Peyzaj Strüktür Analizi ve Potansiyel Kentsel Açık-Yeşil Alan Sistemlerinin Mekansal Bağlantılılığının Değerlendirilmesi

Bu çalışmanın odağında, insanların çevreyle en fazla temas edebileceği, bitki örtüsü ve yapılı olmayanalanlara erişim olanağı sağlayabilecek ve hareket etmelerine olanak tanıyacak kentsel açık-yeşil alan sistemleribulunmaktadır. Bu kapsamda çalışmanın amacı, Aydın ili merkez ilçesi örneğinde kentsel açık-yeşil alansistemlerinin potansiyel erişebilirlik rotaları kapsamında mekansal bağlantılılığının değerlendirimesidir. Çalışmaalanına ilişkin alan kullanım haritası Copernicus Arazi Gözlem Hizmetlerinin (Copernicus Land MonitoringService-CLMS) web sitesinden ücretsiz olarak elde edilen 2012 yılına ait Urban Atlas veri seti temel alınarakhazırlanmıştır. Çalışmada öncelikle, peyzajda fiziksel erişebilirliği destekleyebilecek farklı alan kullanımtiplerinin temel mekansal özellikleri ile bağlantılılıkları FRAGSTATS yazılımı peyzaj metrikleri ileincelenmiştir. Bu amaçla, yaygın olarak kullanılan 6 peyzaj metriğinden yararlanılmıştır. Daha sonra tüm alankullanım tipleri içinde, potansiyel kentsel açık-yeşil alan sistemi öğeleri mekansal bağlantılılık durumlarına görebirbirleri ile birleştirilerek, potansiyel erişebilirlik rotaları oluşturulmuştur. Son olarak, belirlenen potansiyelerişebilirlik rotaları ile tek tek kentsel açık-yeşil alan sistem öğelerinin mekansal bağlantılılığı karşılaştırılmıştır.Sonuç olarak, kentsel alanlarda farklı açık-yeşil alan tiplerinin farklı düzeylerde mekansal bağlantılılık sağladığı,ancak açık-yeşil alan sistemi dahilinde bir bütün olarak değerlendirildiklerinde mekansal bağlantılılığın dahagüçlü olduğu bulunmuştur.

Landscape StructureAnalyses and the Evaluation of Spatial Connectivity for Potential Routes of Urban Open-Green Spaces

The main foci of this paper is in networks of urban open-green spaces which might allow people to move through the urban environment with maximum contact, or opportunity for contact, with vegetation and non-built areas. In this context, the aim of this study is to evaluate the spatial connectivity of urban open-green space systems within the scope of potential accessibility routes in the case of Aydın province central district. The land use map of the study area is based on the 2012 Urban Atlas data, which is obtained from the Copernicus Land Monitoring Service (CLMS) website free of charge. Firstly, this study investigates the main spatial characteristics of different land use types to support structural connectivity in the landscape based on FRAGSTATS landscape metrics. For this purpose, 6 commonly used landscape metrics have been used. Then, in all land use types, potential urban open-green space system components were combined with each other according to their spatial connectedness, and potential accessibility routes were created. Finally, the spatial connectivity of the proposed accessibility routes and each of the individual urban open-green space components were compared. As a conclusion, it was found that every individual open-green space represents different levels of spatial connectivity, but their spatial connectivity reported the highest level when they are regarded as an integrated system of open-green areas.

PDF

___

Amati, M., 2016. Green belts: A twentieth-century planning experiment. In Urban green belts in the twenty-first century. 1-17. Aldershot: Ashgate. 247. ISBN: 978-0-7546-4959-5.
Asgarian, A., Amiri, B.J., Sakieh, Y., 2015. Assessing the effect of green cover spatial patterns on urban land surface temperature using landscape metrics approach. Urban Ecosystems, 18(1): 209-222.
Barbosa, O., Tratalos, J., Armsworth, P.R., Davies, R.G., Fuller, R.A., Johnson, P., Gaston, K.J., 2007. Who Benefits from Access to Green Space? A Case Study from Sheffield, UK. Landscape and Urban Planning. 83(2-3): 187-195.
Bell, S., Montarzino, A., Travlou, P., 2007. Mapping research priorities for green and public urban space in the UK. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 6(2): 103-115.
Botequilla-Leitão, A., Miller, J., Ahern, J., McGarical, K., 2006. Measuring landscapes: A planner's handbook. Washington: Island Press.
Comber, A.J., Brunsdon, C., Green, E., 2008. Using a GIS-based network analysis to determine urban greenspace accessibility for different ethnic and religious groups. Landscape and Urban Planning. 86 (1). p. 103-114. Copernicus, 2018. Urban Atlas 2012 (UA2012). https://land.copernicus.eu/local/urban-atlas/urban-atlas-2012. 17 Mart 2018.
Dai, D., 2011. Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where do intervene?. Landscape and Urban Planning. 102: 234-244.
Dunnett, N., Swanwick, C., Woolley, H., 2002. Improving Urban Parks, Play Areas and Green Spaces. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. London. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/documents /communities/pdf/131021.pdf. 15 Nisan 2018.
Ersoy, E., 2015. An Integrated Approach to Enhancing Ecological Connectivity and Accessibility in Urban Areas: a case study of Sheffield, UK (Doctoral dissertation, Depatrment of Landscape Architecture University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK). Cilt I. 367.
Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). 2012. ArcGIS Release 10.1. Redlands, CA Forest Research, 2011. Green networks and people; a review of research and practice in the analysis and planning of multi-functional green networks. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.490. http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/commissioned_reports/490.pdf. 3 Mayıs 2018.
Fukahori, K., Kubota, Y., 2003. The role of design elements on the cost effectiveness of streetscape improvement. Landscape Urban Planning. 63(2003): 75-91.
Giles-Corti, B., Broomhall, M. H., Knuiman, M., Collins, C., Douglas, K., Ng, K., Lange, A., Donovan, R.J., 2005. Increasing walking: how important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space? American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 28(2005): 169-176.
Groenewegen, P.P., Van den Berg, A.E., De Vries, S., Verheij, R.A., 2006. Vitamin G: effects of green space on health, well-being, and social safety. BMC public health. 6 (1).
Hambrey Consulting. 2013. The management of roadside verges for biodiversity. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 551. http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/commissioned_reports/551.pdf. 3 Mayıs 2018.
Howard, E., 1902. Garden Cities of to-Morrow. London: S. Sonnenschein & Co., Ltd. 167.
Horwood, K., 2011. Green infrastructure: reconciling urban green space and regional economic development: lessons learnt from experience in England's north-west region. Local Environment. 16(10): 963-975.
Ignatieva, M., Stewart, G.H., Meurk, C., 2011. Planning and design of ecological networks in urban areas. Landscape and Ecological Engineering. 7 (1): 17-25.
Landscape Institute. 2009. Green infrastructure and the value of connected multifunctional landscapes. Landscape Institute Position Statement. http://www.landscapeinstitute.co.uk/PDF/Contribute/GreenInfrastructurepositionstatement13May09.pdf . 17 Nisan 2018.
Leitão, AB., Miller, J., Ahern, J., McGarigal, K., 2012. Measuring landscapes: A planner's handbook. Island press. 272. ISBN: 9781597260862.
Levine, J., Garb, Y., 2002. Congestion pricing's conditional promise: promotion of accessibility or mobility?. Transport Policy. 9(3): 179-188.
McGarigal, K., Cushman, S.A., Ene, E., 2012. FRAGSTATS v4: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical and Continuous Maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html. 15 Nisan 2018.
McGarigal, K., 2014. FRAGSTATS HELP. Version 4.0. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/documents/fragstats.help.4.2.pdf. 17 Nisan 2018.
Moseley, D., Marzano, M., Chetcuti, J., Watts, K., 2013. Green networks for people: Application of a functional approach to support the planning and management of greenspace. Landscape and Urban Planning. 116 (2013).
Pauleit, S., Slinn, P., Handley, J., Lindley, S., 2003. Promoting the Natural Greenstructure of Towns and Cities: English Nature's" Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards" Model. Built Environment. 29(2): 157- 170.
Richardson, E. A., Mitchell, R., 2010. Gender differences in relationships between urban green space and health in the United Kingdom. Social Science and Medicine. 71(3): 568-575.
Sandström, U.G., 2002. Green infrastructure planning in urban Sweden. Planning Practice and Research. 17(4): 373-385.
Selman, P., 2009. Planning for Landscape Multifunctionality. Sustainability: Science, Practice & Policy. Community Essay. 5(2): 45-52.
Sotoudehnia, F., Comber, A., 2010. Applying network analysis to quantify greenspace accessibility for different socio-economic groups. In Halay, M., Moreley, J. & Rahemtulla, H. (eds.). Proceedings of the GIS
Research UK. 18th Annual Conference, 14th to16th April 2010. University College, London.
Takano, T., Nakamura, K., Watanabe, M., 2002. Urban residential environments and senior citizens’ longevity in megacity areas: the importance of walkable green spaces. Journal of epidemiology and community health. 56(12): 913-918.
Taylor, P.D., Fahrig, L., With, K.A., 2006. Landscape connectivity: a return to the basics. In Crooks, K. R. & Sanjayan, M. (eds.). Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 712. ISBN: 9780521673815.
TÜİK (Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu), 2018. Adrese Dayalı Nüfus Kayıt Sistemi Sonuçları. http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1059. 15 Nisan 2018.
Wiens, J.A., 2006. Connectivity research-what are the issues? In Crooks, K.R. & Sanjayan, M. (eds.). Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Woolley, H., 2003. Urban Open Spaces. London: Spon Press. 2008. ISBN: 0-419-25690-3.