University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A Study Of The Architectural Design Of Six University Library Buildings

(USC Thesis Other)

A Study Of The Architectural Design Of Six University Library Buildings

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content A STUDY OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF SIX UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BUILDINGS by Uattr Kay Smith A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Library Science) January 1973 INFORMATION TO USERS This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon th e quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques, is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from th e document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru a n image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to hegin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to :m tinue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the firs t row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. University Microfilms 300 North Zeab Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 40106 A Xerox Education Company 4 73-1*4 ,*4*43 SMITE, Lester Kay, 1925^ A STUDY OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF SIX UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BUILDINGS. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1973 Library Science University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor. Michigan THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. UNIVERSITY O F SO UTHERN CALIFORNIA T H IO R A D U A T I SCHOOL UNIVERSITY PARK L O S ANOELSS. CALIFORNIA 8 0 0 0 7 T his dissertation, w ritten by under the direction of hi,ML... D issertation C om m ittee, and appro ved by all its m em bers, has been presented to and accepted by T h e G raduate School, in p a rtia l fulfillm ent of requirem ents of the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y DISSERTATION COMMITTEE Churmmm — .................................. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company PICTURE CREDITS Washington Univarsity Photographic Sarvica Ton Cullan and Sol Goldberg, Offica of Public Information, Cornell Univarsity Richard Linfield, Johns Hopkins University Photographic Sarvica, Arisona State University Gordon Parry, Salt Lake City A.V.B.S, Photographic Laboratories, University of Minnesota TABLE OP CONTENTS LIST OP TABLES.................................. vl LIST OP GBAFHS.................................. vlll LIST OP PIGURES................................ xll LIST OP PLATES.......... xiv Chapter I. INTRODUCTION............. 1 Pressures on Acadenlc Libraries AcadeadLe Library Architecture in the United States Purpose of the Study The Hypotheses Organisation of tha Study II. REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE 22 Introduction Monographs Building Conference Reports Periodical Literature Other Subject Fields Which Influence Library Design Suanary III. RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURES.......... 58 Selection of the Libraries Methods of Investigation The Oplnionnaires Ssapling the Populations Distribution of the Oplnionnaires Methods of Analysing tha Data Application of tha t Test Suanary " ill Chapter IV. A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSITIES AND THEIR LIBRARIES............ 76 Introduction Washington University Cornell University Johns Hopkins University Arisons state University University of Utah University of Minnesota Suanary V. FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION............ 91 Introduction Preparations for Design of the Library Buildings Sits Locations and Entrances of the Library Buildings The Architectural Design of Each Building Interior Organisation and Traffic Accoaaaodatlons in Bach Library Building Description and Comparison of Special Library Spaces for the Public Ambient Conditions in Each Library Building Description and Comparison of Administrative Offices Additional Library Staff Opinions on Their Work Spaces and Related Questions VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS..................... 255 Recapitulation Summary of tha Findings Tha Findings Ralated to tha Hypotheses Conclusions Recommendations i v APPENDIX I........................................ 279 APPENDIX I I .........................................281 APPENDIX III............... 292 APPENDIX IV.........................................304 BIBLIOGRAPHY......................... ............. 383 v LIST OF TABLES Table Pag* 1. Rasults of tha Distribution o£ Opinion- nalrss at tha Six Universities in tha Study. ..................... 68 2. Total Distribution and Racalpt of Opinion- nairas at tha Six Llbrarias. ........ 71 3. Suanary of Information on tha Llbrarias in the Study................. 88 4. Modula Slsas Usad in tha Six Buildings Studlad................................. 130 3. Location of tha Major Sarvlcas and Departments in tha Llbrarias Studied • • . 145 6. Library Service Cues at tha Main Entrance of Each Library in tha Study .......... 149 7. Description of Specialised Study Spaces in the Libraries....................... 167 8. Seminar and Typing Room in the Libraries. . 169 9. Location of Specialised Public Service Spaces in all Six Libraries. ••••••• 184 10. Typical Ceiling Haights in the Six Library Buildings....................... 193 11. Major Interior finishes Used in the Six Libraries............... 203 12. Number and Sixes of Offices in the Library Adadnlstratlve Suites. •••••• 232 v i Table 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Paga Description of the Principal Technical Services Work Spaces In the Six Libraries................................ 239 Frequency of Citations by TS and PS Library Staffs of Adverse Architectural Features Related to Library Work Facilities............. . . . ; ..........245 Frequency of Citations by TS and PS Library Staffs of Adverse Architectural Features Related to Personal Coafort • • • • 248 General Conclusions of the Library Staffs Regarding the Architectural Design of Their Respective Library ........ 249 Sunaary of Positive Library Staff Responses Regarding the Influence of Architecture on Their Work Attitudes and Feelings of Cosifort.................................252 vll LIST OP GRAPHS Page Ratings of all faculty and students on tha location of thair raspectiva library on canpus, 107 Ratings of all faculty and students on tha location of tha entrance, or entrances, to their respective library on canpus. ......... 109 Ratings of all faculty and students on the architectural design of their respective library on canpus • Ratings of all faculty and students on the ease of locating library services Enents In their respective or departi library. Ratings of all faculty and students on the interior arrangenent of their respective library building on canpus, • • • Ratings of all faculty and students on the location of stairways In their respec tive library ............................. 1 Ratings of all faculty and students on the location of elevators In their respective library ....................... 1 Ratings of all facility and students on nunber of elevators in their respective library. ............................ 1 Ratings of all students on the availability. In their respective library, of areas, such as snail roons, where students nay talk or study...................••••••1 Ratings of all students on the variety of study spaces In their respective library • • 1 vill Graph Pag* 11. Ratings of all faculty and studanta on tha adaquacy of typing rooms In thalr raapactlva library. ••••••••••••• 177 12. Ratings of all faculty and studanta on tha adaquacy of microform fad lit las at thalr raapactlva library.................179 13. Ratings of all faculty and students on tha avalllblllty of areas, In thalr respective library, where one nay anoka ... 181 14. Ratings of all faculty and students on tha adaquacy of tha rest room In thalr respective library. ••••........... 182 13. Ratings of all faculty and students on tha sufficient number of drinking fountains In thalr raspactlva library • • • • 183 16. Ratings of all faculty and studanta on tha lighting In tha reading areas of thalr raspactlva library.............•••• 187 17. Ratings of all faculty and students on tha lighting In bookstacks of thalr raspactlva library. ••••••••••••• 188 18. Ratings of all library staffs on lighting In their raspactlva work areas In tha libraries..................................189 19. Ratings of all user-groups on tha location of windows In thalr raspactlva library. . . . 192 20. Ratings of all user-groups on tha maker of windows In thalr raspactlva library. . .. 193 21. Ratings of all user-groups on ths calling heights In thalr raspactlva library • • • • • 196 22. Ratings of all user-groups on tha ventilation (air conditioning) In thalr raspactlva library. ••••••••••••• 198 ix Graph 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. Pag* Ratings of all user-groups on haatlng In thalr raapactlva library..................199 Ratings of all usar-groups on fraadon from nolsa In thalr raspactlva library .. . 202 Ratings of all usar-groups on tha asthatlc design of tha Intarlor of thalr raspactlva library ....................... 207 Faculty, student, public services and technical sarvicas library staff opinions on asiblant features In Olln Library, Washington University........... 209 Facility, student, public sarvicas and tachnlcal sarvicas library staff opin: Llbr Inlons on ambient features In Olln ary, Cornell University............. • 210 Faculty, student, public sarvicas and tachnlcal sarvicas library staff opinions on ambient features In Elsenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University ................. 211 Faculty, student, public services and technical services library staff opinions on ambient features In Hayden Library, Arlsona State University............212 Faculty, atudent, public services and technical sarvicas library staff opinions on smblent features In Marriott Library, University of Utah • • • • 213 Faculty, student, public services and technical services library staff opinions on ambient features In Wilson Library, University of Minnesota. • • 214 Library staff opinions on the adequacy of the work apaces In their respective library.....................................238 x Graph Paga 33. Library staff opinions on tha flaxlblllty of the work spacas In thalr raspactlva library.....................................240 34. Library staff opinions on tha traffic patterns In tne work spacas In thalr raspactlva library ........................ 241 35. Library staff opinions on co— unlcatlona In tna vork spacas of thalr raspactlva library. ........................... 243 36. Percentage of TS and PS library staffs who fait that library facilities related to thalr work ware conveniently located. • • 244 37. Parcantaga of TS and PS library staffs who fait that personal comfort facilities In thalr raspactlva library ware conveniently located.................... 246 xl Pll« 100 101 102 103 104 103 132 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 139 160 LIST OP FIGUKES Washington Univarsity* • • • • ........... Cornell Univaraley • •••••••••••• Johns Hopkins University ........... Arisons State University •••••••••• University of Utah ••••••• .......... University of Minnesota* * ........... D1serene shoeing nodule sloes used In the Olln Library* Cornell University • • • Entrance floor* Olln Library* Washington University........ * ........ Entrance floor* Olln Library* Cornell University........ * ......... Top floor* Elsenhower Library* Johns Hopkins University * ........... Entrance floor* Elsenhower Library* Johns Hopkins University ••••••••• Entrance floor* Hayden Library* Arlsona State University ••••••••• Main entrance floor. Marriott Library, University of Utan •••••* ........ • Main entrance floor* Wilson Library, University of Minnesota* •• ••••••• Typical stack and reader arrangenent, Olln Library, Washington University* • • • Typical stack and reader arrangenent, Olln Library, Cornell University* • • • • xll Figure _ • Page 17. Typical stack and reader arrangenent* Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University.................. • ••••• 161 18. Typical stack and reader arrangenent, Hayden Library, Arlsona State University. • •••••••••••••• 162 19. Typical stack and reader arrangenent, Marriott Library, University of Utah. • • 163 20. Typical stack and raader arrangenent, Wilson Library, University or Minnesota ..................... 164 21. Second level showing the lay-out of the technical sarvicas department, Marriott Library, University of Utah. • • 236 xlii LIST OF PLATES Plate Page I. Olln Library - Washington University.... 114 II. Olln Research Library - Cornell University. • 116 III. Elsenhower Library - Johns Hopkins University........................... 118 IV. Elsenhower Library - Johns Hopkins University. •••••••••••••••• 120 V. Hayden Library - Arisons State University • • 122 VI. Marriott Library - University of Utah • • • • 124 VII. Wilson Library - University of Minnesota. • • 126 VIII. Entrance lobby stairs In Olln Library - Washington University ••••••••••• 218 IX. Main Entrance floor, Olln Library • Washington University.............•••• 220 X. Card catalog area, main entrance floor, Olln Research Library - Cornell University................... 222 XI. Greet stair hall, Elsenhower Library - Johns Hopkins University. • ........... 224 XII. Main entrance lobby, Hayden Library - Arisons State University. •••• ........ 226 XIII. The Atriun, Marriott Library - University of Utah.............................. 228 XIV. Entrance to the periodical departaent, Wilson Library - University of Minnesota............................ 230 xlv CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This Is a study of tha archltsctural daslgn of six modern academic library buildings and how groups of users responded to the design of these buildings* The study points out the strengths and weaknesses of present-day library architecture as evidenced In these six designs and suggests areas which need further study* Before describing the study, some background on the develo|Maent of higher education in recent years appears to be necessary* Since the end of Uorld War II, the expansion of * higher education facilities In the United States has been a major concern of both the governmental and private agencies. If predictions of future enrollments continue to be accurate, many of the existing colleges and universities must continue to expand In order to accommodate added students. Moreover, entirely new campuses must be built, If those who wish to enroll In the future are to be accom modated* The reasons cited for the growth of higher educa tion can be found in various published sources; It Is only sufficient to note, for the purposes of this intro duction, the extent of these Increases In enrollsMmt* 1 2 In 1955, there wtrc 2,651,000 studanta enrolled In all the Institutions of higher learning In the United States.* In 1969, students In colleges and universities totalled 7,978,408, an Increase of 201 per cent In fifteen 2 years. The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education pre dicts that enrollments In the Nation*a colleges and univer sities will Increase to 13,500,000 by 1980.3 It Is not surprising that higher education has been referred to as 4 a growth Industry! Pressures on Academic Libraries As higher education has expanded, so have the academic libraries. In the post-war period, the libraries have had to respond to a variety of pressures. The most Important of these are: 1. Increases In acquisitions. There has arisen *U.S. Office of Education. Division of Educational Statistics. Pro lections of Educational Statistics to 1973/74. (Washington, I9M), p. S.----------------- *U.S. National Center for Educational Statistics. Opening Fall Enrollment In Higher Education, 1969: Report on preliminary Survey. t Washington: U.S. Department ot"" Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, 1970). p. 8. 3 Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. New Students and New Places: Follcleo for the Future Growth and Development or American Higher Education, mew Yorn: McGraw-Hill, 1971;, p. 4. *”Latest *Growth Industry* - Colleges In U.8.,n U^S.^News and World Report. LXIII, (July 17, 1967), 3 the need to house more material as a result of an increase in published information. ^ Added to this is the emphasis on research at many of the colleges and universities. This requires that their libraries obtain substantially all materials in certain subject fields in order to support the research programs. Moreover, libraries are being required to collect materials in subject fields not acquired previously either because there was no Interest in them, or because they did not exist. 2. Increases in student-use. A number of factors have affected the amount of student patronage of academic libraries in the post-war period. First, obviously, has been the pressure of increased numbers of students on many 2 campuses. The American Library Association, in its Standards for College Libraries (1959), recommended that seats be provided for at least one-third of the student body on a college campus. A more commonly quoted figure is that there be seats for twenty-five per cent of the student body. On a rapidly expanding campus, even with ^Estimated world book production increased from 285,000 titles in 1955 to 487,000 titles in 1968. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. Statistical Yearbook. (Paris: 1969), p. 528. 2 Statements about enrollment reflect facts as of the year the research for this paper was done, 1969. •*See Ralph E. Ellsworth, Planning the College and University Library Building (Boulder, Colo.: Pruett Press/Inc., 196&), p. 100. 4 a new library building, It has bean difficult for a library to neat even the lower figure. A second factor affecting student library use con cerns the graduate student. Graduate and professional enrollnents have Increased, In recent years, at an even faster pace than undergraduate enrollmentsGraduate students require more library materials than do under graduates. Furthermore, libraries feel the obligation to provide specialized study spaces for these graduate students. A third characteristic In the Increase of student use of the library Is the result of a higher level of Intellectual performance by the student. Present-day students are, on the average, more serious In their educa tional goals than were their predecessors a few years ago. More Is expected of them by their teachers. Scholastic competitiveness results In heavier use of the library by students, even If It Is only for study hall purposes. 3. Changes In teaching concepts. New methods of teaching In a college or university have been slow In ^In 1953, there wore 242,000 graduate students and, In 1969, 765,865 graduate students, an Increase of 271 per cent during the fifteen-year period. Statistics are from U.S. Office of Education. D1vision of Educational Statistics. Pro lections . . .t p. 5 and U.S. National Center for Educational Statistics. Students Enrolled for Advanced Degrees. Fall 1969: Preliminary Report. (Uashlngton: tr.5. Government Printing Or ties, 1970), p. 2. s developing, but there ere two recent trends which heve some effect on increesing the use of the library. The influences on library use, if these trends continue, will be considerable. The first trend is that of a growing ewphasls on Independent study. A study of 443 four-year colleges taken in 1963,1 revealed that sixty-eight per cent had some type of Independent study programs. The number and complexity of the programs, and the scholastic levels partldpstlng in them, varied from campus to campus. In the implementation of Independent study courses, however, the Increased demands on the resources of the library is clearly evident. The second teaching trend involves a greater use of mechanical instructional aids, such as film strips, slides, televised lectures, motion picture films, sound tapes, phonograph records, and related material. It has been found desirable to have these medle available in the library for student use at tlsies when they are not in class. These educational techniques are still not being used in many four-year colleges and universities, but they are increasingly part of educational programs at the Junior college level. The trend will spread. For this iDell Felder, "Independent-Study Practices in Colleges and Universities," Journal of Hieher Education. XXXV (June, 1964), 335-38. 6 reason, consideration should be given to the effect media might have on the library of a four-year college or uni versity. Msdia use will require planning a library which will allow for the installation of more electronic equip ment than is presently found in libraries. There will also be a need for specially-designed spaces for students to use this equipment. 4. Expansion of library staffs. The expansion of library collections and services has brought with it the need to expand library staffs. As the book budgets of libraries have increased, it has become necessary to add more staff to acquire and process the material. To pro vide service for more students and faculty, the libraries also found it necessary to expand their personnel in service areas.* As a consequence of these four post-war pressures, there has been a need for additional building space for *In the period 1959-1969, professional and non- f rofesslonal staff at colleges and universities doubled, n 1959, there were, in round numbers, 18,000 professional and non-professional staff members in 1,951 libraries. In 1969, there were 37,000 professional and non-professional staff members in 2,122 libraries. Data are taken from U.S. Office of Education. Library Statistics of Colleges and Universities. 1959/60. Advance Analytic Report. (Washington: (j.S. Government Printing office, i960) and U.S. National Center for Education Statistics. Library Statistics of College and Universities. Data for indivi dual institutions. I9&9. (Washington: U.S. Government Printing OHlc, 19707. 7 the housing of new materials, readers, and sarvicas. Deci sions have had Co ba mads about whether to raisodal and expand tha existing library buildings or to build entirely new library structures. It was found that, so far as the existing buildings were concerned, remodeling then, or adding to then often was very expensive. The renovated structures offered no guarantee of satisfactory housing for the expanded library and Its services. To understand the dllenna facing the library administrators during this period, one should be aware of the type of library archi tectural design which prevailed on most campuses before World War II. Academic Library Architecture In the United States The Traditional Building Until nearly the middle of the twentieth century, similar architectural styles prevailed In virtually all the designs of acadesdc library buildings. Tha typical building was Inspired by Classical, Gothic, or Renaissance antecedents. It was designed to be Imposing on the campus; Its monumentality suggested the Importance of the contents of the building. Unusual efforts were expended In the enhancement of Its Interiors by means of grand staircases, spacious lobbies, ornate light fixtures, and 8 rich architectural finishes, such as marble, wood veneers, and mosaics. Functions of the library were carefully segregated, and the architectural spaces housing them were enclosed by thick, load-bearing walls. Principal library spaces were generous In scale. In order to provide sufficient light and ventilation, reading rooms had high ceilings, often thirty or forty feet In height, together with tall, regularly spaced windows. In contrast to the omateness of the public spaces, the bookstacks were severely simple In construction. Made of exposed metal supports, the bookstacks consisted of a series of low-celllnged floors ranging In height from 7*-2" to 7'-6". These floors were highly efficient for their one purpose - the shelving of books. While beautiful, or at least monumental, to look at, these libraries presented problems as functional build ings. With the advent of electricity, they were difficult to wire for artificial lighting. They were virtually Impossible to heat and alr-condltlon. Interior space was not used efficiently, a great deal of It being taken up by the monumemtal staircases, spacious lobbies, thick walls, and hlgh-celllnged rooms. The most difficult problem was that these buildings were Inflexible to change. The thick walls surrounding the various spaces, many of 9 thorn load-bearing, could bo cut through or Modified only with difficulty end ot greet expense. The booksteck ores could not comfortebly be used for edded functions* such es providing specs for renders. Had there been little or no chenge In llbrery services, or the sixes of the llbrery collections, these probleas weald hove been minimal, but In the period between the two World Wars, there were changes In the philosophy of llbrerlenshlp. Chances In Library Philosophy According to Guy R. Lyle, Director of Libraries, Emory University, World War I had a tremendous effect on the college curriculum, especially In the fields of history, social sciences, and the humanities. Furthermore, Lyle stated with regard to college teaching: "Mew Ideas, events, and discoveries could no longer be analysed within the confines of a single textbook.This led Instructors to place a variety of material they thought Important to their courses on reserve In the library for student use. These reserve collections often contained multiple copies of the most Important texts. During this same period, such schools es Harvard University, Smith College, end Swsrthmore College were developing honors courses, general reeding courses, end Library 10 other curriculum changes which brought about a greater need for library msterlals. These two curricular developments -- the sub stitution of assigned library readings for the textbook In many history and social studies courses and the Introduction of the so-called honors courses and the like — brought about the first real breakthrough In the recognition . of the library as an Important aid In teaching,1 A significant experiment In merging classroom and library activities was Instituted, In 1932, at Stephens College, Missouri, a two-year college for women. The program was described by B, Lamar Johnson In his book, Vitalising a College Library.2 Dr, Johnson, In his dual lIbld. 2B. Lamar Johnson, Vitalising a College Library (Chicago: American Library Association, 1939), Several of the experimental programs carried out at Stephens during the period reported were funded by Carnegie Corporation grants. An tip-dated account of the Stephens College educa tional programs, Including a description of Its new library Is found In W. Hugh Stickler (ed,), Experimental Colleges: Their Role In Higher Education (Tallahassee: Florida state University, 1^64;, pp. 33-A>, Stickler Is head of the Department of Higher Education, Florida State University. An Important study on the use of books in colleges which appeared at about the same time as Johnson's, and which proposed Instructional changes similar to those enacted in the Stephens plan, is described in Harvie Brans comb, Teaching with Books (Chicago: Aissrlcan Library Association, supported by a Carnegie Corporation grant to the Association of American Colleges In 1937, the study detailed the generally low student use of college libraries everywhere. The book described the activities at a few schools where concerted efforts had been made to Incorporate library materials Into the Instructional pro gram and the success such programs had in increasing student use of the libraries. The study concluded with specific proposals for merging the classroom and library units Into one Instructional activity. I 11 role of Dean of Instxuctlon and College Librarian, inte grated the resources of the library with the teaching programs by, (1) placing unique collections of books in instructional departments and other places where they were needed, (2) expanding the concepts of library materials to Include nonbook materials such as pictures, music scores, phonorecords, and motion picture films and, (3) uniting teachers and librarians into a single instructional staff. A present-day concept of the Stephens College education pvogram has been advanced by many educators in the educational world, and, most notably, by Dr. Louis Shores, Dean Emeritus, Florida State University Library School. Dr. Shores calls the concept the "Library- College." The "Library-College" plan would abolish formal classroom lectures in favor of a supervised reading program for each student. The student would be guided by teacher-librarians, persons who are as well-trained as librarians as they are in subject disciplines. The library collection would be housed in a struc ture specially designed for the new kinds of learning activities the "Library-College" would emphasize. Since the functions of classrooms and laboratories would be oterged with the library, the "library-learning" building would be the heart of the campus. 12 The "Llbrary-College" concept it being vigorously promoted.I Although this concept has not yet received widespread acceptance in higher education circles, It should be watched carefully. Changes In teaching which would place the library at the hub of academic activities would strongly Influence the architectural design concepts of the building in which these activities are housed. Academic library change was not due entirely to external forces. During the post-World War I period, a new breed of librarians was developing. They were the first graduates of professional library schools which were no longer library training Institutes but were graduate schools aligned with universities. These "new" librarians were a different type from the old scholar-librarians. Lyle has written: If they had any special virtue, It was a mission ary seal to make libraries useful, and they appeared on the scene just at the moment college libraries were beginning to expand In volume and variety of service ... By Improving library technology, making more books accessible on open shelvbe, breaking down the traditional barriers of library aloofness and dignity, extending and Improving reference services, centralising library services, and encouraging general reading through browsing rooms, dormitory libraries, weekly book talks, and student library prise awards, they helped to dispel the museum 9 concept of llbrarlanshlp as well as Its practices.^ *See Issues of Learning Today, edited by Howard Claytoh, Ph.D., School of Library science, University of Oklahoma. 2 Lyle, Administration of the College Library, p. 3. 13 Thus after World War I, the academic library began to emerge aa an Important educational institution on campus. No longer was the library merely a static raposi- tory for books, set apart from the malnetream of college education. Ai» the functlona of the library changed, It became neceasary to modify the building hhualng theae functlona. As haa been seen, the old monumental buildings were often too Inflexible to be changed, or If changes could be effected, they were expensive and usually not very satisfactory. In a word, the old library buildings were obsolete. In the early 1930*s, a fresh approach to the design of libraries was voiced by Angus Snead Macdonald. Macdonald was trained as an architect but did not practice; * , Instead, after graduation he entered the family business, that of manufacturing library shelving. In 1933, he wrote of his conception of the library of the future.^ It was strikingly prophetic of many of the design concepts for libraries of today. Macdonald envisioned a building with free, open spaces, having walls which could be dis assembled and relocated easily. The ceilings would be 8 feet in height. The entire building would be artlfi- cally air-conditioned and lighted. It would not be ^Angus S. Macdonald, "A Library of the Future," Library Journal. LVIII (December 1, 1933), 971-75. 14 monumental, but nor* "homelike," informal in its surround ings. The building could bo easily expanded. Over the years, Macdonald continued to expend his thesis.1 By the 1940's, he had developed the concept which has later been called nodular library design, an idea which he first described in a speech in 1934.2 Modular design Involves using regularly-spaced load- bearing columns in both directions; that is, nodules. With this system, walls can bs placed where needed and removed and re-located without undue expense. Structural members, including columns and floors, are hollow in order to carry electrical and ventilating services to all parts of the Interior spaces. Floors commonly having celling heights of *See Angus 8. Macdonald, "Sons Engineering Developments Affecting Large Libraries," A.L.A. Bulletin. XXVIII (September, 1934), 628-32, and "Mew Possibilities ' in Library Planning," Library Journal. LXX (December 13, 1943), 169-74. For an extensive appraisal of the impact of Macdonald*s ideas on library architecture, see Charles H. Baumann, The Influence of Anaua Snead Macdonald and the Snead Bookstack on Library Architecture. iMctuchcn. N.J.: Scarecrow press, inc., 19727. The text is based on the author's doctoral dissertation for the Graduate School of Library Science, University of Illinois. * This mat not an idea new to architecture. The modular concept has long been used for office and ware house planning; only its application to library design was new. See the following booklet for an early, post war discussion of the possibilities of modular design for academic libraries: Donald B. Bean and Ralph E. Ellsworth, Modular Planning for Collaaa and Small UMvaraltv Libraries. i Iowa Clfcv. leST: gl^etv KInlea. 1948). 15 8 Co 9 fnt for better vortical relationship*. Because of technological advances, it is no longer necessary to have high-ceiling spaces to achieve adequate light, ventilation, and sound control. Library Architecture after World War II Macdonald's nodular library concepts were not used in the design of entirely new library buildings until after World War II. One of the first nodular libraries constructed was the one at the State University of Iowa. Or. Ralph Ellsworth was the University Librarian at the tine. About the construction of this library, Alvin Toffler has written, [tO he dominance of monunentallsm cane to an abrupt end. The swiftness of the modular revolution was amazing. From the time Dr. Ellsworth built his new library at Iowa down to the present, hardly a single major campus library has been built in this country that has not, in one way or another, followed his lead.1 Library design based on modular concepts has now been practiced f6v nearly thirty years. As skills and knowledge in the field have Improved, library design has 1Alvin Toffler, "Libraries," in Educational Facilities Laboratories, Inc., Bricks and Mortarboards Q9643, p. 76. Mr. Toffler is the author ot the recent best-seller, Future Shock. He has been a free-lance writer since 19*1, and wrote this commissioned article on libraries based on interviews with librarians, educa tors, and architects. 16 Also improved. There Is need for still more Improvement, as Ellsworth states, He who la satisfied that the concept of modular planning is the ultimate and final basis for th^ library planning Is lacking in both hindsight and foresight, Indeed, because It should be obvious to all that the technology of building construction is still In Its Infancy In some respects* Buildings still cost too much; use materials that are too heavy; can*t be enlarged readily; haven*t mastered proper ventilation, lighting, or sound-proofing; can»t be remodeled easily and inexpensively; and haven*t made use of* new construction and decorative materials* Surprisingly, there has been virtually no formal critical appraisal of library architectural design* Library literature abounds with articles describing new library buildings and their equipment written by the librarians who, in most Instances, were responsible for the design of these buildings* Concerning this practice, Ellsworth Mason, Director of Libraries, Hofstra University, and a library building consultant, comments tartly, Anyone would be morally offended to read the review of a book by the author himself, but we accept without question the account of a new library building by the librarian who planned it, the very person totally unequipped to give it any objective review* For he has moved out of a rat*s nest Into spacious quarters, which would seem grand no matter what they were, he Is under heavy pressure from his university to get this prime piece ^Ralph E. Ellsworth, Plamd.tut the College and University Library Building (2nd bd*, boulder, Colo*: Pruett Frees, Inc., 1968;, p* 10. 17 of public relations on the roadt there often is a kindly donor of the building pleased as punch Csic] in the background, and the building itself is the librarian*s baby. Consequently, the effervescent flow of bland reviews of buildings (Just run through an architectural issue of LJ), all of which say that they Incorporate in the highest possible degree all the successful elements, described in cliches, of the totally good build ing*1 This quotation is part of the introduction to the author*s lengthy examination of a library building and its planning. Or. Mason indicated his Intention to write a continuing series of critical articles on library archi tecture. Thus far, he seems to have produced only two additional articles in this vein.^ Mew Academic Library Construction Because of educational expansion at college and university campuses and the availability of federal funds for the construction of new buildings, there has been a sharp Increase in the number of new academic libraries built in recent years. The period covering 1967 through ^Ellsworth Mason, "The Belnecke Siamese Twins: An Objective Review of Yale*s New Rarebook Library Bulld- in|,N College and Research Libraries. XXVII (May, 1965), 2 Ellsworth Mason, ”A Coast Range Gem: The Los Gatos High School Library," A.L.A. Bulletin. LX (March, 1966), 270-74, and "The Rock; A Critique ofthe John 0. Rockefeller, Jr. Library for the Humanities and Social Sciences at Brown University." Library Journal. XCIII (December 1, 1968), 4487-92. 18 1971 witnessed the completion o£ over 400 construction projects involving new library buildings or the remodeling and renovation of older buildings* Total costs of the projects, Including furniture, was nearly one billion dollars*^ In 1963, an American Library Association survey of academic libraries in sixteen key states revealed that more than one-fourth of those libraries were constructed before 1923, almost half dated from 1942, and several were 100 years old* It was also determined, due to lack of funds or for similar reasons, that over forty per cent of public and seventy per cent of private Institutions probably could not build new library buildings* Passage of the Higher Educational Facilities Act of 1963 (PL 88-204) a five-year program which provided funds for up to one- third the total cost of the construction of an academic library building, has eased the latter situation* Much remains to be done. Richard Dobar, who is on the Planning Faculty, Graduate School of Design, Harvard University, stated in his book: Actual figure: $984,919,814* Jerrold Ome, "The Renaissance of Academic Library Building 1967-1971," Library Journal. XCVI (December 1, 1971), 3947-67* 2 Theodore Samore, "Academic Library Buildings: Meeds, Legislation, Inventory," College and Research Libraries, XXV (July, 1964), 295-307. 19 There in fm pre-World War IX libraries worth continuing in uaa aa a library, expansion of thsss aonunsnts is costly and difficult, and usually accomplished only through the desecra- tlon of tha stagecraft qualities of design they usually possess.* Purpose of the Study The library building is one of the most costly structures built on any campus. When one considers the large initial Investment for the building and the need for expanding or modifying the original structure within a few years, it is Important to know whether present architectural design concepts for libraries have been sound. What have been the design strengths? What weak nesses have occurred in academic library design? What aspects need more study? It is the intent of this study to examine these topics in a limited way and to isolate soma of the more obvious characteristics of academic library architecture. In using the term "limited," the author is referring to the fact that his study hss had to be limited because of lack of resources to undertake a more wide spread investigation, in depth, of academic library buildings. This study has been restricted to six adademlc library buildings which are thought to be among the ^Richard P. Dober, '•anr'ltt Planning. (New York: Relnhold Publishing Corp., i9ej), p. rl. 20 best-designed since World War II. Choice of Che six libraries was made by polling library building consultants. Chapter III, Procedures and Research Design, describes the methods used and the results obtained in the final selec tion of the libraries in this study. The Hypotheses Because this study was exploratory in nature, only hypotheses of a general nature were written. It was felt that more specific conclusions would be reached only upon completion of the investigation. Therefore, the following three hypotheses were formulated as a basis for the study: HYPOTHESIS I: Each academic library building in the study will have architectural spaces organized and inter related in such a manner that most of the library functions will be effectively promoted. HYPOTHESIS II: The designs of the library buildings will include the capability of their being structurally modi fied. HYPOTHESIS III: Users will generally be favorably dis posed toward each library and will call attention to only a few architectural or functional features they regard as being unfavorable. 21 Organization of tha Study The study consists of six chapters, of which Chapter I la an Introduction to the Investigation under taken. Chapter II Includes a survey of the literature on library design as well as the citation of Important examples of literature on related topics. Chapter III describes the methods of research used. In Chapter IV will be found a brief history of the universities and their libraries which constituted the subjects of the study. The findings of the study are presented in Chapter V, with the summary, conclusions, and recommenda tions concerning these findings being discussed In the final chapter. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction As anyone who has consulted Indexes on the subject knows, there Is a large body of literature on the topic of library architecture. The rate of addition seems to increase each year in effect providing testimony to con* siderable interest in the subject. The preponderance of this periodical literature consists of articles describing newly constructed libraries. The typical article is written by the librarian who has planned the library building. He provides the reader with a description of the building, materials and equipment used, the furnishings included, and an assurance that a generally successful building was produced. No critical appraisal is provided in these articles. None could be expected from the librarian chiefly responsible for the design of the building. The most important literature on library archi tecture is found first in a very small number of monographs which discuss multiple topics of library design and, second, in individual articles which treat more restricted aspects of library architectural design. The intent of 22 23 this review of tho literature la twofold: (1) to describe what the author feels is the most important literature on the problems of academic library architectural design and, (2) to bring up-to-date the most comprehensive work in this field, namely, Plaimlna the Academic and taaaarch Library Bulldlne. by Keyea 0. Metcalf* First, a note on the authors who have produced the writings Cited in this chapter: the contributors have been both specialists and non-specialists in the field of library design* The non-specialists are gen erally libra..ans who have had the experience of designing a library and, in writing, express their opinions and concern for particular aspects of library design* The articles are often valueble for their fresh, unhackneyed viewpoints on design topics* The specialists call upon experience and training in presenting their opinions* Specialists such as architects, and lighting, acoustical, heating, and venti lating engineers have written their views on llbrery design* As far as ths total body of literature is con cerned, the most important group of specialists writing on library design are the library building consultants* They have produced e slseble body of literature on library architecture* Since consultants play an important role today in designing libraries, a more extensive discussion 24 of what a library consultant is, and what ha doss, Is undertaken later In this chapter* In the section, "The Library Building Consultant." The two library' building consultants who have been the most prolific contributors to the literature on library design are Dr. Ralph E. Ellsworth, Librarian Emeritus, University of Colorado, and Dr. Keyes D. Metcalf, Librar ian Emeritus, Harvard University. The fact that they have written extensively on the subject and primarily on the subject of academic library architecture has spread their reputation In the consulting field. There are other librarians who, through their writings, have also become well-known as building consultants. They will be Identi fied as their contributions to the literature are dis cussed. The literature on library architecture can be conveniently divided into three types: 1. Monographs written by one or several persons. As mentioned earlier, there are few up-to-date publica tions In this category. 2. Conference reports In published form. Notable examples of this type are the American Library Association- sponsored library building Institutes. 3. Periodical articles which are found In library journals and in other specialised periodicals such as 25 architectural and educational journals. Before beginning discussion of specific titles In the field of library architecture, there are three other subject areas which have a close relationship to the sub ject at hand. These Include the literature on: (1) higher education, (2) automation and Information storage and retrieval processes and, (3) studies of human percep tion of architectural space. First, with regard to the literature on higher education, It has been noted earlier that the design of the library reflects to some extent the philosophies and goals of education. Librarians wish this relationship were stronger and continually press the case for the library as being one of the principal centers of teaching. Acceptance of this concept may come as a result of educa tional trends toward Independent study and use of mechan ical Instructional aids which were discussed briefly In Chapter 1. Greater use of Independent study programs results In increased use of the library. Mechanical Instructional aids such as film strips, slides, televised lectures, and sound tapes can logically be housed In the library for student use during hours the library Is open. Perhaps these trends will not continue, but planners of an academic library should be aware of current and future educational trends. 26 A second field concerns developments In automation and Information storage and retrieval. As will be noted later, It Is suspected that automation as well as infor mation storage devices will influence library design, but no one is quite certain how this will oome about. In part, consideration of these subjects has spawned several noteworthy publications on the library of the future. These will be discussed In this chapter. Finally, a third field on which there has been little research conducted is that of formal studies of human reaction and Interaction to architectural space. This is a promising area of study and Is largely being carried on today by psychologists and anthropologists. The philosophical concentration of library architectural design Is strongly oriented toward creating the Ideal environment for the library user. It is not known what the "ideal" library environment is. At present,.if students do not complain loudly, it is assumed that a well-designed library has been created for them. Writings on library architecture may be categor ized first as monographs, then conference reports, and finally, significant periodical literature arranged under broad topics. The concluding section Is a brief over view of literature on three subject fields closely related to academic architectural design. 27 Monographs Monographic litaratura in chit fiald is liaitad. Tha first handbook of principles on academic library archi tecture was written by James T. Gerould in 1932.2 Dr. Gerould was University Librarian at Princeton. The book, while out of dafee, still expresses in compact form basic principles of library design concepts which are valid today. Among other things, tha author emphasised the need for a written building program. Unfortunately* few librarians heeded his advice until recent times. A landmark work in library design literature appeared in 1941. Although it is devoted to public library architecture, many of its concepts apply equally well to academic library architecture. This work is The American Public Library by Joseph L. Wheeler and Alfred M. Githens.^ Dr. Wheeler was for many years librarian at Enoch Pratt Library. His co-author was Alfred Git hens, an architect responsible for the design of numerous libraries, both public and academic. Their book is still a ^Jamss T. Gerould, The Colleae Library Bulldlne. ment iCw ]SrS: Charles Scribner*s sons, 1932). m s work was commissioned by the Carnegie Corporation. 2Joseph L. Wheeler and Alfred M. Glthens, The t t p B W r * u k r m (w~ Yorks Charles Scribner^s 28 significant contribution, although parts of it are datad* The work is profusely illustrated and can be read with profit by the designer of an academic library* Lyle has written that the public library led the way in library building planning and arrangement Although two significant books on academic library architecture appeared during the post-World War II period 2 prior to Planning the Academic and Research Library, it is this latter work by Keyes Metcalf, Librarian Emeritus, Harvard University, which is likely to serve as the corner stone text for all academic library planning for some time.^ The book*s publication was sponsored by the Associ ation of Research Libraries and The Association of College and Research Libraries under a grant by The Council on Library Resources. The work is encyclopedic in nature* Dr. Metcalf has been a librarian for over fifty years during which time he studied and dealt with all aspects of library design. Since his retirement in 1955, Dr. *Lyle, Administration of the College Library, p. 8. 2 Edward H. Ashburner, Modern Public Libraries (London: Grafton & Co*, 1946) and Anthony Thompson, Library Buildings in Britain and Europe (London: fiutter- worth & Co., 19ol3). 3 Keyes D. Metcalf, Planning Academic and Research Library Buildings (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. , 19OT. 29 Metcalf has served as a consultant In the designing of over 230 libraries. In this book, he covers virtually every detail of library planning and designing Including suggestions for the kind of prograa one should have for the dedication of the new library building. This volume was not entirely the effort of one man. Dr. Metcalf worked with a distinguished committee of librarians and educators over a period of four end one-half years. He published the book In portions and Invited comments from any and all who read them. The work probably Is as nearly representative of the thinking of the library profession regarding all phases of academic architecture as one will likely see published In the Immediate future. Ralpli Ellsworth, Librarian Bssrltus, University of Colorado, has written a more personal and concise book in this field.*1 His book Is designed to be read at a sitting. In It one obtains a good overview of the con cept of the academic library and the architectural program needed for it. The author states: "I have not tried to summarise whet everybody else thinks end knows but, rather, what I think I know.1,2 Dr. Ellsworth, like Dr. Metcalf, ^Ralph S. Ellsworth, Plannlna the Colleaa and University Library Bulldlne (znded.7 boulder, Colo.: Pruett Press, Inc., 1966;. 2Ibid.. p. Vill. 30 has studied library design and has consulted on the plan ning of libraries for a number of years. Two other books on academic library architecture have recently been published. The first, entitled Libraries: Architecture and Equipment. Is by Michael Brawne, an English architect and contributor to the Archi tectural Review.1 The second book, New Library Design: Guide Lines to Planning Academic Library Buildings. Is by 2 two Canadians. Stephen Langmead Is an architect and Margaret Beckman Is Deputy and Systems Librarian at the University of Guelph. Both texts cover the major aspects of planning and designing academic libraries and are Important In that they largely present the views of archi tects rather than librarians on the subject. It Is worth noting that the subject of library planning Is well-treated In separate chapters In each of *Michael Brawne, Libraries: Architecture and Equipment (New York: Praeger Publishers, o ^Stephen Langmead and Margaret Beckman, New Library Design: Guide Lines to Planning AcademlTTibrary Buildings. (Toronto: John Wllev and Sons. Canada. Ltd.. 1970j. Attention Is called to tne following brief work: James M. Orr, Designing Library Buildings fee Activity (London: Andrl beufcscn, Ltd., 1972J. Hr. 6rr, an English librarian, provides concise statements on some of the underlying principles and problems of design for all types of libraries. Because of ltt brevity, the work is a good Introduction for persons unfamiliar with the subject of library design. 31 three books on academic library administration* Tha newest book is by Rutherford D* Rogers and David C. Vabar and is antitlad Uni varsity Library Administration. * Some what older, but still useful, ara tha Unlvarsltv Library by Louis R» Wilson and Maurica P. Tauber^ and Tha Admini stration of tha Collasa Library by Guy R. Lyle.3 In axamining tha litaratura on library daslgn, ona notas tha naad for a history of tha davalopmant of contemporary archltactural practices in library daslgn. At prasant, an account oiust ba assamblad from dlvarsa sourcas. Tha bdst brlaf history which tha author could find is contained in ona chapter of a book issued by Educational Facilities Laboratories, Inc. antitlad Bricks and Mortarboards.* Not only does this section provide Rutharford D. Rogers and David C. Weber, Univer sity Library Administration (New York: H. W. Wilson Co., lQzlj. kutnerfcordi Rogers is University Librarian, Yale University, and David Weber is Director, Stanford Unlver- sity Libraries. 2 L o u i s R , Wilson and Maurice P. Tauber, Tha Unlvar sltv Library (2nd ad., New York: Columbia University press, 1936). Louis Wilson is ftserltus Professor, School of Library Science, University of North Carolina. Maurice Tauber la Melvll Dewey Professor, Columbia University. ^Lyla, Administration of tha Collasa Library. *Alvln Toffler, "Libraries,1 * in Educational Facil ities Laboratories. Inc., Bricks and Mortarboards (1964), pp. 71-95. A similar article to this is: Donald E. Thompson, "Form vs. Function: Architecture and the College Library," Library Trends. XVIII (July, 1969), 37-47. 32 a history of aarly academic library architecture, and of contemporary design, but it also surveys what its charac teristics are today, and in what direction it may likely be developing in the future, technology permitting. Two books on special subjects important to library design appeared in 1970, The first book is by Metcalf and is entitled Library Lighting,* The work was co-sponsored by The Association of Research Libraries and The American Library Association, This small book begins with a discussion of library lighting problems from several viewpoints Including quality, Intensity, esthetics, function, and costs. The work continues with comments and answers to questions by several types of specialists who have an Interest and competence in lighting. Finally, there are conclusions and recommendations presented by Dr. Metcalf, Educational Facilities Laboratories has Issued a study entitled Instructional Hardware/A Guide to Archl- 2 tectural Requirements which is primarily for designers concerned with school architecture. Various media techniques are organised under the headings of audio ^Keyes D, Metcalf, Library Lighting (Washington, D. C.: The Association of Research Libraries, 1970)* ^Educational Facilities Laboratories, Inc, Instructional Hardware/A Guide to Architectural Require ments (Mew York. 1975). 33 equipment, visual display equipment, television-based teaching systems, computer assisted instruction, and stu dent responses and are discussed and their architectural needs described. The work also contains a glossary o£ terms dealing with electronic teaching aids and a classi fied list of major manufacturers of electronic teaching equipment. This study will be of value to planners of academ ic libraries. It was previously mentlonsd that instruc tional trends at the college level are beginning to Include the electronic media. Some of these media have been intro duced into the libraries. If the media become Important in the educational processes, knowledge of how best to house equipment and users in the library will be vital The following are two books which discuss the use of media for instruction at colleges and universities. James W. Brown and James W. Thornton (eds.) New Msdla and College Teaching (Washington, D.C.: Association Cor Higher Education, 19&8). Brown is Professor of Education and Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, San Jose State College. Thornton is a professor of Education at the same school. This work, jointly sponsored by the U.S. Office of Educa tion and the National Education Association, is an inven tory of current (1967) Instructional uses of new media of communication in college and university teaching in the United States together with critical appraisals of their utilisation. Trevor N. Dupuy. Ferment in College Libraries; The Impact of Information Technology (Washington. h.C.: Communication Service Corp., 19m ). Dupuy, a historian who has taught at Harvard and Ohio State universities, f ives ample evidence that the academic library in the uture will likely undergo extensive re-organisation in order to Incorporate many kinds of "non-book" information services, such as audio-visual materials, automated information resources, and miniaturised media. 34 Building Conference Reports Conferences on library buildings ere slaost «s old es the American Library Association.* For the purposes of this review, however, attention is directed to those conferences end institutes which have taken piece since 1945. It is since World War II that proper emphasis has been placed on the characteristics of aeedealc library design in the conferences. Thus, one finds that written reports now contain separate sections for public libraries and for academic libraries. Most of the conferences and institutes have been held under ALA sponsorship. The typical institute gen erally involves a series of talks on library building problems or techniques given by specialists in their fields. Then architectural plans for libraries currently being designed are presented by their planners for criti cism. Bach set of plans is criticised by a person previously selected to give a critique on that partic ular building, then by members of the audience. The published reports are valuable sources of lnfonsatlon on numerous library design topics. They have also been a source of inspiration for those who heve participated in the programs. ^American Library Association (ALA) will be referred to in following pages as ALA. 35 One can find descriptions of these various con ferences and institutes in Appendix D, "Selected Annotated Bibliography," of Metcalf's Planning the Academic and Research Library Building,* There is no need, therefore, to list each one in this review. Periodical Literature Preliminary Planning Periodical articles on the preliminary stages of planning a library building are discussed in this section, including considerations of the written library building program, the library building consultant, and the role of the architect. As an introduction to the entire process of creat ing a building, Robert R. McClarren and Donald E. Thompson have prepared a helpful checklist of the major steps in sequence the librarian and his associates must take to plan, design, and construct a library building.^ ^Metcalf, op. clt.. pp. 404-405. Since Metcalf's work appeared, the "“following has been published: Library Buildings Institute, Detroit, 1965, Libraries. Building for the Future: Proceedings and the~ALTA workshop. Con ducted ab fletrolt. Michigan. July 1-3. 1965. Robert J. £haw (ed.) (.Chicago: American Library Association, 1967). 2 Robert R. McClarren and Donald E. Thompson, "Architectural Checklist," Library Journal. XCI (December 1, 1966), 5832-37. Mr. McClarren is birector of the Indiana State Library. Mr. Thompson is College Librarian, Wabash College, Indiana. 36 The outline begins with topics covering the need for a new building program followed by details on working with the architect and his planners, the Inspection and approval of drawings, both preliminary and working. The outline continues through construction processes to the final acceptance and testing of the building. The Library Building Program Dr. Ellsworth Mason, Director of Library Services, Hofstra University, and a library building consultant, emphasizes the importance of the written program In his article, "Some Advice to Librarians on Writing a Building Program." He states, The program Is a reference handbook for the architects to use throughout their planning. The easier It is to use, the more likely they are to use It. It should, therefore, contain such reference elements as a table of contents, an Index, summary lists of space requirements, and other useful sumaries.1 Dr. Mason Is equally helpful In indicating what should and should not be In the program. With regard to the latter, the architect does not want, for example, sketches of floor plans or specification of the number of floors from the librarian or any other architectural ^Ellsworth Mason, "Some Advice to Librarians on Writing a Building Program," Library Journal. XCI (December 1, 1966), 5839. 37 specifics which would tend to prejudice his thinking as a designer. There are many other good articles on what library building programs should contain as exemplified by this description from an article by Allle B. Martin, Director of Tulsa City-Counpy Library: A thorough library building program should bd a pragmatic, detailed statement of the func tional, aesthetic, and economic values govern ing every aspect of the design, construction, furnishing, and equlping fsiclof the library. Moreover, it must convey tKeessence of the library's philosophy and its contribution to the community.1 D. W. Dickenson, an English architect, has observed that, in writing a building program, the llbrar- 2 ian saves both his as well as the architect's time. ^Allle B. Martin, nThe Library Building Program.n Wilson Library Bulletin. XL1 (January, 1967), 513. ^D. W. Dickenson, "Building Together: The Archi tect and the Librarian," The Library Association Record. LXV (December, 1963), 440-5.5 • 6ther recommended articles on library building programs Include Donald C. Davidson, "Building by the Book," California Librarian. XVI (Janu ary, 1955), 92-5; Ernest J. Reece, ^Library Programs: How to Draft Them," College and Research Libraries. XIII (July, 1952), 198-211; Margaret KLausner, "The Library Program - Its Purpose and Development." News Notes of California Libraries. LII (July, 1957), 5Z3-31. Two articles giving an outline of what a building program should contain are: McClarren and Thompson, op. clt». 5835-36, and Ralph E. Ellsworth, "Consultants lor (College and University Library Building Planning," College and Research Libraries. XXI (July, 1960),263-8. For examples of actual library building programs, see Appendix A, pp. 367-85 of Metcalf* Planning Academic and Research Library Buildings. 38 The written program can be scrutinised both for omissions and topics not well organised and presented. Dickenson also believes that the librarian who does not write a building program will run the risk of having the architect make decisions regarding the building which, in all like lihood, were the responalblllty of the librarian. The Library Building Conaultant In an article written in 1960, Dr. Ralph Ellsworth attempts to provide a definition of the library building consultant: Who is a building consultant? Unfortu nately, it is anyone who thinks he knows how to plan buildings and can persuade an institution to hire hlmt There are no qualifying examinations to pass, no boards to be interviewed by, no criteria to meet.1- Recognising the risks of choosing a competent building consultant, Ellsworth suggests guidelines for the selection of such a person. The librarian is advised to draw up a list of library building consultants based on names supplied by six to eight librarians who have used a consultant. Each consultant named must then be investigated. The librarian will want to know what libraries the consultant has helped design, the relative 1Ralph E. Ellsworth, "Consultants for College and University Library Building Planning," College and Research Libraries. XXI (July, I960), 263. 39 "success” of each, and on what new projects the consultant is presently working. Donald Bean, President of Library Management and Buildings Consultants, Inc., Evanston, Illinois, Is more critical than Ellsworth of library building consultants.^ Bean feels that the consultants do not spend enough time working directly with their clients. He also notes that many consultants give no written reports, or the reports which are furnished are badly prepared. Bean suggests that the ALA establish standards for library building consultants and promote educational programs which would 2 give the consultants adequate training. The Architect The role of the architect Is described In a series of articles by Donald Canty for the Magazine Architectural Donald E. Bean, "Survey on Library Buildings,” in Library Surveys. Maurice F. Tauber and Irlene R. Stephens, (eds.) (New York: Columbia University Press, 1967), pp. 98-108. 2 The following articles provide valuable informa tion on the responsibilities of the library building consultant. Warren J. Haas, "The Role of the Building Con sultant,” College and Research Libraries. XXX (July, 1969), 365-8, and Dorotny D. Corrigan and Hoyt R. Galvin, "Library Building Consulting, Problems and Ethics," ALA Bulletin. LXII (May, 1968), 505-10. Although public library” oriented, this latter article has good advice about choosing a consultant and describes what should be the ethical relations of the employing board to the consultant and that of the consultant to the board. 40 Forum. ^ Mr. Canty was adltor of this publication at tha tlma ha wrote tha sarlas. Writtan In tha languaga of tha laymanv tha artlclas dascrlba what tha archltact can do for his cllant In designing a building. Tha titles of tha Individual artlclas Indicate what tha reader can expect from tha sarlas: "How to Pick an Architect" "What Architects Do and How to Pay Them" "How to Turn a Problem Into a Sat of Plans" "How to Go from Concept to Construction" "How to Turn a Set of Plans Into a Building" In a paper presented to tha Seventh Annual Summer Workshop of the Council for the Advancement of Small Colleges. J. Russell Bailey commented thoughtfully about the position the academic library and Its building occupies on the campus.^ According to Bailey, there has been an attempt to reduce monumental characteristics in the architectural design of contemporary libraries. It also seems to be true that, ^Donald Canty, "What It Takes to Be a Client," Architectural Forum. CXIX (July, 1963), 84*87; (September, 1963J, 92-9$; (December, 1963), 94-97; XXX (February, 1964), 104-107; (April, 1964), 106-109. ^J. Russell Bailey, "The Library as Part of the Learning Center," A.I.A. Journal. XXXIX (June, 1963), 97-100. Mr. Bailey is an architect who has designed numerous public, private, and academic libraries throughout the United States. 41 Because of tredltlon end an appreciation of the Importance of the contents of the building, the building itself becomes more than a shelter for books, staff and readers* It becoaes by ths nature of things e symbol of educetion. There is no other college building which has more responsibility in dealing wlbh that elusive thing called the image** Bdiley esks, horn does the erchitect express the symbol of the library? Is it a matter of copying a church design as many have done in the past or creating a monumental structure besed on clesslcal models? There are no simple answers* Many architects have taken the easy path of slavishly copying the details of nearby buildings, turning the llbrery into yet another class* room or dormitory* Tha good architect, Belley suggests, . . . will Introduce e freshness of design which will show how satisfying the simple functions of reeding and storing of books can be. He will suggest that a building is not Just for first impressions* Hs will know that a good library should have a character which allows its admfters end readers to discover rich elements throughout the building*2 Library Design-Miscellaneous Tonics Recent periodical literature on llbrery design tends to be uneven in its coverage* The articles cited in the remaining paragraphs of this section have been chosen to complement the two recent major works on academic llbrery architecture by Metcalf and Ellsworth* 1Ibld.. 97. 2Ibld.* 98. 42 The dearth of literature on air conditioning in libraries was noted by Alfred Greenberg, a consulting engineer, in his article written in 1964.1 There con tinues to be little written on this Important subject. Greenberg recommends standards for properly air-condition ing various parts of a library such as the stack area, reading areas, carrels, and other spaces. Air condition ing continues to present problems for librarians. Dis cussion in depth on the methods of ventilating a library is needed. Libraries are collecting microform materials at ever accelerating rates, yet little attention has been paid to the provision of proper library spaces for housing microform materials and readers. David C. Weber, Director of Libraries, Stanford University, has written an article which contains a comprehensive discussion of such aspects as whether to have a centralised microform facility; where it should be located; space needed for readers; lighting; proper humidity and dust controls; acoustics; and other 2 topics. ^Alfred Greenberg, "Library Air-Conditioning Deslen." Architectural Record. CXXXV (February. 1964). 173-194. -------------------- 2 David C. Weber, "Design for a Microtext Reading Room." UNESCO Bulletin for Libraries. XX (Nov.-Dec., 1966), 303-J08. The text of this article has been Incorporated in the book, University Library Administra tion. by Rogers and Weber. 43 What art son* of tha currant trends in acadanlc library architectural Pour authors have recently written on this subject* Or* Donald Davldaon, University Librarian at the University of California, Santa Barbara, listed the following in his article s * * 1* There is an increasing centralisation of library facilities, merging branch or departmental libraries into large, efficient central units* 2* Because of esthetics, or code requirements, more libraries are being built with major portions of their structures underground than before* 3* Bay slses are increasing* Larger bays allow for a more flexible arrangement of readers and stacks* The old standard bay slse of 22*-6" is now being replaced by slses of 24* to 27** The new library at the University of Illinois, Chicago Circle, has a bay slse of 30*x43*« Ellsworth Nason has observed that electric power requirements are changing in libraries.2 Higher amperage needs will necessitate heavier wiring* Mason foresees libraries switching to transistorised equipment needing ^Donald C* Davidson, "Significant Developments in University Library Buildings," Library Trends* XVIII (October, 1969), 125-37* 2Ellsworth Mason, "Lighting and Mechanical Progress in Universities," Library Trends. XVIII (October, 1969), 246-59* 44 no wiring or vlnlcii transmission from tap* docks Co hood* sets which will moko the need for complicated wiring for dial access equipment obsolete. Robert Rohlf, who served as an architectural Juror for the American Institute of Archltects-Amarlcan Library Association-National Book Committee awards program in 1966 and 1968, has written that greater provision is being made for seating in new library buildings. ^ These Increases are reflected in more individual seating in the form of carrels and lounge chairs. Contributing to this trend, Rohlf notes, are the ". • • so-called electronic carrels and othor proposed automated stations." These not only will increase the numbers of individual seats but will require larger amounts of space for each indi vidual reader. These are trends in contemporary library design which Mr. Virgil Massman, Director of the Libraries, University of South Dakota, feels are regressive rather than progressive.2 Monumental stairways are returning. * Robert H. Rohlf, "The State of Library Archi tecture; Observations of a Library Architecture Juror," DC Libraries. XXXIX (Summer, 1968), 67-70. Mr. Rohlf is Coordinator of Building Planning and Director of Admini stration, Library of Congress. 2Vlrgll Massman, "Deficiencies in Modem Design," Mountaln-Plalna Library Quartetly. XII (Spring, 1167), 45 A considerable amount of space is being nested by Baking lobbies too large. H a s sun criticises piecing elevators and stair cores in the center of the building. Ha feels that this reduces the internal flexibility of the floor spaces. Finally, the author feels that tha enviromsent of the libraries being designed today is not sufficiently appealing to hunan emotions. Other Subject Fields Which Influence Library Design Familiarity with literature beyond that immedl- ately concerned' with the subject of library design is lnportant to the librarian dealrlng to dealgn a library capable of serving the institution for a period of twenty years or longer. In particular, it is auggeated that the librarian should be familiar with the literature of these three subjects: (1) the future of higher education, (2) the development of coiqputer technology for automation and information storage and retrieval and, (3) studies of human interaction with architectural space* Hiaher Education The most ambitious book on tha future of higher education is Camnua 1980. edited by Alvin C. Eurich, President, The Academy for Educational Development and Vice Chairman of the Board, Educational Facilitlea 46 Laboratories, Inc.* This work consists of a sarlas of assays representing opinions on what American higher education might be like In 1980. Seventeen contributors have examined the various aspects of education and its influences on both those Involved in it and American society at large. In his contribution to this book, Harold B. Gores, President of Educational Facilities Laboratories, Inc., feels that certain educational trends will have a major influence on the library building. There will be a reduction of the separation between librarians and teach ing faculty — with librarians becoming teachers and teachers becoming librarians. "Look, then, to the Incor poration on a broad scale of faculty offices within 2 library buildings, Gores asserts. Furthermore, It Is his opinion that the library will be placed physically closer on the campus to or even joined to clessroom and instruc tional space, "the better to absorb It some day." There *Alvln C. Eurlch (ed.), CypM" 1980 (Hew York: Delacorte Press, 1968). A work similar to this la by John Caffrey (ed.), The Future Academic Pn—wmltv: Continuity and Chaner. (Washington. D.c.: American Council on Education, 1969;. 2 Harold B. Gores, "The American Campus-1980," In Alvin C. Eurlch, Campus 1980. p. 290. 47 Will be a naad for graatar amounts of aaatlng for studanea aa tha claaarooai merges with tha library.*’ Thara ara experimental collagaa in tha Uni tad Stataa today which ara attempting to focua more individual attantlon toward tha aducatlon of the undergraduate. Many of thaaa collagaa ara daacrlbad in Experimental Collaaaa: Thalr Rola in American Hlahar Education, adltad by V. Hugh Stickler, Haad, Department of Higher education, Florida 2 State University. Tha book la an outgrowth of tha work of a committee at Florida State Unlveralty appointed to plan an experimental collage at tha Unlveralty. In tha concluding chapter of Sticklar'a work, Dr. B. Lamar Johnson aummarlzea trenda characterlatic of tha axpariaantal collagaa. Ha notea tha graatar Involve* ment of tha library in tha educational program of tha experimental collagaa, "the uaa of tha library *• in totality, if you will •• aa tha textbook of teaching.”* **This la a reflection of Dr. Shorea* "Library- College” concept mentioned in Chapter I. W. Hugh Stickler, Bmatlmantal Collaaaa: Thalr Role in American Hlahar Education (Taliahaaaea: Florida Stita unlveralty, 1964). Soma ok tha axpariaantal achoola daacrlbad include Antioch, Stephana, and Paraona Collagaa, Tha Unlveralty of tha Pacific ”Cluater Collages.” th»ivar sity of California, Santa Crus, and Montelth Collage at Wayne State University. Dr. Johnaon la presently Professor of Higher Education, University of California, Los Angelas. ^Stickler, p. 177. 48 Johnson warns that ths experimental col logo program would have little influence on tha mainstream of American higher education unless their advocates ware prepared to provide the leadership necessary to exert such influences. IWo additional books deserve motion in this section. In the first, Innovation in Liberal Arts Col leges. by Michael Brick and Bari J. McGrath,1 the authors attsspt to identify and describe innovative educa tional practices. The authors take note of the increasing importance of independent study and its possible influ ence on the library. The second book, Search for Relevance: The Camus in Crisis^ by Joseph Axelrod and others, is an extended bibliographical essay on the major Issues of higher education today. Final sections of the book Include discussion of subjects such as tha Influences and deter minants on students today, research on problem of higher education, and the relationship of the student ^-Michael Brick and Earl J. McGrath, Innovation in Liberal Arts Colleges (Mew York: Teachers College hress, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1969). Brick and McGrath are Associate Director and Director, respectively, of the .Institute of Higher Education for which this book was published. ^Search for Relevance: T*^ in Crisis, by Joseph Axelrod, efc. al. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1969). For a relatsT”treatment of student unrest over college curricula, see Lewis B. Mayhew, Collaaaa Today and Tomorrow (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1959J. 49 Co hit world. There Is a twenty-six page bibliography. No racanc parlodleal artlclas wara coneamad with tha futura of highar aducatlon which add slgnlflcatnly to tha Information In tha books just ravlswad. Tha author recomnenda that a parson wishing to add to his knowladga In this flald should ragularly examine currant Issuas of such journals as AAUP Bulletin. Tha Journal of Educational Rasa arch. Inorovlna Collane and Unlvarsltv Teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, and Journal of Hlahar Education. Technology for Library Autonation In tha whole field of conputer technology* as applied to library operations* there Is uncertainty and doubt as to whan It will coma about* and how It will affect library architecture. A vary revealing aurvey was recently nade of what university libraries wara doing in the way of autoaating aervlces In tha library.1 Of 194 libraries contacted, 119 responded. It was found that vary little najor work 1>Janes H. Byra, "Autonation In University Libraries • Tha State of tha Art*" Library Resources and Technical Services. XXII (Fall* 1969)* 156-30. Hr an equally pessimistic report about the success of conputer applications in libraries* read Ellsworth Mason. "The Great Gas Rabble Frick*t or* Conputers Revealed by a Gentlenan of Quality." Col lame and Research Libraries. XXXII (May* 1971), 183-997 50 «u being done. Mott of the automation procedures «ar« confined to technlcel processing end circulation. Infor- nation retrieval In librarlaa ". • • la Little advanced outside of the science fiction stage*” In order of Importance, the three prevailing reasons given bp the respondents for lack of progress ware: 1. The critical lack of skilled personnel. 2. Shortage of funds available. 3. Lack of facilities for carrying out a ptogram of autonatlon. Library literature contains aany articles on the future of autonatlon processes In libraries. Until nore llbrerles have had nunerous years of experience with elaborate systens of sutonated housekeeping services and Information storage and retrieval, it will be difficult to predict how these processes will affect library archi tecture. Autonation of services la expensive. Federal financial support, the key to development of nany of the autonatlon programs In the academic libraries, Is presently being reduced or withdrawn. Financial pressures on tha Institutions make than hesitant to continue such programs. This will tend to slow down the development of out caution In tha libraries. SI In 1967, the Educational Facilities Laboratories organised a symposium which Included participants from the coomunications and information industries, librarians, and architects to discuss the impact of technology upon llbrery buildings. The report of their discussions is concisely summarised in a booklet entitled The Impact of Technology on the Library Building.* The conclusions of the panel were that libraries can be built today which will adapt to the technology of tomorrow if, (1) they can be expanded and (2) they can be modified easily in their interior functioning* The rate of development in the computer field continues at a rapid pace. Librarians planning new libraries should be aware of pertinent literature in this field. There ere numerous articles and books which provide background information on this subject.2 IEducational Facilities Laboratories, IAc,, The Inoa^t of Technology on tha Library Building (Mew YSrk: 2The following books and periodical articles are suggested reeding: Bolt, Beranefc end Newman, Inc., icv or Illinois Press, 1964j; All< inning Animation (Washington. S f l 3 & & r a rLuc.tlon, February 9, 1967, (Cam* bridge, Mass,: Library. Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, 1968)$ Ferdinand F. Lelakuhler and Kent (ed,), Library running far Automation (Washington. D.C.! Sp«rtw_ioofc«. !nc.~tjU)i OEr.p jf«*hnolo«f «nd Architecture. Report of a Conference Held at cue Harvard 52 When a n w building is designed, a daclalon ahould ba aadt on whether to lncluda spaca Cor a conputar or uaa tine-shared conputar atoraga facilities elsewhere* In ordar to obtain aubatantlal conputar atoraga capacity at tha lowest coat, librariaa will likely continue to aalact tha lattar option. If it is dacidad that a conputar ahould ba placed in tha library, attention la called to tha fact that present-day cowputera require laaa in tha way of special wiring or envlroiaental controls than waa tha caaa a few yeara ago. Hunan Reaction to Architectural Space It was previously consented that vary few static- tlcal studlea of hunan reaction or interaction to architectural spaca have bean carried out. Much of tha recant raaaarch available in thia field has bean parformed by psychologists and anthropologists. One of tha siost active has bean Or. Robert Sooner, Chairaan of tha Department of Psychology, University of California at Davis. Ha has produced two studies on student reactions to tha anvlronaant of tha acadasdc library. Anthony E. Neville, "Tha Uncertain Future of tha Library,9 Wilson Library Bulletin. XLIII (Septeuber, 1968),30-38; and Robert H. Blackburn, "Autonatlon and Building Plans," Library Trends. XVIII (October, 1969), 262-67. Also. Tha h r t w L r f , l p g g g » f t p S c f y g f 9 . # n d . York:intarscianca Publishers, 1966) contains a chapter on autonatlon processes and advances in libraries. 53 In the first study,1 Dr. Sommer performed his rssssreh In ths esntrsl llbrsry on ths campus st Dsvis. Hs employed two rssssreh tschniquss: obssrvatlon snd qusstlonnalrss. Ths task of ths study was to dstsrwlns studant preferences or dlslikss for both psychological- social and physical factors in architectural space. One interesting conclusion from this study was that approximately half of the students preferred to study In the large reading rooms rather than in carrels located in the stacks. The students indicated that they needed the inspiration of others of like wind when they studied. They also reported thst the continuous rustle of many in a room was not nearly as disturbing as when someone walked into a quiet area containing only indi vidual carrels. The second study by Sommer was more smbltlous, involving nearly three thousand studsnts in the libraries of twenty-two colleges and universities.^ Hs used five different questionnaires for various groups of students. The purpose of the investigation was to * • • .examine ^Robert Sommer, "The Ecology of Privacy," Library Quarterly. XXXVI (July, 1966), 234-48. 2 Robert Sommer, "Reading Areas in College W68), 249-60. This report is Based on his The lcoloev of Studj Arj|^(Davls. California: University of Cali- 54 chc adequacy of reading areaa in college libraries as study placesStudents were asked their opinions on noise levels* lighting* and ventilation in the libraries* reasons that they chose the library as a place to study* and the advantages or disadvantages of studying in the library* This study is ss important for questions raised by it as for the ones it answered* The study directs attention toward future research needed in the field* One conclusion in this article appears to have great significance for library building designers* Sooner writes: There is no single study envlronnent that will meet the needs of all individuals* This is also true for lighting* ventilation, and tenperature* It is futile and economically wasteful to search for the "ideal reading area" with the hope that this will satisfy all patrons • • • The only feasible solution is to provide a variety or reading spaces that differ in Important respects and let users discover the areas nost suitable for then personally*1 A study of a similar nature to those by Sooner 2 was conducted in Massachusetts in I960* The publication lIbid., 255-56. 2Conoittee for Hew College* Student Reaction to Study Facilities (Aoherst, Mass*: 196oj. Inisrqpprt is part or a study financed by a grant fron the Fund for the Advanceoent of Vocation* The sponsors of the study* Mt. Holyoke College* Anherst College, the University of Massachusetts, and Soith College* investigated ths feasibility of creating a fifth school "to which they 55 of the results listed ton characteristics of desirable study space* Interestingly, while most of the factors Isolated were the sane in the studies by Soaner, the one difference occurred in teens of student preference for the slse of the study area* Eighty per cent of the atudents felt snail areas ware preferable to large study areas, as conpared to the approaclnately fifty per cent who expressed such a preference in the study by Sonner* The need for careful planning of the architec tural environment is enphaaisad in this thoughtful observation taken fron a publication by Dr* Lawrence Wheeler, a Professor of Psychology, California State College, Hayward. He writes: We know, for exanple, that hunans adapt to, or becone accustoned to, alnost any constant, unvarying elenent of the environnent, pro vided that the constant factor is not too extrene* This ability to adapt is probably why bad elements of architecture are so widely tolerated; after a while diev cease io be noticed by those who are continuously exposed to then. This does not nean, how ever that the adaptation is without cost to hunans* It requires energy to nova to a new level of adaptation and it requires energy to stay there* Environnsntal factors that do not confom to sons nodal value, on each of the perceptual dimensions, are "expensive” to live or work with; we pay for night contribute, and with which they night develop new departures in educational methods and techniques*” 56 "tuning thaw out" by using wore snsrgy or. by bslng loss effective in our work or play*1 Suwury This concludss ths survsy of ths lltsrsturs. Discussion has centered on tha literature devoted to tha planning and designing of acadeaic libraries* It was noted that only a few monograph* have boon written on ths subjsct and that periodical coverage on specific design topics tends to ba unsvan* Much of tha lltaratura aaraly describes new buildings, no attaapt being made to fora critical Judgasnts of tha succass of ths building dssigns. Lltaratura on othar topics thought to ba ralatsd to the problaas of designing a library was also discussed* Lawrence Wheeler, Behavioral Research for Archi tectural Plannlnt and Dsslsn tTerre haute. Indiana: ~ swing Miner Assoctatea, 1967), p. 4* Tha following ara additional publications, wholly or in part, on architectural spatial enviroMsents, written by architects end behavioral scientists* Brno Architectural Forusi. LXXXIX (Noveaber, 1948), 96-160; Talbot Hesuin, (ed*) Foma and Functions of Twentieth Century Architecture* Vol. 1 U vols.: sew York: Columbia imiverslty Press, 1952); Lawrence Wheeler, Tl ;n h r t o r ‘ 1 y r a j T T i L X 1 " fl*»l«> " (ditcMo: . a i * « ^ . r *ar ce-Haii, inc., 1969); Uwerd T. Hall, Tha Hidden Dimension (Garden City, M.Y*: Doubleday end Company, inc., 1966)* 37 ThtH topics include higher educetion, its role end future trends* automation end Information retrieval and storage in libraries, and how humans perceive archl* tectural spaces. While literature on the first two topics seemed plentiful, it mgs noted that fee studies had been made on how man perceives architectural space. CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURES Selection of tho Libraries In soloctlng tho ac«dwie library buildings for this study, tho author sought tho halp of six library building consultants. Ha vrota to aach consultant asking hi* to nans tan acadasilc library buildings In tho United Rtatas that ha fait achieved the best architectural realisation of library daslgn. Criteria for tha solection of exaeples were given In the author's letter.2 In writing to these six consultants, It was hoped that the six libraries could be selected on the basis of 2 a consensus of opinion esK>ng the consul twits. This plan regrettably did not work. Pi vs of the six consultants replied, but of those responding, only Dr. Metcalf and Dr. Ellsworth provided a list of usable length. Because these two nan are well-known In the field of academic library design, it was decided to select the six libraries from their lists. 2See Appendix I for a copy of the letter. 2The consultants were chosen on the basis of their significant contrl butions to the literature on library architecture. 59 The libraries chosen for this study end the year they opened are: 1. John M, Olln Library, Washington university, St. Louis, 1962. 2. John M. Olin Research Library, Cornell University, 1961. 3. Milton 8. Elsenhower Library, The Johns Hopkins University, 1984. 4. Charles Trunbell Hsyden Library, Arlsona State University, 1966. 5. J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah, 1968. 6. O. Msredlth Wilson Library, University of Minnesota, 1968. Methods of Investigation lbs investigation of each library Involved the following procedures: 1. Background Materials, such as a history of the school and its library, the written library building prograa, and other building planning reports or studies were reed and atudied. 2. A personal visit and inapectlon of each library building was made. This Included observing end ■ensuring the building spaces, noting and describing 60 nsterlels and building aqulpasnt, and recording personal raactlons to the building. 3. Interviews nan conducted with the heed librarians, and the heeds of technical and public services departaents, and other library staff eenbers who had had major responsibilities in designing the library. Univer sity adalnlstratlon opinion ngardlng the library building was obtained by Interviewing an administrative officer reconmended by the university llbrarlen. 4. Oplnloraialres1 were distributed to three groups of library users: faculty, students, and library staff. The purpose of distributing these oplnionnalres was to determine user satisfaction od dissatisfaction with the library building design. *It was decided to tern the three types of investigative Instruments directed to library users "opinlotmaires" Instead of questionnaires because, when responding to an architectural environment, respon dents seem to do so subjectively. Their opinions are not fact. Perhaps reactions to some architectural characteristics can never be measured successfully in a factual way. It would take an Elaborate set of experiments on just one architectural characteristic of a building to establish reliable data on human reaction to that factor. As reported earlier, psycholo gists and anthropologists have only recently begun to study human reaponse to architectural space. Their conclusions are far from final; more study is needed. 61 The Oplnlonnaires Developlnn th> Oolnlonnalres The opinioimalres m n dcilgmd Co allele user resronse to three aaln eleaents of the library building design: 1* The accessibility of the library and its functions to the user* This eleaent Includes the loca tion of its entrance or entrances, interior organisation of the building, and the efficiency of elevators and stairways as naans of trsnsportatlon to sll floors of the building. 2* User attitudes on the architectural effective ness of library spsces for service* Library spaces listed for user appraisal were study areas, alcrofom rooas, typing rooas, and rest rooas* 3* The environmental conditions of architec ture, including lighting, ventilation, heating, acoustics, celling heights, fenestrstlon of the building, end esthetics* The oplnloimaires given to both faculty and students are nearly identical*^ Minor variation between the oplnlotmalree exists because of the need to solicit opinions about a function of importance to a particular *See Appendix II for copies of the oplnlonnalres used. 62 user-group; e.g., faculty lounge facilities. Respondents were askedi to rata aach ltoa on the opinioimalres accord* lng to a scale. The scale indicated that an architectural feature could be rated over a range of 1 for eneellent through 6 for very poor. If the respondent had no opinion about a feature, he was asked to nark it 0. The final item on the oplnlonnalre solicited written consent on the architectural design of the building. The library staff oplnionnaire differs fron those for faculty and students because library staffs use libraries differently. Sections in this oplnlonnalre allow for library staff expressions of opinion on the adequacy of library work spaces and their functional relationships to one another.1 The oplnlonnaires were pre-tested to detemlne whether they could be understood by the respondents. Student oplnlonnaires were tested in bhree classes at a large local state college. Staff opinioimalres were tested at the library of another local state college. Because the faculty oplnlonnalre so closely resenbled that for the student, the author felt it unnecessary to test it. ^See Appendix II for a copy of the library staff oplnlonnalre. 63 Stapling tha Populations Tha following ara tha distribution asthoda which wars usad to rapvasant aach group at a uni varsity. library Staffs A stratifiad aaapla of seventy-five aaployaaa froa aach library staff was taken. The aalaction was aada by lottary and cons is tad of twenty five aaabers froa aach of thraa groups: librarians; sub-profesiionals, darks, and secretaries; and student assistants.1 Faculty As is largely tha case at universities, tha instructional core with tha greatest enroliaents in tha institution is tha collage or division of arts and 2 sciences. Therefore, it was decided that this instruc tional area would provide tha aost representative population for saapling the opinions of both faculty and students. The factlty sanple was obtained by counting *One exception was tha Olin Library, Washington University. It uses full-tine eoployees to perfore tha work that student assistants did at tha other libraries in tha study. This full-tlae aaployea group was treated tha east as tha student group. 2 Each university had its own nans for this administrative unit. The author ia satisfied that aach was representative of tho basic instructional activities of tha university. 64 m v y nth member listed is the faculty of the arts and sciaticas division, for a total of fifty* Students Tha total sample sisa for student opiaioanaire distribution uas sat at 400 for aahh school* the sample was drawn from classes offered by the arts and sciences school or division* To achieve the sample, it was arbitrarily assumed that the average sise of the class was twenty** Therefore, the desired sample sise of 400 required the selection of twenty classes to which the oplnlonnaires would be sent* Every nth class offered in the arts and sciences division was counted* Enroll* ments of classes were noted and those which varied significantly from the assumed average of twenty were eliminated in favor of classes closer to the desired else. At Johns Hopkins University, the author was not allowed to use this technique of sampling student opinion. An alternate scheme was employed in which oplnlonnaires were handed out to every fifth student *The author was not able to learn of a source which provided a nationwide survey of average class slses* The average class sise of the author*s school, the University of Southern California, is slightly over eighteen* The number twenty was chosen as a convenient rounding off of the USC claas sise* 65 entering the library during two-hour periods In tho noro- lnga and In tha aftamoona until tha supply was exhausted. To coopers this latter technique to the primary nethod of distribution to students* the author had 200 oplnlonnaires passed out In the Arisons State University library In addition to the 400 distributed to instruc tional classes. Statistical differences are reported later in this chapter. Llaltatlona of thm » Hn« Methods The author recognises that these research Methods have their llaltatlona. First, returns froa all groups cane only froa those willing to fill out the. opinion- nalres. The author was wholly dependent on the good-will and cooperation of all Involved. A second laportant llaltatlon Involved the populations saapled for student and faculty opinion. By concentrating only on the arts and sciences division, the author Ignored aany research- oriented disciplines whose students or faculty night be expected to use the library heavily. The saapllng techniques did result in replies froa graduate students, both at the neater*s and doctoral levels. A third limitation la concerned with Johns Hopkins University where It was necessary to circulate oplnlonnaires to students who were entering the library. This was a biased technique, since it saapled the opinions 66 only of library u n n and, specifically, uaara at the tlna of distribution. Distribution of tha Oplnloaaairea Upon visiting each library, tha author distri buted tha thraa groups of oplnionnairas. Library staff oplnlonnaires vara issued and collected before the author left canpus. Faculty oplnlonnaires vers sent through canpus nails accoapanied by self •addressed, stanped envelopes so that they could bs nailed to the author* Distribution of student oplnlonnaires Involved sending tha proper nuaber of oplnlonnaires to the Instructor of each class selected acconpanled by a note requesting his help*1 Also with the set of oplnlonnaires was a large, self-addressed, stanptd envelope to enable the Instructor to return the eoapleted oplnlonnaires to tha author* Follow-up nsthods were used for all three opinion* naires* The author personally followed up delinquent library staff oplnlonnaires while he was at aach library* With regard to faculty and student oplnlonnaires, reulnders2 were nailed ten days after initial distribution* *See Appendix IX for a copy of thla note* 2See Appendix II for copies of these reninders. 67 toiulf of tha Distribution The mulct of tho dlatri button of oplnlonnaires to tho throo groups of library usors aro shown in Tablo 1. Totals in tho usablo roturns colustn aro loss than total nunbers received for two reasons. First, faculty opinion* nairas worn sonatinas returned unanswered. Second, sono student oplnlonnalros wore returned narked by the student that he did not use the library under investigation. Students narking this category wore Instructed not to answer any further questions. After the initial distribution of opinioimalres, the author took stops to inprove the total nunber of returns. Besides the follow-up reminders which were aentloned in the previous section, additional copies of the opinioimalres were distributed as follows: 1. A second copy of the oplnlonnalre was nailed to every faculty neaber who had previously failed to resfpnd. Out of ninety-two opinioimalres sent out for a second tine, twenty-seven were returned. 2. An additional 200 oplnlonnaires were dis tributed to students at Cornell using the seam distribution technique as that anployed at Johns Hopkins. Of the 200 distributed, 149 were returned. The author had hoped to distribute additional opinioimalres in the library at Washington but was Infosaad that the library's policy discouraged all activity of this nature. TABLE I RESULTS OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF OPINIONNAIEES AT THE SIX UNIVERSITIES IN THE STUDY University Distribution Croup Onlnlonmilraa ■unbar ■unbar Percentage Usable Distributed Received Returned Returns Washington Faculty 50 40 80 38 Students* in-class 410 127 31 110 Library Staff 75 57 76 57 borneii Faculty 50 39 78 28 Students- in-clasa 410 93 23 49 Students- in-library 200 149 75 149 Library staff 75 54 72 54 Johns Hopkins Faculty 50 31 60 24 Studenta-in- library 400 224 55 220 Library Staff 75 56 75 56 O' OD TABLE 1--Continued University Distribution Group Oplnlonnaires Distributed ■ueber Deceived Percentage Returned Usable Returns Art aetie Stete Faculty Students-ln- 50 36 72 34 elass Studenta-in- 399 253 63 225 library Library 200 123 62 118 Staff 75 59 79 59 Utah Faculty Students-in- 50 46 92 35 class Library 404 279 69 249 Staff 75 62 83 62 Minnesota Faculty Students-In- SO 38 76 25 clasa Library 402 229 57 158 Staff 75 55 73 55 £ 70 As mentioned earlier, the author was dependent on the good-will of all groups In answering the opinion* nalres. He especially was dependent on the cooperation of faculty sasbevs when he asked then to distribute oplnlonnaires to students In their classes, collect the completed foras, and mall then to the author. There was no tine to contact personally each faculty aeaber Involved on each canpus. In view of these difficulties, a return of slxtythree, slxty-nlne, and fifty-seven per cent of the oplnlonnaires distributed to students In classes at Arlsona State University, University of Utah, and the University of Minnesota, respectively, appears to be reasonably good. This technique was not as successful at Washington University and Cornell University where returns of student oplnlonnaires were thirty-one and twenpy-three per cent respectively, A later distribution of oplnlonnaires at Cornell widened the sampling of student opinions received at that school. Because he was unable to improve the returns from Washington, the author has had to work with the oplnlonnaires received. Table 2 shows the grand total of oplnlonnaires dis tributed to and received from user groups at all six universities. TABLE 2 TOTAL DISTRIBUTION AND RECEIPT OF OPIMIONMAIRES AT THE SIX UNIVERSITIES Total Distributed Total Received Percentage Received Total Usable Percentage Usable Facility 300 233 77% 184 61% Students 2,823 1,477 32% 1,278 43% Library Staff 430 343 76% 343 76% 72 Hethods of Analysing tho Dots All data froa tha oplnlonaalroa raoaivod were transfarrad to punchad cards and tabulatad by a coaputar. Thasa data vara usad in Chaptar V, Findings of tha Invest!- gatlon. Each nunbar is an axprasslon of tha naan, or average, of tha rating for a raaponsa toward a particular archltactural faatura llstad on the oplnlonnalre. Statis tical summaries of all dagraas of raaponsa toward aach ltan on tha oplnlonnalra ara prasantad in tabular fom, and locatad in various parts of Chaptar V. Tha Information sollcitad by aaana of tha inatru- nants is that of opinions* Slnaa thara wara no expects- tions of correct answers, no testa for tha reliability of responses have bean made* Application of tha t Teat A statistical evaluation of tha results of sampling student opinions at Cornell Univarsity and Arisons State Uni varsity was made by application of tha t test* As previously described, student opinions at thasa two schools wara solicited by two different methods* Opinion- nairas wara distributed as follows: 1* To every nth class in tha arts and sciences division, which total 400 students• 73 2. To tvtry fifth student entering the library during two-hour periods in the mornings and the after* noons, which total 200 students• The t score, or test for difference between means, wee calculated for each Item of opinion answered on the oplnlonnaires. At Arlsona State University, the results showed that only two ltams out of twenty-five showed a significant difference statistically. The level of significance for both Items was .023. The author concludes, therefore, that there Is little difference between the sampling techniques at this university. Either technique can be used to obtain almllar responses on the oplnlonnaires. This was not true at Cornell. From answers to twenty-five items on the oplnlonnaires it was found that the t score for thirteen Items was significantly dif ferent. The levels of significance varied from .005 to • 03. The author suggests two factors which may have contributed to this difference. 1. There were a low number of usable returns when the first sampling tachnlque was used. Out of 410 oplnlonnaires distributed to students In class, only forty-nine, or twelve per cent, of the total were usable. The use of the second sampling technique which involved the distribution of 200 oplnlonnaires to students entering 74 th« library resulted in a raturn of 149 uaablo opinion* nairas. This is seventy-five par cane of tha total distributad. It can ba saan that tha results obtained from tha use of the first sanpllng technique Mere of insufficient sise to be coopered with tha results of the second technique. 2. It is also believed that tha answers by many of the students in class wars influenced by tha fact that Olin Library at Cornell University is a graduate library and has stacks which are closed to undergraduate students. The bookstack area constitutes about half the total area of the library. Out of the total of forty nine usable oplnlonnaires which ware returned* only seventeen respondents were at graduate level and, there fore, had access to all parts of the Olin Library. Tha other students in this group, lacking full library privileges at Olin, could not ba expected to rata all items on the oplnlonnaires, nor night they rata thsa fairly. In retrospect, it la felt that tha second technique of sanpllng student opinions, that of distrlbut* lng oplnlonnaires to persona entering the library, is best suited for Cornell. With this method one is assured that, in comparison to sanpllng opinions of students in 75 elau, a higher proportion of tho population will ba graduate students and thus will have access to all parts of the library.* Suonary This chapter covers topics concerned with the design and procedures esployed in the study. Subjects discussed include the aethods used in the investigation of the library buildings, goals for the davelopaant of the oplnlonnaires* how the populations were saapled* distribution of the oplnlonnaires* results of the distri bution* and the aethods used in analysing the data. The returns of the oplnionnalree distributed to students entering Olin Library tend to confine this. Of the 149 oplnlonnaires returned* 111 were answered by graduete students. CHAPTER IV A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSITIES AND THEIR LIBRARIES Introduction All tho llbrorloo In this study aro locatod on unlvorslty canpuses. Ttiroo universities, Washington, Cornell, and Johns Hopkins, aro privately supported; tho other throe, Arisons State, Utah, and Minnesota, are publicly supported. All are coeducational and non- sectarian. All offer a sMe range of courses leading to various acadenic, technical, and professional degrees. The universities had their beginnings in the latter half of the nineteenth century, Ttoo universities, Cornell and Johns Hopkins, vere founded after the Civil War when higher education was undergoing aajor changes. The establishnent and dovolopeant of Cornell and Johns Hopkins resulted in a strong and lasting influence on higher education in Anerica. In the case of Cornell, it was the stress the planners of the university placed ”• • .not only on the vocetlonelisn of a land-grant idea but scholarship of the new university novenent." i B S S i Lc 8S 8f f fihr’ p. zfc(. 76 77 Johns Hopkins, frequently rsfsrrsd to as tho first modern Aasrlcon University, emphasised tho role of sciontlflc invsstlgotlon and research In on institution of hlghar looming. Sseh of tho following sections contains o brief history of tho university in which o library in the study is located. The institution's present sise and academic offerings are enumerated. The library system for each university is described. General information on the libraries Included in this study is provided in Table 3, located at the and of the chapter. Washington University Washington University, St. Louis, was founded in 1853 as Eliot Seminary. It was nsmsd in honor of William Greenleaf Eliot, a Unitarian minister who headed the School for three decades. At Eliot's insistence, the name of the School was changed to Washington Institute and, in 1857, to Washington university. The university is privately aupporthd. The University offers a wide range of degrees, both graduate and undergraduate. Graduate programs are offered In the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, including tha Graduate Institute of Education, School of Social Work, Graduate divisions of architecture, business, 78 •nglOHrlng, fine arts, nursing, dentistry, law, and medlcln*. Tha Washington University School of Msdlcins Is of International renown* At tha tine of tha author*s visit in 1969, enroll ment was 3,911 undergraduate and 3,316 graduate students* Out of the total enrollswnt, 6,102, or eighty-four per cent, were full-time students* Faculty totalled 2,220, of which 854, or thirty-eight per cent, were full-time* Approximately thirty-one per cent of the men and fifty- three per cent of the women live in dormitories on campus* Another seventeen per cent of the men live in fraternity houses* There are no residential facilities for sorority women* The library system at Washington University con sists of the John M. Olin Library, the central library on campus, and eleven departmental libraries* TWo of the latter, those for dentistry and medicine, are off-campus* Total library holdings in 1969 were over 1,100,000 volumes of which 750,000 were housed in open stacks in the main library* Cornell University Cornell University was Inaugurated in 1868* It came into being through the concerted efforts of two men, Bara Cornell and Andrew Dickson White* Cornell wss a farmer and businessman from Ithaca who pledged his time 79 and money to tha founding of tha uni varsity nanad aftar him. Aa its first prssldant, White, a Yala graduate, astabllshad tha aducatlonal philosophy of tha Univarsity. Today* Comall Uni varsity holds ovar 7*000 a eras of land for campus* farm* conservation* and racraatlonal purposes. Tha University* although privately supported* still receives some financial support from tha state as a result of its land-grant status* Cornell also operates four units of tha State University of Maw York on tha campus. In 1969* full-time enrollment consisted of 4*033 graduata and 10,021 undergraduate students* Faculty totalled 1,543.* Dormitories are available for thirty par cent of tha students. The University offers undergraduate study in eight colleges and schools. The fields include arts and sciences* agriculture* architecture, engineering* home economics, hotel administration* industrial and labor relations* and nursing. Professional degrees are given in law, medicine, and veterinary medicine* Graduate work is given in most of the subject fields previously mentioned. There are also Graduate Schools of Aerospace Engineering and Business and Public Administration* Medical Sciences* and Nutrition. * Number of full-time faculty was not available. 80 Providing library sarvicaa to tha University aro tho John M. Olin Koooareh Library, tho Uria Library and olovon collogo, school, and departmental libraries.* A twelfth dopartaontal library, for nodlclno, is located in Mow York City. Uris Library la in tho building which fomerly served as tho aain library on caapus. After tho John M. Olin Research Library was conpleted in 1961, tho old building was raaodolod to servo as an undergraduate library. The Uris Library is an open-stack library which houses nore than 100,000 volumes. Thors is seating for 1,100 readers. The library building is directly opposite tha John M. Olin Research Library. John Hopkins University When John Hopkins died, he left money to found a university. Tha institution which bears his name has come to be known as the flret true university in America. Tha educational philosophy of Johns Hopkins University is based on the German tradition that investigation and research are the primary functions of higher education. John Hopkins is a privately-supported institution which, until recently, restricted its undergraduate of these llbrarlee have slsable collections. The A.R. Mann Library for agricultural and home econosd.cs has over 350,000 volumes. The law library has a collec tion in excess of 200,000 volumes. 81 Instruction to non. In 1970, the University became co- sducstlonsl st both tho undorgrsdusts and graduate levels. Undergraduate end graduate instruction is provided in arts and sciences. Professional and graduate training is given in the School of Medicine and the School of Hygiene and Public Health. Thera is also the School of Advanced International Studies located in Washington, D.C. Long famous for its educational programs in science and engineering, Johns Hopkins in recent years has been strengthening its departments in the humanities and the social sciences. University enrollment in 1969 consisted of 6,035 undergraduate and 3,948 graduate students. Of a total enrollment of 10,211 students, 4,140 or forty per cent were full-time. Paculty numbered 1,856 of which 910 or forty-nine per cent were full-time. Residential facili ties on or near campus are available for approximately 1,000 students. Added to this are housing facilities for 240 fraternity men. There are two libraries on the main campus of the Johns Hopkins University: the Milton S. Eisenhower Library, which is the central library, and the Albert D. Hutsler Undergraduate Reading Room. There are four departmental libraries attached to the Johns Hopkins Medical School in downtown Baltimore. The John Work 82 Garrett Library of rara books is near the main campus. The School of Advanced International Studies Includes a library at Its site In Washington, D.C., as does the Applied Physics Laboratory In Silver Springs, Maryland. In 1969, total holdings In all libraries were over 1,500,000 volumes of which approximately 1,000,000 were housed In the Elsenhower Library. Arisona State University Arlsona State University had Its beginnings as the Normal School for the Territory of Arlsona, In 1885. The first Institution of higher education In Arlsona, the School was established to train teachers which the Ter ritory needed desperately. Teacher training was the Institution* s primary mission until 1938 when It began to offer degrees In numerous liberal arts programs. The University offers study and degrees In arts and sdances, architecture, business, education, engineering, fine arts, law, and nursing. In 1969, at tha time of the author's visit, enrollment at the University consisted of 18,769 under graduate and 6,370 graduate students. Out of a total entollmant of 25,139, 17,261, or sixty-four per cent, were full-time students. Faculty numbered 1,083, ot which 896, or elghty-three per cent, were full-time. University residence halls have a capacity of 4,400. 