Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always uncertainty. Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), thre is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans—-that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one’s favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and materials assistance, which no man could have dreamt would come his way. —-Scottish expedition, Mt. Everest
I have lived in Lombard all my life (all except 6 years spent in Chicago). My family lives here, my friends live here. I bought a home here almost 6 years ago. I am raising my children here. The first movie at the DuPage Theatre that I remember was ET because we had to wait in a line that wrapped around the building. Santa came there every Christmas. There were many other free shows for kids that my parents took me to as well. My friends and I went there almost every weekend during our high school years. It was cheap, and somewhere we could walk to where our parents knew we would be. I remember seeing the Star Wars, Nightmare on Elm Street and Purple Rain, among many others. My husband and I had our first date there—-Basic Instinct (not the best first date movie, but the smooching seats in the back row were great!) I could go on, but I hope this “qualifies” me as someone who has the right to speak out in favor of theatre restoration.
And just another quick note. If I look at the above posts it’s clear, the Friends have only been together TWO (3 in October) years—-not six. That’s an important part of the story…
People opposed to the DuPage Theatre’s restoration like to hide behind their aliases. They like to throw out arbitrary numbers that they don’t followup with proof. $500,000? We’d all like to see those receipts and documents. People like Challenger like to perpetuate misleading information. Taxes scare people, that’s why he likes to talk about them. The truth is the funding on this project balances out. Why have a TIF district—-and the DuPage Theatre is in an existing TIF district—-if you don’t want to benefit from it? The DuPage Theatre project is a great example of how to use TIF—-it’s a private/public venture to benefit the community. Because of this correct use of TIF, this project will not raise property taxes. The RSC plan has been put together in the light of day for all to see.
The Friends have worked hard over the years to save the theatre. Money has been raised—-lots of it. Many more pledges have been promised. People have volunteered to take care of the property—-as melders inquired. People have volunteered their labor and other efforts toward restoration. But that momentum has ground to a halt because of the resolution to destroy this historic landmark. From the beginning, we’ve only wanted to do one thing—-SAVE THE DUPAGE THEATRE! That meant we did everything our Village asked us to do in our role of grassroots citizen’s group. It hasn’t been easy, but nothing important is. And we still believe we have a chance to save this beautiful building for the future.
If you would like to discuss this one-on-one, I’d be happy to. Just email me at Again, this site is for those who wish to find solutions for preservation, not excuses for demolition.
And actually, I just broke my own rule and engaged Challenger. What I really wanted to do was let Dupe Neighbor know that we do care about the 5/4 story issue. It’s just that the plan was never allowed to progress that far. The TIF is not dead, and the TIF district as it now stands won’t expire until 2007, which gives us plenty of time to get it through Springfield. And I believe Senator Cronin will get it done as he’s said numerous times he would. At the end of the day, I’m probably not going to convince Dupe Neighbor or anyone else opposed to the plan at hand that the DuPage Theatre is worth saving. But as far as wanting to “keep it no matter what the costs or drastic changes it may make to our town,” remember that there is no “publicly-revealed” plan for the site once the theatre is gone. To me, that’s much more dangerous to this town than adaptively reusing this theatre.
Challenger, glad to see you’re off your site and on one that believes in historic preservation. You like to perpetuate untruths on your site, two in particular: that there are only 60 friends, and that we only have $1200 in the bank. Both claims are false. The Friends are not the Foundation. The Foundation has $1200 in the bank. The Friends are more than 60 people. And even if there were only 60, I bet there are more Friends than people in your group—-21 that we know of for sure, that signed a “petition” to the board sanctioning demolition. Why bother coming to this site, Challenger? You’re not adding anything constructive to the debate as far as I can see. But thank you for your interest.
I’m sorry, Dupe Neighbor, but I need to respectfully disagree with your scenario of the situation. The only code variances currently on this plan deal with five stories instead of four on the condo height. The biggest problem is that the demolition vote came before the rest of the negotiations could be completed. The developer worked with the Village to accomodate all of their requests to that point—-including the setback, which is now 30-ft. off the back of the property line. Talks ended with Village staff stating that there was no funding gap to the plan, meaning it would pay for the restoration in total. And the plan DOES NOT say that the taxpayers will pay for any cost overruns over 12%. The contingency fund has an provision that will cover any unforeseen problems. The developer knows the extent of the needs of restoring the theatre. He has done his homework thoroughly on the property.
People against this plan keep worrying about cost overruns. As I too live in Lombard, cost overruns concern me as well. But let’s look at who came up with the figures—-Daniel P. Coffey, the preeminent architect in theatre restoration. Coffey has done extensive testing on the building. I myself am confident that he knows what he’s talking about, having listened to his presentation twice and asking the questions I needed answered. The problem we face with concerned people like Dupe Neighbor is that they don’t have all the facts (although it’s not their fault, either). It just continually leads to misunderstanding. But I have challenged others to have an expert of Coffey’s caliber dispute his claims. Recently, Coffey restored the Oriental Theatre in Chicago. That theatre is the “big sister” to the DuPage, as it was also built by Rapp & Rapp in the same time period. I just went to the Oriental to see “Wicked” and thought, wow—-we could have this in our town.
This has obviously been 6 years of bad feelings between two groups of people with different mindsets. It is true that if the referendum had been worded legally, we would have supported it. We would even welcome a referendum now, if we thought it would do any good—-but a referendum is advisory, and the Village Board could ignore any effort put toward one, anyway. We’ve never been worried about letting the people of Lombard decide. In fact, that’s the way it should be.
I, for one, will not stop fighting to save this theatre.
Regarding the Tribune article. We never acknowledged that we had no legal recourse. We acknowledged that if the Village Board rejects the state and federal grants of $1.3 million, that the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency can only act as an advocate for the DuPage Theatre. My own quote, clearly taken out of context, meant to convey that.
Don’t give up hope. We’re fighting the good fight. And we’d like to thank all on this site for your words of support.
Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always uncertainty. Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), thre is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans—-that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one’s favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and materials assistance, which no man could have dreamt would come his way. —-Scottish expedition, Mt. Everest
I have lived in Lombard all my life (all except 6 years spent in Chicago). My family lives here, my friends live here. I bought a home here almost 6 years ago. I am raising my children here. The first movie at the DuPage Theatre that I remember was ET because we had to wait in a line that wrapped around the building. Santa came there every Christmas. There were many other free shows for kids that my parents took me to as well. My friends and I went there almost every weekend during our high school years. It was cheap, and somewhere we could walk to where our parents knew we would be. I remember seeing the Star Wars, Nightmare on Elm Street and Purple Rain, among many others. My husband and I had our first date there—-Basic Instinct (not the best first date movie, but the smooching seats in the back row were great!) I could go on, but I hope this “qualifies” me as someone who has the right to speak out in favor of theatre restoration.
And just another quick note. If I look at the above posts it’s clear, the Friends have only been together TWO (3 in October) years—-not six. That’s an important part of the story…
People opposed to the DuPage Theatre’s restoration like to hide behind their aliases. They like to throw out arbitrary numbers that they don’t followup with proof. $500,000? We’d all like to see those receipts and documents. People like Challenger like to perpetuate misleading information. Taxes scare people, that’s why he likes to talk about them. The truth is the funding on this project balances out. Why have a TIF district—-and the DuPage Theatre is in an existing TIF district—-if you don’t want to benefit from it? The DuPage Theatre project is a great example of how to use TIF—-it’s a private/public venture to benefit the community. Because of this correct use of TIF, this project will not raise property taxes. The RSC plan has been put together in the light of day for all to see.
The Friends have worked hard over the years to save the theatre. Money has been raised—-lots of it. Many more pledges have been promised. People have volunteered to take care of the property—-as melders inquired. People have volunteered their labor and other efforts toward restoration. But that momentum has ground to a halt because of the resolution to destroy this historic landmark. From the beginning, we’ve only wanted to do one thing—-SAVE THE DUPAGE THEATRE! That meant we did everything our Village asked us to do in our role of grassroots citizen’s group. It hasn’t been easy, but nothing important is. And we still believe we have a chance to save this beautiful building for the future.
