Analysis of Location According to Suitable Criteria for Earthquake Park in Van/Turkiye City Scale

Keywords: Urban open green space, Earthquake park, Multi-Criteria Decision Making, Van City


After disasters, it's critical to attend to people's basic requirements. In addition to serving the city's recreational requirements on a regular basis, open green spaces in cities can be crucial in providing for residents' basic needs, particularly during emergencies like earthquakes. Site selection is crucial in this situation to prevent earthquake parks from becoming a secondary threat in the event of a disaster.

The study aims to determine the parks that can be earthquake parks in Van's/Turkiye İpekyolu, Tusba and Edremit districts and to choose the most suitable area. The AFAD (Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency)-designated emergency assembly, evacuation, and shelter areas as well as additional parks that satisfy the required requirements were discussed in these districts. These areas were evaluated with the integrated study of MCDM (Multi-Criteria Decision Making) Methodologies AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) and TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solutions) methods in site selection for the earthquake park. The top factors to consider when choosing an earthquake park's location were chosen. The power of each area was graded using these standards. For the creation of an earthquake park in Van, a total of six ideal alternative park locations, two in each district, were identified. Atatürk Park, located in İpekyolu Neighborhood, has been suggested as the most suitable park to be converted into an earthquake park, with its justifications.

In future studies on earthquake-oriented urban planning, the method used for site selection of earthquake parks is believed to offer substantial benefits to the relevant stakeholders.

How to Cite
ASUR, F., & Baskın, A. (2023). Analysis of Location According to Suitable Criteria for Earthquake Park in Van/Turkiye City Scale. SAUC - Street Art and Urban Creativity, 9(2), 86 - 109.