Informal Settlements in Istanbul, Turkey: - SCUPAD

Informal Settlements
in Istanbul, Turkey:
From shacks to high rises
TODAY
TOMORROW
Ayse Yonder, Pratt Institute, NYC
SCUPAD Conference in Salzburg, Austria 2006

A dynamic and integral part of the urbanization process
cannot be understood in isolation from what is
happening in the rest of the city and society

a place to take root in the city,

… jobs, a community of networks,
(Gazi, Zeytinburnu 1982)

shelter -- an investment that would gain value over time
(Gulsuyu 1982,
1990)

• Background: unequal development and rapid rates of
urbanization in Turkey
• Development of Informal Settlements in Istanbul
– 1945-1960
– 1960-1980
– 1980 +
• Current issues + opportunities, future problems

Map of Turkey – regions & Istanbul

Historic Growth

Traditional spatial organization of neighborhoods in the
historic core

Area
57,120 ha
Density 1,928 pe / sq.km
(*)
POPULATION
Turkey Istanbul %
2000 67,803,900 10,018,700 14.8%
1990 56,473,000 7,196,800 12.7%
1980 44,737,000 4,741,900 10.6%
1970 35,605,200 3,019,000 8.5%
1960 27,855,000 1,882,100 6.8%
1950 20,947,200 1,166,500 5.6%
1940 17,821,000 991,200 5.6%
1935 16,158,000 883,600 5.5%
1927 13,650,000 606,900 4.4%

Spatial planning efforts - early years of the Republic
Development of railroad system
Industrial complexes +
Cultural centers
1923-
1935
1890-
1923
1935-
1945

Unequal regional growth
Source: SSI of Turkey 2001
% of manufacturing workers in
Turkey
Per capita Gross Domestic Product
$
% Unemployment (pop. > 12 yrs
old)

Settled areas, industry, highways, and City fresh water reservoirs
E-5
E-5

Informal Settlements

Types of informal settlement processes:
1. Squatter housing = Gecekondu (landed overnight)
Legal definition: unauthorized construction on someone else’s land
2. Informal Subdivision = Hisseli Tapu (shared title deed) OR
Ozel Ifraz (private subdivision)
Shared title deed is legal according to the Civil Law but both the
subdivision and construction are against the Reconstruction Law

1946-1960: Formation of first settlements
Context:
• Multi-party system – 1946
• Economic liberalization policies + high inflation real estate++
• Marshall Aid + mechanization in agriculture migration to cities
• Inner city public works projects dislocation of many residents
• Government unable/reluctant to subsize housing
Attitudes & Policy Response:
• Media image mixed: “cancerous growth,” “poor migrants”
• Some employers support their workers to build gecekondu
• 1949 gecekondu law (1 st ) frequent demolitions
• 1953 Law – consolidation of existing gecekondu
• 1956 Reconstruction law – new rules re. subdivision size/services
Gecekondus increase from 5,000 (1949) to 60,000 (1960)
Informal subdivisions emerge as an alternative

Gradual occupation of
public land + land-indispute
Located on steep slopes,
near highways, and
undesirable land

Located near
places of
employment

Lack of basic infrastructure services

1960-1980: Expansion and Establishment
Context:
• Military coups in 1960 & 1970; weak coalition governments
• 1961 Constitution – expanded democratic freedoms, housing right
• Economic growth + high inflation rates
• Accelerated rates of migration to cities in 1970s
• Five-year Development Plans + gov’t housing investments 50%

Informal settlements in Istanbul

Gecekondu Law provided
infrastructure services to
“Upgrading” areas – but few titles
Squatters have to purchase land
from local power groups; liberated
zones emerge

Informal subdivisions:
mostly on rural land around
the city (village greens,
private farmland, land
allocated to Balkan
immigrants, etc)
Once development takes
place, new municipality
formed (services, ad hoc
master plan, legalization)

Informal subdivison documents:
Shared title deed
+ subdivision map
Public Notary agreement
Construction
of
foundations

Financing of construction:
1) purchase of a larger lot than needed – sell the rest later

2) construction over time
3) tenants finish construction in lieu of paying rent

Pollution

Inadequate infrastructure

Lack of
open
space

Transportation System -
minibuses

Uncoordinated “private” subdivisions + streets

Context:
1980 + : Urban Transformation starts
• Military regime 1980-83; new Constitution
• Military conflict in SE forced migration to cities –w/o resources
• IMF dictated economic stabilization program Soaring rates of
infllation in 1980s; wage levels decline
• Local government reform: revenues increased; planning power
decentralized to local level; infrastructure provision centralized
• Islamic movement captures municipalities 1994; wins national
elections in 2002 (social services for the poor = charity, NGO work;
not government responsibility)
Attitudes & Policy response:
• 1984 new Reconstruction Law; NHA (TOKI) & Mass Housing
Fund created – focus first on middle class housing
• New Gecekondu law + amnesty (1984-86) density increases
• Penalties for all involved in informal subdivisions
• Re-marginalization in media as “speculators” + peripheral
settlements as centers of “crime and violence” and “anarchy”

Densities increase in existing settlements

Formal sector housing production increases (2/3 of
total)
And formal sector and coophousing
enter informal
settlement areas

New settlements pushed out into city’s
water reservoir areas
Access to land & housing controlled by
entrepreneurs w/ underground connections

A wake up call:
1999 Marmara Earthquake Disaster

Opportunities:
Urban Transformation after 1999:
• The need to end ad hoc planning and prevent sprawl,
and to rehabilitate dense areas & to reduce disaster
risks recognized
• 2004 Municipalities Law: increased responsibility and
power to undertake disaster mitigation projects
• Istanbul Disaster Master Plan prepared (1983)
• Istanbul Metropolitan Planning & Urban Design Center
(re)established (2005)

Poor neighborhoods are high risk areas
(Istanbul Disaster Master Plan)
Disaster risk calculations based on geological factors, density, and building quality

Population density (pe/sqKm) in
selected districts of Istanbul (2000)
Istanbul 1,928
Bagcilar 26,501
Bayrampasa 35,144
Gungoren 34,119
Kagithane 24,660
Kartal 11,996
Umraniye 10,763
Zeytinburnu 20,639
Sultanbeyli 7,321
Bahcelievler 29,914
Beyoglu 25,767
Fatih 31039
Kadikoy 16,582
Uskudar 10,763

Issues:
• No clear and shared understanding of what
Urban Transformation means (unique
implementation in Ankara; pilot project in Zeytinburnu;
interagency competition)
• No legislation yet to clarify the process
• No consideration of social, economic,
environmental implications

Gecekondu Housing
Administration’s “vision” of
Urban Transformation
Ankara Municipality’s
Dikmen Valley Project
1998

Concluding questions
• Who will benefit or be excluded from these projects?
• Will there be process for community participation?
• What will be the impact on social life of communities?
• Will it end informal settlement formation?
• What will be the impact on the city as a whole?