Istanbul: City of Islands

CITY OF ISLANDS
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON DEVELOPMENT PLANNING UNIT BUDD 2009-2010
STUDENTS
Krista Canellakis | San Francisco, USA Ricardo Martn | San Jos, Costa Rica Niki Angelis | Kingston, Canada Laura Michener | Connecticut, USA Carlos Manns | Santiago, Chile Marisol Garca | Santiago, Chile Ana Ramos | Lisboa, Portugal Nick Wolff | London, UK Marcel Noeding | Mannheim, Deutschland Iman Hassan | Cairo, Egypt Hana Haq | Lahore, Pakistan Amar Sood | New Delhi, India Swethini Ramamurthy | Chennai, India Hong Yu | Tianjin, China Weiwei Liang | Guangzhou, China
Federico Gori | Trieste, Italia Giorgio Talocci | Roma, Italia Igor Malgrati | Como, Italia
William Hunter | Louisiana, USA
Camillo Boano | Asti, Italia
Isis Nuez Ferrera | Tegucigalpa, Honduras
MEMBERS OF FACULTY
DPU_BUDD 2010_FIELD TRIP REPORT iSTANBUL CITY OF ISLANDS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
teekkr ederim thank you
[istanbul] Zehra Tonbul | Yaar Adanali, DEPO | Orhan Esen | Murat Cemal Yalitan | Mimar Sinan University Sema Zeyhan, IBB | Ula Akin and Murat Vefkiolu, IMP | Mete Gktu, Community Architect Mustafa zkul & Iskender Gne, Union of Municipalities of Marmara | Erdoan Yldz Ali Bier, Armutlu Association | Nilgn Kivircik, Tarlabai Project Office | Dr. Tuna Kuyucu, Bogazici University Nee Erdilek, Bilgi University Community Center of Tarlabai | Yusuf Tln, Mayor of Sariyer Alper nl, ITU, Consultant to Kartal District Municipality | Niyaz Sahan, Hurriyet Neighborhood Association brahim Doan & Can avdar, Kartal Municipality | Nilgn Kvrck, GAP Construction | Esen Avdel, Galata Dernei Mete Gktu, Galataevi, Community Architect | Turan Mengcr, Yakack Neighbourhood Association Ylmaz Yasak, Muhtar of Babyk | Baak Polat, resident of Armutlu Our translators: Dimitra, Haris, Ipek, Julia, Kate All those who treated us to ayran and ay out of genuine kindness
[london] Camillo Boano | Cassidy Johnson | Isis Nuez | William Hunter | Caren Levy | Eleni Kyrou | Ruth McLeod Melissa Garca Lamarca | Our colleagues in the MSc Urban Development Planning 09/10
[all our beloved buddies] Amar | Carlos | Federico | Giorgio | Guida | Hana Hong | Igor | Iman | Krista | Laura | Marcel |Marisol Nick | Niki | Ricardo | Swethini | Weiwei
DPU_BUDD 2010_FIELD TRIP REPORT
iSTANBUL CITY OF ISLANDS
Acronyms List of Figures
3 4 6 9 10 12 14 16 19 20 23 26 28 31 34 38 44 51 62 65 66 68 72 80 86 93 99 116
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/SONU RAPORLARI 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 A city of islands 1.2 Setting the context 1.3 Report outline 1.4 Perspectives: transformation
2.0 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Definition of Transformation 2.2 Fields of analysis 2.3 Criteria & Indicators 2.4 Conclusions
3.0 ANALYSIS: City of Islands

3.1 Converging Pressures 3.2 Mapping actor dynamics 3.3 Four case studies 3.4 Scenarios of Transformation 3.5 Istanbul: City of Islands
4.0 STRATEGIES: Negotiated Spaces

4.1 Vision 4.2 Negotiating language: from Resistance to Empowerment 4.3 Negotiating typology: challenging TOKI 4.4 Negotiating space: slowing gentrification 4.5 Weighing strategies
5.0 REFLECTIONS ANNEXES

Bibliography
01
ACRONYMS
AKP BUDD CBD CDC CHP DPU EU GAP naat IBB IDA IFI IMP KIPTA NGO OECD TOKI UCL
Adalet ve Kalknma Partisi (Justice and Development Party) MSc Building and Urban Design in Development Central Business District Community Design Centre Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (Republican Peoples Party) Development Planning Unit European Union Gap Construction stanbul Bykehir Belediyesi (Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality) Istanbul Development Agency International Financial Institution Istanbul Metropolitan Planning Office stanbul Konut mar Plan Sanayi ve Ticaret A.. (Metropolitan Municipality Institution) Non-Governmental Organization Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Toplu Konut Idaresi (Mass Housing Administration) University College London
LIST OF FIGURES Chapter 1

1.1. General map of Istanbul province (light gray) and its current 39 districts. 1.2. Map of Turkey. Highlighted in yellow is Istanbuls city center 1.3. Structure of the report and areas of analysis
Chapter 2
2.1. The Theoretical Corner of transformation 2.2. The production of space dimension 2.3. The production of knowledge dimension 2.4. The levels of interaction dimension 2.5. Categories of social and spatial dimensions for case analysis 2.6. Table of criteria and indicators derived from the three theoretical dimensions.
Chapter 3
3.1. Istanbul as City of Islands. Adapted from Guy E. Debord, The Naked City, 1959 3.2. Global city pressures are manifested in flows of capital and direct foreign investment that results in the formation of generic islands of capital 3.3. City planning is developed in an effort to brand Istanbul with guidelines that benefit the producers rather than the users of space 3.4. Private Capital in urban transformation schemes is rapidly creating islands of isolated environments available to an urban elite 3.5. Resistance in pockets surfaces from marginalized groups to combat current development top-down plans 3.6. A classification of actors in terms of their roles as user, producers and regulators as well as in relation to the scale of the analysis (micro, mesa, macro) 3.7. Confl icting relations Extreme isolation of the producers of space from the users 3.8. Cooperation relations Collaborative relationships visible within different actor groups 3.9. Financial relations: obvious relationships are formed between owners of land and the government
3.10. Authority relations: exclusionary policies result in strong connections within the macro-meso, but not the micro 3.11. The four elaborated case studies (large circle) and all other sites of interest within Istanbul 3.12. Tarlaba in its zenithal view shows its organic urban pattern due to its historical formation. Highighted in white the nine blocks under GAP naats rededevelopment project. 3.13. Photos represent the condition of the Tarlabasi district. Bottom photos used by the developer to contrast current and future appearance of area 3.14. Aerial view of Hurriyet 3.15. Aerial view of Yakaik 3.16. Aerial view of Kartals new CBD area in the actual situation 3.17. Photos representing the Kartal district 3.18. Photos representing the Maltepe district 3.19. Aerial view of Baibuyuk 3.20. Aerial view of Glsuyu/Glensu 3.21. Photos representing the Sariyer district 3.22. Aerial view of Sariyer 3.23. Tarlaba, building in a state of decay. 3.24. Graphic representation of the degree of connection/isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a historic inner city island. 3.25. Tarlaba, a productive space at the ground level. 3.26. Tarlaba, building in a state of decay. 3.27. Image from Armutlu. 3.28. Graphic representation of the degree of connection/isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a gecekondu island. 3.29. Image from Armutlu. 3.30. Image from Armutlu. 3.31. Image from Zeytinburnu 3.32. Graphic representation of the degree of connection/isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a post-gecekondu island. 3.33. Image from Zeytinburnu. 3.34. Image from Samatya. 3.35. Kipta towers in Glsyu. 3.36. Graphic representation of the degree of connection/isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a mass-housing island. 3.37. Image from Baibuyuk. 3.38. Image from Tozkoparan. 3.39. Zaha Hadid Architects, competition entry for Kartal CBD. 3.40. Graphic representation of the degree of connection/isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity
04
for a New Central Business District island. 3.41. Zaha Hadid Architects, competition entry for Kartal CBD, general plan. 3.42. Zaha Hadid Architects, competition entry for Kartal CBD, view from the sea.
Chapter 4
4.1. Current situation: An absence of inclusive policies and isolation among users and regulators of space (e.g. decision making and implementation power lies solely with TOKI, the implications of the domination of state-owned land). The resistance can only be successful if it shifts the status quo. 4.2. Short term: Initiation of strategies through implementation of the Hub 4.3. Mid term: consolidation of Hub, implementation of specifi c strategies of negotiation 4.4. Long-term: hub develops into citywide alliance, lessons learned over time create transformative and continuous change 4.5. Isolated neighbourhoods: subject to city pressures 4.6. Isolated neighbourhoods: cooperation units (including academia, NGOs, CBOs) emerge as agents of social transformation 4.7. Local entities come together to create a nonpartisan organisation for a collective point of contact for community members 4.8. The point of contact acts as an interchange for information gathering, technical support and knowledge sharing 4.9. Stronger networks are forged between and within communities 4.10. Over time, communities begin to interact more directly with one another, forming stronger connections 4.11. The fi nal stage of the strategy culminates in a city-wide alliance that creates and reinforces connections at a regional, national and international level 4.12. TOKI model of imposition over gecekondu settlements 4.13. Enforced exlusion process over gecekondu dwellers by local authorities (TOKI and municipalities) 4.14. The TOKI model in spatial and social categories 4.15. Suggested model of stakeholder change in
relations 4.16. Geographies of awareness: bridging process of evolving gecekondu in three phases 4.17. Three stages of urban development: from gecekondu to mass housing, and the contested, narrowing space in between 4.18. Gecekondu evolution, from individual, plot based upgrading, to a collective typology of improvement. TOKI then operates as bridge 4.19. Appropriation of space (five stages) 4.20. Suggested individual upgraded typology 4.21. First stage of negotiated gecekondu typology: improved social space and earthquake resistant infrastructure 4.22. Evolution sequence: gecekondu upgrading stages, from existing to proposed typologies 4.23. Evolution sequence: the new gecekondu typologies to challenge the TOKI model 4.24. Bridging gaps: TOKI as an agent of integration through typology 4.25. Negotiated typologies (five stages) (fig 4.25 is written twice) 4.26. Evolution of actor involvement through the negotiated process of new typologies 4.27. Vision of a negotiated gecekondu typology 4.28. GAP masterplan proposal for Tarlaba 4.29. Unmaintained buildings along Tarlaba Boulevard (GAP) 4.30. Rendering of renewed Tarlaba Boulevard (GAP) 4.31. Categories of building quality in GAP project area. Source: adapted from GAP naat 4.32. Negotiated spaces: project phases 4.33. Bridging gaps: increasing island relationships 4.34. Extended project area: buffer blocks beyond GAP project 4.35. Mass-housing block categories before transformation 4.37. Mass-housing block categories after transformation 4.36. Inner-city categories before transformation 4.38. Inner-city categories after transformation 4.39. Illustrative Actions for developing a negotiated language 4.40. Coordinated Strategic Action Timeline
05
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SONU RAPORLARI*
The students of the MSc in Building and Urban Design in Development at University College London (2009/2010) prepared this report as part of an intensive study of the influences, processes and outcomes of urban transformation in Istanbul, Turkey, with a particular focus on socio-spatial dimensions. Objectives This report has three key objectives: 1. To offer a comprehensive external point of view of the urban development processes that can contribute to and enrich the current debate. 2. To develop a diagnostic analysis of urban transformation in the city at various levels in the economic, political, social and spatial spheres. 3. To design strategies grounded in our diagnostic analysis which will have an impact at the different levels at which the city operates and across different time periods. Key Findings Through the analysis, the city is conceptualised as a City of Islands in which processes of exclusion create isolated and homogenous spaces. This understanding has shaped three key findings of this report: 1 . The dominant vision of urban transformation, primarily led by state and profit-driven actors, is driving these exclusionary processes and does not take into
University College London Kalknmada Bina ve Kentsel Tasarm yksek lisans rencileri (2009/2010) bu raporu stanbul, Trkiye'deki kentsel dnmn etkileri, sreleri ve sonular zerine sosyo-meknsal boyutlarna odakl olarak gerekletirdikleri youn almann bir paras olarak hazrlamlardr. Amalar Bu raporun ana amac vardr: 1.Kentsel gelime srelerine geni perspektifli ve var olan tartma ortamna katkda bulunabilecek ve zenginletirecek nitelikte bir d bak as sunmak. 2. Kentteki kentsel dnme farkl seviyelerde, ekonomik, politik, sosyal ve meknsal alanlarda, tehise dayal bir analiz gelitirmek. 3. Tehise dayal analizimizi temel alarak, kentin iledii farkl katmanlarda ve dnemlerde etkileri olacak stratejiler tasarlamak. Anahtar Bulgular Analizde, kent "adalar kenti" olarak kavramsallatrlmtr. Darda brakma sreleri kentte dlanm ve homojen meknlar yaratmaktadr. Bu yaklam raporun anahtar bulgusunu oluturmutur: 1. Kentsel dnmde esasen devlet ve karodakl aktrlerin ban ektii hkim gr, dlama srelerini kumanda etmekte ve yarnn stanbul'unda
* Translation by Zehra Tonbul
06
account the multiple perspectives of the urban poor on the future Istanbul. 2. There is a lack of a common language and collective action between actor groups that are affected by urban transformation which has limited the proposal of viable alternatives; resistance is fragmented and reactive. 3. There are key areas of opportunity and scope for negotiation to overcome some of the social and spatial challenges faced by urban poor communities and formulate alternative visions of the future city. Recommendations Proposed strategies respond directly to the need for more and better spaces of negotiation amongst the urban poor and the rest of civil society. Ultimately, the goal of the strategies is to empower communities to participate more fully in Istanbuls spatial transformation processes through: A negotiated language: A common language and coordinated action that empowers communities to understand, oppose, and formulate alternative visions. The scale of this strategy is citywide with regional, national and international links. A negotiated built form: Two negotiated scenarios of transformation dealing with the built form, challenging TOKI with an alternative model for the evolution of gecekondu settlements and an attempt to counter rapid gentrification in the inner city historic areas of Istanbul. Conclusions The strategies aim for a more responsive and inclusive urban space through increasing its connectedness and encouraging heterogeneity. They enable a created space of participation that is controlled jointly by communities and support agencies and increase the role of urban poor in shaping the city. The overlapping strategies form a coherent starting point for stimulating change in the Istanbul-wide transformation process. They are catalytic and open to alliance, contributing to a more fundamental shift over time in the perspectives of multiple actors about what type of urban transformation they wish to see in Istanbul, what are the implications of different approaches and who should be involved.
kentsel yoksullara dair ok ynl bir bak asn dikkate almamaktadr. 2. Kentsel dnmden etkilenen farkl aktr gruplar arasnda ortak bir dil yoktur ve topluluk olarak hareket etmemektedirler. Bu durum uygulanabilir alternatifler iin gelitirilecek nerileri kstlamaktadr; direni paral ve tepkiseldir. 3. Kentteki yoksul topluluklarn karlat baz sosyal ve meknsal sorunlarn stesinden gelmek ve kentin gelecei iin farkl grler oluturmak iin uzlama olanaklar ve nemli frsat alanlar mevcuttur. neriler nerilen stratejiler kent yoksullar ve sivil halkn geri kalan arasndaki daha fazla ve daha iyi uzlama alanlarna duyulan ihtiyaca direkt olarak cevap vermektedir. Son kertede, stratejilerin amac topluluklar stanbul'un meknsal dnm srelerine daha ok katlmalar iin u yollarla glendirmektir: Uzlalm bir dil: Farkl vizyonlar anlamas, kar gelmesi ve oluturmas iin topluluklar glendirecek ortak bir dil ve koordineli eylemler. Bu strateji kentsel lekte olup, blgesel, ulusal ve uluslararas balantlar vardr. Uzlalm bir yapsal form: Yapsal formla ilgili iki uzlalm senaryo; gecekondu yerleimlerinin dnmne ynelik bir model ile TOK'ye alternatif oluturmak ve stanbul'un merkezindeki tarihi alanlardaki hzl soylulatrmaya kar bir giriim. Sonular Stratejiler ilikilenmelerini arttrarak ve heterojenlii tevik ederek daha sorumlu ve kapsayc bir kentsel alan yaratmay amalamaktadr. Topluluklar ve destek veren kurulularn birlikte kontrol ettikleri katlmcn tasarlanm alanna olanak salarlar ve kentin ekillenmesinde kent yoksulunun roln arttrrlar. rten stratejiler tutarl bir balang noktas yaratarak stanbul genelinde dnm srecini harekete geirirler. Katalizr vazifesini grrler ve ittifaklara aktrlar. Zamanla oklu aktrlerin stanbulda nasl bir kentsel dnm grmek istedikleri, farkl yaklamlarn getirdikleri ve kimin srece dhil olmas gerektii ile ilgili daha temel bir deiime katkda bulunurlar.
07
FG
1.1
A CITY OF ISLANDS
Istanbul - City of Islands is the result of intensive work in Istanbul and London by students in the MSc Building and Urban Design in Development 2009/2010 of the Development Planning Unit (DPU) of University College London (UCL) Istanbul, a multifaceted and fluid city, has experienced rapid and dramatic impacts of global and local pressures, and has recently started to reflect on and debate the underlying issues and to define opportunities and challenges within the process of urban transformation.
This report is situated within this context, with the objective to contribute to the debate and to develop an in-depth diagnosis of processes of transformation in the city and a strategy based on redefining urban transformation in Istanbul. The analysis defines Istanbul as a City of Islands, reflecting the character of enclosed fragments of the city existing in levels of isolation and homogeneity, shaped by the dominant visions of the global city, private capital and city planning. The strategic responses address this isolation through the promotion of a collective vision within the urban poor that can effectively challenge these imposed visions of the city. Building on this, strategies for negotiation of alternative, inclusive models of transformation are proposed that redress the existing imbalance in power relations in this process.
Figure 1.1 (below). General map of Istanbul province (light gray) and its current 39 districts.
CHAPTER 1.0_INTRODUCTION
10
11
1.2
SETTING THE CONTEXT
Istanbul is a global city whose identity is strongly influenced by its geographic position. Historically it has been an in between city (between Europe and Asia, the Golden Horn and Bosphorus, the Marmara and Black Sea, Muslim and Catholic, Ancient and Modern), but today Istanbuls position is beyond just geographic and encompasses economical, political, social and cultural spheres of global influence. Istanbul has been the capital city of many empires spanning the Roman and Byzantine Empires and the Ottoman Empire. Its empiric role throughout Istanbuls long history has shaped the current form and continues to influencethe citys development. With the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1923, modern Istanbul was born. Turkey and its major cities went through deep national reforms laid out by then Prime Minister Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. The institutional and political transformations at the time resulted in many important changes for Istanbul, most importantly the shift in the location and status of the capital city to Ankara. From the 1950s to 1980s Istanbul was transformed by rapid industrialization and urbanization. These political and economic changes coupled with increasing migration patterns into Istanbul had a serious impact on the built form. 1.2.1 Built over night The industrialisation of Istanbul attracted migrants from all over Turkey in search of employment opportunities. The massive influx of migrants was welcomed by the state but was not provided with a
planned housing programme. Informal settlements or gecekondular (singular: gecekondu) were thus developed in this absence of state-provided housing. The homes were typically single storey with backyards. Over time the dwellings were upgraded and expanded in the absence of any state intervention. This form of self-build housing was condoned by the state through gecekondu amnesties enacted between 1983 and 1987. In 1984, a concern over housing led to the creation of TOKI, a public sector actor created to provide credit for construction of housing for low and middle-income groups.The gecekondular were built in the voids of the city, clustered around industrial activities. The post-gecekondu, characterized by multistorey buildings located in the city periphery, were built up after 1985. These settlements have heterogeneous populations and uses. This era saw the transition of the economy from an import-substitution protectionist model towards neoliberalism. Within this model, a great emphasis was placed on financial and cultural activities pushing manufacturing to the outlying areas of the city. This shift threatened the employment of gecekondu dwellers as well as their housing security, particularly those living in the post-gecekondu settlements. The form and function of Istanbul was further altered by booms in the market, in real estate values and in the desire to put Istanbul on the map as a global city. Today, socio-economic inequalities are spatially manifested through the rise of gated communities, the intensification of eviction and gentrification processes and the planning vision of a polycentric city.
12
The 1999 earthquake and the 2001 economic crisis added further stresses upon the citys development and led to restrictive building regulations. TOKIs role was extended and, in 2004, was entitled to create low and medium income social housing, facilities and infrastructure and revitalize blighted neighbourhoods, restore and reconstruct buildings of historic importance and create the infrastructure for rural areas and provide housing, infrastructure and social facilities for the victims of disasters (TOKI, 2010). This has given TOKI an unprecedented amount of power to implement tabula rasa style developments across Istanbul with limited to no participation from its residents. Further to this, an urban transformation bill threatens to execute mega-projects in urban transformation zones and expropriate private property if passed. Already the systematic transformation of the city through the construction of new Central Business districts and mass housing complexes have ignited a change in the existing urban fabric of Istanbul and threatens the informal settlements whose geographical position in the city has become increasingly important in the eyes of the municipality and private developers. In 2010, Istanbul, the former Capital of Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, is the European Capital of Culture, searching for a balance between its ancient past and modern visions of the future. Turkey also has growing political and economic aspirations, including accession into the European Union, which ultimately impacts the growth and development of the city. The city of Istanbul is at a crossroads where the opportunity exists for a transformation that allows for its future growth without compromising its residents. Currently, the challenges to transformation include the development of new CBDs, mass housing blocks, inner city settlements and the gecekondular.
Istanbul: a flavour Istanbul is the largest city in Turkey with over 15 million people (20% of the national population) (OECD:2008:2) 75% of the population are of Turkish origin; the remaining population is made up of Kurdish, Armenian, Greek and Jewish decent The migrant population growth rate is high, attracting upwards of 500,000 people each year. Migrants account for 30% of the working labour force and drive Istanbuls informal economy Ranked seventh in the world in terms of number of known billionaires in the city The countrys economic keystone, [i]t produces almost 27% of national GDP, 38% of total industrial output and more than 50% of services (OECD:2008:2). GDP per capita exceeds the national average by more than 70% and generates half of total exports in Turkey (OECD:2008:2). In 2004 the administrative boundaries of the city were expanded to coincide with the provincial boundaries of Istanbul Province, one of the 11 provinces of the Marmara region Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IBB) coordinates 39 District Municipalities. The Metropolitan Mayor of Istanbul, and the District Mayors and Councils are directly elected bodies At the neighborhood or mahalles level, the elected muhtar acts as a local representative. In 2004 city planning tasks shifted from central government to the sole control of the IBB. It has been criticised for being too complex and fragmented (OECD:2008:6) In 2006, the Istanbul Master Plan, a strategic planning document for Istanbul, was prepared (and revised in 2009) to act as a guide for planning initiatives throughout the city
Figure 1.2. Map of Turkey. Highlighted in yellow the city of Istanbul
13
1.3
REPORT OUTLINE
The terms of reference that preceded the content and structure of this report looked at the processes of urban transformation as the field of analysis. Further expanded into several categories of study, these terms looked to contextualise Istanbul in terms of its recent past and its aspirations for the future as an emergent city looking for a renewed identity. Within that frame, the research and field work that preceded this report led to the formulation of three interlinked objectives, which are explained below. These look to set out the parameters of our work, and organise the main areas of study that feed into our collective vision. 1.2.1 Objectives 1. To offer a comprehensive external point of view, which can contribute to and enrich the current debate on the subject of transformation in the city, based on an understanding of the diverse arguments centred on this subject, amongst the various actors concerned with the urban development processes. 2. To develop a diagnostic analysis of the urban transformation occurring in and influencing the city at various levels in the economic, political, social and spatial spheres while taking into consideration the varied perspectives on transformation of the actors in Istanbul. 3. To design a strategy grounded in our diagnostic analysis which can be adapted and implemented by the whole gamut of actors and, when done so, will have an impact at the different levels at which the city operates and across different time periods.
1.2.2 Report Structure This report contains five chapters, ordered by the processes of analysis and the resultant strategies. Additionally, it includes annexes with complementary information gathered along the period of work. Chapter 1: Introduction sets the report in context and explains the objectives of the work, structure and methodology. Chapter 2: Theoretical framework introduces the theoretical basis for our analysis and the tools used to describe the concept of transformation in Istanbul. Chapter 3: Analysis profiles the city, using the aforementioned theoretical framework. The visions of different actors are accounted for, and the pressures on Istanbul and the islands constituting the city are analysed at different scales. Chapter 4: Strategies outlines strategies for the transformation of the city. After introducing a vision and the concept of negotiated spaces as the logic of intervention, a citywide strategy and a strategy for some of the islands are presented. Chapter 5: Reflections highlights and critically discusses the main achievements of the report.It also assesses the implications of our proposals, the role of the practitioner in this context and reflections. Annexes includes supporting evaluation analysis, glossary and field interviews.
14
1.2.3 Methodology The methodology behind this report has been shaped by our practical and academic experience in Istanbul and London, the time structure of the workgroup behind the report is as follows: Off-site work in London Using the knowledge and experience gained during the first two terms of the MSc program, a theoretical framework was developed for use in the field, in order to understand and analyse the concept of urban transformation. (27th -30th April 2010) Later, an in-depth literature review was conducted using sources relevant to Istanbul and its social, political, economic and environmental elements
related to transformation. (3rd to 7th May 2010) On-site work in Istanbul The on-site field work consisted primarily of site visits, meetings with key city actors and group work (9th to 22nd May 2010). The findings during the stay were assembled and presented to a selection of invited actors as well as UCL staff and students on 21st May 2010. Off-site work in London Upon returning to London, a revised presentation based on the comments and feedback from the actors and the DPU staff was given on the 27th May 2010. This was followed by the consolidation of the work and the production of the report. (28th May to 7th June 2010).
INTRODUCTION
TRANSFORMATION
ISTANBUL ToR METHODOLOGY
FRAMEWORK
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
PRESSURES
ISLANDS
ANALYSIS
ACTOR MAPPING CASE STUDIES SCENARIOS OF TRANSFORMATION
STRATEGIES
NEGOTIATED LANGUAGE NEGOTIATED SCENARIOS
REFLECCTIONS
REFLECTIONS
Figure 1.3. Structure of the report and areas of analysis
15
Inner city transformation New Central Business District Mass Housing Gecekondu
1.5 PERSPECTIVES:
TRANSFORMATION
Urban renewal Transformation is renewal. () is to make these historical buildings supply the contemporary needs of space function and health.
(Nilgn Kivircik, GAP director, 2010)
Underlying our analysis of the Istanbul case is the notion of transformation in its urban form. It is clear though, that in any scenario, transformation not only occurs on multiple levels, but is perceived differently and has distinct consequences according to the subjects relation with it. That being the case, it became necessary for our understanding of this phenomenon in Istanbuls context, to assess varied perspectives that could later better inform our own notions. This assemblage of testimonials and declarations, when joined with our research (off and) on the field has allowed us to stipulate a definition of urban transformation in Istanbul that guided us, paired with our framework of analysis the theoretical corner, in the study of the diverse scenarios we were presented with and the eventual strategies formulation. As such, in the four main urban arenas of transformation we were able to identify (inner city, new central business districts, mass housing and gecekondus) we aimed at gathering the meanings of what the process Istanbul is undergoing following Madanipours (2006) understanding of the roles in the production of space - the users, producers and regulators visions.
Alienation from the city It is easy to make a new city but hard to relocate persons, you loose the nature, your job, familiar surroundings and neighbours you are used to. My soul has died here. So has my childs.
(Bezirganbahce resident, in Uzuncarsili, C. 2010)
New urban space form New city center that successfully integrates with the fabric and network of the surrounding city while also creating a new form of urban space catering towards the communicative requirements of contemporary life
(Zaha Hadid Architects, Kartal competition entry, 2004)
Distorted Urbanization Transformation from distorted urbanisation to accepted urbanisation requires demolition of gecekondus and reorganisation of property relationships
(Orhan Esen, Istanbul bus tour, 2010)
Nostalgic village Keep it how it is right now, as a village, as a nostalgic village

