|
|
STRATEGIC OUTCOMES |
ACTION |
|
Department: |
☒ Safe & Prosperous |
☐ Motion |
|
Planning & Neighborhood Svc |
☐ Active & Appealing |
☐ Resolution |
|
|
☒ Respected & Responsible |
☐ Ordinance - Introduction |
|
Division: |
☐ Connected & Engaged |
☒ Ordinance - Adoption |
|
Community Planning |
☐ Unique & Creative |
☐ Public Hearing |
TITLE: t
Rezoning of Property: Near the Southeast Corner of Avenue 9E and 24th Street
end
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: Summary Recommendation
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial of this rezone request by a vote of 4-2. Public comment will be taken at the public hearing on May 7, 2025. (Planning and Neighborhood Services/Community Planning) (Alyssa Linville)
end
STRATEGIC OUTCOME:
Approval of this rezone supports residential development in the City that will be responsibly constructed, meeting all codes and requirements. This rezone assists in furthering the City Council’s strategic outcome of Safe and Prosperous and Respected and Responsible.
REPORT:
The subject property is located near the southeast corner of Avenue 9E and 24th Street. The site is currently undeveloped and is approximately 33.38 acres in size.
It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide the property for the future construction of approximately 85 single-family dwellings. According to the conceptual site plan, the lots will range in size from approximately 6,000 square feet to 19,672 square feet.
Further specified in 154-05.04, the following are some of the development standards required of a development within the Low Density Residential (R-1-6) District:
1. The maximum lot coverage in the Low Density Residential (R-1-6) District shall not exceed 50% of the lot area;
2. A minimum front yard setback of 20 feet;
3. A minimum side yard setback of 7 feet;
4. A minimum rear yard setback of 10 feet;
5. A maximum building height of 40 feet; and
6. A requirement for each lot to provide 2 off-street parking spaces, appropriately located.
A neighborhood meeting was held on February 12, 2025, to discuss the proposed project with neighbors and property owners within the surrounding area. During the neighborhood meeting, there were eight neighbors in attendance. The neighbors expressed their concern with traffic congestion on Avenue 9E due to school traffic and the railroad, vehicular accidents, future subdivision landscaping, the lack of common open space for the residents of the subdivision, and property values. The neighbors also noted that Yuma County was awarded a grant through the Railroad Crossing Elimination (RCE) Grant program for project planning and activities to examine the feasibility of grade-separating three crossings in Yuma County (9E, Fortuna Road, and County 29E). During the neighborhood meeting, it was suggested by the neighbors to create four larger lots to mirror the existing four approximately 1-acre properties (Patagonia Development). With intent to provide a more consistent density between the existing and future homes.
The applicant has provided a conceptual layout of the proposed subdivision (Attachment B). However, the design and layout of the subdivision has not been finalized. The developer is working with the City to address traffic concerns through the subdivision design plat process. Through this process, the developer will address traffic mitigation, turn lanes and non-access easements. In addition, CIP Project Number 0441-ROAD2 is a Capacity Increase project on 9E from 24th Street to North Frontage Road for a new 4 lane roadway and bridge widening.
The request to rezone the property from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Low Density Residential (R-1-6) District is in conformance with the General Plan.
On March 24, 2025, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-2 to recommend denial of the request to rezone approximately 33.38 acres from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Low Density Residential (R-1-6) District, for the property located near the southeast corner of Avenue 9E and 24th Street.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - EXCERPTS FROM PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES:
“Amelia Domby - Principal Planner summarized the staff report and recommended APPROVAL with the inclusion of a new Engineering Condition - “The Owner/Developer shall dedicate 12.5 feet additional right-of-way along Avenue 9E frontage by Warranty Deed or by Plat to accommodate proposed CIP roadway improvements”.
“Chris Hamel - Planning and Zoning Commissioner asked whether the properties adjacent to the easement have an open area behind the homes. Domby confirmed, noting that the property has several easements, which limit the development potential.
“John Mahon - Planning and Zoning Commissioner asked whether the Municipal Improvement District (MID) would cover neighboring properties or solely those within the subdivision. Domby clarified that it would only include properties within the subdivision, stating that the district's purpose is to maintain the landscaped area.
APPLICANT/APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE
“Kevin Dahl, 1560 S. 5th Ave, Yuma, AZ made himself available for questions and mentioned that he is working with engineering to address traffic concerns, noting that all other issues will be addressed during the platting process.
PUPLIC COMMENT
“Kyla Smith, 2497 S. Avenue 9 E., Yuma, AZ, raised concerns about 9E and the railroad, mentioning that trains stop for about half an hour throughout the night. He also voiced traffic concerns and inquired when the last traffic study was conducted on 9E. Dave Wostenberg - City Engineer, acknowledged significant traffic backup on 24th Street, with congestion including around nine or ten school buses and noted this is one of the reasons for considering the widening of 9E. Wostenberg mentioned that efforts are also underway to work with the railroad on their double-tracking project to coordinate the widening adding that the underpass will be a longer-term project due to its high cost, the need for grants, and the potential requirement to acquire right-of-way, which could involve relocating some residents.
“Quincy Smith, 2497 S. Avenue 9 E., Yuma, AZ, expressed concerns about traffic, described the situation as an eyesore, and expressed frustration with the City of Yuma approving cases where the corner lots designated as common areas are inaccessible for children to use.
“Sheldon Scheffer,11278 E. 24th Place, Yuma, AZ, expressed concerns about traffic, stating that after purchasing a cul-de-sac lot, he is now facing the possibility of main street traffic in front of his property, which could decrease the value of his home.
“Kristina Scheffer,11278 E. 24th Place, Yuma, AZ, expressed concerns about traffic and disappointment regarding the proposal for low-income tract homes. She stated that they were promised custom 1-acre homes would be built in the area and believes the proposed density will only lead to increased traffic.
“Paul Rios, 9681 S. Obsidian Avenue, Yuma, AZ expressed concerns about traffic.
“Emiliano Perez, 5350 E 33rd Pl., Yuma, AZ, expressed support for the rezone request, stating that Yuma needs more homes, with additional work coming to town, and emphasized that the proposed request will not devalue neighboring properties.
“Hamel expressed concerns about traffic, particularly regarding train crossings. Hamel acknowledged the potential for accidents and emphasized the need for improvements, such as underpasses, which require time, planning, and funding. Hamel also discussed the housing trends in Yuma, recognizing the shift from larger to smaller homes and the challenges of limited land availability. Hamel highlighted the necessity of developing available properties.
“Mahon asked Wostenberg to provide more details on the subdivision regulations and requirements along Avenue 9 E, and whether the traffic impact study is based on the numbers previously discussed, along with projected figures and planned improvements. Wostenberg explained that the current right of way for Avenue 9 E is 100 feet but plans to increase it are underway as part of the Transportation Master Plan update. Wostenberg noted that coordination with the railroad revealed that additional right of way is needed to accommodate overhead electric lines and added that a consultant will be hired in the next 30 days to begin the design for the widening project, which will align with the railroad's double-tracking efforts.
“Chelsea Malouff-Craig - Planning and Zoning Commissioner expressed concerns about the proposed density noting that this parcel lacked the necessary supporting roads, like those near 24th Street. Malouff-Craig stated that the subdivision was too condensed for the location and was not comfortable approving the R-1-6 zoning.
“Mahon noted that the developer is in agreement with the conditions and stated that the developer will be required to make the necessary improvements to comply with the codes. Mahon added that not allowing them to develop would be like punishing them for the actions of the previous owner.
MOTION
“Motion by Chelsea Malouff-Craig, second by Lorraine Arney to DENY ZONE-43589-2025 as presented. Motion carried, (4-2) with one vacancy. Chris Hamel and John Mahon voting Nay.’
Planning and Zoning Staff Report - Attached
FISCAL REQUIREMENTS:
|
CITY FUNDS: |
$ 0.00 |
BUDGETED: |
$ 0.00 |
|
STATE FUNDS: |
$ 0.00 |
AVAILABLE TO TRANSFER: |
$ 0.00 |
|
FEDERAL FUNDS: |
$ 0.00 |
IN CONTINGENCY: |
$ 0.00 |
|
OTHER SOURCES: |
$ 0.00 |
FUNDING: ACCOUNT/FUND #/CIP |
TOTAL $ 0.00
|
- |
|
|
To total; right click number & choose “Update Field” |
|
FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT:
NOT APPLICABLE
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS NOT ATTACHED TO THE CITY COUNCIL ACTION FORM THAT ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK:
NONE
IF CITY COUNCIL ACTION INCLUDES A CONTRACT, LEASE OR AGREEMENT, WHO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ROUTING THE DOCUMENT FOR SIGNATURE AFTER CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL?
☐ Department
☐ City Clerk’s Office
☐ Document to be recorded
☐ Document to be codified
|
Acting City Administrator: |
Date: |
|
John D. Simonton |
04/28/2025 |
|
Reviewed by City Attorney: |
Date: |
|
Richard W. Files |
04/28/2025 |