Sustainable city

Sustainable city

Improving Child-Friendly urban spaces based on the right to the city model: the case study of Sardaran neighborhood of Urmia

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
1 Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture, Urban Planning and Art, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
2 Ma Student in Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture, Urban Planning and Art, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
3 Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
10.22034/jsc.2024.455779.1777
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to advocate for the creation of child-friendly spaces in the Sardaran neighborhood of Urmia, which holds a traditional and historical significance. Using the "right to the city" model, the study recognizes that the presence and interaction of different age and user groups (commercial, residential, religious, office) are crucial for improving the quality of spaces. This research is descriptive-analytical in terms of the research method and practical in its purpose. The research sample consists of 135 observations selected from 4 different land uses that comprise the most significant percentage of existing land uses in the Sardaran neighborhood. The collected data is categorized into spatial arrangement models, questionnaire responses, and field impressions. The spatial layout model involves extracting the overall depth map from the axial map of the area. By analyzing the topological relations, the continuity and integrity of the area's accesses were represented in maps. The research results indicate that local access areas such as Sahaba, shishegarkhaneh, and Heshmati Alley have the highest connectivity (10) and strong connections with the immediate neighborhood. The information collected suggests that real estate plots in these areas have great potential for development. There is also a focus on promoting child-friendly spaces to cater to the interests of all age groups in the neighborhood. This includes enhancing neighborhood spatial relations, encompassing residential and commercial spaces, to foster social interactions among residents of all ages despite the limited local facilities.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
The Sardaran neighborhood in Urmia is an old neighborhood where many residents have left due to the lack of facilities and services, as well as the influence of commercial users. Residential units, especially on the edges of the neighborhood, have turned into warehouses and workshops, while some housing units have been destroyed and abandoned, leading to an increase in social issues such as addiction and crime. Access design and the dominance of commercial use have limited the presence and interactions of local communities, especially children. As a result, there is a lack of urban equipment and services for the neighborhood residents, particularly children. This study aims to address these issues by promoting spatial communication and creating connections between local users and communities, focusing on the presence of children. The research emphasizes the importance of participation from all neighborhood members and aims to explore the relationship between the presence of children, the dominant uses of the neighborhood, and its organic and historical spaces.
 
Methodology
The current study uses a descriptive-analytical research method. It aims to gather data from 207 urban plots in the Sardaran neighborhood. A statistical sample was taken from 4 types of land use: residential (53.62%), commercial (39.61%), administrative (1.93%), and religious (1.44%). As per Cochran's formula, the sample size for the current research is 135. The statistical sample for this research is selected from the most significant number of neighborhood users. The sample is distributed among different categories based on the data percentages as follows: residential use (72, including parents and various age groups), commercial use (53), office and administrative use (5), and religious use (5). The data collected for the research hypotheses are divided into three categories. Data on the spatial plan model: utilizing the axial map for overall depth mapping.-  Gathering questionnaire data: collecting qualitative information on direct population opinions;- Spatial data extracted from the questionnaire and field survey.
 
Results and discussion
The area has been analyzed using various maps to assess its integrity and connectivity. On a regional scale, Montazeri, Motahari, Imam Khomeini, and Bagheri streets have high integrity (1.258). Our study block is located locally adjacent to Imam Khomeini Street, where Atai, Imam, and Shishgarkhana streets have the highest integrity (1.09). In the 4th district, streets like Imam, Motahari, Bagheri, and Sheikh Shelto show the highest connectivity. In the Sardaran neighborhood, near Imam Street, Sahaba Alley has the highest connectivity (10), followed by Shishgarkhana, with the highest accessibility connectivity. The correlation ratio between neighborhood roads and neighborhood integrity, known as R2, has been investigated and analyzed. In the studied area, the R2 value is 0.52, which is closer to 1 and indicates a high understanding of the roads by the residents.
Additionally, beyond achieving the main research goal of creating child-friendly spaces, this study highlights the shift from considering this goal optional to viewing it as necessary. It emphasizes that the responsibility for providing such spaces lies with the neighborhood users rather than urban management agents. The presence of children and teenagers in the neighborhood has proven to be beneficial for all users, leading to their full cooperation and participation in maintaining this presence. In the short term, the designated areas serve as population hubs due to the presence of children and local communities.
 
Conclusion
Based on the information gathered, Shishegarkhana, Ataei, and Imam Streets have the highest commercial integration, with office users in these areas. Residential and local users are situated in areas with lower integration, in private or semi-private settings. Additionally, Sahaba Street and Shishegarkhana Street are highly connected within the neighborhood, indicating strong links to nearby areas. These findings align well with the spatial data from the questionnaire, suggesting that the green spaces located on Sahaba Street, Shishegarkhana Street, and Heshmati Street in the Sardaran neighborhood have the most significant potential for creating and enhancing child-oriented spaces.
Even if these places do not have any furniture specifically for children, people of all ages, especially children, still visit. This presence benefits the residents of the area. This presence and interest will naturally grow over time without additional measures, and the activity and presence of each neighborhood group and user in this silent model are justified for the city. In addition, in the three identified areas, it has been suggested that the appeal of these places be increased by installing furniture suitable for all age groups and suitable lighting for children's entertainment.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none.
 
Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgments
 We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.
Keywords

  1. Ahmadi, M., Sarami, H., Ghayor, H. A., & Hayrapatian, V. (2018). Evaluating the role of the child city structure in the realization of neighborhood development (case study: Yazd neighborhood). Journal of Sustainable City, 4 (2), 31-45. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.24766631.1398.2.4.3.7. [in persian].
  2. Alami, R., tavakolinia, J., & mohammadian mosammam, H. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Iranian Cities with Emphasis on Child-Friendly City The case of Tehran and Isfahan metropolises. Geographical Planning of Space, 13(4), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.30488/gps.2024.430897.3704. [in persian].
  3. Brown, C., De Lannoy, A., McCracken, D., Gill, T., Grant, M., Wright, H., Williams, S (2019). Special issue: child-friendly cities. Cities & Health, 3 (1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2019.1682836.
  4. Brown, C., De Lannoy, A., McCracken, D., Gill, T., Grant, M., Wright, H., Williams, S (2019). Special issue: child-friendly cities. Cities & Health, 3 (1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2019.1682836.
  5. City of Edmonton. (2005). Child Friendly Strategy. Edmonton, Alberta: City of Edmonton.
  6. Corsi, M. (2002). The child friendly cities initiative in Italy. Environment and Urbanization page 169-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/095624780201400214.
  7. Derr, V., & Tarantini, E. (2016). Because we are all people: outcomes and reflections from young people's participation in the planning and design of child-friendly public spaces. Local Environment, 21(12), 1-23.
  8. Dong, N., Chen, J., & Zhang, S. (2017). Safety Research of Children's Recreational Space in Shanghai Urban Parks. Procedia Engineering, 198, 612-621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.115
  9. Dryskl, D. (2007). Creating Better Cities with Children and Adolescents. Translated to Farsi by Tavakoli, M. & Rezvani, N. S. Tehran: Dipacheh Press.
  10. Dulger, H. N. (2015). Age Friendly Cities Criteria: An Ideal Type. Graduate School of Social Sciences of Middle East Technical University.
  11. Atai, E., Turabi, Z., & Panahi, S. (2021). The place of creative and creative children in bio-urban spaces with emphasis on the components of participation and sense of belonging to the environment. [in persian].
  12. Eqbal Moghadam, R., & Zarei, M. (2017). Development of optimal solutions to create environmental security for children, focusing on the indicators of a child's favorable environment (case study: Oudlajan neighborhood). Journal of Urban Management Studies, 10(33), 71-83. [in persian].
  13. Ghafari, A., Ghalenui, M., & Emadi, K. (2013) Child friendly city; Evaluation and comparison of how to respond to the principles of child-friendly cities in the new and traditional contexts of Iran. Hoyt Shahr, 18 (8), 27-38. [in persian].
  14. Ghalandarian, I., & Younesi, Z. (2021). Visual Reflections of Child Friendly Urban Space in 7-12 Years Old Children's Painting. Journal of Hoviateshahr, 15(47), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.30495/hoviatshahr.2021.15713. [in persian].
  15. Ghanbari, A. (2009) Urban furniture standards. first edition, Tabriz, Mehr Iman. [in persian]
  16. Gleeson, B., & Sipe, N. (2006). Creating Child Friendly Cities: Reinstating Kids in the City. Routledge.
  17. Gleeson, B., Sipe, N., & Rolley, K. (2015). Pathways to the child friendly city, in: B. Gleeson and N. Sipe (Eds) Creating Child Friendly Cities, Reinstating Kids in the City, ch. 10. London: Routledge.
  18. Gökmen, H., & Taşçi, B. G. (2016). Children's views about child-friendly city (Case Study: Izmir). Megaron, 11(4), 469-482. http://doi.org/10.5505/megaron.2016.20981.
  19. Gruter, M. (1998) Aesthetics in the architecture of Jahanshah Pakzad and Abdul Reza Homayun. first edition, Tehran, Shahid Beheshti University Press. [in persian].
  20. Harvey, D. (2014). Social justice and the city. Mohammad Reza Haeri, first edition, Tehran, Technology and Communication Organization of Tehran Municipality. [in persian].
  21. Heidari, F., & Zareii, M. (2019). The Concept of the Right To The City and its Relation to Citizen-Friendly Urban Design Matching the Comprehensive Norms of Citizenship with The Qualitative Indicators of Urban Design. Manzar, the Scientific Journal of landscape, 11(46), 14-23. https://doi.org/10.22034/manzar.2019.84292. [in persian].
  22. Howard, A. (2006). What constitutes Child Friendly Communities and How are they built?. Benevolent Society, New South Wales. Australia.
  23. Jalilisadrabad, S., Behzadfar, M., & Yazdanniaz, A. (2014). Lighting’s Role for Children’s Presence in Public Parks (Case Study: Fadak Park in Tehran). Armanshahr Architecture and Urban Development, 8(2), 133-141. [in persian].
  24. Johari Timuri, A., Saghf El Salami,  E. S., & Alipour, H. (2012). Investigating solutions for children's needs in the public arena of the neighborhood by promoting social sustainability. National Architecture Conference. Urbanization and sustainable development with the focus on native architecture to the sustainable city of Mashhad. [in persian].
  25. Johnson, W. (2014). Brusels the Childlish Capital. Urban Studies, 11(2), 115- 132.
  26. Kamelnia, H., & Haghir, S. (2008). Green space design patterns in a child-friendly city (case example: Bam's child-friendly city). Bagh Nazar, 6 (12), 77-88. [in persian].
  27. Karbalai Hosseini Ghiathvand, A., & Jamaluddin, S. (2012) examining the characteristics of a lovely city from the perspective of children; study The case area of two Qazvin municipalities. Urban Studies Quarterly, 3 (9), 59-68. [in persian].
  28. Kashani Jo, K., Harzandi, S., & Fath Al-Uloumi, I. (2012). Examining the optimal design criteria of urban space for children; Case example: Nizamieh neighborhood of Tehran. Armanshahr architecture and urbanism, 6(11), 239-249. [in persian].
  29. Kayani, A., & Esmailzadeh Kawaki, A. (2019) Analysis and planning of a child-friendly city from the perspective of children. Bagh Nazar, 9(20), 51-62. [in persian].
  30. Khalilabad kalantari, H., Ardalani, R., Saraji, S., & Pourahmad, A. (2012), planning safe urban spaces based on gender segregation with the CPTED approach, a case study of Farhangian Shahr neighborhood. according to Iranian Islamic City Studies, 15, 12- 26. [in persian].
  31. Kiakjuri S., & Afrasiabi, H. (2012) Study of social trust and its related factors among students. Economic Sociology and Development, 1(2), 143-165. [in persian].
  32. Korpela, N. (2014). Handbook of environmental psychology. Robert b. Bechtel and arza churchman, john wiley & sons, inc, Children's Environment.
  33. Kotlyakov, J., & Kunakhovich, M. (2007) Elsevier's Dictionary of Geography. First ed., UK, Elsevier.
  34. Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on Cities. E. Kofman, E & E. Lebas, E, First ed, Massachusetts, Blackwell.
  35. Mirmoqtadai, R. (1377) Color and light in visual factors of the city level. Art Quarterly, 137-119, 38. [in persian].
  36. Mitchell, H., Kearns, A., & Damian C. A (2007). Nuances of neighbourhood: Children's perceptions of the space between home and school in Auckland. New Zealand. ELSELVIOR. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2006.11.012.
  37. Moaidfar, S., & Safaei, F. (2019) Planning a child-friendly city in order to promote the participation of teenagers. Geographical Explorations of Desert Regions, 2 (7), 27-27. [in persian].
  38. Moffat, D. (2002) Growing up in cities. Places, 15(1), 46-49.
  39. Nahibi, S., Amini, A., &  Khaksar M. (2013) The role of children's play spaces in order to reach a child-friendly city with the aim of sustainable urban development, National Conference on Urbanization. Urban Management and Sustainable Development, 1-13. [in persian].
  40. Nordström, M. (2010). Children's Views on Child-friendly Environments in Different Geographical, Cultural and Social Neighbourhoods. Urban Studies, 47(3), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009349771.
  41. Noushzadeh, S., & Esmaili, E. (2018). Neighborhood design with the approach of a child-friendly city, a case study: Sarjangaldari 2 neighborhood, Kerman. Specialized scientific quarterly of urban design studies and urban research, 6 (2), 85-91. [in persian].
  42. Nowrozi, A., & Nastern, M. (2013). Planning children's playgrounds (city playgrounds) in Isfahan. Isfahan: Isfahan University Jihad Publications. [in persian].
  43. Parsa, P., Mirqolami, M., & Qarabeigloo, M. (2019). CPC (Child Preceptor City): Revising CFC (Child Friendly City) Model in an Islamic Iranian Context. JRIA, 7 (1), 109-128. [in persian].
  44. Pourmohammadi, M. (2012) Urban land use planning. 9th edition, Tehran, Samt Publications. [in persian].
  45. Prihantini, P., & Kurniawati, W. (2019). Mapping of child-friendly parks availability for supporting child-friendly city in Semarang. The 3rd Geoplanning- International Conference on Geomatics and Planning, IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 313 (2019). DOI 10.1088/1755-1315/313/1/012035.
  46. Rakhimova, N. (2011). Child-Friendly Cities and Neighborhoods: An Evaluation Framework for Planners. Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC.
  47. Razi Moftakhar, N., Abdullahzadeh Tarf, A., Saghafi, A., & Sattarzadeh, D. (2023). Assessing the Relationship between the Effective Cultural Indices on the Sustainable Urban Landscape of Urmia City. Journal of Sustainable City, 6 (1), 19-37. http://doi.org/110.22034/JSC.2022.297692.1519. [in persian]
  48. Riggio, E. (2002). Child friendly cities: good governance in the best interests of the child. EnvironmentandUrbanization, 14(2),45-58. https://doi.org/10.1177/095624780201400204.
  49. Safavi Moghadam, S. M., Noghani Dokhtebahmani, M., & Mazloum Khorasani, M. (2015). A Child Friendly City and Happiness of Children in Mashhad. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Journal of Social Sciences, 12(1), 143-165. https://doi.org/10.22067/jss.v12i1.22577. [in persian].
  50. Satispi, E. (2018). Policy Development of the Child-Friendly City: Case Study of South Tangerang City Regional Government. International Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, 3(2), 105-112.
  51. Sh, M., & Z, H. (2018). Urban Citizenship: Citizens' Rights and Duties in Tehran. Social Development & Welfare Planning, 9(34), 95-136. https://doi.org/10.22054/qjsd.2018.9003. [in persian].
  52. Shahrizadeh, S., & Moayedfar, S. (2017). Child-friendly Strategic planning with emphasis children's creativity (Case Study: Yazd City). Geographical Urban Planning Research, 8(28), 171-186. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22285229.1396.8.28.9.1 [in persian].
  53. Shie, I. (2014). An introduction to the basics of urban planning. 33rd edition, Tehran, University of Science and Technology. [in persian].
  54. Tamjidi, Z., Zarabadi, Z. S. S., & Habib, F. (2022). Analysis of the components of improving the quality of urban spaces for children with a right to the city approach (Case study: District 12 of Tehran metropolis). Human Geography Research, 54(4), 1491-1509. https://doi.org/10.22059/jhgr.2021.318033.1008245. [in persian].
  55. Taylor, A.F., Kuo, F.E., & Sullivan, W.C (2014). Coping with ADD: The surprising connection to green play settings. Environment and Behavior, 1(33), 54-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160121972864.
  56. The center for sustainable transportation. (2004). Child-friendly transport planning, organization developed to the pormotion of active transportation.
  57. UNICEF. (2007). Children's Rights and Habitat -Working towards Child-Friendly Cities, New York.
  58. UNICEF. (2009). Child friendly cities - Fact sheet.
  59. Wales, V (2013). Planning for children in public places. Children's Environments, 9(2), 76-96.
  60. Woolcock, G. & Steele, W. (2008). Towards the development of an indicators framework for a child friendly community: literature review. Urban Research Program for the NSW Commission for Children and Young People, Griffith University, March.
  61. Woolcock, G., & Steele, W. (2008). Towards the development of an indicators framework for a child friendly community: literature review. Urban Research Program for the NSW Commission for Children and Young People, Griffith University, March.