Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation Anx25 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears staff presentation on proposed Annexation ANX25-0004 for industrial site at Applebee and the Union Pacific Railroad
Summary
City staff presented Annexation ANX25-0004, roughly 32.2 acres near Applebee Road and the Union Pacific Railroad, with initial city zoning planned industrial (I‑1) for most parcels and AG‑1 for railroad parcels; staff said a prefabricated manufacturing facility is proposed and that the project will be reviewed administratively after annexation.
City planning staff presented Annexation ANX25‑0004 at the Nov. 13 Chandler City Council meeting, describing a proposed annexation of approximately 32.2 acres at the southeast corner of Applebee Road and the Union Pacific Railroad and associated initial city zoning. "Before you today is Annexation ANX 25 Dash 04," the staff presenter said, outlining that one parcel is currently zoned IND‑2 in Maricopa County and would become planned industrial (I‑1) under city zoning, while several parcels currently owned by Union Pacific would receive AG‑1 consistent with other railroad properties.
Staff told council that the site has a general plan land-use designation of "employment," that Chandler will provide water and wastewater services, that city departments circulated the request and returned no negative comments, and that the proponent anticipates a prefabricated manufacturing facility. When Council member Orlando asked about timeframe and employee count, staff said a precise employee number was not known and that the developer is seeking county temporary-use permits while pursuing annexation; staff added the project is expected to be reviewed administratively after annexation and would not require additional council hearings for site review as currently proposed.
The council opened and then closed the public hearing on ANX25‑0004 during the meeting; no formal annexation vote or final council action on the item was recorded in the transcript that evening. Council members asked clarifying questions about intended uses and the administrative review process; staff said they would provide more details if the developer submits materials that require further review.
