Beloved building holds lots of memories — and signs of wear and tear

By Morgan Rothborne, Ashland.news 

Remodel efforts in the city’s long-shuttered Community Center have revealed more structural deficiencies than anticipated, raising the question whether to do extensive repair work or raze and rebuild. At its study session Monday, the Ashland City Council directed staff to investigate how best to proceed with the historic building on Winburn Way, adjacent to Pioneer Hall and across the street from Lithia Park. 

Council was almost, but not quite, unanimous in asking Public Works Director Scott Fleury to assemble a Management Advisory Committee of experts and contractors to determine as rapidly as possible if the city should attempt to restore the Community Center. The MAC is expected to return its findings to council by late November or early December. 

Councilor Eric Hansen stood against the rest of those on the dais in advocating for demolition and building something new, energy efficient, visually similar to the previous building and potentially designed to hold more usable meeting space. 

“Relative to the problems and investment, I just don’t see a path forward for the next 100 years,” he said. 

Like many Ashland residents, Hansen said his children have taken classes there, danced on the stage and he has danced on the floors himself. But Hansen said as a “construction person,” when Fleury took the council and the mayor on a tour of the building earlier that day, he saw too many problems to justify a remodel. 

“I walked in and immediately saw a plate glass window, looking north, out of plumb like 10 degrees, just staggering. I looked into the rafters, saw gaps — the building is spreading,” he said.  

Community Development Director Brandon Goldman stated that to alter the building for expanded meeting space would likely mean a rezoning process, but is possible. The Community Center is a registered historic landmark, creating complications for demolition. 

If the city wanted to build new, it would be required to go through a process of consideration of all possible alternatives and to provide an opportunity for members of the public and interested stakeholders to voice opposition or support for demolition and rebuilding, he said.  

Councilor Jeff Dahle suggested creating a Management Advisory Committee after Historic Preservation Committee member Dale Shostrom spoke as a private individual during public comment. Shostrom advocated for the building and an additional ad hoc committee to determine how best to preserve it. Dahle said the Management Advisory Committee could meet more often without the necessity of public notices of an ad hoc committee and with fewer members could more likely cut through lengthy deliberations. 

Dahle also stated he wanted the city’s historic preservation committee to consider the building and the level of remediation that would be required to reopen it safely. 

“I need to know more about where is that threshold, when a building is no longer considered historic?” he said. 

Councilor Bob Kaplan stated he, too, was concerned with what he saw inside the building that day. He asked if the building’s historic features such as its windows or the wood of its floors could be repurposed in a new building to achieve some preservation. Ryan Eccles, a designer with the city’s contractor ZCS engineering, stated many historic touches such as trim, fixtures, and wall sconces could easily be incorporated in a new building. 

Any new construction in the Community Center’s footprint would also be constrained by the city’s code concerning the historic district, thereby ensuring some continuity in appearance between old and new, Goldman said. 

Councilor Gina DuQuenne requested the creation of a virtual tour of the building to be posted on the city website to allow residents to see the interior for themselves. City Manager Sabrina Cotta stated staff would work to get a virtual tour available for the public. 

Mayor Tonya Graham asked how long council could take to make a decision about how to proceed. Cotta said the sooner the decision is made, the better the city can keep the project’s budget in line.

The unexpected problems in the Community Center have already driven the budget up by an estimated half a million dollars, regardless of the decision council makes, Fleury said. These estimates are conservative and could change if remediation efforts on the building don’t go as expected. Without a design or fleshed-out approach for a new building, estimates of that project cost are also conservative and preliminary, but current estimates place both options at a similar cost for around $2.2 million to reopen both the Community Center and Pioneer Hall, he said. 

The Community Center would need to be jacked up at its foundations. Its walls would then need to be supported and its roof would undergo significant work as it would be destabilized by the work going on in the foundation. These processes introduce a risk of the building coming apart which means additional risk for contractors working in the space. The contractor rather than the city assumes the liability, but transfers the cost to the project, Fleury said. 

The city put out a bid to restore both Pioneer Hall and the Community Center. Combining the projects in one construction bid held “economy of scale” benefits for the project’s costs. Pioneer Hall had some unanticipated problems, but the mitigation of these fit within the $250,000 of contingency funds included in the original construction bid, Fleury said. 

Pioneer Hall is expected to be open to the public in March, but the Community Center project was put on hold weeks prior due to mutual concern from contractors and Public Works staff, he said. 

Councilor Dylan Bloom expressed concern about the building coming apart or presenting further, impossible-to-anticipate problems during a remodel and costing the city far more than a new building. Bloom asked where the city would obtain money to cover the already expanded costs and any further financial surprises. 

Cotta responded that the restoration projects are being drawn from the general fund. Other city maintenance and facilities projects could be impacted by the Community Center in the next budget biennium as the general fund must also support essential services such as police and fire. 

“We are charged with wise usage of taxpayer dollars. It’s all about balancing the community’s desire for space at the center to use, having a space that is a good space for the community, while preserving the historic nature as best we can, so what is the best path forward?” she asked. 

Following Dahe’s suggestion, councilors Paula Hyatt, Bloom, Kaplan and DuQuenne all voiced support for the MAC committee. Hansen maintained that the city had already invested time and energy from experts to consider the building’s structural integrity and he would be curious to see what new information the MAC would produce. 

Judy Kennedy also spoke during public comment urging councilors to do whatever they felt was most prudent to quickly return to Ashland residents what the building used to provide. 

“The public wants to get back in there, they really do. I was the last person in there, in 2019, I want to say. I was teaching a class in there and people came in with clipboards and said ‘Building’s condemned, get your shoes on and get out of there,” she said. 

Kennedy said the building held memories relevant for every facet of life for longtime Ashland residents. Dances, Rotary and garden club meetings, pinochle clubs, weddings and memorials had all been held in the space. 

“I feel as if we need community now more than ever,” she said. 

The intricacies of the restoration project and its funding are further detailed in a staff report included in meeting materials. 

Email Ashland.news reporter Morgan Rothborne at [email protected].