Public comment to the village board at last Thursday’s study session on the superblock plan:
emember when you set your goals for this year? I do. I watched as you discussed the need to empower the citizen commissions and committees. One trustee asked, with a smile on his face, “Does this mean we have to start listening to them?” to which another trustee replied, “Only if they are right.”
What was meant to be humorous is becoming painful. Some of you are developing a reputation for ignoring the work of citizens who volunteer on the villages’ committees and commissions. Which brings me to my two concerns about the evaluation made by some of you regarding the charge and the work of the DTOP Superblock Steering Committee.
First, this was a process unlike any I have witnessed in Oak Park?#34;something that as trustees you should hold up as an example of work well done. Your two representatives (Trustee Greg Marsey and Trustee Ray Johnson) were thoughtful listeners and active participants in the discussions. The commission chairs represented an impressive variety and breadth of knowledge and experience. Citizens were welcomed to comment as often and as much as they desired, and were always treated with respect.
Your charge to the committee was not misguided. This group was up to the task at hand. For your benefit, as well as their own, they collected much public comment. They effectively utilized consultants. From that public comment, along with their own mix of experience, they crafted a plan that could help guide you into the next phase of decision-making.
Some of you are concerned with a lack of “vision.” You are not finished yet. Have any of you ever participated in the restoration or rehabilitation or construction of your own home? Think of yourselves and the Steering Committee as the collective homeowner of the future look of downtown Oak Park. Before you have a “vision” of what you want your project to look like, you have to identify the needs to be met. In this case, the Steering Committee identified the preservation of historic structures, the revitalization of retail, the addition of parking and residential facilities, and the improvement of traffic, all while maintaining a historic small-town feeling. All of these needs are connected to the other, Not one need surpasses the other. Together they form the basis for your vision, and the planning can continue. You don’t start with a vision, you arrive at one.
I am writing you as a citizen who cares about historic preservation, and not in my capacity as a Historic Preservation commissioner. I attended all but one of the Steering Committee meetings. Like others, I began the process with the expectation of preserving all of the historically important buildings. Had I not witnessed the exchange of information and deliberations of the committee, I might not have understood that the unfortunate loss of one building can ultimately help others. If you insist on the rehabilitation of the Colt building, you will dedicate funding to a building that has an arcade that is mostly new?#34;not actually “rehabbed,” but “reconstructed.” This will result in significantly fewer funds for much needed infrastructure, and for the possibility of restoring other historic buildings. There will be no new street, and probably not the funds for a parking facility to draw people to shop on Westgate. Retail will not be revitalized. Your decision to “preserve” the Colt building will actually hurt future effort to preserve other historic buildings. Downtown Oak Park will remain as it is now. You will have no vision.
There is another important potential loss. As you continue to ignore the recommendations of your citizen commissions and commitees, you will see fewer people willing to offer their time and well-reasoned efforts to help our village.