Goodyear tables 70-acre mixed-use rezoning; approves 44-acre commerce park 5-2
GOODYEAR, ARIZONA — January 23, 2023

Goodyear tables 70-acre mixed-use rezoning; approves 44-acre commerce park 5-2

City Council meeting featured two major rezonings—a 70-acre mixed-use project tabled over residential placement and hybrid conversion concerns, and a 44-acre commerce park approved despite warehouse characterization objections, plus public comments on fire response times and freeway noise.

Goodyear Council Splits Over Freeway Frontage: Mixed-Use Rezoning Tabled, Commerce Park Approved Despite Warehouse Debate

The Goodyear City Council's January 23, 2023 meeting crystallized two competing planning philosophies: Can the city's last I-10 frontage support medical-office campuses and upscale business hubs, or is residential and light industrial the pragmatic answer? Council answered differently on two neighboring properties, tabling one project for revision and approving another despite strenuous objections to its characterization.

The evening opened with public comment on fire response times and freeway noise, then pivoted to two major rezonings that consumed nearly three hours of debate and exposed deep divisions over land use, market reality, and the city's identity as it grows.

Goodyear Celebration Plaza: The 18-Month Trap

The largest and most contentious item was the proposed Goodyear Celebration Plaza—a 70-acre rezoning at the southwest corner of Litchfield Road and I-10, directly adjacent to the Cancer Treatment Centers of America (now part of City of Hope). The project proposed a mix of uses: 31 acres of multifamily (MF-12 and MF-24 density), 15 acres of office, 11 acres of retail/commercial, and a controversial 10 acres of "hybrid" zoning that would allow office for 18 months after approval, then default to multifamily if no office was built.

Applicant Jeff Blaley, representing the property owner, presented renderings of a mixed-use master plan with a 1.5-acre public park, 1.5-mile trail system, and architectural design guidelines. He touted the project's urban density and housing diversity:

"The site really isn't a commercial anchored type of property. It's we don't envision this ever being a supermarket type of site or you know Walmart type of site. There's just so much of that in the area." — Jeff Blaley

Staff recommended approval. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6–0 in favor. The Cancer Treatment Centers director submitted a support letter. But council fractured immediately.

The 18-Month Controversy

Councilmember Wally Campbell walked the site and emerged troubled. He articulated the core anxiety: the I-10 frontage is irreplaceable. Once lost to multifamily, it cannot be reclaimed.

"My only concern after seeing all this it's a wonderful project I think it's a great use it's the last of our freeway it's all we have left in Goodyear once it's gone we have no Frontage Road left to do anything with it all." — Wally Campbell, Council Member

He noted the original vision—a medical campus centered on CTCA—had died. Office had not materialized in 15 years despite zoning. Why assume it would in 18 months? He opposed the tabling until he better understood the hybrid trigger.

Brannon Hampton went further. He opposed the entire concept of placing multifamily adjacent to the freeway:

"I'm not okay with it as it is presented today I might be looking for an amendment at some point here especially around the multi-family I don't think the multi-family needs to be right up against the freeway um I think there's other uses for that in the city that can be utilized." — Brannon Hampton, Brannon Hampton noted the Brazos commercial area near a hospital, which thrived without apartments on the freeway. He also cited recent emails from residents concerned about noise. The applicant countered that the I-10 has a natural berm, and architectural sound standards (64 decibels interior, per ADOT specs) would be met. Brannon Hampton was unmoved.

Councilmember Sherry Lauretano expressed appreciation for the project's work but voiced heartburn about the 18-month window in a rising-interest-rate economy:

"I'm not very comfortable with that in this market as was brought out you know even in our prayer today about the economic conditions that we're looking at and the increased interest rates um I think we're setting that up if we approve this I would be concerned that we're basically setting up for definitely to be multi-family because I don't think in 18 months you know I just have those concerns with the economy." — Sherry Lauretano, Council Member

Lauretano also critiqued the multifamily facades as "drab"—cream and white stucco with little "wow factor." The applicant's planner, Mark Ready, pivoted to design guidelines embedded in the pad (articulated parapets, varied rooflines, accent colors, shading elements) that would apply at site-plan stage. But Lauretano was not assuaged; without seeing final architecture, she could not commit to a yes.

Councilmember Vicki Gillis, newly elected, asked about the park's use by cancer patients with compromised immune systems. Ready explained the park was designed in two zones: a passive southern segment (closest to CTCA, with water features and art) and an active northern segment (with playground and lawn). Vicki Gillis remained concerned but acknowledged the intent.

The Mayor's Revelation

Mayor Joe Pizzillo then dropped a bombshell. The 18-month window was not developer-initiated; it was a city compromise. And it was driven by an economic development opportunity he could not disclose:

"The 18-month deal came about because there is something they can't talk about that has to do with economic development that they're working on right next to that place that needs that extra land and the deal was to get more time to do that negotiation and they didn't even want to do that they wanted it all to be uh what you call it residential or apartments." — Joe Pizzillo revelation shifted the debate. The 18-month window was not a buffer for office leasing; it was leverage for a secret deal. Councilmember Step—a vocal supporter—noted the city's economic development team felt 18 months was feasible. (The applicant initially asked for 24 months; city staff countered at 36 months; they landed on 18.)

But given the divided council and the lack of consensus on the 18-month frame, Brannon Hampton moved to table the item. He proposed the applicant return with revised timeline and design standards—specifically around the facades and the hybrid period's economics.

Lauretano seconded the motion, adding:

"For me it's still that 18 months I know that might have been something that we might have started at 36 months I might be more comfortable at a 24 to a 36 month period with the economy where it's at I am not comfortable with an 18 month with everything that's changed." — Sherry Lauretano, Council Member

The attorney clarified that if substantial changes were proposed, the pad would likely need to re-enter the public process. If only the timeline were revised (e.g., 36 months instead of 18), that might be amendable tonight. The council opted for a full table and direction to staff.

Vote: Tabled. Item to be continued at a future date.

Urban District 10 Commerce Park: The Warehouse Debate

Immediately following was the Urban District 10 rezoning—44 acres just west of Goodyear Celebration Plaza, also adjacent to CTCA. The applicant, represented by attorney Shane Alleman, proposed a five-building, 650,000-square-foot "commerce park" with flex industrial, office, professional spaces, and retail. Uses included light manufacturing, research labs, medical-related facilities, and small businesses needing both front-office and back-storage space.

Applicant Jason Nunley of Urban Logistics Realty positioned it as a high-end business campus—think tech training, dental R&D, specialty food suppliers—not a traditional cross-dock warehouse:

"We specialize in exactly what Shane mentioned multi-building multi-tenant business parks and because of the size because of the orientation because of the way that the project is designed it really has a bent towards higher end higher finished users." — Jason Nunley, Urban Logistics Realty

The project included a 2.5-acre "Oasis Park" with trails, seating, and shade structures; enhanced Bullard Avenue landscaping; and 17 design standards codifying colors, materials, and storefront visibility. The application followed C2 (Commercial) zoning standards with additional industrial-screening requirements for truck courts and loading areas, all internalized to hide visibility from roadways.

Staff recommended approval 6–0 from the Planning Commission. CTCA sent a support letter.

The Warehouse Pushback

But Councilmember Vicki Gillis—the same newly elected member—drew a line:

"I'm obviously the newly elected up here I know what I have told my constituents before I was elected I know that um warehouses because even though it's smaller and I like what I see I think it's really beautiful I don't think that's the place for it the reason being is that I have been told by some people in this room in fact that we do warehouses on the outskirting areas of the city to where nothing else is being built." — Vicki Gillis, Council Member

She said her constituents made clear: no warehouses in the city center. She had committed to uphold that mandate. Despite liking the design, she would vote no:

"To me looking at that right from off the I-10 and I did walk it the other day I walked the property so I know exactly where you're going to do it and seeing these slides I really like what you have to offer but I would like to see it somewhere else." — Vicki Gillis, Brannon Hampton echoed the concern. He worried the project would set a precedent for more industrial development near CTCA, especially as the hospital (now owned by City of Hope, a $7 billion foundation) planned expansion. He cited Brazos, a comparable commercial cluster, which thrived without warehousing:

"I just imagine being in the country treatments of America being in one of the rooms and listening to some of the noise or the backup trucks and things like that not to the level of a crosstalk facility but still there's going to be traffic throughout this building." — Brannon Hampton, Vice Mayor

He also raised process concerns: a resident's email to council had been forwarded to the project attorney, creating the appearance of council-attorney coordination. Brannon Hampton was troubled by the optics.

The Commerce vs. Industrial Reframe

Councilmember Bill Step—an engineer—pushed back on the warehouse framing. He pulled up an aerial map showing the surrounding industrial landscape: Southwest Specialty Foods (manufacturing) across the street, Schneider's (food processing), baker development, and small commerce parks—all with roll-up doors and storefronts, all zoned light industrial:

"I'm just going to kind of summarize that this is consistent with the general plan so we're not looking for a journal plan Amendment or anything else so CTCA is supportive is that I gathered that as well." — Bill Step, Council Member (during zoning discussion)

Step argued the city already had light industrial uses in the area; this project, with its design standards and higher finishes, elevated the bar:

"We have a lot of high-end technological facilities the robotics facility the all the data centers they need stuff it's all brand new so nothing's broken but when that stuff starts to break down we're going to want to have those suppliers and repair companies here in the city this is the kind of place that they would go to." — Bill Step, Council Member

He invoked Scottsdale Air Park as a parallel: office front, storage back, small businesses thriving. Councilmember Sherry Lauretano concurred, offering a personal analogy:

"My mom growing up she used to work for a bookkeeping for a gift store and same thing they had the office in the front and these were then these stores were in all the malls in Scottsdale and their product when they came in to go to the stores was in the back so the front was a full-on office and then the back was where you would just have the product." — Sherry Lauretano, Council Member

Lauretano noted the city lacked a "business park" zoning category; everything light industrial fell under "industrial." Residents heard "industrial" and imagined FedEx cross-docks. But the renderings showed a curated campus with small tenants (tech training, dental labs, gift distribution). She supported the project:

"I think this is a component that we don't have in our portfolio right now and I think it's needed for the businesses you're not backing up against the freeway correct that's correct." — Sherry Lauretano, Council Member

Vice Mayor Laura Kaino praised the project's responsiveness and noted it filled a gap: existing small businesses in the area turned over rapidly due to limited space. The "commerce park" label was marketing, but the substance—flexible, smaller-tenant friendly, no cross-dock logistics—was sound:

"I think that you have worked really hard with us to make this a good product the park I believe there was going to be a public art piece in there perhaps as well." — Laura Kaino, Wally Campbell endorsed the project, only noting he would appreciate food vendors or retail uses on-site to serve CTCA patients and staff:

"If you could put like a deli in there or something else that they can get some food uh prepared in there that gives some options that would really be nice for me because right now they're limited." — Wally Campbell, Council Member

Vote: 5–2 (Approved). Yes: Step, Lauretano, Wally Campbell, Laura Kaino, Mayor. No: Vicki Gillis, Brannon Hampton.

Key Speeches

"There's going to be a single mom that works in this place she's going to be there as much time as she's at home how do we make her work environment a little bit better it's not something that you can quantify it's not something that you can measure." — Jason Nunley, Urban Logistics Realty

"The park is public and open to anybody okay well as a cancer survivor recently finishing my cancer treatments you're so compromised with your immune system you can't go to a public park if there's other people around." — Wally Campbell, Council Member (Celebration Plaza)

Timeline

Goodyear Celebration Plaza

Urban District 10 Commerce Park

Opposition (Urban District 10)

Support (Urban District 10)

Project Details (Goodyear Celebration Plaza)

Project Details (Urban District 10)

Vote Breakdown (Urban District 10 Rezoning)

Outcome & Next Steps

Goodyear Celebration Plaza: Tabled indefinitely. Staff to work with applicant on revised 18-month hybrid timeline (likely 24–36 months), enhanced architectural design standards, and clarification of multifamily placement rationale. Item to be continued at future council meeting after revisions are presented.

Urban District 10: Approved. Applicant may proceed to site-plan and design-review stages. Design guidelines and C2 standards will be enforced. Amenities (Oasis Park, trail connectivity, Bullard Avenue landscaping) are codified in pad and must be built.

Controversies & Context

The 18-Month Hybrid Trap (Celebration Plaza)

Council identified a fundamental tension: the mayor revealed an undisclosed economic development deal (likely medical, research, or institutional) required the 18-month office window as negotiating cover. But with interest rates rising and office leasing weak, council doubted office would materialize. After 18 months, the property would default to multifamily—precisely what council hoped to avoid. Brannon Hampton, Wally Campbell, and Lauretano expressed skepticism that the timeline was feasible or that the city should bet irreplaceable freeway frontage on an economic deal it could not discuss.

The Freeway Frontage Philosophy (Both Projects)

Both projects triggered debate over the city's last I-10 frontage. Wally Campbell and Brannon Hampton argued it should anchor a medical-office campus or upscale office park, not residential or warehousing. Lauretano and Step countered that density (residential or mixed-use) is what drives retail and restaurant leasing, and the original medical-campus vision had failed for 15 years. Joe Pizzillo noted CTCA—despite ownership by a $7 billion foundation—had not expanded materially, so waiting longer for a medical boom was speculative.

The Industrial Zoning Lexicon (Urban District 10)

A persistent dispute over language: Vicki Gillis and Brannon Hampton called the commerce park a "warehouse," implying cross-dock logistics. Applicant and supporting council members reframed it as a "business park" with small, professional tenants and no high-volume truck traffic. The disagreement reflected a real zoning gap: the city has no "business park" designation, so flex industrial falls under light industrial, which residents associate with distribution. The applicant's 17 design standards and professional-use list attempted to distinguish the product, but Vicki Gillis and Brannon Hampton remained unconvinced the label matched the reality of roll-up doors and internal loading.

CTCA as Stakeholder

Both projects explicitly courted CTCA's support (now operated by City of Hope Foundation, a major reinvestment signal). CTCA sent support letters for both. Yet the debate revealed tension: residential and warehousing adjacent to a 500-bed cancer hospital raised concerns about noise, traffic, and immune-compromised patients. The park design (two zones: passive for patients, active for families) was an attempt to mitigate. But the opposition (Brannon Hampton, Vicki Gillis) worried the site should be reserved for medical-office expansion or hospitality, not competing uses.

Economic Downturn and Market Timing (Celebration Plaza)

The 18-month hybrid trigger was negotiated when office leasing seemed viable. But by January 2023, interest rates had risen significantly, and recession forecasts clouded the horizon. Lauretano's concern—that office was unlikely within 18 months—reflected real market anxiety. The mayor's hint that an economic development deal was involved suggested staff believed something could materialize. But council could not assess a deal it was not permitted to hear details about, creating a trust gap.

Warehouse Characterization and City Identity (Urban District 10)

Gillis's position—that warehouses belong on the periphery, not near hospitals—reflected a planning ideology: use segregation by city zones (center = high-end, periphery = industrial). Step and Lauretano offered a counter-ideology: mixed-use centers and density-driven support for all uses, including light industrial. The vote split 5–2, with newer council member Vicki Gillis and established skeptic Brannon Hampton on the no side, suggesting a possible generational or ideological fault line.

Duration

Other Notable Items (Brief)

Citrus Park Annexation (Lower Buckeye and Citrus Road): A 3,287-square-foot linear remnant parcel needed for roadway improvements to support the Citrus Park residential development. Approved 7–0. Steve Krachia explained it was a 1970s oversight left behind when the city originally annexed; now being cleaned up for road dedication.

Public Comment — Fire Response Times: Jennifer Barber, 18-year resident and small-business owner, raised concerns about fire response times averaging over 8 minutes. She requested the city target 4-minute response times (consistent with Joe Pizzillo public commitment). She also asked about small-business licensing tiers (Goodyear's $75 annual fee is flat), post-office capacity, passport services, and flag disposal. Joe Pizzillo acknowledged commitment to reduced response times.

Public Comment — I-303 Noise Pollution: Marcia deSalvo, Pebble Creek resident, reported increasing noise from I-303 freeway and warehouse development. ADOT had declined further noise studies absent road widening. City agreed to advocate with ADOT and follow up.

Canyon Trails Townhome Rezoning (Ascent at Canyon Trails): An 8.62-acre rezoning from commercial (PAD) to R1A single-family attached (townhomes) with alley-loaded garages, central amenities (clubhouse, pool, tot lot), and enhanced setbacks protecting adjacent single-family homes to the south. Approved 7–0. Brannon Hampton requested clarity on ingress/egress and pathway connectivity to adjacent commercial; staff noted these would be determined at preliminary plat stage.

Fulton Homes Preliminary Plat: Approved preliminary plat for 796 lots and 87 tracts within the Ballpark Village area. A resident raised concerns about Fourth of July and graduation traffic congestion near the ballpark; city manager acknowledged event traffic management plans and offered follow-up coordination. Approved 7–0.

La Jolla Vista Preliminary Plat: Approved preliminary plat for 736 lots and 59 tracts within the West Goodyear residential community. Approved 7–0.

Annexations (Broadway Road and Sayreville Avenue): Two small annexations (1.81 acres and 0.42 acres, respectively) along freeway alignments, remnant slivers of property in unincorporated Maricopa County that the owner (Endicott Properties) seeks to annex to facilitate a 45-acre industrial rezone (contingent on separate rezoning approval). Both approved 7–0. Wally Campbell asked why they were not annexed originally; staff attributed it to 1970s oversights.

City Manager Report: City has acquired 46 acres around the Goodyear Ballpark (city-owned). A town hall will be held January 24, 2023, 6 P.M., at Goodyear Recreation Campus to solicit public input on future concepts. Wag Tag event scheduled January 28, 2023, 9 A.M.–noon, at Goodyear Civic Square (pet agility, obedience demo, caricatures, vaccinations, fashion show).

Council Comments: Wally Campbell raised concerns about concurrent road construction projects (Litchfield, Bullard, Pebble Creek Parkway, McDowell, Yuma all being ripped up simultaneously). He requested a report on construction permit coordination to prevent overlapping utility work. Joe Pizzillo noted a recent roundtable with Senator Cinema on water issues and a team-building wash cleanup event with Buckeye.