Kosciusko APC Approves Two Ordinance Amendments

Kosciusko County Area Plan Commission brought up two ordinance amendments during their meeting Wednesday.
Matt Sandy, Plan Commission director, talked with the commission about animal feed operations, and the ordinance will be taken before the county commissioners as well.
“Agricultural is agricultural,” said Sandy. “We don’t differentiate between if you’ve got one chicken or 500. Whatever the case is, you are agricultural.”
Sandy stated that this ordinance will be to regulate AFOs with 300 animals or more. If an operation has 299 animals or less, then they will not be regulated. Sandy also stated that this was to help with disease control.
“What triggered this was we were approached by a group that was concerned about disease control and the infiltration of some of these smaller operations coming into areas and not being regulated,” said Sandy.
Under the ordinance, AFOs are defined by a facility, lot or premises where animals other than aquatic animals are confined, fed or maintained for 45 days or more in a 12-month period, and where the number of animals total at least 299, including dairy and beef cattle, calves, swine, horses, sheep goats, turkeys, chickens or ducks. Kennels are not included. It also states that to be consistent with the Indiana Department of Environmental Management regulations and Indiana code, a combined feeding operation will be considered an AFO subject to Kosciusko County Area Planning regulations.
“CFOs are broken down by each critter, and are subject to IDEM regulations,” explained Sandy. “What we did was look at IDEM's regulations and try to implement those as best we could for some of these smaller operations.”
For any AFO, they need to comply with the minimum requirements of being in a lot area of 20 acres; if in a front yard, being setback 100 feet from a right-of-way; in a side or rear yard, being setback 100 feet from the property line; being setback 400 feet from any sensitive use area such as residential dwellings, educational facilities, religious facilities, recreational areas and commercial buildings; being setback 100 feet from any lakes, shorelines, drainageways, wetlands or water wells; and being setback 0.5 miles from any existing AFO.
A public notice will also be required that any applicant needs to provide a written notice to alert all property owners within the half mile distance of any proposed AFO, and if the physical address differs from the owner’s mailing address.
“This is just for notification purposes,” stated Sandy. “It’s not a public hearing, it’s to alert those around where the proposed AFO is proposed to go in, or is planning on going in.”
For manure and mortality management, Sandy stated that this is where they are following state code. “So if there is a violation at the state level, it would be considered a violation at the local level,” Sandy said. “The state would be the one who will have to carry the ball on it.”
“What are Premise IDs and how are they acquired?” asked Bob Conley, county commissioner.
“It’s through the Indiana State Board of Animal Health,” stated Assistant Planner Shannon Shepherd. “It requires them to register what animals they have on their property. It’s also required by 4-Hers to get it.”
“The Board of Animal Health uses Premises IDs if there is any type of disease problem,” stated Steve Miller, an affiliate of Creighton Brothers. “This allows them to look at who they need to test if there is an outbreak.”
“The importance of the ID for me,” said James Moyer, secretary for the commission, “was to make sure that the people realize that they have a responsibility in particular with manure and mortality management as it relates to water quality.”
Kevin McSherry, vice president of the commission, asked Moyer if he would be on board with the setback being amended to 300 feet instead of 100, to which he agreed. McSherry also stated that there needed to be an exception when it came to bovine and equine operations. He stated that those numbers for those larger animals needed to be 150, not 300.
Chad Tucker from Tucker Golden Beef agreed with McSherry that while larger animals produce a lot more by-product, the ad-hoc committee that created this ordinance wanted to make it as uncomplicated as possible.
“That’s the reason we came up with one number,” said Tucker, “and yes, 300 head of cattle on 20 acres is a lot. However, if we can keep it as simple as possible, we can meet our goals.”
Sandy stated that this ordinance will pass on to the county commissioners, and if there are any amendments that they will need to be clarified to the commissioners. Sandy also stated that if this ordinance passes, that they will look for immediate activation on it.
Matt Goodnight, commission member, asked if there were any concerns or amendments, how would they go about doing so, to which Moyer stated he would like to have the time to study the concern. Moyer stated that they will do the research, and bring it to their concern.
Goodnight brought up the concern of the water setbacks, and that they needed to be more than 100 feet. Moyer asked for the board’s permission to collect some information from the state and local governments on rights-of-way, which was granted.
The ordinance passed to bring to the commissioners in its current form.
“I appreciate you guys putting in the effort to make sure that the things we’re doing in our county are responsibly done,” said Miller. “Not withholding anything, but trying to make sure it’s done in a responsible fashion.”
The second amendment is the proposed Table A to the county zoning ordinance. For example, under agricultural zoning, they would be adding AFOs, for a permitted use, and commercial venues for exception uses. This was approved.
Sandy talked to the commission about three problematic bills that were in contention at the Statehouse.
The first bill is SB 176, which prohibits a county, city or town from adopting or enforcing a planning, zoning, or land use ordinance, or imposing a condition for a permit or approval for shooting ranges.
The second bill is HB 1001, which is a broad housing bill. Sandy stated that there is a provision of the bill that states if they revise their zoning ordinances, then they have a year to make sure all the zoning ordinances match the components of the comprehensive plan.
“We’ve been through zoning ordinance amendments,” said Sandy. "And they don’t go that quick.”
The second provision for HB 1001 is that any property that is owned as residential or commercial, as currently drafted, would be a permanent use with no oversight and no parking requirements. This would mean that houses that are at a lake would no longer be required to be so far back from the water line.
The last bill that was brought up is HB 1333, which is a land use and development bill. This would take land classifications four through eight, that are zoned agricultural, and would make any development a permitted use. Meaning they would not have to rezone to put data centers, nuclear plants or solar power onto these properties.
“This was supposed to be dropped, but they pushed it through anyway,” stated Sandy. “Two of our local senators, Donato and Doriot, are on the committee looking at this bill.”
It was approved to have Sandy make appropriate comments and reach out to those senators.
The next meeting of the Area Plan Commission will be 1 p.m. March 4.