City of Chicago v. Exchange Nat. Bank

• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: GOLDENHERSH
• Citation: City of Chicago v. Exchange Nat. Bank, 283 N.E.2d 878, 51 Ill.2d 543 (Ill. 1972)
• Decision Date: 22 May 1972
• Docket Number: No. 44600,44600
• Parties: The CITY OF CHICAGO, Appellee, v. EXCHANGE NATIONAL BANK et al., Appellants.

Page 878

283 N.E.2d 878

51 Ill.2d 543

The CITY OF CHICAGO, Appellee, v. EXCHANGE NATIONAL BANK et al., Appellants.

No. 44600.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

May 22, 1972.

Jules Q. Kaiser, Chicago (Ellis B. Rosenzweig, Chicago, of counsel), for appellants.

Richard L. Curry, Corp. Counsel, Chicago (William R. Quinlan and Daniel Pascale, Asst. Corp. Counsel, of counsel), for appellee.

GOLDENHERSH, Justice.

Plaintiff, City of Chicago, filed this action in the circuit court of Cook County for the issuance of a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to make alterations in an apartment building situated at 1714 West Touhy Avenue, which alterations were allegedly necessary to place it in compliance with applicable zoning ordinances. Defendant Taporek was the builder and former owner of the building and the other defendants are the present owners. Taporek did not appear or plead and the other defendants answered and counterclaimed. The trial court found that Taporek, when erecting the building, had 'departed from the plan upon which the (building) permit was issued' and entered judgment in favor of the city and against Taporek in the amount of $2500 'to reimburse the City of Chicago for all costs and damages incurred by reason of said departure from the plans * * *.' As to the other defendants, the circuit court dismissed the complaint and ordered that the plaintiff 'be * * * enjoined and estopped from interfering with the present owners maintaining the subject premises with 21 bedroom apartments and 12 off-street parking spaces, provided that all other reasonable and valid ordinances of the city pertaining thereto are observed.' The plaintiff appealed and the appellate court reversed the decree (City of Chicago v. Exchange National Bank (Ill.App.1971), 273 N.E.2d 484) and remanded the cause with directions to enter a decree in accordance with the prayer of the complaint. We allowed the present owners' petition for leave to appeal.

The record shows that on December 9, 1960, the city issued a building permit to defendant Taporek for the construction of a 3-story, brick, 12-bedroom apartment and 9-efficiency-unit building at 1714 West Touhy Avenue. On August 16, 1961, an occupancy certificate was issued for 9 efficiency and 12 bedroom apartments.

The plans submitted by Taporek with the application for the building permit show a 125-square-foot area labeled 'dining alcove' in each of the 9 efficiency units. In the zoning ordinance an efficiency unit is defined as 'a dwelling unit consisting of one room exclusive of bathroom, kitchen, hallway, closets, or dining alcove directly off the principal room, providing such dining alcove does not exceed 125 square feet in area.' Apparently the 9 efficiency units were converted into one-bedroom apartments by constructing a doorway between the living room and the dining alcove. Expert appraisal testimony showed that the building in its present condition was worth $225,000 and that if the 9 bedroom apartments must be reconverted to efficiency units its value would be decreased to $190,000. With the building containing 21 bedroom apartments, the area of the lot upon which it stands is 2600 square feet less than the minimum and there are three fewer parking spaces provided than are required under the zoning ordinances.

On February 4, 1963, Taporek entered into a contract with defendant Bernard Rich to sell the apartment building for $250,000. A deed was delivered to Rich on February 18, 1963, and title is now held by Exchange National Bank as trustee for him, his brothers, Norman and Phillip, and their wives. Rich testified that the building contained 21 bedroom apartments when he purchased it. On June 13, 1963, a city building inspector found that the building contained 21 bedroom apartments and no efficiency units.

Defendants contend that the city should be estopped from enforcing...