Analyzing the Role of Behavior Patterns in the Design of Urban Space Case example: Azadi Street (Gohardasht), Karaj

Urban spaces have long been a platform for people's social interactions. Different behaviors are formed in the urban space, and the physical characteristics of the space, such as the body, as well as the qualitative characteristics of the space (the semantic dimension of the urban space) are influential in the formation of these activities. The lack of attention to behavioral and human issues in the design of the urban space of Gohardasht (Azadi) Street in Karaj is the main concern of this research. In this article, the researchers are looking to investigate the role of behavioral patterns in the environment. In terms of purpose and analysis, this research is in the category of applied research, and in terms of the method of collecting information, it is in the category of descriptive-analytical and survey research. The variables of the article include physical-physical factors, social factors, environmental factors, and activity and economic factors. In order to collect information in the theoretical parts of the urban space and behavioral patterns, library studies and references to reliable websites, related articles have been used, and in order to know and examine the scope of the study by referring to the relevant organizations and departments, GIS maps and information The required data has been collected and finally, field methods, questionnaire preparation and direct observation have been used in order to accurately and purposefully know the scope of the study as well as to answer the research questions and hypotheses. The number of questionnaires extracted in this article is equal to 193 based on Cochran's formula, and the sampling method is stratified sampling due to separate sections such as residents, users, shopkeepers, etc. In general, the analysis of the questionnaires shows that the overall average of the combination of functional, physical, and environmental indicators is equal to 37.3%, which indicates the inappropriate and weak conditions of the studied indicators in the study area. Also, functional indicators with a satisfaction rate of 40.7%, physical indicators with a satisfaction rate of 38.7%, and environmental indicators with a satisfaction rate of 32.5% have inappropriate conditions in terms of design quality and design principles and criteria.