Okay. >> Yeah. >> Pan's right there. Okay. >> Can you hear me? >> Yes. cuz I'm promoting you all the panelists right now. >> I think Judy wasn't >> Yeah, I find her here.
>> Here we are. Okay, >> now >> hello everyone. Can you hear us? >> Yep. Hello. >> Okay, so as usual, we had our usual technical difficulties. >> An audio check. Audio check.
>> We're good. >> You might not be able to hear us. >> Okay. So, we started the meeting a meeting a few minutes ago and we've gotten through approval of the past minutes and now we're going to go to public comment and I don't believe we have anybody on from
the public. So, no public comments. So, we'll go right to program updates and discussion uh with MA and David. I'm not sure David is on, but MA I see is here. So, MA, it's
>> all yours. >> Um, so David is at another meeting which hopefully he'll join shortly. >> I'm wondering if we want to bump to a different item because I think tied up
for a half hour now. Yeah, it'd be great if we could start with site or something like that. >> We can go to site updates with Matt. Matt, are you all set? >> Yeah. Uh, can you guys see my screen? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, I just wanted to update
everybody on a meeting that we had earlier this week with the um site plan review committee. This was an informal meeting that we were able to schedule very quickly. Mark Grills um is away on vacation this week, but
Tim Sears, the deputy building commissioner, was able to organize everybody. And so, we met with Tim uh Kathy Williams, the town planner, Amanda, I think is her name, town engineer, um I'm forgetting, the the
health department representative, and I think that Owen J Grand was there. Um John Greco from the LBC was there as well. So, and we had our team plus um G2 collaborative, our landscape architect,
and Sammy Otis, our civil engineer. So, we basically walked them through the presentation that we made to the select board because it was a pretty good summary of where we are. Um, I knew from my conversation with Tim Sears that a
couple people on that committee had seen some of the earlier plans. I wanted to make sure that everybody understood that we had moved away from parcel 50. we were focusing on partial 60 um on this particular site in the northeast corner and that you know among other things
that we wanted to talk about parking was one of the sort of big question marks for us. Um Tim was there as well by the way Tim Arnold. Um, so it it was it was not as conclusive as I would have
hoped, but um but it's a first step in that conversation. And really what came out of it was the recommendation that we present an argument to Mark Grills as to what we
think is a reasonable calculation of parking and and see if he's willing to accept that. If if we look at this table in the upper left, this is an excerpt from the the town zoning bylaw. And that first line that's toned yellow, I don't
know if you all can read it, but it says assembly. This is under use category. It says assembly and in the zoning assembly includes use P1, which is educational institutions. And so we took that to mean that the MacArthur school parking
count would fall under that category, which is one space for every three occupants. We know that there are 48 existing spaces on the east side of the building that are dedicated to the school and there are 19 spaces on the west side of the building adjacent to
the field that we weren't sure whether those were dedicated to the school or the field. This group confirmed that those spaces were for the school. That's so we're looking at a total aggregate of the 19 plus the 48 is the existing school parking area. Um when we continue
to read through the zoning, there's no specific use listed for the library either in, you know, allowable uses per the different zoning districts or referenced in this parking demand table. And so we
thought then that you could argue that it falls into this other category which is the orange toned section on the bottom. Uh and the parking space is required. It says as determined to be adequate by the building commissioner on advice by the site plan review team. So
this basically leaves it up to that group and the mar grills to decide you know whether or not what we're proposing is is appropriate. This group however seemed to be of the opinion that because
the a library from a code standpoint is is assembly occupancy or it's usually actually it's usually a combination of assembly occupancy and business occupancy when we're when we're looking at code for things like egress and construction type and and all of that.
Those are the uses that it's kind of this blended average of of those uses. And so um so that was sort of prompting them to say well it should really be you know parking should really be calculated based on the assembly uh approach which is one for every three
occupants. You all may remember that we talked about this a while back and if you do an occupant code for the library which is an egress occupant code you get a number that's quite high. It's it's um probably 300 plus people and it was
resulting in over a 100 parking spaces for the library which based on other projects that we've done seemed excessive. Um and if you look at the MBLC's requirements for parking, they use one space for every 400 gross square
feet, which for you know a building of this size would be um significantly less than 100 100 plus spaces. So um all of this I guess to say oh well one other thing to add into the mix um we asked
what the occupant count was for the MacArthur school building. what was what was permitted when that when they got their certificate of occupancy, what was the agreement with the town about parking? And what they produced for us was a a sheet of paper that had a stated
occupancy for that building of over a,000 people. I think it was 600 and something on one level and 300 and something on another level, which I in my view is an absurd occupant count in any, you know, any way of calculating
this for a building of 28,000 ft, but also it translates to 330 parking spaces, which again for a building of this size seems completely unreasonable. So, we're not going to get anywhere with that. This is not a school project. This
is a library project. We have to make a proposal for library parking and we have to do it in a way that doesn't set the town back in terms of the MacArthur school building. So I think our our thought is that the the path forward is
to present a scenario and that's that's what this plan did. Although we I'll I'll talk about why this plan now doesn't work, but um propose maintaining all of the existing spaces for the MacArthur school. We have no idea what the future use of MacArthur building is.
If is it an elementary school? There's no way it needs 300 spaces if it's an elementary school. if it's um a Bridgewater State type, you know, uh occupant that has older people that are driving to classes, you know, unlike elementary school age kids,
um then that parking count might be higher. If it if it changes to business use and it gets used as town offices or there's some other tenant that moves in, that's the it's impossible to predict what that use then what kind of parking requirement that use will drive. So we
can't speculate about it and we shouldn't be burdened by whatever that number is. So if we say we're going to maintain the existing spaces and then we're going to we're going to uh create parking for the library based on the state's guideline which is a reasonable
metric of one space for every 400 square ft gross square feet. Um that count that one per 400 does not include accessible spaces and it does not include staff spaces. So we on top of that number we have to add those things. And so the
number of accessible spaces is a formula depending on how many spaces we have in the lot. It could be two, it could be four. Um the number of staff spaces is something that we are talking with David about. What's the right number? Um you know we're thinking it's somewhere in
the 12 uh spot range. You know 12 to 15 is what he was saying. And so, you know, we we're trying to kind of pin down the number of parking for the library. Obviously, as the library size changes,
so does the parking count. So, we have to nail down exactly what the total gross square footage is for the building. And we're going to talk more about that tonight. Um so so this plan that we presented is already out of date and we and we think it doesn't quite meet the the requirements for the
library but it but the the methodology is the same. Maintain the existing spots for MacArthur propose parking for the library at the rate that the state uses for for calculating parking requirements for libraries and present that as you
know this is a non-listed use in the zoning bylaw. we see this as something that the building commissioner has discretion over and you know is he willing to accept that. The other thing that we asked about this is a minor detail but it has an impact on parking
layout. The zoning bylaw calls for 10 foot wide spaces in a lot of communities we see allowance for 9 foot wide spaces. They were not willing to give on that and they went so far as to say that it wouldn't even be a special permit
request. it would be a variance from the zoning bylaw. So, I don't think we want to go through a variance process. So, we'll have to revise the parking lot to accommodate 10 foot wide spaces. Obviously, that means that it takes up more space to get the same amount of
parking. Um, we're working through that with our landscape architect. Now, obviously, as the building changes both in size and in footprint, that affects the layout. And so, this layout that we presented on Wednesday is already out of date.
But but again I think the methodology here is is sound. Um on the on the positive side they appreciated the the approach not in terms of count but in terms of uh layout you know dedicated
drop off for the library, dedicated drop off for the school, accessible spaces associated with each. We've got accessible spaces here next to the drop off area um for the school. We have accessible spaces on either side of this pathway um to the library. We have
accessible spaces here. Uh there's a way a pathway not a driveway to get um to a service entrance in the back. Um so that that's sort of a summary of the discussion we had about parking. The other thing that we talked about when we
were talking about the site was emergency vehicle access. Um, there's no issue with firet truck access in the parking, but the fire chief did say that he wants to make this pedestrian path into a fire lane so that he can pull a
truck all the way up to the front entrance basically. Um, >> and you know, whether we'll have to look at what happens once the truck is there, if we have to provide a way for it to get out through the parking lot or if it
can back up. I think the maximum distance that it can pull in and back out is 150 ft. So that's something we have to look at. Um so that that's one that that's a fairly easy accommodation to to turn that into a fire lane. And we
would do it in a way that um it's either ballarded temporarily or it's gated or it's or or it's handled to to look more like a pedestrian walkway but it's generous enough to accommodate a
firetruck or it's stabilized um turf or it's some other solution so that it doesn't get confused by somebody driving to the library that that's a shortcut to get to the front door. Um, the other place that the fire chief said we would
need to create a fire lane is here in the northeast corner of the of the site to get a truck along the east side of the building. Um, we do have room here between the building and the property line to accommodate both we think a
landscape buffer and a a 20 foot wide um fire lane. So, that's something that will have to make its way into our site plans. And and then the last point that he made was from any spot where the parking lot is or where the fire truck is parked, we have to make sure that
from that point we can get in 250 ft or less to every point of the perimeter of the building. So, you know, whether it's from this corner measured into here, the most remote corner is really going to be this inner inner corner. Um, so they
need to be able to put a truck say here and get a hose around all the way into this um to this kind of center of this location back here. Um, and he felt like if if we were able to do that then there
was no need to get a vehicle in that central area obviously which would be prohibitive given the topography there. So, >> that's a really a summary of of their comments. The only other comment that I
can think of off the top of my head that came up. Um Kathy made the comment that there might want to be a stronger connection, a stronger pedestrian connection between the library site and
building and route 28. Um, there are plans, I think, for improvements of the Route 28 corridor. Um, in terms of improving pedestrian experience, there is a sidewalk on the south side of Route 28. It's very narrow. There's a guard
rail right there, but I think they see a a potential future improvement project that would allow for more pedestrian traffic along uh, Route 28. And so having a way into the building at that end she felt was an important part of a
you know sort of civic building for the town. Um Ma, am I missing anything else that that came up in that meeting? >> Yes, one thing. Um we talked about >> those two lots to the south of the
building. Um, they mentioned that that was an RS40 residential zone and they recommended that we don't >> put any parking there because the the zoning is quite different for a residential lot. >> Yeah, just to piggyback, it seemed like
the parking lot that MacArthur's current parking lot is on was originally zoned for that residential and they already made the exception for that parking. So, it did not seem that they would be willing to get rid of that entire area and give it up for parking.
