02.BA260067 BOA Staff Report

Report to the Board of Adjustment
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case: BA260067 – King Property Variance
Hearing Date: September 17, 2026
Supervisor District: 4
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Applicant: Spencer Ellingson, P.E., Site Engineers LLC
Property Owner: Brad King
Request: Variance to the development standard of the Maricopa County Zoning
Ordinance to permit:
1) A proposed 16’ front setback where 40’ is the minimum permitted
Site Location: 19236 W Audrey Ln, Surprise, AZ 85387 (APN 503-78-966), approximately 1
mile north of W Jomax Rd in the Surprise area
Site Size: Approx. 1.67 acres (72,960 sq. ft.)
Current Use / Zoning: Existing single-family residence / Rural-43
Open Violation: N/A
Background:
1. January 22, 2026: The owner acquires the property via MCR20260072029.
2. January 30, 2026: Permit BLDR2506971 is finalled for an existing single-family residence at a 40’
front setback with the ingress/egress easement at the south of the property ending at the
driveway of the subject property. This shortens the front setback north of the easement itself but
the easements ends prior to the homesite and proposed garage.
3. August 17, 2026: Application for the subject variance proposing a detached garage at a proposed
16’ front setback.

Existing On-Site and Surrounding Zoning/Land Use:
4. On-site: Rural-43 – Existing single-family residence
North: Rural-43 – Vacant
South: Rural-43 – Vacant
East: Rural-43 – Vacant
West: Rural-43 – Single-family residence
Variance Request:
5. The primary constraint on this property is the FEMA Flood Zone AE designation across the
northern and eastern portions of the parcel, which limits the buildable area available for a
detached garage. Arguably the floodplain pushes site development southwestward and closer to
the street at front of the lot. The applicant proposes to reduce the required front yard setback
from 40 feet to 16 feet to site the garage outside the flood zone.
Excerpt from proposed site plan facing north
Site Analysis:
6. The subject property is a 1.67-acre parcel located at 19236 W Audrey Ln in the Surprise area. The
parcel is developed with an existing single-family residence. The south property line is
encumbered by a recorded 16-foot private ingress/egress and public utility easement (MCR
20250479252), and the eastern and northern portions of the parcel are within FEMA Flood Zone
AE.
Page 2 of 7

Aerial of the site with the existing flood map shown.
Aerial image & surrounding environs
Page 3 of 7

Zoning District map
Zoning District Standard:
7. 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 Rural-43 Proposed with
Zoning Variance
District
Min. Front Yard Setback (residence to south property line) 40-feet 16-feet
Note: Standards indicated in bold do not meet base zoning standards
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.”
Page 4 of 7

8. 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.
"The subject property (APN 503-78-966) is located at 19236 W Audrey Ln, Surprise, AZ 85387 in
unincorporated Maricopa County. The peculiar condition on this property is the existence of a
recorded private ingress/egress and public utility easement (Audrey Lane, 16' wide, MCR
20250479252) that runs along and extends 20 ft into the southern boundary of the property. Per
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance, because this private access easement is only 16 ft wide, the
southern boundary is designated as the 'front' of the property, imposing a 40-foot front yard setback
requirement (MCZO Chapter 2 / applicable residential district standards). The existing single-family
home on the property has already been constructed and is located outside the 40-foot front yard
setback area and outside of the 30 ft side yard. In addition, the eastern portion of the parcel is
located within FEMA Flood Zone AE, which further constrains the buildable area of the lot and limits
the options available to the property owner for placing structures in compliance with setback
requirements. The combination of the flood zone, the easement-defined front yard, and the existing
construction creates an irregular and constrained condition unique to this parcel. Strict
enforcement of the 40-foot front yard setback standard, along with the Flood Zone AE limit the
owner's ability to build a detached garage, which constitutes an unnecessary hardship on the
property owner."
9. 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.
"The unnecessary hardship is created by the pre-existing private access easement (Audrey Lane,
MCR 20250479252) that was recorded prior to the current ownership of the property. This
easement is not self-created by the current property owner; rather, it is an existing encumbrance in
the chain of title that was established by a prior recorded instrument. The easement's extension
along and into the southern property line triggers the County's designation of the south boundary
as the 'front' yard under MCZO standards, thereby imposing a 40-foot setback that the existing
home cannot satisfy. Because the hardship arises from the configuration of a pre-existing recorded
easement and the placement of the existing home, and the Flood Zone — not from any voluntary
act by the current owner — the peculiar condition is not self-created. The property owner purchased
the parcel subject to this easement, and the resulting front yard setback conflict was inherent in
the land at the time of purchase."
10. 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.
"Granting a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 40 feet to 16 feet would not cause a
negative impact on the general intent and purpose of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. The
intent of front yard setback requirements is to maintain adequate separation between structures
Page 5 of 7

and rights-of-way, preserve sight lines, and protect the character of residential neighborhoods. The
proposed 16-foot setback still achieves these objectives while accommodating the peculiar
easement and flood zone conditions on this lot. The Audrey Lane access easement itself is a private
road — not a public right-of-way — and the reduced setback does not compromise public safety or
access. Neighboring properties and the general character of the area would not be adversely
affected, as the existing house footprint and site layout will remain unchanged. The variance is the
minimum relief necessary to allow the property to be used in a manner consistent with its
residential purpose."
Findings:
11. 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
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.
12. Based upon what the applicant has submitted and the staff analysis in this report, staff offers the
following observations the Board may consider in its findings:
• The floodplain in of itself is not necessarily a peculiar condition. Several surrounding lots
are also subject to floodplain. It is possible for structures to be built within the floodplain.
• However, the eastern and northern portions of the lot are subject to floodplain and it is
pragmatic to push site development toward the southwestern portion of the lot.
• The property is already developed with a single-family residence. The garage can be sited
closer to the residence, or attached to the residence, and remain out of the floodplain,
albeit at potentially a lesser size.
13. 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 16-foot minimum front (south) setback line for APN 503-
78-966.
Page 6 of 7

Presented by: Joel Landis, Planner
Reviewed by: Darren V. Gérard, AICP, Planning Manager
Attachments: Case Map (1 page)
Site Plan (1 page)
Application / Supplemental Questionnaire (2 pages)
Page 7 of 7

Application Name: BRAND KING VARIANCE ACCESSORY.
Legal Description
Applicant Applicant Phone/Email
(480) 489-4450
Spencer John Ellingson
BA260067
Case Address Parcel Primary:503-78-966
19236 W AUDREY LN SURPRISE, AZ 85387
SURPRISE, AZ 85387
Generated August 26, 2026 3:48 PM Gross Acres: 2 approx. Map scale 1:818
Supervisor District No. 4
VARIANCE FOR A REDUCTION OF SETBACKS FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
/
Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ

SITE
’
’
‐
- ‐ VICINITY MAP
-
-
- -
-
19236 W AUDREY LN APN: 503-78-966
SURPRISE 85387
per permit
#BLDR2506971
LEGEND
- - -
new garage in here,
a 30'x50' shop
T.B.M. 16 ft off S PL
EL.=1440.56 30 ft east of the
house
16 ft driveway around
the shop
door on west side
MCR 20250479252
4.00' P.W.L.E.
MCR 20250479252
8.00' P.U.E. AA
MCR 20250479252
16.00' I.E.E. & P.U.E.
MCR 20250479252
EX. 16.00' I.E.E. & P.U.E.
1763 E EVERGREEN ST
MESA, ARIZONA 85203
TEL:480-489-4450
EMAIL: Spencer@theSiteEngineers.com
BB

RESIDENTIAL VARIANCE SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE
ARS §11-816 B.2
The Board of Adjustment may allow a variance from the terms of the ordinance when, owing to peculiar
conditions, a strict interpretation would work an unnecessary hardship, if in granting such variance the
general intent and purposes of the zoning ordinance will be preserved.
1. 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 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 Regulation(s) or Development Standard(s) would impose
a hardship on the property.
The subject property (APN 503-78-966) is located at 19236 W Audrey Ln, Surprise, AZ 85387 in unincorporated Maricopa County. The
peculiar condition on this property is the existence of a recorded private ingress/egress and public utility easement (Audrey Lane, 16' wide,
MCR 20250479252) that runs along and extends 20 ft into the southern boundary of the property. Per Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance,
because this private access easement is only 16 ft wide, the southern boundary is designated as the 'front' of the property, imposing a 40-
foot front yard setback requirement (MCZO Chapter 2 / applicable residential district standards).
The existing single-family home on the property has already been constructed and is located outside the 40-foot front yard setback area
and outside of the 30 ft side yard. In addition, the eastern portion of the parcel is located within FEMA Flood Zone AE, which further
constrains the buildable area of the lot and limits the options available to the property owner for placing structures in compliance with
setback requirements. The combination of the flood zone, the easement-defined front yard, and the existing construction creates an
irregular and constrained condition unique to this parcel.
Strict enforcement of the 40-foot front yard setback standard, along with the Flood Zone AE limit the owner's ability to build a detached
garage, which constitutes an unnecessary hardship on the property owner.
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.
The unnecessary hardship is created by the pre-existing private access easement (Audrey Lane, MCR 20250479252) that was recorded
prior to the current ownership of the property. This easement is not self-created by the current property owner; rather, it is an existing
encumbrance in the chain of title that was established by a prior recorded instrument. The easement's extension along and into the
southern property line triggers the County's designation of the south boundary as the 'front' yard under MCZO standards, thereby
imposing a 40-foot setback that the existing home cannot satisfy.
Because the hardship arises from the configuration of a pre-existing recorded easement and the placement of the existing home, and the
Flood Zone — not from any voluntary act by the current owner — the peculiar condition is not self-created. The property owner purchased
the parcel subject to this easement, and the resulting front yard setback conflict was inherent in the land at the time of purchase. The
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance's strict application of the 40-foot setback to this property, given its unique easement configuration and
flood zone constraints, works an unnecessary hardship that is disproportionate to the intended purpose of the setback standard. Not
allowing for the construction of a detached garage.
Planning & Development Department Residential Variance Application Packet
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 12/2/24
P: 602.506.3301

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.
Granting a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 40 feet to 16 feet would not cause a negative impact on the general intent
and purpose of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. The intent of front yard setback requirements is to maintain adequate
separation between structures and rights-of-way, preserve sight lines, and protect the character of residential neighborhoods. The
proposed 16-foot setback still achieves these objectives while accommodating the peculiar easement and flood zone conditions on this
lot.
The proposed setback represents a 24-foot reduction from the required 40-foot standard, matching the location shown on the stamped
grading and drainage site plan. The Audrey Lane access easement itself is a private road — not a public right-of-way — and the
reduced setback does not compromise public safety or access. Neighboring properties and the general character of the area would not
be adversely affected, as the existing house footprint and site layout will remain unchanged. The variance is the minimum relief
necessary to allow the property to be used in a manner consistent with its residential purpose. For these reasons, approval of the
requested variance is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. Granting of the variance would allow for the
construction of a detached garage outside of the most severe influence of the flood way.
*Additional sheets may be attached.
** DO NOT USE THIS FORM IF YOU ARE SUBMITTING AN INTERPRETATION
Planning & Development Department
Residential Variance Application Packet
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 6/17/24
P: 602.506.3301