PZC Packet 050322_______________________________________________________________________________
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, MAY 3, 2022 - MEETING BEGINS AT 5:00 PM
100 MIKAELA WAY – AVON TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS – AVON TOWN HALL
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL (PLANNING DIRECTOR MATT PIELSTICKER)
2. SWEARING IN OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBERS (DEPUTY TOWN CLERK BRENDA TORRES)
3. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON (PLANNING DIRECTOR MATT PIELSTICKER)
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (CHAIRPERSON)
5. DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR EX PARTE COMMUNICATION RELATED TO AGENDA ITEM
(CHAIRPERSON)
6. 1910 HURD LANE / VARIANCE– PUBLIC HEARING – DISTURBANCE IN 30’ RIPARIAN BUFFER (SENIOR PLANNER
JENA SKINNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT JAMIE MCCLUSKIE)
7. WORK SESSION / COMMISSIONER TRAINING (TOWN ATTORNEY KARL HANLON)
8. CONSENT AGENDA
8.1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM APRIL 19, 2022 PZC MEETING
8.2. APPROVAL OF RECORD OF DECISION FOR 3087 AND 3091 WILDRIDGE RD/MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN
9. STAFF UPDATES
9.1. SHORT TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS
10. ADJOURN
970-748-4023 jskinner@avon.org
Page 1 of 7
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jena Skinner, AICP, Senior Planner
RE: VAR22002; Variance Application
1910 Hurd Lane
DATE: May 3, 2022
Related Approvals: PUD Development Plan Approved 1999; Subdivision Plat Approved 1999
STAFF REPORT OVERVIEW:
This staff report contains the following applications for consideration by the PZC:
VAR22002: Variance request to permit disturbance and landscaping improvements with the 30’ Riparian
Protection Buffer/setback from the Eagle River. Measured from the high-water mark, no disturbance is
permitted in this area. See Section 7.28.100(b), Stream, River, Waterbody, Wetlands. LINK
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION & COMMENTS:
Notice of the public hearing was published in the Vail Daily in accordance with Sec. 7.16.020(d) of the Avon
Development Code (ADC). Mailed notice is required for this application. This notice was sent out April 21, 2020.
No public comments have been received.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Terry Nolan and Jamie McCluskie, relatives of the landowner ("Applicant"), is representing the Nancy W.
Nottingham Trust in pursuit of this proposed development. Because the AMC restricts activities and disturbance
in the riparian area of streams, rivers, waterbodies, and wetlands to 30’ from the annual high-water mark, they
are required to obtain a Variance to allow landscaping in this restricted area of the property. Variances are
required to be heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission via public hearing.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
The property is located at 1910 Hurd
Lane. This residential property sits
adjacent to Canyon Run and is right on
the Eagle River. More succinctly, the
Eagle River flows through the property.
The home boasts a large front yard
accessing the street (Hurd Lane) and
has a naturally vegetated riverbank on
the south side (see images, next page).
Using the River as an amenity, the
residents would like to develop and
landscape an outdoor area to be used
as a social space. While there is
sufficient area to make improvements
without use of the restricted riparian
area, their current design relies on a
boulder retaining wall, as the grade
970-748-4023 jskinner@avon.org
Page 2 of 7
drops from the house to the river. The proposed features include a fire-table, hot tub/spa, flagstone patio,
an area of synthetic lawn, and a deck, attached to the home.
Existing Conditions
PLANNING ANALYSIS:
In looking at this survey there appears to be an approximate 34’ x 80’ or 2,650+ sq. ft (rough estimate)
available for landscaping between the home and the 30’ riparian buffer limitation line. Per the application, it
states that the needed encroachment would result in a 27% reduction in riparian area, or 285 sq. ft of
improvements. This does not include the area of disturbance to install these improvements.
Much like Eagle County did in 2002 and 2006, and just recently in the town of Vail (2021), Avon increased
their restrictions for riparian areas and established additional protections of their river corridor in 2010. This
means that there are several developments along the river that have grandfathered activity within riparian
areas. While Avon recommends remediation to these areas, it would not require owners to repair and
revegetate these areas unless a change in development is proposed. All new development is subject to
Section 7.28 100 Natural Resource Protection. Although there is a residence on this property, this
improvement is considered new development. These regulations were recently applied to the McGrady
Acres townhome development on Post Boulevard (an older project, currently redeveloping).
970-748-4023 jskinner@avon.org
Page 3 of 7
For this Variance application, the following is being applied to this development:
7.28.100(b)5 – Riparian Protection Buffer
(5) Riparian Protection Buffer:
(i) Intent. The riparian protection buffer is intended to protect the habitat, wetland, slopes
and features in the immediate vicinity of riparian areas. These areas are typically
ecologically rich but sensitive habitats that also serve as critical buffers to sedimentation.
(ii) Minimum Width. The minimum width of the riparian protection buffer shall be thirty
(30) feet from the AHWL.
7.28.100(b)5(v)H:
H. No disturbance of land shall be allowed within riparian buffers, including but not
limited to dumping, filling, dredging, new construction, excavating, substantial
improvements or modifications, installation of septic systems, scraping by motorized
equipment, removal of vegetation or root systems or transferring materials that will
reduce the natural storage capacity of the land or interfere with the natural flow pattern
of any watercourse or degrade the quality of surface or ground water.
The applicants are not simply mitigating existing vegetation or improving drainage systems, they will be
installing boulder retaining walls within the 30’ riparian area, and these improvements cannot be installed
by hand. The boulder wall is a feature that will necessitate the use of machinery. As such, Staff considers
this a substantial improvement or modification to this area and does not conform to the intentions of the
riparian preservation section. Note: the 1999 35’ Platted Stream Setback is applied as a building setback.
970-748-4023 jskinner@avon.org
Page 4 of 7
Variances are necessary to provide relief in situations where the Code is so restrictive that it either
diminishes the ability to improve a property entirely, or, prevents improvements that are needed for a
property with unique conditions. In this case, Staff does not find that the encroachment is necessary for
installing the proposed landscaping improvements. For instance, Staff would support a narrow wall that
follows along the 30’ buffer edge without issue. While it may not be considered as attractive as a boulder
wall, it would act in the same capacity as the oversized/more expansive boulder wall and could be built
entirely within the existing developable area, with disturbance/construction to occur outside of the riparian
buffer. As a result, there would not be a need to install new vegetation; instead, the more mature native
vegetation and riparian habitat would remain “as is”. None of the elements proposed within the
encroachment area for active use. All the proposed areas of activity are contained within the existing,
developable area.
Potential Alternative Design as Prepared by Town Staff
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:
970-748-4023 jskinner@avon.org
Page 5 of 7
(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 submitted what was necessary to evaluate this application. However, only one design
was submitted, which depends on the encroachment. Staff did inquire with the applicants if they explored
other alternatives. They responded that the proposed design was the most desirable as a stone veneer wall
containing the activity area (the other option) would cause a significant grade change and drop-off, as the
riparian zone has a steep slope (1:1). This alternative design would also require either a handrail on top of
a low wall or a taller wall instead of a low wall/railing, which may impede views.
VAR22002
Review Criteria for A Variance:
Section 7.16.110.C of the Avon Municipal Code offers the following review criteria as the basis for a
decision on an application for a Variance:
(1) The relationship of the requested variance to existing and potential uses and structures in the
vicinity;
(2) 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;
(3) Such other factors and criteria as the Planning and Zoning Commission deems applicable to the
requested variance.
Staff Response:
Staff completely understands the need for the enjoyment of a residential property, especially in maximizing
the enjoyment that comes from being adjacent to a river. In removing the boulder wall and potentially
replacing it with a more simplified formed retaining wall, there appears to be sufficient area for backyard
enjoyment without the need for a Variance. Staff estimates that in changing the retaining wall design, it
would result in a negligible loss of improved area over what is proposed, without compromising the atheistic
of the design itself.
Staff also recognizes that there are other properties in the vicinity that have landscaping that may limit
riparian areas closer to the river. This grandfathering or allowances via older PUDs may appear to be unfair
to onlookers; however, when codes change, they cannot be retroactively applied to existing conditions, nor
can they be applied to specific PUDs that govern stream setbacks or riparian areas. In this case, there are
970-748-4023 jskinner@avon.org
Page 6 of 7
no zoning provisions in the Nottingham Station PUD that provide riparian restrictions, so it falls back on
Code for administration. It is important to realize that the change in code was implemented to increase
protections to riparian areas, necessary to enhance and sustain wildlife habitat and water quality, which
positively affects the greater Avon community and not a single property. All lots in this immediate area-
even those with grandfathering are equally subject to these regulations whenever applicable. As such, Staff
feels that a variance is not necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment with other sites in
the vicinity; rather, one day older areas will most likely be brought into compliance and conformity with this
property.
