[3:17] Good evening, everyone seeing it's four 30. I'd like to

[3:19] call the April 13th meeting to order a note that require

[3:23] is present.

[3:26] Chairman Hamel is missing today. So I'm gonna fill in

[3:28] for him. So bear, bear with me, but the first

[3:31] item on the agenda.

[3:32] Is the consent calendar on their amends to approve from

[3:35] March 23rd.

[3:37] Planning zoning, mission withdrawals. None.

[3:40] Time extensions, none. Continuance is none and approvals none.

[3:43] But that can I have a motion to approve the

[3:45] consent calendar as presented?

[3:48] Mr. Vice chairman, commissioner Arnie. I moved to approve the

[3:51] consent calendar as presented.

[3:55] Have a motion to have a second.

[3:57] Second second by commissioner. Maloff Craig with that.

[4:03] All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye.

[4:06] Any opposed?

[4:08] Motion's been approved.

[4:13] Item C there's no action items on today's agenda. So

[4:16] that takes us.

[4:17] To item D we have two public hearing items today

[4:20] on, on the agenda. The first is zone.

[4:24] 44 9 1 19 20 26. This is a request by the city of Yuma

[4:29] there zone approximately 597 acres from.

[4:33] Agriculture district to the heavy industrial district for the property

[4:36] located.

[4:38] At the Northeast and Southeast corners.

[4:41] Corners of state route Sr 1 95 and the avenue a

[4:45] alignment.

[4:46] Staff gather staff, port police.

[4:49] Thank you. Good afternoon. Meredith Rojas, community planning.

[4:53] The subject property is approximately 597 acres located at the

[4:57] Northeast and Southeast corners of state route Sr 1 95 and

[5:00] the avenue a alignment.

[5:03] The city of Yuma purchased the property in 1996 and

[5:07] the property was annexed into the city in 1999.

[5:10] In 2012, the property was a subject of a general

[5:13] plan amendment that changed the land. Use designation from public.

[5:17] Slash quasi-public to agriculture slash industrial to accommodate private industrial

[5:21] activity.

[5:23] The city of Yuma is now seeking to rezone the

[5:25] property from the agriculture district to the heavy industrial district.

[5:29] To support economic development opportunities and large scale industrial uses.

[5:33] Uses as our 1 95 divides the property into a Northern

[5:37] and a Southern portion.

[5:39] Both areas have been undeveloped open desert since the city

[5:42] purchased the property approximately 30 years ago.

[5:46] The city's longtime intent has been to sell this property.

[5:48] And the requested rezone is designed to make the landlord

[5:51] attractive to a new owner, looking to develop the property.

[5:54] At the last meeting we discussed how a specific owner

[5:57] and or use has not been identified.

[6:00] That is still the case. However, I have learned that

[6:03] the city has been approached by a company about possibly

[6:05] purchasing the Northern portion of the property.

[6:08] For a potential gravel pit.

[6:11] In the heavy industrial district, a gravel pit would require

[6:14] a conditional use permit to be approved by this commission

[6:17] before development could occur.

[6:20] Additionally, there have been discussions about locating a cell tower

[6:22] in the Southern portion of the subject property.

[6:27] I also wanted to add that the city has determined

[6:29] this location is not suitable for a space port because

[6:32] of the proximity to the prison directly west of the

[6:34] subject property.

[6:36] And as of this morning, at least the city has

[6:38] not been approached about a data center at this location.

[6:42] At the last meeting, there were ALS, there was also

[6:44] a discussion about access needed to allow rezoning the property

[6:48] into the heavy industrial district.

[6:50] Sr 1 95 is identified as a truck route in the

[6:53] 2025 city of Yuma integrated multimodal transportation master plan, which

[6:57] is shown on the screen.

[6:59] It is also identified as a truck route in the

[7:01] city's 2014 transportation master plan and the 2022 general plan.

[7:07] Access to Sr. 1 95 is available from Cesar Chavez Boulevard,

[7:10] which is a limited.

[7:12] Access frontage road that connects to Sr 1 95 avenue B.

[7:16] And provides paved access to the Arizona state prison complex

[7:19] directly west of the subject property.

[7:22] Additionally, the subject property's recorded, plat identifies multiple dedications of

[7:26] right of way for north south streets, including right away,

[7:29] that would provide.

[7:31] The Northern portion of the subject property, future frontage along

[7:34] avenue, a.

[7:35] As discussed at the last meeting, a future owner or

[7:38] developer would be responsible for extending roadway.

[7:41] Connections to accommodate their ex their specific industrial use.

[7:48] Property owners within 300 feet of the subject property and

[7:51] agencies listed in attachment B were notified of the request.

[7:55] Staff did not receive any opposition to the request.

[7:58] Based on our analysis staff is recommending approval of the

[8:01] request, subject to the conditions and attachment a that concludes

[8:05] my report and I'm available for any questions.

[8:08] Questions. Thank you. Thank you. Does any, any members of

[8:11] the commission have questions or comments for staff?

[8:19] So seeing none.

[8:21] This is typically where we ask the applicant to come

[8:24] forward. But.

[8:26] I believe you're acting as the applicant, right? In some

[8:29] capacity. Yes.

[8:32] I did. So I have a couple questions have, and

[8:36] I have a couple of comments also, but.

[8:39] My first question is why not light industrial.

[8:48] Chairman commission.

[8:50] The heavy industrial allows the greatest range of industrial type

[8:53] activities to occur there and gives it the greatest opportunity

[8:56] for someone to want to purchase this property and develop

[8:58] something different.

[9:03] Okay, thank you. I, I believe the only difference is

[9:05] between heavy, industrial and light industrial.

[9:08] Are like three aviation.

[9:11] Related uses. So that's, that's why I asked the question.

[9:14] Light. Industrial is.

[9:16] A heavy industrial allow allows everything that light industrial allows.

[9:19] Allows plus I believe three aviation related uses of military

[9:24] base, an airport and another.

[9:27] Aviation related use. And that seems to be the only

[9:29] differences between.

[9:31] Light and heavy industrial.

[9:38] Is that a question chairman you want us to list

[9:40] uses? I know I, no, I, I just that, I

[9:42] guess I, you know, I guess that was just a

[9:43] comment. And then I, you know, I, I was, I

[9:45] did bring up the access stuff last time. So bring,

[9:48] you know, so I'll bring it up again. I, since

[9:51] the continuation, I did talk to the.

[9:54] Engineer at ADOT and he did say that there.

[9:57] Is not legal access to this property from on the

[10:00] north or south.

[10:02] From 1 95, it's a controlled access highway. So it's like

[10:06] interstate eight. You can't just pull off of it onto.

[10:10] Onto a property.

[10:12] I believe that

[10:14] in order for this property to have access from 1 95,

[10:18] there'd have to be a new interchange. It seems that

[10:20] today.

[10:21] To get to the north to get to the south

[10:23] side, you can take avenue B, go south and take

[10:25] the Caesar Chavez to the property.

[10:28] The north side, I believe that you'd have to take

[10:30] the avenue B exit.

[10:32] Travel north of mile.

[10:35] To county 22nd alignment.

[10:38] Travel east of mile, and then travel back south mile

[10:40] on avenue a to access the property as it is

[10:43] today.

[10:45] I do see that engineering staff has asked for.

[10:50] The dedication for collector streets and there's some other dedication

[10:53] around there. I.

[10:56] But I, it was my understanding of reading through the

[10:58] code that.

[10:59] Upon rezoning something, it had to meet those conditions.

[11:03] One of which was access along.

[11:05] A arterial or, or, or a truck route.

[11:10] I, you know, so I I'll leave, you know, just

[11:13] that that's my 2 cents.

[11:15] Cents. Good evening, chairman.

[11:19] Vice chairman and commission.

[11:22] Just really quickly to respond to your question about heavy

[11:24] industrial. There are other uses in the industrial district that

[11:27] are permitted by C U P that are not permitted

[11:30] in light industrial.

[11:32] Specifically, I can think of some recycling facilities that are

[11:35] not permitted in light, which would be permitted in heavy.

[11:38] And as we've indicated, the location on the area service

[11:41] highway would be perfect for those types of uses.

[11:45] Uses, I think your example of interstate eight is a,

[11:47] is a great example.

[11:48] And I could also appoint to those that they, those

[11:51] uses along interstate aids. Don't also have direct access to

[11:54] the interstate, but use a frontage road by way of.

[11:57] Of he Ridge road. So Cesar Chavez could eventually develop

[12:01] as that frontage road, similar to Heela Ridge.

[12:05] And I agree with you. I, I guess.

[12:07] Ultimately, I, I think that.

[12:10] The code is kind of ambiguous and maybe needs to

[12:12] be addressed to say something to that extent that.

[12:17] In that example, the heli Ridge road would be sufficient.

[12:20] You know, I'm not sure if he road is how

[12:22] it's classified as a collector, but.

[12:25] Near the highway can pull off it. It seems that

[12:28] the code limits it to only properties that.

[12:31] Gain it says gain access from.

[12:33] That road. So those properties don't gain access from interstate

[12:37] eight. They gain access from Hillary Ridge road.

[12:40] So I, it, it seems to me that there maybe

[12:44] there's a clarification.

[12:47] Issue, but I understand

[12:49] and thank you for thank you for addressing that Alyssa.

[12:53] The

[12:56] and it's, it's a little bit different since it's not

[12:58] a, you know, it's not a typical.

[13:00] Applicant.

[13:04] But do any other commissioners have, you know, any questions

[13:06] or comments for, you know, for staff?

[13:12] I see what you're trying to do, create an example.

[13:15] For further cases that would like to be rezoned from

[13:19] the general public. And I feel like the city of

[13:21] Yuma should follow.

[13:23] Their own rules that

[13:26] you know, they put onto people who are developing places.

[13:29] So is there some way.

[13:31] That we could use this case.

[13:35] As an example for further high industrial.

[13:38] Rezoning that do not have.

