A Gypsy Neighborhood On the Brink Of Transformation: Urban Regeneration in Kuştepe

Turkish Studies International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic

Volume 10/14 Fall 2015, p. 1-16

DOI Number: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.9015

ISSN: 1308-2140, ANKARA-TURKEY

A GYPSY NEIGHBOURHOOD ON THE BRINK OF

TRANSFORMATION: URBAN REGENERATION IN KUŞTEPE

Uğurcan AYİK**

ABSTRACT

The concept of urban regeneration refers to transformation of the areas which cannot respond to some physical, social and economic needs in a holistic way by taking into consideration these factors. Renewal projects in Turkey predominantly take place in the slum areas that emerged after 1950s. In Kuştepe, where urbanization dates back to 1954 and is one of Istanbul's first slum areas, settlement was started as the Gypsies were brought here from Zincirlikuyu by government. Planning process in Kuştepe dates back to last 10 years ago and it is currently shelved. The urban regeneration project in that area is based on the reasons such as remaining of the area within the central area of the city and worn-out physical structure of the buildings here. This study is carried out in order to describe the class and social structures in pre-transformation Kuştepe, to measure the Gypsies’ perception of urban regeneration, and to determine what sort of spatial movement could arise due to the transformation. To accomplish these objectives, the survey data collected by the SONAR group for Şişli Municipality were utilized, and interview technique was used. In addition, the survey data conducted by Istanbul Bilgi University in 1993 in Kuştepe were used where necessary.

Study results were well visualized and tabulated where necessary with the help of Microsoft Office programs. The results showed that demographic indicators regarding Kuştepe such as educational profile, professional distribution and income status seem to be in parallel with other slum areas. On the other hand, the level of satisfaction with Kuştepe homes was found to be around 80 %, still 72.5% of the respondents reported that they would accept the new homes following the renewal. The interviews revealed that the inhabitants seem to be willing about selling the prospective new homes to obtain profit. According to this, two important findings could be suggested. Kuştepe project as well as all the other transformation areas of Turkey, renewal is well understood as a rent-oriented element. Secondly, the idea of embracing the urban space remained behind the profit prospects, and the concept of "right to the city" discussed in critical urban studies seems not to reach a sufficient maturity in places with high rent expectancy

Bu makale Crosscheck sistemi tarafından taranmış ve bu sistem sonuçlarına göre orijinal bir makale olduğu tespit

edilmiştir. ** İstanbul Üniversitesi Doktora Öğrencisi, El-mek: [email protected]

http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.9015

2 Uğurcan AYİK


Volume 10/14 Fall 2015

such as Kuştepe and Fikirtepe. Hence, it was concluded that socio-spatial effects of the renewal needs to undergo a more extensive process in particular places with advanced socio-cultural richness like Kuştepe.

STRUCTURED ABSTRACT

Cities are settlements places really open to development as dynamic and continuously developing structures. Therefore, cities have undergone a number of artificial and natural destruction and have gone through some transformation process throughout history. However, the industrial revolution has added a functional diversity to urban settlements at an unprecedented frequency; as a result, urban settlements have been rapidly inhabited and populated. The most important cities in the world, like Paris and London, have received a share of this rapid population growth and have undergone some transformation intervention.

Regeneration programs have spread to not only central countries that have completed the industrialization early but also to the cities in other countries of the world. Unlike central countries, population movements in those countries took place in the second half of the 20th century along with late industrialization. As one of those cities, Istanbul has also entered a rapid population process since 1950s and its urban functions have rapidly increased. In parallel with such functional diversity, the difficulties and reluctance of the state to intervene the housing area also gave rise to the so-called squatter settlements in Turkey.

