City Council Meeting/Strategic Session - Regular Meeting

Our August 26th, 2026th order, roll call.

Seton.

Here.

Houseman. Here. Furman. Here. Green. Here. Stamen.

Here. Will everyone please stand for the invocation given by Ron Habermel from the North Smoke Church and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Father, we just thank you for the privilege to come and ask you and petition you, Father, for your wisdom and your guidance and your direction. lord you said that if we trust in you with all of our heart and lean not to our own understanding but in all our ways acknowledge you that you will guide our paths so father i thank you lord god that our city leaders are asking and requesting your guidance and your direction father you open doors no man can shut you shut doors no man can open so we thank you father that that lord that you'll give them wisdom and strategy we thank you for your divine protection over our city and all the people in this city and our leaders. And we thank you, God, that you continue to send ministering angels, divine protection for us. And we give you the praise for all that you're doing over us and over our city. And we give you praise in Jesus' name. Amen.

Amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,

with liberty and justice for all.

Next item.

The first item tonight is the Constitution Week Proclamation September 17th through the 23rd.

Whereas September 17th, 2026 marks the 239th year of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America by the Constitutional Convention, and whereas it is fitting and proper to accord official recognition to this magnificent document and its memorable anniversary, and to the patriotic celebrations that will commemorate the occasion, and whereas public law 915 guarantees the issuing of a proclamation each year by the President of the United States of America, designated September 17th through 23rd as Constitution Week. Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Collinsville, Illinois, hereby declares the week of September 17th through the 23rd, 2026, as Constitution Week, and ask our citizens to reaffirm the ideals that the partners to framers of the Constitution had in 1787. By vigilantly protecting the freedoms guaranteed to us through the guardian of our liberties, remembering that lost rights may never be regained. Ladies here from the DAR, would you like to get a picture of them?

One, two, three.

next item next business prior to public input item one is the ordinance adopting the 20 45 comprehensive plan my frustration will be given by community development director travis taylor thank you mayor and members of council

uh... uh... uh... pgv planners and kristen has helped us create so without further ado this will be the final step in that process tonight we're looking to have a discussion questions answers and hopefully we are recommending

Good evening, members of the city council, Mr. Mayor, members of the public. My name is Kristen Hardin. I'm with PGAV Planners, and I'm here tonight to give you all an overview of the comprehensive planning process. And I also want to thank the city of Collinsville for awarding PGAV and our sub-consultant, Crawford Murphy-Tilley, giving us the opportunity and the privilege to work with you all on this project. So just a overview of the process itself. It was completed over three phases. We started with existing conditions, learning a lot about the community, moved into land use planning, and really thinking about the land use and development patterns of the city. And then finally here closing out phase three is where we began to draft those recommendations, write the plan, and then now here going through the adoption process. Community engagement occurred throughout the entire planning process. Here are just some quick numbers to help you understand the impact of the community engagement efforts that have happened. We created a project website that was the home base for all the information about the project, updates, draft plan documents, information about public events and activities that the public could participate in, and so on and so forth. So there were a lot of touch points between digital and in-person engagement throughout this process. And I'm happy later on to answer any questions that you all have specific to community engagement. But there was a lot. We completed all of this in collaboration with staff. So there were also some meetings that staff conducted through this process. We appreciate the extension of the capacity in that way. Phase one, as I mentioned, was existing conditions. This was our team's opportunity to really dig into who Collinsville is today and how the community has changed over the last decade or so. This involved looking at lots of demographic and market-related data to understand specific changes. related to things like population, households, income, education, the commercial and residential markets, and then also taking a look at physical characteristics through an existing land use survey. Phase two, land use planning. This is where we were able to take a lot of the information that we learned in phase one, existing conditions, and really start to transition into thinking about the physical character of development throughout the community. During this process there was lots of engagement. Staff held some neighborhood meetings where they presented this information. Our team also held some meetings on land use planning and this phase actually gave the community the opportunity to really think about land use and development at the neighborhood scale. So during those meetings there were maps and engagement materials that were specific to each neighborhood throughout Collinsville so we often find that in times that residents don't always have a lot of specific or detailed information or feedback about you know the city as a whole but if you ask them about you know something down the street from them on their block then they're more apt to provide some feedback so this was a great way to get feedback from the community Our steering committee, which included members of staff, planning commission, city council, as well as some residents, business owners, and representatives from other institutions throughout the community. That group was able to take all of that community information in stride and really think about land use and development from different perspectives. And so that group really helped us put together the first draft of the future land use map. So thinking about future land use maps, it's a part of a broader future land use plan that includes the future land use map itself as well as a major streets map. So in addition to the recommendations that come out of the plan, these are two really important elements that get adopted with every comprehensive plan. Your land use map really dictating the desired future for land as development and redevelopment occurs and as land uses change and then your major streets map giving guidings as far as where new streets need to be constructed or where major improvements to existing streets need to happen to support development as it's depicted on your future lanes map. This is a image of the city's future land use map. It includes a future land use designation for all parcels within Collinsville's current municipal boundary as well as some parcels outside of Collinsville's municipal boundary. And the reason for that is that the Illinois statutes allow municipalities to plan for land outside of its boundary up to one and a half miles so long as that land is not incorporated by another municipality And then in instances where you have an overlapping one and a half mile buffer with a neighboring municipality, the recommended approach to that is to enter into boundary agreements with those neighboring municipalities, which essentially says that, hey, we as the community, we've adopted a plan and our future growth desires or to grow in this direction and not go past said boundary. And when we were developing the future lanes map, we did reference future lanes maps from neighboring communities who do have current comprehensive plans, just to make sure that we weren't encroaching on areas that other communities had already planned to grow into. And then your major streets map here, again, supports the future lanes map, identifies some new roads that may be needed to support development. And then there are a few places where some changes to existing roadways, such as realignments, are recommended to support development. And this is a map. Both of these, I imagine, will be used pretty regularly by your community development as well as your engineering team to ensure that development is considered hand in hand. with transportation decisions. And then phase three, developing the comprehensive plan. This is just a quick snapshot of what some of that document looks like. This document was published in late July on the comprehensive plan website and so it was available from late July up until the plan commission meeting with a feedback form so that the public had an opportunity to provide some feedback on the draft that could be incorporated into the public hearing for that plan commission meeting. It is still currently on the website As you move through this document, you'll find general information about the planning process. We always like to help communities understand, especially for the general public, what a comprehensive plan is and how it impacts the future of the community. And then as you move through this, you'll find the framework for the recommendations, which is our objectives and key results approach. For each objective, it's associated with a broader theme like housing, growth and development, or transportation. And those objectives essentially tells us what the city wants to do with regard to the different themes. And for each set of objectives, there are key results that describe specific actions, projects, or policy recommendations that the city should implement to achieve the broader objective and theme. And then at the end of the document in more of a matrix or a tabular format is a summary of all of the objectives and key results along with information about the responsible party, which will be one of your city departments and in some cases a boarded commission who should be leading the implementation of the different key results. And then there's also information about potential partners such as the school district or another institution or organization in the community who might have a role in helping to advance different recommendations. And other information in there include priority, timing, helping you understand where you might want to put some recommendations on the top of your list and where some recommendations may take the next five to 10 years to implement. And then metrics as well. The metrics column is not intended to be all-encompassing, but just to give you all some ideas about how you can track and measure the progress of the different recommendations. And throughout the plan document, you will find these little call out boxes for the recommendations. We like to include these just because it helps ground the recommendations a lot. And it gives you all as staff and as elected officials an idea of what success can look like for your communities. And a lot of them are recommendations that have been implemented in other places so it's you know really an opportunity to say hey maybe we know a planner or city manager in some other part of the state or the country and we can reach out to them to understand you know what some of the hang-ups may have been what successes look like and other questions and things that might help you all with your implementation and again this is that matrix summary at the end of the document And just to give you all just a high-level overview of what some of these recommendations look like, just pulled out a couple here, and we can certainly flip back through these as needed. Under our growth and development objective, a lot of this focused on the physical growth of the city, so making sure that we are implementing smart growth principles, thinking about ways to use land more sustainably, and ensuring that we're engaging all of the residents and neighborhoods within the city's future growth area. So this map to the right simply shows the boundary outside of the city's current corporate limits in which the city, as it makes sense in the future, could potentially grow. Housing and neighborhoods, a lot of this focused on creating pathways to attract and support diverse and attainable and more affordable housing within the community. You'll hear zoning recommendations throughout this section of the comprehensive plan and I always like to add when we talk about housing and zoning as one of the primary tools to attract more diverse and affordable housing in the community. Updating or amending your zoning regulations doesn't mean that you're gonna get 500 new housing units here in the next year, but the purpose of that is to, as I mentioned, create clear pathways so that developers and builders, they understand what types of housing the community desires, where you desire that type of housing to be built, and the type of regulations, policies, and even incentives that are available to support that type of housing. And it really just helps create a more competitive development environment and regulatory environment here in the city. So there's information in there, thinking about your existing zoning district regulations, thinking about how you make the most out of undersized lots in the community, and even thinking about unique types of housing such as accessory dwelling units as an option. With regard to transportation, a lot of this focuses on safety and connectivity. where transportation ties back into land use and zoning really came up in the way of multimodal transportation principles. So one example here is a way to promote multimodal transit is thinking about transit oriented development. And one example is here on this neighborhood future land use map shows the Vandalia Street corridor where the land use designation is generally mixed use along that corridor, so incorporating commercial and residential uses together. And the idea here is that you're building increased density around your major transportation and public transit corridors, so placing people closer to areas where they have more than one transportation option and they're not as reliant on automobile traffic. So the Vandalia Street corridor is one of those areas where that makes sense because you have that access to public transit and then the future bike pedestrian pathway that'll come through there as well. When it comes to tourism, this was really about bringing all of Collinsville's tourism assets and resources together and finding ways to connect them all. That was like the number one thing that we heard when we had our hotel managers and tourism managers stakeholder meeting. The sentiment was everyone's sort of moving in their own direction, following their own plans, but to maximize Collinsville's tourism potential. It sounded like there was a strong desire to have a broader tourism plan that all of those entities could work together on. There were recommendations on ways that everybody could benefit from attracting more tourists and visitors to the area and then thinking about ways to encourage the visitors that you're already getting from, you know, the Convention Center, Cahokia Mounds, and the Collins House, you know, thinking about ways to get those visitors to stay in Collinsville a few more nights, visit more local businesses, and generally spend more money here in the city. And then parks, recreation, and the environment. This one was a combination of thinking about ways to further the implementation of the parks master plan and then thinking about ways to incorporate sustainable planning and development in different ways. So one topic I'll mention here as pictured, this is identifying areas where conservation, open space, and agricultural uses are desired to remain in place. This was also another kind of pointed conversation that came up during our stakeholder meetings, wanting to ensure that agricultural and farmland is preserved in the community in places where that makes sense. And a lot of that was tied to, you know, really wanting to hang on to the pride that the community has in being, you know, the horseradish capital of the world. So ensuring that your land use and future zoning policies help to ensure that was important. So pictured here are just a couple of the neighborhood land use maps that identify areas where agricultural and open space is intended to be preserved. And then finally, Uptown Collinsville. This was another major theme throughout the planning project. And our big recommendation here is really to dust off that uptown master plan. As we went through there, we found that there were a lot of good recommendations and, you know, sort of a lengthy plan document for a small sub area, but a lot of good recommendations and some that are still relevant today and things that the city has expressed interest in still wanting to do. And we think that that's something that could, you know, be done fairly easily internally through staff and, you know, support from the planning commission. Just really taking an audit of that plan and figuring out, hey, what are those things we still want to do? How can we prioritize these things? And then how can we start taking some actions? From the community's perspective, catalyst development sites came up. the two being the old Columbian school site and then the site next to the Dee Dee Collins house. So wanting to prioritize coming up with plans for the development or improvement of both of those sites as potential catalysts to attracting other private investment into Uptown. So that's my overview of the comprehensive plan process. I'm happy to answer any questions that you all have.

Travis, could you, for the public, could you give kind of a quick synopsis of how the city uses the comprehensive plan?

Yeah, of course. So especially for planning staff, the comprehensive plan is one of our primary guiding policy documents. We reference it, I don't mean this flippantly, but almost every day where we reference the future land use map and the policies and goals and vision that are laid out in that document as a guide for us in making planning and zoning recommendations as we get requests from the public to rezone property or developments. We reference the plan quite a bit. With these documents, we are afforded the opportunity to lay out a vision, lay out the future land use map, and then also outline some objectives and key results like Kristen had went over. And those are some fairly prescriptive, but also all there for staff to consult when we're trying to prioritize projects or future goals that we're trying to move towards so the comforts of plans just for us it is like the overarching guiding document on how we make our decisions and then out of that we we pull we pull the recommendations and then come up with our zoning code and our zoning map and things that actually guide development and regulate

For the most part, the zoning changes have to conform or should conform with what's been laid out.

Correct. Yep.

So there's about 79 recommendations. I'm new to this, so is that feasible to achieve in 19 years?

It depends on how much work you guys are ready to roll up your sleeves and do. and the key part of that matrix at the end is really the timing and the responsible parties piece and so something that we recommend in there is taking that into your city council work session maybe having an annual work session with the planning commission so that each year you're thinking about what can we bite off the apple here in the next 12 months and with comprehensive plans they're typically updated every 10 to 20 years so In 10 years, the community may have changed. The market will be a little different. So that'll be a good point to kind of take stock and say, hey, what did we accomplish? How has change impacted what we said we wanted to do 10 years ago? And maybe some of those recommendations get tweaked a little bit as well.

Either of you could answer this. But is there maybe three of them that stand out as the ones that are maybe the most pressing that we should be

I'll let Travis answer that one. Thanks.

No, I gravitate towards things that I work in every day, and I think those are some of the recommendations, and I'm not going to speak specifically to the recommendations, but there's a number of recommendations that speak to zoning code-related updates. Our zoning code is... is it's good, but it could use some love. And we try to do that. You see that every meeting where we're bringing in text amendments and trying to band aid and make sure that it's a process that serves us, the residents and the development community. I think some of the most important recommendations of this are those that point directly to our zoning code and say, Hey, you need to rethink defunct zoning districts. You need to think about how accessory dwelling units are categorized in your in your plan and a lot of this is to say that some of these are recommendations are just that they're recommendations and there's a lot of research and time that's going to go into actually before and into it before we actually implement it and it's going to come back to the council and the commissions for review and approval before we actually put in the paper

Thank you. But I would think there needs to be a balance like the tourism one, right, where the hotel operators are saying everybody's doing their own thing. So I think as a city, we need to focus on that as well, because we're talking dollars to the city. If we come up with a tourism plan and get people to work together where we get people instead of staying one night in council, they're staying to.

And to kind of build on Kristen's response, David, as far as how is it feasible to get all these done, it is a 20-year vision document. And the idea is that we're revisiting it every year, too. We don't want to just adopt a plan like this and it sit on the shelf whenever we're taking a look at annual capital budgets and things like that, if it's a public works department or parks. well hey are we advancing the goals outlined in this particular uh in particular plan so that's that's our intent is once this is adopted we'll be referencing this we have our strategic plan which is kind of our short you know two to five year plan that the council regularly does uh this is our long-range vision based on all the feedback from all the very stakeholders that we have involved with this thank you i do think the the progressive communities

they get the sense from the community what they want and they implement it. there was probably 20, 30 years ago or more. I don't know how aggressive council was on implementing those changes, but I think we want to make sure we keep up with that. And this is definitely the first step to that. So a lot of the, I think we all attended those. We had a lot of input from the community. So we got a good sense of what the community feels they want.

Uh, you know, first of all, I appreciate the work that everyone has done on this, particularly, uh, some of our, uh, citizens that came forth and their business owners that participated in this. So, but yeah, I think it's, it's obviously very important to have a vision of where, where things could be, you know, the art of the possible and all that, because, uh, if you don't do that and you're just doing everything ad hoc, you have a mess. And there are some places that are a mess. Um, but I think, you know, looking at the, uh, there are some things already in flight, right? Like the fire service things and stuff like that. You mentioned a priority. I always think uptown is always a priority. I like to see buildings occupied, businesses occupied, and so on. but i think it's a great place for us to look we can break apart in the groups staff can break apart in the groups and like you mentioned who's responsible tackle each section a little bit at a time some of them on the surface may look like crazy but but you have to explore what those opportunities are and and you know who knows what will like you said will be in 10 years so anyway thanks for putting this together

Any other comments or questions? Christian or Travis? Okay. I have none. I have a motion to approve. So moved. Seconded. Motion by Housman, seconded by Green. Brokaw?

Seaton?

Yes.

Housman?

Yes.

Furman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen?

Yes.

Item two is an ordinance amending Title 17 as it relates to residential driveway standards.

Presentation will be given by Senior Planner Caitlin Rice.

Thank you, Mayor Stamen and members of the council. This item before you is an amendment proposed for our residential driveway standards and the zoning ordinance. The reason this is coming up, thank you, is due to noticing a gap in our current regulations where essentially someone can kind of pave their entire lot for parking. We don't have much to stop it based on what our current ordinance says. So the goal is to kind of limit parking in the front yards to help improve or preserve character of neighborhoods while also balancing the needs of folks for off street parking on their property. So this request comes into two parts, both in the zoning ordinance, one in parking front yard section, which kind of is like our overall violation section for parking in residential driveways, and then also our overarching off street parking and loading regulations. So this is an example of kind of what we're speaking of when staff has noticed a kind of a gap or something that we think that our ordinance is not able to fully bring forward the intent of its guidelines. So our current language that regulates size of driveways is essentially that the access point in the right-of-way shall not exceed 30% the width of a lot or 30 feet, whichever is less. and must only access one public right away so for example we have a property off carl street that's 100 foot wide then green is that maximum 30 foot driveway line so again only the part that's in the right-of-way is restricted to that 30 feet maximum because they have a 100 foot wide lot Once they get onto their private property, which is the red line, it can be expanded in any direction, in any dimension, which led to, in this example, about 69% of the front yard being able to be utilized for parking. So when looking at surrounding municipalities and kind of, we identified a potential problem and what are some other communities doing. So kind of a wide swath of either Missouri and Illinois communities. But in sample, there's quite a few methods you could do this. Some just do straight with requirements based off the size of your garage. So if you have a single car garage, you get a 15 foot wide driveway and then it expands up as you go. And others move a more kind of flexible route with just overall percentage of coverage. So this could be like Clayton, Missouri has a minimum 45% green space coverage on their lot. So any structures, parking area, paved, you gotta keep at least 45% of that green. Or like Sunset Hills in Missouri or Carbondale, they do a 40% of your front yard is limited to parking. Ours is again only in the right of way as it stands right now with our width requirements. We did note that the infrastructure design manual adopted last year did conflict with zoning's requirements where they have a maximum 24 foot wide access for residential properties and zoning's can go up to 30, but it depends on the size of the lot. It's been in practice that zoning does take precedent, and so we did bring this to the Planning Commission's attention, wanted to bring it to your attention that there is a conflict. Planning Commission did recommend to keep the zoning maximum of 30 per the IDM, which the IDM, if in agreeance with council, would be amended at a later date. So this is a lot of text, but not much is changing. This is the full parking in front yard section, and it really reads as kind of the violation, so it sets times for parking in front yards for vehicles for sale, if your vehicle needs to be on an approved surface, and kind of if you have valid registration and those sort of property maintenance things. This is also the location of where that access with requirement is located, which can cause some confusion when going into the zoning ordinance where your definition for private driveway is where you control the width, but this is a violation section. So really the big change here is highlighted in green where we're proposing to change the name of this section instead of parking in front yards to residential parking violations, just so it's easier and more clear for staff and the public to navigate. and removing the width requirement from that private driveway section in red down in the middle and putting that into a new section with the general overall standards for residential parking. So this section is really the bulk of the changes. We're proposing a new section to 17-070, our off-street parking and loading regulation section, specific to driveway standards for single and two-family residential districts. So this off-street parking and loading is basically where everything is housed for stall sizes, aisle widths, parking lot standard materials. But it's very designed for larger development like parking lots. where it leaves a gap for the smaller residential driveways of going back and forth between the violation section and just trying to figure out what exactly it's trying to say. Some other communities also split it out this way too, where they have a specific section for residential driveways of this size. So in purple is proposed language that is just being carried over from the violation section that's already in place. So you'll see the private driveway definition. And then also in item C is that 30% the width of the lot requirement. So the big changes here is item B, which is to kind of control that parking area and front yard, implementing that 40% maximum of your front yard area for parking. Some other items, D, we're proposing to codify allowing ribbon driveways or Hollywood driveways, which are those two tracks of paved parallel paths for your wheels. Currently how it's interpreted, a parking space is 10 by 19 rectangle. You're required two and a half off street parking spaces for a single family house. You need a full paved area. So we didn't have a mechanism really to allow it, but talking with engineering staff as well, we're proposing to amend this to permit them as well. The other big, well not really big change, it's already in practice, but clearly codifying driveway and parking area pavement standards. We don't permit gravel or oil and chip driveways, so this is just carrying over language for other parking areas that permit all weather dust-free surfaces required. The other two points are really just addressing having that in for non-conforming driveways. If you have a gravel driveway, you're allowed to maintain it and continue it. It just cannot be expanded. And then referencing our violation section. So I'm gonna dive into a little bit deeper of what these look like with our big changes. So we have the Carl Street example again, and this is showing what that 40% maximum would look like in practice. Figure five at the very top is a measurement of their entire front yard area. That is any portion of yard that's in front of the house to the property line extending to both side property lines. That's about 2,700 square feet. 40% of that is about 1,100 square feet, which is shown in the bottom figure, is what their potential maximum could be in the front yard. And that would, again, only apply to the front yard. If they wanted to pull off to the side yard or rear yard, that would be just regulated as it is now, which not really regulated except for paved surface. And then the example with what was approved through our current ordinance is about 69% is that hatched area shown to the right. So I wanted to show some examples of what this could look like in older and newer subdivisions because 40%, just like our width requirements, varies based off property size. So it scales based off the size of your property instead of just a flat number. So we have a property off Red Pine Court, newer subdivision. They have a front yard of about 2,600. Their existing driveway is about a three-car driveway, and that's only 34% of the front yard. smaller property from Alice Street they have much smaller front yard but the portion that is in their front yard is only 18% and they also have ability to go behind for more and also on this slide is an image of what a Hollywood or ribbon driveway looks like it's a visual and again this was two parallel paved track and with if the 40% was approved we would consider the full width of the parking area, not just the two paved surfaces for that 40% because a car is being parked on top of that area. So some other things to think about with this amendment. We are proposing to remove the language that the driveway has to access only one public right of way. That does not allow through driveways. We see these very often in older areas of the city where you have an alley behind you or your property is bordered by two streets. Some folks already have these types of driveries where you can drive right through your property to access both. This can allow for people to avoid backing up onto busy roads or just access the alley a little bit more conveniently. Currently, those are not allowed. However, with discussions with engineering staff, we have protections in the IDM, the design manual for number of access points based off width, distances from intersections that help prevent potential traffic. So we are proposing to allow those this evening. Circle driveways are another one that comes up. We currently, zoning currently allows them if they have enough width access in the right-of-way. So if they have a 100-foot lot, if each one's 15 and 15, they'd be allowed to do it. However, engineering most likely won't allow it because they restrict access points from one right-of-way based off of the size of their lot and distances from intersections. So that is the high-level summary of the proposed amendment. Staff is recommending approval, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Caitlin, one of my things I question quite a bit is the parking. Police Department will verify that. Parking across sidewalks. Is that just in the violations section, or is that addressed here that

So that wouldn't be addressed in the proposed amendment this evening. That would be in the violation section or when it's in the right of way, I believe it goes to the police department. Yeah.

Oh, state law.

There's a couple different sections. So there is some state law backing, but we also have it outlined in some other nuisance vehicles and violation sections of the code that's not in zoning. Okay.

so if someone's parking would be more than the percentage allowed in this currently even if it's like asphalt or concrete they could maintain that get their driveway redone and keep that and they're basically grandfathered in yep pretty much we would just call those legally non-conforming so they're allowed to maintain them but not expand them so you'd be able to keep it as is Okay, and then can you clarify, because I feel like you've been talking about like street parking as well, like in front of your house. If you're not in your yard, that is okay or it's not?

Yeah, this says this only addresses parking on a private property. So if you have some street parking available, some streets don't, you know, depending on its width. But this would not affect any street parking. So if you're able to do that, folks are able to do it, they still can.

OK. And then my last question is, if someone did have an alley behind their house and they wanted to make a driveway off that, does basically the same rules apply to their backyard?

So only the access and the right of way would be applied to the alley. The 40% would not apply because that's specific to front yards.

So realistically, if they wanted to, they could pave their whole backyard?

Potentially.

OK.

Don't give them ideas. So I've got this correct. So it's 40% of the front yard, correct?

Correct.

But at the street, at the right-of-way, it's 30 feet max. Okay.

uh yeah their width is 30 the width of the lot or 30 feet whichever is less so if you have a property that's less than 100 feet wide you're going to get less than 30.

30 is the maximum um so and i bring this up because there was a neighbor that expanded his driveway and uh he told me that he was not allowed to do a three car with at the street. So he had to go in with two lanes and then and then over. So now he could have done.

So the that will still apply. So that's controlling the access. So once he's on his private property, which sounds like is what he did, he can expand out to the three car. But if his lot is not wide enough,

he won't get 30 feet okay so the red pine court example is a three-car garage and it's it's three lanes all the way to the street is that so what if that is larger than the 40 percent

So like currently?

Yeah.

So if they already have something that wouldn't be permitted by if this ordinance was adopted, they're legally nonconforming and can maintain it and use it.

Okay. So I guess my question is, if you have a three-car garage, you may be prohibited from having three lanes of right-of-way up to the three-car garage in some instances. Is that correct?

Only in the right-of-way portion, so figure eight to the top right here, kind of, I think might be a good visual. So when we control the width and the access, it's only the portion of the right-of-way, which is, you know, you could estimate 10 feet from edge of curb, some are larger, some are smaller. but usually on the other side of a sidewalk if there is one so just like red pine court so if their law was not wide enough to allow their access they would have to taper their access point and then they could expand on private property to a three-car garage if their front yard was large enough okay yeah i just want to clarify that the because there are in my neighborhood there are several three-car

with driveways and that was his point of contention, like wait, everybody else has already done it, how come I can't? So it somehow fell through the cracks, I guess.

yeah so it one depends on the width of their lot so his lot might be they're all the same size okay so it could be that those were put in you know a long time ago and they were allowed to maintain it um or i'm not sure which if they're tapered or not okay so there's potential it was approved either before this ordinance or like you said through cracks make sure we're just consistent moving forward that's all yeah absolutely thank you

Any other questions or comments? I think none. Motion to approve. So moved.

I'll second it.

Motion by Furman, second by Green. Roll call.

Seton. Yes. Houseman. Yes. Furman. Yes. Green. Yes. Stamen.

Yes.

Item number three is the ordinance amending section 17.080, landscaping, screening, and buffering. Title 17 as it relates to tree preservation standards.

Again, Senior Planner Rice.

