03. Z2021007 PZ Report

Maricopa County — Planning & Zoning (2023-10-05)

View PDF Item 3 Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 144581 characters
Z2021007 
Page 1 of 1 
 
 
Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department 
 
 
Case: 
Z2021007 – Montana Tractor & Plow Company 
 
 
 
 
 
Hearing Date: 
October 5, 2023 (tabled September 9, 2021) 
 
Supervisor District: 
3 
 
 
 
  
 
Applicant/Owner: 
Montana Tractor & Plow Company 
 
Request: 
Zone Change from Rural-43 to C-3 CUPD  
 
  
 
Site Location: 
APN 210-09-019 @ 905 W. Happy Valley Rd. Generally located at the 
northwest corner of 9th Ave. and Happy Valley Rd. in the north Phoenix area 
 
Discussion: 
This case was tabled by the Commission on 9/9/21 by a vote of 6-1 
(commissioner Arnett dissenting). Staff requests the case be moved off 
the table.  Once un-tabled staff will instruct the applicant to provide an 
updated list of surrounding property owners and other case materials 
necessary to conduct public notice. Once the material is received the 
matter will be scheduled for the next available Commission public hearing 
after proper public notice. 
 
 
 
Historic case material is attached for reference. A new staff report packet 
will be prepared when the case comes back before the Commission at 
public hearing. 
 
 
Presented by: 
Darren V. Gerard, AICP, Planning Manager 
 
Attachments: 
Z2021007 staff report packet (34 pages) 
 
Z2021007 handout (27 pages) 
 
9/9/21 P&Z minutes (21 pages) 
 
Z2021007 revised site plan (1 page) 
 
Z2021007 revised narrative (4 pages)

Z2021007 
Page 1 of 12 
Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department 
 
 
 
Case: 
Z2021007 - Montana Tractor & Plow Company  
 
 
 
 
Hearing Date: 
September 9, 2021 
 
Supervisor District: 
3 
 
 
 
  
 
Applicant: 
Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo 
 
Owner: 
Montana Tractor and Plow Company 
   
Requests: 
Zone Change from Rural-43 to C-3 CUPD  
 
  
 
Site Location: 
Generally located approx. 350 ft. east of the NEC of Happy Valley 
Rd. and 11th Ave. alignment in the Phoenix area. 
 
  
Site Size: 
Approx. 4.7 acres 
 
Density: 
N/A 
 
County Island:  
Yes (City of Phoenix) 
 
 
County Plan: 
Rural Development Area (0-1 d.u./ac) 
 
Municipal Plan: 
Phoenix – Commercial/Commerce/Business Park uses  
 
Municipal Comments: 
Yes, City of Phoenix   
 
Support/Opposition: 
Seven (7) letters of opposition  
 
Recommendation: 
Approval as conditional zoning per MCZO, Art. 304.6 with a Plan of 
Development and commercial construction permits to be 
completed within six months of Board approval or the zoning may 
be considered for revocation.

Z2021007 
Page 2 of 12 
Project Summary: 
 
1. 
The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 4.7 acres from Rural-43 to C-3 with a 
CUPD overlay in order to permit retail sales of tractors and other agricultural implements. 
The subject property is located on the north side of Happy Valley Road east of 11th 
Avenue in the Phoenix area. Primary access to the site is via Happy Valley Road. The site 
is encumbered by 33’ patent easements on the east, west and north sides of the site. The 
applicant is proposing to abandon these easements in order to facilitate further 
development of the site.  
 
2. 
The subject site is currently zoned for Rural 43 land uses. Currently, the property is being 
used for tractor and equipment sales, which is not an allowed land use within the Rural 
43 zoning district. Also, development on the site consists of a building for retail sales, a 
concrete pad for the assembling of tractors and various equipment storage structures, 
all of which have been constructed without a building permit. A notice of violation is 
present on the property (ref.  #V201902005) for 1) the existing land use without proper 
zoning entitlement and 2) development of the site without benefit of issued construction 
permits. A compliance agreement with the property owner has been executed setting a 
deadline date to bring the property into compliance by October 4, 2021. 
 
As the first step towards bringing the property into compliance, the applicant is 
requesting to rezone the property to C-3 CUPD to allow the use of the property for 
equipment sales and service. However, rezoning of the property is only the first step 
towards compliance. Following the rezoning of the property, the property owner will be 
required to submit an application for the approval of a Plan of Development (POD), 
followed by an application for the approval of construction permits for all site work, 
fencing, buildings and structures, etc. Until a POD and permits are approved for the site 
the property remains in violation. If the zoning of the property is not approved, the current 
use of the property for equipment sales and rentals will need to cease and desist and all 
non-permitted structures on the site will need to be removed. 
 
To date, fines associated with the violation are current, allowing the zoning case to 
proceed. However, investigative fees, an additional noncompliance fine, and accruing 
daily noncompliance fines will become due and owing after the deadline.   
 
3. 
The applicant has applied for a Commercial Unit Planned Development (CUPD) overlay 
as part of this zone change. The CUPD will restrict the uses of the site to only allow farm-
related equipment rentals and sales, and will vary the standard for screening. The 
following table lists the proposed C-3 CUPD development standards. 
 
Regulation 
 C-3 Base Standards 
Proposed C-3 CUPD 
Standards 
Minimum Lot Area 
6,000 sq. ft. 
6,000 sq. ft. 
Minimum Lot Width 
60-feet 
60-feet 
Maximum Lot Coverage 
60% 
60% 
Maximum Building Height 
40-feet 
40-feet 
Minimum Front Yard Setback 
(south property line) 
10-feet 
10-feet 
Minimum Street Side Setback 
(east property line) 
10-feet 
10-feet

Z2021007 
Page 3 of 12 
 
 
4. 
The surrounding area is partially undeveloped with uses comprised of a mix of low-density 
single-family residential development (0-1 d.u./ac.), low intensity commercial uses, and 
light industrial uses as shown on the aerial below.  
 
2021 Aerial Images 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Minimum Interior Side Yard 
Setback (west property line) 
10-feet 
10-feet 
Minimum Rear Yard Setback 
(north property line) 
25-feet 
25-feet 
Screening 
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 or residential 
zone boundary. 
A solid wall, not less than 
eight feet in height, shall 
be required along and 
adjacent to any side or 
rear property line abutting 
any rural or residential 
zone boundary.

Z2021007 
Page 4 of 12 
PlanNet Image 
 
 
Existing On-Site and Adjacent Zoning / Land Use: 
 
5. 
On-site: 
 
Rural-43 / Commercial Tractor sales 
North: 
Rural-43 / Vacant  
South: 
Happy Valley Rd. then Rural-43 / Vacant 
Southwest: 
Happy Valley Rd. then SUP for Light Industrial outdoor storage 
East: 
Rural-43 / Vacant 
West: 
Rural-43/ Single-family residence 
 
 
Utilities and Services: 
 
6. 
Water: 
 
Private Well 
Wastewater: 
Septic 
School District: 
Deer Valley Unified School District 
Fire: 
North County 
Police:  
MCSO  
 
Right-of-Way: 
 
7. 
Happy Valley Road is in the City of Phoenix jurisdiction and future classification and 
improvements to the right of way are subject to approval by the City of Phoenix. 
 
Street Name 
Half-width Existing R/W 
Half-width Proposed R/W 
Jurisdiction 
Happy Valley Rd 
40-feet 
NA 
City of Phoenix 
 
Adopted Plans: 
 
8. 
Vision 2030 (adopted January 2016): The subject site is located outside of County Area 
Plans. Unincorporated areas outside of Area Plans are designated as Rural Development 
Area (0-1 d.u./ac.) the subject site is also located within the City of Phoenix General Plan.

Z2021007 
Page 5 of 12 
9. 
Phoenix General Plan 2015 (adopted March 2015): The site is designated for 
Commercial/Commerce/Business Park uses, which is consistent with the proposed retail 
sale of tractors and other agricultural implements. The City of Phoenix provided 
comments related to the need for right of way dedication and did not express opposition 
to the requested rezoning of the property.  
 
Public Participation Summary: 
 
10. 
The applicant complied with the Maricopa County Public Participation Process with the 
required posting of the property and notification to the adjacent property owners within 
300’ of the subject site. The public participation generated seven (7) letters of opposition 
representing eight (8) individuals. Seven of the opposition letters are located within 300’ 
of the subject site.  
 
Per Section 304.2.4 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance (MCZO), if 20% of the 
owners by number and by area, of all property within 300 feet of the proposed change, 
file a protest, such a change shall not be made except by a three-fourths vote of all 
members of the Board of Supervisors.  According to the opposition letters received, 35% 
of the owners representing 39% of the acreage within a 300’ radius of the site have 
protested the requested rezoning. Therefore, this level of opposition has triggered 
requirement for a supermajority (four affirmative) vote of the Board for C-3 CUPD zoning 
approval. A map displaying the location of the opposition has been attached. 
 
11. 
The applicant’s Final Citizen Participation Results Report states they conducted one 
virtual meeting on March 18, 2021 and one neighborhood meeting at the site on April 13, 
2021. The report states that the residents are generally concerned about the business 
operations generating excessive noise, traffic and dust adjacent to their properties. The 
applicant has stated the property owners will take measures to limit the dust and noise 
emanating from the site. Staff has crafted conditions to address the concerns of adjacent 
property owners (see Conditions e and f).  
 
Outstanding Concerns from Reviewing Agencies: 
 
12. 
The City of Phoenix requests the applicant dedicate 65’ of ROW for the north half of  
Happy Valley Road and construct the north half street with a minimum of 52’ of paving, 
curb, gutter and detached 5’ min sidewalk with appropriate pavement tapers and 
striping plans submitted to the City. The city is also requesting that the site plan submitted 
to the City note that the driveway will be future median restricted. Staff believes the 
request by the City of Phoenix is reasonable to permit access onto City maintained roads 
staff has offered condition ‘i’ to ensure compliance with the Request by the City of 
Phoenix. 
 
13. 
This site is a part of a four-parcel request for annexation into the City of Phoenix that 
appears to have been submitted August 2021. 
 
Staff Analysis: 
 
14. 
Staff has concerns with the current development of the site. The property owner has 
continued to develop the site without zoning entitlements or building clearances. Despite 
efforts from staff to bring the site into compliance by suspending fines and extending

Z2021007 
Page 6 of 12 
compliance deadlines, staff does not believe the granting of this request will fully address 
the violations on the site. On November 15, 2019 County Staff issued a Notice of Order to 
Comply to the property owner and added the following image of the site to the case 
file. Staff has also added a series of aerials showing the continuous development on the 
site after the property owner was notified of the zoning violation. 
 
 
 
2019 Aerial 
 
2020 Aerial 
 
2021 Aerial 
 
15. 
Since the original violation notification in November 2019, the property owner applied for 
a Pre-Application meeting in May 2020 in which he was advised to request a rezone and 
plan of development on the site. Despite the violation (and original compliance 
deadline) the applicant did not apply for the subject rezone until February of 2021. The 
applicant has been advised of the development standards; however, the property 
owner has continued to exacerbate the noncompliance on the site contrary to the 
direction of staff and contrary to the proposed project information contained in the 
narrative report.  The narrative report states that the project has water hauled to the site, 
but upon approval of the rezone a private well will be established. A site inspection 
conducted by staff on August 14, 2021 shows the site is extracting water without known 
consent from a nearby fire hydrant which may affect fire services in the area. 
Additionally, the property owner has established the employee parking within a

Z2021007 
Page 7 of 12 
residential ingress/egress easement that may prevent the use of the easement of 
adjacent residents and emergency services. The Zoning Ordinance prohibits commercial 
parking design that results in vehicular traffic backing into a street. See photos taken by 
staff on August 14, 2021. 
 
Designated Employee Parking in Easement  
 
 
Path to Employee Parking

Z2021007 
Page 8 of 12 
Water Connection from Fire Hydrant 
 
 
Water Supplied to Storage Tank

Z2021007 
Page 9 of 12 
2021 Aerial with Labels 
 
 
16. 
None of the development that has occurred to date has had the benefit of issued 
clearances or permits. Staff does not have faith that the property owner will properly 
develop the site with required permits. Therefore, staff is recommending zoning approval 
be conditioned, setting a timeframe for completion of permits to establish the use and 
bring the property into compliance with development standards and stipulated 
conditions of approval (see Condition h). 
 
17. 
The proposed C-3 CUPD zoning is appropriate for the site. It is located and accessed via 
an arterial road, Happy Valley Rd.  The City of Phoenix General Plan calls for commercial 
land uses. Importantly the City provided comment (email to the applicant copied to 
MCDOT, and attached to this report) with regard to half-street dedication and access 
improvement. The City did not comment with regard to their general plan land use nor 
express any opposition to the requested C-3 CUPD zoning.  However, the Plan of 
Development (POD) earlier submitted by the applicant was not in an approvable form.  
A POD cannot be approved concurrently with the zoning.

Z2021007 
Page 10 of 12 
18. 
Staff is of the opinion that the property owner has not provided a compelling justification 
for POD approval at this time.  They have not provided a site plan demonstrating any 
screening/buffering for adjacent residential properties. Therefore, Staff is recommending 
a condition of approval requiring a landscape buffer be maintained adjacent to any 
side or rear property line abutting any rural or residential zone boundary (see Condition 
d.1). 
 
Recommendation: 
 
19. 
For the reasons outlined in this report, staff recommends the Commission motion for 
Approval of Z2021007subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘l’: 
 
a. 
Development of the site shall be in conformance with the Narrative Report entitled 
“Team Tractor Ranch”, consisting of 4 pages, dated August 16, 2021, and stamped 
received August 16, 2021, except as modified by the following conditions. 
 
b. 
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply: 
 
1. 
Without the submittal of a precise plan of development, no development 
approval is inferred by this review, including, but not limited to number of 
proposed building lots/units, drainage design, access and roadway 
alignments. These items will be addressed as development plans progress 
and are submitted to the County for further review and/or entitlement. 
2. 
A traffic impact study (TIS) must be submitted with future entitlement 
(preliminary plat or POD) application(s). 
3. 
Happy Valley Road is within the jurisdiction of the City of Phoenix. The 
applicant will be responsible for coordinating with the City to review any 
traffic 
impact, 
right-of-way 
dedication, 
permitting 
or 
roadway 
improvement requirements. 
4. 
Engineering review of re-zone cases is conceptual in nature. All 
development and engineering design shall be in conformance with 
Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies 
and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT 
Roadway Design Manual; and current engineering policies, standards and 
best practices at the time of application for construction. 
 
c. 
The CUPD overlay is applied to restrict the use of the site to farm-related 
equipment leasing, rentals, and sales and similar uses as approved by the County 
Zoning Administrator, but not including equipment customarily used for heavy 
construction. 
 
d. 
The following C-3 CUPD standard shall apply: 
 
1. 
Site Screening: 8’ CMU block wall shall be required along and adjacent to 
any side or rear property line abutting any rural or residential zone 
boundary. In addition, there shall be a 10’ strip of landscaping provided 
along the exterior of said wall with 24” box trees planted 20’ apart on 
center. Landscaping shall be maintained.

Z2021007 
Page 11 of 12 
e. 
Required parking spaces, tractor/equipment display areas and the primary site 
access shall be concrete or paved or may be alternatively surfaced with ABC 
material rolled and compressed with a liquid asphaltic binder/emulsifier. 
 
f. 
Outdoor storage areas and internal driveways shall be concrete or paved, 
storage areas may be alternatively surfaced with ABC material. 
 
g. 
Administrative approval of a Plan of Development will be required prior to 
approval and issuance of construction permits to develop and establish use of the 
site. Prior to issuance of a building permit, written confirmation will be required from 
the emergency fire protection jurisdiction having authority that the facility has 
been designed in accordance with their regulations and requirements, and that 
emergency fire protection service will be provided to the facility. Prior to issuance 
of the certificate of occupancy, local fire protection jurisdiction review and 
approval will be required. Prior to issuance of a building permit, written 
confirmation will be provided that the site is served by a public water system. 
 
h. 
C-3 CUPD zoning approval per Z2021007 is conditional in accordance with 
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance, Article 304.6. The property owner shall obtain 
administrative approval of a Plan of Development and shall have completed all 
required construction permitting within six months of Board approval of Z2021007 
or the C-3 CUPD zoning may be scheduled for public hearing to consider 
revocation.  
 
i. 
Prior to Zoning Clearance for construction permits, the applicant shall provide a 
copy of City of Phoenix approvals to Maricopa County Planning and 
Development Department for the right-of-way improvements to Happy Valley Rd. 
 
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, Article 304.6. 
 
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, the property shall revert to the zoning that existed on the date 
of application.  It is, therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due 
to the failure to comply with any conditions, does not reduce any rights that 
existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or possess the property and 
that there would be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held 
on the date of application due to such revocation of the Zone Change.  The Zone 
Change enhances the value of the property above its value as of the date the 
Zone Change is granted and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value 
of the property as if the Zone Change had never been granted.

Z2021007 
Page 12 of 12 
 
 
 
Presented by: 
Jose Castañeda, Planner 
Reviewed by: 
Matthew Holm, AICP, Planning Supervisor 
 
Attachments: 
Case Map (1 page) 
 
Narrative Report (4 pages) 
 
MCDOT comments (5 pages) 
 
MCESD comments (1 page) 
 
DPR comments (2 pages) 
 
Letters of opposition (8 pages) 
 
Map of Opposition (1Page)

M
ARICO
PA CO
UN
TY
/
M
aricopa County Planning & Developm
ent - Phoenix, AZ
3
G
ross Acres: 5 approx.
G
enerated August 23, 2021 16:58 PM
Z2021007
Application Nam
e:
Legal Description
M
O
NTANA TRACTO
R & PLO
W
 CO
M
PANY
Applicant
Case Address
T04N R03E 6, T4N R03E 06
BRIAN G
REATHO
USE for Burch & Cracchiolo
912 W
 HAPPY VALLEY Rd
Applicant Phone/Em
ail
Parcel Prim
ary:210-09-019
602.234.9903
BG
REATHO
USE@
BCATTO
RNEYS.CO
M
PHO
ENIX AZ 85085
M
ap scale 1:1,545
Supervisor District No.
ZO
NE CHANG
E TO
 C-3 FO
R RETAIL/RENTAL O
F TRACTO
RS AND RELA
TED EQ
UIPM
ENT
5.3585 in

C-3 CUPD Narrative Report  
FOR 
 
Team Tractor Ranch 
 
NORTHWEST CORNER OF 9TH AVENUE AND HAPPY VALLEY ROAD  
   
 
 
Case No. Z2021007 
1st Submittal: January 19, 2021 
2nd Submittal:  March 11, 2021 
3rd Submittal: August 16, 2021

2 
 
PURPOSE OF REQUEST 
 
This request is for a Zone Change from Rural-43 to C-3 (General Commercial) with 
Commercial Unit Plan of Development Overlay (“CUPD”) on approximately 4.7 acres located at 
the northwest corner of Happy Valley Road and the 9th Avenue alignment in Maricopa County 
(the “Site”).  Team Tractor Ranch (“TTR”) requests this Site be rezoned from RU-43 to C-3 CUPD 
to allow the existing business (Team Tractor Ranch) to continue its business operations on the Site 
under the regulations of the C-3 Zoning District, as modified through the CUPD Overlay.   
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 
 
TTR sells and leases agricultural tractors, implements, and farm supplies. The Permitted 
Uses on the Site will be Tractor and Tractor Equipment, Sales and Leasing, and similar uses as 
approved by the County Zoning Administrator.  All other uses listed under the C-3 Zoning District 
shall be prohibited on the Site.   
 
TTR’s existing improvements include: one existing building with a customer counter and 
administrative offices, tractor and implements display area, customer and employee parking areas 
on asphalt millings, and rural agrarian fencing along the Happy Valley Road.  Ingress and egress 
to the Site is located along Happy Valley Road. 
 
The proposed improvements on the Site include:  new asphalt or concrete paved parking 
lot and tractor/equipment display area that will minimize dust, new water well and septic system, 
new 8’ masonry wall surrounding the properties west, north, and east boundaries, and new 3’ 
parking lot screen wall along Happy Valley Road.  It is intended that the property improvements 
comply with the C-3 Development Standards and Regulations. 
 
 
TTR business hours are 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Friday and 8:00 AM to 
12:00 PM on Saturday.  Employees are not scheduled or permitted to work afterhours. The existing 
and proposed building are located within the central portion of the Site and there is a Tractor and 
Tractor Equipment Display Area located north of Happy Valley Road.  The employee and visitor 
parking area is located between the Display Area and the building on the Site.  The area north of 
the building is where the water well, sewer septic system, and vendor delivery area are located.  
Signage will comply with Section 14 of the MCZO.  
 
RELATIONSHIP TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES 
 
 
TTR has operated on the Site since Fall of 2019.  The Site is surrounded on the west by an 
existing business and storage yard (The Pond Gnome), two vacant residential lots and an existing 
residential home abutting the northwest corner of the Site.  To the north and east are vacant 
residential lots.  There is an existing single-family mobile home adjacent to the northeast corner 
of the Site, which has access along the 9th Ave alignment via an existing patent easement.  TTR’s 
development will not impact the existing access on the east boundary of the Site.   
 
The Site is within the City of Phoenix’s Planning Area.  Phoenix’s General Plan Land Use 
Map designates the Site as “Commercial / Commerce Park.”  The proposed C-3 zoning is

3 
 
compatible with the City of Phoenix designation.  The County Comprehensive Plan designates the 
Site “Rural/Residential 0-1 du/ac / Natural Desert.”     
LOCATION AND ACCESSIBILITY 
 
Happy Valley Road is currently under construction to be widened.  Electrical facilities are 
available to the Site by APS.  Water is provided to the Site via an above ground tank with water 
hauled into the Site.  TTR intends to continue the existing water service until the City of Phoenix 
installs a waterline in the future.  Further, a septic sewer system will serve the Site until services 
are made available from the City of Phoenix.   
 
CIRCULATION SYSTEM 
 
Access to and from the Site are provided via driveway along Happy Valley Road.  The 
onsite circulation and parking layout have been designed to provide a safe and convenient 
customer experience.  Customer and employee parking is provided along the south side of the 
building.     
 
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE (PHASING) 
 
 
TTR is an existing business that does not conform to the Site’s existing zoning.  We are 
processing this Zone Change Application pursuant to a Compliance Agreement (V201902005).  
We intend to process this Zone Change request then Construction Documents and Permitting to 
bring the Site into compliance with County requirements.  Site improvements are anticipated to 
begin by Fall 2021.   
 
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES 
 
There are no adjacent or nearby community parks or amenities (other than hiking and off-
road vehicle recreation opportunities vacant open space areas).  The nearest public park, amenities 
and recreation (other than hiking and off-road vehicle recreation) is located approximately 3.5 
miles southeast of the Site (Reach 11 Sports Complex).  The Site is located in the Deer Valley 
Unified School District.  The nearest school is Norterra Canyon Elementary located approximately 
1.6 miles northwest of the Site.  The Site is surrounding by mostly vacant desert land.  The TTR 
development will not have any negative impacts on any school district, parks or other amenities in 
the area.  
 
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 
 
Water:  
Private Water Well  
 
Sewer:  
Onsite Septic 
 
Police:  
Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department 
 
Fire: 
 
North County

4 
 
Refuse: 
Private Refuse Company 
 
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE 
 
The C-3 RUPD Development Standards Comparison Table is provided below: 
REGULATION 
BASE ZONING DISTRICT 
REGULATIONS (C-3) 
PROPOSED ZONING  
REGULATIONS (C-3 RUPD)  
Height  
40’ 
40’ 
Min. Front Yard  
10’ 
 
10’ 
Min. Side Yard  
10’  
10’ 
Min. Rear Yard 
25’  
25’ 
Min. Lot Area 
6,000 sq. ft. 
6,000 sq. ft. 
Min. Lot Width  
60’ 
60’ 
Max. Lot Coverage 
60% 
60% 
 
CONCLUSION 
 
This Zone Change Application establishes uses and other criteria that are appropriate for 
the Site and compatible with the surrounding area.  We request the County’s Approval.

From:
Rajanikanth Thoutam (DOT)
To:
Brian Greathouse
Cc:
Darren V. Gérard (PND); Jose Castaneda (PND); Sean Michael; Leslie Chatburn
Subject:
RE: TIS for Maricopa County Rezoning Case #Z2021007 - NWC Happy Valley Rd & 9th Ave alignment
Date:
Monday, August 2, 2021 10:44:24 AM
Attachments:
image003.png
Hi Brian,
As Happy Valley Rd is under COP jurisdiction, county requires that the developer address below city
comments and provide a copy of approvals to P&D. MCDOT has no comments on the TIS.
 
Kind Regards
 
Did I provide excellent service? Tell us how we are doing.
 
Rajanikanth (Raj) Thoutam, P.E.
Traffic Design Branch Manager
Transportation Systems Management
O: 602.506.8940 ▪ F: 602.506.8758
Maricopa County Department of Transportation
2901 W. Durango Street ▪ Phoenix, AZ 85009
Rajanikanth.thoutam@maricopa.gov
Providing Connections that Improve People’s Lives
 
From: Brian Greathouse <bgreathouse@bcattorneys.com> 
Sent: Monday, August 2, 2021 10:24 AM
To: Rajanikanth Thoutam (DOT) <Rajanikanth.Thoutam@Maricopa.Gov>
Cc: Darren V. Gérard (PND) <Darren.Gerard@Maricopa.Gov>; Jose Castaneda (PND)
<Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov>; Sean Michael <sean@teamtractor.com>; Leslie Chatburn
<lchatburn@bcattorneys.com>
Subject: RE: TIS for Maricopa County Rezoning Case #Z2021007 - NWC Happy Valley Rd & 9th Ave
alignment
 
Good morning Raj,
 
I was informed by PDD that our rezoning case has grown inactive.  Per the below chain of emails, we
have not received comments from MCDOT on the TIS.  Please let me know if you need me to send
you a copy of the TIS.  I understand that City of Phx Streets Transportation Dept sent you their
comments on April 8, 2021. 
 
Thank you,
Brian
 
Brian Greathouse

(602) 234-9903
 
From: Christopher Kowalsky <chris.kowalsky@phoenix.gov> 
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 6:47 PM
To: Brian Greathouse <bgreathouse@bcattorneys.com>; Maja Brkovic <maja.brkovic@phoenix.gov>
Cc: Jackson, Mike <mjackson@cecinc.com>; Ricki Horowitz <rhorowitz@bcattorneys.com>; Jacque
Collard <jcollard@bcattorneys.com>; Rajanikanth Thoutam (DOT)
<Rajanikanth.Thoutam@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: RE: TIS for Maricopa County Rezoning Case #Z2021007 - NWC Happy Valley Rd & 9th Ave
alignment
 
Brian,
City responses were provided back to MCDOT, Raj Thoutam on April 8 CC’d on this response.
The following is what is required:
 
We would request that the County require that development to dedicate 65’ of ROW for the north
half of Happy Valley Road and construct the north half street with a minimum of 52’ of paving, curb,
gutter and detached 5’ min sidewalk with appropriate pavement tapers and striping plans submitted
to the City. The Driveway shall be constructed to a 30’ COP Std Dtl. P1255-2 wing type.  
Also, please note that our City Street Classification Map calls for a future median within Happy Valley
Road. We would request that the site plan  note that the driveway will be future median restricted. 
Developer would be required to submit Civil plans to the City for review and improvements within City
jurisdiction.
 
Thanks,
Chris
 
From: Brian Greathouse <bgreathouse@bcattorneys.com> 
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 6:21 PM
To: Matthew Wilson <matthew.wilson@phoenix.gov>; Christopher Kowalsky
<chris.kowalsky@phoenix.gov>; Maja Brkovic <maja.brkovic@phoenix.gov>
Cc: Jackson, Mike <mjackson@cecinc.com>; Ricki Horowitz <rhorowitz@bcattorneys.com>; Jacque
Collard <jcollard@bcattorneys.com>
Subject: RE: TIS for Maricopa County Rezoning Case #Z2021007 - NWC Happy Valley Rd & 9th Ave
alignment
 
Chris and Maja,
Can you provide an update on the TIS review?  ETA?  We’re at the end of our Staff Review of the
rezoning and this is one of the last steps to check off.
 
Thank you,

Brian
 
Brian Greathouse
(602) 234-9903
[bcattorneys.com]
 
From: Brian Greathouse 
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 12:17 PM
To: Matthew Wilson <matthew.wilson@phoenix.gov>; Christopher Kowalsky
<chris.kowalsky@phoenix.gov>; Maja Brkovic <maja.brkovic@phoenix.gov>
Cc: Jackson, Mike <mjackson@cecinc.com>; Ricki Horowitz <rhorowitz@bcattorneys.com>; Jacque
Collard <jcollard@bcattorneys.com>
Subject: RE: TIS for Maricopa County Rezoning Case #Z2021007 - NWC Happy Valley Rd & 9th Ave
alignment
 
Matt,
Yes – County development.  Raj is point of contact at MCDOT.
 
Brian Greathouse
(602) 234-9903
[bcattorneys.com]
 
From: Matthew Wilson <matthew.wilson@phoenix.gov> 
Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 2:25 PM
To: Brian Greathouse <bgreathouse@bcattorneys.com>; Christopher Kowalsky
<chris.kowalsky@phoenix.gov>; Maja Brkovic <maja.brkovic@phoenix.gov>
Cc: Jackson, Mike <mjackson@cecinc.com>; Ricki Horowitz <rhorowitz@bcattorneys.com>; Jacque
Collard <jcollard@bcattorneys.com>
Subject: RE: TIS for Maricopa County Rezoning Case #Z2021007 - NWC Happy Valley Rd & 9th Ave
alignment
 
Brian,
 
Thank you.  Chris and Maja will take point on this review.  Is there a City of Phoenix KIVA number
with this?  I assume not since it is a County project.
 
Is Raj the point of contact at the County?
 
Thank you,

Matt Wilson
602-262-7436
 
From: Brian Greathouse <bgreathouse@bcattorneys.com> 
Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 2:16 PM
To: Streets P STR <streetsp@phoenix.gov>; Matthew Wilson <matthew.wilson@phoenix.gov>
Cc: Jackson, Mike <mjackson@cecinc.com>; Ricki Horowitz <rhorowitz@bcattorneys.com>; Jacque
Collard <jcollard@bcattorneys.com>
Subject: TIS for Maricopa County Rezoning Case #Z2021007 - NWC Happy Valley Rd & 9th Ave
alignment
 
Good afternoon,
 
My Client, Team Tractor Ranch, is processing a rezoning case within Maricopa County.  We received
the following comment from County Planning Staff:
 
You need to contact City of Phoenix since Happy Valley Rd. right-of-way belongs to them and
verify if they want a traffic impact study or if a traffic impact statement will suffice. Contact
the City of Phoenix via email at: StreetsP@phoenix.gov If the city transportation office okays
your study/statement and is ok with the 55’ setback for R/W from the centerline of Happy
Valley then please forward that acknowledgment to me so I can include it in the case file.
 
Attached is our Traffic Impact Statement prepared by SWTE.  There are very minimal trips generated
by the Team Tractor Ranch business – 5 PM Peak Hour Trips. 
 