Kuştepe, one of Istanbul's first slum areas, is among the earliest slum settlements formed in parallel to the urbanization of Istanbul. Urbanization has started in Kuştepe since the Gypsies living in Zincirlikuyu were moved here. Subsequently, urbanization has continued in Kuştepe with settlement of people from Sultanahmet Aharkapı, Surdibi, Çapa- Çukur bastan, Kuledibi, Vefa and Gönen. Also the most distinctive aspect of Kuştepe among squatter settlements in Turkey is the fact that it was created with the state support. The Gypsies living in Zincirlikuyu owned building plots here by the state resulting in formation of a slum area identity. In other squatter areas of Turkey, settlements were created by occupation of public or private lands.

This study mainly aims at investigating the possible interventions on lifestyle and solidarity networks among the Gypsies will shape the urban regeneration. Specifically in Sulukule district of Istanbul, the Gypsy population living here has seen a project that breaks them radically from urban spaces. The main concern of this study is not to witness Kuştepe to turn into a second Sulukule case. Departing from such concern, survey and interview techniques were used as the most common research methods in social sciences in order to put forward the Kuştepe inhabitants’ point of view regarding urban regeneration and their expectations from the regeneration. Study data were obtained from the survey conducted by SONAR as commissioned by the Şişli Municipality. In addition, interviews were held as another research method for more sound results. Moreover, the survey data conducted in Kuştepe by

A Gypsy Neighbourhood On The Brink Of Transformation: Urban Regeneration… 3



Istanbul Bilgi University in 1993, where necessary, were utilized in the study.

In the study, 498 people participated. Of 498 survey respondents, 245 (49,2%) were female, the rest of 253 (50,8%) were male. In relation with education level, 160 of the participants were uneducated (32,1%), 194 were (39%) graduate of elementary-secondary and equivalent schools, 117 (23,5%) were graduates of secondary education-high school, and lastly 27 were (5,4%) university graduates. At the same time, 384 of the participants (77,1%) were married, while 84 persons (16,9%) were single, and 30 persons (6%) were divorced. Income level of the sample group reveals that 322 people (64.7%) have an income level between 0-1500 TL. There were only 61 participants (12,2%) with an income level above 2000 TL. Hence, it can be said that Kuştepe is a poverty venue.

According to the survey results, 408 of the respondents in Kuştepe (82%) said they were satisfied with their home. The number of those dissatisfied with their home remained at 39 (7.8%). Yet, under another question it was found out that 354 people (71.1%) support the Kuştepe urban regeneration project. There were only 21 participants (4,2%) with an opposite view about the project. This situation clearly points to a contradiction in Kuştepe. The satisfaction level of the home as high as 80% is expected to pull down the support rate for the regeneration project on a linear logic. Thus, it can be inferred that merely satisfaction with home is not a stand-alone factor in the context of transformation projects. Likewise, in response for the reasons of supporting the project under the next question, it was determined that many other factors were involved such as green space, serenity, happiness, cleanliness and tidiness, security and social facilities. Yet, during face-to-face interviews, even a more influential factor was identified. Majority of the inhabitants of Kuştepe approach the upcoming urban regeneration project with concern of getting a share from the financial value to be raised by the regeneration project. Therefore, although the level of satisfaction with current homes is as high as 80%, the respondents seem to expect to live much more comfortably in another district of Istanbul thanks to the rental earnings to be gained from the regeneration. Another variable supporting this situation can be the high rate of those who would prefer to obtain a new flat. When asked about their preference of home after the regeneration project, 361 people (72.5%) responded that they would opt for a new flat to be built in this area. 36 people (7.2%) said they would sell their current home, 71 people (14.3%) said they would accept the money to be paid for expropriation of the land and home, and 30 people (6%) said they would buy an equivalent flat.

From both surveys and interviews it was concluded that there is partial security vulnerability in Kuştepe. A large part of such vulnerability is due to the drug dealing in Kuştepe. While 247 participants from the study sample (79,2%) indicated drug dealing as a security problem, while the others chose options such as no security, brawls and all other security-related problems.

