nbul 2004
nstruction
for both
Fc
pr
nga
1ed points
| building
nanner by
1 northern
neans of
complex
t, central
relatively
erlaid and
| MCD is
ngs, ratio
ea, ratio
cas; ratio
lon areas;
buildings
ed to the
resenting
yssible to
ow much
d beyond
onditions
criterion
ansion of
change in
determine
e typical
| planning
pution of
terms of
/ses listed
esults of
analysis
1er valued
International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol XXXV, Part B3. Istanbul 2004
places get higher points and the others get lower respectively.
In ratio between historic buildings floor area and total area
analysis; areas having higher ratio gets high, lower ratio gets
low points. In ratio between historic and non-historic building
construction areas analysis higher ratio gets high and lower ratio
gets low points. In change in the build-up space analysis the
minimum changed areas get highest and the rest get zero points.
In physical quality of buildings analysis higher physical quality
gets higher and others get lower points respectively. After all
those points are assigned the average of all criterions is
caleulated and a total weighted point is assigned for every
neighborhood and mapped as overlay analysis result.
Resulting Analysis
aco. nca:
2 1TOXXEd soul
EC]. 2/00
SEC T oo
mI ot
Figure 9. Resulting Analysis
Southern parts of Beyoglu district have higher value just like a
part of Istiklal Street and northern parts of that district have
relatively lower values. Although, northern parts of that
district; have very low amount of historic buildings; by means
of the harmony of non-historic buildings to represented building
construction coefficient and represented building stories
criterion and having higher building physical case conditions,
these places gather scores.
In Historic Peninsula northern parts of Fatih District and the
boundary places to Eminónü district have higher and the rest of
that district have relatively lower scores. Moreover in Eminónü
district the central parts have the highest and places diverging
from that point get relatively lower scores and also the coastal
part of Historic Peninsula have moderate scores.
4. RESULTS
As a result of this study Beyoglu and Historic Peninsula which
holds historic potential of the city have been changed in time
and partly loose their historic value. Southern part of Beyoglu
district and coastal areas of Golden Horn and Marmara Sea in
Historic Peninsula accommodate dense historic buildings.
As Istiklal Street constitutes the cultural, social and service
center of the city of Istanbul; the nearby neighborhoods have
preserved their historic value respectively. In Historic
Peninsula even at the first glance it can be mentioned that the
past planning decisions carry the neighborhoods to loose their
historic value. Neighborhoods far from the central
transportation routes luckily preserve their historic potential like
the neighborhoods located coastal areas of Golden Horn and
Marmara Sea.
919
Analysis of modeling the change from 1929 to 2000 clearly
shows us how governmental decisions could play an active and
vital role for conservation of those historic areas. In 1950s and
in 1970s the enormous trends of migration of people to Istanbul;
lets the city to be the subject to uncontrolled construction
demands which the historic core of the city is surrounded and
sieged by non-historic urban pattern. This caused the city of
Istanbul to loose its historic value.
Setting out from building detail, all the analyses are performed
for neighborhood scale. As mentioned above the criterion
which affects the scope and detail of the study is the data itself.
The variety of the analysis changes with respect to the data's
content and detail. By means of the same concept, detailed
observations and evaluations could be possible by producing
more detailed data with larger scale.
S. CONCLUSION
In this study the main idea is to bring out and evaluate the
historic pattern and physical quality of the urban fabric,
therefore different kinds of analyses has been done. The
percentage of historic buildings, ratio between historic buildings
floor area and total area, ratio between historic and non-historic
building construction areas; change in the build-up space and
physical quality of buildings are the main ones.
In order to reach a result, all the analyses listed above are
considered by means of a MCD technique. All the analyses are
performed by GIS techniques and it is believed that valuable
information for planners and decision makers are gathered. In
order to evaluate the historic potential of the districts there are
certain items to evaluate. These items are: the change in the
potential, to estimate the development direction and tendency,
to find out the physical value of the urban historic pattern, to
expose the change characteristics of the pattern and to
determine the planning priority between districts. Moreover the
distribution of the similar and dissimilar districts and their
relation in space can be an important criterion for planning and
design.
REFERENCES
Balkanay Ozgün; 2003; “Evaluation of the Build-up Areas in
the Historic Urban Pattern by Using GIS, Historic Peninsula
and Beyoglu"; M.Sc Thesis in ITU Graduate School of Natural
and Applied Sciences, City and Urban Planning Department;
Urban Design Graduate Program
Batty M., Dogde M., Jiang B., Smith A.; 1998; “GIS and Urban
Design"; CASA; Working paper series; s. 21
Glenn E. Montgomery, Harold C. Schurch, 1993, “GIS Data
Conversion Handbook”, GIS World, Inc. Fort Collins,
Colorado, USA.
Malczewski J., 1998.” GIS and multi Criteria Decision
Anlaysis". John Willey and Sons Inc, Canada.
Pragya Agarwal; 2000; “GIS in Cultural Resource Management
in Historic Urban Centres”
William E. Huxhold, Allan Levinson, 1995, “Managing
Geographic Information System Projects”, Oxford University
Press.
