Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 5.1 Dublin Library Improvement Study (2) CI'T'Y OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 25, 1991 SUBJECT _ Written Communications: Dublin Library Improvement Study (Report by Diane Lowart, Recreation Director) EXHIBITS ATTACHED o Correspondence from Linda M. Wood, County Librarian o Summary of the Library Improvement Study RECOMMENDATION 1 . Receive presentation from Alameda County I Librarian and Marquis Associates 2 . Approve formation of Library Planning Task Force FINANCIAL STATEMENT None DESCRIPTION The Alameda County Librarian, Linda M. Wood, has requested the opportunity to share the results of a recent study commissioned by the County Library about ways to improve the existing Dublin Library building. The study was undertaken because the current library building is becoming increasingly crowded and library staff wished to determine what the possibilities are for using the existing site to its maximum capacity. The study was performed by Marquis Associates, an architectural , planning, and interior design firm from San Francisco. Background Library service is provided to the City of Dublin by the Alameda County Library, of which the City is a member. The Dublin Library building is owned and operated by the County, however the City does subsidize 19 additional hours of library service per week through a contractual arrangement with the County. County Service Area L-1973-1 was established by the voters in 1973 to build a permanent library building in the Dublin area. In 1977-78 , a non-profit corporation named the Alameda County/Dublin Library Corporation was formed for the purpose of financing the library construction. Revenue bonds were sold in April , 1978 and the library was opened in March, 1979 . The site for the Dublin Library building is owned by the County and leased to the Corporation. The Corporation in turn owns the building and leases it to the County in exchange for annual rent payments provided from property taxes paid annually for County Service Area L-1973-1 in the Dublin area. The Corporation uses the rent to retire the bonds. The final payment will be due in 1999 , and when the bonds are completely paid off, title will vest with the County. The County's policy on library buildings is that each community is responsible for providing its own library building or buildings and that the County Library provides the operating budget, materials, staff and services. The policy for city-owned library buildings is that the city is responsible for buildings and grounds maintenance, building modifications and major capital expenditures such as re-roofing and carpet replacement. The County Library is responsible for custodial services and utilities. Since the Dublin Library is County-owned, the County is responsible for building and grounds maintenance. However, under the policy that each community must provide its own library building, any expansion or major remodeling must be funded by the community. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ITEM NO. COPIES TO: Alameda County Library CITY CLERK FILE 191lao M6O Library Improvement Study Recognizing the increasing crowdedness of the existing Dublin Library and plans for future population growth in Dublin, the Dublin Library Improvement Study was commissioned by the County. The study shows the maximum possible additional space which can be achieved by remodeling and adding on to the existing Dublin Library building. Attached is a summary of the results of the Library Improvement Study. The study identifies three potential alternatives which address problems such as lack of space, movement of people/materials, supervision of building, aging furnishings and finishes, and inadequate lighting and ventilation. The alternatives are summarized below: Alternate One This alternative represents an internal reorganization of the existing Library; no addition or expansion is included. This alternative is intended to improve existing conditions to the extent possible within the present building envelope. This plan includes only what is presently housed in the Library; it does not increase current collections, seating or workspace. Alternate Two This alternative represents an internal reorganization of the existing library along with a minor program of building expansion. Alternative Two has an internal reorganization similar to Alternative One. However, the building is expanded along the southeast side of the building. This provides space for the relocation of the staff lounge and conference room, resulting in new public floor area for periodicals and seniors area. A new study room is provided for public access computer, typewriter, or tutorial use. Alternate Three This alternative represents the maximum probable expansion and reorganization of the library. This alternative is significantly larger than Alternatives One and Two. Alternative Three has an internal reorganization similar to both One and Two. The building is expanded on the southeast side as in Alternative Two; there are also significant expansions on the northeast and northwest sides. These three expansion areas are specifically for the juvenile, senior, periodical and non-fiction areas. They also result in direct increases to fiction, reference, and young adult areas. With the increase of public floor areas a corresponding increase in public lobby, toilets, and conference room space is required. Conclusion Before either the City or the County Library can determine the reasonableness of investing in improvements in the existing Dublin Library building, a comprehensive look is recommended at long term library building needs in light of the City's projected population growth. It is recommended that options to be considered include expansion of the existing library and construction of a second library in the eastern Dublin planning area, or alternatively, abandonment of the existing library building and construction of a single, larger building to serve the entire City. Library use patterns, standards for access, feasibility and cost must all be considered in evaluating potential alternatives. It is recommended that a joint planning effort be undertaken between the City and the County Library. The first step to carry this out would be the appointment of a Library Planning Task Force with representatives from the community. Staff from both the City and the County Library would serve as staff to the Task Force. The Task Force would review and evaluate the Library Improvement Study by Marquis Associates as well as other options, and make recommendations to the City and the County Library. The proposed Task Force would include representatives from the following groups and organizations: 1. City Council (1) 2 . Friends of the Dublin Library (1) 3 . Dublin Library Corporation (1) 4 . Dublin Unified School District (1) 5. Citizens at-large (2) 6 . Business Community (1) Therefore it is the recommendation of Staff that the City Council take the following action: 1. Receive presentation from Alameda County Librarian and Marquis Associates 2 . Approve creation of a Library Planning Task Force and appoint one member of the City Council to serve on the Task Force Staff will solicit participation from those organizations as shown above and make arrangements for the first meeting of the Library Planning Task Force to be held in early January, 1992. 2450 Stevenson Boulevard, Fremont, California ■ 94538-2326 Phone (510) 745- 1500 FAX (510) 793-2987 Linda M. Wood,County Librarian RECEIVED . November 8, 1991 NOV 12 1991 ARSd.. ......... Mr. Pete Snyder, Mayor Dublin City Council City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, California 94568 Dear Mayor and Council : SUBJECT: LIBRARY IMPROVEMENT STUDY I am requesting an opportunity to share with you the results of a recent study commissioned by the County Library about ways to improve the existing Dublin Library building. The study was undertaken because the building is becoming increasingly crowded and we wished to determine what the possibilities are for using the existing site to its maximum capacity. The study was performed for us by Marquis Associates , an architectural , planning, and interior design firm from San Francisco. Architect Hal Brandes prepared the report after numerous consultations with library staff. Mr. Brandes is available on Monday, November 25 and we would appreciate an opportunity to appear before your Council for a summary report of the study and to request your consideration of a proposed cooperative planning process between the City and the County Library for determining how to proceed to meet Dublin's future needs for library building space. I look forward to an opportunity to meet with you on Monday, November 25. Very truly yours, Linda M. Wood County Librarian LMW:e j cc Richard Ambrose, Dublin City Manager Diane Lowart, Director of Recreation, City of Dublin Hal Brandes, Marquis Associates Rayme Meyer, Dublin Library Manager 2768C Fremont Main Library Albany • Business Library ■ Castro Valley ■ Centerville Dublin • Extension Services • Irvington • Newark Niles • Pleasanton • San Lorenzo • Union City PRINTED BY UNION LABOR-LOCAL 444.AFL-CIO-LOCAL 616.SEIU 0 DUBLIN LIBRARY SUMMARY OF THE LIBRARY IMPROVEMENT STUDY The Dublin Library and the Alameda County Library have determined that the Dublin Library is in need of help. The Library has become crowded with new equipment and materials, lighting and ventilation systems have become aged, and furnishings and finishes are worn. The Library is in need of a coordinated furnishing scheme and an overhaul of finishes. Marquis Associates has been retained for the purposes of developing a study to explore the nature of improvements required and the possibility of adding additional space to the 15,000 square foot building. Since November of 1990 the Library, County, and Architect have performed the following tasks: 1. Conducted interviews of staff to review library program requirements and outline design considerations. 2. Conducted surveys of existing conditions to prepare drawings of the present library. 3 . Circulated questionnaires of staff and county coordinators to assess present and future needs. 