Will the Friends have the sense to abandon this condo plan and start lobbying for a way to save the theater and incorporate it into a much needed new library on the site? They better hurry..
Who’s Marissa? Methinks someone’s been reading the village voice..eh Jules?
Yes, the library will raise property taxes and it may be a hard sell – but unlike your plan, Lombardians will collectively decide and I’m ready to live with the outcome.
If you read up on the library’s website about why the last referendum failed you may see things differently. I think it can and will pass. If not, I won’t be sour grapes but I will still fight to see that we all get a say on how the “gift” is used. Especially if it is to exceed codes.
What about my comment about keeping the library and the theater or a portion of it? Can you see past this RSC plan or not?
We’re glad YOU feel it’s worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what’s best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?
You still don’t get it and you never will.
Don’t be too sure about the library – I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way – the voters will decide… which is the way it should be!
We’re glad YOU feel it’s worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what’s best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?
You still don’t get it and you never will.
Don’t be too sure about the library – I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way – the voters will decide… which is the way it should be!
We’re glad YOU feel it’s worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what’s best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?
You still don’t get it and you never will.
Don’t be too sure about the library – I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way – the voters will decide… which is the way it should be!
What are you waiting for? The “opportunity” will not “come forth”, you needed to initiate it! You should have done that months ago. That property belongs to the village (ALL of us) and any use of the land, especially a use that requires millions of our TIF dollars and a code exceeding condo building should have put to the people long ago.
If the details of this particular redevelopment plan are spelled out for voters – I don’t think it will pass. There is a big difference between signing a petition to save the theatre and authorizing the use of millions of our TIF dollars to restore it. Not to mention the risks involved to the taxpayers of this town if the restoration goes over budget or if the theatre does not financially succeed.
There is really only one way to know for sure – referendum!
Melders- They did just that. The Friends ran out of time at the end of 2004 when the deadline that had been set had passed them by – way short of the funds they had agreed to raise.
Deb, Finding “solutions for preservation” sometimes includes answering the tough questions. Mine haven’t been answered. I logged on to this website because I feel some key facts about the theatre and the many years of preservation efforts have been left out. I want these readers to know that there are good arguments to be made on both sides of this issue and the village board had reasons for it’s actions. I think you want to paint a much different picture. I know you want to portray me as someone looking for an “excuse to demolish”. I think my prior posts will prove that is not true.
Unfortunately, we’ll never agree, but I will continue to post when I feel the whole story is not being told.
Deb- Your answer is what has troubled me about your group for awhile now. Why would you hint that the board has a plan that is not “publicly revealed”. Just because the vote didn’t go your way doesn’t mean our elected officials are on the take! These veiled threats about the dangers the town faces if we don’t restore the theatre hold no water. That’s another scare tactic that aggravates people like me. I’m not sure I would call this “fighting the good fight”.
As far as the TIF – you know that this project won’t proceed without that extension. 2007 will not help you get that building restored. To assume that anything is “in the bag” when it comes to State of Illinois legislature is not realistic.
I have nothing to say about Challenger’s response – we know there are more than 60 friends and you know there are more than 21 that are questioning your plan! That petition was mostly neighboring residents. They have a right to be heard just as you were at the podium last week.
I agree on one issue – we’ll never change each other’s mind necessarily. I only wish the voters could have decided – then we wouldn’t be arguing over who has more supporters, we would know…
Deb- Five stories instead if four is a VERY big deal to the neighboring residents of that plan and shouldn’t be treated lightly by the developer or your group. If it was in your backyard – you may have a slightly different perspective (no pun intended). I realize you all feel the vote to demolish was premature. I don’t agree. The funding for the whole plan was reliant on the state extending the TIF period. The board even authorized a lobbbyist to go to Springfield to help push it through before the end of session. That never happened. Our senator didn’t sign off since “their wasn’t a solid voice behind the plan” Now he is making statements saying he will work to get the extension signed by next spring. That’s a long time and this plan is not funded without that extension signed. That’s another year of lost tax revenue and deterioration of the building. The plan had a lot of problems, but that extension was crucial to even getting started and it didn’t get done. I think the board has been more than patient with restoration efforts. If not, that theatre may have been down 5 years ago.
I do have concerns about the cost overruns. You didn’t mention who pays for this “contingency” fund maybe you can enlighten us? I don’t believe I am misinformed about anything. I heard Mr. Coffey speak about his entire plan and I don’t feel my concerns were addressed about financing at all. I still want to know why he won’t renovate for a fixed price instead of having a “contingency plan” if he’s so sure he will come in at budget?
The referendum was your best shot. I don’t think it would have passed though and I think that is why it was never initiated. This plan should have been on a ballot long before June 2 and then you would have been sitting pretty.
I don’t know how long you’ve lived in Lombard but I’ve lived here since 1972 and I can assure you I’ve been to the Dupe more times than I can count. I remember good times there, but I also remember bad ones. The years it was closed off and on because the owner could never make ends meet. The horrible condition it got into because the same owner couldn’t keep it up to code. It makes me sad now to see bricks crumbling off of it and braces holding up the walls. I don’t believe it’s worth the millions to restore it for cultural arts but if the voters decided it was, I would have supported it.
I know there have been bad feelings between certain people and I believe both sides have conducted themselves poorly at times. There are some people against renovation because the theatre has been a thorn in their side for so many years they just want it gone and then there are those that want to keep it no matter what the costs or drastic changes it may make to our town. I have always said that the Friends of the Dupe have worked hard and their hearts are in the right place. Do I think a majority of voters would have seen this theatre as beneficial enough to spend that many millions of TIF dollars? No.
We’ll have to agree to disagree and see what the future holds. It sure has been a long road for those of us who have lived here awhile and I will be happy when it isn’t the main topic of conversation around here anymore. I wonder what we will do?
Thanks for your kind words Dave – I feel the same way. Any time we lose a historical building it’s sad. I remember hot summer nights when we walked to see so many movies there but the past owner really let it go. He hated the village board and never kept it up to code. The structure is literally crumbling before our eyes. These theaters really fell victim to the modern multi-plexes. It’s so hard when these things happen. I too wish we had a multimillion dollar benefactor. I don’t think their would have been a single soul in Lombard that wouldn’t have jumped for joy.
Not only am I in favor of them restoring and reusing the marquee/facade on whatever goes there but also salvaging the other items inside that may still be intact i.e. the ticket booth, light fixtures etc. The town of Geneva, IL did that and you still walk in the old theatre entrance but inside is retail not a theater and they use the marquee for community events. I think it was a great idea.
Another reason for putting the use of this property on a ballot is because it was “gifted” to the village 6 years ago. Not to the Friends of the theatre but the entire village. That’s a good enough reason for a referendum in my opinion. Then we would all have to live with what the majority decides and move on.
FYI – I don’t support the before mentioned convention center either. All these things put our over-taxed residents at risk.
Melders- For a lot of residents it’s more than the height, there are other code variances that will be detrimental to neighbors but also the financing is a huge issue, more than the TIF dollars. Instead of renovating the theater for a fixed price, their plan says if restoration goes over budget by more than 12%, we the taxpayers will have to cover it. To a lot of folks that’s unacceptable, TIF is one thing but we don’t want to be left opened to overruns as well. It’s a bad plan – the building is giant and will encroah on neighbors, the financing is very shaky. The village board’s job is to protect it’s residents and that’s exactly what they’re doing. If there was a better way to develop this property, it would have surfaced in 6 years of waiting. The only way to cover massive restoration costs is to attach a massive structure as they had planned to. There are so many other problems, I could go on and on. Will these “luxury” condos sell? If you knew Lombard you’d know many of our new condos are empty and 2 new buildings are in construction in close proximity. Phase 2 of their restoration of the theatre relies on their new condos being sold. What if they don’t? Will the proposed use of the theatre as a cultural arts venue be booked regularly? I did some research on neighboring towns with these types of arts centers and they often sit empty for a month or 2 at a time. The way this plan is drawn up, that too will end up being a burden to the village. There are a lot of risks for our residents, the question is how much is too much? You must look at the bigger picture and what is best for our entire town. I’ve always felt that any use of this property should also be on a referendum for voters to decide. The preservation group never initiated that and did fight an effort to put a theatre issue on a ballot years ago. They claim they didn’t like the way it was worded, my answer is why, since then , have they not initiated another one? Even this plan? Then the majority could decide? I think the only answer must be that they don’t feel they have the votes. Now it’s too late because it won’t be on a ballot until a year from November and that will be too late for this particular plan.
Finally, you mentioned we may get a “big box store” or something similar. That is a scare tactic often used by the theatre supporters in our town. My answer is this. The board has proven they are not going to put anything too big for the parcel there. Also – we are desperately in need of a new library in our town. There is a group of residents who will lobby for that site to be used as such, perhaps with some retail attached. Now the library itself will not be a tax generating entity but the costs of construction will go down millions because we already own the land. Also – unlike the theatre, it will definitely go to a referendum and the people will decide. The library tried years ago to devise a way in which they could renovate the theatre and incorporate it into their new library – unfortunately, the theatre costs too many millions to restore, not feasible. The theatre group will say that the voters already voted down a multi million dollar renovation of our current library why would they support this? Well the library polled voters after their referendum failed. Most answered they didn’t like the fact that millions would have to be spent on a temporary facilty while renovation took place. That would be alleviated by building a new library at a different site.
It comes down to this – if supporters think this plan will be so beneficial to Lombard why didn’t they put it on a ballot? I think even naysayers like me would have been happy just knowing that it was the majority of residents that made the decision, not just preservation group and their developer. Fair enough?
Incidentally Mr. Fields – you should definitely speak to those who are NOT in favor of preserving the theater unless it can be with mostly private funds and within village building codes. I’ll be in touch. As far as gaining access to the building for your documentary, I wouldn’t count on it. The structure is in pretty bad shape. The preservation group’s own developer said it needed to be “stabilized”. The village even needed to remove a whole row of public parking spaces in the adjacent lot because of falling bricks and debris. I’m not sure they would let you in due to liability issues but you can try. It’s a shame that the previous owner neglected it for so many years and let it get that bad.
Melders- The theatre has been sitting vacant for 13 years. The last 6 years it has been owned by the village and they agreed to give those years to the preservation society to raise private funds. The only interested party was this current developer who has proposed not only using millions of our towns TIF dollars but attaching a huge condo building (5 stories) that would have needed to exceed many local building codes that are in place to protect neighboring homeowners. There are many in my town that are against this development plan. The developer won’t reduce the size (from 5 stories to 4 that are legal)because he won’t make enough money with 4 stories. We have nothing against the theatre being privately redeveloped per say but we won’t sacrifice our neighborhoods and downtown to save it either. Meanwhile all these years the village is losing tax revenue from this prime piece of property. Money that our schools desperately need. The village governement has been more than fair and they are supported by a number of residents.
Article from today’s Daily Herald.
Will the Friends have the sense to abandon this condo plan and start lobbying for a way to save the theater and incorporate it into a much needed new library on the site? They better hurry..
View link
Who’s Marissa? Methinks someone’s been reading the village voice..eh Jules?
Yes, the library will raise property taxes and it may be a hard sell – but unlike your plan, Lombardians will collectively decide and I’m ready to live with the outcome.
If you read up on the library’s website about why the last referendum failed you may see things differently. I think it can and will pass. If not, I won’t be sour grapes but I will still fight to see that we all get a say on how the “gift” is used. Especially if it is to exceed codes.
What about my comment about keeping the library and the theater or a portion of it? Can you see past this RSC plan or not?
We’re glad YOU feel it’s worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what’s best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?
You still don’t get it and you never will.
Don’t be too sure about the library – I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way – the voters will decide… which is the way it should be!
We’re glad YOU feel it’s worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what’s best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?
You still don’t get it and you never will.
Don’t be too sure about the library – I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way – the voters will decide… which is the way it should be!
We’re glad YOU feel it’s worth the risk. What about the rest of us? Is this one special interest group deciding what’s best for the heart of our downtown? Why not all the voters of Lombard deciding how to use the property we were gifted?
You still don’t get it and you never will.
Don’t be too sure about the library – I think it will garner much more support than you expect. Maybe they can even keep the theater or some of the historical fixtures of it to incorporate into the new library? Either way – the voters will decide… which is the way it should be!
What are you waiting for? The “opportunity” will not “come forth”, you needed to initiate it! You should have done that months ago. That property belongs to the village (ALL of us) and any use of the land, especially a use that requires millions of our TIF dollars and a code exceeding condo building should have put to the people long ago.
If the details of this particular redevelopment plan are spelled out for voters – I don’t think it will pass. There is a big difference between signing a petition to save the theatre and authorizing the use of millions of our TIF dollars to restore it. Not to mention the risks involved to the taxpayers of this town if the restoration goes over budget or if the theatre does not financially succeed.
There is really only one way to know for sure – referendum!
Melders- They did just that. The Friends ran out of time at the end of 2004 when the deadline that had been set had passed them by – way short of the funds they had agreed to raise.
