Neighborhood from Cul-De-Sac to Gated Community in Turkish Urban Culture: The “Fina”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2018.57Keywords:
Gated community, fina, cul-de-sac, neighborhood, anatolian citiesAbstract
In this study, the closed neighborhood was discussed in gated communities and in cul-de-sacs by focusing on public and private concepts, rights and regulations in Turkish urban culture. The study aims to enlighten old concepts such as “close neighborhood,” “gated community,” and “cul-de-sac” with a new approach in order to understand whether planned and modern gated communities contain the same aspects of traditional Turkish cul-de-sacs – part of the “fina” concept. According to tradition and culture, the concept of fina is a kind of usage of public space as if it were private. In the modern age, gated communities have created new life styles, spaces and boundaries with their advantages and disadvantages all over the world. The gated community may be called an “architecture of fear,” namely fear of the neighbors, fear of theft, fear of the one living outside the gates. On the other hand, cul-de-sacs are derived from friendships and family relations – namely, being friends with relatives, neighbors and nature. Gated communities and cul-de-sacs are both created by making public space – belonging to all citizens – into private/semi-private space belonging to only a special community. A comparative method is used between gated communities and cul-de-sacs in order to understand whether the legalization of using public space in private ways creates benefits to society as a whole or not. The result expected from this study is not only to determine the similarities and differences pertaining to cul-de-sacs and gated communities but also to reveal the positive values generated or existing in these two living areas and provide feedback with the potential of reflecting each other.
Metrics
References
Aktüre, S. 1978. 19. Yüzyıl Sonunda Anadolu Kenti Mekânsal Yapı Çözümlemesi (The Analysis of Structural Anatolian City Space in the last 19th Century, Middle East Technical University Press, Ankara.
Alver, K. (2010). Steril Hayatlar (Steril Lifes). İstanbul: Hece.
Abu-Lughod, J. (1987). “The İslamic City, Historic Myth, İslamic City: Historic Myth”, İslamic Essence Contemporary Relevance, International Journal of Middle East Studies.12,30
Acar, E. (1975). Osmanlı Anadolu Kentinde Mülkiyet-Doku İlişkileri, (Basılmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi, Ankara.
Aru, K.A. (1998),Yıldız Sey (Ed.), Tarihten Günümüze Anadolu’da Konut ve Yerleşme (The Settlement and Resident in Anatolian Region From the History to Today), (p. 329-334), İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı.
Bala, A. H. 2003. Konut Alanlarında Kentsel Arayüzlerin Düzenlenmesine Yönelik Analitik Bir Çerçeve, Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, Konya.
Bala, A. H., & Nafa, H.(2008). “Le Cul-de-sac”. On-site Review 19: Street, spring/summer 2008, Canada, 68-71.
Bala A. H. Yoldaş, G.N, 2008 “Yarı /kamusal- yarı/ özel Bir Mekân; Çıkmaz Sokaklar” YAPI Mimarlık-Kültür-Sanat Dergisi sayı:322 Eylül Şubat 2008, sayfa 88-93, YEM yayınları, İstanbul.
Bala A..H., Çiftçi Ç., Meşhur A.H.F.2009. Reading Social (De/Re)- Constructions In Urban Neighborhoods: From Cul-De-Sacs To Gated Communities In Anatolian Cities,LIVENARCH IV International Congress (Re/De) Construction in Architecture, page 675-687, 9-11 July 2009, Trabzon- Turkey.
Bala, A. H., 2010. The Privasition Of Public Space In Enclosed Neighbourhood Case; “Fina” To Gated Community, NHR 2010, WS NO: W02_Housing and Spatial Studies, 12th New Housing Researchers’ Colloquium, 2-3 July, ITU, Faculty of Architecture, Taskisla, İstanbul-Turkey.
Bala A., H., 2012. “Çıkmaz Sokak”; Mahallenin Üstü Açık Oturma Odası”, Güney Mimarlık, Sayı: 10, Aralık 2012, sayfa 27-33, Mimarlar Odası Adana Şubesi Yayını. 2007, sayfa 122-125, Boyut yayınları, İstanbul.
Balamir, A. (1994). Kent Mekânları Sonatı (The Sonato Of Urban Spaces). In İ. Tekeli (Ed.), Kent Planlama, Politika, Sanat (s. 105-113). Ankara: Middle East Technical University.
