Mass Historic Commission Rejects Town’s Analysis for Minimizing Adverse Effects of Jones Library Expansion Project
Historic Jones Library (1932) Source: joneslibrary.org
Commission Requests Additional Information to Move Negotiations Forward
The Town of Amherst is currently in the process of completing a Section 106 review to identify adverse effects of the Jones Library Expansion Project on the historic character of the library building and the historic district in which it resides. To conclude that process the town must negotiate a memorandum of agreement with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) on strategies it will adopt to avoid, minimize, or mitigate those adverse effects. Several adverse effects were identified by the town in the early stages of the review. The Massachusetts Historic Commission (MHC), acting as the SHPO, appeared to reject the town’s “alternatives analysis” in a letter sent on December 19, 2024, and requested additional information from the town before discussions about the disposition of the project can continue.
In its alternatives analysis, submitted to the MHC on November 22, 2024, the town indicated that it has already done all that it can to minimize adverse effects and intends to make no changes to the project design. This is at least the second time that the town has indicated its belief that it has fulfilled the Section 106 requirements only to meet objections from the MHC. The town had previously indicated that its Section 106 review would be concluded by November 15.
The successful completion of a Section 106 review is required in order for $2.1 million in grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) that have been awarded provisionally to the project can be released. Successful completion of the review requires that the SHPO and the Town of Amherst reach an agreement on how identified adverse effects will be addressed. The Section 106 review is also required to satisfy state law. The Jones Library is listed on the National Register of Historic Places as a contributing building in the Historic Amherst Central Business District. This designation mandates compliance with state and federal historic preservation law.
Brona Simon, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Historic Commission, informed the town, in a letter dated December 19, 2024 that, “The alternatives analysis that you submitted principally describes alternatives that were rejected as the project proceeded to design without consultation with the MHC. As such, it justified and explains how the current design was adopted as final. Additional analysis is required in order to make a good faith effort to explore alternatives and modifications that would avoid or minimize adverse effects of the proposed project (see 36 CFR 800.6 (a)).”
The letter goes on to request additional information about replacing the roof in kind, that is, with real slate rather than with the proposed synthetic slate, requesting both a cost and life cycle analysis. It also asks the town to seek ways to avoid cutting a hole in the historic Amity Street-facing stone façade, recommending the adoption of free standing book return bins as an alternative. The letter also requests that the town forward complete results of a recently conducted archaeological survey of the property. Read the full letter here.
Yet to be completed before the HUD grant funds can be released is an environmental impact analysis mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act. This review requires a public participation component. The town has yet to provide the public with any information on the mandated NEPA review.
Responding to the MHC’s letter will require additional time and the Section 106 review also calls for input from consulting parties before an agreement can be settled upon. The project received an extension from the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners until March 31, 2025 to execute a contract with general contractors and receive a building permit. The bids from the contractors are valid only until mid January 2025. It is not known whether they can be extended past that date or whether the contractors would agree to hold their prices beyond that date. Additionally, the changes suggested by the MHC were not part of the original construction documents and would alter the costs and specifics of the project. Such modifications to the original construction documents after bidding has closed are not generally permitted under Massachusetts law, which requires that the project to be rebid. With many unresolved issues, the fate of the project remains in question.
Thanks, Art, for reporting this development. Amherst residents who appreciate the importance of maintaining the historic character of the Central Business District should be grateful to the Massachusetts Historical Commission for raising concerns about the library project’s plan to downgrade the slate roof to a synthetic material and cut into the historic stone facade for an unnecessary book drop.
Before the Library Director Sharon Sharry and Board of Trustees President Austin Sarat came on board and told us that the Jones Library “was never set up to be a library,” generations of trustees and directors worked diligently to maintain the slate roof and historic fabric of the original building while providing the public with a much loved library, and at little cost to the Town.
I agree that The Jones Library was set up to be a library for its times, and in the 20th century, it served us very well, as did the Burnett Gallery.
We are living in times that have changed how we use libraries and what we expect of them. In most places they require less of “buildings” and more of electronic services.
But, here’s the rub: Clearly, Amherst has need of a Community Center and the plans for the Jones Library upgrade address that need, even more than what a 21st century library needs to be. The problem seems to stem from the restrictions on available funding. Funding was available for a library, not for a Community Center.
Clearly, the effort to wiggle into the requirements of funding sources for a library and complying with the requirements of the Historic Commission is a difficult problem.
If at the inception I had been asked, out-front, to help fund a Community Center/Senior/Teen/Early childhood Center (which the “library plan seems to include) I might have been on board as a supporter earlier.
There is a lesson to be learned here about straightforward approaches to available funding, and analyzing civic needs and priorities to make a case for support for those specific needs.
Community Center/Senior/Teen/Early childhood Center at Wildwood School gets my vote.
How about we start discussing that possibility now, in a civil and collaborative way, before it turns into another Amherst style divisive shit show?
It’s time to take Ira Bryk’s (and Anne Burton’s) ideas seriously and for many more residents to weigh in on these related topics.
1. Ignore the comments from Town Council and Town Hall that it is too soon to talk about Wildwood School as a Community Center. It is only too soon for those who have other ideas (like selling the property) and want to control the process.
2. It has never been clear what the library’s expand/demolish plan meant by “teen room” and I have always been suspicious of it as a control issue. And it has never been clear why the Library Director and Trustees are the ones to decide what a Teen Room should be as it morphs recently into a “Teen Center.”
3. Everyone is pro-library, none moreso than those, like me, who oppose the Trustees’ plan and their actions in support of it. A Youth Empowerment Center in a facility which already has a basketball court and multiple opportunities for both quiet study and noisier activities makes much more sense for Amherst than a Teen Room in the library.
4. I am trying not to repeat arguments about the funding history, the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners, or the still-pending issues of historical preservation. However, it is important that new voices join this conversation and that residents can find the decade long history of controversy meticulously explained in the Indy and that searching using the search bar is easy. There has been a lot of opinion on these things in the Indy but also a lot of unimpeachable data supporting those who love the library and oppose the Trustees’ project.
I like the idea of using Wildwood as a community gathering center. The quads and classrooms on one side of the building could be teen space, including separate space for kids of color. The quads and classrooms on the other side could be senior space. Each side could have quiet activity rooms, craft rooms, maker and repairs spaces. The library, lunchroom, gym and art room could be shared by both groups and the whole community for classes, performances, speakers, potlucks, art exhibits, exercise classes, a pick up game of anything, etc. The cafeteria could be a morning cafe for seniors and an afternoon cafe for teens. The parking lot on the side of the building could become 4-6 pickleball courts with few noise problems for neighbors. There is plenty of parking in front and the field and the playground for use by the community. The front offices could be used by senior center and teen center staff. With teens and seniors frequently in the same building, I see great potential for interaction between the 2 groups, but also separation. Wildwood also has several other classrooms and small offices in the building that could be used for music lessons, Community Conversation Circles, tutoring, storage, etc. I am sure there are other ideas. Of course, there will be costs to renovate and repair but that is just part of the life of any building. It seems the perfect time for people to get together and talk over ideas–perhaps with meetings held at Wildwood.
Town Council President Lynn Griesemer has declared that there will not be a council discussion of the use of Wildwood School to meet community space needs. It seems to me, as we think about the considerable need for such space in Amherst, that that is a public discussion we ought to be having. Here are some articles previously published in the Indy,that consider possible new uses of the Wildwood building.
https://www.amherstindy.org/2024/01/19/letter-a-new-senior-center-if-not-at-wildwood-school-then-where/
https://www.amherstindy.org/2023/02/03/letter-wildwood-school-building-can-meet-towns-pressing-needs-for-more-civic-space/
https://www.amherstindy.org/2022/05/20/letter-build-bipoc-cultural-empowerment-center-at-wildwood-school/
https://www.amherstindy.org/2024/03/01/letter-we-need-a-community-forum-on-the-future-of-wildwood/
https://www.amherstindy.org/2024/03/01/opinion-keep-wildwood-as-a-town-building/
https://www.amherstindy.org/2024/02/09/granbys-plan-to-repurpose-old-elementary-school-suggests-possibilities-for-amherst/
https://www.amherstindy.org/2023/02/03/opinion-a-community-center-if-not-at-wildwood-where/
https://www.amherstindy.org/2022/05/06/senior-childhood-and-teen-centers-are-most-suggested-uses-for-elementary-school-building/
https://www.amherstindy.org/2022/04/29/opinion-the-best-use-of-the-remaining-elementary-school-in-amherst/
“ including separate space for kids of color.”
I must be way out in left field and out of the loop! Are we that messed up?
I believe Janet McGowan’s comment about a separate space was a reference to the need for a BIPOC Youth Empowerment Center, identified years ago, advanced by the CSWG, and not yet acted upon. See, for instance, https://www.amherstindy.org/2024/11/01/opinion-equity-under-attack-by-amherst-town-government-2-a-call-for-inclusion/
Thank you Anita, appreciate it.
Jeff
A discussion about the future use of Wildwood should begin asap. It’s odd that the Town Council refuses to initiate or participate in a conversation about Wildwood at this time. Why is that? One can only speculate. I agree with Ira’s Wildwood community center concept above and the need for a transparent public approach to discuss possibilities. Residents need to engage about Wildwood ..either with or without the Town Council before it’s traded away behind the curtain. How?
Adaptive Re-Use of an old building like Wildwood is more affordable than building new and best for our environment and saves space in our landfills!