83 Fraternities and sororities alto provide housing for approximately 1,000 students. Besides the John Trunbell Hayden1 Library, the central library, there are two departmental libraries on the campus at Arisona State University. Total library holdings in 1969 were approximately 1,100,000 volumes of which 1,039,000 were housed in the Hayden Library. University of Utah In February, 18S0, the General Assembly of the State of Deseret enacted an ordinance establishing ths University of the State of Deseret. This act marked the beginning of a school which later evolved into the present University of Utah. Although founded by Mormons, the Institution was apparently free from religious doctrine from the start. The Mormons, always Interested in educa tion wherever they settled, went on to found their own system of higher education, resulting in the later estebllshment of Brigham Young University. Today, the University of Utah is the largest state-supported univer sity in Utah. It is located in Salt Lake City. lTh* Library is named after Judge John Trumbell Hayden, founder of the University. He was the father of the late Carl Hayden, long-time United States senator from Arisona. 84 The University offers program in eleven colleges end schools* Undergraduate curricula Include business, education, engineering, fine arts, liberal arts, nines and nlneral Industries, nursing, and phamacy* Profes sional degrees are given in aost of the subject fields previously Mentioned. There Is also a Graduate School of Social Work. In 1969, at the time of the author*s visit, enrollment was 16,757 undergraduate and 3,950 graduate students, of which 9,855, or forty-seven per cent, were full-tine. Faculty numbered 1,894, of which 894, or forty-two per cent, were full-time. Approxlnately ten per cent of the students can be housed In residence halls. There are also 299 apartnents for married couples. Fraternities and sororities provide residence facilities for approximately 250 students. University of Minnesota The University of Minnesota was chartered In 1851, seven years before the Territory of Minnesota became a state. The eatly years were difficult for the school. It was not until 1869 that the University had Instructional program at the college level. The University offers associate, undergraduate and graduate curricula. Undergraduate curricula are offered in liberal arts, agriculture, architecture, 85 business, education, engineering, forestry, medical tech nology, nursing, occupational and physical therapy* and pharmacy. Professional study is available in the fields of dentistry, law, medicine, and veterinary medicine* Graduate work is offered in most of the subject fields previously mentioned. There is a Graduate School of Social Work. One of the largest universities in the United States, the University of Minnesota, had, at the time of the author's visit in January, 1970, a total enrollment in excess of 42,000 students, of which 7,128 were graduate and 35,296 were undergraduate students. Out of a total of 42,424 students, 14,404, or thirty-four per cent were full-time* There were 3,213 facility, of which 2,009, or sixty-three per cent, were full-time* Residence halls in the Minneapolis-St. Paul cam puses can house over 4,300 students* There are also 400 apartments available for married students* Fraternities and sororities house an additional 1,600 students. The library selected for investigation in this study is located on the Minneapolis campus1 of the University; thsrefore, it is worthwhile to provide a *The University operates campuses all over the State* The Minneapolis campus is the largest* The second largest is located in St* Paul* 86 brief description of the library aystea on this campus. There are two major library buildings on caapus: the 0. Meredith Wilson Library which housea book collections for the social sciences and the humanities, the technical services departments, end the library administration, and the Frank K. Walter Library, formerly the central library on campus, which houses the undergraduate library and three departmental libraries. In addition to these two libraries, there are twelve other departmental or special libraries on the Minneapolis campus. Total library hold ings in early 1970 were over 2,500,000 volumes, of which 950,000 were housed in the Wilson Library. Summary The six universities vary considerably in enroll ment slse end in the slse, capacity, and circulation activities of their main libraries chosen for this study.* Washington has the ssuillest full-time enrollment with 6,102 students and Arisona State the largest with 17,261. Sisea of the libraries in the study range from a low of 176,244 gross square feet at Johns Hopkins to a high of 382,313 gross square feet at Minnesota. The libraries have shelving capacities far books including stored lSee Table 3. 87 materials ranging froai 1,300,000 volumes at Arisona state to 2,000,000 volumes at Cornell* Reader stations accom modated in these libraries vary from 900 seats at Cornell to 3,200 at Utah. Annual circulation for each of the main libraries shooed a greater disparity between high and low figures than did any other statistic. In the academic year 1968-69, the main library at Washington circulated 150,000 volumes while the main library at Arisona State circulated 1,102,000 volumes for the seme period. The differences In circulation may be accounted for In terms of student enrollment and also in the number of other departmental libraries on campus. For example, Washington has one of the lowest student enrollmente of the six universities but It has eleven departmental libraries which students may use. Arisona State has the largest student enrollment but only two departmental libraries. Lacking many departmental libraries, a greater percentage of students would tend to use the main library at Arisona State than would be the case at Washington. Campus library organisation at the other universities also varies markedly. At Johns Hopkins, there Is only a small under graduate library besides the main library on campus. Utah has four departmental libraries. Cornell and Minnesota have eleven and twelve departmental libraries, respectively. TABLE 3 SUM1ARY OF INFORMATION ON THE LIBRARIES IN THE STUDY* Washington Cornell Johns Hopkins Arisona State Utah Minnesota Slse (Square feet) 180,000 239,245 176,344 207,000 295,000 382,313 Volume opacity 1,125,000 2,000,000 1,227,000 1,300,000 1,500,000 1,400,000 Storage capacity 250,000 0 0b 0 25,000 100,000 Current periodical titles housed 12,000 22,500 10,000 8,200 20,600 2,800 Annual growth 50,000 75,000 90,000 113,059 82,000 45,000 Total reader stations 1,500 900 1,380 3,001 3,200 2,205 Open student carrels 175c 319 423d 230 1,250 736 ‘Figures are for Fall, 1969 ^lurby Gilman Hill, once Chi "main" library, can store an astlaatad 300,000 volumes. ‘Approximately ^Carrels have lockers Q D TABLE 3— Continued Johns Arisons Washington Cornell Hopkins Ststs Utah Minnesota Locked student carrels 60 24 0 ISO 775* 60 Locked faculty carrels 126 96 236 69 162 138 Reeder stations at tables 750f 20 1,958 1,482 715 Reeder stations, lounge furniture 200f 168 180 106 200 Reeder stations In group study or conference room 200* 276 208 75 200 76 Annual circulation, 1968-69 150,000 234,813 401,133 1,102,000 419,000 253,870 Thiia m open etmli with loektn. ^Apfmlaattljr OB TABLE 3— Continued Washington Cornell Johns ■op kins Arisona Stats Utah Minnesota Total Library Staff 248-58 281 170 396 229 217 Librarians 30 67 34 40 50 73 Sub-professionals 120 100 13 76 45 Clerks 28 30 87 30 48 Student assistants 70-80 84 36 250 95 51 Library hours open per week 100 107 112 101 101 119 CHAPTER V FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION Introduction As already indicated, an inventigation of the architectural design of a library building has many facets This study of the architectural design of six libraries is presented under eight sain topics with library-user opinions presented where they apply* The eight main topics are: 1* Preparations for design of the library build ings. 2. Site locations and entrances of the buildings. 3. Architectural design of each building* 4* Interior organisation and traffic accosnodatlon 5* Description and conparlson of special library spaces for the public* 6* Asbitnt conditions in each library building* 7* Description and conparlson of administrative offices* 8* Additional library staff opinions on work spaces and related questions* Because two of the libraries in the study have the sane name, the author has decided, to avoid confusion, 91 that a particular library will ba Id anti flad by tha name of tha unlvarslty on whosa campus It la locatad. Tha two Olln llbrarlaa will ba dlffarantlatad froai aach othar by rafarrlng to thalr raapactlva caapuaaa: Washington and Comall* Tha Milton S. Elaanhowar Library will ba Identl* flad aa Johna Hopkins, tha Charlaa Truaball Hayden Library aa Arisona State, tha J. Willard Marriott Library aa Utah, and tha E. Maradlth Wllaon Library aa Mlimaaota. On occasion, othar llbrarlaa on a caapua will ba mentioned• Thaaa will ba approprlataly Id ant If lad. Praparatlona for Design of tha Library Bulldlnga Introduction Savaral toplca prallnlnary to tha actual daalgnlng of tha library bulldlnga In tha atudy ara dlacuaaad In thla aactlon. Tha toplca Include, (1) tha reaaona for constructing a now building, (2) tha purpose for which tha old library buildings ara presently being used, (3) tha written library building program, (4) use of library building consultants, (5) choosing tha architect, and (6) use of othar design specialists. Justification of tha Mead for a Maw Bulldlna Among tha six universities, tha decision to con struct new library buildings was. baaed on tha sum reasons: 93 the old building had become overcrowded with library materials, readers , and library staff. It was ragardad by tha library administration as balng so outmoded as to make a remodelling of tha old struetura unsuecasaful. Thara were additional factors at thraa of tha universities which contributed to tha daslrablllty of constructing a new library building. At Cornelia Keyes Metcalf and Frederic Mood, tha latter a consulting engineer and nasibar of tha Bdard of Trustees* ware asked to study tha organisation of tha University Library and the faci lity housing It. Tha conclusion of tha study was that tha Library should ba divided Into separata graduate and undergraduate libraries, each having Its own build ing. This recommendation was accepted by the University. A new graduate library was constructed next to the old library building and the latter remodelled Into an under graduate library. Tha case fee building new libraries at Utah and Minnesota was strengthened as a result of campus expansion at both Institutions. After World War 11, Utah acquired land which more than tripled the slse of Its campus. The University decided to build a library nearer the geographic center of campus. At Minnesota, there was a major expansion of the University campus across the Mississippi River on the west side. The "West lank 94 CaHfua" waa planned to contain all Instructional depart ments for aoelal aelaneaa and humanities inatruetion at tha University* Becauae atudanta in thaaa diaciplinaa ara traditionally heavy uaara of llbrarlaa, a new library building waa planned aa part of tha "West Bank Caapua” construction* Uae of tha Old Library Bulldlnaa Five of tha old library bulldlnga continue, to a one degree, to ba uaad for library purpoaea. Tha old building at Cornell la an undergraduate library and that at Minnc- aota houaee aavaral dapartnantal llbrarlaa and, tempo rarily, tha library achool. Johna Hopkina haa a anail undergraduate library in ita old library quartera aa wall aa rooai for atoraga of nearly half a million wolumea. Utah remodelled ita old library Into a muaeum of natural hlatory. Written Proarama for Library Bulldlnaa In tha review of tha literature on library dealgn in Chapter II, the author atreeaed the Importance of a good written program in dealgnlng a library building* Five of the alx library bulldlnga In thla etudy had for mal written programs of varying lengths prepared by the university librarians with the assistance of their staffs* 93 One library, Johns Hopkins, did not havs a datailad pro gram.1 A eoaplata discussion of tha virtuos and weaknesses of tha programs would involva more spaca in this papar than it is faasibla for tha author to provids. Hovavar, as tha results of tha Investigation of aach .library build ing ara made known, note will ba taken as to whether a particular feature of tha building was discussed in the program. In some measure, this technique will point up the adequacy, or inadequacy, of discussion of library needs in aach building program. Library Building Consultants Employed Four of tha libraries employed library building consultants. Tha consultants ware used to plan tha Wash ington University library building, one employed by the library, one-by the architect. Only two individuals ware employed as library building consultants at the four universities. Or. Keyes Metcalf served as con sultant for the libraries at Washington, Cornell, and Minnesota. Dr. Ralph Ellsworth was consultant at Utah, and was employed as consultant by the architects at Washington. All the head librarians who employed ^See Appendix III for a bibliographic description of the six Horary building programs. 96 consultants expressed satisfaction with the services rendered. Arisona State and Johns Hopkins did not employ library building consultants. Having planned two pre vious college libraries, Dr. Allen Covey, then University Librarian at Arisona State, did not feel the need for a consultant. How the Architects Ware Chosen In choosing architects to design tha libraries in this study, five of the universities followed what is probably common practice at most campuses: the archi tects were selected by the board of regents. At the sixth institution, Washington University, an architectural competition was held to select the designer for the new library,1 a practice the university had used previously when the original buildings on campus were designed. Johns Hopkins was the only university which required that its new library building conform to a particular historical styla of architecture. *The architectural firms which were asked to compete were Caudill, Bowlett, Scott and Associates, Texas; Eero Saarinen and Associates, Michigan; Hsllmuth, Obfeta and Kassabaum, Inc., Missouri; Jamieson, Spearly, Hammond and Gorlock, Misaourl; Murphy and MacKey, Missouri; and Edward D. Stone, Mew York. Eero Saarinen later withdrew from the competition and Louis Kahn was named as his replacement* Murphy and Mackey submitted the winning design. 97 Tha architect* war* cho*«n for their familiarity with Georgian architecture* the predominant architectural style on campus* A second architectural firm* known for its modern designs, was employed to collaborate with the first firm. Asked their opinions of the abilities of the architectural firms which designed their respective libraries* the university librarians pronounced themselves satisfied with the architects' skills* perceptiveness, and willingness to cooperate* The University Librarian at Washington expressed some reservations about the ability of the architectural firm selected for his library to solve mechanical problems connected with the design of the building* Use of Additional Specialists The firm of Bolt* Beranek and Newman was con sulted on acoustics by the designers of the libraries at Washington and Cornell* Two universities employed land scape designers: Thomas Church at Washington* and Clarke and Rapuano at Johns Hopkins* Plans for the interior designs of the libraries* including the furnishings were completely handled by the architectural firms at four of the six universities* At the other two, Utah and Minnesota* the architects 98 employed interior decorators who chose colors* furnishings* carpeting* and accessories for the libraries. Site Locations and Entrances of the Library Buildings Introduction This section consists of discussion on two topics* (1) the site chosen for each library building and* (2) the location of entrances. Throughout this* and succeed ing sections* the results of library-user responses to architectural features will be reported in narrative and grafhic or tabular forn. As previously stated* all three groups to whoa oplnlonnaires were distributed were asked to rate architectural features on a scale of 1 through 6, with I meaning excellent and 6 very poor. The presenta tion of these ratings is in graph fora. The graphs have been drawn using the aean rating score obtained for each item on the oplnlonnaires for which a rating was requested. The author feels that a mean score with a rating of average or less for an architectural feature is suffi ciently low to Indicate a possible weakness in the design pf that particular feature. Throughout this report, the atbhor will stake every effort to suggest reasons as to why an architectural feature received a rating of average or leas. 99 When student ratings on a topic era Indicated, It la necsssary to differentiate between the two Methods of sampling student opinions which were used* As described In Chapter III, student oplnlonnaires were distributed In the following ways: 1. To randomly-selected Instructional classes* When reference is made to atudent opinions solicited by this technique, the term "Students-ln-ciase" will be ueed* 2* To every fifth student entering the library* When reference Is made to student opinions solicited by this technique, the term "Students-In-library" will be ueed* The oplnlonnaires for all three user-groups eollc- lted written comments. The comments received are quoted In Appendix VI. Site Locations With the exception of Minnesota, all the libraries wers locatad centrally on their respective campus*1 At *9ee Figs* 1-6, maps of tha six university campuses* Building programs for four libraries, Washington, Johns Hopkins, Arisona State, and Minnesota, discussed building sites* The libraries at Cornell, Johns Hopkins, and Mlnnasota occupy sites between dormitory complexes and principal areas of Instruction* Their location makes each of these libraries especially convenient for residential studenta to visit on their way to or free Instructional areas* 100 M L*-Js,.( N'Mln \ H m 1 tn!| H O W A ..V .1 p» ' U * • 1 1 . 1 1 I T i i r f T i t Hr/Ji M r M i H a « M a ll f i r . i K k i ' Vw N h o j K a a l f ) . I W a t l * H i l l •*Kkl\C , > * , R u M I m I R ii« r h » rfKkt*< if » I -l> « f m » r \ M u it ^ 1 1 a t l f t.K ftl* •>!»*' t \ f V t r m , , U H a l l 1! nrrnnr r y R .i iM .n a • v * ' » M i l l W .U ,,* M ai: ,n t n r - • ' n ^ - - , i i i . i i i • / J i l a t i r i i d f j • * n r f - n n ' I I I * > r ^ » i " • \ I I f C l J c r y _ r w a y i o n L i K v i i a r i i I S » u * h - - J 4 ' I ' 1 ' - * tU' 1 H a ll riHTO* W A/.Vfi 0 WKI\c, l i K i m I ( n il V ? » t l . y * I * Fig. 1.— Washington University Cornell University 101 / ** o a 3 D i K H t i f C|«^ Part*# f H s f t S t (hr«st W k.** N#rtK Fig. 3.— Johns Hopkins University 102 103 — N . . <v ' f * * t h t U \ * V M l» ’ : < s r i^ 'T 4 I I * ■ [< I i \ Li* : / » •, ! i u !i - 4 n, r ■ - v - * x . l i ! • _ • ,* ! X\ • • i ' p i u r ! ' ' i t i l l . \ \ 1 ; l i t i t. r \ A v ' - ’ >> i . . J rx ( ' i j J 5 / si 0 i i s n * - : | | itfv X-, 'Xf | j * . f e x , % « . , \ X M < U * ' } V \ _ . . .r ' f t M V l M t t O k i V t n . ' • n . r-*, - 5 r . " S M x - 3 X ; • - 5 ; E„ E- b ta t . Lc ;m ra • ' * • f - f r j . i - L : J * ' — I u » I 1 , . . , , ; ‘ • i . J v * ■ ' * « * ' i V . f . j - , i — * : i ••: -Xvi . «.1 j *•% I / * i • ■ * j x " :U i: : ; » ■ > i X J , f c ’ £4t '5 f Li v.rr® . “ BL-J X;]p I lu *3 t- r • i r T , 1 1 • t ! ., !dlj, U ; L ; x I . in f ; , ? -*-1X5 [ ] ) : - M»<vi il « ■ ; ~ a l J j - y i ✓ / i i i \ .j i - ' x . i is m ) A N r y # » ' J i. 1 , ' ' w t f a n h Fig. 4.— Arisona Stata Univtr«ity Fig. S.— University of Utah 104 MINNEAPOLIS CAMPUS (WEST) MINNEAPOLIS CAMPUS (EAST) Fig. 6«— University of Minns sots 106 Washington, Cornell, Johns Hopkins, and Arisona Stats, tha library was Integrated Into an existing configuration of buildings whose original planning had not envisioned such an addition. It was necessary at Cornell and Arisona State to demolish an older building In order to obtain a suitable site for the library. Location of these four libraries has resulted In their being In close proxlsdty to many basic Instructional units on the campuses. As mentioned earlier, the new libraries at Utah and Minnesota were constructed on expanded areas of their campuses. Plans for new library buildings were conceived as part of the overall development of these areas. The library at Utfah Is In the geographical center of the campus while the library at Minnesota is on the west side of the river from the main campus. Conclusions The faculty and students liked the location of the libraries at five universities.^ The conclusion Is, there fore, that these libraries are well-located for faculty and student needs. At the sixth university, Minnesota, the library location was Judged to be only somewhat better than averaae. It Is likely that this lower rating was due to the fact that the West Bank Campus Is only partially *See Graph 1. Washington Faculty • Stdnts* • Cornell Facultv • Stdnts* • Stdntsb + Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdntsb • Arisona State Faculty • Stdnts* • Stdntsb • Utah Faculty • Stdnts* • Minnesota Faculty • Stdnts* *Students*in-class bStudents-ln-library Graph I.— Ratings of all faculty and students on tha location of their respective library on campu*. 108 developed. Only thi social sciences instructional depart- ■ants ara locatad in this araa. Huaanitias instruction is still on tha aaln csnpus across ths rlvar. Bscausa tha Hast Bsnk Csnpus is geographically isolstad fron tha rast of tha University, thara is sons reason to doubt whether the location of tha Wilson Library will ever be popular with students and faculty. Entrances Tha entrance location at tha libraries was a nors controversial topic than tha location of tha library buildings.* Three of ths library buildings, Washington, Cornell, and Arisons State, have single entrances. Thers was user consent about the lack of mors than one entrance to these libraries, particularly at Arlsona State.2 Since these buildings ara centrally locatad on csnpus, it is to be expected, as Mat calf indicates, that users will ask for aultlple entrances so that it will be easier to 3 enter the library. lSee Graph 2. Only tha building program for Minnesota specified entrance location. 20f tha 368 opinionnalres returned, thirty-five contained written reference to the lack Of more than one entrance. Many suggested that a second entrance should be placed on the west side of ths library building. 3See Metcalf. Planning Academic and laaearch Library Buildings, p. 3uo. i t i s a s Washington Faculty • " \ Stdnts* O Cornell Faculty • Stdnts* • Stdnts* • Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdntsb • Arisons State Facftltv • Stdnts* • Stdntsb (> Utah Faculty m Stdnts* • Minnesota Faculty • Stdnts* • Httadtnta-in-cliM bStudents-ln-llbrary Graph 2*— Ratings of all faculty and students on tha location of tha entrance, or entrances, to their respective library on c— pus* 110 Utah haa a aaln antranca on tha aaat alda and a aaeondary antranca on tha west alda of tha building. Tha two antrancaa hava baan placed ona floor apart in order to dlacourage caaual pedeatrian traffic through tha build ing. The west entrance alao serves atudenta attending the library achool located in the building. The library at Johna Hopkins haa four entrancea, but there la only one entrance to tha main parte of tha library. Of tha alx libraries, users liked tha entrancea to this building the beat. The library building at Minnesota was designed with three entrancea but, at tha time of tha author’s visit, only two were open. Both are on the east aide of the building, one above ground, the other opening onto an underground concourse. Tha third entrance la on tha west aide of the building. There la a heavily-used parking lot on this aide of the library. Users complained about having to walk from the parking lot to tha aaat entrance of tha building. When the west entrance la opened, these complaints should cease. Except for Cornell, the libraries have no entrance barriers for wheelchair patrons. Arlsona State and Minnesota have automatic entrance and axlt doors for Ill ttui convenience of these patrons.* Johns Hopkins impro vised a raap at the quadrangle entrance after the library was constructed. Conclusions Based on faculty and student opinions* the con clusion Is that three libraries* Washington* Johns Hopkins* and Utah, have adequately located entrances. The three other libraries, Cornell* Arisona State, and Minnesota, do not have entrances located to the satis faction of their users. It Is thought that when Minne sota decides to staff the west entrance next to the parking lot* complaints about the location of the entrances to the library will lessen substantially. The Architectural Design of Each Building Introduction Physical characteristics of the library buildings* including architectural style* module sixes* provisions for expansion of the building* provisions for adding electronic capabilities* and other related details are described in this portion of the report. 1 These were specified In the building programs for the Arisona State and Minnesota libraries. The Utah library program asked for special architectural con sideration of wheelchair patrons. 112 Architectural Style Five of the libraries ware dasignad in a contempor ary architectural style. At Washington and Cornell, the architects were presented with the problem of fitting a modern-style building into a period setting. In the author's opinion, both library buildings were well Incorporated into their envlronsient through careful scaling and the use of similar building materials and design motifsIn contrast to these libraries, archi tects at Utah were given the freedom to establish a unique architectural design for tha new library. The intention was to establish a style which would influence the design of other nearby buildings and, to judge from what has subsequently been constructed, this is what is happening. All the buildings on the West Bank Campus at Minnesota are new. The library has been designed in a style similar to the other buildings. The style of the library at Arisona State does not appear to relate to nearby buildings but, because there is such an anarchy of architectural styles in this part of the campus, the (Text continued on p. 127) *The building program for each of these libraries Included general statements on the need for a harmonious integration of tha building into its site. Programs for the other four libraries omitted any reference to archi tectural design. PLATE I— (Overleaf) Olin Library, Washington University. Complatad in 1962. Archltacts: Murphy and Mackay. Library build ing consultants: Ralph Ellsworth and Kayas Matcalf. Tha antranca to tha library may ba saan at tha far laft of tha picture. Rrisas solells ara on both tha north and south facades of tha upper floors. 113 PLATE I PLATE II— (Overleaf) Olin Research Library, Cornell University. Completed in 1961. Architects: Warns* Burnes, Toan and Lunde. Library build ing consultant: Keyes Metcalf. The entrance to the library is at the left, opposite Uris Library. Mote the large amounts of unshielded glass facing west on this end of the building. The technical services department is behind the stone piers at the right. 115 PLATE III— (Overleaf) Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University. Completed in 1964. Architects: Wrenn, Lewis, and Jencks; Meyer and Ayers. Entrance facade facing the ? uadranale. This is the top loor of the library. 117 h i aivia PLATE IV— (Overleaf) Elsenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University* This side of the build ing faces the main entrance to the University on North Charles Street* The entrance doors are located at ground level In the center section beneath the columns* The two upper floors of the library are seen from this side. In addition, there are four floors below grade* 119 PUTS IV PLATE V— (Overleaf) Hayden Library, Arizona State University. Completed in 1966. Architects: Weaver and Drover. The entrance to the library Is centered on the side of the build- ins at right. Inset walls are of polished red granite. 121 PLATE V PUTS VI— (Overleaf) Marriott Library. University of Utah* Conpleted in 1968* Architects: Loranao 8* Young and partnara; Robert A* Fowler; J. Snirl Cornwall. Library building consultants Ralph Ellsworth* Tha bridges at the left leed into the aaln entrance of the library on the east side. A proaenade deck encircles the library at the third floor level* On the upper floors, there are narrow windows between the double piers* 123 PLATE VI 124 PLATE Vll--(Overleaf) Wilson Library, Univarsity of Minnesota. Completed in 1968. Architects: The Cerny Associates. Library building consultant: Kayes Metcalf. A second entrance under ground is directly beneath the entrance shown. 125 PUTS VII 127 lack of such a relationship doss not seem important. The scale of the building does not overpdwer its neighbors. The only library not designed in a contemporary style is the one at Johns Hopkins. Most of the buildings on campus are of Georglan-style architecture. On its exterior, the library mimics Georgian architecture with some modern detailing. The interior is contemporary. As mentioned earlier, fitting a building success fully into an environment with other buildings Involves a concern for thb building's scale. The libraries in this study are large buildings. To achieve a well-scaled structure yet one having adequate floor space, it was necessary at each campus to place part of the building underground. Nearly half the total floor space of the library at Minnesota and seventy-five per cent of the Johns Hopkins library are below ground. Conclusions The architectural designs of the six libraries were considered good, or better, by both faculty and students at each university• * Washington was the most admired and Minnesota the least. The topic inspired con siderable written comment. See Appendix VI, Written Comments about the Libraries. lSee Graph 3. Washington Facultv • Stdnts* • Cornell Facultv • Stdnts* <> Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdntsb • Arlsona State Facultv • • Stdnts* • Stdntsb * Utah Facultv < > Stdnts* <> Minnesota Facultv O Stdnts* • *Students-ln-class ^Students-ln-library Graph 3.— Ratings of all faculty and students on tha archl* tactural daslgn of their respective library on canpus. 129 Module Sl»f Modular construction was briefly discussed in Charter 1* For the purposes of this section, the follow ing are definitions of "nodular construction" and "nodule" taken from Keyes Metcalf’s book. Modular construction: A systen of building construction in which the floor area is divided into equal rectangles defined by structural colunns at the comers, Instead of by load- bearing walls. This systen makes it possible to provide or to extend areas for the different departments as desired. A modular library is one constructed on this principle* Module: One of the rectangular units of space into which a nodular construction is divided; also called a bay.1 The six libraries in the study employed nodular construction.^ Table 4 indicates the module sixes used at each library.3 Attention is called to the larger- slsed nodules at Utah and Minnesota. These libraries are the newest in the study. Or. Donald C. Davidson, Librar ian, University of California at Santa Barbara, has noted ^Metcalf, Planning Academic and Research-Library Buildings, p. 416. 2 An exception is the top floor of the library at Johns Hopkins. This floor contains administrative offices, various public roons, and an entrance lobby. 3 Only the Arizona State library building program referred tb the concept of nodular construction. None of the program mentioned module else. 130 TABLE 4 MODULE SIZES USED IN THE SIX BUILDINGS STUDIED Univarsity Module Slse Washington University 21*-8" square Cornell University Several sixes vara used. Bee explanation In text. Johns Hopkins University 21* -•*» square* Arlsona State University 21*-8»x22*-8" University of Utah 26* square University of Minnesota 26* square aAll floors sxcspt Cop floor. Sss explanation In text. 131 a trend toward larger nodule slsee in library construc tion,^ Larger nodules nake possible a nore flexible arrangenent of books tacks and readers, he states. Module slses for three libraries anployed the dlnenslon of 21*-8" for at least one side of the nodule. This allows for the placement of stacks in a module on 52" centers. The nodule dlnenslon of 26* square, used at two other libraries, also allows for the arrangenent of stack units on 52" centers. At Johns Hopkins,' nodules have dimensions of 22*-6" in each direction which allow for stacks to be arranged on 54" centers. Dimensions of the nodules on the naln level of the library at Cornell were determined by, (1) structural considerations and, (2) the functions which were to take 2 place in certain areas. The dimensions of the modules in the bookstack floors were established so that the maxinun number of sections of shelving, together with other functions, could be placed on each floor. Bccept for the libraries at Utah and Minnesota which use the sane site modules, nodule slses in ths libraries studied show considerable variation from one another. All the module slses appear to be efficient for the placement of stacks. Knowledge of whether they are ^Davidson, "Significant Developments in University Library Buildings," 123-37, 2See fig. 7, 132 16*-11" 25*-10" 16»-8" 25*-10" 25*-10" 23*-10" 25*-10" 16*-11" ✓ * 21*-8" TYPICAL g Main Entrance Floor 25*-10" 23*-10" 25*-10" 1 21*-8" TYPICAL Stack Tovar Fig* 7— Diagram showing nodula slsas us ad In tha Olin Library, Comall University. 133 efficient for other purposes would be dependent on a study of greater depth than the author has made here. Provisions for Expansion Metes If recommends that a new library should be planned so that it can be occupied for at least twenty- five years before it will need to be expanded.1 None of the libraries in the study was planned for that long a period. The following is the number of years the libraries were planned for, and the number of years after opening when they will need enlarging. University Years Planned for Estimated number of Years After Opening when Library will Need Expanding Washington 20 15 Cornell 20 14 Johns Hopkins 10-15 10 Arlsona State 10 8-9 Utah 10 "Probably less than 10 years" Minnesota 10 10 The libraries at Washington and Cornell were planned about the same time; the other libraries are ^Metcalf, Planning Academic and Research Library Buildings. p. 305. 134 lunar, with Minnesota opening at recently m 1968. Nota that tha newer llbrarias were plannad to last for a parlod asieh lass than tha recoenended twenty-five years without expansion. Nota also that, according to present sati net as, Washington and Cornell will need to enlarge their library buildings far sooner than was originally antici pated* five of tha libraries ware plannad to be expanded, Washington, Johns Hopkins, Utah, and Minnesota in a horlsontal direction, Arisons State vertically. Tha four libraries which have bean plannad to be extended horl- sontally will expand underground in aost cases. The sixth library, Cornell, was not planned for an addition.1 A special canpus coaaittee is presently studying the problen of library expansion on the Cornell canpus. All the library buildings have architectural pro visions for the expansion of their electrical capa bilities .2 The technical services daparCannes in the lAt the tine the library was designed, the planners had in wind aodelllng the principal library units at Cornell After those at Harvard. As Harvard had Laaont, Widener, and Houghton Libraries for undergraduete, graduate, and rare book collections, respectively, Cornell would have Urls, 01 in. and a third building for its col lections. The third building was planned for a site 1 suedlately east of Olln. *Tho Washington, Arlsona State, and Utah building prograas aade brier reference to this need. The other progress oaitted aentlon of the problem. 135 libraries at Johns Hopkins, Utah, and Minnesota have grid floors in which additional electrical outlets may be easily installed. Much of the electrical expansion for all the libraries has been designed to take place in the floors, either through floors easily cut through from the celling below, or floors thick enough for electricians to crawl idto them to Install wiring. Interior Organisation and Traffic Accommodations in Each Library Building Introduction This segment is on the placement of departments and services in the libraries and thkir functional relationships to each other and to the library user. Discussion begins with a description of library entrance spaces and patron awareness of the library services impottant to him. Departments and services on the main entrance floor, aa well as on other floors, are located and described. The final topic is on the vertical and horisontal traffic patterns which aftfte, in part, from the location of these departments. ^Except for Johns Hopkins, the library building programs contalnad various desctiptlons on the location and relationship of principal library departments and services. 136 Library Entrance Snace« Library entrance floor plana ara illustrated in Figs. 8 through 14. If ona axaminas tha entrance spacas lmnadiataly inaida tha library buildings, it can ba saan that thaaa spacas ganarally includa stairs and sonatinas alsvators which allow traffic to nova aaslly to and from othar floors of tha library. Thasa antranca spacas also contain tha control point whara patrons ara chackad to raaka sure that they have charged out library natarlals in thalr possession. The entrances at Washington and Utah ara treated as lobbies which ave completely enclosed in order to contain tha noise generated within than* This technique has not bean particularly successful at Washington whara tha lobby doors open immediately onto quiet study areas. Architects at three libraries have used tha entry spacas as a means of incorporating dramatic elements into the library designs. Tha lobby at Washington is dominated by a finely-scaled, cant Havered stairway which is sat against a glass wall affording a view of a planted courtyard. Johns Hopkins has a monumental stair hall measuring 48'x57* and nearly 37* high which connects the quadrangle entrance of the library to the North Charles Street entrance one floor below. At Arizona State, the E |7“1------------- I M I als Biblio JH ---- graphy Tachnlcal Prbcaaaaa Card Catalog □ J e? • o a 2 Rafarence * p-*— 1 1 enca | 1 . ml . Parlodlcals Raadlng A M F l g ‘ 8-wS&!SiSnfiSK*rSttp. lthr"*- J Periodicals Reading Room X I ■ ■ • Reference Reading Room T ► Gallery I Circulation Dept. i SijJ— n B ^Ba-r H O J I I I • Card Catalog Bibliography Collec tion TT e 06 * Seri As Rare Bopks aDept 4___- J - Sculptural Court Special ColLee- I — tlons I __ U E TT rp i Acquisitions ^echn r i i echnlcal Services f Cataloging • a =1-------- Fig. 9.— Entrance floor, Olin Library, Cornell University. Z > Quadrangle Entrance Gallery Gallery □ □ 0 Staff Lounge Lobby Garrett Room Admiei s trat ikre Of fi< es Fig. 10.— Top floor, Elsenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University. G Humanities-Social Sciences Reference r>«pt. • • I L E ED Books Blbllogra phy Coll. Card Catalog ^ Information Seri* Dept Acquisi tions J h- rcu- n i f H . i iw ina , , Documents J —I leading II Room r North Charles Street Entrance Fig. 11— Entrance floor, Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University. N |> 140 Acquisitions Recelvlr Cataloging t U b H |— I ~nf 1 j Card [ Sarlals B Typing- Book jrklni m. n n ? ircula- 1 Ition |DcPt» I In: Una: Card Catalog • a a Bibliography C Infor- a Ion m I M rrgrr Lobby n p y Refarcnca Dapt. • — < J N F ig . 1 2 .— E n tra n c e f l o o r , H ayden L ib r a r y , A riz o n a S t a t e U n iv e r s ity . 141 142 e Administration LT3FT Raadars • Rasarva Books I i • • • 1 si ' 1 * m m | 2 3 1 • • 1 W M Raadars. 1 Lobby Ganaral Rafaranca [ M . J L Raadars Bibliography clSlog H 11 1-Study 2-Typlng 3-Smoking A N Fig. 13.--Main antranca floor, Marriott Library, University of Utah. Fig. 14.— Main entrance floor, Wilson Library University o f Minnesota. Z V ■n Circulation Dept. ► J r o o* £ 22 a hi a 9 n Cataloging ■ □ I M I I 1 _ L J _ L U _ 9 Hi i? S3 HO. o f t o OQ Reference Collection J------ Bibliography Collection 144 entrance ipaei ria«s through two stories creating visual Interest by its being open at the second level. Location of HsavilvUsed Denartiaents and Services The most actively-used departments and services in an academic library are circulation, the card catalog, reference, reserve book, and periodicals. All the libraries in the study have located their card catalog, circulation and reference departments on the main floor.* Reference service is on more than one floor at two libraries. Johns Hopkins has a reference department for human!ties-social sciences on the main entrance floor and a sciences reference department three floors down. Because the library collection at Utah is divided on a subject basis, a general reference desk has been placed on the main floor and subject reference departments on the other floors. Other departments and services are less well represented on the main floor of the library buildings. Ttoo libraries locate reserve books, two periodicals, and one newspapers on the entrance floor. Three libraries, Johns Hopkins, Minnesota, and Arlsona State, maintain information desks on the main entrance level. ’ ’ See Table 5. 145 TABLE 5 LOCATION OF THE MAJOR SERVICES AND DEPARTMENTS IN THE LIBRARIES STUDIED Main Entrance One Floor One Floor Floor Above Below Card Catalog 6* - • Reference department^ 6 - - Circulation department 6 - - Information desk 3 - - c Reserve book department 2 1 2 Current periodicals^ 2 1 2 Newspapers6 1 1 3 Technical services department 5 m 1 Administration offices^ 3 2 - "Number of libraries (typical). ^At Johns Hopkins, the reference department for humanlties-social sciences Is on the main floor. Refer ence fie sciences Is on the third floor below the main floor. Utah has reference departments on all floors, including general reference on the main floor. cCornell places reserve books in the graduate read ing rooms located on the bookstack floors. ^Utah has a subject-divided library with periodicals placed by subject on all floors. Johns Hopkins nas period icals on the first and third floors, below the main entrance floor. "Minnesota houses newspapers two floors below the main entrance floor. ^Minnesota has its administrative office suite three floors above the main entrance floor. 146 In most casts, cara has baan takan to placa heavily- usad dapartmants on or naar main traffic artarlas on aach floor of the libraries, making these dapartmants easy to reach and Isolating traffic from tha more quiet areas of tha building. Tha major exception to this seams to be at Johns Hopkins where one of tha periodical collections and tha science reference department have been located on levels below the main entrance floor and at a distance from the stairs and elevators. This has resulted In the creation of disturbing traffic over much more of the library than seems to be desirable. There are other Isolated Instances In which the location of a department or service could be lmpveved. It Is suggested that the card catalogs at Arizona State and Utah could have been placed somewhat closer to the stairs and elevators In order that users would have less distance to walk to obtain library materials from the stacks.* The circulation desks at Washington and Utah could have been better located. At Washington, there have been problems with the noise of circulation activities Infiltrating quiet reader spaces. It Is suggested that the desk should have been located In the entrance lobby where the noise of Its operations would not be a 1See Figs. 12 and 13. 147 disturbance.1 . This location would also ba tha most con* vanlant for exiting patrons to use* In relation to the main stairs, elevators, and exit, Utah's circulation desk Is Inconvenient for patrons to charge out library auiterl- 2 als. This Is to be corrected in the future when It Is planned to charge out materials at the checkpoints In the lobbies. Relationships of Heavllv-Used Departments and Services At aach library, the key public service departments on the main floor have been located in relation to one another with varying degrees of success. lAttentlon is called to the placement of the reference department, card catalog, and the bibliography collection at Washington, Cornell, and Utah.^ The location of these departments Is such that no great distance separates any one from the other. This makes It convenient and efficient for reference personnel to help students use the card catalog and the bibliography collection as well as the reference collection. There Is no need for an Information desk at the card catalog, as Is thb case at two of the other libraries. 1See Fig. 8. 2See Fig. 13. 3See Figs. 8, 9, and 13. 148 The placement of tha reference department, card catalog, and bibliography collection at Arlsona Stata and at Minnesota has resulted in relationships atKthese libraries which are not as good as those previously described.1 The card catalog at Arlsona Stata is approxi mately forty-five feet from the reference desk making it somewhat difficult for reference personnel to help catalog users. Personnel at tha Information desk cannot readily answer catalog questions as they are even farther from the card catalog. At Minnesota, the reference depart ment and the card catalog are over seventy-five feet apart. This seems to be the principal reason for there being an information dekk next to the cfttalog. Johns Hopkins has an information desk next to the card catalog and the bibliography collection on the main 2 entrance floor. The nearest reference service is at the opposite end of the floor where there is no visual con tact wtth the card catalog. Information Cues for the Incoming Patron The library service element most prominently featured on the main entrance floors at all six libraries 3 is the circulation desk. Other key services on the 1See Figs. 12 and 14. 2See Fig. 11. 3See Table 6. 149 TABLE 6 LIBRARY SERVICE CUES AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF EACH LIBRARY IN THE STUDY strength of cues: 1 - excellent 4 - poor 9 - absence of service or cue University e « 2 ® s US & & g % < 3 < 3 U u 2 I o o < * 4 b C 4^ M O m 2 e A e v •*4 *8 b £ e u w 8 u 2 d Washington Cornell . 2 3 1 4 0 0 0 0 4 2 1 0« 1 0 Johns Hopkins0 1 0 1 0 0 OC 4 Arlsona State 4 3 1 0 0 1 1 Utah 4 1 0 1 0 1 Minnesota 1 1 3 0 0 ld 4 *Refers to stairs In main library area. There are stairs of only fair visibility which lead to the lower floor of the library. t ’ From Charles Street entrance. cRefers to stairs in main library area. Stairs up to quadrangle entrance level are prominently displayed from the Charles Street entrance. dThe first stairs which can be seen lead down to the lower level* only. Main stairs in core of building can also be seen. 150 entrance floors vary in tha dagraa of their prominence from one library to the next.^ For example, two card catalogs are highly visible to the Incoming patron while two are nearly hidden from view until the patron has walked some distance Into the library. Reference desks are conspicuously placed at three libraries but harder to find at the other threeStairs or elevators are not easily located at some of the libraries* As may be noted In Graph 4, the students found It more difficult to locate library services or departments than did faculty. Perhaps this Is primarily the result of the students' lack of sophistication In using a library. It may be, however, that the libraries failed to provide sufficient cities to their services. This points to the need for an examination of how Important departments and services can be organized In a library so that the relatively unskilled user will be led to them In a logical fashion. *Utah and Minnesota have eye-catching signs which Identify Important library services on their main entrance floors• 2 The reference department at Cornell uses two standard-sized office desks which are located approximately 70' from the main entrance. Incoming patrons often mistake the circulation desk next to the entrance for the reference desk. The smell office desks, Incidentally, were specified for the reference department In the building program. 8 > o 0. > Washington Faculty • Stdntsa • Cornell Faculty • Stdnts • Stdntsb • Faculty m Stdntab • Arlsona State Facid tv • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Utah Faculty • Stdnts* • Minnesota Faculty • Stdntsa * aStudents-ln-class ^Students-ln-llbrary Graph 4.— Ratlngs.of all faculty and students on tha aasa of locating library services or departments In their respective library* 152 Faculty and students w n asked their opinion of the interior arrangeswnt of the library building. All libraries were Judged aood or better in this respect.*1 Washington was considered best by both groups. The interior arrangement of this library is sinple and rela tively uncluttered. Host of the principal library depart ments are next to the elevator-stair unit. The stack floors, which are similar, have central spaces uninter rupted by rooms or fixed building functions. Transportation and Traffic Patterns All the libraries appeared to have public stairs which are conveniently distributed throughout the building. There is some variation in the proadnence of the main stairways in the buildings. The designs of three library buildings, Washington, Arlsona State, and Utah, Incorporate generously-proportloned stairways to all floors in a conspicuous position next to the main entrance. The stairways for the other three libraries are less prominently displayed. At one of the latter, Cornell, the stairs are completely hidden.* Locations of the public elevators usually followed the *See Graph S. 2 This was done intentionally. Cornell has upper floors closed off to the undergraduate student and the planners of the building did not wish to call attention to the stairs and elevators. WaahingCon Faculty • SCdntsa • Comall FaculCy • SCdntaa > Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins FaculCy • SCdntsb (► Arlsona Stats Faculty • Stdntsa • SCdntsb • UCah Faculty • Stdntsa • Mlnnasota Faculty • Stdntsa • aStudants*ln-class ^Students-in-library Graph 5.— Racings of all faculCy and students on tha inCarlor arranganant of Chair raspacClva library building on canpus. 153 154 •am* pattarn as for stairs: if a design emphasised the main stairway, it also gave prominence to the elevators* With the exception of Cornell, faculty and students felt that the location of the stairways was good or better.^ All the libraries in the study provide elevators for public use* Four libraries have two public elevators each, one library, Arizona State, has three, and Wash ington has one. There is an escalator at Minnesota which carries traffic from the underground entrance fleor up to the next entrance level* The escalator moves only in one direction* Faculty and students Judged the location of the elevators in most of the libraries to be satisfactory*^ The two groups had somewhat less favorable 3 opinions on the number of elevators in each library* Washington, which has only one elevator, received the lowest student rating for this feature* Four libraries have two elevators each. Students found this number less than good. They liked the three elevators at Arizona State* The likelihood of patron dissatisfaction with the number of elevators appears to be common in most libraries and will Increase as patrons multiply and library services become scattered over a number of floors* *See Graph 6* 2 *See Graph 7. 3 See Graph 8* s S WaahlngCon Faculty • Stdntaa • Comall Facultv • Stdntaa • Stdntab • Johna Hopklna Faculty • Stdntab • Arlsona Stata Faculty • Stdntaa • Stdntab • Utah Faculty • Stdntaa • Miimaaota Faculty • Stdntaa *S tudanta-in-claaa bStudenta-in-library Graph 6.— Ratings of all faculCy and sCudanCa on cha location of atalrwaya In thalr raapactlva library. Washington Facultv » Stdntsa • Cornell Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdntsb • Arisona State Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdnts5 • Utah Faculty • Stdntsa • Minnesota Faculty • Stdntsa ' • ..... aStudents-in-class ^Student#-in-library Graph 7.— Ratings of all faculty and students on the location of elevators in their respective library. 156 Washington Faculty Stdntsa 1 • Cornell Faculty Stdnt«a • Stdnts0 • Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdnts • Arlsona State Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Utah Faculty • Stdntsa » Minnesota Faculty • Stdntsa • aStudents-in-class ^Students-in-library Graph 8,— Racings of all faculty and students on the number of elevators in their respective library. 157 158 With regard to horizontal traffic, three libraries, Washington, Cornell, and Johns Hopkins, were designed with floor spaces largely uninterrupted by fixed functions, such as the stair, elevator, and rest room cores. This has made it possible for the three libraries to arrange their stack floors in a simple, continuous pattern of stack ranges, with well defined aisles.*1 Note that there is little structural Interference with the location of stacks and other functions. Arizona State, Utah, and Minnesota have core service units which are Imposed in the center of the stack floors. The presence of the service cores forces an arrangement of stacks around the cores and makes it difficult to establish a continuity of shelving on a floor. Aisles are less well defined and major aisles run in both directions. Location of Technical Services Departments Five libraries located the major portion of their technical services functions on the main floor of the library near the card catalog and bibliography collection. The sixth library, Utah, placed its technical services department one floor below the main floor. The designs lSee Figs. 15, 16, and 17. 2See Figs. 18, 19, and 20. 159 Faculty Studies L J E 1 r S c f i rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrf Faculty Studies A N Fig. 15.--Typical stack and reader arrangement, 01 in Library, Washington University. Faculty Studies Uraduat f r Study 1 Conf. I l! Room i Li Fig* 16*— Typical stack and raadar arrangement, Olin Library, Cornell University* 160 FaculCy Studies i~r 1 3 ' r - r 1 'a „ | ' & Stacks I t 2 1 * 1 ff1 * * ^ I '---L-OJ---------' - Stacks ' • ' I '• I i * * JK Stacks ' 5 ' 'S1 3 i < L___ ! £ ■ • • Pi I ■ S d. e1 1 e| &I Stacks I g| _$l___■__ J 3i «ii ^ 0 > I 1 4-1 i _ L Stacks |L I -----1 r i Stacksl i I /.IJLUiUV 7! s"lnjrIR ° 0 , M I n T T T T T U T T T T T T T T T T Faculty Studies N £ > Fig* 17*— Typical stack and reader arrangement, Elsenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University* Faculty Studies r T T T T T T T r h T T r i Locked Student Studies (typ.) rrm— 'Stacks' Government Documents Staclis Stacks n K 1 M W Seminar g i i a d Smok ing Loungfe Studs Room] 0 XLLLL m u LJ I_ _ _ I TTTTT r StacHs r * r t— r iStacks I I I i Stacks •----» a ■ I • Stud] Room Readers • • • "TT1 T----- ! Stacks ■ • i m u Fig. 18.--Typical stack and reader arrangement, Hayden Library, Arlxona State University. Faculty Studies 163 Facility Studies (typ.) j t t t1 • n r H n T 'T 'l T j n T ^ i Stacks < ( vtvi Atrium 3 Pi -S i U J itacks! l_Sta_cks_ J 4t*ckjg t l U l ifTT W T T h n if T T t f T T h ___ ( Q i T 1 1-Study 2-Typing 3-Smoking < N Fig. 19.— Typical stack and reader arrange mentt Marriott Library, University o£ Utah. Fig. 20.