(Niyaz Sahan, Leader of Hurriyet, Neighborhood association, 2010)
Exclusionary If things become modern they will send us to another place because we are poor
(Zeynp, Tarlaba resident, 2010)
Gentrification New environment for middle income people

(IBB, planning department, 2010) MG
Destruction Everything will be destroyed except for holy places. Places will become business centres with a big skyscraper.
(Songn, 2010)
(IMP Kartal Competition Design Brief, 2004)
Planned development Urban transformations should be modern and planned to prevent haphazard development
(Erdoan BAYRAKTAR, President of TOKI, 2010)
New face of Turkey Increasing The Spatial and Living Standards Through Transformation Projects
(IMP Masterplan Summary, 2005:105)
We are changing the face of Turkey

(Recep Tayyip ERDOAN, prime minister, TOKIs website, 2010)
Metropolitan Weaknesses Widespread illegal/informal residential areas, especially those on nature sensitive and geologically hazardous zones are the primary weaknesses of the metropolitan area.
(IMP Masterplan Summary, 2005)
FG
MG
IMP
Global city. Economic growth An alternative new centre with business centres, theatres, concert halls, congress halls, and marinas against the mono centric structure of Istanbul
KC
2.1 DEFINITION OF TRANSFORMATION
It is evident from the contrasting perspectives on Istanbuls transformation, presented in the preceding chapter, that the analysis of transformation requires a framework to capture and position each of these perspectives within a more coherent understanding of the complex processes of transformation and their multiple manifestations in the city. Going beyond analysis, such a framework should also assist in pointing out towards areas of potential strategic intervention to bring about changes, where the processes and outcomes currently in place fall short of a normative standard for progressive transformation. Any analytical framework for urban transformation that contributes usefully to academic debate must be grounded in theory. Marcuse (2010) points out the weakness of much mainstream theory in urban analysis in that it typically accepts current institutional and power relations and asks technical questions of specificities within those existing structures. Alternatively, he argues, one can adopt a critical theory approach that is reflexive concerning its relationship to the dominant forces in society, is open to alternatives to existing realities, moves from instrumental to substantive reason and is critical of existing relationships of power. Drawing from these arguments, the framework presented below is an attempt to ground our analysis of transformation in Istanbul within a critical theory approach. That is, it is intended to assist the understanding of the structural roots of contemporary problems in Istanbul, expose potential organisational strategies of alliances to address structural inequalities
and likely opponents, lay open the power relations that shape outcomes and need to be considered in strategic responses, guard against co-optation of strategic responses and politicise struggles by engaging with issues at a level beyond the merely technical (Marcuse 2010). Firstly, drawing from a review of literature within critical theory of urban analysis and development, a set of normative definitions of transformation were developed to define the characteristic of a progressive and socially just urban transformation and set benchmarks for analysis of a case. These definitions relate to three broad fields recurrent in critical discourses of urban transformation: the production of space, the production of knowledge and levels of interaction. Following this, a framework was developed to graphically illustrate and set parameters for the critical analysis of cases of urban transformation. This framework breaks down the three fields of production of space, production of knowledge and levels of interaction into multiple, intersecting axes of analysis drawn from essential elements of the critical theory underpinning these fields and represents these conceptually within a threedimensional corner or space of analysis made up of the three fields. Finally a set of criteria and indicators were developed as a starting point to guide the analysis of a case within the framework, measure the case against our normative definitions of transformation and highlight areas for strategic intervention which could move it closer towards the form of transformation contained in our definitions.
CHAPTER 2.0_THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
20
The framework in this chapter was initially developed before we were exposed to the case. Entering the field with a developed framework, although generic, allowed an immediate step into analysis during the two weeks of field work. Following exposure to the detail of the Istanbul case elements of the framework were subsequently refined into more context specific analytical tools in the field. 2.1.1 Definitions of transformation The concept of urban transformation can exist outside any set of normative values as an observable planned or unplanned re-making of space, place, people, relations, structures and institutions within the city. In developing a set of definitions for transformation that contain and represent normative values against which we could test our findings in Istanbul, we based them within the three broad fields of production of space, production of knowledge and levels of interaction, recurrent in critical discourses of urban transformation. While each focuses on a specific field for the purpose of disaggregating the detailed elements of transformation, it should be made clear that the three definitions are interlinked, reciprocallyreinforcing and to be used collectively in the analysis of a case. Definition 1: Concerning production of space The collective process of negotiating, creating and shaping space that is inclusive, sustainable, and symbolic of an urban imagination that empowers and improves peoples lives. Drawing on the work of Lefebvre (1991) this definition is grounded in the principle that space cannot be separated from its social production in specific urban forms (Madanipour, 2007:180). The organisation and patterning of urban space both reflects and reinforces the social relations that produce it, critically this production of space directly affects the everyday life of people in the city, through driving inclusive access to the citys goods and governance or in tendencies towards fragmenting and peripheralising urban populations (Saunders 1981). Also encapsulated within this definition is the concept that this social production of space, involves the definition of an urban meaning or dominant vision of the city (Castells
1983), which is expressed functionally and symbolically through planning and urban design. As Castells makes clear (and reflected in the varying perspectives on transformation found in Istanbul) the definition of this vision and its negotiated expression are conflictive processes. This definition is therefore concerned with collective processes of production of space that include the establishment of an inclusive and progressive vision to shape these processes and lend similar symbolic meaning to the physical, social and psychological dimensions of urban space. Definition 2: Concerning production of knowledge A shift in power relations that enables a marginalized group to leverage existing and learned knowledge and capacities for greater access to social, political and economic resources. This definition is centred on Foucaults identification of a focus on conflict and power relations as the most effective point of departure for the fight against domination. (Flyvberg 1998:203). It is based within Foucaults conceptualisation of power relations as networked, fluid, multipolar and multi-scalar and inextricably bound up with conceptualisations of knowledge and rationality (ibid). The use of this relationship between power and knowledge in the definition follows Gaventa and Cornwalls (2006:122) assertion that knowledge as power determines definitions of what is conceived as important, as possible, for and by whom. Through access to knowledge and participation in its production, use and dissemination, actors can affect the boundaries and indeed the conceptualisation of the possible. The definition is therefore concerned with the extension of the conceptual boundaries of possibility and action for marginalised groups, through means of knowledge production, use and dissemination and a repositioning of marginalised groups and the knowledge they produce within the mainstream of urban transformation discourse. Definition 3: Concerning levels of interaction A gradual, responsive and non-traumatic evolution of urban space through the networking and scaling up of diverse groups capacity to participate in processes of urban change.
21
This definition connects with scale in dimensions of time, and connectivity in space. As a whole it is concerned with a strengthening the voice of diverse groups through collective mobilisation, as a force of resistance and alternatives to dominating top-down political and economic pressures for rapid transformation at the urban and supraurban (national, international, global) scales. Forces and pressures of post-industrial globalisation can be seen as diving urban spatial disintegration and social, ethnic, cultural and political fragmentation (Jacobs, 2002); the definition is therefore concerned with promoting a rebalancing of the complex global-local
relationships in production of urban space as they are manifested locally (Massey, 2007). It proposes the concept of networking and scaling up as a route to this rebalancing, reflecting Levys (2007) definition of movements operating at scale as a wider level of collective mobilisation through which multiple and diverse groups can equip themselves exercise wider impacts and influence on policy and political and socioeconomic change. With regard to time this connects to ideas of negotiated, gradual change in urban space that avoid sudden traumatic transitions, such as displacement or eviction.
Figure 2.1. The Theoretical Corner of transformation
22
2.2 FIELDS OF ANALYSIS
The analysis of the case against these normative definitions takes place inside a theoretical framework made up of three fields: production of space, production of knowledge and levels of interaction, to form a corner or space of analysis. As illustrated in figure 2.1, the practitioner can enter the theoretical corner in order to perform this analysis. By examining a case with reference to the intersections of the dimension of these three fields one can establish what type of transformation is taking place, where it deviates from the transformation expressed within the normative definitions and where strategies might need to focus to effect change. The fields or faces of the corner each contain six intersecting axes which represent interactions of different elements in the production of space, production of knowledge and levels of interaction. Production of space The axes in this field are taken directly from Madanipours (1996, 2006) framework for analysis of the multiple dimensions of urban design, which he approaches with great breadth of scope as a process through which we consciously shape and manage our built environments (1996:117). The field as a whole combines the analysis of multiple dimensions of political, economic and socio-cultural processes of the production of space in which various actors play a part in roles of producers, regulators and users of urban space. The division of processes and roles of actors into sets of three groups is of course not mechanical or reductive but intended to allow a broad distinguishing of patterns and groupings to assist analysis. Political processes can be broadly understood
as those concerned with government, political power and its tools of government in shaping urban space including legislation and planning; economic processes can be seen as those relating to the market as a driver of urban transformation through land prices and speculation, and land use pressures as a function of economic structure. Social processes can be seen as those relating to the decisions and actions of individuals and groups in civil society, such as choices over location and built form, cultural manifestations in material, social and psychological dimensions of space and adaptive changes in urban space outside of the direct control of the market or government. There are naturally overlaps within these groups and, as with the framework in its entirety, they should be considered a guide to a holistic analysis rather than a rigid grid for sorting and labelling processes. In considering the roles of actors within the three groups of producers, regulators and users it must be stressed that these represent the roles of actors, not actors themselves, which may exist across different groups in different contexts. Madanipours (2006: 174) definition of these roles and which actors most commonly hold them is as follows: Regulators mainly refer to the government and its role in regulating the economy, which in the urban development process is mainly reflected in planning. Producers include those who build the city, predominately developers and their financiers and teams of professionals, including designers and construction companies. Users generally refer to those who work or live in the city and use the urban space
23
in some capacity. This is a broad category that refers to the urban society and should not be seen as a functionalist reduction of citizens roles and interests. These are broad groups and, as can be seen in the actor analysis of Istanbul in Chapter 3, there may be many actors in a case that may not appear to be easily classified within them, however by focusing on roles the framework encourages the consideration of what role a particular actor is playing in the case under analysis, which leads to more critical questions of motivation, interests and the power relations in play. Production of knowledge this field draws directly from Gaventas (2006) Power Cube model of power relations in participation. Its function is to examine the intersection of spaces of participation in urban transformation and who controls them with types of power exercised. The axes of spaces of participation categorises three types of space (which may be physical, social and/or politico-institutional) according to levels of control over and accessibility to decision making processes that they represent. These spaces are dynamic, they can transform from one type to another and are created or closed in response to shifting power relations. The least inclusive are closed spaces. Here decisions are taken by powerful actors without wider consultation or participation. Invited spaces are the commonly found spaces of governance where people are invited to participate in decision making by authorities, but have limited control over the process or rules of engagement and can both empower and co-opt. Finally, Claimed /created spaces are those spaces that less powerful actors generate for themselves outside of the invited spaces offered by more powerful actors. Here they come together to mobilise around common issues, discuss and take collective decisions on resistance, finding a commonality and also building capabilities to take to invited spaces to influence what takes place there. (Gaventa 2006). Gaventas categorisation of types of power builds on work by Lukes (1974), Gaventa (1980), Venekalssen and Miller (2002) to identify types of power that operate in these spaces of participation and affect how decision making processes are constructed and operate, Visible power consists of the visible and definable aspects of political power the formal rules, structures, authorities, institutions and procedures of decision making (Gaventa, 2006:29). Hidden power is
Figure 2.2. The production of space dimension
Figure 2.3. The production of knowledge dimension
Figure 2.4. The levels of interaction dimension
24
the power controlling who gets to the decision-making table and what gets on the agenda. These dynamics operate on many levels to exclude and devalue the concerns and representation of other less powerful groups (ibid:29). Invisible power is the most insidious and complex form of power operating on levels of reflexive consciousness, it shapes the psychological and ideological boundaries of participation. Significant problems and issues are not only kept from the decision-making table, but also from the minds and consciousness of the different players involved (ibid:29). Challenging invisible power therefore involves growing recognition by individuals of structures of power relations shaping the limits of their participation and a subsequent strategic response, typically involving struggle, to reposition marginalized peoples perspectives at the centre of the transformation process, in the minds of both more and less powerful actors. Levels of interaction relates short, medium and long term events with levels of scale, which qualify the scope and connectivity of transformative processes operating within the other two fields. The inclusion of time within analysis is important to enable a consideration of dynamic processes and connectivity of events over time, moving beyond a single moment in the transformation process (Lefebvre, 1991; Madanipour, 2006). Considerations of scale are complex and once again the micro, meso, macro categorisations should not be seen as reductive but as triggers for analysis within multiple and overlapping conceptualisations of scale. Geographical scale should be conceived as a socially produced phenomenon, with different scales operating concurrently and in dynamic interwoven relations in deeply intertwined moments and levels of a single worldwide socio-spatial totality (Brenner, 2000: 369; Lefebvre, 1991). Scale can also relate to non-spatial considerations such as volume or quantum of people, resources that may be involved in, affected by or required for a process of transformation or strategic intervention. Together, these 18 axes form a framework for analysis that is of course not omni-comprehensive, but guides critical questions on roles, processes, decision making structures, power, time and scale in urban transformation. Within the graphical representation of the theoretical corner each can be perceived as projecting into the space of the corner and intersecting with the others. It is at the intersection of the axes
that a case of urban transformation can be analysed in depth, each intersection providing an entry point into detailed questions about the nature of the processes taking place and the role of different actors, forms of power being exercised, control over spaces of participation and the different scales and timeframes of action. A specific axis or intersection - for example, spaces of participation created by users of urban space - can be used as a starting point and questioned in relation to the other axes to highlight how they interact in issues of power, political processes, scale etc. Through this process, issues and challenges for the case are highlighted and areas for strategic intervention can be identified in order to engage on each of these levels to bring about the desired change.
25
2.3 CRITERIA AND INDICATORS
The next step in the construction of the analytical framework was to develop a simplified set of criteria that guide some of the most critical questions opened up by the theoretical framework to enable a more straightforward application to the analysis of a case. Through interrogation of each face of the corner a set of criteria of transformation and indicators were developed that can be held against our normative definitions of transformation. It can be observed that while there are 18 axes overall, there are 12 criteria, this is due to some overlapping (as expected) between the three fields and subsequent rationalisation of criteria. The indicators and criteria also go beyond a simple neutral questioning of each intersection of the axes to a normative position that reflects our definitions of transformation. Any alteration of these definitions would therefore lead to a corresponding change in criteria and indicators. During analysis it became apparent that while the initial framework was strong in the scope it offers to analyse processes of urban transformation, it was less developed as a tool to analyse the socio-spatial outcomes. This was identified as a critical weakness, with socio-spatial outcomes not only providing clear illustrations of where positive impacts of strategic interventions may be experienced but also acting to reinforce and justify exclusionary structures in the city. Following this we sought to develop further the indicator under the criteria sociospatial inclusion, relating to Access to services, infrastructure, resources, space and shared symbols
and meanings in the city to enable a more specific and detailed analysis of these manifestations in the Istanbul context. As measurements of socio-spatial inclusion, the following categories were developed to measure elements of isolation vs. connectivity and homogeneity vs. heterogeneity in social and spatial dimensions:
Social inclusion
Population composition Density of social networks Patterns of land and building ownership Social permeability Perception from the outside
Spatial inclusion
Built typologies Accessibility Density Mixed uses Quality and presence of public spaces
Figure 2.5 (above). Categories of social and spatial dimensions for case analysis Figure 2.6 (right). Table of criteria and indicators derived from the three theoretical dimensions.
26
CRITERIA
INDICATORS
PRODUCTION OF SPACE What are the relations between different processes and roles in the production of urban form and functions? Inclusive institutional structures Balancing structural processes Socio-spatial inclusion Institutional platforms and channels for civil society / urban poor involvement in production regulation and use of space Relative weight of social processes in production, regulation and use of the city Access to services, infrastructure, resources, space and shared symbols and meanings in the city
PRODUCTION OF KNOWLEDGE To what extent do the different actors exercise forms of power in decision making processes? Equitable influence in decision making Recognition of legitimacy Diverse groups represented (gender, age, cultural etc), role and weight in decision making Visibility and legitimacy of voice and demands of urban poor
Changing self-perception Grassroots mobilisation
Self-awareness and confidence of urban poor as actors Mobilisation of shared resources, knowledge, and interests
LEVELS OF INTERACTION What is the interaction involving different actors at different scales within a process of urban changes? Levels of representation Strengthening networks Representation of diverse urban poor groups at scale Extent, and perceived effectiveness and value of networks of urban poor and supportive actors Level of skills, knowledge, organisation, experience, confidence, capital assets among urban poor Replicability and transferability, level of visibility and awareness of more inclusive ways of working Extent to which incremental change is promoted and negative impacts of transition mitigated for affected people
Building capacity Institutionalising change
Adaptive transition
27
2.4 CONCLUSIONS
The theoretical framework is grounded in critical theory of urban transformation. That is, it is designed to allow a process of inquiry into a case that addresses fundamental questions of power relations and structural inequalities behind current realities. Furthermore it allows a positioning of strategic responses within a reflexive understanding of those current realities and what structural as well as technical issues a strategic response may need to address. The framework aims to illustrate, at its core, the complex interrelation of these multiple elements of urban transformation reflected in the fields and axes of the corner. Each of the axes is built upon a density of conceptualisation expressed in a wide body of theoretical literature and provides entry points to numerous questions and deeper levels of analysis. While it can be used as a simple checklist for analysis, far better that it is seen therefore as a series of entry points that allow the user to go deep into specific areas, without losing the conceptualisation of interrelatedness that lies at the heart of its value. The framework was initially developed without any specific case in mind, which enabled a broad perspective on the critical elements of a case that we might wish to analyse to enable development of effective and informed proposals. As such, it is flexible in the sense that the normative perspective as expressed in our definitions of transformation can be adapted quite considerably before the analytical framework of the corner stops being of use.
The normative definitions are therefore critical in the use of this framework, orienting the route of enquiry and shaping the criteria and indicators for analysis. For the analysis that follows in Chapter 3, the framework guided the collection and interpretation of data in the field, allowing us to group our findings and structure our enquiries in the relatively short time available in Istanbul. As discussed above, the criteria were developed further in the field to go deeper into the socio-spatial outcomes we encountered there. Subsequently approaches to representation were also developed to highlight the core findings of our analysis, leading the analysis towards the key entry points for strategic responses.
28
29
RM
Figure 3.1. Istanbul as City of Islands. Adapted from Guy E. Debord, The Naked City, 1959
CHAPTER 3.0_ANALYSIS: City of Islands
32
Istanbuls environment is being shaped by political and economic pressures that are, at different scales, determining a polarisation of investments toward certain areas in the city. These concentrations of capital, along with the vision of a polycentric city, produce patterns of isolation and homogeneity henceforth referred to as a City of Islands. Special development areas, gated residential communities and rigid mass housing programmes, are the symptoms of a fragmented society where certain members are inevitably excluded from the mainstream, lacking access to resources, to decision making and to common narratives (Madanipour, 1998). The model of islands is then not simply a metaphor, but indicates a new territorial organisation of connected spaces (the islands) and disconnected spaces (the enclaves Petti, 2007) that can only survive together, like two faces of the same coin. Therefore we can say, citing Agamben (1998), that what is disconnected is rather taken outside, inevitably included in the mainstream development through its exclusion. Some connections could temporarily or permanently disappear, but the island, even turning to enclave, will keep being part of the whole system, willing or not. The image given in this chapter is then one of an archipelago of recognisable fragments whose connections (or dis-connections) in terms of flows of knowledge, people and capitals constitute narratives that though are diachronic, not present at the same
time and at the several levels. In the Debords Naked City (1959 figure 3.01), recognisability of the islands and diachronicity of their connections are the fundamental elements of his representation: speaking of unities of atmosphere, islands with their own physiognomies, Debord states not only a possible reading of the city (Paris in his case), but also the fact that those fragments are themselves building the city. Moreover, the diachronicity of the connections implies the impossibility of a representation on a traditional map (McDonough, 2002): not an order of places, co-present at the same time, but rather a paratactic assemblage of pieces, connected or not, a map that implies movements, actions and their spatialisation. In the chapter we will explore how this process of inclusion and exclusion is manifested in Istanbul. Starting from an analysis of the pressures toward certain kinds of transformation determined by different visions of the city, we will understand who are the various stakeholders in these transformative processes, their relations and their conflicts. We will then move to the scenes of those conflicts, the cases met during the field trip: their analysis highlights commonalities among some of them that permit to identify several scenarios of transformation, in which the patterns of isolation and homogeneity mentioned above assume particular forms, giving to different islands a precise role in the archipelago system.
33
3.1 CONVERGING PRESSURES
The pressures of inclusion and exclusion are exacerbated by increasingly polarized interests. Three main visions that impact the development of Istanbul include the global city vision, the interests of city planners and the power of the private sector. Conversely, a resistance to these visions, which are generating a counter pressure, are also considered below. 3.1.1 Global City The growth of Istanbuls geographic importance has prompted the redefinition of its status amongst cities around the world. Increased trade and investment with both European Union countries and post-Cold War Asia countries has lead to Istanbuls emergence on the global political and economic nexus (Sassen, 2009). According to Sassen, this optic on globalisation contributes to identify a complex organisational architecture which cuts across borders, and is both partly de-territorialised and partially spatially concentrated in cities (2005, p.36). The pressure of becoming a Global City is translated into powerful flows of capital and concentration of third sector functions. In Istanbuls context, this translates to a shift into service and finance oriented industries and the decentralisation of traditional manufacturing industries to areas outside of the city. The creation of new CBDs in Istanbul not only attracts foreign investment but also triggers the development of urban infrastructures such as roads and bridges catered towards the users of this space. The urban form is affected by a newly imposed urban meaning, resulting in the formation of generic islands of capital across the
city. Foreign and domestic investment concentrate in the erection of gated communities, five-star hotels, the city packaged as a consumption artefact for tourists, [and] new office towers, while passing over areas of Istanbul that are not economically profitable (Keyder, 2005: p. 128). These spaces form economic and political networks that permeate the urban social fabric and livelihoods that more accurately reflect other wealthy global cities than that of the rest of Turkey. Networks of spaces and people are then determined by whether they are included or excluded from the global city (Keyder, 2005). These processes of growing investment in generic islands and isolation of social networks within the space is a continuous processes that reinforces itself and strengthens the pressure to be a more economically Global City. 3.1.2 City Planning The challenge of density and the discourse of a polycentric city have consolidated a model for the production of homogeneous environments. The IBB launched an urban transformation campaign for the purpose of re-branding Istanbul as a global city and to attract foreign investment. The master planning guidelines are thus shaped in reference to the producers of space rather than to the users, without addressing urban poverty. Primarily, city planning concentrates on reinforcing an internationalized image of the city. To do this, planning is conducive for increased economic activity and investment throughout Istanbul, and it
