Development and Application of a Street Furniture Design Evaluation Framework: Empirical Evidence from the Yangzhou Ecological Science and Technology New Town

Abstract

With the advancement of refined urban governance and the construction of high-quality public spaces, street furniture design and usage face multiple challenges, including insufficient public participation and a neglect of actual user experience. These issues highlight the urgent need to establish a scientifically grounded user evaluation framework to inform design practices. This study focuses on Yangzhou Ecological Science and Technology New Town and, drawing on field investigation, grounded theory, and the Delphi method, develops a street furniture design evaluation framework encompassing three core dimensions: planning and configuration, environmental coordination, and operational management. Building on this framework, the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation method are employed to conduct a holistic assessment of the street furniture and to identify critical design deficiencies. The results demonstrate that the proposed framework effectively identifies the strengths and weaknesses of street furniture and provides robust support for formulating targeted optimization strategies. The results reveal significant variations in the perceived importance of design factors among different user groups. Residents primarily emphasize practicality and convenience in daily use. Tourists value aesthetic expression and cultural resonance, whereas government officials focus on construction standardization and maintenance efficiency. In terms of satisfaction, all three groups reported relatively low scores, with the ranking as follows: “planning and configuration” > “management and operations” > “environmental coordination.” Based on these findings, the study proposes targeted design guidelines for future practice. The evaluation framework has been adopted by local authorities, incorporated into official street furniture design guidelines, and implemented in pilot projects—demonstrating its practical applicability and value. This research contributes to the theoretical advancement of street furniture design and provides empirical and methodological support for applications in other emerging urban areas and new town developments.

1. Introduction

As a direct reflection of both urban identity and residents’ quality of life, public urban space is increasingly becoming a critical vehicle for advancing the modernization and human-centered transformation of city governance. As an integral component of public space systems [1], street furniture not only provides basic functions, such as rest, lighting, and wayfinding, but also plays an irreplaceable role in structuring the spatial order [2], enhancing the urban environment [3], and expressing the city’s image [4]. With the growing emphasis on people-oriented development [5] and refined urban governance [6], the configuration quality and user experience of street furniture have become key indicators for evaluating public service delivery and the overall quality of urban spatial environments [7,8]. However, numerous challenges remain in the practical implementation of street furniture, which often fails to respond to emerging or evolving social needs, as reflected in outdated configurations, a lack of typological diversity, and insufficient management and maintenance systems [9]. These challenges directly undermine the functional effectiveness of street furniture and the overall image of public space. In recent years, China’s accelerating urbanization has led to the rapid development of a large number of new towns and districts. However, under the pressures of rapid development, which is marked by short planning cycles, accelerated construction schedules, and limited public participation [10], street infrastructure often fails to keep pace with the expansion of built environments, leading to pronounced temporal mismatches. This phenomenon not only compromises the spatial quality of public areas in new towns but also reveals a disconnection between planning logic, design intentions, and real-world user needs [11]. Against this backdrop, exploring effective planning and design strategies for street furniture in newly developed urban areas is of both theoretical significance and practical value for enhancing the spatial quality of emerging cities.

In recent years, street furniture has emerged as a prominent topic in urban public space research, drawing increasing interdisciplinary attention from design studies, urban planning, and environmental psychology. Early investigations primarily focused on the conceptual definitions and typologies of street furniture [12,13,14], as well as its fundamental service functions and spatial coordination with the urban environment [15,16,17,18]. With the accelerating trend toward diversified and human-centered public space functions, street furniture—as a key component in shaping livable urban environments—has garnered increasing attention regarding its planning and design. Existing studies have systematically examined the planning and design of street furniture from the perspectives of spatial structure optimization, layout characteristics, materials and aesthetics, and smart technologies [4,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26]. Building on this foundation, scholars have increasingly focused on the inclusivity of street furniture across diverse cultural contexts, aiming to promote social equity and spatial justice. For example, Amir et al. [27] suggested that design should identify and integrate features such as comfortable seating, appropriate lighting, multifunctional planters, clean water sources, and improved accessibility through transport hubs to create a more supportive and inclusive urban environment for homeless individuals. Askarizad et al. [28] developed a comprehensive framework to ensure that both men and women have equal opportunities to engage in static social activities around street furniture. Almatar [29] recommended prioritizing user needs—particularly those of people with disabilities—by formulating flexible street design guidelines covering elements such as tree canopies, pedestrian crossings, parking areas, and seating facilities, and applying them across all urban areas. Sádaba et al. [30] proposed a street furniture design checklist and solution prototypes to support the creation of more sustainable and inclusive urban environments. Lakoud et al. [31] emphasized the importance of stakeholder involvement in the design process, noting that adopting modular design approaches and incorporating tactile cues and adaptive street facilities can improve accessibility for visually impaired individuals, thereby enhancing the inclusivity of public spaces. Notably, some studies have incorporated multidisciplinary perspectives such as emotional design [32], co-design [33], and participatory design [34], further advancing the understanding of the human-centered value of street furniture and the mechanisms underpinning user interaction experiences.

In summary, previous studies have systematically explored street furniture from multiple perspectives, effectively enhancing the quality of urban public spaces and providing valuable references for design practices across different types of cities. As a critical medium for public interaction and everyday leisure, street furniture requires designers and decision-makers to go beyond technical [35,36] expertise by incorporating public needs and actual user experiences [37], to ensure both user satisfaction and design quality. User perception not only reflects the operational state of street furniture but also provides essential insights for its planning, implementation, and post-occupancy optimization. In the context of participatory design and collaborative urban governance [38], the joint involvement of multiple stakeholders, such as the public, urban planners, policymakers, and designers, has the potential to shift street furniture development from expert-led approaches to co-created processes [33], thereby profoundly enhancing the quality and social value of public space. In recent years, research on the systematic evaluation of street furniture has steadily increased. Existing studies commonly employ methods such as the Delphi technique [39], Kano model [40], analytic hierarchy process [41], entropy-weighted TOPSIS [42], questionnaire surveys [43], and behavioral mapping analysis [44] to comprehensively assess the current use of street furniture and user satisfaction. The commonly used evaluation criteria for street furniture in the previous literature include functionality (e.g., location, quantity, dimensions), safety (e.g., stability, durability), aesthetics (e.g., design style, appearance, color), cultural relevance (e.g., regional symbols, historical continuity, alignment with urban style), and environmental compatibility (e.g., integration with landscapes, use of eco-friendly materials). Some studies have also incorporated informatization and smart technology indicators to evaluate the role of street furniture in smart city development [45]. The above indicator systems provide an important reference for constructing the evaluation framework for street furniture design in this study. However, most of these studies focus on a single method or specific types of furniture [46], lacking a systematic evaluation of public co-participation in street furniture design [9]. In addition, existing indicator systems remain inadequate for representing multiple stakeholders and balancing public user experience with managerial maintenance needs. Therefore, we propose an evaluation framework for street furniture design that integrates multi-stakeholder collaboration, which not only facilitates precise identification of current issues but also offers theoretical and design support for optimizing urban public space structures and enhancing environmental service capacity. Moreover, the framework’s integrated indicator system addresses both user experience and maintenance management, effectively bridging gaps in the management dimension found in existing studies.

