The Amherst Current

Jones Library Building Project Bid Under Budget

By Jack Jemsek

The Town of Amherst received two general contractor bids for the Jones Library Renovation and Expansion project, with the low bid coming in under the project budget, according to a news release from the Jones Library yesterday. The low bid from Fontaine Bros, Inc. is $35,769,000. Considering project expenses to date and contingency costs, this bid for the “hard costs” places the total project cost approximately $1.6 million under the $46.1 million bond cap approved by Amherst Town Council.

The current Jones Library redevelopment plan promises to bring the following:

  • Eliminate the use of fossil fuels, becoming net zero ready, more efficient and sustainable than the current building, even though the carbon sequestering materials (cross-laminate timber or CLT) were removed from plans;
  • Create expanded, welcoming, accessible and needed space for everyone to accommodate the multitude of programs for children, teens, and adults;
  • Preserve the look and feel of the historic building and open spaces currently unavailable to the public, retaining most of the original 1927 woodwork in place;
  • Provide additional, climate-controlled secure archives for valuable special collections including a permanent home for the Civil War tablets; and
  • Cost the Town less than basic, urgent repairs (HVAC, fire suppression, roof repairs, accessibility), leveraging state, federal, and private funds.

Library Director Sharon Sharry told The Amherst Current that she expects that construction could start as early as next spring, with a reopening as early as the end of 2026. But first she needs to put out a request for proposals for a space where books and other materials can be stored during the construction, and where staff members will work.

And the library is poised for a further challenge from opponents of the project. “I’m sure it’s not the end of the battle,” she said. “I anticipate that there could be a challenge.”

Planning for the addition and renovation has been going on since before Sharry became library director in 2011. In a referendum three years ago, 65.5 percent of voters supported the library project (the vote was 3,201-1,685).

Combined with other fundraising commitments, including over $4.3 million from the community, the Jones Library Capital Campaign (JLCC) has secured just under $9.8 million as of October 1, 2024. The JLCC contributions are in addition to the $15.8 million committed by the Town of Amherst and the $13.8 million initial grant from the MA Board of Library Commissioners.

The project faced a $6 to $7M project cost increase due to a combination of delays caused by project opposition and the subsequent post-COVID pandemic inflation of building materials, etc. So, when library staff got the news of the bids yesterday, Sharry said “Everybody was ‘Wow, that’s incredible! Under budget!'” She added “We really weren’t expecting that. We don’t have to go back to the Town Council for another vote, and that’s amazing.”

Read more about the project on The Amherst Current: Why the Jones Library Trustees Are Seeking to Rebid the Renovation and Expansion Project, June 14, 2024; What’s really going on with the Jones Library project?, August 22, 2024 and Keeping Up with The Jones: Historic Preservation Requirements, October 8, 2024.

7 comments

  1. Letter from Ken Rosenthal:
    Dear Friends,
    In a recent Facebook response to a report on the low bid received for the Jones Library’s effort to rebuild itself, Jonathan Tucker said “Hurray! You outlasted the nit wits.” I think I’m one of those “nit wits.” If so, I’m glad to be in the good company of former members of the library’s board and its most recent treasurer who have said this project is ill conceived and, even with this bid, still overpriced.

    We “nit wits” haven’t been “outlasted”, because this project is far from over. There is at least one large subcontractor bid still to be received, the Section 106 process completed, and the disappointing likelihood that hoped-for federal cash and tax-credits will not be received. Once construction begins, there will be the usual contractor’s change orders that occur in every large demolition and reconstruction project, so you can be sure that the low bidder’s price will not be the final price.

    So far, Amherst taxpayers have been told we can expect to spend $16.8 million ($15.8 M by Town Council vote; $1 M by CPAC vote). But more large expenditures still need to be identified and approved. They include the location and payment for space for the things in the library that must be removed and relocated while construction goes on. And the large interest amount that the Town must pay when it borrows the money to front expenses before donors’ gifts are paid in full and promised state and federal money is received.

    We “nit wits” have also had some things to say about why this project, conceived a decade ago, is outdated and oversized. First, in applying for government money and informing its design firm, the Jones leadership overstated the population it serves. A large number of Amherst residents are faculty and students whose first choice in a library is the one on the campus where they spend their days and many nights.

    And second, evolving technology for the creation, storage, retrieval and use of information means users have more remote access than before, and their physical presence in the library is less. Since this project was first conceived more than a decade ago, the print holdings have been reduced by more than 25%, from 210,547 to 153,011.

    And yet our project is designed to be 63,000 square feet, while Greenfield and South Hadley, whose year round populations are about the same as Amherst’s, recently finished libraries of 26,800 and 23,000 square feet. Now is the time for the leadership of the Town of Amherst and the Jones Library to admit that this project is too big and unaffordable. We “nit wits” have shown them the way to reasonable repairs and affordable improvements, and they should go there.

    Best wishes,
    Ken Rosenthal

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Neither Greenfield, nor South Hadley have the extensive Special Collections that are housed by the Jones. Neither have an ESL program as robust as the Jones. Neither has a book and materials collection as large as the Jones. That said, they are both excellent libraries that have made their communities better.

    Furthermore, despite being the seat of Franklin County, GPL serves fewer people regionally than the Jones.

    Regarding budgetary claims – Mr. Rosenthal is correct in pointing out that the costs of temporary quarters have not yet been finalized. However, there is already an allowance for those costs within the overall project budget. Whether that is an adequate allowance remains to be seen, but it is fallacious to claim that this cost has not been part of the project since day 1.

    The fact of the matter is that we Amherst tax payers will end up with a highly needed library facility that is being substantially/majority subsidized by the State grant AND the generosity of individual, cooperate foundation and other philanthropic sources.

    Finally, I am writing this in my capacity as a resident and tax payers. I will happily continue to disclose that I am also professionally involved in the project, and very grateful for the incredible and dedicated group of volunteers and professionals that are working to bring us a library that will benefit all.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Whoops, I meant to say “corporate” not “cooperate” in my post – Writing on my phone;)

    Like

  4. You’re forgiven the extra “o” and your disclosure of being well-compensated for your efforts is appreciated, Matt, but this demolition/reconstruction project remains a boondoggle.

    Indeed, your rosy rebuttal overlooks the prospect of significant additional costs due to “change orders” in a project of this scale and complextiy, as well as the very significant environmental impact of demolishing the 1993 addition, both direct (transportation and landfilling thousands of tons of bricks, mortar and other materials) and indirect (in terms of the embodied carbon during their manufacture).

    Like

    • Hi Rob – Significant sustainability and life cycle assessment analysis has been done on this project. The direct environmental impacts of demolition are included, and the total environmental impact of the new project is much less than continuing to operate an inefficient building that relies on natural gas. The indirect embodied emissions of the materials in the 1993 addition are not included in a comparative LCA of the new and existing buildings because they are the same for both. For others reading this who may want more information you can find all the detailed plans here: https://www.joneslibrary.org/352/Jones-Building-Project

      Like

    • Thanks Rob for your comment. Based on my professional experiences with more than 30 similar construction projects, I dispute your assertion that change orders will blow up the budget. There are built-in contingencies in the budget – and have been since the get-go. These contingencies were budgeted in large part to account for potential change orders.

      Like

  5. Thank you, Laura: I agree that improving insulation and replacing the HVAC systems (including the gas-fired boilers) at the Jones Library are important merits, but nearly 2 decades ago (when, inter alia, I was Select Board rep to the JCPC) I was already working to appropriate capital funds for that as part of a more modest rehabilitation project. But I confess to some confusion – and perhaps disagreement if you cannot clarify –about “The indirect embodied emissions of the materials in the 1993 addition are not included in a comparative LCA of the new and existing buildings because they are the same for both.” While the new materials which would replace the 1993 materials may have similar amounts of embodied carbon, if the 1993 materials are NOT replaced, wouldn’t that be accounted for as a savings?

    And thank you, Matt: You clearly have more projects under your belt than I do (and for the public projects in the Amherst area which I have helped oversee – notably the design and construction of the Town’/UMass’s Swift Way about 25 years ago, and more recently the redesign and reconstruction of the DCR’s Norwottuck Rail Trail – my roles were advisory and uncompensated). With that said, my own experience with these two (geographically much larger, but in many technical aspects, much simpler) projects makes me less optimistic than you about the prospect of keeping the costs of potential change orders under control (and under the “contingency” in the budget) if the much more complex demolition-reconstruction-expansion Jones project goes forward as planned.

    Like

Comments are closed.