Site and architectural analysis revealed that the size of the existing building, and its location on the site, would have required partial demolition, in order to provide required access to required parking. For this reason the potential cost savings in a re-use option were less than the expanded building. Due to the age and construction of the building, it was also very likely that additional unexpected costs would have arisen during demolition/remodeling. Apart from cost considerations, an expansion/remodel plan would also have required compromising service in some important ways, including access, collection layout, functionality, solar optimization, and support for technology infrastructure. The NOLS Board considered all these factors, and ultimately accepted the recommendations of the community based review committee, that building a new library was the better approach. You can read the full report on the analysis and review process here.