Explore more of our great network. Explore more sites.

Top Ad

Sign up for the Daily North Shore Email

Comments

  1. I stand with Gary Doyle and others who wish to save this home from the wrecking ball. I love people who move into a neighborhood and then complain and attempt to change all the things that make it a great place to live. Reminds me of the folks who move near Wrigley and then complain about noise, night games and lack of parking. The Shmuckers could have moved to many other neighborhoods that had big lots for their kids to play on. Instead, they choose to tear down this home and with it, a part of Lake Bluff’s character. I find it sad.

  2. Branding someone as “selfish” because they want to create a yard for kids to play in? Really? Bullying someone to “come and look us in the eye”? Really? A project that would create more open space is somehow bad for Lake Bluff? Really? Is this America or North Korea?
    Historic and architectural significance is subjective and arbitrary. Such a designation against an owners wishes is a confiscation of private property rights when it prevents the owners from changing their property. Private property rights are a fundamental lynch pin of America.
    Several new homes are constructed in Lake Bluff every year that are beautiful, and blend in seamlessly with the current architecture of the homes of Lake Bluff — in fact, they enhance it!

    • “More open space”, eh? That’s one way of looking at it I guess.

      It’s not an either/or proposition, Carl. There are personal property rights, and there’s preserving the character of the Village. Both must be balanced. I (and a lot of people) feel that the former is winning out these days, to the detriment of Lake Bluff.

      • The Schmuckers have followed the rules. The rules permit them to do what they are doing. It is not about “who you know” or “being well-liked” or “having leverage.” One is entitled to all the services and protections that “resident of Lake Bluff” confers by purchasing a house in Lake Bluff. The Schmuckers bought two.

        And it is not about open space, though the Village does have a bulk ordinance that relates setbacks to building heights, so Mr. Castrogiovanni is quite right that this behavior is encouraged by the Village. But that is not his primary point. He, like any good American, was aghast that Commissioner Janie Jerch said “They are extremely selfish.”

        She went on to tell the Schmuckers how to raise their children and, in her mind, properly use the house. She said “A lot of people would like to live in that house, myself included.” Well, Commissioner, you should have purchased it ten years ago. And if you are so anxious to exercise ownership prerogatives, Gary, perhaps you should not have sold it ten years ago.

        The Village Board should not grant a delay since the only purpose is further coercion (“look us in the eye” -Jerch) which is not an honorable use of government power. Village President O’Hara should remove Ms. Jerch for cause. And, judging from the photograph, so should be that boring little box of a house.

      • It will be such an improvement to sunrise ave. when this house is gone. That block is the most crowded on sunrise. A beautiful yard and garden is exactly what lake bluff needs and deserves. Im sure it will be gorgeous!!! Good riddance to 512 sunrise.

        • I think anyone who says something like “good riddance” about a historically significant home in Lake Bluff probably shouldn’t live here.

          • Really, Gary? You waited over a month to post a reply like that? And just who are you to say who should and should not live in Lake Bluff? You’d prefer that there is no diversity of opinion and viewpoint here? The attitude evident in your reply is precisely the reason why we must keep limits on the power of government committees who would lord over subjective, arbitrary notions such as “historical significance”…

            • I didn’t think about it for a month, Carl. I just saw it a couple of days ago.

              Of course reasonable minds can disagree about 512 Sunrise and historic preservation in Lake Bluff. But I think when someone says “good riddance” to a home like 512 Sunrise, one of only 12 that the Village has designated historically significant — well, that tells me that maybe they’d be better off in a place that has a little less consciousness about this kind of thing. Like, I don’t know, Vernon Hills.

              And hey, 512 Sunrise is coming down anyway, so you’ll get your wish. But the good news is I think this has woken up a lot of people about this issue, and things are about to change.

  3. It’s really a shame that the owners of the house on Sunset Lane don’t understand why they have a responsibility to preserve the house. Many of our north shore communities are losing their character, integrity and historic resources due to demolition of houses that another person or family could easily live in. Tearing down the smaller properties also depletes housing for people who can’t purchase a $1million property, but could purchase a $500,000 property and live in the community to raise their family. Property owners don’t understand stewardship–it’s about “this is good for me” instead of “I’ll have a smaller yard” or “the right thing for the community is to preserve the house”. I believe the loss of housing stock, which has a huge ripple effect on all residents, schools, and business districts, parks, services in LB, etc. is the worst thing that can happen to a community. It shuts out young families and sometimes retirees. I hope the council, owner and HPC will work together in to find a good solution.

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Daily North Shore encourages comments, but we have specific guidelines that you can find here. A general principle is: Do not state anything in a comment that you would not say in public and do not state anything about another person that you would not say to his or her face.

Post comment mobile ad section