Against this backdrop, this study takes Yangzhou Ecological Science and Technology New Town as the research site and develops a street furniture design evaluation framework grounded in field research, grounded theory, and the Delphi method. Building upon this framework, the study integrates the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation to systematically assess the current state of street furniture design, incorporating perspectives from multiple stakeholders, including residents, tourists, and government administrators. This approach enables the identification of key issues across planning, construction, management, and operational dimensions. Corresponding design guidelines are proposed to support the high-quality development of the street furniture system and the ongoing enhancement of public space quality in the ecological science and technology new town.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Yangzhou is located in central Jiangsu Province and is one of the first 24 cities designated as National Historical and Cultural Cities in China. The Yangzhou Ecological Science and Technology New Town, established in 2013, is situated at the intersection of the Yangzhou and Guangling urban areas, and has been positioned by the municipal government as the city’s ecological, transportation, innovation, and urban development hub. At present, the new town comprises three major functional zones: the Fenghuang Island Tourism and Resort District in the north (ecological center), the Wanfu business district in the central area (urban core), and the Hangji High-Tech Industrial Zone in the south, known, respectively, as the “Toothbrush Capital of China” and the “Hotel Supplies Capital of China” (Figure 1). Against the backdrop of accelerated integration of ecological, technological, and cultural development, the demand for street furniture—as a vital component of public urban space—has become increasingly diverse, with varying user needs emerging across different functional contexts and demographic groups [47]. However, current street furniture planning in the new town lacks alignment with the overall urban master plan, leading to inconsistencies in style, weak identity recognition, and limited user-centered considerations—factors that collectively hinder the public’s experience [48]. Therefore, evaluating the current street furniture design in Yangzhou Ecological Science and Technology New Town holds both representational and demonstrative value, offering insights and guidance applicable to similar new towns and emerging urban districts.

2.2. Research Methods

2.2.1. Grounded Theory

Grounded theory, developed by Glaser and Strauss [49], is a widely adopted qualitative research method and has been described as “the most widely used interpretive framework in qualitative research at the end of the 20th century [50].” Rather than beginning with predefined theoretical assumptions, grounded theory requires researchers to derive insights directly from empirical observation, identifying core concepts and their interrelationships through a coding process to inductively build a theoretical framework [51]. Emphasizing the logic of discovery over the logic of verification, grounded theory serves as an exploratory research approach [52]. The coding process, which includes open coding, axial coding, and selective coding, transforms raw data into conceptual, categorical, and theoretical structures [53].

2.2.2. Delphi Method

The Delphi method was originally developed by the RAND Corporation in the 1950s as a qualitative survey technique [54]. It is a structured consensus-building technique designed to elicit and refine expert opinions through iterative feedback [55]. The method relies on a structured panel of experts who respond to questionnaires over multiple rounds; through repeated feedback and revision, expert opinions converge to form statistically meaningful collective judgments [56,57]. Today, the Delphi method is widely recognized across disciplines for its effectiveness in constructing robust indicator systems [58,59,60,61].

2.2.3. Analytic Hierarchy Process

The Analytic Hierarchy Process is often used in conjunction with the Delphi method to determine the relative importance of indicators. Developed by Thomas Saaty in the 1970s, the Analytic Hierarchy Process is a multi-criteria decision-making technique [62]. By conducting pairwise comparisons among elements within a hierarchical structure, the Analytic Hierarchy Process reduces complexity, assesses the consistency of judgments, and minimizes decision-making bias [63]. The method involves the following steps.

First, experts are invited to score the relative importance of indicators using a nine-point scale, thereby establishing pairwise comparisons among criteria. These comparisons are used to construct a judgment matrix between hierarchical levels, expressed as: $A=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}{a}_{11}& a_{12}& \dots & a_{1j}\\ a_{21}& a_{22}& \dots & a_{2j}\\ ⋮& ⋮& \ddots & ⋮\\ a_{i1}& a_{i2}& \dots & a_{ij}\end{array}\right]$, where $a_{ij}$ denotes the relative importance of indicator i compared to indicator j.

Next, the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix is calculated, using the formula:

$${ƛ}_{max}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^n{\displaystyle \frac{{\left(A\omega \right)}_i}{{\omega }_i}}$$

(1)

The resulting weights of each indicator are then derived. A consistency test is performed to ensure logical coherence and to minimize the potential bias introduced by subjective judgment. The consistency index $C.I.$ is computed using the formula:

$$C.I.={\displaystyle \frac{{ƛ}_{max}-n}{n-1}}$$

(2)

$R.I.$ refers to the random index, whose values are provided in

Table 1. Presents the values of the average random consistency index $R.I.$

Order of the Matrix	1	2	3	4	5	6
$R.I.$	0	0	0.52	0.89	1.12	1.24

. The consistency ratio, denoted as $C.R.$, is calculated using the formula:

$$C.R.={\displaystyle \frac{C.I.}{R.I.}}$$

(3)

If $C.R.$ < 0.1, the consistency test is considered passed. If $C.R.$ > 0.1, the test fails, and the judgment matrix must be revised until the criterion is satisfied. After passing the consistency check, the weights of each hierarchical indicator, relative to the overall evaluation objective, are calculated.

2.2.4. Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method

The Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation method is based on the membership theory of fuzzy mathematics and employs the principle of fuzzy relation synthesis to quantify factors with ambiguous boundaries. It is particularly suitable for addressing vague or non-quantifiable problems [64,65]. The fundamental steps are as follows.

First, determine the set of evaluation factors and the set of linguistic ratings. Given the evaluation indicator set X = {x₁, x₂, …, x_n}, the rating set V = {V₁, V₂, V₃, V₄, V₅} is defined based on evaluators’ partitioning of the scoring intervals, corresponding to a scale vector of {5, 4, 3, 2, 1}.

Second, perform a single-factor fuzzy evaluation. Construct the membership subset $R_i$, $R_i=\left\{r_{i1},r_{i2},\dots ,r_{ij}\right\}$, using the formula:

$$r_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{U_{ij}}{{\sum }_{j=1}^5{U}_{ij}}}$$

(4)

Based on the membership subsets $R_i$, establish the fuzzy membership degrees of each indicator level-by-level, and construct the overall fuzzy relation matrix $R$.

$$R=\left[\begin{array}{c}{R}_1\\ R_2\\ \begin{array}{c}⋮\\ R_n\end{array}\end{array}\right]=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}{r}_{11}& r_{12}& \dots & r_{1m}\\ r_{21}& r_{22}& \dots & r_{2m}\\ ⋮& ⋮& \ddots & ⋮\\ r_{n1}& r_{n2}& \dots & r_{nm}\end{array}\right]$$

Then, apply fuzzy synthetic operations on the fuzzy relation matrix $R$ and the corresponding weight vector $\omega$ to generate the Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation result set $Y=\left\{y_1,y_2,\dots ,y_n\right\}$, using the formula:

$$Y=\omega •R=\left({\omega }_1,{\omega }_2,\dots ,{\omega }_n\right)•\left[\begin{array}{cccc}{r}_{11}& r_{12}& \dots & r_{1m}\\ r_{21}& r_{22}& \dots & r_{2m}\\ ⋮& ⋮& \ddots & ⋮\\ r_{n1}& r_{n2}& \dots & r_{nm}\end{array}\right]=\left\{y_1,y_2,\dots ,y_n\right\}$$

(5)

Finally, calculate the overall evaluation score for each indicator by combining the evaluation result set Y with the rating grade set V, using the Formula:

$$F=Y\times V$$

(6)

2.3. Research Framework

First, taking the Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town as a case study, we conducted field investigations and in-depth interviews, and integrated grounded theory with the Delphi method to extract key design elements and construct a street furniture design evaluation index system. Second, a combined quantitative approach using the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation was applied to systematically analyze the importance and satisfaction evaluations of street furniture from multiple stakeholders, including residents, tourists, and government administrators. This approach helped identify the key characteristics and design pain points related to planning, construction, management, and operations. Finally, based on the evaluation outcomes and practical demands, actionable optimization strategies and design guidelines for street furniture systems were proposed (Figure 2).

3. Construction of a Street Furniture Design Evaluation System for Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town

3.1. Analysis of Street Furniture Design Elements

This study adopts the grounded theory methodology to explore the evaluation elements and theoretical framework of street furniture design in Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town. The core data for this study were obtained through in-depth interviews with the target population. To ensure data triangulation in qualitative research, diverse participant types were selected to capture multiple perspectives, enabling the comparison of commonalities and differences to better understand the categories, their properties, and the interrelationships. In-depth interviews for this study were conducted in June 2025 in the Yangzhou Eco-tech New Town. Four main criteria were applied for participant recruitment: (1) aged between 18 and 55 years, covering a range of age groups; (2) having experience of living, working, or maintaining a sustained presence in the study area; (3) possessing some degree of familiarity with the use or management of urban public spaces and street furniture; and (4) willingness to participate and complete the interview. Participants were selected through purposive sampling to ensure representation across different groups and to obtain a comprehensive understanding of street furniture conditions [66]. During sampling, gender, age, and length of residence were further balanced within both resident and visitor groups to capture the diversity of characteristics and perspectives among the target population. The sample size was determined using the principle of theoretical saturation [67], resulting in 56 valid interviews: 12 management staff from the Eco-tech New Town, 13 street furniture researchers and university scholars, and 31 residents and visitors.

Drawing on previous research [9] and local context, the team prepared tailored interview guides for different participant types (

Table 2. Interview outline.

Interview Participants	Interview Outline
Administrators of the Ecological Science and Technology New Town	Q1: How do you evaluate the current planning of street furniture in your district?
	Q2: In your opinion, what are the essential components of an ideal street furniture system, and to what extent have these been realized in practice?
	Q3: What do you consider to be the most challenging issue in the current management of street furniture?
	Q4: Has there been any public participation in the planning and construction of current street furniture, in your view?
Professional practitioners	Q1: From a design perspective, what key aspects should street furniture design prioritize?
	Q2: What fundamental characteristics should a well-designed street furniture system possess?
	Q3: Based on project implementation and post-construction feedback, what aspects of street furniture do you think are underperforming?
	Q4: In your design or construction experience, which aspects of street furniture projects are most commonly overlooked?
Local residents	Q1: Do you think the types and quantities of street furniture meet your daily needs? What shortcomings have you observed?
	Q2: During your daily commute, do you notice street furniture? Are there particular types you frequently use?
	Q3: What inconveniences have you encountered when using street furniture?
	Q4: What functions or services would you like to see added to future street furniture in the city?
Visitors	Q1: What impression did the street furniture leave on you during your visit to Yangzhou?
	Q2: Were there any facilities you found particularly useful or inconvenient? What made you feel that way?
	Q3: In your opinion, do these pieces of street furniture reflect the cultural identity or design aesthetics of Yangzhou?
	Q4: If you return to Yangzhou in the future, what improvements would you like to see in the street furniture?

) and conducted all interviews with informed consent, including audio recording and documentation.

3.1.1. Open Coding

Open coding represents the initial phase of data coding, during which categories are directly derived from interview transcripts without subjective interpretation or researcher-imposed assumptions. Interview transcripts were extracted by team members based on audio recordings. Verbatim transcription and line-by-line analysis of the raw interview texts were conducted to extract semantic units and perform preliminary conceptualization, ensuring maximal retention of the “raw” characteristics of the data. For instance, statements such as “unclean furniture surfaces,” “lack of basic installations,” and “structural breakage risks” were preliminarily categorized under “cleaning and maintenance,” “facility insufficiency,” and “safety and reliability,” respectively. Through multiple rounds of discussion, duplicate entries were removed, and semantically similar concepts were merged, resulting in the identification of 50 distinct concepts and 35 preliminary categories (

Table 3. Examples of conceptualization and categorization from open coding.

Number	Representative Quotes from Original Interviews	Initial Concepts	Initial Categories
1	“There is not a single bicycle parking facility along this street……”	Basic street furniture has not been installed	Infrastructure is lacking
2	“Aside from benches and litter bins, few other amenities are present; even basic drinking water facilities are lacking……”	The types of functional facilities are limited	Types are missing
3	“The number of benches is insufficient—one can walk around without finding a place to rest……”	The number of seating facilities is limited	Quantity is insufficient
4	“Waste bins are too few and far between, prompting many to discard trash indiscriminately……”	The distribution of street furniture is sparse
5	“There is no basic street lighting in this area, making it unsafe to approach after dark……”	Basic usage functions are lacking	User experience
6	“Although visually appealing, this bench lacks a backrest, rendering it uncomfortable to sit on……”	Functions are not fully developed	Practicality
7	“The bench placed in the center of the lawn seems purely decorative; no one is willing to walk across the grass to use it……”	Furniture is disconnected from pedestrian routes	Accessibility
8	“It takes a considerable walk from the train station before encountering a single trash bin……”	Service coverage is insufficient	Service coverage
9	“Maintenance staff noted that this cabinet lacks standardized components, requiring original parts to be shipped from the manufacturer……”	Universal components are lacking	Standardized design
10	“Replacing a single component necessitates disassembling the entire unit, which is highly inefficient……”	Components cannot be replaced
11	“It is hoped that these facilities can be network-connected so that any malfunction can be automatically reported to the management system……”	Fault detection and remote maintenance are not available	Technological innovation
12	“Although the bins are reportedly equipped with sensors to alert sanitation services when full, there is little evidence of this feature being operational……”	Intelligent maintenance is absent	Smart applications
13	“It would be beneficial if the benches were equipped with wireless charging capabilities……”	Smart user experience is lacking
14	“The street furniture along this road appears to be an incoherent assemblage, lacking a unified design language……”	Unified construction standards are lacking	Regulated management
15	“The sudden addition of multiple rest stations—previously absent—has resulted in a visually cluttered streetscape……”	Unified planning has not been implemented

Note: Due to space limitations, only selected excerpts are presented as examples.

).

3.1.2. Axial Coding

Axial coding involves organizing and categorizing the initial categories derived from open coding into more abstract and generalized themes or domains. At this stage, the interrelationships among independent categories remain unclear. Therefore, the 35 preliminary categories were revisited in the context of the original transcripts to examine potential interconnections. Based on this analysis, the research team conducted iterative comparison and cluster analysis, ultimately consolidating the 35 categories into 20 major themes, including diversity of types, quantitative adequacy, spatial layout rationality, accessibility, contextual adaptability, safety, functional utility, age-inclusive friendliness, scale appropriateness, degree of cultural integration, material sustainability, aesthetic coordination, color coordination, construction standardization, rational construction cycle, level of smart integration, surface cleanliness, physical integrity during use, ease of maintenance, and reasonable operational cost.

3.1.3. Selective Coding

These themes were further grouped based on their underlying attributes, resulting in four conceptually distinct core categories that form the design element framework for street furniture in the Yangzhou Eco-tech New Town: spatial configuration, environmental coordination, construction management, and operational maintenance (

Table 4. Four core categories and their descriptions.

Core Categories	Category Content
spatial configuration	diversity of types, quantitative adequacy, spatial layout rationality, accessibility, contextual adaptability, safety, functional utility, age-inclusive friendliness, scale appropriateness
environmental coordination	degree of cultural integration, material sustainability, aesthetic coordination, color coordination
construction management	construction standardization, rational construction cycle, level of smart integration
operational maintenance	surface cleanliness, physical integrity during use, ease of maintenance, reasonable operational cost

).

3.1.4. Theoretical Saturation Test

As part of the grounded theory formalization process, a theoretical saturation test was conducted on the key elements of street furniture design. Five experts in the field of design research were invited to independently review the raw data and the three-level coding results, ensuring the validity and accuracy of the coding process. One-sixth of the research data, previously reserved for saturation testing, was recoded using the same three-stage procedure. The results from ten additional interviews consistently reproduced the four core categories and twenty subcategories, with no new concepts or categories emerging, thereby confirming that theoretical saturation had been achieved.

3.2. Development of the Street Furniture Evaluation System

The Delphi method has been widely employed in the development of evaluation index systems across various fields [68,69,70]. Accordingly, this study applies the Delphi method to comprehensively assess the preliminary street furniture design element system, aiming to verify its scientific validity, objectivity, and practical applicability. The selection of expert panel members is a critical component of the Delphi method [71]. Previous research suggests that a Delphi panel should ideally consist of 10 to 50 experts who are familiar with the research topic and have at least five years of professional experience in the relevant field [72,73].

This study employed purposive sampling to identify information-rich participants [74] and conducted expert consultations in June 2025. A total of 25 experts were invited, representing three groups: (1) seven government officials engaged in urban management and construction; (2) ten university faculty members and researchers with substantial academic expertise in street furniture; and (3) eight professional designers with extensive practical experience in street furniture design. The selection criteria for experts were as follows: (1) at least five years of professional or research experience in urban planning, public space design, or street furniture-related fields; (2) participation in at least two relevant research, design, or policy-making projects within the past five years; (3) familiarity with the urban development background and current state of street furniture in the study area; and (4) recognized influence in academia or industry, along with a willingness to engage in multiple rounds of Delphi consultations and a commitment to providing independent and truthful responses. To enhance sample representativeness, the three participant groups were internally balanced in terms of gender, age, and years of professional experience, ensuring that the panel encompassed diverse knowledge backgrounds and practical expertise, while reflecting the varied perspectives of the target population in real-world contexts.

3.2.1. Survey Design and Expert Consultation

Previous studies have shown that expert consensus using the Delphi method can typically be reached within two rounds of inquiry [75]. Therefore, this study conducted two rounds of expert consultation.

In the first round, each participant received a packet containing a cover letter outlining the study’s objectives, a questionnaire, and a detailed table defining each evaluation indicator. The questionnaire comprised two sections: the first collected background information about the experts, and the second asked them to evaluate the current design elements. Participants were instructed to rate the importance of each indicator using a five-point Likert scale (5 = very important, 4 = important, 3 = neutral, 2 = unimportant, 1 = very unimportant). Additionally, an open-ended question was included to gather supplementary feedback on indicators that might need to be added or removed. Items lacking consensus were re-evaluated in the second round of the Delphi process. In the first round, 25 questionnaires were distributed and 23 were returned on time, yielding a response rate of 92%. In the second round, 25 questionnaires were distributed and 24 were returned, resulting in a response rate of 96%. Furthermore, seven participants provided additional comments in the first round, while three contributed further suggestions in the second round.

3.2.2. Expert Feedback and Indicator Revision

To evaluate expert scoring data, this study computed the arithmetic mean (hereinafter referred to as “M”), standard deviation (hereinafter referred to as “SD”), and coefficient of variation (hereinafter referred to as “CV”), integrating specific suggestions provided by experts to comprehensively refine the evaluation indicators. These statistical measures are widely adopted in prior studies to assess and quantify the degree of consensus among expert judgments [76,77,78]. The mean was used to evaluate central tendency [79], with a threshold of the M > 3.75 indicating sufficient importance of a given category or indicator [80]. The SD was used to assess the level of convergence [81]; an SD < 1 suggests high reliability of the indicator [82]. The CV was applied to measure dispersion [83]; a CV below 25% indicates a strong consensus among experts for a specific item [78]. Accordingly, this study defined consensus as being achieved when M >3.75, SD < 1, and CV < 0.25. The overall coordination of expert opinions was assessed using Kendall’s coefficient of concordance, ranging from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating stronger agreement.

Table 5. Results of expert consultation in Round 1 and Round 2.

Number	Key Elements	First Round (n = 23)				Key Elements	Second Round (n = 24)
		M	SD	CV	Result		M	SD	CV	Result
1	Spatial configuration	4.39	0.50	0.11	Retained	Spatial configuration	4.63	0.49	0.11	Revised
2	Diversity of types	4.22	0.67	0.16	Retained	Diversity of types	4.54	0.51	0.11	Retained
3	Quantitative adequacy	4.26	0.45	0.10	Retained	Quantitative adequacy	4.46	0.51	0.11	Retained
4	Spatial layout rationality	4.26	0.75	0.18	Retained	Spatial layout rationality	4.33	0.48	0.11	Retained
5	Accessibility	3.22 *	1.13 *	0.34 *	Re-evaluated	Accessibility	3.21 *	0.51	0.16	Removed
6	Contextual adaptability	3.04 *	1.15 *	0.39 *	Re-evaluated	Contextual adaptability	3.13 *	0.54	0.18	Removed
7	Functional utility	4.30	0.56	0.13	Retained	Functional utility	4.42	0.50	0.11	Retained
8	Safety	4.48	0.51	0.11	Retained	Safety	4.71	0.46	0.10	Retained
9	Age-inclusive friendliness	4.17	0.39	0.09	Retained	Age-inclusive friendliness	4.38	0.49	0.11	Retained
10	Scale appropriateness	3.74 *	1.01 *	0.27 *	Re-evaluated	Scale appropriateness	3.54 *	0.51	0.15	Removed
11	Environmental coordination	4.22	0.42	0.10	Retained	Environmental coordination	4.17	0.38	0.09	Retained
12	Degree of cultural integration	4.26	0.45	0.11	Retained	Degree of cultural integration	4.13	0.34	0.08	Retained
13	Material sustainability	3.87	0.63	0.15	Revised	Ecological adaptability	3.96	0.20	0.05	Retained
14	Aesthetic coordination	4.39	0.50	0.11	Retained	Aesthetic coordination	4.38	0.49	0.11	Retained
15	Color coordination	3.87	0.76	0.19	Retained	Color coordination	3.25 *	0.44	0.14	Removed
16	Construction management	4.35	0.71	0.17	Integration	Management and operations	4.71	0.46	0.10	Retained
17	Construction standardization	4.35	0.57	0.13	Retained	Construction standardization	4.46	0.51	0.11	Retained
18	Rational construction cycle	3.43 *	0.95	0.27 *	Re-evaluated	Rational construction cycle	3.21 *	0.41	0.13	Removed
19	Level of smart integration	4.30	0.56	0.13	Retained	Level of smart integration	4.08	0.28	0.07	Retained
20	Operational maintenance	4.17	0.58	0.14	Integration	—	—	—	—	—
21	Surface cleanliness	3.96	0.56	0.13	Retained	Surface cleanliness	4.08	0.28	0.07	Retained
22	Physical integrity during use	4.17	0.65	0.16	Retained	Physical integrity during use	4.25	0.44	0.11	Retained
23	Ease of maintenance	4.35	0.65	0.15	Retained	Ease of maintenance	4.46	0.51	0.11	Retained
24	Reasonable operational cost	3.91	0.60	0.16	Retained	Reasonable operational cost	3.25 *	0.44	0.14	Removed
25	Public participation	—	—	—	Added	Public participation	4.25	0.44	0.11	Retained
26	Durability	—	—	—	Added	Durability	4.33	0.48	0.11	Retained

