2010 Library Proposal Boxford, Mass.

April 5, 2010

Table of Contents

1. Objective of Proposal p. 2 2. Brief History p. 2 3. Project Overview p. 2 4. Program/Design Considerations p. 3 5. Economics of Proposal p. 5 6. MBLC Grant p. 9 7. Conclusion p. 11 8. Letters of Understanding p. 12

Board of Library Trustees Jane Moody*, Chair

Susan Daley* Carole Davis

George Fischer Eileen Guerin

Pauline Jenkins Heidi Ellard

Boxford Library Solutions Team Elizabeth Mullard, co-facilitator

Sharon Glass Sarah Haywood Andrew Klouse Charlene Mead Peter Perkins Art Sibbach

Carolyn Tanner Beth Termini Julian Troake

* served on both boards

2

Objective of Proposal: The objective of the 2010 Library Proposal is to address all major concerns voiced by both town officials and townspeople after the May 2009 proposal and present a new vision that will be embraced by the citizens of Boxford and pass with a 2/3 majority at town meeting and a majority at town ballot. Our hope is that after reviewing the information presented in this proposal, there will be enough compelling evidence regarding fiscal responsibility and building functionality to support this project at the town meeting slated for May 11, 2010. Brief History: With a firm challenge in front of them, the Library Trustees engaged a volunteer group of dedicated Boxford citizens (Boxford Library Solutions Team) whose main purpose was to review all past library efforts, evaluate opportunities for improvement and build consensus around a solution that could be agreed upon by the majority of townspeople. Solutions such as a full restoration of existing facilities and a newly constructed, smaller building were considered. After six months of analysis, evaluation and outreach with town committees and town residents, the combined Trustees/BLST team felt that there were compelling reasons to seek this new library warrant article at this time. Project Overview: Wanting to bring a proposal to the town that responded to concerns about the prior proposal, the joint Trustees/BLST team focused on key factors such as location, cost, size, building style, and usage. The joint team felt that fiscal responsibility along with building size and location would be among the issues of greatest interest to the townspeople, and therefore spent significant time and energy assessing options in these areas. After a thorough vetting of possible locations, overwhelming community response indicated that the current site of the library was the preferred location. While the team found that building size was a pivotal issue, it was unclear whether the desire for a specific building size would outweigh Boxford’s desire for fiscal responsibility. With these factors in mind, the 2010 Library Proposal incorporates the following elements:

1. A building in Boxford Village 2. A 12.8% reduction in “new construction” from the May 2009 proposal 3. The ability to take advantage of the existing MBLC grant of $2,784,242 4. A building that fits the rural character of Boxford 5. A building that meets current and future program needs of library users

Further detail on each of these elements will be discussed in the subsequent pages.

3

Program/Design Considerations: The joint team had many spirited discussions about all aspects of the library design. We discussed its location, the programs and services that the library offers, the impact of digital media, its size, and the building style that would most embody the charm and character of a building in the historic district of Boxford. We have highlighted each area below to provide more detail on how we arrived at our recommendation

1. Programs, Services and General Library Usage – Building usage and size are very complex issues and have a major impact on the project cost. When reviewing the space needed for programs, services and functions that the library is expected to provide, it became clear that a significant amount of square footage would be required to perform each function properly and still offer a place to sit, think, read, study, learn or work collaboratively. Additionally, adequate space is needed to properly warehouse, catalogue or lend books, provide space for programming (children’s, teen/young adult, and adult), allow access to online resources, digital archives, and databases, and be fully compliant with current building codes and disability (ADA) requirements. (Note: Bringing any building into ADA compliance and Building Code reduces usable square footage.)

According to the 2009 Annual Report Information Survey compiled for the state 35,011 people visit Boxford’s library annually, which breaks down to an average monthly usage as follows:

a. Average monthly visitors: 2,917 b. Average monthly materials lent: 6,305 c. Average monthly programs for children: 11 (approx. 2-3 programs/week) d. Average monthly children’s attendance: 170 (approx. 42 children/week) e. Average monthly programs for teens/adults: 4-5 (approx. 1 program/week) f. Average monthly teen/adult attendance: 98 (approx. 24 people/week)

Great care and detail was used by the Library Director to estimate a building size that would produce a suitable environment for programs and utilization of our library collections and technical equipment without having to locate anything off site. While maximizing multi-purpose areas as much as possible, the square footage represented in this proposal presents a very accurate picture of what Boxford needs given our usage patterns. Additionally, it is well documented by the MBLC that after the opening of new library facilities, usage patterns increase dramatically – in some case can quadruple during the first year of service.

2. Size – There is presently approximately 11,000 square feet of designated library

space, shared between two locations in town: Boxford Village and West Boxford. West Boxford has been closed to the public but is still used for book storage. Librarians must travel between locations when seeking requested books. 5,700 square feet of library space is open to the public in Boxford Village. All programs are now run out of this location. Space is crowded; the building is ill fit to be efficiently run. There is no closed “quiet space” for team meetings,

4

programs, work, study, etc. The basement is flooding; it is not up to building code, nor is it ADA compliant. The 2010 library proposal would construct a new, 17,000 square foot library and renovate the historic, 1,500 square foot Cummings House that is, and would continue to be, part of the library. This size would allow Boxford to have an efficient, ADA compliant library, built for now, and for the future, as both the town and the collections of books and services continue to grow.

3. Digital Advancements –Various forms of digital media were examined. It was discovered that approximately 20% of all reference material can be digitally archived and stored, reducing shelf space needed to house traditional materials. Digital readers, e-books, online resources and databases were embraced as tools that both keep our library on the cutting edge of technology, and save space as we looked to reduce the overall building footprint. With technology, however, comes access to technology, and while there is a savings of shelf space, there will still be space needed for computer terminals and storage of Kindles and other e-readers.

4. Location – A sub-committee of the joint BLST/Trustees team began afresh in

their review of possible locations for a library to be located in Boxford. It did not limit itself to evaluating only those sites that had been proposed in the past. After an intense brainstorming process, 22 working sites were reviewed by the group. The committee then developed a process and a specific set of criteria to ensure that each site was evaluated equally. Criteria included:

a. Cost (land acquisition, clean-up, site development, water/sewer, legal fees, road/access, size, available grants),

b. Size (flexibility to accommodate buildings from 12,000 to 25,000 sq. ft.) c. Retaining town character d. Programs and services (types of collections and services offered,

technology options, digital readers, etc.) e. Combined usage f. Legal issues g. Opposition or success (likelihood of either) h. Time (delays that could arise because of particular issues at a site) i. MBLC certification j. Traffic (both vehicular traffic and library user traffic) k. Environmental issues (including lighting and noise)

After the process was complete, two sites remained on the list of viable candidates: Boxford Village and Bayns Hill. When given a choice between the two during outreach meetings, community response was overwhelmingly in favor of the Boxford Village location. As an aside, the parcel of land next to the Town Hall was heavily investigated due to heightened interest by the Board of Selectmen and others, and was determined not to be a viable solution for the Library at this time due to extremely high site preparation and roadway construction costs. According to research obtained and analyzed, cost estimates

5

for site preparation alone could add millions of dollars to a library building project, perhaps less if these costs were shared with another town group. However, even shared costs added over $1 million to an overall building cost, and the committee felt that it was not fiscally responsible to pursue that site as a truly viable solution. Additionally, there did not appear to be clear ownership of the property which would cause a significant time delay to investigate it properly prior to beginning a project.

5. Architecture – After several meetings with the Historic District Commission

regarding the project and possible building designs, the joint Trustees/BLST team is optimistic about developing a building that both meets the needs of the town and fits in with the rural character of Boxford Village. As suggested by the HDC, the building style being pursued in the 2010 library proposal would model an architectural design called, “Big House, Little House, Back House, Barn”, a New England farmhouse look that reflects Boxford’s rural character. This style was inspired from a book by the same title written by Thomas Hubka. Our team recognizes the HDC’s desire for a smaller building size, but was encouraged at recent meetings when they showed willingness to participate in the process with whatever size building is ultimately voted on by the townspeople.

Economics The BLST members and Trustees worked diligently to obtain reliable cost estimates. Input was received at two meetings with the PBC and from professionals working on this type of project. Precise costs can only be obtained after a preliminary design and evaluation of the present building and site condition Due to the deadline for accepting the MBLC grant, there was not enough time to prepare a certified architectural design and site evaluation, as would normally be done. However, a conservative estimate has been provided. If the town votes to approve the 2010 library project, $835,000 (30%) of the MBLC grant monies would be immediately available to the town to hire a certified estimator. The PBC would then evaluate this estimate, and amount of the bond request would be adjusted to reflect the projected cost. This project is proposed for the economic advantage of the town. A smaller building, that might not meet the needs of the town, would cost considerably more, assuming no grant would be available, as discussed in the following Grants section of this proposal. The following spreadsheets reflect our conservative estimate, an estimate conducted by Marshall & Swift (gratis), and an example of a 14,000 sq ft building that has no specific “program” attached to it. This is purely a comparison of building costs, not a program comparison, as service delivery would differ considerably and future growth would be non-existent.

6

7

8

9

MBLC Grants Compelling Reasons to take the Existing 2005 Award, instead of re-applying in 2010 2005 GRANT AWARD BENEFITS

o $2,784,242 in hand. That equates to $1000 gift to each Boxford household. 2010 GRANT NEGATIVES

o According to MBLC on 3/30/10, the odds of Boxford receiving an award in 2010 is less than 18% given their projected submissions and anticipated awards.

o If Boxford submitted a building program sized for a population less than best available population projections, our odds of award would be further reduced.

o MBLC does not know if/when another state bond will be passed. o Boxford may be back on a wait list until the state authorizes a new

construction bond. This could significantly delay the Library’s project. o Even though the 2010 construction grant award is likely to be a larger,

construction costs are expected to increase. o The Library cannot expect to apply in the new grant round by largely

resubmitting their 2005 grant. Instead it will be required to: Reevaluate and update the building program. Hire an architect to make design changes.

• No existing funds identified for this expense. Obtain new cost estimate. Conform to new building codes and revised regulations. Respond to new questions on grant application, e.g. green buildings, code

changes, provision for delivery. Rewrite/submit grant application using new grant forms.

o The Library Green Incentive is being reduced from 5% to 2 % - 3.5% depending on the level of LEED certification achieved.

o Time delays increase impact of inflation and rising interest rates. 2010 GRANT POSITIVES

o New grant awards may cover substantially more of eligible project costs. Eligible Costs. Those project costs or proportional costs directly

related to implementing interior and exterior aspects of an eligible project. Eligible costs include: acquisition of real property; planning, study or master plan costs; design services; site preparation; construction; and fixed capital equipment of an approved public library project. For all projects except those for Planning and Design, eligible costs shall include those costs related to acquisition of real property; planning, study or master plan costs and design services incurred within three years prior to the application due date or other date stated in the program notice for a grant round. Where publicly or privately owned real property is to

10

be donated to a project, only so much land as is necessary to provide an adequate library site may be considered in the calculation of eligible costs, and the value of such land must be documented. Up to $800,000 of such documented land value may be used in calculating the local financial commitment. Furnishings, computers, and costs related to any aspect of the exterior grounds or site of the free public library structure including landscaping, walkways and parking lots are not eligible, except exterior handicapped ramps.

In the 2005 grant round, the average grant award was around 30%

of eligible costs. The revised and updated 2010 regulations have a new funding formula that affords more generous grant awards. MBLC expects to see grant awards to increase to around 50% in the 2010 grant round. (Using an estimated construction cost of $6.1M, the 2005 Grant award to Boxford is approximately 42%) Below is the grant formula from our 2010 regulations 605 CMR 6.08 (9) (b) Library Construction Project in a Single Municipality:

o The design can be revised to make improvements and adjustments if

community needs or other factors have changed. o A new site can be considered. o The economy is predicted to improve and if/when it does it could increase the

possibility of getting voter approval for matching fund. In summary, due to the significant uncertainty of the future financial picture, and the significant time delays, we believe that fiscally, the citizens of Boxford will have an increased financial burden if the 2005 Grant Award is not taken, even with a slightly smaller building construction.