34
Figure 3.2. Global city pressures are manifested in flows of capital and direct foreign investment resulting in generic islands of capital
Figure 3.3. City planning is developed in an effort to brand Istanbul with guidelines that benefit the producers rather than the users of space
35
is demonstrated in the new special project in Kartal. IBB is using the star architect, Zaha Hadid in the large development in Kartal to promote the success of the new decentralised business district as well as solidifying the identity of an accomplished service hub. Istanbuls city planning manufactures space that will replace the current, poorer users with wealthier users. Many areas have been earmarked as special project areas in terms of economic, ecological and social sustainability, yet they also generate social and physical fragmention. This is evident in terms of accessibility: it is not viewed as a method to integrate isolated communities within the city or make better livelihoods more attainable for new migrants, but as a way to improve the highway and transport connectivity between business centres and homes in the periphery. The IBB faces pressure to appease both the producers and middle class users because they are the ones who will project the intended character of the city (Erkip, 2000). By ignoring the less affluent classes, the city is abetting the rift between classes through planning. 3.1.3 Private Capital The mid 1980s saw the restructuring of the Turkish government, which transferred power from central government to local municipalities. This transition from centralised to de-centralised government made alternative financial resources available to develop spaces and provide services. To supplement public projects and transform the urban landscape, a neoliberal model was imposed. Private capital was introduced as a medium for making the city modern and profitable, and therefore, more attractive for future investment (Candan and Kolluoglu, 2008). The citys exposure to private capital and investment has changed the way land and building practices are perceived in Istanbul. Land is now commoditised and serves as a component for investment and development (Keyder, 2005). Speculation created a new climate for the private housing market, broadening the gap between affluent and poorer communities. New developments have expedited this process by creating polarised sets of gated communities. On one side, developers are manufacturing private towns that serve as a safe haven for middle classes away from the urban centre. On the other, developers are attempting to clean up unattractive informal settlements on potentially
valuable land by relocating people to newly constructed tower blocks. With this emerged the demand for new urban, leisure and commercial space as well as isolated residential communities (Keydar, 2005). Conversely, the shift away from manufacturing industries resulted in loss of jobs and social disintegration. This disconnection broadened the gap between exclusive gated communities, rigid mass housing programs, and informal settlements. Both forms of gated communities are funded by private capital through private developers or though TOKI using private capital (Candan and Kolluoglu, 2008). The purpose of these developments is to create profits and increase future investment. Imposed or voluntary isolation from the city is the result of the influx of private capital in land development. Currently, the process of transformation is taking place at a rapid pace, producing islands of isolated housing projects and creating a fragmented urban environment available to an urban elite. 3.1.4 Resistance The residents of redevelopment areas are faced with complex challenges, both in their relationship to land and in their transformed positioning in the city. Gecekondu and inner city neighbourhoods are under threat of eviction across Istanbul. The threat was heightened with the passing of numerous legal reforms from 2002 to 2008, resulting in, among other things, TOKI becoming the sole agency responsible to regulate and zone all state owned land. With this, TOKI has the power to revise the planning and zoning of gecekondu transformation zones with the right to expropriate property in these areas. This shift in the balance of power incited resistance movements from residents against development plans. The success of resistance movements is dependent on existing strong social networks within the neighbourhood. While neighbourhoods under threat partake in some form of resistance, there is no shared vision, but rather a dispersed, fragmented and politicized one. The solidarity between and even within groups is difficult to attain due to ethnic diversity as well as differences in tenure. These isolated groups and spaces are experiencing transformation in unequal and complex ways, which contrast rapid economic benefit with traumatic urban transformations.
36
Figure 3.4. Private Capital in urban transformation schemes is rapidly creating islands of isolated environments available to an urban elite
Figure 3.5. Resistance in pockets surfaces from marginalized groups to combat current development top-down plans
37
3.2 MAPPING ACTOR DYNAMICS
As a starting point to our study of the dynamics of Istanbul, we looked at the primary actors involved in urban transformation processes and the relations between them. The classification of actors into distinct categories is a general interpretation of their primary roles as users, producers, or regulators of space, along Ali Madanipours (2006) framework on the roles of actors in urban design processes. There is also a distinction in their realm of influence and their realm of operation that places them in the broad categories of micro, meso and macro that, though simplistic in its interpretation, places the actors in perspective of each other. That said, in reality there is not a mechanical separation in that some actors have roles and functions in multiple categories; for instance users producing and regulating their own space. At the same time, some actors have an operative influence across scales, however, their primary scale of operation falls within one category and has been represented as such. The application of these terms from the theoretical framework is a necessary simplification of this complex web of interconnected roles to facilitate their schematic representation. As per this framework, urban development revolving around the gecekondular is composed of actors from within the Central and Local Governments, Bilateral Institutions, local and international universities and non-governmental organizations, Municipality, Landowners, Academicians and Professionals, and the people themselves. The Central Government, through its institutions of TOKI, IMP and IBB, regulates the development framework at a macro-level. Their role is primarily that of a regulator, formulating policies and
plans for the development of Istanbul that directly influence the gecekondular. These organizations also act at the meso/micro-levels through intermediary actors or directly such as TOKI which is also a producer of mass housing. The two primary political parties AKP and CHP lend their political ideologies to the direction of development through affiliations within the city and district municipalities, and from within the people themselves. On the other end, the people of the gecekondular with distinctions of class, gender, ethnicities, age and religion, are organized in Mahalle Associations represented by a Muhtar. The individuals, including the middle-class are users of the space and knowledge regulated and produced by government and local institutions. At the same time, they also are producers of knowledge and space in various capacities, which places them in a unique position within the framework and introduces a space of transformation within the current process. Between these two poles within this framework, there are actors that operationalise the central and local processes. At the macro-level, these include International Financial Institutions, Star Architects, International NGOs and the Media, all producers of knowledge that influence development through various discourses. Local Architects and NGOs represent the same role at the micro-level, but with varying discourses. Along with local Builders, they have a direct relationship with the people in production of space and knowledge. Local Builders are the main means of production of housing in the legalized Gecekondular and in post-gecekondu settlements all over the city. Private Developers, acting at the meso-level, represent
38
the main force behind production of space for the middle-class and white collared workers in the city. Private Landowners, along with Private Developers are the chief force behind the raging real estate market of Istanbul that place enormous pressures on the adjacent gecekondular and within the settlements. The Chamber of Architects and Engineers along with the Local Universities form the meso-level producers of knowledge that directly or indirectly influence production of space and in turn the users.
The whole process of urban development is operationalised from the top via the District Municipalities and its agencies such as Kipta. Reactionary resistance to the pressures created through these processes are now also being channelised back towards the top via the District Municipalities. The subsequent sections will focus on relationships between various actors unpacking aspects of the process that can be used to alter or strengthen a more inclusive transformative process.
Figure 3.6. A classification of actors in terms of their roles as user, producers and regulators as well as in relation to the scale of the analysis (micro, mesa, macro)
39
The physical and social geography of Istanbul exhibits a number of relations between its various actors in relation to urban development. These relationships stem from the perspective of the city as viewed by the regulators and from the socio-cultural milieu that has come to be called Istanbul. The following analysis of the actor map in terms of relations attempts to highlight areas of concern that can then be used towards formulation of a strategic standpoint that views transformation as described in earlier chapters. Conflicting, Cooperative, Financial and Authority relationships include as much as they exclude in terms of the overall picture of Istanbul. Given the limitations of time and scale of analysis, a detailed analysis is required, that zooms into each zone of the map and brings out formal and informal relationships that have been cultivated over time and that can be used to harness the latent energies of the city as a whole towards a collective vision and future. 3.2.1 Conflicting Relations The actor map lends itself towards a first level analysis of the polarities of the actors and the resulting conflicting situations created as a result of the top-down process. The Central Government acting as the chief regulator of urban development, initiates transformative processes based on a vision that excludes the other pole symbolized by the gecekondular. The users and regulators of urban space do not overlap and two polarities of dominance and resistance have been produced. There is a dominant holistic vision in the master plan for the whole city of Istanbul, which does not take into account the individuality of the islands. This conflict of vision between the government and the communities stems from a physical planning devoid of social considerations or participatory processes. Moreover, the designation of gecekondu settlements as a crime under Law No. 5237 in 2004 punishable by a five year sentence alienates these communities from the producers and regulators of space. This symbolises a conflict that is cross-cutting and strategic that needs to be addressed in a constructive mode of operation. There are also conflicting relations in-between the actors at various levels that are in some cases inherent, and in some, a result of the pressures. Conflicting issues between two Mahalle are destructive towards the cause of the people within a collective framework of operation. These
conflicts need to be resolved and overcome. However, conflicting positionalities such as political views can be constructively harnessed. In a parallel vein, conflicting relations such as that between TOKI, IBB, IMP and the people needs to be negotiated towards a common vision and goal. 3.2.2 Cooperation Relations On a background of conflicting relationships, there are collaborative relationships between various actors that, upon analysis of the actor map, manifest in two separate islands. The first island of cooperation is within the regulators, which are tied together in legal and bureaucratic frameworks of organized hierarchies. The second island of cooperation is between various scales of producers which is more informal and ideology based. This island also includes the people on the users group that form the operational part of the cooperation. The international and local universities and NGOs, with the people are creating a new discourse that can directly challenge the other island. The Chamber of Architects and Engineers, though directly not connected, also subscribes to a similar ideology. The wide gap that exists between the two islands needs to be bridged in order to establish a dialogue, with the potential for a mutually beneficial form of urban transformation. The Metropolitan Municipality operates directly within the central governments vision of transformation. In addition, the IMP is carrying out physical planning without the input of the district government, creating a disconnection from local democracy. While in a few cases there is cooperation between the district government and the communities, this is uncommon. The survival of many gecekondu settlements thus far has been due to solidarity networks with strong political consciousness keeping them intact. However there is limited coordination between communities at the micro-level. Similarly the cooperation from meso-level actors including universities is ad-hoc and inconsistent.
40
Figure 3.7. Conflicting relations Extreme isolation of the producers of space from the users
Figure 3.8. Cooperation relations Collaborative relationships visible within different actor groups
41
3.2.3 Financial Relations Financial considerations are critical for the entire transformative process in Istanbul. Urban development in Istanbul has been linked to economic growth and development of not only the city, but perhaps the entire nation. Economically driven pressures of development and transformation are playing a major role in shaping urban space in Istanbul. This is very much evident from the map with strong relationships between the owners of land and capital with the government playing a guiding role. The vision of Turkey as part of the EU and of Istanbul as a global city puts enormous pressure on the real estate of Istanbul putting land outside the financial resources of the people of the gecekondular. Since most of the land is owned by the state in the form of the Treasury, the Military and universities, the government has a financial interest in the transformation and redevelopment process. Since communities have limited access to finance, their own production and development of space is limited and internalised. TOKI and private developers dominate the design and production of space since they have access to vast amounts of finance and capital, TOKI managing US$15 billion of assets in 2010 (Kuyuu, 2010). Since the IBB vision for Istanbul is based on a service-sector economy, the real estate freed up from the previous industrial use enables the transfer of state land to TOKI at no cost. This land is not necessarily redeveloped for mass housing for the poor but has been used to target wealthy consumers. Based on purely financial models, existing gecekondu communities do not fit into the profit-driven land development approach. The actor map clearly exhibits a lack of financial relations between the people and other actors apart from inbetween the people themselves. There is a pertinent need to harness collective internal financial resources in order to reimagine the reality of the gecekondular which are currently seen as unwanted or external to the vision. Apart from being an important source of human resource, the gecekondular are an important contributor to the economy of the city. Negotiation of these realities at one level can lead to further negotiation of land as a shared resource for both the Gecekondular and for real estate needs of the city, that can be fed back into development of the settlements.
3.2.4 Authority Relations The actor map reveals top-heavy and hierarchical power relations that are directly connected to the cooperation relations. The relations are also hierarchical stemming from the macro to the meso with no linkages to the micro. The policies that have been formulated and implemented are a direct result of this exclusionary local political structure of separation. The state in its various institutions, including the dominant TOKI, holds all decision making and implementation power. The communities, as users, have little organizational structure or institutional support to respond equally and are entirely subject to planning authorities and land tenure situations. The dominance of financial institutions and authorities is exaggerated because land titles are not in the hands of the community. Many land owning bodies, such as universities and various state departments, complicate land tenure dynamics, due for example to the multiple tiers of ownership and responsibility within the government structure. Legal factors, such as the Bosphorus Law (No. 2960) regulating density and Municipality Law of 2005 (No. 5366) that empowers district municipalities to designate Special Project Areas, encourage top-down approaches and mark urban spaces for development without considering their social, cultural and economic roots. TOKI has emerged as a single most powerful real estate agent with vast resources and legal powers much like a private developer in the market. There is an inherent lack of horizontal power structures that can bring the collective voice of the masses in the forefront. Political relationships with the municipality offer a ray of hope that can open a door towards concretisation of a bottom-up pressure that can be the first step towards a horizontal representation of the gecekondular in each district. Such a horizontal structure can harness both internal and external resources apart from taking its voice to the top itself. The current duality of the users, who are producers of space as well, needs to be harnessed towards production of knowledge as well, that can inform and guide the future course of development.
42
Figure 3.9. Financial relations: obvious relationships are formed between owners of land and the government
Figure 3.10. Authority relations: exclusionary policies result in strong connections within the macro-meso, but not the micro
43
3.3 FOUR CASE STUDIES
During the fieldwork we were exposed to four case studies within Istanbul (see figure 3.11), which demonstrate current forms of urban transformation responsible for the changing landscape. All are directly or indirectly influenced by the vision of the city, reflected by the master plan, but from historical districts to later built gecekondular these areas differ from each other in terms including population, history, social processes and the built environment. The historic district of Tarlaba (Beyolu District) is positioned in the centre of Istanbul forming islands of discontinuity with the surrounding built environment, Glsuyu and Glensu and Baibuyuk (Maltepe District) and Armutlu
(Sariyer District) are on prime land closer to the citys periphery, while Uur Mumcu, Yakaik and Hurriyet (Kartal District) are in a position identified in the IBB masterplan for linking the peripheral land to the rest of Istanbul through a future Central Business District. Each case is examined in terms of the three areas of analysis identified in the theoretical framework (Production of Space, Production of Knowledge and Levels of Interaction). The main findings of the three fields of analysis are indicated later in this chapter.
Armutlu Tarlaba Baibuyuk Glsuyu/Glensu
Yakaik Hurriyet
Tozkoparan case studies other cases Zeytinburnu
Sleymaniye Samatya Kartal
Figure 3.11. The four case studies which we were exposed to (large circle) and all other sites visited within Istanbul (smaller circles).
44
3.3.1 Tarlaba (Beyolu) This inner city island is a community of heterogeneous population, which is ever-changing due to its high turnover. Its close proximity to the CBD and extremely low rents make it a first stop for new migrants before moving elsewhere. Part of the historic centre of Istanbul, almost all buildings in this area are listed, creating strict requirements and high costs in building maintenance, which combined with absentee owners have resulted in neglect and dereliction. Rejected by the middle classes since the 1980s following the construction of Tarlaba Boulevard, Tarlaba was deemed an area for renewal by the Beyolu Municipality in 2006 with the aim of developing a new middle class and tourist area. The project developed by GAP naat, the company in charge of implementation, is concentrated on nine blocks north of Tarlaba Boulevard and focuses on urban upgrading, using the current historical fabric in regeneration, to integrate the neighbourhood with the surrounding city, and to improve economic activity. However, tenants, who represent 70% of the whole resident population, are not accounted for in the future project, but will be given one free year rent with the intent that they will save money and move out of the neighbourhood. In other words, they face displacement under the renewal plans but yet have no voice or influence in the redevelopment process. In addition, due to their diverse and fluctuating makeup, the community solidarity, required to resist redevelopment, is absent.
LM Figure 3.13. Photos represent the condition of the Tarlabasi district. The bottom two photos used by the developer to contrast current and future appearance of area. GAP GAP RM
ba Tarla
Boul
evard
Figure 3.12. Tarlaba in its zenithal view shows its organic urban pattern. Highighted in white the nine blocks under GAP naats redevelopment project.
45
3.3.2 Yakaik, Hurriyet and the new Eastern CBD (Kartal) Located at an important junction of the E5 highway on the Asian side of the city, Kartal is marked as a secondary CBD within the IBB masterplan and is central to the objectives of developing a poly-centric Istanbul. It consists of de-industrialised land - subject to a masterplanning competition opened up to star architects at the direction of the Mayor of Istanbul and won by Zaha Hadid - surrounded by gecekondu and post-gecekondu neighbourhoods hosting the former working class and threatened with displacement. Complying with the municipalitys new global city vision of Istanbul, the CBDs represent a complete disconnection of the spatial dimension from the social one. If the social elements indicate a relatively homogeneous gecekondu population, at the spatial level the Zaha Hadid masterplan represents an attempt to impose an new spatial heterogeneity in the area, proposing international built typologies and new uses and meanings of space. However, this attempt at imposing a completely new urban fabric fails through its disregard of the existing one. In this context, the public spaces will most certainly be impersonal and only the shadow of what could be called a truly representational and inclusive space. Yakaik and Hurriyet are two neighbourhoods in Kartal that have been affected by the proposed masterplan of the CBD. Hurriyet, one of the largest neighbourhoods of Kartal, has half its area falling under the transformation plans. The neighbourhood, as with the rest of the project area, was considered as empty uninhabited land for redevelopment, despite intermediary tahsis (rights of use) status being awarded in the 1984 amnesty. Moreover, in the recent decades, redevelopment pressures have led to construction of mass housing in the neighbourhood through private development, side by side with gecekondu typologies still lacking land rights.
Figure 3.14. Aerial view of Hurriyet. Highlighted in white the area of 5-6 storey buildings, result of plot sold on the market.
Figure 3.15. Aerial view of Yakaik
Figure 3.16. (right) Aerial view of Kartals new CBD area in the actual situation. Bordered in white some residential clusters falling inside the site.
46
The resistance at the local level is strong and locally networked with the backing of the newly elected district municipality and has had some success amending the plans in Hurriyet through court action, but the counter proposals from the municipality lack influence. Moreover, the resistance finds political backing from the CHP that has recently been elected to power in the district municipality, however, it has weak links to the neighbouring municipality of Pendik, which has a different political leadership, despite common challenges. In Yakaik the land is owned by the municipality leading to a granting of tapu (right to own) in April 2010 after the new leadership came to power in the municipality. This has led to further development in the neighbourhood with individuals building up their plots with private builders, while others, taking advantage of the rising real estate value due to the proposed CBD, are selling off the plots on the market. These neighbourhoods, along with others in Kartal offer an opportunity for analysing the effect of multiple global and local actors within the same geography, and exemplifies a sequence of transformation that is using multiple channels based on the rights to use/ own land and role of the local municipality in the process.
Fig 3.17 (from above): View from, narrow path and privately developed buildings resulting from sold plots in Hurriyet, the Kartals new CBD area in the actual situation.
IMP
IM
IM
FG
3.3.3 Glsuyu/Glensu and Baibuyuk (Maltepe) The master plan pressure on Maltepe has resulted in diverse typologies of redevelopment. Gecekondular in the area lack land tenure in the two main mahalles (Glsuyu and Glensu). They are politically radical and strongly organised in resistance to threatened imposition of the TOKI typologies. The mahalle have a population of 25,000 with split uniformly between the two mahalles, comprising of migrants from all over Turkey including Alevis, Kurds, Sunnis etc, living in solidarity. They organised themselves to build infrastructure for water supply from another mahalle that has since been legitimised and taken over by the municipality. The mahalles command breath-taking views of the Marmara Sea and hence have been under pressure from real estate developers and TOKI. The mahalles are being slowly surrounded by real estate developments including housing and a new development to build a five star hotel. The two mahalles have been closely supporting Baibuyuk mahalle in opposition to the demolition of nine gecekondu homes and construction of three TOKI blocks in their place. Religiously conservative, the role of women in community organisations is marginal, yet they have been the committed on the barricades, defending the territory during the various actions of
RM
MG
RM
MG
Fig 3.18 (from above). New TOKI mass housing in Baibuyuk, houses in Glsuyu/Glensu and new mass housing developments in Maltepe.
forced eviction by TOKI. These actions have stressed the already existing tensions between the community and TOKI, with a palpable state of resistance and latent confrontation. Both the housing and its public infrastructure are self-produced. The public provision of infrastructure supplied by the municipality has been a fairly recent process. While the mass housing developed by TOKI in Baibuyuk is not accepted by the communities, the pressures from the ongoing construction of high and middle income gated communities in the valley
between Glsuyu/Glensu and Baibuyuk seem likely to force a rapid transition. The future vision of the mahalles, however, does not appear to be developed beyond resistance and a desire to retain the village way of life within the gecekondu. However, the neighbourhoods have been interacting with academicians from universities that promote concepts like the right to the city, as well as other discourses that offer an alternative perspective from the current reactionary discourse and look forward to a constructive platform of ideas.
Figure 3.19. Aerial view of Baibuyuk. Highly visible in the centre the six TOKIs towers.
Figure 3.20. Aerial view of Glsuyu/Glensu. These two mahalles have become one due to population growth.
3.3.4 Armutlu (Saryer) Close to the northern forest reserve areas of Istanbul, Saryer is home to one of the oldest gecekondu communities, Armutlu (Fatih Sultanmet mahallesi), which encompasses two mahalle, Kk Armutlu (small Armutlu) and Byk Armutlu (big Armutlu). Politically radical, the Armutlu neighbourhood has developed a strong resistance identity that keeps it further isolated within Istanbul, yet which has enabled it to form a broader support network, including other communities in the district and emerging city-wide networks. There is a stronger role for women in social organisations than in many other areas we visited. Strong social bonds exist through common religious backgrounds and regional origin but there are some divisions between old and new migrants (Black Sea region, Alevi religious sect etc.). The housing and public spaces are selfbuilt followed with public service and infrastructure provision by the municipality. The local population is well established and relatively static but neither amnesty nor legal land titles have been given. The area, technically owned by IBB and Istanbul Technical University in equal parts, is highlighted as a Special Project Area in the masterplan and its close proximity to the Black Sea and the Bosphorus makes it subject to further economic pressures of redevelopment, such as its designation to be the new technical park of the university itself. The Social Democrat Sariyer district municipality was recently elected and strongly promotes its opposition to the masterplan implementation at a district level. The municipality is in advanced stages of preparation of an innovative Social Development Plan that promotes development of the community rather than physical measures alone.
FG
FG
IM
Figure 3.21 (left). Photos representing Byk Armutlu. Figure 3.22 (above). Aerial view of Byk Armutlu.
50
MG
3.4 SCENARIOS OF TRANSFORMATION
Upon the analysis of the four case studies and further observation in the areas visited, five scenarios of transformation were identified. It is important to note that due to our limited time and exposure to all realities of Istanbuls urban realm, the recommended strategies are aimed at addressing the state of living conditions of the urban poor. We are not considering then other islands that nevertheless are fundamental to understand the way the archipelago-Istanbul works: for example the middle class gated communities, either fortified areas or controlled towers, extremely developed form of homogeneous and voluntary seclusion. Extending our theoretical framework into the islands model we have expanded the social-spatial inclusion criteria of analysis within Production of Space into a tool to examine the following five categories respectively in the spatial and social dimensions: built typologies, accessibility, density, mixed uses, quality and presence of public spaces (spatial dimension), population composition, density of social networks, patterns of land and building ownership, social permeability and perception from the outside (social dimension). The categories intersect the other criteria provided by the theoretical framework, in terms of production of space, production of knowledge and levels of interaction. We have assessed all of them in terms of homogeneity vs. heterogeneity and isolation vs. connection and then extrapolated from the physical and social dimensions the levels of interaction against which the islands are being measured. The following graphs represent this analysis. This is not a quantitative assessment but
rather an illustration of the varying degrees of these categories and qualitative appraisal of the degree of interaction. By observing the extent to which the orange and grey areas of the graphs are overlapped, one can see how the pressures analysed in Section 3.1 above are not necessarily producing the same patterns of isolation and homogeneity at the spatial and social level.
CONNECTION
HOMOGENEITY
HETEROGENEITY
ISOLATION
51
3.4.1 Historic inner city The historic inner city scenario identifies particular groups of mahalles developed in the historical centre, of which Tarlabai and Sleymaniye are clear examples. As shown in the graphic, the different categories are keeping these islands in a sort of middle state between connection and isolation and heterogeneity/ homogeneity. This reflects the current situation of these areas, still working as gates of the city for many migrants, but day by day more threatened by urban renewal pressures.
Figure 3.23. Tarlaba, building in a state of decay.
SOCIAL DIMENSION POPULATION: these islands function as gates and first stopping points for new migrants that then move to peripheral areas. The population is then constantly changing: from this point of view the islands are highly connected and heterogeneous. NETWORKS: residents associations are hard to form due to the transient character of the population. For the same reason solidarity amongst the communities is often absent. Possible connections with the other islands are then compromised. OWNERSHIP: in a situation where only a small percentage (30% in Tarlaba) of owners is actually living in the area, the overlapping between actual landlords (often absentees), long term tenants who claim their rights on the building, and short term renters whose money often doesnt go to the actual owner, the built environment remains frozen with no possibilities investments and then upgrading. PERMEABILITY: these islands are usually highly permeable in terms of employment mobility. Many people working in the production sector come from other neighbourhoods, and many residents are commuters, moving everyday from an inner city island to others. PERCEPTION: the lack of awareness about these settlements by the inhabitants of the surrounding areas is contributing to isolate them, because of fear toward what is perceive as other and in decay.
NW
SPATIAL DIMENSION BUILT TYPOLOGIES: the high flexibility of typologies (they can host any kind of activity and be very adaptable in terms of residential needs), conflicts with the fact that many buildings are historically listed. This prevents organic transformation and partially isolates the areas from the possibility of small scale investments, isolating the islands. ACCESSIBILITY: the historic inner city islands are often separated from the main roads and then hardly accessible by car, further isolated from the surroundings. DENSITY: the challenge of density in the new development plans is attracting new capital investments, that can though lead to a homogenisation of the built environment, especially in terms of uses. The disappearance of the productive spaces (forecasted by the GAP naat in the project for nine blocks in Tarlaba) will disrupt many livelihoods and force poor people to move. MIXED USES: the co-presence of residential, commercial and productive spaces is fundamental in these islands in terms of livelihoods and connections, because of employment mobility and flows of capitals. PUBLIC SPACES: the lack of public spaces is another element of isolation, disconnecting even more the islands from the wider net of public spaces in the city centre and denying de-facto an invitation to enter the island space.
52
CONNECTION
mixed uses
population
density
permeability
HOMOGENEITY
HETEROGENEITY
built typologies networks
ownership
public spaces
accessibility perception ISOLATION
Figure 3.24. Graphic representation of the degree of connection/ isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a historic inner city island. Figure 3.25. Tarlaba, a productive space at the ground level. Figure 3.26. Tarlaba, building in a state of decay.
53
MN
GT
3.4.2 Gecekondu Mainly composed by settlements developed on the fringes of the city during the industrial expansions (see the cases: Armutlu, Glsyu/Glens) this scenario is reminiscent of a rural countryside village with residential clusters and with few or even nonexistent commercial activities. Development pressures are threatening the settlements, which do not have full security of land tenure.The big portion of overlapped areas on the graph hihglights how here in this scenario social and spatial dimensions are still very interrelated. SOCIAL DIMENSION POPULATION: generally composed of homogeneous communities of migrants (several waves of migration in the 1940s and 1950s and then in the 1980s). This homogeneity though is often broken by political and religious differences that determine a certain degree of isolation. The same can be said because of divisions between older and new migrants. NETWORKS: the communities often keep strong links with their place of origins. Many examples of solidarity between mahalles are further increasing the connections among these islands. Inside the singular mahalles though, conservative positions often undermine the womens possibility to play a role in the social networks. OWNERSHIP: land tenure is never secure for these communities, notwithstanding several amnesties that give them (like in the case of Hurriyet) the rights of use on the land. This translates often in a strong level of resistance to the development pressures that tend to see the areas as uninhabited. The resistance is often sterile though, not able to propose an alternative vision and then oriented to the mere persistence of the status quo. From this point of view the islands are highly isolated. PERMEABILITY: conservative and radical positions do not allow a high degree of social permeability. These islands often appears isolated, not welcoming for the strangers. PERCEPTION: although the inhabitants are often well integrated into society and occupy good job positions, there is still a mainstream perception of the gecekondus as varo (something to stay away from) due to the informal character of the settlements and a general lack of awareness of their complex legal status.
Figure 3.27. Image from Armutlu.
MG
SPATIAL DIMENSION BUILT TYPOLOGIES: the high flexibility of the self-built housing solutions give to this settlements a certain degree of heterogeneity. This means also the possibility to increment the typologies and then host new waves of migrants. ACCESSIBILITY: the changing function of the surrounding areas (as forecasted in the case of Kartal) are de-facto cutting out this settlements from the new main transportation networks, contributing to a status of frozen isolation. DENSITY: the incrementality of the built environment, represents an element of connection of these islands with the flows of capitals and people. Nevertheless, the development pressures are pushing for massive transformations of these areas: given the insecure land tenure, the challenge of density means also resistance to that and then isolation. MIXED USES: the gecekondu settlements are often mainly residential, meaning a low level of professional networks. PUBLIC SPACES: there are often community centres organised around public spaces, but this does not generally contribute to increase the degree of connection of these islands. Entering and moving in ease in the gecekondu space as an outsider is not simple, indeed, because of a general impression of being in an observed and controlled space.
54
CONNECTION
networks
built typologies density HOMOGENEITY population HETEROGENEITY
mixed uses
permeability
perception accessibility
public spaces ownership
ISOLATION
Figure 3.28. Graphic representation of the degree of connection/ isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a gecekondu island. Figure 3.29. Image from Armutlu. Figure 3.30. Image from Armutlu. KC 55 FG
3.4.3 Post-gecekondu The term post-gecekondu is used for an area that has evolved over the last few decades from an initial gecekondu settlement to a most dense one, in high building typologies built by small local contractors. At the moment the big challenge for this scenario of transformation is represented by the earthquake vulnerability of the typologies, used as entry points for redevelopment. As the graph shows the post-gecekondu islands are fairly heterogeneous, both at the spatial and social levels, because of their being surrounded by the city and moreover highly permeable. Nevertheless their perception as a distorted urbanism and the need to resist to the development pressures are two big elements of isolation.
Figure 3.31. Image from Zeytinburnu.
SOCIAL DIMENSION POPULATION: the population of these settlements is highly heterogeneous, spreading from low to middle income. NETWORKS: being multi-functional and complete cities, hosting then any sort of activity, the postgecekondular are well connected to the other islands in terms of professional networks. As in the gecekondu scenario, the communities often keep strong links with their place of origins. OWNERSHIP: several amnesties promulgated by the central government and sometimes the purchase of the title deeds have guaranteed security of land tenure and legalisation of buildings. PERMEABILITY: the facts of being surrounded by the city and of hosting many productive and commercial activities give to these island a high degree of permeability. PERCEPTION: the vertical and less formally planned growth of these areas, over time, brought about what is nowadays perceived as a distorted urbanism.
GT
SPATIAL DIMENSION BUILT TYPOLOGIES: the built environment of these areas is characterised by buildings up to eight floors developed by small local contractors, sometimes using unsafe building standards in terms of earthquake vulnerability. As a result often earthquake vulnerability is used as an entry point for redevelopment of these prime locations. The resistance to these pressures isolates the areas. ACCESSIBILITY: being surrounded by the city the post-gecekondular are highly accessible in physical terms. DENSITY: as in the gecekondu scenario, the incremental design of the typologies, here already grown over several stages, represent a high element of connection for these islands. MIXED USES: as said before, the complete character of these cities represents the most striking elements of connection with the other islands. PUBLIC SPACES: as in the inner city scenario, a general lack of public spaces contribute to isolate the areas from the surroundings.
56
CONNECTION mixed uses networks density permeability accessibility
population
HOMOGENEITY
ownership
HETEROGENEITY
public spaces
built typologies
perception
ISOLATION
Figure 3.32.Graphic representation of the degree of connection/ isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a post-gecekondu island. Figure 3.33. Image from Zeytinburnu. Figure 3.34. Image from Samatya.
57
HY
SR
3.4.4 Mass housing The mass housing projects began in the 1960s, and then implemented by TOKI from 1984 on (on large scale since 2007). This form of mass housing is the solution provided by the State to informality, earthquake vulnerability, and new housing needs. As the graph shows, both at the social and spatial levels, these mass housing islands are profoundly disconnected from their surrounding context. The social dimension line attests a high level of isolation. Some elements of heterogeneity (e.g. the composition of the population) are present though. On the contrary, at the spatial level, the rigidity of the typologies, along with the impersonality of public spaces, can only define these island as definitely homogeneous and isolated. Residential coffins then, sterile and unable to deal with the surroundings.
Figure 3.35. Kipta towers in Glsyu.
FG
SOCIAL DIMENSION POPULATION: the population is low to middle income and very heterogeneous, although the tendency at the level of the singular blocks is toward a high homogeneity. NETWORKS: differences between the several blocks often contribute to developed strained social relations that translate in the impossibility of solid social relations. OWNERSHIP: usually new owners through low interest loans, not easily accessible though for the low income population. PERMEABILITY: the general sense of controlled environment, not easily permeable by an outsider, contribute to isolate these islands PERCEPTION: the perception of the great power of TOKI and the attempt to resist by the communities in the surroundings, make these island not accepted by the ones around them, and then isolated.
SPATIAL DIMENSION BUILT TYPOLOGIES: the implemented typologies are generally uniform high rise towers 6-22 stories high. not embedded well into the existing environment. The mono-built type form is absolutely inflexible and then not suitable for needs and aspirations of the inhabitants. ACCESSIBILITY: these islands are usually isolated, profoundly disconnected from their context. Sometimes (as in the Baibuyuk case) they are clear walls between the new transportation networks and the old gecekondular settlements. DENSITY: the inflexible standardisation of the typologies represents a great element of homegenity and disconnection. MIXED USES: commercial and productive spaces are completely absent. Being only residential coffins the TOKI typologies cannot develop livelihoods and professional networks. PUBLIC SPACES: impersonal public spaces and the disconnection between house and street represent another element of isolation and homogeneity in this scenario of transformation.
58
CONNECTION
HOMOGENEITY
HETEROGENEITY
public spaces mixed uses
density
perception
ownership permeability ISOLATION
networks
population
built typologies
accessibility
Figure 3.36. Graphic representation of the degree of connection/ isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a mass-housing island. Figure 3.37. Image from Baibuyuk. Figure 3.38. Image from Tozkoparan. GT 59 AR
3.4.5 New Central Business Districts The planned new Central Business Districts (CBDs) represent the States mainstream vision for Istanbul. The projects, located in de-industrialised zones, will operate as drivers of transformation for the existing settlements, leading de facto to the eviction of the gecekondu communities. As the graph (figure 3.40) shows, the pressure for transformation in this scenario are producing different patterns of isolation and homogeneity at the social and spatial level. While the former is profoundly leaning toward a homogeneous environment, reflecting the high polarisation of employment patterns (and, hence, of the population), the latter is maintaining a certain degree of heterogeneity because of the attempt to have a diverse built form, capable to host mixed uses. We will see in details how this attempt partially fails, though.
Zaha Hadid Architects. Figure 3.39. Zaha Hadid Architects, competition entry for Kartal CBD.
SOCIAL DIMENSION POPULATION: it is fairly homogenous, including mid to high income residents, working for the emerging financial and service sectors. NETWORKS: the CBDs are meant to be part of the global financial web, islands disconnected from the surroundings but linked at a higher level to the global cities network. OWNERSHIP: the land is of international capital owners. This means big scale homogeneous developments and impossibility to access the provision of housing by the lower income groups. PERMEABILITY: the polarised employment patterns (financial and service sectors) do not help in increasing the social permeability of the areas, which remain disconnected from the outside. PERCEPTION: the general perception is that of an international milieu, completely detached from the reality of the surroundings.
SPATIAL DIMENSION BUILT TYPOLOGIES: the attempt to impose a new spatial heterogeneity in the area, proposing international built typologies and new uses and meanings of space fails in disregarding the existing reality and then isolating these islands from the surroundings. ACCESSIBILITY: the CBDs are provided with strong infrastructure network that do not relate with the existing ones though. There is a clear attempt of filtering the possible connections and isolating then the area from what is around. DENSITY: the challenge of density is interpreted without any reflection on the impact on the surroundings. The CBDs appear with their own density that is not related at all with the context. MIXED USES: the CBDs plan to include the so-called global city functions (services, tourism, offices, housing). The connections with the other island is not high because of the lack of commercial and productive spaces. PUBLIC SPACES: the planned public spaces are certainly impersonal and only the shadow of what could be called a truly representational and inclusive space.
60
CONNECTION
HOMOGENEITY ownership
networks
mixed uses HETEROGENEITY
accessibility permeability density perception population public spaces built typologies
ISOLATION
Figure 3.41 (right, top). Zaha Hadid Architects, competition entry for Kartal CBD, general plan. Figure 3.42 (right, bottom). Zaha Hadid Architects, competition entry for Kartal CBD, view from the sea.
61
Zaha Hadid Architects.
Zaha Hadid Architects.
Figure 3.40 (above). Graphic representation of the degree of connection/isolation and heterogeneity/homogeneity for a New Central Business District island.
3.5 iSTANBUL CITY OF ISLANDS
Which future then for Istanbul? The current trends of development analysed in the five scenarios and the resistances to them seem to confirm the tendency toward an archipelago of homogeneous and disconnected islands. An archipelago of fortresses, a new medieval feudal space, in which the gated communities are only the prototype of a total disconnection that can turn into suspension (Agamben, 1998): the island is not only deaf and blind toward the others but de facto imposes its own rules inside its boundaries, further increasing its exclusion. As previously discussed, these enclaves are de facto included through their exclusion: the surrounding sea of knowledge and dialogue is actually the one of economic and political interests, where the visions of a global city and the ones put forward by city planning and private capital create homogenised spaces, looking for a city of gentrified inner areas, wealthy suburbs and new Central Business Districts. At the moment, the absence of inclusive policies, the isolation among users and regulators of space, the decision making and implementation power in the hand of the latter (especially TOKI) and the patterns of ownership of the land dominated by the State leave no room for negotiation: the resistance can express itself only in searching for the persistance of the status quo. The lack of a shared vision among the urban poor is undermining the possibility of negotiated development: therefore any strategy to achieve an inclusive and just urban space must start from the creation of a common language and
coordinated action among the ones excluded from access to resources and decision making. Only this can lead to a common understanding of the imposed visions and to formulate a shared alternative to those visions. This process would imply a scaling up operation that will involve the entire archipelago we have discussed, reaching out further to national and international links: an archipelago of finally inclusive and heterogeneous islands, able to recognise heterogeneity as a richness to be preserved and seeking many new connections to be traced toward other islands. We will see in the next chapter how our strategies could tackle these two issues, focalising either on an island itself or on the space in between and always keeping in mind the need for a coordinated and strategic action across the city (the only scale at which it would be possible to effectively challenge the current paradigms in the production of space).
62
FG
4.1
VISION
In a context of isolated and homogeneous spaces, our strategies propose to help shape the city of Istanbul through our definitions of transformation (as described in Chapter 2). Our vision focuses on the evolution of responsive and inclusive urban spaces that could open up the islands of isolation and encourage heterogeneity. As shown in the figures on the opposite page, we envision a continuous geography where islands are separated but at the same time connected. This represents the current condition, where successful change becomes a cumulative process in time. The sea-line reflects the context that produces the condition of isolation. Our strategies aim to lower the line level and incrementally increase and integrate the geographies and the spaces in between the islands. The form of resistance in practice today results in a limited space for possible negotiation between communities and the authorities, with a lack of visibility in either direction. This leads to a context where transformations have become scenarios of conflict or merely the persistance of the status quo. These strategies should facilitate a process where communities under pressure acquire coping capacities through collaboration and horizontal knowledge production. In the end, a City-Wide Alliance, these capacities enables an institutionalized, inclusive and collectively negotiated urban transformation. The goal of our strategies is to create enabling spaces of negotiation, which represent both a challenge to and an intersection of interests and priorities. Isolated
islands need to develop, in time, an integrated and resilient mechanism of positive transformation at the city-level, beyond the current pattern of confrontational resistance. The strategies, thus, should locate either on specific points of an island (on a case-case basis) or on the spaces in between, which represent the mainstream arena of the current exclusive transformation driven by highly centralized official strategies and market pressures. These pressures are expected to decrease and, in turn, develop new active geographies as places of negotiation. In brief, our strategies are as follows: A negotiated language: The strategy kicks off as a central hub of interaction and evolves into a citywide alliance of key stakeholders in the development process, formulating alternative visions to urban development. The scale of this strategy is citywide with regional, national and international links. A negotiated built form: we have developed two negotiated scenarios of transformation dealing with the built form. The first aims to challenge TOKI and develop an alternative model of how the physical form of the gecekondular can evolve over a 20-year timeframe. The second attempts to counter the rapid gentrification processes currently taking place in the inner city historic areas of Istanbul. The basis of the first strategy is the scenario of the gecekondu, which can be seen and applied throughout the city. The second strategy was born from the specifics of the Tarlaba case and the challenges observed in that context that represents a new alternative for the inner city.
CHAPTER 4.0_STRATEGIES: Negotiated Spaces
66
Fig 4.1. Current situation: An absence of inclusive policies and isolation among users and regulators of space (e.g. decision making and implementation power lies solely with TOKI, the implications of the domination of state-owned land). The resistance can only be successful if it shifts the status quo.
Fig 4.2. Short term: Initiation of strategies through implementation of the Hub
Figure 4.3. Mid term: consolidation of Hub, implementation of specific strategies of negotiation
Fig 4.4. Long-term: hub develops into city-wide alliance, lessons learned over time create transformative and continuous change
67
4.2
NEGOTIATING LANGUAGE FROM RESISTANCE TO EMPOWERMENT
From our analysis, we uncovered a commitment to resistance against the dominant planning approach from many communities and wider organisations. However this is generally fragmented, lacking coordination, a common language and a vision of engagement beyond case-by-case resistance. This strategy proposes a route to rethinking the urban social (Amin, 2007) through a course of action to align actors in a more united approach, strengthening and making more effective the collective voice and enabling a networked process of learning. Amin (2007) argues that urban space should be reimagined beyond the distinctive mapped geographies and boundaries that traditionally define a city. This underlying spatial ontology has led to a set of policies and responses that limit the scope of responses to local social problems to only encompass local solutions. Amins argument advocates for adopting a more holistic view of the city that incorporate translocal networks and connections. It follows that a politics of urban social justice has to work creatively with this multiple connectivity, by allowing local distance and difference, by recognizing plural affiliations, by not expecting too much from spatial juxtaposition, by insisting on the obligations of, and towards, distant strangers, by seeing the achievements as always only temporary and partial. This is to develop a politics of place that draws on disagreement, multiple geographies of attachment and plural political spaces, as the catalyst for achieving greater urban social justice. (Amin, 2007:9)
4.2.1 Goals of the strategy To tap into emerging social movements and capitalise on interest among academics and NGOs to support communities in negotiating a socially just urban transformation addressing their housing rights. To empower communities to better negotiate with different levels of the power structure: forming stronger ties between communities/residents associations - building expertise within communities on urban development options, successful practices - building capacities to develop plans with alternative typologies that better serve community needs To support the growth and networking of community based projects that address wider social challenges facing mahalles, linked to socio-spatial exclusion (e.g. unemployment, education, health) and promote this agenda as: - adressing male dominance and bringing the voice of women and younger people to the forefront - important for the future inclusion of marginalised groups as the housing and land rights agenda To engage civil society in fostering a more socially and physically integrated vision of the city, ultimately bringing about a change of perception of poor communities as outsiders To increase the effectiveness of the voice in the public sphere of groups that are typically marginalised, increasing their social legitimacy and engaging with housing issues in the political dimension to challenge the powerful technocratic arguments for the TOKI model (Sheinsohn and Cabrera 2009).
68
4.2.2 Implementation Current Scenario: Fragile Existing Networks Our study highlights that there are some mahalles with strong community organization, largely tied to political affiliations with male dominated management structures. However, at the district and city scales, there is limited, if any, networking between mahalles, which contributes to the social-political isolation of the urban poor communities. This collaboration is typically fragmented and sparse, and generally occurs on an ad hoc basis in response to a specific threat with limited strategic action, planning or coordinated platforms of negotiation. Moreover, support for threatened mahalles from sympathetic agencies such as universities, NGOs and professional chambers (represented in blue in figure 4.6) is similarly fragmented and ad-hoc, preventing coordinated responses and limiting the scope for cumulative knowledge exchange between aligned actors.
Figure 4.5. Isolated neighbourhoods: subject to city pressures
Figure 4.6. Isolated neighbourhoods: cooperation units (including academia, NGOs, CBOs) emerge as agents of social transformation
69
Figure 4.7. Local entities come together to create a non-partisan organisation for a collective point of contact for community members.
Figure 4.8. The point of contact acts as an interchange for information gathering, technical support and knowledge sharing
Connection Hub (1-2 above) Local entities, including universities, NGOs, professional chambers and existing residents association federations, create non-partisan organisation for collective point of contact. This body provides a single point of support and information exchange in which communities can also, where they choose to, interact on common concerns and interests.. The role of the hub includes: Information point Technical support, e.g. construction, heritage, planning and legal issues Knowledge sharing Exchange visits, conferences Open forum Facilitate communication
Consolidated Hub (3-4 below) As communities begin to communicate more directly, the need for the support point decreases and stronger connections are formalised between them. The strengthening of networks improves the communities capacity to negotiate as a collective and develop their own alternative proposals on a broader and more strategic scale. The increase of networked community development projects promotes social inclusion and resilience to shocks such as displacement, and amplifies the voices of women and younger people within the collective.
Figure 4.9. Stronger networks are forged between and within communities
Figure 4.10. Over time, communities begin to interact more directly with one another, forming stronger connections
70
City-wide Alliance In the long term, an alliance would establish more and stronger connections with similar units at the regional, national, and international level. This stage will also promote a change in perception of the wider community towards a more inclusive city.
We recognize that the principles of this strategy are not new to communities; we propose a course of action following the clearly expressed desire for a broader coalition of mahalles to combat the dominant planning process. Importantly, the strategy also challenges sympathetic support agencies to promote coordination and provide a united point of support to mahalles
Governance Organizing Committee

