Zionsville BZA denies special exception for proposed landscaping contractor at 526 N. 1200 E.

The Town of Zionsville Board of Zoning Appeals voted to deny a special exception request to allow an expanded landscaping contractor operation at 526 North 1200 East following extensive public comment and board questioning.

Planning staff told the board the parcel previously operated under a Boone County approval but that the petitioner's proposal was broader than the historic use. Staff concluded the request failed one of the three special-exception criteria: consistency with the agricultural zoning and the town's airport-area strategic land-use plan, and recommended denial. "We do not support this request," Planning staff said during the presentation.

Melody Jones, a real-estate agent representing the petitioners, told the board the buyers, Brad and Tanya (Tonya) Payton/Peyton, planned site improvements including a 2,400-square-foot office, a 9,600-square-foot shop, two 9,600-square-foot hoop houses, additional tree buffering, a paved entrance and a septic system. Jones said the petitioners committed to daytime hours and to planting large arborvitae along property lines. "The Patents respectfully asked for a favorable decision regarding their business to be relocated to 526 North 1200 East," Jones said, acknowledging the packet contained an addendum the staff had not yet reviewed.

Neighbors sharply questioned aspects of the application, raising noise, traffic and long-term land-use concerns. Elizabeth Haynes, who attended a neighborhood meeting with the petitioners, said the retail plan was not definitive and urged stronger limits: "If given a retail exemption in an Ag zone at this time, who is to say that the next person who purchased the property would be able to sell something else." Gary Shugart, who lives immediately adjacent to the site, warned the project would intensify use compared with the past two decades of quiet activity.

Board members pressed petitioners on inconsistencies and on aspirational language in the application. The filing listed different hours (7 a.m. to 9 p.m. in one place, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. in another); petitioners confirmed final daytime hours would be 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Petitioners also acknowledged the application estimated roughly 1,000 large truck movements per year concentrated over an eight-month season and listed possible future operations such as grinding tree waste and a concrete crusher. Petitioners said concrete crushing was not part of immediate plans and that heavy equipment might never be purchased, but the board said a broad approval could permit future intensification that would be difficult to monitor or enforce.

Board members repeatedly returned to enforcement and the breadth of the request. "When you put everything that you could ever want to do into a proposal ' it's hard for us to judge how many of these things are actually going to happen," the chair said during deliberations. Several members suggested either narrowing the scope, adding clear, enforceable conditions, or pursuing rezoning rather than granting a wide-ranging special exception.

A motion to deny the special exception was made and the clerk took roll call. The record shows the vote: Josh Fedora ' Aye; Jim Hurst ' Aye; Kathy Fosselway ' Aye; Amanda Miller ' Aye. The motion passed and the BZA denied the special exception "as presented and described." The board subsequently dismissed a companion retail variance petition after petitioners were unavailable for follow-up.

What happens next: Petitioners may revise and return with a narrowed, more precisely conditioned request or pursue rezoning. The denial means the currently proposed expansion and retail sales are not authorized at this site under the requested special-exception application.