10.BA260051 BOA Staff Report

Maricopa County — Board of Adjustment (2026-06-18)

View PDF Item 10 Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 17381 characters

Report to the Board of Adjustment
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department

Case:

BA260051 –Oswalt Property

Hearing Date:

June 18, 2026

Supervisor District:

2
____________________________________________________________________________________________

Applicant/Property Owner:
Robert Oswalt

Requests:
Variance to the development standards of the Maricopa County Zoning
Ordinance to permit:

1)
32% coverage in the required rear yard where 30% is the maximum
permitted per Article 602.3.5.A
2)
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) of 1,176 sq ft that exceeds the allowable
size of 75% of the primary dwelling unit or 1,000 sq. ft. whichever is less
on a parcel less than 1 acre per Article 602.3.3.B.

Site Location:
APN 218-29-096 @ 139 S. 83rd Pl. in the east Mesa area

Site Size:

12,057 sq. ft.

Current Use / Zoning:
Residential / R1-6

Open Violation:
V2600433

Background:

1.
circa 1947: Subject parcel is created as lot #14 of the Palo Verde Vista subdivision plat.

2.
February 13, 2024: Current owner takes possession of the subject property.

3.
February 25, 2026: Property owner applies for primary residence under BLDR2601524.

4.
February 26, 2026: Property owner applies then withdraws ADU permit BLDR2601545.

5.
March 18, 2026: Property owner is notified of violation V2600433 for two manufactured homes
moved onto property without issued building permits.

6.
May 12, 2026: Primary residence building permit BLDR2601524 is approved.

7.
May 19, 2026: Subject variance request filed for a future Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) proposed
at the rear of the property.

Existing On-Site and Surrounding Zoning/Land Use:

8.
On-site:
R1-6 / Primary residence & unpermitted ADU

North:
R1-6 / Single Family Residence

Page 2 of 7

South:
R1-6 / Single Family Residence
East:

R-5 / Manufactured Home Park (Twin Knolls)

West:
83rd Pl then R1-6 / Single Family Residence

Variance Request:

9.
The applicant is requesting an increase in allowable rear yard lot coverage for a detached ADU
located at the rear of the property where 30% is the limit per MCZO Section 602.3.5.A along with
a second request to increase the maximum size allowance for a future ADU of 1,176 sq ft where
an ADU is limited to 1,000 sq ft. The primary residence is 1,536 sq ft of livable area and the
proposed ADU is 1,176 sq ft livable area. The proposed rear lot coverage, including awnings, will
be approximately 32%.

Excerpt from proposed site plan

Page 3 of 7

Current Site Condition

Site Analysis:

10.
The property is unencumbered by any natural detriment to development. The property is within
an established subdivision with fully developed infrastructure.

Aerial photo of subject site

Page 4 of 7

Aerial image & surrounding environs

Eagle view of subject site looking north into subject parcel (aerial image dated 3/1/2025).

Page 5 of 7

Zoning District map

Zoning District Standards:

11.
The following table is included to illustrate and contrast the standards for the underlying zoning
district with those proposed by the owner (Note: changes to proposed standards are indicated in
bold).

Standard

R1-6 Zoning District
Proposed with
Variance
Min. Front Yard Setback (residence from western
property line)
10’
10’
Min. Rear Yard Setback (residence from eastern
property line)
25’
25’
Maximum Lot Coverage
50%
50%
Maximum Height
35’
35’
Minimum Lot Area
6,000-sq. ft.
6,000-sq.ft.
Minimum Lot Width
60’
60’
Rear Yard Lot Coverage
30%
32%
Accessory Dwelling Unit Maximum Size on a
parcel less than 1 acre
ADU limited to 75% of
the primary dwelling
unit or 1,000 sq. ft.
whichever is less
(Limitation of 1,000
sq. ft.)
ADU 1,416 sq.
ft.