Baykara, T. (1985). Konya In Seljuklu Periot. Ankara: Ministry of Culture and Tourism.
Berktay, A. (1996). Modernleşme Sürecinde Osmanlı Kentleri Editör:Raul Dumont ve Francois Georgeon Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, İstanbul.
Blakely, E. J, Snyder, M. G. (1997). Fortress America. Gated Communities in the United States. Washington DC and Cambridge: Brookings Institution and Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Borsdorf, A. (2002). Barrios cerrados en Santiago de Chile, Quito y Lima: tendencias de la segregacio´n socioespacialen capitales andinas. In. L. F. Cabrales Barajas (Ed.), Latinoame´Rica: Paı´Ses Abiertos, Ciudadescerradas (pp. 581-610). Mexico: Universidad de Guadalajara, UNESCO.
Calthorpe, P. (1994). The New American Metropolis: Ecology, Community & American Dream, Princeton Press, New York.
Caldeira, T. P. (2000). City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in Sao Paulo. Berkeley: CA University of California.
Carvalho, M., Varkki George, R. & Anthony, K. (1997). Residential satisfaction in Gate-guarded Neighborhoods in Brazil. Environment and Behavior, 29, 734–768.
Cozens, P., Hillier, D. (2008). The Shape of Things to Come: New Urbanism, the Grid and the Cul-De-Sac. International Planning Studies,13:1, 51-73.
Çelik, Z. (1996). 19.Yüzyılda Osmanlı Başkenti Değişen İstanbul Türk Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları İstanbul.
Çevik, S., Özen, H. 1995. Özel Kamusal Mekan Olgusunun Geleneksel ve Günümüz Yaşama Çevrelerinde İrdelenmesi, Uluslar arası 7. Yapı ve Yaşam Fuarı Kongresi, Bursa.
Denel, S. (1982). Batılaşma Sürecinde İstanbul’da Tasarım ve Dış Mekanda Değişim ve Nedenleri (In The Period Of Westernization Design and Changes in İstanbul and The Reasons of The Changes). Ankara: Middle East Technical University.
Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk E., Alminana R. (2003). The New Civic Art: Elements of Town Planning. New York: Rizzoli International Publications. ISBN 0-8478-2186-2.
Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E. (1992). Towns & Town-Making Principles, Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Cambridge.
Erdem, R., Özcan, K. (2004). XVI.Yüzyıl Anadolu-Osmanlı Kentlerinde Çıkmaz Sokak Olgusunun Kökenleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma, Selçuk Üniversitesi BAP Proje No: 2000/049,s.8-21, Konya.
Fabiyi, O. (2004). Gated Neighbourhoods and Privatisation of Urban Security in Ibadan Metropolis. No. 16 IFRA. Ibadan: Occasional.
Greenstein, R., Sabatini, F. & Smolka (2000). Urban Spatial Segregation: Forces, Consequences, And Policy Responses. Land Lines, 12, 6. 66.
Grunebaum, G. (1961), Medieval Islam: A Study in Cultural Orientation. Second edition. Chicago, London: University of Chicago.
Gustave, G. (1946) The Structure of the Muslim Town, Islam, 19, 141-158.
Güner, D. (2010). İstanbul Kıyı Alanlarında Değişen Kamusallıklarhttp://www.archplus.net/index.php?s=Publikationen&c=237
Hakim, B. (2007). Generative Processes for Revitalising Historic Towns or Heritage Districts Albuquerque. Urban Design International, 12, 87-99.
Hakim, B. (2010) The Islamic City and its Architecture: A Review Essay. Third World Planning Review, 12, 1, 75.
Hassan, R. (1972). Islamond Urbanization in the Medieval Middle East. Ekistis, No 195, 86.
Hillier, B., Hanson, J. (1984). The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Kartz, P. (1994). The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community; Mc Graw-Hill, Inc. New York.
Keleş, R. (1999). Kent Bilim Terimleri Sözlüğü (The Terminology Dictionary of The City Science. Ankara: İmge.
Kubat, A. , Asami, Y., Istek, İ. (2001). Characterization of Street Networks in Turkish-Islamic Urban Form. (Proceedings). 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium, Atlanta.
Kubat A.S., Topçu M (2009). Antakya ve Konya tarihi kent dokularının morfolojik açıdan karşılaştırılması. International Journal of Human Sciences, 6(2), 334-347.
Landman, K. (2002). Gated Communities in South Africa: Building Bridges or Barriers?.Paper presented at the International Conference on Private Urban Governance, Mainz, Germany, June 6 –9.
Landman, K. (2004). “Who owns the roads? Privatising Public space in South African cities through neighbourhood enclosures”. Publications of CISR Building and Construction Technology South Africa.
Lapidus, I. M. (1967). Muslim Cities in The Later Middle Ages. Cambridge: Harvard University.
Low, S. M. (2000). The Edge and the Center: Gated Communities and the Discourse of Urban Fear. Issue American Anthropologist,103, 45-58. Retrieved March 18, 2001 from Wiley Online.
Marcuse, P. (2001). “Enclaves yes, ghettos, no: segregation and the state” Paper presented in the International Seminar on Segregation in the City Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, 25–28 July.
Massey, D.,& Denton, N. (1993). American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge: MA, Harvard University.
Mingione, E. (1996). Urban Poverty and the Underclass A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell.
Morris, A. (1979). History of Urban Form Before the Industrial Revolutions. London: George Godwin Limited.
Morrow-Jones, H., Irwin, E. & Roe, B. (2004). Consumer preference for neotraditional neighbourhood characteristics, Housing Policy Debate, 15(1), pp. 171–202.
Moughtin, C. (1992). Urban Design-Street and Square, Great Britain: Butterworth Architecture.
Mumford, L. (1989). The City In History. New York: Harvest Book.
Newman, O. (1972). Defensible Spaces, People & Design in Violent City. London: Architectural.
Pinto, Rovira A. (2002). Los barrios cerrados de Santiago de Chile: en busca de la seguridad y la privacidadperdidas, in: L. F. Cabrales Barajas (Ed.), Latinoame´rica: paı´ses abiertos, ciudades cerradas (pp. 351–369). Guadalajara. Mexico: Universidad de Guadalajara, UNESCO.
Raymond, A. (1994). Islamic City, Arab City: Orientalist Myths and Recent Views, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 21, No. 1 (1994), pp. 3-18.
Raymond, A. (1995). Osmanlı Döneminde Arap Kentleri (The Arabic Cities In Ottoman Period), translated by Bektay A., Tarih Vakfı Yurt Press, İstanbul.
Roitman, S. (2005). Who Segregates Whom? The Analysis of a Gated Community in Mendoza, Argentina. Housing Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2, 303–321.
Rykwert, J. (1982). Learning From The Street, The Necessity of Artifice, s 102-113 New York Arredamento Mimarlık, s 97-98, 2006/12.
Sauvaget J. (1946). Historiens arabes : pages choisies, traduites et présentées par J. Sauvaget, Paris, 1946, in-8 br., 192 pages. Réimpression 1988.
Saoud, R. (2002).Introduction of the Islamic City. Manchoester: FSTC Limited.
Southworth, M.,& Ben-Joseph, E. (2004). Reconsidering the Cul-de-sac. Access, 24, 28–33.
Sözen, M.,&Tanyeli, U.(1992). Sanat Terimleri Sözlüğü (Art Terminology Dictionary). İstanbul: Remzi.
Stewing, R. (1966). İstanbul’da Çıkmaz Sokaklar (The Cul-de-sac İn İstanbul). T. Yazman and Ş. Yazman (trans), İstanbul: Baha.
Svampa, M. (2001). Los que ganaron. La vida en los countries y barrios privados. Buenos Aires: Biblos.
Topçu, M. (2013). Impact of Gated Housing Estates on Housing Values; Case of Konya, Turkey, Research Pares of Wroclaw University of Economics, Economy and Space, ISSN 1899-3192, 155-166.
Yerasimos, S. (1996). Modernleşme Sürecinde Osmanlı Kentleri, Paul Dumont and Francois Georgeon (Ed), Ali Berktay (Trans), İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt.
Webster, C.J., (2002). Gated Cities of Tomorrow. Town Planning Review, 72: 149-170.
Wilson-Doenges, G. (2000). An exploration of sense of community and fear of crime in gated communities, Environment and Behavior, 32, pp. 597–611.
Wilson, W. J. (1987). The Truly Disadvantaged; The Inner City, The Underclass and Public Policy. Chicago: The University.
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 