Lake Forest couple, city reach settlement to build new sidewalk

[Get Real]

"bus only" and "sickofit" have it right. "Gentile" is waaay off base. When you start letting the government usurp your private property rights, you're flirting with disaster. All the people dissing these people are just class-envy rich-people haters. The city of Lake Forest screwed up by not obtaining an easement from the original owners back in the 1980's and these people had every right to take action. Fight for your Constitutional rights!

[Dave]

Get Real wrote:

"bus only" and "sickofit" have it right. "Gentile" is waaay off base. When you start letting the government usurp your private property rights, you're flirting with disaster. All the people dissing these people are just class-envy rich-people haters. The city of Lake Forest screwed up by not obtaining an easement from the original owners back in the 1980's and these people had every right to take action. Fight for your Constitutional rights!

We are all pretty much agreed Gentile is off base. It is their property and it was an illegal sidewalk. Who cares who used it?

[bus only lanes]

But, but, but... but the kids used it to get to school, and God knows that the only thing that should matter to me is someone else's kids, right? Since they're too stupid to cross the street on their own I have a moral obligation to let them cross through my yard, right? Despite the fact that I probably paid what,$800,000 or more to live in this neighborhood?

Yep, "class envy" is right. It's the same entitlement crowd that thinks nobody should have anything that everyone else doesn't have.

[Arbor Ridge]

Facts:
1.) Sidewalk part of orginal development plot of survey.
2.) Arbor Ridge Homeowners covenants signed at closing prohibited removal of the side walk.
3.) All of Kunz legal fees and expenses were covered by his Title company
4.) He filed suit against his fellow homeownwers as well as the city.
5.) He petitioned Lake County to lower his taxes based on the fact that the sidewalk was city owned and maintained therefore lowering the value of his property.
6.) The new sidewalk will only be shifted a few feet towards his neighbors property and will basically
be in the same location with the same sight lines.
7.) Thousands of dollars waisted on legal fees.
8.) Total expense to City, Title Company and homeowners close to $200,000.00

2.)

[Anon]

This is news?????????? Give me a break.

[Dave]

Arbor Ridge wrote:

Facts:
1.) Sidewalk part of orginal development plot of survey.
2.) Arbor Ridge Homeowners covenants signed at closing prohibited removal of the side walk.
3.) All of Kunz legal fees and expenses were covered by his Title company
4.) He filed suit against his fellow homeownwers as well as the city.
5.) He petitioned Lake County to lower his taxes based on the fact that the sidewalk was city owned and maintained therefore lowering the value of his property.
6.) The new sidewalk will only be shifted a few feet towards his neighbors property and will basically
be in the same location with the same sight lines.
7.) Thousands of dollars waisted on legal fees.
8.) Total expense to City, Title Company and homeowners close to $200,000.00
2.)

Facts:
1. Irrelevant
2. Maybe seems non-enforceable since there was no VALID easement according to all the coverage.
3. So?? That's what title insurance is for, to cover something like the city overreaching.
4. Who cares, irrelevant
5. Obviously the illegal easement did lower his property value so his assessment should have been lowered.
6. Fine its not on his property and his neighbor is being compensated (I am guessing the nieghbor agreed) for his loss. The city will no longer be trespassing.
7, 8. Yes, the damn city should have realized it was wrong and left the property owner do what was his right - rip off the sidewalk. More government waste, we agree!

[SANKAR]

it is nice to be rich

[Krusty]

Government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.

[Less Bias]

Arbor Ridge - Very well stated.
The signed covenant alone demonstrates that the homeowner was aware of the fact that the sidewalk was not his to remove. I would love to see a lawsuit brought against him by the homowner's association. And now his settlement demonstrates the ignorance of the "privacy" argument, as 5 feet will hardly affect a pedestrians visibility into the home.

[Jessica]

God knows I don't live in Lake Forest but this is just depressing.

Have people no concept of the value of community? You know being a good neighbor by allowing a sidewalk to remain front of your house so people can walk by safely?

No, it's all about who owns what.

[Larry]

I'm a huge supporter of private property. I think Jefferson erred when he departed from Locke's path. However, I'm also a fan of the rule of law, and some of you should perhaps read up on it. In English common law, the common law of the United States, and statutory law, there are prescriptive easements. This would appear to be a rather classic case of a prescriptive easement. In Illinois, one is created after 20 years of adverse use. The sidewalk, being in long common use, apparently for 20+ years (the article isn't clear), existed as an easement despite the lack of a specific conveyance. The current owner of the land would likely have lost in court ultimately, and this settlement appears to reflect that.

[Enjoy your sidewalk]

Those who live in Lake Forest can pretty much do whatever they want more or less. Money talks....

[TheMusicMan]

Messy wrote:

<quoted text>
The city seems to have built a sidewalk on private property. I'd have gotten rid of it too, and happily paid whatever it took to make sure it was never rebuilt. If the city planners are too stupid to design public access to public spaces in the first place, I have zero sympathy for them.
When these folks purchased their house and lot, they paid for THE WHOLE LOT. They deserve to have full use of it and a reasonable expectation of privacy on their private property.
Sucks to be the city.

So they never heard of a fence, did they. No, of course not.

[RomanB]

The Kunz's should have claimed their home is a church. It's the latest northshore trend.

[wtf]

there are people dying in the world and we have to read about this garbage

[Robert A Brown Jr]

This is why I moved to South Florida. Tax this tax that...$5000.00 is a humongous fine. that's what they get foe easement on their property.
I scream unfair!!!

The cops are out Ticketing vehicles instead of preventing crime which has gotten incredibly high... Why don't you put fines on Burglary, rape, and murder. Fine the gangs when they are caught. It costs too much for patrolling unsafe neighborhoods?

I once saw a taxidriver come after the giant guy who wouldn't pay his fare. When the cab driver approached him the guy punched him in the face and then walked into a diner...

God only knows what happened next... This happened in NewTown and there wasn't a cop in site for the whole time I was there. went into a restaurant across the street and looking out the window there was no cop.

This was on Diversey PKWY, Clark and Broadway area. and I was apalled at seeing this. I was scared to death he might have hurt someone in the diner.

[You Are Racist Subhuman]

<quoted text>I thought the English could read. Didn't you understand the part of the article where it said the walkway was on their property. Would you like to have a public walkway cutting across your front yard affording the whole neighborhood a ringside view of the inside of your house.
And for the record: nobody on your crappy island should talk about elitist pigs. You are the people with a royal family.
</quoted text>

The idiots saw the sidewalk when purchasing the property. They knew it was used by the city beforehand. I'm assuming during one of Deb's candlelight suppers, a bunch of little snot-nosed brats walked past. The old rich hags probably said, "Can't you afford a more private, Deb dear?" They should pay every dime. Being well-to-do does not make them any better. Idiots come in all tax brackets.

[You Are a Racist Subhuman]

"I thought the English could read. Didn't you understand the part of the article where it said the walkway was on their property. Would you like to have a public walkway cutting across your front yard affording the whole neighborhood a ringside view of the inside of your house.
And for the record: nobody on your crappy island should talk about elitist pigs. You are the people with a royal family."

The idiots saw the sidewalk when purchasing the property. They knew it was used by the city beforehand. I'm assuming during one of Deb's candlelight suppers, a bunch of little snot-nosed brats walked past. The old rich hags probably said, "Can't you afford a more private home, Deb dear?" They should pay every dime. Being well-to-do does not make them any better. Idiots come in all tax brackets.

[FAL]

I can understand that some people are upset, however, i recently looked at a house in a neighboring town for purchase. I had never noticed, over the years, any house where there was a sidewalk between two houses going from one street to another. The houses were rather close to each other and with this sidewalk one could easily hear and certainly see into the house i was considering the purchase of. When i inquired why anyone would install such a thing in their own yard, i was informed that it was a city/town installation and it was for kids/anyone to short cut from one street to the next. That was the last i even looked at the house. I have lived in a few states and i guess have never experienced anything like this and would not care to have the certainty of people walking under my bedroom and/or kitchen windows at what would be any time of night or day since it was open to the public.