ContactISSN:e-ISSN: 3108-4885
Author Sign-inReviewer Sign-inRegister
TürkçeEnglish
HomeABOUTAIM AND SCOPEGUIDE FOR AUTHORSSend ArticleLatest IssueArchiveContact Us

Urban Heat Island Effect in Urban Regeneration Areas: The Case of Saraycık-Ankara

Şerife Nisa Özdemir,Cansu KORKMAZ

  • Şerife Nisa Özdemir: Konya Teknik Üniversitesi
  • Cansu KORKMAZ: Konya Teknik Üniversitesi Mimarlık ve Tasarım Fakültesi
  •  Year : 2026
  •  Vol : 3
  •  Issue : 1
  •  Page : 1-17
After industrialization, the rapid population growth in cities led to an imbalance in housing supply and demand. As a result, low-income groups constructed their own houses on public lands, introducing the concept of “gecekondu” or squatters into the Turkish planning literature. These squatters, which evolved into socio-economically and spatially problematic urban zones, have become the focus of legal regulations and urban regeneration practices. Although urban regeneration aims to renew deteriorated urban fabric and address the housing needs of low-income groups, the urban form it produces often contradicts these objectives. Today, climate change, rapid urbanization, destruction of natural areas, and high-density, high-rise vertical development models contribute to heat absorption in cities, thereby triggering the formation of urban heat islands. This study is based on the assumption that the Saraycık Urban Regeneration Project has contributed to the formation of an urban heat island. Accordingly, it examines the impact of changing urban morphology on urban heat island formation before and after the regeneration by employing GIS-based remote sensing methods, including LST, NDVI, and NDBI analyses. The findings reveal that, as a result of urban regeneration projects, increased building density and impervious surfaces, the reduction of natural areas, and the proliferation of high-rise structures intensify the urban heat island effect. In the face of climate crises, improving urban quality of life requires that urban transformation be addressed not only in terms of its socio-economic and spatial impacts but also through its environmental dimensions, integrating climate-sensitive and sustainable approaches into project design.
Cite this Article As : Özdemir, Ş. N., & Korkmaz Yılmaz, C. (2026). Urban heat island effect in urban regeneration areas: The case of Saraycık - Ankara, Thinking of Urban Decoding Journal (TUDEJ) 3(1), 1-17.

Conflict of interest : The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

This article is published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Thinking Of Urban Decoding Journal
2026, Vol3, Issue1
E-ISSN: 3108-4885
Received : , Accepted : , Published Online :

References

  1. Acevedo-De-los-Ríos, A., Jones-Pérez, J., & Rondinel-Oviedo, D. R. (2025). Methodology for prioritizing sustainable urban regeneration interventions in informal settlements: Case study in Lima. Cities, 157, 105550, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105550.
  2. Aksoy, E. & Güzey Kocataş, Ö. (2017). Gecekondu Alanlarında Uygulanan Kentsel Dönüşüm Projelerinin Meşruiyet Zemini Olarak Yoksulluk ve Suç, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(14), 275 – 295.
  3. Auer, A. H. (1978) Correlation of Land Use and Cover with Meteorological Anomalies. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 17, 636–643, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1978)0172.0.CO;2.
  4. Ay, F. (2024). Assessment of spatial/temporal variability of urban heat island effect: A case study in the central districts of İzmir. Degree of Master, İzmir Institute of Technology, City Planning, İzmir.
  5. Balaban, O. (2011). İnşaat sektörü neyin lokomotifi? Birikim, 270, 19–25.
  6. Balaban, O. (2016). İnşaat sektörü neyin lokomotifi? In T. Bora (Ed.), İnşaat ya Resulullah (ss. 17–32). İstanbul: Birikim Kitapları.
  7. Bektaş, Y. (2022). Kentsel dayanıklılık ve kentsel dönüşüm arasındaki ilişkiyi kentsel yoğunluk ve sosyal altyapı değeri üzerinden okumak: Kayseri örneği. Megaron, 17(1), 117–135, DOI: 10.14744/MEGARON.2022.40121.
  8. Bölen, F. (2004). Housing Policy and Housing Systems in Turkey, ITU A|Z: 1(1), 14-31.
  9. Canan, F. (2017). Kent geometrisine bağlı olarak kentsel ısı adası etkisinin belirlenmesi: Konya örneği. Çukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(3), 69–80.
  10. Canan, F., & Geyikli, B. (2021). Kentsel ısı adası etkisinin farklı dokusal özelliklerde karşılaştırmalı analizi: Konya kenti örneği. TMMOB Mimarlar Odası Ankara Şubesi, 5. Ulusal Yapı Kongresi: Yapı Sektöründe Çok Yönlü Kalkınma, Eğitim, Araştırma, Uygulama, Bildiriler Kitabı, 525-538, ISBN: 978-605-01-1525-3.
  11. Chandler, T. J. (1965). The climate of London. London: Hutchinson & Co., s.292.
  12. Çoban, A. N. (2012). Cumhuriyet’in ilanından günümüze konut politikası. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 67(3), 75–108.
  13. ENDEKSA (2026). Türkiye Ankara Sincan Saraycık Satılık Konut m² Birim Fiyatları, https://www.endeksa.com/tr/analiz/turkiye/ankara/sincan/saraycik/endeks/satilik/konut, Access date: February, 2026.
  14. Faraji, A., Agha, T. M. H., Ghasemi, E., Alirezaei, Z., Rahnamayiezekavat, P., & Arya, S. H. (2026). Proposing a layered model to develop sustainable affordable housing focusing on operation phase criteria. Energy Reports, 15, 108945, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2025.108945.
  15. Keith, L. ve Meerow, S. (2022). Planning for Urban Heat Resilience (PAS Report 600). American Planning Association. ISBN 978-1-61190-208-2.
  16. Keogh, D. U., Apan, A., Mushtaq, S., King, D., & Thomas, M. (2011). Resilience, vulnerability and adaptive capacity of an inland rural town prone to flooding: a climate change adaptation case study of Charleville, Queensland, Australia. Natural Hazards, 59, 699–723, doi:10.1007/s11069-011-9791-y.
  17. Korkmaz, C., & Alkan Meşhur, H. F. (2021). Neo-liberal urbanism and sustainability in Turkey. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 36, 1165–1198.
  18. Korkmaz, C., & Balaban, O. (2020). Sustainability of urban regeneration in Turkey. Habitat International, 95, 102081.
  19. Landman, K., & Du Plessis, C. (2007). The impact of gated communities on urban sustainability. Town and Regional Planning, 51, 16–25, https://doi.org/10.38140/trp.v51i.4856.
  20. Li, J., Song, C., Cao, L., Zhu, F., Meng, X., & Wu, J. (2011). Impacts of landscape structure on surface urban heat islands: A case study of Shanghai, China Remote Sensing of Environment, 115(12), 3249-3263, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.07.008.
  21. Lu, X.-H., & Ke, S.-G. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness of sustainable urban land use in China. Habitat International, 77, 90–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.10.007.
  22. Metlink (2025). Urban Heat Island Information, https://www.metlink.org/fieldwork-resource/urban-heat-island-introduction/. Access date: 10 th February, 2026.
  23. NASA. (2026). Urban Heat Islands, https://mynasadata.larc.nasa.gov/basic-page/urban-heat-islands, Access date: 10th January, 2026.
  24. NIHHIS. (2026). Urban Heat Islands, https://heat.gov/urban-heat-islands/, Access date: 5 th January, 2026.
  25. Obeng-Odoom, F. (2014). Green neoliberalism: Green Neoliberalism: Recycling and Sustainable Urban Development in Sekondi-Takoradi. Habitat International, 41, 129–134, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.07.009.
  26. Özdemir Sarı, B. (2015). Konut Üretiminde Aşırılık ve Stok Boşluk Oranları: Yenimahalle ve Altındağ Örnekleri. Konut içinde Ankara: TMMOB Şehir Plancıları Odası, s. 73-84.
  27. Öztop, H., & Şekeroğlu, M. (2016). Konut sorunu. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
  28. Penbecioğlu, M. (2016). Yapılı çevre üretimi, devlet ve büyük ölçekli kentsel projeler: Kapitalist kentleşme dinamiklerinin Türkiye’deki son 10 yılı. T. Bora (Ed.), İnşaat ya Resulullah (s. 163–180). Birikim Kitapları.
  29. Polat, N. (2020). Mardin Ilinde Uzun Yıllar Yer Yüzey Sıcaklığı Değişiminin Incelenmesi. TJRS, 2(1), 10–15.
  30. Ricciardelli, A., & Raimo, N. (2023). Urban regeneration and sustainability. In A. Ricciardelli, & N. Raimo (Eds.), Assessing Sustainability and Organizational Innovation of Urban Regeneration Projects, 1-22.
  31. Sakar, B., & Çalışkan, O. (2019). Design for mitigating urban heat island. ICONARP, 7(Special Issue), 158–181. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2019.
  32. Sincan Belediyesi. (2019). Saraycık Strateji Belgesi Raporu: https://www.sincan.bel.tr/wpcontent/uploads/2020/07/Sincan-Belediyesi-2019-faaliyet-raporu.pdf , Access date: 4th March 2025.
  33. Stewart, I. D., & Mills, G. (2021). The urban heat island: A guidebook. Elsevier.
  34. Stewart, I. D., & Oke, T. R. (2012). Local climate zones for urban temperature studies. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 93(12), 1879–1900, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00019.1.
  35. Tapçı, A., & Bayer Altın, T. (2024). Düziçi Ovası’nın uzun dönemli kuraklık değerlerinin NDVI analizi ile izlenmesi. In III. International Korkut Ata Scientific Research Conference, 2, 1–16.
  36. Taslima, S., Paraparib, D.S., &Shafaghata, A. (2015). Urban Design Guidelines to Mitigate Urban Heat Island (UHI) Effects In HotDry Cities, Jurnal Teknologi, 74(4), 191–124, DOI: 10.11113/jt.v74.4619.
  37. Tekeli, İ. (1982). Türkiye’de konut sorununun davranışsal nitelikleri ve konut kesiminde bunalım. Konut ’81. Ankara: Kent-Koop.
  38. Tekeli, İ. (1996). "Yetmiş Yıl İçinde Türkiye'nin Konut Sorununa Nasıl Çözüm Arandı ?", TOKİ Başkanlığı: Konut Araştırmaları, (1-2 Temmuz 1993); Ankara.
  39. Tekeli, İ. (2012). Türkiye'de yaşamda ve yazında konutun öyküsü (1923–1980). İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı.
  40. Tekpınar, E. (2023). Kentsel Dönüşüm Projelerinin Gündelik Hayata Etkisini Yaşam Kalitesi Perspektifinden Okumak: Saraycık Mahallesi – Ankara, Master of Degree, Konya Technical University, Graduate Education Institute, City and Regional Planning, Konya.
  41. Tekpınar, E. ve Levend, S. (2024). Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesiyle Üretilen Yapılı Çevrenin Yaşam Kalitesi Üzerine Etkisi: Saraycık Mahallesi- Ankara, PLANARCH- Design and Planning Research, 8(1), 12-24. DOI: 10.54864/planarch.1456465.
  42. Theophilou, M. K., & Serghides, D. (2015). Estimating the characteristics of the urban heat island effect in Nicosia. Energy and Buildings, 108, 137–144, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.08.034.
  43. Tuğaç, Ç., & Mahdızadeh Dalir, B. (2023). Kentlerde iklim değişikliğiyle mücadelede kentsel dönüşümün rolü. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 25 (Special Issue), 21–42.
  44. TOKİ (2025). Saraycık Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi, https://www.toki.gov.tr/illere-gore-projeler/7281.
  45. TÜİK (2025). Adrese Dayalı Nüfus Kayıt Sistemi, https://nip.tuik.gov.tr/Home/Adnks.
  46. Uzun, N. C. (2006). Yeni yasal düzenlemeler ve kentsel dönüşüme etkileri. Planlama. 2, 49-52.
  47. Yasdıman, K. (2023). Kentsel ısı adası, sıcaklık dalgaları ve halk sağlığı ilişkisi. ABMYO Dergisi, 67, 53–65.
  48. Zha, Y., Gao, J., & Ni, S. (2003). Use of normalized difference built-up index in automatically mapping urban areas from TM imagery. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 24(3), 583-594, https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160304987.