محمدعلی خان محمدی

Purpose- To examine the architectural and economic strategies of rural business spaces from the perspective of experts. Design/methodology/approach- In synthesis of literature review, after reviewing 47 articles found, the relationships between variables in first relation between R.B.S & R.B.A: The components were extracted & converted to 8 components based on the Roberts synthesis method. But since the main unknown of the research was Architecture & speciology of the building, according to the gaps extracted 8 types of architecture were compiled & the axial coding & 8 research content was extracted from it. Then the content-target-table was generated.  In the current step, since theoretical foundations were insufficient, a combined research method was used & the Delphi research method was used in this phase of research. The study community had 41 elite subjects (rural-urban-architectural-entrepreneurial). To analyze the data collected based on the Q factor analysis extracted results & ultimately the most influential factors on the RBS & RBP from each of the specified spatial attributes. The results of the study indicate that in total, 3 categories are emphasized, 5 categories in the 2nd priority, 3 categories are not generally approved by this community, but in some factors it is emphasized. Findings- In response to the research question of what the classification and perspective of the community of experts are on the architectural strategies of rural business spaces, there are 7 views in this regard: Requirements for multi-purpose spaces (second activity): separate, isolated, sanitary, and Indigenous (12.67%); Second activity in the form of multi-purpose buildings or increasing the area for the construction of a sales place in rural buildings (11.49%); The sales Place is equipped with isolation (10.07%); Sanitary and isolated interior architecture (cultivation space) (8.06%); Indigenous model of Health and isolation (7.85%); Reconstruction of old buildings by equipping, and separating and increasing the business area (7.68%)  and etc. Reseach limitation/implications- Interdisciplinary and lack of coherent studies and literature on Rural Business Architecture (R B A) and multi-purpose & hybrid building and architecpreneure (architecture + entrepreneurship). Originality/value– Research started with the hypothesis of multifunctionalization of production spaces, but ultimately concepts such as health & reducing the penetration of the second activity pest were given priority over multifunctioning & combining activities. There for the priority of health concepts & sales & second activity is the innovation of this research.

The use of building regulations in architectural design has been a controversial issue for a long time. From the view point of critics, building regulations inhibit innovation, promote conservative design and are incapable of insuring design quality. From the defenders point of view, some professional mentalities of architects regarding building regulations are problematical and must be changed. The present research aims to illuminate the reasons for the above-mentioned tension between architectural design and building regulations. This is done by examining the structural match between architectural design and building regulations. Seeing from a designer point of view, the paper compares formal characteristics of building regulations with architectural design. Three general characteristics of building regulations are found in contrast to characteristics of architectural design. Building regulations are analytical in nature, while architectural design is a synthesis-oriented act. Building regulations are mainly based on a reductionist approach towards defining design problems and solutions, while innovation and originality are considered as fundamental values by most architects. And thirdly, building regulations are usually framed in a way that matches an evaluative mode of thought, while architects often have to work in a generative and predictive mode. These explain why architects from time to time feel frustrated with regulations. The paper continues to make recommendations to both architectural designers and regulators. To the designers some facts and points are stated to help them better understand the nature and performance of building regulations and guide them safely and positively use regulations in their design process. Addressing the legislators, the paper offers some recommendations to facilitate the use of building regulations in architectural design. Moving towards performance-based regulations, a broader involvement of information technology in building regulations, and production of designer-oriented guidance documents are some of these recommendations.