Key Points
Planning Area Release
- Six of seven council members support removing two developed Pinal County residential areas from Queen Creek’s planning boundary.
- The two areas total 2,041 parcels and an estimated 6,380 residents.
- Members cited missing impact fees, service costs, and San Tan Valley’s incorporation as reasons.
- A General Plan Amendment would take approximately four months.
Ocotillo and Meridian Annexation
- A separate 6.9-acre annexation at the southeast corner of Ocotillo and Meridian Roads is advancing.
- The ordinance appears on the March 4, 2026, consent agenda.
- The applicant plans a companion commercial rezoning application.
- A neighboring resident opposed the annexation at a November 2025 public hearing.
QUEEN CREEK, AZ — The Queen Creek Town Council signaled to staff on February 18, 2026, to begin removing two large residential areas from its Municipal Planning Area boundary. Six of seven council members spoke in support during the discussion. The move affects roughly 2,041 residential parcels and an estimated 6,380 Pinal County residents. If finalized, these neighborhoods would no longer be candidates for Queen Creek annexation and could instead be included in the newly incorporated Town of San Tan Valley’s future plans.
A separate annexation is still moving forward. Two Pinal County parcels totaling approximately 6.9 acres at the southeast corner of Ocotillo and Meridian Roads appear on the March 4, 2026, consent agenda as Ordinance No. 888-26. The applicant has indicated a companion commercial rezoning application would be processed concurrently.
Two Large Areas Inside Queen Creek’s Planning Boundary Have Never Been Part of Queen Creek
Development Services Director Brett Burningham explained the situation to the council on February 18. As he described it, “the general plan boundary is much bigger than the town’s municipal limits.” That boundary represents Queen Creek’s aspirational footprint for future growth and annexation.
However, two specific areas within that boundary were zoned and built entirely under Pinal County jurisdiction. They were never part of Queen Creek.
The north area contains 461 residential parcels, including one subdivision under construction called The Quarters. It will have an estimated population of approximately 1,380 Pinal County residents. The south area contains 1,580 residential parcels with an estimated current population of about 5,000 Pinal County residents.
Burningham said both areas were developed under Pinal County design standards and subdivision requirements, not Queen Creek’s. These developments never paid development impact fees to Queen Creek.
Why the Council Wants to Release the Areas From Its Planning Boundary
Burningham presented three options to the council. First, keep the planning area as-is, which does not obligate Queen Creek to annex. Second, amend the planning area now through a General Plan Amendment, a process that would take approximately four months. Third, wait and address it during the 2028 General Plan Update, a process Burningham said is not set to finish until 2027.
He also noted the timing factor. San Tan Valley recently incorporated and will need to establish its own general plan. Releasing these areas now would allow San Tan Valley to potentially include them.
Council Member Brown Outlines the Financial Case Against Annexation
Council Member Jeff Brown said keeping these areas in the planning boundary creates an expectation that annexation might eventually happen.
“I don’t think that the town would end up looking favorably upon, especially that south area, the annexation thereof because it doesn’t have commercial to offset the potential cost,” Brown said. He pointed to the costs of providing public safety services and maintaining Queen Creek’s parks standard. Queen Creek pursues an interim goal of 41 acres of developed parks per 10,000 residents.
Brown also noted Queen Creek received no financial benefit during these areas’ development. “We haven’t collected impact fees to build parks land for there,” he said. “We didn’t get to put our thumb on the design standards.” He added that there were no permit fees collected and no construction sales tax. “So it looks like a big cost center to me.”
Brown also said residents have expressed frustration over the years that Queen Creek’s projected buildout population grew from about 125,000 to 150,000. Annexing thousands more would push it higher still. Some residents have told him this dilutes their vote, he said.
Brown also addressed the impact on San Tan Valley directly. “We basically hold them in limbo if we don’t release them,” he said. He suggested the newly incorporated Town of San Tan Valley “may be able to benefit more so from annexation of that area than we would.”
Regarding the north area, Brown acknowledged he felt similarly, though perhaps not as strongly. He noted that an annexation request was already pending in that vicinity. He added that residents there largely oppose additional commercial development, even along major arterials like Gantzel Road. Brown also expressed concern about future road-widening costs and the potential need for eminent domain along that corridor.
