Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1990r SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT MINUTES DRAFT NoT APPROVED Thursday, January 11, 1990 Room 21104 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Ald. Collens, Feldman, Juliar, Morton, and Rainey PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Ald. Collens, Chair STAFF: Carter OTHERS PRESENT: Cappo, Wright, Anderson, Brackett. Weise, Kepler, Allen, Gottschalk, Kipley, Antunovich and Lindwall APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR DECEMBER II, 1989 Aid Feldman requested the "cleaning up" of one sentence. Aid. Rainey moved approval of the minutes. Seconded by Aid. Morton. Motion passed. No nays. DISCUSSION OF PHASED DEVELOPMENT Mr. Carter introduced Mr. David Kipley of Kipley Construction and Vice -President of the Chicago Areas Builders Association and Mr. Joseph Antunovich of Lohan and Associates who is involved with the DePaul library project. He explained that staff had asked both the Builders Association and the American Institute of Architects to provide two representatives of their respective disciplines to share with the Committee their views and experience with phased construction. It was felt that their comments would be helpful to the Committee in reaching a better understanding of phased construction and assist them in reaching a decision. They would be available to respond to the Committee's questions on what to look out for and whether phased construction was an appropriate route for the library project. He explained that staff had briefed the two guests on the background of the library project and where the Committee was in the process. He felt that they were well prepared on the subject and would be very helpful to the Committee. Aid. Collens asked the guests if they had any general comments, knowing what they know about our project. Mr. Kipley began by stating there are some constraints and considerations involved in doing phased construction. First is that the first half of the building has to have complete systems because it will be necessary for it to stand alone. It will also have to have entrys, circulation desk, verticle movement and all the other requirements. To some extent, this is a constraint for the architect. You also have to have a weather tight seal between the first half and the second half of the building to be constructed. This is a temporary feature which has to be provided and then removed at a later date. He noted that some of the elements included in the first phase will not be in the same place in the final configuration of the building and this needs to be anticipated. This is also a constraint. Further, the mechanical Special Committee on the Main Library Nlinutr!; - January 11, 1990 Page Two system will have to carry half of the ultimate load and then be expanded into the final structure. This does not mean it can't be done. it is merely another constraint. fie stated that the project would take twice as long as a single stage project, rather than one and one-half times as long due to the need to to Interconnect the two complete buildings. He explained that one trade starts working through the building followed by others; you don't just build all of one thing, leave and come in and build all of the other. Because these trades follow through, one structure takes about as long to build in total as a half of it does. The final thing; to keep in mind, he stated, is that constraints are really just that. Some constraints already exist such as in the site. in doing a competition, the budget, etc. Phasing may not be the most significant constraint in constructing a new library. Other constraints include the building; program statement, the volume of books that need to be accommodated and limitations on the number of floors. Mr. Antunovich stated that a library is the kind of building which must be designed from the inside out, that the internal functioning of the library is really the most important aspect and how the building looks is secondary. As an example, if you are dealing with an existing building at the most prominent location on the site you would want your entry, your verticle circulation through the project, and your services probably wanting to be in that part of the site. However. in doing a phased construction, you will be building the back half first and those elements will have to be incorporated on a temporary basis. This would include a temporary circulation desk and entry. Elevator service would need to be established in that end to meet the handicapped requirements. This would probably be a service elevator in the final plan wit'!.', your passenger elevator located in the second phase up near the front, if that is where the entry is finally established. In the next phase, the temporary partition would come out as well as the service desk, but toilet cores would probably stay where they are. You don't want to build two separate toilet cores in the building. The location of the toilet cores then becomes another design constraint. it is possible to work around some of these elements, but they do influence the design. He went on to discuss some of the site constraints and encouraged the Committee to seek a better way to accommodate the building on the site than within two and one-half floors. He thought it would be superior to get the building to work on two floors if possible. He suggested looking at the setbacks as a possible way of accommodating the building in two floors. He felt it would be far more cost effective to build on two floors. He thought some of those issues were even more important than the question of phasing. Mr. Antunovich did not believe the constraints would hamper the building to the extent that phasing would result in an unsatisfactory building. He still felt we could end up with a good building. He suggested that the idea needed to be tested and perhaps it would be worthwhile laying out the program statement in plan form to see how it would work. He stated that it was most important that the "adjacencies functioned" so that as you come to the circulation desk, the various functions that relate to that are located in their proper proximity. He felt cost would he another consideration. He thought that there would be a premium through the mechanical system as an example. He and Mr. Kipley estimated that the premium on a $20,000,000 building would be approximately $1.000,000 for doing phased construction. Having to build the second half within a year and one-half would bring in an inflation factor of perhaps as much as another million dollars with roughly $2.000.000 being the added cost for doing phasing. He stressed that these were only approximations, but their guess was somewhere between $1 to $2 million dollars would be the added cost. In response to a question from Ald. Feldman, Mr. Antunovich responded that the penalty for doing phased construction would be from 5 to 10%. Mr. Kipley added that the trend in labor cost was approximately 5% per annum in the construction industry. In response to a question from Aid. Feldman, Mr. Kipley stated that there was enough scale in both buildings so that you are not paying a premium on a smaller job because there is enough work for the trades, once Special Committee on the Alain Library Minutes - January 11, 1990 Page Three they were mobilized. The difference between doing two 50,000 square foot buildings and one 100,000 square foot building is minimal because it is the staging and start-up cost that require the most work. The penalty comes in that you are paying 1993 wares instead of 1991 wages and, comes in smaller ways such as having to undo some of the temporary elements. Aid. Feldman asked with all of the constraints piled on top of oneanother, some over which we have no control, could we still end up with a great building. not just a good one? Will it still be possible to have the range of freedom in design to create are outstanding building? Mr. Antunovich responded that sometimes constraints actually create :3 better building because you have to work at it harder. He explained his own experience in trying to meet the design challenge of the Shedd Aquarium expansion and how that was resolved. He explained that the approximate budget for the DePaul building and the Evanston library are similar and he felt that Evanston could end up with an outstanding library on their site if we kept close to the $100 per sq. ft. If it drops down from that, the results will not be as good. Mr. Antunovich sketched on the blackboard some of the elements which would have to be considered as design constraints by building a library in phases, lie explained the relationship between the verticle circulation and the circulation desk as well as other elements. He explained that what may have to be done for accommodating a first phase development may not be ideal for the final configuration. These were some of the constraints in designing from the inside out through phased development. He thought it might be helpful to do some sketching of alternatives with the building program in mind and in consultation with library staff as a way of thinking through some of the alternatives. Aid. ,Morton asked about the inefficiency of a hall -level mentioned earlier. tier. Antunovich explained that a half -level is a difficult thing to work into a building and stated that if you could somehow plan so that the library did occupy just two floors above grade upon the entire site, he would encourage that. Ms. Cappo explained that the half -level would not be for public areas but probably more for mechanical equipment. Mr. Antunovich urged that they try to accommodate the mechanical in the basement if possible, or on the roof. He was assuming that the 100,000 was all library space. If that is not true, you should try to work all of your library space into the two floors with the mechanical in the basement or on the roof. He also discussed the advantages of already having an excavation under the present building from the standpoint of cost savings and speculated whether the second half could be built on grade. Mr. Antunovich went on to discuss the possibilities of a remodeled structure using the basic structure that is present and reclading it. He also mentioned examples of remodelings combined with extensions, but cautioned that we might not get the best internal function that way. He thought some entrys into the competition might suggest such an option. Chairman Collens asked how much competitors wanted and needed to know about how the building is to be built, in order for their entrys to be meaningful. She asked how relevant it was for the competitors to know it would be a phased construction in their preliminary designs. Air. - Kipley responded that the whole construction process relates closely to communication. The fact that building might he phased is an extremely important factor to consider in design. The = more you communicate to people, the more likely you are to get what you want in the conclusion of the project. He stressed the importance of having a team which is a good problem solver, rather than focusing on appearance as the sole criteria. The competitors need to Special Committee on theMain Library Minutes - January 11, 1990 Page Four demonstrate their ability to solve a difficult aspect of the design problem. Mr. Antunovich stated that the design process is one of a great deal of communication between the architect and the owner. Discussions which take place in the early part of a design are the most critical parts of the design. In a r;ompetition, apart from giving very clear direction, a clear program, and clear mandates, you remove the owner from that dialogue. Someone takes what you give them in the way of instrurtlons, then they go off and come up with a solution. If you want that solution to really have vallsfity you better give was much information as you possibly can on all the issues being discussed tonight. When you evaluate the solutions, evaluate them with the idea that what you are looking at will be the solution and don't just get into a beauty contest. Mr. Kipley addressed the problem of cost overrun. He stated that overrun does not usually come froin the architect preparing something that cannot be built or the contractor pricing; the proirct for a sum for which it cannot be completed. Overrun generally comes from the fact that there has been faulty communication at the start of the process leading to a design that does not really respond to the true problem because maybe the true problem was never properly identified. He stressed the importance of saying what you want clearly and early. Mr. Antunovich noted the importance of testing the solutions proposed for practicality over being impressed by physical beauty. Ald. Morton asked if remodeling, were done whether that would change the relocation needs. Mr. Antunovich responded that all the same factors would apply as in phased construction. There followed a general discussion of the loading capacity of the present structure and it was pointed out that previous survcy5 proved it to be inadequate. The idea of remodeling and expansion had been rejected earlier. Mr. Antunovich stressed the need for planning of flexibility in the design of the under floor system which handles telecommunication and computer wiring. Librarys nowadays must be designed to be very flexible. That is one of the reasons the present building doesn't work. Ald. Feldman commented on the importance of the building program statement and the need to communicate everything that we want to the competitors. He expressed his concerns as to whether we had been asking ourselves all the right questions in communicating what we want. He asked if there was a check fist which could be used to make sure we have posed. answered, and communicated those questions. The response was to make good use of our consultant and write clearly what our needs are. Use the consultant's experience in setting up the format from SAM other competitions. He suggested that it might be valuable to get someone who has gone through such a process and ask them to look at our statement for the translation of library needs _ to the professionals. He stressed the importance of getting good clear statements from the present library staff as to what they need and want as a basis for the building program statement. Ald. Rainey asked if our complicated building program statement and phased construction M- approach to the project will intimidate those architects who are not capable of producing the product we want. Before answering, Mr. Antunovich explained he was with a firm which _ recently lost in a major architectural competition. He also explained that the competition was really a developer's competition rather than an architect's. He was not sure that we would necessarily get a great library with an open competition generating a large number of entrys. He hoped the project would get the architects it deserves. In response to a question from Ald. Rainey, Mr. Antunovich stated that he did not think it was important to get a lot of entrys. He felt it was important to have people with library experience. He felt that, given the architectural heritage of Evanston, it deserved a great building. He stated that a number of Chicago firms had learned a hard lesson on architectural competitions, but noted that what =- Special Committee on the Main Library ltlinutes - January 11, 1990 Page Five Evanston was doing in limiting the materials would certainly limit their risk. On the other hand, he stressed the need to spend a great deal of time in solving the problems, so there was a dilemma around the competition approach. Mr. Kipley added that firms go into competitions based upon the expectation that the final evaluation will be based upon their ability. lie stressed the importance of communicating to the industry that there will be a sophisticated reception for what is done and a sophisticated judginy,. If somebody does something ihat really is clever and insightful with a touch of greatnr's, they need to know they will not he wasting their time. He used his own experience as a contractor interested in delivering something more than the bottom line as a demonstration. Aid. Painey observed that there was an implication that we would not get the kind of class we think we are going to get through an open competition. Mr. Antunovich commented that his firm had entered a number of competitions which were invited competitions of prescreened and selected firms numbering no more than half a dozen. The way this program works is that they are paid somewhere on the order of $20,000 a piece to cover some expenses. He felt that was a better way to get significant entrys. He felt that by knowing who your competitors arc and how serious the competition is, produces a better effort. Ald. Rainey asked if they thought the project was prestigious enough to warrant a competition other than the kind we are conducting. Mr. Antunovich felt that Evanston could attract at least six very reputable firms to enter a limited competition. She then asked whether those six firms would be among the many who would respond to an open competition. fMr.Antunovich felt that perhaps half of them would respond. He added that this was just his judgment and perhaps other architects would think differently. Mr. Kipley added that our consultant could take that Question to the industry and get a response. Aid. Feldman asked whether large firms were necessarily the ones that Evanston wanted. Mr. Antunovich responded that this was the sort of project that medium to small firms could also do. Mr. Kipley added that "large" and "good" were not synominous. ,k'r. Kipley returned to the issue and stated that the question is, "Are we starting to ask such a convoluted question that we are not going to get a good job." He felt this is something that the Committee should ask the consultant who has had extensive experience with competitions. Aid. Feldman observed that, if he were an architect, the fact that there would be a highly prestigious jury involved would be very attractive for him. Mr. Kipley summarized that they had merely presented some of the issues which had come up and that the Committee should place strong reliance upon their consultants in making final decisions. He added that there was no "checklist" we could rely on, but we could use the issues as a guide. None of the issues discussed would fatally flaw the undertaking. All that they were saying was, that as you add constraints and issues to the project, it requires more management and becomes a tougher job to do. None of it even begins to approach the impossible. It is all within the realm of the doable. A great = building, building it in phases, putting it on this site, are all things that can be done and have been done. But, every time you add a piece to the project, it becomes a little more of a problem. He stated that when it comes to doing a difficult construction project find one person, to trust and trust them. You can't do it all. It's important