A lawsuit challenging the Iowa City Council's approval of plans for the 15-story Chauncey tower at College and Gilbert streets has been dismissed.
Trinity Episcopal Church filed its suit in June, saying plans for the Chauncey tower violated the city's comprehensive plan and relied on inaccurate calculations related to the zoning of the property. But Sixth District Judge Paul Miller, after reviewing hundreds of pages of documents and hearing arguments earlier this month, denied the church's petition to block the city council's actions.
Christopher Warnock, a local attorney representing Trinity Episcopal Church, located at 320 E. College St., said that although he "respectfully disagrees" with the ruling, he is satisfied with the conduct and speed of the legal proceedings. Warnock said the church has 30 days to appeal the decision and said he plans to consult with leaders of the church to determine whether an appeal will be filed.
"Justice delayed is justice denied, and this case has gone at warp 10. I think that the court took this case very seriously, thought about it very carefully and did a good job considering the issues," Warnock said. "There's a lot to like about this case as far as the speed and the seriousness of it, but of course we're disappointed with the result."
The church's case focused on two issues: whether the city violated its IC2030 Comprehensive Plan — which calls for transition areas between downtown and adjacent neighborhoods — when it approved a rezoning application for the site, and whether the city violated a section of state law when it included city-owned property in calculations related to a rezoning objection from the church. The church contended that, if city property had been excluded, the church's objection would have passed a threshold necessitating a super-majority vote by the council — with passage failing unless six councilors agreed. The rezoning was approved 4-2, with council members Jim Throgmorton and Kingsley Botchway voting against the measure and council member Michelle Payne recusing herself.
"Nothing in (that statute) limits protests to private property owners," the judge wrote in his ruling. "There is nothing ... that prohibits a city from imposing conditions on itself in reaching zoning decisions, which (the city) did in this case."
PREVIOUSLY:
"The court finds nothing in the Comprehensive Plan that prohibits CB-10 zoning or imposes strict height limitations in this area. The court further finds that the transitional policies and goals of the of the Central District Plan are met by (the city's) zoning decision," Miller wrote. "The subject property is not adjacent to any residential zone or land use, and (the city) took into consideration neighboring areas in imposing the height restriction on the proposed Chauncey tower."
At its meeting Tuesday, the City Council voted 6-0 on a similar comprehensive plan amendment that added three near-downtown blocks to the Downtown District of the city's Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, opening up two city-owned parking lots for development.
The three blocks include the site of the proposed Chauncey tower, the Unitarian Universalist Society church, City Hall, police and fire stations, the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center and the Chauncey Swan Parking ramp.
"Going into this case, I didn't assume that the comprehensive plan was so loosey-goosey that the city could do anything it wanted. It really never imposed any height restrictions, and that's what I feel like coming out of this," Warnock said.
Chauncey developer Marc Moen has been working with the city since the Chauncey tower was selected as the preferred development for the site nearly three years ago. The city approved a development agreement in June, but Moen said that the lawsuit halted all work on the site and that he would like to get the project back on track.
"We'd obviously like to get started, but they have a 30-day appeal period, and the church has already caused enormous damage to us and the city with this lawsuit," Moen said. "Now I have to meet with the architects and we have to regroup and see if we can come up with a new timetable. I don't have any idea what that might look like, but I know the project has been delayed for at least a year. The ripple effect was enormous."
Attorneys representing the city could not be reached for comment Thursday. City Attorney Eleanor Dilkes has said the city plans to close on the sale of the property and begin selling bonds for the project in June 2016.
In April, Miller dismissed another case related to the Chauncey tower, a decision Warnock said is currently being appealed. The lawsuit, filed by the Iowa Coalition Against the Shadow, centers on the city's denial of an application submitted by local attorney Rockne Cole, an organizer of the coalition, in 2013 to rezone the site of the proposed Chauncey tower with a designation capping developments on the site at 75 feet tall.
http://www.press-citizen.com/story/...judge-dismisses-chauncey-tower-case/74425036/
Trinity Episcopal Church filed its suit in June, saying plans for the Chauncey tower violated the city's comprehensive plan and relied on inaccurate calculations related to the zoning of the property. But Sixth District Judge Paul Miller, after reviewing hundreds of pages of documents and hearing arguments earlier this month, denied the church's petition to block the city council's actions.
Christopher Warnock, a local attorney representing Trinity Episcopal Church, located at 320 E. College St., said that although he "respectfully disagrees" with the ruling, he is satisfied with the conduct and speed of the legal proceedings. Warnock said the church has 30 days to appeal the decision and said he plans to consult with leaders of the church to determine whether an appeal will be filed.
"Justice delayed is justice denied, and this case has gone at warp 10. I think that the court took this case very seriously, thought about it very carefully and did a good job considering the issues," Warnock said. "There's a lot to like about this case as far as the speed and the seriousness of it, but of course we're disappointed with the result."
The church's case focused on two issues: whether the city violated its IC2030 Comprehensive Plan — which calls for transition areas between downtown and adjacent neighborhoods — when it approved a rezoning application for the site, and whether the city violated a section of state law when it included city-owned property in calculations related to a rezoning objection from the church. The church contended that, if city property had been excluded, the church's objection would have passed a threshold necessitating a super-majority vote by the council — with passage failing unless six councilors agreed. The rezoning was approved 4-2, with council members Jim Throgmorton and Kingsley Botchway voting against the measure and council member Michelle Payne recusing herself.
"Nothing in (that statute) limits protests to private property owners," the judge wrote in his ruling. "There is nothing ... that prohibits a city from imposing conditions on itself in reaching zoning decisions, which (the city) did in this case."
PREVIOUSLY:
- From a great height, ICFD evaluates challenges
- October date set for Chauncey tower hearing
- Attorneys hope for quick resolution in Chauncey case
- Trinity Episcopal Church asks court to review Chauncey rezoning
"The court finds nothing in the Comprehensive Plan that prohibits CB-10 zoning or imposes strict height limitations in this area. The court further finds that the transitional policies and goals of the of the Central District Plan are met by (the city's) zoning decision," Miller wrote. "The subject property is not adjacent to any residential zone or land use, and (the city) took into consideration neighboring areas in imposing the height restriction on the proposed Chauncey tower."
At its meeting Tuesday, the City Council voted 6-0 on a similar comprehensive plan amendment that added three near-downtown blocks to the Downtown District of the city's Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, opening up two city-owned parking lots for development.
The three blocks include the site of the proposed Chauncey tower, the Unitarian Universalist Society church, City Hall, police and fire stations, the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center and the Chauncey Swan Parking ramp.
"Going into this case, I didn't assume that the comprehensive plan was so loosey-goosey that the city could do anything it wanted. It really never imposed any height restrictions, and that's what I feel like coming out of this," Warnock said.
Chauncey developer Marc Moen has been working with the city since the Chauncey tower was selected as the preferred development for the site nearly three years ago. The city approved a development agreement in June, but Moen said that the lawsuit halted all work on the site and that he would like to get the project back on track.
"We'd obviously like to get started, but they have a 30-day appeal period, and the church has already caused enormous damage to us and the city with this lawsuit," Moen said. "Now I have to meet with the architects and we have to regroup and see if we can come up with a new timetable. I don't have any idea what that might look like, but I know the project has been delayed for at least a year. The ripple effect was enormous."
Attorneys representing the city could not be reached for comment Thursday. City Attorney Eleanor Dilkes has said the city plans to close on the sale of the property and begin selling bonds for the project in June 2016.
In April, Miller dismissed another case related to the Chauncey tower, a decision Warnock said is currently being appealed. The lawsuit, filed by the Iowa Coalition Against the Shadow, centers on the city's denial of an application submitted by local attorney Rockne Cole, an organizer of the coalition, in 2013 to rezone the site of the proposed Chauncey tower with a designation capping developments on the site at 75 feet tall.
http://www.press-citizen.com/story/...judge-dismisses-chauncey-tower-case/74425036/
