Supervisors approve rezoning and minor amendment for Foothills food‑court proposal after public objections

The Yuma County Board of Supervisors voted on March 10 to approve a minor amendment to the county land‑use map and to rezone a parcel on Foothills Boulevard to local commercial (C‑1) for a proposed food‑court development.

Senior planner Richard Munguia summarized the request: the owner seeks to change a parcel just off Foothills Boulevard from urban‑density residential to local commercial to allow a small food‑court development with vendors and outdoor seating. The parcel site plan shows on‑site parking, an entrance and an exit lane, and vendor parking. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval subject to standard conditions; staff noted the applicant would still need a special use permit for outdoor activities.

Opposition: Attorney Jim Smith, representing the Pate Family Trust, urged supervisors to deny both the minor amendment and the rezoning. Smith said the neighborhood between Fortieth and Fortieth‑fourth streets is "entirely residential" and that an existing food‑court operation about three‑quarters of a mile away has produced ongoing problems with live music and on‑street parking. He asked the board to preserve the residential character. Neighbors who testified raised similar concerns about traffic, noise and on‑street parking.

Applicant remarks: Owner Ivan Schneider said the proposed site is hard‑by Foothills and that the plan includes on‑site parking and one‑way ingress/egress. "There's no place to sit and eat besides Jimmy Kay's," Schneider told the board, explaining the community demand he sees and saying the design includes about 44 parking spaces and would require a special‑use permit that could limit vendors and hours.

Board action: The board first approved the minor amendment (motion and second; vote recorded as "aye"; motion carried). The board then approved rezoning case 24‑24 to local commercial C‑1 as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission (motion and second; vote recorded as "aye"; motion carried). Supervisors and staff noted that any outdoor activities, hours of operation, live entertainment and other controls would be addressed in the special‑use‑permit process, and that special‑use permits can include durational limits and conditions such as hours, fencing, screening and enforcement measures.

Why it matters: The approvals change the county’s land‑use designation and allow commercial use in an area several neighbors described as predominantly residential. The rezoning does not itself authorize outdoor entertainment or vendor operations; those activities require a separate special‑use permit that would return to staff and potentially to the board for approval.

Ending: Supervisors approved both the minor amendment and the rezoning despite neighborhood objections and directed staff that special‑use permit conditions should address traffic, parking and noise impacts during subsequent permitting.