PZC Agenda 031522_______________________________________________________________________________
MEETING AGENDAS AND PACKETS ARE FOUND AT: WWW.AVON.ORG
AGENDAS ARE POSTED AT AVON TOWN HALL, AVON RECREATION CENTER, ONLINE AND AVON PUBLIC LIBRARY
IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION NEEDS, PLEASE, IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING,
CALL MATT PIELSTICKER AT 970-748-4413 OR EMAIL MATT@AVON.ORG WITH ANY SPECIAL REQUESTS.
1
AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 2022 - MEETING BEGINS AT 5:00 PM
100 MIKAELA WAY – AVON TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS – AVON TOWN HALL
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 ITEM
4. 2458 DRAW SPUR / ALTERNATIVE EQUIVALENT COMPLIANCE AND MINOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN - PUBLIC HEARING – SPLIT RAIL FENCE ON A FOURPLEX TOWNHOME IN WILDRIDGE (PLANNING DIRECTOR MATT
PIELSTICKER JENNIFER TUCKER).
5. 240 CHAPEL PLACE / VARIANCE AND SIGN PLAN – PUBLIC HEARING – REQUEST FOR LARGER STOREFRONT SIGN
THAT SIGN CODE PERMITS, AND DESIGN REVIEW OF TWO SIGNS TOTAL (SENIOR PLANNER JENA SKINNER AND TJ
MALONE) 6. HISTORIC MARKER SIGNS – REFERRAL – DISCUSS AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS ON DESIGN AND LOCATION OF
NINE (9) HISTORIC MONUMENT SIGNS (PLANNING DIRECTOR MATT PIELSTICKER AND CULTURAL ARTS AND SPECIAL
EVENTS MANAGER DANITA DEMPSEY)
7. CONSENT AGENDA
7.1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 15, 2022 PZC MEETING
8. STAFF UPDATES
7. ADJOURN
970-748-4413 mpielsticker@avon.org
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Matt Pielsticker, AICP, Planning Director
RE: MNR21040 and AEC22002 Public Hearing Lot 83, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision / 2458 Draw Spur, Unit 4
DATE: March 8, 2022
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: Jennifer Tucker (“the Applicant”) proposes a 4 foot tall, two-rail split rail fence with wire mesh to
enclose a portion of her property. Fences in Wildridge are subject to strict standards, detailed below. Deviation from the Avon
Development Code (“ADC”) for material and enclosed area requires an AEC application, public hearing, and final decision by
this board.
Vicinity Map with 2458 Draw Spur Highlighted in Red
PUBLIC NOTICE: Notice of the public hearing was published in the March 4, 2022 edition of the Vail Daily in accordance
with Sec. 7.16.020(d) of the Avon Municipal Code (“AMC”). Mailed notice is not required for this application type. There
have been no public comments received.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The Property is located at the end of Draw Spur culdesac in the Wildridge Subdivision. The
Property is accessed from the culdesac and topography drops away from the road toward the Town open space below. The
property contains a fourplex structure, and the overhead regional electric transmission lines border the property to the north.
Page 2 of 5
Fence installed at 2458 Draw Spur, Unit 1 (Approved in 2017 by PZC)
AEC - RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Case #AEC22002, an Alternative Equivalent Compliance application
for Lot 83, Block 1, 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 wire mesh does not impose greater impacts on adjacent properties than would occur through
compliance with the specific requirements of the Code;
6. The fenced exceeds the allowable fenced area, but it is located in a heavily landscaped area that is not visually
impactful to the neighborhood.
MNR21040 - RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Case #MNR21040, an application for Minor Design and
Development Plan for Lot 83, Block 1, 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;
2. The design meets the development and design standards established in the Avon Development Code, with
alternative design approved by AEC application;
3. The application is complete;
Page 3 of 5
4. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application complies with the
relevant review criteria;
5. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan;
6. The demand for public services is unaffected; and
7. The design of the fence relates to the character of the surrounding community and other similar improvements on Draw
Spur Road.
8. The Property is multifamily and the other owners have approved the fence design, as required by §7.28.080(b)(1)(v).
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
• Deny the application: If the fenced area or wire mesh are disagreeable to PZC, staff suggests denying the
application after considering public comments.
• Continue the Public Hearing: If PZC feels that more information is needed, staff suggests continuing the
applications to your next regularly scheduled meeting.
FENCE REGULATIONS: Section 7.28.080(b), of the ADC offers the following intent and design of fence structures in
Wildridge:
“Within the Wildridge Subdivision and RLD Zone Districts. All fences require approval from the Avon Planning
and Zoning. Although discouraged in Wildridge and Wildwood, fences should complement the property and
landscape rather than contain the property. The following review criteria apply for the review of fence
applications:
(i) Fence material shall be wood and no more than four (4) feet in height; [wire mesh proposed]
(ii) Fences shall be constructed using a split rail design with no more than two (2) horizontal rails;
(iii) Fences shall not be located closer than 7.5 feet from the property lines;
(iv) Fences shall not enclose an area of one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet or more;
[approximately 1,500 square feet proposed]
(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; (Revised Ord 2021-09)”
Staff Response: The Application fences in the rear portion of the applicant’s yard. The fence would be 4’ tall and in
compliance with the 4’ requirement. The fence does not follow property lines and is located more than 7.5’ from property
lines. While fences are required to be made of wood only, aesthetically appropriate two-rail split rail fences with mesh have
been approved by PZC on several occasions.
Other similar examples from the Wildridge nieghborhood include: 2458 Unit 1 Draw Spur (2017), 2511 Old Trail (2019), 2646
Bear Trap (2019), 2345 Fox Lane (2019), 5749 Wildridge Road East (2020), 5161 Longsun Lane (2021). PZC has rarely
allowed deviations from other code requirements (i.e. height,). Given the topography of the lot and the maturity of existing
trees on the Property, the fence should blend well with the overall landscape.
Page 4 of 5
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
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.
REVIEW CRITERIA: §7.16.120(d): 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.
