Analyzing the Concept of Spatial Structure Coherence in Historical Districts Using the Space Syntax Method (Case Study: Historical Districts of Hamadan City)

جغرافیا و توسعه فضای شهری

Article 10, Volume 4, Issue 2 - Serial Number 7, March 2018, Pages 205-219   

Document Type: Scientific-Research

DOI: 10.22067/gusd.v4i2.55960

Authors

Saeid Alitajer^* ; Mina Sahraie

Bu-Ali Sina University

Abstract

Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Historical districts in Iran have been the primary source of Iranian cities coming into existence. These districts are of artistic and historical values as they bear various principles and features of ancient Iranian-Islamic architecture and urbanism. Among these features, coherence is one of the most significant characteristics which is the result of connections between the various components that form different works of architecture and cities. Regardless of their exuberance inside, our cities in the past involved a coherent form. There are two trends regarding the factors that offer coherence in the cities of the past; some scholars consider such a unity as a result of the unitary perspective of Muslim architects while others have pointed out general principles governing physical-spatial organization as the main factors forming this concept.
Population growth along with the emergence of modern technologies has led to the development of city structures, in which unity and coherence as well as other principles of architecture and urbanism of the past are absent. Such developments in cities have brought about shapes that not only broke apart their previous coherence, but also failed to provide unity and consistency in their new forms. Subsequently, cities and districts became a set of buildings and spaces as independent, distinctive structures with no clear connection to their adjacent elements. Therefore, in order to preserve the structure of historical districts as well as revive neighborhoods in which certain interferences have taken place, paying attention to the coherence aspect is of substantial importance.
2. Methology
Space Syntax is a theory and a tool for analysis in architecture and urbanism which is based on studying how social and spatial forms are connected. This theory asserts that to gain a profound understanding of urban spaces, the individual role of each single space in a micro scale is of less significance compared to its roles in combination with other urban elements, i.e., in a macro scale considering the whole urban system. The main idea in this theory involves the notion of space configuration, the purpose of which is to describe how constructed places such as buildings, networks and urban streets are formed. In particular, the concept also deals with how such components are articulated and linked together. Given the aforementioned definitions, the concept of coherence entails connections among various elements. As a result, the most important part of coherence in historical districts that is connections between spatial structures as well as how a social or cultural meaning is expressed, is evaluated using space syntax. Spatial structure is the main organizing force that governs cities and districts. Hence, there exists a bidirectional connection between spatial structures and social organizations. In the present study, the integration index was selected for analyzing coherence in the intended spaces using the axial system in the space syntax method. The integration index marks connections or disconnections between a part and the whole or a second degree system. A space with higher accretions to other spaces involve high integration.
3. Discussion
The Aghajani Beig district involves the highest mean extent of coherence as it is more integrated with its adjacent districts and there are less streets and interferences in this neighborhood. However, it is confirmed in various studies that there is a direct relationship between integration and the extent of people’s presence in the environment. In this regard, a higher comprehensive integration as well as a higher number of connections between spaces in each passage has a positive impact on the number of pedestrians. Consequently, people are present more in this district and more social interactions are formed as a result. On the other hand, Kolapa district entails the lowest mean extent of coherence as it is located far from the congested areas of the city. Nonetheless, numerous interferences have taken place for its development, the consequences of which involve less separation between private and public fields along with insignificant presence of population in public areas. the minimum extent of coherence in four main districts is the same which denotes the similarity between their structures. Constructions in historical districts were carried out in a way as to avoid spatial fractures more than usual; as mentioned, it was attempted to offer coherence and unity in cities by adhering to the principles that govern urbanism. To this end, the maximum extent of coherence lied within the center of districts; the center of Kababian district is more coherent compared to other neighborhoods which has led to the more significant presence of the community along with social interactions forming among them. Kolapa district involves the least extent of coherence at its center due to inactive applications in the area as well as excessive developmental interferences leading to insignificant presence of the population and fewer social interactions.
4. Conclusion
The analysis of the findings shows that one of the effective features in coherence between spatial structures of historical districts is the presence of a single centrality for the district that has always been a proper environment for forming social interactions among citizens. Another feature includes the hierarchical structure of allies and passageways that indicate the private and public areas of the neighborhood as well as the extent of people`s presence in those fields. Historical cities and districts were coherent as they featured such characteristics, yet there are physical-spatial forms emerging in contemporary urbanism which are the result of neglecting the process of coherence in historical districts along with failing to learn from them; shortcomings are district growth in macro scale in the form of checkered networks with no centers, the absence of spatial integrations between various elements and their surrounding urban textures, increase in the number of missing spaces, development of vehicle transportation networks, the absence of hierarchy between realms, and contradictions among different patterns of space and mass combination having formed cities and districts as separate areas. These factors have diminished hierarchies regarding private and public areas and led to insignificant presence of people and frail social interactions among them in public fields.
If the central, hierarchical structure of a district and its passages are conserved, the coherence between spatial structures and their resulting social constructs would not be eliminated. In general, the less there are destructions of historical contexts and new construction projects in a neighborhood, the more coherent their structures are. All in all, paying attention to the principles of local architecture and urbanism and adhering to them can play a significant role in inhibiting and organizing developments in urban districts. Though some may believe that the role of local architecture and urbanism within the modern urbanism process is declining, the instances of historical cities and their values for people can be an appropriate indicator for committing to those local features.

Keywords

Coherence; Historical districts; Space syntax; Integration

References

1. اردلان، ن. و بختیار، ل. (1380). حس وحدت. تهران: نشر خاک.

2. بورکهارت، ت. (1365). هنر اسلامی؛ زبان و بیان، (مترجم: مسعود رجب‌نیا). تهران: انتشارات سروش؛ صداوسیمای جمهوری اسلامی.

3. بیکن، ا. (1386). طراحی شهرها. (مترجم: فرزانه طاهری). تهران: انتشارات شهیدی.

4. بیگلری، ا. (1356). بازارهای ایران. تهران: بنیاد همدمی.

5. تولایی، ن. (1379). شکل شهر منسجم: مطالعۀ انسجام کالبدی شهر در اندیشه و عمل. پایان‌نامۀ منتشرشدۀ دکتری شهرسازی). دانشگاه تهران. تهران، ایران.

6. جعفری‌بهمن، م.ع. و خانیان، م. (1391). مشکل‌یابی طرح‌های جامع از دیدگاه رفتاری و مقایسۀ آن با وضع موجود به روش چیدمان فضا (space syntax) نمونۀ: موردی: محله کبابیان شهر همدان. معماری و شهرسازی آرمان‌شهر، (9)، 295-285.

7. چلبی، م. (1375). جامعه‌شناسی نظم: تشریح و تحلیل نظری نظم اجتماعی. تهران: نشر نی.

8. حق‌شناس ع. م.، سامعی ح. و انتخابی، ن. (1387). فرهنگ معاصر هزاره (انگلیسی-فارسی). تهران: انتشارت فرهنگ معاصر.

9. ریسمانچیان، ا. و بل، س. (1389). شناخت کاربردی روش چیدمان فضا در درک پیکره‌بندی فضایی شهرها. هنرهای زیبا-معماری و شهرسازی، (43)، 56-49.

10. زارعی، م. ا. (1390). ساختار کالبدی-فضایی شهر همدان از آغاز دورۀ اسلامی تا پایان دورۀ قاجار براساس مدارک و شواهد موجود. نامۀ باستان‌شناسی، (1)، 82-57.

11. عباس‌زادگان، م. و آذری، ع. (1391). سنجش معیارهای مؤثر بر ایجاد محورهای پیاده‌مدار با به‌کارگیری سیستم اطلاعات مکانی (GIS) و چیدمان فضا. انجمن علمی معماری و شهرسازی ایران، (4)، 68-55.

12. فلاحت، م.ص. و کمالی، ل. (1390)، انسجام در شهرهای کهن ایران-اسلامی. مجموعه‌مقالات اولین همایش ملی معماری و شهرسازی اسلامی. تبریز: دانشگاه هنر اسلامی تبریز.

13. الکساندر، ک.، نیس، ه.، آنینو، آ. و کینگ، ا. (1373). تئوری جدید طراحی شهری. (مترجم: محمد تقی‌زاده مطلق). تهران: نشر توسعه.

14. کمالی پور ح.، معماریان غ. ح.، فیضی، م. و موسویانم. ف. (1391). ترکیب شکلی و پیکره‌بندی فضایی در مسکن بومی: مقایسۀ تطبیقی عرصه‌بندی فضای مهمان در خانه‌های سنتی کرمان. مسکن و محیط روستا، (138)، 16-3.

15. معماریان، غ. ح. (1387). سیری در مبانی نظری معماری. تهران: انتشارات سروش دانش.

16. معین، م. (1375). فرهنگ فارسی. جلد اول. تهران: انتشارات امیرکبیر.

17. نصر، س. ح. (1389). هنر و معنویت اسلامی. تهران: نشر حکمت.

18. Dawson, P.C. (2002). Space syntax analyze of central Inuit snow houses. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 21, 464-480.

19. Dursun, P. (2007, June). Space syntax in architectural design. In A. S. Kubat (Ed.), Proceedings of 6th International Space Syntax Symposium (pp. 056-1-12). Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey.

20. Haq, S., & Zimring, C. (2003). Just down the road a piece: The development of topological knowledge of building layouts. Environment and Behavior, 35, 132-160.

21. Hillier, B. (1999). The hidden geometry of deformed grids: Or, why space syntax work, when it looks as though it should not. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 26, 169-191.

22. Hillier, B. (2003). The architecture of seeing and going: Or, are cities shaped by bodies or minds? And is there a syntax of spatial cognition? In B. Hillier (Ed.), Proceedings of 4th International Space Syntax Symposium (pp 06-1-32). London, UK.

23. Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The social logic of space. New York: Cambridge University Press.

24. Hillier, B., & Vaughan, L. (2007). The city as one thing. Progress in Planning, 67(3), 205-230.

25. Hillier, B., Penn, A., Hanson, J., Grajewski, T., & Xu, J. (1993). Natural movement: or, configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement. Environment and Planning B: planning and design, 20(1), 29-66.

26. Jiang, B., Claramunt, C., & Klarqvist, B. (2000). Integration of space syntax into GIS for modelling urban spaces. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 2(3-4), 161-171.

27. Kamalipour, H., Dorrani, A. A., Soltani, S., Naser Alavi, S., & Mirzaei, E., (2013). Understanding continuity and change in the Persian vernacular settlements: A comparative syntactic analysis of urban public spaces in a case study. Current Urban Studies, 4, 130-138.

28. Lima, J.J. (2001). Socio-spatial segregation and urban form: Belem at the end of the 1990s. Geoforum, 32, 493-507.

29. Montello, D. R. (2007). The contribution of space syntax to a comprehensive theory of environmental psychology. In A. S. Kubat (Ed.), Proceedings of 6th International Space Syntax Symposium (pp. iv-1-12). Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey.

30. Onder, D.E., & Gigi, Y. (2010). Reading urban spaces by the space-syntax method: A proposal for the South Halic Region. Cities, 27, 260–271

31. Peponis, J., & Wineman, J. (2002). The spatial structure of environment and behavior. In R Bechtel, & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Psychology (pp. 271-291). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

32. Rismanchian, O., Bell, S., & Mokhtarzadeh, S. (2012). Identifying accessibility problems in deteriorated urban areas: A case study of Tehran. In M. Greene, J. Reyes & A. Castro (Eds.), Proceedings of 8th International Space Syntax Symposium (8001:1- 19).Publishing Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile (PUC), Santiago de Chile: PUC

33. Steadman, P. (1983). Architectural morphology. London: Pion.

34. Webster, N. (1984). The new American Webster handy college dictionary. New York: The New American Library.