A B S T R A C TThe right to the city in urban development goes beyond the physical form and, at the same time, has a mental and social meaning, which has been popularized in planning theory and urban studies after its proposal by Lefebvre. This theory focuses on the residents and the distinctive features of the space and believes that the right to the city can only be formulated as the right to the evolved and renewed urban life. Based on descriptive-explanatory purpose, this research seeks to spatially analyze the components of right to the city in Bandar Abbas. Therefore, after collecting 77 subjective and objective measures around the research components, the multi-criteria decision-making technique of COPRAS has been exploited to integrate the data in the ArcMap Tools. The findings show that in the current state of urban development in Bandar Abbas, the right to the city in all its aspects, the right to ownership, the right to participation and the right to difference for the residents have been weakened and ignored. A share of up to 20.7% of the city space, which is mainly directed to the wealthy neighborhoods and parts of the central areas of the city, as well as parts of new developments, the right to the city has been more manifested, and in about 19.8% of the city spaces. Mainly applicable to informal settlements and slums of the city, this right has been undermined and ignoredExtended AbstractIntroductionThe right to the city as a physical, mental and social concept seeks a fundamental change in dealing with urban planning and development issues, which has been popularized in planning theory and urban studies after its proposal by Lefebvre. This theory focuses on the residents and the distinctive features of the space and believes that the right to the city can only be formulated as the right to the evolved and renewed urban life. In other words, this theory is a call for the priority of the consumption value of the city against its exchange value, which can only be pursued through the analysis of urban issues in the framework of the "city space" metaphor in the right to the city. It is a fundamental change in the city to create opportunities and space for citizens to meet and achieve their needs. MethodologyFrom a descriptive-explanatory purpose, this research seeks to spatially analyze the explanatory components of urban development in Bandar Abbas from the perspective of the right to the city. In this research, by collecting 77 subjective and objective measures, the COPRAS multi-criteria decision-making technique has been used to integrate data in the ArcMap environment. Citizens are the source of mental data, official documents and maps are the objective data, and experts are the relative weight of the criteria. It should be mentioned that to guarantee the validity of the content based on the guidance of supervisors and advisors, the collective opinion of university experts and the use of similar studies were exerted. The reliability of the questionnaire was also tested by Cronbach's alpha method, and the value of the alpha coefficient (0.866) indicates the high reliability of the questionnaire. Results and discussionThe findings show that in the current state of urban development in Bandar Abbas, the right to the city in all its aspects, including the right to possession, the right to participation, and the right to difference for the residents, has been weakened and ignored. A review of the findings shows that the social function of the city's real estate and land, with a coefficient of 0.136, followed by environmental justice, with a coefficient of 0.131, has the greatest impact on the urban development of Bandar Abbas. On the other hand, socio-spatial justice in the process of taking over space, with a coefficient of 0.106, shows the lowest level of influence in the development of Bandar Abbas compared to other components of the right to the city. The results show that about 20% of the area of Bandar Abbas city is in a very unfavorable situation compared to the components of urban development based on the right to the city approach. These areas of the city are spaces where the residents' right to the city has been severely denied, and they are deprived of taking over the city space.In this regard, the results show that 20.7% of the city's space, mainly focused on wealthy neighborhoods, parts of the city's central areas, and parts of Mehr's housing, has the right to a greater manifestation of the city. The city's space is more in line with its residents. As shown in the spatial distribution of the urban development components of Bandar Abbas based on the right to the city approach, the possession of space through the right to presence, the accessibility of residents to the opportunities and resources of the city, as well as the fair distribution of facilities and services play a decisive role in urban development. However, as the results show, it is the difference that gives meaning to the urban space, and therefore the space must provide the conditions for the city to play a role in meeting the needs of all city groups. The requirement of this role is the central position of the residents in making decisions about the city space, which is a unique way to realize the right to the city. ConclusionAs Brenner states, the right to the city is a call to create "cities for people, not for profit." In this definition, urban development is more than a physical thing and has a mental and social dimension at the same time. In terms of the right to the city, the right to possession, the right to participation, and the right to difference form the trinity of urban development and the guiding light of these three principles that determine the quality of a different city. Unfortunately, urban development in Bandar Abbas has weakened and denied residents' rights. The zoning resulting from the spatial analysis shows that about 19.8% of the city's spaces, which mainly correspond to informal settlements and poor neighborhoods, this right has been weakened and ignored. From the theoretical aspect of the right to the city, this event originates from the space as an economic and physical thing exchanged in the market, not a consumption thing formed by the citizens and in social interaction with the space. FundingThere is no funding support. Authors’ ContributionAuthors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none. Conflict of InterestAuthors declared no conflict of interest. Acknowledgments We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.

Social relationships occur in a certain time and space. In order for neighborly relations and various forms of communal activities to develop, except getting together in a certain location, a meaningful common denominator must exist. Physical and functional division of the space may increase or decrease the opportunities for developing relationships. Design at different scales consists of urban planning, site design and design of details can have a significant influence on people gathering in outdoor spaces. Using the results of a research project entitled "Design of Urban Passages and Social Relationships", the present paper is prepared. The research was based on both theoretical and field studies. The results of theoretical studies was compared with the conditions of Iranian society. Some results of this project about the influence of urban design on social relationships is presented in this paper.

In recent decades, researchers have attempted to solve the ideological crisis of urban planning in the form of “Creativity” discourse under the titles of “Creative City”, “Creative Cultural Jobs”, “Cultural Planning”, “Cultural Territory”, “Cultural Industry”, etc., which have relied on cultured creative middle class (from the cultural urban regeneration point of view. On the other hand, Urban Gentrification policies that have appeared in the struggle over the culture and its meaning on spatial planning are related to this issue. But it seems that the process of a creativity action in the organism of the mankind have not been studied by researchers. Thus, they have used the culture for defining some concepts like Creative City and Creative Class, only as a tool of economic growth, not necessarily for social-economic development of the societies. Whereas the culture is arising from social-historical work of human’s mediated actions it makes everyone aware of his subject in the world. In this study, it is explained that the creativity is a product of thinking and cognition process, all the people are creative, despite of the class they belong to, how environment can restrict or encourage the creativity, and what is the interplay between creativity and urban space. Our hypothesis is that, first of all, the people are creative, and differences are in their attempt, perseverance and quest for trust. Thus we study the relationships between men and the environment, how culture and social dynamism in urban space can be formed during the attempts for solving daily problems by changing mental schemas. When a person discovers a new answer for a problem, he makes a new mental schema and will change his previous mental schema. During this interaction between objectivity and subjectivity, creativity will be arising from the process of internalizing and externalizing, when the discovered mental schema is a new one. It will be proved that a creative urban space is the base of manifestation, appearance and growth of creativity of the people who have rights of expression and action. The motivation of creative action will become permanent when the socially made value of labor of people will be achieved by themselves. With regard to the aim of this paper, our method has oriented to monism approach and dialectics of subjectivity and objectivity of creativity and urban space. Our method has three dimensions: First, system approach and structural analysis; second, linkage analysis of all relations of system and its mechanism of functions; and third, dynamism of processes of system. Thus, process of dialectics between objectivity and subjectivity of creativity and urban space is in the process of social system as a whole. Therefore our first apriority in this method is that human and environment and especially urban environments which are elements of one social system as a whole, and each of them have its own function and complexity in their relationships and have effects the processes and whole dynamism of social system. But stability of dynamism of social system is depend on regulation between functions and serves progress of system. By this approach, we can explain relationship between mankind and his environment in the stable process of “becoming” and dynamism of social system. In this regard it is obvious that our findings in this research might be divided to three issues: One, relation between mankind and process of its creativity. Two, social dynamism of society and public sphere and its effects on characterizing process manifestation of urban space. Three, relation between urban space and creativity. We suggest researchers, who wants to study and work about creative urban space and creativity, refer to social psychology and cognitive psychology papers, because understanding creative city issue depends on understanding relationship between: 1) cognition process, thought and creativity in the perspective of cognitive psychology; 2) existence of democracy, freedom of expression, and freedom of action which is related to the sociology; and 3) spatial order and public space as the most important factor of social growth, production, and development opportunities. Thus, in research and analysis public domain and urban space, not only morphology and form of urban space must be considered but also the contents and characters of social–cultural forces, that reflects historical, cultural, social and physical potentialities of cities should be studied.

Urban space is one of the most attractive subjects in urbanism which attracts attention of scientists. Studying the history, the man’s kind imagination and so its description of space and urban space has been changing enormously. Basically today urban space is known as the social dimension of description of sheer space, although nowadays analysis and space design in cities are more emphasized on aesthetics and formalist and less attention is paid on content. According to scientists ideas this article tries to present theoretical frame work of space and urban spaces emphasized on social and cultural aspects. On the other hand, with the presentation of this theoretical frame work, definition of developed urban space skeleton are excluded from aesthetic point of view based on formalism and included necessary forces for dynamic urban space and life style forces which create urban space based on social movement of society. So, the urban space is described not only by form but content.

Understanding the existing state of a phenomenon depends on a philosophical cognition of its general principles or its status in quo free of its temporal or spatial position, while understanding the evolutional state requires an understanding of the particular conditions as the outcome of a historical trend. A new system developed on both types of cognition, will have coherency, integration, and harmony otherwise it will only lead to confusion. As a crystallization of socio- economic relations, the modern city presents a new form as the socio- economic and cultural relations have changed. Reminiscent of changing conditions and in many aspects contrasting with the historical concepts, the new form has brought about new values and definitions for the city and the citizen: the city is now the setting for worthy and worthless. Understanding the existing and evolutional state of the city demands the transformation of the city- place to the city- time, i.e. a city with an identity, a place full of memories of the past, yet a synthesis of events of today, the incubator for dreams of future. The desire for a civil society is thus best expressed in the civic life born out of subjective and objective interactions. The socio- economic behavior and conventions of the generations who have built the city thus build its identity. The preferences and beliefs of all kind therefore accumulate, synthesize and form the mentality of the city. A living city allows these socio- cultural accumulations to realize in locations. They are in fact the setting for civic sensation and understanding. It is here that people meet, events happen, and the citizen simultaneously assumes the role of the actor and the audience. The street and the square are physical expressions of such a relationship where the actor and the audience become the same. Otherwise, there will be no reference locations in the city, no roots of understanding, and no understanding of the familiar. By creating urban space based on civic life with a sense of belonging gives an identity to the city that accumulates the experiences despite their time or place. Mental cognition now merges with the aesthetic sensation. The city square can accordingly be considered as the real center of the city, where civic life flows. The location is not just an ordinary point on the map, but it is where years of socio- cultural investments are accumulated. It becomes one of the most valuable favorable urban spaces despite its size or age.

During a very long period of time, civil engineers have been the only ones to be designated as the experts for underground space, while the planners and architects were the ones of the development at the surface. Cities worldwide tend to overlook an invaluable asset that lies beneath their surfaces. Most cities and urban regions are unaware of the benefits underground space use has to offer, both for climate inflicted and spatial constraints: In many cities, infrastructure development is being outpaced by population Growth. Climate change effects are requiring radical new approaches in terms of coping with for example excessive rainfall. The available space at the surface is rapidly being used up and the biggest danger is that built-up spaces are taking over the public green spaces of cities thereby threatening livability and quality of life. Urban underground space forms a societal asset, which is often unappreciated and underestimated in terms of the role it can play within dynamic city environments and associated challenges. The world-wide trend of increased urbanization creates problems for expanding and newly-developing cities alike. Population increase leads to an increased demand for reliable infrastructure, nowadays combined with a need for increased energy efficiency and a higher environmental awareness of the public. The use of underground space can help cities meet these increased demands while remaining compact, or find the space needed to include new functions in an existing city landscape. Use of Urban Underground Space (UUS) has been growing significantly in the world’s biggest and wealthiest cities. UUS has been long acknowledged to be important to the urban development agenda: sustainability, resilience, livability, and creating a better urban environment in particular.