Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Outdoor Storage Shipping Containers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BZA rejects Integrity Electric request to keep shipping containers and taller gate on Washington Street
Summary
The board denied a request to allow seven shipping containers and a 20‑foot gate at 8949 E. Washington St., citing TOD overlay, visibility from Post Road, fire and safety concerns, and neighborhood objections. Staff and neighborhood groups had opposed the permanent placement.
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 3 on Feb. 18 denied a proposal that would have allowed Integrity Electric to permanently place seven shipping containers and a 20‑foot freestanding gate on the southern side yard of 8949 East Washington Street (case 2024‑UV‑3‑017, amended).
Attorney David Dearing, representing Integrity Electric, told the board the containers store largely wooden pallets, shelving and other materials that the company’s insurer would not allow inside the warehouse. Jesse Franklin, manager for the property, said the container arrangement had reduced damage to stored materials and protected vehicles staged inside the fenced area.
“The fire inspector said, ‘You’re okay’ after we removed barricades,” Franklin said, citing a safety inspection.
Neighborhood groups and transit advocates urged denial. Ron Phillips, president of the Warren Township Development Association, and Ryan Hunt of IndyGo both said the containers and outdoor storage are inconsistent with the area’s Transit Oriented Development overlay and with aims to improve the Washington‑Post Road corridor ahead of a proposed Blue Line BRT station.
Staff recommended denial, saying the property lies within a TOD secondary district near a proposed bus rapid transit stop and that outdoor storage and an oversized gate would be visible from the Post Road frontage and from a future station. Staff also cited an open violation file at the site documenting existing nonconformities and said the applicant had not demonstrated a site‑specific practical difficulty that would justify the relief requested.
Vote tallies were split on separate parts of the petition. On the shipping‑container component the board recorded: Brian Hannon — yes; Rayanna Bender — no; Joanna Taft — no; Percy Bland — no. The motion was not granted. On the gate/fence component the board recorded: Rayanna Bender — no; Joanna Taft — no; Percy Bland — no; Brian Hannon — no. That motion was not granted. The board also recorded commitments offered by the petitioner — removal of concrete barricades and submission of a landscaping/screening plan for staff approval — but those commitments were not sufficient to secure approval.
