Z2022118 BOS ORIGINAL REPORT_-COMPRESSED.PDF
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
199713 characters
February 26, 2025
Z2022118
Page 1 of 4
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Board Hearing Date:
February 26, 2025
Case #/Title:
Z2022118 – Patterson 5
Supervisor District:
1
Applicant/Owner:
Jessica Sarkissian, Upfront Planning & Entitlements, LLC/JDP
Properties
Request:
Zone Change with Overlay from Rural-43 to C-3 CUPD
Site Location:
Generally located at the SEC of Riggs Rd. and Sossaman Rd. in the
Queen Creek area
Site Size:
Approx. 5.11 acres
County Island Status:
Yes, Town of Queen Creek
Additional
Comments:
The applicant seeks C-3 CUPD zoning for a commercial retail
development and RV/trailer storage facility. While the request does
not conform to the comprehensive plan’s Rural Development Area
land use designation, it is appropriate for commercial zoning
located at an arterial corner with urban-level utilities. Staff notes
that the Town’s General Plan allows for some commercial
agricultural-related uses under their Rural designation.
The Town of Queen Creek has stated a neutral stance. Their
comments included suggested minor corrections to the landscape
plan, narrative and opposition to the removal of sight visibility
triangles for a gated emergency access. The Town provided a will
serve letter for water and sewer.
Thirteen (13) individuals support the case. Ninety-three (93)
individuals representing fifty-six (56) properties, including a Town
Councilor, oppose the case. Concerns included architectural and
residential character, traffic, crime, property values and quality of
life. A support/opposition map demonstrates that a supermajority
vote (four affirmative) of the Board is required based upon the
number and area of parcels opposing the case within a 300’ radius.
Support is not reflected in the current maps; however, a handout will
be produced closer to the hearing mapping additional support and
opposition.
February 26, 2025
Z2022118
Page 2 of 4
Commission
Recommendation:
On 1/23/25, the Commission voted 5-0 (motion by Acting Chair
Milhaven D2, seconded by Commissioner Curley D3) to adopt a
motion recommending the Board of Supervisors approve
Z2022118 subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘l’:
a.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Site Plan entitled,
“Site Plan” consisting of 11 full-size sheets dated October 21, 2024, and stamped received
December 4, 2024, except as modified by the following conditions. Staff may determine
slight refinements to remain in substantial conformance with the approved site plan.
Minor and major amendments to the site plan will be determined in accordance with
Chapter 3 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
b.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative Report
entitled “Zone Change With Overlay from RU-43 to C-3 CUPD”, consisting of 9 pages, dated
December 4, 2024 except as modified by the following conditions.
c.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Landscape Plan
entitled “Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage”, consisting of 4 pages, dated October 21,
2024 except as modified by the following conditions.
d.
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply:
1.
Engineering review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design only.
All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section
1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards;
Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual;
and current engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of
application for construction.
2.
Based on the conceptual design nature of the information submitted, changes to
the site layout may be necessitated by the final engineering design of the site’s
drainage infrastructure.
3.
Detailed Grading and Plans must be submitted with the application for Building
Permits. Drainage Report must be included.
4.
At the time of application of the Building Permit, extend spreader basin to the
driveway as part of the final design.
5.
At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the offsite drainage design
to accommodate all flows from the south. Extend the channel along the southern
property line to collect flows from the south.
6.
At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the onsite drainage to
include the landscape area on the property along Riggs Road. Update the retention
calculations and the underground storage pipe lengths.
7.
Channel grades and resultant velocities within the east channel exceed those
which would allow for unlined systems. At the time of application of the Building
Permit, the final design of the east channel will warrant stabilization.
February 26, 2025
Z2022118
Page 3 of 4
8.
At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the channel with freeboard
per DPSM Standard 6.8.7.
9.
The subject site is located within the County’s Urbanized Area. A Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Permit (SWPPP) from the County will be required prior to
issuance of any construction permits. This does NOT preclude the requirement to
obtain a Notice of Intent to Discharge (NOID) from the State (ADEQ), as may be
required.
e.
The following C-3 CUPD Zoning District development standards shall apply:
1.
Parking - 1 per 250 sq. ft. of floor area for retail, office and commercial uses with
enclosed vehicle and trailer storage areas not included in floor area calculation
2.
Screening/Buffering - 8’ screen wall required along south and east property line
and 3’ tall landscape screening for parking along the western side to address
restrictions due to the existing drainageway
3.
Landscaping - Landscaping strip waived in lieu of landscape plan
4.
Sight Visibility Triangles (SVTs) – Two (2) sight visibility triangles waived along the
gated emergency access on Indiana. All other required sight visibility triangles
shall remain
f.
CUPD overlay is applied to restrict the use of the site. Until such time as the site is served
by sewer, uses on the site shall only be those acceptable to the Maricopa County
Environmental Services Department (MCESD) that can be accommodated by septic
systems. A public water system shall be required prior to establishment of any use that
requires potable water. A utility services agreement with the Town of Queen Creek shall
be required for any uses that require sanitary sewer.
g.
The CUPD overlay shall prohibit the following uses: adult-oriented facilities; amusement
enterprises and outdoor amusement parks; auction sales, including swap meet
operations; automobile laundries; automobile repair shops and garages, including outside
vehicle display and storage; automobile and golf cart sales, new and used, service and
rental; bars, including retail sales of packaged goods for off-site consumption; billboards;
boat sales, service and rental, including outdoor displays; bowling alleys; bus depots;
circus and carnival grounds having permanent facilities; dance halls and nightclubs,
including outdoor amplified music; drive-in or drive-thru restaurants and refreshment
stands; drive-in or outdoor theaters; equipment rentals and sales, but not including
equipment customarily used for heavy construction; frozen food lockers, including
processing but not slaughtering of animals; funeral homes, mortuaries and chapels;
hospitals; hospitals, clinics and kennels for animals; hotels, motels, resorts; liquor stores;
lumber yards not including industrial milling or planning operations; medical marijuana
dispensary facilities and/or marijuana establishment; miniature golf courses and driving
ranges; mobile home, travel trailer and recreation vehicle sales and service; outdoor race
tracks; parking lots and public garages, vehicle storage; permanent facilities for rodeos,
auctions, swap meets, campgrounds, and sites rented for private parties; pet boarding of
cats and dogs and other small animals; printing, lithography and publishing
establishments; recreation centers with pool halls or billiards; stone monument sales;
theaters, not drive-in or adult-oriented; trade schools; truck stops, with customary
accessory facilities including but not limited to restaurant, convenience retail, motel, truck
wash, and minor repair facilities but not including major repair, freight storage, freight
handling, warehousing or distribution facilities; veterinary hospitals, clinics and kennels
February 26, 2025
Z2022118
Page 4 of 4
for dogs, cats and small animals; and, zoos, including the keeping of wild or exotic animals
on a private or commercial basis.
h.
Prior to issuance of the initial building permit, written confirmation will be required from
the emergency fire protection jurisdiction having authority that the facility has been
designed in accordance with their regulations and requirements, and that emergency fire
protection service will be provided to the facility. Prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy, local fire protection jurisdiction review and approval will be required.
i.
Any lighting shall be placed so as to reflect the light away from adjacent residential
districts. All outdoor light fixtures shall be fully shielded and directed downward.
Additionally, all interior lighting visible to the exterior of the property through windows
shall also be fully-shielded and directed downward.
j.
Noncompliance with any Maricopa County Regulation shall be grounds for initiating a
revocation of this Zone Change as set forth in the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
k.
The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if the
County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with conditions.
l.
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the applicant,
with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows the property to
enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on the date of application,
subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply with any condition, and at the
time of expiration of the Zone Change, the property may be considered by the Board after
recommendation by the Commission at a public hearing for reversion to the zoning that
existed on the date of application. It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either
revocation due to the failure to comply with any conditions, or the expiration of the Zone
Change, does not reduce any rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide,
sell or possess the property and that there would be no diminution in value of the property
from the value it held on the date of application due to such revocation or expiration of
the Zone Change. The Zone Change enhances the value of the property above its value
as of the date the Zone Change is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the
same value of the property as if the Zone Change had never been granted.
Presented by:
Adam Cannon, AICP, Senior Planner
Reviewed by:
Darren Gérard, AICP, Planning Manager
Attachments:
1/23/25 P&Z Packet (91 pages)
1/23/25 P&Z Handout (9 pages)
Support Correspondence (14 pages)
Additional Opposition Petition & Correspondence (22 pages)
Area Opposition Map (1 page)
300’ Support/Opposition Map (1 page)
Note:
1/23/25 Draft P&Z Minutes are not available as of the writing of this report, but can be
provided upon request later when available.
Z2022118
Page 1 of 11
Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case:
Z2022118 – Patterson 5
Hearing Date:
January 23, 2025
Supervisor District:
1
Applicant:
Jessica Sarkissian, Upfront Planning & Entitlements, LLC
Owner:
JDP Properties
Request:
Zone Change with Overlay from Rural-43 to C-3 CUPD
Site Location:
Generally located at the SEC of Riggs Rd. and Sossaman Rd. in the Queen
Creek area
Site Size:
Approx. 5.11 acres
Density:
N/A
County Island:
Yes, Town of Queen Creek
County Plan:
Vision 2030 Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan – Rural Development
Area (0–1 d.u./acre)
Municipal Plan:
Town of Queen Creek – Rural (0-1 d.u./acre)
Municipal Comments:
Town of Queen Creek - Neutral
Support/Opposition:
Seventy-five (75) in opposition
Recommendation:
Approve with conditions
Z2022118
Page 2 of 11
Project Summary:
1.
The applicant is requesting a Zone Change with Overlay from Rural-43 to C-3 CUPD with a Plan of
Development to allow the development of commercial uses to include farm supply store and
RV/trailer storage facility. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Riggs Rd.
and Sossaman Rd., zoned Rural-43 with approx. 5.11 acres and is designated as Rural
Development Area in the Vision 2030 Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan and Rural (0-1
d.u./acre) in the Town of Queen Creek General Plan.
2.
The hours of operation of the retail store are expected to be normal business hours with the
storage facility having twenty-four hour access to tenants. Three buildings are anticipated to be
constructed including the retail facility and two storage buildings. The two storage buildings will
contain a total of fifty-four (54) storage spaces. The storage facility will have controlled, gated
and secure access to tenants. Up to four (4) employees are expected to staff the retail facility.
3.
Access to the site is available from Riggs Rd. Customers will enter and exit the site by turning
right into the property on Riggs Rd. and exit out to the right as well. A separate access is available
on Indiana Ave. The Indiana Ave. access will be gated and closed. A note is placed on the site
plan identifying the access as emergency only. Signage will also identify the access as
emergency only.
4.
The lot is flat and traditionally shaped. There are no structures currently present on the property
other than an existing drainage ditch. The lot coverage for the site is approx. 30.7% or approx.
68,251 sq. ft. The applicant’s site plan proposes seventy-seven (77) parking spaces paved with
a minimum of asphalt millings bound with a liquid binding emulsifier to serve the site including
five (5) ADA spaces. All outdoor lighting will be shielded, directed downward and in conformance
with Section 1112 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. The perimeter of the property and
use will be screened with a minimum 8’ screen wall along the south and east property lines.
Additionally, the landscaping plan provided includes 19 trees and 223 shrubs which are placed
primarily as a buffer to residential on Indiana Ave. and as a buffer to Riggs. Rd.
5.
Water and sewer will be provided by the Town of Queen Creek per the will serve letter received by
Staff. The applicant noted in their narrative that they plan to execute a utility services agreement
with the Town; however, there is no timeline as to when that process will be complete. There are
no code violations or outstanding fees on the subject property.
Z2022118
Page 3 of 11
Exhibit 1 – Site Plan Excerpt
Exhibit 2 – Landscaping Plan Excerpt
Z2022118
Page 4 of 11
6.
The subject site is currently zoned Rural-43. The applicant is requesting to change the zone to C-
3 CUPD. The base C-3 zone and requested zoning standards for the C-3 CUPD zone are listed
below:
REGULATION
BASE ZONING DISTRICT
REGULATIONS (C-3)
PROPOSED ZONING
REGULATIONS (C-3 CUPD)
Height
40’
40’
Min. Front Yard
25’
25’
Min. Side Yard
10’
10’
Min. Rear Yard
25’ (abutting rural or residential)
25’ (abutting rural or residential)
Min. Lot Area
6,000 sq. ft.
6,000 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Width
60’
60’
Max. Lot Coverage
60%
60%
Min. Parking
1 per 250 sq. ft. of floor area
1 per 250 sq. ft. of floor area for
retail, office and commercial uses
with enclosed vehicle and trailer
storage areas not included in floor
area calculation
Min.
Screening/Buffering
6’ solid masonry wall adjacent to or
abutting any rural or residential zone
boundary
8’ screen wall required along south
and east property line and 3’ tall
landscape screening
for parking along the western
side to address restrictions
due to the existing
drainageway
Min. Landscaping
5’ landscaping strip required along
road frontages
Landscaping strip waived in lieu of
landscape plan
Sight Visibility
Triangles
Required. Driveways and Parking are
not permitted within SVTs
Removing sight visibility
triangle requirement along
the gated access on Indiana
for fire access only as Indiana
is a Private Drive. All other
required sight visibility
triangles shall remain
Sign Regulations
Chapter 14, Section 1401 & 1403 of
MCZO
Chapter 14, Section 1401 & 1403 of
MCZO
7.
The applicant is requesting to vary the minimum required parking, screening/buffering,
landscaping and SVT development standards. The request to vary parking is to allow for on-site
vehicle storage spaces to be utilized in lieu of parking requirements generated by the storage
facility lot coverage. The site has provided all parking required for the retail use including required
ADA spaces. Due to the existing drainage way along Sossaman Rd., the applicant is requesting
3’ tall landscaping screening versus a required screen wall. A wall will screen the property along
Riggs Rd. Additionally, an 8’ screen wall would be required along the southern and eastern
property lines which are the property lines which abut single-family residences and rural zoning.
The landscaping strip is requested to be waived as there is a landscaping plan providing ample
site landscaping in excess of County requirements for a 5’ strip along road frontage. The applicant
is requesting to waive two (2) required SVTs along the access of the property located along
Indiana Ave. This access will be gated and only used in emergency situations.
Z2022118
Page 5 of 11
Exhibit 3 – 2022 Aerial Map
Exhibit 4 – Rural-43 Zoning District and Surrounding Districts
Z2022118
Page 6 of 11
Existing On-Site and Adjacent Zoning / Land Use:
8.
On-site:
Rural-43 / Vacant
North:
Town of Queen Creek R1-43 / Newell Barney Middle School
South:
Rural-43 / Single-Family Residential
East:
Rural-43 / Single-Family Residential
West:
Rural-43 / Single-Family Residential
Utilities and Services:
9.
Water:
Town of Queen Creek
Wastewater:
Town of Queen Creek
Fire:
Queen Creek County Island Fire District
Police:
MCSO
School District:
Queen Creek Unified School District #95
Right-of-Way:
10.
The following table includes existing and proposed half-width right-of-way and the future
classification based upon the Town of Queen Creek Street Classification Map.
Street Name
Half-width
Existing R/W
Half-width
Proposed R/W
Existing Classification
Future Classification
Riggs Rd.
70’
70’
Principal Arterial
Principal Arterial
Sossaman Rd.
70’
Varies
Arterial
Arterial
Indiana Ave.
15’
15’
Private
Private
Adopted Plans:
11.
Vision 2030 Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan: (Adopted: 2016): The subject property is
designated as Rural Development Area (0-1 d.u./ac.). The Rural Development Area land use
designation encourages low-density rural residential and agricultural uses.
12.
Town of Queen Creek General Plan (Adopted: 2018): The Town of Queen Creek General Plan
designates this property as Rural (0-1 d.u./ac.). The Rural classification denotes areas where
there are predominantly large lot single-family residential properties. Rural areas generally consist
of very low density residential, commercial including agriculture-related, neighborhood retail,
office and services with requirements. Also permitted are employment uses such as agriculture
and recreation-related uses, home office and garage (home cottage) industries. Appropriate
zoning districts include R1-190, R1-54, R1-43, C-1 with conditions, P/QP, PAD and AT.
Public Participation Summary:
13.
The applicant complied with the minimum requirements of the Maricopa County Citizen Review
Process with the required posting of the site and notification by first class mail to adjacent
property owners within 300’ of the subject parcel and interested parties. The applicant also
notified property owners within 600’ of the subject parcel in excess of County requirements and
submitted a Citizens Participation Results Report.
14.
According to the report, the applicant held two neighborhood meetings on April 28, 2022 and on
June 13, 2023. Twenty-six (26) people attended the 2022 meeting and eighteen (18) people
Z2022118
Page 7 of 11
attended the 2023 meeting. The applicant took detailed notes of responses to citizen concerns
and questions. Both meetings were contentious and neighboring residents expressed opposition
to the proposal. Concerns included traffic, residential character, crime from individuals with
substance use disorders, excessive lighting, property values and quality of life. The applicant
addressed technical questions associated with the proposal and areas where it addressed
concerns such as the aesthetics of the property.
15.
Staff received comments and a petition from seventy-five (75) individuals in opposition to the
zone change request. Comments included an e-mail from Town of Queen Creek Councilman
Robin Benning asking Supervisor Sellers’ office to consider local architect and neighbor Rob
Burgeimer’s concerns with the site. Staff notes that Councilman Benning’s comments do not
represent the opinion of the Town as Staff has not received comments from the Development
Services department or the Council writ-large. Mr. Burgheimer represented himself as a voice of
those individuals aggrieved by the potential commercial site. His concerns included the intensity
of C-3 zoning, access to Indiana St. from the facility, site design as it pertains to on-site traffic
and buffering from residential, lighting, property values, architectural character and potential
impacts to the school. The remainder of neighbor comments express similar concerns to Mr.
Burgheimer’s concerns.
16.
Staff routed this application to the Town of Queen Creek for comment. The Town Planning
Department commented that they believe the Town will remain neutral on the zoning case and
added a few comments from technical review agencies and the planning staff. These comments
included suggested corrections to the landscape plan and the narrative and opposition to the
removal of sight visibility triangles along Sossaman at Indiana. Additionally, the comments
mentioned the need to upsize the water line along the frontage of the property and the need for a
limited access along Riggs by constructing modifications to the two (2) way continuous left. Staff
believes that the corrections mentioned are minor and that some of the comments are design
requirements or road improvements the Town will be able to request anyways. Regarding the site
visibility triangles, Staff disagrees with the Town. It’s an emergency access that will be gated and
only used in extreme circumstances. Additionally, the sight visibility triangle located at the corner
of Sossaman and Indiana will remain in place. Only the sight visibility triangles located along
emergency access point are requested for removal, and the infrequency of use is enough for
justification of their removal. The Utility Services Department of the Town issued a will serve letter
for water and sewer service. The applicant’s narrative states that a utility services agreement is
underway, but does not specify a timeframe as to when it will be completed. Additionally, the
Town approved the applicant’s traffic study with the comment that they are requiring the
installation of a 5’ sidewalk along Riggs Rd. and Sossaman Rd.
Outstanding Concerns from Reviewing Agencies:
17.
N/A
Staff Analysis:
18.
Staff supports the applicant’s requested zone change to C-3 CUPD for commercial uses. While
the request does not conform to the land use designation of Rural Development Area in the Vision
2030 Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan, the property is appropriate for commercial zoning
because it is located at an arterial corner with appropriate utilities to accommodate services and
appropriate space to accommodate on-site traffic. Staff notes that the Town’s General Plan
allows for some commercial agricultural-related uses under the Town’s Rural designation. While
Z2022118
Page 8 of 11
C-3 zoning allows uses outside of the intensity expected by the Town’s General Plan, the proposal
for this site is primarily a farm supply store with a RV/trailer storage component.
19.
Based on resident concerns, staff worked with the applicant to limit potential site uses as the C-
3 zoning district allows for several uses incompatible with the nearby school and residential
homes in proximity to the site. In particular, marijuana establishments, adult-oriented businesses,
nightclubs/bars, billboards, bus depots, drive-thru restaurants, hospitals and hotels are
conditioned to be prohibited uses under the C-3 CUPD zoning district. Site screening and lighting
will conform to the regulations of the zoning ordinance, and the applicant provided landscaping
and buffering sufficient to screen the site from nearby residential properties. Staff believes that
the applicant has acted in good faith to notify nearby owners of the proposed change and to
provide ample opportunity to make comments. Ultimately, Staff believes that this proposal will
be less-intense than expected by individuals in opposition and compatible for the area.
Recommendation:
20.
For the reasons outlined in this report, staff recommends the Commission adopt a motion
recommending that the Board of Supervisors approve Z2022118 subject to the following
conditions ‘a’ – ‘l’:
a.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Site Plan entitled,
“Site Plan” consisting of 11 full-size sheets dated October 21, 2024, and stamped received
December 4, 2024, except as modified by the following conditions. Staff may determine
slight refinements to remain in substantial conformance with the approved site plan.
Minor and major amendments to the site plan will be determined in accordance with
Chapter 3 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
b.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative Report
entitled “Zone Change With Overlay from RU-43 to C-3 CUPD”, consisting of 9 pages, dated
December 4, 2024 except as modified by the following conditions.
c.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Landscape Plan
entitled “Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage”, consisting of 4 pages, dated October 21,
2024 except as modified by the following conditions.
d.
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply:
1.
Engineering review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design only.
All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section
1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards;
Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual;
and current engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of
application for construction.
2.
Based on the conceptual design nature of the information submitted, changes to
the site layout may be necessitated by the final engineering design of the site’s
drainage infrastructure.
3.
Detailed Grading and Plans must be submitted with the application for Building
Permits. Drainage Report must be included.
Z2022118
Page 9 of 11
4.
At the time of application of the Building Permit, extend spreader basin to the
driveway as part of the final design.
5.
At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the offsite drainage design
to accommodate all flows from the south. Extend the channel along the southern
property line to collect flows from the south.
6.
At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the onsite drainage to
include the landscape area on the property along Riggs Road. Update the retention
calculations and the underground storage pipe lengths.
7.
Channel grades and resultant velocities within the east channel exceed those
which would allow for unlined systems. At the time of application of the Building
Permit, the final design of the east channel will warrant stabilization.
8.
At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the channel with freeboard
per DPSM Standard 6.8.7.
9.
The subject site is located within the County’s Urbanized Area. A Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Permit (SWPPP) from the County will be required prior to
issuance of any construction permits. This does NOT preclude the requirement to
obtain a Notice of Intent to Discharge (NOID) from the State (ADEQ), as may be
required.
e.
The following C-3 CUPD Zoning District development standards shall apply:
1.
Parking - 1 per 250 sq. ft. of floor area for retail, office and commercial uses with
enclosed vehicle and trailer storage areas not included in floor area calculation
2.
Screening/Buffering - 8’ screen wall required along south and east property line
and 3’ tall landscape screening for parking along the western side to address
restrictions due to the existing drainageway
3.
Landscaping - Landscaping strip waived in lieu of landscape plan
4.
Sight Visibility Triangles (SVTs) – Two (2) sight visibility triangles waived along the
gated emergency access on Indiana. All other required sight visibility triangles
shall remain
f.
CUPD overlay is applied to restrict the use of the site. Until such time as the site is served
by sewer, uses on the site shall only be those acceptable to the Maricopa County
Environmental Services Department (MCESD) that can be accommodated by septic
systems. A public water system shall be required prior to establishment of any use that
requires potable water. A utility services agreement with the Town of Queen Creek shall
be required for any uses that require sanitary sewer.
g.
The CUPD overlay shall prohibit the following uses: adult-oriented facilities; amusement
enterprises and outdoor amusement parks; auction sales, including swap meet
operations; automobile laundries; automobile repair shops and garages, including outside
vehicle display and storage; automobile and golf cart sales, new and used, service and
rental; bars, including retail sales of packaged goods for off-site consumption; billboards;
boat sales, service and rental, including outdoor displays; bowling alleys; bus depots;
circus and carnival grounds having permanent facilities; dance halls and nightclubs,
including outdoor amplified music; drive-in or drive-thru restaurants and refreshment
Z2022118
Page 10 of 11
stands; drive-in or outdoor theaters; equipment rentals and sales, but not including
equipment customarily used for heavy construction; frozen food lockers, including
processing but not slaughtering of animals; funeral homes, mortuaries and chapels;
hospitals; hospitals, clinics and kennels for animals; hotels, motels, resorts; liquor stores;
lumber yards not including industrial milling or planning operations; medical marijuana
dispensary facilities and/or marijuana establishment; miniature golf courses and driving
ranges; mobile home, travel trailer and recreation vehicle sales and service; outdoor race
tracks; parking lots and public garages, vehicle storage; permanent facilities for rodeos,
auctions, swap meets, campgrounds, and sites rented for private parties; pet boarding of
cats and dogs and other small animals; printing, lithography and publishing
establishments; recreation centers with pool halls or billiards; stone monument sales;
theaters, not drive-in or adult-oriented; trade schools; truck stops, with customary
accessory facilities including but not limited to restaurant, convenience retail, motel, truck
wash, and minor repair facilities but not including major repair, freight storage, freight
handling, warehousing or distribution facilities; veterinary hospitals, clinics and kennels
for dogs, cats and small animals; and, zoos, including the keeping of wild or exotic animals
on a private or commercial basis.
h.
Prior to issuance of the initial building permit, written confirmation will be required from
the emergency fire protection jurisdiction having authority that the facility has been
designed in accordance with their regulations and requirements, and that emergency fire
protection service will be provided to the facility. Prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy, local fire protection jurisdiction review and approval will be required.
i.
Any lighting shall be placed so as to reflect the light away from adjacent residential
districts. All outdoor light fixtures shall be fully shielded and directed downward.
Additionally, all interior lighting visible to the exterior of the property through windows
shall also be fully-shielded and directed downward.
j.
Noncompliance with any Maricopa County Regulation shall be grounds for initiating a
revocation of this Zone Change as set forth in the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
k.
The property owner/s and their successors waive claim for diminution in value if the
County takes action to rescind approval due to noncompliance with conditions.
l.
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the applicant,
with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows the property to
enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on the date of application,
subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply with any condition, and at the
time of expiration of the Zone Change, the property may be considered by the Board after
recommendation by the Commission at a public hearing for reversion to the zoning that
existed on the date of application. It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either
revocation due to the failure to comply with any conditions, or the expiration of the Zone
Change, does not reduce any rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide,
sell or possess the property and that there would be no diminution in value of the property
from the value it held on the date of application due to such revocation or expiration of
the Zone Change. The Zone Change enhances the value of the property above its value
as of the date the Zone Change is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the
same value of the property as if the Zone Change had never been granted.
Presented by:
Adam Cannon, AICP, Senior Planner
Reviewed by:
Rachel Applegate, Planning Supervisor
Z2022118
Page 11 of 11
Attachments:
Case Map (1 page)
Site Plan (reduced 8.5”x11”, 11 pages)
Narrative Report (9 pages)
Engineering Comments (3 pages)
MCDOT Comments (3 pages)
MCESD Comments (2 pages)
Town of Queen Creek Comments (4 pages)
Town of Queen Creek Will Serve Letter (2 pages)
Town of Queen Creek Traffic Study Comments (4 pages)
Opposition Correspondence (45 pages)
/
Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ
1
Gross Acres: 10 approx.
Generated December 31, 2024 12:19 PM
Z2022118
Application Name:
Legal Description
Patterson 5 EDR
Applicant
Case Address
Jessica Sarkissian
19201 E RIGGS Rd
Applicant Phone/Email
Parcel Primary:304-90-408F
4802216150
jessica@upfrontplanning.com
QUEEN CREEK, AZ 85242
Map scale 1:1,452
Supervisor District No.
Patterson 5 EDR
INDEX OF DRAWINGS
Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage
E. Riggs Rd & S. Sossaman Rd
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
LOCATION MAP
NORTH
OWNER
EDWIN PATTERSON
3210 E. CORALBELL AVE.
MESA, AZ 85204
T: 480.268.9920
ARCHITECT
DESIGNHAUS ARCHITECTURE
3300 AUBURN RD.
AUBURN HILLS, MI 48326
T: 248.601.4422
F: 248.453.5854
PROJECT MANAGER: JOE LATOZAS
PROJECT ARCHITECT:
PETER STUHLREYER, A.I.A
CIVIL ENGINEER
BOWMAN
2420 S POWER RD., STE 105
MESA, AZ 85209
T: 480.605.2400
CONTACT: NATHAN LARSON
PROJECT TEAM
SHEET NO:
DRAWING NAME
GENERAL
G001
Title Sheet and Index
ARCHITECTURAL
A100
Building A Plans
A101
Building B Plans
A102
Building C Plans
A200
Building A Elevations
A201
Building B Elevations
A202
Building C Elevations
ARCHITECTURAL SITE
SPA Submittal/ 21.12.20
SHEET ISSUED
REVISED
SHEET REISSUED
STATEMENT OF SELECTED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL
THESE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE ARIZONA
CONSTRUCTION CODES IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF PERMIT SUBMITTAL. ALL ENGINEERS,
CONTRACTORS AND SUPPLIERS INVOLVED WITH THIS PROJECT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE SAME
CODES ISSUED AND APPROVED CODE MODIFICATIONS AND/OR MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION BOARDS OF
APPEALS RULINGS AND WHENEVER REQUIRED SHALL PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS AND SUBMITTALS
CLEARLY DESCRIBING COMPLIANCE TO THE REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL IN RESPONSIBLE
CHARGE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL IN CHARGE:
PETER STUHLREYER. A.I.A.
ARIZONA IDENTIFICATION # 74664
DESIGNHAUS ARCHITECTURE
A1.1
Project Data & Site Plan
S100
Site Plan
S101
Site Details
L100
Landscape Plan
1 of 1
Lighting Plan
Revision/Issue
Date
3 3 0 0 A U B U R N R D . S U I T E 3 0 0
A U B U R N H I L L S , M I 4 8 3 2 6
T : 2 4 8 . 6 0 1 . 4 4 2 2 F : 2 4 8 . 4 5 3 . 5 8 5 4
W W W . D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
I N F O @ D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
DESIGNHAUS
ARCHITECTURE
E S T
1998
SPA Revision 2
Owner Review
SPA Revisions
21.01.25
22.8.29
22.09.23
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
E. Riggs Rd & S. Sossaman Rd
Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage
Title Sheet and Index
021134
G001
Indiana Ave.
Indiana Ave.
E. Riggs Rd.
S. Sossaman Rd.
S. 193rd Way
S. 194th Way
S. 194th Way
E. Lawndale Pl.
E. Via Park St.
S. 191st St.
ALTA/NSPA LAND TITLE SURVEY
1 of 2
Cover, Notes, Schedule "B" Items
2 of 2
Site Details & Easements
CIVIL ENGINEERING
1 of 3
Preliminary Plat Cover Plan
2 of 3
Preliminary Grading Plan
3 of 3
Preliminary Utility Plan
SPA Revisions/ 21.01.25
SPA Revision 2/ 22.09.23
SPA Revision 3/ 23.01.03
SPA Revision 5
24.10.21
SPA Revision 4/ 24.03.08
SPA Revision 3
23.01.03
SPA Revision 5/ 24.10.21
10/21/2024
MATERIAL LEGEND
MATERIAL
SYMBOL
E
Arriscraft Georgia Renaissance Masonry Units
- Garnet Satin Finish
L
Cultured Stone - Cultured Brick Veneer - Canvas
Finish
NORTH
SCALE: 1" = 40'
1
Site Plan
Revision/Issue
Date
3 3 0 0 A U B U R N R D . S U I T E 3 0 0
A U B U R N H I L L S , M I 4 8 3 2 6
T : 2 4 8 . 6 0 1 . 4 4 2 2 F : 2 4 8 . 4 5 3 . 5 8 5 4
W W W . D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
I N F O @ D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
DESIGNHAUS
ARCHITECTURE
E S T
1998
SPA Revision 2
Owner Review
SPA Revisions
21.01.25
22.8.29
22.09.23
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
E. Riggs Rd & S. Sossaman Rd
Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage
Site Plan
021134
S100
E. Riggs Rd.
S. Sossaman Rd.
Building A
Proposed Retail Building
One Story
18,803 SF
Building B
Enclosed Parking
16' Height
23,296 SF
Building C
Enclosed Parking
16' Height
26,152 SF
Parcel I.D.
SITE DATA
Regulation
Information
Existing Zoning
Address
E. Indiana Ave.
DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE DETAIL
PARKING SUMMARY
Regulation
Required
1 Space/250 Sq.Ft. Floor Area for retail, office and
commerical uses with enclosed vehicle and trailer stroage
areas not included in the floor area calculation.
Building A Retail (18,803 Sq.Ft.) / 250 Sq.Ft. = 76
Required Parking Spaces
Parking
Provided
77 Parking Spots including 5
Handicap Accessible
+54 Enclosed Parking Spaces
(all enclosed spaces are barrier
free)
FENCE / GATE DETAIL
SPA Revision 3
23.01.03
Gross Acreage
N/A
RU-43
Proposed Zoning
C-3 CUPD
#304-90-408F
6.77 Acres
Existing Land Use
Vacant
Proposed Land Use
Commerical
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
GROSS:
THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND
MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONIA;
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTH 219.25 FEET
ZONE
TOW AWAY
FIRE LANE
PARKING
STANDING
STOPPING
NO
VAN
ACCESSIBLE
RESERVED
PARKING
PARKING
RESERVED
PARKING SPACE PAINT DETAIL
HANDICAP SIGN DETAIL
REQUEST
ZONE CHANGE WITH OVERLAY FROM RU-43 TO C-3 CUPD
Net Acreage
(222,207 Sq.Ft.) 5.10 Acres
2
Wall Detail Elevation
PERIMETER THEMWALL
CASE ID:
#Z2022118
L
E
Proposed Building
Coverage
Required: 60% of total lot
(222,207SF)
Proposed: 30.7% (68,251 SF)
SPA Revision 5
24.10.21
NET:
THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND
MERIDIAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONIA
ADDITIONAL DETAILS
SEE PAGE S101 FOR ADDITIONAL SITE DETAILS
10/21/2024
VICINITY MAP
MEWS ROAD
RIGGS ROAD
SOSSAMAN ROAD
194TH STREET
32
SITE
Revision/Issue
Date
3 3 0 0 A U B U R N R D . S U I T E 3 0 0
A U B U R N H I L L S , M I 4 8 3 2 6
T : 2 4 8 . 6 0 1 . 4 4 2 2 F : 2 4 8 . 4 5 3 . 5 8 5 4
W W W . D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
I N F O @ D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
DESIGNHAUS
ARCHITECTURE
E S T
1998
SPA Revision 2
Owner Review
SPA Revisions
SPA Revision 5
24.10.21
21.01.25
22.8.29
22.09.23
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
E. Riggs Rd & S. Sossaman Rd
Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage
Site Details
021134
S101
CASE ID:
#Z2022118
Telecom
UTILITY COMMITMENT TABLE
Electric
SRP
Water/Sewer
Gas
Southwest Gas
Town of Queen Creek
CentryLink/Cox Cable
SITE NOTES
All lighting shall be shielded and directed downward and away from adjacent properties. Lighting shall
meet requirements of MCZO
Ground mounted transformers and roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened as required in
the local Zoning Ordinance.
All signs will meet the county sign regulations per MCZO Chapter 14
Parking spaces shall be striped per local Zoning Ordinance
Fire
Queen Creek County Island Fire Department
Police
MCSO
School District
Queen Creek Unified School District
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CHART
REGULATION
BASE ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS (C-3)
PROPOSED ZONING REGULATIONS (C-3 CUPD)
40'
HEIGHT
MIN. FRONT YARD
MIN. SIDE YARD
MIN. REAR YARD
MIN. LOT AREA
MIN. LOT WIDTH
MAX. LOT COVERAGE
PARKING
SCREENING/BUFFERING
LANSCAPING
SIGHT VISIBILITY
TRIANGLES
SIGN REGULATIONS
25'
10'
25' (ABUTTING RURAL OR RESIDENTIAL)
6,000 SQ.FT
60'
60%
1 PER 250 SQ.FT. OF FLOOR AREA
6' SOILD MASONRY WALL ADJACENT TO OR
ABUTTING ANY RURAL OR RESIDENTIAL ZONE
BOUNDARY
5' LANDSCAPING STRIP REQUIRED ALONG
ROAD FRONTAGES
REQUIRED. DRIVEWAYS AND PARKING ARE
NOT PERMITTED WITH SVT'S
CHAPTER 14, SECTION 1401 & 1403 OD MCZO
REQUIRED. DRIVEWAYS AND PARKING ARE
NOT PERMITTED WITH SVT'S
CHAPTER 14, SECTION 1401 & 1403 OD MCZO
1 PER 250 SQ.FT. OF FLOOR AREA FOR RETAIL,
OFFICE AND COMMERICAL USES WITH
ENCLOSED VEHICLE AND TRAILER STROAGE
AREAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE FLOOR AREA
CALCULATION
8' SOILD MASONRY WALL ADJACENT TO OR
ABUTTING ANY RURAL OR RESIDENTIAL ZONE
BOUNDARY
40'
25'
10'
25' (ABUTTING RURAL OR RESIDENTIAL)
6,000 SQ.FT
60'
60%
5' LANDSCAPING STRIP REQUIRED ALONG
ROAD FRONTAGES
10/21/2024
10/21/2024
Riggs & Sossaman Rd.
E. Riggs & S. Sosaman Rd.
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Date
10/21/2024
Scale
Not to Scale
1 of 1
Current View
Schedule
Symbol
Label
QTY
Manufacturer
Catalog
Description
Number
Lamps
Lamp
Output
LLF
Input
Power
A
40
Lithonia Lighting
DSXW1 LED 10C 1000
40K T3S MVOLT
DSXW1 LED WITH (1) 10 LED LIGHT
ENGINES, TYPE T3S OPTIC, 4000K, @
1000mA.
1
3912
1
38.8
B
7
Lithonia Lighting
DSXW1 LED 10C 1000
40K T3S MVOLT
DSXW1 LED WITH (1) 10 LED LIGHT
ENGINES, TYPE T3S OPTIC, 4000K, @
1000mA.
1
3912
1
38.8
Statistics
Description
Symbol
Avg
Max
Min
Max/Min Avg/Min
Calc Zone #1
0.8 fc
8.7 fc
0.0 fc
N/A
N/A
NORTH
SCALE: 3/32" = 1'
1
Building A Floor Plan
Space
103
Space
100
Space
101
Space
102
Space
104
Elect.
