The City of Buckeye Planning and Zoning Commission voted to continue consideration of AT&T’s conditional use permit, PLZUD‑25‑0003, to its Jan. 27, 2026 meeting after sustained public concern about the tower’s proximity to a nearby private airstrip.

Staff planner Trish Cooley presented the application for a multi‑carrier telecommunications facility sited on a roughly 2,500‑square‑foot lease area. Cooley told commissioners the proposal includes a 90‑foot faux‑elm tower, an 8‑foot screen wall and landscape screening, and that staff found the design, setbacks and demonstrated need consistent with the Buckeye development code and the general plan. She also said the applicant provided an FAA determination of no hazard to air navigation.

Airport operators and neighbors said the tower presented a safety risk. Burl Shears, president of Western Pilot Service, told the commission the tower’s height and location conflict with recommended glide‑slope setbacks and argued “it should have been 700 feet away” from airport operations. Hal (Harold) Hayden, who identified himself as the airport owner, said his primary concern was safety in the event of go‑arounds and missed approaches and urged the applicant to move the site farther north.

Bill Koning of SmartLink, representing AT&T, said engineers had identified coverage gaps and that carrier engineering and FAA review supported the chosen location. Koning said the FAA had told the applicant “they believe this is safe” and that carriers rely on FAA findings because they lack aviation expertise.

Assistant City Attorney Toss Henry advised commissioners that he was “not aware of any legal authority for the city to override an FAA determination” and cautioned that generalized or hypothetical safety concerns are not, on their own, lawful grounds to deny a conditional use permit.

Commissioners requested more documentation about the FAA interaction, whether the private airstrip had been formally consulted, and how proposed property transfers or lease provisions might affect siting and setbacks. After discussion, the commission voted to continue PLZUD‑25‑0003 to the Jan. 27, 2026 planning and zoning meeting to allow staff to collect additional information and, if desired, present further FAA and aviation background to the commission.

The continuance gives staff time to confirm the FAA record, clarify whether the FAA review was formal for this private airstrip, resolve outstanding questions about property ownership and recorded leases cited by public commenters, and return with information requested by commissioners.