OPEN ACCESS
This paper evaluates the first local government-led neighborhood regeneration project in central Istanbul with reference to its neighborhood impact and its wider implications for the future of regeneration in the city. From a perspective rooted in historical and international comparative planning studies, the research methodology is elaborated through an analysis of the evolution of a generic model of contemporary sustainable urban regeneration that provides the analytical framework for the evaluation. A review of the emergence of regeneration in Istanbul since the early 2000s establishes the context and rationale for the Sulukule case study. The paper then presents an analysis of events which led to the total demolition of the historic Sulukule neighborhood and the destruction of its Roma community. These events flowed from the authoritarian implementation of the Sulukule Renewal Area Plan, despite the efforts of civil society organizations to secure the development and implementation of a community-based alternative plan. The neighborhood level evaluation explains why the redevelopment of Sulukule should be understood as planned gentrification. Evaluation on a wider front is necessary because Sulukule has become the cause celebre in a vigorous debate about the purpose, scope, and outcomes of regeneration, which centers on the question ‘whose Historic Peninsula?’. Many argue that regeneration should be stopped, as it inevitably means planned gentrification. But others, including the authors, draw on international experience to argue for the development of an Istanbul/Turkish version of sustainable, conservation-led, and community-based neighborhood regeneration. More widely still, the Sulukule experience has fuelled growing opposition to regeneration per se, epitomized in the slogan ‘no Sulukule here’. Thus the paper concludes by outlining the action needed to move toward sustainable regeneration, not only for the city’s central historic neighborhoods, but also for the far more numerous poor and deteriorating 20th century neighborhoods where the threat is not from gentrification, but from the next earthquake.
evaluation and earthquake threat, gentrification, Istanbul, renewal area, Sulukule, urban and neighborhood
[1] Carmon, N., Neighbourhood regeneration: the state of the art. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 17, pp. 131–144, 1997. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0739456X9701700204
[2] Gibson, M., Kocabas, A. & Oztas, T., Sustainable Urban Regeneration in Istanbul as part of EU Harmonisation Process and Earthquake Resistant Housing Development – A Strategy and Action Plan, GIMM-MSU-LSBU, 59-Y and KDM 460.101, Istanbul, 2003.
[3] Goksin, A., Surdurulebilir Mahalle Yeniles¸mesinde Toplum Tabanlı Model: Kadıkoy – Fikirtepe icin bir Model Onerisi, unpublished PhD, MSGSU, Istanbul, 2008.
[4] OECD / DAC, Review of the DAC Principles for Evaluation of Development Assistance, 1998.
[5] Gibson, M. & Kocabas, A., Turkish planning at a cross roads: false dawn or vision of new era? edn. A. Mengi, Kent ve Planlama: Gecmisi Korumak Gelecegi Tasarlamak, Rusen Keles’e Armagan Dizisi, II, pp. 165–201, Imge kitabevi: Ankara, 2007.
[6] Wilson, J.Q. (ed.), Urban Renewal: the Record and the Controversy, MIT Press: Cambridge Mass, 1966.
[7] Gibson, M. & Langstaff, M., An Introduction to Urban Renewal, Hutchinson: London, 1982.
[8] Oxley, M. et al. Financing Home Owners’ Repairs: Learning From Europe, York publishing services: York, 1999 in [2].
[9] Williams, P., Gentrifi cation in Islington. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, 3, 1978.
[10] Blair, T.L., Rehabilitation: the social aspects. Offi cial Architecture and Planning, 33(2), pp.126–130, 1970.
[11] Kocabas, A., Urban conservation planning in London and Istanbul: an international comparative study of two controversial decades – 1969-1989, LAP, Blackwell, 2010.
[12] Healey, P.S. et al., Rebuilding the City: Property-led Urban Regeneration, E. and FN Spon: London, 1993.
[13] Hamnett, C., Unequal City: London in the Global Arena, Routledge: Abingdon, 2003.
[14] Fainstein, S., Economics, politics and development policy: the convergence of New York and London. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 14(4), pp. 553–75, 1990. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1990.tb00157.x
[15] Loftman, P. & Nevin, B., Prestige projects and urban regeneration in the 1980s and 1990s: a review of benefi ts and limitations. Planning Practice and Research, 10(3/4), pp. 299–313, 1995.
