Adopt Zoning Ordinance 11-06, to approve Docket Z-11-04 rezoning Parcels 102-57-139C and 139E from TR-9 to MR-1, pursuant to the application of Blanca Ruiz.

MEMORANDUM

TO: Cochise County Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Keith Dennis, Senior Planner
For: Michael Turisk, Interim Planning Director
SUBJECT: Docket Z-11-04 (Ruiz)
DATE: August 30, 2011, for the September 13, 2011 Meeting
APPLICATION FOR A REZONING
Docket Z-11-04 (Ruiz): The Applicant requests a rezoning for two parcels of land, from TR-9 (one dwelling per 9,000 square feet) to MR-1 (one dwelling per 3,600 square feet). The subject property consists of two parcels of land (Parcels# 102-57-139E and 102-57-139C) which combined are approximately 14,239 square feet in size. There are two existing mobile homes on the site. The property is located at 3724 and 3708 South Rogers Avenue in Naco, AZ. The Applicant is Ms. Blanca Ruiz.

I. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PARCEL AND SURROUNDING USES
Size: 14,239 Square Feet (0.33 Acres)
Zoning: TR-9 (Transitional-Residential, 1 dwelling per 9,000 square feet)
Growth Area: Category C Rural Community Area
Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
Area Plan: Naco Community Plan
Existing Uses: Manufactured Home Dwellings (2)
Proposed Uses: Rezone to Multiple-Household Residential (MR-1), to facilitate the addition of one manufactured home.
Surrounding Zoning
Relation to Subject Parcel Zoning District Use of Property
North TR-9 Manufactured Home
South TR-9 Manufactured Home
East TR-9 Single Family Residential
West TR-9 Single Family Residential

II. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
On August 10, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously (6 – 0) to recommend approval of this Docket, with the conditions recommended by staff.

III. PARCEL HISTORY
1976 – Permit issued for manufactured home on the parent parcel, 102-57-139.
2005 – Permit issued for manufactured home on what is now Parcel 139C.
2006 – Applicant and neighboring property owner (North and South) traded portions of their respective properties: The neighbor deeded over a 17-foot strip along the South side of what is now Parcel 139C, while the Applicant did the same along the South side of Parcel 102-57-138F (See map below). The result was that the manufactured home on this parcel now sits astride the property boundary between Parcels 138F and 139E – and that Parcels 139C and 138F became non-conforming lots.

IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Applicant, Blanca Ruiz, is the owner of both parcels subject to the rezoning request. Her intentions are to combine the two parcels and place an additional manufactured home on the property. She seeks a rezoning in order to accommodate her intentions.



Above is an aerial view of the two parcels (above left - outlined in white). Parcel 139E is the larger of the two; at 9,339 square feet, this parcel does meet the 9,000 square foot minimum required under the TR-9 District. The smaller of the two parcels (139C), at 4,900 square feet, does not meet this requirement. Two other parcels on this block are similarly non-conforming (above right). There are, in fact, a large number of TR-9 properties in the neighborhood that are non-conforming with regard to the 9,000 square foot minimum lot size.

A manufactured home is sited on Parcel 139C, the lower of the two lots, but in fact encroaches onto Parcel 139E. While the Applicant owns the land, a tenant who rents the land from her owns this home.

To the North, an additional manufactured home encroaches over the lot line onto 139E. This manufactured home belongs to the neighboring property owner to the North.


Above: Northeast view of the project site. The proposed manufactured home would be sited between the two left-most units in the photo. Below: West view of the property, where the Applicant intends to install a manufactured home. The two units shown here are approximately 64 feet apart.


The existing manufactured home on the property, shown at left in the photo above, is located on what is now a non-conforming lot. The Applicant seeks to place a manufactured home directly North of this unit, but because the existing home sits astride the property line, she has been unable to obtain a permit to do so. If the two properties were combined, the size of the resulting lot would be 14,239 square feet; if rezoned to MR-1, which requires 3,600 square feet per dwelling unit, the property could accommodate the Applicant’s intention to install an additional manufactured home between the two existing units.

V. ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS

Mandatory Compliance – Naco Community Plan

Section 2208.03.A of the Zoning Regulations sets forth the conditions under which a rezoning request can proceed. Such requests must be to rezone to those Districts that have been designated as compatible with the characteristics of the area, as defined by the applicable Comprehensive or Area Plan policies.
The properties subject to this request are within the boundaries of the Naco Community Plan. Both properties are within a Category “C”—Rural Community Growth Area. The Plan Designation for the project site is “High Density Residential,” a designation particular to the Naco Area Plan. Section 402 of the County Zoning Regulations requires that rezoning requests proceed in accordance with a slate of allowable Districts for each Comprehensive Plan Designation. However, the Cochise County Comprehensive Plan does not include a “High Density Residential” Plan Designation. Instead, we consult the Naco Community Plan to determine compliance. High Density Residential areas within the latter carry densities ranging from 3,100 to 9,000 square feet. The request would be, therefore, in keeping with the Naco Plan densities and policies.
Compliance with Rezoning Criteria
Section 2208.03 of the Zoning Regulations provides fifteen (15) criteria used to evaluate rezoning requests. These factors are employed by staff to analyze a request, to formulate a recommendation, and to determine what conditions would apply to such recommendation. The request is for a small-scale rezoning, which would facilitate the type of development that already exists in the neighborhood and eliminate the non-conforming status of one of the lots. The applicability of some rezoning factors is limited because of the unconventional nature of this request. Staff has determined that 10 of the 15 criteria are applicable to this Docket, and the request complies with each of the 10 applicable criteria as submitted.
1. Provides an adequate Land Use/Concept Plan: Complies
The Applicant's site plan substantially provides all the information required to satisfy this factor. The request, if granted, would result in one additional manufactured home being placed on the property.
2. Compliance with Applicable Site Development Standards: Complies
The development facilitated by the rezoning request could meet all applicable site development standards. The existing manufactured home on Parcel 139C is 20 feet or more from the Southern property line, which would satisfy the setback requirement where an MR District abuts a TR District.

Westward view of the existing manufactured home on the property.

3. Creation of Districts Capable of Development: Complies.
The MR-1 zoning would not result in any limitation on neighboring properties' development capacity.
4. Limitation on Creation of Nonconforming Uses: Complies.
The rezoning would not create any nonconforming land uses.
5. Compatibility with Existing Development: Complies.
As discussed, the block on which the parcels are located is developed with manufactured homes. The proposal would be compatible with existing development.
6. Rezoning to More Intense Districts: Complies.
One of the measures for compliance with this factor is whether the “proposed district is a reasonable extension of a similar density district within the area.” The rezoning request is to facilitate the type of development that already exists in the immediate area.
7. Adequate Services and Infrastructure: Complies
The parcels have immediate access to a paved, County-maintained road, and have adequate access to water sewer and power services.
8. Traffic Circulation Criteria: Complies.
The proposal would result in a land use in keeping with the form and function of the transportation network. Rogers Avenue is a paved County-maintained road and can accommodate an additional residential unit.
9. Development Along Major Streets: Not Applicable.
The property does not access any major roadway.
10. Infill: Not Applicable.
The request is not for a GB, LI or HI District. (This rezoning factor intends to encourage infill in areas where commercial and industrial development exists if rezoning to GB, LI or HI and the site is in an existing Enterprise or Enterprise Redevelopment plan designation area).
11. Unique Topographic Features: Not Applicable.
The subject property is flat and does not include any unique topographical features that require special consideration.
12. Water Conservation: Not Applicable.
The parcel is less than one acre in size and, as such, is not classifed as a major development as defined by the Comprehensive Plan.
13. Public Input: Complies.
The property owner did complete the required Citizen Review report, and received two telephone calls in support of the request.
14. Hazardous Materials: Not Applicable.
15. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan Policies: Complies
Section II of the Naco Community Plan provides the Plan policies regarding residential development. Most notably, the policy encouraging “residential infill of a similar density compatible with the surrounding neighborhood” is applicable here, and the request would comply with this policy.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT

The Department sent notices to neighboring property owners within 1,000 feet. Staff posted the property on August 24, 2011 and advertised the request in the Bisbee Observer on August 25, 2011.
To date, the Department has received one letter in support of the request, and two letters opposing the request from within the 1,000-foot notification area. The opposing neighbors both cited crowding in the area as the reason for objecting.
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Factors in Favor of the Rezoning

1. On August 10, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously (6 – 0) to recommend conditional approval of this Docket;

2. The rezoning request, if granted, would rectify the non-conforming status of one of the two parcels subject to the request;

3. The rezoning request conforms to the policies of the Naco Community Plan regarding residential development;

4. The rezoning request complies with each of the 10 applicable rezoning evaluation factors; and

5. Three neighbors have expressed support for the request: two during the Citizen Review, and one in response to County mailings.

Factors Against Approval

1. Two neighbors expressed opposition to the request, citing crowding as the reason.

VIII. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the factors in favor of approval, Staff recommends conditional approval of the rezoning request, with the standard conditions noted below.

The recommended approval conditions are as follows:

1. The property owner shall provide the County 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.

2. The Applicant shall obtain a building/use permit for the proposed manufactured home within one year of Board of Supervisors approval of the rezoning, otherwise the rezoning approval shall be deemed null and void, and the property shall revert to TR-9 zoning.

3. It is the Applicant’s 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: Mr. Chairman, I move to adopt Ordinance 11-_, conditionally rezoning Parcels 102-57-139C and 139E to Multiple-Household Residential (MR-1), with a recommendation of conditional approval, based on the Factors in Favor of approval as the Findings of Fact, with the conditions of approval recommended in the staff report.

IX. ATTACHMENTS
A. Rezoning Application
B. Location Map
C. Land Use/Concept Plan
D. Citizen Review and Public Comment

If the Ordinance is adopted by the Board, the next step would be for the Chairman to sign the Ordinance.

If the Board does not adopt the Resolution, the parcels will retain their current TR-9 Zoning designation.

Please return a copy of the signed, recorded Ordinance for the Planning Department files.