Universities
Motivations
Expand field of research Potential student learning environment to springboard into practice Helping to fulfill social mission of serving community Vehicle for research grants, awards Broader network of knowledge Recognition as important actors legitimises Support their goals Vehicle for grants, awards, donations Ensure a better quality built environment and construction Strengthen/broaden their network in the professional realm Promoting the profession and their agenda Increase their value and recognition as drivers of social change Need for external help (e.g., currently working with Solidarity Studio). Share struggles/experiences Unite more actors of the city towards their cause
Prospective Roles
Coordinating and partnership building Technical support Facilities Funding Student inputs building alternatives, propositions, presentations, graphic production, legal advice Renowned academics bring credibility and exposure Volunteer organizational force Institutional backing to strategy Logistical and organizational capacity Knowledge and expertise on the issues Access to networks of other organizations, professionals, activists Fundraising Technical guidance and training Understanding of planning/design processes Institutional backing Professionalisation of platform Competitions for design and development of alternative plans Design and planning capacity Access to resources (money, materials, labour, contractors) Inform the agenda Encourage participation of mahalle residents and leaders Insider role: knowledge of community challenges connecting neighbourhoods to unit on the ground assistance and implementation Help inform a plan that is more holistic, flexible and dynamic meeting the needs of multiple groups Balance the tendency to narrow down the focus by bringing a wider perspective Reality check Self- empowerment - citizens become actively responsible for shaping the city
Civil Society Organizations > Solidarity Studio
Chambers of Architects and Engineers
Istanbul Neighbourhood Associations Platform
COMMITTEE ADVISORS: Neighbourhood representation by diverse members of community (womens group, teachers to represent youth, etc)
Strengthen their voice in the citys development Recognition of their role as citizens Shape an outcome that meets their needs
Figure 4.11. The final stage of the strategy culminates in a city-wide alliance that creates and reinforces connections at a regional, national and international level
71
4.3
NEGOTIATING TYPOLOGIES CHALLENGING TOKI
One of Istanbuls main challenges is housing density. The central role of TOKI, the main provider of housing at large scale, has hinged all strategies regarding this issue around its activities. Mass housing is fundamental in the national agenda, and is becoming one of the transformative forces in the city, propagating not only a series of generic typologies (the mono-block), but also a political way of approaching its development. TOKIs concentration of power together with its seemingly immutable rhetoric have encountered a fair share of localised resistance, from residents who are directly threatened by this process, and who feel that alternatives to this model are neither being considered nor acknowledged. This strategy proposes an approach to opening a negotiated process of determining built typologies to move towards more inclusive and grounded alternatives to the current TOKI model of housing provision. 4.3.1 The imposition of space As shown in figure 4.12, the pressures of the TOKI imposed approach to gecekondu settlements has increased their isolation. The topography of Istanbul has played a key role: the valued hilltops are frequently gecekondu sites, and thus highly coveted by the real estate market. The push towards a modern ideal of development has seen an increase of islands, with gecekondu surrounded by tall TOKI compounds as well as gated, exclusive communities and upcoming developments, ranging from high-tech CBDs (Kartal) to five star hotels (Maltepe). Eventually, under this process, the gecekondu dwellers will be forced to leave
TOKI MODEL
IMPOSITION
Figure 4.12. TOKI model of imposition over gecekondu settlements
72
their homes, substituted by new towers and expensive developments. This imposition of policy and product has further strained the relation between the residents/users of the space and the agents that seek its transformation. From a social perspective, it isolates initiatives and coerces decisions, leaving few alternatives to the current dwellers. As illustrated in figure 4.13, the top-down approach from TOKI, plus the resistance of certain district municipalities to aid these settlements, leaves the users with few alternatives, which in both cases is dictated by force: either to move outright or resettle in a TOKI tower far away from their original built and social environment. Furthermore, the TOKI typology itself is encased in a built and social planning frame that is completely contrasting with traditional gecekondu settlements. As derived from the scenario analysis in Chapter 3, this typology is associated with a series of categories (see Figure 4.14), which not only introduce a limited, mono-functional building, but also ignores the character of the gecekondu environment.
So far, the response of these gecekondu communities has been mixed. Some have managed to develop better links with their local municipality, agreeing to some new forms of land formality, which has given them power and leverage before the external pressures. However, in most cases, these communities are still perceived as islands of informality, as failures of urban planning, and as insecure, vulnerable areas that have to be replaced by safer, denser blocks. And although the argument appears logical, the broken dialogue between residents and TOKI has narrowed their alternatives.
Forced Adaptation Municipality Users TOKI Forced Eviction
Figure 4.13 (above). Enforced exlusion process over gecekondu dwellers by local authorities (TOKI and municipalities) Figure 4.14 (below). The TOKI model in spatial and social categories
4.3.2 A strategy for change The previous analysis shows how the TOKI model is extremely limited in terms of participatory, inclusive social processes, as well as having a fairly exclusive production of space. As explained, the mono-block tower not only disrupts the flexible nature of gecekondu areas, but it is foreign to the contextual topography of steep slopes and irregular access points. It becomes an aggressive form planted by the force of development, regardless of the nuances suggested by the land. In the context of this reports aim, the negotiated typology strategy for TOKI and some gecekondu sites follows the spirit of collective action, where local empowerment can become an agent of transformation for the built environment, improving social conditions in the process. By breaking the link of one-sided dependency with TOKI, users of space can become active and recognized producers of their environtment, as shown in figure 4.15. Derived from the previous analysis section, this contested scenario fits into that extended archipelago of islands, which appears isolated from each other. However, as seen in figure 4.16, between them lies a geography of possibilities, where improved collective action can improve the built environment by the gecekondu, in a sequence of stages that ultimately create significant events that can help bridge the islands. If these events and strategies slowly succeed, they should drive towards a new ground of negotiated transformation. Right now, the transitional space between the gecekondu and the housing islands is conflicted and a source of pressure on current dwellers (Figure 4.17). Through the strategy, this model could be changed.
Figure 4.15. Suggested model of stakeholder change in relations
Figure 4.16. Geographies of awareness: bridging process of evolving gecekondu in three phases. 1. Short term: The first stage requires a consolidation of existing islands, which enables the possibility to carry on larger negotiation processes with stronger grassroots groups. 2. Mid term: Once neighbourhood groups become recognized as capable of producing alternative forms of space, an evolved typology would be possible to develop. 3. Long term: an acceptance of alternative urban development (in the form of a formalized, improved gecekondu) would help an horizontal bridging of typologies and islands.
Figure 4.17. Three stages of urban development: from gecekondu to mass housing, and the contested, narrowing space in between
74
4.3.3 Implementation: negotiating typologies This strategy is based on three major stages, which set the case for an improved gecekondu settlement, starting from the upgraded unit, into the formal compound and later into a negotiated bridging typology (see figure 4.18). As a result, the TOKI tower model would need revision before the alternative challenge. The stages are explained as follows: Stage 1: Thinking Bridges The collective initiative of neighbourhood organization, supported by the local mahalles, would enable crosscutting information sharing and empowerment to negotiate a new level of formality. Through the strategy, this ownership and recognition would be channelled as collective empowerment, which can then be translated into the production of improved spaces. Tying links between common groups, who then have access to dialogue with their local authorities is essential; likewise, the benefits of these agreements should be understood in terms of the collective and not as individualised benefits, disconnected from an integrated neighbourhood vision.
3
Figure 4.18 (1-3). Gecekondu evolution, from individual, plot based upgrading, to a collective typology of improvement. TOKI then operates as bridge.
3
Figure 4.19. 1. Existing conditions with pressures of TOKI mass housing and other real estate developments acting on the settlement. 2. Introduction of new typologies with help of the community networks catering to the housing demand, increasing the density. 3.Further appropriation of space by the community introducing new and improved typologies that offer better integration of livelihoods and the public realm. 4-5. Last stage of appropriation of space in the settlement by the community introducing public amenities and landmark buildings offering a character to the settlement.
75
Stage 2: Building Bridges The Gecekondu has been an evolving phenomenon in the physical and socal geography of Istanbul, and needs to continue to do so, sometimes as a reaction to the pressures, and in other as a constructive process of regeneration that is a result of the collective imagined above. This is to prove that the forced adaptation to the TOKI tower of mass housing, plus the transformation of the environment into high-end projects, cannot be the only path. Pivoted on land ownership and collective initiative, local organised groups can make physical upgrades on the Gecekondu sites, evolving sequentially into an improved environment (see figures 4.20 and 4.21 for details of categories). Municipalities should play a central role in supporting these initiatives by facilitating financial support and ensuring these alternative action plans are carried out. Increasing density in the typologies, while ensuring that the current street life dynamics are maintained and enhanced by the introduction of improved shared spaces, should control sprawl. The proposed typology is designed to scale up towards a dense, streetresponsive configuration that allows livelihoods, the public realm and socio-cultural networks to shape the environment through collective and personal stimuli
(see figure 4.22). This should be part of what has been so far described as the evolution of the gecekondu, which is explained graphically in figure 4.23, tracing the stages of the gecekondu from its unitarian genesis into and towards the proposed typology. This sequence builds upon the unit, expanding it and improving its growth, with more inclusive environments, better resistance to earthquakes and overall ability to scaleup in the context of the local topography.
Figure 4.20. Suggested individual upgraded typology
Figure 4.21. First stage of negotiated gecekondu typology: improved social space and earthquake resistant infrastructure
76
Figure 4.22. Evolution sequence: gecekondu upgrading stages, from existing to proposed typologies
Figure 4.23. Evolution sequence: the new gecekondu typologies to challenge the TOKI model
77
Stage 3: Crossing Bridges If a successful gecekondu upgrade is achieved and sustained through time, at numerous points of the city (channelled by the effectiveness of the Hub), an alternative vision to the TOKI mechanism would be evident. This parallel production of space, should challenge TOKI into re-considering their typology, and enter a process of negotiating it in relation to the improved gecekondu areas. TOKI would then serve its purpose of effectively bridging spatial islands, introducing improved urban quality to their projects in between the transitional space that separates consolidated, improved gecekondular, and other scenarios (middle class areas, CBDs, etc.) that continue to shape the city. What is here represented as a physical bridge (figures 4.24 and 4.25) is not a prescriptive alternative but a suggested typology of connectivity, where the new forms built by TOKI integrate communities and coexist with other spatial alternatives and initiatives.
Figure 4.24 (above). Bridging gaps: TOKI as an agent of integration through typology
3
Figure 4.25 1. Existing condition of infrastructure corridor separating the two islands of Gecekondu settlements 2. A negotiated typology is introduced as an infill/ bridge between the two islands along with TOKI and the community networks to create opportunities for new typologies. 3. New typologies created with this process infill the space between the two islands that include housing and public infrastructure and amenities. 4-5. The community appropriates spaces for amenities and landmark buildings.
78
4.3.4 Negotiation as transformation The evolution of the gecekondu, a transformative process of social and built environments, should be seen as an integral part of Istanbuls reconsideration of the way its urban processes are being developed. As discussed previously in this report, current actor dynamics serve the purpose of TOKIs model of unilateral action, where large spheres of civil society are ignored or underrepresented in the provision of mass housing. As the actor-time analysis implies (figure 4.26), the upgraded gecekondu is a collective effort that stems from the users/producers who, supported by stronger local networks (parts of The Hub), are able to become agents of transformation themselves. This process becomes gradually formal (an accepted built strategy that complements other processes in the city) while producers and regulators respond to it by changing their approach. The challenge then, is to produce transformation at the highest levels, through a ripple effect system that evolves in time and space, aiming for local initiatives to produce alternative, successful spaces (figure 4.27).
Figure 4.26 (above). Evolution of actor involvement through the negotiated process of new typologies Figure 4.27 (below) . Vision of a negotiated gecekondu typology
4.4
NEGOTIATING SPACE SLOWING GENTRIFICATION
The GAP Project in Tarlabai is a pilot project within the historic centre that seeks regeneration of the area through a blanket intervention of rebuilding the entire area with massive influx of capital. It is a real estate driven initiative based on a homogeneous image of the area. The following strategy offers a critique and an alternative to the planned project by GAP and the Municipality of Beyolu for the area of Tarlabai. The proposal seeks to slow down gentrification during urban regeneration and to build bridges between islands by establishing a sample typology in historical inner city areas, sharing successful strategies, and proving that urban upgrading can be done without the necessity of a surgical intervention.
4.4.1 Summary and Critique of Existing Plan Tarlaba was deemed an area for renewal by the Beyolu Municipality in 2006. By 2007, the Municipality partnered with the private development company GAP naat for the urban regeneration project and the first phase of the project was approved by the Renewal Council. The first phase of the project concentrates on nine blocks north of Tarlabai Boulevard located in parts of ukur, Blbl and ehit Muhtar Mahalles. The project focuses on urban upgrading, using the current historical fabric in regeneration, to integrate the neighbourhood with the surrounding city, and to improve economic activity.
Figure 4.28. GAP masterplan proposal for Tarlaba
80
To achieve these goals, GAP created a plan that incorporates historically upgraded buildings, reinforces semi-public space, and creates commercial and tourist spaces. Although the area on a whole is mixed use, each space must retain its current use. This is applicable for all spaces except for production spaces, which will be permitted. During the building process, owners of the buildings will be given a subsidy for rent and transportation costs. After completion of the project, owners are encouraged to move back to their homes. If owners do not wish to be part of the project, they will have the right to a TOKI apartment in the periphery of Istanbul. Tenants are not accounted for in the future project, but will be given one free year rent with the intent that they will save money and move out of the neighbourhood. If they choose, they can move into social housing building in Kayabai area. In addition, GAP will provide capacity training in the service sector and participants will have priority to new jobs, a minimum of 40, created by the project. Criticisms When completed, the Tarlabai Regeneration Plan will improve the physical structures, the neighbourhood will be better connected to the city, and there will be increased economic activity. In addition, the plan will
drastically expedite gentrification causing de facto eviction, completely change the demographic of the neighbourhood, and erase the current character. The Project states that it aims to have owners continue to reside in the area and have absentee owners return. However, as owners only make up 30% of occupants, a minimum of 70% of current inhabitants will be forced to leave the area. In addition, 36.55% of current owners have not agreed to the project, which will likely result in forced expropriation of buildings. Additionally, the project proposes large tourist and commercial spaces bordering Tarlabai Boulevard neglecting the fine grain mixed uses that define its current character. The benefits from building improvements, capacity building, and economic development are clearly not intended for and will not be realized by the majority of current residents. Tarlabai is in need of physical regeneration of many historical buildings, but the neglect of the tenants and low percentage of owner agreement to the GAP plan dictate that the project is one of pure urban upgrading, eviction and gentrification instead of a holistic - social and urban - upgrading.
GAP
Figure 4.29. Unmaintained buildings along Tarlaba Boulevard (GAP)
Figure 4.30. Rendering of renewed Tarlaba Boulevard (GAP)
81
GAP
4.4.2 Implementation This strategy is based on the same facts and findings gathered by the Tarlabai survey done by GAP, showing that an incremental and socially just development is possible. Instead of leaving the entire project in the hands of profit-driven developers, it gives the decisionmaking to the residents of Tarlabai themselves. The proposal is based on two main facts that were stated by the collected data from the Beyolu Municipality, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, and GAP Inaat and which were confirmed by our own observations during our stay in Istanbul: a) 70% of the people living in the area are renters b) 40% of the houses are uninhabited, most of them being in bad condition or in ruin. Although the following strategy uses specific facts that are applicable only to the nine block area in Tarlaba, the same strategy can be applied in the surrounding area of Tarlaba and other inner city historical areas by utilising context specific data and the general principles.
Phase 1 The residents and Hub participants will negotiate with The Beyolu Municipality to understand the benefits of an alternative approach to The GAP Project and appropriate the alternative plan into their urban regeneration scheme. During this time, residents and Hub members will perform a technical assessment to record the condition of building and infrastructure. Further a social assessment to gain an accurate census of residents tenure, length of residency, and personal information will be produced. According to the social assessment those renters who have lived in Tarlaba for more than five years will be identified (about 50% of the number of renters). Renters will be split into long term renters (residents living in Tarlabai for more than five years) and short term renters (residents living in Taralbai for less than five years) with the assumption that long term renters will have more permanent stock in the neighbourhood and more economic resources, whereas, short term renters may not be able or want long-term commitment to living in Tarlabai.
Figure 4.31. Categories of building quality in GAP project area. Source: adapted from GAP naat
82
80% of the uninhabited land will be divided between small groups of long-term renters. Each group of renters will purchase the plot of land via long-term loans offered by the municipality. Renters will transfer money previously used for rent to monthly instalments to pay mortgage to the municipality. Renters will have condominium, not co-operative, ownership and will therefore own a percentage of the total land instead of collectively owning all the land. Phase 2 Following the logic of the post-gecekondular, which necessitates minimal financial investment by the renter or the municipality, these new co-owners will have the possibility to sell their share or to organise the construction of a condominium in partnership with a local contractor. The contractors will get the return on their investment in the form of half of the constructed units, which can be rented or sold at market value. These newly created units will allow for outsiders to move into Tarlabai as renters or owners. The Municipality will have ownership of the newly constructed buildings ground floor to be used as rented or sold commercial space. New co-owners would have priority in renting the ground floor either individually or collectively. Due to the unique case of Tarlabai with a large percentage (77%) of historically listed buildings, a distinction will have to be made for listed buildings. There will be a differentiation between buildings requiring facade preservation and higher economic resources and those that do not have to take historical building codes into account. This distinction will create two levels of standards and property value, which will be divided depending SAMPLE CALCULATION: Estimating 2000 inhabitants at present of which 70% are tenants. Out of these 1400 renters about 50% were occupants for more than 5 years and therefore eligible to receive shared land rights. With 40% of all buildings uninhabited, 108 spaces of land are available. Assuming 8 people per plot, long term renters will occupy 88 of the 108 space. Twenty spaces will be given for use to the municipality.
Figure 4.32. Negotiated spaces: project phases
83
on future owners economic capacity. To ease the potentially debilitating process of upgrading listed buildings, additional stakeholders need to work together in the form of a Community Design Centre (CDC), supported by the proposed Hub of the first strategy. The CDC will offer support for construction quality, design quality, networking, etc. The plan would allocate approximately 20% of the vacant spaces to the Municipality with the aim of providing social housing, community centres, public spaces, street markets, and playgrounds. The plan encourages the Municipality to employ Tarlabai residents in newly constructed public facilities. In addition, the Municipality would have the
option to use some spaces for income generation by selling or renting at market value. The plots with clear status of ownership can be rehabilitated individually by generating funds through selling or renting part of their buildings at increased market value. If income generated by sale or rent is not sufficient, owners can opt for small loans from commercial banks and use their home as collateral. Additionally, owners could negotiate for incentives from the municipality or UNESCO for the refurbishment of listed buildings.
Figure 4.33. Bridging gaps: increasing island relationships
84
Phase 3 In time the built environment will slowly adapt to the second generation of needs and uses. The area will be integrated back to the natural cycle of urban upgrading, shaped by the visions and decisions of individuals. After the success of the first phase within the initial nine blocks, the proposed strategy will be repeated in the extended project area. Finally, adaptation of the strategy should be developed and shared in similar historical areas by modifying variables to accommodate the neighbourhoods existing circumstances. The strategy hopes to offer an alternative to the current real estate driven initiative. The proposal integrates elements of heterogeneity and creates opportunities for introducing varied solutions catering to different individual circumstances. It hopes to create a platform for negotiation based on principles of participation that allow people to take control of their environment shaping a new physical geography within the historic areas opening new avenues for an inclusive development.
Figure 4.34. Extended project area: buffer blocks beyond GAP project
85
4.5
WEIGHING STRATEGIES
In Chapter 2 we framed our analytical and strategic approach to transformation in Istanbul in a critical theory approach, developing a set of normative definitions of transformation. These definitions work together to shape a vision of the production of space, production of knowledge and levels of interaction that guide our objectives for these strategic proposals. Similarly, our strategies should be viewed as overlapping, not only individual elements of intervention in particular spatial contexts but together forming a coherent starting point for stimulating change in the Istanbul-wide transformation process. They are catalytic and open to alliance, contributing to a more fundamental shift over time in the perspectives of national and local government, planners, architects and urban designers, the middle classes and the urban poor about what type of urban transformation they wish to see in Istanbul, what are the implications of different approaches and who should be involved. Furthermore, as strategies for long term change in a complex urban system, they are incremental, setting out a clear starting point followed by proposals for phased implementation. We recognise that multiple actors and fluctuating external pressures mean that detailed implementation plans are merely speculative. Instead we have set out a number of key milestones that illustrate incremental stages of mobilisation, change and consolidation that characterise each of our strategies, illustrated in figure 4.40. The core objectives and principles behind each strategy can be maintained within shifting contexts To evaluate our strategies within our theoretical framework we must return to our initial definitions of transformation, and question to what extent these strategies contribute to their achievement.
4.5.1 For the first definition of transformation The collective process of negotiating, creating and shaping space that is inclusive, sustainable, and symbolic of an urban imagination that empowers and improves peoples lives it is clear that the second and third strategies explicitly aim for a more inclusive urban space through increasing its connectedness and heterogeneity. Sustainability is addressed through a re-balancing of perspectives on urban space from exchange-value to use-value and enabling increased production of space by its users according to their needs, rather than through imposed politicaleconomic processes. Through driving a negotiated approach, most specifically in seeking an alternative to the current TOKI mass housing model, a planning / urban design paradigm that currently neglects the relationship between poverty, inclusion and urban space will be shifted towards both symbolic and material changes that have a positive impact on the lives of the urban poor.
4.5.2 For the second definition of transformation A shift in power relations that enables a marginalised group to leverage existing and learned knowledge and capacities for greater access to social, political and economic resources the first strategy is directly aimed at the production of knowledge field of the theoretical framework. It aims to enable a created space of participation that is controlled jointly by communities and support agencies, working at the
86
boundaries of what is currently considered knowledge by political regulators of space. In this way it addresses invisible power by raising the consciousness of the urban poor as actors in production of space, challenges the hidden power relations that keep them away from decision making processes by legitimising and strengthening their voice with the support of academic and professional bodies, and ultimately works to change, in time, the institutional structures of visible power relations by challenging planning systems, roles of actors like TOKI and the plans themselves. This shift is also visible within the strategies for negotiating the built environment, which bring practical application of the principles of realigned power relations in production of space.
conducive to their success. The following factors, each arguably quite difficult to obtain, would contribute to a more favourable milieu of change: A climate of collaboration amongst diverse actors and agreement from key stakeholders to participate and commit to principles and objectives of strategy Availability of adequate funding or finance to kick off, administer and advance projects A degree of political will from the government metropolitan and district municipalities, in particular to acknowledge the possibility of a new approach to developing the city Individual/household/community capability to commit their resources, e.g. time, money, skills, towards planning and execution of strategy A change in how marginalised groups of Istanbul are perceived by themselves, the rest of civil society, and governing powers. 4.5.5 Transformation timeline The strategies described herein are designed to be interwoven and interdependent in order to best achieve their objectives of transformation. Each of them will be most successful if they are viewed not as three separate strategies but as one strategy of multiple components undertaken in a coordinated and strategic manner. The timeline (figure 4.40, two pages ahead) demonstrates how our proposed strategies could potentially be implemented over a period of 20 years with key milestones for each. As is seen by the vertical arrows, there are points and periods in time during implementation in which strategic elements either mutually reinforce or depend on each other. For instance, the outcomes of the Negotiated Language strategy to establish a more collaborative and integrated network of communities are important building blocks for the other two strategies. It is of critical importance that the actions to challenge the planning status quo consider a longterm view of transformation that consists of smaller scale, perhaps independently operating, phases that gradually build up towards an organised, cohesive and interconnected set of goals for an alternative development of Istanbul.
4.5.3 For the third definition of transformation A gradual, responsive and non-traumatic evolution of urban space through the networking and scaling up of diverse groups capacity to participate in processes of urban change each strategy works complementarily to address issues of scale, in time and connectivity. The slowing of rapid, traumatic change is fundamental to the strategy for inner-city historical areas and also implicit within the negotiated alternative to the TOKI model. The networking of diverse groups is central to the first strategy that aims to facilitate the union of currently disconnected actors into an alliance, while also raising the profile of women and younger people within the field of debate over the wider social implications of urban transformation in Istanbul. It is clear, therefore that the strategies are consistent with our principles of transformation as outlined in our initial definitions. While they do not propose to reach these outcomes in their entirety, they can be seen to be directly contributing to their attainment over time and are intended to be combined with other emergent strategies and proposals working to the same ends.
4.5.4 Considerations for strategy attainment The extent to which our strategies can realistically be implemented is largely dependent on a milieu that is
87
4.5.6 Transformation by strategies Derived from the scenario analysis developed in Chapter 3, the graphics below show the transformation of the categories that define the two scenarios contained in our strategies section. Figure 4.xx shows the initial values of the mass housing scenario, while figure 4.xx relocates the new values for this categories after the implementation of the negotiated typology strategy. Similarly, figure 4.xx shows the inner city condition, contrasted by the transformed scenario after the negotiated spaces strategy. In both cases, the effects of transformation look to push both the spatial and the built dimensions towards the shared plane of connection and heterogeneity.
CONNECTION
4.5.7 Action timeline The chart shown on the opposite page is an illustrative timeline of specific actions that could be undertaken as part of the negotiated language strategy. These proposed actions help to understand how this strategy could be grounded in the reality of Istanbul and the practical involvement of actors at different stages of the process. It can be seen through this illustrative series of events that, over time, the communities are incrementally empowered and equipped with the skills and capacities to progress from an approach of political resistance to an approach of strategic coordinated action.
CONNECTION
mixed uses
population
density
permeability
HOMOGENEITY
HETEROGENEITY
HOMOGENEITY
HETEROGENEITY
built typologies networks
ownership
public spaces mixed uses
density
public spaces
ownership permeability ISOLATION population
accessibility perception ISOLATION
perception
networks
built typologies
accessibility
Figure 4.35. Mass-housing block categories before transformation
Figure 4.37. Inner-city categories before transformation
CONNECTION
CONNECTION
mixed uses permeability

mixed uses population networks accessibility built typologies permeability density HETEROGENEITY
population
density
built typologies
public spaces networks accessibility HOMOGENEITY ownership perception HETEROGENEITY
public spaces HOMOGENEITY ownership
perception
ISOLATION
ISOLATION
Figure 4.36. Mass-housing block categories after transformation
Figure 4.38. Inner-city categories after transformation
88
Figure 4.39. Illustrative Actions for developing a negotiated language
years
10
15+
Alliance partners with organizations of similar scale and interest throughout the world. Shares successes and failures.
TOKI requests to join organizing committee of Hub to better understand community interests.
Formation of Alliance of mahalle residents association with coordinated citywide action plan. With help from international law students and facilitation by hub, a community coalition successfully defeats municipality in court case to oppose implementation of masterplan in one mahalle. United for a Better Istanbul: Masterplan for the People alternative development plan produced by communities and published on website and throughout international media.
Funding from EU enables the building and management of Community Design Centers to meet specific needs of particularly vulnerable communities. Mahalles submit applications to Hub for one to be located in their area.
Hub organizes first training seminar for communities on earthquake upgrading for low-rise buildings. Led by member of the Chamber of Architects.
Communities organize citywide conference to discuss the development of mahalle action plans that strategically counter masterplan. Hub creates website with online tool for people to add information about latest news on planning updates from districts and metropolitan municipality.
Formation and consolidation of hub. Setting of agenda and roles of responsibility among actors. Creation of sub-committees for specific areas of interest (e.g. design/construction)
Meetings to prepare for national urban movements forum to be held prior to the European Social Forum
89
Figure 4.40. Coordinated Strategic Action Timeline
years 0
5
- exchange processes between The Hub and communities - strengthening of intra community based organisations - re-shaping of inter community networks -creation of non-partisan organisation for collective point of contact --process can influence policies and regulation -focus on issues of housing and land tenure security -training seminar for communities, e.g. earthquake upgrading for low-rise buildings, led by member of the Chamber of Architects. - solidification of inter community networks - establishment of a city-wide alliance - communities organize conference to discuss the development of mahalle action plans that strategically counter masterplan.
1 2 3
- formation and consolidation of The Hub - setting of agenda and roles of responsibility among actors.
- isolated actions of an evolved gecekondu - 4-6 storeys buildings integrating local developers and building capacity - incremental density - mobility within Mahalles
- new typology spreads along Mahalle - increasing and sustainable density becomes a trend for other Mahalles - formation of alternatives visions - mixed uses buildings - improvement of public spaces and livelihoods
- new apartments - long-term tenants (LTT) move in - apartments available for tenancy and ownership for migrants - owners begin refurbishing their homes
- negotiations begin with the Beyolu Municipality - discussions between stakeholders about financial support
- construction of a condominium in partnership with a local contractor - working with the Community Design Centre, contractors begin to build During construction LTTs remain in their original dwelling - municipality develops social housing, public spaces and apartments
90
10
15
20
- consolidation of the city-wide alliance - implementation of The Hub model in other Turkish cities
- The Hub as an alliance at national level, partnered with similar entities at international level
-space for negotiated typologies and their evolution in time - sustainable and incremental densification - integration and process of inclusion of geographies in citys perception
- new official TOKI strategy aims to bridge the islands by incorporating buildings and infrastructure that serves to connect spaces. - mixing residential, leisure and cultural
- the built environment will slowly adapts to the second generation of needs and uses - strategy is repeated in areas bordering the initial project area - strategy is shared between people of different inner city historical areas
key
Strategy phases Hub and City Wide alliance process creates context for new phases on strategies 2 and 3. elements of strategies 2 and 3 are shared between different groups or scale - up and integrated in Hub.
91
MG
Points of learning and reflection that go beyond the boundaries of the preceding report structure can be placed into three broad categories. Firstly, we will reflect on the stark contrast between what we observed in Istanbul and what we learned from our in-depth study of an urban development program in Thailand. Secondly, our experience in Istanbul raised many questions about the role of practice, including the role of the practitioner, the nature of the BUDD approach, and the implications of our strategic proposals. Finally, we consider some of the limitations of our fieldwork and the potentials biases of the information gathered. All of these reflections can be located across the overlapping borderlines of academia and practice present within the exercise.
to articulate an alternative vision. Moreover, there was a sense of fatalism as being a cog in the giant machine the dominant transformation paradigm of Istanbul without an opportunity to genuinely change the system, either as individuals or as a collective. They have understandably felt overwhelmed with developing alternative plans and strategies and have focused on immediate concerns and reactive approaches to their situation. In response to this context of self-perception, TOKI has created a development model in which it dominates and ensures of its own power by refusing to negotiate with any other entity but the individual household. We believe this can be attributed, in part, to their view of themselves as essentially powerless in anything but resisting pressure. In marked contrast, the urban and rural poor of Thailand have a quite different framing of reality and self-perception of their power in the system. Somsook Boonyabancha characterised the slum dwellers of Bangkok as an army of ants due to their technique of coming together en masse and scattering across the city when searching for suitable resettlement locations. These armies of ants organize on a large (often national) scale, divide labour and have complex systems of communication. They are mission-driven towards extremely clear goals finding a suitable plot of land for them to rebuild their lives again. While there are certainly disagreements and organization is often messy when seen from the outside, the power of their actions is real and effective. That said, these ants still recognize that they are small but instead of seeing this as an insurmountable weakness, they have flipped this weakness to their advantage by creating an
5.1 Scale and (self-) perception of power: Contrasting with Baan Mankong, Thailand The students responsible for this report spent the three months preceding our visit to Istanbul studying the case of a housing and community development programme in Thailand called Baan Mankong. There are some interesting comparisons to highlight between these two markedly different cases. The isolated resistance movements of the poor communities in Istanbul perceive themselves as rooted in the physicality of their situation without a strong imagination for how they could shape their reality in the future. While they are certainly not passive as evidenced by their strong political activism, we observed time and again a real difficulty for them
CHAPTER 5.0_REFLECTIONS
94
army that creates power in numbers. As a result of this collective consciousness, the people of Bangkok have been able to institutionalise a government program that empowers them to shape their vision of the future. CODI, in contrast to TOKI, is a program that refuses to deal with individual households and benefits from the power of the collective by harnessing the creativity and management abilities of the communities themselves. Our negotiated language strategy was a deliberate effort to foster this kind of collective organisation and strategic action with the end goal of changing both the peoples self-perception and others perceptions of their role and potential for influence in the development process. Given the current political and economic scenario in Istanbul, we dont believe the CODI model would be possible today but could be seen as a longterm vision for a new institutional arrangement.
In light of the general approach to the practitioners role in this context, we struggled with what our own role should be in the field. Our role as practitioners was to question but also to articulate proposals. We were there to observe, interact, analyse and draw conclusions about the urban transformation that was taking place but also to propose new design alternatives which could enlighten new possibilities. However, as outsiders and merely visitors with limited exposure to the ongoing challenges and dynamics of the case, we acknowledge that our contribution can only be considered a drop in the bucket. That said, we believe that small contributions of creativity and new ways of thinking, whether from our modest group in London or from communities in Istanbul, have the potential to create lasting ripple effects of change. The BUDD approach Distinct within the BUDD approach to the case has been the consideration of urban space and its production as the locus of our analysis and strategies. This provided a critical standpoint that extended the scope of our analysis and response. It is apparent that while the transformation of urban space is central to the driving forces and dominant visions of future Istanbul, the narratives of both planning and resistance can appear to focus more on the struggle over rights to a location and inclusion within the city than the built environment itself. In partial contrast, our approach retains a focus not only on the inequitable power relations and institutional structures driving transformation, but also on their physical and socio-spatial manifestations. This perspective opened up routes to strategic interventions that address directly the challenges of displacement and isolation on peoples livelihoods, as well their longer term structural causes. Implications of our proposals The fragmented and loose nature of alliances amongst the urban poor and their supporters have their roots in fundamental issues of politics and culture. Therefore we acknowledge that the centrality to our proposals of a collective vision and awareness is not a straightforward objective. However, most recognise the need for change in the current challenges to topdown urban transformation and the opportunities in emergent alliances and increasing levels of awareness; our proposals are aimed at these opportunities and challenge local actors to develop them. It is also
5.2 Role of practice The practitioner's role What are the struggles a practitioner could be subjected to, in the context of Istanbul? We acknowledge that the dominating power structures of the government and TOKI restrict the influence of communities and non-governmental organizations in the process of shaping the city. Very few indications of a strong NGO culture could be found in this context due to this oppressive scenario. We reflected on what the role of the practitioner might be in this scenario. The creation of a collective language between communities is not a straightforward or easy objective to obtain. However, the coordination between local and international non-governmental organizations, academics and communities has the potential to contribute to an equitable process of urban transformation that effectively responds to the needs of the increasing population. The role of the practitioner should stand in between different actors, as the bridge between the islands previously described in the report. The practitioner should provide a platform of communication, raising awareness and consciousness about the ongoing process of urban transformation and its negative impacts on the city and affected communities. Additionally, a practitioner should help communities to articulate new alternatives that could challenge the current processes of transformation.
95
clear that the biggest issues, such as TOKI, cannot be addressed through a single strategy but any strategy must contribute to a web of action that retains a strategic focus on the biggest challenges, while addressing the smaller ones.
5.4 Beyond the city: collective reflections During the field trip, one of our individual tasks was to keep a record of our thoughts and experiences. Many of these were expressed in the form of essays or reflections, where each one of us tried to assess our own personal interpretations of the Istanbul we met. These, of course, had multiple perspectives and sensibilities, from the very personal to the analytical, from the sympathising to the critical. Throughout this report, we have manifested our collective interpretation from the visit to Istanbul, producing a joint analysis that tries to convey this shared experience, following the principles and tools of our academic program. However, some of those reflections are worth their space, as a reminder of the myriad impressions that a city like Istanbul leaves on those who start to understand it. The following quotes from our group are not meant to represent a comprehensive assessment, but they do show some of the personal thoughts and interests that drove most of the analysis of the previous pages, as well as some open-ended reflections that still have no concrete answers. Time, and action, will tell. In Istanbul the different visions of the city are representative of an outside, a global that is in constant dialectic (or in conflict) with the small-scale realities, and these two poles (and whats in the middle) make worthy the use of a model that accepts the existence of a figure/ground logic. Giorgio Talocci Through which eyes, through which role am I to look at this city? From the architects perspective or the rushed and confused student-come-practitioner viewpoint? The (less-than) part-time tourist? Ana Ramos A city, which seems particularly unpredictable, divided between proudly nostalgic sights towards the past and tensions towards multiple visions of the future. Igor Malgrati For whom is history being preserved? Preservation of history is important as it helps one connect to their roots and contributes to ones sense of identity. In the current context, where people have multiple identities or at times even lack a strong identity, what role does the preservation of history play? Swethini Ramamurthy
5.3 Limitations We acknowledge two main limitations of our study. The first one concerns the representativeness of the people we engaged with while the second concerns the general methodology carried out for the study. The first limitation we encountered is related to the lack of insight into the objectiveness of the information we gathered from the individuals representing the people we met, whether it was a community, a political party or a public institution. We had to be careful about taking information at face-value and recognize that there might be political affiliations, economic interests and struggles for power behind both the information presented and the messengers themselves. Are the community leaders representing the voice and needs of the people they should be representing or are they more driven by invisible political influences? How did the balance of time we spent with different political or community leaders versus residents skew our perceptions of the situation? Our exposure to people encountered during the fieldwork was limited mainly to those operating some level of political influence, thus there was limited representativeness of the broad spectrum of voices of Istanbul. In all but very few cases we heard from middle aged males, with the chance to speak with women and youth in a small number of interviews. The image of Istanbul we present in this report is therefore a biased and partial vision of the complex situation in Istanbul. The methodology adopted reviewed trends and themes of transformation within a broad selection of case studies, reflecting different aspects of Istanbuls transformation. Given additional time for fieldwork, deeper analyses of individual cases would have exposed additional layers and reduced the gaps in information. However, given the restricted time available this was a useful and revealing approach that enabled a conceptualisation of a City of Islands and provided the basis for the development of strategic responses across the city-level challenges.
CHAPTER 5.0_REFLECTIONS
96
Istanbul seems to have a split personality: speeding up to develop into an international powerhouse of some sort (service hub, event city, specialized centre) while reclaiming the value of its historical memory. Ricardo Martn The popularization of generic design is not only a threat to the cultural and historical fabric of Istanbul but threatens the already deep social inequalities of its citizens. Niki Angelis Developers already know the potential profits to be had by maximizing the land near central business districts and therefore expedite the process. The neighborhoods of Sleymaniye and Tarlaba are currently being groomed to receive the wealthier classes. Laura Michener Theres nothing wrong with different typologies. They actually make sense. There are different people with different needs and different tastes. The only thing is that, in most cases, the houses werent designed with the consultation of the people, who are going to live in them! Marcel Noeding In the context of climbing and struggling for global city competition, the city always needs springboard areas for new immigrants like Tarlaba. In my personal view, disappearance of Tarlaba may be a way to continue and sustain Tarlaba itself. Hong Yu I was quite astounded at the combination of different cultures that existed in Tarlaba. None of whom we interviewed in Tarlaba were originally from the area, and most of them did not feel a sense of belonging to it, although they have been living in that place for at least 15 years. Iman Hassan Sleymaniyes precedent of metamorphosis into the museum city is already present in todays scenarios of Topkapi palace and the Hagia Sophia. How easily we forget that these too were neighbourhoods once, here too was the hustle bustle of daily life instead of the madness of tourism where East meets West. Hana Haq
This leader of a gecekondu sees himself as a blade of grass powerless to challenge the immediate and future elephant-scale battles happening above him. Krista Canellakis This violence of transformation is probably manifested in a shock and awe treatment of the development process. The response to this shock is almost equally violent in nature and embodies all the elements of a lopsided vision of the city. Amar Sood It is interesting to find through the mapping of this case the lines of desire that consolidate in structures of power dominating the production of space, with users (tenants) being relegated to an isolated dot of an invisible arena with almost no power and no evident interaction with the transformation of the built environment. Carlos Manns A process in time with different grades of maturity and in which a future vision has to be complemented with a realistic vision of the present. Where to start? Which is our utopian vision? Marisol Garca You cannot perceive depth when you only look with one eye, and it is only in the reconciliation of these perspectives we started to find something useful and a place to work, analyze and search for possible answers. Nick Wolff Istanbul is all of these images: slowness-hurrying, connection-isolation, prohibition-appropriation, sacred-profane. Its heterogeneity is its power and equilibrium. Although Im convinced that, as a city, Istanbul is resilient and can adapt to difficult situations, this doesnt apply to single citizens or clusters of inhabitants. Federico Gori A citys future is not its appearance or surface in the past and present, but rather the people living there. Therefore, to deeply understand a city, we should understand the citizen. Weiwei Liang
97
MG
GLOSSARY ACTORS AND TERMS
AKP (PRO-GOVERNMENT) is the right-wing party currently in power in the centre which also has massive representation in the grassroots with affiliations from various Mahalle Associations. BUILDERS Turkey has a large number of construction companies operating within and outside its borders, and with the current rebuilding effort, are providing the infrastructure for transformation at various levels. CHAMBER OF ARCHITECTS is the government recognised association of architects that has an intellectual standing in terms of a pro-people direction of development and transformation within Turkey. CHAMBER OF ENGINEERS - is the government recognised association of engineers. CHP (OPPOSITION) is the left-wing main opposition party of Turkey that has recently found following amongst the people of gecekondus resisting government led initiatives of urban redevelopment and regeneration bringing them to power in a few District Municipalities. CO-OWNERS is a group of formerly long-term tenants who will share condominium ownership in partnership with the Beyulu Municipality and small contractors in the alternative urban regeneration strategy in Tarlabai. DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY Istanbul is comprised of 39 districts each having its own municipality with elected councillors headed by a Mayor, responsible for planning, execution and upkeep of the district through
1:1000 scale detailed development plans based on 1:5000 scale master planning by IBB. EUROPEAN UNION The economic and political organisation of European nations that permits them to exchange men and material at much favourable terms than those outside it, and the organisation that Turkey is striving to join viewing it as the primary channel for future economic growth and development. The EU imposes certain stringent conditions on new nations wanting to join the organisation including human rights and social development. GECEKONDU literally meaning built overnight, gecekondular date back to the 1950s when large numbers of rural migrants came to the city. In an effort to quickly fill industrial jobs, the government allowed migrants to self build homes without legal tenure. GAP NAAT is a private construction company, part of alk Holding, which is working in partnership with the Beyolu Municipality for the completion of the Tarlabai Urban Regeneration Project. GOVERNOR Governor of Istanbul is a centrally appointed position that is in charge of National Primary Education, Local Health Authorities, Police Force, Traffic Management, Industry and Commerce, and Social Services. There are 39 centrally appointed district governors that report to the Governor of Istanbul. ISTANBUL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY is one of 26 regional bodies created within Turkey, complying with EU processes, to coordinate between central and local
ANNEXES
100
bodies for channelizing much needs funds for various urban development projects. INDIVIDUALS The people of Istanbul comprising of different races, ethnicities, religion, class and gender who reside in the Gecekondus, Historic inner city districts, gated communities etc, who are migrants and those who have been in Istanbul for generations. INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (IFI) include the EU, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and other similar organisations that provide technical help and/or funding for various types of urban development and regeneration projects such as historic city regeneration and conservation, slum upgradation and infrastructure development. INTERNATIONAL NGOs are organisations that have been working in the field of urban development, regeneration and conservation around world, having specialised expertise and funding that is channelized towards specific environments and projects e.g. Aga Khan Trust. INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITIES such as University College London that provide a research and intellectual base to the arguments of growth and development in the economic, social and physical realms harnessing resources, ideas and ideologies from around the world, providing an international voice to the local concerns of development. ISTANBUL BUYUKSEHIR BELEDIYESI (IBB) is the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality responsible for master planning of the entire city based in ideologies and vision from the central government. The plans of IBB are statutory documents that District Municipalities have to comply with. The IBB is headed by a major with representation from District Municipalities and is responsible for large-scale infrastructure of Istanbul. ISTANBUL METROPOLITAN PLANNING (IMP) is a part of the IBB and was established recently by the current mayor of Istanbul being responsible for preparing the master plans and urban design schemes of Istanbul. KIPTA is one of the companies established by the IBB in order to undertake redevelopment and regeneration projects in Istanbul, being able to procure land and technical capacities for the process.
LOCAL ARCHITECTS are the professionals functioning on the ground level in various capacities and at various levels. LOCAL BANKS function within the overall economy of Turkey where lending rates are determined by government fiscal policies, but form the main source of retail loans for the local population. LOCAL NGOs are small scale organisations functioning in small capacities at mohalle level offering social services and various types of ideological stand for the people in their cause for resilience and resistance. LOCAL UNIVERSITIES are addressing development issues with local knowledge and are in the best position to provide a research and intellectual base to the direction of urban development and regeneration. MAHALLE ASSOCIATION are the organisations of the citizens of various Mahalle represented by a Muhtar. Mahalle Associations are not officially recognised, but represent the interests of the people from the grassroots. These associations usually are male dominated with very minimal female representation. MEDIA of Istanbul and Turkey represent the opinion of the government and the white collar population, viewing the Gecekondu as an unwanted part of the city. The Media offers a ready platform for mass representation of the concerns of the Gecekondu and its people. MUHTAR is the head of the Mahalle Association and is usually an influential member of the Mahalle representing the concerns of the people from the ground up. The Muhtar is key for operationalisation of collective community action. POLITICAL PARTIES of Turkey represent right wing and left wing ideologies that percolate down to the ground level with affiliations from Muhalle Associations and District Municipalities. POST-GECEKONDU After The Amnesty Law No. 2981 in 1984, people living in gececondular were given amnesty. In addition, laws permitting ownership in the sky allowed more than one person to own a single unit of land, which prompted the development of four or more story buildings with condominium ownership.
101
PRIME MINISTER is guiding the process of urban development in Istanbul through TOKI who the influence of his office to bypass systems and processes in order to achieve the mandate of providing mass housing in Istanbul. PRIVATE DEVELOPERS are operating at the ground level taking advantage of the real estate value of legitimised Gacekondus offering to vertical expansion adding on the housing stock in the city. PRIVATE LAND OWNERS play a vital role in determining the real estate value of land in Istanbul and include rich foreigners buying huge tracts of land for commercial development. PUBLIC LAND OWNERS include the Treasury, Army and municipalities who own the land on which Gecekondu settlements were allowed in the past. The government has been appropriating public land towards their vision of Istanbul and auctioning land for real estate development. STAR-ARCHITECTS High visibility and internationally known architects have been used to increase the credibility and value of the proposed developments in Istanbul. TAHSIS is an informal title deed that gives residents right to use the land, but no right to own the land. Although this traditionally provided some legitimacy, it can be revoked by municipalities. TAPU is a legal document or title deed that proves you have ownership of the land. TOPLU KONUT IDARESI (TOKI) is the Mass Housing Authority of the central government with direct links to the Prime Minister. TOKI, using the influence of PMs office, bypasses procedures and regulations, requisitioning public land from various agencies for creating typical multi-storey mass housing within and on the outskirts of the city for Gecekondu dwellers in and around Istanbul.
ANNEXES
102
STRATEGIES: STRENGTHS AND POTENTIAL WEAKNESSES

We acknowledge that our proposed strategies are based on assumptions made from limited exposure to the invisible and complex inner workings of the situation in Istanbul. In an attempt to avoid a degree of navet in our proposals and ideas, it is important to analyse how our strategies might fit directly into the context we have been studying. To what extent are our proposals realistic given the scenario we encountered on the ground? What are the political, economic, social, cultural, and strategic strengths that would help the strategy gain traction? And conversely, what are the primary challenges or weaknesses of the strategies that hinder the strategy from becoming reality? Additionally, we made an initial attempt to develop ideas for possible means of overcoming and manoeuvring past the stated weaknesses. Though admittedly only a cursory analysis of potential feasibility, this section serves as a starting point for planning strategic action.
1. NEGOTIATING LANGUAGE STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES HOW TO MINIMISE POTENTIAL WEAKNESSES Presenting national and international examples of successful similar practices
Multi-disciplinary
Overcoming embedded cultural norms (e.g. minimal NGO presence, difficult in collective action) Misinterpretation of platforms intents and biased perception of outside entities which can undermine goals Potential for unequal participation- gets co-opted by one particular group Difficulty in gaining legitimacy in its facilitating role
Intended party-political neutrality to overcome strong political differences that typically fragment Creating an opportunity for people who dont normally interact to come together Possibility for knowledge transfer and capacity building
Aiming at multidisciplinary and collaboration with renown national/international entities
Establishing initial quotas of participation for different interest groups Incremental promotion of initiatives that transmit and exemplify the groups aims Possibility of accessing funding through European Social Fund
Flexible and replicable but not prescriptive
Challenge funding alliance initiatives
Platform for internationalization of Turkish unique circumstances
103
2. NEGOTIATING TYPOLOGIES: CHALLENGING TOKI STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES HOW TO MINIMISE POTENTIAL WEAKNESSES Utilize other successful methods that have been precedented for acquiring land (lawsuits, media campaigns, partnerships with districticipality) Through a strategy of re-blocking and densification, land is freed up for development and in-situ re-settlement
Retaining gecekondu social structure and physical character
Reliance on success of network of resistance to build up enough force to gain negotiating power
Densification addresses growing population
Difficulty in security land tenure/ ownership and fending off development pressures
Maintaining tradition of self sufficiency through self-directed production of built form
Sources of funding for upgrading/design
Capitalising on existing resistance network to build funding sources
3. NEGOTIATING SPACES: SLOWING DOWN GENTRIFICATION STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES HOW TO MINIMISE POTENTIAL WEAKNESSES According to present strategy of creation of Network Language of Resistance
Offers flexibility for more physical and social scenarios
Disconnection between diverse groups could prevent cohesion
Empowers the users of the space which are usually the less powerful group
Fails to change focus from ownership to use of space
Network of tenants to advocate their use of space
Better guarantee that users will continue to stay in their space
Resident groups with a high turnover may not be able/ want to commit to long term development plans
Divide tenants in length of residency and work incrementally
ANNEXES
104
ACTOR MAPS: ALTERNATIVE RELATIONSHIPS
Increasing financial flows: Expropriation of absent landowners property by local authorities provides resources for development by inner city urban poor.
Strengthening cooperation: A new collective organisation acts as a single link between mahalles and supporting actors and an entry point for collective negotiation with local government.
105
INTERVIEWS ARMUTLU
KC
Interviews with Armutlu residents took place on the 16th May 2010 in Armutlu (Sariyer)
Interview 1 A 57 year old man is from Resadiya, a district of Tokat Province in the Black Sea region of Turkey. He moved to Edirnekapi in the Old City part of Istanbul in 1966 and moved to Armutlu in 1988. He works as a mobile dealer and drives a cart selling burek and simit pastries in Bayrampasa (20 km away from his house). He lives with eight family members in a home he owns and built himself. He looks for equality between people and feels that high rise buildings are more like a jail than a home. As the majority of peoples homes were self-built, the services and infrastructure are lacking and deteriorating. He likes his neighbourhood but identifies himself with Tokat and not with Armutlu. Although he doesnt have a specific role in the Neighbourhood Association, he works as a revolutionary resisting transformation plans with his revolutionary friends. He believes the government is demolishing houses step by step causing people to leave. He wants regeneration to happen with the people and not to exclude the people from its agenda. Interview 2 A 43 year old male from Malatya, in middle eastern Turkey, came to Armutlu in 1986. He is the founder and current president of the union and also founded the co-operative for the building of the Association. He previously worked at a mall, but now holds the position
of Muhtar. Although his income partially comes from the government, the majority comes from payments from the people when he produces documents they need. Community consultation is as follows: firstly, different families informally meet to decide the general meetings themes. Secondly, there is a public meeting with about 100 to 1000 people depending on the topic being discussed (they are especially crowded when gecekondu issues are debated). When an announcement is made, planners, architects and lawyers attend the meetings to discuss their concerns and to serve as consultants. Finally, the Muhtar goes to the municipality to discuss the problems but, in his perspective, communitys voices are seldom heard by the municipality and he is not listened to because the community belongs to the Alevi sect, which is politically different from that of the government. Interview 3 A 55 year old male from Grn, Sivas province, which is in the central Anatolia region. He and his wife live alone in a self-built house outside the community without land ownership. As a result of being a member of DHKP, he was fired from his job and remains out of work. His son is currently in jail for the second time for injuring people with a knife. He says that the biggest problems within his community are poor infrastructure and land ownership. After spending the majority of his money during five
ANNEXES
106
KC
years building his house he now has no funds to complete repairs. He cannot afford and is not willing to buy a TOKI apartment in the periphery of Istanbul. He prefers to live in a house with no more than 2 floors with a garden. In his opinion, the government thinks that people in the community are illegal residents and members of illegal political parties. He adds that the police have previously killed people for this reason, causing extreme pressure among the population. In the partys last operation in 2002, five individuals were killed and eight were injured. Interview 4 The woman is from Tokat, but has been living in Armutlu for more than 10 years and another part of Istanbul for 12 years before that. Her husband came here 20 years before that. Every year, they go back to Tokat where they have land, a house, and much more space. She lives in a one-storey house with her son and grandchild. She and her husband built their home one room at a time. Her son is working and he supports the household. She also grows food in the garden and doesnt sell it. She is happy in her community and doesnt have any specific problems with it. While she is not a member of the neighbourhood association, she feels she can approach the Muhtar and Mayor freely. There is only one place for people to gather and meet in this community in the garden of the community centre.
IM
When she came to Istanbul, she was told that everything is golden in Istanbul, that there would be a lot of opportunities. But when they came, there was nothing. She has heard of the development plans for Istanbul, but mostly just through the television. She thinks it would be good for Turkey to join the EU for their economic future. Interview 5 A woman came to Armutlu from a village when she was 18. She became a revolutionary at the age of 21 and feels a sense of equality as a woman. She considers life to be hard in Turkey because she works for 10 to 12 hours, 5 or 6 days a week as a nanny, and takes 30 minutes by bus to get to work, which leaves no time for leisure or holidays. She also has no insurance. She aspires to build a kindergarten, as most of the mothers work and children are growing up on the streets. Problems of the mahalle are solved internally and judged by the revolutionaries. This minimises any quarrels and disputes between people making it a very safe area to live in. Although she does not go to the meetings because she is very busy working, 30% of the meeting attendees are women. In general, she feels that Turkey is a great country but there is no democracy and no womens rights.
107
MG
Armutlu residents, 16th May 2010 in Armutlu (Sariyer)
Interview 6 A 36 year old male gardener is living with five family members in a rented house for which he pays 500 TL per month. He has been living in Armutlu for six years. Although he is against the eviction, he is not a member of the neighbourhood association. If he had any problem, he would go directly to the relevant office and would not involve the neighbourhood organisation. Even though his family does not feel integrated in life there, the area is very convenient because of the low rental prices, job opportunities, proximity and familiarity with its people. He is not interested in being a land owner and has no knowledge of the urban transformation project. He does not feel like he is from Istanbul, so if possible, he and his family will go back and get a clean house with a garden in his hometown. Interview 7 The woman is originally from Tokat in Central Turkey and is the Secretary of the Armutlu Residents Association. She moved to the Pir Sultan Abdal Dernei neighbourhood of Istanbul when she was 15 years old. She now lives in Armutlu, a geekondu in the Sariyer district of Istanbul. She lives in a two storey house with a front yard, occupying the first floor with her two sisters and parents. Her brother, his wife and their child live on the second floor. She sometimes works as a cashier in a bar as well as in a bread store.
The water and electricity system in her area is 20 years old and keeps exploding. She has been paying taxes to the municipality since 2000. There was a time when the water would only come on for three days per week. Fifty people wrote letters to the municipality, to come fix the problem but they didnt come. There was no neighbourhood association or Muhtar of Armutlu then. The neighbourhood association was formed in 1999 and, in her opinion, the Muhtar has definitely been working closely with the people, whereas the main problem is more about the Muhtar reaching the municipality. The community is waiting to see if the municipality will deliver on the promises they made a year ago during the election. People worked hard to help get the Muhtar elected.The most common meeting place for men is the coffee shops. Women tend to meet in small groups of 3 to 5 elements in their homes or in the gardens. She feels safe in the community even though crime is increasing. They used to never have to lock their doors. As were told, Armutlu is near a rich neighbourhood and people drive through it in their fancy cars. Children see this and become envious of the wealth. When the police station arrived, so did the drug dealers. Teenagers started to hang out by the bus station and some started taking drugs and stealing. People come from other neighbourhoods and corrupt the kids. She set up a neighbourhood watch group of volunteers to walk around the community and keep an eye out for trouble. The group also brought in some doctors and counsellors to talk to the youth about drugs. If they hadnt been so organised in the community, there would be more crime.
ANNEXES
108
KC
She feels connected to her hometown of Tokat but she gets bored there after two weeks. She doesnt feel connected to Istanbul though either because they wont even fix the road in the town. She hasnt been back home for two years but she will go this year for a festival. She considers that Istanbul getting nominated as Capital of Culture is a joke, while people are starving in the city. She believes that the European Union wont accept Turkey as a member and that Turkish people dont want to become integrated themselves. Interview 8 The man is from Siwas and came to Istanbul in 1974 to work for an energy company. He lives in a 2-storey building with his family. He is now retired and spends a lot of time at the open space of the community centre but also leaves the town often to visit other parts of the city. He believes the biggest problem with this mahalle is that they dont deal with garbage and sanitation issues properly. Other than that, he doesnt see any problems with his community. He is registered in Istanbul so he feels it is his home, but he goes back to Siwas every two to three months. He loves Istanbul but the food is much cheaper in Siwas than in Istanbul. He believes that if they had a new prime minister, Turkey could become more ordered. Instead, he feels like he goes to bed at night and when
he wakes up, the taxes are higher. He would like his voice to be heard in the redevelopment planning and sees the Muhtar of the area very often. Interview 9 A man came from Siwas to this community on April 18, 1984, to work in the communication service sector. He used to commute between Armutlu and Garatepe by a shuttle provided by the company where he worked. He lives with his two children in his two storey home and solely supports the household. He built his house himself and also hired contractors with his own money. He built the first floor first and added on later gradually. He is part of an association in Istanbul of people who come from Siwas. He doesnt see change in Istanbul and is not expecting any help from other people. He says that he is doing the best with the situation.
109
INTERVIEWS TARLABASI
GT
Interviews with Tarlabasi residents took place on the 16th May 2010 in Tarlaba (Beyolu)
Interview 1 The nice lady from the furniture shop is from Antalya, a city on the Mediterranean coast where she still goes regularly. Her family has a house and land there where she visits. She owns a house in Tarlaba and has been living there for 30 years. If she left Tarlaba, she would like to live close to the shores of the Bosphorus in Bebek or in Sese. Her ideal home would be one with natural gas. Even though they would like Tarlabai to be better, they will not leave. She lives in a household with her two children and husband and has very nice neighbours. In addition, she is involved in an association of people from Antalya where they do everything together and take care of each other. She expressed her dislike of the security situation in the area as it is dangerous and that more often than not she cannot leave her house. Through her stories, it is evident that she feels uncomfortable around recent migrants coming from the east. She adds that the government does not respond to anyones needs, but only its own. Nonetheless, the Muhtar is very good and has been elected 4 times consecutively. The Muhtar is interested in people and helps the poor. She is very happy with the renewal project as it should lead to a cleaner Tarlaba and attract more people which will be good for her business. She concludes that beautification is always good.
Interview 2 A 28 year old woman from Amasya, a province of Turkey situated on the Yeil River in the Black Sea Region, moved to Tarlaba 20 years ago. She is a housewife and rents her household with 3 other members of her family. She describes the area as very dirty and dreams of living in a clean place in a single family house. She meets with her friends mainly in their houses or occasionally in Taksim Square. She dislikes the fact that there are no associations for women from Amasya. Interview 3 A 35 year old man of Kurdish origin migrated to Tarlaba from Mardin, a province in the south east of Turkey, close to the border with Syria. He owns an apartment in a four-storey building with four families and has been living in Tarlaba for 20 years, working as a taxi driver to sustain his family. He likes that Tarlaba is in the centre of Istanbul and everything is accessible. However, it is very difficult to live in it as it is very dirty and lacks security and insurance. People live with up to eight people in one room which results in high density. Although he has very nice neighbours, there is no real place for them to meet except at times at the coffee house. He says that this neighbourhood was once owned by Romans, Armenians and Greeks and now by Kurds. As it happened before, the new development plan will
ANNEXES
110
GT
force people out, replacing them with the rich society of Turkey. If he had the chance, he would move back to Mardin or live anywhere in a three or four room house with a garden with his family. Not in blocks, but with a garden. Interview 4 The man from Mardin has been living and has owned a house in the neighbourhood for 17-18 years. To earn his living, he works various jobs such as working in fields, construction, or driving, depending on what job he is able to get. At the moment he is unemployed. Because there are no communal spaces and no place to meet anyone, he, at times, goes to Taksim square. He perceives Tarlaba as something quite separate and different from Istanbul and stated that he was from Tarlaba and not Istanbul. He is satisfied by his living conditions and being in the centre of the city with access to many services, and doesnt want to leave Tarlaba. He claims that although the services might not be many, they are close to the city centre and the municipalities takes care of them. The only thing he dislikes is the fact that in gatherings they always remember what brought them here: the fires of their burning villages back in Mardin. Interview 5 A 71 year old male born in Tarlaba has since moved to Ornektepe, a suburb of Istanbul. He bought a house
in Tarlaba where his sister and twelve other people live. He has made some renovations to the house, but not many. Although he doesnt live in Tarlabai he spoke very highly of it and said that people coming from all over meet regularly and get along very well. The neighbourhood has changed a lot from having primarily Greek and Armenians populations to mostly Kurdish people living there. The main problems with the neighbourhood are that it is always dirty and there has never been any upgrading, which has left it to deterioration. He has heard talk of redeveloping the area, but people have been saying they would regenerate the area for the past 50 years and nothing has come of it. In his opinion there is no one in authority, not even the Muhtar, that will listen to anyone in Tarlaba. Interview 6 An 18 year old Kurdish female works in her familys shop. She has finished secondary school and is now attending a technical school (KOPD), to which she walks an hour each day, to become a teacher. There are 12 people living in her household of which three are married couples and four people are studying. She was extremely positive about Tarlabai, exclaiming that it is superb and was adamant about how wonderful it is. She is aware of a development plan and believes that the area will be destroyed. Foreigners (Armenians)
111
MN
MN
Interviews with Tarlabasi residents, 16th May 2010 in Tarlaba (Beyolu)
already own all of the land and the residents will have to go back to the places where they are from. No one came to speak to them about the plan. The project is negative and the developers are missing the true value of the area. The pressure of the Prime Minister is too strong to do his job of developing the city. She adds that Adnan Polat, who is a really wealthy man, not only owns a football club but also a construction company that is helping to do the job. She believes that only the holy places will stay and everything else will be destroyed. Interview 7 A male in his 40s born in Mardin (South East Turkey) moved to Tarlabai 26 years ago. He owns his house with 12 people living in it. He said that everyone in the neighbourhood has a very good relationship and people of all nationalities live together, but that there is a problem with violence. He has two jobs, one in Tarlabai making mussels and one in Istanbul. He has heard rumours of redevelopment and that a company, who just want to make profits, has taken control of all of Tarlabai and that the case is now in European hands. He is very aware of the threat of redevelopment on his household, but feels that he cant actually do anything serious about it. He can just try to get justice and bring the developers to court. He is currently speaking to the Residents Association about the plan. He also spoke to the Muhtar, but nothing came of it and the Mayor will not do anything either.
GT
Interview 8 A 65 year old male musician and his daughter have been living in a rented house for 15 years. He likes living in Tarlaba and meeting his friends at the coffee house. He would like to stay as long as possible as it is his source of income, but he might not be able if people are evicted due to the development plan. He adds that the government does not respond to the peoples needs, but only to more affluent communities. Ultimately, projects lead to their benefit. It is also his belief that Turkey should not be in the EU as it is not doing the country any justice. Interview 9 A 28 year old male from Batman, a province that lies on the Batman River in south east Turkey has been living in Tarlaba for 15 years and rents both his household (with his 4 brothers) and a mobile accessories shop. He says that Tarlaba is so densely populated that it is even hard to walk through its very narrow streets. Living in Tarlaba, however, is the only way for him to earn his living and be in the centre of the city. He seldom meets his friends as he works all day, but when they do meet, they meet in a repair shop. He would like to live in a clean house with a toilet and kitchen that are separate from one another and a house without the threat of collapsing. He thought that Tarlaba was not safe when there was no police
ANNEXES
112
LM
around, but now that there are policemen around, the problem prevails. Interview 10 Two men in their 20s were sitting outside shops on a main street. One of them is currently working in a factory in Tarlabai and lives with his family. He was born in South East Turkey and has been living in Tarlabai for 10 years. He now spends almost all of his time in Tarlabai because he is always working. He likes the neighbourhood, especially the people and neighbours, but dislikes the violence. He says that people live in a constant state of fear because they can get stabbed, have things drop on their head, or get in a fight at any moment. Regardless, he expects to stay in the Mahalle forever because he believes that even if he had the money he would not be able to leave as all jobs are there. He is aware that redevelopment is going to happen and is not satisfied with the information he has received as no one of authority has provided it. He expects that he will face extra troubles because of his Kurdish background. Interview 11 Two friends, 51 and 41, are neighbours in Tarlabai. One of them moved to Tarlabai 41 years ago and has lived there with her husband, son, and daughter. Her son came by and said that there is nothing to do in
Tarlabai except to eat, drink, watch TV, drive around and listen to music. In contrast, the two friends are very positive about Tarlabai because they have really good relationships with their neighbours. There are no problems with the old people (most of them are Armenians and Roma) who live here and everyone lives and works together without any problems. She also has relationships throughout Istanbul and has family in Ankara. Both women are homeowners and take a lot of pride in their homes. The second woman has done some renovations, such as putting in new windows, modernising her kitchen, and fixing up some things here and there. The most important places in her home are the kitchen, her living room, and the furniture. The first woman said that she thought that change had to happen in Tarlabai, but that nothing serious will happen. She would like to live in a modern place, but if it happens they will be required to go somewhere else. Everyone will be sent to another neighbourhood because they are too poor to stay. They really dont want to be pushed 35km away. Interview 12 A 36 year old man rents a tailor shop in Tarlabai. His shop is in the area of GAPs first phase of the urban regeneration project. The owner is currently in negotiations with the developers for the sale of the shop, but they have not been able to come to an
113
LM
IH
Interviews with Tarlabasi residents, 16th May 2010 in Tarlaba (Beyolu)
agreement on the price. From what he has heard, the developer is trying to buy peoples houses for a much lower price then they had expected, thus developing the area in a way that is only to make money and profits. The area is to be turned into a business centre with many more commercial spaces instead of residential spaces. Changes are not happening in a common way. Only some small foundations and lawyers will be able to stay and everyone else will have to sell their houses because they are too poor. No one is united enough to resist. Peoples dreams are broken. He says that the developers should solve the problem for the renters, that they are still people and that things are hopeless. As of now they are offered a residence space in a far away place. It is a very bad situation because it is affordable, but it is too far. In a TOKI building they will have to pay rent or a loan and still not feel satisfied. What is the positive or benefit for them? Others will just get out on their own. The place where he lives is not being threatened or fought over by the developers as of now. He doesnt think that all of Tarlabai will be developed and if it is, it will take a very long time. He likes his house of two rooms and a living room. It is not very comfortable or modern, but they are used to it. Most people living around him are from Tarlabai, but people come from all over Istanbul. He was afraid of the authorities and did not want any trouble. He was afraid about what we would do with the information he gave us. He had a wife and two kids and he did not want anyone to eat their rights.
GT
ANNEXES
114
INTERVIEWS QUESTIONNAIRE
Tarlabasi (Beyoglu municipality) and Armutlu (Sariyer municipality)
PERSONAL DATA Name: (get correct spelling) Age: Gender: Education: What is the size of the family living together in this household? Place of birth: (get correct spelling) Where have you lived up until now? Years of residence at current location: Tell us about your typical day. Where do you go? Who do you meet? What do you do? (job/job title, family, hobbies, social activities) Who supports the household? Are you owner or tenant in this space? If owner. Type of deed (tapu or hisse), own house and/or land? HOUSEHOLD SPATIAL QUESTIONS What have you improved, renovated, or added onto your space? What are your plans for future? Why are you making these changes? Tell us about your ideal home. (rooms, features, location, gated, tenure, neighbors) What is your opinion of living in a high rise building? (have you lived in one?) What do you like most about the neighborhood? What do you like the least MAHALLE SCALE QUESTIONS What is your relationship with your neighbors? How often do you speak with them? Where do you meet them? (domestic, public, parks,
coffee shops, community centers) Do you make use of communal spaces in the mahalle? Are they adequate for your communal needs? What is your perception of your mahalle? (identity, security, quality of life) What do you think are the main problems of the mahalle? (services, infrastructure, facilities) How long are you planning to stay in this mahalle? URBAN SCALE QUESTIONS Do you feel connected to Istanbul as a city? (citizen, outsider) Do you feel the city responds to your needs? Explain What are positive and negative aspects of Istanbul? (space, infrastructure, transportation, environment and social inclusion) Where do you travel within the city outside of your mahalle? Specify areas and reasons for travel. (Get a sense for spatial mobility) DEVELOPMENT PLAN QUESTIONS What is your awareness of the development plan in this area? If yes, what do you think about the plan? If no, what do you think should change? What is the one thing you wish you could tell your muhtar? Your mayor? Your prime minister? Interview number Interview location
115
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agamben, G. (1998) Homo sacer. Sovereign power and bare life. California, Stanford University Press. Alexandropoulou, A., Junussova, M., Kurtarir, E. and Nollert, M. (2006) Establishing Alliances among Urban Actors. 16th Young Planning Professionals Report: to integrate or to disintegrate: re-assembling the patchwork of disintegrated functions in Istanbul Central Area. ISOCARP, 32-55. Amin, A. (2007) Re-thinking the urban social. City, 11, 100-114. Baharoglu, D. and J. Leitmann (1998) Coping Strategies for Infrastructure: how Turkeys spontaneous settlements operate in the absence of formal rules. Habitat International, 22 (2), 115-135. Bayraktar, E. (2010) Message from President of TOKI. [Online resource] Available from: http://www.toki.gov. tr/english/eb.asp [Accessed 18.05.2010]. Bayram Uzun, Mehmet ete, H. Mustafa Palancoglu (2010) Legalizing and upgrading illegal settlements in Turkey. Habitat International, 34, 204209. Brenner, N. (2000) The Urban Question as a Scale Question: Reflections on Henri Lefebvre, Urban Theory and the Politics of Scale International Journal of Urban and Regional Research (24) 2: 362-378 Candan, Ayfer Bartu and Biray Kolluolu (2008) Emerging Spaces of Neoliberalism: a gated town and a public housing project in Istanbul. New Perspectives on
Turkey, 39, 5-46. Castells, M. (1983) The city and the grassroots : a cross-cultural theory of urban social movements. Berkeley, University of California Press. Cornwall, A. (2002) Making Spaces, Changing Places: Situating Participation in Development, IDS Working Paper 170, Brighton: IDS Debord, G.E. (1959) The Naked City. Illustration de lhypothse des plaques tournantes en psychogeographique [graphic art]. Diner, I., Enlil, Z., Islam, T. (2008) Regeneration in a New Context: a new act on renewal and its implications on the planning processes in Istanbul. Bridging the Divide: celebrating the city. ACSP AESOP Fourth Joint Congress, July 6 11 2008. Chicago, Illinois. Erdoan, R. T. (2010) Message from Prime Minister. [online resource] Available from: http://www.toki.gov.tr/ english/rte.asp [Accessed 18.05. 2010] Erkip, F. (2000) Global transformations versus local dynamics in Istanbul: planning in a fragmented metropolis. Cities, 17 (5), 371-377. Erman, T. (1997) Squatter (gecekondu) Housing versus Apartment Housing: Turkish rural-to-urban migrant residents perspectives. Habitat International, 28 (1), 91-106. Esen, O., Lanz, S. (2005a) Slum, gecekondu in
ANNEXES
116
stagnation, neo- gecekondu: On the losing side of neoliberal economic policy. Learning from Istanbul. The city of stanbul: Material production and production of the discourse. [online resource] Available from: http:// www.metrozones.info/metrobuecher/istanbul/index. html [Accessed 07.06. 2010] Esen, O., Lanz, S. (2005b) Post-gecekondu and urban structural change: Strategies of economic adjustment. Learning from Istanbul. The city of stanbul: Material production and production of the discourse. [online resource] Available from: http://www.metrozones.info/ metrobuecher/istanbul/index.html [Accessed 07.06. 2010] Esen, O. (2010) Istanbul Bus Tour [10-11 May 2010] Flyvbjerg, B. (1998) Empowering Civil Society: Habermas, Foucault and the Question of Conflict. In: M. Douglass & J. Friedmann (eds), Cities for Citizens. Chichester, John Wiley and Son. 185-211. Gaventa, J. (1980) Power and Powerlessness: Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian Valley, Oxford: Clarendon Press Gaventa, J. (2006) Finding the Spaces for Change: A Power Analysis. IDS Bulletin: Power; Exploring Power for Change, 37 (6), 23-33. Gaventa, J., Cornwall, A. (2006) Challenging the Boundaries of the Possible: Participation, Knowledge and Power. IDS Bulletin: Power; Exploring Power for Change, 37 (6), 122-127. Gndogdu, I., Gough, J. (2008) Class-cleansing in Istanbuls World-city Project. In: K. Shaw and L. Porter (eds.), Whose Urban Renaissance? An international comparison of urban regeneration strategies. New York, Routledge. IMP (2004), Kartal Sub Centre and Kartal-Pendik Waterfront, Urban Regeneration Project. In: Vefkioglu, M. (ed.) Istanbul Metropolitan Planning and Urban Design Centre: urban regeneration and urban design projects [presentation sent by email, 18.10.2010]. Islam, T. (2010) Current Urban Discourse, Urban Transformation and Gentrification in Istanbul. Architectural Design, Special Issue: Turkey at the Threshold, 80 (1), 58-63. Istanbul Bykehir Belediyesi (2007) The Istanbul
Master Plan Summary. Istanbul. Jacobs, S. (2002) Shreds of boring postcards: towards a posturban aesthetics of the generic and everyday, in GUST (eds). Post, Ex, Sub, Dis. Urban Fragmentations and Constructions. Rotterdam: 010 Publisher Karaman, O., (2008) Urban Pulse (Re)making space for globalization in Istanbul. Urban Geography, 29 (6), 518-525 Keyder, C. (2005) Globalization and social exclusion in Istanbul. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29 (1), 124-134. Kocabas, A. (2005) The emergence of Istanbuls fifth urban planning period: A transition to planning for sustainable regeneration? Journal of Urban Technology, 12 (2), 27-48. Kocabas, A. (2006) Urban conservation in Istanbul: evaluation and re- conceptualisation. Habitat International, 30, 107-126. Kormaz, T., nl-Ycesoy, E. (2008) Istanbul: Living in voluntary and involuntary exclusion. Diwan, IABR, Refuge. Kvrck, N. (2010) Tarlabasi: Beyoglu Municipality Urban Renewal Project. [Presentation] GAP naat, 14th May. Kuyucu, T. & Unsal, O., (2010) Urban Transformation as a state-led property transfer: an analysis of two cases of urban renewal in Istanbul. Urban Studies, 47 (7), 1479-1499 Lefebvre, H. (1991) The Production of Space. London, Blackwell. Levy, C. (2007). Defining Collective Strategic Action led by Civil Society Organisations: The case of CLIFF, India. Paper presented at 8th N-AERUS Conference, 6-8 September 2007, DPU-UCL, London, UK. Lukes, S. (1974) Power. A Radical View, London and Basingstoke: Macmillan Press Madanipour, A. (1996) Design of urban space: an inquiry into a socio-spatial process. Chichester, New York, Wiley.
117
Madanipour, A. (1998) Social exclusion and space. In: Madanipour, A., Cars G., Allen, J.(eds.), Social exclusion in European Cities: processes, experiences and responses. London, Routledge. Madanipour, A. (2006) Roles and Challenges of Urban Design. Journal of Urban Design, 11 (2), 173-193. Madanipour, A. (2007) Social exclusion and space. In: LeGates, R., Stout, F. (eds.) The City Reader. London, Routledge. Marcuse, P. (2010) In defense of theory in practice. City, 14 (1), 4-12. Massey, D. (2007) The world city in the world: Chapter 8, Grounding the global in Massey, D. World City. Cambridge: Polity Press McDonough, T. (2002) Situationist space. In: McDonough, T. (ed.) Guy Debord and the situationist international: text and documents, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press. OECD (2008) Policy Brief. OECD Territorial Reviews: Istanbul, Turkey. OECD Observer. gdl, H. G. (2001) Social Cohesion; Is it sufficient? Migrant communities in two disadvantaged neighborhoods in Istanbul. Geojournal, 51, 321-328. Oprisan, A. (2002) Overview on the Roma in Turkey. [online] Available from: http://www.domresearchcenter. com/journal/17/index.html [accessed: 07.06.2010] Petti, A. (2007) Arcipelaghi e enclave. Architettura dellordinamento spaziale contemporaneo. Milan, Bruno Mondadori. Sassen, S. (2005) The Global City: introducing a concept. The brown Journal of World Affairs, 11 (2), 27-43. Saunders, P. (1981) Social Theory and the Urban Question, London: Routledge. Scheinsohn, M., Cabrera, C. (2009) Social movements and the production of housing in Buenos Aires; when policies are effective. Environment and Urbanization, 21, 109.
Secor, A. J., (2007) Between longing and despair: state, space and subjectivity in Turkey. Environment and Planning, 25, 33-52. Tait, R. (2008) Forced gentrification plan spells end for old Roma district in Istanbul. [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/22/roma. turkey [Accessed 07.06.2010]. Tekeli, I. (2010) The story of Istanbuls modernisation. Architectural Design. Special Issue: Turkey: At the Threshold. 80 (1), 32-39. Urban Age, London School of Economics (2009) Istanbul: City of Intersections. [online] Available from: http://www.urban-age.net/conferences/istanbul/ [Accessed: 12.05.10]. Uzun, N. (2003) The impact of urban renewal and gentrification on urban fabric: three cases in Turkey. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 94 (3), 363-375. Uzuncarsili, C. (2008) From Ayazma to Bezirganbahce. In: Kormaz, T., nl-Ycesoy, E. (eds.) Istanbul: Living in voluntary and involuntary exclusion. Diwan, IABR, Refuge. VeneKlasen, L. and Miller, V. (2002) A New Weave of People, Power and Politics: the Action Guide for Advocacy and Citizen Participation, Oklahoma: World Neighbors Zaha Hadid Architects (2004) Kartal competition entry. In: Vefkioglu, M. (ed.) Istanbul Metropolitan Planning and Urban Design Centre: urban regeneration and urban design projects [presentation sent by email, 18.10.2010].
ANNEXES
118
SDNALSI FO YTIC
Istanbul is on the move, pointing towards new horizons and searching for a new forged identity on the world map. This is being guided by a vision that is an off-shoot from a vision of Turkey itself. What Istanbul is experiencing is the intensity of that movement at scale: new identities that somehow discard and reinterpret the old; global aspirations that are expressed in massive redevelopments of international projection; but also historical social anchors like the traditional mahalle culture a beautifully complex and yet simple manifestation of a social order that is, at times rigid and binding, as well as flexible and dynamic. This report looks to analyse that snap-shot of Istanbul in mid 2010 by trying to understand the pressures of development through the lens of transformation. A city with growing divisions in both the social and urban environments, Istanbul faces a scenario where the production of space is tightly held by power structures, in a process that has created opportunities but also important tensions, putting at the forefront the gaps and divisions that this unbalanced development creates in its urban geography.
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON DEVELOPMENT PLANNING UNIT BUDD 2009-2010

Istanbul: City of Islands

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Istanbul: City of Islands

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

CITY OF ISLANDS

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON DEVELOPMENT PLANNING UNIT BUDD 2009-2010

William Hunter | Louisiana, USA

Camillo Boano | Asti, Italia

Isis Nuez Ferrera | Tegucigalpa, Honduras

teekkr ederim thank you

DPU_BUDD 2010_FIELD TRIP REPORT