In the light of the findings, it could be discussed that cities in the 21st century are exposed to the marketization process which is dominated by neoliberal dynamics in both global scale and specific

4 Uğurcan AYİK



context of Turkey. In this process expressed as urban cities, the dominant macro form in cities becomes luxury housing, shopping malls, residences, and large-scale urban renewal projects. The efforts to become a global city also give rise to emerging of winners and losers in the urban space. In general, investment groups are winners, whereas the lower class population groups remain in loser position though they create the city. For the last 5 years when urban regeneration work has become more intensive, serious vertical and horizontal movements have taken place in Istanbul. In general, in spaces that have gone through transformation, vertical movement is observed. On the other hand, the population groups that migrated before transformation create new poverty areas elsewhere in the city. In this sense, urban regeneration projects do not remain faithful to the original, rather taking forward the concern for rent income.

The urban regeneration in Kuştepe faces the threat of disappearance of the existing cultural structure and solidarity networks in addition to these risks outlined herein. Also as evidenced by the field study, Kuştepe urban regeneration project is seen as a rent income generating factor by social groups living in this space. Vast majority of the population seem to focus on the financial income which will be generated by the rent increase on the project. This brings in one positive and one negative consequence. Direct opposition to dispossession is the positive result, while the negative outcome can be explained as deteriorating of the urban space and ownership of the living place. This is the basic dilemma of today's urban regeneration works where they reach a deadlock.

Departing from this dilemma, it was concluded that the concept of "right to the city" frequently discussed in recent urban criticisms has not matured yet in areas such as Kuştepe and Fikirtepe which have a high amount of rent. It is essential that right to the city as a progressive concept for the sake of ownership of the city must be given tangible value in Istanbul, which has high historical value. Increasing of the tangible visibility is undoubtedly dependent on social grouping in the area of transformation. This form of organization not only carries the potential to offer ownership of urban space but also can put forward the argument that the city cannot be comprehended with merely rental expectations. Consequently, on one hand, it introduces the possibility of preventing negative consequences frequently discussed lately such as spatial segregation and gentrification. On the other hand, the opportunity of hosting classes in the same space could become concrete.

Key Words: Urban, Urban Regeneration, Urban Geography, Gypsies, Kuştepe.

DÖNÜŞÜMÜN EŞIĞINDE BIR ROMAN MAHALLESI: KUŞTEPE’DE KENTSEL DÖNÜŞÜM

ÖZET

Kentsel dönüşüm kavramı fiziksel, sosyal, iktisadi birtakım ihtiyaçlara cevap veremeyen alanların yine bu faktörler göz önünde




tutularak bütüncül bir şekilde dönüştürülmesini ifade eder. Türkiye’de dönüşüm projeleri, ağırlıkla 1950 sonrası oluşan gecekondu alanlarında gerçekleşmektedir. Kentleşme tarihi 1954 yılına uzanan ve İstanbul’un ilk gecekondu alanlarından olan Kuştepe, devletin Zincirlikuyu’dan Romanları buraya yerleştirmesiyle kentleşmeye başlamıştır. Kuştepe’de planlama süreci son 10 yıla tarihlenen ve hâlihazırda rafa kaldırılmış, alanın kent merkezi içinde kalması, konutların fiziksel yıpranmışlığı gibi nedenlerin öne sürüldüğü bir kentsel dönüşüm projesi söz konusudur. Çalışma ile amaçlanan Kuştepe’nin dönüşüm öncesindeki sınıfsal ve toplumsal yapısını betimlemek, Romanların kentsel dönüşüm algısını ölçmek, dönüşümle birlikte ne gibi mekânsal hareketlenmelerin doğabileceğini tespit etmektir. Bu amaçları gerçekleştirmek için Şişli Belediyesi’nin SONAR araştırma grubuna yaptırdığı anket verilerinden yararlanılmış, ayrıca araştırma yöntemlerinden biri olan mülakat tekniği uygulanmıştır. Ayrıca gerektiği yerlerde 1993 yılında İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi tarafından Kuştepe’de yapılan anket verilerinden de yararlanılmıştır.

İlgili sonuçlar Microsoft Office programları yardımıyla gerektiği yerlerde hem görselleştirilmiş hem de tablolaştırılmıştır. Verilerden hareketle Kuştepe’nin eğitim profili, meslek dağılımı, gelir durumu gibi demografik göstergelerinin diğer gecekondu alanlarıyla paralellik taşıdığı belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca Kuştepe’de evlerden memnuniyet seviyesinin %80’lere kadar çıktığı, fakat dönüşüm sonrası ne yaparsınız diye sorulduğunda katılımcıların %72,5’i yeni evleri alırım demiştir. Mülakat çalışmaları ise elde edilmesi istenen bu yeni evlerin satılıp, kâr edilmesi düşüncesinin daha ön plana çıktığını göstermiştir. Buradan hareketle iki önemli bulguya ulaşılmıştır. Türkiye’nin diğer dönüşüm alanlarında olduğu gibi Kuştepe projesi de rant odaklı bir unsur olarak kavranmaktadır. İkincisi ise kent mekânını sahiplenmenin rant boyutunun gerisinde kaldığı, eleştirel kent çalışmalarında tartışılan “kent hakkı” kavramının Kuştepe, Fikirtepe gibi rant boyutu yüksek yerlerde yeterli bir olgunluğa ulaşmadığı tespit edilmiştir. Buradan hareketle özellikle kültürel zenginliği fazla olan Kuştepe gibi dönüşüm alanlarında dönüşümün sosyo- mekânsal etkilerinin daha kapsamlı süreçlerden geçmesi gerektiği belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Kent, Kentsel Dönüşüm, Kent Coğrafyası, Romanlar, Kuştepe.

INTRODUCTION

In urban research, the studies related to urban regeneration have been increasing rapidly in recent years. Pioneered by Departments of Urban and Regional Planning and Architecture, this study

area has been receiving significant contributions from certain social disciplines such as Sociology

and Geography in recent years. While this matter takes shape in the axis of approach and solution proposals of individual disciplines, the science of geography also shows interest in urban

regeneration research due to its spatial and social impacts. Moving from that point, present study

focuses on the probability that the Gypsies in Kuştepe could face the same situation as Sulukule

Gypsies particularly considering the concrete negative outcomes of the renewal project. Aftermath of the Sulukule urban regeneration project, inhabitant Gypsies were sent to TOKİ house blocks in

Taşoluk. Those who cannot adapt to living in apartment blocks were soon dispersed around Sulukule

6 Uğurcan AYİK



and other districts of Istanbul (FOGGO, 2007: 127-129). Due to the negative perception that exists

in society, Gypsies should be subject to positive discrimination. Instead, they are exposed to further dispossession with transformation projects and their culture and solidarity networks are destroyed.

The study mainly focuses on the risk of being affected of especially Gypsies and other Kuştepe

inhabitants from high rent level in Istanbul. In addition, it aims at seeking answers for different research questions such as the impact of the transformation on the class structure in the urban space,

physical appearance that may occur after the transformation, pre-project demographic characteristics

of Kuştepe and analysis of the potential demographic structure which may occur after the project (FOGGO, 2007: 127-129).

(TANYERİ, 2010) could be regarded as the most comprehensive study in the literature

regarding Kuştepe. The book also documents the founding works of Kuştepe and describes the

development history of Kuştepe over time. Another study about Kuştepe is the (KAZGAN, 1999) based on empirical data. It outlines the socio-demographic characteristics of Kuştepe on the basis of

surveys and interviews and reveals the social and cultural reality of Kuştepe. Due to associated risks

and abundance of slum settlements, Istanbul excels the other cities in the number of urban regeneration projects. Another study detailing such projects and largely closing the research gap is

(TÜRKÜN, 2014). The research is focused on certain districts of Istanbul including Başıbüyük,

Derbent, Aydınlı, Tarlabaşı, Tozkoparan, Ayazma and Tepeüstü with quite an old urbanization adventure. It is a significant study as it is the first sample covering such a large neighbourhood in

Istanbul. In addition, the fact that the other parts of the work focus on urban policies and its outcomes

is another positive aspect of it. Within geography, the first field work on urban regeneration is the

(KARADAĞ & MİROĞLU, 2011). It addresses the urban regeneration project in Bayraklı district of Izmir as a slum area. KARADAĞ & MİROĞLU demonstrates the demographic structure of

Bayraklı and the perception of urban regeneration in general terms by means of the field studies.

While it is significant due to including the concept of urban regeneration in Geography, it remains weak in identifying spatial mobility.

Above all, this study can be considered as a tool for making more visible the Gypsies who

are declared invisible in the social sphere, and instrumentality of it is the first element making the

study significant. The second significance of the study is that it attempts to provide significant contribution to the literature in terms of both disclosing the consequences of the transformation

projects and understanding the perspective of Gypsies as an ethnic identity regarding city. Therefore,

it is expected to start debate over the extent at which the urban regeneration projects in other parts of Turkey can remain faithful to the main intention as they might be used as an intervention tool against

the other ethnic elements besides Gypsies.

Method and Materials

Kuştepe is a neighbourhood in Şisli district of Istanbul, predominantly inhabited by Gypsies.

It is a typical slum settlement with nested one or two-storey buildings. The neighbourhood is

surrounded by Alibeyköy in the northwest, Beşiktaş in the south, Mecidiyekoy Dereboyu Street in

the east and Taşocağı Street in the west. Study data were obtained from the Şisli Municipality, which had previously had the SONAR group conduct a survey on Kuştepe inhabitants in order to find out

their problems with the neighbourhood, their expectations regarding municipal service, qualities of

the houses, uses of them, their expectations, the family structure, the level of knowledge about urban regeneration, their opinions and expectations as well as demographic characteristics of Kuştepe.

The survey was conducted with 498 people living in Kuştepe urban regeneration project area.

Apart from that, the results of a survey conducted by Istanbul Bilgi University in 1991 were compared with the other survey data where deemed necessary. Also interviews were held with the




inhabitants in Kuştepe in the scope of research techniques in social sciences, and recording device

was used where necessary. In this way, information could be obtained about particular concerns of the Gypsies regarding the project or the causes for their support for the project. All of the collected

data are displayed in both pie charts and tables all relevant places by using the Microsoft Office

programs. Therefore, the study data were visualized making it easier to understand.

Urbanization as the Driving Force behind the Regeneration

Cities have continued their development at every stage of history due to their dynamic and

constantly evolving structure. But most importantly, development of industrial capitalism can be described as the cornerstone of this continuum. Upon development of industrial capitalism, transition

took place from artisanal production to factory-type large-scale production, and the productive forces

showed tremendous progress in a very short time. The developing and increasing production

structure brought along the labour demand and thus large scale migration began from rural to urban settlements begun moving. London, Manchester and Glasgow as the most important industrial cities

in the 19th century were rapidly inhabited in a short period.1 In parallel with the industry and

urbanization relationship, the incoming population settled near the production facilities and those areas deteriorated over time eventually becoming needy of transformation due to overpopulation2.

In the West, urbanization dynamics has pursued a relatively harmonious process between

industry and urbanization, whereas the housing problem was dealt in a much more complicated way in neighboring countries where industry leaps took place quite late. In countries like Turkey in pursue

of development with import substititon industrialization policies; demand for cheap labor force

emerged depending on the relative industry. Turkey realized development moves especially in the

second half of the 20th century with import substitution industrial policy (ERSOY, 2001: 38). The metropolitans such as Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir3, where industry developed as a result of the

relative industrial breakthrough and dissolution in rural areas, have soon become major cities

attracting large population mass in a short time (AVCI, 1993: 256; AVCI, 2005: 14).

