Corn v. City of Lauderdale Lakes

• Citation: 771 F. Supp. 1557
• Decision Date: 30 August 1991
• Docket Number: No. 84-6034-CIV.,84-6034-CIV.
• Parties: Herman CORN, Trustee, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF LAUDERDALE LAKES, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida

771 F. Supp. 1557

Herman CORN, Trustee, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF LAUDERDALE LAKES, et al., Defendants.

No. 84-6034-CIV.

United States District Court, S.D. Florida.

August 30, 1991.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Andrew Lavin, Romanik and Lavin, Hollywood, Fla., for plaintiff.

Michael Mattson, Conrad, Scherer and James, Fort Lauderdale, Fla., for defendants.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

PAINE, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court following a four-day non-jury trial held August 12-15, 1991.

I. Findings of Fact

Background

1. Prior to June 1966, Plaintiff, HERMAN CORN, TRUSTEE ("CORN"), acquired 261 acres of real property located in the unincorporated area of Broward County and then zoned for agricultural uses (the "Parcel").

2. After preliminary negotiations with Defendant CITY OF LAUDERDALE LAKES (the "CITY") concerning possible annexation of the Parcel, CORN presented a proposed development plan.

3. On July 12, 1966, the CITY adopted three ordinances:

a. Ordinance 103 created a C-1A zoning category within the CITY, incorporating the permissible uses of the pre-existing category C-1 and requiring the submission of a site development plan before issuance of a building permit;

b. Ordinance 104 formally annexed the Parcel; and c. Ordinance 105 designated various zoning classifications for different portions of the Parcel, including a C-1A designation for an approximately 8½ acre portion bounded to the south by Canal C-13 and to the east by U.S. 441 (the "Property"). The land immediately north and west of the Property was concurrently zoned for residential use.

4. The uses permitted in zoning category C-1 included fertilizer sales, animal boarding kennel, automobile paint shop, storage warehouse, railroad freight or passenger station, and sheet metal shop.

5. Between 1966 and 1977, CORN developed much of the Parcel in accordance with the plan originally submitted to the CITY. As part of this development, CORN constructed waterways along the north and west boundaries of the Property, to form a buffer between it and adjacent residential areas.

6. CORN spent in excess of $100,000.00 preparing the Property to be developed, although it is not clear whether this money was directed toward general commercial preparation or a specific intended use.

7. During 1975, the CITY retained the services of a land use planner, who questioned the propriety of C-1A zoning for the Property. No formal action, however, was taken with respect to changing the zoning classification of the Property until July 12, 1977.

8. On April 1, 1977, CORN submitted a preliminary site plan (the "Site Plan") for development of the Property. The site plan depicted the construction of an approximately 67,000 square foot shopping center on the eastern portion of the Property, which would front U.S. 441, and an approximately 103,000 square foot mini-warehouse on the western, or rear, portion.

9. Many CITY residents publicly opposed the CORN project.

10. On May 12, 1977, the CITY's Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the Site Plan to the City Council, the body authorized to make a final decision thereon. At the request of the City Council, the Planning and Zoning Board again considered the Site Plan at a public meeting held May 26, 1977. By letter dated May 27, 1977, the Planning and Zoning Board re-affirmed its May 12 recommendation of approval.

11. At public meetings held May 31, June 14, and June 21, 1977, the City Council tabled consideration of the Site Plan.

12. On July 12, 1977, the City Council for the first time discussed changes in both the uses permitted within C-1A property and the zoning classification of CORN's Property. The City Council in fact passed two ordinances on first reading that were ultimately adopted:

a. Ordinance 548 amended Article XXXVII, Section 37.2 of the Broward County Zoning Classification Restrictions and Regulations, as adopted by reference, to eliminate storage warehouses as a permitted use in category C-1, and consequently category C-1A; and

b. Ordinance 549 rezoned the Property from C-1A to B-3, a more restrictive category.

13. After passing Ordinances 548 and 549, the City Council voted unanimously to deny approval of CORN's Site Plan. There was no discussion of what modifications would make the plan acceptable.

14. Ordinance 552, which imposed a 150-day building moratorium on all C-1 property in the CITY, was proposed at the July 12, 1977 meeting and later adopted. The stated purpose of the moratorium was to permit the Planning and Zoning Board, which had purportedly advised that C-1 property abutting residential property should be rezoned, to review the CITY's commercial zoning scheme.

15. Prior to July 12, 1977, the City Council made no attempt to investigate mini-warehouses or compare the traffic, noise, and other adverse effects allegedly created by mini-warehouses with those created by any other type of use still permitted under zoning category C-1, as amended, or category B-3. Its actions were, instead, motivated by a desire to thwart CORN's proposed project.

16. CORN sued these same Defendants in the Circuit Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida, Case No. 77-12955 (the "State Court Action"), seeking, inter alia, a writ of mandamus directing the City Council to approve the Site Plan, a judicial declaration that Ordinances 548, 549, and 552 were invalid, and monetary damages for inverse condemnation. Upon a defense motion, the inverse condemnation claim was voluntarily dismissed.

17. Ordinance 568 extended the building moratorium through July 4, 1978.

18. On October 20, 1978, following a three-day non-jury trial, Circuit Judge Frank A. Orlando entered Final Judgment, concluding that CORN's conduct in reliance upon the C-1A status of his Property since 1966 created vested rights, which the CITY was equitably estopped to deny. Judge Orlando therefore declared Ordinances 548, 549, and 552 void and unenforceable against CORN or the Property, and directed the CITY to approve the Site Plan, then issue a building permit, upon correction of three technical deficiencies.

19. The Final Judgment was stayed pending appeal to the Fourth District Court of Appeal.

20. A dispute arose regarding the need for, and proper amount of, a supersedeas bond on appeal. CORN submitted a pleading entitled "Damage Summary" that stated "we have a commitment from Coral Gables Federal Savings & Loan Assn. to borrow 80% of total costs at 10.5211% interest for 24 years," then projected his potential damages as including increased loan costs and increased closing costs.

21. A seventy-five percent (75%) loan-to-value ratio, leaving the owner with twentyfive percent (25%) equity, was customary in the banking industry for construction loans in 1977.

22. On February 16, 1983, in City of Lauderdale Lakes v. Corn, 427 So.2d 239 (Fla. 4th Dist.Ct.App.1983) ("Corn I"), the Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's application of the doctrine of equitable estoppel and the propriety of mandamus, thereby affirming the Final Judgment. The appellate court issued a mandate on March 4, 1983, at which time its opinion became final.

23. During October 1983, seven months after the appellate mandate, CORN submitted a revised site plan (the "Revised Site Plan") to the CITY for approval. No explanation was offered for the seven-month delay.

24. The City Council refused to approve the Revised Site Plan unless CORN platted the Property, citing a Broward County platting requirement imposed after July 1977.

25. On January 17, 1984, CORN filed the instant action (the "Federal Court Action"), seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983¹ for violation of civil rights granted under the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment,² the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,³ and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

26. Among the items of damage specified in each Count of the Complaint were "increased financing and interest charges as a result of the delay in construction" of the project.

27. On October 26, 1984, a full year after submitting the Revised Site Plan, CORN filed a Motion to Enforce Final Judgment in the State Court Action, asserting that, because the CITY should have approved the Site Plan as submitted in 1977, the subsequent platting requirement did not apply. Again, CORN offered no explanation for the one-year delay.

28. On March 26, 1985, Judge Estella M. Moriarty, the successor to Judge Orlando's division, entered an Order on Plaintiff's Motion to Enforce Final Judgment, concluding that CORN was entitled to issuance of a building permit without platting the Property.

29. CORN chose, however, not to pursue development of the Property.

30. On October 22, 1985, United States District Judge Jose A. Gonzalez, Jr. dismissed this Federal Court Action as not ripe under Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S. 172, 105 S.Ct. 3108, 87 L.Ed.2d 126 (1985). In Corn v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 816 F.2d 1514 (11th Cir.1987) ("Corn II"), the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal.

31. The undersigned later held that CORN's cause of action was not barred by the statute of limitations or res judicata. In Corn v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 904 F.2d 585 (11th Cir.1990) ("Corn III"), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed this holding.

32. CORN remains the owner of the Property, which has not been developed.

33. CORN dismissed BEN EIGNER as a Defendant prior to the instant trial.

34. CORN likewise dismissed Counts III and IV, proceeding to trial on Counts I (a takings claim) and II (a substantive due process claim).

Wheeler IV Factors

The parties acknowledged, and the Court ruled (DE 196), that any damages for a temporary regulatory taking of property must be awarded in accordance with Wheeler v. City of Pleasant Grove, 896 F.2d 1347 (11th Cir.1990) ("Wheeler IV"). As discussed infra, ...