Includes appendices (224-276 p.)

Includes references.(216-223 p.)

' ABSTRACT Higher Eucation Councils are the most efficient institutions for the rapid progress of nations on international platforms.They are the leading institutions on developmant of the countries on science and technology.Turkish Higher Education Council,which give service on diffrent parts of the country since the establishment of Turkish Goverment is supported by the new changes on the laws after 1992.Following that year there has been a definite increase on the numbers of established universities there has been inflation on universty planning process. Consequently during this re-construction period of Turkish Higher Education System some problems are met by the user group of the newly built university campuses.The most comeaccrossed problem on campus planning in the recent years seems that the universities do not perform a definite unity in their campus settlements.Instead of collecting all the academic programs a certain university under a major campus site,most of the universities have distributed their academic programs into minor campuses that are separated from each other. Besides that,when the major groups of functions such as resting-feeding-socializing and learning are not designed under a major campus site and they are socializing and learning are not designed under major campus site and they are separated from each other,then the basis of the 24-hour university concept cannor be obtained.Because of this situation the present trend on establishing scattered campuses for a proposed university should be investigated from the begining and alternative university models should be developed for these problematic universities. On the contrary,among the existing Turkish University that are established under a major campus site most of them,either related to their selected campus pattern or to largeness of the selected campus site,are not used effectively as it is desired by the students.Generally these university campuses'development schemes are planned above the average walking distances of pedestrians.So,in most of their land-use palns the accessibilty distances between the major groups of functions and between the relative academic spaces usually exceed the defined average walking standards for pedestrians.As a result students have difficulties on the perception and orientation of the campus spaces.They cannot share with others easily,social unification does not occur and students lack of their social identities on belonging to a certain community. On behalf of these discussions made,it is required to analyze the design process of campus settlements in relation with the requirement of the campus users.It is tried to analyze the alternative models of various land-use plans on the basis of the accessibility in order to create livable campus enviroments. ÖZET Yüksek öğrenim kurumları toplumların biliçlenmesi açısından uluslararası platformdaki en önemli müesseselerdir.Ülkemizde yükseköğretime verilen değer özellikle 1992 yılında yasalarda yapılan yeni düzenlemelerle artmıştır.Üniversitelerimizin sayılarında kısa sürede belirgin bir artış olmuştur ve 1998 yılı itibariyle sayıları 72 ye yükselmiştir.Dolayısıyla bu sürade ciddi bir üniversite enflasyonu yaşanmıştır.Bu yapılanma döneminde tasarlanan üniversite kampüslerinde kullanıcılar tarafından bir takım sorunlarla karşılaşılmıştır.Buradaki en önemli problem özellikle son yıllarda tasarlanan üniversite kampüslerinde belirgin bir bütünlük görülmemesidir.Aynı üniversiteye ait akademik mekanların farklı bölgelerdeki kampüslere dağıtılmış olması üniversite öğrencilerini belirli bir kampüse dolayısıyla,sosyal kimliğe sahip olma yoksun bırakmaktadır. Öte yanda bir üniversitede bulunması gereken ana foksiyon gruplarının bir başka deyişle yeme-uyuma-öğrenme-sosyokültürel ilişkileri geliştirme imkanlarının tek bir kampüs içinde çözülememiş olması öğrencilerin ihtiyacı olan 24-saatlik üniversite ortamını sağlayamamaktadır.Bu açıdan var olan bu dağınık kampüsleşme eğilimleri tekrar gözden geçirilmeli ve bu tür yaklaşımlara alternatif tasarım önerileri getirilmelidir. Bir ana kampüs alanı içinde tasarlanmış olan üniversitelerimizin çoğunluğunda ise gerek seçilen kampüs tipolojisinden gerekse uygulanan kampüsün büyüklüğünden kaynaklanan problemlerden dolayı bu kampüsler istenildiği gibi etkin kullanılamamaktadır.Genellikle bu üniveriste kampüslerinin gelişim şemaları yayaların ideal yürüme standartlarının çok üstünde planlanmıştır.Dolayısyla kampüs binalarının organizasyonunda fakültelerarası ve ana fonksiyon arasındaki mesafelerin ortalama yürüme standartlartlarına göre uzak olması akademik birimler arasında diyolog kopukluğu oluşturmaktadır.Kampüs alanları kullanıcılar tarafından kolay algılanabilir veya tanımlanabilir olamamaktadır.Böylelikle bir akademik çervedee paylaşılması gereken bilgi iletişimi ve sosyal bütünleşme istenilen düzeyde gerçekleştirilememektedir. Sonuç olarak yukarıda açıklanan tartışmalar ışığında,bu tez çalışmasında kampüs mekanlarının kullanıcıların ihtiyaçlarına bağlı olarak nasıl bir dağılım şeması ile biraraya gelebileğini,ve bunların hangi ulaşılabilirlik kriterlerine göre konumlanabileceğini araştırmak gereği duyulmuştur. '

Chapter One

INTRODUCTION

1 A General Framework

1 Aim of the Study

3 Method of Study

5 Definition of University

7 Mass Education

7 Continual Education

7 Elite Education

8 Interdisciplinary Flexible Programs

8 Standardization And Accreditation

8 Advanced Technologies/Remote Education

8 Directed and Organized Basic Research

9 Historical Evaluation of University Education in the World

13 Effects CIAM Congress and Team 10(X) ON University Patterns

15 Historical Evolution of Higher Education in Turkey

20 Provincial Universities

20 Sub - Regional and Regional Universities

21 Metropolitan Universities

22 Methodology of University Planning

22 Theoretical Scale

23 Planning Scale

24 Design Scale

Chapter Two

DETERMINATION OF PLANNING, DESIGN AND ACCESSIBILITY CRITERIA FOR UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES

26 Determination of Planning, Design and Accessibility criteria for University Campuses

26 Planning Criteria

26 Locational Aspects

27 Cultural Aspects

27 Financial Potentials

28 Population Criteria

28 Education Criteria

30 Traffic Segregation

31 Relationships Between City and Industries

31 Flexibility Criteria

32 Campus Growth Models

33 Micro Growth Model

33 Micro Growth Model

37 Design Criteria

37 Determination of the User Groups

38 Determination of the Major Zones

39 Determination of Primary and Interdisciplinary Relations between the Major Zones

43 Accessibility Criteria

43 Physical Control of the Campus

47 The Meaning of Open Spaces for Pedestrians in Campus Settlements

52 Determination of Primary Pedestrian Axes of a Given Site

54 The Meaning of Accessibility Criteria on Campus Design

54 Accessibility Criteria for Students

55 Accessibility Criteria for Academics Staff

57 Accessibility criteria for Recreational Facilities

59 Four Major Accessibility Criteria on Campus Design

Chapter Three

COMPARISON OF CAMPUS PATTERNS WITH CITY MODELS

72 Comparison of Campus Pattern with City Model

72 Molecular Type of Expansion in Campus Settlements

74 Satellite City Model

75 Example of a Molecular Type of Expansion in Campus Settlements University of York

78 Centralized Type of Expansion in Campus Settlements

82 The Star City Model

84 Example of a Radial Type of Expansion in Campus Settlements Temasek Polytechnic

86 Linear Type of Expansion in Campus Settlements

92 Linear City Model

93 Example of Linear Type of Expansion in Campus Settlements/

93 University of Surrey

96 University of Bath

99 Grid Type of Expansion in Campus Settlements

99 The Rectangular Grid City Model

100 Example of a grid Type of Expansion in Campus Settlements University of Loughborough

102 Scattered Type of Expansion in Campus Settlement

102 Scattered (Irregular)City Models

102 The Baroque Axial Network Model

103 The Lacework City Model

104 Example of Scattered Type of Expansion in Campus Settlement/University of Leeds

106 Mega-structure Grouping Campus Settlements

106 Mega - Structure City Model (A Proposed Model)

107 Trihex Grid City Model (A Proposed Model)

107 Example of a Mega-structural Grouping in Campus Settlements/ Lethbridge University

109 Horizontal Grouping in Campus Settlements

110 Example of Horizontal Grouping in Campus Settlements/University City of Mexico

114 Vertical Grouping in Campus Settlements

114 Example of Vertical Grouping in Campus Settlements / Tougaloo University

Chapter Four

A SURVEY OF EXISTING TURKISH UNIVERSITIES

119 Method Employed on the Survey

120 Evaluation of the Survey Questionnaires From Question 1 to Question 5

121 Question 1: The Organisation of the Faculty Buildings in the University

121 Question 2: Type of the Educational Hinterland the University is Located

125 Question 3: The Present Student Population of the University

128 Question 4:Numbers of Staff in Turkish Universities

132 Question 5: Numbers of Academics Institutions in the Universities

136 Evaluation of the Survey Questions from Question 6 to Question 14

136 Question 6:Type of the campus pattern Adapted for the eixsting or Proposed Campus Site of the University

137 Question 7: Existing Conditions of the University Campus on the Requirement of Accessibility Distances for a Pedestrian between Center and the Farthest Edge in Less Than 10-15 Minutes Walking Period

141 Question 8:Total Space of the Existing or Proposed Major Campus Site

144 Question 9:Accessibility Possibilities between the City and the Campus Site

146 Question 10:Most Dominant Circulation Network within the University Campus

148 Question 11: Degrees of Traffic Segregation within Each Circulation Network of the Evaluated Campuses

152 Question 12: Location of the Socialization Centers of the University Either inside or Outside the Campus Site

156 Question 13: Location of the Dormitory Buildings in the Major Campus Site

161 Question 14: Location of the Library Halls in the Major Campus Site of the University

164 General Results of the Survey Study

Chapter Five

EVALUATION OF THE AEGEAN UNIVERSITY AS A CASE STUDY

170 Case Study : Aegean University

170 Definition of a Case Study

172 Method Employed on the Case Study

172 Evaluation of the Existing Conditions of the Aegean University

174 A Redevelopment Project for the Aegean University

177 Proposed Network for Campus Circulation

180 Proposed Pedestrian Bridges

182 Pedestrian Bridges

184 Conversion of the Academics Programs

187 New Building Proposals for the Existing Plan

193 An idealized Scheme for the Existing Academic Program

Chapter Six

CONCLUSIONS

199 Conclusions

199 A New Higher Education Policy

200 Alternative University Models

205 Compact Nucleated Structures with An Axial Order

207 The organisation of the Major Groups of Functions and Their Repetition for Ideal Campus Settlements

216 References

224 Appendices