نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
کارشناسی ارشد طراحی شهری، دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران مرکزی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Introduction
With the increase in population and the rapid expansion of urbanization and the physical development of cities, especially in metropolises, the issue of environmental security, especially in urban areas, has received much attention. Public urban spaces within metropolitan areas are also among the spaces that potentially cause some crimes and social damages like theft, conflict, and addiction, especially if the principles of environmental design are not observed in the design of such spaces. In the metropolis of Tehran, there is also a problem of lack and weakness of security in urban spaces in some of its neighborhoods. Dilapidated physical structures, dilapidated or under-construction houses, many narrow and dead-end and covered passages in the neighborhood on the one hand, and low population concentration, especially after the closing of the market, and low public supervision in some neighborhoods of Tehran, on the other hand, has created the basis for social problems and unsafe places. Many theories and approaches have been proposed by urban theorists to face this problem and create a safe urban space. One of the most important ideas presented in this regard is crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED). This approach, which considers social factors in its designs along with physical factors, provides grounds for removing or adjusting criminal and blind spots and by increasing the level of social support and supervision, it helps to increase the level of security in the neighborhood. The current research has been carried out to redesign unsafe urban public spaces, emphasizing the environmental design approach in neighborhoods with low security.
Materials and Methods
The present research is considered quantitative-qualitative research. Based on the type, it is considered as applied research, and based on the method, it is considered as descriptive-analytical research. In this research, six dimensions (supervision, management and maintenance, activity support, structure, access and movement, and sense of ownership) have been measured in the form of 11 indicators at the neighborhood level. The method of data collection was document-field. The tools of data collection were a researcher-made questionnaire, in-depth field observations, interviews, and photography of the desired urban spaces. The statistical population of the research was a combination of residents (384 people based on Cochran’s formula) and specialists in the field of urban planning (30 people). The analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method has been used to weight research criteria and classify localities. After identifying the unsafe neighborhood using the qualitative method, unsafe urban spaces have been identified, and based on the features of environmental design through the method of analysis and morphology (morphological analysis), unsafe spaces have been redesigned.
Findings
From the perspective of the research expert community, the criterion of supporting activities with a score of 0.266 has the highest score and the criterion of sense of ownership with a score of 0.085 is the least important. Also, the criteria of neighborhood structure, access and movement, supervision and management, and maintenance have received scores of 0.207, 0.168, 0.145, and 0.130 respectively. The analysis of the data collected at the sample neighborhood level determined that the Narmak neighborhood was ranked 0.543, 0.469, 0.493, and 0.450 respectively in the four dimensions of neighborhood structure, supervision, sense of ownership, and management and maintenance. It has won first place in the issue of environmental security of urban spaces. In the body of Narmak Squares, there is no sign of extraneous corners, and the short and readable dead-ends have given the bodies of these spaces good visibility. According to what was obtained from the model, Narmak, North Kargar, Bagh Shater, and Sangalj neighborhoods are ranked first to fourth with scores of 0.393, 0.330, 0.221, and 0.056 respectively. Therefore, Narmak neighborhood has been evaluated as the safest neighborhood, and the Sangalaj neighborhood in the central part of Tehran as the most unsafe neighborhood. The walls of the Sangalj neighborhood are very active due to their proximity to the market, and this neighborhood has caused much non-local traffic to the neighborhood during the day, and this point reduces the security of the neighborhood. To better identify the alleys and unsafe spaces in the Sangalj neighborhood, the designed area was divided into three zones: East, North-West, and South-West. In the eastern zone, features such as the lack of supervision on the alleys, the presence of warehouses, the absence of residents, and the lack of sense of belonging and responsibility of the residents towards the presence of vulnerable groups can be seen. In the northwest area, there have been features like a lack of light lighting, unsafe corners, and indentations caused by the setback of buildings in the alleys. Also, in the southwest zone, features like the increase in the presence of drug dealers in the Tarkhani market at night (when it is closed), the use of drugs openly at the beginning of alleys, and other similar cases can be seen. Khals Alley in area number two of the eastern zone and Hamami Alley in area number one of the northwest zones have been chosen for the design and implementation of ideas due to their location and insecurity. Keeping the old entrance as the entrance to the bathroom alley, turning the corners and hangouts of drug addicts into craft stalls and cultural stalls, and improving the entrances and walls of the shops on Shishegaran Street are some of the design ideas of this unsafe urban space. Repairing the walls and arranging the facades of the buildings, removing visual excesses in the walls to eliminate the confusion of the facades in the space, demolishing the dilapidated building to create openness, and designing the carpet gallery cafe due to its proximity to the carpet shops, installing a security kiosk (to strengthen the observer’s eye) at the entrance Gallery cafe and... are some of the points that can be seen in the proposed designs to improve the environmental security of Khals alley.
Conclusion
The results of the comparative comparison of the studied neighborhoods showed that the Narmak neighborhood in the east of Tehran (District 8) was the safest neighborhood and the Sangalaj neighborhood in the central part of Tehran (District 12) was evaluated as the most unsafe neighborhood in the eyes of the residents. This comparison allows us to review and compare the principles of CPTED in all neighborhoods, use the positive points in safe neighborhoods, and provide lessons to make Sangalj neighborhood safer. The results showed that there are about 20 unsafe situations or spaces in the Sangalj neighborhood, the most important features of which are open alleys and the easy possibility of criminals to escape, unsafe corners caused by the setback of buildings, lack of light and lamp-pointed out, the lack of retail or any related use that seeks greater presence and security, the presence of cardboard sleeping quarters and groups of criminals and drug addicts in some routes. Finally, the current research confirms the results of previous studies regarding the existence of unsafe urban spaces in some localities and the effective use of crime prevention approach criteria in the redesign of unsafe urban spaces. In addition, it is important to mention that securing urban areas, especially in the central part of cities, is not possible only with physical measures and design, but also requires social, policy, and management measures.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)