Dupe Neighbor,
If you would like to discuss this one-on-one, I’d be happy to. Just email me at Again, this site is for those who wish to find solutions for preservation, not excuses for demolition.
Regards,
Deb
And actually, I just broke my own rule and engaged Challenger. What I really wanted to do was let Dupe Neighbor know that we do care about the 5/4 story issue. It’s just that the plan was never allowed to progress that far. The TIF is not dead, and the TIF district as it now stands won’t expire until 2007, which gives us plenty of time to get it through Springfield. And I believe Senator Cronin will get it done as he’s said numerous times he would. At the end of the day, I’m probably not going to convince Dupe Neighbor or anyone else opposed to the plan at hand that the DuPage Theatre is worth saving. But as far as wanting to “keep it no matter what the costs or drastic changes it may make to our town,” remember that there is no “publicly-revealed” plan for the site once the theatre is gone. To me, that’s much more dangerous to this town than adaptively reusing this theatre.
Challenger, glad to see you’re off your site and on one that believes in historic preservation. You like to perpetuate untruths on your site, two in particular: that there are only 60 friends, and that we only have $1200 in the bank. Both claims are false. The Friends are not the Foundation. The Foundation has $1200 in the bank. The Friends are more than 60 people. And even if there were only 60, I bet there are more Friends than people in your group—-21 that we know of for sure, that signed a “petition” to the board sanctioning demolition. Why bother coming to this site, Challenger? You’re not adding anything constructive to the debate as far as I can see. But thank you for your interest.
I’m sorry, Dupe Neighbor, but I need to respectfully disagree with your scenario of the situation. The only code variances currently on this plan deal with five stories instead of four on the condo height. The biggest problem is that the demolition vote came before the rest of the negotiations could be completed. The developer worked with the Village to accomodate all of their requests to that point—-including the setback, which is now 30-ft. off the back of the property line. Talks ended with Village staff stating that there was no funding gap to the plan, meaning it would pay for the restoration in total. And the plan DOES NOT say that the taxpayers will pay for any cost overruns over 12%. The contingency fund has an provision that will cover any unforeseen problems. The developer knows the extent of the needs of restoring the theatre. He has done his homework thoroughly on the property.
People against this plan keep worrying about cost overruns. As I too live in Lombard, cost overruns concern me as well. But let’s look at who came up with the figures—-Daniel P. Coffey, the preeminent architect in theatre restoration. Coffey has done extensive testing on the building. I myself am confident that he knows what he’s talking about, having listened to his presentation twice and asking the questions I needed answered. The problem we face with concerned people like Dupe Neighbor is that they don’t have all the facts (although it’s not their fault, either). It just continually leads to misunderstanding. But I have challenged others to have an expert of Coffey’s caliber dispute his claims. Recently, Coffey restored the Oriental Theatre in Chicago. That theatre is the “big sister” to the DuPage, as it was also built by Rapp & Rapp in the same time period. I just went to the Oriental to see “Wicked” and thought, wow—-we could have this in our town.
This has obviously been 6 years of bad feelings between two groups of people with different mindsets. It is true that if the referendum had been worded legally, we would have supported it. We would even welcome a referendum now, if we thought it would do any good—-but a referendum is advisory, and the Village Board could ignore any effort put toward one, anyway. We’ve never been worried about letting the people of Lombard decide. In fact, that’s the way it should be.
I, for one, will not stop fighting to save this theatre.
Here is a more positive article from the Daily Herald:
View link
Regarding the Tribune article. We never acknowledged that we had no legal recourse. We acknowledged that if the Village Board rejects the state and federal grants of $1.3 million, that the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency can only act as an advocate for the DuPage Theatre. My own quote, clearly taken out of context, meant to convey that.
Don’t give up hope. We’re fighting the good fight. And we’d like to thank all on this site for your words of support.