DESIGN CONSIDERATION

the limitations of underground space, attention is drawn to what is missing by a poor imitation. Many of the techniques discussed above are in common use and can serve to create an environment that is reassuringly similar to conventional building. On the other hand, it is also possible and appropriate in some cases to exploit the uniqueness of being underground, creating a stimulating positive experience. An example of this approach can be found in the design of offices in deep mined space in Kansas City, Missouri, where rock walls are exposed and often lighted in dramatic way.

5.4. Conclusion

Although the functional, psychological, and physiological effects discussed above represent drawbacks to underground or windowless space, a number of modifying factors must be taken into consideration. First, these effects are influenced by the use of the space. Second, not enough information is always available to draw definite conclusions. Finally, many of the negative effects can be alleviated or compensated for with proper design. It is clear that some underground building functions are more psychologically acceptable than others. It has been found that an earth-sheltered house with windows was more immediately accepted as a pleasant place to be than an earthsheltered work environment (Hollon and Kendall 1980). Manufacturing, storage, and other specialized work settings are in turn more readily accepted than a general office environment. Recreational facilities, shopping centers, restaurants, and museums appear to be the most readily accepted. an interior windowless zone of a large above-ground building and occupants of a section of the basement of the same building had quite similar evaluations of their work environment as those occupants in an above-ground exterior zone (with windows) of the same building did. Occupants of the windowless portion of a well-known earth-sheltered building on campus, however, had a much lower evaluation of their work environment. Assessing the physiological effects of being underground should be somewhat simpler than assessing the psychological effects because there are fewer basic concerns, they do not vary as much on an individual basis, and except for length of stay in the building-they are less affected by mitigating circumstances. But, in spite of the greater facility in clarifying physiological effects, it remains difficult to draw definite conclusions on the physiological impacts of the use of underground buildings. Although the negative effects caused by complete lack of sunlight and sensory deprivation have been documented, studies of people using underground buildings have not necessarily concluded that such detrimental effects exist. In summary, although there are several issues of concern for people spending extended periods in an underground or windowless environment, a long-term detrimental effect on humans has not been established. Although scientific proof of negative psychological and physiological effects related to underground buildings is by no means absolute, the safest course in building design is to alleviate the various

Design Consideration

concerns as much as possible. As evidenced by many of the buildings shown here, competent designers intuitively respond to creating an acceptable environment underground. (Design Considerations For Underground 11101240 | PDF | Ventilation (Architecture) | Lighting, 1984)