Thank you, Mayor Stamen and members of the council. This item is the first part of a two-part request as it relates to tree preservation requirements that we discussed last month. So the main point of bringing this forward is we noticed another gap in our ordinance that essentially allows someone to pull a grading permit only clear the entire lot and not be held to tree preservation standards that already exist as if they were developing. So our tree preservation ordinance currently only, it requires replacement of trees if it is outside the minimum site development area. So if you're constructing something, you have a site plan or a subdivision, and you just want to clear cut everything, but you're only building on a small portion, then you would be required to replace some trees on site. So we did notice a gap where our language specifies site plans and subdivisions are required to provide tree preservation, which usually are always accompanied with a grading permit. However, grading permits stand alone, don't have any tie to the tree preservation. That leaves us in a situation where someone can come in only apply for a grading permit, get approved, clear everything, come back a year, five years later, build and not be required to replace any trees. So the proposed ordinances this evening for Title 17 and in the future Title 18 are just trying to close that gap. So go over a little bit of kind of how our tree preservation plan works. I won't go super nitty gritty, but again, essentially if you're developing, you need a tree survey, you need to show your site development and you need to identify trees outside of your site development that you're removing. And if they're in good condition and a certain size and you would have to replace them on site. So we have some examples here, because Council asked for some examples and just kind of helped visualize it. So I pulled just some existing properties of different kind of situations. So Walmart on Collinsville Crossing, this is a 100% built out site. Even if this was fully wooded, since they've built it out 100%, they would not be required to replace any trees by today's standards or existing ordinance. We have an agricultural property, which is most of our new development in the city. On Forney Lane, it's an agricultural property. There are no trees on site. They are not required to replace any trees because there are none. Their site would just follow regular landscaping standards. so i don't have many good examples of like a really wooded site to show you but here's just a kind of sketch up of an example if i have a fully wooded site and i want to build but i don't want to build 100 of the lot so we have building parking area detention area drive access aisles any trees removed within the area of any of those items for your development don't have to be replaced. If you're clearing outside of that area, then you would have to replace trees on site if they're in good condition and of a certain size. The overall goal of the existing tree preservation ordinance is trying to mitigate unnecessary clearing of mature trees. Trees provide their services when they are mature. It can take quite a long time to get there. If it's unnecessary to clear it, we try to incentivize not to, but obviously development, they'll need to clear some trees. Those do not have to be replaced. So we did look at surrounding municipalities to see how other communities handle it and see where we fall. We are a Tree City USA as well as a lot of the communities as outlined in the staff report reference. The tree preservation requirements specifically say grading permits, building permits, site plans, subdivisions or any other permit where ours is very restricted to site plans and subdivisions and why we're in this situation. today so some other key things is there's varying classification methods of what trees are important to be replaced we have just caliper inch you know ratio you have to be a certain caliper inch and size some define them a little bit more specifically or do a minimum canopy coverage We also saw city tree funds, which might help also solve a problem that we are encountering where if a site is so developed or so constrained in some manner, they can't get the trees on site, they could pay into a city tree fund for the city to later plant on public property at a later date. And there's also just general ways to incentivize preservation, very similar to what we do now by incentivizing your trees that are preserved or replaced into your landscape calculations. So with that research and kind of identifying what our gap is, we have a couple proposed amendments to Title 17, specifically wanting to clarify that grading permits will also require tree survey, tree preservation plan. Remove the option to replace offsite. We currently have two to one caliper inch ratio if you want to do offsite, and replace that with a city tree fund instead. Doubling the amount of tree inches that basically need to be replaced is fairly burdensome and it would be much easier I think for the city and for developers to have an option they could pay into the fund at market rate for the trees and labor instead of coordinating as a third party planning on city property. And then also a big gap we notice is trying to handle tree preservation requirements when trees are cleared illegally or without any permits. They've clear cut the site. We got not even a grading permit, no tree survey, and they don't have an approved site plan. We have no idea what was there, what they are going to develop and what would need to be replaced. And they can kind of skirt those requirements and leave us without many tools to address it. So the first part of the amendments is really just kind of cleaning up some language since we're in here. Just specifying, clarifying a tree survey requires middle of these certain things, specifically condition that is in practice, that it must be in good condition in order to be required to be replaced. And that is pretty standard across any tree survey or data that you get. So if it's poor condition, like diseased, dying, dead, invasive, it does not have to be replaced even if it's removed outside of the area. um and also just clarifying that what a tree preservation plan has to have on on it showing what's removed and what's being replaced The second part of the ordinance is our tree replacement or mitigation requirements. So this section is really kind of the meat of it where we're closing those gaps. So where we have replacement of trees without a site development plan and replacement trees illegally without any permit. So if you, item E, if you just submit a grading permit and you have no development plan, you're just clearing the trees, just to clear them and putting nothing else in its place, you would be subject to the maximum replacement, which is 300 caliper inches per acre, is in our existing regulations. The second part is if you're removing trees without any approvals at all, not even a grading permit, how do we retroactively enforce our tree preservation, which would be the same enforcing the maximum requirement. Again, if they have a site development plan, the amount of trees that would be replaced is fairly negligible depending on how they develop their site. And then the last big part is installing the city tree fund where they have an option to pay into this fund at a rate of $250 per cow per inch instead of replacing onsite. So that is a high-level summary of the proposed amendments to Title 17. And we have next on the agenda, assuming this goes well, is addressing Title 18, which is our grading and land development, which ties into connecting these requirements. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Any questions or comments for Kayla?

Thank you. for the extra clarification. Yeah, of course.

Thanks for indulging me a few weeks ago and talking to me like I'm a fifth grader. I appreciate that.

No problem at all. I appreciate the time. Your picture was perfect. Oh, good. My rough sketch. Thank you.

Okay, no more questions. Motion to approve?

So moved.

Second. Motion by seat and second by house. Roll call.

Seton?

Yes.

Houseman? Yes. Furman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen?

Yes.

Item four is ordinance amending chapter 18.04, soil excavation and erosion control, with title 18, land development, as it relates to tree preservation standards.

Here we go.

All right, this is a two part of the tree preservation amendment request. This is for Title 18, which is our land development code. This houses our grading permit requirements and our processes for grading permits. So we notice, along with the gap in the zoning ordinance, it doesn't specify grading permits and leaves us kind of stuck. The Title 18 grading permits also did not reference tree preservation, although the infrastructure design manual does. So the proposal for this amendment to Title 18 is to just clarify that a tree survey is required and tree preservation plan for major grading permits and minor grading permits when it's for commercial activity only. So those small residential projects, I might clear a couple of trees, it is over four cubic yards. meets the requirement for a minor grading permit, normal residents would not be required to go through this process of a tree survey and tree preservation. We're looking at just those big developments or commercial activity. So the proposed amendments themselves are fairly small. It's really just hitting a couple sections of the chapter to just tie into our tree preservation requirements. So the first one is application for grading permit, which establishes the submittal requirements for when you're doing a permit and just adding in there that a tree survey and tree preservation plan meeting our requirements in Title 17 is required. The second is our regulation section, which establishes when a major versus minor grading permit is required. So this is where we're amending the minor requirements. So any minor grading permit for commercial activity would require the tree survey. However, residential projects would not. And then the last one is planned content. So this establishes what sheets and what's supposed to be on those sheets is required for your grading plans, like erosion control, grading, you know, your SWIP plans, et cetera. And then this is just adding that that tree preservation sheet would be required as well. So that is the summary of the proposed amendments to Title 18, and I would be happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Caitlin? Comments? Being done, motion to approve.

So moved.

Second. Motion by Green, second by Furman. Roll call.

Seton? Yes. Houseman? Yes. Furman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen?

Yes.

Thank you. Next, the speaker's from the floor.

Speakers may address the council in the terms of ordinance number 4765. Time is limited to four minutes per speaker. Please refer to the last page of the agenda for specific rules governing input. Is there anyone on this side of the room that would like to speak? So go to the podium and state your name. Anybody on this side that would like to speak? All right, anybody from the right? Oh, okay.

Go ahead.

My name is Donald Way. I live at 1032 McDonald Lake Road. And I'm up here on behalf of my neighbors just to say a few words for Rita and Brian Pescaro. This is about the annexation of their property. And I just wanted to say that they've been good neighbors, they're very hardworking people, and they've always taken care of their property. And they've never asked anything from any of my neighbors that I know of, and they've never asked or wanted to be annexed. I understand that some of the businesses around have asked to be annexed, but I feel it's not fair to force someone to be annexed. and they have concerns about their business and their property that they feel has not been addressed by the city. And I just wanted to please ask that you guys consider not annexing them at this time. And I thank you for the time.

Anyone else on this side? Anyone on the right side? Go ahead.

Good evening. My name is Paige Durham. I'm a proud Collinsville resident, but I'm here tonight representing Madison County Farm Bureau. I'm the manager for Madison County Farm Bureau. We are a nonprofit member-based organization representing 2,470 Farm Bureau members here in Madison County. Our focus is on agricultural advocacy, information, and development. I'm here to speak in opposition of the annexation of the Pescaro property. Illinois Farm Bureau policy supports this opposition. It states, we support efforts to reduce the impact of municipal annexation on agriculture by reducing to at least 10 acres the size of the parcel that may be forcibly annexed. This property is well over that size. and or establishing a fixed minimum period of time during which agricultural practices may continue. Illinois Farm Bureau policy also states, whenever the governing body of any municipality has adopted a resolution to annex any unincorporated land, they shall before proceed present at a public hearing a map and description of the area to be annexed, evidence that it is reasonable and necessary to the development of the municipality, evidence of the ability to furnish normal municipal services at the time of annexation. Agriculture is faced with increasingly difficult regulations that prevent our farmers from successfully doing their job to provide food, fuel, and fiber to the American population. The annexation of this property puts additional barriers on the future of this farmland. On behalf of Madison County Farm Bureau, I ask the council to vote no on the annexation of the Piscaro property. If vote yes is considered, I ask that you consider tabling this to a later date to allow for proper time to address this situation. If you have any questions, I can be reached at Farm Bureau. I know I spoke with Travis before this, but I appreciate your time and thank you very much.

Thank you, Trish. Anyone else on this side?

Hi there. My name is Rita Pasquero, and I'm the owner of BP Hauling on McDonald Lake Road.

My written letter opposing the annexation of our property is already on file with the city. I wanted to add a couple critical points tonight. First, the annexation notice was sent less than 30 days to respond, which really isn't a reasonable time for a business that we must evaluate our operation and financial impacts. On top of that, we've had ongoing mail delivery issues in this area. Important items have been delayed, misdelivered, or not delivered at all. You combine this with unreliable mail service and a short response window, it puts us at a disadvantage. Second, we received no notice about the major reconstruction on McDonald Lake Grove. The project has made it extremely difficult for our heavy trucks, delivery vehicles, and any farm equipment to safely enter and exit the property. I had to track down the contractor myself to learn who was responsible and how long this disruption would last. There was no communication, no consideration for the impact on this long-standing township business that we are. Property owners should not be left in the dark. This has just severely impacted the access roads, and I'm asking for clarification and assistance why no notification was provided and how would this be corrected going forward. Thank you.

Anyone else on the right? Okay, being none, next item.

Comments and announcements from the mayor.

Yes, I'd like to talk a little bit about a loss we had in the city family in the last few weeks. Deputy Clerk Kelly Wilkie in the police department died suddenly, and we usually don't, bring up the obituaries and things, but this is kind of a shock to all of us, to the city family, and particularly to the police department family. She began her career here in 2017 as a deputy records clerk, and prior to 17, she worked as part-time capacity in the records division. In 2019, she transitioned to a newly created position of a full-time evidence custodian, a position she held until 2023. In 2023, she was reassigned to the investigations record clerk and FOIA coordinator position, a position she held until her passing on August 9th. Kelly had an outgoing personality, loved to talk to everyone, and had a natural desire to make people happy and help others, making her an integral part and valued member of the council police department civilian staff. She'll be missed by all.

That's all I have. Comments and answers from council members?

I'll go. I have a comment about the bump outs on Clay Street. I know there was a lot of negativity as they were being put in and the construction and sort of the disruption. But as someone who walks across Clay Street, especially at Clay and Morrison, the shortening of that distance across has been very good. Four, if you tried to cross there, because there's no stop sign, if somebody came around off of Vandalia, you had to move quickly. And now it's about half of that. Also, driving down Clay Street, there's no difference. I mean, you're going to abreast, even with the bump out. So I think they've turned out very well. I know there's been a lot of negative comments, but they're doing the purpose that I can see that we're supposed to.

I agree. Anyone else?

next time comments and announcements from city staff yeah thank you mayor members of the council uh donald uh rita and paige thank you so much for your comments this evening uh we definitely hear the concerns where you're at as far as uh the city annexing what i'll say is obviously this will be on the agenda later our community development director is going to give it over to the council and i'm sure we can answer some of the questions that you guys brought up with that being said please know that we do not make these kind of decisions when it comes to annexations in a vacuum you heard a good presentation earlier with our new comprehensive plan the city also has an existing strategic plan we adopted in 2022 and it specifically outlines annexing kind of donut holes or areas we've encompassed within town so just want to share that with you kind of at the gate as a response to your public comment obviously we'll talk more here in new business and there'll be more discussion at that time just want to share that information and thank you for being here this evening to express your concerns with that being said can i have kimberly corn our parks and rec director come up and talk a little bit about some of the parks and rec programming coming up in the city

your statement members of the council have a couple programs to highlight last time at the last meeting i talked about having a movie night but due to the heat advisory that was that night we decided to move it this thursday is the reschedule date at woodland park we will be showing um inside out too the weather looks fantastic a high of 84 and a low of 66 so it should be a beautiful night um for a movie in woodland park And then I just wanted to remind you that the adult volleyball program is available on a drop-in basis, Monday nights at DIS. And then this is a signal that fall is coming. Tunes at Bloom will start next week. We get a special treat this year in that September has five Wednesdays. So we will be having five uptown concerts at the Bloom House starting next Wednesday. Concerts will run from 6 to 8 p.m. And they're all free to the public.

