HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-02-22 Transcription February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 1
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board 5:30 PM
Council: Lehman, Champion, O~Donnell, Vanderhoef, Wilburn, Pfab, Kanner
Staff: Atkins, Helling, Karr, Craig, Osbom, Clark, Eckholt, Brown, Black, Greene
Library Board: Mark Martin, Winston Barklay, Mary McMurray, Linda Dellsperger, Lisa
Parker, Shaner Magalhaes, Jesse Singerman
TAPE: 01-27, Both Sides
Library Update
Lehman/Its a little after 5:30, some folks are going to have to leave this meeting by 6:30
or so, so it's best to get started. This is your meeting Mark so take it away, thanks
for meeting with us.
Mark Martin/Thank you, the Library Board appreciates the Council meeting with us to
get an update on where we are for the plans for the expansion and with all the
good information is Joe Huberty who is the lead architect in this project for
Engberg Anderson Design Partnership, Inc. of Milwaukee and Joe is (can't hear).
Joe Huberty/Take it away from there, this is an update on what we've been up to over the
last two months. Really trying to refine the concept that was presented to the
community as part of the referendum process. Can everyone hear me?
All/Yea.
Huberty/And our focus has been on three primary areas, one is the functional plan of the
library, make sure it serves the needs of the community and that we can delivery
efficient library service from the building. The second has been planning the
environ. 's around the building, paying particular attention to the pedestrian mall
and how it will be affected during construction and after, and the third component
we've been looking at is the exterior image of the building. And our goal is to
really refine these so the point where at the end of April we'll have a refined cost
estimate that will allow us to hopefully start the construction document phase of
the process and that would bring us to bidding the project in late fall, we're
targeting October or November and then start construction around the first of
2002. Our hope is to be complete with construction 2 years from that point or if
all goes well a little before then. So towards that end we've been working on
refining the plan, and this is essentially the plan that was presented to the
community, the interior we've been working fairly extensively on the circulation
desk and it's approaches, really trying to promote self use of the check out uses,
so we've got a number of self check stations located in that area. That' s really the
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 2
primary change on the first floor in the library proper. The other thing you'll
notice is that the ICN room has been brought down to the first floor, this was
originally up on the second floor which worked out well in terms for location for
wiring and things of that sort but didn't allow the public to use the building before
or after normal library hours so by bringing it down we really increased the
availability of that space to the community. On the second floor the ICN has been
replaced by the large conference room which had been down on the lower level,
we've been playing around and massaging some of the staff spaces to promote
efficiency and ease of material movement through that zone of the building and
then working on the specifics of the collection layout in the public space. Paying
particular attention to the OPAC (catalog), the Intemet and Ref. net stations,
printing and photocopying, business index tables and those core reference
materials that are the heart of the second floor. I think the only other thing that's
really deviated specifically from the first concept is included of a small quite
reading room at the comer of Dubuque and College, this has a fairly dramatic
impact on the exterior of the building because you'll see a reading room down at
the comer which is a significant spot in the community. And whereas before we
had a little notch in here which was a little bit of an introverted response to the
comer, this is a little bit more dynamic and aggressive and it starts to rotate and
turn the comer and we'll see that a little bit in the elevation.
Kanner/What does that mean rotate and turn the comer?
Huberty/You start, the building pulls you around the comer instead of just coming to a
point, you come to a softer and it suggests the space flows around the comer, it
doesn't end of Dubuque. I think you'll see it a little bit in the sight plan, which is
the next drawing. This is the comer that we're talking about specifically and the
upper level you'll get a round form that's the reading room. On the lower level
it's the entry to the retail space. This is a good introduction to a couple of the
items we've been addressing in terms of site plan development, one is a notion of
parking along Linn Street. The library has asked us to study options which would
allow us to increase the number of parking spaces along Linn. And one approach
that would be to introduce angled parking, we would reduce the paved area
adjacent to the building so approximately 10 feet and then introduce angled
parking at 30 degrees which is similar to other recent angled parking installed in
the downtown area. That allows the pick up two spaces along this section of Linn
Street.
Champion/Would that keep parking on the right hand side of the street too?
Huberty/Yes it does. Now this is under continued study with the city departments to see
if this really is the best use for the public right of way along Linn and there' s a
notion it might incorporate continued similar treatment to the north as part of an
accessibility study for the commercial property in this building so we're
continuing to study that. As you know the Library Board is really interested in
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 3
providing additional parking spaces where possible in association with this
project, so we're continuing to study that aspect. The other thing we're looking at
is the development of the pedestrian mall, especially at the east end, here again
you get the sense of the entry gateway that we're trying to create to the east, really
forming an entry plaza for the library and signaling a transition point at that
location. And the space would open up again and really have much the same
character that it does today. The major difference would be we're proposing
flipping the chess board with the playground equipment, this flip allows us to do
several things. One is it allows us to take the existing playground equipment off
the site for one season and that gives us access to the west end of the site and
would allow easy construction, easier construction. It's still going to be a
logistical issue of getting materials into the ped mall and then erecting the steel
frame and putting the masonry on the building. Because of the level of activity
with the emergency vehicle right of way, pedestrian traffic through here, access to
the library, all of those things are going to have to be coordinated in sequence
fairly carefully. Removing the playground equipment takes one piece out of that
difficult puzzle, it also allows us to excavate along the existing foundation of the
Lenoch and Cilek building and replace it with a new foundation. The library
building, the basement wants to go quite a bit lower than the existing basement in
Lenoch and Cilek so the space can be useable first floor lease space and then
ultimately potential expansion space for the library. So we want to make sure we
build a functional space and not a marginal or unusable space and by moving the
playground equipment we can really get at that foundation while remove the
existing wall and build a new one and support the addition on top of that. It also
allows us to get construction equipment down into the lower level and start
erecting the addition, the steel frame for the addition along the north and in the
infill on the second floor. If you know the library was designed for a bit of
expansion space on the second floor in the area that's roof now which is about in
this zone. So our intent would be to work from this comer back out and then pull
the construction out, complete that addition and then start work on the eastern
portion of the building. Removing the playground equipment really makes all that
possible and some of the studies we've done over the last couple of weeks, at the
worst the cost of removing the equipment is going to be a wash and most likely
it's going to be a savings to the library in terms of the premium paid for for
construction, it's just going to be that much easier to complete the operations with
the equipment removed. We also have a better chance of protecting the
equipment if it's stored off site than if it's left in the construction zone. So for all
those reasons we're really looking at pulling the equipment out of the construction
zone for that first season. When we reinstall it there's more space to install the
equipment about 35 feet farther west and that creates a nice proximity with the
fountain which seems to be another amenity that' s really well received by kids and
I think it promotes a bit of synergy between those two uses and then the chess
board would get relocated in adjacent to the elevator tower for the future third
floor. Another really the major features of the pedestrian mall as it's developed
currently. The other thing we've been studying to various extents is how you go
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 4
about building the building and how long that might take, we've looked at a
couple approaches to that phasing aspect. The one I mentioned was really try and
build as much of the western addition and infill as we can and that would allow us
about 52,000 square feet which suggests we can take the 47,000 square feet of
existing library space, move it in it's entirety into the addition and come back and
remodel the existing building, and that gives us two phases. We earlier were
thinking about up to 5 phases for incremental remodeling's of the building, that
has a potential of save us quite a bit of money in overhead costs in phasing
premiums. I think it offers increased patron safety coming to and from a
remodeling in progress and has the potential of save us quite a bit of cash and that
we don't have as many temporary partitions, temporary installation, rewiring,
recableing, and thinking of things of that nature. And so that approach seems to
work out fairly well, it could save us a little bit of time, it will definitely save us
some money. The other approach we looked at was maybe stretching the project
out and doing the project in smaller incremental pieces with the notion that you
create maybe less disruption, you can stretch out the cash flow over a greater
period of time. In analysis it seemed to have the opposite affect, it created more
temporary conditions that the project would have to pay for because you'd be
building more partitions, doing a lot more rewiring, carrying out pieces that you
just constructed as part of that temporary installation. And over the course of a
six, seven or maybe an eight year approach to incrementally building out the
project we could pay a premium of between $3 and $4 million dollars. So in sort
of the course of studying those various approaches we really think that
compressing the schedule as much as possible and really confronting the phasing
head on, the most beneficial approach for the library and users of the ped mall in
general is to really try and compress the project into those two quick phases, and
that's the approach that we'd like to continue. The other aspect of that installation
issue is the use of site 64-1a, lot 64-1a and in talking with city department
officials, a number of contractors and our logistics coordinator, there's no doubt
that it would be a benefit to the library project especially to the contractor if we
had access to part or all of 64- 1 a at least for that first year of construction. And
our biggest issue is the delivery of steel and masomy that will go into the
construction of this project, and the large volumes of material that will have to be
either sequenced very precisely and delivered in small quantities versus the ability
to deliver a large quantity of material to the site and then use it as needed. We'd
be much less susceptible to delays if in fact materials were delivered and available
on site and then could be craned across the emergency vehicle right of way. It's
possible to construct the building without that lot, but it would come at a cost to
the project, it would increased general conditions so ifthere's any way that that
can be available at least for calendar 2002 that would help the project.
Lehman/Is it possible if weather and whatever is favorable that the major portion of the
project that your referring to at first the first phase could be done in 2002?
Huberty/Yes.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 5
Lehman/So that the rest of it which is interior remodeling and face work.
Huberty/Right.
Lehman/Would not necessarily require the use of 64-1 a?
Huberty/That's what we're contemplating, that you would move your layout area to the
parking lane and sidewalk along Linn Street and work out of there and then the
benefit of 64-1a is greatly diminished to the library construction project.
Vanderhoef/(Can't hear).
Huberty/Estimates varied and it comes really down to the approach a contractor would
take but it's on the order of hundreds of thousands of dollars as opposed to tens of
thousands. We've got estimates ranging from a couple hundred thousand to a
million, I think a million is high, I don't think it would be that much of a
premium. I think that person was going on a percentage basis and when you get
into the $11-12 million dollar range that we're talking I don't think that applies,
but I would put in the $100,000 - $200,000 range at a minimum potentially 3,
right now that' s a ballpark kind of number. So those are a lot of the site issues
that are related to the building, we've also discussed the need at some point to
close a portion of the alley as we're laying out masonry along the addition and
there's been discussions with the city about how we address things like waste
removal and deliveries to not only the library but adjacent connnercial properties
especially to the north and then the two parcels that remain to the west. We're
looking at ways to underpin the existing foundation and protect the adjacent
structures during the construction process. We're looking at ways to protect the
public from construction along the west phase of the building, I think we'd be
coming out to the edge of the planters that are in place in the middle of the ped
mall along Dubuque. So there's a lot ofcoordination really going on trying to
anticipate issues that might arise and head of as many of them as we can and that
process will continue through the next few weeks.
O'Donnell/I like that angled parking, what does that reduce (can't hear)?
Huberty/Well it's about 10 feet now, and one of the things we're looking at with the city
is sort of the notion that the minimum they're looking for is about 8 feet clear, so
we have to adjust things like parking meters, waste receptacles, light poles as
elements that can disrupt that width. We don't want to pull it so far ut to the edge
that your bumping into it all the time with your vehicle so we want to balance the
desire for a clear space with the need to protect the elements out there. And
there' s other ways to address that level of protection, but we're at about 10 feet.
Karmer/What is it currently?
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 6
Huberty/Right now I think it's 17 feet, I could be off on that, 16 or 17.
Kanner/It's only a pedestrian area.
Huberty/It's a fairly wide walk way yes.
Kanner/A lot of nice things happen there with people waiting for rides and (can't hear).
Huberty/There' s some waiting drop off space, there' s three trees that are there now that
would be lost.
Lehman/It's also a main entrance now and it will not be after the library is completed.
Huberty/The main entrance is moved basically from this location to a little further south
but we will anticipate significant arrival basically at this drop off and from the
parking so we expect, the current pattern is slightly more people use the Linn
Street entrance than the west entrance but it's fairly evenly split and I would
expect that to continue.
Pfab/Has it been discussed whether you could put angle parking across the street also?
Huberty/We haven't specifically looked at that, one of the issues would be the remaining
width of the street because we've encroached a bit on the sort of clear width and
assume we can push the drive lanes a little further to the east to get the necessary
space for the angled parking so we borrowed from the sidewalk and we borrowed
from those drive lanes and I don't know if there's enough room to get it on both.
another approach would be to put it on the east side of the street I don't know how
that would.
Pfab/No, no, can you do the same thing across the street double your?
Huberty/No I don't think there's enough width?
Pfab/Okay you think there's (can't hear)?
Kanner/And you're anticipating that if you had 64-1a that the pedestrian walk way would
be closed for that whole year then, the 2002 calendar year?
Huberty/No our sense is that we create a pathway around the staging zone, we have to
keep a portion of this clear for emergency vehicles, ambulance, fire department
that sort of thing, but we'd send pedestrian traffic around the layout yard, we'd try
and keep a portion of 64- 1 a open for continued parking and send pedestrian traffic
through in that zone.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 7
Kanner/And your plan is to move playground equipment as described, if we didn't do
that would that still be open for people's use?
Huberty/No it would be fight in the middle of the construction zone, it would be an
extreme hazard, you wouldn't want anyone in there.
Kanner/So it's closed.
