Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves variance to replace 20-year fence at 1419 Tremont Drive

Mishawaka Board of Zoning Appeals · July 14, 2026
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 Mishawaka Board of Zoning Appeals unanimously approved a variance allowing the Aldridges to replace a 6-foot privacy fence in its existing location about 18 feet from the roadway, instead of the required 25-foot rear-yard setback; staff had recommended approval.

The Mishawaka Board of Zoning Appeals voted unanimously July 14 to grant a variance allowing property owners James and Carrie Aldridge to replace an existing 6-foot privacy fence at 1419 Tremont Drive in its current location, approximately 18 feet from the roadway, rather than meeting the 25-foot setback required by code.

Carrie Aldridge, who said she and her husband own the property, told the board the fence has been in place for more than 20 years without causing safety or visibility problems and that moving the fence would disrupt mature trees, shrubs and a storage shed. “Because the fence has existed in this location for over 2 decades without causing any problems, we respectfully believe that granting this variance would not negatively impact neighboring properties,” she said.

Board members noted the Aldridges had worked with city departments in advance and that staff recommended approval. The chair confirmed the city’s departmental review found no issues. After the public hearing was closed, a motion to approve the variance was made and seconded and carried on a roll call vote with all voting members in favor.

The approval allows the owners to replace the aging fence in the same footprint, preserving yard landscaping and the streetscape alignment with neighboring fences, according to the appellant’s presentation and staff summary. The board did not attach conditions beyond standard permitting requirements.

The board moved on to the next item following the vote.