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 granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity;
(3) That the variance is warranted for one (1) or more of the following reasons:
(i) 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,
(ii) 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,
(iii) 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:
Given the area of the backyard and the proposed design presented, it does not appear that the strict
interpretation of the riparian limitations results in a practical difficulty to create social space; rather, it affects
their design itself and choice to use a boulder wall vs a minimalized, formed retaining wall. Further,
applying a Variance to this parcel would constitute a special privilege regardless of if there is an apparent
General Area Image
970-748-4023 jskinner@avon.org
Page 7 of 7
lack of fairness to these applicants when comparing this lot with others in the area. Staff feels that there is
no reduction of enjoyment of the proposed backyard in changing the retaining wall design to be within the
actual developable area shown on plans.
OPTIONS:
PZC has the following options:
• Approve after formulating justifiable findings;
• Approve with modified findings and conditions;
• Continue application to future meeting pending additional details or studies; or
• Deny application after formulating justifiable findings.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends DENIAL of VAR22002
Recommended Motions and Findings:
I move to DENY file VAR22002, a Variance application at 1910 Hurd Lane with the following findings:
1. That the granting of the variance WILL constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations on other properties in the vicinity.
2. That the granting of the Variance MAY BE detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, as protection of riparian areas is
important to the health of wildlife habitat and water quality of the greater Avon community.
3. That the variance HAS NOT been substantiated as warranted. More specifically:
a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the regulation does not result in practical
difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship.
b. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of
the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity, and
c. That the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not
deprive the applicant of privileges.
ATTACHMENTS
• Landscape Plan dated 4/7/22
• 1999 PUD Plat
Terry M. Nolan
for the Nancy W. Nottingham Trust,
property owner, 1910 Hurd Lane
PO Box 953
Avon, CO 81620
Planning and Zoning Commission
Town of Avon
PO Box 975
Avon, CO 81620
Ladies and Gentlemen:
In this application we are seeking a Variance under Section 7.16.110 of the Avon Municipal Code for this
project at 1910 Hurd Lane, Avon.
As you know, Section 7.16.110 AMC seeks to “prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and
unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code as would
result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement.”
We request that the Variance be granted by the Avon PZC because:
1. Due to the existing steepness of the terrain, the proposed modest landscaping improvement
requires that a river rock, plant‐topped retaining wall be built which slightly encroaches into
the Eagle River’s 30’ riparian buffer. The total area of the encroachment would be very small
(approximately 285 sf total for the whole project) and extend just 8’ into the riparian buffer at
the furthest point of encroachment leaving 22’ buffer to the river; the low profile wall is
designed to not only support the landscaping modifications but also to enhance the visual
appeal of both the river‐side view up to the single‐family residence, and the property‐side view
down the riverbank and into the Eagle River itself.
2. I assure you that this is not about cost or inconvenience to the property owner. This project
will enhance the residence owner’s enjoyment of its Eagle River frontage while being
consistent with the neighborhood and respect for the Eagle River corridor itself.
Specifically, with respect to PZC’s required Findings under AMC 7.16.110(c) and (d), please note:
(c) Review Criteria. The PZC shall use the following review criteria as the basis for a decision on an
application for a variance:
(1) The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcements of a
specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among
sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of the Development Code without grant of
special privilege;
The riparian buffer, if strictly imposed, would present a hardship to the property owner by
not treating the owner as other owners in the vicinity who have been allowed to improve
their properties to the river’s edge.
(2) The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities and public safety;
These improvements will have a positive effect on the property owner and property owners
adjacent to the property, even across the Eagle River, by improving the appearance and use
of the property.
(3) Such other factors and criteria related to the subject property, proposed development or
variance request as the decision‐making body deems applicable to the proposed variance.
Note that the proposed improvement project includes a small‐sized synthetic lawn to
minimize water use (not in the encroaching area). The project also includes the addition of
aspen trees, native shrubs, ornamental grasses, and perennial flowers, where none
currently exist. Also note that the large indigenous bushes/trees to the south of the
property that currently provide a significant buffer between the property and the river will
not be impacted.