[13:41] Access as written in the code because all of the

[13:44] properties on Hewlett Ridge road are light industrial.

[13:50] Acting chairman.

[13:52] Commissioners each project has to be looked at uniquely.

[13:56] This particular site is pretty far away from the developed

[13:59] area. So we have to look at that one specifically.

[14:03] In many cases, we do have to do an interpretation

[14:04] of the code.

[14:06] And this is an prime example of that. You know,

[14:08] when the code says it has to be located with.

[14:12] Along a major, minor arterial.

[14:15] Right there. There's a main, no major arterial in our

[14:17] general plan. There hasn't been a major arterial in our

[14:19] general plan since at least 1997. So that's an interpretation.

[14:23] That the zoning administrator has to make. And the zoning

[14:25] administrator is to the director of community development.

[14:29] So we do have to make those interpretations.

[14:31] Specific to each site. And, and thank you for that.

[14:35] I have a comment for that also that if.

[14:38] The code references a 30 year old code, then.

[14:41] We should update that because.

[14:44] If I, as a private property owner,

[14:46] had a property that was outside of town and didn't

[14:49] have access. And I said, Hey,

[14:51] I could, what I could do is I could rezone

[14:54] this and I can bring in a bunch of, I

[14:55] could bring in a recycling plan or all these.

[14:58] Industrial uses.

[15:00] Says, but if I look at the zoning cor code

[15:02] right now, if I look at the zoning and I

[15:03] say, no, I can't do that.

[15:05] Because it doesn't have this access.

[15:08] So I, I think that, you know, the.

[15:11] The landowners to

[15:14] read that code and understand what they can and can't

[15:16] do.

[15:17] Is important. And if that's the guiding.

[15:19] Rules for everybody, not just the city, that that's the

[15:21] guiding rules for all property owners. So.

[15:24] The, you know, if I, I understand that the cases

[15:28] are different, but if, if it was a private property

[15:31] owner, they wouldn't even.

[15:33] Get this far, they'd look at the zoning order and

[15:35] say, oh, I can't do that. There.

[15:40] And, and, and if it, and if it's a interpretation

[15:42] that we don't need, then let's just take it out

[15:44] of the code.

[15:45] Let's just take the, the access part outta the code.

[15:52] Chairman, thank you for the additional information and direction to

[15:55] look at our code and make changes at a future

[15:57] date.

[15:58] Thank you.

[16:04] With that. Is there anybody?

[16:06] From the general public that would like to speak.

[16:09] On this case, sir.

[16:12] Name and address for the record please? Yes, Ronald van

[16:15] white, 86 35 east 24, police hum, Arizona 8 53 65. Good evening,

[16:19] Mr. Chairman, vice chairman and.

[16:21] Commissioners, one thing, this is very different that the city,

[16:26] they, they wanna rezone something to sell it.

[16:30] Is the city in real estate business now.

[16:32] That's one thing. I, I have a question for that.

[16:35] And secondly, if, if

[16:37] can you buy property for me and rezone it for

[16:39] me? Makes me, could you speak up, sir? Sorry to

[16:41] interrupt. Could you speak up?

[16:45] Is the city in real estate business now.

[16:49] Would they be willing to buy property for me and

[16:51] rezone it for me.

[16:52] That's what I'm wanting to know.

[16:55] And one thing about that is, is that if it

[16:56] does not meet the zone requirements, then you can't rezone

[16:59] it.

[17:00] It's right there in, in, in your, in your, in

[17:02] your plan.

[17:03] You've already mentioned that as you as well. So if

[17:05] you're gonna do it for one, you've gotta do it

[17:06] for all.

[17:08] What's right, is right. The city would look, be looked

[17:11] at very badly if poorly, if that was to happen.

[17:15] So I encourage you to think twice about that because

[17:17] we need to do business. We need to be consistent.

[17:21] Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

[17:28] Sir, please come forward and state your name, address for

[17:30] the record, please.

[17:33] Hello everyone. My name's William Katz, 48 64 west 31st street.

[17:38] I speak only for myself. I'm here today. Just to

[17:39] ask a couple questions.

[17:41] Questions. There was some discussion earlier about.

[17:44] Data centers.

[17:46] And I believe paraphrasing. What I heard from the city

[17:49] staff was that.

[17:50] Right now there's no interest that they're aware of in

[17:53] placing a data center there.

[17:55] As of today's date.

[17:57] Was their interest previously.

[17:59] In a data center being placed at that location.

[18:03] Would be my first question.

[18:05] My second question would be.

[18:08] In November, I think it was fifth of 20, 25. The

[18:12] city of Yuma amended its industrial code to include both

[18:15] light, industrial and heavy industrial.

[18:18] And, you know, there's been a lot of discussion today

[18:21] about interpretations of the code and what the code reads.

[18:25] Reads. I just wanna make sure that the community's clear

[18:27] and that I'm clear on.

[18:29] How we're interpreting those amendments that occurred in November of

[18:33] 2025.

[18:35] To both the heavy and light industrial.

[18:38] Code as it relates to data centers.