Staff Response: The fence will be installed with mesh to keep pets in the yard, and at-large animals out of the yard. The
wire mesh should be minimally visible. While the fence deviates from the design standards for Wildridge, this fence type is
not obtrusive and does not impact the neighborhood as a whole. It is integrated with the landscaping and does not impact
views. The fence exceeds the allowable (1,200) square foot enclosed area requirement by approximately 300 feet. Keeping
the enclosed area below 2,000 square feet and in an interior area of the lot helps to diminish its prominence. Staff finds that
the Application achieves the intent of the development standards to the same degree without causing great impacts on
adjacent properties.
REVIEW CRITERIA: § 7.16.080(g)
1. Evidence of substantial compliance with the purpose of the Development Code as specified in §7.04.030, Purposes;
Staff Response: Staff finds the Application generally compliments the property and intent of the subject design standards.
2. The design conforms with the Avon Comprehensive Plan and other applicable, adopted plan documents;
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.”
ALTERNATIVE EQUIVALENT COMPLIANCE
MINOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN - REVIEW CRITERIA
Page 5 of 5
Despite the wire mesh and square footage of the fence not conforming to code, it is supported by staff due to the topography
of the site, abundance of full size native vegetation in the area, integrating existing trees into the design of the fence, and
meeting the general intent of the fencing standards.
3. 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: The neighboring property owner at Unit 1 of this fourplex received approval in 2017 for a similarly designed
fence. That fence enclosed an area of approximately 1,600 square feet and was approved based upon the property’s location,
on the end of a cul-de-sac, limiting visibility from the community at large.
4. 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;
Staff Response: The analysis contained in this staff report, including AEC analysis, addresses all applicable ADC standards.
5. That the development can be adequately served by city services including but not limited to
roads, water, wastewater, fire protection, and emergency medical services; and
Staff Response: Not applicable.
6. The development design conforms with the character of the surrounding community; or, where
redevelopment is anticipated, relates the development to the character of Avon as a whole.
Staff Response: The Wildridge subdivision includes a variety of architecture for structures, and most landscaping is
minimized with native grasses, primarily aspen and spruce trees, boulder retaining walls, and minimized sod areas. The
Mountain View townhomes are true to the nature of the surrounding community, and the addition of a fence maintains the
overall character.
ATTACHMENT:
A. Application Materials
LINKS:
Avon Development Code
Avon Comprehensive Plan
Tucker Residence Fence – Project Narrative
I would like to build a fence enclosing my side yard. I have a dog and a young son and having a fenced
yard would allow for them both to play safely outside. I have found that the largest issue with allowing
my dog and son to play outside is not them getting into trouble, but trouble finding them, in the form of
other dogs wondering into our yard. We are near a trail head and as much as I love dogs, I do not love
uncontrollable, unleashed dogs approaching my son or leashed dog while we are trying to relax and
enjoy our yard.
My home is an end unit in a 4-plex and the other end unit has a lovely fence that I would copy both in
design and placement. I have unanimous HOA approval.
Attachment A
Jennifer Tucker
2458 Draw Spur
Unit 4
Avon, CO 81620
Application # AEC22002 in tandem with application # MNR21040
I am requesting the addition of wire mesh to the split rail fence I am in the process of obtaining a permit
to install. The wire mesh would be for containment of a medium sized dog and my 8 year old son.
Per the review criteria, please see underlined comments:
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 split rail fence is per design code, the addition of
wire mesh is nearly invisible while providing peace of mind to a single mother to allow her dog and
son to play outside without fear of other dogs entering our yard.
2 – The proposed alternative achieves the goals and policies of Avon Comprehensive plan to the same or
better degree than the subject standard. The proposed addition of wire mesh would be installed in a
manner that upholds the goals of Avon in that would not impede views for anyone, would be nearly
undetectable from the street as we are the last unit on a cul-de-sac and the yard I would like to
enclose is lower in elevation than the street and on the side of my unit.
3 – The proposed alternative results in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than
compliance with the subject standard. The proposed addition of wire mesh results in being a good
neighbor by containing my dog and son all while maintaining a very natural aesthetic and a to-code
split rail fence.
Thank you for your consideration.
Regards,
Jennifer Tucker
Attachment A
Attachment A
Neighboring Fence on Unit 1
Attachment A
Attachment A
Enclosing Area up to existing tree
Attachment A
1
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 15, 2022
DATE OF DECISION: March 15, 2022
TYPE OF APPLICATIONS: Sign Variance and Sign Design
FILE NUMBERS: #VAR22001 & #SGN22001
PROPERTY LOCATION: Tract B1, Lot 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
ADDRESS: 220 Beaver Creek Place
APPLICANT: TJ Malone, Discount Sign for Appliance Factory
This decision and recommendation is in accordance with the Avon Sign Code (“Sign Code”) Chapter 7.34 .
Staff Report - VAR22001 and SGN22001
March 15, 2022 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting
Project type: Sign Design PUD
Zoning: PUD
Address: 218 Beaver Creek Place
Location: Tract B1, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Applicant: TJ Malone, Discount Signs- Representative of Charles E. Ewing, CEO, H& A Quality
Appliance, Inc. DBA Appliance Factory
Owner: SCB Properties Holdings
Prepared by: Jena Skinner, AICP
Staff Report Overview:
This staff report contains the following applications for consideration by the PZC:
1. VAR22001: Variance for the sign size of the new Appliance Factory/Mattress Kingdom location.
This application seeks approval for a sign design larger than the maximum 64' sign allowed in
Avon.
2. SGN22001: Sign Design for Tenant Identification Sign.
Background
This is a new commercial tenant in the Town of Avon. Poised to
occupy the previous Pier 1 Imports location, the business owners
have produced a study in which increasing the sign as now
proposed, it would lend potential customers and increase in
visibility. It is important to note that during the initial process, Staff
recommended a slight modification to their sign to be more in
alignment with the Sun & Ski and other more linear signs in the
area, thereby decreasing the white background. At this time, the
proposed sign is slightly larger than the previous Pier 1 Imports
sign and exceeds the maximum allowable size of permitted signs
in the Town by 15.11 sq. ft. Staff judged this application as
meeting the criteria for a variance and not a sign program (which
could allow a sign in excess of 64 square feet) due to the building's location, ownership structure, and
historic use.
