Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fence Variance Corner Lot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BZA allows 6-foot privacy fence on corner lot if petitioner verifies property line
Summary
The board approved a variance letting a 6-foot opaque privacy fence remain in a corner-side yard at 1305 Cedar St., conditioned on verification that the fence is at least 1 foot inside the property line.
Get email alerts on the Fence Variance Corner Lot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Aaron Yoder received approval from the Elkhart Board of Zoning Appeals on Sept. 11 to keep a 6-foot opaque privacy fence in a corner-side yard at his property, 1305 Cedar St., on the condition he demonstrates the fence is at least 1 foot inside the property line along Oak Street.
Yoder told the board he replaced an existing 4-foot chain-link fence earlier this year without a permit and that he believed an upgrade to 6 feet was allowed. He said the fence sits well back from the roadway and that Elkhart County GIS measurements show the fence is about 7 to 10 feet from the property line. Staff cited a zoning violation issued July 1 for the 6-foot wood fence installed in the corner side yard and denied the fence permit July 31 because the fence exceeded the permitted 4-foot height and was opaque in a corner-side yard.
City staff told the board the updated Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) expected this fall would allow 6-foot privacy fences set at least 1 foot inside the property line; staff amended its recommendation to support the petition if the petitioner can verify the fence location by locating property corner markers or by providing a survey. Staff proposed and the board adopted a condition requiring verification: the petitioner must submit evidence to staff (surveyor mark or photos showing surveyed corner markers) that the fence is at least one foot from the property line.
Staff mailed 30 notices and reported no written objections. On the record the three-member board voted unanimously to approve the variance with the verification condition (Mulvaney: Yes; Osborne: Yes; Lightman: Yes).