Deb, Finding “solutions for preservation” sometimes includes answering the tough questions. Mine haven’t been answered. I logged on to this website because I feel some key facts about the theatre and the many years of preservation efforts have been left out. I want these readers to know that there are good arguments to be made on both sides of this issue and the village board had reasons for it’s actions. I think you want to paint a much different picture. I know you want to portray me as someone looking for an “excuse to demolish”. I think my prior posts will prove that is not true.
Unfortunately, we’ll never agree, but I will continue to post when I feel the whole story is not being told.
Regards, DN
Deb- Your answer is what has troubled me about your group for awhile now. Why would you hint that the board has a plan that is not “publicly revealed”. Just because the vote didn’t go your way doesn’t mean our elected officials are on the take! These veiled threats about the dangers the town faces if we don’t restore the theatre hold no water. That’s another scare tactic that aggravates people like me. I’m not sure I would call this “fighting the good fight”.
As far as the TIF – you know that this project won’t proceed without that extension. 2007 will not help you get that building restored. To assume that anything is “in the bag” when it comes to State of Illinois legislature is not realistic.
I have nothing to say about Challenger’s response – we know there are more than 60 friends and you know there are more than 21 that are questioning your plan! That petition was mostly neighboring residents. They have a right to be heard just as you were at the podium last week.
I agree on one issue – we’ll never change each other’s mind necessarily. I only wish the voters could have decided – then we wouldn’t be arguing over who has more supporters, we would know…
Deb- Five stories instead if four is a VERY big deal to the neighboring residents of that plan and shouldn’t be treated lightly by the developer or your group. If it was in your backyard – you may have a slightly different perspective (no pun intended). I realize you all feel the vote to demolish was premature. I don’t agree. The funding for the whole plan was reliant on the state extending the TIF period. The board even authorized a lobbbyist to go to Springfield to help push it through before the end of session. That never happened. Our senator didn’t sign off since “their wasn’t a solid voice behind the plan” Now he is making statements saying he will work to get the extension signed by next spring. That’s a long time and this plan is not funded without that extension signed. That’s another year of lost tax revenue and deterioration of the building. The plan had a lot of problems, but that extension was crucial to even getting started and it didn’t get done. I think the board has been more than patient with restoration efforts. If not, that theatre may have been down 5 years ago.
I do have concerns about the cost overruns. You didn’t mention who pays for this “contingency” fund maybe you can enlighten us? I don’t believe I am misinformed about anything. I heard Mr. Coffey speak about his entire plan and I don’t feel my concerns were addressed about financing at all. I still want to know why he won’t renovate for a fixed price instead of having a “contingency plan” if he’s so sure he will come in at budget?
The referendum was your best shot. I don’t think it would have passed though and I think that is why it was never initiated. This plan should have been on a ballot long before June 2 and then you would have been sitting pretty.
I don’t know how long you’ve lived in Lombard but I’ve lived here since 1972 and I can assure you I’ve been to the Dupe more times than I can count. I remember good times there, but I also remember bad ones. The years it was closed off and on because the owner could never make ends meet. The horrible condition it got into because the same owner couldn’t keep it up to code. It makes me sad now to see bricks crumbling off of it and braces holding up the walls. I don’t believe it’s worth the millions to restore it for cultural arts but if the voters decided it was, I would have supported it.
I know there have been bad feelings between certain people and I believe both sides have conducted themselves poorly at times. There are some people against renovation because the theatre has been a thorn in their side for so many years they just want it gone and then there are those that want to keep it no matter what the costs or drastic changes it may make to our town. I have always said that the Friends of the Dupe have worked hard and their hearts are in the right place. Do I think a majority of voters would have seen this theatre as beneficial enough to spend that many millions of TIF dollars? No.
We’ll have to agree to disagree and see what the future holds. It sure has been a long road for those of us who have lived here awhile and I will be happy when it isn’t the main topic of conversation around here anymore. I wonder what we will do?
Thanks for your kind words Dave – I feel the same way. Any time we lose a historical building it’s sad. I remember hot summer nights when we walked to see so many movies there but the past owner really let it go. He hated the village board and never kept it up to code. The structure is literally crumbling before our eyes. These theaters really fell victim to the modern multi-plexes. It’s so hard when these things happen. I too wish we had a multimillion dollar benefactor. I don’t think their would have been a single soul in Lombard that wouldn’t have jumped for joy.
Not only am I in favor of them restoring and reusing the marquee/facade on whatever goes there but also salvaging the other items inside that may still be intact i.e. the ticket booth, light fixtures etc. The town of Geneva, IL did that and you still walk in the old theatre entrance but inside is retail not a theater and they use the marquee for community events. I think it was a great idea.
Another reason for putting the use of this property on a ballot is because it was “gifted” to the village 6 years ago. Not to the Friends of the theatre but the entire village. That’s a good enough reason for a referendum in my opinion. Then we would all have to live with what the majority decides and move on.
FYI – I don’t support the before mentioned convention center either. All these things put our over-taxed residents at risk.
Melders- For a lot of residents it’s more than the height, there are other code variances that will be detrimental to neighbors but also the financing is a huge issue, more than the TIF dollars. Instead of renovating the theater for a fixed price, their plan says if restoration goes over budget by more than 12%, we the taxpayers will have to cover it. To a lot of folks that’s unacceptable, TIF is one thing but we don’t want to be left opened to overruns as well. It’s a bad plan – the building is giant and will encroah on neighbors, the financing is very shaky. The village board’s job is to protect it’s residents and that’s exactly what they’re doing. If there was a better way to develop this property, it would have surfaced in 6 years of waiting. The only way to cover massive restoration costs is to attach a massive structure as they had planned to. There are so many other problems, I could go on and on. Will these “luxury” condos sell? If you knew Lombard you’d know many of our new condos are empty and 2 new buildings are in construction in close proximity. Phase 2 of their restoration of the theatre relies on their new condos being sold. What if they don’t? Will the proposed use of the theatre as a cultural arts venue be booked regularly? I did some research on neighboring towns with these types of arts centers and they often sit empty for a month or 2 at a time. The way this plan is drawn up, that too will end up being a burden to the village. There are a lot of risks for our residents, the question is how much is too much? You must look at the bigger picture and what is best for our entire town. I’ve always felt that any use of this property should also be on a referendum for voters to decide. The preservation group never initiated that and did fight an effort to put a theatre issue on a ballot years ago. They claim they didn’t like the way it was worded, my answer is why, since then , have they not initiated another one? Even this plan? Then the majority could decide? I think the only answer must be that they don’t feel they have the votes. Now it’s too late because it won’t be on a ballot until a year from November and that will be too late for this particular plan.
Finally, you mentioned we may get a “big box store” or something similar. That is a scare tactic often used by the theatre supporters in our town. My answer is this. The board has proven they are not going to put anything too big for the parcel there. Also – we are desperately in need of a new library in our town. There is a group of residents who will lobby for that site to be used as such, perhaps with some retail attached. Now the library itself will not be a tax generating entity but the costs of construction will go down millions because we already own the land. Also – unlike the theatre, it will definitely go to a referendum and the people will decide. The library tried years ago to devise a way in which they could renovate the theatre and incorporate it into their new library – unfortunately, the theatre costs too many millions to restore, not feasible. The theatre group will say that the voters already voted down a multi million dollar renovation of our current library why would they support this? Well the library polled voters after their referendum failed. Most answered they didn’t like the fact that millions would have to be spent on a temporary facilty while renovation took place. That would be alleviated by building a new library at a different site.
It comes down to this – if supporters think this plan will be so beneficial to Lombard why didn’t they put it on a ballot? I think even naysayers like me would have been happy just knowing that it was the majority of residents that made the decision, not just preservation group and their developer. Fair enough?
Incidentally Mr. Fields – you should definitely speak to those who are NOT in favor of preserving the theater unless it can be with mostly private funds and within village building codes. I’ll be in touch. As far as gaining access to the building for your documentary, I wouldn’t count on it. The structure is in pretty bad shape. The preservation group’s own developer said it needed to be “stabilized”. The village even needed to remove a whole row of public parking spaces in the adjacent lot because of falling bricks and debris. I’m not sure they would let you in due to liability issues but you can try. It’s a shame that the previous owner neglected it for so many years and let it get that bad.
Melders- The theatre has been sitting vacant for 13 years. The last 6 years it has been owned by the village and they agreed to give those years to the preservation society to raise private funds. The only interested party was this current developer who has proposed not only using millions of our towns TIF dollars but attaching a huge condo building (5 stories) that would have needed to exceed many local building codes that are in place to protect neighboring homeowners. There are many in my town that are against this development plan. The developer won’t reduce the size (from 5 stories to 4 that are legal)because he won’t make enough money with 4 stories. We have nothing against the theatre being privately redeveloped per say but we won’t sacrifice our neighborhoods and downtown to save it either. Meanwhile all these years the village is losing tax revenue from this prime piece of property. Money that our schools desperately need. The village governement has been more than fair and they are supported by a number of residents.