BISBEE — Though a rezoning request was advertised correctly at the county offices and in the newspaper, the Cochise County Board of Supervisors chose to table the item since it was listed as an action item and not a public hearing on the supervisors’ agenda.

During Tuesday’s meeting applicants Sgt. Christopher and Sonja Schultz asked for a downzoning on a lot they are planning to buy that is smaller than the current zoning allows.

The lot was split years ago illegally and has been vacant since that time at the corner of Piette Drive and De Mello Street. The area is zoned TR-36 (transitional residential with a minimum lot size of 36,000 square feet), but the lot is 26,136 square feet. In order for the Schultzes to be able to develop the property for a home, they needed to have it rezoned to TR-18 (transitional residential, minimum lot size of 18,000 square feet).

Planner Keith Dennis said there was the possibility the spot zoning could lead to more requests.

“The lot split was recorded, but there was no cross-check for lot size and zoning. The Planning and Zoning Department was not in the loop on the split,” he told the supervisors.

Supervisor Paul Newman said he had problems with spot zoning and had been told by the former deputy county attorney John MacKinnon that all spot zoning was illegal. He asked the legal staff draw up an opinion stating the basis of the determination that since the rezoning was only allowing a home in a residential neighborhood it would be legal.

Deputy County Attorney Britt Hanson said the regulations against spot zoning only prevent those that would be incompatible with current uses.

“If you put a grocery store in a residential neighborhood, that would be illegal. But, if the zoning is compatible like this one where there is a smaller lot in a residential neighborhood, it would not be illegal, but would be a policy decision made by the board,” said Hanson via cell phone.

The supervisors heard comments from residents near the property and will consider those comments when the rezoning request comes back before the board. Two letters of opposition to the rezoning have been received by the planning department, Dennis said.

The matter will be addressed again at a future supervisors’ meeting, and a public hearing will be held during that meeting. It was noted the supervisors had to make a unanimous decision on the rezoning request.

A procedural matter concerning wording that was excluded from an amendment to a contract with Dibble and Associates that increases the cost of services from $360,103 to $717,849 for additional work that needs to be done to deal with road and drainage improvements in the Babocomari Road and Traffic Signal District. Omitted from the amendment was the “not to exceed” clause.

That was added back in, and when the vote was taken, board Chairman Richard Searle and Supervisor Pat Call voted in favor, but Newman cast his vote in opposition. Newman said he was wary of committing the county to such an amount in uncertain times due to the home market crisis even though the county is expected to recoup the sum through bonds and property assessments. There is also the possibility of placing liens on the properties involved to cover the county outlay if the development goes belly-up.

The supervisors also agreed to allow Gayland Davis, the Heavy Fleet Management Department manager, to put out bids to rent equipment the county does not need year-round. That equipment includes bulldozers, back hoes, road scraper, water truck, dump truck and a compactor for the county landfill. This machinery is used seasonally in some cases and is needed for backup when county equipment needs repair.

The companies that will lease the equipment to the county are J. S. Cole Co., ECCO Equipment Corp., Empire Machinery, Hertz Equipment Rental Corp., Neff Rental Inc., Rental Service Center, Road Machinery LLC and Tucson Tractor Co. The equipment will be leased on an as-needed basis and is expected to cost $182,000.