Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Downtown Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Manteno committee backs engineering study for new Oak Street parking; staff eye mirrored half-lot
Summary
The Manteno Public Works Committee asked staff to prepare an engineering PSA and cost estimate for new public parking on Oak Street between Division and Adams, targeting roughly 70–80 spaces and considering a half‑block “mirror” of an existing lot to contain costs.
The Manteno Public Works Committee on June 30 asked staff to draft a design‑engineer PSA and refined cost estimate for a proposed public parking lot on the east side of the train tracks along Oak Street, between Division and Adams, to ease persistent downtown parking shortages.
A board member introduced the item, saying clients of nearby businesses — including Premier Fitness, physical therapists and Tire Tracks — regularly fill adjacent lots and spill onto Division Street. Bruce, the staff member who reviewed preliminary numbers, told the committee the initial, back‑of‑the‑envelope estimate would likely create about “70 to 80” new spaces.
The nut of the proposal is accommodating demand without overbuilding. Board members discussed building a full block‑length lot versus mirroring the smaller existing lot across the tracks. Estimates discussed during the meeting ranged from roughly $300,000 to $500,000 depending on scope and whether the project is built in a half‑lot (mirror) configuration or the full block; Bruce and other staff called those figures preliminary and said they included a 10% contingency on the ballpark numbers.
Committee members emphasized the project’s potential to support small businesses and local festivals such as Oakfest and noted some private lots (for example, Tire Tracks) had been absorbing overflow parking. Peggy asked how new public parking would help attract businesses; members replied that visible, reliable parking reduces a potential barrier for prospective tenants.
Rather than vote on construction, the board directed staff to prepare a PSA for an engineer’s estimate and a bid‑ready design for a half‑sized (mirror) lot that could be expanded later if demand increases. Bruce said he could aim to have a PSA ready by the next board meeting or the following meeting at the latest.
The committee also discussed funding options in general terms; one member noted proceeds from the pending sale of an underused public‑works building could be applied toward capital investments. No formal construction authorization or funding appropriation occurred at the June 30 meeting. The next procedural step is staff submission of a PSA and a detailed cost estimate for committee review.
