ASSESSING PUBLIC SPACE COMPLEXITY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WATERFRONT AREAS IN ISTANBUL'S BOSPHORUS DISTRICT
Öz
Public space is an essential symbol of connection and integrity for both citizens and cities, serving as a platform for interaction and shared experiences. Among public spaces, coastal areas hold significant importance as they facilitate integration between citizens and water, offering opportunities for transportation and recreational activities. This paper aims evaluating complexity on public space in waterfront in comparison with the two side in Istanbul based on Carmona’s classification. The study utilizes a comparative analysis based on land use data from the analysis by using Geographic Information System (GIS). Land use data, in essence, provides embedded information on accessibility. By analysing these classifications, the paper seeks to shed light on the similarities and differences in the public space characteristics and public access between the coastal areas of the Bosphorus District. Preliminary findings indicate that the positive space characteristics in both sides are comparable. However, the ratio of ambiguous and private spaces varies due to historical factors, property ownership and land use patterns. These influence the nature and accessibility of public spaces, thereby contributing to the observed diversity along the waterfront. The study's findings have implications for urban planning and the development of inclusive public spaces in coastal areas.
Anahtar Kelimeler
bosphorus, coastal areas, public spaces, waterfronts
Teşekkür
This paper was prepared in the "GIS in Urban Planning" course conducted by Prof. Dr. Fatih Terzi in the Urban Planning Master's Program at Istanbul Technical University.
We would like to express our sincere thanks to Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, Urban Planning Department for the data of land use analysis.
Kaynakça
- Akkar, M. (2005a). The changing ‘publicness’ of contemporary public spaces: a case study of the Grey's Monument Area, Newcastle upon Tyne. Urban Design International, 10, 95–113.
- Akkar, Z. M. (2005b). Questioning the ‘publicness’ of public spaces in postindustrial cities. Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review, 16,75–91.
- Al-Hagla, K. S. (2008). Towards a sustainable neighborhood: the role of open spaces. International Journal of Architectural Research Archnet-IJAR, 2(2), 162-177, DOI: 10.26687/archnet-ijar.v2i2.239
- Banerjee, T. (2001). The future of public space: beyond invented streets and reinvented places. Journal of the American Planning Association, 67(1), 9-24, DOI: 10.1080/01944360108976352
- Carmona, M. (2010a). Contemporary public space: critique and classification, part one: critique. Journal of Urban Design, 15(1), 123-148, DOI: 10.1080/13574800903435651
- Carmona, M. (2010b). Contemporary public space, part two: classification. Journal of Urban Design, 15(2), 157-173, DOI: 10.1080/13574801003638111
- Carmona, M. (2015). Re-theorizing Contemporary Public Space. Journal of Urbanism. 8(4): 373–405. DOI: 10.1080/17549175.2014.909518
- Carmona, M. & Wunderlich, F.M. (2012). Capital Spaces: The Multiple Complex Public Spaces of a Global City. London: Routledge.
- Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L. G. & Stone, A. M. (1992). Public Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dines, N., Cattell, V., Gesler, W. & Curtis, S. (2006) Public Spaces, Social Relations and Well-being in East London. Bristol: The Policy Press.
- Dovey, K. & Pafka, E. (2020). Mapping the publicness of public space, An access/control typology. In Mehta, V. & Palazzo, D. (Eds.), Companion to Public Space (1st ed., pp.234-248). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351002189