This file was created by scanning the printed publication.
Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain.
1
ABSTRACT
Grasslands in Cochise County are increasingly under development pressure from 11 Wildcat land divisions and new residential subdivision development. If grasslands are to be maintained, methods must be employed that accommodate this growth in a manner that retains the natural resources and rural open feeling including the grasslands.
INTRODUCTION
The quality of life in Cochise County creates challenges along with opportunities. After the Civil war, pioneers pushed westward with hopes of striking it rich in mining or establishing their own ranch or farm. Others followed, creating communities to provide necessary services. Doctors, teachers, storekeepers and entertainers clustered in the communities throughout the County. In
1881, when the County was established, land seemed endless, water infinite, clean air was taken for granted and a rider could travel for miles without seeing another person. Measures to protect the rivers, grasslands and mountains were not considered.
Times have changed. Cochise County is now one of the three rural Arizona Counties with increasing population. The County is located within a reasonable commute to Tucson, has economic opportunity and is an attractive place to live. People move here hoping to escape the problems of the city and enjoy the pleasures of the country.
As a result of this influx of population, the attractions that draw people are in danger of being lost. Traditional industries such as ranching are experiencing economic downturns making it difficult to for them to maintain the rural character they provide which is so valued in the County.
The vast open spaces are increasingly being subdivided, often in an unguided fashion. These trends create a challenge to plan in a manner that helps preserve, protect and enhance natural resources, existing communities and neighborhoods, and rural character, while at the same time recognizing the desire for economic opportunities and the likelihood of growth.
GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Cochise County is located in the southeast corner of the State, sharing boundaries with Mexico,
New Mexico, Graham, Pima and Santa Cruz Counties. The County is 6,219 square miles in size, seventh in land area of the fifteen Arizona counties. The number of people per square mile is estimated to be 16.3, tied with Coconino County but a little less densely populated than Santa Cruz and Pinal Counties. The annual growth rate is 3. 77 percent similar to the overall rate of growth for the State. The Planning Department issues approximately 1400 building permits per year.
Forty-one percent of the land is privately owned, the highest percentage in the State- Santa
Cruz County, our neighbor to the last is a close second with thirty-nine percent of their land in
1
Cochise County Planning Department, Sierra Vista, AI...
343

private ownership. Maricopa and Pima Counties, the most intensively developed Arizona Counties have respectively thirty-one and thirteen percent of land privately owned.
Grasslands in Cochise County are concentrated east and north of the Huachuca Mountains in the southwest corner of the County. They are found in the Palominas/Hereford area between Sierra
Vista and Bisbee on both sides of Highway 92.c Grasslands can also be seen along Highway 82 approaching the boundary with Santa Cruz County. The San Simon/Bowie in the northeast corner of the County can also be considered grasslands.
All of these areas are zoned to allow development at a density of one house per four acres although under a density bonus option, used to encourage the formal subdivision process rather than uwildcat 11 land splits, the density can increase to one house per three acres. Much of this grassland is located on privately owned land.
The areas along Highways 90 and 82 are subject to the most development pressure.
Residential development, on forty acre splits that subsequently split down to four acre parcels as allowed by state law, is beginning to extend westward along Highway 82 from the Whetstone area.
Along Highway 90, a similar trend of development is occurring at an even faster pace.
Additionally, a 7,000 acre tract of land was sold several years ago which is now developing; two subdivisions have been approved, with a total of 156 three acre lots; and the remainder of the land has been divided into 160 acre parcels some of which are being surveyed into forty acre parcels and advertised or sale as five, eight acre parcels which could then be further split into two more four acre parcels by new owners.
During the recent update to the Comprehensive Plan, it was clear that the rural, open character of the County, including the wide open grasslands, was cherished by longtime and recent residents like. The question asked was 11 Can this character be retained 11
•
The response an adamant 11 Yes but voluntarily!~~ Given this response, County Regulations include three methods for property owners and developers to voluntarily retain more open space on their land.
The first is the subdivision cluster option, which was recently opted allowing developers in the rural areas to cluster housing at a higher density on part of the site, leaving the remaining property in natural vegetation and open space to be used for passive recreation, such as hiking and horseback riding, or retained in agricultural use.
The second is voluntarily downzoning from smaller lot sizes to larger lot sizes; this option has been used by developers to help guarantee that buyers of thirty-six acre or larger
II rural lifestyle .. parcels do not find neighboring parcels split into postage stamp lots. No fee is charged for this action.
Third, the
offers property owners the opportunity to establish
on their own property, to protect significant resources such as untouched grasslands, stands of oak trees or washes that serve as wildlife corridors .
In addition to options found in the regulations, also available, are options which fall outside the realm of County jurisdiction such as private deed restrictions and conservation easements.
344

CONCLUSION
The provision under State law that allows dividing of land into five separate lots by an individual owner down to the minimum lot size allowed by zoning means that much of land development in the county occurs outside of our jurisdiction. Clearly, to preserve cultural resources and retain some regulatory control, the County could rezone the rural areas to larger lot sizes thereby, for example, requiring minimum lot sizes of thirty-six acres. In the current climate with heightened concern over violating property rights, the County Board of Supervisors does not support such voluntary downzonings. Given this reality and the steady residential growth in the County, it seems most likely that the grasslands will be developed in four acre parcels each with its own house, fence, driveway, corral and swing set unless other innovative measures are found or property owners take advantage of existing options.
345