City Faces Third Lawsuit Over Delayed Midtown Boca Development
Cypress Realty of Florida blames the city for refusing to consider its proposal for a 204-unit luxury apartment building and accompanying retail.
October 31, 2018 at 03:05 PM
5 minute read
A developer who wants to build a mixed-use project on his 10 acres in Boca Raton is suing the city for refusing to consider his proposal.
It's the third lawsuit against the city after it scaled back regulations for what was once envisioned as a live-work-play development.
Jupiter-based Cypress Realty of Florida LLC wants to build a 204-unit luxury apartment building and 64,000 square feet of retail at 1751 N. Military Trail, 21046 Commercial Trail and nearby lots. Cypress owns at least some of the lots through its affiliate, CR VII Boca TC LP.
The city in 2010 changed its comprehensive plan to guide growth and development and designated Midtown as a planned mobility area covering about 200 acres from Interstate 95 to St. Andrews Boulevard off Glades Road.
CR VII and Crocker Partners LLC, another property owner that sued, accuse the city of not following through and adopting the necessary zoning changes and other regulations that would allow Midtown investors to build in line with the new designation.
CR VII Boca TC LP filed a complaint for writ of mandamus Oct. 12, arguing the city has been “stonewalling” its project application pending since at least 2015 and asking the court to compel the city to consider the application.
Palm Beach Circuit Judge Jeffrey Gillen on Monday found CR VII's complaint facially sufficient and ordered CR VII and the city to have a conference call within 10 days after CR VII serves the complaint with the court to schedule a hearing on the issue.
A city spokeswoman said the city was served Tuesday and its attorney was working on a response. The city had no comment by deadline.
In a Sept. 24 letter to Gunster shareholder J. Michael Marshall, a CR VII attorney but not the one who filed suit, the city said it can't legally process the application because residences aren't allowed on the site by the city or Palm Beach County code and the property has commercial zoning.
Cypress Realty wants to build a mixed residential-commercial project in line with its business model, said Nader Salour, a principal of CR VII and Cypress Realty.
“We bought it specifically because of the planned mobility designation, because the planned mobility designation encourages mixed-use projects, in other words residential and commercial, and that's what we do,” Salour said.
CR VII bought the properties in 2011 and planned to demolish the existing Nippers Bar & Grill and Strikes@Boca bowling alley, he added.
Richard Sarafan, CR VII's attorney who filed the suit, argued CR VII's properties are not controlled by any city zoning regulations.
Sarafan of Genovese Joblove & Battista in Miami said in the lawsuit that the city annexed the properties in 2003 and Palm Beach County zoning and other development regulations governed the properties — but only until Boca Raton in 2010 approved the Midtown comprehensive plan amendment. At that point the properties no longer were governed by county zoning. But because the city did't meet a one-year deadline to approve zoning corresponding to its comprehensive plan, the properties remain unzoned, he said.
The city disagrees. In a Sept. 24 letter to Marshall, the city argued the county's 2002 Unified Land Development Code still applies to the properties.
Under the county code, the properties have a commercial general zoning, City Attorney Diana Grub Frieser wrote in the letter.
Since annexation, “the city has consistently applied the ULDC zoning district regulations to all of the annexed properties in the Midtown area (including the property), and the city has continued to apply the ULDC since the adoption of the 2010 amendments to the city's comprehensive plan,” Frieser wrote.
When the comprehensive plan changes were approved in 2010, the changes “expressly” say county code remains effective, she added in her letter.
Cypress Realty has estimated a dollar loss from the development delay, but Salour declined to disclose the amount.
“The money is unrecoverable because we never estimated sitting on this piece of property for seven years,” he said.
The other two lawsuits pending against the city were filed bcand a leading Midtown investor with three properties covering 64 acres.
Crocker Partners sued the city first on May 22 over not adopting the needed zoning and on Jan. 23 for designating a small-area plan, which Crocker argued amounted to a development moratorium.
In its motion to dismiss, the city argued it could — but is not required to — adopt land development regulations that reflect the planned mobility designation. The city also said its land development regulations are consistent with its comprehensive plan, requiring no further action.
Palm Beach Circuit Judge Howard Coates Jr. on Aug. 27 granted the city's motion to dismiss one count of Crocker's lawsuit but left intact a second count challenging the constitutionality of draft ordinances that would require a master plan for the entire Midtown district.
Crocker, which hasn't revealed a final development plan, sued Oct. 23 over the same issue, claiming $137 million in damages from lost property rights under the Bert J. Harris Jr. Private Property Rights Protection Act.
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readHow Much Coverage Do You Really Have? Valuation and Loss Settlement Provisions in Commercial Property Policies
10 minute readThe Importance of 'Speaking Up' Regarding Lease Renewal Deadlines for Commercial Tenants and Landlords
6 minute readMeet the Attorneys—and Little Known Law—Behind $20M Miami Dispute
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250