Theme: Land & Built Environment

Bibliography Theme: 3- Land and the built environment

Author: Ozan Karaman, 2008

Title: Urban Pulse-(Re)Making Space For Globalization in Istanbul

ABSTRACT

The author reflects on the ‘urban transformation campaign’ launched by the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) to upgrade Istanbul to “world city” status. The effects of the two main aspects of the campaign - involving ‘prestige’ mega projects and redevelopment of informal housing areas - put the livelihoods of poor residents at stake.

SUMMARY / MAIN IDEAS

IMM (actor) – currently controlled by the Islamic Justice and Development Party (JDP), is a promoter and partner of large scale prestigious projects (hotels, office bldgs, waterfront devel). Their priority is to market Istanbul for foreign investment. They have been criticized for violating planning decisions and bldg regulations, without any consideration of their connection to the wider urban context and existing infrastructure.

Slums/informal settlements viewed as eyesores – hence, slum clearance on lucrative devel sites and gentrification enforced in inner city.

Chamber of Architects (actor) (spearhead opposition bloc) challenge the IMM for its speculative approach to urban transformation (UT), that in most cases privatizes land.

Waterfront Developments seen as most valuable assets. They fundamentally lack transparency and direct participation of citizens, community groups and NGOs in decision making.

Urban Transformation Bill, used to regulate large scale urban renewal and regeneration projects still pending. It would authorize the admin (the IMM and local municipalities) to establish UT zones, expropriate private property, execute projects, engage in P-P-Ps and form private firms or real estate partnerships with private firms.

Participation is not mentioned and only refers to owners/dwellers could be entitled to housing in the projects on the condition they agree to pay a scheme that could extend over 20 years.

IMM targeted areas:

1) Gecekondu settlements established before 1985 (where legal status was granted through “gecekondu amnestities” enacted between 1983 and 1987). They date back to the 1950s with first wave of rural migrants. Settlements made up of makeshift single storey dwellings. Over time, dwellings upgraded and expanded by owners w/ no government interference or regulation and w/out adherence to bldg and zoning codes.Today: crowded, multi-story and pose major earthquake risks. The once tight-knit social networks among residents is now gone.

2) Gecekondu established after 1985. Mostly multi-story apartment bldgs, containing a max number of units for sale or rent. Located more peripherally than the first group and therefore have maintained affordable rents. These areas have received the majority of the forced Kurdish migration since the early 1990s. High levels of socio-economic and ethnic heterogeneity. Social cohesion and community solidarity is minimal and a major cause of tension. These types of gecekondus are the primary IMM targets. (see Demolition case study of Ayazma-Tepeustu in 2007)

3) Slums in the historic city centre. Typically areas of extreme poverty. Conditions vary from completely rundown (Sulukule) to neglected Ottoman vernacular architecture (Tarlabasi) but share extremely crowded living conditions.

Contesting redevelopment – primarily from filing law suits against IMM and local munip., devising their own plans, individual or collective resistance. Chamber of Architects and the chamber of Urban Planners assist with legal procedures, NGOs with alternative plans (Sulukule case outlined).

AUTHOR’S CONCLUSION / POSITION

The urban transformation program is non-participatory and top-down, there is no real attempt to address affordable housing needs of the city and the program runs the risk of deepening the already highly segregated urban environment.

RELEVANT QUESTIONS / KEYWORDS

Keywords: global city, urban transformation, gecekondus