.
Glen Ellyn library seeks $3 million for repairs

Daily Herald September 24, 2009
— By Marco Santana | Staff Contact writer

Would rather spend tax money on that Vs Astroturf.

I'm curious where there defects in the original construction. If so were bonds or insurance taken out to cover such defects. Also if certain things were missing, why did it take fourteen years to find out. Wasn't the building inspected afterwards and why wasn't it noticed then.

I can hear the answer coming. We should move on. Whats done is done and we need to look to the future. Taken from the D41 playbook.

Well, I've heard homeowners reflect with regret when they've done construction or repairs the 'cheap' way, in order to minimize immediate costs. An awful lot of people, including taxpayers, sort of miss taking the long view and opt for what's cheap right this minute, instead of what's cost effective for years to come (I see this at my own condo association meetings).

I agree it'd be good to see if there is any sort of insurance recourse, but I don't find it surprising that cheap materials would wear out quickly.

Agree that I'd far rather spend money on the library than extra turf for sports at the schools.

What was the major repair work they did last summer? I recall seeing a bunch of blue tarps on the 2nd story/parking lot side.

Much to the surpries of many knowledgable locals, Perkins Pryde Kennedy Steevensz Architects bid on the Library... but did not win. (Jerry Perkins designed almost every building of consequence in Glen Ellyn, and has been credited with giving the village its beloved and charming “New England” look.)

You get what you pay for. —Ted E.

If what the article says is true- that the building was not constructed to plan to save money, looks to me like the only one holding the bag is going to be the library (and taxpayers).

"not built according to plan" and "substandard materials" don't sound like poor architecture. Those quotes sound like poor construction management and poor materials approval responsibilities. But who is to blame is entirely dependent upon the project delivery method, roles, and responsibilities. It could have been any (some, or all) of the parties who made mistakes.

quote:

Originally posted by middlein87:
"not built according to plan" and "substandard materials" don't sound like poor architecture. Those quotes sound like poor construction management and poor materials approval responsibilities.

I'm not sure what poor architecture sounds like, but I know what it looks like, making the library a perfect 3 for 3.

Why not get rid of the Library? Turn the building into a large computer center (servers?), digitize all the books, make the vagrants sleep somewhere else! Get rid of all the staff. . . . Brilliant Huh?!

Lets see there are roughly 27,000 people in GE. So that works out to roughly 120.00 a person. Or I would guess around 500.00 a household to pay for this.

That's all! Seems like such a great deal for a NEW building that has so many problems! When will it end?! To bad there are so many vagrants hanging out there, can't even take the kids there without worrying about their safety.

Maybe it could be a homeless shelter!

quote:

Originally posted by Biostitute:
Maybe it could be a homeless shelter!

It IS!

This is another thing, where before they even think of asking for more cash, they really owe an explanation of exactly who screwed up, and why the same mistakes will not be repeated. I'm not saying someone needs to be nailed to the wall - we all know that will never happen. But don't act as tho everyone did a bang up job, and it is just "unfortunate" that a 14 year old multi-million $ building requires repairs costing nearly 50% of the constructon price.

FWIW — when I was a Library Trustee (c.2004), we became aware that the HVAC system was doing a poor job of heating in the winter and cooling in the summer.

We discovered that the HVAC equipment was undersized for the building, and replaced the boilers, etc.

I have no recollection as to whether or not the system was incorrectly speced by the architect, or if the builder installed a smaller one than was specified. I'm guessing the subject never came up. It simply had to be fixed.

In any case, I don't think it ever occurred to us to check the rest of the structure for any other corners that may have been cut. —Ted E.

Isn't it amazing, The inspector all but shoves a flashlight up my *** when I build something in town, but build a public building and nobody knows what the hell happened!

What about the soggy ground that it was built on in the first place?

In the very early days of Danby/Glen Ellyn, there was a spring-fed stream that ran from (roughly) the present location of the library to Lake Ellyn (before it was a like), pretty much following what is now Crescent Boulevard. It was piped underground and paved over decades ago, but should you happen to find yourself in the basement of the library, open the “secret” crawl-space door and you can see the spring water flowing into the grate that feeds it into — eventually — the East Branch of the DuPage River (via Lake Ellyn and the Churchill Forest Preserve).

The water control system seems to be working as designed, even in the heaviest of rains and spring floods. They got something right.

If we'd only dig up Crescent and turn it back into a babbling brook with a walkway, we could be just like Naperville! —Ted E.

quote:

Originally posted by Ted E.:
(before it was a like), —Ted E.

Uh hmmmm!