Man Who Called La Grange Critic 'Naive' Picked For Village Post

LA GRANGE, IL – An architect who called a critic of La Grange's regulations for big developments "naive" has been nominated for a village post.

Kurt Volkman, who works for the Chicago-based HED architectural firm, is poised to become the next chairman of the village's Design Review Commission. Such a body reviews aspects of proposed developments.

Last week, Volkman, a member of the design commission, spoke out during a Plan Commission meeting against resident Jonathan Robinson's proposed changes to the village code.

Robinson stepped forward after a developer proposed a 39-unit condo complex on Burlington Avenue next to his Seventh Avenue house. The developer, who got the village's approval last week, did not meet with neighbors about the project.

One of Robinson's proposals was to require developers to host a meeting with neighbors before submitting applications to the village's zoning office.

Commissioners said they liked the idea, but Volkman argued against it.

"You're adding to the cost of the development," he said.

At the same time, Volkman said it was unfortunate if the condo developer failed to hold a neighbor meeting. (Elmhurst is among a few towns that require such gatherings.)

Volkman also objected to Robinson's proposals to ban new buildings over three stories directly sharing lot lines with single-family homes and to prevent developers from bypassing setbacks next to such homes.

Commissioners opposed the ideas. Volkman agreed with them.

"We have had two hours of grievances about Burlington," Volkman said, referring to Robinson's presentation. "It was a terrible experience, but the process actually worked."

Calling Robinson "naive," Volkman said the proposed rules would make La Grange's code among the most restrictive in the United States. He said Robinson's presentation was insulting to staff.

In an exchange with Robinson last week on Patch's Facebook page, Volkman criticized him.

"You come across as aggrieved and naive. Your actions suggest as much," Volkman said in a post. "You act as if you are lashing out. Meanwhile, 1000s of residents experience stormwater damage. They go unheard."

On Monday, the Village Board plans to vote on appointing Volkman as the chairman of the Design Review Commission. He would replace Kevin Cahill, who resigned.

Village President Mark Kuchler nominated Volkman.

According to his firm's website, Volkman is a housing sector leader, designing projects for developers of multifamily developments. The site states Volkman "focuses on creating residential and mixed-use environments that balance wellness, longevity, and lived experience."

On Sunday evening, Volkman responded to Patch's Friday message for comment (below).

As the chairman, Volkman said he plans to follow the village's guidelines.

"Those are the long-standing rules to abide by," Volkman said. "These are not arbitrary. Often due to the dynamics of the real estate market and to the age of the building stock in La Grange, we need to be mindful of what we suggest and approve to not add any undue burden onto buildings, that might put the buildings at risk or to small business owners or residents. This is where I find my professional experience as an architect helps the discussion be constructive."

He also thanked La Grange police for driving by his house after village meetings because of the "threats and actions of others who put my family and property at risk." He did not describe the threats.

Here is Kurt Volkman's statement to Patch on Sunday:

I appreciate your inquiry regarding my nomination to become the Chairperson of the DRC. I believe it is a fair question. For a little background, prior to my time on the La Grange Design Review Commission, I served on the Environmental Quality Commission. I have served on the Design Review Commission since November of 2022. In the recent past, I served as the pro tempore Chairperson of the Commission when Chairperson Cahill was unavailable to attend. I kindly welcome everyone to review our meeting minutes regarding past deliberations to get a sense of my engagement in discussions regarding upholding the standards of La Grange. In my time on the Design Review Commission, we have never had members of the general public attend our meetings. The residents of La Grange are more than welcome to attend if they are interested. All commission meetings are publicly posted and available on the Village of La Grange Website for everyone’s access. https://il-lagrange2.civicplus.com/Archive.aspx?AMID=38&Type=&ADID=

The purview of the Design Review Committee in La Grange is to review the exterior designs, colors and other aesthetic features of the proposed improvements to the buildings and potentially surrounding landscape brought before us. Depending upon the area of work within town, we have different prescribed guidelines we are to follow. Much of our recent work has been related to signage review. We typically do not see proposed projects until after Zoning and Planning Commissions have provided comment and approval.

To answer the question of how I intend to serve as chairperson is simple, follow the prescribed guidelines. Those are the long-standing rules to abide by. These are not arbitrary. Often due to the dynamics of the real estate market and to the age of the building stock in La Grange, we need to be mindful of what we suggest and approve to not add any undue burden onto buildings, that might put the buildings at risk or to small business owners or residents. This is where I find my professional experience as an architect helps the discussion be constructive.

All of us who serve on any of the commissions in La Grange do so as unpaid volunteers. We are engaged residents who want the best for La Grange, now and into the future. If anyone wants to volunteer, they can do so through the Village Website and when an opening arises, they can be considered for a commission.

When we think about the culture of La Grange, I think along the same lines as Trustee Augustine. The culture and character of La Grange is not its buildings; it is its people. Buildings are merely the backdrop of our culture. Over the history of La Grange, as Trustee Augustine described, buildings have changed. What has driven our way of life is the people who make La Grange a wonderful place to live.

When I attended and spoke at both the recent Plan Commission and Board of Trustee Meetings, I was not attending in my role as a member of the DRC. I attended as a resident of La Grange, as is my right. Prior to these meetings, within the January 9, 2026, Patch Facebook posting, I provided a comment noting that the Robinsons had bought their house in 2021 with the unrealistic expectation that the property next store would never change. During this prolonged online engagement with them and others in the comment section of the Patch’s post, Mr. Robinson’s contention was he had rights over their neighbor’s property for which they do not own. His contention was they were owed a measure of authority over the 112 Burlington property. It is naïve on the part of the Robinsons to believe that they have legal rights over a neighboring property they do not own. Every landowner in La Grange has a right to improve their own property to the highest and best use. There are zoning and planning processes to follow within the Village to guide how that can be achieved.