[18:41] So if a data center wants to be cited,

[18:46] and placed in the light industrial district.

[18:50] Does that require a conditional use permit?

[18:53] And if a data center wants to be placed or

[18:56] cited.

[18:57] In the heavy industrial district.

[18:59] Does that require a conditional use permit?

[19:02] And the reason why I believe that's important is there

[19:04] was discussion today.

[19:06] As to why the city's interested in heavy industrial.

[19:10] And what that would mean going forward for the various

[19:13] types of uses that could occur.

[19:16] Now I'm a big believer in private property rights.

[19:19] Rights, but this is city property. I believe the public

[19:22] has a right to know.

[19:24] And really my questions only deal with interpretations of code.

[19:27] And whether there was previously a data center that wanted

[19:30] to be, or was considering to be placed at the

[19:33] 597 acres.

[19:36] So if possible, I'd like to get answers to that.

[19:40] So thank you for your time. Thank you. And sir,

[19:43] I think I can address one of your questions. The.

[19:47] At least with this commission.

[19:49] This case was

[19:52] extended from a case back in March, and the question

[19:54] came up of data centers, then I think that's why

[19:57] staff addressed.

[19:58] Data centers and the, the discussion for it on this,

[20:01] on this property today, because that question was asked.

[20:05] At a, at a previous meeting. Your other questions. I

[20:07] think that's.

[20:08] That's maybe something that, that staff can help with and,

[20:11] you know, interpretations, but as far as how that came

[20:15] up today, I think it was because of, of some

[20:17] questions at a previous meeting. And, and I appreciate that.

[20:19] I guess my question was also asked, has a data

[20:22] center ever been interest in the 597 acres?

[20:26] Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

[20:31] Anyone else from the general public that would like to

[20:33] speak for this? Can we get some, can we get

[20:35] some answers on the gentleman's questions on the C U

[20:37] P for the light industrial?

[20:39] And the heavy industrial. I know you spoke about it

[20:41] last time, but I can't remember John's coming towards us.

[20:44] so I'm gonna try and answer as many questions

[20:46] as I can. And if I miss something, please remind

[20:48] me. I was trying to write, as everyone was talking.

[20:52] So there was a question.

[20:54] About the

[20:56] the history of this property and is the city and

[20:58] the market for real estate.

[21:00] No, the city purchased this property with the intent of

[21:03] developing it for a landfill years ago.

[21:06] Because that is no longer necessary. The city would like

[21:08] to dispose of this property, cuz it's no longer of

[21:11] use to the city. The city does that on occasion

[21:13] when they need to purchase property for various reasons. And

[21:16] if they don't need it any longer, then they like

[21:18] to dispose of it. They don't don't wanna keep it

[21:20] if they'res no benefit to this city in longer, get

[21:22] it back on the tax roll. So that was the

[21:24] intent of.

[21:25] This, we're not the, city's not in the market of

[21:27] real estate.

[21:28] The second was, I believe.

[21:31] About any interest of a data center, as far as

[21:35] I'm aware, this site has never been the subject of

[21:38] any interest for a data center.

[21:40] Not today and not prior, I have not heard any

[21:42] of that.

[21:44] And then was there a question about C O P

[21:46] requirements for a data center?

[21:48] At this time, the city of Yuma does not identify

[21:50] provisions for data centers.

[21:52] I've been doing a lot of research about data centers,

[21:55] specific to Arizona. What other communities are doing?

[21:58] We talked briefly with city council.

[22:00] Last week during a retreat and the direction from council

[22:03] is that they wanted to address data centers.

[22:05] In a regional approach. So they don't want the city

[22:08] yet to move forward on data centers. They wanna approach

[22:10] it again, regionally with other jurisdictions in our community. So

[22:14] that's kind of the direction that we've been taken at

[22:16] this point is we'll probably, hopefully with this city and

[22:19] other jurisdictions will adopt some regulation for data centers as

[22:23] a.

[22:24] Whole. So that might be a C O P requirement

[22:27] or some sort of public hearing requirement in my experience

[22:30] with other jurisdictions who have established.

[22:33] Requirements for data centers. The public process is extremely important

[22:36] in that. So potentially that will come forward at this

[22:40] time. The city does not have requirements for data centers.

[22:43] So no requirements. So

[22:45] what zoning classification could they go in?

[22:49] At this time, I would argue that there's no permitted

[22:51] zoning district in the city of Yuma. Interesting.

[22:57] I think that's tough. The.

[23:00] Definition of data centers will probably have to be.

[23:04] Defined because there's small data centers in this. Yeah. You

[23:07] know, in this room, there's small data centers, right? The

[23:10] hospital has a data center. It's accessory to the hospital,

[23:12] but standalone data centers.

[23:14] One could argue that it's a warehousing use. So we

[23:17] do really need to move relatively quickly on this.

[23:20] Because data centers do seem to be something that our

[23:22] nation is seeing a lot more interest in.

[23:25] Thank you, Alyssa. I, I, one more follow up. So.

[23:29] I, I think we heard that there's a possibility for

[23:33] a.

[23:34] Like a rock crushing operation or a mining, but is

[23:36] that.

[23:37] That's not the case. The city's just looking to.

[23:40] To, to sell, to sell this property and market it.

[23:42] So after the council meeting in Mar or after the

[23:45] P and Z meeting in March, I was made aware

[23:47] that there's the potential for somebody that, to be interested

[23:49] in purchasing that Northern section of land. So north of

[23:53] S R 1 95 to purchase it for.

[23:57] A rock crushing gravel pit, which is considered an extraction

[24:00] use, which would require a C U P. And they

[24:03] would purchase that through the city. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

[24:06] Mm-hmm .

[24:13] I think that there was another member of the public

[24:15] that wanted to address council, please through your name and

[24:19] address for the record.

[24:21] Henry Valenzuela 1970 west country lane.

[24:25] Some of my questions were answered. I still have two

[24:27] questions remaining and they should be pretty simple questions.

[24:30] Questions one is if, if I own this property,

[24:34] and I, and I, and I wanted to rezone this

[24:38] as it is today.

[24:40] To heavy industrial.

[24:44] Do would I be allowed to do that?

[24:47] As it sits.

[24:49] Sits it's if I own that property.

[24:52] Without access to, to

[24:55] you know, roadway, access without access to city streets.

[24:59] No plan for there to be water.

[25:01] Police and fire.

[25:03] All of that as it sits right now, would I,

[25:05] as a private citizen, be able to rezone that. And

[25:08] the number two is, is kind of a simple question.

[25:10] I think we need to always ask ourselves is if

[25:12] we don't, we don't.

[25:15] Don't rezone this today.

[25:17] What happens? What happens if we just decide not to

[25:19] rezone this today?

[25:21] Thank you. Thank you.

[25:28] Hello again. Okay. I'll try and answer these as well.

[25:31] The first question was cons. If this was privately owned,

[25:34] can somebody rezone this? I think I mentioned it to

[25:37] the last meeting.

[25:38] That if this was a private property, the city of

[25:40] Yuma would have recommended approval of this cuz in our

[25:42] opinion, there is access.

[25:45] To that necessary roadway classification, it meets the general plan.

[25:48] So, yes. I also wanna point out that the commission

[25:52] approved a very similar rezoning.

[25:56] April of last year for a property that was 160

[26:00] acres.

[26:01] They also rezone from ag to heavy industrial at avenue

[26:04] a and county 19th street.

[26:06] No development plan, but did receive a rezoning from the

[26:10] city council as well.

[26:12] If this property is not rezoned.

[26:15] Rezoned too heavy industrial. It would remain.

[26:19] Ag as is. And

[26:21] maybe the city would have a successful.

[26:23] Opportunity for someone to purchase it again. The city is

[26:26] looking to market this for the highest and best use

[26:29] the city does not.

[26:31] Buy high and sell low. That's not what we need

[26:33] to be doing with our properties.

[26:37] Thank you.

[26:38] Alyssa was the 160 acres that we rezoned last year.

[26:41] Was that a private individual, a city of Yuma. It

[26:44] was the private individual.

[26:51] Thank you. Hey.

[26:53] Staff and, you know, public, you know, bring it back

[26:55] to the commission for some discussion.

[27:00] I think that Mr. Mr. Chair.

[27:04] I would be remiss if I didn't provide some additional

[27:07] information about the subject property. If, if I maybe just

[27:10] take a second to.

[27:12] Please address the commission.

[27:33] So I just wanted to take a moment to.

[27:36] Focus on the provision in our zoning code that we've

[27:39] been talking about. Okay. Cuz there seems to be an

[27:41] assumption that we're not.

[27:43] Gonna be in compliance with, with that.

[27:47] Provision. So

[27:49] and I'm not under the assumption that that I'm gonna

[27:52] be able to answer all of the questions.

[27:55] Questions, but I think what I might share will, will

[27:58] be relevant to you and you, you may want to

[27:59] look at, so the provision of the zoning code is

[28:02] here at D.

[28:04] The location of any heavy industrial.

[28:06] District shall be restricted to property, which has access to

[28:10] and frontage on a major.

[28:12] Or minor arterial as classified by the transportation element of

[28:16] the Yuma general plan or which gains access by a

[28:19] designated truck route as defined by this code.

[28:22] Or which is contiguous to an industrial zoning district, which

[28:26] meets either of these requirements.

[28:29] So one thing to keep in mind here.

[28:31] This is on the very, as you know, this other

[28:34] south Porsche boundary of our city.

[28:37] We're not the only jurisdiction.

[28:40] That with, with jurisdiction over these roads.

[28:44] That that are adjacent. So I want to show you

[28:46] what San Luis in their general plan.

[28:50] This is the San Luis general plan.

[28:54] And you'll see that.

[28:57] Here on the

[29:00] they designate

[29:02] all of these county road, 22nd.

[29:05] County road 23rd.

[29:07] Avenue a Arizona avenue alignment.

[29:11] Avenue B is all principle arterial.

