Building and Enoironment Vol. 33, No. 5, pp.

311-323, 1998
0 1997 Elsev~er Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Pergamon Printed m Great Bntam
036&1323/98 $19.00+0.00

PII: SO360-1323(97)00050-4

Spatial Adaptability and Flexibility as

Parameters of User Satisfaction for
Quality Housing

NUR ESIN ALTAS*t (Received 16 April 1996; revised 25 February 1991; accepted 2 September 1997)
AHSEN GZSOY?

Residential satisfaction on dwelling space is the function of three groups of variables. These are
user characteristics, physical attributes of a space, and beliefs andperception of the user about the
experienced space. This article intends to focus on the evaluation of the ‘dwelling space’ in terms
of residential satisfaction of the occupants. Level of residential satisfaction gradually decreases by
the time with the changing spatial needs of occupants. Users achieue satisfaction by changing
the physical characteristics of their environments to create more adaptable and flexible spaces.
Adaptability andflexibility are quality characteristics of a space. In this study, they are studied in
terms of size, space organization, and changes and alterations on physical attributes. This study
presents the results of a comparative analysis of four 2-bedroom type apartment units, having
different plan organizations andphysicalattributes. Factors of spatial satisfaction due to size and
physical characteristics of dwelling spaces after alterations were investigated. Comparisons were
made to find out the potential plan types for future alterations for residential satisfaction. This
study is based on the data of a comprehensive post-occupancy evaluation of 1620 year old housing
settlement in Istanbul, Atakoy. 0 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. INTRODUCTION: EMERGING PROBLEMS OF ,On the other hand, a rental housing system has not
HOUSING IN TURKEY been seen as a way of solution for the housing problem.
In the meantime, there is no control on rents, and rents
Turkey has been undergoing a rapid process of popu-
are increased with the increase in inflation rates. People
lation growth and urbanization for several years.
prefer to own a dwelling whenever they get an oppor-
Especially the city of Istanbul as a great metropolis, has
tunity. Thus, families live in their dwellings for a long
experienced continuous population growth because of
period of time, since they lack the economic power to
economically motivated migration from the east of the
change their dwelling to a bigger or more adequate one.
country to the west. Housing shortage has forced the
Instead, residents try to solve the emerging spatial needs
government to solve the housing problem by rapid hous-
by making some alterations in their existing dwellings,
ing production systems in several ways. The Housing
and thus adapting the space to their changing needs.
Estate Bank provides housing credit with high interest
Another emerging problem in housing is the growing
rates for the middle-higher income groups, and organizes
demand of residents for better quality housing. While
the housing production activities [I]. Government also
the previous efforts in housing estate have been directed
encourages cooperative housing for middle-low income
towards meeting the quantitative shortage of dwellings ;
groups [2]. Dwelling units in both systems are designed
qualitative aspects of housing have gained importance in
for standard average users. Neither the differences of
recent years. Users are getting more conscious of quality
occupants’ characteristics, nor the changing needs of resi-
issues in housing environments [4, 51.
dents in time are considered in design. Social change in
Under these socio-economic circumstances, ‘adap-
household composition is towards getting smaller, and
tability’ becomes one of the essential spatial features for
this has been also reflected in the size of dwellings in
residential satisfaction of dwellings of mass(standard)-
newly constructed housing settlements [3]. Composition
production types. This article aims to search this sig-
of single bedroom (studio type), 2 and 3 bedroom apart-
nificant issue based on the post-evaluation study that
ment blocks are very common in such areas. These dwell-
investigates adaptability of the original plan arrange-
ing units are considerably smaller in area when compared
ments of dwellings which have been used for 16-20 years
with the 2 and 3 bedroom type dwellings of 50s and 60s
in the two regions of Atakiiy Housing Settlement in Istan-
of the same regions.
bul [6]. Spatial and socio-psychological dimensions of the
subject are also discussed in the light of the other research
*Corresponding author. Fax: 00-90-216-417-0875.
tIstanbu1 Technical University, Faculty of Architecture, results on quality factors such as residential satisfaction,
Taskigla, Taksim 80191, Istanbul, Turkey. adaptability and spatial adequacy.

315
316 N. E. Altaq and A. ~ZSOJ

2. RESIDENTIAL SATISFACTION, subjective response to laboratory simulated rooms (e.g.

ADAPTABILITY AND SPATIAL ADEQUACY the perception of the size of rooms) of various dimensions
are some of them. Oseland et al. [16] referred to the
Residential satisfaction and quality of housing are two findings of Espe et al. They stated that subjects’ overall
mutually related concepts in housing evaluation studies. evaluation of perceived room size varies slightly for
In some works, satisfaction is referred to as a criterion different room sizes [17]. Room shape also affects the
for evaluating the quality of the residential environment perception of room size [18]. Pennartz stated that the
by measuring the effect of perception and assessments of size, shape, level of enclosure and arrangements of rooms
the objective environment upon satisfaction. While some were also found to affect the experience of the ‘atmo-
other writers refer to it as a predictor of behavior [7], sphere’ of the home [19]. Oseland and Raw argued the
Francescato and others conceive satisfaction as a func- effect of experiencing the real space instead of simulated
tion of different categories of variables: the objective space in such evaluations. Their study was conducted on
characteristics of the residents, objective characteristics existing dwellings. They concluded that the connection
of the housing environments, and the occupants’ per- between perceived space and dwelling size is not a simple
ception and beliefs about the aspects of their housing one [16].
environment which are the physical environment, the
housing management, and the other residents [8]. Marans
and Sprecklemeyer’s model recognizes the physical 3. THE RESEARCH
environment by indicating that objective attributes of the
particular environment have an influence upon a person’s In the following research, adaptability of the original
satisfaction through the person’s perception and assess- plan arrangements of dwellings were investigated which
have been used for 16-20 years in the two regions of
ments of those environmental attributes. It also states
Atakiiy Housing Settlement in Istanbul [6]. The evalu-
that a person’s behavior is influenced by satisfaction, the
perception and assessments of the objective environ- ation studies comprised the search on social charac-
mental attributes, and the objective attributes of the teristics as well as the physical characteristics of the settle-
environment itself [9]. ment. Social characteristics such as family characteristics,
“management and maintenance of the buildings and the
Some other writers concentrate on the mechanisms
surroundings, attitudes of neighbors etc. were studied.
affecting spatial behavior of the users. The aim of spatial
behavior is to meet requirements, and changing/adapting Physical characteristics of the blocks, and plan charac-
behavior occurs when there is need to change the existing teristics of several dwelling types were also recorded and
unsatisfactory situation. There are two different views investigated. Findings presented in this article were
concerning the adaptation of the environment : the more driven from the data of several statistical analyses as well
changes in the environment, the more suitable the as spatial analyses conducted by the authors.
The term ‘adaptation’ is defined as the adaptability for
environment will be [lo], and too many adaptations made
changes and alterations to adapt environment to the
in the environment indicate that the environment is far
from being satisfactory for the requirements [Ill. The changing needs of the occupants in time. The term ‘flexi-
problem seems to arise from the degree and the quality bility’ refers to use of space for various purposes without
making physical alterations. The higher level of flexibility
of adaptations made. In designing flexible dwellings, the
question is what level of flexibility would be sufficient in the use of rooms can be achieved in the dwelling types
and suitable for the satisfaction of the user. Two design where there exists a potential for adaptation with physical
change. The subject is studied considering the following
models which can be accepted as valid according to the
level of flexibility in terms of building type are : potential aspect of adaptability/flexibility :
for adaptability without physical changes, and capability
l The potential of the dwelling unit for adap-
for internal changes according to zoning decisions (flex-
tability/flexibility for the various needs of families, and
ible, modular component architecture). Potential for
also for their changing needs in time ;
adaptability without physical changes is a more suitable
l Suitability of dwelling spaces or zones for different
approach according to Rabanec. He observes that possi-
activity patterns.
bility for a change in dwellings is higher not in terms of
activities, but in terms of locations and interrelations of In this study, four plan types having two bedroom
activities [12]. Price observes that the most significant units were investigated. 2-bedroom dwelling type was
change occurs in the service areas as a result of the intro- chosen which seems to be the critical size for evaluating
duction of some new labor saving technological devices user satisfaction through changing spatial needs.
[ 131. Flexible/modular component model, however, pro- Spatial satisfaction with the dwelling is investigated
poses a solution that the user can find by arranging the with the physical attributes of the dwelling., The term
component as he desires. A significant example of this ‘size’ (dwelling size and space size) is taken as a research
model is the methodology used in the SAR dwelling tool in order to investigate the degree of satisfaction.
design which has been developed by Habraken et al. [ 141. Basic assumptions of this study are stated in terms of
Most of the housing evaluation studies concern neigh- dwelling size and space size, space organizations, and
borhood scale and social variables such as management, spatial changes and alterations.
maintenance, friendly neighbors and other residents.
Among these few dealt with physical attributes of room l Assumption 1 : Dwelling size is a function of dimen-
spaces (layout, space and room size) as predictors of sional variables (width, length, area etc.) defining the
dwelling satisfaction [I 51. Psychological researches on dwelling and the characteristics of the family or house-
 User Satisfaction for Quality Housing 317