to have someone who understands the industry and with whom you are comfortable. Aid. Feldman asked, with an open competition, and a good jury, was there a good chance getting what we want. Mr. Antunovich responded that with the restricted amount of materials submitted, it was a two-edged sword. On the one hand the architects are protected from making an over investment, but on the other the project might require more attention and detail than these details would over. He used the example of a successful competition for his firm which resulted in the acceptance of their firm, but a rejection of their design. He felt it was Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - January 11, 1990 Page Six important to consider the people you were going to hire as part of the decision. He stressed the need for good collaboration between the client and the architect. The better the collaboration the better the building. Chairman Collens reminded the Committee that the winner of the contest wins the right to negotiate the contract and, if those negotiations are unsatisfactory, the "winner" can be rejected. Ald. Ri-Iney asked how many phased projects they had done. Mr. Kipley responded that they had only done one project spr7611cally phased in exactly the sarne way the library would bf! done, but every -,ime they do a major addition, most of the same elf-ments are involved. They have had considerable experience In that area. Mr. Antunovich said that the aquarium wa, a current example of what his fire, was working on that involved a phased development, Hfr stated that his firm had done a number of older institutional buildings which had doubled in size and faced many of the same common problems as would be faced with the library. She asked if the project would be considered two buildings as far as zoning and permitting was concerned. The answer was in the affirmative. She also asked. in terms of the general contractor, whether it would be a problem if there were different subs for the different phases. Mr. Kipley thought not because he didn't sec it being bid in two phases. He felt that the job was big enough and attractive enough to be considered one long job. He explained that most construction companies were not committed over the long term and often didn't know what they would be doing three months to six. months out. He also added that the actions were not so segregated as they might sound. The work of the subs is spread out, sometimes with long periods of waiting before they return for the next operation. !.1r. Antunovich expressed some concern over the budget and the possibility of added encumbrances which may bring the square foot allowance down from $100 a square foot to perhaps $85 a square foot affecting the quality of the building. With a little more money, the gap could be made up perhaps in the second building and have the contractor work overtime and thereby condense the time for construction. Chairman Collens commented on the implications of having an alternative to phased construction. She stated that, if there were another place to move, we would still have to pay to move, pay to rent and pay to renovate. If there were a place to build a temporary structure we would still have to pay for the construction and the move. It is not a case of an extra $2 million out of the project budget or not. Every time we look: at an alternative we are still looking at the $1 to $2 million cost. Mr. Antunovich strongly recommended that the extra cost of moving or phased construction be considered as an additive and you keep a base budget that would yield a quality building. ;lid. !.Morton asked if they thought the public really expects a library to operate all of its programs on the same site during construction. She expressed the concern of $1 to $2 million Collars for phased construction. Mr. Antunovich felt that the essential elements of the library did need to continue at the same site. He did not feel would lead to total disruption of the _= library function rather, there would be some disturbance and minor aggravation. Mr. Kipley felt that there would not be serious disruption as well. It is no different than having to live with a typical remodeling or addition. He went on to describe in some detail how some of the features of phasing would be handled to keep disruption to a minimum and how these would be planned to be incorporated into the finished building. Mr.Antunovich stressed the need for flexibility in the design of the building's systems. It should be the distribution network that gives the new building its ability to expand into the new space. if you build a flexible enough building, (once you get away from the circulation desk, the vertical access, the toilet core and distribution of mechanical) you should be able to do almost anything in basic working parts of the building. That is the kind of flexibility the modern library demands. fir. Kipley stressed that in operating Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - January 11, 1990 Page Seven on the site during construction you are talking about a minor contraction of service and you have that situation right now. He used the branch and library networks as an example. He stressed that we were dealing with a manageable process and that we should be able to do it. The process just requires greater planning. Committee members felt that the general public would be understanding of some of the inconveniences due to construction knowing that they would be temporary and that a much better building would result in the end. In discussing his recent experiences with a design competition. Committee members a!iked Mr. Antunovich if he had any difficulty with lay people being on the jury and he stated that lie welcomed them. He did question having east coast architects select a building for a Chicago. Aid. Feldman asked whether that meant he would recommend only local people on the jury and stir. Antunovich replied that as long as they were qualified jurors, as many as possible they should be given preference. Committee members thanked ,ter. Antunovich and Mr. Kipley for the generosity of their time and their most helpful expertise. Aid. Morton raised the question of whether it would be advantageous to build two buildings to accommodate the library function, one on the Chicago Avenue parking site and the other on the existing library site. She wondered whether or not we would save money over doing phased construction. Aid. Juliar commented that something like that had been considered earlier, but it was demonstrated that the flow between the functions did not work well. Aid. Collens commented that this would require doubling nearly everything including systems and staf I. One of the things that would be lost is having the large spaces to rearrange and provide for flexibility, which is one of the primary attributes of the new library. Committee members discussed the dilemma of reasonable alternatives to phased construction and the necessity for confronting the difficulties involved in this approach. Aid. Collens wondered whether they should start talking about an eighteen million dollar library instead of a twenty million dollar library based upon what they heard tonight. Aid. Feldman commented that it is still a $20 million library even if we are spending $18 million on the building itself. Aid. Collens stated that she wasn't certain what the last number was that we are spending on the library project and that there was a need to reexamine all of the elements that go into the final number. These need to be firmed up before competition materials go out. She also felt that it would be necessary to take still another look at the footprint of the building to see if there was a way to construct it in two floors rather than two and one-half. She asked if should we be talking about building three floors. She stated that we need to know the total cost for the project and the construction budget. Firmer information is needed for the capital improvements program. Committee members congratulated Jeanne Lindwall on finding the two guests who were so helpful to them in this meeting. Aid. Feldman asked whether there was anything the two guests said that would lead us to new conclusions about the form of the design competition. Chairman Collens commented that the Committee had been over the question about whether the competition should be open or invited many times and that each time they came back to the conclusion that an open competition was preferable. Aid. Feldman commented that he was impressed by what comes out of a dialogue such a the one the Committee just had. Aid. Juliar reminded the Committee of the testimony a they had received from the design community which overwhelming recommended an open = competition. Chairman Collens commented that one of the things that swayed us was hearing over and over again that most important part of communication takes place at the design development stage. She had concerns about the winner of the competition turning out to be -_ Special Committee on the Alain Library Nlinutes - January 11, 1990 Page Eight someone with whom we couldn't work. But, she thought that could be dealt with and we do not have to accept a winning entry from such a firm. The winner merely wins the right to negotiate the project with the City. Aid. Rainey referred to a letter which she received from the Lundburg's questioning competition process. She stated that the more open the competition, the broader the participation, however, that did not necessarily mean better quality in her opinion. Chairman Collens recalled that the point those favoring an open competition made did have to do with improving the chances of better quality, because the smaller, but very highly qualified firms had a chance to submit and show their talent. They would be likely to be excluded if only top name firms were allowed to eompety. Aid. Rainey asked if the Committee had ever talked about the possibility of getting a winning, design by a firm which had never done a library before. Aid. Juliar commented that if we werN not fully satisfied with the capabilities of the winner we could insist that they affiliate with another firm to help do the project. Don Wright commented that everyone was concerned about the final communication and raised the pa:,tiibility of an alternative competition structured in such a way as to select three or four qualifier which would then be interviewed by the board and special committee to determine if they would be compatible. Chairman Collens asked Mr. Wright to put that idea before the competition consultant and wondered what sort of a message it would send to both the jurors and thf: competitors. NEXT MEETING DATE Committee members selected Thursday,March 25th at 7:30 p.m. as their next meeting and Thursday, February 15th 7:30 p.m. for the following meeting. Aid. Morton requested a list of decisions the Committee needed to make be given to them in advance. ills. Cappo commented that one of the things the Committee would need to act on is the consultant's proposed schedule and that should be helpful in guiding the Committee. Chairman Collens asked Ms. Cappo to lead the Committee through the Library Board's memo. The first recommendation of the Board was that the fee for entering the competition be $85 and noted that not everyone who buys d competition packet actually enters. She had favored a higher fee, but was persuaded to keep it at $85 since a higher fee seemed to be some form of psychological barrier. Aid. Juliar asked how the fee related to the cost of preparing the materials. his. Cappo responded that they had not looked at whether the cost of the fee offset the cost of the packet and that the cost of the packet was not yet known. Aid. Juliar felt that it would be important to know what the material costs are because that is likely to be asked by the Council. He did not think however, that it was terribly relevant as to how we set the entrance fee. tics. Cappo felt it was important to rely upon the consultant's judgment and experience in these matters. AId. Rainey noted that she definitely favored a higher fee which might hold down the number of less qualified entrants. She requested copies of competition materials be brought in to the next meeting so that Committee members could see an example of what goes out to competitors. Chairman Collens mentioned seeing competition materials and a video tape for a municipal complex. k Aid. Feldman commented that he was not certain of what the significance was and the difference between entry fees, how much return there would be, whether it would be exclusive, or if there was a price that could maximize income. He wanted to see the cost covered. He did not want to see a price which would discourage entrants. Ms. Cappo commented that the consultant's judgment was that $85 was the tipping point over which some contestants might drop out. Chairman Collens suggested that the Committee reserve decision on the entry lee until the next meeting. Special Committee on the plain Library Minutes - January 11, 1990 Page Nine Ms. Cappo described the recommendation of the Library Board on the composition and the jury stating that the consultant had recommended five to seven members, but that the board felt this should be increased from eight including five design professionals and three nonprofessionals. This would include five design professionals representing a variety of backgrounds including practicing architects, interior designers, urban planners and urban designers. They were looking for a combination of specialities to be included in the compositlein of the jury. Chairman Collens asked about the question of jurors from outside the reglon and whether that was discussed. Nis. Cappo responded that, as you select the jury,you are looking for people who are well thought of in the design community as well as people who male good jurors so that they will attract quality people to the competition. Reputation was very important. The Board did not address where the jurors might come from. Sht noted that there were quite a few jurors from the local area. however. Some were from Chicago and some where from Evanston. Aid. Feldman asked Nis. Cappo to describe the qualities of some of the jurors on the list. She said there was a dean of architecture from a well known school, a partner from a well -respected Chicago architectural firm, an internationally known urban planner. Ald. Rainey asked if the names of potential jurors were known and its.. Cappo replied in the affirmative. She clarified it was important not to go public on the names until they had been contacted. Chairman Collens recalled that composing the chemistry of the jury was particularly important since they had to be a group which would work well together. Ald. Rainey asked for clarification as to how these jurors were going to be selected. Chairman Collens responded that after the Committee had approved the list of the types of qualifications, the consultants will go back and start working through the list and what the Committee will get to approve is the consultant's recommendation on who the five jurors will be. There followed a general discussion of what the Committee's expectations were on jury selection. The general consensus at the conclusion of the discussion was that the Committee members needed to see the larger list of jurors from which the consultants would select particular individuals and ratify that list. Aid. Feldman asked whether the Board excluded anyone from the list that they had seen after consulting their own sources on it. his. Cappo replied that they did not. They did express some preferences as to the mix of skills they would like to see on the jury, but relied upon the consultant's judgment as to which ones would work best together. She stated at some point we have to trust someon else's judgment because we are not all architects and knowiedgable about who would make good jurors. Aid. Feldman commented that he feels comfortable with the jury's selection because he had been part of the meeting and heard first-hand from the consultants about the qualities of these jurors. He suggested an executive session be held where the particular qualities of the recommended jurors are discussed. Aid. Rainey felt it was absolutely essential for the Committee to review the list given their responsibility in the library project. Aid. Morton also felt it was important to see the list, but it was not the Committee's responsibility to conduct individual investigations. Ms. Cappo suggested that the Committee review the list in executive session. It was clarified that this was appropriate under the personnel provisions. Aid. Feldman reported that, in his participation with the Library Board, he heard the consultants present the qualifications of the jurors in a very professional way and that they enlarged upon the stature of these individual jurors and their particular qualifications to work on this project. He recommended that the Committee get the same kind of appraisal that the Library Board received in addition to the name it would be very helpful. Aid. Rainey suggested that a Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - January 11, 1990 Page Ten confidential memo be written to the Committee covering the qualifications of the jurors. Chairman Collens asked the Committee whether they felt it was necessary to take the entire list to the council and the response was that the Committee should take the final five. It was also made clear that the Committee would not attempt to select the final five themselves, but would be free to offer any input on the total list presented to them. Chairman Collens asked Committee members to think about a total composition of the jury including the three nonprofessional jurors recommended by the Library Board. Aid. Feldman expressed the hope that there would Ise the same kind of reason and rationale expressed in the Library Hoard meeting concerning. the qualities of jurors in the written document which would be coming to the Committee. Committee members went on to discuss the total number of jurors. Aid. Juliar raised the question of why a member of the Library Committee was recommended to sit on the jury. The response was that this person could be a very important link in communication between the jury and the City Council as to what went on in the selection of the winner. %1s. Cappo explained that in the composition of the jury it was important that it be heavily weighted with design professionals in rrder to attract quality design. It was also important to have strong client representation from the library side. The Board felt it was important that all members of the jury be voting members. She explained that the consultant would have been content to go with four design professionals and three nonprofessionals, but the Board felt it was important to be very strong on the design side. It was pointed out that it was not a concern over whether the number of jurors be odd or even since the final vote is a consensus vote. Aid. Feldman commented that the consultants had recommended that a political person be on the jury to represent the liaison between the jurors and the Council. It was important to have someone who could describe, validate and communicate exactly what went on and what the process was. Aid. Juliar agreed with the value of that function, but noted that it might put the aldermen in a difficult position. He wasn't sure whether the liaison now being performed by the Committee should or should not be extended. He thought it was necessary to make a very thoughtful decision on this. Ms. Cappo used the example of ail the discussions that have taken place between the Board and the Committee and the kinds of understandings which have taken place. She felt it was most important to continue the link of communications with the Council. Chairman Collens confirmed that it was- the Committee's understanding that they will finish their discussion on jury selection and the fee for the competition at their next meeting and go to the Council with a recommendation. DISCUSSION OF SURVEY BY THE LIBRARY After reviewing the survey of other libraries involved in construction, it was found that the information was not helpful for the purposes of the Committee. Chairman Collens asked what else the Committee might find out that would be helpful to know = about phased construction which might help them with their decision. She suggested that staff collect the available information from this meeting, from previous minutes, the Green report, and the information on alternatives and that this information be put into a packet for the Council. This needs to go very soon to go to the Council so some decision can be made on phased development. Aid. Rainey requested another review of the issue on moving utilities in the alley. Aid. Rainey particularly wanted to know about any difficulties with the telephone lines that were there. Chairman Collens recalled that there was a walk-through of this site with a representative from "f-__�-_--- the Schall Company and an old report on the subject. It was requested that the report be E_ Special Committee on the plain Library Minutes - January 11, I990 Page Eleven located and recirculated. Aid. Rainey commented that she would particularly like to understand the difference between City staff reaction that moving the utilities is not a big problem and the developer adversion to dealing with the moving of utilities. ChnJrman Collens recalled that the Schaal recommendation was not to excavate all the way to tlly edge of the new alley but to leave utilities where they are now and have access to it from the tiew haserient. COMMUNITY FORUM ON THE LIBRARY The forum on the new library is scheduled for February I st at 7:30 p.m. There were no comments on the wording of the public announcement. Different methods of notifying the public were briefly discussed. Meeting adjourned approximately 10:40 P.M. STAFF: DATE: /b�/!12 7Y67/77 F ,t SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT MINUTES DRAFT NOT APPROVED Thursday, January 25. 1990 Room 2402 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Aid. Collens. Feldman, Jullar, Morton, and Rainey PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Aid. Collens, Chair STAFF: Carter OTHERS PRESENT: Cappo, Wright, Wolin, Weise, Kepler, Chiss, Gottschalk, and LindwalI APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 11, 1990 With two minor corrections, one on the obvious error In the square foot cost for building a library, Aid. Rainey moved approval of the January I I th minutes. Seconded by Aid. Feldman. Motion passed. No Nays. REVIEW OF THE LIBRARY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE COMPETITION JURY Chairman Collens called members' attention to the January 18, 1990 memo from the Library Board containing three recommended actions for the architectural competition. The first of these concerned the composition of the jury, the number of furors and the division between design professionals and non -design jurors representing the client interest. Aid. Feldman moved approval of the Library Board's recommendation that the jury be composed of five professionals and three client representatives, all as voting members. Seconded by AId. Rainey. Aid. Feldman stated that he felt comfortable with the jury composition proposed as well as with the list of jurors and their qualifications. He felt this type of jury would do much to attract good contestants and get good results. Aid. Rainey commented that she was impressed by the variety of talents contained in the list, but had no basis on which to make a judgment. She inquired about the urban planner and asked if that person was also an architect. There followed a general discussion of which professionals on the list might not be architects and what qualities some of the non -architects would bring to the work of the jury. It was pointed out that some of the urban designers bring special skills in assessing how well a project fits into the context of its surroundings. Aid. Rainey stated that her concern was not with the different areas of expertise, but where these professionals came from and whether they would be appropriate for assessing the Evanston context. Aid. Feldman felt that urban designers could apply their skills In a variety of settings. �f Special Committee on the Alain Library Minutes - January 1 I, 1990 Page Two There followed a general discussion between members of Library Board and the Special Committee concerning the importance of having a cross section of talents and the ability of the consultants to choose a group of jurors who could work well together. It was emphasized that it was the consultant's knowledge of these, individual talents and personalities that enabled them to compose a jury which could work well together on evaluating designs for Evanston's library. it was stressed that there was a nerd for the Committee to rely upon the consultant's judgments in this area. Library Board members commented that they had done some independent checking and three different sources indicated that Evanston couldn't go wrong with the list of potential jurors. One additional name was suggested for inclusion. Chairman Collens clarified that the motion was to support the recommendation for eight voting members, five design professionals plus three City representatives and approval of the list of potential jurors from which to draw. Motion passed. No Nays. There followed a general discussion on what materials the City Council should receive concerning the Committee's recommendations. Concern was expressed over the confidential nature of the list of jurors and the possibility of losing a juror if they found out they were being considered before actually being asked. Library Board members stressed their concern over maintaining the confidentiality and Committee members felt it was important for City Council to receive the full information packet. Aid. Morton objected that the jurors had not yet allowed themselves to be considered. Aid. Feldman shared the rationale for the reason not to release the names, but felt the Council needed to know. It was agreed to explain the highly confidential nature of the information in a cover memo and distribute the information to the Council. COMPETITION ENTRY FEE Chairman Collens called Committee members attention to an explanatory ;-nemo from the Library Board recommending a competition entry fee of $85 and asked for a motion. Ald. Rainey moved approval. Seconded by Aid. Morton. Motion passed. Four ayes. Aid. Rainey voting no. PROPOSED COMPETITION SCHEDULE Chairman Collens announced that this item was information rather than for formal approval. She called attention to the draft schedule prepared by the consultants for Committee review. Mr. Wright clarified classifications on sponsor staff and designer. He emphasized the need for an agreement upon a firm date for the jury to be scheduled, since the consultants needed to start the jury selection process with a definite date in mind for the jury. Chairman Collens noted that we were already a month behind in the schedule and asked if the schedule could be revised whether time could be made up elsewhere. Staff responded that the time could be made up. Chairman Collens reminded Committee members that the consultants had hoped that the jury week could be scheduled with some major event in Evanston to capture maximum publicity. Mr. Carter commented that we really did not have such a time in Evanston, such as a major festival, and, in his opinion, the most important thing was to make time on the project. not try to hit a certain week or month for publicity. Chairman Collens noted that the March 1991 time was going to come just before the Aldermanic elections of that year. There followed a general discussion of the implications and it was noted that Committee members would be up for reelection at that time. Committee members discussed the possibility that their representative �. Special Committee on the plain Library Minutes - January 11, 1990 Page Three on the jury may or may not run again or be relected. Also, it Is unlikely that a Committee member would be willing to give up a week of campaigning just before the election to serve on the jury. Aid. Rainey noted that the Committee would either have a "lame duck" or someone running for election so there would be a problem either way. She recommended moving the date forward so that the representative could stay on and fill out his or her obligation and function. It was noted that the jurors had to be announced on the program to be mailed out and that the critical date for the review and approval of the program was In early spring of this year. Chairman Collens noted that this would be a very critical period requiring thorough and perhaps extra meetings so as not to have the program delayed. There would be a need to get draft documents to the Committee early and anticipate that some topics may take more than one meeting to complete for approval. Library Board members recommended that the date of the jury be changed at this time to one after the election. Committee members agreed and It was decided it would probably be no sooner than April 8 to the 18th depending upon verification as to when elections would take place. DISCUSSION OF THE FORUM ON THE LIBRARY Chairman Collens reminded Committee members of the forum to be held next Thursday, February Ist at the Civic Center. She stated that it appeared to have adeauate publicity in the form of newsletters, flyers, the Review, and Highlights. Announcements have also been carried on cablevision. Mr. Wright stated that the forum itself would be cable cast. Chairman Collens indicated that the presentation should be limited to where we are on the library, where we have been, and why we are conducting a forum. She announced that she would not be able to attend and had asked Aid. Feldman to chair the meeting. She stressed that the purpose of the forum was not for presentations, but to hear suggestions on what people wanted to see in the new library. She suggested a brief summary be kept including the name of the person and the essence of their comments. There was brief discussion as to what the Committee's posture should be on any questions regarding the site. It was concluded that the position should be that the site has been chosen and that, if amicable negotiations do not succeed, the City has officially declared its intention to go to court. Committee members discussed possible time limits on speaking, but reached no conclusion since they were uncertain as to how many people would sign up to speak. In response to a question on available materials, his. Cappo responded that building program notes would be available as well as a building program statement and information on where the building program statement would be available. It was suggested that cards be available for people wishing to make written comments instead of verbal ones. It was suggested that there be a signup sheet or attendance and for those wishing to speak for the record. It was recommended that the microphone be in a comfortable place for people to speak. In response to a question as to where people would go for information after the forum, that they communicated with Mr. Wright and that it should be made clear at the forum that there comments are welcome. Aid. Rainey commented that once the project was under way, it would help if some sort of update column in the Review or elsewhere for getting the word out on progress on the library. In response to a question from Aid. Feldman as to how questions would be handled and by whom, Chairman Collens urged Board and Committee members to be personally prepared to answer the questions rather than deferring to staff. She felt this would do a great deal to strengthen the confidence of the attendees that the Committee members thoroughly understood issues and recommendations. Ald. ,Morton commented that the emphasis in the meeting should be upon hearing what the public wants rather than getting into questions and answers. Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - January 11, 1990 Page Four Aid. Feldman suggested that a one page facts sheet on the library be prepared to handle most of the basic Information. OTHER BUSINESS Chairman Collens called attention to a memorandum from the Library Board on the process of review of library recommendations. She noted the memorandum raised a number of questions and offered some good suggestions; however, these needed to be put on the agenda for the next meeting. Chairman Collens announced that the main agenda item for the next meeting will be question of phased construction. NEXT MEETING DATE Chairman Collens announced the next meeting for the Committee would be on Thursday, February 15th at 7:30 p.m. Committee members also selected Thursday March I at 7:30 p.m. for a follow up meeting and a possible subsequent meeting for March 15. Mr. Carter announced that the February 15the meeting would have to be held at the Library. Meeting adjourned approximately 9:00 p.m. STAFF: DATE: 7 /� 7Y 78/81 E 4; SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT MINUTES DRAFT NOT APPROVE❑ Thursday, February 15, 1990 Library Board Room 7:30 P.M. EVANSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY ,MEMBERS PRESENT: Aid. Collens. Fcldman, Jullar, Morton, and Rainey PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Aid. Collens, Chair STAFF: Carter OTHERS PRESENT: Cappo, Wright. Wolin, Weise, Kepler, Anderson, Gottschalk, Lindwall, and reporters from the Northwestern Daily APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE JANUARY 23TH, 1990 MEETING Aid. ,Morton moved approval of the January 25th minutes. Seconded by Aid. Rainey. Motion passed. No Nays. QUESTIONS FROM THE JANUARY 25TH MEETING Chairman Collens called Committee members attention to the July 29th memo from Mr. Wright responding to questions brought up at the January 25th meeting. In summarizing, she noted that only one of the potential jurors was not an architect and that the April 9th through 15th dates recommended for jury deliberation were acceptable to the consultants. RECOMMENDATION ON PHASED CONSTRUCTION AND INTERIM SERVICE ALTERNATIVES. Chairman Collens introduced the topic and asked the Committee if they had sufficient information from the staff memo on the topic to make a recommendation. Aid. Rainey moved that the Committee recommend to the City Council that the new library be built on the present site through phased construction. Seconded by Ald. Feldman. Aid. Rainey went on to explain that phased construction might cost a little bit more, but after hearing all of the arguments and debates, a greater value should be placed on staving in the present location. She did not concur with the idea that the Committee should go on record as being willing to change their position should a more desirable site for an interim location become available. Chairman Collens commented that she had similar reservations and that the decision would have to be final before competition materials went out. She went on to comment that either the space would have to _ be rented about a year and a half before it was actually needed. or the Committee would have to count on a space becoming available at a later date. She felt that. at most. there would only be a period of about two months in which the decision could be changed. Aid. Morton commented that she wished it would be possible to move out and reconstruct the library in the way that was desired. but if phased construction could work and staff be maintained. she would agree. Ald. Feldman noted that there did not seem to be a viable option and that in spite of cost there was no other reasonable place to go. He felt that his concern about being able to have the kind of library he envisioned built with phased construction had been answered. 4_ e ]Mayor's Special Committee on the Attain Library Project Minutes - February 15. 1990 Page Two Chairman Collens reviewed the chart of comparative costs and noted that they were approximately the same whether an interim location or phased construction was used. Even a third alternative of building a temporary structure did not save money and was considered to be the least desirable alternative. Aid. Rainey questioned whether the figures being used were entireiv current or realistic. Aid. Collens acknowledged that the numbers might be a little stale. but it was the difference between the approaches that was relevant. Chairman Collens asked for a clarification on how phasing would be handled In the design , competition. A.tr. Wright reminded Committee members that the consultants had been talking about reouiring three panels for the competition and had suggested that a fourth panel could be required to show how their proposal would be phased. Aid. Feldman commented that the case for phased construction would have to be well written for presentation to the Council. Committee members made suggestions for editing the draft memorandum including a tightening of the language and updating cost figures. Committee members discussed when they would take their recommendation to the City Council. If the agenda would permit it. Aid. Collens suggested that the recommendation go to the Council on the 26th of February. Motion passed to recommend phased construction and to forward the memorandum as edited. No Nays, Vr. Carter suggested that it would be appropriate to develop the background on the recommendation a little bit more thoroughly since the Council would not be up todate on the extent of the Committee's deliberations. He suggested that the Committee might want to list some of the sites that had been considered and why they would not be satisfactory so the Council would understand how the Committee arrived at their recommendation. Chairman Collens suggested a confidential memo on the possible interim sites be prepared and that the minutes of the meeting on phased construction be reissued. Aid. Rainev inquired as to whether there was anything new in the way of available property since the Committee last discussed the question of possible interim sites. Mr. Carter replied that staff had just heard about the possibility of another site, but Committee would need to go into executive session to discuss this. Aid. Juliar moved that the Committee go into an executive session. Seconded by Aid. Rainey. Motion passed No ;*lays. The Committee so conviened at 8:05 p.m. The Committee reconviened at 8:28 p.m. PROCEDURAL ISSUES Chairman Collens called attention to a letter from the Library Board to the Committee. Ms. -_ Cappo opened the discussion by stating that what was in the letter represented the Hoard's true feelings at the time it was written. She explained that the Board was an advocate for the _ Library and take their responsibilities seriously. She stated that while the convictions expressed in the letter are held strongly, they are backed with respect for the Committee's function and responsibilities. .Aid. Morton commented that the problems which had occurred are natural in that the parameters of the operation of this Committee were not clearly established. thus creating problems of defining "territory" between the Board and the Committee. She did not feel that the Committee should have allowed the dissatisfaction to occur. Mayor's Special Committee on the Main Library Project Minutes - February 15. 1990 Page Three Chairman Collens responded that there may be communication and human relations problems, but she thought the mission of the Committee was clear. She acknowledged that the Committee had to go over and reconsider everything the Board had recommended and that the Council may very well do the same with the Committee's recommendations. She acknowledged the frustration that such a process produces, but stated that it was just part of the process problems and In the nature of how we operate. She noted a parallel between Committee work of the City Council and the Council reexamining all of the Committee's work. She acknowledged the recommendations in the Library Board's letter as intelligent and well focused on the problem. She felt that their suggestions would help and that the problem was mainly one of communication. not one of process. She emphasized that it was necessary for the Committee to respectfully reexamine the work of the Library Board in order to arrive at the same conclu%lons. Aid. Morton felt that the expertise of the Library Board should be recognized and that it may not be necessary to reexamine all of their work. She felt more might be accomplished in meetings where Committee simply asked for clarification of the work of the Board. Ms. Wolin commented that she felt that Committee had every right to examine everything the Board recommended on what is going to be one of the most expensive building projects ever undertaken by the City. ['hat she felt was needed was a more collegial atmosphere. She stated that the Board knew a great deal that thev could tell the Committee. they would like to feel more included in the process. They would like to feel that they are more colleagues of the Committee. (ids. Cappo commented that a great deal of progress had been made since the letter was first written.. She acknowledged that it was an enormous project and that it took time for everyone to think through what the steps should be. She stressed.the need to work together on the project and that the Board wanted to be able to offer whatever they can. They have no problem with the questions being raised. Aid. Feldman stated that he was happy to have heard the comments of the Board because there was nothing that he felt comfortable in suggesting to the Council that he didn't fully understand and believe. He observed that the Board and the Committee were trying to solve the same problem: however. there is an additional perspective and that is the one of the Council. When the same issues are discussed by the Council. they are discussed with a different perspective and that perspective has to come about. As long as that is understood. he stated that he was very much in favor of a collegial atmosphere to get as much help as possible from the Library Board. The Committee both needs and wants their knowledge and expertise. The Committee did not want to denv themselves the benefits of the energy and intelligence of people they respect. who have done a great deal of work on the project and know more about libraries that the Committee does. He stressed that their input was absolutely essential. . Ms. Cappo commented that Board Members and staff are taking a closer look at their materials with an eve to improving the style of communication. Chairman Collens acknowledged that a r challenge in communicating materials effectively to the Council, that a particular form and style is required which requires materials to be cast somewhat differently. Aid. Feldman underscored that the Board's recommendations is of great importance, yet it is not enough to simply stand on its own. A1d. Rainey commented on what a rare opportunity serving on the Library Committee was to focus as much energy and attention on a project in such great detail. Aid. Morton commented that she liked tonight's seating arrangment around the table as a means of improving the communication between the Board and the Committee. Aid. Rainey observed that the original creation of the Committee made the structure more formal. but she did not see EF- anv reason why there shouldn't be full participation. She expressed her gratitude for the letter because she was not aware there was a problem. Mayor's Special Committee on the Alain Library Project Minutes - February 15. 1990 Page Four In response to Chairman Collen's request for comments on specific items contained in the letter, Aid. Feldman stated that the two groups should operate separately. Where the Board is deliberating on a recommendation to be brought to the Committee. they should operate autonomously rather than having the Committee present. He felt the efficiency might not be as good. but the integrity of the discussion would be better preserved. He liked the idea of saving time through joint consideration of recommendation, but the presence of the Committee would distort the deliberations. Ms. Cappo responded that this particular recommendation had been an outgrowth of a problem in having the consultant present and then having to bring them back a second time for the Committee. She thought perhaps it would make sense to have joint meetings when the consultants were reporting. Chairman Collens felt that it was important to improve collegiality. but to preserve the separate perspectives. She felt it was different to have a recommendation arrived at from one perspective and then presented to a separate perspective. She did not believe that the Committee and the Board should function as a joint committee. In reviewing the history of the formation of the Committee. she noted that it was already a joint committee representing three separate other committees of the Council. This was done to keep the Board from having to go to three separate places with parts of their recommendations. TASKS AND TIMELINES Chairman Collens introduced Committee members to two documents: a memo identifying a series of Committee decisions which would affect content of the competition program and a revised task and timeline chart for the total project. Committee members were pleased to see how manv items have been completed. Chairman Collens reviewed the meeting schedule for the Committee stating that for the March Ist meeting they would review a budget of updated numbers for what would be needed in the Capital Improvement Program and reviewing how the numbers in the last vear's program were arrived at. There would also be a review and discussion of the alley and utility relocation. including cost and timing. She also recommended that the Committee consider the footprint for the final site configuration. Mr. Carter recommended that discussion of the foot print be delayed to a subsequent meeting following the Committee's discussion with Design Evanston on the Design Challenge Statement. The question of yards and siting the building would be part of Design Evanston's comments and Mr. Carter felt the Committee would be in a better position to make a decision following the discussion. Chairman Collens announced that the March 15th meeting would be one at which the competition consultants would be present to respond to suggestions for a modified competition and that Committee could take advantage of having them there to hear what Design Evanston has to sav about the Design Challenge. Chairman Collens also wanted to use the meeting to get from members of the Committee and the Board on what they want to see in a new library. Chairman Collens reminded Committee members that the question of phased constuction or interim site may also be on the agenda of the March 1 st meeting. Aid. Morton raised the question of whether an architect could prepare a design which would not conform to the zoning ordinance. Mr. Carter clarified that the issue was probably a narrower one than that and that the only thing likely to be in question would be the yards. The question to be explored is whether the design needs to be within the yard specified by the zoning requirements of the District or whether it would be desirable to apply the municipal exception for some compelling design reason. It is a question whether the space requirements of the library might make it desirable to modify the standards on the vards. Are we going to say that you absolutely must build within the present vards or can you demonstrate a need or improvement in the design by encroaching in some of those vards. He noted that the present footprint has alreadv made an exception on the rear yard and the front yard does not conform to present zoning. Mayor's Special Committee on the Main Library Project Minutes - February 15. 1990 Page Five He stated that Design Evanston would attempt to respond as to whether specific yard requirements should be stated in advance or left open. If for example. the yards made a difference between a library which would be more spacious and function more efficiently versus holding on tb the yards. as a public benefit. which would be the more important? He explained that the municipal exemption pave them some latitude and was there because many public buildings don't fit the typical parameters of other buildings. He explained that conditions could be put in the requirements for the competition as a preference for preserving the yards and if you must exceed them, or your find a compelling design reason. such as the way the building presents itself to the streetscape and demonstrate that you can do that and what the advantages are. Otherwise. you define a specific set of lines and say the design may not exceed these yards. He felt that this needed to be explored before a final decision was made. Chairman Collens requested staff prepare a summary document of the public hearing on the library for the Council and for the record. The Committee returned to reviewing the task and timeline chart and suggested there may be additional steps between number 14 and 15 concerning a change in the competition process to make it a two-step one. Aid. Feldman suggested that item 16 on design development should have an asterisk for Council approval. After discussion. it was determined that this was a technical step that would typically be left to staff and other projects. It was suggested that another step be added under concept design for Council approval. There should be approval before working drawings are initiated. According to the timeline. actual construction of the library would begin in the spring of 1992. OTHER BU51NESS Aid. Feldman commented on the forum conducted by the Committee on February I. 1990. and stated that he had hoped for more people and varied input, but the Committee did hear some novel concepts and the form did serve Its purpose. NEXT MEETING DATES Next meetings dates were set for March Ist. at 7:30 p.m. in room 2401 of the Civic Center: March 15th at 7:30 p.m. in room 2401 and Tuesday &larch 271h at 7:30 p.m. In the Civic Center. Meeting adjourned approximately 9:20 p.m. STAFF: 62"L \1 � e14 DATE: 4v�61"�9 7Y42/46 C k SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT MINUTES DRAFT NOT APPROVED Thursday. !March 15. 1990 Room 2►+01 7:30 P.M. EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER , WIPERS PRESENT: Aid. Collens, Feldman, Morton. and Rainey PRESIDING OFFICIAL.: Aid. Collens. Chair STAFF: Carter and Lindwall OTHERS PRESENT: Including: Library Board and staff members Wolin, Kepler, Allan, ;1+a)colm. Brackett. Anderson. and Wright: competition advisors. 011swang. Wittsling; Design Evanston representatives Johnson, Blake. Yas, Abrahms. Eieger. and McGuire APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 15, 1990 MEETING Ann Painey moved approval of the February 15th minutes. Seconded by raid. Feldman. !.lotion passed. No nays. It. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE TO FINAL STEP IN ARCHITECTURAL COMPETITION Chairman Collens reviewed the proposal on revising the competition format to one of selecting three finalists who win the opportunity to sell themselves as the best firm to construct the new library by addressing the Committee's concerns of how thev would be able to communicate with an unknown winner. This process would be different from the normal competition in which a single winner is selected for the best design. She called attention to the letter sent to the advisors from Air. '.'right and the Library Board raising certain questions about the competition process. She then asked the consultants to respond. fir. Wittsling stated that thev still preferred a one stage competition which selected the first. second and third place winners, but with an elaborate interview process to satisfy Evanston's concerns. If the concerns were addressed, then we could enter contract negotiations and award to the first place winner. The consultants then made the following responses to questions raised in ;Mr. Wright's letter: 1. They did not think the proposal presented for a two -stage competition was a good idea because the winning design would not necessarily be the best design. This would tell prospective competitors that there is at least a two-thirds possibility that the best design would not be selected. 2. What they thought the reaction to such a competition would be that better designers were less likely to enter and the best qualified jurors might not want to participate in such an arrangement. Roth parties would express great concern that the selection should result in an award to t` ! best design. 9 Special Committee on the Again Library 1<.1Inutes - February 15. 1990 Pape Two 3. How would you assess the increase or decrease of registrants? There would probably be fewer. but they did not know how many. 4. Would the alternative approach generate more entrants? The consultants doubted i t. 5. Was it common to do this in the construction Industry? Yes, but in those circumstances there is not a question of what the best design is. 6. would there be additional cost? Yes. some additional cost for interviewing the three finalists. 7. Other costs which need to be considered? The process will take more time resulting in additional negotiation costs. S. What effect would this have on jurors already being considered? It would delay the jury selection process. 9. Will the negotiation process be made easier or shorter? It will probably take longer because with three finalist the focus is likely to be on the design, rather than on the ability to work with the design team as intended. The negotiation process will be much more complex and take longer under these circumstances. They estimated one to four months. 10. No. the change in the process would not result in extra work from the advisors. F In summarizinp their position, Mr. Wittsling stated that he believed Committee and Board had touched on a critical issue. that of being able to work with the team which is finally selected. The Question is how the process is structures' so as to get the best design and then satisfy yourst:Nes that the design team is a good team and one you can work with. What he suggested was that after a first place winner is designated. the process be constructed in such a way (through interviews. checking of references. checking credentials of local firms they affiliate with), to make sure that the local firms and the designer have the capacity to engage in an intensive dialog with the client. He also suggested that the winner be asked to demonstrate how they would go about making changes in the design. if requested. as a means of testing their willingness and flexibility. If they pass all these tests, then you formally agree to enter contract negotiations. All that the winner is guaranteed of at this stage is first place for his design and the right to negotiate. If the client is not satisfied that they can work with this team successfully. they are not obligated to do so. '. r. Wittsling felt that. under the model suggested of three finalists, we would not only be focusing more upon the design than the teams' ability. but also placed in the position of making decision based on the salesmanship and marketing of these firms. If we set uo a process where we're dealing only with the first place winner. it takes _ a great deal of the pressure off that firm having to be the best sales firm. This allows them to focus on demonstrating how thev are to work with. In response to a question from Chairman Callens. fir. Wittsling explained that, in this particular case, the competitor would win first prize and the right to enter th interview process to F determine whether a gcod working relationship could be established. The right to negotiate a - contract would only follow after passing this test. He saw the challenge in preparing a program in defining as carefully as possible what would go into the interview process so that anybody who enters the competition would know beforehand exactly what their getting into. Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - February 15, 1990 Pape Three Aid. Feldman speculated on whether the difference between the first and second place winner would be very great and wondered if it would not be to our advantage to interview more than one firm because of what we might learn from them. He asked if we didn't limit ourselves by interviewing only the winner. Mr. Wittsling resrmrsded that it was unlikely that the first. second. and third place winners would be similar. He antlripated there would be substantial differences based upon their previous experience with t:ompetitions. If you therefore wind up in a process where you have three different designs. and three different teams, you have to combine both the team and the design. Several different difficulties can result. If you do not ask the jury to pick the best design, you will have to determine it yourself. If you do ask the jury to pick the best design, it is difficult to keep it confidential. Once it becomes public there will be a political problem and management problem. When you interview architects or consultants and they are competing with one another you will find their marketing behavior is very different. You get different impressions when they are in a competitive mode versus being open and relaxed about the project. He questioned the validity of this process. 1tr. Brackett commented on behalf of the Library Board about some of their concern with the competition processes presently structured which they felt would be addressed by the alternate proposal. The Board saw the issue as larger than what the best design was in an abstract way. They considered the issue as being "what is the best design that can be built within the sponsor's budget and be responsive to the needs of the community". They were concerned that the competition as now structured was not set up to permit consideration of certain important criteria. He acknowledged that the jury would be composed so that cost would be a consideration. but thought the alternate plan enabled the sponsor to take a look at the cost independently. They also saw an advantage in having an assessment of the design by others such as staff. Board members. Committee members, library building consultant. etc. This would be an additional assessment that the building could address the needs of the community. He also pointed out thit the jury could not consider the reputation and construction experience of the competitors because the competition is supposed to be anonymous. He also raised the question of the "fit" between the client and the winner of the competition. When the competition is "blind". how do we assure that we have the right working relationship as well as the best design? He acknowledged that the Library Board had not considered the modification to the competition process offered by the advisors this evening. Mr. Brackett felt that the contestants would be more pleased to know that their chances of acceptance had been improved by a two -phased competition where they would be chosen as a finalist to come in and promote their design, their people and experience. %1r. WitalinQ responded to the issues raised first dealing with cost. He noted that there are several safeguards built in the program which would focus the competitors on the issue of cost control. to make sure that the jurors pick selections they feel would fall within the budget, and by then taking the first place project and running it through cost estimates as part of the interview process. He stated that it was not uncommmon to produce a cost estimate at the end of schematic design as a matter of course. The second issue dealing with phasing and feasibility of construction is similar to the cost issue. That is, by the end of the schematic and the beginning of design development phase. some of those issues will already have been addressed by the jury. However. much of this evaluation begins in the second phase. You are then beginning a conventional dialog and much of what happens with cost and technical issues are covered at that stage. Special Committee on the Main Library ;'inutes - February 15, 1990 Page Four What he heard as the biggest difficulty was the "blind" selection with no way to gauge experience and reputation of the winner other than through the design itself. He indicated that it was the character of the competition, but there is a statement in the program to the effect that the client has the right to demand that the winner demonstrate the capacity and competence to do the work. The capacity to do the work can be identified in a variety of ways. He described the recommended process of dealing with three finalists as having some serious difficulties and fraught with the possibilities of being hit with more salesmanship than substance. The people who generally do the selling for architectural firms are not usually the people with whom the working relationship is actually established. He noted that under this arrangement we would be not only asking the firms to go to an enormous effort in preparing their designs, but also to submit to the traditional approach of interviews. This process was not a very conventional one. Usually you do one or the other. stir. 011swang pointed out that by stating up front very clearly what the client wants and communicating that to the jury. takes some of the blind quality out of the competition. He stated that from their experience, the proposed two -stage competition would be a flawed one in the eyes of the prospective competitors because they will know the best design will not necessarily win. They had already had such responses from prospective competitors as well as jurors. The same people recognized that the modified interview process being recommended by the competition advisors was an equitable one which was acceptable to them. He felt it was very important. if we expected the best people to enter. that the competition be seen as an equitable one. He reemphasized that this was just not a beauty contest, but that the design had to meet expectations as far as internal functions were concerned and cost. He was confident in the iurors ability to interpret proposals for functionality cost as well as design quality. His greatest fear concerning the proposed modification by the Board was that the emphasis would not be on the abilities of the various designers, but would shift to the substance of the designs themselves. He felt the discussions would be drawn out, protracted and potentially devisive. Aid. Rainey commented that while she had opposed the competition Drocess in the beginning, she had been brought along through the discussions and accepted the idea of a competition. Even though some of the suggested modifications seem to make sense. she felt that if the Committee had committed to a competition, in determining the best design then they should stick to a competition. She felt the advisors were absolutely right when they stated that the modified procedure would end up judging three designs rather than three design teams. She felt the visual par* would dominate evervone's thinking. She drew a parallel from her aldermanic experience in selecting auditors and noted whatever they picked seem not to turn out to be what they thought they were getting. She felt that the advisors explanation and recommendation as to how to modify the interview process was the way to go. Aid. Feldman asked about how the West Hollywood library design went and was there not a second phase to that competition. Mr. Wittsling stated that it was a twvo-stage competition and that the clients had the opportunity to review designs and make comments. Those comments were passed on to the professional advisor and jury and the comments were then passed on to the five finalists to be used in their final stage design. At the beginning of the second stage, the firms were known and the makeup of their teams were known. There was no evaluation of the working relationships. Then the jury did the evaluation at the conclusion of the second stage. Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - February 15, 1990 Page Five Chairman Collens commented that she originally thought that the modification of the competition suggested would be helpful in establishing confidence that the winner was someone that we could work with. She had some concerns about being stuck with an impossible person or situation. She felt. however, that the advisors arguments were persuasive. She felt that if our concerns were not addressed. then we ought not to have a competition. However. if the modification suggested by the advisors were workable and this could be a true competition with such provisos, then we should proceed with the competition. She then recalled her own experience on the selection process on the Church/Chicago project and how difficult that was because of all the options involved. She expressed the concern that a negotiated process with several candidates would become incredibly complex and cumbersome rather than enlightening. Mr. Wittsling stated that the advisors clearly understood the dilemma of the Committee and that they hac{ been on both sides of the table during such selection processes. They fully appreciated the communications difficulties. They were trying to work out a process for Evanston that would address their specific concerns. Chairman Collens clarified that what the successful competitor would win was the right to go through and interview process with representatives of the client to determine whether or not a working relationship could be established. They have not won the right to negotiate the contract until they have successfully concluded this phase. Mr. Wittsling responded that ouestions of cost. the feasibility and the functionality are much more heavily weighted on the competition process itself. Their construction experience. reputation. and client -architect fit are more heavily weighted on the subsequent interview process. These concerns can be built in. but this is how they would see them be divided. Mr. Brackett commented that the advisors had answered a good many of the Library Board concerns. If a condition of entering into the good faith negotiations with successfully passing the interview with the sponsor, that would give them an added comfort level that manv of the concerns which could not be addressed in the competition, could be addressed during the interview phase. He asked the advisors if adding such a requirement would detract from the competition? Mr. 011swang responded that, if the competitors know beforehand that they will win the right to negotiate based upon the merits of their design if they know what the = evaluative criteria are and they know what the post competition negotiations are, it will have no impact at all. Further, it will add to the credibility of the sponsor by saving that we are not onlv interested in design. but our ability to work with the winner. In response to a question from ►lr. Brackett. Mr. 011swang stated that it would be made clear in the guidelines that if a competitor did not successfully complete the interview process. we would move to negotiations with the second place winner. He said that they would have to carefully develop the wording. but that could be done. In response to a question from :old. Rainey they went on to elaborate what some of the specific requirements would he and the need to develop other measures of the competitors willingness to work with the client. Ald. Rainey expressed her concern that we specifically identifv ways to gauge the competitors ability to work with the client in a flexible and responsive way. She stated that we also needed to be assured that this person would not be negative to phased construction nor insensitive to the needs of the library during construction. Mr. Wittsling responded that the first step was to develop the evaluative criteria and the second was to attempt to develop some forms of measure. He acknowledged that some aspects were more qualitative and would be difficult to measure. He gave an example of one test which could be used would be to take some of the jury's recommended modifications and ask the designer to suggest some alternatives. This could measure his flexibility and willingness to work with others. Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - February 13, 1990 Page Six Ms. Wolin commented that there were risks in any approach but she felt that great progress had been made toward minimizing the risk through the discussions held this evening. She wanted to go back to the Library Board with these ideas next Tuesday night and see how they respond. Chairman Collens suggested that if everyone was In agreement that this was the best way to go. we should get to work on establishing a list of criteria to see how well we can spell them out. Ms. Wolin indicated that she would share the information from this evening's meeting with other Library Board members and communicate back to the Committee the feeling of the Board. In response to a question from a Library Board member as to how the factors discussed this evening could be conveyed to the jury. Air. Witzling stated that the program statement would contain design criteria for the jury to pick a winner. The criteria is based upon the type of input being received during this meeting. Once the criteria have been defined, those criteria are communicated to the jury. The jury, as part of their agreement to serve and this binds them to abide by the rules, regulations and criteria. The competition advisors are present during the evaluation. they charge them with the rules and remind them that it is upon these criteria that they are to base their selection. He also noted that a substantial number of the jurors are local and that the Library Board and City Council would be represented on that jury. PRESENTATION OF DESIGN CHALLENGE STATEMENT BY DESIGN EVANSTON Bennett Johnson, representing Design Evanston, thanked the Committee for the opportunity to contribute to the process of creating a new library. He indicated that the statement represented a fairly precise summary of the views expressed by various members of Design Evanston as well as some designers outside the organization. He read the three -page statement which dealt with thirteen different aspects of design including: orientation, setbacks, context. circulation. massing, feel. phased construction, urban setting, signage. scale, flexibility and expansion, and the relationship of interior design to exterior appearance. In general, the statement declared that Design Evanston would not attempt to dictate the design of the building by specifying materials or style. but would leave it to the individual designers to interpret just how their work would express the context of Evanston and its Downtown. He felt the solution should be an exciting. dynamic cultural magnate that would continue to be appropriate in Evanston's future. Individual statements on the variety of design topics were included as a kind of check list and reminder of elements needing special consideration. In concluding, he noted that, while Design Evanston was interested in seeing a distinguished and attractive building. they felt that first and foremost this building must be designed from the inside out with the emphasis upon a flexible. functional, comfortable and well -lighted library that really worked for its diverse population of users. Mr. 011swang thanked Design Evanston for their work. stating that it was exactly the kind of information that they like to get from a community. He felt that many of the issues raised would fit into a variety of places within the program statement. It gave the advisors a better understanding of how the community feels about the context of the building. All of the elements seem Compatible, but they have to be studied and the board and committee give direction to the competition advisors as to how to use the material. Hayward Blake emphasized the need to consider the library signage program as part of the total design and not as an afterthought. It has to fit within the lighting system as well as the architectural nature of the library. He underscored the need for a quality sign system as vital to the communication with its users. Special Committee on the A+ain Library Minutes - February 15. 1990 Page Seven ,Mr. Johnson brought up the question of how we convey the sense of Evanston to potential competitors who are not local. He suggested the possibility of developing a video for this purpose. He offered the many pictures which Design Evanston had taken to be used as "stills" and suggested that perhaps a storyboard approach might be used. Members of the Committee and the Library Board thanked ❑esign Evanston for their materials and their contribution. Chairman Collens raised the question about how setbacks would be determined. Mr. Johnson discussed one or two examples where it might he advantageous to modify the present setbacks If the competitors could demonstrate a stronp positive design reason for doing so. He described circumstances where some positive amenity could be provided for the building, but only if the setback requirements were waived for that portion of the building. He described the approach as one similar to planned development where deviations from the underlying zoning requirements are allowed, but only for very good reasons. Mr. Yas elaborated that there were value judgments involved in the setback question as to which is more important - design or space. Mr. Yas, based on his experience with the Church/Chicago project. stressed the importance of clear guidelines laid down in advance so that the competitors knew what the rules would be for judging their design. Mr. Witzling explained that a setback preference could be expressed. but if a number of teams were able to produce a good design without violating setbacks, then they might likelv eliminate one that did not satisfy this preference. Mr. 011swang pointed out the differences between a preference and a requirement. He stated that if you specify certain setbacks as a requirement and one of the best designs imaginable failed to meet that requirement by the smallest degree, it would be disqualified in advance. He felt that it was not a good position to be in and there ought to be some leeway available. Aid. Morton commented on the Tucson library and some of the difficulties faced with citizen opposition to the initial design which recuired changes at the corner to provide open space. She felt that moving the building back from the streetline helped expose the beauty of the building. She was pleased to hear the call for some flexibility. however, in considering the setbacks. Ald. Rainey commented on her concern as to public reaction on the question of zoning flexibility and thought it would be wiser to set the perimeters now rather than leaving them open to consideration. Aid. Feldman agreed stating that he did not want to see a beautiful design mired down in a political battle over setbacks. He did not think the Council would allow flexibility in advance of natural design. Nir. 1t'itzling urged the committee to communicate clearly and effectively on what would be requirements and what would be preferences and not to be ambiguous. In response to a question from Aid. Rainey on timing. Mr. Witzling responded that they hoped to have a competition program readv by June I St. Chairman Collens asked for clarification on the internal functions perhaps dictating the setbacks and whether or not we didn't need to know the answer to that before releasing the competition materials. Discussion clarified that we are no longer considering a two -and -one-half story structure. but a full three stories for design and construction efficiency as well as space. In response to a question from Ald. Feldman. Mr. Bennett commented on the desirability of a flexible building envelope versus the desire for consistency on the setback. t Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - February 15. 1990 Page Eight COh''MITTEE/COUNCILILIBRARY BOARD DISCUSSION ON GOALS FOR THE LIBRARY BUILDING Aid. <%lorion stated that she hoped the structure of the new library would allow for future, unknown programs. That there would be adequate electricity and access to amenities to accommodate future changes. She also expressed the hope that there would be space for the workers as well as the patrons and that it would be a pleasant place in which to work. She felt that staff rooms should be in handy locations and not in obscure ones. Aid. Feldman commented that the library would be the most significant municipal building in Evanston, but had no aspiration as to particular style or materials. He hoped for a result which would make everyone feel good about it. library would be a pleasant and exulting building inside and out, both from the visual perspective and its use. The building should be a constant source of interest, pride. and pleasure when we look at it and when we use it. It should symbolize the high values of the community. The library should be central to the town's history, values, to the intellectual and educational values of the community. Aid. Rainey commented that she wanted to make certain the library would have three floors with ,is much space as possible. She found ventilation in most libraries inadequate and wanted to see a much better system to move or exchange air in the new library. She also wanted to see a new library created on the interior with materials easy to maintain. She wanted to see a long term. sophisticated preventative maintenance program which would permit us to stay on top of the property. She called for high standards of maintenance and constant vigilance. She did not want to see cheap materials and inadequate cleaning programs. Chairman Collens concurred and underscored Aid. Rainey's comments calling for careful initial selection of materials which would be easy to maintain. She also went on to stress that, in the selection of materials and maintenance services as well as design of the systems, the operating cost of the building be carefully scrutinized. She expressed a preference for not having a lot of glass walls for potential maintenance problems as well as the need to have internal space for hanging things on walls. She would like for the library to be something which we do not now have. a place where civic activities happen. We do not have a public place for noncity business activity, displays, fairs, and other social and cultural functions. She suggested movable walls to create flexible space for activities. She discussed her recent trip to %Cashington and the feeling which a person gets walling into some of the public places there. She felt that there was a need to create a sense of entry in the new library which would help announce it. She expressed a hope that the library would not look like it had always been there nor look like a tourist attraction. It should be distinctive without being an extension of the buildings on either side. Chairman Collens also echoed ti'r. Blake's comments on the importance of considering signage early in the process. She thought that it should he a building in which people immediately feel comfortable, it should be a community facility. a people facility. The Committee discussed the need to be aware of the environmental concerns raised. but at the same time felt. they needed to be cautious about designing a building for people with environmental illnesses. They noted the need to take into consideration problems for people in wheelchairs and the need to go beyond some of the minimal federal requirements. Vs. Kepler commented that she would like to see the design make a minimum impact on security. That is, be more secure without additional staff. She called for building materials which would be easy to clean and maintain as well as for soundproofing. Thought should be given to ways of separating noise generating activities from quiet areas. St:pcial Committee on the Main Library ltinutes - February 15, 1990 Pave NIne Chairman Collens commented that she did not know how to translate into design language, but sha liked the "feel" of the Highland Park library and did not like the "feel" of the WIlmette library and wondered how designers create an inviting feel to their buildings. Mr. Brackett commented that he agreed with all of these statements made so far and stressed the importance to create a place where people can be noisy and congregate and places for quiet. Ms. Kepler commented on a library which had small rooms and special places for people to read which were enclosed yet had visibility for security purposes. .'+r. Titzling commented that from the designer's perspective, one of the things that he did not hear. but what he thought the designers would be focusing upon. reading rooms and little niches to read. He invited Committee and Hoard Members to think about that issue and make some statement on it. Aid. Feldman wanted to know what steps would be necessary to take to make sure that the environmental concerns and access concerns are met. Mr. Oilswang stated that we inform the competitors at the beginning what portions of the library must be handicapped accessible in a gracious and commodious way rather than meeting the marginal standards. Having that on the schematic design allows you later at the design development stage to be able to take it into account. tier. Yas described how one building took into account the handicapped accessibility rrcuirements in a way that made the building function for everyone in a better way. He felt a statement about "ecuality for all" would be helpful in guiding the design. ❑r. Malcolm commented that the codes on accessibility were well-defined. but environmental illness was not so well defined. He stressed the need to get input from knowledgeable people. He called for a well-defined, comprehensive approach to this problem. he felt there was a need to go out and get the expertise so that it could be incorporated into the planning process. Chairman Collens agreed and asked the Library Board to pursue this. Vs. Wolin commented that her real hope and dream for the library was to see it built. Bennett Johnson commented that in the building program statement there was a place calling for windows only in the staff area and he hoped that would not be true. He felt there were r.anv ways to control various problems without mandating on the windows. He also expressed the hope that there would be a room for Evanston history and Evanston in general as a way of creating a sense of where you are. He also stressed the need for an adequate budget for the library. ".'r. Wright announced an invitation to the ,'Matteson Public Library Competition on March 31st. ! e stated that this would be a good opportunity to see the competition materials presented by the competitors. Chairman Collens announced the next meeting of the Library Committee would be Tuesday. ,'arch 27, 7:30 p.m. in room 2403. The agenda would Cover the agenda for the March Ist meeting which had to be cancelled. The April meeting was scheduled for Thursday, April 19th at 7:30 p.m. Veeting adjourned approximately 10:15 p.m. tanning Director 7Y58/SG w I] SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT MINUTES DPAFT NOT APPPOVED Tuesday, March 27,1990 Room 2401 7:30 P.M. EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER ,+IENIBEPS PPESENIT: Aid. ColIens, Feldman, and Morton PPESIDING OFFICIAL: Aid. Collens, Chair STAFF: Carter, Barber and Lindwall OTHEPS PPESP NT: Cappo. Wolin. Weise. Brackett, Gottschalk and Wright I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MARCH 13, 1990 WEETING With the correction on spelling for Dr. Malkinson's name and the substitution of Vr. Allen for 1'r. prackett's comments. Aid. Dorton moved approval of the minutes. Seconded by Aid. Feieman. Motion passed ,Vo nays. Two spelling corrections on narnes were also offerer' on the "Votes from the Forum or) the Future Library ;Feeds." Chairman Collens announced an the executive meeting of the Committee would be held on personnel matters. Chairman Collens called attention to a memo from the Library Roard an the competition structure indicating their agreement that the modification in the final portion of the competition recommended by the advisors was a satisfactory resolution of their concerns. The memo went on to specify what criteria should be addressee'. The Committee and Board Members went on to discuss refinements in the language. Aid. Feldman clarified that the revised competition process allowed for a review of the winner's previous work. If. DISCUSSION CF ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE RELOCATION OF THE ALLEY AND UTILITIES Chairman Collens introduced Dave Barber. Director of Public works. and explained that Aid. Painey had requested a reexamination of the utility relocation question to see if the estimates for the cost of relocation were reasonable and that the operation would be feasible. Mr. Farber states' that his understanding of Aid. 1= ainev's concern had more to do with the phone cables than with the other utilities. After having reviewed the earlier cost estimates put together by Vr. Pudloski, ,Mr. Parbor felt the estimates were still reasonably close. He affirmed that the phone company relocation was the more difficult challenge since it involved 120,000 pairs of phone lines which will require 2 - 3 months to relocate involving two possible structures. One of these structures would be at Church Street and the alley and one would be over the line in the old alley after the new alley makes the curve to the north. New conduits would be run through the new alley. The matching of the cables is a very time consuming labor intensive activity, but it can be done. Earlier estimates by Mr. Pudloski were around S270.000 for moving the phone lines and IBT officials currently estimate the job to be somewhere between $200,000 and Special Committee on the &lain Library Vinutes - 1!,'arch 27. 1990 Page Two $250,000. During the two to three month period of relocation. it may be necessary to close the north lane of Church Street. The only particular problem indicated by JET officials would be that of handling the continuous data of transmission lines. This is a more difficult process with some possible risk to interruption if something goes wrong, but it is a manageable process. This is not an unusual task, just a difficult one which requires close coordination. A second option to the relocation would be to design the new library in such a way that the open area in the old alley is left intact for the cables with access to those cables throoph either a basement or a access corridor. There would be need to coordinate the design to incorporate such an area with the plans for underground parking at the library, but this is an option which could potentially save the cost cif relocation and its tcr�hnical difficulties. The area for containing these lines would have about a four foot cross section. In response to a questlon from Aid. �llorton. &Ir. Barber explained that there were power centers for street lights and traffic signals in the area of the old alley. He did not see these as creatiny any serious problem. Aid. Collens stated that there had been some fear expressed for the potential of interruption of phone service. the hospital and northeast Evanston for some length of time. Mr. Farber stated he did not set. that as a concern unless a cable were cut accidently during construction. To relocate cables. everything stays in service. As far as power is concerned. only street lights might be interrupted for a period of [free. Traffic lights and other power would be maintained. "'r. Parber stated that he had conferred with Mr. Larson of IPT and that they reevaluated the relocation which would be involved and provided him with current estimates, so he was confident that the information the Committee was petting was current. Chairman coNens asker' where the relocation of utilities would fit in the schedule. Mr. f, arber responded that if a decision were made to move the utilities. that should be accomplished when the alley is relocated and before construction of the new library. He stressed the importance to maintain traffic through the alley curing construction. - Committee briefly discussed the question of a stagine area for construction and the possibility of using the parking lot across the alley was considered. Chairman Collens asked how much information on the utility relocation needed to be forwarded to the advisors for inclusion in the competition materials. Mr. Carter responded that for design purposes. the contestants would need' to know whether or not there was full basement and the L need to consider retaining the phone fines in their present location. M. CISCUSSION OF Z-ONIi\G PEOUJP ENIEN T S APPLICAPLE TC THE LIPP AP1' PPCJECT Aid. Vorton asked if, in the construction of a city_ facility we needed to conform to the zoning. Vr. Carter explainer' that a municipal project did not have to necessarily have to conform to the specific requirements of the zoning district in which it is located. but could be legally handled under the municipal exemption provisions of the zoning ordinance. The philosophy of the municipal exception is one that says since municipal physical facilities are often unusual in their physical requirements. they may not be able to meet the typical yard, lot coverage or other requirements established to guide typical construction expected in that district. For example, you have to be able to build a water works in an P-I district and obviously such a facility couldn't meet the P-1 requirements. Pe stated that the library was located in an P-7 district which was designed to guide the construction of high rise apartment buildings. Thile a high rise l Special Committee on the Lain Library Pinutes - it+arch 27, 1990 Page Three residential structure could easily be accommodated on the site, a library because of its special requirements of needing to keep similar functions on the same floor, results in a different kind of building. The need for large floor areas in only two or three stories makes it difficult for the library to get enough space on their site and meet the P-7 yard requirements. In fact. it becomes impossible. These same needs create a much larger lot coverage for the library than is allowed In an P-7 district. He stated that the purpose of the municipal exemption was not to totally ignore the underlying requirements of a district, but called for a best effort to ameliorate any problems created for neighbors or appearance issues. The municipal exemption is treatee somewhat like a planned development in that one has more latitude in designing a buildiny ane going beyond the strict rules of the district is justified by meeting other important objectives. The higher public good in this case would be a library which can satisfy its internal functional needs as opposed to meeting some particular setback or lot coverage requirement. Ald. Vorton verified that there was a recommendation by a consultant for a minimum 40,000 square foot footprint for the library, ,1+r. Carter responded in the affirmative and indicated that the proposed footprint as shown in the drawing was slightly more than 38,000 square feet. Aid. Porton asked whether this limitation was imposed by the budget or not to have a full third floor. ,Mr. Carter clarified that the resultant area for the footprint was the direct result of the rectangle agreed to by the Committee as defined by each of the front, rear and side yards. Peflected in this rectangle was the agreement to maintain the present setback on Crring;ton and Church Streets as well as the agreement to reduce the north side yard to 10 feet and the rear yard to 5 feet. She asked if the Committee was going to tell the contestants what the exact footprint should be. Aid. Collens stated that the Design Evanston and the staff had suggested that some latitude be offered, but this was not a requirement. It was not a requirement of the competition or the zoning ordinance that the lines be fixed. but it may be a Council requirement. Aid. ,Morton clarified that the Committee would be recommending a full 3 story building, rather than a 2 1/2 story one and the Committee agreed. !'s. Lindwall reviewed a site drawing with Committee members demonstrating the footprint which would result on the site from their earlier recommendations. The refinement of this drawing showed a small triangular piece at the north end left from the old alley right-of-way u hich could be incorporates' as a loading dock. She also showed the 15 foot strip of land between the V'oman's Club property and the proposed cast edge of the new alley which was originally going to serve as a buffer strip. This land could be used for other purposes to help the library function better including moving the alley a little further east. thereby allowing a greater rear yard on the library and a possible ramp area for underground parking. Vs. Cappo questioned why the yards were an issue if we had an adequate footprint? Chairman Collens clarified that the question was whether or not the new library needed to be built within these precise line or whether any latitude could be allowed for design considerations to in some way exceed them. Should the question of the setbacks be left to some discretion if strong design reasons were presented for exceeding them. There followed a general discussion as to why it might be desirable to leave the lines flexible should some reason to do so emerge from the design competition. Vs. Lindwall pointed out if for example, it turns out that from the design that it would be better to have 40.000 square feet than 38,000 square feet, what happens? Or if the building simply needed to be moved one foot this wav or two feet another which might al'ow you the 140,000 square feet, wouldn't it be better to do that? It is the type of problem one really doesn't know the answer to until you get into design. Aid. Feldman raised the ouestion of whether we actually knew how much the entrance way to the underground garage would possible eat into the area available for the first floor space as an example. l Special Committee on the Main library t'inutes -~~'arch 27, 1990 Page Four �'r. Carter affirmer+ that the library should be designed for the inside out and that whatever the requirements were should be allowed to be met. The flexibility that we have with the municipal exemption would allow for this. However, there is a political question of how much is allowable and a question of what we tell the designers would be acceptable. If we get a design which is an excellent design, but in some way intrudes into one of the yards, does that create a serious controversy for the design? Aid. Morton pointed out that the lines on the map reflect what is there now and that it is not necessarily valid for the future. She diet not feel that there was a legitimate argument for maintaining the present lines. W. Carter stated that we had to be clear on our instructions to the contestants as to whether or not these lines were absolute or whether you say