Environmental feedback is needed in current architectural practices in order to achieve sustainable and well-qualified buildings that seriously fulfil the needs of their inhabitants. Postoccupancy evaluations can be seen as useful tools for obtaining feedback on how buildings perform and how they are experienced by their inhabitants after they have been occupied. These studies evaluate designed spaces in a scientific way and can be accepted as important resources supplying valuable information to architects for their future design proposals. In this way, they also constitute an important link between architectural research and practice. The aim of this paper is to focus on the post-occupancy evaluations of two student centres which have been designed in the scope of renovations at Istanbul Technical University. In the last fifteen years ITU has worked hard to improve and develop physical and social structures on its campuses, and new projects have been designed. Some faculty spaces that have completed their functional life span have been renovated and new spaces have been created to serve the changing needs of their users. In this study, first the concept of “re-functioning of existing buildings” is introduced and then two projects designed during these renovation attempts are tested comparatively by their architects. Occupants’ needs, perceptions and expectations are taken into account and in-depth interviewing with the administration, teaching staff and the students, behavioural observation and photographic documentation have been employed in the post-occupancy analysis. Technical (acoustic, lighting, ventilation, heat), spatial (function of space, arrangement of space, order of space/spatial relations, size of space), behavioural (personal expressions, social interaction, comfort and aesthetic) and management issues (service quality, control of space) are tested in the POEs. By measuring both successes and failures inherent in the buildings’ performance, feedback for further developments in other ITU academic buildings is provided.
[1]
P. Dursun.
SPACE SYNTAX IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 056
,
2007
.
[2]
Chris Watson,et al.
Review of Building Quality Using Post Occupancy Evaluation
,
2003
.
[3]
Tadj Oreszczyn,et al.
Architects need environmental feedback
,
2004
.
[4]
Ian Cooper,et al.
Post-occupancy evaluation - where are you?
,
2001
.
[5]
Wolfgang F. E. Preiser,et al.
Assessing building performance
,
2005
.
[6]
George Baird.
Building evaluation techniques
,
1995
.
[7]
Bill Hillier,et al.
How is design possible
,
2013
.
[8]
Edward T. White,et al.
Post-Occupancy Evaluation
,
1988
.
[9]
Richard Wener,et al.
Advances in Evaluation of the Built Environment
,
1989
.
[10]
F. E. Wolfgang Preiser,et al.
Toward Universal Design Evaluation
,
2001
.
[11]
Bryan Lawson,et al.
How Designers Think
,
1980
.
[12]
Mark Martin,et al.
Post-occupancy evaluation: benefits and barriers
,
2001
.
[13]
D. M. Gann,et al.
Closing the loop between design and use: post-occupancy evaluation
,
2001
.
[14]
Ervin H. Zube.
Environmental Evaluation: Perception and Public Policy
,
1984
.
[15]
John Zeisel,et al.
Inquiry by Design: Tools for Environment-Behaviour Research
,
1984
.