Board of Adjustment - Regular Meeting

Call this meeting of the Maricopa County Board of Adjustment to order. Rosalie, if you'd please take roll call. Chairman Loper, present. Vice Chair Person, present. Member Clap.

Member Ward. Member Ward, can you hear us? We'll give it We'll give it a moment. We're having some technical difficulties. New software, which means it's an improvement, of course. Yeah, she's responding in my text. Well, u we can we can skip the roll rest of the roll call and go on to the next item, I guess.

Oh, we can't have we have to have corn.

She says trying to sign back in. She can see the room, the screen, everything. We don't see her. She's trying to sign back on. Darren, did you bring your harmonica?

There you go. And Nick, you can hum a little bit. Neither can any of us. Hello. All right. [Music] Yeah. Best dad jokes. Bring them. Bless you.

Bless you again. What's that?

Now saying camera open in another program. Shutting down and trying again. So, it might be a few minutes. Yeah, let's do that.

Go ahead and phone. Should we have phone me or phone you, Darren? I'll have her call me. There she is.

Here present. All right. All right. Chairman, we have a quorum.

Awesome. Um, we only have one item on our agenda. We have no one online and uh we did the announcements last month. So, I'm going to dispense of the announcements. I can do that. Nope. I need to do the announcements. Okay. All right. This meeting has been noticed in accordance with the open meeting law of ARS 38-431. Agendas are available within 24 hours of each meeting in the Maricopa County Planning and Development Office and also available on the Planning and Development website one week prior to the hearing at www.mmaricopa.gov/ GV/planning. With respect to the hearing process, cases will be considered in the order they appear on the agenda unless otherwise agreed to by the board. One item, so we're not changing the agenda. For each case, the applicant will be given a set amount of time to present their testimony. Any witnessing to give testimony on a particular case shall notify the board of such interest. This shall be done by filling out a speaker's card if you're here in person like this one I'm holding up or registering a desire to comment on the published agenda. Also, at the appropriate time for each case, the chairman will ask those attending in person and online who wish to speak to a case to raise their hand by clicking on that icon on the webinar screen. Rosalie, do you need one of these um if for the applicant?

No. Okay. Uh staff will provide the chair with the names of persons who have registered noted desire to comment and those registered participants who have raised their hand. Page one have page one of the announcement. Um

oh right in front of me. Thank you. The chair will call on each name participant one at a time. Such testimony shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes. However, the actual amount of time allowed for testimony shall be at the discretion of the board chair. The chair will conduct the hybrid in-person and virtual public hearing according to the bylaws and according to the rules established by the chair regarding public comment. Votes will be done by roll call vote only and the chair will verbally identify the specific members responsible for all motions and seconds. Moving on to the minutes. Everybody had a chance to look at the minutes from last month for July 17, 2025. Are there any changes or comments? Seeing none, uh those are considered approved. Move on to staff announcements. Anything Darren?

Uh Mr. Chairman, just that uh case B8250048 known as Opansky Luca property in district 3. Variance to front west setback at 4115 North Third Street in Desert Hills has been continued to October 16th. So no actions necessary of the board. Thank you very much. We'll move on to the regular agenda. We have one item. This is continued from last month. BA250033, the WY property at 16832 East Hazeline Way in the Gilbert area in District One. Go ahead, staff.

Thank you, Chairman Loper, members of the board. So, case BA250033 is a request for a variance to permit a private pickle ball court on parcel uh 30487056B now with a setback of 12 ft from the north lot line where a minimum of 20 ft is required in the R4 zoning district. Uh as well as a variance to permit a three-foot front setback from the north property line where a minimum of 20 ft is also required. Uh per the first handout memo, the owner and applicant had previously request requested a court specific setback of four feet from both the north and the west lot lines since the surfacing material for the court measures about four to 5 ft uh from both lot lines. Uh the court had also included basketball hoops on either end uh with the westside hoop measuring less than 5t from the west lot line. Uh according to the owner, however, the westside hoop has since been removed uh since the July 17th hearing, and only the pickle ball court markings and surfacing material remain. Uh staff's interpretation of setback requirements for a pickle ball court is that setbacks must be measured from the court's baseline to the lot line, which would place the court just over 12 feet from the north lot line and just over 16 ft from the west lot line. Uh the owner has informed staff that he can shift the court about 5 feet toward the east which would negate the need for a court specific setback variance from the west lot line. As such only a court specific setback variance of 12 ft would be required from the north lot line. Uh per the second handout memo staff received an additional notice of opposition from the owner of the neighboring property to the west and the neighbors letter has been included with the memo. Uh if the board finds the applicant has satisfied the statutory test, the grant of this variance will memorialize uh item A, variance approval establishes a 12-oot setback for a private sports court from the north lot line for APN 30487056B. And item B, variance approval

establishes a 3-foot north property line front setback for APM 30487056B. At this time, I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Nick. Are there any questions of uh staff from any of the board members at this time? Seeing shaking heads, no. I did I do just want to clarify and good presentation. So um so right now the request number one is not four feet, it's 12. Uh Chairman Looper, that is correct. And then number two, that three feet still remains. Yes.

