اجتماعات محصور دروازه دار: مسائل و راهکارها، نمونه موردی: اجتماع محصور دریاکنار

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجو دکتری شهرسازی، پژوهشگر فرهنگ هنر و معماری جهاد دانشگاهی، تهران، ایران.

2 دانشیار گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده هنرو معماری؛ دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران.

3 استادیار پژوهش جهاد دانشگاهی، عضو گروه پژوهشی برنامه ریزی شهری، تهران، ایران.

4 دانشیار پژوهشکده فرهنگ، هنر و معماری، جهاد دانشگاهی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

اجتماعات محصور را می توان فضاهای سکونتی دانست که حصارها و درواز ههایی، دسترسی غیرساکنان به آن ها را محدود میکند. این اجتماعات اگر چه با هدف دستیابی به امنیت، ایمنی، حریم خصوصی، تشخص و سبک خاص زندگی به وجود می آیند، اما در دیدی جامع نگرتر معلول جهانی شدن شیوه زندگی، مشکلات اجتماعی، جرم و بی نظمی عمومی هستند. از دهه 1970 تاکنون، دنیا شاهد شکل گیری هر چه گسترده تر اجتماعات محصور در کشورهای کمتر و بیشتر توسعه یافته است. در ایران نیز این اجتماعات از دهه 1340 و در ناحیه ساحلی دریای مازندران به علت گرایش ساکنین مرفه تهران بهسکونت موقت در نواحی خوش آب و هوای شمال کشور به وجود آمدند و به سرعت ازدیاد یافتند. محصور بودن این اجتماع، نوعی جدایی فضایی میان ساکنین این اجتماعات و ساکنین اطراف پدید آورده است. علاوه بر این محصور شدن، تغییراتی را در زمینه قیمت زمین و سوداگری املاک پدید  آورده و همچنین منجر به ایجاد و ساخت اجتماعات محصور بسیاری در اطراف این اجتماع محصور شده است. از اینرو، محیط برنامه ریزی شامل محیط درونی این اجتماعات و محیط بیرونی آن ها بوده است. بررسی این محیط دوگانه، فن و روشی را م یطلبد که جامع بوده و قابلیت تحلیل محیط درونی و بیرونی را به طور همزمان دارا باشد. از این رو در این مقاله از مدل بهبودیافته سوات برای بررسی استفاده شده است. از مهم ترین راهبردهای این مقاله می توان به بازنگری در ضوابط و مقررات مرتبط با محصور شدن به عنوان یکی از  اشکال توسعه سکونتگاه ها، حذف عاملین متعدد تصمیم گیری و ایجاد یک نهاد متمرکز در امور اجتماعات محصور، استفاده از پتانسیل های فضایی موجود برای برقراری ارتباط میان ساکنان درونی و پیرامونی و توقف توسعه قار چگونه و خارج از کنترل اجتماعات محصور با جهت دهی به تمایلات سرمایه گذاری در محدوده اشاره کرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Gated Communities: Problems and Solutions, Case Study: Darya-Kenar Gated Community

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sara Kalantari 1
  • Mojtaba Rafieian 2
  • Aref Aghasafari 3
  • Hossein Kalantari 4
1 Ph.D. Student in the Institute of Culture, Arts and Architecture of ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Professor of Urban Planning, Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Arts, University of Tarbiat Modares, Tehran, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor of Academic Center for Education, Culture & Research (ACECR), Tehran, Iran.
4 Associate Professor of Department of Architecture and Landscape Research Institute of Culture, Art & Architecture, Academic Center for Education, Culture & Research (ACECR), Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The Gated Communities are being assumed as Residential Territories, in which fences and gates restrict accessibility for the non-residents to such environments. These areas are being under control by a variety of security systems and instruments. Such territories could be established in small or large areas for a permanent or non-permanent residence. Furthermore, the burden of management in gated communities could be in the hands of private or public gatherings. However interior management of the facilities in the Gated territories by the residents is the specific characteristic in most of these communities. Since 1970, the universe has been encountered with the wider formation of Gated Communities all over the developed and undeveloped countries. In the northern province of Iran Mazandaran, due to the impressive tendency of the affluent residents of Tehran for lodging and temporary residence specially in coastal areas, such Gated Communities have been founded in the fortieth decade (1340) and rapidly developed. Darya-Kenar has been evaluated as an important case study for the mentioned Gated Communities located in coastal areas. Meanwhile, a form of environmental segregation between the residents and people of the surrounded areas has been appeared. Moreover, based on this segregation, the land price has encountered with some high levels of changes and caused an especial land speculation. According to the rise of this phenomenon, many gated communities have been constructed, and because of existence in the Babolsar city environs, and in the lack of clear legislations’ existence, a huge number of deficiencies and problems have been appeared. Due to these issues, a comprehensive approach or special procedure is required for coincident evaluation of interior and exterior environment. In this article, the improved SWOT method has been applied for the evaluations. Some of the important strategies in this article include: A revision in the legislations about surrounding rules and instructions as a way of settlement development configuration; elimination of multi decisional administrations and creation of a concentrated responsible unit; applying existed spatial potentials to set a connection between internal; and external residences (to prevent of uncontrolled development of gated communities according to
increase of the investment attractions). Initially it is necessary to identify the position of Gated Communities in the integrated Coastal zone management; moreover, changing the land use of agricultural territories in coastal areas must be prevented in coordination with  local organizations, and also occupying the periphery of the coasts should be prohibited and an appropriate access of people be provided. For eliminating of the problems in the Darya-Kenar Gated Community, a comprehensive development document has to be proved to change the development capacity into an appropriate reduction of shortages in this community. The Correction of legal resources based on the revision in residential community development regulations and against the occupation of coastal peripheries and approving new laws related with social development can have an appropriate influence in prevention of future social problems. Legitimating of the Darya-Kenar Gated Community and withdrawal of this residential complex from BABOLSAR City’s periphery and solving the claims with the Constructor & developer firm in courts can effect on the reduction of numerous occurred problems. Abundant deficiencies at the present situation of the Darya- Kenar Gated Community during our own time, is emanating from fever of land trade, lack of public facilities, absence of comprehensive systematic statistical regulations, none distinguished management structure, multi and parallel decisions units, and etc. It will be mentioned that, based on the following strategies a proper confrontation with these kinds of deficiencies occurs: An appropriate attendance and participation of residents in exploitation and maintenance of Gated Community in some internal management systems. Census Population and habitation based on economic, social, physical configuration of gated communities in correlation with its function. The amendment of multi decisions and parallel units and founding a concentrated and intensified decision about the gated communities to correct and vanish the influences emanating from such decision units. Configuring a follow up unit in order to recognition and acquiring necessary documents. Legitimating the kind of operating and constructional activities based on the creation of legal suitable resources. Necessitating the urban government specifically in appropriate applying of coastal integrated management and development system and revision in residential complex construction regulations, and approving new laws based on the especial type of such gated communities. Revision in the approach and method and structure of gated community management with the aim of elimination of existent legal deficiencies and obstacles. And also managing the relationship in accordance with other urban and rural communities.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Gated Communities
  • Social Inclusion
  • Spatial Inclusion
  • Improved SWOT Method
  • Strategies
Akbari, R., Ghaderian, M., & Montazeri, M. (2015). The Query Around Efficiency of SWOT Technique. Hoviat Shahr, 22, 87-98.
Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2004). Fortress UK? Gated Communities, the Spatial Revolt of the Elites and Time–space Trajectories of Segregation. Housing Studies, 19(6), 875-892.
Atkinson, R., Flint, J., Blandy, S., & Lister, D. (2004). Gated Communities in England. Final Report of the Gated Communities in England ‘New Horizons’ Project. University of Glasgow, Sheffield Hallam University.
Bible, D. S., & Hsieh, C. (2001). Gated Communities and Residential Property Values. Appraisal Journal, 140–46.
Blakely, E. J., & Snyder, M. G. (1997). Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States. Washington: The Brooking Institution.
Blandy, S. (2006). Gated Communities in England: Historical Perspectives and Current Developments. Geo Journal, 66, 15-26.
Blinnikov, M., Shanin, A., Sobolev, N., & Volkova, L. (2006). Gated Communities of the Moscow Green Belt: Newly Segregated Landscapes and the Suburban Russian Environment. Geo Journal, 66, 65-81.
Caldeira, T. P. (2000). City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in Sao Paulo. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Connell, J. (1999). Beyond Manila: Walls, Malls and Private Space. Environment and Planning, 31, 417-439.
Coy, M. (2006). Gated Communities and Urban Fragmentation in Latin America: the Brazilian Experience. Geo Journal, 66, 121–132.
EDGÜ, E., & CİMŞİT, F. (2011). Island Living as a Gated Community: Place Attachment in an Isolated Environment. ITU Journal of Faculty of Architecture, 8, 156-177.
Giddens, A. (2009). The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. (Manuchehr Sabouri,Trans.) Tehran: Shiraze.
Glasze, G. (2003). Private Neighbourhoods as Club Economies and Shareholder Democracies. BelGeo (Privatisation of Urban Spaces in Contemporary European Cities), 1, 87-98.
Glasze, G., & Alkhayaal, A. (2002). Gated Housing Estates in the Arab World: Case Studies in Lebanon and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 29, 321-326.
Jurgens, U., & Gnad, M. (2002). Gated Communities in South Africa- experiences from Johnnesburg. Environment and Planning B. Planning and Design, 29(3), 337-355.
Khorshid, S., & Ranjbar, R. (2010). Strategic Analysis, Compilation and Selection Strategy based on SWOT Matrix and Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision Making Techniques. Journal of Industrial Management, 12(5), 19-40.
Kurttilaa, M., Pesonena, M., & Kangasb, J. (2000). Utilizing the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in SWOT Analysis — A Hybrid Method and its Application to a Forest-certification Case. Forest Policy and Economics, 1(1), 41–52.
LaCour-Little, M., & Malpezzi, S. (2001). Gated Communities and Property Values. Washington, DC: National Association of Home Builder.
Landman, K., & Ntombela, N. (2006). Opening up Spaces for the Poor in Urban Form: Trends, Challenges and their Implications for Access to Urban Land. Urban Land Seminar. Muldersdrift, South Africa: CSIR Built Environment.
Le Goix, R. (2005). Gated Communities: Sprawl and Social Segregation in Southern California. Housing Studies, 20(2).
Leisch, H. (2002). Gated Communities in Indonesia. Cities, 19(5), 341-350.
Low, S. (2003). Behind the Gated: Life, Security, and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America. New York: Routledge.
Low, S., Donovan, G. T., & Gieseking, J. (2012). Shoestring Democracy: Gated Condominiums and Market-Rate Cooperatives in New York. Journal of Urban Affairs, 34(3), 279–296.
Luymes, D. (1997). The Fortification of Suburbia: Investigating the Rise of Enclave Communities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 39(2-3), 187–203.
Mieszkowski, P., & Mills, E. S. (1993). The Causes of Metropolitan Sunurbanization. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(3), 135-147.
Mittelstead, L. (2003). A Case Study of Gated Communities in Nove Scotia. M.A Dissertation. Dalhouse University.
Morris, A. J. (1994). History of Urban form before the Industrial Revolutions. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.
Raposo, R. (2006). Gated Communities, Commodification and Aestheticization: The Case of the Lisbon Metropolitan Area. Geo Journal, 43-56.
Rohrbach, K. (2012). Closing the Gates on Democracy. London: London School of Economics and Political Science.
Roitman, S. (2008). Urban Social Group Segregation: The Analysis of a Gated Community in Mendoza. Unpublished PHD Thesis. Argentina: University of London.
Salcedo, R., & Torres, A. (2004). Gated Communities in Santiago: Wall or Frontier. 44 International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28, 27-44.
Smith Bowers, B., & Manzi, T. (2006). Private Security and Public Space: New Approaches to the Theory and Practice of Gated Communities. European Journal of Spatial Development, 22, 1-17.
Teaford, J. C. (1943). The American Suburb: The Basics. (Keramatollah Ziari and Samere Arazesh, Trans.) Tehran: Arad Ketab.
Thuillier, G. (2003). Gated Communities in the Metropolitan Area of Buenos Aires (Argentina): A Chanllenge for Town Planning. Gated Communities: Building Social Division or Safer Communities? Glasgow.
Van Eijk, S. (2014). Walled Cities. Thesis Plan. Delf: Tu Delf.
Vesselinov, E., & Le Goix, R. (2012). From Picket Fences to Iron Gates: Suburbanization and Gated Communities in Phoenix, Las Vegas and Seattle. Geo Journal, 77, 203–222.
Webster, C. (2001). Gated Cities of Tomorrow. Town Planning Review, 72(2), 149-169.
Webster, C. (2002). Property Rights and the Public Realm: Gates, Green Belts, and Gemeinschaft. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 29(3), 397 – 412.