Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/06/2014

Home

Zoning Law Bulletin December 25, 2013 1 Volume 7 I Issue 24 Citation: Boice v. Ottawa Hills, 2013-Ohio-4769, 2013 WL 5992275 (Ohio 2013) OHIO (11/07/13)—This case addressed the issue of whether landowners had a vested right in their lot's status as buildable that continued beyond enact- ment of a village zoning amendment that increased the area for a buildable lot to one larger than that owned by the landowners. The Background/Facts: In 1974, Willis and Annette Boice (the "Boice Family") purchased two adjacent lots in the village of Ottawa Hills (the "Village"). One of the lots contained a house, and the other was vacant. At the time of the purchase of the lots, as per the Village zoning require- ments, the minimum buildable lot size was 15,000 square feet. The vacant lot was 33,000 square feet. Four years later, in 1978, the Village amended the zoning requirements to increase the buildable lot size to 35,000 square feet. The Boice Family lived in the house for 30 years. Also for 30 years, they paid taxes on the vacant lot as a buildable lot. Then, in 2004, the Boice Family sold the lot containing their residence. They sought approval from the Village manager to have the vacant lot declared a buildable lot so that they could sell that as well. The manager denied their request, citing the fact that the lot was smaller than the 35,000-square-foot required for a buildable lot under the Vil- lage zoning requirements. The Boice Family appealed to the Village Zoning Commission, also seek- ing a variance. Their appeal and variance were denied. The Boice Family then appealed to court. They argued that their variance request should have been granted, and that the denial of the request amounted to a regulatory taking. More specifically, the Boice Family contended that they had a vested right in the lot's status as buildable that continued beyond the 1978 zoning amendment. Ultimately, the trial court determined that because the Boice Family had never used the vacant parcel as a buildable lot, they never acquired a vested right to use the land as a buildable lot. The Boice Family again appealed, and the appellate court agreed with the trial court. The Boice Family once again appealed. DECISION: Judgment of court of appeals reversed, and matter remanded. Agreeing with the Boice Family, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that the Boice Family had a vested right in the lot's status as buildable that continued beyond the 1978 zoning amendment. The court concluded that there were three "pillars" that supported this holding: First, the court found that, upon the zoning amendment in 1978, the lot should have been grandfathered-in as a buildable lot. The ordinance that increased the minimum lot size provided that: "the lawful use of . . . any land or premises existing at the time of the effective date of this ordinance . . . may be continued although such use does not conform to the provisions hereof." The court rejected the Village's argument that until construction begins on a lot, the lot has no legal "use," and the property owner can have no expectations about the future use of the ©2013 Thomson Reuters 3