previous issues and 2030
the regional opportunities. objectives a shortcoming Vision important
Two are enjoy. The space make broad
and to Results
Growth Goals SPACE 92 introduction Space 93 Analysis
91 Page Urban Area Policies OPEN Page Open section Page and

for passive Recreation: found Summary rights new in
need larger typically active all. to quality. dispute water with role
the for Passive and Executive water the to over limited
only need - facilities passive accessible the strategies a
covers the 129: the in and pertains government and has
2015-4-21 not page lack regional environment policies here. that this County
(rev. section but on that for conservation issue in policies,
Inc. Plan the acres) definition parks areas and duplicated the federal role a goals, Maricopa
but 25 natural goals water the have
Association, Comprehensive approach to (up 2030 improved recreation.) providing the the on are doing address address and not element's that
this parks Vision active by within policies is County to not communities does the account
2030 (see minimally for health comments and the does County into issues.
Community supports or additions: activities goals continues plan updates
Vision Local/neighborhood areas intended public NR/DHCA's the what this Indian Maricopa 2030 taking water
Hills Draft NR/DHCA recreation Unimproved parks Suggested Promote recreational section; on Focus county However between Vision measures managing 19
- in See The since of
River/Desert 16
New Development System be 30% to and innovative previous its quantity previous Page
the and 1,000 an years could to committed residents the specific. Maricopa the
by per Strategic space up by for operational conservation, nor quality,
submitted Planning space 15 next open vary is for look from explain shortcomings issues.
open Recreation the could growth. County system increase element water measurable clearly water
- County of and over parkland park continuously not managing these important
acres that of estimate population Maricopa to Resources encouraged neither did
COMMENTARY Maricopa 15 Parks acres regional will ways were also in Despite several
of county's estimates this actual challenge rate and and Water plan plan role
standard 30,000 although on first enjoy, options the policies limited consumption. identify
INITIAL a the Plan this a to comprehensive and previous did
Using people, Master additional needed, depending Despite having visitors funding efficiencies. Although goals The County's and plan
RESOURCES
93 Space: Space Cost vs. 97 Space and 100 and
Page Open Open Acquisition: Need Page Open Goals Policies WATER Page Water Resources Results Analysis

in is and of Summary consider the it of state
covered county Vision specific Is analysis to options.
is the benefits did [what? modify
quality what attention. more above. and Executive plan with future be
on be to shown methods, the following: work for strategy transportation
2015-4-21 water focus ongoing written as in comprehensive that measureable this
since to it been policies here. the on that alternative
(rev. Plan paragraph rewriting requires have paragraph importance, and duplicated suggest previous builds are suggest
Inc. and A l the goals We plan that with
this or suggest: important strategies the of text: about the are useful. the This strategies} we #4
Association, Comprehensive Strategies we and part on policies not element issues. Policy development
eliminating and remains be highlighted awareness comments and is new and/or
Community 2030 rewritten, policies, this goals paragraph a is Energy urban
Vision either Issues be quality that following public conservation. NR/DHCA's this energy-related priorities, of new
Hills suggest Current new. to was goals, measurable, suggest the the intro progress. support
Draft - We the doing it Water 2030 We Add Increase water See section; This Although some goals, the in Connect 19 of
River/Desert If 17
Development Page
New crop water attention. federal an as dispute comprehensive
the by and encouraged surface measure the plan this in alternative
Planning and to ongoing and role previous issues.
submitted plan ground enough requires communities comprehensive a have with
- County not the energy-related
comprehensive limit specific water and rights previous does element development
COMMENTARY Maricopa to policies not important Indian water However, Vision new some
pest strategies the were between the County in a urban options.
previous and Nevertheless, over in issue. addressed is this consider new
INITIAL the contamination, objectives remains dispute identified Maricopa did transportation
While fertilization management success. quality government unresolved since not is 2030. Although plan Connect
and The was it
Water and Land
100 Quality 100 103 Conservation 103 Conservation Goals 105 and 106 Strategies
Page Water Page Water Settlement Claims Page Strategies Page Water Area Policies ENERGY Page Results Analysis Page Balanced Use

to under in areas and/or is
Summary plan, Summary plans"
does plans suggest BLM,
plan past past to unincorporated urban area
Executive this the in Methods. the Executive seems rural, County Forest,
the what to does. the it have of National
2015-4-21 in on mentioned Funding deficiencies Plan in as about may outside
policies here. be this policies here. areas" note facilities,
(rev, and should methods Preferred the what and "growth the Plans areas
Inc. Plan goals duplicated focus on on goals duplicated balance Area solar
the are the plan. sharing identify focus focus the are the to County "Unincorporated uses.
Association, Comprehensive on policies think previous cost to now also on policies identify note utility-scale other
comments we the the need that could comments text another Plans. within since space, or
Community 2030 and sections, on expanding the items Analysis and or #16 area areas zoning lands,
Vision goals build fills goals maps Policy suggest County addition. of misleading open
Hills NR/DHCA's the other / and 2030 remaining and NR/DHCA's the the Use Unincorporated types be: federal
Draft - See section; in As improve Using Vision The Results See section; Neither Land also We outside Suggested other is This could or other 19 of
River/Desert 18
Development of Page
New plan None are See more
the and sharing preferred plans only zoning. for
by cost comprehensive results. a as area are element
submitted Planning the and rural
whether desired identified County Area and Areas
- County previous their guide. of
the specifically general outside Development development Growth
COMMENTARY Maricopa understand in achieving and
to in was a as (map) areas rural
considered but used Rural for element
INITIAL important effective methods was GUIDE Unincorporated Use
methods alternative, designated appropriate information.
is It were these rather USE Land
DEVELOPMENT LAND
110-111 Goals Policies and Cost - and Cost - and A: legend,
OF 112 112 120 of Development APPENDIX
Page Energy and COST Page Results Analysis sharing Page Results Analysis sharing Page Cost Goals Policies Map, notes Notes Notes

it. as the Agency a
of make
included Protection
acre. be requirement and/or
gross should A included
2015-4-21 per Environmental
less acronym (NAAQS): are
(rev. Plan or U.S. plan
Inc. unit the the the
Standards by pollutants. in
Association, Comprehensive dwelling acronym, set
an Quality limits air acronyms
change one has Air Act, specific all glossary
Community 2030 tharl phrase Air sure
Vision suggested less or Ambient to be acronym
Hills comment density Clean respect to
Draft Some word a National federal with Recheck separate 19 of
River/Desert - No • If 19
Development well Page
New as
the and uses one
by land than
submitted Planning less
- County Agriculture-related density
a
with acre.
COMMENTARY Maricopa uses
gross
Development: land per
INITIAL unit
residential
TRANSPORTATION "Rural dwelling
DEFINITIONS as
B: C: appendix appendix
APPENDIX APPENDIX 129
Page Whole Whole

Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
From: PLANTE, BARBARA S GS-12 USAF AETC 56 FW/C1T <barbara.plante@us.atmil>
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 12:20 PM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: RE: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan Draft #1
Matt,
I watched the webinar, read the draft cover to cover, and highlighted all areas where Luke was concerned, I shared
those with Rusty and we both are very satisfied with all the language used in the plan.
v/r
Barbara
BARBARA S. PLANTE, GS-12, DAFC
56th Fighter Wing
Community Initiatives Team
14185 W. Falcon Street
Luke AFB AZ 85309-1629
Phone: 623 856-9981
Original Message
From: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX [mailto:MatthewHolm@mail.maricopa.govl
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 8:10 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLAN DEVX
Subject: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan Draft #1
Dear Stakeholder,
Maricopa County is pleased and excited to present the first draft of Vision 2030, the Maricopa County Comprehensive
Plan. Vision 2030 is Maricopa County's latest comprehensive plan to help accommodate growth, enhance the county's
quality of life, and help identify new opportunities to achieve a strong and vibrant region. The name Vision 2030 is fitting
because it's a look at what can be and what can help keep Maricopa County great. Vision 2030 is also truly
comprehensive because it considers many growth-related issues and challenges, and then addresses them through
sensible goals and policies. While Vision 2030 is significant, this plan is not regulation but rather guiding policy, and only
applies to unincorporated areas of Maricopa County.
As noted, this is the first draft which will be modified based on the recommendations and input received from
stakeholders. Your participation in this process is very important, and the Maricopa County Planning and Development
Department wants to make it easy to learn about Vision 2030 and to share your thoughts. To participate, simply log on
to www.maricopa.gov/planning and follow three steps. First, watch the brief introductory webinar that gives an
overview of Vision 2030. Second, read the draft plan for details about each section and element. Finally, share your
recommendations about any element or other part of the draft plan via the online survey. All recommendations will be
1

reviewed and, as appropriate and feasible, considered for inclusion in the second draft. To help ensure timely progress
we ask that you provide input by no later than May 1st. At that point a second draft will be prepared and notification will
be sent and posted on the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department web page for review and final
recommendations. Any remaining recommendations, as appropriate and feasible, will be considered for inclusion in a
final draft prior to public hearings.
Thank you again for your participation and for helping make Vision 2030 a success!
Sincerely,
Matthew Holm, AICP
Planning Supervisor, Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
501 North 44th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85008
Fax: (602) 506-3711
Email: matthewholm@mail.maricopa.gov <mailto:matthewholm@mail.maricopa.gov >
www.maricopa.gov/planning <htto://www.maricopagov/planning>
Your feedback is important - Click HERE <https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NDBTDCZ > to let us know!
2

Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
From: Jeannette Fish <mcfb@qwestoffice.net >
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 12:01 PM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: RE: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan
Good afternoon, Matt. Long time, no see!
A very quick scan of the executive summary reveals no plans for agriculture in Maricopa County in 2030. How accurate
is that observation? Perhaps a projected land use map would help me get a better grasp. Right now I just don't have
time to read it all!
Jeannette Fish
Maricopa County Farm Bureau
Phoenix, Arizona
602-437-1330
"There are two spiritual dangers in not owning a farm. One is the danger of supposing that breakfast
comes from the grocery, and the other that heat comes from the furnace." — Aldo Leopold, A Sand County
Almanac'
From: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX [mailto:MatthewHolm@mail.maricopa.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 8:21 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan
Dear Stakeholder,
Maricopa County is pleased and excited to present the first draft of Vision 2030, the Maricopa County
Comprehensive Plan. Vision 2030 is Maricopa County's latest comprehensive plan to help
accommodate growth, enhance the county's quality of life, and help identify new opportunities to
achieve a strong and vibrant region. The name Vision 2030 is fitting because it's a look at what can
be and what can help keep Maricopa County great. Vision 2030 is also truly comprehensive because
it considers many growth-related issues and challenges, and then addresses them through sensible
goals and policies. While Vision 2030 is significant, this plan is not regulation but rather guiding
policy, and only applies to unincorporated areas of Maricopa County.
As noted, this is the first draft which will be modified based on the recommendations and input
received from stakeholders. Your participation in this process is very important, and the Maricopa
County Planning and Development Department wants to make it easy to learn about Vision 2030 and
to share your thoughts. To participate, simply log on to www.maricopa.gov/planninq and follow three
steps. First, watch the brief introductory webinar that gives an overview of Vision 2030. Second, read
the draft plan for details about each section and element. Finally, share your recommendations about
any element or other part of the draft plan via the online survey. All recommendations will be
reviewed and, as appropriate and feasible, considered for inclusion in the second draft. To help
ensure timely progress we ask that you provide input by no later than May 1 st• At that point a second
draft will be prepared and notification will be sent and posted on the Maricopa County Planning and
Development Department web page for review and final recommendations. Any remaining
i.

recommendations, as appropriate and feasible, will be considered for inclusion in a final draft prior to
public hearings.
Thank you again for your participation and for helping make Vision 2030 a success!
Sincerely,
Matthew Holm, AICP
Planning Supervisor, IVIaricopa County Planning and Development Department
501 North 44th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85008
Fax: (602) 506-3711
Email: matthewholmamail.maricopa.gov
www.maricooa.00v/planninq
Your feedback is important — Click HERE to let us know!
2

Maricopa County
Department of Emergency Management
5630 E. McDowell Road
Phoenix, Arizona 85008 April 9, 2015
Phone: (602) 273-1411
Fax: (602) 275-1638
Tr: (602) 244-1638
TO: Matthew Holm, Planning Supervisor
Maricopa County Department of Planning & Development
FROM: Julie Syrmopoulos, Operations and Planning Manager
Maricopa County Department of Emergency Management
SUBJ: DEPARTMENT COMMENTS ON VISION 2030
Below, please find MCDEM's response to your draft. After review, please feel free to
contact me with any questions you may have regarding the submittal. Thank you.
Executive Summary:
• Page v — Land Use - Suggest "The Land Use element maintains that sensible,
function, balanced SUSTAINABLE, RESILIENT and. fiscally BALANCED AND
ECONOMICALLY VIABLE. .. "
• Page v - Land Use Goal #3 - We suggest "Protect public health, safety, RESILIENCE
and well-being."
• Page vi — Land Use Policy #6 — "Maricopa County supports educating residents
about the potential 44ks-DIFFERENCES of living in unincorporated areas."
• Page vi — We recommend you retain Land Use Policy #12 which reads "Maricopa
County supports coordinating with state and federal agencies to address safety and
security issues associated with development near the Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station."
• Page vii — MCDEM recommends you retain Land Use Policies #28 and 29, which
read "Maricopa County supports implementing the multi-jurisdictional hazard
mitigation plan" and "Maricopa County supports public education about the risks
and limitation of developing in hazard-prone areas."
• Pave ix —Transportation Goal #4 - MCDEM suggests the following edit "Have a
comprehensive transportation system that helps reduce air pollution, PROMOTES
ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SUSTAINABILITY."
• Page xiii — Economic Growth Goal #4 - MCDEM recommends "Create and GROW A
sustainABLE, VIBRANT business climate."

Maricopa County
Department of Emergency 2
Management
2035 N. 52.6 Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85008
Phone: (602) 273-1411
Fax: (602) 275-1638
General Considerations
• Page 14 Planning Hierarchy — MCDEM recommends reconsidering this flow chart
to reflect the county's main development plans in a dynamic, integrated
presentation of equal weighting: Comprehensive Plan, Flood District Plan, Hazard
Mitigation Plan. Also recommend that "other Maricopa County Plans" be listed by
name, not department. This graphic also implies that need drives investment and
budget, when in reality we are zero-based and driven by revenue. Accordingly,
those boxes may need to be re-conceptualized.
• Page 16 — First paragraph —We recommend rewording for cultural sensitivity,
example follows: "Maricopa County plans do not apply to sovereign native
American communities regardless of location within the County."
Maricopa County Overview
• Page 19, Location/Size — last sentence of paragraph, we recommend adding the
word "River" after "New" to increase readability.
Land Use
• Page 27— Land Use —Consider adding "SUSTAINABLE" in the first sentence.
• Page 29 — Paragraphs 2 and 3 — MCDEM recommends you reconsider statements
like "but was not implemented consistently primarily because county expectations
were somewhat vague" and "consistent application of this key principle did not
happen" by using statements that are more positive and forward looking. Example,
"Vision 2030 anticipates to clarify this issue and provide a more robust application
of this key concept."
• Page 31 — MCDEM suggestions the following edit to the first sentence "accept
EMBRACE these limitations, it is CRITICALLY important that those living in ..."
• Page 32 — Item #7 - "That libraries are available and proximate to serve new
residents." It is not clear how this would happen. Additionally, in other parts of the
document you talk about how technology has started to replace the brick and
mortar based services like libraries.
• Page 32— Please retain item # 10 - "That there is regional flood control
infrastructure to protect new residents and/or businesses as necessary."
• Page 34 Fifth bullet point — Consider the following addition to "Evaluate
comprehensive plan amendments and zoning district changes for consistency with
the county's capital improvement AND HAZARD MITIGATION PLANS.

Maricopa County
Department of Emergency 3
Management
2035 N. 52nd Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85008
Phone: (602) 273-1411
Fax: (602) 275-1638
• Page 38 - Last bullet — "Deciding if or when it is appropriate for residents in cities
and towns to pay for enhanced urban services and infrastructure that exclusively or
predominantly benefit residents of unincorporated areas, including law
enforcement, animal control, and some street and infrastructure maintenance. Is
it ever appropriate? Additionally, should fire and EMS be on this listing as well?
• Page 40 — County Islands — paragraph 1 — "In some scattered and isolated county
islands emergency response is unavailable or inadequate " I believe that state
statute now requires county islands be serviced by the cities if petitioned to do so.
• Page 39 —First two bullet points — Specifically with our experience with mulch fires,
MCDEM recommends you retain the both "Evaluate new urban land uses to identify
potentially negative impacts to existing rural land uses and use mitigation measures
where necessary" and "evaluate new rural development to identify potentially
negative impacts to existing urban land use, and use mitigation measures where
necessary."
• Page 40 — Last paragraph — Although some residents choose to live in county
islands, Maricopa County encourages their annexation as feasible to help ensure
reliable and efficient public services AND COMPATIBLE LAND USE.
• Page 40— Last bullet — MCDEM encourages the retention of the last bullet which
reads "Discourage new rural land uses in existing urban areas."
Development in High Risk Areas
• Page 42— Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station — Please strike "and-one-of-the
". Additionally, please edit to read
"Phozne-Expeou-re-Bathwasti Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ)" as it is technical correct
as offered, but more easily understood.
• Page 43 — First paragraph, please strike the following as it doesn't really read
correctly "and to homeland security."
• Page 43 — Urban/Wildland Interface — Paragraph 2 — MCDEM recommends the
following amendment "While Maricopa County's ability to manage parcel splits is
limited by state law, it does support careful building and design standards, sensible
land use planning and fire mitigation practices in high risk areas THROUGH THE
COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN."
• Page 43 — Flood-prone Areas — Parcel splits are not the only activity that
complicates flooding. You may consider referencing incremental development that
provides mere pieces of the overall drainage infrastructure for the larger area which
leads to flooding in developing areas.

Maricopa County
Department of Emergency 4
Management
2035 N. 52nd Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85008
Phone: (602) 273-1411
Fax: (602) 275-1638
• Page 44 —Fourth bullet —Amend to read "Coordinate with the Maricopa County
Department of Emergency Management 44a1:143
Security during the review of new development in areas potentially affected by the
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station."
• Page 44 —Strategies - add bullet — "Coordinate with the Maricopa County
Department of Emergency management during the review of development with
hazard considerations or in high risk areas."
• Page 44— Fifth bullet — Consider adding reference to the Community Wildfire
Protection Plan.
Page 46 — Unique Land Uses — Consider adding a bullet to Strategies that reads —
Ensure these unique land uses are property placed in terms of minimizing cascading
impacts during a disaster.
Transportation
• Page 51— Life Cycle Analysis —The last two sentences in this first paragraph are very
negative and should probably be written in a more positive, forward-looking
manner.
• Page 52 Creating a regional, multimodal transportation system — you mention
that there were false expectations; however, you may want to explain why
Maricopa County is neither a provider nor operator of mass transit.
Environment
• Page 61 — Results and Analysis — Recommend you rewrite in a more positive,
forwarding looking manner, etc., "this document aims to "
• Page 66 Were you planning to reference light pollution in this section?
Economic Growth
• Page 81 — Have you considered adding a strategy to promote access to high speed
data flows?
Growth Areas
• Page 87 — Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station: Please delete the following
clauses from the first paragraph " 4.1443
the-wor-14" and "4244me-E-mparAiFe-Pathwait".

Madcopa County
Department of Emergency 5
Management
2035 N. 52' Street
Phoenix, Aci'zona 85008
Phone: (602) 273-1411
Fax: (602) 2754638
• Page 87— Recommended changes to paragraph 2 —Whi.le Tthe Pathway
EMERGENCY PLANNING ZONE (EPZ) will eventually be home to tens of thousands
of residents
ciesecamissioneek If it does, then protecting public health and safety is a high
priority in the unlikely event of a radioactive incident. Although the risk is very
small, the potential consequences of not evacuating residents in the Pathway area
within a short time frame could be catastrophic which is why careful planning and
an efficient transportation system are so important,-4n-addition, sevoing-high-
gfewth-i-rt-that-p-ar-t-of-the-caunty, THIS AREA SEEMS PRIMED FOR ALTERNAIVE
USES TO RESIDENT THAT MAXIMIZE ON EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE AND
TOPOGRAPHY (E.G. SOLAR POWER GENERATION AS REFERENCED ON PAGE 89).
Open Space
• Page 97 - Goals and Polices — MCDEM is curious if an Open Space Policy could exist
that supports hazard mitigation and/or the wildland urban interface.
Water Resources
• Page 100 — Water Settlement Claims — MCDEM questions that value of including
this paragraph.
• Page 104— Consider incentivizing low water usage in development and design
Energy
• Page 106 - Consider incentivizing increased energy conservation and efficiency in new
development and design
• Page 107 —Considering adding a second strategy bullet that would encourage this type
of use in areas that would benefit from quality employment but minimal population
(e.g., PVNGS).
Cost of Development
• Page 113 — Consider removing Volunteer Contributions paragraph entirely.

Martcopa County
Department of Emergency 6
Management
2035 N. 52nd Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85008
Phone: (602) 273-1411
Fax: (602) 275-1638
• Page 116 — Intergovernmental Revenues: Recommend you add the word
"CURRENTLY," in front of "Twenty percent of HURF funds are ..."
Definitions
Page 126 — Consider the following amendment to the definition for Hazard Mitigation Plan
definition "Plan prepared to-comply-with-federal-law that identifies natural hazards,
assesses vulnerability and risks to people and structures, and identifies and implements
strategies for mitigating the identified natural hazards. (Note: This plan is not required by
federal law, but is required to qualify for certain funding.)
General Comments/Questions:
• How does this plan address the whole community? Where do portions of the plan speak
about integrated land use and transportation in a fashion to increase mobility or
participation of the access and functional needs community? At a minimum, mention of
the AFN community should be made in general (or perhaps in lieu of the term "public".)
Also, consider adding the term to your definitions.
• Results and Analysis sections are particularly negative and backward-looking. MCDEM
has noted several within this memo, but would suggest a positive, forward looking
orientation for these sections.
cc: Pete Weaver, Director

aoyERNoR
Dou6(..,AS
THE. STATE OF ARIZONA COMMISSIONERS
CilamMAN, ROBERT E. MANsoi. WINSLQ
GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT KURT EDWARD R. DAVIS, 'PAT" MADDEN. PHOENGS FLAGSTAFF
5000 W. CAREFREE HIGHWAY JAMES J.W. Finms, R. AmmoNs, TUCSON Yuto
PHOENIX, AZ 85086-5000 DIRECTOR
(602) 942-3000 • VIM/KAMM GOV LARRY D. VoYilis
DEPUTY. DIRECTOR
T‘,.. E. GRAY
April 29, 2015
Mr. Matthew Holm, AICP
Planning Supervisor, Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
501 North 44th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85008
Re: Review of the Vision 2030: Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan, Draft 111
Dear Mr. Holm:
The Arizona Game and Fish Department (Department) has reviewed the above-
mentioned Draft Comprehensive Plan. Given the continuing recovery in the economy
since 2008, a comprehensive planning process to address population growth and the
County's many resources is increasingly critical. The Department appreciates the
County's support for the conservation of natural resources throughout the document, as
the preservation of fish and wildlife resources and habitat are integral in maintaining
healthy and well-balanced communities.
The Department offers the recommendations below for incorporation into the next draft
of the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the Department requests the continued
coordination with Maricopa County as the development of this Comprehensive Plan
progresses, and as specific projects throughout the county are planned and
implemented. Specifically, we would like to provide our expertise and best available
data on the conservation of fish and wildlife resources, habitats, wildlife movement, and
recreational opportunities throughout the county. Although the Department has an
interest in all proposed and/or planned projects, the types of projects that we believe
may have the greatest impact on Arizona's fish and wildlife resources include
transportation, utility scale energy development, new residential and community
development, industrial development, community planning, and open-space planning.
If coordination is early enough in the planning stages, these types of projects also
provide the greatest opportunities to promote a balanced growth model that benefits
Arizona's residents and businesses, while conserving and improving Arizona's unique
and diverse fish and wildlife resources.
PLAN ELEMENTS
As detailed below, fish and wildlife resources and values should be recognized in the
Land Use, Transportation, Economic, Environment, Open Space and Water Resources
elements.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS AGENcy

Mr. Matthew Holm, AICP
April 29, 2015
2
LAND USE
The Department appreciates the recognition of the importance for having interconnected
open space; the Maricopa Trail system provides recreation opportunities and serves as a
link to regional parks. Additionally, the Department supports the need to discourage lot
splits and "wildcat" subdivisions, and encourages development that is deliberate and
considers habitat and movement corridor conservation in the planning and design.
Lack of Incentives, Page 35
• Incentives can tie to conformity with clear ordinances, regulation, policies, codes
and/or design guidelines for open spaces and riparian protection such as: density
transfers, permit streamlining, inspection priorities, county incentives (community
flood rating), etc.
Federal and State Property, Page 39
• Strategies- Incorporate the County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment, and
coordinate with the AGFD in county planning efforts. The Department's mission is
to protect and manage wildlife throughout Arizona, including on private, state, and
federally-managed lands.
Reducing Environmental Impacts, Pages 44-46
• In addition to identified open spaces and wildlife linkages, in-tact habitat blocks (i.e.
large areas within little disturbance or development) should be evaluated for
conservation and protection.
• Utilize a green design and landscaping approach through the use of existing natural
resources such as trees, soils, land formations, and natural drainage systems to
achieve immediate and future operation and maintenance cost savings.
• Discourage large-scale grading of parcels in favor of cluster housing that allows for
buildings, walls and fences within an envelope, while leaving portions of the
property as undisturbed open space that provides wildlife habitat and movement
linkages.
• Implement low impact/least footprint construction technologies during all phases of
the development process as well as site restoration.
6 Retain the natural character of and public access to, regionally significant rivers and
washes.
• Only permit infrastructure to extend into undeveloped areas pursuant to land use and
open space plans.
• Encourage development to locate within close proximity to existing infrastructure
and population.

Mr. Matthew Holm, AICP
April 29, 2015
3
Land Use Goals and Policies, Pages 47-50
• Ensure protection of natural resources as an integral part of the land use planning
efforts,
• Encourage development to be located within close proximity to existing
infrastructure and population,
• Ensure preservation of localized and regional scale systems of integrated open
spaces to protect fish and wildlife linkage and connectivity.
TRANSPORTATION
In order to maintain continuity for open space, wildlife habitat, and movement
corridors, all transportation planning should be aligned with open space planning
efforts, and should contain strategies and design features that ensure transportation
corridors are permeable to wildlife.
Transportation Goals and Policies, Pages 59-60
• Recognize that identification and preservation of wildlife linkages benefits public
safety, reduces collision potential, and promotes wildlife connectivity.
• Roadway project planning should incorporate the installation of roadway mitigation
features such as wildlife crossing structures and fencing to funnel wildlife, and
wildlife friendly Right-of-Way fencing.
ENVIRONMENT
The Department appreciates the recognition of the critical role that biological resources
play in our environment, and the strategies the Comprehensive Plan has identified to
protect native flora, fauna, and movement corridors.
Habitat and Cultural Resource Preservation, Page 63
• This section should reference the Desert Spaces Plan (MAG), the Natural Resource
Management Plan (Maricopa Co. Parks and Recreation), and the County Linkage
Assessment Report.
• This section should recognize the importance of open space including habitat and
wildlife linkages, greatly benefitting wildlife conservation as well as quality of life
for residents.
Environmental Goals and Policies, Pages 67-68
• Environmental Policy #5 supports recommendations by SHP() and Arizona Game
and Fish Department, however, in order for the Department to evaluate and provide
project recommendations, a review by the Department for all large scale projects
(e.g. housing developments, community developments, industrial development,
utility-scale energy projects, community or regional planning documents, etc.)
should be incorporated into the County's planning and permitting processes.

Mr. Matthew Hohn, AICP
April 29, 2015
4
• Recognize that fish and wildlife species are essential components of healthy
ecosystems and communities at large.
• Encourage conservation of existing habitat, restoration of habitat that has been
impacted, and creation of new habitat to offset development impacts.
• Encourage landscape-level and project-level planning of, and evaluation for, open
space and linkage corridors.
ECONOMIC GROWTH
Quality of Place Matters, Page 75-76
• Interconnected and integrated systems of open spaces retain the regionally
significant resources and preserve the amenities that residents and tourists seek;
these open space areas enhance property values, quality of life, recreational
opportunities, and attract new potential homeowners and businesses.
Economic Growth Goals and Policies, Pages 80-91
• Encourage programs that increase focus on outdoor recreation and quality of life.
• Implement policies to continue growth focused on outdoor recreation, both passive
recreation (i.e. recreation occurring in undeveloped open space) and active
recreation (recreational activity that requires significant infrastructure for the
purposes of active sports or organized events).
OPEN SPACE
The Department encourages Maricopa County to continue planning efforts for
connected open space, and to evaluate in-tact habitat blocks (i.e. large areas within little
disturbance or development) as habitat suitable for preservation, in addition to currently
identified open spaces and wildlife linkages.
Overview, Page 92
• Fish and wildlife linkages and connectivity should be recognized as a value of open
space, in addition to wildlife related recreation.
• The Desert Spaces Plan and the Natural Resource Management Plan should be
referenced.
• Incorporate the County Linkage Assessment Report into the comprehensive and
open space plan.
Open Space Goals and Policies, Page 97
• Provide both passive and active recreation opportunities
• Provide linkages for fish and wildlife resources and conserve the habitat blocks
connected by the linkages
• Provide buffers for important habitat areas such as riparian

Mr. Matthew Holm, AICP
April 29, 2015
5
WATER RESOURCES
The Department supports the Comprehensive Plan's strategies to reduce water
consumption in new development and encourage low water use solar electric generating
technologies. Water is the critical and limiting factor to much of Arizona's unique and
diverse biological resources.
Water Conservation — Strategies, Page 103
• Conserve, protect, and enhance rivers and washes to promote hydrologic function,
fish and wildlife resources, water quality, ecosystem sustainability and services, by
limiting groundwater depletion.
The Department appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on the Vision 2030:
Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan- Draft #1. If you have any questions regarding
this letter, please contact me at (623) 236-7602.
Sincerely,
.----- .,----__
Laura Canaca
Project Evaluation Program Supervisor, Habitat Branch
Arizona Game and Fish Department
cc: Habitat Program Managers, Regions IV and VI
Ray Schweinsburg, Wildlife Research Supervisor
AGFD# M15-03243248

DRAFT COMMENTS FROM MAG ON MARICOPA COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
DATE: May 4, 2015
FROM: Scott Wilken, Regional Planner III, Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG)
SUBJECT: MARICOPA COUNTY VISION 2030 DRAFT #1 COMMENTS
Comments from MAG Information Services Division
1. The existing Comprehensive Plan refers to Rural Development Areas as being appropriate for
development that is no more than one lot per five acres, but that reference is not included in
this draft plan. Page 72 states that "Unincorporated areas outside of county area plans are
designated Rural Development Area and are only appropriate for rural land uses and rural
zoning." Is the current five acre minimum rule planned to apply to the updated Comprehensive
Plan? Our long-range socioeconomic model relies on this sort of guidance for any development
that ends up in a Rural Development Area.
2. Related to the first comment, it might be helpful with we are able to work with you to get some
guidance on how many dwelling units could reasonably be expected to be built in the Rural
Development Areas as we draft our updated socioeconomic projections over the next year or so.
Comments from MAG Environmental Programs Division
Transportation and Environment Elements
On Page 57 in the Transportation Element and Page 62 in the Environment Element, the Comprehensive
Plan indicates that the portions of Maricopa County are designated as nonattainment for particulate
matter (PM-10), carbon monoxide, and ozone. At one time, the region was designated as a
nonattainment area for PM-10, ozone, and carbon monoxide; however, great strides have been made
with all three pollutants. The current status of air quality in the region is provided below.
Regarding PM-10, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a notice on May 30, 2014
approving the MAG 2012 Five Percent Plan for PM-10. The plan includes a wide variety of existing
control measures and projects that have been implemented to reduce PM-10 and includes a new
measure designed to reduce PM-10 during high risk conditions, including high winds. EPA has also
determined that the region has met the standard based upon three years of clean data for 2010-2012 as
measured by the air quality monitors.
For ozone, the region was redesignated to attainment for the one-hour standard, effective June 14,
2005. There have been no violations of this standard since 1996. In 2004, the Environmental Protection
Agency designated the region as a Basic nonattainment area for the eight-hour ozone standard of 0.08
parts per million. There have been no violations of the 0.08 parts per million standard since 2004. On
August 20, 2014, EPA approved the MAG 2009 Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and

DRAFT COMMENTS FROM MAG ON MARICOPA COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
Maintenance Plan for the 0.08 parts per million standard, EPA has redesignated the Maricopa
nonattainment area to attainment status for the 0.08 parts per million standard. In March 2008, EPA
revised the eight-hour ozone standard to 0.075 parts per million. On May 21, 2012, EPA published a
final rule to designate the Maricopa nonattainment area as a Marginal Area. The region has an
attainment date of July 20, 2015.
For carbon monoxide, the region has met the federal air quality standard. EPA redesignated the
Maricopa County nonattainment area to attainment for the carbon monoxide standard, effective April 8,
2005. There have been no violations of the eight-hour standard since 1996.
The Environment Element also states that given this area's dry climate it is also often challenged to meet
air quality standards for the fine particle matter contaminant known as PM-2.5. The region is in
attainment of the PM-2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Comments from MAG Transportation Division
Transportation has reviewed the draft General Plan and has no comments.

From: Linda Edwards
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 3:44 PM
To: tpdcustomerservice(amail.maricopa.gov'
Subject: RE: County Plan survey
Please see some comments below for your consideration for the Comprehensive Plan. I tried to
submit with the link you provide, however, the comment space would not take the volume of
notes we offer.
Comments on Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan- Transportation Section:
1. The Overview of the Transportation Chapter could use some additional
information and detail with regard to the Chapter and Plan's role in the overall
transportation system in Maricopa County, roles of plan with ADOT, MCDOT,
MAG, etc.
2. Under Results and Analysis — it is noted that the previous comprehensive plan
was "vague and difficult to measure results". It would appear that Vision 2030
still lacks specific information, detail and/ or data; in the document itself and
goals and policies.
3. Transportation — Page 52 & 55 (footnote) — Regarding transit services, there
should be discussion/ goals/ policies acknowledging that the County can in fact
apply land use and development principles that support transiQMaricopa County
is involved in providing transit services: the County funds transit services (either
locally or via Prop 400), and they have a seat on the MAG Transit Committee.
4. Transportation — Page 54 — Maricopa County — Major Street and Routes Plan -
the term "Street" in this context; Does Street include pedestrian and bicycle
facilities or are you referring to a street as curb to curb.
5. Transportation — Page 57 — under Strategies — "Design county island roads...
should be changed to "Construct county island roads...."
6. Transportation — Page 59-60 — under Goals and Policies — It would be helpful to
have more specific and measurable goals and objectives as noted as being
provided on page 51 & 52.
Comments on Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan- Water Resources Section:
1. The use of the word effluent/greywater in the Overview section is incorrect, this
resources is most commonly referred to as reclaimed or recycled water.
2. In the Surface Water section, the proposed Plan states "However, surface water
availability is somewhat unpredictable and varies from year-to-year based on
precipitation in Arizona and surrounding states." While it is true that runoff can be
unpredictable, it is captured in reservoirs to store for times of low runoff. The
surface water supplies that serve Maricopa County are quite predictable and vary
little from year to year. This thought is incorrectly replicated in the overview

section: "supplies unpredictably expand and contract depending on yearly
weather patterns." It should be deleted.
3. The proposed Plan indicates "Although the Water Resources element from the
previous comprehensive plan encouraged water conservation, its goals and
policies were neither measurable nor specific." The proposed Plan continues with
similar goals and policies that are not measurable or specific. The following are
revisions to a few of the proposed goals and policies:
a. Water Resources Goal #2: Promote regional water quality and efficient
use of water.
i. Policy- Maricopa County will engage in regulatory stakeholder
groups, advocating for high quality policy that ensures regional
water quality standards and the efficient use of water.
b. Water Resources Goal #3: Encourage renewable water use in new
development.
i. Policy 1- For areas within the AMA, Maricopa County will
encourage or incentivize growth in service areas of designated
providers.
ii. Policy 2- For areas outside of the AMA, Maricopa County will
require water adequacy determinations for new development.
(Board of Supervisors action required for this policy to be
implemented)
iii. Policy 3- Maricopa County will encourage the direct use of
reclaimed water by working with water providers and Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality to redevelop the rules
governing this resource to ensure public health while increasing its
potential use.
Environmental
• The Environmental Chapter is somewhat negative and focuses on the issues and
mitigation of issues with very little discussion about the maintaining and building
on the positive environmental resources the county does have.
• The document states that there is a noise ordinance for unincorporated areas
and that the ordinance is overseen by the Sherriff's Departments. It would be
helpful to see some of the topics covered bullet pointed: Vehicular Noise, Radios
and Sound Amplification Devices, Public Disturbances. Animals are not included
in the ordinance at this time (this is important because animals are often an issue
on County property).
• There is discussion/policies regarding military noise, but very little about local
airports and their impact on the surrounding community.
• It is also surprising that there is not a mandatory re-vegetation requirement when
hillside development above 15% occurs to minimize slope erosion, stabilize soil
and help with scaring.
• This truly is high level broad brush and is not that informative about the existing
Maricopa County environment based on this chapter.
Open Space

• The Open Space information was well rounded and informative
• The County Park Edge Treatment is a topic that would be a very interesting APA
session.
• Maricopa Trail vs Sun Circle Trail. What happened to the Sun Circle Trail, is it
part of the Maricopa Trail?
• More graphics such as a Maricopa Trails Map would be appreciated.
• Goal: Connect the Maricopa Trail System into Town and City park systems
through coordination and IGA agreements/projects.
• Overall the Land Use Element (LUE) is very comprehensive and provides
excellent background information. The County should consider including a Land
Use Map showing the County's land use classifications as they relate to both the
County's planning areas and "county islands"; unfortunately the proposed
Appendix A "Land Use Guide" does not provide land use classifications but
merely shows the location of area plans. In conducting the technical review, the
proposed LUE appears to address ARS 11-804.B.1.a and 11-804.B.1.d through
LUE Table 9 and LUE Policies #16 & #17, respectively. However, ARS 11-
804.B.1.b, 11-804.B.1.c and 11-804.B.1.e do not appear to have been
addressed. "Compact Form" and "air quality and access to incident solar
energy" are generally not addressed in LUE goals and policies. Moreover, it
does not appear that aggregate source identification and protection has been
addressed.
• Overall the Cost of Development Element (CODE) is well organized and
addresses key issues. The County should consider a strategy, goals and
policies that would result in or establish formal Concurrency Review and the
adoption of an Adequate Facilities Ordinance. In conducting the technical
review, the proposed CODE addresses ARS 11-804.C.4.a and 11-804.C.4.b
through the Available Funding Sources narrative (page 116) and CODE Goal #2,
Policies #1-3, respectively.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Linda M. Edwards, AICP
Planning Manager
Town of Gilbert
90 East Civic Center Drive I Gilbert, AZ 85296
Work: 480.503.6750
Email: Linda.EdwardsPgilbertaz.gov
Mon-Thurs, 7:00am - 6:00pm; Closed Fridays

Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
From: Gordon Taylor <GTaylor@aziand.gov>
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 10:07 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Cc: Michelle Green; Mark Edelman; Gordon Taylor
Subject: Maricopa County Vision 2030
Matt, thank you for the opportunity to review the County's 1 st draft "Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan". After a staff
review the Arizona State Land Department has no objections to the proposed Plan. We would like to point out that this
is an excellently written document that clearly conveys your understanding of State Trust lands and how the
Department manages these lands.
Gordon Taylor
Planner IV
Arizona State Land Department
Real Estate/Planning Section
gtaylor@azIand.gov
602-542-2647
NOTICE to CUSTOMERS
The Department will be initiating a document scanning project in July, 2014 and it is expected to last nearly a year. During this
timeframe some of our documents will be off-site for approximately two weeks at a time. We ask for your patience during this time. ff
your request must meet a legal deadline we will do our best to retrieve the information for you. We apologize in advance for any
inconvenience this may cause. Through this process, we hope to make our records more readily and efficiently accessible and at the same
time protect and preserve irreplaceable documents. Thank you for your cooperation.
1

LAND CRUST
_1)ecting the landscape you love
May 1, 2015
Matt Holm
Maricopa County Planning and Development
501 North 44th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85008
Dear Mr. Holm,
On behalf of Desert Foothills Land Trust, thank you for the opportunity to review the
draft Vision 2030 Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan. We are pleased to see that the
protection of open space plays an important role in the vision for our future, and we
know this reflects the community's values, as well. Of course the Land Trust believes
our community's open spaces provide places to relax and recreate, protect valuable
plant and wildlife habitat and scenic beauty, provide places for people be physically
active and play an important role in our tourism industry.
As a land conservation organization, we applaud the County's goal to protect and,
when necessary, expand the regional park system. Additionally, recognizing the
importance of an interconnected network of open space is beneficial, not only for our
communities as a whole, but provides critical travel corridors for our wildlife.
Desert Foothills Land Trust intends to remain involved in the Comprehensive Plan
process as it moves forward, and welcome future opportunities to contribute to other
plans that incorporate conservation and open space.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to review the draft Comprehensive Plan. We
would greatly appreciate being included in future correspondence and updates
concerning the Plan. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Sonia Perillo
Executive Director
cc: Vicki Preston, Conservation Director
P.O. Box 4561 u Uwe C2reek, Arizona 85327 11 480.4188.613] E Fax 480,4885545 w infoediltorg www.cif[torg

Atidat&IL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SURPRISE
ARIZONA
Date: May 1, 2015
To: Maricopa County Planning and Development
From: Eric Fitzer, Community Development Director
Lloyd Abrams, Long Range Planning Manager
Joshua Mike, Planner II
Re: Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan
Thank you for including the City of Surprise in the initial stakeholder review of the draft
Comprehensive Plan. As of our first review, there are no changes that we recommend.
Surprise will continue to be a partner in positive, high quality development within our shared
boundaries. The City has initiated a major amendment to the Surprise General Plan 2035 to
incorporate a "holistic" approach to planning for the future. It is important that both the City
and the County comprehensive plans include a shared vision of future development balances
and preservation for this region.
Please continue to include us in upcoming draft revisions, map presentations, and
stakeholder meetings.
Sincerely,
Joshua J Mike, Planner II
City of Surprise I Community Development
16000 N. Civic Center Plaza I Surprise, AZ I 85374
623.222.3134 t
623.222.3001 f

General comments:
• Where are the measureable goals? How do you know if you are meeting goals?
• Use more active verbs like adopt, work with, construct, utilize, coordinate, protect, preserve,
etc. The word "support" is used too many times.
• General layout/formatting is difficult to read and track.
Land Use Policy #2 (PDF p5) - How will the County address existing zombie developments? and prevent
new zombies from occurring? should be required to resubmit new plans for projects that have been
sitting for years to reflect current market demands. Should have even more of a focus on infill and not
sprawl.
Land Use Policy #30 (PDF p8) —should support parks, trails, recreation, etc that also provides
connectivity to the adjacent development.
Transportation Policy #5 (PDF p10) — include commuter rail; wildlife over/under passes and corridor
protection and other technologies into transportation policies.
Environment Goal #1 (PDF p11) - take a stronger/more prominent role in regional level leadership and
coordination of planning projects. Promote environmental stewardship in all goal areas and policies,
Environmental Policy #5 (PDF p11) — survey as a matter of best practice before a project. SHPO/Game
and Fish cannot make a recommendation without some survey material to tell them what's out there.
Open Space (PDF p16)— "Revised open space categories are also included to more accurately reflect
actual conditions" — what does this mean? What is revised? Where is it defined?
Open Space Goal #1 (PDF p16) — "Provide regional leadership to promote environmental quality,
including the preservation of open, natural park and recreation lands." - Provide regional leadership to
promote environmental sustainability, including the active preservation or conservation of open spaces
and natural park and recreation lands.
Water resources Goal #1 (PDF p17) — "Promote and protect the public health of the community" -
Promote and protect the public health through a clean water supply.
Water resources Goal #? —Add a new goal - Secure and protect adequate water supply/rights for its
County parks and other county properties.
Interconnected Open Space (PEW p49) - Interconnected open space should also include adequate
wildlife movement patters/corridors as well as plant life migration and propose options to
preserve/conserve and enhance these areas as interconnected open space. Should support partnering
with other agencies to do the same and provide regional leadership and preserve/conserve areas that
share adjacent jurisdictional boundaries but are located in the same species use area.
Strategies (PDF p60)— land use buffers are also a means to stabilize/increase property value.