>> Right. >> And Matt, >> so that's the that's the two residential lots that are south of Parcel 60. >> Matt, we have two questions, I think, John and Judy. >> So, Matt Kathy mentioned a couple of times about
providing areas that could be additional spaces. So I guess in your your philosophy you're trying to present something. Are you going to mention possible additional spaces or not? Because >> yeahment was that you could use you could always build out if you needed
extra spaces and and she agreed with you don't want to have extra parking that may never get used. >> Yeah. And I would divide that into two categories. One is future expansion for the parking lot which is you know the
ability to increase paved surface to to add more spaces and then a kind of separate thing which would be overflow parking for special events which is never intended to be paved. It's just what do you do when there's a big event? Where can cars go? Um and so I think yes
any plan that we present ultimately should highlight those two areas. And then the other, if I heard the the fire person correctly, you could add hydrants and the additional hydrants could be
used to cover the 250. Thus, you may not need uh access to there because if there's a hydrant, then you can take that as your point of 250. Uh, I do remember him talking about
hydrants providing some measure of of relief, but I I don't >> I don't remember him saying that >> the truck being within 250 ft is the much preferred option. And if for some
reason that cannot be attained, you know, hydrants could be an alternative we could go down. I I don't think that they would necessarily want to start the conversation with hydrants until we were like, you know, we proved to them that there's no other way for us to, you
know, provide protection in this area. >> Yeah, that sounds right, >> Judy. >> Okay. So, I had two questions or points. one is I think it might be an interesting exercise to determine how
wide the existing spaces are if they're 9 ft or 10 feet. Um so that's just one thing. Um, and the second is I know the staff is a little concerned about uh a delivery location
>> for daily drop offs of books, not just intermittent ones, but the daily ongoing in and out. And if we're thinking about uh an access point from 28, this fire
lane, uh could that also potentially be a an inroad that would just be used for deliveries? >> That's a good question, Judy. I don't know the answer, but I I think we would want to clear that with the fire
department. I I mean I can imagine a scenario where there's a delivery truck parked there and there's an emergency and the firetruck can't get in and they've got to wait for the delivery truck to back out. So I don't know >> if they would allow that kind of shared use, but they might and it's a it's a
good suggestion. Um, you know, we we don't typically see in library deliveries a loading bay or, you know, a loading dock or the a situation where a delivery truck pulls right up to
a back door and offloads things. Usually, frankly, e even in cases where we have provide service entrances or staff entrances, we find from conversations with staff that deliveries tend to go through the front door and and then find
their way to the staff. So, I think, you know, I think we need to consider other ways of of of accessing the building than going through the front door. Um, but as of right now, we're we're sort of suggesting that there's a back service
door, which is both for, you know, somebody coming to work on the hot water heater or uh a place to take the trash out or or possibly, you know, book bin deliveries, but those could also happen through the front door, the book bin
deliveries. We're also and uh Mica will talk through the plan in a minute, but based on uh comments that we've gotten from the staff and the requirement for a book drop and some other things, we've sort of revised the layout of this community wing and the staff has been
very interested in getting a door into the building in that location somewhere closer to the meeting room. And so that also, you know, it's becomes a kind of operational question. Is that door unlocked during the day? Could deliveries, you know, come in that way
and and sort of get back into the staff area quickly without having to go through the lobby. So, I think there are a couple of different scenarios we can talk through related to that. >> Thank you. >> Thanks.
>> Uh, any other questions about the sort of site plan before we go to the building plan? >> Got one right here. Matt, >> I just have one question. Have we given up? Have we abandoned the idea of moving the um access road to in back of the Maca building? I don't see that in the
Is that no longer under under consideration? >> Um we you know we we show it here as a dashed line. Um that's where that kind of future drive would be. It's on this plan. We didn't talk about it
specifically with this group because I I felt like it was just gonna kind of go down a a path that it was a little bit premature with them, frankly. And and it also meant, you know, what do we do with these 19 spaces? We would have to
incorporate those 19 spaces into the parking lot somehow if we're removing them from the from the west side of the MacArthur building. So, for that group, it just seemed better to not talk about that. But I do think that as we look at parking lot options and parking lot
counts, we'll want to see obviously we have to see what the kind of maximum is that the site can support and is there a scenario where we can both meet the library's needs and MacArthur's needs and accommodate some future
uh shift of those 19 spaces over to this combined lot. Um, so as we look at at other layouts for parking, we will continue to see if we can accommodate that. And if we can, then it does tee us up for the possibility of of shifting
that access road. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Uh, anybody else before we move into building plan? >> None here. Matt, you building. So, Marica, do you want to
take over from here? >> Sure. Um, this so basically this plan does not differ greatly um from the plan we showed last meeting with the exception
of reconfiguration of the community wing. Um, so everything is basically as as shown before. Um, we haven't gotten a chance to tighten up the staff area um, based on comments we received from David
and his team in the past day or two. Um, but that's on its way. If you flip to the next plan, we can talk through some of the changes. So, um, we mentioned in the last meeting that the building had got to be close to 27,000 square ft and
we knew that was problematic. So we basically did an exercise that we did previously which was just tightening up the overall square footage making sure that all of the programs were right sized. Nothing was you know um there was not too too much circulation not too you
know any um oversized programs and part of the reason for the change in the community wing was part of that right sizing pro process. So um in the previous configuration we had circulation along the west side of the community wing against um against the
entry plaza. Um part of that what that did was part of the reason for this move was that the two program spaces the multi-purpose room and the classroom were becoming oversized because we were trying to give them direct access to
windows and and views um and also balancing it with the size of the much larger auditorium. So what it did was made circulation bigger than it needed to be or it made the program spaces bigger than they needed to be. So um and we were also battling with orientation
of rooms. So if you imagine a classroom with a presentation wall in the in the past orientation it it was a sort of long and long and horizontal room versus what is now a vertical room with a clear presentation zone. So it allowed us to
both ro rightsize those rooms, have a clear presentation wall and also rotate the auditorium. So the high point of the auditorium, the presentation wall is also the high point of the roof. Um so centering the corridor allowed us to sort of rightsize that corridor. So it's
not overly large at the moment. It's sufficient without being too generous. and you have a direct sight line um from the circulation desk all the way down to the auditorium. And uh it also allows to us to place all of the subsidiary programs that feed the
auditorium along the length of it. So we have um we have the storage room between the multi-purpose room and the auditorium. It's much larger space than it was previously. Um the kitchenet is directly on the auditorium. You could add a door to the hallway now if you'd
wanted one. Um, we have an AV room on the other side and a book drop directly um to the exterior um as close to the drop off point as you can get essentially. And then the um the second entryway which would be an out after hours entry is directly above the book
drop. Um and then obviously this this required a reorientation of the bathrooms as well. So technically the, you know, the desk if they wanted it had a much more control over who's going down that wing, who's using the
bathroom, and um the the ability to close off that wing is now a smaller zone. It could be be handled by a single double door potentially. Um I think that's all the changes for that wing. Everything else um reflects
just basic tightening up. Um, we did have to move some program in the children's wing. If you look along the the southern portion of that wing, um, we've incorporated only a few things that we heard from the staff. One of
them being that we want a separate mother's room and sensory room and so those have been reoriented on the south side as long as as well as this multi-purpose story hour room. So, we have a slightly different configuration of the children's room at the moment in
an effort to try to open up that space. Um, the only other change that's really reflected from the last time we saw it is we've reoriented the study room, showing them as single occupancy and um a side view to the glazing so that
there's, you know, better sight lines when you're in the room if someone's approaching the door. Otherwise, it's basically as change just tightened up. So, I think the the gross square footage is just over 26,000. So, that activ um effort we did in the past two weeks has
shaved off almost 1,000 square feet. >> How much I'm sorry, how much? >> Almost a thousand. >> What does it count? >> 2608 >> 26,000 roughly currently. Um this this then gets us to the the big topic for
tonight in our view which is sort of a late breaking thing which is um which is collections. So a as we have been getting the program to settle down make sure that we've accommodated everything that we've right sized everything that we're meeting the square footages that
are called for in the building program. Um we started doing a collection analysis to make sure that you know that fiction and non-fiction and children's collections were all sort of fitting in the shelving areas that we have. Also checking the seating counts because
there are um list specific seating requirements for each room in the program. As we started going through that exercise, we discovered that the we weren't even coming close to accommodating the adult collection. Children's collection and teen
collection seemed fine, were able to accommodate the the program numbers in those two areas. But in the adult room, even though it was designed to the square footages that were in the program, there isn't enough we can't get enough shelving in there to accommodate the collection as described in the
program. And so this prompted hours of conversation with David and with the MBLC over the course of the last several days. And so th this kind of summarizes I think where we've ended up at hot off the presses as of this afternoon. And
I'll I'll walk you through this. Um so starting on the left the this pull that up. >> Yeah. Hold on. Let me give me one sec. Uh, too much.
