Suleymaniye Regeneration Area - Revision history

WikiSysop at 08:46, 12 February 2009

2009-02-12T08:46:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, 12 February 2009
Line 21:		Line 21:
	\| '''Project costs''' \|\| style="background:Lavender"\|''Please enter the costs (if known)''		\| '''Project costs''' \|\| style="background:Lavender"\|''Please enter the costs (if known)''
	\|-		\|-
	\| colspan="3" align="center" style="background:silver"\| [[Image:~~projectimage~~.jpg\|300px]]		\| colspan="3" align="center" style="background:silver"\| [[Image:SocialCenter_Istanbul.jpg\|300px]]
	\|-		\|-
	\| \|\|style="background:Lavender"\|		\| \|\|style="background:Lavender"\|

Ekinoglu: /* In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs? */

2008-12-15T03:11:02Z

In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs?

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:11, 15 December 2008
Line 90:		Line 90:

	==== In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs? ====		==== In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs? ====

			According to President of UNESCO World Heritage Center Europe and North America chair; Catherine Rossler, the unique aim is not protecting the physical site that presents a very rich cultural and historical context, the purpose should also be "integration". "The point is to provide a social and economical integration together with the physical interventions". As in Istanbul, in many developping countries metropols, such issues related to inhabitant rights, are totally connected with being a legal owner of a property or not in a particular urban regeneration district. This is another way to kick the renters out of an upgrading and value gaining territory. It can be easily understood that the alternatives named as "opportunities through urban regeneration" are far from market economy based approaches in the middle of Istanbul Metropolitan Area`s economical facts. By this reason a slow motion eviction threat is always keeping its existence for the renters. The renters in regeneration areas are aware of this fact. And they also know what will make them break away from their neighborhoods, will also change their way of living which is originally structured on strong social capitals and economic networks built in the district through the years. Even if you choose the option of transferring low income inhabitants to the "social houses" which is at 30-40 km far away of the city by long run and cheap mortgage proposals; the weaknesses of this proposal will be as; the new residential area is going to be very "foreigner" and "not a place of survival" for them; and this is an inevitable result of breaking those group of people away from their social networks, cultural practices, and socio-spatial integrations.

	=== Analysis of program/function ===		=== Analysis of program/function ===

Ekinoglu: /* How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)? */

2008-12-15T02:17:32Z

How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:17, 15 December 2008
Line 80:		Line 80:

	==== How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)? ====		==== How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)? ====

			The analysis of the process of "participation" in Suleymaniye case can be defined as consisting of a clear axis of a non-dialective actors of managers and audits. The main process was actually settled on a network of technical bodies and authorities at local and national level who is in charge of monitoring and controlling the interval steps in order to pretend it from the timing failures throught the process. However, a network of authorities and audits is potentially and by definiton have been missing to create resolutions model to mobilize the inhabitants in order to design an opportunist idea of involving the inhabitants to generate not only an economical but also social rehabilitation outcomes. As a source of problem on this paralel is some specific survey questions that posed to the renters by the local administration.
			in order to analyse a specific step of the process, a question for the renter surveyors is below:

			Do you want to own a property in the area?......................Yes/No
			Do you want to continue to live in the area as renter?..........Yes/No

			The concern of "participation" is implied in the survey as the idea of mapping the demand on willing to have a property in the area or willing to live in the area after the regeneration process. No questions were posed to the surveyors in order to map the economical and social destruction of the process to design a set of specific policy interventions for the survivor inhabitants.

	==== In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs? ====		==== In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs? ====

Ekinoglu: /* Who was involved in the participation process? */

2008-12-09T02:32:57Z

Who was involved in the participation process?

@@ Line 67: / Line 67: @@
 === Core Questions Working Group Public Space and Civic Identity ===
 ==== Who was involved in the participation process? ====
 ==== How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)? ====
 ==== In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs? ====

WikiSysop: /* Spatial analysis of area/project/plan */

2008-12-07T11:38:10Z

Spatial analysis of area/project/plan

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:38, 7 December 2008
Line 64:		Line 64:

	Illustration: Map/diagram/sketches photos and background notes		Illustration: Map/diagram/sketches photos and background notes

			=== Core Questions Working Group Public Space and Civic Identity ===
			==== Who was involved in the participation process? ====
			==== How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)? ====
			==== In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs? ====

	=== Analysis of program/function ===		=== Analysis of program/function ===

131.175.12.100: /* Cultural/social/political context */

2008-11-26T01:40:33Z

Cultural/social/political context

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:40, 26 November 2008
Line 52:		Line 52:
	*Brief explanation of culture, political economy, legal framework		*Brief explanation of culture, political economy, legal framework

	~~Illustration:~~		In 20th century, same as the districts surrounding Suleymaniye, the area left her brilliancy and became the habitat of poverty. However she kept inside the functions of education and health until 1950s, and preserved its vernacular architecture even though was damaged throughout the time. Like all other woodwork material based historic Istanbul districts, Suleymaniye had fires and today there is still some streets and houses preserves its historic characteristics in the area.
	~~Bullet points~~, ~~image~~, ~~background notes~~

