The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1999-04-06 MinutesFayetteville Public Library Board of Trustees Building Expansion Meeting April 6,1999 Trustees present were M. Thomas, S. Singleton, M. Roberts, M. Lawrence, and L Brewer, L. Gottsponer, M. Goff. Staff members present were L. Schaper, Steven Thomas, Melanie Stockdell. Members of the press present were: Shannon Hemann, Sarah Fisher, and Chadie Allison. Gtizens I present were Elizabeth Wood. The meeting was called to order at 4:07 p.m. 1. Jeff reviewed input from previous public meeting. a. Senior seemed to like site A. They worried about safety at site B. b. Those present considered trolley as public transportation c. Those present considered access to site B as marginal, like site A. Intersection at Center and West is difficult. Non -profits in area of site B were concerned they would be displaced by rising property values, also concerned about parking. d. Those present expressed concern about the future of the Roberta Fulbright name. • e. They also expressed concem about status of library, i.e. operational funding. L. Schaper reported on progress. 2. Then each Board member spoke their thoughts about the site decision. a. M. Roberts: He felt grateful for the process, felt Board had listened to all sides, and it was democracy at work. He said the process was inspirational espedally in regard to the neighbors on Conner who could see and express both sides of the issue. He also expressed his gratitude to Jeff Scherer and to Washington Regional Medical Center Board. He said he favored the new site. He mentioned the daughter of Warren Segraves who expressed her desire to have the building saved and kept for a public purpose. b. S. Singleton: He said he had no affection for the existing building, but does have affection for the site and its beautiful views. He said he has respect for those who honor the architectural merit of the building. He sald that what was most important was not the location, but what happens inside the library. He said he regrets what could have happened here. c. L. Brewer: She said her analytical side was not able to help her make a dedsion—the criteria comparison was too close to call She explored her connections to the existing site. She heard the concerns of neighbors and voiced her concem that we work with the City to make sure the building is kept, reused and continues to offer something to the community. She said it was exdting that everybody wants the library as their neighbor. She said from living in another area of town, this is all one neighborhood to her—it's all downtown—but through this process she realized there are separate neighborhoods within downtown. She wondered if locating the library at site B if these neighborhoods could be united. She said her appreciation of site B has grown and that the library being there will enhance that part of the City, and therefore, all the City. She said the more you see a site, the more you become attached to it. d. L Gottsponer: He said he would rather build here because of the type of building that could be built here. But, he said, when we move pass this, we can have a very functional library on either site. He said we can maintain the existing neighborhood better by going to site B He said he was in favor of the other site. e. M. Lawrence: He said he was in favor of site B. He said either site can allow us to meet our goals. He mentioned the sheer nightmare of moving twice. f. M. Goff: She said she was not excited by the existing building, but knew many others who like it. She said it shouldnt be taken down. She said that if we build new on the new site, there wont be a perception of safety Issues because of gentrification. g. M. Thomas: He said he s a traditionalist. He likes the existing site, but the landscape would be lost if we build here. He's talked to many who like the building. We dont know what the value of the building will be in twenty years or so. He said we need to keep it maintained, we need to save it, and he would feel happy to do a new building on the new site. 3. M Roberts moved to select site B the land north of itv Hospital owned by the Washington Regional Medical Cent r for h site of the new library. L Brewer seconded the motion. All voted aye. 4. M. Lawrence moved and L. Brewer seconded a motion to recommend to the City of Fayetteville that the existing library building be retained for a public purpose in a form that maintained the integrity of the original Warren Segrave buildings. M. Lawrence moved to amend the motion, L. Brewer seconded, to state that: The Fayetteville Public Library Board of Trustees recommends to the City of Favtteville that the existing library buildings and site be retained in a form that maintains the integrity of the original Warren Segraves design. All voted aye. 5. S. Singleton said that $23M if divided by 70,500 people (between 55K and 851) works out to $16-$20 per person per year – less than the cost of one hardback book. 6. The Board then discussed how it would present this decision to the City Council. The following points were made: a. To keep it simple and strong. To read the motions. b. To express the rigorous process we used. We have conducted a process that was open and public. c. Any costs quoted are predicated on an election this year. Inflation is $600K/yr. Or $50K/mo. on this project using national data across 20 cities. d. We can defend our actions. We believe firmly that it is the right thing to do. 7. S. Singleton wondered if we should proceed to procure the land. L. Gottsponer said we would need an appraisal and M. Goff said we would need soil borings. Jeff said a level 1 environmental assessment and a soil survey would cost about $15-20K. L. Gottsponer said the Medical Center wants to sell the property to us and will work on our timeline. M. Lawrence said we should authorize L. Gottsponer to begin talks with the Medical Center. J. Scherer asked who is buying the land? He suggested we send a letter to the WRMC Board confirming our decision today. 8. M. Thomas asked M. Roberts to speak to City Council this evening. M. Roberts accepted. • 9. The meeting was adjoumed at 5:15 p.m.