5.A.
Board of Adjustment
- Meeting Date:
- 10/01/2025
- From:
- Tiffany Antol, Zoning Code Manager
Information
REQUEST:
PZ-25-00171-01: A request from applicant David Carpenter, on behalf of Flag Holdings, LLC, for a Zoning Code Variance from the lot width requirements outlined in Table 10-40.30.050.C: Industrial Zones – Building Form and Property Development Standards of the Zoning Code. The applicant seeks to reduce the required minimum lot width from 100 feet to 32 feet to allow the parcel to be split. The subject property is located at 495 S. River Run Road and is zoned Light Industrial Open (LI-O).
STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustment approve the proposed variance for a 32-foot minimum lot width, in accordance with the findings presented in this staff summary, subject to the conditions listed below.
INTRODUCTION AND DISCUSSION::
The subject property (APN 104-16-005) is Lot 5 of the Rio de Flag Business Park Subdivision, a ten-lot subdivision recorded in 1995. Located off Butler Road, between Warner’s Landscaping and the Sawmill Road mixed-use development, the property is a 2.86-acre lot developed with a 15,840-square-foot multi-use industrial building. The site was previously planned for an additional 5,000+ square-foot building.
The property fronts the River Run Road cul-de-sac, with its narrowest section at the frontage—typical of cul-de-sac lots. It is oddly shaped and constrained by several encumbrances, including:
The property fronts the River Run Road cul-de-sac, with its narrowest section at the frontage—typical of cul-de-sac lots. It is oddly shaped and constrained by several encumbrances, including:
- A reserved resource area (approximately 0.5 acres)
- A 50-foot rear setback
- A 16-foot public utility easement traversing the property east/west
- A 10-foot drainage and public utility easement along the western property line
ZONING CODE REQUIREMENTS:
The applicant is requesting a variance from the minimum lot width requirement found in Table 10-40.30.050.C of the Zoning Code. This request is to allow the existing lot to be split into two parcels.
According to the table, new lots/parcels in the LI-O zone must have a minimum lot width of 100 feet, measured at the front setback line, which is 15 feet from the front property line.
According to the table, new lots/parcels in the LI-O zone must have a minimum lot width of 100 feet, measured at the front setback line, which is 15 feet from the front property line.
VARIANCE CRITERIA AND ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to A.R.S. Section §9-462.06, the Board of Adjustment is authorized to consider and approve variances from the otherwise applicable provisions of the Zoning Code subject to specific standards or findings. Division 10-20.70 of the Zoning Code establishes the process for applying and the requirements to review and approve a variance application by the Board of Adjustment. The information to be considered by the Board in the approval or denial of a variance application is limited to four (4) criteria specified below. It should be noted that the Board of Adjustment may only consider and apply arguments pertaining to the findings.
A variance shall only be granted if the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
A. That, because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including its size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of these regulations will deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property of the same classification in the same zone;
Applicant Statement:
The special circumstances is that our lot is an odd shape due to it being located on the end of a cul-de-sac, and the strict application of the regulation is depriving us of splitting the lot and developing the back 1.3 acres.
Staff Analysis:
The size of the subject property is sufficient in size or area to permit a lot/parcel split through a minor subdivision process. Previous development proposals have shown the sufficiency of the new proposed parcel to support additional development in accordance with the Light Industrial Open zone standards. The applicant’s proposal to create a flag lot will not be able to meet the minimum lot width requirement of the LI-O zone. There are provisions in residential zones to create alternate lot dimensions, lot coverage, and setbacks through the subdivision process but there are currently no such provisions in the commercial and industrial zones. In the past it was commonplace to make these adjustments through the subdivision platting process even though there are no specific code provisions that permit these adjustments. This is exemplified in the subdivision in which the subject property is located which requires a 50-foot rear setback where no setback is required by the zone.
The circumstances applicable to the property include the frontage on a street cul-de-sac which puts the property at a disadvantage as most lots created on a cul-de-sac have a smaller than average lot width at the front of the property. Both proposed new lots will have sufficient area to support development and exceed the 100-foot minimum lot width just not at the front setback. This requirement would prohibit the split of the existing lot. Four other similar sized lots within the same subdivision have already been split. The only other alternative for creating a new lot would be to add a new public road or private street tract, as each new lot is required to have frontage on one or the other. At the time this subdivision was create the street standard requirements were smaller and even smaller private street tracts were permitted. That is no longer the case. The new required street widths would eliminate the possibility of creating a new road on this site.
B. That a grant of a variance will be subject to conditions to ensure that the adjustment authorized is the minimum variation needed and that it will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located;
Applicant Statement:
We are only asking for one very specific regulation to be modified and that is the minimum lot width measured at the front setback. This will allow us to utilize the rear of the property. This does not constitute a special privilege because it is simply allowing our property to be developed in a way the other properties in the vicinity have been developed. There have been 7 lot splits in the Rio de Flag Business Park over the years since it was subdivided.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed lot width of 32 feet is the minimum variation needed to accommodate the proposed lot split due to the location of the existing development on site. The current property owner purchased the lot with the existing development.
Applicant Statement:
We were not involved in the original subdivision process and purchased the property in its current form.
Staff Analysis:
The applicant did not develop the Rio de Flag Business Park subdivision. It was clearly not in opposition to the original developers intention to allow lot splits to occur within the development, as several other lots within the subdivision have already been split. In one case, additional roadways were included to allow for the splits to occur. This split occurred prior to the current roadway standard requirements.
Applicant Statement:
(1) We are not asking for a change of use. (2) We do not currently have any non-conforming uses or structures and this variance would not create any non-conforming uses or structures. (3) We are not asking for the zoning to be changed in any way.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed variance does not impact the permitted uses of the LI-O zone, nor would it result in the extension of a nonconforming use or structure. The variance does not change the terms of the zone for any or all of the subject property.
A variance shall only be granted if the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
A. That, because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including its size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of these regulations will deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property of the same classification in the same zone;
Applicant Statement:
The special circumstances is that our lot is an odd shape due to it being located on the end of a cul-de-sac, and the strict application of the regulation is depriving us of splitting the lot and developing the back 1.3 acres.
Staff Analysis:
The size of the subject property is sufficient in size or area to permit a lot/parcel split through a minor subdivision process. Previous development proposals have shown the sufficiency of the new proposed parcel to support additional development in accordance with the Light Industrial Open zone standards. The applicant’s proposal to create a flag lot will not be able to meet the minimum lot width requirement of the LI-O zone. There are provisions in residential zones to create alternate lot dimensions, lot coverage, and setbacks through the subdivision process but there are currently no such provisions in the commercial and industrial zones. In the past it was commonplace to make these adjustments through the subdivision platting process even though there are no specific code provisions that permit these adjustments. This is exemplified in the subdivision in which the subject property is located which requires a 50-foot rear setback where no setback is required by the zone.
The circumstances applicable to the property include the frontage on a street cul-de-sac which puts the property at a disadvantage as most lots created on a cul-de-sac have a smaller than average lot width at the front of the property. Both proposed new lots will have sufficient area to support development and exceed the 100-foot minimum lot width just not at the front setback. This requirement would prohibit the split of the existing lot. Four other similar sized lots within the same subdivision have already been split. The only other alternative for creating a new lot would be to add a new public road or private street tract, as each new lot is required to have frontage on one or the other. At the time this subdivision was create the street standard requirements were smaller and even smaller private street tracts were permitted. That is no longer the case. The new required street widths would eliminate the possibility of creating a new road on this site.
B. That a grant of a variance will be subject to conditions to ensure that the adjustment authorized is the minimum variation needed and that it will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located;
Applicant Statement:
We are only asking for one very specific regulation to be modified and that is the minimum lot width measured at the front setback. This will allow us to utilize the rear of the property. This does not constitute a special privilege because it is simply allowing our property to be developed in a way the other properties in the vicinity have been developed. There have been 7 lot splits in the Rio de Flag Business Park over the years since it was subdivided.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed lot width of 32 feet is the minimum variation needed to accommodate the proposed lot split due to the location of the existing development on site. The current property owner purchased the lot with the existing development.
C. The special circumstances applicable to the property are not self-imposed by any person having an interest in the property; and
Applicant Statement:
We were not involved in the original subdivision process and purchased the property in its current form.
Staff Analysis:
The applicant did not develop the Rio de Flag Business Park subdivision. It was clearly not in opposition to the original developers intention to allow lot splits to occur within the development, as several other lots within the subdivision have already been split. In one case, additional roadways were included to allow for the splits to occur. This split occurred prior to the current roadway standard requirements.
D. The variance will not allow the establishment of a use which: (1) is not otherwise permitted in the zone, (2) would result in the extension of a nonconforming use or structure, or (3) would change the terms of the zone of any or all of the subject property.
Applicant Statement:
(1) We are not asking for a change of use. (2) We do not currently have any non-conforming uses or structures and this variance would not create any non-conforming uses or structures. (3) We are not asking for the zoning to be changed in any way.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed variance does not impact the permitted uses of the LI-O zone, nor would it result in the extension of a nonconforming use or structure. The variance does not change the terms of the zone for any or all of the subject property.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
The applicant has provided notice by mail of the Board of Adjustment hearing for this application to the property owners within 300 feet of the subject property and has placed a sign on the property. Staff also placed an ad in the Arizona Daily Sun on September 13, 2025.
As of the date of this report, staff has not received any public comments.
As of the date of this report, staff has not received any public comments.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustment finds that the criteria required for granting of a variance have been met, and approve the variance application subject to the following conditions:
- The subject property may be split with a minimum 32-foot-wide lot measured at the front setback line as shown on the proposed parcel split map provided by the applicant. All other required provisions of the Zoning Code shall be met.
- The parcel split shall be accomplished through the recordation of a minor subdivision plat.
- Each parcel shall be served with water and sewer in accordance with the Engineering Design Standards & Specification for New Infrastructure.