Consent 3.
Regular Board of Supervisors Meeting
Community Development
- Meeting Date:
- 06/10/2014
- Title:
- Docket Z-14-04 (Dorofey) - A Request to Amend the Zoning of a Property Northeast of McNeal to RU-4 from RU-2
- Submitted By:
- Peter Gardner, Community Development
- Department:
- Community Development
- Division:
- Planning & Zoning
Presentation:
No A/V Presentation
Recommendation:
Approve
Document Signatures:
BOS Signature Required
# of ORIGINALS
Submitted for Signature:
Submitted for Signature:
1
NAME
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Peter Gardner
TITLE
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Planner I
Docket Number (If applicable):
Mandated Function?:
Not Mandated
Source of Mandate
or Basis for Support?:
or Basis for Support?:
Information
Agenda Item Text:
Adopt Zoning Ordinance 14-06, approving Docket Z-14-04, amending the zoning district designation for parcel 404-02-302 to RU-4 from RU-2, pursuant to the request of applicant Ian Dorofey.
Background:
APPLICATION FOR A REZONING
The Applicant seeks to rezone a five-acre parcel from RU-2 (Rural, one dwelling per two-acres) to RU-4 (Rural, one dwelling per four-acres) for the purpose of utilizing the County’s Owner-Builder Opt-Out program to permit existing structures. The current RU-2 Zoning designation does not qualify for the program. The property (Parcel #404-02-302) is located on N. EE Ranch Road in McNeal, AZ. The Applicant is Ian Dorofey.
I. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-1 to forward this Docket to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of approval. The motion included the conditions of approval recommended by staff.
II. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PARCEL AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
Size: 5-acres
Zoning: RU-2 (Rural, one dwelling per 2-acres)
Growth Area: Category D (Rural Area)
Area Plan: None
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Rural
Existing Uses: Single Family Residence
Proposed Uses: Same
Surrounding Zoning
Relation to Subject Parcel Zoning District Use of Property
North RU-2 Vacant Land
South RU-2 Vacant Land
East RU-2 Vacant Land
West Non-Maintained Road/RU-2 N. EE Ranch Rd/Vacant Land
III. PARCEL HISTORY
There is a small home on the property which the Applicant constructed without a permit. When the Applicant discovered that permits were required for construction, he came forward proactively to rectify the situation. Staff has no further history on the parcel.
IV. NATURE OF REQUEST
The Applicant, Ian Dorofey, has a home on his property which was constructed without a permit. Upon discovering that building permits were required, he approached Staff to correct the situation. As it is difficult to inspect existing structures for Building Code compliance, the Owner-Builder Opt Out program was presented as an option. The Applicant chose to use this program to legitimize the construction, though the property is not currently eligible under the current RU-2 zoning. The Owner-Builder Opt Out program requires a property to be zoned for a minimum lot size of four-acres or more, and must be a minimum of four-acres. While the property currently complies with the second provision, a downzoning to RU-4 is required to meet the first provision.
V. ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS
Mandatory Compliance
The subject property lies within a Category “D”–Rural Area and is considered a “Rural” land use designation area per the Comprehensive Plan. Section 402 of the County Zoning Regulations allows an owner of property lying within this designation to request a rezoning to RU-4 (Rural, one dwelling per four-acres), as this is the default zoning in the unincorporated areas of the County. Decreases in density such as this are encouraged in such Rural areas to protect open space and the County’s rural character.
Compliance with Rezoning Criteria
Section 2208.03 of the Zoning Regulations provides 15 criteria used to evaluate rezoning requests. Nine of the criteria are applicable to this request, which, as submitted, complies with each of the nine applicable factors.
1. Provides an Adequate Land Use/Concept Plan—Complies.
While the Applicant has not yet submitted a site plan, Staff’s review of the site and information from the Applicant is sufficient for the current proposal. A complete site plan will be required at permit submittal. Note that Section 2208.03.B.1 of the Zoning Regulations does not relate specifically to what is proposed. That is, the rezoning would not facilitate a new residential subdivision development and so would not require a new subdivision plat submittal.
2. Compliance with the Applicable Site Development Standards—Complies.
All existing structures comply with applicable site development standards, such as minimum setbacks, for example.
3. Adjacent Districts Remain Capable of Development—Complies.
The proposal would not affect the development prospects of any neighboring property.
4. Limitation on Creation of Nonconforming Uses—Complies.
The proposal would not create any non-conforming land uses.
5. Compatibility with Existing Development—Complies.
There is no existing development, and the proposed downzoning further preserves open space in the area.
6. Rezoning to More Intense Districts—Not Applicable.
The request is to rezone to a less intensive district.
7. Adequate Services and Infrastructure—Complies.
The site is located off grid, but has potential for all necessary utilities.
8. Traffic Circulation Criteria—Complies.
While the local roads are primitive, the request will not serve to increase potential usage of said roads.
9. Development Along Major Streets—Not Applicable.
The property does not border any major street.
10. Infill—Not Applicable.
This Factor applies only for rezoning requests to GB, LI or HI, and is therefore not applicable.
11. Unique Topographic Features—Not Applicable.
There are no exceptional topographic features warranting consideration on or near the site, nor is the request a rezoning to a more intensive district.
12. Water Conservation—Not Applicable.
As a proposal to reduce the permitted density on the parcel, this factor is not applicable.
13. Public Input—Complies.
As a request to rezone to a less intensive district, no Citizen Review was required. Staff posted the property and mailed letters to property owners within 1,500-feet of the site. To date, Staff has received requests for clarification, but no formal responses from neighboring property owners.
14. Hazardous Materials—Not Applicable.
No hazardous materials are proposed as part of the development plan.
15. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan—Complies
A reduction in potential density from one dwelling per two-acres to one dwelling per four-acres, while maintaining the Rural designation is in harmony with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
VI. SUMMARY
The rezoning request is for two adjacent five-acre parcels in McNeal. The Applicant is requesting to downzone the parcels from RU-2 to RU-4 to facilitate using the Owner-Builder Opt Out program to legitimize structures constructed without a permit. The Applicant approached Staff to rectify the situation, and therefore no violation has been issued. The requested zoning of RU-4 is in character with the five-acre lots and open, undeveloped nature of the area. Staff’s recommendation is based upon the above analysis, as well as the following Factors in Favor and Against approval:
Factors in Favor of Approval
1. Allowing the rezoning request would be in keeping with the rural character and lack of development in the area;
2. The Comprehensive Plan policies encourage reductions of density in undeveloped areas.
Factors Against Approval
1. The request comes as a result of a request to legitimize structures built without a permit.
VII. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the Factors in Favor of Approval, staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward Docket Z-14-04 to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of conditional approval, subject to the following standard conditions:
1. The Applicant shall provide the County with a signed Acceptance of Conditions and a Waiver of Claims form arising from ARS Section 12-1134 signed by the property owner of the subject property within thirty (30) days of Board of Supervisors approval of the rezoning; and
2. It is the Applicants' responsibility to obtain any additional permits, or meet any additional conditions, that may be applicable to the proposed use pursuant to other federal, state, or local laws or regulations.
Sample Motion: Mdm. Chair, I recommend we Approve Docket Z-14-04, subject to the conditions recommended by staff.
VII. ATTACHMENTS
A. Rezoning Application
B. Location Map
The Applicant seeks to rezone a five-acre parcel from RU-2 (Rural, one dwelling per two-acres) to RU-4 (Rural, one dwelling per four-acres) for the purpose of utilizing the County’s Owner-Builder Opt-Out program to permit existing structures. The current RU-2 Zoning designation does not qualify for the program. The property (Parcel #404-02-302) is located on N. EE Ranch Road in McNeal, AZ. The Applicant is Ian Dorofey.
I. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
On Wednesday, May 14, 2014, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-1 to forward this Docket to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of approval. The motion included the conditions of approval recommended by staff.
II. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PARCEL AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
Size: 5-acres
Zoning: RU-2 (Rural, one dwelling per 2-acres)
Growth Area: Category D (Rural Area)
Area Plan: None
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Rural
Existing Uses: Single Family Residence
Proposed Uses: Same
Surrounding Zoning
Relation to Subject Parcel Zoning District Use of Property
North RU-2 Vacant Land
South RU-2 Vacant Land
East RU-2 Vacant Land
West Non-Maintained Road/RU-2 N. EE Ranch Rd/Vacant Land
III. PARCEL HISTORY
There is a small home on the property which the Applicant constructed without a permit. When the Applicant discovered that permits were required for construction, he came forward proactively to rectify the situation. Staff has no further history on the parcel.
IV. NATURE OF REQUEST
The Applicant, Ian Dorofey, has a home on his property which was constructed without a permit. Upon discovering that building permits were required, he approached Staff to correct the situation. As it is difficult to inspect existing structures for Building Code compliance, the Owner-Builder Opt Out program was presented as an option. The Applicant chose to use this program to legitimize the construction, though the property is not currently eligible under the current RU-2 zoning. The Owner-Builder Opt Out program requires a property to be zoned for a minimum lot size of four-acres or more, and must be a minimum of four-acres. While the property currently complies with the second provision, a downzoning to RU-4 is required to meet the first provision.
V. ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS
Mandatory Compliance
The subject property lies within a Category “D”–Rural Area and is considered a “Rural” land use designation area per the Comprehensive Plan. Section 402 of the County Zoning Regulations allows an owner of property lying within this designation to request a rezoning to RU-4 (Rural, one dwelling per four-acres), as this is the default zoning in the unincorporated areas of the County. Decreases in density such as this are encouraged in such Rural areas to protect open space and the County’s rural character.
Compliance with Rezoning Criteria
Section 2208.03 of the Zoning Regulations provides 15 criteria used to evaluate rezoning requests. Nine of the criteria are applicable to this request, which, as submitted, complies with each of the nine applicable factors.
1. Provides an Adequate Land Use/Concept Plan—Complies.
While the Applicant has not yet submitted a site plan, Staff’s review of the site and information from the Applicant is sufficient for the current proposal. A complete site plan will be required at permit submittal. Note that Section 2208.03.B.1 of the Zoning Regulations does not relate specifically to what is proposed. That is, the rezoning would not facilitate a new residential subdivision development and so would not require a new subdivision plat submittal.
2. Compliance with the Applicable Site Development Standards—Complies.
All existing structures comply with applicable site development standards, such as minimum setbacks, for example.
3. Adjacent Districts Remain Capable of Development—Complies.
The proposal would not affect the development prospects of any neighboring property.
4. Limitation on Creation of Nonconforming Uses—Complies.
The proposal would not create any non-conforming land uses.
5. Compatibility with Existing Development—Complies.
There is no existing development, and the proposed downzoning further preserves open space in the area.
6. Rezoning to More Intense Districts—Not Applicable.
The request is to rezone to a less intensive district.
7. Adequate Services and Infrastructure—Complies.
The site is located off grid, but has potential for all necessary utilities.
8. Traffic Circulation Criteria—Complies.
While the local roads are primitive, the request will not serve to increase potential usage of said roads.
9. Development Along Major Streets—Not Applicable.
The property does not border any major street.
10. Infill—Not Applicable.
This Factor applies only for rezoning requests to GB, LI or HI, and is therefore not applicable.
11. Unique Topographic Features—Not Applicable.
There are no exceptional topographic features warranting consideration on or near the site, nor is the request a rezoning to a more intensive district.
12. Water Conservation—Not Applicable.
As a proposal to reduce the permitted density on the parcel, this factor is not applicable.
13. Public Input—Complies.
As a request to rezone to a less intensive district, no Citizen Review was required. Staff posted the property and mailed letters to property owners within 1,500-feet of the site. To date, Staff has received requests for clarification, but no formal responses from neighboring property owners.
14. Hazardous Materials—Not Applicable.
No hazardous materials are proposed as part of the development plan.
15. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan—Complies
A reduction in potential density from one dwelling per two-acres to one dwelling per four-acres, while maintaining the Rural designation is in harmony with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
VI. SUMMARY
The rezoning request is for two adjacent five-acre parcels in McNeal. The Applicant is requesting to downzone the parcels from RU-2 to RU-4 to facilitate using the Owner-Builder Opt Out program to legitimize structures constructed without a permit. The Applicant approached Staff to rectify the situation, and therefore no violation has been issued. The requested zoning of RU-4 is in character with the five-acre lots and open, undeveloped nature of the area. Staff’s recommendation is based upon the above analysis, as well as the following Factors in Favor and Against approval:
Factors in Favor of Approval
1. Allowing the rezoning request would be in keeping with the rural character and lack of development in the area;
2. The Comprehensive Plan policies encourage reductions of density in undeveloped areas.
Factors Against Approval
1. The request comes as a result of a request to legitimize structures built without a permit.
VII. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the Factors in Favor of Approval, staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward Docket Z-14-04 to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of conditional approval, subject to the following standard conditions:
1. The Applicant shall provide the County with a signed Acceptance of Conditions and a Waiver of Claims form arising from ARS Section 12-1134 signed by the property owner of the subject property within thirty (30) days of Board of Supervisors approval of the rezoning; and
2. It is the Applicants' responsibility to obtain any additional permits, or meet any additional conditions, that may be applicable to the proposed use pursuant to other federal, state, or local laws or regulations.
Sample Motion: Mdm. Chair, I recommend we Approve Docket Z-14-04, subject to the conditions recommended by staff.
VII. ATTACHMENTS
A. Rezoning Application
B. Location Map
Department's Next Steps (if approved):
Planning staff will take recorded ordinance to GIS to amend County Zoning Maps to reflect this action.
Impact of NOT Approving/Alternatives:
If the Board does not approve the Zoning Ordinance, the subject parcel will retain the current RU-2 zoning designation.
To BOS Staff: Document Disposition/Follow-Up:
After the Chair signs the Zoning Ordinance, Board Staff should send a recorded copy of the same to the Planning Department for our files.