Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

ROD Yöntemi İle Parkların Görsel Peyzaj Kalitesinin Değerlendirilmesi: Kastamonu Örneği

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 215 - 225, 30.12.2023

Sevgi Öztürk Ece Çilli Rıdvan Şen Çağla Nur Gün

https://doi.org/10.51552/peyad.1355371

Öz

İnsanın doğa ile etkileşimiyle birlikte çevre ve peyzaj üzerinde insan kaynaklı değişimlerin yaşanması kaçınılmaz olmuştur. Bu değişimler peyzajın görselliğini ve görsel kalitesini etkileşmiştir. Görsel peyzaj kalitesi, peyzajla etkileşime giren bireylerin peyzaj hakkında olumlu veya olumsuz değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda ortaya çıkan öznel bir değer olmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, Kastamonu il merkezinden seçilen 5 adet parkın (Sinan Bey Parkı, Cevizli Park, Turhan Topçu Parkı, Kışla Parkı ve Güney Parkı) görsel kalitesinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Çalışma alanı olarak seçilen parklardan çekilen fotoğraflar Rekreasyonel Olanak Dağılımı (ROD) sınıflandırmasına (kentsel, yarı-doğal ve doğal) göre seçilmiştir. Bu fotoğrafların değerlendirilmesinde (1) doğallık, (2) tarihsellik, (3) peyzaj çeşitliliği, (4) uyum, (5) manzara güzelliği, (6) konfor, (7) okunabilirlik ve (8) bakım-düzen ölçüt olarak belirlenmiştir. Değerlendirmeler ise Kastamonu Üniversitesi Mühendislik ve Mimarlık Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü lisans ve yüksek lisans öğrencileri tarafından (n=100) çevrimiçi foto-anket uygulamasıyla 5’li Likert ölçeğinde (5: en yüksek- 1: en düşük) puanlanarak yapılmıştır. Yapılan çalışma sonucunda elde edilen foto-anket verilerine göre parkların görsel kalite değerlerine ulaşılmıştır. Doğal peyzaj elemanlarının yoğun olduğu alanların belirlenen görsel kalite ölçütlerine göre daha yüksek puan ortalamasına sahip oldukları, yapısal peyzaj elemanlarının ağırlıkta olduğu alanların ise daha düşük puan ortalamasına sahip oldukları belirlenmiştir. Parkların ROD’a göre sınıflandırılmış fotoğraflarına ve genel ortalama değerlerine bakıldığında genel yüzdelik puan ortalamalarında en yüksek puanı alan Sinan Bey Parkı (%53,51) olurken en düşük puanı alan Güney Parkı (%32,49) olmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Görsel peyzaj görsel peyzaj kalitesi rekreasyonel olanak dağılımı Kastamonu

Kaynakça

  • Anonim, 2023. Kastamonu coğrafi yapısı. Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://kastamonu.tarimorman.gov.tr/Menu/46/Cografi-Yapisi.
  • Amir, S., & Gidalizon, E. (1990). Expert-based method for the evaluation of visual absorption capacity of the landscape. Journal of Environmental Management, 30(3), 251-263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-4797(90)90005-H
  • Angileri, V., & Toccolini, A. (1993). The assessment of visual quality as a tool for the conservation of rural landscape diversity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 24(1-4), 105-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(93)90089-V
  • Aytaş, İ., Uzun, S., 2015. Düzce kent merkezindeki yaya alanlarının görsel peyzaj kalitesinin belirlenmesi. Journal of the Faculty of Forestry Istanbul University 65(1): 11-29. DOI: 10.17099/jffiu.60910
  • Bogenç, Ç., Dönmez, Y., & Çufalı, A. B. (2023). İklim Dostu Şehirler ve İyi Uygulama Örneklerinin Kentsel Peyzaja Katkıları. Peyzaj Araştırmaları ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, 5(1), 31-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56629/paud.1212408
  • Chang, J., Qu, Z., Xu, R., Pan, K., Xu, B., Min, Y., ... & Ge, Y. (2017). Assessing the ecosystem services provided by urban green spaces along urban center-edge gradients. Scientific reports, 7(1), 11226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11559-5
  • Clark, R. N., & Stankey, G. H. (1979). The recreation opportunity spectrum: A framework for planning, management, and research (Vol. 98). US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.
  • Daniel, T. C., Anderson, L. M., Schroeder, H. W., & Wheeler III, L. (1977). Mapping the scenic beauty of forest landscapes. Leisure Sciences, 1(1), 35-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01490407709512869
  • Daniel, T. C., & Vining, J. (1983). Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In Behavior and the natural environment (pp. 39-84). Boston, MA: Springer US. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3539-9_3
  • Deng, L., Luo, H., Ma, J., Huang, Z., Sun, L. X., Jiang, M. Y., ... & Li, X. (2020). Effects of integration between visual stimuli and auditory stimuli on restorative potential and aesthetic preference in urban green spaces. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 53, 126702. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126702
  • Dickinson, D. C., & Hobbs, R. J. (2017). Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research. Ecosystem services, 25, 179-194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.04.014
  • Driver, B. L., & Brown, P. J. (1978). The opportunity spectrum concept and behavioural information in outdoor recreation resource supply inventories: a rationale. In: Integrated inventories of renewable natural resources: proceedings of the workshop, January 1978, Tucson, Arizona (Edited by HG Lund et al.). USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report, (RM-55), 24-31. Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/19791854941
  • Fairclough, G., Herlin, I. S., & Swanwick, C. (2018). Landscape character approaches in global, disciplinary and policy context: an introduction. In Routledge Handbook of Landscape Character Assessment (pp. 3-20). Routledge. ISBN: 9781315753423
  • Fuller, R. A., & Gaston, K. J. (2009). The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biology letters, 5(3), 352-355. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0010
  • Guloglu, Y., Bulut, A., Altunel, A. O., & Bayramoglu, M. M. (2021). The effect of population shift on land cover change and illegal forest activities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193, 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08802-4
  • Hartig, T., & Kahn Jr, P. H. (2016). Living in cities, naturally. Science, 352(6288), 938-940. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf3759
  • Herzog, T. R., & Bosley, P. J. (1992). Tranquility and preference as affective qualities of natural environments. Journal of environmental psychology, 12(2), 115-127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80064-7
  • Işınkaralar, Ö. (2023). Turizm Potansiyeli Ekseninde Yapılı Çevrelerdeki Görsel Karmaşıklığın Analizi: Odunpazarı, Eskişehir Örneği. Mimarlık ve Yaşam, 8 (2), 373-391. DOI: 10.26835/my.1206985
  • Kaplan, R., & Herbert, E. J. (1987). Cultural and sub-cultural comparisons in preferences for natural settings. Landscape and urban planning, 14, 281-293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(87)90040-5
  • Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge university press.
  • Kim, D., & Jin, J. (2018). Does happiness data say urban parks are worth it?. Landscape and Urban Planning, 178, 1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.05.010
  • Le Dû-Blayo, L. (2018). Atlas du paysage: landscape atlases in France and Wallonia. In Routledge Handbook of Landscape Character Assessment (pp. 143-153). Routledge. ISBN: 9781315753423
  • Lonsdorf, E. V., Nootenboom, C., Janke, B., & Horgan, B. P. (2021). Assessing urban ecosystem services provided by green infrastructure: Golf courses in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area. Landscape and Urban Planning, 208, 104022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.104022
  • Lothian, A. (1999). Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder?. Landscape and urban planning, 44(4), 177-198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00019-5
  • Ode, Å. K., & Fry, G. L. (2002). Visual aspects in urban woodland management. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 1(1), 15-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1078/1618-8667-00003
  • Swanwick, C., & Heritage, S. N. (2002). Landscape character assessment: guidance for England and Scotland. Making sense of place..
  • Swanwick, C. (2012). The assessment of countryside and landscape character in England: an overview. Countryside Planning, 109-124. ISBN: 9781849770910
  • Swanwick, C., & Fairclough, G. (2018). Landscape character: experience from Britain. In Routledge handbook of landscape character assessment (pp. 21-36). Routledge. ISBN: 9781315753423
  • Öztürk, S. (2013). Kentsel Açık ve Yeşil Alanların Yaşam Kalitesine Etkisi “Kastamonu Örneği”. Kastamonu Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(1), 109-116. Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/kastorman/issue/17231/179963 .
  • Ozturk, S., Ayan, E., & Isinkaralar, O. (2018). Visual landscape evaluation of Kastamonu clock tower environment as a historical urban area. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 27(12), 9617-9625. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330105043
  • Öztürk, S., Işınkaralar, Ö., ve Kesimoğlu, F. (2021). An Assessment on Shopping Centers as Consumption Place. Kastamonu University Journal of Engineering and Sciences, 7(1), 65-73. ISSN:2667-8209
  • Öztürk, S., Işınkaralar, Ö., Yılmaz, D., Şimşek, M., Almansourı, H. M. S., & Elahsadı, A. H. M. (2021). COVID-19’un tüketici alışkanlıklarına etkisi üzerine bir araştırma: Türkiye-Libya karşılaştırması. Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 26(46), 97-108. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17295/ataunidcd.958864
  • Polat, A.T. & Önder, S. (2011). Konya İli Kent Parklarının Görsel Kalitesinin Belirlenmesi. Conference: I. Konya Kent Sempozyumu
  • Türker, H.B., Metin, A.E., & Balıkçı, O. (2022) Kent parklarının görsel peyzaj kalitesi yönünden incelenmesi: İstanbul Esenyurt ilçesi örneği, Turkish Journal of Forest Science 6(2): 377-399.
  • Ueda, H. (2009). A study on resident landscape perception through landscape image (Doctoral dissertation). Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://kobra.uni-kassel.de/handle/123456789/2009072029116
  • Van Eetvelde, V., & Antrop, M. (2009). Indicators for assessing changing landscape character of cultural landscapes in Flanders (Belgium). Land Use Policy, 26(4), 901-910. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.11.001
  • Yılmaz, S. (2013). Adalet Bayramoğlu'nun Atatürk Konulu Panoları. Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 5(5), 104-117. Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/sanattasarim/issue/20649/220309
  • Zhang, X., Lin, E. S., Tan, P. Y., Qi, J., & Waykool, R. (2023). Assessment of visual landscape quality of urban green spaces using image-based metrics derived from perceived sensory dimensions. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 102, 107200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107200
  • Zube, E. H., & Pitt, D. G. (1981). Cross-cultural perceptions of scenic and heritage landscapes. Landscape planning, 8(1), 69-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3924(81)90041-1

