Globalisation that is growing fast since the 1990’s and its results can be divided into two: while there is a dependent society and economy, also there is a gap that is growing between the inequivalent classes of society. Referring to Şerife Güneş, there’s an inequivalance that is getting bigger between the North and South countries. Considering that inequal developments between North and South, this division can be seen in today’s cities of Turkey: especially İstanbul and Ankara, which are under the influence of globalisation.
Inequality can be defined as gap between life standards of different community classes and individuals, while the urban inequality is defined by Plato almost 2500 years ago with the words “any city however small, is …show more content…
Dr. Baykan Günay that “Batıkent has no heart”, which means that as a sub-center, Batıkent does not have all the features that a sub-center should have. Also, considering that, Çayyolu can be defined as a sub-center with existing properties. In Batıkent, with huge commercial activity near Atlantis Shopping Center, it may look like there is a centeral development is happening; unfortunately, a sub-center cannot be centered around a shopping mall. Likewise, in the case of Çayyolu, Arcadium cannot be considered as a sub-center without all the commercial and cultural development around it. A sustainable sub-center should have different kinds of transportation network links to CBD both public and private while various transportation systems should be supporting the accessibility; but Batıkent has a discontinous metro line which is a weak linkage to the city center. Likewise, Çayyolu is also linked with a weak metro line, which also caused urban sprawl by being late in construction of metro. Therefore, both of the sub-centers are problematic in the case of division and segregation, but Çayyolu is more likely to be a sub-center; although Batıkent is a planned jump with metro construction and linear growth and Çayyolu is …show more content…
Looking backwards to the green belt of the city, it can be seen that there was a planned green belt around the city that embraces and the continous green line was consisting Atatürk Orman Çiftliği in the city. Although it’s still painted in green and called as ‘farm’, it is obvious that AOÇ lost its characteristics. Viewing Figure 8, AOÇ lost its land and became a fragmented area that has no longer defined as a public space; it is now became an undefined area that is stuck between North and South developments. Therefore, while the city is growing towards East-West axis, and North and South of the city is sprawling, AOÇ should be conserved. Loss of the areas is caused by the planning policies of the government, therefore, this point of view in planning should be changed. Usage ways of AOÇ should be under consideration so that the gap may be
Inequality can be defined as gap between life standards of different community classes and individuals, while the urban inequality is defined by Plato almost 2500 years ago with the words “any city however small, is …show more content…
Dr. Baykan Günay that “Batıkent has no heart”, which means that as a sub-center, Batıkent does not have all the features that a sub-center should have. Also, considering that, Çayyolu can be defined as a sub-center with existing properties. In Batıkent, with huge commercial activity near Atlantis Shopping Center, it may look like there is a centeral development is happening; unfortunately, a sub-center cannot be centered around a shopping mall. Likewise, in the case of Çayyolu, Arcadium cannot be considered as a sub-center without all the commercial and cultural development around it. A sustainable sub-center should have different kinds of transportation network links to CBD both public and private while various transportation systems should be supporting the accessibility; but Batıkent has a discontinous metro line which is a weak linkage to the city center. Likewise, Çayyolu is also linked with a weak metro line, which also caused urban sprawl by being late in construction of metro. Therefore, both of the sub-centers are problematic in the case of division and segregation, but Çayyolu is more likely to be a sub-center; although Batıkent is a planned jump with metro construction and linear growth and Çayyolu is …show more content…
Looking backwards to the green belt of the city, it can be seen that there was a planned green belt around the city that embraces and the continous green line was consisting Atatürk Orman Çiftliği in the city. Although it’s still painted in green and called as ‘farm’, it is obvious that AOÇ lost its characteristics. Viewing Figure 8, AOÇ lost its land and became a fragmented area that has no longer defined as a public space; it is now became an undefined area that is stuck between North and South developments. Therefore, while the city is growing towards East-West axis, and North and South of the city is sprawling, AOÇ should be conserved. Loss of the areas is caused by the planning policies of the government, therefore, this point of view in planning should be changed. Usage ways of AOÇ should be under consideration so that the gap may be