(d) Required Findings. The PZC shall make the following written 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 classified in the same district;
Prior to the implementation of the 30’ riparian buffer, numerous properties adjacent to the
river along Hurd Lane and Eaglebend Drive made property improvements that, if built now,
would require this same Variance ‐ as they encroach with improvements into the 30’
riparian buffer to the river’s edge. This property owner is simply asking for a very small
encroachment into the riparian buffer that would still leave at least a 22’ buffer to the river.
(2) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity;
We believe this project will enhance the properties in the area by replacing an unkept area
with a well‐conceived and designed landscaped plan that respects the Eagle River
environment.
(3) That the variance is warranted for one (1) or more of the following reasons:
(i) The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would
result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of the Development Code;
(ii) 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; or
(iii) 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
same zone district;
We believe the variance is warranted for the reason stated in (3) (iii); prior to Avon’s
implementation of the 30’ riparian buffer, numerous properties adjacent to the river
along Hurd Lane and Eaglebend Drive made property improvements that would now
encroach into the 30’ riparian buffer, including improvements to the river’s edge. This
property owner is simply asking for a very small encroachment into the riparian buffer
that would still leave at least a 22’ buffer to the river.
Thank you for your service on the PZC of Avon and thank you for your time and attention to this project.
I look forward to answering any questions you have.
Sincerely,
Terry M. Nolan
on behalf of the 1910 Hurd Lane property owner,
my mother‐in‐law and her Nancy W. Nottingham Trust
CONSENT ITEMS
1
AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 2022
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 5:06PM. A ROLLCALL WAS TAKEN, AND ALL
COMMISSIONERS WERE PRESENT. ALSO PRESENT WERE POLICE CHIEF GREG DALY, PLANNING
DIRECTOR MATT PIELSTICKER, SENIOR PLANNER JENA SKINNER, AND PLANNER 1+ MAX MORGAN.
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 GOLEMBIEWSKI, AND ALL WERE IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
WITH A 7-0 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. O’NEAL SPUR POCKET PARK; SADDLERIDGE APARTMENTS; ANNEX; MOUNTAIN STAR WATER
TANK MINOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN – PUBLIC HEARING – FOUR (4) NEW SIRENS TO COMPLETE
NORTHERN HILLSIDE EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM (POLICE CHIEF GREG DALY AND
PLANNING DIRECTOR MATT PIELSTICKER)
PUBLIC COMMENTS: NONE.
ACTION: COMMISSIONER GOLIMEBIEWSKI MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINOR
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (MNR22009) WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS:
1. THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE DEEMED NEW “DEVELOPMENT” AND QUALIFY FOR PROCESSING
AS A MINOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN PURSUANT TO AMC SECTION 7.16.1080;
2. THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETE;
3. SUFFICIENT INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO DETERMINE THAT THE APPLICATION
COMPLIANCE WITH THE RELEVANT REVIEW CRITERIA;
4. THE APPLICATION SUPPORTS AVON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOAL G.2.BY IDENTIFYING AND
MITIGATING POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS TO PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH,
SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE NORTHERN HILLSIDE COMMUNITIES;
5. SIRENS ARE CONSIDERED MUNICIPAL FACILITIES AND THEREFORE PERMITTED ON THE
SUBJECT PROPERTIES;
6. THE DEVELOPMENT CODE DOES NOT CONTAIN STANDARDS FOR SIREN STRUCTURES, AND
THEREFORE ANTENNA AND SATELLITE DISH STANDARDS WERE CONSIDERED IN THE
CONTEXT WITH THIS APPLICATION AS THEY ARE SIMILAR IMPROVEMENTS;
7. SCREENING STANDARDS APPLY TO ANTENNAS AND DISHES ACCORDING TO AMC
7.28.060(B), AND ALTERNATE SCREENING IS ACHIEVED BY INCLUDING NATURAL COLORED
WOOD UTILITY POLES AND POWDER COATED EARTH TONE COLORS, AND GROUPING NEAR
EXISTING BUILDINGS OR FACILITIES; AND
8. INSTALLATION OF EMERGENCY AWARENESS EQUIPMENT PROMOTES AWARENESS OF
WILDFIRE AND OTHER SIGNIFICANT EVENTS, WHICH PROMOTES THE PUBLIC HEALTH,
SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
COMMISSIONER LANIOUS SECONDED THE MOTION AND MOTION PASSED WITH A 7-0 VOTE;
5. 3087 WILDRIDGE ROAD / MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN –PUBLIC HEARING – TWO SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES (SENIOR
2
PLANNER JENA SKINNER AND ARCHITECT BOBBY LADD
PUBLIC COMMENTS: LAWRENCE LANE (3083 WILDRIDGE RD).
