60-Day Public Review Draft

I strongly oppose the proposed development in Rio Verde. Our local neighborhood values peace and quiet, consistent water access, and a sustainable environment for our domesticated animals and wildlife. Please do not add any more homes to an already fragile ecosystem, nonetheless ones that will require rezoning of the serene and sacred desert! Our lots are one acre or more for a reason which preserves the desirability and sustainability of the entire area. Please do not approve this project which such devastating consequences, especially in an area already limited by singular road access. Further congestion is not prudent or safe given the wildfire risk and prevalent accidents. I urge the council to reject this proposal!

Required elements:
1) Protection of current rural and semi rural parcels by retaining current zoning in particular R43 rules. Examples include the Rio Verde Foothills and North Scottsdale south of Cave Creek.
2) Five year moratorium on new developments in the Rio Verde Foothills. Freeze the planned development west of Tonto Verde.
3) Strict enforcement of night skies light pollution rules.
4) No high density housing or reduced lot sizes in rural and semi rural areas
5) Encourage high density housing in areas in proximity to major employers and existing or planned public transportation.

Subject: Public Comment on Framework 2040 Draft – Enshrine the Rural Character of Rio Verde Foothills

To the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department:

As a resident of the Rio Verde Foothills (RVF), I am submitting this formal public comment on the Framework 2040 Comprehensive Plan Public Review Draft. I urge the County to ensure that the final adopted plan strictly maintains the rural, low-density designation of the RVF area, capping density at a maximum of one home per acre (Rural-43).

Under Arizona law (A.R.S. § 11-814), all future rezonings must be consistent with and conform to the adopted comprehensive plan. It is imperative that Framework 2040's land use maps and policies explicitly prohibit high-density master-planned communities in this area, such as the active MorDo Ranch proposal (Cases CPA260001 & Z260002) which seeks to force up to 15 homes per acre into the middle of our community.

Framework 2040 must recognize that high-density development does not fit our rural community due to several insurmountable constraints:

No Proven Water Supply: The RVF community has a well-documented history of water scarcity, relying heavily on hauled water and domestic wells suffering from diminished yields. The area lacks the renewable water infrastructure required to support thousands of clustered homes.

Infrastructure Deficits: Our rural perimeter roads are simply not built to handle the massive increase in daily traffic that urban-density development would generate.

Septic Risk to Groundwater: Concentrating thousands of homes in an area without municipal sewer connections requires high-density septic usage, which poses a severe contamination risk to the underlying aquifer that existing residents rely upon.

Limited Emergency Access: Introducing urban density into a rural desert environment places an unsustainable burden on limited emergency response resources, such as the local Rural Metro Fire Station, jeopardizing public safety.

The Comprehensive Plan serves as the roadmap for county-level development over the next decade. I respectfully demand that Framework 2040 prioritize the protection of our fragile desert environment, our strained aquifer, and our established rural lifestyle by rejecting any land-use designations that would enable high-density rezoning in the Rio Verde Foothills.

Sincerely,
Brian Smith

Further clarification is needed to ensure cost-sharing requirements are proportionate to actual service demands and impacts. This is of particular importance to renewable energy generation and energy storage facilities that do not strain public services due to lack of water, sewer, and transportation needs.
The following proposed revisions help clarify that cost of development requirements should be proportionate:

Cost of Development Policy #3.1:
"Maricopa County supports new development CONTRIBUTING ITS PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE COSTS OF infrastructure NECESSARY to support the demand for electric, water, sewer, and other services generated and necessitated by the development."

Cost of Development Policy #3.2:
"Maricopa County supports REQUIRING new development TO CONTRIBUTE ITS PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF long-term maintenance costs associated with the infrastructure to support the demand for electric, water, sewer, and other services generated and necessitated by the development."

Similar to comment above, suggest the following language revision in Step 3: Any unincorporated land falling in the Rural Service Area ACCOMMODATES rural land use designations.

The current draft of the Municipal-Rural Influence Framework is confusing as applied to energy generation and storage projects and risks excluding appropriately sited projects. The current framework generally identifies rural areas as suitable for electric generation facilities; however, it does not address municipal influence areas, which often include large, undeveloped parcels that may also be appropriate for such uses – especially as interim uses lasting approximately 30 years. Clarifying that these utility scale facilities may be considered within both rural and municipal influence areas, where compatible with surrounding uses, would ensure flexibility and better reflect existing development patterns within the County. Additionally, providing this clarity will also help avoid restrictive readings of this language that could trigger unnecessary plan amendments. Some specific language revisions are proposed below:

Last sentence of 2nd paragraph: The Rural Service Area ACCOMMODATES rural land uses, AND ALLOWS FOR rural industrial or certain commercial land uses that would both not be considered part of the County’s Urban Growth Area.

