Building Interface - Robarts LibraryNathan BortolinLAN 2018October 18, 2010

-

Currently, the space in front of Robarts scores adequately as a successful public space, using Jan Gehl’s checklist.

ProtectionThe space is situated close to the street, but the main sidewalks and walkways are far enough away from it to keep pedestrians safe from danger. The space is usually very busy during the day and into the evening and good visibility deters crime. The immensity of the building can either block wind or enhance the sensation of it depem-ding on its direction, and the street parking zone and row of trees provide a buffer zone against traffic noise and exhaust fumes.

ComfortFor the most part there is plenty of room for people to walk around, even with the temporary limitations placed by construction fences and scaffolding. However, people tend not to stay very long as there are few benches and no tables within immediate proximity of the building. Within the surveyed hour, the longest anyone stayed in one place was around ten minutes, sitting on a bench. Views of the street are good on the south side of the entrance, but more limited on the north by the planted trees. The crowds and vehicular traffic can make the space noisy, but not overwhelmingly so. There is not much room for play, though the wide sidewalks allow for unplanned activities.

EnjoymentThe building dominates the space in front of it and takes up room near the sidewalk which could be better used as social space. The south entrance walkway is very wide open and serves as a preferred gathering space. The uniqueness of the impressive structure as well as the vegetated mounds offer pleasant sense experiences.

good

50m

averagepoor

St. George St.

Hoskin Ave.

Built in 1973, Robarts Library is the largest library on the University of Toronto campus. In 1997, St. George St. underwent a revitalization effort in which the space in front of the library was revamped with planters and ledges. However, the space requires more adequate program for the thou-sands of building users and passersby who visit the site daily. A new revitalization effort to the building will place more seating and a wider stair-case on the south end of the building facing the corner of St. George and Hoskin. Below are shown current views of the entrances from the south (A) and north (B), and views from those entrances, respectively north (C) and south (D).

A

C D

B

Robarts Main Entrance & Public Space

construction

construction

construction

Character of Activity-TrafficThousands of patrons, mostly Unversity of Toronto students, visit the building when it is open during the week and on weekends, particularly during the fall and winter semesters. During this visit at least a few hundred people passed through this space, most either walking past or into the building. Most people were viewed on the main sidewalk, with the south entranceway attracting more pedestrians than the north one. A Chinese food truck received considerable business, as did a hot dog stand, both which are regularly parked in front of the building.

Pedestrian traffic is relatively well-accommodated. More pedestrian traffic came from the corner of St. George and Hoskin rather than north of the building. The side-walk along St. George St. is wide enough to allow for people to pass by the building while the walkways lead-ing from the sidewalk to the building’s entrance collect people so as not to cause congestion. People will gather within these walkways (A). On this particular occasion promoters stood along the sides of the sidewalks to hand out advertisements, targeting passers-by more so than gatherers (B). There is ample provision of space for people to lock their bikes (C).

People will gather (standing) near the building entrance, more often on the south side rather than the north (D). In between the planters are zones which link the two sidewalks, which sometimes are used as gathering spots (E).

At the time of this visit, access to the second floor via stairway was hindered because of renovations. People did still venture up the stairs to find out they could not enter the building up there (F).

total visible pedestrian activity over one-hour period

viewerpersonparked car

food truckhot dog standbench

A

B

C D E F

Interaction with SurfacesThere exist some opportunities for people to sit, namely on the ledges of four grassy mounds where a row of trees aligns with the street (A). The ledges facing the street were underused; those ledges perpendicular to the street were used more often. Only two benches are provided near the doors along the entrance walkways; these benches are often used. Next to each of these benches is a ledge that juts out from a wall (B, C). These ledges are used less than the benches--it seems that more benches would be used were they there.

Objects with which people can interact include the garbage cans (D) and ashtrays. Telephone poles receive posters which sometimes gain attention of passers-by.

The food truck had customers for the entire hour, often with more than one person standing in line. Only by the truck did people stand on the planter ledge or on the grass on the mounds, and only a few times during the survey period. When they did so they were waiting in line to order food (E). The planter ledges were relatively unused on the north side of the building entranceways. People sometimes ate their food on the benches or on the planter ledges, but often they took their food else-where to eat it. Sometimes they even ate standing on the sidewalk (F).

A B

C

D FE

ShortcomingsSome aspects of the design of this space fall short of encouraging social life.

The entrance is designed to accommodate pedestrians moving from the south or north. An overhang covers this entranceway and rests on a triangular block which con-tinues on a slope all the way to the sidewalk. This protru-sion does little to animate the space other than to impose itself upon the pedestrian, and no one interacted with it during the survey period but instead passively bypassed it (A). On either side of this protrusion are patches of grass which also were never stepped on.This overhang also interferes with space directly in front of the entrance, where people are more likely to gather (B).

Other unused spaces are lowered alcoves on either side of the entranceway in which service pathways lead to entranceways accessible by staff only. These grassy areas, though substantial, are seemingly cut off from the social life nearby (C, D).

Perhaps on account of the shade, the ledges on the north of the entranceway were not sat on at all. Were these ledges facing the larger sidewalk rather than the street, they would perhaps be used more (E). Instead, all they face are parked cars. Also, while it provides a zone of access to those vehicles, the smaller sidewalk is used much less than the larger one (F).

Proposed Solution:

BA

C D

E F

12:30

12:35

12:40

12:45

APPENDIX- panoramic imaging and mappingFriday, October 15, 2010, 12:30-1:25PM, sunny, wind 15 km/h, temp. 14 C

class �eld trip, gathering between planters

pedestrian between planters

continuous sidewalk tra�cbusy street corner use of benches

use of garbage can

gathering near bikespeople walk in front of rather than behind tree

food truck and hotdog standattracts customers

12:50

12:55

1:00

1:05

standing on grass rather than ledge

event promoters, wearing costumes

1:10

1:15

1:20

1:25

sitting on ledge

sitting on ledge

standing on ledge

no food truck customers, but some hot dog stand customers