Planning commission begins bylaws update and considers SR 174 text amendment for antiquated subdivisions

At a work session the Cochise County Planning and Zoning Commission discussed proposed revisions to its bylaws and a possible text amendment to the SR‑174 zoning district intended to address issues in antiquated subdivisions such as SunSites.

Bylaws discussion highlights: commissioners debated attendance rules and meeting procedures. Suggested changes included limiting electronic attendance (allowing remote attendance no more than once per quarter), and a stricter attendance standard whereby the chair notifies the Board of Supervisors if a commissioner is absent from more than three regular meetings in a 12‑month period. Commissioners also asked staff to reorder procedural text so a motion and second to open a docket discussion are recorded before substantive discussion, aligning the commission’s practice with Robert’s Rules guidance. Commissioners asked staff to return a marked‑up bylaws draft for formal action at a future meeting.

SR‑174 text amendment work session: staff presented three options to address recurring conflicts in SunSites and similar antiquated subdivisions (parcels platted before county zoning/subdivision rules and that did not materialize as full development): 1) leave current zoning as-is; 2) amend county zoning regulations to allow accessory structures to be built before a principal residential structure and to allow accessory structures to exceed the size of the residence where the site is at least four acres; or 3) adopt option (2) but limit it to defined antiquated subdivisions only. Staff proposed language to define “antiquated subdivision” (platted prior to modern zoning/subdivision regulations and lacking infrastructure and build‑out), and recommended the commission consider targeted amendments rather than countywide changes.

Commission response and unresolved points: commissioners generally supported clearer rules but raised implementation and enforcement concerns: how to measure “exceed the size” (square footage vs. height or other metric), how to verify that a principal residence will in fact be built, and how to protect long‑time neighbors' views and rural character. Commissioners suggested a phased approach, additional landscaping setbacks, and to retain existing height and setback limitations in the rural districts. Staff will return a draft text amendment in June that incorporates the commission’s edits and defers numeric caps to case‑by‑case review unless the commission requests a specific square‑foot/height limit.

No formal action taken: this was a work session and discussion; staff will prepare a marked‑up bylaw draft and a proposed SR‑174 text amendment for a future public hearing and vote.