Note: Standards indicated in bold do not meet base zoning standards

Page 6 of 7

State Statute / County Zoning Ordinance Tests - ARS § 11-816.B.2 and MCZO Article 303.2.2 states the
Board of Adjustment may, “Allow a variance from the terms of the ordinance if, owing to peculiar
conditions, a strict interpretation would work an unnecessary hardship and if in granting the variance the
general intent and purposes of the zoning ordinance will be preserved.”

12.
Statutory Test -1 Does the applicant’s property contain any peculiar condition– Discuss and
explain what is/are the peculiar conditions facing the property and include reference to the
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance Regulations or Development Standards to be varied.

“Changes to Zoning Ordinances @ time of application”

13.
Statutory Test 2 – Does applying the requirements of the Ordinance to the applicant’s property
create an Unnecessary Hardship – Explain how the peculiar condition identified in #1 causes an
unnecessary hardship to the property when the requirements of the Maricopa County Zoning
Ordinance are applied. Explain how the that the peculiar condition of the property came to be and
whether the condition was created by the applicant or someone in the property’s line of title.
Explain the proposed use of the property with the variance request. Identify and explain all
peculiar conditions on your property in regard to the following areas: slope, narrowness,
shallowness, irregular shape, location, washes, vegetation, and easements, etc. Explain how
enforcement of the Zoning Regulations or Development Standards would impose a hardship on
the property.

“Change to Zoning Ordinance @ time of application. No one person @ Maricopa County had
knowledge that ADU need to be a 1000 sqft or 75% of main dwelling. All (5) differant conversation
told me 75% of main dwelling.”

14.
Statutory Test 3 – General Intent and Purpose of the Zoning Ordinance – Discuss the purpose
of the zoning requirement from which the variance is being sought. Then, discuss and explain
how, provided statutory tests #1 and #2 are satisfied, the granting of the requested variance
would preserve the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance.

“Only 158 sq ft off percent overage in rear of lot. Livable is minimum overage is awnings.”

Findings:

15.
The applicant has the burden of proving to the Board that, in accordance with the standard set
forth in ARS §11-816.B.2 and MCZO Article 303.2.2, the property requires a variance. To grant the
relief, the applicant must prove, and the Board must find and identify, a physical condition of the
applicant’s property that is peculiar and not common to the area or the universe of the zoning
district. Also, any such peculiarity must not have been created either by the applicant or anyone
in the chain of title. If the Board determines that there is no such peculiar physical condition, its
inquiry stops, and the application must be denied.

If the Board identifies a peculiar physical condition of the applicant’s property which is not self-
imposed, then the applicant must prove, and the Board must find and identify, an unnecessary
hardship imposed upon the property due to the strict application of the requirements of the zoning
ordinance which the applicant wishes to have varied such that there is no viable use of the
property without the variance.

If the Board identifies a peculiar physical condition of the property which is not self-imposed, and
that in applying the requirements of the zoning ordinance to the property, because of the peculiar
physical condition, an unnecessary hardship exists, the applicant must prove, and the Board must

Page 7 of 7
find and identify, how the granting of the variance will preserve the general intent and purpose of
the zoning ordinance.
In order to approve the variance the Board must make findings and articulate them in motion
memorializing the above.
16.
Based upon what the applicant has submitted and the staff analysis in this report, staff offers the
following positive and/or negative observations the Board may consider in its findings:
•
Staff cannot identify a peculiar condition of the lot that when presented with application of
the zoning ordinance standards prevents reasonable development of the property. The parcel
is in an improved subdivision with complete infrastructure with no encumbrances to the lot.
The parcel is reasonably sized to accommodate standard manufactured homes within R1-6
development standards. The applicant applied for his building permits after the
implementation of the updated Zoning Ordinance on January 9, 2026.
17.
And further, if the Board finds the applicant has satisfied the statutory test, and has stated its
findings on the record, the grant of this variance will memorialize the following:
a)
Variance approval establishes a rear lot coverage of 32% for APN 218-29-096.
b)
Variance approval establishes a maximum ADU size of 1,176 sq ft livable area for APN
218-29-096.
Presented by:
Reviewed by:
Attachments:
Daniel Johnson, Planner
Darren V. Gérard, AICP, Planning Manager
Case Map (1 page)
Application / Supplemental Questionnaire (6 pages)
Site Plan (1 page)