Note: Items marked with an asterisk failed the expert consensus test.

presents the results from the first and second rounds of the survey. To aid understanding of the process, Appendix A provides an example illustrating how one expert’s opinions changed across the two rounds. Based on feedback from both rounds, the indicator system was revised as follows: (1) the indicators “Accessibility,” “Contextual adaptability,” “Scale appropriateness,” “Rational construction cycle,” “Reasonable operational cost,” and “Color coordination.” were removed; (2) “Material sustainability” was revised to “Ecological adaptability,” “Spatial configuration” to “Planning and configuration,” and the first-level indicators “Construction management” and “Operational maintenance” were merged into “Management and operations”; and (3) two new indicators, “Public participation” and “Durability”, were added.

Finally, Kendall’s coefficient of concordance was calculated using SPSS 27.0 to assess expert agreement on the importance of each indicator. The results showed that W increased from 0.197 in the first round to 0.560 in the second round, with both rounds yielding statistically significant results (p < 0.001). This indicates a substantial improvement in consensus among experts [76], suggesting that no further rounds of consultation were necessary.

In summary, after two rounds of Delphi consultation and subsequent refinement based on expert scoring, the final evaluation index system for street furniture design comprises three primary dimensions: Planning Configuration, Environmental Coordination, and Management and Operation, incorporating a total of 16 secondary indicators (

Table 6. Evaluation index system for street furniture design in Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town.

Primary Indicators	Secondary Indicators	Indicator Definitions
Planning and configuration B1	Diversity of types C1	Is the range of furniture types comprehensive enough to meet diverse user needs?
	Quantitative adequacy C2	Is the quantity of the furniture aligned with pedestrian density and frequency of use?
	Spatial layout rationality C3	Are the placements of the furniture convenient for use, avoiding traffic flows and maintaining visual continuity?
	Functional utility C4	Are the functions of the furniture complete and practically useful?
	Safety C5	Is the structure of the furniture robust and free of safety hazards, with edges properly rounded?
	Age-inclusive friendliness C6	Are the furniture dimensions ergonomically appropriate and inclusive for diverse user groups?
Environmental coordination B2	Degree of cultural integration C7	Does the furniture reflect local cultural characteristics?
	Ecological adaptability C8	Are the materials and manufacturing processes environmentally friendly and designed for sustainable use?
	Aesthetic coordination C9	Do the form and color of the furniture harmonize with the surrounding architecture and environmental context?
Management and operations B3	Construction standardization C10	Is the furniture installed in accordance with municipal standards and designed following systematic guidelines?
	Level of smart integration C11	Does the furniture incorporate features such as Wi-Fi and charging, and is it easily identified, archived, and monitored for efficient operation and maintenance?
	Surface cleanliness C12	Is the furniture maintained in a clean state, free from stains, vandalism, or graffiti?
	Physical integrity during use C13	Is the furniture in good condition and free from functional failure?
	Ease of maintenance C14	Does the furniture feature a modular design for easy maintenance and replacement?
	Public participation C15	Was public participation included in the early stages of furniture planning and design?
	Durability C16	Does the material and structure of the furniture ensure durability against long-term use, environmental erosion, and human-induced damage?

).

4. Current Status and Design Guidelines for Street Furniture in Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town

4.1. Evaluation of Street Furniture in Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town

4.1.1. Weighting of Evaluation Indicators

To scientifically determine the weights of the evaluation indicators, 25 experts with long-term experience in the field of street furniture were invited in July 2025 to participate in the study, and an indicator system questionnaire was distributed. The selected experts were the same as those consulted in the earlier Delphi survey stage. Based on their professional knowledge and practical experience, the experts assessed the importance of each evaluation indicator related to street furniture design in the Yangzhou Eco-tech New Town. The Analytic Hierarchy Process was then applied to analyze the questionnaire data and calculate the final weightings of each indicator (

Table 7. Composite weights of the evaluation indicators.

Criterion Level	Weight	Factor Level	Weight	Composite Weight
B1	0.4207	C1	0.0454	0.1079
		C2	0.0409	0.0972
		C3	0.0500	0.1188
		C4	0.1266	0.3009
		C5	0.0832	0.1978
		C6	0.0746	0.1773
B2	0.1735	C7	0.0649	0.3741
		C8	0.0342	0.1971
		C9	0.0744	0.4288
B3	0.4058	C10	0.0608	0.1498
		C11	0.0390	0.0961
		C12	0.0732	0.1804
		C13	0.0686	0.1690
		C14	0.0751	0.1851
		C15	0.0379	0.0934
		C16	0.0512	0.1262

).

4.1.2. Composite Scoring

To capture public perceptions of street furniture in the Yangzhou Eco-tech New Town, the study employed a Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation method to assess both satisfaction and perceived importance across various performance dimensions. Based on the constructed evaluation system for street furniture design in Yangzhou Eco-Tech New City, a questionnaire survey was conducted in July 2025. Using purposive sampling, respondents were drawn from three groups: residents, tourists, and government administrators. The eligibility criteria included (1) age between 18 and 55 years, covering different age groups; (2) residence, employment, or stay in the study area for more than six months (for residents and administrators), or a visit within the past 12 months (for tourists); (3) actual experience in using, managing, or interacting with street furniture in Yangzhou Eco-Tech New City; and (4) voluntary participation with survey completion. Considering the population composition and the size of the administrative group, 100 questionnaires were distributed to each of the resident and tourist groups and 40 to government administrators, totaling 240. Data collection combined online and offline approaches: online distribution via email and offline distribution at fixed points along main streets, public activity nodes, and government offices. A total of 217 valid questionnaires were returned, yielding an overall effective recovery rate of 90.4%. The questionnaire data were verified for reliability and validity. From the collected data, satisfaction and importance scores were obtained for each indicator (Figure 3).

4.2. Evaluation Results and Analysis

The survey results indicate significant group-based differentiation in the perceived importance of street furniture among various user groups in Yangzhou Eco-tech New Town. Residents placed the highest importance on “safety,” “durability,” and “functional utility,” reflecting their prioritization of everyday security and convenience. Tourists emphasized “degree of cultural integration,” “aesthetic coordination,” and “age-inclusive friendliness,” indicating stronger aesthetic preferences and a need for cultural resonance. Given their short-term, experience-oriented spatial behaviors, tourists are more sensitive to the city’s image and are therefore more likely to perceive street furniture as a vital component of the urban cultural identity and visual system. Government managers prioritized indicators such as “safety,” “level of smart integration,” “construction standardization,” and “ease of maintenance,” highlighting their roles as planners and operators and their focus on standardization, functional completeness, and long-term management.