109
Riser
110
Space
105
E
D
C
B
A
1
3
2
Space
106
Space
107
F
G
H
J
Revision/Issue
Date
3 3 0 0 A U B U R N R D . S U I T E 3 0 0
A U B U R N H I L L S , M I 4 8 3 2 6
T : 2 4 8 . 6 0 1 . 4 4 2 2 F : 2 4 8 . 4 5 3 . 5 8 5 4
W W W . D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
I N F O @ D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
DESIGNHAUS
ARCHITECTURE
E S T
1998
SPA Revision 2
Owner Review
SPA Revisions
21.01.25
22.8.29
22.09.23
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
E. Riggs Rd & S. Sossaman Rd
Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage
Building A Plans
021134
A100
Toilet
108
NORTH
SCALE: 3/32" = 1'
2
Building A Roof Plan
1
3
2
4
A200
1
A200
2
A200
3
A200
4
A200
1
A200
2
A200
3
A200
SPA Revision 3
23.01.03
CASE ID:
#Z2022118
SPA Revision 4
24.03.08
10/21/2024
Revision/Issue
Date
3 3 0 0 A U B U R N R D . S U I T E 3 0 0
A U B U R N H I L L S , M I 4 8 3 2 6
T : 2 4 8 . 6 0 1 . 4 4 2 2 F : 2 4 8 . 4 5 3 . 5 8 5 4
W W W . D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
I N F O @ D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
DESIGNHAUS
ARCHITECTURE
E S T
1998
SPA Revision 2
Owner Review
SPA Revisions
21.01.25
22.8.29
22.09.23
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
E. Riggs Rd & S. Sossaman Rd
Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage
Building B Plans
021134
A101
NORTH
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'
1
Building B Floor Plan
NORTH
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'
2
Building B Roof Plan
1
A201
4
A201
2
A201
3
A201
1
A201
4
A201
2
A201
3
A201
SPA Revision 3
23.01.03
CASE ID:
#Z2022118
SPA Revision 5
24.10.21
10/21/2024
Revision/Issue
Date
3 3 0 0 A U B U R N R D . S U I T E 3 0 0
A U B U R N H I L L S , M I 4 8 3 2 6
T : 2 4 8 . 6 0 1 . 4 4 2 2 F : 2 4 8 . 4 5 3 . 5 8 5 4
W W W . D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
I N F O @ D E S I G N H A U S . C O M
DESIGNHAUS
ARCHITECTURE
E S T
1998
SPA Revision 2
Owner Review
SPA Revisions
21.01.25
22.8.29
22.09.23
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
E. Riggs Rd & S. Sossaman Rd
Riggs & Sossaman Retail & Storage
Building C Plans
021134
A102
NORTH
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'
1
Building C Floor Plan
NORTH
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'
2
Building C Roof Plan
1
A202
4
A202
2
A202
3
A202
1
A202
4
A202
2
A202
3
A202
SPA Revision 3
23.01.03
CASE ID:
#Z2022118
SPA Revision 5
24.10.21
10/21/2024
Commission Packet - Landscaping Plan (3
pages) – see separate PDF
Commission Packet - Landscaping Plan (3
pages) – see separate PDF
Commission Packet - Landscaping Plan (3
pages) – see separate PDF
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
1
ZONE CHANGE WITH OVERLAY FROM RU-43 TO C-3 CUPD
NARRATIVE FOR
5-ACRES
AT THE SEC OF SOSSAMAN & RIGGS ROAD
Submitted to:
Maricopa County Planning Department
301 West Jefferson Street
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Z2022118
Prepared by:
Upfront Planning & Entitlements, LLC
December 4, 2024
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
2
1.
REQUEST
Upfront Planning & Entitlements, LLC is pleased to submit for your consideration a zone change
with overlay from RU-43 to C-3 CUPD request on approximately 5-acres located at the southwest
corner of Sossaman and Riggs. The application will be comprised of a rezone from RU-43 zoned
property to Commercial C-3 zoning with a CUPD to allow for development of a commercial building
with outdoor trailer and equipment storage.
2.
LOCATION
The property is identified as Maricopa Assessor Parcel Number 304-90-408F (the “Property”) at the
southeast corner of Riggs and Sossaman Roads in unincorporated Maricopa County (the “County”)
and is zoned as RU-43 on 5 acres.
2.
BACKGROUND
The property is in an area designated on the County’s Comprehensive Plan as being unincorporated
between the County line and is in close proximity to the Town of Queen Creek. The approximately
5-acre site is currently vacant. This project is being proposed to provide commercial uses to the
surrounding communities in the southeast area of the County which currently has limited services.
The surrounding property has slowly over the years been annexed into the Town of Queen
Creek on the north side of Riggs Road while the south side has primarily remained in the
County however the surrounding area remains in the Couty with the more rural agricultural
and equestrian feel. Development has pushed south along the arterials into this area and
the addition of the junior high across the street and the high school to the west, there has
been many new residential developments and roadway improvements to serve this
growing area.
site
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
3
3.
PROPOSAL
The Property is being proposed to rezone to Commercial C-3 CUPD Overlay to develop this area for
higher intensity commercial use in this unincorporated area. The site is approximately 5 acres on
parcel #304-90-408F and located just east of Sossaman Road and south of Riggs Road, making this
a highly compatible use at the intersection of two arterials.
The intent is to develop a retail building on site with enclosed trailer storage behind the building.
A one-story 18,803 sq. ft. retail building is proposed to front along Riggs Road which will provide 77
parking spaces of which 5 will be ADA. Two enclosed trailer parking consisting of a total of 23,296
sq. ft. and 26,152 square feet are proposed on the site which will provide a total of 54 trailer stalls.
There is no office facility proposed to be onsite for the storage as it will be managed remotely,
therefore no parking stalls are required. The required ADA and parking will be provided on the
north side of the site.
The project is proposed to be commercial in nature and provides for a design that is in theming
with the surrounding community agricultural nature. Ample landscape buffering and wall design is
provided along Riggs Road on the north, along the neighbors to the east and south along Indiana
Avenue with extra design consideration along the south with wall and window accents facing
Indiana Avenue and decorative landscaping.
The site is proposed as a local neighborhood commercial site envisioned with retail services to serve
the surrounding community. No drive-thru are permitted and the retail building has been designed
with the ability to provide rear pickups if feed, hay or similar sales are located within this project.
The buildings are designed to look more in line with barn facilities while providing various accent
material and roof line accents to be visually appealing and a positive addition to the Riggs and
Sossaman streetscape.
Deviations below is requested due to the concerns of adjacent properties requesting a higher wall
requirement to further buffer the uses against those parcels and addressing the existing drainage
along the north and west sides.
Table 1 – Development Standards
Development Standards
C-3 Development Standards
Proposed C-3 Development
Standards
Front Yard – Abutting an
arterial street to residential
10-feet
10-feet
Side
Yard
–
abutting
Residential
10-feet
10-feet
Street Side Yard – abutting
Residential
10-feet
10-feet
Rear Yard Setback adjacent to
Residential
25 feet
25 feet
Maximum Height
40-feet
40-feet
Site Enclosure and Screening –
whether abutting a Rural
zoning district or not
A solid wall, not less than six feet
in height shall be required along
and adjacent to any side or rear
property line abutting any rural
Minimum 8’ screen wall
required along south and
east sides.
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
4
or residential zone boundary, or
any alley abutting such zone
boundary at the time of
development of the commercial
property. Further, any access
gates in said solid wall shall be
constructed of view-obscuring
material to provide effective site
screening
3’ tall landscape screening
for parking along the western
side to address restrictions
due to the existing
drainangeway.
Sign
Visibility
Triangle
Requirement
Removing sight visibility
triangle requirement along
the gated access on Indiana
for fire access only as Indiana
is a Private Drive. All other
required sight visibility
triangles shall remain.
Deviations only to the screening is being requested at the request of neighbors and through
discussion with City and County staff to further mitigate potential views into the commercial site.
Deviations to the sight visibility triangle along Indiana Avenue where it is a gated access only
available to emergency vehicles is being requested due to the reduced private drive and road width
and lack of traffic at that location.
Outdoor lighting is proposed, and will be in conformance with the provisions in Chapter 11 of the
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance, and shall be placed and oriented so as to reflect light away
from any adjoining properties. Any signage will also conform with the requirements of the C-3
zoning district. No neon lighting shall be permitted.
4.
PERMITTED USE LIST
The following are a list of permitted uses and non-permitted uses for this proposed C-3
CUPD overlay property to better be in line with the Town of Queen Creek discussions with
staff and neighborhood discussions to ensure a type of intensity is maintained. Uses which
were deemed not compatible have been stricken and those left remaining were agreeable
to the Town of Queen Creek, County staff and the proposed commercial developer. The
entire list was left in to further provide assurances as to what uses would not be permitted.
Use Description
Principally
Permitted
Not Permitted
Accessory buildings and uses customarily
incidental to the above uses
X
Adult Oriented Facilities
X
Amusement enterprises and outdoor
amusement parks
X
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
5
Any use permitted in the C-1 Zoning District in
the MCZO
X
Art mental and ornamental shops
X
Auction sales, including swap meet operations
X
Automobile laundries
X
Automobile repair shops and garages, including
outside vehicle display and storage
X
Automobile and golf cart sales, new and used,
service and rental
X
Awning and canvas store
X
Bars, including retail sales of packaged goods
for off-site consumption
X
Billboards
X
Blueprint, photostat and reproduction (copy)
services
X
Boat sales, service and rental, including outdoor
displays
X
Bowling alleys
X
Bus depots
X
Cabinet and carpenter shops
X
Catering Establishments
X
Circus and carnival grounds having permanent
facilities
X
Commercial storage of mobile homes,
manufactured homes, travel trailers, recreation
vehicles, boats and aircraft
X
Conservatories or studios: Art, dancing, music
X
Dance halls and nightclubs, including outdoor
amplified music, except adult-oriented facilities
as defined under Chapter 2 of this ordinance
may not have outdoor music or entertainment
X
Department Stores
X
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
6
Drive-in or Drive-thru restaurants and
refreshment stands
X
Drive-in or outdoor theaters
X
Electrical fixtures and appliance sales, repair
and service
X
Equipment rentals and sales, but not including
equipment customarily used for heavy
construction
X
Feed Stores with outside storage
X
Frozen food lockers, including processing but
not slaughtering of animals
X
Funeral homes, mortuaries and chapels
X
Furniture Stores, new, used, finished and
unfinished
X
Health clubs, spas and public gyms
X
Hospitals
X
Hospitals, clinics and kennels for animals
X
Hotels, motels, resorts
X
Laboratories, medical or dental
X
Landscape material sales provided all incidental
equipment and supplies, including fertilizer and
empty cans, are kept within a completely
enclosed building or within an area enclosed on
all sides by a solid fence or wall at least six feet
in height, and no goods, materials or objects
are stacked higher than the fence or wall so
erected
X
Liquor Stores
X
Lumber yards not including industrial milling or
planning operations
X
Medical clinics and surgical hospitals for farm
animals (horse, cattle, and other farm animals)
X
Medical Marijuana Dispensary Facilities and/or
Marijuana Establishment
X
Miniature golf courses and driving ranges
X
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
7
Mobile home, travel trailer and recreation
vehicle sales and service
X
Nurseries, flower and plan sales, provided all
incidental equipment and supplies including
fertilizer and empty cans is stored indoors
X
Outdoor race tracks
X
Paint and wall paper stores
X
Parking lots and public garages, vehicle storage
X
Permanent facilities for rodeos, auctions, swap
meets, campgrounds, and sites rented for
private parties
X
Pet shops
X
Pet boarding of cats and dogs and other small
animals
X
Plumbing shops
X
Printing, lithography and publishing
establishments
X
Radio and television broadcasting stations and
studios
X
Recreation centers with pool halls or billiards
X
Rental services, household, lawn, garden,
sickroom or office equipment
X
Retail stores
X
Restaurants and cafes, including patios, cocktail
lounges and outside dining and drinking areas
X
Self-Storage Facility
X
Stone monument sales
X
Taxidermist
X
Theaters, not drive-in or adult-oriented
X
Tinsmith shops
X
Trade schools
X
Truck stops, with customary accessory facilities
including but not limited to restaurant,
X
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
8
convenience retail, motel, truck wash, and
minor repair facilities but not including major
repair, freight storage, freight handling,
warehousing or distribution facilities
Upholstery shop
X
Veterinary hospitals, clinics and kennels for
dogs, cats and small animals
X
Wholesale stores
X
Zoos, including the keeping of wild or exotic
animals on a private or commercial basis
X
Wholesale ice distributing stations
X
5.
RELATIONSHIP TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
The surrounding parcels of the Property consist of residential uses zoned RU-43 and a Jr. High
School located in the Queen Creek R1-43 zoning uses. The Property is generally bounded on the
south, east and west by rural residential zoning. The Comprehensive/ General Plan Land Use
classifications, along with the existing zoning and uses for the parcels adjacent to the Property, are
listed in the table below:
Adjacent Land Uses
Direction
QC General Plan Land Use
Existing Zoning
Existing Use
North
Rural (Queen Creek)
R1-43 (Queen Creek)
Jr. High School
East
Rural (Queen Creek)
RU-43
Residential
South
Rural (Queen Creek)
RU-43
Residential
West
Rural (Queen Creek)
RU-43/ R1-35
Residential/ Retention Basin
6.
COMPLIANCE TO THE COMPEHENSIVE/ QUEEN CREEK GENERAL PLAN
The site is located in unincorporated Maricopa County; however, it is also located with the Town of
Queen Creek General Plan which has a designation for Rural which allows for Commercial rural
related and agricultural uses which is detailed in the permitted use list and was circulated to the
Town staff for review and consideration.
The owner has been working extensively on the design of the buildings and uses to ensure the
commercial use being located on these two principal arterials is still maintaining the rural feel while
addressing the large lot rural properties to the south, east and west. This proposal is in line with
the Town Goal 4 in the land use element to promote seamless development between the Town and
adjacent jurisdictions, specifically Action item 4.A.5. to work with Maricopa County.
Additionally, the list provided herein has been reviewed by the Town on appropriate uses at this
arterial intersection across from the school and within the Rural land use category while being able
to still provide retail opportunities to the area which are limited in this part of the County.
Rezone Narrative
Maricopa County
9
7.
CIRCULATION SYSTEM
The site is located along two major arterials, Riggs Road (a 6-lane Principal Arterial) and Sossaman
Road (a 4-lane arterial) which are both fully improved principal arterials at 140’ to 150’ of total right
of way and detailed on the 2035 Transportation Plan. Access into the site is restricted to only from
Riggs Road on the more eastern side of the site and shall not be from Indiana Avenue.
8.
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
The applicant anticipates that development will occur as soon as the C-3 CUPD zoning is approved.
The project is proposed to be developed in one phase approximately.
9.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Sewer – The Property currently does not have sewer, but is adjacent to lines maintained by
the Town of Queen Creek and an agreement with the Town and a utilities services
agreement is underway.
Water – The subject site is within the service area of Queen Creek and a utilities services
agreement is underway.
Power – Salt River Project is the electricity provider for the area.
Fire – Rural Metro Fire
Police – Maricopa County Sheriff
10.
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
The project is located within the Queen Creek Unified School District. The nearby Newell Barney
Junior High School is located to the north across Riggs Road. The project is not anticipated to
generate any impact on these nearby amenities.
11.
CONCLUSION
The proposed rezone application will allow the site to develop to its highest and best use as is
depicted within the Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan to provide future land intensities
consistent with the surrounding properties and serve a large area of the County and south Queen
Creek and Gilbert which currently have no commercial services within 1.8 miles and larger
commercial areas are located 4 miles away. This site will serve the local needs of the community.
Jeri Loucks, PECFM
Planning & Development
301 W. Jefferson Ave., Suite 170
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Phone: (602) 506-6332
www.maricopa.gov/planning
email address:
Jeri.Loucks@maricopa.gov
Maricopa County
Planning & Development Department
Date:
December 6, 2024
Memo To:
Darren Gerard, AICP, Planning Manager, Department of Planning &
Development
Attn:
Adam Cannon, Planner, Planning & Development Services
cc:
Bob Fedorka P.E., Engineering Manager, Planning and Development
From:
Jeri
Loucks,
PECFM,
Engineering
Supervisor,
Planning
&
Development
Subject:
Z2022118 – Rezone from RU-43 to C-3 (Retail & Storage Facility)
APN(s):
304-90-408F
Engineering Review has reviewed the plan and report routed for review on 12/04/2024,
for the subject application and has the following stipulation:
1. Engineering review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design
only. All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with
Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and
Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway
Design Manual; and current engineering policies, standards and best practices
at the time of application for construction.
2. Based on the conceptual design nature of the information submitted, changes
to the site layout may be necessitated by the final engineering design of the
site’s drainage infrastructure.
3. Detailed Grading and Plans must be submitted with the application for Building
Permits. Drainage Report must be included.
4. At the time of application of the Building Permit, extend spreader basin to the
driveway as part of the final design.
5. At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the offsite drainage
design to accommodate all flows from the south. Extend the channel along the
southern property line to collect flows from the south.
6. At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the onsite drainage to
include the landscape area on the property along Riggs Road. Update the
retention calculations and the underground storage pipe lengths.
7. Channel grades and resultant velocities within the east channel exceed those
which would allow for unlined systems. At the time of application of the
Building Permit, the final design of the east channel will warrant stabilization.
Page 2 of 3
8. At the time of application of the Building Permit, update the channel with
freeboard per DPSM Standard 6.8.7.
9. The subject site is located within the County’s Urbanized Area. A Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Permit (SWPPP) from the County will be required prior to
issuance of any construction permits. This does NOT preclude the requirement
to obtain a Notice of Intent to Discharge (NOID) from the State (ADEQ), as
may be required.
Please contact me with any questions.
Page 3 of 3
DRAINAGE PLAN REVIEW REFERENCES:
The Drainage Regulations are listed in Section 1205 of the MCZO:
https://www.maricopa.gov/documentcenter/view/272
Maricopa County Drainage Policies and Standards Manual:
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/2369
For Additional Information See:
https://www.maricopa.gov/1635/Drainage-Review
PND TRANSPORTATION REFERENCES:
Residential Driveway Guidelines
https://www.maricopa.gov/documentcenter/view/362
Roadway Design Manual
http://www.mcdot.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/24883
Maricopa County Resolution for ROW Permits
https://www.maricopa.gov/documentcenter/view/364
For Additional Information See:
https://www.maricopa.gov/156/MCDOT
PND STORMWATER QUALITY (SWPPP) REFERENCES:
Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control Regulation
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6577
Air Pollution Control Regulations Rule 310
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5354
For Additional Information See:
https://www.maricopa.gov/3980/Water-Sewage-Stormwater-Waste
!
" #
$
"%&%
' (
)"%&%*+ %, +%!+--
(
.
/*0* /
1
2
2) 2)
3 4% 2
5
6
) 7
3""
8
4
)
9
*
2
:
; %
(
.
/*0* /
1
7
)
6 )
)
9
2
3 42
2
2
; <
6
+ .
)
9
%
(
.
/*0* /
.
1
$
2
2)
;
;
)
9
%
7
2)
2
6 <
6
+ .
)
9
%7
%
8
8
2
9
$
=
%
2
' ,+ >
)
6
-.
%&
,%
..
)?,
$7
.+
"7
%
&
2)
"
; (
7 8<>(
%
2)
*"
(
%
@"
%
)
2
:
)
)6 6
% 6
A)
) %
%
!"
#!
!
$
%
&
"
MCDOT -- TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
REVIEW COMMENT SHEET
1 of 1
Project Name: Riggs and Sossaman Retail and Storage
Location: SE Corner of Riggs Rd and S. Sossaman Rd
MCDOT File No.: Z2022118
Date: 11/21/2023
Reviewer: Bonnie Perotti
Phone No.: 602-506-4618
Consultant: Lokahi, LLC
Project No.: 23.5574
Plans Sealed By: Shelly A Sorensen, PE
Consultant Code:
A = Will Comply B = Deleted
C = Consultant to Evaluate
Item
Number
Page
Number
Comments
Consultant
Reply
= = =
1
2
3
4
= = =
General
General
General
35
2nd REVIEW (TS)
Consultant: Please use the code and respond to each comment in the
Consultant Reply Column. This sheet is for our record, please answer every
question and sign and date your acknowledgement or the plans will be
sent back to complete the process. Send back the marked-up plans and a
new set of plans along with this comment sheet. Thank you for your
cooperation.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
General Project Summary:
The proposed Retail and Storage development is located on the
southeast corner of Riggs Road and Sossaman Rd in Queen Creek,
Arizona. The proposed development consists of approximately 20,560
SF of retail and two additional buildings to house 73 trailer parking
spaces. Estimated opening year is 2025. Site is estimated to generate
1,133 daily trips –50 trips during the AM peak hour and 136 trips
occurring in the weekday PM peak hour.
General Comments:
This updated study includes new traffic numbers, but no comment
responses or communication with City of Queen Creek.
Repeat comment:
The project site is entirely within the jurisdiction of unincorporated
Maricopa County. However, Riggs Rd and Sossaman Rd on the site
frontage falls under the jurisdiction of Queen Creek. Developer must
submit a copy of this TIS to the City of Queen Creek for their review
and approval.
Repeat comment:
While there is currently a 40’ drainage easement on the west side of
the parcel, this is in the process of being transferred to the City of
Queen Creek.
Repeat comment:
East Indiana Ave will require some drainage improvements to allow for trailer
access across the culvert and between the guardrails. As this is being
transferred to City of Queen Creek, please coordinate.
Traffic Impact Analysis is Not Approved.
Use CODE
"A", "B","C"
in this column
next to every
comment.
= = = =
!"!!#
$%&"%!"!!
'()
* $"!+,"$+-$#
.
/ *0
)1*120
.
234
51)3
3.
' .
