Studies of restorative environments have mainly focused on the restorativeness of natural environments, and very few studies have examined the restorativeness of other types of environment. Although many studies showed that natural environments were more restorative than urban environments, it doesn’t mean necessarily that an urban setting is not at all restorative. Even in an urban environment, there should be some restorativeness, supposedly ranging from low to middle or high. This study was conducted as a first step to the research of restorativeness in various environmental settings, especially, people’s everyday settings. The aim of this study was to find out what types of environment people feel restorative and which aspect of it is more important, they think, to their perception of restorativeness of the environment, and then to examine the relations among those aspects. In this study, a questionnaire, which contains four free-answer questions and the 26-item Perceived Restorativeness Scale (PRS), was distributed to university students. On top of the first page of the questionnaire, a scenario was given to the participants. The scenario described a student experiencing mental fatigue in preparing end-term exams and doing a lot of assignments. Participants were then instructed to imagine the scenario given was that of their own, and to answer the following questions. Around 300 questionnaires were distributed at the end of classes and 220 complete answers were collected. The four free-answer questions included in the questionnaire were on (1) the places where they think the most restorative and the least restorative when they have mentally fatigued, (2) simple descriptions about each places answered in question 1, (3) their feelings while being there, and (4) the behaviors they would do to restore in those places. The contents of the answers to these four questions were grouped into a small number of categories, and the answers to the questionnaire were binary dummy coded to quantify using the categories. As for the restorative places, the frequent categories of answers were such as ‘their own home,’ ‘a place with nature,’ and ‘a park,’ and for non-restorative places, the frequent categories were ‘a place with too many people,’ ‘at school,’ and ‘downtown.’ The results of correspondence analysis with dummy coded data of free-answer questions showed that the categories of restorative environment were much more diverse than those of non-restorative environment in its characteristics. It was also suggested that the categories of the restorative environments can be grouped into several subcategories. Also, according to the general analysis, the most significant difference between restorative and non-restorative environment was physically or psychologically being away from the source that causes mental fatigue. Further detailed results of the analyses on the differences in characteristics among each subcategories of restorative environments will be discussed.