ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Original Research

Authors

Nazemi   G. (1)
Rezazadeh   R. (2)
Saghatoleslami   A. (*1)
Sarvari   H. (1)






(1) Department of Urban Planning, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran
(2) Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Iran Science and Technology University, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence

Address: Department of Urban planning, Faculty of Architecture and Art, Islamic Azad University of Mashhad, Ostad Yousefi Street,Ghasem Abad, Mashhad, Iran. Postal Code: 9187147578.
Phone: +98 (51) 38423408
Fax: -
Saghatoleslami@mshdiau.ac.ir

Article History

Received:  July  10, 2020
Accepted:  August 8, 2020
ePublished:  December 12, 2020

BRIEF TEXT


The inflexibility and steadiness of the "Master Plan Model" before and after the Islamic revolution in 1979 shows that there is a need to examine the relationship between the planning style and the planning environment.

After seven decades from the approval of the master plan model, the global changes in urban planning have not been able to change Iran's urban planning strategies [Mosavi & Rafieian, 2005]. Except for the structural-strategic design theory, there have been no local and indigenous perspective or theory; and the dominant perspective for urban planning was ordered by the supreme council of the urban development [Habibi et al., 2011]. Clearly, cities are multi-layer, multi-aspect, multi-role, and multi-purpose phenomena [Firouzi et al., 2016]. Daneshpour et al. (2017) believe the current theories from other countries are not compatible with Iran's planning environment. According to the majority of the recent studies [Habibi et al., 2011; Seyed-al hoseini et al., 2012; Malekpour et al., 2012; Daneshvar & Bandarabad, 2013], structural-strategic plans do not deserve the same purpose and all other plans change back into the master plan framework [Sarrafi et al., 2014].

This study aimed to evaluate the application of the "Master Plan Model" in the urban planning environment of Iran.

The current research is a descriptive-analytical study.

Research society, place and time are not reported.

The sampling method and number are not reported.

Used devices and materials are not reported.

According to the planning literature, planning theories can be classified into three main types of "planning theories" (how to plan), "theory in planning" (those theories were used while planning depending on the aims and principles), and "theories about planning". The master plan model is in the first group that is used for organizing the planning. Various aspects of planning should be taken into consideration while planning or preparing a proper pattern for planning (Table 1).The master plan model is a type of step by step planning since it just take physical planning into consideration and ignores development planning (economic, social, cultural, sanitation, welfare, occupation and so on). According to the results, the influential factors in the planning environment are the planning environment factors (Table 1). Planning environment factors: these factors provide an overall image of the planning environment Planning environment factors: the aim is to measure these factors to evaluate planning in three main aspects of "the overall attitude toward planning", "the evaluation of planning", and "aims and actions of planning" (Table 3).

In relation to the urban planning structure, the system has imbalanced unbounded social policies [Qarakhani, 2017] that have a totalitarian, centralist, and hierarchical approach [Sarvar et al., 2015; Sarrafi et al., 2014, and Elyazadeh Moghaddam, 2011]. Planning is linear, the state is the main power [Sarrafi et al., 2014], and there is a reductionist attitude [Pour Ahmad et al., 2006].

There is no suggestion reported.

There is no limitation reported.

Evaluating the planning style, it is clear that planning compatible with Iran's planning environment tends to "practical planning with reviewing time frames", "wise comprehensive planning", and normative planning. The results of the current research show that Iran planning environment is incompatible with "Master Plan Model". "Wise comprehensive planning" can be a proper planning style for Iran's planning environment.

The authors thank the staff particularly the academics of the urban planning department at Azad University of Mashhad.

None.

None.

This paper is extracted from the first author's Ph.D. thesis "Formulation of urban planning theory in interaction with elements of the formal structure of the Iranian planning environment"

TABLES and CHARTS

Show attach file


CITIATION LINKS

[1]Abbaszadegan M, Razavi H (2006). Adopting a new approach to urban development plans design-based planning. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba. (28):15-22. [Persian]
[2]Ajlali Parviz, Rafieian M, Asgari A (2017). Planning theories: Traditional and new perspectives. Tehran: Aghah Publication. [Persian]
[3]Allmendinger P (2008). Planning theory. Bahman Teymouri E. translator. Tehran: Azarakhash Publication. [Persian]
[4]Barati N (2006). Challenges have to be faced in the context of urbanism in Iran at the beginning of the 21th century. Bagh- E Nazar. 3(6):5-29. [Persian]
[5]Daneshpour A, Behzadfar M, Burkpour N, Sharafi M (2017). Participatory planning environment: A conceptual model for analysis of effective factors in citizen participation in planning. Letter of Architecture and Urban Development. 9(18):23-43. [Persian]
[6]Daneshvar M, Bandarabad A (2013). studying about adaptation new master plan with specifications of structural strategic plan, case study: Mashhad’s comprehensives plan. Hoviatshahr. 7(14):83-92. [Persian]
[7]Elyaszadeh Moghaddam N (2011). Surveying and feasibility of replacement of structural-strategic model with urban comprehensive planning model in Iran. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development. 4(6):35-48. [Persian]
[8]Estelaji A (2009). Comprehensive planning land preparation with emphasis approach systematic. Geography. 3(10):71-87. [Persian]
[9]Fainstein S, DeFilippis J (2012). Readings in planning theory. 4th ed Edition. New York: Wiley Publiction.
[10]Faludi A (1970). The planning environment and the meaning of planning. Regional Studies. 4(1):1-9.
[11]Faludi A (1973). Planning theory. 1st ed. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
[12]Firozi MA, Sajjadian N, Alizade H (2016). Prioritizing the application of non-euclidean planning theory of John friedman in Iranian urban planning. Geographical Space Journal. 16(53):1-21. [Persian]
[13]Ghavam A, Malmir M (2015). An analytical framework for study of nation-state cleavage: Modeling and pattering of relations between state and society. Research Letter of Political Science. 10(1):157-197. [Persian]
[14]Habibi K, BehzadFar M, Meshkini A, Alizadeh H, Mekhi W (2011). Evaluating the impacts of urban development plans on deconstruction and quality improvement of ancient Iranian space. Islamic Iranian Quarterly. 1(4):15-28. [Persian]
[15]Habibi M, Tahsildar M, PourMohammad Reza N (2011). A description of the principles and principles of indigenous urban planning in relation to contemporary urban theories. Housing and Rural Environment. 30(135):3-22. [Persian]
[16]Hashemi Toghr oljerdi SM (2016). Assessment and criticism of the decisions of the supreme council for urbanism and architecture about Islamic identity of urbanism and Iranian architecture. Iran University of Science & Technology. 4(3):21-40. [Persian]
[17]Husseinzadeh Dalir K, Pourmohammadi MR, Soltani A (2011). Investigating the influencing factors on the inefficiency of Iranian master plans case study: Tabriz master plans). Geography and Planning .15(31):131-151. [Persian]
[18]Husseinzadeh Dalir K, SadrMousavi M, HeydariChinay R, Rezatabe K (2012). An introduction to the new approach of urban development strategy [CDS] on the urban planning process with emphasis on the challenges of master plans in Iran. Geographical Space Journal. 11(36):173-210. [Persian]
[19]Kazemian G, Jalili M (2015). Key stakeholders power analysis of policy making process in Tehran’s strategic-structural plan (1999-2011). Journal of Architecture and Urban Plannig. 8(15)139-158. [Persian]
