04.BA260074 BOA Report

Report to the Board of Adjustment
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case: BA260074 – Bales Property
Hearing Date: October 15, 2026
Supervisor District: 5
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Applicant: Trevor Bales
Property Owner: TIRM Properties LLC
Request: Variance to the development standard of the Maricopa County Zoning
Ordinance to permit:
1) Proposed side yard (south) setback of 5’ where 20’ is the minimum
permitted per MCZO Section 502
Site Location: APN 504-21-503A @ 2521 S 215th Dr – 215th Dr. and Lower Buckeye Rd.,
in the Buckeye area
Site Size: 1-acre
Current Use / Zoning: Single-family residence / RU-43
Open Violation: None
Background:
1. Circa 2005: Parcel created via unregulated lot-split.
2. May 11, 2010: Current owner takes possession of the subject property.
3. c.2024: The subject 1,953 sq.ft. carport structure appears on the property as evidence by aerial
photography.
4. August 1, 2025: Owner submits building permit for a swimming pool. He is notified the existing
permit is unpermitted.
5. July 9, 2025: Owner submits permit for the as-built carport. He is notified the carport fails to meet
the minimum required 20’ side (south) setback.
6. August 18, 2026: The subject variance request is submitted.
Existing On-Site and Surrounding Zoning/Land Use:
7. On-site: Rural-43 / Single-family residence
North: Rural-43 / Single-family residence
South: Rural-43 / Single-family residence
East: City of Buckeye (Planned Residential) / Field Crops

West: Rural-43 / Single-family residence
Variance Request:
8. The applicant is requesting a variance to the side yard (south) setback regulation to
accommodate an unpermitted carport structure of 1,953 sq ft. As evidenced in historic aerial
photography, the carport first appears circa 2024 setback approximately 6’-3” from the south lot
line. The variance request is a reduction in the minimum required side yard from 20’ to 5’. Although
not attached to the primary residence, the structure hangs over the primary residence,
contributing to primary residence footprint. The structure’s highest vertical point is 16’-8” and
overhangs 3’-10” over the existing garage entry of the primary residence. The vertical distance
between the overhang and the top of the garage is 4’8”. The intent of this overhang is to create a
covered entry for the front of the garage door.
9. A detached, accessory structure if not located within the required front yard may have limited
encroachment into the required side and rear yards. The limitation is that they must be setback
at least 3’ from side and rear lot lines and the required yard coverage is limited to no more than
30%. Staff’s interpretation of detached is that the structure/building is structurally detached form
the primary building and does not have overlapping roof or eave.
Excerpt from proposed site plan
Page 2 of 10

Overhang Detail Highlighted
Section of the carport
Page 3 of 10

Photographs of subject structure
Page 4 of 10

Page 5 of 10

Site Analysis:
10. The site is within an area of unregulated lot-splits that carved up a farm. The subject property is
one acre and is accessed off of 215th Dr via private ingress / egress easements. City of Buckeye
jurisdiction is adjacent to the immediate east of the parcel. The property appears to be irrigated.
There are no natural conditions, topography or other physical constraints that appear to affect
development of the lot.
2026 Aerial photo of subject site
Page 6 of 10

Aerial image & surrounding environs
Page 7 of 10

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 Rural-43 Proposed with
Zoning Variance
District
Min. Front Yard Setback (residence to west property line) 40-feet n/a
Min. Rear Yard Setback (residence to east property line) 40-feet n/a
Min. Side Yard Setback (residence to south property line) 20-feet 5-feet
Maximum Height 30-feet n/a
Minimum Lot Area 43,560-sq. ft. n/a
Minimum Lot Width 145-feet n/a
Max. Lot Coverage 25% n/a
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 8 of 10

