traditional shopping streets or modern malls

[ANI MNATSAKANYAN] January 14, 2012

SHOPPING STREET VS SHOPPING MALL A case study in Yerevan, Armenia

Author: ANI MNATSAKANYAN

ANI MNATSAKANYAN January 14, 2012

1

Shopping Street vs Shopping Mall

A case study in Yerevan, Armenia, 2011

Author: Ani Mnatsakanyan

Abstract

The socio-economic, cultural and physical behaviour of a society is related to sustainable

development; hence a change has a resultant and multiplier effect on the whole system

(Voorburg, 2010). The shopping mall has long been on the centre of attention of various

researchers. The recent transformation of the retail spaces in Yerevan, the shopping mall and the

traditional shopping streets are the focus of this study due to the primary influence on urban life.

The paper discusses the importance of current shopping streets in Yerevan, and the prospective

impact of the development of the Mall in the city. Qualitative method was chosen as the basis for

the development of the discussion part of the paper. The 50 face to face interviews with various

representatives of the society show the importance of the Small Center, the shopping center in

Yerevan. The fact that the Dalma Garden Mall is still under construction, the possible effect is

discussed.

Key words: sustainable retail development, vitality, vibrancy, place attachment, liveability,

shopping mall, shopping street, mixed – use, accessibility, attractiveness.


2

Contents

1. Introduction ____________________________________________________________ 2

Problem Statement ______________________________________________________________ 4

Aim and research questions _______________________________________________________ 4

Research Questions _____________________________________________________________ 5

2. Urban context of Yerevan _________________________________________________ 5

Presentation of the study objects ___________________________________________________ 6

3. Findings and analysis ____________________________________________________ 8

Mixed range of products _________________________________________________________ 9

Accessibility____________________________________________________________________ 9

Attractiveness _________________________________________________________________ 10

The shopping mall _____________________________________________________________ 11

4. Discussion ____________________________________________________________ 12

Mix of activities________________________________________________________________ 13

Accessibility___________________________________________________________________ 13

Place attachment ______________________________________________________________ 14

Potential impact of the Shopping mall______________________________________________ 15

Concluding remarks ____________________________________________________________ 16

References ________________________________________________________________ 17

Appendix _________________________________________________________________ 21

All the photographs presented in the paper are made by the author

1. Introduction

Throughout history city space has served as meeting place, marketplace and connection

space, and most of the world’s cities still provide the framework for these vital functions

(Gehl Jan, 2010). In many developing countries, numerous important daily functions take

place outdoors in city space (Gehl Jan, 2010). According to Jackson (1994) the strongest

sense of place may thus occur in places that are able to preserve these different functions. City

centers retain the most consistently important examples of historic preservation, pedestrian-

scale urban design, socially cohesive community identity, and sense of place (Herzog, 2006).


3

Public places are a vital resource in the development of the central city, but public life has

suffered in the decentralized metropolis of the late twentieth century (Herzog, 2006). The role

of the streets as settings for human activities is threatened by creation growing shopping

complexes development and shopping malls (Shuhana & Bashri, 2004). Shopping malls are

being developed in many countries. When referring to the reshaping of landscapes through

globalization, Arjun Appadurai (1990) provides us with a stimulating outline of complex,

overlapping and disjunctive landscapes. Due to the influences of globalization that are making

the world a “global village”, the malls are likely to become part of the urban scene in many

countries including Armenia.

The transformation of city life from public to private, between the seventeenth and the

twentieth centuries, still left open the question for contemporary urban policy makers: what

role should public spaces play?

The retail viability of inner-city shopping streets is highly influenced by pedestrians and that

the impact of new retail developments on the turnover in the shopping street is closely related

to the functional linkages between shops/shopping streets, the location pattern of malls

(Johnston and Kissling 1971; Bennison and Davies 1977a, b; Pacione 1980).

The current development of the shopping streets in the city, as exemplified by the

construction of new mall at suburban area of the city, may change the pattern of inner-city

pedestrian behaviour and hence the viability of particular shopping streets dramatically. That

is why, it is important to predict the likely effects of such redevelopment schemes on vibrancy

in shopping streets when evaluating alternative planning scenarios.

The study addresses the issues of retail space of the urban and social functions of the

shopping streets and squares which are the key urban spaces in the city of Yerevan. The focus

of the study is the Small Center, the main public space in Yerevan. With its busy shopping

streets, the Small center is a place for gathering, socializing for city residents of all ages. It

contributes to the city character with unique sense of place, and attachment. The study

investigates the role of shopping streets in the social lives of the people and their relation to

the urban characteristics of the city in order to understand the urban qualities that will be lost

with the replacement of the Small Center by the shopping mall in Yerevan.


4

Problem Statement

The development of the retail space in Yerevan seems to take the form of transformation of

the currently old fashioned (traditional format) retail outlets to shopping malls.

The traditional place for shopping is the Small Center in Yerevan. The Small Center of the

city consist of several central shopping streets, which are among the earliest streets built in the

city and have always been associated with the mix of retail and leisure activities. Moreover,

the Small Center is also a residential area. The buildings of the area have a mix arrangement

where the shops are on the ground floors facing the street and the living areas are on the upper

floors. This kind of design results in a very lively environment where there will be people at

any time of the day in this area. The Small Center is an important part of the city history and

the vibrant shopping and socializing scenes in this area can be seen to form part of the city’s

characteristics and identity.

According Rybczynski (1993) shopping malls casts as the new downtown business districts,

and the new public spaces. Some urbanists argue that since the format has caught on,

developers and merchandisers will now become more innovative in making the shopping

malls respond to the larger public life needs (recreation, public discourse) of city dwellers

(Rybczynski, 1993). In contradiction, Sorkin (1992) argues, that many are critical of such a

view, noting that such retail environments are artificial public spaces, in that they are

controlled by private capital and principally designed for marketing and not for residence.

The “Dalma Garden” Mall is a new shopping mall that is being built at the outskirt of the city,

in the south-western part of Yerevan in Malatsya – Sebastya administrative region. The Mall

is considered to be pioneering for the new-generation format mall. Only worldwide known

brands will be represented in the Mall.

The question is raised as to what kind of impacts the development of the Mall will have to the

retail activities in the Small Center and to the city identity. Will the shops at the Mall draw out

all the customers from the Small Center? How will this affect the social life in the city center?

How will this affect the vibrancy of the city center and the city’s urban character?

Aim and research questions

The aim of this research is to highlight the urban qualities of the shopping streets at the Small

Center. This will serve as a basis to discuss possible impacts of the transformation of the retail


5

space from Small Center with shopping streets to shopping malls in Yerevan and how this

will affect the urban character of the city and the social life of the people.

Research Questions

Q. 1. What are the urban and social qualities of the Small Center?

Q. 2. How will the development of the shopping mall affect the social/cultural values of the

traditional shopping streets and the characters/identity of the city?

2. Urban context of Yerevan

Armenia gained its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. During these past years of

transition period the Armenian economy has undergone a systematic transformation. Armenia

has managed to reduce poverty, slash inflation, stabilize the currency, privatize most small-

and medium- sized enterprises. Armenia had made progress in implementing some economic

reforms, including privatization, price reforms, and prudent fiscal policies, but a narrow

export base and the geographical isolation and monopolies in important business sectors have

made Armenia particularly vulnerable to the sharp deterioration in the global economy. The

economy of Armenia relies on manufacturing, services, remittances, and agriculture.

Yerevan is the capital of the Republic of Armenia. Yerevan is situated in the north-eastern

part of Ararat valley, on both sides of Hrazdan River. Yerevan occupies 227.0 sq. km. Area.

The population of the capital is 1 million 113 thousand, which is approximately 34.0% of the

whole population of the Republic of Armenia. Daily approximately 400-450 thousand people

are arriving and departing to Yerevan from the other regions of Armenia.

Yerevan is Armenia's largest economic, scientific and cultural center, and is a major

transportation hub. With 29.0% of Armenia’s economic active population (345.9

thousand), the capital's share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is 52.0%, almost half of the

production capacity (Statistics of Administrative region, 2009).

There is numerous state and private universities, a great number of schools, colleges and

libraries in the city. Yerevan is a centre of national Armenian and international political,

business and scientific events, such as conferences, congresses, symposia, forums, seminars,

exhibitions, as well as cultural and sport events like festivals, sport competitions and artistic

tours.


6

The development of the commercial real estate property so far has been driven by the

residential real estate, mainly through the formats of mixed use projects. Along with the

gradual increase of demand for quality commercial space, the purely commercial real estate

formats are expected to dominate the new completions. Yerevan market of commercial real

estate has enjoyed an upsurge in supply of shopping space, with compound annual growth rate

of about 17% during 2001-2007. The increment in the total stock was generated both by the

new supply of shopping centers and the developments in street retail property.

Presentation of the study objects

The objects of the study are taken two areas:

the first one is the so called Small Center

(Figure 1) of the city - the Northern Avenue

with nearby shopping streets, which is hosting

the most prestigious international brand, retail

operators and small-size unbranded boutiques at

the same time, and the second area is the

Dalma-Garden Mall, which is the largest multi-

functional shopping complex in Armenia.

Small Center includes Nothern Avenue and the nearby streets: Tumanyan Street and Abovyan

Street. The Northern Avenue is located between two main socio-cultural areas of Yerevan. It

starts from the Main Republic Square (Figure

2), which is the center of the city and has been

one of the favourite places of the residents for

leisure. On the other side of Northern Avenue

the Opera House is located (Figure 3). The

Opera House besides being cultural house, its

nearby area (Figure 3) has been one of the most

attractive places for all residents of Yerevan for

many years and till now. The shopping streets

are manifested by the use of multi-storeyed

buildings of which retail stores for the most part

Figure 3

Figure 2

Figure 1


7

occupy choice street level frontage, service establishments are concentrated either on the

street level or into upper story offices. The residential occupancy is set as residential.

The Small Center draws customers from all parts of the city. Many people besides being

customers are likewise employed in the various commercial and service occupations.

To serve this movement of purchasing, visiting, and working population to and from the area

all modes of intra-city transportation (metro, bus, minibus, etc) are focused here (Figure 4).

All the community facilities such as parks, schools, post offices, banks are located within

close proximity in a compact urban form.

Malatsia – Sebastia administrative region is the

south-western gate of Yerevan. The district was

founded in 1927 with the decision of Soviet

Armenia Government. The region occupies

25.80km2. The population of the area is

158,700. There are several industrial enterprises

in the district. The trade and service sphere is

quite developed and is distributed considerably

equal. There are 340 trade and services objects

and 10 supermarkets.

In 2008 the construction of the largest multi-functional shopping complex in Armenia has

been launched in this district. The estimated opening date of the Complex is set the first

quarter of 2012. It occupies 43.500 m2,

from

which 32.600 m2 is trading area. The director

of the company Alexander Harutyunyan

stated that more than 150 companies will be

situated in the two floors and the roof of the

building (Figure 5).

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 4


8

3. Findings and analysis

The study found that males go for shopping with their family more often than females, and the

female respondents prefer to go shopping with their friends. As it was expected, females go

shopping more often than males: 80% (16) of female respondents answered that they go for

shopping at average 4-5times a week, while only 20% of males go for shopping so frequently.

A high majority of male respondents (90% (18 persons) say that they go for shopping with

their family. Only 14 females (60%) do this, while40% of females go shopping with friends.

They combine meeting with friends and shopping because of the busy schedule and the lack

of time.

Less than half of the respondents live in the area: 40% (16 people) of all the respondents are

residents in the area. They work and spend their free time: shopping socializing in the Small

Center. Only 2 of 16 residents go to work to the other parts of the city every day, but they

socialize and go shopping in Small Center – when they return from work. 60% of the

respondents are visitors, coming to the area for

various reasons, such as studying, shopping,

working, for services. The respondents said that

the area provides them with wide range of

activities both for socialising and leisure.

All visitors (24 people) go to the area during the

office hours for shopping or for other services

(banks, providers of communication services).

Most of the visitors (20 people) come back to

the area after office hours also, to participate in

the wide range of activities such as walking, socialising, visiting cafes, restaurants, or for

cultural purposes.

Where do the visitors come from? While a larger group of visitors (15 of 24 people) are from

different districts of Yerevan, some also come from nearby towns, such as Ashtarak,

Abovyan, and Artashat.

The Northern

Avenue (evening)


9

Mixed range of products

One of the key questions of the survey refers to what kind of products the respondents buy in

the area. All the visitors (60% of the interviewed) buy their clothes, shoes, jewellery in this

area. They buy food and household stuff near their houses as they are stores nearly on the first

floor of every residential building. The visitors mentioned that the wide range of choice of

products and activities (various types of shops, cafes, restaurants, theatres, greenery areas) is

the reason for them to come to the area.

The residents (40% of the interviewed) who live

in the area, explain that the wide range of the

shops that are situated near the homes make it

convenient for them to do most their shopping in

the Center. They buy their food and household

stuff from nearby SAS and STAR supermarkets.

‘The mix of prestigious international brands’

and unbranded boutiques of women’s and men’s

clothing, shoe stores, jewellery stores, cafés,

restaurants, all of these that are operating along

the streets of the Small Center are the main attracting factor for me in this area during the

office hours. In the evenings, when the shops are closed, there are a greenery area with a

small water pool near the Opera house, lots of cafés and restaurants for every budget, and the

developed pedestrian, that attracts me to return to this area in the evenings.”- interview with

a 35 years-old woman, visitor.

Accessibility

Accessibility is another factor that attracts the people to come to the Center. The residents of

the area answered that they walk in the area and usually don’t need to use any other transport

means. 37,5 % of the resident-respondents have their own cars, but they only use car when

they travel outside the area. The majority of the residents (62,5 %) don’t have their own cars,

and use public transport, especially metro and minibuses in their daily travel.

The transport means of the visitors is not that much different. Three fourth of the visitors (17

people) use public transport to get to the area and only nearly one fourth of the visitors (7

people) have their own cars, and they use them to travel to the Small Center. All of the car-

SAS Supermarket on

Tumanyan Street


10

owners are men. Good accessibility is one of the reasons for many visitors to come to the

Small Area, as expressed by this visitor (woman):“Visiting this area is more comfortable. I

can mention few reasons: though I use public transport, I choose to come here, first of all

because nearly all types of the public transport have access to this area, which makes my

visiting more convenient. The second is the mix of the shops and the services, which are

situated close to each other, which allow me not to think about the transport during my visit

to the area.”

Attractiveness

The question regarding to the attractiveness of the area was discussed with shop-owners,

visitors and the residents of the area.

The shop-owners mentioned that the main factor that attracts them to start their business in

this area is the mix of activities which ensured the presence of customers of various age,

social status and etc. All shop-owners, totally 10 people are connected with area due to

economic reasons; this is the only source of income for them.

“I start my business on the Northern Avenue few years ago. The area attracts me with the

existence of people of different preferences, age and sex. I can also mention that the

popularity of the Northern Avenue is increasing every year, more and more people are

coming here both during office hours and in the evenings. I run a small café on the Tumanyan

street for already 10 years. The Tumanyan street is one of the oldest and central streets of

Yerevan and it is always full of people. The main factor for me to start business is the

popularity of the area. ” – said a middle-aged male shop-owner.

It was quite interesting to discuss this question with the residents of the area, especially with

those of the older generation, who has seen all the transformations of the area, have their own

memories, and stories about the Abovyan and Tumanyan streets. The streets Abovyan and

Tumanyan are the oldest streets in Yerevan. Their location between the Opera House and the

Republic Square and mix of activities always make them popular among all members of the

society of all age. For many residents these public spaces become the landmark of the area.

Through these places, the residents have developed a unique sense of attachment with the area

as illustrated by the interview with this respondent: “I have lived on the Sayat - Nova street

since 1950s. I remember the old center of the city. When I was young our favourite place for

hanging up was the surrounding area of the Opera House or the Republic Square. I have a lot


11

of sweet memory about this area. I spend my

childhood, youth in this area and I am still

here. We nearly know each other who has lived

in the Small Center, it was like big family.

During this period of time I have seen the

transformation of the area. I can notice that

each year more and more people are coming

here, but I can mention with sadness that every

year the unique atmosphere of the Small

Center is disappearing, this are even noticing the younger generation.”- An old male resident

of the area.

The responses show that landscape elements such as trees and green areas are important and

contribute to the attractiveness of the place. All the respondents both visitors and residents

consider Northern Avenue less attractive than Abovyan and Tumanyan streets since there is

no trees and green along the Avenue.10 visitors said that though they come to the Small

Center they try to avoid from walking in the Northern Avenue when it’s sunny especially in

hot weather. They also add that this fact makes uncomfortable for visiting the shops on the

Northern Avenue during the mentioned period.

The shopping mall

The question about the new shopping mall in

Yerevan was asked to all 50 respondents, including

the shop-owners. All the 10 shop-owners have

heard about the new shopping mall in Yerevan. I

asked the shop-owners if they have any branches of

their shops in the mall, and got the following result:

none of them have or is planning to have shop there

yet. Nearly half (45%) of the respondents who are not shop owners, answered that they have

heard about the mall, 55% (22 people) haven’t heard about it.

When asked if they are planning to visit the mall and why they will visit it, all the interviewed

people answered that they will definitely visit the mall, first of all because of curiosity since it

is a new thing in the city.

Dalma Garden Mall


12

The residents of the Small Center said that they will visit it, just for viewing and because of

curiosity. Whether they will do shopping there? They hesitate and answer that it will be

inconvenient for them to buy things from the Mall and carry them home. The remaining

respondents (34 people including the shop-owners) answered that they definitely will visit the

mall, but as only high end branded shops will be in the mall and as there will not be many

activities there, they will not be frequent visitors of the mall.

As all the interviewed people show their interest in visiting the mall, I was wondering what

kind of transport they will use to get there.

7 people who are visitors of Small Center who has their own car answered that they will visit

the mall by car. 10 people said that they will walk there, if they have nothing to buy that day,

any other time they will have to use public transport for visiting it.

6 shop-owners out of 10 have their own car and they will visit the Mall by car. The remaining

(37 people) will use public transports. And respondents said that due to the inconvenient

linkages and the lack of public transport they won’t visit the mall often.

The above show that visiting the Mall brings additional inconvenience in the life of all the

respondents. It is clear that visiting the Mall will increase transport dependence for the

respondents; even just for visiting the Mall they have to use car or public transport, rather than

walking. It also puts some limitation on the activities of the respondents: such as it was

mentioned by the respondents that because of the fact that only international high end brand

shops will be represented there, most of the respondents will become just the visitors of the

Mall. As they become visitors not the customers of the Mall they prefer to spend their time on

the open air and in the area that has the mix of activities.

4. Discussion

The field study illustrates that mixed uses found in the Small Centre succeeded in creating a

close knit community that is interdependent of each other in their daily routine. The situation

makes the city more sustainable as the urban form is more compact with maximum use of

resources (land) and efficient infrastructure.


13

The study shows that centrally located shopping streets in in the city provide favourable

settings for people to meet and socialise. The elements that users associated with the

attractiveness of the Small Centre fall into four broad categories which mix of activities,

accessibility, and comfort and place attachment.

Mix of activities

The study shows that mix of activities of the street attracts users to the Small Center. The

Northern Avenue, Abovyan street and Tumanyan street are popular with the respondents for

their very intense in mix-use in terms of street activities and also accommodate activities such

as walking and sitting. The types of business operating along the streets of the area, the mix of

the most prestigious international brands’ and unbranded boutiques of women’s and men’s

clothing stores, shoe stores, jewellery stores, department stores, drug stores, cafes, restaurants

and other stores selling convenience goods are the main factors mentioned by the“mobile”

users, that attracts them to the Small Area. Following the responses of the people the variety

of land-use and the mix of activities are among the most important elements that attract users

to the area, compared to other physical factors, such as design of the street and its

architectural qualities. According to Jenks (2000) the cities in developing countries, such as

Yerevan, are characterised by high level of mixed use, ease of access to a wide range of goods

and services, which ensure high levels of vitality and vibrancy. Concentration of retail

activities and place attachment of the users to the area are the main pulling factors of the

Small Center, that both type of the users associate with the identity of the area. The

interaction between static and mobile users creates an environment full of life and sensory

effect.

Accessibility

According to the study the distance between the public transportation stations and the study

area influence the quality of linkages and play significant role in attracting people. So,

convenient distance between the stops and the streets is a good combination for a “successful”

public open space.

The study shows that accessibility of the street is very important to the users of the Small

Center. Saving of cost and time are the reasons mentioned by most part of the respondents.

According to the respondents activities along the streets develop a “walkable” experience,

which is a factor that attracts the users. The presence of a large number of people also acts as


14

a security and comfort features of the street. Jacobs (1995) argues that the street will gain and

maintain a reputation for being interesting, lively and secured, when people enjoy going there

to see and to be. Safety of the space is another reason, and the presence of the people in the

area already makes it safe and reliable. Provision of outdoor cafes and restaurants also helps

to create walkable environment and provide comfort for the users even after the office hours.

The transportation is related to accessibility, easy access is one of the main factors that attract

people to the Small Center, as has been mentioned by the respondents. But as Jacobs (1995)

mentioned the street should be a public place for diverse human activities rather than just for

vehicular transportation. The respondent-residents mention that the variety of access is one of

the most important factors for visiting the area. The variety of access relates to the different

public transportation service, such as metro, minibuses, buses, taxies, trolleybuses, which all

together is the public transport in Armenia. Public transportation has been mentioned by users

in attracting them to the area.

Place attachment

According to the study longer period of engagement resulted in more explicit knowledge of

the streets and its history and transformation, which increases the strong sense of pride and

belonging to the area. This kind of attachment could be noted among the respondents who are

residents of the Small Center and who have been going through its transformation. who has

been familiar with all transformations in the Small Center, especially in Abovyan Street and

Tumanyan street. The shop owners have a strong influence on the sense of attachment; they

strongly expressed a sense of belonging to the area, due to the economic dependence and

substance on the places. The mobile users, mainly the visitors of the area, are attached to the

area due to their functionally attractive roles. The Northern avenue is a pedestrian priority

area and according to users opinion large matured street give a sense of comfort which attracts

them to shop here. It has been discussed that place attachment is an affective bond or link

between people or individuals and specific places (Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001; Moore and

Graefe, 1994), which is expressed through interplay of affects and emotions, knowledge and

beliefs, behaviours and actions (Altman and Low, 1992).

According to the respondents the variety outdoor activities, mixed range of products, cultural

values: such as theatres, museums; walkability and safety are other factors that attract them to

come to the Small Center. The multiple outdoor activities in form of open-air cafes, green

spaces, meeting places, which are also physical form of the area, make the environment


15

liveable and attractive for people of all ages. Activities and interesting shop window fronts

force the pedestrians to slow down by their very complexity. The detail design and goods

displayed can make the pedestrians to stop and look at “window shop”. This fact has been

mentioned by both and shop-owners and mobile users. The findings support the arguments

made by Canter (1997) and Montgomery (1998) that physical form, activity and meaning are

the main components of place.

The centrally located buildings and public places in the Center provide settings for people to

meet and socialise. Residential use is part of the streets character in the Small Center,

especially due to the fact that Abovyan street and Tumanyan street are among the oldest

streets that were built in the city, and create a unique environment of the area. According to

Davenport and Anderson (2005) sense of belonging and purpose give meaning to his or her

life. That’s why the place plays important role in developing and maintaining self and group

identity as well as a person’s well-being. The responses of the residents show that the central

location of the streets and their being places, that have historical meanings, are elements that

form the attraction of these streets. They also make the area attractive to visitors and

contribute significantly to the city identity.

The open-air concerts near The Opera House or in The Republic Square, classical concerts or

operas in The Opera House, The National Gallery and the theatres on the Abovyan street are

the example of unique environment created by the cultural values and life style of local

residents and the visitors.

Landscape elements have been mentioned by both types of the users of the area, that there is a

lack of this element especially trees in the Northern Avenue, which makes passing through it

during day time in summer quite uncomfortable. The Abovyan street and Tumanyan street as

they are old streets there are trees and plants along the both sides of the streets. The trees

provide both physical and psychological presence to the street. The integration of the street

planting creates “sense of enclosure”, which decreases the vulnerable feelings of openness,

and all these brings to the establishment a “sense of territoriality and belonging”.

Potential impact of the Shopping mall

Discussing the answers of the respondents can be said that Dalma Garden Mall will be place

where people from middle and low class go just for interest in the new place in Yerevan. As

only worldwide known brands will be represented there it will mostly become a place for


16

shopping of the higher class of the society. Goodman and Coote (2007) argue that shopping

malls add very little to the diversity or developing individual sense of place, they are

providing bland representations of a monoculture. This can result the limitation of the

presence of the people from different layers of the society as customers. This fact was

discussed by Kowinski (1985), who mentioned that mall would not become true community

center and people existence would be ensured just by few public activities. As the respondents

do not exclude the fact that they will visit the Mall though not as costumers, there is

possibility that controlled environment of the Mall will keep them inside the Mall and make

comfortable socializing there. As there is residential area near the Mall the social life might be

ensured by those residents. According to the respondents answers they will prefer to do their

shopping in the Small Center rather than go to the Mall. They also mention that going to the

Mall will add some inconveniences in their daily life.

Unfortunately during the interviews there wasn’t anyone among the respondents from the

area where the Mall is being built, this let us just to suppose that the Mall may become a place

for social interaction for the residents of nearby houses. As suggested by Jackson (1996) the

malls might be another kind of space for a positive atmosphere for social interaction, which

may significantly contribute to the retail traffic of the mall.

Due to the answers it obviously has become clear that it will increase the car dependency,

because getting to the Mall all the respondents answer they will have to use transport: private

cars or public transport. But public space is destroyed by widespread car usage in cities and

facilitates the creation of privatised public space. According Wickham and Lohan (1999), as

cars take over the world outside the house, it less and less an area for public sociability - the

key characteristic of city life.

Concluding remarks

The mall experience in Armenia is quite new, and this makes it difficult to draw conclusions

about consumption and identity issues and proposed changes in lifestyle, as opposed to

Jewell’s (2001) claim for Britain, that it seems to be a long lasting one, considering the socio-

cultural context.

As Zukin (1995, p. 191) suggests‘‘… ordinary shopping districts frequented by ordinary

people are important sites for negotiating the street-level practices of urban public culture in

all cities’’. This can definitely be true for Yerevan, which has traditional shopping streets in

the Small Center, in addition to the urban core and a few high streets. The current situation in


17

Yerevan indicates that it is possible that both the newly established mall and the traditional

shopping center may be used. This mainly may be because of the novelty of the shopping mall

development, and change through time may favour the controlled spaces provided by the

malls. However, it is still early to make comments upon positive and negative aspects of mall

development in Yerevan. It may result a disappearing of the urban core and open spaces such

as parks and other recreational areas, or it may develop alongside them.

The study has shown that accommodation of various activities that reflect cultural values of

the residents ensures the success of the Small Center. The ability of the traditional shopping

streets to sustain the sense of place, which is created by the meanings and association, links to

the Small Center. The mix of activities and the historical significance of the Small Center as

the earliest shopping center in Yerevan evoke a lot of meanings to the users that influence on

their degree of attachment. The study has shown that place attachment should be taken into

consideration for the design of urban space and places due to its significant contribution in

influencing the sense of place. As mentioned by Roger, a city is attractive and creative if it is

well designed and if people want to come and live in it because as they walk about it day by

day, they feel enlightened by what they see and feel (Knox, 2005). This is what urban design

is all about.

Ensuring a diversity of accommodation, business and infrastructure is the cornerstone of

healthy, vibrant and sustainable urban communities (Jenks, Jenks, Burgess, 2000) and this

have to be the main objective for every city.

References Alexander, C. (1979) “A timeless way of building,” Oxford Unv.Press, New York.

Altman, I., & Low, S. (1992). Place attachment. New York: Plenum Press.

Appadurai, A. (1990). “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy”, Theory,

Culture & Society 7: pp. 295-310

Appleyard, D. (1981). Liveable Streets. Berkley: University of California Press

Appleyard, D. and Lintell, M., (1977).“The Environmental Quality of City Streets: The

Residents’ Viewpoint.” AIP Journal 43, no. 2 (March): pp. 84-101


18

Arefi, M. and Meyers R. W. (2003). “What is Public About Public Space: The Case of

Visakhapatnam, India”. Cities, Vol. 20, No. 5 : 331–339.

Batı, U. (2007). “Tüketimkatedralleriolarakalişverişmerkezlerinintoplumsalgöstergebilimi:

Forum Bornovaalişverişmerkeziörneği,” UluslararasıİnsanBilimleriDergisi, cilt.4, sayı.1

Bennison, D.J., and R.L. Davies (1977a). “The Movement of Shoppers within the Central

Area of Newcastle upon Tyne.” Seminar Paper no. 34, Department of Geography, University

of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle.

Bennison, D.J., and R.L. Davies (1977b). “The Local Effects of City Centre Shopping

Schemes: A Case Study.” PTRC Summer Annual Meeting, Proceedings of Seminar A, P148

Retailing, University of Warwick, 8-19.

Beuregard R. A.,(1986), Urban form and the redevelopment of central business districts, J.

Archit. Plann. Res.3, pp. 183–198.

Bogden, R.C. & Biklen, S.K., (1982).Qualitative research for education: An introduction to

theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc.

Borgers A. and Timmermans H. J. P., (1986). City Centre entry points, Store Location

Patterns and Pedestrian Route Choice Behavior: A Microlevel Simulation Model, Socio –

Econ. Plan. Sci. Vol. 20, No 1, pp. 25-31

Bromley, R. D.F. and Thomas C. J., (1993). "Retail Change and the Issues," in Retail Change,

Contemporary Issues, R.D.F. Bromley and C.J. Thomas, ed. London: UCL Press, 2-14.

Canter, D. (1977). The psychology of place. London: The Architectural Press Ltd.

Davenport, M. A., & Anderson, D. H. (2005).Getting from sense of place to place-based

management: An interpretive investigation of place meanings and perceptions of landscape

change. Society & Natural Resources, 18, pp. 625–641.

De ROO, G, (2004), Coping with the Growing Complexity of our Physical Environment: the

search of new planning tools in the Netherlands, Towards Sustainable Cities, edited by Andrè

Sorensen, Peter J. Marcotullio, Jill Grant, Ashgate, London.

Feinberg, R. A., Sheffler B., Meoli J., and Rummel A., (1989). "There's Something Social

Happening At The Mall," Journal of Business and Psychology, 4 (1), pp. 49-63.

Gehl, J.; Rogers, L. R., (Foreword by) (2010). Cities for People. Covelo, CA, USA: Island

Press.

Goodman, R. and Coote, M., (2007) 'Sustainable Urban Form and the Shopping Centre: An

Investigation of Activity Centres in Melbourne's Growth Areas', Urban Policy and Research,

25: 1

Heng, C. K. and Malone-Lee L.C., (2009)."Liveability, Density and Sustainability", in

Liveable Cities for Tomorrow, Centre for Liveable Cities, Singapore. (Report to the East Asia

Summit Liveable Cities Conference June 2008).


19

Hidalgo, M. C., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place attachment: Conceptual and empirical

questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, pp. 273–281.

Ibrahim, M. F. and McGoldrick P. J. (2003).Shopping Choices with Public Transport Option.

Aldershot, Ashgate.

Insch, A., & Florek, M., (2008). A great place to live, work and play: Conceptualising place

satisfaction in the case of a city's residents. Journal of Place Management and

Development, 1(2), 138-149. Retrieved May 25, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global.

(Document ID: 1554902391).

Jackson K. T., (1996), All the World's a Mall: Reflections on the Social and Economic

Consequences of the American Shopping Center, The American Historical Review,

Vol. 101, No. 4 (Oct., 1996), pp. 1111-1121

Jacobs A. B. (1995). The Great Streets. United States of America: The MIT Press

Jacobs, J., (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York: Vintage

Jackson, J. B., (1994). A Sense of Place, a Sense of Time. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Jenks M., Jenks M., Burgess R. (ed.), (2000). Compact cities: sustainable urban forms for

developing countries.

Jewell, N (2001) The fall and rise of the British mall. The Journal of Architecture 6, 317–377.

Johnston, R. J., and C. C. Kissling (1971).”Establishment Use Patterns within Central Places.”

Australian Geographical Studies, 9, 116-32

Jones, K. and Simmons, J. (1993). Location, Location, Location: Analyzing the Retail

Environment. Scarborough: Nelson Canada.

Herzog, Lawrence A. (2006). Return to the center : culture, public space, and city building in

a global era, Austin, USA

Kavonius, I. K., (2006) The Implication of Employee Stock Options and Holding Gains for

Disposable Income and Household Saving Rates in Finland. Journal of Official Statistics, Vol.

22, No. 3, pp. 585-597

Knox, P. L., (2005). Creating Ordinary Places: Slow Cities in a Fast World. Journal of Urban

Design. Vol. 10. No 1, February 2005: 1-11.

Kowinski, W. S., (1985). The Malling of America, New York: William Morrow

Lennard, S.H. and Lennard L. H. (1995).Liveable Communities Observed. Carmel: Gondolier

Press.

Lorch J. and Smith M. J., (1993), Pedestrian movement and the downtown enclosed shopping

centre, APA J.51 (1), pp. 75–86.

Miller D., (1998), Shopping, place, and identity, London.


20

Moore, R. L., & Graefe, A. R. (1994). Attachments to recreation settings: The case of rail-trail

users. Leisure Sciences, 16, pp. 17–31.

Ooi, Giok Ling (Editor); Yuen, Belinda (Editor). (2009). World Cities : Achieving Liveability

and Vibrancy. River Edge, NJ, USA: World Scientific Publishing Co.

Pacione, M. (1980). “Redevelopment of Median-Sized Central Shopping Area: A Case Study

of Clydeband,” Tijdschrift voor Economische en Social Geografie, 71, 159-68.

Rapoport, A. (1977). Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards Man-Environment Approach

to Urban Form and Design.Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. London: Pion.

Robertson K., (1988), Pedestrian skywalk systems: downtown's great hope or pathways to

ruin?,Transport. Q.42 (3), pp. 457–484

Rybczynski, Witold (1993). “The New Downtowns.” Atlantic Monthly (May): 98–106.

Shuhana, Sh., and Bashri, A. S. (2002).The Role of Streets in Influencing the Sense of Place

of Malaysian Towns and Cities. Proceeding of Great Asian Streets Symposium: “Public Space

2002”.25-26 July 2002, Singapore. Centre for Advanced Studies in Architecture

(CASA),Department Of Architecture, School of Design and Environment, National

University of Singapore. pp. 35-43

Shuhana, Sh., Bashri, A. S., Norhaslina, J., &Maslyana, M. (2004). Criteria of success for

traditional shopping streets in Malaysia: Case study of Kuala Lumpur. Unpublished Research

Report, UniversitiTeknologi, Malaysia.

Sorkin, Michael, 1992 (ed). Variations on a Theme Park. New York: Hill and Wang.

Stokols, D., & Shumaker, S. A. (1981). People in places: A transactional view of settings. In

J. H. Harvey (Ed.), Cognition social behaviour and the environment. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates. pp. 441 – 488

Tamagawa, Hidenori (Editor), (2006) Sustaninable Cities: Japanese Perspectives on Physical

and Social Structures. Tokyo, JPN: United Nations University Press.

Voorburg, A., 2010, Sustainable Urban Development: En Ethic Challenge, Continues Change,

The Netherlands

Whyte, W. (1988) City: Rediscovering the Centre (New York, Doubleday).

Whyte, W., (1980). The Social Life of Small Urban Places, Washington, D.C.; Conservation

Foundation

Wichkam J., and Lohan, M. (1999) 'The Transport Rich and the Transport Poor: Car

dependency and social class in four European cities', Paper for conference ‘Urbanism and

Suburbanism at the End of the Century’ November 26th and November 27th, 1999, National

University of Ireland, Maynooth


21

Williams, A., Kitchen, P., Randall, J. and Muhajarine, N. (2008), “Changes in quality of life

perceptions in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan: comparing survey results from 2001 and 2004”,

Social Indicators Research, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 5-22.

Williams, D. R., Anderson, B. S., Mc Donald, C. D., & Patterson, M. E. (1995). Measuring

place attachment: More preliminary results. Paper presented at the 1995 Leisure Research

Symposium, NRPA Congress, San Antonio.

Zacharias, J., (1993). Reconsidering the impacts of enclosed shopping centres: A study of

pedestrian behaviour around and within a festival market in Montreal, Landscape and Urban

Planning, 26, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam pp. 149-160

Zukin S. (2011). Urban lifestyles: Diversity and standardisation in spaces of consumption.

Urban Studies (Routledge) [serial online]. May 1998;35(5/6): 825. Available from: Academic

Search Elite, Ipswich, MA.

Data Sources

Data of Central Bank of Armenia, is viewed April 30, 2011 ( http://www.cba.am )

Statistics of Administrative region, 2009, Data of National Statistical Service of the Republic

of Armenia, is viewed May 1,2011 (http://www.armstat.am )

Appendix

General questions for the interviews

1. Do you go for shopping often?

2. Do you go for shopping alone/ with friends/ family?

3. Which part of the city do you live?

4. How often do you visit the Small Center?

5. Where are you usually shopping (Food, household stuff, clothes)?

6. How do you travel to shop (car, public transport, walk)?

7. What attracts you in the Small Center?

8. Have you heard about the shopping mall in Yerevan?

9. Have you ever been in that area?

10. Will you visit the Mall?

11. What will you go there for (shopping or viewing)?

12. How do you intend to get to the Mall (car, public transport, walk)?


22

traditional shopping streets or modern malls

Documents

shopping center

traditional shopping

dalma garden mall

case study

sustainable development

urban context of yerevan

sustainable retail development

armenia author