DuPage Theater
109 S. Main Street,
Lombard,
IL
60148
109 S. Main Street,
Lombard,
IL
60148
14 people
favorited this theater
Showing 1,101 - 1,125 of 1,253 comments
Deb, when was the ‘friends’ last fundraiser? A long time ago? Why fundraise when the taxpayers will fund the project…I heard a friend once say.
The $500,000 figure was from the Village board, I am just repeating what they told the taxpayers.
I am NOT hiding behind my alias..many people know who I am. The only one have who have reported misleading information is the friends. 5000 friends, 1000 sign..Please, both figures highly inflated.
Come on Deb answer my questions. Quit hiding and changing subjects.
Deb, so as a taxpayer, lifelong area resident, and someone who was actually a patron of the theatre in to 70’s and 80’s I am NOT allowed to comment about the theatre? How long have you lived here yourself? What movies did you see there?
But let’s not forget the ad hoc committee and all the games played by the supporters for all these years that have amounted to nothing. Your odds of saving this decaying relic are next to none. You’d have a better chance winning the lotto than seeing this place restored before it is too late.
And TIF is to jumpstart development not fund nearly the entire project! And now “over the years” is only two going on three years?
The only misleading information comes from the local tabloid and the theatre supporters. The real story has been reported by the respectable local papers in their editorials that clearly stated it is time to move on. The real story has been heard by our village board and they have acted on behalf of the majority of residents and not the few remaining theatre zealots. It is a sad commentary that they continue this fight when it is so clearly over. Take this energy on to a real cause.
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.
I can’t really understand the opposition to a 5 story condo. That’s quite small as far as condos go, and the effect on neighbors is really pretty minimal. I should know, I live on a block of single family homes next to a block of condos.
There may be new successful buildings, but Ziggy is right, modern buildings are not built to last. Most of them are built with 30-50 year projected lifespans. The older building from the 1920s and before are practically built to last forever, when properly maintained.
Ziggy, how much have you donated to the theatre? You obviously don’t live in Lombard. My property taxes have gone up over 40% in 5 years. We are still shell-shocked from the last tax increase and our high school district is trying to pass a referendum. What we don’t need is a publicly financed theatre. All one has to do is scroll up to the top of this message board and look at the about the 3rd comment..the one telling us about fundraising efforts. That was over 2 years ago and all they have is $1200 in the bank. The reason for that is because there is a lack of support. The theatre is an eyesore and is crumbling as we speak.
The ‘friends’ fail to mention the the Village is already out over $500,000 on upkeep and maintanance. Also for safety reasons their is a construction fence that we are renting each month, agian more taxpayer dollars wasted. The fence is there because the building has become a safety hazard.
Your comment about demolition and redevelopment is quite inaccurate. There are many new successful buildings in our area.
I don’t understand this mania that Dupage residents have against using taxpayer funds to save this theatre. There isn’t a building project that ever takes place without the use of taxpayer funds. Whether it’s the purchase price, or tax breaks, or some incentive to get a developer moving, they all do it. So what’s the problem here? As far as the efforts on the parts of the “Friends”, there’s not a whole lot they can do unless they own the theatre or have the owner’s permission.
When Buffalo (a city that is basically bankrupt, by the way) decided to purchase and renovate the Shea’s Buffalo Theatre they not only saved a beautiful and irreplacable building, it turned out that Shea’s became a focal point for downtown. Even though it’s still not a moneymaker the benefits to the businesses surrounding it, and the benefit to the city’s image have been enough that no one ever says saving it was a mistake. On the contrary, whenever someone walks into the building the comment that always comes up sooner or later is “I can’t believe they wanted to tear this down”.
When San Francisco (a city that has a large tourist base, and plenty of tourist attractions) declined to purchase the Fox Theatre and allow its demolition they created a loss that is still talked about in that city today, even though it happened 40 years ago!
If Dupage puts a new structure up on this site, they will have something that they can be proud of for about 10 years, at which point the building will become dated, then unkempt, then within one generation the new building will either be empty or demolished. It’s just the way it is with modern development. They’re not built to last, no matter what they are. Take it from someone who lives in a city that still thinks demolition and redevelopment is a good idea, it doesn’t work. You should save the best of what you already have, and only allow the best to be built when the opportunity arises.
It seems to me that the “Freinds” organization has not made much of an effort to save this theater. After 6 years, why has nothing at all been done. They could have had cleanup days and clean out the interior. Or tried to get local contractors to donate time to get the theater stable. I have stated on this site many times that I would love to see this theater saved, but it seems that the organization that was supposed to do that was not organized good enough to accomplish this task. If I am wrong about this, please correct me.
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, so as a taxpayer, lifelong area resident, and someone who was actually a patron of the theatre in to 70’s and 80’s I am NOT allowed to comment about the theatre? How long have you lived here yourself? What movies did you see there?
Fine, I’ll admit there are more than 60 ‘friends’ if you’ll admit that there are less than 5000 as you have claimed in the past. You also talk about this “grand plan” that is ‘fully funded’, well we heard about plans from your group in the past. The original plan over 6 years ago was supposed to be the one, and that failed, and then the next 4 or 5 plans failed, and this current one has even been altered. Quite frankly, are we supposed to believe that, finally, after 6 years you got it right. Sorry, I don’t.
Plus I don’t think your approach of bashing the Trustees for their lack of support is a good idea.
As for the rest of you “theatre-preservationist” don’t start bashing me until you have all the facts. As far as preservation goes, if this can be done with no TIF’s or taxpayer money than I would support it 100%, but we all know that won’t happen. IF the building gets torn down than I do support saving the marquee for other uses.
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
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…
Good for you Deb! Keep fighting the good fight!
I find it curious that fiscal insanity has stopped responding since I questioned his background/motives/anonymity, and now we have challenger…Just another alias from fiscal?
I don’t understand people coming here and lobbying against preservation. If preserving the theatre means putting up a 50-story skyscraper next to it, then put up the skyscraper. Don’t destory a theatre.
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.
It has been a long road, one filled with broken promises and fantasy visions of “build it and they will come.” Well has anybody on this site offered and $$ to the friends…NO. They have $1200 in the bank because there are only 60 or so people who want to save the theatre. Time to move on Deb Dynako, the friends fought hard but the end is near.
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?
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.
I also agree that interior fittings should be saved and reused on this site, especially if the facade and marquee is saved. While it is sad that time and neglect has caught up with this theater, hopefully at least some of it can remain intact.
Thanks Dupe. Whatever they can save, if only the facade. Might be a lesson to those who are trying in their own small towns to save their theaters to keep them in working order and NOT let them stay dormant for too long.
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.
What you are saying Dupe sounds like a good alternative plan. While I am allways in favor of saving EVERY old theater you can, especially at least one in every downtown suburb, keeping the facade and marquee intact is something. It’s sad that deferred mantinence has caused this problem. If it was just a matter of a few coats of paint and a good cleaning that would be a no-brainer to keep it running. But it appears that is not the case. Unfortunately, Lombard does not have an Oprah-like millionaire to drop a wad of bucks on a whim. It WOULD be nice, but most self-made millionaires are busy building 20 room mansions these days!
I won’t lose hope till the end, as I witnessed the senseless destruction of the Granada Theater in Chicago in 1989 due to the “machinations” of Loyola University that systematically caused its' end. Ask around. The spokeman for the Theater Historical Society said that it was “the most intact theater”. Looking at demolition videos shows that. The Granada had the last laugh though. During demolition, the workers underestimated their work, and the side wall collapse wrong and bricks cascaded on to the Red Line tracks causing a MAJOR delay. I smiled at the last word on that GRAND LADY of Rogers Park.
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.