Other Council Members Agree to Release Both Areas
Council Member Leah Martineau said she agreed with Brown and would not oppose starting the process now. She cited the change brought by San Tan Valley’s incorporation as a reason the timing felt appropriate.
Council Member Robin Benning said he wanted to go on record as supporting the release of both areas from the planning boundary. He also supported acting now rather than waiting for the full general plan rewrite. Earlier in the discussion, Benning raised a concern frequently heard from residents: people buying residential properties, seeking annexation into Queen Creek, and then requesting commercial rezoning. He specifically noted properties along Gantzel Road as potential candidates for such efforts.
Mayor Julia Wheatley also supported releasing both areas. “I think the timing is good now versus a couple years down the road,” she said. She added that allowing San Tan Valley to include these areas lets those residents “choose their destiny.”
Council Member Bryan McClure agreed with the decision. He said the northern area residents likely have no interest in being annexed by Queen Creek. As for the southern area, McClure said the developers missed their opportunity. “If that were the goal, then the developer should’ve approached this long ago and met our design standards, lower density, et cetera. But they didn’t do that,” he said. He pointed to the lack of revenue generated from that development to support public safety, fire, roads, and parks. “They have to understand the reality of the situation and what pays for what, and growth pays for growth,” McClure added. He said he feels the window for annexation of that community is “closed.”
Council Member Dawn Oliphant also agreed. She supported releasing both areas so residents in those neighborhoods can decide whether to pursue annexation into San Tan Valley. She noted the council has heard from northern-area residents multiple times about their opposition to annexation.
Queen Creek’s Annexation History and Evaluation Criteria
Burningham noted that between 2013 and 2018, Queen Creek completed approximately ten annexations totaling about 2,600 acres. In 2018, Queen Creek adopted Resolution 1235-18, which refined the criteria for evaluating future annexation requests, replacing the previous annexation policy established under Resolution 1133-16.
Under that resolution, staff must analyze any proposed annexation across several factors, including fiscal impact, economic development, public safety, and consistency with the General Plan.
November 2025: Ocotillo and Meridian Annexation Public Hearing
The Ocotillo and Meridian annexation case (P25-0138) first came before the council on November 19, 2025. The item appeared on the Public Hearing Consent Agenda. The council did not discuss the item before opening the hearing.
However, one member of the public spoke. Mark Linder addressed the council regarding the annexation. Linder said he lives in Country Mini Farms, a rural residential community of 3.5- to 5-acre lots just over the Pinal County line. He told the council that the community’s CC&Rs restrict properties to residential use only, that no business can be operated from the properties, and that they cannot be used as storage or service yards.
Linder said there had been three attempts over the previous six years to amend the CC&Rs to allow commercial use. The CC&Rs require 75% approval for any change. None of those attempts received more than 20% support. He described multiple commercial proposals the community had successfully blocked, including a teen center, event venue, soda bottling plant, mini storage, and fast food restaurants.
Linder said the community views the annexation as a first step toward commercial rezoning. He said the attorney representing the annexation applicant indicated a rezoning request would follow. “The only reason they want to do that is potential commercial use,” Linder said. He stated the community would fight any attempt to change the properties from their residential status.
The applicant, represented by Adam Baugh of Withey Morris Baugh, PLC, stated in the annexation narrative that the companion rezoning would seek a C-1 designation with a PAD overlay. The narrative described the corner as an opportunity for “neighborhood-oriented commercial” development consistent with the General Plan’s Rural land use category. Town documents describe the annexation area as approximately 6.9 acres, though the applicant’s narrative references approximately 7.97 acres.
Vice Mayor Martineau closed the public hearing. The Public Hearing Consent Agenda, which included the annexation’s first required public hearing, was then approved 5-0. The annexation ordinance itself was not before the council for a vote at that meeting. Mayor Wheatley and Council Member McClure were absent from the November 19 meeting. The annexation returned as Consent Agenda Item 8.E on the March 4, 2026, Town Council agenda.
General Plan Amendment Process and Timeline
If the council proceeds with removing the two residential areas from the Municipal Planning Area, the process would follow a General Plan Amendment. Burningham’s February 18 presentation outlined a projected timeline. It includes a neighborhood meeting on March 18, a first Planning Commission public hearing on April 8, a second Planning Commission public hearing on April 22, and a Town Council public hearing on May 6.
Residents can find meeting agendas, minutes, packets, and livestreams on the Town of Queen Creek’s meetings page.
