06.BA260077 BOA Report

Report to the Board of Adjustment
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case: BA260077 – Kirsner Residence
Hearing Date: October 15, 2026
Supervisor District: 3
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Applicant: Wendy Kirsner
Property Owner: Kenneth and Wendy Kirsner Revocable Trust
Request: Variance to the development standard of the Maricopa County Zoning
Ordinance to permit:
1) Proposed front setback of 40’ from the south lot line where 50’ is the
minimum permitted per MCZO Section 502
Site Location: APN 211-73-010E @ 40731 N. 3rd Ave. – Central Ave. and Rockaway Hills
Rd., in the Desert Hills area
Site Size: 43,567 sq. ft.
Current Use / Zoning: Single-family residence / Rural-43
Background:
1. January 19, 2007: A lot split created the subject parcel.
2. August 25, 2016: The current owners took possession of the subject property.
3. August 31, 2025: Building permit submitted for a 570 sq. ft. accessory structure to be placed within
the lot’s required front setback (BLDR2506998). The permit is currently in review, and permit
issuance is pending on the outcome of this variance request.
4. August 22, 2026: Property owners applied for a variance to reduce the depth of the front setback to
accommodate the future accessory shade structure.
Existing On-Site and Surrounding Zoning/Land Use:
5. On-site: Rural-43 / Single-family residence
North: Rural-43 / Single-family residence
South: Rural-43 / Single-family residence
East: Rural-43 / Vacant
West: Rural-43 / Single-family residence

Variance Request:
6. There is an internal 10’ access easement along the south lot line. This creates a minimum front
setback line of 50’ from the south lot line which is 40’ from the street line. The applicant proposes
to add a 570 sq. ft. RV shade structure in the southwest portion of the lot that will be 12’ from the
west side lot line but only 30’ from the south street line. Thus the applicant is requesting to vary
the required front setback from 50’ to 40’ from the lot line (which is from 40’ to 30’ from the street
line).
Excerpt from proposed site plan
Photographs of subject site
Page 2 of 7

Site Analysis:
7. The lot is relatively flat with a wash traversing the majority of the east side of the lot rendering
most of the site development in the western portion of the lot. This lot has a trapezoidal like shape
with the angle lot line as the east lot line. There is a 10’ wide access easement along the south
lot line that forms as a cul-de-sac bulb in the southeast corner of the lot. The site is at an elevation
of generally 1,940’ above sea level in the north part of the Desert Hills area between Skunk Creek
to the west and the Desert Hills to the east.
Aerial photo of subject site
Aerial image & surrounding environs
Page 3 of 7

Eagle view of subject site looking south into subject parcel (aerial image dated 3.1.25).
Zoning District Map
Page 4 of 7

Zoning District Standard:
8. 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 (to south lot line inclusive of a 10’ 50-feet 40-feet
access easement)
Min. Rear Yard Setback (to north lot line) 40-feet 45-feet
Min. Side Yard Setback (to west lot line) 30-feet 39-feet
Min. Side Yard Setback (to east lot line) 30-feet 112½-feet
Maximum Height 30-feet n/a
Minimum Lot Area 43,560-sq. ft. 43,567-sq. ft.
Minimum Lot Width 145-feet 250-feet
Maximum Lot Coverage 25% 14%
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.”
9. 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.
“Request to build a shade structure at 31 ft from the easement”
10. 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 set back is 40 ft”
11. 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.
Page 5 of 7

“The shade structure is hidden behind the RV Garage and Solid Steel Fence at 40735 3rd ave, the
shade structure does not obstruct any view and is at the end of a private cul de sac.”
Findings:
12. 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.
13. 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:
 There is a wash traversing the eastern portion of the lot pushing all pragmatic development
into the western half of the lot.
 The lot has longer dimensions along the street frontage making for a relatively shallow
building envelope.
 Arguably these conditions are self-created in the line of title due to poor lot-splitting practice
via unregulated land division.
 The shade canopy is small and there is a large RV garage on the neighboring property which
is 20’ away from the south access easement on their lot that will be able to obscures the
canopy from view from 3rd Ave. east of the subject site making this structure hardly less
noticeable.
14. 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 40’ front setback line (as measured from the
south lot line) for APN 211-73-010E.
Presented by: Martin Martell, Planner
Reviewed by: Darren V. Gérard, AICP, Planning Manager
Attachments: Case Map (1 page)
Application / Supplemental Questionnaire (3 pages)
Page 6 of 7

Site Plan (1 page)
Engineering comments (1 page)
Page 7 of 7

Application Name: Kirsner Residence
Legal Description
6N-3E-20
Applicant Applicant Phone/Email
6028185541
Wendy Kirsner
BA260077
Case Address Parcel Primary:211-73-010E
40731 N 3RD AVE PHOENIX, AZ 85086
PHOENIX, AZ 85086
Generated September 23, 2026 5:08 PM Gross Acres: 1 approx. Map scale 1:756
Supervisor District No. 3
Request for Variance to install a shade structure less than 40' from the easement at the front of the
property
/
Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ

7
RESIDENTIAL VARIANCE
MAR\~cOPA
PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION
COUNTY APPLICA T10N FORM
Ml. REI AR£ 0W AT TM Of »Pl.lCA'YDt Ne,,_ NON MRN>Mt.E
RESJDOmAL VAMANC£"1QlUY'- -
ONa___,tARtqutlt: .. ,, ♦+•_..• ..... • .. mt.-1>1•--• ·••.A..,.__...,_,dp,,pa,ty
Exllllng Zoning Otl1nC:1 and UM_af_Pr_oPllf.__r,...,y _________________________ _
Allllld C.. N&mblr(s)
NONNTYINFCllMAllON
~ (tf known) 40731 n 3rd..._....,.._ AZ._,.
I Size Genni si N;IN Location 11 (lnc:We nenst cttyttown) -"---•-----~----------------- Sqlllf'tf.«
Lapl ~ Section _____ To,,nahlp ____ AM0t
AM111or'1. Parcel~•) -~-~~----------------------- 211-73-410E 8
SubdM It on Name (If rppll,,. ... ). Dw,t ... _____________ _
Is .. ~ p,ope,1y .Mis, an.,_ of 1-=~.,.......or-grealef----,h-,•:-•"""11tt--,•-1111-•....,,..,..y,,...•- □--No-EJ
NOPerrYOWNOtlNFOlttlilATION
Hant ~&w.ncty~Alic-.r,. Contllct: _w._,ct,~Khl-• ______ _
Addrtu ◄0731 N 3rd Aw
City Phoeru Stat~ AZ. ZJp
Phone .- 602-818-5541 fat ,-
E-mail Addrnl ~ a,,n
PtlOPOTY OWN9 NC> MlfllJCANT AllTHOAIZATION
Ic,1,lf'IJ'~ w.rw,yten,., aulhonze·( ,,rt_.•,...> ----------- w.wtyKnnw'
to fie tNs ~ on .. man.rs relatinQ to this request wrth ~ County. By sq,lng 1h11 form u 1ht prape,1y OIMW I hereby.-• IO
lb6df by 1fff and II condmonl that may be~ by the M-1copl County Board of SupeMlcn. Mlricopl County PWnng and Zo,q
Commiakln, °' M~ Courey Planntng and Dftetopmen\ Departmn auff as appllcablt. • part of 'llf1 appr0¥II of 1NI r~ lrddno
coucltions. ~ ~.U. ■nd/c. .,., octw requirement that may~ or otherwise lffeet lht use of my property.
NOflOSfflOM 207 WAIVER - SIGNAn.flf' REQUIRED
The property owner adcnowtedgH 1hat lht ■ppfM beeng 50Ught by this appl.c:a1Jon may CIUM • reducoon In tht UIStWIQ righca to UM,
dM<», Ht ar poans the ~ propttty that 1s the ltbfect of thts ,ppliatlon n,. property OWNt further 1dcnowtldgtl !hit II Is 1N
pcapany owner who has requested the ■ct,on sought by the filtno of tN& appl.catJon Therefore. With ful knowtedge al al nghtl grW1llld to
1 the property ownet P'RUMl to A_R.S §1 §1 • 11321hrCKq1 1138, ~ pr owner r does watve any and al dim• fOf dmtnutJon in
_,, of the P,oe-tl wtth ~d to an taMtJ by MIOCOpl the i11ng al this applab0n
r>c1, -zv
i, t~
tHSPECTIONS
B 1ubmlttln th11 j cation. I am In Coun 5taff to conduct all Slit 1
VEJURCATION Of APPLICATION INFORMATION - SIGHA1VRf IWJtllRED
I oen,fy thM the stitemenll in this appbcat.lon and "4JPOII matenal e U\11.. Mt/ apcJrovall OI pennb ~ ~ MlnCCll)e County lit l'"""1t
upon tht truthfuAne&1 of hit ltllementl may be rewoMd r·-"""..,.. •
ARS 1605 TMnAMC D1tNSION
I 1uthonze 1 5ft ..,.... .... ...__.,n for lhe m,ew of my~ u ldopted by~ llo«d of SupeMson per AAS§ 1605 end H
amended
Date
------------------ l~ ) ------------- ----
Planning , Ofl.topment 0epa,tment RH!dentl• VMlanc-t Applle4Uon Packvt
12/2/24
301 W Jeffeflon SI, SUite 170 PhomrJ, Alll0nl 85003
P 602506 3301
RECEIVED 25. AUG 26 -- BA260077 -- 1. SUBMITTAL

RESIDENTIAL VARIANCE SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE
ARS §11 -816 8.2
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, ff in grantmg such variance the
general Intent and purposes of the zoning ordinance will be preserved
1 Please discuss and explain what ls/are the peculiar conditlon(s) facing the property and Include reference to the
Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance Regulatlon(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 Regu/at,on(s) or Development Standard(s) would Impose
a hardship on the property
RtQuHt lo build a~ Slructure at 31 ft from the euement
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 set back Is 40'
-------~~-------
Planning , Development Depmment Re-'1dental VarfMiee Awllcatlon Packet
301 W Jetfen.on St., Surt.e 170 Phoenix. Araona 85003 12/2/24
P- 602506 3301
RECEIVED 25. AUG 26 -- BA260077 -- 1. SUBMITTAL

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.
The shade structure Is hidden behind the RV Garage and Solid Steel Fence at 40735 3rd ave, the shade structure does not obstruct
any view and is at the end of a private cul de sac
*Additional sheets may be attached .
.,. DO NOT USE THIS FORM IF YOU ARE SUBMITTING AN INTERPRETATION
-------)l, ______ _
Planning & O~velopment Department ResldentLlJ Variance Application PacJc~t
301 W Jefferson St, Suite 170 Phoenix. Arizona 85003 6/17/24
P: 602 506 3301

Residential Residential RECEIVED 25. AUG 26 -- BA260077 -- 1. SUBMITTAL
Property line 211-73-007h 211-73-007e
304' 10 1/2"
Pool Barrier
Dog Kennel
Pergola
Pool 20’ x 20’
LOT COVERAGE
RESIDENCE 2,825 sqft
GARAGE 625 sqft
PATIO 1,659 sqft
Patio PERGOLA 400 sqft
94’ 8" x 17’ RV SHADE 570 sqft
5" TOTAL 6,079 sqft
42' 5"
APN 211-73-010E
LOT SIZE 43567 SF
AREA UNDER ROOF IS 14%
Residence
Residential 211-73-010D 165' Electrical Box 9"
39' Wash 183' Vacant 211-73-010f
16' 5 1/2" 5'
3' ZONING COMMENTS:
2. ADD APN#, LOT SIZE AND
AREA UNDER ROOF TO SITE
Concrete PLAN.
30' New RV Driveway
Shade
19'
15'
12' 9 1/2" 3'
Leach Joy Ranch Rd
Field
Gravel Ave
40'-0" Driveway Septic Tank 5" 7th
57' Cloud Rd
31'
Carefree Hwy
20.00' I/E & P.U.E DOC.
No. 2007-0071633, M.C.R. Vicinity Map
10'
224'
10'
25' 20.00' I/E & P.U.E DOC. B
3rd Ave
ZONING COMMENTS:
9'-11 1/2" 1. NEW RV SHADE MUST NOT ENCROACH ON A X REVISED KC 06/01/26
THE FRONT THE FRONT SETBACK OF 40'.
RELOCATE THE RV SHADE . REV DESCRIPTION BY DATE
MCZO SECT 502 ACCESSORIES...
10' 20' 30'
AMENDMENTS
SITE SCALE DATE DRAWN BY
40731 N. 3rd AVE CUSTOM SHADES AND FENCING
1:30 06/01/2026 KC
PHOENIX, AZ 85086
37684 W. VERMONT AVE
TITLE PROJECT NO. DRAWING NO. SHEET NO. TONOPAH, AZ 85354
KIRSNER RESIDENCE
1027 0089 A01 TEL: 602.412.8587

Planning & Development
Engineering Plan Review
Alba L. Holloway Date: September 9, 2026
Engineering Associate
Planning & Development
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Memo To: Darren Gerard, Planning Manager, Planning & Development
Phoenix, Arizona 85008
Phone: (602) 372-0850 Attn: Martin Martell, Planner, Planning and Development
Fax: (602)506-3282
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Email address: From: Alba L. Holloway, Engineering Associate
alba.holloway@maricopa.gov Planning & Development Department
cc: Bob Fedorka, P.E., Engineering Manager, Planning and Development
Subject: BA260077 – Residential Variance / Front setback reduction.
Address: 40731 N 3rd Avenue Phoenix AZ 85086
APN(s): 211-73-010E
PND Engineering has no comments on the variance request.
PND Flood Control District has no comments on the variance request.
PND MCDOT has no comments on the variance request.
Other Maricopa County Agencies must review and recommend approval of this project.
Please contact me if you have any questions or require clarification of these comments.
Revised 3/1/23 Page 1 of 1