Kosciusko County BZA denies backyard chickens, approves multiple variances and imposes settlement for rebuilt home

The Kosciusko County Board of Zoning Appeals on its recent meeting denied an after‑the‑fact request to keep chickens on a Bass Drive property, approved a series of variance and exception requests for lakeshore and residential properties, deferred enforcement in one temporary‑residence case for six months and negotiated a $1,500 settlement for a rebuilt porch that exceeded an earlier setback approval.

The denial of the chicken request came after board members and staff cited disease‑control concerns. Staff noted state poultry‑health protocols that trigger additional controls when commercial confined animal feeding operations lie within a two‑mile buffer of a hobby flock. The board voted to deny the exception and ordered removal of the birds within 60 days.

The board also moved to allow several after‑the‑fact or modified structures to remain with conditions: one shoreline pergola and a carport were approved with the requirement that the owners obtain after‑the‑fact permits and pay the applicable fees; a shed that straddles a property line was allowed to remain under an existing encroachment agreement and with a deed/recording condition to protect future owners; and a proposed oversized accessory building was approved after testimony that the structure would match the house’s materials and would not require additional setback reductions.

Separately, the board approved a conditional rebuild for Donald and Sheila Clausen: the board allowed the owners to reconstruct portions of the roof and walls 2 feet from the north property line but made that approval conditional. If, during demolition, the rest of the structure must be removed, the house must be moved or rebuilt to meet the 5‑foot setback.

The board denied a variance request filed by Sheila McDonald for a completed addition that sits 7 feet 10 inches from a property line; members voted to require the addition and an air‑conditioning unit be reduced to the ordinance’s required 10‑foot setback and to obtain proper permits.

In another contested matter, the board voted to deny a petition to keep a second dwelling in place at Reininger Lake but delayed enforcement for six months to allow occupants to relocate; staff had reported a health‑department waiver and neighborhood complaints about multiple vehicles, road congestion and septic capacity.

On a separate compliance case, the board approved a variance for Harvey Hayes to leave a rebuilt residence and deck at 15.5 feet from the right‑of‑way (the prior approval had referenced 19 feet), and the board agreed on a settlement in lieu of civil enforcement: the petitioner will pay a $1,500 settlement and obtain the required permit and pay the $250 permit fee within 30 days.

Votes at a glance

- Continued: Case of Mike Bauer (Epworth Forest) — motion to continue to July, approved. - Approved: Variance 2025115 (Corin Hendrix) — new residence setbacks approved as presented (setbacks included roughly 20 feet from Mulberry Street, 12 ft 5 in from South Street and ~14 ft 5 in from water's edge); motion carried. - Approved with condition: Variance 2025122 (Donald & Sheila Clausen) — allowed reconstruction at 2 feet from north property line provided the entire structure is not demolished; if demolition requires rebuilding the full footprint, structure must meet the 5‑foot setback. - Withdrawn: Variances 2025126 and 2025127 (Winegan) — withdrawn; refiling anticipated to address survey/overhang calculations. - Denied: Variance 2025129 (Sheila McDonald) — addition closer than 10 feet required; board ordered removal of bump‑out and relocation of AC unit to meet 10‑foot setback and required permits. - Denied but enforcement deferred 6 months: Variance 2025130 (Connie Rodocap) — second residence in a shed used as living quarters. Denied; enforcement deferred until Jan. 1 to allow occupants time to vacate; board directed removal of shed occupancy when time expires. - Approved: Variance 2025134 (Robert Baker) — pergola measured closer than prior approval; board approved revised dimensions and required an after‑the‑fact permit and $125 fee. - Approved (after‑the‑fact permit required): Variance 2025138 (Tanish Thompson) — nonconforming carport allowed to remain; owner/builder acknowledged failing to obtain permit and was required to obtain it and pay fees. - Approved: Variance 2025139 (James Bowman) — accessory building permitted to remain as placed; motion carried. - Approved: Exception 202551 (Tim Graber) — oversized accessory building (1,644 sq. ft.) approved with residential appearance conditions and no setback reductions; board found the design complementary to the house. - Withdrawn: Variance 2025140 (Christopher Mater) — withdrawn due to septic issues with the proposed project. - Approved with deed condition: Variance 2025142 (Carlos Rico) — 14×16 shed encroaching on the common line allowed to remain under an encroachment agreement; recording/deed condition recommended to bind future owners. - Denied: Petition/exception (Michael McKay) — hobby flock of chickens denied; birds ordered removed within 60 days because of proximity to commercial poultry operations and disease‑control concerns. - Approved with covenant: Variance (Stuart Cluffer) — generator allowed to remain 7 ft 7 in from south property line with a recorded covenant requiring an open, unobstructed access route for emergency or maintenance use. - Approved with permit and settlement: Variance 2025117 (Harvey Hayes) — rebuilt residence and deck allowed to remain at 15.5 ft; petitioner to secure a $250 permit and pay a $1,500 settlement to resolve the ongoing violation within 30 days.

What the board discussed and why it matters

Board members repeatedly emphasized compliance with setback rules and the limits of county authority along shorelines and rights‑of‑way, while also weighing neighbors’ concerns, public‑safety access and the practical cost of correcting longstanding construction. Health‑department and county staff input shaped the denial of the chicken exception, and the county highway and property‑line concerns influenced multiple lakeshore setback decisions.

Several approvals were granted with explicit conditions: after‑the‑fact permits and fees, deed recording or covenants to preserve emergency access, and a conditional approach to partial versus full demolition. In one enforcement‑sensitive case, the board chose a time‑limited deferral of enforcement to avoid immediate displacement while still preserving the county’s right to require code compliance later.

The board also briefly discussed administrative policy questions: how to treat large “playhouses” or screened porches in the zoning code (the board signaled that structures that function as sheds should be treated as structures requiring permits and setbacks; one campground’s screened porches were treated as allowable open porches because the screening is non‑structural), and how to reconcile hearing‑record exhibits and prior hearing officer conditions in follow‑up enforcement reviews.

Ending

The board completed its agenda after several hours, asking staff to prepare required deed verbiage or permit language where applicable and reminding petitioners that failure to meet the board’s conditions will restore normal enforcement options, including fines or court action. The board continued one case to the July hearing calendar and adjourned.