The Impact of Physical Factors on the Vitality of Public Space in the Qeytarieh Market: A Study with a Landry Approach in Isfahan

Subject Areas : architecture

Mohammad Latifi ¹ , Mehdi Mohammadkhani ² , Naghmeh Alizad Gohari ³

1 - Department of Architecture, Institute of Society and Media, ISF.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
2 - Assistant Professor,Department of Islamic Education, Isf.C.,Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
3 - Department of Architectural Engineering, Na.C., Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.

Received: 2025-05-06 Accepted : 2025-09-18 Published : 2025-09-23

Keywords: Physical Factors , Vitality , Landry Approach , Isfahan Market,

Abstract :

Urban vitality is a multidimensional concept that encompasses environmental qualities, spatial features, and the satisfaction individuals derive from interacting with the city. It represents the degree to which urban environments stimulate social interaction, cultural expression, economic activity, and a sense of belonging. Within urban studies, vitality has become an essential indicator of sustainable and livable cities, reflecting the capacity of spaces to support both personal well-being and collective urban life. Traditional bazaars, as historical public spaces, hold a unique role in shaping urban vitality. Beyond their commercial functions, they are embedded with cultural, architectural, and social values, serving as long-standing centers of exchange, communication, and cohesion. These qualities make them important arenas for investigating the relationship between the physical environment and perceptions of vibrancy. Isfahan’s Qeysarie Bazaar, one of the most significant bazaars in Iran, provides a prime example. With its Safavid-era architecture and central location, the bazaar demonstrates how spatial design, circulation, and atmosphere influence how people experience vitality and perceive urban liveliness on a daily basis, especially during peak social and commercial hours. The objective of this research is to identify and prioritize the physical factors that most strongly affect urban vitality in Qeysarie Bazaar, using Landry’s creative city framework. This theoretical perspective emphasizes how physical and design qualities can foster inclusiveness, creativity, and liveliness in urban spaces. It also provides a useful lens for assessing how historic environments can adapt to modern needs while preserving their cultural significance. A quantitative method was adopted, based on a structured questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale. Respondents included bazaar users, whose subjective assessments of spatial clarity, accessibility, safety, and environmental qualities were collected. Data were analyzed through SPSS software to determine significant relationships between physical attributes and perceived vitality. The systematic approach ensured both reliability and validity, while allowing patterns of perception to emerge across different groups of users, including both residents and visitors from surrounding areas. The findings highlight two dominant indicators: legibility and perceived safety. Legibility refers to clarity and coherence in the spatial layout, ease of orientation, and navigability, all of which reduce confusion and enhance user comfort. Perceived safety relates both to environmental conditions, such as lighting and visibility, and to social dimensions, including surveillance and the presence of others, which together create a secure atmosphere. These factors directly encourage people to remain in the bazaar, engage with others, participate in cultural and commercial activities, and perceive the space as lively and inviting. Accordingly, enhancing vitality in historic bazaars depends largely on improving these dimensions. Attention to legibility through coherent design and clear circulation patterns, along with measures that strengthen safety and the sense of security, can significantly reinforce vibrancy. Within Landry’s framework, these findings highlight the central role of physical design in fostering dynamic, inclusive, and resilient urban environments. Ultimately, Qeysarie Bazaar illustrates how heritage spaces can remain relevant and vibrant in contemporary urban life by combining cultural identity with spatial qualities that encourage vitality, sustain meaningful human interaction, and support broader urban well-being

References:

