Riverside Info » About Riverside

The folly of grants you can't afford...

(15 posts)
  1. spatny
    Member

    From the Landmark

    4/28/2009 10:00:00 PM

    Bethany Vogelsberg/Staff
    Centennial Park work eyed for early July
    Final cost 27. 7% higher than initial estimates

    By BOB UPHUES
    Editor

    The effort to improve Centennial Park and the streets that border it will begin just after July 4, according to Village Manager Kathleen Rush, after trustees last week approved spending over $400,000 in final engineering and construction costs.

    According to the latest figures released by the village, the final cost of the project will be just over $536,500. That's 27.7 percent higher than the initial estimate for the project, originally pegged at $420,000.

    The long-awaited project has been in the pipeline since December 2005, when the village applied for an Illinois Transportation Enhancement Program grant. Riverside won $336,000 for the grant and initially expected to have to chip in $84,000 in village funds.

    Because of cost overruns with respect to engineering, Riverside is on the hook for $200,000 to complete the work.

    In its grant application, Riverside estimated engineering costs for the project at $50,500. The total cost for engineering is now expected to run right around $156,600. It is expected that the additional money will come out of the village's capital projects fund.

    Trustees voted unanimously to approve carrying through with the improvements at their meeting April 20.

    "The trustees' action allows the village to be placed on the June letting," said Rush. "The contract could be awarded on June 15, and they'd start construction almost immediately after July 4, so it can be wrapped up by school."

    The additional engineering costs have led to a change in one aspect of the plan as approved by the board. Originally, the plan called for new sidewalks and gutters on the west side of East Avenue. The new sidewalks have been removed from the plan.

    However, other aspects of the plan remain, including new planters with perennials along East Avenue, a larger area to accommodate outdoor café seating along the west side of East Avenue and accent lighting for the historic water tower.

    In addition, both East and Pine avenues adjacent to the park will be repaved, the concrete service drive in the park will be removed and new landscaping and sidewalks will be installed along the south end of the park.

    New grant application for underpass

    Since the beginning, the idea of renovating Centennial Park was to link it more closely with the downtown train station and create a railway/water tower campus.

    Another aspect of that linkage is a pedestrian/bike underpass just west of the train station at the Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railroad tracks. Since 2006, when the railroad threatened closing the old underpass linking the two train platforms, Riverside has toyed with building a new tunnel.

    In 2008, Riverside petitioned the Illinois Commerce Commission for a grant to build the new tunnel and create a green bike-to-rail program for downtown Riverside. But on April 1, Riverside learned it would not be getting a grant from the ICC.

    On April 20, however, trustees approved a request by Rush to apply for federal transportation funding for the tunnel. On April 7, U.S. Congressman Dan Lipinski wrote mayors within the 3rd Congressional District., encouraging them to submit up to three proposals to be funded by the federal government in its new transportation bill. Applications were due back to the congressman by today.

    According to information provided to trustees on April 20, the village estimates the new tunnel will cost just under $3.5 million to construct and would likely take four years to complete, most of it negotiating the preliminary and final engineering process.

    In addition, Riverside will apply for federal grant funding for street improvements to Longcommon Road from Woodside to Harlem and Barrypoint Road from the bridge to the railroad tracks.

    Years back I questioned the reason to take the centennial grant when it was being pitched as something that would have cost us about $85K. What we are getting was not worth it then and isn't worth it now at over $200K and counting. This project, like others, has never been vital to the Village and will do little to enhance what already exists.

    This is a leftover from the rejected era of the TOD when they wanted to rezone and build condos on Pine along with a multi-level parking garage and build the western-approach tunnel that I see they are still hankering for. All this was to be the "front yard" for the hulking VC which doesn't have one of it's own. How this "links" the tiny, postage stamp sized space that is Centennial to the train station is beyond me. This is like one of those gated communities along County Line Road that went belly up, the kind they call "Oak Forest" or Timber Ridge. You know, no timber and no ridge. Like Topsy, this project just grew and became part of that "Golden Age" we recently passed through. In reality this is simply another "artist's misconception" that includes a few planter beds and more paving. A $50,000 removal of that driveway and landscaping job could have accomplished this without all the engineering and cutting that big tree.

    This is how the money goes, folks. $65K here and $200K there and pretty soon... Hopefully this is the last "improvement" this Board has on the shelf for us.

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 08:49 #
  2. CuriousResident
    Member

    Tend to agree it sounds like an example of the "developer-mentality" that got us all in trouble.

    But I have to admit that I like the image/idea of having more evolved piazza like environment that incorporates café seating. It would make for a more social atmosphere to the village center and (hopefully) make it more attractive for businesses to be here. Granted, I've heard nothing but bad things about the landlord of the building that would benefit most...but I do not know how much of it is true.

    BTW, which big tree is on the chopping block? Folks just don't seem to respect the value of the mature trees left...they are the essence of our village!

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 09:10 #
  3. ChrisHajer
    Member

    Centennial Plaza image courtesy of The Landmark

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 10:08 #
  4. spatny
    Member

    The tree is already long gone - went last year. Only one left now.

    What outdoor seating? Look at the drawing. There won't be much of an enlarged area (if any) on the west side/building side of East Avenue. They should have kept the Rec Department at the DPW or put it in the back of the Arcade and used the Water Dept. for a Cafe/Bistro site that would have generated rent revenue and sales tax $ and had place for outdoor seating in Centennial. It is not really a park anyway - last I heard it was still an "industrial site" although they may have changed that sometime when I wasn't looking.

    The point I wanted to make is that we are still committed to continue to expend (squander?) funds we can ill afford to part with on superfluous projects all related to the misguided "development ueber alles" direction we were taken in. I'll bet that when all is said and done there will have been about $3 million spent in that tiny place when you count this latest foolishness, the Water Tower rehab, the Water Department building makeover for the Rec Dept., the West Well House, etc. Nothing particular great, but nice to have if you can afford it. We can't, but we are going to anyway. It doesn't matter whether it came from us or grants - we always get led into these things by the lure of "something for nothing" that then turns out to cost the village a lot more than it was supposed to. It will be the same thing with the parking lot project on Burlington. And now we see that even after the election they are going after that $3.5 million tunnel project again. Can't they understand what the voters clearly told them on several occasions?

    I don't know whether anyone saw the figures today showing that the U.S. has dropped 6.5% in the last year. Things are going to be very tough and a lot of people are going to lose their jobs and their ability to meet their obligations. We should refrain from loading these kinds of unnecessary (and overpriced) projects on the residents.

    From RGE Monitor:I tried to blockquote this but can't seem to get it to work.

    Real GDP growth contracted 6.1% in Q1 2009 after contracting 6.3% in Q4 2008. Exports, inventories, govt expenditure and investment had a negative contribution to GDP growth whereas consumption had a positive contribution
    Details of Q1 2009 GDP: Real final sales (GDP - change in private inventories) decreased 3.4%. Private inventories subtracted 2.79% from GDP growth, most since records began in 1947. Real Personal consumption rose 2.2% (the most in 2 years); private investment fell 51.8% led by a 38% decline in both residential and business investment; government expenditure fell 3.9% due to decline in defense and state and local govt spending; exports fell 30% but imports fell at a much faster pace at 34.1%. This led to a positive GDP contribution of net exports of 1.99%
    In spite of second derivatives of some economic indicators turning positive, the indicators themselves are expected remain in the negative territory for a prolonged period. This is exacerbated by the fact that job losses, negative wealth conditions and tight lending conditions will keep putting downward pressure on consumer spending and manufacturing. This will also raise defaults and delinquencies on consumer loan, mortgages, credit cards and corporate loans which will lead to further bank writedowns and keep credit tight in the economy

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 10:46 #
  5. Catherine
    Member

    I can't believe these people just voted to spend this money on April 20 when they clearly were voted out for just this sort of thing. What gall. Or is it denseness when you cannot read the signs of the times?

    I wonder if the decision can be reversed? Green is good.

    TANSTAAFL. I understand we would still have parking on Burlington today if a board hadn't accepted a federal grant to 'beautify' the street by adding the beds that have turned out to be such headaches.

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 11:17 #
  6. spatny
    Member

    When people are squawking about federal spending and "projects to nowhere" I hope they remember that even after the advisory referendum against the tunnel, and even after being defeated three times at the polls on issues like this, they went ahead anyway and applied for funding for the tunnel. I guess it's OK if it's your pet project, just not the other guy's. There has to be something else here we are not seeing...