--Typical stack and raadar arrangement Wilson Library, University o f Minnesota. r p rmiiiiiiim im in n i Stacks I Stacks ! • i Stacks • ! : , Stacks '{ixj , n r - i f ~ i I " i Stacks i-,n n n Z V l j t,_ia l • ----------' • ! - ' J d. ~ l - • i Stacks j xiiiiiiiim iiiiiiiiin 9> a* Locked Studies (typ.) r m iiT i r r im i Ti 165 of the technical service* department* will be discussed In greater detail later In this chapter. Conclusions In conclusions based on user-eplnlons, it can be said that all six libraries have Interior arrangements satisfactory to their users; however, the ease of locat ing library services and departments was rated less than good by users at five of the libraries. The location of stairs was satisfactory to virtually all user groups. The location of elevators In the libraries was met with favor by the users but the member of elevators received a less than good rating at five schools. User opinions on one Item In the opinloimalres will not be reported because the author strongly suspects that respondents Interpreted it In two different ways. The Item concerned the ease of locating books in the library. In asking for an opinion on this feature, the author wanted to know whether the architectural design of the library building aided or hindered persons In locating books. While some respondents may have inter preted the Item this way, It is felt that others thought that the Item referred to whether they could find copies of particular books on library shelves. Because of this possible misinterpretation, the author has decided not to report the ratings on this item. 166 Description and Comparison of Special Library Spaces for the Public Introduction The designs of various specialised public service spaces In each library are described In this section. These spaces Include group study rooms, locked student studies, locked faculty studies, seminar rooms, and typing roomsAlso Included In the section are descrip tions of each library*s provisions for microform reading, smoking, and rest rooms. Group Study Rooms Washington and Johns Hopkins do not have group study rooms. At Cornell, there are rooms on the west end of the stack floors which are called "conference rooms". These rooms, when not scheduled for seminars, are used as open study rooms and, It Is assumed, can be used as group study rooms If the persons occupying them so desire. The number and slse of group study rooms vary at each library. Utah has the greatest number, most of which are larger than any In the other libraries. Students *See Tables 7 and 8 which summarise these public service spaces In the six libraries. The spaces were carefully described In all the building programs except Johns Hopkins*• TABLE 7 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIALIZED STUDY SPACES IN THE LIBRARIES University Group Study Rooms Locked Student Studies Locked Faculty Studies Washington none 60 studies,.4*x5'*6" 22 ft2 each 126 studies, 7*x8* 56 ft2 each Cornell Four rooms. 12*xl9*a 228 ft2 each Four rooms. 19'x21*a 339 ft2 each TWo rooms, 21*x8"x25,-10"4 561 ft2 each One room, 17x23'-10"a 306 ft2 Four rooms, ell-shapeda 530 ft2 each 24 studies, 4'x6' 24 £t2 each 96 studies, 8*xl0*-6" 84 ft each Johns Hopkins none none 236 studies, 6'x8* 48 ft2 each aThese rooms are also regarded by the library as being seminar rooms or graduate reading rooms. ■ v j TABLE 7--ContInued University Group Study Rooms Locked Student Studies Locked Faculty Studies Arlsona State Three rooms,09*-3"x9»-3" 85 ft each Six rooms, 10,-4', xll*-4" 117 ft2 each 150 studies, 4»-3"x4»3" 18 ft2 each 69 studies 7»-6"xll»-6" 86 ft2 each Utah Fourteen rooms, 12*-6"xl9» typical slse, 237 ft2 each none 162 studies 6»x8», 48 ft each Minnesota TWo rooms« 16'xl8* 238 ft2 each Four rooms, 8*xl3* 101 ft2 each Twelve rooms, 9»xl3» 117 ft2 each 60 studies, 5*x6* 30 ft2 each 138 studies 6'xlO* 60 ft2 each O ' 00 TABLE 8 SEMINAR AND TYPING BOOMS IN THE LIBRARIES University Saalnar Ro o m Typing Ro o m Washington 2 room, 15vx20*, 300 ft2 sach 3 rooM, 18*x20*, 360 ft2 asch 1 rooa, 15*x37't 555 ft2 Sach 4 room, 3*-9"x4*, 15 ft2 aach. In addition, 2 typing sta tions hava baan locatad in aach of five saoking room. Comall Ro o m 1 is tad as Group Study Ro o m in Tabla 11 ara also usad as saainar room. 4 room, 12»xl0», 228 ft2 aach. Johns Hopkins 3 rooM, l2'x30v, 366 ft2 aach 4 rooM, 6*x6', 46 it2 aach 4 room, 8*xll*, 88 ft2 aach Arisons 1 rooa, 17'-3*xk2*-6h, 39l Ifc2 1 rooa, 16*-2»xl9"-6», 315 ft2 1 rooa, 21»-8”x22«-8”, 491 ft2 1 rooa, l6«-io^tl7*, IWIt* 3 room, ll,-3"xl3,-2", 148 ft2 aach Utah nona 2 room, 12*x20«, 240 ft2 aach 2 rooM, 12'xl2*, 144 ft2 aach 4 room, 12»-6"xl9», 238 ft2 aach Minnssota nona 21 room, 6*-6"x8", 52 ft2 aach g 170 ware asked Chslr opinions on ths "availability of arsas, suck as small rooms, where students may talk and study together." As might be expected, the libraries where there were no group study rooms received lower ratings on this feature than those which did.^ Cornell received a low rating, possibly because the students did not feel that the conference rooms were successful as group study rooms. It is probably unwise to assume that the same rooms can be used Interchangeably for quiet or noisy study, depending on student desires. In this author's experience, persons seeking quiet will retreat to an unoccupied room in the library. These persons will resist other students* attempts to use the room for converse* tion unless the library exercises some control over the situation. Students were asked their opinions on the "variety of study spaces" in each library. Four libraries were felt to be good, or better, on this featureStudents at Cornell and Johns Hopkins rated "variety of study spaces" average or somewhat better. At both these libraries^ the student has few choices in study areas. At Cornell, he may study at a carrel in the stacks, *See Graph 9. 2 *See Graph 10. Washington Stdntsa • Cornell Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Stdntsb • Arizona State Stdntsa Stdntsb Utah Stdntsa Minnesota Stdntsa ... f - aStudents-ln-class bStudents-in-library Graph 9.— Ratings of all stridents on the availability, in their respective library, of areas, such as small rooms, where students may talk and study. Washlnston Stdnts* < > ■ Cornell Stdnts® (> Stdntsb • Johns Korkins Stdntsb • Arizona State Stdntsa • Stdnts^ • Utah Stdntsa • Minnesota Stdntsa • 0 Students-ln-class ^Students-in-library Graph 10.••Ratings of all students on the variety of study spaces In their respective library. 172 173 either one assigned to him or one which Is vacant at the tlme.^ The student may also use the conference and graduate study rooms located at the end of the stack floor* Downstairs, he has large public areas, such as the refer ence room, In which to study. At Johns Hopkins, the student may study In a carrel In the stacks, or In the reading room* located at the south end of the building. The choice at this library Is very limited. Slxty-one of the 213 students who responded to this Item Indicated that the variety of study spaces was poor or very poor. Locked Student Studies Four libraries have locked studies for students. Their number and size vary at each library. Cornell, with twenty-four, has the fewest, while Arizona State has the most with 150. Study sizes vary from eighteen square feet at Arizona State to thirty square feet at Minnesota. The libraries at Johns Hopkins and Utah do not have locked studies for graduate students. Instead, open studies have been created ftom desks hung on stack uprights. Above each desk Is a locker. The desks at Johns * There are only two general-use tables located on the center aisle of each books tack floor for a student without a carrel to use. There was a need expressed by four or five respondents to have more spaces In which to study, preferably smaller rooms than the library presently has. 174 Hopkins srs arranged in a double row with an aisle between. The typical double row has twenty-six reader stations con centrated In one area. Becauae of thalr total lack of privacy, these desks are not liked by the greduate students. There were several written consents to this effect. The open graduate student carrels at Utah are not concentrated In rows as at Johns Hopkins but are scattered throughout the stack areas. Locked Faculty Studies All the llbrerles provide locked faculty studies. The sixes of the studies range from forty-six square feet at Johns Hopkins to elghty-slx square feet et Arlsona State.* Although two faculty persons are assigned to each study at Arlsona State, there are Insufficient studies avellable for even the full professors, the one group allowed to use thee. Seminar Rooma The intent of a seminar rooa in a library Is to provide space so that classes may aeet to use library materials. Four of the libraries, Washington, Cornell, Johns Hopkins, and Arlsona State, have a Halted number of seminar rooms. Some of the seminar rooms originally lSee Table 7. 175 built at Washington and Johns Hopkins hava baon convartad to othar library purposas• Schadullng of tha usa of samlnar rooms In tha library at Washington has baan assumsd by tha unlvarslty administration. According to tha Unlvarslty Librarian, this has resulted In tha rooms bislng turnad Into class rooms. Tha library administration Is anxious to discontinue this practice feeling that classrooms In tha library are a source of unwanted and disturbing traffic. Typing Rooms All tha libraries provide dosed spaces In which library patrons may use typewriters. Some of the libraries provide coin-operated electric typewriters as wall as provide additional space for tha patron to usee his own typewriter. Sizes of tha typing rooms at the libraries vary widely.* Three libraries, Cornell, Arizona State, and Utah, hava large typing rooms each of which provide stations for five to eight typists. Most of tha rooms at Johns Hopkins and Minnesota provide space for a single typist. Washington also has some stogie occupant typing rooms but most of Its typing stations are located In tha *See Table 8. 176 smoking lounges.^ Faculty indicated that tha typing rooms 2 ware adequate at all the libraries. The students thought that the rooms were less than good at five libraries. The average rating at Washington was, possibly, a comment on the typing stations in the smoking lounges. At Cornell, the undergraduates in the Students-ln-class group do not have access to the typing rooms which are located on the bookatack floors. This appears to explain a less than average rating by this group. There appear to be suffi cient typing rooms at Johns Hopkins but they are not labelled as such and perhaps many students were unaware of their existence. Microform Rooms Microform rooms at Washington, Johns Hopkins, and Minnesota were specially designed by the architects for microform reading. At two of these libraries, custom- designed surfaces to support the microform readers were built into the rooms. The brightness of the lighting is controlled by rheostats at two libraries. In addition to the general area for microform readers, Minnesota has *This seems an unlikely combination. One thinks of smoking lounges as being quiet areas where the noise of typewriters would not be welcome. *See Graph 11. > o Q. > Washington Faculty • Stdnts* O Cornell Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdntsb • Arlsona State Facultv • Stdnts* • Stdntsb • Utah Facultv » Stdnts* • Minnesota Facultv • Stdntsa • aStudents-in-class **S tudents-in-1 ibrary Graph 11 .— Ratings of all faculty and students on tha adequacy of typing rooms in thalr raspactive library. 178 three Mall roona with raadars for parsons who wish to typa as they usa tha microform. Microform raadlng facllltlas at tha othar thraa llbrarlas hava tha appaaranca of being Improvised. Light ing Is raducad by turning off light flxturas• Mlcroforn raadars ara placad on standard library tables. Arlsona Stata placad Its Microform raadars In ons part of tha rasarva raadlng room.1 So far as tha opinions of tha usars ara concarnad, microform raadlng facllltlas at all but ona library wara thought to ba aood or somewhat better.2 At Cornell. Students-ln-library rated this feature mid-way between avaraaa and aood. Smoking Accommodations Smoking accommodations wara Incorporated In tha daslgn of all tha llbrarlas In tha study. In five of tha libraries, rooms furnished primarily with lounge lftirolture ara designated for smoking. Tha sixth library, Johns Hopkins, lacks closed-off public rooms and therefore permits smoking in most areas of tha building. An attempt Is made to prohibit smoking In tha stacks* Most library ^Slnce activity In a alcrofom raadlng area tends to ba noisy, tha author wonders whether It la desirable to combine this function with a rasarva raadlng room. 2See Graph 12. Washington Facultv • Stdntsa Cornall Facultv • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Facultv • Stdntsb • Arlsona Stata Facultv • Stdntsa • S0dntsb • Utah Facultv • Stdntsa • Mlnnasota Facultv • • aStudants-ln«class ^>tudents-ln-llbrary Graph 12.— Ratings of all faculty and students on tha adaquacy of microform facllltlas at thalr raspactlva library. 179 180 users found smoking accommodations In the libraries to be £OOd or better.^ Rest Rooms and Prinking Fountains Johns Hopkins and Utah have public rest rooms on all floors while the other libraries have them on every floor except the main entrance level. In most Instances, the rest rooms have been located next to the public elevators. Users Judged the "adequacy of the rest 2 roosts" as being good or better at all the libraries. The water fountains are generally located near the rest rooms and the users felt that there were a sufficient 3 number of them at every library. Conclusions Based on the opinions of the users, the libraries have adequate facilities for microform reading, smoking, and rest rooms. A sufficient number of drinking fountains have been provided. Group study rooms are liked at those libraries which have them. One library, Johns Hopkins, Is noticeably deficient in offering a variety of study spaces for students. *See Graph 13. 2 See Graph 14, 3See Graph 15. Washington Faculty • Stdnts* i> Cornell Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Facility • Stdntsb • Arlsona State Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Utah Faculty • Stdntsa • Minnesota Faculty o Stdntsa • g Students-ln-dass **Students-in-llbrary Graph 13.— Ratings of all faculty and students on the availability of areas, in their respective library, where one nay smoke. 181 Washington Facultv • Stdntsa (> Cornell Facultv » Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdntsb • Arizona State Facultv • Stdnts* • Stdntsb • Utah Faculty • Stdntsa • Minnesota Faculty • Stdntsa • aStudents-in-class ^Students-in-library Graph 14.— Ratings of all faculty and students on the adequacy of the rest rooms In their respective library. « > §> % o p. Washington Faculty ....... Stdnts® o Cornell Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdntsb • Arlsona State Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Utah Faculty • Stdntsa • Minnesota Faculty • Stdntsa * aStudents*ln-class ^Students-ln-llbrary Graph IS.— Ratings of all faculty and students on the sufficient number of drinking fountains In their respective library. TABLE 9 LOCATION OP SPECIALIZED PUBLIC SERVICE SPACES IN ALL SIX LIBRARIES Univarsity Croup Study Room s Looked Student Studies Locked Fsculty Studies Seminar Ro om s Typing Ro om s Microform Reading Room s Washington X X X X X Cornsll X X X X X X Johns Hopkins X X X X Arisons Ststs X X X X X X Utah X X X X Minnesota X X X X X 185 The typing rooms do not appear to be liked by the students. Possibly some of the dissatisfaction registered concerned student inability to find these rooms. It is also thought that there was some student displeasure expressed over the number of typewriters which were not in good working order. Ambient Conditions in Each Library Building Introduction This section is on lighting, fenestration, ceiling heights, acoustical control, architectural finishes, and esthetic design as they contribute to ambient conditions in the public and staff areas of each library. The opin ions of faculty, student, and library staff user-groups on these subjects are reported at points where they apply to the topic at hand. These opinions are comparable only IS a general sense because each group reported only on library spaces it used. Faculty and students used public spaces in the library. Public services staff^ used both public space and private offices and rated these spaces accordingly, 2 while technical services staff used private spaces almost exclusively. Therefore, the ratings of these groups together represent a composite opinion of the library's ambient features. ^Hereafter referred to as PS staff. 2 Heeeafter referred to as TS staff. 186 A word of explanation la also necessary concerning the reporting of user-ratlngs on lighting In the libraries* Faculty and students were asked to appraise lighting In two areas of each library. Library staffs were asked about lighting only In their work spaces. Therefore, on the graphs which show user opinions, It has been necessary to specify three areas where lighting was judged: in the reading areas, In the bookstacks, and In staff work areas. Lighting Lighting In the six libraries Is predominantly fluorescent. Some Incandescent lighting Is used In passageways or In stairwells. The use of Incandescent lighting for general Illumination is rare In the libraries studied. Johns Hopkins has flush-to-the-celllfig spotlights which light the card catalog area. Spotlights direct light specifically rather than generally. While thh light ing on the catalog appears adequate, the author wonders If It would be If It were necessary to shift the catalog cabinets Into a different pattern. Most user groups found lighting to be satisfactory.^ The lowest rating, for bookstack lighting, was given by *See Graphs 16, 17, and 18. Only three building programs mentioned lighting, one specifying fluorescent fixtures, another foot-candle levels. The critical Import ance of good lighting was emphasised in one of the programs. Washington Faculty • Stdntsa • Cornell Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntab • Johns Hopkins Faculty • Stdnts* • Arlsona State Faculty i> Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Utah Faculty • Stdntsa • Minnesota Faculty Stdntsa aStudents-ln-class ^Students-in-library Graph 16*— Ratings of all faculty and students on the lighting in the reading areas of their respective library. Washington Faculty • Stdntsa i► Cornell Faculty » Stdntsa • Stdntsb • Johns Hopkins Facility • Stdntsb t> Arizona State Faculty • Stdntsa • Stdntab <> Utah Faculty • Stdntsa • Minnesota Faculty • Stdntsa • g Students-ln-class bStudents-in-library Graph 17,— Ratings of all faculty and student« on the lighting in the bookstacks of their respective library. 188 Washington TS Staff PS Staff < > 1 Cornell TS Staff PS Staff • Johns Hopkins TS Staff • PS Staff • Arlsona State TS Staff • PS Staff • Utah TS Staff • PS Staff • Minnesota TS Staff • PS Staff • Graph 18,— Ratings of all library staffs on lighting In thalr rftspactlva work areas In the libraries. 190 Che students at Cornell. Lights over each bookstack aisle are on timer switches and have to be turned on by the students. ^ It Is wondered whether this Influenced the somewhat less than good rating. The library staff at Johns Hopkins judged lighting In their work areas as being less than good. The architects used wall reflecting fixtures to light petlpheral spaces In work rooms, studies, and miscellaneous spaces. These fixtures did not always appear to provide adequate light in a space. Fenestration The libraries differ widely In the amounts and kinds of fenestration. So far as the author was able to observe, the windows In most of the buildings generally are carefully located and shielded in order to prevent injurious or disturbing light. Deeply tinted glass Is also used In certain areas to shield the Interior from heat and glare. In the estimation of the author, there Is an excessive amount of Improperly shielded fenestration In the library building at Cornell. Ldrge windows are located In offices, technical services work spaces, and study areas. The windows are neither double-glased nor tinted. Venetian blinds are used to control the light ^The timers were Installed In order to reduce the heat load which would have c o m from having the lights on all the tlM. 191 entering the spaces. The air conditioning In the build ing was considered to be mid-way between poor and average by technical services sta££. The heat from the unshielded glass may have placed an excessive burden on the air conditioning system. In contrast to the building just described, the Johns Hopkins library has most of its floors underground. Fenestration of the underground floors at the south end of the building was possible because of the rapid down ward slope of the site. The user-groups were asked to rate location and number of windows In their respective library. The two features were controversial.1 All user-groups rated the location and number of windows at Johns Hopkins less than good. As has been noted, this library Is largely underground. TS Staffs at all six libraries Indicated that the location and number of windows was unfavorable. At two libraries, Utah and Minnesota, the only type of fenestra tion In the technical services area are clerestory windows. Washington has two narrow floor-to-ceillng windows as well as clerestory windows. The cataloging room at John Hopkins has windows but the acquisitions *See Graphs 19 and 20. None of the building programs discussed the subject of fenestration in the library building. 192 u e « o s 1 00 >* u 8 •§ 8> 8) a 8 >4 o a • 0 JC u « u a c 3-4 Faculty It I Stdnts® t 1 It PS Staff t Facultv # H .4 Stdnts® I • c Q • O • 1 2lPfl#»nltv 1 • • g V • Faculty .... 1 2 Stdnts® * 82 Stdnts® t -4 4 Li LI TS Staff • 1 < w|ps Staff • L Faculty H i ■S Stdnts® • 4 4 1 TS Staffl It 1 3 I Faculty 1 . S KStdnts® • C 4 1 -4 C TS Staff: ♦ x « PS Staff ^tudents-in-dass ^Studcnts-in-library Graph 19.--Ratings of all ussr-groups on ths location of windows in thair raspactlva library. o Hi * S. S * • 8 ar 3 S ft • ? : sr r» • a 9 0 0 r n o ft hi H* 3f. JT ft & 9 9 i * 9 9 CO ft & • 9 ft • I f — 9 t n 56 * t • f t * • 3 •6 Mlane- •OtA Utah Ari Sta zona ta Jc He rhns mkli Cornell Wash ington P S Staff| Facultv P S Staff T S Staff ( A f t a 9 f t • a 2 o e M f t < a w f t 9 Hi H i T S Staff CO rr a 9 f t 9 O Stdnts9 Faculty P S Staff 8 CO r t a hi Hi CO rt & rt 9 a 1 Faculty >9 CO CO r t 9 Hi Hi 3 CO r t 9 Hi Hi CO f t a 9 ft 9 a CO f t a 3 9 a •9 9 n c f t < I P S Staff I T S Staff Rol rt o. 9 rt 9 9 I Faculty • • • ■ • • • 0 00 0 0 • • • • 00 • ft 0 • • 0 • • Excellent very good good average poor very poor 193 194 and serials departments do not. At Arlsona State, some areas are more generously fenestrated than others. There are window walls with a southern exposure In the technical services department at Cornell which possibly were judged to result In too much light and heat for the occupants. PS staffs at most of the libraries also found the location and number of windows unsatisfactory. Most PS staff work spaces In the libraries tend to be placed In the center of the floors, thus eliminating the opportunity to provide windows to the outside. Office partitions partly of glass should reduce some feeling of claustro phobia on the part of the staff but this type of window usually does not allow for a view of the outside of the library. The fenestration ofi the library at Cornell was the most favorably rated by student and faculty groups. This building, as described earlier, has more areas of glass than do the other libraries In the study. Celling Heights The libraries In the study generally have similar ceiling heights.*’ The main entrance floors of five of the libraries have ceilings which average 10*-6W high. The entrance floor at the sixth library has a celling *See Table 10. 195 TABLE 10 TYPICAL CEILING HEIGHTS IN THE SIX LIBRARY BUILDINGS Library Entrance Floor Other Floors (typical) Washington 10*-6" 8*-6" Cornell 10*-10" 8*-l%" Johns Hopkins 10*-6" 8*-3" Arisons State 10*-4" 8*-6" Utah 12*-0" 9*-0" Minnesota 10*-6" 8*-6" height of 12*. Colling heights on other floors very between 8*-l%" end 9*, Snaller spaces, such es elevetor lobbies on upper floors, have ceilings under 8' high. One lerge under ground floor et Mlnnesote hes e 7*-2N high celling, the lowest noted by the author.1 All user-groups reted 2 celling heights In their respective library favorably. Ventilation and Heatlne Five of the libraries In the study are fully air- conditioned. Washington, the sixth library, does not *The author, who Is 6' tall, had no feeling that the celling was too low, 2See Graph 21, 196 Cornell Wash ington Faculty • sfcdnts* • • ' • Stdnts" • Stdntsb • TS Staff • f Johns Hopkins 5tdntsD ♦ I TS Staff # 3 Faculty m Stdntsa Lt o e N i i P *4 < 0 l i i i TS Staff r • 1 <«»|PS Staff # Faculty i 1 j c |Stdntsa | i i 9 # i 3* Faculty Stdnts8 ....• C i i A | £ i|PS Staff| P aStudents-ln-tlass r ^tudents-ln-llbrary Graph 21 •— Ratings of all user-groups on Che calling heights In their respective library. 197 have an all*weather system. Liquid has to be drained £rom the air conditioner in the winter season to prevent damage from freeslng. As a result, there is no cooling capacity available in the library If It is needed in winter.* Utah, at the time of the author's visit, was having difficulty maintaining a satisfactorily low humidity level. The level tended to remain high. Excess moisture In the air made people feel uncomfortably warm. In addition, algae growing In the humidifiers produced a bad odor In the alr-condltloning system. Ventilation and heating In the libraries were controversial topics with more user-groups rating them 2 unfavorably than favorably. Faculty groups were the least critical of these features while library staff groups registered the most unfavorable opinions. Wash ington, which has an Inflexible alr-condltloning system, was given low ratings by the library staff. All groups judged the alr-condltloning at Cornell unfavorably. As mentioned previously, It Is believed that the alr- condltloning system In this library Is made less effective *0f the six library building programs, only those for Washington and Arizona State briefly mentioned air conditioning In the new building. *See Graphs 22 and 23. The reader Is also referred to Appendix VI which contains numerous written comments on heating and ventilation In the libraries. 198 c1 Faculty j.£|Stdntaa m e p l IPS Staff! • Stdntsa £ Stdntab " 8 Its staff u w m n P-'TT.rTfTI J RTTHTi « c §3* J C o . 33 PS Staff" i T m r m ki'TTiITU s _ 8 8 fstdnt«b r< a co E3R7T73 {Faculty I IPS Staff! ^rcmrui "IPS Staff I 1 aStudants-in-class bStudant•-In-library Graph 22.— Ratings of all uaar-groups on vantl- latlon (air conditioning) In thalr raapactlva library. JC ii Faculty _ . . . Stdntsa 4 m u £ * • PS Staff • Faculty • H • 1 S 1 Stdnts* 1 • N 8 TS Staff • PS Staff S II Faculty • - Stdnts0 * i" ' PS Staffl Arizona State Faculty • Stdnts® t Stdnts* • TS Staff PS Staff * Faculty ’ Utah Stdnts* 1 f J TS Staff r m PS Staff • Faculty • 1 2 elStdnts* 1 • c u as TS Staff 1 PS Staffl aStudents-ln-class ^Studenta-ln-llbrary Graph 23.--Ratings of all-user groups on boating In tholr respective library. 200 by the presence of many windows which ere poorly shielded from heaC end light. Acoustical Control Noise In the libraries has been reduced in various ways. The most Important technique Is to isolate noisy areas from quiet areas. This has been done with various degrees of success at the libraries In this study. All the libraries have stairways which are closed off by walls and doors to contain the noise. Four libraries, Washington, Cornell, Utah, and Minnesota, have elevator lobbies which are enclosed. Sometimes, closing off stairwells and elevators has not been a sufficient remedy. Noise from the stairwells will penetrate Into quiet spaces when doors are opened. Washington Is particularly troubled by this problem. The most common architectural material used for sound control In the libraries studied is acoustical celling tile. Five libraries have ceilings of this material while the sixth uses acoustical plaster In some parts of the building. All the libraries have floors covered with sound absorbing materials in areas where a quiet atmosphere Is desired. Some of the materials used are cork tile at Washington, rubber tile at Cornell and John Hopkins, and carpeting at Arlsona State, Utah, and Minnesota. 201 Johns Hopkins Is noticeably deficient in sound con- trcl. Host of the spaces are hard and do not absorb sound. The four lowest levels of the building have ceilings of waffle flat construction and vinyl asphalt tile floors. The University Librarian asked that the ceilings be treated with acoustical plaster but the budget would not allow it. Study spaces are not closed off from noisy areas. The library administration Is attempting to find solutions to the over-all problems of noise In the building. Many user-groups considered noise control In the libraries to be less than good.* Faculty were the least critical of this feature. Architectural Finishes and Esthetic Design Table 11 Is a list of the major Interior finishes used In the six libraries. For the floors, the most commonly used materials are terrasso and asphalt or vinyl asphalt tile. With the exception of Cornell, terrasso Is used In the entrance lobbies of the libraries. Washington and Utah have terrasso floors In the elevator *See Graph 24. Building programs for four libraries, Washington, Cornell, Utah, and Minnesota, briefly Indicated the need for acoustical materials In the library. The Arlsona State program devoted two pages to the problem of acoustical control. The subject was not covered In the Johns Hopkins program. Ml H O a g M* :? M-T5 3 3* rr hi • • M> I *1 • "S’ f t rr ft n ft 5 ° <Ml ft co7 " rr S. ft 3 3 I JP rr & • 3 rr 3 i n 2£ <38 • I 00 I 0 3 Hi M ft 1 Minne sota__ Utah Arizona StfttA S (O o f t Johns Hopkins o< Cornell C*ft (Wash ington excellent very good good average poor very poor 202 203 TABLE LL MAJOR INTERIOR FINISHES USED IN THE SIX LIBRARIES H « Arlsona State Wash- ingtoi i 8 Johns Hopkii ■s u EJ s* C * j rj o X • Floors Terrasso Asphalt tile Vinyl asphalt tile Cork tile Rubber tile Carpeting X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Walls and Partitions Painted plaster Painted exposed block Vinyl wallcovering Travertine Wood veneer Fovsdita#. wood-patterned Brick veneer X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Ceilings Acoustical tile Acoustical plaster Exposed waffle flat slab X X X X X X X X X 204 lobbies and on stair treads. Asphalt tiles are used as a general floor covering In all six libraries. The three newest libraries In the study, Arlsona State, Utah, and Minnesota, have carpeting on major public areas of their respective building. The author notes that the carpeting is visually attractive, feels "comfortable1 * underfoot, and appears to contribute to a quiet atmosphere In the library spaces where It Is applied. One library has cork flooring on Its main floor. The cork deadens the sound of footsteps but, because of poor maintenance, this Installation Is unsightly in appearance. Painted wall surfaces are common to all libraries. Plastered or concrete block walls are painted to fit Into the general decorative scheme. Wood veneering Is used extensively at four libraries for office or special purpose room partitioning. The veneering often Is framed by darker horlsontal and vertical strips. Arlsona State has made extensive use of photographed walnut formica which, In the author's opinion, is monotonous In the regularity of its pattern. The color Is also poor, tend ing to have a bluish cast. At three libraries, the same brick used on the exterior of the building has been applied to interior walls. This technique aids In unifying the designs of the buildings. The texture and color of the brick walls 205 provide a pleasing visual contrast with other Interior surfaces. Travertine Is used extensively on the entrance lobby walls at Johns Hopkins, Utah, and Minnesota. Utah has travertine walls through all levels of the main stair well. Johns Hopkins and Arlsona State have walls covered with vinyl wallcovering. The application of this material at Johns Hopkins seems to have been defective. As a result, it peels off, disfiguring the walls. At Arlsona State, the author was Impressed with the subtle, rich colors and surface textures of the vinyl. Ceilings at all the libraries are covered, In part, with acoustical tile. Cornell and Johns Hopkins have exposed waffle flat slab ceilings In their bookstack and reading areas. This type of celling results from con struction techniques employed to create a strong floor Inexpensively. A waffle flat slab ceiling Is handsome to view but its surfaces do not absorb sound. With regard to the esthetic design of the library Interiors, the author feels that all six buildings are attractive, pleasant placesDecorative schemes at five ^The library building programs made little or no reference to the esthetic design of the library. Two programs referred to the need to make areas "attractive". One program suggested possible wall finishes which could be employed. 206 libraries avoided strong colors In favor of exploiting the beauty of such natural materials as stone, brick, and wood set against neutral backgrounds• Color accents In the Interiors were largely created through the use of upholstered furniture In the buildings. It Is felt that Johns Hopkins and Minnesota may have erred somewhat in creating too neutral an Interior, verging on the dtill. Steps are being taken at Minnesota to enliven Its Interior with paintIngs, sculpture, and live plants. In contrast to the five libraries which have low- key Interiors, Arizona State Is richly colored. The wall colors come from the vinyl wall coverings used on a majority of the core wall spaces and building columns. Each floor Is distinctively colored with the carpeting and furniture colors coordinated to match the walls. Most of the user-groups liked the Interior design of their respective library.^ TS staffs at four libraries registered less than good opinions of this feature. This is likely due to the tendency of library design to provide a less attractive decor for staff work spaces than for the more public areas of the libraries. Conclusions Based on the opinions of the users, It Is concluded that the libraries are adequately lighted. Interior *See Graph 25. c faculty ' ~9~ • o J5 4JStdnts3 f a t «* «e TS Staff • 9*4 PS Staff • ^ Facultv • r - 4 f - f Stdnts3 s Stdnts1 * • t TS Staff * 8 PS Staff • a tFaculty • • TS Staff W ' PS Staff • Facultv 2 Stdnts3 • o « StdntsD • *4 9 TS Staff i H U < toPS Staff • Faculty J S V. rt o 3 ft a a • 9 u TS Staff • PS Staff * Facultv • e Stdnts3 • §2 TS Staff 1 2 «|PS Staff 1 * aStudents-In-class ^Students-in-library Graph 25.--Ratings of all user-groups on the esthetic design of the interior of their respective library. 208 esthetic design and ceiling heights are satisfactory. * * Noise control in the buildings needs to be inproved, so far as students and library staff nesibers are concerned. The same is true of heating and ventilation which were one of the most controversial topics on the opfkftftoimalres. It is also concluded that users do not like window less or near-windowless buildings. Library staffs do not like spaces which have clerestory windows as the sole means of fenestration nor do they appreciate interior offices which, though their partitions may be partly of glass, do not afford a view of the outside of the library. Graphs 26 through 31 were prepared to show all user-group opinions on the ambient features of the six libraries studied. These graphs were created to give visible form to the characteristics of the collected data. The forms provide a means of easily comparing opinions of a group to those of another group, or the opinions of groups at one university to those at another university. The data were plotted on the graphs in the following manner: 1. Numerical values were established for the con centric circles. Every fifth concentric circle on the (Text continued on p. 215) *It is suggested that the architects should have made some of the work spaces in the libraries more attractive. Legend: 209 Faculty — ■ Students-ln-dass----------- PS Lib. Staff------------ TS Lib. Staff •••••«••........ » io a«ao. uwfiMin i s m Katina Scala: 1 • axcallant 2 - vary good 3 - good 4 - average 3 - poor 6 - vary poor Graph 26*— Faculty, student, public services and technical services library staff opinions on anblant features in Olln Library, Washington University. Litwd: Faculty —.. .... Studtn(«*ln-clMi Studants-in-library \\v- PS Ub. Staff------------- TS Ub. Staff***** *..... 210 AS- '/Sy • X x : ::• N;:- ■ \ I1 ’ ' / • • • ' • / ' / / / / V ' - , V/v/V: W ' m i k i a ! ■ M i • , . J E b ftL |l»ir|*TI»i(fc , . . . 1 I ; * m m d z M A'. \ v ' \ • A \ \ \ , . \ \ • \ * . * • \ \ • . • ■ • \ , j:; t. t ' ! * ; W '•/'' /; ’; ' • / i: i i < h i * . - ' • * / / / ' • • • / ' . : V-.'-v:■m ■ • \ V' - * , # • • ' • ■ • • ' . / . , • * / • ■ * - • ' //vy'• • • • : • / W : j * « i* .» c » ;> ^ t » * i > -* •* < i • o ? < * * « * > * • . l* i» * • « » .» ■ 1 - axcallsnt 2 - vary good 3 - good 4 - avaraga 3 * DOOf 6 - vary poor Graph 27.— Faculty, student; public sarvlcas and tachnlcal aarvicao library staff opinions on aabiant faaturas in Olin Ubrary, Cornall Univarsity 211 U t i a d : Faculty ■ ■ ■ Students-ln-llbrary \\v - ■ PS Ub. Staff-------------- TS Ub. staff••••••••••••••'•••• T ' : : T P'n;: \x; - • • • ; rgr : - - ; » * o MIO U * * < < •’. * - .' V • » * , / Katlaa Scala: 1 • excellent 2 - vary good 3 - good 4 - average 5 • poor 6 - very poor Graph 28.••Faculty* student, public service* and technical eervlcee library staff opinions on anblant features In Blsenhouer Uerary, Johns Hopkins University. kraal* Faculty ..... Students-in-class— - Students-ln-llbrary FS Ub. Staff- TS Lib. Staff- 212 F H T f / T ^ T r r j X ' - y ////> ! ! / i /.' /■'',/ ' / / , , W ' / / //.*> . //. 's' / / i ^7V /; /i f - I L l i i !i i 1 , I'ililiiitthVfi;. ; r « i 1 • l : » 1 _ V • \ v ‘ * \ \ \ ■ , ' i \ A ■ . \ ■ \\\v. vV\W\\\v\; £"-\ i V.' iV\U>V ' .''.AW I v C k s‘ fc. A'\\ ;\\\v v \':-A'.V V\«5 s5 « k \V\V^\\\v\\\v -V' • > \K ■ , ; : • i I W i W i i m :• • /«/;•:/ ■ i i t i : * . i 1 ! t ■ ' I ■'///1 am W x ' W w M f c ’ j W m m ' v ' - ■' ' ■ ’ ! ■ ■ ''. ■ /, ■ ■ ■ • ' — I \y . U i> Sating Scalar 1 • excellent 2 • vary good 3 - good 4 - average 3 - poor 4 - vary poor Graph 29.— Faculty, student, public services and technical services library staff opinions on asblent features in Hayden Library, Arisons State University. Ifwdt Faculty------------- 8tudanta«ln*clats----------- PS Ub. Staff------------- 11 Ub. Staff"...... . V// r-// ■ w , - ! > f f , % ■ ■ >/. / > V/V • - ' < :l!j;ii : l h l \ M W i\U’ i ii ’ I ‘ " wfl u i . l l ! 1i: h :;! ! i 1 1 i'll v y $ ;u ;/;/l,/i;fri!i!.if • • : • 7 \ c > * y ->mxnvk-- ? ■ • / \w,. ,nv-M.»< ' • vr Ky^'/ys/.- : ■ ■ ' / latlna Scalat « a ^ 1 - axcallant 2 - vary good 3 - good 4 - avaraga — ™ 3 - poor 6 • vary poor Graph 30.— Faculty, atudant, public aarviaaa aad tachnlcal aarvlcaa library ataff opinions on anbiant faaturaa in Marriott Ubrary, Uni varsity of Utah. ♦ < C t*>0. U « |< 214 Laaend: Faculty ■ < Students-ln-class------------ PS Ub. Staff-------- TS Lib* staff rFTT^np.Tr .A ' ... IB ■' j t W W t M N l S ;i; It:-M||-••■:-j.- ! )vv-• )' « : '’V * - ‘ ; i 2 i l 4 | ^ VX\A ' '7 \taAW ' aV v VXwcXa . - ^/ ; /j//;/p</ y.s// -r-- > - v ' s C / ; / / - ' . - /7>v ■ / ■ • ■ • ' ■ / ■ • • • v ? . -oy.' ■ ■ / ■ ■ • ' ••/ p p y t p t s p : - t f t - P'-p>Ppp<-<:"p : ■ ■ ;;v ^^wjL/1: l . i i . ; ;_u a;J“- Ratlna Scale: 1 - axcallant 2 • vary pood 3 - food 4 - average 3 - poor 4 - vary poor Graph 31.— Faculty, student, public services and technical services library staff opinions on aablent features In Wilson Library, University of Minnesota. 213 graph, counting from tha cantor outward*, la distinguished by a dark line. Starting at tha first dark line circle, a value of ”1” was given, the next dark lino drcla, a value of *2", and so on through "6". These nunbers cor respond to the rating scale for architectural features used on the oplnlonnalres In which "I" denotes excellent. "2" very eood. continuing through *6" which Is very poor, 2, After establishing the numerical value of the concentric circles, the data from the tables were plotted on equidistant radii. The points were connected by lines to create the forms seen on the graphs. Each line was coded to represent a group's opinion. The following are oonments on the general character istics of the shapes on the polargraphs, 1, The sisaller the shape, the aore favorable are the opinions of a group on the architectural features of the library building, 2, A regular shape Indicates similarity of oplnlona on all architectural featurea, 3, The distortion of the form In an outward direction Indicates a less favorable opinion of an architectural feature, A study of the data shown on Graphs 26 through 31 prompts tha following observations about user-oplnlons of ambient features In the six libraries: - 1, Faculty groups expressed the most favorable 216 opinions of ths four groups* Student opinions wars tha second most favorable, while library staff opinions, particularly those of TS staff, were least favorable, 2. Based on the pattern, it appears that the longer a group remains in the building the less favorable its rating of the building* Faculty usually spend the shortest tine in ths library* Students spend longer periods of tine than do faculty, but not as long as library staff who are in the building seven to eight hours per day* 3* There was similar agreement on ratings of ambient features among the four groups at Cornell, Johns Hopkins, and Arlsona State**1 The groups* opinloos differed on some features at Washington and differed on most features at Utah and Minnesota*2 6* Of the libraries studied, Arlsona State received the moat favorable opinions from ell user* groups* With the exception of the TS staff, there was a close similarity of opinion among the groups* 5* Of the libraries studied, Johns Hopkins, Utah, and Minnesota appear to be the least favorably rated by all groups* (Text continued on p* 231) *8ee Graphs 27, 28, and 29, 2See Graphs 30 and 31* PLATE VIII— (Overleaf) Entrance lobby stairs In tha 01in Library, Washington University. The glass wall on the left faces a semi* enclosed courtyard which rises through three floors of the library. 217 IIIA 31Yld PLATE IX— (Overleaf) Main entrance floor, Oiln Library, Washington University. Shelves on the left are for the display of new books. The window-wall faces the courtyard. 219 PLATE IX M M o PLATE X— (Overleaf) Card catalog area, main entrance floor, Olin Research Library, Cornell University* 221 PLATE X PLATE XI— (Overleaf) Great stair hall, Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University. The entrance doors on the upper level £ace the quadrangle. The lower level is the main entrance level of the library. The hall is proof that monumental ism still lives in library architecture. 223 PUTS XI 224 PLATE XII--(Overleaf) Main entrance lobby, Hayden Library, Arizona State University. The circulation desk is at the right, elevators and administration offices to the left, of the picture. The lobby is two stories high. 225 PLATE XII PLATE XI11— (Overleaf) The atrium, Marriott Library, Univerilty of Utah, The space enclosed by the atrium Is three stories high. Lighted signs Identify the function of each library service In this space. Pictured Is the circulation desk and the entrance to the admlnls* tratlve offices at the right. 227 PLATE XIII 228 PLATE XIV— (Overleaf) Entrance to the Periodical Depart ment, Wilson Library, University of Mlnnesoca. The Department shelves both bound and unbound periodicals. PLATE XIV 230 231 Description end Comparison of Administrative Offices Table 12 Is a summary of library spaces allowed for each head librarian and his professional assistants. Each office complex also has space for secretaries and clerks. Administrative suites are located on the main entrance floors at Washington, Arizona State, and Utah, on one floor above the main entrance at Cornell and Johns Hopkins, and two floors above at Minnesota. Offices for the head librarians range In size from 299 to 344 square feet. Office sizes for assistants range from 130 to 224 square feet. There Is less similarity in the sizes of offices for assistants to the head librarian than for the head librarian offices. The office sizes appear to be adequate at all the libraries. In addition to offices, five of the administrative suites have separate conference rooms. At Washington, the office of the university librarian serves as a conference room. With regard to planning administrative suites, Metcalf takes note of the problem of • • .whether the assistant librarians should have quarters Immediately adjacent to the librarian*s office in order to make consulta tion easier, or whether It is better for TABLE 12 NUMBER AND SIZES OF OFFICES IN THE LIBRARY ADMINISTRATIVE SUITES University Office for Head Librarian Offices for Assistants Washington 13,-9Bx21,-8" (229 ft2) 3 offices, each 10'xl3* (130 ft2 each) Cornell 15*x22* (330 ft2) 4 offices, each ll'xl7* (187 ft2 each) Johns Hopkins 14»-2%Bx23* (327 ft2) 2 offices, each 13*xl7-2" (224 ft2 each) Arlsona State 15*x21»-8B (325 ft2) 4 offices, each 10*-10Nxl5f (162 ft2 each) Utah !6»-6"x20* (330 ft2) 2 offices, each 12'xl3* (156 ft2 each) 1 office, ll*xl2' (132 ft2) Minnesota 14'x26* (344 ft2) 3 offices, each ll*xl4* (154 ft2 each) 2 offices, each 14'xl4* (196 ft2 each) K> U 233 them to bo cIom to the departments of the staff that thay lupcrviic.1 All the libraries In this study vary from one another In the manner they have chosen to locate offices for key administrative personnel. The administrative offices at Cornell. Arizona State, and Utah are designed to accommodate administrative personnel next to the head librarian.2 At the other three libraries, some of the chief administrators are located in their departments rather than next to the head librarian. At Johns Hopkins, the head of technical services has her office in the department. Both the head of technical services and the public services supervisor have offices in their depart ment at Minnesota. Washington originally included all key library personnel in its administrative suite and as a result of its location on the main entrance floor, the administrators could also supervise staffs in the public and technical services departments. Later, crowded conditions forced the removal of the office for the public services head. The University Librarian expressed his ^Metcalf, Planning Academic and Research Library Buildings, p. 93. 2 Arizona State appears to have achieved both options cited by Metcalf. The office suite is on the main floor of the library sufficiently near both the technical services and reference departments as to make supervision from the administrative suite possible. 234 concern Chat the PS head, relocated In offices two floors below the administrative suite, is so far from other library administrators as well as the PS staff she supervises. Additional Library Staff Opinions on Their Work Spaces and Related Questions Introduction This section reports the responses of library personnel to items which were not Included in the opinion- nalres distributed to faculty and students. These items included a request for library staff to rate the follow ing in their work areas: 1. Adequacy of the space 2. Flexibility of the space 3. Traffic patterns 4. Communications such as telephones and intercoms Library staffs were also requested to Indicate whether all facilities related to their work and personal comfort were conveniently located. They were asked questions concerning their general attitudes toward the architectural design of their respective library. The opinions reported in this section represent a composite view of library staff work spaces in each library. No attempt has been made to Isolate and describe 235 ■any of the work spaces used by Chs staff. This is because nuch of the staff, especially PS staff, work all over the library In both public and private areas. It was possible to examine the principal technical services work space at each library. As previously noted, these spaces are located on the main entrance floors of all libraries except at Utah where the TS department Is one floor below the main entrance level As staff work spaces are discussed, details on TS spaces will be provided. Concerning work space provided for library personnel In a building, MsteaIf writes: If experience over ebb last fifty years applies today (and there Is no reason to believe that It does not), It seems fair to say that In most library buildings accomaodatlons for the staff tend to become Inadequate before those for books or readers.2 This appears to be a valid comment on the adequacy of space for library personnel at the six libraries In this study. *See Fig. 21. 2 Metcalf. Plannlna Academic and Research Llbrarv Buildings, p. 12*:----- --------- *--“ ----- Wefct Entrance 236 Library School ii [ " C Mali Room Auditorium Lobby Dupli cating Gifts] and Exchange- Acquisitions Library School • I 1 c Cataloging Serials Area 1-Serials Office 2-Hecd Cataloger's Office A 3-Business machines N Fig. 21 .— Second level shoeing the lay-out of the technical services department* Marriott Library* University of Utah. 237 Opinions on Staff Work Sm c m Most library staffs In ths study ratsd ths adsqusey of thslr work spscss Isas than wood** Ths two oldsst libraries, Washington and Comall, hava erowdsd tschnlcal ssrvlcas departments*2 TS staffs judgad thasa work spscss to ba lass than avsraaa. At ths othar llbrarlas, tha library administrations consldar tha TS spscss adequate but, with tha ax caption of Johns Hopkins, this faallng Is not shared by tha TS staffs* All staffs thought that tha flexibility of thalr work spaces was lass than aood and four groups rated It avaraaa or less*^ Traffic patterns In ths work spaces wars considered lass than aood by all library staff groups and avaraaa or lass by four groups*^ Coasnmlcatlons such as telephones ISea Graph 32* Tha library building programs ware generally brief In describing library staff space needs, providing only total square footage requirements for a given function* Mora detail was given in the pro gram for TS space than for PS space* Utah's program was the only one to specify square footage allowances for various kinds of workers* 2 These departments were originally designed to accoanodate twenty-nine staff members at Washington and sixty-three at Cornell* There are now forty-six and 107 members, respectively, In the two departments. Both libraries have had to move parts of the technical services operation to other floors or the library* See Table 13, a summary description of the TS work spaces in tha six libraries* 2See Graph 33* *See Graph 34* Washington TS Stafl • PS Staff • Cornell TS Staff • PS Staff • Johns Hopkins TS Staff (> PS Staff • Arlaona State TS Staff • PS Staff (> Utah TS Staff • PS Staff • Minnesota TS Staff • PS Stiff • Graph 32•••Library staff opinions on tha adequacy of the work spaces In their respective library. TABLE 13 DESCRIPTION OF THE PRINCIPAL TECHNICAL SERVICES WORK SPACES IN THE SIX LIBRARIES University Departments/Services Housed Floor Space (Square feet) Number of Staff Members In Space Square Feet Per Staff Member Washington Acquisitions, serials, and catalog ing 3,065 46 67.7 Comall Acquisitions, serials, and catalog ing 8,157 107 76.2 Johns Hopkins Acquisitions, serials, cataloging, and card typing 5,443 58 93.8 Arisons Stata Acquisitions, serials, cataloging, card reproduction, card typing, and receiving room 10,733 77 139.4 Utah Acquisitions, serials, cataloging, card typing, and nail room 14,900 68 219.1 Minnesota Acquisitions, cataloging, marking, card preparation, and card duplication 13,312 70 190.1 N U Washington TS Staff ...... J ...... PS Staff • 1 Cornell TS Staff PS Staff • Johns Hopkins TS Staff • PS Staff • Arisons State TS Staff • PS Staff • Utah TS Staff • PS Staff • Minnesota 1S Staff 1► PS Staff • Graph 33.— Library ataff opinions on tha flexibility of tha work spaces in their respective library. 240 Washington TS Staff • PS Staff Cornell TS Staff • PS Staff • Johns Hopkins TS Staff t► PS Staff Arizona State IS Staff • PS Staff • Utah IS Staff i> PS Staff • I Minnesota IS Staff PS Staff _ . . . 4 ... j Graph 34.— Library staff opinions on ths traffic patterns In ths work spaces In their respective library* 242 and Intercom ware judged lees than aood by most of the staffs.1 Library workers were asked to evaluate the con venience of library facilities for both their work and their personal comfort. The percentage of library personnel who felt that work-related facilities were conveniently located ranged from slightly over fifty per cent of one group to nearly eighty per cent of another. Asked to specify architectural Inconveniences, the staffs most frequently Indicated Inconvenient locations of bibliographic facilities and related library departments, and that the room dimensions were inadequate for the arrangement and Inclusion of llbrayy furniture and equip ment. ^ The latter tends to reinforce judgments on the Inadequacy of work spaces reported previously. The percentages of the library groups who felt that personal comfort facilities were conveniently located in their respective library ranged from over fifty per cent to nearly ninety per cent.* The facilities for comfort most frequently cited by the staffs as being ^See Graph 35. 2 See Graph 36. ■*See Table 14. *See Graph 37. o 8 2 §> fr t M e u 5 > « o S . u o 0 u fr 1 Washington IS Stafl • PS Staff • Cornell TS Staff • PS Staff (> Johns Hopkins IS Staff • PS Staff • Arisons State IS Staff • PS Staff <► Utah IS Staff • PS Staff • Minnesota IS Staff • PS Staff • Graph 35.--Library staff opinions on cosounications in tha work spaces in their respective library. 243 Percentage 10 20 %0 60 S0 60 70 60 99 1 Washington ! rs Staff » PS Staff • Cornell TS Staff • PS Staff • Johns Hopkins TS Staff • PS Staff » Arizona State TS Staff • PS Staff • Utah TS Staff • PS Staff • Minnesota TS Staff • PS Staff • Graph 36•— Percentage of TS and PS library staff• who felt that library facilities related to their work were conveniently located. TABLE 14 FREQUENCY OF CITATIONS BY TS AND PS LIBRARY STAFFS OF ADVERSE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES RELATED ID LIBRARY WORK FACILITIES Adverse Architecture! Features Wash ington Cornell Johns Hopklna Arlsona State Utah Minne sota IS X PS I TS X FS X TS X PS X TS 1 PS X TS X PS X TS X PS X Inconvenient location of: elevators 3 - 13 5 9 - 7 3 37 3 7 5 stairs - - - 3 m - 7 3 11 6 14 3 central card catalog 6 s - m 7 22 3 - IS 20 14 3 bibliographic facilities 10 10 12 5 7 17 20 10 33 13 21 10 related library departaent 10 s 4 m 7 17 17 3 IS 1 3 14 3 Inadequate room dimensions for: efficient arrangement of li brary furniture and equipment 20 10 23 3 18 22 27 14 7 10 10 16 Inclusion of all needed library furniture and equipment 17 10 19 5 - 30 20 3 11 10 3 10 Percentage 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Washington TS Staff <> PS Staff • Cornell TS Staff • PS Staff • Johns Hopkins TS Staff • PS Staff • Arisons State TS Staff • PS Staff • Utah IS Staff • PS Staff • Minnesota TS Staff • ESJtilEL • Graph 37•••Percentage of TS and PS library staff who felt that personal comfort facilities In their respective library were conveniently located. 247 Inadequate Include rest rooms and private work spaces The author attempted to determine what Influence the architecture of the libraries night have had on the personal attitudes of the library workers. They were asked whether their attitudes toward work were Influenced by the architectural design of the L&brary. Those who answered "considerably* to this question ranged from eighteen per cent of one group to fifty-two per cent of another group. Those who answered "some" to the question ranged from twenty-six per cent to slxty-elght per cent. Personnel were asked if they felt comfortable In their work surroundings. Affirmative answers ranged from a low of flfty-slx per cent at one library to one hundred per cent at another. When asked If their feelings of comfort or lack of it were Influenced by the architectural design of the library, the staffs who answered "con siderably" ranged from fifteen per cent of one group to forty-two per cent of another group. Those who answered "some” ranged from twenty-nine per cent to slxty-slx per cent. The PS staffs at Washington and Utah Indicated strongly favorable attitudes toward the architecture. *See Table 15. The need for staff rest rooms was mentioned In only one library building program. *See Table 16. TABLE 15 FREQUENCY OF CITATIONS BY TS AND PS LIBRARY STAFFS OF ADVERSE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES RELATED TO PERSONAL COMFORT Advmi Architectural Features Wash ington Cornell Johns Hopkins Ariaona State Utah Minne sota TS PS TS PS TS PS IS PS TS PS TS PS % X X X X X X X X X X X The following are inadequate: nueber of drinking founteins - 10 19 36 - 4 7 • 4 3 14 10 rest roons 10 5 26 9 7 4 30 10 25 20 14 10 space in rest roons in which to lie down 6 19 18 8 13 10 36 20 3 5 private work space 13 16 26 61 4 17 20 19 32 11 17 5 staff lounge 6 5 22 9 7 4 m 10 32 20 14 5 location of staff lounga - - - 5 4 4 3 10 21 20 14 20 N TABLE 16 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS OF THE LIBRARY STAFFS REGARDING THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THEIR RESPECTIVE LIBRARY Wash ington Cornell Johns Hopkins Arlsona State Utah Minne sota TS PS TS PS TS PS TS PS TS PS TS PS X X X X X X X X X X X X Influence of architecture on etaff work attitudes: considerable 52 53 32 22 18 43 32 35 44 43 35 26 sone 24 44 39 48 46 26 39 45 48 47 35 68 only a little 17 3 15 17 10 13 19 10 m 7 20 6 not at all 7 - 15 13 21 18 7 10 8 3 10 - no opinion m - m - 5 - 3 - - - - - Reepondente who feel: coafortable at work 76 100 69 83 68 65 73 68 56 80 73 67 uncomfortable at work 24 - 31 17 32 35 27 32 44 20 27 33 TABLE 16--Continued Wash ington Cornell Johns Hopkins Arlsona State Utah Minne sota TS PS TS PS TS PS TS PS TS PS TS PS X X X X X X X X X X X X Architectural Influence on feelings of confort or lack of It: considerable 34 32 15 13 19 30 23 38 26 30 20 42 S O M 31 58 42 56 29 26 27 43 59 63 66 36 only a little 11 5 15 13 4 22 33 14 4 3 4 11 not at all 24 5 15 9 48 22 10 5 11 3 10 11 no opinion m - 13 9 - m 7 - m - m • 251 Ninety-seven and ninety per cent of the two groups respec- tively stated that their work attitudes were influenced either "considerably" or "some” by the architectural features of the library.* One hundred per cent and eighty per cent of the two groups respectively said that they felt comfortable in their work surroundings, with ninety per cent and ninety three per cent respectively indicating that the architectural features Influenced their answers "considerably" or "some". There appears to have been a negative influence by the architecture on the PS staff at Arizona State and the TS staff at Utah. In their answers to the question concerning architectural Influence on work attitudes, eighty per cent of the PS staff and ninetytwo per cent of the TS staff indicated that this influence existed either "considerably" or "some”. Neither of these groups gave a high rating toward being comfortable in their work surroundings and over eighty per cent of both indicated that their feelings of comfort or lack of it were influ enced either "considerably” or "some" by the architectural features of the building. *See Table 17. A t test was performed to establish the significance of the mean of the percentages. The test showed that a score of eighty per cent or greater was significant to the answer. These percentages are under lined as an aid to the discussion. TABLE 17 SIMfARY OF POSITIVE LIBRARY STAFF RESPONSES REGARDING THE INFLUENCE OF ARCHITECTURE ON THEIR WORK ATTITUDES AND FEELINGS OF COMFORT T&K=" ington Cornell 3oKni“ Hopklns Arisona State Utah Minne sota IS X PS X TS X PS X TS X PS X TS X PS X TS X PS X TS X PS X Percentage of staff who felt that their attitudes toward their work were Influenced "con slderably" or "sone" by the architectural features of the library building* 76 97 71 70 64 69 71 80 92 90 70 94 Percentage of staff who said that they felt comfortable in their work surroundings* 76 100 69 83 68 63 73 68 56 80 67 73 Percentage of staff who re sponded that their feelings of cosfort or lack of it were Influenced "considerably" or "sows" by the architectural features of the building* 63 90 57 69 48 56 SO 81 85 93 86 78 Significant percentages are underlined* 253 Conclusion* It is concluded that tho six libraries studied fail to provide adequate working space for their staffs. Library personnel were dissatisfied wlhh the leek of space and its Inflexibility. Traffic patterns were Judged to be less than aood. probably the result, in tost cases, of crowded conditions. At the oldest libraries, one of the reasons for dissatisfaction with work spaces is that they have becoaw overcrowded as departswnts have ewpanded their work forces. The author cannot give reasons for staff dissatisfaction at the newest libraries. It is suspected that the planners did not give sufficient study to the problems of housing their staffs. More consideration should have been given to providing anple staff rest rooms. In the libraries in this study, the staff rest roons are on the main entrance floor where most of the library personnel work. The rest roons appear to be too snail to handle the nunber who want to use them. The public rest roons are often inconveniently located on other floors of the libraries and, therefore, do not serve well as substitutes for Inadequate staff rest roons. A need was indicated for private work space. Methods should have been devised to provide more private 254 •pace either by architectural means or by furniture which gives the illusion of privacy* The architectural design of the libraries appears to have made a noticeable impression on some library staffs* especially those at Washington and Utah* However* the results of the questions asked on architectural Influence are inconclusive, based, as they are, on the staffs' abilities to perceive how architecture affects them. Detection of additional Influences on persons working in the libraries can only come about as a result of a far more detailed study than the one made here* CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Recapitulation In tha introduction to this paper, some of tha significant changes in American education since World War II were briefly described. It was noted that there has been an increasingly larger student enrollment in higher education each year since the war. Not only are there more students, but many more are remaining in school for longer periods of time. Enrollment in graduate education is increasing at a faster rate than that of undergraduate education. It was pointed out as well that there have been changes in educational practices. The traditional class lecture is often being supplemented with assigned reading of library materials. The use of audio-visual informa tional sources is increasing, both as a part of the clesaroom preaentatlon as well as for Individual student use. Independent study, formerly reserved for upper division students, has become a common form of education at all levels. During the course of his studies, the 255 236 student Is sxpsctsd to perform scholastically at a higher level than the student of pre-World War II days. It was also observed that academic libraries have changed. Between the two World Wars, the librarians began breaking down the traditional aloofness of the library toward its academic community. Library technology was refined and services were improved and expanded to open up the library's resources to the students. As these practices developed, it was noted that the traditional forms of library architecture no longer could be made to serve these new concepts. Library architecture, there fore, underwent changes. All the influences Just mentioned, including changes In educational methods, substantial lncreasea in student enrollment in higher education, aid modifications in library practices combined to exert Influences on the design of thb library buildings after World War II. During this period, the concept of modular construction was first applied to library design. Recognizing that they had no real Mans of predicting how a library would continue to function over a long period of time, library planners looked to the flexibility of modular construction as a solution to their problems. It was hoped that, when library functions changed, the modular library building could easily be modified to accept these new functions. 257 In riecnt ytan, anonaoua suns of aonsy hsvs bssn spsnc for now library construction on Anarlcan canpusas. It Is predict ad that mora must ba spant. Since a library building Is one of the costliest structures erected on a college or university campus* It Is Important to know whether the architectural design concepts being used today are sound. The author notes that vary little formal criticism of present day library architecture has been undertaken. It Is felt that serious study of library architectural daslgn la needed. This study Is on six academic library buildings named by two library bbftldlng consultants* Keyes Metcalf and Ralph Ellsworth, as being representative of good library architectural design. To carry out this study, the author spent several days at each library examining and describing each building. He Interviewed the library personnel responsible for planning the library buildings. In addition, other key members of each library staff wera Interviewed for their opinions on how well their respec tive structures functioned as libraries. As an additional technique In the Investigation of each library building, the author circulated oplnloimalres to representative samples of three classes of library uaers: facility, students, and library staff. These groups were asked to Judge the design of their respective 258 library In tarms of its functions, physical comfort, and esthetic design. The study is limited. It will serve to point out certain strengths and weaknesses in the architectural designs of the six libraries which may be common to much of present-day library design. It is hoped, particularly, that the study will direct attention to aspects of library design which need more study. Summary of the Findings Introduction Following are summaries of the findings on the six libraries. These findings are organised under the eight topics listed at the beginning of Chapter V. Opinions and conclusions have been drawn on the basis of the three techniques of investigation used in the study: personal examination of each building, interviews with library personnel, and the distribution of oplnlon- nalres to library Users. Preparations for Design of the Library Buildings The new libraries were constructed to replace old structures which were generally regarded as being over crowded and outmoded. Upon the completion of the new libraries, all but one of the old library buildings were continued in use, at least partially, for library purposes. 259 Detailed programs were written to aid In the design of five of the library buildings. Only a brief outline of space needs was written for the sixth library. With the exception of one university which held an archi tectural competition, architects for the buildings were chosen by the university boards of regents. Library building consultants were employed at four libraries. Among other specialists who were Involved In the design of the buildings were Interior designers at two libraries and landscape architects at two other libraries. Site Locations and Entrances of the Buildings On four university campuses, the libraries were placed Into an existing configuration of buildings. Development of entirely new sections of the campus at the other two universities provided the opportunity to establish a site for a new library building. Respondents liked the location of the new libraries at five univer sities. At the sixth, the library site is across a river from the main part of the university In a section not yet completely developed. Users did not particularly like the location of this library. Three library buildings have single entrances. The other three have multiple entrances. Users were divided In their approval regarding the 260 location of tha single entrances. Thera ties considerable consent In favor of a second access to these buildings* One library, which has three entrances, received a less than aood rating because, it is thought, it has not opened the entrance next to a parking lot* Architectural Design of the Library Buildlnes Five libraries were designed in a contemporary idloa and one in a historical style* The buildings generally relate well in design and scale to other struc tures In their environments* Library users liked the designs of all the buildings* In four libraries, nodule slses used varied con siderably* The two other libraries, which are the newest, enployed the sane sise nodule, one which is larger than those found in the other four* All nodule slses allowed for the efficient placement of bookstecks* Building designs for five libraries Include pro vision for expansion of the buildings when it is needed* In nost cases, enlargenent of the building will occur at the underground levels although one library is planned for an additional two stories* All the libraries are physically capable of having additional wiring for electrical equipment Installed as the need arises* 261 miasma; aum*- The libraries organised Chsir essential aarvlcas and departments In sosawhat tha same manner, placing certain key services on the sain entrance floor where they were readily accessible to the patrons. Heavily-used departaants ears located next to aaln traffic arteries, both on the aaln and secondary floors. One library varied soaewhat froa thla practice by placing soae of its actively-used departments at one end of the building, aaay from traffic centers. This building was regarded by the studente and library staff as lacking in nolae control. Washington, Cornell, and Johns Hopkins appear to have a simpler and more direct organisation of thalr floor plans than do the other three libraries in the study. Essential building services at these libraries do not . force a complicated organisation of bookstacks and reader atatlons. There appears to be more uninterrupted space in these buildings than is the case at the other three. In the latter, circulation and service cores force a complicated pattern of stacks and readers on all four sides. Aisles are numerous and there is less continuity of shelving. Users felt that the interior arrangement of the libraries wes less than aood. The location of stairs and elevators was favorably rated. Students at five 262 libraries noted the Inadequate number of elevators* Description and Comparison of Special c All the libraries have these types of special library spaces for the public: locked faculty studies, typing rooas, and mlcrofons reading rooas* Pour llbrarlas have group study rooms, four locked student studies, and four seminar rooas* All libraries make provisions for smoking. Users epproved of the saoklng, rest room, end microform reading facilities at all the libraries* Group studies and typing rooas mere liked at three libraries. Students thought that the variety of study spaces In four libraries ass good or better* Ambient Conditions In Each Library Building Lighting fixtures In the libraries are largely fluorescent* Fenestration In the buildings Is gensrally carefully located and well-shielded except et one library. The letter appears to have too much glass which, by admitting so auch heat and light, has placed en overload on the elr conditioning system* All the libraries are alr-condltloned* One library, however, cannot be cooled during the winter* Celling heights In five buildings are slallar* The 263 libraries are attractive, esthetlcaliy, although It Is felt that two of them are somewhat neutral in their Interior decor. Users, for the most part, liked the lighting and celling heights In the libraries. Other features which contributed to the general pleasant ambience of the libraries were more controversial. Library staffs, especially TS personnel, did not like the number and location of the windows. Heating and air conditioning were given less than good ratings at five libraries by most library staffs and student groups. Students and many library personnel were critical of noise control In five libraries. Esthetic design was judged less than good by library staffs at two libraries. Students also con sidered that two libraries were not particularly pleasing, esthetlcaliy. Description and Comparison of Administrative Offices Sizes of office space for head librarians were similar In the six library buildings, but offices for subordinates varied noticeably In square footage. Admin istrative suites at three libraries house all key administrators; suites In the other libraries contain most administrators with the exceptions of the TS head at two libraries and the PS head at one. 264 Ubcarv staff Opinions rfc spimi and — litaJ Library staffs at tha six llbrarlas most consist* antly downgraded tha adequacy and flexibility of their work spaces* Traffic patterns within these spaces were also judged less than aood. Bibliographic facilities necessary for the staffs' work were most often Mentioned as being Inconveniently located. Library personnel felt that staff rest rooms were Inadequate and that there was Insufficient opportunity to work In private. Investigation showed an apparent architectural Influence on staff attitudes at sons of the libraries. In sons Instances, the Influence was positive while In others It wss negative. Generally speaking, the attempt to Measure library staff consclousnsss of tha architec tural design of their respective library was Inconclusive. The Findings Related to the Hypotheses In Chapter I, three hypotheses were postulated as aids to the design and execution of this study. In the following section, each hypothesis will be repeated and evidence to support or deny It will be dlsctosed. HYPOTHESIS I: Each acadenlc library bulldlne In tha study dill have architectural spaces organised and Interrelated 265 In such t ■inrnt that nit of tha library function* will On the evidence prcunCcd, both fron the opinion- tuiirei and tha author's observations, Hypothesis I Is ganarally supportad. Faculty and students rated the Interior arrangements of all six libraries favorably. Few comments were written about the complexity of the organisation of any of the libraries. Library staffs also seldom commented negatively about the organisation of their respective library. The staffs were largely concerned with the adequacy add flexibility of their work spaces. Few Indicated that any departments related to their work were Inconveniently located. All the libraries have their most heavlly-used services, that Is, reference, card catalog, and circula tion on the main entrance floor. Most othsr actively- used departments are located in the libraries either on the main entrance floor or one level above or below the aaln floor. The library departments are sometimes uniquely successful In their Interrelatedness as, for example, the reference, card catalog, bibliography, and technical services departments at Washington and Cornell. The author noted a few examples of what appear to be weak relationships between departments. Two libraries have reference departments sufficiently remote from the 266 card catalog aa to nocaaaltata tha establishment of an information daak next to tha catalog* At another library, tha technical services department is one floor distant from the card catalog and bibliography collection* Com munications among these departments is impaired by the distance* A heavily-used subject reference department in one library is three floors from the main entrance, placing a strain on elevator service* Considered in their context, it is not felt that the weaknesses Just cited undermine the general conclusion that Hypothesis I is supported by the evidence obtained in the study* HYPOTHESIS II: Tha daslias of tha library buildlnas will Include tha capability of their bains easily modified, structurally. The six libraries in the study are of modular con struction.* Few interior walls are load-bearing* It is therefore possible to remove or add walls in the interior of each building* This has already been done in four of the six libraries in the study. It is concluded, there fore, that the findings in the study support Hypothesis II* Hflth one exception: the top floor of the library at Johns Hopkins is not of modular design* This floor is outside the control area of the main part of the library* 267 HYPOTHESIS Ills Um m will ttniullv bt favorably dlsposad tomtd tich library and will call attention to only i fit architectural orfunctlonal features that they rnirt «• being unfavorable. Faculty wan generally favorable toward all archi tectural features in the library buildings. Students liked ■oat of tha architectural features except ventilation, location and nuober of windows, number of elevators, and noise control In the libraries. Library staffs, particularly TS staffs, expressed more adverse opinions on the architectural features of the library than did students. These groups gave unsatis factory ratings to location and number of windows, venti lation, heating, freedom from noise, adequacy and flexibility of staff work spaces, traffic patterns, and communications. It Is concluded that Hypothesis III Is supported by faculty and students, but less strongly by library staffs. Conclusions Facfclty and students expressed favorable opinions bn various aspects of the designs of the six libraries, Including locations of the libraries, Interior arrange ments, ceiling heights, lighting, esthetic design, entrance locations, and the adequacy of special function roosia and spaces. Library ataffs liked lighting, ceiling heights, 268 and aathac&e daalgn. It la clear, however, that tha uaara fait that eartaln daalgn eharactarlatlea vara not auccaaa* ful. Tha following ar chi tact nr a I faaturaa wara contro- varalal: 1* Vantllatlon - Ventilating eyatema wara con* aidarad unaatiafactory. Uaara fraquantly characCarlaad library vantllatlon In extreme terma, auch aa ita balng too hot or too cold, too drafty or too stuffy, or noisy. Uhlla It la unlikaly that an airccondltlonlng system can provide a temperature which will please everyone, It ahould be poaalbla to achieve compromise condltiona aatlafactory to noat people, Llbrarlana ahould make archltacta and anglnaara thoroughly aware of uaar dla* aatlafactlon toward ventilating ayatana and be apedflc aa to thalr complainta. Many factora have to be conaldared when a ayetan la designed.*1 Thaaa ahould be Identified at tha outeet whan a library la balng planned. Tha author euggeata that arong important conalderatlona there la a need to define typea of human aetlvitlea which will occur In varloue apacaa of the library. Areae where humane are active will need different ventilation from areaa which are quiet. *For a good outline of the problem, aee Metcalf, Planning Acadamlc and Eaaaarch Library Bulldines. pp. 193- 269 One# the activities in defined, then the architect should ha askad to daalgn optlnua vantllatlon lor aaeh of tha •paces housing than* Tha vantllatlon systea ahould also be adjustable In at least tha uajor areas of tha library, such aa bookstack-readlng areas, technical services rooas, and tha Ilka* Whan planning a ventilating tystea, librarians should keep In stlnd tha experience of tuo libraries In this study* At tha first, Washington, a ventilating systea was Installed which does not cool tha building In tha winter* This results In considerable dlscootfort for the users during transitional periods In ths fall and spring when the weather warns up* The second library, Cornell, has a considerable aaount of fenestration which la poorly shielded and Insulated* The aaount of heat and light adnltted by the windows overtaxes the ventilating systea* 2* Noise - Students and TS staff eoaplaln about excessive noise In the libraries* It Is recognised that noise probleas cannot be entirely solved by architectural naans. Sons of the libraries, however, felled to Include architectural eleaenta which help noise reduction* Study areas lacked both sound-absorbing surfaces and Isolation froa noisy traffic* Sound-absorbent materials for walls, ceilings, 270 and floors In tha library naad to ba usad as ganarously as tha budgat paralts. Carpatlng is tha singla bast sound- absorbant natsrial that can ba aaployad. Vinyl or rubbar tils floors ara lass good than carpatlng but battar than asphalt tllas. Callings should ba traatad with acoustical tils or plaster. Curtains on wlndow-walls also aid In nolsa control. Traffic areas within a library naad to ba enclosed as such as possible. Furthermore, they should not open lanedlately onto a quiet study area, as Is tha case at Washington and Johns Hopkins. At these two libraries, these should have bean bookstacks or elements placed next to tha elevator or stair exits which would absorb tha nolsa eaanatlng from these traffic areas. Planners should also ba concerned with placing hsavlly-usad services and departaants where traffic to thoa will ba the least disturbing to occupants In tha library. Most libraries did this, but Johns Hopkins Is an axaapla of where this rule was not followed con sistently. Soaa of Its aost-used departaants require students to walk a considerable distance through book- stack and reader spaces to reach them. Johns Hopkins also erred In creating "gang" rows of graduate carrels In the stacks. Noise at one of these carrels can potentially be heard at twenty-five others In 271 tha cooplax. It would ba far nor* dwinblc to scatter thasa carrals throughout the stacks, taking advantaga of tha aurroundlng books tacks to absorb noisas. In tha tachnlcal services waak spacas, thara naads to ba an architactural saparation of parsonnal basad on thalr naad for qulat. Catalogars and acquisitions librarians probably should hava an anclosad araa apart frosi tha spacas housing sub-professional and clarical workers, Tha slsa and shape of tha work rooas should allow for the placement of tha furniture in a pattern which will allow traffic to flow easily and with a mlnlnua of disruptive affects on tha staff# Acoustical treataent of tha surfaces in thasa work areas should ba carefully planned. Floors should ba carpeted and callings treated with acoustical tile or plaster, 3, Dunbar and location of windows - While faculty and students in general adldly objected to tha lack of windows, library staffs wara strongly opposed to window lass or near windowlass interiors, Basad on ratings and consents made by tha respondents, thasa conclusions on user likes and dABllkes on fenestration are suggested: a. Users, especially library staff, do not like windowlass spaces, b. Library staffs do not Ilka clerestory windows as tha sole naans of fenestration. 272 e. Narrow or "•lit" windows as tha sola means of fenestration ara not llkad by library uaara. d. Wlndow-walls, In cartaln instances, ara llkad by tha user.* Wall spaces in library work rooas ara oftan naadad for bookahalvaa. This craataa tha temptation to daalgn wlndowlaaa enclosures, or apaeaa with elaraatory wlndowa undar which a halving may ba placed. Aa aentioned pre viously, neither type of space la llkad. Baaed on tha opinions of tha students and faculty at Cornell, walla of glass, If properly shielded from light and heat, would ppsslbly meat with tha most favor by users. A coaprostf.se between tha extreaes of no windows or glass walls In a staff work space alght ba one of placing regularly-spaced windows on tha outside walls* Tha else of tha windows should ba proportionate to tha area enclosed. Tha windows should have a pleasant view and ba adequately shielded from excessive light and temperature. 4. Library staff space - It was found that library staffs, especially TS staffs, felt that they did not have sufficient work space In their respective library nor was the space flexible. They also found traffic patterns to *ficcept by the TS staff at Cornell who occupy a room with windows along the entire south wall. Staff Judged the number of windows to be less than aood. possibly because there were too many windows Improperly shielded from the sun. 273 be Im i than aood. which la a pyaptom of tha inadequadea of tha flrat two factora. Thaaa flndlnga appear algnl- flcant in vlaw of tha fact that there waa about tha aane aaount of ataff dlaaatlafactlon over library work apace in tha neweat Llbrarlea aa for thoaa nearly tan yeara old* Thla auggeata one of two thlnga: (1) ataff apace in tha new buildInga did not receive eufflclent planning or (2) preaent-day concepta of ataff work*apace naada ara inadequate* Staff work-apacea ware inadequately daacrlbad f t f a tha prograna for tha library buildinga* Thera waa little or no deacrlptlon of PS ataff apace* Mora detail waa given for tha houalng of TS ataff* It la difficult to determine from tha prograna how much apace waa allowed for each ataff aember. Whan thia figure can ba dlacerned, tha area requeated varied froa 90 to 125 aquare feat* One program aakad for 220 aquare feat for each cataloger* Thia lack of apedfldty in tha prograna poaalbly betraya a failure to racogniaa tha inportanca of houalng ataff adequately or lndlcataa an area in which tha library plannera wara uncertain on how to proceed* In order for there to ba an architectural concept of apace requlrenenta for varloua claasaa of library personnel, it la neceaaary that their work routlnea ba carefully daacrlbad* Whan it la known what a paraon doea 274 In order to accomplish his assigned Casks, sobs idea •aargas as to chs kind and amount of space that ha snist have. Whan individual raqulrssisnts arc defined, Chen Chare must be a description of the relationships of the Individuals to the whole library operation, Fbr example, how do the various classes of workars relate to each other In a cataloging or circulation department? What are worker relationships with necessary furniture and equipment In these departments? Perheps If these factors had been more carefully detailed In the programs, the library staffs would not have regarded their workspaces as being Inadequate, Inflexible, and lacking In good traffic patterns. The staffs also Indicated the desire for more privacy In which to work, Tha author wonders, for exampls, whsther there Is s bettsr solution to housing TS library staff than In tha lsrge open rooms found In the libraries In this study. For those performing work requiring con* contratlon, these spaces offer little privacy or quiet. Libraries regularly provide Individual studies for faculty and students. They should also furnish studies for library personnel, S. Staff rest rooms - Sons library staffs termsd staff rest room facilities at tha libraries Inadequate, Lack of a place where one Biy lie down was also mentioned 275 at sone libraries* Tha author auggaata that a n n carafui deteralnatlon of ataff raat roon uaada in ralatton to public raat rooaa ahould hava baan undertaken at aoat of tha librarlaa In tha atudy. A larga proportion of a library ataff uaually worka on ona library floor and, tharafora, will place a haavy danuind on ataff raat rooa facllltlaa on that floor, Thia will ba aapadally trua If publle raat rooaa ara not nearby. In ganaral, ataff raat rooai facllltlaa probably ought to ba wore ganaroua than thoaa found In tha librarlaa In thia atudy. Thaae rooaa ahould ba dealgned apacifically for ataff naada and ba located In tha building where they ara convenient for tha greateat nunber of library peraon- nal. Aa part of tha raat rooaa, there ahould ba quiet apaeaa where peraona nay lie down. Thera ahould be an araa where ataff nay atore peraonal thlnga. Staff raat rooaa ahould ba thought of aa contributing to tha over-all coofort and efficiency of library workara and ahould, tharafora, ba planned aa carefully aa other library apaeaa. Recoonendatlona Aa Indicated In Chapter I, there have been few atudlea on how people react to library apace. The archi tectural daalgn of the librarlaa haa developed by enplrl- cal naana. Library daalgn would greatly benefit If 276 careful research studies were side of both the kinds of spaces needed by library users and the functional needs of the library Itself* For a beginning, the author would like to suggest the following topics as being suitable for additional study: 1. Architects. How are architects chosen to design academic libraries? What criteria are used In selecting them? How valuable Is an architectural competition? 2. Module else. What Is the optimum module else for (1) structural purposes, (2) economy of construction, (3) housing library furniture and equipment and, (4) maximum flexibility of Interior spaces? 3. Entrances. How many entrances should a large library have? What are the determining factors? How might a lack of multiple entrances Influence thb frequ ency of use of the library? How can ltoatlon of entrances Influence use of the library? 4. Celling heights. What are desirable celling heights? How do they Influence how a person feels In a space? How are lighting, heating, and ventilation affected by the height of a celling? 5. Interior design. How does Interior design contribute to desirable study environments in a library? What Is the Influence of color and texture on library users? What Is the Influence of color and design on 277 library work apacti} e.g., technical services spacasT How does color affect tha quality of lighting? 6. Group study rooms. Is thara an optimum slaa for a group study roooif Should thara ba several slses of studies In a library? How many group study rooas should be provided In a library? What equipment should tha rooms contain? 7. Library staff work spaces. Are present space formulas for library staff too low? How Is space utilised by various kinds of library workers? What kind of environ mental needs do the workers have? How can more privacy be achieved for those desiring It? 8. Typing rooms. Since inexpensive photocopying services are widely available in libraries, how laportant Is it to provide typing rooas In a library? How many typing stations par student population should be provided? Should the library furnish coin-operated typewriters? 9. Ventilation. How can better eool4*«s and heat ing systems be developed for libraries? What factors of ventilation most affect library patrons? What Is tha range of temperature and humidity tolerance of Individuals? How can drafts In buildings ba avoided? 10. Expansion. What are the best methods of expand ing a building for, (I) housing materials, (2) staff spaces, and (3) user spaces? 278 11* Traffic. How can traffic ba controlled In a library ao that It doaa not Interfere with the beer* of the library? 12. Noise. How can noiae be aore efficiently con trolled both in public spaces and In library work apaeaa? What klnda of background nolae ara beneficial? 13. Staff raat rooaa. What criteria ahould be uaed to deteralne the optimal alas of ataff reat rooaa? What apodal facllltlaa ahould ataff reat rooaa have? 14. Feneatratlon. What Influencea do wlndowa have on library occupanta? What klnda of feneatratlon are llkad? What klnda dlaliked? Although thia atudy wea Halted, It waa hoped that tha six librarlaa choaen typified the beat thinking on library daalgn aa It haa been practiced over the laat ten or fifteen years. To test these concepts of library design, the author sought out user reactions to the archi tecture of the alx libraries. The study revealed both atrengtha and weaknesses of design; what uaers liked, what they disliked. It la evident that aore atudy of library architecture la necessary. Soac design problesa reaailn unsatisfactorily aolved. Hew problaas will arise as librarlaa evolve Into ever aore coaplex entltlea. Library design can be better, If the needs are known. APPENDIX I LETTER SENT TO LIBRARY BUILDING CONSULTANTS 279 280 Pear x I aa a doctoral candidate at the School of Library Science, University of Southern California, beginning research for ay dissertation. The subject of the dis sertation is on the relationship of academic library architecture and its users. I aa writing to you to ask your help in selecting a saaple of acadealc libraries in the United States which are, architecturally, the aost successfully designed; that is, those which best fulfill the functional requirements associated with academic libraries. Would you please list your choice of ten of these libraries subject to the following liaitatlons: 1. The libraries aust be part of a university, or of a college with a strong graduate prograa. In other words, the libraries ought to nave, roughly, the saae educational deaands on them as to be comparable to one another in their functions and goals. 2. Each aust be the principal library on the canpus. 3. They aust have been functioning for a period of at least two years, but aust not be more than ten years old. if you would care to make coaaents about your choices, they would be aost appreciated. It is also hoped that you will not fail to consider buildings for which you have served as a consultant. I would like to thank you, in advance, for your taking the tins to nake this list. May I have your selections by 13 July 1969? Yours sincerely, Lester K. Salth 833 18th St., Apt. D Santa Monica, Ca. 90403 APPENDIX II OPINIONNAIRE8 AND RELATED MATERIALS USED IN THE STUDY 281 262 STUDBHT OPINIONNAIRE ON THE HUM LI WARY BUILDIMCf ) Dear Student: Thia oplnlomialra la part of a project to atudy uaara' raactlona to acadealc library architecture. Whan It la known what uaara want, It will ba poaalbla to build batter librarlaa for than. Your help In anawerlng thia oplnlonnalre la greatly appreciated. Plaaaa do not algn your naae. 1. Claaa (check one) (1) freahaan (2) aophoamre (3) Junior (4) aenlor (5) atudylng for naatar'a degree (6) atudylng for doctoral degree 2. Your aubject aajor (pleaae specify) NOTE: IF TOU DO NOT USE THE MAIN LIBRARY, OR USE IT RARELY. PLEASE CHECK HERE: . DO NOT ANSWER THE REMAINING questions. ---- The following la a Hat of featurea, prlaarlly archi tectural, of the aaln library bulldlna. Would you pleaae rate each feature according to the following acale: 1 - excellent 3 - poor 2 - very good 6 - very poor 3 • good 0 - no opinion 4 - average 3. location of the library building on caapua 4. location of tha entrance(a) to tha library 3. architectural daalgn of the library building 6. Interior arrangement of the library building (OVER) 283 7. esthetics of the Interior 8. lighting in the reading araaa 9 ._____ llghClng in the bookstacks 10. haatlna 11. ventilation (air conditioning) 12. freedom froa nolae 13. variety of study apacaa 14. aaaa of locating booka 13. availability of araaa, auch aa aaall rooas, where atudenta way talk and study together 16. availability of araaa where aaoklng la peraltted 17. eaae of locating library aervlcee or departaents 18. auffldont nuaber of drinking fountalna 19. location of atalrwaya 20. location of elevatora 21. nuaber of elevatora 22. location of windows 23. nuaber of windows 24. colllna heights of the rooas 23. adequacy of rest rooas 26. adequacy of alcroprlnt reading rooas 27. adequacy of typing rooas 28. Please write any coaaents you aay care to aake on questions 3*27 (above), or additional eoaaenta (favorable or unfavorable) on the architectural design of the library building. TH4MK VDU FOR ANSWERING THIS OPINIONNAIRB 284 NOTE TO FACULTY REGARDING STUDENT OPINIONNAIRE DISTRIBUTION Dear Prof* Will you halp na? In chla anvaiopa ara oplnion- nalraa I would Ilka you to drculata to your atudants in * Tha oplnlonnalras ara a vary significant part of tha research projact for ny doctoral dlasartation on academic library architactura* This specific class of yours has baan selected as tha ra- •ult or Intact Group sampling, so It Is Important that your students be asked to participate* Will you please ask thsm to fill out tha oplnion- naire, either in, or outside of, class (at your option), than mall tha completed forms, together with this memo, in tha accompanying anvaiopa? I vary much appreciate your help* Sincerely, Lester K. Smith School of Library Science, University of Southern Calif* REMINDER CARD SENT TO FACULTY REGARDING STUDENT OPINIONNAIRE DISTRIBUTION Dear Prof* Recently I sent you copies of an opinlonnalre on tha architectural design of tha Library for your students In to itil out. Hava you had time to distribute them7 I would vary much appreciate your sanding them on as soon as possible* Because of the research techni ques being used, the opinions of the students in your class are vital to the obtaining of an unbiased sample. Again, I deeply appreciate your cooperation in this study* Sincerely, Lester K. Smith School of Library Science, University of Southern Calif* 28S FACULTY OPINIONNAIRE ON THE MAIN LIBRARY BUILDING(________) Dear Profaaaor: May I respectfully aak you to halp me by Filling out thia oplnloimalra? It la part of a <Ha- sartatlon pxojact to study usars' raactlons to academic Library architecture. Whan it la known what uaara want, It will ba poaslbla to build battar llbrarlaa for thaw. Your naaa has boon salactad on tha basis of systawatie sampling, thus your answering this opinion* naira la an Important contribution to an unblasad cross sactlon of faculty opinion. Plaasa do not sign your naaa. Will you plaasa ratum this to aa In tha attached anvaiopa? Thank you. Lester)K. Smith, School of Library Sdenca, University of Southern California. 1. Your rank (check one) (1) professor (2) associate professor (3) assistant professor (4) Instructor (3) lecturer NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT USE THE MAIN LIBRARY, OR USE IT RARELY. PLEASE CtCCK HERB DO NOT ANSWER THE REMAIN* INC QUESTIONS. Tha following is a list of features, primarily architectural, of the main library bulldlna. Would you plaasa rata each feature according to the following scale: 1 - excellent 5 - poor 2 - very good 6 • very poor 3 - good 0 - no opinion 4 - average 2. location of the library building on campus 3. location of the entrance(s) to the library (OVER) 286 4. archlte ctural design of tho library building 5. Interior arrangement of the library building 6 .____oathetics of the interior 7. lighting in the reeding areas 8. lighting in the bookstgeks 9 .____heating 10 .____ventilation (air conditioning) 11. freedom from nolee 12 .____eaee of locating booka 13. availability of areae where smoking is permitted 14. adequacy of faculty lounge facilities 13. ease of locating library services or departments 16. sufficient number of drinking fountains 17. location of stairways 18. location of elevators 19. number of elevators 20 .____location of windows 21. number of klndows 22. celling heights of the rooms 23. adequacy of rest rooms 24. adequacy of microprint reading rooms 23. adequacy of typing rooms 26. Please write any comments you may care to make on questions 2-25 (above), or additional comments (favorable or unfavorable) on the architectural design of the library building. THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THIS OPINIONNAIRE 287 REMINDER CARD SENT TO FACULTY Dear Prof. Recently I toot you on oplnlotmaire on tho archi tectural design of the Library. Could you find the tine U.6-1S minutes, at fcne nost) to answer it and then mall it in the envelope which accom panied it? Because of sampling procedures, it la very important that X have your opinion so that there will be no bias in my research. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely. Lester K. Smith. School of Library Science, University of Southern California 288 OPIMIONHAIRE - LIBRARY STAFF Dear Staff Member: This oplnlonnalra la part of an lnves* tlgatlon into tha adequacy of tha architactural daaign of acadanlc libraries. It la an atteept, In pqrt, to determine how wall praaant acadanlc library bulldinga aarva tha paopla who work In than* Tha nora that la known about a library ataff'a naada for architectural apaca, tha battar archltacta can design for than* Your help In thia project by filling out this oplnlonnalra la greatly appreciated* Flaaaa do not sign your nana* Will you plaaaa return thla to bv ■ _____ Thank you* Laatar I. Saith, scnool or Library science, University of Southern California* 1* What la your job poaltlon? (check one) (1) librarian (2) sub-professional (3) clerk (A) aecretary (5) atudent aaalatant (6) other (Plaaaa Indicate) 2* In which type of library aarvlca department do you work? (check one) (1) technical aervlcea (2) public aervlcea (3) administration _ (4) other (please anaclfv) 3* On which floor, or level* of the library do you work? (check one) (0) ground (I) first (2) second 289 4-2 (3) third (4) fourth (3) fifth (8) sixth (7) other (plots* spoclfv) 4. Do you fool tho attitudes you have toward your work aro Influoneod by tho architectural features of the library building? (1) odnslderably (2) tone (3) only a little (4) not at all (8) no opinion The following Is a list of architectural features. Would you please rate each feature. as It applies to vour decartiasnt. according to the following scale: 1 - excellent 5 - poor 2 - very good 6 - very poor 3 • good 0 - no opinion 4 - average 5. adequacy of the space 6. flexibility of the space 7. acoustics 8. lighting 9. location of windows 10. nuwbor of windows 11. ventilation (air conditioning) 290 4-3 12. heating 13. traffic pattema 14. Conmunlcatlona. such at Ctltphonat, InCarcoma 13. calling htlghc(t) 16. ttthatlet 17. Do you foal comfortable, Chat It "at home”, in your turroundlngt7 (chack ona) (1) yn« (2) no 18. Did tha archltactural faaturaa of tha library build ing lnfluanca your antwar to quattlon 17 (abova)? (check ona) (1) conaldarably (2) tona (3) only a little (4) not at all (0) no opinion 19. Ara all tha library facllltlea which ara neceaeary for your work, Including atalra or elevatora If you move about, conveniently located for you? (chack ona) (1) yet (2) no 20. If tha antwar to quattlon 19 It "no", plaaaa chack all factort lltted which you faal are wrong. (1) elevatora ara not conveniently located (2) atalra ara not conveniently located (3) central card catalog(a) la too remote 291 4-4 (4) other bibliographic facilities are too distant (3) a related library department with which I work is not close enough (6) dimensions of the room do not permit efficient arrangement of library furniture and equipment (7) dimensions of the room do not permit inclusion of all necessary library furniture and equipment (8) other (please specify) 21. Are all the library facilities which are necessary for your personal comfort (drinking fountains* rest rooms* etc.) available and conveniently located for you? (check one) (1) yss (2) no 22. If the answer to question 21 is "no", please check all factors you feel are wrong. (1) not enough drinking fountains (2) rest rooms are Inadequate (3) there are no spaces as part of the rest rooms where one may lie down (4) there is lack of space where one may work in private (5) the staff lounge is inadequate (6) the staff lounge is inconveniently located (7) other (please explain) APPENDIX III BIBLIOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING PROGRAMS FOR THE LIBRARIES IN THE STUDY 293 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Program Title: "Program of Competition for the John M. Olin Library at Washington University." The building program consiats of twenty-nine muitilithed leaves, stapled together. The text is divided into three sectlona: 1. "Terms of the Competition" specifies the terms of the architectural competition which was used to choose the architects for the new library building. 2. "Building Program" discusses general concep tions of the new library building, including topics con cerned with the location of the building, creation of the proper library environment, and the major library functions to be housed. A concluding section summarises specific recommendations for space allotments. 3. "Appendices" is in two parts. Appendix A provides a brief description of the departmental libraries on the Washington University campus. Appendix B presents a detailed description of space and functional require ments for each library department or service point. The subject of the ideal relatlonahlps of these library units is Included in the discussions. 294 CORNELL UNIVERSITY Program Tltla: "Program for tha Raaaarch Library** Tha building program for tha library conalsta of sixteen mimaographad leaves, ataplad togathar. It la In tha following parts: 1. "Tabla of Contents" 2. "Introduction" discusses tha general nature and concept of tha library building. 3. "Primary Service Areas" defines and describes library departments or functions, Including the lobby, circulation, reference, rare books, and technical services depattmsnts, union card catalog and bibliography areas, and reading spaces for current periodicals or general purposes. Under each sub-heading the purposes and func tions of the activity are discussed. Recosssended space allowances are included. 4. "Secondary Areas - Readers" consists of descriptions of reading facilities for smaller groups of readers in the library in connection with sppcial materials, such as microtexts, maps, newspapers, and special collections. Graduate study rooms, conference rooms, and bookstack reading areas are also discussed with recommended space allotments. 295 5. "Secondary Araaa - Raadara - Individual" daacrlbaa study carrals, typing carrala, and faculty atudlaa. 6. "Secondary Araaa - Staff" Includes descrip tions of space and functional needs for administrative offices, the staff lounge, shipping and receiving roof, binding preparation and book mending room, rare book binding room, and stock room. 7. "General Services Areas and Facilities" describes elevators, bookllfts and conveyors, toilets, and coat facilities. 8. "Desirable Space telatlonshlps" Is a brief paragraph noting that earlier sections of the program had sometimes described Ideal relationships, but that no attempt had been made to describe all such relation ships. The assumption Is advanced that such topics are better left to discussion with the architects at a later time. 9. "Recapitulation of Space Requirements" provides data. In tabular form, for the number of seats, volumes, staff, and area, In square feet, for the library spaces described previously. 296 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY Program Title: "Suggestions for s New Library Building” Tho building program for tha library consists of twelve mimeographed leaves, stapled together. Tha program has tha following parts: 1. "Table of Contents” . 2. "A New Library" is in two parts. The first part of this section suggests, by the nature of the writing, that fundamental decisions on ths part of the university to construct a new central library had not yet been made. The second part of this section presents, in tabular form, recommsnded square footgge allotments for major library spaces, such as bookstacks, individual studies, open reading spaces, staff working quarters, seminar and meeting rooms, special collections, and other special areas# Following this one-page summary is a discussion of possible sites for the new building. 3. "The Faculty of the University" provides the number of faculty by subject discipline and rank. 4. "The Johns Hopkins University - Summary of 1936-1957 Homewood Enrollment" lists undergraduate and graduate student enrollment by various subject disciplines. 297 5* "A Preliminary Selected List of College end University Library Buildings (including major additions) Completed during the Pest Ten Years" is a two-page list of selected colleges and universities which had constructed a new llbrery or made a major addition to their present library. The list covers the period 1945 to 1938. 6. "Faculty Opinion Concerning Library Building Plans" describes university faculty reaction to five alternative library expansion plans submitted to the entire body of the faculty. 298 ARIZONA STATS UNIVERSITY Program Title: "Program Raqulrmmanta for tha Library Building" Tha program consists of thirty-one dittoed loavest stapled together. It Is divided as follows: 1. "Introduction" Is a brief statement of the objectives of the written program. 2. "Project Growth of ASU Library, 1962-1972" provides, In tabular form, the projected annual number of volumes to be added for the period. 3. "The University Which the Library Serves" Is a brief statement on the number of students enrolled In undergraduate and graduate programs at the University. 4. "Bsslc Library Policies" discusses several topics Including undergraduste versus greduate and faculty library needs, centralised or decentralised library services on campus, fixed function or subject organisation of the llbrayy, and open or closed stacks. 5. "Sise of Library Building" briefly describes the else of the library, citing the number of books and students to be housed. 6. "Location of Library Building" contains a brief discussion of siting problesm. 299 7. "Aaaumptlona upon Which This Report Hat Been Bated" la a brief deacrlptlon of the building at envlaloned by tha Librarian. The number of floora In the building, location of the entrance, and other conceptt of building conatructlon are Hated and dlecuaeed. 8. "Space Dlatrlbutlon for New ASU Library Building" la In two parta. The firat part la a table citing aquare footage, nuaber of eeete, end number of book volumea to be atored, for departmenta on each floor of the propoaed library. The aecond part la a detailed dlacuaalon of the architectural needa of the departmenta and aervlcea which will be part of the library. 9. "General Recommendatlona" discuaaea lighting* ventilation, and acouatical control In the library. 300 UNIVERSITY OF UTAH Program Tltla: "Architectural Design Program" Tha program conalata of 224 mimeographed laavaa bound In fibreboard covers. It la divided aa follows: 1. "Contents" 2. "Introduction" Incorporates numerous topics Including, (1) description of the changing rolea of university libraries, (2) types of patrons and how their needs are served, (3) the organisation of library materials and services, (4) the needs of special library collections, (5) special library services, (6) predicted annual growth of thb University enrollamnt and, (7) growth of the library collections In relation to the University program. 3. "Volume and Study Station Summary" provides, in tabular form, the square footage recommendations for library services and functions. In addition, numbers and types of patrons and number* of volumes are specified for each major division of the library. 4. "General Facility Information, General Area Information, and Specific Space Requirements” constitutes 200 pages of the program. Each library space to be Incorporated In the building Is completely described In terms of library functions, relationships, number of 301 people occupying the space, equipment end furniture to be Included, end utilities needed. 3. "General Architectural Requirements" discusses the esthetics of building design, building construction, site considerations, and the desired specifications for building utilities; that Is, air conditioning, lighting, heating, and electrical systems. 302 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Program Tltla: "Program for tha Vast Bank Library" Tha program conalata of seventy-two multl-ilthad laavaa, bound In a spiral bindar. Tha program is dividad as follows: 1. Tabla of Contants 2. "Chaptar I. Introduction and Background Information*1 providas background information on tha Univar sity library system, including a tabular summary of volumas housad and saating avallabia in all llbrarlas on both tha Mltmaapolls and St. Paul campuses. 3. "Chaptar II. Unlta to Ba Housad in tha VNst Bank Library" is tha major portion of tha vrlttan program. Each library spaca is dlscussad in tarns of functional naads, relationships, furnltura and aqulpmant in tha spaca, and squara footaga racommandad. 4. "Building Location and Aecass Features" includes several topics, such as tha location of tha library, entrances and exits, vertical circulation facilities, pro vision for wheftl chair patrons, and parking facilities. 5. "Special Purpose Facilities" discusses group study rooms, carrels, faculty studies, smoking rooms, typing facilities, and computer facilities. 303 6. NMiscellaneous Special Features" discusses topics such as types and alses of furniture and equipment which will be placed In the library, toilets, drinking fountains, lighting, and signs and directories. 7. "Appendixes" Is a sunaary tabulation of estlnated space needs. APPENDIX IV DATA ON THE RESPONDENTS TO THE OPINIONNAIRES 304 305 CLASS LEVEL OF STUDENTS WHO RETURNED OPINIONNAIRES1 9 f l S £ -.1 I j s I ij 13 1 if I ill II II I Washington 127 26 (20) 31 (24) 23 (18) 25 (20) 3 (2) 19 (15) Comall In class 93 2 (2) 42 (45) 17 (18) 14 (15) 7 (8) 10 (ID 1 (1) In library 148 1 (.7) 2 ((1) 10 (7) 12 (8) 22 (15) 89 (60) - Johns Hopkins 224 15 (7) 30 (13) 43 (19) 37 (17) 14 (6) 79 (35) 6 (3) Arlsona Stats In class 227 74 (33) 33 (15) 56 (25) 69 (30) 7 (3) 2 (.9) 4 (2) In library 123 21 (17) 17 (14) 37 (30) 25 (20) 20 (16) 3 (2) m m Utah 279 27 (9) 61 (22) 63 (23) 91 (33) 21 (8) 16 (6) m m Minnesota 229 56 (24) 32 (14) 44 (19) 52 (23) 27 (12) 18 (8) m m 1Flgur«s In psranthaaas in pireinCigM of total rotumod. * t a n o m s • o rt • a r t sr 3 i M M O s to rt m n z I I K i •9 ft n • ft sr s s * £ o Ht ? f t ft U l a * U l u > O ' u » O B M UtM U»M ♦•M UlM o o f * O'O' own W»M w N a * w < i * V M MM M UIM i-*a» MM 0»M MO ' • a ' V a » ^ * S Mi MM M M MOB v C W O '00 > ■ * w > « N M f t - M 00 M U l M ■w > • » » > a a U l M 1 t • 1 UIM w w « • *»M 3 rt u I© U»M U)M ►*o oo H t o ©00 W H M HN W« OtW U H I ( UM I I Total ftaaponsa Piafassor Aasoclata Profaasor Assistant Profaasor Lacturar Instructor Rank Unknown 307 POSITIONS OP LIBRARY STAFF WHO RETURNED 0PIM80NNAIRES1 Total Librarians j 4 <* 1 e u m • % u 5 e (S Student Assistants * u o Washington 57 19 20 12 2 2 2 (33) (35) (21) (3) (3) (3) Cornell 54 21 6 9 s » 14 4 (39) (11) (16) • (26) (7) Johns Hopkins 56 17 6 17 1 15 m (30) (ID (30) (2) (27) * Arizona State 59 24 10 7 1 16 1 (41) (17) (12) (2) (27) (2) Utah 62 20 14 2 3 19 4 (32) (23) (4) (5) (31) (6) Minnesota 55 19 11 8 2 12 3 (35) (20) (15) (3) (22) (5) 1Figures in parentheses are percentages of total returned. APPENDIX V LIBRARY BUILDING DATA 308 JOHN M. QUH LIBRARY. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ARBHITECT(S): OONSULTANT(S): COSTS: LIGHTING: FLOOR: SEATING: BOOKS: BUILDING DATA Murphy & Mackey, Inc., St, Louis Ralph Ellsworth • Library Planning Thomas Church A William Roberts - Landscaping Bolt, Bsransk & Newman - Acoustics Kayes D. Metcalf - Consultant to the University Building cost, including built-in equip ment: $3,134,000; cost per square foot: $17.41; gross floor area: 180,000 square feet. Equipment and furniture, other than built- in: $630,000; total project coat: $3,984,000; cost per square foot: $22.13. Fluorescent & Incandescent Terrasso, cork or asphalt tile Open student carrels: approx. 173; locked student carrels: 60; locked faculty carrels: 126; tables: approx. 930; lounge furniture: approx. 200; total: Total voluom capacity: 1,330,000, including 225,000 in storage. 310 JOHN M. GLIN RESEARCH LIBRARY. CORNELL UNIVERSITY ARCHITECT(S): OOMSULTANT(S): COSTS: LIGHTING: FLOOR: SEATING: BOOKS: BUILDING DATA Utrnnr, Burns, Tosn & Lunds, New York Kays* D. Mat calf - Library PMmnlng Fradarlc C. (food - Ganaral Planning Bolt, Baranak & Newman - Acoustics Building cost, Including built-in equip ment: $4,930,000; cost par square toot: $20.61; gross floor area: 239,245 square feat. Equipment and furniture, other than built-in: $250,000; total project cost: $5,700,000; cost par square foot: $23.82. Fluorescent & Incandescent Asphalt tile, rubber tile Open student carrels: 319; locked student carrels: 24; locked faculty carrels: 96; tables: 296; lounge furniture: 168; total: 903. Total volume capacity: 2,000,000 MILTON S. EISENHOWER LIBRARY. JOHNS HDPKIHS UNIVERSITY ARCHITECT(S): CONSULTANT (S ) : COSTS: lighting: FLOOR: SEATING: BOOKS: BUILDING DATA Wrann, Lavla & Jcneki; Mayir & Ayers, Baltimore Clarks & Rapuano - Landscaping Van Rsnnsalaar P. Saxa - Structural Engineering Egll & Gompf - Mechanical Engineering Building cost, including built-in equip ment: $3,708,289; cost per square toot: $21.00; gross floor area: 176,344 square feet. Equipment and furniture, other than built-in: $230,000; total project cost: $4,442,131; cost per square foot: $25.19. Fluorescent & Incandescent Terrasso, vinyl asbestos tile, rubber tile, carpet, hardened concrete Open student carrels: 423; locked faculty carrels: 236; tables & lounge furniture: 721; total: 1380. Total volume capacity: 1,227,000. CHARLES TR lTMRKl.l HAVQgN LIBRARY. ARIZONA S T a t r iTM TVgpyTTy ARCHITECT(S): CONSULTANT(S): COSTS: LIGHTING: FLOOR: SEATING: BOOKS: BUILDING DATA Weaver & Drover. Phoenix None Building coat, including built-in equip ment: $3,287,385; coat per aquare foot: $15.88; groaa floor area: 207.000 aquare feet. Equipment and furniture, other than built- in: $530,000; totfcl project coat: $4,148,485; coat per aquare foot: $20.08. Fluoreacent Terrasso, vinyl aabeatoa tile, carpeting Locked atudent cereela: 150; locked factlty atudiea: 69; tablea & lounge furniture: 2,782; total: 3001. Total volume capacity: 1,102,000. J. WILLARD MARRIOTT LIBRARY. UNIVERSITY OF UTAH ARCHITECTS ): CONSULTANTS ): COSTS: LIGHTING: FLOOR: SEATING: BOOKS: BUILDING DATA Unnio S. Young & Partners, Robert A. Fowler, J. Shlrl Cornwall, Salt Lake City Ralph E. Ellsworth - Library Building Building cost, including bullt*ln equip ment: $5,383,750; cost per square foot: $18.26; gross floor arsa: 295,000 square feet. Equipment and furniture, other than built* in: $940,000; total project cost: $6,750,000; cost per square foot: $22.88. Fluorescent, incandescent Terrasso, homogenous vinyl tile, carpeting Open student carrels: 1,250; locked faculty studies: 162; tbbles: 1*682; lounge furniture: 106; total: 3,200. Total volume capacity: 1,525,000, including 25,000 storage. 0. MEREDITH WILSON LIBRARY. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA ARCHITECT(S): CONSULTANTS ): COSTS: LIGHTING: FLOOR: SEATING: BOOKS: BUILDING DATA The Cerny AsiocUCti, Minneapolis Ktyti D. Matcalf - Library Building Building cost, Including built-in equip ment: $8,426,760; cost par square coot: $22.04; gross floor area: 382,313 squars fast. Equipment and furnlturs, othsr than built-in: $1,112,418; total projact cost: $8,980,463; cost par squars foot: $26.11. Fluorsscsnt Tsrrasso, vinyl asbestos tils, carpeting Open student carrels: 736; locked student careels: 60; locked faculty studies: 96; tables: 1,113; lounge furniture: 200; total: 2,203. Total volume capacity: 2,000,000 APPENDIX VI WRITTEN COMMENTS ABOUT THE LIBRARIES 315 316 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Stildv Spaces and Fritdoni from Nolsa Faculty connanta: not enough studies or carrels Grossly Inadequate number (60) of carrels for graduate students; somewhat Inadequate number of faculty studies. Student comments: There should be Individual carrels for under graduates. Fenestration and Lighting Faculty comments: Since most parts of the building are not at all dependent on windows for light, they become Important for aesthetic purposes. They seem to fulfill this function very well In a variety of ways. I would prefer to have windows In the faculty studies - I bike to be able to look out. Windows are good In reading rooms. Student comments: Windows on level 4 and 5 functional neither for lighting nor ventilation. There Is a high frequency buss from the lighting that makes It very difficult for me to study. but they hum making It hard to concentrate (coimsent opposite the feature: lighting In the reading areas). 317 Library staff comments: thars ara planty of windows, but thay don't opan. Thasa ara not windows In tha usual sanaa of tha worH, but a strip of glass bbout 2% faat wlda that axtands around 2 sldas of our offlca right undar tha calling. It has natal dividing strips about avary 3 faat. — Our llbrayy has a somewhat uniqua situation In that windows do not opan. For tha most part this is good as I don't Ilka drafts & would hata to hava sonaona always pulling up tha window. It also allnlnatas tha back breaking problan of opening & closing windows that wa had In our old library. ... but you can't opan them (comment opposite tha feature: number of windows) Ventilation and Heating Faculty consents: Tha ventilation in tha closed carals PslC] Is not too good. too cold (comment opposite tha feature: heating) variable heating & cooling especially In transi tional seasons I find It stuffy often, especially In faculty studies. Olin Library Is outstanding In most respects, and even heating and alr-condltloning (questions 9 and 10) ara fine, but during tha transition periods In fall and spring, tha Llbrayy la so hot for a few days as to be unusable. sometimes too hot; sometimes too cool Student comments: ftccessive Heating during winter Often la too cold Library building has an abundance of drafts and wind noise, particularly near doors to reserve 318 reading room*. Heating and vantllatlon (air cond.) temperatures vary from laval to laval and ganarally ara althar too cold or too hot* too damn hot Library staff conaants: m bought a "bargain" air condltlonar Tha air conditioning Is comfortable* Ones In awhile It breaks down and that Is whsre tha trouble comas In that windows can't be opened* Tha heating Is average In our department. It Is colder than I personally like and the girls wear sweaters much of the time* Other parts of the library are comfortable to warm. Coolness In our dept* may be due to outside walls and direction* air conditioned but ventilation poor Elevators. Stairs, and Entrances Fsculty comments: My Impression Is that two elevators might be enough, but by making one available only for staff, the library users have to take their chances on the other one being out-of-order, held up for Janitorial or book-cart purposes, or Just plain heavy usage* My heart being In good condition as yet, I don't mind climbing from level one to level three, or even five, but I would not advertise the elevetor service as one of the sttractlons of Olln library* not available to anyone but library personnel (comment opposite feature: location of elevators) Mould be Improved If had both East & West entrances would probably be Improved If East & Mast treated symmetrically (comment opposite feature: stair ways, location of elevators) Student comments: Stairs sre hard to walk up - steps too smsll, slippery no railings Hi Cl 319 Could bo wore entrances, but It's not bod. More ontroncos ro #4 • thoro aren't enough ontroncos to tho library. Design is outstanding In alaost all rospoets except no. of olovators and no. of rest rooas Rost Rooas and Drlnklne Fountains Student consents: Moro drinking fountains & different kind, can't keep ay hair dry. Library staff coaaonts: tie rest rooa on tho third level could bo bigger although tho aaln thing against It Is tho location • In tho passage nay whore shelvers work arranging books on trucks & shelves to go to other levels of tho library for shelving. No drinking fountain In dept. Drinking fountain too far away. Esthatlca Facility coaaonts: Tho design & layout of this library Is particularly f ood, coapared with aany other libraries with which 'a faalllar. The carrels & studies are a parti* cular asset. Building Is very beautiful and I like It very auch. The coaaonts above concern a few of tne lacks that 1 find In It. Student coaaonts: 1 find the Interior of Olln Library "cold" & uncomfortable. I do not like to work there. 320 It Is extremely antiseptic, not st all conduclvs to studying unloss on# fools thot o "prison" atmosphere Is fovorsblo to coneontrotlon. Blonds well with tho campus EstKetlcs of tho oxtorlor good It's ths most Intimidating structure on campus and loovos no, If not with a negative foaling, at least a sense of apprehension & coldness. Library staff comments: I think from tha outside It Is tha most beautiful university library In tha country Miscellaneous Faculty comments: Smoking should not be permitted at all. except that one must continually go downstairs to check card catalog (comment opposite feature: Interior arrangement of tha library building) WU's library (Olln) Is new & excellent In my Judgment. The prior library (Ridgley) was an abomination in regard to most ovary point. Our library In general Is excellent. Enjoy the building Enjoy classes In building - good for seminar classes Would like 1 or 2 classrooms without tables for role plavlng purposes Comfortable for me - students complain room too hot or cold but Infrequently - usually bbfore season settles. Lika art on walls - color & structure. Services generally good Very good building Olln Is the best academic library I've seen— beats Harvard, Chicago, Rochester, Illinois (Urbane) 321 Studant commant*: I think paopla who uaa tha library raraly should complata this quastloimalra In ordar to gat tha nagatlva raaaons why tha library la not usad. Tha "avaraga" atudant doasn't cara how high tha callings ara •2 lowar floors balow ground saam vary "clooad-ln". Too much wastad spaca, high laval of malntananca nolsa. Could you Install soda drink nachlna In library— No food but Just drinks. Bacausa nany quastlons ara answarad avaraga doasn't naan fad lit las ara adaquata. Thara should ba a room whara paopla nay aat snacks. I think It's an outstanding library! Tha natarials ara saparatad too widaly, making nacassary to run all about looking for sonathlng and Its ralatad topics. Csldl It's daslgnad to maka ma fall aslaap otharwlsa I Ilka It rsldf Library staff conmants: Naad anothar staff roosi or nora spaca. Staff kltchan not daslgnad for usa by mora than 2 at onca. No hip room - kltchan should ba llnaarT A clock Is naadad In tha staff lounga CORNELL UNIVERSITY Study Snacas and Fraadom from Nolsa Faculty constants: mora spaca for faculty studios naadad Tha graduata studlas (a.g. 603) ara much too small 322 Are no faculty loungaa but ara faculty studies, which ara an excellent Idea but very poorly heated and very poorly sound prodfed. Student consents: No carrels are available that really obstruct your view & therefore isake It easier to study. The carrels are Just as open as the tables on main floor. No area available on first floor where you can talk freely (loudly) Rooms for talking together appear to be too scarce. The periodical room seesw to have to double for that purpose too frequently. reading room too noisy because it is separated laic? from main corridor, card catalogue, etc. It works middling well but It's utterly unusable for study. You go there, get your books and leave. Small rooms (smaller than the periodical room) with excellent lighting and comfortable chairs would be nice for reading. The only objection I have to this library, which la quite good generally, Is that spaces are so large etc you feel as though you're In an airport/fishbowl. I think the provision of rooms for students to get together and talk (#15) la important, but do not know if these exist. Having only minimal knowledge of architecture I have only one comment concerning question 16. I don't think smoking should be permitted within the library anywhere, but certainly not everywhere outside of the stacks. Aside from any "remote" danger of a fire, It Is very hard to study with smoke blowing In your face. Smokers are generally Inconsiderate of non-smokers in all public build ings, Including the library. It Is relatively sound proof but rules concerning talking in library not enforced or they should be. All carrels should be closed and located In the middle of the stacka. 323 true only for chose who can use Che sCacks (comment made opposlCe feaCures: freedom from noise, varleCy of sCudy spaces, ease of locaClng books) Need much more carrel space, smaller sCudy areas pref. w/rugs. The studies upstairs w/reference according Co dept, are good, Chough Coo small -- also too close Co bell Cower. Need for more Individualized study areas (I.e. carrels or Improved varieties thereof); need for more open air reading areas No walls on main floor between main rooms which allows noise Co cravel throughout Che lib. Not enough - e.g. In 601 there is sometimes a clash between those who want to talk and those who want to write or read (comment opposite feature: availability of areas, sucn as small rooms, where students may tftlk and study together) The long rows of carrels have the disadvantage of sending sound the whole length when people stop to talk. The carrels also have insufficient shelf •pace and even less sufficient table top area. Rooms smaller than the departmental seminar rooms - perhaps the size of faculty studies, should be made available for groups of 2-3 to work togethen Often a large area Is wasted by domination of a few. should be lounge on each floor with easy-chairs & tables (or desks) for reading, smoking, studying not a good idea to have carrels near rest room total lack of comfortable chairs and tables on all floors Library staff comments: room is very noisy All of technical services are in one large room with no divisions - so disturbances in one division distract everyone In all the others 324 Ftntitratlon and Lighting Faculty comment*: It would be desirable to have the windows In the faculty studies operable for ventilation. Should replace fluorescent lighting with Incan descent (comment opposite feature: lighting In the reading areas) Student comments: son, have you looked at the bldg? (comment opposite feature: location of windows) If the switches made no noise, better (comment opposite feature: lighting In bookstacks) Switch lighting in stacks: nolsv flickering & bussing near lights In some areas are a bother too many! (comment opposite feature: number of windows) Please get rid of the "white noise" (that bussing sound). It drives me crasy! Slit windows on floors 2-6 are depressing; seventh floor much better The more the better (consent opposite feature: number of windows) Despite my answers to 22 & 23 I find the qlndows on Floors 3 to 6 entirely Inadequate as far as the Stack area is concerned, for they are so small & narrow as to Intensify rather than relieve claustrophobia. On question #8, some areas of the reading rooms have excellent lighting, others (not near the windows could use more. C*l<n why can*t some open? (comment opposite feature: location of the windows) 325 The lighting In reading areas combines with distinctly poor chairs in most carrels and studies to render prolonged study In any one area uncomfortable* fine except Its poorly lighted, esp* for writing while viewing (comment opposite feature: adequacy of the microprint reading room) Library staff comments: more use should be made of natural lighting to Slfl much glass area In many technical services areas on 1st floor bad - they don't open (comment opposite feature: number of windows) Ventilation and Heating Faculty comments: Heat/air cond* in faculty carrels terrible; can't open windows. Zero ventilation* Choose cold- stuffy or hot-stuffy* Comment on 9 & 10, ventilation & heating: Strongly object to non-operable windows, accessi bility of nothing but canned air* Canned air is necessary of course, and It seems to do its job well enough, but I want to be able to open a window every now and again* (If security Is a problem the windows could perfectly well be barred - as with Harvard's Uldener Library*) Heating varies widely with cul-de-sacs barely above freezing (a bit of hyperbole there!) and others where the air rarely If ever changes* (always over heated) Just one criticism related to heating and air conditioning* In summer It may be so cold that one needs a sweater to keep warm, even If It Is quite hot outdoors* In winter It may be hard to keep a small room (such as a faculty study) from overheating, although the larger areas of the building are usually quite comfortable. 326 Student comments: J uestlon 11. The air conditioning is lnsu££lclsnt. hsrs Is an oxygsn shortage on the upper floors. air conditioning Inadequate - suggest higher* velocity air conditioner & use of thermopane windows• I am really very satisfied with the library, except for the excessive heating in the winter and the total lack of ventilation in the spring. The problem is particularly severe in the spring when the rooms are either very cold or so hot ana muggy that I find it impossible to use them. The air-conditioning is efficient, or fairly efficient, when it is turned on. but there is always a period Tn EKe likespring and early summer when the heat is left on, even though temperatures outside are soaring. I find that two of the major problems are (1) the ventilation system which is generally poor (either too cold or too hot) Inadequate before air conditioning is switched on (April ••) The greatest fault is a miserable heating- air conditioning system. The temperature is proper about 20 days a year. Erratic nature of ventilation & heating system especially in spring & fall (i.e. normally too hot!) Building usually too hot (uneven when the building is subject to strong cold winds) (comment opposite feature: heating) sometimes, but by no means always, better than nothing, (comment opposite feature: ventilation) These rooms & departmental studies - because on the west, have ventilation well below average for the building. 327 Air conditioning & boating aro atrocloua - upstairs, In tho snoking rooas, lt*s cold soao winter days, hot & stuffy othors, - during tho summer, wo occasionally havo to opon tho windows to cool off non existent (coaaont opposite foaturo: venti lation) overheated & freeslng periodically terribly hot In spring before air conditioning turned on generally too hot (both winter & summer) I must admit that nothing Is as bad as the venti lation system. Mot uniform throughout building. Also too hot at times. (Ventilation) noisy In places. too stuff file!, too hot, too cold, at various times Olln Library's greatest problem for working comfort is its nesting system. It swelters In winter & frequently In summer too, except when It freeses. The library Is too cold In sueaer and drafty in winter. Heating & cooling systea the chief horror. Air conditioning doesn*t get cool enough The only problem seems to be that the Wason room Is generally too cold. But, perhaps the lower temperature Is maintained to protect thk books. On a hot day the seats by the window can be very stuffy, the air conditioning not counteracting the sun. On a cold day, these chairs are dra fty. g ood In the summer (comment opposite feature: eating) good In the winter (comment opposite feature: ventilation) Often needed sooner In spring (comment opposite feature: ventilation) 328 It Is ixecpt for air-conditioning tha aoit aanalbiy daslgnad and Llvablo building I nave avar known. Library staff ooomsnts: appalling; It Is lnconcalvabla that windows can not ba opanad bacauaa of air conditioning blggast single disadvantage of building (cowmant opposite feature: ventilation) bad, tha air Is stagnant (coosMnt opposite feature: ventilation) Elevators. Stairs, and Entrances Faculty consents: should be a second public entrance at rear Student comments: there should be an exit near east end I’ve never seen an elevator there, but I*ve got no stack-pass anyway (consent opposite feature: location of elevators) should be more than one entrance It Is curious that all other buildings bordering the Arts quad open on to the quad whereas the library's entrance Is on the side. I think the symmetry and general tone of the Quad as literally 4-slded architectural design suffers because of this situation. Entrance at east end • toward Stlmsen would also be convenient. should be another entrance should be an entrance across from Stlmpson Cslcl not enough (comment opposite feature: location of entrance(s)) another entrance/exit on the opposite side of building would facilitate use. • • • too few elevators and only one main entrance 329 Entrance & Stairways at Both Ends of Building Would Hava Baan Mora Convenient Cslfl Although It Is adequate for the flow of people Into the library, there Is only one public entrance to It (I believe), which I regard as a (perhaps not too serious) fault. Building needs more entrances need one more set (comment opposite feature: location of entrance(s)) Location: there Is only one entrance which makes It slightly Inconvenient. Need elevators It more than 1 place (eg. try to get from Wason to 7th floor). need rear entrance limited (comment opposite feature: humber of elevators) not enough entrances should have more (comment opposite feature: location of entrance(s)) But why no entrance at the back? should be one on other end (comment opposite feature: location of entrance(s)) Q 20 & 21— There should be another two elevators at the other end of the stacks. The elevators themselves should have some means of Indicating (both Inside & outside) the floors at which they are currently programmed to stop. need another entrance Need another set of main stairs Needed In different parts of bid (comment opposite feature: location of elevators) All located In one area now there should be a second entrance facing Stlmson Hall should be rear entrance 330 On* *ntr*ne* at tha on* location la oft*n Inconveni ent Rather Inconvenient and fruatratlng to have only 1 entrance. The elevators are alto quite unreliable, being particularly prone to collapae of service. Library staff conmsnts: due to overcrowding (comment opposite feature: traffic patterns) none near rear of building (comment opposite feature: elevators are not conveniently located) Rest Rooms and Drinking Fountains Student consents: The only one I've found on the main floor doesn't work correctly (consent opposite feature: iuffldent number of drinking fountains) Adequate In stacks but not In main area (consent opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooms) very difficult to find (consent opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooms) If you carry books to the rest rooms there's no place to put them but on the floor. Five or six small tables would much improve this. poorly lit (comment opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooms) you have to know where they are (comment opposite feature: sufficient number of drinking fountains) downstairs terrible (comment opposite feature: sufficient number of drinking fountains) No Cslc^l enough & the ones there are well hidden (comminc opposite feature: sufficient number of drinking fountains) should be one on main floor (comment opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooms) 331 Need better fountains bad location (comment opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooms) I'd like better lighting (comment opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooms) very poor on all floors except basement (comment opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooms) Library staff comments: Rest rooms Inconveniently located No separate room Is easily available to rest In (Not everyone smokes!) Drinking fountains often In disrepair or give unpotable water. Esthetics Faculty comments: doesn't fit It EslcI with the rest of the campus This Is a new and well designed library. Our old one was awful It Is a decent mediocre job; excellent In plan; banal In esthetics; fair In siting. Student comments: fits Into arts quad but nothing great on Its own The building Is extremely functional for research In terms of practical needs. But It Is, aesthetic ally, just another box In which people, albeit a headier bunch than usual, are kept. Shouldn't architecture be an expression of the total life experience of a culture, not just Its practicality? But maybe the archetypal box is an expression of the American total lire experience. If so, the environmental depression one sometimes feels In the library may nave origins elsewhere than the idea of "academic", or as a friend of mine once described the library "the temple of the Intellect". 332 But then the academic community la only a victim of Its culture* & that Isn't a pleasant thought. the look of the building ruins the arts quad The building Is on the campus Arts quad, «ihlch Is composed of a number of 19th cent, buildings, tha newest built In 1897. The architect made an attempt to Integrate the building Into this milieu, and simultaneously avoid dwarfing the Library Tower, the Campus landmark. His attempt was reasonably successful* though by no means excellent. Architecturally It lacks punch. It Is a blah! achievement. Too concerned with just meeting the fundamentals of function. Architectural details - purely aesthetic - not as successful as functional aspect - but at least not Irritating. The design Is sort of nothing - It Isn't patently offensive but It ddesn't really fit in. The architecture Is undistinguished - poor architect - too bad - The exterior Is undistinguished. Design Is excellent - carrying the "Quad" motif Into a modern structure. It Is still a very cold and heartless building that lacks In Inspirational excitement and lacks rooms where music could be heard while studying. That* I think* should be very essential feature of any library, fblcl The aesthetics of the Interior might be Improved. For example, carpeting, such as Is In Urls, might be added to the main reading room. This would be a most welcome esthetics Improvement. Maybe, It could be even added to smaller study rooms as well. A really beautiful library In which It Is very pleasant to work. Design: The building Is quite attractive but does not aulte fit In with the design of the other buildings on the quad. 333 atmosphere too antiseptic alove the first floor exterior blends in nicely with arts quad a very beautiful building the first floor (main floor) Is really something nice I like the atmosphere Nothing very original in building but superior to most older designs & par for work contemporary. needs more color In whole bid inside and out, a la Nlemeyer In Brasil. U of Mexico, and Hausavlertel In West Berlin It Is a pleasure to look at the building and it*s also a real pleasure to work In It. The architecture & Interior design of Olln are really conducive to studying. ... In all, I think Olln library should serve as a model In library architecture. In addition, placing sculpture In the library adds to the pleasure & stimulation of studying here. Perhaps a few more works could be added. Stands out on arts quad like sore thumb - color & texture conflict with the "atmosphere" of the other buildings on the quad. Too much ugly green paint and cheap linoleum Lack of rugs, soft chairs, etc. & a general lack of warmth - emphasis on study space. May 1 recommend a look at the new wells College Library, which tho lacking In some respects, allows for the Individual. Why no carpets: The lounge on 2nd floor should have one at all events. Library staff comments: Colours depressing; far more attention should be paid to colour psychology The general design Is boxy and sterile 334 Mlmllintom Faculty comments: The bast sits for the central library on the Cornell campus would have been the location of the former President•■ house (now the White Art-Museum); this was blocked, At the time funds were available, by the then President (B.E. Day). The present site Is good for the Arts-College campus but not for the upper (Agriculture) campus. The building Itself Is unbeautltul from the outside (the students call It "the IBM-card"), but on the whole quite good on the Inside. I do not smoke, nor lounge around while working In the library, so have no opinions on nos. 13, 14; similarly for Items 24 and 25. There are no areas for the scholarly Investigation viewing, and frame by frame analysis of the motion picture. Film reading equipment Is often not available - particularly at term paper time. The overall film collection Is very useful, compounding the difficulties. All told this Is a good library, & well planned. I am, by the way, a heavy user. Perhaps my experience with the former library building makes me rate this one so high, but I think not. It Is an extraordinarily well-dbne building, and spacious. This Is a magnificent library building. I have worked for extended periods In numerous leading eastern University libraries, as well as on many occasions In the British Museum and the London Library. Provided the needed material were available, I would prefer the Olln Library to any other with which I am familiar; the collections are excellent, but naturally do have to be imple mented from time to time as far as my work is concerned. I find myself, therefore, making occasional trips to check on material not available here, but returning here by choice as the Ideal place In which to do the major part of my Independent studying and In which to organise my material Into final form once I have put together all needed data. From my point of view there is 33S only one drawback: much matetlal naadad by ma la In a departmental library In anothar building whara facilities ara far lnfarlor. 1 just, thara- fora, taka out matarlal from tha dapartnantal library In consldarabla quantItlas and transport It a consldarabla distance tha Cildl my faculty study In tha Olln Library* Tha Olln Library faculty studies ara especially attractive and wall equipped; as ona of these Is regularly available to ma, I naturally have an advantage over students— however, I should consider that student facilities too ara excellent by regular library standards* We«ve got a spectacular library - it's that simple* Student comments: Why was a sun-deck put on tha north side whara the sun rarely shines - especially during tha normal (sept-May) school year? It does serve for mass rallies. Building Is excellent for work & study - 1st rata in relation & Its use & function* (Personal note - I am particularly Impressed by fact that graduate carrels have windows) need more machines & keep them In good repair (comment opposite feature: adequacy of micro print reading room) Ease of location of books: Wldner rslcl Library puts overslse books on bottom or end shalves of the same row where regular-else books are shelved* This eliminates the need for looking In three different locations (tt; t; regular) for books on a similar subject. Most of us develop a famili arity with the stacks & go directly to a subject area (e.g. F/118-F/129 for MY local histories) without checking catalog for exact call number. Shelving books in accordance with Wldner'• rslcH? system would make this easier & at same time conserve shelf space. Also, books in 1st floor reference department are extremely difficult to locate. The chairs are mlsereble - & make a dreadful noise when turned 336 Chairs In periodical room should be clustered, not lined up back to windows. Should face windows (no Informal arrangements) Probably should have chairs In the main lobby with backs. Maybe an area for young children so grad students can leave them for a few minutes while getting books. I have found the facilities excellent and conducive to study Xerox service location very poor. The one room Is lnacessible from all floors. There should be several units throughout building, or else a centrally located service (with better and cheaper facilities.) ...the locating of books made both difficult (If not Impossible at times) and convenient (a paradox!) due to the carrell falc7system. No coffee room. Great deficiency, particularly during winter Location of all card catalogs on first floor when doing extensive research and other sources are found for which call numbers are needed. No services except on main floor means having to return to main desk for Inquiries, etc. Perhaps an Intercom system would help. Placing books In various rooms with no notices In the normal location makes finding books difficult. There are only two tables on each floor (in the heavy traffic area) for non-carrel owners and there are no pull-out shelves on which to place books as you find them. I find Olln Library better than any other large library I have ever used, compared to the U. of Mich, for x. Non-smoker, never noticed availability Overcrowded with machines too close to the stacks Often difficult to find a vacant machine. (comment opposite feature: adequacy of the micro print reading room) It’s a good building - I don’t care about elevators & smoking rooms one way or the other. 33* Taking all the libraries together, rather than just this one would change some of the answers, i.e., location, variety, etc. Needs more cosy lounge areas - how about equip ping one with vending machines so you don't nave to make a big project out of a coffee break. Typing rooms too frequently filled with library personnel. no telephones for campus use. no comfortable chairs to read in None - It would be great to have a student lounge (comment opposite feature: availability of areas, such as small rooms, where students may talk and study together) The library building does not interfere with Its major functions. I think It Is a great library! Not enough parking near library for night time convenience. Book arrangement on shelves on each floor confusing Xerox service Is almost Inacesslble. A better location for the building would have been almost Impossible to find. Library staff comments: Lons open rooms are not conducive to efficient work; semi-privacy achieved by partitioning would be better, because the Co-and-fro movement Is distracting. Room Is too crowded for flies we need access to, and adequate shelf space for books In process, to be located near where we sit. The present space Is greatly overcrowded, thus many of the good features of the plan were negated because of the present conditions. Ho lockers for personal belongings such as coats, boots, umbrellas, etc. No office space Is provided other than a crowded workroom - for non department heads. 338 Space assigned Co technical services will probably not permit the reorganisation of technical services from four to five departments without considerable expenditure of fund for rearrangement* pneumatic tubes & light systems should be in middle of floor* Would be more conlenlent fslcl. Circulation dept, is a bit small & not particularly well arranged. Also - telephones needed for library patrons to use* telephones poorly placed JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY Study Spaces and Freedom from Noise Faculty comments: But talking or typing in an adjacent study is bothersome (comment opposite feature: freedom from noise) Student comments: Graduate reserve room is already over-crowded & not well-ventilated. Talking at the desk is often too loud. But, generally the service is very good. why aren*t there carrels— i.e. small, 3 sides enclosed private study areas instead of thfcs public, very inconvenient shelf with chairs? Reading areas at end of each floor too cramped Carrells f»lc1 should have been of the kind irfilch are placed one in front of the other rather than alongside each other, which is more conducive to talking and distractions than it is to studying. Area for studying in the lower levels is very constricted and unimaginative. With a *closed* visual space. 339 Position of carrols vis-a-vis telephones, stair ways & slavators - vary vary bad. Should Hava tha rows of carrals away trow wain entrances* Saa plan balowt It is axtraawly inconvaniant to hava carrals back-to-baick, vis 2 rows together, as at cantral portion whara alavators ara* Idaal situation - as at North and of library (on B laval) axcapt for fact that stairs + phona opan onto study araa* Hava a room on aach floor whara paopla can rap fraa of paranoia Tha M*E. Library, as most othar univarsity llbrarlss, crlas for tha lack of two facilities— (1) a lounge araa whara students can gather Informally but Intimately— by this I mean an araa whara smoking and talking ara permitted, but whara tha seating provides soma alternative to tha voyeuristic and stooge-like arrangement of tha "Great Hall", more importantly (2) an araa where students who ara working together may consult ona another without disturbing those who ara reading privately* Carrals ware obviously not designed with a large parson in mind* Tha most unfavorable aspect of this library is tha lack of areas, such as small rooms, whara students may study. Tha seminar rooms used to be vary good for this purpose* However, most of these hava bean converted to othar uses (l*a* periodical room, & offices). Tha two or three remaining rooms ara frequently used for classes* Tha lack of areas whara talk is allowed is tha library*s greatest weakness* Thera should be more than ona lounge/study araa par floor to eliminate frequent long walks to stacks at the othar and of tha floor. Mora small rooms should be available for ssuill jsroups^of students* Tha typing rooms shouldn't Freedom from noise & 15-avail* cf discussion rooms is fslcl tha only short-costing of tha library, but these ara hardly beyond coping with* 340 15 needs great improvement (comment opposite feature: availability of areas, such as small rooms, where students may talk and study together) Carrells Z*lc"7 should be made available for all the enrolled students, undergraduate as well as graduate. The arrangement of the carrels is terrible- very noisy, no privacy. The working areas for graduate students are Inadequate. The desks are too small and being placed In rows there Is a constant noise from people walking up & down, talking to each other etc. Desks should not have noisy metal lockers. It would be much quieter If the main walkways In the library were carpeted. Need Many small & large study spaces in every where r sic 7 The number of carrels available to the whole grad, school Is woefully Inadequate. Non-degree & part-time grad, students never have a chance for one because limited nos. restrict usage to degree candidates. The carrels are much too crowded so as to make them too noisy too f ic“1 study In. I feel that more adequate study carrels should be made available. When two people from one humanities department share the same carrel, con flicts In scheduling constantly occur. Also In open carrels noise and distractions become significant factors. Working In corridors Is not conducive to any sort of scholarship— and this Is what the carrels are. smaller rooms— with doors which close & so shut out Intra-level noise are desirable. should be easily accessible places for TALK I like It, except for places for students to discuss & possibly be social. There Is to fslcTI much noise of people moving up and down the halls. People's talk distracts attention 341 I’d like to have carpeting in tha reading rooms to reduce noise and make the floors warmer in winter. The xerox room next to the magazine section sometimes makes too much noise for people who are trying to read or study. Carpets in main aisles would cut down noise a lot! The rows of carrells fslc7 could be staggered — not all the way across the Library. Please do something to noise-proof the phone booths--on levels A-B-C, & D Unquestionably too noisy and cold. The study areas are too crowded— difficult to be by your self if you dislike carrels. Carpeting necessary — at least in the lounge areas at the ends And in the corridors to keep down the noise. There should be more side rooms as in (13) Not only for groups, but also for singles who want extra quiet. More corners, etc. should be utilized to give a quiet area, & more solitary carrels should be put in Library is uniformly noisy and acoustics are conducive to echoing of the slightest sound. Carts rattle and high heels click. Why not put in some cheap rugs, drapes, tapestries, acoustic tile etc. like every library in the world seems to have except this one. A few carpeted areas might help Noise is the worst problem of this library— both students & stackers, walking & talking noises. Typing rooms not sufficiently soundproofed, but well placed away from bulk of study space.— Microprint room— again noise is the object. The noise factor, especially near the elevators, is the worst. More effort should be made to limit talking in the carrells fslc’ 7 & reading rooms; more study space should be provided for undergraduates so tnat they are not forced! to sit in graduate carrells fslc7 & study; graduate students, should have enclosed carrells fslcl to cut noise level 342 fro* othir itudinta & give nor* privacy for studying--Having ail' desk* in a row cuts afficiancy of individual desks 6 is worst possible arrangement. the noise level is intolerable— the floor should have been covered with soft rubber-type tiles— or at least the wain aisles in the carrel areas — typing rooms should be soundproofed as well as offices with typewriters— TOO MUCH MDX8B Fenestration and Llehtlne Faculty consents: Low rating for Mo. 21 (no. of windows) is due to the fact that, for special reasons, stacks are almost entirely subterranean. Under the circum stances, one can hardly expect there to be nor* windows, but one does miss them. Student comments: somewhat improved since opening (comment opposite feature: lighting in the reading areas) what?! f4r being burled, yes, windows are extraordinary at end of building LightInc in the reading areas in the lowest levels is poor and causes eye strain. Noting items 22 & 23: although I find the number of windows quite adequate, many persons to whom I have talked find the relative lack of windows confining. Should be Incandescent (comment opposite feature: lighting in the reading areas) Wasted space on Main level and extremely poor lighting. The limits buss badly The lighting is not only poor-vislbly, it also "buss-ss-ea" so loudly it is difficult to concentrate lighting is uncomfortable & inadequate 343 I like windows chat can be opened And I like to study near such windows The table leaps only throw light on a saall area of the table the actually reading grea lies in thsir penuabra tSs "lights on the wall on the aaln floor reading area are useless The lighting of the carrells rsicl is pretty good Lighting— I realise floresent rsic7 lights are not as expensive as other types out they are noisier also. Usually careful aalntenance can take care of this but there are aany bussing lights In the library that distract one's concentration. The limiting at the South end of each level could be better (lounge area). Soae of the leaps do not work or the outlets are not secure enough. The lighting in aany study areas (e.g.carrels* graduate reserve rooa) aafce a loud bussing sound which is disturbing and decreases ay ability to concantrate. Whenever I had the choice 1 find spot relatively free fron the noise, but such spots are definitely a alnority Lslcf. This, to oia. is the worst feature of the library. Tha lights hua Library staff consents: White walls end fluorescent lighting are not conducive to working for long periods of tlae. It is extreaely hard on the eyes. Lack of Windows lessens the feeling of space and gives one the lapresslon of being boxed in. Inadequate lighting (coaaent opposite feature: the staff lounge is inadequate; not having windows bothers as. not only din. but very noisy - bussing lights Adequate here for us— but (coaaent opposite feature: lighting) In general, there are continual coaplalnts froa library patrons about Inadequate lighting for study purposes. 344 Vf nt^ltl9n Jttd-Hg?£lni Faculty coaaents: wall air Conditioned adequate, but aenewhat difficult to control (coaaent oppoalte feature: heating) aooe of the atudlea get too warn Student coanenta: too hot on cold daya; too cold on hot daya aoaevhat variable In parte of building or with correapondence to external - aooe tinea to f*»lc7 warn. aonetlmea noley (coaaent oppoalte feature: ventilation) we freeae In 1-A, and In grad reaerva too cold (connent oppoalte feature: ventilation) at tinea, cold (connent oppoalte feature: ventilation) The ventilation ayatea la very effective but can be too noiay. 10 • needs great Improvement (connent oppoalte feature: heating) Haat In Messanlne reading level la terrible. Ventilation la generally poor and air conditioning and heating la poorly coordinated with outside temperature. Why la It that level B la often cold enough for neat storage? Better open air ventilation would be good Mo ventilation In rest roons at all— plaaae renedy Library often nuch too cold, auaawr and winter 343 I rated air-conditioning & heating poor becauae It la always elth falcTao "hot" you can*t study or so "cold" --(In susser) you freese! The circulation for air should be wore efficient; It gets stale In the study-rooas Heating Is poor *00x 100 sose levels (^sections on levels; It is too cold & others too were It*s too hot usually except on Main & lt*s too noisy there Too cold In suener Ventilation In typing room not good The air conditioning Is abonlnably noisy & the building Is alnost Invariably too cold and always too danp. The heating Is atrocious - sons areas are cold all year round— others are husld & warm. The air conditioning usually forces one to keep more clothes In the library than 1 do at horn during the staner. The lower levels don't get their share of fresh air! too cold— especially In reading areas Library staff consents: absolutely wretched; after 4 yrs the systen Is still not functioning properly. Bxtrenely draughty and very cold. Inadequate (consent opposite feature: heating) Elevators. Stairs, and Intrancea Student consents: Should be sore lslited fslc"7 fros study areas only two, East-west, restricted entrance (consent opposite feature: location of the entrance(s)) 346 if you know vhtn they oil «n (consent opposite foaturo: location of the antranca(s)) Not enough elevators. The library needs a central area staircase to carry the nain body of traffic up and down— there is a constant danger of being hit by the doors opening without warning in the Eisenhower staircases. the back elevators should be usable nore of the tins Library staff connents: etalrs up to staff lounee are locked & one uust have a key to use the elevator Rest Rooua and Drlnkina Fountains Faculty connents: Stinky. Need better exhaust fans! (connent opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooes) Student coanents: Rest rooos always seen to be crowded during day: should be nore of then. Library staff connects: not enough coanodes and urinals in own's rooa. Esthetics Student connents: Exterior and Main Entrance Hall very nice; Renalnder Awful The exterior design of this building is unlnaglna- tlve & uninviting— The lower levels are oppressive & stuffy. & overcrowded. The aaln lobby is noisy & has all the ataosphere of a train station. 347 As long m It departs significantly fro* tha paeudo-georgian architecture of the quadrangle, it could have been sure interestingly dona. Fairly drab on the whole. Interior accoaodatlons rilc / sparse and generally oppressive. The building itself is ugly. This is unfortunate but true— It has very little character* and the design has no inspiration whatever. Yes* it functions— Thers are shelves for books and plenty of drinking fountains, and the library staff does a fairly good Job, but the architecture is bland and insipid, as dull as the "scholarship" which ? oes on within its walls. How can people live nsplred lives in uninspired surroundings? Let us out*do the Greeks, in thought and beautiful architecture. This archltecturs is slow and heavy, not light and daring. Also, there is no place for the display of art & exhibitions, except upstairs, where it is not immediately accessible and where a guard is needed. I think architectural design & overell lay out Is beautiful. Aesthetically its Cblc" t a great place, with beauty in its useful purposes. The library in general is of extremely poor design. • .there seemingly was little or no consideration of the human users. •• students and faculty...husuin beings.• .it in fact is nore on the order of a eultl-level parking garage or warehouse...a warehouse for books, a mausoleum for people. Ksthetlcally,. the closest building whlcn I can conpare to it is the Luftgau in Berlin.••the W.U.II headquarters of the Nasi Luftwaffe.•.a brilliant example of mld-30*s gemaneeque architecture. outside is Just a big shoe box like the plants & such stuff (comment opposite feature: esthetics of the interior) Inside really well done, not too fancy but modern neat & clean rilcl S aeudo-Georgian Mies van de Rohe (comment opposite nature: architectural design of the library building) big & little boxes (coment opposite 348 fMtura: interior arrangement of library building) Sterile. institutional broun 4 beige & linoleum, why not carpeting? Upholstery not that cheap cold & uncomfortable plaetic rale"? — letherette [sic J and stiff furniture— witnanu that keep you too far from tables* Exterior design is sterile 4 unlaaglnatlve* Interior work areas 4 stacks— too Metallic 4 cold— nothing vans* looking or sound absorbing* The Elsenhower Library is wore attractive than most university libraries, it is slaply because it is still new and fairly dean* It was not designed by people who alanet live in libraries as I do* Just a little imagination would have done wonders on the Interior design* It*s an architectural abortion, growing as it does out of Hopkins* committment to the neo- Georglen! Carpeting of center aisles would help the noise problem considerably and would be practical as is the upkeep on tile* I like exterior appearance I like patio and windows on one end* Would like nore, though* Sterile atmosphere more fitting for the efficient operation of a machine than the relaxed study of a student* Carpeted floors would improve the esthetic environment as well as decrease the noise due to traffic* The combination of Georgian 4 modem in the exterior design is just horrendous. It to my mind looks neo-fascist* Any thing would be better. The overall building is too sterile— A warmer atmosphere would make studying less neurotic- put color on the walla The site of Eisenhower Library is very unfortunate* Putting it at the end of the Gilman Quadrangle automatically required that most of it would have to be built underground so as not to overpower the other buildings* The library should nave been built south of Levering where it could 349 h m been alaoit entirely above ground and the new administration building put on tho Cllnan Quad. Tha floor plan la As Bad As Posslbla. Looks Ilka a hone town 11 braryln klckcouSilSA tha nolsa is atrocious, fslcH Mo plsaa to talk without disturbing soaeone. Study carrals ara atupldly designed and look Ilka feeding bins for horses. Tha audio rooa la also a disaster. Tha tables shake when tha slightest pressure is put on than Jarring tha turntable and obviously destroying the records. Xt*s stupid to put so aany turntables on ona long table. Too crowded. Too much nolsa In that rooa. On and on. Tha architect who designed that building did so with no Idea of how a library la used and with no concern for the aesthetic responee of the people who use It. Library staff consents: cold ataosphere Miscellaneous Faculty coaaenta: an excellent modern library facility 1 like low ceilings Elsewhere, I've had extensive experience with the aain libraries at Vanderbilt Univ. (Joint Univ. Lib.) and the U. of Wisconsin (Madison). I'd rate then for my satisfaction as 1. Elsenhower 2. J.U.L. 3. Wis. (a poor third, despite Its large collection of books 6 journals) The librarian at Elsenhower Is excellent, as was the one at J.U.L. 16 years ago (itunlaaim). Wisconsin seaaed poorly aaneged and, of course, vastly overcrowded. (I left there In 1965) Student coaaents: Too Low (coaaent opposite feature: celling heights) 350 too little known and secretive on workings (consent opposite feature: ease of locating library services or departnents) I think the library is very well done* The noise is due to loud-southed students, soaethlng unfortun ately uncontrollable* Of course this is a Judg- nent relative to past experience but I prefer the Elsenhower Library to anvthlna in Bslto* or Hash* Generally, I an happy with library* The building is generally well situated, but it lacks scale when viewed froa the outside* Typing rooas should be restricted in use to typing only, not all day-night refuge for library "inhabitants”* Record listening rooa is a real asset too ouch clutter in the original floor plan over the course of tine— taking over of sealnar rooas for Centers of journals or reading areas for library adninlstration. Obviously, what is needed la an extension of the library Under Keyser quad! And soon! Too dean snail (cosawnt opposite feature: Interior arrangenent of library building) Set up a roon with a full assortaent of food & cigarette nachlnes Underground stacks a good idea* The lower level ceilings should be finished* the library is dysfunctional in presentation of ■atarials. Lobby is too loud for regular reading use* Try carnation the floor to ease up on noise of feet clopplng on the tile* Additional typing facilities & typewriters are desperately needed* Rugs are desperately needed. Too ouch noise* I frequently use the library, which offers good things to be said about it, such as good location, 351 spacious & Interesting floor plan on tha first floor & cooperative personnel. However, dis advantages Include fairly poor lighting in the reading rooas (though carrels ere very well lit), and noise, due to noisy hallways 6 talking both in carrels & reading rooas. The latter problea could partially be alleviated by providing soae area for socialising on each floor. Natural light is at a ainiaiai, thus creating an oppressive, unnatural ataosphere. I wonder if an underground library is worth it, it seeas that auch good lighting & interesting architectural variations have been sacrificed to the desire to prevent the height of ths library froa overwhelalng the rest of the caapus buildings. Most of the floors in the library look exactly alike— lapcrsonal & aonotonous. 1'a afraid the library reflects the idee that a university should he a brain factory rather than a place of individual learn ing & experience. It needs saall reeding areas and no re windows. Perhaps carpeting in the halls and reading areas would help the noise problea and give the building a warmer ataosphere. I rated location of library poor because I feel the view of Gllaan froa Charles should have been preserved in its original state! insufficient nuaber of clocks— should be located at ends of halls where they can be seen froa a distance..• In general this is still the finest library I've been in and an very thankful for it. Because of poor planning, reading areas in this new (1965) library are being taken over for offices, reserve rooa expansion etc. Crowded. Overheated in Vinter. A tendency to let building aelntenance slide, so there ere problsas like squeaking air conditioning aachlnery, bussing fluorescent lights (but this is laprovlng). Because of overcrowding, conversation of saployees and students is very annoying. Provide no saoking areas on each floor (aaybe all of one side of building) 352 to foie*7 for frosi parking lot (coanne oppoaita faatura: location of tha library building) Library staff cooaanta: should hava a privata cloak rooa ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY Study Snacaa and FYaadoa froa Nolaa Student coaaents: Need seal-sound proof "boxes" or enclosed indi vidual study desks— it's plenty noisy in there unless you go up to level 5 in a far comer & even then it is still soswwhat noisy* Not enough conference rooas Catch too auch nolsa froa aall on upper floors Like open stacks In ay opinion the Hayden Library is not designed for concentrated study. The only place a student who wishes to study and not be disturbed is to go in the Quiet Study rooas. However these rooas are not properly designed. Desks are too close together for studylg fslcl I think the Library should add snail rooas for individual study such as the Phoenix Public Library and the Mesa Public Library's rslcl have. The library should Include a greater # of rentable booths or desk area, such as would be necessary for grad, students or act fslc7 I have felt* along with a nuaber of other graduate students, that Hayden Library is not a good place for studying. The reason for this is hard to define, but with all Its carpeting and ultra aoderalty, soaethlng is wrong. I believe there should be sub-divisions for graduate and under- R aduate students. The talking of the latter notorious• 3rd floor has a large open area Just above the second & noise tends to carry up through the open area. 353 More dtaki should bo arranged so as to glvo •tudont a fooling of solitude, no dlatractions froai othora' mov— ants. Posaiblo a few aore ouch rooas aro nocoasary (coimont opposite feature: availability of areas, such as saall rooas, where stridents aay talk and study together) There is to Pale"? ouch noise on the open parts of each floor It is a good, quiet place to retreat to & get things done! in the quiet study areas only! Its Pale"7 Impossible everywhere else, (coaaent opposite feature: freedoa froa noise) Need to make library better place to study; quieter, wamer.etc 3rd level too noisy due to open area in center which let's fslcl 2nd level noise filter up. I think there should be one conplete floor set aside for Just studying. It should be carpeted with no books, mag., machines, etc. The library is a very pleasant place to study in, both aesthetically and convenience-wise. There is a deperate need for aore study carols /sic*7 for grad, students (esp. those without offices). 1 especially like the individualised study area's /sic7 (desks with dividers) as they ellainate many distractions. On level 3 in the individual study booths, noise is a problea. Carpeting lnsteed of tile would cut down on foot noise and have sound absorbing qualities. There is also a lot of noise produced by library personnel putting books on the shelves. Perhaps another type of shelves could be used which would not clang and bang so auch. The ealsslon of sound (noise) froa the aaul r a id . aaln entrance, on 3rd, 4th and 5th levels is distracting 334 Thin should bt available spaca for students to study that isn't surrounded by the noise of people getting & returning books, coning in and out of different areas (a little nore carpet would help this), and other various noises that continually hooper a student in his study endeavors in this library non. Poor insulation between atudy rooas-aounds pass easily between coons. on west side all noise from nail cones through For reasons unknown sounds fron the ground level seen to be amplified (by the over-hanging roof possibly - so that even snail sounds can bs heard fron the peripheral study areas. People who use quite rsi^ study roons need quiet because anything could disturb his con centration another person entering a qulet-study room disturbs the people studying. fslc3 Maybe individual study booths would be better. The stSady drone of ventilation ducts, nachlnsry, or whatever it is gives ns headaches. Library staff consents: Connent: Being a student, 1 know for a fact, that this library lacks nost all Ciltfl study araas where one can study without hearing about the daily functions or duties of the library staff nenber. Fenestration and Llahtlna Student consents: Because of our Arlsona heat perhaps our library's lack of windows is architecturally sound, but to as, windows, stained or plain, helps fslcl aake a aore restfull [tie} and enjoyable reading ataosphere, i.e. U of Dublin (Ireland) library Thoes ralcJ daaa relc'7 flours scent lights are the world worse I filcj especally raid in open reading areas. Generally I an well satisfied with the library, however, I feel its aaln drawback is its lakk of windows & window area. It produces a synthetic ataosphere which isn't always desirable or conducive 335 of auattn & prolonged study. for soon, glare Is s problea (coaaent opposite feature: lighting in the reeding area) The lack of windows on the Upper floors is disheartening. One could alt there and not even know that it la dark outaids. The design of the building ia great except it needs aore windows for the people who like to dey-dreaa. Need aore windows Lighting tends to be "too artificial■ or for soae reason seeas very cold & often tiring on eyes. could be nore (connent opposite feature: nuaber of windows) It's probably tco expensive, but how about desk lights built'into the wooden study desks on each of the floors? There definitely should be nore windows on the 3rd, 4th & Swh levels. Ventilation and Heatlns Student coaments: Cold cround doors & windows Hasting insufficient on level 4, SV corner too cold! It is either too cool or too hot in the library. The building teap. is too cold It's usually too cold, asp. In suaaer Heating is sort than fine, it is too hot. Psych studies show that aore and better work can be done in cooler tenpsT" 336 Building often becows, particularly in wanar uaathar, too cool for sitting very long, which anyone studying will be doing. Elevators. Stairs, end Entrances Faculty coasMnts: enough, but it takes a long tisa to set one (cowant opposite feature: masher of elevators) Need nore entrances! There should be other entrances & exits Student co wants: As to entrances-*you have to walk all the way around the building, then halfway back (it seew) on the porch to find the doors— except fron 40 feet straight ahead coning fron the chapel* elevators are slow operating slOw-slow-slow (connent opposite feature: location of elevators) Only one aaln door— need nore there is only one set of doors for entering and exiting because of checkout procedure* Entrance is strictly by Hast doors, which are handy to the student on the nail, but not fron any other approach* Should have easer relc7 entraces CiisO & exits There should be one nore exit at the opposite end of the Library* A back entrance is needed* Often its r»lc1 cold or youvre in a hurry and it takes a long cine to get all the way around* Should be aore entrances* Should have a bakk entrance for availability 357 Main entrance hat a good location, but entrance fron old MU or circulation froa old MU to entrance it poor* I feel there should be one or two aore entrances* rather than Just the aain one! Our library is beautiful & aodern* The biggest problea is only one entrance facing the aeln nail. another entrance would help The entrance to the library is in a good location except there should be another entrance on the other side of building* The llbrery only has entrances in the front of the building* I feel one is needed at the back. Otherwise library is excellent for its else and nunber of books* It's too hard to get into & out of! The lower level entrance is always locked to entrance & egress* Open stairways & aore of thea «ould laprove the "slotted" feeling one gets in being trepped in the elevator bank* Need at least one aore entrance/exit at opposite side. There are not enough entrances. The aout flie7 is ridiculous* I wish there were better established roads & entrances to the library* I feel the one side entrenoe is poor. There should be aore entrances rather than one aain one. It should be easier to find your wey eround. There are too slow & not programed correctly elevators* There should be aore than one entrance why not one on the 1st floor? In addition to the entrance there should be another door to go into the library* Maybe there should be a door in the rear of the 358 building (Bn«C Side) or on tho South Sido; hwum , Im v i tho ono exit where it is. (Maybe!) Thoro oro enough elevators, but thoy operate to rile"! slowly. Naad entrances on other aidea If there can only be entrances on one side, then I would rate I, but, I believe an east entrance would be nice also. entrance is moat inconvenient because there la only one end building la so large— inconvenient if approaching library froa all angles. Have an east entrance, so don't have to walk all the way around building. half-asa ayaten for leaving the building More entrances are needed. Sunken 1st level deaterted falc*7 Mo inlet or outlet to structure. At least let than gat out down there. More than 1 entrance would be preferred, the additional one on the opposite aide of the build ing. Where library la located in the middle of canons, it would be better to have entrances fron botn aides. The Moat surrounding the library's exterior should be converted in £slC£P aonething, like a cafe, instead of a waste of apace. More doors or entrances on dlffeeent aides of buildings. Except for only one entrance to the building, I find Hayden one of the noat beautiful, purposeful libraries I have cone in contact with. My conpllnents! the entrance is bad & there should be another bridge across the noat near the SS building & another door opposite the existing entrance. Other-wise it's a groovey place. 359 R*»t Roo— and Prinking fomtilm Student commsnts: The filcl should heve restrooms on the main level* shouldn't have to welk so far on 1st floor to get to bathroom. Should be one on first floor* Best room & fountain are only on 1 side of building. I feel that the restrooma are too small and that the lighting in then is harsh and glaring. Library staff comments: Not enough toilets on this level - Or sinks (books are dirty!) coat closet near back door, which no one is allowed to use too snail on working floor (cowent opposite feature: rest rooms are Inadequate) Bsthetics Faculty cowants: Beautiful! if only it were as functional! The Library is new, attractive (to se) esthetically both as to interior and anterior design. It seens to be well arranged to provide tor the various functions it serves with adequate and varied study spaces and convenient placement of catalogues, Indexes, periodicals, volumes and special services* Vandalism seems to be a bigger problem than it should be (Belated to architecture?) Student comments: The overall design is excellent— however the con fused and hodgepodge arrangement of materials makes it an all day project running from floor to floor to look up one topic* The library is excellent in all aspects except esthetics. 1 feel a need for more artlct rslcl J ualities. There is a need for more paintings, ravings and other works. 360 This library it visually vary pleasing to n. Tha lonar level malls could ba a havan for study areas in tnesnaded outdoors, but thay arc usad as nothing but passageways by a United number of people. Thay aarva no purpose, aora tha pity (with such potential). It la a baautlful library and I think that con* sldaring our Campus's growth It la doing its bast to kaap up with ust I lova tha architactura Rafraahing daalgn wall auitad to tha anvironaant, cllaata I faal tha Haydan Library la an outstanding building I think tha architactural daalgn la highly recommended, I think tha Haydan Library la ona of tho aost baautlful buildings I have avar scan. great library, new, pretty, coafortabla, clean tha design is vary good. It looks baautlful at night from tha outside! I think tha architactural daalgn of tha Haydan Library ia vary good-only I can never find tha specific book I want froai tha card catalogue, Architactura and asthetlcs r a le * ? la ralcl good, so la study area. Hot only ia it an ugly building, but it la out of place on tha campus, I Ilka tha building asthatlcally vary much. Interest canters might ba placed in tha main floor area— tha area la rather sterile as it la now, Tha outside appearance la good & in particular I Ilka tha windows on tha 2nd floor & faal there should ba aora like it rale7 • So I would Ilka to see more windows. 361 Thtn should bs more buildings on cssipus that are designed as Haydan Library. Tha daslgn of tho overall library is prstty good* 1 think Haydan Library is a cradlt to Arlsona Stata University— Tha building is of good daslgn and you should try to usa tha swat spaca to nora of an advantaga I Ilka tha ralatlonshlp batwaan tha library and tha nail* Largar windows on that slda would add to tha quality of tha anvlronmnt. Tha penetra- tlon of tha lobby spaca Into tha laval above Is a stop in tha right diractIon*-it helps to unify and relate tha spaces* Consider Haydan a superior building & facility -in coaparlson with U of Missouri, U of Missouri at KC, U of Kansas, U of Colorado, U of Colorado Stata Tha architactural daslgn seens to ba that of a fortress with a aaat around it* Tha building seems sat off from tha students and doesn’t reach out to them as it should* Tha exterior daslgn of tha library would ba fitting for an insurance office; tha lines are too busy and complex for a library* Stuco used in basic monolltic fsicl form Ilka Gonsalss * Scottsdale Library is Ideal* ASU*s interior should ba more constant fsicj Tha entry is a good example ef too many form in a single view, while on other levels the architects could only think of plastic covered walls and carpet* Tha Haydan Library is an example of today*s confused archi tecture; lacking a strong massage, and using an unnecessarily wide range of materials* I really Ilka tha Library hare* It is a baautlful building* Com and visit it sometlsw* Miscellaneous Faculty comments: I believe that in many areas we do not make tha bast possible usa of our space* Also, special 362 artu, such as reserve books saccion is hardly sufficient— that la, for handling traffic and checkouts— Mot a functional library for all discipline areas* It Is a better looking building at nlant than In daylight* I think there Is too much space poorly utilised at a terrible cost* Would prefer a closed-atack library to facilitate locating Materials* I am disturbed by the massive waste represented by the design of Hayden Library* Student comments: Architects should plan for relative space per topic— like or related topics together* kef* erence Room central 1st floor— and plan for tlma. space, movement--not Just pretty Almost Impossible to find anything— for dumb people like me! The library Is too complicated & can*t find anything. You have to search the whole floor to find a clock. They are rarely In Immediate vision* It Is very well organised In"idealn A In layout but personal 1 rslca Is needed to keep books where they belong— Typing rooms should be more numerous. The architectural design of Hayden Library Is In the form of a rslcT Island, Isolating people from It. A library should not be Isolated from the public but be able to mingle with the public* Good basic, functional structure, poorly admini strated rale7 and less than adequately supported* The moat around the library Is really redlculous r * i c j . no sense of security* It wanders forever* It Is either too tight or too loose* 363 I think they should havs a lalsura reading room with pipad in auslc. Thara oust ba a siaplar syste* of locating matarials in a larga library. In our library it ganarally takaa an hour to rind an articla that takas tan ain. to raad. With new 6 fancy build ings tha arrangaaant saaas to bacoaa aora coapli- cata fsicl and confusing tharafora discusting fticj. Ona big problaa is locating books. It saaa rsic7 as though books and shelves are aixad up for no reason at all. At tlaes, to find a book is iapossible??? Windows, heights of ceilings ate do not aake to rslc~? auch difference to as whan l*a studying. soTTong as it is quiet, I'a OK Architactural stateaent is "a aonuasnt to learn ing" but is learning bast achieved in such an institutional daslgn which reduces the individual? Thara are only a few quiet nooks to study in peace (corrals rslc7 are too forbidding— tha daslgn forces youto lock yourself away.) functionally OK— but arrangeaent of books par floor is confusing (Dewey aystea or whatever is again institutional — not easy for tha user) Noise--bad (Study areas bacoaa social areas. Floors auch too noisy) Tha carpet fsic3 generate static electricity and l*a shocked wfian I touch tha door handles after walking on these carpets. A good place for the Pay Telephones would be anywhere except in front of the elevators. It is bad enough that they are not in booths but placing thea in front of the elevator where people are standing is adding Insult to Injury. I also think there should be a rooa where we can drink coffee. Library staff coaaents: there are no private phone booths for placing personal calls. The only pay phones are "open- air" ones opposite the public elevators. 364 Mo place Co koop onto f aid peraonal belongings not «v«n • plact to hang a coaC fjlcj. Room not daaignad for cantral rafaranea araa - noC adequate rooa or furaiCura • Uorkrooaa too reaote cron araa. UNIVERSITY OF UTAH Study Soacaa and Fraadoai from Molaa Faculty comanta: Tha building la vary quiet, avan during tha intarval between classes. vary good faculty study rooms. Generally a vary good building for a library. Many good atudent atudy araaa. Student coananta: Not enough individual atudy rooaa. Why can't glasa ba put from tha top of tha wall to tha calling, aa in tha honora rooa, on tha raaarva daak. It'a vary nolay If you are trying to atudy. Tha varloua typaa of atudy araaa are vary aatlafactory. I think llbrariea ahould have more amoklng rooaa and more private atudy room*. not enough encloaed (private) atudy araaa Thara la a great need for aora group atudy rooaa— many of theae type rooaa are being uaed for atorage, ate. Wa need a dlvlalon of atudy araaa. not enough (coonant opposite feature: availability of araaa, auch aa aaall rooaa, where atudenta nay talk and atudy together) 365 additional atudy araaa ara naadad. wore group atudy - aauillar parhapa (coaaaant o^oaltc feature: intarlor arrangaaant of tha Tha n o i s e would ba laaaanad in individual atudy araaa if nora, aaall group araaa were availablal faicT tha cantral araa la uaad for rathar loud talking— ona can haar thia in tha atudy araaa. It naada to ba quiatar Molaa laval la vary high dua to alavator and vantllata falcf systea. I found it's too nolay to atudy in many araaa and hava to find a daap dark comar for paaca & quiat. Molaa— It la incradlbly bad. Tha library lias a coffaa houaa atmosphere which isn't daalrabla. I think that soae of tha atudy araaa ahould ba aoundproof ao that atudanta couldn't ba haard whan laughing. Fenestration and Uahtlng Faculty comments: axcaaalva hun froa lighting Studant conwanta: Humming nolaa from aana of tha llghta ahould ba alIninatad. Llghta buaa fale 7 too auch Really, I don't faal that any windowa ara nacaaaary in a library. I hava haadachaa froa tha llghta if I atudy for aora than an hour, plua thay "buaa". Ona can often haar tha llghta buaalng. but tha llghta hunI 366 The llghta in i o m araaa tend to make a vary annoying bussing nolaa which library maintenance doaa not appear to avan try to corract. Library staff comments: Thara ara nona that do any good (comment oppoalta faatura: nuaibar of windows) Windows datract frosi off lea affldancy. this is an annoyance to isa (comment opposlta faatura: location of windows) Vantllatlon and Haatlna Faculty comments: 10 - Faculty study room vantllatlon poor, temperature la kapt to /sic7 high but otharwlsa Is uniform with no drafts (co— snt opposlta faatura: haatlng) Student comments: Tha air conditioning and haatlng of tha library Is comparable to a tropical climate at least 73% of tha time* Tha air In tha building Is perpetually too warm and too heavy. Many students study for but a short while to ba oveepona by drowsiness. Thara appears to ba a vary high percent age compared with other university libraries I nave visited of students who put thalr head down on tha desk or lean back and let their heads drop either back or down on thalr chest. Tha honors groups study room is an exception. As a consequence of this deficiency 1 study In tha Flrmage Business Library tha great part of tha time. tha vantllatlon and haatlng ara extremely bad. vantllatlon Is lousy; tha building often smells Ilka an aquarium. usually too hot 6 humid 367 Too auch (coeaaant oppoalte feature: heating) The atmoaphere (vent Hat lon-wiae) ia unbearable- one haa tha feeling of drowning all-year-round. Too humid (comment oppoalte feature: ventilation) Excellent library except the teaperature la oniggy aoawtlmea Group atudy rooaw poorly ventilated— occaalonally the whole library amelle Ilka onlone. it la very hot The only problem— la the ventilation aometlawa It geta atuffing ralcl. and a little too hot* ventilation la poor, tend to get atuffy & hot (In group atudy rooaa, aooklng rooaa) to fate 1 hot (coonent oppoalte feature: heating) either too hot and huold or too cold (coomwnt oppoalte feature: heating) Air cond* haa a horrlbl falcl groaning round aa doora open and cloae The place 1a too hot & the ataff on the aouth aide 3rd Floor nakee too ouch nolao The ventilation ayatea la quite noieey raid aa all who uae the library are aware* The building geta atuffy aooetlnea (noat of the time)* Maker atudy difficult* #11 needa apecial attention (coament oppoalte feature: ventilation) Ventilation - air aeana heavey faicl to aw eapeclally ddrlng the aprlng perhaps a better type of circulation ayatea would aleviate Falcl tnla heavy air— Too warm (comment oppoalte feature: fleeting) The library la too nomld! Continued problena controlling the team In the anall rooma (rooking, etc) Indicator the ayatem la not properly aet up. 368 Heating— In tha individual study rooms, it’s too hot but in the rest of the building, it’s too cold. Sometimes the building is too verm, I think. maybe a bit warm (comment opposite feature: heating) HEATS to point where thermostat setting at 60 degrees (if you can adjust!) can maintain about 80 degrees. Great forethought. Cooling system works overtime. Library staff comments: revolting fish smell (comment opposite feature: ventilation) fish smell (too frequently)?- nauseating and causes terrible headaches the air has not been changed since we moved in. The off and on "fishy" odour should be corrected if it might. It does affect efficiency of working. except sometimes it stinks (comment opposite feature: ventilation) Blavatora. Stairs, and Entrances Faculty comments: Should have stairs and/or elevators in two places (front & back) Student comments: Stairways are too centrally located— there should be some around the periphery of the building. The stairways on the north, south and west sides of the building are poor in as much as one must go in opposite directions to get from the third to gfbund level. Inconvenience in stairway deslgp for easy access Parking problem. 369 Need aone back stairways! The elevators are very poorly located, •• Hone on Ground level west end (comment opposite feature: location of entrance(s)) Thera are only two doora, each next to each other where a peraon nay enter or exit.— This is dus to the book checkins proceedure fslcf that Is In effect here. I feel the number of exits & entrances Is Insufficient, especially in an emer gency situation. Rest Roowa and Drlnklns Fountalna Faculty comments: The restrooms are large and accommodate sufficient numbers, but their central location on eabh floor makes for an exceedingly long trek to them from the study rooms that are on the periphery of each floor. One must go through two sets of heavy glass doorways to reach the central area. Studant comments: Not serviced enough; more than one should be on main (3rd floor) #25 For such an extravagant building there is an extreme Inadaquacy of restroom facilities — especially the "male sit down typeM. Very Poor. Very Bad (commant opposite feature: adequacy ot the rest rooms) It Is too late to change but the restroom capacity Is terrible. The rest rooms are too few & small. Library staff comments: no close rest room facilities too few (comment opposite feature: rest rooms are Inadequate) 370 drinking fountains hava warm watar. Thay should ba coolad watar fountains* Tha drinking fountains ara much too noisay M e l Esthatics Faculty comments: Architactural daslgn (exterior) is excellent and admirably suited to its location in tha complex of University buildings as wall as tha entire city* The bulk of tha building is in no wav ungraceful or intrusive -- a real accomplishment. Tha Marriott Library is brand new, baautlful and vary advanced in daslgn and function* I hava never seen a batter one* Ona of tha architect's staff defended tha daslgn as based on it's being a "warehouse for books*" Agreed* If that's what a library is to be, this ona achieves it* great inside, ugly outside In general, our new library was built more like a museum than a library -- more to Impress visitors (marble, panelling, carpets, etc) then to facilitate reeearch. Student comments: The exterior is well-designed but needs contrast of textures* Too much wasted area, e.g., whole building (each floor is around large space wtth balcony*) Perhaps there is too much marble, also* It needs more color* Pretty outside — but can only get in two doors and one is very confusing* The esthetics of the architecture inside the library are "blah!" The plants (fern like?) in the large, cold white rooms ere ngly* The art displays are good* Felt, colpred tables nice* Auditorium pleasant* 371 I like tha Browsing araa but thara should ba aora magaslnes. Our library la baautlful. It*s big enough that aany aora studants study thara than did In our old library. 1 ballava tha baautlful, new styla has addad a posltlva spirit on campus. It’s tha placa to go. Only problaa Is It becomes a social place. library Is now and baautlful but heat could ba battar oontrollad. I really aa excited about tha library, because It really Is so wall planned. After using tha old library on lower caapus, I find thara Is no coaparlson really, because tha new ona Is so superior. Tha paste-on concrete, not structural at all, Is cracking & will undoubtably fblcl bacons worse looking & perhaps dangerous in the coming years. Tha building Itself seems to ba to tha aye tha same basic daslgn of a Greek taapla with a Florentine Cornice claapad on. Tha aaterlals ara modem & tha construction is aodem. However tha concept A daslgn Itself ara antiquated as Is tha general appearance. It is a great white eyesore. Bast designed library I hava aver seen or used! One of tha finest points of achleveaent both architecturally and conveniently to tha studants at U. of U. I Ilka tha daslgn of tha building but tha archi tactura students I’ve talked with think it’s horrible altng with tha engineering building. I think tha library Is vary wall designed, archi tecturally wise. Tha building Itaelf la a vary attractive structure & adds to the appearance of tha caapus. Atrium Is addad spaciousness to tha building. 372 Library staff coaaants: (too blah!!) nsutral (coaaent opposlta faatura: asthstlcs) baautlful but duttarad & too full This la a baautlful & plaaaant building to work In and as a rasult Incraasas affldancy accordingly. Mlscallanaous Faculty coaaants: Tha Marriott Library la* largely. a windowiass •tructura, dapandant alaost coapletely upon artificial lighting and air-conditioning--both of which seemed altogether satisfactory. Compared to other facilities I hava used this building seeus vary good. My.Min objection la that tha cost par "usable" ft2 Is amen higher than necessary. Student constants: Thara Is too auch wasted space. If any thing tha library nay hava excess space. Tha lobbies ara lareer than need be. Also there Is often considerable backing at tha 3rd floor east exit. Tha spaca In canter foyer araa could ba put to batter usa, either astnetlcally Aslcl or functionally. Tha stacks ara so confusing. Uhy can't naps ba placed so you can tall where ona section of nunbers ends and another ona starts. I avoid ualng tha University library whenever possible because there la too auch tine wasted In going froa floor to floor searching for books. Also— not having a coaplete card file In each section Is also a handicap— one has to consult the card files on the aaln floor which again wastes tlae. 373 Sometimes It im i i books, itc a n spread out too nuch but that's bscauss you either havs to walk up two flights or wait % hour for tha elevator. It's Ilka a laybrlnth. Typing arsas ara insufficient, lachlnss oftan "out of order"• good roosis - but typewriters ara In constant disrepair. Should hava aora typewriters avallabia. Large, aasy to study, good atmosphere, oftan difficult to find what you look for At tha prasant tlM, parking spacas ara llaltad closa to tha library, for those who want to study at othar tlnas besides between classas, ate - find It difficult to park and antar tha library without having to walk from tha outslda of tha campus. location of books— lt's Impossible to lfccate books alons. Tha book racks don't follow a logical order. Thara needs to ba, I fssl, an araa for vending machines, or a room to take a rest and aat or talk. There needs to ba more parking lot spaca for library usa A roads to the library for accessibility It might would fslcl ba nice If It had a small anack bar. No parking closa to Library Thara should ba a snack-machine room for tha students. No food or drinks In tha library. This Is tha main reason I don't usa tha library. Library should ba more centralised on caapus It Is a great facility. I would usa It more If It wasn't so far from tha lower caapus though. Being a Physics najor and having all my classas 374 In that araa I hava an awful long walk to gat thara* I think tha aaln lobby la tha blggaat waata of apace any building haa avar had Ovar all I think thla la a vary good facility I hata library atnoapharea altogathar but our library la battar than noat. Library ataff coaaenta: Staff rooa la not a plaaaant placa to lounga bacauaa It la not daalgnad to lnduca a coarortable, relaxed faallng We hava to continually run out and opan tha dock door and than go lock It again. Thla not only waataa a lot of tine, tha natal door takaa two of ua to opan. library haa limitad apaca and lnatallatlon of elactrlcal pluga UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Study Snacaa and Fraadoa froa Molaa Studant coaaenta: Tha location of tha atudy araaa which ara aaparatad by atacka or hallwaya la an axcallant way to kaap tha noiaa concantratlona down. Alao If tha back atudy araaa wara carpatad It would halp con- aidarablv. Otharwlaa tha architactura ia vary practical and efficient. need aora caral rale*} Tha only aajor fault of tha library la that It doaa not provide enough cloaad aound tight apaca for lntenalve raaaarcn i.e. for theaea where you need a aaall private allant apaca to do In depth raaaarch. falci Aa an undergraduate fielllty, though. I anould think It ia axcallant. 375 Also eirrcli or study docks ars sot up so that kids talk to othars too auch on floors 2 & 3 • can saa avaryona moving around — not anough isolatad study araa* Vary qulat placa to study — lots of room Otherwise, tha library is a vary good placa for studying* ltvs now, clean, and has adaquata spaca and facilitias for studying. On tha whole, the atnosphara of tha library is axcallant* Fanastratlon and Llahtlna Studant comments: Lighting of individual carols Pslclis poor. I think aach room should hava a switch and it could hava batter lighting, Tha only study areas with windows ara smoke rooms CsicT* Would Ilka araa with windows where smoking is prohibited* Tha bright lights combined with tha white or light colored walls wrack my eyas causing me to fall asleep rather quickly* Lighting in smoking rooms is bad. (Worse than balance of library— no good lights over lounge chairs*) Ventilation and Haatlng Studant comments: usually too cold The air conditioning is too good - during finals my hands gat so cold after 3*4 hours I can hardly faal them* (I taka no pills) its tha room* too cold in summer The air conditioning is always sat too cold* I usually wear a coat! 376 He #16: It it good when one dots not hava to breath falcl tha pollution of dgarat smoke* gata too hot In winter I am an employee baaldaa being a student who uaaa Wilson Library & worka tnere* During tha aummar montha wa had trouble with tha vantlla tlon — It would ba terribly hot aoma daya & tha air-conditioning wouldn't ba on — wa roaatad— It appeared they had troubla controlling tha temperature— each dapt. ahould ba abla to ragulata tha tamparatura* Alao tha floora naad more phonea--people ara alwaya waiting to uae phonaa* Alao naad for aoaw more Individual atudy deaka In private cornara for maximum quiet* Elavatora. Stalra. and Entrances Faculty conmanta: My general complaint would ba that If I park behind tha building, 1 hava to walk all tha way around to gat In; tha aacalator aaama ridiculous, only ona flight, ona way, using up precious spaca In tha vary center of the floor, forcing tha card catalog off Into a dead and area* Wilson has many fine attributes; soma of tha rooms (government documents) ara vary pleasant and serviceable* Studant comments: Only ona outside entrance--sort of bad— how about up tha west entrance— tha underground Library entrance faces away from all offices, classrooms & parking area's ftlcl 20-21* number & location la good— operation (speed of elevators) Is vary poor— very slow* Only comment la that tha entrance's fslcl to the library are designed very poorly* Only 1 allowable outside entrance* Very Inconvenient when cooing from parking lots In back of library* I believe thb designer should have allowed for a rear entrance* 377 It*s on the one end of campus, the doors face most of campus so If you drive later at night you have to walk around it to get in. f reat need for better outside entrances— there s only one In my opinion, one of the worst features of the library is that there is no rear entrance from the rear parkins lot. In order to get into the bldg., you nave to walk way around to the front, which isn»t too fun on a cold day. Library staff comments: Stairs close by do not allow traffic as they are fire exits. Meed "down" escalator & more elevators. Practically speaking I hate the fact that there is only one entrance and exit from this building. This is inconvenient especially in the winter. Also there are no sidewalks connecting the back and side parking lots to the library. This again is very inconvenient. Rest Rooms and Drinking Fountains Student comments: Where are they? One has to search before dis covering their location. How about direction signs? (comment opposite feature: adequacy of rest rooms) Drinking fountains are approx. % mile from study areas. Library staff comments: Only on 1st floor, where the majority of the library staff works (comment opposite feature: rest rooms are inadequate) Staff rest rooms are inadequate. Ours are used by part-time student workers, also. 378 rut room too small— too stuffy etc. There Is only ons staff lavatory on tha first floor (vhara ovar half of tha staff works) and it is too small and crowdad, with no provisions for hanging up of coats or satting aside of packagas, books, ate. Esthetics Faculty comments: Tha exterior architactura lacks esthetic Impact or interest, but somehow tha architects hava built serenity into tha interior, and tha spaces within ara interesting and conducive to medita tion. The building is very sterile and the interior decoration should be used as classroom examples in architecture schools as to how to screw up a building. There is only one painting I saw that was adequate— Cameron Booth's. The base ment skylight area is badly articulated by the arrangement of the expensive trees. They should be under the skylights. More &_battar art is required for the brick walls. There is not enough wood showing. It is one of the best designed libraries I have ever seen. I like particularly the open stacks. Student comments: Its /slc"7 ugly, oppressive, hard, unfriendly, cold, and dull. In other words— lOOX Institu tional. Successful in turning out totally dehumanised, sterile, non-thinking cyphers. Recess Architecture. The arbitrarily Imposed design (exterior) has little relationship to library function. Bnterlor design (floor plan) works functionally but has little variety or interest. Basic cosplaint: ST8RILB. I hate to study there. It provides a very relaxing yet inspiring atmos phere in which to study— I like very much to do my studying there. 379 I think the building is lowly, bot it saems s bit cold— 'not temperaturs-wisa, but in ths ssnss that it saams a bit Ilka a hospital or something. It is vary star!la and uninviting. Tha layout is vary confusing and araas aran*t dafinad too wall •• vary hard to find ona particular book or araa. Tha placa nsads mors color but tha art in tha ? laca is Just cool - raally. ts rslcl a baautlful study placa but! To find notarial is Impossible - books ara not sot out claarly & I hava yat to find a pattern to tha location of books — also books ara spraad out all over campus in at laast 4 libraries. It’s a baautlful and architacturally favorable building On tha whole Wilson Library has an axcallant architactural design and gives tha studant an axcallant atmosphere for study. • • 1 know because I spend almost all of my studying time thara! Tha building is dull, characterless, IBM-card atmosphere— Underground approach is particularly depressing— reminds ona of sots in The Cabinet of Dr. Callgarl— painfully white empty unarticu- latad space. It was designed for a tall cow with bad taste. Library staff comments: it is quits drab, in white, gray, soma blacks (commsnt opposlta faatura: esthetics) (everything is ugly white-walls calling & floor— ) (comment opposlta faatura: esthetics) Miscellaneous Faculty comments: As an occasional user, I can't offer any authori tative opinion; and it is hard to offer much of an opinion at all because how do I know (or how 380 can I judge) what Wilson library should or could hava been? Tha Idaal library architactura would aaka It aasy for aa to gat to tha library, aasy to gat In froa whatavar direction I wish to taka, aasy to gat around Inslda, aasy to find what 1 want, • .ate. ate. This would ba Utopia* I parsonally believe aost largo llbrarlas ara forbidding and uncoafortabla to usa* 1 don*t know how this can ba changed* Money aakas a difference: "you can please soaa of tha people all tha tiae. • •" ate* 1 hope you receive enough reactions and opinion to draw soaethlng statistically worthwhile* But a large nuaber of personal, unfounded opinions won't necessarily prove anything. Merely hbw wa aay faal about tho Library; now wa faal aay ba laportant.•.If you can fix on soaa aajor architactural reasons for how wa faal* Good luck! The space allotted for tha card catalog Is auch too saall and confining. Disappointing bacausa It Is so average* The damn building Is too saall for the library's collections! There Is no rooa for growth* Student coaaents: stacks era sandwiched In between Reading/Studying areas* Batter to hava stacks first than study- reading areas aaybe a little too high (coaaent opposlta faatura: celling heights of tha rooas) The thing I object to aost Is locating books In Deceaber when I wanted to usa the typing facilities, after soaa searching I finally located ona on the fourth floor* Soaeona had to wait an hour to usa It after I finished* Thara ware no typewriters In any other typing rooa* Typing rooas ara great* Ceilings too high— waste of aoney It would ba nice If there was some placa to buy coffee, etc* 381 I think if It were higher, say 7 storlas tha view would ba sore Interesting and tha goings-on outside would be less distracting* For some reason I find I can study best on the 4th floor* On our caapus the library is divided into two buildings, an extreaely Inconvenient situation, f articularly since the naln library is separated roa the main caapus* The card catalogue is loeated only in the aaln library. Involving a bus trip simply to look up a book and possibly a return trip to find the book in the aaln caapus library* Lack of frae parking for library users is ridiculous* Having to pay 2Sc to return a book is robbery* The books are scattered among the various libraries on Caapus and the card catalogue is located at Wilson. The slse of caapus aakas it inconvenient to go to West Bank for Book and find that it is on tha Bast Bank. This library is such a vast improvement over Walter Library that everything seems excellent at first. Those who use tha library extensively seem to encounter a few Inconveniences, but in general, it is superior in every way. Availability of books to all is the feature I like best. Mo stacks to crawl through! I have a biased opinion on its location however— because my classes are on the East Bank. It is a waste of space. It should have been more compact — especially for a university that had to increase tuition. Library staff comments: Bibliography section of Ref. room not large enough to hold all the little-used Mbls. necessary for original cataloging. These are kept in the sub- basement, with no tables on which to put them. (much too high, a waste of space) (comment opposite feature: celling heights) The staff lounga is not open to students. Result: 382 students oust uss % of brook tins walking to and from other distant lounges. There should be food dispensing machines in staff lounge like for rolls, candy, pop, milk, etc. the entire office space is in full view of the patrons— rather like a soo. The perking situation is terrible. If you go to classes in the morning it costs you 35 cents. And if you have to come beck to work (for example 6-2A.M.) it costs you 35 cents more. There is no perking on local streets because of ell the night school students. Tha library workers should have a pass for free perking at night time. The two libraries to which we most often refer our patrons for additional material (Periodicals and Documents) are quite far from the Reference Dept. It would be more convenient if we were closer to them Instead of Circulation. There is no sink in our department, which makes it Inconvenient to clean lup after working with dusty materials. Why not have little rooms where people can smoke and talk— not sterile conference rooms. Why not have rooms where people can show films, bring Instruments musical .Why not conserve space by using more microfilm. I think library should be stimulating cultural center for reading music painting and conversing and not a book factory. rslc*7 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Annual Review of Information Scloncs and Technology. New Vork: Infcerscience Publishers, 1956. Ashburnar. Edward H. Modara Public Librarlas. London: Grafton & Co., 1916.---------------- Barzun, Jacquas. Tha American Univarsity. How It Runs. Whara It Is &>lng. Haw Vork: Harper & Row. 1968. Baumann, Charlas H. Tha Influence of Angus Snead Macdonald and tna Snead faookstack on Library Architecture. Metuchan. K.i.: Scarecrow Press. 1972. Baan, Donald E. and Ellsworth, Ralph E. Modular Planning for Collage and Small University Libraries. Iowa CityV Iowa: Privately Printed, IMS. Bergen, Dan and Duryaa, E. W. (ads.). Libraries and tha Collage Climate of Learning. Syracuse. O . ” Syracuse University School of Education and the School of Library Science, 1964, c. 1966. Bishop, Morris. A History of Cornell. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1962. Blake. Pater. Tha Master Builders. London: Victor GcUancsTLtd., 1960.----- Blagan, Theodora C. Minnesota: A History of tha State. Minneapolis, Minn.: university or Minnesota Iress, 1963. Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc. Toward the Library of the 21st Century. Cambridge, Mass.: 1964. Branscomb, Harvle. Teaching with Books. Chicago: American Library Association, 1940. 3&3 Brawne, Michael. Libraries: Architecture and Equipment. New York: Praeger Publisher*, 1970. Brick, Michael and McGrath, Earl J. Innovation In Liberal Arts Colleges. New York: Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1969. Brough, Kenneth J. Scholar*a Workshop: Evolving Con ceptions of Library Service. Urbana. 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1953. Brown, Janies W. and Thornton, Janes W., Jr. (eds.). Mydjy aHj.gQllege Teaching. Washington, D.C.: Association for Higher Education, 1968. Caffray, John (ed.)« The Future Academic Community: Continuity and change. Washington, b.C.: American Council on Education, 1969. Carnegie Commission oi Higher Education. New Students and New Places: Policies for the Future Growth and Development of American Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill, 19>1. Chamberlin, Ralph V. The University of Utah, a History of Its First Hundred Years. 1850 to 1950. Salt Lake City, Wtah: University of Utah Press, I960. Chicago University. Graduate Library School. • - Library Conference. Library Buildings for Library Service. Chicago: American Library Association, T957T Clapp, Vemer W. The Future of the Research Library. Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1964. Committee for New College. Student Reaction to Study Facilities. Amherst, hass., I960. Cooperative Committee on Library Building Plans. Planning the University Library Building. Edited by John E. Burchard, Charles w. David,and Julian P. Boyd. Princeton, E.J.: Princeton University Press, 1949. Dober, Richard P. Campus Planning. New York : Relnhold Publishing Corp.7 1963. 385 Dupuy, Trevor N. Forwent In College Libraries? The Impact of Information Technoioev. Uaahinifcon. D.c.: CotwunlcefclonTEet^M" Corp.* 1968. Edueetionel Facilities Laboratories. The Impact of Technology on the Library Building. New ^ork? n.d. . . Instructional Hardware/A Guide to Architectural Requirements. Hew York: Educational Facilities Laboratories* 1970. Ellsuorth* Kelph E. Plamilng the CoUaM^nd University Library Building. 2nd ed.Boulder* Colo.: Pruett press* Inc., 1968. Eurlch, Alvin C. (ed.). Campus 1980. New York: Delacorte Press, 1968. Gerould, James T. The College Library Building. Its Planning and Equipment, hew York: Charles Scribner's Sons* l93l. Gray* James. The University of Minnesota. 1831-1951. Minneapolis, mrai.: University or Minnesota Press* 1951. Hall, Edward T. The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, N.J.: Doubleday & Co.* Inc., 1966. Hamlin* Talbot (ed.). Forms and Functions of Twentieth Century Architecture, h vols. Hew York: Columbia university Press* 1952. Handbook of Architectural Practice. 8th ed. Washington, b.fc.: American Instituteof Architects* 1958. Hawkins, Hugh. Pioneer? A History of the Johns Hopkins University. Ithaca. b.¥.: Cornell university Press, I960. Hopkins, Ernest J. and Thomas, Alfred, Jr. The Arlsona State University Storv. Phoenix* Arls.: South west Publishing Co.* i960. Johnson* B. Lamar. Vitalising a College Library. Chicago: American Library Association, 193^. Kent, Allen (ed.). Utoary Planning for Automation. Washington* D.c.: spartan books* ifte., ivo5. 381 Langmead, Staphan and Beckman, Mar gar at. Man Library Wjts-Ss yoraFT Bulldinaa.Toronto:John Wllav and Sons Canada. uar, iE?o. Llbratx Ta£hnolgay «f?d^chltactiga, Raport of a Con- taranca Hald at tha Harvard Graduata school of Education, rabruary v. l W . Cambridge. Maas. Library, Graduata school of Education, Harvard University, 1968* L y U > t f i a . m r L * b r » r T - Mayhav, Levis B. Collages Today and Tomorrow. San Francisco: Jossay'Bass, inc., 1989. Matcalf, Keyes D. Library Lighting. Washington, D.C*: Tha Association or Research Libraries, 1970. L i B f i f f ? " m . Michigan University. Survey Research Canter. Faculty t pralsal of a University Library. Ann Arbor, ch.: The University Library, university of Michigan, December 15, 1964. Orr. James M. Daslanlna Llbrarv Bulldlnas for Activity. London: AndH_Dauksch, Lkd.; 197T Rogers, Rutherford D. and Weber, David C. University Llbrarv Administration. New York: rt.il. Wilson Co' ., 1971. --------- aud.lph. FMd.rtck. sju|COQ[. new Torn* Airrad a. anopr, i70<. Search for Relevance: The Campus In Crisis. By Joseph Axelrod, at al. San Francisco: Jossey-Baaa, Inc., 19677 Sommer, Robert. Personal Space: The Behavioral Basis of^Dos^an. Enaleuoodclltts. B.J.: Prentice- Standard Education Almanac. Los Angeles: Academic Media, Inc., 1968. 387 Stickler, W. Hugh (ed.). Experimental Colleges: Their Role In A— rlcan higher Education. Tallahassee. Fia.: Florida ^iate university, 1964* Strakosch, Gaorga R. Vartlcal Transportation: Elevators and Escalators. New York: John Wllav & Sons. T9 67 '. Thompson, Anthony. Library Buildings of Britain and Europe. London: kittan#orch & Co., 1963. United Nations Bdueatlonal, Sclantific and Cultural Organization. Statistical Yaarbook. Paris: 1969. -------------------- Whaalar, Josaph L. and Githans, Alfrad M. Tha American Public Library. New York: Charlas Scribner^s Sons, l94i. Whaalar, Lawrence* Bahavioral Rasaarch for Archltactural Planning and Design. Tarra Hauta. Ind.: Ewing Miliar Assodatas, 1967. . Tha Of flea Environment: a Summary Report to Respondents ot ^Behavioral kasaarcn survey ot flttlca Design^. Chicago: ISb Inc.. 1969. Wilson, Louis R. and Tauber, Maurica F. Tha Univarsity Llbrarv. 2nd ad. New York: Columbia University Press, 1956. Yanawina, Wayna S. (ad.). Contanoorarv Library Paslgn. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse university tress, 1958. Articles and Periodicals "The Architect's Concent." Llbrarv Journal. LXXX (Decem ber 1, 1956), 2762-67:---- ------ Arms, Brock. "Principles of Illumination for Libraries," in Library Equipment Institute* 2nd, St* Louis, 1964. The Library Environment: Aspects of Interior Planning: Proceedings. Chicago: American Library Association, i965, pp. 32-33. Bailey, J. Russell; "Tha Library as Part of tha Learning Canter." A.I.A* Journal. XXXIX (June. 1963). 97-100. ------------- 38® Bean, Donald E. "The Planning Team*-Tha Consultant's Role and Responsibility," Illinois Libraries, XLIX (November, 1967), 774-80. _______ • "Survey of Library Buildings," In Library Surveys. Edited by Maurice F. Tauber and Irlene R. Stephens. New York: Columbia University Press, 1967, pp. 90-108. Berthel. John H. "Johns Hopkins Dies Down." Llbrarv Journal. LXXXIX (December 1, 1964), 4732-54. Berthoi fslcl , John H. "A New Library for the Johns Hopkins," Maryland Libraries. XXIX (Winter, 1963), 5+. Blackburn, Robert H. "Automation and Building Plans," Llbrarv Trends. XVIII (October, 1969), 262-67. Blackwell, H. Richard. "Lighting the Llbrary-Standards for Illumination," in Library Equipment Insti tute. 2nd, St. Louis, 1964. The Llbrarv Environment: Aspects of Interior Planning. Proceedings. Chicago: American Library isodation, 1965, pp. 23-31. Bleton, Jean. "The Construction of University Libraries," UNESCO Bulletin for Libraries. XVII (Nov.- Pec.,"lW); 307-13+.------- Byrd, Cedi K. "Site, Seats, Selectivity," College and Research Libraries. XVIII (March, 1957), 127-31. Byrn, James H. "Automation In University Libraries— the State of the Art," Llbrarv Resources and Technical Services. XIII (Fall, 19b9), 5ZO-3&. "A Campus Showplace at Washington University." Pioneer. XXVI (Summer, 1964), 12-15. Canty, Donald. "What It Takes to Be a Client: 1. How to Pick an Architect." Architectural Forum. CXIX (July, 1963), 84-87; _______ . "What It Takes to Be a Client: 2. What • Architects Do and How to Pay Them," Architectural Forum. CXIX (September, 1963), 92-95. 389 . "What It Takas to Ba a Cllant: 3# How to Turn a Probi ana Into a Sat of Plans." Architactural Forum. CXIX (Dacambar, 1963), 94-971---------- . "What It Takas to Ba a Cllant: 4. How to Go from Concapt to Construction," Architactural Forum. CXX (February, 1964), 104-107. . "What It Takas to Ba a Cllant: 5. How to Turn a Sat of Plans Into a Building." Architactural Forum. CXX (April, 1964), 106-109. "Charles Trumbell Hayden Library," Arlsona Librarian. XXXII (Summer, 1966), Insert between pp. 22 & 23. Corrigan, Dorothy D. and Galvin, Hoyt R. "Library Building Consulting, Problems and Ethics," A.L.A. Bulletin. LXII (May, 1968), 503-10. "Critiques of Three Completed Library Buildings," Collage and Research Libraries. XIV (April, 1953), 129-42. Davidson, Donald C. "Building by tha Book." California Librarian, XVI (January, 1955), 92-5. --------- ________• "Significant Developments In University Library Buildings," Llbrarv Trends. XVIII (October, 1969), Dickenson, D. W. "Building Together: The Architect and the Librarian," The Library Association Record. LXV (December, 1963), 440-45. Eaton, Andrew. "Building Competition Proves Successful," Llbrarv Journal. LXXXIII (April I, 1958), 1008-12. Ellsworth, Ralph E. "College Students and Reading," American Scholar. XXVII (Fall, 1958), 473-81. . "Consultants for College and University Library Building Planning," College and Research Libraries XXI (July, 1460)7 263-8. . "Determining Factors In the Evolution of the Modular Plan for Libraries," College and Research Libraries. XIV (April, 1953), 125-8+. _______ • "Library Buildings," In State of the Llbrarv Art. Vol. Ill, Part 1. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, I960. 399 Felder, Dell. "Independent-Study Practices In Colleges and Universities." Journal o£ Hither Education. XXXV (June, 1964), 335-38. ------------ Githens, Alfred M. "Libraries," in Talbot, Hamlin (ed.). Forms and Functions of Twentieth-Century Archi tecture. Vol. ill, New York: (Columbia University Press, 19S2. Goldfinger. Emo. "The Sensation of Soace." Architectural Review, XC (November, 1941), 129-31. Goldstein, Stanley J. "Environmental Control," in Library Buildings and Equipment Institute, Kent State university, 1961. Planning Llbrarv Build ings for Service. Proceedings. Chicago; American Library Association, 1966. Goodrich, Francis L. D. "Some Recent Trends in College Library Buildings," A.L.A. Bulletin. XXXV (September, 1941), P-lIft-17. Grad, Ian and Greenberg, Alfred. "Air Conditioning for Books and Peoele." Architectural Record. CXXI (June, 1957), 231-34T ---------• Greenberg, Alfred. "Library Air-Conditioning Design," Architectural Record. CXXXV (February, 1964), Guerlac, Rita. "Cornell's Library," Cornell Llbrarv Journal. No. 2 (Spring, 1967), 1-33. Haas, Warren J. "The Role of the Building Consultant," College and Research Libraries. XXX (July, 1969), 365-8. Jenkln, Joseph H. "Programming and Financing Library Buildings," in Library Buildings Institute, Detroit. 1965. Libraries. Building for the Futur.: Procdln..fWlttA OorUhoTT Conducted at betrolt. Michigan. July 153._1965. Chicago: American Library Association, m ) , pp. 34-38. Jesse, William H. "Common Faults in Planning Library Buildings." Southeastern Librarian. XIV (Serins. 1964), 28-34. 391 _______ . "Nnr Library Buildings: Song Strengths and Weaknesses.N Library Journal. LXXXIX (Oecenber 1. 1964), 4700-4735: Jordan, Robert T. "Lighting In University Libraries," UNESCO Bulletin for Libraries. XVII (Nov.-Dec., l963), 326-36. Kaplan, Louis. "The Librarian's Function In Working t Drawings," In American Library Association. Buildings Committee. St. Paul, Minn. June 19-20, 19S4. Proceedings. Chicago: American Library Association, pp. 19-23. Ksally, Francis. "An Architect's View of Library Plan- nine." Llbrarv Journal. LXXXVIII (December 1. 1963), 4521-23. — Klausner, Margaret. "The Library Program - Its Purpose and Development." News Notes of California Libraries. LII (July,1937), 323-31.------ Kuhlman, A. F. "Data Needed to Plan a New College Llbrarv." Southeastern Librarian. XI (Summer. 1961), 170-72:— -- ---- Lashmlt, Luther. "The Arbhltect's Function In Preliminary Planning," In American Library Association. Buildings Committee. Planning a the Mator Steps: Proceedings of Sponsored bv the American Llbrar 19-20.^1934. Chicago:American Library Assocla- "Latest 'Growth Industry* - Colleges In U. S.," U.S. News & World Report. LXIII (July 17, 196777*86-8. Lelmkuhler, Ferdinand F. and Neville, Anthony E. "The Uncertain Future of the Library," Wilson Llbrarv Bulletin. XLIII (September, 1968), 30-35. McClarren, Robert R. and Thompson, Donald E. "Architec tural Checklist." Library Journal. XCI (Decamber 1, 1966), 5832-37. -------------- Macdonald, Angus S. "A Library of the Future." Llbrarv Journal. LVIII (December 1. 1933). 971-75"ah5 Ttiecemtier 15, 1933), 1023-25. LlbrfryBuildln^; the institute v Association 392 _______ . "New Possibilities in Library Planning," Llbrarv Journal. LXX (December 15, 1945), 1169-74. _______ • "Some Engineering Developments Affecting Large Libraries," A.L.A. Bulletin XXVIII (September, 1934), 628-32. McDonald, John P. "Campus Contemporary," Llbrarv Journal. LXXXVII (December 1, 1962), 4376-79. McQuade, Walter. "Cornell Rediscovers Architecture," Architectural Forum. CXVI (February, 1962), 64-69. Martin, Allle B. "The Library Building Program," Wilson Llbrarv Bulletin. XLI (January, 1967), 514-IK Mason, Ellsworth. "The Belnecke Siamese Twins: An Objective Review of Yale's New Rare Book Library BuiIdIns." Collese and Research Libraries. XXVI (May, l965),-m*i:-----“ ------------ _______ • "The Great Gas Bubble Prick* t or, Computers Revealed - by a Gentleman of Quality," College and Research Libraries. XXXII (May* 1971), 183-96. _______ • "Lighting and Mechanical Progress In Universi ties." Llbrarv Trends. XVIII (October. 1969). 246-59. ------------- . "Some Advice to Librarians on Writing a Build ing Program." Llbrarv Journal. XCI (December 1. 1966), 5838-44.---- Massman, Virgil. "Deficiencies In Modern Design," Mountaln-Plalns Llbrarv Quarterly. XII (Spring, 1967), 21-23. "Measure." Architectural Forum. LXXXIX (November. 1948). t03-lVrnMf;*I27i33t 155-60. Metcalf, Keyes D. "The Librarian's Function in Program ming," in American Library Association. Buildings Committee. St. Paul, Mlno., June 19-20, 1954. Proceedings. Chicago: American Library Association, 1956, pp. 3-8. 393 . "The Use of Hindsight In Library Planning," In Library Buildings Institute, Datrolt, 1965. Llbrarlss.Building for tha Futurs: Proceedings and tha alta workshop Conducted at Datrolt. Michigan. July 1-3. 1^5. Chicago: Amarlcan Library Association, 1947, pp. 3-8. "Mistakes That Have Been Made In Recent Library Buildings," In Library Buildings Institute, Detroit, 1965. Libraries. Building for the Future: Proceedings and the alta workshop Conducted at Detroit. Michigan. July 1-3. 1965. Chicago? American Library Association, 1967, pp. 9-19. Muller, Robert H. "The University Library and the Evolution of Its Physical Plant," Southeastern Librarian. X (Summer, 1960), 70-77+. Nelson, Esther. "University of Utah Llbrarv." Llbrarv Journal. LXI (October 15, 1936), 751-53.------ Nielsen, Andre S. "Planning the Library Building," Illinois Libraries. XL (December, 1958), 793-96. Orne, Jerrold. "The Renaissance of Academic Library Building 1967-1971," Llbrarv Journal. XCVI (December 1, 1971), 3947-67. Patton, Normand S. "Architects and Librarians." Llbrarv Journal. XIV (May-June, 1889), 159-61. ------ Reece, Ernest J. "Library Programs; How to Draft Them," College and Research Libraries. XIII (July, 1952), 198-211. Reynolds, Helen M. "University Library Buildings In the United States, 1890-1939." College and Research Libraries. XIV (April, 1953), 149-57+.---------- Richards, James H., Jr. "Getting Along with Your Archi tect." Llbrarv Journal. LXXX 7June 15. 1955). 1 4 6 9 - 7 1 . ------- Rohlf, Robert H. "The State of Library Architecture; Observations of a Library Architecture Juror," DC Libraries. XXXIX (Summer, 1968), 67-70. 39* Samore, Theodora. "Academic Library Buildings: Needs, Lealslacion. Inventory." Collate ana Research Libraries. XXV (July, 1964), 295-307’ . — Schell. H. B. "Cornellvs Research Llbrarv." Llbrarv Journal. LXXXV (December 1, 1960), 4311-14'. Schults, Lois B. and Goldstein, Harold. "Planning New Llbrarv Facilities." Illinois Libraries. XLVIII (December, 1966), 779-117 Shores, Louis A. "The Library Arts College, a Possibility In 1954?" School and Society. LXI (January 26. 1935), 110-T57 ------- • "The Llbrarv Collate Idea." Llbrarv Journal. XCI (September, 1966), 3871-75. Slafck. Kenneth T. "Oasis In the Desert." Llbrarv Journal. XCI (December 1, 1966), 5883-85. . "Our Buildings Shape Us." A.L.A. Bulletin. LXII (June, 1968), 715-18. Smith, Howard D. "What the Architect Expects of the Client," In The American School and University; Educational Purchaslnc Guide and frlant Reference. XXI, 1949-50, New York: buttenhelm Publishing Corp., pp. 39-42. Sommer. Robert. "The Ecology of Privacy." Llbrarv Quarterly. XXXVI (July, 1966), 234-4FI • "Reading Areas In College Libraries." Llbrarv Quarterly. XXXVIII (July, 1968), 249-60. ------ Soule, Charles C. "Points of Agreement Among Librarians As to Llbrarv Architecture." Llbrarv Journal. XVI (1891), Conference Nunber, 17-19. "Standards for College Libraries." College and Research Libraries. XX (July, 1959), 274-80: Tauber, Maurice F. "Technical Services and the Library Bulldlne." Southeastern Libraries. X (Summer. i960), 82-917“ 395 Taylor, Robert S. "Toward tha Daslgn of a Collaga Library for tha Seventies,” Wllaon Library Bulletin. XLIII (September, 1968J, 94*51* Thompson, Donald E. "Form vs. Function: Archltactura and tha College Llbrarv." Llbrarv Trands. XVIII (July, 1969), 37-47. ------- Tofflar, Alvin. "Llbrarlas," In Educational Facilities Laboratories. Inc. Bricks and Mortarboards. £l964j, pp. 71-98. ---------------------- "University of Minnesota West Bank Library, Minneapolis, Minnesota," In Library Buildings institute, Detroit, 1965. Libraries. Building for tha Future: Proceedings ana the ALTA workshop Con ducted at Detroit. Michigan. July i-3. l9o3. Chicago: American Library Association, l947, pp. 79-87. "Unlversltv of Utah.” Mountain-Plalns Llbrarv Quarterlv. XI (Fail, 1966)"TB~21~-------- ---- ------- Walter, Frank K. "Minnesota*8 New University Library,” Llbrarv Journal. XLIX (December 1, 1924), 1029-32. Weber, David C. "Design for a Microtext Reading Room,” UNESCO Bulletin for libraries. XX (Nov.-Dec., 1966), 303-8. Public Documents U.S. National Center for Edticatlonal Statistics. Llbrarv Statistics of Colleges and Universities. Data tor individual Institutions. 1969. O.S. Government Printing oftice, 1970. ________• Opening Fall Enrollment In Higher Education. 1969: Report on Preliminary survey. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, 1970. _______ • Students Enrolled for Advanced Degrees. Fall 1969: Preliminary Report. U.S. dovernmsnt Printing ottice, 1970. 396 U.S. Off upiv.r.m..: MW. • Division of Educational Statistics. Prelections of Educational Statistics to 1973/74. Washington, mi. Arlsona Stats University. "Progran Raqulrenents for tha Library Building." January, 1963. (Dittoed.) Cornell University. "Program for the Besearch Library." Revised March 27, 19S6. (Mimeographed.) "Progran of Competition for the John M. Oiin Library at Washington University." February, 19S6. (Multlllthed.) "Suggestions for a New Library Building." February 24, _ 1958. (Photo Offset.) CJohns Hopkins University.) University of Minnesota. "Progran for the West Bank Library." January, 1964. (Multlllthed.) University of Utah. University Learning Center and Library. "Architectural Design Progran." December, 1963. (Mlneographed.) Reports Qtetcalf, Keyes D. and Wood, Frederic C "Central Library Facilities." | (Multlllthed.) i . J LMpOTb Q>U Cfcomell^ , 1935. 1 0 teport on) Library Building Programs

