Evaluating Residential Satisfaction on Location Utility in Iranian Planned Urban Areas, (Case Study: Mehrshahr of Karaj)

Subject Areas : architecture

Mojtaba Rafieian ¹ , Moones Nazari ² , Hashem Dadashpour ³

1 - Associate Professor of Urban Planning, Tarbiat Modares University,
2 - MA of Urban Planning,Tarbiat Modares University
3 - Assistant Professor of Urban Planning, Tarbiat Modares University

Received: 2014-11-29 Accepted : 2015-09-07 Published : 2016-11-21

Keywords:

Abstract :

Community satisfaction has often been linked to the level of satisfaction with a community’s infrastructure, job opportunities and social support networks. Apart from concern over population decline, there is another important reason for demand of have a better understanding of what factors influence “community satisfaction.” Community development practitioners, community leaders and other local stakeholders see “community cohesion”, “a strong sense of community” and similar concepts as having both intrinsic and instrumental value associated with their work and responsibilities. Yet, most empirical analyses of community and residential satisfaction have focused on only one aspect of the available theory to predict the satisfaction of individuals. However there are some similarities in those definitions which stems from this notion that there is a core in all of those interpretations. Those cores need to be portrayed clearly to make this concept more understandable in multidisciplinary activities. Residential satisfaction reflects the degree to which individuals’ housing needs are fulfilled. RS is a subjective dependent variable which depends on many physical and social parameters. However, the propriety of those parameters could vary for different people with different social cultural and professional back grounds and other reasons. Housing is a mixed used element that satisfies several needs. The failures of many housing projects stems from lack of knowledge on the determinants of Residential Satisfaction (RS) concept. Results of most studies indicate that housing satisfaction is affected by an array of individual, housing and neighborhood attributes. Nonetheless it’s also important and significant to take into account the effect of social interactions. RS has been an important factor for policy makers during the preparation of their guide line of housing construction for the variety of people. RS for policy makers means that habitants needs have been met and that they are happy in their dwelling unit.Residential Satisfaction and its effective relationship with Quality of Life are of those concepts into consideration in recent decades. Not recognizing RS in designing projects leads to a severe problems. These problems includes projects do not satisfy the occupant’s needs, in terms of comfort, social, cultural and religious needs. Consequently, it influences the quality of life and affects the psychosocial aspects of the inhabitants. This study has aimed to investigate the residential satisfaction of Mehrshahr, which had once been consisted of low-rise single house units, settling high-income residents and in recent years has modified to a composite dense structure. So assessing changes occurred in this region is the main point of this study. To achieve this goal, several attributes in subjective and objective dimensions were evaluated, applying several regression analysis and a model attributed to Amerigo and Aragones in 1997. Previous models in community satisfaction have included many different categories of variables, but no model has yet incorporated all of them simultaneously. Data were collected through field inquiry and results indicate low residential satisfaction(below average) in this region, which regarding their length of residents, with significant percentage dwelling less than 10 years, infer the lack of sense of place among individuals.... Keywords: Residential satisfaction, Quality of life, Iranian Planned Urban Areas, Mehrshahr of Karaj.

References:

1. براتی، ناصر؛ و کاکاوند ،رضا. (1392). ارزیابی تطبیقی کیفیت محیط سکونت شهری با تاکید بر تصویر ذهنی شهروندان مطالعه موردی: شهر قزوین.نشریه‌های هنرهای زیبا- معماری و شهرسازی ،18(3)،25-32. 


2. داداش پور،‌هاشم؛ و روشنی، صالح. (1392). ارزیابی تعامل میان فرد ومحیط زندگی در محلات جدید با استفاده از سنجش کیفیت عینی و ذهنی، مطالعه موردی: شهرک نفت تهران.مطالعات شهری، 6 ، 1-13.


3. رفیعیان، مجتبی؛ عسگری زاده، زهرا؛ و عسگری زاده، محمد.(الف1389). ارزیابی میزان کیفیت مجتمع‌های سکونتی با تاکید بر رویکرد رضایتمندی در محله نواب.فصلنامه مدرس علوم انسانی،14(1)،197-212. 


4. رفیعیان،مجتبی؛ امین صالحی،فرزین؛ و تقوایی، علی اکبر. (ب1389). سنجش کیفیت محیط سکونت در شهرک اکباتان تهران.برنامه ریزی و آمایش فضا، 68، 63-85.


5. رفیعیان، مجتبی؛ و مولودی، جمشید. (1391).رویکردها و روش‌های سنجش کیفیت محیط مسکونی شهر.تهران: انتشارات آذرخش.


6. رضایی، محمدرضا؛ وکمائی زاده، یعقوب.(1391). ارزیابی میزان رضایتمندی ساکنان از مجتمع‌های مسکونی مهر. مطالعه موردی: سایت مسکن مهر فاطمیه شهر یزد. مطالعات شهری، 5، 13-26.


7. شیعه، اسماعیل.(1382). لزوم تحول مدیریت شهری در ایران. مجله جغرافیا و توسعه،1(1)، 37-62.


8. غیاثوند، الهام.(1388). تأثیر سرمایه‌های اجتماعی بر کیفیت زندگی ساکنان محلات شهری.فصلنامه مهندس مشاور، 45، 22-27.
   
   
   1. Aragones, J. J.,&  Amerigo, M. (1990). Residential satisfaction in council housing. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, 313-325.
   
   
   2. Boyer, R., &Savageau, D. (1981). Places rated almanac. Chicago: Rand McNally.
   
   
   3. Connerly. C. E., & Marans, R. W., (1985).Comparing two global measures of perceived neighborhood quality. Social Indicators Research, 17(1), 29-47.
   
   
   4. Gabriel, S., Mattey, J., &Wascher, W. L. (2003). Compensating differentials and evolution in the quality-of-life among U.States. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 33 (5), 619–649.
   
   
   5. Gilbert, A., & Ward, P. (1988). Housing, the state and the poor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   
   
   6. Lee, T., & Marans, R. W. (1980).Objective and subjective indicators: Scale disordinance on interrelationships. Special Indicators Research, 6(1), 47-64.
      
      
      1. Marans, R. W., & Rodgers, W. L. (1975).Towards an understanding of community satisfaction. In A Howley and V Rock (Eds), Metropolitan America in contemporary perspective. (pp.299-352). New York: Halsted Press
      
      
      2. Morris, E., & winter, M. (1997). Housing, family and society St. Paul, Minn: Department of Design, Housing and Appear. (2th Ed.). Minnesota: University of Minnesota.
      
      
      3. Pacione, M., (2003). Urban Environmental Quality and Human Wellbeing-A Social Geographical Perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 19–30.
      
      
      4. Struyk, R., & Turner, M. (1986).Finance and Housing Quality in Two Developing Countries, Korea and the Philippines.  New York: University Press of America.
         
         
         1. Ward, L. M.,& Russell, J. A. (1981). The Psychological Representation of Molar Physical environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24,221-233.