Abstract
İstanbul’da
seksen sonrası ekonomik olarak yükselen grupların konut çevresi kalitesi
konusundaki beklentilerinin kentin mevcut olanakları dahilinde sağlanamıyor
olması, kentin her türlü olumsuzluğundan kaçıp güvenli ve doğaya yakın konut
alanlarında yaşama isteği ve deprem güvenli yeni konut arayışları gibi
nedenlerle güvenlikli yerleşimler hızla kentin çeper alanlarında geliştirilmektedir.
Bu çalışmada, sakinlerine yeni bir yaşam biçimi sunan güvenlikli yerleşimlerin
tercih nedenlerinin ve kullanıcıların konut çevresi memnuniyetlerinde etkili
olan kriterlerin belirlenmesi, İstanbul’da güvenlikli yerleşimlerde 2006
yılında gerçekleştirilmiş olan bir araştırma projesi kapsamında yapılmış olan
400 adet anket soruşturmasının verilerine tek değişkenli analiz teknikleri
uygulanarak yapılmıştır.
Keywords
güvenlikli tek-aile konutları konut tercihi konut memnuniyeti konut ve çevre kalitesi İstanbul
References
- Berköz, L. (2008). “İstanbul’da Korunaklı Tek-Aile Konutlarının Yerseçimi Özellikleri“, İTÜ BAP Destekli Araştırma Projesi (pr. No: 31981).
- Blakely, E.J. & Snyder, M.G. (1997). Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States, Washington, DC: Brookings Institutions Press.
- Calderia, T. & Teresa P.R. (2000). City of Walls: Crime, Segregation, and Citizenship in São Paulo, California: University of California Press.
- Coy, M. (2006). “Gated communities and urban fragmentation in Latin America: the Brazilian experience”, Geojournal, 66:121-132.
- Davies, M. (1990). City of Quartz, Excavating the future in Los Angeles, Vintage Books, New York.
- Ellin, N. (1996). Postmodern urbanism, Oxford: Blackwell.
- Glasze, G., Webster, C. & Frantz, K. (Eds.) (2005). Private Cities-Global and Local Perspectives, Studies in Human Geography, London: Routledge.
- Kurtulus, H. (2005). İstanbul’da Kapalı Yerleşmeler: Beykoz Konakları Örneği, in H. Kurtuluş (eds.), İstanbul’da Kentsel Ayrışma, İstanbul: Bağlam Yayıncılık, 161-186.
- Landman, K. (2000). An international review of gated communities, CSIR Publication, Pretoria.
- Landman, K. (2000b). An overview of enclosed neighbourhoods in South Africa, CSIR Publication, Pretoria.
- Le Goix, R. (2003). “Gated communities sprawl in Southern California and social segregation?”, paper presented at ‘Gated Communities: Building Social Division or Safer Communities? Conference delivered on 18-19 September 2003, Glasgow.
- Low, S. (2003). Behind the Gates, Life, Security, and the Pursit of Happiness in Fortress America, New York: Foutledge.
- Marcuse, P. (1997). “Walls of fear and walls of support” , in N. Ellin (Ed.), Architecture of fear, New York: Princeton architectural Press.
- Ozgur, E.F. (2006). Sosyal ve Mekansal Ayrışma Çerçevesinde Yeni Konutlaşma Eğilimleri; Kapalı Siteler, İstanbul, Çekmeköy örneği, Planlama, 4, 79-93.
- Roitman, S. (2003). “Who Segregates Whom?” paper presented to the conference on “Gated Communities: Building Social Division or Safer Communities?” held at the University of Glasgow.
- Soja, E. (1995). Postmodern urbanisation: The six re-structurings of Los Angeles, in: S. Watson, & K. Gibson, (Eds.), Postmodern cities and spaces (pp. 125-137), Cambridge: Blackwell.
- Töre, E.Ö., Som, S.K. (2009). Sosyo-mekansal Ayrışmada Korunaklı Konut Yerleşmeleri: İstanbul Örneği, Megaron, 4(3), 121-130.
