|
Editorial: Big key to city’s future
Op-Ed · March 28, 2014
The energy surrounding the plans to build a larger West Branch Public Library intertwined with building a recreation center/community center in Pedersen Valley in the past few months, and we find ourselves very interested in where it will lead, though a lot of work and thoughtful discussion remains.
In recent stories about the library, we have been careful to say “larger” or “expanded” or “bigger” rather than “new” because all we know is that there seems to be a consensus that the library needs more square footage, but the city has yet to decide whether that means an addition to the current building or an altogether new building.
And it has been quite tempting to write “recreation center” without the “(slash)-community-center” add-on, because while the city has yet to decide what it wants in Pedersen Valley, a lot of folks who filled out the Parks and Recreation Survey seem quite interested in building features that lean heavily toward recreation, like both indoor and outdoor swimming pools.
There are a few big questions to consider when Parks and Rec throws open the doors to City Hall on April 24 to welcome the public for a day-long meeting to tackle those issues.
• Does the community really want the library in Pedersen Valley? A question in the Parks and Rec survey asked if residents wanted to see a rec/community center combined with a library. By nearly a three-to-one vote, people said “yes.” While the question did not say where such a facility would go, Library Board President Dan Stevenson makes a strong point that the city has been talking about putting a rec/community center at Pedersen Valley since purchasing it last year, so the public probably assumed a combined facility would go there.
However, the Library Board was interested in expanding the current building up until West Branch Community Schools released its 15-year master facilities plan in January. That plan would tear down the middle school and send the fifth-graders back to Hoover Elementary while sending the sixth-through-eighth-graders to the high school.
If that happens, the library board argued in February, the majority of their after-school foot traffic would drop off. There is validity to that argument, but if that is the primary reason for a move it would be good to see some data to support it. How many pupils are we talking about, and how many would the library lose? And if that number is extrapolated over an entire year, is it substantial enough to support relocation?
• The question over combining the library and rec/community center is more likely a question of costs, both long- and short-term. Many of those who took the survey left comments like “it worked in North Liberty.” Yes, it is true that North Liberty put their library and recreation center under the same roof. However, the two operations run largely separate. Conversations about combining the West Branch library and rec/community center have revolved around training library staff to help oversee and run the entire facility, not just the library portion. This is a significant, fundamental difference.
• How do you feel about keeping promises? Some 20-plus years ago, several residents donated large sums of money to help build the current library with the assurance that, when the library needed more space, it could build an addition, thus giving their donation extra longevity. The Library Board has had considerable turnover since the 1990s, so the people who made those promises are gone, but the board itself still exists, and 20-year-old library buildings are not considered old by any means.
• On the flip side, do changing circumstances make the promises of the 1990s moot? Back then, Orange Street did not connect Downey to Pedersen Valley and there were hardly any homes in those rolling hills. Now Orange reaches through, making it one of the busiest side streets in the city running through the fastest-growing neighborhood. Perhaps those who donated to the library back then today see a greater value in putting the library on a larger plot of land, even if it has to share space with ball fields, playgrounds and concession stands. Perhaps somebody needs to ask them.
• What will become of the current library building if the library moves out? On paper, the property would revert back to the school district. However, we doubt the school would tear down a well-maintained building. Yet the school’s master plan says nothing about acquiring the library building. In fact, it expected the library to expand to the north and even made way for it by moving the bus barn to the high school.
• And what about the new revelation on Monday at the city council meeting that shoring up pipeline under the Pedersen Valley land could add $250,000 to $1 million to the cost? If the city is still gung-ho to move forward, will that cost be absorbed by the city’s current budget, or will it be included in a bond referendum to build a rec/community center?
The library board says it is ready to move ahead while the parks and rec department is up to its neck in forming a master plan of its own.
Between the school’s master plan, the library’s active work in proposing a bigger building and the parks and rec survey, excitement for building for the future is running high right now. And we’re glad to see it.
Yet big questions — tough questions — remain. We encourage the community to take part in the April 24 meeting at City Hall to tackle these very real issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