    I doubt it will be reversed because much of it has already been spent on engineering and subs. My point is that maybe you would like a new Lexus or such, but in tough times you have to put on some new rubber and make the old one last another year, which is what we should have been doing with a lot of stuff. Our budget is just like Bush's, we forgot to put the war costs in it. Then when we come up short and somebody has to ask for more they say "Read my lips." If we keep throwing these "smaller" extras that no one budgeted for on the pile that just compounds the problem.

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 11:55 #
  7. Fred
    Member

    Post from a week ago from Tom J:

    Is it just me, or are articles about the Pedestrian Tunnel oddly timed?

    For example, the tunnel funding (lack of) was ruled on April 1, 6 days before the election. Why does it only come out now, at the same time as the two employees that had gone after the grant have resigned?

    http://www.rblandmark.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=4917&TM=39092.33

    I find it equally odd that right before the tunnel was going to be filled, this article came out. It certainly kept the pitch forks away on that day, while we waited for a freight to pass on the first day of school. I feel kind of hoodwinked.

    http://www.rblandmark.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=4086&SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&S=1

    There doesn't seem to be unanimouty on the tunnel subject. The new administration can always turn down the grant money for the tunnel. This is probably not true for centennial project.

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 12:29 #
  8. mrt
    Member

    spatny, do you mean that a mature tree was removed for a project that was not even officially voted on or approved at the time? Or was it diseased - the tree, not the project?

    a little background on the tunnel...

    http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/bnsf-petitioning-to-close-tunnel-comments#post-6148

    The question was ...shall the village of R issue bonds of $4M to repair the tunnel?

    Village of Riverside Issue Bonds - $4,000,000
    Referendum - vote Yes Or No
    Precincts Counted: 11 of 11 (100.00%)
    Candidates Votes %
    YES 1,230 34.29%
    NO 2,357 65.71%

    What is the estimated cost of the alternative design (w/ the grant)?

    If we cd get the tunnel for free, wd or sd we do it?

    obviously

    what about for $1,000?

    same

    what about for $10,000?

    ...or $60,000? number seem familiar?

    or the $650,000+ ...used for the two houses on Burlington? Did we save our receipt, or did the return period on that expire :)?

    what is the price, especially for an infrastructure/safety thing, which most wd agree is the proper scope of the use of public monies? This is where Village board judgement comes in to handle the gray areas using deliberation and judgement. It is curious that even for a seemingly non starter of a question ($4M; the board obviously did not want to do that repair), over 1200 did say Yes - that is Saachi/Shevitz numbers).
    http://www.riversideinfo.org/forum/topic/10-of-10-showing-reported#post-8755

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 12:42 #
  9. spatny
    Member

    There is no free lunch. This is the dying gasp for the ill-conceived TOD that was adopted by the Board as the official vision for this Village against strenuous objection at those bogus workshops that were headed by the same firm that did the design work on Centennial. The VM had obviously discussed the possibility of rezoning on Pine (and Forest) for condo development along with the multi-level garage on Pine and the eventual reuse of property there. Part of the money they can get is supposed to be used for ramps and bike racks and facilities that will extend into greenspace on the south side of the tracks. So it is never just about dollars - it's about all the strings and wider ramifications that go with it.

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 13:04 #
  10. mrt
    Member

    spatny, please clarify:

    This is the dying gasp for the ill-conceived TOD

    What is 'this' - the tunnel project, the centennial project, or both? Is there a tunnel in that centennial project picture above? Cdn't the tunnel be separated from TOD and Centennial?

    Speaking of wider ramifications, wdnt a tunnel connecting the north and south sides of the tracks, in addition to the safety feature (which is certainly greater than mere dollars), be a good thing to help the Arcade? I see how well Scott Zimmer has done in that 'kinda nothing' building and has brought people there (ala Boston my wife just opined to me when she saw it the other night). A leisurely amble afterwards to the real goods and jewels of Riverside might be helped w/ a tunnel (somewhere).

    Agreed that money is tight now - the 'min' vision won (alluded to recently in another thread), and the will of the people was pretty clear on how the decision making needs to go in the next admin - fiscally responsible/conservative.

    Posted Wednesday Apr 29, 2009 13:21 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.