Why Ankara / Akyurt Urban Floods Cannot be Considered as Natural Disasters?

Recently, the global climate change issue has been constantly on the agenda. Global warming intensifies the global water cycle subsystems, which leads to an increase in flood magnitudes and frequencies in many regions. Weather forecasting has become difficult, precipitation has become variable, and the probability of heavy precipitation and storms have increased due to climate change. Severe thunderstorms are becoming more frequent. As they are warmer than the surrounding rural areas and create local air circulation called “urban heat island”, urban areas can increase the activity of thunderstorms. Dust particles act as seeds absorbing the moisture in the clouds, resulting in the formation of rain droplets that may eventually turn into a severe thunderstorm phenomenon. Climate change indirectly reminds us of the concept of urban floods more often.

The most distinct result of global warming in Turkey is Urban Floods. This term now creates a critical agenda. The effectiveness and intensity of urban floods are increasing regardless of the season and eventually urban floods will be a part of our daily lives. This inevitable and, now routine, climate cycle opens up the definition of EXTRAORDINARY RAINFALL to discussion. Namely, In Turkey, where CITY & INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING and CIVIL STRUCTURES have been built in the light of the highest data with regards to the statistical precipitation rates on past years, all of the big cities have, in a way, taken their final form in their settlements based on such old planning. In addition, there are all the problems such as illegal housing, disorderly development planning, inadequacy, and neglect of infrastructure. These problems should be solved by the local authorities and relevant institutions of our country. There is no connection or cooperation between the experts and the implementors. Managing the flood risks in cities taking into account all circumstances is a must.

In these circumstances, managing the risk of urban floods in a sustainable manner is becoming an increasingly challenging task for urban communities and responsible authorities. Unfortunately, many cities around the globe cannot keep up with this increasingly challenging task. However, the common feature of urban flood management, which prevents a more effective response the flood risk, is the approach on single-sector. Urban flood management is mostly carried out with a narrow approach of floods and focuses only on hydraulics and engineering aspects, ignoring spatial, ecological, political and socio-economic aspects. This narrow approach is aimed at the prevention or full control of floods, which is far from reality. Increasing people’s resilience to floods allows them to live with them.

According to the Turkish Language Association, NATURAL DISASTER is defined as each of disasters such as flood, storm, earthquake, hail that cannot be prevented by human intervention. If the definition is; an event that cannot be prevented by human intervention, we need to question how many of the disasters that have occurred in Turkey recently are actual natural disasters. Because almost all of the urban floods that have occurred in the recent rainfall events are preventable by human intervention, as a matter of fact; damages were caused by humans. There should be a limit for blaming the natural disaster. 😊

The heavy rainfall that was effective last week caused many floods / inundations to occur throughout Turkey. Numerous residences and workplaces were flooded, resulting in significant financial losses. Based on initial assessments, it is estimated that the direct material and physical loss reserve in only Akyurt district of Ankara province is at around $5 Billion. We are currently investigating the $2 Billion portion of this amount.

Are Akyurt Urban Floods Natural Disasters?

If a natural disaster is defined as an event that cannot be prevented by humans, can we define the conjoined risks created by humans and resulting in losses as natural disasters based on the satellite image below? Pursuant to the definition of catastrophe(ic); all areas must be equally affected. If 5 people of out 100 get wet during a rainfall, it cannot be defined as a natural disaster… The examination is carried out only for those that sustained damages, and this is never considered catastrophic.

Pursuant to our initial investigations at Akyurt region;

Different damage characteristics have been identified based on the regions. The zones marked in the plan below represent regions with significant and different damage characteristics. The flood incident that materialised in these regions – which cannot be defined as a Natural Disaster Region – has occurred due to the responsibilities of different institutions. On that sense, it should be inevitable that the damages materialising in the region to be compensated or assumed by the responsible institutions.

While the responsible institutions can directly provide what is necessary without allowing this to happen through legal means, unfortunately, there is an avoidance. As a result, while it is an option for those directly responsible to minimize the damage in cases where some individuals and companies are harmed, the extended processes turn into a problem that would also affect the economy of the country. Since each of the damaged areas presents a separate damage mechanism, it is no possible to associate the events with construction and call it a natural disaster. At least, science proves this easily.

Based on the numbering in the plan above;

Zone #1: Büğdüz Stream extending in east-west direction is located here. The flow is towards west. After heavy rainfall, the water coming from the roofs of the buildings could not be discharged due to the lack of infrastructure, and various damages occurred in the buildings in the zone. If the buildings are assumed to have “Occupancy Permits”, the roof water not being discharged is probably due to the kickback, clogging in the municipal’s drainage system around the building, and overflowing from the roof and the water leaking into the building. The images captured of manhole covers overflowing during our site visits support this occurrence. It is currently being researched whether the poor functioning of the storm drainage system is due to the lack of adequate regulation and cleaning works in the Büğdüz Stream.

Zones #2 and #3: Both zones are located to the east of Akyurt motorway, at the sections where the culverts passing under the motorway. The yard of the flooded facilities seems to be public roads, and the section further along seems to be in private ownership. The exit section of the culvert passing under the motorway is also privately owned. There is a circumstance where the water is discharged by left and right turns, other than the natural movement of the water. In addition, new channels were opened, and the natural structure of the land was disturbed during the excavations on the opposite side of the road, the flow of water from the surface along the motorway toward the culverts was not possible due to blockages, and the water crossed the road and flooded the facilities on the opposite side. The natural flow of water is blocked by development/construction when moved further from the culvert passing under the motorway.

Zone #4: The collapse of the wall around the airport at various sections, and the cutting the service road from 2 points, which extends parallel to the perimeter wall within the airport borders at 4a and 4b, was not caused by natural reasons, but by construction equipment. It is currently being researched whether the perimeter wall and the service road were built in accordance with the standards. It has been understood that it was built in a way that prevents the surface waters coming from the areas to the east and the stream passing through Balıkhisar district/village, structures such as cement pipes/culverts in these areas were insufficient, the water that could not be discharged after heavy rainfall accumulated toward the back and in order to prevent the negative effects of this, the institution demolished the perimeter wall at 5 sections and the service road at 2 sections at night, to ensure water flow. This flow has caused facilities to be flooded.

Zone #5: These and nearby facilities suffered damages as a result of the wall / road destruction and the flow of accumulated water described above in Zone #4.

In light of these assessments, we have found that there are at least 5 different damage characteristics in the region, and they are specific to each zone. However, the only common aspect of damages in these zones is that the cause of damages is not a Natural Disaster. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the responsible parties and compensate the losses incurred by the facilities. We further our studies in the region…

What to call a natural disaster will become evident when forensic experts and scientists investigating the root cause, reveal tangible and objective studies.