Muyni
← Back to Winona

Board of Adjustment

Regular Meeting

Winona, MN · July 15, 2020

AgendaMinutes

Minutes

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Regular Meeting DATE: July 15, 2020 TIME: 5: 00 p. m. PLACE: Zoom Online Meeting PRESENT: Krofchalk, Murphy, Conway, Kouba, Breza ABSENT: Sanchez, Buege Acting Chairman Kouba called the meeting to order at 5: 35 p. m. No minutes were approved at this time. Petition No. 20- 21- V, Karen Coleman & Rafael Narvaez Acting Chairman Kouba opened the public hearing and read the petition: Karen Coleman & Rafael Narvaez — City Code Section 43. 03. 51( C) which requires that corner lots whose rear lot line abuts the side lot line of another lot in an R- District shall not have a six- foot ( 6') fence within 25 feet of the common lot line, shall be closer to the side street lot line than the front yard setback required on the lot fronting the side street. Applicant is proposing a six- foot ( 6') fence two feet from the side lot line which is within the 10- foot ( 10') front setback of the lot to the rear ( 313 Wilson Street). Property is described as R- 2 zoning, Sect-22, Twp- 107, Range- 007, ORIGINAL PLAT, Lot- 010, Block- 109, ORIGINAL PLAT E 7th 10' LOT 9 ALL LOT 10, or at 402 West Wabasha ( Street). Ms. Coleman & Mr. Narvaez, 402 West Wabasha, Winona, MN addressed the Board. The reason they are asking for the variance is to put up a six foot fence along the side of their house only two feet from the front of the house instead of the six feet required for a setback. Jon Krofchalk asked why they wanted the fence so close and Ms. Coleman said that there have been some incidences of people trespassing into their yard and using their playhouse for inappropriate behavior. The fence would provide some security for those individuals wishing to access their property. Mr. Narvaez stated the concern about the playhouse and mentioned that trespassing had been going on for a number of years. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES July 15, 2020 PAGE 2 Tom Conway asked about the height of the fence and did it have to be six feet or could there be an option to put it at 41/ 2 or five feet. Mr. Narvaez stated that there is an existing six foot high fence and he wishes to continue with six feet for continuity of both fences. Tom Conway had mentioned the requirement for a fence as it gets closer to a sidewalk and that it needs to become lower for visibility and site from adjacent corners and street traffic. Dave Kouba mentioned that the placement of the fence would not pose a great concern for a six foot high fence between the two yards. Tom Conway reiterated his concern about someone backing out of the adjacent driveway and with the taller fence making it harder to see. Jim Murphy also had concerns about being able to see and have clear visibility coming out of the driveway. Jon Krochalk asked about the exact location of the fence and the bushes along the border of the property and the fence location if it would be on the yard side or the street side of the bushes. Mr. Narvaez said the fence would be on the yard side of the bushes. He explained that there would be about two feet from the sidewalk to the edge of the bushes and the other side of bushes would be the fence. Staff commented that in reviewing the property from the GIS Mapping it appeared that the bushes were approximately three feet wide and maybe the set back of a foot or two, which boils down to the setback from the sidewalk to the fence to about four feet. Jon Krofchalk mentioned from his observations on the site that the bushes were in fact wider and his estimation the setback would be about six feet from the edge of the sidewalk. Jim Murphy stated that he was sympathetic to the issues of people accessing the playhouse but also there is a definite concern for public safety. Acting Chairman Kouba closed the hearing and opened it up considerations. Tom Conway requested that if the variance were passed that there was an exact measurement from the sidewalk to the fence and what would the Board allow for that measurement to be. Jon Krofchalk thought a measurement of seven feet from the sidewalk would be adequate and still maintain a path to get around the backyard. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES July 15, 2020 PAGE 3 Ms. Coleman & Mr. Narvaez physically measured some areas in the yard and a six foot setback would compromise access to areas in the yard. The Board went through the variance finding questions and question number one asked if the variance was in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance? Yes, it is ensuring adequate site lines and visibility based on the proposed compromise that the Board will have when a motion is made. Is the variance consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? Yes, fences are the part of the landscape around town. Does the proposal put the property to use in a reasonable manner? Yes, it is a fence. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner? Yes, it is a problem with the lot configuration. Will the variance, if granted, retain the essential character of the locality? Yes, the addition of a fence would not be detrimental to the character of the locality. Tom Conway made a motion to approve the variance under certain conditions. The motion was to make a four foot setback and utilizing a clipped corner on the fence with it being three feet off the driveway and the height of the fence would be at five feet. John Krofchalk amended the motion by defining that the clipped corner should be at a forty-five degree angle and that the fence could be six feet tall. Tom Conway made the amended motion and it was seconded by Jon Krofchalk. Acting Chairman Kouba asked for a vote and all the members present agreed to the motion as it was amended and no one was opposed. Motion carried as amended. Petitioner was informed that there was a 10- day appeal period during which time no action could be taken on the petition. The Board discussed the variance request for Mitchell Walch that was tabled at the July 1, 2020 meeting. Jon Krofchalk made a motion to table the request for two weeks to able to examine the resolutions that were drafted by Staff to make sure that they were consistent with what the Board was intending. Tom Conway seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the Board to postpone the request for two weeks and will be brought back to the August 5, 2020 meeting. Adjournment John Krofchalk made a motion to adjourn with a second by Jim Murphy. The vote of the Board was unanimous. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES July 15, 2020 PAGE 4 There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 6: 55 p. m. d Secretary 110

Agenda

AGENDA City of Winona Board of Adjustment DATE: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 TIME: 5: 00 P. M. PLACE: Via Zoom 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. NEW BUSINESS A. Applicant: Karen Coleman & Rafael Narvaez Parcel Address: 402 East Wabasha Nature of Request: Applicant requests modification from code which requires that corner lots whose rear lot line abuts the side lot line of another lot in an R District, no 6 foot ( 6') fence within 25 feet of the common lot line shall be closer to the side street lot line than the front yard setback required on the lot fronting the side street. Applicant is proposing a six foot ( 6') fence two feet from the side lot line which is within the ten foot ( 10') front setback of the lot to the rear ( 313 Wilson St). City Code Section: 43. 03. 51 3. OTHER BUSINESS Re- review variance request from Mitchell Walch for 51 Riverview Drive that was tabled at the July 1, 2020 meeting. 4. ADJOURNMENT Notice of Public Hearing By Electronic Means 402 West Wabasha Notice is hereby given that on Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 5: 00 pm the Winona Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing by electronic means concerning a variance request for the following application. Karen Coleman & Rafael Narvaez— City Code Section 43. 03. 51( C) which requires that corner lots whose rear lot line abuts the side lot line of another lot in an R- District shall not have a six- foot ( 6') fence within 25 feet of the common lot line, shall be closer to the side street lot line than the front yard setback required on the lot fronting the side street. Applicant is proposing a six- foot ( 6') fence two feet from the side lot line which is within the 10- foot ( 10') front setback of the lot to the rear ( 313 Wilson Street). Property is described as R- 2 zoning, Sect- 22, Twp- 107, Range- 007, ORIGINAL PLAT, Lot- 010, Block- 109, ORIGINAL PLAT E 10' LOT 9 ALL LOT 10, or at 402 East Wabasha ( 7th Street). This informational meeting is being conducted electrically following Minnesota State Statute 13D. 021 pursuant to Resolution 2020- 17 Declaring a Special Emergency, as adopted by the Winona City Council on Monday, March 16, 2020. All interested parties are invited to provide input via Zoom at which time you will be given the opportunity to express comments on the project. This meeting is open to the public via web or phone. To join the Zoom Meeting via web, go to: https:// zoom. us/ i/ 96880614307 and enter meeting ID: 968 8061 4307 To join via phone, dial either phone number: 1 312 626 6799 US ( Priority) 1 646 558 8656 US ( Backup) When prompted, enter the following Meeting ID: 968 8061 4307 Written testimony will also be accepted prior to the public hearing. Written comments must be sent via email to: Carlos cespinosaAci. winona. mn. us by 4: 00 p. m. on Monday, Espinosa - July 13, 2020. Specific questions can be directed to the Community Development Office, 507. 457. 8250. Notice is sent to the applicants and to the owners of the properties affected by the application. THIS NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING BY TELEPHONE OR OTHER ELECTRONIC MEANS IS GIVEN PURSUANT TO MINN. STAT. § 130. 04. Dated: July 3, 2020 Carlos Espinosa, City Planner Chris Sanchez Board of Adjustment Chairman Greg Karow, Building Official Board of Adjustment Secretary Zoom Procedures for Board of Adjustment All interested parties are invited to participate via electronic means. This meeting is open to the public via web or phone. This meeting begins at 5: 00 pm; please log in prior to the start of the meeting. You may exit the meeting at any time. Board of Adjustment Commissioners and Staff: To join the Zoom Meeting via web, go to: https:// zoom. us/j/ 96880614307 and enter Meeting ID: 968 8061 4307 To join via phone, dial either phone number: 1 312 626 6799 US ( Priority) 1 646 558 8656 US ( Backup) When prompted, enter the following Meeting ID#: 968 8061 4307 Then enter your participant ID# if you have one; if not, enter# For participants: Only use one audio source; audio from computer is preferred if available. Be aware of background noise from your location. If using phone, do not use the speaker function. If using a web cam, be aware of what is in your background. If you have headphones, please use them as that will limit background noise Please mute your audio until you wish to speak. Then unmute your audio, and ask the Chairman for permission to talk. If using web access, note the options for you to view the meeting ( gallery shows all participants same size) Other notes: Staff will " host" the meeting on a city computer and will manage when participants' audio is muted / unmuted. The public hearing notices included the Zoom meeting information, and also