Table 1. Sampling information

REGION 1 REGION 34 TOTAL

Dwelling Type HM K 0 O-TO

Number of Dwellings 384 240 720 1020 2364
Sample Dwellings 58 40 135 165 398
Sampling Percentages (X) 15.1 16.6 18.8 16.2 16.8 (Average)

hold occupying the dwelling, As Oseland et al. stated,
the relation between the perceived space and dwelling
size is not a simple one.
l Assumption 2 : Different space organizations may offer
different possibilities in terms of adaptability to user
needs. The degree of flexibility/adaptability for alter-
ations and divisions depends on the organization
dwelling-type.
l Assumption 3 : What physical changes can be made in
a dwelling to adapt it to the user’s needs depends on
the physical characteristics (such as dimensions, instal-
lations, supporting systems) of the adjacent spaces, and
on their functional suitability.
In this context, on the basis of 398 samples chosen
from 4 different types of 2-bedroom dwellings, the com-
parisons of the original plan and organization scheme
with the altered plan and organization scheme were inves-
tigated in terms of user satisfaction. Alterations/ adap-
tations made by the users on a single space, and the use
of the same space for different activity patterns were
assessed. Stratified sampling was applied and sampling
percentages of each plan type are given at Table 1. Sam-
pling considers the following conditions :
l A region having homogeneous socio-economical family
characteristics was selected (see Table 2 for user charac-
teristics) ;
l The owners’ dwellings were investigated to search for
of
alterations made in the life span of the buildings (rental
houses were not covered in research, since they are not
permitted to make such alterations);
l Dwelling size for investigation was decided as 2-bed-
room type, since the need for physical alterations
becomes critical at that size ;
l Four plan types having different physical charac-
teristics, and offering different possibilities for physical
alterations were chosen. These differences are about (i)
dwelling area ; (ii) passage from entrance to bedroom
zone ; (iii) possibility of area growth or division in living
zone and in bedrooms ; (iv) possibility of area additions
to kitchen or alterations of toilet into kitchen (Table
5). Investigated plan typologies and alterations made
by the sample users.

Table 2. General findings about family characteristics for the sample dwellings (including four dwelling types)

Frequency Percentage

Family (Household) Types

1. Individual 31 9.3
2. Nuclear family without children 3 0.8
3. Contracting family (Daughter/son and one of the parents) 76 (19.1)
4. Nuclear family with children 177 (44.5)
5. Extended family (nuclear family with one of the relatives) 38 9.5
6. Other forms (two friends, etc.) 67 (16.8)
TOTAL 398 100.0
Average Age of Family (Household)
1. 15-20 year old 50 (12.6)
2. 21-30 year old 142 (35.7)
3. 3140 year old 105 (26.4)
4. 41-50 year old 75 (18.8)
5. 51-up 24 6.0
9. Unknown 2 0.5
TOTAL 398 100.0
Number of Individuals in the Dwelling
1 person 31 9.3
2 persons 125 (31.4)
3 persons 91 (22.9)
4 persons 108 (27.1)
5 persons 28 7.0
6 persons 6 1.5
7 persons 1 0.3
8 persons 2 0.5
TOTAL 389 100.0
318 N. E. Altad and A. ozsoy