Strategies (PDF p66)— Also work with Parks and Recreation Department(s) to increase opportunities for
active lifestyles.
Strategies (PDF p86) - Encourage a regional approach to natural/cultural resource protection,
conservation, and management.
Economic Growth (PDF p92) - Recognize and support the economic impacts of County Regional Parks
and support their contribution to the local economy
Strategies (PDF p116) - funding options for operations AND maintenance AND capital improvements.
Cost of Development PDF (p135)— should also include Regional Parks, libraries, etc. or support other
means of recouping this lost revenue.

Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
From: Leigh Johnson - PARKSX
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2015 8:08 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLAN DEVX
Cc: RJ Cardin - PARKSX
Subject: general plan comments
Attachments: CompPlanNotes.docx
Hi Matt,
Please see attachment for my notes. Let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment.
Leigh
Leigh E. Johnson, MPA -MURP
Park Planner
Maricopa County Parks and Recreation Department
(at Lake Pleasant Regional Park)
41835 N. Castle Hot Springs Rd — Unit Operations Center
Morristown, AZ 85342
ph 928-501-9207
-please note my new phone number and address-

Looking at the Draft and specifically the section on Transportation, the report does not include any
reference to the shift to become more efficient in managing the roadway system through
Transportation Systems Management and Operations strategies and application of ITS technologies.
Instead it still focusses on the traditional look at transportation through goals and policies to save
money on construction and maintenance through traditional partnerships and annexations. I would
propose the following changes to give more weight to the importance of managing the Transportation
System with an overall focus on the efficient movement of people and goods and savings to both County
and road users. Comments below in red are the changes and/or additions.
1. Page ix of Executive Summary under Transportation add to Transportation Goal 444: "Have a
comprehensive transportation system that focusses on Transportation Systems Management
and Operations (TSM&O) to help reduce air pollution".
2. Page ix of Executive Summary under Transportation add the following Transportation Policies:
a. Maricopa County supports regional mobility and safety through the integration of Maricopa
County, Cities and Towns, and State traffic management systems;
b. Maricopa County supports using technology such as Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
and evolving Connected Vehicle technology for the efficient and safe movement of people
and goods;
c. Maricopa County supports partnerships with Cities and Towns, and State, focusing on traffic
operations and management to provide seamless transportation across jurisdictional
boundaries.
3. Page x of Executive Summary amend Transportation Policy #6 to read: "The overall goal of
moving people and goods efficiently and safely across jurisdictional boundaries will be included
in the consideration of annexation of roads that are in and adjacent to county islands."
4. Page 5 of Introduction in the last paragraph amend to read: "....obligation is to help develop,
maintain and operate an effective and efficient transportation system."
5. Page 7 of Introduction within the Promotes Quality Communities add transportation.
6. Page 51 under Transportation Overview add in the second paragraph, before the last sentence:
"Limited financial sources and physical limitation to acquiring additional right of way to
continuously build more lanes, have contribute to a change in approach by federal, state and
local agencies to address these challenges through a Transportation Systems Management and
Operations (TSM&O) approach implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
technologies."
7. Pages 52 and 53: Various references are made that directly refer to the previous TSP or MCDOT
as a whole and point out previous apparent deficiencies for example "it lacked specific policies
or strategies" or "the information was confusing and difficult to understand". With a document
intended for public use, I would suggest that these shortcomings be addressed in a more
positive way with acknowledgement of current improvements being worked on or
recommendations on how these will be addressed.
8. Page 53 under Transportation Current Issues and Strategies include:
"Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
ITS includes the implementation of technology that optimizes mobility and safety. These
systems include for example traffic signals that are responsive to actual traffic demand; roadway
detection that collects information on travel times that is provided back to the driver through
overhead message signs or phone applications; and incident response which is based on real
time information to help first responders clear incident scenes quicker and return roadways to
full use sooner. Where signal systems are synchronized and integrated across jurisdictional
boundaries through ITS, travel times are reduced for the road users with associated cost savings.

In addition to time savings, the use of ITS technologies contributes to reduction in fuel usage
and emissions and air pollution.
With the appropriate application of ITS features, substantial capacity improvements can be
implemented at costs lower than the traditional approach of adding more lanes. This approach
has been successfully illustrated on the Bell Road Corridor where ITS was implemented in
partnership with various local agencies
Strategies
• Identify potential transportation corridors where ITS will provide substantial benefit to
the road users.
• Through partnerships implement ITS along identified major corridors.
9. Page 57 under Transportation Road Annexation; County Islands under Strategies amend first
bullet to: "While annexation of roads adjacent to municipalities is encourage, the overall goal of
moving people and goods efficiently and safely across jurisdictional boundaries will be included
in the consideration of annexation of these roads."
10. Page 58 under Transportation add bullet under strategies: "Implement ITS strategies to reduce
delay and minimize air pollution".
11. The Transportation Map at the back of the report does not show connectivity of roadways
through the region, only shows County jurisdiction. It does not relate to any known roadway and
while it does not show city roads it shows ADOT freeways and highways going through the
County.
12. Page x of Executive Summary amend Transportation Policy I7 to read: "Maricopa County
supports constructing roads on county islands to the standards of the surrounding city or town
where these roads are intended to be annexed into a city or town".
It is good that the County Mission Statement includes reference to "provide regional leadership"
(executive summary page iii). From a transportation perspective MCDOT with ADOT are the leaders in
ITS, integrated systems and Connected Vehicle technology in the region. This is also included in the
Strategic Priorities on page iv of the Executive Summary "best-in-class regional services".

MARICOPA COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
COMMENTS — Arizona Alliance for Livable Communities
June 21, 2015
Environment:
1. Kudos to highlighting the deficits of the last plan.
2. Hillside? Strengthen...
Water:
1. Recognize the uncertainty in water supply from the CAP'
2. Recognize the need for water for the environment including effluent release into natural areas
3. Low water use technologies are important. However there is a need for higher water use in certain
situations where water is available and where utility-scale generation is needed.
4. Have a policy around supporting water use for natural systems.
Energy:
No comments
Open Space:
In the overview, it talks about how "open space provides places for people to be physically
active." (p.92)
Local/Neighborhood Parks:
It dose state that local and neighborhood parks are important to the stability of neighborhoods because
they provide places for recreation, socialization and healthy lifestyles. (p. 95)
Both sections refer to healthy lifestyles. They are generally mentioned, but so are the other points
mentioned in this element.
1

Transportation Element
Page 51:
Overview
The overview provides a good quick synopsis. In particular, it is important to keep the language that
includes "efficient movement of people and products..." In some circles, transportation descriptions
have included "moving products" but not "moving people".
Throughout, it is helpful to define "multimodal" so people understand what this includes and to talk
about "transportation options" vs. "alternative transportation" (when appropriate).
Results and Analysis
We appreciate the document acknowledges that the vagueness of the previous plan makes it hard to
measure impact. To us, all the more important to ensure this plan contains specific performance metrics
and deadlines.
Page 52:
Creating a Regional, Multimodal Transportation System
At the end of the paragraph, it notes how Maricopa County can provide leadership for "bicycle,
pedestrian and other low-volume alternative transportation." Maricopa County can also provide
leadership by encouraging decision makers to expand public transportation — e.g. rail, bus, ... - and by
promoting the benefits of public transportation to the public.
Page 54:
Current Issues and Strategies
Maricopa Association of Governments— Regional Framework Studies
Many existing transportation plans continue to reflect outdated assumptions that the number of miles
driven will continue to rise steadily over time. It is important to make sure that transportation plans
reflect recent declines in driving and new understandings of the future demand for travel.
Other plans and processes underway such as the Maricopa County Dept. of Transportation's
Transportation System Plan 2035, ADOT-MAG's Spine Study, ADOT's Phoenix-Tucson Passenger Rail
Study etc. are likely to impact Maricopa County transportation plans and should be referenced.
Transportation Funding
The first paragraph mentions "prioritizing high cost items like roads, bridges and other expensive
infrastructure." This paragraph should promote a reallocation of resources toward system repair and
programs that expand the range of transportation options available to Arizonans due to the fact that
driving is stagnating and demand for transit, bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure is increasing. The
same sentiment should be included in the strategies section.
Page 55:
Alternative Transportation
The language in the initial sentence lacks validity and should be removed (as should statements
stemming from this sentence). Phoenix is one of the largest cities in the country and Maricopa County
has the potential to significantly increase its use of public transportation — similar to large cities and
counties elsewhere in our country.
2

While we understand that Maricopa County is focused on bicycle and pedestrian travel in this section, it
seems like a missed opportunity and an incomplete plan to fail to reference the growth of light rail and
buses etc. in Maricopa County and the future potential of "public" transit ("mass transit" is an outdated
term). Maricopa County can encourage decision makers to expand public transportation — e.g. rail, bus,
... - and should promote the benefits of public transportation to the public.
I'm not sure how policies such as Complete Streets best get integrated into this plan but it seems
Maricopa County can encourage policies at both the county and municipal level. Also, the Complete
Streets work happening in municipalities in Maricopa County should be referenced and highlighted as
examples and important components to the transportation plan.
It would be good to include the above points in the strategies section as well.
Page 57-58:
Air Pollution
Public transportation should be included as a significant part of the solution. In addition to light rail and
buses, carpools, vanpools, policies that encourage electric vehicles etc. should be included.
While we appreciate public education efforts and agree they should be included, strong transportation
policies will make a more significant dent in air pollution. In the third paragraph, public transportation
deserves to be a stand-alone statement. The success of public transportation also warrants inclusion
(perhaps in another section): In the Phoenix metro area, the light rail opened in late 2008 and is already
experiencing ridership numbers that weren't projected to be reached until the year 2020. Between 2007
and 2013, boardings on Valley Metro transit service jumped from 58 million to more than 74 million.
Page 58:
Strategies
Encourage decision makers to expand public transportation to reduce air pollution.
Promote the benefits of public transportation to reduce air pollution to the public.
Page 59:
Transportation Goals and Policies
Top policy should be that Maricopa County supports efforts in Maricopa County and its municipalities to
bring more transportation options (rail, bus, Dial-A-Ride, carpool, vanpool, Complete Streets, ...) to
citizens and businesses in Maricopa County (could also add tourists).
Transportation Policy #5 — remove the words "As warranted".
Other general points for inclusion:
Transportation agencies should compile and make available to the public more comprehensive,
comparable and timely data to allow for better informed analysis of the causes and magnitude of
changes in driving trends. Officials at all levels should eliminate inconsistencies in the reporting of
transportation data, increase the frequency of surveys that shed light on changes in transportation
preferences and behaviors, and use emerging new sources of information made possible by new
technologies in order to gain a better grasp of how driving trends are changing and why.
3

In many areas, planning and zoning laws and transportation funding rules limit public officials' ability to
expand access to transportation choices. Officials at all levels should remove these barriers and ensure
access to funding for non-driving forms of transportation.
New technologies and techniques provide transportation officials with new tools to address
transportation challenges. Transportation agencies should encourage the use of carsharing, bikesharing
and ridesharing and provide real-time travel information for public transit via smartphone.
4

change -
someone No NEW NEW Revised NEW NEW
Plan that detail. ..." They the we
ask we more the tax have what #4 needed.
be all statutes special HOAs. not However, than Policy not
Comprehensive most law". has the to do is
2015-8-12) but would 3-4 of and County. Use
couple 19 element. state Page name organizations, association" services,....". organizations Land comparison
and of commissions
2030 (Rev. a 18 each Plus the organizations Maricopa 50 a
noted Suggestion page in requirements message. Include . clear. type "related maintain type Page when
Vision Inc. We on found - zoning not a and by and of..."
it. See and/or Text text fulfills statutes and reimbursement is other..community not are groups and community supported 32 comparison
Draft Association, after The full "It important example: planning "Exceptions" _ "manage of be Page on aspects
2nd comma response? Comment long. the have really the list when associations to types to for unique implies
- a too just only to For County of community-based other wish provided
Community need policies? County is duplicated and the HAVE list. made meaning note: associations; authority be that the "differences" 13
Development and Summary than list is does §11-802 are as Community may and is "...about of 1
clause and Maricopa the this really 2030 ARS The change homeowner grassroots political there has comment to, - Page
and Hills goals and Executive appropriate Eliminate REASON: you if VISION • "Adjustments REASON: Please REASON: a or realize NR/DHCA Change REASON
dependent element Or, "... are legal Same
Planning River/Desert a the comments in
with Revised special living
support public law, Maricopa
County New start or the state Arizona taxpayers using companies and by educating of
the sentences walk show of of reimbursement associations, services differences
Content to supports private provided supports
Maricopa by of cross county http://www.coconino.az.gov/DocumentCenter/View/10316. requirements sections impacts maintain the areas
lot include County and/or not County
to Submitted a fix. strategies the these (ARS): limit homeowner/related and about
contains and could fulfills Exceptions help Maricopa districts infrastructure Maricopa residents unincorporated
FEEDBACK find element It 1. including Statutes To tax operate County
version,
document county the SUMMARY
Comments the all this Policy Policy Policy
The at Do For EXECUTIVE Section iii v Use vi Use vi Use
General 1) 2) 3) Overall comment Page Page Land #1 Page Land #4 Page Land #6

change change
NEW No NEW No NEW Revised NEW
Plan make and to the
maps. have
should communities emergency or opportunities should
Comprehensive this urban text
2015-8-12) annexing. scale either impacts. The county
Development, large fire-adaptive mitigate by the
(Rev. the and plan the development. but
2030 and doing and inclusive: the reduce arise.
Vision Inc. are spaces promotes residents in to development they
Planning county) open and that identified places existing' when
Draft Association, for of proactive protect of and
d the design planning to NOT list new existing
2' working (not more potential are both. the be in opportunities addition.
- municipalities not ".... be supports areas" to should rare this
Community those municipalities to wildfire costs. including Corridors"' this be for supports 13 of
Development by For highlighted: revision County "growth may look 2
of think to Page
and Hills Annexation REASON: that clear the development." Suggested Maricopa reduction management Currently, Recommend .. AddSCenic still features flexibility NR/DHCA
it Add We add
Planning River/Desert supports mitigation new area's the Maricopa Trail centers use strategies
planning lifestyles parks, land
County New supports County the County and directing growth reducing on Maricopa trails, recreation urban using use voltage
the County development. in urban of the the spaces. healthy new land high corridors.
Maricopa by Maricopa land large-scale Maricopa prevention design supports to supports development parks, open and supports space, in supports future
Maricopa urban Trust wildfire the County development , this.p16n; County new regional public active County open features County compatible and line
to Submitted of :r feasible State of necessary in development, in of and existing utility
feasible atc including design development. supports measures Maricopa identified Maricopa impacts County's other promote Maricopa preserves, similar development. Maricopa buffers electric
FEEDBACK As n;e:.g Where and Where new urban and To and near
Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Land #30: Land #33:
vi Use 9 vi Use vi Use vii Use vii Use viii Policy viii Policy
Page Land & #8 Page Land #11 Page Land #13 Page Land #16 Page Land #23 Page Use Page Use

-
NEW NEW Revised NEW NEW NEW - NEW revised
Plan all by that some non- people- in meet
promote growth. quality of defined skies is there public professional invasive countywide to follow.
transportation and air basis the (as of dark a and/or of and municipalities to
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) projected and on skies the the others, by other spread a on broadband technologies County
on pollution pollution dark construction to with "annexation space or access and technologies, Several the
(Rev. focuses air future efficiently policies. protect and adjacent destroying this (SHPO) open BLM the available of
2030 reduce and air on are share mean places? to Service, minimize universal wireless rest
Inc. that needs focus vehicles and to design sometimes communities. we other Office plan: adjacent land. collaboration development. the
Vision system help goals jurisdictions the and/or As - you the Forest to ensure reliable commercially for
to current should moving own to: in County NEEDED think and Preservation in order public to and and example
Draft Association, operations goal of its policy through residential We here proposed with in to economic
nd transportation meet means has a other Association) go the in clarify Historic elsewhere are agency private efforts affordable learning installing an as
2 - and that transportation by Growth add and that lands. the "annexation". you or coordinate from Policy: supports support serve
Community read: patterns future and/or ADOT Skies systems county projects by CLARIFICATION Could State here developments will management Growth efficient, networks, that currently will 13
Development to #4 comprehensive management This the Economic #7 with Dark ADOT valued - about "Arizona policy County species County are and of 3
Goal traffic in Policy highly new new lands plant Economic fast, communication services County needs Page
and Hills Modify a systems efficient REASON: and growth. Modify Coordinate International transportation unincorporated REASON: so QUESTION confusion municipality". out a When the land, public native Maricopa for basis centric these
Have now are Spell Add Add the
Planning River/Desert
County New growth"
the efficient
Maricopa by 'SHPO...
to "promote by
Submitted
Eliminate annexation directed
FEEDBACK As
ix Transportation #4 xi - ix Transportation xi - ix Transportation xi Environment xi Environment xiii Economic
Page Goal Page policies Page policies Page Page Page growth

NEW NEW Revised Revised NEW NEW NEW
Plan to for ; in
on grant housing efficient areas. the efficient sources "Maricopa more
covered block urban dedicated within and as Government a
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) is least: affordable fiscally the of eliminate energy say has
it at Federal v as development." conditions balanced Green element that
and with create balanced, page well provision or its renewable one
2030 (Rev. acronym glossary Program): to on as the groundwater Achieve clarify of this in least
Inc. true the functional, intro area residential allow #1: match, implementing use policies at have
Vision a in (HOME exclusively Element rural and to of Goal and equipment. to
Association, be not be to sensible, patterns Use include areas systems." change area. Use them by efficiency the All good
Draft may needs Program designed use Land to rural monitoring Land make example and ; be
nd 2 it it establish land the goal in preserve legislative and County of Either an energy fleets proactive. would
- glossary; policy, Partnership governments viable to this and policy: Maricopa duplicate set vehicle more It ".
Community the this households. help to relates like amenities park encourage evaluation a patterns. will improving is of 13
Development to for Investment local occur economically This would "... "their and/or for like County and facilities, This supports approach. 4 Page
Hills HOME but 75 and low-income to: to goal and unincorporated seems development
and Add page HOME state ...should and REASON: NR/DHCA Change Revise a Add Explore resources This redundant. Maricopa program County REASON; County active
Planning River/Desert that
explains use with the 102 assesses
County WMEZ, programs. should land space recreation connect page and implementing
New the also systems. on element
the growth sensible open residential to this ..." balanced
Maricopa by supports CDBG element urban and appropriate park Overview supplies Have patterns, supports
and Areas establish parks urban municipalities their use program.
to Submitted County HOME when help and in to the "...Specifically, water #3: land County
Growth and to quality development. with system Referencing Goal Green Government
FEEDBACK Maricopa IDAMC, The where occur patterns. Have adequate amenities Work trails states available Energy efficient Maricopa its
7 8
Policy xiii - Area Space Space #3: policy
xiii Economic xiii xv #4 xiv xvi Resources xvi xvii
Page growth Page Growth Page Open Goal Page Open Policy Page Water Page Energy Page Energy

NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW SAME SAME NEW
Plan in use skies the cities
costs water dark federal .._. _ in or
the
against wildlife, views, with utilized non-profit, ownership." be
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) elsewhere: align and would
or benefits health, noise, to town, other 24)
2030 (Rev. element the human erosion, County. Suggestion decision' Guidelines positioned currently. county, or page
Inc. this weigh on quality. expectations; better is to private with
Vision in will impacts vegetation, Maricopa and/or air annex growth-related Amendment be it go does into line
strategy and would where put in
Draft Association, County of 7 someday county to Land change: and (and
d or the negative development, elements Comment quality ...and Plan and add: Addenda element opposed Trust off term American"
2' - policy and water may " box, & this
a as projects, life town Comprehensive Statutes etc Ordinance Ordinance each as State suggest auctioned correct African 13
Development Community this positive economic of congestion, or decisions: State Sky Additions of Summary, we is more or of 5
include considering both quality city for highlighted: the Ordinances, Dark Noise Local description auctioned use, land a "Black Page
Hills of quality, other traffic to: the "s" a the ;regulations. Executive their when like
and Please When terms and and as Change ....that Add Add Revising the In • • • The Because for "... Seems
Planning River/Desert
does put
and
County New quality, land off
air annexed decision Trust auctioned
the Content and be State
Maricopa by on is ownership
congestion someday growth-related land ...
to Submitted may OVERVIEW Development when private by Black
FEEDBACK traffic as that ... ...and a occur into ...as
CONSIDERATIONS
COUNTY
& Plan
xviii of Development INTRODUCTION Section 9 10 10 12 New Different? 15 Planning Hierarchy GENERAL 18-19 Elements MARICOPA 22 Management 23
Page Cost Page Page Page Page What's Page Page Page Land Page

- -
Revised NEW. NEW NEW NEW Revised . NEW
Plan some it call with by statement many ..." tax They the we
is there to Plus made organization. government. since special HOAs. have However, than Maricopa 50
others, a by mentioned. true/valid district. are original implies ' to not other Page
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) fire services similar the county "limitations" is it do by and vi
with "annexation more a organizations; association" and services,....". organizations supported Page
this where is It MCSO by other Also, elected or "limitations" conditions,
2030 (Rev. share by covered protection. residents or type "related organization type be on #4
Inc. we mean places everyone. covered boards everyone. an by instead term these maintain to
Vision As - you other to are all, fire to the community a not or and community wish Policy
think and concern are not equal unincorporated governing concern represented "conditions" of accept are group also Use
Draft Association, NEEDED We here areas if has Use and ------ other "manage of may Land
2nd a not all most, district a not are word prefer, associations to types who for
- "annexation". clarify "issue" is since since everyone regarding is they the benefits. associations, community-based other provided
Community CLARIFICATION to This "police" aid", associations, This that use as note: authority be represents 13
Development Please "issue" "fire" decisions and these ".....recognize, as Community may is of 6
- about "concern" REASON: Delete Delete "mutual REASON: discounts see change homeowner grassroots political there NR/DHCA comment Page
Hills municipality". : an many homeowner : "prefer" disadvantages. REASON: or
and QUESTION confusion Change • • • Change: Also, • Change Add residents Suggest Please "... a are legal realize what County. Same
Planning River/Desert have local do are living is it
through governing
not water, and generally their residents elected decisions by residents limitations urban understand lifestyle
County New islands do like disposal towns outside an made district organization. development in 'related'associations
the county most residents services by most are these living communities making
Maricopa by that is area trash and services unincorporated represented services associations, similar unincorporated rural accept those to .....
existing municipal fire, cities government prior districts
to Submitted concern police, because these because their other many and that homeowner tax
eliminating annexation unincorporated to offer jurisdiction. formally municipal regarding homeowner or low-density, recognize, important unincorporated situation
FEEDBACK Another access sewer, parks not Also, not boards While in this choices Have special
County Current
USE 31 32 page of 32 page of 32 page of 32 and Strategies
LAND Page Islands Page Top Page Top Page Top Page issues

NEW NEW NEW - NEW Revised Revised NEW NEW Same
Plan meet would to
on residents to that cumulatively Summary
take withdrawal
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) to new infrastructure agency(ies) or Executive
wishes serve
to used: the proposed? to: groundwater adverse, column. the
2030 (Rev. provider available to or is resources of in
lnc. transportation -Onai-tran:S.portation source this potential previous policies here.
Vision service customers? is location...." when water impacts the and
a service of reii this to say in mitigate in goals duplicated
Draft Association, when fire types for the link a have and/or cumulative and withdrawals." sentence the are
d e case residential/business and . .: of showing a here and solution new on policies
- the __.,... inclusive expenditures provide PUBLIC the this comments
Community about police/sheriff clarity: maps you the strategy effective from and 13
Development What existing more public for law,, Can Will a sustainability supports goals of 7
-- adequate businesses; be to needs;" comma state responsible? add an impacts NR/DHCA's the Page
and Hills Question additional Modify "Increased a per QUESTION: CONCERN: 46- "Evaluate formulate adverse, NR/DHCA section;
That and/or local Add "As be Page See
Planning River/Desert of the the Public —
Necessity is and/or regional suburban is by (SRP) importance protect
water a of provider -- neW service for the restricts efforts Arizona Project the and
County New potable and service .- serve - fire residents low-density, that groundwater supports - of help will buffers strategies.
the confirmation . and expenditures needs; utilities River Policies
Maricopa by Convenience the adequately new laWrap,s.-gliovOqg category animals. much gap a Salt awareness and through use and
sufficient by .. police serve public local optional large too leaving County electric and corridors, land Goals
to Submitted is including of verification to .rOsidOrts:and,:biiigirie000-; adequate to meet state .... an district of --- (APS) public integrity Use
there Certificate ability . available businesses; Increased .,., to per locations Create zoning keeping 45 removed "...Maricopa major Service raise these compatible Land
FEEDBACK That service, and the That roadg As Page two to of their
last 46
"Urban for last of and Land 49-52
32 Development" 33 27 39 sentence paragraph 40 strategy 45 47 Unique
Page Solutions Urban Page #6 Page Page Page 4th Page Page Uses Page

-
Revised Revised same NEW NEW NEW Same NEW Revised NEW
Plan to is this broken Sonoran issues:, _— .
Or, Summary VISION which change. changes: and washes."
opportunity of may not the specific
Comprehensive Glossary. (GFC). areas)..." time for other habitats, and are of
2015-8-12) the other zero Executive the period situation rivers that character address
in Crisis" be areas. the "At time make animal Glossary. space ...
2030 (Rev. explained Financial and will in or, " the the and and significant open visual , policies _
there existing policies here. .... "native", plants, the in of the , the
Vision Inc. term "Great development that in and 2015 indicate 2025 in natiYe regionally to while _
as be assume options goals duplicated "In to effect emphasize explained silhouette contribute _
Draft Association, Recession" would urban not the are somehow in vulnerable within term the outcomes . .
d 2" (new should transportation on policies "currently" or, " be still of as create therefore section. _ -.. "
- "Great terminology areas comments .... may proactive, including "SHPO" that new ... .....
Community all county and word protection and this identifies.desireci _ reaffirm 13 of
Development term "... The alternative goals the of implementation plan more corridors, term strategy: ridgelines likes .._ 8
the preferred say: NR/DHCA's the use this be to the the development, say: goal _ they Page
and Hills Highlight suggest to Revise REASON: improve section; Change since Change _ "Promote migration Highlight this "Protect Desert." NR/DHCA to Revise ."Each Together
See 2030 true _ Add by .
Planning River/Desert a
... should to park-and- needed. currently and washes. reaffirm protect through
County New transportation Policies are protect habitat within and help
fundamentally County pedestrian, as County to animal including rivers to.... policies to management.
the neW-urbarvidevelopment transportation available and efforts and environment
Maricopa by alternative Maricopa Goals and SHP0 version goals commitment use
Recession bicycle, are Maricopa regional plant corridors, significant with 2nd its land
to Submitted make option if similar of in following county's preserve
Great help evaluate determine and infrastructure Transportation Portions designated Identify vulnerable migration regionally Coordinate text responsible
FEEDBACK The To viable ride New The the and
TRANSPORTATION 57 Transportation 58 Transportation 61-63 ENVIRONMENT 65 Environment 66 Environment - 67 3rd 69 Strategies -70 69 Skies 71 Environment And
Page Funding Page Alternative Page Page Page Page bullet Page Page Dark Page Goals Policies

SAME New New Revised NEW
Plan on the chosen
Summary priorities approach 2011. nor to strategies networks from
avoid an but in program replacement column are currently
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) Executive to strategic promoting exist to the implement quote
order approach:, state a be in communication you the
(Rev. the in in and by . ceased the statement to articles updates,
2030 policies here. "mission" statement this program neither . Package organizations advanced The there 2030.
Inc. development .... the
Vision and on complement state however http://www.azcommerce.corn/locate/incentives. support support? are by
goals duplicated word mission focuses the Competitiveness other emerging, only outdated
Draft Association, the are the of s economic 2030 since exist, http://www.azcommerce.com to and technologies. to Not
nd 2 on use County . County Vision this may strategies GPEC of data be to
- comments policies the promotes " ... in "zone" Arizona with use the recent respectively. going
Community and changing Maricopa "Build Maricopa policies modify the these collaborative more quickly 13 of
Development goals with County to _ you the on Would See adding Coordinate support find 2007, 9
NR/DHCA's the reason; and that listed that and you are Page
and Hills section; Recommend confusion 4. "Maricopa strives Forth's goals Suggest Alternatively, is Question: program??? Consider • and sets
See page that _ The report left: Could 2000 data
Planning River/Desert that
through that 2030 strategies, idea technology global continuously workers
County New growth mission Maricopa strategies: the on and
Policies Vision and Program will
Maricopa the and promotes mission several in irnission Zone based is information interconnected businesses
by development on policies societies
to Goals County "Build... this this Enterprise Economy in and way
Submitted implement focuses and changes increasingly the
Environment Maricopa economic to goals complement New economies operate.....
FEEDBACK an strives To County The Arizona The rapid and change
GROWTH
71-72 ECONOMIC 73 Overview 74 79 Economic Growth" 77-79
Page Page Page Page Page

-
NEW EW N Revised NEW NEW NEW
Plan in Summary there possible noise of Factors horns, welded sound and
priority their of spending outside static; is may generate interaction train and and ventilating,
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) a billion this Executive areas always erosion areas. these produce can noise. speed, ties day, processing,
recreation $646 better, Americans. the similar not floodplain Although may Trains The train of train cross of heating,
(Rev. Even million in to are continuous they uses. events. the concrete time industrial and
2030 outdoor putting policies here. as the noise component include events,
Vision Inc. by economy. 6.1 for connections floodplains well readjust operations: transportation, of use train includes: stations,
http://www.asla.org/uploadedFiles/CMS/Government_Affairs/Federal_Govern made wallets jobs and duplicated the as rail) noise-sensitive intermittent major noise of This equipment.
Draft Association, Americans their the into goals the are promote that events), potentially light a is rail conditions, nature noise. pumping
2nd ment_Affairs/01A_OutdoorRecEconomyReport2012.pdf with back sought-after on policies and mention year can and/or alternative adjacent brief, rails and overall track barriers. of equipment, (HVAC)
- million it proving right highly comments areas, 1000 that (train desired disrupt relatively wheels the intermittent sources 13
Development Community workers" 140 dollars in and goals growth " document as event may yet steel influence engine, of the other or mechanical conditioning of 10
than lives, results NR/DHCA's the areas; this (such rain Railway provided that high, the that type track, walls Stationary air Page
and Hills "Recreation Resource: more daily hard-earned directly section; ".... Add: growth Should events any • •
Add: Yet, their See are with Add:
Planning River/Desert and areas,
resources growth similar noise include:
County New to of
the Policies natural identified location areas; sources recognizable
Maricopa by and their growth many
Goals significant within are most
to Submitted spaces coordinate outside there the
Environment Conserve of
FEEDBACK open and areas While some
AREAS
81 84-85 86 Areas 88 89-90 Noise-generating uses
Page Non-Basic Sector Page GROWTH Page Growth Page Page land

NEW NEW NEW same NEW NEW NEW NEW
Plan is (on
that like _ they and less Summary accessible Plan this for .
Seems County. since health. the provide --,,-.-, Oenmonities,
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) Management areas? _ County residential utilizing Executive provides System within overcome to . of rural of
Maricopa public order
Land Program in Maricopa from buffer the in that for Strategic non-existent to in stability inclusive development.
2030 (Rev. of land uses spatial space issue: the
Inc. Bureau Purposes Trust within policies here. open opportunities Recreation is Department criteria) : to becomes "
Vision the of only noise-generating sufficient and duplicated for criteria address space." "communities" important "urban" to
Draft Association, by Public acres is a goals need and to Recreation acquisition open are strategy of development
owned And 600,000 this with the are the recreational Parks added the exclusive
nd 2 is that statewide. persistent uses on policies strategy: acquisition and land parkland with parks so
- land Recreational than clear land comments regarding active the of be Parks "urban" than residential 13
Community much mentioned. more be to million or and and 1.6.1 "Land should Develop "neighborhoods" neighborhood rather of
Development How their be Need 92 excessive noise-sensitive goals additional education passive in that, the (i.e. additional word urban 11
of oversees uses NR/DHCA's the stated strategy with and the Page
and Hills Question: part should ASLD REASON: about Separate sensitive section; Suggested Support outdoor is website) system." This "Work oversight of need Replace "Local because..." Remove development, "Evaluate
not this have Add: other See It
Planning River/Desert Need to
Policies additional space 'ne:ighborhoods development
County New Acquisition: an open are
and parks of
the Goals Space years parkland stability residential
Maricopa by Area 15 needed....." neighborhood
Open next of the
to Submitted Growth Space: the acres to urban
be and
FEEDBACK Urban Open Cost over 30,000 could Local important because Evaluate
vs. "...
91 92 94 95 SPACE 97 97 99 100 Strategies
Page Page Page Strategies Page OPEN Page Page Page Page

Same NEW same NEW same NEW same NEW
Plan for
Summary wells Summary Summary as Summary a
groundwater new true is using
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) Executive that Executive ..." Executive 2030 this change. Executive
of impact which may suggest
the the the VISION the —
(Rev. in availably in comprehensive in for situations in
2030 inc. policies here. the negative policies here. policies here. of time date policies here. developed
Vision and determine potential and duplicated previous and duplicated the the the and and duplicated be
Draft Association, goals duplicated the goals the goals "At or, indicate 2025 goals cannot
d the are to the are ---.. the are " .... in the are that denote.
2' on policies efforts measure on policies element, on policies 2015 otherwise effect on policies Lands to
- comments and wells." comments new comments and "In "or in comments and color 13
Community and encourage wells existing and a is to .... be still Federal than of
Development goals : goals this goals currently goals the 12
NR/DHCA's the strategy and on NR/DHCA's the comma: NR/DHCA's the implementation may NR/DHCA's the rather comment Page
and Hills section; a "Support self-sufficient have section; a "Although section; Change plan section; Designate pattern
See Add may See Add See this See No
Planning River/Desert
or consider Goals
self- delivered, and the percent
County New have Goals did twenty Development
Policies in element plan
the living must water service..." Area issues. Policies Policies
Maricopa by and areas have new Currently, of
Goals "....those water a is comprehensive and Cost and map)
to Submitted wells, for Conservation this energy-related Goals GUIDE
Space unincorporated a
FEEDBACK Open Reference sufficient have contract Water Policies Although previous some Energy revenues USE TRANSPORTATION DEFINITIONS
DEVELOPMENT of LAND
RESOURCES Cost - A: B: C:
101 105 Issues 108 109 and 114-115 OF 120 Development Intergovernment 120 APPENDIX 125 APPENDIX APPENDIX
Page WATER Page Current Page ENERGY Page Results Analysis Page COST Page Page Page

NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW
Plan public is it States of sides that
be a to ALL though like; United acres the their all on borders areas page on
Comprehensive 2015-8-12) to quantities Even else the million sustaining has Indian an land cumulatively be
materials manages etc). within 247.3 managing surrounded that and adjacent foot." should program?
(Rev. useable BLM Parks, something for for is Flood? without (1) SHP()
2030 saturated in agency than responsible and STATUTE: that territory municipalities MC the one active
Inc. definition):. water believe US state an more lands, from and flood than (i.e. an
Vision sufficient to Service, to is are STATE territory or more SHPO still
USGS's one better (BLM) administers They BLM Communities." THE unincorporated definition watercourse 100-year by this
Draft Association, transmitting leads Forest be of municipality the elevation sort Is
2nd to contains US would that States. uses." FROM unincorporated the the other 74.
- similar that and document it Management productivity of Indian - where a of include or discharge surface acronyms, page
Community very water the include says, Land Interior United and variety or ".. CONSIDERATION means or this river to other regarding 13 of
Development (and formation storing in would mission of the of the in a add combination Should a of order water the SIP. 13
ADWR of definition (which Bureau lands diversity, for -- 41 island" municipality a channel in the for comment comments Page
and Hills geologic capable their Department resources page FOR "county a involve reservation. Question: necessary increasing done before
From "A well" The lands what "The public health, Per JUST by "The As 135 See No
Planning River/Desert
GUIDELINES
area more
County New or
one
the Unincorporated by AMENDMENT
Maricopa by
surrounded PLAN
to Submitted definition island:
FEEDBACK Aquifer County completely municipality. Floodway WMEZ COMPREHENSIVE
BLM
D:
138-140
128 128 129 130 136 137 APPENDIX
Page Page Page Page Page SHP() Page Page

Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
From: PLANTE, BARBARA S GS-12 USAF AETC 56 FW/CIT <barbara.plante@us.atmil>
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 12:39 PM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: RE: Vision 2030, Marleopa County Comprehensive Plan Draft #2
Matt,
Thanks for sharing, I have looked it over and see no issues from Luke.
v/r
Barb
Original Message
From: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX [maifto:MatthewHolm@mail.maricopa.gov ]
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 10:02 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan Draft #2
Dear Stakeholder,
Maricopa County is pleased to present the second draft of Vision 2030, the Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan.
Vision 2030 is Maricopa County's latest comprehensive plan to help accommodate growth, enhance the county's quality
of life, and identify new opportunities to achieve a strong and vibrant region. We received a lot of positive feedback and
many useful recommendations and suggestions on the initial draft, most of which were included in this second draft.
The second draft is available for your review and comment atwww.maricopa.gov/planning
<http://www.maricopa.gov/planning > . Changes from the initial draft are in edit format, meaning additions are shown
with red, underlined text while deletions are shown with red, strikethrough text. Your continued participation in this
important planning effort is both welcomed and encouraged, so an updated feedback survey is also available at this
website to give you an easy and convenient opportunity to register any additional or final recommendations regarding
Vision 2030. Otherwise, you can submit comments via email, fax or U.S. Postal mail. All remaining comments and
recommendations will be reviewed and, as appropriate and feasible, included in a final draft. To help ensure timely
progress we ask that you provide any remaining comments by no later than August 14th, after which a final draft plan
will be prepared for consideration at public hearings by the Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission and the
Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. Notice of the dates, times and locations of these hearings will be provided to you
and publicized as required.
Thank you again for your continued participation and for helping make Vision 2030 a successl
Sincerely,

Matthew HoInn PLANDEVX
From: Froke, Jon <JFroke@GLENDALEAlcom>
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 9:05 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLAN DEVX
Subject: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan Draft #2
Hi Matt. Glendale has a few comments on Vision 2030.
1. Why on page 41, table 1 is 2008 used for population rather than 2010?
2. Maps of locations of regional framework studies would be helpful
3. Actions claimed for rest of general plan in first full paragraph of page 80 not done in other parts of
the plan
4. Growth Areas element also needs maps and specific action steps
S. 10 parks are listed on page 116, 11 parks are listed on page 112 — which one is it?
6. Open Space Element also needs maps
7. Area of high noise and accident potential is in White Tank / Grand Avenue area plan — two separate
maps would be helpful
8. Please update transportation map to show Loop 303 is finished in west Valley
Jon
Jon M. Froke, M.Ed., AICP
Planning Director
Planning
City of Glendale
5850 West Glendale Avenue
Suite 212
Glendale, AZ
85301
(623) 930-2585
ifrokegglendaleaz.com
www.glendaleaz.com
Homo of MiGeollogo Football
National Championship
From: Matthew Holm - PLAN DEVX [mailto:MatthewHolm(@mail.maricopa.govj
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 10:16 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan Draft #2
Dear Stakeholder,

From: Leslie Jarrell [mailto:LeslieJ0mwdaz.com]
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2015 3:33 PM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan Draft #2
Matthew,
Pursuant to the below email, the attachment of the Vision 2030, Ma ricopa County
Comprehensive Plan Draft #2 is too large for us to print, can you send a harcicopy to Maricopa
Water District for our review?
Thank you,
Leslie Jarrell
Fropert,9 & Contracts 5pedaIIst
Maricopa Water District
1+825 W. Grancl Avenue
Surprise, AZ. 8537+
Fkone: (623)546-8266 Ext. 20+
rax: (623)584-2536
E-mail: lesliej@rnwclaz.com

From: Cindy Kolaczynski [mailto:CindyKolaczynskiPmcldaz.orql
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 9:41 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: RE: Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan Draft #2
Good morning Matthew,
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments. After meeting with my management team
the Library District would like to submit two comments for consideration.
On page 7 of the Introduction include libraries in Promotes Quality Communities section:
Promotes Quality Communities
Vision 2030 supports parks, open space, schools, libraries,, community centers and other features
that improve quality of life and help unify neighborhoods, communities and residents.
On page 79 - Economic Growth include libraries under Quality of Place Matters section:
Quality of Place Matters
Access to quality services like health care, )ibranes, and shopping;
Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment and consideration.
Regards,
Cindy
Cindy Kolaczynski I Director/County Librarian
Administration I 602-652-3030

MWD comments on Vision 2030
August 14, 2015
prepared by David Maguire, Land Solutions Inc.
On page 34 there is a chart entitled Urban Services & Infrastructure
Requirements. I would like to see a clarification that states that these
urban services and infrastructure either already exist to serve urban
development or can be provided as necessary. My concern is that as
written, it could be interpreted that if the infrastructure wasn't already
there, then the land could not be developed.
On page 33 just prior to the chart I would suggest the following change
(in red):
Not all urban development requires these services or infrastructure, so
Table 7— Urban Service & Infrastructure Requirements identifies which
services and infrastructure should be confirmed to exist or be
attainable through the development of the project prior to
comprehensive plan amendment and zoning district changes (note: the
numbers in the table correspond to the paragraph numbers listed
above).
On page 47 under the title Healthy Community Design; the last bullet
point under Strategies states:
• Include community centers and community gathering places in new
development.
Community Centers are typically only viable in large (mainly retirement)
communities. They are expensive to operate and for young active
families are not a popular addition to a suburban neighborhood. The
HOA fees to cover a community center requires a very large master
planned community.
I would suggest the wording of the bullet point be modified to read:

Include community centers and community gathering places in new
development when appropriate for the size and scope of the
development.
On page 53— Table 9: Land Use Designations
Under Residential Single Family the densities do not line up well with
the zoning categories. A density of 3 du/ac would require lot sizes of
60'-65' wide or so. It is listed as R1-18.
A density of 5/du/ac requires lot sizes of 40' — 45' in width or a wide
and shallow product. It typically takes an R-2 zoning category or an R1-6
with modified lot dimensions, setbacks, etc. for this lot size and density.
It is basically impossible to achieve the densities listed using the zoning
categories identified.
Recommendation:
Density of not more than 2du/ac should include R1-35, R1-18 and R1-10
Density of 2-3du/ac should include R1-10, R1-8 and R1-7.
Density of 3-5du/ac should include R1-7, R1-6 and R-2
Page 105 — Renewable Water
I'm a bit concerned by the use of the term renewable. Technically, all
water is renewable. I think what is meant is reclaimed. If that is the
case, the reference to new development using it for decorative features
and landscaping should be modified to say "if available". Water in most
parts of the County is provided by private water companies. Some
provide reclaimed water and some don't. Providing a reclaimed water
system is very costly and most water providers have chosen to use
effluent for recharge, etc.
On page 108 under Water Resources: Goals and Policies it states:
Water Resources Policy #8: Maricopa County supports reclaimed water
use.
Here again I would suggest adding the verbiage If available"

On page 114 under the heading Energy Goals and Policies, Goal 4 reads:
Increase energy efficiency in new development. Also, Energy Policy #1:
Maricopa County supports energy efficient design and construction of
new development.
These statements are very open ended and could add substantial costs
to development.
For an example: if the County required solar panels on all new homes.
Perhaps it could just mean that builders use energy efficient materials
and methods that are available.
Therefore I would modify the verbiage to read:
Energy Policy #1: Maricopa County supports energy efficient design and
construction of new development with technology that is proven and
cost effective.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Vision 2030 Plan.

Goal #30: Land 4t23 Land 43 Land ------
#4 Transportation Use Use Use - 4. 3. 2. 1. General
Policy Policy Policy Section Change In the opposed The word(s) sentence We DRAFT
suggest Comments
growth. efficient ....to and Maricopa To and County's impacts Maricopa is urban studies "New discussion to have description under that
help development. similar preserves, promote other of appropriate appropriate. warranted Maricopa River of the of identification, a FEEDBACK
traffic reduce open County public regional new County development to and County Area the Goals each "Balanced copy Submitted
air features space, active open parks, help cost/benefit Plan" and element formatting, Land editor by to
movement in new supports and the development supports in determine supports Content to demographics, Policies on Use review the
and polluticiii*d , urban recreation trails, healthy spaces. analyses "Daisy page and the New Maricopa
on reducing unincorporated when market for 17 style Patterns",
economic promote - centers parks, rifaaVes Mari6dpgiTal1:: MAcepa, the new where Mountain employment, each and issues.. and document County
H 1 , i areas feasibility element 18 Page to River/Desert
' - i i Area and would
through Skies Reason: efficient Change have .-, Reasons: resources Change Add `1, out, 'community Varicopa Add Plan" economic in the be 38 last correct the Planning
to the oppb40nities ,ore Reflects .supports to umticoripotated the as better Hills and
Page 1 and/or Association) Need traffic ".....to flexibility the such and cenic(*Odor tavitr, 7, highlig,, noted drivers, Executive paragraph several
5 of are to to add inclusive language 4, as -- i; areas input CountY'Sy: ted: in two positioned after Community Development
in have movement help to to trails, promotes 5" --'1' where _ - Summary instances
adjacent the adhere look features not of a _ to t2pit mril-r' o 1 places th4e:''retiree" and,utipzea "Per
to design guidance and to for ARS parks, ,p thei p, isiappropriate. warranted below and state where -
the and to Dark may restrict 11-804. and regional :.. §t of arket Corn should then in law"). a Association, 3nel
protect economic Sky opportunities be rare this preserves places to feasibility n andanywhere be repeated the The comma Draft
unincorporated construction dark growth. goals, in policy system to determine I a factor in Executive person is Inc. Vision
of skies when existing features. of reduce stgies, else the needed (Rev.
county (as reduce they to integrated the when Suggestion found. considered. Element Summary can for 2030
transportation defined air arise. development "new" impacts. new cost/benefit also clarification
lands. pollution urban open urban Section. to improve 2015-9-20)
by make Comprehensive
systems and but space analyses, that the (e.g.
International the and development line Page
that promote county development. and shorter, spacing, 29
go Dark recreational in as first Plan
should The glossary

Indian Page County Page GENERAL Cost of Energy Policy Water Goal #4 Open Growth Policy Economic Policy Environment
15 13 INTRODUCTION Development Policy Space Area #4 #4
Communities Federal Area Relation #8 Resources growth DRAFT
Gov. Plans To CONSIDERATIONS - No to pays ways The Green states Have training provide and protect design
comments serve additional its to Cost Maricopa available Referencing amenities adequate Economy Maricopa Maricopa FEEDBACK
specific .... but New new fair help of Government County "...Specifically, the in and quality necessary citizens County migration important and County Submitted
recreational instead River develbanent. infrastructure sharethbwards ensure water urban appropriate parks and to with corridors. plant development by to
benefits purpose are Area ttiati Develontrygg:element program. supports this Overview residential open compete the supports and supports the Maricopa
or such as managed Plan and the cost new supplies element on page recreation space in education programs animal techniques innovative New
national scenic for , -4.- serviceneedeci a -_c, develoonnen specifies imMbilenting ..." , assesses 102 development. with the New and that habitat that County
and a , , its ' that project River/Desert
national .... but Modify: Change to reduce pays The tkiiiA Reason, Rcise resoOlces AdEl'Oicy:.- ReisCiti Change: No provided to compete the Change: avoiding Change: Hills Planning
Page instead New deVaopment. its fair e Th i unincorporated for "... comment technologief4Apeet tri, ..dts connect To in universal or and
2 of priority. are River negative stiale -t14,-, tOS•tDevelp-Pment introduction is4bore Mricp -5.7.. is,goal on the _1 tegfaSt, the robust Maricopa ...protect Community
5 Area towards County'' - evaluation . Ilpre and sliGil ameRiff6i5rural Expcutiy surrounding hav'e*diverse ,y NewEcOnekirly minimizing Development
managed Plan environmental the of proactive ,-4,vi! and Icl the efficient, County the important
for to cost element this pr MapcapaCountyrea. encourage Include needs d an an communication supports spread plant - 3
a Daisy of element. approach. motes mbnitoring areas Ainmary of the . affordable resilient of and Association, nc1
specific impacts, specifies rural and municipaligts,that ,rtrk Draft
Mountain existing implementing of legislative area contelittOr ftitiO. and technologies, programs invasive animal Inc.
purpose Area and and ways groundwater change as well urbaii,idential are reliable economy, that habitat Vision
such services to its as this non-native (Rev. 2030
as Plan additional help Green to the element. currently residents education provide and
scenic, needed ensure conditions allow urban communication and and species. migration 2015-9-20)
to infrastructure, that Government the areas. development." installing residents Comprehensive
cultural, serve new within provision networks business training and corridors
recreation new program. the of commercially as need to necessary businesses
mitigations development dedicated they be including Plan
or such are able to with

Page Page Page Page Page LAND - Page MARICOPA
78 73 Development 68 ENVIRONMENT Transportation Alternative 57 54 USE - Attainment Educational 24
Strategies Hillside - see Table 5 COUNTY DRAFT
see - above
is - see above are ride viable To but see
businesses societies interconnected information based Reference above available and determine evaluate help Vision comprehensive above comments OVERVIEW FEEDBACK
will on - comments similar if new option make in Submitted
and the page as 2030 comments
workers continuously global technology idea 73 ' coniMe:nts in needed. bicycle, urban Maricopa alternative builds plan on Executive by to
that - on Executive transportation as an in the Maricopa
operate and The,N,ew Goals pedestrian, development County Executive Summary New
change economiesanct inor1,1.asingl_ Aiikr.l. raPidtbanges an &mrnary to should transportation important the be This
tife way - .1- Economy' 4!blicies 442. r infragructure park-and- Summary strategy in line Reason: table River/Desert County
., plus a priority,
use On eVeloprnert, :eje:ve the olus . . on with These should Planning
of "Coordinate page Neitherlbe ihlEXecutive a rOteCtlri'dgellnes following alternative REASON: 1,IP RioVilsg: Eliminate the page the schools Hills
Page emerging, 78, hillside 1 areas ....comprehensw failiiWin 78 Economic include and
3 with add a http://vMv.azcommerce.corn. Arizona Summary riC1,:thgrefOre that The the-!`: says support the
5 of advanced GPEC strategy Create riic transo,P4ation county (new ! u '• Growth Community
and Enterprise plus quality, urban Ian "Encourage Trade/Technical Development
to the contribute the should Y77 7 businesse,and
communication other support Zone followin to silhouette add this optioriJ ,66t development asi:;ahamportant =programs section Association, - 3"
organizations the program the of strategy: i assume that the Schools. Draft
statement visual open existing that and priority. that acknowledges graduates Inc.
networks to state character space areas. there other aLt. . , increase help Vision
and implement on page program that will areas Vision the (Rev. 2030
75: nor of the are be to)..." 2030 education need drive
collaborative not zero for our 2015-9-20)
strategies report Sonoran broken builds and such economy. Comprehensive
that is listed by opportunity priority... training
technologies." support on Desert." to for schools/training This
the improve workers,...." would Plan
and also

Page Need Page Need Page OPEN Page GROWTH Sector Page
98 vs. 96 vs. 96 SPACE Floodplains 87 80
Strategies Cost Cost - see AREAS Non-Basic DRAFT
-
above see
..... Evaluate needed..." parkland additional "... over above
development the comments Submitted FEEDBACK
to open 30,000 next on comments
urbahreSidential space 15 Goals on by to
1 could acres of years and Goals the Maricopa
' be an Policies well An Add: and New
"EValuat p Reason. riail d Work Add - Suport Add in as additional Policies County
Reasorr:This :-,,,lOcquisitiOnlv ac qui v,, strat:Qy efteational strategy: continuous in River/Desert
, i IS 3.ition Ifh the Executiv&Spffii issue Executive million the proving Yet, Add: Planning
should ria Le of to erosion is more Resource:
'be urntr'residential is-tib stated-161.6.1 criteria. Parks opportakities educatiotregarding -tiraL is that Surn economy. it "Recreation Hills and
Page • l w suppattheirCeed -plus rgiary Americans. with than
4 of inclusive (d.,_ q,aktent ,, . he iiidge,creation for t the possible floodplams plus Even their 140 Community
5 of development of-Ote e r-,open iNvith the ' bettet wallets' million workers" Development
rural within . . Parks pkIlicrhealth.' fO1164:pg are ment_Affairs/01A_OutdoorRecEconomyReport2012.pdf
to....." the and DePartment foráddignal - any notalvys following iS4criding Putting Americans -
development. - spacre,-b,enefits rain http://www.asla.org/uploadedFiles/CMS/Government Association, 3nd
system." Recreation to parkland: event static; directly $646 made Draft
There develop that that tlk billion outdoor Inc. Vision
Strategic and include Can lare results of
needs tentially events in their (Rev. 2030
to System implement highly recreation
criteria. Plan accessible readjust (such hard-earned a 2015-9-20)
(on qualitative outdoor the as 1000 sought-after priority Comprehensive
website) year dollars in Affairs/Federal
and passive floodplain jobs right their
that, and events), for back daily Govern Plan
"Land quantitative active areas. as 6.1 lives,
into

APPENDIX APPENDIX APPENDIX • • APPENDIX COST ENERGY service Page and Page WATER
OF 103 Analysis 103
D: C: B: Change Designate A: no Water Results RESOURCES DRAFT
DEFINITIONS "New the LAND DEVELOPMENT comments -
COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION River USE supply County urban factors Water a sufficient in County Unlike discussed. The see
- No Federal GUIDE see is demonstrate municipality contract is encouraged previous above FEEDBACK
- Area Lands requires growth that service for wells, unincorporated not most .... Submitted
PLAN comments No Plan" (map) available that occurs determines is or water a cities Then comments to
to that above,eomments for a new one private have areas water and comprehensive by
AMENDMENT comments Daisy canOtbe safe which of the service water provider towns previous in the Maricopa
on q, _ futuremeeds. and development is where most company. with must Executive New
Mountain Gag:* _ ., adz why and a delivered, have so Maricopa plane plan
GUIDELINES Area developed _ uateM rto . Maricopa when important or self- those also Summary County
- Plan" Politlesin er have living River/Desert
No suggest r and I. Add of Modify less In Insert since Within Change plus the Planning
comments using Executive' a futbre all thelmost —p, regards the Communities fertilization consumption. it to Hills and
Page a Supportifidncourage - -, strai-eg necds-:" deVeloornent,to WI4ndetermining the designatedAmAs, thari'g- equipped*.lth'a Maricopa limited be following
5 of pattern potentignegative . — , _,. rest of Ares following- and and Vision less Community
5 ummary important the are pump _ County pest role, Development
rather demonstr, , — where , a there of to'ttiej-self-sufficientwells after has 2030 confusing
than impact efforts factors. . and graph F are irrigated, 35 . ".... . the-federa4overnment, no management Maricopa and -
color that to that This when (or no are galler03:fter private , specific includes more Association, 3nd
to new determine a safe is start pumping exeniipt 'f•-L: strategies new County Draft
denote. wells and why urban a ne 110L*, :. within company. this role in goals will proactive: Inc.
may the Maricopa growth -restrictions from minute the issue and and address Vision
have availably adequate aragraph) reporting (gpm) AMAs, it is settlement other policies (Rev. 2030
on of water County should on capacity, private not claims to managing
existing occur, with: domestic water included water-related address 2015-9-20)
groundwater supply requires water use. or domestic between water Comprehensive
wells. is new wells. less, in issues. quality,
for available service Outside and wells Vision Indian identified
wells is of for 2030. crop quantity Plan
for one which However,
and

From: Paul Michaud [mailto:pmichaud(&paradisevalleyaz.gov ]
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 8:25 AM
To: Matthew Holm - PLANDEVX
Subject: Vision 2030 - 60-Day Review Response
Matthew:
Responding to the 60-day jurisdiction review period, the Town of Paradise Valley staff has
reviewed the proposed Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan. We appreciate the ability to comment.
We find the proposed plan an improvement over the existing plan. As noted in our phone call a
couple weeks ago, the only comment from the Town is to consider adding the limited use of
exterior lighting to maintain minimum night-time lighting levels and preservation of dark sky to
the general hillside design characteristics under Environment, P 68.
Regards,
Paul E. Michaud, AICP
Senior Planner
6401 E Lincoln Drive
480-348-3574 (phone)
480-483-1811 (TDD)
pmichaud@paradisevalleyaz.gov

VISION 2030
Comprehensive Plan
DRAFT #3
DRAFT #1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD
Executive Summary ............................................................................ iii
SETTING
Introduction ........................................................................................ 1
General Considerations ....................................................................... 13
Maricopa County Overview ................................................................. 19
ELEMENTS
Land Use .......................................................................................... 27
Transportation ................................................................................... 52
Environment ...................................................................................... 63
Economic Growth ............................................................................... 72
Growth Areas .................................................................................... 85
Open Space ....................................................................................... 95
Water Resources ............................................................................. 101
Energy ............................................................................................ 108
Cost of Development ........................................................................ 114
APPENDIX
Appendix A: Land Use Guide ............................................................. 123
Appendix B: Transportation Map ....................................................... 124
Appendix C: Definitions .................................................................... 125
Appendix D: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines ................... 136
Table of Contents
DRAFT #3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OVERVIEW
In 1997 Maricopa County adopted its first comprehensive plan and in doing so
established a sensible new approach to confronting important growth and
development issues facing this region. Much has changed since 1997, most
notably the county’s population has grown to more than four million and is
projected to increase by another million people in each of the next two decades.
While growth will challenge the ability to maintain a high quality of life, this
comprehensive plan — known as Vision 2030 — helps meet this challenge by
protecting public health and safety, promoting stable economic growth,
maintaining a healthy environment, providing adequate community services, and
ensuring that tax money is spent efficiently.
Vision 2030 serves three important purposes:
1. It fulfills requirements of state law, including these sections of Arizona
Revised Statutes (ARS):
 ARS §11-802
 ARS §11-804
 ARS §11-805
 ARS §11-811
 ARS §11-814
 ARS §28-8481
2. It helps implement Maricopa County’s Mission, Vision, and Strategic Priorities:
Maricopa County Vision
Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, innovatively, efficiently
and effectively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally
prudent.
Maricopa County Mission
The mission of Maricopa County is to provide regional leadership and fiscally
responsible, necessary public services so that residents can enjoy living in a
healthy and safe community.
Executive Summary - iii
DRAFT #3

Maricopa County Strategic Priorities
 Maricopa County will support safe communities and neighborhoods by
providing access to a timely, integrated, and cost-effective smart justice
system;
 Maricopa County will provide best-in-class regional services, both
mandated and of concern to citizens, while coordinating with
municipalities, other local jurisdictions, and community-based entities to
consolidate services and avoid duplication, when applicable;
 Maricopa County will deploy an effective and efficient infrastructure to
implement streamlined policies and procedures improving delivery of
services, and promoting a healthy workplace and a fully engaged
workforce;
 Maricopa County will innovatively leverage its resources, be adaptive in its
regulatory policies and practices, and proactive in its public relations to
attract, promote and support the growth of business enterprises in order
to produce a vibrant and balanced regional economy;
 Maricopa County will continue to efficiently manage county resources and
engage in effective fiscal planning with integrity and transparency to
promote financial stability and economic prosperity for Maricopa County
residents.
3. It helps Maricopa County make informed decisions that:
 Protect public health, safety and the environment;
 Promote quality communities;
 Allocate limited financial resources;
 Establish public policy expectations;
 Link complex and interrelated issues;
 Build community consensus
CORE PRINCIPLES
The policies and recommendations spelled out in Vision 2030 are based on three
core principles. These principles also guide Maricopa County’s decisions
regarding future development, and for when changes to this plan are justified:
 Decisions should support implementation of Maricopa County’s mission
statement and strategic priorities;
Executive Summary - iv
DRAFT #3

 Maintain a disciplined approach where comprehensive plan policies and
growth-related decisions are understandable, measurable, consistent,
practical and promote efficiency. Land use decisions are also based on
these factors;
 Avoid future problems by carefully considering past decisions.
PLAN ELEMENTS
Vision 2030 considers nine important growth-related topics that will affect the
county’s future. Each topic – known as elements – examines key issues that
shape the goals and policies that Maricopa County uses to make informed and
effective decisions. The following is a brief description of these elements, and the
goals and policies that guide the county’s decisions:
Land Use
The Land Use element maintains that sensible, functional, balanced, fiscally
efficient, and economically viable land use patterns are important priorities. This
element also reinforces the county’s support for its area plan program, and
includes updated land use categories.
Land Use Goal #1: Achieve balanced and efficient development patterns.
Land Use Goal #2: Provide regional leadership on land use issues.
Land Use Goal #3: Protect public health, safety and well-being.
Land Use Goal #4: Exercise sound financial management through land use
decisions that build the county’s fiscal strength.
Land Use Policy #1: Maricopa County supports compliance with its capital
improvement and other funding programs,
except when reimbursement is made to the
county for unplanned costs or when services and
infrastructure are funded by private capital.
Land Use Policy #2: Maricopa County supports phasing plans for new urban
development to coordinate such development with new
urban services and infrastructure.
Executive Summary - v
DRAFT #3

Land Use Policy #3: Maricopa County supports market feasibility studies,
cost/benefit analyses, and public input where warranted
to help determine when new urban development in
unincorporated areas is appropriate.
Land Use Policy #4: To help limit impacts to taxpayers Maricopa County
supports using homeowner associations and
related organizations and improvement
districts to manage and maintain services, infrastructure
and amenities.
Land Use Policy #5: To help limit financial impacts Maricopa County supports
using development agreements for large-scale urban
development.
Land Use Policy #6: Maricopa County supports educating residents about the
unique aspects of living in unincorporated
areas.
Land Use Policy #7: Maricopa County supports coordinating land use and
infrastructure planning with state agencies, counties, and
municipalities.
Land Use Policy #8: As feasible Maricopa County supports annexation of urban
Development by municipalities.
Land Use Policy #9: As feasible Maricopa County supports county island
annexation by municipalities, and the prevention of new
ones.
Land Use Policy #10: Maricopa County supports coordinated planning efforts
between local, state and federal agencies.
Land Use Policy #11: Where feasible Maricopa County supports including
State Trust land in the planning and design of large-
scale urban development.
Land Use Policy #12: Maricopa County supports coordinating with state and
federal agencies to address safety and security issues
associated with new development near the Palo Verde
Nuclear Generating Station.
Executive Summary - vi
DRAFT #3

Land Use Policy #13: Where necessary Maricopa County supports wildfire
prevention and mitigation measures in the design of
development.
Land Use Policy #14: Maricopa County supports compliance with
watercourse master plans and area drainage master
plans.
Land Use Policy #15: Maricopa County supports evaluating comprehensive
plan amendments and zoning district boundary
changes to determine the existence of the urban
services and infrastructure identified in this element.
Land Use Policy #16: Maricopa County supports directing new urban
development to the urban growth area identified in this
plan.
Land Use Policy #17: Maricopa County supports balanced land use patterns
that include various residential, retail, non-retail
employment, and public and civic land uses.
Land Use Policy #18: Maricopa County supports flexible design and zoning
techniques when used to establish balanced and
efficient land use patterns, and when used to protect
important environmental and open space areas and
connections.
Land Use Policy #19: Maricopa County supports mixed housing options.
Land Use Policy #20: Maricopa County supports reducing the impacts of new
urban development on existing rural land uses and
agriculture.
Land Use Policy #21: Maricopa County supports reducing the impacts of new
rural development and new agriculture on existing urban
land uses.
Land Use Policy #22: Maricopa County supports reducing the impacts of new
development on environmentally sensitive areas,
including native wildlife (flora and fauna) habitat and
corridors.
Executive Summary - vii
DRAFT #3

Land Use Policy #23: Maricopa County supports reducing the impacts of new
development on Maricopa County’s regional parks, the
Maricopa Trail and other public open spaces.
Land Use Policy #24: Maricopa County supports land use compatibility within
the High Noise or Accident Potential Zone of Luke Air
Force Base, Auxiliary Airfield #1, and the military
auxiliary airfield near the town of Gila Bend.
Land Use Policy #25: Maricopa County supports land use buffers and land
use transitions in urban/rural interface areas, including
near aggregate mining operations and the county’s
regional parks.
Land Use Policy #26: Maricopa County supports subdivisions rather than
“wildcat” lot splits.
Land Use Policy #27: Maricopa County supports keeping development out
of delineated floodways and, where necessary, 100-
year floodplains.
Land Use Policy #28: Maricopa County supports implementing the multi-
jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan.
Land Use Policy #29: Maricopa County supports public education about the
risks and limitations of developing in hazard-prone
areas.
Land Use Policy #30: To promote active and healthy lifestyles Maricopa
County supports interconnected trails, parks, preserves,
open space, recreation centers and similar features in
new urban development.
Land Use Policy #31: To promote safe and active communities Maricopa
County supports public safety and security features
included in the design of new and existing development.
Land Use Policy #32: To help protect neighborhoods and property values
Maricopa County supports rehabilitation of substandard,
vacant and abandoned homes and buildings.
Land Use Policy #33: Maricopa County supports using land use buffers and
compatible land use strategies near existing and future
high voltage electric utility line corridors.
Executive Summary - viii
DRAFT #3

Transportation
The Transportation element establishes Maricopa County’s support for
coordinating future growth with an efficient transportation system. The
Transportation element also emphasizes the importance of an efficient
transportation system to the region’s economy and air quality.
Transportation Goal #1: Promote and protect public health through a safe
transportation system.
Transportation Goal #2: Contribute to a safe, seamless and effective
transportation system.
Transportation Goal #3: Coordinate land use decisions with transportation
investments to help the county exercise sound
financial management and build the county’s fiscal
strength.
Transportation Goal #4: Have a comprehensive transportation system that
focuses on Transportation Systems
Management and Operations to help reduce air
pollution and promote efficient traffic movement and
economic growth.
Transportation Policy #1: As necessary, Maricopa County supports preserving
future road alignments called for in county-
recognized transportation plans, especially mid-
section line, section line and arterial roads;
parkways; freeways; and interchanges.
Transportation Policy #2: Maricopa County supports compliance with its
Major Streets and Routes Plan.
Transportation Policy #3: Maricopa County supports adherence to its
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
Where new development requires deviation from
the TIP Maricopa County supports such
development funding unanticipated, accelerated
and non-programmed improvements.
Transportation Policy #4: Maricopa County supports using the preferred
funding methods identified in the Cost of
Development element to pay for transportation
improvements necessary for new development.
Executive Summary - ix
DRAFT #3

Transportation Policy #5: As necessary, Maricopa County supports
alternative transportation in the design of
urban development, including the Maricopa Trail
and related trail connections, the Maricopa County
Bicycle Transportation System Plan, Park-and-
ride/public transit facilities, and other appropriate
practices.
Transportation Policy #6: Maricopa County supports municipal annexation of
roads that are adjacent to county islands.
Transportation Policy #7: Maricopa County supports constructing roads in
county islands to the standards of the surrounding
city or town where these roads are intended to be
annexed by the city or town.
Transportation Policy #8: Maricopa County supports partnerships with cities
and towns in cost sharing for road repairs and
improvements.
Transportation Policy #9: Maricopa County supports balanced and efficient
land use patterns that reduce the number and
length of vehicle trips.
Transportation Policy #10: Maricopa County supports participating in the
State Implementation Plan (SIP) amendment
process.
Transportation Policy #11: Maricopa County supports National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) compliance.
Transportation Policy #12: Maricopa County supports improving low volume
dirt roads as directed by its PM-10 Dust
Abatement Program.
Transportation Policy #13: Maricopa County support public education efforts
that assist in reducing air pollution.
Transportation Policy #14: Where necessary, Maricopa County supports
roadway planning that promotes identified scenic
corridors, wildlife connectivity and linkages.
Executive Summary - x
DRAFT #3

Transportation Policy #15: Maricopa County supports regional mobility and
safety by integrating state, county and local
traffic management systems.
Transportation Policy #16: Maricopa County supports using Intelligent
Transportation Systems and Connected Vehicle
technology for efficient and safe movement of
people and goods.
Transportation Policy #17: Maricopa County supports state, county and local
partnerships for interjurisdictional traffic
operations and management.
Environment
The Environment element identifies Maricopa County’s foremost concerns with
respect to its environmental issues, and potential strategies for lessening the
impact that development has on its environment. Particular attention focuses on
air quality, water quality, wildlife protection, natural and cultural resources, and
natural and human-caused hazards.
Environment Goal #1: Provide regional leadership to promote all aspects of
regional environmental quality.
Environment Policy #1: Maricopa County supports its Compliance Assurance
model approach to meet federal air quality standards.
Environment Policy #2: To help improve air quality Maricopa County supports
balanced and efficient land use patterns where
employment, retail and residential land uses are
proximate rather than separate.
Environment Policy #3: To help protect water quality Maricopa County
supports compliance with its Drinking Water program
and its Water and Wastewater Treatment program.
Environment Policy #4: Maricopa County supports innovative project design
and development techniques that protect important
plant and animal habitat and migration corridors.
Environment Policy #5: As directed by the State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) and Arizona Game and Fish Department,
Maricopa County supports cultural resource and
Executive Summary - xi
DRAFT #3

biological surveys being completed – and needed
mitigation measures established – prior to new
development.
Environment Policy #6: Maricopa County supports the Military Compatible
land use designation for High Noise or Accident
Potential Zones, and compliance with state laws
relating to land use compatibility and consistency with
the high noise or accident potential of Luke Air Force
Base and the ancillary military facilities.
Environment Policy #7: Where necessary Maricopa County supports noise
reductions in new development design and in the
construction of new buildings.
Environment Policy #8: Maricopa County supports flexible zoning techniques
when used to keep new development below the 15%
hillside slope and to protect riparian areas.
Environment Policy #9: Maricopa County supports using the hillside general
design characteristics identified in this element.
Economic Growth
The Economic Growth element includes strategies that Maricopa County can use
to help create a diverse and resilient economy. Opportunities focus on locating
employment proximate to where people live, supporting small and start-up
businesses, and supporting industries that require a lot of land but not urban
services or infrastructure.
Economic Growth Goal #1: Contribute to an effective regional economy.
Economic Growth Goal #2: Have a diverse and balanced economy to
promote long-term economic stability and
economic resiliency.
Economic Growth Goal #3: Attract knowledge industries in a range of Basic
Sector clusters, and attract the knowledge
workers they need by achieving quality of place
and quality of life.
Economic Growth Goal #4: Create and grow a diverse business climate.
Executive Summary - xii
DRAFT #3

Economic Growth Policy #1: Maricopa County supports orderly and balanced
land use patterns that include Basic and Non-
Basic sector businesses, especially in master-
planned communities and similar urban
development.
Economic Growth Policy #2: Maricopa County supports public-private
alliances to increase business success and
address community needs.
Economic Growth Policy #3: Maricopa County supports increasing
entrepreneurial activities and business
formation.
Economic Growth Policy #4: Maricopa County supports programs that
provide citizens with the education and training
necessary to compete in the New Economy.
Economic Growth Policy #5: Maricopa County supports programs that attract
a variety of Basic Sector industry clusters that
have long-term, stable growth prospects.
Economic Growth Policy #6: Maricopa County supports efforts to recruit
prospective businesses and industries to the
county, and efforts to retain existing businesses
and industries.
Economic Growth Policy #7: Maricopa County supports the IDAMC,
HOME, CDBG and other incentive programs.
Economic Growth Policy #8: Maricopa County supports continuously
assessing its regulations and processes to
enhance effectiveness, ensure quality service,
increase efficiency and establish a competitive
advantage.
Economic Growth Policy #9: Maricopa County supports implementing Vision
2030 in a clear and consistent way to help
businesses make long-term investment
decisions.
Economic Growth Policy #10: Maricopa County supports leveraging its solar
resource potential to attract solar-related
industries and alternative energy research and
development.
Executive Summary - xiii
DRAFT #3

Growth Areas
The Growth Areas element pinpoints areas suitable for urban growth because
they have appropriate and efficient levels of urban services and infrastructure.
The Growth Areas element also explains where and when urban growth should
occur to help establish sensible and efficient land use patterns.
Growth Areas Goal #1: Achieve orderly urban growth that is fiscally and
environmentally responsible, protects public health
and safety and promotes sensible annexation
patterns.
Growth Areas Goal #2: Have urban growth that is consistent with the
county’s urban growth area, meets statutory
requirements, and implements the Urban Solutions for
Urban Development strategy.
Growth Areas Policy #1: Maricopa County supports consistent
implementation of its urban growth area except in
the noted instances.
Growth Areas Policy #2: Maricopa County supports periodically evaluating
the development constraints identified in this
element to determine how they impact the urban
growth area, and whether these constraints require
reconsideration or modification.
Growth Areas Policy #3: Where feasible Maricopa County supports
annexation of new urban development within the
urban growth area.
Open Space
The Open Space element recommends ways to increase the amount, quality, and
variety of open space in unincorporated Maricopa County, and ways to link open
space into interconnected systems. New categories of active and passive open
space are also included in Table 9: Land Use Designations to more accurately
reflect the variety of recreational opportunities that exist in unincorporated areas.
Open Space Goal #1: Provide regional leadership to promote environmental
quality, including the preservation of open, natural
park and recreation lands.
Executive Summary - xiv
DRAFT #3

Open Space Goal #2: Protect and expand the regional park system
proportionately with population growth.
Open Space Goal #3: Build the Maricopa Trail and the Maricopa County
Regional Trail System. Work with municipalities to
connect this trail system to their park and preserve
systems.
Open Space Goal #4: Have quality neighborhood parks and open space with
adequate and appropriate recreation amenities in urban
residential development.
Open Space Policy #1: Maricopa County supports implementing the Parks and
Recreation Strategic System Master Plan.
Open Space Policy #2: Maricopa County supports dedication and improvement
of trail right-of-way within new development, including
the Maricopa Trail and Maricopa County Regional Trail
System.
Open Space Policy #3: To help maintain high quality, Maricopa County
supports user-based funding options for its regional
park system and, where feasible, regional trail system.
Open Space Policy #4: Maricopa County supports soft edge treatments along
the perimeter of its regional parks, regional trail
system and the El Rio corridor.
Open Space Policy #5: Maricopa County supports partnering with cities and
towns to address edge treatments along the perimeter
of regional parks and the regional trail system.
Open Space Policy #6: Maricopa County supports compliance with the local
park ratios identified in this plan.
Water Resources
The Water Resources element focuses on strategies to help ensure that an
adequate water supply is available to meet future growth. Since water supply
and allocation are regulated at the state level, strategies in this element target
water conservation and water quality protection efforts that Maricopa County can
implement at a local level.
Executive Summary - xv
DRAFT #3

Water Resources Goal #1: Promote and protect public health with a clean
water supply.
Water Resources Goal #2: Provide leadership to promote regional
water quality and water use.
Water Resources Goal #3: Increase renewable water use.
Water Resources Goal #4: Increase water conservation.
Water Resources Policy #1: Maricopa County supports water adequacy
determinations for new subdivisions outside
Active Management Areas.
Water Resources Policy #2: Maricopa County supports water conservation
techniques in the planning and design of new
development.
Water Resources Policy #3: Maricopa County supports renewable water use
for landscape, park and common area irrigation;
artificial lakes; and decorative water features.
Water Resources Policy #4: Maricopa County supports compliance with its
Drinking Water and Water and Wastewater
Treatment Programs.
Water Resources Policy #5: Maricopa County supports low water use solar
electric generating technologies.
Water Resources Policy #6: Maricopa County supports informing the public
about the importance and benefits of water
conservation.
Water Resources Policy #7: Maricopa County supports low water use and
drought tolerant landscaping .
Energy
The Energy element is the newest in this plan and includes policies to promote
renewable energy, energy conservation and overall more efficient energy use.
Executive Summary - xvi
DRAFT #3

Energy Goal #1: Provide leadership to promote regional environmental
quality.
Energy Goal #2: Make Maricopa County a leader in alternative energy research
and development.
Energy Goal #3: Have balanced and efficient development patterns.
Energy Goal #4: Increase energy efficiency in new development.
Energy Policy #1: Maricopa County supports energy efficient design and
construction of new development.
Energy Policy #2: To limit energy consumption Maricopa County supports
balanced and efficient development patterns where
residential, commercial and employment land uses are
proximate rather than separated.
Energy Policy #3: To limit energy consumption Maricopa County supports
having new urban development locate in cities and towns,
and in the appropriate growth areas identified in this plan.
Energy Policy #4: To limit energy consumption Maricopa County supports
alternative transportation options in new development.
Energy Policy #5: Where feasible and effective, Maricopa County supports
incentive programs that promote energy efficiency.
Energy Policy #6: Maricopa County supports being a responsible leader in
alternative energy research and development.
Energy Policy #7: Maricopa County supports efforts to assist businesses
and individuals with renewable energy options and energy
conservation.
Energy Policy #8: Maricopa County supports implementing its Green
Government program.
Executive Summary - xvii
DRAFT #3

Cost of Development
The Cost of Development element specifies ways to help ensure that new
development pays its fair share towards the cost of additional infrastructure and
services needed to serve new development. The Cost of Development element
also identifies current cost sharing methods, recommends future cost sharing
strategies, and includes ways to ensure reasonable application of the
recommended strategies.
Cost of Development Goal #1: Exercise sound financial management and
build the County’s fiscal strength.
Cost of Development Goal #2: New development pays its proper and
reasonable share of the costs of new
infrastructure, services, and other public
improvements.
Cost of Development Policy #1: Maricopa County supports recouping the
costs of its products and services without
unfairly burdening those most in need of its
products and services.
Cost of Development Policy #2: Maricopa County supports using the
preferred funding methods identified in this
plan to offset costs of new development.
Cost of Development Policy #3: Maricopa County supports continuously
evaluating the preferred funding methods
with respect to the legal, socioeconomic,
land use and administrative considerations
identified in this element, and making
changes when deemed necessary.
CONCLUSION
While each element addresses a unique growth-related issue, in combination
they reinforce the core principals of Vision 2030 and promote consistent
implementation of the policies and recommendations. Ultimately, Vision 2030
builds on past successes and uses the core principles to direct sensible decisions
that meet Maricopa County’s Mission, Vision and Strategic Priorities. While this
plan does not address every growth-related challenge it can help Maricopa
County achieve a healthy, vibrant and prosperous future.
Executive Summary - xviii
DRAFT #3

INTRODUCTION
In 1997 Maricopa County adopted its first comprehensive plan and in doing so
established a timely new effort to address important growth and development
issues facing this region. The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (Board)
recognized that a normally prosperous economy, pleasant climate and other
favorable conditions produce a quality of life that attracts many new residents.
But the Board also recognized that while strong growth brings opportunities, it
also creates social, economic and environmental challenges that require careful
foresight and action. Known as Maricopa County 2020, Eye to the Future, this
plan tried to improve Maricopa County’s quality of life by identifying and
implementing many goals, objectives, and policies.
Maricopa County has changed since 1997, most notably its population has grown
to more than 4 million and projections show it will likely add another million
people in each of the next two decades. For perspective, while it took nearly 125
years for Maricopa County to reach approximately 2½ million people, that
population may roughly double in just the next 25 years. While growth will
challenge the ability to maintain a high quality of life, this updated
comprehensive plan — known as Vision 2030 — will help meet this challenge
over the next decade.
WHAT IS PLANNING?
To understand the importance of this comprehensive plan it is helpful to
recognize the importance of planning itself. The field of planning is broad and
wide-ranging, often described as “part art and part science” because it involves a
mix of many social, economic, environmental, political and legal issues. How
these issues are dealt with determines the extent to which public health and
safety is maintained, and whether a community has stable economic growth,
maintains a clean environment, ensures that citizens’ needs are met, and that
tax money is spent efficiently.
One very important quality of planning is that it is a public process where citizens
and community leaders continuously collaborate to identify and address ever
changing, complex, and interconnected issues facing society. Planning both
anticipates and reacts to issues and concerns through consensus-building meant
to produce practical, constructive and innovative solutions. Readers interested in
learning more about the field of planning can get additional information from the
American Planning Association.
Introduction - 1
DRAFT #3

HISTORY OF PLANNING
Although planning in the U.S. dates back to the colonial era, the modern age
began in the early 1900s with growing awareness that large and rapidly growing
cities created social, environmental and economic problems that needed to be
managed. Recognizing these problems states began requiring long-term plans to
address health, safety and quality of life issues. The importance of planning was
further solidified in 1926 and 1928 respectively with publication of the Standard
State Zoning Enabling Act and the Standard City Planning Enabling Act
by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Many states, including Arizona, enacted
similar recommendations which still serve as the basis for modern planning.
Planning for Maricopa County began in the late 1950s when the county first
studied land use and population growth on a regional basis. Over the next few
decades small-scale plans were developed for specific unincorporated areas,
and the county also helped small cities and towns prepare general plans for their
jurisdictions. Maricopa County’s large size (approximately 9,225 square miles)
and rapid growth eventually led it to prepare Area Plans to address unique,
localized issues. While Area Plans remain an important part of Maricopa County’s
planning strategy, in the early 1990s population growth along with the need to
address pressing countywide issues led it to develop its first comprehensive plan
covering all unincorporated areas. Known as Maricopa County 2020 - Eye to the
Future, that plan established county policy for land use, transportation, economic
development, and the environment.
Soon after adopting that comprehensive plan Arizona passed two new laws
known as Growing Smarter and the Growing Smarter Plus. These laws expanded
comprehensive plans by requiring counties to identify and plan for urban growth
corridors (growth areas), open space, environmental impacts, water resources,
and the financial costs associated with new development. Other important parts
of these laws include:
 A requirement for more effective and inclusive public participation;
 Enhanced planning coordination with the Arizona State Land Department;
 A requirement that all changes to zoning district boundaries comply with
comprehensive plans.
In 2002 Maricopa County updated its comprehensive plan to comply with these
requirements, and also added a component that addressed housing affordability.
Maricopa County later modified its comprehensive plan to comply with new state
laws that require it to enact land use and zoning protections around military
facilities, protect aggregate materials and aggregate mining from incompatible
land uses, and add an element that considers energy efficiency and renewable
energy.
Introduction - 2
DRAFT #3

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Arizona has long recognized the need for careful and deliberate planning and has
laws directing how Maricopa County must prepare, adopt, and amend this
comprehensive plan. The following is a summary of how Arizona Revised
Statutes (ARS) directs the county’s comprehensive planning responsibilities.
 ARS §11-802: Requires that Maricopa County plan and provide for future
growth and improvement in its jurisdiction (i.e. unincorporated areas) to
promote public health, safety, convenience and general welfare. This statute
also requires that Maricopa County coordinate all public improvements and
adopt and enforce rules, regulations, ordinances and plans regarding future
development.
 ARS §11-804: Requires that Maricopa County prepare and adopt a long-term
comprehensive plan for unincorporated areas. Specifically, this plan must
address the following topics:
 Land use
 Transportation
 Water resources
 Open space
 Urban growth corridors (growth areas)
 Environment
 Public service and infrastructure financing (cost of development)
 Energy resources
 ARS §11-805: Requires Maricopa County to adopt and subsequently amend or
extend a comprehensive plan to serve as the official guide for development of
areas within its jurisdiction. This statute also outlines the procedures and
requirements for adopting and amending the comprehensive plan.
 ARS §11-811: Requires that Maricopa County’s Zoning Ordinance, and all
rezoning and zoning amendments, be consistent with the county’s
comprehensive plan.
 ARS §11-814: Requires that all rezonings be consistent with and conform to
the county’s comprehensive plan.
 ARS §28-8481: Requires that Maricopa County adopt a comprehensive plan
that ensures development is compatible with the high noise or accident
potential generated by military airport and ancillary military facilities.
Introduction - 3
DRAFT #3

VISION, MISSION & STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
Unlike cities and towns Maricopa County’s authority is limited to only what is
specifically required or allowed by state law. But within this limitation the county
provides many services like public health and healthcare, roads and related
infrastructure, flood control, law enforcement, criminal justice, education, parks
and recreation, libraries, animal control, election oversight and community
development. To help provide these services with quality and consistency
Maricopa County uses unifying mission and vision statements along with several
Strategic Priorities. These statements and priorities are a commitment to
achieving quality results for residents:
Maricopa County Vision
Citizens serving citizens by working collaboratively, innovatively, efficiently and
effectively. We will be responsive to our customers while being fiscally prudent.
Maricopa County Mission
The mission of Maricopa County is to provide regional leadership and fiscally
responsible, necessary public services so that residents can enjoy living in a
healthy and safe community.
Maricopa County Strategic Priorities
 Maricopa County will support safe communities and neighborhoods by
providing access to a timely, integrated, and cost-effective smart justice
system.
 Maricopa County will provide best-in-class regional services, both mandated
and of concern to citizens, while coordinating with municipalities, other local
jurisdictions, and community-based entities to consolidate services and avoid
duplication, when applicable.
 Maricopa County will deploy an effective and efficient infrastructure to
implement streamlined policies and procedures improving delivery of services,
and promoting a healthy workplace and a fully engaged workforce.
 Maricopa County will innovatively leverage its resources, be adaptive in its
regulatory policies and practices, and proactive in its public relations to
attract, promote and support the growth of business enterprises in order to
produce a vibrant and balanced regional economy.
 Maricopa County will continue to efficiently manage county resources and
engage in effective fiscal planning with integrity and transparency to promote
financial stability and economic prosperity for Maricopa County residents.
Introduction - 4
DRAFT #3

Vision 2030 helps implement these Strategic Priorities in the following ways:
1. Maricopa County will support safe communities and neighborhoods
by providing access to a timely, integrated, and cost-effective smart
justice system.
The fundamental purpose of planning is to help ensure public health and
safety. Vision 2030 helps meet this priority by supporting compatible land
uses; environmental quality; and safe, efficient and practical development
patterns.
2. Maricopa County will provide best-in-class regional services, both
mandated and of concern to citizens, while coordinating with
municipalities, other local jurisdictions, and community-based
entities to consolidate services and avoid duplication, when
applicable.
There are several reasons why Maricopa County is in a unique position to
provide regional leadership on important issues:
 The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors is the only countywide elected
organization that has authority to address wide-ranging issues;
 With this countywide authority Maricopa County can help build consensus
among public and private organizations to achieve practical solutions to
regional problems;
 Maricopa County has a long and successful history of addressing regional
issues.
Vision 2030 identifies strategies and policies that help achieve the quality of
life residents expect, and if these strategies and policies are successful it
helps raise citizen satisfaction with and trust in Maricopa County services. But
since most planning issues are regional in character Vision 2030 emphasizes
that regional coordination with local, state and federal agencies is essential.
3. Maricopa County will deploy an effective and efficient infrastructure
to implement streamlined policies and procedures improving
delivery of services, and promoting a healthy workplace and a fully
engaged workforce.
One of Maricopa County’s most important obligations is to help develop,
maintain, and operate an effective and efficient transportation system.
Considering that such a system is necessary for the county to remain
economically competitive, Vision 2030 supports this strategic priority by
Introduction - 5
DRAFT #3

helping to address some of this area’s most important transportation and
related infrastructure concerns.
4. Maricopa County will innovatively leverage its resources, be
adaptive in its regulatory policies and practices, and proactive in its
public relations to attract, promote and support the growth of
business enterprises in order to produce a vibrant and balanced
regional economy.
The deep and prolonged recession that affected Maricopa County in the early
years of this new century showed the importance of economic diversity, and
the consequences of overreliance on certain industries. Going forward,
overreliance on population growth and certain related industries is not a
strategy that will allow this area to be competitive in the global economy, so
Vision 2030 outlines how Maricopa County will help establish a strong, diverse
and resilient regional economy coupled with functional, balanced and efficient
land use patterns.
5. Maricopa County will continue to efficiently manage county
resources and engage in effective fiscal planning with integrity and
transparency to promote financial stability and economic prosperity
for Maricopa County residents.
Vision 2030 promotes functional, efficient and balanced land use patterns to
help coordinate services and infrastructure with new development which, in
turn, helps Maricopa County anticipate and control costs, broaden its tax
base, maintain a sound budget and minimize tax burdens.
WHY IS THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPORTANT?
Fulfills Statutory Requirements
State law requires that Maricopa County prepare and adopt a comprehensive
plan, directing which elements the plan must include but also granting the
flexibility to address other issues as necessary. However, since state laws and
societal conditions change plan amendments are sometimes necessary for
Maricopa County to remain compliant with state law and for this plan to remain
responsive to public needs.
Protect Public Health
Protecting public health is one of the most important responsibilities for Maricopa
County. Effective planning helps improve public health in many ways, most
Introduction - 6
DRAFT #3

notably by establishing efficient land use patterns that reduce air pollution and
other environmental problems, and by supporting personal well-being through
interconnected open spaces that encourage fitness and safe pedestrian, bicycle
and non-motorized travel.
Protects Public Safety
Vision 2030 supports public safety by coordinating new development with roads,
police and fire service, and water and sewer systems. Vision 2030 also protects
public safety by discouraging development in hazardous areas where lives and
property can be at risk.
Consensus Building Process
Comprehensive plans represent a consensus building process that considers the
complex, cumulative and interrelated effects of issues on society. Although
competing interests may prevent complete consensus on the extent of these
issues or how to best address them, general consensus is nonetheless important.
Consensus building is a continuous process because planning issues periodically
change, and because of the need to adjust spending priorities to align with these
changes.
Promotes Quality Communities
Vision 2030 supports parks, open space, schools, libraries, community centers
and other features that improve quality of life and help unify neighborhoods,
communities and residents.
Helps Allocate Limited Financial Resources
New development provides many economic benefits, but also generates costs
associated with new service and infrastructure requirements. Vision 2030
protects Maricopa County and its taxpayers from unnecessary costs by:
 Encouraging balanced, efficient land use patterns that broaden the County’s
tax base, reduce tax burdens, establish economically stable communities and
allow the county to implement its capital improvement program
consistently;
 Implementing an “Urban Solutions for Urban Development” strategy
that links new development with services and infrastructure, thus helping
minimize costly new service and infrastructure obligations;
 Requiring that new development pay its necessary share of the costs of new
services and infrastructure.
Introduction - 7
DRAFT #3

Vision 2030 helps Maricopa County use its limited financial resources more
effectively by managing growth in a way that allows it to better anticipate future
costs so it can appropriately allocate its resources to address those costs.
Establishes Important Public Policy
Vision 2030 includes policies that Maricopa County uses to effectively and
consistently address long-term social, economic and environmental issues. These
policies direct Maricopa County for what it considers the best way to tackle
important issues, meaning that deviation from these policies requires justification
that betterment of Maricopa County as a whole will be achieved.
Serves as a Decision Making Guide
Vision 2030 helps Maricopa County, citizens, and businesses:
 Make informed decisions about the location, type, density and scope of
development, and the need for new services and infrastructure;
 Develop more cost-effective capital improvement programs and better
prioritize competing needs;
 Make more informed lifestyle decisions based on the locations and
characteristics of new development;
 Make more informed investment decisions by weighing the level of services
and infrastructure Maricopa County provides in certain areas against the
levels needed to support development.
Links Complex and Interrelated Issues
It can be difficult to realize how much of a cumulative impact new development
can have on society. For example, decisions regarding the density, location and
types of residential development can affect housing and rent prices, and the
types and levels of services and infrastructure that are needed. In turn, this can
affect budget and tax policies for schools, parks, roads, police and fire
protection, libraries and other essential services. Such decisions can also impact
locations for employment, retail and other non-residential development as well
as traffic congestion, water and air quality, and other environmental issues.
Adding to this complex interrelationship are competing priorities among
municipalities, special districts and interest groups that influence planning
decisions. Vision 2030 has an important and meaningful role in dealing with
these complexities, and in helping respond to the rapid changes facing Maricopa
County.
Introduction - 8
DRAFT #3

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LIMITATIONS
While the importance and necessity of careful long-term planning is clear,
comprehensive plans have many limitations, some of the more important of
which are discussed below.
Comprehensive Plans vs. Zoning Ordinances
Comprehensive plans are sometimes confused with zoning ordinances, but there
are legal and practical differences. Specifically, Vision 2030 is a policy and
decision making guide for how to address community needs, whereas Maricopa
County’s zoning ordinance is regulation for how land can be developed by
controlling the type, height, size, lot dimensions and other aspects of
development on individual parcels. However, the zoning ordinance does support
the comprehensive plan because Arizona law only allows changes to zoning
district boundaries if the change is consistent with the plan.
Flexibility vs. Certainty
Vision 2030 includes clear, concise and consistent policies for how Maricopa
County deals with important issues which helps eliminate uncertainty. However,
to prevent becoming obsolete Vision 2030 must adapt to changes in state laws,
the environment, the economy, elected leadership and community priorities.
While this plan will be periodically reviewed to determine when changes are
necessary, Maricopa County reaffirms that any change should improve county
conditions and not undermine the plan’s core principles.
Countywide Applicability
One of the most common misunderstandings about Maricopa County’s
comprehensive plan is that it applies to the entire county. However, Vision 2030
only relates to unincorporated areas and not incorporated cities and towns. Every
city and town in Maricopa County has its own general plan that is similar in
scope and purpose to this comprehensive plan, but applies to their specific
territory. General plans often extend to unincorporated areas that a municipality
may someday annex, but this comprehensive plan remains the controlling
document until annexation takes place.
Limited Time Horizon
Unlike many general plans which illustrate the desired build-out of cities, Vision
2030 takes a shorter view of approximately the next 20 years. Given the size of
Maricopa County and the many social, environmental, economic and political
uncertainties it faces it is neither possible nor prudent to project desired future
land use and development patterns beyond this time frame. This approach allows
Introduction - 9
DRAFT #3

Maricopa County to plan in a methodical and pragmatic way rather than try to
project an “end state” well into the future.
CORE PRINCIPLES
The policies and recommendations in Vision 2030 are based on three core
principles which guide Maricopa County’s decisions regarding future
development, and for when changes to this plan are warranted:
Land use and other decisions should support implementation of
Maricopa County’s mission statement and strategic priorities.
Maricopa County’s mission statement and strategic priorities are unifying
principles for how the county delivers quality, effective and needed services.
Vision 2030 helps implement this results-oriented strategy by dealing with
important issues in a sensible and careful manner.
Maintain a disciplined approach where comprehensive plan policies and
growth-related decisions are understandable, measurable, consistent,
practical and promote efficiency. Land use decisions are also based on
these factors.
Understandable
A common problem with comprehensive plans is that while meaningful and well-
intentioned, they can be difficult to understand and interpret. Vision 2030
provides clear, sensible policies that allow readers to understand Maricopa
County’s expectations for future growth and development.
Measurable
Having clear and sensible policies is important, but those in Vision 2030 are also
measurable to help the county evaluate its successes and shortcomings, and
allow it to better understand which policies are appropriate and which should be
changed.
Consistent
Vision 2030 includes nine elements, each of which deals with a particular growth-
and development-related issue. With this many elements it is important that the
goals and policies complement each other, and that land use decisions are
consistent.
Introduction - 10
DRAFT #3

Practical
One of the most important aspects of this plan is its simple and reasonable
approach to difficult problems through policies that are clear, measurable and
easy to understand. This allows for informed decisions that help Maricopa County
effectively implement its core principles.
Efficiency
The effectiveness of this plan can be measured in different ways, but one of the
most important measures will be the extent to which it promotes efficient use of
land, energy and financial resources. These efficiencies help reduce costs to the
county and its taxpayers, and help improve the region’s quality of life.
Avoid future problems by carefully considering past decisions.
History gives Maricopa County the opportunity to consider the positive and
negative impacts of past decisions regarding growth. Maricopa County will
continuously assess its past decisions to help avoid future problems and serve
the public’s best interest.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: CONTENTS
 Executive Summary – Summarizes the plan, its elements, and the
amendment process.
 Introduction – Reviews the history, purpose, and scope of planning; the
concepts and core principles of Vision 2030; and important limitations of
comprehensive plans.
 General Considerations – Explains how Vision 2030 relates to other plans and
regulations, how Maricopa County coordinates with other jurisdictions on new
development, and the standards and requirements for amending this plan.
 Overview – Discusses Maricopa County’s history, current conditions, future
potential, and potential outcomes for consideration.
 Comprehensive Plan Elements – Presents each plan element and identifies
the strategies, goals and policies Maricopa County uses to deal with important
issues.
 Appendix – Includes a glossary of notable terms – identified in the document
with red, underlined text – to help make this a more user-friendly plan, and
explains the comprehensive plan amendment process and requirements.
Introduction - 11
DRAFT #3

WHAT’S NEW & DIFFERENT?
Vision 2030 readers will notice similarities with Eye to the Future 2020, but there
are several changes that should help make this a more effective plan. These
changes include:
 Using Maricopa County’s Mission, Vision and Strategic Priorities as the
foundation for the goals and policies;
 Analyzing the successes and shortcomings of the previous comprehensive
plan, and applying those lessons to make more effective policies, strategies
and decisions;
 Eliminating redundant objectives in favor of practical, effective and
measurable goals and policies;
 Revising the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines to align with state
laws and county expectations;
 Revising and expanding the land use categories to more accurately reflect
and accommodate actual land uses;
 Revising the plan’s format and content so it is more user-friendly and
understandable.
CONCLUSION
Vision 2030 builds on past successes and uses core principles to ensure
consistent and sensible decisions that help implement Maricopa County’s Mission,
Vision and Strategic Priorities. While this plan does not address every
development challenge it can help ensure a healthy and prosperous future.
Introduction - 12
DRAFT #3

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
RELATION TO COUNTY AREA PLANS
Vision 2030 explains Maricopa County’s policies and expectations for the development
of unincorporated areas, but given how much area this includes it is neither possible
nor practical for this plan to consider local and site-specific issues. To address this
problem Maricopa County uses its Area Plan program to support local needs.
Area Plans are small-scale plans that account for the unique conditions and needs of
specific parts of the county. Maricopa County has 13 area plans that range in size and
scope:
 White Tank/Grand Avenue Area Plan  Laveen Area Land Use Plan
 New River Area Plan  Estrella Area Land Use Plan
 Mobile Area Plan  Rainbow Valley Area Plan
 Rio Verde Foothills Area Plan  State Route 85 Area Plan
 Goldfield Area Plan  Old U.S. Highway 80 Area Plan
 East Mesa Area Land Use Plan  Tonopah/Arlington Area Plan
 Queen Creek Area Land Use Plan
Area plans include policies, a future land use map, and an implementation program.
Although area plans address local needs they nonetheless support Vision 2030 and will
be updated as necessary to reflect this support.
RELATION TO OTHER PLANS, ORDINANCES, & REGULATIONS
Vision 2030 is Maricopa County’s plan for addressing future growth, but there are other
County plans, ordinances, and regulations that also influence development. Figure 1 –
Comprehensive Plan Hierarchy shows how Vision 2030 fits with these and within
overall county operations.
General Considerations - 13
DRAFT #3

Figure 1 – Comprehensive Plan Hierarchy
Maricopa County Mission, Vision, Strategic Priorities Broad Policy
Other Maricopa County
VISION 2030
Plans, Ordinances, Regulations
 Dept. of Transportation
 Flood Control District
 Environmental Services
County Area Plans  Air Quality
 Community/Economic
Development
 Emergency Management
 Human Services
Scenic Corridor &  Library District
Special Studies  Parks & Recreation
 Public Health
 Sheriffs Office
 Solid Waste
Ordinances,
Regulations, &
Guidelines
 Zoning Ordinance Capital
 Abatement Ordinance Improvement
 Adult Business Ordinance Program
 Hours of Operation
Ordinance
 Subdivision Regulations
 Addressing Regulations
 Drainage Regulations
 Construction Codes County Budget
Specific
 Comprehensive Plan Implementation
Amendment Guidelines Strategies
 Public Participation
Guidelines
 Licensing Time Frames
Ordinance
 Dark Sky Ordinance
 Noise Ordinance
General Considerations - 14
DRAFT #3

RELATION TO OTHER JURISDICTIONS’ PLANS
An important feature of Vision 2030 is how it considers other jurisdictions’ plans for
future growth. This is challenging given that the federal and state government, as well
as the many cities, towns and Indian communities all manage development in certain
areas. Despite this challenge Maricopa County coordinates with these jurisdictions
where practical to ensure consistent growth patterns. The following is how this
coordination occurs.
Municipal General Plans
Arizona cities and towns have general plans for their respective jurisdictions, and it is
common for these plans to extend into unincorporated areas that may someday be
annexed. Maricopa County recognizes these plans and the need to coordinate planning
with cities and towns – particularly for county islands – to achieve timely annexation
when feasible. Maricopa County will refer to municipal plans as guides when making
decisions involving county islands, and will also consider them elsewhere when
reasonable. However, until land is actually annexed Maricopa County has planning
authority for such areas.
Arizona State Land Department
State law requires the Arizona State Land Department (ASLD) to develop long-term
plans for certain Trust lands under their management. Maricopa County has a lot of
Trust land, but not all has been included in an ASLD plan. Where they have been
included Maricopa County must coordinate with the ASLD to add these conceptual plans
into its own comprehensive plan. This coordination makes sense because it’s an
effective way to address future growth in so-called urban interface areas. Maricopa
County will continue coordinating with the ASLD on strategies that enhance value to the
Trust, yet protect the county and taxpayers from premature development and
unexpected costs.
Federal Government; Indian Communities
Maricopa County includes a lot of federally-managed land including the Tonto National
Forest, Barry M. Goldwater Range, Sonoran Desert National Monument and several
wilderness and wildlife areas. The federal government prepares plans for these areas
which are generally off-limits to development but instead are managed for a specific
purpose such as scenic, cultural and recreational benefits or national priority. Maricopa
County reaffirms its commitment to coordinate with federal agencies, especially in areas
adjacent to federal land, to help avoid potentially adverse impacts from new
development.
General Considerations - 15
DRAFT #3

Maricopa County also has several Indian Communities but given their sovereign nation
status Vision 2030 does not apply to such areas. Instead, each Community is
responsible for preparing land management plans for its area of jurisdiction.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
Vision 2030 is a consistent and predictable guide for making growth-related decisions,
but must periodically be revised to account for changing conditions provided that such
revisions benefit the county as a whole. In such instances the following is the process
for amending this comprehensive plan or area plan:
County Initiated Amendments
County initiated amendments are put forth by Maricopa County to meet statutory
requirements, address policy needs or correct typographic and other minor errors.
County initiated amendments originate with the Maricopa County Planning and Zoning
Commission (Commission) and require approval by the Board of Supervisors (Board).
Applicant Initiated Amendments
Applicant initiated amendments include changes to the goals, policies and/or land use
designations of the comprehensive plan or county area plan, and changes to previously
approved development master plans and comprehensive plan amendments. Applicant
initiated amendments are processed according to state laws and the county’s
comprehensive plan amendment guidelines, and always require Board approval. All
applicant initiated amendments are categorized as one of the following:
Category 1: Goal, Policy, and Condition Amendment
Category 1 comprehensive plan amendments change the goals and policies of this
comprehensive plan or a county area plan, or change the conditions of previously
approved development master plans and comprehensive plan amendments. Category 1
amendments are standard amendments, must comply with State laws and county
requirements, and must be approved by the Board.
Category 2: Major Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Category 2 comprehensive plan amendments apply to new development of more than
640 gross acres and should include various types, densities and intensities of
residential, commercial retail, office/non-retail employment, open space and community
land uses in a master-planned community design. However, exceptions are
considered for single- or limited-use industrial and other large-scale employment
projects on a case-by-case basis. Category 2 amendments are major comprehensive
General Considerations - 16
DRAFT #3

plan amendments, must comply with county and state requirements, and must be
approved by the Board. Category 2 amendments are evaluated for consistency with the
goals and policies of this comprehensive plan and applicable area plan.
Category 3: Standard Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Category 3 comprehensive plan amendments apply to new development of 640 gross
acres or less. Category 3 amendments are standard amendments, must comply with
county and state requirements, and must be approved by the Board. Category 3
amendments are evaluated for consistency with the goals and policies of this
comprehensive plan and applicable area plan.
Major Comprehensive Plan Amendments
In accordance with state law major comprehensive plan amendments are considered at
a single public hearing in the calendar year that the amendment is requested. Since the
Board considers major amendments at a public hearing in December, the application
filing deadline for major comprehensive plan amendments is the last business day of
May of the calendar year in which the amendment is requested. No filing deadline is
necessary for standard comprehensive plan amendments (Category 1 and Category 3)
since they are considered by the Board throughout the calendar year.
Comprehensive Plan Amendments: Rights and Privileges
Comprehensive plan amendments do not grant entitlement or protected development
rights, do not vest any development right, and do not confer any other rights beyond
those outlined in state law. When approved by the Board comprehensive plan
amendments do allow requests for zoning district boundary changes consistent with the
approved comprehensive plan amendment, Arizona Revised Statutes and other
applicable county requirements.
PLAN ELEMENTS
Vision 2030 includes the nine elements listed below, each of which addresses a subject
that affects the county’s quality of life. All the elements are either required by state law
or are otherwise important to Maricopa County’s long-term success. While each element
is distinct, combined they reinforce the county’s strategic priorities and the core
principals of Vision 2030, and promote consistent interpretation and implementation of
its policies and recommendations.
 Land Use: Supports efficient, functional, and balanced land use patterns. The Land
Use element also reaffirms Maricopa County’s area plan program, includes updated
General Considerations - 17
DRAFT #3

land use categories, and identifies strategies and policies that address numerous
land use issues.
 Transportation: Reinforces the importance of coordinating land use with an
efficient transportation system. The Transportation element highlights the
importance of an efficient transportation system to the region’s economy and its air
quality.
 Environment: Identifies important concerns with Maricopa County’s environment,
and ways to lessen the impacts that development has on its environment. Attention
focuses on air quality, water quality, cultural resources and natural and human-
caused hazards.
 Economic Growth: Presents strategies that Maricopa County can use to help
create a diverse and resilient economy. Opportunities focus on having balanced land
use patterns so employment can be close to where people live. Attention also
focuses on support for small, start-up businesses as well as industries that require
large amounts of land but few services or infrastructure.
 Growth Areas: Identifies areas suitable for urban growth because they have
appropriate and efficient levels of services and infrastructure. The Growth Areas
element also identifies where and when urban growth should occur to help avoid
sprawl and to establish sensible land use patterns that meet county policy and
state law.
 Open Space: Recommends strategies for increasing the amount and quality of
open space in unincorporated Maricopa County, and methods to combine open
space into interconnected systems. This element also establishes new categories of
open space to better reflect current and future conditions.
 Water Resources: Focuses on strategies that help ensure an adequate water
supply is available to meet future growth. However, since water supply and
allocation are regulated at the state level strategies in this element center on water
conservation efforts that Maricopa County can implement at the local level.
 Energy: The newest element of this plan identifies policies to promote greater use
of renewable energy and more efficient energy use overall.
 Cost of Development: Specifies strategies to help ensure that new development
pays a fair share towards the cost of additional infrastructure and services needed to
serve new development. The Cost of Development element identifies current cost
sharing methods, provides recommendations for future cost sharing strategies, and
includes ways to ensure reasonable application of the recommended strategies.
General Considerations - 18
DRAFT #3

MARICOPA COUNTY OVERVIEW
HISTORY
Records indicate that Maricopa County was inhabited as far back as 9,000 B.C. by
nomadic tribes that traveled between present-day Alaska and Central and South
America. The first known permanent settlers were the Hohokam who occupied the area
between approximately 500 and 1450 A.D. It is believed the Hohokam lived in
progressively larger villages and used the Salt and Gila Rivers to sustain crops by
building extensive canal systems, many of which were used by later European settlers.
However, around 1300 A.D. the Hohokam began abandoning the region for reasons not
fully known. From 1540 until 1821 the area was under Spanish rule, but when Mexico
declared independence from Spain it became part of the Republic of Mexico. Following
the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsen Purchase in 1848 and 1853
respectively the region became part of the United States.
The first Anglo settlers arrived in the early 1800s but their numbers grew rapidly during
the California gold rush of the mid-1800s and with the increasing presence of the U.S.
Army. The Desert Land Act of 1877 and the expansion of agriculture production brought
additional settlement, and in 1871 Maricopa County was officially formed. Slow and
steady growth characterized the county through World War II, after which growth
accelerated rapidly due to industrial development and the widespread use of
automobiles, refrigeration and air conditioning that makes the desert climate tolerable.
Despite a recent slowdown Maricopa County is still one of the fastest growing regions in
the nation and now includes more than half of the state’s population. Maricopa County
is already the fourth largest county by population in the nation and may eventually rank
even higher.
MARICOPA COUNTY CHARACTERISTICS
Location / Size
Maricopa County is located in the Sonoran Desert of south-central Arizona, and at
approximately 9,225 square miles is larger than seven states (comparable in size to the
state of Vermont) but is only the 5th largest of Arizona’s 15 counties. The county is
roughly bisected by the Salt and Gila Rivers but also includes several other notable
rivers like the Verde, Agua Fria, New River, and Hassayampa.
Geography
The county’s many mountains contrast with its relatively low desert areas, evidenced by
elevations that range from approximately 300 feet above sea level near Gila Bend to
Maricopa County Overview - 19
DRAFT #3

over 7,600 feet in the Four Peaks Wilderness Area. Higher elevations in northeast and
some mountains of central, southern and western Maricopa County contain small
woodlands and forests, while lower elevations include desert scrub, Saguaro and other
cactus species. However, the most diverse native and non-native plant and animal
species are found along the county’s many rivers, streams and washes.
Climate
Table 1 – Climate Data identifies the average and record monthly temperatures and
precipitation in Phoenix. While this data is for Sky Harbor Airport, temperatures in the
county can vary significantly due to the contrasts in elevation. Summer temperatures in
lower desert areas occasionally exceed 120°F, while in higher mountain elevations
winter temperatures can fall well below freezing (32°F) and significant snowfall is
common.
Water
Despite its dry climate Maricopa County has one of the most abundant water supplies of
any desert region in the western U.S. Maricopa County receives runoff from snow melt
in higher elevations of the state and is also located on productive groundwater
aquifers. Water is also supplied by the approximately 336-mile Central Arizona Project
Canal that brings about 1½ million acre-feet of water from the Colorado River to Pima,
Pinal and Maricopa Counties. Yet even with multiple water sources periodic droughts
and increasing population require strategies to ensure dependable, long-term supplies.
Most water conservation efforts are overseen by the Arizona Department of Water
Resources including the Active Management Area program and the Arizona Water
Banking Authority. These and other state and local efforts help ensure safe and
reliable water supplies for future population growth.
Table 1 - Climate Data*
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Avg. High 67° 71° 76° 85° 94° 104° 107° 105° 99° 88° 75° 70°
Avg. Low 45° 48° 51° 58° 67° 75° 81° 80° 75° 63° 50° 44°
Avg. Precip. 0.83" 0.77" 1.07" 0.25" 0.16" 0.09" 0.99" 0.94" 0.75" 0.79" 0.73" 0.92"
Record High 88° 92° 100° 105° 114° 122° 121° 116° 116° 107° 96° 87°
Record Low 16° 24° 25° 35° 39° 49° 63° 58° 47° 34° 27° 22°
* Temperatures shown in farenheit
Source: www.weather.com Maricopa County Overview - 20
DRAFT #3

Land Management
Given its size it is sometimes thought that Maricopa County has nearly unlimited future
growth potential. Although growth will continue it is actually constrained by the fact
that only about 30% of the county’s approximately 9,225 square miles is privately
owned land. The largest land owner is the federal government who controls about 53%
through national forests, national monuments, wilderness areas, and military facilities
where development is either prohibited or very limited. Other large land holders include
the State Trust (approximately 11%), Indian communities (approximately 5%) and
public and recreation areas (approximately 2%). Development on State Trust land does
occur when land is auctioned off and put into private or other ownership. Development
can also occur on land controlled by Indian communities, but such decisions are the
responsibility of the respective community.
POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS
Maricopa County will continue to attract large numbers of people which means new
development will expand into many areas. While the county’s large size allows for
expansion, the location of growth will be directed by land management, steep terrain,
and other constraints that also challenge efficient infrastructure and service expansion
for roads, water and sewer lines and other necessities. Also, as Maricopa County’s
population grows it will be increasingly important to enact policies that promote
effective and efficient water use. While Maricopa County does have an adequate water
supply despite its desert location it is neither unlimited nor evenly distributed and can
be affected by increasing use and periodic droughts.
MARICOPA COUNTY DEMOGRAPHICS
Population
Maricopa County’s rapid and significant population growth really accelerated around
1970. Figure 1 – Maricopa County Population shows that the County’s current
population of over four million is expected to continue growing over the next couple
decades.
Population Characteristics
Similar to national trends Maricopa County’s growing population will become more
diverse and increasingly older. Although the county will continue attracting many
retirees, Table 2 – Age Distribution shows that the median age of residents is
Maricopa County Overview - 21
DRAFT #3

Figure 2 – Maricopa County Population Trends
7,000,000
6,000,000
N
O 5,000,000
I
T
A
L 4,000,000
U
P
O 3,000,000
P
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2008 2020 2030
Y E A R
*Source: U.S. Census Bureau
actually lower than both Arizona and the nation. Also, Table 3 – Population
Composition shows that Maricopa County’s diversity comes primarily from a large
portion of people that are identified by the U.S. Census Bureau as being of Hispanic/
Latino origin which is nearly twice that of the U.S. By contrast, the percentage of people
in Maricopa County classified as Black by the U.S. Census Bureau is less than half that
of the U.S. as a whole.
Income & Educational Achievement
There is a strong link between an individuals’ educational achievement and their
income, both of which are important factors in the economic strength of a region.
Table 4 – Income and Table 5 – Educational Attainment show that compared to
Arizona and the nation as a whole Maricopa County has a slightly higher percentage of
residents with a Bachelor or higher degree. Therefore, it is not surprising to find that
Maricopa County’s median household income is approximately 9% higher than the
statewide average and about 6% higher than the national average.
Maricopa County Overview - 22
DRAFT #3

Table 2 - Age Distribution
Age Distribution (%)*
Median Age
0 - 14 15 - 24 25 - 44 45 - 64 65+
(years)
Maricopa County 22% 14% 28% 24% 12% 35
Arizona 21% 14% 26% 25% 14% 36
United States 20% 14% 26% 27% 13% 37
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
* Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number
Table 3 - Population Composition
Maricopa
Arizona United States
County
White persons (a) 85% 85% 78%
African-American 5% 5% 13%
American Indian / Alaska
3% 5% 1%
Native persons (a)
Asian persons (a) 4% 3% 5%
Native Hawaiian / other
<1% <1% <1%
Pacific Islander (a)
Persons of Hispanic /
30% 30% 17%
Latino origin (b)
Persons of two or more
3% 3% 2%
races
White persons not
58% 60% 63%
Hispanic
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
(a) includes persons reporting only one race
(b) Hispanics may be of any race, so also are included in applicable race categories
Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number
Maricopa County Overview - 23
DRAFT #3

Table 4 - Income
Median household income (dollars) * #
Maricopa County $55,054
Arizona $50,448
Highest state (Maryland) $70,647
Lowest state (Mississippi) $37,881
United States $51,914
Average Wage: Maricopa Co. $20.99/hr
Source: U.S. Census Bureau; Arizona Department of Administration
* Household income includes the income of the householder and all other people 15 years and older in the
household, whether or not they are related to the householder
# Median is the point that divides the household income into two halves where one half with income above the
median and the other with income below the median. The median is based on the income distribution of all
households, including those with no income.
Table 5 - Educational Attainment *
Maricopa
Arizona United States
County
Less than 9th grade 7% 7% 6%
9th - 12th grade, no
8% 8% 8%
diploma
High school graduate &
24% 25% 28%
equivalency
Some college, no degree 25% 26% 21%
Associate degree 8% 8% 8%
Bachelor degree 19% 17% 18%
Graduate / Professional
10% 10% 11%
degree
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Percentages rounded to the nearest whole number
* Indicates the highest education level achieved
Maricopa County Overview - 24
DRAFT #3

Employment & Occupation
Table 6 – Employment by Sector lists broad sectors of employment and how
Maricopa County compares to Arizona and the nation. Overall, Maricopa County mirrors
the state and nation closely in employment except that Maricopa County has a slightly
higher concentration of jobs in the “Sales and Office” and “Management, Business,
Science & Arts” occupations, and a slightly lower concentration in the others.
One measure of a region’s economic strength is its diversity of employment
opportunities. Employment diversity is important because it provides citizens with
different education levels and skills more employment options, and helps limit the
impact of economic downturns by lessening dependence on certain industries. For
instance, Detroit has historically been heavily dependent on automobile manufacturing
while the San Francisco / San Jose area of California is often referred to as “Silicon
Valley” for its concentration of computer and technology-related industries. When these
industries suffer their respective regions suffer as well. Like some other areas of the
country, Maricopa County has historically been exposed to construction-related
population growth, so when the recent “housing bubble” burst it helped trigger a severe
recession that dropped home values in the region by up to half and produced a home
foreclosure rate among the highest in the nation. The ensuing recession pushed Arizona
to near the bottom of states for job growth where it had been ranked in the top 10 for
most of the past two decades. While long-term growth prospects remain positive, that
recession showed that economic diversity helps create economic resiliency which is
crucial to avoid so-called “boom” and “bust” cycles and help moderate the impacts of
economic downturns.
Table 6 - Employment by Sector
Maricopa
Arizona United States
County
Management, Business, 36% 35% 36%
Science, & Arts Occupations
Service Occupations 17% 18% 18%
Sales and Office Occupations 28% 27% 25%
Natural Resources,
Construction, & Maintenance 10% 11% 9%
Occupations
Production, Transportation, & 9% 10% 12%
Material Moving Occupations
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Maricopa County Overview - 25
DRAFT #3

POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS
The policies and strategies in this plan address several important issues and long-term
trends:
 Early this century Maricopa County had one of its most severe economic downturns
since the Great Depression which nearly stopped population growth for a period
of time. While short-term prospects for both population and economic growth are
muted, stronger long-term growth trends should continue which necessitates careful
planning to ensure that adequate land use, infrastructure and public service needs
are met.
 Similar to state and national trends Maricopa County’s population will continue to
become more diverse by age and ethnicity which could affect housing choices,
community needs and development patterns.
 With respect to educational achievement and household income, Maricopa County is
higher than both state and national averages. Vision 2030 cannot address either
issue directly, but through policies that help maintain a high quality of life Maricopa
County can continue to attract a diverse workforce and promote and encourage
business expansion, formation and success.
 A stable and diverse job base is important for long-term economic success. Though
Maricopa County has many features that attract new businesses, these features are
not necessarily unique. With an increasingly interconnected global economy
Maricopa County competes with other regions, states and nations for economic
development. Given the importance of a healthy job market Maricopa County should
continuously identify and implement innovative strategies that broaden employment
opportunities for all groups.
Maricopa County Overview - 26
DRAFT #3

LAND USE
OVERVIEW
Sensible, balanced and economically efficient land use patterns are important for
Maricopa County to have successful long-term growth and a high quality of life.
Decisions made today about how land is used will impact this region for many
generations, which is why careful and thoughtful land use planning is so important. In
the coming years the goals, policies and principles in Vision 2030 will influence the
types and timing of land uses in unincorporated areas, and it will be the consistent and
predictable implementation of these goals, policies and principles that will provide
Maricopa County’s leadership for future growth and development.
Much has changed in the county since approval of the previous comprehensive plan in
1997, most notably an approximately 40% population increase that pushed
development into more unincorporated areas. The type of development in these areas
also changed from traditionally rural and low density residential uses to more urban
design which is evident by numerous master-planned communities (formerly known as
development master plans) that were either built or are planned for the future. The
shift from rural to urban development creates challenges that must be considered, but
before considering these challenges it can be helpful to evaluate some of the results of
the previous comprehensive plan. Which land use planning strategies were successful
and which ones were not? What major land use objectives were met? While an
evaluation is subjective a general analysis allows Maricopa County to improve on past
efforts so it can be more effective in the future.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
County Area Plans:
Since 1997 Maricopa County has completed several new plans for unincorporated areas
that are expected to see increased growth. Each area plan was coordinated with the
respective planning area residents and stakeholders to address local concerns. Maricopa
County’s area plan program proved to be effective at addressing local concerns and will
continue to be an important part of its future strategy.
Inter-Jurisdiction Coordination
Maricopa County’s previous comprehensive plan stressed the importance of
coordinating land uses in unincorporated areas with those in municipalities, especially in
county islands and municipal planning areas. Coordination with federal and state
agencies was also a priority and proved generally successful. Maricopa County included
Land Use - 27
DRAFT #3

state and federal agencies in its planning efforts, and those agencies reciprocated by
letting the county participate in planning for their respective lands. Coordination is
becoming increasingly important so Maricopa County will continue to work with federal,
state and local agencies to help ensure compatible land uses where possible.
Land Use Buffers
Given the various land uses in the county it is not always possible to locate similar types
next to each other, and that is when problems with incompatibility can occur. To
address this Maricopa County’s previous comprehensive plan directed that land use
buffers be included in project design. The most common buffer is open space but walls,
fences, landscape berms and separation between buildings are also used on a case-by-
case basis. Maricopa County supports compatible land use planning and appropriate
buffers that minimize potential problems and help sustain property values.
Affordable Housing
Maricopa County’s previous comprehensive plan encouraged housing variety for
different income levels, which helped establish it as a leader in housing choice.
Maricopa County allows various densities of single- and multiple-family housing, as
well as site-built, manufactured, and mobile homes. Maricopa County supports
housing variety and considers it a priority, but recognizes that housing affordability is
ultimately determined by supply and demand, interest rates, material and labor costs
and other economic factors.
Interconnected Open Space
Having interconnected open space was an important objective in the previous
comprehensive plan, and one that was ultimately achieved with approval of the
Maricopa Trail. The Maricopa Trail is a non-motorized, shared-use corridor for both
transportation and recreation that links each of the county’s regional parks. This trail is
a long-term legacy for future generations and Maricopa County supports its completion
and preserving open space in general.1
Innovative Design
Another important part of the previous comprehensive plan was its support for creative
and innovative project designs to produce high-quality, attractive and well-organized
neighborhoods. Creativity and innovation allow for quick response to changes in
consumer and market demands, and help produce quality, stable and marketable
communities. Maricopa County should support flexible planning and zoning standards
1 Additional information about the Maricopa Trail is available in the Open Space element and from the Maricopa County Parks and Recreation
Department.
Land Use - 28
DRAFT #3

when it is demonstrated that it will result in innovative, quality, efficient and stable
communities.
Urban Service Area; “Urban Solutions for Urban Development”
The Urban Service Area is defined as those areas where appropriate levels of
infrastructure and services are readily available to serve new urban development,
including water, sewer, electricity, emergency response (police and fire), libraries,
schools, recreational facilities and roads. Development in the Urban Service Area helps
limit financial impacts to taxpayers by reducing the need to extend services and
infrastructure to so-called “leapfrog” and premature development. While the Urban
Service Area was successful in certain instances, the Urban Solutions for Urban
Development concept will benefit from clearer expectations about new infrastructure
and services. Maricopa County maintains its Urban Service Area model to establish
orderly and efficient land use patterns, to help ensure efficient and timely annexation of
urban development, and to avoid financial and public service problems.
Another important priority was ensuring that growth occurred in an orderly and
financially responsible manner. Key to this effort was making sure that necessary
infrastructure and services were available to serve urban development. Linking urban
infrastructure, urban services and urban development helps protect public health and
safety, and helps Maricopa County avoid unplanned expenses. This Urban Solutions for
Urban Development concept was successful in some instances, but Vision 2030 can
build towards even greater success by establishing clearer expectations to help ensure
that urban services and infrastructure are readily available for urban development.
Balanced Land Use Patterns
Since most unincorporated land is outside the metropolitan area having a balanced mix
of residential, retail, and employment uses was a very important principle of the
previous comprehensive plan. Although balanced land use patterns were achieved in
certain instances, consistent application of this key principle is emphasized in Vision
2030 since balanced and efficient land use patterns are so important, and since
Maricopa County considers this a priority to help promote economic efficiency and long-
term stability.
County Islands
The previous comprehensive plan identified several challenges associated with county
islands that were compounded by a confusing classification system of islands based on
size, location, and other characteristics. This classification system is eliminated in Vision
2030 because regardless all county islands present challenges in that they may not
have the services and infrastructure residents need. Since state law now prohibits
Land Use - 29
DRAFT #3

county island creation, Maricopa County reaffirms its support for eliminating existing
county islands through annexation by a municipality wherever feasible.
Land Use Categories
The previous comprehensive plan included land use categories that were developed by
the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) to unify regional land use
patterns. These categories were very broad so the land use categories in Vision 2030
are modified and expanded to more accurately reflect development in unincorporated
areas.
CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
Maricopa County faces land use challenges that require creative and practical solutions.
Some of these challenges are new while others remain unresolved. Although not all-
inclusive the following is a synopsis of several important issues, all of which are
addressed in this element’s policies.
Urban Development in Unincorporated Areas
Until around 1990 most development in unincorporated Maricopa County was generally
low-density and rural in character. Since then urban development has expanded
noticeably due in part to an increase in the number of master-planned communities.
Since 1997 over two dozen master-planned and similar type communities have been
planned or built on 63,000 acres and could eventually be home to around 486,000
people, which is nearly double the most recent census count. As unincorporated areas
become more urban the county may need to increase spending on infrastructure and
services which are subsidized in part by residents of cities and towns. The financial
costs and benefits of urban, unincorporated development should be carefully considered
to ensure the efficient and proper use of the county’s financial resources. Another issue
is that most unincorporated area residents do not have access to municipal services like
water, sewer, municipal police and fire departments, trash disposal and local parks
because cities and towns generally do not offer these services outside their jurisdiction.
Aside from police protection from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office the county does
not provide these services, which instead require subscription or contract through
private companies. Also, because unincorporated residents are not formally represented
by an elected municipal government many decisions regarding their services are made
by homeowner associations, district governing boards or other similar organization.
While many unincorporated residents living in low-density, rural development
recognize and prefer these conditions it is important that those living in urban
unincorporated communities understand this situation prior to making lifestyle choices
and property investments.
Land Use - 30
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 To establish clear public expectations, raise public awareness about the differences
between living in cities and towns as opposed to living in unincorporated areas.
 Have homeowner/related associations, special tax districts and/or private companies
operate and maintain services and infrastructure not provided by Maricopa County.
 Where feasible, encourage annexation of urban development that requires urban
services and infrastructure.
 Prior to approving comprehensive plan amendments and zoning district
changes, evaluate the costs and benefits to Maricopa County and its taxpayers of
having new urban development in unincorporated areas.
“Urban Solutions for Urban Development”
As Maricopa County considers where urban development is appropriate it will continue
to use its Urban Solutions for Urban Development strategy which requires that services
and infrastructure be currently or readily available to meet the needs of residents and
businesses, protect taxpayers and protect public health and safety. This means that the
following should be identified before approving comprehensive plan amendments and
zoning district changes for urban development:
1. That there is sufficient potable water service, including confirmation of a
Certificate of Convenience and Necessity and verification by the service
provider of the ability to adequately serve new residents and businesses;
2. That there is sufficient sewer service, including verification by the service provider of
the ability and capacity to adequately serve new residents and/or businesses;
3. That dry utilities (electric, telephone, natural gas), as applicable, are available to
serve new residents and/or businesses;
4. That there is sufficient road capacity to accommodate expected traffic increases
from residents and/or businesses;
5. That there is adequate elementary, middle and high school capacity, as applicable,
to serve new residents, and that such schools are proximate to applicable
neighborhoods;
6. That adequate law enforcement and fire service is available to serve new residents
and/or businesses;
7. That libraries are available and proximate to serve new residents;
Land Use - 31
DRAFT #3

8. That adequate park, recreation and community facilities are available and proximate
to serve new residents;
9. That adequate hospital or emergency medical facilities are available and proximate
to serve new residents;
10. That there is regional flood control infrastructure to protect new residents and/or
businesses as necessary.
11. That alternative transportation facilities are available and proximate to serve
new residents as necessary.
12. That other urban services and infrastructure, as necessary and on a case-by-case
basis, are available to serve new residents and/or businesses.
Not all urban development requires these services or infrastructure, so Table 7 –
Urban Service & Infrastructure Requirements identifies which services and
infrastructure should be confirmed to exist or be readily available prior to
comprehensive plan amendment and zoning district changes (note: the numbers in the
table correspond to the paragraph numbers listed above).
Land Use - 32
DRAFT #3

Table 7 ‐ Urban Service & Infrastructure Requirements
Urban Land Use Type
Service / Urban Urban Urban
Infrastructure Residential Commercial Industrial
1 (water) YES YES YES
2 (sewer) YES YES YES
3 (dry Utilities) As applicable As applicable As applicable
4 (roads) YES YES YES
5 (schools) YES NO NO
6 (police & fire) YES YES YES
7 (libraries) YES NO NO
8 (parks; rec.) YES NO NO
9 (medical) YES NO NO
10 (flood control) As applicable As applicable As applicable
11 (transportation) YES As applicable As applicable
12 (other) As applicable As applicable As applicable
Confirming these urban services and infrastructure achieves several important
objectives:
 It protects taxpayers as well as public health and safety;
 It shows which unincorporated areas are able to support urban development – a key
part of the Growth Areas element;
 It implements an important county policy: have orderly, timely and efficient urban
development;
 It helps the county determine when and where urban development is appropriate
Land Use - 33
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Evaluate comprehensive plan amendment and zoning district changes to ensure that
urban services and infrastructure are available to serve urban development.
 Promote infill development to create orderly urban growth patterns.
 Encourage phasing plans that link infrastructure and services with new
development.
 Use conditional zoning to help reduce land use risk.
 Evaluate comprehensive plan amendment and zoning district changes for
consistency with the county’s capital improvement plans.
Balanced Land Use Patterns
Achieving balanced and economically efficient land use patterns is important because
different types of residential, retail commercial, office, industrial, employment, open
space and community amenities help achieve two important objectives:
 It implements Maricopa County’s Strategic Priorities and improves overall quality of
life;
 It broadens Maricopa County’s economic and tax base, helps maintain a stable
budget, and discourages overreliance on residential development;
 It contributes to public health through more recreational opportunities, shorter
travel times, and increased personal time.
Balanced and efficient land use patterns are especially important in unincorporated
areas where long distances between where people live, work, shop and recreate are
common. Despite that land use imbalances can result in longer travel times and
increased traffic congestion, for various reasons balanced land use patterns are not
always easy to achieve.
Obstacles to Balanced Land Use Patterns
Workforce Changes
In the past few decades the number of multiple worker households has increased
significantly, meaning where people choose to live has become less predictable.
Continuing population and employment dispersal away from central cities adds to the
unpredictability since workers in the same home typically travel in different directions
and distances for employment, shopping and other obligations so proximity to home
may not be as important as other factors. Today’s workforce is also more mobile and
flexible than in the past and it is not uncommon for workers to change job locations
Land Use - 34
DRAFT #3

periodically. Finally, increasing use of telecommuting, flexible work schedules and self-
employment also make peoples’ decisions about where they live more unpredictable.
Outdated zoning regulations
Traditional zoning is based on the idea that residential, commercial and industrial land
uses should be widely separated to protect health and safety. This model was
established many decades ago when widespread industrial pollution in big cities created
serious environmental and health problems that required corrective action. While
separating certain uses is sometimes necessary, in many instances residential,
commercial and employment can successfully coexist and, therefore, help create
efficient and balanced land use patterns.
Many zoning ordinances also do not to account for changing family and living patterns
that require more options. For instance, some ordinances prohibit accessory dwelling
units like garage apartments and caretaker units that cater to single individuals and
those needing flexible or temporary living options that let them live close to
employment or needed personal care. Further, some ordinances don’t easily
accommodate the growing trend of home-based self-employment.
Lack of incentives
Many zoning ordinances lack incentives that can help create balanced land use patterns,
such as allowing greater density and intensity under certain conditions or accelerating
the permitting process for employment-generating land uses. Incentives can be an
effective way to achieve specific outcomes while also providing economic benefits to
businesses and the broader community.
Consequences of Land Use Imbalances
While the obstacles to balanced land use patterns can be challenging, the
environmental, societal, and economic consequences of imbalances are important to
consider:
Traffic congestion and related costs
Traffic congestion is one of the most recognizable consequences of inefficient land use
patterns as people make more frequent and longer trips for work, shopping and other
daily tasks. Consequently, more frequent and longer trips can result in some of the
following:
 Spillover traffic from congested highways and arterial roads to local streets as
drivers search for less congested shortcuts, thus potentially affecting the quality and
safety of neighborhoods;
Land Use - 35
DRAFT #3

 Long commute times and opportunity costs;
 An inability to forecast travel times, resulting in personal and work schedule
disruptions;
 An increase in traffic accidents and stress-related health risks;
 Reduced worker productivity due to travel delays, resulting in lost business efficiency
and profitability;
 Increased vehicle-induced air pollution;
 Increased public expenditures for regional roads and infrastructure to meet local
needs;
 Cumulative health, economic and environmental effects on the region’s quality of
life.
While the economic and opportunity costs of traffic congestion in Maricopa County are
not as high as some other metropolitan counties, the rate at which these costs are
increasing is noticeable. Data from the Texas Transportation Institute (Table 8:
Mobility Data for the Phoenix Area) concludes that between 1997 and 2007 the
economic and opportunity costs of traffic congestion grew considerably, and that a
typical Phoenix-area commuter spends more than a week of work hours each year
delayed in peak period traffic. These delays result in excess fuel consumption, vehicle
wear and lost productivity and personal time.
Air Quality
Traffic congestion can also affect air quality since most trips to work, shopping and
other destinations are done by automobile. While alternative transportation like carpools
and mass transit can help, one of the most effective ways to reduce traffic congestion is
to bring residential, retail and employment uses closer together rather than separating
them by great distances.
Balanced Land Use: Financial Considerations
Balanced land uses can also help limit costs to citizens by creating a more balanced tax
base from which to provide services and infrastructure. For example, it is generally
more expensive to provide infrastructure and services for residential land uses than for
non-residential uses because of the need for schools, parks and libraries. In Maricopa
County municipalities receive approximately 72 to 79 cents in tax and other revenue for
each dollar spent providing infrastructure and services to single- and multi-family
homes. However, those local governments receive approximately $1.08, $1.55, and
$8.62 in tax and other revenue for each dollar spent on services and infrastructure for
industrial, office and retail uses respectively.2 While the comparison between the county
2 Central Arizona Association of Governments. Jobs-Housing Balance in Pinal: Economic Colony or Economic Independence? Found at
http://www.caagcentral.org
Land Use - 36
DRAFT #3

Table 8: Mobility Data for the Phoenix Area 1
% Increase 1997
2007 1997
‐ 2007
Population 2 3,425,000 2,450,000 40%
Total annual excess fuel 57.2 million 27.1 million 111%
consumed gallons gallons
Total annual delay (person- 80.5 million 40.2 million 100%
hours) hours hours
Total annual delay per
3 44 hours 35 hours 26%
traveler (peak hour)
Total annual cost $1.9 billion $701 million 171%
Total annual cost per $1,034 $610 70%
traveler (peak hour)
1 Schrank, David and Tim Lomax. The 2009 Urban Mobility Report. Texas Transportation Institute.
The Texas A&M University System, 2007.
2 Approximate
3 Peak period = 6 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 7 p.m.
and municipalities is not precise given the different types and levels of services and
infrastructure provided, the key point is that balancing residential and non-residential
land uses can help even out tax burdens, create higher quality communities, and
produce a financially stable and healthy economy.
Strategies
 Continue using land use ratios for master-planned communities and other large-
scale developments.
 Evaluate new urban development to determine if balanced land use patterns are
maintained.
 Consider incentives and flexible zoning techniques that encourage balanced land use
patterns.
 Promote mixed-use projects that integrate rather than separate residential, retail
and employment land uses.
Urban/Rural Interface
As growth expands outward new challenges arise where urban and rural areas
converge in what is referred to as urban/rural interface areas. Because these challenges
Land Use - 37
DRAFT #3

can affect an area’s quality and livability they must be addressed through reasonable
measures. Some of the challenges include:
 Making consistent decisions regarding land use compatibility;
 Balancing rural residents’ expectations with those of urban residents, including:
 Limiting the impacts that horses and other large animals have on
urban/suburban areas and, conversely, limiting the impacts that urban/suburban
development have on the ability to keep horses and other large animals;
 Limiting the impacts that agriculture (i.e. noise, dust, odor) can have on
surrounding suburban/urban development and, conversely, limiting the impacts
of such development on the ability to perform agriculture;
 Determining the proper density and intensity of land uses in urban/rural interface
areas;
 Meeting the different expectations of residents that want:
 A “rural” lifestyle, which are typically those that want large lots and large
animals but don’t want or need urban services;
 A “suburban” lifestyle, which are typically those that want low density
development similar to rural areas, but don’t want large animals. These
residents also usually want services and amenities typical of urban areas;
 An “urban” lifestyle, which are typically those that want higher
density/intensity development and want access to the amenities, services and
opportunities found in cities.
 Establishing realistic expectations for infrastructure and services in rural and remote
locations;
 Deciding if or when it is appropriate for residents in cities and towns to pay for
enhanced urban services and infrastructure that exclusively or predominantly benefit
residents of unincorporated areas, including law enforcement, animal control and
some street and infrastructure maintenance.
Urban/rural interface areas also pose challenges when trying to separate residential
uses from aggregate mining operations. State law defines aggregate as cinder, crushed
rock or stone, decomposed granite, gravel, pumice, pumicite and sand which are used
to make concrete. Aggregate material is typically extracted from dry river beds and
washes although it can also be found in other locations. While aggregate mining is an
important and necessary part of the economy the noise, light, dust and traffic from
aggregate mines can affect the quality of life of nearby residents. To protect aggregate
mining and safeguard residents’ quality of life Maricopa County supports open space
buffers, land use transitions, and other techniques that appropriately separate
aggregate mining and residential land uses. Per state law maps showing the
Land Use - 38
DRAFT #3

locations of currently identified sources of aggregate are to be made available by State
agencies.
Strategies
 Evaluate new urban land uses to identify potentially negative impacts to existing
rural land uses, and use mitigation measures where necessary.
 Evaluate new rural development to identify potentially negative impacts to existing
urban land uses, and use mitigation measures where necessary.
 Support public education about urban/rural land use conflicts and effective
mitigation measures.
 Create an optional low-density, suburban zoning district category that restricts
keeping large animals.
 Evaluate new urban development to determine the financial costs to Maricopa
County of providing services and infrastructure.
 Use land use buffers and land use transitions in urban/rural interface areas,
including near aggregate mines and Maricopa County’s regional parks.
Federal and State Property
Much of Maricopa County is controlled either by the Arizona State Land Department for
Trust beneficiaries or by the federal government as national forests, wilderness
areas, national monuments and military facilities. As urban growth moves towards these
areas ensuring reasonable land use becomes increasingly important. While most federal
land is intended for preservation, State Trust land can be sold for development which
makes service and infrastructure coordination an important priority. When development
occurs on or near federal or state land Maricopa County should coordinate with those
levels of government to help ensure consistent and efficient development patterns.
Strategies
 Coordinate county planning efforts with federal and state agencies, and participate
in state and federal planning activities.
 Where feasible include State Trust land in master-planned communities and other
large-scale projects.
 Coordinate with the Arizona State Land Department to include their long-term land
use plans in Maricopa County’s plans.
 Coordinate with the Bureau of Land Management on their short- and long-term
plans for exchanges, sales and development.
Land Use - 39
DRAFT #3

Effects of the “Great Recession”
Several years ago the nation was in the midst of one of the longest and, in many
respects, deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Maricopa County was
affected by this downturn more than many other areas because of the decline in
building construction and real estate values. Easy access to credit, lax lending
standards, financial and land speculation, and significant overbuilding all contributed to
this downturn. One potential concern is the lingering effects that the oversupply of
homes may have on existing housing since many were left vacant for extended periods
affecting the quality, safety and livability of neighborhoods. Maricopa County may also
have to consider how to deal with the many master-planned communities and other
large-scale projects that were approved during the height of the real estate bubble but
will not be constructed for many years if ever. While the effects might linger the Great
Recession should help restore housing affordability and possibly result in a more
economically stable model for future growth.
Strategies
 Use market feasibility studies as warranted to help identify the need for new urban
development in unincorporated areas.
 Encourage rehabilitation of substandard, vacant and abandoned homes and
buildings.
 Where appropriate, use development agreements to properly terminate vacant,
inactive development.
County Islands
Unincorporated areas surrounded by municipalities or Indian Communities – commonly
known as county islands – face several challenges, most notably a potential lack of
rapid and reliable emergency response service. In some scattered and isolated
county islands emergency response is unavailable or inadequate, potentially
jeopardizing residents’ safety and ability to obtain proper insurance. Many county
islands also have low-density and rural land uses surrounded by urban development in
a neighboring city or town which creates quality of life problems for both county island
residents and the adjacent municipal residents.
Although some residents choose to live in county islands Maricopa County encourages
their annexation when feasible to help ensure reliable and efficient public services, and
compatible development patterns. State law no longer allows new county islands, but
they can occur unintentionally so Maricopa County should carefully consider
development that could result in new islands or that will make existing ones permanent.
Maricopa County also discourages municipalities from haphazard annexations that
create new islands.
Land Use - 40
DRAFT #3

Strategies
Help raise public awareness about the potential risks and consequences of living in
county islands.
 As feasible support annexation of existing county islands.
 As feasible support annexation of new development if it is likely to result in a county
island.
 Implement the requirements of ARS §11-814(G, H) as they relate to county islands.
 Discourage lot splits and “wildcat” subdivisions that can result in county islands
if eventually surrounded by urban development in a city or town.
 Evaluate zoning district changes to determine the likelihood of county island
creation.
 Discourage new rural land uses in existing urban areas.
Development in High Risk Areas
When new development occurs in potentially hazardous areas it can be difficult to
ensure peoples’ safety because while the dangers to lives and property can be reduced,
eliminating them is impossible. Maricopa County has several recognizable high risk
areas.
Airports; Luke Air Force Base; Ancillary Military Facilities
Given their noise and safety hazards airports can significantly influence the type of
development that is appropriate in certain areas. Maricopa County has two airports –
Sky Harbor International Airport and Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport – that offer
commercial service to national and international destinations, as well as several general
aviation airports that support private operations. In unincorporated Maricopa County
there is particular concern about noise and potential aircraft accidents near Luke Air
Force Base and its ancillary military facilities. However, both the state and county
recognize the important economic impacts of Luke Air Force Base and the need to
protect base operations.
For areas within the High Noise or Accident Potential Zone of Luke Air Force Base
and its ancillary military facilities, state law requires that local governments adopt land
use plans and zoning ordinances that ensure future development is compatible and
consistent with the high noise or accident potential generated by these facilities’
operations. While these requirements apply to Maricopa County the cities and towns of
Surprise, Glendale, El Mirage, Goodyear, Youngtown, Buckeye and Gila Bend are also
required to adopt general plans and zoning regulations to assure development
compatible with the high noise and accident potential generated by military airport and
ancillary military facility operations that have or may have an adverse effect on public
Land Use - 41
DRAFT #3

health and safety. ARS §28-8481 identifies specific uses that are and are not considered
compatible with the high noise or accident potential, although other uses may be
permitted upon mutual consent of Luke Air Force Base and the local jurisdiction. The
consistent and compatible uses for unincorporated Maricopa County are identified in
Chapter 10, Section 1010 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance and are applicable
to Luke Air Force Base and its two ancillary military facilities.
Vision 2030 designates areas within the High Noise or Accident Potential Zones as
“Military Compatible.” The purpose of this designation is to ensure that future
development is compatible with the high noise or accident potential generated by these
military facilities that may have an adverse effect on public health and safety. This
designation complies with ARS §28-8461 and §28-8481 so only those uses that are
compatible and consistent with the high noise or accident potential generated by these
facilities are permitted.
State law also identifies a larger risk area around Luke Air Force Base and Auxiliary
Airfield #1 where military aircraft can impact public health and quality of life. Known as
the Territory in the Vicinity of a Military Airport, this area extends ten miles to the north,
south and west, and four miles to the east parallel from the center of the main runway
at Luke Air Force Base and Auxiliary Airfield #1. While land use restrictions do not apply
in this area noise reduction techniques are required in the construction of new habitable
buildings.
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) is located approximately 55 miles west
of downtown Phoenix near the unincorporated community of Wintersburg. PVNGS
supplies power to approximately 4 million people in several states making it the largest
power producing facility in the U.S. When constructed approximately 30 years ago few
people lived near the plant, and while the surrounding population is still relatively low
several large master-planned communities that could eventually be home to tens of
thousands of new residents are planned within the Emergency Planning Zone. The
Maricopa County Department of Emergency Management defines the Emergency
Planning Zone as a ten mile radius surrounding PVNGS where protective actions could
be required to safeguard the public from exposure to radioactive material should an
unintended radioactive release occur. A larger safety area known as the Ingestion
Exposure Pathway Emergency Planning Zone extends as many as fifty miles from
PVNGS.
Protecting lives is the highest priority in the event of a radioactive incident at the plant
which is why careful land use planning is so important. Proper transportation planning is
also needed to help ensure the safe and timely evacuation of residents if necessary.
However, careful land use and transportation planning must also be combined with
Land Use - 42
DRAFT #3

educating residents living in the PVNGS area about the importance of this issue to their
health and safety.
Urban/Wildland Interface
When development moves into remote or isolated areas the potential for wildfires
increases and becomes a threat to lives and property. Since many wildfires are human-
caused controlling them in so-called urban/wildland interface areas is difficult because
of the growing number of homes in mountainous and rugged locations. Danger to
people and property also increases when wildfires start in populated areas because they
can be difficult to contain and extinguish. Compounding the danger is that naturally-
occurring wildfires that might normally reduce fuel buildup are obviously restricted in
populated areas which increase both the potential risk and severity of such fires.
Most development in isolated or remote areas occurs through parcel splits where
unimproved, primitive roads can prevent safe evacuation and thus jeopardize public
safety. While Maricopa County’s ability to manage parcel splits is limited by state law, it
does support careful building and design standards, sensible land use planning and fire
mitigation practices in high risk areas as identified in the Maricopa County Community
Wildfire Protection Plan.
Flood-prone Areas
Although Maricopa County typically receives less precipitation than most areas flooding
is one of its most common natural disasters and has resulted in lost lives and significant
property damage. While it is generally known that dry rivers and washes are most
susceptible to dangerous flooding other areas are also vulnerable. Proper engineering
and development techniques can reduce or eliminate flood hazards in new
development, but uncontrolled parcel splits and fragmented development patterns can
compound problems when washes and drainage channels are altered. These alterations
can create flooding problems for large areas and produce widespread threats to lives
and property. Maricopa County supports educating the public about flood dangers
associated with parcel splits, and efforts to manage flood risks along rivers and washes.
Subsidence/Earth Fissures
Certain areas of Maricopa County have a difficult and chronic problem known as land
subsidence, which occurs when too much groundwater is removed leaving a gap where
the weight of the overlying soil and material compresses causing the ground to sink.
Unfortunately, when ground sinks it usually does so unevenly creating cracks known as
Earth fissures. Fissures typically start small but gradually expand due to erosion and can
form gullies dozens of feet wide and equally deep. Once fissures begin they usually
increase in number and length, and spread at uneven speeds and directions. Land
subsidence of up to 18 feet has been recorded in certain areas of the county and some
fissures are hundreds of feet in length. Subsidence and the resulting fissures can
Land Use - 43
DRAFT #3

damage roads, utilities and irrigation systems; destroy buildings and livestock; and
become dumping grounds for hazardous materials that can affect water quality.
Strategies
 Maintain the Military Compatible designation around Luke Air Force Base and its
auxiliary airfields.
 Continue the Military Airport and Ancillary Military Facility Overlay Zoning District
(Chapter 10, Section 1010 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance) that protects
Luke Air Force Base and its auxiliary airfields.
 Coordinate with Luke Air Force Base during the review of new land uses in areas
near Luke Air Force Base and its auxiliary airfields.
 Coordinate with the Maricopa County Department of Emergency Management and
the Arizona Department of Homeland Security during the review of new
development in areas potentially affected by the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
Station.
 Coordinate with applicable state and local agencies to mitigate wildfire dangers in
high risk areas; promote firebreaks around homes and structures.
 Coordinate with the Maricopa County Department of Emergency Management during
the review of development within hazard and high-risk areas.
 Implement Maricopa County’s area drainage master plans and watercourse
master plans, and support public education about these plans.
 Deter development in 100-year floodplains and in floodways, as well as in areas
known for subsidence and Earth fissures.
 Implement Maricopa County’s Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.
 Educate the public about the risks of development in hazard-prone areas.
 Discourage lot splits and “wildcat” subdivisions.
Reducing Environmental Impacts
With new development comes a need to prevent or reduce harmful environmental
impacts. Historically, most development occurred near Phoenix but more recently has
moved further into outlying areas that are characterized by natural desert and rugged
terrain. While this does not necessarily create environmental problems it does require
innovative planning and design techniques that reduce potentially harmful effects.
Strategies
 Coordinate with applicable federal, state, and local agencies to review new
development for potential environmental impacts.
Land Use - 44
DRAFT #3

 Where warranted, use environmental impact analyses together with mitigation and
remediation plans.
 Where warranted, use native plant salvage plans and promote indigenous species in
landscaping.
 Discourage new development on steep hillsides and important riparian areas.
Discourage mass grading in such areas and use low impact development processes.
 Promote innovative planning and site design techniques that reduce environmental
damage.
 Direct new urban development to existing urban and infill areas where
environmental impacts can be reduced.
 Protect environmentally sensitive areas, including wildlife migration corridors
identified by the Arizona Game and Fish Department.
 Require the Maricopa Regional Trail System to be included in new development.
Healthy Community Design
There is growing awareness about the personal and financial benefits of improving
physical health and of ways that individuals can lead healthy lifestyles. Encouraging
healthy citizens is becoming one of the most important issues facing society because of
the rising costs associated with chronic diseases. Maricopa County considers
opportunities for physical activity and healthy lifestyles in new development
appropriate. As identified by the U.S. Department of Health – Centers for Disease
Control, some potential opportunities include:3
 Providing adequate and appropriate outdoor open space and recreation facilities;
 Providing multi-use (ex: bicycling, jogging, walking, skating) trails and facilities;
 Locating schools within walking and bicycling distance of residential areas;
 Providing public transportation facilities within walking and bicycling distance of
residential areas;
 Encouraging mixed-use projects in urban areas to decrease distances between
live/work/shop destinations and make bicycle and pedestrian travel practical;
 Applying community design techniques that increase personal safety and discourage
vehicle traffic near outdoor recreation facilities;
 Use design techniques that encourage community interaction;
 Support efforts by the Maricopa County Parks & Recreation Department to increase
opportunities for active, healthy lifestyles.
3 Department of Health and Human Services – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recommended Community Strategies and Measurements to
Prevent Obesity in the United States. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. July 24, 2009.
Land Use - 45
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Work with the Maricopa County Department of Public Health to identify ways to
increase opportunities for active lifestyles.
 Evaluate new urban development for adequate and appropriate open space and
recreation facilities like pedestrian and bicycle trails/paths and parks.
 Coordinate with local school districts to ensure that elementary, middle and high
schools are located where students can access them safely via pedestrian and
bicycle routes.
 Connect pedestrian and bicycle trails/paths to public transit facilities and trail
systems.
 Encourage integrated land uses connected by pedestrian and bicycle trails/paths so
that live/work/shop destinations are easily and safely accessible by non-vehicle trips.
 Ensure that pedestrian and bicycle trails/paths are designed with the safety and
security of users as a priority.
 Emphasize park and open space maintenance as a way to encourage use.
 Separate automobile traffic from trails and parks.
 Include community centers and community gathering places in new development
when appropriate, and based on project size and scope on a case-by-case basis.
Unique Land Uses
The unincorporated county includes many land uses not typically found in cities and
towns like automobile test facilities, landfills and electric power generation plants.
Maricopa County recognizes the special requirements of unique land uses and wants to
help sustain their operations while minimizing impacts to surrounding areas.
Another land use that often draws special attention is electric utility lines and related
structures. These facilities vary in size, shape and characteristics depending on the
voltage running through them and the locations they serve. 500Kv and 230Kv
transmission lines and structures are typically the largest, with smaller lines and
structures required for lower voltage. Public awareness about the locations of existing
and future high voltage electric line corridors is important to both protect the integrity
and viability of the corridors, and the quality of life of residents near these corridors.
Maricopa County supports efforts by the two major electric utilities - Arizona Public
Service (APS) and Salt River Project (SRP) – to raise public awareness of the
importance of these corridors, and will help protect their integrity through buffers and
compatible land use strategies.
Land Use - 46
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Use land use designations that accurately represent the variety in unincorporated
areas.
 Use appropriate buffers to moderate incompatible uses and support business
operations.
 Raise public awareness about existing and future electric utility line corridors, and
reduce potential impacts through land use buffers and compatible land use
strategies.
Land Use - 47
DRAFT #3

LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES
Managing growth in an efficient manner is an important responsibility for Maricopa
County, but property owners, residents, businesses, developers and other community
members are also key stakeholders in helping maintain the county’s quality of life. To
help maintain its quality of life Maricopa County affirms that the goals and policies in
this element will guide future land use decisions.
The land use goals identify expected outcomes and desired achievements, while each
policy helps the county reach its goals by addressing specific problems and issues;
prioritizing financial decisions; and protecting public health, safety and well-being. The
goals are consistent with the county’s Strategic Priorities and the policies implement
them by conveying expectations for quality and efficient growth. Although the goals and
policies identify what Maricopa County expects to achieve, to encourage innovative
planning they are flexible with respect to how compliance is achieved.
Land Use Goal #1: Achieve balanced and efficient development patterns.
Land Use Goal #2: Provide regional leadership on land use issues.
Land Use Goal #3: Protect public health, safety and well-being.
Land Use Goal #4: Exercise sound financial management through land use decisions
that build the county’s fiscal strength.
Land Use Policy #1: Maricopa County supports compliance with its capital
improvement and other funding programs. Exceptions
include reimbursement to the county for unplanned
costs or when services and infrastructure are funded by
private capital.
Land Use Policy #2: Maricopa County supports phasing plans for new urban
development to coordinate such development with new urban
services and infrastructure.
Land Use Policy #3: Maricopa County supports market feasibility studies,
cost/benefit analyses and public input where warranted to
help determine when new urban development in
unincorporated areas is appropriate.
Land Use - 48
DRAFT #3

Land Use Policy #4: To help limit impacts to taxpayers Maricopa County
supports using homeowner associations and related
organizations and improvement districts to manage and
maintain services, infrastructure and amenities.
Land Use Policy #5: To help limit financial impacts Maricopa County supports
using development agreements for large-scale urban
development.
Land Use Policy #6: Maricopa County supports educating residents about the
unique aspects of living in unincorporated areas.
Land Use Policy #7: Maricopa County supports coordinating land use and
infrastructure planning with state agencies, counties, and
municipalities.
Land Use Policy #8: As feasible Maricopa County supports annexation of urban
Development by municipalities.
Land Use Policy #9: As feasible Maricopa County supports county island
Annexation by municipalities, and the prevention of new ones.
Land Use Policy #10: Maricopa County supports coordinated planning efforts
between local, state and federal agencies.
Land Use Policy #11: Where feasible Maricopa County supports including
State Trust land in the planning and design of large-scale
urban development.
Land Use Policy #12: Maricopa County supports coordinating with state and federal
agencies to address safety and security issues associated
with new development near the Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station.
Land Use Policy #13: Where necessary Maricopa County supports wildfire
prevention and mitigation measures in the design of
development.
Land Use Policy #14: Maricopa County supports compliance with watercourse
master plans and area drainage master plans.
Land Use - 49
DRAFT #3

Land Use Policy #15: Maricopa County supports evaluating comprehensive plan
amendments and zoning district changes to determine the
existence of the urban services and infrastructure identified in
this element.
Land Use Policy #16: Maricopa County supports directing new urban development
to the urban growth area identified in this plan.
Land Use Policy #17: Maricopa County supports balanced land use patterns that
include various residential, retail, non-retail employment, and
public and civic land uses.
Land Use Policy #18: Maricopa County supports flexible design and zoning
techniques when used to establish balanced and efficient land
use patterns, and when used to protect important
environmental and open space areas and connections.
Land Use Policy #19: Maricopa County supports mixed housing options.
Land Use Policy #20: Maricopa County supports reducing the impacts of new urban
development on existing rural land uses and agriculture.
Land Use Policy #21: Maricopa County supports reducing the impacts of new rural
development and agriculture on existing urban land uses.
Land Use Policy #22: Maricopa County supports reducing the impacts of new
development on environmentally sensitive areas,
including native flora and fauna habitat and corridors.
Land Use Policy #23: Maricopa County supports reducing the impacts of new
development on Maricopa County’s regional parks, the
Maricopa Trail and other public open spaces.
Land Use Policy #24: Maricopa County supports land use compatibility within the
High Noise or Accident Potential Zone of Luke Air Force Base,
Auxiliary Airfield #1 and the military auxiliary airfield near
the town of Gila Bend.
Land Use Policy #25: Maricopa County supports land use buffers and land use
transitions in urban/rural interface areas, including near
aggregate mining operations and the county’s regional parks.
Land Use Policy #26: Maricopa County supports subdivisions rather than
“wildcat” lot splits.
Land Use - 50
DRAFT #3

Land Use Policy #27: Maricopa County supports keeping development out of
delineated floodways and, where necessary, 100-year
floodplains.
Land Use Policy #28: Maricopa County supports implementing the multi-
jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan.
Land Use Policy #29: Maricopa County supports public education about the risks
and limitations of developing in hazard-prone areas.
Land Use Policy #30: To promote active and healthy lifestyles Maricopa County
supports interconnected trails, parks, preserves, open space,
recreation centers and similar features in new urban
development.
Land Use Policy #31: To promote safe and active communities Maricopa County
supports public safety and security features included in the
design of new and existing development.
Land Use Policy #32: To help protect neighborhoods and property values Maricopa
County supports rehabilitation of substandard, vacant and
abandoned homes and buildings.
Land Use Policy #33: Maricopa County supports land use buffers and compatible
land use strategies near existing and future high voltage
electric utility line corridors.
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
Table 9: Land Use Designations lists the designations recognized by Maricopa
County for future planning purposes. In keeping with state law all changes in zoning
district boundaries must be consistent with and conform to this comprehensive plan.
Therefore, each designation includes an equivalent zoning district to help ensure
consistency.
Land Use - 51
DRAFT #3

Table 9: Land Use Designations
Land Use Designation * Designation Description & Characteristics Appropriate Zoning District **
Residential - Single Family
Single Family - Rural Density of 1 dwelling unit or less per gross acre Rural 190, Rural 70, Rural 43
Density greater than 1 dwelling unit per gross acre, but not more than 2
Single Family - Large Lot R1-35
dwelling units per gross acre
Density greater than 2 dwelling units per gross acre, but not more than 3
Single Family - Suburban R1-18
dwelling units per gross acre
Density greater than 3 dwelling units per gross acre, but not more than 5
Single Family - Transitional Lot R1-10
dwelling units per gross acre
Density greater than 5 dwelling units per gross acre, but not more than 8
Single Family - Small Lot R1-8, R1-7, R1-6
dwelling units per gross acre
Residential - Multiple Family
Density greater than 8 dwelling units per gross acre, but not more than
Multiple Family - Low R-2
12 dwelling units per gross acre
Density greater than 12 dwelling units per gross acre, but not more than
Multiple Family - Intermediate R-3
20 dwelling units per gross acre
Multiple Family - High Density greater than 20 dwelling units per gross acre R-4, R-5
Residential - Other
One or more mobile homes on a parcel of land that typically comprises a Special Use Permit, or least intensive zoning district to
Mobile Home Community
mobile home park or mobile home subdivision meet requirements
Retail Commercial
Commercial plant nurseries, public riding & boarding stables, feed stores, Special Use Permit as applicable, or least intensive
Rural Retail
kennels, and large animal medical clinics zoning district to meet requirements
Gas stations, convenience grocery/drug, and other small stand alone
Convenience Retail stores of similar character; total retail space: ≤ 30,000 sq. ft; typical site C-1
area: up to 5 acres
Lead tenant single supermarket or specialty retail store along with small-
C-S or C-1 (least intensive zoning district to meet
Neighborhood Retail scale secondary stores; total retail space: 30,000 - 150,000 sq. ft
requirements)
(anchor ratio: 30% -50%); typical site area: up to 15 acres
Lead tenant of one or more department, warehouse, or specialty retail
stores along with small-scale secondary stores typical of a Power Center;
Community Retail C-S
total retail space: 100,000 - 400,000 sq. ft (anchor ratio: 40% - 60%);
typical site area: up to 40 acres
Lead tenant of more than one department store along with small-scale
secondary stores typical of outlet or enclosed malls; total retail space:
Regional Retail C-S
400,000+ sq. ft (anchor ratio: 50% - 70%); typical site area: up to 100
acres
Stand alone commercial uses that do not meet any other commercial
Miscellaneous Retail Least intensive zoning district to meet requirements
land use category, and are intended to serve local or community needs
Employment
Office space for administrative, professional, semi-professional, and
Office C-O
support activities where no retail trade is conducted
Warehouse, distribution, and large-scale storage activities as well as
manufacturing and assembly of small goods intended for end users.
Light Industrial IND 1
Noise, odor, dust, glare, and other side effects are completely confined
within an enclosed building.
Manufacturing, assembly, and fabrication of large goods requiring heavy I-2 or I-3 based on uses (least intensive zoning district
Heavy Industrial
raw materials; processing and refinement of natural resources. to meet requirements)
Large area specifically designated for office, research, warehouse, and
direct support employment uses of similar types that are grouped
together and located in close proximity or on the same lot. Uses are
Business Park C-O
developed under a coordinated plan with integrated infrastructure.
Residential, general retail, and industrial uses involving assembly,
fabrication, and processing are not allowed
Large area specifically designated for either light industrial and support
uses or heavy industrial and support uses of similar type, and developed IND 1, IND 2, or IND 3 (least intensive zoning district to
Industrial Park
under a coordinated plan with integrated infrastructure. Residential and meet requirements)
general retail uses are not allowed.
Mix of office, research, warehouse, light industrial, and support
Mixed Use Employment employment uses on the same or adjacent parcels. Residential and Least intensive zoning district to meet requirements
general retail uses are not allowed.

Land Use Designation * Designation Description & Characteristics Appropriate Zoning District **
Recreation
Golf Golf courses and driving ranges Any (golf course); Special Use Permit (driving range)
Active recreation areas improved with playfield, exercise, picnic, and
general recreation facilities. Sub-categories include mini-parks (¼ mile
Parks service area, approximate size 1 acre); neighborhood parks (1 mile ANY
service area, approximate size 15 acres); community parks (1-2 mile
service area; approximate size 25 acres)
Unimproved areas specifically designated for preservation in an
Open Space ANY
unaltered, natural state and which only offer passive recreation
Special Use Permit as applicable, or least intensive
Resort & Campground Guest ranch, RV park, campground, resort
zoning district to meet requirements
Special Use Permit as applicable, or least intensive
Zoo Zoo, wildlife preserves, exotic animal farms
zoning district to meet requirements
Other
Mix of single and multiple family residential, office employment, parks
and open space, appropriate community services, and retail commercial
Mixed Use uses within the same building, same parcel, and/or same area under a Least intensive zoning district to meet requirements
single, integrated plan that emphasizes close proximity and pedestrian
orientation.
Stadiums, arenas, amphitheatres, race tracks, rodeo facilities, auctions
and swap meets, amusement parks, convention facilities, amusement Special Use Permit as applicable, or least intensive
Public Assembly
parks, miniature golf course, commercial dormitories, and other uses zoning district to meet requirements
involving large assemblage of people
Facilities for government, education, religious worship, cemeteries, social
Special Use Permit as applicable or least intensive zoning
Community Service gathering, public safety, residential care, and large-scale medical care
district to meet requirements
which serves the general public.
Electric generating plants, water and wastewater treatment facilities, and
Utilities IND 1
associated offices and accessory equipment
Transportation Airports, Transit centers, rail yards Special Use Permit as applicable; IND 2
Waste Disposal Landfills, waste transfer and recycling facilities Special Use Permit as applicable; IND 3
C-2 as applicable; special use permit as applicable; I-3
Mini-warehouse; storage & impoundment of vehicles, homes, aircraft, &
Storage as applicable based on use (least intensive zoning
boats; general outdoor storage
district to meet requirements)
Proving Grounds Facilities for testing equipment and products C-3
Applicable only within state statute-defined High Noise or Accident
Potential Zones, it includes only those uses determined to be compatible Military Airport & Ancillary Military Facility Overlay
Military Compatible
and and consistent with the high noise or accident potential of a military Zoning District
airport or ancillary military facility.
* Unincorporated areas outside of county area plans are designated Rural Development Area and are
only appropriate for rural land uses and rural zoning
** For guidance only based on gross project density and as applicable to current zoning districts. Other
zoning districts may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis via the UPD process. This does not prevent
the addition of new zoning districts to the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.

TRANSPORTATION
OVERVIEW
A functional and high quality transportation system is necessary for the efficient
movement of people and products, and absolutely essential for Maricopa County to be
economically competitive. These stakes are the main reason why state law requires that
this Transportation element identify the general location and extent of existing and
proposed freeways, arterial and collector streets, bicycle routes and multimodal
options. State law aside, this element also supports regional efforts to create unified
road and multimodal networks, and identifies potential obstacles to improving existing
roads in unincorporated areas.
Maricopa County faces many transportation-related challenges, in particular that
population growth; limited financial resources; and federal, state and local decisions
regarding air quality, energy and alternative transportation could affect the type and
quality of the county’s transportation system for many years. But these challenges are
also an opportunity to put in place innovative ideas that allow the county to meet some
of the transportation needs of citizens and businesses despite ever-changing conditions.
Fewer resources and right-of-way acquisition limitations for more roads are pushing
federal, state and local agencies to address these challenges through a Transportation
Systems Management and Operations approach to implement Intelligent Transportation
Systems technologies. Although this comprehensive plan cannot address all
transportation issues it does encourage an effective system that coordinates
transportation and land use decisions.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Because the transportation goals, objectives, and policies from the previous
comprehensive plan were vague it is difficult to measure their results. However, there
are several topics that merit reconsideration.
Life Cycle Analysis
The previous comprehensive plan explained that Maricopa County evaluates its road
and management systems through a process known as a Life Cycle Analysis. This
analysis is primarily a budgeting tool that allows the Maricopa County Department of
Transportation (MCDOT) to make more informed financial decisions about road
improvements. This information was important, but since the Life Cycle Analysis is not
specifically related to the comprehensive plan it is not included in this update.
Transportation - 52
DRAFT #3

Transportation Improvements
The previous comprehensive plan identified several ways to improve Maricopa County’s
transportation system, including:
 Integrating land use and transportation planning;
 Creating a regional, multimodal transportation system;
 Promoting mobility, access and safety;
 Preserving, repairing and improving existing roads;
 Improving air quality by reducing the number and length of vehicle trips;
The following is a brief discussion of each topic.
Integrating Land Use and Transportation Planning
The previous comprehensive plan recognized that coordinating land use and
transportation planning is essential for an efficient and effective transportation system.
Vision 2030 builds on this idea and specifies Maricopa County’s expectations for the
transportation system needed to support new urban development.
Creating a regional, multimodal transportation system
The previous comprehensive plan concluded that Maricopa County should encourage
bicycle, pedestrian and mass-transit travel because these help address several problems
including the county’s poor air quality and the economic, social and environmental costs
of traffic congestion. This conclusion is well-founded, but it is important to distinguish
that while Maricopa County helps fund public transit it is neither a provider nor operator
of such service. While public transit is important Vision 2030 focuses on bicycle,
pedestrian and other low-volume alternative transportation for which Maricopa County
can directly help provide opportunities and leadership.
Promoting mobility, access, and safety
The previous comprehensive plan discussed the importance of providing funding for
transportation mobility, access and safety programs. These remain worthy goals, but
limited resources and statutory authority minimize the county’s role in these areas.
Regardless, Vision 2030 reinforces that the county’s Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) continues to be an important way to establish a timely and efficient
regional road system that improves mobility, accessibility and safety. More information
about the TIP is provided later in this chapter.
Transportation - 53
DRAFT #3

Preserving, repairing, and improving existing roads
Building new roads to accommodate growth is an important responsibility for Maricopa
County, but just as important is the need to maintain and improve existing roads. Vision
2030 emphasizes the TIP’s road improvement prioritization so that proper road
programming and funding is available.
Improving air quality by reducing the number and length of vehicle trips
Improving air quality was identified in the previous comprehensive plan as an important
priority. Vision 2030 builds on this priority by including specific policies to help reduce
air pollution through balanced and efficient land use patterns, by emphasizing the
importance of alternative transportation, and stressing adherence to Maricopa County’s
dust abatement programs.
Transportation System Plan
Maricopa County’s Transportation System Plan (TSP) is a long-range plan that identifies
how it will to use its limited resources to maintain and enhance existing roads, while
also meeting the growing demand for new roads and infrastructure. The TSP is
primarily a technical document but covers a range of engineering, road design and
financing issues. While the previous comprehensive plan identified the purpose and
certain details of the TSP, this information has been eliminated from Vision 2030 since
readers can obtain complete information about the TSP from the Maricopa County
Department of Transportation. Overall, since initial approval of Eye to the Future 2020
much progress has been made by Maricopa County in making improvements to all of its
transportation operations, and in using technology to enhance transportation safety and
efficiency.
CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
Being that a safe, efficient and effective transportation system is one of the county’s
strategic priorities this section identifies several concerns that will affect the future
system and which will be the focus of the strategies and policies of this element.
Preserving Road Alignments
Road alignments are locations where new or expanded roads will be needed to
accommodate increased traffic from new development. Identifying and protecting these
alignments is important in order to have a functional and efficient transportation
system. Although identifying future road alignments can be difficult because of many
environmental, economic, legal, political and engineering considerations, such a process
results in long-term plans that decide the preferred locations for future roads, highways
and bridges. The following are examples of such plans.
Transportation - 54
DRAFT #3

MAG Regional Framework Studies
MAG prepares transportation studies that consider regional population and growth
trends so that the location of future roads, highways and bridges can be established to
meet future travel demand. Two recent framework studies – Interstate 10/Hassayampa
Valley Roadway Framework Study and the Interstate 8 and Interstate 10 Hidden Valley
Transportation Framework Study – focus on western and southern Maricopa County and
portions of Pinal County. The findings and recommendations of these studies have been
accepted by the MAG Regional Council although funding for construction has not
been approved. Maricopa County participated in the development of these plans and
will use them to help make land use and transportation-related decisions. Both plans
are available from MAG.
Maricopa County – Major Streets and Routes Plan
MCDOT prepares and periodically updates a report known as the Maricopa County
Major Streets and Routes Plan (MSRP). The MSRP is important because it designates
street width requirements for all primary and secondary roads maintained by the
county. Knowing the width of future roads is important so that adequate alignments can
be preserved, and particularly important to maintain consistent and cohesive section
line and mid-section line roads. Maricopa County acknowledges the importance of
maintaining future road alignments and will use this and other transportation plans to
help maintain their integrity.
Strategies
 Preserve future road alignments identified in county-recognized transportation plans,
with particular attention focusing on preserving mid-section and section line roads,
arterials, parkways, freeways and interchanges.
 Implement the roadway classification system requirements identified in Maricopa
County’s Major Streets and Routes Plan.
Transportation Funding
The Great Recession fundamentally changed how people, businesses and governments
operate and make investment decisions in light of limited financial resources. Maricopa
County is no exception, especially prioritizing high cost items like roads, bridges and
other expensive infrastructure. To help efficiently allocate its limited resources Maricopa
County uses its annual TIP to identify five years of improvements to roads that are
within the County’s jurisdiction. The TIP identifies and prioritizes road improvements,
with the highest priorities scheduled for the first year, the next highest in year two, and
so forth through year five. As each year passes projects move up in priority and new
projects are added to the back at year five. Although the TIP identifies improvements
over a five year period only those projects listed in the first year are actually funded
Transportation - 55
DRAFT #3

since Maricopa County does not use a multi-year budget. However, as projects move up
in priority they usually receive funding as well.
Because the TIP matches available funding to highest need deviations from the plan
can be problematic. Therefore, when new development requires infrastructure
improvements that are not in the TIP Maricopa County will determine whether such
development should pay the costs of these improvements. This situation not uncommon
in unincorporated Maricopa County – especially where large urban development is
located in remote areas – but does underscore the need to ensure that new growth not
overburden the county’s limited financial resources, and that future improvements are
done in a strategic and equitable manner.
Besides the TIP the Cost of Development element identifies several ways that Maricopa
County allocates funding for new services and infrastructure.1 Maricopa County supports
using these methods to help pay for transportation improvements associated with new
development.
Strategies
 Implement Maricopa County’s TIP recommendations and determine whether new
development should fund needed improvements not accounted for in the TIP.
 Use the preferred funding methods identified in the Cost of Development element to
help ensure that new development pays for needed transportation improvements.
Alternative Transportation
For the foreseeable future travel in the Phoenix area will be done primarily by
automobile because it is usually the most convenient and personal form of
transportation. As a result most transportation-related resources are spent on
constructing, reconstructing and improving roads, bridges and similar infrastructure.
Maricopa County will continue to focus most of its transportation funding on roads and
related infrastructure, but also recognizes the importance of making alternative
transportation an appealing and viable option.
For the purposes of this comprehensive plan alternative transportation primarily means
bicycle and pedestrian travel.2 Maricopa County understands that alternative
transportation helps create a more efficient and economical system and provides
several important benefits:
 Helps reduce air pollution which is an ongoing environmental and public health
problem;
1 See the Cost of Development element for a description of its preferred funding methods.
2 Public transit is not included because while Maricopa County helps fund public transit through Valley Metro it does not directly provide or operate
such services.
Transportation - 56
DRAFT #3

 Helps reduce traffic congestion which then helps commuters save time, increases
worker productivity and improves business efficiency;
 Saves commuters money on fuel, vehicle maintenance, insurance and depreciation;
 Reduces commuter stress which promotes better personal health.
To help make alternative transportation a viable option Maricopa County will evaluate
new urban development to determine if bicycle, pedestrian, park-and-ride/public transit
and similar transportation infrastructure are available as needed. Also as needed
Maricopa County looks to have the Maricopa Trail, the Maricopa County Bicycle
Transportation System Plan, and other appropriate practices included in the design of
new development.
Strategies
 Evaluate new urban development to determine where alternative transportation
facilities are needed.
 Evaluate new urban development to see if the Maricopa Regional Trail System Plan,
the Maricopa County Bicycle Transportation System Plan, park-and-ride/public
transit facilities and other appropriate practices as necessary are included in project
design.
Road Annexation; County Islands
Future population growth will continue to affect the region’s transportation system
which is why close coordination between and with cities and towns is becoming so
important. Maricopa County operates roads in unincorporated areas that are typically
rural and remote, but as cities and towns expand Maricopa County considers it
important that both land and roads be annexed. Historically, cities and towns
sometimes annex land but not adjoining roads leaving the responsibility to fund,
maintain and manage what are typically urban roads with the county. This should no
longer occur because state law now requires cities and towns to annex adjoining roads
which can help reduce financial burdens on county taxpayers and help address a
hazardous condition known as scalloped streets. Although state law now prohibits
selective road annexations, Maricopa County continues to be burdened with scalloped
streets in many county islands.
As noted county islands are unincorporated areas completely surrounded by one or
more municipality. Roads inside and adjacent to county islands are often scalloped,
short segments that do not meet surrounding city standards so they are effectively rural
roads within urban areas that are costly to maintain and difficult to eliminate. Maricopa
County supports annexation of county islands when feasible, and where county island
annexation is not possible Maricopa County supports working with municipalities to
share the costs of repairing and improving roads to the applicable municipal standards.
Transportation - 57
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Encourage annexation of roads adjacent to municipalities to help move people and
goods efficiently across the region.
 Design and construct county island roads to the standards of the adjacent
municipality where annexation is likely.
 Implement partnerships with cities and towns to fund repairs and improvements to
county island roads.
Air Pollution
Maricopa County’s air quality problems are well known and difficult to solve. Although
important strides have been made over the past decade Maricopa County struggles to
meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set by the federal Clean
Air Act. The Clean Air Act establishes air quality standards for several types of
pollutants like carbon monoxide and ozone, and the one that is always among the
most difficult to address: particulate matter. Because of Maricopa County’s dry, dusty
environment particulate matter occurs naturally but is also caused by farming, fine road
particles, construction and engine exhaust.
Air pollution causes serious health problems including respiratory and cardiovascular
disease that affects the heart and lungs, and can reduce crop production which has
negative economic consequences. Maricopa County considers air pollution a serious
problem that requires regional cooperation, and leadership for this cooperation is the
role of Maricopa County’s Air Quality Department which is responsible for planning and
monitoring air pollution reduction efforts and compliance enforcement of federal air
quality standards. When a region fails to meet federal standards for any specified
pollutant the Clean Air Act requires state and local governments to prepare a state
implementation plan (SIP) that explains how the region will comply with NAAQS. The
Air Quality Department is directly involved in preparing the SIP for the Phoenix area
because portions of Maricopa County have been designated non-attainment for
particulate matter, carbon monoxide and ozone.
Vision 2030 identifies ways to help ease the county’s air pollution problem, most
importantly by emphasizing balanced and efficient land use patterns that connect –
rather than separate – where people live, work and perform daily activities. Vision 2030
also promotes alternative transportation in new urban development and paving dirt
roads as called for in the county’s PM-10 Dust Abatement Program. Finally,
Maricopa County will continue education and outreach programs like the Clean Air Make
More campaign that explains the economic and health consequences of polluted air and
how citizens and businesses can affect change. More information about Maricopa
County’s clean air efforts is available from the Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
Transportation - 58
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Create balanced and efficient land use patterns for live, work and daily activities.
 Continue public education efforts about the consequences of air pollution.
 When necessary, play an active role in revising the SIP.
 Continue compliance enforcement of NAAQS.
 Pave dirt roads where directed by Maricopa County’s PM-10 Dust Abatement
Program.
Intelligent Transportation Systems
Intelligent Transportation Systems use modern technology to optimize traffic mobility
and safety. Examples of such technology include synchronized traffic signals that
respond to real-time demand, road monitors that continuously update drivers on travel
times, and real-time data to help first responders clear accidents quicker. Where such
technology is used across jurisdictions travel times can reduced, air quality improved,
and cost savings realized for drivers through less fuel use. Moreover, with appropriate
use Intelligent Transportation Systems can improve traffic capacity at lower costs
compared to the traditional approach of adding additional lanes.
Strategies
 Identify transportation corridors where Intelligent Transportation System technology use
would be beneficial and necessary.
 Use partnerships with cities and towns to implement Intelligent Transportation Systems
where warranted.
Transportation - 59
DRAFT #3

TRANSPORTATION GOALS AND POLICIES
The importance of a safe and efficient transportation system is reflected in the goals
and policies of this element. Each goal identifies desired transportation outcomes while
the policies address specific issues, help prioritize financial decisions concerning
transportation infrastructure, and protect public health and safety. Although the goals
and policies identify its position Maricopa County encourages innovative solutions to
achieve a quality, functional system.
Transportation Goal #1: Promote and protect public health through a safe
transportation system.
Transportation Goal #2: Contribute to a safe, seamless and effective transportation
system.
Transportation Goal #3: Coordinate land use decisions with transportation
investments to help the county exercise sound financial
management and build the county’s fiscal strength.
Transportation Goal #4: Have a comprehensive transportation system that focuses
on Transportation Systems Management and Operations to
help reduce air pollution and promote efficient traffic
movement and economic growth.
Transportation Policy #1: As necessary, Maricopa County supports preserving future
road alignments, called for in county-recognized
transportation plans, especially mid-section line, section
line and arterial roads; parkways; freeways; and
interchanges.
Transportation Policy #2: Maricopa County supports compliance with its Major
Streets and Routes Plan.
Transportation Policy #3: Maricopa County supports adherence to its Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). Where new development
requires deviation from the TIP Maricopa County supports
such development funding unanticipated, accelerated, and
non-programmed improvements.
Transportation Policy #4: Maricopa County supports using the preferred funding
methods identified in the Cost of Development element to
pay for transportation improvements necessary for new
development.
Transportation - 60
DRAFT #3

Transportation Policy #5: As necessary, Maricopa County supports alternative
transportation in the design of urban development,
including the Maricopa Trail and related trail connections,
the Maricopa County Bicycle Transportation System Plan,
Park-and-ride/public transit facilities, and other
appropriate practices.
Transportation Policy #6: Maricopa County supports municipal annexation of roads
that are adjacent to county islands.
Transportation Policy #7: Maricopa County supports constructing roads in county
islands to the standards of the surrounding city or town
where these roads are intended to be annexed by the city
or town.
Transportation Policy #8: Maricopa County supports partnerships with cities and
towns in cost sharing for road repairs and improvements.
Transportation Policy #9: Maricopa County supports balanced and efficient land use
patterns that reduce the number and length of vehicle
trips.
Transportation Policy #10: Maricopa County supports participating in the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) amendment process.
Transportation Policy #11: Maricopa County supports National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) compliance.
Transportation Policy #12: Maricopa County supports improving low volume dirt
roads as directed by its PM-10 Dust Abatement
Program.
Transportation Policy #13: Maricopa County supports public education efforts that
assist in reducing air pollution.
Transportation Policy #14: Where necessary, Maricopa County supports roadway
planning that promotes identified scenic corridors,
wildlife connectivity and linkages.
Transportation Policy #15: Maricopa County supports regional mobility and safety
by integrating state, county and local traffic
management systems.
Transportation - 61
DRAFT #3

Transportation Policy #16: Maricopa County supports using Intelligent
Transportation Systems and Connected Vehicle
technology for efficient and safe movement of people
and goods.
Transportation Policy #17: Maricopa County supports state, county and local
partnerships for interjurisdictional traffic operations and
management.
Transportation - 62
DRAFT #3

ENVIRONMENT
OVERVIEW
One of Maricopa County’s most important responsibilities is to help protect its
environment because it has such a direct effect on everyone. Air pollution, water
pollution, ground pollution and noise pollution can harm people’s health, cause
environmental damage and even undermine the economy. Awareness of these
problems and the need to protect this area’s unique desert setting led the county
to create Strategic Priorities to maintain a healthy environment. Maricopa County
recognizes that a healthy environment helps make healthy communities, and
while there are many ways to define a healthy community it usually comes from
maintaining a clean and healthy natural and built environment. Figuring out
how best to accommodate growth given the inevitable impacts to this area’s
sensitive desert environment is a challenge that all county residents must face.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
While state laws, the county’s Strategic Priorities and overall best practices direct
how Maricopa County should address environmental problems, an observation
can be made about environmental protection efforts put forth in the previous
comprehensive plan. The environmental concerns that were identified – air
quality, water quality, ground contamination and loss of habitat and cultural
resources – remain important. However these are mainly regional problems that
require a high level of cooperation among people and organizations to resolve.
CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
Most of the environmental concerns identified in the previous comprehensive
plan still remain, so this section examines these and other concerns and the
strategies that Maricopa County should use to address them.
Air Quality
Unhealthy air remains one of the most difficult and controversial environmental
issues facing this region. Federal laws like the Clean Air Act set air quality
standards that all areas of the country must meet or face potential punitive
measures including a loss of federal highway funding, increased federal
regulatory oversight, construction permit restrictions and loss of economic
Environment - 63
DRAFT #3

development opportunities. States with areas that do not meet federal air quality
standards must develop a plan – known as a state implementation plan (SIP) –
that identifies how they will control air pollution. Periodic revisions to the SIP are
made because of changing air quality conditions and federal requirements which
are then submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality. Locally, however, the Maricopa County Air
Quality Department is the agency responsible for ensuring compliance with
federal clean air standards.
At the time this plan was written portions of Maricopa County were designated as
a nonattainment area for two pollutants: coarse particulate matter (PM10) and
ozone. Given this area’s dry climate it is also often challenged to meet air quality
standards for the fine particle matter contaminant known as PM2.5. Some
pollutants are natural given the area’s dusty soil while others are caused by
human activity. Unfortunately, all are known to be health hazards. Eliminating
them to the greatest extent possible is an important responsibility for the county,
so to protect public health and the regional economy Maricopa County supports
continuing the Compliance Assurance Model approach used by its Air Quality
Department to achieve cleaner air and a better quality of life.1
Strategies
 Participate in revisions to the SIP.
 Implement the Compliance Assurance model approach to meet federal health
standards and improve air quality.
 To reduce vehicle use, establish balanced land use patterns where
employment, retail and residential land uses are proximate rather than
separate.
Water Quality
The Water Resources element explains that a clean and safe water supply is a
priority for Maricopa County, and two of the most important ways to protect
water quality are the county’s Drinking Water and Water and Wastewater
Treatment programs. Clean water is essential for healthy growth and both of
these programs help the county in its commitment to achieving this result.
1 Additional information about Maricopa County’s role and responsibilities in meeting federal air quality standards is available from the
Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
Environment - 64
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Enforce the provisions of the county’s Drinking Water program and its Water
and Wastewater Treatment program.
Habitat and Cultural Resource Preservation
One thing that makes Maricopa County special is its unique Sonoran Desert
setting that sustains many plants and animals, some of which are found nowhere
else. Elevations ranging from about 300 feet near Gila Bend to over 7,600 feet in
the mountains contribute to this diversity, as do the many washes and streams
that pass through the county. Federal and state laws like the Endangered
Species Act and the Arizona Native Plant law protect vulnerable and endangered
plants and animals, but everyone has a role to play in safeguarding the county’s
ecosystem. For its part Maricopa County helps protect unique plants and animals
by ensuring that new development is designed in a way that preserves needed
open space for wildlife habitat and migration corridors, and by recognizing
helpful practices in documents such as the MAG Desert Spaces Plan, the
Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment report, and the Maricopa
County Parks System Strategic Master Plan.
Besides unique plants and animals Maricopa County also has important historical
and prehistoric cultural resources. Humans have inhabited this region for
thousands of years including the first permanent settlers known as the Hohokam.
Evidence of the Hohokam’s existence, including hieroglyphics, pottery, tools and
campsites are found throughout the county. As with endangered plants and
animals cultural sites are protected by federal laws like the National Historic
Preservation Act that preserves sites, buildings and objects of significant historic
and cultural value. At the state level SHPO assists in identifying and protecting
historic and archaeological property of significance for local communities,
Arizona, and/or the nation. For its part Maricopa County supports preserving
significant cultural sites, particularly by coordinating with SHPO to ensure that
where necessary land is surveyed for potential cultural resources before new
development occurs, and that mitigation measures are used when needed.
Strategies
 Support protecting vulnerable plant and animal habitat and migration
corridors, including within regionally significant rivers and washes.
 Mitigate loss of natural habitat and migratory corridors for native flora and
fauna.
Environment - 65
DRAFT #3

 Coordinate with the Arizona Game and Fish Department to determine if a
biological survey is needed to identify practical and valuable species prior to
new development, and that mitigation measures are completed prior to land
disturbance.
 Use the Maricopa County Wildlife Connectivity Assessment when planning and
designing new development.
 Coordinate with SHPO to ensure that, where necessary, cultural resource
surveys are conducted prior to new development and that mitigation
measures are completed prior to land disturbance.
Noise
Although often overlooked as an environmental issue noise pollution can be a
serious problem because of its effects on individuals and communities. Persistent
and/or loud noise can lead to sleep deprivation, psychological stress, high blood
pressure, hearing loss, lack of concentration and lost productivity. While loud
noise is a matter of personal tolerance the health effects can nevertheless be
significant.
There are many potential sources of loud noise including vehicles, aircraft,
commercial and industrial activity, and lawn and garden equipment. Particular
concern to Maricopa County is noise associated with military aircraft operations
at Luke Air Force Base and its ancillary facilities. As noted in the Land Use
element state law requires local governments to have land use plans and zoning
ordinances that ensure future development is compatible with the high noise and
accident potential of these facilities’ operations. In addition, for areas inside and
certain areas outside High Noise or Accident Potential Zones state law and
Maricopa County’s building construction codes require that noise reductions be
included in the design of new buildings.2 Going forward Maricopa County’s dual
responsibilities to protect Luke Air Force Base from encroachment and the public
from the noise and safety hazards of military flight operations will guide its land
use and development policies.
Recognizing the effects that persistent and/or loud noise can have on public
health – and that it is in the best interest to control noise in a way that promotes
commerce, the value and enjoyment of property, and overall environmental
quality – Maricopa County enacted its first noise ordinance in 2006 to prohibit
excessive, unnecessary, disruptive, and annoying noises in unincorporated
areas.3 Ordinance enforcement is the responsibility of the Maricopa County
Sheriff’s Office which is typically done on an individual
2 More information about land use and noise reduction protections for Luke Air Force Base and its ancillary facilities is available in the Land
Use 3 element, Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance, Maricopa County Building Code, and Arizona Revised Statutes.
The Maricopa County Noise Ordinance is available online at the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department website.
Environment - 66
DRAFT #3

complaint basis. Maricopa County supports the noise restrictions included in this
ordinance and will evaluate new development to ensure that, where necessary,
noise reduction techniques are included in project design.
Strategies
 Continue the Military Compatible land use designation within the High Noise
or Accident Potential Zones.
 Enforce the Military Airport and Ancillary Military Facility Overlay Zoning
District.
 Enforce the county’s noise ordinance.
 Review new development to determine if noise abatement is necessary. If so,
use proper site design techniques to mitigate noise impacts in high noise
generating land uses.
 Where necessary, coordinate with local jurisdictions to ensure compatible
development near local/municipal airports.
 Ensure compatible land uses.
Hillside Development
While most development in the county is located on the flat desert floor, rugged
areas – particularly in northern Maricopa County – do attract certain types of
development, mainly custom homes that offer low densities, rural character,
unobstructed and expansive views and privacy. However, if not designed
carefully damaging and dangerous conditions can occur that affect the very
features these individuals seek. Some of the potential problems and hazards can
include:
 Destruction of scenic quality;
 Increased stormwater runoff and flooding;
 Loss of plant and animal habitat;
 Erosion;
 Soil/slope failure;
 Wildfire hazards;
 Lack of safe access for people and emergency vehicles;
 High utility and infrastructure/maintenance costs
Hillside stability can degrade as slope increases above 15%, making
development financially unfeasible due to difficult and costly engineering
Environment - 67
DRAFT #3

requirements.4 Maricopa County recognizes the right to develop private hillside
property, but also its responsibility to protect the health and safety of other
residents that may be affected by such development. To help minimize potential
dangers Maricopa County discourages development on hillside grades above
15% and favors the following general design characteristics:
 Cluster development in areas below 15%;
 Retain trees and native vegetation for slope and soil stabilization;
 Minimize scarring from infrastructure cut and fills;
 Minimize building footprints;
 Minimize hillside disturbance and allow for appropriate landscaping and
natural stormwater runoff;
 Use appropriate materials, shapes, and colors that allow buildings to blend
into the environment.
Strategies
 Discourage development on hillsides above 15% grade where possible.
 Use flexible zoning techniques to protect hillside areas.
 Use the general design characteristics identified in this element.
Excessive Nighttime Light
Excessive nighttime light – often referred to light pollution – occurs when
outdoor lighting is misdirected, unshielded, and/or generally excessive and
unnecessary. The resulting light that travels upward and outward causes glare
and an orange-tinted glow overhead that obscures astronomical observation.
Simple solutions, such as directing light towards the ground, light shielded
fixtures, and proper fixture wattage are steps that can help limit excessive light.
The Maricopa County Dark Sky Ordinance includes provisions to control the use
of outdoor, artificial illuminating fixtures emitting light into the night sky. This
ordinance encourages good light practices that conserve energy and money,
while also increasing safety, security and productivity. Maricopa County
continues to consider this ordinance an important part of nighttime sky
protection, while acknowledging that this is an issue that must be considered on
a regional basis.
4 A 15% slope is land that rises 15 feet in elevation over a distance of 100 feet.
Environment - 68
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Continue to enforce the Maricopa County Dark Sky Ordinance
 Support regional efforts to limit excessive nighttime light
Environment - 69
DRAFT #3

ENVIRONMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
Maricopa County’s unique and scenic desert setting is one of the reasons why so
many people choose to live here, and why protecting it is such a high priority.
The following goals and policies reaffirm the county’s commitment to help
protect and preserve its environment through responsible land use management.
Environment Goal #1: Provide regional leadership to promote all aspects of
regional environmental quality.
Environment Policy #1: Maricopa County supports its Compliance Assurance
model approach to meet federal air quality
standards.
Environment Policy #2: To help improve air quality Maricopa County supports
balanced and efficient land use patterns where
employment, retail and residential land uses are
proximate rather than separate.
Environment Policy #3: To help protect water quality Maricopa County
supports compliance with its Drinking Water program
and its Water and Wastewater Treatment program.
Environment Policy #4: Maricopa County supports innovative project design
and development techniques that protect and
mitigate damage to important plant and animal
habitat and migration corridors.
Environment Policy #5: As directed by SHPO and Arizona Game and Fish
Department, Maricopa County supports cultural
resource and biological surveys being completed –
and needed mitigation measures established – prior
to new development.
Environment Policy #6: Maricopa County supports the Military Compatible
land use designation for High Noise or Accident
Potential Zones, and compliance with state laws
relating to land use compatibility and consistency
with the high noise or accident potential of Luke Air
Force Base and the ancillary military facilities.
Environment - 70
DRAFT #3

Environment Policy #7: Where necessary Maricopa County supports noise
reductions in new development design and in the
construction of new buildings.
Environment Policy #8: Maricopa County supports flexible zoning techniques
when used to keep new development below the 15%
hillside slope and to protect riparian areas.
Environment Policy #9: Maricopa County supports using the hillside general
design characteristics identified in this element.
Environment Policy #10: Maricopa County supports enforcement of its Dark
Sky Ordinance, and supports regional efforts to limit
excessive nighttime light.
Environment - 71
DRAFT #3

ECONOMIC GROWTH
OVERVIEW
A pleasant climate and traditionally strong job market have combined to help attract
millions of people to Maricopa County over the past few decades. Recently, however,
population growth has slowed because of the difficult economic downturn that took a
serious toll on job availability and the local economy. Emphasis on industries like real
estate and construction, which are directly tied to population growth, contributed to the
severity of the downturn and demonstrated that over reliance on any industry is not
good policy. Moreover, the rapid changes and competition that characterize what is now
a global economy means that Maricopa County cannot simply rely on a pleasant
climate and population growth as the basis for its economic development strategy. The
global economy means business, industry, and the workforce are more mobile than
ever and it is important to recognize that other places in the U.S. and around the world
have advantages and characteristics that rival those of Maricopa County. Ultimately,
Maricopa County must continuously compete to attract new businesses and diversify its
economy.
Early this century the nation experienced one of its most severe economic downturns
since the Great Depression. During this time Maricopa County fared worse than many
other parts of the country because of the collapse in the construction and real estate
industries brought on primarily by risky real estate conditions and overbuilding of
residential and, to a lesser extent, commercial development. Although difficult to
endure it provides a new perspective and opportunity to commit to having a stable and
diverse local economy. Economic diversity creates economic resiliency, and economic
resiliency can help Maricopa County avoid future “boom” and “bust” cycles that are so
destructive.
Maricopa County promotes economic growth through an approach that strives to “Build
a vibrant, sustainable and environmentally responsible economy resulting in increased
quality of job opportunities and income levels, strengthened tax base and enhancement
of the quality of life for Maricopa County residents and communities.” To implement
this approach Maricopa County focuses on several strategies:
 Contribute to business attraction and retention efforts of established organizations;
 Support programs directed at improving the business climate in the region;
 Contribute to the promotion of professional sports, tourism and small business
development;
 Broker resources for business and community development activities;
Economic Growth - 72
DRAFT #3

 Provide strategic information to enable business decisions;
 Administer the Western Maricopa County Enterprise Zone;
 Promote and contribute to comprehensive planning efforts to guide and promote
development in the region;
The goals and policies in Vision 2030 complement this approach, but also identify other
ways to help the county achieve a long-term, globally competitive economic position.
Ultimately, the most important principle put forth in this element is creating a diverse
and resilient economy to avoid the damaging “boom” and “bust” cycles that periodically
affect this region.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Industrial Development Authority of Maricopa County
The Industrial Development Authority of Maricopa County (IDAMC) is a nonprofit
corporation that provides low-cost financing for qualified projects by acting as a type of
“conduit” for issuing revenue bonds that are exempt from state and sometimes
federal taxation. Many types of projects are eligible for IDAMC financing including
manufacturing, offices, healthcare facilities, nonprofit educational facilities, industrial
parks and single- and multi-family housing. Overseen by a volunteer board of directors,
since its establishment in 1973 the IDAMC has been influential in helping finance over
$4 billion in new development. With its history and success of supporting financing for
quality, non-speculative development Maricopa County continues to support IDAMC
objectives.
Community Development Block Grant Program; HOME Investment Partnership Program
Administered by the Maricopa County Human Services Department, the Community
Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) helps communities provide housing and
economic opportunities to those of modest means. Through a cooperative arrangement
with smaller cities and towns Maricopa County formed what is known as an “Urban
County” which allows them to participate in the CDBG program so they can realize the
economic benefits. However, not all requests for CDBG funding can be fulfilled so a
Community Development Advisory Committee – consisting of elected officials from
participating jurisdictions – makes funding recommendations to the Board which can
then vote to authorize the expenditure of funds for specific projects. More information
regarding the CDBG and Community Development Advisory Committee is available from
the Maricopa County Human Services Department.
The HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME Program) was established in 1996
to strengthen public-private partnerships and expand the supply of safe and affordable
Economic Growth - 73
DRAFT #3

housing. Federal funds for the HOME Program are received through the Maricopa HOME
Consortium which is a legal entity created through an intergovernmental agreement
between Consortium members that include Maricopa County and several cities and
towns. Each member receives a pro rata share of HOME funds to meet their respective
local needs which are identified in the Consortium’s Five Year Consolidated Plan and
Annual Action Plans. Additional information about the HOME program is also available
from the Maricopa County Human Services Department.
The impacts of the Great Recession, most notably high unemployment and a significant
number of home foreclosures, created economic problems unlike any this region has
experienced in the past several decades. As a result the need for the CDBG and HOME
programs is arguably greater than ever which is why Maricopa County supports the
cooperative relationship it has with partnering jurisdictions to promote economic
opportunities for low- and moderate-income residents.
Greater Phoenix Economic Council (GPEC):
Created in 1989 GPEC is a non-profit, public-private economic development partnership
that works cooperatively to promote a regional identity and a competitive, vibrant
economy. GPEC members include Maricopa County, 20 cities and towns, and over 150
businesses of varying size that leverage their resources to attract quality businesses
from around the world. Attracting new business to this area is what differentiates GPEC
from local chambers of commerce who primarily focus on existing business retention
and expansion. According to GPEC since 1989 it has assisted more than 520 companies
in locating to the Phoenix area, resulting in over 93,500 jobs, $11 billion in capital
investment, and $3.3 billion in payroll.1 GPEC maintains its goal to be one of the
premier economic development organizations in the nation by marketing the Phoenix
area nationally and internationally. Maricopa County supports the important role GPEC
plays in helping build a strong local economy.
CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
The rapidly changing global economy requires new and dynamic ways to adapt and
compete, and as the speed of change accelerates Maricopa County must carefully
decide how it will position itself for future success. This section outlines several
important issues that shape the county’s policies, and that can help lead it to success.
Adapting to the “New Economy”
The New Economy is more a theory than an economic system, and although no formal
definition exists the trends behind it are real and must be appreciated. Many agree that
the New Economy began several decades ago but accelerated rapidly around the mid-
1 Greater Phoenix Economic Council. Found at http://www.gpec.org
Economic Growth - 74
DRAFT #3

1990s with the introduction of the internet into many aspects of business and personal
life. The New Economy is based on the idea that rapid changes in information
technology and increasingly interconnected global economies and societies will
continuously change the way businesses and workers operate. Unlike the past when
economies were based primarily on manufacturing and industrialization, the New
Economy is more knowledge-based, entrepreneurial and global in scope. However, even
in traditional manufacturing industries knowledge-based skills and technology are
becoming essential for success.
In a relatively short time the New Economy has changed and will continue to change:
 How and where people work: Employees are becoming less dependent on traditional
offices and headquarters where face-to-face interaction with people and customers
is necessary. Because of technology a growing number of businesses and
professions now enable someone living in one part of the world to transact business
or provide services to customers in another part without ever leaving home.
 How people and businesses produce, buy and sell products and services: The
internet and a growing service sector are creating an e-commerce economy that
is less reliant on “brick-and-mortar” plants, offices, and stores.
 How people and businesses interact in a global society: Technology allows for
instant global voice and video communication for personal, social, educational and
business purposes.
A report issued by the National Governor’s Association (NGA) New Economy Task Force
identifies several results of these transformative changes:2
 Products such as computers and cell phones are becoming smaller and lighter;
 Worker and business productivity is rising which allows wages to increase without
causing a significant rise in inflation;
 Markets are global and competitive, and jobs are increasingly moving to where
people reside rather than the other way around. Businesses look globally when
choosing a location and advantages go to workers in regions that have needed skills
and education;
 Entrepreneurs are the drivers of economic growth with small, fast-growing
companies (known as Gazelles) creating most new jobs;
 Private-private partnerships (businesses–to–business cooperation) and public-private
partnerships (government–businesses cooperation) are increasingly important;
 Workers need to constantly acquire new skills and “reinvent” themselves;
2 National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. State Strategies for the New Economy. 2000. Found at
http://www.nga.org.
Economic Growth – 75
DRAFT #3

 Markets and businesses are dynamic, flexible, and constantly changing;
 Information technology is fundamental to all types of businesses;
 Knowledge is the most important factor in the production of goods and services;
Maricopa County understands that the New Economy is changing the way businesses
and societies function, and that there are positive and negative effects of these
changes. This section summarizes how the New Economy influences the policies in
Vision 2030.
 Maricopa County competes against other cities, states and nations for business
growth and skilled workers.
 While keeping the county’s business and living costs low is important, this alone is
not a winning strategy since there will always be other areas where these costs are
much lower. In fact, many high-cost areas like Seattle, Boston and the Silicon Valley
of California are known for attracting knowledge industries and knowledge
workers because of an emphasis on creating quality places and a high quality of
life. To compete in the New Economy Maricopa County should implement policies
that create the quality of life that attracts knowledge industries and the knowledge
workers they require.
 Maricopa County must help identify ways to attract high-growth, knowledge-based
industries through industry clusters, including a critical mass of competitors in
those industries so that they have access to a broad pool of skilled workers and
resources. Attracting industry clusters allows knowledge to be shared among firms,
thus creating high levels of cumulative and synergistic knowledge which is appealing
to businesses. While industry clusters are found in both high-tech and more
traditional low-tech firms, and in both the manufacturing and service sector, it is
important that their long-term growth prospects are stable so that the potential for
raising the county’s living standards remains strong.
 Fundamental to the New Economy is competition and choice for businesses,
consumers and workers which means Maricopa County should continuously evaluate
its place-based assets and socioeconomic conditions in relation to other areas, and
constantly improve those aspects that attract knowledge industries and knowledge
workers.
 Business and capital are very mobile in the New Economy, giving knowledge
workers more options about where they choose to live which, in turn, affects where
knowledge industries choose to locate. This change in work and relocation patterns
means that decisions about where knowledge workers choose to live are
increasingly made by them rather than for them, and is yet another reason why
quality of place and quality of life are so important. This also explains why some
high cost regions that focus on quality of place win out over low cost, low quality
locations.
Economic Growth – 76
DRAFT #3

 The NGA identifies that attracting knowledge industries and knowledge workers is
essential for raising living standards because of the correlation between knowledge
workers with college degrees and per capita income.3 The NGA also identifies that
metropolitan areas with the most educated populations have per-capita income
increases twice that of less educated areas, and highly educated areas appear
correlated to increased levels of entrepreneurship, new firm formation and fast-
growing firms.4
 The Great Recession showed that Maricopa County must continuously strive to
diversify its economy. Overreliance on industries tied to population growth is not an
effective long-term strategy if it wants to avoid “boom” and “bust” cycles and create
economic resiliency. Therefore, Maricopa County should implement policies to help
attract a variety of industries with long-term, stable growth prospects.
 Maricopa County recognizes that cooperative arrangements with the private sector
are critical to solve problems, and will become increasingly necessary since both
public and private capital may be limited for the foreseeable future.
 In the New Economy competition for growth is very intense so Maricopa County
should continuously consider ways to support business start-ups, attract workers
with the skills needed to staff those businesses, and create an environment where
businesses and workers can succeed. In addition, given their increasing importance
in the New Economy Maricopa County also supports the unique role and needs of
entrepreneurs and the start-up businesses they create.
Strategies
 Implement policies that create and maintain quality of place so Maricopa County can
compete for new businesses, capital formation and inflow and knowledge workers.
 Coordinate with GPEC and other organizations to implement strategies that support
industry cluster formation in a variety of long-term, stable growth sectors.
 Identify ways to form partnerships with businesses and industries to address their
needs and those of the broader community.
 Provide an economic climate that is supportive of entrepreneurial activities.
 Encourage programs that increase education and training for workers, with
particular attention focusing on skills necessary to compete in the New Economy.
 Implement policies that help diversify Maricopa County’s economy and help it
compete for new business growth.
3 National Governors Association. The 2007 State New Economy Index: Benchmarking Economic Transformation in the States. 2007.
Found at http://www.nga.org.
4 Ibid at http://www.nga.org
Economic Growth – 77
DRAFT #3

Quality of Place Matters
The New Economy requires that communities continuously find new and innovative
ways to compete for economic growth, new capital and knowledge workers. Since
quality of place is such an important factor in competing effectively it is essential that
Maricopa County focus on providing the amenities, features and characteristics that
create the quality places that knowledge industries and knowledge workers demand.
Some of the factors that affect quality of place and quality of life include:
 The condition of the natural and built environment, including traffic congestion, air
pollution, sprawl and dilapidation;
 The variety of employment opportunities;
 Access to quality services like health care, libraries and shopping;
 The variety of open space, recreation & leisure opportunities;
 Cultural amenities like museums, theatres and symphonies;
 A quality education system;
 Strong community and neighborhood character;
 Pleasant climate;
 Healthy and active residents;
 Community sustainability;
 Continuous revitalization, reinvention and innovation;
 Community support systems and community interaction;
 Public safety and a sense of security;
 A sense of place, acceptance and belonging (i.e. a belief that “this is home”)
Maricopa County understands the importance of these factors and should continuously
assess how it can strengthen its competitive advantage in these areas to establish itself
as a good place to do business and a good place to live.
Strategies
 Continuously assess Maricopa County’s quality of place to help achieve a competitive
economic advantage; identify ways to strengthen the quality of place factors that
impede economic growth.
 Implement policies that create orderly development patterns; make Maricopa
County’s quality of place a high priority.
Economic Growth – 78
DRAFT #3

Create a Good Business Climate
Maricopa County considers quality of place a high priority, but also understands the
importance of having a good business environment that allows companies of all sizes to
flourish. Establishing this environment must be a cooperative effort between the public
and private sectors to identify effective and appropriate strategies such as incentives,
business-responsive economic policies and aggressive marketing and outreach. The
policies in Vision 2030 focus on both Basic Sector and Non-Basic Sector businesses,
each of which are important but require a different strategy.
Basic Sector
Maricopa County should support Basic Sector industries because they bring new capital,
new jobs, and spending power to the region. There are certain characteristics many of
these businesses look for when making location and relocation decisions, including:
 A strategic location that provides access to target markets, subcontractors,
customers and raw materials;
 Access to an educated and trained or trainable workforce;
 Access to quality utilities, roads, and infrastructure;
 Low operating costs; state and local incentives;
 Developable land;
 Support for entrepreneurship and innovation;
 Access to financial capital;
 Low cost of living for employees;
 High quality of life and quality of place for employees;
Since most Basic Sector industries locate in cities and towns Vision 2030 has a limited
role in helping attract and support such businesses. However, it does play an important
role in ensuring quality of place, designating land for business development, and
coordinating new business development with needed infrastructure.
Non-Basic Sector
While Basic Sector industries are critical for raising living standards, Non-Basic Sector
businesses are also important because many are locally-owned and provide valuable
products and services to residents. These businesses also account for many
professional jobs so they too are an essential part of the local economy. Some
examples of Non-Basic Sector businesses include:
Economic Growth – 79
DRAFT #3

 Health care workers
 Attorneys
 Accountants
 Insurance agents
 Real estate agents
 Banking, loan, and financial agents
 Business consultants
 Architects
 Veterinarians
Vision 2030 supports small business development by promoting non-residential land
availability, especially within master-planned communities and similar types of urban
development.
Strategies
 Coordinate with GPEC and other economic development organizations to attract
and retain Basic Sector industries.
 Provide information and assistance to prospective businesses about Maricopa
County, and assist economic development organizations with information and
data as needed.
 Provide information to businesses regarding assistance and incentive programs
offered by state and local organizations.
 Consider incentives to attract Basic Sector industries.
 Encourage programs that support Non-Basic sector success and retention.
Small Business Development
One of the most important principles of Vision 2030 is the need for efficient and
balanced land use patterns. Such patterns are especially important within master-
planned communities and similar urban development that can include hundreds of
thousands of new residents. These communities provide excellent locations for
small, entrepreneurial businesses to start and expand. Where possible business
incubator programs in these communities could also help create new jobs and
expand the local economy.
Economic Growth - 80
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Support and assist entrepreneurial and early-stage small business development
in master-planned communities and similar urban development.
 Where possible, encourage business incubator programs in master-planned
communities and similar urban development.
Align Public/Private Sector Outcomes
The familiar phrase the only constant is change is appropriate for the New Economy
because change is both frequent and rapid. For many businesses rapid and
continuous change means increased competition to find new customers and markets
for their products and services. While success is never guaranteed, those businesses
that cannot compete effectively and efficiently will likely fail.
Maricopa County must also compete for new businesses and the workforce they
need, and it’s this commonality that should bring businesses and the county
together to create a healthy and stable economy. Maricopa County can help
businesses compete by developing partnerships and alliances that support their
operations, and by treating them as customers whose needs must be understood.
Some of the ways this can be achieved include:
 Continuously look for ways to improve its services using an entrepreneurial
approach that focuses on enhancing efficiency, effectiveness, innovation and
creativity;
 Continuously assess and reassess rules, regulations, and requirements to
demonstrate their effectiveness, and whether desired outcomes can be achieved
more efficiently;Identify ways to measure progress in aligning government and
business needs so that successes can be replicated, deficiencies corrected and
citizen support for outcomes increased.
 Clearly articulate policies and expectations so that uncertainty is minimized;
measure progress towards achieving policy outcomes.
Although business and government serve different purposes they should build
cooperative partnerships based on common interests and needs. For example,
businesses need the services, infrastructure and quality of place that Maricopa
County can help provide, while Maricopa County needs successful businesses so its
residents have employment opportunities. Importantly, economic growth need not
come at the expense of quality of life since both Maricopa County and businesses
need to attract an educated and skilled workforce that demands quality places.
Economic Growth - 81
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Use an entrepreneurial approach to become more efficient and effective in
service delivery.
 Continuously assess the county’s operations and regulations to ensure quality,
effective, and competitive services.
 Implement Vision 2030 consistently and clearly articulate policies and desired
outcomes.
Economic Growth - 82
DRAFT #3

ECONOMIC GROWTH GOALS AND POLICIES
Stable, long-term economic growth is not assured in the competitive New Economy,
so Maricopa County should continuously seek new and innovative ways to
encourage such growth. Innovation is fundamental to this element’s goals and
policies to support existing county efforts, yet supplement them with additional
business-oriented, labor force-oriented and place-oriented strategies.
Economic Growth Goal #1: Contribute to an effective regional economy.
Economic Growth Goal #2: Have a diverse and balanced economy to promote
long-term economic stability and economic
resiliency.
Economic Growth Goal #3: Attract knowledge industries in a range of Basic
Sector clusters, and attract the knowledge workers
they need by achieving quality of place and quality
of life.
Economic Growth Goal #4: Create and grow a diverse business climate.
Economic Growth Policy #1: Maricopa County supports orderly and balanced
land use patterns that include Basic and Non-Basic
sector businesses, especially in master-planned
communities and similar urban development.
Economic Growth Policy #2: Maricopa County supports public-private alliances
to increase business success and address
community needs.
Economic Growth Policy #3: Maricopa County supports increasing
entrepreneurial activities and business formation.
Economic Growth Policy #4: Maricopa County supports programs that provide
citizens with the education and training necessary
to compete in the New Economy.
Economic Growth Policy #5: Maricopa County supports programs that attract a
variety of Basic Sector industry clusters that have
long-term, stable growth prospects.
Economic Growth - 83
DRAFT #3

Economic Growth Policy #6: Maricopa County supports efforts to recruit
prospective businesses and industries to the
county, and efforts to retain existing businesses
and industries.
Economic Growth Policy #7: Maricopa County supports the IDAMC, HOME,
CDBG and other incentive programs.
Economic Growth Policy #8: Maricopa County supports continuously assessing
its regulations and processes to enhance
effectiveness, ensure quality service, increase
efficiency and establish a competitive advantage.
Economic Growth Policy #9: Maricopa County supports implementing Vision
2030 in a clear and consistent way to help
businesses make long-term investment decisions.
Economic Growth Policy #10: Maricopa County supports leveraging its solar
resource potential to attract solar-related
industries and alternative energy research and
development.
Economic Growth - 84
DRAFT #3

GROWTH AREAS
OVERVIEW
In 1998 Arizona approved a sweeping new law known as Growing Smarter to
help ensure sensible growth and protect the state’s environment. Among its
provisions the law requires that this comprehensive plan identify areas suitable
for planned multimodal transportation and infrastructure expansion to support
concentrations of urban land uses. The law also requires this plan to include
policies and strategies that:
 Make multimodal transportation more efficient;
 Make infrastructure expansion more economical;
 Provide for rational land development patterns;
 Conserve significant natural resources and open spaces within identified
growth areas, and coordinate and connect their locations to similar areas
outside growth areas;
 Promote timely and financially sound infrastructure expansion
Steady and consistent growth is important to Maricopa County’s future, but how
and where growth occurs can affect the environment, transportation system,
public finances and overall quality of life. This Growth Areas element is important
because it requires that new growth occur in an efficient, orderly and responsible
manner to help resolve problems like traffic congestion and air pollution. Also, by
identifying areas appropriate for urban development this element helps Maricopa
County implement its Urban Solutions for Urban Development strategy.
The Growth Areas element was one of several later added to the previous
comprehensive plan in response to the Growing Smarter law. Although the time
frame for measuring the results of previous efforts is limited, some noteworthy
conclusions can be made.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Growth Area Considerations:
The previous comprehensive plan identified several constraints that were
expected to affect the amount and location of new urban growth in
unincorporated areas:
Growth Areas - 85
DRAFT #3

 Physical constraints, including steep slopes, riparian areas, floodplains, land
subsidence, Earth fissures, water availability and important plant and wildlife
habitat.
 Built constraints, including the lack of infrastructure and services, and the
location of noise sources like airports, automobile proving grounds, racetracks
and highways.
 Ownership considerations, including public land managed by federal, state
and local governments and Indian communities.
The previous comprehensive plan also identified where urban growth should
occur including General Plan Development Areas, certain locations within county
area plans, and within development master plans/master planned communities.
In general, the constraints analysis was accurate as each did direct the types and
intensities of development in certain areas. The opportunities and constraints
analysis remains an important part of Vision 2030, and both existing and new
opportunities and constraints are considered.
CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
Following many years of rapid growth the Great Recession took a serious social
and economic toll on Maricopa County. While near-term population and economic
growth are expected to be somewhat restrained as a result, most projections
anticipate that stronger growth will eventually return which makes identifying
areas appropriate for future urban development an important and timely priority.
The following section considers several potential constraints to new urban
growth and, as directed by state law and county policy, establishes where urban
growth is most appropriate.
Growth Area Constraints
Physical Constraints
Soil
While not often thought of as an obstacle soil can affect the quality and
character of land uses and sub-surface infrastructure. Some of the soil properties
that can affect development include permeability, compaction, shrink-swell
potential, plasticity, salinity, erosion vulnerability and corrosiveness.
Topography
The significant slope and elevation changes in Maricopa County directly affect
land use. Slopes range from less than 2% on the desert floor to well over 20% in
some areas making development very difficult and expensive. The result is that
Growth Areas - 86
DRAFT #3

rugged and steep areas are either bypassed for less challenging locations or
developed at very low densities and intensities.
Floodplains
Floodplains are areas vulnerable to flooding during significant rain events, most
notably in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s 100-year floodplain.
While the 100-year floodplain includes areas that have a 1% chance of
experiencing certain flood levels in any given year, such events frequently
happen more than once every 100 years and can significantly exceed typical
flood levels. Insurance, engineering and other technical obstacles can make
development in these areas both difficult and expensive.
Subsidence/Earth Fissures
As noted earlier certain areas of Maricopa County have a difficult and chronic
problem known as land subsidence, which occurs when too much groundwater is
removed leaving a gap where the weight of the overlying soil and material
compresses causing the ground to sink. Unfortunately, when ground sinks it
usually does so unevenly creating cracks known as Earth fissures. Fissures
typically start small but gradually expand due to erosion and can form
deceptively dangerous gullies dozens of feet wide and equally deep. Once
fissures begin they usually increase in number and length, and spread at uneven
speeds and directions. Land subsidence of up to 18 feet has been recorded in
certain areas of the county and some fissures are hundreds of feet in length.
Subsidence and the resulting fissures can damage roads, utilities and irrigation
systems; destroy buildings and livestock; alter drainage patterns; and become
dumping grounds for hazardous materials that can affect water quality.
Water Quality / Availability
Maricopa County’s water supply comes from groundwater contained in sub-
basins of varying depth, and from surface water like the Central Arizona Project
Canal and dam-impounded lakes. The amount of water available from both
sources depends on precipitation, especially from winter snow melt in higher
elevations of Arizona, Utah and Colorado. Water quantity and quality varies by
location in the county which can affect the density and intensity of new
development.
Vegetation/Wildlife Habitat
Maricopa County has many plants and animals unique to the Sonoran Desert that
are protected by federal and state laws. These laws safeguard important habitat
and can influence where development can occur, or at least restrict land
disturbance.
Growth Areas - 87
DRAFT #3

Cultural/Archaeological Sites
Maricopa County has many archaeological sites associated with the Hohokam
and other early inhabitants. The Arizona State Historic Preservation Office and
the Arizona State Museum keep inventories of important cultural resources in the
state, while other agencies like the Arizona State Land Department, U.S. Forest
Service, U.S. Defense Department, Bureau of Land Management and Indian
communities keep inventories of cultural resources for areas under their control.
Depending on their scope and significance archaeological sites can affect where,
when and/or if development occurs.
Built Constraints
Infrastructure and Services
One the most obvious constraints to urban development are the availability of
infrastructure and services since they dictate the type and timing of new growth.
While usually not necessary for rural development, appropriate infrastructure and
services are required for urban development to help protect public health and
safety, meet residents’ needs, and support orderly and fiscally responsible
growth patterns. This remains a fundamental principle of Vision 2030 and the
county’s Urban Solutions for Urban Development strategy which necessitates the
services and infrastructure identified in the Land Use element be confirmed
before considering changes to this plan or zoning district boundaries.
Infrastructure and service availability impact the type, timing, and location of
urban development and is a key factor in where growth areas are appropriate.
Noise-generating Land Uses
Persistent, loud, and/or continuous noise can affect health, sleep, learning
patterns, and even property values. While there are many sources of noise some
of the most recognizable include:
 Airports: Given their potential for noise and safety hazards airports play an
important role in determining the type and location of new development.
Maricopa County has many airports including Sky Harbor International and
Phoenix-Mesa Gateway that provide commercial airline service, general
aviation airports that serve private aircraft, and so-called “fly-in” communities
for light aircraft. While airports create noise and safety hazards they also
have important economic benefits so compatible land use planning around
them is an important factor in determining the location of growth areas.
 Automobile Proving Grounds: Automobile proving grounds are facilities where
manufacturers test vehicle and related component capabilities in a controlled
environment. Several manufacturers have such facilities in Maricopa County
Growth Areas - 88
DRAFT #3

that allow them to test equipment in hot climate conditions. Noise from
automobile testing, along with security concerns about product design and
performance, are considerations in determining the types and intensities of
new growth in surrounding areas.
 Major Roads & Highways: Although roads and highways are sources of
continuous noise they are vital to the economy and society. Because
compatible land use near major roads and highways is important they are
factors in determining appropriate growth areas.
 Railroads: Trains can generate brief but high noise events due to train speed,
use of horns, track and other specific conditions. Like roads and highways,
railroads are essential for the movement of people and products so adjacent
land use compatibility can be a factor in determining appropriate urban
growth areas.
Hazardous Areas
Hazardous conditions can also dictate the types and intensities of new
development. Two of these hazards – floodplains and subsidence/Earth fissures
– are discussed earlier in this chapter, but there are other potentially hazardous
conditions that determine growth areas:
 High Noise or Accident Potential Zone: State law designates certain areas
around military facilities as High Noise or Accident Potential Zones (HNAPZ),
including near Luke Air Force Base, Luke Auxiliary Airfield #1 in Surprise, and
the auxiliary airfield south of Gila Bend. The HNAPZ is defined as areas within
noise contours that surround these facilities and the accident potential zones
that extend off the ends of their runways. The HNAPZ helps ensure that
future development is compatible with the high noise or accident potential
generated by military aircraft that may have an adverse effect on public
health and safety.
In 2004 Arizona enacted laws that enhance protections for Luke Air Force
Base, add ancillary military facilities to the list of protected installations, and
require local governments – Maricopa County, Surprise, Glendale, El Mirage,
Goodyear, Youngtown, Buckeye and Gila Bend – to adopt land use plans and
zoning regulations for property in the HNAPZ of each facility. These land use
plans and zoning regulations must ensure that development is compatible
with the high noise and accident potential generated by military airport or
ancillary military facility operations that have or may have an adverse effect
on public health and safety. State law restricts the types of land uses that are
allowed in these areas and only those uses found by the state to be
compatible and consistent with the high noise or accident potential generated
Growth Areas - 89
DRAFT #3

by these facilities are allowed, although other uses may also be permitted
upon mutual consent of Luke Air Force Base and Maricopa County.
State law also identifies a larger risk area around Luke Air Force Base and
Auxiliary Airfield #1 where military aircraft can impact public health and
quality of life. Known as the Territory in the Vicinity of a Military Airport, this
area extends outward from the center of the main runways at Luke Air Force
Base and Luke Auxiliary Airfield #1. While land uses in these areas are not
restricted, noise reductions are required for construction of occupied buildings
which may influence the types and densities of new growth.
 Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station: PVNGS is the largest power producer
in the U.S. Few people lived near the plant when it was built several decades
ago, and while the surrounding population is still relatively low several
master-planned communities that could eventually be home to tens of
thousands of new residents are planned within the Plume Exposure Pathway
Emergency Planning Zone (Pathway). The Pathway is a ten mile radius
surrounding PVNGS where protective actions could be required to safeguard
the public from the effects of exposure to radioactive material should an
unintended radioactive release occur. A larger safety area, known as the
Ingestion Exposure Pathway Emergency Planning Zone, extends an additional
fifty miles from PVNGS.
While the Pathway will eventually be home to tens of thousands of residents,
it is unknown whether this growth will occur before PVNGS is ever
decommissioned. If it does then protecting public health and safety is a high
priority in the unlikely event of a radioactive incident. Although the risk is very
small, the potential consequences of not evacuating residents in the Pathway
area within a short time frame could be catastrophic which is why careful
planning and an efficient transportation system are so important. In addition,
securing high-profile facilities like nuclear power plants is a priority for
federal, state, and local officials so it is unknown whether future homeland
security interests could eventually restrict or otherwise regulate the type,
intensity and/or location of growth in that part of the county.
Ownership Constraints
Land ownership also affects the location of growth areas since only about 29%
of Maricopa County’s approximately 9,225 square miles is privately owned. By
comparison, over 50% is controlled by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management
(BLM), U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Department of Defense; 11% by the state;
and 5% by Indian communities. The remainder is controlled by various entities
including Maricopa County.
Growth Areas - 90
DRAFT #3

Federal Land
The federal government is the largest land holder in Maricopa County, managing
approximately 484,000 acres of the Tonto National Forest, nearly 508,000 acres
of Wilderness areas, and about 1.5 million acres of military and other
miscellaneous property. Most federal land is not available for development
although in certain instances land managed by the BLM can be acquired for
development via land trades or outright sales. Since most federal land is not
available for development it is not considered a growth area.
The U.S. Department of Defense is the largest land holder primarily because of
the Barry M. Goldwater Range (Goldwater Range) located approximately 70 miles
southwest of Phoenix. The Goldwater Range includes approximately 2.7 million
acres – approximately one-third of which is in Maricopa County – for air and
ground training. Only a small portion of the Goldwater Range is actually used for
training operations meaning the vast majority remains undisturbed desert. The
entire range is off limits to private development, thus is not a growth area.
State Trust Land
The ASLD oversees more than 600,000 acres of Trust land in Maricopa County
on behalf of beneficiaries like public and specialized schools, colleges, hospitals
and charitable institutions to ensure that when land is sold or leased it receives
the highest value-added return possible. State law mandates that fair market
value be obtained for all Trust land sales and commercial leases, and all revenue
derived from the sale and lease of Trust lands are placed in a fund administered
by the State Treasurer. Whether Trust land is considered a growth area depends
on several factors, including when such land is made available for auction or
lease, the status of ASLD land management plans, and available infrastructure
and services.
Indian Communities
Maricopa County includes approximately 200,000 acres of land controlled by
various Indian communities including the Fort McDowell-Apache, Salt River Pima-
Maricopa, Gila River and Tohono O’odham. While development can occur in
these areas each respective nation controls the location, type and intensity of
growth within their borders. Therefore, for the purpose of this plan these
communities are not considered growth areas.
Maricopa County Regional Parks
Covering approximately 120,000 acres Maricopa County’s eleven parks and
conservation areas comprise one of the largest regional park systems in the
nation. Each park offers various levels of recreation for the more than 1.2 million
Growth Areas - 91
DRAFT #3

residents and guests that visit the system annually. Except for recreational
enhancements, development in the parks is prohibited meaning these are not
growth areas.
Attitudinal Constraints
Public attitudes about development also affect the types, intensities and locations
of new growth. For instance, while some residents prefer urban development
others prefer more rural settings. Such contrasting opinions are usually strong
among residents in unincorporated areas and do affect the types and character
of development in certain areas. Public attitudes both for and against urban and
rural development continues to be an important factor in how and where growth
occurs.
Urban Growth Area
Although constraints can influence the types and locations of new urban growth,
there are opportunities for such growth in some unincorporated areas. In light of
these constraints, Maricopa County’s expectations for responsible and orderly
growth, and state requirements for this element Maricopa County considers the
following as the urban growth area:1
Places designated for urban land use in Vision 2030, the respective county area plan or an
applicable municipal general plan if urban services and infrastructure are readily available and
timely annexation can occur. Areas designated for rural land use in Vision 2030 and a county
area plan could also be considered the urban growth area if those areas are designated for urban
land use in an applicable municipal general plan, provided that urban services and infrastructure
are readily available and if timely annexation can occur to avoid new county islands. Areas that
do not meet these criteria are most suitable for rural land uses. Moreover, urban growth is
unsuitable anywhere that the constraints identified in this chapter, as applicable, cannot be
properly addressed.
Other Growth Area Considerations
 Maricopa County affirms that where possible urban development – especially
urban residential development – should annex into cities and towns to avoid
new county islands and to ensure urban services, urban infrastructure and a
locally-elected government are available.
 Certain industrial land uses that require large amounts of land, but not urban
services and infrastructure, are acceptable outside the urban growth area.
These uses could include electric generating facilities, proving grounds and
test facilities, agriculturally-oriented businesses and other rural-type industrial
uses on a case-by-case basis.
1 Except as noted in the Other Growth Area Considerations, all other unincorporated areas are appropriate for rural development. In all
instances conformance with the approved land use designation is required unless it is modified via a comprehensive plan amendment.
Growth Areas - 92
DRAFT #3

 Maricopa County affirms that new urban development should meet state
requirements for urban growth areas and the county’s Urban Solutions for
Urban Development requirements.
Strategies
 Monitor the constraints identified in this chapter to determine when changes
are needed, and to determine their effect on the urban growth area.
 Monitor the urban growth area to determine when changes are necessary,
and to evaluate its effectiveness in implementing state requirements and
county policies.
 Strive for consistent implementation of the urban growth area by directing
new urban development to these locations.
 Promote annexation of new urban growth prior to actual development.
Growth Areas - 93
DRAFT #3

GROWTH AREAS GOALS AND POLICIES
While the Land Use element presents the county’s support for balanced and
efficient land use patterns, this Growth Areas element complements it by
identifying the most appropriate locations for urban growth. The goals and
policies reinforce the most important positions that Maricopa County has with
respect to future urban growth, in particular sensible and efficient development
patterns that are well-integrated with those in cities and towns.
Growth Areas Goal #1: Achieve orderly urban growth that is fiscally and
environmentally responsible, protects public health
and safety and promotes sensible annexation
patterns.
Growth Areas Goal #2: Have urban growth that is consistent with the
county’s urban growth area, meets statutory
requirements, and implements the Urban Solutions for
Urban Development strategy.
Growth Areas Policy #1: Maricopa County supports consistent
implementation of its urban growth area except in
the noted instances.
Growth Areas Policy #2: Maricopa County supports periodically evaluating
the development constraints identified in this
element to determine how they impact the urban
growth area, and whether these constraints require
reconsideration or modification.
Growth Areas Policy #3: Where feasible Maricopa County supports
annexation of new urban development within the
urban growth area.
Growth Areas - 94
DRAFT #3

OPEN SPACE
OVERVIEW
Maricopa County’s rise to the fourth most populated county in the nation highlights the
challenge and necessity of protecting its quality of life. Two important factors that
determine the appeal of an area are the amount and quality of open spaces for people
to enjoy. Open space provides places to relax and recreate, valuable plant and wildlife
habitat and overall scenic beauty. Open space also helps moderate urban temperatures
and reduce air pollution, both of which are especially important in this region.
Importantly, open space also provides places for people be physically active and plays a
part in the county’s important tourism industry.
For this element state law requires that the county identify existing open spaces,
forecast future open space needs, identify strategies to preserve and acquire open
space as necessary, and integrate open space on a regional basis. To help meet these
requirements Vision 2030 supports the county’s Parks and Recreation Strategic System
Master Plan and Regional Trail System Plan, and considers open space and connectivity
a fundamental part of future development.1
Maricopa County manages one of the largest regional park systems in the nation with
10 regional parks encompassing approximately 120,000 acres, and which hosts more
than 1.4 million annual visitors. Each park provides a distinct level of active and/or
passive recreation:2
 Adobe Dam Regional Park – 1,526 acres
 Buckeye Hills Regional Park – 4,474 acres
 Cave Creek Regional Park – 2,922 acres
 Estrella Mountain Regional Park – 19,840 acres
 Lake Pleasant Regional Park – 23,643 acres
 McDowell Mountain Regional Park – 21,099 acres
 San Tan Mountain Regional Park – 10,000 acres
 Spur Cross Ranch Conservation Area – 2,154 acres
 Usery Mountain Regional Park – 3,648 acres
 White Tank Mountain Regional Park – 30,000 acres
1 More information about both plans is available from the Maricopa County Parks & Recreation Department.
2 More information about each park is available from the Maricopa County Parks & Recreation Department.
Open Space - 95
DRAFT #3

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
The previous comprehensive plan included several open space issues for consideration
including public access, regional connectivity and declining recreation opportunities.
While that plan included conceptual objectives and policies addressing these issues,
Vision 2030 provides clearer expectations and differentiates active recreational parks
from undisturbed and passive natural open space.
CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
Preserving park and open space is one of the county’s Strategic Priorities because it
helps maintain the area’s quality of life. However, there are many things that affect the
county’s ability to plan for and preserve open space, several of which are identified in
this section.
Open Space Acquisition: Need vs. Cost
Before acquiring more open space it is necessary to consider how much additional
space might be needed to support the county’s growing population. To do this the
Maricopa County Parks and Recreation Department uses a population-to-open space
metric that estimates an appropriate amount of park space to meet public needs and
expectations. Using a standard of 15 acres of open space per 1,000 people, the
county’s Parks and Recreation Strategic System Master Plan estimates that over the
next 15 years an additional 30,000 acres of parkland open space could be needed,
although this estimate could vary by up to 30% depending on actual population growth.
Most of the county’s regional park system covers mountain areas that were acquired
from the federal government for $2.50 an acre through the Recreation and Public
Purposes Act of 1924. Although this historic law helps Maricopa County acquire
parkland the cost to operate, manage and maintain large areas to acceptable standards
is challenging. Despite this challenge Maricopa County is committed to having a first-
rate regional park system for residents and visitors to enjoy, and will continuously look
for innovative funding options and ways to increase operational efficiencies.
Strategies
 Implement the Parks and Recreation Strategic System Master Plan.
 Identify and implement efficiencies in park operations.
 Identify and implement innovative funding options for park operations, maintenance
and capital improvements with consideration of user-based options.
 Develop and implement qualitative and quantitative land acquisition criteria.
Open Space - 96
DRAFT #3

Edge Treatment
The transition from urban development to open space along the edge of the county’s
regional parks is one of the most important issues affecting the park system. How best
to minimize the effects of this transition – known as edge treatment – ultimately
determines the quality, accessibility, security and sustainability of these parks. So-called
hard edge treatments like walls and fences detract from a park’s scenic quality and
isolate it from surrounding areas. Conversely, so-called soft edge treatments like natural
landscaping and increased building setbacks preserve scenery and help make the park a
part of the surrounding area. Maricopa County supports coordinating with municipalities
to implement effective soft edge treatment on a case-by-case basis in their respective
jurisdictions, and supports soft edge treatment guidelines for unincorporated areas.
Strategies
 Use soft edge treatments around regional parks.
 Coordinate with cities and towns to address edge treatments on a case-by-case
basis.
 Use soft edge treatment guidelines in unincorporated areas.
Regional Park Connectivity; Maricopa Regional Trail System
Maricopa County’s regional parks are recognized as some of the best in the nation in
part because each offers different amenities to suit visitor preferences. While each park
is unique, for many years visitors have dreamed of finding a way for them to be
conveniently and easily connected by a non-motorized trail system. This dream became
a reality in 2003 when after much planning and preparation the Board adopted the
Maricopa Trail.
When complete the approximately 242 mile multi-use Maricopa Trail – a component of
the larger Maricopa County Regional Trail System – will connect each of the county’s
regional parks. The Maricopa Trail passes through many cities and towns, Indian
communities and federal and state land so cooperative agreements will be critical to
realize the trail’s full potential. Maricopa County supports completing the Maricopa Trail
and eventually the priority segments of regional trail system.3
3 More information about the Maricopa Trail and the Maricopa County Regional Trail System is available from the Maricopa County Parks & Recreation
Department.
Open Space - 97
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Implement the Maricopa Trail and, eventually, the remaining priorities of the
Maricopa County Regional Trail System.
Security and Maintenance
Unauthorized access and misuse of county parks is an ongoing challenge to their
quality, character and pristine nature. This challenge, coupled with unpredictable
funding for capital improvements, maintenance and upgrades to existing facilities
affects the County’s ability to provide visitors with the recreational and contemplative
experiences they expect. Therefore, Maricopa County will continue to identify and
support efforts that deter unauthorized access, and that provide capital funding to
enhance park security and overall quality.
Strategies
 Identify and implement cost effective measures to deter unauthorized park access
and unauthorized activities.
Local/Neighborhood Parks
Maricopa County operates one of the largest regional park systems in the nation that
offers the million plus annual visitors an opportunity to experience large, natural desert
areas within a busy urban area. While the park system meets environmental,
recreational and economic needs it is not a substitute for local and neighborhood parks.
Local and neighborhood parks are important to the stability of communities and
neighborhoods because they provide places for recreation, socialization, and healthy
lifestyles. Unlike cities and towns Maricopa County does not operate local parks,
meaning those in unincorporated areas are private and overseen by homeowner
associations or similar organizations. Regardless, Maricopa County considers local parks
with adequate and appropriate amenities an important part of the community and will
use the ratios in Table 10: Local Park Ratios as a guide when evaluating urban
residential development:
Strategies
 Use the local park ratios as a guide when considering urban residential
development.
 Evaluate urban residential development to determine if adequate and appropriate
recreation amenities are included in local parks.
Open Space - 98
DRAFT #3

Table 10: Local Park Ratios
APPROXIMATE TYPICAL
PARK TYPE SERVICE AREA AMENITIES
SIZE
Mini-parks ¼ mile Up to 1 acre playground equipment
ball fields, ball courts,
Approx. 5 - 15 playground equipment,
Neighborhood Park ¼ - ½ miles
acres picnic facilities
Any combination of
athletic complexes,
Approx. 25 playground equipment,
Community Park 1 – 2 miles picnic facilities, swimming
acres pools, community &
recreation facilities
Open Space - 99
DRAFT #3

OPEN SPACE GOALS AND POLICIES
Maricopa County is proud of its regional park system and the contribution it makes to
the area’s quality of life. Maricopa County also understands the importance of parks and
open space because of the environmental, societal and economic benefits. Having
quality parks and open space for residents and visitors is important to Maricopa County,
thus sets forth the following goals and policies to achieve such quality.
Open Space Goal #1: Provide regional leadership to promote environmental
quality, including the preservation of open, natural park
and recreation lands.
Open Space Goal #2: Protect and expand the regional park system
proportionately with population growth.
Open Space Goal #3: Build the Maricopa Trail and the Maricopa County Regional Trail
System. Work with municipalities to connect the trail system to
their park and preserve systems.
Open Space Goal #4: Have quality neighborhood parks and active and passive open
space with adequate and appropriate recreation amenities in
urban residential development.
Open Space Policy #1: Maricopa County supports implementing the Parks and
Recreation Strategic System Master Plan.
Open Space Policy #2: Maricopa County supports dedication and improvement of
trail right-of-way within new development, including the
Maricopa Trail, the Maricopa County Regional Trail
System, and wildlife linkages.
Open Space Policy #3: To help maintain quality and security, Maricopa County
supports user-based funding options for its regional park
system and, where feasible, regional trail system.
Open Space Policy #4: Maricopa County supports soft edge treatments along
the perimeter of its regional parks, regional trail
system and the El Rio corridor.
Open Space Policy #5: Maricopa County supports partnering with cities and towns to
address edge treatments along the perimeter of regional
parks and the regional trail system.
Open Space Policy #6: Maricopa County supports compliance with the local park
ratios identified in this plan.
Open Space - 100
DRAFT #3

WATER RESOURCES
OVERVIEW
For centuries inhabitants of this area’s dry desert environment have understood the
importance of carefully planning for and wisely using its water supply. Given how little
precipitation this region receives it’s this careful planning and wise use that allows
millions of people to live in one of the driest places in the world. But supplying an ever-
growing population with a reliable water supply will require finding new ways to
increase efficient use as supplies unpredictably expand and contract depending on
yearly weather patterns. With this consideration state law requires that Maricopa
County include this Water Resources element to help protect and manage the region’s
limited water. Specifically, this element assesses available water supplies, expected
water use demands in relation to future growth, and how water use demand can be
met. The policies and recommendations in this element try to present a balanced and
long-term approach to water use.
Maricopa County’s water supply comes from three sources: groundwater, effluent/
reclaimed water and surface water including that brought through the Central Arizona
Project (CAP) Canal. The following is an overview of each source.
Surface Water; CAP Canal
Surface water is considered the State’s major renewable water source and comes
from rivers, streams and lakes. However, surface water availability is somewhat
unpredictable and varies from year-to-year based on precipitation in Arizona and
surrounding states. To fully benefit from precipitation reservoirs and dams along the
Salt, Verde, Gila and Agua Fria Rivers capture rain and snowmelt from northern and
eastern Arizona for use in Maricopa County and other desert areas which helps smooth
out water supplies during periods of high and low runoff.
The CAP Canal, managed by the Central Arizona Water Conservation District, brings
approximately 1½ million acre feet of water annually from the Colorado River to
Maricopa, Pinal, and Pima Counties. The CAP Canal extends nearly 340 miles from Lake
Havasu to the San Xavier Indian Reservation near Tucson, and is considered a vital
source of water for the Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas. Colorado River water is
allocated to several western states based on the 1922 Colorado River Compact where
Arizona, California and Nevada comprise what are known as Lower Division states,
while Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and New Mexico comprise the Upper Division states.
Each Division receives 7½ million acre-feet annually that is apportioned to each state in
various amounts. Arizona has rights to 2.8 million acre-feet annually which is either
used or stored in underground aquifers to help alleviate potential future water
Water Resources - 101
DRAFT #3

shortages. The complex process of storing and managing water in these aquifers is
overseen by the Arizona Water Banking Authority.
Groundwater
Groundwater comes from rain and snowmelt that slowly soaks into deep underground
aquifers over many years. Because it takes a long time to naturally recharge these
aquifers once water is withdrawn, groundwater is typically considered a non-renewable
water source. To help manage this limited source Arizona created the Groundwater
Management Code which controls groundwater depletion and effectively allocates its
use.1 Areas with the most severe groundwater depletion are Active Management Areas
(AMA) and are overseen by the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR). There
are five AMAs in Arizona, including the Phoenix AMA which covers most of Maricopa
County. The Phoenix AMA has a management goal of achieving safe-yield, meaning a
balance between the amount of groundwater withdrawn and the amount of
groundwater naturally and artificially recharged, by 2025.
Effluent / Greywater
Greywater is wastewater from activities like bathing and washing that is retrieved and
treated to a level where it can be used for landscape irrigation, industrial production
and other applications where non-potable water is acceptable. As of April 2010 there
were 92 wastewater treatment facilities in the region producing 324,000 acre-feet of
treated greywater annually.2 As Maricopa County’s population grows and concerns
about ground and surface water availability intensify, greywater will likely become an
increasingly important water source.
Projected Water Demand
Projecting future water demand for all of Maricopa County is difficult given the
increasing number and mix of residential, commercial, business, industrial and
agriculture users, and the lack of available countywide data. However, ADWR data is
available for the Phoenix AMA which covers most of Maricopa County including the
Phoenix area. In 2010 ADWR published its Phoenix AMA Demand and Supply
Assessment which includes historical supply and demand data for groundwater, surface
water, CAP, and effluent/greywater use from 1985 to 2006.3 The assessment shows
that in 2006 total water use in the Phoenix AMA was 1,118,409 acre-feet. The
assessment also projects future water use based on different scenarios of population
and climatic change, and on amounts of reclaimed water use to 2025. Using the mid-
level projection – a midpoint of high and low water demand – ADWR estimates that in
1 Additional information about the Groundwater Management Code is available from the Arizona Department of Water Resources.
2 Arizona Department of Water Resources. Arizona Water Atlas Volume 8 Active Management Area Planning Area April 2010. Found at
www.azwater.gov/AzDWR/StatewidePlanning/WaterAtlas/ActiveManagementAreas/documents/Volume_8_final.pdf 3 Arizona Department of Water Resources. Draft Demand and Supply Assessment 1985-2025 – Phoenix Active Management Area. 2010. Found at
www.azwater.gov/azdwr.
Water Resources - 102
DRAFT #3

2025 demand within the Phoenix AMA for ground, surface, CAP and reclaimed water will
be 1,763,467 acre-feet; a nearly 60% increase from 2006. The increased water
consumption over this and longer periods highlights the importance of using
groundwater efficiently, and using renewable water to help ensure a long-term supply.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
The previous comprehensive plan encouraged water conservation and identified crop
fertilization and pest management strategies as necessary to limit water contamination.
Vision 2030 includes new goals and policies to address these and other water-related
issues. The previous plan also discussed water settlement claims between Indian
Communities and the federal government, but since Maricopa County has no specific
role in this issue it is not included in Vision 2030.
CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
An important part of regional environmental quality is ensuring a stable water supply.
Future growth in this arid region means that water consumption and availability remain
important concerns so the following are some issues that shape the strategies and
policies in this element.
Agriculture Irrigation
Agriculture is one of the largest water users in Arizona and accounts for about ⅓ of the
state’s total consumption.4 In many unincorporated areas farming is an allowed use so
Maricopa County supports efforts by the ADWR and agriculture industry to use efficient
crop irrigation methods.
Strategy
 Support efforts by the ADWR and agriculture industry to use efficient crop irrigation
methods.
Water Service
Unlike most cities and towns Maricopa County is not a water provider so those living in
unincorporated areas must have self-sufficient wells, have water delivered, or have a
contract for water service with a municipality or private company. Water service is one
of the most important factors that determines where and when urban growth occurs
4 Arizona Department of Water Resources. Draft Demand and Supply Assessment 1985-2025 – Phoenix Active Management Area. 2010. Found at
www.azwater.gov/azdwr.
Water Resources - 103
DRAFT #3

which is why Maricopa County requires new development to demonstrate that a safe
and adequate water supply is available for future needs.
Strategy
 Ensure that safe and adequate water service is available for new urban development
prior to amending this comprehensive plan or zoning district boundaries.
Renewable Water
Continuous population growth means that a diverse water supply is a critical part of
long-term economic growth. Maricopa County can help promote efficient water use by
supporting water conservation in the design of new development, and renewable water
use for landscaping, fountains and decorative features and park and common area
irrigation.
Strategies
 Ensure that water conservation is included in the design of new development.
 Use renewable water, such as reclaimed water, surface water or CAP water for large
common area landscape irrigation, golf course irrigation, and decorative lakes.
Adequate Water Supply
Water use in the AMA is regulated by state laws that require land subdividers obtain a
Certificate of Assured Water Supply. However, the authority to control water use
outside AMAs was limited until 2007 when the state provided clear authority for cities,
towns and counties to require newly subdivided land outside AMAs to obtain what is
known as a Water Adequacy Determination. While the requirements for a Water
Adequacy Determination are not as rigorous as those of a Certificate of Assured Water
Supply, new subdivisions must nonetheless ensure that water is physically, legally and
continuously available; that the subdivision is financially capable of providing necessary
water; and that water quality meets required safety standards. Maricopa County
considers Water Adequacy Determinations to be an important and reasonable part of
quality growth outside AMAs.
Strategy
 Have new subdivisions outside AMAs obtain Water Adequacy Determinations.
Water Resources - 104
DRAFT #3

Water Quality
Having safe and clean water is an obvious priority, and because of state and county
health regulations Maricopa County is able to review plans, perform inspections and
issue permits for water services. The county’s Drinking Water program regulates public
water systems to ensure that water meets or exceeds federal standards and provides
outreach, instruction, and advice to public water system administrators about
compliance with drinking water rules. Maricopa County’s other major program – the
Water and Wastewater Treatment program – regulates water and wastewater
treatment facilities, reclaimed water facilities and reuse water systems. Although
Maricopa County does not own or operate these facilities, both programs demonstrate
its commitment to helping ensure clean and safe water for the public.
Strategy
 Implement Maricopa County’s Drinking Water and Water and Wastewater Treatment
programs.
Water Demand
In 2010 ADWR reported that while water demand in the Phoenix AMA shifted between
major users in previous 20+ years, overall use remained relatively stable because
reduced water use for agriculture offset much of the rising demand from population
growth.5 Water use for agriculture fell from 57% of total demand in 1985 to 33% in
2006, while demand from other water users like Indian Communities and industrial
consumers increased only slightly.6 This gradual shift from agriculture to municipal use
will probably continue as urbanization displaces farmland, but going forward another
potentially large water user may affect demand and consumption: solar electric
generating plants.
Interest in solar electric energy production is increasing nationwide but especially in
Maricopa County where abundant sunshine offers some of the highest potential in the
world for solar energy. Many companies have already discovered this potential, evident
by the number of large- and small-scale solar generating plants that are either planned
or are already in operation. While these plants offer economic and air quality benefits
they can consume a lot of water depending on the technology used to generate
electricity. Maricopa County welcomes the benefits solar electric plants offer, but should
remain vigilant to ensure that these facilities do not deplete groundwater.
5 Arizona Department of Water Resources. Draft Demand and Supply Assessment 1985-2025 – Phoenix
Active Management Area. 2010. Found at www.azwater.gov/azdwr.
6 Ibid
Water Resources - 105
DRAFT #3

Strategies
 Reduce water consumption in new development.
 Encourage low water use solar electric generating technologies.
 Reduce groundwater depletion.
Water Conservation
As the county’s population grows water conservation will play an increasingly important
role in ensuring an adequate water supply. Because water conservation requires
cooperative efforts by governments, businesses, and individuals Maricopa County is
helping provide important leadership through its Green Government program by
reducing water use in its facilities and promoting conservation in new development. The
county should continue to raise awareness that conservation helps the environment,
saves money and protects a needed resource for future generations. The county also
reiterates its support for water conservation in new development design.
Strategies
 Increase public awareness about the importance, methods and benefits of water
conservation.
 Make water conservation a priority in the planning and design of new development.
Water Resources - 106
DRAFT #3

WATER RESOURCES: GOALS AND POLICIES
The Water Resources element emphasizes three important aspects: reducing water use,
expanding water supply and protecting water quality. All three are necessary to achieve
quality growth and are the focus of this element’s goals and policies.
Water Resources Goal #1: Promote and protect public health
with a clean water supply.
Water Resources Goal #2: Provide leadership to promote regional water quality and
water use.
Water Resources Goal #3: Increase renewable water use.
Water Resources Goal #4: Increase water conservation.
Water Resources Policy #1: Maricopa County supports water adequacy
determinations for new subdivisions outside Active
Management Areas.
Water Resources Policy #2: Maricopa County supports water conservation
techniques in the planning and design of new
development.
Water Resources Policy #3: Maricopa County supports renewable water use for
landscape, park and common area irrigation; artificial
lakes; and decorative water features.
Water Resources Policy #4: Maricopa County supports compliance with its Drinking
Water and Water and Wastewater Treatment Programs.
Water Resources Policy #5: Maricopa County supports low water use solar electric
generating technologies.
Water Resources Policy #6: Maricopa County supports informing the public about
the importance and benefits of water conservation.
Water Resources Policy #7: Maricopa County supports low water use and drought
tolerant landscaping.
Water Resources Policy #8: Maricopa County supports reclaimed water, surface
water or CAP water use for large common area
landscape irrigation, golf course irrigation, and
decorative lakes.
Water Resources - 107
DRAFT #3

ENERGY
OVERVIEW
In 2007 Arizona enacted a law requiring Maricopa County to include this Energy
element in Vision 2030 to encourage and provide incentives for energy efficiency,
and to identify policies and strategies that increase renewable energy use.
Because energy is used throughout society, including in transportation, the
production of goods, and the consumption of electric power efficiency is
becoming increasingly important because of concerns about the environment and
the long-term costs and availability of natural resources. Finding ways to
promote efficient and renewable energy use is good environmental and
economic policy, and helps Maricopa County become a leader in supporting a
lasting, dependable energy supply.
Maricopa County recognizes that technological innovation leads to cost effective
energy production and use, which ultimately creates economic and
environmental benefits. To realize these benefits Maricopa County developed a
new and innovative Green Government program which lays out short- and long-
term strategies it uses to reduce its own energy consumption and thus save
money. The Green Government program uses a “lead by example” approach to
encourage energy conservation and efficient energy use.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Although this is a new element, the previous comprehensive plan did consider
some energy-related issues. Specifically, the previous plan promoted infill
development, employment proximate to housing, and efficient approaches to
development. The previous plan also supported mixed-use development and
innovative practices to encourage energy efficiency and renewable energy use.
Other aspects of the previous plan advocated trip reductions and transit
ridership, alternative fuel and electric powered vehicles for short trips, and
energy efficient building materials and construction standards. These remain
important issues that will continue to influence county efforts to achieve and
promote maximum energy efficiency.
Energy - 108
DRAFT #3

CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
Energy Costs
Obviously Maricopa County has no control over future rises in global energy
prices, but it can control its own expenses by practicing energy conservation in
all aspects of its operations. It can also help reduce residential and business
energy costs by supporting energy efficient development techniques and
technologies.
Strategies
 Implement Maricopa County’s Green Government program.
 Increase energy conservation and energy efficiency in new development.
Balanced Land Use
Energy use in the county will increase as it becomes more urban which could
further affect its already challenged air quality. Therefore, Maricopa County
reiterates its support for efficient land use patterns that combine – rather than
separate – residential, commercial and employment land uses.
Strategies
 Promote balanced and efficient land use patterns to reduce energy
consumption.
 Connect new development with alternative transportation options.
 Discourage scattered urban development in remote areas.
Energy Efficient Development
The most cost effective way to achieve energy efficiency is at the initial planning
and building design stages which is why Maricopa County supports innovative
techniques that help conserve energy. Although Maricopa County reviews plans
to determine if energy conservation is included in project design, it also
continuously assesses its design and construction requirements to ensure they
do not impede energy conservation. Going forward, Maricopa County could also
consider incentives to help increase energy efficient design and construction.
Strategies
 Review new development to determine if energy conservation is included in
design and construction.
Energy - 109
DRAFT #3

 Continuously evaluate new approaches to construction codes that help
promote energy efficiency.
 Consider incentives as a way to promote energy efficiency.
Renewable Energy
Maricopa County has the potential to be a global leader in renewable energy
research and development, especially with respect to solar energy. Figure 3:
Photovoltaic Solar Potential and Figure 4: Concentrated Solar Potential
show that Maricopa County is one of the most productive spots in the world for
both photovoltaic and concentrated solar energy generation. Many
companies have already discovered this potential, evidenced by the large
number of utility-scale plants being planned in unincorporated areas. Solar
energy is also available to businesses and homeowners through custom solar
systems for buildings and homes.
Because of the economic and environmental benefits Maricopa County supports
state and local efforts to attract solar research and development to this region.
Maricopa County also supports expanding other forms of renewable energy,
although options such as wind energy production are limited. The region does
have a limited but promising biofuels industry but its potential as a cost-
competitive alternative remains unknown.
Strategies
 Attract solar and other alternative energy research and development to
Maricopa County.
Green Government Program
Future growth will likely increase energy consumption which, in turn, may
exacerbate the county’s already difficult air quality problem. Consumption can be
reduced if conservation becomes a priority which is why Maricopa County
adopted an innovative plan known as the Green Government program to help
reduce its energy use, save money and protect the environment. The energy
conserving methods in the Green Government program primarily address county
operations, but broader regional efforts that consider land use, design and
building construction are also included. What's more, as an important source of
Energy - 110
DRAFT #3

Figure 3: Photovoltaic Solar Potential
Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Figure 4: Concentrated Solar Potential
Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Energy - 111
DRAFT #3

information the Green Government program can help individuals and businesses
make energy efficient choices that help the environment and save money.
Strategies
 Implement Maricopa County’s Green Government program.
 Increase public awareness about the financial and environmental benefits of
energy conservation.
Energy - 112
DRAFT #3

ENERGY GOALS AND POLICIES
It can be difficult to realize just how much of an impact energy consumption has
on society and individuals. At a societal level it affects the environment and
economy, while at an individual level it can affect personal finances and even
personal health. For these and other reasons Maricopa County considers energy
efficiency, conservation and diversification important priorities.
Energy Goal #1: Provide leadership to promote regional environmental
quality.
Energy Goal #2: Make Maricopa County a leader in alternative energy research
and development.
Energy Goal #3: Have balanced and efficient development patterns.
Energy Goal #4: Increase energy efficiency in new development.
Energy Policy #1: Maricopa County supports energy efficient design and
construction of new development through methods that are
proven and cost effective.
Energy Policy #2: To limit energy consumption Maricopa County supports
balanced and efficient development patterns where
residential, commercial and employment land uses are
proximate rather than separated.
Energy Policy #3: To limit energy consumption Maricopa County supports
having new urban development locate in cities and towns,
and in the appropriate growth areas identified in this plan.
Energy Policy #4: To limit energy consumption Maricopa County supports
alternative transportation options in new development.
Energy Policy #5: Where feasible and effective, Maricopa County supports
incentive programs that promote energy efficiency.
Energy Policy #6: Maricopa County supports being a responsible leader in
alternative energy research and development.
Energy Policy #7: Maricopa County supports efforts to assist businesses
and individuals with renewable energy options and energy
conservation.
Energy Policy #8: Maricopa County supports implementing its Green
Government program.
Energy - 113
DRAFT #3

COST OF DEVELOPMENT
OVERVIEW
Maricopa County’s population growth consistently ranks among the highest in the
nation. This growth has many benefits but also brings challenges to meet
requirements for new roads, health care and criminal justice facilities, law
enforcement, parks and other community needs. Recognizing that these can be
very costly Maricopa County must carefully and wisely allocate its limited service
and infrastructure investments.
Because of concerns about the financial impacts that new development can have
on local governments and taxpayers, Arizona requires Maricopa County to
include this Cost of Development element and identify policies and strategies it
will use to make new development pay its fair share of the costs of new public
facility needs. State law also requires that this element analyze techniques that
can be used to fund additional public services borne from new development, and
ensure that these funding techniques bear a reasonable relationship to the
financial burden imposed on the county. Notwithstanding this mandate the Cost
of Development element is important to help the county prepare and implement
responsible budgets that use public money as efficiently as possible.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Cost Sharing Methods
It is important to understand whether the cost sharing methods considered in
the previous comprehensive plan were effective in achieving their desired results.
None of these methods was specifically identified as a preferred alternative, but
rather were used as a general guide.
Urban Service Area
The previous comprehensive plan defined the Urban Service Area as places
where timely and adequate infrastructure and services are provided to new
urban development. The Urban Service Area was not a cost sharing strategy per
se, but it did try to help minimize capital outlays by directing urban development
to such areas. Directing urban development to where urban services and
infrastructure can be provided efficiently and effectively remains an important
priority.
Cost of Development - 114
DRAFT #3

Development Agreements
Maricopa County used development agreements to ensure equitable cost
sharing, particularly with large master-planned communities. As contracts
development agreements make clear the financial responsibilities of the county
and developers so they are both mandatory and effective. Development
agreements proved successful so Maricopa County continues to support their use
to ensure financially stable and efficient growth.
Conditions of Approval
Conditions of approval are specific responsibilities that property owners must
meet when granted changes to the comprehensive plan and/or changes to
zoning district boundaries. Conditions identify a property owner’s obligations for
infrastructure improvements, service requirements and/or financial obligations.
Most local governments use conditions because they are an effective way to help
ensure equitable cost sharing and protect taxpayers. Because of their
effectiveness Maricopa County considers conditions of approval an important part
of its overall cost sharing program.
Volunteer Contributions
Voluntary contributions from developers were not a practical method of cost
sharing. Therefore, Vision 2030 recommends more dependable and equitable
cost sharing techniques.
CURRENT ISSUES & STRATEGIES
Implementing a fair and effective cost sharing program can be difficult as there
are several factors to consider. Cost sharing programs must be designed and
implemented in a way that does not harm the local economy, trigger affordable
housing problems or burden the county with unanticipated legal and
administrative costs. This section summarizes several considerations and
identifies available and preferred methods for funding new growth.
Issues & Considerations
Legal Considerations
One of the most important considerations is the legal limit to which Maricopa
County can require new development to pay for services and infrastructure.
Cost of Development - 115
DRAFT #3

Although state law requires that new growth pay its fair share for needed
infrastructure and services, it also requires that any cost sharing method result in
beneficial use to the new development and that it bear a reasonable relationship
to the financial burden imposed by that new development. This requirement for
a rational nexus is also fundamental to Arizona and U.S. Constitution protections.
Due Process
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, along with Article
2 of the Arizona Constitution, prohibit government from depriving people of
property without the due process of law. Protections include both procedural due
process (ensuring that the process by which cost sharing methods are adopted
and implemented is fair and according to protocol) and substantive due process
(ensuring that the cost sharing methods are appropriate and not unduly
oppressive). Importantly, substantive due process requires that government
demonstrate a legitimate relationship between the cost sharing methods and the
public purpose they serve. Due process protections prohibit cost sharing methods
that are unreasonable, arbitrary and/or unpredictable.
Takings
The takings clause of the Fifth and, through court interpretation, Fourteenth
Amendments to the U.S. Constitution prohibit private property from being taken
by government for public or other use without just compensation. With respect
to cost sharing, takings issues typically only arise from discrepancies over the
rational nexus described earlier and rough proportionality which is the fair share
relationship between a cost sharing requirement and the impacts intended to be
addressed.
Equal Protection
The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution ensures that all people are given equal protection under the law,
which for cost sharing means the assurance that a system must not
unreasonably differentiate between similar circumstances. Although courts have
generally interpreted that circumstances do not have to be dealt with identically,
it does mean that if distinctions are made those distinctions should be relevant to
the specific instance.
Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2006 (“Proposition 207”)
Passed by Arizona voters in 2006, Proposition 207 includes a provision that
protects private property owners from certain eminent domain actions by state
and local government. While eminent domain is not related to cost sharing,
Proposition 207 also restricts state and local governments from approving any
Cost of Development - 116
DRAFT #3

land use law if such law reduces the value of a property. The potential for broad
interpretation of this provision requires careful review of cost sharing methods to
ensure compliance with this law.
Economic Considerations
Economic
It is also important that a cost sharing program not discourage economic growth
because while the costs of services and infrastructure for new residential
development are usually greater than the tax revenues received, the construction
industry is an important part of the local economy. This is usually not a
significant problem in areas where there is a proper balance between residential
and non-residential development.
Non-residential development is critical because it helps create a stable economy
and prevents what could otherwise be high residential property taxes to pay for
parks, schools, libraries and other services. Since non-residential development is
so important for a diverse tax base the county’s cost sharing program should not
hinder business expansion, but also not encourage inefficient development
patterns.
Land Use Considerations
While most cities and towns require some type of cost sharing the requirements
and expectations can vary significantly. These variations can have the
unintended effect of creating inefficient land use patterns where new growth is
drawn to areas with the lowest cost sharing requirements. Since inefficient land
use patterns are strongly discouraged Maricopa County should work to ensure
that its cost sharing program does not contribute to this problem.
Administrative Considerations
Maricopa County should also be mindful of potential administrative costs
associated with the continuous oversight needed to ensure proper and consistent
implementation. Given these inherent costs the county should periodically review
the efficiency of its cost sharing program to identify if changes or more efficient
methods are needed.
Still another important consideration is whether the long-term and ongoing costs
of new development are factored into the cost sharing methodology. Specifically,
while many cost sharing strategies address upfront costs, facilities and services
also require continuous funding for maintenance and upkeep. Long-term costs
are difficult to estimate and recoup so they are typically the responsibility of all
taxpayers rather than those that directly benefit. That said, Maricopa County can
consider the complete life cycle costs for new development so that informed
Cost of Development - 117
DRAFT #3

land use decisions can be made and appropriate budgets can be implemented.
Available Funding Methods
This section identifies methods that Maricopa County can use to help pay for new
growth and development.
 User Fees: Maricopa County charges fees to customers, applicants, and
other governments that use or directly benefit from its products, goods, and
services. Examples include court-filing fees, kennel fees, park entrance fees,
vital record document fees and probation service fees. Maricopa County’s
policy is to recover the costs of providing goods and services, although fees
are carefully calculated to avoid unfairly discriminating against those most in
need. The Board sets all user fees unless otherwise directed by state law.
 Property Tax: Maricopa County can assess taxes on both real and
personal property through a primary property tax (used to fund general
obligations and special overrides) and secondary property tax (used to fund
voter-approved general obligation bonds and overrides). A uniform property
tax rate is set by the Board each year, but because of differences in assessed
property valuation the actual tax owed on individual property varies. As of the
writing of this comprehensive plan Maricopa County only levied a primary
property tax.
 Excise Tax/Special Sales Tax: An excise tax is a locally-imposed sales tax
that is limited in scope and purpose. As of the writing of this comprehensive
plan the only county-administered excise tax is a ଵ of one-cent jail excise tax
ହ
used to fund construction and operation of adult and juvenile detention
facilities. This excise tax is voter-approved and temporary.
 Intergovernmental Revenues: Maricopa County receives a lot of its
operating revenue from three different state programs. Since it is not allowed
to levy a general-purpose sales tax, it instead receives a portion of Arizona’s
state sales tax collection which is distributed to every municipality and county
based on a set formula. Maricopa County’s portion is initially collected by the
state but later transferred to the county where it is used for general
operations. Maricopa County also receives a portion of the state tax levied on
motor fuel which is known as Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF). At the
time of plan implementation, twenty percent of HURF funds are allocated to
counties based on fuel sales, estimated fuel consumption and county
population. Finally, Maricopa County also receives a portion of the Arizona
Vehicle License Tax (VLT) which is assessed annually on all vehicles based on
their estimated value. The VLT is paid by owners at the time of annual vehicle
Cost of Development - 118
DRAFT #3

registration, but since VLT rates are based on a vehicle’s depreciating value the
actual revenue derived from it depends on the growth in vehicle sales.
Other intergovernmental revenues come from agreements with other
jurisdictions including payments in lieu of taxes, charges for services and federal
grants and payments. However, federal grants typically carry restrictions on how
they can be used so their effect on general operating revenues is unpredictable
and limited.
 Licenses and Permits: Maricopa County collects fees from the various
licenses and permits it issues. Unless directed by state law rates for all
licenses and permits are set by the Board and are used to offset costs related
to their issuance. Examples of county-issued licenses and permits include
building permits, environmental health permits and animal and marriage
licenses.
 Bonds: State law allows Maricopa County to issue general and special
purpose bonds to fund operations, including:
 General Obligation Bonds, which are backed by the full faith and credit of
a government including a pledge of general revenues and the ability to
raise tax rates to cover the outstanding debt;
 Revenue Bonds, which are paid back by specific and not general
revenues. Revenue bonds are self-supporting through the fees or rents
collected on the use for which the bonds were issued.
 Special Assessment Bonds, which are issued to special districts where
property owners within a defined area agree to pay for specific
infrastructure improvements through a supplemental property tax.
Repayment of these bonds is the responsibility of those property owners
who most directly benefit from their issuance.
 Conditions of Approval: Conditions of approval establish the
responsibilities that property owners must meet when granted changes to the
comprehensive plan and/or changes to zoning district boundaries, including
their obligations for building and financing new infrastructure and services.
Conditions are used by most local governments because they are an effective
way to ensure equitable cost sharing.
 Development Agreements: Typically required as a condition of approval,
development agreements are contracts between a government and a
property owner that establishes the terms, conditions and financial
obligations concerning future development. These terms can address allowed
uses, densities and intensities of development, reservations and dedications
of land for public purposes, phasing or timing of construction, financing terms
Cost of Development - 119
DRAFT #3

for new infrastructure, improvement district formation and other related matters.
Maricopa County typically requires development agreements for master-planned
communities and other large-scale projects where necessary.
 Special Tax Districts: Special tax districts, also known as special purpose or
community improvement districts, provide a specific service that might not
otherwise be offered by a city, town or county. There are many types of
special districts in Arizona including those for hospital and health services,
agriculture irrigation, community parks, libraries, jails, flood control, domestic
water and sewer, fire protection, road improvements, stadiums and schools.
Special tax districts can be small and localized or regional and countywide,
but typically have non-partisan elected or appointed officers that oversee tax
assessment and bond issuance to cover the cost for which the district exists.
Special tax districts can provide numerous benefits, including:
 Offering a service that local governments lack the authority to provide,
lack the ability to provide due to tax and debt limitations, or otherwise
choose not to provide;
 Providing local control and oversight of a service;
 Enjoying support from district citizens since they typically initiate district
formation;
 Focusing attention exclusively on a particular service or problem
While special tax districts are not without their drawbacks they do fulfill an
important objective: having those that want, need and benefit from a service
pay for that service.
 Development Fees: Development fees, also known as impact fees, are
special charges levied on new development to partially or wholly pay for the
costs of providing new services and infrastructure. Like special tax districts
development fees pass the costs of new infrastructure and improvements to
the property owners that directly benefit. Development fees are typically
calculated on a per unit basis for residential development, per square foot
basis for non-residential development, or some similar alternative. State law
restricts Maricopa County from levying impact fees except to cover the capital
costs for water, sewer, streets, parks and public safety if a capital
improvement plan exists. Since Maricopa County is not a sewer or water
provider development fees would be limited to its regional parks, roads and
law enforcement activities. However, the major downside of development
fees is that they can only be used to fund upfront costs and not long-term
operations and maintenance.
Cost of Development - 120
DRAFT #3

 Fines, Forfeitures, and Other Resources: Although not a significant
revenue source money collected from civil traffic citations, court fines, patient
charges for health services, concessions and food sales, land and equipment
sales, building rentals and interest earnings are nonetheless important
because they help Maricopa County recoup costs associated with specific
services.
Preferred Funding Methods: New Growth and Development
While there are many funding methods available only a few are used exclusively
to fund improvements for new development. Both the state and Maricopa County
support new development paying its fair portion of improvement costs so the
county will use the following methods to ensure reasonable cost sharing:
 Development Agreements: Maricopa County supports using development
agreements for master-planned communities and other projects where an
agreement is deemed necessary.
 Community Improvement Districts: Maricopa County supports
community improvement districts on a limited basis where a specific public
improvement is considered necessary.
 Intergovernmental Agreements: Maricopa County supports agreements
with cities and towns to help share infrastructure improvement costs.
Intergovernmental agreements are particularly important for road and other
enhancements that benefit multiple jurisdictions.
 Fee for Service: New development requires oversight to ensure compliance
with federal, state and local regulations, and to ensure proper permitting for
public health and safety. Therefore, Maricopa County supports fully
recovering the costs of its services in a way that does not unfairly burden
those most in need of such services.
Cost of Development - 121
DRAFT #3

COST OF DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
The goals and policies in this Cost of Development element help Maricopa County
use taxpayer money efficiently and effectively by ensuring that new development
pays its proportionate share for needed improvements. The goals identify
expected outcomes and the policies specify the county’s position on important
financial issues. These goals and policies also reinforce the strategic priority to
build the county’s fiscal strength.
Cost of Development Goal #1: Exercise sound financial management and
build the County’s fiscal strength.
Cost of Development Goal #2: New development pays its proper and
reasonable share of the costs of new
infrastructure, services and other public
improvements.
Cost of Development Policy #1: Maricopa County supports recouping the
costs of its products and services without
unfairly burdening those most in need of its
products and services.
Cost of Development Policy #2: Maricopa County supports using the
preferred funding methods identified in this
plan to offset costs of new development.
Cost of Development Policy #3: Maricopa County supports continuously
evaluating the preferred funding methods
with respect to the legal, socioeconomic,
land use and administrative considerations
identified in this element, and making
changes when deemed necessary.
Cost of Development - 122
DRAFT #3

¡¡¢ 71 APPENDIX A: LAND USE GUIDE
¡¡¢ 60
¡¡¢ 60
rx 74
rx 303
LEGEND
rx 87 Jurisdiction
rx 101 Unincorporated Maricopa County
Incorporated Muncipalities
§¨¦ 17 Indian Communities
§¨¦ 10 ¡¡¢ 60 County Area Plans * +
rx 88
rx 101 East Mesa Area Plan
Estrella Area Plan
rx 202 Goldfield Area Plan
Laveen Area Plan
¡¡¢ 60 Mobile Area Plan
New River Area Plan
§¨¦ 10 Old US Highway 80 Area Plan
rx 202 Queen Creek Area Plan
rx 85 Rainbow Valley Area Plan
Rio Verde Area Plan
State Route 85 Area Plan
Tonopah / Arlington Area Plan
White Tank / Grand Ave Area Plan
¡¡¢ 80 Other
Unincorporated Maricopa County
* Unincorporated areas outside of County area plans are designated Rural Development Area and Incorporated Muncipalities
are only appropriate for rural development and rural zoning. See Land Use element and Growth
Areas element for more information. Municipal Planning Areas
High Noise or Accident Potential Zone #
+ See applicable County area plan for specific land use designations.
§¨¦ 8 # See Land Use element for more information. As of 11/01/2012.
®
rx 85
Miles
0 5 10 20 30 40
123

!
!
APPENDIX B: TRANSPORTATION*
!
17
§¨¦
!
!
60
¡¡¢
!
! !
!
! rx 74
!
!
!
! LEGEND
! !
!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! Jurisdiction
! !
!
! ! !
! ! ! 87 Unincorporated Maricopa County
rx
! Incorporated Municipalities
!
Streets and Routes
!
! High Capacity Roadway
10
§¨¦ ! Highway
! Freeway
!
Planned Freeway
!
! ! Proposed Freeway
! !
MCDOT Classification
!
! ! ! ! Major Collector
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! Minor Collector
!
! !
!
Principal Arterial
!
! !
! ! ! ! !
Minor Arterial
85 ! ! !
rx ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
Parkway
! 10
! ! ! §¨¦ !
! ! ! ! !
! Future Principal Arterial #
!
!
! !
! ! Future Minor Arterial #
! !
! !
!
! !
! Future Major Collector #
! !
!
! ! Future Minor Collector #
* Does not imply design, construction, and/or maintenance of any road by
! !
! Maricopa County. Detailed descriptions of investment priorities ! is available from Future Parkway #
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! MCDOT. ! !
! Other Roadway
!
!
!
! !
! ! Road locations shown are approximate; the exact location of new roads and
*
! ! !
corridors is subject to future corridor studies and design ! concept reports. # Dashed roadways represent future corridors,
!
!
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! please refer to the Maricopa County Major
! !
! * For illustrative ! ! purposes only. Refer ! ! to ! the ! Maricopa ! County Major ! Streets and Streets and Routes Plan.
! ! ! ! !
!
Routes Plan for details.
! !
!
8 !
§¨¦ As of 11/01/2012.
!
! !
Only roads in Unincorporated Maricopa County are ! shown. Refer to applicable
*
! !
general plan for roads within the applicable cities and ! towns.
! !
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
85 !
rx
®
! ! !
Miles
0 5 10 20 30 40
Source: Maricopa County Department of Transportation Major Streets and Routes Plan (June 2011). 124

APPENDIX C: DEFINITIONS
The following definitions are intended to help readers and users of Vision 2030
interpret and implement its content, policies, and recommendations. These
definitions are considered applicable only to this plan and should not necessarily
be used in any other capacity. Readers are encouraged to seek additional
information on any of these concepts and terms if needed.
100-year Floodplain: A high risk area that is susceptible to a one percent
chance of experiencing a 100-year flood event in any given year. The amount of
water needed to create a 100-year flood event varies by location.
208 Amendment: A change to Section 208 of the federal Clean Water Act
which requires regional water quality management planning, and which
facilitates the review of projects to ensure they are consistent with the certified
regional water quality management plan of a local jurisdiction.
Accessory Dwelling Unit: A small, self-contained residential unit built on the
same lot as an existing single-family home and most often used by extended
family members or renters.
Acre-feet: A measure of volume, it is the amount of water that is needed to
cover one acre of land to a depth of one foot (one acre-foot = 325,851 gallons).
AMA - Active Management Area: Portions of the state identified in the
Arizona Groundwater Code as being heavily reliant on groundwater use.
Groundwater in such areas is managed to achieve a safe-yield, meaning no more
groundwater is withdrawn than is annually being replaced.
Active Recreation: Type of activities found in parks with facilities such as
athletic fields, courses, courts, pools, playgrounds and related equipment, and/or
buildings and structures for various pursuits.
Aggregate Material: A category of raw material such as sand, gravel and
stone that is used to make concrete and asphalt.
Alternative Transportation: Modes of travel other than private cars such as
walking, bicycling, carpooling and mass transit.
Ancillary Military Facilities: In Maricopa County this includes Auxiliary Airfield
#1 located in the city of Surprise, and the auxiliary airfield located south of the
town of Gila Bend.
Appendix C: Definitions - 125
DRAFT #3

Aquifer: An underground geological formation containing saturated materials
capable of storing water that can be extracted via a well.
Area Drainage Master Plan: Prepared by the Maricopa County Flood Control
District, these plans identify and recommend strategies to mitigate flood hazards
in specific watersheds of Maricopa County.
Area Plan: A subcategory of Vision 2030, these are specific plans for particular
areas or regions of Maricopa County.
ADWR – Arizona Department of Water Resources: State agency
responsible for helping protect and ensure long-term, reliable water supplies.
ARS – Arizona Revised Statutes: The state laws of Arizona.
ASLD – Arizona State Land Department: State agency responsible for
managing State Trust lands within Arizona.
Arizona Water Bank Authority: A system where Colorado River water is
stored primarily in underground aquifers for use in times of shortage.
Arterial Road: A major route that carries moderate to high levels of traffic
regionally. Arterial roads are normally located at one mile intervals.
Basic Sector: Businesses and industries that export most or all of their
products or services, thus creating new incomes and new spending power in the
economy of their country or region of origin.
Biofuel: A gaseous, liquid or solid biomass material used as a fuel source.
Built Environment: Includes all structures and spaces in which people live,
work, recreate and conduct other activities.
Business Incubator: Programs designed to accelerate the development of
entrepreneurial and early-stage businesses through business resources, including
workspace, coaching, networking and other support services.
BLM – Bureau of Land Management: Part of the U.S. Department of Interior,
this is the federal agency responsible for sustaining the health, diversity, and
productivity of America’s 247 million acres of public lands, and for managing
public lands and public land resources for a variety of uses.
Capital: Assets in the form of money, property and other tangible resources
that have economic value.
Appendix C: Definitions - 126
DRAFT #3

Capital Improvement Program: A five-year plan that identifies funding
priorities for infrastructure and services needed to serve the public.
Carbon Monoxide: A colorless, odorless, toxic gas formed by the incomplete
combustion of carbon or other material.
CAP – Central Arizona Project: Steward of central Arizona’s Colorado River
water entitlement and delivery.
Certificate of Assured Water Supply: Document issued by the Arizona
Department of Water Resources which confirms that a water supply will be
physically, legally and continuously available for the next 100 years.
Certificate of Convenience & Necessity: Document issued by the Arizona
Corporation Commission which confirms that a utility is authorized to provide
service in a particular area. A CC&N must be obtained before a utility can begin
constructing or operating any utility system.
Clean Air Act: Federal law first enacted in 1970 that authorizes the
establishment of regulations limiting stationary and mobile sources of air
pollution.
CDBG – Community Development Block Grant: A program from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development which helps fund local
community development activities.
Compliance Assurance (model): A system of methods used by the Maricopa
County Air Quality Department to increase air quality compliance rates and
remove incentives for noncompliance.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Changes to Maricopa County’s
comprehensive plan and/or area plan.
Concentrated Solar: A system that uses mirrors to reflect high-temperature
sunlight which heats water, creates steam and ultimately powers an electric
generator.
Conditional Zoning: A change in a zoning district boundary that is
preconditioned upon a schedule for development.
County Island: Unincorporated area completely surrounded by one or more
municipality and/or Indian Community.
Appendix C: Definitions - 127
DRAFT #3

Density: A numerical average of the number of people or dwelling units per
unit of land (ex: a population density of 200 people per square mile; a residential
density of 4 houses per acre).
Development Agreement: A contract between Maricopa County and a
property owner or developer which establishes funding and operational
responsibilities for infrastructure and services.
Development Community: Refers to builders, brokers, realtors and others
involved in the financing, transacting and construction of new development.
E-Commerce: Business transactions conducted electronically via the Internet
or other online system.
Emergency Response (service): Includes law enforcement as well as fire
and emergency medical services.
Eminent Domain: The power of a government to take private property for
public use following payment of fair compensation to the property owner.
Entitlement: The right to develop and use land based on the established
zoning district and, as applicable, plan for development.
Firebreak: An area of cleared or plowed land intended to stop the spread of a
wildfire.
Floodway: the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land
areas that must be reserved in order to efficiently carry and discharge flood
waters.
General Plan: A plan that is similar to a comprehensive plan but is prepared by
and for cities and towns.
Global Economy: Economic activity not limited to one specific country, but
rather includes an international integration of markets for goods, services, labor,
production, commerce and capital.
Great Depression: A period from 1929 to about 1940 characterized by a
worldwide economic collapse and mass unemployment.
Great Recession: A term frequently used to describe the severe economic
downturn that began in 2008, ran for several years, and which by many
measures was the worst since the Great Depression.
Appendix C: Definitions - 128
DRAFT #3

GPEC – Greater Phoenix Economic Council: A public-private partnership
group that works to attract quality businesses to the Greater Phoenix region from
around the world, and that advocates for improving this region’s
competitiveness.
Hazard Mitigation Plan: Plan that identifies natural hazards, assesses
vulnerability and risks to people and structures, and identifies and implements
strategies for mitigating the identified natural hazards.
HNAPZ - High Noise or Accident Potential Zone: Defined by state law, in
Maricopa County this includes all areas within the noise contours and accident
potential zones of Luke Air Force Base and the ancillary military facilities.
HURF – Highway User Revenue Fund: A fund consisting of fees and charges
relating to the registration and operation of motor vehicles on Arizona highways
which are distributed to cities, towns, counties and the State Highway Fund for
highway construction, improvements and related expenses.
IDAMC – Industrial Development Authority of Maricopa County: A
political subdivision of Arizona whose mission is to create and maintain jobs
within Maricopa County, and assist county residents through providing affordable
single- and multi-family housing.
Industry Cluster: A geographic concentration of competing, collaborating and
interdependent businesses, suppliers and associated institutions in a common
industry sector that helps increase business productivity.
Infill: Development of empty or skipped-over land in otherwise built-up and
urban areas.
Knowledge Industry: A type of business where the creation and use of
knowledge and information to develop products, ideas and intellectual property
are the dominant activity.
Knowledge Workers: Individuals whose primary job is the acquisition,
management, analysis, processing, interpretation and communication of
information or data as opposed to physical goods.
Land Use Transition: A change in land use pattern to or from a more intense
land use such as a commercial or industrial, from or to a less intense land use
like residential.
Appendix C: Definitions - 129
DRAFT #3

“Leapfrog” Development: Growth that occurs well beyond existing
development and which is separated by a substantial amount of vacant land.
Life Cycle Costs: The total cost of a service, structure, or system including all
recurring (ongoing) and non-recurring (one-time) expenses. Such expenses
include purchase price; installation; operation, maintenance, and upkeep;
upgrades; and end-life residual value.
Lot Split: The unregulated division of one land parcel into five or fewer
separate parcels.
MSRP – Major Streets and Routes Plan: A plan prepared by the Maricopa
County Department of Transportation that includes functional classification
categorization, geometric design standards, and a street classification atlas.
Manufactured Home: A home constructed in a controlled factory environment
and transferred to the site it is to be located.
MAG - Maricopa Association of Governments: An organization consisting of
local governments that serves as a regional planning agency for the Phoenix
metropolitan area, and that convenes to make policy decisions for transportation,
air and water quality and human services.
Maricopa Association of Governments Regional Council: The governing
and policy-making body for the Association which is comprised of elected officials
from each of the member jurisdictions.
MCDOT – Maricopa County Department of Transportation: Maricopa
County agency responsible for planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining
roads in unincorporated areas.
Master-Planned Community: A wholly and deliberately planned, relatively
autonomous community consisting of residential, non-residential, recreational
and public land uses.
Mid-section Line Road: Roads that run north-south or east-west at half-mile
intervals between section line roads.
Mixed-Use (projects): A single building that contains more than one type of
use, or a development that combines several different but complementary types
of residential, commercial, civic and business uses on a single parcel or area.
Mobile Home: A home placed on a permanent chassis that is capable of being
moved to the site it is to be located.
Appendix C: Definitions - 130
DRAFT #3

Multimodal (transportation): A combination of two or more methods of
transporting goods and people.
Multiple-Family Housing: Multiple and separate residential units that are
contained within a single building. Such housing typically includes duplexes,
condominiums, townhouses and apartment buildings.
Municipal Planning Area: Unincorporated area that has been identified by a
municipality as likely to be annexed in the future.
NAAQS - National Ambient Air Quality Standards: A requirement of the
federal Clean Air Act, limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency with
respect to specific air pollutants.
NGA – National Governors Association: Bipartisan organization of the
nation’s governors that share best practices and work collectively on policy.
Non-Attainment Area: Location where air pollution levels typically exceed
National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Non-Basic Sector: Businesses and industries that sell their products or
services within a community, and thus are dependent upon local economic
conditions since existing money is recirculated locally.
Non-Potable Water: Water that is not of drinking water quality but can be
used for industrial production, irrigation, cooling towers and other applications
not involving human consumption.
Opportunity Costs: The most highly valued opportunity or alternative forfeited
when a choice is made (also known as a trade-off or substitution).
Ozone (surface level): A colorless, odorless gas formed by reactions with
societal pollutants and found most often in hot, stagnant weather.
PM-10 Dust Abatement Program: A MCDOT-administered plan to reduce air
pollution primarily by paving roads.
PVNGS – Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station: Nuclear power plant in
west-central Maricopa County that annually generates approximately 29,000
gigawatt hours of power.
Parcel: A legally recognized, continuous plot of land usually resulting from the
division of a larger land area.
Appendix C: Definitions - 131
DRAFT #3

Particulate Matter: Air pollutants that vary in size and composition (solid or
liquid droplets) and which originate from stationary sources like power plant and
industrial processes, from mobile sources like diesel vehicles, and naturally from
dust and soil.
Passive Recreation: Unimproved or minimally improved parks that lack the
facilities typically found in parks intended for active recreation.
Personal Property: Privately owned items that are movable and not affixed to
land such as vehicles, watercraft, furniture, collectibles, etc.
Phasing Plan: A deliberate and incremental plan for development based on
appropriate sequences and timeframes.
Photovoltaic Solar: A device or system that directly converts light energy into
electrical energy through the process of photovoltaics.
Primary Road: Roads intended to serve regional travel.
Public Improvement: Infrastructure or service financed by Maricopa County
that is for the benefit or use by the general public.
Public Water System: Any water system with at least fifteen service
connections, or any system that regularly serves an average of at least twenty-
five people daily for at least sixty days a year.
Quality of Life: The social, economic, environmental and physical well-being
that an area offers individuals.
Quality of Place: The features and characteristics of a specific area or region
that are considered appealing to individuals with respect to livability.
Real Property: Buildings, structures, and anything else affixed to land that is
not considered movable, including the land itself.
Renewable Energy: An unlimited source of energy that is naturally
regenerated over a short time period, including sunlight, wind, rain, tides and
waves and geothermal heat.
Renewable Water: Water from sources like rivers, streams and lakes that are
continuously and frequently replenished.
Appendix C: Definitions - 132
DRAFT #3

Revenue Bonds: A limited-liability bond (i.e. not backed by the full-faith and
credit of the issuing jurisdiction) whose debt service requirements are paid only
from the earnings of a project.
Rural Development: Agriculture-related and residential land uses with a
density of one dwelling unit or less per gross acre.
Scalloped Streets: Roads with uneven and irregular widths.
Secondary Road: Roads intended to serve sub-regional travel.
Section Line Road: Roads that run north-south or east-west at one mile
intervals.
Service Sector: That part of the economy that produces services rather than
goods.
SHPO – State Historic Preservation Office: A division of Arizona State
Parks, it provides assistance in identifying, evaluating, protecting, and enhancing
historic and archaeological properties that have significance for local
communities, the State of Arizona, or the Nation.
Single-family Housing: Separate or free-standing dwelling intended for
occupancy by just one household or family.
SIP – State Implementation Plan: Cumulative record of all air pollution
strategies, state statutes, state rules and local ordinances implemented in
accordance with the federal Clean Air Act by government agencies in Arizona.
Site-built Home: A home that is primarily constructed on the site in which it is
located.
Special District: Government unit that is separate and independent from a
general purpose government a like city, town or county, and that exists to
provide a specific service not provided by a general purpose government.
Sprawl: The unplanned, uncontrolled spreading of urban development into
rural and undeveloped areas near cities.
Standard City Planning Enabling Act: An advisory proposal developed
during the 1920s that includes various features of planning legislation, and that
serves as a model for most state planning enabling laws.
Appendix C: Definitions - 133
DRAFT #3

Standard State Zoning Enabling Act: An advisory proposal developed during
the 1920s that serves as a model zoning enabling statute in most states. Among
its main components, this act provides that zoning regulations should be in
accordance with a comprehensive plan.
TIP – Transportation Improvement Plan: The five-year planned roadway
systems improvements for Maricopa County.
Transportation Systems Management & Operations: An integrated
program to optimize the performance of existing infrastructure through
multimodal, cross-jurisdictional systems designed to preserve road capacity and
improve safety and reliability of the transportation system.
TSP – Transportation System Plan: Maricopa County’s long-range plan for
transportation.
Trust Beneficiaries: Organizations that receive monetary proceeds from the
sale or lease of State Trust land. The largest beneficiary of revenues are
Common Schools (K-12), but other public institutions also receive revenue
including universities, specialized schools and the state hospital.
Unincorporated: Areas not included within a city or town.
Urban Development: Commercial and industrial land uses as well as
residential land uses with a density greater than one dwelling unit per gross acre.
Urban Interface Area: Areas where urban- and rural-type land uses are
adjacent to or intermixed with one another.
“Urban Solutions for Urban Development”: A Maricopa County planning
model based on the view that to protect public health, prevent new county
islands, and create fiscally and environmentally efficient development patterns
comprehensive plan amendments and zoning district boundary changes for new
urban development should be predicated on clearly demonstrating that urban
services and infrastructure are available to serve new residents and businesses.
VLT – Vehicle License Tax: A state tax charged in lieu of a personal property
tax on vehicles.
Watercourse Master Plan: Prepared by the Maricopa County Flood Control
District, these are similar to Area Drainage Master Plans but focus on
watercourses (such as rivers and major washes) rather than on larger
watersheds.
Appendix C: Definitions - 134
DRAFT #3

“Wildcat” Subdivision: A de facto subdivision that occurs through repeated
lot splits of a large parcel or area. Wildcat subdivisions are not subject to local
subdivision regulations or related health and safety requirements.
Zoning District Boundary Change: A change to the boundary of a zoning
district which results in property transferring from one zoning district to another.
Appendix C: Definitions - 135
DRAFT #3

APPENDIX D:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT GUIDELINES
Vision 2030 is intended to be a consistent, predictable, and transparent guide for
making land use decisions in unincorporated areas. The goals and policies in this
plan support consistent and predictable decisions, but to remain relevant the
plan must be periodically modified to adapt to changes in state law, the
environment, the economy, elected leadership and community priorities.
Although amendments are sometimes necessary Maricopa County reaffirms that
any change should improve the county’s overall condition and not undermine the
plan’s core principles.
Amendments include changes to the goals, policies and/or land use designations
in the comprehensive plan or county area plan, and changes to previously
approved development master plans and comprehensive plan amendments. All
amendments are processed according to state laws and require approval by the
Board of Supervisors (Board). Applicant initiated amendments are classified as
one of the following:
Category 1: Goal, Policy, and Condition Amendments
Category 1 comprehensive plan amendments change the goals and policies of
this comprehensive plan or a county area plan, or change the conditions of
previously approved development master plans and comprehensive plan
amendments. Category 1 amendments are standard amendments, must comply
with State laws and county requirements, and must be approved by the Board.
Category 2: Major Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Category 2 comprehensive plan amendments apply to changes of more than 640
gross acres and should include various types, densities and intensities of
residential, commercial retail, office/non-retail employment, open space and
community land uses in a master-planned community design. However,
exceptions are considered for single- or limited-use industrial and other large-
scale employment projects on a case-by-case basis. Category 2 amendments are
major comprehensive plan amendments, must comply with county and state
requirements, and must be approved by the Board. Category 2 amendments are
evaluated for consistency with the goals and policies of this comprehensive plan
and applicable area plan.
Appendix D: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines - 136
DRAFT #3

Category 3: Standard Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Category 3 comprehensive plan amendments apply to changes of 640 gross
acres or less. Category 3 amendments are standard amendments, must comply
with State laws and county requirements, and must be approved by the Board.
Category 3 amendments are evaluated for consistency with the goals and
policies of this comprehensive plan and applicable area plan.
Major Comprehensive Plan Amendments; Standard Comprehensive
Plan Amendments; Application Deadlines; Hearings
In accordance with state law major comprehensive plan amendments are
considered at a single public hearing in the calendar year that the amendment is
requested. Since the Board considers major amendments at a public hearing in
December, the application filing deadline for major comprehensive plan
amendments is the last business day of May of the calendar year in which the
amendment is requested. No filing deadline is necessary for standard
comprehensive plan amendments (Category 1 and Category 3) since they are
considered by the Board throughout the calendar year.
Comprehensive Plan Amendments: Right and Privileges
Comprehensive plan amendments do not grant entitlement or protected
development rights, do not vest any development right, and do not confer any
other rights beyond those outlined in state law. When approved by the Board
comprehensive plan amendments do allow requests for zoning district boundary
changes consistent with the approved comprehensive plan amendment, Arizona
Revised Statutes and other applicable county requirements.
PROCESS
1. Preliminary Discussion (“preapplication” meeting)
Before official amendment application the applicant must participate in a
preapplication meeting with Maricopa County. The preapplication meeting
determines the extent of the changes needed, potential issues and
considerations, the amendment process necessary to meet county
requirements and the submittal requirements.
Appendix D: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines - 137
DRAFT #3

2. Application
Once the preapplication meeting is complete official application can occur.
Submittal and fee requirements are included in the application packet along
with information about the required public participation process. Applicants
should carefully review these requirements to help avoid potential delays in
processing.
3. Official Review
Upon receipt of the official application and fees the Planning and
Development Department will refer the application to the appropriate
internal and external stakeholders for review. As necessary, official review
will also include a technical advisory committee (TAC) meeting where
stakeholders will provide comments and recommend changes needed to
meet county requirements and/or stakeholder requests. Information and
details about the TAC meeting are provided at the preapplication meeting.
4. Public Hearing – Planning and Zoning Commission
Once TAC requirements are met the amendment application will be
scheduled for public hearing by the Maricopa County Planning and Zoning
Commission (Commission). Adjacent landowners and other stakeholders
and affected parties will be notified of the date/time of hearing based on
the applicant’s required site posting and notice in a newspaper of general
circulation (Note: additional information about site posting and other
notification requirements is available in Maricopa County’s Community
Participation Guidelines). If the Commission makes a recommendation of
approval or denial of the application it will be transmitted to the Board for
final consideration and action.
5. Public Hearing – Board of Supervisors
As the governing body for land use decisions in unincorporated areas, the
Board is responsible for making a final determination of approval or denial
of the application. Notice of Board hearing is provided in the same manner
as the Commission hearing, and the Board may either accept or reject the
Commission’s recommendation. If the Board approves the application it is
effective immediately and the applicant is thenceforth responsible for
meeting all required conditions of approval.
Appendix D: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines - 138
DRAFT #3

Contact Agency
For further information about the comprehensive plan amendment process
please contact the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department:
Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
501 North 44th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85008
Telephone: (602) 506-3301
Fax: (602) 506-3711
Email: pdcustomerService@mail.maricopa.gov
Appendix D: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Guidelines - 139
DRAFT #3

RESOLUTION OF ADOPTION
Maricopa County Board of Supervisors
Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MARICOPA COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
January 13, 2016
BE IT RESOLVED by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors as follows:
WHEREAS, Arizona Revised Statutes direct Maricopa County to
prepare a comprehensive plan for areas under its jurisdiction to bring
about coordinated physical development in accordance with the present
and future needs of the county. The comprehensive plan shall be
developed so as to conserve the natural resources of the county,
to ensure efficient expenditure of public funds, and to
promote health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of
the public; and
WHEREAS, Vision 2030 helps promote economic prosperity,
maintain a vibrant quality of life, and facilitate continued growth in a
coordinated, harmonious, and responsible manner; and
WHEREAS, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors
acknowledges its responsibility to exercise its power in
establishing land use patterns and development requirements
that mitigate adverse impacts while enhancing opportunity,
respecting property rights, and facilitating operation of a free
marketplace; and
WHEREAS, sensible planning can help build a strong economy,
create compatible and efficient development patterns,
maintain quality of life, and result in more efficient and
effective use of infrastructure and finances; and
WHEREAS, Vision 2030 gives the Maricopa County Board of
Supervisors and other decision makers, both public and
private, clear guidelines to make informed choices; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with statutory requirements and
to create a truly inclusive comprehensive plan, broad public
participation was sought in order to understand the public's
issues and concerns, and to translate those into effective
strategies and policies to address those issues and concerns;
and;
WHEREAS, input was solicited and received from various
Maricopa County departments and agencies to help ensure
coordination with their respective plans and operations; and
WHEREAS, input was solicited and received from cities and
towns, and the Arizona State Land Department to help
ensure coordination with their planning efforts; and
WHEREAS, Vision 2030 will help guide preparation and revision
of county area plans, and is intended to be flexible in
application to achieve quality outcomes; and
WHEREAS, the Maricopa County Planning and Zoning
Commission, after careful consideration and public hearing,
has recommended approval of Vision 2030; and
WHEREAS, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has
carefully considered Vision 2030 and finds that it constitutes
an appropriate, timely, and effective document to help guide
future growth in Maricopa County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the document consisting of the text and maps
entitled Vision 2030, Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan is hereby approved this 13 th day
of January, 2016.
Chairman Date
Clerk of the Board Date
fv-I
Director Date
Planning & Development Department