/
Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ
2
Gross Acres: 0 approx.
Generated May 29, 2026 1:42 PM
BA260051
Application Name:
Legal Description
Rob Oswalt
Applicant
Case Address
1N-7E-20
Angie K Couden
139 S 83RD PL MESA, AZ 85208
Applicant Phone/Email
Parcel Primary:218-29-096
6022921308
MESA, AZ 85208
Map scale 1:366
Supervisor District No.
Change to zoning ordinance at time of application

,ii
fLry
MAR}COPA
COUNTY
RESIDENTIAL VARIANCE
PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION
APPLICATION FORM
TION AND ARE NON.REFUNDABLE
Description of Request:
Existing Zoning District and Use of
Related Case Number(s):
PROPERTY INFORMA'
General Location (include nearesi cilv/t
Size in Acres:
LegalDescription:' '
sectlon:
Assessor's Parcel Number(s):
Subdivision Name (if aPPlicable):
ls this subject property within an area of 15% or greater hilldide slopes? Yes
Name:
Address:
City
Phone #:
Narrie:
Ad dress:
City:
Phone #:
I (property owner) l/g
^ fJ: . ^:\--
-.
authorize (applicant's name)
wrtfr waricopa County. By signing this form 4(the prdEetr:*:,e'l%**:,]:
to file this application qh afl
.;,j;;;"";;'.;;.;iiJ;fr,-l;.hffi;e.a;;i;,;lbytheMaricopaCountyeoaroot,supe1l.."w'n^:.1,,:::::
;;;ilJril, "iirr.i:i."pl-i*;;i1;;;;;s
;n,r-o.i,ul"p#.irt Deparrment staff as applicable, as part of anv,approial offis request, includins
conditions, development agreemlnts, andTor any other requirement that may encumber or otherwise affect the use of my propefty'
The propeny owner acknowledges that the approval being sought by this application may cause a reduction in the existinq rights to use,
divide, sell or possess the private property that is the .un1""t o1 thii application. The property owner further a:flYl:,99::I1:l:]:,t!:
prop"ity owner who has reqqgsted the action sought by thl tiling of this application. Therefore, with full knowledge of all rights granted to
the property owner pursuani toAn-s.Srf1"-X 321hr9Jgh{1 3B,the property ownerdoes hereby waive .Ly 19-rll claims for diminution in
value of the property with reg&GlD{"tion\uffiH/u\opu County as result of the filing-6f this application
property owner sisnatu r",
_=_- Date: 5l' I l>t"
staff to conduct all site inspections
permits granted by M
the statements in this application
upon the trtrthfulness of these statemdnts
owne *
ihorized Agent Signature:
ARS S 1605 TIMEFRAME EXTENSION
review of my applicatiotr as
by the Board of Supervisors per ARS $
-l 605
t
Planning & Developtnent Department
301 W. Jeffersotl St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizorra 85003
P: 602.506.330 I
Residential Variance Application Packet
1212124
218-29-096

1.
RESI DENTIAL VARIANCE SUPPLEM ENTAL QUESTIONNAI RE
ARS 511-816 8.2
The Board of Adjustment may allow a variance from the terrns of the ordinance when, owing to peculiar
conditions, a strict interpretition wauld work an unnecessary hardship, if in granting such variance the
generallntent and purposes of the zoning ordinance will be preserved.
please discuss and explain what is/are the peculiar condition(s) facing the property and include reference to the
Maricopa County Zoning ordinance Regulation(s) or Development Standard(s) to be varied. Explain the proposed
use of it,. prop.rty withlhe variance request. tdentify and explain all peculiar conditions on your property in regard
to the foliowing areas: slope, narrowness, shallowness, irregular shape, location, washes, vegetation, and
easements, etc. Explain how enforcement of the Zoning Regulation(s) or Development Standard(s) would impose
a hardship on the property.
Me1,ra vD tulty 6tlDr
ryfl ,e-n'T7.n^J.<
I
l*F-W
2.
please explain the unnecessary hardship the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance creates because of a peculiar
condition/the peculiar conditions on site. Please discuss and explain that the peculiar condition of the property is
not self-created in the line of title.
A T, 'L*tb0fnrfk"rdfu @-TN-IE-
ffi,h.a T{trp*'",
U-A
ytfiI)
l+D (n^)l6Ar""7tT *t! !Y,
" kll
ll^fiN
k,4
@L^l 0Nltrt>qp- 'Itrya frYt
loqei&Wl{%,af /,!4 ffilm1
Dlffi;IT Gililre,^i-\s) TDLD NL 1;% dF
rl,,
--l
Planning & Development Department
30'1 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizona 85003
P:602.506.3301
Residential Variance Application Packet
1212124

3. please discuss and explain how the granting of the requested variance would not cause a negative impact on
the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance.
*Additional sheets may be attached.
** DO NOT USE THIS FORM IF YOU ARE SUBMITTING AN INTERPRETATION
d etu#fL€r. brlr*Au
;*,,^;
yrft*l,tu t> rtau'Nt'vt ;
\"
Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizolla 85003
P:602.506.3301
Residential Variance Application Packet
6117 /24

: i..: '.: '
'l39,SoUTFl 83rd ptAeE
MESA AZ 85208
I
218-29-096
PALO VERDE VISTA
LOT,I4
LOT SF
12057
24X49 MFt
,t{76 SF
24X64 MH
't536 SF
206tf
mew w<lod
fene ing
20OAMP Electric
L(Ir
COVERAGE
?.2.4"/"
SCAI.E
4"aZA'
ivt
ASPHALI'
U)
utE
H,
6)
@
N
0t!
tx
F
ao|
.o
:'o
Eq
(\
*'--' - '^- |
lrc I
a
< B'0" I
t< 24'0" > -
LJ
i>
I
I
t- t*-].
i
l-l
lac I
ll^
iffu I a zaxas
t"
tv MH
.
|il, lvaeove
| ru | GRoUND
Ir\
lo
I
L_,* *, .-
i.l lrlla\-
f;-l
iTIl.l/---
>1""k24'o'>: I kil'o"F ,.
---- .---
'-.ts:r-.---- in
L"",,*"lu-*il
l^'o*s":'*".1,'lto
l; r1:#
Lru
GRAVI:
.+.---.---. , lir
r I
<Bo'o';
rl
i-rL.E B3rd Flace-..,
aee---
t;i,
li,,lri:
ii

E 83rd Place
150' 3"
80' 0"
15' 0"
218-29-114E MHP
218-29-095 RES
218-29-097 RES
139 SOUTH 83 LLC
139 SOUTH 83rd PLACE
MESA AZ 85208
218-29-096
PALO VERDE VISTA
LOT 14
LOT SF
12057
24X49 MH
1176 SF
24X64 MH
1536 SF
206lf
new wood
fencing
LOT
COVERAGE
22.4%
SCALE
1"=20'
24X49
MH
ABOVE
GROUND
24' 0"
49' 0"
10' 0"
33' 0"
8
X
49
ALU
M
A
W
N
I
N
G
8' 0"
49' 0"
10
X
49
ALUM
AWN
10' 0"
49' 0"
5' 0"
GAS
E
A/C
24 X 64 MH
ABOVE GROUND
SET
24' 0"
64' 0"
10' 0"
15' 0"
10
X
64
ALUM
AWNIN
G
10' 0"
64' 0"
11 X 64
ALUM
AWNIN
G
11' 0"
64' 0"
E
W
W
W
GRAVEL
DW
25' 0"
AC
NEW 6' WOOD FENCE
EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE
A SPHALT EDGE
11' 0"
5' 0"
10' 0"
10' 0"
12' 0"
636' 4 1/8"
42' 1 5/16"
15' 1 5/16"
Home and awnings are 31.8% of the
rear yard setback
BA260051 RCVD 5/21/26
45
N