Agenda - Planning Commission - 07/09/2015

Home

Zoning Bulletin May 25, 2015 1 Volume 9 1 Issue 10 § 36-7-4-616—which governs agricultural nonconforming uses—and, if so, whether or not a county zoning ordinance could restrict the agricultural use of the property. The Background/Facts: In 2006, Alan J. and Roderick Pahl purchased a 10.08 -acre parcel of land in a five -lot subdivision in Lowell, Indiana (the "Property"). The other lots in the subdivision were less than five acres. The Property was situated in an area of Unincorporated Lake County. From 1957 through 1995; the Property was zoned by Lake County (the "County") as an A-1 agricultural zone. In 1995, the zoning classification for the Property was changed to R-1, single family residential. When the Pahls purchased the Property, the realtor's listing advertised it as being zoned Agricultural -Residential, and the Property was being used for ag- ricultural purposes. The Pahls constructed a home on the property and, begin- ning in 2008, kept a variety of animals on the Property, including chickens, ducks, rabbits, riding horses, mini horses, alpacas, and goats. In 2009, the County Plan Commission notified the Pahls that they were in violation of the Unincorporated Lake County Zoning and Planning Ordinance (the "Zoning Ordinance") because they were keeping animals on the property. Under the Zoning Ordinance, the R-1 district in which the Property was zoned prohibited the keeping of any animals except dogs or cats. The Zoning Ordinance also required at least a 20 -acre parcel in order for a landowner to have a faiin, and prohibited "hobby farms" in a residential subdivision unless 80% of the subdivision platted lots were five acres or more in size. The Pahls filed petitions for a variance with the County Board of Zoning Appeals—one to operate a hobby farm and the other to build an accessory building barn. The Pahls soon withdrew those petitions upon their determina- tion that their Property might qualify as an agricultural nonconforming use under Indiana Code § 36-7-4-616. Indiana Code § 36-7-4-616, deems certain agricultural uses as "agricultural nonconforming uses." Among other things, the statute defines an "agricultural nonconforming use" as including: (1) the "the production of livestock or live- stock products" or "poultry or poultry products" "in the case of land that was not subject to a comprehensive plan or zoning ordinance before the most recent plan or zoning ordinance, including any amendments, was adopted"; or (2) ag- ricultural purposes consistent with a comprehensive plan or zoning ordinance but not permitted under the most recent comprehensive plan or zoning ordinance. The statute prohibits county or municipal: termination of an agri- cultural nonconforming use that has been maintained for at least any three- year period in a five-year period; or restriction of an agricultural nonconform- ing use; or the requirement of a variance, special exception, special use, contingent use or conditional use for the agricultural nonconforming use of land. Notwithstanding those restrictions, the statute specifies that an agricul- tural nonconforming use can still be required to be maintained and operated in compliance with all: state environmental and state health laws and rules; and requirements to which conforming agricultural use land is subject under the county's comprehensive plan or zoning ordinance. The Pahls maintained that their use of their Property qualified as an agricul- tural nonconforming use under Ind. Code § 36-7-4-616. They argued that they © 2015 Thomson Reuters 3