Analytical Hierarchy Process for the Selection of A Square: the Case Study of Konya City
Rapid population growth, industrial and technological development, and improvement in the social and economical conditions of people have increased their need for socializing, gathering, and relaxing with various recreational activities and mutual communications. The sustainable development of social life has increased the importance of squares as public spaces, which brings the citizens together for cultural, commercial, and political purposes; thus, giving an identity to the city and becoming the focal point of urban life. The selection of an area as a square is based on certain criteria. The decisions regarding the choice of the location and their use as squares must be per the internationally accepted criteria. We studied four squares, namely Mevlana Square with historical background, Hükümet Square, Anıt Square, and Kılıçarslan City Square with a high demand for social events. The squares are considered to be important and comprehensive titles for evaluating their comparative functions under the selection criteria of visuality, functionality, and accessibility. The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method was used to determine the importance of the selection criteria of squares in a survey with participants for solving the problem and selecting the best square according to these criteria. By performing the AHP analysis, we found that the most preferred square by the participants was the Mevlana Square with a preference rate of 58.68%, and the most preferred criterion was “visuality” with a preference rate of 64.5%. In this study, we aimed to determine the characteristics of a preferable square to improve the existing squares and to contribute to the stages of a new square design, planning, and implementation.
Altınçekiç S, Kart N. 2001. Kentsel tasarım sürecinde meydanlar, İstanbul Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 50 (2), 111-120.
Çorbacı ÖL, Ertekin M. 2017. Environmental Design in City Squares “Yalova Cumhuriyet Square in Turkey”. International Journal of Current Research, 9 (12), 63631-63634.
Demirel T. 2008. Kent Meydanları Yer Seçimine Metodolojik Bir Yaklaşım: Adana Kenti Örneği, Lisans Tezi, Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı, Çukurova Üniversitesi.
Erdönmez ME, Akı A. 2005. Açık kamusal kent mekanlarının toplum ilişkilerindeki etkileri, Megaron, 1 (1), 67.
Güngör S, Polat AT, Demir M. 2019. Investigation of Positive and Negative affect of Plants and City Furnitures By Design Criteria of Landscape Architecture In The Main Transportation Arteries of Afyon/Turkey. Uluslararası Peyzaj Mimarlığı Araştırmaları Dergisi (IJLAR) E-ISSN:2602-4322, 2(1), 07–14. Retrieved from https://ijlar.org/index.php/ ijlar/article/view/135
Kürkçüoğlu İ. 2009. Kentsel açık mekanlarda yapay su elemanı tasarım ilkelerinin mekansal algı ve çevre psikolojisi bağlamında irdelenmesi: Üsküdar Belediye Meydanı örneği.
Marcus CC, Francis C. 1998. People Places “Design Guideslines for Urban Open Space, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
Özer MN, Ayten MA. 2005. Kamusal odak olarak kent meydanları, Şehir Plancıları Odası Planlama Dergisi, 3, 96-103.
Öztaşkın B. 2008. Tarihe Tanıklık Etmiş Meydanlar, Arkitera.
Sayın G, Çorbacı ÖL. 2019. The Development of Squares from the Past to Present, Mehmet Dalkılıç (Ed.), International Researches in Health and Natural Sciences, (pp. 63-77), ISBN: 978-605-7809-42-80-3 Gece Kitaplığı, Ankara.
Sertkaya İ, Çolak A. 2011. Kent meydanları: Adana 5 Ocak Meydanı örneği üzerine bir irdeleme, Çukurova Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
Yamaçlı R. 1997. Mimari Tasarım ve Görsel Çevre Etkileşimi Bağlamında “Yer” Kavramı: İstanbul Edirnekapı-Fatih-Şehzadebaşı Aksı Örneği, Doktora Tezi, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi.
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.