Site
If the site is given by a donor, or chosen by some other authority, and has been accepted by the board, the only thing to do is to make the best of it. Adapt your plan to it, improve whatever opportunities it may offer, and overcome its defects as best you can.
If it is open to choice, there are often embarrassing conditions. Owners of lots more or less eligible (usually less) are anxious to unload at good prices, and besiege the board with importunities; or owners of real estate not immediately eligible, exert all their direct and indirect influence to get the library building in their district or on their “side.” Even after the choice has been narrowed down to two or three acceptable lots, and has been freed from “pull,” selection is difficult because of different pros and cons.
The main consideration for central library or branch is accessibility for the largest number of users. Retail centers, not so much geographical as practical, well served by car lines, point out the proper neighborhood, but main streets are often too noisy, and good lots on them are too expensive and not easy to get. If there is a quiet street next back of, or close to a main street, especially with an adjoining public square or small park, it will furnish an ideal spot for a library. Good vistas of approach afford opportunities for effect, and bring the library into view and notice.
Space all around the building, and adjoining streets on as many sides as possible, give light, isolation from dangers of fire, more quiet, less dust, than positions directly on a main street.
A wholesale business section, whose occupants only come during business hours of the day, is not a good location. Edges of vast open spaces are not so good as actual centres of residence or of small retail trade to which residents are attracted.
If a site among high buildings must be chosen it would seem wise to build the library high, with reading rooms up toward air and light.
By all means try to foresee and provide for future developments as they may affect immediate surroundings and future accessibility. The neighborhood of schools is always good. Bear in mind that certain noisy or smoky occupations are bad neighbors, and slums only suitable for charitable work.
A lot too high above the street grade may offer architectural advantages, but is bad for public library purposes. Popular departments ought to be directly at street grade, and the necessity of climbing steps hinders rather than attracts readers. A lot sloping upward requires objectionable and expensive approaches, one sloping sideways is unbalanced, but one sloping backwards is often good, for it allows a light basement at the rear, or a stack above and below the main floor at street grade.
It goes without saying that a wet soil is to be avoided where books are to be stored.
In a large city a favorite site for the central library is on some municipal square, near other public buildings. But in such a prominent place, especial care is necessary to escape a heavy architectural style which would darken the building, and divert cost from library facilities to expensive material.
In smaller cities and towns, better sites in proportion may be obtained. Here, where land is cheap enough to allow more space, always provide for growth and future extensions of the building. It has been advised to get enough land for future development, even at expense of the first building.
“The worst site is a deep one, of irregular shape, with only one frontage. If offered, don’t buy, or even accept it as a gift.”—Burgoyne.[161]
But a deep and irregular lot, with a possibility of light on all sides, may not be unfavorable for a building with a stack at the rear. Narrowness in a stack, if somewhat unfavorable to short lines of communication with the desk, give possibilities of excellent daylight everywhere.