Buckeye City Council has approved a controversial update to the Desert Creek Community Master Plan, adopting a pod-style system aimed at balancing land use while facing concerns about predictability and traffic impact.
While primarily residential, the plan includes a variety of land uses including commercial and light industrial. The goal is to create predictability and balance, said Principal Planner Bart Wingard at the Nov. 5 general city council meeting. Besides, the community master plan was first introduced 20 years ago. The times and market conditions have certainly changed and the plan needed to change, as well. To remedy the problem, developers and city staff introduced a pod system.
The agreement establishes that the developers are obligated to construct water and wastewater infrastructure. It also determined further details regarding ownership transfers, fire requirements, school district needs and creating an I-10 interchange with contributions from each pod.
A small number of residents attended a neighborhood meeting on Jan. 31, hosted at the Coyote branch of Buckeye Library. There were "no significant concerns or objections," according Wingard.
City council was skeptical, however, likening the land use designations to a "blank check."
"I'm looking for some clarification on what wouldn't be allowed," said Mayor Eric Orsborn.
"I would say that the original proposal was a blank check," replied Wingard. "This with the pod concept is going to give us control and predictability."
"So, it's got the numbers filled out on the check, just not signed," said Orsborn.
Deputy Director of Planning Adam Copeland clarified that any industrial development would only be "light industrial." Additionally, it would be cut off at Yuma Road with everything north being predominantly residential pods.
"We don't want to see industrial next to residential so, with the pod concept, the way that side is set up, is you do have those natural buffers. The power-line corridors, you have the major arterial roads," he said. "You're not going to have a residential community right next to an industrial project. So the pod concept separates that out and gives that guarantee for staff that makes us more comfortable and gives that predictability so when it does come in we have those protections. So, we thought that was creative."
District 1 Councilmember Tony Youngker was still not convinced. "I feel like we're giving you the majority of our uses open and then you just find your buyer," he said. "We don't really have a plan or have any intentions of what we're actually going to do."
Copeland replied that it's not uncommon to have fewer details with mixed-use master planned communities.
District 4 Councilmember Craig Heustis also questioned the I-10 interchange plan, asking what will be done with Johnson Road as Yuma Road will not be able to handle traffic caused by the new development. Senior Traffic Engineer John Willett answered, saying the city is currently selecting a consultant to do a study on the corridor and identify what improvements will be required. Worse case scenario, the study could take a year.
"We're working on it to get answers," he said. "We're not sure at this point, but we're working on it."
In the end, city council approved the land use proposal. District 2 Councilmember Jeanine Guy was absent and Youngker was the only dissenting vote.
