دانشگاه تهرانJournal of Environmental Studies1025-862040420141222Evaluation of Isfahan’s “Mâdies” as greenways, with sustainable development approach; a case study of Niasarm MâdiEvaluation of Isfahan’s “Mâdies” as greenways, with sustainable development approach; a case study of Niasarm Mâdi106710825302010.22059/jes.2014.53020FAMahmoodGhalehnoeeAssistant Professor and Director of Department of Urban Design, Art University of Isfahan0000-0003-4213-2979MinooAlikhaniMaster of Urban Planning, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University of ArakJournal Article20140223Introduction <br />Using greenways could be one of the ways which fulfill the improvement of urban streets. Greenways, as they are known, improve the pedestrianism and related qualities like climatic comfort, visual complexity and desirable serial visions. The objective of this research is to evaluate the capacity of <em>M</em><em>â</em><em>dies</em>[1] network in <em>Isfahan</em> to function as greenway. This research aims to assess in what extent they can play as main part of a vast green network. <em>Mâdies</em> are several streams divided directly from <em>Zayandeh-Rood </em>River<em>. </em>They constitute the main part of the historic-natural structureof <em>Isfahan</em>. There are about 250 km of these manmade streams which are perfectly planned, designed and constructed according to the topographic characteristic of the plain of Isfahan. Originally, <em>Mâdies</em> were created to irrigate the farmlands surrounding the river in the plain of <em>Isfahan</em> since the <em>Safavide</em> period. Today their role is completely changed; in one hand due to the drought of <em>Zayandeh-Rood </em>River (source of water in <em>Mâdies</em>) and expansion of city and land use transformation from agricultural to different urban land uses in the other hand. By the way, today <em>Mâdies </em>could play a vital role in improvement of environmental qualities despite their changing role. They are fundamental elements of urban structure in the city and reinforce the organic and natural aspects of urban planning and design as basic parts of greenway characteristics. Therefore they could be considered as main structure of green network in the city of Isfahan. As it is known, greenways enhance quality environment, aesthetic, recreation, education, relaxation, and preservation of habitation. Greenways can help the protection of ecological continuity. They are managed, planned and designed for several functions such as environmental, recreational, cultural, aesthetic and other purposes. So we can extract greenway characteristic from existing definitions such as their linear form, organic design, social inclusiveness and their perfect adaption to the urban environment. <em>Mâdies </em>can play a central role as part of a structure which is greenway network. To do this, it is necessary to know in what extend they are apt to this function. This paper tried to define what the strengths are and weakness of <em>Mâdies</em> to fulfill the task of being greenways. <br />Materials and methods <br />The first step of the method consists on description and definition of <em>Mâdies</em> and greenways as two principle parts of this study. The identification of two abovementioned concepts was necessary to establish the categories of indicators which make possible the comparison between them. Describing and categorizing the main characteristics of greenways was the next step of the research. In this part greenways are summarized across principal sources and expert in the field. The next step was defining the criteria and indicators to evaluate in what extent <em>Mâdies</em>could play the role of greenways in Isfahan. In-order to determine the indicators the main axis of precedent tables constitute the categories in which the indicators are extracted from different sources. The data is gathered through observation, noting and measurement. Table 1 shows the criteria, sub-criteria and indicators. <br />Table 1: Critera and indicators for assessment of Madies as greenways <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Criteria <br /> <br /> <br />Indicators <br /> <br /> <br />Niasarm <br /> <br /> <br />Unit <br /> <br /> <br />Quantification and Measurement <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A. Pedestrianism <br /> <br /> <br />A1. Interconnection of pedestrians and cars <br /> <br /> <br />96% <br /> <br /> <br />Length (m). <br /> <br /> <br />Length of common path (pedestrians and cars) transportation. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A2. Pavement facilitating pedestrian <br /> <br /> <br />34% <br /> <br /> <br />m2 <br /> <br /> <br />More convenient pavement covered percentage among 3 types identified. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A3. Efficient width of pedestrian way <br /> <br /> <br />45%, <br /> <br /> <br />Width (m). <br /> <br /> <br />Width variation along Score<em> of Niasarm.</em> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A4. Noise pollution rate <br /> <br /> <br />34% <br /> <br /> <br />dB <br /> <br /> <br />Average noise pollution recorded in one week with <em>Noise Dosimeter</em> and <em>Sound Label Meter</em> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B. Security <br /> <br /> <br />B1. Nightlife uses <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Number/ unit of length <br /> <br /> <br />Land uses having nightlife potentials <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B2. Social control <br /> <br /> <br />35% <br /> <br /> <br />Individual/ unit of surface <br /> <br /> <br />Number of individuals in space over 2 Hours (2 times a day), (+10→4 pts; 10-6→3 pts; 5-4→2 pts; 3-1→1pt; 0→0 point( <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B3. Night lighting <br /> <br /> <br />45% <br /> <br /> <br />Lux /unit of length <br /> <br /> <br />M2 of alighted spaces/total space along <em>Mâdi</em> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B4. Sense of security and control <br /> <br /> <br />40% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B5. Transparent fronts <br /> <br /> <br />25% <br /> <br /> <br />Unit/ length <br /> <br /> <br />Opening surfaces in m2/total surface <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />C. Safety <br /> <br /> <br />C1. Accident prone spots <br /> <br /> <br />90% <br /> <br /> <br />Number/ unit of length <br /> <br /> <br />Number of prone spots in length <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />C2. Sense of security in pathways <br /> <br /> <br />100% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />D. Sociability <br /> <br /> <br />D1. Equipment and facilities <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Number in unit of surface /total <br /> <br /> <br />Average areas of Equipment and facilities measured in unit of surface/ total surface <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />D2. Programmed socio-petal spaces <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />m2 of programmed spaces / m2 total <br /> <br /> <br />Average areas of programmed socio-petal spaces measured in m2 /total <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />D3.Public participation in maintenance <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />D4. Place attachment rate <br /> <br /> <br />70% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />E. Viability <br /> <br /> <br />E1. Inclusivity of space <br /> <br /> <br />25% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Diversity of different groups (sex, age) recorded in a week (2 times per day) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />E2. Climatic comfort of space <br /> <br /> <br />100% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Creating a list and determining score of <em>Mâdi</em> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />E3. Permeability of space <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Block length (m). <br /> <br /> <br />Length of blocks measured by GIS <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />F. Physical aspects <br /> <br /> <br />F1. Geometry <br /> <br /> <br />100% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Linear form (of green way)→Best point; semi-linear→0.5 point; non-linear→0 point <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />F2. Structural elements <br /> <br /> <br />50% <br /> <br /> <br />Number in length <br /> <br /> <br />Elements of greenway (Corridors and pause points); <em>Mâdi</em> has no visible pause point <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />F3. Network character <br /> <br /> <br />50% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Structure of <em>Mâdi</em> is branching, so is part of a network. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />G. Place quality <br /> <br /> <br />G1. Adventure <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />G2. Fun of space <br /> <br /> <br />100% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />G3. Biodiversity <br /> <br /> <br />70% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Creating a list and determining score of <em>Mâdi</em> according to obtained information from the Park organization. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />As it is shown in Table 3, the indicators are grouped in seven categories: pedestrianism, security, safety, sociability, viability, physical aspects and qualities of place. Then the <em>Mâdi</em> of <em>Niasarm</em> has been assessed through the set of indicators defined in Table 1. Quantification and measurement of each indicator is explained and several techniques like questionnaire, mapping, observation and survey are used. <br />Results: The findings show that to become greenway, <em>Mâdi of Niasarm </em>needs to be improved. In seven established categories the situation is satisfactory in just one category of Safety. In two other categories (pedestrianism and physical aspects) the results is above the average of 50%. Concerning the rest, the situation is not satisfactory. For example the category of Security is below the total average. Diagram 1 shows seven categories and their respected indicators. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Match the parameters of Madies relative to Greenway <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Criteria and Indicator <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Diagram 1: seven categories and their respected indicators <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Conclusion: In conclusion as shown in results, the physical, functional and spatial similarity of Madies in Isfahan and greenway are proved; but according to this study, <em>Mâdies </em>do not function perfectly as a standard and greenway. The evaluation of <em>Mâdi of</em> <em>Niasarm</em> in this study in seven groups of criteria and 24 indicators shows that the efforts are necessary to make the existent <em>Madies</em> good greenways even if they are apt to be good ones. In some criteria such as C (Safety) <em>Mâdi of Niasarm</em> has approximate condition of a standard greenway. In three groups of A (Pedestrianism), F (Physical aspects) and G (Place quality) the score is above 50% and could be considered as acceptable. <br /><br clear="all" /> <br /> <br /> Introduction <br />Using greenways could be one of the ways which fulfill the improvement of urban streets. Greenways, as they are known, improve the pedestrianism and related qualities like climatic comfort, visual complexity and desirable serial visions. The objective of this research is to evaluate the capacity of <em>M</em><em>â</em><em>dies</em>[1] network in <em>Isfahan</em> to function as greenway. This research aims to assess in what extent they can play as main part of a vast green network. <em>Mâdies</em> are several streams divided directly from <em>Zayandeh-Rood </em>River<em>. </em>They constitute the main part of the historic-natural structureof <em>Isfahan</em>. There are about 250 km of these manmade streams which are perfectly planned, designed and constructed according to the topographic characteristic of the plain of Isfahan. Originally, <em>Mâdies</em> were created to irrigate the farmlands surrounding the river in the plain of <em>Isfahan</em> since the <em>Safavide</em> period. Today their role is completely changed; in one hand due to the drought of <em>Zayandeh-Rood </em>River (source of water in <em>Mâdies</em>) and expansion of city and land use transformation from agricultural to different urban land uses in the other hand. By the way, today <em>Mâdies </em>could play a vital role in improvement of environmental qualities despite their changing role. They are fundamental elements of urban structure in the city and reinforce the organic and natural aspects of urban planning and design as basic parts of greenway characteristics. Therefore they could be considered as main structure of green network in the city of Isfahan. As it is known, greenways enhance quality environment, aesthetic, recreation, education, relaxation, and preservation of habitation. Greenways can help the protection of ecological continuity. They are managed, planned and designed for several functions such as environmental, recreational, cultural, aesthetic and other purposes. So we can extract greenway characteristic from existing definitions such as their linear form, organic design, social inclusiveness and their perfect adaption to the urban environment. <em>Mâdies </em>can play a central role as part of a structure which is greenway network. To do this, it is necessary to know in what extend they are apt to this function. This paper tried to define what the strengths are and weakness of <em>Mâdies</em> to fulfill the task of being greenways. <br />Materials and methods <br />The first step of the method consists on description and definition of <em>Mâdies</em> and greenways as two principle parts of this study. The identification of two abovementioned concepts was necessary to establish the categories of indicators which make possible the comparison between them. Describing and categorizing the main characteristics of greenways was the next step of the research. In this part greenways are summarized across principal sources and expert in the field. The next step was defining the criteria and indicators to evaluate in what extent <em>Mâdies</em>could play the role of greenways in Isfahan. In-order to determine the indicators the main axis of precedent tables constitute the categories in which the indicators are extracted from different sources. The data is gathered through observation, noting and measurement. Table 1 shows the criteria, sub-criteria and indicators. <br />Table 1: Critera and indicators for assessment of Madies as greenways <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Criteria <br /> <br /> <br />Indicators <br /> <br /> <br />Niasarm <br /> <br /> <br />Unit <br /> <br /> <br />Quantification and Measurement <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A. Pedestrianism <br /> <br /> <br />A1. Interconnection of pedestrians and cars <br /> <br /> <br />96% <br /> <br /> <br />Length (m). <br /> <br /> <br />Length of common path (pedestrians and cars) transportation. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A2. Pavement facilitating pedestrian <br /> <br /> <br />34% <br /> <br /> <br />m2 <br /> <br /> <br />More convenient pavement covered percentage among 3 types identified. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A3. Efficient width of pedestrian way <br /> <br /> <br />45%, <br /> <br /> <br />Width (m). <br /> <br /> <br />Width variation along Score<em> of Niasarm.</em> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A4. Noise pollution rate <br /> <br /> <br />34% <br /> <br /> <br />dB <br /> <br /> <br />Average noise pollution recorded in one week with <em>Noise Dosimeter</em> and <em>Sound Label Meter</em> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B. Security <br /> <br /> <br />B1. Nightlife uses <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Number/ unit of length <br /> <br /> <br />Land uses having nightlife potentials <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B2. Social control <br /> <br /> <br />35% <br /> <br /> <br />Individual/ unit of surface <br /> <br /> <br />Number of individuals in space over 2 Hours (2 times a day), (+10→4 pts; 10-6→3 pts; 5-4→2 pts; 3-1→1pt; 0→0 point( <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B3. Night lighting <br /> <br /> <br />45% <br /> <br /> <br />Lux /unit of length <br /> <br /> <br />M2 of alighted spaces/total space along <em>Mâdi</em> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B4. Sense of security and control <br /> <br /> <br />40% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />B5. Transparent fronts <br /> <br /> <br />25% <br /> <br /> <br />Unit/ length <br /> <br /> <br />Opening surfaces in m2/total surface <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />C. Safety <br /> <br /> <br />C1. Accident prone spots <br /> <br /> <br />90% <br /> <br /> <br />Number/ unit of length <br /> <br /> <br />Number of prone spots in length <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />C2. Sense of security in pathways <br /> <br /> <br />100% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />D. Sociability <br /> <br /> <br />D1. Equipment and facilities <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Number in unit of surface /total <br /> <br /> <br />Average areas of Equipment and facilities measured in unit of surface/ total surface <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />D2. Programmed socio-petal spaces <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />m2 of programmed spaces / m2 total <br /> <br /> <br />Average areas of programmed socio-petal spaces measured in m2 /total <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />D3.Public participation in maintenance <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />D4. Place attachment rate <br /> <br /> <br />70% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />E. Viability <br /> <br /> <br />E1. Inclusivity of space <br /> <br /> <br />25% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Diversity of different groups (sex, age) recorded in a week (2 times per day) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />E2. Climatic comfort of space <br /> <br /> <br />100% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Creating a list and determining score of <em>Mâdi</em> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />E3. Permeability of space <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Block length (m). <br /> <br /> <br />Length of blocks measured by GIS <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />F. Physical aspects <br /> <br /> <br />F1. Geometry <br /> <br /> <br />100% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Linear form (of green way)→Best point; semi-linear→0.5 point; non-linear→0 point <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />F2. Structural elements <br /> <br /> <br />50% <br /> <br /> <br />Number in length <br /> <br /> <br />Elements of greenway (Corridors and pause points); <em>Mâdi</em> has no visible pause point <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />F3. Network character <br /> <br /> <br />50% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Structure of <em>Mâdi</em> is branching, so is part of a network. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />G. Place quality <br /> <br /> <br />G1. Adventure <br /> <br /> <br />5% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />G2. Fun of space <br /> <br /> <br />100% <br /> <br /> <br />Number of positive responses <br /> <br /> <br />Positive responses in questionnaires <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />G3. Biodiversity <br /> <br /> <br />70% <br /> <br /> <br />Percent <br /> <br /> <br />Creating a list and determining score of <em>Mâdi</em> according to obtained information from the Park organization. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />As it is shown in Table 3, the indicators are grouped in seven categories: pedestrianism, security, safety, sociability, viability, physical aspects and qualities of place. Then the <em>Mâdi</em> of <em>Niasarm</em> has been assessed through the set of indicators defined in Table 1. Quantification and measurement of each indicator is explained and several techniques like questionnaire, mapping, observation and survey are used. <br />Results: The findings show that to become greenway, <em>Mâdi of Niasarm </em>needs to be improved. In seven established categories the situation is satisfactory in just one category of Safety. In two other categories (pedestrianism and physical aspects) the results is above the average of 50%. Concerning the rest, the situation is not satisfactory. For example the category of Security is below the total average. Diagram 1 shows seven categories and their respected indicators. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Match the parameters of Madies relative to Greenway <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Criteria and Indicator <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Diagram 1: seven categories and their respected indicators <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Conclusion: In conclusion as shown in results, the physical, functional and spatial similarity of Madies in Isfahan and greenway are proved; but according to this study, <em>Mâdies </em>do not function perfectly as a standard and greenway. The evaluation of <em>Mâdi of</em> <em>Niasarm</em> in this study in seven groups of criteria and 24 indicators shows that the efforts are necessary to make the existent <em>Madies</em> good greenways even if they are apt to be good ones. In some criteria such as C (Safety) <em>Mâdi of Niasarm</em> has approximate condition of a standard greenway. In three groups of A (Pedestrianism), F (Physical aspects) and G (Place quality) the score is above 50% and could be considered as acceptable. <br /><br clear="all" /> <br /> <br /> https://jes.ut.ac.ir/article_53020_c7713301116de31a6e496f5fffc7b843.pdf