El Mirage council staff review 2020 general plan, zoning code, building rules and development process

City of El Mirage planning, building and engineering staff reviewed the 2020 General Plan, the city’s zoning code (Chapter 154), building-code requirements (Chapter 150) and several development-permit and subdivision chapters during a March 18 work session of the Common Council.

The meeting focused on how developers and residents move from initial inquiries to site plans and permits, fees and time limits for entitlements, the city’s zoning map and overlays, and upcoming code updates. No formal votes were taken at the work session.

Jose Macias, senior planner, summarized the public outreach that produced the 2020 General Plan and described the development application steps. “We started the process in 2019,” Macias said of the outreach that led to adoption in 2020. He said the plan was approved by the council in May 2020 and ratified by voters in November 2020.

Macias described the pre-application and technical-review process used to vet prospective projects before they reach the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council. “Pre-app” meetings are short, staff-led consultations; Macias said the city logged 10 pre-applications in early 2024 and four proceeded through the full review. He said the pre-application fee is $500 and the development-application (zoning) fee is about $1,450. After city approval the applicant generally has one year to submit construction plans; Macias said extensions are possible and described options for a new owner to use an approved site plan or to start a new review.

On zoning, Macias explained El Mirage uses a form-based code updated in 2011 to allow more flexible development patterns in the city’s limited land area. He reviewed nine zoning categories (from natural open space to industrial) and noted several overlays that restrict or guide development along specific corridors and near Luke Air Force Base. He cited an Arizona statute and a 2001 Attorney General action that established noise/flight-related development limits near the base and described an “accident potential zone” that informs what industrial uses are appropriate near runways.

Brigham Bennett, the city’s building official, reviewed Chapter 150 and the city’s building-code adoptions. Bennett said the city enforces the International Building Code suite adopted in 2018 and the 2017 National Electrical Code, and that the city plans to adopt the 2024 model building codes after the start of the fiscal year. “Those model codes are usually updated on a three-year cycle for large cities and on a six-year cycle for smaller jurisdictions,” Bennett said, adding the city typically follows a six-year adoption cycle. He also described manufactured-home standards established under an intergovernmental agreement with the Arizona Department of Housing and said the department issues and collects state-mandated fees for those permits.

Bennett explained operational details: the building department issues certificates of occupancy only after inspections and sign-offs from all departments; there are defined construction hours (about 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. in cooler months and earlier start/shorter days in summer) with the possibility of exceptions for large projects; and the city uses staff inspectors but contracts outside certified inspectors when staff are unavailable.

Bryce (assistant city engineer) summarized Chapters 151–155, which cover encroachments and right-of-way permits, off-site improvements, floodplain management and subdivision rules. He said right-of-way work, striping, signs and temporary neighborhood events require permits and insurance; major projects must include off-site improvements such as curb, sidewalk, lighting or signals and may trigger reimbursement agreements when developers build improvements that benefit adjacent properties. On floodplain management he said Maricopa County Flood Control reviews and signs off on any plan that encroaches on regulated floodplain. He said the city’s subdivision chapter largely tracks the city’s design and development standards manual and that staff will propose cleanups to remove redundancies, with a plan to return to council in late 2025 or early 2026.

City Attorney John Paladini summarized legal limits and approval standards. “The general plan is a guide; it is not a regulatory document,” Paladini said. He explained that rezonings and text amendments are legislative actions that must be consistent with the General Plan land-use designation or accompanied by a general-plan amendment. Paladini described the different legal standards for legislative rezoning and for conditional-use permits, variances and site-plan approvals, and he noted that variances and nonconforming ("grandfathered") uses carry different legal tests and appeal pathways.

Council members asked for follow-up materials and clarifications. Councilmember Gentry asked for copies of the maps and the outreach survey questions used for the 2020 plan; staff said the plan and the outreach materials are available online and that staff would circulate a link and provide printed copies on request. Council members also asked about fees and enforcement: Macias confirmed zoning fees are separate from building and engineering fees and said the city’s zoning fees are under $2,000 for a typical application; Bennett said building and engineering charge separate permit fees during plan review and construction. On enforcement of deferred off-site work, Bryce said development agreements and bonds (letters of credit) or deadlines built into agreements are the mechanisms the city uses to ensure required improvements occur.

Staff identified next steps: staff will circulate the General Plan link and provide copies on request; the engineering division will update the off-site improvement/reimbursement section and return with proposed revisions in the summer; building staff will prepare the 2024 building-code adoption package for council consideration after the fiscal-year start; and planning staff will continue to route development applications through TAC (the technical advisory committee), the Planning and Zoning Commission and council. No ordinance amendments or rezoning requests were decided at the work session.

The council recessed at 5:45 p.m. for a 15-minute break before the regular 6 p.m. meeting.