Photo credit: Claudio Rodriguez – Chief Photographer

By: Emma Garcia – Senior Editor

The future of the Jackson Square Antique Mall, located on 112 E. Burlington Ave., remains uncertain after Judge D. Renee Jackson temporarily halted plans to demolish the historic building and replace it with a five-story, 39-unit condominium and residential building. 

The lawsuit was filed on April 8 by a neighboring resident, Jonathan Robinson, against Five South Six LLC, a real estate development company based in La Grange, and the Village of La Grange. It challenges the village’s approval process for the project and argues that zoning requirements were improperly modified.

Residents received formal notice on May 1 that demolition was scheduled for May 18. However, Jackson later granted a temporary restraining order (TRO), pausing demolition and development activity while the case proceeds through the court system. According to court documents, Jackson heard arguments from both sides before determining that a TRO was warranted. 

“The biggest obstacle to a TRO is that the judge has to be able to say, at a very early stage, that we have a likely chance of succeeding with our lawsuit,” Robinson said. “For her to be able to conclusively say that we have a likely chance of succeeding is huge.”

The lawsuit mostly focuses on the village’s approval of several modifications to existing zoning regulations. Unlike a standard “by-right” project that complies with all zoning requirements, the proposed condominium development requested changes to nine provisions of the village code.

One of the disputed modifications involves the required setback between the development and neighboring residential properties. Village code requires a 29-foot, 7-inch buffer, but developers requested reducing that distance to 11 feet for balconies facing nearby homes.

“Per the zoning code, the Plan Commission is not allowed to modify the zoning code in any way that significantly affects the neighboring property,” Robinson said. “The village staff ignored that discussion in their staff report presented at the Plan Commission in October of 2025, so that discussion did not happen [then].”

Robinson also said that neighboring property owners were not given sufficient opportunity to present concerns during public hearings. While residents were allowed to speak, they were limited to the same three-minute time allotment as any other members of the public.

“When someone is directly affected by a neighboring property, it is not reasonable to restrict them to the same time limits as [someone] across town,” Robinson said. “While that person’s view is valid and should be heard, when not directly affected, it is reasonable to restrict time.”

Robinson emphasized how the village failed to sufficiently examine whether the historic building could be reused before deciding to demolish it. Community members repeatedly requested evidence showing that restoration or repurposing options had been considered.

“[A representative for Five South Six LLC] swore under oath in the Plan Commission in October of 2025 to the contrary that they had considered reusing the building,” Robinson said. “The public repeatedly asked for that proof and [for] proof that a qualified restoration professional was utilized to make that assessment, and it was never produced.”

Not opposed to development in La Grange, residents would just like future projects to comply with existing zoning regulations and consider the impact(s) on neighboring properties, Robinson said. They also hope the case will encourage stronger protections for historic buildings as the village updates its zoning code in the coming years.

The lawsuit remains pending, and a future final court decision will determine whether the condominium project proceeds or whether village approvals are reconsidered.