Table 3. Family characteristics of four plan types (frequency percentages)

Plan Type 1 (O-TO) Plan Type 2 (HM) Plan Type 3 (K) Plan Type 4 (0)
ti-= 165 ti-= 58 N-i40 N i-135

Family (Household) Types

1. Individual 8.5 15.5 12.5 6.7
2. Nuclear family without children 5.0 0.7
3. Contracting family (15.8) (31.0) (17.5) (18.5)
4. Nuclear family with children (49.1) (32.8) (37.5) (45.9)
5. Extended family 10.3 6.9 7.5 10.4
6. Other forms (16.4) (13.8) (20.0) (17.8)
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number of Individuals in the Dwelling
1 person 8.5 15.5 12.5 6.7
2 persons 8.5 (43.1) (37.5) (30.4)
3 persons (26.7) (19.0) (17.5) (20.0)
4 persons (27.3) (17.2) (27.5) (31.1)
5 persons 6.7 5.2 5.0 8.9
6 persons 1.8 2.2
7 persons 1.2 0.7
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
University Level Education 57.0 67.0 66.9 41.0
-

Statistical analyses (basic statistics and Factor Analy- such as audio-visual devices and computers is in between
sis) and spatial evaluation techniques (visual-mor- 2045%. Car ownership is about 50% in investigated
phological analyses) were employed to make comparative dwellings.
investigations on the relationships between dwelling size,
organization and adaptability/flexibility concept. 4.2. Plan investigations
4.2.1. Comparisons of plan organizations in terms of pri-
vate/semi-private zones
4. FINDINGS
l Plan Type 1 has separate entrance to bedroom zone.
Findings of the research are presented under three No problem of privacy.
headings, these are user characteristics, plan inves- l Plan Type 2 is the same as type 1.

tigations and the results of statistical analyses.
4.1. User characteristics
As Ktray pointed out household composition and fam-
ily size in Turkey is getting smaller. Families and house-
holds in big cities mostly consist of nuclear families and
even of small families with 2-3 children. Other types
of household compositions are two or more working
individuals, and single women living on their own. While
the rate of young and growing households increases, a
decreasing tendency is observed in elderly households [3].
The same tendency is observed in the research. Table 2
shows the general user characteristics in the two regions
of the settlement for the selected plan types. Household
composition is in the form of nuclear family with children
(44.5%), contracting family type and other forms which
have a small number of individuals in the dwelling, rang-
ing from 2 to 4. Average age of the household is in
between 20 and 50 (cumulative 80.9%). Table 3 shows
how these characteristics are similar in four dwelling
types. The education levels of the households are also
l Plan Type 3 has no entrance hall and no private passage
to the bedroom zone. The main problem in using this
plan is the lack of household privacy because of this
plan organization. Most of the alterations were made
to provide a private bedroom entrance.
l Plan Type 4 has no definite private entrance to the
bedroom zone but it has the potential to create a pass-
age out of the living zone, that makes an organizational
change in plan.
4.2.2. Comparisons of potential for area enlargement,
and spatial alterations (Table 4)
l Plan Type 1 (O-TO) : effective dwelling area can be
enlarged by the addition of living balcony from 63.95
sq m to 67.80 sq m. There is no possibility to create
third bedroom.
l Plan Type 2 (HM): effective dwelling area can be
enlarged from 66.45 sq m to 89.55 sq m by adding
balconies to the living room, bedrooms and the kitchen.
There is no possibility to create a third bedroom.
l Plan Type 3 (K) : effective dwelling area can be enlarged

similar : Nearly half of the interviewees (household prin- from 74.60 sq m to 84.00 sq m by the addition of the
ciple or one of the parents) have university level living room and the kitchen balcony to the interior.
education. In order to get information about the level of There is no possibility to create a third bedroom.
life standards of the families, they were asked about the l Plan Type 4 (0) : Effective dwelling area can be enlarged

