A couple of thoughts—-The Providence study has no allowance costs for an interim library facility, moving in and out, architect and other professional fees ($6M-$7M), technology costs, various city fees including street closure costs (will they be closing part or all of Fifth Ave. or William?), etc.

Also, the Providence Study for the complete reconstruction option envisioned an underground parking component at a cost of almost $20M. (They thought they could get 400 spaces for that amount of money)

Both Providence and Skanska had similar estimates per square foot for just the actual new construction part of the total cost. ….$334 per sq ft for the Skanska study and a high range estimate of $353 for the Providence study. But Skanska added an additional $111 per sq ft for the expense types I mention above, while Providence had an extra $163 per sq ft budgeted for the parking.

As for the renovation and remodel option (tearing down some of the building and leaving some the earlier additions) I think the Skanska study allocates about $303 per sq ft for actual construction while Providence has a high range cost of about $209 per sq ft. The difference may be due to the extra new square footage envisioned by the Skanska estimate, about 38,000 more than the Providence study. And again, Skanska adds in over $100 per sq ft for those other costs, which Providence doesn’t address.

I’m not sure this helps, but your question inspired me to take a closer look at the two separate studies.

I wish Skanska had provided an estimate for a renovation only option.

In fiscal year 2010 the downtown library saw 649,000 (rounded to nearest thousand) patrons come through it’s doors while the branches had a combined 1,119,000 visitors.

In 2011 the downtown had 590,000 patrons visit and the branches had 1,146,000 patrons visit.

So, in 2011, the downtown library had 34% of the total patrons of the system. Compared to the relative size of the branches that seems to be far less than what would be expected.

Downtown Library-----------113,850 sq feet
Malletts Creek Branch-------14,000 sq feet
Traverwood Branch-----------16,500 sq feet
Pittsfield Branch-----------14,600 sq feet
West Branch------------------5,900 sq feet

Even if we discount a substanial portion of the Downtown Library’s space because of it’s unique administrative and storage functions as well as it it’s large and aging mechanical rooms, the Downtown Library still has over half all the available patron space in the Library System and probably is between 55% and 65% of the whole.

Yet it only handles 30% of all internet sessions, 32% of total checkouts, and 34% of all Library visitors.

Many factors could be causing this discrepancy occurring at the downtown building…..length of stay by patrons, different focus, ie. more programming events, collections that consume space but aren’t widely used, etc.

However, without further information, the numbers just on their face suggest to me that the branches are where the action is, and thus may deserve a greater allocation of resources.

As noted in the article, there’s lots of info. about the proposed building project on the Library website and questions / comments directed to “downtown at aadl.org” are posted and responded to by the Director.

Exactly. Surovell has apparently drunk the realtor make-the-sale kool aid. The extra $3 average annual difference in property taxes between the two options (would he really notice that, even if his house is worth 10x the average?) is likely less than most households pay in late fees at the library. Kaplan was incorrect that a shorter term would save the library money, but that doesn’t make Surovell’s case stronger.

That said, property values are still inflated. The board was wise to postpone as long as it has. Let’s get by with what we have for yet a few more years and let things bottom out before committing to any new construction and more long-term debt. (I also doubt that bonds issued early next year would get 5%–unless the rating dropped between now and then.)

Three new branch libraries – Malletts Creek, Pittsfield and Traverwood – were funded with a total of $24 million in revenues generated from the existing operating millage. To do that, the board raised its millage to 1.92 mills – the highest amount that AADL is authorized by voters to levy. [The original millage approved by voters in 1996, when the library spun off from the public school system, was actually 2.0 mills. That amount has gradually been rolled back due to the Headlee Amendment, which was passed by the state legislature and was intended to offset property assessment increases.]

When those three branches were completed, the AADL board dropped the amount that it levies to 1.55 mills, starting in July of 2009. That is the current amount that taxpayers pay to the AADL. The millage rate is set annually – and therefore, could change – as part of the AADL budget process. Budgets are typically approved in May, for the fiscal year beginning July 1.