CU25-014 PC Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Other potential impacts include the pollution of Brandy Creek by chemicals leaking from the tow trucks. The applicant’s business partner suggested during the hearing that the trucks are parked 10-15 feet away from the creek. It is worth noting that the creek was filled in across the subject parcel at some point in the past. As a result, water gathers in this area and slowly drains towards the east where the creek body still exists. Mapping indicates that the creek drainage begins to the southwest of the subject parcel. (C) An assessment of whether all identified impacts of the proposed use when considered together could have a significant impact to any farm or forest operation in the surrounding area in a manner that is likely to have an important influence or effect on that operation. The applicant suggested that the only impacts are from trip generation. Based on testimony received after the hearing notice, and at the hearing itself, there appear to be other impacts. The development of the parcel with the 15,000 square foot agricultural structure and surrounding fenced parking lot has decreased the amount of farmable area significantly. Prior to the applicant establishing the agricultural structure, the subject parcel was leased and utilized by a neighboring farm for grass seed production. That lease was broken and the farm operation has been affected as a result. The subject parcel itself is no longer farmed. The representative for Manton A. Carl LLC’s farms states that the traffic generated by the applicant poses issues for their farming and timber operations. (D) For purposes of this subsection, examples of potential impacts for consideration may include but are not limited to traffic, water availability and delivery, introduction of weeds or pests, damage to crops or livestock, litter, trespass, reduction in crop yields, or flooding. The applicant only considered the potential impacts from traffic. (E) For purposes of subsection (a) and (b), potential impacts to farm and forest practices or the cost of farm and forest practices, impacts relating to the construction or installation of the proposed use shall be deemed part of the use itself for the purpose of conducting a review under subsection (a) and (b). The applicant stated that this criterion does not apply to his proposed use. However, the actual operation appears to involve the structure built with an agricultural exempt permit, and the fenced parking area around that structure. During the hearing, testimony was presented explaining that B&T Trucking not only provides tow service, but transportation service. The alleged transportation service utilizes the semi-truck trailers stored in the parking area of the agricultural exemption building. These trailers were previously parked in the applicant’s driveway as seen in Marion County’s 2023 aerial imagery. The applicant did not address the non-farm transport element of B&T Towing in the application. The applicant states these enclosed semi-trailers parked around the agricultural structure are for the transport of hay. The applicant could not provide any