[16] Parkinson, M., Combating Social Exclusion: Lessons from Area-based Programmes in Europe, Policy Press: Bristol, 1998.
[17] EC, Sustainable Urban Development in the European Union: A Framework for Action, COM/98/605 F, 1998.
[18] Leather, P. & Mackintosh, S., Housing renewal in an era of mass home ownership. Implementing Housing Policy, eds P. Malpass & R. Means, Open University Press, 1993.
[19] Leather, P. & Mackintosh, S., Towards sustainable policies for housing renewal in the private sector. Directions in Housing Policy: Towards sustainable housing policies for the UK, ed. P.Williams, Paul Chapman Publishing, 1997.
[20] Gibson, M., The greening of housing policy. Housing and the Environment: A New Agenda, Housing Policy and Practice Series, eds M. Bhatti, J. Brooke & M. Gibson, Chartered Institute of Housing: Southampton, 1994.
[21] Couch, C. & Denneman, A., Urban regeneration and sustainable development in Britain. Cities, 17(2), pp. 137–147, 2000. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0264-2751(00)00008-1
[22] Roberts, P. et al. (eds), Urban Regeneration Hand Book, Sage: London, 2000.
[23] Holmes, C., Mixed Communities: Success and Sustainability, Joseph Rowntree Foundation: York, 2006.
[24] Simon, P., Gentrifi cation of Old Neighbourhoods and Social Integration in Europe. Cities of Europe, ed. Y. Kazepov, Blackwell: Oxford, 2005.
[25] Mayor of London, The London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London, GLA: London, p. xii, 2004.
[26] Mayor of London, The London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London, Consolidated with Alterations since 2004, GLA: London, 2008.
[27] www.southwark.gov.uk
[28] Kocabas, A., Urban Conservation Planning and Development Outcomes in Conservation Areas in Central Istanbul and in Central London: 1969-1989, published PhD, LSBU: London, 2000.
[29] Kocabas, A., Kentsel Donusum (/Yeniles(Tir)Me): Ingiltere Deneyimi ve Turkiye’deki Beklentiler, Istanbul: Literatur yayinevi, p. 10, 2006.
[30] Bayindirlik ve Iskan Bakanligi (BIB), Kentlesme Surasi: Komisyon Raporlari, cilt I, BIB: Ankara, 2009.
[31] Istanbul Metopolitan Planning Centre (IMP) Kartal Sub-centre, Kartal-Pendik Seafront Urban Transformation Project Competition Brief, 2006.
[32] Kocabas, A. & Gibson, M., Handling earthquake threat. Planning Journal of the RTPI, 26 September, p. 16, UK, 2003.
[33] JICA & GIMM, The Study on a Disaster Prevention / Earthquake Mitigation Basic Plan in Istanbul, GIMM: Istanbul, 2002.
[34] Ozaydin, G. & Kocabas, A., Urban design as a necessary tool for developing projects in keeping with the traditional context: assessment of urban projects in Istanbul. Euro-Mediterranean Regional Conference: Traditional Mediterranean Architecture: Present and Future, Barcelona, July 12-15, 2007.
[35] Görgülü, T. & Kaymaz, S., Türkiye’de barınma biçimlerinde yas¸anan deg˘is¸imler: son dönemde yapılan tüketim odaklı konutlar. Mimarlık, no. 337, 2007.
[36] ODTU, ITU, BU, YTU and IBB, Istanbul Deprem Master Planı, IBB: Istanbul, 2003.
[37] Kocabas, A., Neighbourhood Regeneration: English Practice and Turkish Prospects, LSBU: London, 2005.
[38] ITU, MSGSU, ODTU, YTU, Istanbul’un eylem planlamasına yonelik mekansal gelisme stratejileri arastirma ve model gelistirme calismasi sonuc bildirgesi. www.planlama.org, 01.06.2008.
[39] Gibson et al., Zeytinburnu Outline Strategy and Action Plan Framework: Building a Future in Europe, IBB-Tribal Consulting, 59Y and KDM 460.106, IBB: Istanbul, 2005.
[40] Diren, M., Master planning of Istanbul: legacy, current situation and future prospects. TKHV: Istanbul, 2010.
[41] Turgut, S. & Ceylan, E., Bir Yerel Yonetim Deneyiminin Ardından: Kucukcekmece, Ayazma-Tepeüstü Kentsel Dönüs¸üm Projesi, Alfa: Istanbul, 2010.
[42] Kocabas, A., Urban conservation in Istanbul: evaluation and re-conceptualisation. Habitat International, a Journal of the Study of Human Settlements, Elsevier, p. 120, 2006.
[43] Ercan, M.A., How to shape up conservation-led regeneration initiatives regarding community needs. Middle East Technical University Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 27(1), pp. 201–221, 2010.
[44] IMP, Istanbul Tarihi Yarımada Yonetim Planı Analitik Etüd Ara Raporu, Istanbul, 2010.
[45] Somersan, S. and Kırca-Schroeder, S., Resisting eviction: Sulukule Roma in search of right to
space and place. Anthropology of Eastern Europe Review, 25(2), pp. 96–107, 2008.
[46] Cetingoz, M., Neslisah ve Hatice Sultan Mahalleleri (Sulukule) kentsel yenileme projesinin surdurulebilirlik ve katılım baglamında incelenmesi, unpublished dissertation, MSGSU: Istanbul, 2008.
[47] www.trekearth.com, 17. 03.2008.
[48] Foggo, H., The Sulukule affair: Roma against expropriation. Roma Rights Quarterly, No.4, 2007.
[49] Istanbul – Fatih I˙lcesi 1. Grup 2 no.lu Yenileme Alanları Proje ve Uygulamalarına Ilis¸kin Protokol, 13.07.2006.
[50] www.radikal.com.tr, 18.03.2009.
[51] Sulukule Platform, Report on the Impact of Sulukule Urban Renewal Project, 25.04.2009.
[52] www.habervesaire.com/haber/1875/, 13.06.10.
[53] Accessible Life Association, The Sulukule Roma Neighbourhood Development Project, Application to the EC Delegation to Turkey, Strengthening Civil Society in the pre-accession process: NGO grant facility, 13.10.2006.
[54] UCL – DPU, Placing Sulukule: towards an alternative proposal to conserve the living heritage of Romans, www.ucl.ac.uk, 2008.
[55] www.febayder.com/content/fatih-belediyesi-ne-yapmaya-calisiyor, 25.4.2010.
[56] www.artizinconnu.com/Belgesel.
[57] Yeni Mimar, ‘Kent yonetiminde yeni bir asamaya geciliyor’, 18.05.2007.
[58] www.mimdap.org, ‘Avrupa Birligi Sulukule’de’, 26.06.2007.
[59] Foggo, H., ‘Sulukule’de alternative plan calismasi basladi’, BIA Haber Merkezi, 25.06.2007.
[60] www.arkitera.com, ‘Meclis Sulukule dosyasini kapatti, 18.01.2008.
[61] UNESCO – WHC, Historic areas of Istanbul. Thiry-third Session: Seville, Spain, 22-30.06.2009.
[62] www.gencmimar.com, Kentin tozu. 03.06.2009.
[63] www.cnnturk.com, Sulukule nereye gitti. 13.01.2010.
[64] www.hurriyetdailynews.com, Istanbul land to sell for fi ve times amount Roma given. 22.09.2010.
[65] www.radikal.com.tr, 20.10.2009.
[66] Goksu, F., Tarlabasi, Stratejik Sosyal Plan (2008–2010), unpublished report, 2009.
[67] Bozkulak, S., Sermaye, kentsel dönüs¸üm ve varos¸: fakirin malı, zenginin hazinesi. Birgün, 14.05. 2010.
[68] Kocabas, A., Regeneration of Kartal: challanges, opportunities and prospects for the future. The sustainable City VI: Urban Regeneration and Sustainability, eds C.A. Brebbia, S. Hernandez & E. Tiezzi, WIT press: UK, 2010.
[69] Altun, L., Kentsel Dönüs¸üm. TMB Gündem, 01, pp. 44–77, 2009.
[70] T.C. Bayindirlik ve Iskan Bakanligi, Kentlesme Surasi Komisyon Raporlari, www.bayindirlik.gov.tr,. 2009.