Um, >> that's good. That's good. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Uh, hold on. I need to Can you see the full width of the screen? Can you see my cursor over here? >> Yes. >> Yeah, we're just missing the numbers on the Okay.
>> Can you see the numbers now? Okay. So, so starting on the left hand side, >> this is these numbers reflect um collection size. So, this is number of volumes and this is adults only as I said children and teens. We are able to
accommodate in the shelves the proposed collection which reflects growth. I I don't know how much growth because we don't know what the existing counts are for those but um but the program was was created in a way to to account for growth of the collection. So children
and teens seem fine based on the way that the building is laid out currently. Adults the adult collection uh based on David's tally uh as of today was 26,1800. So that's that's what would need to go
into the building from south and west when this building opens. That does not factor in any growth. That is just current collection. And and I think David uh I think I see you in the room. I can't tell because my screen is tiny, but >> Oh, great. Um, so correct me if I'm
wrong, but this this number reflects um a reduction of the West collection as you combine the two collections into this building. Is that right? >> Yeah. So, basically, um, I got some numbers from Clams, and I think
with what we have here, we're kind of in the 20,000 range for, um, adult collections, meaning fiction, non-fiction, biography, um, like graphic and manga. We in talking to a couple of the staff
members, their feeling was that we would probably pull somewhere I mean and this is just sort of an estimate without doing any real collection evaluation. We'd probably be pulling maybe 30% out of what out of what West has. Um just as
really a back catalog. Um apparently West has certain things that are no longer in print. um or you know series titles that are so um if we were combining those items, West as far as I
can tell has about 20,000 volumes plus or minus. So you figure there's about six. So that that's kind of where this number comes from roughly. I mean, these are all just estimates really uh based off of the raw numbers that clams gave us, but that's kind of where we're
roughly at in terms of um in terms of housing, you know. >> Question. >> Sure. >> Why would >> Well, if we were So, the original intention as I understand it was that we were consolidating between like that we
were designing this building with the assumption that this would be the building, right? So that's that well what I'm saying is that this is if we're looking at the collection and we're looking at the size of the collection and we're looking at you know we're
operating off of that basis then that's kind of where where I we came up with a number. So >> so from the adult collection the West Jam Library you're going to pull out about 6,000 volumes of something >> probably 6,000 out of everything roughly speaking. Has that been really
discussed with anyone? >> What I was as I said the idea is that when this it is my understanding that this was based on the idea that there would be one life. So if that is the case because that is my understanding of the original intention of this program
then that is probably the amount of material that would be transferred between the two libraries. I'm not saying that that's something like we have not made that as a plan. We're saying that that is what I believe we would be pulling out of that library. And then it's a question of how much we
would be adding on top of that, how much space we would have going forward. >> We were making it clear that um West Yarmouth would would continue that it would not be the consolidation into one library. we're going to have the West Yarmouth
branch and that it should be continuing to be as significant as it always has been because we the we we the select board saw unbelievable uh response from the public on the West
Jam branch. >> Right. And I'm not um I think I should be clear that it's more a question of how we might think about arranging materials. It's not necessarily um you know again we've
been operating off of an off of a certain assumption or or at least that is how I understood this to be designed. The numbers that are in the program are substantially larger than these numbers. So the the original capacity as stated
in the program um is substantially larger than what we're talking about here. >> Right? that was based on consolidation. But after the after several public hearings and meetings in front of the board of select the decision was made, the West Lab will will definitely stay
open as an operating library. >> Well, I wasn't aware of that, but okay. >> Well, I had a question. um >> on that one. That may be a true statement, but at one point in time, if the town doesn't have money to fund to >> on both, >> then you still need a
>> Well, but if you're building a library, are you building it for today, tomorrow, or 10 years up? What are we building for? >> We're we're usually building for like 20 year growth.
and and so >> is is West guaranteed to be open for the next 20 years? >> I think if you even talk about 60 years from now closing West Jam, you're going to have a significant problem in town. >> Well, >> and remember remember that your
atmosphere in town is very, shall we say, anti- library. And um if if you we kind of calmed down West Jarmath, we the select board by saying that we were going to continue to have
the West Jarmath branch. It would continue to operate would not be a consolidation into one library over here whether and and that's the way that's the way everyone um is looking at it. Certainly the way I'm looking at it from
a select board perspective. But we have too strong a community hold on West Yarmouth to talk about ever closing that library. >> Tom, >> ever. >> Yeah, I see you. Judy Judy's got a
question. Well, I just wanted to chime in here, too, that uh what David is talking about is using the study that was presented to
the select board to create a town library. and that did that study and these numbers and this program that are being used all of those things together are based on having a library.
So when the select board although I don't remember hearing a vote particularly I know there's a lot of uh sympathy toward >> maintaining West Yarmouth Library but
that kind of numerical adjustment was not made. So I think it still needs that's why these numbers are still being worked on. Uh and that that preservation of West Yarmouth Library
really needs to be a very clear voted decision. Um but >> it was voted on >> it was voted by whom? >> Select board. It was a it was a meeting of the select board. No, Judy, there isn't a No, there is not
an official, but I mean, >> we could put it on the agenda for December 4th and you will have one. >> I mean, it is it is very clear that that is the intent is to have both libraries.
We're not closing West Jarmath. And and that was stated repeatedly to the public that we would not be closing West German. and uh we can't, you know, like why then are you going to
go ahead and and go down a path that we're not going to follow? >> Well, I I think there's a couple of things going on if we can tease out a few of these strands. Um one one would be that reassurances from the select
board, if they're not voted on, uh it can't guide what we as a committee are doing. and we said, "Well, we're going to go down this path. Do you bless us doing this?" And it was yes. And then
there might be this um thing on the side to look at MacArthur which was voted down. But uh so that's that's like one strand. Another strand is looking at the collection and
where do like uh single issue kinds of things. Do we have a history room? Are there special collections that are west at West? If West is going to be uh a branch library
or whatever that designation might be, you know, how do those collections get distributed when you have a central library and then a another library? And I'm not a librarian, but I know there must be things based on the
circulation, what circulates out of that building and that sort of thing. So I think looking at the primary collection in one way just for the point of this discussion is another thread. So that
um if we could keep that thread alive too. This is what it might look like down the road if we're saying there's a primary collection and then a secondary collection if you will. I don't know if those are the right terms. Um but I
think there are a number of strands here that are getting woven together and we need to tease them out. >> Yeah, if I could just jump in on that specific point. I think I think what people need to understand is that we have been operating these two libraries
in many ways West has already been um operating as a branch for some time which means that from a collection development perspective. there are items there that are older items um that are you know sort of the back catalog of series authors or things like that that
probably would be better um held in a main library. Both buildings are essentially at capacity in terms of shelving. So we are currently in a situation where everything that comes in not everything but just about everything every time an order is made we are in
the process of removing materials. So we would try to you know we would look to be redistributing things in some fashion in order to reduce some of that to create space because right now we simply do not have it. Um going forward the
focus would be as far as West Yarmouth would be more on you know if branch libraries typically have a collection that's more focused on that which circulates. So, you'd be buying popular titles, you know, that type of thing. Not building a collection that's maybe
quite as deep, if you will, but that has things that people want. Um, because that's sort of the focus of that collection. But in either case, in both buildings, we need to create space so that we're not as constrained as we are currently because right now, it's it's
an operational problem. >> I've got want to get some clarification. I think I'm with Judy here cuz Dus, my understanding was that our charge was to find one building. I understand and the passion the west I get that and we we
fully understand that. But our understanding was that it wouldn't it it was going to be up to the select board to decide whether west stays open. If you guys decide wait a minute wait finish. If the select board decides that
they want to maintain west, then that becomes a budgetary issue. And then people are going to argue the case of well, why do you why are you just closing south? You're just building a new south library. If that's what's that's the message you're going to get. >> If you're going to keep West open,
you're back then. Why are you doing just this library for South Monstrosity? I mean, I want this library as much as anybody. I really do. But I'm thinking, you know, that was not and I I'm with Judy again. I don't that was not my
understanding when we left that meeting with the select board that the decision was to maintain West. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But >> you you don't think that they made a decision? >> No, I don't think they did. They said that they would they would look at it was my understanding
>> overwhelming public support that they would look at it >> was noted but it wasn't >> it wasn't it was never decided upon that west would stay open >> so can I the other thing correct me if I'm wrong but as we applied for the
grant it has a program that's assumed something so when we accepted the grant we're we're accepting the assumption which is what the program came up with which those numbers are even
>> John thank you that's exactly what the program is >> that that's exactly the problem that we have now we have this program that that clearly and I think the NBLC acknowledges this David I think acknowledges this we have come to
recognize that what's in the program is not feasible you cannot accommodate 52 2,000 volumes in the square footage that they've allocated to the adult room. And if you look at this chart, irrespective of the the discussion about
West Yarmouth, obviously that affects this baseline number, this 26,000 number, but but the concept is the same. We can accommodate a c a collection of a certain size, which you know is is let's
call it close to existing. Um and that's in a combination of four high shelves which you can see over which is important for sight lines supervision etc. A combination of four high shelving and seven high shelving which is tall
you know like the ones behind John that you can't see over and that are more challenging in terms of sight lines. So we want to minimize the amount of seven high shelving. We've got it around the perimeter. do have some freestanding seven high because we have to in order
to accommodate even the existing collection. So the question then is what kind of growth is reasonable to assume is it 10% 20% 30% you know the program if if you believe their numbers is
basically a doubling of the collection which is more than we have ever seen in a in a library building program. So first I think we have to understand what what is the what's the right allowance for future growth. Um and as you see at
the bottom those that growth translates into increased size right the building has to get bigger in order to accommodate the collection as the collection grows. And so we want to make sure that whatever we submit to the MBLC
gives you whatever flexibility you need for future growth. Um we we obviously don't think that accommodating what's in the program makes sense. That would require almost a 4,000 square foot increase in the building to accommodate a collection of that size. Um whereas a
30% growth of the existing collection would would be a,000 square feet or 20% growth 700 square feet. So, we need to figure this out so that we know what we're presenting to the MBLC. Um, obviously we this isn't a decision for us to make. It's it's a deci
decision for you all to make and then we need to figure out how to get the building uh and the program aligned to to be able to submit to the NBLC. We what we don't want to do is submit something that we then have to backtrack on after the fact. Um, when we submit
it, this goes for the parking too. We don't want to we don't want to overpromise and underdel when we submit this this stuff in December. We we want to make sure that it's as close to what everybody feels is the right size for everything, collection, building,
parking, etc. So it sounds like there's still some discussion about what that base number is that this and and again this is just adult collection but is you know is this 26,000 reflective of of West staying open? What
does that look like? If if West were to stay open, what would it do to this this 26,000 volume number? Um and then once we set that baseline then we have to look at what's a reasonable expectation for growth over the next 15 20 years.
