Workers carry out construction work on a large industrial building east of CR 700W north of Interstate 70 in October 2021.
HANCOCK COUNTY — Officials are considering beefed-up buffering, landscaping and screening standards for developments in unincorporated parts of the county.
The proposed revisions were sparked by concerns of residents living near the surge of industrial buildings going up on the county’s west side. Most of the buildings are hundreds of thousands of square feet, designed for logistics purposes and draw increased semitrailer traffic.
To help with the changes, Hancock County hired Context Design, an Indianapolis-based landscape architecture and land planning firm.
Alyssa Prazeau, managing principal of Context Design, briefed the Hancock County Area Plan Commission on the proposed amendment to the county’s zoning ordinance earlier this week.
“This is about really enhancing when you have two different uses that are in opposition to each other,” Prazeau said. “So industrial against residential is where you want the highest level of buffer, and we have increased that density.”
Under the county’s current rules, when an industrial project develops next to an existing residential property, the industrial property needs a buffer yard at least 25 feet wide as well as two broad-leaf deciduous canopy trees and two evergreen trees every 50 feet along the shared property line. Other requirements include shrubs along 50% of the length of the yard as well as a mound at least 3 feet high or a 6-foot-tall opaque fence of wood, brick or stone with 75% of the plant material outside the fence or wall.
The proposed changes would boost that buffer yard width to a minimum of 30 feet and require eight trees every 100 feet, at least half of which would have to be evergreen, as well as two ornamental trees every 100 feet. Certain conditions, like loading docks, would trigger a 6-foot-tall opaque screen made of masonry walls, berms and other solid, opaque materials that absorb noise when facing a public right-of-way or residence.
Another proposed change to the zoning ordinance calls for determining buffer yard requirements based on neighboring properties’ land uses rather than the current practice of relying on neighboring zoning designations.
The existing ordinance outlines three different kinds of buffer yards that are triggered based on what kind of property a proposed development borders, while the update addresses four. The revision provides a new list of approved tree species as well.
County plan commission members unanimously gave the suggested changes a favorable recommendation to the Hancock County Board of Commissioners, which will consider their adoption.
Byron Holden, a plan commission member, said he likes parts of the amendment but wishes it drew more public feedback. He added while big developers behind the warehouses in the western part of the county may not have trouble implementing the stronger standards, that may not be the case for smaller players.
“There’s the west part of the county, and there’s the east part of the county,” Holden said. “And maybe the east part of the county may not be able to afford what they’re doing with everything that’s going on in the west part of the county.”
Other plan commission members, like president Michael Long, noted builders can always seek exceptions to rules from the county’s board of zoning appeals, which can determine if leniency is warranted based on the circumstances.
“I think we actually will probably learn a little bit about how much we like this ordinance, if we approve it, by how much BZA action we have,” Long said, adding the ordinance could always be amended further.
Sandra Hudson, who lives on the county’s west side, recalled during the amendment’s public hearing how she asked a developer building near her home for stronger buffers, which the company agreed to. She noted that while residents can always ask for stronger buffers, it doesn’t mean developers must comply, and thanked officials for contemplating a bolstered codification.
“I really applaud you for considering this,” Hudson told the plan commission.
Steve Elsbury, a Greenfield-based lawyer, said changing buffer yard determinations from being based on neighboring zoning designations to neighboring land uses may lead to difficulties in ascertaining exactly how a property is being used.
Scott Wooldridge, also a Greenfield-based lawyer and Republican nominee for Hancock County Council District 4 in this November’s general election, praised the plan commission’s support for the proposed changes.
“To me, what’s most important is that you’re actually looking at making changes and improving the code section,” Wooldridge said.
Context Design is also preparing proposed revisions to the county’s exterior lighting standards. Potential changes include establishing requirements for minimum and maximum lighting levels and requiring developers to prepare reports verifying lighting meets the county’s ordinance. According to the proposal, when a property borders a residence, the brightest its light can be at the boundary is 0.2 foot candles. A public hearing for those changes will be at the plan commission’s next meeting, which is at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 28 at the Hancock County Annex, 111 American Legion Place, Greenfield.
Proposed changes to the county’s architectural standards for industrial properties are underway as well. Mike Dale, executive director of the county plan commission, said those should be ready for discussion with plan commission members at the June meeting.
Read the proposed landscaping, buffering and screening standards