Across the three user groups, the mean satisfaction scores suggest a generally below-average perception of the current street furniture design, with most scores ranging between two and three. The overall composite score was 2.1591, with subdimension scores of 2.7651 for “planning and configuration,” 2.6278 for “environmental coordination,” and 2.7183 for “management and operations.” These results suggest that the current street furniture system faces notable deficiencies in functional completeness, environmental integration, and day-to-day management, falling short of meeting the actual needs and spatial expectations of diverse stakeholders. The following sections present a systematic analysis based on the three core dimensions to identify underlying issues and propose pathways for improvement.

4.2.1. Imbalanced Spatial Planning: Challenges in Meeting Diverse User Needs

Within the “planning and configuration” dimension, “functional utility” (C4), “safety” (C5), and “age-inclusive friendliness” (C6) were consistently rated as highly important across user groups. Notably, “safety” (C5) ranked among the most important indicators overall (mean scores: residents 4.2174, tourists 4.1494, and government 4.1579), reflecting a shared prioritization among the public and administrators regarding street furniture’s role in ensuring user security, maintaining public order, and fostering a dependable urban environment. This underscores that safety remains a fundamental and paramount concern in urban public design; “functional utility” (C4) followed in importance. However, satisfaction levels reported by residents (2.4130) and tourists (2.5632) were relatively low, highlighting a typical discrepancy between high expectations and an underwhelming user experience. This pattern indicates a prevailing issue wherein street furniture tends to emphasize form over function in practical usage. Field observations revealed problems such as benches lacking backrests and waste bins that are difficult to open, limiting users’ sense of convenience and comfort. “age-inclusive friendliness” (C6) exhibited a classic mismatch, with high perceived importance but low satisfaction—particularly among residents (2.1630), the lowest across all indicators—revealing significant shortcomings in inclusive design. Both survey and field data indicate a substantial gap in age-inclusive coverage of street furniture, with notable issues such as a lack of age-friendly seating, limited availability of accessible facilities, and absence of amenities for infants and toddlers—all of which hinder the daily use experiences of older adults, children, and other vulnerable groups. In addition, basic configuration indicators such as “diversity of type” (C1), “quantitative adequacy” (C2), and “spatial layout rationality” (C3) received uniformly low satisfaction scores across all user groups. Among tourists, “layout rationality” scored the lowest at just 2.0690. On-site investigations further revealed that street furniture in the new town suffers from limited diversity and is often poorly positioned relative to pedestrian traffic density and circulation paths, resulting in low utilization rates.

4.2.2. Insufficient Environmental Integration: Aesthetic and Ecological Gaps

Survey results indicate that tourists placed significant emphasis on “degree of cultural integration” (C7) and “aesthetic coordination” (C9), with importance scores of 4.2299 and 3.9080, respectively. This suggests that tourists, beyond basic functional expectations, perceive street furniture as key carriers of urban cultural identity and visual representation, paying close attention to its alignment with the local historical context, architectural style, regional color schemes, and symbolic cultural expression. However, satisfaction scores for these two indicators were considerably lower (2.4943 for C7 and 2.6437 for C9), revealing a significant gap between expectation and experience in terms of cultural expression and visual design quality of current street furniture. Further field investigation revealed that most street furniture lacked regional cultural relevance in form, color, and material selection, often exhibiting homogenized styles and limited material diversity—confirming the concerns expressed by tourists regarding poor cultural integration and visual coherence. In contrast, residents assigned relatively lower importance and satisfaction scores to cultural integration and aesthetic harmony, indicating a stronger focus on the practical and comfort-related aspects of street furniture, with less sensitivity to its cultural value. Regarding “ecological adaptability” (C8), government officials rated it highest among the three groups (3.8158), reflecting the core emphasis on green, ecological development in the planning strategy of the Eco-Tech New Town and the government’s institutional commitment to sustainable urban development goals. Nonetheless, satisfaction scores for this indicator were generally low across all groups (residents: 2.5109, tourists: 2.9195, and government: 3.1053), revealing a typical high-expectation–low-satisfaction discrepancy. Structured interviews and field studies suggest that this discrepancy may stem from the fragmented and superficial implementation of ecological design strategies. For example, although materials are often labeled as environmentally friendly, they fail to convey a tangible ecological experience. Furthermore, the ecological features are poorly integrated with the furniture’s functional aspects, preventing users from perceiving real ecological benefits.

4.2.3. Fragmented Management System: Hindering Smart Urban Governance

Within the “management and operations” dimension (B3), different stakeholder groups exhibited distinct priorities. The survey results revealed that government respondents assigned high importance (scores > 4.0) to “construction standardization” (C10), “level of smart integration” (C11), and “ease of maintenance” (C14), highlighting their focus on a standardized and systematic approach across the entire lifecycle of street furniture, from planning to operational management. In contrast, residents and tourists prioritized “surface cleanliness” (C12), “physical integrity during use” (C13), and “durability” (C16), suggesting that the general public is more concerned with the tangible user experience and long-term usability of street furniture in everyday contexts. Notably, satisfaction scores for “public participation” (C15) were the lowest across all indicators, at 1.6739 for residents and 2.1053 for government officials. This indicates a widespread lack of participatory mechanisms in the planning and deployment of street furniture, undermining the “people-centered, co-creation and co-governance” principles of inclusive urban governance. Overall, satisfaction with indicators such as “level of smart integration” (C11), “surface cleanliness” (C12), “physical integrity during use” (C13), and “ease of maintenance” (C14) was consistently low across all three stakeholder groups, highlighting substantial deficiencies in the daily maintenance and operational systems of street furniture. Field observations further revealed widespread issues, such as surface grime, peeling coatings, and damaged components. Most installations still utilize traditional closed-structure designs, lacking modular components or quick-replacement mechanisms, thereby increasing maintenance difficulty. Moreover, the current level of intelligent functionality in most street furniture remains insufficient to meet the future demands of digital urban governance, particularly in terms of refined management and intelligent maintenance capabilities.

4.3. Design Guidelines for Street Furniture in Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town

The design implementation outcomes of this study were primarily led by a 12-member editorial team responsible for drafting the street furniture design guidelines, complemented by an environmental design workshop involving 46 postgraduate students majoring in design. Through multiple rounds of field research and expert interviews, and informed by prior evaluation results, the design team systematically explored the current issues in the street furniture of Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town, formulating a series of design interpretations and strategic guidelines to facilitate the translation of research findings into practical design solutions.

4.3.1. Developing a Hierarchical and Scenario-Based Allocation Framework

The survey results indicate that the current street furniture in the Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town exhibits generally low satisfaction levels across key dimensions, such as “functional utility”, “age-inclusive friendliness”, “diversity of types”, “quantitative adequacy”, and “Spatial layout rationality”. In response, this study proposes a set of multi-level, actionable design optimization guidelines based on empirical findings, aimed at systematically enhancing the spatial service capacity and public satisfaction of street furniture.

First, based on extensive field investigations and spatial structure analysis, this study proposes an initial concept for the “spatial planning structure of street furniture in the Eco-tech New Town” and, in combination with the town’s functional zoning and transport network, develops a multidimensional layout model described as “one core, two belts, three zones, five axes, and multiple nodes.” Specifically: (1) “one core” refers to a priority configuration zone centered on the Yangzhou East Railway Station, intended to serve as a demonstrative and guiding example; (2) “two belts” indicate furniture installation corridors along Phoenix Island Road–March Blossom Road–Liaojia Canal Road and Jinwan Road; (3) “three zones” correspond to the Wanfu Business District, Phoenix Island Ecotourism Resort, and Hangji High-tech Development Zone within the Eco-tech New Town, with street furniture types allocated according to each area’s functional characteristics; (4) “five axes” align with the main traffic arteries—Jintai Road, Xinwanfu Road, Wenchang Road, Ning-Tong Road, and Zhaizhuang Road—to increase service density in transit-oriented scenarios; and (5) “multiple nodes” focus on crowd-gathering spaces, such as parks and squares, where high-frequency-use furniture is installed. Furthermore, to enhance the rationality of street furniture placement, on-site surveys, behavioral observations, and spatial feature analyses were conducted across the three zones to identify the main pedestrian activity axes and functional nodes. This process yielded a “cross-axis” furniture layout for each zone: Phoenix Island Road–Jintai Road, March Blossom Road–Wenchang Road, and Shuguang Road–Zhaizhuang Road (Figure 4). The specific locations and types of street furniture were determined from survey data and spatial analyses: first, identifying road hierarchy, crowd concentration areas, and high-frequency activity points; second, assigning functional categories of furniture (e.g., seating, wayfinding, display) according to surrounding land uses, and, finally, arranging furniture in an orderly manner along the designated axes based on layout principles, thereby achieving precise alignment between furniture provision and contextual needs.

Second, targeted design and arrangement strategies were proposed according to the functional characteristics of different scenarios. Based on on-site surveys and behavioral observations, the study first identified the main activity types and crowd-gathering nodes in typical urban spaces, such as squares, roads, and parks. It then determined priority areas for furniture placement through analyses of the visual corridors, accessibility, and surrounding functional facilities. Finally, furniture types were selected and combined according to the behavioral characteristics of each scenario to enhance the practical effectiveness of the installations. For example, in square scenarios, composite furniture, integrating rest, gathering, and cultural display functions, was arranged along crowd circulation routes and activity cores. In road spaces, seating, information guidance, and shelter facilities were placed at bus stops, major intersections, and pedestrian nodes. In parks, interactive, ecological, and recreational furniture was integrated within activity-intensive zones and landscape nodes (Figure 5).

Finally, in response to the increasingly diverse demographics of urban users, a “universal age-friendly street furniture system” is proposed. This system addresses the physiological and psychological needs of specific groups, such as children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with limited mobility, through optimized scale design and safety standards. For example, in parks and residential entrances frequented by elderly individuals, seating should be ergonomically designed with appropriate height and supportive armrests. In commercial streets and family-oriented leisure zones, child-friendly seating and interactive signage systems should be incorporated to achieve inclusive functionality and social integration in a substantive way. Through coordinated strategies involving spatial stratification, scenario-based classification, and user-oriented design, the evolution of street furniture can be steered from uniform provision toward refined, diversified, and personalized deployment.

4.3.2. Exploring Culturally and Ecologically Responsive Design Languages

The indicators of “degree of cultural integration”, “aesthetic coordination”, and “ecological adaptability” are highly valued by residents, tourists, and government officials alike, yet overall satisfaction levels remain low. To effectively address the demands of diverse stakeholders and enhance the cultural significance, visual identity, and environmental compatibility of street furniture, systematic optimization is required across design philosophy, material selection, and technological application.

It is essential to strengthen the narrative capacity of street furniture by systematically interpreting and translating regional cultural imagery specific to Yangzhou—such as the spirit of the Grand Canal, the symbolism of the city flower (Viburnum macrocephalum Fort. f. keteleeri), the stylistic characteristics of classical gardens, and the formal language of intangible cultural heritage crafts. These elements should be integrated with the ecological and technological identity of the Eco-Tech New City to establish a culturally distinctive thematic system for street furniture design. By applying structural reinterpretation, formal abstraction, and symbolic transformation, cultural elements are embedded into the form and texture of street furniture. This approach supports the orderly continuation of the urban cultural context, enabling visual harmony with the surrounding environment while fostering public identification and a sense of belonging (Figure 6). Furthermore, aligned with the strategic vision of the Eco-Tech New City, priority should be given to the use of biodegradable ecological materials, renewable resources (e.g., reclaimed wood, recyclable metals), innovative low-carbon concrete, and intelligent photovoltaic coatings with environmental-sensing capabilities to achieve sustainability in street furniture production.

4.3.3. Establishing a Lifecycle-Oriented Management System

Satisfaction with the indicators of “level of smart integration”, “surface cleanliness”, “physical integrity during use”, and “ease of maintenance” remains low across residents, tourists, and government managers, highlighting the urgent need for a systematic operation and maintenance mechanism to enhance management efficiency. A full life-cycle management system for street furniture is now recognized as a key strategy for improving service quality and expanding operational functionality.

Drawing on previous studies [84] and extensive field investigations, we categorized the street furniture of Yangzhou Eco-Tech New City into four systems encompassing 30 distinct types. On the one hand, we advocate the establishment of a unified coding management mechanism. An 18-digit identification system was developed, consisting of a 9-digit administrative region code, a 3-digit furniture type code, and a 6-digit serial number. This structure enables precise identification and digital tracking of street furniture throughout its planning, construction, and maintenance lifecycle. The administrative code corresponds to different districts within the Eco-Tech New City. The 3-digit furniture type code consists of two parts. The first digit is based on the pinyin initial of the furniture system name (with the second initial used to resolve duplicates). The remaining two digits are derived from the initials of the first and last characters of the furniture name. If duplicates occur, the middle character’s initial is used to ensure the uniqueness and recognizability of the code. For example, the code for a garbage bin is “GLX” (

Table 8. Street furniture classification and coding system.

System		Category
Number	Name	Number	Name	Number	Name
J	Traffic safety infrastructure system	JL	Traffic barrier	RL	Pedestrian guardrail
		DZ	Bollard	SD	Construction enclosure
		JJ	Traffic poles and signposts	LP	Street name signage
		TP	Parking signage	GT	Bus shelter
		FJ	Bicycle parking rack
		JL	Traffic barrier	RL	Pedestrian guardrail
G	Public service system	LX	Waste receptacle	ZY	Public seating
		ZP	Sunshade canopy	YC	Mobile vending unit
		ZS	Public drinking fountain	FZ	Urban service kiosk
		DP	Wayfinding signage	SP	Commercial signage
S	Municipal facility system	SG	Utility cabinet	PZ	Stormwater grate
		MD	Tactile paving for the visually impaired	WD	Barrier-free ramp
		LS	Curb stone	JG	Manhole cover
		LD	Street light	BD	Pathway lighting
		HX	Planter box	LL	Greenbelt guardrail
Y	Public art system	GS	Public sculpture	LT	Three-dimensional floral installation
		YZ	Artistic installation

). On the other hand, an efficient feedback and fault–response mechanism should be established. By scanning the furniture code, users can report faults, enabling real-time condition updates, problem localization, and rapid repair responses (Figure 7).

Integrating maintainability principles into the design phase is a crucial strategy for improving long-term management efficiency. The adoption of modular structures, standardized components, and quick-release mechanisms enables the rapid replacement and repair of individual parts without compromising the main structure, thereby reducing maintenance costs at the source. Concurrently, efforts should be made to upgrade street furniture through smart technologies. By embedding environmental sensors, damage detection modules, and data transmission units via the Internet of Things, real-time monitoring, fault alerts, and backend coordination can be achieved, offering technical support for fine-grained governance in smart cities. Solar-powered systems can be integrated into benches, signage, and bus shelters by embedding photovoltaic charging modules, enabling on-site collection and use of clean energy. This not only enhances the multifunctionality of street furniture but also aligns with the objectives of green and low-carbon urban development.