[20]Majedi H (2013). Structural-Strategic planning theory. Hoviatshahr. 6(11):17-26. [Persian]
[21]Malekpour B, Alimohammadi M, Katoozian S (2012). The proposed outline issues in strategic planning for urban revitalization and comparative comparison the theoretical framework and its usage requirements for Tehran strategic-structural Planning. Haft Shahr. 3(41-42):36-57. [Persian]
[22]Mashhodi S (2007). The bases of urban smooth plans. 2nd ed. Tehran: Pardazesh va Barnamerizi Shahri Company Publication. [Persian]
[23]Moghimi A (2015). Future epistemology of theoretical approaches to urban planning, architecture and building industry. Urban and Rural Management. 14(38):75-104. [Persian]
[24]Morsali F, Ashraf Nazari A (2016). Emerging social gaps and analyzing social cohesion in Iran: Analyzing the goals of the document of Iran's Vision on 2026. The 5th Iranian Islamic Model of Progress Conference: Basic Pattern of Progress. 2016, 18-19 May: Tehran, pp. 1-20 [Persian]
[25]Mortazavi Hashtrodi M, Moradi Kopaei A (2019). Social gaps in Iran and its impact on political survival of the islamic republic of Iran 1979-2002. The 6th National Conference on Sustainable Development in Educational and Psychological Sciences, Social and Cultural Studies. 2018, 23 Arpil: Tehran, pp. 1-20 [Persian]
[26]Mosavi A, Rafieian M (2005). Evaluation of the feasibility of comprehensive and detailed plans of East Azarbaijan cities. Journal of Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Tabriz. 17:177-202. [Persian]
[27]Mosavi MN, Modiri M, Kohaki F (2017). Determining Iranian islamic influential factors and indicators in the balanced development of Khorasan Razavi province using MicMac software. Urban and Rural Management. 15(45):7-30. [Persian]
[28]Mowlaei M, Rahimirad Z (2018). The study of poverty among Iran's urban households in five economic development plans: 1989-2015. The Economic Reseach. 18(3):167-192. [Persian]
[29]Naghizade M (2011). A reflection on what islamic city is. Iranian Islamic city. 1(1):1-14. [Persian]
[30]Nasri G, Morsali F (2019). New social cleavages and political legitimacy: Case study of Iran from 2017-2027. Contemporary Political Studies. 10(1):81-100. [Persian]
[31]Nemati M, Damanbagh S, Sajadian N (2019). Analysis of the digital divide among socioeconomic groups The cases of citizens of Kianpars, Golestan and Ameri districts in Ahvaz. Journal of Geography and Environmental Studies. 7(28):7-18. [Persian]
[32]Pour Ahmad A, Hataminejad H, Hosseini H (2006). Pathology of urban development plans in Iran. Geographical Research. 38(58):167-180. [Persian]
[33]Qarakhani M (2017). Social policy in Iran: The gap between the state and the nation. Social Sciences. 23(75):93-118. [Persian]
[34]Sarrafi M, Tavakkolinia J, Chamani Moghaddam M (2014). Planners’ position in the Iranian urban planning process. Motaleate Shahri. 3(12):19-32. [Persian]
[35]Sarvar R, Sharif Jahed S, Tavakkolan A (2015). Ranking of Tehran urban development plans based on planning principles. Geography. 13(46):155-179. [Persian]
[36]Seyed- al hoseini S, Habib F, Majedi H (2012). Application of design-based planning as interactional approach in macro and micro scale plans. Bagh- E Nazar. 9(22):45-54. [Persian]
[37]Shafie Dastjerdy M (2013). Renovation of deteriorated areas and the necessity of reorientation in preparation and execution of master and detailed plans a case study: The master and detailed plan of Isfahan city. The Bagh- E Nazar. 10(24):91-104. [Persian]
[38]ShakouriAsl S, Rafieian M (2016). Usage of spatial decision support systems in urban planning. Hoviatshahr. 9(24):35-42. [Persian]
[39]Zangi Abadi A, Abdullahi M, Salek Ghahforkhi R, Qasemzadeh B (2013). Evaluation of factors influencing the implementation of urban master plans in Iran and there challenges case study: Historical-cultural axis of district 6 of Tabriz]. Urban Planning and Research. 5(18):41-58. [Persian]