Aspects of Urban Regeneration in Turkey The Zeytinburnu Project

Aspects of Urban Regeneration in TurkeyThe Zeytinburnu ProjectMurat Balamir - balamir@arch.metu.edu.trwith Ö.Kıral, M.Burnaz, M.Kayasü and the post-graduate students of CP 501-2 (2004)WHY TURKEY HAS TO SHIFT RESOLUTELY TO POLICIES OF REGENERATION?The Domestic Production (Chart-2):The main promoter of housing production and thesource of variations is the blocks of flats, comprisingmore than 90% of total private investments.The other components of total production show nosignificant increases or variations in time.The International Comparison (Chart-1):Chart-1 is an understatement of facts because internationalstatistics contain reinvestments in existing stock besides‘new starts’. The ratio of reinvestments is particularly highin stock-saturated countries. Actual new starts are thereforelower than observed.Figures for Turkey on the other hand, stand only for authorisedinvestments. No figures are available for unauthorisedproduction. Estimates for the period under consideration arenot lower than 30-50% of total production. The red curve istherefore significantly higher than observed.This high comparative performance prevailed, despitedeficiencies in capital availabilities and low GDP levels inTurkey. It was the special property ownership arrangementsin production processes that released such capability.The Surplus (Chart-3):Contrary to claims of ‘housing deficits’ in urban areasin Turkey, a clear surplus in production is observed.Compared to growth of households. This is yet anotherunderstatement:Available figures on urban housing production representauthorised dwellings only. This means that actual productionlies somewhere 30-50% above this curve.The household statistics on the other hand refer to totalurban population including households accommodated inthe unauthorised part of the stock.Despite the surplus, 35-40% of urban households are tenants,indicating to the disparities in urban social groups based onproperty ownership.CONCLUSIONS:1. Turkey has produced in global terms a significant volume of stock, within a limited period. Pace of production has barelyallowed full professional services and supervision. As a result, the dominant nature of urban areas are low standard and low-qualityunauthorised environments, representing large pools of risks.2. Even though the ratio of rural population has to drop further in the near future, for an economy compatible to Europe, the rate ofurbanisation is levelling and it is probable that the surplus is to persist.3. Turkey cannot afford to follow the same policies of town expansion for another number of decades. Turkey has to upgrade itsurban environment extensively, introducing better infrastructure, transportation systems, public services, shifts in scale economies,ensuring higher safety, reclaiming superior design standards and aesthetics, re-structuring social justice, and make a historical turnto comprehensive policies of urban regeneration.

IN WHAT WAYS THE NEED FOR URBAN REGENERATION IS CURRENTLY PERCEIVED IN TURKEY?Urban regeneration has recently beena central issue of consideration, andattempts to regulate this process havemultiplied in Turkey. This may be dueto risks involved, or aspirations ofappropriating rents involved, or simplyfor the sake of appearances. Thereis no uniform undestanding of whatregeneration is.The Law of ‘GreatercityMunicipalities’ (5216; 2004):Prerogatives given to these authoritiesinclude the preparation of ‘StrategicPlans’ which are essentially socioeconomicin nature, besides physical(article 7a). ‘environmental plans’(7b), and plans concerning disasters(7u). Powers to ‘vacate and demolishdangerous buildings, and to ‘demolish allother non-conforming structures’ (7z) arevested with these municipalities. Theyare capable of instituting partnershipswith local municipalities and privatefirms, or establishing firms themselves.They can participate in services andcosts of projects carried out with public,private bodies or NGOs (24n), nationalor international. These municipalitiesare also entitled to institute ‘financialorganizations’, and to undertake manyforms of partnerships in comprehensiveregeneration projects (26).The Law of Municipalities (5215;2004):Municipalities are responsible forprotecting natural, historical andcultural assets in their functions of planpreparation. They can exercise powersof compulsory purchase for this purposeand for housing provision; start firms,borrow capital, issue shares and paperassets (68). Municipalities of 50 000 andabove can designate areas (not smallerthan 50 000 m 2 ) for ‘urban regenerationand development projects’ and riskreduction (73). Processes of demolishingor altering existing buildings under thispretext are subject only to 0.25 of regularduties. Voluntary agreements withproperty owners are the preferred methodin regeneration projects. This doesnot however exclude the prerogativesof exercising compulsory purchase.Disagreements have priority to othercases in the courts.The Law Concerning the NorthernEntry to Ankara (5104; 2004)This special Law aims to improve theappearances and ‘life standards’ of adelineated project area. The GreaterMunicipality of Ankara is responsible forthe preparation of a plan (1/5000), subjectto the approval of the Ministry. Allpublic and private property is subject tocompulsory purchase. This is preferablycarried out with mutual agreementsbetween property owners and theMunicipality. An inventory of propertyowners entitled to specific shares inprospective property is to record the size,development type, and the legal status ofcurrent property. This provides optionsfor individuals (tenants included), anddescribes a programme of payments, thevalue of the existing property deducedfrom total debt. The non-conformingproperty owners are subject to the specialprocedures of the Compulsory PurchaseLaw (2942, article 3), empowering themunicipality to distribute payments upto 5 years. The Greater Municipalityof Ankara is entitled to have access tocredits of the Housing Administration.The Draft Development Law:The intended Law empowers themunicipalities in the designation ofseveral types of special planning areasfor the purposes of implementing projectsconcerning protection, regeneration,intensive development, and public and/orprivate investments. Municipalities areobliged to carry out mitigation plansto reduce disaster risks, if ignored, theMinistry could use its prerogatives. Theyare entitled to determine the location andsize of areas for such operations, prepareplans and projects. The municipality orthe majority of the property owners inan area could form partnerships for theredevelopment and/or joint managementof the area. Besides physical operations ofclearance, development, protection, suchprojects are envisaged to cover policiesof finance, management, ownership andmeans of socio-economic development.The tools for such operations aredetermined by the municipalities, whichare entitled to 30% of the property valuesand 25% of building surface increasesgenerated. “Protecting the rights ofthe original owners, the municipalitiesin these areas could carry out leaseagreements, servitudes, comprehensiveproject development, tendering forconstruction, supervision, arrangingshares according to the Flat OwnershipLaw, management organizations, etc....and demolish existing buildings avoidingpublic purchase” Such property will beexempt from sales and purchase taxes for5 years, and VAT will be applicable at therate of 1%.The Draft Law of Urban Regenerationand Development:Still another draft law is currently underreview in the Parliamentary Committee.This has almost identical wording withthe Law of Municipalities, reducing onlythe regeneration area to 10 000 m 2 , andallowing a phased implementation. Thedraft law provides absolute powers to themunicipalities not only in the preparationof plans and projects, but also in theappropriation of all property, and thearrangement of rights of developmentand use, even in the cases of absenteeownership.Action Preferred by the MetropolitanMunicipality of Istanbul (MMI):Disturbed by the earthquake lossassessments, the MMI intends to carry outsurveys of the existing stock, identifyingbuildings destined to collapse. Theresidents of such buildings will be eligiblefor the option of owning a new ‘safe andhigh quality’ dwelling elsewhere in thenew development areas of metropolitanIstanbul. These households will then beliable to pay back a long-term (20-30years) credit debt. Concurrently, MMIis to undertake a building programmewith resources provided by the HousingAdministration of Turkey. Distributedto various subdistricts in groups, it isclaimed that pilot implementationstotaling twenty thousand dwelling unitswill be completed in two years. Thisis said to correspond to an investmentprogramme of 2 billion US Dollars.Pointing to the fact that 70% of theIstanbul stock of one million buildingsis unauthorised, the Mayor demandedfree access to Treasury lands in order toaccomplish the total ‘survival project’.Although there are multiple attempts toregulate urban regeneration processesin Turkey, there is little real worldexperience or finely detailed projectsbased on authentic circumstances.One exception has been the case ofZeytinburnu, a most vulnerable districtin Istanbul in the face of the impendingearthquake.

