Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Avon BZA approves Chick‑fil‑A canopy variance to cover dual drive‑through lanes
Summary
The Avon Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance allowing an expanded drive‑through canopy at Chick‑fil‑A East, reducing the required 60‑foot front setback to 35 feet to shelter staff and customers at 10791 East US Highway 36. The vote was unanimous and the approval is subject to site‑plan conditions.
The Avon Board of Zoning Appeals on Jan. 20 approved VAR26‑01, allowing Chick‑fil‑A East to install an expanded canopy that will extend into the ordinance’s 60‑foot front setback and result in a 35‑foot setback. The motion passed unanimously after staff and the petitioner described operational and safety reasons for the change.
Town staff recommended approval, citing the site’s development history and surrounding encroachments. Staff noted many adjacent properties already have canopies and other structures inside the 60‑foot setback and concluded the proposal "would be consistent with what's there" and recommended approval "subject to substantial compliance with the site plan." The property is Lot 2 of the Meyer Park subdivision at 10791 East US Highway 36 and is roughly 1.5 acres.
Brandy Seagum, speaking for the petitioner, said the dual drive‑through lanes already exist but the second lane is underused in bad weather because it lacks a canopy. "There will be heaters out there. There will be fans when it's hot, to kind of make the staff comfortable while they're out there delivering," Seagum said, describing the canopy as a safety and efficiency measure that will reduce off‑site stacking during peak hours.
Board members questioned whether the addition met the third variance finding (practical difficulty). One member said the claim sounded like a preference until the petitioner explained how the canopy would include a curb and footer that function as a physical barrier to protect staff and circulation. "With that clarification, I'm happy with practical difficulty now," the member said, and the board moved to approve the variance subject to the staff‑recommended conditions.
The motion to approve VAR26‑01 was made by Catherine Rensberg and seconded by Paul Guggenberger; a roll‑call vote recorded affirmative responses from all five members. The public hearing had been opened and closed earlier in the meeting with no outside speakers.
The approval is conditioned on substantial compliance with the conceptual site plan and the findings of fact recorded in the staff report. The board did not change other site or building square footage; the action authorizes only the canopy encroachment as described in the application.
