Public Hearings 9.
Regular Board of Supervisors Meeting
Community Development
- Meeting Date:
- 03/27/2018
- Title:
- Z 18-03 (Santa Lucia)- A request to amend the Zoning of Parcels 107-66-029, 029C, 029F and 029G from R-36 to R-18
- Submitted By:
- Robert Kirschmann, Community Development
- Department:
- Community Development
- Division:
- Development Services
Presentation:
PowerPoint
Recommendation:
Approve
Document Signatures:
BOS Signature Required
# of ORIGINALS
Submitted for Signature:
Submitted for Signature:
2
NAME
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Robert Kirschmann
TITLE
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Planner II
Mandated Function?:
Not Mandated
Source of Mandate
or Basis for Support?:
or Basis for Support?:
Docket Number (If applicable):
Z-18-03
Information
Agenda Item Text:
Adopt Zoning Ordinance 18-03 approving Docket Z-18-03 amending certain zoning district boundaries from R-36 (Residential, one dwelling per 36,000 square feet) to R-18 (Residential, one dwelling per 18,000 square feet), pursuant to the application of Cochise County.
Background:
Cochise County Development Services is requesting a rezoning from R-36 (Residential, one dwelling per 36,000 square feet) to R-18 (Residential, one dwelling per 18,000 square feet). The request is to make four existing sub-standard lots (three with single family residences) compliant, re-buildable, and the vacant lot buildable.
Earlier this year Mr. Willie Pigott foreclosed on a parcel of land purchased from the Cochise County Treasurer's Office (Tax Lien). Upon discussion with Planning and Zoning staff, it became clear that the lot (107-66-029F) was a non-compliant lot. The lot is zoned R-36, which requires a minimum of 36,000 square feet. The lot is not quite 22,000 square feet. Staff did some additional research and realized that the parcel to the south 107-66-029G also did not meet minimum lot size requirements. However, a permit was issued by staff in 1986, and again in 1989 in error.
Further research showed two additional adjacent lots 107-66-029 and 107-66-029C were also too small. However, these lots were created prior to 1975. To clean up the area and provide consistency, staff included these parcels into the rezoning request before the Commission. None of the parties responsible for the non-compliant lot splits retain ownership. Based on this fact, as well as that staff issued 2 permits in error and that no new additional residential lots will be created because of the rezoning request, staff recommends approval.
Other than maximum density, no other site development standards change from R-36 to R-18. This does pose a problem with setbacks, as several of these lots have homes, sheds and garages which project into required setbacks. Staff would request that the existing non-compliant structures be allowed to remain and deemed compliant.
Earlier this year Mr. Willie Pigott foreclosed on a parcel of land purchased from the Cochise County Treasurer's Office (Tax Lien). Upon discussion with Planning and Zoning staff, it became clear that the lot (107-66-029F) was a non-compliant lot. The lot is zoned R-36, which requires a minimum of 36,000 square feet. The lot is not quite 22,000 square feet. Staff did some additional research and realized that the parcel to the south 107-66-029G also did not meet minimum lot size requirements. However, a permit was issued by staff in 1986, and again in 1989 in error.
Further research showed two additional adjacent lots 107-66-029 and 107-66-029C were also too small. However, these lots were created prior to 1975. To clean up the area and provide consistency, staff included these parcels into the rezoning request before the Commission. None of the parties responsible for the non-compliant lot splits retain ownership. Based on this fact, as well as that staff issued 2 permits in error and that no new additional residential lots will be created because of the rezoning request, staff recommends approval.
Other than maximum density, no other site development standards change from R-36 to R-18. This does pose a problem with setbacks, as several of these lots have homes, sheds and garages which project into required setbacks. Staff would request that the existing non-compliant structures be allowed to remain and deemed compliant.
Department's Next Steps (if approved):
The Ordinance will be recorded and the official zoning map updated.
Impact of NOT Approving/Alternatives:
The parcels will remain R-36. The vacant lot will not be buildable. The adjacent lots will not be able apply for permits (other than minor repairs and fencing) and they will not be able to be rebuilt if destroyed.
To BOS Staff: Document Disposition/Follow-Up:
Board Staff will have ordinance signed, recorded and a copy provided to Planning Staff.