that these lines represent our strong preference and if you exceed them you must have a very solid reason for doing so. Aid. Feldman commented that he wanted to make sure that we have whatever support we need for whatever decision that needs to be made an this issue in advance because it would be a travesty if we had a great design which no one would approve because of where the lines are drawn. Chairman Colfens stated that she had similar concerns, especially getting a building designed that we would then agree to because of a zoning issue. She cited the examples because of the Church -Chicago experience in which the Council said they would consider zoning changes as part of the proposal and then decides' not to. She did not want to see the project held up for months and a highly charged situation because of any similar reaction. She stated she would rather take a chance on the designers coming up with highly creative solutions within the constraints of the lines rather than take a chance on the political process effectively handling the questions of flexibility. Personally she would have no difficulty in allowing design flexibility and would be willing to trust in appropriate design resulting, but she wasn't sure of the political part of the process. she felt there was a good reason for selecting the present setbacks and that they fine up with the adjacent buildings is important. Chairman Collens questioned whether the type of preliminary design we would get would be likely to be so detailed as to tell us that we might need one or two feet more to accommodate the building and that if during design development phase we find there is such a need, then take that to the Council at that time. Vs. Cappo felt the outside footprint should be established now, but get some understanding of what flexibility might be allowed by the Council in advance. She expressed her concern over running into a roadblock at the end of the process which would frustrate the building of a new library. Ald. Feldman questioned whether the Council would be willing to make allowances for additional setbacks based upon design because of the likely difference of opinion of design. He is also not sure that Council members would agree in advance for some allowance basee upon some unknown abstract. lie did feel that it was important to discuss the issue with the Council, however. .old. Collens asked if it would not be possible to hire an architect to do a preliminary layout based upon the present building program statement and give us a judgment as to how well it would work within the confines we are suggesting whether we would be running into particular difficulties. She asked if that would not be helpful to have each floor laid out in this way? She wanted to confirm that there was some way in which the program could work within the space available. a ' Special Committee on the Alain Library Minutes - March 27, 1990 Page Five Committee and Foard members briefly discussed the question of entrance locations and various problems associated. Ms. Lindwall commented that the least firm of the footprint lines was the one on the east and that could be more easily modified than the others. Committee members discussed the location of the alley in relationship to the western facade of the Woman's Club. They also further discussed the option use of the east 15 feet of the library's expanded property. Mr. Barber suggested moving the alley as far east as possible to give the architect more space to work with on the cast end of the property. It was noted that this strip could potentially add 2,800 square feet to the footprint if necessary. However, it was also noted that this would result in an increased building costs and that there might be other needs for this area besides building. Chairman Collens reminded Committee members that Council has already approved the footprint being shown this evening and if there are to be any proposed changes, the Committee will have to go back to the Council for approval. Chairman Collens recommended that when the statement foes to the advisors to put in the competition program, a written statement on how to handle the alley location and flexibility question should be included. Aid. Feldman observed that the least amount of controversy would result form offering flexibility on the east than on the south or west sides. In response to a ouestion from Chairman Collens concerning the timing of Council approval on any changes to the footprint, Mr. Carter stated that a new drawing showing the Committee's intent needed to go to the Council before the drawing was included in any packet for the competitors. He further stated the the ,mooning approval process under the municipal exemption would have to be scheduled through the Planning and Development Committee when specific plans are finally prepared for the site. He felt it was important to be clear about the intent of the building placement and envelope with the Council in advance, however. 1'r. Carter indicated that the staff would prepare a modified site drawing based upon the Committee's discussion along with some language explaining both the requirements and flexibility of the footprint. REVIEW OF THE CURRENT BUDGET ESTIMATE Ms. Lindwall reviewed the budget memo submitted to Committee members earlier. Since the memo was written, a cost estimator has been hired to help refine estimates and certain alternatives. The cost estimator will be developing a cost parameters model in which different assumptions can be tested on the computer. Mr. Wright and the staff have put together a detailed list of all of the ecuipment and furnishings that are necessary xhich are far more specific than the earlier estimates based upon a certain cost per square foot for these items. The computer model will also be able to test certain material alternative for brick, glass, or limestone in varying degrees of use. The firm will take the present building program statement and additional materials provided to develop their estimate. She stated that this was the same firm which had supplied cost estimation materials to Green and Company so they are familiar with the project. Aluch more detailed information is now available for them to modify their estimates. ;ss. Lindwall asked for any additional assumptions related to cost that the Committee might want to have examiner+. Chairman Collens asked how the cost estimate might be related to an increased footprint or floor area for the library. AOs. Lindwall pointed out that the library is still talking about a 109,000 square foot building. The question became should extra area be built in? There followed a general discussion on the question of how much space the library needs under its present assumed program which is approximately 109,000 square feet versus whether additional space was necessary to accommodate long range future growth. Other alternatives to be included in the cost estimate was one concerning the moving of the phone cables versus leaving them in place. Special Committee on the Main library Minutes - March 27, 1990 Page Six In reviewing the basic numbers, it was pointed out that the program statement called for 90,000 square feet of functional space and approximately 18,000 square feet for mechanical, elevator shafts, walls, etc. Aid Feldman pointed out some confusion between the building footprint of 38,000 square feet which. multiplied by three floors yielded 114,000 square feet the 109,000 square feet which had been considered for the building volume. It was pointed out that the program statement calls for 109,000 square feet in actual building volume and the building footprint is a more general or theoretical number which shows how much building volume could result from following those lines. Some confusion resulted as to why we should consider changing the setback lines if we have somewhat more than enough space to accommodate the library functions according to the building program statement. The answer was that, until the program statement is actually laid out, we can't be exactly sure that the functions can all be accommodated easily within a single floor and the dimensions suggested by the footprint. It was further noted that there was still reason to allow some flexibility on the yards for special design features. Chairman Collens suggested that the cost estimator prepare figures in the alternative for the 114,000 as well as the 109.000 square feet. The question came up as to whether a third estimate should be prepared for increasing the building volume based upon moving the alley even further to the east. This was considered to be impractical in terms of the potential costs and Ms. Wolin pointed out that the additional land area would simply give more choice in locating the building as well as parking ramps and access. In response to a question from Chairman Collens, Vs. Lind"all responded that the Capital Improvement Program would be going to the Council in June and estimates on the library would be needed well before that time. The construction budget must be establishes' prior to the mailing of competition materials. In response to a question from Aid. Feldman concerning the contacts with the competition advisors. Mr. Wright responded that staff was in the process of ,gathering materials to be included in the program statement and that they would be scheduling work sessions with the advisors. He added that the advisors were pleased with the responses they received at the last meeting regarding the kinds of things people wanted to see in the library. Chairman Collens announced that there was some delay in the recommendation of phased construction going to the Council because additional staff work was being prepared to develop a very thorough analysis of possible alternative sites as background material to take to the Council. This material will presented to the Library Committee at their next meeting. Ald. - Vorton asked what the target date was for getting all of the competition materials out. ,Mr. Wright commented that September 5th was the target date for mailing competition materials, but the consultants wanted to start producing those materials by June 1. Between now and that time, materials will be coming back to the Committee for approval and being passed on to the City Council for their approval. Chairman Collens called for a motion to go into executive session. Aid. Feldman so moved. Seconded by Aid. 1`orton.Motion passed No Nays. ,Veeting adjourned approximately 9:30 P.M. STAFF: 6AZ� biIle - DATE: P ECImes 7Y77J32 -= SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT MINUTES DRAFT NOT APPROVED Thursday, April 19, 1990 Board Room 7:30 P.M. EVANSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Aid. Collens, Feldman, Rainey, Morton and Jullar PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Aid. Collens, Chair STAFF: Carter and LindwaIl OTHERS PRESENT: Cappo, Wolin, Aialkinson, Weise, Gottschalk and Wright I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MARCH 27, 1990 MEETING Motion was passed to approve the minutes of the March 27, 1990 meeting. No Nays. II. REVIEW OF FUND RAISING REPORT FORM THE LIBRARY BOARD Chairman Collens called Committee members attention to a new memo from the Board and asked Library Board president Cappo for her comments. his. Cappo stated that the range for special gifts indicated in the memo would actually be more open ended than the specific range of $10,000 to $25,000. She further clarified that the $250,000 indicated as a target was not a fixed figure for the fund raising. It could run above or below that level. She further clarified that the $250,000 would not likely be for "bricks and mortar," but rather for such things as furnishings, computers or equipping a special room. She pointed out that the Campbell report did not see that there would be the potential for collecting a $1,000,000 in gifts and that the proper figure to plug into the budget would be $250,000. This number represented their best guess at this time. Chairman Collens discussed question on seeking donations at a certain critical time in the competition in order to capitalize on the publicity and enthusiasm. She stressed the need to coordinate the time frames for the competition and the fund raising. In response to a question from Aid. Feldman, &Is. Cappo stated that the use of a professional fund raiser had not yet been determined by the Board. III. REVIEW OF DRAFT PROGRAM MATERIALS FOR THE COMPETITION Chairman Collens reminded the Committee members that they were looking more at the form and content and appropriateness of materials rather than specific language. Aid. Feldman suggested that some statement of the history of Evanston should be in the introduction rather than in the appendix so that competitors would -get a sense of the community earlier in the document. Ms. Cappo concurred that the history and background as shown in the advisors outline was too flat. It needed a greater sense of place. Committee members discussed various sources of text which could give the desired perspective on the community for the competitors. Nis. Lindwall suggested various excerpts from the Comprehensive General Plan as well as the Design Evanston Design Challenge Statement. In response to a requestion from Aid. Feldman concerning aerials and various perspectives of the site, Mr. Carter indicated that the City had such materials. Aid. ,Morton suggested that the Committee agree first to the table of contents of the report and then begin to incorporate the material. Special Committee on the Main Library 14 Minutes - April 19, 1990 Page Two The Committee examined three sets of materials: the general outline and abbreviated text from the competition advisors: the background notes on Evanston's new library prepared for the public forum; and draft text prepared by Jeanne Lindwall to fill out the outline suggested by the competition advisors. They did not find the material in the background notes from the forum to be helpful for this particular purpose. Committee members then proceeded to review and comment on the various sections of the introduction to the program statement. They felt it was important to be firm about Evanston's intent to build a library and not give the impression that it was in any way contingent. Committee members then began to review his. Lindwall's text for corporation Into the outline prepared by the competition advisors. During the discussion for the need for flexibility and expansion of the library, it was pointed out that there was not specific mention of the need for this library to have the capacity to add a fourth floor if necessary. Committee members went on to discuss the relevance of this requirement for both the cost of construction as well as for the competition itself. It was pointed out that ability to construct a fourth floor was a serious design constraint. Committee members were careful to separate the cost consideration for construction of a building capable of carrying an additional floor from the need to design a building; which could support such a scheme both physically and visually. It was determined that this ability to expand vertically had to be one of the criteria for judging entries. Committee members recommended that, once after all the written material had been incorporated into the advisor's outline, a number of the titles be revised for clarity. Under the title, "History of Downtown Evanston," Aid. Feldman commented that he saw little history In this text and mostly a listing of famous architects who had practiced in Evanston. Ms. Lindwall suggested that the section be rearranged to start out with the material used to introduce the building program statement, then follow with the material under this particular heading. Aid. Rainey suggested some history on the library be included as well. In discussing the context for the library, Aid. Rainey expressed concern that the designers not be too constrained by all the buildings that are currently there. Aid. Juliar noted that the architects mentioned in Evanston's history were leaders of their time and that this should promote innovation and design. his. Cappo expressed a similar concern that we don't build a building that simply reflects the past. Chairman Collens observed that the other part of Evanston history is that we are Innovative and ground breakers and that this message should also be included along with the idea that there is a context within which to build. Ald. Feldman also felt that some mention should be made of the great architectural heritage of Chicago and Evanston's relationship to that. Committee members discussed the delicate balance between not instructing architects to come up with something that is old and looking just like everything else versus some bizarre and totally out of context structure and how that balance gets communicated to the contestants. A number of other editorial and language changes were suggested for this section. Under the Design Challenge section, the Committee wanted to be more explicit about future F expansion by clarifying that the design would have to permit both internal and external changes and to be specific about the ability of the building to take an additional floor, when and if needed. Clarifications were made concerning the question of "entryways" their definition and number. While the exact number of entryways had not yet been determined, their number would be limited for security and cost considerations. Aid. Rainey suggested that the wording be stronger on the question of phasing and indicate that this was the intention of the Committee. Dr. A'alkinson noted that there were several places in the text where the question of phased construction seemed to be unresolved and these areas needed to be strengthened. Chairman Collens commented that since phased construction was such an important element that it ought to have a separate subheading in the text. It was agreed to add phased construction as a fourth criterion under the goals and criteria for judging. Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - April 19, 1990 Page Three Under "Goals and Criteria for Judging," Committee members suggested more direct language under number one, "Exterior Image and Response to Context," stating that the building should look good on the site. On criteria number three, "Response to Economic Issues." the Committee suggested the phr;vse, "be within the proposed budget," be Incorporated. his. Wolin asked for clarification on thr, criteria and questioned whether any designs could be eliminated based on these criteria. Chairman Collens responded that specific language concerning the basis for elimination of projects was contained elsewhere and that the criteria were used for the judges in evaluation the proposals. There is a section of the application which contains all of the rules for submittal which the Committee has not yet seen. A distinction was made between the specific requirements and those which rely upon the judgment of the jury. Committee members agreed to add a fifth criterion stating that the design had to have the ability to expand and add an additional floor if necessary. Aid. Rainey suggested clarification of the language under building height to specify the designers should design a building that would be no more than three floors. Under Building and Zoning Requirements, the Committee decided to eliminate the discussion of the municipal exemption and quotes form the zoning ordinance concerning this provision and simply indicate what basic minimum building and zoning requirements must be observed. It was the Committee's understanding that they would be applying a municipal exemption process as required, but the architect did not need to know the details of these provisions. It was the understanding on the specific yards that had been developed to define the Iimits of the building envelope that constituted the critical material to guide the competitors. IV. PARKING AND ACCESS REQUIREMENTS The Committee strengthened the language on access by indicating that parking must be provided below grade with access to the parking from the alley. They eliminated the possibilities of using either Church or Orrington Avenue for access. There followed general discussion of the traffic characteristics of the present alley as well as the current parking under the library. Committee members agreed that the new development would not significantly alter traffic volumes and characteristics. Under utilities, Committee members discussed the locational implications of the water, sewer, electricity and telephone services. Only the IBT cable and the sewer lines had to be relocated. There was the passibility of keeping the IBT lines in place under the building if access could be provided. Committee members agreed to drop the last sentence requiring competitors to indicate whether the phone cable would be relocated or left in place as part of their design solutions since this question would be more appropriately addressed under the design development phase of the project. It was clarified that construction of the alley would begin before construction of the building; however, construction of the alley would not begin before the design development phase of the new library was completed. It would be necessary to first have a design solution for the utilities in relationship to the library before initiating such construction. Under phasing requirements, the Committee eliminated the phrase stating that it was probable the new library would have to be phased and made it certain. Under parkway trees, the Committee eliminated the entire section. Committee members acknowledged the desirability of retaining the trees and the sensitivity of this issue: however, _ they also recognized that there would be additional stress on them during construction. The Committee decided that, since the trees were not located within the proposed building envelope that details for handling their preservation could best be worked out at the design development — stage. Special Committee on the Alain Library Minutes - April 19, 1990 Page Four Under Percent for the Arts, Committee members elected to eliminate any reference to this program at this time since it has yet to be approved by the City Council and that the application for a percent for the arts program would begin at the design development stage and not at the preliminary design stage. V. MATTESON COMPETITION Chairman Collens shared with other Committee members her experience of attending the awards ceremony for the Matteson Library competition. Matteson is building a 21,000 square foot library on a $2.5 million dollar budget. There were 700 inquiries for the competition all of whom paid a $80 fee to enter eventually resulting in about 300 official entries. There were approximately 40 of these entries displayed in the City Hail as part of the awards ceremony. She reported that there were a steady stream of people all day long coming through the city hall to look at the various designs. She was struck by the great variety of designs and especially the variety in the presentations. 5he was not expecting such a variety given the specific submittal requirements. She stated that there were also architects from all over the country which had come to view the exhibits. She stressed that the winning team was a group that one would want to hire as the winners. Their attitude towards working with the Board. library staff, and community was exemplary. Mr. Wright described how that out of town firm affiliated with local groups and how flexible they were in responding to some of the functional library design problem in their original scheme. They also asked to tour three local libraries with the staff to have them point out strengths to be incorporated and weaknesses to be avoided. Chairman Collens commented that she had asked the Matteson people if Evanston could borrow some of their display boards when they were finished with them. She felt this might be helpful for members of the Committee to examine so they would have some idea on the type of materials submitted. Chairman Collens called for a motion to go into executive session for the purpose of discussing land acquisition. Aid. Feldman moved the Committee go into an executive session. Seconded by Aid. Morton. Roll call: Juliar - aye, Rainey - aye, Feldman - aye, ,Morton - aye, Collens - aye. Motion passed The meeting so adjourned at 10:05. The Committee reconvened at approximately 10:15. Next meeting date. Chairman Collens announced that the next meeting had been scheduled for May 3 to look at the budget and the refined cost figures from the cost estimators and to review the final draft of the program materials for the competition., She announced that it did not look like it would be possible to have a draft of the final competition materials by that date and recommended that the Committee not meet on the third. She felt it would be better to cover all remaining items c on the next regularly scheduled meeting of May 17. Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - April 19, 1990 Page Five Chairman Coilens announced that on May 7th an executive session, the Committee would take the phased construction issue to the Council. On the 21 st of May the Committee would take the open session approval of phased construction to the Council. Aid. Feldman stressed that he wanted to see the argument for phased construction made in an articulate way before the Council without reference to the specific real estate considered during the Committee's review. Meeting adjourned approximately 10:20 p.m. i STAFF: /t9a DATE: � l 25Y52/56 61 SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT MINUTES DRAFT NOT APPROVED Thursday, May 17, 1990 Library Hoard Room 7:30 P.M. EVANSTON PUFLIC LIBRARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Aid. Collens, Feldman, Juliar, and Rainey PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Ald. Collens, Chair STAFF: Carter and Lindwall OTHERS PP.E5ENT: Cappo, Chiss. Wright, Gotschalk, ClIswang. IVitsling and Newburger APPROVAL CF THE' MINUTES FOR APRIL 19,1990 Motion was passed to approve the April 19th minutes. No Nays. REVIEW OF COST ESTIMATES Nis. Lindwall explained the basis of the consultant's cost estimates which were based on the program statement detail provided them. She felt that all project cost had been covered in the report. The Committee discussed the implications and cost of asbestos removal at length. Aid. Rainey felt that it was difficult to justify such a high figure and that it needed to be looked at further. his. Lindwall acknowledged that while the figure of $250.000 was many times greater than the original S40.000 included in last year's Capital Improvement Program, it was a precautionary figure based upon some surprises which had been encountered in recent asbestos removal programs. She assured the Committee would be looked at more closely and refined during the Capital Improvement Programming work now taking place. She stated that one of the main reasons for the increase was it was not previously anticipated that asbestos floor tiling would need to be covered and that it is a very large item. AId. Feldman asked when the per square foot cost went to $1 19.000 and stated that he had been under the assumption that the cost was going to be more at the level of 5100.000 per square foot. his. Lindwall responded that the current estimate includes the cost for underground parking, the cost for allowing a fourth floor to be added on and some other additional cost based upon the analysis of the program statement. Further, the cost estimate had been escalated to assume a start of construction in April 1992 and completion in April of 1994. Chairman Collens noted that the budget has now gone from a $21,000,000 project to a $23,000,000 and that whatever numbers are agreed to must go into the budget for the building a part of the Capital Improvements Program. It was clarified that the actual building construction costs, separate from the project cost, were $17.5 million. The competition advisors pointed out that the figure critical for the competitors was the $17.5 million which reflected the quality of the building and the cost per square foot. Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - May 17. 1990 Page Two Ald. Rainey inquired about the utility relocation and the difference In the figures. Nis. Lindwall explained that the cost estimator had based the $300,000 cost on placing the cables in a vault versus relocating the cables. She explained that, at this point. it appears that it would be less expensive to relocate the cable. but we are including the figure for the vault to be on the safe side. She emphasized that the approach of the staff and consultants was to be certain that we had a bueget within which the library could be built. REVIEW OF PROGRAM DRAFT Chairman Collens called the Committee's attention to the draft program for the Evanston Public Library Design Competition which is going to the Council on June I I for their approval. She noted there were only three weeks in which to complete this document and that the Committee needed to get all the questions handled and editorial items cleaned up with one additional draft for the Committee to review prior to going to Council. Chairman Collens noted some problems with the introductory material and reported that a committed of the Library Board had volunteered to do some editorial polishing on this material for the Committer:. ,ald. Feldmen stated that one of the big issues from the beginning was the need to communicate the special qualities of Evanston in this program. He did not feel it had been done and read an eloquent statement which he had -prepared for this purpose. The statement was very well receives: by the Committee and it was agreed to incorporate it into the program. Committee members, Library Board representatives and the competition advisors then proceeded to review the document section by section to recommend any changes to make the document clear, correct. and helpful to potential competitors. The consultants commented on the document from their perspective indicating which statements were most critical. %1r. 011swanp stressed the importance of the maps and photographs in communicating the context to potential competitors. Ms. Lindwall distributed some mockup pages of photographs illustrating the setting and other graphics to be included in the program. The importance of blending the descriptive text with the maps and photographs was emphasized. In response to a question from Mr. Wright, Air. Wittsling explained the difference between the design challenpe statement and the design criteria by which a project is judged. He emphasized that the challenge statement should be relatively brief and concise. It is often used in conjunction with the poster advertising the competition. The competition advisors discussed with Committee members the question of the last jury member to be appointed as being a member of the Special Committee of the ,stain Library Project and the need for additional information. Committee members responded that this appointee would have to remain unknown until after the elections in next April. It was agreed to simply identify this slot as an alderman of the City Council. In reviewing the procedures and regulations of the program it was asked whether a member of the City Council was an employee of the City and whether the exclusion from employees from = participation would eliminate an architectural firm who employed an alderman. They raised the question of whether the firm could compete. but the individual could not. Ann Rainey asked that this question be referred to the legal department for clarification. The competition = advisors urged the Committee to seek advice on this and determine how they want the regulations written. Chairman Collens asked the advisors why they generally exclude employees in a competition. they responded that there were two reasons. One was perception of a conflict of interest. The other is that they may have an undue advantage even though the competition is anonymous. == I Special Committee on the plain Library Minutes - May 17, 1990 Page Three Chairman Collens suggested the need for highlighting or putting together In one place the important Items that might get a competitor disqualified. It was suggested that these appear in bold face type. The competition advisor stressed that they wanted to keep the tone of the document positive and only would disqualify entries for flagrant disregard of the competition requirements. In the discussion of the criterion for judging. Mr. Carter commented that under number one most of the key objectives did not relate to the exterior design image as they were supposed to. After considerable eiscussion, modification of the objectives and criteria for criterion number one, exterior image was agreed to. Additional changes were also made to criterion number two on the interior plans and agreed to. On criterion number three. response to economic issues and cost. minor language change was suggested and the criterion agreed to. Under Criterion number four, ability to phased construction, some explanatory material on why we needed to do phased construction was eliminated and competitors were reminded that the first phase of construction had to function as an interim library. Included was a table of the floor areas devoted to each use in the interim library. The competition advisors had questions about the fifth criterion and felt that it would be very confusing to competitors. They felt it would be sending a mixed message to competitors that had a built in contradiction. They suggested including comments about building expansion under the section on building constraints to make it possible to add a fourth floor even though there may be aesthetic considerations as part of this. Committee agreed to eliminate criterion number five on the ability to accommodate future expansion and reference it under building constraints. As long as the question of ability to expand was in the record and did not affect the present design except to the extent of the need to enforce walls to sustain an additional level. Committee members felt it was important not to compromise the aesthetics of the building to be designed based upon a future possibility of expansion. That aesthetic issue could be dealt with at the time such expansion became necessary. Committee members tightened the language under building height for greater clarity. Under building and zoning regulations, the Committee tightened the paragraph on Boca code to merely indicate that Evanston uses the Boca code. Under the parking and access reouirements, there appear to be some contradiction and confusion in the second paragraph and it was agreed to have this paragraph rewritten for greater clarity. The parking requirement was specified as 78 spaces but acknowledged that there could be technical difficulties in accommodating this precise number below grade. If the design could accommodate the full 78 spaces in the basement, then the competitors would be permitted to include other functions as they deemed appropriate in the basement area. If the design could not accommodate all 78 spaces in the basement. then it is expected that the competitors would maximize the number of spaces rather than including other functional activities. Staff was asked to rewrite the paragraphs on parking and to review them with the traffic engineer to make certain the numbers were appropriate. It was further emphasized that all vehicular access would be from the alley. Under Utilities, the last two sentences were struck. Committee members discussed the section on Awards and Prizes and it was clarified that the number of honorable mentions could go as high as five. This is at the jury's discretion. They E further clarified the section dealing with follow-up discussion with the first place winner to determine whether the sponsor would enter into negotiation to award a design commission. Special Committee on the Main Library Minutes - May 17, 1990 Page Four The competition advisors stressed that out-of-town firms, particularly any less experienced one, would likely affiliate with Chicago area firms if they were selected as a winner. Chairman Collens asked Committee members what further materials or communications would be needed to send to the competitors. General brochures describing the community were suggested. They discussed whether most of the varlous citizen comment collected from the forum and on the cards at the library had been incorporated into the program draft. They discussed whether or not to send the total package of unedlied material and decided against that since Chairman Collens suggested that Committee members review materials to see if there was anything excluded that needed to go into the program. It was stressed that everything in the document had been thoroughly reviewed by both the Board and the Committee and this material represented a very thoughtful process which represented consensus. The public comment material is very different and does not necessarily represent the view of the Committee. It was felt that the prologue statement drafted by Ald. Feldman more than adequately covered a kind of participatory and involved citizenry we have. Chairman Collens reminded the Committee that they wanted to take the program to the City Council on June I I for final approval. In order to make that date, she suggested that the present draft be revised and redistributed to Committee and ward members by May 24th and that members review this draft for any additional changes promptly. If there are any changes needed they should be forwarded to the Chairman by Tuesday, the 29th. If any changes are substantial enough to require one final meeting. this meeting would be held on the morning of June 1st. Chairman Collens announced that she did not see any need to set an additional meeting date for the Committee. The Committee may be out of business, but will remain available to consider additional items in the future. Meeting adjourned approximately 10:15. STAFF: /1� DATE: PEC/mec 7Y66/69