Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Avon board approves variance for 600‑sq‑ft accessory building at 916–918 North Avon Avenue

Avon Town Board of Zoning Appeals · November 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Avon Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance allowing a 600-square-foot accessory structure behind a two-family dwelling at 916–918 North Avon Avenue. The board debated whether the town ordinance itself creates hardship; one member voted against the measure.

The Avon Town Board of Zoning Appeals voted to allow construction of a 600‑square‑foot accessory structure behind a two‑family dwelling at 916–918 North Avon Avenue, approving a variance of use recommended by town planning staff.

Town planning staff presented the application, describing the 0.69‑acre site as zoned C‑2 when annexed into Avon in 2010 despite its residential use and noting a county rezoning in 2005. Staff said the duplex on the property dates to 1968 and recommended approval of the variance subject to the site plan dated Oct. 20.

Lorraine Miller Zareb, the property owner and petitioner, told the board the building is intended primarily for storage related to the rental properties on the site — “we have a riding mower, we have an extra stove, an extra refrigerator in case something breaks,” she said — and that she and others were not aware the lots were zoned C‑2 when purchased.

Board discussion focused on the variance criteria. The Chair questioned whether the mere existence of an ordinance constitutes an “unnecessary hardship,” saying strict application of the ordinance alone does not automatically create a practical difficulty. Board member Anne Inman and town staff countered that the site’s zoning and annexation history make it difficult to achieve typical residential improvements without relief.

Inman moved to approve the variance, and Paul Guchenberger seconded the motion. On roll call the transcript records Guchenberger and Inman voting in favor and Marcus Turner voting against; at least one roll‑call response in the transcript was garbled and is not clearly readable. The Chair declared the motion approved.

The board also approved the minutes from Oct. 21, 2025, and adopted the proposed 2026 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting schedule during the same session.

The board did not receive any public comments on the item during the hearing. The board’s approval allows the petitioner to pursue the accessory structure as shown on the approved site plan; any building permits or inspections required by the town’s building code remain separate processes and were not decided by the BZA at this meeting.