In my career, I have presented at over sixty zoning, planning, and village board meetings. I have been a part of six such meetings in the last calendar year. On behalf of my clients, I have asked for planned developments, and I have asked for special uses and relief from some guidelines. In my experience, La Grange’s current process of public meetings is one of the most open and well documented. Public Commission Meetings are subject to the Open Meetings Act in the State of Illinois. There is a level of documentation required and there are rules about how long the documentation of the meetings are to be held in storage for public access. The Village of La Grange follows these guidelines. It affords the public opportunities to speak on record, which to me is one of the most important aspects. These meetings have the potential to enact real change and address concerns. Any other type of unofficial advisory meeting has no legal merit and thus rarely results in change. In the case of 112 Burlington, the zoning and planning process was very public from what I could see from the meeting minutes, the meetings were documented, and the public was given time to speak, the proposed building was changed as part of the final compromise. That is how the process is supposed to work. It was open and documented. Unfortunately, these recent meetings devolved into some of the most inflammatory I have ever witnessed throughout the country. The Robinsons asserted claims in their presentation that criticized and insulted the Village Staff and the Village Attorney. I understand their frustration in not getting their way. Devolving to insults and harassment is not going to obtain favor nor win decisions. It deflates their arguments. The contentious nature of the crowd was not fully reported by you, David, in your writing in the Patch. Insults, accusations, and falsehoods were thrown at anyone and everyone on the Board. People speaking with a differing opinion than those against the 112 Burlington development were interrupted and booed. How is booing others with differing opinions and disrupting community meetings being a good neighbor?

One of the greatest challenges in La Grange is that many of our existing properties predate the zoning codes. In that, existing structures do not meet the current zoning setbacks or height guidelines that are in place today. The Robinsons own home is one of those properties. Their home does not meet the side yard setback that is specified in the code today. They cannot be expected to physically move their house. This too must be considered when a commission renders decisions about a planned development. None of this goes without thought. Whenever any proposal comes before a commission, the commissioners take it upon themselves to go in person to review the conditions, review the proposals and develop a real opinion based upon what they witnessed both for the subject property, the neighboring properties, and the general area. This has happened in the case of 112 Burlington.

My reasoning for my opinion on why the planned development proposed for 112 Burlington is important for La Grange is simple. As I stated at the meeting, one of the chief reasons for adding potential density in the comprehensive plan is we have a major stormwater issue in La Grange. MWRD will not let La Grange access the Deep Tunnel project until at least 2029. The lawsuit with the Quarry drags on. The State of Illinois can only do so much. The people of La Grange are affected. Every year people are experiencing thousands of dollars of damage. La Grange has planned future projects to help improve stormwater sewer systems in town. The ability to pay for these projects comes from the sewer fees we La Grange residents pay. Each home, apartment and condo in La Grange pays a sewer fee. Funds can also come from the State, and from grants. We can no longer count on the Federal Government for financial assistance.

We are left with two choices; we keep our tax paying population stagnant and see our property taxes and sewer fees rise exponentially (above the % they have risen in recent years) and create real affordability issues for all residents and age groups. Or we can increase density in the prescribed areas designated in the comprehensive planning process and create a larger property tax and sewer fee base to draw from for these required improvements. We need to help ourselves. The idea of increased density along the BNSF line does not come from the RTA as stated by Mr. Robinson. It is a recommendation from the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus Greenest Region Compact of which La Grange is a member. It is also a long-standing best practice in Urban Planning globally since the advent of passenger rail in the 1800s. Cities all over the country are creating walkable and equitable transit-oriented developments. La Grange has an existing transit-oriented community that is not yet fully realized. The comprehensive plan stopped well short of what building codes will allow. International Building Code will allow up to seven stories before a building is considered a high rise. In the Comprehensive Plan process in 2024, those of us who volunteered to be part of the process all agreed to restrict the building heights below what is allowable by building codes in effort to not put too much stress on the Village. The 2024 La Grange Comprehensive Plan demonstrates a measure of restraint with the residents in mind.

Smart Growth, in my experience, provides a diversity of housing types, like affordable housing for seniors and empty nesters who want to age-in-place in La Grange after building their lives here. We do not nearly have enough of that now. La Grange needs more housing options for young families that want to raise their children in a thriving community and feed into our celebrated school districts. We need more attainable housing for people who work in the region so they can have shorter commutes or simply want to jump on the train to head downtown for work. These additional people create the desired foot traffic we need to keep our local businesses thriving. La Grange would become a destination that other towns would envy. This is how I view my responsibilities on the Design Review Commission. I want La Grange to thrive.

At Mr. Robinson’s suggestion, creating new regulations that further restrict development, as pointed out in the recent Planning Commission meeting, tells La Grange residents, “We want your property taxes and sewer fees to rise exponentially.” Knowing that stormwater management solutions and affordability are the most pressing needs in La Grange, which affects every one of our 16,321 residents, shows adding density smartly is a significant way we can address both issues. I know there are a handful of residents that feel aggrieved about the 112 Burlington development. We also need to think of the other 16,321 residents, many of whom are at risk every time it rains. To me, that is being a good neighbor. It is a binary choice. We can either increase population smartly to help pay for improving the aging village infrastructure or cause many of our neighbors to no longer be able to afford to live in our community with increasing financial impacts from stormwater damages and taxes. I will continue to support solutions for stormwater management and affordability in La Grange and will think about proposed projects through that lens.

I would like to thank the La Grange Police Department for driving by my property after the events of the Board of Trustees and Planning Commission meetings because of the threats and actions of others who put my family and property at risk.