MİLANO'NUN GÜNEY ÇEPERİ İÇİN YAKINSAMA PROJESİ: GÜNLÜK YAŞAMIN ALTYAPISI OLARAK EŞİTLİKÇİ KAMUSAL YEŞİL ALANLARA DOĞRU

Öz

Yakınlık, erişilebilirliği ve kamusal hizmetleri sorgulayan çağdaş kentsel alanda önemli bir kavramdır. Dünya nüfusunun büyük bölümünün kentsel alanlarda yoğunlaşması, özellikle kent merkezlerinde artan nüfus yoğunluğu ile mekânsal yoğunlaşmayı beraberinde getirmektedir. Dolayısıyla ‘günlük yaşamın altyapısı’ olan kentsel kamusal hizmetler de kentlerin merkez bölgesinde yoğunlaşırken, kentin çeper alanlarında temel olanaklara ve hizmetlere erişimde mekânsal eşitsizlikler ortaya çıkarabilmektedir. Kent çeperi alanlarda yaşayanların günlük yaşamlarının önemli bir parçası olan kamusal alanlara 'yakınlık' ilkesi doğrultusunda sadece fiziksel olarak değil, aynı zamanda nitelik ve kullanılabilirlik açısından da eşit erişimini sağlayacak kentsel tasarım yaklaşımları neler olabilir? Bu çalışma, kentsel kamusal hizmetlerin önemli bir bileşeni olan yeşil alanların bu bütüncül 'yakınlık' anlayışı çerçevesinde incelenmesine odaklanmaktadır. Vaka çalışması olarak, İtalya’nın Lombardiya bölgesinin başkenti ve ikinci en kalabalık şehri Milano tercih edilmiştir. Milano, çok yönlü fonksiyonları, morfolojik yapısı ve sosyal dinamikleriyle kentsel yaşamın yoğun olarak yaşandığı bir merkez iken, güney çeperinde yer alan ve sosyo-çevresel açıdan kırılgan nitelikteki Milano-Sud bölgesi, çalışmanın analiz odak noktasıdır. Çalışmanın yöntemi, çalışma alanının makro ve mikro ölçekli mekânsal analizleri ile saha çalışması ve kullanıcılarla yapılan görüşmelerin sonuçlarına dayanmaktadır. Bulgular, bazı parkların kamusal hizmetlere ve kullanıcılara yakınlık açısından erişilebilir olmasına rağmen, yeterince çekici, güvenli veya işlevsel olmadığını göstermiştir. Araştırma, kentsel tasarım ilkeleri doğrultusunda bu problemlerin nedenini detaylıca incelenmiş ve kamusal yeşil alanların tasarımının etkilerini ortaya koymuştur. Sonuç olarak bu çalışma, kent çeperlerinde yaşayanların günlük yaşamında önemli yer tutan kamusal alanların 'yakınlık' ilkesiyle erişilebilirliğini ve kullanılabilirliğini artıracak tasarım önerileri geliştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu öneriler, sadece erişilebilirliği değil, aynı zamanda bu alanların çekiciliğini, güvenliğini, işlevselliğini ve kullanıcılar arasındaki sosyal etkileşimi de artırmayı hedeflemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• yakınlık
• kentsel tasarım
• yeşil alanlar
• kent çeperi
• Milano

MILAN'S SOUTHERN MARGINS PROXIMITY PROJECT: TOWARDS EQUITABLE PUBLIC GREEN SPACES AS AN EVERYDAY LIFE INFRASTRUCTURE

Öz

Proximity is a key urban concept related to accessibility and public services. Urban population concentration increases density, especially in city centres. Accordingly, while urban public services, which are the ‘infrastructure of daily life’, are concentrated in the central areas of cities, spatial inequalities in accessing essential facilities and services emerge in peri-urban areas. What are the urban design approaches that will provide equal access to public spaces, which are an important part of the daily lives of those living in peri-urban areas, not only physically but also in terms of quality and usability in line with the principle of “proximity”? This study focuses on analysing green spaces, which are an important component of urban public services, within the framework of this holistic “proximity” understanding. Milan, Italy's Lombardy capital and second most populous city, is the case study. Its Milan0 Sud peri-urban region, marked by socio-environmental fragility, is the analysis focus. The study's methodology is based on macro and micro-scale spatial analyses of the study area, combined with findings from user interviews conducted during fieldwork. The findings showed that although some parks are accessible in terms of proximity to public services and users, they are not attractive, safe or functional enough. The research analysed the causes of these problems in detail in line with urban design principles and revealed the effects of the design of public green spaces. As a result, it aims to develop design recommendations for the solution of the ‘proximity’ problem experienced in public spaces where users living in urban peripheries can spend most of their daily lives. These proposals aim to increase not only accessibility but also the attractiveness, safety, functionality and social interaction between users.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• proximity
• urban design
• green spaces
• peri-urban
• Milano

Kaynakça

1. Albrechts, L., Balducci, A. and Hillier, J. (eds.) (2017). Situated practices of strategic planning: An international perspective. Routledge.
2. Allen, A. (2003). Environmental planning and management of the peri-urban interface: perspectives on an emerging field. Environment and urbanization, 15(1), 135-148. DOI: 10.1177/095624780301500103
3. Amin, A. (2014). Lively infrastructure. Theory, Culture & Society, 31(7-8), 137-161. DOI: 10.1177/0263276414548490
4. Armondi, S., Balducci, A., Bovo, M. and Galimberti, B. (eds.) (2022). Cities learning from a pandemic: Toward a preparedness. Routledge.
5. Aşıcı, G. (2023). Kır-kent çeperinin iklim değişikliği perspektifinden incelenmesi: Denizli örneği. (Master's thesis, Pamukkale University, Türkiye)
6. Balducci, A., Fedeli, V. and Curci, F. (2017). Post-metropolitan territories: Looking for a New Urbanity. Routledge.
7. Barbosa, V., Pradilla, M. M. S., & Rajendran, L. P. (2022). Peri-urbanization, dynamics, and challenges in developing countries towards sustainable urban growth-Special Section Editorial. urbe. Revista Brasileira de Gestão Urbana, 14, e20220998.
8. Bedimo-Rung, A. L., Mowen, A. J. and Cohen, D. A. (2005). The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: a conceptual model. American journal of preventive medicine, 28(2), 159-168. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.024

9. Belge, Z. S. and Ercan, M. A. (2022). Mobility and the Role of Pedestrian in the Making of Public Space: The Case Study of Mersin. Transportation Research Procedia, 60, 386-393. DOI: 10.1016/j.trpro.2021.12.050
10. Blečić, I., Saiu, V. and Trunfio, G. A. (2020). Towards a high-fidelity assessment of urban green spaces walking accessibility. In Proceedings of Computational Science and Its Applications–ICCSA 2020: 20th International Conference, Cagliari, Italy, July 1–4, 2020, Part IV 20 (pp. 535-549). Springer International Publishing.
11. Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61-74. DOI: 10.1080/0034340052000320887
12. Breuste, J. and Artmann, M. (2020). Multi-functional urban green spaces. In Making Green Cities: Concepts, Challenges and Practice, J. Breuste, M. Artmann, C. Ioja and S. Qureshi (eds.), pp. 399-526. Springer International Publishing
13. Bricocoli, M., Orsini, F., Renzoni, C. and Savoldi, P. (2022). Schools and cities: spaces for solutions. In Cities Learning from a Pandemic, Armondi, S., Balducci, A., Bovo, M. and Galimberti, B (eds.), pp. 209-231. Routledge.
14. Carmona, M. (2021). Public places urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. Routledge.
15. Cervero, R., Sarmiento, O. L., Jacoby, E., Gomez, L. F. and Neiman, A. (2009). Influences of built environments on walking and cycling: lessons from Bogotá. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 3(4), 203–226. DOI: 10.1080/15568310802178314
16. Davoudi, S., Peter Hall, S. and Power, A. (2008). Key issues for planning futures and the way forward. Twenty-First Century Society, 3(3), 229-247. DOI: 10.1080/17450140802376304
17. De Vidovich, L. and Scolari, G. (2022). Seeking polycentric post-suburbanization: a view from the urban region of Milan. Urban Geography, 43(1), 123-133. DOI: 10.1080/02723638.2020.1858587
18. Dias, C. M. F. A. F. (2023). Accessibility and Availability of Urban Green Areas within the 15-Minute City Scope: Lisbon Case Study. (Master's thesis, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Portugal)
19. Ercan, M. A. and Belge, Z. S. (2020). Measuring Walkability for More Liveable and Sustainable Cities: The Case of Mersin City Centre. Ekistics and The New Habitat, 80(1), 50-67. 10.53910/26531313-E2020801422
20. Ewing R. and Clemente, O. (2013). Measuring Urban Design: Metrics for Livable Places. Island Press.
21. Frank, L. D., Sallis, J. F., Saelens, B. E., Leary, L., Cain, K., Conway, T. L. and Hess, P.M. (2010). The Development of a Walkability Index: Application to the Neighborhood Quality of Life Study. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 44(13), 924-933. DOI: 10.1136/bjsm.2009.058701
22. Gehl, J. (2013). Cities for People. Island Press.
23. Gil Solá, A. and Vilhelmson, B. (2018). Negotiating proximity in sustainable urban planning: A Swedish case. Sustainability, 11(1), 31. DOI: 10.3390/su11010031
24. Giles-Corti, B., Broomhall, M. H., Knuiman, M., Collins, C., Douglas, K., Ng, K., ... and Donovan, R. J. (2005). Increasing walking: how important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space? American journal of preventive medicine, 28(2), 169-176. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.018
25. Givoni, B. (1991). Impact of planted areas on urban environmental quality: a review. Atmospheric Environment. Part B. Urban Atmosphere, 25(3), 289-299. DOI: 10.1016/0957-1272(91)90001-U
26. Graham, S. and McFarlane, C. (2014). Infrastructural Lives. Taylor & Francis.
27. Gupta, K., Kumar, P., Pathan, S. K. and Sharma, K. P. (2012). Urban Neighborhood Green Index–A measure of green spaces in urban areas. Landscape and urban planning, 105(3), 325-335. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.01.003
28. Halecki, W., Stachura, T., Fudała, W., Stec, A. and Kuboń, S. (2023). Assessment and planning of green spaces in urban parks: A review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 88, 104280. DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.104280
29. Handy, S. (2020). Is accessibility an idea whose time has finally come? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 83, 102319. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2020.102319
30. Iaquinta, D. L. and Drescher, A. W. (2000). Defining the peri-urban: rural-urban linkages and institutional connections. Land reform, 2, 8-27.
31. Jacobs, J. (1995). The uses of sidewalks. In Metropolis: Center and Symbol of Our Times, Kasinitz, P. (ed.), pp. 111-129.
32. Jiang, M., Hu, J. and Gao, X. (2024). Community Life Circle, Neighbourly Interaction, and Social Cohesion: Does Community Space Use Foster Stronger Communities? Land, 13(7), 1094. DOI: 10.3390/land13071094
33. Kahouei, S. K. (2013). An Analysis on the Proximity of Green Spaces in Housing Environments. (Doctoral dissertation, Eastern Mediterranean University)
34. Laan, C. M. and Piersma, N. (2021). Accessibility of green areas for local residents. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 10, 100114. DOI: 10.1016/j.indic.2021.100114
35. Lambert, M. R., Brans, K. I., Des Roches, S., Donihue, C. M. and Diamond, S. E. (2021). Adaptive evolution in cities: progress and misconceptions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 36(3), 239-257. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2020.11.002
36. Lotfi, S. and Koohsari, M. J. (2009). Measuring objective accessibility to neighborhood facilities in the city (A case study: Zone 6 in Tehran, Iran). Cities, 26(3), 133-140. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2009.02.006
37. Marchigiani, E. and Bonfantini, B. (2022). Urban transition and the return of neighbourhood planning. Questioning the proximity syndrome and the 15-minute city. Sustainability, 14(9), 5468. DOI: 10.3390/su14095468
38. Marino, M. (2024). Designing More Permeable Urban Areas Based on Green Solutions: Comparing Practices in Copenhagen and Porto. (Master's thesis, Universidade do Porto, Portugal).
39. Miles, L. S., Carlen, E. J., Winchell, K. M., and Johnson, M. T. (2021). Urban evolution comes into its own: Emerging themes and future directions of a burgeoning field. Evolutionary Applications, 14(1), 3-11. DOI: 10.1111/eva.13165
40. Moroni, S. (2020). The just city. Three background issues: Institutional justice and spatial justice, social justice and distributive justice, concept of justice and conceptions of justice. Planning Theory, 19(3), 251-267. DOI: 10.1177/14730952198776
41. Moroni, S. and De Franco, A. (2024). Spatial justice: A fundamental or derivative notion? City, Culture and Society, 38, 100593.
42. Mulliner, E. and Maliene, V. (2011). An introductory review to the Special Issue: Attractive places to live. Urban Design International, 16, 147-152. DOI: 10.1057/udi.2011.11
43. Pileri, P., Renzoni, C., and Savoldi, P. (2022). Piazze scolastiche. Reinventare il dialogo tra scuola e città (pp. 1-110). Corraini.
44. Rasheed, S. A. A. and Mahmoud, W. S. (2024, May). The Role of Land Use Diversity and Vitality in the Urban Systems Organization. The Case Study of Baghdad Al-Karkh. In International Symposium: New Metropolitan Perspectives, pp. 117-127. Springer, Cham.
45. Rasidi, M. H., Jamirsah, N. and Said, I. (2012). Urban green space design affects urban residents’ social interaction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 68, 464-480. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.242
46. Renzoni, C. (2021). Attrezzare territori, costruire spazi di urbanità: note per uno sguardo di lungo periodo sull'infrastruttura scolastica italiana. Archivio di studi urbani e regionali, 132, supplemento, 18-35. DOI: 10.3280/ASUR2021-132-S1002
47. Sadushi, S. (2023). Using QGIS-Based Analysis to Estimate the Availability and Accessibility of Urban Green Spaces in Tirana. (Doctoral dissertation, EPOKA University)
48. Sahana, M., Ravetz, J., Patel, P. P., Dadashpoor, H. and Follmann, A. (2023). Where is the peri-urban? A systematic review of peri-urban research and approaches for its identification and demarcation worldwide. Remote Sensing, 15(5), 1316. DOI: 10.3390/rs15051316
49. Scheiber, S. (2021). Urban open spaces and their potential as green infrastructure. (Doctoral dissertation, L-Università ta' Malta, Malta)
50. Sharma, S. N., Dehalwar, K., Kumar, G. and Vyas, S. (2023). Redefining Peri-urban Urban Areas. Thematics Journal of Geography, 12(3), 7-13.
51. Shu-Yang, F., Freedman, B. and Cote, R. (2004). Principles and practice of ecological design. Environmental Reviews, 12(2), 97-112. DOI: 10.1139/a04-005
52. Smith, A. (2023). Beyond the pale: Fencing off parks for festivals. Urban Studies, 60(14), 2763-2778. DOI: 10.1177/004209802311609
53. Valentine, G. (2013). Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life. Geography, 98(1), 4-9. DOI: 10.1080/00167487.2013.12094359
54. Woltjer, J. (2014). A global review on peri-urban development and planning. Jurnal Perencanaan Wilayah dan Kota, 25(1), 1-16.
55. Geoportale Lombardia (https://www.geoportale.regione.lombardia.it/)
56. ISTAT (https://www.istat.it/)
57. OECD (https://www.oecd.org/)
58. OSM (https://www.openstreetmap.org)
59. PGT (https://www.regione.lombardia.it/wps/portal/istituzionale/HP)