Mesa council reviews EO zoning rewrite aimed at ASU innovation projects

Rachel Phillips, the cityAssistant Planning Director, summarized the councilagenda item on Sept. 4 as an amendment to the Employment Opportunity (EO) District, "which is chapter 14 of the zoning ordinance." She said the rewrite would repeal and replace Chapter 14 and amend Section 1186.1A to clarify use classifications and expand the districtto better accommodate mixed‑use projects and political subdivisions.

Phillips said the EO district is a flexible tool adopted in 2016 and has been used only twice in Mesa, noting the Pecos EO district and a project known as Red Hawk. "It allows an applicant to really tailor the land uses and the development standards to their project," she told council.

City staff, including Mr. Butler, framed the EO rewrite as preparatory to agreements with Arizona State University. Butler said the district was needed before finalizing the cityagreement with ASU for the Polytechnic Innovation Zone, drawing a parallel to TempeNovus Corridor.

Council members asked whether school districts and other political subdivisions could use the EO district. Phillips said the draft applies to political subdivisions in general but that a minimum area requirement applies. "So originally it was 160 acres ... the existing minimum area is," she said, and staff revised that in the draft to 140 contiguous acres so the tool could be usable for some projects.

Council also pressed staff on how the EO district would guarantee employment outcomes. Phillips and Butler said the EO ordinance itself sets the zoning framework but that employment, residential and commercial ratios would be set later in a development agreement or intergovernmental agreement when a specific EO development plan is submitted.

Council members asked how many parcels of 140 contiguous acres exist in the city; Phillips said fewer than five currently meet that size. She said annexation could create additional opportunities.

Why it matters: staff described the EO rewrite as foundational legal work to allow large, employment‑focused, mixed‑use developments to proceed more quickly and with clearer development standards. The change would let future EO applicants (including political subdivisions) use an administrative site plan process and negotiate development agreements that set project‑specific requirements.

What happens next: staff told council the EO amendment is intended to precede an IGA or development agreement with ASU and that the specifics of employment and commercial ratios will come when a development plan is filed. Council provided direction to return with further details and site plans before adoption.