(402) 387-2844

Brown County Planning Commission Postpones Sending Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Regulations to Brown County Commissioners

The Brown County Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 17th on the proposed Brown County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Regulations.

Planning Commission President Linda O’Hare opened the meeting and introduced the members of the Planning Commission, who are Jim Carley, Steve Bejot, Linda O’Hare, Brad Wilkins, Pat Schumacher and Mark Miles.

Election of officers were held and with Linda O’Hare re-elected president and Pat Schumacher as vice-president.

Tom Jones, Planning Commission administrator, said that Brad Wilkins and Mark Miles are new to the board. They replaced Wilbur Saner and Roby Woods.

Jones explained the new Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Regulations are set up by the Planning Commission and then sent to the as a recommendation. The Brown County Commissioners will hold another hearing and then pass the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Regulations.

Jones said the present Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Regulations were written in 1992. It is recommended that the Comprehensive Plan along with Zoning Regulations be updated every 10 years, but Brown County’s has not been.

Jones said the Zoning Regulations have been amended three times over the years. There is nothing in the current Zoning Regulations about wind towers or solar farms.

“The way agriculture is done and managed these days called for some changes in the zoning regulations,” said Jones.

“We will send our amendments to the Zoning Regulations on to the County Commissioners,” said Jones. “The amendments are not written in stone. What we hear tonight will help possibly change the amendments.”

Prior to the hearing start, Jones commented, “The Planning Commission takes their job very seriously. We are an agricultural economy and we don’t want to cripple the ag economy.”

“This county is agriculture. You have a right to do with your land what you want, but not at a detriment to your neighbor's land,” said Jones.

“We are looking for answers. We all know pigs smell. What we are looking for is to set zoning regulations to help the county,” concluded Jones.

Jones reported on some of the proposed amendments to the zoning regulations.

• Setbacks for livestock facilities;

• Change to animal unit system;

• The animal unit system would be used for special use permits;

• Solar glare and easements;

• Wind tower setbacks and decommissioning plan for end of life;

• No use of eminent domain for wind towers and;

• Conservation easements.

Zoning Hearing

The zoning hearing opened with Marsha King being the first speaker. She said, “I was born in this county and we need to get back to families instead of corporations. The proposed setbacks need to be farther from peoples’ homes.”

Jack King, Sr. said, “Setbacks should be on the border fence and not on dwellings. You don’t make a living from your house.”

“I’m proud of you guys (Planning Commission) for what you are doing,” concluded King.

Colt King said, “Boundaries are my biggest thing. I know what it is like south of Ainsworth and it is bad.”

Tom Bejot said, “There will be no expansion of our feedlot due the proximity of dwellings."

Bejot questioned if he went out and built another feedlot in an area with the proper setbacks, would the Planning Commission protect the new facility from people wanting to build a house within the livestock facilities two mile setback.

Jones said, “That is the way it is written in the Zoning Regulations, it is reciprocal. Nobody can come in and build a house within the two mile setback limit of a livestock facility.”

Planning Commission member Brad Wilkins explained a livestock facility could grant a waver within the two mile setback limit for a new house, but then if the livestock facility wanted to expand at a later date, it would have to get a waver from the new homeowner.

Troy Peters said, “Setbacks are very important and we need them. You have people living here their whole lives and have a hog unit come in beside them. It is not really fair. We don’t want a place where people don’t want to live. That is huge, please remember that.”

Jack King Jr. commented that setbacks are very important and not just a half mile, which could ruin it for people who have lived in Brown County their whole lives. He said four mile setbacks from property lines were needed, maintaining that trees and stuff on fences don’t keep smell out.

Kim Snyder stated she is from Long Pine and is personally pleased that people are updating the zoning regulations.

Snyder questioned if the new zoning regulations affect current facilities.

Dean Jochem said, “We have existed for over 19 years without setbacks. Buy your own setbacks, don’t put pain on your neighbors.”

In regards to setbacks, Jochen stated that a person could buy five acres in the country, build a house and they would have control of property for a two mile radius around them. They could then control the potential use of land that people have owned for years.

“If you own land, don’t build a house on the edge of your property, move it back. There are things you can do to protect yourself. I built on the corner of my land and now I have a feedlot across the road from me and I could have built in the middle of my land,” said Jochem.

Jochem concluded, “There are times when we need setbacks but there are times when the setbacks are abused.”

Steve Bartak brought up the Nebraska Livestock Matrix which makes a distinction between solid and liquid manure as far as setbacks.

Bartak asked if the Planning Commission had looked at different setbacks for the type of manure the operation is producing.

Jones said the Planning Commission has looked at different setbacks for Environmentally Controlled Housing (ECH) and Open Lots, which could be similar.

Jones explained the proposed change to amendment 37A.

The proposed amendment reads:

Amend Article 3 GENERAL DEFINITIONS by adding Article 3.3121 ENVIRONMENTALLY CONTROLLED HOUSING: Shall mean any livestock facility/operation meeting the definition of an Intensive Livestock Facilities/Operations and is contained within a building which is roofed and may or may not have open sides and contains floors which are hard surfaced, earthen, slatted, or other type of floor. The facility is capable of maintaining and regulating the environment in which the animals are kept.

Also Amend Article 3 GENERAL DEFINITIONS by adding Article 3.3311 OPEN LOTS: shall mean pens or similar areas or open front buildings, with dirt or concrete (paved or hard) surfaces, wherein animals or poultry are substantially or entirely exposed to the outside environment except for possible small portions affording some protection by windbreak or small shed-type areas.

Also Amend 5.1 AG AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT By adding Article 5.20 INTENSIVE LIVESTOCK FACILITIES/OPERATIONS SETBACKS.

Jones explained the setbacks on the amendment 37A sheet were just examples for Open Lot and ECH livestock operations. Jones said actual setbacks have not been determined by the Planning Commission:

Animal Units Open ECH

300 to 1,000 ½ Mile ¾ Mile

1,0001 to 5,000 ¾ Mile 1½ Miles

5,000+ 1 Mile 2 Miles

Open = Open Lot Operation

ECH = Environmentally Controlled Housing

All setbacks apply to people building near animal operations as well. Setbacks may be waived or reduced by signed waivers. Setbacks are from habitable dwellings, public areas and other intensive livestock facilities/operations.

Planning Commission member Brad Wilkins said, “For the last 19 years we have functioned without setbacks. With setbacks you are putting things on autopilot and taking a lot of the decisions away from the Planning Commission and County Commissioners. I think we need to let the Planning Commission and Commissioners do their job.”

Wilkins said the Planning Commission and Commissioners need to look at the Livestock Matrix.

Wilkins said a project should be looked at on its merit. "I don’t want to hard wire something," he said.

Commissioner Dennis Bauer commented, “Without setbacks facilities can expand. With setbacks there won’t be any expanding of present facilities in Brown County.”

Planning Commission member Mark Miles commented, “We can’t determine setbacks by species, but we can change setbacks by environmentally controlled housing versus open lots.”

“It is not just corporations that will be controlled, there are families here that want to expand,” said Miles. “I’m the fifth generation to live in this county and my wife and I have just had the sixth generation. My family has been here for 138 years and the margins are different today than they were 30 years ago. You have to have more volume to operate, so from a feedlot perspective with the amended zoning regulations, we couldn’t expand.”

Following the hearing on the Zoning Regulations, the Planning Commission voted 4-2 to postpone sending the Comprehensive Plan to the County Commissioners and hold a special meeting to be scheduled within 60 days.

Prior to the vote on the Zoning Regulations, Commissioner Dennis Bauer commented, “There is a lot of controversy about setbacks. Is it possible to have no setbacks on open facilities but have setbacks on confinement facilities?”

“Basically you would not limit existing feed yards from expansion. They would still have to go through all the hoops to expand. I really worry about the beef industry in this county. We don’t want to stifle growth. If you don’t grow some, you go the other way,” said Bauer.

Commissioner Reagan Wiebelhaus commented he could get behind Bauer’s proposal.

The Planning Commission voted to postpone action on the Zoning Regulations and hold a special meeting within 60 days.