Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Engineering / 2026 / Volume: 10 Issue: 2

Investigation of Tokat Toki Residences in Context of Design and User Satisfaction

Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2026-05-01
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

It has been determined that user satisfaction will increase if Toki chooses the settlement of the houses to be built in Anatolia in places with low slopes and close to the city centers.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study aimed to assess whether the needs of residents in Tokat TOKİ housing are being met and to evaluate their satisfaction levels.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:A survey was administered to 276 randomly selected residents, and the data were analyzed using the SPSS program.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:It has been determined that user satisfaction will increase if Toki chooses the settlement of the houses to be built in Anatolia in places with low slopes and close to the city centers.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Mass Housing · Housing Satisfaction · Anova Analysis Technique

Abstract

This study aimed to assess whether the needs of residents in Tokat TOKİ housing are being met and to evaluate their satisfaction levels. For this purpose, vectorization work was carried out using Geographic Information System (GIS), Arcmap software, and tables were created for C.F,Y residential blocks as attribute table information. A survey was administered to 276 randomly selected residents, and the data were analyzed using the SPSS program. The analysis considered various factors, including block types, architectural floor plans, housing environment, and transportation conditions. The findings were thoroughly evaluated. In the study, the rate of those who are very satisfied with the architectural floor plan design of the houses is 18.1 %, rate of those who are satisfied is 48.9%, users who are very satisfied with the thermal insulation of the houses are 19.9%, and those who are only satisfied are 48.6%. However, satisfaction rates with sound insulation are low. It was determined that 3.3% were very satisfied with the sound insulation, 6.5% were only satisfied, and the total rate of those who were not satisfied was 73.5%. In addition, while the satisfaction rate about the quality of the materials used in the houses was 55%, the satisfaction about topography of the land on which the houses were built was below 50%. Although information obtained in terms of house plan analyzes varies according to the block types, dissatisfaction has been found about the sound insulation and the very slope of the land in general. It has been determined that user satisfaction will increase if Toki chooses the settlement of the houses to be built in Anatolia in places with low slopes and close to the city centers.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Başdemir, H., Oruç, F. B. (2026). Investigation of Tokat Toki Residences in Context of Design and User Satisfaction. Turkish Journal of Engineering, Volume: 10 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.31127/tuje.1828174

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (42)

  1. Türel, A., (1989). 1980 Sonrası Konut Üretimindeki Gelişmeler. ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1), 137-157.
  2. Türel, G. (1996). Yaşlılar için konut. Diğerlerinin Konut Sorunları, TMMOB Mimarlar Odası Yayını: ISBN 975-395-170-1,, Ankara. ss, 30-31
  3. Kellekci Ö. L. Ve Berköz L., (2006). Mass Housing: User Satisfaction in Housing and its Environment in Istanbul, Türkiye, Journal European Journal of Housing Policy Volume 6, 77-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616710600587654
  4. Özsoy, A. (2011). Toplu Konut Uygulamalarının Gelişimi. EkoYapı Dergisi. Erişim Adresi (12.12. 2021): https://www. ekoyapidergisi. org/toplu-konut-uygulamalarinin-gelisimi.
  5. Kaarasu, M. A., Gültekin, N. (2012). TOKİ Konutlarının müşteri memnuniyeti açısından değerlendirilmesi: Şanlıurfa ilinde bir uygulama. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 34(2), 383-404.
  6. Bostancı, B., Bakır, N. Y., Doğan, U., Güngör, M. K. (2017). Bulanık karar verme teknikleri ile CBS destekli konut memnuniyeti araştırması. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(4), 1193-1208. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.369540
  7. Olcay, Y., Esin, N. (2011). Toplu konut üretiminde kullanıcı tatmini yönelimli bir veri toplama modeli: kalite fonksiyon yayılımı. İTÜDERGİSİ/a, 9(2), ss.71-82.
  8. Deneç, E. A. (2014). Türkiye kentlerinin mekansal üretiminde TOKİ etkisi. Mimarlık Dergisi, 378, 65-68.
  9. Yılmaz, E. (2016). Konut sorunu ve toplu konut üretiminde TOKİ’nin ve belediyelerin rolü. Gazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(7), 31-50.
  10. Alkan, Y., Sağlık, A., ve Kelkit,A. (2016). Site yerleşimlerinde dış mekân–peyzaj niteliğinin ölçülmesi ve konut değerlerine etkisi üzerine bir araştırma: Çanakkale kenti örneği. Uluslararası Hakemli Tasarım ve Mimarlık Dergisi, 9, 111-128. Doi: 10.17365/TMD.2016922567
  11. Semerci, F., Gümüş, B. (2017). Sivil mimarlık örneklerine bir değerlendirme önerisi: Afyonkarahisar örneği. Uluslararası Hakemli Mimarlık ve Tasarım Dergisi, 11, 91-113. Doi: 10.17365/TMD.2017.2.6
  12. Gür,M., Erbil,Y. (2018). Konut ve konut çevresine ilişkin kullanıcı memnuniyeti araştırması: Bursa/Yıldırım. Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research, 5(30), 4135-4148.
  13. Barutçular, T., & Dostoğlu, N. (2019). Üst Gelir Grubu Konutlarda Kullanıcı Memnuniyetinin Aidiyet Üzerinden İncelenmesi: Ataköy Örneği. Megaron, 14.
  14. Çiftçi, M. (2020). Türkiye’de konut üretim özelliklerinin 1964-2019 arasında uzun dönemli dönüşümü. Kırklareli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(1), 83-99. Yaman,K.,Suzan,T.(2021). TOKİ konutlarında kullanıcı memnuniyeti araştırması: Karabük örneği. Euroasia Journal Of Social Sciences & Humanities, 8(20), 45-59.
  15. Çivici, T. (2022). Kullanıcı memnuniyet algıları aracılığı ile toplu konut projelerinde kalite: Balıkesir ili TOKİ konutları örneği. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 24(2), 448-467.
  16. Şahin, B. H., & Tereci, A. (2021). Survey on the user satisfaction with the mass housing projects led by district municipality: Konya-Karatay example. Gazi University Journal of Science, 1-1. DOI: 10.35378/gujs.765147
  17. Erdoğdu, H., & Erdem, N. (2020). Konut Memnuniyetinin Sıralı Lojistik Regresyon Analizi İle Araştırılması: Osmaniye İli Örneği. Geomatik, 5(2), 146-159.
  18. Sarı, S., & Türk, T. (2021). An investigation of urban development with geographical information systems: 100-year change of Sivas City, Türkiye. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences, 6(1), 51-63.
  19. Yaman, K., & Arslan, G. (2017). Analysis of annual energy requirement of a residential house with TS825 and ashrae heat balance methods. Turkish Journal of Engineering, 1(1),5-10. https://doi.org/10.31127/tuje.316503
  20. Coşkun, H., & Sancar, S. (2021). Client satisfaction as perceived by Architects and Civil Engineers. Turkish Journal of Engineering, 5(3), 100-104. https://doi.org/10.31127/tuje.688291
  21. Boz, Y., & Çay, T. (2020). New regulation to register the anomalous constructions and finance urban regeneration projects in Türkiye: Development peace. Turkish Journal of Engineering, 4(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.31127/tuje.571020
  22. Amerigo, M.,(2002). A., Psychological approach to the study of residential satisfaction In Residential Environments: Choice, Satisfaction, and Behavior, Bergin&Garvey, Westport, Connecticut, London, 81-99
  23. Berkoz, L., Turk, Ş. Ş., Kellekci, Ö. L. (2009). Environmental quality and user satisfaction in mass housing areas: the case of Istanbul. European Planning Studies 17(1):161-174. Doi:10.1080/09654310802514086
  24. Vestbro, D.U.,(2012). Collective Housing for Sustainable Lifestyles in the Swedish Context, International Conference on Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity, University of Venice, 19 – 23 September 2012, Venice.
  25. Ibem, E. O., Opoko, A. P., Adeboye, A. B., Amole, D. (2013). Performance evaluation of residential buildings in public housing estates in Ogun State, Nigeria: Users' satisfaction perspective. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 2(2), 178-190.
  26. Tezgelen, D., Karaman, O. Y. (2014). Evaluation of user comfort in tunnel formwork housing areas: Izmir as a case study. ArchNet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 8(1), pp.78-92.
  27. Huber, C., Koch, D.,Busko, S., (2014). An International Comparison Of User Satisfaction In Buildings From The Perspective Of Facility Management. International Journal of Facility Management, 5(2). 1-15 Corpus ID: 166558264
  28. Devrim, I. A. (2016). Housing policies in Türkiye: evolution of TOKI (Governmental Mass Housing Administration) as an urban design tool. Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 10(3), 316-326.
  29. Balla, R., Benkő, M., Durosaiye, I. O. (2017). Mass Housing Estate Location in Relation to Its Liveability: Budapest Case Study. Cities, Communities and Homes: Is the Urban Future Livable, 192-203.
  30. Riazi, M., & Emami, A. (2018). Residential satisfaction in affordable housing: A mixed method study. Cities, 82, 1-9.
  31. Karji, A., Woldesenbet, A., Khanzadi, M.,Tafazzoli, M. (2019). Assessment of social sustainability indicators in mass housing construction: a case study of Mehr housing project. Sustainable Cities and Society, 50, 101697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101697
  32. Nwankwo, S. I. (2021). Improving Mass Housing in Nigeria through Diagnosis of Users' Satisfaction. Journal of Architecture and Civil Engineering, 6(7), 30-38.
  33. Bhavsar, C., Gadhavi, M., & Shaikh, M. (2025). Impact Assessment of Land Use Change Detection on the Environment of Ahmedabad District, Gujarat, India using Supervised Classification In GIS. Turkish Journal of Engineering, 9(4), 823-830. https://doi.org/10.31127/tuje.1605134
  34. Fathelrahman, S., & Mohamed, H. (2025). Remote Sensing and GIS methods for detecting changes in Land Cover and Urbanization in Khartoum, Sudan (1975-2022). Turkish Journal of Engineering, 9(4), 678-685.
  35. Baş T., (2006). Anket Nasıl Hazırlanır Uygulanır Değerlendirilir? Seçkin Yayınları, Ankara, (Ss 26-34)
  36. Eroğlu, E., (2005). Müşteri Memnuniyeti Ölçüm Modeli. İ.Ü. İşletme Fakültesi İşletme Dergisi, 34(1), 7-25.
  37. Tokat Belediyesi İmar Müdürlüğü Arşivi, (2019). TOKİ 1. Etap Konutları Mimari Projesi,
  38. Elsınga, M., Hoekstra, J. (2005). Homeownership and housing satisfaction. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 20, 401–424.
  39. Önder, D. E., Köseoğlu, K, Bölen, O, (2010) “The Effect Of User Participation In Satisfaction: Beyciler After-Earthquake Houses in Düzce”, İTÜ Dergisi/A, Mimarlık, Planlama, Tasarım, Vol:7 No:1, ss. 18-37.
  40. Gündoğdu, M., Kuru, A., Özkök, M. K., Yeler, G., Erşan, Ş. (2019). Yapılı Çevre Özellikleri ve Konut-Konut Çevresi Kullanıcı Memnuniyeti Etkileşimi: Kırklareli Merkez Örneği. Megaron, 14(4). 579-597. Doi: 10.14744/Megaron.2019.57070
  41. Türel, G. (1996). Yaşlılar için konut. Diğerlerinin Konut Sorunları, TMMOB Mimarlar Odası Yayını: ISBN 975-395-170-1,, Ankara. ss, 30-31
  42. Gür,M., Erbil,Y. (2018). Konut ve konut çevresine ilişkin kullanıcı memnuniyeti araştırması: Bursa/Yıldırım. Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research, 5(30), 4135-4148.