L82 B1 WR Variance setbackTown of Avon
Variance Staff Report
September 2, 1997 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Report date
December 20, 2019
Variance type
Retaining Wall in Side Yard Setback
Legal description
Lot 82, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision – MVM Developers
Zoning
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Residential – 4 units
Address
2492 Draw Spur
Introduction
On March 18, 1997, the Planning & Zoning Commission approved this four plex’s final design. The site has a slope of approximately 31% in the development area.
During excavation of the project, a +2 to a +6 foot discrepancy in the topographic survey was discovered. This discrepancy resulted in six feet of additional retainage above the driveway.
Additionally, the existing topography for the building envelope was underestimated by approximately three feet (please see attached Peak Land Surveying, Inc. letter dated June 19, 1997).
To minimize the increase in the retaining wall’s height, the building and associated driveway were raised three feet.
The applicants subsequently have requested a grant of variance to place in the side yard setback the second tier of a two-tiered inter-locking block retaining wall. The first tier would
be placed upon the 10-foot side yard setback, reaching a maximum height of approximately 7 feet. The second tier would be located on the 7.5-easement line and reach a maximum height
of approximately 5 feet. The walls would taper down from their centers.
A second option is to construct on the setback line a single 13-foot concrete retaining wall, which would not require a variance. The applicants prefer the block retaining walls for
aesthetic reasons.
Staff Comments
The staff reviewed the variance request with respect to the following criteria:
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity.
Within the subdivision, other properties with comparable topography possess variances for similar retaining walls.
The degree to which relief from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites
in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege.
As originally approved, the project required over 6 feet of tiered retaining walls in the same side yard setback. Though the topographic conditions are more severe than originally indicated,
it is staff’s opinion that the site’s increasing steepness and confined access would cause any development on this site to seek relief from the setback requirements. Relief from the
setback requirements appears warranted and does not constitute special privilege.
The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities and public safety;
The 13-foot maximum of retainage does present a safety concern relative to the neighboring uphill project, Buffalo Head Townhomes. However, the applicants propose increasing the landscaping
above the retaining wall as well a placing a split rail fence between the wall and the additional landscaping. Staff believes these measures should provide sufficient mitigation of
the safety concerns.
Such other factors and criteria applicable to the proposed variance.
Moving the project down the slope to provide additional room for the retaining walls would cause increased site disturbance, and is problematic due to the site’s increasing steepness.
Approval Criteria
According to the Section 17.36.040, the Avon Municipal Code, the Planning & Zoning Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance:
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity;
The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among
sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege;.
The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety;
Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed variance.
Findings Required
According to Section 17.36.050 of the Avon Municipal Code, the Planning & Zoning Commission shall make the following written findings before granting a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district;
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties of improvements in the vicinity;
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons:
The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives
of this title;
There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone;
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff believes the requested variance satisfies the required findings, and therefore recommends granting the variance.
Recommended Motion for Requested Variance
Approve Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution 97-11, granting a variance for Lot 82, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, to place structural retaining walls in the side yard setback as
depicted in the plans dated “Received” August 19, 1997, based upon findings A., B., C.1, C.2, & C.3.
If you have any questions regarding this or any other project or community development issue, please call me at 949-4280 (extension 139), or stop by the Community Development Department.
Respectfully submitted,
George H. Harrison
Planner