Per the above County Staff comment, can you please review the attached TIS and reply back stating
the City of Phoenix has no objections and the 55’ setback for R/W from the centerline of Happy
Valley is sufficient?
 
Please let me know if you have any questions.
 
Best,
Brian
 
Brian Greathouse
Direct:        602.234.9903
E-mail:        bgreathouse@bcattorneys.com
Secretary:  Jacque Collard
Direct:        602.234.8727
E-mail:        jcollard@bcattorneys.com

[bcattorneys.com] [nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]
BURCH & CRACCHIOLO, P.A.
1850 North Central, Suite 1700 | Phoenix, AZ 85004
602.274.7611 Main Office | 602.234.0341 Fax
www.bcattorneys.com [bcattorneys.com] [nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com] 
 
This message is confidential and may contain privileged information.  Only the intended recipient is authorized to
read or utilize the information contained in this e-mail.  If you receive this message in error, please discard the
message and advise the sender by reply e-mail or by phone.
 
 
[EXTERNAL - This email originated from an external sender. Do not click on links or open
attachments unless you were expecting this message from the sender.]
[EXTERNAL - This email originated from an external sender. Do not click on links or open
attachments unless you were expecting this message from the sender.]

Water and Waste Management 
Division 
Subdivision Infrastructure & 
Planning Program 
1001 N. Central Avenue #150 
Phoenix, Arizona 85004 
Phone: (602) 506-0376 
Fax: (602) 506-5813  
TDD 602 506 6704 
Maricopa County 
Environmental Services Department  
DATE: 
February 8, 2021 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TO : 
Jose Castaneda, Planning & Development Dept. 
 
 
Senior Planner 
 
 
 
FROM: 
Souren Naradikian, P.E. 
 
 
Senior Civil Engineer 
 
SUBJECT: 
Rezoning from RU-43 to C-3.  
Z2021007 
 
The Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) has received 
documentation request for the above project. This request is for a Zone Change from 
Rural-43 to C-3 (General Commercial) on approximately 4.7 acres located at the 
northwest corner of Happy Valley Road and the 9th Avenue alignment in Maricopa 
County. 
 
Based on the submitted documentation, this project is Rezoning to C-3 to allow the 
existing business (Team Tractor Ranch) to continue its business operations on the Site 
under the regulations of the C-3 Zoning District. TTR sells and leases tractors and 
tractor equipment at APN # 210-09-019. Water service will be by delivery only and 
sewer will be provided by onsite septic system. MCESD has concerns, NOID must be 
obtained prior to construction permits approval. 
 
Based on the above, MCESD raised no objections to the Planning & Development 
Department in in Accela Automation on February 8, 2021 and can allow the project to 
proceed at this time subject to the following stipulations: 
 
Stipulations:  
None. 
 
It should be noted that this document does not approve the referenced project.  
Comments are provided only as advisory to Maricopa County Planning and 
Development Department to assist staff to prepare a staff report.  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 regulations in force at the time of application.

Doug Jones, P.E., CFM
Planning & Development
301 W Jefferson St, Suite 170
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Phone: (602) 372-0790
Fax: (602) 506-8762
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Email address:
Doug.Jones@maricopa.gov
 
Maricopa County
Planning & Development Department
Engineering Plan Review
Date:  
August 23, 2021
Memo To: Darren Gerard, AICP, Planning Manager, Department of Planning & 
Development
Attn:
Jose Castaneda, Planner, Planning & Development Services
From:
Doug Jones, P.E., CFM, Plans Examiner Engineer, Planning & 
Development Services
cc:
Michael Norris, P.E., Engineering Manager, Planning & Development
Bob Fedorka, P.E., Engineering Supervisor, Planning & Development
Subject:  
Z2021007 - Zone Change (to C-3)
(E3 Memo)
Job Site Address: 912 W HAPPY VALLEY Rd, PHOENIX, AZ 85085
APN(s):
210-09-019
This application is to specify zoning for future development and does not include a 
Plan of Development.
PND Engineering Plan Review (DPR, FCD and PND Transportation) has reviewed the 
3rd  submittal of the Zone Change application routed for review on August 18, 2021, 
and has no objections provided that the following conditions are made part of any 
approval:
The following conditions will apply as part of any approval:
1. Without the submittal of a precise plan of development, no development approval 
is inferred by this review, including, but not limited to number of proposed 
building lots/units, drainage design, access and roadway alignments. These items 
will be addressed as development plans progress and are submitted to the County 
for further review and/or entitlement.
2. A traffic impact study (TIS) must be submitted with future entitlement 
(preliminary plat or POD) application(s). 
3. Happy Valley Road is within the jurisdiction of the City of Phoenix. The applicant 
will be responsible for coordinating with the City to review any traffic impact, 
right-of-way dedication, permitting or roadway improvement requirements.
4. Engineering review of re-zone cases is conceptual in nature. All development and 
engineering design shall be in conformance with Section 1205 of the Maricopa

County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage Policies and Standards; Floodplain 
Regulations for Maricopa County; MCDOT Roadway Design Manual; 
and current engineering policies, standards and best practices at the time of 
application for construction.
Please contact me if you have any questions or require any additional information.

Wed 07/21/2021 9:49 AM 
hagartyelectric@gmail.com 
RE: 11 th Ave -tractor team - Case Number Z2021007 - Montana Tractor & Plow Company 
 
Jose, 
First thank you for replying so quickly. My name is Dennis Hagarty, my address is: 25225 N 11th Ave, 
Phoenix.   We have been fighting this business for some time now and nothing seems to be happening.  
This business continues to operate, building more buildings on the property and he continues to 
assemble and sell equipment.  We have been told that he is being fined and has more than one cease 
and desist order but he continues to operate.  He is now working seven days a week, starting as early as 
5:30am and continuing until after dark.  He creates dust spreading all the way down past my property, 
and the noise is deafening.  On July 4th (Sunday) we were trying to have a family get together, the noise  
and dust coming from Montana Tractor Company was so bad that we had to move our get together 
from my house to another family members house.   
I can't understand why he is allowed to continue to operate and build/improve his business when this 
area is clearly not a commercially zoned area.  Please shed some light on this subject and let us know 
why this is not being handled.  Why is he being allowed to continue to operate?  He has received electric 
service with no permit, he is using water from a fire hydrant, he has no septic tank permit, I shudder to 
think how the employees are using any proper bathroom facilities.   
You mentioned that the county staff is working with the property owner to attempt to bring the site into 
compliance, how can he be compliant when he is operating a manufacturing business in a residential 
area?  There is no compliance, he needs to move his business to a commercially zoned area, period.   
Thank you for your prompt attention to this urgent matter.  We look forward to hearing from you soon 
and to putting this case to an end.  
 
Regards, 
 
Dennis Hagarty

Fri 04/16/2021 9:23 AM 
Jamie Macfarlane jmac103012@gmail.com 
Re: Z2021007 - MONTANA TRACTOR & PLOW COMPANY - 
 
Hi Jose, 
I want to thank you for emailing me. As you have probably gathered by now, there are many neighbors 
including ourselves who are in opposition of this development and have been since they set foot on the 
property. We will be sending you our opposition and I will also be providing this information to other 
neighbors who are also in opposition. I was wondering if you had any time for a conversation? I have 
some questions regarding the process. Are you available today anytime except between 1-2pm? 
Thank you! 
Jamie Macfarlane 
25219 N 9th Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85085 
623-451-6704

From:
Wade Hagarty
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
RE: 11th Ave -Tractor Team - Case Number Z2021007 - Montana Tractor & Plow Company
Date:
Thursday, August 19, 2021 8:34:23 PM
Good Morning All,
 
I am Wade Hagarty, my address is 25207 N 11thAve, Phoenix, my property butts up to the
Team Tractor property line.  I have experienced the same disregard for my property.  My
privacy has been invaded by flashlights flashing around  in my bedroom window at 3:00 am
by workers at the Team Tractor property, employees yelling and cursing,  tractor noise all
hours of the night, and what seems like endless major construction.  We have tried many
avenues to get this zoning issue resolved but it seems as if all of our efforts fall on deaf
ears.  I am not sure what it will take to get this matter resolved. 
 
As mentioned by Mr. Macfarlane, now another company has moved in and is setting up
shop.  Apparently Maricopa County does not care about the tax payers and  voters.  Why do
we have laws if no one has to follow them or no one will enforce them?  When we were
building our home, the inspectors gave us such grief about how far apart the screws in our
drywall were, but now the county can turn a blind eye at the gross negligence going on
here,  not only on one lot but now two residentially zoned lots.    
Can someone in the Maricopa County office please step up and help us take care of this
issue?  Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated.  Both our homes and privacy
have been invaded by these two companies that clearly have no regard for the law.  
 
Regards, 
 
Wade Hagarty

From: Tommy Macfarland 
To: Valerie Orsulak; Jose Castaneda (PND) 
Cc: "Lia Tupita"; whagarty50@gmail.com; "Brian Greathouse"; tarin.jewell@gmail.com; 
sean@teamtractor.com; 
bill@sombreropainting.com; "Clancy Jayne"; "Jacque Collard"; "Jamie Macfarlane"; "Leslie Chatburn"; 
"Ricki 
Horowitz"; Andres Martin (OBM) 
Subject: Case Number Z2021007 - Montana Tractor & Plow Company 
Date: Wednesday, July 21, 2021 3:23:30 PM 
 
Yes, thank you for replying to the previous emails. I am Tommy Macfarlane, 25219 N 9th Ave. We also 
experienced the 4th of July with obnoxious noise and the blatant disregard for the community as a 
whole by the tractor Co. Not really sure how many more emails you would need as all of the neighbors 
have expressed their disapproval of the illegal operation that Team Tractor Supply or Montana Tractor 
or whatever name they are using this week has been running with impunity for 3 years now. Because 
the county has allowed these law brakers to operate, in perpetuity is seems, several more industrial 
businesses have moved in next to them and set up shop on residential property as well. There have 
been several meetings with the Tractor company and their lawyers with all the neighbors present 
expressing their feelings towards the matter. Everyone's disapproval cannot be overstated. I was under 
the impression that those meetings and there content were a matter of public record and were to be 
presented to the Maricopa County Planning Department objectivity and with impartiality. Was that just 
another lie that has been given to my community members to pacify us? Along with the promise of 
shorter working hours, no noise, no weekend work, less trash (everywhere), no more new construction 
without permits, and the list goes on. The last email explained that we should keep filing code violations 
against the property every time we see them. Is this the case. Do we need to just keep making new 
complaints on the website you provided? Are there other departments in the county for specific 
violations? For instance who takes care of the environmental concerns? Or who do we report bulk fuel 
tanks being stored on site directly between a main driveway and the office building? Who should we 
send the pictures of the brand new slab that was poured to? When there are a dozen people assembling 
tractors in the middle of the night, who do we call to report these violations to? Please help us 
understand what is going on. 
Last question. 
I just re-read the last email stating that you cannot use group emails to track who I opposed to the illegal 
industrial operation operating in a residential zone so I will resend this to you with just my email in the 
"to" box. Does this mean that all of the neighbors need to do that as well? 
Sorry for being so long winded but we do group emails to keep everyone informed at the same time. We 
are all very busy and just want to go home to some piece and quite and have had none for many years. 
Tommy

From:
Lia Tupita
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
Re: Z2021007 - MONTANA TRACTOR & PLOW COMPANY -
Date:
Tuesday, August 24, 2021 9:14:03 AM
Hello, we are Lia Tupita and Vasi Tupita , our address is 25113 N 11th Ave, Phoenix AZ
85085.
In 2018 we start our residence home construction, in 2019 we noticed that a business is
developing in back of our backyard. After we moved in our life turned upside down because
and our privacy was invaded.
The tractor noise, banging, metal noise and dust all day long, weekend as well.
We have 3 girls and another one is due in October, the ages are from 8-14 y old, why is this
important  ? Because the workers have access to see in our backyard , we do have a 2 feet wall
but is not enough for our privacy.
Beside noise and dust my kids hear cursing and improper music.
Along with the time I collected videos recorded by me to prove everything.
I have numerous of complaints at Maricopa county and nothing change and they continue to
have busses in despite that their activities are illegal and is being a long time and we can’t
understand how is this possible?
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 9, 2021, at 11:35 AM, Jose Castaneda (PND)
<Jose.Castaneda@maricopa.gov> wrote:

Hello,
 
I am the Planner assigned to review the subject application for a rezone. I was out of
the office last week and was notified that you had concerns. Please let me know if you
have any questions regarding the subject application. Also note if you would like to
submit opposition to the case I will need you to state that you are opposed to the case.
Please provide your full name and if you would like, please provide your address.
 
Thank you,
 
 
<!--[if !vml]-->
<image001.png>
<!--[endif]-->
<image002.png>
  
Jose Castañeda
Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-506-8358 | Fax: 602-506-3282
Jose.Castaneda@Maricopa.Gov
 
P&D is now 100% digital. Find information on our new permit process here.

From:
Tarin Jewell
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
CASE# Z2021007 - MONTANA TRACTOR & PLOW COMPANY
Date:
Thursday, August 26, 2021 11:33:59 AM
My name is Tarin Jewell and I would like to formally submit my opposition to the following request:
Request: Zone Change with Overlay from Rural-43 to C-3 CUPD on approx. 4.7 acres generally
located approx. 350 ft. east of the NEC of Happy Valley Rd. and 11th Ave. alignment in the Phoenix
area.
As a partial owner of one adjacent property, beneficiary of a separate property within 300ft, and future
homebuilder on yet another parcel that directly borders the Montana Tractor & Plow Company, I have
severe and vested concerns in the outcome of this and future hearings regarding the change of zoning
request.
First, I would like to make it clear that I am not in total opposition to the growth happening in this area
along Happy Valley.  My family has purchased land and property in this area over the last two decades to
escape the noise and hustle of city life.  We own businesses in an industrial part of Phoenix and deal with
the noise and pollution there all day, every weekday. When we leave work, however, we wanted a place
to escape that.  We know that the south side of Happy Valley Rd is primarily zoned Commercial and do
not have a problem living across the street from it. Many of our neighbors are small business owners who
keep their business activity quiet and unobtrusive.  We don't even complain about the rapid urban sprawl
that has drastically affected traffic on Happy Valley Rd. Ok, maybe we complain about it privately, but
never publicly.  
We understand the need for growth and are accepting of many changes that have occured over the
years. BUT, the arrival and activity of the Montana Tractor & Plow Company has caused huge upset and
massive aggravation in our community. From their noise and light pollution to their diesel fumes, dust,
and J-John odors, it has been awful sharing space with them.  They do not operate as a retail showroom
with occasional service operations as is their description.  They operate almost 24/7 either in facility
maintenance/building or in tractor manufacturing and shipping.  This company receives multiple semi-
truck deliveries of tractor and other equipment parts, assembles the tractors and other equipment on-site
using impact wrenches powered by extremely loud air compressors and welding equipment, and then
ships them all back out on more semi-trucks.  This happens constantly.  The semi-trucks arrive at all
hours of the day and night and their "back up" beeping can be heard echoing all over the surrounding
area.  Once the tractors are assembled, there is a lot of scrap metal left over from freight.  The large and
very heavy scrap metal piles are picked up high into the air by their machines and dropped into large
commercial sized steel dumpsters resulting in deafening outbursts of noise...again, at any time of day or
night that they choose.  
We have met with the owner and his attorney virtually (during the height of covid), and in person to
express our concerns. Each time we are assured that they will change their operating hours and alter
their activities to try to lessen the disruption.  I witnessed no such changes aside from them finally not
parking on 9th ave which had blocked access to our properties in the past.  I could give numerous
specific examples of the disruption they have caused but really it is just the constant noise, dust. odor,
and lighting that makes it intolerable.
In closing I would like to reiterate that my family and I (as well as our neighbors) bought these parcels of
land and residential properties with the understanding that the south side of Happy Valley Rd was where
businesses like this would operate and the north side was zoned residential and light agriculture.  There
is a fair amount of generational wealth tied up in this area.  To allow a tractor manufacturing plant to set
up shop on a large unit of land in the very middle of a residential neighborhood is completely astonishing. 
There is ample space across Happy Valley Rd. (where all the other commercial businesses operate) for
the Montana Tractor & Plow Company to run its manufacturing business.  But I'm sure he didn't want to
pay those commercial real estate prices.  So, by building and developing this residential land into an

industrial tractor manufacturing plant and requesting a change in zoning, he is stripping ALL the existing
residential landowners of their generational investments in the surrounding neighborhood. It doesn't seem
fair and it doesn't seem to be in the best interest of the rapidly growing residential community
developments nearby.  It makes more sense to keep the residential areas residential and let the
commercial and industrial areas stay that way - there is no need or benefit to combine the two by
rezoning this property.
Thank you for your time,
Tarin Jewell

From:
cornel silasi
To:
Jose Castaneda (PND)
Subject:
case #z2021007
Date:
Friday, August 27, 2021 8:58:23 AM
Hello, Mr. Castaneda
My name is Cornel Silasi.  I am writing to you in regards to the property on Happy Valley Rd.  I
would like to let you know that we oppose to the zoning change.  We recently bought the lot
directly behind this property and have plans to build our dream home.  When we bought the
lot we were told by neighbors that the tractor company is only supposed to be operating in
the front as a store and that all of them complained to Maricopa county in regards to them
using all the lots to do other activity that creates a lot of noise and dust.  We bought the lot
based on the fact that the current zoning does not allow them to operate what looks like an
industrial company and county/city will do something about it.  I attended a couple of the
meetings where none of the neighbors were in acceptance of such change.  Please don't allow
this company to continue its activity in the manner its operating now.
Thank you,
Cornel Silasi
602-291-3609  
Sent from Outlook

PHOENIX
PHOENIX
N 9th A
ve
Central Arizona
Project Csr
Central Arizona
Project Csr
N 11th A
ve
Happy Valley Rd
210
09
026E
210
09
007C
210
09
032B
210
09
004A
210
09
007E
210
09
026A
210
09
026E
210
09
007C
210
09
032B
210
09
004A
210
09
007E
210
09
026A
210
08
024B
210
08
003B
210
09
004B
210
09
026B
210
09
019
210
09
021A
210
09
033
210
08
024A
210
08
013G
210
09
021B
210
08
003A
210
09
026C
210
09
006
210
09
013
210
08
015D
210
08
020
210
09
020C
210
09
020D
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: T:\JohnsonS\PlanningandDevelopment\OppositionCases\Z2021007\Z2021007.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, 8/31/2021
110
0
110
55
Feet
Opposition and Support
Z2021007
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Supporting Parcel
Opposition Parcel
All Opposition Parcels
300' Buffer Selection
300' Buffer Interior
Eligible parcels: 17
Supporting parcels: 0
Opposition parcels: 6
Supporting parcels sq ft: 0
Opposition parcels sq ft: 302,789.00
Subject parcels sq ft: 204,138.96
All area inside the 300' buffer:
1,055,932.19
All area inside the 300' buffer -
excluding subject parcel,
ROW and excluded parcels:
775,471.30
No-response parcels sq ft: 472,682.30
Super Majority opposed parcel acres:
39%
Super Majority opposed parcel number:
35%

Planning and Development Department  
 
 
 
 
DATE: 
September 9, 2021 
 
TO: 
Planning and Zoning Commission 
 
FROM: 
Jose Castañeda, Planner   
 
SUBJECT: 
Z2021007 - MONTANA TRACTOR & PLOW COMPANY   
 
Agenda Item: #3 
 
 
 
Since the publishing of the staff report for the subject case, the applicant presented 23 
letters of support from residents in the area, and a map showing the location of the 
parcels in support of the subject zone change. In addition to the letters of support, the 
applicant has provided documentation showing the site had legal access to the fire 
hydrant for dust control purposes from September 11, 2019 - 2020 and September 2, 2021 
- 2022. 
 
Additionally, the City of Phoenix has provided comments on the subject project, it should 
be noted that the City has stated the project is in concert with their General Plan and 
have not indicated any opposition to the project.  
 
Shown below are the additional letters of support from residents of the area and the 
correspondence from the City of Phoenix.  
 
 
 
Attachments: 
 
9/09/21 Letters of Support (23 pages)  
 
 
 
9/09/21 City of Phoenix Correspondence (3 pages)

City of Phoenix
       200 West Washington Street
          Phoenix, Arizona   85003
   General Information 602-262-7811
POST THIS PERMIT ON JOB SITE
Before you start to dig, call Blue Stake 602-263-1100
PERMIT
bprp01
STATUS: OPEN
09/02/21
Printed:
To find out about Phoenix construction code adoption news and 
to research your permits or projects, please visit 
http://www.phoenix.gov/PDD  
Planning And Development Department
Permitted Building Construction hours are (non-Holiday weekdays):
6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. from May 1 to September 30
7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. from October 1 to April 30 
WSHM
Permit #
21029665
02-SEP-2021
Issued
Expires
QS 47-26 V 402 13TH AVE & HAPPY VALLEY R
Permit Description
21-18
Project
2021 FIRE HYDRANT METERS
Description/Scope of Work:
Owner Information
EPR
Permit Issued By
JBL3
Entered By
BACKFLOW
Inspections Required:
NOTICE - This permit authorizes the above described work to be done in accordance with the approved plans and all applicable City codes
and ordinances. Plan approval and permit issuance does not authorize violation of any city code or ordinance. The contractor(s) doing the
work and the property owner or tenant/occupant authorizing the work are all legally responsible for complying with all codes and ordinances.
By applying for this permit, I am requesting and hereby consent to periodic inspections of the above referenced project in accordance with
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 9, Chapter 7, Article 4. This permit shall expire on the expiration date printed above. Work after this time or
beyond the scope of this permit requires a new supplemental permit. This permit can be suspended or revoked for failing to follow the
approved plans or for violation of any City code or ordinance. Work within the public right-of-way shall comply with all City standard details
and specifications. The contractor is responsible for maintaining streets and sidewalks safe and usable at all times. All barricades shall be
approved in advance and shall comply with the City Traffic Barricade Manual.
Address
WATER SERVICES HYDRANT METER
Contractor Information
Name
Instructions and Comments
***  CONSTRUCTION USE FOR:***
VALVE: 402
HYDRANT KEY:
QS: 47-26
AUTHORIZATION TO USE CITY WATER FROM THE PUBLIC HYDRANT LOCATED AT:13th ave and Happy Valley rd 1100 WEST HAPPY VALLEY 
ROAD
          THIS METER PERMIT IS ISSUED FOR A TEMPORARY WATER SERVICE FOR A SPECIFIC JOB AND IS NOT INTENDED TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF A 
CONTRACTOR ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS.  THIS CONTRACTOR HAS NO AUTHORITY TO RELOCATE OR REMOVE THE METER.  FOR REMOVAL OR
REPAIR, NOTIFY THE METER SHOP AT 602-495-0225.
          ALL CHARGES ARE DUE AND PAYABLE WHEN RENDERED AND SHALL BE DELINQUENT 15 DAYS AFTER DATE BILL IS RENDERED.  AFTER 
DATE OF DELINQUENCY, THE METER IS SUBJECT TO REMOVAL, THE SERVICE TERMINATED AND THE DEPOSIT FORFEITED.
          A REDUCED PRESSURE PRINCIPLE BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY (RP) IS REQUIRED FOR ALL CONNECTIONS TO A FIRE HYDRANT 
PRIOR TO USING HYDRANT WATER AS REQUIRED BY CITY CODE CHAPTER 37 AND 2006 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE SECTION 603.3.11.  THE RP 
ASSEMBLY SHALL BE INSTALLED AND SUPPORTED PER THE CITY STANDARD DETAIL P1356 OR THE ALTERNATE SUPPORT DETAIL WHEN IT IS NOT 
PRACTICAL.
          THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY MUST BE TESTED AND CERTIFIED BY A BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER AT THE TIME OF INSTALLATION.  FOR 
INFORMATION, CALL 602-534-2140.  AFTER TESTING AND CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSEMBLY, AN INSPECTION SHALL BE REQUIRED BY CALLING
602-495-0800 (CALL BEFORE 8 PM FOR NEXT DAY INSPECTION), USING CODE "217" FOR INSPECTION TYPE.  THE BACKFLOW TEST 
CERTIFICATION REPORT SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE CITY INSPECTOR AT THE TIME OF THE INSPECTION.
0 S 0 E  0 N 0 W Q-S: Q3-19 ZONING: C-2
Address
Call 602-495-0800 or go online to www.phoenix.gov/BUSINESS before 8PM to request for a next day inspection
02-SEP-2022
NONE
Certificate of
Occupancy Type:
$0
Valuation:
Phone
Address
OWN
Type
OWNER
Name
Contact Phone
  
City/St/Zip
none 
Ins
01-JAN-25
Exp
Zoning
2966040
Web Insp Key
Permit Categories:
Suite

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 1 of 21 
 
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 
OF THE 
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 
 
September 9, 2021                            Gotowebinar.com 
9:41 a.m. 
 
 
 
   Phoenix, Arizona 
_____________________________________________________________________________________ 
 
MEMBERS PRESENT:  
Mr. Greg Arnett, Chairman  
Mr. Jay Swart, Vice Chairman 
Mr. Kevin Danzeisen 
Mr. Matt Gress  
Mr. Erik Hernandez (left at 11 a.m.) 
 
 
 
 
Ms. Kate McGee 
Mr. Lucas Schlosser  
 
MEMBERS ABSENT: 
 
Mr. Jimmy Lindblom  
Ms. Francisca Montoya 
 
 
 
 
  
STAFF PRESENT: 
 
Mr. Tom Ellsworth, Planning and Development Director 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Darren Gérard, Planning Services Manager 
 
 
 
 
Ms. Rachel Applegate, Senior Planner 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Ray Banker, Senior Planner 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Jose Castañeda, Planner 
 
 
 
 
Ms. Rosalie Pinney, Recording Secretary 
 
 
 
 
 
COUNTY AGENCIES:  
Mr. Wayne Peck, County Attorney 
 
 
 
 
Mr. David Anderson, Business Engagement Manager, OET 
 
 
 
 
Ms. Alisha Bach, Technical Team 
 
CONSENT: 
Z2020099, Z2021058 
 
REGULAR: 
Z2021007, TA2018001 
 
Chairman Arnett made the standard announcements and asked if there were any 
changes or comments to the minutes for July 8 and July 22. None.  
 
COMMISSION ACTION: Vice Chair Swart motioned to approve the July 8, 2021 and July 
22, 2021 minutes as written. Commissioner McGee second. Approved 7-0.  Ayes: 
Arnett, Swart, Danzeisen, Gress, Hernandez, McGee, Schlosser. 
 
CONSENT AGENDA 
 
Zoning - Z2020099 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
District 5 
Project name: 
All Trucks Auto Parts      
Applicant: 
 
Raad Salih – Saif Engineering LLC 
Request: 
Zone Change from Rural-43 to IND-3 IUPD with a Plan of 
Development (POD) for large truck repair and part sales business

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 2 of 21 
 
Location:  
Generally located approx. 2,769’ southwest of the SWC of 35th Ave. 
and Broadway Rd. in the Laveen area 
   
Zoning - Z2021058 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
District 2 
Project name: 
Lewellen 1.25 Industrial     
Applicant: 
 
Jessica Sarkissian, Upfront Planning & Entitlements, LLC 
Request: 
Zone Change with Overlay from Rural-43 to IND-2 IUPD with a Plan of 
Development (POD)  
Location:  
Generally located 1,425 ft. east of the SEC of Hawes Rd. and 
Mesquite St., in the Mesa area  
 
Mr. Gerard presented the consent agenda.  
 
Chairman Arnett asked if anyone wished to speak on the consent agenda. None. 
 
COMMISSION ACTION: Commissioner Gress motioned to approve the consent agenda, 
Z2020099 with conditions ‘a’-‘h’ and Z2021058 with conditions ‘a’-‘i’.  Commissioner 
McGee second. Approved 7-0.  Ayes: Gress, McGee, Schlosser, Hernandez, Danzeisen, 
Swart, Arnett. 
 
Z2020099 conditions; 
a. 
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the 
Narrative Report entitled “All Trucks Auto Parts”, consisting of 4 pages, 
dated August 16, 2021, and stamped received August 20, 2021 except as 
modified by the following conditions. 
 
b. 
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply: 
  
a. 
Broadway is in the jurisdiction of the City of Phoenix. At the time of 
acquisition of building permits, the applicant shall obtain any and all 
permits that the City requires for work within Broadway Road right-
of-way. 
 
b. 
Engineering review of rezone cases is for conceptual in nature. All 
development and engineering design shall be in conformance with 
Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance; Drainage 
Policies and Standards; Floodplain Regulations for Maricopa County; 
MCDOT Roadway Design Manual; and current engineering policies, 
standards and best practices at the time of application for 
construction. 
 
c. 
The following IND-3 IUPD Zoning District standards shall apply:  
 
1. 
Uses Permitted – All uses are prohibited except for the following uses: 
heavy vehicle, truck, semi-truck, and automobile repair; on-site 
storage and sale of vehicle, truck, semi-truck and automobile parts; 
and; accessory buildings and uses customarily incidental to the 
above listed uses.

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 3 of 21 
 
 
d. 
A Plan of Development is approved subject to site plan entitled “All Trucks 
Auto Parts” consisting of 2 full-size sheets, dated July 22, 2021, and stamped 
received August 19, 2021. The Plan of Development may be amended 
administratively under separate application as long as the amendment 
complies with the established IUPD development standards as approved 
by the Board of Supervisors.   
 
e. 
A will serve letter for fire and wastewater shall be required prior to receiving 
approval of construction permits. 
 
f. 
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.  
 
g. 
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.  
 
h. 
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 shall revert 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 
Special Use Permit.  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. 
 
Z2021058 conditions; 
a. 
A Plan of Development is approved subject to site plan entitled 
“Construction Yards for Rusty & Allyson Lewellen,” consisting of 1 full-size 
sheet, dated July 6, 2021, and stamped received July 9, 2021. The Plan of 
Development may be amended administratively under separate 
application as long as the amendment complies with the established IUPD 
development standards as approved by the Board of Supervisors. 
 
b. 
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the 
Narrative Report entitled “Rezone and Industrial Use Permit (IUPD) 
Application for 20221 E. Mesquite Street, Mesa, AZ,” consisting of 6 pages,

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 4 of 21 
 
dated July 2021, and stamped received July 9, 2021, except as modified 
by the following conditions. 
c. 
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply: 
 
1. 
Septic facilities not shown. When submitting the plans for a building 
permit include the septic facilities on the plans. Maintain a minimum 
25 ft. separation between septic facilities and the underground 
retention. 
  
2. 
E. Mesquite Street is along a midsection alignment requiring 
preservation of 40 feet half width future right-of-way per Maricopa 
County Zoning Ordinance Section 1105 per email by MCDOT 
Planning, Lynndsay O’Neill (lynndsay.oneill@maricopa.gov). 
 
3. 
E. Mesquite Street north half is within jurisdiction of the City of Mesa. 
The applicant will be responsible for coordinating with the City to 
review any traffic impact, right-of-way dedication, permitting or 
roadway improvement requirements. 
 
4. 
The site is accessed through a series of public and private easements 
that comprise 202nd Place. 202nd Place has not been accepted by 
the County; and is therefore not maintained by the County.  
 
5. 
The subject site is not located within the County’s Urbanized Area 
and thus will not require a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Permit 
(SWPPP) from the County. This does NOT preclude the requirement 
to obtain a Construction General Permit (CGP) Notice of Intent to 
Discharge (NOI) from the State (ADEQ), as may be required. 
 
6. 
Retention basin(s) underground storage must drain within 36 hours. 
 
7. 
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. 
 
d. 
The following IND-2 IUPD standards shall apply:  
 
1. 
Front yard (north): 0 ft.  
 
2. 
Outdoor material storage may exceed the height of the enclosure, 
but shall not exceed 12 ft. and outdoor vehicle storage may not 
exceed a height of 40 ft.

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 5 of 21 
 
e. 
The IND-2 IUPD overlay is applied to restrict the use of the site to allow an 
office/warehouse storage building and outdoor contractor material 
storage yards.  
f. 
Prior to issuance of a building permit, written confirmation (i.e. “will serve” 
letter) 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.  
 
g. 
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.  
 
h. 
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.  
 
i. 
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request 
of the applicant, with the consent of the landowner.  The granting of this 
approval allows the property to enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by 
the zoning existing on the date of application, subject to conditions.  In the 
event of the failure to comply with any condition, the property shall revert 
to the zoning that existed on the date of application.  It is, therefore, 
stipulated and agreed that either revocation due to the failure to comply 
with any conditions, does not reduce any rights that existed on the date of 
application to use, divide, sell or possess the property and that there would 
be no diminution in value of the property from the value it held on the date 
of application due to such revocation of 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. 
 
 
REGULAR AGENDA 
 
Zoning - Z2021007 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
District 3 
Project name: 
Montana Tractor & Plow Company      
Applicant: 
 
Brian Greathouse, Burch & Cracchiolo 
Request: 
 
Zone Change from Rural-43 to C-3 CUPD 
Location:  
Generally located approx. 350 ft. east of the NEC of Happy Valley 
Rd. and 11th Ave. alignment in the Phoenix area 
 
Mr. Castañeda presented Z2021007 and noted the applicant is proposing to rezone the 
site in order to allow the existing use of the property for equipment sales and service of 
tractors and other agricultural implements. The applicant also applied for a Commercial 
Unit Plan of Development (CUPD) overlay as part of the zone change in order to request 
certain variations to the development standards and restrict the uses on the site to only 
allow farm related equipment and sales.  There is an active violation on the property for

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 6 of 21 
 
the existing use of land without the proper zoning entitlement, and development of the 
site without the benefit of issued construction permits. Staff received 7 letters in opposition 
representing 8 individuals, and 24 letters of support. Seven of the opposition letters are 
from those located with 300 feet of the site with concerns of the business generating 
excessive noise, traffic, and privacy concerns with the business activity adjacent to the 
residences.  The applicant has worked with the community to address some of the 
oppositions concerns.  The CUPD overlay is being applied to restrict the use of the site 
and to require 8-foot high screen walls and a 10-foot landscape buffer, and pavement 
to address dust control.  Since the printing of the staff report, the applicant has provided 
additional letters of support.  The surrounding area is partially undeveloped with mixed 
uses: low-density, single-family residential, low intensity commercial uses, and light 
industrial uses. The site is in access to an arterial road. The City of Phoenix provided 
comments - the use is consistent the city general plan and did not oppose the request.  
Staffs opinion the use is consistent with the development patterns in the area and the C-
3 CUPD zoning is appropriate.  There are concerns on this site; the property owner has 
continued to develop the site without zoning entitlements or building clearances despite 
receiving the violation notification in November 2019.  Staff has worked with the 
applicant to bring the site into compliance by extending compliance deadlines and 
suspending fees while they obtain the appropriate entitlements. The property owner 
continues to exacerbate non-compliance on the site contrary to the direction from staff. 
Since November 2019, the development on the site has steadily progressed. The patent 
easement was designated employee parking and walkway restricting the use of the 
patent easement to the adjacent property owners.  The City of Phoenix believes the use 
is appropriate and the development patterns in the area seem to align with these types 
of uses. There are some light industrial uses in the area, but there is some friction with 
industrial uses / commercial uses in an area with a mix of low-density residential.  Staff is 
recommending approval as conditional zoning with a POD and commercial construction 
permits to be completed within six months of Board approval or the zoning may be 
considered for revocation.  
 
Chairman Arnett asked about the annexation and if the other properties are 
commercial.  Mr. Castaneda said the application to annex was received by the City of 
Phoenix in August.  The applicant is trying to annex but they have violations with the 
County. The only way to address the violation and potentially annex is to receive the 
entitlements to bring the site into compliance with building permits and the approved 
plan of development, or return the site to its natural state and then process the 
annexation through the City of Phoenix.  
 
Commissioner Gress asked has this applicant been a bad actor. Chairman Arnett said 
there is a violation case and that is why we are here. 
 
Mr. Ellsworth said there is an open violation and there is a compliance agreement. The 
applicant needs to get into compliance by getting the zoning in order before we can 
work with them on the site issues and building permits.  The reason for the tone of the staff 
report is the apprehension, the site has not progressed very well to date and we are 
conditioning this to 6 months.  If not, they would be back for revocation of that zoning.

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 7 of 21 
 
Commissioner Gress said according to the staff report there was a violation notice in 
November 2019 and the property owner applied for a pre-application meeting in May 
2020 and were advised to rezone. Then nothing happened until the next year and during 
that time, the property owner continued to exacerbate the non-compliance on the site 
contrary to the direction of staff and contrary to the proposed project information 
contained in the narrative report.  There was an additional site inspection last month and 
the site continues to extract water without consent from a nearby fire hydrant, which may 
affect fire services in the area.  This sounds egregious that they can be jeopardizing the 
safety of a nearby community by siphoning water off a fire hydrant.  He is alarmed by 
the behavior of this applicant. We have rules in place so we can all work together to 
share land and neighborhoods together, and this is a continual march for this applicant 
to do whatever they want with this parcel of land disregarding the rules we have in place 
as a functioning society.  
 
Mr. Brian Greathouse said he is with Burch & Cracchiolo representing the applicant.  He 
was involved in this case in early February 2020 and there were existing violations. They 
met with County and entered into a compliance agreement with certain critical dates, 
and we had our pre-application meeting in May 2020.  One of the comments in the 
meeting was to explore annexation with the City of Phoenix. In August 2020, we went 
through the re-zoning pre-application process with the city and a month later, they went 
through the site plan pre-application process with the city.  They wanted us to engage 
surrounding properties to annex a larger area rather than just one property. At that time, 
there were no properties adjacent to us that wanted to annex in the city.  We went back 
to the county and filed a zone change application.  We had to hire an architect and 
survey the property to show what improvements were already out there. We also had to 
get topography on the site and engage a civil engineer, which took time and occurred 
during the year of COVID making it hard to get things done. It took us until early 2021 to 
file our application. We had three reviews with county staff and three separate meetings 
with neighbors one being virtual and two others on site.  The only difference on site 
between the 2020 and 2021, the owner laid down ABC material on the whole site and on 
9th Avenue to cut down on the dust issues. He also installed a concrete pad, which he 
should not have done. In our first virtual meeting, the ABC material was suggested by the 
neighbors to help with all the dust, so the ABC material was part of that solution. His 
employees would not park along 9th Avenue but the employee parking sign remained. 
There is no parking there.  He is hoping that clears up what challenges they went through 
to date.  
 
Chairman Arnett said some commissioners have not had time to go through all the recent 
information provided. 
 
Commissioner McGee said she did not like the late submission of information received 
late yesterday afternoon including documentation from the City of Phoenix that granted 
access to the fire meter for dust control. They had that for two or three years. The 
complaints she is reading from the neighbors is of continuous dust.  The employee hours 
were to be from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and the neighbors are saying they are there all night 
long.  This is a massive case of beg forgiveness opposed to ask for permission.  She would 
like a continuation in this case to have the opportunity to review the support letters with

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 8 of 21 
 
all identical letters signed by different people living in the area and from businesses 
operating in the area.  
 
Chairman Arnett asked if the applicant would like more time to address some of these 
concerns.  
Vice Chair Swart said, he is urging the applicant to continue this case. There are so many 
things going on with this case and he agrees with Commissioner Gress and Commissioner 
McGee’s statements.   
 
Commissioner McGee said the continuance would be to construct additional 
requirements and guardrails that we might conceivably grant going forward. She wants 
to clear up what is going on with the City of Phoenix annexation application.  This should 
not come back with the same proposal it would need to have additional guidelines.  
 
Mr. Greathouse said his client is okay continuing this case and he wants to do things right 
and knows he made some mistakes in the past.  They would like to proceed with the 
presentation since he has a lot of information that was not included in the staff report 
and feels this would be very helpful for the commission.  Then if the continuance is still 
recommended, we would be fine with that.   
 
Mr. Peck said if he makes his presentation, the absent commission members would have 
to review the record where they may or may not have an opportunity to do. You could 
run into an issue when this comes back to hearing and there could be issues to how many 
are eligible to vote.  
 
Vice Chair Swart said, he is adamantly against hearing his presentation.  
 
Commissioner Gress said he does not support giving the applicant time to present on a 
flawed application.  
 
Chairman Arnett said this is a public meeting and he has the right to present if he wants 
to and he will leave that decision to the applicant.   
 
Commissioner Gress said he moves to table this case.  Mr. Peck said it is a motion to table 
and it is not debatable.  
 
Commissioner McGee asked is this to a certain date and time when it would come off 
the table.  Commissioner Gress said it would be delayed until the Chair brings it back. It 
is tabled for this meeting.  
 
Mr. Peck said a motion that is tabled comes off the table by vote of the commission. Any 
commissioner can bring it up at any time because of open public meeting laws. He 
recommends if a commissioner proposes it come off the table at a particular meeting 
that staff be advised so the agenda could reflect that.  
 
Mr. Gerard asked would it be easier for those online to understand if the motion were for 
an indefinite continuance, then we would have a new public notice before it comes 
back to the Planning and Zoning commission.

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 9 of 21 
 
 
Mr. Peck said there is a procedural problem with that, a motion for continuance is 
actually an action. Unless the applicant consents, it would not be an order until he has 
made whatever presentation he wishes to make. The motion to table is always an order. 
The chair could ask the maker and the seconder of the motion to withdraw their motion. 
Until you ask the applicant if he is going to consent to a continuance in light of what he 
has heard then you could do it to a date specific.   
 
Chairman Arnett asked could the motion be rescinded in order to speak with the 
applicant about an indefinite continuance.  Commissioner McGee said she calls the 
question. 
 
Mr. Peck said a motion to call the question is really a motion to end debate. Since there 
is no debate on a motion to table there is no need to call the question. Commissioners 
Gress and Swart were asked if they would withdrawal and they have not. The proper 
procedure is to proceed with a vote on the motion to table.  
 
COMMISSION ACTION: Commissioner Gress motioned to table Z2021007. Vice Chair Swart 
second. Tabled 6-1.  Ayes: Gress, McGee, Schlosser, Hernandez, Danzeisen, Swart;    
Nays: Arnett. 
 
Commissioner Hernandez left the hearing early at 11:00 a.m. 
 
Text Amendment - TA2018001 (Cont. from 8/5/21) 
 
 
 
All Districts  
Applicant: 
 
Joseph White, Becker Boards Small, LLC   
Requests: 
Text Amendment to amend Chapter 2, Definitions, Section 1112.7.1, 
Section 1301.1.21, and Chapter 14, Articles 1403 and 1404 of the 
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance (MCZO) relating to Off-Site 
Advertising Signs (Billboards) 
 
Mr. Banker presented TA2018001 and noted this is an applicant proposed text 
amendment for Offsite advertising signs (billboards). This text amendment was previously 
discussed at the June 17, 2021 ZIPPOR meeting and was continued by the Commission 
to allow the applicant more time to address concerns and to revise the proposed 
language. This proposal has been around for more than 3 years with many revisions to 
the proposed text being reviewed, with stakeholder and ZIPPOR meetings held, and the 
entire amendment being indefinitely continued in 2019 until earlier this year.  The major 
changes from the last ZIPPOR meeting will give staff’s perspective for support of the 
proposed language with recommended changes as discussed within paragraph 12 of 
the staff report.   The applicant has added language since the last ZIPPOR meeting to 
the first definition that would prohibit new billboards on future freeways within the County. 
This also contains scenic corridor language to include both the regulatory overlay districts 
within the zoning ordinance along with the policy document areas. No billboards are to 
be allowed within the scenic corridor areas with this text amendment.   More definitions 
including static and digital billboards are proposed changes to language within Section 
1112.7.1 of the zoning ordinance - bottom mounted lighting to be in conformance with 
Article 1112.3.2 regarding top down, fully shielded lighting.  Staff agrees with this proposal, 
we see issues with requiring conformance within 6 years if the TA is approved for signs that

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 10 of 21 
 
meet legal non-conforming standards. Staff recommends revised language would 
require downward lighting for any new or altered signs at the time of permitting and not 
conflicting with existing signs with legal non-conforming status.   Another change since 
the previous version of the proposed text amendment language is the inclusion of 
updates to Section 1301.1.21 regarding the Special Use Permit process for conversion of 
legal non-conforming signs to digital.  The previous version had a proposed Conditional 
Use Permit process to be sent directly to the Board of Supervisors after staff review. The 
newly introduced Special Use Permit process would require the requested conversions to 
go through the legislative process through public hearings, which includes the 
Commission as a recommendation body to the eventual Board of Supervisors for 
consideration.    Proposed changes to Article 1403.3 as it pertains to billboards within 
commercial (C-2 & C-3) zoning districts. Staff notes the need for the proposed radial 
versus the existing linear separation distances, which would remove the need for 
interpretational determination of street orientation as it relates to existing and new 
signage. The separation distances of 3,000’ or 1,000’ depending on proximity to 
municipality would be maintained. Since the last version of the text, the applicant has 
removed the proposed 500’ separation distance language for proposed digital 
conversions.  The proposed setback changes to 0’ from property lines with certain 
restrictions for residential zoning and uses. This would keep the minimum 500’ separation 
distance from parks, schools, and roadside rest areas as it is in the ordinance language 
today.  The scenic corridors, which would be defined to include both regulatory and 
policy scenic corridor areas and further clarifies that no billboard shall not only be 
prohibited from being erected within scenic corridors but also within 660’ of these scenic 
corridor areas.  Proposed development standards include increased height and sign 
area for billboards located within 300’ of a freeway.  All other billboards would need to 
meet the current standards of maximum 300 sq. ft. in area and maximum 30’ in height.   
Updated diagrams and exhibits as well as inclusion of the military zoning overlay 
requirements should that be a factor depending on the site or sites involved.   Digital 
billboards are currently not allowed per the County zoning ordinance. A major change 
since the last ZIPPOR meeting is that the applicant has restricted digital billboards to only 
freeways, so no arterials, not even highways would allow digital per this text.  The 
changed language would require technology features with horizontal and vertical 
louvers as well as downward angled LED’s to help minimize additional light pollution near 
residential areas.   This is continuation of the proposed digital billboard text language with 
general provisions and any new billboard whether static or digital would need to meet 
the requirements of Article 1403.3 of the zoning ordinance. Legal non-conforming sign 
modifications or conversions to digital would require the Special Use Permit process. The 
industrial zoning district billboard section to be subject to all requirements as the 
commercial zoning districts.   The two exhibits within the staff report are scenic corridor 
locations across the County.  The applicant provided map from darksky.org showing 
large portions of Maricopa County as being within the green area which represents 
allowance of Electronic Message Centers or digital signs per state statutes. The other 
starred and yellow areas near Tucson and Flagstaff extending to the northern parts of the 
state represent major astronomical observatories as well as International Dark Sky areas.  
The opposition includes concerns with lighting, dark skies and scenic views, drivers safety, 
lack of public inclusion, input during hearing process, energy use, property values, larger 
and taller signs, and general oppositions to billboards. Staff has over 1,000 pages of 
opposition, support, and other comments, and staff understands the concerns by the

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 11 of 21 
 
opposition.  Digital billboards would be allowed if this text amendment were approved, 
and be limited only to freeways. Increase in height and size would also be restricted to 
being along freeways, and will not be allowed within or adjacent to Scenic Corridors and 
any new freeways in the future.  Newer technology including horizontal and vertical 
louvers, downward angled LED’s for mitigation of light trespassing to nearby residential 
properties would be required. A radial separation requirement instead of existing linear 
would eliminate determination and interpretational issues. Conversion to digital of 
existing legal non-conforming billboards would require obtaining a Special Use Permit 
through a public hearing process. There would be a requirement for all new and altered 
illuminated billboards to have downward lit and fully shielded lighting. 
 
Chairman Arnett asked should this text amendment carry forward, a legal non-
conforming billboard needs a Special Use Permit and the discretion of the Board of 
Supervisors.  Mr. Banker said any conversion of legal non-conforming to digital would 
require the Special Use Permit process; otherwise, all other billboards would need to meet 
the current standards if the text amendment is approved without any further entitlement.   
 
Commissioner Danzeisen said he has a conflict with this case and is recused.  
 
Chairman Arnett asked if we would lose our quorum.  Mr. Peck said we have enough 
members and the fact he has to leave because he is recused does not affect the 
quorum. 
 
Commissioner Gress asked do we need a majority of the 10 commissioners to approve 
these things or a majority of commissioners present when voting.  Mr. Peck said it is the 
majority of those voting. 
 
Mr. Bill Lally with Tiffany and Bosco said he is here representing the applicant. The 
application was submitted in 2018 and we had series of meetings at the County and all 
of the industry professionals, the dark sky groups, and the New River/Desert Hills interested 
parties. We made a number of changes to this text amendment in response to their input.  
When this started there was a number of things staff wanted changed to the overall 
zoning code. In that process, we inserted a number of things that really brought the code 
up to today’s standards. Prior to this, we did a number of variances and legislative 
changes to height and size to accommodate areas where they are harder to see.  
Maricopa County’s development standards for billboards is the only one of its kind in the 
entire valley. Every other city in this valley has billboard allowances to allow billboards to 
go up to 48 feet by right and 70 feet in some areas, 14’ x 48’ as the standard size.  Bringing 
the county zoning code to the new standards made a lot of sense.  We went through the 
process to initiate a process to allow for digital billboards. Every other municipality in the 
valley allows billboards, and allows digital conversion and digital billboards by right. Every 
city has a little different process, and the state statute allows cities to delegate things to 
a Board of Adjustment and to a non-legislative body.  Many cities including the City of 
Phoenix process digital conversions through a non-legislative body.  The Special Use 
Permit process has been in place at the County for many years, it is a tool to allow large

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 12 of 21 
 
uses like airports, cell towers, and large storage facilities.  It is a legislative process and 
sends public notices out to surrounding property owners within 300 feet, reports and 
reviews, commission hearing and Board of Supervisors hearing.  We chose that as the 
appropriate process for digital conversion because it is one of the few processes that are 
not geared toward like a zoning case residential to commercial. The SUP process made 
the most sense.   There is a new louver and LED technology; it is a shielding technology 
to direct the image from a digital billboard to the viewing public along the freeway. It will 
prevent and shield light from spilling into areas we don’t want it to go like adjacent 
properties and direct the light to the intended audience on the road.  One of the biggest 
changes is radial distancing, a measure of separation from other billboards.  A radial 
circle will be drawn around the billboard, a thousand feet in all directions.  New billboards 
would have to maintain that separation.  We took all of the scenic corridors that are 
referred to in policy documents and put this in the ordinance to say no billboards in those 
scenic corridors. Not just no digital billboards, but no billboards.  This is a huge change to 
where billboards can and can’t be located by trying to protect the sensitive areas in 
response to a lot of the comments from the dark sky community.  No billboard shall be 
erected in or within 600 feet of a scenic corridor.  Many letters in opposition have come 
in with concerns of degrading existing neighborhoods in central Phoenix area.  These 
billboards are not within those neighborhoods and will be on arterials.  They are existing 
billboards along the freeways and within 300 feet and subject to the digital conversion.  
This code does allow for billboards to get taller and bigger similar to what every city in 
the valley is doing.  A majority have already received variances and/or allowances 
through zoning cases.  It restricts scenic corridors and newly built freeways, SR30 and 
corners of intersections. The digital conversion will go through a public hearing process 
similar to any kind of a land use with an SUP.  It also restricts it to only freeways.  There was 
a section to limit the separation for legal non-conforming billboards; less than 1,000 feet, 
but it was removed.   If driver safety and distraction was a massive issue, why did every 
city in the valley and the state of Arizona allow for digital conversions of billboards if it is 
a massive problem? He does not know of any local study that demonstrates a public 
concern.   This code is beneficial, it brings things to be consistent with all of the other cities 
in the valley, and it mandates a technology that no other city in the valley has mandated 
to help mitigate the light. It will provide a public process when the conversions happen. 
 
Mr. Matt Anderson said he a technical resource to the applicant and is available to 
answer any questions. 
 
Mr. Cheng Qian said he is the inventor and technology engineer for this product and he 
is available to answer any technical questions or clarify any concerns with the 
technology.  
 
Mr. Claude Haynes said he is the manager of the Gilbert Rotary Sentinel Observatory and 
member of the East Valley Astronomy Club. There is misconception of the text of this 
proposed amendment, the diagram on page 5 that shows billboards at 300 square feet 
is not the norm. All of the billboards along the freeways are greater than that size.  Becker 
Boards has eight signs in Sun City and El Mirage not near the freeways.  Almost all of the 
arterial signs nearby are greater than 300 square feet and have been allowed for a long

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 13 of 21 
 
period. The current digital billboards from Becker Boards are 672 square feet, and the 
mass majority of static billboards with 80 in Becker Boards inventory are the same size. This 
is not about increasing size it is about normalizing large billboards. This is an outrageous 
attempt to allow signs greater than 301 square feet.  Almost the entire inventory of Becker 
Boards and other sign companies especially along the freeways go dark after midnight. 
This wording should not be replaced with a free pass to be non-compliant for six years. 
This is a prime example why ordinances written by vendors to control their own industries 
must be carefully reviewed. Do not legalize bad behavior and do not accept the 
recommendation to strike out a current lighting requirement that is beneficial to the 
community.  Most static billboards are non-compliant and are lite from below, and if the 
standard lighting is from above why are Becker Boards continuing to be permitted with 
non-compliant lighting.  He encourages the Commission to include wording to require all 
new signs to be conforming and not to continue to approve non-compliance as the 
norm.  Becker Boards has almost 90 static billboards currently along the freeways. He 
encourages the Commission to consider the impact of density and congestion of 
billboards and not simply convert them or not.  
 
Mr. Mark Falzone said he is the president of Scenic America based in Washington D.C., 
our mission is to preserve and enhance the visual character and scenic beauty of our 
country, and we advocate for all people and communities.  One of the worst aspects of 
digital billboards is the dangers to drivers and pedestrians, making roads more dangerous 
by creating harsh lighting and distracting electronic imagery that impairs drivers putting 
lives at risk. Digital billboards create dangerous and unavoidable driver distractions by 
design for the purpose of driving the attention away from the road and towards the 
advertisements. Human error is the leading cause of traffic accidents, and lawmakers 
want to reduce driver distraction by enacting laws like banning cell phone use while 
driving. The industry actually lead the efforts because they realized their products were 
distracting.  Many studies indicate that digital billboards create similar distracting 
conditions.  Veridian Group specialized in the research study are an independent group 
leading researchers in digital billboards and distracted driving. They evaluated 27 
different high quality studies and demonstrated there is conclusive evidence that digital 
billboards contribute to distract driving.  Billboards are a harmful form of scenic blight with 
significant negative impacts. Research indicates billboards reduce property values for 
nearby property owners causing economic harm to the surrounding community.  
 
Dr. Rolf Jansen said he is a professional astronomer, and even the best digital billboards 
with the newest technology emit light above the horizontal. Light emitted near and 
above the horizontal is scattered many times in the atmosphere and reaches distances 
well over 100 miles away making this kind of light pollution a regional issue.  It affects not 
just Maricopa County but all of the neighboring counties, which requires coordination 
with multiple counties involving all stakeholders.  Conversion of traditional billboards to 
larger, higher and brighter digital boards increases the prominence of the light of the 
Phoenix metropolitan area.  Astronomy, planetary scientists and space scientists 
represent a capital investment in the Arizona economy of more than a billion dollars, and 
stargazing is in an excess of 250 million dollars a year.  Arizona has the largest optical 
telescope in the world. This industry brings in federal and international funding to Arizona, 
and is contingent on the assumption of long-term local protection. The Arizona state 
legislature in 2012 included certain state protections and placed protection on digital

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 14 of 21 
 
billboards. In other parts of the country, operators are required to remove 6-10 existing 
billboards as a public benefit in order to erect or convert to one digital billboard. To 
compensate for the brightness, larger and brighter electronic boards should require 
removal of a large number of existing billboards.  The present language omits any of 
these requirements and limits the opportunity for public comment and oversight, and fails 
to involve neighboring governments who are stakeholders in this issue. He urges rejection 
of this text amendment; it is not in the best interest of Maricopa County residents.  
 
Mr. Tristahn Schaub asked whom does this request serve.  He said billboards are 
dangerous. When you approach a military checkpoint, the first thing they do is flash a 
light in your eyes this is to disarm and disorient, and to draw attention to the checkpoint.  
The applicant claims this is the wave of future.  Is looking at a cell phone while driving a 
good idea, but then allow a 14’x48’ display placed on roadways.  These billboards are 
meant to distract drivers.  In a study showing safety impacts on digital billboards, when 
the billboards were covered or removed accidents declined by 30 to 40 percent.  When 
they put them back up they increased by 30 to 60 percent.  The Arcadia/Camelback 
Association requested from the Phoenix police department digital billboard distraction 
accidents within our boundaries.  Specifically on 44th Street and Camelback where there 
are no digital billboards, 44th Street and Indian School where there are existing billboards.  
Digital advertising corresponds to a great number of vehicular accidents on average 
and the relative rates are increasing each year from 10 percent more in 2018, 30 percent 
more in 2019, and 57 percent more in 2020 comparing those two intersections.  Both 
arterials, similar streets and in their neighborhood.  At both of these intersections the lights 
cycle first for left turning traffic followed by thru traffic. This is a 38 percent increase in the 
number of left turn accidents between the digital intersections verses the non-digital 
intersection.  These local billboards are dangerous.  He asked the Commission to adhere 
to the same legislation that applies to cell phones to put these things down, and the 
darker areas are dangerous at night when lite up.  This only serves the digital billboard 
companies to get digital displays placed in areas before being annexed.  
 
Mr. Richard Green said he is an astronomer at the University of Arizona, and assistant 
director of the Astronomy program. He is speaking on behalf of the Arizona Astronomy 
Consortium, which represents all the professional observatories in Arizona.  We have 
major concerns with the proposed text amendment because of the technology to 
replace conventional illuminated billboards with digital billboards. He acknowledges 
they are installing state of the art technology, however in the picture the top profile of 
the light goes above horizontal. Light is projected outwards, not as if it is reflecting external 
light off a board, a third of the light goes above horizontal.  The louvers cut the top angle 
down in half from 30 degrees to 15 degrees. That light that is projected directly just above 
horizontal travels the farthest in the atmosphere. It contributes directly to the sky glow 
above the observatory up to 200 hundred miles away. Most counties do have regulations 
to control light trespass in the skyward direction. The core of those regulations are fully 
shielded fixtures, which means no light is directed above horizontal.  Even though this 
proposal has the best current technology, if you legalize it you are taking a step 50 years 
backwards in protection of Arizona’s valuable resource of a dark night sky by saying it is

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 15 of 21 
 
okay to have lights that are not fully shielded.  The sky glow above Maricopa County 
impacts telescopes throughout our whole state, Flagstaff, Tucson, even Mt. Graham with 
the world’s largest telescope. This text amendment runs counter to the needs of one of 
the most visible and high impact industries in the state of Arizona, professional astronomy.  
 
Commissioner Gress asked if he is representing the astronomers in Arizona.  Mr. Green said 
the professional observatories with the large professional telescopes located on the 
mountain sites.  
Commissioner Gress asked do you believe the observatories will be closed and not 
function because of the digital billboards.  Mr. Green said they could be subject to 
closure, and there is potential for growth in this industry by building new telescopes, but 
that depends on external investors perception of the willingness of local governments in 
to cooperate trying to control the growth of the light in the sky of artificial light.   
 
Mr. Larry Whitesell said Mr. Lally said every city has approved digital billboards, which is 
incorrect.  A letter from the Town of Gilbert said offsite commercial signs/billboards are 
prohibited in the Town of Gilbert and they concerned about the number of county islands 
in Gilbert.  We all live and drive through Maricopa County and care about the quality of 
life, and we care about issues either we support or oppose. Much of the conversation is 
about 50+ existing billboards that could convert to digital, but the text amendment would 
allow the addition and installation of new billboards in areas where they do not exist 
today.  There has been many iterations of this text amendment, and it is confusing 
because the iterations are not dated. It would be helpful if we knew when each of these 
iterations were issued so we would have current information.  There is a lot opposition 
from the stakeholders and this text amendment should be rejected and drafted by all 
stakeholders not just a single billboard company.  His biggest concern is the distancing; 
separation requirements and setbacks are inadequate and are less restrictive than the 
current language. Most cities and towns require at least 500 feet from residential.  He is 
also concerned about the southern part of the county along State Route 85 and I-8, 
where these scenic areas are not designated scenic corridors.  
 
Mr. Neal Haddad said many of professionals and hundreds of residents have voiced their 
opposition to this proposal. These are decisions that will have a generational impact. 
There has been no discussion about take down boards in exchange for putting up a 
digital face, and no discussion with brightness levels or messages. The process does not 
allow a third vetting of request or adequate public input and he has issues with how the 
process has played out. This text amendment should be rejected and start over with 
industry and resident stakeholders in a transparent manner. He asked the Commission to 
deny this application.   
 
Mr. Luke Edens said he is the vice-president of the International Dark Sky Association  
Phoenix Area Chapter. Light pollution is well documented and the negative effects on 
wildlife and human health. When an electric light source is used in one specific location, 
its light is scattered by dust and gas molecules in the atmosphere producing a luminous 
background, which effects the entire region for miles away from the initial light source. It

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 16 of 21 
 
is one of the main forms of light pollution.  The intensity of light from thousands of LED’s on 
a digital billboard face causes more light pollution then any current conventional lite 
billboard even if louvers are used accordingly. They produce triple the amount of 
illumination during daytime hours and can be legibly be seen in the sunlight. Digital 
billboards produce the most night glare during sunset hours when ambient light in the sky 
is at its lowest levels causing a safety risk for rush hour traffic.  Placement of taller billboards 
in the night sky increases light pollution on the entire region from the sky glow effects.  The 
lighting policies and ordinances need to be reviewed and updated to the current 
independent industry standards before discussing any new lighting proposals because 
many of these policies are outdated.  Allowing applicants to be the leading source is 
biased misdirect, and we oppose this text amendment. 
 
Ms. Lisa Perez said she lives in the City of Phoenix and is in opposition to this text 
amendment. Billboards are not necessary; they create visual blight and serve no public 
benefit.  The applicant in his presentations points out where the letters of opposition have 
originated and certain zip codes are not impacted.  She is a Phoenix resident but less 
than a three-minute walk, she is in unincorporated Maricopa County. It does have a 
direct impact no matter where you live in the county.  Maricopa County should be as 
transparent as possible when their public policy is being developed, and in this instance, 
you are allowing a private company to lead the process to change the zoning 
ordinance. This is a horrible way to make public policy and is not the solution.  This should 
have been initiated by county staff and meetings be held by all stakeholders including 
representatives from the entire billboard industry, other municipalities and residents in 
Maricopa County.  EROP is not a good outreach process and she did not find out about 
this text amendment until May 2021. She asked the Commission to deny the text 
amendment.    
 
Ms. Amy Oliver said astronomy and astrophysics brings one-billion dollars to the economy 
in Arizona by bringing a significant number of jobs, investments in our communities and 
infrastructure. Astro tourism is one of the biggest industries in Arizona.  This text 
amendment is based on one industry that benefits just that one industry.  We had several 
conversations with Becker Boards.  The technology does not mitigate the dark sky. The 
louvers are good at mitigating light trespass, but light pollution is not the same thing. 
Anything above 15 degrees above horizontal is going to continue to impact light 
pollution that impacts our economy.  This new text amendment is opening the door to 
any legal non-conforming billboards to be converted to digital. Every single static non-
conforming billboard that is built in the future now automatically qualifies for conversion. 
This is opening a “can of worms” creating this larger sky dome that continues to impact 
observatories in the area.  Anything we can do to mitigate that growth will help us in the 
long run to all to be better neighbors.  
 
Mr. Charles Huellmantel said he represents Outfront Media and he completely disagrees 
with this process. This only helps Becker Boards.  He does not feel they have been able to 
participate in a process that will impact the industry, and they didn’t have the 
opportunity to work with staff.  If this is approved each of us in the industry will have to

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 17 of 21 
 
follow the same process.  He believes this should be a larger process with all of the 
stakeholders, neighbors, and the astronomy industry with a more level playing field.  He 
asked the Commission to reject this text amendment. 
 
Commissioner Gress asked will other billboard companies like Outfront Media be able to 
convert their billboards into digital billboards under this proposed text amendment.  Why 
would this be a competitive disadvantage to them?  Mr. Huellmantel said they didn’t 
have anything to do with the processing of the case. They might benefit in that way, but 
this is not good for the industry.   Commissioner Gress asked why digital billboards would 
not be good for the industry.  Mr. Huellmantel said he does not think this text amendment 
is good for the industry.  
 
Ms. Sandy Bahr said she represents Sierra Club Arizona Chapter with members throughout 
Maricopa County. They have long opposed these special laws, rules and ordinances and 
now text amendments to benefit billboard companies. They are strongly opposed to this 
text amendment and asked the Commission to reject it. The Sierra Club and its members 
have a significant interest in keeping dark skies, reducing energy use, insuring public 
safety and protecting wildlife, and making our communities livable. Digital billboards 
contribute significantly to roadway and neighborhood blight, and a distraction for 
already distracted drivers. They emit a considerable amount of light, disrupting wildlife 
and threatening dark skies in natural areas as well as for Arizona observatories.  Artificial 
light can impact the migratory patterns of birds, attract insects away from where they 
should be, and contribute to their decline.  Many communities have taken action to 
protect the dark skies recognizing their value for residents, wildlife, and observatories.  The 
applicant said everybody else is going to digital billboards, which is incorrect. This 
argument is weak especially when the activity is harmful.  People in our communities are 
not demanding more and bigger digital billboards, they want our communities beautiful, 
desert and wildlife protected, and to look at the stars.  She asked the Commission to 
reject this text amendment and to put the welfare of our community ahead of the 
demand of these billboard companies.  
 
Mr. Taylor Earl said he represents Clear Channel Outdoor and they are not opposed to 
the county zoning ordinance providing an entitlement pathway for digital billboards.  This 
text amendment should not be approved because it does not have industry wide 
consensus. It fails to provide the type of reasonable balancing interests for adjacent 
municipalities, property owners, and the outdoor advertising industry.  This amendment 
hasn’t been drafted in a way that would benefit or protect the community as to why the 
County is receiving so much opposition. All billboard companies would have to use this 
new zoning ordinance for years to come. To have one company present a text 
amendment without having a broader consensus with the industry isn’t how the County 
should proceed.  The best course of action is to take the input from the community, and 
not take a vote at the end of the hearing; instead, he asks the commission to continue 
this case and direct staff to host an open forum where members of the industry can 
discuss the details of the text amendment.  That type of open discussion has not been 
done for two years on this current reiteration.  We believe all digital billboards should go

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 18 of 21 
 
through a special use process and only some of them are required in the current version.  
Staff should establish a clear application procedure for the digital sign permits and to be 
done well in advance of any approval so there is an open, fair and transparent permit 
process.  Spacing for residential should be increased to 500 feet, and a requirement to 
notice adjacent cities and towns should explicitly be included into that text amendment.  
They are not opposed to an entitlement pathway for digital billboards, but right now, the 
amendment has defects.  The County needs greater consensus among the industry 
before they proceed with an amendment to the zoning ordinance.  
Mr. Mark Mayer said he is here on behalf of Scenic Arizona whose mission is preserve and 
enhance the natural beauty of Arizona.  They are opposed to the proposed billboard 
text amendment. The public does not want it and it will increase visual blight along 
Maricopa County freeways, and undermine municipal billboard restrictions by allowing 
large electronic billboards in their planning areas prior to annexation.  In 2005, Scenic 
Arizona commissioned an opinion poll and the results were that Maricopa County 
residents opposed to electronic billboards by an overwhelming 3-1/2 to 1.  The public 
clearly does not want these eyesores, and the draft today is not a result to the citizens 
demanding such changes.  This ordinance would further exploit county islands along the 
Loop 202 and State Route 24 within the communities of Mesa, Gilbert and Queen Creek 
whose codes do not allow billboards.  Peoria and Surprise can also be affected if these 
billboard allowances became an incentive to rezone county land prior to annexation.  
He urged the Commission to stand up for the scenic quality of our state and the integrity 
of local governance and reject this text amendment.  The map shown is irrelevant, 
motorists drive on these freeways come from all kinds of locations. Others see these 
billboards, not only those in the valley but also those also traveling through Phoenix.   
 
Mr. Sandy Hamilton said he lives in Laveen and the citizens rely on your help to protect 
us, the voter from the distracted driving that might occur because of this. Along with 
billboard blight and the property values dropping.  If this issue were on the ballot, do you 
think it would pass?  
 
Mr. Harvey Shulman said he believes they are getting ahead of themselves because a 
couple of months ago the U.S. Supreme Court in a case with the City of Austin verses 
Reagan National Advertising said it would be deciding by June 2022 whether onsite 
business signs and offsite signs must have the same right to advertise through the same 
rules.  If this proposal is approved before the Supreme Court acts, you may be opening 
yourselves to all kinds of digital signs, not just billboards but onsite premise advertising.  He 
urges the Commission to wait and see how that plays out.   Almost every other place in 
the country those that convert a non-digital billboard to digital have to take down two 
or more boards to do the digital conversion.  If somebody wants to convert one of their 
conventional boards to digital why not make them at the same time change the lighting 
on their under mounted conventional boards.  The proposed standards for conversion 
are far too lose even looser than the City of Phoenix digital standards, which are now 
being challenged in court.  The International Engineering Society issued a report in 2019 
that digital billboard messages should appear for at least 20 seconds minimum not 8 
seconds. The brightness of digital boards in rural areas should not exceed 20 nits, and you

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 19 of 21 
 
are proposing to allow 300 nits in unincorporated parts of the county.  Three hundred nits 
is about the brightness of 9 or 10 full moons. The conventional billboard in the Phoenix 
area has a brightness of 30 to 50 nits.  You are proposing to replace digital billboards and 
increase the brightness by ten-fold.  He asked if anyone has stood in front of a digital 
billboard at 150 feet. That is being proposed to allow people’s homes to be within 150 
feet.  The 1,000-foot distance is very inadequate; someone passing on the highway would 
see six different messages in a one-minute period as soon as they start seeing the 
billboard.  He would like the parties on all sides to have a debate in a public forum.  This 
proposal is not ready for a vote.  
 
Chairman Arnett asked if anyone else from the public wished to speak on this item. None. 
 
Mr. Lally said they have tried to be as transparent as possible. Two members of the 
billboard industry referenced their inability to participate in the process and this was not 
a consensus among the industry. All of the meetings they had on this case those members 
and/or their clients participated in the meetings making similar comments. There has 
been a hundred changes to the text over the last three years all of which were in 
response to industry professionals, the community and stakeholders.  The intent of his 
exhibit was to show how this would impact the surrounding property owners and where 
they are located in the county and which billboards could be re-purposed or modified 
to digital. The billboards he was talking about are in areas where people reside, live and 
work near those billboards, they are not coming out in vast opposition.   There was a 
debate many years ago with the legislature and the astronomy industry where they 
came and discussed what parts of the state are appropriate for billboards and what 
parts of the state are not. They passed a law that all cities have followed and this 
ordinance is following the state law as it relates to locations and protection of those 
facilities.  The law also recommends 8 seconds for flips and 300 nits. The City of Phoenix 
and all other jurisdictions around the valley have adopted those standards.  There was 
mention of an Israeli study and he is not familiar with it and does not know if the roads 
and conditions in Israel are the same as Maricopa County.  He requested a public records 
request from the City of Phoenix for the 44th Street area and asked for numbers of wrecks 
increasing over the years. They checked if it reflected a reason to have increased traffic 
and wrecks that had anything to do with billboards. The information received was there 
is not even a category since driver distraction of a billboard is so slight.  The impact on 
drivers and surrounding property owners will be mitigated with this new technology. This 
code is doing what most of the jurisdictions in the valley do.  Every jurisdiction that allows 
billboards also allows digital billboards. A number of jurisdictions in the valley do not allow 
billboards, and the ones that do allow digital billboards. The developments standards are 
the same in terms of the size 14’x48’ and 1,000 feet or more apart from each other, and 
300 nits and 8 second turn time. We are following the general consensus of the valley.  
This is the best technology available today and Maricopa County will be groundbreaking 
with this technology for digital louvers.  The applicant has done everything that has been 
asked and if this process was not true, transparent, and fair he does not think over the 
three years and hundreds of changes staff could say this was not a transparent and fair 
process to all of those involved.

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 20 of 21 
 
 
Chairman Arnett said he knows this is a passionate issue and we all care about our 
community. The people on this commission are serving because they care about their 
community and we are residents of this community. He agrees with all the comments 
made. There are such big signs, but you can choose not to read them. We all live in this 
community and this is a difficult discussion.  He knows the process has not been perfect, 
but it has been a process and there is always somebody that’s not going to agree. He 
does not think it has been unfair.  He is inclined to support this. 
 
Commissioner Schlosser said he recalls three years ago, it was his first ZIPPOR meeting and 
all the billboard companies were there. He asked over the last three years how much 
time of County staff has spent on this text amendment.   Mr. Gerard said possibly a couple 
months’ worth of work for a full-time position.  Commissioner Schlosser said it’s been a lot 
of time spent for everybody. 
 
Commissioner Schlosser said he heard similar comments back then as today, that it 
wasn’t a fair process and they were not included in the process. He finds that hard to 
believe.  He has tremendous respect for the astronomers and their profession and he 
appreciates all their comments and concerns. We have to keep in mind; the City of 
Phoenix just took the fifth largest city in the nation, and there are hundreds of thousands 
of residences, commercial buildings, all which produce light in this metropolitan area. It 
is time for this application to move forward, it has been three years. He knew this was a 
complex issue but did not think it would take three years.  
 
Vice Chairman Swart asked counsel about the U.S. Supreme Court case that was 
mentioned.  Mr. Peck said if we were to adopt an ordinance and that case comes in 
and raises questions with our ordinance, we would present that to the commission and 
see if our ordinance needs to be amended at that time.  We do not know how the court 
is going to decide.  In most cases, the concern with billboards is whether you are 
regulating content. There is nothing in the text amendment that deals with content.  
Unless you feel it is appropriate to wait until that time.  Vice Chair Swart said no he does 
not. 
 
Commissioner McGee said there were many concerns raised about the process and she 
thinks the process from the get go was fatally flawed. She is supportive of small business, 
but if you get off on the wrong foot, it is difficult to get back on the right foot.  In this 
instance, the process itself does not allow for that.  It needs to be a larger conversation 
and everybody needs to be at the table at the same time with the same facts and 
information.  She bases this on her experiences at the State Capitol as a brand new state 
legislature with processes to establish Arizona law. The whole request needs to be 
handled differently as a general text amendment opposed to a text amendment 
generated by a specific business.

Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 
Meeting of September 9, 2021 
Page 21 of 21 
 
COMMISSION ACTION: Commissioner Schlosser motioned to approve TA2018001 with 
revisions. Chairman Arnett second. Approved 3-2.  Ayes: Schlosser, Swart, Arnett; Nays: 
Gress, McGee; Danzeisen recused. 
 
The revisions from paragraph 12: 
 
Proposed Section 201 definition of “Sign, off-site advertising (billboards) – 
digital”: Change “utilizes” to “utilizing” in first sentence.  
 
Proposed Article 1112.7.1.1.21: Change language to “Any lawfully existing 
bottom mounted upward lighting is permitted to remain. However, any 
alteration to said billboard will require the lighting to be removed and replaced 
with downward lighting in conformance with Article 1112.3.2. All new billboards 
are required to be in conformance with Article 1112.3.2.” This would allow 
continued use of existing lighting for signs that meet legal non-conforming 
standards but would require downward lighting for any new or altered signs at 
the time of permitting. 
 
Proposed Article 1301.1.21.2.3: Add “to be relocated” at end of sentence.  
 
Proposed Article 1403.3.1.C: Add “have features that emit sound or” before 
“be audible in any manner.” 
 
Proposed Article 1403.3.1.F.2.a: Add “immediately adjacent to sign” after 
“main travel lanes of a freeway”.  
 
Proposed Article 1403.3.1.G: Under the table for sign face and embellishments, 
add asterisks for each of the sign face standards (300 sf and 672 sf) to include 
a footnote that states “this maximum square footage applies separately to 
each side of a double-faced sign”.  
 
Proposed Article 1403.3.1.J.1.ii: This should state “Digital billboards shall be 
permitted if along AND WITHIN 300’ OF AN EXISTING freeway…” (Emphasis 
added).  This change is consistent with language in other articles of the text 
amendment and is also more precise, removing interpretational drift with 
determination as to what location is along a freeway. 
 
Proposed Article 1403.3.1.J.4: Replace the first word “Such” with “Digital”.  
 
Proposed Article 1403.3.1.J.5: Remove the first word “Minimal”.  
 
Proposed Article 1403.3.1.J.9: Add “modified or” before the word “converted” 
to be consistent with language from Article 1301.1.21.1.2. Also, remove from 
sub-section “J” and make a new sub-section “K” under same article, this is to 
remove from digital sub-section J as this doesn’t just apply to digital billboards.  
 
Proposed Article 1403.3.1.J.10: “Add the word “existing” before the word 
“rights”. Also, remove from sub-section “J” and make new sub-section “L” 
under same article as this applies to not just digital billboards.  
  
Chairman Arnett adjourned the meeting at 12:43 p.m. 
 
 
Prepared by Rosalie Pinney 
Recording Secretary 
September 9, 2021

KEY NOTES
1.
AREA OF NEW ASPHALT PAVING
2.
EXISTING ASPHALT PAVING
3.
EXISTING ELECTRICAL METER
4. 
NEW 5' WIDE SIDEWALK
5.
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT AND BOLLARDS
TO BE RELOCATED
6.
NEW ASPHALT OR CONCRETE PAVING
7.
NEW LANDSCAPED AREA
8.
NEW CONCRETE WALKWAY - ADA ACCESSIBLE
UNDER EXISTING CANOPY, TO EXISTING
OFFICE ENTRANCE
9.
NEW CMU SCREENING WALL
HEIGHT: 3'-0"
10. 
NEW SITE LIGHTING
HEIGHT:16'-0"
11.
NEW SITE LIGHTING ON BUILDING
12.
EXISTING POWER POLL
13.
EXISTING POWER POLL  TO BE RELOCATED
14. 
PROPOSED LOCATION OF SEPTIC TANK AND FIELD
15.
PROPOSED LOCATION OF WELL AND WATER TANK
16.
STABILIZED CRUSHED GRANITE PAVING
(FOR DUST PROOFING)
17.
NEW CMU WALL. HEIGHT 8'-0"
18.
10'-0" WIDE LANDSCAPED AREA WITH TREES
(PLANTED 20' APART)
19.
25'X25' VISIBILITY TRIANGLE
20.
ADA RAMP
PROJECT INFORMATION
AAK ARCHITECTURE & INTERIORS, INC.
7585 EAST REDFIELD ROAD, SUITE 106
SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260
CONTACT: ART KNADJIAN
TEL: 480.588.5852
EMAIL: ART@AAKAII.COM
ARCHITECT:
OWNER:
MONTANA TRACTOR AND PLOW COMPANY
MAILING ADDRESS:
21427 N. BLACK CANYON HWY,
PHOENIX AZ 85027
PROJECT DATA:
PARCEL NUMBER:
210-09-019
LOT SIZE: 206,182 S.F. / 4.74 ACRES
EXISTING ZONING: 
RU-43
PROPOSED ZONING: 
  C-3
  WITH CUPD OVERLAY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT COVERAGE:
PRIMARY COVERAGE:
(MAIN BUILDING STRUCTURES ONLY)
TOTAL BUILDING AREA 4,603 S.F
COVERAGE: 2.3%
TOTAL COVERAGE:
(MAIN BUILDING STRUCTURES PLUS
CANOPIES & SHADE STRUCTURES)
TOTAL COVERED AREA:  7,453 (4,603 + 2,850)
COVERAGE: 3.6%
-ALL STRUCTURES ARE EXISTING-
PARKING:
REQUIRED:
OFFICE: 
1,668 (1,668 / 300=5.56) 
6 PARKING SPACES
OUTDOOR DISPLAY AREA: 
11,800 S.F (11,800 / 10,000= 1.18) 
2 PARKING SPACES
EMPLOYEES:
MAX. 3
1 PARKING SPACE
SERVICE BAYS:
1
1 PARKING SPACE
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED:
10 PARKING SPACES
(PER CHAPTER 702:
1 PER 300S.F. OF OFFICE, 1 PER 10,000 OF OUTDOOR DISPLAY AREA,
1 PER 3 EMPLOYEES,1 PER SERVICE BAY)
PROVIDED
REGULAR: 
12 PARKING SPACES
ADA: 
  2 PARKING SPACES
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED:
14 PARKING SPACES
VICINITY MAP
W HAPPY VALLEY RD.
I - 17
N 7TH ST.
N 9TH AVE.
THIS
SITE
THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 3
EAST OF GILA AND SALT RIVER BASE AND MERIDIAN,
EXCEPT ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS AS RESERVED IN PATENT
FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
UTILITY SERVICES
APS
ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE
CENTRAL ARIZONA WATER
CONSERV DISTR / ENGINEERING
COX COMMUNICATIONS
CENTURY LINK
CITY OF PHOENIX INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
COMPANY
UTILITY TYPE
ELECTRIC
COAXIAL,ELECTRIC,
FIBER OPTICS, WATER
CATV, FIBER OPTICS
COAXIAL, FIBER OPTICS
COAXIAL, FIBER OPTICS
MINIMUM LOT AREA
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH
MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK
(SOUTH PROPERTY LINE)
MINIMUM STREET SIDE SETBACK
(EAST PROPERTY LINE)
MINIMUM INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK
(WEST PROPERTY LINE)
MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK
(NORTH PROPERTY LINE)
SCREENING
REGULATION
C-3 BASE
STANDARDS
PROPOSED C-3 CUPD
STANDARDS
6,000 SQ. FT.
60-FEET
60%
40-FEET
10-FEET
10-FEET
10-FEET
25-FEET
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 OR
RESIDENTIAL ZONE BOUNDARY
6,000 SQ. FT.
60-FEET
60%
40-FEET
10-FEET
10-FEET
10-FEET
25-FEET
A SOLID WALL, NOT LESS THAN
EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT, SHALL BE
REQUIRED ALONG AND ADJACENT
TO ANY SIDE OR REAR PROPERTY
LINE ABUTTING ANY RURAL OR
RESIDENTIAL ZONE BOUNDARY
PLANT PALETTE
SYMBOL
BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME
SIZE
TREES
MISCELLANEOUS
DG
3/4" DESERT GOLD DECOMPOSED GRANITE GROUND COVER
LIVE OAK
QUERCUS VIRGINIANA
ARIZONA ASH
FRAXINUS VELUTINA
CHITALPA
CHITALPA
TASHKENTENSIS
MULGA ACACIA
ACACIA ANEURA
36" BOX
NOTES
SPACED" 12' O/C
SPACED" 40' O.C.
SPACED" 40' O.C.
SPACED" 20' O.C.
36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX
AT ALL
LANDSCAPED
AREAS
EXISTING
CONCRETE SLAB
EXISTING
CONCRETE SLAB
EXISTING
CANOPY AND
CONCRETE SLAB
STABILIZED CRUSHED
GRANITE PAVING
EXISTING CANOPY
W HAPPY VALLEY RD
STREET CENTER LINE
 N 9TH AVE
659'-11"
330'-4"
660'-0"
330'-9"
33'-0"
PATENT
EASEMENT
TO BE
ABANDONED
33'-0"
PATENT
EASEMENT
TO REMAIN
33'-0"
PATENT
EASEMENT
TO BE
ABANDONED
EXISTING
EASEMENT
40'-0"
EXISTING
EASEMENT
40'-0"
98'-11"
172'-7"
49'-7"
81'-11"
32'-8"
90'-0"
56'-7"
53'-5"
224'-11"
328'-6"
322'-2"
50'-0"
94'-0"
76'-4"
98'-11"
89'-6"
APN: 210-09-019
EXISTING MODULAR
BUILDING 2
-OFFICE-
EXISTING MODULAR
BUILDING 1
TRUCK DISPLAY AREA
TRUCK
DISPLAY AREA
TRUCK
DISPLAY AREA
30'-0"
6
TYP.
6
TYP.
6
TYP.
7
TYP.
18
7
TYP.
8
9
9
5
13
12
3
7
10
TYP.
10
10
TYP.
13
11
11
DIRT DRIVE
DIRT DRIVE
NEW RETENTION AREA
14
15
10
TYP.
7
TYP.
7
TYP.
6
TYP.
33'-0"
PATENT
EASEMENT
TO REMAIN
ASPHALT OR CONCRETE
PAVING
16
TYP.
16
TYP.
16
TYP.
16
TYP.
17
TYP.
17
TYP.
17
TYP.
17
62'-5"
95'-5"
FUTURE COP ROW
65'-0"
FUTURE COP ROW
65'-0"
18'-0"
10'-0"
18
TYP.
18
TYP.
18
TYP.
10'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
17
TYP.
9'-0"
TYP.
18'-0"
TYP.
11'-0"
5'-0"
11'-0"
18'-0"
TYP.
54'-0"
9'-0"
72'-0"
25'-0"
45'-0"
75'-0"
25'-0"
20'-0"
40'-0"
35'-0"
43'-0"
10'-0"
25'-8"
25'-8"
7
TYP.
10
TYP.
NEW CURB
 52'-0"
5'-6"
5'-0"
4
4
1
2
2
2
⅊
⅊
⅊
⅊
⅊
NEW RETENTION AREA
NEW RETENTION AREA
NEW RETENTION AREA
NEW
RETENTION
AREA
19
19
20
20
NEW RETENTION AREA
20'
0'
40'
80'
40'
8'-0"
8"
8" CMU WALL
FINISH GRADE
SOLID GROUT BELOW GRADE
#5 REBARS @ 16" O.C.
STANDARD WEIGHT JOINT
LADDER REINFORCING
#9 LONG WIRES
#5 CONT. IN 8" DP. BOND BM.
1'-6" MIN.
NOTES:
FOOTING CONSTRUCTION JOINT
NOT TO EXCEED 40' O.C.
WALL CONSTRUCTION JOINT
NOT TO EXCEED 20' O.C.
ALL CELLS CONTAINING
REINFORCMENT SHALL BE GROUTED
SOLID
PILASTER LOCATIONS TO BE VERIFIED
FOR CONSTRUCTION DESIGN
2 #5 CONT. IN FOOTUING
THESE PROJECT DOCUMENTS ARE THE PROPERTY OF AAK ARCHITECTURE & INTERIORS, INC.  NO PART OF THESE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPRODUCED OR USED WITHOUT THE  WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE AUTHORS. COPYRIGHT  ©  2021 AAK ARCHITECTURE & INTERIORS, INC.
PLOT DATEWednesday, November 3, 2021 3:15:54 PM
11/04/2021
2017-00
SHEET TITLE
JOB NUMBER:
DATE:
SCALE:
REV.
CONSTRUCTION PHASE
BULLETIN #
DATE
ISSUED FOR:
PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE
DATE
NO.
Northwest corner of
W. Happy Valley Rd. & N. 9th Ave.
APN: 210-09-019
© 2021
7585 e redfield rd #106 scottsdale arizona 85260
480.588.5852
aakaii.com
TEAM TRACTOR
11-04-2021
COUNTY REVIEW
11-04-2021
MARICOPA COUNTY CASE NUMBER #: Z2021007
A001
 SITE PLAN
EXISTING & PROPOSED
AS NOTED
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
scale: 1"= 40'-0"
1
PRELIMINARY SITE WALL 
scale: 3/8"= 1'-0"
2
12/14/2020
  RECEIVED
11/04/2021

C-3 CUPD Narrative Report  
FOR 
 
Team Tractor Ranch 
 
NORTHWEST CORNER OF 9TH AVENUE AND HAPPY VALLEY ROAD  
   
 
 
Case No. Z2021007 
1st Submittal: January 19, 2021 
2nd Submittal:  March 11, 2021 
3rd Submittal: August 16, 2021

2 
 
PURPOSE OF REQUEST 
 
This request is for a Zone Change from Rural-43 to C-3 (General Commercial) with 
Commercial Unit Plan of Development Overlay (“CUPD”) on approximately 4.7 acres located at 
the northwest corner of Happy Valley Road and the 9th Avenue alignment in Maricopa County 
(the “Site”).  Team Tractor Ranch (“TTR”) requests this Site be rezoned from RU-43 to C-3 CUPD 
to allow the existing business (Team Tractor Ranch) to continue its business operations on the Site 
under the regulations of the C-3 Zoning District, as modified through the CUPD Overlay.   
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 
 
TTR sells and leases agricultural tractors, implements, and farm supplies. The Permitted 
Uses on the Site will be Tractor and Tractor Equipment, Sales and Leasing, and similar uses as 
approved by the County Zoning Administrator.  All other uses listed under the C-3 Zoning District 
shall be prohibited on the Site.   
 
TTR’s existing improvements include: one existing building with a customer counter and 
administrative offices, tractor and implements display area, customer and employee parking areas 
on asphalt millings, and rural agrarian fencing along the Happy Valley Road.  Ingress and egress 
to the Site is located along Happy Valley Road. 
 
The proposed improvements on the Site include:  new asphalt or concrete paved parking 
lot and tractor/equipment display area that will minimize dust, new water well and septic system, 
new 8’ masonry wall surrounding the properties west, north, and east boundaries, and new 3’ 
parking lot screen wall along Happy Valley Road.  It is intended that the property improvements 
comply with the C-3 Development Standards and Regulations. 
 
 
TTR business hours are 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Friday and 8:00 AM to 
12:00 PM on Saturday.  Employees are not scheduled or permitted to work afterhours. The existing 
and proposed building are located within the central portion of the Site and there is a Tractor and 
Tractor Equipment Display Area located north of Happy Valley Road.  The employee and visitor 
parking area is located between the Display Area and the building on the Site.  The area north of 
the building is where the water well, sewer septic system, and vendor delivery area are located.  
Signage will comply with Section 14 of the MCZO.  
 
RELATIONSHIP TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES 
 
 
TTR has operated on the Site since Fall of 2019.  The Site is surrounded on the west by an 
existing business and storage yard (The Pond Gnome), two vacant residential lots and an existing 
residential home abutting the northwest corner of the Site.  To the north and east are vacant 
residential lots.  There is an existing single-family mobile home adjacent to the northeast corner 
of the Site, which has access along the 9th Ave alignment via an existing patent easement.  TTR’s 
development will not impact the existing access on the east boundary of the Site.   
 
The Site is within the City of Phoenix’s Planning Area.  Phoenix’s General Plan Land Use 
Map designates the Site as “Commercial / Commerce Park.”  The proposed C-3 zoning is

3 
 
compatible with the City of Phoenix designation.  The County Comprehensive Plan designates the 
Site “Rural/Residential 0-1 du/ac / Natural Desert.”     
LOCATION AND ACCESSIBILITY 
 
Happy Valley Road is currently under construction to be widened.  Electrical facilities are 
available to the Site by APS.  Water is provided to the Site via an above ground tank with water 
hauled into the Site.  TTR intends to continue the existing water service until the City of Phoenix 
installs a waterline in the future.  Further, a septic sewer system will serve the Site until services 
are made available from the City of Phoenix.   
 
CIRCULATION SYSTEM 
 
Access to and from the Site are provided via driveway along Happy Valley Road.  The 
onsite circulation and parking layout have been designed to provide a safe and convenient 
customer experience.  Customer and employee parking is provided along the south side of the 
building.     
 
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE (PHASING) 
 
 
TTR is an existing business that does not conform to the Site’s existing zoning.  We are 
processing this Zone Change Application pursuant to a Compliance Agreement (V201902005).  
We intend to process this Zone Change request then Construction Documents and Permitting to 
bring the Site into compliance with County requirements.  Site improvements are anticipated to 
begin by Fall 2021.   
 
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES 
 
There are no adjacent or nearby community parks or amenities (other than hiking and off-
road vehicle recreation opportunities vacant open space areas).  The nearest public park, amenities 
and recreation (other than hiking and off-road vehicle recreation) is located approximately 3.5 
miles southeast of the Site (Reach 11 Sports Complex).  The Site is located in the Deer Valley 
Unified School District.  The nearest school is Norterra Canyon Elementary located approximately 
1.6 miles northwest of the Site.  The Site is surrounding by mostly vacant desert land.  The TTR 
development will not have any negative impacts on any school district, parks or other amenities in 
the area.  
 
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 
 
Water:  
Private Water Well  
 
Sewer:  
Onsite Septic 
 
Police:  
Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department 
 
Fire: 
 
North County

4 
 
Refuse: 
Private Refuse Company 
 
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE 
 
The C-3 RUPD Development Standards Comparison Table is provided below: 
REGULATION 
BASE ZONING DISTRICT 
REGULATIONS (C-3) 
PROPOSED ZONING  
REGULATIONS (C-3 RUPD)  
Height  
40’ 
40’ 
Min. Front Yard  
10’ 
 
10’ 
Min. Side Yard  
10’  
10’ 
Min. Rear Yard 
25’  
25’ 
Min. Lot Area 
6,000 sq. ft. 
6,000 sq. ft. 
Min. Lot Width  
60’ 
60’ 
Max. Lot Coverage 
60% 
60% 
 
CONCLUSION 
 
This Zone Change Application establishes uses and other criteria that are appropriate for 
the Site and compatible with the surrounding area.  We request the County’s Approval.