Will County Capital Improvements Committee met Oct. 30.
Here is the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Ray Tuminello called the meeting to order at 9:40 AM
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Ray Tuminello Chair Present
Mike Fricilone Vice Chair Present
Gloria Dollinger Member Present
Gretchen Fritz Member Present
Charles E. Maher Member Absent
Donald A. Moran Member Present
Annette Parker Member Present
Beth Rice Member Absent
Denise E. Winfrey Member Present
Also Present: J. Moustis, R. Freitag and M. Johannsen.
Present from State's Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Mr. Moustis led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Capital Improvements Committee - Regular Meeting - Oct 2, 2018 11:00 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gloria Dollinger, Member
SECONDER: Denise E. Winfrey, Member
AYES: Tuminello, Fricilone, Dollinger, Fritz, Moran, Parker, Winfrey
ABSENT: Maher, Rice
IV. OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
1. Discussion Re: Surface Parking Improvements on County Owned Land South of New Courthouse
Mr. Tkac stated this is the concept plan for surface parking next to the courthouse.
The county owned property, south of Washington Street, is currently used as employee parking with two buildings which would be demolished. The entire property would be reconfigured to maximize the number of employee parking spaces and provide for secured parking for the approximately 50 judges. We have a first opinion of probable cost as opposed to a hard estimate. The numbers have several assumptions in them and is valued at $3 million.
Mr. Dwyer stated we worked with Gilbane on the concept plan. The idea is to put the secured judges parking in the northwest corner, closely aligned to the secured courthouse entrance, consistent with our plan since we began looking at this piece. There are 50 to 55 secured spaces for judges and 140 for other county parking. There is a requirement for stormwater detention, much like we had at the courthouse site, we are looking at underground detention to maximize the usable area of the site. We will eliminate the two existing buildings as they are in the footprint of where we want to put the secured parking. We are looking at a small storage building in the southwest portion to house some maintenance vehicles and equipment.
Mr. Tkac stated from a scheduling standpoint, the time to start would be early spring of 2020. It has to come after the City redoes the current courthouse parking lot and opens Chicago Street.
Mr. Fricilone asked how big is the current maintenance building? The proposed one is 2,700 sq. ft., did we talk to anyone to determine if this would be adequate?
Mr. Tkac stated the current building is underutilized. There is storage, but it is oversized for what we need. We need a building to store snow removal equipment.
Mr. Fricilone state I want to make sure someone who is putting stuff in there can confirm the building would be adequate. The building could be extended if necessary.
Mr. Van Essen added we currently use the building for snow removal equipment used by employees, along with storage of desks and other office furniture.
Mr. Moran asked how small is the stormwater cistern at a cost of $200,000?
Mr. Dwyer responded even with separated stormwater and sewer we have to do detention to hold the water for a period of time. About one acre foot of volume is required, or about 40,000 cubic feet of water storage.
Mr. Lesniak stated it is our guesstimate, not knowing the volume on use as a parking lot. I threw in something that seemed reasonable based on what we had.
Mr. Moran asked are you expecting issues with rock based on what the City ran into on Washington Street?
Mr. Lesniak stated at the corner of Joliet and Washington, they went down 18 feet and did not hit dolomite rock. It was Lafayette and Joliet Streets they had issues.
Mr. Dwyer stated we can keep it as a shallower underground detention, because it is not a huge volume. I suggest keeping it at southern end of the site, so in the future you could do something else on this property since it would probably sit closer to Washington Street.
Mr. Scott Creech stated from an elevation standpoint, you will need a foot above those underground chambers and another foot for the pavement structure. With two feet of cover, you get quite a bit of detention under that. I don’t think you have to go too deep on this. It will be similar to what you did under the courthouse. It seems very doable.
Mr. Moran asked it is doable, but is it doable for $200,000?
Mr. Lesniak stated until I get a footprint of what I need, I cannot put a better number to it.
Mr. Moustis stated I park in the lot south of the tracks regularly and the lot is never full. It is an underutilized lot and we have to tell people they have to park there. It is not a bad walk from the lot to the courthouse. We have to let our employees know they have to use the lot; especially employees we give stipends to for parking. I see demolition of the old courthouse in a timely manner once it is vacated. It is a good site for a multipurpose private sector/government building, but I don’t see the property being developed initially. I was told the Joliet is interested in moving if a building is built there. It is a good site, but it will take a while to build. In the interim do we use it for parking? Should that be part of the overall parking strategy for the next eight or ten years? I think that parcel has potential. Maybe the building doesn’t come down until 2022, but should we be looking at that as part of our entire schematic or plan?
Mr. Fricilone stated I agree with using that other parking lot. With the concept plan, if you parked by the proposed maintenance building you are further away than the lot south of the viaduct. We need to look at this as a parking lot; we will not use this property for anything else at this point. At one time we talked about expansion of the courthouse, but this is a good location, especially for the judges’ parking now. I think we need to get the numbers down and be a lot tighter before we move forward.
Mr. Moustis asked if we knew we were going to use this for temporary parking, does that change demolition of the current courthouse? Would we use crushing?
Would we leave stuff on site? Would that change anything to know we are using this for parking for the next ten years? Would you fill in the basement or take everything out?
Mr. Lesniak answered when this started this, it was to get secure parking for the judges in close proximity to their entrance and it grew. The earliest you could demolish the old courthouse would be in the spring of 2021. It depends on how much parking you need to accommodate prior to the new courthouse opening.
Right now we are looking at a fenced in area for the judges and the rest is employee parking. You need something, unless you tell everyone they must go south of the tracks, park and walk to the building, then just do the judges’ parking.
Mr. Moustis stated we should direct people to park in the south lot. It is not that far. When we did the land swap with Joliet, part of the strategy was the lot would be used for employee parking. The Sheriff’s Department and video visitation use the Chicago Street lot, we developed. Joliet has a pay lot that is rarely full. Perhaps we could work something out with Joliet to save some spaces for county employees. Our jurors park in the south lot and walk, but our employees don’t.
We need better utilization of our assets.
Ms. Winfrey asked is there any financial advantage if we only improved from Ottawa Street to the alleyway by the Beach Building as judges’ parking? Could we get enough spaces to accommodate the judges and would it save any significate money?
Mr. Lesniak replied the lot has to be resurfaced with detention. The thought process for putting the parking at the corner of Washington and Joliet Streets was it was in close proximity to the judges’ entrance. On Ottawa Street they will walk down Washington to get to their entrance.
Mr. Holland stated the plan also includes handicap parking in the corner. That was a concern whether we had enough parking spots. The closest corner, Washington and Ottawa Streets would have designated spots, because there are not a lot of
spots around the building for that type of parking. In addition, there are some squad cars for probation that park in that lot. I agree with Mr. Moustis we need to encourage our employees to use the lot south of the tracks. The lot being proposed does include somethings we have not talked about.
Mr. Fricilone stated before we spend money on this, we need to do a parking analysis. We need a count daily of who is parking on the south side of the tracks and how many spaces are open. If we have 100 open spaces every day it will make
a difference in what we need to move forward with. This is a good plan and a good idea in the discussion stage, we are not voting on anything, we need to go a little deeper to get the number a little tighter.
Mr. Lesniak asked do you know the number of spaces you want to accommodate the parking?
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=15&ID=3106&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up