نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه شهرسازی، مرکز تحقیقات افق‌های نوین در معماری و شهرسازی، واحد نجف‌آباد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، نجف‌آباد، ایران.

2 استادیار، گروه شهرسازی، مرکز تحقیقات افق‌های نوین در معماری و شهرسازی، واحد نجف‌آباد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، نجف‌آباد، ایران.

3 استاد مدعو، گروه شهرسازی، مرکز تحقیقات افق‌های نوین در معماری و شهرسازی، واحد نجف‌آباد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، نجف‌آباد، ایران. و استاد، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

فضای شهری در یک بستر تاریخی، علاوه بر دارا بودن همه عملکردهای متعارف خود که در سایر محیط­­های شهری نیز عهده­دار است، ­باید نقش خود را در ترازی بالاتر و چند وجهی منطبق با ویژگی­های یک بافت تاریخیِ هویت­مند ایفا نماید. بر این مبنا هدف اصلی پژوهش حاضر،کشف چگونگی ارتباط و نحوه برهمکنش مؤلفه‌های فضای شهری با  اجزا و ارکان متشکله جریان زندگی در بافت‌ تاریخی است؛ به نحوی که بتوان با مدیریت و استفاده شایسته از ظرفیت‌های فضای شهری در بستر بافت تاریخی، کیفیت زندگی ساکنان و کاربران آن را ارتقا بخشید. این مهم به نوبه خود حفظ ساکنین بومی در محدوده بافت تاریخی، بازگشت مهاجران از محدوده و پایداری اقتصادی، اجتماعی و محیطی را موجب خواهد شد. روش تحقیق پژوهش حاضر "توصیفی_ تحلیلی"، "استدلال منطقی" و در نهایت "دلفی­سازی و نظرسنجی از خبرگان" است. بدین ترتیب که ابتدا به مؤلفه‌های فضای شهری و کیفیات ناظر بر آن پرداخته شده، سپس ابعاد و سنجه‌های کیفیت زندگی شهری بررسی و شاخص‌هایی از آن که به فضای شهری و کیفیت محیطی اشاره دارد و موضوع کار طراحی، برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت شهری است، بر اساس دیدگاه‌های نظری و تحقیقات انجام شده گذشته مشخص شده است. در گام بعدی شاخص‌های استحصال شده با ویژگی‌های خاص بافت تاریخی مورد پایش و بازبینی قرار گرفته است. شاخص­های به دست آمده از دلفی (با تعداد 91 شاخص) با اظهارنظر حدود 40 نفر از خبرگان رشته و حرفه به 64 شاخص تقلیل یافتند. در نهایت نتایج آن در قالب مدل مفهومی نقش فضای شهری در ارتقای کیفیت زندگی در بافت‌های تاریخی شهری ارائه شده است. این مدل مفهومی از شش مؤلفه تشکیل شده؛ شامل مؤلفه زیست­محیطی با معیارهای «کیفیت زیست خرد فضاها»، «پایداری زیست­محیطی»، مؤلفه تجربی_زیبایی­شناختی با معیارهای «هم­پیوندی بافت جدید و قدیم»، «کیفیت منظر شهری و ارتباط فضایی»، مؤلفه عملکردی با معیارهای «تنوع استفاده از محیط»، «سرزندگی وکیفیت محیطی»، «ایمنی و امنیت» و «حمل­ونقل و دسترسی»، مؤلفه اجتماعی_فرهنگی با معیارهای «سرزندگی و انسجام اجتماعی»، «حفظ تعادل جمعیت»، مؤلفه­ی اقتصادی با معیارهای «سرزندگی و ثبات اقتصادی»، «انعطاف­پذیری برنامه­های توسعه» و مؤلفه­­­ی زمان با معیارهای «مدیریت زمان در فضاهای همگانی»، «تداوم مکان» که شاخص­ها را تعریف کرده­اند.  

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Conceptual model of the role of urban space in improving the quality of life in historical contexts

نویسندگان [English]

  • Alimohamad Saadati 1
  • Fereshte Ahmadi 2
  • Ali Ghafari 3
  • Elham Nazemi 2

1 Department of Urban planning, Advancement in Architecture and Urban Planning Research Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.

2 Department of Urban planning, Advancement in Architecture and Urban Planning Research Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.

3 Department of Urban planning, Advancement in Architecture and Urban Planning Research Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran. and Shahid Beheshti University,Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Highlights:
 

Improvement of the quality of life in historical contexts
Presentation of a conceptual model of the role of urban spaces in public life
Without the interaction of the environment, community, and economy, the quality of life will not improve.
There are many physical-functional and environmental qualities in urban public spaces that can guarantee the success of the field in satisfaction of residents and users of historic districts.

 
Introduction
In addition to performing all its standard functions in other urban areas, an urban space in a historic district should play its role at a higher multifaceted level matching the characteristics of a historic district with established identity. Accordingly, the present work aimed to discover how the components of an urban space, on the one hand, and the constituent elements of the flow of life in a historic district, on the other, are linked and interact so as to enable reasonable management of urban space potentials in a historic district and their proper application to enhance the quality of life for the residents and users.
Theoretical Framework
The model consisted of six components defining the following factors: the environmental component, with life quality in micro‑spaces and environmental sustainability as criteria; the empirical-aesthetic component, with old-new area integration and quality of urban landscape as criteria; the functional component, with variety in environment usage, environmental liveliness and quality, safety and security, and transportation and accessibility as criteria; the socio-cultural component, with social liveliness and cohesion and maintenance of population balance as criteria; the economic component, with economic liveliness and stability and flexibility of development plans as a criterion; and the temporal component, with time management in public spaces and continuity of place as criteria.
Generated based on the urban space components, the presented conceptual model offered a new approach to urban planning and management, and was concerned with all the urban regeneration measures adopted in historic districts. Functioning on local, regional, urban, and extramural scales, it can also assume applications in the quality assessment of measures adopted in public arenas within historic districts.
Methodology
The above strategy will in turn keep indigenous residents in historic contexts, have immigrants to those areas return, and bring about socio-economic and environmental sustainability. Employing logical reasoning, the Delphi method, and expert opinions, this descriptive-analytical study first discussed the urban space components and their qualitative requirements. Next, the dimensions and measures of the quality of urban life were analyzed, and their factors concerning the urban space and environmental quality and topics formed on urban design, planning, and management were identified based on the theoretical views found in the literature. In the next step, the factors extracted based on the characteristic features of historic districts were monitored and reviewed. The 91 factors obtained from the Delphi method were reduced to 64 after views and comments from about forty experts in the field were applied. Finally, the results were presented as a conceptual model describing the role of urban spaces on quality‑of‑life enhancement in historic urban districts.
Results and Discussion
According to the findings, there are many physical–functional and environmental qualities in public urban spaces that can guarantee the arena’s success in provision of the residents and users of historic districts with satisfaction. However, taking notice of economic activities and social mobility in these districts is fundamental to the effectiveness of a measure adopted for enhancement of the quality of life in public arenas within historic districts. Meanwhile, a rise in the sensitivity of local communities to the values of historic districts and the potentials of public arenas for enhancement of the quality of life therein encourages them to assume an active role in the application of these arenas and the local communities’ socio-economic potentials in enhancement of the quality of public arenas. This can also enable these communities to express problems and propose solutions; in some cases, it can even lead to innovative financing ideas for project implementation. In tandem with urban planning, it ensures the sustainability of public arenas in historic districts, and improves the quality of life for their residents and users. Therefore, the issues of socio-cultural livability and dynamic economy are the cornerstones of the formation of quality spaces within historic districts, and the quality of life will not improve regardless of the triad of the environment, society, and economy.
Conclusion
The presented conceptual model, based on the urban space components, offers a new approach to urban planning and management, and is concerned with all the urban regeneration measures adopted in historic districts. Functioning on local, regional, urban, and extramural scales, the model can also assume applications in the quality assessment of measures implemented in public arenas within historic districts. Here is a brief description of the intervention measures adopted for these districts and their regeneration process based on the proposed model.
The socio-cultural component. Contextualizing, contributing to/collaborating with, providing a process orientation for, innovating, and influencing the satisfaction of residents and users in public areas, utilizing the contribution/collaboration from the users of public arenas, delegating authority to non‑governmental organizations for utilization management, allowing for effective, constructive interaction among the organizations involved in the quality enhancement of historic districts and observing the pertinent legal frameworks, clarifying the procedures and promoting the accountability of officials, and respecting the cultural, social, and economic structures of life in the district.
The empirical-aesthetic component. Integrating old and new spaces within public arenas while respecting the features of their historic districts and taking notice of the mass and space simultaneously and avoiding shell designs.
The environmental component. Reducing environmental pollution and protecting energy resources and the natural heritage.
The functional component. Providing a favorable impact on space liveliness and enhancing social inclusion to be able to hold various events.
The economic component. Helping businesses flourish and promoting tourism.
The temporal component. Taking notice of nightlife, holding seasonal, monthly, and weekly events and recognizing the sense of place and making an effort to preserve it within the environment.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • quality of life
  • urban public space
  • Historic District
  • Conceptual Model
  • Resident
Ahmad Akhoundi, A., Barakpur, N., Khalili, A., Sedaghatnia, S., & Safiyari, R. (2014). Measuring Quality of Urban Life in Tehran Metropolitan. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi, 19(2), 5-22. [in persian]
Carmona, M. (2010a). Contemporary public space, part two: classification. Journal of urban design, 15(2), 157-173.
Carmona, M. (2010b). Contemporary public space: Critique and classification, part one: Critique. Journal of urban design, 15(1), 123-148.
Carmona, M. (2019). Place value: Place quality and its impact on health, social, economic and environmental outcomes. Journal of urban design, 24(1), 1-48.
Carmona, M. ((2020).). Urban maestro, The place alliance,. In. the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement.           
Carmona, M., De Magalhaes, C., & Hammond, L. (2008). Public space: the management dimension. Routledge.
Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (2003). Public Space–Urban Space, The Dimention of Urban Design. Edisi, 2, 114.
Tehran City Studies and Planning Center. (2019). Strategic document for urban space management. Shahid Beheshti University Press. [in persian]
Das, D. (2008). Urban quality of life: A case study of Guwahati. Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 297-310.
Esmaeily, A., & Ashjaei, H. (2020). A Customized Model for Assessing Urban Life Quality Based on Objective and Subjective Approaches (Case study, Qom city, District one). Journal of Geomatics Science and Technology, 9(3), 97-111. [in persian]
Falamaki , M. M. (2018). Rehabilitation of historic buildings and cities. Publisher University of Tehran. [in persian]
GOLKAR, K. (2001). COMPONENTS OF URBAN DESIGN QUALITY. SOFFEH, 11(32). [in persian]
Habibi, S. M., & Pour-mohammad-reza, N. (2013). Public spaces and social life in the historic city of Varamin. Hoviatshahr, 7(15), 5-14. [in persian]
Hamdan, H., Yusof, F., & Marzukhi, M. A. (2014). Social capital and quality of life in urban neighborhoods high density housing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 153, 169-179.
Hassanzadeh , M., & Soltanzadeh , H. (2018). Developing a Conceptual Model for Urban Texture Sustainability: an Integrated Revitalization Approach. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 14(56), 57-70. [in persian]
Jacobs, J. (2016). The death and life of great American cities. Vintage.
kokabi, A. (2012). Criteria for assessing the quality of urban living in urban centers. Hoviatshahr, 1(1),18 -38. [in persian]
Littlefair, P. J. (2000). Environmental site layout planning: solar access, microclimate and passive cooling in urban areas. BRE publications.
Low, C.-T., Stimson, R., Chen, S., Cerin, E., Wong, P. P.-Y., & Lai, P.-C. (2018). Personal and neighbourhood indicators of quality of urban life: a case study of Hong Kong. Social Indicators Research, 136(2), 751-773.
Lynch, K. (1984). Good city form. MIT press.
Marans, R. W. (2015). Quality of urban life & environmental sustainability studies: Future linkage opportunities. Habitat International, 45, 47-52.
Mohammadi, M., Azimi, M., Moghaddam, H., & rafieian, m. (2013). urban public spaces: realization of social interactions in historical texture. maremat-e asar & baft-haye tarikhi-farhangi, 2(4),20 -39. [in persian]
Petruccioli, A. (1998). Typological process and design theory.
Pourahmd, A., Hhabibi, K., & Keshvarz, M. (2010). new approaches of the process of conceptualizations of the regeneration of the urban distressed area. journal of studies on Iranian Islamic city, 1(1). [in persian]
Punter, J., & Carmona, M. (1997). The design dimension of planning: theory, content, and best practice for design policies. Taylor & Francis.
Research Assembly of the Islamic Consultative Assembly. (2019). Law on Protection of Restoration and Restoration of Historical-Cultural Textures. https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/1199470. [in persian].
saadati, A. m., & Lotfipour Siahkloroodi, M. (2018). study of the role and position of public spaces in promoting quality of life in historical textures The 4th National Conference on Applied Research in Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Management, Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/612469 [in persian].
Soltanzadeh , H., & Rohbakhshan , A. (2016). Urban spaces in the historical contexts of Iran. Cultural Research Office Publications. [in persian]
Southworth, M. (1989). Theory and practice of contemporary urban design: a review of urban design plans in the United States. The Town Planning Review, 369-402.
Tibbalds, F. (2012). Making people-friendly towns: Improving the public environment in towns and cities. Khak publisher.
Ülengin, B., Ülengin, F., & Güvenç, Ü. (2001). A multidimensional approach to urban quality of life: The case of Istanbul. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(2), 361-374.
Yaghfoori, H., Rusta, M. R., & kooshaahi, M. (2016). Spatial Evaluation of Quality of Life Indicators in the Neighborhoods of Bam City after Earthquake by Using Multi-criteria Decision-making Models [orginal]. Social Welfare, 16(61), 187-220. [in persian]
Zainal, N. R., Kaur, G., Ahmad, N. A., & Khalili, J. M. (2012). Housing conditions and quality of life of the urban poor in Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 50, 827-838.
Zare, A., rezaei, m., & Laghai, H. (2019). Explaining the Effective Factors on Improving the Environmental Quality of Urban Historical fabrics (Case Study: historical fabrics of Shiraz). 10(38), 1-12. [in persian]
Zebardast, E. (2009). The housing domain of quality of life and life satisfaction in the spontaneous settlements on the Tehran metropolitan fringe. Social Indicators Research, 90(2), 307-324.