A Reflection on the Aesthetics and Perceptual Implications of Urban Edges: From Movement and Perception to Spatial Identity, A Case Study of the Rey Cement Factory

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

• farhad karimani ¹
• Kiana sharifi ²

¹ Graduated in Urban Planning from the Technical University of Vienna (Austria)

² Graduated in Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

https://doi.org/10.22067/context.2025.93646.1016

Abstract

this research delves into the profound influence of aesthetics in articulating boundaries and transitional spaces within the fragmented micro-zones that lie along the edges of cities. It examines how these aesthetic qualities shape the personal experience of movement through such liminal environments. At the heart of the study lies a central question: in what ways, and through which spatial dimensions, do aesthetic elements inform an individual's perception and lived experience of navigating urban edges?
The case study focuses on the urban edge developed within the grounds of the Rey Cement Factory in Tehran. By engaging in a thorough review of existing theories, scholarly works, and previous studies, the research constructs a conceptual model and theoretical framework for analyzing these complex spatial conditions.
The findings reveal that visual element—such as lighting, color palettes, shifts in elevation, tactile materials, artistic forms, and spatial proportions—can serve as vital mediators among disjointed and ambiguous micro-spaces. These components contribute significantly to feelings of safety, serenity, and belonging, while also leaving a lasting imprint on the emotional and psychological states of individuals within these spaces.
Ultimately, this study emphasizes the transformative power of aesthetic design in redefining marginal urban areas. It suggests that when thoughtfully applied, aesthetic strategies can convert neglected or undefined edges into cohesive, emotionally resonant environments that enrich the experience of urban movement and interaction. As such, the integration of sensory and aesthetic dimensions in urban design is not merely decorative but essential to creating humane, meaningful public realms.

Keywords

• Urban Aesthetics
• Urban Edges
• Personal Experience
• Movement in Space
• Visual Elements

©2025 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)

References

1.Ahmadnia, H., Suleiman, Y. H. (2018). Aesthetics of space organization: Lessons from traditional European cities for today’s urban areas.Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs, 2(1), 38–46. https://doi.org/10.25034/ijcua.2018.3659.

2.Ahmad Nia, H., & Alpar Atun, R. (2016). Aesthetic design thinking model for urban environments: A survey based on a review of the literature. WIT Transactions on Ecology and The Environment, 21 (3), 195–212. https://doi.org/10.1057/udi.2015.25

3.Arriaza, M., Cañas-Ortega, J. F., Cañas-Madueño, J. A., & Avilés, P. (2004). Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69 (1), 115-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10.029

4.Arthur, L. M., Daniel, T. C., & Boster, R. S. (1977). Scenic assessment: an overview. Landscape planning, 4, 109-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3924(77)90014-4

5. Askarzadeh, Z. and Shokuhi Bidhendi, M. S. (2016). Analyzing the Effects of Urban Edge Overlay on Natural Coastal Features in Cities of India. Journal of Art and Civilization of the Orient, 4(13), 33-41. (In Persian)

6.Bahrainy, H,. (1996). Urban Space Analysis. University of Tehran Press, Tehran. (In Persian)

7.Berlint, A., & Alafchi, J. (1998). Zibashenas-e Mohiti. Ziba Shenakht, 16(1), 283–296 . (In Persian)

8.Bostanci, S. H., & Ocakçi, M. (2011). Innovative Approach to Aesthetic Evaluation Based on Entropy. European Planning Studies, 19(4), 705–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2011.548473.

9.Carlson, A. (2013). Environmental aesthetics. In The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics (pp. 485-498). Routledge.

10.Challet, F. (1949). Zibai-shenasi [Aesthetics] (A.-A. Bamdad, Trans.). Tehran: Safi Alishah Press. (In Persian)

11.Dehkhoda, A. A. (1998). Loghatnameh-ye Dehkhoda [Dehkhoda Dictionary]. Tehran: University of Tehran Press. (In Persian)

12.Dutton, D. (2004). Let’s Naturalize Aesthetics. www. aesthetics-online. org/ideas/dutton. html, 3.

13.Ebrahimi-Dehkordi, S. (2020). Naghsh-e Labeh-haye Shahri-ye Ecologic dar Keyfiat-e Fazaye Shahri. Memari Shenasi, 16(3), 200–204. (In Persian).

14.Geisen, T. (2003). Grenzen und Differenz: Soziale und kulturelle Aspekte von Inklusion und Exklusion [Borders and difference: Social and cultural aspects of inclusion and exclusion]. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. (In German).

15.Grütter, J. K. (1987). Ästhetik in der Architektur: Grundlagen der Architektur-Wahrnehmung [Aesthetics in architecture: Fundamentals of architectural perception]. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. (In German)

16.Hatami, S., Mousavi, S. J., & Talischi, G. (2016). Negarash-e Peydarshenasaneh be Barrasi-ye Naghsh-e Marz dar Makanha-ye Tabiei va Makanha-ye Ensan-Sakhteh. Motaleat-e Mohiti Haft Hesar, 4(15), 27–36. (In Persian).

17.Hekkert, P. (2006). Design aesthetics: Principles of pleasure in design. Psychology Science, 48(2), 157–172.

18.Jafari, M. T. (1990). Falsafe-ye honar va ziba’i-shenasi az didgah-e elahi [Philosophy of art and aesthetics from a theistic perspective]. Tehran: Islamic Culture Publications. (In Persian).

19.Janparvar, M. (2017). Negareshi no be motaleʿat-e marzi: Mafaheem, osoul va nazarieha [A new perspective on border studies: Concepts, principles and theories]. Tehran: Iranian Geopolitical Association. (In Persian).

20.Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

21.Kappacher, D. (2008). Grenze und Identität: Zur Funktion sozialer und räumlicher Grenzen [Boundary and identity: On the function of social and spatial boundaries]. Munich: Wilhelm Fink. (In German).

22.Konijnendijk, C. (2018). The forest and the city—the cultural landscape of urban woodland. The forest and the city. Springer Cham. NewYork.

23.Melkeshahi, H. (1988). Translation and commentary on Avicenna’s Al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat. Tehran. Soroush. (In Persian).

24.Mansouri, R. , Habib, F. and Shahcheraghi, A. (2022). Explaining the Conceptual Model based on the Grounded Theory Method Influenced by Environmental Aesthetics in the Genius Loci, and Prioritizing and Weighting its Sub-Indices in the Cultural Works of Contemporary Iranian Architecture. Islamic Art Studies, 19(46), 517-540. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22034/ias.2022.357414.2042.

25.Mansouri, R. , Habib, F. and Shahcheraghi, A. (2022). Validation of a Conceptual Model Influenced by Environmental Aesthetics in the Genius Loci of Cultural Works of Contemporary Iranian Architecture. Islamic Art Studies, 19(47), 579-595. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22034/ias.2022.336102.1923.

26.Mansouri, S. (2010). -. MANZAR, the Scientific Journal of landscape, 2(9), 30-33. (In Persian).

27.Mohazzab Tollab, M. , Karimimoshaver, M. and Sajadzadeh, H. (2018). Attitudes in Urban Landscape Aesthetics. Quarterly Journals of Urban and Regional Development Planning, 3(6), 81-111. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22054/urdp.2020.50220.1190.

28.Mousavi, S. J. , Hatami, S. and Talischi, G. (2019). Boundaries, Places. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 11(25), 189-199. (In Persian).

29.Mesgari, A.A.A., & Saatchi, S. M.  (2014). The Transformation of aesthetics in Hegel’s philosophy of art. Knowledge. Journal of Human Sciences, 69(1), 127-145. (In Persian).

30.Molavi, M. (2005). Tahlil-e Formal-e Fazaye Shahri va Payeh-haye Falsafi-ye An. Honar-ha-ye Ziba, 21(21), 27-34. (In Persian).

31.Naghizadeh, M. (2003). Philosophical foundations of aesthetics in Iranian landscape design. Journal of Environmental Studies, 29(Special Issue), 61–80. (In Persian) https://sid.ir/paper/359294/en.

32.Nasar, J. L. (1994). Urban design aesthetics: The evaluative qualities of building exteriors. Environment and Behavior, 26(3), 377–401.https://doi.org/10.1177/001391659402600305.

33.Pakzad, J. (2016). Mabani-ye Nazari va Farayand-e Tarahi-ye Shahri.Tehran. Entesharat-e Shahidi. (In Persian).

34.Palmer, J. F. (1997). Stability of landscape perceptions in the face of landscape change. Landscape and Urban Planning, 37(1-2), 109-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(96)00375-1.

35.Parsi, D. H. (2002). Shenakht-e Mohtavaye Fazaye Shahri. Honarha-ye Ziba, 11(11). (In Persian).

36.Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. SAGE Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks.

37.Sajjadi, S. J. (1996). Farhang-e ‘Olum-e Falsafi va Kalami. Tehran. Amir Kabir. (In Persian).

38.Shahcheraghi, A., & Bandarabad, A. (2017). Environed in the environment: Application of environmental psychology in architecture and urban planning. Tehran: Jahad-e Daneshgahi Organization. (In Persian).

39.Shahlaei, A., & Mohajeri, M. (2015). In-Between Space: Dialectic of Inside and Outside in Architecture. International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development, 5(3), 27–36.

40.Smout, T. C. (1993). The Highlands and the roots of green consciousness, 1750-1990. Scottish Natural Heritage.

41.Stamps, A. E. (1990). Use of Photographs to Simulate Environments: A Meta-Analysis. Perceptual and Motor Skills - Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71(3), 907-913. https://doi.org/10.2466/PMS.71.7.907-913.

42.Tabnak. (2014). Mahi-giri az Ab-e Alude “Masil” Kenar-e Bozorgrah. (In Persian) https://www.tabnak.ir/fa/news/395698.

43.Tolstoy, L. (1998). What is art? (K. Dehghan, Trans.). Tehran. Amir Kabir.

44.Yarahmadi, S. (2010). Surveying the role of edges in the realization of landscape goals. MANZAR, the Scientific Journal of landscape, 2(11), 30-37. (In Persian).