Duck plans altered

The Jay County Board of Zoning Appeals denied a variance request 4-1 Thursday after the applicant noted he could move the planned building to meet setback requirements.
The board reviewed a variance request for Mahlon Neuenschwander, 6150 North 550 West, Pennville, that asked to build a duck barn 650 feet from his uncle’s residence. The required setback is 750 feet.
The 50-foot by 368-foot barn will hold 12,600 head of ducks.
The board reviewed a letter submitted by Neuenschwander’s uncle that said he had no issue with the building being within the required 750 feet.
However, several other neighbors attended to oppose the variance request, although their complaints centered around the construction of the barn itself and not so much that it would break the setback requirement.
Dorothy Buschur, 6262 North 550 West, spoke against the barn, claiming that it could potentially lead to water quality issues in local wells as well as in the Loblolly watershed and Magic Valley in Jackson Township.
“Every bit of water that comes off his farm goes into the Loblolly,” she said. “He can’t guarantee me that that water’s going to stay there (on his property).”
Her husband Arthur Buschur spoke next, firing off a long list of questions about the project including its size, whether it will be a “wet” or “dry” manure operation, how it will be heated, how dead livestock will be removed, the slope of the land that the barn is being built on, if it was being built far enough from ditches and streams and several more.
“There’s a lot of questions about this site is what I’m saying,” he said.
Buschur and other neighbors within 1 mile of the site submitted a petition stating that they do not want the barn to be built.
“I don’t want my water fouled,” Arthurt Buschur said. “I don’t want my peace of mind taken away.”
Although Buschur questioned several other zoning requirements, Jay/Portland Building and Planning Director Bill Milligan said the planned construction meets all other setbacks and requirements except for the one being considered in the variance request.
Kenny Keller, 5101 West 500 North, spoke about the effect another confined feeding barn would have on the quality life in the area.
“This would be easy if he could build his barn and it didn’t affect anyone, but it does,” he said.
Trent Paxson, 5664 North 500 West, expressed a different concern regarding how variances were decided, saying that if 100 feet is OK then what stops 150 feet or 200 feet from being acceptable.
“We have ordinances and they’re there for a reason,” he said. “Where do you stop granting the waiver for the person?”
After hearing some additional public comment, board chairman Carl Walker informed the public that the role of the BZA was to address issues pertaining to the zoning law and, although many neighbors objected to the construction of a confined feeding barn, they would only make a decision based on the merits of the zoning law.
“The only reason for the meeting today is to address the 650-foot setback,” Walker said.
Addressing Paxson’s concern, the board members looked into the zoning ordinance at the rules for granting variances, noting that the major qualification that typically applies is the “undue hardship” clause.
The undue hardship specification means that a variance can be granted if the board believes that the applicant will face extreme financial or other hardship if the variance is not granted.
After reviewing a satellite map of the proposed area, Walker asked Neuenschwander if it would be possible for him to move the location of the barn further back toward a wooded area in order to meet the setback.
Neuenschwander said that he might have to remove some trees in order to make it work but that “the cost of that would not prevent me from building that building.”
“It’s less expensive for you to put it here,” Walker observed.
“It’s something I can do if I have to,” Neuenschwander said.
“If you couldn’t do it, that’s a whole different story for me,” said board member Steve Ritchie.
Walker explained to the public that if the board denies the variance but Neuenschwander moves it to meet the zoning requirements, that the barn will still be constructed.
The board voted to deny the variance request and it passed 4-1, with board member Steve Fennig casting the dissenting vote.
Fennig said that he voted against it since he felt that if the affected neighbor didn’t object, the variance should be OK’d.
“If the neighbor within the 750 doesn’t care, it should be approved,” he said.
In other business Thursday night, the zoning board of appeals:
•Elected officers for 2011: Walker, chairman; Scott Hilfiker, vice chairman; Fennig, secretary; Pati McLaughlin, recording secretary; and Bill Hinkle, legal counsel.[[In-content Ad]]