Eligible Cost Incremental State Share First $3,000,000 60% of amount up to $3,000,000 $3,000,000 - $6,000,000 45% of amount between $3,000,000 and $6,000,000

$6,000,000 - $15,000,000 40% of amount between $6,000,000 and $15,000,000

$15,000,000 and up 30% of amount above $15,000,000

11

Conclusion: Due to the downturn in the economy and the difficulty that many cities and towns faced in getting their finances in order with regard to building a library, the MBLC granted extensions to all 2005 award recipients which Boxford secured in November 2009. Those extra six months have enabled the Trustees/BLST team to perform in depth due diligence on the most challenging aspects of the 2009 library proposal and make smart, thoughtful revisions to the program. In conjunction with the HDC, we have developed a conceptual design that fits the rural character and charm of Boxford. We have evaluated library usage, reviewed building size and reduced the new construction footprint by 12.8% while still ensuring that the library will be appropriately sized to accomplish its mission. We have thoroughly investigated alternate locations and concluded that community feedback suggests that any new library should be rebuilt on its current location. And we have compiled financial estimates and analyzed cost options to arrive at a recommendation that utilizes the existing $ 2,784,242 million construction grant awarded to us by the MBLC in 2005. We believe the project is worth pursuing. Our challenge now is that because of the expedited timing to meet the MBLC grant acceptance deadline on June 15, 2010, funding requests for architectural design and final construction is required to be made at the same town meeting: May 11, 2010, instead of splitting the request and asking for architectural design costs in May and final construction costs in October, which would be preferable. We understand the complexities of this situation but still feel the project merits serious consideration. The Permanent Building Committee has asked for greater testing and site evaluation prior to making a fully informed recommendation to the Board of Selectmen, which we understand but can’t supply without receiving the funds to pay for it. To resolve this dilemma, we are proposing that if upon performing the preliminary testing and site evaluation recommended by the PBC (at a cost of approx. $30,000-40,000) it is determined that the estimated total project cost is no longer within an acceptable variance, we will return the grant money, reassess the project parameters and redevelop a library proposal that would be brought to the town at a future date. It was our objective to bring forth a proposal that addressed all major areas of concern and present a new vision for the library that would be embraced by the citizens of Boxford. We are making great strides in this effort and with your support will continue to do so. Our team takes seriously the issue of fiscal responsibility and knows that while the financials are estimates, they have been carefully researched with the help of many experts in the fields of architecture and construction to provide a strong sense of what actual costs would be throughout each phase of the project. Although these are not certified estimates, they are valid estimates, which we can move forward with. We believe there is compelling evidence to support this project, and with the addition of the $2,784,242 million grant that evidence is even stronger. The MBLC grant monies would significantly reduce the taxpayer burden not just to build a library, but to revitalize our historic Village and create a landmark that will serve as a community focal point for years to come. We hope you agree.

12

May 8, 2009 Diane Giarrusso, Director Boxford Town Library 10 Elm St. Boxford, MA 01921-2322 Dear Diane: Here is my response to your request for clarification of the status of state funds for the Boxford public library construction project. The Board of Library Commissioners voted in August of 2008 to offer Boxford and 28 other communities then on a waiting list a provisional grant award in the Massachusetts Public Library Construction Program. The Board voted in August after the legislature authorized $100,000,000 for these projects. Governor Patrick has included $20,000,000 in his capital plan for public library construction in FY2009. We have been advised by officials at the Executive Office for Administration and Finance who manage the capital plan that similar amounts will be available over the next four years. The entire $100,000,000 is in account 7000-9090 and we have been making payments to communities from this account. The funds are real, they are in an account and we are spending funds for projects. The Commonwealth has never failed to follow through on its commitments to communities in the Public Library Construction Program. The provisional grant is available to Boxford when the town is ready to accept it by signing a standard grant agreement that confirms that the local share of the construction cost has been secured. The Board of Library Commissioners is prepared to issue this agreement when you inform us that the local share is in place. Once that agreement is in place we will make the first 30% payment. In short, the best way to secure these funds is to move forward with the project. Sincerely Yours,

Robert C. Maier, Director

Commonwealth of Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners

98 North Washington Street, Suite 401 • Boston, Massachusetts 02114 617-725-1860 • 800 952-7403 (in-state only) • Fax: 617-725-0140

13

For Immediate Release Contact: Heidi Ellard

617-529-1723

Library Solutions Team Recommends Proposal to Trustees for May Town Meeting

Team advocates use of state funds, but smaller building Boxford, Mass. (April 5, 2010) – The Boxford Library Solutions Team, a consensus building group of town residents working on library issues, has recommended that the Boxford Library Trustees pursue a warrant article at the May 11th town meeting. After months of project analysis, team deliberations and meetings with the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners (MBLC), the Library Solutions Team is recommending a proposal that includes: (1) a building in Boxford Village (2) a 12.8% reduction in the size of “new construction” from the May 2009 proposal, (3) the ability to take advantage of the existing grant of $2.8 million that would help defray construction costs, and (4) a building that fits the rural character of Boxford. During the last six months, the Library Solutions Team has sought feedback from town residents and has met with over 10 town committees, to arrive at a recommendation. “We have really tried to listen to the desires and concerns of the community at large,” said Elizabeth Mullard, co-facilitator of the Boxford Library Solutions Team. “And our recommendation reflects what we have heard.” Wanting to bring a proposal to the town that responded to concerns about the prior proposal, the Library Solutions Team focused on key factors such as location, cost, size, building style, and usage. After a thorough vetting of all other possible locations, overwhelming community response indicated that the current site of the library was the preferred location. Building usage and size are very complex issues, and have a major impact on the project cost. When reviewing the space needed for programs, services and functions that the library would provide, the Library Solutions Team was surprised to learn how much space was required to perform each function properly and still offer a place to sit, think, read, study or work as a team. Significant space is needed to properly warehouse, catalogue or lend books, provide space for programming (children’s, teen/young adult, and adult), allow access to online resources, digital archives, and databases, and be fully compliant with current building codes and disability (ADA) requirements. Since building cost would be a factor at any size, the Library Solutions Team wanted to minimize the cost to taxpayers as much as possible, while still addressing concerns of size and functionality. And, after several meetings with the Historic District Commission regarding possible building designs, the Solutions Team is optimistic about developing a building that both meets the needs of the town and fits in with the rural character of Boxford Village.

14

Spirited deliberations and intense discussions ended with a compromise that the Library Solutions Team felt addressed all major areas of concern in some way. The 2010 proposal would construct a new, 17,000 square foot library and renovate the historic, 1,500 square foot Cummings House that is, and would continue to be, part of the library, thereby providing a total of 18,500 square feet to enable Boxford to accept the MBLC grant money available until June 15th. This size would allow Boxford to have an efficient, ADA compliant library, built for now, and for the future, as both the town and the collections of books and services continue to grow. As suggested by the HDC, the building style would model an architectural design called “Big House, Little House, Back House, Barn”, a New England farmhouse look that reflects Boxford’s rural character. And, a new building would revitalize Boxford Village and serve as a place where town residents could read, relax, study, learn, work, and build a stronger sense of community. “We’ve worked very hard to address all major concerns surrounding this project,” said Elizabeth Mullard. “Folks said, ‘Make it smaller, keep it in Boxford Village, make it rural in character, and make it economical.’ This design has rural charm, it’s in Boxford Village, and it is smaller. The reduction in size still qualifies for the grant, making it as affordable as possible, yet offers the right mix of programs and services for the town. We’re offering this proposal now because we’ve got one last shot to work with the MBLC to lower the building costs. And, we’re encouraged by the feedback we’ve received.” This press release was approved by BLST and HDC on 3/31/10.