Add the following language: CERTAIN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS, INCLUDING THE UTILITIES DESIGNATION, CAN OCCUR IN EITHER THE RURAL SERVICE AREA OR URBAN GROWTH AREA OF THE AREA OF MUNICIPAL INFLUENCE.

Setbacks should be appropriate to the context and should be assumed to be substantial in all cases.

Suggested revisions for Energy Policies 3.3 and below:

Energy Policy #3.3:
"Maricopa County supports the use of APPROPRIATE setbacks and buffers to residential uses from energy generation and/or energy storage facilities to prevent or lessen the impact from potential fires and other potential hazards."
Energy Policy #3.5:
"Maricopa County supports APPROPRIATE buffers and setbacks to ecological and riparian habitats found along borders of significant washes and riverbanks from energy generation and/or storage facilities."

To the Maricopa County Planning Commission,
I am writing as a Rio Verde Foothills resident to formally oppose the rezoning request associated with the Mordo Ranch development proposal — approximately 700 residential units located between 156th and 160th Street. My opposition is grounded in two critical concerns:

1. WATER AVAILABILITY Rio Verde's water infrastructure is not equipped to support a development of this scale. This community has already experienced firsthand the consequences of water insecurity — residents were left without service when Scottsdale terminated its water hauling agreement in 2023. While steps have been taken since, the underlying supply constraints have not been resolved. Approving 700 additional units before the community has achieved long-term, sustainable water security is premature and irresponsible. Density approvals must follow infrastructure capacity — not precede it.

2. COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND INCOMPATIBLE DENSITY Rio Verde is a low-density, rural-character community. Residents chose this area specifically because of its open space, limited traffic, and quiet neighborhoods. A 700-unit development fundamentally changes that character. The cumulative impact on roads, public services, school capacity, and quality of life for existing residents has not been adequately addressed.

I urge the Commission to deny this rezoning request and require any future proposal to demonstrate: - Verified, long-term water supply commitments from a legally designated provider - Infrastructure studies showing roads and services can absorb the density - Community engagement that reflects the preferences of existing Rio Verde residents This community deserves growth that is responsible, measured, and sustainable — not density driven by developer timelines.

Given that 2010 to 2020 unincorporated growth had slowed to 8%, why are you projecting 20% growth going forward?

Maricopa County should also support documented proof of limited impact of existing wells that are within 1 square mile of a new development or subdivision.

Consideration must be made to how a subdivision using groundwater will impact existing wells. Modeling should be provided to show impact of wells that are within 1 square mile of a subdivision planning to use the same aquifer.

There should also be support for existing wells. For example, if a subdivision is planned in an area with adjacent homes dependent on an the same aquifer as the subdivision, there must be plans to protect the existing wells before the subdivision is approved.

Maricopa county is very diverse considering its expansive square mile coverage. The county should consider the geographical, economic, environmental, and societal make up of each unincorporated area before changing zoning. There are areas, such as the Rio Verde Foothills, that are land locked with the Tonto Nation Forest to north and to the east. Increased populations due to high density zoning can place exponential burdens onto existing residents especially regarding safety. Please ensure that unincorporated areas continue to have plans unique that suit their areas.

WATER WATER WATER

Rezoning and allowing hundreds of small lots is in complete contradiction to 1.4. We do not have the water, sewage, or roads to accommodate the rezoning or development of Mordo Ranch, especially if there was a need for a mass evacuation in case of wild fires which we are at great risk of.

Do not approve the continued development and rezoning in Rio Verde Foothills. We do not have the water resources to accommodate 700 new homes, do not have the road capacity, it will fundamentally change the character of our community, and it will disrupt and change the drainage and flood risk in our area. We are built around washes and flood zones. The continued development puts our homes and community at risk.

Continuing to develop homes in Rio Verde Foothills when we are dry as a bone at here and don't have enough water for current residents, in addition wanting to rezone and cram hundreds of more houses on tiny lots is the worst sort of Fire and Emergency Management I have heard of.

How are we in Rio Verde Foothills supposed to do that when the county is considering allowing rezoning to cram hundreds of small lots adding potentially thousands more people who will need water when we are struggling to have water for the people who already live here? Why would the county make our water, traffic, and emergency evacuation challenges near impossible to deal with?

