4.3 Article

Post-occupancy evaluation of the urban underground complex: A case study of Chengdu Tianfu Square in China

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13467581.2021.2024204

Keywords

Post-occupancy evaluation; urban underground complex; user satisfaction; China; factor analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This research utilizes post-occupancy evaluations to assess user satisfaction in urban underground complexes (UUCs) and identifies transport convenience and transfer efficiency as the major concerns among UUC users. The study also finds that spatial morphology and texture, space proportions, color, decoration, materials, and overall planning have a significant impact on user satisfaction.
The urban underground complex (UUC) is an important approach in the utilization of urban underground spaces in high-density Asian cities. Presently, UUCs in China are large in scale and in quantity, which makes it necessary to assess the condition of UUCs and evaluate whether they meet users' requirements. This can serve as feedback and optimize the design and construction of UUCs. This research employs post-occupancy evaluations (POEs) to determine the major problems and concerns among UUC users and assess their satisfaction levels, taking the Chengdu Tianfu Square UUC as an example. Field interviews and online and field questionnaire surveys were used to establish an index set. The results revealed that transport convenience and transfer efficiency were the most frequently mentioned issues by users. They were less satisfied with the UUC's walking accessibility, internal physical environment, and orientation. The spatial morphology and texture, space proportions, color, decoration, materials, and overall planning had a higher correlation coefficient with the overall user satisfaction results. Eight main factors were identified through factor analysis, which represents the eight key aspects that the design of UUCs should focus on.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available