A dispute over a big Wicker Park apartment project has moved from City Hall to the courtroom.

The Chicago City Council violated the law by approving the 17-story tower near the intersection of Milwaukee and Ashland avenues and Division Street in April, according to two lawsuits filed against the city. Former Ald. Proco “Joe” Moreno, 1st, who represented the neighborhood until May, slipped a zoning change for the project through a lame-duck council “as his parting gift” to the building’s developer, RDM Development, the suits say.

Opponents of the controversial 121-unit project criticized it as too big for the neighborhood. But Moreno, who was voted out of office in February, put the zoning proposal on the City Council’s agenda for his final council meeting as alderman, on April 10. It passed unanimously.

The project at 1628 W. Division St. “will diminish the value of neighboring properties as a result of its inappropriate size, density and building scale and the resulting undue burden on public infrastructure and city service—including specifically the already overcrowded CTA Blue Line stop at Division Street,” the complaints say.

The case illustrates aldermanic privilege in action, the long-standing Chicago custom that gives alderman almost total control over development issues in their wards. Critics of the practice argue that it leads to abuses, and new Mayor Lori Lightfoot says she wants to curtail it.

Ironically, the lawsuits are the work of another developer, Chicago-based Vermilion Development, which is building a 55-unit condo and townhome project next door to RDM’s site. A Vermilion venture alleges the City Council violated the Illinois Open Meetings Act because Moreno never placed the RDM zoning proposal on the agenda of the council’s April 10 meeting.

Vermilion also argues that the zoning amendment should never have gotten that far because the council failed to act on it within a six-month time frame mandated by the city’s zoning code, according to the suits.

Vermilion President and CEO David Cocagne declined to comment, as did a spokesman for the city’s Law Department.

“The city doesn’t comment on pending litigation,” said the spokesman, Bill McCaffrey.



Moreno is not named as a defendant in the suits, but he has other legal problems: He was indicted in June on charges that he loaned his car to his girlfriend and then claimed it was stolen. Moreno has pleaded not guilty to the allegations. An attorney representing him in his criminal case did not return a phone call.

Chicago-based RDM filed plans for its Wicker Park project with the city in 2016. Called Vision II, the tower would rise on a parking lot next to Vision, a 33-unit building that RDM completed in 2010. RDM’s plan for a bigger second tower fits with the city’s policy of promoting larger, denser developments near train stations, said RDM President Robert Mosky.

“I am the poster child for greater zoning on that corner because it is so close to the el stop,” he said. “At the end of the day, this is what the city wants.”

RDM is not named as a defendant in the lawsuits, which were filed in Cook County Circuit Court. But the firm is redesigning the building, shrinking it to 13 stories from 17, Mosky said. It will still include 121 apartments.

The Chicago Plan Commission and City Council’s Zoning Committee approved the zoning change for RDM’s project in March 2018. But Moreno appeased critics of the development by not allowing the proposal to advance to the full council for final approval, the suits say. He wanted another community meeting to review the project.

“Alderman Moreno also informed community members that he believed the project was too large and would seek further changes to the plan before its approval,” according to one of the complaints.

More than a year later, after Moreno lost his re-election bid, the alderman changed his mind, deciding to put the zoning proposal on the City Council agenda after all, the suits say. Because the move violated the state’s Open Meetings Act and the six-month deadline under the city’s zoning code, the zoning change is invalid and should be rescinded, according to Vermilion.