Original Branded Logo
2
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 15, 2022
Summary of Request:
The Applicant is proposing to replace the Pier 1 Imports tenant identification sign with a redesigned
Appliance Factory and Mattress Kingdom sign. The application proposes a new design form what was
originally submitted, which includes interior lit channel letters and a significantly reduced symbol that is
found in their typical logo. There is no back panel. All lighting comes from internal LEDs. The total area is
calculated in “geometric shapes, as follows:
The building frontage is 67 linear feet. The Applicant has stated that the sign area is less than the former
Pier 1 Imports sign of 76.25 sq. ft.
Conformance with Section 7.16.010(f)(1) Review Criteria
(1) Review Criteria. The reviewing authority shall be Director when the Director has the authority to
administratively approve a development application. The reviewing authority shall be the PZC
and/or Town Council for all development applications which are subject to public hearing. The
reviewing authority shall review development applications for compliance with all relevant
standards and criteria as set forth in the specific procedures for the particular application in this
Development Code, as well as the following general criteria which shall apply to all development
applications:
(i) The development application is complete;
(ii) The development application provides sufficient information to allow the reviewing authority to
determine that the development application complies with the relevant review criteria;
(iii) The development application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive
Plan; and
(iv) The demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity is mitigated by
the development application.
Staff Response:
The applicants have been very responsive and communicative regarding this application. They have
submitted what was necessary to evaluate this application, however; Staff discovered one of the designs
needed additional sizing verification: the western side. As they need to get field measurements we are
excluding this sign as part of the application. As such, the sign slated for the western side will have to come
in for an independent sign permit at a later date. In summary, this application is in conformance with the
general review criteria for these files.
3
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 15, 2022
VAR22001
Variance Review Criteria:
The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the
following factors in assessing the Variance:
The relationship of the requested variance to existing and
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;
Such other factors and criteria as the Planning and Zoning
Commission deems applicable to the requested variance.
Staff Response:
The requested variance and sign application integrates well with the intended and neighboring uses, both in
the shopping center and the surrounding area (please see attached simulation images). In proximity to the
Sun and Ski location, other retail spaces have had signs larger than what regulations allowed for, with no
real impact on the community. Relief from the strict regulations would allow Appliance Factory Mattress
Kingdom (hereinafter AFMM), a sign compatible with the building and lot size, wall space, and location,
while also meeting the company site distance needs without being overbearing.
The application strikes a good balance between the needs of a large-scale retail space and the general
interests of the Town.
Required Findings:
The Planning and Zoning Commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance:
1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations on other properties in the vicinity;
2. That the variance is warranted for one (1) or more of the following reasons:
3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty
or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Sign Code,
4. 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 vicinity,
5. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the
applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity.
Staff Response:
Strict interpretation of the sign code's maximum square footage limitations would result in difficulty
inconsistent with the objectives of the Sign Code. With a large storefront size, the circumstances of this site
are generally not applicable to other locations in the vicinity and therefore do not constitute a special
privilege. Further, given the scale of this building frontage, it is reasonable to allow this owner the same
benefit of having a sign in proportion to smaller buildings, and whose scale is more in alignment with the
expectations of the existing sign code.
Location
4
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 15, 2022
SGN22001
Review Criteria for a Sign Plan:
Section 7.16.160 of the Avon Municipal Code offers the following sign review criteria for consideration:
Review Criteria. The following review criteria shall be considered as the basis for a decision on sign plan
applications:
1. Evidence of substantial compliance with the purpose of the Sign Code as specified in Section
7.32(A) Sign Code Purposes;
2. The suitability of the improvement, including materials with which the sign is to be constructed and
the site upon which it is to be located;
3. The nature of adjacent and neighboring improvements;
4. The quality of the materials to be utilized in any proposed improvement;
5. The visual impact of any proposed improvement, as viewed from any adjacent or neighboring
property;
6. The objective that no improvement will be so similar or dissimilar to other signs in the vicinity that
values, monetary or aesthetic, will be impaired;
7. Whether the type, height, size and/or quantity of signs generally complies with the sign code or
sign program, and are appropriate for the project;
8. Whether the sign is primarily oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic, and whether the sign is
appropriate for the determined orientation.
Staff Response:
Staff considers that the sign is in harmony with the Town scale, building scale, potential visual impacts, and
architecture. The white sign backing has been removed from the sign since the initial application, and this
change is now found to be conformance with other linear, neighboring sign types for this location relative to
size, scale and materials. Further, the application appears to be in conformance with all review criteria, and
is suitable for the use and area, as proposed.
Area signs exemplify an approach of visually appealing signs, which is continued in this application. Sun
and Ski, The Linen Kist/ANB Bank Building, Christy Sports, City Market, and the shopping center across
the street have internally lit channel letters. Other outlets in the Chapel Square area have oval, exterior lit
polycarbonate signs. Typically, almost all signs in this area of Town are linear in design.
5
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 15, 2022
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approving VAR22001 and file SGN22001 with the following language:
Recommended Motions and Findings:
I move to Approve file VAR22001 a Sign Variance application at Tract Bl, Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver
Creek with the following findings:
1. With a large storefront size, the circumstances of this site are generally not applicable to other sites
in the vicinity and therefore do not constitute a special privilege.
2. The variance is warranted because strict interpretation of the sign code maximum square footage
would result in difficulty inconsistent with the objectives of the Sign Code.
3. Given the scale of this building frontage, it is reasonable to allow this owner the same benefit and
privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity in having a sign in that is in
proportion to their storefronts.
I move to Approve file SGN22001 a Sign Design application at Tract Bl, Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver
Creek with the following findings:
1. The design application was reviewed in conformance with Chapter 7.34 Sign Code and as it is
found to be consistent with the requirements of this chapter.
