Board approves rezoning for Patterson 5 project with enclosed RV storage and retail

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors on a unanimous vote approved a zoning change (Z2021118) for the Patterson 5 site, allowing C3 CUPD development on about 5.1 acres at the southeast corner of Sossaman and Riggs Roads. The applicant and staff said the plan centers on a single‑story retail building fronting Riggs with fully enclosed RV storage buildings behind it.

County planning staff told the board the request was modified from an earlier application to remove outdoor RV storage and to include a number of prohibited uses in the CUPD. Tom Ellsworth, director of the Planning and Development Department, said staff and the applicant had agreed to a modified condition prohibiting all outdoor storage (memo condition G) and to exclude many higher‑intensity C3 uses. Ellsworth said a required secondary access for emergency vehicles is shown on the plan via a gated, Knox‑box entry on Indiana, and that Queen Creek controls access on Sossaman and Riggs and is still working with county staff on whether a Sossaman emergency egress can be approved.

The applicant's attorney said the project team and neighbors have negotiated multiple concessions over two years of review, including increased setbacks and landscape buffers, fully enclosed storage buildings, directional LED lighting and a 17–30 foot rear buffer where none was required. The applicant reiterated willingness to continue working with the Town of Queen Creek about shifting the emergency egress to Sossaman if the town will allow it.

Neighbors who spoke at the hearing raised objections about scale, aesthetics, traffic and potential property‑value impacts, with multiple residents saying they do not want a storage facility adjacent to one‑acre residential lots. Several neighbors said they had gathered petitions and written opposition. Supporters — including nearby residents and two speakers who said retail services are needed at the arterial intersection — argued the corner is an arterial commercial node and that a low‑intensity retail storefront and enclosed storage can be appropriate with the proposed conditions.

Supervisor Mark Stewart, who represents the district, said he had worked with the applicant and neighbors to narrow differences and asked staff to memorialize stipulations in writing at the time of permitting. The board’s approval was moved by Supervisor Stewart and seconded by Supervisor Lesko; the motion carried unanimously.

The approval binds the conditions made part of the plan of development at permitting; staff told the board that if the secondary access cannot be resolved administratively, the matter may return to the board for further action.

Votes at a glance: Motion to approve Z2021118 (Patterson 5) moved by Supervisor Mark Stewart, seconded by Supervisor Lesko; outcome: approved, unanimous (5–0).