People 'Preying' On Hinsdale Historic District: Official

HINSDALE, IL — Participants in a Hinsdale meeting this week exchanged sharp words over plans to tear down a historic house on Oak Street. The demolition came up during a meeting of the village's historic preservation commission. Three proposed demolitions were on the agenda for discussion.

Wednesday's meeting came in the wake of Village President Tom Cauley's announcement a day before that he would like to see the village enact a six-month moratorium on teardowns in the Robbins Historic District while the village considers new regulations. All three of the proposed demolitions are in the district.

It was the house at 716 S. Oak St., where the Dean family once lived, that generated the most heat. Built in 1928, the house's style is classical revival. The owner, Arnold Kozys, wants to tear down the house and build anew. He is represented by Hinsdale lawyer Peter Coules.

At the commission meeting, Coules said he was "pretty confident" that no one on the commission wanted to see the house come down.

"It's bad to say this, but everyone has the right to do what they want with their property," he said.

"Yes and no, Mr. Coules," John Bohnen, the commission's chairman, responded. "There has been a groundswell of emotion in this town due to the fact that our historic district has been preyed upon by all kinds of people who don't respect it, don't like it and do what they want to do."

Bohnen noted Cauley's comments about the issue, saying the president wanted to see whether public support existed for protecting historic homes. If not, Bohnen said, then the village should disband the commission.

"This particular home has been a treasure for most of us who have lived in Hinsdale for many years. This is one of the iconic homes," Bohnen said.

Coules said the house was on the market for a year and many of the second-floor rooms are small and have slanted ceilings. But Bohlen said the Deans did not live in squalor, noting the commissioners have been in the home before.

Coules said he notified neighbors about the plans and heard no objections. But some of them attended Wednesday's meeting to express their concerns.

One of the neighbors, Susan Davis, who moved there two decades ago, said it would be a "great loss" to Hinsdale if the house were torn down.

"My house will be the only remaining historic home on my block. All the others have been knocked down," she said. "That certainly wasn't the case when I moved there."

Another neighbor, Julie Brunini, said one of the reasons that her family bought their house was so they could look at the Dean home. "It sickens me that it will go down," she said.

Ashley Dean Killpack, daughter of the Deans, said her mother did not want to see the house torn down.

"We hoped and prayed for the integrity of the person who would buy it," she said.

At the same time, Killpack conceded the house needed a lot of work, including plumbing and electrical. As for the second floor, she said, it needed to be "blown out" and redone.

Another nearby resident, Sarah Barclay, said she disliked government interference in people's lives, but acknowledged she was torn by the pending demolition. "Just because you can doesn't mean you should," she said.

"When I bought my home, the first question everyone asked was when was I going to tear it down. That didn't cross my mind," she said.

Bohnen, the chairman, said he would give Coules a list of topics that the commission would like to discuss with him at the next meeting. He also said commissioners would like to tour the inside of the house.

Also at the meeting, Julie and Doug Laux spoke about their request to demolish the house at 641 S. Elm St. They said the economics were difficult for a renovation.

"The house we're building is our forever home," said Julie Laux, owner of Hinsdale-based J. Jordan Homes.

Commissioners told the couple they were glad they were coming early in the process.

The third request for demolition is the house at 419 S. Oak St. The owner was not present at the meeting. Bohnen canceled the discussion because village code requires the owner's presence.