Goodyear advances 267-acre industrial rezone despite residential proximity concerns, vote pending

Goodyear Planning Commission Advances Controversial 267-Acre Industrial Rezone Despite Strong Community Opposition on Proximity to Homes

The Goodyear Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 4 for a major general plan amendment that would redesignate 267 acres from neighborhood residential to business and commerce uses, permitting industrial warehouses, light manufacturing, and commercial development adjacent to unincorporated Maricopa County single-family homes. The hearing drew passionate community testimony and marked the opening salvo in a three-stage approval process extending through December 16.

The proposal represents a dramatic pivot from the property's 20-year history as an entitled 750-unit residential subdivision. Attorney Wendy Rell, representing developer KET Ranken, attributed the shift to two regulatory constraints: Luke Air Force Base overflight restrictions that capped residential density, and a fundamental change in Arizona water policy that rendered residential development "a near impossibility" on the site.

Key Speeches

"I'm surely going to miss my Mountain View, the winter sunrise and sunsets, and sitting on my front porch watching a storm or rain coming because tall buildings won't allow us to see that anymore. Most of the families in the neighborhood have no plans to sell or leave their properties as children and grandchildren are being raised in our little community. So please, I ask you to make sure that this project, if approved, does not affect our lives." — Alma Lares, West Roosevelt Street resident

"We are very aware of the context here. We are aware of the fact that we've got some Maricopa County residences here, and we have agreed already that we will be limiting the business park uses within 300 feet of that adjacent residential, so that more intense industrial is only permitted in that interior. We are including commercial uses that would be allowed up along Citrus and some potentially along [other streets] to add some commercial for all the employment that we see coming here as well." — Wendy Rell, Attorney for KET Ranken

"One of the reasons why me and my family moved to Goodyear is because we were seeking that peace that Goodyear offered us and that security that we felt we were going to get. And just my fear of building this thing is kind of losing that privacy and that peace that I hoped for." — Esther, Goodyear resident and high school district employee

Timeline

• Staff presentation: Principal Planner Guadalupe Ortiz Cortez outlined the project scope, noted conformance with the city's general plan's "prosperous and innovative" and "livable and connected" fundamental strategies, and detailed mitigation measures including required street improvements and traffic evaluation through the later rezoning application.

• Commission questions: Vice Chair Sam Beo raised concerns about building height (56 feet maximum), truck traffic impacts on roads not designed for heavy vehicles, development impact fee distribution, use orientation (preference for business park over warehouse uses on the western edge), setback and landscaping requirements, and maintenance obligations for landscape buffers. Commissioner Beo specifically requested exploration of whether building heights could be scaled down on the west edge adjacent to residences. Planner Ortiz Cortez confirmed the zoning ordinance mandates a 180-foot building setback (in addition to a 50-foot landscape buffer) when commercial or business park districts are adjacent to single-family residential, based on a formula of 50 feet plus 5 feet for each foot of height above 30 feet.

• Applicant presentation: Attorney Rell and KET Ranken representatives presented site plans, architectural renderings by Butler Design Group, and a map showing surrounding context including Crow's Innovation Center development across Citrus Road and planned industrial uses in Buckeye to the west. Rell discussed the three primary drivers for the proposal: Luke Air Force Base overflight constraints, Arizona water policy shifts limiting residential viability, and the surrounding employment-focused development context. The applicant committed to a 300-foot buffer limiting business park (not industrial warehouse) uses adjacent to county residences, a 180-foot building setback plus 50-foot landscape buffer, a frontage road design for Roosevelt Street separating local and project traffic, trail system along Roosevelt, and exploration of wireless communication facilities and fiber-optic improvements to address connectivity concerns raised by neighbors. Rell indicated the architectural design standards would include facade relief and varied materials to break up large building walls, citing Butler Design Group's portfolio as examples.

• Public comment: Four speakers addressed the commission. Alma Lares, a West Roosevelt Street resident, expressed concerns about loss of mountain views, disruption to outdoor activities and family gatherings, and the need to maintain the neighborhood's safety and character. Jeff Ly, self-identified as a family member of industrial developers, supported the rezone, arguing that warehouse and industrial uses are more compatible with residential than apartments adjacent to industrial areas (citing examples from the city's 85th Avenue corridor). Lanna McDonald, a county island property owner with horses, opposed the project's proximity to residences but requested that if industrial development proceeds, commercial retail and food services be included on the west side of the freeway to serve future employees and existing residents, noting the lack of services requiring residents to cross the freeway to Buckeye. She also raised concerns about building heights and requested landscape softening at the Citrus and Roosevelt corner. Esther, a second-year Goodyear resident who relocated from Phoenix seeking safety and peace, expressed fears about losing privacy and mountain views, requested consideration of safe pedestrian crossings for high school students, and noted ongoing security concerns in her family's move to the area.

• Council discussion: Vice Chair Beo engaged applicant's counsel on architectural and buffering details, requesting confirmation that the 180-foot setback plus 50-foot landscape buffer would apply, and requesting stipulations for facade relief and materiality to visually break up large industrial buildings. He also discussed tree maintenance obligations and the city's compliance enforcement for landscape replacement after storm damage. Commissioner Beo further noted that the property's original residential entitlement ("20 some odd years") warranted careful consideration of scaling down industrial uses on the western edge where the county island residences are concentrated, and expressed appreciation for the frontage road concept and trail system commitments.

• Vote and continuance: No vote was taken. Vice Chair Beo closed the public hearing. The commission scheduled a second public hearing and vote for December 10, 2024, at the Goodyear Municipal Complex, 6 p.m. City council is scheduled to hear the matter December 16, 2024, at 5 p.m. at City Hall.

Opposition

Number of speakers against: 3 (Alma Lares, Lanna McDonald, Esther)

Main concerns:

1. Loss of mountain views, winter sunsets, and visual amenity that attracted residents to the area
2. Increased noise and vibration from industrial and warehouse operations disruptive to quality of life
3. Truck traffic and road damage; safety concerns for exiting/entering properties and children attending nearby high school
4. Proximity of 56-foot industrial buildings (within 300+ feet) to single-family homes creates an imposing, unwelcome character change
5. Loss of privacy and the peaceful, secure environment that prompted relocation from urban Phoenix
6. Lack of safe pedestrian crossings for high school students accessing the area
7. Drainage concerns and other infrastructure impacts not adequately addressed

Most compelling arguments:

Alma Lares' testimony about her family's search for safety and her fear of losing the home as a sanctuary, combined with Esther's parallel narrative of fleeing a dangerous Phoenix neighborhood only to see the newly found peace threatened, framed the debate as one of community character and livability rather than mere zoning mechanics. Lanna McDonald's point about food and retail access for future industrial employees underscored a gap in the project's service infrastructure—if hundreds or thousands of workers will occupy the site, why not capture sales tax and serve the community's needs on the Goodyear side rather than force reliance on Buckeye?

Organized groups: None identified; opposition appeared as individual neighbors and residents.

Support

Number of speakers in favor: 1 (Jeff Ly)

Main arguments:

Jeff Ly's testimony centered on the futility of restricting industrial development given market realities and the site's constraints. He noted that Lennar Homes, which held the property previously, withdrew from residential development—a clear market signal. Ly compared the Goodyear Planning Commission's concern about industrial-residential proximity to what he called the commission's own contradiction: approving apartments directly adjacent to warehouses on 85th Avenue (the "Ice Cube houses" or "Bungalows" near Lake and Parks Industrial Park). His argument framed the application as the "best project that could be put on this property" given the Luke Air Force Base overflight restrictions and water policy constraints.

Project Details

• Case number: I-10 Citrus Gateway General Plan Amendment (major general plan amendment; rezoning application pending)

• Applicant / developer: KET Ranken

• Attorney: Wendy Rell, Ray Law Firm

• Location / address: Approximately 267 acres at the southwest corner of North Citrus Road and West Roosevelt Street, west of Citrus Road, south of Roosevelt Street, east of Perul Road (a row of homes in unincorporated Maricopa County), and north of Bamban Street and Destiny RV Resort. The property straddles the Goodyear city boundary, Maricopa County unincorporated area, and Buckeye city boundary.

• APN: Not stated in transcript

• Current zoning / land use → Proposed zoning / land use: Las Palmas Planned Area Development (PAD) with underlying residential and commercial zoning (single-family, multifamily, manufactured homes, commercial) → Business and Commerce general plan designation, with rezoning application to follow (proposed Business Park District with PAD overlay, permitting flex general commercial and light industrial zoning in parts)

• Density / units / square footage: Current entitlement: 750 residential units (capped by Luke Air Force Base graduated density contours). Proposed: No unit count specified; industrial, warehouse, light manufacturing, commercial, and business park uses permitted under the new designation.

• Changes from previous version (if reconsideration): This is the initial major general plan amendment application. The property has been entitled for 20-odd years as residential (Las Palmas PAD) but has never been developed, in part due to Luke Air Force Base restrictions and, more recently, Arizona water policy constraints.

Vote Breakdown

No vote was held on December 4. The public hearing was opened and closed with a continuance to December 10, 2024, when the Planning Commission will vote on the general plan amendment recommendation.

Outcome & Next Steps

The Planning Commission held an informational public hearing on December 4 and will reconvene for a second public hearing and vote on December 10, 2024, at 6 p.m. at the Goodyear Municipal Complex. If the commission votes to recommend approval, the matter will proceed to the Goodyear City Council for a hearing and final decision on December 16, 2024, at 5 p.m. at City Hall.

In parallel, the applicant's rezoning application (converting the Las Palmas PAD to Business Park District with PAD overlay and mixed light industrial/commercial zoning) is currently in second staff review and is expected to return before the commission in the first quarter of 2025. The applicant has committed to additional neighborhood meetings and stakeholder engagement, including:

• A frontage road design for Roosevelt Street (separating local traffic from project traffic)
• A 300-foot buffer limiting business park (not warehouse) uses adjacent to county residential areas
• 180-foot building setbacks plus 50-foot landscape buffers on the western edge
• Architectural design standards with facade relief and varied materials to break up large building walls
• Trail system along Roosevelt Street
• Wireless communication facilities and fiber-optic improvements to enhance connectivity
• Required half-street improvements for Citrus Road and Bamban Street, and frontage road improvements on Roosevelt Street

Staff will continue to work with the applicant and residents through the rezoning phase, where additional design and operations details will be addressed.

Controversies & Context

The I-10 Citrus Gateway project crystallizes a broader tension in Maricopa County's western growth: the collision between newly built residential communities seeking rural quietude and the region's employment-focused development agenda. The property's history is instructive. Entitled as Las Palmas PAD in the early 2000s for 750 residential units, the site has remained largely dormant for 20 years—a symptom of regulatory constraints that have only tightened. Luke Air Force Base overflight zones impose graduated density restrictions, and Arizona's shifts in water policy (stemming from gubernatorial initiatives around groundwater sustainability and Colorado River Compact negotiations) have made residential development on sites without reliable water supply increasingly difficult or uneconomic.

The applicant's pivot to industrial and commercial uses is, in that sense, pragmatic and market-driven. Jeff Ly's comment that Lennar Homes abandoned the project is telling: one of the nation's largest homebuilders would not walk away lightly without a fundamental change in feasibility.

However, the residents' opposition reflects a real loss of expectations and character. Alma Lares and Esther both moved to or remained in their county homes with an assumption of residential, low-density character. The general plan amendment nullifies that assumption and converts neighboring land from "neighborhoods" to "business and commerce"—a 56-foot-tall industrial zone 300 feet from their front porches. The traffic, noise, and visual impacts are not hypothetical; they are documented concerns from the applicant's own neighborhood meeting.

The developer's response—a 300-foot business park buffer, 180-foot setbacks, landscape screening, facade relief, and a frontage road for Roosevelt Street—represents meaningful mitigation but does not eliminate the fundamental change. Residents will still see industrial architecture, hear truck traffic, and experience the visual and acoustic signature of a mixed-use employment center rather than a residential neighborhood.

Vice Chair Beo's intervention on architectural standards and setback confirmation suggests the commission may condition its recommendation on stronger design guidelines and possibly lower height allowances or greater business park (versus warehouse) emphasis on the western edge. His comment that the property was "supposed to be houses" for 20 years signals potential council-level discussion of whether the city should negotiate further commitments (e.g., retail/food service on the Goodyear side, stronger architectural controls, additional traffic mitigation) before approving the general plan amendment.

The comment from Lanna McDonald about the absence of commercial services on the west side of the freeway—and the loss of sales tax and convenience to industrial employees and residents—may also surface in council deliberations as a missed opportunity for the city to capture economic benefit and improve livability for both the project and the adjacent community.

Duration

• I-10 Citrus Gateway item: Approximately 90 minutes (staff presentation, applicant presentation, commission questions, four public speakers, and applicant rebuttal)

• Total meeting: Approximately 2.5 hours (including approval of minutes, excuse of commissioners, ADU text amendment with staff presentation and unanimous approval, and announcements)

Other Notable Items

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) Zoning Ordinance Amendment — The commission unanimously approved a text amendment to conform to Arizona HB 2720 (2024), allowing one attached and one detached ADU on single-family residential lots, with an additional ADU permitted on properties of 1 acre or greater if deed-restricted for affordable housing. A key exception: ADUs are prohibited in the Luke Air Force Base vicinity box, a red-outlined area cutting through Palm Valley, Sedona Abel Ranch, Pebble Creek, Canyon Trails, and other west-side subdivisions. Outside the box, HOAs may still restrict ADUs, but the state law requires cities to permit them. The amendment carries a January 1, 2025, compliance deadline. Planning Manager Christian Williams presented the ordinance, noting that ADUs are self-contained accessory structures that may include kitchens, are capped at the height of the primary structure (typically 30 feet), and are exempt from matching the primary structure's design guidelines per state law.