PROPOSED
PREVIOUS SIGN
To whom it may concern,
The following submission requests that a variance be granted to allow Appliance Factory to install a
sign on the storefront elevation that is larger than what is currently allowed by code. With a 67'
frontage the current code allows for a maximum sign size of 43.66 sq ft on the storefront elevation. The
sign we are proposing is 58.77 sq ft which is still smaller the previous Pier 1 sign which was 76.25 sq
ft. With this unit being a larger tenant space (12,000 sq ft of gross floor area) and having a larger store
front paired with the distances the sign would be viewed from we believe that the increase in size is
warranted.
Due to the way the distance the sign would be viewed from we feel the allowed size would not provide
enough letter height to be effectively readable as is required per the Avon Municipal Code which states
that “Signs shall be readable, with letters large enough to be legible, and with adequate contrast
between the letters and the background.“
Appliance Factory prides itself on being good stewards in the communities they operate in and
understands the need for size restrictions on signage to attain a balanced look and feel in the area as a
whole. We simply feel that the current restrictions for this specific tenant space are counterproductive
to the intent of the sign code and with us being new and unknown in the Avon community would result
in a hardship in being able to effectively target potential customers who are not familiar us.
Thank you for taking the time in considering our request.
970.748.4413 mpielsticker@avon.org
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Matt Pielsticker, AICP, Planning Director
RE: Referral – Historical Marker Signs
DATE: March 9, 2022
SUMMARY: PZC is being referred a plan to install nine (9) historic marker signs throughout the valley floor.
The signs are considered Government Signs per code and exempt from design review, however, Staff
wishes to hear PZC comments and recommendations prior to moving forward with finalizing sign package
and production. The purpose of referring this to PZC is to gain feedback on site selection and sign design.
Staff plans to proceed with the project this spring and install all signs except for the Harry A. Nottingham
sign, which will be installed when the East park improvements are completed next year.
BACKGROUND: The concept for historic marker
signs originated in the 2007 Main Street plans,
whereby Lettuce Shed Lane was going to include 3-4
vertical banners signifying the area’s history. In
2018 a historic marker was installed on the Highway
6 Valley Trail opposite the Nottingham Powerplant
(waterwheel). This project has evolved and
flourished over the last 1 ½ years with the assistance
of Cultural Arts and Special Events Manager Danita
Dempsey, Councilors Underwood and Smith-Hymes,
and the assistance of Eagle County historian Kathy
Heicher. Sign content (photos and text) have been
thoroughly vetted internally and with the working
group
Existing Power Plant Sign
SIGNS: The signs would be generally installed and anchored with dual-posts, at 45 degree viewing angle.
Two of the signs (#5 and #8) would be custom fabricated and affixed to a railing (#5 Avon’s Homestead)
and fence (#8 DRG Railroad). The sign faces measure 24”x36” to 30”x40” depending on the sign location.
Sign #4 Harry A Nottingham Park and Sign #7 Hahnewald Barn are both larger format sign faces.
1. Avon Amusement Hall
2. Ancient Human History
3. Metcalf Cabin
4. Harry A. Nottingham Park [LARGE] 5. Avon’s Homestead
6. Avon’s Cash Crop
7. Hahnewald Barn [LARGE]
8. DRG Railroad
9. Avon’s Bridges
Sign Installation Design
Page 2 of 2
PZC FEEDBACK: Before proceeding staff is seeking PZC feedback on the following items:
• Sign Design
• Color recommendations for sign bases
• Specific sign locations
Sign Locations
*NOTE: Sign #5 is to be located on fence adjacent to Recreation Path
ATTACHMENT: Sign Design Proofs
AVON AMUSEMENT HALL
EarlydayAvonresidentsunderstoodhardwork.Transformingsemi-aridfieldsofnativevegetationintoirrigatedfarmsandranches
requiredingenuity,determination,andgruelingmanuallabor.Thoseindustriouspioneersalsoneededsocialinteraction,andthey
recognizedthevalueofcommunitygatherings.
Formanyyearsafterthearrivalofthehomesteadersinthe1880s,Avonwasacollectionofscatteredranches.Theareanearthe
confluenceofBeaverCreekandtheEagleRiverwastheclosestthingtoatowncenterformilesaround.ItwashometoGeorge
Townsend’soriginalstagecoachstop,StephenBivan’sgeneralstore,andtherailroaddepot.Avon’sone-roomschoolhousewas
thecommunitygatheringplace,butthesmallbuildingofferedlimitedspace,particularlywhenneighborsinEdwardsandMinturn
participatedinsocialevents.
ThatsituationpromptedlocalresidentstocreatetheAvonAmusementAssociation(AAA)inthesummerof1905“toperpetuatethe
socialspiritwhichexistsintheneighborhood,formutualimprovementandsociability.”TheAAAsoldshares,raisingenoughwithinsix
monthstobuildabare-bonesauditoriumatthebaseofthegypsumcliffs,acrosstheroadfromthegeneralstore.Itwasanimmediate
successandwentbyavarietyofnames:theAvonHall,theAvonAuditorium,theAvonAmusementCenter,orsimplytheAAA.
After20yearsofschoolprograms,theaterproductions,dances,masqueradeballs,fraternalorganizationmeetings,picnics
andicecreamsocials,enoughmoneywasraisedtobuildanewfoundationin1925andakitchenette,cloakroom,andbrick
chimneysayearlater.
In1927,whenstateimprovementstoHighway6wereroutedthroughthefrontofthebuilding,communityleadersHarryA.Nottingham
andWilliamGustafsonconvincedtheEagleCountycommissionerstomovethebuilding10feetbackfromthenewroad.
TheAAAremainedthehubofsocialandcivicactivityforanother20yearsandisareflectionofitstime:eighthgradersheld
orationcontests,dancesbenefittedtheAvonbaseballteam,andassociationsofcattlemenandlettucegrowersconvened
their meetings there.
ThischapterofAvon’shistorywasendedwhenthebuildingwasdemolishedin1948tomakeroomforanotherwideningofHighway6.
TheAvonAmusementAssociation,
circa1930,islocatedontheleft.
The Avon general store is on the
right.(PhotocourtesyofEagle
CountyHistoricalSocietyandEagle
Valley LibraryDistrict)
LOCATION #1
ANCIENT HUMAN HISTORY
A young man of the Utes (Nuche) with his horse.
A wickiup, which served as a temporary shelter, is
pictured to the right. (Photo courtesy of Denver Public
Library Western History Collection)
Long before the trappers, miners and homesteaders arrived in the mid to late 1800s, the mountainous terrain of the
Eagle River corridor, including the Avon area, was Ute (Nuuchu) territory. Archaeological evidence verifies that these
Native American hunter-gatherers inhabited the region for more than 10,000 years until their expulsion from Western
Colorado in 1882.
Artifacts and prehistoric features found locally tell the story of centuries of daily life: stone tools and projectile points;
fences made from tree branches and brush to funnel game to hunters; campsites and wickiups – shelters made of
woven pinion and juniper branches; food remains, fire pits and burial sites. After acquiring horses from the Spanish
in the 17th century, these animals became central to the Ute lifestyle. Twenty-five miles down valley in Brush Creek,
evidence of a Ute horse racing track has been identified.
The presence of Utes in the Eagle Valley was first officially noted by the Escalante Expedition in 1776. Mountain men
encountered bands of Utes camped in the valley in the 1860s. The Utes sometimes tolerated the intruders, but at
other times chased them away and confiscated the animal hides that the mountain men had collected. Early Anglo-
European pioneers often followed Ute foot trails to access remote reaches of Ute territory to stake their own mining
or homestead claims. Many of these foot trails were transformed into roads by the influx of thousands of newcomers
seeking their fortunes in the Mountain West.
Legend has it that Battle Mountain, located about 15 miles southeast of Avon along Highway 24, earned its name
from a fierce battle in 1868 between the Utes and the Plains Arapaho who made summer incursions into the area.
In response to hostile encounters and increasing demand for mines and homesteads, newspapers and politicians
adopted the slogan, “The Utes Must Go!”. Starting in 1863, a series of treaties between the government and the Utes
restricted the native people to increasingly smaller territories. Tensions peaked in 1879 with the Meeker Massacre
in northwest Colorado. Resentful Utes rebelled against and killed reservation agent Nathan Meeker and others,
further fueling the political demand that the Utes be removed from their native territory. There is no official record
documenting the removal of the Utes from the Avon area and the Eagle River Valley. However, by 1882 political
policies and treaties forced the Utes from their historic territory and onto a reservation in Utah.
LOCATION #2
JOHN C. METCALF FAMILY CABIN
John Conard Metcalf was one of Eagle County’s earliest non-native settlers. He was ranching in South Park, Colorado in
1881 when he and a small party of adventurers ventured over the mountain passes into the Eagle River Valley. After several
weeks of exploring, Metcalf found an appealing parcel of level land in what is now the heart of Avon.
The following spring, Metcalf returned to this valley with his 19-year-old wife, Elizabeth (Lizzie), their two-month-old son, his
wife’s grandfather, and several other men. The group, traveling in a horse-drawn covered wagon with extra saddle horses,
a small cattle herd, and a milk cow, spent six weeks traveling from Breckenridge to Avon, arriving on May 14, 1882. The
same trip would take about an hour today.
Temporary quarters were set up in a tent while the able-bodied men cut logs for a cabin, which Metcalf situated just
northeast of where West Beaver Creek Boulevard crosses the Eagle River today. That first sod-roofed cabin, built of unpeeled
logs about 16 inches in diameter, measured 20 by 20 feet. Entrance through the wooden door was gained by pulling up
a wood bar with a buckskin latch string. The latch could be pulled inside at night to lock up.
The solitary window featured eight panes of wavy glass, which in the years to come the three Metcalf children would
remember refracting the light into rainbows. Heavy canvas covered the hard-packed earthen floor. While many pioneer
cabins offered only logs to sit on, the Metcalfs enjoyed actual chairs, the worn rattan seats covered with deer hide.
In 1887, the railroad reached Avon. The new depot was nearly one mile east of the cabin, but the tracks were laid so close to their home that the Metcalfs feared for
their children’s safety. They built another cabin in 1887, a quarter mile away. The original Metcalf cabin was used to house the first school in Avon.
On June 2, 1890, John Metcalf filed homestead claims on 240 acres of land at Avon. He added another 160 acres on August 18, 1893.The men who came to the valley
with Metcalf settled farther down valley, near Eagle. All became prominent in the county. Metcalf was one of the first three county commissioners when Eagle County
was established in 1883.
Like most pioneers, John Metcalf was restless, always seeking new adventure. In 1896, he was drawn to Alaska by the Klondike Gold Rush. He disappeared in Alaska and was
declared dead in 1898 at the age of 47. Lizzie and the children moved to her parents’ prosperous ranch in Eagle. Lizzie Metcalf died in 1908 and is buried in Edwards. The Avon
pioneer family’s name lives on in Metcalf Creek, Metcalf Road, Metcalf Gulch, and their cabin which was moved to its current location in Harry A. Nottingham Park in 1984.
The Metcalf family, circa 1890, were some of
Avon’s earliest pioneers. From left are Lizzy
Metcalf, children Emma, John and Amy,
and John Conard Metcalf. (Photo courtesy
of Eagle County Historical Society and Eagle
Valley Library District)
LOCATION #3
Harry, Marie, and daughter
Winifred with his Haynes
automobile, circa 1916.
Harry A. Nottingham, circa 1955 after irrigating
at Colorado State University’s experimental
farm, known locally as “the college farm,”
which is now EagleVail.
Harry A. Nottingham
(1890 – 1966).
HARRY A. NOTTINGHAM PARK
Harry Arnold Nottingham was the hard-working son of a pioneer family that rolled into the mining camps of Eagle County in a
covered wagon in 1882 during the silver mining boom. In 1886, Harry’s parents, William and Angeline, paid $800 for a 160-acre
homestead on the north side of the Eagle River where Eagle Vail sits today.