Evaluation of Visual Landscape Qualityof Parks by ROD Method: The Case of Kastamonu

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 215 - 225, 30.12.2023

Sevgi Öztürk Ece Çilli Rıdvan Şen Çağla Nur Gün

https://doi.org/10.51552/peyad.1355371

Öz

With the interaction of human beings with nature, it has been inevitable to experience human-induced changes in the environment and landscape. These changes have affected the visuality and visual quality of the landscape. Visual landscape quality is a subjective value that emerges as a result of positive or negative evaluations of individuals interacting with the landscape. In this study, 5 parks selected from Kastamonu city centre (Sinan Bey Park, Cevizli Park, Turhan Topçu Park, Kışla Park and Güney Park) It is aimed to evaluate the visual quality of the parks. The photographs taken from the parks selected as the study area were selected according to the Recreational Opportunity Distribution (ROD) classification (urban, semi-natural and natural). In the evaluation of these photographs, (1) naturalness, (2) historicity, (3) landscape diversity, (4) harmony, (5) scenic beauty, (6) comfort, (7) readability and (8) maintenance-order were determined as criteria. The evaluations were made by Kastamonu University Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Department of Landscape Architecture undergraduate and graduate students (n=100) by scoring on a 5-point Likert scale (5: highest - 1: lowest) with an online photo-survey application. According to the photo-survey data obtained as a result of the study, visual quality values of the parks were obtained. It was determined that the areas with dense natural landscape elements have a higher average score according to the determined visual quality criteria, while the areas where structural landscape elements are predominant have a lower average score. Looking at the photographs of the parks classified according to ROD and the general average values, Sinan Bey Park (53.51%) received the highest score in the general average percentage points, while Güney Park (32.49%) received the lowest score.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Visual landscape Visual landscape quality Distribution of recreational opportunities Kastamonu

Kaynakça

  • Anonim, 2023. Kastamonu coğrafi yapısı. Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://kastamonu.tarimorman.gov.tr/Menu/46/Cografi-Yapisi.
  • Amir, S., & Gidalizon, E. (1990). Expert-based method for the evaluation of visual absorption capacity of the landscape. Journal of Environmental Management, 30(3), 251-263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-4797(90)90005-H
  • Angileri, V., & Toccolini, A. (1993). The assessment of visual quality as a tool for the conservation of rural landscape diversity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 24(1-4), 105-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(93)90089-V
  • Aytaş, İ., Uzun, S., 2015. Düzce kent merkezindeki yaya alanlarının görsel peyzaj kalitesinin belirlenmesi. Journal of the Faculty of Forestry Istanbul University 65(1): 11-29. DOI: 10.17099/jffiu.60910
  • Bogenç, Ç., Dönmez, Y., & Çufalı, A. B. (2023). İklim Dostu Şehirler ve İyi Uygulama Örneklerinin Kentsel Peyzaja Katkıları. Peyzaj Araştırmaları ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, 5(1), 31-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56629/paud.1212408
  • Chang, J., Qu, Z., Xu, R., Pan, K., Xu, B., Min, Y., ... & Ge, Y. (2017). Assessing the ecosystem services provided by urban green spaces along urban center-edge gradients. Scientific reports, 7(1), 11226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11559-5
  • Clark, R. N., & Stankey, G. H. (1979). The recreation opportunity spectrum: A framework for planning, management, and research (Vol. 98). US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.
  • Daniel, T. C., Anderson, L. M., Schroeder, H. W., & Wheeler III, L. (1977). Mapping the scenic beauty of forest landscapes. Leisure Sciences, 1(1), 35-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01490407709512869
  • Daniel, T. C., & Vining, J. (1983). Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In Behavior and the natural environment (pp. 39-84). Boston, MA: Springer US. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3539-9_3
  • Deng, L., Luo, H., Ma, J., Huang, Z., Sun, L. X., Jiang, M. Y., ... & Li, X. (2020). Effects of integration between visual stimuli and auditory stimuli on restorative potential and aesthetic preference in urban green spaces. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 53, 126702. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126702
  • Dickinson, D. C., & Hobbs, R. J. (2017). Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research. Ecosystem services, 25, 179-194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.04.014
  • Driver, B. L., & Brown, P. J. (1978). The opportunity spectrum concept and behavioural information in outdoor recreation resource supply inventories: a rationale. In: Integrated inventories of renewable natural resources: proceedings of the workshop, January 1978, Tucson, Arizona (Edited by HG Lund et al.). USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report, (RM-55), 24-31. Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/19791854941
  • Fairclough, G., Herlin, I. S., & Swanwick, C. (2018). Landscape character approaches in global, disciplinary and policy context: an introduction. In Routledge Handbook of Landscape Character Assessment (pp. 3-20). Routledge. ISBN: 9781315753423
  • Fuller, R. A., & Gaston, K. J. (2009). The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biology letters, 5(3), 352-355. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0010
  • Guloglu, Y., Bulut, A., Altunel, A. O., & Bayramoglu, M. M. (2021). The effect of population shift on land cover change and illegal forest activities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193, 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08802-4
  • Hartig, T., & Kahn Jr, P. H. (2016). Living in cities, naturally. Science, 352(6288), 938-940. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf3759
  • Herzog, T. R., & Bosley, P. J. (1992). Tranquility and preference as affective qualities of natural environments. Journal of environmental psychology, 12(2), 115-127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80064-7
  • Işınkaralar, Ö. (2023). Turizm Potansiyeli Ekseninde Yapılı Çevrelerdeki Görsel Karmaşıklığın Analizi: Odunpazarı, Eskişehir Örneği. Mimarlık ve Yaşam, 8 (2), 373-391. DOI: 10.26835/my.1206985
  • Kaplan, R., & Herbert, E. J. (1987). Cultural and sub-cultural comparisons in preferences for natural settings. Landscape and urban planning, 14, 281-293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(87)90040-5
  • Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge university press.
  • Kim, D., & Jin, J. (2018). Does happiness data say urban parks are worth it?. Landscape and Urban Planning, 178, 1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.05.010
  • Le Dû-Blayo, L. (2018). Atlas du paysage: landscape atlases in France and Wallonia. In Routledge Handbook of Landscape Character Assessment (pp. 143-153). Routledge. ISBN: 9781315753423
  • Lonsdorf, E. V., Nootenboom, C., Janke, B., & Horgan, B. P. (2021). Assessing urban ecosystem services provided by green infrastructure: Golf courses in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area. Landscape and Urban Planning, 208, 104022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.104022
  • Lothian, A. (1999). Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder?. Landscape and urban planning, 44(4), 177-198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00019-5
  • Ode, Å. K., & Fry, G. L. (2002). Visual aspects in urban woodland management. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 1(1), 15-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1078/1618-8667-00003
  • Swanwick, C., & Heritage, S. N. (2002). Landscape character assessment: guidance for England and Scotland. Making sense of place..
  • Swanwick, C. (2012). The assessment of countryside and landscape character in England: an overview. Countryside Planning, 109-124. ISBN: 9781849770910
  • Swanwick, C., & Fairclough, G. (2018). Landscape character: experience from Britain. In Routledge handbook of landscape character assessment (pp. 21-36). Routledge. ISBN: 9781315753423
  • Öztürk, S. (2013). Kentsel Açık ve Yeşil Alanların Yaşam Kalitesine Etkisi “Kastamonu Örneği”. Kastamonu Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(1), 109-116. Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/kastorman/issue/17231/179963 .
  • Ozturk, S., Ayan, E., & Isinkaralar, O. (2018). Visual landscape evaluation of Kastamonu clock tower environment as a historical urban area. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 27(12), 9617-9625. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330105043
  • Öztürk, S., Işınkaralar, Ö., ve Kesimoğlu, F. (2021). An Assessment on Shopping Centers as Consumption Place. Kastamonu University Journal of Engineering and Sciences, 7(1), 65-73. ISSN:2667-8209
  • Öztürk, S., Işınkaralar, Ö., Yılmaz, D., Şimşek, M., Almansourı, H. M. S., & Elahsadı, A. H. M. (2021). COVID-19’un tüketici alışkanlıklarına etkisi üzerine bir araştırma: Türkiye-Libya karşılaştırması. Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 26(46), 97-108. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17295/ataunidcd.958864
  • Polat, A.T. & Önder, S. (2011). Konya İli Kent Parklarının Görsel Kalitesinin Belirlenmesi. Conference: I. Konya Kent Sempozyumu
  • Türker, H.B., Metin, A.E., & Balıkçı, O. (2022) Kent parklarının görsel peyzaj kalitesi yönünden incelenmesi: İstanbul Esenyurt ilçesi örneği, Turkish Journal of Forest Science 6(2): 377-399.
  • Ueda, H. (2009). A study on resident landscape perception through landscape image (Doctoral dissertation). Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://kobra.uni-kassel.de/handle/123456789/2009072029116
  • Van Eetvelde, V., & Antrop, M. (2009). Indicators for assessing changing landscape character of cultural landscapes in Flanders (Belgium). Land Use Policy, 26(4), 901-910. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.11.001
  • Yılmaz, S. (2013). Adalet Bayramoğlu'nun Atatürk Konulu Panoları. Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 5(5), 104-117. Erişim adresi (20.07.2023): https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/sanattasarim/issue/20649/220309
  • Zhang, X., Lin, E. S., Tan, P. Y., Qi, J., & Waykool, R. (2023). Assessment of visual landscape quality of urban green spaces using image-based metrics derived from perceived sensory dimensions. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 102, 107200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107200
  • Zube, E. H., & Pitt, D. G. (1981). Cross-cultural perceptions of scenic and heritage landscapes. Landscape planning, 8(1), 69-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3924(81)90041-1
Toplam 39 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Peyzaj Mimarlığı (Diğer)
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Sevgi Öztürk 0000-0002-3383-7822

Ece Çilli 0009-0009-3091-7729

Rıdvan Şen 0009-0000-6564-573X

Çağla Nur Gün 0009-0004-4736-8918

Erken Görünüm Tarihi 30 Aralık 2023
Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Aralık 2023
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2023 Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Öztürk, S., Çilli, E., Şen, R., Gün, Ç. N. (2023). ROD Yöntemi İle Parkların Görsel Peyzaj Kalitesinin Değerlendirilmesi: Kastamonu Örneği. Türkiye Peyzaj Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(2), 215-225. https://doi.org/10.51552/peyad.1355371
 Kapak Resmi İndir