Furthermore, to enhance public satisfaction and acceptance of furniture configurations, robust public participation mechanisms should be established, fostering multi-stakeholder collaboration. By instituting a “community planner” system, street-facing businesses, local residents, and public representatives can be engaged throughout the planning process. This enables precise identification of practical needs regarding functional features, spatial scale, and usage habits. Such collaborative design ensures localized optimization of street furniture deployment, embodying the principles of co-creation and shared governance.

5. Discussion

This study takes Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town as a representative case to develop a comprehensive evaluation framework for street furniture, encompassing three key dimensions: planning configuration, environmental integration, and management operations, with a total of 16 core indicators. A dual-perspective evaluation model based on stakeholder importance and satisfaction (residents, tourists, and government managers) was constructed, providing empirical support for the systematic assessment and design of street furniture in new urban areas.

As research on street furniture evaluation deepens, methodological systems have diversified, with different approaches showing distinct advantages in data acquisition, indicator processing, and result presentation. However, most existing studies focus on a single stage of the evaluation process, such as ranking indicator importance or calculating satisfaction, and lack a systematic design that spans from indicator construction to comprehensive analysis. In this study, qualitative and quantitative methods are integrated: grounded theory is used to extract evaluation dimensions, the Delphi method to refine the indicator system, and the Analytic Hierarchy process, together with fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, to determine weights and synthesize results, thereby establishing a full-process evaluation framework. This approach enables the incorporation of input from multiple stakeholders at each stage. It should be noted, however, that this method demands high standards for the composition and quality of expert and public samples and involves relatively complex procedures. Thus, when applied across regions, it should be adapted and optimized in light of local resources, governance models, and cultural contexts.

The previous literature has underscored the importance of improving design practicality and incorporating cultural elements in street furniture [26,32,85]. Consequently, existing evaluation systems for street furniture tend to focus on the planning or design stage [86,87], with a primary emphasis on indicators related to public user experience. While such systems offer some reference value for design and assessment practices, their construction logic often relies on a single professional perspective, making it difficult to balance public perceptions with governmental requirements for management and maintenance. To address this limitation, the present study adopts a full life-cycle perspective on street furniture, systematically integrating the key elements of planning, construction, management, and operation, thereby expanding both the scope and depth of the indicator system. The study advances beyond the traditionally user-centric design perspective by introducing a multi-stakeholder co-evaluation approach. By examining the differentiated perceptions and heterogeneous needs of residents, tourists, and government managers, the study promotes a paradigm shift in street furniture research from a design-centric approach to one that is oriented towards user needs. Methodologically, the study introduces a dual-dimension “importance–satisfaction” evaluation framework, which overcomes the limitations of traditional satisfaction-only assessments and more effectively reveals structural mismatches between supply and demand in real-world usage. This framework captures the gaps between user expectations and actual experiences across different indicators, providing critical data to guide future design optimizations. The preliminary outcomes of this study have been translated into the Street Furniture Design Guidelines for Yangzhou Eco-Tech New Town and are currently being piloted in selected urban projects. Future work will involve continuous monitoring of implementation outcomes, with regular feedback collection from residents, tourists, and managers to further validate and refine the proposed evaluation framework and strategic recommendations. Overall, this research expands the existing theoretical contributions to street furniture planning and design, offering a valuable reference for similar urban contexts. Its methodological framework and strategic guidance demonstrate strong replicability and practical value for broader application.

Despite the methodological and empirical progress achieved in this study, several limitations remain and warrant further investigation. First, the data collection relied primarily on self-reported perceptions, lacking support from objective behavioral and technical monitoring data. Future research could incorporate machine learning and object classification techniques, integrating on-site measurements with user behavior data to enable furniture-type recognition and automatic extraction of spatial distribution characteristics, thereby enhancing the scientific robustness of the evaluation framework. Second, this study combined purposive sampling with judgment sampling to recruit both experts with extensive experience in street furniture and diverse groups, including residents, tourists, and government administrators. While this approach is well-suited for in-depth exploration of specialized issues and targeted population insights, its limited randomness may constrain the generalizability of findings to broader populations. To address this, the study sought balanced representation across expert categories, professional backgrounds, gender, and age to enhance diversity and representativeness. Although the sample size met commonly recommended expert numbers for relevant methodologies, its coverage of wider populations could be improved. Future research could incorporate stratified random sampling and expand the sample scope to further strengthen the representativeness and the general applicability of results. Third, although this study proposes a street furniture evaluation framework of reference value, it should be noted that the results are grounded in the specific cultural, social, and administrative context of Yangzhou Ecological Science and Technology New Town, and its applicability may be limited in other regions. To ensure the replicability and applicability of the framework, its implementation in different regions should be adapted and refined in light of local environmental and social characteristics. For example, local residents’ aesthetic preferences, usage habits, and patterns of governmental management may differ from those in other countries or cities, thereby influencing the prioritization of certain indicators and the resulting satisfaction levels. In cross-cultural applications, the framework should be tailored to the specific local context. For instance, at the indicator level, Middle Eastern regions may prioritize equality and inclusive design [28] and European regions may place greater emphasis on historical and cultural heritage [88], while rapidly developing cities may prioritize functionality and capacity to address diverse and evolving urban environments [9]. As global climate and environmental challenges intensify, the sustainability of street furniture design is expected to become a focal concern for many cities [89]. Therefore, future research could incorporate a broader set of representative cases and appropriately expand or adjust the evaluation dimensions to improve the model’s generalizability and flexibility, ensuring closer alignment with local urban design orientations and cultural needs. Furthermore, to enhance the replicability and adaptability of the evaluation framework, subsequent studies may focus on a specific category of urban space, such as squares, streets, or parks, for more in-depth exploration and empirical analysis.

6. Conclusions

The key conclusions of this study are as follows:

(1)

Based on field investigations, in-depth interviews, and the literature review, this study integrates grounded theory and the Delphi method to extract key design factors and establish a street furniture evaluation system comprising three primary dimensions and sixteen secondary indicators. This framework not only provides a theoretical and quantitative foundation for assessing the current status of street furniture in the Eco-Tech New Town but also offers a transferable model for the planning and evaluation of street furniture in other emerging urban areas;

(2)

By combining the Analytic Hierarchy Process with Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation, this study conducts a systematic analysis of the perspectives of stakeholders, including residents, tourists, and government managers, regarding the importance and satisfaction dimensions of street furniture. The results reveal significant group differences in perceived importance: residents prioritize practicality and convenience in daily use; tourists focus more on aesthetics and cultural resonance; and government stakeholders emphasize standardization and maintenance efficiency. Overall satisfaction levels remain low across all groups, with the average ranking of the satisfaction dimensions being: “Planning and configuration” > “Management and operations” > “Environmental coordination.”;

(3)

Based on the evaluation results and practical demands, this study proposes feasible strategies and design guidelines for optimizing the street furniture system. In terms of planning and configuration, a refined deployment framework is suggested based on spatial hierarchies and scenario-specific functions. For environmental coordination, the study advocates for a design language rooted in local cultural expression and ecological sustainability. In management and maintenance, a full-life-cycle management model is recommended to enhance the operational efficiency and service resilience of street furniture systems.