>> Judy Judy. >> Yeah. >> Go ahead. >> I'm sorry. The numbers underneath the the zero line is that discards >> that is square footage. So that number,
that square footage number correlates to the light green box. So >> got it. >> In the case of 20% growth, the 20% growth would be 5,000 volumes, >> that would mean we would need to grow the building by 700 square ft
>> based on maintaining the same ratio of low shelving and high shelving. >> Okay, understood. Thank you. >> What had been the percentage of growth to that report? that deconstruction con whatever the name of the consultant was
what had what is a what is a reasonable percentage of annual >> do you know >> I don't well >> I don't know what there said I know that they did not count the collection correctly and that the numbers in there were not correct to begin with um
>> have they ever corrected the >> answer is yes >> I I Jane would know the answer to that from my knowledge they discovered that the um numbers were incorrect and through this process we learned that the numbers were incorrect not at that point
in time >> when you say they are you talking about >> I want to say just Odin Ellis everybody we started looking at the numbers if I'm correct and >> so um yeah there were there are certain assumptions for certain
collections that are skewed that don't really reflect where what our collection Where did those number come from? >> I have no idea. I was not teach before my time. >> I know. But all right. Because this is a difficult conversation because this all wraps around money.
>> Yes. >> And bigger policy issues. So I think one of the things we have to do is at least have a reasonable amount of or reasonable um growth number. I mean the is this 26,000 individual pieces? Is
that what you're talking about? this. So you get 26,000 that are characterized as adult material. >> Yeah. According to the last >> errors report um you know the statistical reports there are 35,000 some odd print volumes between the two
libraries and you know other collections there are >> and are you reason are you reasonably happy with that number? Can you say with any kind of certainty that that number is accurate? Well, yeah, it is accurate. >> Okay. All right. So, >> yeah. So, those numbers, just so you
understand those numbers, um, we get those reports from claims. >> So, that basically everything in here, as you know, has a tag and that's basic. >> So, that's the base number. And then we we're talking about potential growth. >> In the library world, what is like
normal growth? What is a normal growth percentage? Well, I mean, I'll just obviously I'm not as familiar with the pattern here because I didn't do the errors report. I know in Whitman we turned about 4,000 items a year. >> Now, when you say turn, they mean new stuff came in,
>> right? Sort of in and out. Okay. So, you had old stuff leave, new stuff come in, but but not in an equal amount. So, there was some >> not zero some gain. >> We were we were getting pretty close to capacity. We did a pretty sizable weed
there. It's not as bad as it is, but this is truly a tight as about about as tight as can be. I mean, it's really >> we're in a situation where it's almost one in, one out. So, that's all right. >> That's
make a statement. If this is a program designed for one building, we can't grow this building anymore. We can't do it. It's it's already at 20. >> Can't do it. The site couldn't handle it. >> So, it's already at 20. So, not only the
site couldn't handle it, but the dollars couldn't handle it. We could not handle the ex the larger growth dollar-wise. That's not going to happen. So, I think what I'm having a difficult time understanding is,
and maybe we need some some guidance here from the select board. Sorry, Durk. Is, you know, are we one building? Are we two buildings? And I think until we really know that, I don't I don't know what the outcome is here.
>> Well, as you're talking about money, one thing to keep in mind is all those books that we're now replacing instead of holding on to, that's more money going out, too. >> I know. Yeah. So, >> I'm talking about >> size. >> You don't have enough room to grow here.
I mean, you're you're at 26 your adult wing on this new building is only able to hand it's not going to be able to handle an additional 26,000 books, >> right? >> It's not and you can't you can't make
the building grow 10 years down the road unless you have some sort of amorphous wall that you just press a button that grows. >> Yeah. >> But Tom, I think right it's it's a ying and a yang. >> Yeah. The collections can't grow, but all the other stuff that is in adults
could possibly shrink. But then, but you're not going to shrink that much, John. I don't see. >> Well, you could, >> but but you're left with some sort of You're right. >> You're going to have you're going to have some old stuff leaving, new stuff
coming in. Is it a zero sum game? >> No. No. is as offices get reduced as >> well I don't there aren't is how much can we go back to the to the uh >> where else can you squeeze additional room for >> I don't see where you can squeeze
>> that would be here I don't know >> you look at the adult wing up there where are you going to squeeze space that's my question unless you shrink the aisles >> I'll raise the I'll raise the stacks and
>> or raise the stacks and but but Susan that's a that is a I mean that's where we started because we thought okay we we were trying to maintain initially our hope was that all of the shelving in this area could be low enough that you could see over top of it. So four
shelves high um with perimeter shelving being taller shelving seven high. Come to find we can't accommodate the collection. We started looking okay well we could make this the non-fiction area seven high with some oversight from the reference desk um orient it in a way
that from the circ desk you can see down the aisles um and that was kind of a a best case scenario but even that wasn't accommodating the collection we didn't think it certainly wasn't accommodating growth so we did talk with Andrea at the NBLC about what if this went to all
seven high um you know you change the orientation like we did down in non-fiction, but it's suboptimal because you you then lose the sightelines through that space both from a patron wayinding standpoint, but also from a staff supervision standpoint. So, that's
not ideal. Um, but obviously that does allow you to increase capacity. Um, I I mean I I think the question was asked about what the typical growth is. I I want to say and MA correct me if I'm wrong here, but I I want to say that
Andrea in the course of our probably three hours of discussion about this issue said that they would typically expect to see 20 to 30% growth. >> Uh no, she said 15 to 20. >> 15 to 20. Okay. >> Yeah.
>> 20 years. >> Over how many years? >> What period of time? That's the amount of collection that they support in in in the sense that if your current collection is a thousand books, you can
the library is built to support a 20% growth in the overall collection. >> It's not ongoing. It's it's it's a finite >> it's total correct. You are basically capped at 20% growth.
>> So right now we couldn't even do that. We could not do that. So >> 20% growth as as things stand now. If you were to maintain low shelving in 2/3 of the adult area, we could accommodate
20% growth by increasing the adult area by 700 square ft. Um so right it it won't that 20% growth cannot fit currently unless you were to jack up all the shelving to 7 ft. the and I just want to point out that the the column on the far right here is what was in the
building program. There's no way that that in any you know scenario can happen. It's just this is a complete fiction. You can't get you can't double the collection in this building. The only way to do that would be to add a huge amount of additional space which I
think everybody agrees is not feasible. So we we put this here to sort of illustrate the problem that we recognized this week and thought, "Oh what do we do?" And and then we've been struggling with this and and I I recognize that there's more to it than
just, you know, what's the right amount of growth and what's the base collection. I think, you know, the question about West is a big one and and needs to be factored in. But just so everybody is clear, you know, it's it's now November 20th. Thanksgiving is next
week. We have a submission to the MBLC due at the end of December. These are some big questions that we wouldn't have expected to have to make this late in the game. And the building program has kind of thrown a real wrench in the works here. So, we're we're on the back
foot. We're scrambling to try to figure this out and and we need to do it quickly so so that we can make adjustments to the building plan that work with the staff that work with the NBLC um and and coordinate that building
layout with a site layout with our consultants and you know bring this all together by the end of December. So all of this discussion needs to happen fairly quickly and and we need to make decisions pretty quickly and I know that puts a lot of pressure on this group but
that's sort of where we are. >> Yeah. Can I ask a question about growth? >> Is in the library world is there any is any growth happening in like the digital world? Are these books getting digitized? Are you is growth all anticipated as a back paper book? Are is
some of this growth do you think some of these books will come in in digital form which is a lot smaller? >> That's that's sort of a different >> So we're making the assumption that the growth is all paper hardback book. >> That's that's what this that's what this
is about. This is about the storage capacity for physical items in the building. the electronic collection. >> Judy, >> Judy, do you have a question? >> Uh, so I had two points. One, one was back to West in that conversation is
that I don't think the select board can even make a decision until after any new building is built because it would end up being a financial discussion around staffing and maintaining.
So I think this is one person's opinion that whatever stance that the select board chooses to take it still could be colored in the future by financial
uh pressures. Uh so >> so there could be a goodwill gesture but I don't I don't I see that as all it is. Um, >> I think the problem you you have there, Judy, is if we go down the road with the assumption that West stays open and then
this building is built and then we turn around and say, "Oh, by the way, we can't afford West and we close it." >> That's not going to work. >> I don't I don't want to hear I don't want to hear what that's going to sound like. >> Can I just get Judy? Maybe we should get because I
think the board hearings are all taped. Correct. Mhm. >> I think we ought to get that hearing and you you should listen to it because the people in that audience there was no doubt that the board of select made an absolute commitment that West Jamoth was going to stay open and and the and the
words they chose were that the operating funds were going to be put in the budget. I mean that's what people left that meeting uh believing that we would have a new library but west well let's get the tape and listen to it >> first meeting didn't say it. H the meaning
doesn't say it or >> then you have to correct. >> Yeah. The video is even stronger. So when when I hear words like you know maybe we ought to west that is not what that's not what West is under the impression. West J's under the impression that the West German library
is staying open and whatever way we can that that that building can be used to either wide space or reorganize the collections or something. But everyone in West German believes that building is staying open and that there was a commitment on the part of the town that
it would stay open. I mean that was very very clear. I don't think anyone misunderstood that. >> I think I agree that the people who spoke were clear about that. But I don't think there was a vote taken. And also I think five years down the road, whoever's on the select board at that
point faced with what >> financial budgeting constraints they're faced with are going to make a decision for that point in time. So that may be reducing hours that, you know, I'm not saying it's closing it.
I'm just saying that a a commitment made in december 2025 may look very different in December 2030 with whatever's going on. Um that that's
that's all I wanted to say about that. The second thing was uh how married are we to these uh study rooms and is that where we can buy some collection space? I was going to come into this meeting
talking about the fact that I wanted to see us go back to the 24,000 square feet that's going to go there. >> And now it sounds like it's more going to be like 27,000 square feet. >> Well, if you add the 720, you're getting right back up to 20 27,000 square ft,
which is >> Can I cut in for one second? Um, I just reviewed notes from the last two days and Matt was correct that it's 20 to 30% growth is typical. So, I think you have to consider that 30% is a possibility. >> Okay.
>> Tim, Tim, you had a question? >> Yeah. >> Just my two cents on the whole thing, right? Obviously, this project is going to be, you know, a massive financial undertaking for the town. I think it would be remiss to not consider the fact
that this could operate as a sole library, right? Even if West does stay open and continues to operate, I think the financial commitment that the town is going to put into this building, I think it would be a missed opportunity
to reduce it down to a size similar to say South, right? Again, it's I think that would have implications on the grant itself. And again, I I think that it would be, you know, a bit better service to the town to at least have the foresight to be able to operate as a
sole library capacity. >> Tim, I hear your point, Tim. I don't think we're ever thinking about going back to the size of South. If that was the case, we'd do something at South instead. But I mean, I guess
based on last meeting, our thought was you were close to 27,000. Our understanding was you were going to try to push it back down. I see why you're running into problems. We're not getting it back closer to the 25 at least. So I
I don't know. It kind of leaves us in a dilemma at this point. >> I'm confused now. We kept on talking about adults. Does the other rooms have >> do they have growth potential or they don't have growth potential? children's room.
>> So, the the children's room and the teen room as currently laid out are accommodating the program numbers. Now, we don't know those program numbers reflect growth. We don't know what percentage growth that is because we
don't know what what the current holdings are for children and teens. But if if the growth of those two collections is anywhere near what the growth was projected for adults, you're you're in pretty good shape there. I I think we need to go through
the exercise with David and staff to to establish what those current counts are and understand what we can accommodate in this plan as compared to that. So we understand how much growth is is represented here. Um I
you know I don't have a lot of confidence in the numbers in the program at this point. So I think we need to sort of double check some of those. But we've been focusing on adults because that was the one where it was very clear to us that that we weren't able to meet the number based on the square footage
that was listed in the program. um you know are in terms of other areas for for reduction I we I don't think we can reduce aisles because we have a kind of certain minimum that we have to meet
to allow for circulation um you know accessibility etc etc. So it it comes down to are there other sacrifices that can be made and um you know are there I
I don't I don't know what those are. I mean an example that has been talked about um is the the kind of redundancy of the classroom and the multi-purpose room. Could you have a scenario where there is just one of those two and the
meeting room is the auditorium is used for for other programs. You also have you know three group study rooms. One of which accommodates um eight people potentially more even. Uh this this one here there two four person study rooms
and then there are six individual study rooms. You know, when we looked at this initially, we have the same number of meeting rooms in this u not not necessarily one for one in terms of square footage size of rooms, but in terms of the number of sort of
individual flexible spaces for meeting uh programs and individual and group study, I think we counted 14 rooms. That's the same amount that we have in the Belmont Library, which we're currently designing, which is a 40,000
square foot building. Um, so double the size, but the same number of of individual or or flexible meeting spaces. So, in our mind, that was one area where we thought, okay, maybe there's some some efficiency that can be
gained by re-examining those numbers. That said, like a lot of communities, what we have heard from a number of different people is what this town lacks is community meeting space, space for individual study room. I I can also say that pretty much every library I've been
to wishes that they had more individual study rooms. You know, those are the things that tend to be the most in demand. So it it's a difficult position to be in to to try to make some of those value decisions aside from just a straight increase in in area to
accommodate collection. >> Um >> and and and sorry one more thing before I stop that that just to to um alleviate any concern. I think if we were talking about a 700 square foot or
even a thousand square foot increase in size, I think the site can handle it. I think we could make the building that much bigger on this site. Um I mean we have to sort of examine that and figure out exactly how we're going to do it. But I think it's doable. I
don't think that we are at maximum capacity yet with this building on this site. Two questions here, Matt. One from Judy and then one from John. Judy, >> I'm good.
>> You're good, John. >> So, I'll throw it out to every So, I mean, I know we would love an auditorium, but is that another one that's large square footage that again is talked about a million times, but if you need to cut something, Yeah. is it
that? And then the other question, Matt, is is there other things like the those office, not the offices, the study rooms that MBLC is indifferent on that they they're not going to, I'll say, penalize
when they review it if it's not in the in the plans. >> Um, I I don't know because we haven't posed the question that way to them. Although I will say that I think they would have a problem with eliminating the
auditorium. That's that's pretty much a requirement in every project we do with them and the ability to have access to space off hours. I I think they would they would rather see you eliminate one of the two kind of midsize multi-purpose rooms
>> and maybe you know one or two small study rooms than than the auditorium. Um they Andrea made the suggestion today about if you were to eliminate one of the two 600 square foot rooms either the classroom and the multi-purpose room you
could theoretically introduce a folding partition in the auditorium to divide it in half and or or into two separate spaces. That is not without its challenges and those partitions are not the best acoustically. So it's a little bit limiting. It also is difficult
because you have to create two entrances to that room which requires more circulation space. So there's some inherent inefficiency to that as well. Um but but those are the kinds of things we were talking about with her today.
>> I I think we were pretty clear that we didn't want to do one of those divide. I I >> I think we can just leave that alone. Is there any uh way to do like special collections along the perimeters of the
classroom and the multi-purpose room? And I'm just trying to, you know, buy, you know, like maybe making a history collection or a local information collection or some kind of division like
that that would uh take up enough of that collection count. >> David, um, so two things to that. For one, uh, we have been thinking that we, well, so for one thing, the numbers that
I cited didn't include the Cape Cod collection that we have in the small reference room because it's not that big. Um, and we there is we were actually thinking that um the larger meeting room at the far end of the uh
adult wing would be like the Yarmouth room and would have the special collections in. So >> where's >> we're not to that towards them not appearing on that right there. We're not obviously we haven't really, you know, gotten to that level of design yet, but that was one thought that we had as a
staff. Anyway, um >> for those collections on >> Matt, I had one thought. >> Yes. >> Staff rooms. Can we just get rid of them? >> Give us a tent out. No, but my thought was, and hear me out, and this may sound
strange, could you build a small second floor and put the staff rooms on on a smaller second floor? >> I mean, I and then I don't know leave David's office downstairs, >> no. Okay.
>> I It's not It's not a crazy question. And I I mean, I don't know how the staff would feel about it because it pulls them that much further away from activities in the library. >> Um, >> a long time ago. Um, in fact, we were
doing >> the West Y Library was specifically eliminated from discussion because the concept there was to put a second floor on and the answer came back absolutely not. They did not want a second floor. You have to have elevators. It sight lines. Uh, it just added so much more
cost. In addition, it eliminated the Westmouth library from any consideration. So I don't think we I like the idea but but it was >> I think part of the problem was it even if you put a second floor it didn't have enough square >> footing matter the convers it was a
blanket they didn't do MBLC and the staff did not want a second floor regardless of where it was going to be >> because of the added costs I think you have to do elevators you have to do a uh >> ADA requirements it was just so much more expensive even if it was a small portion of a wing it was going to be
just >> not not to be considered. >> Yeah, I think if it was staff only and it was treated like like a mezzanine level, I think there's a scenario in in terms of code compliance where you could
avoid the requirement of an elevator. You would still have to build a stair. You'd probably need a bathroom up there. You know, it's it's there is some inefficiency to it. Um, I mean it the the other thing is it doesn't it doesn't reduce square
footage, right? It's it's reduces footprint, but it's not reducing square footage >> collecting space, I guess. >> Uh, yes, but but you're you're adding square footage to accommodate collecting space. Yeah, >> I know. I'm against adding square
footage. Take a look, >> Judy. Does the grant application for 24 the two multi-purpose rooms? What is the square footage on each of those? >> Not that big. >> 600 600 square f feet each roughly.
>> Okay, so 600's a big part of 723 or whatever that number is. Um, and if we just did a quick poll around the table, if we lose one of those rooms, keep the auditorium without a dividing room.
um you know obviously not where it is but you know move that building block down at the other end. Does how does that satisfy people? Because I was with Dorcas. I was hoping we were coming into a smaller gross square footage
conversation tonight. Um >> I agree. though I don't I don't want to add and I I want to make sure that we we have what we want for programming but not excessive amounts. So I was just wondering if we wanted to throw it out
to everybody. >> Well, what would the staff prefer? What do you think is more valuable? Either the multi-purpose room or the classroom? Which one do you think gets more use? >> They're both the same. They're not. I don't I don't see them as being honest with you.
>> Our question is um how much I know there's a big plan that people wanted the meeting space for after hours so that multiple meetings could happen at the same time. If you eliminate one of them, >> is that need now not being met? Because that was one of the big
auditorium. >> Yeah. But if we had if somebody was in the one space and we had a second meeting, would we want to be in a giant auditorium or is that too big of a schedule issue. But I mean of the two to me >> from a library programming perspective
the um >> the classroom is more valuable because I it would be right now we don't have a space um like for instance the um adult craft programs have been very popular.
We were they were just doing whatever it is jelly painting. Uhhuh. >> Um, you'd really hate to do that in a beautiful auditorium with a nice wood floor and get paint and blue on the floor. Um, with that said, I do have a little bit of a concern about um, if the
intention, you know, to Mindy's point, certainly, you know, if if the room if the other meetings, the other multi-purpose room, you know, I have always thought of as a meeting room in fact and if if you know the loss of that
as a meeting room is not a problem for the town, then that's an obvious place to go. that obviously when the library is open we have other spaces. So if there were a need for the use of those spaces during the day, that's one thing. But part of the discussion has always
been what is available to the public after at night. And that's this is an area where yes, we can certainly sacrifice that from an operational perspective, but it will have an impact on >> how the you know how the building was used by the public.
>> Same. Uh, I guess I I don't I don't want to cut us short on collection space because that to me is the primary thing. And I think, wow, isn't that lovely that we can offer two
spaces, two meeting spaces where now between the two sites, we have the Leonard room and that's it. So, you know, there's still spaces if somebody needs a small meeting, although it's not after hours, but if we're just
limiting our conversation here to after hours meeting space, you know, I don't think it's the library's job to provide meeting space for everyone. So, >> I would assume the community wing is
going to be open to the public during business hours, right? Is there any way to lose the larger study room that's seated for eight and simultaneously shrink the multi-purpose
room? So, now that's a larger study room during the day, smaller meeting room at night. kind of, you know, sacrifice a little bit on both ends. >> I think, well, I won't, but I I think the problem is I think it it it's a
function of how the rooms are used. I don't think we would want the um we would want a study room that was not like directly monitored by the staff because that's a lot of the the
discussions we've been having have been around, you know, making sure that that staff can easily and efficiently monitor what's going on in the study rooms. With that said, I mean, to me, this is really a question of um I do see that those two
spaces could be thought of as being somewhat interchangeable. Um but I think it's just it's more a function of the off hours access and and the degree to which that's a priority for, you know, the committee and the town
because the idea here is to be able to make those spaces available after hours. So that's that's really what it comes down to. >> So I think where we are right now is we need to get a clearer idea of where the collection stands. Correct. We need to
get a more definitive number on where we are with the collection and because you I think David you stated you weren't totally sure what that number was at this point. >> I mean what specifically I know like what the holdings are. Okay. Um, so I'm
not sure. >> So you from you you believe that right now we're at about 20,000 or somewhere around there. >> I think it's larger. >> Was it larger? Why 3.6 with the combined maybe? >> Well, so what's in here is about 20,000
print I would say. I mean it's always a little bit inexact because you don't um these are these are item records. They're not we didn't go around and count 20,000 items on the shelf, >> right? I I get I get that. But I mean, >> okay, so two assumptions here. If if we
go to just one building and it's and we leave West open, then 20,000 this building will accommodate growth. Correct? Am I right? >> This building accommodates growth in
children and teens currently as as drawn here. It does not accommodate growth in adults. Well, >> if if West if West stays open, it even with West staying open, Matt. >> Uh, well, that's I guess that's a
question for David then. What is If West stays open, is this the right number for current holdings for this building, this 26,000? >> Uh, no. No, that's more than my opinion. I mean, I'd have to double
check, but I'm we're not quite there. At least on the adult side. My tally on the adult side was closer to 20 >> here. West Yamouth. What's the adult on West Yamoth? >> Um, I haven't gotten that far. The total number in West Yarmouth is about 22.
>> All right. >> But that's everything. >> And you That's everything. That's you. So, you don't have an adult count. That's everything in the building, >> right? Because But the plan was you were going to pull at least 6,000 out of there to bring over here. So, there's going to be at least 6,000 adult unless that's the entire adult >> well
>> collection. >> No, because if if we're keeping the building open, there's no real need to shift things around. >> No, but I mean, if if you bring this plan, you were going to bring 6,000 over here. >> You have duplicates between the two. So, I think what David is saying, there's only going to be about six that will bring over.
>> What I'm saying is >> we wouldn't if if the mandate was close the building, right? that our estimate is that there are about 6,000 items in that building that we would want for the collection because they're not duplicates. >> Okay. >> Most of what's in there I mean the we
that library has been run as a branch basically for decades and so there are the the vast majority of the collection are duplicates because there's a copy there, there's a copy here. Obviously there as time goes on one gets weed, one
does not, you know, that type of thing. But um in terms of like if we were consolidating that was the amount that we came up with that we would be transferring to the main branch. Obviously if the building is not closing
then we don't do any of that. So then we're just moving what's here. And you know obviously there are certain collection management considerations in the sense that if we're moving this stuff then we would go through and do a real evaluation. I mean, I'm sure there's plenty of stuff in the
non-fiction shelves that's out of date or whatever that would be, you know, so it's not quite as cut and dried as it appears. Um, >> so, >> so, so David, just to be I just want to make sure I'm clear. If West stayed
open, you said that you thought the adult count that would be going into this building would be 20,000. What the current plan accommodates is 26,000 volumes. That's a 30% growth from
20. So >> in in the scenario where West stays open, the plan is currently drawn accommodates collection plus 30% growth. Is that a reasonable is that a reasonable position to to be taking? I
mean, ba based on what we heard from the MBLC, it sounds like that growth is is is sort of in the range of what they would expect. >> So, I um I actually I'm sure she told
you, but I um had a meeting with Andrea today, another two hours um and uh because I was concerned about whether the BLC, you know, whether the discrepancy was an issue for them. and she told me that a
it's not and b um they are generally they will generally be supportive of kind of wherever you've come out on your collection number. What it probably would mean from an operations perspective is that we would approach things a little bit differently um and
there would be more throughput if you will of materials than perhaps had been the practice in the past. Um, but again, that's an operational consideration, not a not a building consideration. >> Throughput, meaning what? I'm sorry.
>> Meaning that things would not um stay on the shelves as long as they have in the past. >> Okay. >> Um, >> so if they're not moving, they would be taken off the >> Yeah. I mean, she said she cited the example of a the library where she was a director where they had like a one-year
thing. So, they would be anything that had moved in a year was gone. Gone. Now that's you know that's a an operational decision the library. Yes. Yep. Okay. So >> I'm saying children. So what that means is a lot of the classics go and we lose
a lot of the books that get checked out occasionally. Little houses on Little House on the Prairie would all be gone. Outsiders. All those classic books that rarely get checked out would lose their space in children's.
But you could, again, that would be a library decision. You could say children's is handled differently. >> Well, they said children's can handle the >> children. You have the issue. >> Well, right now though, my collection, I don't double order a lot of books for
West. I keep them separate. So in this, a lot of the books would then become here to fill up that gap too. Well, far. So, where are we going?
What's next? >> So, if we stay with what you have there now, Matt, of the 26,000, um would that be something that could accommodate if the West Yarmouth Library remained open?
>> That's I mean that's what it's sounding like to me. If if as David said, West Yarma stays open, that means that we're talking about a collection size for adults of 20,000 items rather than 26.
6,000 items represents a 30% growth, I think, right? That's 30% of 20. Um so so as drawn today the building would accommodate that that current holding
plus the ability to grow and that's with shelving that's a combination of seven high and four high but the majority being the the lower four high shelves. >> Okay. So let's say that let's just say the collection stays at the 26 180. What
is the total square footage then starting with if you don't cut out a a conference room or a classroom or you know like what it is right now? >> 26,000. >> Yeah. 26,000. >> This is square footage,
>> right? >> Yeah. >> Okay. And if we talked about cutting out a classroom or a conference room, would we be then talking about 25,000 square feet or pretty much still staying at 26,000?
>> It it would reduce, but we would have to go through the exercise of sort of reconfiguring things. So you would you would absolutely lose the net square footage, but there's also the all the gross square footage that's associated with that. you know, if you pull if you
pull one of these two rooms out, things have to shift to kind of fill in that gap and shorten that wing. And so we we obviously we would try to be as efficient as we can in that replanning. It's hard to say if it would be an absolute one to one, you know, grossing
factor related to that net square footage, but but at a at a minimum, we would be reducing by the net square number. So, if we were to pull out a 600 ft room, this number would go down by at least 600 square f feet, hopefully more
because there's some gross area that's allocated to each net square foot in the building. Um, so, you know, this could be at 255 and if another decision is made, it might go down, you know, there's a
there's a chance that you could get it down to 25. I don't know. you'd have to getting it to 24 would be a pretty significant reduction in net program. >> Is there any office sharing at all?
Are there all individual offices or are there some there's some offices? >> No, there's there's a there's shared office here. >> There's shared office here. There's shared office here. >> Um there there are one, two, three individual offices. >> Okay. Matt, I had in my notes that there
were three kitchenetses. Is that accurate or not? I have only one. >> Is there just one kitchen in >> There's a kitchenette at the auditorium, >> right? >> There's a kitchenet in the staff break room, you know, sink and a refrigerator.
Under counter refrigerator. >> Not a full Not a full kitchen. >> Not a full kitchen. Just it's a Yeah, it's a it's a break room. And then children's >> children's has a sink in the program room. There's a sink in the mother's
room. >> Ma, am I missing something? >> Yeah, there's a sink in the um in the young adults work room. >> This one? Yeah. >> Yeah. >> But they're not kitchenets. Those are
those are kind of work sinks or >> you know this is for cleanup of activities. This is for >> the story hour has a bridge though. >> Yeah. >> This does. Yes, that's right. >> Children's.
>> Those would be sort of the three kitchenets then. I guess the the children's story hour room, the auditorium kitchenet, and then the staff break room. >> Any other questions, guys? So, I guess Judy's got a question. Judy.
>> Um, no. My question is in here. I I realize this is a very complicated and um in some ways very loaded conversation, but I do need to take my leave now and I just wanted to let you know, but I will watch the tape.
So, good night and thank you for tackling this. >> Thanks, Judy. >> Thanks, J. Thanks, J. Um, I have a question, Matt, and maybe you can help me articulate this better, but um, I'm wondering if, um, our,
as far as I understand, the way the grant application was written, it was written under the under the opaces of this being a single library for the town. Whether that's true or not now is is a different question. But if that's what the MBLC has in mind that we are
designing for one library for the town and then it's now suggested that West Dharmas stays open, is the MBLC going to be okay with the reduction of collections or the the difference in collection building to
a different size collection um with like you know what I mean? Do we need to give some kind of assurance that we're We're now chang >> I'm sorry, Marie, go ahead. >> No, I just it feels like we're changing the terms of the grant somehow and I
want to make sure that the MBLC will be okay with that. >> I I don't think the MBLC can can tell the if the town has three libraries, which we do, I don't think that the NBLC cares whether you keep those two
libraries open or not. I think they're just providing the grant to build a library. >> And maybe I'm wrong, but I I that's the way I understood that that it was submitted. >> But with that, my question would be, but the program that's in the application is
based upon what? What did the program be and what's here? >> What's there? >> It's based on what's what's in this building. >> It doesn't say we close. >> It doesn't say we close. I think it's based on the needs analysis >> for this building. >> It was No, it would have been based on
the needs analysis for the whole library system. >> Correct. >> So, but all I'll say, Maria, is I did kind of talk at some length with Andrea about this and she because I was very concerned about that as well and we came
back to that several times and she does not seem it. She definitely gave me the impression and I could certainly talk to her again tomorrow that you know where we end up on a number is not going to impact the grant. I didn't so
>> yeah and I think that's consistent with David with what you were saying about collections you know they ultimately they defer to communities on or to the library staff on size of the collection right so it's similar I would think
>> I think that's pretty much exactly what she said I think she used those exact words >> if you look at it from another side if they said well they wouldn't assume that the library would stay open. If the if the town decides if they said, "Oh, we submit and
say we're going to maintain two libraries, build the new library, and then three years down the road, the town says we can't afford to have two li, you know, two libraries. The staffing is too much. We close the library." I mean, not that it would happen, but I mean, that's
conceivable it could happen. And what are they going to do? Come back and say, "You got to give us our money back?" >> Well, no. I mean, if you they you do have to keep the main branch open, >> right? that that there's no and this would that would be the new library. >> No, but it all it means that you've just built you spent $34 million on a new
library that doesn't meet the future needs of the library. >> For Matt's team 26,83 are they tked to reduce it to less than that or are we happy with 26,000? So
that I think that's the think 25 >> 25. >> Yeah. So we >> No, I think we need to figure out how to get down close to 25 if you know for if we're 100 off or 50 off. I don't think
that's going to be a big deal for the MBLC. Moneywise, it'll be a deal. But I think we I think we have to task the library staff and Matt's group to get down to closer to 25. >> It's got to get a little skinnier. >> Yeah, it's got to get a little skinnier.
>> Yeah. >> And it, you know, that's going to mean probably taking away one of the multi-purpose rooms and reconfiguring something else at this point. Any other Matt, you okay with that?
You >> been shook? >> I mean, look, we we can we can design it any number of ways. It's going to come down to David and the staff having to make some hard decisions. It sounds like >> uh and we'll obviously we'll work with
them to to tighten things up with decisions like that made. We can't make those decisions for them. and and that's but but if that's if that's the direction then that's what we're tasked with doing and
um >> that's perfect know that and that's perfectly understandable man I would expect that you guys and I I trust you guys immensely between you and the staff that you will figure something out that's going to be an issue you'll do that
>> you Virginia people you know you you just do what you I have >> I'm never going to live that down, am I? >> I know you're not. >> Do you have any Do they have any estimate now about what the furniture, equipment, and fixtures would be? Is that an algorithm based on total project
cost? >> We can we can give you a rough budget based on some benchmarks that that we've done. >> Okay. >> Uh we can do it. You know, I I I think I I I don't want you to hold me to this, but I would say that my recollection is
that somewhere in the 25 to $30 a square foot range is probably what we're looking at. We, as I said, we would want to go back and do a kind of proper budget that, you know, sort of identifies based on
uh the, you know, the furniture requirements that are in the program. So we have a more accurate thing and but we could put some rough numbers to it and come up with a a a rough idea of budget. So you have that but um for a building
of this size, you know, 20 $25 time 25,000 ft would be $625,000. That includes shelving. You know that that could be right. 30,000 $30 a square foot would be
750,000 >> and that's the full foot shelving there. >> That's that's shelving everywhere whether it's four or seven. It's that that that's I mean again I think we would we would need to do a more detailed analysis to come up with a
budget that we feel more confident in. But as a very quick back of the napkin I would say that's >> probably the starting point. and and green building. Would we have to start adding on extra costs if we were making it a green
building? >> Yes. >> I think that's I mean when we think about buildings like this and we we generally for budgeting purposes use $1,000 a square foot as a kind of rough construction budget. And that assumes a
certain level of of construction that includes some some sustainable features. I mean, we we're at this point that, you know, Massachusetts is aggressive in terms of adopting more stringent energy
code and, you know, building performance requirements. So, we're just by meeting code, we're going to be pretty sustainable. We always try to go beyond that. Um, we are obligated as an example now by code to make this a solar ready building. So not that doesn't mean
putting solar on it but it means designing the building in a way that solar can be put on it at a future date. >> Making sure the structure can accommodate it providing you know a rate potential path for for getting wiring up there etc. So um same thing with um
electric vehicle charging stations. We're obligated to provide infrastructure to facilitate future installation of EV charging stations in the parking lot. There's also in the grant program there are incentives for creating a
sustainable building. Right? If we go after I'm forgetting exactly what the language is, >> but it's more or less set up in a way of if you try to achieve some of these certifications, the costs are more or less offset by the incentive program.
>> Yeah. And in this case, the incentive I I did that calculation with Andrea about a month ago, and I want to say that that incentive was in the $400,000 range uh for this project. There are three >> coming back.
>> That's money coming back. It's a It's a reimbursement. >> That's a reimburse. >> Yeah. So once you demonstr once the building is built and you demonstrate through one of three compliance paths that you meet that requirement whether it's lead certification I think it's
lead gold is the minimum uh there there are two other compliance pathways that you could that you could use um and once you demonstrate that you comply then you get that as a reimbursement and that offsets the administrative cost of
pursuing those lead is a is is a complicated um process. It requires a lot of sort of management, you know, sort of paper management and tracking down the contractor for different
things, keeping track of of credits and going through the review process with multiple revisions with the USGBC. So between the design team and the registration fees and all that, we generally say budget about $100,000 for
lead. Um so you get that money back as part of the reimbursement plus you get a little a little extra. >> Um >> we can meet >> but again I think we're talking about $400,000. >> I think we can meet the green building incentive without doing Matt just >> Yeah, there are two other factors.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Matt, can you get an estimate for how much it would cost to put solar panels on the building? I know it's solar ready, but any idea of what's it cost now for a solar panel? >> Yeah. Um, I don't remember off the top of my head, but we just we're we're
building a project in Western Mass now where solar was part of the bid package. And so, we have some some actual costs for that. So, I can try to get a square foot cost or a cost per watt, kilowatt or whatever. Well, we can we can find that out.
