Explanation of The Theoretical Model in Order to Improve the Identity of The Buildings’ Facades in The Street View(Case Study: Valiasr Street, Tehran)
Mahsa Hajmaleki
1
(
Ph.D. student, Department of Architecture, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Department, Tehran, Iran
)
Khosro Daneshjo
2
(
Assistant Professor of Architecture Department, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
)
Azadeh Shahcheraghi
3
(
Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Unit, Tehran, Iran
)
Keywords: Physical Identity, Valiasr Street, Tehran, Urban Views, Urban Landscape,
Abstract :
The concept of urban identity in the process of cognition and perception presents us with a multidimensional and complex phenomenon. The physical identity of cities has become an influential category in city life. For this reason, in order to promote identity, this research tries to find the roots of the existing relationship in the field of urban landscape and facade of buildings, and after extracting and analyzing key parameters for the feasibility of approaching identity in this space, to compile a theoretical model with practical criteria for coordination. For the analysis, library sources were studied and then the effective factors in the facades with identity were investigated, then the existing buildings in Valiasr Street were analyzed to measure the obtained factors. A qualitative and quantitative case study method has been carried out to obtain information about the changes in the appearance of buildings over time. For quantitative analysis of data, software (SPSS) was used to provide statistical analysis of data, analysis and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique and factor analysis using varimax rotation were performed. The results show that each period of the evolution of Valiasr Street in Tehran has faced different types of modernity forces and finally, the most influential parameter on the enhancement of architectural identity on the facade of the buildings in the street view has been presented in the theoretical model
1. ابل، کریس، 1387، معماری و هویت، ترجمه فرح حبیب، انتشارات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم تحقیقات، تهران.
2. جاوید صباغیان، مقداد؛ و سید احمدی زاویه، سید سعید. (1392). درآمدی بر مطالعات تطبیقی هنر در مقام یکی از گونه های مطالعاتی حوه پژوهش هنر. نامه هنرهای تجسمی و کاربردی، 4(12)، 275.
3. لینچ، کوین. (1960). سیمای شهر، ترجمه منوچهر مزینی، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
4. لنگ، جان. (1383 ). آفرینتش نظریه معماری . عینی فر علیـرضا . چـاپ دوم . تـهران . موسسـه چـاپ و انتشـارات دانشگاه تهران.
5. برادبنت، جفری. (1388). با برادبنت درباره معماری، ترجمه: رضوی، جورابچی، نوربخش، نشر: دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
6. سلطان زاده، حسین. (1396). هویت معماری، کتاب معماران ایران. جلد 1. تهران: تیس، انجمن مفاخر معماری ایران.
7. کالن، گوردون. (1377). ترجمه: طبیبیان، منوچهر، نشر: دانشگاه تهران
8. فرامپتون، کنت. (1385). منطقه¬گرایی انتقادی معماری مدرن و هویت فرهنگی، ترجمه:رئیسی، ایمان،نشریه معماری و فرهنگ
9. قبادیان، وحید. (1400). سبک¬شناسی و مبانی نظری در معماریمعاصر ایران. چاپ چهارم، تهران: علم معمار.
10. ذشولتز، کریستیننوربرگ (1387) .معماری، حضور، زمان و مکان، ترجمه علیرضا سیداحمدیان، موسسه نشرمعمار، چاپ اول.
11. Abel, C. (1997). Architecture and Identity, Towards Global Eco-Culture (1st ed.). London: Architectural Press.
12. Elkadi, H. (2005). Identity: Glass and Meaningful Place-Making. Journal of UrbanTechnology, 12(3), 89–106.223
13. Elkadi, H., & Küchler, S. (2008). Diversity in the Arts: Perspectives and Challenges of theProduction of Art & Architecture. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei Retrieved12,February, 2010, from http://www.ebos.com.cy/susdiv/uploadfiles/SD2008-007.pdf
14. Elsheshtawy, Y. (1997). Urban Complexity: Toward the Measurement of the PhysicalComplexity of Street-Scapes. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research14(4), 301-316.
15. Correa, C. (1983). Quest for Identity. In R. Powell (Ed.), Exploring Architecture in Islamic Culture , Architecture and Identity. Singapore: Concept Media Ltd, Singapore.
16. Dul, J., & Hak., a. T. (2008). Case Study Methodology in Business Research (First editioned.). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd.
17. Rapoport A (1977). Human aspects of urban form: towards a man-environment approach to urban form and design, Oxford, United Kingdom: Pergamon.
18. Rapoport, Amos, (1982), The Meaning of the Built Environment, A Nonverbar communication Approach, SAGE.
19. Lynch K (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Norberg- Schulz, C, (1980), Genius Loci: toward a phenomenology of architecture, Rizzoli, New York.
20. Sekaran R, Lance. C (2003) A Review and Synthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature Suggestions, Practices, and Recommend dations for Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods. January 2000,3: pp 4-70.
21. Thiel P. people, path, and purposes: notation for participatory envirotecture. University of Washington press, 1961
22. Wells, J. C. (2009). Attachment to the Physical Age of Urban Residential Neighborhoods:A comparative case study of historic Charleston and I’on. Unpublished Ph.D thesis,the Graduate School of Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina.
23.Welz, F. (2005). Rethinking Identity: Concepts of Identity and ‘the Other’ in SociologicalPerspective. The Society. An International Journal of Social Sciences, Varanasi,U.P., India, 1, 1-25.
24. Wells, J. C. (2009). Attachment to the Physical Age of Urban Residential Neighborhoods:A comparative case study of historic Charleston and I’on. Unpublished Ph.D thesis,the Graduate School of Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina