Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Urban design—or lack thereof—as policy: the renewal of Bursa Doğanbey District

  • Policy and Practice
  • Published:
Journal of Housing and the Built Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For architectural identity in Bursa, see Birlik (2011).

  2. Karaman (2014) uses the term in reference to the current urban regeneration projects in Turkey, but this particular form of subjectivity has its roots in the 1980s.

  3. As a result, the number of houses constructed by TOKI between 2003 and 2016 reached 700 000, while this number was merely 43,000 for the period 1984–2003 (TOKI 2011a, b, 2016). The figure given by TOKI includes apartments currently under construction; the number of houses actually delivered to their owners is 588 221 (TOKI 2016).

  4. For a historical account of Bursa’s urban development, see Karakurt Tosun (2007: 106–126).

  5. For the City Branding Project, see Gündoğdu (2014).

  6. For Bursa’s urban identity as perceived by its citizens, see Taşkın and Tuncel (2011). For urban coalitions in Bursa, see Tunç (2011).

  7. For a detailed account see, Uyan (2008: 150–155).

  8. The fact that Bursa Commodity Exchange had a share in the project was only revealed once the organization waived its share later in the process.

  9. Here, it is worth mentioning that there are counter arguments as well. For instance, Raco and Imrie (2000) have argued that “technologies of government” as a set of mechanisms, regulate and monitor actions of all the actors in the local development process toward the expected end by the government. Thus, “active citizen” and policy-making communities turn out to be another tool of government rationality.

  10. TOKI organized an event in 2011 to assess its errors in urban regeneration. See TOKI (2011d).

  11. See, for example, the cases presented in TOKI (2011c).

  12. See, for example, Cooper and Boyko (2010) for effective decision-making processes in various urban design projects. Palermo and Ponzini (2012) further exemplifies how urban development could be supported with appropriate urban design tools and strategies.

References

  • Balaban, O. (2012). The negative effects of construction boom on urban planning and environment in Turkey: Unraveling the role of the public sector. Habitat International, 36, 26–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batuman, B. (2013). City profile: Ankara. Cities, 31, 578–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batuman, B. (2016). Architectural mimicry and politics of mosque building: Negotiating Islam and Nation in Turkey. The Journal of Architecture, 21(3), 321–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birlik, S. (2011). Bursa’nın Mimari Kimliği. In H. Ertürk, N. Dostoğlu, N. Sam (Eds.) Cumhuriyet Döneminde Bursa’da Kentleşme Sempozyumu 22–23 Eylül Bildiriler Kitabı (pp. 215–230).

  • “Bursa’da 7. Kattan Atlamaya Kalkan Genci Polis Kurtardı,” Bursadabugün, 22.03.2016. http://www.bursadabugun.com/haber/bursa-da-7-kattan-atlamaya-kalkan-genci-polis-kurtardi-667843.html. Accessed 27, 2016.

  • Carmona, M., de Magalhaes, C., & Edwards, M. (2002). Stakeholder views on value and urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 7(2), 145–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamber of Architects Bursa Branch. (2011). “Bursa’daki TOKI Konutları”, unpublished report. Retrieved March 06, 2016, http://www.bursamimar.org.tr/ckfinder/userfiles/files/BURSADA%20TOK%C4%B0%20KONUTLARI%20MAKALE.pdf.

  • Chamber of City Planners Bursa Branch. (2009). “Bursa Kent Raporu 2009”, unpublished report available online. Retrieved March 06, 2016, http://www.spo.org.tr/genel/bizden_detay.php?kod=840&tipi=2&sube=3#.VtsZmX2LTDc.

  • Childs, M. C. (2010). A spectrum of urban design roles. Journal of Urban Design, 15(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R., & Boyko, C. (2010). How to design a city in five easy steps: Exploring VivaCity2020’s process and tools for urban design decision making? Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 3(3), 253–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eraydın, A., & Taşan-Kok, T. (2014). State response to contemporary urban movements in Turkey: A critical overview of state entrepreneurialism and authoritarian interventions. Antipode, 46(1), 110–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gospodini, A. (2002). European cities in competition and the new ‘uses’ of urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 7(1), 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunder, M. (2011). Commentary: Is urban design still urban planning? An exploration and response. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 31(2), 184–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gündoğdu, İ. (2014) “Bursa, Turkey’s journey in becoming a European brand city”. The Global Grid June 2. Retrieved March 16, 2016, http://theglobalgrid.org/bursa-turkeys-journey-in-becoming-a-european-brand-city.

  • Gür, M., & Dostoğlu, N. (2010). Bursa’daki Alt ve Orta gelire Yönelik TOKI Konutlarında Memnuniyet Araştırması. Uludağ Üniversitesi Mühendislik-Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(2), 139–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gür, M., & Dostoğlu, N. (2016). Bursa Doğanbey Üzerinden Kentsel Dönüşümde Yaşam Kalitesinin Tartışılması. Megaron, 11(1), 89–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard, P. (1996). Urban design and city regeneration: Social representations of entrepreneurial landscapes. Urban Studies, 33(8), 1441–1461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karakurt Tosun, E. (2007). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Kentlerde Mekansal, Sosyal ve Kültürel Değişim: Bursa Örneği. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Uludağ University, Bursa.

  • Karaman, O. (2014). Resisting urban renewal in Istanbul. Urban Geography, 35(2), 290–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaygalak, S. (2008). Kapitalizmin Taşrası: 16. Yüzyıldan 19. Yüzyıla Bursa’da Toplumsal Süreçler ve Mekânsal Değişim. İstanbul: İletişim.

  • Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2012). Addressing the challenges of urban landscapes: Normative goals of urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 17(4), 467–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madanipour, A. (2006). Roles and challenges of urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 11(2), 173–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madanipour, A. (2016). Ephemeral Urbanism. In Keynote speech given at Designing Urban Design: Towards a Holistic Perspective International Symposium., October 4–6, 2016. Ankara, Turkey: Middle East Technical University.

  • Nalbant, K. (2011). Doğanbey Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi Mimari Projeler ve Uygulama Sonuçları. Unpublished document.

  • Osmangazi Municipality. (2008). Bursa Osmangazi Doğanbey Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi Çalışma Raporu. Bursa: Osmangazi Municipality.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özdemir, D. (2011). The role of the public sector in the provision of housing supply in Turkey, 1950–2009. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35(6), 1099–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palermo, P. C., & Ponzini, D. (2012). At the crossroads between urban planning and urban design: Critical lessons from three italian case studies. Planning Theory and Practice, 13(3), 445–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raco, M., & Imrie, R. (2000). Governmentality and rights and responsibilities in urban policy. Environment and Planning A, 32, 2187–2204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radford, A. (2010). Urban design, ethics and responsive cohesion. Building Research and Information, 38(4), 379–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawlins, J. R. (2013). From wheat fields to mass housing, Ankara’s neoliberal conjuncture. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Simon Fraser University.

  • Roberts, P., & Sykes, H. (2000). Urban regeneration: A handbook. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taşkın, Ç., & Tuncel, C. O. (2011). Sürdürülebilir Kentsel Rekabet için Markalaşma: Bursa Kentinin Markalaşma Stratejilerinde öne Çıkan Faktörleri Belirlemeye Yönelik bir Araştırma. In Cumhuriyet Döneminde Bursa’da Kentleşme Sempozyumu 22–23 Eylül Bildiriler Kitabı (Der. Ertürk, H. Dostoğlu, N. and Sam, N.) (pp. 81–92).

  • Tekeli, İ. (1996). Yaşamda ve Yazında Konut Sorununun Gelişimi. Ankara: TOKI.

    Google Scholar 

  • TOKI. (2011a). Building Turkey of the future: Corporate profile 2010/2011. Ankara: TOKI.

    Google Scholar 

  • TOKI. (2011b). Kentsel Dönüşümde Model Arayışları. Ankara: TOKI.

    Google Scholar 

  • TOKI. (2011c). Gecekondu Dönüşüm Kentsel Yenileme Projeleri. Ankara: TOKI.

    Google Scholar 

  • TOKI. (2011d). 2011 Konut Kurultayi/Housing Convention 2011. Ankara: TOKI.

    Google Scholar 

  • TOKI. (2016). “TOKI Konut Üretim Raporu,” 12.02.2016. Retrieved February 15, 2016, https://www.toki.gov.tr/AppResources/UserFiles/files/FaaliyetOzeti/ozet.pdf.

  • “TOKİ Doğanbey’e Ayak Bastık,” tokidoganbey.com 25.01.2010, http://www.tokidoganbey.com/haber/haber8.html.

  • “TOKİ Doğanbey’de 10. Kattan İntihar,” Bursaport, 09.07.2012. http://www.bursaport.com/haber/guncel/polis-adliye/toki-doganbeyde-10-kattan-intihar-24549.html. Accessed 27, 2016.

  • “TOKİ Başkanı Turan Açıklaması,” Haberler.com, 29.03.2015. http://www.haberler.com/toki-baskani-turan-aciklamasi-7131317-haberi/.

  • Tunç. (2011). Bursa’da Yerel Ekonomik Büyümeye dair Koalisyon İnşaası üzerine Eleştirel bir Değerlendirme. In Cumhuriyet Döneminde Bursa’da Kentleşme Sempozyumu 22–23 Eylül Bildiriler Kitabı (Der. Ertürk, H. Dostoğlu, N. and Sam, N.) (pp. 101–122).

  • Türel, A. (2011). Bursa’da Konut Üretimi. In Cumhuriyet Döneminde Bursa’da Kentleşme Sempozyumu 22–23 Eylül Bildiriler Kitabı (Der. Ertürk, H. Dostoğlu, N. and Sam, N.) (pp. 63–80).

  • Uyan, A. (2008) Kent Merkezlerindeki Konut Alanlarında Çöküntüleşme ve Dönüşüm: Bursa Doğanbey Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi Örneği. Unpublished master’s thesis, Gazi University, Ankara.

  • White, J. T. (2015). Future directions in urban design as public policy: Reassessing best practice principles for design review and development management. Journal of Urban Design, 20(3), 325–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2015). Rise of the anatolian tigers: Turkey urbanization review. Washington, DC: World Bank. Retrieved March 16, 2016, https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/22388.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urban Design and Landscape Architecture, Bilkent University, 06800, Ankara, Turkey

    Bülent Batuman & Feyzan Erkip

Authors
  1. Bülent Batuman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Feyzan Erkip
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bülent Batuman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Batuman, B., Erkip, F. Urban design—or lack thereof—as policy: the renewal of Bursa Doğanbey District. J Hous and the Built Environ 32, 827–842 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-017-9542-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-017-9542-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation