Mike Jones lives in Villa Park’s only log cabin.
According to his research, the home was built in 1916 from timbers of the structure that housed the displaced Chicago Board of Trade after the Chicago Fire, in 1871.
Last year, Jones renovated and added to his home near Euclid and Highland Avenues and paid special attention to its historic character, especially its exterior. But Jones staunchly believes the owner of any home, no matter how historic, should have the right to do whatever he or she wants with it, so long as it conforms to zoning laws.
Frank Carlson, chairman of the village’s Historic Preservation Commission, views things differently. Fed up with demolitions and annoyed by the threat of more so-called teardowns in Villa Park, his panel has devised a proposed ordinance that might prevent the demolition of historic buildings.
The battle of historic preservation versus individual property rights came to a head in Villa Park recently, when the Village Board rejected the proposed ordinance drafted by Carlson’s commission. Despite the apparent victory, opponents of the proposal said they worry that the board might later consider a watered-down version.
What rankled Jones and his neighbors most in the proposed ordinance was the “non-owner consent clause,” which would make it possible for a home or building to be designated as historic by an outside party, such as the village, even without the support of the property owner. Such a designation could prevent owners from making significant changes to the exterior of their homes or buildings.
But village officials who supported the proposed ordinance said they were trying to preserve structures that might otherwise become targets for demolition.
Carlson said, “Mainly, what we’re after are the developers who want to buy three or four buildings on large lots and then attempt to tear them down and build five or six in their place.”
Carlson called the residents’ complaints “ridiculous.”
“Without the non-owner consent clause, the ordinance doesn’t mean anything,” he said.
Trustees voted 6-1 against moving the proposed ordinance forward.
Trustee Joyce Daly said, “The problem I’ve had is that residents do not want their choices taken away from them.”
Jones was not mollified, saying he and his neighbors worry that the board might approve another version and later amend it to include the non-owner consent clause.
“We want a guarantee that if this ever comes up again, the village will notify us,” Jones said. “It breaks my heart to see a house torn down, but the property exists to serve its owner as best as it can. A small group in town wants to dictate to homeowners what they can and can’t do to their homes.”
Jones said that although the proposed ordinance’s intent was to raise Villa Park’s property values, it might have the opposite effect. He said few home buyers are interested in communities that place special restrictions on historically significant structures.