	=== History ===		=== History ===

131.175.12.100: /* Landscape and/or urban context */

2008-11-26T01:38:20Z

Landscape and/or urban context

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:38, 26 November 2008
Line 45:		Line 45:
	*Biogeography, cultural features, overall character, history and dynamics		*Biogeography, cultural features, overall character, history and dynamics

	~~Illustration:~~		By the beginning of mid 16th century, the district had been called by the name of the Suleymaniye mosque and its complex that was completed in 1557. Suleymaniye had become the second one of the two most important educated/sophisticated people districts in Istanbul. What gave the name of ‘’Suleymaniye’’ to the district is basicly the Suleymaniye Mosque and its Complex that is formed by every level of schools, Madrasas, Darulhadis, Darussifa, Darulkurra, Imaret (Daruzziyafe), Hammam, Kervansaray-Tabhane, Arasta and Bazaar*. Education in schools and Madrasas was the unique urban characteristics of Suleymaniye what made the district to become an area of highly educated inhabitants throughout the time.
	~~Map; sketches; short descriptive analyses~~
			Today in the area, number of buildings with function of being residential units for families decreased and the others are being occupied by the occupiers from the cheap or marginal sectors and students who are studying at Istanbul University. Inhabitants are mostly male and coming to Suleymaniye from different cities of the country by the internal immigration movement for working. There is also a number of dormitories at the district.

	=== Cultural/social/political context===		=== Cultural/social/political context===

131.175.12.100: /* Author's perspective */

2008-11-26T01:22:00Z

Author's perspective

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:22, 26 November 2008
Line 40:		Line 40:
	* What theoretical or professional perspective do you bring to the case study?		* What theoretical or professional perspective do you bring to the case study?

			As a landscape architect and urban designer, I especially improved a co-thinking on relationship of the space in transformation and its user in transition. My primary demonstration in this case study is the idea of urban space has a potential to initiate a socio-cultural and socio-economic development under a well designed actors and policy network. My aim was to looking for efficient solutions on this axis for this case study.

	=== Landscape and/or urban context===		=== Landscape and/or urban context===

131.175.12.100: /* Rationale: Why is this case study interesting? */

2008-11-26T00:02:46Z

Rationale: Why is this case study interesting?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:02, 26 November 2008
Line 31:		Line 31:
	=== Rationale: Why is this case study interesting? ===		=== Rationale: Why is this case study interesting? ===

	The regeneration project of Suleymaniye is an ongoing process at the core district of Eminonu in Historical Peninsula of Istanbul under the authority of Local Administration of Istanbul. The Case study is focusing on emerging weaknesses of regeneration process such as of disregarding the existing user and their potentials reality for the area.		The regeneration project of Suleymaniye area,that exists in the UNESCO world heritage sites list since 1985, is an ongoing process at the core district of Eminonu in Historical Peninsula of Istanbul under the authority of Local Administration of Istanbul. The Case study is focusing on emerging weaknesses of regeneration process such as of disregarding the existing user and their potentials reality for the area.

	In this case study, the aim is to analyze an ongoing regeneration process in Istanbul`s Suleymaniye district in order to improve proposals for a comprehensive regeneration process with a strong social dimension. The case study is aiming to combine the physical intervention with the revision of social dynamics by proposals for increasing the distribution of the benefit of regeneration to the all actors existing in Suleymaniye. Strengthening the Public participation and promoting the employability rate by means of reinforcing the local economic activities through the strategic partnership with private sector investors are some most important components of the case study. The objective is offering methods for healing the results of immigration and exile that occurred at the area through the time and increasing social integration and decreasing the rate of alienation by the regeneration process.		In this case study, the aim is to analyze an ongoing regeneration process in Istanbul`s Suleymaniye district in order to improve proposals for a comprehensive regeneration process with a strong social dimension. The case study is aiming to combine the physical intervention with the revision of social dynamics by proposals for increasing the distribution of the benefit of regeneration to the all actors existing in Suleymaniye. Strengthening the Public participation and promoting the employability rate by means of reinforcing the local economic activities through the strategic partnership with private sector investors are some most important components of the case study. The objective is offering methods for healing the results of immigration and exile that occurred at the area through the time and increasing social integration and decreasing the rate of alienation by the regeneration process.

	In accordance with the intention of Local Administration to return the regeneration process at the historic but ''slum'' area of the city, into a existing-inhabitant friendly process; this case study is acting a key role by a comprehensive analysis of ongoing regeneration methodology and its policies . Thus, the results of the case study are expressions of dos and don`ts in order to re-shape the process to be able to share the opportunities of the process and enabling the social and spatial integration of the area to the Metropolitan city whole of Istanbul in economical,spatial and cultural aspects.		In accordance with the intention of Local Administration to return the regeneration process at the historic but ''slum'' area of the city, into a existing-inhabitant friendly process; this case study is acting a key role by a comprehensive analysis of ongoing regeneration methodology and its policies . Thus, the results of the case study are expressions of dos and don`ts in order to re-shape the process to be able to share the opportunities of the process and enabling the social and spatial integration of the area to the Metropolitan city whole of Istanbul in economical,spatial and cultural aspects.

	A slum upgrade process can be literally a commonly known intervention but the context is interestingly different through this case study. The biggest failure of the existing process can be expressed for Suleymaniye Specific; as the disregarding the potential of existing user in the area and the weak comment of ''re-integration'' of the area to the city whole. As an area that exists in the UNESCO world heritage sites list since 1985, local administration is in charge of taking into consideration the historic settlement regeneration definitions by UNESCO as vital guide.

	=== Author's perspective ===		=== Author's perspective ===

131.175.12.100: /* Rationale: Why is this case study interesting? */

2008-11-25T03:34:21Z

Rationale: Why is this case study interesting?

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:34, 25 November 2008
Line 31:		Line 31:
	=== Rationale: Why is this case study interesting? ===		=== Rationale: Why is this case study interesting? ===

	The regeneration project of Suleymaniye is an ongoing process at the core district of Eminonu in Historical Peninsula of Istanbul under the authority of Local Administration of Istanbul. The Case study is focusing on emerging regeneration ~~problematic~~ of disregarding the existing ~~problematic~~ and reality ~~of inhabitant at~~ the area.		The regeneration project of Suleymaniye is an ongoing process at the core district of Eminonu in Historical Peninsula of Istanbul under the authority of Local Administration of Istanbul. The Case study is focusing on emerging weaknesses of regeneration process such as of disregarding the existing user and their potentials reality for the area.

	In this case study, the aim is to analyze an ongoing regeneration process in Istanbul`s Suleymaniye district in order to improve proposals for a comprehensive regeneration process with a strong social dimension. The case study is aiming to combine the physical intervention with the revision of social dynamics by proposals for increasing the distribution of the benefit of regeneration to the all actors existing in Suleymaniye. Strengthening the Public participation and promoting the employability rate by means of reinforcing the local economic activities through the strategic partnership with private sector investors are some most important components of the case study. The objective is offering methods for healing the results of immigration and exile that occurred at the area through the time and increasing social integration and decreasing the rate of alienation by the regeneration process.		In this case study, the aim is to analyze an ongoing regeneration process in Istanbul`s Suleymaniye district in order to improve proposals for a comprehensive regeneration process with a strong social dimension. The case study is aiming to combine the physical intervention with the revision of social dynamics by proposals for increasing the distribution of the benefit of regeneration to the all actors existing in Suleymaniye. Strengthening the Public participation and promoting the employability rate by means of reinforcing the local economic activities through the strategic partnership with private sector investors are some most important components of the case study. The objective is offering methods for healing the results of immigration and exile that occurred at the area through the time and increasing social integration and decreasing the rate of alienation by the regeneration process.

	In accordance with the intention of Local Administration to return the regeneration process at the historic but ''slum'' area of the city, into a ~~participatory, democratic and positive~~-~~sum game~~ process; this case study is acting a key role by a comprehensive analysis of ~~existing~~ regeneration methodology and ~~interventions~~. Thus, the results of the case study are expressions of dos and don`ts in order to share the opportunities of the process and enabling the social and spatial integration of the area to the Metropolitan ~~City~~ of Istanbul in ~~Economical~~,spatial and cultural aspects.		In accordance with the intention of Local Administration to return the regeneration process at the historic but ''slum'' area of the city, into a existing-inhabitant friendly process; this case study is acting a key role by a comprehensive analysis of ongoing regeneration methodology and its policies . Thus, the results of the case study are expressions of dos and don`ts in order to re-shape the process to be able to share the opportunities of the process and enabling the social and spatial integration of the area to the Metropolitan city whole of Istanbul in economical,spatial and cultural aspects.

	A slum upgrade process can be ~~somehow universally common urban regeneration~~ intervention but the interestingly different through this case study. The biggest failure of the existing process can be in Suleymaniye Specific ~~that can be observed~~ as disregarding the potential of existing user in the area and the weak ~~idea~~ of re-integration of the area to the city whole ~~in contrast with the definition of slum upgrading process~~. As an area that exists in the UNESCO world heritage sites list since 1985, local administration is in charge of taking into consideration the historic settlement regeneration definitions of UNESCO as vital guide~~, although this dimension is still appearing as a ''weakness'' in the ongoing process~~.		A slum upgrade process can be literally a commonly known intervention but the context is interestingly different through this case study. The biggest failure of the existing process can be expressed for Suleymaniye Specific; as the disregarding the potential of existing user in the area and the weak comment of ''re-integration'' of the area to the city whole. As an area that exists in the UNESCO world heritage sites list since 1985, local administration is in charge of taking into consideration the historic settlement regeneration definitions by UNESCO as vital guide.

	=== Author's perspective ===		=== Author's perspective ===