The emergence of Istanbul's fifth urban planning period: A transition to planning for sustainable regeneration?

Abstract

I N a groundbreaking study a decade ago, Tekeli developed the concept of "planning cycles" to explain the "semi-planning" nature of state intervention in different periods in the growth of Istanbul. He identified four planning periods since the emergence of modern Turkey, each with a distinctive planning cycle, which incorporated a relatively intense program of publicsector-led development. The last period started in 1984 with the re-establishment of democracy, the liberalization of the economy, and the decentralization of some state powers to metropolitan municipalities. This paper draws on recent and ongoing research into Istanbul's changing planning agenda, new planning priorities, and innovative planning methods to argue that since 1999 conditions have emerged for the development of a fifth planning period of either a continuation of "semi-planning" or, more optimistically, for a transition to a Turkish version of planning for sustainable urban regeneration.The aim of this paper is to develop an initial assessment of the significance of a range of new policy drivers that have emerged since 1999 and are now influencing the development of planning in Istanbul.

Homeowner Involvement, Land Readjustment, and Sustainable Urban Regeneration in Hong Kong

“…As far as urban regeneration is concerned, not only should economic competitiveness and efficiency be considered in the process, but issues of social equality and social inclusion should also be addressed (Kocabas, 2005). That is why urban regeneration in many jurisdictions has moved from the old development-led approach to the new community-based approach in which the quality of life, and not the capital asset base of property markets, is the focus of development (Deakin, 2009).…”

Spatial Transformations in Istanbul CBD

“…The further acceleration of the formation of the new CBD coincides with the liberalization of markets after the 1980s. Following the military coup in 1980, especially after the 1984 elections, the new economic deregulation of neo-liberalization process also accelerated the transition of Istanbul into global markets (Dök-meci & Berköz, 2000;Kocabaş, 2005;Osmay, 1998;Taşan-Kok 2004;Yenen, Dinçer, Şengezer, Yakar, & Dikçinar, 1996).…”

Investigation of Urban Texture and Energy Consumption Relationship in the Context of Urban Transformation: Kadiköy Case Study

“…İMSAD (Türkiye İnşaat Malzemesi Sanayicileri Derneği) tarafından yapılan bir çalışmada; kentsel dönüşümün amaçları mutluluk üreten ekolojik mimari yapılar, enerji verimliliği sağlayan ve karbon salınımını minimuma indiren tasarımlar, yerel ve bölgesel olarak sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel sürdürülebilirliği sağlayan bütünleşik projeler olarak ele alınmasının gerekliliği olarak ifade edilmiştir (Aydöner, 2013). İstanbul özelinde ise, Kocabaş mevcut kentsel dönüşümü; İstanbul için beşinci kentsel yenileme süreci olarak tanımlamış ve bunun sürdürülebilir kentsel yenileme için bir geçiş dönemi olacağının beklendiğini ifade etmiştir (Kocabas, 2005). 2011 yılına kadar geçen süreci düşük karbon salınımlı kentsel yenileme kapsamında değerlendiren Kocabaş, pozitif adımların olduğunu ve bunların devam etmesi gerekliliğinin altını çizmiştir (Kocabas, 2013).…”