[29:16] Future. So these roads are our designed by.

[29:20] The, in the general plan for the San Luis to

[29:23] be.

[29:24] To be truck be used for that purpose.

[29:28] Now

[29:30] our code does speak to.

[29:33] Designated identified by the transportation element of the Yuma general

[29:37] plan.

[29:39] This is the transportation element of the San Luis general

[29:42] plan.

[29:43] But they are, they are truck designated routes. So I

[29:46] just wanted you to be aware of that.

[29:49] Thank you. The thank you for addressing that. I.

[29:58] I have

[30:01] some reservations with the, with this case.

[30:04] I, I, I think the, the use out there on

[30:08] county 23rd street and the avenue a alignment.

[30:11] Is probably a

[30:15] good place for heavy industrial. It's not going to interfere

[30:19] with neighboring pro with neighboring property. It's not going, you

[30:21] know, it's, it's not gonna be.

[30:24] Offensive to neighboring property owners.

[30:27] But I also think that.

[30:29] It does not meet.

[30:31] What the zoning ordinance says, and we've heard that.

[30:35] There was part of, it was referenced to code from

[30:37] 1996.

[30:39] That San Luis's general.

[30:41] Plan identifies him as future roads.

[30:48] The

[30:49] the code seems to the intent of the code. As

[30:52] I read, it seems to be that heavy industrial is

[30:54] on.

[30:55] Major, minor Ontario roads or truck routes. So that.

[30:59] It can accommodate traffic.

[31:02] But future roads are just that future roads.

[31:05] And I, again, I, I.

[31:09] If

[31:12] the avenue, a alignment.

[31:14] You know, or 16th street alignment runs out to.

[31:19] You know,

[31:21] very rural areas.

[31:23] Areas, and I don't believe that those rural areas.

[31:26] Areas are primed for industrial use because of the alignment

[31:29] of these roads attaches to 'em. I think that the

[31:32] intent of the code is.

[31:34] To is on

[31:37] to have having like heavy industrial night industrial on.

[31:40] Access roads where they can accommodate.

[31:45] Access and

[31:47] if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But I, I, I, I

[31:48] think that what we've iden, I think that what has

[31:51] been identified.

[31:52] Is that

[31:55] the zoning or parts of the zoning ordinance.

[31:59] Maybe need some update if we're not going.

[32:02] Just by the

[32:05] the general plan, then just take it out. Then we

[32:08] should take it out of the zoning ordinance.

[32:10] Because

[32:12] private property owners.

[32:15] You know, maybe don't have the ability to say, well,

[32:19] San Luis's roads are classified as this. So, you know,

[32:22] here, but if a private property owner reads that today,

[32:26] and they just bought this property or just inherited it

[32:28] from their family. They don't look at it and say,

[32:30] oh yes, I can do.

[32:32] Heavy indu heavy industrial there. And maybe it's just some,

[32:36] you know,

[32:37] administrative or, you know, maybe it's.

[32:39] It's revising the code, but it seems to me that

[32:43] the way that the code is written.

[32:45] That this does not meet the code.

[32:48] I I, I, and again, it's not that it's not

[32:50] a great.

[32:51] Or it's not that the use is isn't good. And,

[32:54] and I, and I, and Alyssa, thank you for bringing

[32:56] that.

[32:57] Example what we did before. And I, you know, and,

[32:59] and may I.

[33:01] You know, it wasn't read well enough, but if we

[33:02] did it before.

[33:05] And

[33:06] we didn't take that piece of the code into, into

[33:08] account then I don't think we should do that. I

[33:11] think that, that it should be.

[33:14] If we're approving stuff without that, then we should just

[33:16] take it out of the code. If we're not enforcing

[33:18] it as it's written, we should just take it outta

[33:20] the code.

[33:27] Sorry, just really quick. Maybe I can address that.

[33:30] The prior rezoning that was approved, it is located on

[33:33] a minor arterial roadway.

[33:35] As the code identifies, but there was no development plan.

[33:37] Okay. Similar to this one. So I would argue that

[33:40] we believe frontage on Sr 1 95 meets the code requirement.

[33:45] Okay. And, and if, and thank you. And so I,

[33:48] so I don't, you know, I I'm glad that other

[33:50] one met, you know, met the code. I just.

[33:54] I guess maybe we're

[33:58] have a different interpretation of access from.

[34:01] Gaining access from 1 95.

[34:03] Because I don't believe today at that, that you can

[34:06] drive from.

[34:08] Sr 1 95 and pull onto the north or south side

[34:11] of that property from Sr 1 95.

[34:17] I, I guess, in addition to that argument, whether or

[34:19] not Sr 1 95 is, is sufficient to meet the code.

[34:23] There's also the separate question that the private landowner might

[34:26] ask a zoning and administrator.

[34:29] Mr. And Mrs. Administrator, will you.

[34:32] Recognize roads that have been designated.

[34:35] As arterial in the, in the San Luis general plan.

[34:40] As satisfying the Yuma code, even though Yuma code says

[34:43] the Yuma general plan, will you.

[34:46] Accept roads that have been designated arterial in the San

[34:50] Luis plan as, as.

[34:52] And the answer

[34:54] has been said, yes.

[34:57] S and, and that, and that makes sense. And I,

[34:58] you know, I just, I'm I'm, this is a di

[35:00] this is kind of a different case. I'm kind of

[35:02] torn. I think it's hard that.

[35:04] You know, I, I think one of the resolutions would

[35:07] be to build an exit from straight route 95 at

[35:10] avenue.

[35:11] Avenue a

[35:13] and so, you know, you pull off avenue a and

[35:15] be adjacent to this property, but.

[35:18] If the intent is to sell the property, I think

[35:21] that's a.

[35:23] I don't want a condition, somebody building an ex, you

[35:26] know, coordinating with ADOT and the engineering and cost that

[35:29] it'd be to, to build that, to build that exit.

[35:31] But.

[35:32] But thank you for the clarification and, and, you know,

[35:34] the.

[35:36] I just the

[35:40] I believe in private property rights. And I believe that

[35:43] somebody should be able to open that zoning ordinance and

[35:45] read it and say, I can do this with my

[35:48] property.

[35:49] And no.

[35:51] Exactly what they can do at their property.

[35:54] It it's. I think that there's a lot of.

[35:57] Confusion around this. So, and so maybe that's, you know,

[36:00] maybe that maybe city or the city council hears that,

[36:03] that.

[36:05] Maybe we look back at the qualifying.

[36:08] Route types and

[36:11] where it's designated as specific types of routes.

[36:14] Routes and either open or eliminate open or eliminate that.

[36:19] Whatever makes the most sense. It, it, it.

[36:22] Just seems challenging that if a private property owner came

[36:26] in and, you know, looked at that, I I'd read

[36:28] it and say, Hey, I, I can't, I can't do

[36:30] that. There.

[36:35] So chairman and commission.

[36:37] The step forwards step forward. Now, if, if the public

[36:40] common is done is to.

[36:42] You can take actions to recommend approval with the conditions

[36:44] that are there. You can recommend approval with additional conditions

[36:47] or you can recommend denial. Okay. Thank you with that.

[36:49] Is there anyone else from.

[36:52] The community that would like to address this case.

[36:56] Seeing none. I'll bring it back to the commission for

[36:58] discussion or discussion that will lead to a motion.

[37:18] The chairman has the ability to make a motion. If

[37:20] the commission members.

[37:22] Choose not to, we would prefer to see a final

[37:25] action, whether it's recommended recommendation of denial or approval. Okay.

[37:30] Thank thank you again.

[37:33] And again, I'm very, you know, I'm, I think I've,

[37:36] you know,

[37:40] everyone's probably sick of hearing from me, but I, you

[37:41] know, I've kind of said what I believe. I don't

[37:44] think that this is a bad space for heavy industrial.

[37:46] I think it's.

[37:47] It's far from anything that would find it obnoxious to

[37:51] have a heavy industrial use.

[37:53] I do not think that as the code is written,

[37:56] that.

[37:58] The property meets the minimum.

[38:02] Standards for the heavy industrial zone district.

[38:06] So I will

[38:08] I'll make a motion.

[38:11] That

[38:12] rezoning case

[38:25] I'd make a motion to deny rezoning case.

[38:30] Zone 40 49, 18 20 26.

[38:35] Noted because

[38:37] belief that the.

[38:39] Property does not meet the standards.

[38:42] Standards in section 1 54.

[38:44] Dash. Oh, nine dash oh three D.

[38:47] Related to

[38:50] access and frontage on major, minor arterial or truck route.

[38:56] Chairman before. There's a second. I just wanna note that

[38:58] the case number is.

[39:00] Zone 4 49, 19 20 26.

[39:04] Okay.

[39:08] Do you want me to go to.

[39:09] Make, should I make the motion again?

[39:12] My packet says one eight.

[39:16] Sorry. It's one eight. My apologies. Thank you.

[39:28] Motion to yeah. Motion.

[39:39] Yeah. So I, so there's a motion to deny the,

[39:42] the case. So, you know, open to.

[39:47] Seconds or not, we can, you know, our entertain another

[39:50] motion.

[39:52] Mr vice chair.

[39:54] I second that, okay. We have a, a motion and

[39:58] a second.

[39:59] So with that, everybody.

[40:02] That. So the motion is to.

[40:04] Deny. So an I vote will be to agree with

[40:07] that motion to deny.

[40:10] Nay votes will

[40:12] will disagree with that. So there, so with that motion,

[40:15] can we get a roll call?

[40:21] Alright, chairman, you can just call for. Okay. IR N

[40:23] okay. So I'll call, call for the iron a so.

[40:27] Those

[40:29] in favor of

[40:31] denying the motion wrote by saying, aye. Aye. Aye. Those

[40:36] opposed.

[40:37] Nay nay.

[40:41] So the motion.

[40:43] To deny passes.

[40:45] Passes three to two.

[40:48] And, and for the record, I'm sorry. I guess we

[40:50] do need to just call out.

[40:53] Alex. Do you have a microphone? No. Okay. All right.

[40:56] So the votes in favor of the request and an

[40:59] aye were from commissioner.

[41:01] Mahan Gonzalez and Mr. Cuevas, commissioner Cuevas, and then Vos.

[41:09] Votes against the motion were from.

[41:12] Commissioner Arne and commissioner Malouf Craig.

[41:16] Thank you.

[41:19] So with that.

[41:22] Where we'll move on to the next item on the

[41:25] agenda.

[41:27] Which is

[41:31] general plan 4 47 56 dash 2025.

[41:36] Is a major plan amendment request by Britney Lee on

[41:38] behalf of T3, AZ, LLC. To change the land use

[41:41] designation from low density, residential.

[41:44] To high density, residential for approximately 0.7, two acres for

[41:48] the property located at 1 912.

[41:51] Two south Arizona avenue in Yuma staff command report, police.

[41:55] Good afternoon, Erica Peterson with community planning.

[41:58] As mentioned, this is a general plan amendment. This is

[42:01] the second public hearing for this major general general plan

[42:04] amendment.

[42:05] For approximately 0.7, two acres for the property located at

[42:08] 1912 south Arizona avenue.

[42:12] The subject property is currently under development with 15 dwelling

[42:16] units and one commercial office. It is in the general

[42:19] commercial infill overly D zoning district.

[42:22] The applicant is proposing to change the land. Use designation

[42:25] from low density, residential to high density, residential.

[42:31] On January 8th, 2024, the planning and zoning commission approved a conditional

[42:35] use permit.

[42:37] To allow the de the development of 15 multi-family dwelling

[42:41] units in conjunction with an established business.

[42:45] Within the general commercial, which is the B2 zoning district

[42:49] since the approval of the C U P and with

[42:51] construction already underway.

[42:53] The applicant is requesting to convert.

[42:56] Convert the office into a residential dwelling unit.

[43:00] For a total of 16 dwelling units.

[43:03] This request is what prompts the need to amend the

[43:05] general plan as having only residential on a commercially zoned

[43:09] property.

[43:11] Not a permitted use.

[43:15] With this request, the maximum number of dwelling units allowed

[43:18] at the property would increase from one to 22 dwelling

[43:21] units.

[43:22] Under the high density of residential land use designations, the

[43:25] expected population would be between three and 40 people.

[43:29] Following the general plan amendment. It is the applicant's intent

[43:32] to rezone the property to high density, residential for the

[43:36] total development of 16 dwelling units.

[43:40] Property owners within 660 feet of the subject property were

[43:44] notified of the request. And a neighborhood meeting was held

[43:46] on site.

[43:48] One neighbor attended the neighborhood meeting.

[43:51] And four neighbors either called or emailed.

[43:54] Two neighbors were in opposition of the request and.

[43:57] The other three just wanted additional information.

[44:00] Comments from the public can be found in attachment a

[44:03] and comments from the neighborhood meeting can be found in

[44:05] attachment C.

[44:07] Staff recommends the planning and zoning commission approve the request

[44:10] to change the land. Use designation from low density, residential.

[44:14] Two high density, residential for approximately 0.7, two acres.

[44:20] This concludes my presentation and I'm available for question.

[44:24] Thank you. Thank you. Erkart commissioners. Any questions for staff?

[44:30] Okay, thank you with that. Is the applicant here. And

[44:33] can you please come up and state your name and

[44:36] address for the record, please?

[44:38] Good afternoon. My name's Brittany Lee at 1700 south first avenue.

[44:43] Commissioners, any questions for the applicant?

[44:46] Thank you.

[44:48] Thank you. Is anyone from the public like to speak?

[44:52] On this agenda item.

[44:55] Seeing none. I will bring it back to the commission

[44:58] for discussion or discussion that will lead to a motion.

[45:01] Mr. Vice chairman, commissioner Arnold. I moved to approve the

[45:04] request to change the land use designation for approximately.

[45:08] 0.7, two acres.

[45:11] From low density, residential to high density, residential.

[45:14] I have a motion. Is there a second?

[45:16] Second with the, with the second I'll.

[45:22] Everybody in favor.

[45:24] Of approving the change in language designation.

[45:27] Signified by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[45:32] Motion passes.

[45:34] Passes five to zero.

[45:39] With that we are moved to item E which.

[45:43] We don't have, we have no need for an executive

[45:45] session. So F is informational items. Are there any.

[45:49] Updates from staff seeing none.

[45:53] Any comments from the commission.

[45:57] With that.

[45:58] Then I'd like to adjourn this meeting at five 13.

[46:02] I'm sorry, chairman. There is one more item to allow

[46:04] public comment.

[46:05] Oh, I'm sorry.

[46:07] Is there anyone from the public who would like to

[46:10] speak.

[46:14] Okay.

[46:15] Now, seeing now seeing none.

[46:18] Like to adjourn the meeting at five 13.

2026 04 13 Planning Zoning

Transcript