Thank you. Mayor, that's all we have for staff comment this evening.

Next item.

Next is the consent agenda. Item 1, motion to approve payment of bills for the period ending August 14, 2026 in the amount of $2,446,362.39. Item number 2, motion to approve payroll for the period ending July 31, 2026 in the amount of $903,640.73. Item three, motion to approve minutes of the August 11th, 2026 council meeting. Item number four, ordinance regarding the disclosure of closed session meeting minutes for the first half of 2026. And item number five is a resolution reporting members to the community appearance board, Jones, Brown, and Zika.

Is there any items that anyone would like to remove from the consent agenda to vote on separately? Hearing none, a motion to approve. So moved. Second. Motion by Furman, seconded by Seaton. Roll call.

Seaton? Yes. Houseman? Yes. Furman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen? Yes. Next, under new business, item one is an ordinance increasing the 2026 expenditure budget in the motor fuel tax fund and the water sewer fund.

Presentation begin. Finance Director Tim Landau.

Thank you, good evening mayor and city council members. Before you this evening is an ordinance increasing the 2026 expenditure budget in the motor fuel tax fund and rebalancing budgets in the water sewer fund to cover expenditure line items. Specifically, this ordinance has three appropriations. The first two appropriations increase expenditure budgets in the motor fuel tax fund to complete the following two projects. It's two infrastructure projects. One, Clay Street Reconstruction from 2017 will be detailed a little more later in the presentation by our Director of Public Works. And the other is a project on South Clinton from 2014. The first is for $291,052.43 and the second is for $11,015.46. The third appropriation with this ordinance transfers $16,000 out of the sludge disposal line into the fuel line for a zero net transfer in the water sewer fund. This ordinance appropriates a total of $302,000. Got out of the way. Open my skis. $67.89. These expenditures are consistent with the operational objectives of the Department of Public Works. Staff is recommending approval of this ordinance, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Tim? Being none, motion to approve. So moved. Second. Motion by Seaton, second by Housman. Roll call.

Seaton. Yes. Housman. Yes. Furman. Yes. Green. Yes. Stamen.

Yes. Next item.

Item number two is an ordinance approving and authorizing the execution of an annexation boundary agreement between the city of Collinsville and the village of Maryville.

The presentation will be given by City Manager Derek Jackson.

Thank you, Mayor. Members of the Council, I'm pleased to present this to you. I think this will probably be our first action item on the recently adopted 2045 Comprehensive Plan. What this ordinance is before you this evening is looking to establish a new annexation boundary agreement with our friends in North and the Village of Maryville. As you know, Mayor White was sworn in as the new mayor in 2025. I had good dialogue with his crew, Tanya Flannery is the village administrator. They met with the city shortly after they took their respective post. We discussed the need that we actually have an annexation agreement that has been expired. It was originally created in 1995 and it was effective until 2015 when it did expire. So we had several meetings with the village that included staff from their public works department, staff from our community development department, public works department, the mayor and I and Jessica, and we basically came up with a mutual area in which we'd like to reestablish that line. As Kristen pointed out earlier in the comprehensive plan, it's good for communities, especially that are this close to each other and in some ways adjoining, to have this to give certainty to future development for the property owners that kind of live on each side of the line. for developers that live on, or they're exploring developing certain properties on each side of the line. So it's very healthy and pretty standard to have these in place. The terms of this proposed agreement is 20 years, and with that, there's an automatic five-year renewal, unless either municipality reaches out in advance to discuss changing it. So what we want to point out is this, what this agreement does not do is require any annexations of any of the properties that are currently unincorporated between the village and the, City of Collinsville, so I'm about to show the map here There was one small change we had from the previous edition really a lot of it was as is But we'll focus in on the one area based on some historical digging that the village and city did Related to it. So here you see the aerial map what the green line is this is essentially what we're looking to reestablish the boundary agreement and between the community. So the areas you see highlighted in red, those are properties that are currently annexed into the Village of Maryville. The property you see in purple are currently annexed into the City of Collinsville's corporate limits. And everything that doesn't have a color, it's kind of that aerial map, is currently unincorporated. So this is very consistent with where the line was in 1995. Here is, I guess I would kind of point out some, you can see Vandalia Road, 159 over here. This is West Country Lane. It kind of follows the northern part of some of the existing development up there. It goes up Keibler Road and then to Sugarloaf and above the Sugarloaf area, eventually out to 157. So the village and city were good with this line. Here is a version of the street map, kind of a little bit more clear. Again, the areas in white are currently unincorporated. The loan change we really had to this agreement, because we felt like based on discussing with the village where their utilities are at, where the city's utilities are, we were really comfortable. They did a good job in 1995. The one correction area I would bring to your attention or modification is what a lot of people know as the old Sharkies down on that southeast quadrant of 159 and Vandalia. That originally in the 1995 agreement appeared to be on the city of Collinsville side of the annexation line. However, after doing some digging with the village, they were digging through their basement and looking for the records. They did actually annex that. subject property in 1987. So we kind of chalked that up as the technology at the time. It appeared it was on our side, but obviously the Village annexed it prior to the 1995 agreement. So either I'm gonna correct that, it's been in the Village for many years now. That's currently the home of the, there's a CrossFit over there. I think Hartman has a rental, a realtor office as well as budget blinds. So we're not looking to obviously change where the corporate boundaries are. That is the one change from this. council two this is another item that you're aware of uh there was a correction with the legal description from the original one that was posted uh we wanted to make sure that this is the idot along interstate 255 here this is the excuse me the illinois state police way station there was a discrepancy that maryville caught thankfully before we got to the boat this evening to correct the legal description so that has been since updated we have that corrected which is exhibit three of the agreement So with all that being said, we're excited to get this done. I know that the village was great to work with. Mayor White plans on up-leaf routing this to the village board's next available meeting here sometime, if not this month, early September, pending any changes that their board might have. Our recommendation is approval of the boundary agreement as you see it, and I'd be more than happy to address any questions the council might have.

Any questions or comments for Derek? We don't need a motion. Okay, no questions. Motion to approve. So moved. Second. Motion by Green, second by Houseman. Roll call.

Seton? Yes. Houseman? Yes. Furman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen?

Yes.

Thank you.

Item number three is ordinance annexing property located adjacent and continuous to the City of Collinsville, various parcels along McDonald Lake Road and North Bluff Road.

A presentation given by Community Development Director Travis Taylor.