4. Explored alternative approaches to interior reorganization and building additions. 5. Reviewed structural, mechanical, and electrical systems with consultant engineers. 6 . Reviewed alternatives with the Dublin Planning Department. During the progress of the work it has been found that the existing facilities are good - with improvements the library will be serviceable for many years. After a number of design studies, it is clear that there are three potential alternatives with variation in scope - not so much a question of what to do but how much. In general , the alternatives developed respond to the following types of problems: 1. The irregular layout of stacks results in problems organizing the collection into easily recognized patterns. 2 . Lack of space results in clutter - especially with new materials and equipment. 3 . Movement of people/materials is congested (especially near the Circulation Desk) . 4. Supervision problems for YA and Juvenile section are created by the corners, especially the seating pits. 5 . The Meeting Room shape, lighting, and ventilation needs improvement for better use. 6 . Furnishings and finishes are aging. 7. Lighting and ventilation need overhaul to improve comfort. 8 . New technologies require extended power/communications provisions, especially at the Reference Desk. 9. The lobby is congested, especially at tax time. 10. There is no adequate seniors areas. 11. The shelves should be seismically upgraded. 12 . The fire sprinkler system should be inspected. Three alternatives have been developed which typify the range of improvement options that might be considered. Alternative One represents an internal reorganization of the existing Library; no addition or expansion is included. This alternative is intended to improve existing conditions to the extent possible within the present building envelope. This plan includes only what is presently housed in the Library; it does not increase current collections, seating, or workspace. Alternative One resolves functional problems of the existing building with a modification of the Juvenile Area and Meeting Room and the Young Adult Area and Conference Room. The alleviation of space problems in some areas - such as the Entry Lobby and Circulation Desk - are achieved by the increase in density in others, such as the Fiction/Non-Fiction stack areas. These changes will achieve the goals of improving the appearance and organization of the Library; they will not alleviate the need for additional space. While this alternative does not increase building areas, it does not preclude the possibility of future expansion; it is possibly the first phase of an expansion plan. Alternative Two represents an internal reorganization of the existing library along with a minor program of building expansion. Alternative Two has an internal reorganization similar to Alternative One. However, the building is expanded along the southeast side of the building. This provides space for the relocation of Staff Lounge and Conference Room, resulting in new public floor area for a Periodicals and Seniors Area. A new study room is provided for public access computer, typewriter, or tutorial use. As in Alternative One, the Meeting Room and Juvenile Area are reconfigured. Alternative Two could be a phased expansion of Alternative One. Alternative Three represents the maximum probable expansion and reorganization of the Library. This alternative is significantly larger than Alternatives One and Two. Alternative Three has a internal reorganization similar to both One and Two. The building is expanded on the southeast side as in Alternative Two; there are also significant expansions on northeast and northwest sides. These three expansion areas are specifically for the Juvenile, Senior, Periodical , and Non-Fiction Areas. They also result in direct increases to Fiction, Reference, and Young Adult Areas. With the increase of public floor areas a corresponding increase in public lobby, toilets, and conference room space is required. It is possible to view Alternative Three as the result of a phased program of improvements and expansion. In all alternatives, the organization has evolved through a study of many different approaches. With detailed design, this layout could evolve further. In general, the Circulation Desk and Juvenile Desk locations are determined by relationships to Entry Lobby and Meeting Room. The Reference Desk completes a service desk triangle. The catalogs are located in prominent locations, close to service desks, where patrons can be easily assisted. The stacks are arranged in an orderly pattern around the service desk with end panels oriented for easy identification. Information and orientation is key in the efficient use of the Library by patrons and for the service flexibility of staff. There are a range of options for improvement or expansion of the Dublin Library. The Library Improvement Study prepared with the assistance of Marquis Associates is not a detailed plan, but a comparison of alternatives to help determine the proper project direction.