>> One of our select members is a big energy person, so I have a feeling she will definitely ask questions about solar panels on Joyce. >> Yeah. I mean, solar solar probably requires >> with and
solar probably requires its own meeting because it's it's complicated. There are a lot of different ways and and the rules have changed. It used to be that municipalities didn't get the tax credit, but but now they do. So, it used to be that we would find donors were interested in donating a solar array,
taking the tax credit, and then and donating the the solar array to the library, right? So, there was it was kind of a win-win. The the rules have changed now. I think I think municipalities are now eligible for the tax credits for solar um from from the
Biden administration policy. Whether that's been undone at this point, I don't know, but but it's a it's a complicated um it's a complicated topic and there are different ways of of of putting solar on your roof. You can buy
it outright, you can lease it. Um there there are a lot of different options. So that it's it requires a much longer conversation. >> I I have another project going on up in um Salem right now that had photovoltaic photovoltaic system solar panels
included in a you know very conceptual part of the project and that was estimated at $85 a square foot. um tickets. I don't know exactly what our, you know, roof square footage is, um if it would be the same as the, you know, floor area, maybe a little bit
more with some overhangs. Um but >> yeah, so if you if you just took um you know, $80 a square foot times 20,000, assuming you're not going to get every square foot of the of the roof, >> that's a $1.6 million array. But that's
that's probably more solar than you need >> for a building of this size. But but that's >> that's an analysis we can do too. How much square footage would we need to power a building of this size? >> Um >> I just think we should have the
information because I'm sure they're going to ask. >> They're going to ask >> particularly the two members will ask. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Hey, thanks guys so much. I really appreciate everybody's comments and it was a great discussion and I think we know where we're going um with Matt and
and the library staff, but I'd like to move on to um outreach and potential. Jen, are you on? >> There she is. >> I'm here. Yes, >> all yours.
>> Okay. So we so in terms of this is basically about the website that we had talked about setting up and um our Accenture team is able to put together a site. Um there would be
so I'm just going to explain like what's on the information that they gave to me. um discovery and set up and it's kind of kickoff and getting materials together and Tim has already reached out to Lori at the town to find out about getting
some information as to what we can populate this with and um not necessarily just the library stuff but but what we need to know about populating website for the town. Um there's the website design and it's on this Wix platform. I don't know if anybody's ever heard of that, but um we
work with kind of a template. So there's not a lot of we're not reinventing the wheel. It's kind of like plugging some things in to kind of streamline and make it go quickly. And we can then configure it with colors and fonts and all that jazz. and then website development and content integration. Just putting
putting all of the information about the library and the process that you all want to have in there, the graphics and the maps and all that all that kind of thing. Um then then there's the piece where we could do updates if you would
like um you know there's a place where we can put in hey this is what's happening right now. we just submitted the schematic design and we're waiting for a response by XYZ. Um so so there's that piece of it and and then um so
there's all that getting it set up and then there would be a a a monthly like $29 a month for the you know like the domain and the connection and and you know the having the site running for the
town. So the whole setup depending on what has to be done, what you want, what level of detail, how many tabs you think you might want, it could be 2500 to 3500 to get it set up. That said, I will
double check our budget in terms of what we predicted our fee would be for this first phase, what our task order is for this first phase. And my my hope is that we can just send you a proposal but more
or less try to absorb that. You know, I think we've built a little bit under what we had originally anticipated and our contract is um um hourly not to exceed versus a lump sum. So, anything we don't use then you
do not get build for. So, I think we have a little bit of wiggle room in there, but I will get back to you on that. Um, I think that that would probably that's I think probably the best plan of attack for that so that it's not really a a big cost. >> Thank you.
>> That work. >> How long would it take J once we start? How long would it take to get this whole thing up and running? >> What's the time frame? >> A few days. Basically get what I've got kind of in front of me and I'll send this to you in like a a formal format.
But uh it discovery and setup's like 3 to 5 hours. The design is maybe 10 hours. Integration 16 hours. Enhancements, you know, the the kind of setting up the page for updates is maybe, you know, 8 to 10 hours. Um Okay.
>> So, yeah, it's it's really not it's not like it's going to take us two months to get it up and going. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Sure. Jen, who do you work with on are they working who are they working with on the committee? Are you working with anybody on the committee or is it just
town? I'm sorry. >> Literally, we got we got the green light. Um gosh, what day? It was about a week ago, right? Or a couple weeks ago from Bob and he said, "Yeah, just go ahead and he suggested we reach out to Lori and Tim did that." But >> thus far, we have not started working
with any of you to get this going. let me get you the kind of proposal tomorrow and then you can get back to me and let me let us know how you want to go from there working with you guys. >> From everything that I've heard from our colleagues that have also kind of set up
similar websites to this of again it's we we have somebody come in to help set everything up but then once everything's set up it's like I'm going to have full reign of updating going through everything. So again, it's I if there's
something you guys want up there, it's, you know, the matter of minutes, hours to be able to get it up onto the website. It's not it's not you're going to have to convey something to us. We're going to have to kick it back to somebody else who's then going to have to update. It's what we bring in this other person to just get everything off
the ground and get like the website actually created and then from there it's you're just dealing straight with us. >> Thanks, Tim. Any other questions for Tim? Did I send all of you the website example or did Judy share it? We had we
had shared the website that that was a an example for um a project in Amherst. >> Yeah, you showed it to us at the last meeting, but you haven't shown it. Yep. Okay. >> Pretty question.
>> Yeah. Any other questions for Jen? Okay. updates from town hall we had earlier, right? >> Thanks. Okay, guys. Future steps. Where are we going? So, I think the first future steps are you guys are going to get together again. Matt and your group are going to get together again and
you're going to come to some meeting of the mind meld mind meld thing and get a square. Um any other ideas for the goal 25,000? >> Yeah, the goal the goal to try to get us
as close to 25,000 as possible. Okay, >> I give you a penny for every foot you get closer now. >> So, our next meeting >> is December 3rd. It's December >> third the planning
>> with the All right. December 3rd with the planning board, but the fourth was >> do you want do you want us to hold that just in case >> to hold that meeting on the fourth? >> Okay. >> But definitely the third with the planning. That's next week. Well, two weeks. two weeks, right?
>> You want to meet next week, Susan? You're welcome. >> We can schedule. So, I just want to make sure I don't have the right meeting when you're there. >> From what I have in December, it's every Thursday, right? >> Christmas Eve almost. >> Yeah.
>> So, Matt, did you ever work out with the town engineer? Do you have any more information on GIC and when they're going to be able to to do their stuff? Um, currently they are scheduled, they've got the drilling subcontractor scheduled for December 1st. Uh, the head
of DPW was out this week on vacation. So, Monday, our geotech engineer is going to reach out to him to try to coordinate in advance of that day. Um, where we have left it is we are not going to do any clearing. We're going to get the drill rig as close to the tree
line as we can get and we're going to take a couple of borings at that point. That's roughly the southern end of the community room. Um I I'm planning on talking to McFale, our geotech, uh before this happens to also have them
just do a kind of walk through of the site to get get a kind of visual assessment. One thing I want to talk to the DPW director about is whether it's possible to have somebody from the town maybe get in there with a Bobcat or something and get a little bit deeper
into do a test pit. not a boring but but just you know get see if there would be any benefit to doing that for for McFale in terms of their preliminary findings. Um but I think what we discussed was a preliminary report that obviously puts
this into perspective. It's limited to what you know the whatever investigative work they're able to do now without doing any clearing. We all agree that doing clearing at this point doesn't make sense. uh the NBLC seems supportive of that approach that this is a
preliminary set of findings to be confirmed at SD. Um so we'll see. I mean it's it's really at this point it's to it's it's partly to inform the structural uh engineers narrative, but
it's also to confirm that the site is viable. Like if there was something that um Are you guys still hearing me? It looks like you're all frozen. >> I can still hear you. >> Okay, >> we lost you guys.
>> You're back. We lost you for a few minutes. >> So, we're unstable. >> We're unstable just for 30 seconds. >> All right. So, I I don't know how much of that you missed, but basically, it's in the works. Um, we're going to coordinate with the DPW director on Monday,
>> and I I think we'll be in good shape. >> Thanks. Any other questions, guys? I know it's a long night. Really appreciate everything, all the hard work, all the discussion. It's really great. Um, I hear a motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Second. Yeah.
>> All in favor? >> I. >> All oppose. >> We're all going home. Hey, Matt, don't go anywhere. Just two questions real quick. Where's your project in Western Mass? >> Uh, Shootsbury. >> Shootsbury. >> Yep.
>> Okay, cool. And then how was Morocco? >> It was fantastic. Aside from a little dysentery. >> Oh, >> gee, we can we can trade notes on that one. Been there, done that.
>> You didn't you didn't prepare me, Tom. >> Hey, you got to learn on your own. >> I learned. >> Sorry about that. That's tough. I really is. >> But it was it was amazing. >> Yeah. library. So, Shootsberry, huh? It's a library.
>> Shootsberry. It's a library. It's the smallest library we've ever done. It's a 4,500 foot library. Net zero, 100% on-site renewable. Mass >> Timber. Have a happy Thanksgiving everybody.
>> Yes, you too. Thanks, everybody. >> Thanks.