Kamu Binaları ve Yerleşkelerinde Fiziksel Erişilebilirlik Düzeyinin Değerlendirilmesi: İstanbul Örneği

Öz

Günümüzde kentleşmenin hızla artması, engelli bireylerin ulaşım, barınma, sağlık ve eğitim gibi temel hizmetlere erişiminde çeşitli mekânsal engellerin ortaya çıkmasına neden olmaktadır. Bu durum, erişilebilirlik kavramını kapsayıcı ve sürdürülebilir kent politikalarının önemli bir bileşeni haline getirmiştir. Erişilebilirlik, bireylerin kamusal alanlara ve hizmetlere güvenli ve bağımsız biçimde ulaşabilmesini ifade etmektedir. Bu doğrultuda Türkiye’de erişilebilir yaşam alanlarının oluşturulmasına yönelik yasal düzenlemeler yapılmış ve izleme–denetleme mekanizmaları geliştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, Erişilebilirlik İzleme ve Denetleme Yönetmeliği kapsamında hazırlanan “Binalar İçin Erişilebilirlik İzleme ve Denetleme Formu” kullanılarak İstanbul’da bulunan kamuya açık bina ve yerleşkelerin erişilebilirlik düzeyleri değerlendirilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında üniversite, okul, sağlık hizmetleri, idari hizmetler ve bakım hizmetleri olmak üzere beş farklı kategoride toplam 138 bina ve yerleşke incelenmiştir. Bulgular, incelenen bina ve yerleşkelerin yalnızca %3,6’sının erişilebilirlik kriterlerini tam olarak karşıladığını göstermektedir. Erişilebilirlik kriterlerine uyum sağlamayan yapı ve yerleşkelerdeki temel uygunsuzluklar belirlenmiş ve bu sorunların giderilmesine yönelik çözüm önerileri geliştirilmiştir. Bu çalışma, farklı kamu bina türlerini kapsayan geniş ölçekli bir erişilebilirlik değerlendirmesi sunması bakımından literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Erişilebilirlik
• Engellilik
• Kamusal Bina
• Denetim
• İzleme

Assessment of Physical Accessibility Levels in Public Buildings and Campuses: The Case of Istanbul

Öz

With the rapid increase in urbanisation, disabled individuals living in cities experience difficulties in accessing fundamental rights and services, such as transportation, housing, health, and education. When access to these basic rights is not provided, they may become isolated from society as well as unable to benefit from fundamental services. Accessibility refers to every individual’s secure and independent access to all services and rights. With the creation of accessible living spaces, disabled individuals can access all their rights and needs independently without any assistance. As in many countries, legal regulations and monitoring mechanisms have been introduced in Türkiye to create accessible living environments. In this study, the accessibility levels of public buildings and campuses in Istanbul were evaluated using the “Monitoring and Inspection Form for Buildings,” prepared within the scope of Article 22 of the Accessibility Monitoring and Inspection Regulation. A total of 138 buildings and campuses were examined in five categories: universities, schools, healthcare, administrative, and care services. A building or campus was considered “accessible” only if all criteria in the monitoring and inspection form were met. The findings indicate that only 3.6% of the examined buildings and campuses fully comply with accessibility criteria. The main reasons for non-compliance were identified, and recommendations were developed to address these problems. This study contributes to the literature by presenting a large-scale accessibility assessment covering different types of public buildings in Türkiye.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Accessibility
• Disability
• Public Building
• Audit
• Monitoring

Kaynakça

1. Aile, Çalışma ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı. (2020). Erişilebilirlik Kılavuzu. Engelli ve Yaşlı Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü. google scholar
2. Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı. (2022). Engelli ve Yaşlı İstatistik Bülteni. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı. google scholar
3. Burns, S. P., Mendonca, R. J., & Smith, R. O. (2023). Accessibility of public buildings in the United States: a cross-sectional survey. Disability and Society, 39(11), 2988–3003. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2023.2239996 google scholar
4. Carlsson, G., Slaug, B., Schmidt, S. M., Norin, L., Ronchi, E., & Gefenaite, G. (2022). A scoping review of public building accessibility. In Disability and Health Journal (Vol. 15, Number 2). Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2021.101227 google scholar
5. Christensen, K. M., & Sze, N. N. (2017). Access to urban transportation systems for individuals with disabilities. IATSS Research, 41(2), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iatssr.2017.05.002 google scholar
6. Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. (2022). Concluding observations on the initial report of Türkiye. https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/concluding-observations/crpdcturco1-committee-rights-persons-disabilities-concluding google scholar
7. Dünya Sağlık Örgütü. (2022). Global Report On Health Equity. Dünya Sağlık Örgütü. google scholar
8. Evcil, A. N. (2009). Wheelchair accessibility to public buildings in Istanbul. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 4(2), 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483100802543287 google scholar

9. European Commission. (2021). Persons with disabilities in the EU. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice- and-fundamental-rights/disability/persons-disabilities-eu_en google scholar
10. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2019). Directive (EU) 2019/882 on the accessibility requirements for products and services. Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/882/oj google scholar
11. Fischer, D. R. (2004). Wheelchair accessibility of public buildings in Al Ain, Disability and Rehabilitation, 26(19), 1150–1157. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280410001724800 google scholar
12. Flemmer, C., & Mcintosh, A. (n.d.). Equitable Access to the Built Environment for People with Disability. Athens Journal of Technology & Engineering 2025, 12, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajte.X-Y-Z google scholar
13. Gök, C. (2020). Erişilebilir kentler için araştırıyor izliyoruz: Çankaya. Engelliler ve Gençlik Derneği. https://www.stgm.org.tr/sites/default/files/2020-09/erisilebilir-kentler-raporu.pdf google scholar
14. Gupta, A., Yadav, M., & Nayak, B. K. (2025). A Systematic Literature Review on Inclusive Public Open Spaces: Accessibility Standards and Universal Design Principles. In Urban Science (Vol. 9, Number 6). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci9060181 google scholar
15. Hansen, W. G. (1959). Accessibility and residential growth. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press. google scholar
16. Imrie, R., & Kumar, M. (1998). Focusing on disability and access in the built environment. Disability & Society, 13(3), 357–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599826687 google scholar
17. Marín-Nicolás, J., & Sáez-Pérez, M. P. (2022). An Evaluation Tool for Physical Accessibility of Cultural Heritage Buildings. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215251 google scholar
18. Petit, A. M., Morera, S., Morera, P. L., & Valladares, M. (2022). The accessibility chain: A challenge and an opportunity for cities and people with disabilities. Journal of Public Space, 7(2), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.32891/jps.v7i2.1604 google scholar
19. Preiser, W. F. E., & Smith, K. H. (2011). Universal design handbook (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. google scholar
20. Ribbonaar, D., & Verster, B. (2004). A Disablıng Public Transport System. Pretoria: Document Transformation Technologies. google scholar
21. Story, M. F., Mueller, J. L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The universal design file: Designing for people of all ages and abilities. NC State University, Center for Universal Design. google scholar
22. United Nations. (2023). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html google scholar
23. U.S. Department of Justice. (2010). 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. https://www.ada.gov/2010ADAstandards_index.htm google scholar
24. Useh, U., Moyo, A., & Munyonga, E. (2001). Wheelchair accessibility of public buildings in the central business district of Harare, Zimbabwe. Disability and Rehabilitation, 23(11), 490-496. google scholar