Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Pud Fence Modification topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Evansville planning panel permits 8-foot fence along rear of 5939 Beaver Trail after neighbor objections

Area Planning Commission of Evansville and Vanderburgh County · November 7, 2024
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 Area Planning Commission approved a limited modification to the Indian Woods PUD allowing an 8-foot fence along the rear (east) property line of 5939 Beaver Trail while keeping side yards at 6 feet; the decision followed hours of public comment and a staff reminder that utility easement clearance and permits remain required.

The Area Planning Commission of Evansville and Vanderburgh County voted Nov. 7 to allow an 8-foot fence along the rear property line of 5939 Beaver Trail while requiring the side yard fences to remain at the PUD standard of 6 feet.

Carol Malvino, the homeowner who requested the change, told the commission she lives alone and wants greater privacy and security because properties behind her sit at a higher grade. "I live alone. I don't want people, you know, when I'm home alone... I had a pressure washer, a brand new weed eater...they disappeared," Malvino said while explaining why she sought the taller fence.

Neighbors opposed the full request. Anne Fisher, whose property borders Malvino's, said she submitted photos and argued that an 8-foot fence running immediately beside her 6-foot boundary fence would "diminish or destroy the look of the original" fence and could box in her yard and harm the neighborhood's uniform character. "If the 8-foot fence is permitted, I will literally end up with a border that may or may not match or blend with my fence," Fisher said.

Other residents offered alternatives. Sue Blakesley, who lives nearby, suggested landscaping such as fast-growing arborvitae to provide screening without changing PUD standards: "I put in a row of arborvitae...they've tripled in size, nobody can see," she told the commission and offered to obtain quotes.

After extended discussion about visibility, property lines and precedent, commissioners proposed and voted to approve only the rear (east) property-line increase to 8 feet and to deny the requested 8-foot height along the side lot lines, leaving sides at 6 feet. The motion passed on roll call, 10–0.

Staff cautioned the petitioner that the commission's height decision does not negate other requirements. "What this body says about how high something can be does not supersede the need to have clearance from utilities who are using that easement," a staff member said, noting a 20-foot utility easement along the rear property line and that utility letters and site plans will be required before permits can be issued.

Two emailed statements were read into the record in support of Malvino's request, one from Cindy Ratliff and one from Crystal Greer, who said she also would prefer an 8-foot fence because neighboring land is elevated.

The commission's approval is limited to Lot 324 within the Indian Woods PUD and applies only to the specific configuration the panel approved; any work in the easement area or accessory structures still require separate permits and utility clearances, staff said.