An Assessment About Barrier Free Design in Urban Green Areas

Full text

289
AN ASSESSMENT ABOUT BARRIER FREE DESIGN IN URBAN
GREEN AREAS
,
Introduction
Public spaces in cities are social, economic and cultural functions and a scene
2004). Some individuals in the community may be congenital or subsequently
disabled. World Health Organization (WHO) describes disability as lack of or
limitation in the performance of normal activities, expressed as behaviors,
abilities and tasks expected of the person or the body as a whole (WHO, 1980).
Disability is the state of limiting mental-physical disruptions, limiting the
individual's life activities, and limiting the individual's abilities and strength
(Coleman, 2000). However, the physical characteristics of an individual do not
actually prevent him / her from being a part of the society in which he / she lives,
but the meanings attributed to his / her disability cause him / her to be prevented
by being labeled (Burcu, 2011).
In the design approach of urban spaces, barrier-free design and universal
design (universal design) appear as a design for physical integration and social
required for the survival of all disabled people in urban space is different
according to the type of disability of the individual. For example, a disabled
person who has a vision problem in traffic needs a design such as an acoustic
traffic light, while a disabled person using a wheelchair needs a specially
designed
accessories to be made within the scope of disability regulations should be made
considering all kinds of disability. Providing services to as many individuals as
possible in urban green spaces is one of the main discussion topics in planning,
design and management (Hussein, 2006). In this context, the green areas, which
are part of the urban public space, were evaluated within the framework of
different definitions of disabilities.
Study Material
The material of the study is located in Kastamonu, West Black Sea Region of
Kastamonu Province, and its altitude is 775m with a surface area of 13.108.1 km2

290
Mountains lying parallel to the Black Sea coast in the north of the
province, and Ilgaz mountains with east-
2013).
In this study, the open and green areas in the city have been examined, and the
parks located at the important strategic points for the disabled have been taken
into consideration by considering the population size of the neighborhood. The
parks that are selected as research areas are located in the central district of
Kastamonu. The city currently has a total of 46 parking spaces. The total area of
Esen Parks are considered as the study area.
with a length of 121 meters. The area around the park is 400 meters and 8740 m2.

291
Figure 2. Environmental relationship analysis of
Cevizli Park
of the park. The park is 180 m long and its area is 2400 m2.
Figure 3. Environmental relationship analysis of Cevizli Park

292
Park, Kastamonu Central Ismailbey District is located on Kisla Street. The
city's main road), t
tutes the main entrance of the park. Access to
the parking area, which is located inside the park, is also possible by car. The area
around the park is 420 meters and the area is 10270 m2.
Figure 4. Environmental relationship an
Dr. Ekrem Esen Park
The park is located on the 57th Alay Boulevard in the North District of
is a residential area on the west side of the park. The main entrance of the park is
made by 57th Alay Boulevard. The area around the park is 362 m and 8120m2.

293
Figure 5. Environmental relationship analysis of Dr. Ekrem Esen Park
Methods
A structured questionnaire was used as a method of collecting information.
For this, Kastamonu Turkey Disabled Association Branch located in the city
center has been reached with various physical disabilities associations and
schools. Turkey Disabled Association Kastamonu Branch There are 10,714
people with disabilities detected in Kastamonu centers, according to data from
the Association. When determining the number of questionnaires to be
conducted, 10,714 disabled individuals in the center were considered. Cross-
sectional method calculation and n= (Z2NPQ)/(ND2+Z2PQ) formula were used to
In the formula n: Sample size, Z: Confidence coefficient (this coefficient is
taken as 1.96 for 95% confidence), N: Main mass size, P: Probability of the
property we want to measure in the main mass (taken as 50%), Q = 1 P, D:
Refers to the accepted sampling error (a sampling error of 10%). Accordingly,
the number of surveys to be reached was calculated as 62.
The survey was conducted in urban areas. In this study, in order to see the
wishes and expectations of the users, questions about the open and green spaces
where individuals with disabilities can spend their spare time were asked. The
questionnaires were prepared as a result of face-to-face interviews. In this way,
problems, needs and expectations were perceived and analyzed better.
In this study, the approach of disabled people to accessible physical
environment and compliance with the standards (TSE 12576, TSE 9111) on 4
selected sample areas were examined. For this purpose, 62 disabled people can
be reached within the city and their approach to the physical environment and
their problems are tried to be determined. In addition, observation forms were
created for each selected park area and field analyzes were processed on this
form.

294
Findings
Demographic characteristics of the survey participants are given in Table 1. It
is seen that the ratio of males to females among participants is higher (60%) and
orthopedically disabled people (40%) are more likely than disabled people. The
findings show that the rate of non-work (66%) is higher. This factor, which affects
both the conditions of health conditions and social life, is between 3000-4000
with 39% and 2000-3000 with close value. It is observed that they mostly live in
Kuzeykent neighborhood.
DEMOGRAPHIC FEATURES
unable to see
unable to hear
unable to hear and
speak
orthopedic disability
Mentally Handicapped
Autistic
Mental Retardation
Nanism
Chronic Disease
Total
Percent
Gender
Woman 0 4 4 12 1 1 2 1 0 25 40
Man 7 6 3 18 2 0 0 0 1 37 60
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Education
Not literate 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Literate 0 4 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 11 18
Primary school 0 0 1 6 1 0 0 1 0 9 15
Middle School 1 3 1 10 0 0 0 0 0 15 24
High school 2 3 1 7 2 1 0 0 1 17 27
College 3 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 7 11
Faculty
Undergraduate 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Graduate 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Working Situation
Working 4 3 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 21 34
Not working 3 7 7 16 3 1 2 1 1 41 66
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Income status
Less than 1000 TL 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5
1001-2000 TL 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 15
2001-3000 TL 1 2 6 11 1 1 1 0 0 23 37
3001-4000 TL 0 3 0 18 2 0 0 1 0 24 39
4001 TL and more 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 5
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Job
Worker 2 1 0 4 0 0 2 0 0 9 15
Officer 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 10
Freelance Business
Owner 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 10
Student 1 3 3 9 1 0 0 1 1 19 31
Unemployed 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 3
Never Worked 2 3 1 12 2 0 0 0 0 20 32
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Distribution by
Neighborhood
Akmescit 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 5
Aktekke 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Atabeygazi 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 6
Cebrail 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 3
Esentepe 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 4 6

295
Hepkebirler 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Honsalar 1 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 8
2 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 7 11
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3
0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 6
1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 6
Kuzeykent 0 1 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 13 21
M. Akif Ersoy 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 5
1 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 6 10
Yavuz Selim 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Table 1. Demographic structure of the participants
When questioned the degree of the relationship between the disabled and the
other persons in the social life outside the family, it is seen that 34% of them have
the highest value. When the adequacy of physical arrangements for the disabled
in open and green spaces is questioned, it is not very pleasant. 53% was very
poorly preferred. The comparison of the obstacle status of the participants and
their suitability in terms of anthropometric measurements (body measurements)
and ergonomic aspects of urban furniture in the green area and the comparison of
the obstacle statuses and the suitability of stairs and ramps in the green area are
given in Table 2.
Comparison of the
disability status of the
participants and the level
of social relations other
than non-family members
Very
inadequate 4 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 9 15
Insufficient 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 5 8
Partially
adequate 0 0 3 7 1 0 0 0 1 12 19
Enough 0 3 2 14 0 1 1 0 0 21 34
Very adequate 3 6 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 15 24
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of the
obstacle situations of
participants and the
adequacy of the physical
arrangements of the
parking area in the green
spaces
Very
inadequate 4 4 1 21 2 0 1 0 0 33 53
Insufficient 2 1 2 7 0 1 0 1 0 14 23
Partially
adequate 1 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 1 9 15
Enough 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 8
Very adequate 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Toplam 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
The comparison of the
participants' disability and
their suitability in terms of
anthropometric
measurements (body
measurements) and
ergonomic aspects of
urban furniture in the
green area
Very
inadequate 3 3 1 18 2 0 1 0 0 28 45
Insufficient 3 2 2 7 0 1 0 1 0 16 26
Partially
adequate 1 2 2 4 1 0 1 0 1 12 19
Enough 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 8
Very adequate 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of the
obstacle status of the
participants and the status
of the stairs and ramps in
accordance with the
standards in the green area
Very
inadequate 2 2 2 17 1 0 1 0 0 25 40
Insufficient 4 1 1 6 1 0 0 1 0 14 23
Partially
adequate 1 3 2 5 1 1 1 0 1 15 24
Enough 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 10
Very adequate 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Table 2. Qualification findings depending on the disability of the participants

296
The relationship of the participants to go out in line with their obstacle
situations and needs, and comparison of the assistance they receive for mobility
in the urban space has been revealed. According to this, it was found that the
participants preferred closed spaces, encountered accidents and had difficulty in
going to the parking areas.
Comparison of
participants' disability
status and going out
according to needs
Required 1 3 1 13 1 1 1 0 0 21 34
Work-School 1 2 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 8 13
Social Activity 4 3 3 8 0 0 1 0 1 20 32
Going to Parking
Areas 1 2 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 9 15
Going to Disabled
Institutions 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 4 6
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of
participants' disability
status and assistance
for mobil
ity in urban
areas
Alone 4 8 4 16 2 1 1 0 1 37 60
Family 1 1 1 11 1 0 1 0 0 16 26
Relative 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 5 8
Friend 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 6
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of
participants' disability
and leisure time
Open area 6 6 1 6 0 1 0 1 1 22 35
Closed area 1 4 6 24 3 0 2 0 0 40 65
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of the
obstacle conditions of
the participants and the
ease of walking on the
sidewalk and
pedestrian roads
Yes 4 6 1 19 2 0 1 0 1 34 55
Pavement widths not
suitable 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 1 0 7 11
There are obstacles on
the sidewalk 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 8
Bump pit on the roads
0 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 5 8
There are tools on the
sidewalk 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 3
Ramps insufficient 0 1 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 9 15
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of the
obstacle conditions of
the participants and the
ease of walking on the
sidewalk and
pedestrian roads
Yes 3 1 2 19 2 1 1 0 1 20 32
Upper and lower
pedestrian crossings
not suitable for
disabled use
4 2 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 9 15
Suitable level
crossings for disabled
people are less likely
than lower and upper
pedestrian crossings.
0 3 3 1 0 0 1 1 0 16 26
Vehicle drivers do not
show respect 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 7 11
Light times too short 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 10 16
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of
obstacle situations of
participants and
difficulty of using high
pavement
Very little 1 1 1 19 1 0 0 1 0 24 39
Moderate 2 2 2 4 0 1 1 0 1 13 21
Highly 0 2 1 6 1 0 1 0 0 11 18
Too much 4 5 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 14 23
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of
accident situation due
to the obstacle status of
the participants and
urban space design
Yes 4 4 2 16 2 0 2 1 1 32 52
No 3 6 5 14 1 1 0 0 0 30 48
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
A comparison of
participants'
abandonment status
Yes 4 4 3 12 2 0 1 1 1 28 45
No 3 6 4 18 1 1 1 0 0 34 55
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100

297
due to disability and
urban space design
Comparison of
obstacle status of
participants and easy
access to green area
Yes 4 7 2 18 2 1 2 1 1 32 52
No 3 3 5 12 1 0 0 0 0 30 48
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of
obstacle status of
participants and
reliability of green area
Yes 3 5 4 24 2 0 1 0 1 40 65
No 4 5 3 6 1 1 1 1 0 22 35
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Comparison of the
obstacle status of the
participants and the
frequency of going to
the parking area
I can not go 4 4 2 11 2 0 1 0 0 24 39
Several times a year 1 1 2 17 0 1 0 1 0 23 37
Several times a month 1 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 1 9 15
Several times a week 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 6
Everyday 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3
Total 7 10 7 30 3 1 2 1 1 62 100
Table 3. Evaluation findings depending on the disability status of the
participants
After the surveys, spatial observations were made. The main problems and
approaches related to the selected parks as a result of the observation forms are
given below.
5 of the 6 entrances on 3 fronts of the park are accessible for disabled people.
In this way, it is possible for people with disabilities to enter and exit the park
from all sides. The park is suitable in terms of pedestrian paths, but the lack of
guide track pavements makes it difficult for visually impaired individuals to use
the park and pass between the compartments. The parking area consists of two
sections, upper and lower. These areas have an almost flat slope. The ramp that
connects the two sections is a problem with the standards since the slope is
between 6-8%. The second ramp in the park is not accessible with a slope of 17%
and no warning surface. Seating areas are located in suitable places. However, it
is not suitable for bench dimensions and area measurements. In addition, it is not
accessible because there is no warning surface in front of the bench. There is no
fountain in any part of the park. The garbage cans in the park are accessible by
standards.
Cevizli Park
Only one of the 4 entrances in the park is accessible for disabled people.
Therefore, entrance and exit of the park from all directions is not possible for
disabled people. The pedestrian paths in the parking area are suitable in terms of
size, but the lack of guide track pavements makes it difficult for visually impaired
individuals to use the park. The parking area is flat and has a close slope.
Although ramps are needed at the entrance and surrounding pavements of the
park, no ramp analysis has been performed. Seating areas are located in suitable
places and are suitable for bench dimensions and area dimensions. However,

298
since there is no warning surface in front of the bench, the seating areas are not
accessible. There is a fountain at the back of the park. The fountain is accessible
as a measure for the disabled. The garbage cans in the park are accessible by
standards. There is no parking.
The entrance with two staircases located on two different fronts in the park is
not accessible for disabled people. There is no ramp analysis in these areas. The
park is also accessible with a flat entrance and the largest entrance is accessible
for disabled people. The park is suitable for pedestrian walkways, but the lack of
guide track pavements makes it difficult for visually impaired individuals to use
the park. The parking area consists of 3 separate sections at separate elevations.
Between these sections, ladder and ramp solutions are designed. The ramp
designs applied in the entrances and between the sections of the park are not taken
into consideration. Seating areas are located in suitable places and are suitable for
bench dimensions and area dimensions. However, since there is no warning
surface in front of the bench, the seating areas are not accessible. There is a
fountain in the middle section of the park. The fountain is accessible as a measure
for the disabled. The garbage cans in the park are accessible by standards. The
-restaurant in the park area increases the number of visitors to this area. For
this reason, there are insufficient parking spaces for 16 cars in total, 10 cars inside
and 6 cars outside. In addition, there are no disabled parking spaces, warning
signs and signs reserved for disabled people in the existing car parks.
Dr. Ekrem Esen Park
Including the ramp size of the park, which has 3 stair entrances and 1 ramp
entrance on two different fronts of the park, not all are accessible for disabled
people. The pedestrian area in the parking area is suitable in terms of size, but the
lack of guide track pavements makes it difficult for visually impaired individuals
to use the park. The parking area consists of 4 separate sections at separate
elevations. Between these sections, ladder and ramp solutions are designed. The
ramp designs applied in the entrances and between the sections of the park do not
comply with the standards. The seating areas are not accessible in terms of their
size and the absence of a stimulating surface in front of the seating area. There is
a car park for 50 cars at the south entrance of the park. This parking lot is
sufficient for the number of vehicles, but there is no disabled car park and warning
signs and signs reserved for disabled people in the parking area.
Conclusion
A significant amount of the world's population is composed of individuals
with disabilities. However, the difference between people with disabilities and
non-disabled individuals is not due to the fact that people with disabilities have

299
disrupted bodies or minds, but because they represent an oppressed minority
within a society that renders them disabled (Shakespeare 1994; Burcu, 2011). The
profile formed when the needs of the disabled are mentioned in the society, the
fact that the wheelchair and visually impaired individuals come to mind, leads to
the fact that the profile is not taken into consideration. However, the requirements
that may vary according to the type of chair used by a wheelchair individual may
be insufficient for another disabled person. For example, the ramp that an
individual using a wheelchair may exceed may not meet the needs of an
In the light of the evaluations, the suggestions for the selected sampling areas
are given below;
The priority design principle in open and green spaces should be the
realization of designs that enable healthy people and disabled individuals to use
all areas together. In line with the results obtained with the field observation and
evaluation form made within the scope of this research, the suggestions for
problematic areas in the study area are as follows;
Guide tracks should be laid at all entrances of the selected parking areas and
information signs should be brought. All sections with stairs should be analyzed
according to the standards and existing and inaccessible ramps should be
rearranged according to the standards. Handrails should also be made at the
appropriate points of all ramps.
de pavements should be made on all pedestrian roads in order to ensure
that visually impaired people can reach and easily reach the area.
should be redesigned. In addition, non-slip guide slabs should be made to the
appropriate dimensions at the beginning, end and end of the steps of the stairs.
Ramp design should also be applied in the parts where stairs are made. For safety,
handrails on both sides of stairs and ramps should be made in appropriate
dimensions.
in the park and the number of disabled parking spaces should be reserved in
accordance with standards. Disabled parking signs and signs should be placed in
these car parks.
the wheelchairs can easily enter and dock alongside the seating elements. In
addition, the warning surface should be made in front of the bench.
re is no fountain in the park. Due to the need, fountain suggestions can
be brought to the use of all individuals with disabilities in terms of their use.

300
groups in areas where vehicle and pedestrian entrances are together.
Open and green spaces, which are part of the urban public space, play a major
role in enabling disabled people to participate in the social environment. In these
areas, the problems faced by the disabled cause them to move away from the
society and lose their self-confidence. In order to avoid these problems,
practitioners need to address the unhindered design approaches of local
governments.
Acknowledgement
This study was carried out by utilizing the thesis entitled abled Mobility in
Case of Kastamonu which was completed in Kastamonu
University, Institute of Science and Technology, Forest Engineering Department.
References
Atici Physically Handicapped and Use of Urban Space. Master Thesis,
T.C. Gazi University Institute of Social Sciences. Ankara.
Burcu E., 2011. Cultural Definitions Relating to Disabled Persons in Turkey:
Case of Ankara, Hacettepe University Faculty of Arts Journal, c.28 37-54.
Coleman, D. 2000. Assisted suicide and disability. Human Rights: Journal of the
Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities, 27 (1), 1-11.
Hussein H., 2006. Barrier-Free Park Design for the Disabled Persons: A Case
Study of the KLCC Park, Journal of Design and tha Build Environment, s.57-
67.
Kaplan H., Ozturk M., 2004. Disabled People, Public Space and Barrier-Free
Design: A Framework for Examination of Public Interiors, Planning, 2004/2
s.67-74.
Ozdamar, K. 2001. Biostatistics with SPSS, Ankara: Kaan Bookstore.
Shakespeare, T. 1994. Cultural representation of disabled people:dustbins for
disavowal. Disability and Society, 9 (3), 283-300.
WHO, 1980. International classification of impairments, disabilities and
handicaps. Geneva: World Health Organisation.