types of domestic equipment owned. All the families have from 81.40 sq m to 85.60 sq m by the addition of the
basic domestic equipment such as oven, vacuum cleaner, living room balconies. It is possible to obtain a. third
refrigerator, washing machine, color TV (100%). Per- bedroom by dividing one part of the living area. By this
centage of the ownership of additional electrical devices way separate passage to private zone becomes possible.
 User Satisfaction for Quality Housing
Table 4. Possibility of area increase in the plan types
Interval of area increase
Dwelling Type Area (sq m)
Min. Max.
Type 1 63.95-67.80
Type 2 66.45-89.55
Type 3 74.60-84.00
Type 4 81.40-85.60
The toilet can be added to the kitchen to obtain more
suitable space.
4.3. Statisticalfindings about dwelling types
Variables of statistical analyses are family/household
characteristics such as size and type, dwelling area (orig-
inal and altered), area of dwelling spaces, and user evalu-
ations about the dwelling and rooms. Household types
in the investigated dwellings are nuclear family with chil-
dren (44.5%) nuclear family (19.1%), and contracting
family type of daughter/son and one of the parents or
sisters/brothers etc. (16.8%). Elderly or individuals, and
extended family types have the similar percentage of 9.3
and 9.5 respectively. Family sizes are cumulated on 24
person families (81.4%). The 80.9 percent of the families
are at the age of 25-60.
Multiple regression analysis was applied to under-
stand, to what extent one can predict the dwelling size
evaluations of the user by looking at the variables of
dwelling area and household size. The relation is found
to be 45% which is mostly dependent on the household
size (0.42). It is also discovered that, it is not possible to
predict the user satisfaction by looking at family size
only. On the other hand, no specific relation is found
between the dwelling area and the user satisfaction about
the dwelling size (Table 6).
These findings support authors’ hypothesis that user
satisfaction depends on variables other than the dwelling
or space size (in terms of dimensions). Factor analysis
was applied on the sample of 389 dwelling users, to find
out these unobserved variables. Four factors that were
extracted by the analysis were named as the following
(Table 7) :
l Factor 1: Effect of alteration in the living zone on the
user evaluation of satisfaction,
l Factor 2 : Effect of family/household size and type on
the user evaluation of satisfaction,
Factor 3 : Effect of alteration in the kitchen on the user
evaluation of satisfaction,
l Factor 4 : Potential of creating a third room.
4.3.1. Factor 1 About the physical alterations made in
the living zones, two situations can be observed, these
are :
l To increase the living area by adding the living balcony
inside. At the dwelling type 1 this kind of alteration
makes the space more flexible and creates a potential
to divide up the living space for obtaining a third room.
Thus it brings an organizational change in dwelling
plan.
319
Percentage of
Min. Max. alteration
3.85 10.7
1.60-23.10 60.3
1.80-9.40 40
4.20 1.5
l The balcony addition has no help for further alterations
as division of space, and/or further flexible use. This
phenomenon is observed at the dwelling types 2 and 4,
and the most inefficient situation occurs in the dwelling
type 3.
It can be claimed that users’ positive evaluations
towards satisfaction from the dwelling size can be deter-
mined by its potential to create new uses.
4.3.2. Factor 2 This factor points out the role offamily
size and type in users’ positive evaluations among dwell-
ing size. Increase in the family size and bigger family
types indicate negative attitudes in users’ evaluations
(CX= -0.65).
4.3.3. Factor 3 It is understood that alterations to the
kitchen influence the users’ evaluations about dwelling
size positively. Two situations were observed in the plan
types which were investigated, these are :
l To increase the kitchen area by the addition of the
adjacent toilet area. This situation does not cause any
increase in the total area of the dwelling.
l To increase the kitchen area by the addition of kitchen
balcony inside. Although this also creates an increase
in the total dwelling area, the authors could not find
any significant relation between user satisfaction and
area increase in dwelling caused by kitchen alteration
(c( = 0.3 l), since 82% of the investigated dwellings have
no kitchen balcony.
4.3.4. Factor 4 Potential for creating a third room is
not related to the total dwelling area (c( = 0.39) but it is
defined as the potential for division of the existing dwell-
ing areas in terms of spatial dimensions which are suitable
for activity patterns. The dwelling type 4 is the best exam-
ple of this situation.
4.4. Investigations on dwelling spaces
Further analyses were made on the living room, kit-
chen and bedroom zones of the dwelling types to inves-
tigate and control the results of factor analysis. Variables
are area changes in dwelling,spaces, area changes in the
adjacent balconies, user evaluations about space size and
flexible use of that space, family type and family size.
In the investigated plan types, 53% of the living zones
are rectangular in shape, and 45% are L shaped. No
significant change was recognized before and after alter-
ations. Additions of the total area of balconies in plan
types are 8.8%. That means most of the users prefer to
keep some part of the living balcony (91.2%). If the size
320 N. E. Altq and A. ijzsoy

