County zoning officials on a motion voted to table consideration of a rezoning request that would convert a large, mostly agricultural parcel to an industrial landfill designation, saying they need written technical reports and input from local conservation groups before acting. The motion to table passed unanimously.

The request would have rezoned an upper tract of roughly 80 acres that is part of a larger 100‑plus‑acre parcel currently used in part for grazing and formerly for a paint barn and other landfill support activities. Supporters of the applicant said portions of the property have been cleaned of old equipment and that the company uses part of the site now for a single consolidated operation. A representative for the landfill operator described standard construction controls, liners and monitoring used at the existing site and said leachate is routed to the Newcastle wastewater treatment plant for treatment.

The board paused the request after multiple residents raised concerns about surface- and groundwater. One resident said there is a local pond and a creek called Pink Creek upstream of downstream receptors and warned that the pond "eventually" drains to the Big Blue River; another said the area sits over a shallow groundwater source and local springs. Residents pressed the board to limit the rezoning so it would not open the entire upper parcel to future expansion, suggesting splitting the parcel or leaving the east 40 acres zoned agricultural.

County staff explained that the parcel historically includes mixed zoning, that state regulations require setbacks from streams and other features, and that any future landfill construction would be subject to Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) permitting and state code setbacks. Speakers cited state setback examples discussed during the hearing including a 200‑foot buffer from flowing streams, setbacks from potable wells and separation distances tied to sensitive sites such as hospitals and dwellings; staff also explained the regulatory concept of an "aquifer of significance," which triggers more stringent design (for example, double‑liner systems) when a formation can produce more than about 200 gallons per minute.

Landfill representatives described standard landfill construction practice: testing of native clay, installation of a synthetic liner and drainage layer, leachate collection and off‑site treatment, and semiannual groundwater monitoring wells to detect statistically significant changes. They said third‑party engineering firms observe testing and IDEM inspects construction. Staff noted that whether the upper tract would actually be usable for future landfill cells depends on site‑specific hydrogeologic testing, permitting and meeting setback requirements such as the 200‑foot stream setback mentioned during the hearing.

Members of the public also raised nontechnical concerns: potential odor impacts in summer, tree clearing near the pond and floodplain concerns raised by a local conservancy. A resident noted previous rezoning attempts in 1971 and 1994 and asked the board to consider historical context before approving further changes to the parcel.

After discussion the commission recommended tabling the application pending written documentation: groundwater/aquifer analysis, a written statement or comment from the Blue River Conservancy (and related conservancy groups), and any clarifying wetlands or floodplain information. The board chair said the item could be rescheduled for consideration as early as the September meeting if the requested material is provided.

The hearing record shows no vote on rezoning; the formal board action was to table the item and request additional technical and stakeholder input.