Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Work session on Desert Rural ZTA focuses on accessory-structure caps, livestock limits and rural roadway standards
Summary
Staff briefed the commission on a proposed Desert Rural zoning text amendment (FS25‑0039); commissioners generally supported exploring a 6,000-square-foot accessory-structure cap with a conditional-use permit for larger buildings, asked staff to research livestock caps/ratios and requested visuals and peer comparisons before the public hearing.
City staff and commissioners used a May 7 work session to continue drafting a Desert Rural zoning text amendment that would create standards for low‑density, rural neighborhoods within Surprise.
Trevor and Johnny (staff) described the proposed changes: permitting portable storage containers as accessory structures, allowing additional driveway capacity and dust-control surfacing, increasing flexibility for fencing and landscaping consistent with rural character, and creating a new desert‑rural roadway cross-section with minimal paving, no curb and gutter, no sidewalks and no streetlights for local roads.
A central point of debate was accessory structures. Staff said the current 3,000‑square‑foot cap is frequently too small for barns and large shops and suggested either tying caps to lot coverage or raising the per‑structure cap to 6,000 square feet while keeping lot‑coverage limits. Commissioners asked for visuals and examples; several favored studying a 6,000‑sq‑ft cap with a CUP option for larger structures.
The livestock discussion touched on defining "large" (equine, bovine) versus "medium" (sheep, goats, llamas, miniature horses) and proposed substitution ratios (one large = two medium). Commissioners raised enforcement questions about classifying animals and suggested consulting veterinary or industry standards; staff said they would research national standards and peer city approaches (staff cited Cave Creek as a precedent). Residents from the rural 219th/Deer Valley group urged rules that reflect actual local practices and suggested practical caps for hobby farms versus commercial ranching.
Staff said they will return to council with the commission’s feedback, provide visual examples, research standards and bring legislative edits for the public hearing. No final code changes were adopted at the work session; staff took direction to refine numeric caps and enforcement language.
