Zoning Error Puts Collinsville IL in Middle of Dispute
Mistakes happen, but they are often costly. The City of Collinsville IL (St. Louis Metro East) is realizing as much. From the Belleville News-Democrat:
The city is facing threats of lawsuits from a new business and from its potential neighbors thanks to an error in a zoning map.
According to City Manager Bob Knabel, the developer sought zoning information about 102 Gaylord Drive before buying it, and was told that it was commercial. The developer later was issued a building permit.
The problem: The zoning map was in error, and the building was in a residential zone.
Now the residents of Gaylord Drive are asking the City Council to stop the construction of a beauty salon in the middle of their residential street.
Oh, not good. No matter which way the city goes they will have a lawsuit on their hands. But the above description of the “middle of their residential street” is not really accurate.
Per Google Maps (and Mapquest) the site in question is on a corner of Gaylord Drive (small street to the left) and a larger arterial street, Vandalia (diagonal upper right to bottom left). As you can see, Vandalia St is lined with suburban commercial establishments in both directions. Residential housing, such as those on Gaylord, also abut Vandalia while some even front on this street. Quite the delima.
The first question I have is if the developer, if they knew it was residentially zoned, could have pursueded the city to rezone the property before purchasing the land? That is, could they have taken out an option and tried to rezone to commercial. Neighbors would have objected but if Collinsville is anything like the rest of the region they would have jumped at the chance to increase their tax base with more commercial property.
The bigger issue is that Vandalia St looks like a hodge podge of pure vanilla suburban development — zero thought as to creating a cohesive streetscape. No wonder the residents object to the end of their street potentially contributing to this nothingness. Vandalia St. is a typical 4-lane arterial with a center turn lane and generic buildings on each side. Both the residential areas and Vandalia St. lack sidewalks so nobody sees the point in walking down the block to one of the nearby establishments.
The developer will likely prevail in court regardless of which side the city takes.
There is an article in today’s Washington Post – Metro section, about an embarrassing & costly zoning error. The District of Columbia paid $1.5 million for a house that was improperly approved and paying $160,000 to have it dismantled, piece by piece, granite countertops, fireplaces, and all. They are donating materials to Habitat for Humanity. I suppose as a way to make a little lemonade out of a very costly lemon. The neighbors bought the lot for $135,000 and will use it as green space.
It would seem reasonable to allow a hair salon on the site. I wonder why the zoning map is “wrong” and why it wasn’t an issue until now? My best guess is how some ordinance was written, verbally describing a boundary line. The other questions are whether or not the ordinance has an error and/or what the original intent was/is? This is a classic case of encroaching commercialism – sometimes residents just need to “draw a line in the sand”. Unfortunately, if the city ends up “paying”, it’s going to be coming out of taxes everyone pays, and not out of the salary of the employee or consultant who made the mistake in the first place . . .
Google and Mapquest estimate addresses based on line segment length and address ranges. It is possible that address is nowhere near a corner in reality.
Steve, you did a great job with this and the google photo was a nice addition. You are partially correct in saying Vandalia St. (159) is commercial at that point. There is a middle school nearby as well as some single family homes, fairly typical of Vandalia all the way from Main St. to the entrance to 55/70.
I was a Collinsville city councilman for some years and even though we moved to the St. Louis area a year ago, we still have our home in Illinois and follow things pretty closely. The city’s zoning has been in the process of being updated and changed the past couple of years, in part to avoid just this type of situation. I can tell you the city officials do not automatically jump for commercial plans, especially in neighborhood areas, and that they are probably experiencing more than a little inner angst over this.
So, what is the legal issue? Should they, or a court, decide on the basis of a map or the actual legal, written zoning the map should have been based on? The staff person who gave the initial permit probably should have cross referenced the zoning ordinance as well as the map, especially since the zoning has been changing. Unfortunately…
Added to the mix is the upcoming IDOT plan which the state has not shared as yet, to widen Vandalia (159). As it is, most of Vandalia is a hodge podge, but has gradually become commercial. The residents living nearby have a real point, the property is residential even though it borders on commercial.
Steve, I agree that you did a good job and would like to clarify some of the questions and give some updates. I am one of the residents on Gaylord and the property in question is as you say not in the middle of the street. In fact it is a corner lot. The problem with the arrow on your photo is that it does not denote the actual building which is the white roof further down the the street. The property was originally 2 lots being 100 Gaylord and 102 Gaylord. The building sits at 102 Gaylord so you are in fact well into the subdivision before getting to the building. The front lot was never built upon and was used as a buffer to 159. IDOT did not approve an entrance from 159 so the only access to the property is down Gaylord. Vandalia is loaded with a hodge podge of commercial properties but all those properties front Vandalia (159) and this property does not. Additionally 159 at this location is already 5 lanes wide and is not included in the IDOT 159 project which stops at the Belt Line. The court has rendered a verdict in favor of the residents so currently all development has stopped but the city has received a rezoning application by the property owner. Gaylord and Linda Drive were annexed into the city in 1999 as an R1 district. Prior to that time the entire street was listed as “unrestricted” and the official zoning map was never updated. The frustration as a resident is over the issue that before the property was sold, it was advertised as a commercial property. We contacted the realitor and provided them with ordinance number stating the property as R1. They sold it as commercial anyway to a retired Collinsville police officer. The buyer’s spouse already operates a nail salon in Collinsville which would move to this property thus offering a minimal increase to the city’s revenues. The city has offered to buy the property back at a more than reasonable amount but the owner has refused all offers. There will be a public hearing with the planning commission on Thursday August 16th at City Hall and the commission will make a recommendation to the City Council whether to approve rezoning the property or not. As Diane said, the city does not automatically jump on commercial rezoning without knowing it would have a solid positive impact. Sadly, if they do rezone, the only reason will be to try and cut their loses in court and not to improve the revenues or quality of life within the community.
Is the governance of Columbia actually referred to as the “District of Columbia”? I guess there is representation (albeit poor) and taxation.