After more than two years of investigating the building of a new pool facility, Oak Park and River Forest High School is close to finally deciding where it will go.
The D200 Board of Education will make a final selection on Thursday at its regular meeting.
A D200 ad hoc committee has recommended building the pool facility on a portion of the varsity baseball field next to the football stadium. It was one of three sites the school explored since last spring.
Supporters of the school’s baseball and softball programs, and those supporting off-campus youth programs, however, think the baseball field site is a bad idea.
The school board heard and discussed the recommendation on Aug. 19 at a special meeting.
The ad hoc committee, which includes D200 administrators and school board members, chose the baseball field over the two other proposed sites — the land currently occupied by the parking garage on Lake Street, and Scoville Avenue between Lake and the viaduct next to Ridgeland Park.
The roughly $35 million facility that was selected includes an Olympic-sized pool, a design option strongly supported by the school’s swimming community. The two-story, 50,000 square-foot structure includes upper-level bleacher seating and lockers rooms on the first floor. A connecting pedestrian bridge from the structure to OPRF’s main building is also part of the facility.
The committee, which met over the summer, looked at each site in depth and mostly all landed on the same choice, John Phelan, D200 board president, said.
Still, most of the 19 people who spoke at last week’s special meeting, want the baseball field taken off the table.
OPRF baseball and softball will have to relocate to alternative off-campus sites during the two-year construction period. Other Oak Park youth programs that use the field will also have to find somewhere else to play and practice for that period. That prospect is unthinkable and impractical, opponents argued.
Bill Sullivan, president of Oak Park Youth Baseball and Softball (OPYBS), said other locations are already taken up by Park District of Oak Park programming. Space in town, he said, is already tight and closing the varsity field will only make matters worse.
“Those organizations are already feeling the stress of limited field space to the extent that there’s very little, if any, practice time for the various teams that will eventually generate players for OPRF,” Sullivan said.
Having OPRF’s players relocate to another community to play and practice would also be an undue burden placed on them, Sullivan said.
Other speakers agreed.
“With the recommendation, we’re just killing the field space. And its not just about baseball and softball, it’s about all the programs our kids participate in,” said Tony Nowak, vice president of OPYBS.
“I’m not here to say that we shouldn’t do the pool,” he added. “I question the fiscal responsibility and, perhaps, the priorities of the community that’s about to spend $50 million, or more, in five years on two pools. But my biggest problem is where we’re going to put it.”
Other speakers, like Eric Sorensen and Wayne Franklin, said the parking garage was the better choice for the facility.
“It seems to me that [the parking garage] next to the school is a pretty gosh darn good site. The problem is that you’ve got to take down a parking structure,” Sorensen said.
Built in 2003, the garage generates about $6,000 in revenue annually but is projected to have a deficit of nearly $1 million this year, according to Village of Oak Park budget figures from last year. It was built with $4.5 million in issued bonds and currently has yearly operating costs of more than $100,000, including maintenance.
Connie Coleman, a 42-year Oak Park resident who spoke at the meeting warned against tearing down the parking garage.
“While I have been here for many years, the parking problem around the neighborhood was horrendous,” Coleman, who lives across the street from OPRF on Scoville Avenue, said.
“The next big improvement in our lives in this neighborhood was the building of the parking garage, which was quite a big investment,” she said. “I share the concern of those who don’t want to lose any open space — that’s a very valid concern. I’d also hate to see the parking garage lost.”
Board members also expressed their preferences for where to build.
Sharon Patchak-Layman and Jackie Moore leaned more toward building on the parking garage site, saying that site would cause less disruption to students and the school’s athletic programs.
Patchak-Layman also noted that the garage, with its 300 vehicle spaces mostly used by OPRF faculty, has been under-utilized since its construction. Phelan preferred building on the baseball field but acknowledged the difficulty that placed on groups currently using the field.
Moore also expressed concern about the varsity field once the facility is complete, and whether they’ll be enough practice space for athletes and the OPRF marching band who use the field at similar times.
OPRF Athletic Director John Stelzer told members that shouldn’t be a problem. The teams and band might need to line up in different spots but both will still have shared space on the field, Stelzer said.
The baseball field site had two design options proposed by Legat Architects, the school’s design firm. The parking garage site also had two design options. These four options, along with one for the Scoville site, all ranged between $34 and $38 million. None of the designs included placing tennis courts on the roofs of the pool facility, which was in earlier draft’s plans.
The board also did not narrow down a specific price to build any structure. Phelan said that discussion will come after a final site is chosen.