To Assess the effectiveness of resulted changes from the municipality proceeding to improve quality of space around Metro Stations (Sadeghiyeh subway station)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Abstract

Urban spaces refer to the man-made spaces which possess a special order for human behavior and activities. One of these spaces is the surrounding space of public transportation stations. The subway stations, although potentially encompass many different groups of people, few social interactions take place in these spaces. However, an appropriate designing of these spaces, as an interface between the inside and outside of the cities, can cause much more activities to be continued in the public places. In this regard, by making the surrounding areas of the subway stations be public space, the potential for increasing the socialization capacity of the mentioned spaces will be provided. Sadeghieh Subway Station can be considered as the most important subway station in Tehran, which on the one hand is the rail port of Tehran's western entrance, and on the other is the port for railway journeys inside the city. The main concern of this study is to assess the success or failure of the interventions made by the municipality for changing the surrounding area of the Sadeghieh Subway Station into a public space, and examine the amount of the area's improvement into a desirable space. The method used in this study is survey, in which the data were collected using questionnaire and interview.  The study's population is all people who use Sadeghieh Subway, and the sample size for the study were considered 140 subjects. In data analyzing phase, using SPSS software and parametric one-sample t-test, we found out that in such cases as transportation, security, Pedestrian infrastructure, vitality and attractivity, rate to remain in the space, the amount of traffic crossing the sidewalk, walking group, the lighting, the vendors, the cleaning, pavement structure and climatic elements after the municipality's actions to change the space into a pedestrian-oriented space have a progressive process can be observed, but in such cases as mix use, recreational activity, readability and design furniture no significant change was seen, and in some cases the results were counterproductive. 

سرعت سی - دکتر جهانشاه پاکزاد – 1384 – انتشارات نشر دانشگاهی – چاپ اول
بررسی پیاده راهها، مرکز مطالعات و برنامه ریزی شهر تهران، 1390
واتسون، 1390 دونالد و پلاتوس، آلن وشیبلی، رابرت جی. 1389. مجموعه کامل استانداردهای طراحی شهری. ترجمه کیانوش داکرحقیقی، مرکز مطالعات معماری و شهرسازی ایران.
پورسرتیپ، فریناز. 1389. پیاده راه : تحکیم رابطه انسان و محیط شهری. جستارهای شهرسازی، فصلنامه تحلیلی پژوهش معماری و شهرسازی، سال نهم، شماره 31.
-حبیبی، سید محسن. 1386. مسیر پیاده گردشگری. نشریه شماره 9، هنرهای زیبا، ص 52-43.
-معینی، محمد مهدی. 1385. افزایش قابلیت پیاده‌مداری گامی به سوی شهری انسانی‌تر. هنرهای زیبا، شماره 27، ص 16
 
Fyfe, N, R. 1998. image of the street. london-routledge publication
Arth, michael E. (2010). Democracy and the common weath: Breaking the strangle hold of the special interests golden apple media, pp. 120-139, 363-386
Grant, J. (2006) Planning the Good Community: New Urbanism in Theory and Practice. London: Routledge
Cowan, Robert, The Dictionary of urbanism, streetwise press Ltd, London, 2005
Appleyard, D. 1981. Livable streets. Berkeley: Univ. of California. Press.
Arens, E., and P. Bosselmann. 1989. Wind, sun and temperature—predicting the thermal comfort of people in outdoor spaces. Building and Environment 24: 315–20.
Bacon, E. 1967. Design of cities. New York: Viking.
Banerjee, T. 2001. The future of public space—Beyond invented, streets and reinvented places. Journal of the American Planning, Association 67: 9–24.
Carmona, M., T. Heath, T. Oc, and S. Tiesdell. 2003. Public places—Urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. Oxford, UK: Architectural Press.
Gehl, J. 1987. Life between buildings. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 1989. 6: 9–17.
Hass-Klau, C., G. Crampton, C. Dowland, and I. Nold. 1999. Streets as living space: Helping public spaces play their proper role. London: ETP/Landor.
Jacobs, J. 1961. The death and life of great American cities. New York: Vintage Books.
Krier, L. 1992. Leon Krier: Architecture and urban design, 1967–1992. New York: St. Martin’s. Krier, R. 1979. Urban space. New York: Rizzoli.
Montgomery, J. 1998. Making a city: Urbanity, vitality and urban design. Journal of Urban Design 3: 93–116.
Rapoport, A. (1990) History and Precedent in Environmental Design (New York: Plenum Press).
Jacobs, J. 1961. The death and life of great American cities. New York: Vintage.
Jacobs, J. 1961. The death and life of great American cities. New York: Vintage.
Jensen, S. U. 1998. DUMAS: Safety of pedestrians and two-wheelers. Note no. 51. Road Directorate, Division of Road Safety and Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Nasar, J. L., and B. Fisher. 1993. Hot spots of fear and crime. A multi-method investigation. Journal of Environmental Psychology 13: 187-206.
Newman, O. 1972. Defensible space. Crime prevention through environmental design. New York: Collier. -
Taylor, R., and A. Harrell. 1996. Physical environment and crime. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice Research Report.
Zelinka, A., and D. Brennan. 2001. Safescape: Creating safer, more livable communities through planning and design. Chicago: American Planning Association.
NASAR, J. L. (1994) Urban design aesthetic s: the evaluati ve qualities of building exteriors, Environment
and Behavior, 26, pp. 377±401.
YEUNG, H. W. C and SAVAGE, V. R. (1995) The Singapor ean image of the Orchardsc ape, in: B. S. A. YEOH and L. KONG (Eds) Portrait of Places. Singapore : Times Edition.
TUAN, Y. F. (1990) Realism and fantasy in art, history, and geograp hy, Annals, Association of American Geograph ers, 80, pp. 435±446.
HULL, R. B., LAM, M. and VIGO, G. (1994) Place identity: symbols of self in the urban fabric, Landscap e and Urban Planning, 28, pp. 109±120.
APPLEYARD, D. (1979) The environment as a social symbol, Journal of the American Planning Association, 45, pp. 143