One of my favorite things about Sebastopol is its compact downtown and walkability. I simply love popping by the library with my kids on the walk from Ives Park to get ice cream. I love not worrying about getting in the car, finding parking, fighting traffic just to run a simple errand. Moving our city hall, senior center, and library to the O'Reilly building is a step on the wrong direction, that will shift Sebastopol towards a more car-centric, spread out town without a communal core, like so many other towns in America.
That's also one of my favorite things! I lived in DC for 10 years and never owned a car! That said, *truly walkable cities are walkable beyond their downtown*, and focus on expanding and improving walkable areas beyond downtown
While I appreciate the sentiment, it simply won't make us any more car-centric, it just shifts some of the destinations for cars (see my other reply to you here). We already have three, not one, core commerce areas in Sebastopol. We have the South Gravenstein Hwy (anchored by Fircrest), the midtown crossroads of 116/12, and the North Gravenstein Hwy which includes 2 grocery stores.
I get why people are focused on midtown, because it's where the parades are, tourists go, has the farmer's market, and the larger assortment of entertainment/dining/shopping. But it's not the only game in town, and our civic functions are only loosely tied to its vitality. The north end of town, with an eventual increasing property and sales tax base there, would make far better use of their presence, benefiting the entire city.
I think you missed my point, that being - are we going to spend all this money we don’t have on the pies in the skies that we have already dreamed up, or on this new shiny idea? And, are they counter-productive, taken all together?
In trying to sort out what are opinions and what are questions I can provide data for, your comments ended up somewhere in the middle. I admit that your characterizing the hundreds of hours we spent researching, analyzing, discussing, and planning as a "new shiny idea" is disincentivizing to me. Lumping everything together simply obscures the data necessary to have a productive conversation.
Taking the high road, you have a legitimate question about how all the city/county/state funded projects fit together and which truly benefit the area in the long run. It's important to understand that a city of 7 - 7.5 thousand people servicing an area of 50 thousand people doesn't do it alone. There are different outside funding sources/augments for different kinds of projects.
Yes, it is the job of Council and staff to consider all the projects before them. That is exactly why my committee has spent a year of service, putting together all the information and recommended options, so the current Council and staff can make informed decisions about how to proceed. My committee built upon the fact-finding of a dozen years of previous efforts. That means at least some portion of our idea has lasted through several Council election cycles and staff employment durations. It is far from a "new shiny idea".
Moving into the opinion territory, given what I've learned in this process, I don't believe that moving the 3 highlighted institutions from midtown to our North end commercial area is in opposition to placemaking or the 2 way street projects. The city is more than one place, the vitality ties between these institutions and midtown commercial success are demonstrably weak, and 2 way streets has as much to do with the drive-through crowd as anything else. Again, now we are just exchanging opinions, because these aren't the topics which I professionally investigated, so in this part we are both just rightfully exchanging impressions.
I hope that the Council takes into consideration the whole gamut of needed and/or wished for public projects in their upcoming discussion of the Commons, and does not consider it as a stand-alone matter unrelated to other City needs and initiatives. For instance, if the “commons” facilities are all relocated to the north City limits, is the City giving up already on “place-making” in the downtown core? Does this mean there is no longer a need to spend all that money on reverting the downtown streets to 2-ways?
Thanks for the great coverage Laura. I think the Commons at O’Reilly is the best fit even though it is so far from downtown. Will the city council meeting be held at O’Reilly? With the vacancy of 3 down town buildings (senior center, library, and city hall), will the city be able to sell those to pay for O’Reilly?
This idea is pretty great! The presentation is pretty slick. If the city had its finances in proper order this would be no brainer...but that is not the case:
- City budget in deficit – depleting the reserves every year for the next 5 years. Owes $5.5million to rate payers for overcharges for the last 9 years. Overcharging now for several departments. Where does the city’s contribution come from?
- It appears the city is backstopping the financial risk of poor planning, execution or just a bad economy. Where is the city going to get that money?
- Rental Income to make loan payments is a critical assumption. What rentals are being considered? Will the library, senior center and community center be paying rent? Will there be office space on the second and third floors?
- There is a lot of vacant space around town, is there a market for 40,000 square feet of rental space? Who is going to manage it? What provision is included for vacancies? What renovations would be needed to create the target rental properties (Office, retail?)
- Financials appear to include only $2MM for costs to renovate and prepare spaces for new uses? Is that supported by architect renderings and real cost estimates? Public comments suggest that Library Administration do not feel their requirements are being met. Do they have an option to go elsewhere?
- $4MM to sell existing city properties? Properties for sale in Sebastopol have been on the market literally for years. Assume this is a tear down, what restrictions will the planning commission place on development of downtown property? Can the city even legally sell the senior center or repurpose it?
- Why spend $500,000 to form an EIFD? Why not just pledge the required property tax increase to paying the loan? Why not ask the county to contribute to the Commons?
- What is the effect on downtown? Originally Councilmember Zollman extolled the economic advantage a new library would bring downtown. One assumes no library downtown takes away from the downtown economy. This means less sales tax for the city to spend.
These are only some of the things not being addressed. It does not matter. There are likely three votes to move ahead with negotiations. Two council members are already the architects. Not hard to imagine one more vote is likely. Three council members voted for a budget with an $800,000 deficit and then voted to add new costs at the next two meetings. This will require a substantial investment for preliminary architectural drawings and cost estimates, appraisals and inspections and consultants to seek financing. None of that is in the current budget, new spending no new revenue?
EIFD formation is budgeted at $130,000 on the high not to exceed end, not $500,000. 400% and potentially misleading and even ongoing maintenance is lower per contributed capital contribution from the county. Formation costs are expected to be reimbursed from future tax increment, which theoretically the improvement increases faster.
RE: Overcharging now for several departments - recent work was to lower the ones we know and redo the Cap Allocation - so this is in progress and incorporated into financial planning.
The per-square-foot figure is $199 for purchase, not $199,000. as opposed to $800-$1200 for remodel or new build. Maybe that number could come down but not supported by recent comparable civic builds. The fluid model has places to experiement with different scenarios. Please explore.
On pledging the property tax increase directly to the loan instead of forming an EIFD, that is what an EIFD is. It is the mechanism that lets the city capture and pledge increment. There is no simpler version available. The County's contribution is its share of that same increment, and the agreement is in process now.
Several of your other questions are fair. There is no tenant list, no verified fit-out estimate except the LIbrary and Senior Centers have noted capability to contribute. No determination on what the city can legally sell. I would rather say that than pretend otherwise, but there is interest and possibly it could be a more dynamic space - and yes - a real need for zone change from government.
I thought I saw $18MM listing price. Says $18MM in the article. The property is actually listed at $16,629,000. The "financial model" shows 90,258 feet. Property listing says 41,781 in each building for a total of 83,562 square feet. I'm probably missing something, but the numbers don't add up....yet again....
$199,000 per square foot cost. Three buildings in Santa Rosa from $170-175 a square foot. This is at the higher end of the market. Seems like some room to negotiate?
Will there be upfront costs for the city budget to absorb? $1.00-$1.50 for appraisal? Some preliminary architectural drawings - $3-$5/square foot? Does the city donate the costs any permitting that is required?
I'm glad there's good parking at the O'Reilly site, because very few people will be able to walk there. It's 1.3 miles, and a 33 minute walk from downtown according to Google maps. This is a serious negative to this site. It's not a "center" in any geographic sense.
I’m very troubled tnat there was no community input and no opportunity for questions or comment. If the people who actually use these buildings are not given an opportunity to participate that would be awful and is the antithesis of the values we purport to uphold. I’d like to know what the committee has planned for involving the citizens. Also, If this proceeds, what is the plan for the current buildings we have now in our downtown? We don’t need more vacant buildings and the problems that accompany that. Also, while I recognize there are challenges faced by the library and senior center, why is the focus on this now when we are facing serious infrastructure issues such as broken roads, wells, and sewage problems ?
Hi - Yes this is a finding and we opened for small questions. And this is the coming out of the recommendation yet to be presented where community input is very welcome and vital - questions can be sent at any point! We have been thinking about the current library location and have struggled for at least 7 months to produce something worth our citizens time to consider rather than something of an impracticle wish. Most of the now is the opportunity that may go away - a little rush to secure the growth for the senior center - and the combination is more optimal than tackling the problems independently. Also - the city has been looking at this a while - hence the Lantern study in 2019 and there is reason to be proactive rather than reactive.
Sebastopol's government is already on the hook for impending ratepayer reparations that must be used to improve our dilapidated water and sewage systems. Sebastopol's seniors, who have presided over our infrastructure's deterioration (in particular Sarah Gurney), now want to our saddle future generations with even more debt to protect their own interests.
Buying vacant office complexes based on the supposition that city hall will be able to profitably rent what the current landlords (including the owner of this publication) have been trying to unload makes little sense.
Why not keep city hall where it is, move everything else to a location just beyond the county line and rely on the county to fund it? After all, many attendees of the committee's presentation and supporters of this proposal reside outside city limits.
And there it is again. The "Sebastopol is an island" contingent. Never mind it survives on the sales tax base of 50,000 West Count residents. Never mind it is the intersection of two state routes. Never mind it is a bedroom community that has no industry other than tourism and has 0 chance of surviving on city residents' shopping habits. Just put up a fence and keep our few truly local institutions to ourselves. Don't have any county funding grace our commercial districts. Don't have outsiders work and shop here. Just the 7000 of us are going to go it alone.
That isn't how many of these commenters say it, but that's the message. I guess those of us outside the city line should just drive through and get on over to the 101 corridor.
I too am outside the city line, but drive or bike into town to run errands over other options, mostly because it is convenient to park once and run most of my errands, and because it is our community. If we have to drive to each individual errand, its going to be much less appealing to run errands in town, and the draw of west SR becomes much stronger.
Silas, I completely understand that there are real people with real experiences of running multiple shopping/entertainment/errands in our midtown. I completely understand it's a wonderful experience. Moving civic services around will interrupt some proportion of that particular experience for those particular people.
The trouble here is that while that particular experience does happen, it only happens for a very small proportion of the people who avail themselves of Sebastopol services and venues. Once you net out the people who gain that experience with the new locations, you are down to 1-2% of population affected.
Once you then tease out the multi errand trips that INCLUDE something in midtown AND the Library or Senior Center or City Hall, you are demonstrably now at less than 1%. Yes, it happens but how often and for who? If a civic institution move benefits the City financially, the Library and the Senior Center dramatically improve their service ability, and we reduce the car traffic burden at 116/12, should the Council focus on the needs of the 1% or the 99%.
The 1003-1007 Gravenstein Hwy N location is not in the middle of nowhere. It too, has walkable shopping/dining/entertainment (and a very nice hardware store!). Yes, it isn't nearly as extensive as midtown, but if the point is being able to do multiple errands in one trip, then it has more than enough.
The Commons is a big, complex project that affects a lot of people in a lot of different ways. No civic undertaking is perfect. You've identified a very real personal pain point. That's why every project should be thoroughly discussed, as we are doing here. Ultimately the job of the City Council is to choose the path that confers the most community benefit with the least amount of cost and inconvenience. It's not an easy job.
Mr. Carter's presentation is very well done - so well done that it's a bit intimidating. But, to me, it seems that moving to O'Reilly is the best option.
However, several points to make: 1) both the library and senior center are best "centered" on the ground floor - elevator use would be 'clumsy' at best. Is there enough ground floor space for library reading rooms and the senior center? 2) It's pretty clear that the "O'Reilly project" would exceed the 10% limit on use by for-profit occupants that allows tax-free financing. I'm not smart enough to figure out how much that adds to the cost to the City - and if that would be a deal-breaker. 3) Where does the City find a Swami who can foretell the office rental market 5, 10 years out and whether the City would be able to lease the "excess" space? Is O'Reilly's departure a sign of what's to happen to the office leasing market? 4) I can't quite get the Community Cultural Center into my computations. I think we need to rethink whether the City has any need for the CCC.
I think the City should find a super smart consultant and proceed, carefully, in pursuit of the O'Reilly option.
You are asking reasonable questions. 9 professionals from government, nonprofit, and business have volunteered for a year to research and analyze these kinds of questions. Our recommendations are simply that, recommendations. It will be up to the City Council to act or not act on our recommendations next month. If they vote to proceed, then the project officially starts and will include all the paid professional work usually associated with projects of this size and scope.
People complain about it not being downtown. My unscientific analysis says that Sebastopol is essentially two miles by two miles. That is not far from anywhere. I would rather be able to find parking.
I'm curious... is there any way to include affordable rental housing on the upper floors of any of the buildings (or renovate the warehouse into housing), since housing is such a critical need in Sebastopol?
Maybe it makes long-term sense to move the library, City Hall, and whatever else to the O'Reilly campus, but what I am not seeing anywhere is a plan to reopen the library sooner rather than later. How long are we going to have to go without a library in town? I used to take my kids there all the time, and it never felt overcrowded to me—the children's section was empty more often than not. Yeah, parking could be tricky sometimes, but having a library is way, way better than not having a library. A functional library now, however imperfect, is far better than a beautiful library that may or may not open several years from now.
Nick, you are highlighting a very important point. The library is a shared responsibility with the County. Essentially, the City provides a building and the Library funds its contents and operations. There is nothing magical about its current structure and location. It's been identified as too small for more than a decade now.
I absolutely agree with you that not having a local library, one that adequately serves the entire West County population it's supposed to. The current closure is very unfortunate. As you suggest, even "too small" is better than none. Yet, I ask that you share your concerns with the County Library Administration. The City has acted in good faith to find ways to restore some level of Library services as quickly as possible within the city limits. One the other hand, the County Library administration seems satisfied with the pace and scope of their current solutions.
Please understand that our local branch staff and management have been doing their best as they can with what they have to work with. Unfortunately the kind of decisions and funding allocations necessary to improve service levels are made at the central office, not the local branch. The central office moves at a slower pace.
Hi Kent, thanks for your reply, and thanks for your work on this issue. I am relatively new in town and rely heavily on the Sebastopol Times to understand local issues like this.
What I find confusing about the Commons proposal is, if it moves forward, what happens to the existing library building while the O'Reilly site is being readied? My understanding is that the City Council has set aside money to determine the extent of the mold damage and the cost to fix it, so are we just waiting to hear an update on that? Is it realistic that the library could reopen before the end of the year? I am not sure what more the County Library Administration can do without a building—they have already reopened a book drop and holds pickup in what used to be the community room.
Nick, the Commons proposal (which I have knowledge of) and the current library mold situation (which I am not involved in) are two different issues. The Commons is the vision of a new location and bigger home for the library, while the current closure is reactive process that is very much in progress. Yes, the move to O'Reilly would be a significant, planned process. From what I read and hear, it's very much an unresolved issue about what happens in the short term.
If the City Council approves moving forward with The Commons, then all the usual paid professional workups and studies these kinds of projects require will be done. My committee is made up 9 volunteer professionals who have spent a year scouting out the project and are now providing an informed opinion on the most workable option.
In terms of traffic, at the O'Reilly campus, there is ample parking and it is on a regular bus route. That option would likely relieve midtown parking congestion and move a lot of non-shopping traffic away from 116/12. For the record, at City Hall they report that they get at most 5-10 lobby visits a day. With the existing Library and Senior Center, the overwhelming majority of traffic to them are on single destination trips. And, for both of those institutions, visitors come from all over West County. Moving them away from our busiest intersection should make it better for the shopping and recreation visitors who need to be there.
If the Council decides to do nothing or make a long term strategic plan to build something new, then there is no traffic analysis to be done. It will stay as good or as bad as it is now, depending on your opinion.
Thank you to the 100+ attendees, and thank you Sebastopol Times for covering this event.
It was difficult to schedule an Open House during the middle of vacations and school starts. Hopefully, it's just the kickoff event of many to come, scheduled at various times so everyone has a chance to attend at least one. We want people to experience and get familiar with this Committee's work, which built on years of efforts by previous committees and organizations. We'll need our community's collective intelligence and support to show up for the City Council's upcoming vote on how to proceed.
It's worth noting a couple of things:
1) This Open House was designed to highlight the array of issues that the City Council will need to consider when they vote on it next month. All the research, analysis, and model making up to this point is simply to answer the Council's question from last year: "If we were to proceed with a Sebastopol Commons, what could it look like, where might it be, and how would it be financed?" If they say yes to something, then Thursday's event was just the beginning of an extended public process.
2) A minor note...we don't currently own the O'Reilly campus, so our ability to be inside it is limited and requires a tremendous amount of coordination with the current owner, city staff, and committee members. We did make a conscious choice to not have a formal one-at-a-time Q&A. Instead we made all of the Committee and involved City Staff available for one-on-one and small group conversations. We wanted to make sure the maximum number of people could get their questions and comments heard without some arbitrary 2 minute limit or similar.
Looking forward to continuing our community discussion. The Committee's monthly meetings are public. We've already submitted multiple public updates to the City Council. Please go to the City's website and take a look at all the data and deliberations. Our committee has a wide variety of member professional and personal experiences. It's likely that whatever questions you are having have been considered over the last 12 months, and there is some kind of data there to help you with your consideration.
Also can someone explain what the problems library is having besides mold ? Is the city hall busting at the seams ? I honestly don’t know why these two buildings need to move. I see the senior center space is too small but that is one building and tnere are so many vacant buildings around town. Maybe someone can explain that to me.
Happy to. At least 12 years ago, the library was identified as too small for its West County service population. They currently have about 10,000 square feet and are asking for 20,000 square feet. Creating a 20,000 square foot facility at its current location has been estimated to cost $32 million if it were done today.
The City Halls has a similar problem - it is too small and it was built at the same time as the Library, which as you know is having some issues.
The idea behind the Commons is to bring as many civic facing (not commercial) entities together in a common space to not only save each of them facility costs but to also foster better working relationships between them so the entire community benefits.
I keep coming back to the question "what problems is this solving for the library?". I can't adequately speak to city hall and the senior center's needs, but it's hard to see how this improves the library experience for most people. Is our library small and dated? Yes. But the best library is the one interwoven into the fabric of the town, and its hard to imagine getting into a car and driving to the library. This is doubly true for any Analy students who might be looking for a place to go after school.
Small, dated, and currently closed except for a small temporary space. Our current committee didn't dream up the problems. 12 years of committees, commissions and the County have said the library "as is" is a problem. It hadn't been addressed yet, because the library system chose to first work on the Roseland project (and that is winding down).
The library needs to be open, robust, big enough and with parking to fully serve its intended audience. The Senior Center and City Hall are fully supportive of their moves if the Council approves, because the space and cost benefits are overwhelming. The space and cost benefits hold for the Library as well. And, the simple fact is that most seniors and library users get to those locations by car. City Hall only has 5 - 10 visitors per day, most there to pay their water bill.
I ask that you think about what "improving the library experience for most people" means. Because both the Senior Center and the Library, while located in Sebastopol, are designed, used, and funded as City + West County institutions. Depending on which data you use, the intended service areas for either one are 30,000 to 50,000 people, not just the 7,400 people in Sebastopol.
In terms of houses/occupants within walking distance the current library, there will be other locals who would be now be in walking distance of the Gravenstein Hwy location. The difference is far less than 100 residents. In both cases, a large proportion of the surrounding spaces are commercial, park or open, not residences, so our impressions of density don't actually conform to head count.
In terms of school populations within walking distance, again, the current location is slightly better, but not significantly so when you think about the tens of thousands of people it is designed to serve. For reference, Brookhaven is equal walking distance to both sites. For Analy, it's slightly farther, but they have the trail right there which leads directly to it.
To your point about the core users of sebastopol, my family are one of those West county families you are talking about. From my perspective, when we drive into town, we park one time, and can do our grocery shopping, go to work, go to the park, go to the library, go to a restaurants, go to peacetown, all without getting back into the car. The thought of getting kids into carseats just to go to the library is a non-starter for me.
I cant help but feel that the proposal treats the library as a financial puzzle piece required to make the O'Reilly campus purchase pencil out. I would much rather retain a smaller, dated library in the heart of downtown than trade them for a beautiful facility that forces people to drive.
Appreciate your sentiment and understand your experience. You do represent a slice of the user pie.
For the record, the Commons concept (bringing civic and nonprofits together) only came about because the Library needed a bigger space to fulfill its role as the main West County branch (ask them for details about their branch distribution and necessary size metrics). Neither City nor County has the budget to remake the current facility at the size the County Library System says it needs. The option of the O'Reilly campus purchase is driven in part by the needs of the library, not the other way around.
The vast majority of library patrons drive...their number one complaint is parking. Not everybody. Just most people.
I mentioned concern over empty buildings earlier and still hoping someone can answer. We all know how much Empty buildings tear down the appeal of our town. What would be the plan for these buildings if this proceeds ? Who takes responsibility for this , what are they zoned for? It sounds like people have worked hard but I’ve yet to hear the answer to this questions as well as to the unintended consequences. I would appreciate a well rounded reply to the bigger impacts to our city rather than just the library needs more space to serve the greater community. Why ? Parking? Not enough books? Do they not have enough business? No decision like this is not without greater impacts. I’d be more comfortable if the response wasn’t trying to convince concerned citizens. An approach to a supposed problem
Concern is always justified as a starting point. It leads to questions, which leads to discussions, which leads to answers, which ideally leads to consensus. But this process only works when enough people go through the entire process. I hope by now you've taken the time to read the publicly available, more well-rounded project descriptions, planning reports, and full financial models to address your broader concerns. Unfortunately, all we can really do here in replies-to-comments-on-an-article is to answer specific questions.
In no particular order, here some answers I can provide to your direct questions...
Empty buildings: The O'Reilly campus is currently empty and sits on our 116 economic corridor. Swapping the emptiness of one set of buildings for another would be a wash, except that we realize twice the space for Senior Center and the Library by making this particular swap.
The O'Reilly campus area is already getting new housing. Opening up areas on North High Street would open the possibility of more midtown housing and/or retail space. Both of which would generate property and sales tax revenue that currently isn't there. The City has the power to change use and zoning requirements. Moving the two destination institutions to O'Reilly will be a boon to the adjacent commercial corridor, generating more sales and property tax revenue there.
You ask why the library needs new space, and suggest this is a "supposed problem". This is a City and County identified problem, existing long before the O'Reilly property was even available as a solution. If you want to fully understand the details, please direct your questions about the problem's metrics (books/parking/access/layout/etc.) to the Sonoma County Library (SCL).
One of my favorite things about Sebastopol is its compact downtown and walkability. I simply love popping by the library with my kids on the walk from Ives Park to get ice cream. I love not worrying about getting in the car, finding parking, fighting traffic just to run a simple errand. Moving our city hall, senior center, and library to the O'Reilly building is a step on the wrong direction, that will shift Sebastopol towards a more car-centric, spread out town without a communal core, like so many other towns in America.
That's also one of my favorite things! I lived in DC for 10 years and never owned a car! That said, *truly walkable cities are walkable beyond their downtown*, and focus on expanding and improving walkable areas beyond downtown
While I appreciate the sentiment, it simply won't make us any more car-centric, it just shifts some of the destinations for cars (see my other reply to you here). We already have three, not one, core commerce areas in Sebastopol. We have the South Gravenstein Hwy (anchored by Fircrest), the midtown crossroads of 116/12, and the North Gravenstein Hwy which includes 2 grocery stores.
I get why people are focused on midtown, because it's where the parades are, tourists go, has the farmer's market, and the larger assortment of entertainment/dining/shopping. But it's not the only game in town, and our civic functions are only loosely tied to its vitality. The north end of town, with an eventual increasing property and sales tax base there, would make far better use of their presence, benefiting the entire city.
I think you missed my point, that being - are we going to spend all this money we don’t have on the pies in the skies that we have already dreamed up, or on this new shiny idea? And, are they counter-productive, taken all together?
In trying to sort out what are opinions and what are questions I can provide data for, your comments ended up somewhere in the middle. I admit that your characterizing the hundreds of hours we spent researching, analyzing, discussing, and planning as a "new shiny idea" is disincentivizing to me. Lumping everything together simply obscures the data necessary to have a productive conversation.
Taking the high road, you have a legitimate question about how all the city/county/state funded projects fit together and which truly benefit the area in the long run. It's important to understand that a city of 7 - 7.5 thousand people servicing an area of 50 thousand people doesn't do it alone. There are different outside funding sources/augments for different kinds of projects.
Yes, it is the job of Council and staff to consider all the projects before them. That is exactly why my committee has spent a year of service, putting together all the information and recommended options, so the current Council and staff can make informed decisions about how to proceed. My committee built upon the fact-finding of a dozen years of previous efforts. That means at least some portion of our idea has lasted through several Council election cycles and staff employment durations. It is far from a "new shiny idea".
Moving into the opinion territory, given what I've learned in this process, I don't believe that moving the 3 highlighted institutions from midtown to our North end commercial area is in opposition to placemaking or the 2 way street projects. The city is more than one place, the vitality ties between these institutions and midtown commercial success are demonstrably weak, and 2 way streets has as much to do with the drive-through crowd as anything else. Again, now we are just exchanging opinions, because these aren't the topics which I professionally investigated, so in this part we are both just rightfully exchanging impressions.
I hope that the Council takes into consideration the whole gamut of needed and/or wished for public projects in their upcoming discussion of the Commons, and does not consider it as a stand-alone matter unrelated to other City needs and initiatives. For instance, if the “commons” facilities are all relocated to the north City limits, is the City giving up already on “place-making” in the downtown core? Does this mean there is no longer a need to spend all that money on reverting the downtown streets to 2-ways?
Thanks for the great coverage Laura. I think the Commons at O’Reilly is the best fit even though it is so far from downtown. Will the city council meeting be held at O’Reilly? With the vacancy of 3 down town buildings (senior center, library, and city hall), will the city be able to sell those to pay for O’Reilly?
Yes!
This idea is pretty great! The presentation is pretty slick. If the city had its finances in proper order this would be no brainer...but that is not the case:
- City budget in deficit – depleting the reserves every year for the next 5 years. Owes $5.5million to rate payers for overcharges for the last 9 years. Overcharging now for several departments. Where does the city’s contribution come from?
- It appears the city is backstopping the financial risk of poor planning, execution or just a bad economy. Where is the city going to get that money?
- Rental Income to make loan payments is a critical assumption. What rentals are being considered? Will the library, senior center and community center be paying rent? Will there be office space on the second and third floors?
- There is a lot of vacant space around town, is there a market for 40,000 square feet of rental space? Who is going to manage it? What provision is included for vacancies? What renovations would be needed to create the target rental properties (Office, retail?)
- Financials appear to include only $2MM for costs to renovate and prepare spaces for new uses? Is that supported by architect renderings and real cost estimates? Public comments suggest that Library Administration do not feel their requirements are being met. Do they have an option to go elsewhere?
- $4MM to sell existing city properties? Properties for sale in Sebastopol have been on the market literally for years. Assume this is a tear down, what restrictions will the planning commission place on development of downtown property? Can the city even legally sell the senior center or repurpose it?
- Why spend $500,000 to form an EIFD? Why not just pledge the required property tax increase to paying the loan? Why not ask the county to contribute to the Commons?
- What is the effect on downtown? Originally Councilmember Zollman extolled the economic advantage a new library would bring downtown. One assumes no library downtown takes away from the downtown economy. This means less sales tax for the city to spend.
These are only some of the things not being addressed. It does not matter. There are likely three votes to move ahead with negotiations. Two council members are already the architects. Not hard to imagine one more vote is likely. Three council members voted for a budget with an $800,000 deficit and then voted to add new costs at the next two meetings. This will require a substantial investment for preliminary architectural drawings and cost estimates, appraisals and inspections and consultants to seek financing. None of that is in the current budget, new spending no new revenue?
Three corrections.
EIFD formation is budgeted at $130,000 on the high not to exceed end, not $500,000. 400% and potentially misleading and even ongoing maintenance is lower per contributed capital contribution from the county. Formation costs are expected to be reimbursed from future tax increment, which theoretically the improvement increases faster.
RE: Overcharging now for several departments - recent work was to lower the ones we know and redo the Cap Allocation - so this is in progress and incorporated into financial planning.
The per-square-foot figure is $199 for purchase, not $199,000. as opposed to $800-$1200 for remodel or new build. Maybe that number could come down but not supported by recent comparable civic builds. The fluid model has places to experiement with different scenarios. Please explore.
On pledging the property tax increase directly to the loan instead of forming an EIFD, that is what an EIFD is. It is the mechanism that lets the city capture and pledge increment. There is no simpler version available. The County's contribution is its share of that same increment, and the agreement is in process now.
Several of your other questions are fair. There is no tenant list, no verified fit-out estimate except the LIbrary and Senior Centers have noted capability to contribute. No determination on what the city can legally sell. I would rather say that than pretend otherwise, but there is interest and possibly it could be a more dynamic space - and yes - a real need for zone change from government.
I thought I saw $18MM listing price. Says $18MM in the article. The property is actually listed at $16,629,000. The "financial model" shows 90,258 feet. Property listing says 41,781 in each building for a total of 83,562 square feet. I'm probably missing something, but the numbers don't add up....yet again....
$199,000 per square foot cost. Three buildings in Santa Rosa from $170-175 a square foot. This is at the higher end of the market. Seems like some room to negotiate?
Will there be upfront costs for the city budget to absorb? $1.00-$1.50 for appraisal? Some preliminary architectural drawings - $3-$5/square foot? Does the city donate the costs any permitting that is required?
