The Architectural and Interior Design Planning Process

LIBRARIES depend upon the RESOURCES, SERVICES, AND PROGRAMS space layout and installation of certain types of furniture and equipment. Operating costs depend in large measure upon how well the facilities are designed. This article explains the planning process and focuses upon library building requirements wrought by the advent of electronic information technologies. AN OVERVIEW Libraries are object-intensive facilities. Their resources, services, and programs depend on the installation of certain types of furniture and equipment. Without shelving to house hard copy, there would be no place to put books, journals, documents, and other artifacts of the print world. Without microcomputers or terminals, CD-ROM players, printers, microfilm readerdprinters, and photocopiers, it would be difficult to provide online services, CD-ROM information, or hard copies of micro media. Staff need service desks, workstations, and work areas to perform their jobs. Patrons perusing hard-copy resources also need places to sit. Of course, where patrons sit depends on their personalities and how in-depth their browsing will be. Some people prefer to read or study in an attractive area and others couldn’t care less. In any event, lounge chairs and sofas and chairs at tables or carrels are important library items. Few people are willing to stand for more than a few minutes while leafing through a periodical, studying a Elaine Cohen, Aaron Cohen Associates Ltd., RFD 1, Box 636, Teatown Road, Crotonon-Hudson, NY 10520 LIBRARY TRENDS, Vol. 42, No. 3, Winter 1994, pp. 547-63 8 1994 The Board of Trustees, University of Illinois 548 LIBRARY TRENDWWINTER 1994 reference book, or researching a specific topic. Chairs have also become essential aspects of a large percentage of the online public access stations being installed today. When OPACs first appeared on the library market, library planners believed that patrons would stand while performing quick searches. Although many patrons do not mind standing, many more prefer to sit. Besides, today’s terminals are constantly being loaded with host databases. Browsing through these takes such a long time that sitdown stations are showing up everywhere. It is not uncommon, for example, to find a large academic library’s reference area outfitted with four stand-up and twenty-six sit-down OPAC stations. The problem is that each additional chair costs money, and construction budgets tend to disregard this fact. Funds are often encumbered for construction only, and monies for “loose” furniture must be garnered elsewhere. The same is true for electronic equipment (e.g., microcomputers and CD-ROM players) and general supplies (e.g., wastepaper baskets, pencils, paper, and desk sets). The construction budget ignores these completely. Where plans for construction of new facilities are concerned, knowledge of the architectural contract and the resulting contract documents (blueprints and specifications) is essential. It is imperative to know exactly what these do contain. In some instances, all “millwork” or custom built woodworking is to be designed and constructed under the architectural contract. Millwork of ten includes custom built service desks, built-in display cases, and similar aspects of interior design. On the same project, shelving may also be considered part of the architecture. This is often the case on very large installations; for medium to small installations it is not. Funding for shelving falls into the loose furniture category, which also includes all library technical furniture (tables, carrels, chairs, atlas stands, etc.) and office workstations and chairs. Surprisingly, carpeting is nearly always part of the architectural contract because it provides the finished floor. Sometimes the budget contains all the items necessary to build and operate the facility-construction, loose furniture, supplies, and electronic equipment. The library administration and staff are informed that a certain amount of money is available, and it is up to them to divide the sum logically. If the renovatiodnew addition comes in over budget, there is less money to spend for other items. Having enough money to spend on the proper furniture, supplies, and equipment is not enough, however. The idea is to be cost effective and maintain a low overhead once the project is complete. The building must be able to operate relatively efficiently. Here, the design of the interior architecture is extremely important. That is one of the COHEN/ARCHITECTURAL AND INTERIOR PLANNING PROCESS 549 reasons why library consultants are kept on projects beyond the programming stages. They critique the interior architecture and, later, the interior design space plan. For example, a proliferation of dividing walls promises operational inefficiencies and thus more staff. Walls impede traffic flow which, in turn, forces employees to waste considerable time getting from place to place. Additional floors or more than one entrance also demand more staff. Too many libraries have had to add more service desks/control points-and employees-to prevent security problems. It is logical to assume that the interior architecture affects any building’s space layout possibilities. An old school converted into a library may have long corridors and a variety of cinderblock walls that once delineated classrooms. An award-winning public or academic library building may feature a vast central atrium, “flying” staircases, and many attractive but unusual areas. In both cases, interior architecture is rather inflexible and limits layouts. The spaces that are created within the envelope are usually characterized as fixed function; these tend to resist logical rearrangement. For example, if a school was designed as a classroom facility, only activities that fit into 400 square feet segments will function properly. Few library collections have logical breaks which enable them to fit neatly into spaces that are just that size. An award-winning building’s central atrium can be an important aesthetic. Its primary function is to bring a sense of grandeur to the interior. One can look up and see through to the next story or look down and view the floor below. Unfortunately, a central atrium creates a “ring around the rosey” effect. Patrons and staff must walk in circles to get from here to there. For the budget conscious, it is important to note that atriums are also nearly as expensive to heat, ventilate, or air condition as the full floors they replace. Furthermore, buildings with atriums are very difficult to balance mechanically. Service calls that require fixing such gadgets as malfunctioning vents, fans, circulators, pumps, and blowers become a constant fact of life. Filling in a central atrium is always a solution, but it is one thing to tear down the interior walls of a 1950s school building and another to deck over the glorious atrium of an award-winning building. In both situations, the expense may cause a public furor, but the protests are bound to rise to untenable heights whenever political forces believe that bureaucrats are about to destroy a precious work of art. Similarly, if the school building was erected at the turn of the century, it immediately becomes a historic structure. Should it be replete with special details and fine appointments, resistance 550 LIBRARY TRENDSIWINTER 1994 to any architectural changes could be defended by an equally ferocious political battle. Old school buildings are not the only historic structures. Libraries with historical significance seem to be everywhere. There are any number of seventy, eighty, and ninety year old structures still functioning, and they house a variety of libraries-public, academic, governmental, and private. These buildings evoke great affection, even those that have not been well maintained and, thus, have deteriorated. Communities may have ignored their existence, but once one of these structures enters the spotlight, it is amazing how many people profess kinship. The populace tends to view the structures as examples of a gentler age and something they wish to return toeven if they were never there. Indeed, some of these structures feature architectural details that are either too expensive to fund today or literally against the law. For example, old buildings tend to have impressive exterior stairs that were built without regard to barrier-free environments and, of course, do not comply with Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. Sometimes a stair leads to a very handsome entrance flanked by difficult to open heavy wooden doors. Not only are these doors phenomenally expensive to replace, they also are incompatible with ADA guidelines. Once inside one of these old buildings, the interior architecture and related interior design all too often limit the ability to conduct state-of-the-art library services. An imposing but inflexible teak and granite circulation desk may take up far too much room. In order to add terminals and other details of automated circulation services, makeshift work areas have been created behind and to the side of it. In close proximity to the desk are one or two wood paneled reading rooms whose floors were not constructed to bear the 150 pound per square foot live loads that library bookstacks presently require. Since the majority of the collection was not expected to be open to the public, it was placed in a once closed and now open access metal self-supporting stack whose small entrance is located to the back of the facility. Within the stack, the only access to the second and third tiers is via a narrow metal stair. The inflexibility of this building’s design implies that there is only one way to perform library service-and, at the time it was erected, that probably was the case. Its architect wanted to create an important work of art that could support processes that were clearly defined. Of course, library services have changed dramatically over the ensuing years. Now their facilities are expected to house a wide variety of activities, some which came into existence just recently, perhaps COHEN/ARCHITECTURAL AND INTERIOR PLANNING PROCESS 551 only yesterday. Indeed, radical changes in library missions and goals are occurring daily, but the buildings that are expected to support these activities are still being designed with century old rules in mind. The result? A host of new structures that are quickly becoming outdated. The situation is so common that library consultants often receive urgent telephone calls late into the night from harried librarians administering inflexible, barely relevant, buildings that are less than five years old. Until ADA went into effect, any number of new buildings’ were constructed with the older models in mind. Too many buildings were designed with requisite impressive exterior stairs that led to equally impressive but hard to open front doors. Administrators now find that they must scurry to find places to add exterior ramps or elevators as well as inexpensive ways to install automatic doors. Beyond inappropriate exterior access, another difficulty concerns the all too common confusing internal pathways. First time patrons complain that they cannot find the interior elevators or stairs. It is not uncommon to find disabled users being forced to traverse long distances before they reach the ramp that will lead them up or down a two step level. Of course the most universal inadequacies relate to insufficient collection and user spaces; nearly nonexistent electrical and telecommunications wiring; too few places to install equipmentdedicated seating; and inappropriate meeting, conference, or training rooms. Because new construction or reorganizationhenovation can be costly, it is not surprising that, in an era of tight money, academic, public, corporate, or governmental financial officers resist making any changes at all. Although librarians take it for granted that we are living in a global information economy, arguments may be forthcoming that i t is not necessary to upgrade the building. In five years the book will disappear. With dial-in capabilities, everyone will have access to the virtual library. Or conversely, adding substantial electronics to a building is an expensive and unnecessary use of space. Spending money on hardware and software will diminish the book budget. When money is tight, allocating resources does tend to be a zero sum game. Furthermore, whether books or electronic equipment are more attractive tends to be in the eye of the beholder. While too many funding authorities are finding i t increasingly difficult to believe that hard-copy collections are still growing, in this age of high speed data, librarians still find ways to relegate microforms and microcomputers to small enclosed rooms in dreary basements or other dismal places. 552 LIBRARY TRENDWWINTER 1994 The irony is that, while electronics are threatening to chase printon-paper out of some facilities, hard-copy publications are still proliferating. Everyone thinks there will come a day when hard-copy collecting will come to an abrupt stop, but more than likely that event will occur far into the future. An increasing number of books and periodicals are being published in third world and developing countries, especially in the far east. Scientific subjects are multiplying and diversifying. New medical practices and innovative drugs command individual subclassifications. International law is becoming of interest to the ordinary person in the street. That is why few buildings are being erected without some place to install compact shelving. Depending on the method of construction, the difference between a floor that has the loading capacity of 150 pounds per square foot live load or one with 300 pounds may only be a dollar or two more for each square foot erected. To minimize this cost on the upper floors, only one floor may be designated for compact shelving. In other situations, a quadrant slicing through the building’s floors may have its columns and floors reinforced. In many cases, the most inexpensive method is to place compact shelving on the ground floor. This tactic usually requires only a thicker floor slab-provided, of course, the subsoil can support the weight of fully loaded compact stacks. The rails upon which these units slide can either be a part of the floor slab construction or added later. If the latter is the case, then the floor to ceiling height should be sufficiently high to take the addition that the track assemblies require. At an overwhelming majority of libraries, an installation of compact shelving appears to go hand in hand with increasing reliance on electronic services. No one wants to stop collecting hard copy, but space must be created in the public service areas for online searching and CD-ROM workstations. After all, online services and local area networks promise to overcome the limits of architecture and, at the same time, put a cap on the number of renovations to be made. Within the telecommunications cabling, there will be streams of data that must be able to pierce ceilings, walls, and floors. Here, a major consideration concerns the amount of electrical and telecommunications power that is brought to the building from the various utilities in the planning stage. It is important not to be too conservative. In the near future more is bound to be required. A rough rule of thumb is that each piece of electric/electronic equipment requires five amps. For example, five times sixty pieces of initial equipment amounts to 300 amps, where those sixty include microcomputers, terminal printers, copiers, microform machines, and electric pencil sharpeners-and coffee pots, microwave ovens, toasters, COHEN/ARCHITECTURAL AND INTERIOR PLANNING PROCESS 553 and so on. Do not forget the substantial amount of electricity required to run all the mechanical and electrical building equipment-heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC), and lighting. In a moderately-sized building, the HVAC and lighting needs may add up to more than three times the amount needed by information systems and workstation equipment. Although the former’s requirements may stay static, the latter’s will not. The number of electric/electronic devices is bound to keep on growing. It is only a small increase in cost to bring more electricity to the building in the initial planning. Larger cables may be all that is required. Once construction has been completed, bringing more power may require a large addition of money. Stringing cables is a labor-intensive process. Another consideration revolves around the availability of cableways, ducts, and other aspects of wire management within the facility. Future retrofits can be expensive if horizontal and vertical power distribution has not been planned carefully. It is not necessary to run substantially more wiring than initially needed. Rather, it is wise to plan building details that will allow wiring and cabling to be added sometime in the future. Most people will think twice before they drill into a marble wall or through good oak molding. They will go to lengths (no pun intended) to avoid unsightly wires from being draped from one end of the room to another. Knowledge of local codes is also important. Some codes restrict how wiring is run in the plenum above the suspended ceiling; ducts must be provided for that purpose. To bring the wiring down, channels may have to be cut in the plasterboard around columns or in walls. To run wiring along the floor, attractive and newly installed broadloom may have to be cut and spliced and the cement beneath chiseled to create trenches. If the library designer chooses broadloom, then the option of using undercarpet cabling (flat wiring) closes. The fire code allows carpet tile but prohibits broadloom from hiding this form of wiring. Undercarpet cabling is an excellent retrofit device. Obviously, the best suggestion is to prevent major wiring problems in the planning stage. During the planning process, ground rules should be created that minimize inflexibilities and thus future expenses. Architectural solutions should come first and interior design solutions second. An architectural solution may be a cellular floor and cable trays along upper walls, while interior design solutions may consist of furniture containing wire management. It is essential that these ground rules be followed during the design phases and not jettisoned the first time a schematic is displayed or opposition is voiced. For example, since carpet tile costs about 20 percent more than broadloom, it is often hard to sell it to the powers that be. It is 554 LIBRARY TRENDSIWINTER 1994 clearly the better choice, however. Not only can it act as a future retrofitting device, it is also easier to maintain. One can simply lift up a dirty tile and exchange i t with a clean one-perhaps from attic stock or underneath a desk. Tiles in very active walkways can be replaced on a regular basis, perhaps every few years, without affecting any other areas. Other suggestions to minimize inflexibilities concern the shape of the building’s interior. Simply shaped spaces lend themselves to rearrangement whereas complicated ones do not. Whenever the spaces are simple, the resulting areas can be used in any number of ways. Complicated spaces, on the other hand, tend to define the activities that can and cannot be performed. For example, a large open area can house books, seating areas, service points, or instructional facilities, often by simple rearrangement, but an interior “street” that threads through alternately narrow and wide spaces may force the adjacent square footage to be used only as originally intended-as offices, group study rooms, storage areas, etc. Another example of important guidelines concerns the roof and the suspended ceiling. Under no circumstances should either be dropped over the main stacks to minimize construction costs. This is a tactic used by many architects. In a single story building, initial costs can be somewhat lessened by reducing the total cubic area to be erected. In a multistory building, by dropping the suspended ceiling and letting the ducts run just above it, less interior space has to be finished which, in turn, minimizes costs. At first glance these tactics appear to have a second benefit-the possible reduction of utility costs as well. There is less space to heat, air condition, or light. Unfortunately, by dropping the roof or the suspended ceiling, spaces meant for human habitation in the public service area are created that are only seven and one half feet tall. Although this is tall enough to accommodate nearly everyoneexcept perhaps one or two of this nation’s basketball players-it can cause the feeling of claustrophobia. Most of us live in homes with finished ceilings about eight feet high, and we are conditioned to like public spaces with ceilings that are even higher. In a place of public accommodation, seven and one half feet is just too low. Designers agree but argue that few people stay in the stacks for hours on end and reading areas with taller ceilings tend to be only steps away. But what will happen in the future is the primary concern. More than likely, in five, ten, or fif teen years a percentage of bookstacks will no longer be needed. The materials-perhaps bound indexes or periodical backfiles-will be removed and access to the resources will be substituted with online services or CD-ROM networks or some COHEN/ARCHITECTURAL AND INTERIOR PLANNING PROCESS 555 other form of networked micromedia. How can a library recycle public service space that is only seven and one half feet high? The same question relates to self-supporting stacks. During the open access heyday, from the early 1950s through the late 1980s, purchases of hard copy grew geometrically decade after decade. To squeeze all this material into buildings with insufficient floor space, self-supporting stacks were installed in libraries all over the country. The height of three tiers amounted to about twenty-three feet. From slab to slab, even the lowest ceilinged building had two floors with about twenty-four feet. Thus, self-supporting stacks can be found in any number of “modern” buildings as well as those that are nearly a century old. Typically, these structures depend on uprights that pierce each deck and support the stacks above. To demount even one stack, it is essential to start at the top; to do otherwise would cause the whole structure to fall down. Unfortunately, the space on the first floor is what everyone covets the most. The only way to make that space available but leave the upper tiers of the self-supporting stack intact, is to remove shelves and leave the uprights right where they are. The result is an unattractive area studded with posts every three feet. Because the problem is so endemic, there are any number of libraries that contain at least one such area. Witness seating in an academic library with three foot wide student carrels shoved between the uprights. At more than one major public library, workstations have been installed in the decks, and the staff forced to work in them of ten complain about the conditions vociferously. The gist of the foregoing discussion is to avoid creating unpleasant spaces in public service areas. They will affect the library’s future ability to function effectively. For small libraries or libraries with very long runs of bookstacks, for example, the floor to finished ceiling height should be a minimum of nine feet, while a better guideline is eleven and a half feet. It not only is less claustrophobic, it also enables better air circulation and light distribution-provided lighting runs either perpendicular to the stacks or is set in a nondirectional pattern on the ceiling. Further, the fire code requires eighteen inches from the top of an obstruction to the bottom of the sprinkler head. Although one can install sprinkler heads that are flush to the ceiling, in the less expensive installations they tend to protrude an inch or two below. This diminishes the required clear space above the stack canopies. In several well-publicized incidents, top shelves had to be removed by order of the local fire marshall. At one famous law school, the library had to move one-seventh of the collection elsewhere. Everyone knows that off-site storage is an expense they would rather not incur. 556 LIBRARY TRENDVWINTER 1994