Investigating the Transit Oriented Development in New Urbanism, Case Study: Subway Stations Development in Mashhad
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New urbanism aims to reform the constructed cities as it seeks to create new and complete cities. The main idea of transit oriented development (TOD) is manly based on the public railroad transportation as the quickest and most effective tool in competition with automobiles (car) in order to cause an effective change in the transportation style and decrease the dependence on cars and horizontal growth of the city. In the current study, the experiences of the development corridors are analyzed after investigating the transit oriented development using applied descriptive method and the planning, capitalization and implementation methods are examined based on the corridor development theory. Types of land use suitable for development including residential, commercial, educational, leisure time and so are evaluated in terms of establishment and location. Next, the feasibility of implementation of this method in new spaces created by subway lines in the Mashhad city is studied. Investigation of one of the urban train lines shows that a station named Koohestan Park (mountain-park) located in the Vakil Abad Boulevard has appropriate potentials and advantages for corridor development and urban investments and can contain diverse land uses for orientation toward sustainable objectives. Finally, land use and market activity in the area around this station are investigated using the SWOT model and the necessity of investment and creation of corridor development unit is evaluated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".