As someone whose 2400 square foot house, and the land it sits on, is worth slightly less than this out-house, I find this whole situation crazy. There has got to be a better way to get teh facility than spending $560,000. WTF?

Just plain nuts.

This is a classic example of why this state is screwed beyond hope, unless Gov. Rauner can force Madigan to blink and let his stooges adopt Rauner’s turnaround agenda.

Thank you, Democrats (and RINOs) for ruining the state I have lived in for 40 years. Ironically, that’s about when Madigan got his start in Springfield, so he has driven things downhill the entire time I have been here.

I wonder if any thought has been given to simply NOT doing this project? A reasonable contract with a portable commode company, and the purchase of a large pop up tent might reduce some costs here. Even if Park District employees were paid to put up and take down such a tent repeatedly for decades the costs of these amenities would never reach six figures. Why do we need these improvements and why do we need them now?

Unfortunately, I’ve read that that some years ago the Park District agreed to accept a $1,000,000 paycheck to allow the Uptown Developer relocate to city’s water reservoir from Uptown to Hinkley (west of the city). The outcome of this decision has been some fairly soggy fields for football games, and perhaps some other stormwater consequences not so easily identified. Perhaps a “rainwater harvesting system” will help the fields, but again the cost listed seems somewhat unreasonable.

I think we should ask ourselves if we are spending money because we have a “need”, or because we have a “want”.

EDITOR’S NOTE: That’s always a good question to ask, Alderman. But a little background is in order.

This editor was a member of the Park Board when the Uptown Redevelopment was being planned, and he was involved in all the discussions between the City and the Park District over the reservoir relocation project. It was the City – not the developer – that decided, as part of the TIF process that preceded the contract award to PRC Partners, to replace the deteriorating, undersized reservoir; and to move it to the old City garage property at Greenwood and Elm.

This editor, along with then-7th Ward alderman Larry Friel, proposed the Hinkley location to save the City a couple of million dollars in construction costs while also keeping the City garage site available for future sale and development (which could not have been done if the reservoir was located there).

Because of EPA regulations the Hinkley reservoir could not be placed under the playing fields. Hence, it was build at the west end of Hinkley, under the tennis and volleyball courts.

The Park District was assured by the City’s Public Works Dept. and outside consultants that the reservoir would have no effect on those playing fields. In return for saving the City the approx. $2 million of relocating costs and whatever sale value the Public Works garage property had, and as compensation for the year or so of disruption the new reservoir construction caused at Hinkley, the City agreed to pay the Park District $1,000,000.

Park Ridge Baseball and Falcons Football are the main users of the current bathrooms and have complained about them, so why don’t those two organizations chip in for at least half the cost?

If memory serves, Park Ridge Soccer donated a couple hundred thousad dollars to build the soccer fields at Emerson, so there is precedent for that kind of contributions.

Ok…we get it….it’s a ridiculous price. However, I haven’t read ONE solution by anyone.

Hinkley bathrooms are absolutely disgusting. They are unsafe, and disgusting.

The bathroom situation is just like many of other infrastructure issues in Park Ridge. Everyone agrees they are awful…but then we fight about what to do forever, while nothing gets accomplished.

I challenge anyone reading this blog, to visit other suburbs and see how terrible our park facilities are. Yes, our fields, bathrooms…and lack of even gym space.

But again, fine, the bid is expensive…what’s the solution???? Finding a tree?

EDITOR’S NOTE: One solution is to stop no-bid deals with public trough-feeders like FGM.

Another solution is for anyone who has a beef about any Park Ridge facilities – including our “terrible” park facilities – to show up at board meetings and express those beefs to the folks whom you have elected to be the stewards of those facilities, and not just gutlessly and anonymously chirp about it here.

Yet another solution is for the Park Board to grow a spine and do the survey/study work necessary to legally challenge the inflated “prevailing wage” rates before blowing $150K or more on overpriced labor.

And you could always contact your Madigan/Cullerton stooge state officials and demand that the prevailing wage laws be changed so that the taxpayers stop getting gouged for work that any one of them, individually, could get for 2/3 or less the price.

I stand corrected. Thank you for the clarification on the water reservoir. It’s certainly hard to keep the history of events accurate these days (internet and misinformation). We need more long standing residents to participate in local government, so we don’t fall victim to repeating mistakes of the past and maintain a clear view of historical undertakings. Thanks.

EDITOR’S NOTE: You’re welcome, Alderman. And thanks for providing the opportunity for such a history lesson.

Anon 1:12 at 742am…Park Ridge Baseball does spend money on baseball fields, fences, lights and more.
Do skateboarders use the bathroom? Pool attendees ? Dog walkers? Moms with strollers? Joggers? Teens who are drinking in the park?

Bottom line, Hinkley needs a bathroom. A SMART and forward thinking Park District, would build a bathroom, and have a full concessions to you know….create revenue.

Let’s fast forward to what will happen: Park Ridge will settle for either inaction or a bad facility.

EDITOR’S NOTE: FYI, a concession stand was actually in the original plan for the Hinkley outhouse but PR Baseball didn’t want it so it was scrapped.

And BTW, the concession stand at Centennial Water Park makes the Park District virtually nothing makes the PD virtually nothing – so the taxpayers put up around $500K for that facility with basically no ROI.

So your “revenue” idea is both unwanted and likely worthless, but don’t let that stop you from going to the Board meeting and telling them why you want the outhouse.

There’s an outhouse there, can’t it be remodeled? Pretty sure I also saw bathroom doors at the west end of the park near the tennis/volleyball courts (the maint. building-??) and of course there’s the Pool house which presumably has bathrooms. I am sure they all need work, but wouldn’t it be cheaper to remodel than build new? Just asking.

This is the problem with social media and the current generation. People post information as if fact, when they don’t understand anything about process or facts.

I am sure that to most homeowners that the cost appears excessive. But understand that commercial construction and building codes for commercial construction result in greater costs than residential construction. Right or wrong, whether you agree or not, this is a fact. The prevailing wage act is partially to blame, but keep in mind that Chicagoland is a strong union area, and most commercial work is union work. The result is that building public buildings are more than what the general public understands in terms of cost. If this is unacceptable, then the system needs to be corrected. Don’t penalize the Park District for the system that they must work within. Keep in mind that municipalities do not have to accept the prevailing wage act as long as they adopt one of their own. This is a large task and requires a lot of work, research, updates, and justification for a lot of professions. The result is that most municipalities choose to accept the state/ county standard. All of this ‘end of the world’ mumbo-jumbo is just that – a means to rile people up. Provide all facts and an alternative if you want to spout off. Otherwise you are just promoting anger and hate without reason.

As for the budget for the work discussed, this is not a proposal nor a bid. It is a budget for the proposed solution that the architect is giving the park district to allow them to decide how to proceed. This will still need to be documented and bid out to a contractor to build. To state that the architect is ‘trying’ to increase costs for the project to make a few extra cents on fee is insane. If design professionals did this, they would not get repeat business and get a ‘black eye’ in the area making sure that no one ever used them again. It is just plain bad business. besides, I believe that the professional fee for this said project is listed as a fixed fee, meaning a set amount of money and not a percentage based option. again, get your facts correct. As a professional service, a government agency is allowed to maintain a working relationship with said agency. Any fees or projects are negotiated with them as they arise. The alternative is to go through a long and lengthy qualifications process, review, interviews, and finally negotiation. That said process will take more time and money to complete. So your claim to the ‘golden-ticket’ is actually saving the park district in the long run. Again, if its all about saving money and using it in the best manner, be sure to include all sides and give an alternative.

I like the comment that the facility, if completed, should include as many amenities as possible to serve the community and provide possible revenue sources. Maximize your potential. I believe that the park district worked with the architect to pursue and research several options and ideas, possibly exceeding 10. This is a lot of options, and I can only assume that most of these options had different prices, amenities, and benefits. I would hope that the park district is weighing all of these options looking at cost and benefits for those costs. Afterall, responsible management of taxes and improving services provided is what the park district is tasked with. This is what should be asked of the park district, not bashing them on non-substantiated false statements and anger rhetoric.

EDITOR’S NOTE: You claim you’re stating a lot of “facts” but all you provide is your fact-less opinions. For example, what Park Ridge “commercial construction” codes for the outhouse are causing “greater costs than residential construction,” and how much extra cost do they impose?

You claim that the Park District’s adoption of its own “prevailing wage” standard “requires a lot of work, research, updates, and justification for a lot of professions, but where’s your factual support for that?

As for your characterization, as “insane,” of our contention that FGM likes high project costs that drive its fees higher, because “design professionals…would not get repeat business,” you’re obviously clueless about why FGM and its ilk so aggressively seek out the public trough, which is because public troughs tend to be run by bureaucrats who couldn’t manage a sidewalk lemonade stand, overseen by equally clueless elected officials (Can you say Joan Bende, Cindy Grau, or Jim Philips? Are you Joan Bende, Cindy Grau, or Jim Philips?) who rubber-stamp NO-BID contracts for the FGMs to come up with non-competitive ways to spend the taxpayers’ money.

I’m surprised you haven’t proposed a revenue generating idea of your own. A coffee bar maybe, or better yet how about we simply charge admission to use the facilities? Because heaven forbid we provide adequate facilities without demanding something in return from those freeloaders who dare use them? And speaking of which, how are you going to handle a non-resident using the “outhouse?” Stand out front and demand an ID? Put up a sign saying “for taxpayers only?” Even better, let’s just forget it and let the facilities deteriorate to the point where we need to eventually demolish them. Who needs a park anyway when we can cram a bunch of houses or condos on that land!

EDITOR’S NOTE: Another typical “anonymous” MWR comment that can’t address the merits of the post so, instead, throws out a number of irrelevant or reductio-ad-absurdum arguments as so much chaff.

“The merits of the post.” Ah, got it. Your post has merits. Opinions that differ from yours do not. And apologies to MWR if you are reading, I didn’t set out to steal your identity.

EDITOR’S NOTE:You didn’t need to steal her identity because you already own it.

When was the vote for FGM taken by the Park Board?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Look it up and get back to us.

There wasn’t one.