Table 5,Original plan types and alterations made by the sample users

Plan Type 1 (O-TO Type)

Original Plan Characteristics

. Separate entry into the living room after the main entrance :
l Wet rooms and the living Room all open into the main hall ;
l The kitchen and the bathroom are located side by side :
l The wall between the bedrooms is suitable for storage arrangements ;
l The living room has no balcony.

Alterations made

. Adding the balcony space into the living room, and then dividing the living room to obtain a third bedroom of 12.00 sq m with the
entrance through the living room.
. Changing the adjoining cabinets between the bedrooms to obtain extra storage area.
l Removing the walls between the bedrooms to create space for the third bedroom without natural lighting.
. Removing the wall between the living room and‘the main hall provides a false increase of 5.70 sq m in the living space ; Causes direct
entry into the living room, opening of the kitchen and the bedroom onto the living room, and passage into the bedroom zone through
the living zone (lack of privacy).

Plan Type 2 (HM Type)

Original Plan Characteristics

l Separate entry into the living room after the main entrance ;
l Adjoining the kitchen and the bedrooms, there are balconies having the same total area in each dwelling ;
l The bedroom hall is large enough to be arranged for storage purposes.

Alterations made

l Adding the balcony space into
. Adding the balcony space into
. Adding the balcony space into
. Adding the balcony space into
. These alterations do not bring
and activity patterns allows for
the living room, an increase of 6.65 sq m or 10.45 sq m in the living room area.
the kitchen space, an increase of 3.20 sq m in the kitchen area.
the bedroom 1, an increase of 5.75 sq m in the bedroom I area.
the bedroom 2, an increase of 4.60 sq m in the bedroom 2 area.
about a significant change in the plan organization. However the increase in the number of activities
different arrangements of the furniture (Flexible use of the spaces)

Plan Type 3 (K Type)

 User Satisfaction for Quality Housing 321

Table 5-continued.

Original Plan Characteristics

l Direct entry into the living room ;

l Passage into the kitchen and the bedroom hall through the living room ;
The kitchen and the living room with adjoining balconies.

Alterations made

l Adding the balcony space into the living room, an increase of 5.00 sq m in the living room area.
. Adding the balcony space into the kitchen space, an increase of 4.40 sq m in the kitchen area.
. Separating the part of living room by using a wall, cabinet or panel, partly provides the possibility of creating space for the main
hall.
. Changing the living balcony into the third room, provides a very small room with the entrance through the living room.
. Dividing the kitchen into two or division of the long kitchen space into two, provides space for the arrangements of the main hall;
in essence, the main hall is transferred into this newly created space.

Plan Type 4 (0 Type)

Original Plan Characteristics

. Direct entry into the living room;

. The bedroom and the bathroom open onto the bedroom hall ;
. The main entrance hall is not clearly separated from the living room ;
l The kitchen and the toilet both open into a small front hall ;
l The living room has an adjoining balcony.

Alterations made

. Obtaining a third room by separating a part of the living room, here two alternatives arise as separating that part of the living room
adjoining the kitchen or that part opposite to the kitchen. This may provide direct entrance into the bedroom hall.
. Filling up empty space between the column and the wall of the living room by a wall, a cabinet or a door; this separates a main
entrance hall from the living room.
. Addition of toilet and the small front hall into the kitchen space, provides an increase of 8.30 sq m in the kitchen space. Moving the
kitchen door to the middle, facilitates the kitchen arrangement and use.

Table 6. Dwelling type/user evaluation about dwellings with the location of kitchen in the dwelling. Area growth
by the addition of balcony was observed as 67.5% at
Dwelling Type Area Users who found
satisfactory (f%) dwelling Type 3, and 78% at Type 2. 33.9% of the total
(sq m)
dwellings originally have toilets and this ratio decreases
Type 1 63.95 52 to 14.3% after alterations. Of the investigated dwelling
Type 2 66.45 60.9 types, 83% have no balcony.
Type 3 74.60 58
Type 4 81.40 60
5. CONCLUSION

Space consciousness is the function of the set of vari-

ables such as size, shape, solid and void ratio, furniture
and the geometry of a living space is suitable users prefer type, color, etc. in a dwelling. There is a complex relation
to obtain extra room by dividing (Dwelling Type 4 as an between the perceived space and real dwelling size in
example, with the frequency percentage of 20). terms of space organization. A similar result was also
Multiple regression analysis was applied to predict user found by Oseland about the room size. The proper organ-
evaluations about the size of the living zone by means of ization of rooms can encourage flexible use or adaptation
the other spatial and family variables. Evaluation on size in a dwelling. The presented plan organizations have
can be predicted by living area (0.50), and passage directly different potentialities in this respect.
from living zone to bedroom zone (variable shows the In another research the authors found out that, sat-
privacy situation), (0.42). isfaction with the plan organization is one of the quality
In the plan types, 89.2% of the users were satisfied parameters in dwellings. It is independent of other physi-
322 N. E. Altag and A. &soy

Table 7. Factor analysis about users’ spatial satisfaction-variables and factor tables

Variable Labels

DAAA Dwelling area after alteration UEDS User evaluation about dwelling size
LAAA Living area after alteration UELS User evaluation about living size
KAAA Kitchen area after alterations UEKS User evaluation about kitchen size
RNAA Number of rooms after alteration FS Family/household size
FT Family/household type

Factor Table

Fl F2 F3 F4

var. fat. loading var. facloading var. faeloading var. faeloading

LAAA 0.99 FS 0.84 KAAA 0.87 RNAA 0.97
DAAA 0.77 FT 0.70 UEKS 0.78 DAAA (0.39)
UELS 0.75 UEDS -0.65 DAAA (0.31)

Note : I. Significant factor loading greater than the absolute value of 0.50 is taken into consideration, other nearest values are given in
brackets. 2. Factor Loading is denoted as ‘m’.

Table 8. Living zones

Dwelling Effective Potential Balcony Alteration Users who found

Types area of growth area Percentage satisfactory (f%)

Type 1 20.80 31.05 .1.60/10.25 30.0 57.0

Type 2 26.00 35.55 3X519.55 9.5 20.7
Type 3 26.90 35.40 -3.50/-5.00 47.5 70.0
Type 4 40.90 26.00 -6.80/- 1.70 20.0 75.0

Table 9. Kitchen zones

Dwelling Effective Potential Adjacent Balcony Alteration Users who found

Types area of growth Toilet Percentage satisfactory (f%)

Type 1 7.60 10.80 No Yes 6.9 (balcony add.) 24.8

Type 2 6.20 0.00 No No 0.0 56.9
Type 3 12.30 16.70 No Yes 30.0 (balcony add.) 100.0
Type 4 5.60 8.30 Yes No 46.7 (toilet add.) 43.7

Table 10. Bedroom zones

Dwelling Effective area of BR Dimensions Users who found Users who found
Types BRl and BR2 (m) (m) flexible (f%) satisfactory (f%)

Type 1 14.50 3.40 x 4.25 41.2 70.9

12.00 3.20 x 3.75 45.5 74.5
Type 2 13.30 3.20x4.15 39.7 74.1
10.90 3.20 x 3.40 39.7 75.9
Type 3 15.65 4.50 X 3.45 72.5 77.5
9.40 3.60 x 2.60 42.5 40.0
Type 4 12.50 3.20 x 3.90 26.7 39.3
9.60 3.20 x 3.00 25.9 34.8

cal quality characteristics such as material type or detail- ing types, since it is assumed to be the critical type in
ing. A dwelling can be high in quality with materials and terms of need for physical alterations. The research can
detailing but the same dwelling can be poor in quality be extended to cover more plan types to discover the
with plan organizations [4]. underlying physical characteristics of desired plan organ-
The study has been conducted on the 2-bedroom dwell- izations for future designs.
 User Satisfaction for Quality Housing 323

REFERENCES

1. &soy, A. and Esin Altas, N. Spatial Analysis of the Relationship between Design, Construction
System and Spatial Use in Housing Units. Istanbul Tech. Univ., Environmental and Urban Research
Center, Istanbul, 1988, (in Turkish).
2. Pulat, G. The Housing Problem of Urban Poor and Architectural Approaches with Social Contents
in Turkey, Kentkoop Publ. No. 98, Ankara, 1992, (in Turkish).
3. Knay, M. B. Metropolitan City and Changing Family, The change of family structure in Turkey,
Research on Social Sciences, Turkish Social Science Association, Ankara, 1984. p. 69-78 (in Turkish).
4. Gzsoy, A., Esin Altag, N., Ok, V. and Pulat Giikmen, G. Quality Assessment in Housing based on
Behavioral Data, Research Report sponsored by Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey,
1995, (in Turkish).
5. Gzsoy, A., Esin Altas, N., Ok, V. and Pulat Gokmen, G. Quality Assessment Model for Housing : A
Case Study on Outdoor Spaces in Istanbul. Habitat International, 1996, 20(2), 163-73.
6. Esin, N. and C)zsoy, A. The Analysis of Growth, Change and Flexibility in Mass-Housing Dwellings,
Research Report, Istanbul Technical University, Environment and Urban Research Center, Istanbul,
Turkey, 1993, (in Turkish).
7. Weidermann, S. and Anderson, J. R. A Conceptual Framework for Residential Satisfaction. In:
Altman I, Weiner CM, editors. Home Environments. Plenum Press, New York and London, 1985. p.
153-82.
8. Franescato, G., Weidemann, S., Anderson, J. R. and Chenoweth, R. Evaluating residents’ satisfaction
in housing for low and moderate income families: A multi-method approach. In: Carson DH, editor.
Man-environment interactions: Evaluation and applications, vol. 5. Washington, D.C.: Environmental
Design Research Association, 1974. p. 285-96.
9. Marans, R. and Sprecklemeyer, K. F. Evaluating built environments: A behavioral approach, An
Arbor, University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research and the Architectural Research Labora-
tory, 1981.
10. Perin, C. With Man in Mind, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1970. p. 42-44.
11. Brolin, B. C. and Zeisel, J. Mass-Housing, Social Research and Design, Architectural Forum, vol. 129,
No. 1 July, August, 1968.
12. Rabanec, A., Sheppard, D. and Town, P. Housing: Flexibility/Adaptability, Architectural Design, Feb,
1974. p. 76-9 I.
13. Price, C. 24 Hour Living Toy, Architectural Design, Vol. 41, No. 1, 1971. p. 2.540.
14. Habraken, N. J., Boekholt, J. T., Thijssen, A. P. and Dinjens, P. M. Variations, The Systematic Design
of Supports, The MIT Press 1982.
15. Johnson, P. J. and Abernathy, T. J. A research note on: Sources of urban multifamily housing
satisfaction. Housing and Society, 1983, 10(l), 3&42.
16. Oseland, N. A. and Raw, J. G. Room size and adequacy of space in small rooms. Building and
Environment, 1991, 26(4), 341-47.
17. Espe, H. and Schulz, W. Room evaluation, moods and personality. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1983,
57,215-21.
18. Sadalla, E. K. and Oxley, D. The perception of room size: the rectangularity illusion. Environment and
Behavior, 1985, 16(3), 394-405.
19. Pennartz PJJ. Atmosphere at Home: A qualitative approach. J. of Environmental Psychology, 1986,6,
135-53.