Saskatoon Construction III

[roryn1]

Well obviously I’m not speaking to my millennial generation on this one haha. You can easily get an old iPhone or iPad for free and Sasktel has WiFi across the city if a $10/month data plan doesn’t sustain your asking. Asking for a 60M dollar library is elitism. No one that can’t afford these things is reading the latest Hilary clinton book - which was 6 months overbooked because the library only bought like ten copies for the entire city. Access to information can’t get much easier nowadays and those funds can be spent on a lot better things for people that seem to be struggling to get access to a silly physical newspaper when Starphoenix’s free app on a phone gives you every article lol. Sorry guys the days of physical books and newspapers are dead - an audible subscription to a book is like $10/month. A renovated library can for sure exist but it sure doesn’t need to be worth more than a 10 million. I’d love to see a beautiful one like Halifax’s downtown but that money can benefit people a lot better in ways that aren’t just the cost of concrete.

[Arts]

Originally Posted by djforsberg

I hate to be snarky but you come across as extremely ignorant, especially when two posters already addressed the above points of yours.

Personally I agree with roryn1 quite closely... Paper books are going to become more and more unsustainable. I find that my own comprehension seems better reading a page than a screen, that tactile nature of a book makes for a more effective intake of large amounts of written words on a subject. But to me the augmentation of audio and video in multimedia has the potential to improve comprehension by orders of magnitude, and in terms of learning effectiveness can only really be surpassed with hands on real world experience. The library is full of stacks and stacks of books, 90% of which will never be opened again, while similar content is being downloaded in print, images, video and interactive media.

As much as I think paper books are only a couple generations away from complete obsolescence, I do think public libraries will be an important place for learning, disseminating and understanding published information - I'm just not sure in which form. I think the concept of libraries are well suited to small lecture halls, quiet study areas, small meeting rooms, digital interface with internet for individuals and groups etc. I think there is also opportunities to incorporate more science and tech (offering access to lab equipment for public use, technology to build/create/innovate such as makerspaces etc).

And as any civic space meant to accomodate people it will have ammenities to service people's basic physical needs as well. I think libraries can become more and more the centre of public congregation even as the stacks of books just collect dust and get relegated to the warehousing areas).

[Echoes]

I'm a millennial, just for the record.

[WoodlandCritter]

[QUOTE=Arts;8299166].

As much as I think paper books are only a couple generations away from complete obsolescence, I do think public libraries will be an important place for learning, disseminating and understanding published information - I'm just not sure in which form. I think the concept of libraries are well suited to small lecture halls, quiet study areas, small meeting rooms, digital interface with internet for individuals and groups etc. I think there is also opportunities to incorporate more science and tech (offering access to lab equipment for public use, technology to build/create/innovate such as makerspaces etc).

QUOTE]

As per my previous post. Take a look at the link.


I will disagree on the coming obsolete nature of paper books though

[djforsberg]

Originally Posted by Echoes

I'm a millennial, just for the record.

Me too

[Arts]

[QUOTE=WoodlandCritter;8299190]

Originally Posted by Arts

.

As much as I think paper books are only a couple generations away from complete obsolescence, I do think public libraries will be an important place for learning, disseminating and understanding published information - I'm just not sure in which form. I think the concept of libraries are well suited to small lecture halls, quiet study areas, small meeting rooms, digital interface with internet for individuals and groups etc. I think there is also opportunities to incorporate more science and tech (offering access to lab equipment for public use, technology to build/create/innovate such as makerspaces etc).

QUOTE]

As per my previous post. Take a look at the link.


I will disagree on the coming obsolete nature of paper books though

Just did, and I think it's closer to what all public/civic libraries of the future will offer. The place will be just as important as ever, the architecture will have a major influence on the reason people go to the place, and libraries will always be libraries even if there are barely any paper books. As to the future of those paper books, our grandkids will tell us how it is in a few decades.

[djforsberg]

Originally Posted by Arts

Personally I agree with roryn1 quite closely... Paper books are going to become more and more unsustainable. I find that my own comprehension seems better reading a page than a screen, that tactile nature of a book makes for a more effective intake of large amounts of written words on a subject. But to me the augmentation of audio and video in multimedia has the potential to improve comprehension by orders of magnitude, and in terms of learning effectiveness can only really be surpassed with hands on real world experience. The library is full of stacks and stacks of books, 90% of which will never be opened again, while similar content is being downloaded in print, images, video and interactive media.

As much as I think paper books are only a couple generations away from complete obsolescence, I do think public libraries will be an important place for learning, disseminating and understanding published information - I'm just not sure in which form. I think the concept of libraries are well suited to small lecture halls, quiet study areas, small meeting rooms, digital interface with internet for individuals and groups etc. I think there is also opportunities to incorporate more science and tech (offering access to lab equipment for public use, technology to build/create/innovate such as makerspaces etc).

And as any civic space meant to accomodate people it will have ammenities to service people's basic physical needs as well. I think libraries can become more and more the centre of public congregation even as the stacks of books just collect dust and get relegated to the warehousing areas).

Not sure how books, which are made from a natural renewable resource, is unsustainable. Its extremely shortsighted to think we should move all knowledge to digital formats, especially when all it takes is one solar flare, like what happened in the 1800s, or a nuclear war, which we are closer to more than ever today, to completely wipe out all the digital information we have stored (books outside the blast zone can withstand the more widespread EMP). Less people may be reading nowadays but it has more to do with other distractions (i.e. video games, television, etc.) than it has to do with better access to digital content. Once people realize that sharing knowledge and reading is more important than ever in a service-based economy, reading will make a come back. And like this millennial, and many other people I know, from my girlfriend, to her father, to the people who use the many "corner libraries" that exist throughout our cities, there will always be a large segment of the population who prefers paper books. Remember, not everyone is like you or roryn1.

[roryn1]

Originally Posted by djforsberg

Not sure how books, which are made from a natural renewable resource, is unsustainable. Its extremely shortsighted to think we should move all knowledge to digital formats, especially when all it takes is one solar flare, like what happened in the 1800s, or a nuclear war, which we are closer to more than ever today, to completely wipe out all the digital information we have stored (books outside the blast zone can withstand the more widespread EMP). Less people may be reading nowadays but it has more to do with other distractions (i.e. video games, television, etc.) than it has to do with better access to digital content. Once people realize that sharing knowledge and reading is more important than ever in a service-based economy, reading will make a come back. And like this millennial, and many other people I know, from my girlfriend, to her father, to the people who use the many "corner libraries" that exist throughout our cities, there will always be a large segment of the population who prefers paper books. Remember, not everyone is like you or roryn1.

That’s fine that not everyone is like me - but as a taxpayer that owns a condo two blocks from the current downtown library I can see 60 Million going to better use - and a lot of people if not more agree with me, hence the shape of the current library. I’ve been there once and a fancy building with phone plugins and a coffee shop will not incentivize me nor my friends who are still students to hang out there when a library at the university (that’s also open to anyone) has areas that are busy to deafening quiet to read with a Starbucks - all 5 minutes away.

[djforsberg]

Originally Posted by roryn1

That’s fine that not everyone is like me - but as a taxpayer that owns a condo two blocks from the current downtown library I can see 60 Million going to better use - and a lot of people if not more agree with me, hence the shape of the current library. I’ve been there once and a fancy building with phone plugins and a coffee shop will not incentivize me nor my friends who are still students to hang out there when a library at the university (that’s also open to anyone) has areas that are busy to deafening quiet to read with a Starbucks - all 5 minutes away.

I would suggest to stop suggesting that corporations (Kobo, Starbucks, etc) take over the fundamental roles of essential public services such as public libraries. It’s sounding a little too fascist. Yes, I went there. The fact the SaskParty re-negged on cutting funding to public libraries in 2017 leads me to believe you are out of touch with the general opinion of the people in this province. I'm sure you won't miss the pocket change it costs you for your portion of funding for libraries. Its pretty pathetic that someone who owns two condos, or anyone, would choose public libraries as a target of attack for their "taxpayer woes". Your complaints fall on deaf-ears, man/lady.

[Echoes]

Originally Posted by roryn1

That’s fine that not everyone is like me - but as a taxpayer that owns a condo two blocks from the current downtown library I can see 60 Million going to better use - and a lot of people if not more agree with me, hence the shape of the current library. I’ve been there once and a fancy building with phone plugins and a coffee shop will not incentivize me nor my friends who are still students to hang out there when a library at the university (that’s also open to anyone) has areas that are busy to deafening quiet to read with a Starbucks - all 5 minutes away.