indicated that written comments could be submitted to staff by a set date prior to the Board of Adjustment meeting. These written comments will be provided to the Commissioners either in advance or at the public hearing. June 21, 2020 Community Development, City of Winona City Hall, Room 210 Dear Members of the Board of Community Development: We would like to build a 6 foot fence around the side of our backyard that fronts to one of the sidewalks surrounding our house to complete the fence that encircles the rest of our yard that fronts to the backyards of our two neighbors. I am requesting the variance because the fence would only by about 3 feet from the sidewalk instead of the 10 feet currently required by the ordinance. We would place it behind a row of shrubs that are currently there. We are unable to put the fence much further back as we have a raised garden bed that is only a few feet from the shrubs( see attached photos and diagram). As our house stands on a corner lot, our backyard has borders with our two neighbors' backyards and the sidewalk and public street, and, as we have had issues with people entering our playhouse at night( we have found unfortunate evidence of amorous activity), we would like a space to gather as a family and have our two school- age children to play in privacy and security. We believe that this request meets all the required criteria: 1. It is harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance in that the health, safety, morals, and comfort of our family would be promoted, without interfering with that of our neighbors, passers- by, and community. It would protect the property values as the fencing will provide a private outdoor space ( which otherwise does not exist) for the family and future families. It would secure the most appropriate use of land, in that we can provide some privacy for our family while keeping the neighborhood green and attractive ( through the shrubs that can be seen from the sidewalk). 2. I don' t have details about the Comprehensive Plan. 3. This proposal puts the property to use in a reasonable manner, as a desire for one outdoor place with privacy and security seems to us reasonable. 4. There are unique circumstances not created by use that requires this request: we are on a corner lot and every green space we have is exposed to the public street and sidewalks. 5. This variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood as it involves only approximately 72 feet of fencing, behind decorative shrubs, leaving approximately 166 feet of grass and plantings for the public on the sidewalks and streets to enjoy. 6. The main consideration for this request is not economic: the main considerations are the privacy and security of our family. Sincerely, Karen Coleman and Rafael Narvaez, Property Owners It i 0 0I, f 0 c I I - J" 4 0 6 1 •% " 11S. 11.• 1 4' I itrEi G „„ it. i'..-------) ai-- 10-‘ 1 ...... ..,) ve DD i_........._ __ - 14,06- Ties. I 1 I i I 1 o N i 1 MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: Board of Adjustment FROM: Carlos Espinosa, Luke Sims DATE: June 29, 2020 SUBJECT: BOA Application Considerations for 07/ 15/ 2020 Zoom Meeting Applicant: Karen Coleman & Rafael Narvaez - 402 West Wabasha Considerations related to Board of Adjustment Variance Criteria are provided below: 1) Is the variance in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance? The intent of the ordinances in question is to ensure that neighboring lots have adequate visibility and do not have an undue impact from taller adjacent screening structures. 2) Is the variance consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? The variance does not affect the land use as dictated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan' s future Land Use map designates this property as Traditional Neighborhood, which will not be affected by the variance. Fences are a regular occurrence in Winona' s Traditional Neighborhood areas. 3) Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? Fences to the rear of the property are a common use in residential districts. Fencing is typically associated with residential character in Traditional Neighborhood land use designations and residential zoning districts. 4) Will the variance, if granted, retain the essential character of the locality? Fencing is common in the surrounding area and representative of the residential character of the locality. Tall privacy fencing is relatively uncommon and rarely used along corner side streets in the area. 5) Are there other considerations for the variance request besides economics? If the findings of questions 3- 5 are affirmative this criterion is satisfied. Page 2

Get email alerts for Winona

A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.

Report an issue with this meeting