This study evaluates the façade quality of three municipal buildings using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to identify strengths, weaknesses, and improvement priorities in public architecture. Although façade design has been widely studied, quantitative and integrated assessment frameworks for municipal building façades remain limited. To address this gap, the study integrates the Design Quality Indicator (DQI) with AHP within a Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) framework, proposing a systematic and replicable evaluation model. The research assesses three main DQI criteria-functionality, building quality, and impact-subdivided into twelve sub-criteria and analyzed through pairwise comparison matrices. Data were collected through structured expert interviews with four academic designers and façade condition evaluations using a 5-point Likert-scale questionnaire. Consistency of expert judgments was verified through consistency ratio analysis. The findings indicate distinct quality levels among the buildings. The Yenisehir Municipality Building achieved a partially sufficient quality score (408.29), the Kayapınar Municipality Building demonstrated a moderate level (310.07), and the Sur Municipality Building was evaluated as insufficient (171.21), highlighting the need for comprehensive façade improvements. The study contributes by demonstrating the applicability of an integrated AHP-DQI framework in municipal façade evaluation and provides a transferable decision-support model that supports objective assessment and evidence-based design interventions in public architecture.
Tutal et al. (2026) studied this question.