Prioritizing of infill development strategies in urban areas transect zone (Case Study: District 6 of Mashhad)

Mashhad megalopolis has experienced a rapid and dispersed physical development over the past decades. It has also witnessed problems such as environmental degradation, lack of attention to traditional patterns of the main urban fabric, ignorance of urban identity, etc. Meanwhile, there are abundant internal capacities and potentials in the city such as worn-out, less developed and undeveloped lands (including empty, abandoned, desolate ones, etc.) in the form of single lot and extensive zones, which could serve as appropriate opportunities for development and growth within the borders of the city of Mashhad. Among the districts with a high potential for development from within is District 6 of Mashhad, which about 20% of its total area is gross urban lands (such as agricultural, barren and ruinous lands). According to the Mashhad Master Plan, most of the neighborhoods in District 6 are considered to be worn-out. However, in most cases, there is room for development within the city boundaries. One of the most appropriate options for development is utilizing the infill development approach. Infill development, i.e. development from within, or endogenous development is a sort of urban development which forms on desolate, abandoned and unused lands within the limits of existing urban fabric. One of the main factors supporting infill development is urban zoning. Zoning should support infill development programs. Among the methods used in urban zoning is transect zoning which is generally one of the tools for implementing smart codes of development. In the meantime, it is important to consider the factors which support infill development strategies and policies. Due to its nature, transect zoning is considered as one of the zoning methods which can support the infill development approach. Therefore, the following article aims to provide a discussion on transect zones and to prioritize infill development strategies in these zones in District 6 of Mashhad. The study method is analytical. Documentation, field observation and survey (which includes completing questionnaires by the experts) are used for collecting data. The final weight of each criterion was calculated using the AHP method in the Expert Choice. The transect zoning of the scope was proposed after overlapping thematic maps and adding weights related to the criteria to the maps using the WOI method. SWOT analysis was been used to provide strategies. Subsequently, based on experts’ opinions, the strategies were weighed and prioritized using the Friedman test in SPSS. According to the analysis carried out in the form of AHP method in the Expert Choice, the criteria of density (0.482), texture feature (0.219), accessibility (0.114), and distance from the land use (0.064) gained the most weight among the transect zoning criteria. The case study was classified into four T-zones (T1, T2, T3, T4) and two special zones (agricultural and power station zones). Also, the most important infill development strategies for T-zones of the city core were respectively identified to be restoring unused lands to the cycle of city activity (S4O3: 0.107), reduction of activity incompatibility (W3T3: 0.103) and strengthening public participation (W2T3: 0.1).