Like: Livingston Dining Hall
This photo was taken in Rutgers Livingston Campus. This is Livingston dining hall which provides students with a place to enjoy food and chat with friends. This skyway which connects the second floor of the dining hall with that of student center (did not appear in the photo) is the biggest reason that attract me. John M. Levy mentions that “The skyway plus the connecting corridors in commercial and public building form a five-mile system.” (182) Likewise, skyway in Livingston campus saves students’ time spending on looking for meeting rooms in student centers and encourages students to shop like buying coffee in Dunkin’ Donuts in student center.
Like: Livingston Plaza
These two photos were taken in Rutgers Livingston Campus. These two buildings are Apartment A and Apartment B, the living halls for Rutgers students. These two living halls are part of the plaza which provides students with conveniences. After a whole day’s class, students could easily enjoy Chinese and Mexican food; After a whole week’s class, students could step into drink stores like Starbucks to sit down and chat with friends. Furthermore, the street int the second photo is so wide that it is safe for pedestrians, bicycles and automobiles to pass through at the same time. Levy lists “2. Minimum conflict between pedestrians and vehicles” (185). as one of criteria for urban design, and in my opinion, Livingston plaza greatly satisfy this rule.
Dislike: Busch Silvers Apartments
This photo is taken in Rutgers Busch Campus. This building is one of silvers apartment. As an apartment for students, this building is inconvenient for two reasons. First of all, as we can see, there is only one path in front of this building. That means pedestrians and bicycle derivers need to share it together. So, it is possible to create frictions when students and bicycle drivers neglect the existence of the other ones. Moreover, the distance between random two apartments is so close that students could clearly hear the noise from the party which held in another building. Levy lists “2. Minimum conflict between pedestrians and vehicles. 3. Protection from rain, noise, wind, and so one” (185). as criteria for urban design. I don’t think this building satisfies those two rules.
Dislike: Science and Engineering Center
This photo was taken in Rutgers Busch Campus. This is the Science and Engineering Center. There are two reasons that this building is not satisfying. First of all, the lack of plants around the building could not provide enough shades for pedestrians. There is a stone bench near the building, but no one will be willing to sit on it when it is boiling hot in summer and covered by snow in winter. After that, we can see that the path to the building is too narrow. Students and bicycle drivers will have conflicts easily. This building contains lecture rooms. When class ends, there will be a lot of students rushing out of the building. At that time, frictions will easily appear. So, this building is not qualified for “2. Minimum conflict between pedestrians and vehicles.” (185) as Levy mentions as criteria for urban design.
Levy, John M. Contemporary Urban Planning. 10th ed. New York: Routledge, 2013. Print.