Abstract
The increasing importance of neighbourhoods in urban planning, combined with an enhanced focus on the social aspects of designing desirable communities and societies, has emanated the necessity of developing a clear understanding of spatially desirable neighbourhoods. When considering various dimensions of social vitality and existing urban planning norms for residential neighbourhoods, it appears essential to consider and integrate both social and spatial aspects to formulate a desirable community. This article examines the impact of social factors on spatial desirability and vitality of residential neighbourhoods in the context of Iran. The historic city of Yazd has been selected as the case study. Following thorough evaluation of existing neighbourhoods in the city, three study areas have been selected for detailed study; Zortosht neighbourhood, Shahrak University residential complex and Baqiyatullah Azam residential complex. Based on the nature of this study, a qualitative method has been adopted to conduct this research. Extracting from the literature review, three factors of safety and security, sense of attachment to place and social interaction are among the most important socio-cultural factors that can affect the social vitality of a neighbourhood. After the content analysis of the interviews (through semi-structured questionnaires) from the stakeholders and residents of the study areas, observation and documentation of physical and spatial structure of the neighbourhoods and analysing data by interrelating social, as well as spatial aspects, the study concluded that social and spatial aspects are interconnected and both are impacting each other to result in social vitality and spatial desirability of a neighbourhood. Moreover, it was observed that spatial layout of neighbourhoods can increase the potential for social vitality and liveliness. Finally, research recommends design policies for socially integrated and spatially desirable neighbourhoods in the context of Iran, which may be applicable in other similar contexts too.
INTRODUCTION
Following the growth of urban areas and replacement of old neighbourhoods with newly developed urban environments throughout the world, the significance of developing efficient urban neighbourhoods is getting more evident. The formation process of the old neighbourhoods which were shaped and evolved during a long period of time had been such that it has the necessary efficiency in responding to the needs of residents; however, it seems that in Iran the recent transformation in various economic, social, environmental and physical factors of cities in general and in residential neighbourhoods in particular, has had significant undesirable effects on their gradual growth and efficiency in responding to the needs of residents (Hosseininasab 2018. 83–92). In recent years, with the growth of urbanisation and the importance of improving the quality of residential environments in order to achieve a high-quality urban environment, the need to design planned residential neighbourhoods seems more essential (Mousavi–Irani 2008). A neighbourhood is a combination of physical and social environment in which groups of people live and interact with each other. The basis of its formation is qualitative factors such as psychological and emotional needs which must be in harmony with the spatial structure, lead to the formation of a larger family called neighbourhood (Shieh 2012). Despite a substantial discussion on common social factors affecting desirability of a neighbourhood, identifying and assessing exact social features of a desirable neighbourhood is context-based, varying in different cultures and communities (Shirazi–Keivani 2021).
Building on the analysis of relevant resources, this research has two goals, firstly identifying the social factors influencing the spatial desirability of a neighbourhood in general and secondly, examining case studies from Iranian context based on the identified factors. To achieve the goals, the study has selected the case of Yazd city in Iran. The historic city of Yazd serves as a suitable case study for this research, since Yazd is a significant historic city containing intact neighbourhoods in the historic core shaped during centuries, as well as recently designed residential neighbourhoods in the new part of the city.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research aims to examine the impact of socio-spatial factors on the social vitality and spatial desirability of residential neighbourhood in the context of Iran. As socio-cultural subjects may vary based on context, the in-depth case study methodology was adopted for this study. The historic city of Yazd was selected as the case study. Yazd city due to its long history contains both old residential neighbourhoods shaped over the time, as well as the contemporary designed urban neighbourhoods. Following thorough evaluation of existing neighbourhoods in the city based on the findings of literature review, 10 neighbourhoods which were most suitable for the study were shortlisted and eventually three neighbourhoods were selected as study areas for detailed study. These are Zartosht neighbourhood, Shahrak University residential complex (only phase 1 was considered to balance size of the sample) and Baqiyatullah Azam residential neighbourhood. One of the most important criteria while selecting the study areas was the time and the age of neighbourhoods. Study areas from different periods can reflect varying cultural, social, and economic contexts, offering a deeper understanding of how these factors may affect communal aspects within a neighbourhood. Other factors including size and the number of residents became less critical as they had less impact on evaluation parameters, although demographic factors and spatial parameters based on the definition of neighbourhood were taken into consideration too.
Based on the nature of this study, a qualitative method has been adopted to conduct this research. Extracting from the literature review, three factors of safety and security, sense of attachment to a place and social interaction and networking are among the most important factors that can affect the social vitality of a neighbourhood. Further, the socio-spatial parameters affecting each factor were extracted from the precedent studies. Studies were identified and analysed using academic databases and the bibliographies of published works. These studies varied widely in type, ranging from theoretical frameworks to international case studies and covered various scales from local to regional. We did not impose any time restrictions on the selection of resources, however, we tried to select the leading studies in the field of urban neighbourhood during the last few decades.
A detailed survey of study areas was done through observations, and interview of the stake-holders including the residents. Around 278 interviews with stakeholders were conducted during the course of study (about 90 per study area) through semi-structured questionnaires. The gender balance was considered while selecting the interviewees, however, children under 13 were not considered directly for the interviews. Based on the initial survey, we tried to conduct the interviews from various range of residents from housewives (who spend more time in the neighbourhood) to head of families and young adults. We took assistance from management committees of the neighbourhoods to invite and interview the selected members.
The questionnaire used in the research focuses on residents’ perceptions of safety & security from their neighbourhood, the quality of their social interactions, and the use of communal spaces within their neighbourhood. The questions are designed to evaluate the respondents’ sense of security by asking whether they feel safe in their neighbourhood and to elaborate the spatial reasons contributing to their feelings of safety or unsafety. This is followed by a question exploring their sense of attachment to the neighbourhood, aiming to understand the emotional or personal ties residents may have with their living environment. Furthermore, the questionnaire contains surveys about social dynamics, such as the level of interaction with neighbours and whether children engage in active play with peers in the area. It also touches on the presence of designated spaces for neighbourhood meetings, reflecting the accessibility and functionality of communal areas. Finally, questions regarding access to spaces for exercise, walking, and other activities, as well as the usage of communal and green spaces, are included to capture how residents utilise the neighbourhood’s physical environment for recreational and social purposes.
Observations took place in all three study areas in order to document the planning and layout of the neighbourhoods, social norms and interactions within the neighbourhoods as well as cross check the results derived from questionnaires. We made the observations in different hours including the daytime and towards night and the dark hours. Observations took place within and around the neighbourhoods.
For data processing, after the content analysis of the interviews based on the keywords and parameter derived from the literature review, a set of negative and positive factors affecting the social vitality of each area was prepared. The results derived from interviews were cross checked via direct observation of the study areas, GIS information and documentation of physical and spatial structure of the neighbourhoods. After analysing the data, the conclusion and recommendations of the research are presented in the form of policy and design solutions.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The concept and definition of neighbourhood has been studied by a variety of scholars around the world. Although each one of them points at specific qualities of neighbourhood, yet they all agree that a neighbourhood is a combination of spatial and socio-cultural aspects and both factors have impact on the desirability of a neighbourhood (Shirazi–Keivani 2019. 448–471). A deeper survey of the literature reveals a variety of socio-spatial aspects that define an urban neighbourhood based on experts’ opinion, in which many of the qualities are common. Table 1 presents an overview of the major spatial and socio-cultural qualities that define a neighbourhood based on earlier studies.
Overview of the literature review on physical and socio-spatial defining aspects of urban neighbourhood
| Source | Keywords defining a neighbourhood |
|---|---|
| (Moreno 2024) | Proximity, accessibility, sustainability, community engagement, mixed-use development, equity, health & wellbeing, resilience |
| (Inoue et al. 2020) | Social interaction, interpersonal relationships, social cohesion, attachment to place, health and well-being, security |
| (Barton–Grant–Guise 2021) | Residential area, distinct identity, distinguishable from the whole city, 1,000 population, bordered, under the banner of primary school and local shops |
| (Gilderbloom 2016) | Physical environment with identifying boundaries, place for daily stay and shopping, socio-cultural commonalities |
| (Dempsey 2009. 315–345) | Social interactions, participation, community stability, pride and sense of place, safety and security |
| (Choguill 2008. 41–48) | Civic participation, social interaction, sense of belonging, interpersonal relations, collective action, mutual support, access to facilities, safety |
| (Jayne–Bell 2004) | Organised, structured, sustainable living environment |
| (Kearns–Parkinson 2001. 2103–2110) | Place for work and family environment, interaction, mutual support and assistance, socialisation, recognition, built environment, social organisation, identity, reflecting values and ideals and socio-economic conditions |
| (Kallus–Law-Yone 2000. 815–826) | Designed spatial environment, easy access to facilities, defining one’s position in the city, pedestrianised and safe accessibility, access to public transportation |
| (Wellman 1979. 1202–1231) | A facility to create a sense of belonging and a sense of community |
| (Keller 1968) | Physical space, containing facilities, common value of residents, population living in an identifiable sector, public interaction network, common identity, common symbol |
| (Perry 1929, reprinted 1998) | Pedestrian accessibility, social interactions, community facilities, human scale, self-containment, traffic management |
Based on the findings of the literature review, it is evident that three factors, namely safety and security, sense of attachment and belonging, as well as social interactions and networking are among the common socio-cultural parameters that define an urban neighbourhood, hence influencing its desirability (Shirazi–Keivani 2019. 448–471). Following sections will review and identify the tangible and intangible aspects of each parameter.
Safety and security
Safety and security are influential factors in improving the quality of human life. Since a significant part of people’s activities and communication takes place in public areas and urban spaces, one of the most important factors of efficiency of urban spaces (especially within residential neighbourhoods) is safety and security. In fact, the level of people’s sense of security in urban spaces affects the individual and collective behaviour of users to a large extent (Brounen–Cox– Neuteboom 2012. 2669–2691). In other words, if a space is not used due to its insecurity, that space loses its dynamism, which itself can create a favourable environment for crime in the said space due to the reduction of social supervision (Shakoori Asil 2016. 77–91).
Sense of safety and security is a state in which an individual feels satisfied, valued and confident to spend time and move freely in a public space, and it has direct relation with safe environment in terms of traffic, motor vehicles, level of crime or fear of crime (Bennett et al. 2007; Foster–Giles-Corti–Knuiman 2010. 1156–1165). In urban spaces, the sense of urban security means that citizens feel safe to move freely, communicate with their fellow citizens and engage in social activities; without being threatened or facing physical and mental violence and harassment or sexual inequality (Raco 2007. 305–320). The sense of safety and security among the citizens is equally important and it complements the actual safety and security of a place.
In urban neighbourhoods, it is important how much the residents feel safe and that is directly relevant to the spatial design of a neighbourhood. However, security in residential neighbourhoods is not possible only through rigid physical barriers. Perhaps such barriers may have a reversed impact on the sense of security in residents as they imply an unsafe environment (Charkhchiyan 2010. 37–48). It seems that one of the ways to achieve the maximum sense of security in residents is through indirect design solutions that can also be integrated with the socio-cultural aspects. Via this method and by creating sense of security in the residents, their satisfaction from their residential environment can increase. The built environment affects human behaviour. On one hand, the environment can encourage criminals to commit crimes by creating opportunities for them, and on the other hand, it can prevent crimes by increasing the ability of residents to monitor the environment. Most of the theories are based on the claim that with proper design one can prevent crime in urban environments in addition to having a positive effect on the quality of life. This theory states that principals such as increasing the sense of belonging to a place, balance between public and private spaces, enhancing visibility and surveillance, make crime targets more difficult and thus limit accessibility, can reduce opportunity of wrongdoings.
Table 2 shows a combination of spatial design solutions and socio-cultural aspects which through integration can result in creating sense of security in a residential neighbourhood.
Socio-spatial factors impacting the sense of safety and security in a public place
| Effective criteria on formation of sense of safety & security | ||
|---|---|---|
| Socio-cultural factors | Ownership | Reducing the ratio of tenants to owners |
| Control of residents over public areas | Increasing the visibility of the urban spaces so that residents can have visual connectivity with public places | |
| Distinctions and similarities | Socio-cultural significances of the residents can create social ties | |
| Spatial factors | Pedestrian and vehicular domain | Minimising the number of entrances and exits to supervise commuting – segregating pedestrian and vehicular domain |
| Diverse land use | Creating diverse land uses in urban neighbourhoods so that they can be active throughout day and night | |
| Defining boundaries | Defining clear boundaries between public and private spaces that classifies the ownership of a space by means of which spatial hierarchy can be supported in urban neighbourhood. | |
| Orientation of building | The more compatible the surrounding land uses are, the more safety and security can be expected | |
| Hierarchy | Maintaining the hierarchy in accessibility between public and private spaces can increase the security | |
| Visibility | The view and visibility from other land uses to residential areas should be reduced to minimum from openings such as windows or entrance doors | |
| Eliminating hiding places and escape routes for criminals | The layout and physical characteristics of buildings and public spaces should be in such a way that it does not encourage illegal activities | |
| Proper lighting of the public space | Avoid creating dark and deserted spaces for criminals | |
Sense of attachment to a place
One of the important and effective meanings in the relationship between man and the environment that has been the attention of designers is the sense of attachment. In environmental design methods, despite the frequent use of this word, a specific definition of this meaning and its constituent elements has not been provided. Sense of belonging is one of the evaluation criteria of quality environments. In architecture and environmental design disciplines, physical characteristics such as form, colour, size, shape, scale, and ergonomics as well as emphasis on the social activities within the environment, play an important and effective role in the formation of sense of belonging to a place. The feeling of belonging and attachment to a place is a higher level of sense of place, which determines the role of people in any situation and space in order to benefit and continue the presence of people in the place.
Belonging to a place or attachment to a place is formed based on cognitive, emotional and functional interaction between people and groups as well as physical and social places over time (Charkhchiyan 2010. 37–48). Pakzad considers a part of existential personality of every human being, which makes his/her individual identity, the place by which he identifies himself and relates himself to others. He believes when a person thinks about himself, he connects himself to the place where he lives and considers that place a part of him (Pakzad 2008). The spatial belonging of the residents of the neighbourhood to the living environment, a memory of the neighbourhood that is in the minds of the residents and the collective memories of local residents are important elements of local identity (Ghasemi–Negini 2011. 13–113). Other researchers have also mentioned the indicators of sense of attachment to a place, which is mentioned in the table below. Table 3 shows the most essential factors related to people’s sense of belonging to a place from the point of view of previous thinkers and researchers.
Factors related to people’s sense of belonging to a place
| Expert | Keywords |
|---|---|
| (Lynch 1960) | Legibility, perceptibility, memorability of the place, clarity |
| (Sampson–Groves 1989. 774–802) | Social order |
| (Scannell–Gifford 2010. 1–10) | Shared symbolic meanings, shared experiences and values and shared historical symbols, duration of residence, ownership, planning to stay or leave the place |
| (Anton–Lawrence 2016. 145–154) | Social interaction, loyalty, emotions, participation, place identity, stability and length of stay |
| (Shirazi et al. 2020. 441–465) | The attractiveness of the public spaces of the city in the streets, squares, green spaces and parks, interaction |
| (Habibi 2010) | Mental images, memories and the role of physical structure |
The studies conducted regarding the sense of attachment to a place point to various factors, including the role of cultural, social, individual and spatial factors, as well as the impact of land, time, activity and social interaction (Hosseininasab 2021. 227–235). The general impression resulting from the definitions of the sense of place shows that the sense of place is the result of human inner communication, his mental images and environmental characteristics. On the one hand, this concept is rooted in subjective experiences such as memory, tradition, history, culture, society, etc., and on the other hand, it is influenced by objective and external contexts in the environment such as design, scenery, smell, and sound. It shows that the sense of place is a complex concept of human feelings and attachment to the environment, which arises as a result of human adaptation and use of place. So, sense of place is not a predetermined entity, but it is created by human interaction with the places of daily life. An individual attributes to the place in which he lives a set of previously received preconceptions, which shape how he responds to the environment. Although constant and frequent familiarity is one of the factors that creates a sense of place, it is not enough on its own. Physical characteristics, by facilitating activities and creating identity, strengthen the sense of place. The counter model of physical factors and socio-cultural factors improve the meanings and activities through the quality of the design, and by satisfying the biological, psychological and social needs of users, causing a series of perceptions, satisfaction and finally create a sense of place. According to the stated content, sense of attachment to a place has physical, as well as social dimensions. This sense in architecture is the result of relationship between three factors: the individual, others and the environment. This creates an environmental meaning for sense of belonging in a tripartite process. Table 4 demonstrates the spatial and social factors which have impact on developing the sense of belonging to a place.
Spatial and social factors impacting the sense of belonging to a place
| Factors | Principals | |
|---|---|---|
| Socio-cultural | Knowing the residents of neighbourhood | Acquaintance of residents creates social interactions and finally the sense of belonging to the place |
| Duration of stay | The existence of amenities and services is a factor to encourage residents to stay for a long time | |
| Social class | Occupation–religion–age | |
| Collective memories | Positive and common memories of events and incidents increase the positive feeling towards the environment | |
| Neighbourhood relations | Neighbourhood relations are directly related to the sense of belonging and sense of security | |
| Celebrating social and religious rituals | Formation of cultural, social and religious centres or groups | |
| Spatial | Permeability | – Visual: Diaphragm transparency – controlled visibility – Mobility permeability: safe and easy access by vehicles – Physical and visual access to the neighbourhood |
| Visual proportion | Height from the floor – skyline – flooring – scale | |
| Individualisation | Using some significant colours as signature colours for the neighbourhood – unified but different public façade | |
| Legibility | Increasing perception of space-readability in functionality | |
| Variety | Diversity in vision – diversity in details – variety in material – variety in furniture | |
Social interaction
According to Maslow’s pyramid of human needs (1954), people’s needs are divided into two groups, the first group is material and physical needs. If this category is fulfilled, another range of needs emerges, which goes back to the psychological dimension of human life. Accordingly, one of the natural needs of humans is the need to establish interactions and social relationships. Social interaction means creating a relationship between two or more people that leads to a reaction between them, and this type of reaction is known to both parties (Abbaszadeh–Sevda 2013. 95–104); Therefore, relationships without meaning are not included in this definition. With the increase in the size of cities, speed, density, etc., qualities such as civility, citizenship and social relations as the basic urban principles have been weakened (Behzadfar 2008). Experts in the field of social sciences emphasise the role of public spaces in creating social interactions and they believe that more than any other factor, it is the presence of people in the space that attracts people towards social interaction (Mcclurg 2003. 449–464). On the other hand, the social aspects as well as ongoing activities in a space, along with the shape, dimensions, propositions, scale and aesthetics, are known to be effective factors in the formation of social interactions among people (Shirazi–Keivani 2019. 448–471). According to the studies that formed the theoretical foundations of this study, the factors influencing the formation and quality of social interactions in an urban neighbourhood are: socio-environmental security, sense of place, sociability of space, social trust, public and engaging space, common religious ceremonies, socio-financial class, availability of various public spaces and hangout areas in a neighbourhood as well as accessibility and distance to public amenities. Table 5 demonstrates the spatial and social factors which have impact on quality of social interactions in the context of an urban neighbourhood.
Socio-spatial factors impacting the social interaction in an urban neighbourhood
| Factors | Principals | |
|---|---|---|
| Socio-cultural | Feeling safe | Sense of security is the beginning of any kind of social relationship |
| Integrity in socio-cultural and financial status | Residents being on the same level in every respect (religion, financial, occupation, etc.) may cause more social interactions among the residents | |
| Duration of stay | Longer stay has impact on positive social interaction among the residents | |
| Sense of belonging to place and people | Satisfaction with the environment can increase the desire for social interaction | |
| Spatial | Presence of natural elements and green spaces | Encouraging the presence of people in public space – children to play – elderly to rest – social interactions |
| Functional proximity | Allocating spaces to the elderly or children’s play area, in a way that the elderly residents can supervise children | |
| Public and semi-public spaces | In these spaces, the presence of strangers is controlled through indirect, non-physical and socio-emotional barriers – open spaces inside the neighbourhood, such as the centre of the neighbourhood, passages, children’s play areas are part of this category of spaces | |
| Diversity | Engaging public façades – creating visual and functional liveliness | |
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Based on the criteria mentioned in the previous section, three study areas were selected for in-depth investigation. In order to have a right blend of neighbourhoods, variables such as time of construction, accommodation of different ethnicities in Yazd, as well as designed vs naturally developed neighbourhoods were considered. Eventually following neighbourhoods were selected:
–Zartosht complex: a neighbourhood which emerged around a stream of water over the years, without any initial comprehensive planning. The significance of this neighbourhood is that the majority of residents are from minority community of Zoroastrians.
–Shahrak University residential complex: This neighbourhood has been designed and set up from the beginning with a comprehensive plan in order to create a complete neighbourhood unit for university employees and faculty members of Yazd University. Currently this neighbourhood consists of around 1,500 households, so this sample is considered as a macro sample.
–BaqiyatAllah Azam neighbourhood: this neighbourhood with the total of 26 residential units and a population of about 120 people was built in the old core of the city and contrary to the traditional external design, the interior of each unit is designed and built to respond to the needs of a modern life.
Documentation of spatial factors
| Zartosht residential complex | Location: Qasim Abad district | Year: 1930s |
|---|---|---|
| Location: Zartosht residential complex located in Qasim Abad district, is considered as the primary core of Qasim Abad neighbourhood in Yazd city. The first buildings of this area were built around 1930s. The inhabitants of this neighbourhood mostly follow the Zoroastrian religion. The built public places, including religious, educational and other services, are all in accordance with the religion and culture of the residents of this complex (Fig. 1). | ||
| Accessibility: The main access to the complex by vehicle is from Ferdowsi Street, which is about 200 meters to reach the centre of the neighbourhood. The small width of the alley and its twists and turns has resulted in the absence of strangers in the complex. Due to the fact that the ends of the alleys are closed, there is only one way for foreign vehicles to pass, which is at the beginning of the neighbourhood and has no traffic inside the complex (Fig. 2). | ||
| Land use: – Residential: The houses in this neighbourhood are in two patterns. They are built in traditional style using clay and mud. Main patterns are four-sided central courtyard or U-shaped courtyards. – Education: There are two educational buildings in this complex, one of which is the centre of the neighbourhood and the main street and belongs to Zarathashtan, and the other is a girls’ primary school. – Cultural: Atashkdeh – Centre of religious affairs of Zoroastrians (Abanbar) Qasim Abad Water reservoir – Clinic (Figs 3–4). | ||
| Neighbourhood Centre: The centre of the neighbourhood of this complex is the central and main alley of the complex in terms of functionality, which has made the complex lively despite the movement of water and sufficient green space, as well as all the public and service spaces in this alley. The proper location of the green space and the water atmosphere in the centre of the neighbourhood, the proper orientation of the alley and the height of the surrounding buildings are a proof of the functional proximity in the space, and the creation of a suitable shade during the day has caused the maximum use of the alley, which is mentioned below. – Children’s play – Elderly rest – Walking – Biking – Car Parking (Figs 5–6). | ||
Location of Zartosht residential complex (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Accessibility to Zartosht residential complex (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
A view of one of the secondary roads in Zartosht residential complex (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Water reservoir at Zartosht residential complex (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Central and main alley in Zartosht residential complex (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Centre of Zartosht neighbourhood in the form of an alley (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
After documenting the neighbourhood based on observations and evaluation of spatial factors, an open-ended questionnaire was prepared with questions based on the keywords and parameters of the research to evaluate the social factors based on the stakeholders’ opinion. Around 100 residents of the neighbourhood from different age groups and with a gender balanced of 50% were interviewed. After the content analysis of the questionnaires, the data derived from the questionnaire were analysed by removing the less important keywords and prioritising the important keywords while keeping in mind the three factors of the research (safety and security, sense of attachment to a place, social interactions). Later the data was cross checked with the data collected via observations and a list of factors were prepared. The keywords containing concerns or demonstrating dissatisfaction were labelled as negative, highlighted with different colour and the keywords stating satisfaction were labelled as positive.
In answer to the questions regarding safety and security in the Zartosht neighbourhood, almost all the participant showed satisfaction. The most highlighted fact by the participants was “close social connection of the residents,” which naturally is due to belonging to the same minority group. As mentioned earlier, most of the residents are Zoroastrians and, in some cases, they have developed family connections, too. Getting to know the entire neighbourhood had a great impact on the sense of safety and security of the neighbourhood. In addition, this fact had helped the residents to remain alert in case a stranger entered the neighbourhood. The statistics of crime in the neighbourhood also confirms that the neighbourhood is a safe one, as no major report of theft, robbery or any other crime is available in the last five years.
Belonging to the same minority group also had a positive impact on the satisfaction of the residents regarding the other two factors; sense of belonging to the place, as well as having a consistent and productive social relationship with each other.
The other highlight in the questionnaires was regarding the communal spaces within the neighbourhood. Although this neighbourhood is not designed and it has been shaped and developed with the passage of time, residents spend quite a considerable time in the public spaces of the neighbourhood. That is normally in the form of small gatherings of women for afternoon meet ups in front of any house or men sitting under the tree shades in the main alley for short meet ups. As it was mentioned earlier, the main centre of the neighbourhood is an alley stretched from east to west. This alley also plays a role as the main accessibility of the neighbourhood. Although both vehicular and pedestrian movements are happening within this alley, still residents do not hesitate to meet, say hello hi or even take a walk in this alley. According to the residents, there is always some kind of presence of people in this alley and that is one of the key factors in the safety of the neighbourhood. Other public spaces such as Atashkadeh (fire temple) and Community centre are regularly and commonly used by the residents, creating a strong social bond.
The only concerns were regarding lack of lighting in some of the areas within the neighbourhood, but after observations we discovered it was just one secondary alley which was dark in the late hours of night. In total, most of the keywords listed were positive. The final results for Zartosht neighbourhood have been presented in Table 6. The feedback with negative concern are displayed in grey colour.
Summary of analysis of socio-spatial factors for Zartosht Neighbourhood
| Summary of analysis for Zartosht Neighbourhood | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety and Security | Appropriate visual connectivity of public spaces | Sense of belonging to place | Sharing a strong socio-cultural bond (minority group) | Social interaction | Common religious functions and rituals |
| Presence of people in public spaces (except for evenings) | Long duration of residing | Flexibility of public spaces for different purposes | |||
| Functional proximity | Family connection | Enough public spaces for social interaction | |||
| Lighting at nights (some streets were unlit) | Suitable amenities | Same level of social status of the residents | |||
| Appropriate boundaries of public and private spaces | High number of plots owned by residents | Minimum presence of vehicles in public areas | |||
| Appropriate hierarchy of spaces | Presence of natural elements and green areas | Family connection in the neighbourhood | |||
| Separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation | Education facility (elementary school) | ||||
| Shahrak University residential complex | Location: Safaiyeh district | Year: 1980s |
|---|---|---|
| Location: The university residential neighbourhood is located in Safaiyeh neighbourhood of Yazd. It is situated in the boundary between Ferdowsi Street and Prof. Hasabi Street on one side and adjacent to Palestine Boulevard and Amir Kabir Boulevard on the other side. Most of the buildings in this neighbourhood were built in the late 1980s. The neighbourhood has been divided into 9 smaller complexes due to its larger area and accessibility pattern. Each complex has at least 4 green spaces that are centrally located between the residential buildings (Fig. 7). | ||
| Accessibility: The main rout of access for vehicles is from Ferdowsi Square to Farhang Square. There is a pedestrian access to all the centres of neighbourhood from the main streets. It is possible to walk to the centre of the neighbourhood from all the alleys. The presence of vehicles is possible in all alleys within the neighbourhood, however, narrowness of the alleys inside the complex has made it difficult for vehicles to pass through. Traffic flow is reduced in the complex due to narrow alleys and their many twists and turns (Fig. 8). | ||
Land use:
| ||
| Neighbourhood centre: There is one main central space and four smaller central spaces in each neighbourhood unit. The centre of the main neighbourhood lacks any distinct spatial quality and has no efficiency and is only a place of passage. The centre of smaller neighbourhoods due to their proximity to the entrance of residential houses, the presence of suitable green space, suitable access and also having a suitable spatial quality have more uses such as children’s play, women’s gathering, resting of the elderly, car parking and walking track (Fig. 9). | ||
Location of Shahrak University residential complex (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Accessibility to Shahrak University residential complex (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Neighbourhood centre in a form of a public park in Shahrak University residential complex (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
The same process of interview and data analysis was implemented for the university neighbourhood. Based on the data from the questionnaires almost all the participants showed satisfaction about the amenities available within the neighbourhood. Similarly, most of the points regarding the safety and security of the neighbourhood were positive. Controlled traffic and commuting within and to the neighbourhood, presence of petrol police at nights, safe and walkable play areas for the children were among the most positive comments of the residents. However, commercialisation of the main streets of the neighbourhood was a serious concern of the residents when talking about all three factors. The vehicular traffic created by the commercial plots, noise and pollution caused by such traffic and commuting of non-residents to the neighbourhood are among the reasons which were considered harmful to the integrity of the neighbourhood, as well as its safety and security, according to the residents’ point of view.
The macro size of this neighbourhood has an impact on the level of social interaction of residents, and their sense of belonging too. The layout of the university town is based on grid-iron pattern, consisting of grid-iron streets and standard type of plots in 2 sizes. Despite the macro size and the layout, mostly neighbours living in a close vicinity of each other have developed a fairly good social connection. They know each other, their kids play together and they occasionally meet. One of the reasons probably is of the layout of the neighbourhood at micro level. There is a central space in a form of a park located in almost every cluster of houses, making it possible for the neighbours to interact with each other.
Another point mentioned often when asked about sense of belonging to the place as well as social interactions, was the presence of tenants in the neighbourhood who were mostly university students. The neighbourhood is in close vicinity of three university campuses. This fact, plus connection of students with employees and faculty members of the university, makes this neighbourhood a very suitable option for residence of the students who do not prefer or cannot live in the hostels. However, the residents consider the bachelor life of most of the tenants conflicting with the family life of the neighbourhood. Moreover, most of the tenants were not interested in social interaction as they perceived themselves as temporary members of the community. Overall, this neighbourhood in all three factors was evaluated positively.
The summary of the results are presented in Table 7. The feedback with negative concern are displayed in grey colour.
Summary of analysis of socio-spatial factors for Shahrak University residential complex
| Summary of analysis for Shahrak University residential complex | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety and Security | Commercialisation of main accessibilities | Sense of belonging to place | Close distance to the workplace (university) | Social interaction | Neighbourhood meetings for the management |
| Suitable privacy within the neighbourhood | Long duration of residing | Presence of management committee for the neighbourhood | |||
| Appropriate privacy within the residential units (no visual disturbance due to low density) | Suitable and enough amenities | Sufficient public spaces to support social interactions such as kids’ playing areas & walking tracks for parents | |||
| Safety and Security | Appropriate lighting of streets at nights | Sense of belonging to place | Number of plots owned by the residents (ownership rate is average) | Social interaction | Same level of social status of the residents |
| Segregation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation | Presence of natural elements and green areas in most of public spaces | University students as tenants (disparity between bachelor life and family life) | |||
| Appropriate visual connectivity of public spaces | |||||
| BaghiyateAllah Azam neighbourhood | Location: Sheikhdad district | Year: 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| Location: BaghiyateAllah Azam neighbourhood is located in Sheikhdad district of Yazd city and it was built in the middle of the old fabric of Yazd. The current neighbourhood consists of 26 residential units, including villas and apartments. This residential complex was established on the site of two traditional houses (Mukhtarapur House) that had turned into ruins. The purpose of implementing such project was to revive the historical fabric as well as to provide affordable housing for the youth (Fig. 10). | ||
| Accessibility: Access to the neighbourhood is possible in two ways. The main access is from Sayed Gol-e-sorkh Street and Shahid Hatami Street with the width of 10 meters. The prominent sites around the neighbourhood are the Sheikhdad Mosque and the park of the neighbourhood. Another way to access the complex is from Enqelab Street and the main alley of Sheikhdad neighbourhood, which is around two kilometres from the neighbourhood (Fig. 11.) | ||
| Design: Residential units are made of two types.
| ||
Location of BaghiyateAllah Azam neighbourhood (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Accessibility to BaghiyatAllah Azam neighbourhood (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
A view of the central common courtyard among villa units in BaghiyateAllah Azam neighbourhood (https://irabon.com/ Accessed 01 July 2024)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
The same process of interview and data analysing was implemented for BaghiyaAllah neighbourhood. This neighbourhood has two distinctions as compared to the other study areas; a) it is a gated community designed in the recent years, b) it is of a relatively smaller size (26 families).
The summary of the feedback of the residents regarding the safety and security of the neighbourhood is positive. All the residents feel safe individually and for their families. According to the questionnaires it is mostly due to being a gated community with high level of privacy, surveillance, appropriate lighting and secure car parking in the complex. Statistics also show almost no record of theft or robbery in the last five years. However, the other two factors, sense of belonging to the place and satisfaction with social interactions within the neighbourhood raised concerns. The families living in villa houses believed that they have less connections with their neighbours due to the larger size of the houses and the fact that each house has an independent attached courtyard, which is used by their children as play area and by the family for leisure time. Therefore, they rarely used the public central courtyard of the neighbourhood. Contrary to that, families living in the apartments had comparatively more interaction as there are more families living in the apartments who use the central courtyard.
Generally, the fact that the number of tenants in the neighbourhood is considerable, and the lack of integrity in the social status of the families, especially of those who are immigrants, were the highlighted points in the sense of belonging and social interaction sections. Overall, in this neighbourhood the number of negative parameters in all three factors were more as compared to the other two study areas. This result came as a surprise as considering the spatial factors, it seemed this neighbourhood had more potential as it is a gated community, well designed, and smaller in size (number of families). The summary of the results are presented in Table 8. The feedback with negative concern are displayed in grey colour.