COMPREHENSIVE REGENERATION IN THE VULNERABLE DISTRICT OF ZEYTINBURNU, ISTANBULThe District-Level Prospects as a Basisfor RegenerationLocated at the centre of Istanbul andclose to the fault-line, Zeytinburnuhas a number of major potential sitesand development prospects at themetropolitan scale. These will havedirect impact on the regeneration of thedistrict, and plans will have to base theirstrategies on their shaping. Large tracksof land available at two distinct pointsin the area constitute a rare opportunityat the metropolitan level. The fate ofthese areas is not unpredictable as manydecisions are already made. However thesheer size of these investments demandscareful planning and procurement,involvement of investors from abroad,and competitive mechanisms in theirdesign and development. It is essential toclarify the macro-level scenarios, prior tothe monitoring of regeneration operationsat the level of local communities.Nodes and the Spine:1. The METROGAR complex is verylikely to take place on vacant land Southof the railway, as the terminal point ofthe Trans-European Rapid train (TER),and the surfacing point of the Marmarail.This prospect is to transform the areainto a most prominent node of Istanbulwhere all metropolitan, regional andinternational links of rail, sea, landtransportation modes and routes willconverge. This immense potential isto prove very high rates of return, anddeserves special projects exploitinginternational investment capacitiesin transport and tourism facilities,commercial, offices, etc., where up to10 million m 2 of building floor area canbe estimated to agglomerate. Specialorganizational skills are necessary tomonitor this attractive investment area, inthe form of Consortiums or REITs led bythe Metropolitan Municipality. Planningand design of the area could largely becarried out by national and internationalcompetitions.2. The Northern Development Area(METROMOD) consists of twoneighbouring large sites availablefor intensive development on the E5motorway, and represents a uniqueopportunity. The area can be developed asa multi-purpose complex, an outlet centerfor leather and textiles industries backedby a techno-park, R&D and informationcenter, design and fashion center,integrated with training, workshops,and congress centre, exhibition, fair,show-rooms, hotels, office complexesof corporate firms etc. to up-gear theindustrial sectors of Zeytinburnu. Majorshopping and outlet centers next tothe motorway could complement thiscomplex leading to an agglomerationof almost 8 million m 2 . This justifiesan investment strategy to mobilisemost of the Zeytinburnu industrial andcommercial capital, incorporating boththe Commercial and Industrial Chambersof Istanbul.3. Zeytinburnu URBAN SPINE is likelyto develop between these two attractionnodes (1200m.) even if not envisaged byany plan. Intensive demand on this axiswill favor mixed uses at high densities.Development Partnerships can operatein this area, providing shares to existingproperty owners, the municipality,community partnerships, and otherright holders. A central pedestrian axis,a promenade, plazas, open and greenpublic spaces could mark the mainSpine, accessible by public transportstations, and underground carparks.Such public investments will justifyincreased densities and partnership ofthe Municipality. The Develoment Plancould be revised here to indicate thenew rights of development in the caseof unified building plots, encouragingproperty owners to form Partnerships,entitling them to higher densities ifthey do incorporate transferred rights ofdevelopment.Fault lines under seaZEYTİNBURNUSpecial Policy Areas in ZeytinburnuOther than the Nodes and the Spine,Zeytinburnu district has a number ofspecial areas that require distinct spatialpolicies. These are the Water-Front, theWall-Front Tourism Band, the High RiskÇırpıcı Valley-Front, the E-5 ChannelBands, and the Industrial Zone, eachdemanding special incentives.Local Community Partnerships(Super-Blocks):Regeneration processes in the residentialstock will be under the physical andeconomic pressures of macro leveltendencies and policy changes in thearea. The property owners in this contextwill be encouraged for local cooperationand partnerships in self-financingredevelopment schemes. The overallmonitoring will take place by revisions inthe Development Plan, the Municipalityidentifying the Super-Blocks (of about1000 households) for the purpose. Thepartnership in the Super-Block is notnecessarily different from the familiarflat-ownership management practicesin individual buildings. The details ofthe local regeneration model based onpartnerships are described below.Hierarchy of Interrelated Rent-Generatingand Transferring Mechanisms:One of the major objectives ofregeneration operation in the district isto involve all real and legal persons inthe formation and management of assetsin the area. Community Partnerships willbe eligible for shares (however small)in the rent generating Urban Spineand Consortiums, alongside with theMunicipality, land owners and investors.

ZEYTINBURNU SUB - PROVINCE ISTANBULPrepared for the UK-Turkey Urban Regeneration Symposium, 22 March 2005 Ankara500 printed at Ünal Ofset.

COMPREHENSIVE REGENERATION IN ZEYTINBURNU BY MEANS OF COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPSThe purpose of this project is to demonstratethat comprehensive regeneration could proveviable in physical, economic and socialterms, even under most adverse conditions.Zeytinburnu has comparative advantagesin comprehensive regeneration withinthe metropolitan context. Unique localopportunities exist to capitalize and generatean impetus for total physical change androbust development.The Need for ComprehensiveRegeneration in the Residential Areas ofZeytinburnuThe dominant form of development inZeytinburnu is unauthorized blocks of flatson informally subdivided land. Althoughall technical and engineering services wereavoided at their inception, a minor part ofthis stock experienced legal registration after1984. This does not however make them anysafer. The urban texture characteristics arenarrow and irregular roads, complete coveragein plots, small frontage, 4-5 storey high blockswith high proportion of circulation spaces inthe buildings. This represents not only awaste of space, but also a large pool of risks.When EQ strikes, risks are consistently veryhigh irrespective of whether one is withinthe buildings or out in the street. This is thefundamental reason for a comprehensiveregeneration, rather than a retrofitting policyconfined to singular buildings. Retrofitting ofthe unauthorized stock is legally and sociallynot viable. Another reason for comprehensiveregeneration is the intense need for social andeconomic promotion of households, and theenhancement of community life, collectiveactivities and spaces. It is essential to improvelife standards, introduce variety in economicsectors and employment, and induce socialintegration in Zeytinburnu, besides physicalredevelopment. A comprehensive regenerationapproach will not only discard the idea ofpiecemeal retrofitting operations but alsoinvalidate partial attempts as widening of‘evacuation boulevards’.The Scope of Regeneration1. Integration of the recommendations ofthe EQ Mitigation Plan for Istanbul (EMPI)and the measures envisaged in the subprovincegovernorate Emergency Plan in thepreparation of an overall Master Plan;2. Assessment of likely investmentsand developments in the near future inZeytinburnu, and exploiting such tendenciesto speed up regeneration processes;3. Methods and tools to attract propertyowners and other stake-holders in Partnershipsfor cooperating in local and macro-levelphysical and social improvements in the area;4. Engagement of interest, participation andcontributions of local communities in theprocess, through regular information systems;employment of residents in regenerationactivities, and in special social projects toupgrade employment, incomes, and livingstandards, devised particularly for the lowincome groups in Zeytinburnu.5. Preparation of an explicit ‘organisationalprocedures road-map’ to identify stake-holdersand responsibilities in the coordination ofConsortiums, Development Corporations andlocal Community Partnerships.Targets and Principles1. Residents as owner occupiers and tenantswill not be forced out from their habitats,unless hazard characteristics dictate otherwise;Gentrification will be avoided;241 Buildings990 DwellingsPLOTCOVERAGEBUILDINGDENSITY4500 PersonsExisting Densities2. No free external resources, subsidies orgrants will be assumed available; Rather,as self-financing schemes, it is the propertyowners’ own economic capacities andlong-term credit and debt programmescoordinated under Community Partnerships,that comprehensive regeneration will find itsresources;3. This is a ‘campaign management’ projectto create a climate of total mobilization,involving each and every individual andgroup of the community in mitigation efforts;4. Through the Community Partnerships,property owners will become share-holders inthe Development Corporations, Consortiums,Urban Spine enterprises, and other incomegenerating bodies in Zeytinburnu;5. The redevelopment will lead to highersafety and quality in urban environments;to social organisations that allow collectivemanagement of larger urban areas, anda new representation system in the cityadministration;6. The model devised here with its physical,organizational, financial and legal apparatuswill be replicable in other areas in Istanbuland Turkey.

Spatial and Physical AspectsEconomics and FinanceBuilding Development PreferencesA Regeneration Model Based on LocalPartnershipsAn outlying feature of the model describedhere is the role of Municipality in activatingand enabling local communities to startpartnerships for the redevelopment andmanagement of Super-blocks (of about 1000dwellings). Programs will be conductedto attract and inform households about theobligations, advantages and procedures ofparticipation. Such campaigns will employas many residents from the area as possible.Special programs will be organised fora small group of authentically poor andhandicapped households. The nature of thisparticipation is not any different from thewidely practiced ‘flat-ownership’ procedures.Households will undertake individual creditdebt programs organised by the Partnershipand the Municipality, in return for rights toredeveloped property and a bundle of otherrights.Redevelopment and Physical DesignOptionsMany alternative site plans and urbandesigns could be devised when a scope forcomprehensive renewal arises as propertyis unified through Community Partnerships.The investigation here considered a densely(3.5) packed area (plot coverage 0.80), andquestioned if methods are available forredevelopment, and if densities could befurther increased to fulfil specific objectives:as protecting the tenants and avoidinggentrification in the area, minimizingrunning costs, accommodating all carsunderground, or compensating some ratio ofthe debt programmes. Even in such packedareas it is observed that 15-20% increase inbuilding densities are feasible due to spaceeconomies of unification without concessionsfrom urban space standards. A second setof considerations dealt with the shapingof buildings. Tunnel-frame construction,symmetrical designs, lowering centre ofgravity, pyramidal sections in monolithicbodies with high rates of concrete curtainwalls in either axes avoiding lifts werepreferred for higher safety and relativelylower construction costs. Such preferencesalso promise alternative aesthetics, designsolutions and some capacity to change urbanidentity in the city. This unification promisesa rewarding area of professional practice forarchitects and urban designers.Economics and Finances of RegenerationTwo voluntary constraints are imposed here.The operation is a self-financing project, andno incidental external resources are deemedessential for regeneration. If such resources areavailable, these would only act as a bonus tomake regeneration more attractive. Secondly,the deal will offer no building area in returnfor the services of a developer, but a normalrate of profit, contrary to the conventions inTurkey. This is to avoid gentrification. Onthe other hand, two financial and proceduralburdens often confronted in regenerationprojects are avoided here. No ‘compulsorypurchase’ is necessary since this is a voluntaryproperty development partnership, andan extensively-practiced easement in theconstruction of single blocks of flats willsuffice. Secondly, the task of ‘current valuesassessments’ is avoided. The operation herewill only have to take into account the existingdeed shares and recalculate them in terms ofnew totals. This will be the basis for newrights subject to minor corrections accordingto the ‘as built’.The total costs of development is to includethe developers’ average profit rates anddisturbance costs of the residents. These will bemet by the individual credit debt programmes.It is most likely therefore that costs oftemporary accommodation will be minimized,individuals exploiting their own means to theend. The mass removal of residents and oftheir household items could well be organisedby the Municipality to reduce such costs to aminimum by competitive tender. Yet it is theorganizational capacities and the renderingof superior professional conduct that themodel demands. Under the circumstances, anindividual debt programme of 20 years for a100m 2 dwelling unit will imply a payment of420 YTL/month. Varying sizes in dwellingsallows a range of monthly payments (300-550YTL). These could be described as rentalpayments for housing. About one third ofthis amount is usually paid by the owner-Mixed-use Layout(Housing, workshops, commercial,services)

Social Preferences Structuringoccupiers in terms of running costs, which arenullified in the renewed property. If anotherone third of such costs were compensated bypublic resources, the total resources requiredfor activating the whole residential stock inIstanbul would be about twice the amountTurkey has very recently volunteered to raisefor the Tsunami victims. This would havereduced the individual payments to the orderof 150-200 YTL/month.In macro-economic terms, the greatestpart of the capital engaged in regenerationaccording to this model would have a verylow opportunity cost. Yet on the other hand,the triggering of the construction industry,and therefore the contribution to the overalleconomy and labour markets are immense.Social PoliciesRegeneration in Zeytinburnu is not confinedto operations of physical redevelopment,but a social process representing atransformation into authorised and registeredconduct. Changes are to occur not only inproperty ownership but also in business,employment, and in many aspects of life.Moving into a registered economy requirescareful monitoring. Smooth change willnecessitate economic sweeteners, businessand property tax exemptions, concessionsfor intermediary periods, etc. This is a newsocialisation process, and a move to higherlevel organisational structures. Social projectsof various types have to complement theComprehensive Regeneration process:Compensations for tenants oustedfrom Zeytinburnu, reimbursements ofrentals covered for three years, sharedbetween the Partnership involved and theMunicipalityA system of training and accreditation ofdevelopers, builders, building componentsand materials providers and workers ofdifferent categories, with priority to localresident labourTraining courses in EQ mitigationmeasures and emergency skillsTraining courses in the tourism servicessector for Zeytinburnu residentsProjects to promote employmentvariability and job enhancementTraining of Municipal personnel forthe new management tasks involved inregeneration projects; New databaseformation and managementSchedule of annual concessions fromproperty taxes and other municipalburdens for business enterprisesemploying local labourTax exemptions and other subsidies tolocal Partnerships that start constructionalactivities in 3 yearsIssuing Municipal bonds for the taxincomes of 2010-15, etc. with accesspriorities to local PartnershipsMicro-financing of households intendingto operate workshops and small businessSocial agreement that each localcommunity Partnership unit is representedin the Municipal Council, to ensure also atleast 1/3 in each genderWHY WILL RESIDENTS FAVOUR THE PARTNERSHIP MODEL?Aspirations for living in an EQ-safe environment with prestigious urbanstandardsRelief from the unauthorised state and its pending penaltiesValue increases in property held, up to 3-4 times of present valueExtra building area to existing (collective ownership and titles to car-parks,storage, workshops, rental dwellings)All maintenance and running costs covered by collective income toPartnershipsFamiliar democratic and powerful management and representation principles of‘flat-ownership’ applyCommunity income flow from shares in local investments, Urban Spine, andConsortiumsLow-interest long-term credits obtained through Municipal intermediaryactionProject preparation and building procedures carried out at lower costs and inshorter periods, exempted from administrative costsSupervision of constructional work under municipal responsibility at lowercostsExemptions from Bank and Insurance taxes and costsHouse-moving and disturbance costs accounted within the total costsTemporary exemptions from property taxes, and low rates for periods extendingup to ten yearsObligatory EQ Taxation at lower rates when collectively paid by thePartnershipTemporary exemptions from taxes concerning purchases and sales, exchange,and inheritance of propertyRights of current tenants protected by access priorities in collectively-ownedexcess stock, at former rental values for a minimum of 5 yearsOpportunities for participating in numerous social projects, financially supportedby external sources, providing options for new jobs and additional incomeWHY WILL THE RESIDENTS CONSIDER PARTNERSHIP MODEL ANIMPERATIVE?Concerns that the EQ could inflict heavy damages and loss of lifeConcerns that the Illegal State of Ownership could bring heavy penalties inthe near future as these are to be effective soon, introduced by the Penal Law(2004)Likely action of the Municipality to send notice to property owners about theRisks of the buildings and declaring it a Public NuisanceLikely action of the Metropolitan Municipality to exercise its powers to demolishthe buildingPossibility of Compulsory Purchase with extended periods of paymentMeasures and intervention tools recently introduced by the HousingAdministration Law, the Municipalities Law, and several draft lawsUrban design options are available at similar densities (from published international examples)

ImplementationSTEPS OF IMPLEMENTATION ATTHE MACRO LEVEL1. Collaborative Preparation of MasterPlan and Area Programmes by theMunicipality2. Consortium and REIT formationby the Metropolitan Municipality incollaboration with the local Municipality,Chambers of Industry and Commerce,International Enterprises3. Encouragement of local communitiesfor Partnerships formation4. Revisions in the Development Plan5. Preparation of concept projects andmarketing of Consortium areas6. Procurement of credits programmeswith financing groups7. Preparation of application projects andentitlements8. Temporary accommodationarrangements9. Supervision of constructional activities10. Adopting to the new organizationaland administrative contextThe basic urban configuration introduced here is only a means to investigate the viability ofphysical redevelopment, and indicating to the advantages available even of simple ‘slab andperimeter blocks’ against the existing pattern of conventional individual plot developmentin relaxing figure-ground relations. It is a method of verification that higher urban standardsthan existing are possible, even if total building densities are increased by 15% at a mosttightly-packed area. It is the unification of urban land in larger sizes that enables spaceeconomies an provides opportunities for new horizons in urban design. Superior designsand many alternative aesthetics are available to reshape appearances in our cities withinthe organisational, procedural, financial, legal, and social guidelines introduced here. Everyincentive given for the formation of Community Partnerships is therefore an immensecontribution for improved life standards, safety, environmental quality, and for the promotionof local society and democracy.STEPS OF IMPLEMENTATION ATTHE MICRO LEVEL1. Participation of individuals in residentsinformation campaigns2. Participation in Partnership formationprocedures and claim of rights3. Participation in project developmentprocedures4. Application for individual credits5. Moving and temporary accommodationarrangements6. Participation in supervision,completion and reclaiming procedures ofproperty7. Moving in and monthly payments8. Participation in the new managementadministration and representationprocessesACTORS IN REGENERATIONAll actors must find some incentive orreward commensurate to its contributionto the regeneration process:Public: Prime Ministry, Ministries,Housing Administration, Governorate,Metropolitan Municipality, Municipality(Coordination, credit arrangements,legal provisions, REITs, Consortiums,Corporations)Private: Developers, Financing andProject Management Bodies (specializedco-ordination, integration and monitoringservices), National and InternationalInvestorsLocal: Participation of the Municipality inCommunity Partnerships and ManagementBodies Formed by Property Owners(a ‘flat ownership’ regime as practicedwidely in individual buildings)