State Bank v. City of Waterloo
Case Date: 05/30/2003
Court: 5th District Appellate
Docket No: 5-01-0942 Rel
JUSTICE CHAPMAN delivered the opinion of the court: In 1995, as partial compensation in an eminent domain proceeding, the IllinoisDepartment of Transportation (IDOT) granted the plaintiffs a series of permits for access tothe planned Illinois State Route 3 bypass around the City of Waterloo, Illinois (City). Afterthe construction of the bypass was complete, the plaintiffs applied to the city council forapproval of a subdivision plat that proposed utilizing two of the access points previouslygranted by IDOT. The city council denied the plat based on its failure to meet standards foraccess to Route 3 contained in the City's comprehensive plan and subdivision ordinancesenacted after IDOT had granted the plaintiffs the permits. Ruling on the plaintiffs' motionfor a summary determination of major issues, the trial court held that IDOT's jurisdictionover Route 3 does not preempt all local control over access to the highway. Pursuant toIllinois Supreme Court Rule 308 (155 Ill. 2d R. 308), the plaintiffs requested the trial courtto certify to this court the question of whether IDOT's authority to regulate access to statehighways preempts the City's authority to deny a proposed subdivision plat based on itsproposed accesses to Route 3. The trial court certified the question, and the plaintiffs filedthe instant interlocutory appeal. We answer the certified question in the negative and affirmthe trial court's ruling. In July 1995, plaintiffs Tom and Joan Adams, Jay Huetsch, Robert Hawkins, andMarket Street Development, Inc., entered into a settlement agreement with IDOT in aneminent domain proceeding. Under the agreement, the plaintiffs sold IDOT a highwayright-of-way for the construction of a portion of Route 3, which IDOT planned to reroutefrom its previous location to bypass the city. IDOT compensated the plaintiffs for the takingboth by providing monetary compensation and by granting the plaintiffs permits for accessto Route 3 from their property. At that time, the property was agricultural. In the winter of 1996, while the construction of the Route 3 bypass was ongoing, theCity adopted a comprehensive plan. That plan recommended, in relevant part, as follows: "It is recommended that the City take preemptive measures to protect thelong[-]term utility of the [Illinois] Route 3 corridor. The State and FederalGovernment[s] are making a substantial investment in these improvements[,] andtherefore[,] protecting its use as a through-traffic carrier is important. The [Illinois] Route 3 Bypass has initially been designed to rural 2-lanestandards. The right-of-way[,] however[,] could eventually accommodate a 5-laneurban design standard. It is recommended that access along the Bypass be limited topublic street intersections at not less than 1000-foot intervals. Land access toadjacent parcels would be from these intersecting public streets rather than fromprivate entrances off Route 3." On July 20, 1998, the City amended the chapter of its code of ordinances governingsubdivisions to implement the comprehensive plan. As amended, the City's revised code ofordinances provides, in relevant part, as follows: "Whenever a development abuts an existing or proposed arterial highway,access to the development or property from the arterial highway shall be provided byone of the following means: (A) A public frontage road separated from the arterial highway by aplanting strip, defined as landscape twenty (20) feet wide, consisting ofshrubbery and trees at least five (5) feet in height when planted and ***maintained at not less than eighteen (18) feet in height when full grown. Thefrontage road shall have access to the arterial highway at [a] right angle. (B) A public street entered onto the arterial highway at [a] right angle. (C) Public street intersection[s] off of the Limited Access Highwayshall be located at not less than one thousand (1,000) foot intervals on thesame side of the street." Waterloo Revised Code of Ordinances |
|||||