Willow Grove, Ltd. v. Olmsted Twp. Bd. of Zoning Appeals
2021 Ohio 2510
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2021Background
- Willow Grove applied for a zoning certificate to develop one lot into 202 residential townhomes in Olmsted Township, including a private internal street, a 1,664 sq ft community center, a 2,600 sq ft pool, and eight parking spaces to serve the center/pool.
- The township zoning inspector denied the application; the BZA sustained five deviations and denied the application for (inter alia) inadequate setbacks for the townhomes, classification/setback of the pool, and insufficient parking for the community center and pool.
- The common pleas court, on R.C. 2506 review, found: the proposed private street was not an "existing public right-of-way" for setback purposes (so the 35-ft local-street setback did not apply); the pool was an accessory use (not a conditional principal use), so the 75-ft conditional-use setback did not apply; but the community center and pool were subject to OTZR parking-space requirements, and Willow Grove’s eight spaces were insufficient.
- The trial court nevertheless remanded to the BZA with instructions to issue a zoning certificate in accordance with its opinion.
- On appeal the court of appeals affirmed the trial court on the setback and pool-accessory rulings and on the parking-space determination, but reversed the trial court insofar as it ordered issuance of a zoning certificate that did not fully comply with zoning law (citing R.C. 519.17). The case was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded to amend the order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court could order the BZA to issue a zoning certificate despite the application not complying with OTZR parking requirements | Willow Grove: court can order issuance; application can be marked "as permitted" or later amended to conform | Township/BZA: zoning certificate cannot be issued unless plans fully comply with zoning (R.C. 519.17) | Trial court erred to order issuance; issuance must await full compliance (reversed in part) |
| Whether the community center and pool must meet OTZR parking-space requirements | Willow Grove: parking rules govern principal uses only and center/pool are accessory, so requirements don't apply | BZA: OTZR 310.02(a) applies to any building or new use; parking schedule applies regardless of accessory/principal label | Court: parking requirements apply to both center and pool; trial court correctly held application insufficient on parking (affirmed) |
| Whether townhomes must meet 35-ft setback from the proposed internal street (is that an "existing public right-of-way") | Willow Grove: internal private street is not an existing public right-of-way, so schedule setbacks do not apply | BZA: proposed street is a local street and townhomes must meet 35-ft setback | Court: OTZR 230.05(a) applies to existing public rights-of-way; the proposed private street would not be an existing public right-of-way, so setback requirement did not apply (affirmed) |
| Whether the swimming pool is a conditional use (triggering 75-ft setback) or an accessory use | Willow Grove: pool is accessory incidental to the residential development and intended for residents/guests, so OTZR 230.02(d) governs | BZA: pool is listed as conditional in OTZR and thus subject to OTZR 270.04 setback | Court: pool is a permitted accessory recreational facility under OTZR 230.02(d)(2), not a conditional principal use; 75-ft conditional-use setback does not apply (affirmed) |
Key Cases Cited
- Cleveland Clinic Found. v. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 23 N.E.3d 1161 (Ohio 2014) (common pleas court may review entire administrative record under R.C. 2506 and reverse only if BZA decision unsupported by preponderance of reliable, probative, substantial evidence)
- Kisil v. Sandusky, 465 N.E.2d 848 (Ohio 1984) (appellate review of trial-court R.C. 2506 determinations focuses on questions of law)
- Willow Grove, Ltd. v. Olmsted Twp., 38 N.E.3d 1133 (Ohio App. 2015) (prior appellate ruling addressing related OTZR challenges and interpretation of zoning-certificate issuance requirements)