Loading...
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