Determining potential planting areas in urban regions
- 238 Downloads
Impermeable surfaces are getting larger in Turkey, as they are in most parts of the world as urban sprawl increases. The increase in impermeable surfaces leads to air pollution, floods, and overflows due to changes in urban landscapes and ecosystems. In order to prevent such damages, impermeable surfaces must be reduced by the means of urban afforestation. The main purpose of this study is to determine which areas are suitable for urban afforestation, and thus to improve the ecological conditions of the city. Accordingly, the study adopts a method that takes urban density into account. Satellite image classification, canopy measurement and determination of potential afforestation areas have been performed within the boundaries of Bartın Municipality. The IKONOS satellite images have been taken as a base for the study, which has been carried out via ENVI, GIS, and SPSS techniques and Tree Canopy Cover. By excluding the too-small spaces within the study area, as well as the ones too close to infrastructural facilities, I have been able to identify potential planting areas using GIS-based decision-making mechanisms. The existing trees and other plant covers have been noted in order to plan the potential plant cover.
Considering the locational suitability of the planting areas and the canopy of the trees, the planting areas have been set out using three grid types: 15 × 15 m (large tree), 10 × 10 m (medium tree), and 5 × 5 m (small tree). A total of 29,773 potential trees have been planned for. After corrections, the potential canopy cover has been calculated to be 0.71 km2. Of the potential trees, 93.34% are small, 5.23% are medium, and 1.43% are large trees. If the potential planting areas determined in this study are forested as calculated, the canopy in Bartın city will increase by approximately 2%. In the city, where impermeable surface areas have expanded because of rapid urban sprawl, this new increase will make an important contribution to the improvement of the city’s ecosystem.
KeywordsGIS Potential planting area Remote sensing Tree canopy cover Urban forest Urban planting
The IKONOS image view used in this study has been obtained within the scope of “Role of the Agrarian Landscape in Urban Sustainability, Case Study: Bartın City, Turkey (No:2013.84.2)” project being carried out by the Landscaping Department of the Bartın Forestry Faculty.
- Akbulak, C., Tatlı, H., & Cengız, T. (2011). Suitability analysis of land use of the upper Kara Menderes basin with analytic hierarchy process and GIS. In The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK). Project Number: 108K550.Google Scholar
- AMEC. (2011). GIS analysis of Salem’s potential urban tree canopy. Salem Phase-2 UTC technical Report, 2011, 27 p.Google Scholar
- Arnold, H.F. (1980). Trees in urban design. Van Nostrand Reinhold, NY.Google Scholar
- Balci, A.N. (1958). Protection facilities from siltation of Elmalı dam and researches on vegetation-water order (doctoral thesis, unpublished).Google Scholar
- Bassuk, N. L., & Trowbridge, P. J. (2004). Trees in the urban landscape: site assessment, design and installation (p. 232). Hoboken, ISBN: 978-0-471-39246-0, 2004: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Bauer, M., Kilberg, D., Martin, M. (2017). Mapping Minneapolis urban tree canopy, USDA Forest Service Individual Highlight, Highlight ID: 222. Available at: http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/urban/utc/. Accessed 03 March 2017.
- Carver, A. D., Danskin, S. D., Zaczek, J. J., Mangun, J. C., & Willard, K. (2004). A GIS methodology for generating riparian tree planting recommendations. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry, 21(2), 100–106.Google Scholar
- Çepel, N. (2017). Impact of forest on erosion. Available at: http://w2.anadolu.edu.tr/aos/kitap/IOLTP/1270/unite08.pdf. Accessed 05 March 2017
- Central Cost Council (2006) Report of Central Cost Council. http://www.centralcoast.tas.gov.au/wpcontent/uploads/2016/11/Cc15022010_doc_WEB.pdf. Accessed 15 Nov 2018
- Cetin, M. (2015). Using GIS analysis to assess urban green space in terms of accessibility: case study in Kutahya. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 22(5), 420–424.Google Scholar
- Cetin, M., Sevik, H. (2016a). Assessing potential areas of ecotourism through a case study in Ilgaz Mountain National Park, InTech, Chapter 5. In Leszek Butowski (Ed.) (p 190). ISBN:978-953-51-2281-4, 81-110Google Scholar
- Cetin, M., & Sevik, H. (2016b). The change of air quality in Kastamonu City in terms of particulate matter and CO2 amount. Oxidation Communications, 39(4-II), 3394–3401.Google Scholar
- Cetin, M., Kalayci Onac, A., Sevik, H., & Sen, B. (2018a). Temporal and regional change of some air pollution parameters in Bursa air quality. Atmosphere & Health (Air Qual Atmos Health). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-018-00657-6.
- Cetin, M., Onac, A. K., Sevik, H., Canturk, U., & Akpinar, H. (2018b). Chronicles and geoheritage of the ancient Roman city of Pompeiopolis: a landscape plan. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 11, 798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-4170-6 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12517-018-4170-6. Accessed 05 Jan 2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cetin, M., Sevik, H., Canturk, U., & Cakir, C. (2018d). Evaluation of the recreational potential of Kutahya urban Forest. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 27(5), 2629–2634.Google Scholar
- Coder, K. D. (1996). Tree planting area size: futuring resource availability and identifying constraints. FOR 96-038 (p. 5). Athens: University of Georgia, Warnell School of Forest Resources.Google Scholar
- Daubenmire, R. (1959). A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis. Northwest Science, 33, 43–64.Google Scholar
- Demir, K., & Cabuk, S. (2017). Türkiye’de Metropoliten Kentlerin Nüfus Gelişimi. Available at: http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/219523. Accessed 20 March 2017.
- Durkaya, B., & Durkaya, A. (2008). One tree biomass above ground turkey and stand tables. Journal of Bartin Faculty of Forestry, 10(13), 1–10.Google Scholar
- Durkaya, A., Durkaya, B., & Çakil, E. (2010). Predicting the above-ground of crimean pine (Pinus nigra) stands in Turkey. Journal of Environmental Biology, 31, 115–118.Google Scholar
- Durkaya, B., Varol, T., & Durkaya, A. (2014). Determination of carbon stock changes: biomass models or biomass expansion factors. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 23(3), 774–781.Google Scholar
- Dwyer, J. F., McPherson, E. G., Schroeder, H. W., & Rowntree, R. A. (1992). Assessing the benefits and costs of the urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture, 18(5), 227–234.Google Scholar
- Esetlili, M. T., & Kurucu, Y. (2003). Research on supervised classification methods to determine cotton planted areas by remote sensing technique. Ege University Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture, 40(2), 105–112.Google Scholar
- FRA Country Report (2010). Turkey, pp. 37–39.Google Scholar
- Galvin, M.F. (2006). A report on Baltimore City’s present and potential urban tree canopy. Baltimore City Urban Tree Canopy Report, 17 p.Google Scholar
- Gilman, E. F. (1997). Trees for urban and suburban landscapes. Albany: Delmar publishers 662 p.Google Scholar
- Guptill, S.C., & Morrison, J.L. (1995). Elements of spatial data quality. Pergamon, Albany, NY, 202 p.Google Scholar
- Hitchcock, D. (2009). Urban tree planting and strategic shade. Houston Advanced Research Center Sustainable Communities, 15 p.Google Scholar
- Karakuyu, M. (2002). Urbanization impact on deviation of global climate and floods, Marmara. Geography Journal, 6, 97–108.Google Scholar
- Kaya, L. G. (2009). Assessing forests and lands with carbon storage and sequestration amount by trees in the State of Delaware, USA. Scientific Research and Essays, 4(10), 1100–1108.Google Scholar
- Kaya, L. G., Yücedağ, C., & Bingöl, B. (2017). Usage of ineffective mining quarries for recreational purposes: The case study of Burdur City, Turkey. The Journal of Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, 8(2), 184–190.Google Scholar
- Kaya, E., Agca, M., Adiguzel, F., & Cetin, M. (2018a). Spatial data analysis with R programming for environment. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2018.1470896.
- Kaya, L. G., Kaynakci-Elinc, Z., Yucedag, C., & Cetin, M. (2018b). Environmental outdoor plant preferences: a practical approach for choosing outdoor plants in urban or suburban residential areas in Antalya, Turkey. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 27(12), 7945–7952.Google Scholar
- Kuhns, M., & Rupp, L. (2000). Selecting and planting landscape trees. Utah University Extension, 49 p.Google Scholar
- Love, L.S., Wimpfheimer, P., & Noble, K. (2009). Selecting, planting and caring for trees, shrubs and vines, University of Idaho Short-Season. High-Altitude Gardening Bulletin 860, 18 p.Google Scholar
- Lowe, P. D., & Goyder, J. M. (1983). Environmental groups in politics. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
- Mcdonald, A. G., Bealey, W. J., Fowler, D., Dragosits, U., Skiba, U., Smith, R. I., Donovan, R. G., Brett, H. E., Hewitt, C. N., & Nemitz, E. (2007). Quantifying the effect of urban tree planting on concentrations and depositions of PM10 in two UK conurbations. Atmospheric Environment, 41(38), 8455–8467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mcpherson, E. G., & Rowntree, R. A. (1993). Energy conservation potential of urban tree planting. Journal of Arboriculture, 19(6), 321–331.Google Scholar
- Mcpherson, E.G., Nowak, D.J., & Rowntree, R.A. (1994). Chicago’s urban forest ecosystem: result of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. General technique report, NE-186, USDA Forst Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Radnor, PAGoogle Scholar
- Mcpherson, E.G., Xiao, Q., Maco, S.E., Van Derzanden, A.M., Simpson, J.R., Bell, N., & Peper, P.J. (2002). Western Washington and Oregon Community tree guide: benefits, costs and strategic planting. Center for Urban Forest Research, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Soutwest Research Station, 84 p.Google Scholar
- Mcpherson, E.G., Simpson, J.R., Xiao, Q., & Wu, C. (2008). Los Angeles 1-million tree canopy cover assessment. General technical report PSW-GTR-2007, 2008, 64 p.Google Scholar
- Mostyn, B. (1979). Personal benefits and satisfactions derived from participation. In Urban wildlife projects: a qualitative evaluation. Nature Conservancy Council, London.Google Scholar
- Myeong, S., Novak, D.J., Hopkins, P.F., & Brock, R.H. (2003). Urban cover mapping using digital, high resolution aerial imagery, urban ecosystems. 5:243–256.Google Scholar
- North Sydney Council (2006) “State of the Environment Report: July 1999–June 2000.” “North Sydney Urban Forest Strategy 2011.” North Sydney Council, Sydney, Australia” North Sydney CouncilGoogle Scholar
- Nowak, D.J. (1994). Air pollution removal by Chicago’s urban forest. In McPherson, E.G, D.J. Nowak & R.A. Rowntree (Eds.), Chicago’s urban forest ecosystem: results of the Chicago urban forest climate project (pp. 63–81). USDA Forest Service general technical report NE-186.Google Scholar
- Nowak, D. J., & Crane, D. E. (2000). The urban forest effects (UFORE) model: quantifying urban forest structure and functions. In M. Hansen & T. Burk (Eds.), Integrated tools for natural resources inventories in the 21st Century (pp. 714–720). St. Paul: USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NC - 212.Google Scholar
- Nowak, D.J., & Dwyer, J.F. (2007). Understanding the benefits and costs of urban forest ecosystems. Urban and community forestry in the northeast, chapter 2, pp 25–46.Google Scholar
- Nowak, D. J., Hoehn, R., & Crane, D. E. (2007). Oxygen production by urban trees in the United States. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry, 33(3), 220–226.Google Scholar
- Ogdul, H., Ulucay, H., & Ongel, S. (2007). Types of change of the rural areas in the urban area. In The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Grant Group. Project number: SOBAG–105K076.Google Scholar
- Ozel, H.B. (2007). Bartın ve Devrek Doğu Kayını (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) Ormanlarında Meşcere Kuruluşları ve Grup Gençleştirme Uygulamalarının Başarısını Etkileyen Faktörler. ZKU Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Department of Forest Engineering. Doctoral thesis (unpublished).Google Scholar
- Perry, J.L., & Le Van, M.D. (2017). Air purification in closed environments: Overview of spacecraft systems. In NBC Defense Collective Protection Conference. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jay_Perry/publication/23903409_Air_Purification_in_Closed_Environments_An_Overview_of_Spacecraft_Systems/links/54f78f510cf2ccffe9db44b4/Air-Purification-in-Closed-Environments-An-Overview-of-Spacecraft-Systems.pdf. Accessed 03 March 2017.
- Richards, J. A., & Jia, X. (2006). Remote sensing digital image analysis, an introduction (4th ed., ISBN-10 3-540-25128-6p. 453). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Simpson, J. R. (1998). Urban forest impacts on regional cooling and heating energy use: Sacramento County case study. Journal of Arboriculture, 24(4), 201–214.Google Scholar
- Souch, C. A., & Souch, C. (1993). The effect of trees on summertime below-canopy urban climates: a case study, Bloomington, Indiana. Journal of Arboriculture, 19(5), 303–312.Google Scholar
- TFS (2010) Galveston ReLeaf: a strategic plan for replanting. Texas Forest Service, 44 p.Google Scholar
- TSI (2018). Turkish Statistical Institute (TSI). Available at: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=15844. Accessed 05 April 2018.
- USFS (2004). The large tree argument: the case for large-stature trees vs. small-stature trees. Center for Urban Forest Research, Southern Center for Urban Forest Research & Information, 8 p.Google Scholar
- WRS (2010). The Woodlands township, 66 p.Google Scholar
- Yazgan, I., & Ozel, H. B. (2013). The factors affecting the success of natural regeneration efforts in Kastamonu-Araç region’s black pine (Pinus nigra Arnold. subsp. pallasiana (lamb.) Holmboe) stands. Journal of Bartın Faculty of Forestry, 15(1), 88–121.Google Scholar
- Yener, H., Koc, A., & Coban, H. O. (2006). Remote sensing data and technical characteristics, Istanbul University. Journal of the Faculty of Forestry, B(56), 33–48.Google Scholar