Title
title
A Motion to Finalize the Preferred Concept for the Oak Park Municipal Campus and Direct Staff to Advance the Preferred Concept to Schematic Design
..end
Introduction
overview
Reflecting the feedback received from the Village Board on November 20, 2025, Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, along with the schematic design team, will share a further refined Multi-site concept design, with two options for the Village Hall renovation. Preliminary pricing for the two Village Hall options and the Police Department have been provided as order-of-magnitude estimates for planning and budgeting purposes; however, once a preferred concept is advanced to schematic design, layouts, material choices, and costs can be further detailed, ensuring alignment with project goals and budget expectations.
end
body
Recommended Action
Village staff recommend that the Village Board choose a preferred concept for the Oak Park Municipal Campus and advance that concept to schematic design.
Prior Board Action
• On November 20, 2025, Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, along with the schematic design team, shared two conceptual design options with the Village Board, highlighting the financial and operational advantages and disadvantages of each option. The Village Board chose a preferred conceptual design option, the Multi-Site concept, to further explore the estimated costs of optionality and phasing (MOT 25-262).
• On February 11, 2025, the Village Board had the opportunity to receive an update from the schematic design team and provide feedback on the program validation report, the community engagement portion of the design process, and the outcomes of the Charrette Day activities (ID 25-182).
• On December 3, 2024, the Village Board approved a resolution for a Professional Services Agreement with Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, Inc. for Schematic Design Architectural Services for the Oak Park Municipal Campus (RES 24-358).
• On November 21, 2024, the Village Board approved the Motion to direct staff to negotiate a professional services agreement with Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, Inc. for schematic design architectural services for the Oak Park Municipal Campus (MOT 24-269).
• On July 30, 2024, Village staff brought forth a resolution for an amendment to the professional services agreement with Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, Inc., for additional conceptual solutions for village facilities. The Village Board denied this resolution and instead came to a consensus to move forward with the original Option 3, to build a new police station on the existing site and make renovations to the existing Village Hall. The Village Board directed staff to work through the process of choosing an architect to set the project’s budget and prioritize the Village’s needs (RES 24-261).
• On May 28, 2024, Ludwig Speaks facilitated a discussion with the Village Board to affirm their priorities as they relate to the Police Station Improvement Project in an effort to ensure that future Village Board actions align with their values (ID 24-287).
• On April 9, 2024, the Facility Review Committee, with the support of Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, Inc., provided a presentation to the Board on the feasibility of renovating Village Hall to meet the needs of modern governance for the Village while maintaining its historic integrity (ID 24-200).
• On October 30, 2023, the Village Board approved a Professional Services Agreement with Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, Inc. for historic preservation architectural services (RES 23-298). The Village Board also approved a resolution creating a Facility Review Committee for the Oak Park Village Hall Facility Renovation Evaluation Project and appointed its members (RES 23-309).
• On July 31, 2023, the Village Board approved an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with FGM Architects, Inc. for additional conceptual solutions for Village facilities (RES 23-239). The Village Board also directed staff to engage a separate architectural firm with experience in historic preservation to evaluate the viability and cost of renovating the Village Hall facility to meet the goals of the Village.
• On July 5, 2023, the Village Board approved a motion to advance the Police Station Improvement Project Option 4 (Rebuild the current Village Hall Campus with a new Village Civic Center that meets the current and potential future service needs of the Village including, but potentially not limited to, current Village Hall services and Public Safety and facility parking needs) to schematic design (MOT 23-67).
• On April 24, 2023, the Village Board approved an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with FGM Architects, Inc. for additional conceptual design options for the Police Station Improvement Project (RES 23-138). At this meeting, the Village Board also approved a task order for Professional Engineering Services with Cordogan Clark & Associates, Inc. to conduct condition assessments and complete energy audits for Village Hall (RES 23-132).
• On February 18, 2020, the Village Board approved an Agreement with FGM Architects, Inc. for Architectural and Engineering Schematic Design Services for the Oak Park Police Department in an Amount Not to Exceed $322,600 (RES 20-093).
• On November 19, 2018, the Village Board approved an Agreement with FGM Architects, Inc. for a Space Needs Assessment for the Oak Park Police Department in an Amount Not to Exceed $53,680 (RES 18-1050).
• On January 22, 2013, the Village Board approved the Historic Preservation Commission’s 2013 Work Plan, allowing the Historic Preservation Commission to pursue listing the Oak Park Village Hall building on the National Register of Historic Places. The application was accepted, and the building was listed on August 25, 2014.
Background
At a special meeting of the Village Board in November 2025, Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects (JLK) presented two concept designs, the Municipal Campus Concept and the Multi-site Concept, and additional optionality for Village Hall and Council Chambers. The goal of the presentation was for the Village Board to choose a preferred concept and provide feedback on the various options associated with the Village Hall and Council Chambers.
The Village Board chose, nearly unanimously, to explore the Multi-site Concept further, highlighting its cost advantages, improved programmatic outcomes, and sustainability associated with relocating the Police Department to an existing building and retrofitting and expanding it to meet the needs of the Department. While the Police Department option seemed intuitive, the Village Board was split on its approach to Village Hall and Council Chambers and requested additional information from JLK on the cost implications of relocating Council Chambers within the existing footprint of Village Hall or building an addition to the south façade. The Village Board also requested further clarification on the difference between basic maintenance costs and full renovation costs for the Village Hall, emphasizing the need for transparency in financial planning.
As part of this presentation, JLK and the schematic design team plan to present two concept designs for Village Hall, the Core Addition Concept, which relocated Council Chambers to the East wing of the building with a minimal addition for an accessible entry, and the Council Chambers Addition Concept, which relocates Council Chambers into a new addition along the south façade including an accessible entrance to Council Chambers and Village Hall. Both concept designs provide for improvements to the efficiency of building systems, improve modern workplace standards, create accessible and inclusive spaces, and address safety and security issues for facilities and site to varying degrees.
In addition to the two concepts for Village Hall, JLK and the schematic design team have further refined the Police Department conceptual design for 11 Madison in an effort to solidify the decision to consolidate all functions into one building off-site. The conceptual design for the Police Department emphasizes operational efficiency, security, and functionality in an appropriately sized space for current and future needs.
Timing Considerations
The cost estimates provided by MCC, which coincide with the concept designs and optionality presented, assume that the construction timeline begins in or around the first quarter of 2027. Therefore, in order to maintain the integrity of these cost estimates, the Village Board would need to provide direction on a preferred concept design as soon as possible so the design team can commence the design process, beginning with schematic design. The entire design process is anticipated to take approximately 12-18 months to complete, depending on the amount of value engineering required.
As has been discussed in the past, in relation to this project and others, the longer a project is delayed, the more likely it is for the total cost to increase. Village staff requested that the design consultants quantify those increases, for both the Police Department and Village Hall, based on a one-year (Q1 2028), three-year (Q1 2030), and five-year delay (Q1 2032). Those delays would cost the Village an additional 5.5% percent, 12.5 percent, and 21 percent, respectively.
Budget Impact
There is no expenditure directly associated with the selection of an option. The provided presentation and the work in preparation for the presentation is included in the current professional services agreement with Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects that was approved on December 3, 2024 (RES 24-358).
Once a preferred option is advanced to schematic design by the Village Board, Village staff are prepared with the necessary documents to execute a new professional services agreement with Johnson Lasky and Kindelin Architects along with the associated budget amendment to cover the expenditure.
Operating Impact
While this item aligns with the Public Works Department’s core service delivery, as depicted in the Prior Board Action section, the entire process has demanded cross-department involvement over several years.
Village staff have been working with the schematic design team since December 2024 to review previous feedback from Village staff, the Village Board, and the Facility Review Committee to put together design options for Village Board review. While this process has demanded significant Village staff and consultant(s) time, the actual hours associated with this project are unquantifiable, at this time.
DEI Impact
Renovating Village Hall not only enhances the functionality and appearance of the space but also provides the opportunity to strengthen community ties, promote inclusivity, and acknowledge the diverse needs of the Village’s population.
Building a new Police Department could transform not only the working conditions for the members of law enforcement who serve the community but also their relationship with that community. Pulling the Police Department out of the basement could further foster a culture of trust, transparency, accountability, and collaboration that benefits everyone in the community. This approach could lead to better policing outcomes, improved community safety, and a stronger sense of belonging among all residents.
Community Input
As part of the community engagement process, the Village hosted two surveys and an Open House at Village Hall in January 2025. The first survey was posted on Engage Oak Park and was meant to elicit feedback from community members. The second survey was posted to Open Forms and the link was shared with internal Village Hall users. The community input received was previously presented to the Village Board as part of the February 11, 2025 board item associated with the Police Station Improvement Project.
Staff Recommendation
Village staff recommend that the Village Board choose a preferred concept for the Oak Park Municipal Campus and advance that concept to schematic design.
Advantages:
• By advancing a concept to schematic design, the Village Board would be able to gain further clarity on budget expectations once layouts, materials, and costs are identified in further detail.
• Once a preferred option is advanced to schematic design, the Village Board could then use preliminary pricing to explore financing options and delivery methods.
Disadvantages:
• Escalating a concept to schematic design creates momentum for the project that will be hard to slow down.
• Schematic design requires additional consultant time. If the project pauses or slows down following schematic design, some of those fees may be lost due to the need to repeat work.
Alternatives
Alternative 1:
The Village Board can delay action to gain additional information.
Advantages:
• Taking additional time to design and further develop the Board’s vision for the project could result in a different approach than currently represented by the Board’s goals that may better align with an updated perspective on the project, based upon new insights gained through the current design process.
• A delay could provide time to address any additional concerns articulated by the Village Board, further review or secure funding mechanisms, or pursuit of potential municipal partnerships.
Disadvantages:
• Additionally, delaying this project will lead to increased costs. As discussed in the Timing Considerations section, a one-year (Q1 2028), three-year (Q1 2030), and five-year delay (Q1 2032) will cost the Village an additional 5.5 percent, 12.5 percent, and 21 percent, respectively.
• The time and resources spent waiting could lead to missed opportunities, such as changes in market conditions or the change to invest in other projects.
• Delays could disrupt the momentum of the project, leading to a loss of interest from stakeholders and community members.
• Additional time would allow room to change the project scope or add new features, which could complicate and lengthen the project even further.
• Frequent delays could harm the reputation of the Village, leading to a loss of trust among involved contractors, future partners, and the community.
• Delaying this project could lead to scheduling conflicts with other projects, potentially making it harder to secure the same labor and materials when the project is eventually resumed.
Alternative 2:
The Village Board can provide direction to Village staff to pause the project indefinitely.
Advantages:
• No additional staff or financial resources would be committed to this project until otherwise directed by a future Village Board.
• Staff or financial resources could be redirected to other priorities.
Disadvantages:
• Delaying this project indefinitely could make it difficult to recruit and retain valuable Village and Police Department staff to develop, implement, and manage Village programs and services that directly benefit community members.
• The Village Board's goal to ensure a healthy working environment would be further deferred.
• A priority recommendation from the Berry Dunn Community Safety Study would be delayed indefinitely.
Anticipated Future Actions
Village staff plan to return several times over the coming year to gain additional feedback on the schematic design process and to discuss financial considerations and delivery methods for the project.
Prepared By: Erin Duffy, Deputy Public Works Director
Reviewed By: Rob Sproule, Public Works Director
Approved By: Kevin J. Jackson, Village Manager
Attachment(s):
1. Oak Park Municipal Campus- Concept Design Report