The Nottinghams initially split their time between the Battle Mountain mining camps and their down-valley homestead, raising five
children. Harry was born July 8, 1890 at Bell’s Camp, located between Gilman and Minturn. By the mid-1890s, the Nottinghams
were well-established cattle ranchers in what is now Avon. Harry’s father, William, continuously expanded the ranch by acquiring
adjacent properties where they raised cattle, oats, wheat, and hay. Working on the ranch precluded Harry from schooling after
the eighth grade.
Notoriety dogged William, who had a history of aggression and litigation. He was killed in a gun fight with his business partner in
1896. Twenty years later, the family matriarch, Angeline, split the Nottingham property among William’s three sons, Clyde, Harry,
and Emmett. Scandal would later force Clyde to leave the area.
On Jan. 2, 1909, Harry eloped with W. Marie Cole, daughter of the Avon railroad station agent, who objected to the marriage
and to the Nottingham family in general. The couple sneaked off to a wedding ceremony in Leadville, travelling separately by
train. Harry proved to be a stable husband, industrious farmer and rancher, and engaged community leader. Harry and Marie
had six children: Winifred, Clare, Harry Arnold Jr., Carol, Mauri and Allan.
Harry served on the school board for 28 years, participated in the local stockmen’s and grower’s associations,
and managed the Avon-Minturn baseball team. In 1933, he was elected Eagle County Commissioner,
campaigning on promises of careful use of tax money and improvement of County roads. With the exception
of one term, Harry Nottingham served as a commissioner continuously for 32 years. He was a progressive,
promoting good roads, better bridges, and development of a County airport. In 1941, Harry cut the ceremonial
ribbon for the opening of the new highway over Vail Pass. It was Harry who first suggested naming the pass
after State Highway Engineer Charles Vail.
While dedicated to his county job, Harry ran a productive ranch in Avon raising cattle, sheep, hay, oats, potatoes, and row crops such as
head lettuce and peas. He typically rose at 4 a.m. to irrigate fields or tend livestock and crops before returning home to dress in a suit, happily
motor to Eagle in his automobile, and tend to commissioner business. Harry retired from public life in 1964 and died in 1966 at the age of 76.
Harry and Marie’s sons, Arnold and Allan, continued ranching in Avon until 1972 when their extensive land holdings were sold for
development. Those lands became the Town of Avon when the municipality was incorporated on May 5, 1978. This park, a
beloved community gathering place since 1979, is named after Harry to honor his life-long service to this community.
(Photos courtesy of the Mauri Nottingham
Collection)
LOCATION #4
AVON’S HOMESTEAD
Before Avon became a bustling resort community, this was farm and ranch country. Just a few families
made a living on the land that is now home to well over 6,000 people.
The Homestead Act, signed by President Abraham Lincoln on May 20, 1862, granted 160-acre plots
of public land for the price of a small filing fee and the promise to build a dwelling and cultivate the
land. This law spurred Western migration by giving people the opportunity to become landowners.
The success of homesteading in Colorado, granted statehood on July 4, 1876, displaced the native
Utes who were forcibly removed in 1882 to allow more settlers into the area.
Also in 1882, homesteaders O.P. and J.L. Herwick jointly claimed a parcel in the middle of the Eagle River
valley presently known as Avon. They started to “prove up” (improve) their homestead as required by
law. They cleared, plowed, and planted acres of land, built simple cabins, and constructed barns and
corrals for raising livestock. Proximity to water was especially valuable for irrigation and livestock.
William H. Nottingham paid $800 for the Herwick homestead in 1886. William and his wife, Angeline, had
lived at the silver mining camps on Battle Mountain where he hauled ore from the mines and timber from
the forests with his wagon and team of horses. In Avon William raised hay and cattle to feed the miners.
William partnered with Peter Puder and Ernest Hurd to expand their holdings by acquiring adjacent
homesteads including those of early pioneers John Metcalf, William Swift, and Oscar Traer.
In 1941, Harry A. Nottingham, one of William’s sons, replaced cattle with sheep. Land was also irrigated
for crops including potatoes, head lettuce, grain, and hay but farming and ranching was hard work,
unpredictable, and not always profitable. Weather could play havoc with the crops, coyotes and bears
were a constant concern, and market prices were volatile: one year Harry made a profit of just 47 cents
on 330 sacks of potatoes shipped by rail to Texas. In the early 1970s through 1990s, the ski industry and
developers came knocking, and the Nottingham ranches were sold.
The Harry A. & Marie Nottingham ranch, circa 1920, with view south
from Buck Creek to Willis Nottingham’s ranch which is now the
Beaver Creek ski resort. (Photo courtesy of Eagle County Historical
Society and Eagle Valley Library District)
LOCATION #5
AVON’S CASH CROP: HEAD LETTUCE
In 1921, Eagle Valley ranchers turned their attention from raising cattle to a new agricultural venture: head lettuce.
In a high mountain environment, this leafy vegetable proved a perfect fit for Avon and its surrounding area. Head
lettuce thrives at elevations of 7,000 to 9,000 feet and on slopes boasting dark, loamy soils and abundant water. Sunny
days and dependably cool nights formed crisp, hard heads of lettuce. The growing season was a mere 90 days from
seeding to harvest so plantings were staggered for a more manageable yield.
Local growers branded their produce as “Evercrisp” and “Mountain Iceberg” to evoke the image of the ideal head
of crisp iceberg lettuce. This crop worked well for small-scale homestead farming. One man could tend five or six
acres, only needing help for thinning and harvesting. In good years, farmers raised 500 crates of lettuce per acre.
Top market price was $42.25 per crate.
In 1924, Eagle County led the state in lettuce production: the yield from 940 acres was packed
in more than 50,000 crates, 20,000 of which were shipped from Avon. The crop at the Frank Terrill
ranch, on the east edge of current day Avon, was declared “best lettuce of the valley.”