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A Study Of Some Aspects Of The Publication Program Of The Government Of India, With Recommendations

PDF

A Study Of Human Response To California Library Organization And Management Systems

PDF

Attitudes Of Academic Librarians In The Pacific Coast States Toward Library Technicians

PDF

The Library In The Administrative And Organizational Structure Of The American Public Community College

PDF

Federal Aid To School Libraries; A Study Of The Title Ii, Phase Ii Program In California, 1965-1966

PDF

California Public Libraries And The Cooperative Systems Concept: A Study with Recommendations

PDF

The influence of published reviews of sixteen millimeter motion pictures on film selection in public libraries with large film collections

PDF

A Survey Of Mechanization And Automation In Large University Libraries

PDF

AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF CERTAIN PERSONALITY FACTORS TO THE AMOUNT OF TIME ALLOTTED TO SPECIFIED PUBLIC SERVICE TASKS BY SELECTED SCHOOL LIBRARIANS.

PDF

Organic Wholeness Of Being In Selected Novels Of D.H. Lawrence

PDF

The effect of selected review procedures used in instructional media on immediate and delayed recall

PDF

A Critical Study Of Selected Changes In Protestant Theological Students With Clinical Pastoral Education

PDF

A Study Of The Relationships Between Technique And Theme In The Shorter Works Of Kafka

PDF

A Study Of California History Knowledge Possessed By High School Seniors Compared With Adults

PDF

Satire In The Prose Of Francisco Zarco

PDF

Reality In The Works Of Unamuno And Ortega Y Gasset: A Comparative Study

PDF

The Influence Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The District Of Columbia On Federal Policy In Broadcast Regulation, 1929-1971

PDF

Representation Theory And Apportionment Models: A Study Of California Constituencies

PDF

A Critical Edition And Study Of The Play 'Privar Contra Su Gusto'

PDF

Development Of A Test Of Auditory Word Discrimination In Spanish

Asset Metadata

Creator Smith, Lester Kay (author)

Core Title A Study Of The Architectural Design Of Six University Library Buildings

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Library Science

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Library Science,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Boaz, Martha (committee chair), Hess, Edward J. (committee member), Hurst, Sam T. (committee member), Kilpela, Raymond (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-800369

Unique identifier UC11363595

Identifier 7314443.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-800369 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7314443

Dmrecord 800369

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Smith, Lester Kay

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA