3/3/2004 LIBRARY BUILDING COMMITTEE Minutes

Home Browse Search

1W . Decisions Made,and Why They dere lade. T Sheldon reviewed a history of the decisions that have been crude by the LBC to date, regarding the outcome of the existing library. The LBC had made a decision to demolish the library, because the cost of renovating and integrating it into a new building would be as much as the construction of a new building. The,original building was not sited for future expansion, and was not-built efficiently. In terms of long term planning and providing services to the community,the existing library was a rhistake. The LBC felt that keeping the library building hindered our ability to design a proper building to meet the future needs, both in terms of the building itself and in terms of expanding the building to serve a greater population as time went b . One of the trigs the LBC warts to ensure is that the neer library can be expanded w ithout the problems that this library has presented Jn' terms of expanding the activities to the community. The committee had come'a certain distance when Randall Imai proposed that we try to use the existing building. In Randall lmai's presentation last week, included were two options based on the theme of containing the library. one of the options presented was to incorporate the existing library into plans for a new library, limiting the use of the old building to administrative offices, or perhaps a children's library. To consider this option would be to go back on the decision the LBC had made, which-was to get rid of the existing library. The question before the LBC now is the timing of demolition of the library: a before the construction begins, which would incur not only demo costs but also relocation costs, but also would give free range on design and placement of the building on the site. Relocation costs are estimated to b $100,000. b construction is completed, which would place some Iimitation on where the new building would be placed and what the design would.be, in order to accommodate continued operation of the library. costs to secure the construction area from traffic into the librarY would be incurred: on the plus side, relocation costs are eliminated. Helena DeFoe reported that she m.et last week with Patience-Jack on, a building consultant for the lass. Board of Librar Commissioners. Helene asked Patience about use of the library for a children's program'arid whethe'r'there was,a different code for the weight. Patience w-as not aware of a different code, but commented that the weight on bhldren' bookshelves is not that much lighter than that.on shelves holding books for adults. Because of their thinness,,you tend to have-many more childrens books on the shelves. Sheldon's conclusion, after-considering all the pros and cons outlined above, was that the LBC should not build on an old mistal e. 'This was the general feeling of the LB-c early on, but as a result of Imai's options presented at the last meeting, the idea of working around the existing building had been resurrected. Sheldon intredw'ced a lever that he had received from Buff Chace, managing general partner of I ashpee Commons(SEE ttach nt . The letter indicated that Mashpee Commons has asked Mr. Imai to step away from the library building project until such time that there is a clear, consistent, workable and realistic plan in place which provides a mechanism to fund the construction of the new facility and sets in place a program to sufficiently staff, operate and maintain the new, enlarged library. Mr. Chace also indicated that he would like to see the LBC, the Friends and the Trustees of the Library, the Board of Selectmen all actively participate in the development of the construction plan. Sheldon reminded the committee that there ha8 been drefim9tic Mo ernerit t wr rd rneetih the Selectmen's desires. The design has been reduced in size from the or'ig'inal 27,000 sq.ft. to 17,307" sq.. Joyce Mason has indicated that the Selectmen may verb weII support an increase from million to$3.5 million. 2