Fishers BZA denies short‑term rental special exception amid neighborhood notice and traffic concerns

The Fishers Board of Zoning Appeals on Sept. 24 voted to deny a special exception that would have allowed operation of a short‑term rental at 107 Northwood Drive.

Petitioner Andre (Andres/Andre) Bello and his wife, Terry, described their proposed short‑term rental as family‑ and pet‑friendly, with limits on vehicle counts and minimum stays intended to discourage parties. Bello said the listing has been active on Airbnb since July 2025 and presented letters of support from adjacent neighbors.

Planner Grace Wiley explained that under Indiana law municipalities cannot limit owner‑occupied short‑term rentals tied to home occupation; because this property does not meet the city’s home‑occupation standards the applicant sought a special exception. Staff said two public comments had been received in the staff report (one supporting, one opposing), and recommended that any approval be recorded with the Hamilton County Recorder and be tied to the specific owner so the special exception would be void if the owner sold or vacated the property.

Public comment was strongly mixed. Supporters including a local short‑term rental host described benefits such as affordable temporary lodging and help for families displaced by emergencies. Several neighbors, including John Hyatt and others who live adjacent to the property, raised concerns that notice of the hearing had not been widely received; multiple speakers said a gray van had been parked in front of the posted meeting sign, obscuring it. Neighbors said increased traffic, vehicles cutting corners and potential safety risks for children were concerns; one resident said construction crews staying in other short‑term rentals had previously created heavy vehicle activity in the neighborhood.

Staff and the chair clarified that the city would follow up on unpermitted listings: Grace Wiley said staff would contact property addresses that may be operating short‑term rentals to determine whether they are owner‑occupied (which state law allows) or not (which would be a violation if no special exception is in place). Lucas Smith noted city enforcement limits with owner‑occupied units.

A board member moved to "not approve" SE‑25‑3, citing detriment to property and community safety. The motion was seconded; roll‑call votes were yes from Mister Grinsley and Mister Silvey, a no from Mister Stevenson, and Chair Ferrucci also voted to not approve. The motion to deny carried and the special exception was denied.

The denial means the property cannot be used as a non‑owner‑occupied short‑term rental without returning to the city for a new application; staff indicated they would follow up on other potentially unpermitted listings.