Website Home   or   Forum Home

Riverside Info » About Riverside

1. spatny
   Member

   D 96 is going to do landscaping and hardscaping in front of Ames and Hauser. I am moving my previous post to this thread below - maybe Admin can remove the old one? I won't comment on Ames because I don't know the situation there, but as I live immediately next door to Hauser, and experience the traffic there daily, I feel can contribute to this thread.

   First, I think, people should ask where this project came from. Why now? How much is being spent on it. FLOS, LAC and other interested parties should look into this. I know that when Dr. Lamberson first came here there were some conversations - I think Trustee-elect Sacchi was in on them - about landscaping the front in native plants. Nothing more came of that. If they want to (try) and keep the kids from cutting across the lawn (making go-paths) that might be a beautiful way to do that, and it, in turn, might make a great project to do with the Garden Club, the ECO Club at RBHS (many of those kids are Hauser Alumni). I think the Sustainability people should look at this too - adding a lot of concrete is not the answer.

   And one more thing: Can someone that has some clout at D 96 PLEASE get them to put some covered trash containers around the perimeter and then empty them on a regular basis? At RBHS there are trash receptacles at all the doors and around the fields, and they work. Here there are none near the backstops or driveways where the kids come and go. They need about four swing-top, all-weather tops on trash barrels.

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 09:07 #

2. Catherine
   Member

   Why not call Lamberson?

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 09:40 #

3. spatny
   Member

   I've done that, written letters, went to school board meetings, even copied pages from the web on where to get them and dropped them off - andthey are always "going to do it." It just never happens. Same with getting the sign on the wall here between the scvhool and our building that should say "No Loitering or Skateboarding". Sometimes, if we complain enough, they paint "No Skateboarding" on the pavement but the kids claim they didn't see it and it wears off and then we have to do it again. It wasn't like this when Bonnet was here...

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 10:01 #

4. idic5
   Member

   Everyone - we got us an object case !....for that reconciliation and progress thread, in order to find more about something that we are all affected by , both when we experience the landscape and when we spend our money to modify the landscape.

   I was going to say, the lack of an answer to the questions posed above and here is an example of the need for improved communication tools, but then I thought I wd try that one page summary of communication options that I quickly put together on the thread about same. When I clicked on the d96 link, I actually found something on this hardscape work.

   I want, however, to see more - and one can see where a more robust document repository or tool could be helpful. Apparently, this work is coming out of a 10 yr life safety plan approved by something called ISBE in 2007....I bolded where I think clickable links to provide more detail would be appropriate and would help in answering the questions. ++

   The Board authorized the administration to work with the district’s architect, Mark Miller from Concept 3 Architects to prepare specifications and seek bids for summer life safety work as noted in the 10-year life safety plan approved by the ISBE in 2007. Work will include tuckpointing at Hauser as well as district-wide hardscape renovations. Because of the anticipated work at Hauser, summer school will be held at Ames School.

   http://www.district96.org/index.php?s=architect

   chrisrobling talks about using RSS feeds for d208 and d96 here.

   Perhaps each of the public bodies being discussed, the village and districts 96 and 208, should provide RSS service to push out their various agendas no less than one week in advance of their meetings. Obviously, in the village case, that would include all of the commission agendas as well as the board of trustees'. On the school side, it would include the committees.

   I think most would agree that if we had a week ahead looksee into this proposed work, it would have helped everyone interested in finding out about the work, including the rationale, the scope and the cost. Obviously, backtracking, if we were more plugged-in to the work we wd have known more about the 10 yr life safety plan, and, addressed the details THEN, when it was the free volunteer time of our fellow citizen school board trustees. Now we have to pay an architect for each turn he or she comes out, probably.

   It is amazing what one finds out just by watching the *sausage* being made.

   The current way of being plugged-in , going to the physical meetings, is certainly not just-in-time, is inefficient, and requires time and luck, luck that you can make it to the meeting, and time that you can make it through a bunch of stuff that might not be relevant to what you are interested in.

   THANKS, again, Don Spatny, for being our eyes and ears until a more robust information exchange gets hooked up ...somehow.
   .
   .

   ++
   one quick point - if one will propose a comment, or even an intelligent question, one needs first to be up to speed on what and why something is going on

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 17:17 #

5. spatny
   Member

   This cannot be construed as a mandated "Life Safety" issue unless you work for AIG, where words and results mean nothing. The school is going to build two reading circles, some other stuff. No doubt some parent didn't like stepping out of her warm SUV into the snow or something and thought this was a good idea. There is a 6 ft. sidewlk there - all along the street. A 6 ft. sidewalk will remain in front of Central. The cars unload all over, including the other side of the street, down in front of the church, in front of our building where we have a normal sidewalk, and all the way back to Akenside. This is just someone's idea of a pleasing design - someone who likes to "build things", someone who likes to pour concrete. This will not keep the kids from cutting across the grass and will start a trend that will be as disastrous as theVC was/is.

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 19:11 #

6. idic5
   Member

   If you're pouring, I'm not buying. :) Seriously, we have to see that life safety study. Is that online somewhere? Those are pretty strong words, 'life and safety' - antithetical to 'discretionary'....hmmm (that is code for the taxpayers have no choice...)

   But evaluating or opposing something like this at BID TIME, seems to me a bit like assessing or opposing the TIF after houses were listed in the newspaper. I wonder if much money and work had already been expended just to get to this point. Are we seeing a pattern?

   googling, I found....
   http://www.district96.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/minutes-2-17-09-board-meeting1.pdf

   09-10 The Building Committee has been working to determine the scope of life safety
   and general maintenance projects to include for completion during the summer
   of 2009. The district prepared and submitted a 10-year life safety plan to the
   State Board of Education. The plan was approved by the ISBE in 2007. The
   largest project scheduled for the summer of 2009 is tuckpointing Hauser Junior
   High School and additional interior life safety work. In order to move forward
   with the plans a motion was made by Mr. McCarthy, supported by Mr. Volpe to
   authorize the administration to seek sealed bids for the work noted above
   according to specifications prepared by Mark Miller of CONCEPT 3 Architects.
   The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
   Ayes: Mr. McCarthy
   Mr. Schraidt
   Mr. Volpe
   Mrs. Wakely
   Mrs. Jensen
   Ms. Berdelle
   Nays: None
   Absent: Mrs. Bade

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 19:19 #

7. JohnM
   Member

   According to Don:

   No doubt some parent didn't like stepping out of her warm SUV into the snow or something and thought this was a good idea.

   Right. No doubt at all. This is the only possible explanation and you've been good enough to pass it down from the mount.

   I wouldn't be surprised to find out that any proposed work at the schools is due to ISBE (that's Illinois State Board of Education) requirements. But I don't know that for a fact, so I won't state it as a fact. I hope the work is done well, I hope the work is done with a respect for the existing architecture. And, from what you've said, it seems that the Preservation COmmittee was on the ball.

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 21:32 #

8. spatny
   Member

   I happened to get up off my ass to go to the meeting, and so I saw that the original plan, which perhaps you care to assume was mandated by something, was maneuvered around to where the archs will now present a different plan. Also, it was stated by the Archs that "this was what Dr, Lamberson wanted." They are going to tear out the half wall in front of thr Hauser auditorium "because nefarious things have been happening behind there" or some such. What? In Riverside? They are also taking out the sign "because kids can hide behind it" and put it on the wall, and put in solid to the ground benches "so they can't hide underneath." This is what they said, not me. If you went to the meetings you'd know about it. Go there, ask questions, find out, then criticize. BTW, the entire Preservation Commission saw it the same way I did.

   They are going to build two reading circles etc. Hardly a life support issue. IO thought they needed money to operate? Is this another instance of Topsy "just growed?" The point is that the property line is five feet back from the existing sidewalk so they are not dealing with school property, they are dealing with the public right-of-way.

   There are some people here on the Forum - usuallyunidentified -that seem to just want to argue against anything I bring up or for anything that some admin advocates. Why don't you next week get up out of your chair, go to the school. ask to see the drawings and get an explanation of the project, walk around and see first hand where it is they want to do this, and then argue. There is no valid reason why they should pour a sidewalk 12 feet wide along there. This is how this crap happens, like the library circle. No one watches, no one is responsible, a commission weighs in against doing it and yet it gets poured - even without a permit being issued. That has to stop. Concrete stays around a long time. ( BTW, the entire Preservation Commission saw it the same way I did.)

   We have codes and zoning to protect the many from the few. Here it has been working the other way around. We are not supposed to pave over the public lands because a bunch of people want to drive there and park there - despite the signs admonishing them not to do so - and sit in their cars for a half hour and and talk on the phone and wait for their kids. That is not a proper function for the school to spend dollars on. Go there at 2:45, stick around until3:30, see if you see any traffic control, or people obeying the signage. Take a good look around, see what happens, read the signs, see how the police do nothing, etc.

