Extracted text (via pymupdf)
68130 characters
January 25, 2023 Z2020011 Page 1 of 3 Report to the Board of Supervisors Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department Board Hearing Date: January 25, 2023 (Cont. from December 7, 2022) Case #/Title: Z2020011 – Eagletail Airstrip Supervisor District: 5 Applicant/Owner: Gretchen House & Michael Tragarz, 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association Request: Modification of Condition for permanent extension of Special Use Permit (SUP) Z 99-87 for a private airstrip/runway in the Rural-43 zoning district Site Location: Generally located between Broadway Rd. and Southern Ave. approximately ¼ mile west of 539th Ave., in the Harquahala area Site Size: Approximately 7.52 acres County Island Status: N/A Additional Comments: This application had been previously continued by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors on December 9th, 2020, pending litigation from the parties involved. Litigation has run its natural course and appeals timeframes have lapsed. No new information is given. Staff continues to forward all public comments and notifications to the file, including an opposition packet received on December 2, 2022. The applicants are requesting a modification of condition ‘d’ of Special Use Permit (SUP) Z 99-87, to renew the SUP and allow continued use of Eagletail Airstrip without expiration / validity period. Staff received 6 opposition letters/emails (and attachments) representing 4 parties and 4 properties part of, or adjacent to, the subject property. Staff also received 19 support letters/emails (and attachments) representing 13 parties and 19 properties part of, or adjacent to, the subject property. Staff received 1 letter of concern from the Harquahala Fire District. Shown below is the existing language of Z 99-87 condition ‘d’ d. This Special Use Permit shall expire 20 years from the date of approval by the Board of Supervisors. January 25, 2023 Z2020011 Page 2 of 3 The requested modification of condition ‘d’ is shown with new language underlined and bold. Staff notes that the original approved narrative report with Z 99-87 will remain as the original approved document. The changes to stipulation ‘d’ will only reference the requested modification of condition. d. This Special Use Permit shall be in perpetuity or shall expire upon termination of the use. Any improvements associated exclusively with the SUP shall be removed within 180 days of such expiration. Commission Recommendation: On October 22, 2020, the Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval of Z2020011 with waiver to the Runway Protection Zones and Obstacle Free Zones per MCZO Art. 1111.3, subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘j’: a. Development shall comply with the site plan, entitled "Site Plan of Eagletail Airstrip,”, consisting of 4 sheets, dated November 18, 1999 and stamped received February 24, 2020 except as modified by the following stipulations. b. Development shall comply with the provisions in the narrative report entitled "Eagletail Airstrip, Maricopa County, Arizona Special Use Permit Narrative Report", consisting of 8 pages, dated February 10, 2020 stamped received February 24, 2020 except as modified by the following stipulations. c. The applicant shall submit a written report outlining the status of the development at the end of five years from the date of approval by the Board of Supervisors. The status report shall be reviewed by staff to determine whether the special use is compatible with the surrounding area. d. This Special Use Permit shall be in perpetuity or shall expire upon termination of the use. Any improvements associated exclusively with the SUP shall be removed within 180 days of such expiration. e. All outdoor lighting shall conform to Section 2318 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. f. Major changes to this Special Use Permit must be processed as a revised application with approval by the Board of Supervisors upon recommendation of the Commission. The Department of Planning and Development may administratively approve minor changes. g. No person shall operate, maintain, use or allow the use of any area larger than 5,000 square feet for the parking, storage, servicing or dispatching of motor vehicles without first implementing reasonably available control measures to effectively prevent or minimize fugitive dust. January 25, 2023 Z2020011 Page 3 of 3 h. After zoning approval, but prior to issuance of any building permits or the issuance of a drainage clearance, the developer or his representatives must contact the Flood Control Permitting Office. i. Non-compliance with the regulations administered by the Maricopa County Environmental Services Department, Maricopa County Department of Transportation or the Maricopa County Flood Control District may be grounds for initiating a revocation of this Special Use Permit as set forth in Section 2806 of the Zoning Ordinance. j. The number of flights per month shall be unlimited. Presented by: Andrew Lorentzen, Planner Reviewed by: Darren Gerard, AICP, Planning Manager Attachments: 10/22/20 P&Z Minutes (8 pages) 10/22/20 P&Z Packet (141 pages) PZ Appeal Form (2 pages) Comments Received After PZ (1 page) 12/02/22 Opposition Packet (20 Pages) Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 22, 2020 Page 6 of 18 k. The Military Compatibility Permit shall be limited to the following uses as per UC2019008: a. Self-storage and RV (boat/vehicle) outdoor storage area REGULAR AGENDA Special Use Permit - Z2020011 (Cont. from 10/8/20) District 5 Project name: Eagletail Airstrip Applicant: Gretchen House & Michael Tragarz, 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association Location: Generally located between Broadway Rd. and Southern Ave. approximately ¼ mile west of 539th Ave., in the Harquahala area Request: Modification of Condition for permanent extension of Special Use Permit (SUP) Z 99-87 for a private airstrip/runway in the Rural-43 zoning district Mr. Watkins presented Z2020011 and noted staff has received six opposition e-mails and 18 support letters/e-mails. Staff recommendation is to approve with conditions. This is a private landing strip in Eagletail Mountain Ranch along eight parcels with eight separate ownerships. The applicant is requesting modification to condition ‘d’, and to have continued use of the Eagletail strip in perpetuity. The changes will only reference requested modifications of condition: This Special Use Permit shall be in perpetuity or shall expire upon termination of the use. Any improvements associated exclusively with the SUP shall be removed within 180 days of such expiration. An appeal to the Board of Adjustment (BOA) BA2020043 was filed by the opposition for interpretation of Director Pokorski’s determination of a beneficiary of an easement equate to a property owner to provided property owner authorization for filing a Special Use Permit application. The appeal went in front of the BOA October 15, 2020, which voted 3-1 to deny the appeal and uphold staff’s interpretation. SUP Z99-87 was approved by the Board of Supervisors April 5, 2000 and the SUP was to expire on April 5, 2020. Then on April 22 the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution to extend all critical deadlines 120 days which extended this deadline to August 22. On August 19, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved another resolution to extend all deadlines with critical dates for one year. The current expiration of the SUP is August 19, 2021. Staff found no zoning violations on record in association with the SUP. The applicant complied with the Maricopa County participation process with site postings and notifications to adjacent property owners within 300 feet of the site. Staff is in support of the request for the perpetual SUP with conditions and modification to condition ‘d’. Chairman Schlosser asked how many were in support and opposition. Mr. Watkins said in opposition there are six e-mails, representing four parties and two households which are four properties in the SUP area. In support we have 18 support letters/e-mails representing 13 parties, one household adjacent to the SUP area, for a total of 19 properties. Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 22, 2020 Page 7 of 18 Chairman Schlosser asked about the Board of Adjustment case. Mr. Peck said that is a complete non-issue before this commission. There is a dispute between the property owners and they took the matter to the BOA, and the Board resolved it. This is something not in the commission’s jurisdiction, and this SUP is just an application like any other. Vice Chairman Arnett asked what the intent was for the easement. Mr. Peck said there are multiple easements on the property, and there is one that is clearly established as an airstrip. The easement allows an airstrip, and the SUP allows the zoning for an airstrip. Mr. Reece Anderson said he is an attorney with Pew and Lake. What is before the commission is not a new SUP, but a renewal of an existing SUP. The site is at 539th Avenue and the airstrip is one mile long. On January 4, 1994 the plat was recorded, and that is when we all agreed the airstrip and development as a flying-in property was established. On January 25, 1994 Eagletail Ranch CC&R’s were established, and in April 2000 is when the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors approved the SUP. In February 2020 the renewal of the SUP was filed. The easement states, this is 100’ easement for Restrictive Air Strip which are in the public record, and the airstrip has been in operation since 1994. Most of the time opposition comes from outside of the airport, but here the opposition is coming from the inside. The SUP was obtained in April 2000 and have been used for ranching operations, farming, crop dusting, Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, Air Force Civil Air Patrol, local flight training operations and emergency landing zone. The SUP states the number of flights is unlimited. The airport is not abandoned. There was a fly-in event with the Civil Air Patrol in November 2019. Eleven of the owners are in support of renewing the SUP representing 200 of the 320 acres, with a total of 13 owners. Each supportive owner provided authorization to Michael Tragarz and Gretchen House to file on their behalf as co-applicants. There is legal standing for each owner to enforce rights as an easement holder. The Board of Adjustment upheld the director’s interpretation that we have the right to move forward. In the last 20 years, Mr. Lyle Spargo and others have been flying out of this airstrip where these easements exist by right. Mr. Spargo was involved and was on the SUP approval letter in 2000. In 2005, there was a status update on how the airstrip was doing and Mr. Spargos signature was on that document authorizing Michael Tragarz to move forward. In 2007 the FAA registration shows the name of the airstrip 99AZ, with Michael Tragarz and Lyle Spargo as co-managers. In 2014 there was involvement with ASU with an experimental lighting system showing a document where Mr. Spargo as one of the owners. In 2018 Mr. Spargo was listed as a manager of the airstrip on the FAA database, but then something happened between 2018 and today where there was a failing out between the parties. Instead of working with us to resolve the dispute, Mr. Spargos went to the FAA and filed to deactivate the airport from the FAA database. This was a safety hazard because pilots in this area would no longer have this in their database as a potential landing space. Plus Board of Supervisors extended the zoning deadlines. This issue was discovered in August, and the FAA sent a letter to Mr. Tragarz reinstating it. They have made many attempts for resolution to talk about the issues. For years they have been working on getting the HOA in place and get a comprehensive set of CC&R’s, and to work on maintenance schedules. Many times they have offered to work with the Spargos and Kooistras and received some correspondence back, but never an answer or acceptance to our offer to sit down and resolve any issues. Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 22, 2020 Page 8 of 18 Mr. Michael Tragarz said he has been the airport manager since 1994. Because of the location of this property, which is outside of the class bravo airspace in the Phoenix area it is very beneficial to the operations within the airspace that are in synchronicity with Sky Harbor and Luke Air Force Base and all of the neighboring airports. He retired from the airlines after 44 years, he’s an aviator, and has lived in the valley for over 25 years. He currently lives at another airpark which was approved AZ90 Hangar Hacienda off of 27th Avenue. In the past, there was a group association forum where we came together to address issues similar to issues the opposition has. Then we voted for a change of the CC&R’s and deed restrictions to allow for certain activities, including the support of the agricultural farmers in the area and other aviation activities. We have reached out in many parts of the community to help enhance aviation, to come together as an official association, to meet the requirements of the SUP, and control and manage the development as it goes forward with the use of the airspace and airport. Chairman Schlosser asked about the location and how many minutes to get to this property once off of I-10? Mr. Tragarz said about 15 minutes from I-10, and it’s located an hour west of the City of Phoenix. Chairman Schlosser said he is familiar with Hacienda, and asked if his intentions are to do the same with this airstrip. Mr. Tragarz said he purchased that property for a number of reasons. For many years he worked on all of the projects and was the chief designer of the airspace in Phoenix and Las Vegas, and many other places around the world. The Phoenix airspace is equally constrained for the general aviation community. We are in a great position to team up with the county and people working out of Goodyear and Glendale, where students have a place to go and practice their skills without interfering and congesting the airspace in Phoenix. He also has every intention to have a residence there. They have the opportunity to attract the general aviation side of the community by having a place to live and a place to have their aircraft, and to have the ability to operate that aircraft without being in conflict with the two major airports. Mr. Lyle Spargo said he is a 19 year resident of Sunup Arizona AMD Subdivision. He is a retired engineer accustomed to reading and evaluating technical documents for consistency, accuracy and validity. He is speaking in opposition to the SUP. The owner on the application says its 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association, but they do not own any property. The request is a modification of conditions for permanent extension of a Special Use Permit. Meaning it will go on forever and we can never do anything about it. A modification from 20 years to perpetuity is a major change. Stipulation ‘g’ – major changes to this SUP must be processed as a revised application, so this must be a new application and not a modification. The Arizona Constitution Article 2 Section 29 states in part: “no law shall be enacted permitting any perpetuity or entailment in this state.” The report to Planning and Zoning states the site size as 7.52 acres, the runway surface is 7.54 acres. The actual site size is approximately 52.52 acres. All the parties in opposition are residents, we live there and it is our home. The 18 letters in support of the SUP are non- residents, they don’t live their or care what is going on. The supporters aren’t their when the crop dusters are flying from the runway. He doesn’t recall any search and rescue using that runway. Staff notes the original approved narrative report with Z99-87 will remain as the original approved document. So they are saying we are not going to go with this new one submitted with the application and the one that applies is the original Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 22, 2020 Page 9 of 18 document. In the narrative is says the Airstrip is in no way associated with Eagletail Ranch is on the other side of the airport. Neither report accurately describes history of the airstrip nor the current status and vision of the applicant. He discussed the MCZO relevant content for airports, landing areas and special uses. Article 1301.1.2 states runways/airstrips, helipads/heliports and other landing areas provided that the OFZ or RPZ as defined should be located entirely on the same lot or parcel as the runway or landing strip. In any instance, where any portion of the OFZ or RPZ of a runway or landing strip extends beyond the lot or parcel of property containing the runway or landing strip, written consent or aviation easements must be obtained from all property owners in which the OFZ or RPZ may wholly or partially lie. In the compliant runway diagram the total area of the runway and safety areas would be 24.5 acres. Of that 24.5 acres area, 3.5 acres are in 506-27-055B and 4.35 acres are in 506-27-059E, neither of which have an aviation easement nor written consent of the owners. Three-eighths of the total property is owned by people that don’t want this runway there, and there is no easement or consent from those other owners in Sunup Arizona AMD. In the MCZO Article 1111.3 it states in any instance where any portion of the OFZ or RPZ of a runway or landing strip extends beyond the lot or parcel of property containing the runway or landing strip, written consent or aviation easements must be obtained from all property owners in which the OFZ or RPZ may wholly or partially lie. The provisions of this paragraph may be waived for any private airport if it will not conflict with applicable regulation of the Federal Aviation Administration or Department of Defense requirements. Since the FAA does not regulate private airports any authors of this ordinance must have known what it meant it will not conflict with applicable regulations. Who holds the liability for approving an airstrip without safety zones recommended by both the MCZO and the FAA? Who’s going to waive this if somebody gets in a wreck? His objections to the airstrip are the cost for maintenance, improvements and liability. The current residents are the only owners that have any of the equipment needed to maintain the runway and they dedicate their time to do runway maintenance. They are at risk for liability claims regarding runway conditions. The cost allocation by acreage, maintenance and upgrade projects, disproportionately affect large parcel owners. An 80 acre parcel owner pays 32 times what a 2.5 acre owner pays, yet the 2.5 acre parcel has the same runway access. The original concept was 40 acre parcels to provide an open, uncongested, low density residential environment. The openness and low density was one of the reasons some land owners wanted to escape the high density HOA environment of the city. They changed the deed restrictions in 2009 and allowed 2.5 acre parcels. The sale of a 2.5 acre parcel to a commercial aerial applicator (crop duster) has resulted in noise, dust, and chemical contamination in our community. The Civil Air Patrol was a land sale promotion for non-owners to use the runway, turning our private runway into a public runway. According to aircraft owners and pilots association, piston engine takeoffs and landings have dropped by over 43% between 2000 and 2018. Less than one person in 500 would be interested in property at Sun Up Arizona. 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association promises to impose the burden and negative marketability of an HOA on the community where a lot of us moved out there to get away from an HOA, and Mr. Tragarz wants to put one in. We are not going to consent to it or want it. The alternative is to tailor the runway dimensions of the western half, to fit within the boundaries of 506-27-055A and 506-27-059D. This precludes including the OFZ and RPZ recommended by both the MCZO and FAA. It also precludes using the prohibition zones depicted in the original SUP application. Granting a variance to the zoning ordinance and waiving the Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 22, 2020 Page 10 of 18 recommended safety zones would seem to rest liability with Maricopa County in the event of any incident that could be avoided if the safety zones are required. The question then becomes should Planning and Zoning recommend waiving all runway safety zones to side with the non-resident applicants. Or would it be better to side with the residents and follow the ordinance as written? 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association is requesting special use of property it does not own against the wishes of the property owners. He asked the commission to reject this application. Mr. Stephen Brower said he represents Stephanie and Stephen Kooistra. Approval of the Special Use Permit would be a legal taking of nearly one million square feet of his client’s property without their approval or just compensation. There’s 1,000 feet by 1,000 feet at the end of the runway, this 1,000 feet was required by the old zoning code which they say is still applicable to the prohibition zone going forward. This is a million square feet property taken without their consent. His clients understood the SUP would expire in 20 years, and have not authorized or signed a Prop 207 waiver, and have not authorized the prohibition zone to continue indefinitely. This would be a governmental take over. His clients are here in opposition of the SUP. The narrow easement that they showed was dedicated as a restricted easement. The easement is limited to the use by the property owners, but Mr. Tragarz invited all sorts of different groups to use the airstrip. This not the purpose of the airport and it goes well beyond the scope of the original SUP and the authorization provided for a restrictive airstrip. This is not what they signed up for. All of the resident land owners are in opposition, and the only one supporting this are speculative investors and land owners that do not live in the community. There are no working hangars, no fueling stations, no reason to land an aircraft on site, and no purpose for the airstrip other than pure land speculation. One of the applicants that signed the application, Gretchen House does not have authority to waive the Prop 207 for his clients. Commissioner Montoya asked staff how did this go from 20 year SUP to perpetuity. Mr. Gerard said the applicant requested the 20 years to be removed. When we looked at Special Use Permit validity periods or expirations dates, we wanted to make sure the land use and development patterns are still compatible with the special use down the road. In this instance, we determined there is no change in land use patterns in the foreseeable future that would indicate this is an incompatible use, a private air strip in area of large lots. That is where staff supported their request to modify that condition of the original SUP to remove the validity period. It’s still substantive to the original zoning exhibit and original narrative. The original narrative in section 3.b does speak to runway protection zones and obstacle free zones. You may add in any motion for an SUP modification of condition to extend the SUP indefinitely, the runway protection zones and obstacle free zones are waived per MCZO Article 1111.3. Mr. Peck said it’s really not in perpetuity, it takes away any expiration date. When you rezone a piece of property it doesn’t have an expiration date, that doesn’t mean it’s in perpetuity. The Board of Supervisors can change zoning, and an SUP is really like zoning. If there were a change in the zoning or planning and legitimate reasons to do so, the Board could rezone the property and that could impact the SUP. Commissioner Ruby asked if there were violations under this SUP would it be treated the same way as an SUP with an expiration date. Mr. Peck said it wouldn’t even have to be Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 22, 2020 Page 11 of 18 a zoning violation. If the area changed, the whole area developed differently, and it became a nuisance, a court can rule a nuisance and it can be rezoned. Mr. Anderson said he finds it ironic that someone who bought in a piece of property that has an airstrip in it, where it was planned, used and operated as an airstrip now wants to destroy the easement rights of others by trying to eliminate this SUP. He urged the Commissioner’s support. Mr. Peck said the only thing before you is an SUP and what they are requesting is appropriate zoning or use for the property. None of the issues whether the easement has been abandoned or whether it’s within the scope of the easement. You are not authorizing an operation of an airstrip, you are telling them by operating an