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.
“The subject property is burdened by the required setback per Section 502. Rural & Residential
Zoning Districts Development Standards zoning RU-43 (20 ft) and Section 903.1.4 for the distance
required (10 ft) between detached accessory structures, which encroaches the interior-side yard
building setback. The request seeks a variance from the MCZO Section 502 development standards
to reduce the required interior-side yard setback from 10 ft for accessory structures or 20 ft for
main building to 5 ft minimum, specifically for the existing detached covered carport. The required
setback prevents the essential covered vehicular parking and weather protection adjacent to the
existing residential footprint, as relocating the structure elsewhere on the parcel is constrained by
the existing driveway placement.“
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.
“Strict compliance with the interior-side yard setback creates an unnecessary hardship by depriving
the property owner of a reasonable residential use, specifically, covered vehicle protection that is
commonly enjoyed by surrounding properties in the same zoning district. This condition is inherent
to the physical configuration and original layout of the lot and primary dwelling, which was
established in the line of title prior to current construction needs. The hardship stems directly from
these pre-existing site constraints rather than a self-created action.”
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.
“Granting the requested setback variance will preserve the general intent and spirit of the Maricopa
County Zoning Ordinance. The carport is open-sided, maintaining adequate light, air circulation, and
emergency access between properties. The structure does not obstruct sight lines, encroaches
towards an adjacent property line without negatively impacting neighboring drainage patterns, and
maintains a harmonious visual character consistent with the surrounding residential development.”
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.
Page 9 of 10

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.
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 is unable to identify a peculiar condition facing the property that when the ordinance
requirement is applied creates an undue physical hardship not self-created that prevents
reasonable development of the property. In fact the property is developed with a single-
family residence and a pool that complies with setbacks and other ordinance
requirements.
 The carport was erected by the property owner without benefit of an issued permit
authorizing the work. This condition is self-created.
 There are alternatives available such as modifying the construction so that it is neither
structurally attached to the primary building nor of an overlapping roof/eave. In such
instance the subject carport would be considered a detached accessory structure
permitted at a minimum 3’ side setback.
 Granting of the variance would not preserve the intent of the zoning ordinance in that the
property is already developed with a single-family residence as the primary use.
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 minimum 5’ side (south) setback line for APN 504-21-
503A.
Presented by: Daniel Johnson, Planner
Reviewed by: Darren V. Gérard, AICP, Planning Manager
Attachments: Case Map (1 page)
Application / Supplemental Questionnaire (3 pages)
Site Plan (1 page)
Page 10 of 10

Application Name: 215th Variance Application
Legal Description
1N-3W-13
Applicant Applicant Phone/Email
(623) 826-4818
Trevor Bales
BA260074
Case Address Parcel Primary:504-21-503A
2521 S 215TH DR BUCKEYE, AZ 85326
BUCKEYE, AZ 85326
Generated September 23, 2026 5:07 PM Gross Acres: 1 approx. Map scale 1:602
Supervisor District No. 5
The subject property is burdened by the required setback per Section 502. Rural & Residential Zoning
Districts Development Standards zoning RU-43 (20 ft) and Section 903.1.4 for the distance required (10 ft)
/
Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ

BA260074 RCVD 8/18/26
RESIDENTIAL VARIANCE
PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION
APPLICATION FORM
ALL FEES ARE DUE AT TIME OF APPLICATION AND ARE NON-REFUNDABLE
RESIDENTIAL VARIANCE REQUEST
Description of Request: Variance request to reduce the required interior-side yard setback, 20 ft to 5 ft.
Existing Zoning District and Use of Property: Zoning RU-43 Single-Family Residential
Related Case Number(s): BLDR2601275 - Plan Review
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Address (if known): 2521 S 215TH DR BUCKEYE AZ 85326
General Location (include nearest city/town): Unincorporated Maricopa County near Goodyear
Size in Acres: 1.00 Square Feet: 43,560.00
Legal Description: Section: 13 Township: 1 Range: 3
Assessor’s Parcel Number(s): 504-21-503A
Subdivision Name (if applicable): N/A
Is this subject property within an area of 15% or greater hillside slopes? Yes No ✔
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name: Trevor Bales Contact:
Address: 2521 S 215TH DR
City: Buckeye State: AZ Zip: 85326
Phone #: (623) 386-2988 Fax #:
E-mail Address:
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name: TIRM Properties Contact:
Address: 20600 W. Beloat Rd.,
City: Buckeye State: AZ Zip: 85326
Phone #: (623) 386-2988 Fax #:
E-mail Address:
PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT AUTHORIZATION
I I (property (property owner) owner) TIRM Properties, LLC authorize e (applicant’s (applicant’s name) name) Trevor Bales
to file this application on all matters relating to this request with Maricopa County. By signing this form as the property owner I hereby agree to
abide by any and all conditions that may be assigned by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, Maricopa County Planning and Zoning
Commission, or Maricopa County Planning and Development Department staff as applicable, as part of any approval of this request, including
conditions, development agreements, and/or any other requirement that may encumber or otherwise affect the use of my property.
PROPOSITION 207 WAIVER – SIGNATURE REQUIRED
The property owner acknowledges that the approval being sought by this application may cause a reduction in the existing rights to use,
divide, sell or possess the private property that is the subject of this application. The property owner further acknowledges that it is the
property owner who has requested the action sought by the filing of this application. Therefore, with full knowledge of all rights granted to
the property owner pursuant to A.R.S.§1§12-1132 through 1138, the property owner does hereby waive any and all claims for diminution in
value of the property with regard to any action taken by Maricopa County as result of the filing of this application.
Property Property Owner Owner Signature: Signature: Date: 8.18.2026
INSPECTIONS
By submitting this application, I am inviting County staff to conduct all site inspections they deem necessary.
VERIFICATION OF APPLICATION INFORMATION – SIGNATURE REQUIRED
I certify that the statements in this application and support material are true. Any approvals or permits granted by Maricopa County in reliance
upon the truthfulness of these statements may be revoked or rescinded.
Owner Owner or or Authorized Authorized Agent Agent Signature: Signature: Date: 08.18.2026
ARS § 1605 TIMEFRAME EXTENSION
I authorize a 50% timeframe extension for the review of my application as adopted by the Board of Supervisors per ARS § 1605 and as
amended.
Property Owner Signature: _________________________________________________________ Date: _08.18.2026_______________________
Planning & Development Department Residential Variance Application Packet
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 /24
P: 602.506.3301

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 is burdened by the required setback per Section 502. Rural & Residential Zoning Districts Development Standards
zoning RU-43 (20 ft) and Section 903.1.4 for the distance required (10 ft) between detached accessory structures, which encroaches the
interior-side yard building setback. The request seeks a variance from the MCZO Section 502 development standards to reduce the
required interior-side yard setback from 10 ft for accessory structures or 20 ft for main building to 5 ft minimum, specifically for the existing
detached covered carport. The required setback prevents the essential covered vehicular parking and weather protection adjacent to the
existing residential footprint, as relocating the structure elsewhere on the parcel is constrained by the existing driveway placement.
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.
Strict compliance with the interior-side yard setback creates an unnecessary hardship by depriving the property owner of a reasonable
residential use, specifically, covered vehicle protection that is commonly enjoyed by surrounding properties in the same zoning district.
This condition is inherent to the physical configuration and original layout of the lot and primary dwelling, which was established in the line
of title prior to current construction needs. The hardship stems directly from these pre-existing site constraints rather than a self-created
action.
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 the requested setback variance will preserve the general intent and spirit of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance. The
carport is open-sided, maintaining adequate light, air circulation, and emergency access between properties. The structure does not
obstruct sight lines, encroaches towards an adjacent property line without negatively impacting neighboring drainage patterns, and
maintains a harmonious visual character consistent with the surrounding residential development.
*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

(5/28/26)
APN: 504-21-503B
RESIDENTIAL USE COMMENTS
VICINITY MAP
PROPERTY LINE 244.22' COUNTY'S
PER
W YUMA RD
REVISED
3' ADUSL 5' RAIL FENCE
20' BSL
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WAY
SETBACK LINE (ADUSL) 6/6/2025
2521 S 215TH DR VERRADO
BUCKEYE AZ 85326 1
42'-10"
S
RD
PRIMARY BUILDING DEAN
SETBACK LINE (BSL) W LOWER BUCKEYE RD
S
11'-6"
6'-6" PARCEL INFORMATION CODE
RESERVE DISPOSAL PARCEL NUMBER: 504-21-503A
EGRESS 5'
FIELD
OWNER: TIRM PROPERTIES LLC
20'
/ DRIVEWAY 5'
ADDRESS 2521 S 215TH DR
10' 10' 10' BUCKEYE AZ 85326
INGRESS SUBDIVISION: N/A
21' PRIMARY DISPOSAL
41' 10'
A FIELD LOCAL JURISDICTION: MARICOPA COUNTY
5' RAIL FENCE
EXISTING ZONING: RU-43
26'-6" 45'
RESIDENCE
1250 GALLON LOT NUMBER: N/A
SEPTIC TANK 3'
ADUSL FRONT SETBACK: 40 FT
ADU SETBACK: 40 FT
USE USE
D 40' REAR SETBACK: 40 FT
BSL ADU SETBACK: 3 FT
504-21-503D 40' PATIO 504-21-004 SIDE SETBACK: 20 FT
BSL / ADUSL COVER ADU SETBACK: 3 FT
RESIDENTIAL EXISTING AGRICULTURE MCR: N/A
STR. #2
PATIO
APN: COVER 178.38' APN: FEMA FLOOD ZONE: X
46'-1"
23'-5" EXST.
08/16/26
PORCH
178.38' LINE
BUILDING AREA SCHEDULE
LINE 58'-2" 9'-6" AREA DESCRIPTION AREA
PROPERTY IDEAS, ARE
21' A EXISTING RESIDENCE INFORMATION BE VERIFIES THE
- 1ST FLOOR 1,941 SF TO CONSTRUCTION CORRECT
- COVERED PATIO 471 SF IS ALL HEREON OF THIS IS
16'-11" NOT
PROPERTY EXISTING - GARAGE 505 SF USER PLAN AND
EXISTING AND IS
UNPAVED RESIDENCE B EXISTING SHED 72 SF DRAWING COPYWRITTEN. PROPERTY FOR THE THIS
PRESENTED REGISTRANT.
DIRT DESIGNS DRAWING CURRENT VERSION.
DRIVEWAY EXISTING C CARPORT (STR #1) 1,953 SF THIS THE USED UNTIL THAT
25' 23'-6"±
GARAGE
D PATIO COVER (STR #2) 968 SF
52'-5" 3'-10"± LOT COVERAGE (A+B+C) 5,910 SF
12'-9"
6'
POOL LOT SIZE 43,560 SF
LOT COVERAGE (%) 13.6% COVER 85326
20' ALLOWABLE LOT 25.0%
COVERAGE
PLANS AZ
IRRIGATION REFERENCE // BLDR2505446 PATIO
EASEMENT CUSTOM POOL CONSTRUCTION/ARTIFICIAL RESIDENCE BUCKEYE
GROTTO WATERFALL AND EQUIPMENTS
C
/195LF OF 5FT HIGH WI FENCE W/ SL, SC,
20' CARPORT GATES FOR POOL BARRIER/OUTLET
48'-4" AND DR
STR. #1
44'-6" EXISTING SHED
STRUCTURAL
BALES 215TH
B 10' S
CARPORT
2521
12' 30'-7"±
3'-2"±
20' BSL
3' ADUSL 17'-1"±
40'-5" 5' RAIL FENCE
6'-3"± 5' RAIL FENCE
PROPERTY LINE 244.22'
ABBREVIATIONS
APN: 504-21-500
NORTH BSL BUILDING SETBACK LINE
RESIDENTIAL USE
ADUSL ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT
SETBACK LINE
STR STRUCTURE
SITE PLAN 1" = 10'
SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1"=10'
C-1
0 10' 20' 40'
DATE: Aug 16, 2026 FILE: