CUS  Vol.4 No.2 , June 2016
Evaluation of Infill Development Potential in Zone 8 of Tabriz by Analysis Network Process Method
Abstract: One of the most important issues in the development of modern cities is the dispersed and horizontal expansion of cities. Due to a substantial effect of the form of a city on its stability, it is necessary to know, study and understand its different dimensions and guide it to achieve sustainable development. Thus, infill development that is the simplest interpretation of urban endogenous development is considered as one of the urban smart growth strategies. Focusing on the vacant and abandoned lands in cities, infill development tries to load development on these lands. This study aimed to use infill development approach to achieve future development of Zone 8 of Tabriz and identify its potentials, in which several indicators have been used including quality of buildings, access and permeability, compressibility and granularity. In order to determine the final capacity of development and the effect of each indicator, the indicators were weighted by analytic network process (ANP) approach. The results of the study indicated that 38 hectares of the area under study had very high potential of development that accounted for 12.14%. Therefore, Zone 8 of Tabriz has much potential in the infill development. It could be said that half of the total area within the study area is prone to the internal development that requires formulating a suitable planning based on the principles of smart growth.
Cite this paper: Razavian, M. and Samadi, R. (2016) Evaluation of Infill Development Potential in Zone 8 of Tabriz by Analysis Network Process Method. Current Urban Studies, 4, 125-139. doi: 10.4236/cus.2016.42009.

[1]   A Comparative Plan of Tbriz. (2011).

[2]   Anderson, W. P., Kanaroglou, P. S., & Miller, E.J, (1996). Urban Form, Energy and the Environment: A Review of Issues, Evidence and Policy. Urban Studies, 33, 7-35.

[3]   Falconer & Frank (1990). Sufficiency of Infrastructure Capacity for Infill Development. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 116, 137-148.

[4]   Grant, J. (2006). Planning the Good Community: New Urbanism in Theory and Practice. Cornwall: Routledge.

[5]   Greenbelt Alliance (2008). Smart Infill. San Francisco.

[6]   Habibi, S. M., & Maghsoudi, M. (2002). Urban Restoration. Tehran: University of Tehran.

[7]   Mirzaei, H. A. (2006). Capacity Building of District Development Based on the Approach of Urban Infill Development (Case Study: Shadabad District in Zone 18 of Tehran). Tehran: Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Science and Technology.

[8]   Parizadi, T. (2012). The Study of the Internal Development with an Emphasis on Housing, a Case Study of Sanandaj. Esfahan: Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Esfahan University.

[9]   Rafieian, M., Barati, N., & Aram, M. (2010). Measurement of the Development Capacity of Useless Spaces in the Center of Qazvin with Emphasis on the Infill Development. Architecture and Urban Planning Letter, 2010, 45.

[10]   RSRC (Real Estate Research Corporation) (1982). Infill Development Strategies, Published Jointly by ULI-Urban Land Institute and American Planning Association, USA.

[11]   Sendich, E. (2006). Planning and Urban Design Standards. Hoboken: American Planning Association, John Willey & Sons.

[12]   Sharifian, E. (2010). Infill Development. Utilization of Internal Capacities of the City. Periodical of Manzar, 10, 50.

[13]   Wheeler, Stephen. M. (2001) Infill Development in the San Francisco Bay Area: Current Obstacles and Responses. November 2001. Paper Presented at the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning (ACSP) Conference in Cleveland and Published Electronically by HUD’s Regulatory Barriers Clearinghouse.

[14]   Wyporek, B. (2000). ISoCaRP Millennium Report Findings for the Future. The Work of the Congresses of ISoCaRP. Hague: ISoCaRP.