Optimizing Spatial Adjacency in Hospital Master Planning

  • ZhouZhou SuEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1028)


Hospitals are one of the most complex building types. Each is comprised of a wide range of service areas and functional spaces. Spatial relationships comprise one of the most critical design criteria, to be considered early-on in the master planning stage. Proper adjacency contributes to shorter travel distances, better wayfinding, improved patient care, higher satisfaction, and reduced overall cost. However, there is a lack of research on the automatic generation of design solutions that can be applied to real-world hospital master planning projects. Moreover, given the complexity of hospital design, an optimization tool is needed that is capable of evaluating both machine- and human-generated solutions. This study proposes a rating system for evaluating existing plans and proposed designs in hospital master planning, and explores optimal design solutions through rapid computational simulations. The first stage of this work presents interviews with senior professionals in the industry to explore best practices regarding spatial relationships in hospital planning. The second stage describes an automatic analysis tool for ranking the design options generated by healthcare planners and examining optimal design solutions that feature the best spatial adjacencies. This tool was employed in a recent master planning project with over fifty programming spaces, in order to test its validity.


Optimization Spatial adjacency Hospital master planning 


  1. 1.
    Dettenkofer, M., Seegers, S., Antes, G., Motschall, E., Schumacher, M., Daschner, F.D.: Does the architecture of hospital facilities influence nosocomial infection rates? A systematic review. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 25(1), 21–25 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ulrich, R.: View through a window may influence recovery. Science 224(4647), 224–225 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harris, D.D., Shepley, M.M., White, R.D., Kolberg, K.J.S., Harrell, J.W.: The impact of single family room design on patients and caregivers: executive summary. J. Perinatol. 26, S38–S48 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Conner, J.M., Nelson, E.C.: Neonatal intensive care: Satisfaction measured from a parent’s perspective. Pediatrics 103(1 Suppl. E), 336–349 (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hardy, O.B., Lammers, L.P.: Hospitals, the Planning and Design Process. Aspen Publishers, New York (1977)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kobus, R.L.: Building Type Basics for Healthcare Facilities, vol. 13. Wiley, Hoboken (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zimring, C., Joseph, A., Choudhary, R.: The Role of the Physical Environment in the Hospital of the 21st Century: A Once-in-a-Lifetime Opportunity. The Center for Health Design, Concord (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hendrich, A., Chow, M., Skierczynski, B., Lu, Z.: A 36-hospital time and motion study: how do medical-surgical nurses spend their time? Permanente J. 12(3), 25–34 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vangelatos, G.: Health Care Design Needs To Take Adjacency Into Consideration (2012).–13601. Accessed 25 Aug 2016
  10. 10.
    Boon, C., Griffin, C., Papaefthimious, N., Ross, J., Storey, K.: Optimizing spatial adjacencies using evolutionary parametric tools: using grasshopper and galapagos to analyze, visualize, and improve complex architectural programming. Perkins Res. J. 07.02(Special), 25–37 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moseley, L.: A rational design theory for planning buildings based on the analysis and solution of circulation problems. Architects’ J. 138, 525–537 (1963)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gross, M.D., Ervin, S.M.: Designing with constraints (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lorenz, W.E., Bicher, M., Wurzer, G.X.: Adjacency in hospital planning. IFAC-PapersOnLine 48(1), 862–867 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arvin, S.A., House, D.H.: Modeling architectural design objectives in physically based space planning. Autom. Constr. 11(2), 213–225 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holland, J.H.: Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence. U Michigan Press, Ann Arbor (1975)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gero, J.S., Louis, S.J.: Improving Pareto optimal designs using genetic algorithms. Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 10(4), 239–247 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Strakosch, G.R., Caporale, R.S.: The Vertical Transportation Handbook, vol. 4. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aspelin, K. Establishing pedestrian walking speeds, pp. 5–25. Portland State University (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Su, Z., Yan, W.: A fast genetic algorithm for solving architectural design optimization problems. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 29(4), 457–469 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Su, Z., Yan, W.: Creating and improving a closed loop: design optimization and knowledge discovery in architecture. Int. J. Architectural Comput. 13(2), 123–142 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.EYPHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations