An evaluation of Urban Spaces Conformity with the Indicators of Age- Friendly City; the Case of Chahar Bagh-e Abbasi Street of Isfahan

Subject Areas : architecture

Ayoub iranshahi ¹ , Mahmoud ghalehnoee ²

1 - M.A. at Isfahan University of Art. Isfahan, Iran.
2 - Ph.D., Associate Professor and Director of Department of Urban Design at Isfahan University of Art, Isfahan, Iran.

Received: 2017-09-25 Accepted : 2017-09-25 Published : 2017-08-23

Keywords:

Abstract :

The increase in the aging population has become one of the biggest concerns of the modern world, and Iran, in particular. According to statistics, if the current situation continues with the growth in the aging population, an increasing aging population will happen in Iran's near future. Isfahan, as one of the biggest and most crowded cities in Iran with a high urban population rate, will face aging population increase in the coming years. Chahar bagh-e Abbasi Street of Isfahan as one of the most important streets is located at the heart of the city. Many people and tourists from different ages always use this street; consequently, it should be appropriate for all of them. An age-friendly city was introduced by World Health Organization as a new approach in urban planning. Aging people like other age groups, and as precious social capitals, have the right to use urban spaces. Perhaps their presence in urban spaces can supply many of their physical and mental needs and their participation in communities may provide the means for the realization of the concept of active aging due to the fact that mental and physical activities have a direct impact on the quality of life for the elderly. This research aimed at extracting assessment indicators of age-friendly urban spaces and assessed them in the Chahar Bagh-e Abbasi Street of Isfahan. In this descriptive-analytical research, following a literature review, urban design indicators in age-friendly cities have been extracted from different related resources. Then, indicators were assessed based on the relations defined by the author according to standards and GIS software. Afterward, for evaluating indicators, based on formula defined by the authors and Standards, GIS software and fieldwork were used and finally the desirability of all indicators was offered. The results identified indicators such as access to the water closets, access to public transportation and access to rest area were recognized as the best indicators while some indicators such as blocks scale and pedestrian crossing were recognized as the worst indicators. In conclusion, some guidelines have been offered in order to improve the weak indicators and increase the space conformity of Chahar Bagh-e Abbasi Street of Isfahan with the age-friendly urban spaces criteria. Firstly, pedestrian crossing areas should be mobilized by voice signals in order to be matched with the low rate of speed among the elder. Secondly, all the building blocks need to be constructed with standard scale so that ageing people can find their ways much easier. Thirdly, all the factors in stairs and ramps including slope, height, width and texture should be standardized to increase public space safety for the elder, disabled people and other citizens with particular condition. In addition, using tiles with suitable color, texture and size can improve the legibility of pedestrian areas. Last but not least, trash bins with standard height, capacity and color should be added in some parts of the street in order increase the accessibility of them for citizens particularly for ageing population.Keywords: Urban spaces, Age-friendly city, Elderly, Evaluation indicators, Chahar Baghe Abbasi Street of Isf high-performance architecture, performative design, contemporary architecture, architecture criticism, future legacy in architecture, discourse

References:

1. احمدی، وکیل؛ و بهشتی، سید صمد. (1390). بررسی ویژگی‌های جمعیت شناختی و رفاهی سالمندان در ایران. فصلنامه جمعیت. 61، 19- 38.
2. بنتلی، ای یان؛ الکک، آلن؛ مورین، پال؛ مک گلین، سو؛ و اسمیت، گراهام. (1390). محیط‌های پاسخده. (مصطفی بهزاد فر، مترجم). تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران
3. برتون، الیزابت؛ و میچل، لین. (1392). طراحی شهری همه‌شمول خیابان‌هایی برای زندگی. (الهه ساکی و ساناز فنایی، مترجمان). تهران: انتشارات آرمانشهر. (چاپ اول)
4. خوارزمی، امیدعلی؛ زرقانی، سید ‌هادی؛ و جوهری، لیلا. (1393). ارزیابی فضاهای باز شهری و حمل و نقل درون شهری در مشهد بر اساس شاخص‌های شهر دوستدار سالمند. ششمین کنفرانس ملی برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت شهری با تاکید بر مؤلفه‌های شهر اسلامی. آبان 21- 22، (ص 156-176). مشهد مقدس.
5. سراج، مصطفی. (1388). استانداردهای دسترسی؛ راهنمای مناسب‌سازی ساختمان، فضاهای عمومی، حمل و نقل و تجهیزات. تهران: اداره کل روابط عمومی سازمان بهزیستی کشور.
6. علی الحسابی، مهران؛ و رفیعی، فرخنده. (1391). ارزیابی نیازمندی‌های سالمندان در فضاهای شهری، مطالعه موردی پارک خلدبرین شیراز. نشریه آرمانشهر. 9، 247- 257.
7. کامور شلمانی، آمنه؛ و حناچی، سیمین. (1394). بررسی تأثیر عوامل بصری فضاهای شهری بر الگوهای رفتاری شهروندان(مطالعه موردی: میدان شهرداری رشت). مجله هویت شهر. 24، 78-65.
8.کرمی متین، بهزاد؛ رضایی، ستار؛ علی نیا، سیروس؛ شااحمدی، فرامرز؛ و کاظمی کریانی، علی. (1392). سالمندی در ایران 1410، هشداری برای نظام سلامت. فصلنامه طب و تزکیه. 2، 9- 18.
9. گلکار، کوروش. (1382). مؤلفه‌های سازنده کیفیت طراحی شهری. نشریه صفه. 32، 38- 65.
10. محمدزاده، رحمت. (1394). تحلیل فضاهای گذران اوقات فراغت سالمندان پارک گلستان شهر تبریز. مجله هویت شهر. 23، 47-58.
11. معاونت عمرانی دفتر حمل و نقل و دبیرخانه شورای عالی هماهنگی ترافیک شهرهای کشور (1386). راهنمای ایستگاه‌های سیستم اتوبوس‌رانی. تهران: عمرانی دفتر حمل و نقل و دبیرخانه شورای عالی هماهنگی ترافیک شهرهای کشور
12. نعمتی، داریوش؛ و آقا بخشی، حبیب. (1392). تهران شهر دوستدار سالمند گام‌های آغازین تحقق نخستین پایتخت سالمندی جهان. فصلنامه پژوهش‌های اجتماعی. 6، 15- 44.

13. Alidoust, S. Holden, G. Bosman, C. (2014). Urban Environment and Social Health of the Elderly: A Critical Discussion on Physical, Social and Policy Environments. Athens Journal of Health, 3, 169-180.
14. Ball, S. (2012). Livable communities for aging populations, urban design for longevity. New York: John Wiley.
15. Fitzgerald, K., Caro F. (2015). An Overview of Age-Friendly Cities and Communities around the World. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 26, 1-18
16. Handler, S. (2014). An alternative Age -Friendly Handbook. England: The University of Manchester Library
17. Lee, Y., Hwang, J., Lim, S., Lee, H., Tai Kim, J. (2012). Identifying Space Planning Guidelines for-Elderly Care Environments from the Holistic Health Perspective. International Symposium on Sustainable Healthy Building in Korea
18. Phillipson, C. (2011). Development age-friendly communities; new approaches to growing old in urban environment. National community care conference. March 4, (pp. 279-293) Adelaide
19. Su, J. (2013). Built for Dementia: Urban Design Analysis for Dementia-Friendly Communities. Unpublished master’s thesis, San Jose state university, USA, MA.
20. World Health Organization (WHO). (2007). Global Age-Friendly Cities: a guide. France
21. Lehning, A. (2010). Local Government Adoption of Aging-Friendly Policies and Programs in the San Francisco Bay Area. Department of Housing and Urban Development Doctoral Dissertation Research Grant and the Society for Social Work Research.
22. Marsh, A. (2012). Analyzing for Age-Friendliness within Planning Policies in the City of Waterloo. Unpublished master’s thesis, the University of Waterloo, Canada, MA.