Developer is suing Summit again

SILVER CREEK JUNCTION, Summit County — The same developer who has sued Summit County at least a half-dozen times in the past two years filed another lawsuit Monday in U.S. District Court, alleging county officials extorted payments and land from property owners.

Anderson Development, Evergreen Development and eight property owners and trusts argued that Summit County's planning department and county commissioners have required exorbitant fees or gifts to the county for higher-density developments.

Most undeveloped land in Summit County is now zoned at one residential unit, or house, per 20 acres. Most developers, however, seek densities as high as five houses per acre in efforts to concentrate growth and earn higher profits.

The plaintiffs' lawyers said in a news conference that Summit County officials committed racketeering activities by coercing open space, trails, payments to school districts and cash payments to the county from developers and land owners who wanted densities on their property raised.

In the 144-page lawsuit, they are seeking base damages of $50 million and attorney's fees but have requested that the judge triple the damages to $150 million as allowed by federal racketeering laws.

The $50 million is a conservative guess at what property owners have lost by not developing their land, said Michael Hutchings, one of the plaintiffs' attorneys.

He estimated the alleged extortion fees Summit County would want from the combined 1,186 acres plaintiffs own cost less than the fees for taking the case to court. The requested $50 million in damages, however, would make the expense and hassle worthwhile, he said.

But what the plaintiffs call extortion is what Dave Thomas, the chief deputy county attorney, said is an accepted practice called incentive zoning. Thomas said the county revised its zoning practices this January to de-emphasize incentive zoning and that the plaintiffs have never applied to develop with the county.

"We've invited them many times to come in and go through the public process like everybody else does," Thomas said. "They haven't been willing to do that."

Thomas said property owners could subdivide their land and develop at the one-house-per-20-acres density without being required to provide amenities. Thomas could not explain exactly how property owners could increase densities under the new zoning requirements.