04. BA250017 BOA Staff Report

Report to the Board of Adjustment
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case: 
BA250017 – Amator Property
Hearing Date:
July 17, 2025
Supervisor District:
3
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Applicant: 
Chris Krieger, Platinum Design Studio & Consulting, LLC
Property Owners:
Clint and Jane Amator
Request:
Variance to the development standard of the Maricopa County Zoning 
Ordinance to permit:
1)
Proposed hillside disturbance outside of the principle building envelope 
of 1,162 sq. ft. where none is permitted per MCZO Article 1201.6.1.6
Site Location:
APN 211-24-105F@ 33821 N. 5th Dr.  Rock View Rd. and 5th Dr., in the 
Phoenix area
Site Size:
Approx. 1 acre 
Current Use / Zoning:
Undeveloped desert / Rural-43
Open Violation:
N/A
Background:
1.
July 7, 20023: Subject property was created via unregulated land division via recorded survey 
map MCR#2003-580839.
2.
February 12, 2024: The subject property was conveyed to current owners via recorded deed 
MCR#20240083359.
3.
January 30, 2025: Building permit BLDR2500833 was submitted for a 6,383 sq. ft. single-family 
residence on subject property.
Existing On-Site and Surrounding Zoning/Land Use:
4.
On-site:
Rural-43 / Vacant
North:
Rural-43 / Vacant
South:
Rural-43 / Vacant
East:
Rural-43 / Single-family residence
West:
Rural-43 / Vacant

Page 2 of 7
Variance Request:
5.
The applicant is proposing a small amount of hillside disturbance outside of the lot’s principle 
building envelope to accommodate the development of a single-family residence on the property.  
The proposed disturbance will be 1,162 sq. ft. of cut hillside slope on the southern portion and 
northwest region of the property to accommodate the building pad for the proposed residence 
and drainage.  There is an active building permit BLDR2500833 for the home.  
Excerpt from proposed site plan (oriented north)
Site Analysis:
6.
The subject property is in an area dominated by unregulated land divisions.  The subject site is 
located just north of a large rocky geological protrusion that creates a steep downward slope 
running south to north on the property.  While the property has steep slopes, only a small portion 
of the lot on the southern end has slopes steep enough to be classified as hillside as per the 
zoning ordinance, along with a small portion within a wash on the northern end of the property.  
Most of the surrounding properties are faced with similar topographical challenges.  The 
proposed location of the residence meets all setback requirements.  Staff notes that with the 
currently proposed floor plan and home orientation it would likely be difficult to avoid the 
disturbance outside of the lot’s principle building envelope, however an altered floor plan may be

Page 3 of 7
able to be oriented in a way to avoid the hillside disturbance on the southern portion of the lot, as 
disturbance outside of the principle building envelope in areas that do not qualify as defined 
hillside, like the majority of the northern portion of the property, is permitted. 
Aerial photo of subject site

Page 4 of 7
Aerial image & surrounding environs 
Eagle view of subject site looking east into subject parcel (aerial image dated March 1, 2025). 
Zoning District map

Page 5 of 7
Zoning District Standards:
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  
Zoning 
District
Proposed with 
Variance
Min. Front Yard Setback (south property line) 
40-feet
n/a
Min. Rear Yard Setback (north property line)
40-feet
n/a
Min. Side Yard Setback (east property line)
30-feet
n/a
Maximum Height 
30-feet
n/a
Minimum Lot Area
43,560-sq. ft.
n/a
Minimum Lot Width
145-feet
n/a
Lot Coverage
25%
n/a
Hillside Disturbance outside principle building envelope
none
1,162 sq. ft.
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

Page 6 of 7
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.” 
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 property is located in a designated hillside area and was not part of a large subdivision 
designed to minimize hillside slopes and integrate with a centralized storm system. Due to the site's 
topography, the design requires extending the disturbance beyond the building envelope, which is 
prohibited by Section 1201.6.1.1.
The house, as positioned on the plan, is located south of an existing wash and complies with section 
1201.6.1.4, minimizing the driveway length.
  
The property will serve as a residence for the Amator family. Strict enforcement of the 
aforementioned sections of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance would prevent the owner from 
developing the lot and installing the septic system in the most viable location based on percolation 
testing. “
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.
“Section 1201.6.1.1: This section prohibits disturbance outside the building envelope. The 
envelope is approximately 95 feet wide, and fitting the house within this space and reducing the 
driveway envelope as explained in the previous section, necessitates extending the disturbance 
beyond the envelope.”
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.
“Although there will be some disturbance outside the building envelope, the project will comply with 
Section 1201.6.2.1, which requires reestablishing vegetation on all exposed fill slopes, cut slopes, 
graded areas, or otherwise disturbed areas. This will be achieved through a mixture of indigenous 
grasses, shrubs, trees, or cacti, creating a natural ground cover to prevent erosion and support 
natural re-vegetation. Alternatively, the exposed cut slopes can be riprapped with stone or treated 
with chemically stained materials that blend into the natural surroundings.
 
The lot does not allow for shifting the house north, as doing so would violate Section 1201.6.1.4, 
which mandates the shortest possible driveway. Additionally, positioning the house as shown on 
the plan will enable runoff to flow around the house toward the wash without compromising the 
structure’s integrity.”

Page 7 of 7
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:
•
After reviewing the submission, staff is unable to identify a peculiar condition of the property 
as the hillside slopes are only present on the southern portion of the property and are 
consistent with geological features present on neighboring properties.  As disturbance of non-
hillside portions of the property outside of the lot’s principle building envelope, the lot could 
ostensibly be developed in a similar manor as the current proposal if a different design, 
orientation, or location of residence were employed.
13.
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 allows 1,162 sq. ft. of hillside disturbance outside of the lot’s principle 
building envelope for APN 211-24-105f. 
Presented by:
Joseph Mueller, Planner
Reviewed by:
Darren V. Gérard, AICP, Planning Manager 
Attachments:
Case Map (1 page)
Application / Supplemental Questionnaire (3 pages)
Site Plan (2 pages)

/
Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ
3
Gross Acres: 1 approx.
Generated June 25, 2025 11:15 AM
BA250017
Application Name:
Legal Description
Applicant
Case Address
Applicant Phone/Email
Parcel Primary:
Map scale 1:801
Supervisor District No.

Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizona 85003
P: 602.506.3301
Variance Application 
Packet /23 
VARIANCE / INTERPRETATION 
APPLICATION
ALL FEES ARE DUE AT TIME OF APPLICATION AND ARE NON-REFUNDABLE
Is this Design Build? 
Yes 
No
Is this Residential? 
Yes 
No
Please select the type of Board of Adjustment application from the checkboxes below. 
Residential Variance 
Non-residential Variance
Interpretation
BA Blanket Variance
Is this subject property within an area of 15% or greater hillside slopes? Yes 
  No  
REQUEST
Description of Request:
Existing Zoning District and Use of Property:
Related Case Number(s):
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Address (if known):
General Location (include nearest city/town):
Size in Acres:
Square Feet:
Legal Description:
Section:
Township:
Range:
Assessor’s Parcel Number(s):
Subdivision Name (if applicable):
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name:
Contact:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Phone #:
Fax #:
E-mail Address:
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name:
Contact:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Phone #:
Fax #:
E-mail Address:
PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT AUTHORIZATION 
I (property owner)
authorize (applicant’s name)
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 7MKREXYVIVIUYMVIH
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 Owner Signature:
Date:
INSPECTIONS
By submitting this application, I am inviting County staff to conduct all site inspections they deem necessary.
VERIFICATION OF APPLICATION INFORMATION 7MKREXYVIVIUYMVIH
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 or Authorized Agent Signature:
Date:
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:
  ______________________________
■
SECTION 1201.6.1.1, SECTION 1201.6.1.2, & SECTION 1201.6.1.6.
BLDR2500833
33821 N 5TH DR, PHOENIX, AZ 85085
City of Phoenix North Gateway Transfer Station
1.018 Ac
44,353 SF
8
5 NORTH
3 EAST
211-24-105F
Platinum Design Studio & Consulting,LLC
Chris Krieger 
11201 N. Tatum Blvd. #300
Phoenix
Arizona
85028
(623) 888-9488
chris@platinumaz.com
Clint and Jane Amator
Clint Amator
31841 N 124th Dr
Peoria
Arizona
85383
(602) 695-3564
Clint Amator
Chris Krieger
03/19/2025
Clint Amator
Digitally signed by Clint Amator 
Date: 2025.03.19 13:54:24 -07'00'
RU-43 and Vacant Land
Clint Amator
Digitally signed by Clint Amator 
Date: 2025.03.19 13:53:45 -07'00'
Georges Maalouf
Digitally signed by Georges Maalouf
Location: georgesmaalouf111@gmail.com
Reason: I am approving this document
Contact Info: 610-732-0707
Date: 2025.03.19 08:42:00-04'00'
03/19/2025
03/19/2025

Planning & Development Department 
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 
P: 602.506.3301 
Variance Application 
Packet 12/1/23 
 
 
 
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.
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 property is located in a designated hillside area and was not part of a large subdivision
designed to minimize hillside slopes and integrate with a centralized storm system. Due to
the site's topography, the design requires extending the disturbance beyond the building
envelope, which is prohibited by Section 1201.6.1.1.
The house, as positioned on the plan, is located south of an existing wash and complies
with section 1201.6.1.4, minimizing the driveway length.
  
The property will serve as a residence for the Amator family. Strict enforcement of the
aforementioned sections of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance would prevent the
owner from developing the lot and installing the septic system in the most viable location
based on percolation testing..
Section 1201.6.1.1: This section prohibits disturbance outside the building envelope. The
envelope is approximately 95 feet wide, and fitting the house within this space and reducing
the driveway envelope as explained in the previous section, necessitates extending the
disturbance beyond the envelope.

Planning & Development Department 
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 
P: 602.506.3301 
Variance Application 
Packet 12/1/23 
 
 
 
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.
*Additional sheets may be attached.
** DO NOT USE THIS FORM IF YOU ARE SUBMITTING AN INTERPRETATION 
Although there will be some disturbance outside the building envelope, the project will comply with Section 
1201.6.2.1, which requires reestablishing vegetation on all exposed fill slopes, cut slopes, graded areas, or 
otherwise disturbed areas. This will be achieved through a mixture of indigenous grasses, shrubs, trees, or 
cacti, creating a natural ground cover to prevent erosion and support natural re-vegetation. Alternatively, 
the exposed cut slopes can be riprapped with stone or treated with chemically stained materials that blend 
into the natural surroundings.
 
The lot does not allow for shifting the house north, as doing so would violate Section 1201.6.1.4, which 
mandates the shortest possible driveway. Additionally, positioning the house as shown on the plan will 
enable runoff to flow around the house toward the wash without compromising the structure’s integrity.

’
’
Georges Maalouf
Digitally signed by Georges 
Maalouf
Location: 
georgesmaalouf111@gmail.com
Reason: I am approving this 
document
Contact Info: 610-732-0707
Date: 2025.06.15 
08:19:47-04'00'

Georges Maalouf
Digitally signed by Georges 
Maalouf
Location: 
georgesmaalouf111@gmail.com
Reason: I am approving this 
document
Contact Info: 610-732-0707
Date: 2025.06.15 
08:20:04-04'00'