Comments Comments

Comments on the Draft General Plan 2020 for Casa Grande from the 60 day review process

The General Plan 2020 60 day review process is now completed. The comments for the General Plan are listed below.

Please review our web site privacy policy if you have any questions.

Comments collected for the General Plan 2020 Update Comments collected for the General Plan 2020 Update

We believe that the DRAFT General Plan Land Use designation for the One P and Diwan property noted on the attached map as “1” and “2” should be Commerce and Business. The current DRAFT plan appears to divide this property between Commerce and Business and Community Center. We feel strongly that a designation of Commerce and Business for all of the property ensures a more cohesive development.  See map here - Wendy R. Riddell

I just wanted to insure that language remains in the GP re: no development above the 15% grade, as is noted in our current general plan. Is this language in the GP2020, and if so, can you tell me where it is located? Thanks. - Mary Johnson

I have been reviewing the portion of the draft general plan dealing with energy planning and infrastructure and I applaud the City for working to include the various utilities in the design of the plan. In its opening statement, the report specifically mentions the City’s involvement with APS and Southwest Gas Corporation “in supporting their service provision throughout the residential, commercial and industrial communities.” It should be noted that Electrical District No. 2 presently serves significant numbers of residential, commercial and industrial loads within the existing city limits, and will serve substantially more during the period of time envisioned in this report. Most of the expansion of the Casa Grande city limits east of Interstate 10 will be served by ED2. Similarly, SRP owns a power plant in the city limits and will be building a 500kV line and a 230kV line through portions of the City. If mention of specific utilities is relevant in this report, then all should be mentioned by name in the context of the City working closely with them.

Figure C-6, referred to in Policy C-14.3.1, is not correct as it relates to the SRP 500kV line and the path it will take. I would suggest contacting SRP for an updated map. I also don’t understand what corridors are intended to be shown in this figure. It would appear from the hash marks that the corridors are identified as being anywhere in or around the cities of Maricopa, Casa Grande, Eloy, Coolidge and Florence. I think there should be some further discussion about what this figure is intended to illustrate. As this area of Pinal County grows, there will be many more transmission lines (230kV and above) needed. It is very important that the cities anticipate the need for these facilities in their general plans and have some accommodation made to allow them to be placed in areas where they are needed. While it may be possible to route 500kV lines around the outskirts of the cities and towns shown in the figure, it will very likely be necessary to allow some 230kV lines to be placed within the City proper. There should be some mention of this and how the corridors can be used for recreational and other purposes, such as park areas with biking and jogging paths, truck gardens, nurseries, etc.

In Policy C-14.3.2, the strategy to “ensure all power transmission lines less than 60kV are provided underground throughout the City” is a bit confusing. Electric utilities distinguish between transmission (usually 69 kV and above) and distribution (usually less than 69kV). It might be useful to specify that distribution lines, not transmission lines, are the target in this policy. While I understand the desire of the City to place all electric distribution facilities underground, it is simply not economical to place existing overhead distribution lines underground unless the lines themselves must be moved for other reasons, such as road widening. It would be more appropriate to rephrase the strategy to say: “Work with providers to place all new electric distribution lines less than 60kV underground throughout the City where appropriate.” This would provide a little maneuvering room to both the City and the affected utilities when deciding what should go underground and how it should be paid for.



In Policy C-14.3.3, one strategy states: “Support and encourage existing work of APS Solar Partners Incentive Program.” Keeping in mind that there will be other programs developed, I would suggest revising the strategy to state: “Support and encourage solar development through such efforts as the APS Solar Partners Incentive Program and any others that may be developed.” This gives credit where credit is due, but does not preclude the City’s support of other programs as they evolve.

 I don't think it would be useful to include a map of boundaries of the various electric power providers because of overlapping service areas.
For instance, ED2's district boundary includes much of the Casa Grande, Coolidge and Florence city limits. I am attaching our district boundary map as an illustration. However, as a result of a territorial agreement we have with APS, certain areas within the District's boundaries are limited to existing customers. Hohokam Irrigation and Drainage District (HIDD) and San Carlos Irrigation Project (SCIP) also provide electric service to customers in Casa Grande, Coolidge, Florence and surrounding
areas. Consequently, in many areas between Maricopa and Florence there may be several entities who could supply power at a specific location. Rather than get everyone confused about who is where, I would limit the scope of the map to show the transmission corridors and current and planned facilities. When individual parcels of land are developed, the developer can contact any of the listed electric service providers for information about whether they can provide service at that location.
I've also attached a map from the AzPower website that may be more helpful in depicting various planned and existing facilities. Thanks for the opportunity to present these comments. - Thomas Martin see map here

 John H. Sundt 1st Deed Funding, LLC Comments

 I continue to be impressed with the amount of involvement your crew has solicited for this program; and I wish I could have taken a more effective role is each of your workshops. There is no doubt that this effort that has gone into the Plan will pay off in the end and have a positive influence on the city. Good job!  - Bill Alkema

 

I have reviewed the first 100 pages of the 60 day draft. My comments are attached. As I continue to review the document I will send you my comments. Thanks for the opportunity! - Jackie Guthrie see comments here

 

Joint Area Studies

Regional cooperation has been one of the most important guiding principles of this plan update process. A challenge to regional cooperation is inconsistent land use designations between Municipal General Plans and the County’s Comprehensive Plan within Municipal Planning Areas (MPA). MPAs allow Municipalities to use their General Plans to plan for future land uses in areas outside of their incorporated boundaries. The conflict is that these areas are still governed by the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance until they are annexed. Municipalities are often frustrated by the lack of authority in their MPAs.

To create cohesive, well planned development and to allow Municipalities, and Indian Communities to participate in planning for areas outside of their incorporated boundaries, Pinal County will be offering a Joint Area Study process. These Joint Studies will be open to any Municipality or Indian Community, and can be done with multiple Municipalities and Indian Communities.

Joint Area Studies will allow for greater focus on specific areas than can be accomplished in the overall Comprehensive Plan update. They will also allow for much more interaction with property owners, so the County, Municipalities and Indian Communities can better understand the owners ideas and goals for their lands.

In order for Joint Area Studies to take effect, the County, Indian Community, City or Town would need to amend their General or Comprehensive Plans. Approving these amendments will be at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors and the Councils of the Communities that are participating. If these amendments are approved by all parties they will create opportunities for coordinated reviews of development proposals.

Joint Area Studies can focus on the following areas:
• Land uses, proposed and existing
• Existing zoning and platting
• Transportation planning
• Cost of development
• Provision of infrastructure
• Provision of services
• Schedules of development
• Growth management goals
• Any other Municipal or County goals

The City of Casa Grande is planning rural and agricultural land uses primarily at the outskirts of their community. The City would like Pinal County to reflect their goals for these areas. The County proposes one or more Joint Area Studies for these areas. The Joint Studies will allow for participation between the County, Casa Grande, and other nearby Municipalities and Indian Communities. These Studies will also allow property owners and other interested parties to become integral parts of the process. - Jerold Stabley

 We have reviewed the General Plan and spoke with you at the Promenade recently. We wish to document our approval of the portion of the plan that retains the rural designation of the land East of I-10. As residents of this unincorporated rural area, we would be in favor of maintaining the current minimum lot sizes of 1.25 acres. In addition we would be happy to work with the City of Casa Grande to prevent any large scale power lines or truck routes from bisecting the area. In the past we provided support for the southern routing of the 500KV SRP power line and support maintaining the land east of I-10 for very low density rural residential use and open space. We would also like to see the present North Mountain Park be maintained and patroled / supervised so that criminal activities don't take it over. Thank you for your efforts developing the General Plan. - Tom and Margo Neis 

 APS appreciates the opportunity to review and provide comment on the draft Energy section of the City of Casa Grande General Plan 2020 (General Plan). The type of long-range planning in development by the City reflects our shared values of identifying opportunities for sustainability and sound energy resource planning for the customers and communities we serve. We commend the City’s recognition of energy issues as important economic and resource considerations worthy of a specific section in the General Plan and note that the Energy section in its current draft form is comprehensive and well-written.

The following comments are based on the page and policy numbers listed in the current draft of the Energy section of the General Plan and are offered for your consideration in developing the next draft of the document:


Policy C-14.3.1, Page 182

APS agrees with the recommendation of closely working with regional transmission planning efforts in the Desert Southwest area and recommends that language be added to “encourage Casa Grande to continue participating in the Central Arizona Transmission Study (CATS) work groups that are tasked with identifying generation and transmission projects to serve the central portion of the state.” The CATS initiative has produced a number of electrical infrastructure studies with the input of Casa Grande, Pinal County, and other regional municipalities and stakeholders and the recommendations and studies developed by this group should continue to be an important electrical planning tool for Casa Grande.

Under the "Strategy" heading for Policy C-14.3.1, it is noted that the "future siting of electric transmission lines, gas pipelines, and merchant power plant locations shall be accommodated through existing corridors serving the City, as reflected in Figure C-6." Although siting new power lines adjacent to existing facilities is typically one of the first considerations utilities will evaluate, there are some factors that necessitate the development of new electric transmission lines outside of existing corridors because of electric reliability issues. Electric transmission planners must study the resulting effects of losing service from lines in a corridor on the rest of the transmission system. If the loss of lines in a common corridor or immediately adjacent to each other results in the inability to deliver electricity to customers for a prolonged period or has a negative effect on other parts of the electrical system, the new transmission project must be constructed in a different area than adjacent to the existing line. It is therefore suggested that the General Plan state that “utilities should consider existing infrastructure corridors for the location of new facilities unless reliability issues or other negative system impacts may occur.”


Policy C-14.3.2, page 182

The City's recognition of the need for interaction on planning issues and providing a recommendation that land use planning information be communicated to utility providers is an important point that APS supports. Regarding the Strategy associated with this section, it should be noted that electrical facilities 69kV and below in voltage are typically referred to by APS as either "subtransmission" or "distribution" facilities. Furthermore, the interest in placing distribution facilities underground is understandable; however, does have potentially significant cost and engineering considerations. There are some scenarios in which placing existing overhead distribution lines underground is feasible, such as when roads are widened or as part of other infrastructure projects. APS recommends that this policy include language that states, “The City of Casa Grande should work with utility providers to identify opportunities to place electric transmission lines below 60kV underground where appropriate and economically feasible."


Policy C-14.3.3, page 182 and 183

We appreciate the City’s acknowledgement and recommendation of participation in the APS Solar Partners Incentive Program. There are a number of initiatives that APS has developed, including our Solutions for Business program and other energy efficiency programs, that may be introduced in the future that would match the goals of the City in this and other policy sections of the General Plan. We suggest that language be included in the General Plan that states that Casa Grande will, “continue coordination with electric utility providers regarding existing and future programs to identify potential energy efficiency and cost-saving measures.”


Figure C-6

The inclusion of a graphic illustrating future transmission projects approved by the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) is helpful. We note that the recently approved Sundance Power Plant to Pinal Central Substation alignment proposed by APS is not part of the current draft of the map. A portion of that corridor is included in the City of Casa Grande planning area. APS will provide a GIS layer with that alignment to the City for inclusion in this graphic.

Additionally, there is an initiative underway to develop a web page that will illustrate all of the ACC-approved utility corridors in the state and provide corresponding information, including a utility contact, for public and municipal planning purposes. Salt River Project (SRP) is leading the web page development and the site is anticipated to be on-line by late summer 2009. Casa Grande has received some information about the project and it is suggested that a reference to the site may be useful in the final draft of the General Plan, if the web page is operational at that time.


Summary

APS appreciates the working relationship we have with the City of Casa Grande as noted on page 180 and will continue to look for opportunities to develop sound energy projects that best match the goals and policies of the city. We believe the type of long-range planning underway in Pinal County at the county and municipal levels are important steps in matching community needs with its objectives for the future. The recognition of electrical infrastructure issues is an important consideration and we welcome the continued opportunity to be a part of that dialogue with you.

If you have any questions about any of the information presented here, please do not hesitate to contact me. You may also contact Tom Yost, APS Energy Delivery Manager in Casa Grande at 520-421-8228. - Gregory L. Bernosky, AICP

 

The City of Coolidge congratulates Casa Grande on an impressive new approach to general plans. I think you are on the right track here.

The only substantive comment we have at this time is that your MPA boundary breeches the boundary agreement between our two cities in the area of 11-mile Corner Road and Storey Road. We would prefer to see the MPA to conform with the agreed upon boundary. - C. Alton Bruce

 

The attached spreadsheet contains several comments the Planning Team at CMX compiled to aid you in your project. Updating a city’s general plan is a daunting task and we commend you for your work to date. The spreadsheet is organized by page number, section or element, comment, and suggested action. Should you have any questions or need clarification of the comments herein, please contact us. If a spreadsheet of all comments received and your responses is generated, we would like to receive a copy for review. Thank you and good luck,
- Bob Pikora see comment sheet here

 The PCWAA board appreciated the opportunity to review the City's Water Element and decided to make no recommendation, rather, leave that up to the specific municipality. (I will, hopefully, get a progress report out today indicating this.) Thank you, - Barbara Massey-Nino