Critique of Public Space
The public space I chose to
visit was the local mall, Park City Center, in Lancaster. Whoever designed this
mall was clearly not thinking of the average shopper, the speed shopper, or
even a shopper who has a lot of time on their hands. This is one of the worst
layouts of any building I have ever seen and that’s why I immediately chose it
for this critique.
Online Directory:
This is the map that is
available on the malls website. Online, the designer did a great job at
displaying the different sections of the mall by the use of color. The designer
also used a legend to display where mall entrances, restrooms, customer
service, ATM’s and mail offices are. The
directory and map online are visually easy to understand and interpret.
Mall Directory:
The design and layout of the mall
directory itself is very easy to understand due to the individual decisions the
designer made. Firstly, the designer used color to separate the different zones
of the mall.
They also used a unified
sans-serif font throughout the map that kept the store directory simple. The font size was only
changed and made bold for the headings of the different categories of the store
listings, to emphasize the category and make it stand out from all the store
listings.
Under each category there is a list of stores with a ZONE – (_). For example, lets say a
shopper was looking for Sephora, they would browse the Health & Beauty
category, and locate Sephora on the listing, for examples sake we will say
Sephora is located at Zone - D. Once the
shopper locates the wing they are looking for, they can head to their
destination.
At the Mall:
These directories are so hard
to locate. I’ve only seen two haphazardly placed throughout the mall. Aside
from the few directories located in random locations in the mall, there are no
other visuals to guide the shopper through the building except for the Logos of the major brand department stores at the end of each major wing.
During the holiday times and
quite often, they use the center of the building (where the wings meet) as a
place to hold events. There are a few small coffee shops and food stands in
this center as well, with chairs and tables scattered around the stands, which
makes walking from wing to wing awkward and inconvenient.
The overall design of this building
is not in anyway cohesive or united. The directories are not easy to locate and
the wings of the buildings are not connected at the ends, which makes walking
up and down each separate wing irritating and problematic for the shopper.
There is also a wing that has stores that are only accessible through the
outside of the building, which is also really inconvenient. I didn’t realize
those outdoor stores existed until one day I parked in a different wing than
usual. The only component of this place that makes sense and is easy to
navigate due to road signs and signs for the different stores are the parking
lots.
Areas of Improvement:
Some differences I would
definitely make as a designer would be to add the directories to the online
map, so users could easily locate them when they do enter the mall. Jacobsen
writes, “The urban and architectural environment has also grown more
perplexing; just finding our way around our built environment, a trivial task
in the past, is now a distinct challenge. Thus the design of information and
its efficient communication are more critical than ever (Information Design
84). So, I would also put a directory at the end of each wing of the mall,
making them easy to find and close no matter what wing of the building you are
in.
Another one of the issue with
the layout of this mall is how all of the wings meet in the center circle where
there are food stands, kiosks, and coffee stands with tables. As a designer I
would create barriers between these areas to sit or purchase food so that
shoppers could still easily maneuver through the center of the mall. Jacobsen
writes, “as designers, we need to be conscious of, accept, and embrace the
notion of unique perceptual abilities and respond generously to the needs it
implies” (ID 128).
The most major issue with the layout of this mall is not so much the signage or visual markers as it is with the actual accessibility and layout of the building itself. To better direct people where to go, I would recommend the above suggestions. However, taking it to another level, the actual building itself needs improvement in order for the building, the stores, and information in general inside this building to be as easily accessed as possible by its customers.
Something I think about every
time I go to this mall is how I hate that every wing is a dead end. If the
store I want to go to is all the way at the end of the wing, I have to walk all
the way back up to the center and then turn the corner to a different wing and
the process repeats itself. This may seem trivial but if there are 8 major
wings of the building and two outside and you decide you want to go back and
get that item you thought about, all the way down another wing, it's frustrating and certainly deters most people from actually going all the way back.
The simple graphic I created
on Photoshop is supposed to represent all of the main entrances to the building
being at the 4 major department store wings. I’d also include 4 other separate
entrances between the 4 major department stores. From there, I would basically
make a circle connecting the all the wings of the structure. This way, when the
customer gets to the end of one wing, they can turn down the hall and walk up
the next wing instead of going up and down. I would also leave the department
stores separated from the hallway by also having their own entrances because if
the circle was connected to the department stores, the customers would have to
walk through the department stores to get to the desired wing, which wouldn’t
help too much.