1. ایراندوست، کیومرث؛ و بهمنی اورامانی، آرمان (1390). تحولات کالبدی بازار سنتی در شهرهای ایران (مطالعه موردی: بازار شهر کرمانشاه). شهر ایرانی اسلامی، 2(5)، 5-15. https://sid.ir/paper/177407/fa
2. ایزدی، سعید؛ نیکوخوی، مونا؛ و سماواتی، سحر. (1391). بررسی نقش مولفه های کیفیت بخش قلمرو پیاده در سرزندگی و کارآمدی خیابانهای شهری (مطالعه موردی: خیابان بوعلی سینا همدان). جغرافیایی فضای گردشگری، 1(3)، 103-118. https://sid.ir/paper/214192/fa
3. بنتلی، ایان؛ الکک، آلن؛ مورین، پال؛ مکگلین، سو؛ و اسمیت، گراهام (1382). محیط های پاسخده. ترجمه‌ مصطفی‌ بهزادفر، چاپ اول، تهران: علم و صنعت. https://www.gisoom.com/book/11594596/%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D9%85%D8%AD%DB%8C%D8%B7-%D9%87%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D9%BE%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AE%D8%AF%D9%87-%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8%DB%8C-%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%87%D9%86%D9%85%D8%A7-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%86/
4. پامیر، سیریل بی. (1394). آفرینش مرکز شهری سرزنده. ترجمه‌ مصطفی ‌بهزادفر‌ و امیر ‌شکیبامنش، چاپ‌ چهارم، تهران: علم ‌و ‌صنعت. https://www.gisoom.com/book/11596254/%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D8%A2%D9%81%D8%B1%DB%8C%D9%86%D8%B4-%D9%85%D8%B1%DA%A9%D8%B2-%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%B1%DB%8C-%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%AF%D9%87-%D8%A7%D8%B5%D9%88%D9%84-%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AD%DB%8C-%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%B1%DB%8C-%D9%88-%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B2%D8%A2%D9%81%D8%B1%DB%8C%D9%86%DB%8C/
5. جیکوبز‌، جین (1388). مرگ و زندگی شهرهای بزرگ آمریکایی. ترجمه‌ حمیدرضا پارسی‌ و آرزو افالطونی، چاپ دوم، تهران:دانشگاه تهران. https://www.iranketab.ir/book/67384-the-death-and-life-of-great-american-cities
6. خستو، مریم؛ و سعیدی ‏رضوانی، نوید،(1389) ، عوامل مؤثر بر سرزندگی فضاهای‏ شهری، نشریة هویت شهر، ش 6، صص63-74. https://sanad.iau.ir/fa/Article/795443?FullText=FullText
7. خنیفر، حسین؛ بردبار، حامد؛ و فروغی ‏قمی، فریبا، 1392، مدیریت شهر شاداب، تهران: سارگل. https://modir.ir/News/10407.aspx
8. ذکاوت, سینا؛ رضایی ،محمدرضا؛ و پیام, حاتم. (1399). ارتقاء سرزندگی در فضاهای شهری با تأکید بر رویکرد ساماندهی منظر شهری (مطالعه موردی: شهر یاسوج). آمایش محیط, 13(50), 197-215. https://journals.iau.ir/article_678518.html
9. رخشانی‏نسب، حمیدرضا؛ و رشیدیان، مریم،(1396)، تحلیلی بر جایگاه مبلمان ورزشی در افزایش سرزندگی فضای شهری مطالعة موردی: شهر نورآباد ممسنی، فصل‏نامة جغرافیا و توسعه، ش 26، صص 101-116. https://gdij.usb.ac.ir/article_3047.html
10. عارف حسینی ،سید علی؛ پناهی،علی؛ آذر،علی؛ و لیزاده، رضا. (1400). سنجش و ارزیابی ابعاد سرزندگی در انواع فضاهای عمومی کلانشهرتبریز. مطالعات جامعه شناسی، 4(52), 65. https://journals.iau.ir/article_681308.html
11. کالن،گوردون (1387). گزیده منظر شهری. ترجمه‌ منوچهر طبیبیان، چاپ سوم، تهران:دانشگاه تهران. https://www.gisoom.com/book/11235793/%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8-%DA%AF%D8%B2%DB%8C%D8%AF%D9%87-%D9%85%D9%86%D8%B8%D8%B1-%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%B1%DB%8C/
12. کریر، راب (1383). فضای شهری. ترجمه‌ خسروهاشمی نژاد، چاپ اول، تهران: خاک. https://www.gisoom.com/book/11315589/%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D9%81%D8%B6%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%B1%DB%8C/
13. گلکار، کوروش (1386). مفهوم کیفیت سرزندگی در طراحی شهری. صفه،16(44)،66-75. https://sid.ir/paper/94282/fa
14. لینچ، کوین (1381). تئوری شکل شهر. ترجمه‌ سید حسین بحرینی، چاپ دوم، تهران:دانشگاه تهران. https://www.gisoom.com/book/1847598/%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D8%AA%D8%A6%D9%88%D8%B1%DB%8C-%D8%B4%DA%A9%D9%84-%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%B1/
15. ماجدی، ‌حمید؛ و بندرآباد‌، علیرضا (1393). بررسی ‌معیار ‌جهانی ‌و بومی ‌شهر ‌زیست پذیر.هویت شهر،8(17)،76-65. https://civilica.com/doc/986323/
16. هدایت نژاد کاشی, سید مصطفی؛ هادیانی, زهره؛ حاجی نژاد, علی؛ و عسگری, علی. (1398). سرزندگی شهری مفهومی میان رشته ای (واکاوی اصول، ابعاد و شاخصها). مطالعات ساختار و کارکرد شهری, 6(20), 75-103. https://shahr.journals.umz.ac.ir/article_2283.html
17. Abdul Aziza, A., Sani Ahmada, A., & Edrus Nordinb, T. (2012). Vitality of Flats Outdoor Space. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 36, 402-413. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042812005113
18. Appleyard, D. (1981). Livable Streets. Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/Livable_Streets.html?id=pfreUQKD_4QC
19. Chang, K. (2015). The Effects of Spatial accessibility and Centrality to Land Use, Cities Journal, No. 46, Vol. 1, pp. 30-43. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264275115000657
20. Chapman, D. (1996). Creating Neighbourhoods and Places in the Built Environment. London, Weinheim, New York, Tokyo, Melbourne, Madras. Published by E & FN SPON. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203362341/creating-neighbourhoods-places-built-environment-david-chapman
21. Chen, Y., Yu, B., Shu, B., Yang, L., & Wang, R. (2023). Exploring the spatiotemporal patterns and correlates of urban vitality: Temporal and spatial heterogeneity. Sustainable Cities and Society, 91, 104440.‏ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2210670723000513
22. Colantonio, A. (2007). Social sustainability: an exploratory analysis of its definition, assessment methods metrics and tools. UK: Oxford Institute for Sustainable Development. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/35947/
23. De Koe, D. (2013). “Urban Vitality Through a Mix of Land-uses and Functions: An Addition to Citymaker”. MSc Thesis Land Use Planning-Landscape- Wageningen University. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://edepot.wur.nl/273611
24. Gehl,J. (2016).How to study public Life.(M.behzadfar,N.Nadushan,&A.Nadushan,Trans).Elme Memare Royal Institute. https://link.springer.com/book/10.5822/978-1-61091-525-0
25. Gehl, J. (2000). New City Spaces. Copenhagen, Denmark: Danish Architectural Press. https://adk.elsevierpure.com/en/publications/new-city-spaces-2
26. Hakim, B. S. (1986). Arabic-Islamic cities: Building and planning principles. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Arabic-Islamic-Cities--Rev-Building-and-Planning-Principles/Hakim/p/book/9780415861687?srsltid=AfmBOoqdpfVYW5ri68_bZ0ywn4tV4ACv615_-dbYyAJkz4mSaasvBqT7
27. Holuj, D. 2018. Public Spaces and Cultural Heritage in Community Projects, the Example of Warsaw. European Spatial Research and Policy, 24(2): 127- 144. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=664427
28. Işiklar, s .(2017). Vitality of The Cities. International Journal of Architectural Engineering Technology, 4, 18-23. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sena-Isiklar-Bengi/publication/321890083_Vitality_of_The_Cities/links/5b2b8ceaaca272821e460d39/Vitality-of-The-Cities.pdf
29. Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. Random House. https://www.scielo.br/j/rbeur/a/GLmp6hWFCBFWgNSmJhYDN8L/?format=pdf
30. Jin, X., Long, Y., Sun, W., Lu, Y., Yang, W., & Tang, J. (2017). Evaluating cities’ vitality and identifying ghost cities in China with emerging geographical data. Cities, 63, 98-109. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026427511630261X
31. Landry, C. (2000), “Urban vitality: a new source of urban competitiveness”, prince ClausFund journal, ARCHIS issue urban vitatilty/ urban Heroes. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=fa&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Landry%2C+C.+%282000%29%2C+%E2%80%9CUrban+vitality%3A+a+new+source+of+urban+competitiveness%E2%80%9D%2C+prince+ClausFund+journal%2C+ARCHIS+issue+urban+vitatilty%2F+urban+Heroes.&btnG=
32. Montgomery, J .(1998). Making a city: Urbanity,Vitality and Urban Design. Journal of Urban Design, 3 (1), 93-116. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13574809808724418
33. Shaw, K. (2004) Liveability in NDC Areas, Findings from Six Case Studies. Sheffield, Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research. Sheffield Hallam University. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=fa&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=33.%09Shaw%2C+K.+%282004%29+Liveability+in+NDC+Areas%2C+Findings+from+Six+Case+Studies.+Sheffield%2C+Centre+for+Regional+Economic+and+Social+Research.+Sheffield+Hallam+University.&btnG=
34. Kalan, A. M., & Oliveira, E. (2014). Sustainable architecture of the bazaar of Tabriz and its relation with the social and cultural aspects. IARS'International Research Journal, 4(1).‏ https://researth.iars.info/index.php/curie/article/view/33
35. Silaci, I., & Vitova, L. 2017. Public Spaces as the Reflection of Society and its Culture. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 245 (2017) 042009 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/245/4/042009. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/245/4/042009/meta
36. Vuchic. (1999): liveability as a series of elements that make a city liveable: "generally understood to encompass those elements of home, neighbourhood, and metropolitan area that contribute to safety, economic opportunities and welfare, health, convenience, mobility and recreation". https://jsaud.sru.ac.ir/article_1436.html
37. Zarin, Sh., Niroomand, M., & Heidari, A.A. (2015). Physical and Social Aspects of Vitality Case Study: Traditional street and modern street in Tehran. Asian Conference on Environment-Behaviour Studies, Korea, 25-27, 659 -668. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281500083X