6
.
7
.
7
.
51
8649 :
.
05 ('1
;.
1. /(
*5 (7
7 /
5
*5
!
"
#"
<
.
1
#$
##
% &
' (
$
)
&***
+
&,- +./
0
# .
#0 1
#
*
#
0,=
, #'2
&>
#"
2
<
3 "3
2
4"$ & ##
#
3 % 5$
6 % $"
$
& #
%
1
6
'$ " 7
# $
"
$
"#
' #
% &
6
5
2 1
255'
#
899999999999999999999999999999999999995
899999999999
?
@2@0@)@0@@
)$
Page | 1
Subdivision
Infrastructure
& Planning Program
301 W. Jefferson St.
Phoenix, AZ 85003
S u b d i vi s io n @ m a ri co p a .go v
e s d .m a r i c o pa .g o v
The Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) has completed review
for the Patterson 5 planning case(s). Please note the following MCESD requirements for site
development:
Environmental Health –
For any food service operations occurring on site, where food is offered, sold, or prepared
from a fixed/permanent location, requires submittal of a Permanent/Fixed Food
Establishment Permit application.
x
Additional information for permanent/fixed establishments can be found on the
Environmental Health webpage.
For Environmental Health related questions, please call (602) 506-6824.
Subdivision and Infrastructure –
An Approval to Construct application is required and must be submitted to MCESD’s
Subdivision & Infrastructure Program for water, reclaimed water and/or wastewater system
infrastructure.
A will serve letter issued by the Utility is required and must be submitted to MCESD’s
Subdivision & Infrastructure Program if the site/development will be provided with water
and/or reclaimed water by a Utility. A capacity assurance letter issued by the Utility is
required to MCESD’s Subdivision & Infrastructure Program if the site/development
wastewater service is being provided by a Utility.
For subdivision related questions, please contact the Subdivision and Infrastructure
Program at (602) 506-1058 or email subdivision@maricopa.gov.
Additional Notes –
Environmental Services does not require these items for condition of approval of Z2022118, however
these items must be addressed with the development of the site. Environmental Services does not
require additional review of this case.
Project Name: Patterson 5
Primary Contact Name: Jessica
Sarkissian
Planning Application Type: Zone Change
with Overlay
APN(s): 304-90-408F
Reviewer: Ryan Hall, P.E.
Email: Ryan.Hall@maricopa.gov
Phone: 602-918-1241
Planner Name: Adam Cannon
Planning Case #: Z2022118
Date: December 5, 2024
Water and Waste Management Division
Page | 2
*It should be noted that this document does not approve the referenced project. Comments are provided
for the benefit of the applicant for MCESD permit requirements and as an advisory to Maricopa County
Planning and Development Department. Other Maricopa County agencies may have additional
requirements. Final review and approval will be made through Planning and Development Department
procedures. Applicant may need to submit separate applications to the Maricopa County Environmental
Services Department for approval of proposed facilities regulated by the Department. Review of any such
application will be based on current regulations at the time of application.
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the
county.
From:
Erik Swanson
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); Darren Gerard (PND); Brett Burningham
Subject:
TOWN OF QUEEN CREEK: Re: Z2022118 - Zone Change with Overlay for Patterson 5
Date:
Thursday, January 2, 2025 5:58:51 PM
Attachments:
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
image006.png
image007.png
image623933.png
image446399.png
image689854.png
image635893.png
image889624.png
image378528.png
Adam,
I hope all is well and that you had a great Christmas and New Year. I appreciate the
opportunity to provide additional comments on this development. Recognizing that you are
out of the office, I am also cc'ing Darren on this email (Darren, I hope you also had a great
Christmas and New Year).
From a general land use perspective, I believe the Town is going to remain neutral on this
item. I do have a few "design/development" related comments that come from the Town's CIP,
Traffic, and Utility Divisions.
1. The landscape site plan doesn't show any sidewalks being added along Sossaman or Riggs
and those are needed to be installed by the developer, at least along the south side of Riggs as
it is in the Town. Sossaman is a MCDOT street so they may not require the sidewalks
unfortunately but I think we should ask for it there since the development is urbanizing the
roadway edge.
2. Presuming understanding of the narrative and proposed development standards table on
Page 4 correctly, I do not recommend allowing deletion of the sight visibility triangle along
Sossaman at Indiana. It will be unsafe for vehicles regardless of the number of vehicles using
the roadway even if only for emergency access. The gate is labeled on Sheet 10, Site Plan, so
I expect understanding of the request is correct.
3. The landscape plan of the same gated entry doesn't accurately portray the curb returns at the
gate and the site triangle on Sossaman at the NEC of Indiana is portrayed backwards.
4. The Context map on Page 17 of the narrative report incorrectly depicts the project site to be
on the SEC of Power Road and Riggs, not Sossaman Road.
5. The water line along the frontage of the property will possibly need to be upsized.
6. Since the proposed Riggs access is just over 200-ft west of a full access, the developer will
need to create a limited access by constructing modifications to the 2-way continuous left.
Please feel free to reach out with any questions.
Sincerely,
Erik Swanson
Planning Manager
t: (480) 358‑3013
e: erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov
22358 S Ellsworth Road, Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Office hours: Monday – Thursday, 7 a.m. – 6 p.m., closed on Fridays
Emails generated by council members, members of Town commissions and committees and by staff and that pertain to Town business are public
records. These emails are preserved as required by law and generally are available for public inspection. Email correspondence is regularly reviewed by
members of the public, media outlets and reporters. To ensure compliance with the Open Meeting Law, members of the Town Council, Commissions
and Committees should not forward or copy e-mail correspondence to other members of the Council, boards or commissions and should not use reply
all when responding to this message. Any questions should be directed to the Town Attorney: (602) 285-5000.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 1:34 PM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
wrote:
Hi Erik,
Looked this over - I need them to correct a couple of things (such as chart consistency and SVTs).
Beyond that, nothing really has changed on the planning side. Drainage and MCDOT have both
signed-off as well (see attached drainage conditions). So they are ready for hearing. As expected
per the prior e-mail, PZ will be on Thursday 1/23/24 at 9:30 a.m. and BOS will be on Wednesday
2/26/24 at 9:30 a.m.
If the Town has any comments, please let me know. I will be out of the office from 1/1 to 1/13,
but otherwise please send my way.
Thanks!
Maricopa County Logo
Adam Cannon, AICP
Senior Planner
Planning & Development
301 W Jefferson St. Phoenix, AZ 85003
O: 602-372-0292
E: adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
[ Maricopa.Gov ]
Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
Maricopa County is developing the Framework 2040 Comprehensive Plan – a document which guides growth and
development for the next decade and beyond.
Visit Framework 2040 to learn how to participate, attend meetings and be heard!
From: Erik Swanson <erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2024 12:06 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Re: Z2022118 - Zone Change with Overlay for Patterson 5
Thank you for the update, Adam. Has anything changed since March? In looking at the documents it appears the only updates are report related and no changes to the Site Plan/Elevations. Is that correct? Erik Swanson
Thank you for the update, Adam. Has anything changed since March? In looking at the documents
it appears the only updates are report related and no changes to the Site Plan/Elevations. Is that
correct?
Erik Swanson
Planning Manager
t: (480) 358‑3013
e: erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov
22358 S Ellsworth Road, Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Office hours: Monday – Thursday, 7 a.m. – 6 p.m., closed on Fridays
Facebook
Instagram
Nextdoor
Twitter
YouTube
Emails generated by council members, members of Town commissions and committees and by staff and that pertain to Town business
are public records. These emails are preserved as required by law and generally are available for public inspection. Email
correspondence is regularly reviewed by members of the public, media outlets and reporters. To ensure compliance with the Open
Meeting Law, members of the Town Council, Commissions and Committees should not forward or copy e-mail correspondence to
other members of the Council, boards or commissions and should not use reply all when responding to this message. Any questions
should be directed to the Town Attorney: (602) 285-5000.
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 11:38 AM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov> wrote:
Good afternoon all,
This e-mail serves as notification of a 4th submittal we have received from Upfront Planning &
Entitlements, LLC for a Zone Change with Overlay. Applicable documents for review are
available on the Permit Center at: https://maricopacountyaz-
energovweb.tylerhost.net/apps/selfservice#/search. You can search for the case by using the
Zone Change with Overlay case number Z2022118.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Best regards,
Maricopa County Logo
Adam Cannon, AICP
Senior Planner
Planning & Development
301 W Jefferson St. Phoenix, AZ 85003
O: 602-372-0292
E: adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
[ Maricopa.Gov ]
Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
6HSWHPEHU
3DWWHUVRQ(QWHUSULVHV&RQVWUXFWLRQ//&
(*HUPDQQ5RDG6XLWH
*LOEHUW$UL]RQD
$WWQ (G3DWWHUVRQ
7KLVOHWWHULVWRFRQILUPWKDWWKHSURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFW
&RPPHUFLDO improvements consisting of DSSUR[LPDWHO\6)EXLOGLQJDQG&RYHUHG6WRUDJH
located HDVWof 6RVVPDQRoad and VRXWK of 5LJJVRoad, Section , Township 2 South, Range 7 East
of the Gila and Salt River Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona OLHVZLWKLQWKHZDWHUDQGVHZHU
VHUYLFHERXQGDU\RIWKH7RZQRI4XHHQ&UHHNDPXQLFLSDOO\RZQHGHQWLW\
8SRQILQDO7RZQRI4XHHQ&UHHN0DULFRSD&RXQW\3LQDO&RXQW\&$*5'$'(4DQG$':5
DSSURYDOVDQGFRQGLWLRQVZKHUHDSSOLFDEOHIRUWKLVSURMHFWWKHIROORZLQJZLOODSSO\
:DWHUSURYLGHU $JUHHVWRSURYLGHWRWKHGHYHORSPHQWLQGLFDWHGDERYHDQDPRXQWRIGRPHVWLFZDWHU
DQGDGHTXDWHILUHSURWHFWLRQVXIILFLHQWWRVDWLVI\WKHZDWHUGHPDQGVRIWKHGHYHORSPHQW
6HZHUSURYLGHU 7KHDGGLWLRQDOYROXPHRIZDVWHZDWHUGHOLYHUHGWRWKHIDFLOLW\E\WKHSURSRVHG
GHYHORSPHQWZLOOQRWFDXVHDQ\IORZRUHIIOXHQWTXDOLW\OLPLWVRIWKHLQGLYLGXDODTXLIHUSURWHFWLRQSHUPLW
IRUWKHVHZDJHWUHDWPHQWIDFLOLW\WREHH[FHHGHG7KHGHVLJQIORZRIWKHVHZDJHWUHDWPHQWIDFLOLW\ZLOO
QRWEHH[FHHGHGE\WKHDGGLWLRQRIDQ\IXWXUHLPSURYHPHQWVFRQVWUXFWHGSHUWKHDSSURYHGFRQVWUXFWLRQ
SODQV,QDGGLWLRQWKHH[LVWLQJFROOHFWLRQV\VWHPFDQPDLQWDLQWKHSHUIRUPDQFHDVUHTXLUHGE\$$&5
( % XSRQDGGLWLRQRIWKHIORZVIURPWKLVSURMHFW
3OHDVHQRWHWKDWWKHUHPD\EHZDWHUDQGVHZHURQVLWHDQGRURIIVLWHREOLJDWLRQVWKDWQHHGWREH
PHWE\WKHGHYHORSHU V WRSURYLGHVHUYLFHVZLWKLQWKHIXWXUHSURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQW
%\ZD\RIEDFNJURXQG7RZQRI4XHHQ&UHHN8WLOLWLHV6HUYLFHV'HSDUWPHQWLVDPXQLFLSDOSXEOLF
VHUYLFHFRUSRUDWLRQGXO\RUJDQL]HGDQGH[LVWLQJXQGHUWKHODZVRIWKH6WDWHRI$UL]RQDDQGLVHQJDJHG
SULPDULO\LQWKHEXVLQHVVRISURYLGLQJZDWHUDQGVHZHUVHUYLFHVZLWKLQFHUWDLQDUHDVRI0DULFRSDDQG
3LQDO&RXQWLHVLQWKHFRUSRUDWHOLPLWVDQGYLFLQLW\RI4XHHQ&UHHN$UL]RQD7KH0DULFRSD&RXQW\
+HDOWK'HSDUWPHQWWKH$UL]RQD'HSDUWPHQWRI:DWHU5HVRXUFHVWKH7RZQRI4XHHQ&UHHN¶V7RZQ
&RXQFLODQGRWKHUDJHQFLHVUHJXODWHWKH7RZQRI4XHHQ&UHHN8WLOLW\6HUYLFHV'HSDUWPHQWRSHUDWLRQV
7RZQRI4XHHQ&UHHN:DWHU'LYLVLRQ¶V$UL]RQD'HSDUWPHQWRI:DWHU5HVRXUFHV $':5 5LJKW
QXPEHULV7KHGHYHORSHULVUHVSRQVLEOHIRUHQVXULQJWKDWD&HUWLILFDWHRI$VVXUHG
:DWHU6XSSO\LIH[LVWLQJLVWUDQVIHUUHGLQWRWKHQHZGHYHORSHURZQHU¶VQDPHRUDQHZ
&HUWLILFDWHRI$VVXUHG:DWHU6XSSO\LVDFTXLUHGDQGVXSSOLHGDORQJZLWK&$*5'HQUROOPHQW
YHULILFDWLRQWR3DXO*DUGQHUZLWKLQWKH7RZQRI4XHHQ&UHHN8WLOLWLHV6HUYLFHV'HSDUWPHQWSULRU
WRDQ\ZDWHUPHWHULQVWDOODWLRQV
The issuance of this letter by the Town of Queen Creek Utility Services Department does not express or grant
approval of or for the proposed project/ development, it is only acknowledging that the proposed project/
development is within the Town of Queen Creek water and/ or sewer service areas and water and/ or sewer will be
available once all conditions and approvals of the project/ development have been met. The Town of Queen Creek
Planning and Utilities Services Department(s) and/ or Maricopa or Pinal Counties will make the final
determinations and approvals for said proposed project/ development.
6KRXOG\RXQHHGIXUWKHULQIRUPDWLRQSOHDVHIHHOIUHHWRFRQWDFWPHDW\RXUFRQYHQLHQFHDW
6LQFHUHO\
0LFKDHO+XEHU
8WLOLWLHV6HQLRU3URMHFW0DQDJHU
8WLOLW\6HUYLFHV'HSDUWPHQW
7RZQRI4XHHQ&UHHN
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the
county.
From:
Jessica Sarkissian
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); Jeri Loucks (PND); MCDOT Plan Review; Bonnie Perotti (DOT)
Cc:
Kenneth Wallace; Ed Patterson
Subject:
Z2022118 - Patterson 5 QC traffic comments
Date:
Tuesday, January 9, 2024 12:44:28 PM
Attachments:
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
Town of QC Comments on traffic study
Please let me know if you need anything else from us to move forward with this case.
-Jessica Sarkissian
From: Jan Martin <jan.martin@queencreekaz.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2024 12:22 PM
To: Shelly Sorensen <shelly@lokahigroup.com>
Cc: Erik Swanson <erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov>; mohamed.youssef@queencreekaz.gov;
Jessica Sarkissian <jessica@upfrontplanning.com>
Subject: Re: Riggs and Sossaman Retail & Storage
Hi Shelly,
Comments on Traffic Impact Report
1. We have reviewed the proposed access points in the plan and found that they comply with the
Town's standards and requirements.
2. We agree with the recommendation to construct a new right turn lane at the driveway on Riggs
Road.
3. Regarding pedestrian infrastructure, we require the installation of a 5-foot wide sidewalk along
the Sossaman and Riggs frontages. This sidewalk is essential to ensure safe and comfortable
pedestrian movement along these roads and aligns with our commitment to promoting walkable
environments.
We appreciate the opportunity to review and provide comments on the plans.
Jan Martin
Operations Manager ‑ Public Works
t: (480) 358‑3821
m: (480) 747‑0583
e: jan.martin@queencreekaz.gov
19805 S. 220th Street St, Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Office hours: Monday – Thursday, 7 a.m. – 6 p.m., closed on Fridays
Facebook
Instagram
Nextdoor
Twitter
YouTube
Emails generated by council members, members of Town commissions and committees and by staff and that pertain to Town business
are public records. These emails are preserved as required by law and generally are available for public inspection. Email correspondence
is regularly reviewed by members of the public, media outlets and reporters. To ensure compliance with the Open Meeting Law,
members of the Town Council, Commissions and Committees should not forward or copy e-mail correspondence to other members of
the Council, boards or commissions and should not use reply all when responding to this message. Any questions should be directed to
the Town Attorney: (602) 285-5000.
On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 3:52 PM Shelly Sorensen <shelly@lokahigroup.com> wrote:
Jan-
I hope that you have had a wonderful Christmas and New Years. I’m just circling back with you
on this project. I don’t believe that we received any comments on this project. Please let me
know if you have any questions.
Thanks!
Shelly Sorensen, PE, PTOE
Principal Traffic Engineer
M: 480.209.7425 O: 480.536.7150 x252
E: shelly@lokahigroup.com W: www.lokahigroup.com
A: 10555 N. 114th Street, Suite 105, Scottsdale, AZ 85259
From: Jan Martin <jan.martin@queencreekaz.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2023 9:50 AM
To: Shelly Sorensen <shelly@lokahigroup.com>
Cc: Erik Swanson <erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov>; mohamed.youssef@queencreekaz.gov;
Jessica Sarkissian <jessica@upfrontplanning.com>
Subject: Re: Riggs and Sossaman Retail & Storage
Hello Shelly,
Queen Creek Traffic division will review the document and provide comments by the end of day
Friday, Dec 21st.
Jan Martin
Operations Manager ‑ Public Works
t: (480) 358‑3821
m: (480) 747‑0583
e: jan.martin@queencreekaz.gov
19805 S. 220th Street St, Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Office hours: Monday – Thursday, 7 a.m. – 6 p.m., closed on Fridays
Facebook
Instagram
Nextdoor
Twitter
YouTube
Emails generated by council members, members of Town commissions and committees and by staff and that pertain to Town
business are public records. These emails are preserved as required by law and generally are available for public inspection. Email
correspondence is regularly reviewed by members of the public, media outlets and reporters. To ensure compliance with the Open
Meeting Law, members of the Town Council, Commissions and Committees should not forward or copy e-mail correspondence to
other members of the Council, boards or commissions and should not use reply all when responding to this message. Any questions
should be directed to the Town Attorney: (602) 285-5000.
On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 8:00 AM Shelly Sorensen <shelly@lokahigroup.com> wrote:
Jan/Erik-
I just wanted to circle back with you on the below. We received minor comments from
MCDOT on the project, all of which asked that we coordinate with the Town of Queen Creek.
I’m just looking for direction from you to let me know who those conversations need to
happen with. Please let me know if there is a formal submittal process that I need to do to
get this reviewed.
Thanks!
Shelly Sorensen, PE, PTOE
Principal Traffic Engineer
M: 480.209.7425 O: 480.536.7150 x252
E: shelly@lokahigroup.com W: www.lokahigroup.com
A: 10555 N. 114th Street, Suite 105, Scottsdale, AZ 85259
From: Jan Martin <jan.martin@queencreekaz.gov>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 3:48 PM
To: Shelly Sorensen <shelly@lokahigroup.com>; Erik Swanson
<erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov>
Cc: mohamed.youssef@queencreekaz.gov; Jessica Sarkissian <jessica@upfrontplanning.com>
Subject: Re: Riggs and Sossaman Retail & Storage
Hi Shelly,
Let me copy Erik Swanson, Planning Manager. He may want you to upload project documents
to our Development portal so that other departments can review them.
Jan Martin
Operations Manager ‑ Public Works
t: (480) 358‑3821
m: (480) 747‑0583
e: jan.martin@queencreekaz.gov
19805 S. 220th Street St, Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Office hours: Monday – Thursday, 7 a.m. – 6 p.m., closed on Fridays
Facebook
Instagram
Nextdoor
Twitter
YouTube
Emails generated by council members, members of Town commissions and committees and by staff and that pertain to Town
business are public records. These emails are preserved as required by law and generally are available for public inspection. Email
correspondence is regularly reviewed by members of the public, media outlets and reporters. To ensure compliance with the
Open Meeting Law, members of the Town Council, Commissions and Committees should not forward or copy e-mail
correspondence to other members of the Council, boards or commissions and should not use reply all when responding to this
message. Any questions should be directed to the Town Attorney: (602) 285-5000.
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 10:11 AM Shelly Sorensen <shelly@lokahigroup.com> wrote:
Jan-
I left a message with you but wanted to follow up with an email.
I believe that the attached report has been submitted for review, but I’m not sure with
who. I’ve attached the report and the comments received from MCDOT requesting that
we coordinate with the City of Queen Creek on a few items related to the project. If you
would be able to help or point me to the person that would best be able to help me that
would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Shelly Sorensen, PE, PTOE
Principal Traffic Engineer
M: 480.209.7425 O: 480.536.7150 x252
E: shelly@lokahigroup.com W: www.lokahigroup.com
A: 10555 N. 114th Street, Suite 105, Scottsdale, AZ 85259
From:
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
To:
"Jessica Sarkissian"
Cc:
"Evan Balmer"; "Erik Swanson"; "Brett Burningham"; ndumke40@gmail.com
Subject:
RE: SEC Riggs and Sossaman update
Date:
Friday, July 22, 2022 11:27:16 AM
Jessica,
Thank you for sharing this information with me. I do not see a compromise position on this project.
The Community does not want to see the site rezone to commercial. We understand why your client
wants to do this project at this location, however this project would be better at Power and Riggs or
Ellsworth and Riggs. The Community does not support any commercial in between at Hawes or
Sossaman. The community wants to preserve the one acre residential lots along Riggs. The meeting
last month with the neighborhood was a very clear “no” on this project. Here is some of the
community talking points:
1. C3 is too intensive with too many unsupported uses next to residential.
2. Access onto Indiana Street to the south with motorhomes, trailers and delivery would
be disruptive to the homes.
3. Indiana is essentially a private un-paved street and concerns for dust control would
need to be addressed.
4. The Site is extremely tight for RV and trailer traffic. This will cause site circulation and
movement problems. This will create impacts on Riggs.
5. The landscape buffer to the south is way too small. Should be 30’ minimum. This
would eliminate the RV Storage.
6. The existing RV storage on Riggs with 15’-16’ canopies with lights mounted
underneath would be unacceptable.
7. The intersection of Riggs and Sossaman has a great deal of traffic accidents currently,
we do not see this project improving this issue.
8. The School across the street will be negatively impacted by this project.
9. The architectural character of this project is below the standards for the area.
Basically the building is lower quality design for the area. The design needs to be
enhanced.
10. The Residential properties to the south will be negatively affected having a
commercial in front of their homes. Their property values will be effected.
The General plan documents call for Residential for this site. So this project is against the general
plan. I could potentially see some commercial projects working on this site such as senior housing,
residential treatment or low scale office. Higher density residential could be an option too. The
Neighborhood is well organized and many connected individuals live in this area. I do not see a
successful outcome for your client.
Rob
Robert B. Burgheimer, AIA, NCARB
Principal
Sketch
Architecture company
2454 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 110
Mesa, AZ 85204
480-668-8015 office
480-215-3375 cell
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
From: Jessica Sarkissian <jessica@upfrontplanning.com>
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2022 8:37 AM
To: rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com; robin.benning@queencreekaz.gov
Subject: Re: SEC Riggs and Sossaman update
I was wondering if you had any initial comments or suggestions from what I sent you earlier this
month since I haven’t heard anything back
Jessica Sarkissian
480-221-6150
On Jul 5, 2022, at 6:45 PM, Jessica Sarkissian <jessica@upfrontplanning.com> wrote:
We submitted the Rezone at the SEC of Riggs and Sossaman. We are not schedule to
have our first review back until early August.
We added a permitted use list table with non-permitted uses so they cannot occur on
the site.
We added the renderings and wall elevations to the south and design style.
Please let us know if you have any suggestions or items which you feel should be added
or removed from the permitted use list or any other comments.
We will know more about changes once we get comments back from the County next
month, if there are any technical changes which may require site layout changes. We
placed the secondary southern entrance as close to Sossaman as we can without
impacting the drainage channel.
Let me know if you have any questions or comments.
Jessica Sarkissian, AICP, LEED AP
[cid:image002.jpg@01D8909F.773CE930]
3514 N. Power Road #115
Mesa, AZ 85215
Ph: 480-221-6150
www.UPFRONTPlanning.com<http://www.upfrontplanning.com/>
From:
Darren V. Gérard (PND)
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
FW: [WARNING: ATTACHMENT UNSCANNED]Proposed development at SEC of Riggs Rd and Sossaman Rds in
Queen Creek
Date:
Tuesday, July 26, 2022 2:48:35 PM
Attachments:
RE_ SEC Riggs and Sossaman update.msg
NARR-1.pdf
SITE-PLN-1.pdf
Aerial Exhibit.pdf
image001.png
image002.png
FYI
Darren V. Gérard, AICP
Planning Services Manager
Planning & Development
602-506-7139
Darren.Gerard@maricopa.gov
From: Tom Ellsworth (PND) <Tom.Ellsworth@maricopa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 2:40 PM
To: Richard Bohan (BOS) <Richard.Bohan@Maricopa.Gov>
Cc: Jen Pokorski (COA) <Jen.Pokorski@Maricopa.Gov>; Darren V. Gérard (PND)
<Darren.Gerard@Maricopa.Gov>; Matthew Holm (PND) <Matthew.Holm@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: FW: [WARNING: ATTACHMENT UNSCANNED]Proposed development at SEC of Riggs Rd and
Sossaman Rds in Queen Creek
Rick,
A brief summary of the request mentioned in the email from the QC councilmember.
The subject property is a 5± acres parcel located on the southeast corner of Riggs Road and
Sossaman Road. The applicant is proposing a zone change with overlay from RU-43 to C-3 CUPD with
a Plan of Development showing a retail farm implements store including trailer and equipment
storage. The site plan shows the proposed retail building facing Riggs Road with trailer/RV storage in
the rear on the south side of the property.
As part of the CUPD overlay the applicant is proposing to prohibit certain uses that could be
considered incompatible with the neighborhood, including marijuana facilities, adult businesses,
liquor stores, nightclubs/dance halls and pool/billiard halls. The use list also prohibits potentially
noisy and rural unfriendly uses such as billboards, bus depots and fast-food drive ins. It should be
noted the applicant is not proposing a limitation on multi-family uses.
The surrounding property consist of residential uses to the east, south and west zoned Rural‐43 in
the county with a Jr. High School to the north in the Town of Queen Creek.
Staff is currently reviewing and preparing comments for the scheduled Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) meeting next Tuesday 08/02/2022 at 9:45. Pending this meeting and review
comments it can be anticipated that this case will likely be heard by the P&Z Commission later this
fall in October or November. Which means it has the potential to be on the BOS agenda in late
November or December.
It should be noted that the sewer, water and right of way access to the site off of Riggs Road are all
within the Town’s jurisdiction. Staff will be encouraging the applicant to annex the property.
As you can see by the attached email the neighbors have significant concerns regarding the impact
of this development on their rural lifestyle. We are in the process of reaching out to Town staff to
discuss their thoughts and concerns with the request.
We will keep you informed of developments of this case and will provide you a copy of the TAC
report when it is available.
In response to the concerns expressed by the Councilmember:
In reviewing any request for the rezoning of property, staff’s analysis always includes a review of the
comprehensive plan, the context of the surrounding land uses, the availability of infrastructure and
the valuable input from neighboring property owners received through the citizen outreach process.
All this information is taken into consideration to make an informed recommendation to the P&Z
Commission and Board of Supervisors. Comments received from the surrounding community are a
vital part of the review and are carefully vetted and addressed with the applicant for potential
mitigation and compromise. A summary of these outreach efforts is included in the staff report as
part of the recommendation to the Commission and Board.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need more information.
Tom Ellsworth, AICP
Director
Maricopa County Planning & Development
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-506-8557 | Cell: 602-291-1048
Tom.Ellsworth@maricopa.gov
From: Jen Pokorski (COA) <Jen.Pokorski@Maricopa.Gov>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 9:27 AM
To: Tom Ellsworth (PND) <Tom.Ellsworth@maricopa.gov>
Subject: FW: [WARNING: ATTACHMENT UNSCANNED]Proposed development at SEC of Riggs Rd and
Sossaman Rds in Queen Creek
Can you call me when you have a chance?
Thanks.
Jen Pokorski
Assistant County Manager
602-372-0688
Jen.Pokorski@Maricopa.gov
From: Richard Bohan (BOS) <Richard.Bohan@Maricopa.Gov>
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2022 10:11 AM
To: Jen Pokorski (COA) <Jen.Pokorski@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: FW: [WARNING: ATTACHMENT UNSCANNED]Proposed development at SEC of Riggs Rd and
Sossaman Rds in Queen Creek
FYI, let's discuss next week.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Robin Benning <robin.benning@queencreekaz.gov>
Date: 7/22/22 2:17 PM (GMT-07:00)
To: "Richard Bohan (BOS)" <Richard.Bohan@Maricopa.Gov>, "Jack Sellers (BOS)"
<Jack.Sellers@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: [WARNING: ATTACHMENT UNSCANNED]Proposed development at SEC of Riggs Rd and
Sossaman Rds in Queen Creek
Good morning Richard
(Please forward this to Supervisor Sellers)
I am reaching out to you on behalf of a number of residents who live either in the unincorporated
portion of Maricopa County adjacent to Queen Creek or within the Town of Queen Creek limits.
They have been made aware of a proposal to develop a commercial center on the SE corner of Riggs
and Sossaman which is currently zoned R1-43. The proposal would negatively impact the quality of
life of many adjacent property owners for a number of reasons. I have attached an email from one of
the residents expressing their concerns and copies of the exhibits which the developer has been
showing around.
It has been my experience that the planning department for the county has in the past not taken the
concerns of the surrounding neighbors into account when considering commercial development
along Riggs Road. I would ask that you please reach out to your staff and attempt to help the
residents.
Thank you for always being so helpful for the residents of District 1 and of Queen Creek.
Sincerely,
Robin
--
Robin Benning
Council Member
e: robin.benning@queencreekaz.gov
22358 S Ellsworth Road, Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Office hours: Monday – Thursday, 7 a.m. – 6 p.m., closed on Fridays
Facebook
Instagram
Nextdoor
Twitter
YouTube
Emails generated by council members, members of Town commissions and committees and by staff and that pertain to Town business
are public records. These emails are preserved as required by law and generally are available for public inspection. Email correspondence
is regularly reviewed by members of the public, media outlets and reporters. To ensure compliance with the Open Meeting Law,
members of the Town Council, Commissions and Committees should not forward or copy e-mail correspondence to other members of
the Council, boards or commissions and should not use reply all when responding to this message. Any questions should be directed to
the Town Attorney: (602) 285-5000.
From:
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Cc:
"Nichole Dumke"
Subject:
RE: Southeast corner Riggs and Sossaman
Date:
Tuesday, May 16, 2023 2:39:28 PM
Attachments:
Z2022118 - Comment Letter.pdf
Adam,
We have received a letter from the development team they would like a meeting with the
neighborhood on this project. My concern is that they have not addressed the original concerns in
the first submittal.
We will be wasting time going over the same stuff as before with no changes. I am concerned that
the neighborhood will not be reviewing the final documents. I think they should be required to
address staff’s original concerns first and then go back to the neighborhood for feedback. To be clear
the community is in opposition to this project.
Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Rob
Robert B. Burgheimer, AIA, NCARB
Principal
Sketch
Architecture company
2454 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 110
Mesa, AZ 85204
480-668-8015 office
480-215-3375 cell
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
From: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 5:46 PM
To: rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
Subject: RE: Southeast corner Riggs and Sossaman
Good afternoon Rob,
Thank you for sharing your concerns with me during our conversation and through this letter. As we
discussed, I have attached the Staff comments we distributed at the Technical Advisory Committee
Meeting.
Other documents are available for review on the County’s Online Permit Manager at:
https://accela.maricopa.gov/CitizenAccessMCOSS/Default.aspx. You can search for the case by using
the Zone Change with Overlay case number Z2022118 under the Planning Services search button.
Thank you again. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Adam Cannon, AICP
Senior Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003
602-506-3301
adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
P&D is now 100% digital for construction permit applications.
Find information on our new permit process here.
From: rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com <rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 5:14 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Cc: Tom Ellsworth (PND) <Tom.Ellsworth@maricopa.gov>; 'Brett Burningham'
<brett.burningham@queencreekaz.gov>; 'Erik Swanson' <erik.swanson@queencreekaz.gov>;
ndumke40@gmail.com
Subject: Southeast corner Riggs and Sossaman
Adam,
Thank you for contacting with me and discussing this project. I do not see a compromise position on
this project. The Community does not want to see the site rezone to commercial. The Community
does not support any commercial in between at Hawes or Sossaman. The community wants to
preserve the one acre residential lots along Riggs. The meeting last month with the neighborhood
was a very clear “no” on this project. Here is some of the community talking points:
1. C3 is too intensive with too many unsupported uses next to residential.
2. Access onto Indiana Street to the south with motorhomes, trailers and delivery would
be disruptive to the homes.
3. Indiana is essentially a private un-paved street and concerns for dust control would
need to be addressed. Secondary access should be off of Sossaman over the drainage
easement.
4. The Site is extremely tight for RV and trailer traffic. This will cause site circulation and
movement problems. This will create impacts on Riggs.
5. The landscape buffer to the south is way too small. Should be 30’ minimum. This
would eliminate the RV Storage.
6. The existing RV storage on Riggs with 15’-16’ canopies with lights mounted
underneath would be unacceptable.
7. The intersection of Riggs and Sossaman has a great deal of traffic accidents currently,
we do not see this project improving this issue. I de-cel lane should be reviewed.
8. The School across the street will be negatively impacted by this project.
9. The architectural character of this project is below the standards for the area.
Basically the building is lower quality design for the area. The design needs to be
enhanced.
10. The Residential properties to the south will be negatively affected having a
commercial in front of their homes. Their property values will be effected.
The General plan documents call for Residential for this site. So this project is against the general
plan. I could potentially see some commercial projects working on this site such as senior housing,
residential treatment or low scale office. Higher density residential could be an option too. The
Neighborhood is well organized and many connected individuals live in this area. We do not believe
that Queen Creek Planning is supportive of this project. Please feel free to contact them directly.
Rob
Robert B. Burgheimer, AIA, NCARB
Principal
Sketch
Architecture company
2454 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 110
Mesa, AZ 85204
480-668-8015 office
480-215-3375 cell
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
From:
Nichole Dumke
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Update on parcel 304-90-408F
Date:
Tuesday, May 16, 2023 8:32:20 AM
Attachments:
Meeting June 13.pdf
Good morning Adam,
Hope you're doing well. I spoke with you a few times about the property in front of our house.
Corner of Sossaman and Riggs. You said you would let me know if there are any updates with
this property. We are in opposition of this project changing from RU-43 to C3.
Did you know they are doing a neighborhood meeting? What did they resubmit to Maricopa
County?. What are the changes?
Thank you, Nichole Dumke
480-748-8114
From:
bruce
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
rezone request on SEC of Riggs & Sossaman
Date:
Friday, June 9, 2023 7:30:21 PM
Attachments:
Heather Ferenz.docx
Please save our neighborhood! Thank you.
Heather Ferenz
19130 E. Via Park St.
Queen Creek , AZ
85142
July 13th 2023
To whom it may concern:
I am writing this letter to express my strong opposition to
the rezoning request at the SEC of Riggs & Sossaman Rds.
near my neighborhood. I have lived in my home for 27
yrs. What once was a quiet rural retreat is now become
like an urban city zone. We have schools on both sides of
the neighborhood causing noise, lights and tons of
traffic! A RV storage business will be too much of a
burden on the already busy streets producing more
noise, lights and traffic to our residential area! Unlike a
school, businesses don’t close at 3 pm or for the
summer. Storage facilities are open 24/7. The owners of
this property purchased it as a residential zone. I would
have zero issues with them building homes as it was
zoned for. Just because they want to make a continual
income it should not be at my neighborhoods expense!
2
Please don’t let this happen! It will impact 3
neighborhoods in a VERY NEGATIVE way! Greed is not
always a bad word but in this case it is. Thank you for
your time.
Sincerely, Heather Ferenz
From:
Scott Baxter
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Sossaman & Riggs Rd
Date:
Tuesday, June 13, 2023 7:45:38 AM
Dear Adam,
We moved out to Queen Creek in 1999. We moved out here for the peace and quiet that Chandler was no longer
proving. We are located in the southwest quadrant of QC. Its all acre property, so we still have our space, but
growth has come to Queen Creek and its gets noisy again.
There is a project trying to get off the ground putting commercial property on the southeast corner of Sossaman and
Riggs Rd. While most of us are not opposed to putting additional acreage homes there, re-zoning for commercial is
not what us locals want. It will attract non-locals into the area, bring additional unwanted lighting, and heavy traffic
into the area. There are many places in QC and the county that is more appropriate for these types of businesses.
Putting this in the middle of residential area is not what folks signed up for. Please help support our efforts to keep
this residential.
Thanks for your time!
Scott Baxter
From:
jeri arnold
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); erik.swanson@queencreekAZ.gov; Jack Sellers (BOS)
Subject:
Rezoning Request Riggs and Sossaman
Date:
Thursday, June 29, 2023 8:36:21 AM
Hello. We are writing to ask you to please deny the rezoning request to Commercial for the
lot on the corner of Riggs and Sossaman. This will completely change the character and safety
of our neighborhood. Not only that, the entrance from Riggs will be dangerous (directly across
from Newell Barney Junior High) and the entrance off E Indiana Ave is directly in front of
homes. When we purchased our home, we bought it because we loved the rural feel of Queen
Creek and because all surrounding lots are an acre or more. Very quickly, changes such as
this are eroding the quality of life in our town. Please vote no on this request. We have plenty
of commercial space!
Michael & Jeri Arnold
19112 E Indiana Ave
Queen Creek
707-477-3062
Get Outlook for Android
From:
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Cc:
Tom Ellsworth (PND); "Brett Burningham"; "Erik Swanson"; ndumke40@gmail.com
Subject:
Southeast corner Riggs and Sossaman
Date:
Tuesday, August 9, 2022 5:13:46 PM
Adam,
Thank you for contacting with me and discussing this project. I do not see a compromise position on
this project. The Community does not want to see the site rezone to commercial. The Community
does not support any commercial in between at Hawes or Sossaman. The community wants to
preserve the one acre residential lots along Riggs. The meeting last month with the neighborhood
was a very clear “no” on this project. Here is some of the community talking points:
1. C3 is too intensive with too many unsupported uses next to residential.
2. Access onto Indiana Street to the south with motorhomes, trailers and delivery would
be disruptive to the homes.
3. Indiana is essentially a private un-paved street and concerns for dust control would
need to be addressed. Secondary access should be off of Sossaman over the drainage
easement.
4. The Site is extremely tight for RV and trailer traffic. This will cause site circulation and
movement problems. This will create impacts on Riggs.
5. The landscape buffer to the south is way too small. Should be 30’ minimum. This
would eliminate the RV Storage.
6. The existing RV storage on Riggs with 15’-16’ canopies with lights mounted
underneath would be unacceptable.
7. The intersection of Riggs and Sossaman has a great deal of traffic accidents currently,
we do not see this project improving this issue. I de-cel lane should be reviewed.
8. The School across the street will be negatively impacted by this project.
9. The architectural character of this project is below the standards for the area.
Basically the building is lower quality design for the area. The design needs to be
enhanced.
10. The Residential properties to the south will be negatively affected having a
commercial in front of their homes. Their property values will be effected.
The General plan documents call for Residential for this site. So this project is against the general
plan. I could potentially see some commercial projects working on this site such as senior housing,
residential treatment or low scale office. Higher density residential could be an option too. The
Neighborhood is well organized and many connected individuals live in this area. We do not believe
that Queen Creek Planning is supportive of this project. Please feel free to contact them directly.
Rob
Robert B. Burgheimer, AIA, NCARB
Principal
Sketch
Architecture company
2454 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 110
Mesa, AZ 85204
480-668-8015 office
480-215-3375 cell
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
From:
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Cc:
"Nichole Dumke"
Subject:
Z2022118 - Patterson 5 EDR SW corner of Riggs and Sossaman
Date:
Wednesday, October 19, 2022 5:00:32 PM
Adam,
We were wondering where this project is in process. We spoke a couple of months ago in opposition
to this project. Some of the points we talked about with you and Tom Ellsworth were:
1. The neighborhood is in strong opposition to this project.
2. A proper neighborhood meeting needs to take place.
3. A detailed traffic study needs to be completed. Concerns were brought up on the
intersection and the amount of traffic accidents.
4. The residential property to the south will not accept access on to their street.
Emergency access is also not an option.
5. The residential street is not paved and is a dust control issue
6. The Site plan does not have proper turning radius for fire, trash and RV units.
7. C3 is too intensive for this area
8. The site secondary access should be on Sossaman over the drainage easement.
9. The Town of Queen Creek is against this project.
10. The project does not meet the general plan for the area.
We want to have a meeting with City Staff and Supervisor Sellers to discuss the neighborhood’s
concerns. The informal meeting was over-whelmly against this project moving forward.
What is the current timeline if this project moves forward?
Rob
Robert B. Burgheimer, AIA, NCARB
Principal
Sketch
Architecture company
2454 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 110
Mesa, AZ 85204
480-668-8015 office
480-215-3375 cell
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Cc:
"Nichole Dumke"
Subject:
RE: Notice of Resubmittal Z2022118 - Patterson 5.
Date:
Monday, December 11, 2023 2:02:45 PM
Adam,
My Comments below:
The submitted plan does not address any of the neighborhood comments. The
neighborhood is willing to compromise potentially to lower intensity commercial. The
neighborhood is against retail and storage facility on this site.
1. No vehicle access to the south is allowed. This includes emergency access onto Indiana.
The concern is that emergency gate will become secondary access and be used.
2. The neighborhood is requesting a buffer on the southside of this property for landscape.
50’ setback is requested.
3. The master plan for Queen Creek and the County do not show commercial zoning in this
location. The neighborhood has expectations for this site to remain residential.
4. The traffic study does not address the current conditions on Riggs Road. The speed of
traffic and accidents at this intersection have increased considerably. The traffic study
does not address the slowing of large trailers and motorhomes turning onto the site. The
study should consider a deceleration lane pull-out similar to 191st street in the west
bound side.
5. The turning radiuses for motorhome and tracker trailers are likely not functionally
possible on the site. This will cause back-up and site clogging. This will likely create delays
pulling into the site from Riggs.
6. If a secondary access point is needed, this should be added to the West to Sossaman.
7. The photo metric does not take into account the lights mounted under the canopy and
the height of the rear fence to the south. The storage facility on Riggs at Recker creates
glare to the street and the lights are clearly visible from view from below.
8. Streetlights, sidewalk and landscape should be added to south, west and north side of the
site.
9. Underground storage will be required, how will septic and drywell be accomplished?
We are requesting this case be tabled until the neighborhood’s concerns have been addressed.
Rob
Robert B. Burgheimer, AIA, NCARB
Principal
Sketch
Architecture company
2454 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 110
Mesa, AZ 85204
480-668-8015 office
480-215-3375 cell
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
From: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2023 2:51 PM
To: rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
Subject: RE: Notice of Resubmittal
Good afternoon Rob,
At this point, Staff is undertaking another review. We have 14 business days to complete that
review. If the review finds that our technical comments have been left unaddressed, then we will
place the case back into resubmittal status and the applicant will receive comments again and need
to resubmit. If technical comments have been addressed, then Staff will sign off for hearing. As
stated previously, you will be notified if we are taking the case to hearing.
Thanks,
Adam
From: rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com <rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com>
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2023 2:31 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Cc: 'Nichole Dumke' <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Notice of Resubmittal
Adam,
Thank you for giving us the heads up on this project. I am disappointed that nothing has changed or
been addressed.
What is the next step?
Rob
Robert B. Burgheimer, AIA, NCARB
Principal
Sketch
Architecture company
2454 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 110
Mesa, AZ 85204
480-668-8015 office
480-215-3375 cell
rob@sketcharchitecturecompany.com
From: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Sent: Friday, November 3, 2023 12:46 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Cc: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Notice of Resubmittal
The following is a notification of a resubmittal of Z2022118 – Patterson 5.
Applicable documents for review are available on the Online Permit Manager at:
https://accela.maricopa.gov/CitizenAccessMCOSS/Default.aspx. You can search for the case under
the Planning Services search button by using the Special Use Permit case number Z2022118.
A public hearing date has not been set at this time. When such dates are set, you will be notified of
the date, time and venue.
Best regards,
Maricopa County Planning and Development
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Mitchell Ferguson
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Cc:
PND PZAppeal
Subject:
Protest for Case # Z2022118-Patterson 5
Date:
Thursday, January 9, 2025 7:53:10 AM
Attachments:
Outlook-f3abwdua.png
Importance:
High
Mitchell Ferguson
19227 E Indiana Ave, Queen Creek Az, 85142
Parcel Number / 304-90-408B
We oppose this project for the following reasons:
1. C3 zoning is too intensive and allows many incompatible uses next to residential areas.
2. Access from Indiana Street for motorhomes, trailers, and deliveries would disrupt local
homes.
3. Indiana Street is an unpaved, private road, raising concerns about dust control.
4. We do not support any access on Indiana Avenue; access should be limited to Sossaman
Road.
5. The site is too tight for RV and trailer traffic, leading to circulation issues that will impact
Riggs Road.
6. The proposed landscape buffer to the south is inadequate; it should be a minimum of 30
feet, which would eliminate RV storage.
7. The existing RV storage on Riggs, with 15 to 16-foot canopies and underneath lights, is
unacceptable.
8. The intersection of Riggs and Sossaman has a high accident rate, and we do not believe this
project will improve safety.
9. The school across the street will be negatively affected by this project.
10. The project's architectural design is substandard for the area and requires enhancements.
11. Residential properties to the south will be adversely impacted, leading to decreased
property values.
12. This project will not improve our property values; we do not want to overlook a storage
facility or a wall.
13. Proposed lighting will disrupt our neighborhood, and a more thorough traffic study is
necessary due to the number of existing accidents.
The property in question currently holds an R-43 zoning designation, and we are adamantly
convinced that retaining this zoning is essential for our community’s future. Preserving the R-
43 zoning is vital not only for facilitating the sale of our homes but also for nurturing a family-
oriented atmosphere that we cherish. As residents, we are already grappling with increased
traffic, and any additional congestion would further strain our streets and compromise our
safety. We see no necessity for more commercial development, including retail outlets or
additional storage facilities, particularly since we already have similar businesses located at
Riggs and Power, as well as Riggs and Ellsworth. These existing establishments are
conveniently located and adequately meet the needs of our neighborhood.
Furthermore, we unequivocally oppose any proposals that would permit recreational vehicles
(RVs) or farm equipment to access Indiana Avenue. This dead-end street is home to just three
residences and is filled with families that include children ranging from infants of six months to
teenagers of 18 years. The introduction of RVs and farm machinery would not only increase
noise levels but also generate significantly more traffic, which would detrimentally impact the
quality of life for these families. Our community holds the value of a peaceful, residential
environment filled with families dear to our hearts, and we are determined to preserve this
atmosphere.
The prospect of transitioning our zoning to C3 is, in our view, excessively aggressive. This
change would open the floodgates to a vast array of potential uses that don’t align with the
vision we have for our neighborhood. It could usher in businesses such as tattoo parlors,
medical marijuana dispensaries, or convenience stores that sell cigarettes, all of which would
be alarmingly close to an elementary school directly across the street. Such establishments
pose grave concerns for the safety and well-being of our children. Furthermore, C3 zoning is
fraught with numerous stipulations, many of which can be modified or diluted over time,
posing an ongoing threat to the integrity of our community. We earnestly urge decision-
makers to carefully consider these factors and to prioritize the interests of families, ensuring
the safety and cohesion of our neighborhood remains intact.
Thank you
HAVE A GREAT DAY
Mitchell Ferguson
President
19227 E Indiana AVE
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Mobile: (928) 300 2093
Office: (480) 493 7767
Email: Mitchell@Integritydrillingservice.com
Website: Integritydrillingservice.com
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Adam Cannon (PND)
To:
Nichole Dumke
Subject:
RE: Questions about the postcard Case # z2022118-Patterson
Date:
Tuesday, January 14, 2025 8:41:00 AM
Attachments:
image001.png
Good morning,
1. 300’ is the minimum required by the zoning ordinance and state law. The County cannot
mandate additional notice beyond the 300’; however, the applicant can choose to provide
notice to additional people as part of their public participation efforts.
2. The middle school is within 300’ and receives notice of hearing. Schools are allowed to
comment just as anyone is allowed to comment on a proposed rezoning.
3. If the application is approved and the emergency access is being used for regular access to the
site, then that would be a zoning violation and you would be able to report it to code
enforcement. Code enforcement would investigate the matter and if they verified that the
complaint is valid, then the property owner would be subject to fines pending a hearing
officer’s decision.
Best regards,
Adam Cannon, AICP
Senior Planner
Planning & Development
301 W Jefferson St. Phoenix, AZ 85003
O: 602-506-3301
E: adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
[ Maricopa.Gov ]
Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
Maricopa County is developing the Framework 2040 Comprehensive Plan – a document which guides growth and
development for the next decade and beyond.
Visit Framework 2040 to learn how to participate, attend meetings and be heard!
From: Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 5:29 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Re: Questions about the postcard Case # z2022118-Patterson
Good evening, Ok thank you for the information. Why is it only 300 ft. This is a big project and it is going to affect more than 24 homeowners. This is not fair. Can you change this for us? 2 out of the 24 is not even in the 300' The Queen
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
Good evening, Ok thank you for the information. Why is it only 300 ft. This is a big project and it is
going to affect more than 24 homeowners. This is not fair. Can you change this for us?
2 out of the 24 is not even in the 300'
The Queen Creek Middle school. How can they have a say?
Also as for Indiana Ave only emergency exit:
Ok for some reason if this does pass which we hope it does not.
You said only emergency exit but what if they do not use it for emergencies and use it all the time
later down the road. What right as a homeowner do we have?
Thank you again,
Nichole Dumke
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 4:43 PM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov> wrote:
Good afternoon Nichole,
The 20% does not apply until the Board of Supervisors meeting and refers to requiring a
supermajority vote (4 out of 5 instead of 3 out of 5) to approve the case. If 20% of property
owners living within 300’ and 20% of the area within 300’ of the site are opposed, then the
supermajority vote would be triggered. This will not be evaluated by staff until after the Planning
and Zoning Commission meeting.
25 postcards were sent out including one for the Town of Queen Creek. The signatures will factor
into whether a supermajority vote is required so long as they occur within 300’ of the site.
The Indiana Ave. access is for emergencies only and will be gated. A secondary Sossaman access
would be preferred; however, as the Indiana Ave. access is for emergencies only, that is sufficient
for a secondary access as well.
Best regards,
Adam Cannon, AICP
Senior Planner
Planning & Development
301 W Jefferson St. Phoenix, AZ 85003
O: 602-506-3301
E: adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
[ Maricopa.Gov ]
Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
Maricopa County is developing the Framework 2040 Comprehensive Plan – a document which guides growth and
development for the next decade and beyond.
Visit Framework 2040 to learn how to participate, attend meetings and be heard!
From: Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 2:50 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Questions about the postcard Case # z2022118-Patterson
Good afternoon, Hope all is well with you. I called and talked to Nick, but I wanted to touch base with you also. What does this 20% of protests mean and can you tell me who the postcards were sent to? So how many postcards went out and how
Good afternoon, Hope all is well with you. I called and talked to Nick, but I wanted to touch base
with you also. What does this 20% of protests mean and can you tell me who the postcards were
sent to? So how many postcards went out and how many letters do we need for the protest to
work?300 ft is not a lot in our area to reach everyone that needs to know what is going on with
our community.
Do the signatures work for the 20% protests?
Also, Just wanted to ask about the blueprints that show that they can still use Indiana Ave. ? I
thought they had to use another access on Sossoman if this project went through? Hopefully not
though
I know for sure Rob Burheimer will be going to speak on all of our behalf. We will probably do the
Zoom. I wish it was in the evening so more of us can attend.
Thank you
Sincerely,
Nichole Dumke
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
jeri arnold
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); PND PZAppeal
Subject:
Re: Z2022118 - PROTEST
Date:
Tuesday, January 14, 2025 11:00:23 AM
Please consider this as our formal protest and complaint in regards to changing the zoning of
the lot on the corner of Riggs and Sossaman Rd from residential to commercial.
We have met with Jessica Sarkissian of Upfront Planning with our concerns and did not hear
back from her with any type of resolution. We purchased our home (and paid significantly
more for it) because our neighborhood was zoned for one acre parcels. Now you want to
change the zoning of this lot to Commercial. The result of this will be only negative especially
to our neighborhood. Not only will it reduce our property value, there will be increased traffic
and crime that come with bringing in commercial businesses. There are many commercial lots
nearby off San Tan Blvd and a recent Circle K has already been built less than a mile away.
There are also numerous storage units within a couple mile radius. We don't need any more of
any of these.
Do you know there is a middle school directly across the street? What is this going to do to the
traffic already at our corner? (Have you already studied the huge amount of traffic on Riggs
Rd and the many accidents we already have on this corner?) And what dangers will this bring
to our children? Have you seen there are homes directly behind this lot that will now have
traffic on their very small street, not to mention huge lights at night on the storage units.
Please do your due diligence.
How can you approve something that will be so detrimental to our neighborhood? The only
person that is benefiting from this is the owner of this lot who purchased it knowing what the
zoning was? Let him build the 1 acre homes it is zoned for.
Please, don't approve this change. Think of the quality of life for the taxpayers that already
live here for once.
Michael & Jeri Arnold
707.477.3062
19112 E Indiana Ave
Queen Creek Az 85142
Parcel #304-89-944
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy A54 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone
Get Outlook for Android
From: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2024 5:03:27 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Cc: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Z2022118 - Notice of Hearing
The following is a notification of hearing for case Z2022118.
A Planning and Zoning Commission Hearing has been scheduled for Z2022118 on Thursday, January
23, 2025 at 9:30 a.m. You may attend in-person at the BOS Auditorium at 205 W. Jefferson St. or you
may register virtually once meeting details are posted on the calendar at
https://www.maricopa.gov/calendar.aspx?CID=14,33.
A Board of Supervisors Meeting has been scheduled for Z2022118 on Wednesday, February 26, 2025
at 9:30 a.m. You may attend in-person at the BOS Auditorium at 205 W. Jefferson St. or you may
register virtually once meeting details are posted on the Clerk of the Board website at
https://www.maricopa.gov/324/Board-of-Supervisors-Meeting-Information.
Best regards,
Maricopa County Planning and Development
DATE:
January 22, 2025
TO:
Planning & Zoning Commission
From:
Adam Cannon, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT:
Z2022118 – Patterson 5
Agenda Item: #4
Since the publishing of the staff report, staff received three (3) additional opposition letters and
one (1) duplicate opposition letter. The opposition letters are concerned with the intensity of C-3
zoning, access to Indiana St. from the facility, site design as it pertains to on-site traffic, crime
and buffering from residential, lighting, property values, architectural character and potential
impacts to the school.
The original staff report number included a duplicate opposition letter in error, and the number in
the staff report should be seventy-four (74) opposed instead of seventy-five (75). With the
additional letters, the total number opposing the case is seventy-seven (77) individuals
representing forty-six (46) properties. A case opposition map is also provided in addition to a
support/opposition map with the 300’ buffer surrounding the subject property. At this time, a
supermajority vote of the Board is not required; however, the number and area of parcels required
to trigger a supermajority vote is close and a supermajority vote may be triggered with additional
opposition.
Attachments:
Case Opposition Map (1 page)
300’ Support/Opposition Map (1 page)
Opposition Correspondence (6 pages)
S Mandarin Dr
S Grapefruit Dr
S 196th St
E Natalie
Wy
S 198th St
S 195th
S
t
E Mews Rd
E Via
Park St
E Country
Meadows Dr
E Mews
Rd
E Lawndale Pl
S 188th
St
E Vallejo
St
S 196th
Pl
E Via
Park St
E Via De
Olivos
S 187th
Wy
S 197th St
S 188th
Pl
E Karsten
Dr
S 191st
St
E Cherry
Hills Pl
S Grapefruit Dr
S 198th Pl
E Peg
a
sus
D
r
E Mews Rd
S 196th
Wy
S 197th
Wy
S 195th
Wy
S 193rd Wy
E Melissa Pl
E Vallejo
St
S 196th Wy
S 190th
Pl
E Cherry Hills Pl
S 193rd Wy
E Flintlock Dr
S 197th
St
E Flintlock Dr
S 195th Pl
S 195th Pl
S 193rd
Pl
S 197th Pl
E Indiana
Ave
E Chestnut Dr
E Indiana
Ave
S 189th St
S 192nd Pl
S 195th
St
S
198th
Pl
S 194t
h St
S 187th Pl
E Lawndale
Pl
S 195th St
S 193rd St
E Happy Rd
E Via
Park St
S 186th Pl
S 187th St
E Via
Park St
E Country
Meadows Dr
E Indiana
Ave
S 191st St
S 190th St
E Karsten Dr
E Mary Ann Wy
E Karsten Dr
E Vallejo
St
E Cloud Rd
Sossaman Rd
San Tan Blvd
Riggs Rd
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: \\gisteam.maricopa.gov\workgroup\patrick.dongarra\PND\OppositionCases\Z2022118\Z2022118_Alternate.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 1/21/2025
Ü
575
0
575
287.5
Feet
Case Opposition
Z2022118
Legend
Parcel
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Opposition Parcels
S 192nd Pl
E Indiana Ave
S 193rd Wy
E Indiana Ave
Sossaman Rd
Riggs Rd
304
89
066H
304
89
068G
304
89
068H
304
90
016D
304
90
017D
304
90
408B
304
90
408C
304
90
358B
304
90
016F
304
90
408F
304
90
438E
304
90
408G
304
89
946A
304
90
016A
304
90
358A
304
90
016G
304
90
398Q
304
90
077D
304
90
077C
304
89
887B
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: \\gisteam.maricopa.gov\workgroup\patrick.dongarra\PND\OppositionCases\Z2022118\Z2022118.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 1/21/2025
Ü
90
0
90
45
Feet
Opposition and Support
Z2022118
Parcel
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Opposition Parcel
Supporting Parcel
All Opposition Parcels
All Supporting Parcels
300' Buffer Interior
300' Buffer Selection
Eligible parcels: 23
Supporting parcels: 0
Opposition parcels: 5
Supporting parcels sq ft: 0
Opposition parcels sq ft: 105,266
Subject parcels sq ft: 221,834
All area inside the 300' buffer sq ft:
778,411
All area inside the 300' buffer -
excluding subject parcel,
ROW and excluded parcels sq ft:
556,577
No-response parcels sq ft: 0
Super Majority opposed parcel acres:
19%
Super Majority opposed parcel number:
22%
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Bob Butterfield
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Case #Z2022118-Patterson 5; Parcel Number 304-90-077C
Date:
Friday, January 17, 2025 5:30:12 PM
We want to cast our vote against this being approved. Below are some of the reasons for us to
vote against this rezoning
Concerns:
1.) Currently there is a lot of noise from the road/intersection this would only increase because
of the increase in traffic.
2..) THere would be a light increase to the pollution
3.) Possible decrease in home values, we purchased our home knowing the area around us was
zoned residential.
4.) There is also concern for the safety of the children that attend middle school
5.) There are a lot of activities at the school during the week as well as over the weekend.
This creates a parking issue and people jaywalking because of said parking issues. Increasing
traffic at this intersection and in this area will be dangerous for not only the families that live
here but the families and children that attend the school
Please vote "NO" on this issue
Thanks,
Bob Butterfield
503.329.3546
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Jackie Hampton
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Fwd: Protest #Z2022118-Paterson 5 - Sossaman Riggs project
Date:
Monday, January 20, 2025 5:49:08 PM
The site is too tight for RV/trailer traffic.
This will impact Riggs rd.
Thank
Jackie Hampton
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jackie Hampton <hamptonjackie04@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jan 20, 2025, 5:46 PM
Subject: Protest #Z2022118-Paterson 5 - Sossaman Riggs project
To: <adam.cannon@maricopa.gov>
This email is to notify you that I don't approve of this project.
Jackie Hampton
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Heather Kennedy
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); PND PZAppeal
Subject:
No C3, please!
Date:
Friday, January 17, 2025 12:46:21 PM
Dear Mr. Cannon and whom else should be addressed,
We are writing you regarding Case # Z2022118-Patterson 5 and the attempt to change the land
from RU-43 to C-3 and to plead our case. We know you care about your people and how this
would hurt us.
Like many of my neighbors, we did our research while looking for our "forever home". One
of the factors we considered was the zoning for the land in question across from our
neighborhood. We were comfortable enough with it becoming residential and, along with
other considerations, that zoning made us decide to make this Indiana Avenue neighborhood
our home and long-term investment. When we found out that there was an attempt to change
it to C3, we were immediately strongly opposed to this. C3 allows for too broad a range of
possibilities next to quiet residential and the school.
Learning about the specific impacts that this project would bring, our opposition grew. Both
of us have attended meetings discussing the proposed impositions. Indiana is a private
residential street and it is not paved by local government. The privacy of Indiana, especially
my section that ends in a cul de sac, would be shattered by access to it. We are especially
against access to Indiana
Both of us are law enforcement officers (LEO's) and both of us are very familiar with the
crime that typically comes with such storage facilities whether it be indoor, outdoor, or RV.
Tweakers, sex offenders, and burglar nests do not belong next to our quiet,
fastidious neighborhood, or the school! I understand that the businesses will make attempts at
combating this, but like with all storage businesses, they will only be attempts. If this project
goes through, this will be a long term issue as time goes on and we have to fight the spread of
"big city crime rates" spreading south as it is through Gilbert now. This is somewhat
unstoppable, but decisions like this ahead of time will make a huge impact on good people.
The lighting specific to that type of storage business would amount to light pollution when so
close to a very dark neighborhood. Aesthetics are also a consideration for us and we feel that
the business and its RV shelter structures would be hideous. Its design, even the updated one,
does not fit the neighborhood or area. This is a financial consideration too as it affects
property values and our long term investment.
Access to Indiana would impact the privately paved section as well as create dust issues in the
unpaved section. Access onto Sossaman would be preferable, but the amount of traffic
handled there would be worsened by this business. We think normal traffic flow would be
impacted and this would probably increase the already growing number (historically) of traffic
crashes.
On top of all that, that section of land seems too tight for that project. The buffer made up of
landscaping would be too small based on our information.
Thank you for hearing our concerns,
Heather and Brent Meile
19118 E. Indiana Avenue
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
480-294-8225
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Jackie Hampton
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Protest #Z2022118-Paterson 5 - Sossaman Riggs project
Date:
Monday, January 20, 2025 5:46:39 PM
This email is to notify you that I don't approve of this project.
Jackie Hampton
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
From:
Jason Johannesen
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); PND PZAppeal
Subject:
Protest for Case # Z2022118-Patterson 5
Date:
Friday, January 17, 2025 5:01:58 PM
Mr Adam Cannon and BOS,
My family and I are not in support of this zone change. We ask that you turn it down.
C3 is too intensive with too many unsupported uses next to residential neighborhoods.
1. Access onto Indiana Street to the south with motorhomes, trailers and delivery would be
disruptive to the homes.
2. Indiana is essentially a private unpaved street and concerns for dust control would need to
be addressed.
3. We do not want access at all on Indiana Ave. They would need to use another outlet on
Sossaman Road.
4. This location is small and would not support large rigs and would create more traffic across
the street impacting the school.
5. We do not want commercial business in front of our homes.
6. This will negatively impact our property values.
7. Putting up a brick wall or steel fence is not an option.
8. Project shows building a lower end building.
9. The lighting would disrupt residential properties and increase noise.
10. Would also bring up safety concerns for middle school and increased traffic.
11. A lot of youth sports take place on the weekend there also. It's already overcrowded and
children and families already jaywalk across those roads because of parking issues.
Sincerely,
Jason and Stephanie Johannesen
19316 E Lawndale PL
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
480.710.4855
Z2022118
2
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Troy Lines <troy.l.lines@gmail.com>
Sent:
Saturday, February 1, 2025 9:19 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
February 1, 2025
Queen Creek Planning and Zoning Commission
22358 S. Ellsworth Road
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
RE: Support for Case #Z2022118 - Patterson Commercial Project
Dear Members of the Queen Creek Planning and Zoning Commission,
I am writing to express my support for the proposed commercial project on the corner of Riggs and
Sossaman (Case #Z2022118 - Patterson). I believe this project would be a valuable addition to our
community for several reasons.
First, our area is in great need of more retail and commercial services. As Queen Creek continues to
grow, it’s important to ensure that residents have access to essential goods and services within a
reasonable distance. This project would help meet that need, reducing the reliance on travel to other
areas for retail options and providing more convenience for local families.
I also want to commend the design of the project. The aesthetic fits well with the character of the
surrounding area, and I appreciate the thoughtfulness that has gone into making it an attractive
development. From my understanding, the developer has made several compromises based on
feedback from neighbors, which demonstrates their commitment to working with the community.
Additionally, I support the types of businesses that will be allowed within the development. The
restrictions in place ensure that only family-focused businesses, aligned with the values of the
neighborhood, will be able to operate there. This gives me confidence that the project will enhance the
community in a positive way.
One specific benefit I would like to highlight is the inclusion of enclosed Boat, RV, and toy storage. As a
member of the community, I know that storage options for recreational vehicles and equipment are in
high demand, and this service will be a welcome addition to the area.
In conclusion, I believe that this project would be a significant asset to our community, providing much-
needed retail and commercial services, while maintaining the values and aesthetics of the
3
neighborhood. I encourage the commission to approve this project, as it will benefit both current and
future residents of Queen Creek.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Troy Lines
4
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Travis Breinholt <travisazls@gmail.com>
Sent:
Saturday, February 1, 2025 8:20 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
Mr Cannon,
My name is Travis Breinholt. I own my home located at Power and Riggs road. I’m voicing my support
to the commercial project being planned for the intersection at Sossaman & Riggs. I have several
reasons for putting my support being this project. I feel like we need more retail in this area. I have
reviewed the design concepts for this project and feel like it fits well in the area. I understand that the
developer has been working to compromise on the design and layout. We need more developers that
try to work with Cities and Counties.I also understand that the type of businesses are restricted. This
allows for a concept that works within guidelines. I am also the owner of a RV and boat that are
currently being stored in Mesa. I love the concept and would love to have my machines closer to
where I live.
Thank you for your time.
Travis Breinholt
18725 E. Karsten Dr.
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
5
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Verna Mortemore <vernamortemore@gmail.com>
Sent:
Saturday, February 1, 2025 1:14 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); District_1
Subject:
Support for Case # Z2022118-Patterson 5
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
Good Afternoon,
We are building a large custom home near Riggs and Power. I was pretty excited when I heard
that someone was planning a new strip mall project on the corner of Sossaman & Riggs, that
includes boat and RV storage. We need retail services in the area, but we especially have a real
need for boat and RV storage. Many of our neighbors have nowhere to store their boats and RVs.
This project has enclosed garages that have a very nice finish, and will protect the large
investments of RVs and boats.
I previously lived in this area back in the 80's and 90’s when Power was a 2 lane road. The growth
out here has always been astronomical, and controversial. However, as the area grows with all
these new homes, more services are also needed. Please vote to approve this project. We will be a
customer as well as many of our neighbors.
Sincerely ,
18224 E Navajo Dr
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Verna Mortemore
602-622-0473
6
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Summer Ashton <summerashton@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Saturday, February 1, 2025 11:38 AM
To:
District_1; Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To Whom it May Concern,
Thank you for your service to our county and community. I am writing this letter to express my
support for the above mentioned case number. We have a real need in our area for additional
feed stores, restaurants, and general commercial developments, especially boat and RV storage.
Many of our neighbors have nowhere to store their boats and RVs. This project has enclose
garages that will look great and protect the large investments of our neighbors RVs and boats.
The specific intersection outlined in the proposal looks to be a perfect location for this project. I
wholeheartedly support it.
Thank you
Summer Ashton
2863 E Flower St
Gilbert, AZ 85298
Sent from my iPhone
7
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Richard Ashton <richardashton2dmd@gmail.com>
Sent:
Saturday, February 1, 2025 11:35 AM
To:
District_1; Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To Whom it May Concern,
Thank you for your service to our county and community. I am writing this letter to express my
support for the above mentioned case number. We have a real need in our area for additional feed
stores, restaurants, and general commercial developments, especially boat and RV storage.
Many of our neighbors have nowhere to store their boats and RVs. This project has enclose garages
that will look great and protect the large investments of our neighbors RVs and boats.
The specific intersection outlined in the proposal looks to be a perfect location for this project. I
wholeheartedly support it.
Thank you
Richard Ashton
2863 E Flower St
Gilbert, AZ 85298
Sent from my iPhone
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages
from new senders. Always validate the sender first.
Bill Guttery
Chief Executive Officer
T: 480.420.2101
C: 480-758-9096
F: 480.346.2075
E: bill@charter.one
6913 E. Rembrandt Ave
Mesa, AZ 85212
www.charter.one
From:
Bill Guttery
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson 5
Date:
Monday, February 3, 2025 4:19:05 PM
To whom it may concern,
I wish to express my full support for the commercial project planned for the corner of
Sossaman and Riggs.
We have lived in this area for over 20 years and have loved watching it grow. The
population continues to increase but the infrastructure and services seem to be
behind. We need more retail and commercial services in our neighborhood. I have
reviewed the design of the project and it is in line with the look and feel we want in
our area. The landscaping is important to me and what the developer has done to
the Southside of the building looks really nice. Many of my neighbors and friends
have RV's and a facility like this gets those vehicles out of peoples back yards and
makes the whole community look better.
Having services like this close to home cuts down on pollution and maintenance on
our vehicles.
Please consider my comments in your decision.
Bill and Vonda Guttery
20534 E Via De Arboles
Queen Creek, Arizona 85412
IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s)
only. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to
anyone or make copies thereof.
1
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
mfiero53@gmail.com
Sent:
Tuesday, February 4, 2025 9:25 AM
To:
District_1; Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
FW: Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
From: mfiero53@gmail.com <mfiero53@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2025 9:22 AM
To: district_1@maricopa.gove; adam.cannon@maricopa.gov
Subject: Case #Z2022118-Patterson
02/04/2025
Re: Case #Z2022118-Patterson
To Whom It May Concern:
I recently became aware of the proposed project referenced in this correspondence. After reviewing the
proposal, the intended use of the property, and the theme incorporated in its’ construction and design, I
feel this project enhances and positively contributes to the surrounding enterprises and it in lockstep the
general theme of the community as a whole.
Given that there is a school immediately North of this property, it was important for me to know that any
proposed commercial venture would not adversely impact the students. This project fulfills this
important criterion. In addition, I appreciate that the RV storage will be an enclosed structure that adds
aesthetically to this project as well as the security component.
In our community, there already exists an overabundance of commercial enterprises that reflect
negatively on the Town, violate zoning and building codes, and infringe upon the privacy and peaceful
usage of other surrounding property owners and residents. I appreciate builders that make a sincere
eƯort to ensure that their project(s) adds value to the adjacent entities specifically and to the community
in general.
I strongly support this, and other quality projects that follow these general principles.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
2
Delfor Alvarez
33318 North Vaquero Crt
San Tan Valley, AZ 85144
1
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Kyle LeSueur <kylelesueur@gmail.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, February 5, 2025 2:09 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson 5
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
Hello my name is Kyle LeSueur and I live at 25809 S 174th St, Queen creek AZ 85142. I am emailing
today to give my support for the project on Sossamon & Riggs. We need more storage unit places
close by.
2
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Trevor Ethington <tank_trevor@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, February 4, 2025 11:28 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To whom it may concern,
I’m voicing my support to the commercial project being planned for the intersection at Sossaman
& Riggs. My reason are as follows:
1. We need more retail & commercial services in the area
2. I Like the design of the project
3. My understanding is the developer made compromises based of feedback from neighbors
4. There are restrictions to what type of businesses can open there
5. We need more retail & commercial services in the area, especially enclosed RV storage.
Thank you for your time.
Trevor Ethington
18604 E Via De Arboles
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
3
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Micah Slade <micahslade@gmail.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, February 4, 2025 8:32 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To whom it may concern:
I am currently building a home very close to this property. I would love to see this commercial project
being planned for the intersection at Sossaman & Riggs. I would hope that you would vote to approve
this project. This area needs way more retail, and commercial to support the overwhelming residential
base that we currently have. I also feel it’s important the commercial and retail spaces steer away
from the cookie cutter buildings I see all over. We need unique timeless architecture to add character
and charm to our community. I feel this project embodies that as well as being very functional and
serviceable to many different needs. I feel the developer has been sensitive to neighbors input and
expectations for this particular project which is huge. This is so needed and what I love is that it
combines visually attractive buildings with curb appeal with much needed commercial spaces. It really
is a perfect use for this corner property.
Thank you for your consideration.
Micah Slade
24912 S. 182nd pl.
Gilbert, AZ 85298
4
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Whitney Slade <whitneyslade@gmail.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, February 4, 2025 8:32 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
I am writing this as a resident that lives close to this project and travels by this corner every single day.
I would be thrilled to see this commercial project being planned for the intersection at Sossaman & Riggs.
This is what we want in this area. Thoughtful designed structures that serve the communities families with retail and much needed
commercial space. This area is overloaded with residential and very little commercial to support it. Would you please vote yes on this
project so we can move closer to meeting this dire need of shops, services, and family functional spaces. I feel this project checks all
the boxes.
My understanding is the project developer has listened to the neighbors surrounding this project and has put into action their input and
desires.
Bottom line… We need beautifully planned services for our families in this area and this project will be just that.
Thank you for your time.
Whitney Slade
2559 E. Calle de Flores
Gilbert, AZ 85298
1
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Lona King <lonamking@gmail.com>
Sent:
Monday, February 3, 2025 8:32 AM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Fwd: Support for Case #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To Whom It May Concern:
I’m voicing my support to the commercial project being planned for the intersection at Sossaman &
Riggs.
My reasons are as follows:
1. We need more retail & commercial services in the area
2. I like the design of the project.
3. My understanding is the developer made compromises based on feedback from neighbors.
4. There are restrictions to what type of businesses can open there.
5. We need more retail & commercial services in the area, especially enclosed RV storage.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you,
Lona King
18818 E Reins Rd
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
1
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
CarleyMorgan <CarleyMorgan@proton.me>
Sent:
Friday, January 31, 2025 9:34 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); District_1; PND PZAppeal; erik.swanson@queencreekaz.org;
development@queencreekaz.gov
Subject:
Opposition Letter: Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To whom it may concern,
Re: OPPOSITION to Z2022118-Patterson
My name is Claire "Carley' Morgan and I am a homeowner within 300 feet of the proposed re-zoning site as
well as being the elected Republican Precinct Committeeman of Lime Precinct here in LD15, proudly
representing the voices and concerns of 125 additional registered voters/homeowners potentially affected by
this rezoning proposal.
My husband and I Iive at 19124 E. Lawndale Place, Queen Creek, AZ, 85142. We have lived here for over 10
years, on a dead-end, dirt road, with our children on a small family farm.
It's because we believe in personal property rights that we respectfully oppose the rezoning of the property on
the SE corner of Riggs and Sossamon for the following reasons:
1. The Property Owners in this neighborhood bought their property fully aware that the undeveloped
property was zoned for more acre and a quarter residential lots, like the ones we live on. The new
buyer of the property was also fully aware of that when he purchased the property. The main reason
we have zoning laws is to protect citizen's home from this type of abuse. The fact that this buyer
appears to live in Gilbert and have multiple other commercial projects underway leads me to believe
he bought this property with the predetermined intent of rezoning it for commercial investment.
Corporations and investors shouldn't be allowed to come into neighborhoods and buy residential land
and flip it to commercial just to make a buck. I believe there are plenty of undeveloped commercial
real-estate properties in QC that can, and should be, purchased for commercial use. There are a lot of
families moving into QC and we need residentially zoned areas to stay residential to provide them
places to live.
2. This property isn't in someone else's back yard; it's in mine! I have a very clear and unobstructed view
of that lot from my back yard. I do not care to look at a 16-foot block wall or have bright commercial
lights lighting up my back yard. We choose to live on streets with no street lights for a reason, we like
to sit on our back porch and see the stars at night. The business's lights will directly impact my privacy
and tranquility I currently enjoy in my back yard.
2
3. The three families living on Indiana, just South of the proposed business plan, will be
disproportionately affected, significantly more so than anyone else. Those three homes will be
profoundly impacted if this project is allowed to go forward.
4. We do not need another RV storage facility in this area. Less than two miles away at 17635 E. Riggs Rd
is a Cube Smart RV Storage and just 0.3 miles South, on Sossamon and San Tan, is a commercial storage
lot for large equipment, AZ Storage Lot.
5. We do not want the additional traffic or noise. We can already hear the school bells and daily
announcements coming from Barney Newell School on that corner, as well as the marching band,
fireworks and football games from Casteel High. In addition, a new circle K was just built to the
immediate West of us on Power and Riggs. The increased traffic and noise have already negatively
impacted our quality of life. Our community has even suffered a motor vehicle accident fatality in that
intersection in the short time it has been open for business.
6. Lastly, there is a concern over what businesses could move into the commercial retail stores. There's
nothing to stop then from renting to a 24 hr. business or lease to cell phone tower companies; neither
of which should be a part of any residential neighborhood.
I have spent many hours knocking on doors, talking with neighbors and gathering petition signatures opposing
this rezoning proposal. So far, I have not found one family that supports this rezoning or has a personal need
for RV storage.
Please respect the rights of property owners who bought their homes with knowledge that this lot was zoned
for residential acre and a quarter properties.
Thank you for your time and attention to my letter, and to this project. Please be mindful that your decision
effects hundreds of rural, farming families like mine.
Respectfully,
Claire and Mike Morgan
480-710-9084
19124 E. Lawndale Place
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
3
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
MnA Faison <nettieu2@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Friday, January 31, 2025 1:05 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); PND PZAppeal
Cc:
District_1; Erik.Swanson@queencreekaz.org; development@queencreekaz.gov
Subject:
Important concerns regarding: Sossaman & Riggs Project Case # Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
Sossaman & Riggs Project Case # Z2022118-Patterson
To All Whom It May Concern:
This is the Faisons. We were the first family to settle in this county island at Riggs/Sossaman back at
the turn of the 21st century. It was pristine desert at the time and with the new water district coming
in, it became an attractive location for a homestead. So, we obtained 5 acres and build a small family
community upon it. The word got out that QC was in a real estate boom, so over the next several
years many new households moved in and built homesteads on 1+ acre lots. These were well built
and maintained homes which helped significantly increase property values. Meanwhile, other
essential services building projects commenced, including a junior high school and a Queen
Creek fire station. Both Riggs and Sossaman Roads were widened considerably. Post-pandemic
there has been another housing boom whereby several parcels of remaining vacant wilderness was
converted to homesteads as citizens moved here to escape contagion in densely populated areas.
The high caliber of the 1 acre subdivisions further increased property values and contributed to the
sustained rural culture which encompassed the working class and the affluent co-existing in a
atmosphere of common lifestyle and mutual respect.