(All talking)
Huberty/Right, even if it's left there no one can use it, right.
Champion/(can't hear).
Huberty/Right, we talked about talking it out of commission, we thought it would be
easier to do then, it's turning out to be, the new equipment is set in some fairly
substantial foundations and much more solidly built than the wood structure it
replaces. But even with that level of construction it's still economically feasible
and in fact advantageous to remove it, store it and reinstall it at the end of that first
construction season.
Kanner/Do you have an estimate on the costing?
Huberty/Yea we talked to the original installer and the cost to relocate the equipment,
store it for a year and then reinstall it is $39,000 and then the cost of the concrete
work and the drainage and the pad and the initial installation was about $34,000
so you add those two together and your in the $70,000 range and I expect that's
going to be $50,000 cheaper than if we had to work around it, and potentially.
Kanner/$120,000 vs. $70,000.
Huberty/Right, 70, and $120,000 would be a minimum. It would be a major I mean
inconvenience for anyone working around a protected installation here. And that
doesn't get into the fact that if we protect it it's really 40 feet farther east and
that' s sort of in the line of the existing building and then we have issues of do you
cut the building back or do you cut the playground equipment back, how do you
preserve the integrity of both of those? That introduces another layer of issues.
Kanner/Do you have to know as soon as possible if we agree to the moving to the (can't
hear)?
Huberty/Right, right, and if you look at it it's cheaper to pull it out than leave it, it's
easier for construction to pull it out than leave it, it's better for the library in terms
of planning to pull out it and leave it, it's better for the final installation of the
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 8
playground equipment to pull it out than to leave it so with all those factors we're
really leaning towards removal and reinstallation.
Wilburn/You'll also have to significantly close it up so that someone wouldn't be
tempted to get it so while construction was going on in the evening hours and also
it's just important to have enough room to work with.
Huberty/And let' s be realistic with construction, it's a fairly messy process and things are
going to get slopped on and fall near it that sort of thing so.
Pfab/I have a question I don't know if it makes any sense or not. You say there's a
certain amount of infrastructure underneath the playground.
Huberty/Yes.
Pfab/Is that something that could be connected to the library to construction phases?
Huberty/Well we're going to replace the infrastructure we destroy in this process, the
infrastructure with the playground essentially consists of a concrete pad with some
drainage that connects to the sanitary line and we're going to replace that as we
move it farther west.
Pfab/Okay because you said it would cost, it would cost, the infrastructure whatever is
going to be used was $39,000 when they put it there the first time.
Huberty/It was $34,000 the initial installation, fight.
Pfab/So that would not be another cost to the city?
Huberty/Not to the city, it's funded by the library project, it's in our expense, right.
Lehman/Has the staff looked at the relocation of the playground equipment?
Huberty/Yes they have.
Lehman/And that's, they're cool?
O'Donnell/I don't know about cool.
Huberty/The biggest issue was.
Susan Craig/Terry Trueblood's exact words were as long as you take the grief on this it's
okay with me.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 9
Lehman/Did he indicate what kind of grief he might expect? I mean I don't see any
problem with it.
Linda Dellsperger/Well there won't be playground equipment for a season.
Lehman/There' s not going to be playground equipment for a year anyway you cut it and
if you leave it there you're going to have to get stranded to get to it or your going
to damage it so it's going to have to be removed. And my only question is is there
any particular significance in removing it, I don't see any, I see no problem.
Huberty/Well Terry was the one that pointed out that it might even be better closer to the
fountain.
Lehman/Thank you, good, proceed.
Champion/But we count on telling the public that it's an improvement.
Huberty/Right, right, as long as we're in that one year window that's consistent with
what we've been representing.
Vanderhoef/(can't hear).
Wilburn/I think you have to, you're doing major construction in an area that's
surrounded by stuff and so there's going to be destruction and we want to try and
minimize it as much as possible.
Champion/But people will (can't hear) they'll say why did you put it in if this was going
to happen.
Vanderhoef/We didn't know.
Lehman/We didn't know. People told us to do it, 78 percent of them did so we're doing
it. I would think though that we'd be much better off getting it out of there,
removing it totally, if we only lose it for a season which my suspicion is if we try
and work around that we're going to lose it for more than a season, besides the
inconvenience and the expense of trying to work around it.
Huberty/It's going to slow us down. Right, okay. The third component we've been
looking at is the exterior image of the building. And the comer element I was
talking about you can see on the Dubuque Street elevation this a, the cylindrical
form that sort of peaks out and then wraps the comer around the edge and you can
see that on the far west end, on the far west end of the College Street elevation
that this piece coming around the corner again. And you recall that we're really
trying to break the building down into a series of pieces so it doesn't get to be
overwhelming and that's the first element as you work your way west to east. The
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 10
retail component is the next piece you'd see, we're studying brick color in these
two areas and it's always with drawings, we're representing as close as we can
given the current thinking, I think a more telling story will be the brick samples
you'll start to see piled up outside the library but we're definitely looking for
something that has a little bit more of the earth tone color to it than the original
renderings which would be.
Lehman/How about the yellow colored, cream colored, isn't that limestone?
Huberty/This is the Anamosa stone, right, so it should really, to the recent improvement
to the mall.
Champion/And then to the right, the white is marble?
(All Laughing)
Vanderhoef/5 million dollar.
Lehman/Is that concrete?
Huberty/That's a metal panel.
Champion/Oh really.
Lehman/White is?
Huberty/Yea, it's suppose to be an aluminum color, a light silver color to it, that's a hard
color to render so it's white on the drawing. And all of that whether it's
limestone, metal, brick that sits on a granite base, and that granite base along with
the sun screens are intended to start knitting the building together so you get a
sense of that common element through all of the building forms. The same is true
when you wrap around the comer to Linn Street and you can se the Limestone and
the metal and glass pavilion out in front that is the entry. Come around the comer
and then it starts stepping down, this is the book drop access and then the staff
entry is at this end and then behind that you get a sense of the simple brick volume
again.
Pfab/Are you indicating that that' s going to be one story for a while?
Huberty/There's a couple of layers here, the first floor comes closer to the street than the
second floor which is about 15 feet farther back much as it is today.
Pfab/Okay I thought it was going to be the distance to you.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 11
Huberty/No, they're pretty close, they're about 15 feet apart, but as you walk along it
you'll get a sense of one story in this area and then it'll step up and it'll feel much
more dramatic as you get towards the entry to the pedestrian mall which I think
will work fairly well as anticipated development on 64-1 a will probably be at least
that tall if not higher so you have a sense of progressively taller structures that you
work with to the parking structure at the far west end south.
Pfab/This might be a good time to ask you a question about moving the ICN room
downstairs.
Champion/They already did (can't hear).
Pfab/No, no, no, I have a question because it's going to be more accessible to the public.
Huberty/Right.
Pfab/Now how much ICN do we anticipate versus conference rooms or meeting rooms?
That' s my question, is that a better? That makes me a little uncomfortable, I'm
not saying it's wrong but I, it's really the only thing I question.
Huberty/There's a lot of meeting space.
Susan Craig/Let me just give you, we could have the regular three meeting rooms that we
have now and a little bit bigger and we have the ICN room on the first floor so we
have, we've not lost the meeting room and replaced the ICN room, we did plan for
a fourth meeting room which we have moved to the second floor now and moved
the ICN room downstairs so the public has not lost the meeting room space, they
have gained a meeting room space, it happens to be on the second floor, and it
will only be available when we're open, but it is an additional meeting room.
Pfab/But how, is the loss of that meeting room, or what's the utilization and what's the
(can't hear) utilization versus an ICN room.
Craig/The ICN room we allow it to be used for meetings as well, so if you wanted to use
it you can book it for your group, you don't have to have an ICN meeting in them,
it's just a classroom style meeting room and it's used for either meetings or ICN
meetings.
Pfab/Okay so it's not exclusively.
Craig/Right.
Pfab/Okay all right, that's, I thought maybe that was.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 12
Kanned What' s the additional cost you said for putting it downstairs because of the
wiring?
Huberty/It would be the same in either scenario, there' s no additional cost for putting it
on the first floor as compared to the second floor.
Kanner/You said it was a little more expensive because the wiring was easier where you
had it before, that's what.
Huberty/The connection to the main server room, the distance is a little greater (can't
hear), I mean given the scope of the project, handreds of dollars as opposed to
thousands. Yea.
Kanner/What about if we were to close one block of Linn Street as a staging area, we're
talking about taking proposals for 64-1a and we're looking at how that might fit in
with this whole scenario.
Huberty/Right.
Kanner/Was that something that was looked at and what that cost would be for that in
saving?
Huberty/Right, from the library's point of view, Linn Street is important in the first phase
of construction because it will be the only access to the library building. The
existing entry is at the bottom of the ramp and you would come in, we would have
closed off the west entrance because that's under construction so the initial year
of construction Linn Street pretty much has to stay open for the library to be
useable, it's the only way the public can get into the building, once this is
constructed and we have a new entry and we'd be relocating the circ. desk to the
west end patrons can come in the building at that point and then we'd be moving
our layout yard over to that end and really do anticipate taking at least the
sidewalk and maybe the parking lane of Linn and that becomes our staging area,
so that' s a likely scenario for the second phase, the second year of construction.
But initially it's not a costing, it's just a, I have no way to get people into the
building if we close that off.
Kanner/But what if iCs the block south of College there?
Huberty/That doesn't impact the library as much as if it were north.
Kanner/(Can't work) almost as well as taking some of 64-1 a, it's not the ideal location.
Huberty/It doesn't because it doesn't allow us to use a single crane to pick up and move
things into place, it would be a double sort of a maneuver, you'd have to, you'd
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 13
deliver it here and then you'd have to find some way to bring it within range of
the crane.
O'Donnell/That would also block off 64-1 a.
Huberty/That's true too.
Wilburn/And one entrance to the parking.
Lehman/Right.
Huberty/Linn Street is I think it's used more than people perceive and it becomes critical
when we're starting to take up space in College.
Lehman/I don't see what benefit you'd gain by closing part of(can't hear).
Karmer/Well if we're talking about 64-1a to construct, to take proposals, and we were
talking about the idea of we'd have to wait a year or two to have private
construction on there, I'm looking at other possibilities, what other possibilities, I
think we ought to be open about what other possibilities and get a cost, what the
cost would be, I assume that the cost would not be as high as the other proposals
you had if we were able to stage out of the street there south of College.
Huberty/Yea there's a couple factors there to consider, one is the space would be
available probably without charge so that would be a savings. If it's large enough
to be efficient it would give us some of the benefit of having a layout area, if it's a
narrow strip, the viable materials needed for this end of construction is greater
than what we'll need for this end simply because the structure is there, we won't
have the big piles of steel we need. So initially we'd be looking for a fairly
substantial piece to make it an efficient layout space. The other thing is it would
have to be convenient enough so that we aren't doing that double handling, if
we're double handling we're actually introducing another lost of cost that is really
a major component of off site staging, now if you can't get it onto the site then
it's not coming directly from the manufacturer, your picking it up twice rather
than once, that would negate any of the savings, and that way it would be the same
as a block away or a mile away, you'd have to pick it up twice, I mean there' s
tracking expenses for greater distances but you will have to haul a beam from here
to where a crane can pick it up.
Champion/Tell me again when do you anticipate construction starting.
Huberty/Oh we're anticipating demolition mid-October through the end of the year, this
year and then construction on the foundations would begin most likely in January
of 2002, I would.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 14
Champion/So that lot would not be available until 2003 basically then so, around then.
Huberty/Right, right.
Vanderhoef/And how would it work if construction was going on both at the same time?
Huberty/That would be a pretty sequence of events, that essentially means there's no
staging area or equipment storage for either project in this vicinity so both of them
are going to end up premium for off site staging or sequence delivery which
makes them both susceptible to delays because of the logistical factors. All
deliveries to both projects would have to be in the zone along this edge which
means no one can get into the library because we'd be hauling it all along this
edge and essentially you've cut off the library from any access point it has. That's
not as big an issue here because no one's trying to get to the west end of this
parcel.
Lehman/But basically your saying after the first year the major portion of the need for
64-1 a would be gone, you'd be able to function without using 64-1 a for a staging
area or for a place to put construction materials.
Huberty/Right, correct.
Vanderhoef/Start in 2003.
Champion/(can't hear).
Huberty/That would be, right, that would be the longest we would need it.
Champion/We've had that lot for so many years, go for it.
Mark Martin/Well this may be the appropriate time just to say on behalf of the Library
Board we obviously have some thoughts on this, it shouldn't surprise you and we
will express those formally in a letter to the council because I know that your
going to be discussing how put together the RFP for the 64-1a. But the first thing
I'd like to remind you is that all of us, that is council and board when we put this
project together had accessibility to the library as one of the top criteria for the
projects (can't hear) so to eliminate accessibility to the library I think is defeats
one of the primary things we want to accomplish and I have not heard until just
now that you see a possibility of doing this in two stages instead of five or six
which is just awesome really for the library.
Lehman/And the city too, oh it's a.
Martin/For everybody yea, yea.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 15
Lehman/Absolutely.
Martin/So I think that to keep the library accessible is a key issue for us. The other one
of course is cost, the Library Board would be not thrilled I guess to have the cost
of staging in some way that increases the cost of the project adopted instead of
staging it in the way that keeps it level or decreases the cost of the project and I,
you know our intention is to make it as cost effective as we can for the community
which I think is part of being and having integrity as a board to do that so we'll try
to put that in words that will come in a formal letter that you can have and
certainly I don't think those two things are surprising to any of the councilors in
terms of our conGerns.
Lehman/No but I think this two stages, two stages, a total construction time of two years
is significantly better than what I was anticipating from early on construction that
indicated the project might be a three year project or more.
Huberty/Yea it's still, there's a potential it could last three years, a year planning, two
years of construction, our hope is that it's shorter but it will be a lot easier at two
year even if it extends for those 24 months and I believe that we can get some
time out that it might not be the full 24 months, that requires more testing to be
certain of that though, but it certainly would be a lot easier in terms of it's impact
on patrons, they'll just have to get used to one temporary installation, a lot safer, a
lot more useable for the library, and a lot less expensive.
Kauner/Well perhaps a key component for us is Council is (can't hear) how long 64-1a
will be used.
Huberty/Right.
Kauner/With relation to the consideration of proposals, we're going to be looking at that
Very SOOn.
Huberty/Right.
Karmer/So it's something we need to know, is that the part that could be shortened or is
it going to be the other part? It sounds like that's pretty fixed, that part that you'll
need 64-1a for about a year, 12 months.
Huberty/Right, yes.
Kanner/From about January 2002 to about January 2003.
Huberty/Yes, right, it's the incremental remodelings that are affected by the approach,
it's going to take a good 9-10 months to get most of this to the point where we can
start relocating this and once we have that restored then 64-1 a isn't as important
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 16
and we can do the rest of it in as many steps as we want but that first step is the
long step and it's the one we need 64-1a for to accommodate construction.
Lehman/Any project on 64-1a is going to require a certain amount of time to be
designed, and put together and back to council and whatever so it may be, it might
be very simple in the RFP just to put in such a way that that property is not
available until for a year after construction of the library, I mean that wouldn't be
that hard to put in the RFP.
O'Donnell/I think that would make a great deal of sense, it's going to knock off a
substantial amount of time and both cost (can't hear).
Kanner/Do you need 64-1a during the demolition of the Lenoch and Cilek building?
Huberty/No, we, let me think through this before I say no definitely but I don't believe
we do, we will be taking out the equipment, setting up our temporary partitions
along this zone, demolishing the building and hauling the material out through
that path and until we have new material arriving on the site that we need to stock
pile we don't need 64-1a. But I'd start to see the temporary protections starting to
be installed around the first of October and you'd start to see an impact on the ped
mall at that time but we won't really need to cross it until January.
Kanner/And do you know approximately how many parking spaces you plan to take out
of 64-1a?
Huberty/I want to say it's 16 plus 12 it would be the first two rows of parking plus it's
drive lane and then we would hope to keep some of it available the library patrons
use that fairly extensively and we want to see some of 64- 1 a remain in use.
Pfab/I would be inclined to say that use what effectively, that's probably the highest that
that' s used for that building to whatever space it takes to accommodate the
construction to get the cost down.
Martin/The other thing I'd like to mention the Library Board has been very grateful about
the Council' s willingness to talk about how the parking issues may be resolved
and we would encourage you to continue considering the participation of whoever
would build on 64-1 a and making that available to library patrons in some form
and that's important to us and I know that's one of the major issues that we face
together as we talked about the project and the conversation that I've heard
regarding responses of possible purchases indicates to me that there' s some
willingness on contractors parts to look at that as well so.
Champion/We did as the staff that as a (can't hear).
Lehman/Well I think that would be sort of an option sort of yea.
February 22, 200I Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 17
Martin/See what to do.
Lehman/Yea.
Martin/We appreciate that.
Kanner/One other thing, we're looking at possibility of a ten story building up to it could
go in 20 stories if it comes in far enough and how does that affect the light? I
think we asked that a year ago or so but I was wondering if you could tell me
again, how that affects the light that might.
Huberty/The construction that we're building across the street actually in some senses
helps the library in that we reduce some of the direct sun light coming in from the
south. We're taking measures that if there is no building in there ever that we can
still control the amount of light coming into the building but if you get beyond a
four or five story building right up to the edge of the developable property that's
beyond that we start to have distinct impact on the library, I don't think it ever
gets to the point where it's a huge detriment to the library or in fact much of any
detriment, it's part of living in an urban environment. Having a building there to
block some of the sun is actually beneficial, we're using that to our distinct
advantage on the west end of the building where the light is especially difficult to
control through a vertical window and having Plaza One there is actually a
benefit, same with the hotel, south lights are easier to control so we can do it with
sun screens but the building, if it's a good looking building we're glad to see it.
