Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Confined Feeding Operations topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Page County planning commission backs zoning amendment to clarify confined feeding rules

Page County Planning Commission · January 13, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission unanimously recommended that the Board of Supervisors adopt an amendment clarifying how confined feeding operations are measured and regulated, aligning Article IV with earlier Article VI changes and removing a redundant phrase in §125-35. The BOS will receive the item Jan. 20, 2026.

The Page County Planning Commission on Jan. 13 voted unanimously to recommend a zoning amendment that clarifies how confined feeding operations are defined and measured in county zoning regulations. The change responds to a staff request after a recent application raised questions about a residence on the same lot as a feeding operation; staff said the amendment aligns Article IV (Agriculture and Woodland-Conservation district regulations) with the Article VI changes adopted March 20, 2023.

Planner Tracy Clatterbuck presented the background, telling commissioners the ordinance previously reduced the minimum setback from 600 to 300 feet from any structure "designed to be occupied as a residence," which excluded residences owned by the applicant. Commissioners discussed using the term "dwelling" versus the ordinance wording "residence" but agreed to retain "residence" so the amendment would not be delayed. Chairman Jared Burner framed the change as a clarification for staff, noting it helps when evaluating scenarios with multiple operations on one parcel; he also stated, "you can't take away a confined feeding operation," reflecting limits on revocation authority flagged during discussion.

Commissioners also agreed to remove a redundant phrase in §125-35 referring to "for poultry." Mr. Ken Johnson raised a drafting point about the use of the word "parcel" and whether it should include the words "per parcel," and commissioners asked staff to ensure definitions and cross-references are consistent without making the ordinance more restrictive. Mr. William Turner moved that the commission recommend approval of the proposed amendments; Ms. Catherine Grech seconded. The motion passed by roll call, unanimously (5-0). Tracy Clatterbuck said staff will introduce the item to the Board of Supervisors at its next meeting on Jan. 20, 2026.