- Webster, C. (2002). “Property rights and the public realm: gates, green belts, and Gemeinschaft”, Environment and Planning B, 29 (3), 320-472.
Abstract
Gated
communities are becoming increasingly popular in İstanbul. This transformation
began in the 1990’s when the high-income groups, who had accumulated wealth in
the aftermath of the 1980’s, chose to escape from the dense life of the city
centre, leaving the heterogeneous residential areas behind. Instead, they
showed a tendency to settle in isolated residential areas. The rise of Gcs has
gained significance due to the demand for the northern and northeastern
districts of the city since the 1999 earthquake in the Marmara Region.
In
this article, the arithmetic mean and the standard deviation values have been
analysed based on the answers related to the accessibility to function areas
and the satisfaction in the various facilities in the housing environment,
which affect the overall satisfaction in housing and housing environment.
Keywords
gated housing housing preferences housing satisfaction housing and environment quality İstanbul
References
- Berköz, L. (2008). “İstanbul’da Korunaklı Tek-Aile Konutlarının Yerseçimi Özellikleri“, İTÜ BAP Destekli Araştırma Projesi (pr. No: 31981).
- Blakely, E.J. & Snyder, M.G. (1997). Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States, Washington, DC: Brookings Institutions Press.
- Calderia, T. & Teresa P.R. (2000). City of Walls: Crime, Segregation, and Citizenship in São Paulo, California: University of California Press.
- Coy, M. (2006). “Gated communities and urban fragmentation in Latin America: the Brazilian experience”, Geojournal, 66:121-132.
- Davies, M. (1990). City of Quartz, Excavating the future in Los Angeles, Vintage Books, New York.
- Ellin, N. (1996). Postmodern urbanism, Oxford: Blackwell.
- Glasze, G., Webster, C. & Frantz, K. (Eds.) (2005). Private Cities-Global and Local Perspectives, Studies in Human Geography, London: Routledge.
- Kurtulus, H. (2005). İstanbul’da Kapalı Yerleşmeler: Beykoz Konakları Örneği, in H. Kurtuluş (eds.), İstanbul’da Kentsel Ayrışma, İstanbul: Bağlam Yayıncılık, 161-186.
- Landman, K. (2000). An international review of gated communities, CSIR Publication, Pretoria.
- Landman, K. (2000b). An overview of enclosed neighbourhoods in South Africa, CSIR Publication, Pretoria.
- Le Goix, R. (2003). “Gated communities sprawl in Southern California and social segregation?”, paper presented at ‘Gated Communities: Building Social Division or Safer Communities? Conference delivered on 18-19 September 2003, Glasgow.
- Low, S. (2003). Behind the Gates, Life, Security, and the Pursit of Happiness in Fortress America, New York: Foutledge.
- Marcuse, P. (1997). “Walls of fear and walls of support” , in N. Ellin (Ed.), Architecture of fear, New York: Princeton architectural Press.
- Ozgur, E.F. (2006). Sosyal ve Mekansal Ayrışma Çerçevesinde Yeni Konutlaşma Eğilimleri; Kapalı Siteler, İstanbul, Çekmeköy örneği, Planlama, 4, 79-93.
- Roitman, S. (2003). “Who Segregates Whom?” paper presented to the conference on “Gated Communities: Building Social Division or Safer Communities?” held at the University of Glasgow.
- Soja, E. (1995). Postmodern urbanisation: The six re-structurings of Los Angeles, in: S. Watson, & K. Gibson, (Eds.), Postmodern cities and spaces (pp. 125-137), Cambridge: Blackwell.
- Töre, E.Ö., Som, S.K. (2009). Sosyo-mekansal Ayrışmada Korunaklı Konut Yerleşmeleri: İstanbul Örneği, Megaron, 4(3), 121-130.
- Webster, C. (2002). “Property rights and the public realm: gates, green belts, and Gemeinschaft”, Environment and Planning B, 29 (3), 320-472.
Details
| Primary Language | Turkish |
|---|---|
| Journal Section | Articles |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | April 20, 2018 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2012 Volume: 3 Issue: 6 |
