SHAPING OF FLEXIBILITY IN URBAN RENEWAL LEGAL SOURCES IN TURKEY AND ITS EFFECT ON PRACTICES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2020.131Keywords:
Flexibility, regulatory planning, legal sources, urban renewal practices, TurkeyAbstract
Purpose
Discussions in planning systems of different countries under the influence of structural changes at the macro level are concentrated around flexibility and certainty. Since 2000, Turkey have triggered a shift in the planning system which is defined as regulatory in theory, towards a more flexible system in practice. This flexible system can be also seen in urban renewal practices. The aim of the article is to discuss the flexibility shaped by the legal sources with examples of urban renewal in Turkey.
Design/Methodology/Approach
As methodology, in the study, firstly, international and national literature on flexibility in planning systems was investigated. Afterwards, shaping flexibility in planning systems is focused on three categories; (1) spatial planning, (2) property rights, and (3) discretionary power. Legal sources related to urban renewal areas, and their practices are examined under three categories based on findings of some examples in literature.
Findings
The findings demonstrate that the increase in the degree of flexibility directly affects the spatial planning, property rights, and using of the discretionary power: Firstly, the scope and power of spatial plans are eliminated. Secondly, the property right, which is protected by the constitution, is ignored. Thirdly, since the limits of discretionary power are not clear, the outcomes of practices cannot be controlled either.
Research Limitations/Implications
The study based on findings of some examples in literature. In the study, no specific area study has been conducted.
Social/Practical Implications
As a result of these study, laws and regulations related to urban renewal can be rearranged in terms of property rights, discretion power and spatial planning. Thus, more livable cities can be created with the participation of people in urban renewal practices and the public benefit of planning.
Originality/Value
There are quite limited studies focus on shaping of flexibility, and its effects in urban renewal. The originality of this study is to examine the shaping of flexibility in legal sources related to urban renewal, and reflections into the practices.
Metrics
References
Bektaş, Y. (2014). Bir Kentleşme Stratejisi Olarak Yasanın Kentsel Mekanı Dönüştürmedeki Etkisi: Ankara Örneği (The Impact of Law on Transforming Urban Space as an Urbanization Strategy: The Case of Ankara), Planlama Dergisi (The Planning Journal), 3(24), 157-172 (in Turkish).
BIB Urbanization Forum (2009). Kentleşme Şurası (Cilt 1) (Urbanization Council, Volume 1). Ankara, Ministry of Public Works and Settlement (in Turkish).
Biggar, J. & Siemiatycki, M. (2020) Tracing Discretion in Planning and Land-Use Outcomes: Perspectives from Toronto, Canada, Journal of Planning Education and Research 1–17, DOI: 10.1177/0739456X20904427
Booth, P. (1996) Controlling development Certainty and discretion in Europe, the USA and Hong Kong, Taylor and Francis, London.
Booth, P. (2003) Planning by Consent: The Origins and Nature of British Development Control, London, Routledge.
Buitelaar, E. & Sorel, N. (2010) Between the rule of law and the quest for control: Legal certainty in the Dutch, Land Use Policy (27), 983-989.
Catney, P. & Henneberry, J. (2012) (Not) Exercising Discretion: Environmental Planning and the Politics of Blame-Avoidance, Planning Theory & Practice, Vol. 13, No. 4, 549–568
Ergun, N. (2006). Gentrification Kuramlarının Istanbul’da Uygulanabilirliği (The Applicability of Gentrification Theories to Istanbul). D. Behar, & T. İslam (Eds). Istanbul’da Soylulaștırma Eski Kentin Yeni Sahipleri (Gentrification in Istanbul: The New Owners of the Old City). Istanbul, Istanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları (in Turkish).
Ersoy, M. (2000). İmar Planlarının Kademelenmesi ve Farklı Ölçeklerdeki Planlar Arasındaki İlişki (The Staging of Zoning Plans and Relationships between Plans of Different Scales). M. Ersoy & Ç. Keskinok (Eds), Mekan Planlama ve Yargı Denetimi (Space Planning and Judicial Control) Ankara, Yargı Yayınevi (in Turkish).
Gervan, A., Demir, H. & Yılmaz, A. (2013) Kentsel dönüşüm projelerinde mülkiyet kazanımlarının ekonomik analizinin Ayazma Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi örneğinde incelenmesi (Economic analysis for change of ownership in urban renewal projects based on Ayazma renewal project case), HKMO 14. Türkiye Harita Bilimsel ve Teknik Kurultayı, Ankara (in Turkish).
Gur, S. & Turk, S. S. (2014). 6306 Sayılı Kanunla Yeniden Ortaya Çıkan Bina Ölçeğinde Kentsel Yenileme Pratiği: Bağcılar İlçesi Örneği (The Practice of Urban Renewal on a Building Level Reemerging with Law No. 6306: The Case of the Bağcılar District), 38. Dünya Şehircilik Günü Kolokyumu, Istanbul (in Turkish).
Fox-Rogers,L. & Murphy,E. (2014) Informal strategies of power in the local planning system, Planning Theory, 13 (3), 244-268.
Guzey, Ö. (2016). The last round in restructuring the city: Urban regeneration becomes a state policy of disaster prevention in Turkey. Cities (50), 40-53.
Islam, T., Sakızlıoğlu, B. (2015) The making of and resistance to state-led gentrification in Istanbul, Turkey. L. Lees; H.B. Shin, E. Lopez-Morales (Eds.) Global gentrifications: Uneven development and displacement (245-264) .Bristol, Polity Press.
JICA (2002). Afet Önleme/Azaltma Temel Planı (Basic Disaster Prevention/Mitigation Plan). Istanbul, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (in Turkish).
Jowell, J. (1973). The legal control of administrative discretion. Public Law, 178–219.
Keleş, R. (2012). Kentleşme Politikaları (Urbanization Policies). Ankara, İmge Kitapevi (in Turkish).
Kılınc, N. & Turk, S.S. (2018a) Planlama Sistemlerinde Hibritleşme ve Plan Değişikliğine Yaklaşımları (Approaches to Hybridization and Plan Change in Planning Systems), 18. Ulusal Bölge Bilimi ve Bölge Planlama Kongresi, Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul (in Turkish).
Kılınc, N. & Turk, S.S. (2018b) Hybridisation in Planning Systems and its Effects on Legal Sources: Turkish Case, AESOP 2018, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Kim, J. H. (2011) Linking land use planning and regulation to economic development: A literature review, Journal of Planning Literature, 26 (1),35-47.
Klosterman, R. E. (1996), Arguments for and against planning. Campbell, S. and Fainstein, S. (Eds.), Readings in Planning Theory (150-168), Malden, MA, Blackwell.
Kocabaş, A. (2007). The Emergence of Istanbul’s Fifth Urban Planning Period: A Transition to Planning for Sustainable Urban Regeneration, Journal of Urban Technology, 12(2), 27-48.
Kuyucu, T. & Ünsal, Ö. (2010). 'Urban Transformation' as State-led Property Transfer: An Analysis of Two Cases of Urban Renewal in Istanbul, Urban Studies, 47(7), 1479–1499.
Kuyucu, T. (2018) Türkiye’de Kentsel Dönüşümün Dönüşümü: Hukuki ve Kurumsal Çatışmalar Üzerinden Bir Açıklama Denemesi (The Transformation of Urban Transformation in Turkey: An Institutional Analysis), İdealkent, 24 (9), 364-386 DOI: 10.31198/idealkent.447526 (in Turkish).
Kürşat, Z. (2013). 6306 Sayılı Afet Riski Altındaki Alanların Dönüştürülmesi Hakkında Kanunun Özel Hukuk Alanındaki Etkileri (The Impact of Law No. 6306 Regarding Transformation of Spaces at Risk for Disaster on Private Law). M. Yasin & C. Şahin (Eds.). Kentsel Dönüşüm Hukuku (Urban Transformation Law) (pp. 19-48). Istanbul, Istanbul Üniversitesi S.S. ONAR İdare Hukuku ve İlimleri Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Yayınları (in Turkish).
