رویکردهای انطباق‌محور و کارکرد‌محور ارزیابی اجرا در برنامهریزی کاربری زمین، موردپژوهی: ارزیابی انطباق‌محور در شهر لواسان
Conformance-based and Performance-based Approaches of Implementation Evaluation in Land-use Planning , Case Study: Conformance-based Evaluation in City of Lavasan
اشتراک گذاری
اشتراک در شبکه های اجتماعی :
گزارش خطا
برنامه های توسعه شهری در راستای ایجاد نظم در شهرها و پاسخگویی به نیازهای روزافزون جمعیت شهری از سوی برنامه ریزان شهری تهیه میشوند و دارای ویژگی ها و اهداف متفاوتی هستند. اغلب این برنامه ها، بدون توجه به اهداف و نتایج برنامه های پیشین تدوین میشوند و به ارزیابی میزان موفقیت برنامه های گذشته نمیپردازند. ارزیابی اجرای برنامه های توسعه شهری میتواند موجبات تهیه برنامه هایی کارآمد و پاسخگو را فراهم آورد. در این بین، برنامه کاربری زمین که تاثیر قابل توجهی بر منافع افراد دارد، بیش از همه نیازمند ارزیابی است.
یکی از روشهای ارزیابی اجرای برنامه ها، سنجش میزان انطباق میان برنامه پیشنهادی و شرایط کنونی شهر است. این تحقیق با بهره گیری از این رویکرد با اتکا بر سه شاخص کاربری، سطح اشغال و تراکم به ارزیابی اجرای برنامه کاربری زمین شهر لواسان پرداخته است تا مغایرتهای بروزیافته در سطح شهر را تشخیص دهد. یافته های تحقیق نشان میدهد که 54 درصد از سطح شهر دارای مغایرت در کاربری هستند. علاوه براین، 5 درصد از قطعات نیز دارای مغایرت در سطح اشغال و تراکم هستند. مهمترین دلایل بروز این مغایرتها را میتوان نظارت ناکافی بر روند تغییر کاربری اراضی، عدم توجه شهروندان و مسئولان به منافع عمومی و ابهامات و خلاءهای موجود در برنامه پیشنهادی دانست.
Planning of cities in order to respond to considerable needs of urban population, is one of the most important concerns of urban managers and authorities. Urban development plans which have been provided to respond to these issues, have different objectives and characteristics. Hence different plans are developed to plan and organize cities. Most of these plans are being prepared without consideration of outcomes and results of previous plans. They don't evaluate and measure the success of previous plans in improving the condition of city. Evaluation enhances planning practice. It legitimizes planning before citizens, providing sustained appraisals on planning products, procedures and results. Implementation evaluation of urban development plans can result in creating efficient and responding plans. Many regulatory-oriented planning systems employ comprehensive land-use plans as a central tool for carrying out planning policies. Aside from the vast effort invested in planning, land-use plans have a direct economic effect on land value and property rights. So, Land-use plan as a part of urban development plan which has considerable influence on public and private interest, needs to be evaluated more than other parts.
Implementation evaluation of plans is performed based on three main approaches: Conformance-based, Performance-based and synthesis approaches. Conformance-based evaluation means judging the success or failure of planning using one or two criteria - the conformance degree between the outcomes on the ground and the plan proposals and the promotion of planning goals and objectives through the available implementation instruments-. Performance-based evaluation follows from defining a plan as a decision framework. After distinguishing between project plans and strategic plans and concluding that the conformance criterion is useful only in the evaluation of the former, performance-based approach develops the performance criterion to assess strategic plans. In some few studies on plan implementation, researchers explore the potentialities of an integrated use of both approaches and their simultaneous application for comparative purposes. These researchers have tried to create new methods based on the strengths of those approaches.
This study wants to measure the conformance between proposed plan and current condition of city and to evaluate the implementation of land-use plan of Lavasan with regards to this. The evaluation is based on three factors: land-use, density and floor area ratio. Non- conformances in land-use has been grouped in 12 main groups. Results show that 54 percent of city area has non -conformance in land -use which 12 percent of these non -conformances are basic and they represent disobedience from proposed plan. Moreover, 7 percent of city area is allocated to lots with non-conformance in floor area ratio and 9 percent of city area is allocated to lots with non -conformance in density. 5 percent of lots have both non - conformances - floor area ratio and density- . Most of non- conformances has been occurred in central neighborhoods of city.
In order to reduce these non-conformances, it is useful to consider specific situation of Lavasan in providing new plans. Control and supervision of plan implementation is also helpful for improving plan's degree of success.
(444.7 کیلوبایت)
دانلود مقاله
مشخصات مقاله
زبردست، اسفندیار، (1388)، روشهای ارزیابی در شهرسازی، جزوه درس روشهای برنامهریزی شهری.
عبدی دانشپور، زهره، (1390)، درآمدی بر نظریه های برنامه ریزی با تاکید ویژه بر برنامه ریزی شهری، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران.
وزارت راه و شهرسازی (مهندسین مشاور آمایش محیط)، (1-1386)، طرح تفصیلی شهر لواسان ،گزارش شناخت.
وزارت راه و شهرسازی (مهندسین مشاور آمایش محیط)، (2-1386)، طرح تفصیلی شهر لواسان، پیشنهادات.
وزارت راه و شهرسازی (مهندسین مشاور آمایش محیط)، (3-1386)، طرح تفصیلی شهر لواسان، ضوابط و مقررات مصوب.
وزارت راه و شهرسازی (مهندسین مشاور همکار پارس بوم) ، (1393)، طرح جامع جدید شهر لواسان، خلاصه گزارش شناخت.
Alexander, Ernest. R, Faludi, Andreas,(1989), Planning and plan implementation :notes on evaluation criteria, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 16,(127-140).
Alexander, Ernest. R, (2006a), Evolution and status: Where is planning evaluation today and how did it get here?, In Evaluation in planning: evolution and prospects, Alexander, Ernest. R, England:Ashgate.
Alexander, Ernest. R, (2006b), Problems and prospects: Dilemmas in evaluation and directions for the future, In Evaluation in planning: evolution and prospects, Alexander, Ernest. R, England:Ashgate.
Alterman, Rachelle, Hill, Morris, (1978), Implementation of urban land use plans, AIP Journal, Journal of American Institute of Planners, No.33, (274-285).
Baer, William C. , (1997), General plan evaluation criteria: An approach to better plans, Journal of American Planning Association, Vol.63, No.3, (329-344).
Brody, Samuel et al., (2005), Does planning work? Testing the implementation of local environmental planning in Florida, Journal of American Planning Association, Vol.71, No.2, (159-175).
Calkins, H.W. , (1979), The planning monitor: an accountability theory of plan evaluation, Environment and planning A, Vol.11, (745-758).
Chapin, Timothy et al., (2008), A parcel-based GIS method for evaluating conformance of local land use planning with a state mandate to reduce exposure to hurricane flooding, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 35,(261-279).
De Lange, M, Mastop, H, Spit, T, (1997), Performance of national policies, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 24,(845-858).
Driessen, P, (1997), Performance and implementation institutions in rural land development, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 24,(859-869).
Faludi, Andreas, (2000), The performance of spatial planning, Journal of Planning Practice & Research, Vol. 15, no.4, (299-318).
Laurian, Lucie et al., (2004), Evaluating plan implementation: A conformance-based methodology, Journal of American Planning Association, Vol.70, No.4, (471-480).
Laurian, Lucie et al., (2004), What drives plan implementation? Plans, Planning agencies and Developers, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol.47, No.4, (555-577).
Laurian, Lucie et al., (2010), Evaluating the outcomes of plans:theory, practice, and methodology, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 37,(740-757).
Lichefield, Nathaniel , Prat, Anna, (1998), Linking ex ante and ex post evaluation in british town planning, In Evaluation in planning, Lichefield, Nathaniel, England:Springer..
Loh, Carolyn. G. (2011), Assessing and Interpreting Non-conformance in Land-use Planning Implementation, Journal of Planning Practice & Research, Vol. 26, (271-287).
Mastop, Hans, Faludi, Andreas, (1997), Evaluation of strategic plans: the performance principle, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 24,(815-832).
Mastop, Hans, (1997), Performance in Dutch spatial planning:an introduction, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 24,(807-813).
Mastop, Hans, Needham, Barrie, (1997), Performance in spatial planning: the state of the art, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 24,(881-888).
Needham, Barrie et al., (1997), Strategies for improving the performance of planning: some empirical research, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 24,(871-880).
Oliveira, Vitor, Pinho, Paulo, (2010), Evaluation in urban planning: Advances and Prospects, Journal of Planning Literature, Vol.24, No.4, (343-361).
Oliveira, Vitor, Pinho, Paulo, (2010), Measuring success in planning: Developing and testing a methodology for planning evaluation, Journal of TPR, Vol.81, No.3, (307-331).
Oliveira, Vitor, Pinho, Paulo, (2009), Evaluating plans, Processes and results, Journal of Planning Theory and Practice, Vol.10, No.1, (35-63).
Rivolin, Umberto Janin, (2008), Conforming and performing planning systems in Europe:an unbearable cohabitation, Journal of Planning, Practice and Research, Vol.23, No.2, (167-186).
Van Damme,L et al., (1997), Improving the performance of local land use plans, Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, volume 24,(833-844).
Talen, Emily, (1996), Do plans get implemented? Areview of evaluation in planning, Journal of Planning Literature, Vol.10, No.3, (248-256).
Talen, Emily, (1996), After the plans: Methods to evaluate the implementation success of plans, Journal of Planning Education and Research, No.16, (79-91).
مسابقات
جوایز
نشریات
