Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maricopa commission approves zoning text amendment to align code with state law
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved TX T26-1 to update Maricopa's zoning ordinance to reflect House Bill 2447 and clean up code language; staff said major review notices and 600-foot owner notifications remain in place and no public comments were received.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Maricopa Planning and Zoning Commission voted Jan. 26 to approve a text amendment to Chapter 18 of the Maricopa zoning ordinance intended to bring the city code into compliance with recent state law changes.
Rick Williams, planning manager, told the commission the amendment responds to House Bill 2447 and corrects scrivener errors in the code. "That bill mandated the legislative body of a city or a town shall by ordinance authorize administrative personnel to review and approve site plans, development plans, land divisions, lot line adjustments, lot ties, preliminary plats, final plats and plat amendments without a public hearing," Williams said, summarizing the state requirement that prompted the local change.
Williams said the amendment will clarify that certain secondary development reviews can be approved administratively while retaining key protections: "Major development review permits are still required to be posted on-site and they're still required to notify all property owners within 600 feet," he said. Williams also told commissioners the ordinance version the council approved Dec. 2 is consistent with the intended change but noted the city code posted online had not yet been updated and staff would double-check the published text.
Commissioner Robert Clow asked staff to confirm that the appeals table in the city code reflects the new process; Williams acknowledged the online code had not caught up with the Dec. 2 council action and said he would verify the published language. Commissioners also asked what applications will continue to come before the commission; Williams listed rezonings, plan amendments, text amendments and conditional use permits as items that will still require commission review and council approval.
Williams said the city ran public notices on its website and placed a newspaper advertisement on Jan. 10; he reported that, as of the meeting, no public comments had been received. The commission approved the text amendment on a voice vote after a motion by Commissioner Thomas and a second by Commissioner Yocom.
The commission also discussed a forthcoming code rewrite, which Williams said would be a larger, participatory effort in which the commission and council will have roles shaping new code language and tools. The amendment takes effect as a cleanup aligning local procedures with the state law changes and staff follow-up to ensure the published city code reflects the approved revisions.

