Mixed Use Spirit Square and Main Library Redevelopment

[RANYC]

1 hour ago, B Randy said:

Have to disagree.  Existing library footprint is too large  (deep) to create the "hub of activity" they're striving for.  A full gut would also be extremely expensive and still not ideal in my opinion.  Layout not great to get natural light penetrating to that lower level and all facades would need complete remakes to create transparency and inside/out "interactivity".  

Also think going denser on this block and filling it in completely will be a long term benefit when development jumps to 8th and north of this site.  

Do think that their program is a bit over the top and the price tag could have been lower though...

Didn't say the existing building had to be the new library either.  Just wish a building that historic-looking could have been re-used, and another surface lot taken out in the process.

[JRCLT]

IMO I hate that building…it looks dystopian. Im glad it’s coming down. I’m not sure what the library is like on the inside but what I know is that from the outside it might as well be a prison with extra windows…or a facility of some kind. It doesn’t look anything like a library. I say the older building is 100x better than what they have now and I wouldn’t even try to advocate to save it.

They should restored and or reused the previous building. The new design is modern looking…and I don’t hate it, and with all the glass id say it kind of fits in with the Carolina theater across the street.

In terms of it being over the top? I don’t think it’s too much? It does have an interesting design and I think that that is great considering it’s the Main Library and where it’s located and If the money exists why not make something great. Buildings aren’t just functional, to those who design them. They are a work of art as well.

previous library to the current one:


This is a beautifully designed building that I would have protested it being torn down rather than improved/expanded if those were the necessary needs for that site.

[RANYC]

3 minutes ago, JeanClt said:

IMO I hate that building…it looks dystopian. Im glad it’s coming down. I’m not sure what the library is like on the inside but what I know is that from the outside it might as well be a prison with extra windows…or a facility of some kind. It doesn’t look anything like a library. I say the older building is 100x better than what they have now and I wouldn’t even try to advocate to save it.

They should restored and or reused the previous building. The new design is modern looking…and I don’t hate it, and with all the glass id say it kind of fits in with the Carolina theater across the street.

In terms of it being over the top? I don’t think it’s too much? It does have an interesting design and I think that that is great considering it’s the Main Library and where it’s located and If the money exists why not make something great. Buildings aren’t just functional, to those who make them are a work of art as well.

previous library to the current one:


This is a beautifully designed building that I would have protested it being torn down rather than improved/expanded if those were the necessary needs for that site.

Potato-Potato.

Although I have no idea what the current library being dystopian means.  Above my pay grade. 

[JRCLT]

Potato-Potato.
Although I have no idea what the current library being dystopian means.  Above my pay grade. 

I guess what I meant was Brutalist…instead of dystopian, but I mean those words are like Potato-Potato. Bland. A prison with extra windows as described.

[tozmervo]

The current library is a by-the-books post-modern design. 

I am usually the first to advocate for renovation instead of replacement, but the building has some really fundamental flaws that can't just be renovated way.

• The only nice space in the building is the big reading room, and it is ludicrously separated from public eyes. I wouldn't be surprised if most regular patrons never make it past the first floor and don't even realize it exists.
• It's completely oriented toward the center of 6th street where the main entrance is. There are no secondary entrances. Even if you added one at Tryon, College is a dead zone.
• A major amount of square footage is dedicated to book logistics and offices. Offices are easy to reprogram, logistics spaces (loading docks, etc) are not. The library is smartly moving most of those functions to much less expensive locations across the county.
• The deep footprint makes for horrendous daylight access in much of the building, creating really stale and depressing spaces.

 

[Guest]

This picture needs no elaboration

[RANYC]

1 hour ago, tozmervo said:

The current library is a by-the-books post-modern design. 

I am usually the first to advocate for renovation instead of replacement, but the building has some really fundamental flaws that can't just be renovated way.

• The only nice space in the building is the big reading room, and it is ludicrously separated from public eyes. I wouldn't be surprised if most regular patrons never make it past the first floor and don't even realize it exists.
• It's completely oriented toward the center of 6th street where the main entrance is. There are no secondary entrances. Even if you added one at Tryon, College is a dead zone.
• A major amount of square footage is dedicated to book logistics and offices. Offices are easy to reprogram, logistics spaces (loading docks, etc) are not. The library is smartly moving most of those functions to much less expensive locations across the county.
• The deep footprint makes for horrendous daylight access in much of the building, creating really stale and depressing spaces.

 

Point well taken.  I was suggesting the structure be kept but used for some other purpose, and the new library occupy some under-used surface lot elsewhere in the vicinity.  That way, we get more coverage of the North Tryon area of Uptown with edifices.  I understand the current library really isn't the best design, internally or externally, for a modern library.  But I still find something really beautiful about it, especially for use as a non-library not needing lots of natural light...maybe an independent film/art house.  I just feel it is part of Charlotte's capital investment history meaning at one point there must have been some kind of civic consensus for its funding and development, and that gives it significance.  Civic Capital projects serve as a hallmark of the times and the aesthetics in a community.  Can only imagine how the "bunker-like and brutalist" quality can be interpreted and what it says about Charlotte's views on architecture, public access, reading, etc at the time it was designed and ratified.

Edited November 24, 2021 by RANYC

[deleted account]

13 minutes ago, RANYC said:

Point well taken.  I was suggesting the structure be kept but used for some other purpose, and the new library occupy some under-used surface lot elsewhere in the vicinity.  That way, we get more coverage of the North Tryon area of Uptown with edifices

Ditto.

[SydneyCarton]

Is the whole block between 7th and 8th and College and Tryon part of the Spirit Square development?

 

 

[go_vertical]

3 hours ago, MothBeast said:

This picture needs no elaboration

I never realized how off center that window above the entrance is. The building MUST be destroyed. 

[15895]

I like the building and lament it is leaving. People are focused a lot on the outside, understandably, but I still felt it was quite “grandiose” and a nice thing to have. 

being in there and having the soaring BofA towers filling up the windows felt special. 

 

I’m not the biggest fan of the new library as it is new & shiny, a little sterile looking. I wish the building could be saved and have the library be closer to 1st Ward Park or Imaginon. It’d be dope if the building was taken over by someone who turned it into a nice night life venue or multipurpose entertainment area. 

 

Edited November 24, 2021 by AirNostrumMAD

[TheOneRJ]

There are plenty of buildings in Charlotte to advocate for saving, this library is not one of them. 

Edited November 24, 2021 by TheOneRJ

[JRCLT]

I like the building and lament it is leaving. People are focused a lot on the outside, understandably, but I still felt it was quite “grandiose” and a nice thing to have. 

being in there and having the soaring BofA towers filling up the windows felt special. 

 
I’m not the biggest fan of the new library as it is new & shiny, a little sterile looking. I wish the building could be saved and have the library be closer to 1st Ward Park or Imaginon. It’d be dope if the building was taken over by someone who turned it into a nice night life venue or multipurpose entertainment area. 
 

This building isn’t useless or per say insignificant. It’s an important part of the community regardless of where it is placed. I think where it is now makes sense. Surrounded by the theater, discovery and spirit square. The facility could be so much more. You should reserve your opinions about the new library for now and wait to actually experience it as you did this old building. I just think we downgraded with this and now we’re getting something better. The new place I believe can feel just as special especially with more windows so you can be surrounded by the soaring towers. If it was moved you couldn’t get that same nostalgia when it’s done and you go visit! I myself am more tempted to visit now than before.

Edit: (When it’s done).

[15895]

I already know the Charlotte culture of tear it down, btw. 
 

You really think they tore down Common Market, those cute buildings Dimensional replaced or anything else in the city that people thought were useful or significant? 
 

Honestly, all the areas that have buildings that aren’t particularly useful or significant are usually the cooler areas of the city/more interesting blocks/etc. 
 

Just my little fantasy would be saving this, turning it into a cool venue and having the new library front 1st Ward park or be by Imaginon. There’s plenty of land in uptown alone still to build the library.
 

These would be cool to still have uptown. 

 

Glad Latta Arcade was saved  nice little alley that I think is a great example of saving things. 

Edited November 24, 2021 by AirNostrumMAD

[davidclt]

On 11/23/2021 at 10:51 AM, B Randy said:

Do think that their program is a bit over the top and the price tag could have been lower though...

Nope, I think we should have spent and done even more. We should have commissioned Rem Koolhaas, Renzo Piano or Moshe Safdie to design a library for the ages. I think it's time for Charlotte to truly invest in our future not just continue to pursue cost engineered, gilded, uninspired, cookie cutter public-works projects priced right for our get it done cheapy mindset. We need architecture that will be celebrated for the ages and will age gracefully and become notable for how it was designed and not just because of what it is. We are becoming a big city; we need to start thinking and acting like a big city (not "world class"), Growing rapidly yet still growing up too slowly.

[j-man]

So when does this break ground officially.
 

 

[JRCLT]

So when does this break ground officially.
 
 

Early next year I think.

[RANYC]

On 11/26/2021 at 12:18 PM, JeanClt said:

Early next year I think.

Late October, close to the closure of the Library, brought headlines that Spirit Square and the Library would “deliver a year later than expected,” so around year-end 2025.  At least according to Bizjournals.  Reason cited was a design complexity issue.  Whether that means ground-breaking is postponed was unclear.  I had assumed so if they’re citing design issues as a reason for delay just last month, but perhaps not.  The Observer article said demolition relating to the Library project (which includes the theaters) will begin at the start of 2022.  The other parts of the two-block renovation, between 6th and 8th, are being handled by Metropolitan Partnership and the city hasn't finished negotiations with the development firm as of yet.  Negotiations should be finalized in early 2022, according to the Observer.

Edited November 28, 2021 by RANYC

[j-man]

1 hour ago, RANYC said:

Late October, close to the closure of the Library, brought headlines that Spirit Square and the Library would “deliver a year later than expected,” so around year-end 2025.  At least according to Bizjournals.  Reason cited was a design complexity issue.  Whether that means ground-breaking is postponed was unclear.  I had assumed so if they’re citing design issues as a reason for delay just last month, but perhaps not.

I wonder why they just won't start on the other block first instead and then finish the library last since its technically the only thing from this development that has to be open. 

[Bikeguy]

Given that the designs are buried several pages back...  thought it might suit to bring them, (and a perspective photo from KJ) , up front & center..

[RANYC]

1 hour ago, Bikeguy said:

Given that the designs are buried several pages back...  thought it might suit to bring them, (and a perspective photo from KJ) , up front & center..

I know most of you here despise the current library and eagerly await this new glass design, but I have this nagging fear that the GC is going to value-engineer the daylights out of this curvy and wavy thing, and my concerns have grown with this recently announced "design complexity delay."  

Edited November 28, 2021 by RANYC

[KJHburg]

39 minutes ago, Bikeguy said:

Given that the designs are buried several pages back...  thought it might suit to bring them, (and a perspective photo from KJ) , up front & center..

that tall tower is the background is the new Truist Tower and yes on the list about 34 stories or so if I remember from the list. 

[Diaz]

I know most of you here despise the current library and eagerly await this new glass design, but I have this nagging fear that the GC is going to value-engineer the daylights out of this curvy and wavy thing, and my concerns have grown with this recently announced "design complexity delay."  

General Contractors don’t value engineer anything unless they are part of the design team. Especially with commercial work. Even then they are the low man on the design team and are basically being asked “if we go with this more cost affordable material what’s that gonna do to the labor because it’s cheaper and more of a pain to work with?”Architects, Engineers, designers, and The Client do value engineering and design. Usually at the request of the client. The general contractor and all the subs work with the materials spec’d by the design people and assemble/install them according to manufacturers instructions and local codes. And there are even specific fastener specifications and spacing for the Sheetrock/drywall/gypsum board. GCs primarily facilitate the construction of a given project. They and the subs have latitude with very small things as long as the aren’t going against what’s on the plans. If something isn’t gonna work according to the plans there are meetings with the guys who drew the plans to work out solutions. If changes are to be made to accomplish the the overall vision Change orders are submitted on every level for approval before materials are ordered or work is done. The only “control” over costs that the General Contractor really has is choosing which vendors, suppliers, equipment rental companies, and subs to negotiate price with and to use in the first place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RANYC]

1 hour ago, Diaz said:

General Contractors don’t value engineer anything unless they are part of the design team. Especially with commercial work. Even then they are the low man on the design team and are basically being asked “if we go with this more cost affordable material what’s that gonna do to the labor because it’s cheaper and more of a pain to work with?”Architects, Engineers, designers, and The Client do value engineering and design. Usually at the request of the client. The general contractor and all the subs work with the materials spec’d by the design people and assemble/install them according to manufacturers instructions and local codes. And there are even specific fastener specifications and spacing for the Sheetrock/drywall/gypsum board. GCs primarily facilitate the construction of a given project. They and the subs have latitude with very small things as long as the aren’t going against what’s on the plans. If something isn’t gonna work according to the plans there are meetings with the guys who drew the plans to work out solutions. If changes are to be made to accomplish the the overall vision Change orders are submitted on every level for approval before materials are ordered or work is done. The only “control” over costs that the General Contractor really has is choosing which vendors, suppliers, equipment rental companies, and subs to negotiate price with and to use in the first place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"The GC has been hired to build what the architect has set forth in the plans and specifications for the project - no more and certainly no less.  However, you [developer] can ask the GC to do a review of what and how the architect has set forth the vision in the plans and specs.  The review process is referred to as value engineering and can be, as the name suggests, very valuable.  A GC will often bring a more practical insight to what is being built and can save you thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars.  However, value engineering is not just changing architectural plans of the vision.  Value engineering can have a significant impact on the building's performance, especially in the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing areas."

-The Complete Guide to Developing Commercial Real Estate, 2017, Robert A. Wehrmeyer, p. 16

Sourcing part of the premise of my statement.  Maybe book's assertion represents an expansion of scope than what you've seen traditionally.  Perhaps the book is all wrong.  Perhaps it's not just exclusively the GC and it's others among the teaming partners whereby issues are jointly escalated.  By the way, the book goes into detail on change order requests, but refers to them as a type of event or incident during construction, and not during pre-development when the dev works with GC to translate blueprints and plans and other reports into a practicable way forward.  Change order requests are a huge pain because they're a disruption during construction, but VE during pre-construction is a much smoother process of incorporating adjustments to ensure smooth execution.

At any point, this wasn't the point of my post...ignore that I even said GC...was just really wondering if anyone on the inside of this project knew how reliable and how predictive the wavy and glass renderings of the new library really are, or if the design and final look are still very much in flux.

Edited November 28, 2021 by RANYC

[Miesian Corners]

Not a fan of the current building. It was piecemealed together, anyway. The Tryon facade is what's left of the 1956 iteration--it was stripped of its modernist attributes and got a good dose of what I call the "UNC Charlotte Treatment": brick it up and go PoMo/faux classicism. The end result being a poorly integrated interior for library users and a clumsy exterior.

Give me Seattle or Minneapolis designs any day of the week over the current schlock.

By the way, here's the previous incarnation: