Judge dismisses first Children's Museum lawsuit
05/08/2009 8:46 AM
No Comments - Add Your Comment
Contributing reporter Ben Myers provides an update on the legal wrangling over the Children's Museum's proposed move to Grant Park going down this week. One of the suits challenging the move was dismissed yesterday:
Circuit Court Judge Sophia Hall dismissed a lawsuit seeking to halt the Chicago Children's Museum's controversial plans to move to Grant Park.
The suit, brought by residents who live near Grant Park, challenged City Council's decision to allow the needed zoning change. Pat Ruberry, attorney for the plaintiffs, called it a “procedural” decision that is “in no way a decision on the merit.”
“Under no circumstances is the court saying the defendants in this case can erect a building in Grant Park,” Ruberry said.
Ruberry said the suit was difficult to win because it asked the judge to override a separate branch of government. The burden on the plaintiffs, Ruberry said, was to show that the zoning decision was “completely irrational.”
“When you're asking the court to review a legislative decision, a court is required to show extraordinary deference,” Ruberry said. “If [City Council] decided to amend the zoning ordinance so you could establish an industrial hog farm in Grant Park, that wouldn't pass muster.”
Ruberry said there is no decision yet on an appeal.
The court will hear arguments May 12 in a second lawsuit on the matter. That suit focuses on the Plan Commission's decision, which plaintiffs say violated their due process and the Lakefront Protection Ordinance.
Meta Brown, a director with Save Grant Park, said the suit to be heard May 12 is “more significant to us.”
Ruberry said the plaintiffs' burden in this case is different because the Plan Commission is “administrative,” as opposed to legislative.
“The issue there is did the Plan Commission live up to its obligations and duties?” Ruberry said.
The suit, brought by residents who live near Grant Park, challenged City Council's decision to allow the needed zoning change. Pat Ruberry, attorney for the plaintiffs, called it a “procedural” decision that is “in no way a decision on the merit.”
“Under no circumstances is the court saying the defendants in this case can erect a building in Grant Park,” Ruberry said.
Ruberry said the suit was difficult to win because it asked the judge to override a separate branch of government. The burden on the plaintiffs, Ruberry said, was to show that the zoning decision was “completely irrational.”
“When you're asking the court to review a legislative decision, a court is required to show extraordinary deference,” Ruberry said. “If [City Council] decided to amend the zoning ordinance so you could establish an industrial hog farm in Grant Park, that wouldn't pass muster.”
Ruberry said there is no decision yet on an appeal.
The court will hear arguments May 12 in a second lawsuit on the matter. That suit focuses on the Plan Commission's decision, which plaintiffs say violated their due process and the Lakefront Protection Ordinance.
Meta Brown, a director with Save Grant Park, said the suit to be heard May 12 is “more significant to us.”
Ruberry said the plaintiffs' burden in this case is different because the Plan Commission is “administrative,” as opposed to legislative.
“The issue there is did the Plan Commission live up to its obligations and duties?” Ruberry said.