Submitted By
Collette Lueck and Dan Roush, Facility Review Committee Co-Chairs
Rob Sproule, Public Works Director
Reviewed By
Ahmad M. Zayyad, Deputy Village Manager/Interim Neighborhood Services Director
Agenda Item Title
Title
A Presentation and Discussion on the Outcomes of the Village Hall Renovation Feasibility Study and Recommendations of the Facility Review Committee
End
Overview
Overview
In July 2023, the Village Board approved a motion to advance the Police Station Improvement Project Option 4, a conceptual design option that proposed rebuilding the current Village Hall Campus with a new Village Civic Center that meets the current and future service needs of the Village, to schematic design (MOT 23-67). After further engagement with constituents and public feedback received by the Village Board regarding the existing Village Hall facility and potential for renovation, the Village Board created the Facility Review Committee (RES 23-309) and directed staff to engage historic preservation architects. Village staff supported the Facility Review Committee and Johnson Lasky Kindelin, Inc. (JLK), historic preservation architects, in preparing a report and presentation on the feasibility of renovating the current Village Hall facility to meet Village goals as identified by the Committee. Village staff, JLK Architects and the Facility Review Committee will present the evaluation’s findings and the Committee’s recommendation.
End
Recommendation
Recommendation
Village staff seek feedback from the Village Board on the schemes presented by Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects and the Facility Review Committee’s recommended scheme. The feedback gathered will be used to inform an analysis of the preferred renovation option in comparison to the approved redevelopment option to be presented at a future Village Board Meeting.
Background
In July 2023, the Village Board approved a motion to advance the Police Station Improvement Project Option 4, a conceptual design option that proposed rebuilding the current Village Hall Campus with a new Village Civic Center that meets the current and future service needs of the Village, to schematic design (MOT 23-67). Later that month, the Village Board provided further direction to staff regarding a desire to engage with a historical preservation architect to further evaluate the feasibility of renovating the Village Hall facility to meet Village Board goals. Village staff issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to solicit responses from interested architectural firms to provide Historic Preservation Architectural Services for the Oak Park Village Hall Facility Renovation Evaluation. A committee of Village staff was formed to review the RFQ submissions and conduct interviews with prospective consultants. JLK was chosen by Village staff due to their extensive knowledge of local historic preservation, and their current and past projects involving feasibility studies, programming analysis, and civic work.
In late October 2023, Director Sproule and Architect Meg Kindelin, of JLK, attended a Village Board meeting to discuss the Village Hall facility’s historic preservation evaluation. At that meeting, the Village Board approved a Professional Services Agreement with JLK and a resolution creating the Facility Review Committee and appointing its members. From there, Village staff initially began work with both JLK and the Facility Review Committee, separately. All members of the Facility Review Committee, as well as, the JLK team had the opportunity to tour the Village Hall facility, review historic and current facility plans, the National Register nomination forms, and historic facility photos.
The first meeting of the Facility Review Committee was held on Wednesday, December 20, 2023. This meeting was the most heavily attended, of all the Committee meetings, by the public. The Committee Co-chairs and members introduced themselves, provided some insight on their professional expertise and/or community engagement efforts, and expressed their desired outcomes of the facility evaluation. Director Sproule provided a presentation on the background of the project leading up to the formation of the Facility Review Committee and identified Village Board goals for the Village Hall and Police Department projects. Following this presentation, the Committee, led by its Co-chairs Colette Lueck and Dan Roush, began developing its own independent goals and determining the standards/criteria by which it would evaluate proposed facility solutions. The meeting ended with the Committee hearing four in- person public comments and two written public comments.
The second meeting of the Facility Review Committee was held on Wednesday, January 17, 2024, and was the first meeting attended by JLK Architects. The Committee Co-chairs initially led a discussion to recap the goals and standards that the Committee identified at the first meeting. The Committee identified the following goals:
1. The building should exhibit pride of place, be significant, speak to the Village, be welcoming, and identifiable as Village Hall with increased wayfinding efforts.
2. Construction and remodeling should be cost efficient. Residents will be paying close attention to how much it costs and how funds are spent.
3. The new Police Department facility should meet the needs, and space requirements, of modern-day policing. Preference should be given to a location on the Village Hall site.
4. Modifications to the building should be made under a “lens of inclusion,” holding the building to a higher standard than ADA compliance. All spaces in the building need to be welcoming and accessible to all visitors and staff, alike.
5. All schemes evaluated should include solutions for parking needs.
6. The Committee agrees that Village services will always be staff-driven and, therefore, there needs to be more space at Village Hall to account for all departments’ needs.
7. The Committee agreed that increased safety and security should be addressed without driving the design of the building.
8. Sustainability standards addressed by construction or renovation of the Village Hall facility should align with Village goals already outlined in the Climate Ready Oak Park plan.
Following this discussion, JLK provided a presentation introducing the Building Preservation Plan, which outlined the applicable National Register criteria, the interior and exterior character defining features of the Village Hall facility, and JLK’s definition of three treatment zones characterized according to historic and architectural significance. The meeting ended without any public comment.
The third meeting of the Facility Review Committee was held on Wednesday, February 21, 2024. JLK Architects presented three schemes to preserve the Village Hall facility that prioritized the Committee goals identified at its last two meetings.
Scheme One: Retain is the least intrusive design option and prioritizes maintenance of existing spatial organization and the overall Village Hall building footprint. ($31.5M - $32.5M) This scheme includes the following:
• Village Hall occupies a portion of the Lower Level and the entire First Floor and Mezzanine while the Police Department retains some spaces on the Lower Level.
• New elevator at South façade that extends from the Lower Level through the Mezzanine Level.
• Existing walls are largely retained- approximately 10% stud wall modification.
• Council Chambers Relocation:
o Council Chambers becomes a conference room and large meeting space.
o Relocate Council Chambers functions to Room 101.
o Modify Room 101 and absorb space from the staff breakroom.
o Modify Council Chambers and install raised access flooring to provide more flexible meeting space.
Advantages:
• Minimizes visual impacts from both interior and exterior.
• Minimizes wall reconstruction at interior.
• Lower rough cost and shorter construction timeline, comparatively.
Disadvantages:
• Some office spaces are located on the Lower Level.
• Less flexibility and conference/meeting space with a combined training and Council Chambers space.
• Does not address public versus staff circulation or restrooms.
• Maintaining police functions on the Lower Level does not address issues related to sound transference and also creates potential for new issues resulting from the decentralization of the Police Department.
Scheme Two: Hyphen-Addition explores a small addition, to the South façade of Village Hall, housing a lobby and security spaces on the First Floor and additional restrooms and conference space on the Lower and Mezzanine levels. ($54.8M - $56.0M) This scheme includes the following:
• Village Hall occupies the entire building and the Police Department moves all operations and spaces to a new facility elsewhere.
• New 3-level glass atrium and brick hyphen addition at the South façade to include two elevators for vertical circulation between Lower and Mezzanine Levels, reception, additional restrooms, and small meeting and conference spaces.
• Rework site access to create a new circle drop off at South façade.
• Demo approximately 40% of interior wall studs to better accommodate current office functions and programming.
• Creation of new light wells at Southeast corner foundation walls.
• Renovate Council Chambers to be accessible by adding new stairs to the balcony, removing two rows of seating to provide increased meeting space, and adding a new walk-through tube to provide egress.
Advantages:
• Meets space needs, as identified in the FGM Space Program, while avoiding office spaces on the lower level.
• Improves both site/exterior circulation and interior/building circulation.
• Council Chambers maintains use.
• Large public commons with a variety of gathering spaces for staff and public use.
Disadvantages:
• Although it meets historic preservation standards, an addition may be less desirable to Village Hall neighbors.
• Higher rough cost and longer construction time, comparatively.
• Does not meet the initial assumption to maintain some Police Department functions on the lower level.
Scheme Three: Sunken Plaza avoids the need for an addition by incorporating a new, below-grade entrance plaza with circulation and reception spaces at the Lower Level. ($35.5M - $38.0M) This scheme includes the following:
• Village Hall occupies the entire building and the Police Department moves all operations and spaces to a new facility elsewhere.
• New main entrance and lobby added to the Lower Level at the South façade.
o Site grade and access to allow for below-grade accessibility.
o Two elevators for vertical circulation from the Lower Level to the Mezzanine.
o Reworked stairway from the Lower Level to the First Floor.
• Demo approximately 40% of interior wall studs to better accommodate current office functions and programming.
o Renovation of Room 101 for use as an office suite maintaining the double height ceilings.
• Creation of new light wells at Southeast corner foundation walls.
• Renovate Council Chambers to be accessible by adding new stairs to the balcony, removing two rows of seating to provide increased meeting space, and adding a new walk-through tube to provide egress.
Advantages:
• Avoids visual impacts of an addition and provides a new outdoor space.
• Meets space needs while avoiding office spaces on the Lower Level. Large public commons with a variety of gathering spaces for staff and public use.
• Improves both exterior and interior circulation.
• Council Chambers maintains use.
Disadvantages:
• Creates additional landscaped areas to maintain, program, and monitor.
• Staff and public entrance at Lower Level could be undesirable and require more vertical circulation.
• Median cost and construction time, comparatively.
• Does not meet the initial assumption to maintain some Police Department functions on the lower level.
Following JLK Architects presentation, in an effort to add structure to their discussion, the Co-chairs polled Committee members in regards to the main differences between the schemes: relocation of Council Chambers, an addition to the South façade, and a below-grade entrance plaza. Since Scheme One did the least to address the Committee’s goals it was quickly discarded; however, the Committee spent a great deal of time discussing the potential relocation of Council Chambers to make the space inclusive for all users. The Committee members agreed this was a desired modification in the preferred scheme, but wanted to explore the proposed location further. The Committee also discarded Scheme Three, which included the below-grade, sunken plaza, due to concerns that the grand entrance plaza would be inconvenient to navigate and eventually go unused in a similar fashion as the Madison Ave entrance. The majority of the Committee members united around Scheme Two including the relocation of Council Chambers from Scheme One.
The Committee concluded the meeting by requesting that JLK Architects return in March with further information and examples of smaller office trends, proposed Council Chambers locations, and walkable skylights and light wells. The Committee heard one written public comment.
The fourth and final meeting of the Facility Review Committee was held on Wednesday, March 13, 2024, and provided the presentation of the final submittal by JLK Architects. In their presentation, JLK Architects recapped all three presented schemes highlighting the preferred scheme, provided examples of smaller office trends and walkable skylights and light wells, elaborated on location ideas for the new Council Chambers, and provided conceptual costs for all three schemes including the addition with and without the new Council Chambers.
The Committee reviewed the space needs identified by FGM Architects and smaller office trends that JLK has observed in the industry. While the Committee did agree that uniform office and workstation sizes were warranted, they rejected the idea that the Village Hall facility needed more flex space and unassigned work stations. The Committee recognized that there are operations within various departments (Law, Village Manager’s Office, Human Resources, Public Health, etc.) at Village Hall that require private offices and workstations that allow for the communication of sensitive information behind closed doors.
The Committee considered three locations for the new Council Chambers- Village Hall Room 101, the proposed public commons on the Lower Level, and an enlarged addition at the South façade to accommodate the space on the Mezzanine Level. After weighing the safety, security, inclusivity, and cost impacts of all three locations, the majority of the Committee agreed that the proposed public commons on the Lower Level would be the ideal location. In the recommended scheme, to be presented to the Village Board, the Committee requested that JLK propose degrees of intervention to the Lower Level space to provide the sense of gravitas that the Council Chambers requires.
A majority of the Committee’s discussion at this meeting centered around the size of the addition at the South façade and it’s impacts on cost. Cost was the predominant driving factor in eliminating the Council Chambers from the Mezzanine Level in the addition, despite it being the best opportunity for inclusive access to the space. The Committee further eliminated space to accommodate satellite public facing village hall functions, small conference rooms and flexible displays from the addition in an effort to make it as small as possible while still addressing accessibility needs. The additional restroom facilities, stairs, and elevators remained.