It is no wonder then that there is community resistance to the advent of lifestyle-disruptive
commercial development in the interest of unfettered growth. For these working residents who likely
work at stressful jobs to care for their families, returning to their homes in this quiet placid
community is a refuge that helps them cope and dispel anxiety. The specter of importing the hustle
and bustle of urban industrial commercial enterprises that don't directly benefit this neighborhood is
difficult to fathom. Is there nothing sacred remaining? It is in the hands of astute civic leaders like
yourself to exercise the foresight to avoid contributing to the dismantling of a social tapestry that has
been decades in the making. There may be a time in the unknown future when it may be practical,
feasible or even necessary to advance urban-like planning. But that time is clearly not now, as
exhibited by the vehement resistance from the residents. Therefore, it is incumbent on you as public
servants to yield to the will of the citizens most effected, rather than to external forces whose
principal concern is profit-taking regardless of the adverse (material, physical, psychological, moral,
aesthetic) impact their presence may have on this community. Here are reasons commonly held for
resisting this rezoning:
It is zoned for residential we want to keep it that way
Extra traffic that we do not need. There are already a lot of accidents on this corner
No need for retail of RV storage in our community
4
We do not need extra lighting in our neighborhood
We would have no control who leases out these spaces. It could be a smoke shop, liquor
store, medical marijuana etc… There is an elementary school across the street.
Changing to commercial is too aggressive and has a lot of stipulations that can be diluted
down the road.
This particular project does not work for our community. Please take our concerns into
consideration to help keep our neighborhood safe and rural like it should be. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Mike Faison family
25325 S 193rd Way
480-987-5004 (lv a msg)
5
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Tom Dennis <tomdennis1019@gmail.com>
Sent:
Friday, January 31, 2025 9:35 AM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); District_1; PND PZAppeal; Erik.Swanson@queencreekaz.org;
development@queencreekaz.gov
Subject:
Action/ Z2022118 Opposition for Rezoning
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
Dear Council,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to #Z2022118-Patterson, the proposed rezoning at
Sossaman & Riggs. While the local community may be unable to prevent development, that in itself will
be detrimental to the area, nearly all residents in this Queen Creek neighborhoods are completely
opposed to the change from residential rural to commercial property that will cause traffic and safety
problems, create even more problems with schools that are already over-capacity, and potentially lower
the property values of the existing community. The traffic already at the intersection of Riggs and
Sossaman is a concern, and with the Newell Barney Junior HR High School at that intersection, here is no
need to add to it. The number of accidents at this corner has made this a concern for all who live in this
area.
There is already a storage unit being built at Power & Riggs across the street from Casteel HS., and the
amount of congestion has been noticeable.
I urge you to disapprove the proposed rezoning (Z2022118), and from recent meetings and discussions
with my neighbors, I know my opinions are shared by many who have not managed to attend meeting or
write letters and emails.
Thank you for your continued service and support of our communities.
Best regards,
Tom Dennis
19108 E Lawndale Pl
Queen Creek Az 85142
480-694-3235
6
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent:
Friday, January 31, 2025 9:10 AM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Re: Z2022118 - Patterson 5
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the county.
Good morning Adam, I have not seen the updated signatures or letters yet? Working on getting more
signatures and letters to be sent. Thank you Nichole
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 8:37 AM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov> wrote:
Good day:
Please be advised that we have received your comments on Z2022118. They will be incorporated into the case file.
Applicable documents for review are available on the Permit Center at: https://maricopacountyaz-
energovweb.tylerhost.net/apps/selfservice#/search. You can search for the case under the Planning Services search
button by using the Zone Change with Overlay case number Z2022118.
A Board of Supervisors Meeting has been scheduled for Z2022118 on Wednesday, February 26, 2025 at 9:30 a.m. You
may attend in-person at the BOS Auditorium at 205 W. Jefferson St. or you may register virtually once meeting details
are posted on the Clerk of the Board website at https://www.maricopa.gov/324/Board-of-Supervisors-Meeting-
Information. Registration for virtual attendance will not be available until the Friday or Monday prior to the
meeting. Please contact the Clerk’s Office if there are any questions about virtual registration for the Board of
Supervisors Meeting with the Go To Webinar system.
Best regards,
Maricopa County Planning and Development
1
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent:
Thursday, January 23, 2025 8:22 AM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Re: Sossaman and Riggs Project More signatures
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the county.
Ok thank you
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:21 AM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov> wrote:
I have them and they will be included in the Board report, but we do not have time to print and distribute them this
morning because we get prepared for hearing right before it starts. I will mention it in the presentation to the
commission.
Thanks,
Adam
From: Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2025 8:20 AM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Re: Sossaman and Riggs Project More signatures
Ok we will be there, but I forgot them. I have them on my computer . Will this work for you? Thank you. On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8: 12 AM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam. Cannon@ maricopa. gov> wrote: G ood mor ning Nichole, T hese are receiv ed, but will
Ok we will be there, but I forgot them. I have them on my computer . Will this work for you?
Thank you.
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:12 AM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov> wrote:
Good morning Nichole,
These are received, but will not be recorded today because they were not received in enough time in advance of
hearing. They will be included in the attachments to the Board report.
2
Best regards,
Adam
From: Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2025 7:28 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Sossaman and Riggs Project More signatures
Good evening Adam, Her e are 15 more signatures of neighbors that oppose this project. Thank you, Nichole Dumke
Good evening Adam, Here are 15 more signatures of neighbors that oppose this project.
Thank you,
Nichole Dumke
3
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent:
Thursday, January 23, 2025 8:20 AM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Re: Sossaman and Riggs Project More signatures
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the county.
Ok we will be there, but I forgot them. I have them on my computer . Will this work for you?
Thank you.
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:12 AM Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov> wrote:
Good morning Nichole,
These are received, but will not be recorded today because they were not received in enough time in advance of
hearing. They will be included in the attachments to the Board report.
Best regards,
Adam
From: Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2025 7:28 PM
To: Adam Cannon (PND) <Adam.Cannon@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Sossaman and Riggs Project More signatures
Good evening Adam, Her e are 15 more signatures of neighbors that oppose this project. Thank you, Nichole Dumke
Good evening Adam, Here are 15 more signatures of neighbors that oppose this project.
Thank you,
Nichole Dumke
4
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
carley bluemel <carley_bluemel@hotmail.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, January 22, 2025 9:00 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); PND PZAppeal
Subject:
Protest case for #Z2022118-Patterson
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
To whom it may concern,
My name is Claire "Carley' Morgan and I am a homeowner within 300 feet of the proposed re-zoning site as
well as being the elected Republican Precinct Committeeman of Lime Precinct here in LD15, proudly
representing the voices and concerns of 125 additional registered voters/homeowners potentially affected by
this rezoning proposal.
My husband and I Iive at 19124 E. Lawndale Place, Queen Creek, AZ, 85142. We have lived here for over 10
years, on a dead-end, dirt road, with our children on a small family farm.
It's because we believe in personal property rights that we respectfully oppose the rezoning of the property on
the SE corner of Riggs and Sossamon for the following reasons:
1. The Property Owners in this neighborhood bought their property fully aware that the undeveloped
property was zoned for more acre and a quarter residential lots, like the ones we live on. The new
buyer of the property was also fully aware of that when he purchased the property. The main reason
we have zoning laws is to protect citizen's home from this type of abuse. The fact that this buyer
appears to live in Gilbert and have multiple other commercial projects underway leads me to believe
he bought this property with the predetermined intent of rezoning it for commercial investment.
Corporations and investors shouldn't be allowed to come into neighborhoods and buy residential land
and flip it to commercial just to make a buck. I believe there are plenty of undeveloped commercial
real-estate properties in QC that can, and should be, purchased for commercial use. There are a lot of
families moving into QC and we need residentially zoned areas to stay residential to provide them
places to live.
2. This property isn't in someone else's back yard; it's in mine! I have a very clear and unobstructed view
of that lot from my back yard. I do not care to look at a 16-foot block wall or have bright commercial
lights lighting up my back yard. We choose to live on streets with no street lights for a reason, we like
to sit on our back porch and see the stars at night. The business's lights will directly impact my privacy
and tranquility I currently enjoy in my back yard.
3. The three families living on Indiana, just South of the proposed business plan, will be
disproportionately affected, significantly more so than anyone else. Those three homes will be
profoundly impacted if this project is allowed to go forward.
5
4. We do not need another RV storage facility in this area. Less than two miles away at 17635 E. Riggs Rd
is a Cube Smart RV Storage and just 0.3 miles South, on Sossamon and San Tan, is a commercial storage
lot for large equipment, AZ Storage Lot.
5. We do not want the additional traffic or noise. We can already hear the school bells and daily
announcements coming from Barney Newell School on that corner, as well as the marching band,
fireworks and football games from Casteel High. In addition, a new circle K was just built to the
immediate West of us on Power and Riggs. The increased traffic and noise have already negatively
impacted our quality of life. Our community has even suffered a motor vehicle accident fatality in that
intersection in the short time it has been open for business.
6. Lasty, there is a concern over what businesses could move into the commercial retail stores. There's
nothing to stop then from renting to a 24 hr. business or lease to cell phone tower companies; neither
of which should be a part of any residential neighborhood.
I have spent many hours knocking on doors, talking with neighbors and gathering petition signatures opposing
this rezoning proposal. So far, I have not found one family that supports this rezoning or has a personal need
for RV storage.
Please respect the rights of property owners who bought their homes with knowledge that this lot was zoned
for residential acre and a quarter properties.
Thank you for your time and attention to my letter, and to this project. Please be mindful that your decision
effects hundreds of rural, farming families like mine.
Respectfully,
Claire and Mike Morgan
480-710-9084
6
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, January 22, 2025 7:28 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
Sossaman and Riggs Project More signatures
Attachments:
more signatures.pdf
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the county.
Good evening Adam, Here are 15 more signatures of neighbors that oppose this project.
Thank you,
Nichole Dumke
7
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Jacki Arnell <jacki@arnellfam.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, January 22, 2025 3:36 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); PND PZAppeal
Subject:
Protest for Case # Z2022118-Patterson 5
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
c/oMaricopa County Planning
Subject: Protest for Case # Z2022118-Patterson 5
We DO NOT support this project, and these are the main reasons why:
We bought our home on Indiana Ave. with the understanding that the lot was zoned for residential. We would not
have bought this home had we known it could be changed to commercial, and we would have some big
monstrosity with lights blocking our view right next to our home.
We just spent a lot of money putting a pool in our backyard and having a commercial building next to our home will
bring down the value that we just put into our home. Not to mention how things have gone up in Queen Creek, we
would be priced out of the market to move somewhere else at this point.
We love the location but would no longer be happy here if we had anything commercial right next to our home. We
do not want to move our kids.
Getting out of our neighborhood is already a nightmare during morning and afternoon traffic, adding more to this
would make it hard to turn left out of our street. We have teen drivers and already worry about their safety, having
to turn left out of our street.
Indiana is essentially a private unpaved street and concerns for dust control would need to be addressed. We also
pay for the street repairs ourselves and if people used our cul-de-sac for a turn-around that would be infuriating.
There are already a lot of accidents at the Riggs and Sossaman intersections, adding anything commercial will only
make that worse.
The school across the street will be negatively impacted by this project.
The Residential properties to the south will be negatively affected having a commercial in front of their homes.
Their property values will be affected.
This project will not benefit our property values at all. We do not want to look at a storage facility or a brick wall.
The lighting would disrupt our neighborhood, and a more intense traffic study needs to be done.
We will fight to keep it zoned for R-43 for the sale of our homes and the community! We like to have homes and
families in this community. Zoning for C3 would be too aggressive and could be for so many uses that would bring
down the values and quality of our areas.
This project does not work for our community. Please take our concerns into consideration to help keep our
neighborhood safe and rural. This is why we moved here.
8
Thank you -
Todd and Jacki Arnell
jacki@arnellfam.com
602-350-6905
1
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Rachel Applegate (PND)
Sent:
Friday, January 31, 2025 6:59 AM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); Darren Gerard (PND)
Subject:
FW: Opposition letter for Case # Z2022118 Patterson-5
From: Nichole Dumke <ndumke40@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2025 1:08 PM
To: PND PZAppeal <PNDPZAppeal@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Opposition letter for Case # Z2022118 Patterson-5
Nichole & Dave Dumke 19213 E Indiana Ave. Queen Creek,AZ 85142 Parcel number 304-90- 408G I am the homeow ner that will be drastically affected by this project. I’m writing this letter to express my strong opposition to allowing parcel number
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please use caution when corresponding outside the county.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBanner End
Nichole & Dave Dumke
19213 E Indiana Ave.
Queen Creek,AZ 85142
Parcel number 304-90-408G
I am the homeowner that will be drastically affected by this project. I’m writing this letter to express my strong
opposition to allowing parcel number 304-90-408F to rezone to C-3 commercial with a Commercial use Permit
(CUPD) Overlay to allow for Commercial uses with outdoor trailer storage.
As a resident/property owner. The proposed property is right in front of us and 2 other houses. We live on a dirt
road that has a dead end.
The Community does not want to see the site rezone to commercial. The Community does not support any
commercial in between at Hawes or Sossaman. The community wants to preserve the one acre residential lots
along Riggs. Every meeting that they had with the neighborhood was a very clear “no” on this project. Here is
some of the community talking points:
1. C3 zoning is too intensive and allows many incompatible uses next to residential areas.
2. Access from Indiana Street for motorhomes, trailers, and deliveries would disrupt local homes.
3. Indiana Street is an unpaved, private road, raising concerns about dust control.
4. We do not support any access on Indiana Avenue; access should be limited to Sossaman Road.
5. The site is too tight for RV and trailer traffic, leading to circulation issues that will impact Riggs Road.
6. The proposed landscape buffer to the south is inadequate; it should be a minimum of 30 feet, which would
eliminate RV storage.
7. The existing RV storage on Riggs, with 15 to 16-foot canopies and underneath lights, is unacceptable.
8. The intersection of Riggs and Sossaman has a high accident rate, and we do not believe this project will
improve safety.
9. The school across the street will be negatively affected by this project.
10. The project's architectural design is substandard for the area and requires enhancements.
11. Residential properties to the south will be adversely impacted, leading to decreased property values.
12. This project will not improve our property values; we do not want to overlook a storage facility or a wall.
13. Proposed lighting will disrupt our neighborhood, and a more thorough traffic study is necessary due to the
number of existing accidents.
2
Please respect the rights of property owners who bought their homes with knowledge that this
lot was zoned for residential acre and a quarter properties. The General plan documents call for
Residential for this site. The Neighborhood is well organized and many connected individuals live in this
area.
Thank you for your time and attention to my letter, and to this project. Please be mindful that
your decision affects hundreds of rural, farming families like mine.
Respectfully,
Nichole and Dave Dumke
480-748-8114
3
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Rachel Applegate (PND)
Sent:
Friday, January 31, 2025 6:59 AM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND); Darren Gerard (PND)
Subject:
FW: Project case#Z2022118-Patterson
From: bruce ferenz <hbferenz@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2025 8:08 PM
To: PND PZAppeal <PNDPZAppeal@maricopa.gov>
Subject: Project case#Z2022118-Patterson
January 29, 2025 Sossamn/Riggs Project case#Z2022118-Patterson HELLO SUPERVISOR MARK STEWART, My name is Heather Fer enz and I am writing to you for your help. A recently purchased plot of land near my house is going to ruin our neighbor without
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBanner End
January 29, 2025
Sossamn/Riggs Project case#Z2022118-Patterson
HELLO SUPERVISOR MARK
STEWART,
My name is Heather Ferenz and I am writing to you for your help. A recently purchased
plot of land near my house is going to ruin our neighbor without your help. The new owner
is trying to change the zoning right next to a neighborhood so they can build a mini mall
and a storage facility. This area of land has been zoned residential for the last 30 yrs. I
have lived here. The city of Queen Creek has had such growth in that time. I have been so
grateful to still have that rural feel in my neck of the woods. Myself, my husband and all
my neighbors would like to keep commercial businesses downtown keeping our homes
quiet, low traffic and less lights. We already have two schools that cause high traffic and
noise during start and dismissal times. That is all the burden we can bear. Please help
us!!!!!!! We are all hoping greed will not win this battle. It is a battle because it will change
our lives and property values gravely. Hoping for a still bright future in the big city.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
4
Sincerely,
Heather Ferenz 19130 E. Via Park St Queen Creek Az 85142
480-329-7914
hbferenz@gmail.com
5
Adam Cannon (PND)
From:
Bruce F <hbferenz@gmail.com>
Sent:
Thursday, January 30, 2025 7:55 PM
To:
Adam Cannon (PND)
Subject:
zoning case Z2022118
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender. Please use caution when you receive messages from new senders.
Always validate the sender first.
January 29, 2025
HELLO SUPERVISOR MARK
STEWART,
My name is Heather Ferenz and I am writing to you for your help. A recently purchased
plot of land near my house is going to ruin our neighbor without your help. The new owner
is trying to change the zoning right next to a neighborhood so they can build a mini mall
and a storage facility. This area of land has been zoned residential for the last 30 yrs. I
have lived here. The city of Queen Creek has had such growth in that time. I have been so
grateful to still have that rural feel in my neck of the woods. Myself, my husband and all
my neighbors would like to keep commercial businesses downtown keeping our homes
quiet, low traffic and less lights. We already have two schools that cause high traffic and
noise during start and dismissal times. That is all the burden we can bear. Please help
us!!!!!!! We are all hoping greed will not win this battle. It is a battle because it will change
our lives and property values gravely. Hoping for a still bright future in the big city.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Heather Ferenz 19130 E. Via Park St Queen Creek Az 85142
480-329-7914
6
hbferenz@gmail.com
S Mandarin Dr
S Grapefruit Dr
S 196th St
E Natalie
Wy
S 198th St
S 195th
S
t
E Mews Rd
E Via
Park St
E Country
Meadows Dr
E Mews
Rd
E Lawndale Pl
S 188th
St
E Vallejo
St
S 196th
Pl
E Via
Park St
E Via De
Olivos
S 187th
Wy
S 197th St
S 188th
Pl
E Karsten
Dr
S 191st
St
E Cherry
Hills Pl
S Grapefruit Dr
S 198th Pl
E Peg
a
sus
D
r
E Mews Rd
S 196th
Wy
S 197th
Wy
S 195th
Wy
S 193rd Wy
E Melissa Pl
E Vallejo
St
S 196th Wy
S 190th
Pl
E Cherry Hills Pl
S 193rd Wy
E Flintlock Dr
S 197th
St
E Flintlock Dr
S 195th Pl
S 195th Pl
S 193rd
Pl
S 197th Pl
E Indiana
Ave
E Chestnut Dr
E Indiana
Ave
S 189th St
S 192nd Pl
S 195th
St
S
198th
Pl
S 194t
h St
S 187th Pl
E Lawndale
Pl
S 195th St
S 193rd St
E Happy Rd
E Via
Park St
S 186th Pl
S 187th St
E Via
Park St
E Country
Meadows Dr
E Indiana
Ave
S 191st St
S 190th St
E Karsten Dr
E Mary Ann Wy
E Karsten Dr
E Vallejo
St
E Cloud Rd
Sossaman Rd
San Tan Blvd
Riggs Rd
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: \\gisteam.maricopa.gov\workgroup\patrick.dongarra\PND\OppositionCases\Z2022118\Z2022118_Alternate.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 1/27/2025
Ü
575
0
575
287.5
Feet
Case Opposition
Z2022118
Legend
Parcel
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Opposition Parcels
S 192nd Pl
E Indiana Ave
S 193rd Wy
E Indiana Ave
Sossaman Rd
Riggs Rd
304
89
066H
304
89
068G
304
89
068H
304
90
016D
304
90
017D
304
90
408B
304
90
408C
304
90
358B
304
90
016F
304
90
408F
304
90
438E
304
90
408G
304
89
946A
304
90
016A
304
90
358A
304
90
016G
304
90
398Q
304
90
077D
304
90
077C
304
89
887B
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: \\gisteam.maricopa.gov\workgroup\patrick.dongarra\PND\OppositionCases\Z2022118\Z2022118.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 1/27/2025
Ü
90
0
90
45
Feet
Opposition and Support
Z2022118
Parcel
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Opposition Parcel
Supporting Parcel
All Opposition Parcels
All Supporting Parcels
300' Buffer Interior
300' Buffer Selection
Eligible parcels: 23
Supporting parcels: 0
Opposition parcels: 8
Supporting parcels sq ft: 0
Opposition parcels sq ft: 157,537
Subject parcels sq ft: 221,834
All area inside the 300' buffer sq ft:
778,411
All area inside the 300' buffer -
excluding subject parcel,
ROW and excluded parcels sq ft:
556,577
No-response parcels sq ft: 0
Super Majority opposed parcel acres:
40%
Super Majority opposed parcel number:
35%