   The schools are valuable, and I campaigned for them to get the money at 208 because the high school needed to be updated for the coming sciences, etc. I campaigned against the TIF because it would have taken money from the schools. I think that 96 should landscape the front , involve the organizations andthe kids in it so they have some pride in what is done, but this is going way too far. Why is this money being spent now?

   We have this problem all around town. People in private homes here extend walls and pour oversize driveways of impermeable concrete and extend electric lights into the public lands, and the village does nothng to enforce the code or defend the public's interest. Drive around at night and see if there isnot light extending into the public way. That's against the code. We have people hanging lights from trees to illuminate their entire lots - and of course it blows over into their neighbor's property, and nobody does anything about it. If you are a school, a church. somebody's mother or somebody's daughter you get to do this and nobody says anything. That has to change - the ambiance of this town is being whittled away by this garbage.

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 22:56 #

9. idic5
   Member

   A quick question about the exercise of examination and questioning of trustees (school or village):

   Since they are called TRUSTees, then why are the meetings public, and why is there a spot for public comment? Kind of like a Stephen Wright bit. Also, why is there an Open Meetings Act that puts such importance on the discussions by these people to be in the open and available to the public? After all, we TRUST them, right? When you trust someone or something, by definition, you do not check it out, or follow up. It is assumed to be done per the parameters of the position.

   Remember those trust exercises in those group psych seminars, where you are supposed to fall back and TRUST that your partner will catch you? Remember Kaa in the Jungle Book, 'trust in me'? +

   Also, I noticed that not one, not two, but all three board elections that we just had, d96 d208, and the Village, all candidates emphasized transparency and responsive feedback and communication with constituents. In a purely TRUSTing relationship, transparency and feedback are not applicable concepts. Why did they emphasize this in their handouts and in their speeches?

   The "TRUST , BUT VERIFY" during detente with the USSR during the 1980s was interesting and humorous because it was actually paradoxical. However, in that context, the paradox was understandable since the two parties were in a cold WAR.

   I think the answer to the question is....it is ok, it is expected, and it is acceptable to ask honest questions, if one wants, of the TRUSTees. In fact, from all the handouts, the trustees should be excited to fulfill their campaign pledges. For others not so inclined, they can also feel quite free and comfortable to not ask questions and let the TRUSTees govern and take it up w/ them the next election.

   anyway,

   From the d96 blurb,

   10-year life safety plan approved by the ISBE in 2007

   I took this to mean that the d96 board drafted the plan, possibly prompted by the State, which then gave approval for the d96 plan.

   If anyone is interested enough to clarify, please add here.

   If anyone can find the means of contacting d96 board members, please add here. I cd not find on the d96 website.

   Also, if someone can cite the lifesafety report here, it would help in understanding the provenance of the hauser hardscape mods.

   I did not see this lifesafety report in the planning documents page, unless I am missing it...

   http://www.district96.org/school-board/planning-documents/

   .

   +

   Posted Friday Apr 10, 2009 23:01 #

10. JohnM
    Member

    Don,

    I think it's clear the Preservation Commmission agreed with you--I noted that in my reply to your post.

    My issues with your post are two-fold:

    1)Nowhere do you state why the proposed work is being carried out. You speculate, but you don't know. You just know you're against it. I don't know either--I speculated it was due to State regs, but I may be wrong. And--let's be very clear--the plan the architects presented was rejected.

    2) Your sneering contempt for anyone who doesn't share Don Spatny's worldview is growing wearisome, and any valid points you make are--at least to me--overshadowed by this. How many times have you bitched about SUV drivers, claimed that people with updated kitchens don't use them or complained that kids today don't walk, bike, play, etc.? You're certainly entitled to your opinions, and you're free to express them as loudly and as frequently as you like. However, I'm sure you are aware that these opinions inspire a visceral reaction in some people, and that your otherwise intelligent and thoughtful posts may be ignored because of this.

    I agree though, that traffic on Woodside is a problem--I'm generally at work at the times you mention, but I have on occasion seen the mess. The ugly no-parking and towing signs that are defacing St. Pauls are the direct result of this. I'm sure the church didn't want to put them up, but apparently people felt entitled to park their cars in the church driveway while running errands or attending functions at the schools--I don't fault the church for feeling the need to do something about this (and, I bet they feel awful--that church spent a lot of time and $$ making their landscaping sensitive to the Olmsted legacy).

    Posted Saturday Apr 11, 2009 09:25 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.