Aurora Beacon-News
June 3, 2006

Landowners lose: Supreme Court justices say outerbelt route selection not unlawful

By Matthew DeFour
Staff writer

SPRINGFIELD - The Illinois Supreme Court ruled Friday against a group of
landowners challenging the state's decision in 2002 to site a protected
corridor for the proposed Prairie Parkway.

In a unanimous opinion, the seven justices upheld two lower court rulings
that rejected a request by more than 40 land owners to rule the state's
ability to record the corridor as unconstitutional.

The landowners contended that the 36-mile, 400-foot-wide corridor depressed
property values and interfered with their ability to develop their property.

Under the corridor-siting statute, landowners who wish to make improvements
to their property must inform the Illinois Department of Transportation,
which has the option to then purchase the property or acquire it under
eminent domain laws.

Rebutting the argument, Justice Mary Ann McMorrow wrote that IDOT's argument
that the statute "places no economic restriction on any landowners' property
is incorrect."

"However," she wrote, "it has been held that such a restriction does not
amount to a regulatory taking (of the property)."

IDOT Chief Counsel Ellen Schanzle-Haskins said the department was "very
satisfied with the decision."

"We feel that the right-of-way map is designed to provide landowners with
advanced and explicit notice that we may be acquiring their property," she
said. "It's designed to inform the public and prevent conflicting and costly
land development."

St. Charles attorney Tim Dwyer, representing the landowners, said his
clients haven't decided whether to appeal the decision to the U.S. 
Supreme Court. If the plaintiffs decide to pursue that last resort, a
petition would have to be filed within 30 days.

"Obviously my clients are disappointed by the results," he said. 
"We're just going to take it one step at a time."

Dwyer said he was disappointed that the decision did not analyze all aspects
of the state's corridor-siting statute, specifically the indefinite amount
of time that the corridor exists after it is created.

He also objected to the ruling's analysis of the corridor's negative effect
on property values, which states: "This is simply the unavoidable
consequence of the public announcement that a highway will be built."

"In fact, everyone was going off the proposition that it may be built,"
Dwyer said, adding that his criticisms could form the basis for an appeal.