ACTION: COMMISSIONER NUSBAUM MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
PLAN (MJR22001) WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS:
FINDINGS
1. THE PROPOSED APPLICATION WAS REVIEWED PURSUANT TO §7.16.080, DEVELOPMENT
PLAN, AND THE DESIGN MEETS THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ESTABLISHED IN THE
AVON DEVELOPMENT CODE;
2. WITH CONDITIONS, 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;
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.
CONDITIONS
1. ILCS ARE REQUIRED TO CONFIRM BUILDING HEIGHT.
2. ENGINEERED DESIGNS FOR DRAINAGE MUST BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY STAFF
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR EITHER PROPERTY.
3. ENGINEERED DESIGNS FOR ALL RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING 4-FEET IN HEIGHT MUST BE
SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT
FOR EITHER PROPERTY.
4. LIGHTS IN THE RECESSED LIGHTING FIXTURES SHALL NOT CREATE A GLARE OR NUISANCE
FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS. LOWER WATTAGES OR DIFFUSERS ARE
REQUIRED FOR THESE FIXTURES IF GLARE IS DETECTABLE.
5. ADDED CONDITION: THE APPLICANT SHALL STUDY AND REVISE THE PLAN TO ADDRESS
THE VISUAL IMPACTS OF THE RETAINING WALLS ON 3087 WILDRIDGE AS WELL AS
ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING AND / OR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES TO REDUCE THE VISUAL
IMPACT OF THE FOUNDATION WALL ON THE REAR OF 3087. STAFF CAN REVIEW THOSE
PLANS FOR COMPLIANCE
COMMISSIONER LANG SECONDED THE MOTION AND MOTION PASSED WITH A 7-0 VOTE;
6. CONSENT AGENDA
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM APRIL 5, 2022 PZC MEETING
2. APPROVAL OF RECORD OF DECISION FOR CHAPEL SQUARE SIGN VARIANCE/MINOR SIGN PLAN
ACTION: COMMISSIONER MACALLISTER MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER NUSBAUM SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION PASSED WITH A 5-0 VOTE.
COMMISSIONER BARNES AND COMMISSIONER GOLEMBIEWSKI ABSTAINED.
7. STAFF UPDATES
1. SHORT TERM RENTALS UPDATE FROM TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
2. FRONTGATE DEVELOPMENT
3
8. STAFF APPROVALS
1. 5651 WILDRIDGE RD. LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS (MNR22010)
9. ADJOURN
THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:44PM
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 RECORDING OF THE MEETING, WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE TOWN CLERK’S
OFFICE BY SUBMITTING A PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST.
APPROVED:
X
CHAIRPERSON
PZC Record of Decision: MJR22001
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: April 19, 2022
TYPE OF APPLICATIONS: Major Development Plan
PROPERTY LOCATION: 3087/3091 Wildridge Rd.
FILE NUMBER: MJR22001
APPLICANT: Bobby Ladd
This Record of Decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code §7.16.010(F)(1)
DECISION ON MJR22001: Approved with Conditions
FINDINGS:
1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080, development plan, and the design
meets the development standards established in the Avon development code;
2. With conditions, 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;
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.
CONDITIONS:
1. Ilcs are required to confirm building height.
2. Engineered designs for drainage must be submitted and approved by staff prior to the issuance of
a building permit for either property.
3. Engineered designs for all retaining walls exceeding 4-feet in height must be submitted and
approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit for either property.
4. Lights in the recessed lighting fixtures shall not create a glare or nuisance from neighboring
property owners. Lower wattages or diffusers are required for these fixtures if glare is detectable.
5. PZC Added condition: The applicant shall study and revise the plan to address the visual impacts
of the retaining walls on 3087 Wildridge as well as additional landscaping and / or architectural
features to reduce the visual impact of the foundation wall on the rear of 3087. Staff can review
those plans for compliance
THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ARE HEREBY APPROVED:
BY:______________________________________ DATE: ___________________
PZC Chairperson