Saskatoon Central Library | 4 Floors | Design Phase

[Roquentin]

Originally Posted by Stormer

The old building seems like fairly low quality construction for a main library - at least the precast concrete exterior. Also it is only two floors. Is this a tear down?

Its days are probably numbered, yep.

"The SPL has reported previously that the current downtown library is non-compliant with all significant building codes, with life-safety deficiencies dating back nearly 20 years. The City’s Building Standards Branch determined back in May of 2000 that no architectural improvements would be permitted without the non-compliance issues being addressed."

https://www.cjwwradio.com/2022/02/24/139828/

I wonder who bought it. Not a bad location for government offices, maybe?

[phone]

Originally Posted by Roquentin

I wonder who bought it. Not a bad location for government offices, maybe?

Maybe Dutchak bought it and are planning River Quarry II

[Roquentin]

Originally Posted by phone

Maybe Dutchak bought it and are planning River Quarry II

Ha! I wonder what the story is there --- are they waiting for a dream tenant to roll in before they fit out the space?

With the old library, I was thinking more along the lines of "Sturdy Stone Part Two: Even Sturdier." But is the world even ready for twin Sturdy Stones? Is there such a thing as too much brutalism?

[mitchellk12]

Originally Posted by Roquentin

Ha! I wonder what the story is there --- are they waiting for a dream tenant to roll in before they fit out the space?

With the old library, I was thinking more along the lines of "Sturdy Stone Part Two: Even Sturdier." But is the world even ready for twin Sturdy Stones? Is there such a thing as too much brutalism?

Actually, that wouldnt be a bad idea lol, the building is already centralized downtown for the most part. And a different style of brutalism with the similar size could look cool.

[phone]

Originally Posted by mitchellk12

Actually, that wouldnt be a bad idea lol, the building is already centralized downtown for the most part. And a different style of brutalism with the similar size could look cool.

Yeah, I have no clue about the build quality (setting aside issues resulting from the contemporary building code), but I have to say I find Frances Morrison to be a good looking building. It's a Holliday-Scott building, the same architect who designed the Law-Commerce Building, Ogle Hall, Wascana Place in Regina. His work has definitely contributed to the look of public buildings in this province, and while some malign that style, I find it engaging and unique. Like brutalism infused with more of a humanist sensibility.

I am also a fan of Sturdy Stone. Love the interior space and how it imposes over the area. And the fact that it's named after Mr. Sturdy and Mr. Stone.

I wouldn't want the whole city to have that look, but it is nice to have such varieties of buildings interspersed amongst ones of other styles and eras.

It would be a shame if we were to knock down Frances Morrison (or give it the Modern Press treatment) for the mere fact that the developer considers it to not be worth preserving. We lost enough heritage property from the early 20th century because of that attitude, and we shouldn't make the same mistake about architecture from the last half of the 20th century. That said, if it is not feasible to bring the building up to current code, then so be it.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by phone

Yeah, I have no clue about the build quality (setting aside issues resulting from the contemporary building code), but I have to say I find Frances Morrison to be a good looking building. It's a Holliday-Scott building, the same architect who designed the Law-Commerce Building, Ogle Hall, Wascana Place in Regina. His work has definitely contributed to the look of public buildings in this province, and while some malign that style, I find it engaging and unique. Like brutalism infused with more of a humanist sensibility.

I am also a fan of Sturdy Stone. Love the interior space and how it imposes over the area. And the fact that it's named after Mr. Sturdy and Mr. Stone.

I wouldn't want the whole city to have that look, but it is nice to have such varieties of buildings interspersed amongst ones of other styles and eras.

It would be a shame if we were to knock down Frances Morrison (or give it the Modern Press treatment) for the mere fact that the developer considers it to not be worth preserving. We lost enough heritage property from the early 20th century because of that attitude, and we shouldn't make the same mistake about architecture from the last half of the 20th century. That said, if it is not feasible to bring the building up to current code, then so be it.

I wasn't commenting on the overall design, just that the precast concrete exterior looks cheap. Maybe that is easily fixable. What is not so easy to fix is the low density (2 floors) and the lack of underground parking.

[Echoes]

Originally Posted by phone

It would be a shame if we were to knock down Frances Morrison (or give it the Modern Press treatment) for the mere fact that the developer considers it to not be worth preserving. We lost enough heritage property from the early 20th century because of that attitude, and we shouldn't make the same mistake about architecture from the last half of the 20th century. That said, if it is not feasible to bring the building up to current code, then so be it.

I agree with you. It's a perfectly good (but not great) example of civic architecture from the mid-century. I like its interface with 23rd Street.

It's hard for me to see the case for demolition and redevelopment penciling out. Building code deficiencies can be overcome, and I imagine that the bones of the building are solid. This is not a particularly lucrative part of downtown where there's much development interest, and this is a substantial enough building where demolition costs would be a considerable expense on top of the purchase price. There are numerous vacant sites or properties with buildings of more marginal quality in the downtown for anyone looking to build new.

My money is on the building being re-purposed.

[Roquentin]

Originally Posted by Echoes

I agree with you. It's a perfectly good (but not great) example of civic architecture from the mid-century. I like its interface with 23rd Street.

It's hard for me to see the case for demolition and redevelopment penciling out. Building code deficiencies can be overcome, and I imagine that the bones of the building are solid. This is not a particularly lucrative part of downtown where there's much development interest, and this is a substantial enough building where demolition costs would be a considerable expense on top of the purchase price. There are numerous vacant sites or properties with buildings of more marginal quality in the downtown for anyone looking to build new.

My money is on the building being re-purposed.

This article (https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...9044a105196084) surprised me by mentioning that the now for sale building at 279 Third Avenue North was built in 1929. I've always known it as a bland stucco blob. The final photo in its real estate listing shows it in its original glory (https://www.collierscanada.com/en-ca...ada/can2008645). I don't know the history of the building, but I'd imagine that at some point it needed the "Modern Press treatment" to extend its lifespan as a usable building, and the end result was the ugly, if functional, lump that we're left with now on a prominent corner.

I wonder if 279 Third Avenue North can be salvaged --- if the original building is still underneath all that stucco, waiting for the right owner to see it. Saskatoon's had some success at returning historic buildings to their former beauty. I'm thinking of recent examples in the warehouse district. I also hope that the Frances Morrison building won't be "Modern Pressed" so that, in the future, people won't be left wondering if it can be "de- Modern Pressed." That is a "de- Pressing" thought!

Anyway, we'll see.

[phone]

Originally Posted by Roquentin

This article (https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...9044a105196084) surprised me by mentioning that the now for sale building at 279 Third Avenue North was built in 1929. I've always known it as a bland stucco blob. The final photo in its real estate listing shows it in its original glory (https://www.collierscanada.com/en-ca...ada/can2008645). I don't know the history of the building, but I'd imagine that at some point it needed the "Modern Press treatment" to extend its lifespan as a usable building, and the end result was the ugly, if functional, lump that we're left with now on a prominent corner.

I wonder if 279 Third Avenue North can be salvaged --- if the original building is still underneath all that stucco, waiting for the right owner to see it. Saskatoon's had some success at returning historic buildings to their former beauty. I'm thinking of recent examples in the warehouse district. I also hope that the Frances Morrison building won't be "Modern Pressed" so that, in the future, people won't be left wondering if it can be "de- Modern Pressed." That is a "de- Pressing" thought!

Anyway, we'll see.

Interesting. I’d hope that Colliers would be reluctant to include that vintage image if they didn’t think that the building could be restored to that state, even from a lay perspective. The Egadz building is the only example I can think of locally where something like that actually happened.

What do people think about the King George? That building got “Modern Press’d” as well, and the result is a little gaudy, but not so bad as the Nexus Building. My impression was that the hotel was a bit of a flop house prior to the conversion, not near Barry levels, though I could be misremembering for the worse. Anyway, if memory serves, the loss endured in the conversion process wasn’t so bad. I do miss bowling downtown though…

[prairieguy]

The original version of 278 3rd Ave is quite stunning. Would be fantastic if a developer decided to "restore" or replicate that! Although, its not like there are complimentary buildings in the vicinity. If this was along 21st Street or 2nd Ave or 3rd Ave South, it might fit in better as a more heritage type feel.

[phone]

Here's 279 3rd Ave N for posterity...



Compare this view today:



With all that concrete stuck on the sides of the building protruding out from the windows, it stands to reason that there really is a gem hidden under there.

[roryn1]

I wonder if we’re in for another cycle of tackiness with inflation really hitting construction costs..

[Echoes]

Final design of Saskatoon's New Central Library released today:



























https://saskatooncentrallibrary.ca/design/final-design/

[FarmerHaight]

Thanks for sharing!

[Saskabusher]

Cool library! I hope it's as popular with creative people as Vancouver main library is to its commun. i get the idea behind limiting parking but in Saskatoon they missed an opportunity to build 2 fl below ground for this block. it would get far more use. We don't have the great transportation network of Van. and the city and library could share the revenue. Winter is coming!

[Roquentin]

Originally Posted by Saskabusher

i get the idea behind limiting parking but in Saskatoon they missed an opportunity to build 2 fl below ground for this block. it would get far more use. We don't have the great transportation network of Van. and the city and library could share the revenue. Winter is coming!

Given how much people moan about the price tag on this, I bet the cost of underground parking was deemed to be prohibitive. In any case, it looks like the plan includes the addition of angled parking spaces to that stretch of 2nd ave. There's no shortage of parking lots in the vicinity, either.

I love the renderings. This will be quite the addition to that part of downtown (as much as I'll miss the liquor store, haha). I have one cynical wish, though --- I hope the new library will have 24-hour security. The park they're planning for the southern end of the block will need it.

[Saskabusher]

The price tag is not directly on the people and security is a given in any city setting, but I know what you mean it's getting as bad as warman down here!

But the cost of building underground parking pays for itself, and keeps on giving, so why the negation?

Guaranteed folksll moan about this until everyone wants to come and visit. Saskatoon will become great in spite of itself, thanks to immigration, historically and forever....

[Crisis]

Originally Posted by Saskabusher

The price tag is not directly on the people and security is a given in any city setting, but I know what you mean it's getting as bad as warman down here!

But the cost of building underground parking pays for itself, and keeps on giving, so why the negation?

Guaranteed folksll moan about this until everyone wants to come and visit. Saskatoon will become great in spite of itself, thanks to immigration, historically and forever....

As for the parking paying for itself, I have my doubts. The cost to construct an underground parkade is in the range of $50,000 - $70,000 per stall. The monthly rate for underground parking at River Landing East Tower is $275/month and monthly parking at the Library location should be less. So even using a low end price of $50K per stall, and assuming it's rented every month at $250/month, it would take 200 (16+ years) months to recoup that cost. Most developers (including the COS) are looking for a much quicker return than that.

Of course, hourly rental would make for a better return if it was full all the time, but that would be highly unlikely.

[roryn1]

Story time as a child should be one of a child’s best young memories. I hope they don’t miss out on this (since the other photos proposed scenarios seem mostly like a farce reality) with how they weren’t really able to bring kids into the downtown library right now with all the social issues occurring in and around the building.

Edit: I just realized they aren’t even reading to the kids but playing games lol. Yeesh

[roryn1]

One thing the modern libraries are good for is giving uni/college students an extra working location to work - WITH LAPTOPS. I don’t think I see a single laptop here / everyone’s busy chatting in groups at the library LOL. yeesh