Citizen Portal

Carefree board approves variance to extend patio and wall at 3018 Ironwood Circle

5788793 ยท September 10, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board of Adjustment approved a variance to allow a homeowner in the Boulders subdivision to extend a patio cover and build a wall that encroaches into required rear and side-yard setbacks, finding the lot is a legal nonconforming parcel that creates a hardship under Arizona law.

The Board of Adjustment for the Town of Carefree on July 14 approved a variance allowing property owners at 3018 Ironwood Circle in the Boulders subdivision to extend a patio cover and adjust their backyard wall, despite both features encroaching into the town's required setbacks. The motion to approve the variances, with staff-recommended conditions, carried with the ayes prevailing.

Town planner Stacy (staff member) told commissioners the property is a legal nonconforming lot that was developed under county standards before annexation and therefore does not meet the R-118 zoning district's current development standards. "This lot in particular is a legal nonconforming due to its size," Stacy said, explaining the lot's small size limits where structures can be placed.

The applicants seek to extend an existing patio cover across the full width of the house and expand the backyard area, which results in approximately 24 feet of the patio cover lying within the 30-foot rear-yard setback and additional imposition into the 10-foot side-yard setback. The owners also requested relief related to a wall that would be measured as roughly 12.8 feet into the setback when accounting for the provision that walls may occupy half of a side-yard setback.

Architect Tyler Green told the commission the team considers the condition a hardship under state law because the lot is roughly one-third the size normally required under the zoning category. "We think we definitely have a hardship as required by law just because the site is about a third of the size that would legally be set for that zoning," Green said, adding that the homeowners obtained homeowners association approval and that neighboring property owners had no outstanding objections.

A public hearing was opened and closed with no public speakers recorded. Commissioners moved and seconded the staff recommendation and voted to approve the variances with the conditions listed in the staff report.

The approval includes the following clarifications recorded in the file: the patio cover expansion reduces, rather than increases, the property's existing lot-coverage nonconformance; the proposed trellis is intended to reduce the area of solid roof coverage; and the owners confirmed construction access and neighbor coordination occurred after initial notice issues related to postal delivery to Ironwood Circle.

No precise construction schedule was recorded in the hearing; the commission's action authorizes the property owners to proceed subject to the staff conditions attached to the variance approval.

Less critical details: the application materials noted adjacent lots in the immediate area also have legal nonconforming conditions, and staff confirmed no objections were received through the town's public-notice process.