airstrip they are not violating the zoning ordinance. Mr. Stephen Kooistra said he lives at Eagletail Ranch, he is not a pilot, and they live out there 12 months out of the year. Everything was going good at the airstrip until the crop dusters came in. Then they started running three planes and 15 trips a day, from sun up until dusk. That is 100 planes landing and taking off with the noise, dirt, dust, and spilling chemicals. The crop dusters clean out their tanks and fly over the area, and not running a very clean operation. They want to get rid of the airstrip because it is turning into a commercial aviation application. Mr. Gerard said the crop dusting operations today would be a zoning violation. The parcels adjacent to this airstrip do not have any commercial zoning entitlement for crop dusting operations. Chairman Schlosser said that’s not the issue before us today. Mr. Gerard said that’s correct. Commissioner Andersen said his understanding is there is a stipulation that is part of the original SUP that limited the use of the SUP to private status limited to the owners. If that hasn’t been a land use pattern, and asked shouldn’t we consider that to extend this SUP? Mr. Gerard said yes, the Special Use Permit approved was limited to the adjacent land owners and you can take that into account. Ms. Jennifer Pokorski said the crop dusters are property owners adjacent to the airstrip. The airstrip is private and not for commercial air traffic. The crop dusters using the airstrip is not the issue. If you have a commercial business on a residential lot you need entitlement for that, but that is separate entitlement and a completely separate question from the Special Use Permit that the commission is considering. Commissioner Andersen said this is one of the issues that’s motivating the opposition to oppose this SUP. Ms. Pokorski said they are concerned about the crop dusters using the airstrip but that is a separate issue. It is an issue for their HOA or CC&R’s from what type of uses they allow on that airstrip. We are looking at whether the airstrip is an appropriate use for this area. This SUP does not prevent a crop duster from using the airstrip, Mr. Gerard was saying if you are running a business from a residential lot you need a separate entitlement for that, and this SUP does not grant that entitlement. Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 22, 2020 Page 12 of 18 Commissioner Andersen asked do the residents opposing this SUP have a remedy with the county with respect to individuals using the SUP and those in violation of the SUP. Ms. Pokorski said the crop dusting planes are okay with the SUP, if they are operating out of one of the residential lots with a crop dusting operation then a remedy would be to get an SUP for crop dusting on a residential parcel. Ms. Pokorski asked if the crop dusters are currently operating. Mr. Anderson said the crop dusters were operating spring and summer and they are property owners. No one is here arguing that the crop dusters have a right to operate there. They are not operating today, and if they want to continue that operation they have to get their own Special Use Permit. COMMISSION ACTION: Commissioner Montoya motioned to approve Z2020011 with a waiver to the Runway Protection Zones and Obstacle Free Zones per MCZO Art. 1111.3, subject to conditions ‘a’ –‘j’. Commissioner Ruby second. Approved 8-0. a. Development shall comply with the site plan, entitled "Site Plan of Eagletail Airstrip,”, consisting of 4 sheets, dated November 18, 1999 and stamped received February 24, 2020 except as modified by the following stipulations. b. Development shall comply with the provisions in the narrative report entitled "Eagletail Airstrip, Maricopa County, Arizona Special Use Permit Narrative Report", consisting of 8 pages, dated February 10, 2020 stamped received February 24, 2020 except as modified by the following stipulations. c. The applicant shall submit a written report outlining the status of the development at the end of five years from the date of approval by the Board of Supervisors. The status report shall be reviewed by staff to determine whether the special use is compatible with the surrounding area. d. This Special Use Permit shall be in perpetuity or shall expire upon termination of the use. Any improvements associated exclusively with the SUP shall be removed within 180 days of such expiration. e. All outdoor lighting shall conform to Section 2318 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. f. Major changes to this Special Use Permit must be processed as a revised application with approval by the Board of Supervisors upon recommendation of the Commission. The Department of Planning and Development may administratively approve minor changes. g. No person shall operate, maintain, use or allow the use of any area larger than 5,000 square feet for the parking, storage, servicing or dispatching of motor vehicles without first implementing reasonably available control measures to effectively prevent or minimize fugitive dust. Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Meeting of October 22, 2020 Page 13 of 18 h. After zoning approval, but prior to issuance of any building permits or the issuance of a drainage clearance, the developer or his representatives must contact the Flood Control Permitting Office. i. Non-compliance with the regulations administered by the Maricopa County Environmental Services Department, Maricopa County Department of Transportation or the Maricopa County Flood Control District may be grounds for initiating a revocation of this Special Use Permit as set forth in Section 2806 of the Zoning Ordinance. j. The number of flights per month shall be unlimited. Commissioner Montoya left the hearing. Zoning - Z2020016 District 4 Project name: West Valley RV, Auto & Boat Storage Applicant: Glenn Davis, GRD Development LLC Location: Generally located on the southwest corner of Montgomery Rd. and Highway US 60 in the Surprise area Request: Zone change from C-2 WHSC & Rural-43 WHSC to C-3 CUPD WHSC to accommodate a commercial storage facility Mr. Martell presented Z2020016 and noted the applicant is proposing to develop the site to a commercial storage facility for RV’s, autos and boats for 2,902 storage spaces at final build out. All storage will take place under 26 shade structures and a small office building adjacent to the main entrance. They propose to build a six foot masonry wall, topped with wrought iron fencing material for a total of 10 feet in height, and to minimize dust they will pave the entire surface. They will have one to two full time employees with hours of operation of 8 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily. They would like to develop in two separate phases, with phase 1 on 15 acres of the site near Montgomery Road on the northern portion of the site and will take approximately nine months to construct. Phase 2 will be on the remaining 22 acres to take place sometime in the future. They are requesting to vary the front yard setback to 10 feet regardless of the adjacent zoning district. In the zoning if you are next to a residential zoning district you need 25 feet. Also increasing the fence height from eight feet to 10 feet, and reducing the required landscape buffer adjacent from the highway from 25 feet to 10 feet. Varying the development standards allows the future facility to match similar commercial development in a way that would be hardly noticeable by residents and passing motorists. Staff received 11 letters of opposition and three letters of support. The majority in opposition believe the rezoning would be too intense for this area and fear that once the site is zoned to C-3 future high intensity development may occur on the site. The vast majority would prefer it be low density single-family residences which they feel would be more compatible with the area. The individuals in support believe a commercial storage facility would be compatible to the area due to proximity to the highway. The applicant feels it is consistent with many developments in the surrounding area and market demand for shaded covered storage in this portion of the county warrants this type of development. The proposal to develop 37 acres of natural desert into a large commercial storage facility would be appropriate use for the site, and will have very little traffic and few customers using the facility at the Z2020011 Page 1 of 8 Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department Case: Z2020011 – Eagletail Airstrip Hearing Date: October 22, 2020 (cont. from July 23, 2020, September 10, 2020, September 24, 2020 & October 8, 2020) Supervisor District: 5 (* Denotes changes from the July 23, 2020 Commission staff report.) Applicant: Gretchen House & Michael Tragarz, 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association Owner: 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association Request: Modification of Condition for permanent extension of Special Use Permit (SUP) Z 99-87 for a private airstrip/runway in the Rural-43 zoning district Site Location: Generally located between Broadway Rd. and Southern Ave. approximately ¼ mile west of 539th Ave., in the Harquahala area Site Size: Approx. 7.52 acres Density: N/A County Island: No County Plan: Rural Development Area Municipal Plan: N/A Municipal Comments: None received * Opposition: 6 opposition letters/emails (and attachments) representing 4 parties, 2 households and 4 properties part of or adjacent to the subject property * Support: 18 support letters/emails (and attachments) representing 13 parties, 1 household and 19 properties part of or adjacent to the subject property Recommendation: Approve with conditions Z2020011 Page 2 of 8 Project Summary: 1. * The applicants are requesting a modification of condition ‘d’ of SUP Z 99-87, to renew the SUP and allow continued use of Eagletail Airstrip in perpetuity. SUP Z 99-87 was approved by the Board of Supervisors on April 5, 2000. That approval was to expire on April 5, 2020, however, on April 22, 2020 the County Board of Supervisors (BOS) approved a resolution (C-44-20-109-M-00) to extend all deadlines with critical dates from March 1, 2020 to July 1, 2020 for 120 days. Accordingly, the deadline for Z 99-87 was extended to August 22, 2020. On August 19, 2020 the BOS approved another resolution (C-44-21-032-X-00) to extend all deadlines with critical dates from March 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 for 1 year from the date of the resolution. Accordingly, the current expiration of Z 99-87 is August 19, 2021. On July 22, 2020 the applicants requested, and were granted, a continuance of this case in order to address new legal arguments proposed by opposing legal counsel, and to allow the applicants and their legal counsel additional time to attempt to resolve outstanding concerns. On September 1, 2020 the applicants requested and were granted, a continuance of this case from the September 10, 2020 Commission hearing to the September 24, 2020 Commission hearing to allow additional time to establish dialogue with opposing residents. The case was continued from the September 24, 2020 Commission hearing to the October 8, 2020 Commission hearing because the quorum was lost at the September 24, 2020 Commission hearing before the case could be heard. The case was continued from the October 8, 2020 Commission hearing to today’s Commission hearing to allow additional time to establish dialogue with the as yet opposing residents. 2. Eagletail Airstrip is an approximately 3,280’ x 100’ (7.52 acre) private landing strip on the Eagletail Mountain Ranch. The strip bisects 11 approximately 40-acre parcels having 8 separate ownerships generally located between Broadway Road and Southern Avenue, and approximately 0.25 mile west of 539th Avenue, in the Harquahala area. 3. Violation V201902093 was opened and a Notice of Complaint was mailed to the Flying Ranch Properties LLC on November 15, 2019 in response to a complaint regarding alleged non-compliance of stipulations of approval of SUP Z 99-87, specifically, unpermitted runway lighting. Code Enforcement followed-up on the complaint by visiting the subject property on January 6, 2020. No runway lighting was found and the complaint was determined to be invalid. Accordingly, the violation case was closed with no further action required. 4. Shown below is the existing language of Z 99-87 condition ‘d’ d. This Special Use Permit shall expire 20 years from the date of approval by the Board of Supervisors. The requested modification of condition ‘d’ is shown with new language underlined and bold. Staff notes that the original approved narrative report with Z 99-87 will remain as the original approved document. The changes to stipulation ‘d’ will only reference the requested modification of condition. d. This Special Use Permit shall be in perpetuity or shall expire upon termination of the use. Any improvements associated exclusively with the SUP shall be removed within 180 days of such expiration. Z2020011 Page 3 of 8 2018 Aerial Photo (SUP Area Outlined in Red) * SUP Area Ownership and Support/Opposition Status Z2020011 Page 4 of 8 Zoning Map (SUP Area Outlined in Red) Site Plan Rural-190 Rural-43 Rural-43 Z2020011 Page 5 of 8 Existing On-Site and Adjacent Zoning / Land Use: 5. On-site: Rural-43 / Graded & Compacted Airstrip North: Rural-43 / Vacant and Single-Family Residential South: Rural-43 / Vacant and Single-Family Residential East: Rural-43 / Vacant West: Rural-190 / Vacant (state trust land) Utilities and Services: 6. Water: Private wells (Eagletail Water Company) Wastewater: Septic School District: Arlington Elementary School District #47, Buckeye Union High School District #1 Fire: Harquahala Valley Fire District Police: MCSO Right-of-Way: 7. The following table includes existing and proposed half-width right-of-way and the future classification based upon the Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) Major Streets and Routes Plan. Street Name Half-width Existing R/W Half-width Proposed R/W Future Classification 539th Avenue 55’ 55’ Minor Arterial 547th Avenue 0’ 0’ None Adopted Plan: 8. Comprehensive Plan Vision 2030 (adopted January 2016): The plan designates the area as Rural Development Area. Public Participation Summary: 9. * The applicant complied with the Maricopa County Public Participation Process with the required site postings and notification by first class mail to the adjacent property owners within 300’ of the subject site and interested parties. To date staff has received opposition from four parties: Irene & Lyle Spargo and Stephanie & Stephen Kooistra. Irene & Lyle Spargo own one of the parcels that comprise the SUP area (APN: 506-27-055A) and an adjacent parcel (506-27-055B), which includes an apparent residence and an aircraft hangar with access to the airstrip. The Spargos oppose the current SUP renewal and inclusion of their property in it because they oppose the commercial (crop dusting) operations that have apparently been taking place at the airstrip, which they believe were never part of the intent of the SUP. Additionally, the Spargos believe the crop dusting aircraft create more noise and dust than non-commercial aircraft would produce. Finally, the Spargos do not believe that the materials submitted by Ms. House and Mr. Tragarz (on behalf of the 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association) provide authority to proceed with the current request over their objections. Similarly, Stephanie & Stephen Kooistra own one of the parcels that comprise the SUP area (APN: 506-27-059E) and an adjacent parcel (506-27-059D), which includes a residence and apparent access to the Z2020011 Page 6 of 8 airstrip. The Kooistras also do not believe that the materials submitted by Ms. House and Mr. Tragarz (on behalf of the 99AZ Eagletail Runway Association) provide authority to proceed with the current request over their objections. 10. * To date staff has received support from 13 parties who represent the balance of SUP area properties that are not owned by the Spargos or Kooistras, and all of the other properties that are directly adjacent to the SUP area (see “SUP Area Ownership and Support/Opposition Status” on page 3). Outstanding Concerns from Reviewing Agencies: 11. Staff has received no comments of concern from reviewing agencies including Luke Air Force Base, the Arizona State Land Department, the Arizona Department of Transportation, or the Federal Aviation Administration. Staff Analysis: 12. * County records indicate that Eagletail Airstrip has adhered to the stipulations of approval for SUP Z 99-87. Staff found no valid zoning violations on record in association with the SUP area. V201902093 was opened on November 15, 2019 alleging non-compliance with the conditions of approval associated with SUP Z 99-87 (runway lighting); however, staff found the complaint to be invalid (no permanent runway lighting was found) and closed the violation case. V202000895 was opened on May 12, 2020 alleging aircraft operations on a closed runway; however, the original April 5, 2020 expiration date for SUP Z 99-87 was extended to August 5, 2020 by Board of Supervisors Resolution C-44-20-109-M-00 (April 22, 2020). Accordingly, V202000895 was determined to be invalid and was closed. Staff has received information that suggests commercial aviation operations (specifically crop dusting) may be taking place at the airstrip. It appears that SUP Z 99-87 would not provide for that activity under paragraph ‘D’ of the approved narrative report, which states: “Due to the Airstrip's "private" status, immediate air and ground traffic will be limited to the Owners, those who have permission to use it and emergency situations. It will operate under Visual Flight Rules only. No artificial light is provided to illuminate the Airstrip, therefore the Airstrip's hours of operation will be limited exclusively to daylight hours. The Airstrip will be used by approximately eight (8) users consistently (the Owners). On average, approximately ten (10) flights per month will occur on the Airstrip. These flights will be made in small single engine or small twin engine aircraft.” Notwithstanding questions of adequate property owner authorization for this application, staff is supportive of the current request for a perpetual SUP. Reviewing County agencies have no objection to the modification of conditions. Recommendation: 13. For the reasons outlined in this report, staff recommends the Commission motion for Approval, subject to stipulations ‘a’ – ‘j’ of Z 99-87 including modified condition ‘d’: (All other stipulations associated with Z 99-87 shall remain in effect.) Z2020011 Page 7 of 8 a. Development shall comply with the site plan, entitled "Site Plan of Eagletail Airstrip,”, consisting of 4 sheets, dated November 18, 1999 and stamped received February 24, 2020 except as modified by the following stipulations. b. Development shall comply with the provisions in the narrative report entitled "Eagletail Airstrip, Maricopa County, Arizona Special Use Permit Narrative Report", consisting of 8 pages, dated February 10, 2020 stamped received February 24, 2020 except as modified by the following stipulations. c. The applicant shall submit a written report outlining the status of the development at the end of five years from the date of approval by the Board of Supervisors. The status report shall be reviewed by staff to determine whether the special use is compatible with the surrounding area. d. This Special Use Permit shall be in perpetuity or shall expire upon termination of the use. Any improvements associated exclusively with the SUP shall be removed within 180 days of such expiration. e. All outdoor lighting shall conform to Section 2318 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. f. Major changes to this Special Use Permit must be processed as a revised application with approval by the Board of Supervisors upon recommendation of the Commission. The Department of Planning and Development may administratively approve minor changes. g. No person shall operate, maintain, use or allow the use of any area larger than 5,000 square feet for the parking, storage, servicing or dispatching of motor vehicles without first implementing reasonably available control measures to effectively prevent or minimize fugitive dust. h. After zoning approval, but prior to issuance of any building permits or the issuance of a drainage clearance, the developer or his representatives must contact the Flood Control Permitting Office. i. Non-compliance with the regulations administered by the Maricopa County Environmental Services Department, Maricopa County Department of Transportation or the Maricopa County Flood Control District may be grounds for initiating a revocation of this Special Use Permit as set forth in Section 2806 of the Zoning Ordinance. j. The number of flights per month shall be unlimited. Z2020011 Page 8 of 8 Presented by: Sean Watkins, Planner Reviewed by: Matthew Holm, AICP, Planning Supervisor Attachments: Case map (1 page) * Opposition Comments (75 pages) * Support Comments (18 pages) Narrative Report (8 pages) Site Plan (reduced 8.5 x11, 4 pages) MCENG comments (1 page) MCENV comments (1 page) Luke AFB comments (3 pages) Arizona State Land Department comments (4 pages) Arizona Department of Transportation comments (1 page) * Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Incident Report (16 pages) * Pew & Lake Request for Continuance for 9/10/20 PZ hearing (1 page) * Pew & Lake Request for Continuance for 10/8/20 PZ hearing (1 page) MARICOPA COUNTY / Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ 5 Gross Acres: 7.52 approx. Generated June 22, 2020 14:54 PM Z2020011 Application Name: Legal Description EAGLETAIL AIRSTRIP Applicant Case Address T01N R09W 030, T1N R09W 30 MICHAEL TRAGARZ Applicant Phone/Email Parcel Primary: 506-27-062F 602.628.0243 MICHAELTRAGARZ@GMAIL.COM Map scale 1:12,984 Supervisor District No. EAGLETAIL AIRSTRIP FAA 99AZ RENEWAL 7 /L3l2o Stephen and Stephanie Kooistra Eagletail Ranch 5205 S. 547th Ave. Tonopah, AZ 85354 Pancels: 506-27 -059D 506-27 -O59E Maricopa County Planning and Development 501 N. 44th St. Ste. #200 Phoenix, AZ 85008 RE: CASE #Z2O2AO11 Eagletail Airstrip Attention: Sean Watkins, We wish to let it be known, that Mr. Tragarz never had authorization to represent Stephen and Stephanie Kooistra, owners of the Eagletail Ranch which includes part of the AZ99 airstrip. We wish to declare that we have never authorized Mr. Tragarz to act as our agent or to represent Eagletail Ranch . We strongly oppose the renewal of the SUP for the AZ99 airstrip. oate 7/5;2t=, 7/t2/2O20 Irene Spargo 54651W. Sunland Rd. Tonopah, AZ 85354 Maricopa County Planning and Development 501 N. 44th St. Suite#200 Phoenix, AZ 85008 Parcels: so6-27 -O5SA 506-27 -0558 RE: CASE # 22020011 Eagletail Airstrip Attention: Sean Watkins, As a matter of record, Mr. Tragarz never directly to represent my interest in airstrip A299. Since I Deed for Lyle and lrene Spargo, I wish to declare nor would l. notified me nor requested my signature for his authorization am an owner on both the Joint Tenancy and the Warranty that I have never authorized Mr. Tragarz to act as my agent, I also question how many other Joint property owners of record have never granted authorization? I strongly oppose renewal of airstrip 99AZ which originally expired on April 5,2020. The 20 year contract has been completed and did not require an extension or making an expiration date retroactive or any other manipulations. From: lyle spargo To: Sean Watkins (PND) Subject: Special Use Permit Z99-87 Date: Thursday, February 27, 2020 3:54:33 PM Importance: High Sean, I reached out to Ombudsman Garcia in June of 2019 when it became clear to me that Michael Tragarz intended to try and renew the SUP against my wishes. Her response (below) assured me that my signature authorizing the inclusion of my property was required. Mr. Tragarz has an old form 504 which I signed in 2005 when we were considering a runway owners association. This does not give him Power of Attorney to sign the SUP application on my behalf. He intends to use that as proof that he speaks for me. Ombudsman Garcia stated: Kathryn Garcia (PND) <Kathryn.Garcia@Maricopa.Gov> Mon 6/24/2019 9:07 AM You Mr. Spargo, Thank you for reaching out to me in regards to your concerns. The Special Use Permit (SUP) renewal will require property owner authorization. You can write a formal letter explaining your ownership and the desire for the zoning to not be renewed/extended then Planning and Development will save that letter in the SUP case file for future reference. If you’d like to be proactive and organize all of the property owners of the SUP in the area to sign a petition requesting Planning and Development have the Board of Supervisors revoke the Special Use Permit that is also an option. If you have further questions about either of these process or would like to submit a letter you can send it to or contact Rachel Applegate, I have included her contact information below. Rachel Applegate Senior Planner Planning & Development 602-372-0318 Rachel.Applegate@maricopa.gov Please feel free to contact me if you have any challenges. Thank you! Kathryn Garcia RS Ombudsman Maricopa County Planning and Development Department 501 N. 44th St., Phoenix, AZ 85008 Desk | 602-506-0495 I did contact Rachel Applegate and she assured me she would keep track and let me know if an application to amend the SUP was received. I just want to be sure that my protest is noted and that I DO NOT want to include my property in any SUP for Eagletail Airstrip Z99-87. Any guidance you can provide is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Lyle Spargo Parcel# 506-27-055A/B Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well. From: lyle spargo To: Sean Watkins (PND); Stephen Brower; Stephanie Kooistra Subject: Re: Z2020011 - Eagletail Airstrip SUP Renewal Date: Thursday, July 16, 2020 11:33:49 AM Attachments: Irene Protest.pdf Kooistra Protest.pdf lyle Protest.pdf Sean, I am highly disappointed in this Report and its recommendation for approval. Apparently the MCZoning Ordinance requirement for property owner approval doesn't carry much weight. The post card notice you sent out stated, "Submit, questions/comments one week prior to the hearing date" That is unclear at best and misleading to most English speakers. If the comments needed to be submitted more than 1 week prior to the meeting, it should have been stated that way. I have been waiting until today to send in my comments!!! See attached objections. Lyle Spargo From: Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@Maricopa.Gov> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 11:00 AM To: lyle spargo <lyle_spargo@hotmail.com> Subject: Z2020011 - Eagletail Airstrip SUP Renewal Hello Mr. Spargo, The SUP update is going before the Planning and Zoning Commission (PnZ) on 7/23. Please see the meeting agenda and staff report, attached. The meeting is virtual, so please register to attend to speak ASAP by following the directions in the attached agenda. Thank you! Sean Watkins Planner Maricopa County Planning & Development Department 501 N. 44th Street, Suite 200, Phoenix, AZ 85008 Desk: 602-506-8150 sean.watkins@maricopa.gov I protest the renewal of Eagletail Airstrip 99AZ for the following reason: ln the original Deed Restrictions presented when I bought my property under the heading: "Desiring to establish the nature of use and enjoyment thereof," it stated: "premises shall be limited to residential uses, farming of agricultural use not contributing well recognized public or private nuisance through odor, sight or sound." "for personal use" "to preserve the openness of Eagletail Ranches, no parcel may be subdivided into less than ten (10) acres." ln the new deed restrictions were proposed and voted on, primarily by non-resident land owners who neither use nor enjoy their property at Eagletail Airstrip. The amended Deed Restrictions allow: Premises limited to residential and commercial uses in compliance with zoning provisions. (RU43) lwould not have bought property on a commercial runway. Note that these are Deed Restrictions and not amendments to the SUP. The SUP for the airstrip was not granted for commercia! operations When we petitioned the county for the SUP in 2000, the Narrative Report described: A private residential airstrip that is peaceful and open for the use of the residents. "the owners purchased their parcels with the anticipation of using the airstrip for personal use." Due to the airstrip's private status, traffic will be limited to owners, those who have permission to use it and emergency situations. ln Section 4 paragraph B of the Narrative Report: "The owner's enjoyment of their property will be enhanced without compromising the use and enjoyment of other property owners." All these assurances to the county and property owners clearly indicated the airstrip would not be used for commercial aviation operations. The new deed restrictions also allowed subdivision of parcels as small as 2.5 acres. When I bought the property, all parcels were 40 acres. I grudgingly agreed to the 10 acre subdivision provision. 2.5 acres does not promote a feeling of openness when you are out in the wilderness area. The residential pilot community did not materialize in the 20 years since the origina! SUP was granted. ln the past year, the majority of aircraft operations from the runway have been high powered crop dusters that create a nuisance of chemical contamination, dust, and noise. The runway is a liability to those of us who live near the runway and detracts from our use and enjoyment of our property. lt degrades our quality of life. DO NOT RENEW THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT. Lyle Spargo Parcel 506-27-O55A Parcel 506-27-0558 Phone (602) 42L-4833 lyle_spargo@hotmail.com From: lyle spargo To: Sean Watkins (PND) Subject: Re: Z2020011 - Eagletail Airstrip SUP Renewal Date: Thursday, July 16, 2020 2:16:46 PM One more comment you can add. To: Sean Watkins and all concerned with the renewal application for 99AZ Eagletail Ranch Airstrip When I bought my property some 26 years ago I negotiated with Bill O’Brien directly. We discussed his vision for an Eagletail Residential Fly-in community of pilot owners. The Original design was 40 acre parcels. That was the density I wanted. The attraction was the openness and low density living that would limit the congestion and conflict of suburban Airparks. I conceded to the existing Deed Restrictions that allowed subdivision to 10 acre parcels hoping that the other owners would refrain from chopping their property up into tiny 10 acre parcels and ruining the openness that drew me to Eagletail. In late 1999, early 2000 some of the land owners decided they wanted to force Mr. O’Brien to get a Special Use Permit for Eagletail Airstrip. I cannot be sure what the motives were for this move. The other owners seemed to think there was a mandate and since Bill had spent the money on legal services to get it done, I agreed with the SUP and actively participated in the process to get it done. Initially some of the owners would meet to plan how to surface the runway and improve the taxiways. There was even discussion to form a separate LLC of the runway property. Each property owner would parcel off the 83 foot easement and deed it to an LLC. This runway parcel would in turn be given to the county in return for assuming runway maintenance. Our hope in this fantasy was that the county would pave and light the runway, thereby bringing power to our property. I think this is where the original suggestion of 2.5 acre subdivisions was proposed. 2001 brought dramatic changes to the way people looked at airplanes. The discussions on the Airstrip trailed off and stopped. One of the Part time residents (Bert Hook) moved to another airpark and John Fredricks moved back East a short time later. The only remaining resident Dennis Culp was the non-pilot rancher at that time operating Eagletail Ranch. In 2002 I put a house on my property and moved my home of record to Eagletail. Since 2002 no property owner, save for Mr. Kooistra and me, has made any improvements to their land. They have surveyed their land, subdivided their land, but have done nothing to make their raw land more valuable. In 2009 there was a push to amend the deed restrictions to allow subdivision of parcels to 2.5 acres. Additionally, there was the addition of commercial uses for farming of agricultural use not constituting a well recognizable public or private nuisance through odor, sight or sound. I was clearly against this change and was the only property owner to vote against the change. Since Charlie (Stephen Kooistra) moved to Eagletail Ranch more than 15 years ago, he and I have done all the maintenance on the airstrip, save for a time in 2012 when the summer rains did extensive damage to the East end of the runway. That time we asked each owner to contribute ~$9.40 per acre to hire the equipment and operator needed to repair the damage and put in proper drainage ditches. If the other property owners use the runway as Mr. Tragarz claims they do, they do so at our expense, never offering to contribute for our time, equipment and fuel. In 2018 we all received a notice from Michael Tragarz saying that we needed to renew the SUP. Since my copy of the SUP clearly expired in 2020 I questioned the need to apply 2 years early. This is when Mr. Tragarz started his campaign against me. Most of his emails to the property owners tried to assert his superior understanding of the real estate law and what creates value. I explained in response to these rants that: In 2020 when the SUP is actually due for renewal, my property will not be part of the SUP. Listed below is my reasoning. FAA data shows: between 2002 and 2018 General aviation for personal use has declined by 25% General Aviation airports are being abandoned with great frequency. The general population is becoming more urban/suburban than rural. The population of Harquahala Valley is declining. The farmers are pumping the aquifer down and drying up domestic wells. Less than ½ of 1% of all potential property buyers are pilots. For non-pilots, a runway nearby is a negative and reduces marketability. In January of 2019 my decision to not participate in the SUP was validated. One afternoon I discovered a Commercial Crop Duster idling on the end of the runway, awaiting a truck to refill his chemical tanks. When I told the pilot Eagletail Airstrip is a Private Residential Airstrip and commercial operations are not allowed, he said his boss, who had purchased a parcel from Michael Tragarz, had told him that commercial operations were allowed. A debate with Mr. Tragarz ensued and I again reaffirmed to all Property owners that my property will not be part of any renewal of the SUP. Although I firmly believe that commercial aviation is not allowed by the SUP or the Deed Restrictions I decided not to take the matter to the County Board of Supervisors and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. Rather, I felt I could put up with the noise, dust, and chemical hazard for a year and the problem would resolve itself in the expiration of the SUP. My wait is coming to an end. I bought the property over 5 years before it had a SUP and it is still the same property. I have lived here nearly 18 years. I use and enjoy my property. It is not the right of others that neither use nor enjoy their property to dictate what rights I should relinquish. Lyle Spargo Parcels 506-27-055A and 506-27-055B For your reference In the Narrative Report under: II. Description of Proposal Paragraph 3 starts with: Each of the owners of the eight (8) forty (40) acre sections (the “Owners”) own private airplanes. The Owners purchased their parcels with the anticipation of using the airstrip for personal use. IV. Benefits to Community B. Use and Enjoyment of Property The Owners enjoyment of their property will be enhanced without compromising the use and enjoyment of other property owners. The new deed restrictions state: 1) The Premises shall be limited to: a.) Residential and commercial uses and normal accessory activities which may include pets normally considered house pets. Non-residential uses shall be in compliance with zoning provisions now or subsequently established. Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance SECTION 503. RURAL-43 (Rural Zoning District - One Acre Per Dwelling Unit) ARTICLE 503.1. PURPOSE: The principal purpose of this zoning district is to conserve and protect farms and other open land uses, foster orderly growth in rural and agricultural areas, prevent urban and agricultural land use conflicts, and encourage sustainable development, but when governmental facilities and services, public utilities and street access are available, or can reasonably be made available, applications for change of this zoning district to any single-family residential zoning district will be given favorable consideration. Principal uses permitted in this zoning district include both farm and non-farm residential uses, farms and recreational and institutional uses.*2 ARTICLE 503.2. USE REGULATIONS: The use regulations are the same as those in the Rural-190 Zoning District. SECTION 501. RURAL-190 (Rural Zoning District - 190,000 Square Feet Per Dwelling Unit) ARTICLE 501.2. USE REGULATIONS: A building or premises shall be used only for the following purposes: 1. One single-family dwelling per lot of record.*5 2. Churches and houses of worship, including accessory columbarium provided that the building area of the columbarium shall not exceed 10% of the total building area of the church building(s).*8, *39 3. Gardens, community gardens and farms, as defined in Chapter 2.*37 4. Group homes for not more than ten persons, subject to the following performance criteria:*11, *16 5. Schools, elementary and high.*19, *27, *39 6. Public and private forests and wildlife reservations. 7. Service to the public of water, gas, electricity, telephone and cable television. The foregoing shall be deemed to include without limitation, distribution, collector and feeder lines, pumping or booster stations along pipelines, and substations along electric transmission lines. (This does not include public utility treatment and generating plants.)*5, *18, *39 8. Golf courses including clubhouses located thereon, but not including miniature courses or practice driving tees operated for commercial purposes. 9. Libraries, museums, parks, playgrounds and community buildings, provided such uses are conducted on a nonprofit basis.*1 10. Home occupations, subject to the following:*10, *39, *41 e. The business shall not generate any noise (if the noise would be considered to have an adverse impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood per the Maricopa County Noise Ordinance), vibration, smoke, dust, odors, heat, glare, or electrical interference with radio or television transmission in the area that would exceed that normally produced by a dwelling unit in a zoning district used solely for residential purposes. f. No mechanical equipment or power tools shall be used, except that used for normal household purposes if the noise would be considered to have an adverse impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood per the Maricopa County Noise Ordinance. From: Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@Maricopa.Gov> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 11:52 AM To: lyle spargo <lyle_spargo@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Z2020011 - Eagletail Airstrip SUP Renewal Mr. Spargo, All of your comments (today’s and previous), the comments you forwarded today and comments submitted by others to date are in the project record for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Thank you, Sean Watkins Planner Maricopa County Planning & Development Department 501 N. 44th Street, Suite 200, Phoenix, AZ 85008 Desk: 602-506-8150 sean.watkins@maricopa.gov From: lyle spargo <lyle_spargo@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 11:32 AM To: Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@Maricopa.Gov>; Stephen Brower <sbrower@brentwoodlg.com>; Stephanie Kooistra <s.kooistra@aol.com> Subject: Re: Z2020011 - Eagletail Airstrip SUP Renewal Sean, I am highly disappointed in this Report and its recommendation for approval. Apparently the MCZoning Ordinance requirement for property owner approval doesn't carry much weight. The post card notice you sent out stated, "Submit, questions/comments one week prior to the hearing date" That is unclear at best and misleading to most English speakers. If the comments needed to be submitted more than 1 week prior to the meeting, it should have been stated that way. I have been waiting until today to send in my comments!!! See attached objections. Lyle Spargo From: Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@Maricopa.Gov> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 11:00 AM To: lyle spargo <lyle_spargo@hotmail.com> Subject: Z2020011 - Eagletail Airstrip SUP Renewal Hello Mr. Spargo, The SUP update is going before the Planning and Zoning Commission (PnZ) on 7/23. Please see the meeting agenda and staff report, attached. The meeting is virtual, so please register to attend to speak ASAP by following the directions in the attached agenda. Thank you! Sean Watkins Planner Maricopa County Planning & Development Department 501 N. 44th Street, Suite 200, Phoenix, AZ 85008 Desk: 602-506-8150 sean.watkins@maricopa.gov