Tag Archives: Itasca

How long zoning disputes can take in court, Haymarket and Itasca edition

Posted on by

I have been following the efforts of Haymarket Center to open an addiction treatment facility in the suburbs of Wheaton and then in Itasca. Haymarket filed a lawsuit in federal court and the case is ongoing. Here is where it stands now:

Photo by KATRIN BOLOVTSOVA on Pexels.com

Nearly six years after Haymarket Center announced a plan to open an addiction treatment facility in Itasca, the nonprofit remains locked in a legal fight with the DuPage County town.

Itasca trustees unanimously voted in November 2021 to reject Haymarket’s request to convert a former Holiday Inn into a 240-bed facility for patients with substance use and mental health disorders. In response, Haymarket filed a federal lawsuit against the village in January 2022, arguing that Itasca officials violated antidiscrimination laws.

In the latest twist, a federal judge has ruled the U.S. Department of Justice cannot join Haymarket’s lawsuit against Itasca…

According to the court docket, the two sides continue to depose witnesses and experts and exchange documents. The next court hearing is in July.

Sometimes zoning issues can be resolved fairly quickly. A change is proposed, decisions are made quickly at the municipal level, and matters are concluded.

But this case shows what can happen if the process goes to court. The article says the lawsuit was filed in early 2022. The next hearing is in July 2025. We are three and a half years in and it is not clear when it all might end in court (or be resolved otherwise).

This has consequences for both parties. They have to pay lawyers. The process takes twists and turns. The company and municipality have to keep an eye on everything. They have to commit money and time to an ongoing process with no clear end date.

Is it worth it? I would guess both sides are convinced of their own cause. Is this more of an issue of how courts operate that this amount of time can go by?

Addiction treatment center sign goes up but lawsuit with suburb continues

Posted on by

The saga of Haymarket Center attempting to open an addiction treatment facility in the suburbs of DuPage County continues:

Photo by EKATERINA BOLOVTSOVA on Pexels.com

Although the lawsuit remains unresolved, Haymarket has installed a new sign with its logo of a deep-rooted tree in the center of the east side of the building, facing I-290. Haymarket, one of the largest addiction treatment providers in the region, owns the property…

After two years and more than 35 public hearings, Itasca trustees in November 2021 unanimously voted against the project. The subsequent lawsuit alleged officials violated the Fair Housing Act and other laws prohibiting discrimination against people with disabilities, including patients in treatment for substance use and mental health disorders.

Village officials, however, are adamant that Itasca, a town of less than 10,000, lacks the infrastructure to support a treatment center that would serve more than 4,700 patients a year…

The lawsuit argues that Itasca violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and other anti-discrimination laws when it required that Haymarket submit a zoning application as a planned development rather than as a health care facility. As a result, Haymarket was held to a “higher and more onerous standard than would have been required had it been allowed to apply for a special use as a health care facility.”

This is a case I have followed as I think about undesirable land uses within suburban areas. (See earlier posts here, here, and here on this particular case and a recent post on undesirable land uses in suburbs.) I would guess many suburbanites would see such treatment centers are needed within a reasonable drive of themselves – from the article: “Last year, 150 people died from overdoses in DuPage, compared to 137 in 2021” – but few want it in their community.

As the lawsuit unfolds, is the suburb losing out by having an empty building? Suburbs also do not like vacant structures.

And if Haymarket loses, where do they go next to try to open a facility? Do they try a new strategy to sweeten the pot for a community?

Taking extra time to make a decision in Itasca on controversial proposal

Posted on by

I have followed the proposal to convert a suburban hotel to a treatment center from an earlier iteration in Wheaton, a march against the proposal in Itasca, and the ongoing discussion. The process is still ongoing and the final vote was recently delayed:

Photo by cottonbro on Pexels.com

Itasca’s plan commission on Wednesday unanimously agreed to recommend the village board deny Haymarket’s proposal. The Chicago-based nonprofit group is seeking permission to convert a former hotel along Irving Park Road into a 240-bed facility for adult patients with drug and alcohol use disorders.

The final decision rests with the village board. But trustees don’t want to rush their decision.

On Thursday, Mayor Jeff Pruyn said the village board plans to have at least two special meetings beginning in the middle of October. The first would allow public comment about the proposal. Haymarket representatives would make their case before the village board during the second.

As a result, the village board will not vote on the proposal until late October or early November.

Making a hasty decision may be in no one’s best interest. Particularly given the controversy surrounding the proposal, making sure everyone has a chance to voice their opinion and the board has all the time to make up their mind seems reasonable.

At the same time, what would change between now and then that would have a big effect on how the board members are viewing the situation? The proposal has been under discussion from some time and community members have made their voices heard.

This is not an easy decision for a smaller community to make. There could be consequences for life in the community and future development. Either way, some people will be upset. The village board decision will either agree with the plan commission or go the other direction (and the board is able to choose either option).

Yet, a decision needs to be made. I will be interested to see what happens: how will Itasca respond? Will Haymarket look for another suburban location? More broadly, what suburban communities might welcome land uses like these that are needed in metropolitan regions?

Suburbanites can rally en masse against (and for) zoning issues

Posted on by

Suburbanites may participate at low rates in local elections but they certainly can be energized by controversial local zoning proposals. More on the ongoing Haymarket case in Itasca, Illinois:

Itasca plan commissioners admitted they underestimated public interest in a proposed addiction treatment center when a crowd representing 16% of the town’s population packed their meeting Wednesday night…

Demonstrators marched earlier Wednesday evening through downtown Itasca to pressure a Chicago nonprofit group to abandon plans to convert a hotel into a 200-bed drug and alcohol treatment center…

Prominent politicians, advocates and other nonprofit groups have thrown their support behind Haymarket, maintaining that the center would address a shortage of easily accessible residential programs for recovering addicts in DuPage County. Proponents also say much of the outcry stems from the stigma around opioid addiction…

Opponents have focused their main objections on the size and location of a facility they say would put too much of a burden on the village’s police and ambulance services.

Quite the excitement for a suburb with less than 10,000 people. Several parts of this latest news report stood out to me:

1. A public march through the community from those opposed to the center.

2. Public demonstrations of support from those in favor of the facility. While there may be a good amount of NIMBY activity, there are also people willing to stand up for the facility.

3. That this all is based on a medical center. This is not a landfill or huge condominium building in a town of single-family homes. Of course, it is not just any medical center: it is one involving drug treatment. (And many suburbs do not like getting involved with anything to do with drugs.)

4. This is not how such local political activity works but it would be interesting to hear where Itasca residents think the facility should be located or whether they could help broker a deal for another community rather than just reject the local proposal. More broadly, how might communities and residents work together to locate facilities that may be undesirable but are needed?

Suburban opposition to drug treatment centers

Posted on by

The case of opposition to a proposed drug treatment center in Itasca, Illinois sounds similar to opposition last year to a center in Wheaton. On the Itasca proposal:

But opponents said the project would hurt Itasca’s economy. The hotel currently generates around $250,000 in annual tax revenue that would be lost.

Village officials also are trying to determine how the proposal would affect police, fire and emergency medical services.

While they agree DuPage needs treatment options, the residents said they would prefer the facility be more centrally located in the county.

“When direct questions were asked regarding the impact on Itasca, they were all pushed back toward the needs of DuPage,” the residents’ statement reads.

“They (Haymarket) found a facility that fit their needs in Itasca, but we believe overlooked the impact of putting it in such a small town with limited resources.”

Residents say they understand the need for the facility but do not want it in their town. The concerns are similar to those that any suburban residents might lodge against a new development: a loss of tax revenue and concerns about the size of the facility (which could be related to traffic, noise, use of municipal services).

Residents say such a facility should be more in the center of the populous county…like in Wheaton? The problem facing less desirable but necessary land uses is this: what might be good for a region on the whole is often undesirable for individual communities who suggest it should be located elsewhere. Since zoning and development decisions are left to municipalities, whole regions could suffer.

This does not just affect facilities that might be less desirable. In Wheaton, the conversation about a drug treatment center included the people who would be treated as well as crime rates around the facility. But, imagine the case of a hospital or medical clinic. People need medical care and these do not usually have negative connotations. Yet, any medical facility may not generate tax revenues like commercial uses. The size or design of the facility might clash with the character of the community.

There is no easy answer. In an ideal world, the process might look like this: a metropolitan planning board would consider the needs of the population and then find locations throughout the region that would best serve residents. There is just one big problem: Americans, particularly suburbanites, like local control over land use decisions. Few metropolitan regions in the United States can do this and place important infrastructure or facilities where they are needed because Americans place local control as a higher priority.

It will be fascinating to see how Haymarket will respond with this particular facility. If Itasca says no, what is the next suburb to approach? Additionally, how many people will go untreated as the wheels of zoning approval turn?