A study on city center accessibility and transportation network functionality: The case of Trabzon

Öz

Accessibility is a key factor in shaping the functionality of city centers. Access through public transportation, the prioritization of pedestrian-friendly circulation, and reduced private-vehicle use significantly enhance urban usability. In cities where public transport systems and pedestrian infrastructure are underdeveloped, dependence on private vehicles often leads to congestion, traffic problems, noise, and air pollution. The road network surrounding Atatürk Area, an important node in Trabzon’s city center, has changed continuously over time in response to the city’s development needs. This study examines how different transportation modes affect city-center accessibility and functionality. To this end, the accessibility of Trabzon’s city center and the effectiveness of its transportation network were analyzed across two periods through three transportation modes: pedestrian circulation, public transportation routes, and private-vehicle roads. The analysis is based on fieldwork and mapping methods. The findings indicate that pedestrianization efforts and improvements to public transportation between 2019 and 2025 have significantly improved mobility and traffic flow in the area.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Accessibility
• City Center
• Functionality
• Transportation Network
• Urban Planning

Kent merkezi erişilebilirliği ve ulaşım ağı işlevselliği üzerine bir inceleme: Trabzon örneği

Öz

Erişilebilirlik, kent merkezinin işlevselliğini belirleyen temel unsurlardan biridir. Toplu taşıma olanaklarıyla erişimin sağlanması, yaya dostu dolaşımın önceliklendirilmesi ve özel araç kullanımının azaltılması, kentsel kullanılabilirliği önemli ölçüde artırmaktadır. Toplu taşıma sistemleri ile yaya altyapısının yetersiz olduğu kentlerde, özel araçlara olan bağımlılık genellikle trafik sıkışıklığı, ulaşım sorunları, gürültü ve hava kirliliği gibi olumsuz sonuçlar doğurmaktadır. Trabzon kent merkezinin önemli bir düğüm noktası olan Atatürk alanı çevresindeki yol ağı, kentin gelişim ihtiyaçları doğrultusunda yıllar içinde sürekli değişim göstermiştir. Bu çalışma, farklı ulaşım türlerinin kent merkezinin erişilebilirliği ve işlevselliği üzerindeki etkilerini araştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu doğrultuda, Trabzon kent merkezinin erişilebilirliği ve ulaşım ağının etkinliği; yaya dolaşımı, toplu taşıma güzergâhları ve özel araç yolları olmak üzere üç ulaşım türü üzerinden, iki farklı zaman diliminde analiz edilmiştir. Analizler, saha çalışmaları ve haritalama yöntemlerine dayanmaktadır. Bulgular, 2019 ile 2025 yılları arasında gerçekleştirilen yayalaştırma çalışmaları ve toplu taşımaya yönelik iyileştirmelerin, bölgede hareketliliği ve trafik akışını önemli ölçüde artırdığını ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Erişilebilirlik
• Kent Merkezi
• İşlevsellik
• Ulaşım Ağı
• Kentsel Planlama

Kaynakça

1. Akbulut, F. (2016). Kentsel ulaşım hizmetlerinin planlanması ve yönetiminde sürdürülebilir politika önerileri. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 11, 336–355. https://izlik.org/ja69jm24nh
2. Al-Daini, R., Danilina, N., & Alaraza, H. A. A. (2021). Developing a theoretical model to improve the road network of a historical city in Iraq. E3S Web of Conferences, 263, Article 05007. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202126305007
3. Alp, G., & Özdemir, Ş. (2022). Arnavutköy’de raylı sistem yatırımlarının bölgeye etkisi. İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 4(1), 14–17. https://doi.org/10.-47769/izufbed.1059989
4. Aygün, E., Korkut, A., & Kiper, T. (2018). Engelli bireyler için kentsel dış mekânlara erişilebilirliğin incelenmesi: Tekirdağ örneği. ARTİUM, 6(2), 20–32. https://izlik.org/ja57zf43pl
5. Besser, L. M., & Dannenberg, A. L. (2005). Walking to public transit: Steps to help meet physical activity recommendations. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 29(4), 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2005.06.010
6. Bindajam, A. A., & Mallick, J. (2020). Impact of the spatial configuration of streets networks on urban growth: A case study of Abha City, Saudi Arabia. Sustainability, 12(5), Article 1856. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051856
7. Cervero, R., & Kockelman, K. (1997). Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2(3), 199–219. https://-doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00009-6
8. Crotti, D., Grechi, D., & Maggi, E. (2022). Proximity to public transportation and sustainable commuting to college: A case study of an Italian suburban campus. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 10(1), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cs-tp.2021.12.003

9. Dönmez Kara, C. Ö. (2021). Türkiye’de mekânsal erişilebilirliği sınırlayan altyapı eksikliklerinin engelli istihdamına etkisi. Sosyal Güvenlik Dergisi, 11(1), 117–140. https://doi.org/10.32331-/sgd.952558
10. Duranton, G., & Puga, D. (2014). The growth of cities. In P. Aghion & S. N. Durlauf (Eds.), Handbook of economic growth (Vol. 2, pp. 781–853). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53540-5.00005-7
11. Eray, S. S., & Öksüz, A. M. (2026). Measurement of urban compactness in neighborhood scale. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 152(1), Article 04025075. https://doi.org/10.1061/jupddm.upeng-5738
12. Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for people. Island Press.
13. Günebakış. (2025, January 7). Her yol meydana çıkar. https://www.gunebakis.com.tr/haber/15075841/her-yol-meydana-cikar
14. Hafiudzan, A., Kusumaningrum, D., & Prasetyoputra, P. (2024). Who gets the most? Study of housing clustering and its relation to urban public transport accessibility in Jakarta. In C. M. Roelfsema, A. B. Rimba, S. Arjasakusuma, & A. Blanco (Eds.), Eighth Geoinformation Science Symposium 2023: Geoinformation Science for Sustainable Planet (p. 72). SPIE. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.3009742
15. Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. Random House.
16. Kraft, S. (2016). Measuring and modelling the spatial accessibility of public transport stops in GIS. Hungarian Geographical Bulletin, 65(1), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.15201/hungeobull.65.1.5
17. Macke, J., Rubim Sarate, J. A., & de Atayde Moschen, S. (2019). Smart sustainable cities evaluation and sense of community. Journal of Cleaner Production, 239, Article 118103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118103
18. Mierzejewski, E. (1998). A strategic approach to the transportation planning process. Journal of Public Transportation, 2(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.2.1.2
19. Olsson, L. E., Friman, M., & Lättman, K. (2021). Accessibility barriers and perceived accessibility: Implications for public transport. Urban Science, 5(3), Article 63. https://doi.org/-10.3390/urbansci5030063
20. Orhan, C. C., Soman, J., & Wallace, S. W. (2024). Disconnecting a city centre to prevent through traffic: An a priori evaluation with a focus on freight transport. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 185, Article 104125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2024.104125
21. Oyama, Y., Murakami, S., Chikaraishi, M., & Parady, G. (2024). Designing pedestrian zones within city center networks considering policy objective trade-offs. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 185, Article 104119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2024.104119
22. Öztaşkın, D., & Levend, S. (2023). Toplu taşıma duraklarının erişilebilirliği: İstanbul örneği. Turkish Journal of Remote Sensing and GIS, 4(2), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.48123/rsgis.1299707
23. Peng, J., Cui, C., Qi, J., Ruan, Z., Dai, Q., & Yang, H. (2021). The evolvement of rail transit network structure and impact on travel characteristics: A case study of Wuhan. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(11), Article 789. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10110789
24. Petrova, T., & Grunin, A. (2024). Transport accessibility of urban districts in megapolis: Insights from Moscow. Urban Science, 8(2), Article 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci8020036
25. Pozo, A. M. M., Priesmeier, P., & Fekete, A. (2025). Measuring spatial accessibility to critical infrastructure: The Access Road Identification model. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 49, Article 100760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2025.100760
26. Republic of Türkiye. (2005, July 7). Law on Disabled People (Law No. 5378). Official Gazette (No. 25868). https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuat?MevzuatNo=5378&MevzuatTur=1&MevzuatTertip=5
27. Republic of Türkiye. (2013, July 20). Regulation on Accessibility Monitoring and Inspection. Official Gazette (No. 28713). https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2013/07/20130720-9.htm
28. Ruiz, M., Bonhomme, M., Ginestet, S., & Masson, V. (2024). Multi-objective assessment of the retrofit of traditional walls located in a historical city centre using an urban climate model. Energy and Buildings, 324, Article 114873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2024.114873
29. Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., Black, J. B., & Chen, D. (2003). Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: An environment scale evaluation. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1552–1558. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.93.9.1552
30. Sancar, C., & Acar, C. (2016). Türkiye’de kent peyzajının yeni yüzleri olarak meydanlar: Trabzon-Ortahisar ‘Atatürk Alanı’ dönüşüm projesi. Inonu University Journal of Art and Design, 6(13), 57–73.
31. Selçuk, İ. A., & Szeri, R. (2019). Eşitlik, erişilebilirlik ve toplu taşıma. Kent Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10(28), 1207–1229. https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.519139
32. Semple, T., & Fountas, G. (2023). Demographic and behavioural factors affecting public support for pedestrianisation in city centres: The case of Edinburgh, UK. International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology, 12(1), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2021.12.001
33. Seyhan, Ç., & Acar, H. (2023). Children’s travel to school in urban areas: A systematic review of different application models. İDEALKENT, 15(42), 1060–1084. https://doi.org/10.31198/-idealkent.1317880
34. Stojanovski, T. (2020). Urban design and public transportation – Public spaces, visual proximity and Transit-Oriented Development (TOD). Journal of Urban Design, 25(1), 134–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2019.1592665
35. Suthanaya, P. A. (2016). Accessibility to public transport services (Case study of Tabanan Region, Bali-Indonesia). MATEC Web of Conferences, 58, Article 02002. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20165802002
36. Turan, B., Ayataç, H., & İnce, E. C. (2022). Ulaşımdaki türel dağılımın kamusal alanlara erişimdeki etkisi. İDEALKENT, 13(36), 519–544. https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.1064805
37. Vásárus, G. L., & Lennert, J. (2022). Suburbanization within city limits in Hungary—A challenge for environmental and social sustainability. Sustainability, 14(14), Article 8855. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148855
38. Yang, J., Guo, A., Li, X., & Huang, T. (2018). Study of the impact of a high-speed railway opening on China’s accessibility pattern and spatial equality. Sustainability, 10(8), Article 2943. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082943