The City of Bloomington is refuting realtor Juan Carlos Carrasquel’s objection filed earlier this month.
In a response filed last week, the City of Bloomington says it is legally allowed to amend its attempt to acquire Carrasquel’s property on the corner of 3 rd and Walnut in order to make room for the proposed Fourth Street Garage.
Carrasquel, on the other hand, says the city cannot do so because it was “attempting to change facts” after a judge’s ruling against the city.
The city’s response says it “initially proceeded with the good faith intention of complying with local code requirements imposed by the City Council requiring the inclusion of a first-floor nonresidential, non-parking component at the facility. As a result of this Court’s Order, however, that part of the project is no longer an option. Therefore the City has modified its design.”
Carrasquel says the city’s original plan for first floor retail should invalidate the proposed do-over, because it would need a waiver from the Plan Commission to scrap those plans for ground floor retail. He also says the garage’s funding was based on that required retail space.
In its response, the city says it foresees no problems acquiring a waiver since the city’s Plan Commission would be informed “that the first floor nonresidential, non-parking requirement of the Municipal Code is legally unenforceable for this Project” and it “is well aware of how crucial the garage is for the residents of the City, and it will not refuse to approve this Project.”
The city also says the garage’s funding is not tied to the ground floor retail aspect since it had previously agreed with Carrasquel that the “City of Bloomington has not requested a waiver from B.M.C. § 20.03.120(6) that requires first floor non-residential use for the Project. This aspect of the design was explicitly requested by the City Council.”
The city says the Council’s “request” for the ground-floor retail space was a “permissive, non-binding aspiration” since the “City Council did not and cannot prohibit the Plan commission from granting a waiver.”
There is no timetable for the judge’s decision.
