Council amends Rittenhouse Commons PAD to allow rentals; vote 6-1

Queen Creek Town Council approved an amendment to the Rittenhouse Commons PAD that removes the project’s previous “for sale” restriction and allows a for-rent product, while keeping the previously approved site plan and design intact. The council adopted ordinance P24-0100 (amendment to PAD) on a 6-1 vote.

Principal planner Les Johnson told council the subject property is about 16.5 acres at the northeast corner of Rittenhouse Road and Sossaman Road, bordered by Rittenhouse to the south, Sossaman to the west and Union Pacific Railroad to the northeast. The property was rezoned from C-2 (General Commercial) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) with a PAD in June 2023; the PAD and site plan previously approved a 166-unit attached townhome project with associated amenities. Johnson said the applicant’s request changes only the PAD language that specifies the product as “for sale” and does not alter the site plan, unit count, access points or building design.

The applicant’s representative, Shawn Lake, and developer Tyler Wright said the underlying entitlement and site plan were approved in 2023 and that a subsequent state change affecting certificates of assured water supply has prevented filing a final plat and a for-sale product. Wright said the developer’s intent remains to sell individual homes once a certificate of assured water supply can be obtained, but because the subdivision public report cannot be issued without that certificate, the practical path to begin construction is to remove the for-sale restriction and allow for-rent development for now. Wright told council the delay has imposed carrying costs and soft costs on the developer estimated at roughly $300,000–$500,000 and that they’ve spent about $250,000 on engineering and soft costs to date.

Councilmember Benning said the parcel is constrained by surrounding arterials and the railroad and that the project will provide 166 homes that meet the town’s design standards. He noted the developer intends to convert to for-sale once water is secured. Councilmember Brown opposed the amendment, citing constituent preference against additional rentals and noting the approved density equals roughly 10.1 units per acre; Brown said he had supported the project when it was for sale but would not support it as rentals. Other council members who spoke — including Councilmember McClure, Vice Mayor Martineau, Councilmember Oliphant and Councilmember Padilla — said they would support the amendment, citing that the plan and buildings were unchanged, private property rights, and the developer’s stated intent to return to for-sale if water is available.

Johnson told council staff had received over 120 emails in opposition; the planning map shown at the meeting included 53 verified addresses and staff said an additional 38 addresses were verified too late to appear on the prepared map (53 + 38 verified addresses submitted). The Planning and Zoning Commission had unanimously recommended approval.

Councilmember Benning moved to approve the ordinance amendment; Councilmember Padilla seconded. The motion passed 6-1. The recorded dissent was Councilmember Brown. The amendment allows the developer to proceed with a for-rent product consistent with the previously approved site plan; no changes to the unit mix, building elevations or access points were approved in this action.