Design Interventions to Creating In-Between Spaces for Healthy Neighborhoods: Case of Mersin, Halkkent Neighbourhood

Öz

Restrictions on public life during the Covid-19 pandemic caused the spatial organization to be questioned in the modern city and revealed the importance of "in-between/border spaces". This study was designed as an explanatory article; It aimed to develop design interventions to create in-between/border spaces for the Halkkent neighbourhood in Mersin province, Turkey. Although the problem area has many possibilities in its mass organization, it is weak in terms of spatial hierarchy and social levelling. The method of this study is quantitative research; the potential and problems of the problem area have been analysed through 6 spatial criteria that the spaces should contain, and the current situation has been revealed by using schematic representation techniques and a basemap. In the study, schematic representation, and photographing techniques were used. Based on the identified problems and potentials of the space, the study was concluded with a proposal urban design scheme for the creation of semi-public and semi-private spaces in the study area within the framework of spatial needs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• in-between spaces
• healthy neighborhoods
• social levelling
• spatial hiearchy
• pandemic

Sağlıklı Mahalleler için Arada-Mekânlar Yaratmaya Yönelik Tasarım Müdahaleleri: Mersin, Halkkent Mahallesi

Öz

Covid-19 pandemisi sürecinde kamusal yaşama getirilen kısıtlamalar, modern kentte mekânsal organizasyonun sorgulanmasına neden olmuş ve "arada/sınır mekânların" önemini ortaya çıkarmıştır. Açıklayıcı bir makale olarak tasarlanan bu çalışma; Türkiye'nin Mersin ilinde yer alan Halkkent mahallesi için arada/sınırda kalan mekânlar yaratmaya yönelik tasarım müdahaleleri geliştirmeyi amaçlamıştır. Sorun alanı, kütlesel organizasyonunda birçok imkâna sahip olmasına rağmen, mekânsal hiyerarşi ve sosyal kademelenme açısından zayıftır. Bu çalışmanın yöntemi nicel araştırma olup; problem alanın potansiyel ve sorunları, arada mekânların barındırması gereken altı ölçüt ile analiz edilmiş; şematik gösterim teknikleri ile halihazır harita kullanılarak mevcut durum ortaya konulmuştur. Çalışmada şematik gösterim ve fotoğraflama teknikleri kullanılmıştır. Çalışma, mekânın tespit edilen sorun ve potansiyellerinden yola çıkılarak, mekânsal ihtiyaçlar çerçevesinde çalışma alanında yarı kamusal ve yarı özel mekânların oluşturulmasına yönelik bir öneri kentsel tasarım şeması ile sonuçlandırılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• arada mekanlar
• sağlıklı mahalleler
• sosyal kademelenme; mekânsal hiyerarşi
• pandemi

Kaynakça

1. Appleton, J. (1988). Prospects and refuges revisited. In Environmental Aesthetics—Theory, Research and Applications, Jack L. Nasar (Ed.), pp. 27-44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Aydınlı, S. (1986). Mekansal Değerlendirmede Algısal Yargılara Dayalı bir Model. PhD Thesis, İstanbul Technical University, İstanbul.
3. Berkman, L. F. & Syme, S. L. (1979). Social Networks, host resistance and mortality: A nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. American Journal of Epidemiology, 109, 186-204.
4. Bolat, A. (2022). Kentsel Açık Mekân Olarak Caddelerin Kalite Kriterleri Bağlamında Dğerlendirilmesi ve Kavramsal Bir Model Önerisi. Master Thesis, İstanbul Technical University, İstanbul.
5. Booth, N. K. (1983). Basic Elements of Landscape Architectural Design. Vaveland Press.
6. Ernst M. L. & Schwartz A. U. (1962). The Right to Be Let Alone. New York: Macmillan.
7. Ertez Ural, S. (2018). Colour and Spatial Comfort in Architectural Context. AIC Interim Meeting. www.aic2018.org.
8. Gehl, J. (2011). Life Between Buildings. IslandPress.

9. Gelter, H. (1999). Friluftsliv: The Scandinavian Philosophy of Outdoor Life. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 5, 77-90.
10. Göregenli, M. (2013). Çevre Psikolojisi. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
11. Greene, S. (1992). Cityshape Communicating and Evaluating Community Design. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58(2), 177-189.
12. Hall, E. T. (1969). Hidden Dimension. New York: Pan-American Copyright .
13. Kaplan, S. (1987). Aesthetics, Affect and Cognition: Environmental Preference from an Evolutionary Perspective. Environment and Behavior, 19(1), 3-32.
14. Kürkçüoğlu, İ. E. (2009). Kentsel Açık Mekânda Yapay Su Elemanı Tasarım İlkelerinin Mekânsal Algı ve Çevre Psikolojisi Bağlamında İrdelenmesi. Master Thesis, Yıldız Technical University, İstanbul.
15. Lawrence, R. J. (2002). Healthy Residential Environments. In Handbook of Environmental Psychology, R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), pp. 394-412. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
16. Longstreth, R. (2000). The Buildings of Main Streets: A Guide to American Commercial Architecture. Rowman & Littlefield.
17. Madanipour, A. (2003). Public and Private Spaces of the City, 1st edition, Vol.1. Routledge.
18. McCormack, G. R., Petersen, J., Naish, C., Ghoneim, D., & Doyle-Baker, P. K. (2022). Neighbourhood environment facilitators and barriers to outdoor activity during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada: A qualitative study. Cities & Health, 7(4), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2021.2016218
19. Moos, R. H. (1979). Health Psychology: A Handbook. G. C. Stone, F. Cohen, & N. E. Adler, (Eds.), pp. 523-547. Jossey-Bass.
20. Newman, O. (1996). Creating Defensible Space. US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
21. Omar, D. B., Ibrahim, F. I., & Mohamad, N. B. (2015). Human Interaction in Open Spaces. Elsevier; Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 201, 352-359.
22. One Community. (2018). Meeting The Six Foundational Human Needs as a Path to Global Transformation. https://www.onecommunityglobal.org/foundations-of-fulfillment
23. Sitte, C. (1945). The Art of Building Cities. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
24. Stokols, D. (2002). Establishing and Maintaining Healthy Environments Toward a Social Ecology of Health Promotion. American Psychologist, 47, 6-22.
25. Trettenero, S. (2017, 04 02). The Comfort Zone and Personal Growth. Psychreg: https://www.psychreg.org/comfort-zone-personal-growth/
26. Vassilaki, P., Ekim, E. (2015). Levels of Privacy. Master Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg.
27. WHO (World Health Organization) (1946). Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health conference, New York, 19–22 June, 1946. New York: WHO.
28. Wooley, H. (2003). Urban Open Spaces. New York: Taylor and Francis e-library.