National Gardens and Landscape Design Criteria: An Application Assessment of the Kırıkkale National Garden
Abstract
This study evaluates the design quality of the Kırıkkale National Garden using criteria from the National Gardens Guide. These projects have expanded rapidly in recent years and shaped the open-space agendas of many cities. Guiding principles are examined under six headings: spatial–functional performance; access, movement, and universal use; ecological and environmental sustainability; social life, health, and public use; innovation and technological integration; and identity, sense of belonging, and spatial meaning. An evaluation matrix was developed, and each criterion was qualitatively assessed as “meets,” “partially meets,” or “does not meet.” Findings show strong performance in social life and public use, but deficiencies in accessibility, ecological sustainability, innovation, and identity. Although the site meets basic recreational needs as a large-scale urban park, it lacks distinctive National Garden design qualities and sustainable infrastructure. The study argues that National Gardens should be judged not only by size but also by spatial quality, inclusivity, and local identity integration.
Keywords
National garden, landscape design, design principles, Kırıkkale
Ethical Statement
The article complies with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics committee approval was not required for the study.
References
- Abdallah, M. B., & Tülek, B. (2024). Çankırı Devlet Bahçeli Parkı Millet Bahçesinin kentsel yeşil alan planlama ve tasarım kriterlerine göre incelenmesi. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Mimarlık ve Yaşam Dergisi, 9(3), 423–450. https://doi.org/10.26835/my.1522541
- Ahern, J. (2011). From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience in the new urban world. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100(4), 341–343. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.02.021
- Aktepe, E. (2025). Millet bahçeleri: Soylulaştırmanın yeşil hali. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(2), 855–879. Doi: https://doi.org/10.21180/iibfdkastamonu.1646168
- Alshehri, R. M., Alzenifeer, B. M., Alqahtany, A. M., Alrawaf, T., Alsayed, A. H., Afify, H. M. N., Elmoghazy, Z. A. A., & Alshammari, M. S. (2025). Impact of urban green spaces on social interaction and sustainability: A case study in Jubail, Saudi Arabia. Sustainability, 17(10). Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104467
- Batty, M. (2017). The new science of cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Benedict, M. & McMahon, E. (2006). Green infrastructure: Linking landscapes and communities. Washington, DC: Island Press.
- Bentley, I., Alcock, A., Murrain, P., McGlynn, S. & Smith, G. (2012). Responsive environments: A manual for designers. London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
- Biçen, A. (2023). Millet bahçelerinin engelli ulaşılabilirliği üzerine bir değerlendirme: Diyarbakır Bağlar Millet Bahçesi. International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research (JSHSR), 10(100), 2614–2628. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10028899
- Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (2012). Public places–urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. London, UK: Routledge. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080515427
- Çelik, F. (2018). Kentsel açık-yeşil alanlarda güvenlik. İdealKent, 9(23), 58–94.