Careful extrapolating the "shape of the current library" into the future to justify that nothing can change from how it is today so nothing should be done.

"I observe 'x' to be in current condition 'y', therefore I conclude that it will always be in condition 'y', so nothing should be done." -- People use this to argue against bike lanes, BRT, or improving the pedestrian experience on Idylwyld.

I think what many of us are saying is that the current central library is not living up to its potential, and a new one can better fulfill its role in a changing society. There is no crisis of usage at the library (you seem to ignore that the stats support that the library is well-used, despite your anecdotal observations to the contrary, and your one visit to it), but there definitely is a crisis of the library increasingly not being able to meet the needs and expectations of its modern day users. Hence the very sensible decision of our civic leadership to (finally) take a look at: what a new library could look like, what it might be able to offer to the community, and yes, what it might cost. I think the $60M figure has only been bandied about by you so far.

[Jimmy James]

Originally Posted by roryn1

That’s fine that not everyone is like me - but as a taxpayer that owns a condo two blocks from the current downtown library I can see 60 Million going to better use - and a lot of people if not more agree with me, hence the shape of the current library. I’ve been there once and a fancy building with phone plugins and a coffee shop will not incentivize me nor my friends who are still students to hang out there when a library at the university (that’s also open to anyone) has areas that are busy to deafening quiet to read with a Starbucks - all 5 minutes away.

As a taxpayer who lives in Stonebridge and has two children, one in high school, and who knows several other families with teenage children, I can't see much better use of $60 million. Not on roads, not on garbage pick up, and certainly not on a downtown arena.

I think you need to pay more attention to people outside of your circle of friends. My teenage daughter and her friends, who all have tablets, phones and Internet access anytime they want it, all make weekly trips to the library downtown. They get books, DVDs and CDs. All of them prefer to read paper books over using their mobile devices. Demand for paper copies of books, not to mention other services offered at the library, is not going down, as Echoes noted.

Central libraries are important to the communities they serve. There is a reason Winnipeg, Halifax and Seattle constructed new libraries. There is a reason Calgary is doing the same. They serve multiple segments of the community and offer services few others do, like free access to computers and the Internet.

I'm puzzled by your comparison of the Frances Morrison Library to those at the university. They serve very different audiences. The university libraries are academic - they simply don't carry many of the popular books that a regular library does. Nor are they family friendly - there wasn't much selection for children or teens there, the last I checked. I can't see many of the people who I run into at the Frances Morrison feeling comfortable in the Murray Building, searching amongst the journals for the latest New York Times bestseller.

This is all reminding me of the backlash from the recent Mourdoukoutas opinion piece in Forbes. Echoes, djforsberg and WoodlandCritter have made some excellent arguments for why public libraries are still essential in 2018.

[Arts]

Originally Posted by djforsberg

Not sure how books, which are made from a natural renewable resource, is unsustainable. Its extremely shortsighted to think we should move all knowledge to digital formats, especially when all it takes is one solar flare, like what happened in the 1800s, or a nuclear war, which we are closer to more than ever today, to completely wipe out all the digital information we have stored (books outside the blast zone can withstand the more widespread EMP). Less people may be reading nowadays but it has more to do with other distractions (i.e. video games, television, etc.) than it has to do with better access to digital content. Once people realize that sharing knowledge and reading is more important than ever in a service-based economy, reading will make a come back. And like this millennial, and many other people I know, from my girlfriend, to her father, to the people who use the many "corner libraries" that exist throughout our cities, there will always be a large segment of the population who prefers paper books. Remember, not everyone is like you or roryn1.

I didn't mean ecologically unsustainable (though as someone that used to live on Vancouver island and seen firsthand the sheer scale of footprint left behind by the paper industry I'm not easily convinced that traditional wood-paper should be considered renewable, but hemp or other crops may be a good solution to that).

I meant as a cost effective means of sharing information. They are heavy (requiring special considerations in the building code to accommodate the dead load), take up a huge amount of size for the amount of data contained within, will become cost prohibitive as less demand will decrease the economies of scale for printers and publishers, are not easily revised when needed, present a bit of a health hazard in that they can promote growth of mold and must and can harbour infestation of pests, and for archival purposes worst of all they may not even be the longest-lived form of physical archival - if that is the goal then microfilm is a better choice than paper.

For more than a decade already, digital is the primary/original form for almost all data, with printable hardcopies being available for those that want pages to flip. This means large scale printing doesn't really make sense any more, we are at the cusp where it will be cheaper to print one-offs of a textbook (either from an online print shop or from home even) for those that want one than it would for a publishing company to print off small runs, and distribute them to businesses that have to hold on to inventory for hopefully less time than it takes for the next revision to be printed. Meanwhile devices will get better and better and new readers that didn't grow up with shelves full of paper books will be more accustomed to the new medium.

I do agree with you completely that sharing knowledge and reading is due for a comeback from all the modern high tech distractions, just think (as one of the last gen x'ers) that the practice will be not be done in permanent ink.

[djforsberg]

Originally Posted by Arts

I didn't mean ecologically unsustainable (though as someone that used to live on Vancouver island and seen firsthand the sheer scale of footprint left behind by the paper industry I'm not easily convinced that traditional wood-paper should be considered renewable, but hemp or other crops may be a good solution to that).

I meant as a cost effective means of sharing information. They are heavy (requiring special considerations in the building code to accommodate the dead load), take up a huge amount of size for the amount of data contained within, will become cost prohibitive as less demand will decrease the economies of scale for printers and publishers, are not easily revised when needed, present a bit of a health hazard in that they can promote growth of mold and must and can harbour infestation of pests, and for archival purposes worst of all they may not even be the longest-lived form of physical archival - if that is the goal then microfilm is a better choice than paper.

For more than a decade already, digital is the primary/original form for almost all data, with printable hardcopies being available for those that want pages to flip. This means large scale printing doesn't really make sense any more, we are at the cusp where it will be cheaper to print one-offs of a textbook (either from an online print shop or from home even) for those that want one than it would for a publishing company to print off small runs, and distribute them to businesses that have to hold on to inventory for hopefully less time than it takes for the next revision to be printed. Meanwhile devices will get better and better and new readers that didn't grow up with shelves full of paper books will be more accustomed to the new medium.

I do agree with you completely that sharing knowledge and reading is due for a comeback from all the modern high tech distractions, just think (as one of the last gen x'ers) that the practice will be not be done in permanent ink.

Fair enough! Thanks for the explanation.

[casper]

Originally Posted by djforsberg

No, they are not. Not even close. You might want to get out of your bubble.



To suggest someone has to have an e-reader to access books is asinine. I have a Kindle and only use it when it is not practical to have a physical book. You also seem to forget that there's a large segment of the population who can't afford the things that you obviously take for granted.

Universities are for higher learning. To suggest impoverished teens, for example, should go to the university to access the resources they previously did at the public library is ridiculous. I went to university and it was intimidating enough for myself. I don't think universities want to just open the doors to the public when they are already underfunded.

I hate to be snarky but you come across as extremely ignorant, especially when two posters already addressed the above points of yours.

The University has a research library. It is geared around having material (books, journals etc.) around the academic departments it supports. A community library is going to be focused on searching the needs to a much larger population. You will probably find a book on the most obscure type of microbe at the University library but not the "Watch spot run..." boot for a 5 year old.

I think libraries today provide a venue for people to access material but also meeting rooms for community groups and a central library should provide an auditorium for talks etc. Kids going to the library to have someone read a story to them is about the interaction as much as the book.

Vancouver has a great library. The base/lobby area has a number of for profit stalls that help subsidy the operation.

[roryn1]

In the last few posts defunct CD’s, defunct DVD’s, driving teenagers driving from their suburb (which already has a library) to downtown’s library to hang (I don’t know a single teenager who’s gone to a library when their school has one), and many more silly remarks about how going to a library is a social gathering (when reading books is best done by yourself lol) were made with no clear explanation to what a university, countless convention space available, lower cost suburban libraries can’t replace in a $60 M (will definitely not be less than $60M comparing Saskatoon to Halifax and inflation) cost of concrete. Too much duplication in this old school way of thinking all for a fancy building. Very interesting to see people trying to make a social justification for a library when those funds could lift quite a few out of poverty. Thanks for the discussion.

[casper]

Originally Posted by roryn1

In the last few posts defunct CD’s, defunct DVD’s, driving teenagers driving from their suburb (which already has a library) to downtown’s library to hang (I don’t know a single teenager who’s gone to a library when their school has one), and many more silly remarks about how going to a library is a social gathering (when reading books is best done by yourself lol) were made with no clear explanation to what a university, countless convention space available, lower cost suburban libraries can’t replace in a $60 M (will definitely not be less than $60M comparing Saskatoon to Halifax and inflation) cost of concrete. Too much duplication in this old school way of thinking all for a fancy building. Very interesting to see people trying to make a social justification for a library when those funds could lift quite a few out of poverty. Thanks for the discussion.

Here is the guide to the program in Saskatoon: https://saskatoonlibrary.ca/sites/de...2018_Web_1.pdf

The programs that provide basic education, ESL, resume writing, how to use a computer etc. are all programs that help lift people out out of poverty.

Some of the other kids oriented program that help get kids engaged in readying, science, technology etc. are also important.

[roryn1]

Originally Posted by casper

Here is the guide to the program in Saskatoon: https://saskatoonlibrary.ca/sites/de...2018_Web_1.pdf

The programs that provide basic education, ESL, resume writing, how to use a computer etc. are all programs that help lift people out out of poverty.

Some of the other kids oriented program that help get kids engaged in readying, science, technology etc. are also important.

All things that can be googled. Computers aren’t hard to use anymore - My workplace is currently switching from laptops to tablets haha. For fact, more money could go into these programs if people aren’t capable of using the free Duolingo app or googling a resume template without a multi multi million dollar building.

Kenny the Clown doesn’t need to perform in a 40-60 Million dollar venue unfortunately. My childhood wooden and stucco library branch was worth maybe $200,000 - same programs offered - didn’t care about the cost of building as a kid haha.

[Echoes]

Man, I can fully respect your position that you have misgivings about significant capital dollars going into a major new publicly-owned facility, and I can even respect your uncertainty about the ongoing relevance of the institution itself. But when several posters have spent a lot of time explaining why they feel that libraries still have real value and are relevant in the modern day (and even back it up), and you dismiss it all as being a performance space for "Kenny the Clown", it's as if you didn't read a single thing that folks had to say today.

This is the last post that I'll offer on the topic. Thanks for the robust debate everyone.

[djforsberg]

Originally Posted by Echoes

Man, I can fully respect your position that you have misgivings about significant capital dollars going into a major new publicly-owned facility, and I can even respect your uncertainty about the ongoing relevance of the institution itself. But when several posters have spent a lot of time explaining why they feel that libraries still have real value and are relevant in the modern day (and even back it up), and you dismiss it all as being a performance space for "Kenny the Clown", it's as if you didn't read a single thing that folks had to say today.

This is the last post that I'll offer on the topic. Thanks for the robust debate everyone.

Millennials . Am I right? Lol

[roryn1]

Originally Posted by Echoes

Man, I can fully respect your position that you have misgivings about significant capital dollars going into a major new publicly-owned facility, and I can even respect your uncertainty about the ongoing relevance of the institution itself. But when several posters have spent a lot of time explaining why they feel that libraries still have real value and are relevant in the modern day (and even back it up), and you dismiss it all as being a performance space for "Kenny the Clown", it's as if you didn't read a single thing that folks had to say today.

This is the last post that I'll offer on the topic. Thanks for the robust debate everyone.

You have me mistaken - I read through the entire programming booklet and read all of the comments and have had this opposition to spending so much on a library for a very long time. None of this programming needs to be in a $40-60 Million dollar building. Spending those dollars on expanding the chikdren’s Museum would go to far greater use.

The biggest new spending the city is doing this year is expanding the city dump. We don’t have money to throw around like Calgary. Halifax mainly did theirs because unemployment is 13% there and people are begging for any work. A $100 Million dollar art gallery attracts a lot of people to stay in the city and to come visit. So far I see nothing this library would do that a wooden stucco building under a Million $ couldn’t offer.