The Library Building is Architecture for People

 

See Library Space Through the Eyes of the People Who Use It


The library promises a place to think, a place to meet, a place to browse without purpose, a place to work without interruption.


Whether the building keeps those promises is not a question the architect can answer, and it is not a question the library community can answer with the library consultants help.


Yes, it is a question answered by the people who occupy the library. It is the people who make unconscious judgments about where they will sit and where they will not.


The Visual Scan is a method for gaining user insights.


The Design Thinking workshop puts focus group participants inside the building, walks them through it, and asks them to grade what they find. The results are very helpful to the design team.


They are also more useful than any amount of expert opinion offered from a conference room.


The Grading Framework


Participants assign each space a letter grade. The criteria are physical and specific — the attributes a user perceives immediately upon entering a zone, before any conscious evaluation begins.


"A" Space

The window wall. The corner. A zone defined by walls and pathway that reads clearly. Acoustical privacy. Good lighting. The ceiling of ten feet or more. Reliable climate control.


These are the seats that fill first. They fill first every day, in every library, regardless of what the floor plan intended. The combination of daylight, enclosure on at least one side, and vertical volume produces a space users will cross the entire building to reach.


"B" Space

A corner. A wall-defined zone. A defined pathway. Acoustical privacy. Good lighting. A ceiling of nine to ten feet. Reliable climate control.


The "B" space differs from the "A" space by one attribute: the window wall. The distinction is instructive. Daylight and outward view are not amenities layered onto a functional space — they are the single factor that separates good from excellent in the user's estimation.


"C" Space

A high wall-defined zone. Maze-like pathways. Unsecured private zones. Mediocre lighting. A ceiling of eight to nine feet. Questionable climate control.


The "C" space is where wayfinding fails. Pathways that require navigation rather than intuition impose a cognitive tax on every person who enters. The presence of unsecured private zones compounds the problem: spaces that feel isolated without feeling protected are avoided by the users who most need seclusion.


"D" Space

An undefined zone. Poor acoustical privacy. Poor lighting. An eight-foot ceiling. Poor climate control.


The "D" space is not merely unpopular. It is dead square footage, carried on the institution's operating budget at the same cost per foot as the spaces users fight over.


Library Building Programming: Another Dimension of the Scan

Grading space is only half the exercise. The designer needs to understand that space graded as "A" may still fail because it may be the wrong kind of space for the behavior required. We must accommodate all types of library users and needs.


Aaron Cohen Associates, developed the Visual Scan as a user engagement exercise to develop the next generation library. It identifies four distinct worksphere types, as Aaron Cohen Associates programs and plans. Each with its own arrangement logic, physical elements, behavioral signature, and native environments.


Formal

The formal worksphere, according Aaron Cohen Associates, is the standard library seating layout: geometric, controlled, arranged in rigid patterns. It comprises open areas and instructional facilities equipped with chairs, tables, computers, microform equipment, and auditoriums with fixed seating.


Behavior here is quiet and serious. The defining characteristic is the behavior bubble — the privacy requirements of the individual user, including protection of the back and sides. This is why the corner seat and the carrel against a wall outperform the table in the middle of the floor. The user reads the room for exposure before sitting down.


Native environments: seating areas for study, research, and work; classrooms and labs.


Collaborative

The collaborative worksphere, according Aaron Cohen Associates exists so patrons can work together and talk with one another. Its arrangement is interactive, flexible, and mobile. It requires open areas and enclosed rooms fitted with chairs, large tables, and computer stations.


Behavior includes conversation and noise, study and work that may be serious or playful, and small behavioral bubbles — users in collaborative mode surrender personal space voluntarily. The design consequence is direct: collaborative zones must be acoustically separated from formal zones, or one will destroy the other.


Native environments: seating clusters within study, research, and work areas; group study rooms; labs.


Casual/Informal

The casual worksphere, according Aaron Cohen Associates, accommodates browsing, reading, and coffee. Its arrangement is relaxed, changeable, and mobile. Its elements are couches, comfortable chairs, occasional tables, and cafeteria-style chairs and tables, distributed across open areas and enclosed rooms.


Behavior is quiet or noisy, serious or playful, with standard or small behavioral bubbles. This is the most tolerant of the worksphere types and the most frequently underbuilt.

Native environments: informal clusters, lounge areas, the cafe, the internet cafe.


Nomadic

The nomadic worksphere, according Aaron Cohen Associates, is the creative use of space and other physical resources by patrons. Its arrangement is unpredictable. Its elements are any element. Its environments are any environment.


Behavior is independent, rule-breaking, and strange. The nomadic user sits on the floor between the stacks, works at the end of a service desk, drags a chair to an outlet that was never meant to serve a chair. This behavior is not a discipline problem. It is user engagement data that is used to develop the modern library.


 
 
 
Facebook  Web