Motion by Member Randall Limbach, Second by Member Gerry Gonzalez

Vote: 8 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Jim Martzke, Second by Member Randall Limbach 

Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Julie Wycoff, applicant, provided a statement.

Chair DePew opened the public hearing. No one present or online spoke in favor or opposition to the request. Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion:

Member Saunders asked the applicant if the park site was State or deeded property and the applicant confirmed it is private property but is accessed through State land. Member Gonzalez asked if additional water sources are needed for the park expansion and the applicant replied existing infrastructure can support the increase in spaces with utility extensions to the new spaces, adding trash service is provided by the applicant. Member Limbach asked the applicant if length of stay restrictions will be imposed and the applicant stated there are no restrictions on length of stay but 30-day leases will be used.

Staff recommended conditions relative to the number of spaces, quiet hours, grounds maintenance, and retaining open space and drought-tolerant vegetation.

Vote: 8 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Randall Limbach, Second by Member Jim Martzke 

Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Al Armenta, applicant, provided a statement.

Chair DePew opened the public hearing.

Graham Yost spoke in favor. Codi Zetich spoke in favor.

Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion:

Vice Chair Montgomery noted that the one response in opposition did not include a reason for the opposition and stated the project fits with the area. Chair DePew asked if roping was occurring in the arena and the applicant replied no and that there are no cattle systems. Chair DePew asked if events include amplified announcing and the applicant replied small speakers were used for contestants. Member Limbach asked about seating and the applicant stated attendees bring lawn chairs and sit along the south side of the arena in the trees.

Staff recommended conditions relative to limiting outdoor arena events to daylight hours, site access, and providing a traffic analysis to the county.

Vote: 8 - 0 Approved

Motion by Member Randall Limbach, Second by Member Jim Martzke 

Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Jose Henriquez, applicant, provided a statement.

Chair DePew opened the public hearing.

David Valencia spoke in opposition. Rafael Gonzalez spoke in opposition. Diane Mazanek spoke in opposition. Vincent Houseknecht spoke in opposition. Andrea Messersmith spoke in opposition.

Mr. Henriquez provided a rebuttal.

Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion:

Member Saunders asked the applicant to clarify the number of trucks and drivers and the applicant said he currently has 3 trucks and 3 drivers, including himself, but would like to expand up to 5 trucks in the future. Member Saunders asked when the trucks are parked on the property and the applicant stated weekends, since the trucks are usually on the road Monday through Friday. Vice Chair Montgomery complimented the applicant on his business but spoke about neighbor concerns and that the applicant should consider other options for parking his trucks. Member Gonzalez spoke about neighborhood concerns of blocking views and impacts on Acorn Lane caused by the applicant’s trucks and complimented the applicant on his business and concern for his neighbors. Member Limbach expressed concerns about the impact of large trucks on Acorn Lane and the appropriateness of the use in a residential neighborhood. Chair DePew asked staff about a road maintenance agreement and case planner Taylor replied that the road is maintained and staff recommends a condition requiring the applicant to grade Monte Vista Trail and Acorn Lane at least once a year.

Member Limbach, Member Martzke
Motion Failed 2-6

Member Fickett commended the applicant for his business efforts but voted no, stating the property wasn’t the best place to park his trucks. Member Limbach voted no due to lack of infrastructure and the property being in an established neighborhood. Vice Chair Montgomery voted no because of neighbor concerns, including truck traffic and the roads. Member Young voted no due to lack of infrastructure, specifically truck traffic on a non-county maintained road. Member Saunders voted no due to lack of infrastructure and encouraged the neighbors to work together to address concerns about the road. Chair DePew voted no since the area is a residential neighborhood and not a commercial area.

Vote: 2 - 6 Disapproved

AYE:

Member Jim Martzke
Member Gerry Gonzalez

Case planner Taylor provided a presentation, which is preserved in the files. Michael Marks, Ardent Arizona LLC, provided a statement.

Chair DePew opened the public hearing.

Laurie Odle spoke in opposition. Pat Shank spoke in opposition. Steven Helfrick expressed concerns about the development of the Port area and requested the Commission continue the docket. Francisco Ambriz requested clarification on the rezoning area.

Mr. Marks provided a rebuttal. Heather Gardner, Ardent LLC, also spoke during the rebuttal.

Chair DePew closed the public hearing.

Commission discussion:

Member Gonzalez asked who owns the properties and Mr. Marks confirmed both parcels are owned by Ardent Arizona LLC. Member Gonzalez asked about water supply. Jackie Watkins, Cochise County Engineering and Natural Resources Director, stated the City of Douglas would be bringing water to the area. Member Gonzalez asked the applicant what was meant by an employment center and Mr. Marks responded that the development would create jobs. Ms. Gardner added the City of Douglas will provide water, sewer, and broadband that will run to Cochise College and south along James Ranch Road. Member Gonzalez asked about utility costs and Ms. Gardner stated that is best answered by the City of Douglas. Jackie Watkins added that Douglas’ utility infrastructure for the area has been in design for two years and James Ranch Road is also in design and that hydrology studies will be coordinated between the applicant and the County. Ms. Gardner further discussed traffic between James Ranch Road and Kings Highway. Member Limbach asked if there would be any Department of Defense involvement with the project and Mr. Marks stated no and that the development would be purely commercial. Member Limbach asked if the applicant would be agreeable to increasing minimum setbacks and Mr. Marks stated Ardent is willing to discuss setbacks. Member Limbach asked staff if the Commission could amend staff’s buffer condition to increase the buffer and case planner Taylor replied yes. Chair DePew asked if the applicant could phase the development to delay impacts on existing residences. Mr. Marks stated growth would occur first near James Ranch Road.

Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Motion by Vice Chair Montgomery, Second by Member Saunders
Approved 8-0

Rezoning
Motion by Member Martzke, Second by Member Limbach
Approved 8-0

The Commission recommended increasing staff's recommended 20’ landscape buffer along property lines shared with adjacent residential properties to 100’.

Vote: 8 - 0 Approved