[kcantor]

For owner's representation? I don't think so except on mega projects (like LRT). No idea what @kcantor 's referring to but if I had to guess, sometimes the public sector has a bad way of hiring non-technical bureaucrats into management of highly technical areas. Major approvals and decisions come across their desk and they don't have the right expertise to see through the noise and choose the best direction.

It happens in the private sector also... boeing's a good example except replace bureaucrat with MBA

I thought I was pretty clear...

I remember describing Hall D (albeit before the DREAM latticework and vines got added in an attempt to hide it) as "a block long urinal facing Jasper Avenue". One of the councillors at the time who approved the project and the budget said "well don't blame me, I can't read a set of plans" at which point all one can do is shake one's head.

 

[Stevey_G]

For owner's representation? I don't think so except on mega projects (like LRT). No idea what @kcantor 's referring to but if I had to guess, sometimes the public sector has a bad way of hiring non-technical bureaucrats into management of highly technical areas. Major approvals and decisions come across their desk and they don't have the right expertise to see through the noise and choose the best direction.

It happens in the private sector also... boeing's a good example except replace bureaucrat with MBA

Yeaaaaah. In this case I would be the bureaucrat as the politician. I’d want a reputable architect and a couple of engineers giving me inputs on aesthetics, technical challenges, etc.

 

[kcantor]

Yeaaaaah. In this case I would be the bureaucrat as the politician. I’d want a reputable architect and a couple of engineers giving me inputs on aesthetics, technical challenges, etc.

Well it did go to EDC and that was when it looked like this:

This is after the original vertically curved facades in the initial design were eliminated in favour of the flat faces shown here but before the actual cladding was changed to the vertically ribbed zinc siding.

EDC's comments were:

Motion of nonsupport

● Although the applicant has made efforts to enhance the public realm, the Edmonton Design Committee is not supportive of the building and streetscape.
● There is concern that the north and south sides of the public realm will be insufficiently animated. There needs to be clarity on programming and furnishings.
● There is concern that the other three corners, excluding the northwest, will not encourage pedestrian access and participation in the public realm adjacent to the library.
● The conceptual genesis of the dynamic form is no longer carried around the entire perimeter of the building as previously presented.

From my perspective, despite the enthusiasm shown by some other posters at the time, I think EDC treated them gently.

 

[Offworld]

It’s not a matter of who has control of city hall. It’s a matter of delegating design decisions and approvals to individuals who, as a previous city councillor admitted, “can’t read a set of drawings” and architects who enable them.

And locally it’s not just the downtown library (Hall D and the new RAM are other examples) and it’s not just government either (and there’s no lack of private sector examples).

Being reminded of the Library, Hall D and RAM in a single post has put me into a deep funk. I've been triggered by your macro-aggression!

 

[David A]

For owner's representation? I don't think so except on mega projects (like LRT). No idea what @kcantor 's referring to but if I had to guess, sometimes the public sector has a bad way of hiring non-technical bureaucrats into management of highly technical areas. Major approvals and decisions come across their desk and they don't have the right expertise to see through the noise and choose the best direction.

It happens in the private sector also... boeing's a good example except replace bureaucrat with MBA

It is true there are more than a few companies in the private sector whose work is underwhelming, focused on cost reduction and some even shoddy, apparently like Boeing's.

Fortunately, Boeing doesn't make buildings in Edmonton, but I feel the standards are higher for government not to cheap out on what should have been a signature building here and instead makes us cringe.

 

[archited]

I still think the existing Library has the base for some exceptionally good design solutions for the exterior if properly addressed.

 

[Stevey_G]

I still think the existing Library has the base for some exceptionally good design solutions for the exterior if properly addressed.

Cover it in murals and lights. Cheap and effective.

 

[kcantor]

Cover the whole damn thing with screens or murals depicting the original Carnegie Library design drawings from George MacDonald and Herbert Magoon and their protégé, Esther Hill )Canada’s second female architecture graduate and daughter of the E.P.L.’s Chief Librarian).

 

[Stevey_G]

lol

 

[archited]

murals depicting the original Carnegie Library design drawings from George MacDonald and Herbert Magoon and their protégé, Esther Hill

You may have been suggesting this half in jest but I think it is a damn fine idea as well -- etching historical library elevation drawings onto the vertical zinc walls and continuing them over windows with vinyl applications (continuity of the design). So with this, with accent lighting as suggested by @Stevey_G (plus other mural forms. Then removal and replacement of the 100-street entry to the Library parkade (moving it over to 99th street by dead-ending that road into a parking service affair; replacing the 100th street entry with a pedestrian walkway liberally planted with street trees and mass ground cover/accent plantings. Vertical wind screens on the front and rear sides of the library (also with graphics and lighting in place. And then on the eastern-most roof and bleeding down to the ground planting accents -- evergreen shrubs on the roof (flowering preferably) with vertical plant walls leading up to the roof and trees -- lots and lots of trees.

 

[Out of Towner]

You may have been suggesting this half in jest but I think it is a damn fine idea as well -- etching historical library elevation drawings onto the vertical zinc walls and continuing them over windows with vinyl applications (continuity of the design). So with this, with accent lighting as suggested by @Stevey_G (plus other mural forms. Then removal and replacement of the 100-street entry to the Library parkade (moving it over to 99th street by dead-ending that road into a parking service affair; replacing the 100th street entry with a pedestrian walkway liberally planted with street trees and mass ground cover/accent plantings. Vertical wind screens on the front and rear sides of the library (also with graphics and lighting in place. And then on the eastern-most roof and bleeding down to the ground planting accents -- evergreen shrubs on the roof (flowering preferably) with vertical plant walls leading up to the roof and trees -- lots and lots of trees.

Even with those improvements the Milner would still be at the top of the list of Edmonton's worst buildings. Best examples of good architecture (still standing) in Edmonton are the Hotel Macdonald and City Hall. CN Tower imho is a good representation of a building in the International Style that has stood the test of time and I'd rank it number 3 on my list of the best. CN Tower would be exceptionally good if 100 Street wasn't so sterile and more like 108 Street looking onto the Legislature. 107 Street looking at MacEwan may prospectively be better too. Teeple architects could have taken the CN Tower's contemporary appearance into consideration when they designed the library but with that roof line, it's basically trying to make silk purse out of a sow's ear now.

 

[Offworld]

Cover it in murals and lights. Cheap and effective.

Cover it over with a multitude of DREAM signs. Precedent was made elsewhere, I hear.

 

[Yeggy]

All that needs to happen is some of the surfaces to a different colour. This monochrome hulk of a building would be so much better if you highlighted some of the facets.

 

[Gronk!]

Transform the Soviet-era walls into Instagrammable murals.

 

[kcantor]

All that needs to happen is some of the surfaces to a different colour. This monochrome hulk of a building would be so much better if you highlighted some of the facets.

Sorry, but a poor choice of colour is not what makes this building an opportunity not just lost but squandered and changing it's colour will not change that.

The only think I can think of that wouldn't be half in jest would be something like this (which would be quite fitting for a library) and the vertical ribs can be treated like shelf or book ends: