- 26 -
recorded against their Library Square tract parcels to fulfill
the requirements of the MTP Designated Building Site Application
continue in effect until released by the City.
Although the City could repeal Ordinance No. 159802 and the
MTP Designated Building Site, that possibility exists for any
zoning change. A property owner has no vested right to have its
property’s current zoning continued; a local governmental or
zoning authority, in the exercise of its police power, may later
revise the property’s zoning. See, e.g., Avco Cmty. Developers,
Inc. v. S. Coast Regl. Commn., 553 P.2d 546 (Cal. 1976) (a
governmental authority may not contract away its right to
exercise its police power in the future).
We conclude that the zoning change made by Ordinance No.
159802 and the MTP Designated Site produced benefits of an
indefinite and undeterminable duration for the Library Tower and
Grand Place Tower parcels and/or the owners of those parcels.
The cost of obtaining this zoning change is thus not depreciable
by either Library Square or Fifth & Grand, but it must instead
be capitalized and allocated to the Library Tower parcel or
Grand Place Tower parcel. Galt v. Commissioner, 19 T.C. at 910;
cf. Chevy Chase Land Co. v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. 481, 487-489
(1979) (the costs incurred by the taxpayer for an unsuccessful
rezoning effort were deductible as an abandonment loss). Our
case here is like Galt and is distinguishable from Chevy Chase
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011