Quality of Life in Urban Areas (Case study: District 11 of Tehran Municipality)

Introduction   Urban quality of life and promotion of citizen satisfaction about their living environment have attracted the attention of many urban planners and policy makers. The quality of life has to kinds of natural and human dimensions. The natural environment of a city in the form of physical setting, economic, cultural and social structures can affect the promotion of the quality of life. Attendance at religious places or membership in trade unions can be different in different climatic regions. Quality of life is the main goal prepared by planners. Issues and needs of citizens in the urban neighborhoods faced urban planners and managers with the challenges that mainly as a result of the quality of life. According to Aristotle Mkan‌Hayy, cities are a base for residents to bring happiness and security. In fact, as long as mankind has achieved a kind of peace and relative security in thought and action, cities were formed. Over time with development of the cities, the realization of human ideals such as justice, public relations, law were gradually formed. However, in recent decades, cities with rapid population growth and migration of population are faced with many problems including overcrowding, pollution, pressure on natural resources, unplanned growth of cities, weak sources of income, lack of public transport, lack of opportunities and jobs and health centers, social inequalities. To achieve a suitable environment for the citizens, it is very important to consider the different issues. Given all the problems and difficulties in cities such as improper use and unbalanced distribution of landuses, lack of adequate municipal facilities and so on, it is required to study the nature of socio-cultural, economic and physical quality of urban life. District 11 of Tehran Municipality with 19 neighborhoods in the central part of Tehran is today faced with problems of poor life, including chaotic situation of vulnerable deteriorated areas, no necessary vitality, poor quality of education and health, low income level of residents, poor employment. Accordingly, old infrastructure, shortcomings and in plans of street network, intersections and squares, poor public green space, poor public transportation, low education and general welfare,  and environmental pollution are among the most important problems in the city. The study for evaluation of quality of life is considered as an approach that represents the benefits of citizens in the district 11 of Tehran Municipality. Thus, appropriate solutions can be achieved by improving the quality of life in the region. Methodology This cross-sectional study has employed survey methods for collecting library data and a particular questionnaire. Up to 400 residents of district 11 in Tehran have been selected as the samples of the research. We have used SPSS and Excel to analyze data and information. We have applied one-sample t-test to test the research hypothesis. District 11 of Tehran, with an area of 1,200 hectares, has  a population of about 288 thousand people in central part of Tehran metropolitan area. Results and discussion Analysis of the questionnaires has indicated that satisfaction of the residents in the district mainly show lower-middle quality of life. The greatest satisfaction is in terms of socio-cultural citizens (security, Partnership, health, leisure, vitality) and the lowest is in terms of the physical (housing quality, installations and infrastructure, educational access and treatment).   Conclusion   The results highlight that the residents of District 11 of Tehran Municipality have low satisfaction level in terms of quality of life measures (in physical, economic, socio-cultural aspects). A significant portion of the residents of the district is poor economic situation of people. The results of the analysis have also indicated that, in its economic dimension, the quality of the urban environment show 58 percent relative to the average state. Finally, we can conclude that the highest satisfaction of spaces and buildings (building density, building aesthetics, building size), business services (shopping centers, shops), security and social relations ( neighborhood safety, neighborhood vitality and connect with neighbors) and the size and housing (size of the room, the home facilities and climatic conditions of household) suffer from low satisfaction with the organization of access and transport, entertainment services, life  and the cost of housing. Therefore, the greatest satisfaction is the socio-cultural aspects of the citizens and the lowest is in terms of the physical. Eightfold increase in applications services, restrictions in construction industry jobs and plants in the neighborhoods.