Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Faculty of natural resources and earth sciences, Kashan University

2 PhD in geography and urban planning

3 Associate Professor, Faculty of natural resources and earth sciences, Kashan University

4 Masters of geography and urban planning, University of Kashan

Abstract

Introduction
Nowadays, rapid urbanization; mismatch between modern streets and the demands of population; population attracting land uses along streets; and vicinity of incompatible land uses have resulted in traffic congestion in cities. Traffic is one of the major problems in most large cities, and even medium and small cities. It is also one of the social problems of modern societies and cities. Although, extensive studies have been carried out on the network structure and land use separately, their interaction has been disregarded. Like other modern cities, the city of Kashan faces this problem. The central texture of Kashan attracts a large population throughout the day, and especially during rush hours. This is on the one hand, due to the presence of historical elements, such as Kashan historical bazaar, historical buildings and schools, and on the other hand, because of population attracting land uses like commercial, educational, and therapeutic land use. Therefore, it is necessary to consider this problem, and the spatial redistribution of population attracting land uses.
 
Materials & Methods
The present study applies a descriptive-analytic methodology. The necessary information was collected using library research, documentary method, and expert interview. Then, the data was entered in GIS software. GIS software and network analysis model were used for data analysis.
 
Results & Discussion
In this study, the role of educational and therapeutic land use in traffic congestion in central areas of Kashan was investigated. To carry out network analysis, the network map of Kashan streets and their operating speed were required. The street network was depicted in GIS software. Then, the maximum operating speed of the main streets of Kashan was determined based on the master plan. Table 1 presents operating speed in five main axes of Kashan based on the master plan.  These include main and crowded streets of Kashan. The operating speed of other streets was collected through expert interviews. After designing the network and determining operating speed of streets, (educational and therapeutic) land uses with the most significant impact on the traffic congestion of Kashan were identified by interviewing ten experts, with the aim of determining service areas. For each sample land use, a test was performed to determine service areas in the network analysis phase. To conduct this test, the standard service radius of educational and sanitation land uses in Iran was used. In network analysis, the test was separately conducted for each primary school (minimum operating radius of 4 minutes/ maximum operating radius of 5 minutes), middle school (minimum access radius of 6 minutes/ maximum access radius of 7 minutes), high school (minimum access radius of 8 minutes/maximum access radius of 10 minutes), and therapeutic land uses (minimum access radius of 7 minutes/ maximum access radius of 8 minutes).
 
Conclusion
Based on the analysis of service provision range in Kashan downtown, we conclude that compared to other areas in the city, primary schools (in their minimum access radius) face 2.25% increase in traffic congestion; middle schools in their minimum radius of access face 4.67%, increase and in their maximum radius of access face 1.83% increase; high schools in their minimum radius of access face 3.25% increase, and in their maximum radius of access face 7.95% increase, and therapeutic land use in their minimum radius face 7.46% increase, and in their maximum radius face 6.16 % increase in traffic congestion. However, primary schools in other areas of the city face 0.24% higher traffic congestion in maximum access radius as compared to downtown. Thus, downtown attracts 13.13% more unnecessary urban commutes and traffic in its minimum radius of access. This reaches 20.68% in the maximum radius of access, which is due to a larger overlap between educational and therapeutic land use.
 

Keywords

1 - بهبهانی، قربانی، امینی، احمدی‌نژاد؛ حمید، حسین، بهنام، محمود؛ (1373). مهندسی ترافیک و تئوری و کاربرد. سازمان حمل و نقل و ترافیک تهران
2 - پرنیان، بهمن؛ (1376). جایگاه مطالعات حمل ونقل و ترافیک در فرآیند برنامه‌ریزی شهری ایران (جلد اول و دوم: بررسی تجارب برنامه‌ریزی شهری در ایران). انتشارات مرکز مطالعات برنامه‌ریزی وزارت کشور، چاپ اول، تهران.
3 - پورمحمدی، محمدرضا، (1382). برنامه‌ریزی کاربری اراضی شهری، سمت
4 - پیرمحمدی، نوید (1393). تحلیلی بر چالش‌های حمل‌ونقل شهری با تأکید بر مفهوم آرام‌سازی ترافیک شهری مطالعه موردی: محدوده آبرسان تبریز. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، استاد راهنما رحیم حیدری، پردیس بین‌المللی ارس.
5 - جوتین خیستی، سی و بی و کنت لال (1381). مهندسی ترابری و ترافیک (جلد اول:ترابری). ترجمه: محمود صفارزاده، انتشارات دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، چاپ اول، تهران.
6 - چپمن، دیوید. (1386). آفرینش محلات و مکان‌ها در محیط انسان‌ساخت، ترجمه شهرزاد فریادی و منوچهر طبیبیان، چاپ دوم، تهران. دانشگاه تهران.
7 - رضایی، صفرپور، کمانداری؛ محمدرضا، میثم، محسن؛ (1393). بررسی و تحلیل تناسب کاربری اراضی شهری با شریان‌های ارتباطی، مطالعه موردی: بیمارستان‌های منطقه 2 کلانشهر تبریز. کنفرانس ملی برنامه‌ریزی ومدیریت شهری، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.
8 - رضویان، محمدقلی. (1381). برنامه‌ریزی کاربری اراضی شهری. منشی، تهران.
9 - زیاری، کرامت الله (1392)، برنامه‌ریزی کاربری اراضی شهری، چاپ چهارم، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران، ص 189.
10 - سعیدنیا، احمد. (1383). کتاب سبز شهرداری‌ها، جلد دوم: کاربری زمین شهری. انتشارات سازمان شهرداری‌ها و دهیاری‌های کشور، تهران.
11 - صادقی، شعبان (1380). برنامه‌ریزی راهبردی درجهت کاهش آثار سوء حمل ونقل بر ناحیه مرکزی شهرها نمونه موردی محدوده مرکزی شهر مشهد، پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد شهرسازی، گرایش برنامه‌ریزی شهری و منطقه‌ای، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.
12 - صیدی، سمیه (1390). تحلیل کاربری اراضی شهر ایلام با تأکید بر حمل‌ونقل آن. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، استاد راهنما اکبر پرهیزکار، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران.
13 - طرح بهسازی ونوسازی بافت فرسوده کاشان، (1389). شرکت مادر تخصصی عمران و بهسازی شهری ایران، شرکت عمران و مسکن‌سازان استان اصفهان. شرکت احیاء و عمران بافت فرسوده کاشان، مهندسین مشاور باغ اندیشه.
14 - قرخلو، عزیز آسیایی؛ مهدی، فرامرز (1384). توزیع فضایی و ساماندهی شبکه گذرگاهی منطقه هشت شهر تهران. فصلنامه پژوهش‌های جغرافیایی شماره54، زمستان 1384.
15 - قریب، فریدون (1386). شبکه های ارتباطی در طراحی شهری. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
16 - کاظم السعیدی، یاسر نعمه (1396). بررسی تأثیرات کاربری‌های شهری بر روی شبکه حمل و نقل در محیط GIS، مطالعه موردی شهر مشهد. پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد، استاد راهنما، روزبه شاد، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.
17 - کرمی، مسلم (1391). بررسی تأثیر کاربری اراضی بر حمل‌ونقل بخش مرکزی شهر نمونه موردی: بافت قدیمی شهر زنجان. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، استاد راهنما علی‌اکبر لبافی، دانشگاه زنجان.
18 - محمدزاده قوشچی، رحمت (1370). عوامل مؤثر در کارایی حمل‌ونقل شهری. وزارت کشور.
19 - مهندسین مشاور آمودراه (1376). مطالعات حمل‌ونقل و ترافیک در تهیه طرح‌های تفصیلی، تهران: شرکت پردازش و برنامه‌ریزی شهری. چاپ اول.
20 - مهندسین مشاور توسعه بوم‌سازگان پایدار (1385). مطالعات جابجایی و حمل‌ونقل و شبکه‌های ارتباطی طرح جامع تهران. جلد اول، وزارت مسکن و شهرسازی شهر تهران.
21 - مومنی آزاد، طاهره. (1395). برنامه‌ریزی کاربری اراضی در شبکه حمل و نقل درون شهری: مطالعه موردی مناطق چهارگانه شهر کرمان. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، استاد راهنما، حسین غضنفرپور، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان.
 
22. Bono. F. &, Gutierrez (2011). A network- based analysis of the impact of structrul damage on urban accessibility following a disaster: the case of the seismically damaged port Au Prince and Carrefour urban rode network Jourmizanl of Transport Geogarphy 19: 1443-1445.
23. Cambridge, MIT Press.Hillier Bill; Burdett Richard; Peponis John; Penn Alan. (1987). Creating Life: Or, Does Architecture DetermineAnything? Architecture et Comportement/Architecture and Behavior, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 233-250.         
24. Cervero, Robert (2006). alternative approaches to modeling the travel-demand impacts of smart growth. Journal of the american planning association 72(3): pp.285-295.
25. Crcighton, l Rogcr(1970).  urban tranportation planning, univecrsity lllinois urban a,pp 80. 
26. Crucitti,Paolo; Latora,Vito; Porta;Sergio (2006). Centrality in Networks of Urban Streets. Chaos, Vol. 16, No. 1.  
27. Gachanja. N.J (2010). Toward integrated land use and transport modeling: evaluating accuracy of the four the step transport model the case of Istanbul, Turkey. Master thesis.
28. Gordon, peter and richardson, harry (1997). Are compact cities a desirable goal? .american planning association journal, 63(1), pp. 95-106.                                                                                                       
29. Greenwald, michael J(2006). the relationship between land use and intrazonal trip making behaviors: evidence and implications. Transportation research, part d:transport and environment 11(6):pp.432-446.  
30. Haggett Peter, Chorley richard j. (1969). Network Analysis in Geography. London: Butler & Tanner Ltd,p.348.     
31. Hu Y., Wu Q., Zhu D. (2008). Topological Patterns of Spatial Urban Street Networks. Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, WiCOM 4th International Conference.
32. Jiang Bin; Liu Xintao (2011). Computing the fewest-turn map directions based on the connectivity of naturalroads. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, Vol. 25, No. 7, pp.1069-1082.
33. Jian, Wang and Guanglin, sang (2010). Combinaatorial Optimization of congested Road and Parking chaging Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology. Valume 10 Issue 3.24-28.        
34. Jr .f. Stuart Chapin. (1970). Urban Land Use Planning. University of Illinois Press; Second Edition edition.
35. Kansky Karel joseph (1963). Structure of Transportation Networks: Relationships Between Network Geometry and Regional Characteristics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.p.12.                                                                                                                             
36. Khattak, asad jand Rodriguez,Daniel (2005). “travel behavior in neo-traditional neighborhood developments: a case study in the usa.” Transportation research, part a: policy and practice 39(6):pp.481-500.
37. Khisty, castmost jotin & lall, B kent (2003). Transportation engineering: an introduction (3rd ed.).upper saddle river, nj: pearson,p,385.
38. Kockelman, kara m(1996). Travel behavior as a function of accessibility, land use mixing and land use balance: evidence from the san francisco bay area. Ph.d. Thesis, department of city and regional planning, university of california, berkeley.p.17.                                                                                                      
39. Kuzmyak, Richard J; Pratt, Richard H; b. Douglas, and f. Spielberg(2003). Land use and site desig chapter 15, tcrp report 95: traveler response to transportation system changes handbook. Washington, dc: transit cooperative research program.p.278.                  
40. Marshall, stephen (2000).the potential contribution of land use policies toward sustainable mobility toward activation of travel reductio mechanisms.vol.13,pp.63-79.
41. Mitchell, robert and chester, rapkin (1945)urban traffic: a function of land use. Columbia university press, new york.
42. Okabe, Atsuyuki; Okunuki, Kei-ichi and Shiode, Shino (2006). SANET: a toolbox for spatial analysis on a network. Geogr. Anal. 38, pp.57–66.
43. Ozbil, ayse; Peponis John and Stone Branden (2011). Understanding the link between street connectivity, land use and pedestrian flows. Urban Design International, 16, pp125-141.
44. Porta Sergio; Crucitti, Paolo and Latora, Vito (2008). Multiple centrality assessment in Parma: a network analysis of paths and open spaces. Urban Design International, 13, pp 41-50.
45. Scheurer Jan; Curtis; Carey and Porta, Sergio (2007). Spatial Network Analysis of Public Transport Systems: Developing a Strategic Planning Tool to Assess the Congruence of Movement and Urban Structure in Australian Cities. Australasian Transport Research Forum, Melbourne, 25-27 September. 
46. Shaw, shih and xin, xiaohong (2003). Integrated land use and transportation interaction: a temporal gis exploratory data analysis approach. Journal of trans port geography 11,pp.103–115.
47. Shay,Elizabeth and Khattak, Asad J (2005). “automobile ownership and use in neotraditional and conventional neighborhoods.” Transportation research record: journal of the transportation research board 1902.
48. Tabor P. (1976). Networks Distances and Routes. Geometry of Environment: An Introduction to Spatial Organization in Design, L. March (Ed.), pp.366-367.
49. Tanimowo, nigeria (2006).Land use mix and intra-urban travel pattern in ogbomoso.Acharacteristics, urban studies, 35(7), pp.1155-1169.
50. Turner Alasdair (2001). Depthmap: A Program to Perform Visibility Graph Analysis. 3rd  international Symposium on Space Syntax. Georgia Institute of Technology, 7-11 May,pp.1-12.
51.Urban land institute(2005). Higher-density development: myth & fact. Washington, d.c.: urban land institute.