Architectural Design Principles of Public Spaces Based on Social Sustainability Approach: A Case...

S

Architectural Design Principles of Public Spaces Based on Social Sustainability Approach: A Case Study in Ardabil, Iran

Iman Raeisi, Islamic Azad University of Qazvin, Qazvin, Iran (Islamic

Republic of) Alireza Kharazmi Nezhad, Islamic Azad University of Qazvin, Qazvin,

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Maryam Hafezifar, Art University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran (Islamic

Republic of)

Abstract: Considering the environmental, economic and social goals of sustainable architecture, most

of the researches that have been done in the “sustainable architecture” topics are developed generally

in the environmental and economic goals and even in some cases have resulted in design principles

that reflect these goals in design. But concerning social objectives, there are less established design

principles which have utilized these goals in designing. Therefore extensive studies are required to

reflect the goals as rules in design. With this background, the paper’s question is raised: “How can

we determine the principles of architectural design in public spaces in terms of social goals of sustain-

able architecture?” Regarding the question, this hypothesis arises that: “A method of the architectural

- urban design has direct impact on non-physical stability of space”. In order to prove this hypothesis,

considering that the social sustainability has different definitions in the different cultures - thanks to

diversity of behaviors, beliefs and cultures- in this article the spatial and environmental quality criteria

are reviewed to find overall optimum spatial qualities which can be effective on social sustainability

of public spaces, then these cases are studied in Ardabil (Iran) to suggest design principles based on

social sustainability in the city. The research method is field research (interviews and questionnaires),

archival research combination.

Keywords: Social Sustainability, Public Space, Human Behavior, Architectural Design, Ardabil

Introduction1

USTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IS an issue that has been considered by scientific

societies since late twentieth century and nowadays, is of a special importance in

different fields of science. Architecture is one of the main fields of sustainable

development, which is known as “sustainable architecture” in the world. Sustainable

buildings may be defined as building, which strive for integral quality (including

economic, social and environmental performance), in a broad way (John et al,

2005). Therefore, sustainable design is a sort of interference in the environment that

1 This paper has been extracted from M.Arch thesis entitled: “Designing Ardabil City Hall with Social Sustainability

Approach” by Alireza Kharazmi Nezhad under supervision of Iman Raeisi (Ph.D.) which has been successfully

defended on March 08,2010 at the faculty of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University of Qazvin,

Qazvin, Iran.

Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal

Volume 4, Number 5, 2010, http://www.Design-Journal.com, ISSN 1833-1874 © Common Ground, Iman Raeisi, Alireza Kharazmi Nezhad, Maryam Hafezifar, All Rights Reserved,

Permissions: [email protected]

DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL

is trying to create solutions for achieving balance with environmental, economic and social

goals in a holistic approach, to provide high life quality for the current generation and

maintain that heritage for the next generations (Ahmadi, 2003). Based on these definitions,

the triple objectives of sustainable architecture can be briefly classified in physical and

non-physical sectors: environmental and economic goals relate to the physical part and

social goals put forward the non-physical sector in sustainable architecture. Main

concentration of this research which is called “social sustainability” is in fact, the non-

physical part of sustainable architecture which follows social goals of sustainability. In spite of

the studies conducted in urban areas with regard to this topic (Dempsey et al, 2009; Bramley

et al, 2009; Mitlin et al, 1996; Yiftachel et al 1993) unfortunately, in architectural scale,

there has been less attention paid to the non-physical part of sustainable architecture.

Recently most researches and even accomplished projects in sustainable architecture have

focused mainly on the environmental and economic goals (physical part), whereas, long

time before announcement of “sustainable architecture” manifestos, researchers were

studying human social behavior in architecture (Rapaport, 1969&1989&1977; Oliver,

1969&2007; Gifford, 1981&1985&2005&2007). So, nowadays, it has been proved to all

that space and society are clearly related: it is difficult to conceive space without social

content and, similarly, to conceive society without spatial components (Carmona, 2003).

Although it was expected that such topics should gradually be highlighted in recent years,

raising sustainable architecture and its social goals, rarely motivated researchers to study

such issues in architectural theory and practice.

On this basis, in the present article, what has been focused on is defining social sus-

tainability in architecture with regard to the efficient factors in designing public buildings as

small-scale public spaces. Considering that social sustainability in architecture could be

defined differently in each geographical region owing to socio-cultural differences, in this

research, Ardabil city in Iran has been selected for regional considerations and offering

some effective factors in architectural design of public spaces based on the theory of social

sustainability.

According to what mentioned above, this article investigates the answer to this question:”

How can we determine the principles of architectural design in public spaces in terms of

social goals of sustainable architecture?”; In order to answer this question, the hypothesis

raised as: “it seems that a method of the architectural-urban design has direct impact on

non-physical stability of spaces”, so that proving this hypothesis responses the main

question of the research.

Investigating the Concept of Social Sustainability in Architecture

Nowadays, what is known as “Social Sustainability” in architecture arises from socio-

cultural approaches in architecture. In fact, when the top styles, developed in recent decades,

subsided and when Modernism became weak, attention to the human-oriented architecture

as a production which meets human needs in different dimensions, led to the formation of

approaches in architecture that are known as social approaches (Raeisi et al, 2007). In

recent years, these kind of socio-cultural and psychological approaches in architecture,

encountered with “Sustainable Development”2

and caused taking into consideration such

viewpoints in architecture as “sustainable architecture” more than before and

comprehensively.

2 There is a comprehensive list of social aspects of sustainable development in “Agenda 21” that have been approved

in 1992 in Rio conference.

100

IMAN RAEISI, ALIREZA KHARAZMI NEZHAD, MARYAM HAFEZIFAR

As already mentioned, sustainable architecture and design contains three main

objectives: economic goals, environmental goals and social goals. According to Betel

McCarthy’s opinion about social goals, such goals contains: security, adaptation

capability, to engage the quality, to eliminate energetic poverty, making sound

insulation, flexible programs, healthy living, domestic cares, permanent education

(Ahmadi,2003). Thus, the social goals can be named as non-physical goals in sustainable

architecture (against the environmental and economic goals as physical one).

On the other hand, according to the existing literature in this field, it can be observed that

the problem of society and architecture has always been discussed and thus creates

socio-cultural attitudes in architecture. Since about thirty years ago, some of well-known

researchers such as Amos Rapaport and Paul Oliver studied about “architecture, culture and

society”, with specific socio-cultural attitudes (Memarian, 2005). However, such studies

have their roots in the fields like sociology, but architectural researchers have been

focused more on the customs, traditions, social manners, thoughts and beliefs and their

role in the architecture out of different definitions of culture (Memarian, 2005). Culture-

oriented researchers classify at the first steps of importance the affects of behaviors, beliefs

and culture in architecture. According to the socio-cultural attitudes, a building is a

production that is formed in connection with the nature, society, ideology, lifestyle, social

and psychological needs, physical needs, individual and collective needs, economic

resources and available techniques (Memarian, 2005). As can be seen, environmental

psychology has also deserving influence on the studies of socio-oriented researchers and

plays an important role in such investigations. In the environmental psychology, the

customs, values and socio-cultural criteria are noticed (Mortazavi, 2001). So, it seems

reasonable to explore some parts of the history of social sustainability in the

environmental psychology. Environmental psychology is that area of psychology which

brings into conjunction and analyzes the transaction and interrelationships of human

experiences and actions with pertinent aspects of the socio- physical surroundings

(Canter et al, 1981). Environmental psychology may become more and more concerned

about helping societies to develop sustainable environments (Uzzell et al, 2009). So in this

research, that studies social sustainability at the architectural scale, results of the researches

has been done in environmental psychology, are considered as fundamental studies.

In the existing literature about those investigational approaches in architecture which human

and his or her mental and emotional comfort are important, the following cases are often

examined: Human needs; Human behaviors and activities; Human relationship with the

environment (space) and vice versa. Since the starting point of such investigations is human,

it can be an appropriate start for achieving to the meaning of social sustainability in architec-

ture.

A) Human Needs:

On the subject of human needs in architecture and urbanism, generally, Maslow’s hierarchy

of human needs (1943) is popular. The classified “Human Needs” by the Maslow, make a

hierarchy in which the needs are organized from the strongest to the weakest and the strong

ones are prior to weaker ones. His hierarchy from strongest to weakest is as follows:

physiological needs, such as hunger and thirst; safety needs, such as security and protection

from physical harm; belonging and emotional needs, such as membership in social groups

and the receiving affection; esteem needs, those desires of an individual to be held in high

101


value by himself and others; self-dehiscence needs, representing the desire to fulfill one’s

capacities; and cognitive and aesthetic needs, such as the thirst for knowledge and the desire

for beauty for its own sake (Lang, 1987).

B) Human Behaviors and Activities :

Human beings do something to meet their needs which is called “Activity”; and the way of

doing the activity is called “Behavior”. Indeed, behaviors are formed for satisfaction of

needs. Greatly simplified, outdoor activities in public spaces can be divided into three cat-

egories, each of which has very different demands on the physical environment: necessary

activities, optional activities, and social activities (Gehl, 1987). The circumstance of these

activities creates the behavior. Individual’s behavior is a function of his or her motivations,

the affordances of the environment, and the images of the world outside direct perception

and the meanings those images have for the individual (Lang, 1987). It is claimed that human

behaviors are separate from human activities because of the special features of behavior such

as objectivity, flexibility (convertibility), crossing the psychological space of human3. Beha-

vior is not only the product of rational, deliberative and individual evaluation, but is based

on customs and cultural tradition, emotional impulses, the influence of family and friends

and social norms as well as wider trends. Moreover, while values and attitudes are clearly

important in influencing behavior, values and attitudes are not formed in a social and cul-

tural vacuum. They are embedded, nurtured and emerge from a social context, such as class,

gender, ethnicity, and environmental settings, resulting in specific everyday cultures (Uzzell,

2009). May be this is the main reason of various definitions of social sustainability of archi-

tecture in the different regions.

C ) Human Relationship with the Environment (Space) and Vice Versa :

Man for his or her special abilities can change or control his or her living environment. Such

environment that is made with human’s direct interference is called “the Built Environment”;

also the built environment has some features and properties that “James Gibson” called them

“Affordance” of the environment. The concerned properties of Gibson are the physical

properties of the configuration of an object or setting that allow it to be used for some overt

activity (Lang, 1987). The concept of affordance is a simple yet powerful one. It is funda-

mental to environmental design theory. Different patterns of the built environment afford

different behaviors and aesthetic experiences. The affordances of the environment thus limit

or extend the behavioral and aesthetic choices of an individual depending on how the envir-

onment is configured. People have changed and continue to change the natural and the arti-

ficial environments to alter set of affordances they possess (Lang, 1987). These changes

have been made so that the terrestrial, animate, and cultural environments should better serve

an individual’s or group’s purposes. The changes reflect the beliefs and attitudes and resources

of a time and help provide a pattern for the future (Lang, 1987). So it can be resulted that

understanding the affordances of the environment is in touch with the human characteristics

3 “The human relationship with outdoor environment is not direct and he or she used a filter between himself or

herself and outdoor space that named psychological space. This space contains different layers such as knowledge,

experience, custom, value, memory and etc. … the human activity by crossing from this space converts to behavior”

(Pakzad, 2007)

102


and stimulations, and this requires examining circumstance of individual’s perception from

environment and studying the interaction of human and environment.

One of the most important factors that lead to perception of the meaning of

environment is “Schemata”. In fact, the schemata are the same imagery and imaginations

of person that obtain from surrounding environment based on his or her experiences and

information. There are different theories about the meaning of environment. The built

environment can convey different meanings such as symbolic meanings, unity meanings,

and even emotional and affective meanings. In this respect, empirical and experimental

research suggests that there are three primary emotional responses: pleasure, arousal, and

dominance. Pleasure has to do with feelings of liking and disliking; arousal has to do with

the interest-evoking qualities of the environment; dominance has to do with the

individual’s feelings of freedom of action (Lang, 1987). In each cases, learning and past

experiences (memories), culture, beliefs and values are effective, and because of this, for

instance, variety of cultures can caused different responses by individuals and consequently

can led to change the meaning of the environment in the various cultures. This can be

particularly perceived about symbolic meanings. So, the role of learning and thus of

cultural differences is particularly important in dealing with symbolic meanings and the

development of likes or dislikes of artifacts and patterns of the world (Lang, 1987).

The environment has an important role in how the human behavior is4. This is interpreted

in the environmental psychology to the terms such as “Environmental Determinism”,

“Physical Determinism”, and “Architectural Determinism”. Architectural determinism or

comprehensively, physical determinism contains the meaning that the human behavior, es-

pecially in the level of social behaviors, can be altered by creating changes in architectural

elements of environment and its affordances (Motallebi, 2002). In fact, the terms [mentioned

above] all refer to the belief that changes in the layout of the environment will lead to a

change in the social behavior and (when they are considered at all) in the aesthetic values

of the persons involved (Lang, 1987). Environmental determinism should be used broadly

to reflect the belief that it is nurture within the setting of our geographical, social, and cultural

environments, rather than nature, our heredity, that shapes our values and behavior (Lang,

1987). The words fit, afford, synomorphy, and congruence have all been used to describe

the relationship between a pattern of behavior and a pattern of the physical environment.

They can all be used in a qualitative sense (Lang, 1987). Furthermore, it should not be forgotten

that the individuals have to be competent enough to perceive the environmental affordances.

If there were differences between individual competency and environmental affordances,

the psychological comfort or psychological press will be influenced5.

Thus, about the relationship between human and environment it can be resulted that: the

human and the environment has mutual affect on each other. This depends on competencies

and capabilities of both. Most of environmental affordances and personal competencies appear

due to the culture, beliefs, and social values. It can be also resulted that like the human beha-

viors, the built environment can be impressed by culture and social relations. Culture, by

this way, effects the built environment or behavioral setting to force the individuals to do or

not to do of their treatments. In this case, the environment may induce a behavior to the

4 Jon Lang has considered four approaches in this respect: free-will approach, possibilistic approach, probabilistic

approach, and deterministic approach (Lang, 1987) 5 See the Loweton’s proposed model for competency (Lowton, 1973)

103


people or prevent it. In other words, the built environment controls the human behavior in

terms of the cultural rules of society. Social and socialization forces are strongly coercive…

people are socialized also to carry out behaviors in particular places. They select a behavior

setting because they have the ability and the desire to conform to the standing pattern of

behavior taking place there. This occurs because the pattern has the potential to fulfill either

the instrumental or the symbolic ends of the people who choose it (Lang, 1987). Therefore,

the environment controls the behaviors.

In the study of the relationship between the environment (space) and the human behavior,

perceiving spatial qualities has an important role. The behavioral setting (built environment)

with its specific design, can lead to perform or omit some of the human behaviors and thus

encourages some particular senses in the users of a space. In this manner, all individuals in

the behavioral setting deduce a quality (e.g. security and beauty and etc.) from that environ-

ment or space. These are “Spatial Qualities”. Spatial qualities are topologic qualities of space,

meaning that the spatial qualities do not depend on spatial geometry (i.e. the size of the

components, quantitative distance between the components and so on), but they pertain to

some factors raised from geometrical relations such as how adjacent elements and their order,

segregation and integration (Pakzad, 2007). In fact, how the spatial elements and relations

between perceived elements in the space lead to create some qualities that lonely or together,

provokes some senses in the observer. It should be noted that these senses are not spatial

qualities but they are the effect of qualities called spatial qualities. For example, the quality

of intelligibility creates readability feeling in individuals. In this regard, researchers such

as Jane Jacobs (1961), Kevin Lynch (1981), Francis Violich (1983), Ian Bentley et al

(1990), Allan Jacobs and Donald Appleyard (1987) and Francis Tibbalds (1989). have

suggested various factors to promote the qualities of built environment.

According to what mentioned in this part of the article, it can be extracted some components

for the social sustainability of architecture. These components would potentially be the

main items for situating social sustainability in a building. This will be discussed in the

next section.

Main Items for Situating Social Sustainability in Architecture

Social sustainability6

at the architectural level studies the space and by examining the human

needs and behaviors, managing the project in a way that the relationship between the

human and the space can last for a long time. In other word, the space, non-physically, can

support the life for a long time.

To achieve the non-physical sustainability in a space, at the first step, the space must have

the ability of responding to the primary and fundamental human needs. As mentioned above,

the hierarchy of human needs, provided by Maslow, can be considered more than other

models in this respect. All the needs that have been suggested by Maslow, are general human

needs, although some exceptions may exist. For example, religious beliefs may cause

forbear from a need. But, generally, majority of people show their activities and behaviors

based on this hierarchy.

6 The expression “social sustainability” exists in the fields such as social science, sociology, urban planning and

the other related fields. The definition of the expression is not the same in all of them, and each field has its own

definition. It is also clear that in this article “social sustainability” defined in terms of architecture.

104


On the other hand, it was mentioned that the spatial qualities are defined based on the

human needs. In other word, spatial qualities may emerge somehow by reflecting these

needs in space designing. Table 1. provides a translation of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

to the qualities that potentially may emerge in designing.

Table 1: Translation of the Human needs to the Design Qualities (Source: Golkar, 2001)

Human Needs Spatial Qualities in Design

Physiological Needs

• Sufficient facilities and equipments

• Comfort (temperature, sun, rain, microclimate

adaption,…)

• Firmness and Balance based on ecology

Safety Needs

• Safety of passage

• Stewardship and Care

• Privacy

• Permeability and flexibility

Belonging Needs

• Social facilities

• Sense of place and Identity

• Intelligibility and Visual proportions

Esteem Needs • Place attachment

• Personalization and Belonging to groups

Self-Actualization Needs

• Creating opportunities for personalized space and

to participant in design

• Diversity

Beauty Needs • Façade and Sight

• Visual richness

According to the Table 1. there are some qualitative factors for every need. It means

while a designed space possesses the mentioned qualities, it can establish a long-term

relationship with the users.

In addition to what stated, there is another component that is associated and intertwined with such discussions and also has a big influence on social sustainability. It is the

compatibility of behavioral patterns and physical patterns in a building7.

Based on these discussions it can be resulted that the establishment of social sustainability of

architecture depends mainly on:

1. Paying attention to the fundamental human needs in the architectural design

7 The latest method that argued about the compatibility of behavioral patterns and physical design patterns in archi-

tecture and urbanism, is the method of “Space Syntax”.

105


2. Promoting the quality of space and prioritized the qualities concerning the space

function (based on highest and fine human needs)

3. Considering the compatibility of the behavioral-biological patterns and the physical

patterns in design

Social Sustainability in Architectural Design of Public Spaces (Public Buildings)

As seen in the mentioned components of social sustainability, the first and third items i.e.

considering the fundamental human needs and compatibility of activity systems

(behavioral patterns) and physical patterns of space, can be noticed as essential and fixed

items in either public buildings or private buildings, but the second one, spatial qualities,

are changeable; because it is mostly affected by building function and it’s usage and also

the region within which the building located. People have different expectations from

different spaces, so every place or space will require particular spatial quality. For

instance, in a residential building, public part is possessed high intelligibility than private

part of it and in case on ignorance this in designing, it may cause some problems for the

residents. This is also true about the public buildings. As it is clear, various spatial

qualities can be expected according to public buildings functions. For example,

qualitative expectations from an official public space are different from expectations from

a commercial public space. But it is certain that some of spatial qualities are in common

with all public spaces in a region. Exploration of these qualities, which is one of the

purposes of this research, can be effective contribution for social sustainability of public

buildings.

It is previously mentioned that there has been many argues about the environmental

qualities by different theorists. With regard to public spaces, Matthew Carmona in the

“Public Places, Urban Spaces” (2003) has collected them and has presented a list of spatial

qualities in various scales of Buildings, Spaces, Quarters and Settlements (Carmona, 2003).

The stated cases by Carmona, that he listed them as effective factors on sustainable

design, consist: Stewardship, Resource Efficiency, Diversity and Choice, Human Needs,

Resilience, Pollution Reduction, Concentration, Distinctiveness, Biotic Support and Self-

Sufficiency (Carmona, 2003). To study such indicators in addition to social sustainability

components, it is necessary to examine them within a territory of a certain culture or

region. Following section provides the case study of this paper.

A Case Study

In this article, the city of Ardabil in Iran is selected for the study. Ardabil is one of the

Azeri’s cities in northwest of Iran, located in the near of Azerbaijan’s border, and it is

counted as one of the coldest cities of Iran contains so many natural attractions. The

population of Ardabil is about 550,000 that speak in Turkish (Azeri). Also the

majority of people are Muslims. According to the urban context of Ardabil, this city is

one of the ancient and historical cities in Iran that it is about 5000 years old. The

name of the city on the muddy tablets of “Summers” inscribed as “Aratta” sets back

to more than 5000 years ago (Amiri, 2005). According to the geographical and

strategic position of the city and also Ardabil’s location in the passage of the “Silk

Road”, this city has been the capital city of governments in different historical periods

even at present remains of historical features are seen in the city so that one can admit

the city has kept its traditional texture. This point is obviously reflected in the

106


behavioral characteristics of the citizens. Since the modernity ideas have entered to the

public, people are experiencing the contradictions between tradition and modernity. Naturally

architectural and urban spaces have impressed by this opposition and at the present time

their social sustainability study (according to the paper’s definition) is of more importance.

For instance, buildings or areas can be found that had social sustainability for many years

and by the passage of time and the changing of people’s thought, they have lost their

validity; on the contrary, spaces can be found of more socially sustainability. In other

words, the city’s architecture is experiencing sensitive time that happens in the passage from

tradition to modernity, and thus, appropriate principles for social sustainability of

architectural spaces are demanded. This is the main reason for choosing Ardabil city as

the case study of the paper and it could be a proper sample for examining the definition of

social sustainability in this article. So, it was necessary to collect some information about

the public behavior of the citizens and also about their relationship with the urban spaces of

the city. Therefore, at first, two types of “open-ended” questionnaires were designed: the

questionnaire (A) to study the social and behavioral characteristics of the residents,

according to the research aims; and questionnaire (B) to study residents’ relationships and

general expectations from architectural and urban spaces. Then the questionnaires were

filled out by a number of residents who were among the young and middle-aged

population as the major age-group of the city8. In fact the aim of formulating these

questionnaires, is investigating citizens’ requirements, in order to reach the corresponding

spatial qualities of their needs; in addition, collected answers can be helpful in the

studying of third component of social sustainability i.e. the compatibility of the

behavioral-biological patterns and the physical patterns.

According to the results form questionnaire “A”, a number of more important behavior

specifications of Ardabil residents are as follows:

1. The people are relatively sentimental, simple-hearted with hospitality inclinations.

2. The people’s living style is strongly influenced by Islam religion and their way of

thinking is moving towards modernity gradually with low speed.

3. Because of religious obligations in the culture and limitations on men-women relation-

ship, women are comparatively more confined and need social security in some ways.

And it is also believed that there is a massive shortage on some special facilities for

women.

4. The residents are mostly introverted, however, in some issues such as their disposure

they are extrovert. But in most cases, especially on their family issues, they are rather

introverted. These characteristics are because of the traditional and religious features

of their culture.

5. Most of the residents have low or average income (in comparison to the standards).

However in recent years, they have tendency to accept the new topics in their life and

would like to transform the living environment by means of less cost to higher levels.

6. Considering the interviewees’ ideas, young people are the dominant age group in the

city. Due to available internet and satellite facilities, most of young people are familiar

with issues of the day. They have also tendency to future and enjoy facing new innov-

ations in their lives.

8 According to the national statistics, this age-group is populous in the city; see the Headcount of the Residents of

Ardabil City, 2006

107


7. People are mostly interested in luxurious shopping centers and prefer to buy what they

need in such places rather than common ones.

8. Considering the fact that the city is located in the mountainous region and the lack of

special facilities in different seasons in the city causes immobilization, so that people

just go out for their necessary work.

According to the results from questionnaire (B), “The Residents Facing the

Architectural Spaces” can be listed as follows:

1. In the architecture and urban development, in this city, facades and exterior views of

buildings are of more importance to the public.

2. People are interested in flexible spaces which are capable of accepting new forms, fur-

niture and diverse appearance.

3. In this city changing the form of known places (spaces that have became familiar for

people and have accustomed to them) is not welcomed and they think that the function

will turn these places in to unpleasant and isolated places in case of change.

4. The residents need a place capable of reminding their history and reminiscences. They

also need spaces creating the sense of “place attachment” for them.

5. Because of the culture, the residents like the places capable of showing off with their

opulence and wealth. The main reason, for this, problem is a type of wrong rivalry in

the current culture.

6. Citizens tend to come together in some places; they also need streets for walk arounds

and public relations.

7. Most young people in the city tend to be in touch with others in friendly atmospheres,

meanwhile, they demand social safety in this kind of places. (Especially for women).

8. Considering old city texture, easy access to public spaces and easy vehicle flow in the

city are important and should be noticed; meanwhile, because of their economic prob-

lems, they would like to have free parking for their vehicles.

9. People do not like to be watched by the dwellers of higher neighborhood buildings facing

their private living areas and even public part of their houses.

Through analyzing the given results, effective factors in the architectural designing of

public buildings and the relevant spatial qualities in Table 2 could be considered. In this

table, effective design indicators have been arranged using the collected answers form

questionnaires “A” and “B”; on the other side, each row shows the necessitating spatial

quality9. On the other hand, these factors and their corresponding qualities have been

arranged and collected based on the requirements of individuals.

9 The spatial qualities in Table 2. have been suggested globally because of having generalization ability.

108


Table 2: Compiled Spatial Qualities, for Public Buildings of Ardabil Based on

Questionnaires

Effective Factors in Architectural Design Spatial Qualities

Updating the design and using distinctive forms

rather than common forms

• Visual richness

• Distinctiveness

Designing luxurious public spaces • Encourage public sector civic respons-

ibility

• Self-sufficiency

Designing flexible spaces and attention to

changeability and variability of the

environment

• Flexibility

• Diversity

Designing suitable, innovative and

attractive spaces for winter

• Encourage public sector civic respons-

ibility

• Self-Sufficiency

Attention to buildings façade and its proportion • Visual richness

Using the familiar and memorial elements

in buildings

• Place attachment

• Distinctiveness

Creating sitting and walking areas • Concentration

• Vivacity


Designing parkings with maximum

capacity with safe access

• Encourage public sector civic respons-

ibility


Respect to neighboring privacy and

prevent public visibility • Neighborhoods visual security

To examine the third component of social sustainability in architecture, compatibility of

behavioral and physical patterns, the proposed method of the authors, are the methods of

“Space Syntax”. As already said, how to use this method depends on type and location of

the buildings. Space syntax at the architectural scale, based on that “space organization in

a building is in accord with behavioral characteristics of users,” discovers and analyzes

the concealed patterns or genotypes of the buildings (Hillier and Hanson, 1984; Hillier,

1996). With space syntax techniques, we can analyze the number of considered building

types and achieve the results about spatial organization in that type of buildings which is

based on users behavioral features. Considering that describing the methods and their

applications is out of the topic of the paper, the given descriptions here seem adequate.

109


Conclusion

It is argued that the social sustainability in architecture, can be generally defined over

three components, the first one is paying attention to the fundamental human needs in design,

the second is to promote the spatial qualities and the third one is considerations of the

compatibility of behavioral patterns (activity systems) and the physical design patterns of

the buildings.

Paying attention to the fundamental human needs can be manifested in building’s design

through the observance of physical and architectural standards in design. But, concerning

the second and the third components, it can be concluded that human and his or her way of

perception in environment is the starting point in architectural design based on social

sustainability approach. According to the various perception theories, the process is based on

“learning, former experiences and also beliefs” which forms the culture and social

customs. Thus, “individuals with different cultures can perceive a space differently”, on

the other hand, “culture and social customs determine the non-physical qualities of a

space”. Therefore examining the second and third components of social sustainability of

architecture may have different results in the various regions and areas. Thus, Ardabil city

(Iran) was selected as a case study in this paper, in order to examine the components more

accurately.

Based on the paper’s findings, the indicators such as concentration, diversity and

choice, self-sufficiency, and flexibility, belong to the general spatial qualities in architectural

spaces as in urban spaces. Through the regional studies, a list of such spatial qualities

which may affect the social sustainability of public buildings (Ardabil), were identified and

recommended. These include qualities such as visual richness, self-sufficiency, flexibility,

place attachment, livability, distinctiveness, and visual security that were mentioned with

their design obligatory guidelines. Consequently, identifying these qualities and promoting

them in public buildings, can strongly guarantee their social sustainability.

In order to study the compatibility of behavioral patterns and physical design patterns,

which concerns with buildings typology, number of considered building types can be

analyzed in the relevant area to reveal the spatial organization and physical pattern; so by

matching them with previously gained information as behavioral patterns, the third

component will be completed.

References

Ahmadi, F. 2003. Sustainable Architecture. Abadi, No 40and 41. (In Persian)

Amiri, P. 2005. In search of urban identity Ardabil . Ministry of Housing and Urban Development

Press.Tehran.Iran. (In Persian)

Bramley G & N. Dempsey& S.Power & C.Brown & D.Watkins . 2009. Social sustainability and

urban form: evidence from five British cities. Environment and Planning A 41(9) 2125 –

2142

Canter, D.&K.Craik. 1981. Environmental Psychology.Journal of Environmental Psychology,1.

Carmona, M. 2003.Public Places-Urban Spaces:The Dimensions of Urban Design.Architectural

Press.UK

Dempsy. N. & G.Bramley &S.Power&C.Brown.2009. Tho Social Dimension of Sustainable Develop-

ment: Defining Urban Social Sustainability. Sustainable Development.

Gehl, J. 1987.Life Between Buildings.Van Nostrand Reinhold.New York.

Gifford, R. 1981. Sociability: Traits, settings, and interactions. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 41, 340-347.

110


Gifford, R., & Gallagher, T. M. B. 1985. Sociability: Personality, social context, and physical setting.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1015-1023.

Gifford, R. 2007. Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation,

and challenges. Journal of Social Issues, 63, 199-212.

Gifford, R. 2005. Applying social psychology to the environment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Golkar, K. 2001. The quality maker components in urban design. Soffeh. No 32.Shahid Beheshti

University Press.Tehran (In Persian)

Headcount of the Residents of Ardabil City.2006. statistics centre of Iran

Hillier, B&J, Hanson.1984.The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge University Press.

Hillier, B.1996. Space is the machine. Cambridge University Press.

John,G. &D. Croome & G.Jeronimidis.2005. Sustainable building solutions: a review of lessons from

the natural world. Journal of Building and Environment.NO40.

Lang, J. 1987.Creating Architectural Theory: the role of behavioral Scinces in environmental design.

Van Nostrand Reinhold.New York.

Lawton, P. 1979. Therapeutic environments for the aged. In D. Canter and S. Canter (eds).pp. 233-71.

Memarian, G.2005. A Research in the theoretical basis of architecture.Sorush-e-Danesh.Tehran (In

Persian).

Mitlin, D & D. Satterwaite.1996. Sustainable development and cities. In Sustainability. The Environment

and Urbanization. Pugh C (ed.). Earthscan.. London; 23–61.

Mortazavi, Sh. 2001. Environmental psychology and its functions.Shahid Beheshti University

Press.Tehran (In Persian) .

Motallebi, G.2002. Environmental psychology as a new knowledge in architecture and urban

design.Journal of Fine Arts.No 10.university of Tehran Press.Tehran (In Persian).

Oliver, P. 1969. Shelter and Society.Barrie and Rockliff . London.

Oliver, P. 2007 new ed.Dwellings: The Vernacular House World Wide. Phaidon. London

Pakzad, J. 2007. Theoretical basis and the process of urban design . Ministry of Urban Planning and

Housing. Tehran (In Persian)

Raeisi, I & M. Abbaszadehgan & A. Habibi. 2007. A research on social sustainability in dwelling.

Abadi. No 55 (In Persian) .

Rapaport. A. 1969. House Form and Culture . Prentice Hall.

Rapaport. A & S. Low & E.Chambers . 1989 . Housing, Culture, and Design: A Comparative Perspect-

ive. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Rappoport A., 1977, The Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards a man-environment approach to

urban form and design, Oxford, Pergamon.

Uzzell, D. & N. Rathzel.2009. Transforming environmental psychology. Journal of Environmental

Psychology.

Yiftachel. & D. Hedgcock.1993. Urban social sustainability: the planning of an Australian city. Cities

10: 139–157.

Appendix

Questionnaires

Questionnaire “A”: For Extraction of a Part of Resident’s Social Characteristics

(Questionnaire Type: Open)

1. What do you think of people mood (spirit)?

2. How effective has religion been on your life and what do you think of such effect?

111


3. In your opinion, are there any special limits for men and women of the society? Please

consider their relationship with together and the societies to answer.

4. Do you intend your ordinary family relationships being easily accessed by strangers?

How much?

5. Do you prefer a continually changing or non-changing lifestyle? If you choose the first,

how much cost are you ready to pay for the changes?

6. What is your idea about the dominate people in the city? Which age-group are dominate?

7. Shopping is one of the daily works. Which shopping centers do you refer?

8. According to climate, what is your outdoor hobby in the cold and snowy days?

Questionnaire “B”: For Extraction of the Residents Facing the Architectural Spaces

(Questionnaire Type: Open)

1. In your idea, what is the important part of an architectural artifact?

2. To what extent are you fan of change in your living environment? Is it better to have a

changeable or unchangeable environment?

3. Imagine a place like “” or “”, do you want to destroy these areas for establish a beautiful

official building or like that?

4. Imagine a place that has some familiar parts for you and also it is a kind of memorial

for the public, in spite of the fact that this space is unfamiliar for strangers and emigrants

and such people do not feel free there. Against this space, imagine another space that

has contained public elements for all visitors. Now with this supposition, which do you

prefer?

5. Do you prefer to show your best belongings to others or to keep them in a private place

that only you and your family have access to? Why?

6. Imagine that “” again, if there were no such places where people come together and

walk in the cities, what would happen? Do you like it?

7. Do you like to take friendly times with your colleagues, classmates, or friends in other

spaces than office or schools? How do you describe such places?

8. How would you like to access the hobbies, ceremonies and etc. which take place in

public spaces? Do you prefer to go there on foot or by car?

9. Do you prefer to have so many tall buildings or ordinary buildings in the city? What is

the reason?

112

About the AuthorsDr. Iman RaeisiIman Raeisi (Assistant Professor) is responsible person for directing the B.A andM.A thesesfor architecture students while in addition to teaching architecture he works in the field ofarchitecture, research and critic. He has written 31 papers regarding introduction and criticof Iranian and international current architecture, published in specialty architecture andurbanization publications. He has also offered a paper titled “The image of current architectureof Tehran” in poster format in the 22nd congress for Union of International Architects (UIA)in 2005, Istanbul. He is among the founding members of Iranian Architects Society andsecretary for the Student Association. Raeisi has translated a summary of SMLXL in Persianlanguage and published it with an analysis of new Rem Koolhaas’s Statistics by Khak Pub-lication in 2006.

Alireza Kharazmi NezhadIslamic Azad University of Qazvin, Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Maryam HafezifarArt University of Isfahan, Iran (Islamic Republic of)

113


DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL http://www.Design-Journal.com First published in 2010 in Champaign, Illinois, USA by Common Ground Publishing LLC www.CommonGroundPublishing.com. © 2010 (individual papers), the author(s) © 2010 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground Authors are responsible for the accuracy of citations, quotations, diagrams, tables and maps. All rights reserved. Apart from fair use for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act (Australia), no part of this work may be reproduced without written permission from the publisher. For permissions and other inquiries, please contact <[email protected]>. ISSN: 1833-1874 Publisher Site: http://www.Design-Journal.com DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL is peer-reviewed, supported by rigorous processes of criterion-referenced article ranking and qualitative commentary, ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest substance and highest significance is published. Typeset in Common Ground Markup Language using CGCreator multichannel typesetting system http://www.commongroundpublishing.com/software/

Architectural Design Principles of Public Spaces Based on Social Sustainability Approach: A Case...

Documents

Transcript of Architectural Design Principles of Public Spaces Based on Social Sustainability Approach: A Case...