The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 1 voted Wednesday to grant an amended use variance for Hannah Haunted Acres, allowing expanded seasonal indoor and outdoor commercial recreational activity on a longtime Franklin Township farm, while staff urged the petitioner to consider rezoning the property to SU-16 for a more durable regulatory fit.

The petitioner, Hannah Haunted Acres Inc., sought an amended variance to extend and clarify the seasonal haunted‑attraction operations originally permitted by a 2009 variance. The petition would allow additional days and certain new attractions, a limited outdoor stage area, state‑alcohol sales within designated areas and an optional indoor escape-room attraction of up to 10,000 square feet (the petitioner said that attraction might not be built). The property is approximately 78 acres and remains farmed outside event days.

Why it matters: The site is well known regionally and brings seasonal crowds; staff recommended rejection of the use-variance tool for the proposed expansion because the amendments substantially increase days and hours of outdoor operation and intensify the site’s recreational use. Staff recommended rezoning to a special-use district (SU‑16) instead. The board approved the amended variance subject to detailed recorded commitments and operational limits.

Attorney David Rutherford, representing Hannah Haunted Acres, said the operation employs more than 100 seasonal workers and that the family-run attraction has operated under the 2009 variance without major incident. He described additions to the plan that the petitioner said were designed to maintain neighbor protections: noise monitoring, limits on bonfires, additional buffering and administrative review of new structures. Rutherford said the revised commitments are “90% identical to” the prior conditions and would be recorded to remain enforceable.

Staff outlined its principal concern: the proposed amendments would expand the number of outdoor operation days from about 55 days under the 2009 plan to a potential of roughly 108 days, lengthen the operating season into mid‑August and beyond Thanksgiving in some cases, and allow additional late‑night hours on many nights. Staff said that scope would make the seasonal use the site’s primary function and recommended redevelopment under the SU‑16 special‑use zoning instead of layering a second use variance on top of the existing approval.

Board members questioned the petitioner about alcohol control and noise monitoring. The petitioner agreed to modify the metric in the plan from a specific, older meter model to “a substantially similar sound‑measuring device” that staff and neighbors could use to evaluate compliance. The board also required commitments limiting consumption areas for alcohol, designating off‑hours controls and recording the plan and commitments.

The board voted to grant the amendment to the use variance (2025‑UV1‑017) with recorded commitments governing hours, noise monitoring, buffering, limits on bonfires and administrative approval of new structures. Staff reiterated its preference for a rezoning to SU‑16 but did not oppose the board’s decision once the commitments were recorded.

Next steps: The petitioner must record the commitments and file plans for any new structures; staff indicated it would accept funds the petitioner has already paid toward the variance application if the petitioner chooses instead to pursue a rezoning petition.