Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13091/4259
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorÖztürk Saka, Mihribanen_US
dc.contributor.authorErdoğan, Aygünen_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-14T12:29:46Z-
dc.date.available2023-06-14T12:29:46Z-
dc.date.issued2022en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13091/4259-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2022.224-
dc.description.abstractThe starting point of this study is the problematic perspective of focusing only on the final product in spatial planning, while ignoring the planning process, and a lack of certain standards/criteria of the evaluation stage for the internal and external consistencies of spatial plans. Although it has recently attracted significant interest in the field, the methodological use of evaluation is not widespread in planning practice. Evaluation, which is considered to be a simple checking duty in the Turkish planning system (TPS), is not considered in the related literature and legislation. Focusing on the “evaluation stage” of spatial planning, this paper aims to demonstrate the contribution of the previously developed Guideline for Evaluation of Spatial Plans (GESP) in testing and ensuring the consistency of different scale and types of plans prior to their approval. The first phase of the study focuses on the concept of evaluation, reviews a series of related literature for the evaluation of plans, and discusses the evaluation stage in the TPS. In the second phase, the consistency of the selected case area plansafter addition of new resources that comply with the input of the previously developed evaluation framework GESPis examined. This guideline, which is an analytical method proposal, is applied over the selected cases, involving the upper-scale plans that cover Trabzon province and lower-scale plans for some settlements that were selected from within this province. Consistencies of all the plan components (plan sheets, plan report, plan notes, plan legend) of plans with different scales for the case area were tested in terms of the criteria of the developed guideline. Most of these plans were found to be inconsistent, both internally and externally. In the study, it was determined that the plans in fact contained many inconsistencies on their approval without being subjected to such evaluation. Although the study did not focus on the frequency of evaluation of spatial plans, the parties that will make those evaluations, and how to use their output, it provides basis for future studies. The “evaluation stage”, an important theoretical issue in the international literature, is exemplified for both how it would be handled and tested in practice. Identifying the needs, processes, and problems related to the evaluation stage, mainly for its ex-ante stage, will allow the TPS to intervene in the preparation of plans before their approval. This may have a positive impact on the production of final plans that are more comprehensive, and do not require continuous changes during the planning process. The introduced use of the guideline will contribute to the limited number of studies, concerning the evaluation stage of the spatial plans in Türkiye, besides guiding the related possible legal regulations regarding the TP.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherKonya Technical University Faculty of Architecture and Designen_US
dc.relation.ispartofICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planningen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectSpatial planningen_US
dc.subjectEvaluationen_US
dc.subjectGuide for evaluation of spatial plansen_US
dc.subjectTrabzonen_US
dc.titleAn Application of Consistency Testing for Spatial Plans: Case of Trabzon, Türkiyeen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.15320/ICONARP.2022.224-
dc.relation.issn2147-9380en_US
dc.description.volume10en_US
dc.description.issue2en_US
dc.description.startpage759en_US
dc.description.endpage799en_US
dc.departmentKTÜNen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Başka Kurum Yazarıen_US
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.openairetypeArticle-
Appears in Collections:ICONARP - International Journal of Architecture and Planning
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
18.674.pdf3.08 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record



CORE Recommender

Page view(s)

108
checked on May 6, 2024

Download(s)

32
checked on May 6, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check




Altmetric


Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.