Kütük İnce, E. (2006). Kentsel Dönüsümde Yeni Politika, Yasa ve Eğilimlerin Degerlendirilmesi “Kuzey Ankara Girişi (Protokol Yolu) Kentsel Dönüsüm Projesi (A Review of New Policies, Laws and Tendencies in Urban Transformation "North Ankara Entrance (Protocol Way) Urban Transformation Project). Ankara, Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü (in Turkish).
Munoz Gielen, D. & Tasan-Kok, T. (2010). Flexibility in Planning and the Consequences for Public-value Capturing in the UK, Spain and the Netherlands, European Planning Studies, 18(7), 1097-1131.
Munoz Gielen, E. (2010) Capturing value increase in urban redevelopment. Leiden, Sidestone Press.
Ocakçı, M., Turk, S.S. & Terzi F. (2017) Kentsel Dönüşüm Uygulamalarında Planlama İlke ve Kriterleri (Planning Principles and Criteria in Urban Transformation Practices). Istanbul, Birsen Yayınevi (in Turkish).
METU-ITU-BU-YTU-IMM (2003). Istanbul için Deprem Master Planı (The Earthquake Master Plan for Istanbul). Istanbul, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (in Turkish).
Ozden, P. P. (2006). Türkiye'de Kentsel Dönüşümün Uygulanabilirliği Üzerine Düşünceler, İ.Ü. Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi (35), 215-233.
Ozden, P. (2013) Üst Ölçekli Planlamadan Projeci Yaklaşıma Planlamanın Değişen Yüzü (The Changing Face of Planning from Top Level Land Use Planning to Project Approach), K. Eyüpgiller, Z. Eres (Eds.) Mimari ve Kentsel Koruma Nur Akın'a Armağan (Architectural and Urban Conservation A Gift to Nur Akın) (pp. 417-436). Istanbul, Yem Yayınevi.
Ozkan, H. A. (2012). Planlama Sistemlerinde Esneklik Kavramı: Türkiye Üzerine Bir Analiz (The Concept of Flexibility in Planning Systems: An Analysis of Turkey). Istanbul, Istanbul Teknik Üniversitesi (in Turkish).
Ozkan, H. & Turk, S.S. (2016). Emergence, formation and outcomes of flexibility in Turkish planning practice, IDPR, 38, 25-54.
Ozsunay, E. (2015). 6306 Sayılı Kanun ve Kentsel Dönüşüm Uygulamalarına İlişkin Düşünceler (Thoughts on Law No. 6306 and Urban Transformation Practices). Istanbul, Vedat Kitapçılık (in Turkish).
Rivolin, U. J. (2008). Conforming and Performing Planning Systems in Europe: An Unbearable Cohabitation, Planning, Practice & Research, 23(2), 167-186.
Steele, W. & Running, K. (2012). Flexibility Versus Certainty: Unsettling the Land-Use Planning Shibboleth in Australia, Planning, Pratice & Research, 27(2), 155-176.
Şen, B. & Türkmen, H. (2014). Başıbüyük- Bir Kentsel Dönüşüm Sınaması. A. Türkün (Eds.) Mülk, Mahal, İnsan - Istanbul'da Kentsel Dönüşüm (Properties, Spaces, Humans - Urban Transformation in Istanbul) (s. 143-188). Istanbul: Istanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları (in Turkish).
Şen, B. & Öktem Ünsal, B. (2014). Derbent- Memeleketin İşçi Mahallesi ya da Küresel Kentin "Hukuksuz" Gecekondu Alanı. A. Türkün (Eds.) Mülk, Mahal, İnsan - Istanbul'da Kentsel Dönüşüm (Properties, Spaces, Humans - Urban Transformation in Istanbul) (s. 189-225). İstanbul, İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları (in Turkish).
Simsek, S. (2015). Türkiye’de Kentsel Dönüşüm Uygulamaları (Urban Transformation Practices in Turkey). Ankara, Seçkin Yayıncılık (in Turkish).
Tarakci, S. & Turk, S.S. (2015). Istanbul’da Deprem Riskinin Azaltilmasi Gerekçesine Dayali Kentsel Yenileme Uygulamalari (Urban Renewal Practices in Istanbul Due to Mitigation of the Risk of Earthquake), 8th National Earthquake Engineering Conference, May 11-14, 2015, Istanbul (in Turkish).
Tarakci, S. & Turk, S.S. (2017). Flexibility in Urban Renewal Practices: The Case of Turkey. AESOP Annul Congress, (pp. 2538-2552), Lizbon.
Tarakci, S. & Turk, S.S. (2018) Impact of planning on land value in urban renewal practice: The case of Istanbul-Fikirtepe, FIG Congress, 2018, Istanbul.
Tasan-Kok, T. (2006). Küresel Bütünleşme Sürecinde Kurumsal ve Mekânsal Değişim: Budapeşte, Istanbul ve Varşova Örnekleri (Institutional and Spatial Change in the Process of Global Integration: The Cases of Budapest, Warsaw and Istanbul. A. Eraydın (Eds.). Değişen Mekan Mekânsal Süreçlere İlişkin Tartışma ve Araştırma Toplu Bakış: 1923-2003 (A Comprehensive Review of Changing Spaces, Discussion on Spatial Processes and Research: 1923-2003) (s. 307-339). Ankara, Dost Kitapevi Yayınları (in Turkish).
Tasan-Kok, T. (2008). Changing Interpretations of ‘Flexibility’ in the Planning Literature: From Opportunism to Creativity?, International Planning Studies, 13(3), 183-195.
Tekeli, İ. (2012). Türkiye Kent Planlamasının Yeniden Kurumsallaşmasını Düzenlerken Düşünülmesi Gerekenler Üzerine (On What to Consider as the Reinstitutionalization of Turkey's Urban Planning is Being Organized), Journal of the Chamber of City Planners (3-4), 53-65 (in Turkish).
Turk, S. S. & Korthals Altes, W. K. (2010) Institutional capacities in the land development for housing on greenfiled sites in Istanbul, Habitat International, 34 (2), 183-195.
Turk, S.S. (2018) Comparison of the impacts of non-negotiable and negotiable developer obligations in Turkey, Habitat International, 75, 122-130.
Türkün A. (2014) Mülk, mahal, insan: İstanbul’da kentsel dönüşüm (pp. 79-139). İstanbul, Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları (in Turkish).
Türkün, A. & Sarıoglu, A. (2014) Tarlabaşı: Tarihî Kent Merkezinde Yoksulluk ve Dışlanan Kesimler Üzerinden Yeni Bir Tarih Yazılıyor. A. Türkün (Eds.). Mülk, mahal, insan: İstanbul’da kentsel dönüşüm (pp. 267-307). İstanbul, Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları (in Turkish).
Ünlü, T. (2006). Kentsel Mekânda Değişimin Yönetilmesi (Managing Change in the Urban Space), METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 23(2), 63-92 (in Turkish).
Unsal, F., Turk, S.S. (2014) Legal and institutional context of urban planning and urban renewal in Turkey: Thinking about Istanbul. Gülden Erkut and M. Reza Shirazi (Eds.) The Case of Beyoğlu, Istanbul Dimensions of Urban Re-development. Berlin, Endformat GmbH.
Üstün, G. (2014). Kentsel Dönüşüm Hukuku (Urban Transformation Law). Istanbul, On İki Levha Yayıncılık (in Turkish).
Uzun, N. (2015). Istanbul'da Seçkinleştirmenin Üç Aşaması: Cihangir, Galata ve Tarlabaşı Üzerinden Bir Değerlendirme (Three Stages of Gentrification in Istanbul: A Review of Cihangir, Galata and Tarlabaşı). B. Duman & İ. Coşkun (Eds.), Neden Nasıl ve Kim İçin Kentsel Dönüşüm (Urban Transformation - Why, How and For Whom) (s. 431-451). Istanbul, Litera Yayıncılık (in Turkish).
Voltanen, E, Falkenbach, H., Viitanen,K. (2017) Development-led planning practices in a plan-led planning system: empirical evidence from Finland, European Planning Studies, 25 (6), 1053–1075.
Yayla, Y. (2010) İdare Hukuku (Administrative law). Istanbul, Beta Yayınları (in Turkish)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
COPYRIGHT POLICY
1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.
2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.
The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.
If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.
The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues.
The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs.
3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles.
4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material.
5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name.
6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.
ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning is an OAJ supported by 