Ultimately, the Facility Review Committee unanimously approved the characteristics of their recommended scheme, which was a combination of all three schemes evaluated by JLK Architects. The recommended scheme is outlined below. To end the meeting, the Committee heard one written public comment.
Facility Review Committee Recommended Scheme
The Facility Review Committee coalesced around a recommended scheme that was a combination of all three schemes presented by JLK Architects. First and foremost, the Facility Review Committee believes that it is feasible to rehabilitate the current Village Hall facility to meet the needs of modern governance while also preserving the integrity and significance of the National Register-listed building ($39.2M- $41.2M). The notable upgrades, alterations, and additions of the Committee’s recommended scheme are, as follows:
• Build a small addition at the South façade to house an inclusive and secure entry. Features to be included in the addition are:
o Combined stair and ramp circulation between the First and Lower Levels.
o Two-way elevator for vertical circulation between all three levels of the building.
o Gender neutral restrooms on the First Floor.
• Rework the site to provide a circular drop off with streamlined pedestrian circulation at the South facade.
• Create a new, larger, state-of-the-art Council Chambers adjacent to the public commons at the Lower Level with walkable skylights above within the existing courtyard. The Committee coalesced around the interest in documenting three degrees of intervention that could take place. For diagrams, please see section 11-1 of the Building Preservation Plan.
o First Degree: The space would be a simple rectilinear room with daylighting from walkable skylights above.
o Second Degree: The space would be of a different geometry and include excavation of the slab to provide amphitheater seating and increased ceiling height.
o Third Degree: The space would be of a different geometry, include excavation of the slab to provide amphitheater seating, and a sculpture glass skylight installed above in the courtyard.
• Renovate the Lower Level to create storage space, staff areas, gender neutral restrooms, conference and meeting spaces, and a new Public Commons with flexible working and gathering space.
• Minor upgrades to the historic Council Chambers to improve accessibility, security, and functionality for use as a small meeting space. The balcony and stairs would be left intact and no longer utilized.
• Rework the stairs leading to the historic Council Chambers to address code-compliance. Provide a new two-way elevator that allows for access to all levels including the Council Chambers via the existing walk-through tube.
• Interior wall modification throughout the First Floor and Mezzanine Level to provide additional work areas. Existing open offices at the Mezzanine Level would be enclosed with glass partitions to maintain visibility while affording greater privacy.
• Upgrades to heating, cooling, lighting, roofing, window, and insulation systems to improve operational efficiency and sustainability.
The Facility Review Committee believes that with these modifications the Village Hall facility will continue to be a place of pride that is welcoming to all in a way that allows all users to experience the space and site equally. As demonstrated by JLK Architects, in the Building Preservation Plan (Sec 11-2), this scheme could be implemented in phases to allow for the relocation of the Police Department and rehabilitation of Village Hall.
Fiscal Impact
Financial information for all schemes evaluated by the Facility Review Committee is available in the Background section and the Historic Preservation Planning and Study Report compiled by Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects. All cost estimates presented by JLK are high level, conceptual costs that have been projected to account for a Spring 2026 construction. All numbers are estimated order of magnitude costs subject to further refinement based on future scope parameters.
DEI Impact
There are several DEI impacts to consider with the renovation or new development of Village Hall and Police facilities. Internally, the renovation or construction of new facilities creates better work environments and space to ensure maximum efficiency and efficacy to meet staff and public safety needs. Externally, improving the Village Hall facility provides an opportunity to make public-facing spaces inclusive for all visitors; however, marginalized communities may feel a significant investment in a new Police Department facility could impede efforts to rebuild police and community relationships. Overall, improving both the Village Hall and Police Department facilities presents a crucial opportunity for the Village of Oak Park to address accessibility disparities throughout Village Hall and have a Police Department that is better equipped to respond to the many challenges involving public safety.
Alternatives
N/A
Previous Board Action
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 listed on August 25, 2014.
Citizen Advisory Commission Action
N/A
Anticipated Future Actions/Commitments
On May 7, 2024, Village Staff will present an analysis of the Village Board’s preferred Village Hall renovation option in comparison to the redevelopment option.
Intergovernmental Cooperation Opportunities
N/A