Town Square

Post a New Topic

Cost of new Mitchell Park Library continues to climb

Original post made on Mar 9, 2012

The new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center is slated to open this fall as scheduled, but the city's concerns over who is responsible for the project's cost overruns are expected to drag on well after the new library is built.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, March 9, 2012, 9:17 AM

Comments (16)

Posted by David Pepperdine, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 9, 2012 at 11:43 am

Common sense says that you allow a minimum of 5% for change orders on any construction project. So the city thought it was immune to this?


Posted by Cost overruns, a resident of South of Midtown
on Mar 9, 2012 at 12:03 pm

I last read that the cost overruns were $4 million. Now it is $6 million in requests?
The scandal, and the incompetence all around should be determined NOW, not later, when the public is o-o-hing and a-a-hing and the children are high on sugar, running around and smiling.
No coverups please, on this fiasco.


Posted by architect, a resident of Midtown
on Mar 9, 2012 at 12:56 pm

i can't help but think it's mostly the architect's fault for not having a complete set of drawings.

or it's the city's fault for continuing to use this architect...


Posted by John Kidd, a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Mar 9, 2012 at 12:56 pm

The quote "We'll sort out change orders later. We don't think this (dispute) will have a material effect on the future library." is an invitation to REAL trouble. Postponing the process of getting a hold of the problem will only make it harder, and more expensive, to solve. Isn't the City paying a handsome fee to a Construction Manager to stay on top of these things?


Posted by Cost overruns, a resident of South of Midtown
on Mar 9, 2012 at 1:49 pm

Yes we are paying a Construction Manager.
We need the details N O W! Not later when the facts will be buried in pages and pages of spreadsheets and no one will want to go through it. If we don't get an accounting NOW we should not pay NOW.
Clearly the early specs should have been caught. Sounds like a lot of highly paid people dropped the ball and we are having to pay for their mistakes.
THEY should pay for their mistakes. Or $247,000 Manager Keene, who oversees big projects, or $183,534 Dir. of Public Works, James Sartor.
Enough of city coverups.


Posted by Peter Mueller, a resident of Barron Park
on Mar 9, 2012 at 3:11 pm

Is there too much knee jerk sensitivity being expressed here?
Overall there seems to be an under run so far.

Isn't it natural as one sees the actual shape emerging, and with technological advances in desirable features since the building was conceived a few years ago that there would be cost changes to fit them and corrections in now, as compared to having something to modify or change later?




Posted by Terry, a resident of Midtown
on Mar 9, 2012 at 6:34 pm

I would like to know who is responsible for such a B**T-UGLY building design.


Posted by Palo-Alto-Builds-Another-White-Elephant, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 10, 2012 at 7:57 am

> I would like to know who is responsible for such a
> B**T-UGLY building design.

The architectural firm was: Group 4 (San Jose). It was approved by the City Council, and all of the supporters of this massive waste of money.

The City Council did not object in any meaningful way. Group 4 called it a "Gateway to the park" design.

Hopefully, people will take note of this monstrosity, and remind any/all associated with this project just how bad their opinions of public building design turned out to be.

Keep in mind, that architects tend to get about 7% of the price of the project--so the bigger the building, the larger the fee for folks like Group 4.


Posted by Cost overruns, a resident of South of Midtown
on Mar 10, 2012 at 1:50 pm

>architects tend to get about 7% of the price of the project
So they might get 7% of the cost overruns caused by their malfeasance?


Posted by Palo-Alto-Builds-Another-White-Elephant, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 11, 2012 at 9:46 am

> So they might get 7% of the cost overruns caused by
> their malfeasance?

Interesting question. If they are involved in doing any of the design for the change orders--the answer is probably yes. As to exactly how much they have received for the total project, that would take a full audit of the total construction project. Don't forget that they have been involved for a while. Well over a million was spent coming up with preliminary plans in the past. What's really annoying is that none of these costs are every assigned to a tally of costs associated with running the library. It might take a little work, but for some years there are probably more than a million dollars spent on library operations that do not show up on the accounting for library expenditures.

One of the problems with government projects is that generally no one (other than the taxpayers) ever seems to be "responsible" for the project, from both a completion point-of-view, and a cost-management point of view.

The Planning and P/W people have been involved in this project, as has the City Manager and Finance people. Yet, it would be hard to find anyone who has one of those "the buck stops here" signs on his desk. There is supposed to be a residents' "oversight committee" involved, but these sorts of groups are always chaired by "yes men", or people who have no idea how to evaluate construction projects. Even if they were to spot something, they have not authority to do anything but write a memo to the City Council--that has no obligation to read the memo, much less take action on anything that might be identified by such a group.

The City Auditor is unlikely to do anything with the project (if we even had a City Auditor), and so .. projects like this become little more than a "fattened goose", or pinata, for all of the various actors who line up with their hands out--looking to tap the never ending stream of public funds for their own benefit.


Posted by John, a resident of Meadow Park
on Mar 11, 2012 at 3:52 pm

The stream of public funds ie taxpayers is drying up.


Posted by Library bond, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 11, 2012 at 10:58 pm

The bond measure far exceeded the cost of the library so one way or another the contractor is going to get that money!!!


Posted by Terry, a resident of Midtown
on Mar 12, 2012 at 9:06 pm

I have never voted for Palo Alto's White-Elephant building lust, but I can imagine one exception. I would support tearing down this pile of crap, selling it for scrap, and then replacing it with the original building designs which were far more appropriate for the area.


Posted by trudy, a resident of Crescent Park
on Mar 13, 2012 at 3:10 am

Is there a link to a final appearance drawing some where? All I can see is it looks huge compared to the old library.

(Don't blame me for voting for this, I've been away.)


Posted by Common Sense, a resident of Palo Verde
on Mar 13, 2012 at 8:44 am

I can't help to think it is the fault of the architect as well as the Contractor itself, Flintco. Just another example of why you don't always go with the low bid, AND when the city doesn't require the payment of prevailing wages on their projects attracts a whole host of non-desirables (not to mention out of the area, how about using a local)to the bidding process. You get what you pay for! That's what you get when money is the bottom line.


Posted by Dave Hood, a resident of Crescent Park
on May 22, 2013 at 12:06 pm

And the new main library is going to cost $22.6M? Even if it comes in on budget (fat chance!), for that price, we expect it to have gold-plated plumbing.

Say $100k to demolish the old one. Say $3M to build a new glass and steel building, big enough to hold as many books as today (unlike the actual plan). That leaves close to $20M for incompetence, mismanagement, graft and corruption.

We expect incompetence, mismanagement, graft and corruption to be expensive, and it's true that Palo Altans never yet met a tax they didn't like, but surely even Palo Alto has a limit?


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Most Seniors do not Need Senior Housing But Could Benefit from other Choice to Remain in Palo Alto
By Steve Levy | 51 comments | 2,112 views

Custom pizza joint on its way to Mountain View
By Elena Kadvany | 5 comments | 1,901 views

"The Galapagos Affair: Satan Came to Eden"
By Anita Felicelli | 0 comments | 1,235 views

I Spy
By Cheryl Bac | 6 comments | 1,108 views

The Cinderella ride
By Sally Torbey | 10 comments | 842 views