Evaluating Spatial Legibility of the University Campus using GIS

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2, 127 - 147, 30.12.2020

Aslı Bozdağ Münevver Gizem Gümüş Kutalmış Gümüş S. Savaş Durduran

https://doi.org/10.29002/asujse.767122

Cited By: 1

Öz

Spatial legibility is related to the obtainment of spatial information (2D and 3D) that is in the urban area according to the characteristics of the observer who perceives this space. The aim of this research is to examine the spatial legibility of the campus of Selçuk University which is located in Konya province according to the characteristics of the area and the observer. The spatial characteristics of the application area were determined with the analyzes that were conducted with the help of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and the characteristics of the observer were determined with analyzes that reveal the understanding of the observer to the area (Lynch analysis, questionnaire application and statistical evaluations). When the conducted spatial analyzes and statistical evaluations are examined, it was determined that the spatial legibility of the campus has a statistically significant relationship with the characteristics of the area and the observer.

Anahtar Kelimeler

spatial legibility, spatial awareness, environmental behavior, GIS

Kaynakça

• [1] F.C. Bilsel, S.G. Bilsel, A.A. Bilsel, Kuramsal yaklaşımlardan kentsel mekan tasarımına, 1. Ulusal Kentsel Tasarım Kongresi, (1999).
• [2] G. Bell, P. Dourish, Getting out of the city: Meaning and structure in everyday encounters with space. In Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing on the Urban Frontier, Ubicomp. (2004).
• [3] S. Kaplan, R. Kaplan, The visual environment: Public participation in design and planning. Journal of Social Issues, 45(1), (1989), 59-86.
• [4] A. E. Stamps, Mystery, complexity, legibility and coherence: A meta-analysis. Journal of environmental psychology, 24(1), (2004), 1-16.
• [5] E. Köseoğlu, D. E. Önder, Mekânsal Okunabilirlik Kavramının Çözümlenmesi. Yapı Dergisi, 343, (2010), 52-56.
• [6] O. Belir, D.E. Önder, Accessibility in Public Spaces: Spatial legibility for visually impaired people. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Space Syntax Symposium Edited by Kim, YO, Park, HT and Seo, KW, (2013).
• [7] R. Passini, Wayfinding in architecture. (Environmental Design Series, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1984). [8] K. Lynch, The image of the city, (ma: mit press, Cambridge, 1960).
• [9] D. Appleyard, Why buildings are known: A predictive tool for architects and planners. Environment and Behavior, 1(2), (1969), 131-156.
• [10] J. Weisman, Evaluating architectural legibility: Way-finding in the built environment. Environment and Behavior, 13(2), (1981),189-204.
• [11] T. Gärling, A. Böök, E. Lindberg, Spatial orientation and wayfinding in the designed environment: A conceptual analysis and some suggestions for postoccupancy evaluation. Journal of architectural and planning research, (1986), 55-64.
• [12] E. Köseoğlu, D.E. Önder, Subjective and objective dimensions of spatial legibility. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, (2011), 1191-1195.
• [13] N. Dehghan, A.M. Moradi, G.H. Memariyan, Comparing the Dimensions of Spatial Legibility with Wayfinding Strategies. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 3, (2012), 2637-2646.
• [14] E. Kürkçüoğlu, M. Ocakçı, Kentsel Dokuda Mekânsal Yönelme Üzerine Bir Algı-Davranış Çalışması: Kadıköy Çarşı Bölgesi. Megaron, 10(3), (2015), 365-388.
• [15] B. Güç, Okunabilirlik Ve Erişilebilirlik Açısından Hastane Dolaşım Alanlarındaki Mekânsal Düzenin Etkisi: Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Poliklinikleri. Mühendislik Bilimleri ve Tasarım Dergisi, 3(3), (2015), 425-432.
• [16] K. D. Topçu, M. Topçu, Visual presentation of mental images in urban design education: cognitive maps. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, (2012), 573-582.
• [17] Y. A. Türk, B. Sen, A. Özyavuz, Students exploration on campus legibility. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, (2015), 339-347.
• [18] S. Suthasupa, The Portrayal of a City's Image by Young People. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 38, (2012), 284-292.
• [19] I. Delikostidis, J. Engel, B. Retsios, C.P. Van Elzakker, M. J. Kraak, J. Döllner, Increasing the usability of pedestrian navigation interfaces by means of landmark visibility analysis. The Journal of Navigation, 66(4), (2013), 523-537.
• [20] N. Taylor, Legibility and aesthetics in urban design. Journal of Urban design, 14(2), (2009), 189-202.
• [21] T. R., Herzog, O.L. Leverich, Searching for legibility. Environment and Behavior, 35(4), (2003), 459-477.
• [22] H. Safari, F.F. Moridani, S.S. Mahdzar, Influence of geometry on legibility: An explanatory design study of visitors at the Kuala Lumpur City Center. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 5(4), (2016), 499-507.
• [23] D.M., Kelly, W.F. Bischof, Orienting in virtual environments: How are surface features and environmental geometry weighted in an orientation task?. Cognition, 109(1), (2008), 89-104.
• [24] A. P. N. De Faria, R. Krafta, Representing urban cognitive structure through spatial differentiation, In 4th International Space Syntax Symposium, (2003).
• [25] A. Baskaya, C. Wilson, Y.Z. Özcan, Wayfinding in an unfamiliar environment: Different spatial settings of two polyclinics, Environment and Behavior, 36(6), (2004), 839-867.
• [26] Z. Eraydin, Building a Legible City: How Far Planning is Successful in Ankara (Doctoral dissertation, Mıddle East Technıcal Unıversıty), (2007).
• [27] T. Ishikawa, D. R. Montello, Spatial knowledge acquisition from direct experience in the environment: Individual differences in the development of metric knowledge and the integration of separately learned places. Cognitive psychology, 52(2), (2006), 93-129.
• [28] R. Dalton, S. Bafna, The syntactical image of the city: A reciprocal definition of spatial elements and spatial syntaxes. 4th International Space Syntax Symposium (2003).
• [29] A. Rapoport, Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards a Man – Environment Approach to Urban Form and Design, (Pergamon Press, UK, 1977).
• [30] G. Cullen, The Concise Townscape. (Architectural Press,London, UK: Paisagem Urbana,1961).
• [31] R. Chang, T. Butkiewicz, C. Ziemkiewicz, Z. Wartell, N. Pollard, W. Ribarsky, Legible simplification of textured urban models. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 28(3), (2008), 27-36.
• [32] F. Habib, M. Sashourpour, The Cognition of the City at Night. International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development, 2(3), (2012), 5-12.
• [33] Ç. Kol, S. Küpçü, ArcGIS Spatial Analyse. Ankara, TR:İşlem Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri Mühendisliği ve Eğitim Ltd. Şti Yayınları, (2008).
• [34] P. Bartie, S. Mills, S. Kingham, An egocentric urban viewshed: A method for landmark visibility mapping for pedestrian location based services. In Geospatial Vision: new dimensions in cartography, 4, (2008), 61-85.
• [35] W. Michelson, An empirical analysis of urban environmental perception. Journal of American Institute of Planners, 32, (1966), 355-360.
• [36] D. Pocock, R. Hudson, Environmental cognition in cross-cultural perspective. Environmental Knowing. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross. London, UK: Macmillan, (1978).
• [37] M. J. Proulx, O. S. Todorov, A. Taylor Aiken, A.A. de Sousa, Where am I? Who am I? The relation between spatial cognition, social cognition and individual differences in the built environment. Frontiers in psychology, 7(64), (2016), 1-23.