Thank you, Mayor and members of council. This may look familiar to you. We considered annexation of several of what we call donut holes within the community last year. As a result of that effort, we did table a myriad of different properties that were eligible for annexation. The Piscaro properties here in question were one that was tabled at that time. We are looking to bring this back up, mainly due to some recent activity on site. This is completely surrounded by the city limits of Collinsville. The area in total is less than 60 acres. Tonight I'm gonna talk a little bit about Illinois State statute, what allows us to annex the property, how this property qualifies and what we did in terms of notice and and procedure so the property in question is 1102 mcdonald lake road it is across from the dayton freight site and we are proposing to annex four parcels that are completely surrounded by colinville city limits So this map provides a little bit better context with a small caveat that I'll outline here in just a moment. These are the four parcels in question, all owned by the Pascaro family, different entities within that group. The blue here you see is the Collinsville city limits, and then the subject property is kind of highlighted in red there. The area not shaded is unincorporated Madison County. And the one caveat that I'll note is this map here is pulled from the Madison County GIS. Their property boundaries lines do seem to be a little bit off as these are actually, our property, our city limits is extending across McDonald Lake Road and that was completed when we annexed property due to the Dayton Freight development. I'll note that here in just a moment. So by Illinois state statute, we are allowed to annex wholly surrounded properties within to the city of Collinsville as long as we, again, surround those properties wholly. And they have to be less than 60 acres. The subject territory here totals approximately 37.09 across all four parcels. It is a mere it is a mix of agricultural and business property There have been there was a note this this evening and I thank you for the comments to the residents That there were questions about what would happen with those businesses the business the agriculture all would remain as is and they are able to continue their operations as they would be if this was approved tonight and As they continue tonight, they would be able to continue those operations without any perceivable change to their business operations. Territory must be wholly bounded by municipal city limits. We noted that, highlighting the triggering factor here that made that property wholly bounded by Collinsville city limits was the Dayton Freight annexation. We did that in two rounds, via ordinance in 22 and via ordinance in 24. In 22, we annexed the most of the Dayton Freight property, but at that time, they did not own the Cobb property, which was the residential parcel in the middle of the Dayton Freight property, which you can see around about here. So they did not have that or own that at that time. So in 22, we annexed all of Dayton Freight but the Cobb property. In 24, they obtained ownership, they revised their plans, and they annexed the Cobb property. As is practice and as is allowed by state statute, when we annex property, we also annex all the right-of-way adjacent to that property. And I double-checked both of these plats, and both of those were recorded and annexed with all of the right-of-way of McDonnell Lake Road, which then extends across to the Pescara properties, wholly bounding the Pescara property by consular state buildings. As required by state statute, we provided notice to the impacted taxpayers of all four parcels at least 15 days prior. We sent this via certified mail on August 7th. We also provided notice with the newspaper of general circulation. We published that in the Troy Times Tribune on August 13th, and we provided notice to some impacted jurisdictions. This is a high-level summary of the work that staff did to make sure that we were following the state statute to the letter. As was referenced this evening and as the council received, we did receive a notice of opposition from the owners. I also received a phone call in opposition to the annexation. We believe this serving as a hopefully an answer to that letter is how we complied with the notices outlined in state statute. We do this in conjunction with the city clerk's office and with our public works department. And so we appreciate them for their work on this annexation tonight. And I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

Any questions or comments for Travis?

So just two questions. Do we maintain the roads that are surrounding this property that they would be using for accessing the property?

We do.

And then are they, with them being currently not in the city limits, does our fire and our police respond to anything that would happen?

Not being not in city limits currently, they are served by the Collinsville Fire District. So they are served by Collinsville Fire, but not in city limits. They are not served by Collinsville Police. Once they are annexed, they would be served by the Collinsville Police Department.

And I have long been a supporter of annexing these poppet areas in town, particularly when, I use an example from the last time, when you're pulling out onto a city street and you have those city services. I do know from the letter we had, there were some things that happened in the past that We didn't go the best, but I think this area is growing, and I think it's important to have as part of it, whether they change anything in the property or not, but understood that most of this farmland down there that's been sold, Dayton Freight, west of there, has been sold by the farmers that farm that property. So I don't look at it as a city just grabbing up the land. Everything that's been sold on it has been sold by somebody that's farmed on it. So I think the benefits outweigh any negative.

So I'll be supporting it.

Any other questions or comments?

The benefits to them would be Collinsville Police. Correct.

Correct.

And then the ability to tap into sewer water.

Correct. That is available on McDonald Lake Road now.

So maybe not of interest to them now, but maybe down the road.

Correct. If the way that Collinsville regulations and county regulations are worded is even today as we stand here, if they weren't annexed, if any of their systems should fail, their water or sewer systems should fail, they would potentially be required to tap on to our services and would be annexed at that time.

And then other implications, I know taxes, I think people always talk about the taxes, so they would be paying city taxes, but we already know those are some of the lowest in the area, so there would be a wash somewhere against that.

They're not realizing the full benefit that we find with some of our residential properties, well, even our commercial properties, because they are not currently tapped onto city water or city sewer. What we see is that upon annexation, their Collinsville Fire District tax will fall off because Collinsville Fire taxing is absolved into the city tax when you're in city limits. So the Collinsville fire tax will fall off and then the Collinsville city limits property tax will come on. That is going to be a little bit higher. We see some properties realize savings in their in-city versus out-of-city water rates. Since they're not currently tabbed, they would not realize those savings.

Any other comments or questions? Motion to approve.

So moved. Second.

Motion by Seaton, second by Houseman. Roll call.

Seaton?

Yes.

Houseman? Yes. Berman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen?

Yes. Thank you.

Item number four is a resolution to appropriate MFT funds in the amount of $291,052.43 for Clay Street Streetscape Project.

The presentation will be given by Public Works Director Troy Turner.

Thank you, Mayor and members of the Council. This is a project on Clay Street. I'm sure most of you are familiar with it. It was completed back in 2017. IDOT has officially closed out the project and they sent us the final bill. And so we're appropriating money so that we can pay the bill with MFT. Unlike Clinton, Clinton was appropriated MFT money up front for payment. This was originally in the TIF district, but the TIF has run out, so we're appropriating MFT money to pay our portion of the construction costs. Just as a side note, we do have an agreement with Madison County, and they will be reimbursing us for the full amount that we are paying IDOT for this bill. this portion of the project if there's any questions i'd be happy to answer does it always take nine years for i'd have to close out a project so i was told that they had accountants retire and as they were retiring they weren't replacing them but they have since started replacing their accountants and the projects are starting to close out a lot sooner now it's it's usually within four or five years of it closing out now of the project being done

Didn't we have one that was 16 years recent?

Yeah, let's see. We've also had Eastport that finished in 2020, and we've already been billed out for that one, and same for the Fairmont Avenue Bridge. That one's completed now.

Any other questions or comments?

A motion to approve? So moved.

Second. Motion by Furman, second by Housman. Roll call.

Seton? Yes. Houseman? Yes. Furman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen?

Yes. Thank you. I have a motion to go into closed session to discuss in accordance with five ILCS 120-2C. Number five, the purchase or lease of real property. Number six, the selling of a price of sale lease of property. And 11, pending or threatened or imminent litigation. Motion?

So moved.

Second. Motion by Seaton, seconded by Houseman. Roll call.

Seaton? Yes. Houseman? Yes. Furman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen?

Yes.

Last is adjournment.

I have a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Second. Motion by Green, seconded by Furman. Roll call.

Seaton? Yes. Houseman? Yes. Furman? Yes. Green? Yes. Stamen?

Yes. This is a council meeting for... August 20th.