Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Feedlot Expansion Denial topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies variance for Hoshite feedlot expansion in Mayville Township after public concern over odors, roads and manure handling
Summary
A proposed variance to permit structural changes and an effective increase in animal units at a Mayville Township feedlot was denied after public comments raised concerns about odors, road mud, manure management and proximity to residences.
The Houston County Board of Adjustment on July 31 denied a variance application from Cole and Tom Hoshite (Mayville Township, parcel 090196000) to permit construction and associated changes at their feedlot site that county staff and the applicants described as an environmental upgrade but that opponents said would increase local nuisance and traffic risks.
Applicants described plans for two new buildings (one bedded pack and one free-stall facility), moving heifers from a valley feedlot into the proposed covered buildings, and using older buildings for storage. The Hoshites said the goal was to reduce runoff by housing animals under cover and to improve animal welfare; they also said overall regional animal numbers would not increase, only that animals would be relocated between sites.
Several neighbors spoke at the hearing, expressing opposition. Concerns included odor and fly issues, previous manure runoff incidents that residents said affected groundwater or wells, mud and debris tracked onto roads by heavy equipment and trucks, and the prospect of increased semi and tractor traffic on county roads. Residents asked for stronger guarantees about manure storage locations and enforcement or monetary penalties if conditions cause road or water problems.
Staff noted the proposal could increase animal units at the specific site and that surpassing regulatory thresholds (300 animal units) would trigger additional state permitting and county conditional-use or manure-storage reviews. The board discussed the application at length, including whether conditions could be added to require closure of the valley feedlot after the new buildings go into service.
After debate, a motion to deny the variance passed. Board members cited concerns about increasing animal units at the site near city limits, the proximity of dwellings and subdivisions, and unanswered questions about long-term manure management and road impacts. The outcome means the applicants must either revise the proposal to avoid increasing animal units on the site or pursue alternative locations or designs before returning to the board.
Public commenters were encouraged to raise any continuing concerns with the county feedlot officer and the Environmental Services Department; staff said more detailed building and manure-management plans could change the required approvals if the applicants return with a different proposal.
