• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Capital Facilities Committee 100201rev

Capital Facilities Committee 100201rev



Presentation ot the City of Appleton's Capital Facilities Committee for their decision on whether to pursue branch libraries

Presentation ot the City of Appleton's Capital Facilities Committee for their decision on whether to pursue branch libraries



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



3 Embeds 40

http://newcybrary.blogspot.com 37
http://feeds.feedburner.com 2
http://static.slidesharecdn.com 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Capital Facilities Committee 100201rev Capital Facilities Committee 100201rev Presentation Transcript

    • Capital Facilities CommitteeBranch library decision
      February 1, 2010
    • Background & decision
      Review 2008 needs study
      Details on consideration of branches
      Review 2009 program design study
      Branch library/libraries vs. central library
    • 2008 needs studyProcess
      Consultant selected via RFP process & interviews involving Director of Facilities, Library Board, Library staff
      Review of current facility
      Community surveys
      Focus groups
      Discussions with Library Board
      Public town hall meetings
    • 2008 Town hall meetings
      DVDs of these meetings are available for checkout; slideshows of the presentations can be seen at
    • 2008 needs studyConclusions
      Current facility has design problems relative to current and projected use:
      Meeting room access
      Technology usability
      Staff & user efficiency
    • 2008 needs studyRecommendations
      Short-term (a= underway)
      RFID (Radio Frequency ID materials security) a
      Move toward AMHS(Automated Materials Handling System)
      Increased self-checkout units
      Increased bandwidth for Internet connection a
      Better seating w/power & data distribution a
    • 2008 needs studyRecommendations
      New building
      Single central downtown site, not branches
      Sustainable / green design
      Adequate space
      ADA accessibility
      Efficiency for staff and public
      Drive-up window
      Increased access to technology
      Increased meeting rooms, accessible outside library hours
      Improved security for materials
    • A branch: an obvious solution?
      It’s Your Call, Post-Crescent, Jan. 24
      “BETTER IDEA: There has been a lot of talk about spending $40-million plus for a new library. Instead, remove some things that don’t have to be in the same building. There are a lot of empty stores on College Avenue, Conkey’s bookstore for one. Better idea – get some books out there in different areas for people who don’t normally get down to the old library. An example is Northland Mall. Winslow’s Hallmark Shop has been empty for quite awhile. Pay rent to the mall; hire a carpenter to put in bookshelves; and stack them full of books. It’s a nice quiet area with a big parking lot. The added traffic would probably help the stores that are in the mall. And I would be the first one in line for a library card.”
      Phyllis Thatcher,
    • For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
                  H.L. Mencken
    • Staff has affinity for brANCHES
      Many reasons some staff like the idea:
      An alternative, more low-key workplace
      Opportunities for staff
      Local community spirit
      Neighborhood feeling
      Get to know a smaller group of patrons
      Advantages of working at a small library with the resources of a large library
      Able to work as a generalist, serving all ages & functions
      Possible promotional opportunity for “branch manager” position
      Ability to park for free & close to workplace
      Due to low capital cost, could be a relatively “easy sell”
      But … this is not about what staff would like, or even what’s easy -- it’s about what’s right for the whole community in the long term.
    • Single library vs. branch –relative advantages
    • branch operating costs
      Features of main library duplicated at branch
      Check-in/Checkout equipment
      Building envelope & associated upkeep
      Janitorial services & supplies
      Additional requirements of a branch
      Transportation of materials & personnel
      Estimated annual operating cost of possible Greenville library, comparable in scope to a full-service branch: $348K in 2004, with some facilities costs
      Won’t necessarily reduce costs at central library
    • Single library operating costs
      Features of new or remodeled single library: opportunities for cost-effective service increases
      Reduced service points
      Centralized Check-in/Checkout equipment & operations
      Enhanced community center function via expanded, more accessible meeting rooms
      Building envelope & associated upkeep
      Opportunity for green construction – demonstrating sustainability in City’s most public building
    • No CLEAR LOCATION in need of a branch
      APL is a regional asset
      No clear neighborhood need
      City resident users live within 15 minutes
      APL borrower distribution
      March 2008: Each red dot is a
      household which borrowed
      materials; due to scale, many
      dots in City are not distinctly shown.
      Other public libraries
      “…when libraries are located in downtown, village, or neighborhood centers, there’s also a special synergy at work. Libraries generate increased business for local merchants, while those shopping or working downtown visit the library as part of their day.”
      “Required now is the will to understand that Appleton downtown, as a business entity and as an economic engine for the region, requires a dynamic, economic infusion to nurture a development curve that has been flat for far too long...”
    • 2008 Study: branch notes
      [Town Hall Meeting Results, p.21] “Participants also discussed the feasibility of branches and of other locations for the APL.
      While a few participants, especially those from areas outside the city itself, were adamant about wanting a branch nearer their homes, few participants supported the concept of branches (or satellites as they were sometimes called). Those favoring branches talked about potential library users who were not currently using APL. Those opposing branches were concerned that branches would reduce the resources available to a central library and would draw people away from downtown.”
      [Conclusions, p.51] “a branch library would diminish the usage of the current central library and effect the ability of the staff to deliver enhanced programming via two different locations.”
    • 2009 program design study
      Consultant selected via RFP process & interviews involving Director of Facilities, Library Board, Library staff
      Review of current facility & 2008 study
      Discussions with Library Board & staff
      Development and testing of alternative program designs
      Four expansion scenarios
      Four new building scenarios
      Presentation to Library Board & Common Council
    • 2009 program design study
      Conclusion & Recommendations
      Agreed with conclusions from 2008
      Validated single building rather than branch
      Validated RFID & AMHS
      A new library building would offer the best advantage for service improvements & operating efficiency
    • Branch conclusion
      Two collections,
      Two buildings,
      Two staffs:
      Too expensive.
    • Summary / Recommendation to capital facilities committee
      Based on
      Costs of establishing and maintaining an additional city facility
      Costs of staffing
      Costs of duplication of services
      Impact on downtown
      Appleton should continue to develop a single central library with a new or expanded facility rather than developing branches