05.BA250025 BOA Report

Report to the Board of Adjustment
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case: 
BA250025 – Sunset Cove Investments LLC 
Hearing Date:
June 19, 2025
Supervisor District:
5
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Applicant / Property Owner: Chris McCarty / Sunset Cove Investments LLC
 
Request:
Variance to the development standards of the Maricopa County Zoning 
Ordinance to permit:
1)
Proposed maximum lot coverage of 28% where 25% is the maximum 
permitted per MCZO Article 503.5.4
Site Location:
APN 300-81-016K @ 3902 W. Kayenta Trl. – 39th Ave. and Kayenta Trl., in 
the Laveen area
Site Size:
43,889 sq. ft. 
Current Use / Zoning:
Vacant / Rural-43
Open Violation:
No violation on property
Background:
1.
June 2, 1929: Subject parcel was created originally as part of lot 17 of Sunset Cove recorded plat, 
Book 21 Page 29.
2.
June 6, 2006: Subject parcel split into current configuration Split Control #7674.
3.
August 15, 2024: Subject property conveyed to current owner under deed MCR 20240437392.
4.
April 21, 2025: Application date for subject variance request. 
Existing On-Site and Surrounding Zoning/Land Use:
5.
On-site:
Rural-43 / Vacant
North:
Rural-43 / Vacant
South:
Rural-43 / Vacant 
East:
39th Ave then Rural-43 / Vacant
West:
Rural-43 / Vacant
Variance Request:
6.
The applicant is requesting an overall lot coverage of 28% where 25% is the limit of lot coverage 
(roofed) structure. The proposed construction, which includes a primary residence; an accessory 
dwelling unit; an ancillary structure and all covered patios, would total 12,084 sq ft.

Page 2 of 8
Excerpt from proposed site plan

Page 3 of 8
Photograph of subject site
Site Analysis:
7.
The subject parcel is relatively flat and appears to have been graded in preparation for 
construction. There is a terminated permit on record for grading & paving of the Keyenta Trail 
easement under B200710384. The permit never received final drainage inspection. The lot 
features ample space and is unhindered by any natural features, drainage concerns, or easements 
that prevent reasonable development of the lot. MCDOT has reduced the requirement for the 
street-side setback to be measured from the ultimate right-of-way of 40-feet from the centerline 
of 39th Ave. to 33-feet, reducing the overall street-side setback from the east and increasing the 
development envelope.

Page 4 of 8
2025 Aerial photo of subject site

Page 5 of 8
Aerial image & surrounding environs

Page 6 of 8
Eagle view of subject site looking north into subject parcel (aerial image dated 1/13/2025). 
Zoning District map

Page 7 of 8
Zoning District Standards:
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 
Variance
Min. Front Yard Setback (from south property line) 
40-feet
n/a
Min. Rear Yard Setback (from north property line)
40-feet
n/a
Min. Side Yard Setback (from west property line)
30-feet
n/a
Min. Street Side Yard Setback (from half-street right-of-
way)
20-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%
28%
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.  
“I would like to go from 25% to 28% lot coverage.“
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.
“When I build my home. I want to have a covered portecocher that connects the main house to the 
casita, by adding this shade structure it will put me over the 25% lot coverage. I am asking for less 
than 3% more.”
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 8 of 8
“I have been building custom homes in this area for 15 years. I currently live 1 street North. I always 
want to Improve this are. I want to add value to this area and help all neighbors Increase there home 
values by building nice custom homes. All homes in this area are 3k sqft or bigger.”
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 positive and/or negative observations the Board may consider in its findings:
•
The applicant has not demonstrated that there is a peculiar condition facing the property. 
•
The parcel is not encumbered by any impediments to construction for a primary residence. 
Future right-of-way reduction for 39th Ave. was granted, reducing the requirement of the 
street side setback measured from a 40-foot half street right-of-way to 33-feet. This 
reduces the overall setback from the centerline of 39th Ave from 60 feet to 53 feet. The 
current allowance for lot coverage would allow 10,972.25 sq. ft. of roofed construction, 
an ample amount for reasonable development of a single-family residence and accessory 
structures. This variance is not warranted and applicant can receive zoning clearance 
meeting Rural-43 development standards.
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 maximum lot coverage of 28% for APN 300-81-016K.
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 pages)

/
Maricopa County Planning & Development - Phoenix, AZ
5
Gross Acres: 1 approx.
Generated May 29, 2025 9:28 AM
BA250025
Application Name:
Legal Description
Sunset Cove Investments LLC Property
Applicant
Case Address
1S 2E 15
Christopher McCarty
3902 W KAYENTA TRL
Applicant Phone/Email
Parcel Primary:300-81-016K
6027414131
arizonabuildinggroup@gmail.com
LAVEEN, AZ 85339
Map scale 1:696
Supervisor District No.
I would like to go to 28% lot coverage for my new home I would like to build. I would like to add just shy
of 3% more.

BA250025 RCVD 5/22/25

BA250025 RCVD 5/22/25

KAYENTA TRAIL
39TH AVENUE
APN 300-81-016K 
43,889 S.F.
FFE 1,170.00'
PAD 1,169.33'
FFE 1,170.20'
PAD 1,169.53
FFE 1,169.80'
PAD 1,169.13'
THIS DRAWING IS
COPYWRITTEN. ALL IDEAS,
DESIGNS AND INFORMATION
PRESENTED HEREON ARE
THE PROPERTY OF
REGISTRANT. THIS
DRAWING IS NOT TO BE
USED FOR CONSTRUCTION
UNTIL THE USER VERIFIES
THAT THIS PLAN IS THE
CURRENT AND CORRECT
VERSION.
#RT
(+.'
&#6'
SUNSET COVE INVESTMENTS LLC PARCEL (APN 300-81-016K)
NWC 39TH AVENUE & KAYENTA TRAIL LAVEEN, AZ  85339
GRADING & DRAINAGE
C3
PRELIM.
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
PO BOX 6801  GOODYEAR, AZ  85338
623-910-9112
        KEITH.DLKCIVIL@OUTLOOK.COM
C2
PRELIM. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
PROPERTY INFORMATION
   Accessory Structure
1,320 Sq Ft
   Total Footprint
           12,084 Sq Ft
   Lot Area
           43,889 Sq Ft
   Lot Coverage %
27.5%
Under Roof Square Footage Table
Main Floor
Casita
Total Livable Space
Ancillary Covered Space
BA250025 RCVD 5/22/25