The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 1 on Wednesday granted a limited use variance allowing the seasonal, owner-operated repair of lawnmowers at 9743 Indian Creek Road South, subject to a recorded plan of operation and binding commitments.

The petitioners, David and Margaret Sisk, requested variances to allow a lawnmower repair business with accessory outdoor storage and operations at their DA‑zoned property, to legalize several accessory structures that are closer than current setbacks allow, to regularize a rear deck and to permit a small portable sign. They told the board the operation is owner‑occupied and seasonal.

Why it matters: Neighbors close to the site told the board they supported the petition after reviewing a plan of operation that limited outdoor work to a defined hashed area and restricted activity to the owner. Staff recommended denial because the use is classified as a heavier commercial activity and some accessory structures sit within minimal setbacks, but staff also noted the petition included documented neighbor support and commitments the petitioner agreed to record.

Attorney David Rutherford, representing the petitioners, said the operation is small and seasonal and that the owner performs repair work behind the home in a compact, defined area. Rutherford said the petitioner “repairs lawnmowers in his backyard” and that the packet included a plan of operation and neighbor letters of support. He told the board that the repair work has occurred for decades without significant problems and that many neighbors signed an informed petition in support.

Staff summarized the issues that led to the April violation finding: the inspector documented lawnmowers, vehicle parts, an unlicensed trailer and other outdoor items; some accessory buildings lacked permanent foundations and sat close to property lines. Staff recommended denial on the grounds the use is inconsistent with the DA dwelling/agricultural district and because outdoor work area and noise could be difficult to enforce. The petitioner agreed to commitments limiting hours, defining the enclosed work area and tying the variance to the owner’s on-site occupation, and accepted a requirement that some commitments be recorded so they would remain enforceable if the property changed hands.

Several neighbors who had supported the petition at the prior hearing were not present this day, but the petitioner supplied a written petition and civic‑league endorsement. The board voted unanimously to grant the variance (2025-UV1-016), conditioned on the plan of operation and recordable commitments covering noise limits, owner occupancy and the defined work area.

Next steps: The petitioner must record the board’s commitments and file any affidavits of compliance required by the Division of Planning once the commitments are met.