Implications of density bonus tool for urban planning: relaxing floor area ratio (FAR) regulations in Tehran

Karampour, Katayoun

doi:10.1080/13563475.2020.1802235

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Under such an entrepreneurial urban agenda, planning instruments have experienced a general reframing and contribute to urban inequalities. For example, density bonuses (Karampour, 2021) or floor-area-ratios (Liong et al, 2020) that were established to regulate density to promote public welfare have been used to "facilitate the profitability of real estate projects for developers and local government revenues" (Liong et al, 2020(Liong et al, , p. 1073. Also, the management of design has been attributed to promote neoliberal practices of urban competitiveness (Chen & White, 2021, pp.…”

Section: Embedding Planning Committees Into the Governance Of Vertica...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Negotiating Vertical Urbanization at the Public–Private Nexus: On the Institutional Embeddedness of Planning Committees

Herburger

Hilti²,

Lingg³

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>While the planning and development of dense and high-rise neighborhoods are commonly perceived as primarily technical procedures, the past several decades have highlighted the growing social complexity of these processes. Neighborhood initiatives opposing development, as well as an increasing variety of public and private stakeholders involved in these processes, have led to the continual emergence of organizations that facilitate the production of urban density and verticality. Committees are founded to operate at the nexus of public and private development, while simultaneously promoting urban growth and public interests. Although they often are not formally recognized as political entities, they are constituted by political acts and hence influence planning processes. However, despite all the research into dense and high-rise neighborhood developments, academic interest has so far neglected the role of committees in these processes. This article aims to fill this gap by presenting an analysis of 23 committees engaging with high-rise housing and neighborhood developments in the three German-speaking countries of Austria, Switzerland, and Germany. First, it reveals the heterogeneity of committees, delineating four components for the institutionalization of committees. This is followed by an in-depth analysis of two committees in Austria and Switzerland, to demonstrate how these structural components influence the development of neighborhoods.</p>

show abstract

Section: Embedding Planning Committees Into the Governance Of Vertica...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Negotiating Vertical Urbanization at the Public–Private Nexus: On the Institutional Embeddedness of Planning Committees

Herburger

Hilti²,

Lingg³

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The increasing demand for a public-private partnership for the creation and management of public spaces also stems from the current global direction of municipal budget levels (Németh, 2009(Németh, : 2480. The financial dependence of municipalities on income generated by private developers can lead to planning that is responsive to property market interests rather than the city's strategic needs or the public interest (Katayoun Karampour, 2021). In such cases, urban management of the creation of public spaces, exposed to the private and public sectors negotiations, can often result in private interest prevailing over the public one.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Planning Criteria for Defining Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS)

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research is based on the systematic literature review related to the definition of Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS). POPS arise as a bonus of the urban planning concession resulting from negotiations between private investors and city administration. The question arises whether, during their formation, the urbanistic criteria that ensure public space quality are sufficiently represented, or the superior private interest results in critical urban quality aspects. By comparatively analyzing the definitions’ key features, nine specific POPS aspects have been identified and classified into two categories according to basic criteria: impact on investors and on broader urban contexts. The results show that a group of spatial criteria (usage impact, user’s perception, connectivity, urbanity and socialization) have been neglected or ignored in defining POPS. Current definitions do not consider the importance of POPS influence in a wider urban context and POPS is not, in any way, controlled or connected to the comprehensive process of urban planning, which can lead to a neglect of the fundamental roles and quality of public space. Further studies should focus on analyzing the impact of POPS in a broader urban context as well as defining mandatory urban planning criteria for insuring the quality of public space.

show abstract

“…Soft densification refers to small-scaled and incremental developments on the threshold of formal planning frameworks which are undertaken by individual owners and local developers [23]. The three underlying dimensions of soft densification encompassing its temporality, its politico-governance indeterminacy and its economically driven and speculative nature are all recognisable in Tehran [24,25]. As its main objective, this article aims to explore the intersection between urban social sustainability, place (un)making and (quasi)formal urban planning practices in Tehran.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Interplay between Urban Densification and Place Change in Tehran; Implications for Place-Based Social Sustainability

Dianati

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent scholarship on urban social sustainability has redirected its attention to the role of place-based theories and practices in achieving and sustaining social outcomes. The notion of place and its centrality in everyday life of urban citizens could be used as an anchor point to study urbanisation processes and rapid urban changes. This paper employs a place-based framework of urban social sustainability in parallel to a framework of ‘place transformation’ to examine the consequences of soft densification on place attachment at the neighbourhood level in Tehran, Iran. Through analysing sixteen semi-structured interviews with residents, this paper argues that the temporal element of soft densification makes it a place undermining process, eradicating individual and collective place memory through resetting the time of the place. Moreover, the findings highlighted parallel trajectories in the meanings associated to place by residents which underscore the contradiction between ‘lived space’ and ‘conceived space’. Furthermore, it was found that loss of place attachment due to urban densification commonly leads to passive modes of response such changing lifestyle and daily routines, and voluntary relocating to adapt to the new socio-spatial order.

show abstract

Implications of density bonus tool for urban planning: relaxing floor area ratio (FAR) regulations in Tehran

Cited by 11 publications

References 30 publications

Negotiating Vertical Urbanization at the Public–Private Nexus: On the Institutional Embeddedness of Planning Committees

Negotiating Vertical Urbanization at the Public–Private Nexus: On the Institutional Embeddedness of Planning Committees

Urban Planning Criteria for Defining Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS)

The Interplay between Urban Densification and Place Change in Tehran; Implications for Place-Based Social Sustainability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About