Okay. And um but the applicant has indicated that they could make which one 16 number two or number one.

Uh so chairman Loper currently uh interpreting the setback requirements as applying from the court baseline which is so to speak the edge of the white markings for the pickle ball court as seen on the site areas. Currently that measures uh 16 feet um from the west lot line uh and it's across the west lot line where we've received the opposition. Um previously the court had included a semi-permanent basketball hoop which made it part of the court and that's why there is such a small setback variance from before that westside hoop has since been removed. So since the court marking the pickle ball court marking is the only permanent feature really left that set back 16 ft at this point. That's still 4 ft short of what's required, but the owner has indicated to us that he can shift those markings uh about 5T or so to the east, which would negate the need for a setback from the west, a variance to the setback from the west entirely.

Okay. Thank you. And ju just to clarify, it's not it's not the slab that's issue here. I mean, we all can have slabs in our rear yard, front yard, park on them, whatever. it's the the setbacks measured from the marking or if they had a a low fence like or you know some structure associated with the sport or the basketball standard or something like that that's that's where the setback's measured from. Correct.

Uh Chairman Loper that is correct and admittedly the zoning ordinance doesn't specifically define how the setback is measured and the zoning ordinance does mention a tennis court. It doesn't specifically mention a pickle ball court. Uh but the interpretation is that the setback regulation also does apply to a pickle ball court. And in this case, because that white boundary marks the edge of the playing area for the pickle ball court, that's considered the adequate the appropriate location from which to measure the set back to the lot line.

And and one more question for you. Last hearing, there was some mention about a wall that's along the property line and that may need to be included in the variance. Has there been any discussion that may be upcoming or did need doesn't need to be included or it's a whole other issue or chairman Loper? I'm not aware of any permanent improvements with regard to fencing or netting. The owner may be able to provide more context. Uh I'm not aware of any from what I understand. The only permanent improvements uh that are left with this court are in addition to the slab the court markings themselves as well as I believe the basketball hoop on the east side still remains but that's not a setback issue.

Okay. Thank you very much. Oh yes, vice chairman person Nick. So if this particular house did not back to a street, what would the setback be required to be along that area?

So with the north uh yard, it does effectively function as a rear yard with the improvements and whatnot. Because of Stacy Road to the north, it is technically a through lot. So that is considered a front setback. If it were a rear setback, it would be a 25- foot setback, but it wouldn't be an issue because accessory structures and uses may be permitted in a rear yard, but not a front yard. And that's why, um, we've offered the variance to reduce the north front yard to three feet. Um, which is would be the deacto setback for an accessory use anyway if it were a rear yard. Okay. Thank you.

Yes. And I have a followup to that because we've talked about this before, but my memor is bad any anymore. If they did a VNA, a vehicular non-access easement um along all or a portion of that north property line, would that negate it being a through lot or is that a private matter that that the county doesn't acknowledge?

Uh Mr. chairman. Uh yes, that specifically the ordinance allows for through lots to have a vehicular non-access easement applied to one of the frontages and that uh negates the frontage and it's treated like a rear yard as opposed to any other lot line where a VNA would only control access and not change setback requirements.

Would would you mind going back to the aerial for this property? Um, so it doesn't look like So, but if they put a VNA and that this may be new. Yeah, the oblique right there. I like that. The other aerial that you just had. Yeah. So, if they were to put a VNE there, that would negate the variance potentially. Yes. Okay. All right. And then they and they don't need one as per they don't need one to the west now. Correct. I'm sorry. Could you repeat that, Chairman Looper?

So if they did a VNA along the north, right? That would negate the need for variance request number one. Uh it would negate the need for variance request number two if they did a VNA because that would turn it from a front yard into a rear yard. It would not negate the need for variance number one because the core itself is subject to its own setback requirement regardless of whether it's a rear yard or a front yard. The but it's but that request has gone from 4 to 12 and the applicant would have to speak for themselves has indicated that they could go up to 16.

Uh chairman Loper specifically the 16 ft was to the west not the north. the 16 they can increase to over 20, but the 12 feet from the north would remain the same. Okay. And that's why the variance still includes the 12 feet from the north. It was originally four for both. Um, now it's just 12 from the north. It would just be two that goes away with the VNA. Uh, correct.

Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Any other questions of uh Nick or Darren or anyone else? Seeing none, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is the applicant or applicant's representative in attendance? wish to come up and go ahead and speak. I think after last meeting, we had hoped that there had been a resolution where you both were sitting next to each other. I can tell that hasn't happened, but hopefully we can arrive at something today where maybe it you leave here together. Go ahead. Provide your name for the record, please.

My name is David Wy and I'm the owner of that property in question. Um, you're correct, sir. um in your statement and it is unfortunate in this circumstance that the previous owner soured the homeowners next door um to this uh facility. Um we we're trying to change that. Uh I am concerned about safety for all of us in the neighborhood. Um I would not want that 1oz whiffle ball coming flying into my yard either. I have um I have a slide that I have um uh installed some collapsible poles um on my property so that we can lift up a golf net which is a little bit more um a little bit closer knit than the previous net that was up. Um you can see that um on the right slide that the basketball hoop has been removed and the two poles there are holding a golf net and they're collapsible so they're not visible from the neighbor's yard. Um and I'm sorry um we don't play pickle ball during the day. So um the only noise that is generated during the day during work hours is from Stacy Road. the traffic there. We have three services for garbage. We have UPS, we have mail, we have all kinds of traffic up and down the road. I work from home occasionally also myself and I don't hear that traffic. Um we don't play pickle ball at night. Um the lights have been taken down. We've uh I believe we've done everything we can to accommodate the safety of our neighbors. Um, but having a pickle ball court is not illegal. It just has to fall within the zoning ordinances. So that's why my

proposal to move the pickle ball court five feet to the east will satisfy the zoning ordinance for the for the west side of the property. And I'm requesting the 12oot setback on the north side. Um and and if that's not approved, then I can move that line um 7 ft 7 in to the south in order for that line to fall within the zoning ordinance. So that is um I appreciate your time and that is my request.

Thank you very much. So So you have the ability to make it fall within the the required setbacks. I mean, so you have a request today to leave it as is, but you could make it you could comply with the zoning ordinance. Yes, sir. Uh, just for a point or just for a question. So, this collapsible net that's on the screen, you raise that then when you play pickle ball or you do activities in the rear yard. I will. Yes. What's the height of that? I'm assuming this extends over the uh the wall, the common wall. The actual physical net is 10 ft. Okay.

So, if you go to the bottom of their wall, that's over 22 feet high. Okay. Oh, yeah. Cuz they have a wall on their property that's higher. Um because I remember the testimony from the neighbor about being out at the pool and I certainly can appreciate that. If I was at my pool and something came flying over, be a little disconcerting. and I appreciate the efforts that you've made removing the basketball standard and and other things. It's unfortunate that the previous owner created this, you purchased it not knowing of the issue. Um, but I am appreciative that you've tried to make amends on it. All right. Any other questions? May I make another statement? Yes, absolutely.

There's another slide. The materials that we've purchased to play pickle ball are noise reducing paddles. they reduce the noise by 50%. And also um no sound pickle balls. So I don't believe that that should be an issue as far as noise. And again, these are extra steps because right now it seems to me that it's just a zoning violation and not anything else. But we want to do everything we can to keep our neighborhood together. Right. Again, I'm very appreciative of the efforts that you're you're attempting to make to try to to alleviate um as much as that as you can. Thank you.

Uh any questions or comments to the applicant by any of the board members? Seeing none at this time. We may have others. Um so, thank you. Thank you. Go ahead to the neighbor to the west. I screwed it up last time. I'm going to screw it up again. Ontario. Ant told you BB. Yes. Okay. If you wouldn't mind just giving your name for the record and then go ahead. Absolutely. My name is Ant BB. Can you guys hear me? Okay. Yes.

Right. It always feels so unnatural to lean forward into a microphone. Um okay. So to be honest with you, uh we are pretty surprised we're here today. Um because last meeting you had requested that the WY's, you know, work with us to try to find a solution that would be amendable to everybody involved. Um and since then they did remove the basketball hoop which we are eternally grateful for eternally. Um but we never heard anything at all about a plan for the pickle ball court. We didn't hear anything. We understood it's a challenge, right? But we didn't hear anything. So last week I emailed Nick and said, "Hey, can we get a continuence?" because we figured the Wley's needed more time. Um, and it wasn't until yesterday afternoon that I found out that the Wley's had come up with this new plan, a plan we had no details of and had never heard anything about. Um, and that he wanted to go ahead and continue this this hearing today. So, I was like, "Oh, okay. Well, we'll go ahead and uh make sure we we show up today and submit this comment." So, I didn't have any details on the plan at all until the agenda item was published this morning. So again, this is kind of all uh very new to us, but even in just hearing sort of the idea of what the plan is, which is um we're going to move the court and the court's now established based on the the white lines. So I think there's some feasibility questions there in terms of okay, so the lines themselves are going to be the demarcation for the court. So what's to say someone So what somebody can't stand behind that line? A ball can't fly behind the line, right? at what point how do how do we really say this is there's no barrier at that line of any sort, right? And then he mentioned the nets that he installed. Well, he didn't say anything to us about that either. We actually found out about that because contrary to his point, we can see the pole from over the fence. He had brought up last time a um privacy screen that we had erected saying was like nine feet tall. We have proof which we're happy to share. It's about six and a half feet tall. The topography of our

property and theirs is different. And so things some things might seem taller on our property, but they're not. Um, so we don't have some huge huge fence. Again, we can absolutely see the poles. Took pictures of those because again, I mean, I can I can see them from our property. But anyway, I feel like we're running a really nuancing pickle ball courts at this point. Um, and also, I mean, even we are going to nuance this. It's confusing. So, how is this going to be enforced now? Who is going to say they're not going to be at that point? Where are they going to be at? Um, and so we're concerned about that. this to become a civil issue. Perhaps we don't want this to become a civil issue. That's why we're here for the zoning and the the variance itself. When this all started, Nick had said, "Hey, review some previous cases if you want to know how this works." I did. I saw one from last July, the Chanel case. They had put in unpermitted shade structures. Shade structures, not a court, but shade structures. And they came in after the fact wanting approval. A neighbor said, "Hey, we don't like it." HOA said, "No, we don't like it." And unanimously this board said no, we're not going to approve it. One of the members said this is a blatant disregard for the county as zoning and by approving this would be rewarding negligent and bad behavior. And to that point, the chairman's mentioned a few times that they weren't aware when they brought this property this variance need. That is not true. We have a voicemail. I'm happy to share it with you from their realtor from back in May before they purchased the property indicating they were fully aware they needed a variance for this court. Not just for the lights, for the court itself. So, I guess they figured maybe you just wouldn't care. Maybe they figured I couldn't take work off over and over to come down here and plead your case because all we're actually asking is that you just uphold the zoning ordinance the way it's written. We're not asking for special treatment. Nothing like that. It was written a certain way for a reason. We are that reason. We have already experienced issues. They literally hit a c a pickle ball into our yard the day after the last hearing. They said they wanted to

test the net. Didn't communicate that with us. It wasn't until our dog ate it. That we said, "Hey, can you not do that? We already communicated the net doesn't work." So, they continue not to communicate with us. They continue to tell you they didn't know, but they knew full well. All we're trying to do is request that you please just hold uphold the zoning ordinance the way it's written that everyone else is subject to. Thank you. Thank you. Any uh questions or comments? Vice Chair Pursu.

Um thank you for taking the time to come down and share your feedback. Um my question is if I'm understanding this correctly, if Mr. WY were to move, you know, restripe to meet the, you know, dimensions that are required, he doesn't need a variance. So, if he's saying he can do that, um, he can just do it. And I just want to make sure you totally understand that because I, you know, I I both sides of this. And

yes, so if he restripes and then we start seeing footage, right, that they're playing past the restriping, that was a question actually presented to Nick yesterday afternoon because this was all brand new, right? Again, we just found out about this. So, well, when they are, let's again, the court's still there, right? They have to physically move the net in the center as well. I guess I don't know what the plan is there. Um, you know, I don't know. I don't know any of these plans really, but say they move everything. They restripe, they move the center net, all of that. So, let's say they start playing on, you know, it the play stretches out a bit, right? It's hard to maybe control people sometimes when there is no barrier to say, "Oh, I'm not going to back up a few feet." is I'm trying to hit by I mean it it just seems pretty unfeasible. So I'm wondering so when when this isn't being upheld, who do I complain to then? Is that just a civil lawsuit?

Those are not zoning complaints. I understand. Right. The only obligation is to stripe to meet setbacks, whatever those are that the board grants. Yes. So if somebody steps outside the lines, it's just like a setback for a building. If somebody puts a chair outside of a setback, that's not a zoning issue to bother the county with.

I agree. So, I think the easiest way to resolve all of this is to not approve the variance. He just said he doesn't need it, right? He said he doesn't need the variant. So, if he himself says he doesn't need it, it doesn't need to be approved. That also protects this long term. I understand he's willing to move the striping and put in the and I appreciate him buying these uh other pickle ball um items, but who's to say? I mean, what if they sell the property, right? They're who I don't know how long they're going to have it. What about the next owner? What do they do at that point? Is that some sort of gentleman's agreement? Are they like, I don't have to use these type of paddle balls and then we're back here or I'm just filing a lawsuit. I don't really know. All I know is I think the easiest way to do this because also if they actually follow the permitting process, planning and zoning would have denied it from the beginning. It never even would have been approved, right? So since they decided not to do that, they follow the we're not going to ask permission and just do forgiveness later. That's why we're all here. So if we just say no, we're don't grant the variance then, right? It's not a zoning problem at that point. It's strictly a neighbor issue. It's strictly civil, right?

Yeah. I mean, we can only weigh in on whether a variance is um granted or not. So, I think we're on the same page with that.

Yes, I Yeah, I understand that. I know you can't pro and he could do whatever he wants on the court after this. I mean, we get I totally understand that. It's just having it on paper to say, "Okay, this isn't going to be I think there's an official language that it would then place into what is trying to pull this out here that it would then obviously make it uh allowed legally to have this variance approved, which of course, right, is what we're trying to not have. The only thing I'm asking is to not have the variance approved. Anything above and beyond that is strictly between me and the owner. Completely understand.

Thank you. Do any any other board members have any comments or questions? Thank you very much. We may have more. And for Nick or Darren or Max or somebody, um I maybe overstated the obligations of the county, but um or maybe I didn't, but could you speak to what what's enforcable um given it whatever action it is? It's just really where the lines are. Correct,

Mr. Chairman. That's correct. Uh there's there's nothing in the uh we have no control over anything except for the location of the court, not where someone may play on their property or a ball lands or anything else like that. So I just want whether it's granted or not granted for for everybody to understand that those are not code enforcement issues. Okay. All right. This is a public hearing. Do we have anyone else in attendance in the audience who wishes to speak on this? Seeing none, anyone online that popped up? No one. No one online.

No one online. I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and turn this over to the board for discussion and or a possible motion. This is in district one. We do not have a representative right now from district 1. So, it's wide open for whoever wants to make a motion. Um, I'll offer my two cents because there are a number of options here. In my mind, the impact to the neighbor appears to be about the same whether the variances are granted or not. Historically, if that's been the case, I have cited on the on the applicant. However, we do have a neighbor here who um um is agrieved against and we have an applicant who said that they can operate if they don't if they don't get the variance and if they conform with the zoning ordinance. So, um I think I'm inclined more towards not granting it, but I'll wait and see what happens with the other board members. Vice Chair Person.

Um yeah, I agree with you. I think um I can personally see the case for a peculiar condition on the north setback because and I consistently feel this way when there's a lot that has you know a road on the back or whatever. But um I I think that you know given the opposition my and your willingness to be able to modify the lines my recommendation would be to move forward to deny it and let you put them in without needing the variance. Is that a motion or or member Ward, did you want to make a comment? No, I was hoping that that was a motion. I'll rephrase it that way. So, I move that we deny case BA250033.

We have a motion for denial by member Vice Chair Person. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second by member Ward. Rosley, when you get an opportunity. Member Ward. Yes, Vice Chair Person. Yes, Chairman Loper. Yes, Chairman. Uh, we have a motion for a denial by a vote of three to zero.

Um, it's been denied. I I would hope that there's an opportunity in the future that you're playing pickle ball on his court and you're celebrating um in the evening sometime with margaritas or whatever your drink of choice is in their pool. I hope that somehow you guys can work this out and not in a civil court. Thank you very much. We have no other items on the agenda. Anything Darren? Mr. Chairman, just uh to let you know that uh member Carden has resigned. You're going to have a new member on board next month. Adam Ba, I heard that is correct. Yes. Back to another zoning attorney. Had him before. All right, we'll go ahead and adjourn. Thank you everyone for your time and attention.