دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی طراحی شهری یا عدم آن به عنوان سیاست: تجدید منطقه Bursa Doğanbey - اشپرینگر 2017

Abstract

The role of urban design in urban policy making has been extensively discussed in recent years due to the insufficiency of existing applications in the complex structure of global urbanization. This paper aims at addressing the role of urban design as a policy instrument in urban politics through a case in one of the metropolitan cities of Turkey, Bursa. The case presented in the article reflects the emergence of a non-space in a city with a rich historic and cultural heritage. Lack of control and accountability, lack of communication between actors in the process and power coalitions are the main reasons of this process that caused the huge misfit between TOKI Doganbey settlement and the overall context. This settlement harmed Bursa’s identity tremendously and caused a lot of turmoil since none of the parties involved is content with the end product. We try to elaborate on the process and the role of various actors in shaping it. Turkey does not have a rich urban design experience although successful projects are seen in high-income housing settlements. We conclude that it is timely to start with a new approach to the discipline to prevent such failures with large impacts on the urban form and life. The need for a holistic approach seems imperative to establish the core of a new urban design discipline involving socio-spatial concerns.

3 Conclusion

In this article, we analyzed the mechanisms and processes of building a non-space with a drastic case asking questions on interested parties, lacking tools and communication gaps between various actors. In Dog˘anbey case, neither public nor private benefits are satisfied as far as the citizens buying and living in the houses are concerned. Particularly in Bursa, TOKI settlement creates a problem for city branding and sustainability issues, indicating that even the neoliberal policies are overridden by the investors, developers and public authorities. ‘‘Responsive cohesion,’’ as applied by Radford (2010) to urban design decisions, seems one good and timely suggestion for future urban design processes. To set ethical foundations and boundaries of urban design practices, it needs to be beneficial for all parties involved. Bursa’s identity is damaged tremendously by the misfit between TOKI Dog˘anbey and the overall context. Seemingly, the dominating factor in urban design practice of Turkey is economic benefit and it constitutes the foundation of related decisions. Yet, the Bursa case illustrates the loss of economic rationale due to lack of communication and accountability, which led to a failure to establish long-term power coalitions.

It is crucial to note the difference between construction in a vacant lot and a dense tissue in the urban core of a historic city such as Bursa. In the first case, architecture may enhance or restrict the life of the inhabitants only, whereas in the latter it is also a stain in the urban context. Thus, a successful urban design is crucial along a successful architecture. We might consider the settlement partly a public space due to its central location, both for its inhabitants and other citizens either passing through or viewing it from a distance. This issue of publicness is very much related to esthetical values and needs to be discussed from an urban design viewpoint. Thus, we think that the effect of the built environment—an edifice or a settlement—in the city is threefold: its collective use as a public good, its fac¸ade and physical features as an esthetic component of the city and its economic impact on the inhabitants and citizens. This understanding necessitates a thorough analysis of the context, in terms of economic and social relations and space characteristics before and after the production process.