Rio Verde Foothills must maintain its current zoning. The new proposed project to cram hundreds of small lots in this area is absolutely insane. It does not fit with the character of the community at all and will permanently alter it. We are a rural community of large, ranch lots filled with livestock and need to remain that way. It is why we all moved here and remain here and have a right to maintain our community.

In addition, we have all experienced wildfires here over the last few years. It is already too much to evacuate all of the homes and livestock out of the area with one main road in and out of the community. It would be extremely unsafe to add hundreds of new homes and potentially thousands of additional cars to the area that would need to evacuate. We do not have the roads to accommodate more cars for day to day traffic, never mind a mass evacuation.

Most importantly, WATER. The water crisis in our area is well known and well documented. It is crazy that adding this many new homes and people to the area is even being considered when we do not have enough water for the current residents.

Do not destroy our our rural community, one of the last of it's kind. Do not further strain our water crisis. Do not create a evacuation catastrophe when the wild fires hit again.

Why is a rezoning in Rio Verde Foothills to allow hundreds of small lots being crammed in a rural area even being considered when this area has a known water shortage issue and there already isn't enough water for current residents?

Rezoning Rio Verde Foothills to allow hundreds of small lots crammed into a rural area designed for 1+ acre lots puts the entire area in danger. We have already had numerous wild fires in recent years. We have one main road in and out - Dynamite. It would be catastrophic to add to the traffic needing to evacuate this area in case of an emergency.

Rezoning in Rio Verde Foothills to cram hundreds of small lots in a completely rural area that already does not have the water and roads to support it's current residents completely contradicts Land Use Policy #1.4

NO to MorDo Development.

Rural communities across Arizona are diminishing. At a minimum, the zoning for the unincorporated Maricopa County should be R-43--At a minimum!! The paving over the desert has increased temperatures and reduced significantly the natural habitat for native flora and fauna. Even more important-RAIN! Native trees help lower the temperature and create favorable conditions for cloud formation and precipitation. (see phys.org) Rural communities are essential to keeping a balanced environment. Any attempt to merge rural and urban would negatively impact the unincorporated area resulting in an urban only environment.

Please do not change the zoning in the Rio Verde Foothills area. We already have water issues, traffic issues and not enough emergency services. We do not need high density subdivisions going in out here. Please keep the R-43 zoning to maintain our 1 house per acre.

Please keep our rural areas intact. Prevent rezoning into lots under an acre and main rural-43 zoning!

Pursuant to 1.4 - please do not approve the MorDo development. There is no infrastructure to accommodate the change of zoning that the developer is requesting. We are on wells, we have one way in and one way out, and we have already had many wildfire scares. This development would add to liability and possible fatalities because of the lack of existing infrastructure. The impact to wildlife, residents, horse properties, and public safety makes this an easy NO TO MORDO DEVELOPMENT.

I moved out to this area for Scottsdale and Shea area to enjoy the quiet and the views not to have neighbors living on top of me. Let Scottsdale overbuild and litter the city with apartment complexes, leave us alone out here to enjoy AZ.

I have a well for a reason, I don't want to drink reclaimed water and the impurities that are not filtered out like prescription meds.

The pressure on the water supply will decrease if growth is cut in the Rio Verde Foothills earlier. The area is already to densely populated and further growth will damage the area.

My husband Thomas & I reside on N 159th. We love our rural environment. Have horses & we oppose the the zoning for this Ranch. All homes approved for this area should keep the rural way of life & consider zoning that is compatible with current zoning statues. Water would be a huge concern affecting everyone

I strongly oppose rezoning and development in the Rio Verde Foothills. There is limited water resources, reliance on septic systems, and inadequate road capacity for increased traffic. The area includes a natural watershed and designated floodplain, where development could disrupt drainage and increase flood risk to existing homes. This project would negatively impact wildlife habitat and introduce significant light and noise pollution. Most importantly, it would fundamentally change the rural, quiet character of the community that residents intentionally chose to make their home.

No to MorDo Development

No to MorDo!!! Further development in the Rio Verde area, will greatly impact this long standing rural area for not only the horse community, but also the residents that have purposely moved away from the urban areas to enjoy the peace and tranquility that this desert possesses. Residents with the current population already feel our delicate water, and roads strains. another large housing development is not necessary nor wanted.We residents enjoy our larger 1 acre + zoning and this should absolutely not change. Another concern should be on our already fragile eco system, from the desert fauna, wildlife to their natural environment. Please do not change our beloved home.

What will it take to stop the building out here. We have no water for this new development- where will the water come from? The roads can’t handle another development- the traffic is challenging enough.

I strongly oppose Case CPA260001 & Z260002 and urge you to vote NO.
Overburden rural infrastructure and roadways

I strongly oppose Case CPA260001 & Z260002 and urge you to vote NO. Reduce the effectiveness of emergency response and public safety services

Re "need to address the spectrum of housing factors"...

Include in those factors the very real need for lifestyle differences, i.e., urban vs. rural---and that they do not mix.

Include the fact that all costs for everything in life have increased.

Include the fact that rezoning a rural unincorporated area to meet housing needs does NOT mean new housing will be any more affordable than elsewhere.

And include the fact that it's less expensive (in every way) to continue building up, within the urban areas, than it is to build new in unincorporated areas that haven't the infrastructure to accommodate the population increase.

When considering housing, you must also consider lifestyle; they cannot be separated. You must recognize the necessity of multiple lifestyle options and understand that some lifestyles do not mesh.

In an urban setting, traditional single-family home neighborhoods work well with newer subdivisions, and those neighborhoods blur with the varieties of higher density apartment-style residences.

As cities built out to meet their boundaries, these urban dwelling styles pushed out larger properties of acreages with horses and other lifestock. Those displaced rural-flavored moved to the unincorporated county lands, and they did so fully understanding the trade-offs. They valued the rural-flavored lifestyle enough to forfeit municipal infrastructure and conveniences.

*Do not allow zoning changes that would expand the urban lifestyles into the unincorporated county.* Just as there is need for urban residences, so too is there need for rural properties.

Rural and urban do not mix. If zoning changes were allowed for any development, any subdivision, in an unincorporated county, massive changes would ensue---and it would be at tremendous cost to rural property owners and to the county.

When assessing housing occupancy in unincorporated Maricopa County, do so with specific areas in mind and with their unique qualities and conditions in mind. *Keep the rural zoning intact, and keep the higher-density zoning to the municipalities.*

So does this go for areas that are trying to Incorporate into there own Municipalities. As Tonopah has been trying for the last 25yrs. I per there maps they have not done any legal survey just a meta & Bonds done by a lawyer that is not surveyor. Here is a link to there Meta & Bonds link in which they do not have permission any more from buck with in the 6 miles and still have not pulled there web site

I / WE (RESIDENTS OF RIO VERDE FOOTHILLS) DO NOT WANT MORE DENSE ZOING IN RIO VERDE FOOTHILLS. KEEP IT RURAL ZONING PLEASE. WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH ENOUGHT OVER THE YEAR. WE INVESTED IN THIS AREA DUE TO THE RURAL ZONING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. (FOR SO MANY REASONS)

Do not approve the re-zoning for Mordo Ranch at 156th St in Rio Verde Foothills please. It needs to stay rural zoning only. Much of the land in is floodplain. New homeowners will need flood insurance. Massive washs flood often every year out here (they travel to the Rio Verde River 3 miles away). Dixieleta Road IS A WASH. They are talking about paving it?????

I am very concerned about this for same reasons point 3.

I am very concerned about this for same growth reasons. stated in point 3.

There is not sufficient road capacity to support: 700 new homes at Mordo Ranch. We have 3 other new items going in: Toll Bros 1200 homes, Trilogy expansion, Shopping Mall at 176th St. There is one accident per day on Rio Verde Dr as it is. When an accident occurs, things backup for miles. It happens often out here.

I am a Rio Verde Foothills resident. Built home in 2023 with hauled water setup (as 50+% of our community have, others have wells that also have hauled water as backup due to low performing wellls). Where are you planning to get water for this Mordo Ranch (700 homes/rezoned)??? Please say no to this new subdivision between 156th St and 160th St. We just went through 5 years of a fight to retain our long time water source from Scottsdale. They cut us off. (National News). Then we wound up with a poor and expensive solution, using Epcor water. The prices are rediculous and were poorly developed. We are in talks with ACC now to re-evaluate the water pricing and delivery at this time. The Epcor just stated Jan 2026. We cannot share our water with a new 700 home community. There is already a Toll Bros community going in with 1200 homes and Trilogy is supposed to be expanding plus a shopping mall is going in at 176th St. Let me add that we don't have the road structure to support the increased in traffic that will result. Also everyone out here has septic systems. How will sewer service work for 700 new homes out here?

Should an emergency or evacuation arise with the existing infrastructure, the likelihood of a FATAL situation is increasingly likely. The LIABILITY would be with the County, and possibly Scottsdale, for allowing the rapid growth without providing enough exits for residents in the Rio Verde Foothills. Please do not approve the MorDo Development project. Make wise choices for preserving the rural feel by keeping the original 1 acre or more parcels.

NO to MorDo Development.