The is a third warehouse building.
I'm glad there's good parking at the O'Reilly site, because very few people will be able to walk there. It's 1.3 miles, and a 33 minute walk from downtown according to Google maps. This is a serious negative to this site. It's not a "center" in any geographic sense.
I’m very troubled tnat there was no community input and no opportunity for questions or comment. If the people who actually use these buildings are not given an opportunity to participate that would be awful and is the antithesis of the values we purport to uphold. I’d like to know what the committee has planned for involving the citizens. Also, If this proceeds, what is the plan for the current buildings we have now in our downtown? We don’t need more vacant buildings and the problems that accompany that. Also, while I recognize there are challenges faced by the library and senior center, why is the focus on this now when we are facing serious infrastructure issues such as broken roads, wells, and sewage problems ?
Why, indeed?
Hi - Yes this is a finding and we opened for small questions. And this is the coming out of the recommendation yet to be presented where community input is very welcome and vital - questions can be sent at any point! We have been thinking about the current library location and have struggled for at least 7 months to produce something worth our citizens time to consider rather than something of an impracticle wish. Most of the now is the opportunity that may go away - a little rush to secure the growth for the senior center - and the combination is more optimal than tackling the problems independently. Also - the city has been looking at this a while - hence the Lantern study in 2019 and there is reason to be proactive rather than reactive.
Where's the money?
Sebastopol's government is already on the hook for impending ratepayer reparations that must be used to improve our dilapidated water and sewage systems. Sebastopol's seniors, who have presided over our infrastructure's deterioration (in particular Sarah Gurney), now want to our saddle future generations with even more debt to protect their own interests.
Buying vacant office complexes based on the supposition that city hall will be able to profitably rent what the current landlords (including the owner of this publication) have been trying to unload makes little sense.
Why not keep city hall where it is, move everything else to a location just beyond the county line and rely on the county to fund it? After all, many attendees of the committee's presentation and supporters of this proposal reside outside city limits.
“The owner of this publication” is not a landlord of the O’Reilly property and has had no ownership interest since 2018.
Apologies for the misconception, Dale. I'm glad to hear you were able to get out while the getting was good. ;-)
And there it is again. The "Sebastopol is an island" contingent. Never mind it survives on the sales tax base of 50,000 West Count residents. Never mind it is the intersection of two state routes. Never mind it is a bedroom community that has no industry other than tourism and has 0 chance of surviving on city residents' shopping habits. Just put up a fence and keep our few truly local institutions to ourselves. Don't have any county funding grace our commercial districts. Don't have outsiders work and shop here. Just the 7000 of us are going to go it alone.
That isn't how many of these commenters say it, but that's the message. I guess those of us outside the city line should just drive through and get on over to the 101 corridor.
I too am outside the city line, but drive or bike into town to run errands over other options, mostly because it is convenient to park once and run most of my errands, and because it is our community. If we have to drive to each individual errand, its going to be much less appealing to run errands in town, and the draw of west SR becomes much stronger.
Silas, I completely understand that there are real people with real experiences of running multiple shopping/entertainment/errands in our midtown. I completely understand it's a wonderful experience. Moving civic services around will interrupt some proportion of that particular experience for those particular people.
The trouble here is that while that particular experience does happen, it only happens for a very small proportion of the people who avail themselves of Sebastopol services and venues. Once you net out the people who gain that experience with the new locations, you are down to 1-2% of population affected.
Once you then tease out the multi errand trips that INCLUDE something in midtown AND the Library or Senior Center or City Hall, you are demonstrably now at less than 1%. Yes, it happens but how often and for who? If a civic institution move benefits the City financially, the Library and the Senior Center dramatically improve their service ability, and we reduce the car traffic burden at 116/12, should the Council focus on the needs of the 1% or the 99%.
The 1003-1007 Gravenstein Hwy N location is not in the middle of nowhere. It too, has walkable shopping/dining/entertainment (and a very nice hardware store!). Yes, it isn't nearly as extensive as midtown, but if the point is being able to do multiple errands in one trip, then it has more than enough.
The Commons is a big, complex project that affects a lot of people in a lot of different ways. No civic undertaking is perfect. You've identified a very real personal pain point. That's why every project should be thoroughly discussed, as we are doing here. Ultimately the job of the City Council is to choose the path that confers the most community benefit with the least amount of cost and inconvenience. It's not an easy job.
I think people are entitled to their opinion and shouldn’t be judged for it.
Mr. Carter's presentation is very well done - so well done that it's a bit intimidating. But, to me, it seems that moving to O'Reilly is the best option.
However, several points to make: 1) both the library and senior center are best "centered" on the ground floor - elevator use would be 'clumsy' at best. Is there enough ground floor space for library reading rooms and the senior center? 2) It's pretty clear that the "O'Reilly project" would exceed the 10% limit on use by for-profit occupants that allows tax-free financing. I'm not smart enough to figure out how much that adds to the cost to the City - and if that would be a deal-breaker. 3) Where does the City find a Swami who can foretell the office rental market 5, 10 years out and whether the City would be able to lease the "excess" space? Is O'Reilly's departure a sign of what's to happen to the office leasing market? 4) I can't quite get the Community Cultural Center into my computations. I think we need to rethink whether the City has any need for the CCC.
I think the City should find a super smart consultant and proceed, carefully, in pursuit of the O'Reilly option.
You are asking reasonable questions. 9 professionals from government, nonprofit, and business have volunteered for a year to research and analyze these kinds of questions. Our recommendations are simply that, recommendations. It will be up to the City Council to act or not act on our recommendations next month. If they vote to proceed, then the project officially starts and will include all the paid professional work usually associated with projects of this size and scope.
People complain about it not being downtown. My unscientific analysis says that Sebastopol is essentially two miles by two miles. That is not far from anywhere. I would rather be able to find parking.
I'm curious... is there any way to include affordable rental housing on the upper floors of any of the buildings (or renovate the warehouse into housing), since housing is such a critical need in Sebastopol?
Maybe it makes long-term sense to move the library, City Hall, and whatever else to the O'Reilly campus, but what I am not seeing anywhere is a plan to reopen the library sooner rather than later. How long are we going to have to go without a library in town? I used to take my kids there all the time, and it never felt overcrowded to me—the children's section was empty more often than not. Yeah, parking could be tricky sometimes, but having a library is way, way better than not having a library. A functional library now, however imperfect, is far better than a beautiful library that may or may not open several years from now.
Nick, you are highlighting a very important point. The library is a shared responsibility with the County. Essentially, the City provides a building and the Library funds its contents and operations. There is nothing magical about its current structure and location. It's been identified as too small for more than a decade now.
I absolutely agree with you that not having a local library, one that adequately serves the entire West County population it's supposed to. The current closure is very unfortunate. As you suggest, even "too small" is better than none. Yet, I ask that you share your concerns with the County Library Administration. The City has acted in good faith to find ways to restore some level of Library services as quickly as possible within the city limits. One the other hand, the County Library administration seems satisfied with the pace and scope of their current solutions.
Please understand that our local branch staff and management have been doing their best as they can with what they have to work with. Unfortunately the kind of decisions and funding allocations necessary to improve service levels are made at the central office, not the local branch. The central office moves at a slower pace.
Hi Kent, thanks for your reply, and thanks for your work on this issue. I am relatively new in town and rely heavily on the Sebastopol Times to understand local issues like this.
What I find confusing about the Commons proposal is, if it moves forward, what happens to the existing library building while the O'Reilly site is being readied? My understanding is that the City Council has set aside money to determine the extent of the mold damage and the cost to fix it, so are we just waiting to hear an update on that? Is it realistic that the library could reopen before the end of the year? I am not sure what more the County Library Administration can do without a building—they have already reopened a book drop and holds pickup in what used to be the community room.
Nick, the Commons proposal (which I have knowledge of) and the current library mold situation (which I am not involved in) are two different issues. The Commons is the vision of a new location and bigger home for the library, while the current closure is reactive process that is very much in progress. Yes, the move to O'Reilly would be a significant, planned process. From what I read and hear, it's very much an unresolved issue about what happens in the short term.
Was there any traffic analysis done ?
If the City Council approves moving forward with The Commons, then all the usual paid professional workups and studies these kinds of projects require will be done. My committee is made up 9 volunteer professionals who have spent a year scouting out the project and are now providing an informed opinion on the most workable option.
In terms of traffic, at the O'Reilly campus, there is ample parking and it is on a regular bus route. That option would likely relieve midtown parking congestion and move a lot of non-shopping traffic away from 116/12. For the record, at City Hall they report that they get at most 5-10 lobby visits a day. With the existing Library and Senior Center, the overwhelming majority of traffic to them are on single destination trips. And, for both of those institutions, visitors come from all over West County. Moving them away from our busiest intersection should make it better for the shopping and recreation visitors who need to be there.
If the Council decides to do nothing or make a long term strategic plan to build something new, then there is no traffic analysis to be done. It will stay as good or as bad as it is now, depending on your opinion.
Thank you to the 100+ attendees, and thank you Sebastopol Times for covering this event.
It was difficult to schedule an Open House during the middle of vacations and school starts. Hopefully, it's just the kickoff event of many to come, scheduled at various times so everyone has a chance to attend at least one. We want people to experience and get familiar with this Committee's work, which built on years of efforts by previous committees and organizations. We'll need our community's collective intelligence and support to show up for the City Council's upcoming vote on how to proceed.
It's worth noting a couple of things:
1) This Open House was designed to highlight the array of issues that the City Council will need to consider when they vote on it next month. All the research, analysis, and model making up to this point is simply to answer the Council's question from last year: "If we were to proceed with a Sebastopol Commons, what could it look like, where might it be, and how would it be financed?" If they say yes to something, then Thursday's event was just the beginning of an extended public process.
2) A minor note...we don't currently own the O'Reilly campus, so our ability to be inside it is limited and requires a tremendous amount of coordination with the current owner, city staff, and committee members. We did make a conscious choice to not have a formal one-at-a-time Q&A. Instead we made all of the Committee and involved City Staff available for one-on-one and small group conversations. We wanted to make sure the maximum number of people could get their questions and comments heard without some arbitrary 2 minute limit or similar.
Looking forward to continuing our community discussion. The Committee's monthly meetings are public. We've already submitted multiple public updates to the City Council. Please go to the City's website and take a look at all the data and deliberations. Our committee has a wide variety of member professional and personal experiences. It's likely that whatever questions you are having have been considered over the last 12 months, and there is some kind of data there to help you with your consideration.
Also can someone explain what the problems library is having besides mold ? Is the city hall busting at the seams ? I honestly don’t know why these two buildings need to move. I see the senior center space is too small but that is one building and tnere are so many vacant buildings around town. Maybe someone can explain that to me.
Happy to. At least 12 years ago, the library was identified as too small for its West County service population. They currently have about 10,000 square feet and are asking for 20,000 square feet. Creating a 20,000 square foot facility at its current location has been estimated to cost $32 million if it were done today.
The City Halls has a similar problem - it is too small and it was built at the same time as the Library, which as you know is having some issues.
The idea behind the Commons is to bring as many civic facing (not commercial) entities together in a common space to not only save each of them facility costs but to also foster better working relationships between them so the entire community benefits.
I keep coming back to the question "what problems is this solving for the library?". I can't adequately speak to city hall and the senior center's needs, but it's hard to see how this improves the library experience for most people. Is our library small and dated? Yes. But the best library is the one interwoven into the fabric of the town, and its hard to imagine getting into a car and driving to the library. This is doubly true for any Analy students who might be looking for a place to go after school.
Small, dated, and currently closed except for a small temporary space. Our current committee didn't dream up the problems. 12 years of committees, commissions and the County have said the library "as is" is a problem. It hadn't been addressed yet, because the library system chose to first work on the Roseland project (and that is winding down).
The library needs to be open, robust, big enough and with parking to fully serve its intended audience. The Senior Center and City Hall are fully supportive of their moves if the Council approves, because the space and cost benefits are overwhelming. The space and cost benefits hold for the Library as well. And, the simple fact is that most seniors and library users get to those locations by car. City Hall only has 5 - 10 visitors per day, most there to pay their water bill.
I ask that you think about what "improving the library experience for most people" means. Because both the Senior Center and the Library, while located in Sebastopol, are designed, used, and funded as City + West County institutions. Depending on which data you use, the intended service areas for either one are 30,000 to 50,000 people, not just the 7,400 people in Sebastopol.
In terms of houses/occupants within walking distance the current library, there will be other locals who would be now be in walking distance of the Gravenstein Hwy location. The difference is far less than 100 residents. In both cases, a large proportion of the surrounding spaces are commercial, park or open, not residences, so our impressions of density don't actually conform to head count.
In terms of school populations within walking distance, again, the current location is slightly better, but not significantly so when you think about the tens of thousands of people it is designed to serve. For reference, Brookhaven is equal walking distance to both sites. For Analy, it's slightly farther, but they have the trail right there which leads directly to it.
To your point about the core users of sebastopol, my family are one of those West county families you are talking about. From my perspective, when we drive into town, we park one time, and can do our grocery shopping, go to work, go to the park, go to the library, go to a restaurants, go to peacetown, all without getting back into the car. The thought of getting kids into carseats just to go to the library is a non-starter for me.
I cant help but feel that the proposal treats the library as a financial puzzle piece required to make the O'Reilly campus purchase pencil out. I would much rather retain a smaller, dated library in the heart of downtown than trade them for a beautiful facility that forces people to drive.
Appreciate your sentiment and understand your experience. You do represent a slice of the user pie.
For the record, the Commons concept (bringing civic and nonprofits together) only came about because the Library needed a bigger space to fulfill its role as the main West County branch (ask them for details about their branch distribution and necessary size metrics). Neither City nor County has the budget to remake the current facility at the size the County Library System says it needs. The option of the O'Reilly campus purchase is driven in part by the needs of the library, not the other way around.
The vast majority of library patrons drive...their number one complaint is parking. Not everybody. Just most people.
I mentioned concern over empty buildings earlier and still hoping someone can answer. We all know how much Empty buildings tear down the appeal of our town. What would be the plan for these buildings if this proceeds ? Who takes responsibility for this , what are they zoned for? It sounds like people have worked hard but I’ve yet to hear the answer to this questions as well as to the unintended consequences. I would appreciate a well rounded reply to the bigger impacts to our city rather than just the library needs more space to serve the greater community. Why ? Parking? Not enough books? Do they not have enough business? No decision like this is not without greater impacts. I’d be more comfortable if the response wasn’t trying to convince concerned citizens. An approach to a supposed problem
has to take a broader view in my opinion.
Concern is always justified as a starting point. It leads to questions, which leads to discussions, which leads to answers, which ideally leads to consensus. But this process only works when enough people go through the entire process. I hope by now you've taken the time to read the publicly available, more well-rounded project descriptions, planning reports, and full financial models to address your broader concerns. Unfortunately, all we can really do here in replies-to-comments-on-an-article is to answer specific questions.
In no particular order, here some answers I can provide to your direct questions...
Empty buildings: The O'Reilly campus is currently empty and sits on our 116 economic corridor. Swapping the emptiness of one set of buildings for another would be a wash, except that we realize twice the space for Senior Center and the Library by making this particular swap.
The O'Reilly campus area is already getting new housing. Opening up areas on North High Street would open the possibility of more midtown housing and/or retail space. Both of which would generate property and sales tax revenue that currently isn't there. The City has the power to change use and zoning requirements. Moving the two destination institutions to O'Reilly will be a boon to the adjacent commercial corridor, generating more sales and property tax revenue there.
You ask why the library needs new space, and suggest this is a "supposed problem". This is a City and County identified problem, existing long before the O'Reilly property was even available as a solution. If you want to fully understand the details, please direct your questions about the problem's metrics (books/parking/access/layout/etc.) to the Sonoma County Library (SCL).
For a highlight of their thoughts, see the public report to the City Council 2 years ago: https://www.cityofsebastopol.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Agenda-Item-Number-12-Library-Ad-Hoc-Committee-Report.pdf
From that report:
"C. INADEQUATE BUILDING = RESTRICTS SERVICE POTENTIAL: In 2017 and
2022 the SCL commissioned two independently conducted Facilities Master Plans.
The Facilities Master Plans both described aging buildings where maintenance had
been deferred from lack of funds and constraints from the pandemic. To fully
modernize the library system, the total cost could exceed $200 million over 25 years.
SCL is not solely responsible for these expenses; they are shared by local
municipalities and the Library, supported by fundraising by the Sonoma County
Public Library Foundation.
The 2017 Facilities Master Plan included a comprehensive library system assessment
which reviewed (1) Who is Sebastopol Library Serving? (2) How is library space
programmed? and, (3) How is library space being used?35 The findings,
Sebastopol has a slightly above average rate of library visits relative to its
population.
Sebastopol has very little space for the number of borrowers it has. It also has a
below average number of items held for the number for library visits (patrons) it
has. (Emphasis added)
The 2023 Facilities Master Plan Pages 52-53 found that,
Given the inadequacies of the existing building, it is strongly
recommended that it be replaced with a larger branch of at least 20,000
square feet. ...(Emphasis added)
"Both reports determined that the library's facility is too small for the number of
patrons it serves.
In fact, the 2023 Master Plan concluded:
A new Sebastopol Library building will be the perfect model for a flexible,
resilient, and modernized library system, able to serve the community for
generations. (Emphasis added)
In the letter of April 3, 2023 Library Director, Erika Thibault, states:
The Sebastopol Branch is known for its innovation and dedication to
service, as the foot traffic in the branch demonstrates. It's also a small and
inadequate space for what your community needs and expects from a regional
library. (Emphasis added)
This assessment of the functionality of the present library building as too small will
not improve merely with the passage of time."