Summary of analysis of socio-spatial factors for BaghiyatAllah Neighbourhood
| Summary of analysis for BaghiyatAllah Neighbourhood | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety and Security | Gated community | Sense of belonging to place | Prominent urban location | Social interaction | Lack of social integrity due to gap in social status of residents |
| Safe & designated car parking | A quite place with no noise disturbance | No play area for children | |||
| Instalment of safety & surveillance appliances including cameras, etc. | Ethnic design of the neighbourhood based on traditional patterns while being adjusted to the modern life | Short duration of stay (tenants & immigrants) | |||
| Appropriate lighting within the community | Lack of playing areas for the kids | Meet ups in the central courtyard (rarely) | |||
| Visual privacy | Less duration of residing for most residents | ||||
| Some private corners without surveillance | Presence of immigrants and tenants | ||||
| Lack of lighting in approaching streets outside the gate | |||||
As it can be seen, overall negative impressions of the stakeholders are more in BaghiyatAllah neighbourhood, however, most of them are related to the intangible aspects related to the sense of belonging to the place, as well as social interaction between neighbours (Table 8). Contrary to that, the results are opposite in the case of Zartosht neighbourhood. The last two factors got total positive response from the residents in Zartosht neighbourhood. BaghiyatAllah neighbourhood is a gated community, designed more recently as a residential complex. It was expected that in such a well-designed neighbourhood with a high level of privacy, residents maintain a close and lively social interaction among themselves. Nonetheless, as per the investigation it seems they are less satisfied with their neighbourhood relations as compared to the other two study areas. The survey revealed that it was mostly due to the social (intangible) aspects, rather than spatial and physical aspects related to the environment. Residents of Zartosht neighbourhood as well as University town neighbourhood share a close tie due to their longer period of stay in their respective neighbourhoods, as well as belonging to the same minority or professional group.
CONCLUSION
The overview of the results in the three study areas shows that maintaining spatial quality and following certain design principals will definitely improve the quality of safety and security in a neighbourhood, enhance the sense of belonging to the place and encourage a positive social interaction among the residents, all of which will ensure the social vitality of a neighbourhood to a great extent. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that as per the analysis of this study, it seems that social (intangible) aspects such as duration of stay, socio-cultural bonds (like belonging to the same minority group or being the employees of a same organisation) or ownership of a plot can have equal or at times more impact on the social vitality of a neighbourhood. At the end, this study recommends a set of design policies that can enhance the spatial quality of a residential neighbourhood towards social vitality (Table 9). The design principals in each category may overlap with each other and they are not confined to one parameter only (Figs 13–15). It is important to mention that spatial characteristics of a neighbourhood are complimentary to the social aspects of a community and both are essential for the social vitality of a neighbourhood. This study also suggests that social vitality of neighbourhoods and variable factors may vary in different contexts.
Efficient management of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the neighbourhood while creating spatial boundaries in public spaces enhances the safety and security in the neighbourhood (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Easily accessible and walkable public spaces increase the opportunity of social interaction of residents (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Flexibility of public spaces creates opportunities for various public gatherings and different age groups (Authors’ own creation)
Citation: Építés – Építészettudomány 52, 3-4; 10.1556/096.2024.00124
Summary of the spatial factors influencing the social sustainability of a neighbourhood
| Factors | Design policy | Description & detail |
|---|---|---|
| Safety and Security | Management of vehicular and pedestrian circulation | The efficient management of vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the neighbourhood and their access to the neighbourhood is directly related to the comfort and safety of the residents. It can also prevent the presence of strangers in the area. |
| Creating spatial boundaries | Creating spatial boundary can be done by several design solutions such as using fences in public areas, green edges, diversity of materials, etc. This will help functioning of various public spaces, increasing safety and security, as well as maintaining privacy. | |
| Controlled visibility and visual privacy | The placement of mass and space, building height, openings height and their direction, etc. can control residents’ privacy; hence impacts sense of safety and security. | |
| Eliminating hiding corners | The layout of buildings and their orientation should not be in such a way that would create hidden corners for accommodating wrongdoings or criminal activities. | |
| Accurate lighting of public spaces | There is a significant difference in the frequency of crimes during the day and night, and the time factor aggravates the crime conditions of the place. The appropriate development of the lighting system reduces the fear of crimes among the residents. | |
| Sense of belonging to a place | Permeability | A more permeable layout offers pedestrians and cyclists a choice of routes, thereby providing greater visual interest and generating a higher level of pedestrian and cycling activity. This in turn enhances the security of those using the routes and encourage them to commute freely within the neighbourhood. |
| Public amenities | Sufficient and accessible public amenities will bring comfort for the residence; hence, causing satisfaction for residents. | |
| Legibility | Using various techniques to enhance the legibility of the neighbourhood layout including enhancing visual connectivity, removing hidden and unused corners and connecting secondary public open spaces with the main axes of neighbourhood. | |
| Use of natural elements | Use of natural elements enhances the quality of public spaces and increases the duration of stay. | |
| Social interaction | Flexibility | Flexibility of public spaces creates opportunities for various public gatherings and different age groups. |
| Functional proximity | Easily accessible and walkable public spaces increase the opportunity of social interaction of residents. |
REFERENCES
Abbaszadeh, Shahab–Sevda, Tamry: Analysis of Factors Affecting the Improvement of Pedestrian Walkway Spatial Quality and Pedestrian-Oriented Spaces, in Order to Increase the Social Interactions Level of People. The Case Study: Tarbiat & Valiasr axis, Tabriz Metropolitan. Motaleate Shahri. Quarterly Journal of Urban Studies 1 (2013) 4. 95–104. https://urbstudies.uok.ac.ir/article_3668.html?lang=en (Accessed 01 July 2024).
Anton, Charis E.–Lawrence, Carmen: The Relationship between Place Attachment, the Theory of Planned Behaviour and Residents’ Response to Place Change. Journal of Environmental Psychology (2016) 47. 145–154.
Barton, Hugh – Grant, Marcus – Guise, Richard: Shaping Neighbourhoods: For Local Health and GlobalSustainability. (3rd ed.) Routledge, 2021.
Behzadfar, Mostafa: The Identity of the City; Looking at the Identity of the City of Tehran, Shahr publication,Tehran, Iran 2008.
Bennett, Gary. G.–McNeill, Lorna. H.–Wolin, Kathleen Y.–Duncan, Dustin T.–Puleo, Elaine–Emmons,Karen M: Safe to Walk? Neighbourhood Safety and Physical Activity among Public Housing Residents. PLOS Medicine 4 (2007 October) 10. 1599–1606; discussion 1607. . PMid: ; PMCID:
Brounen, Drik–Cox, Ruben–Neuteboom, Peter: Safe and Satisfied? External Effects of Homeownership in Rotterdam. Urban Studies 49 (2012) 12. 2669–2691.
Charkhchiyan, Maryam: Explaining the Model of Attachment to Place and Examining Its Different Elements and Dimensions. Journal of Fine Arts. Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Tehran (2010) 1. 37–48.
Choguill, Charles: Developing Sustainable Neighbourhoods. Habitat International 32 (2008) 1. 41–48.
Dempsey, Nicola: Are Good-Quality Environments Socially Cohesive? Measuring Quality and Cohesion in Urban Neighbourhoods. The Town Planning Review 80 (2009) 3. 315–345. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27715105 (Accessed 01 July 2024).
Foster, Sarah–Giles-Corti, Billie–Knuiman, Matthew: Neighbourhood Design and Fear of Crime. A Social-Ecological Examination of the Correlates of Residents’ Fear in New Suburban Housing Developments. Health & Place 16 (2010) 6. 1156–1165.
Ghasemi, Vahid–Negini, Somayeh: Investigating the Effect of Neighbourhood Context on Social Identity, with an Emphasis on the Identity of Neighbourhoods in Isfahan City. Journal of Urban and Regional Studies and Research 2 (2011) 7. 13–113.
Gilderbloom, John I.: Ten Commandments of Urban Regeneration. Creating Healthy, Safe, Affordable, Sustainable, and Just Neighbourhoods. Local Environment 21 (2016) 5. 653–660.
Habibi, Mohsen: From Flux to the City: A Historical Analysis of the Concept of the City and Its PhysicalAppearance: Thinking and Impression, Tehran University Press, Tehran 2010.
Hosseininasab, Shariyeh: Evolution of Policies and Approaches to the Revitalisation of Iranian Historic CityCentres. Journal of the Punjab University Historical Society 31 (2018) 1. January–June, 83–92.
Hosseininasab, Shariyeh: The Interaction of University and The City. A Socio-Spatial Bond. Journal of thePunjab University Historical Society 34 (2021) 1. January–June, 227–235.
Inoue, Takuo–Rikutaro, Manabe–Akito, Murayama–Hideki, Koizumi: Neighbourhood Analysis Based on “Place Values” Estimated by Subjective Evaluation of Landscape Values. Case Study of Fujimidai Neighbourhood in Kunitachi City, Tokyo. Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan (2020) 55. 1372–1377. (Accessed 01 July 2024)
Jayne, Mark – Bell, David: City of Quarters. Urban Villages in the Contemporary City (ed. Bell, D.) 1st ed.,Routledge 2004.
Kallus, Rachel–Law-Yone, Hubert: What is a Neighbourhood? The Structure and Function of an Idea. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 27 (2000) 6. 815–826.
Kearns, Ade–Parkinson, Michael: The Significance of Neighbourhood. Urban Studies 38 (2001) 12. 2103–2110.
Keller, Suzanne: The Urban Neighbourhood. A Sociological Perspective. Random House, United States 1968.
Lynch, Kevin: The Image of the City. MIT Press, 1960.
McClurg, Scott D: Social Networks and Political Participation. The Role of Social Interaction inExplaining Political Participation. Political Research Quarterly 56 (2003) 4. 449–464. .
Moreno, Carlos: The 15-Minute City. A Solution to Saving our Time and our Planet. John Wiley & Sons, 2024.
Mousavi, Mirsaeed – Irani, Gholamreza: Investigating the Impact of Iran’s Contemporary Developments on Deterioration of Urban Fabrics. In 3rd National Conference of Improvement & Retrofitting. Tabriz University, Iran 2008.
Pakzad, Jahanshah: Articles on the Concepts of Architecture and Urban Design. Shahidi Publications, Tehran,Iran 2008.
Perry, Clarence: The Neighbourhood Unit. (1929) Reprinted Routledge/Thoemmes, London 1998.
Raco, Mike: Securing Sustainable Communities Citizenship, Safety and Sustainability in the New UrbanPlanning. European Urban and Regional Studies 14 (2007) 4. 305–320.
Sampson, Robert J.–Groves, W. Byron: Community Structure and Crime. Testing Social-DisorganizationTheory. American Journal of Sociology 94 (1989) 4. 774–802.
Scannell, Leila–Gifford, Robert: Defining Place Attachment. A Tripartite Organizing Framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology 30 (2010) 1. 1–10.
Shakoori Asil, Shideh: Identifying the Environmental Characteristics Affecting Women’s Sense of Security in Urban Spaces. Scientific-Research Quarterly Journal Of Urban Management (2016) 410. 77–91.
Shieh, Esmaeil: Introduction on Principals of Urban Management & Planning. 3rd edition, Siyam Publications,Iran University of Science and Technology 2012.
Shirazi, M. Reza–Keivani, Ramin: The Triad of Social Sustainability: Defining and Measuring Social Sustainability of Urban Neighbourhoods. Urban Research & Practice 12 (2019) 4. 448–471.
Shirazi, M. Reza–Keivani, Ramin: Social Sustainability of Compact Neighbourhoods Evidence from London and Berlin. Sustainability 13 (2021) 4. 2340.
Shirazi, M. Reza–Keivani, Ramin–Brownill, Sue–Watson, Georgia: Promoting Social Sustainability of Urban Neighbourhoods: The Case of Bethnal Green. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 46 (2020) 3. 441–465.
Wellman, Barry: The Community Question: The Intimate Networks of East Yorkers. American Journal of Sociology 84 (1979) 5. 1202–1231.