At harvest time, heads were cut early in the morning, placed into field crates, and driven to
the packing sheds adjacent to the Denver & Rio Grande Railroad tracks near the Avon depot.
Workers trimmed, graded, and re-packed the lettuce in large shipping crates between layers
of crushed ice. Refrigerated rail cars delivered to markets around the country lasting up to three
weeks.
Availability of ice throughout the summer shipping season was critical. Each winter, large blocks of ice were cut from
the headwaters of the Eagle River at Pando located to the south. Blocks were stored in ice sheds near the railroad
tracks for use throughout the summer.
For about two decades, Avon’s lettuce industry thrived however the small rural farms could no longer compete when a
hybrid seed enabled large-scale head lettuce production at lower elevations.
Lettuce was packed in
ice and stored in crates in
this shed on the east spur
of the D&RGRR at Avon,
awaiting shipment by
refrigerated rail cars.
Family members were often the field workers
who helped tend lettuce crops.
(Photos courtesy of the Eagle County Historical
Society and Eagle Valley Library District)
LOCATION #6
HAHNEWALD BARN
The history of the Hahnewald barn is a classic Eagle County pioneer tale. Albert
Hahnewald, a German immigrant with little formal education, joined his four bothers in
Leadville in the mid-1890s. Energetic and willing to take risks, the Hahnewalds began
mining silver, finding a particularly lucrative vein that became famous throughout
Colorado as the Hahnewald Chute.
The ambitious brothers, recognizing the many needs of a mining community, also
ranched and owned a grocery store, bakery and saloon in Leadville. Seeking economic
diversity, in 1908 Paul Hahnewald purchased 160 acres of land (the original John Conard
Metcalf homestead) in the heart of Avon for $10,000. On the same date as the land
transfer Paul paid an additional $10,000 for a substantial number of items related to
ranching operations including eight horses, 64 head of cattle, wagons, a buggy, a mower,
a hay stacker, sleds, harnesses, plows, harrows, cultivators and other equipment. The
deal included a blacksmith shop complete with anvils, bellows and tools. Paul sold all
the newly acquired assets to his brother Albert and his wife, Frances, for $9,000 and the
Hahnewald Land and Livestock Company was established.
The Hahnewalds expanded the Metcalfs’ log cabin as their residence and then constructed a large (30 x 125 feet) wood barn
in about 1910. The upper level of the barn was for hay drying and storage and the lower level for sheltering livestock. The barn supported an
extensive ranching operation - 900 acres with horses, hogs, and 1,000 head of purebred Hereford cattle. In 1915, Hahnewald moved his ranching
operation west towards Edwards, and sold his Avon property, including the large barn, to another German immigrant, Paul Kroelling, for $15,000.
Hahnewald died unexpectedly at age 51 during the influenza pandemic of 1918.
For the 33 years that Kroelling owned the ranch, the farmstead was further expanded. A belfry was added to the house to call field hands to
meals, and the barn was occasionally used for community gatherings, its sturdy wooden floors making an ideal dance floor. Kroelling raised
cattle and sheep, pasturing the animals along the Eagle River and at the higher elevations of the Piney Divide. A typical year, like the fall of 1917,
would see the Kroellings busy harvesting 90 acres of well-irrigated land planted with 12 acres of potatoes (producing 200 sacks of potatoes per
acre), 30 acres of oats, and the remainder in hay at four tons per acre. The hay, feed for the Kroellings’ cattle, was stored in the barn’s large
upper floor loft. An overhead wheeled Louden Hay Carrier (patented 1894) moved hay along a rail through the huge hay door on the west end
of the barn
In 1948, the barn became the property of another prominent Avon rancher, Harry A. Nottingham, when he added the Kroelling property to his
extensive land holdings. The Nottinghams ran sheep on the property, housing the ewes and lambs on the barn’s lower level to give them easy
access to the Eagle River for watering. Although ranching in Avon ended in 1972 with the sale of the land to Benchmark-Avon Properties, the barn survived another 47 years. It became
an integral part of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District wastewater treatment plant as a parts and equipment storage facility. The District, recognizing its functionality as well as its
place in Avon’s history, maintained the barn until it was demolished in 2019 to make room for an expansion of the treatment plant. Efforts to relocate the Hahnewald Barn by local historic
preservationists and the Town of Avon were ultimately unsuccessful. The logistical and financial challenges of moving and repurposing a structure of its age and size proved insurmountable.
The large door and Louden Hay carrier on the barn’s
west end provided access to vented hay loft storage.
In 1985, the Eagle River Water and Sanitation
District purchased the barn and repurposed it
for parts and equipment storage until its
demolition in 2019.
Albert Hahnewald painting the original
Avon bridge prior to his move to Edwards
in 1915. (Photo courtesy of the Hahnewald
family)
LOCATION #7
THE DENVER & RIO GRANDE RAILROAD
The railroad was the key to Eagle County’s early success in mineral and agriculture production. In 1881, the Denver & Rio Grande
Railroad (D&RG) extended service from Pueblo on the Front Range of Colorado to Rock Creek, just below Gilman, about 12 miles
upstream from Avon on the Eagle River. The tracks dead-ended there. The railroad company, while eager to serve Leadville and
the mining camps on Battle Mountain, did not initially have the money or the interest to extend tracks through the fledgling ranching
operations down the length of the Eagle River Valley.
That changed in 1886 when the Aspen silver mining boom kicked the D&RG and the Midland railroads into a high-stakes race to that
bustling mining camp. Property rights were purchased, and hundreds of men were hired. Ten months of furious construction in 1887
extended the narrow-gauge railroad line along the Eagle River and all the way to Glenwood Springs. In 1890 the rails were upgraded to
standard gauge to better handle the large engines and heavy trains needed to make the arduous trip through the Rocky Mountains.
The earliest documented use of the name “Avon” appeared on a D&RG route map in 1888. A small depot was constructed on
the siding south of the tracks near today’s intersection of Avon Road and Hurd Lane. It featured a
small stockyard and a wooden crane for transferring mail bags to and from the train while in motion.
Workers bunked in the section house. Smiley Cole was the D&RG’s railroad station agent.
The ranchers and farmers of the area rejoiced. The railroad efficiently connected the Eagle Valley with the rest of the nation, allowing
larger shipments of livestock, crops, ore and timber to market. Numerous passenger and freight trains traveled daily along this route. Locals
could easily and affordably hop on a train to visit relatives and neighbors down valley, attend the Strawberry Festival in Glenwood Springs,
or tend to business up the line in the county seat at Red Cliff.
Railroad lines through the valley were busy through the early 1940s. After World War II, the federal government shifted its spending from
railroads to highways; cars and trucks became the preferred modes of transportation and railroad traffic slowed. In 1990 the D&RG merged
with the Southern Pacific Railroad, which in turn was absorbed into the Union Pacific Railroad. Expensive to maintain and operate in the
modern age, rail traffic on what is now called the Tennessee Pass line halted in 1997, bringing rail traffic through the valley to a standstill.
Since then, there has been periodic interest in resurrecting the rail line for freight, passenger, or recreational uses. The cost and competing interests
of various stakeholders have stymied these efforts to date, so only time will tell whether trains will ever rumble through Avon again.
A coal-fired locomotive steams
past the Avon stock yard and
depot, circa 1920. Nearby,
Emmett & Myrtle Nottingham’s
white farmhouse can be seen.
A crew of railroad section
workers pose at the Avon
depot with the passenger-
powered hand car, used for
rail maintenance work, circa
1910.
(Photo courtesy of the Eagle County Historical
Society and Eagle Valley Library District)
LOCATION #8
Men with lettuce crates on the south end
of Avon’s second bridge, circa 1928.
Mildred Howard and her horse, Dot, on Avon’s first bridge, circa 1920.
AVON’S BRIDGES
River crossings were especially challenging for early pioneers, their
wagons, and horses. Archival records indicate that early Avon settlers
forded the river where shallow waters permitted. Faint remains of a
primitive road on the south bank of the Eagle River can be seen about
200 yards west of the Avon Road bridge in use today. It leads to a
shallow point in the river – the ford – that was a convenient crossing
point below the original schoolhouse perched above the river. By 1899,
enterprising pioneers had built the original wooden Avon bridge, which
crossed the Eagle River at this location. The pioneer structure, featuring
a center pier, was suspended about 10 feet above the river. That
bridge was replaced by Avon’s second bridge, also wooden, in 1923
at a cost of $10,165. The Lewis brothers, who apparently lived nearby,
did the extensive dirt work for the second bridge’s approaches. The
second bridge served the community until 1971, when heavy trucks
damaged the decking and support brace. Eagle County replaced
it with an Army Corps of Engineers prefabricated steel bridge. The
current bridge, named “Bob” by a construction worker who won the
town’s “name that bridge” contest, was built in 1991.
(Photos courtesy of the Eagle County Historical Society and
Eagle Valley Library District)
LOCATION #9
_______________________________________________________________________________
1
AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2022 MEETING
100 MIKAELA WAY – AVON TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS – AVON TOWN HALL
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 5:05PM. A ROLLCALL WAS TAKEN, AND ALL COMMISSIONERS WERE
PRESENT EXCEPT FOR COMMISSIONER MACALLISTER. ALSO PRESENT WERE TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL,
INTERIM TOWN ATTORNEY KARL HANLON, AND PLANNING DIRECTOR MATT PIELSTICKER.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
ACTION: THERE WERE NO CHANGES PROPOSED TO THE AGENDA. COMMISSIONER LANG MOTIONED TO APPROVE
THE AGENDA AS PUBLISHED. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NUSBAUM, AND ALL WERE IN
FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY WITH A 6-0 VOTE.
3. DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR EX PARTE COMMUNICATION RELATED TO AGENDA ITEM
THERE WERE NO CONFLICTS OR EX PARTE COMMUNICATION.
4. NORTHERN HILLSIDE EMERGENCY SIRENS – WORK SESSION – DISCUSS PLAN AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCERNING PLAN WITH FOUR (4) ADDITIONAL SIRENS: TWO IN WILDRIDGE, ONE IN WILDWOOD, AND ONE IN MOUNTAIN
STAR (PLANNING DIRECTOR MATT PIELSTICKER AND POLICE CHIEF GREG DALY)
PUBLIC COMMENTS: JEFFREY SNYDER MADE COMMENTS ON HIS OBSERVATIONS. ACTION: NO MOTION OR VOTE REQUIRED. THE COMMISSIONERS WERE IN FULL SUPPORT OF ALL SIREN LOCATIONS.
PZC REINFORCED THE NEED FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION FOR THE COMMUNITY BY WAY OF SOCIAL MEDIA AND VAIL
DAILY OUTREACH, MONTHLY TOWN NEWSLETTER, DIGITAL SIGNS, ETC. RECOMMENDATION FOR DARK EARTH TONE
COLOR POLE AND TO (CO)LOCATE O’NEAL SPUR AND SADDLERIDGE POCK PARK SIRENS NEAR BUILDINGS. 5. CONSENT AGENDA
5.1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 1, 2022 PZC MEETING 5.2. RECORD OF DECISION AND FINDINGS OF FACT FOR MNR21044, 3770 EAGLBEND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 5.3. RECORD OF DECISION AND FINDINGS OF FACT FOR AEC22001, 1782 SWIFT GULCH ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS
ACTION: COMMISSIONER LANIOUS MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS DRAFTED. COMMISSIONER
SEKINGER SECONDED AND ALL COMMISSIONERS WERE IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY WITH A 5-0 VOTE.
COMMISSIONER LANG HAD LEFT THE MEETING PRIOR TO ITEM 5.CONSENT AGENDA. 7. ADJOURN THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 6:19PM.
_______________________________________________________________________________
2
THESE MEETING NOTES 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 RECORDING OF THE MEETING, WHICH
CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE TOWN CLERK’S OFFICE BY SUBMITTING A PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
CHAIRPERSON