PZC Packet 042021
Notice of Regular Avon Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting
April 20, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. MST
WEBINAR MEETING ONLY
Avon Town Hall is closed to the public due to COVID-19
pandemic health orders to restrict gatherings.
Physical attendance of Avon Planning and Zoning meeting
is not allowed.
Please go to the Town of Avon website, www.Avon.org, and
click on the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting bar on
the top of the home page to find information on registering to
join the meeting. You can also find the agenda and meeting
packet materials for the Council meeting under Government >
Planning and Zoning Commission > Agendas, Packets &
Materials.
We apologize for the inconvenience and
appreciate your patience!
______________________________________________________________________________
MEETING AGENDAS AND PACKETS ARE FOUND AT: WWW.AVON.ORG
AGENDAS WERE POSTED AT AVON TOWN HALL, AVON RECREATION CENTER, AVON ELEMENTARY AND AVON PUBLIC LIBRARY.
IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION NEEDS, PLEASE, IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING,
CALL TOWN PLANNER DAVID MCWILLIAMS AT 970-748-4023 OR EMAIL CMCWILLIAMS@AVON.ORG WITH ANY SPECIAL REQUESTS. 1
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 2021
MEETING BEGINS AT 5:00 PM
VIRTUAL MEETING ONLY
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3. DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR EX-PARTE COMMUNICATION RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS
4. BUSINESS I TEMS
4.1. 5151A LONGSUN LANE – LOT 48A BLOCK 4 WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING – MINOR
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ALTERNATIVE EQUIVALENT COMPLIANCE FOR A SPLIT RAIL FENCE WITH MESH
THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH AVON DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS (TOWN P LANNER DAVID
MCWILLIAMS AND ALEXESS REA SMITH).
5. CONSENT AGENDA
5.1. MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 6 , 2021
5.2. RECORD OF DECISION - 42 RIVERFRONT LANE - MJR21004 – MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN
6. STAFF UPDATES
7. ADJOURN
3:30 PM: 42 RIVERFRONT LANE.
SITE TOUR: CONCERNING ITEM 4.1 -MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
SUMMARY: 30 MINUTE TOUR.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 6, 2021 VIRTUAL MEETING ONLY
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Chairperson Jared Barned called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m. A roll call was taken, and Planning
Commission members present were Steve Nusbaum, Sara Lanious, Marty Golembiewski, Anthony
Sekinger, Donna Lang, and Trevor MacAllister. Also present were Town Planner David McWilliams,
Planning Director Matt Pielsticker, and Town Attorney Paul Wisor.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Action: Commissioner Lang motioned to approve the agenda. Commissioner Golembiewski seconded
the motion and it carried unanimously 7-0.
3. DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR EX-PARTE COMMUNICATION RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS
Action: No conflicts or communication were disclosed.
4. BUSINESS I TEMS
4.1. 42 RIVERFRONT LANE – LOT 1 RIVERFRONT SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING – MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR A 40 UNIT CONDOMINIUM BUILDING ABOVE A PARKING GARAGE. THIS IS PHASE II FOR THE
PROPERTY (TOWN PLANNER DAVID MCWILLIAMS AND J IM TELLING).
Public Comment: None.
Action: Commissioner Golembiewski motioned to approve Case #MJR21004 with the following findings
and conditions:
Findings:
1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan,
§7.16.090(f), Design Review. The design meets the development and design standards
established in the Avon Development Code and the PUD Design Standards;
2. The application is complete;
3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application
complies with the relevant review criteria;
4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; and
5. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community.
Conditions:
1. A satisfactory irrigation plan that achieves silver or better LEED standards, and demonstrates
square footage coverage and hydrozones shall be presented to staff before a building permit will
be issued;
2. A stormwater quality plan that accounts for Phase I development will be approved by Staff before
issuing a building permit;
3. Snow arresting measures for roofs that shed onto pedestrian areas will be presented for Building
Official review; and
4. A new design for short-term parking on Riverfront will be implemented before any closure of the
current short-term parking area related to building on Lot 1.
Commissioner MacAllister seconded the motion and it carried unanimously 7-0.
5. CONSENT AGENDA
5.1. MEETING MINUTES
5.1.1. MARCH 16, 2021
5.2. RECORDS OF DECISION
5.2.1. 2171 LONG SPUR – #MJR21001 – MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN
5.2.2. 42 RIVERFRONT LANE - MJR20006 – MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN
5.2.3. 120 METCALF ROAD – #SGN21001 – MAJOR SIGN PROGRAM
5.2.4. 5150 LONGSUN LANE UNIT A - #MJR21002 AND #AEC21001 – MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND ALTERNATIVE EQUIVALENT COMPLIANCE
5.2.5. 5150 LONGSUN LANE UNIT B - #MJR21003 AND #AEC21002 - MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND ALTERNATIVE EQUIVALENT COMPLIANCE
Action: Commissioner Nusbaum motioned to approve the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Lanious
seconded the motion and it carried unanimously 6-0, with Commissioner Barnes abstaining.
6. STAFF UPDATES
Action: Matt Pielsticker updated PZC on reapplying to the board.
7. ADJOURN
There being no further business before the Commission adjourned the meeting at 6:36 p.m.
These meeting minutes are only a summary of the proceedings of the meeting. They are not intended to be
comprehensive or to include each statement, person speaking or to portray with complete accuracy. The most
accurate records of the meeting are the audio of the meeting, which is housed in the Town Clerk' s office.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
_________________________________
David McWilliams, Town Planner
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Chairperson
PZC Record of Decision: MJR21004 Page 1 of 1
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF RECOMMENDATION
DATE OF DECISION: April 6, 2021
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Major Development Plan
PROPERTY LOCATION: Lot 1 Riverfront Subdivision
FILE NUMBER: MJR21004
APPLICANT: EW Riverfront East Investor, LLC
This Record of Recommendation is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code §7.16.080(c):
DECISION: Approval of the development plan with the following findings and conditions:
Findings:
1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan,
§7.16.090(f), Design Review. The design meets the development and design standards
established in the Avon Development Code and the PUD Design Standards;
2. The application is complete;
3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application
complies with the relevant review criteria;
4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; and
5. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community.
Conditions:
1. A satisfactory irrigation plan that achieves silver or better LEED standards, and demonstrates
square footage coverage and hydrozones shall be presented to staff before a building permit will
be issued;
2. A stormwater quality plan that accounts for Phase I development will be approved by Staff before
issuing a building permit;
3. Snow arresting measures for roofs that shed onto pedestrian areas will be presented for Building
Official review; and
4. A new design for short-term parking on Riverfront will be implemented before any closure of the
current short-term parking area related to building on Lot 1.
THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ARE HEREBY APPROVED:
BY:______________________________________ DATE: ___________________
PZC Chairperson
970-748-4023 cmcwilliams@avon.org
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: David McWilliams, AICP, Town Planner
RE: MNR21013 and AEC21003 Public Hearing Lot 48A Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision /5151A Longsun Lane
DATE: April 13, 2021
STAFF REPORT OVERVIEW: This staff report contains two applications for consideration by the Planning and Zoning
Commission (PZC): Minor Development Plan and Alternative Equivalent Compliance (AEC) for a proposed fence on the
property (the Application).
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Alexess Rea (the Applicant) propose a two-rail split rail fence with mesh to enclose a portion of
her back yard to keep the dogs in. Fences in Wildridge are subject to strict standards, detailed below. The enclosed area
traces the property lines and is less than 2,000 square feet. Deviation from the Avon Development Code (ADC), in this case
for delineation of property line and material, requires an AEC application, public hearing by the PZC, and final decision by this
board.
PUBLIC NOTICE: Notice of the public hearing was published in the April 9, 2021 edition of the Vail Daily in accordance with
Sec. 7.16.020(d) of the AMC. Mailed notice is not required for this application type.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Lot 48A is located on Longsun Lane above the Water Department’s pumphouse. The yard has a
continuous grade sloping down from the house. It is a duplex and approval for the project was granted by the duplex neighbor.
Page 2 of 5
View of the back yard.
PLANNING ANALYSIS: Section 7.28.080(b), of the ADC offers the following intent and design of fence structures in
Wildridge:
Although discouraged in Wildridge and Wildwood, in all instances fences should complement the property and
landscape rather than contain the property. Fences that delineate property boundaries are not permitted. Fences will
be considered for approval by staff only when demonstrated by the applicant that the design is consistent with the
following criteria:
i. Fence material shall be wood and no more than four (4) feet in height;
ii. Fences shall be constructed using a split rail design with no more than two (2) horizontal rails;
iii. Fences shall not delineate property lines;
iv. Fences shall not enclose an area of two thousand (2,000) square feet or more;
v. Fences shall ensure that wildlife migration is not negatively affected with the proposed fence design;
vi. If a fence is part of a multi-family project, approval shall be received from the association and the fence design shall
be integrated with the overall landscape design of the property; and
vii. If a fence is located on a duplex property, written approval shall be received from the adjoining property owner and
the fence design must be integrated with the overall landscape design.
Staff Response: The Application fences in the rear yard closest to the house and delineates the property line on two sides.
While fences are required to be made of wood only, aesthetically appropriate two-rail split rail fences with mesh have been
approved by PZC. PZC has rarely allowed deviations from other code requirements.
DESIGN STANDARDS ANALYSIS:
Landscaping: No landscaping changes are proposed. The back yard is mostly medium length grasses.
MINOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN & DESIGN REVIEW - REVIEW CRITERIA: § 7.16.080(f), Development Plan
1. Evidence of substantial compliance with the purpose of the Development Code as specified in §7.04.030, Purposes;
Staff Response: The PZC should carefully weigh if the application complies with the applicable purposes outlined in the
Development Code (linked below).
(e)Promote adequate light, air, landscaping and open space and avoid undue concentration or sprawl of population;
(l)Promote architectural design which is compatible, functional, practical and complimentary checking to Avon's sub-
Page 3 of 5
alpine environment;
Staff finds the Application generally compliments the property.
2. Evidence of substantial compliance with §7.16.090, Design Review; Staff Response: This application should be assessed for compliance with the Design Review Criteria of the Development
Code, found below. The Design Review section seeks quality development that is visually harmonious with the site and the
surrounding vicinity.
3. Consistency with the Avon Comprehensive Plan;
Staff Response: The site is located in the Northern Residential District (District 11 of the Comprehensive Plan, linked below),
which states, “The character for the developed landscape should reflect the area’s dry climate and typically steep terrain with
low water-requiring plant materials and natural landscaping. Due to the limited number of existing trees and shrubs and the
open character of the property, special care should be taken to ensure that all structures are compatible with one another
and in harmony with the natural surroundings.” Despite the location of the fence not conforming to code, it is supported by
staff due to the distance from the neighboring property and grade difference from the street.
4. Consistency with any previously approved and not revoked subdivision plat, planned development, or any other precedent plan or land use approval for the property as applicable;
Staff Response: Except where noted, the application conforms with the accompanying requirements of the PUD zoning
and the ADC.
5. Compliance with all applicable development and design standards set forth in this Code, including but not limited to the provisions in Chapter 7.20, Zone Districts and Official Zoning Map, Chapter 7.24,
Use Regulations, and Chapter 7.28, Development Standards; and
Staff Response: The analysis contained in this s taff report addresses all applicable ADC standards.
6. That the development can be adequately served by city services including but not limited to
roads, water, wastewater, fire protection, and emergency medical services.
Staff Response: Not applicable.
§7.16.090(f), Design Review:
1. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community; or, where redevelopment is anticipated, relates the development to the character of Avon as a whole;
Staff Response: PZC should carefully weigh if the location of the proposed fence relates to the character of the surrounding
community.
2. The design meets the development and design standards established in this Development Code; and
Staff Response: Except as noted, the design is compliant with the development and design standards contained in the
Development Code.
3. The design reflects the long- range goals and design criteria from the Avon Comprehensive Plan and
other applicable, adopted plan documents.
Staff Response: Applicable adopted plans include the Avon Comprehensive Plan and ADC. The design has been evaluated
for conformance with these plans and staff has determined the proposed design meets the requirements, except as noted.
7.16.120 ALTERNATIVE EQUIVALENT COMPLIANCE: Alternative equivalent compliance is a procedure that allows
development to meet the intent of the design-related provisions of the code through an alternative design. It is not a general
waiver or weakening of regulations; rather, this application procedure permits a site-specific plan that is equal to or better
Page 4 of 5
than the strict application of a design standard specified in the Development Code. This procedure is not intended as a
substitute for a variance or administrative modification or a vehicle for relief from standards in this Chapter. Alternative
compliance shall apply only to the specific site for which it is requested and does not establish a precedent for assured
approval of other requests.
AEC Review Criteria: The PZC shall use the following review criteria as the basis for a decision on an application for
alternative equivalent compliance: 1. The proposed alternative achieves the intent of the subject design or development standard to the same
or better degree than the subject standard;
2. The proposed alternative achieves the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the subject standard;
3. The proposed alternative results in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with the subject standard; and
4. The proposed alternative imposes no greater impacts on adjacent properties than would occur through
compliance with the specific requirements of this Title.
Applicant Response: According to the Applicant, the fence will be installed with mesh to keep the dogs in the yard. While
the fence deviates from the design standards for Wildridge, this fence type is minimally visually obtrusive and does not impact
the neighborhood. It is integrated with the landscaping and does not impact views (Attachment A, page 3).
Staff Response: The AEC application achieves the intent of the development standards to the same degree without causing
great impacts on adjacent properties. The delineation of property lines is not concerning to staff, as the duplex neighbor has
approved the location, and the neighboring (south) house is approximately 150 feet away from the property line. At this
distance, the delineation of property line seems less unsightly and visually discordant.
AEC - RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Case #AEC21003, an Alternative Equivalent Compliance application
for Lot 48A Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision together with the findings as recommended by staff."
Findings:
1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.120, Alternative Equivalent Compliance;
2. The proposed alternative achieves the intent of the subject design or development standard to the same or better
degree than the subject standard;
3. The proposed alternative achieves the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better
degree than the subject standard;
4. The proposed alternative results in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with
the subject standard;
5. The proposed alternative does not impose greater impacts on adjacent properties than would occur through
compliance with the specific requirements of the Code; and
6. Delineation of the property line is permitted in this case due to duplex neighbor consent and the roughly 150 feet
between the fence and the neighboring house.
MNR21013 - RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Case #MNR21013, an application for Minor Design and
Development Plan for Lot 48A Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision together with the findings of fact outlined by staff.”
Findings:
1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review.
The design meets the development and design standards established in the Avon Development Code;
2. The application is complete;
3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application complies with the
relevant review criteria;
Page 5 of 5
4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan;
5. The demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity is mitigated by the application; and
6. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Deny the application: If the location and height of the fence are disagreeable to PZC, staff suggests denying the application. Continue the Public Hearing: If PZC feels that more information is needed, staff suggests continuing the application.
ATTACHMENT:
A. Application Materials
LINKS:
Avon Development Code
Avon Comprehensive Plan
Thank you,
David McWilliams
970-749-4023
cmcwilliams@avon.org
Attachment A
Attachment A
5151 Longsun Lane AEC Fence (A. Smith)
1 of 2
Background: We recently purchased our home in Wildridge and already love so much about
our neighborhood and living in Avon. Our sole purpose in seeking approval of a fence plan is to
provide our two beloved dogs—Nellie (Vizsla) and Oso (Husky-mix)—a useful space where they
can safely enjoy their new home, too. Unlike some others, I am not comfortable letting my
dogs loose on our property off-leash. This is particularly so for Oso, who quickly proved himself
to follow the husky stereotype of being a “runner” if given even a brief opportunity. We love
both dogs too much to risk losing them, and know from previously having a fenced yard just
how much they relish being outside soaking up the fresh air and Colorado sunshine (and, at
least for Oso, just lying in the snow, too).
Note: For final fence style, we have attached multiple options/photos provided to us by our
fence contractor. Our understanding is that they all comply with established standards aside
from the meshing we wish to add. We prefer the dimensional rail, but are comfortable with
whichever option the Board deems most suitable for our neighborhood.
Response to Mandatory Review Criteria in § 7.16.120(d) Review Criteria:
(1) The proposed alternative achieves the intent of the subject design or development standard to
the same or better degree than the subject standard: The proposed fence plan encompasses
minimal deviation from the subject standard, primarily the addition of wire meshing. We are
working with a contractor (Strategic Fence) that is familiar with the area and applicable
standards. The plan we have discussed involves using the most aesthetically pleasing, i.e., as
invisible as possible, meshing option that still offers safe containment for our dogs. Hence, we
believe that the final product would, just as a standard fence, “maintain adequate visibility”
and “openness” on our property. See §7.28.080(a). In addition, given the small area at issue,
proximity to our physical home, and wide-open spaces surrounding our property, the
“movement of wildlife” would be minimally, if at all, affected. See §7.28.080(a). (We love that
we frequently have deer on and near our property and do not recall ever having witnessed
them in the small area the proposed fence would encompass.) Further, to the extent the
proposed fence does follow portions of our property line, they are only small portions of the
overall property line on two sides—they in no way “contain the property.” See §7.28.080(b)(1).
Given the shape and topography of our property, the proposed lines are necessary to fulfill the
inherent purpose of the fence, which is to provide safe and useful containment for our dogs.
The neighborhood is already peppered with similar fences. And to further ensure integration
with the overall appearance of our property, we have decided we would bear the extra cost of
staining the wood portion of the fence to match the wood on our home.
(2) The proposed alternative achieves the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to
the same or better degree than the subject standard: The minimal proposed deviation from
the subject standard is limited to our small property, and does not in any way undermine the
goals or policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan. To the extent our fence would impact the
goals or policies of the Avon Comprehensive plan at all, it would do so equivalently to other,
standardly-approved fences.
Attachment A
5151 Longsun Lane AEC Fence (A. Smith)
2 of 2
(3) The proposed alternative results in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better
than compliance with the subject standard: The benefits to the community of the proposed
alternative fence—which aims to keep our dogs safely contained—are at least equivalent to,
if not greater than, a fence under the subject standard. Dogs that are happy and safe at
home benefit the community.
and
(4) The proposed alternative imposes no greater impacts on adjacent properties than would
occur through compliance with the specific requirements of this Title: The deviation
encompassed by our proposed plan is present in existing fences throughout the
neighborhood and would not impose greater impact on adjacent property than compliance
with the specific requirements of this Title.
Attachment A