Susan Craig/With parking.
Huberty/A good looking building with parking.
Champion/Let me just you one thing because some of us have to leave, is there anything
else you need to know from us? I mean you wanted to know about the lot, leave
the lot open, about moving the playground equipment. Is there something else
you needed to know from us (can't hear)?
Huberty/Those are the big things that will impact our cost estimate and we're planning
on doing that in the month of April if there's some sense that portions of 64-1 a
will be available, that would be good information to have or if there's a leaning
one way or another. The notion that our approach to the playground equipment is
another one, if there's some reason that the equipment absolutely has to stay
where it is it's an issue during construction certainly but longer term, that means I
have to redesign a portion of the building and will probably lose seating, the
capacity will lose future expansion and that has a big impact on the design as well.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 18
Lehman/Mark we're going to get a letter from you folks, outline these specifically which
I believe we should have our staff look at and obviously I think we heard some
concerns I don't know that I see huge problems here but our staff on the other
hand is a lot more familiar with this than we would be. But I think we need to get
your letter requesting moving of the playground equipment, use of 64-1 a basically
the time that's involved and get a recommendation from our staff so we can react
to it.
Craig/Emie I just want to say that we do have a working group of city staff that have met
now three times and when Joe was here and reviewed and talked about some of
these issues, we met this aBemoon you know I don't want to speak for everyone
there but I feel a sense that that group was very much, they are okay with all the
things that Joe's been standing here telling you and that if your okay with it then
(can't hear).
Lehman/I think that's what I sense as well but I just think that it's nice to cross the t's
and dot the i's and the paper trail we all know what each other is talking about.
Craig/And so if you'd like some communication from (can't hear).
Lehman/Mark said he was going to write me a letter and I was just making that verbalize
to that so if he forgets I can refer to it.
Craig/I just wanted you to know that I'm getting to know the city staff better than I have
because we've spent a lot of time together (can't hear).
Lehman/But I also think this is an issue that we need to discuss with planning folks
regarding the RFP for that lot and see what impact there is and obviously it may
be that we should not be putting an RFP out there for construction on that
property until after the first phase is done but that' s something we need to discuss
at a council meeting.
Vanderhoef/RFP can go out with a gate.
Lehman/Well that' s what I'm saying.
Vanderhoef/Available.
Lehman/Which would reserve the lot for the first year when that lot is really critical but
then also I think there are issues involved if we do in fact accept an RFP for that
property where that construction then starts at the end of the first year after you,
there is at that time going to be a certain amount of conflict between even the
work that your doing though it would be associated much closer to the building
and the work on a new building but I mean there would have to be some pretty
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 19
close coordination of effort to make that work and those are the kinds of things we
really need to talk about.
Huberty/Right.
Kanner/Before you came up with the two stages as opposed to the five, had it still be
anticipated that 64-1 a would only be used for a year because we had been told six
or seven year there might be with a private, not with yours but a total of two or
three from you and two or three from a private construction for that stage.
Lehman/I think that was the ped mall that we said would be closed for six years if we
built them one and totally and then the other one totally but the ped mall basically
be unusable for almost six years.
Champion/(Can't hear).
Kanner/Are we still saying six years with this scenario if we wait until your done, or does
that change from your thing?
Huberty/I'd probably say that the ped mall will be impacted by the library project for two
years and beyond that whatever happens on 64-1 a, depends if it's partially
concurrent or totally sequential, I can't.
Kanner/Your time frame really hasn't changed from this from two phases or?
Huberty/At this point I don't want to say it's less than two years there's a potential that it
may be but I'm not in a position to really know that for certain so I'd like to say
that there's the potential to impact the ped mall for two years and actually when
you count demolition it would be two years and three months.
Kanner/And that was (can't hear) you were talking the same amount last year?
Huberty/Right, right, towards the end of that period the impact is going to be less than
during the initial phases but you'll know we're out there. Other questions or
comments?
Lehman/Looking good.
Huberty/Thank you.
Pfab/I think it's two thumbs up.
Huberty/Okay I'll take that.
Lehman/Thank you very much.
February 22, 2001 Joint Meeting with Library Board Page 20
Huberty/Thank you.
Lehman/You know it's always a pleasure listening to you because you really know what
your talking about.
Huberty/Susan makes sure of that.
Lehman/Oh no, you can't, that is very much appreciated. Thank you.
Huberty/Thank you.
Adjourned 6:20 PM