While the industrialization movements in the West could meet the demand for housing,

industry moves in countries like Turkey have failed to meet the housing needs of the incoming

population due to the excessive urbanization. As a result, the mass of the population spontaneously

created their own shelter, and slums have soon constituted the dominant settlement pattern of the city. In Ankara, barakas appeared as the first slum settlements (TÜRKÜN, ASLAN, & ŞEN, 2014:

46); also in Istanbul slum areas have proliferated rapidly in districts such as Zeytinburnu,

Kazlıçeşme, Fikirtepe and Kuştepe. Showing a gradual progress, the informal settlements have yielded the dominant view of the city. Although squatters invade lands of the persons or the state,

they have been legalized4 in the course of the time due to the reasons such as providing cheap labor

for industry (ŞEN, 2011: 3) and being seen as a source of votes.

1 Such inhabitation process has reached tremendous increases within a very short time. While the population of Manchester

was 75.000 in 1800, it increased to 338.000 in 1851. Beside, the population in Glasgow increased from 84.000 to 350.000 between these years reaching a growth rate of 317 % (PACİONE, 2005: 62). 2 For a detailed analysis of the social and spatial conditions in the United Kingdom during that period, see: (ENGELS, 1999). 3 Having always been an important city since the Ottoman time, Istanbul has remained important although Ankara became the capital city of the Republic of Turkey. Throughout the inhabitation process, the population of Istanbul went up from 806.863 to 1.166.477 between the years 1927 and 1950. It increased to 4.741.890 in 1980, rising to 10.018.735 in 2000, ultimately reaching 14.377.018 in 2014 (TÜİK, 2015). The inhabitation mentioned above is significant as it summarizes

the urbanization Dynamics of Istanbul. 4 The issue of legalization of slums has been included in the state policy in Turkey after 1980. In particular, the Zoning Law No. 2981 issued by the Motherland Party government has been one of the most important steps towards legalization of the squatter phenomenon in Turkey. This in turn has led to development of multi-storey slums, as a result, the slums

8 Uğurcan AYİK



The squatters have gradually become depression areas as a result of lacking of engineering

services and inability to meet a number of physical and social needs. Especially expansion of Istanbul towards its periphery and remaining of slums in urban centers besides the physical staleness, these

areas have been declared to be the places that need to be transformed quickly. Adding of the 1999

Marmara earthquake to the negative factors in slum areas caused declaring undesirable settlements of the slums while they were previously tolerated in 1950s and made possible by the stage. This

transformation of the slums is generally realized through efforts of violence. The main point here is

the recognition of the earthquake probability by the society through consent as a result of hegemonic imposition (AYİK, 2014: 781). What makes the transformation applications controversial is some

spatial segregation which follows the urban regeneration projects. So far, many slum area have been

transformed, as a result, there have been many spatial segregation processes.5 It is referred to as

gentrification in the literature (SMİTH, 1996; SMITH, 2002), the main subjects of the city have been marginalized and "urban regeneration" has taken on the mission of dispossession rather than

improving the area in stark contrast to the original concept.

Urban Regeneration in the Neoliberal Era and Example of Kuştepe

The development of industrial capitalism developed the productive forces resulting in a set

of variations. The most important variation is the Fordist mode of production named after Henry

Ford which emerged following mass production. Even though a fundamental change did not take place in the production system with the Fordist mode of production, rationalization of the division

of labour led to large increases in production (HARVEY , 1992: 125). As a result, works were often

realized by specialized workers who do not even move during production. The Fordist mode of

production not only resulted in enormous increase in production but also brought with it an increase in prosperity in the West. Overcoming the earliest jarring effects of industrial capitalism in urban

area, the Western managing powers have strictly supported the Fordist production with the

Keynesian policies due to increasing prosperity. During this period, gains of the working class increased, massive welfare went up, social housing policies came to the fore, and mass democracy

was started to be protected (HARVEY , 1992: 125-126; BEŞİKTEPE, 2007: 47-48).

While Keynesian policies could meet the needs of the existing capital accumulation until the

1970s, it entered into a serious crisis especially after the 1970s. The global oil crisis and the difficulties in capital accumulation (TÜMERTEKİN & ÖZGÜÇ, 2014: 304) brought the Keynesian

policies into question at the macro scale. Thus, the world was introduced to a new era called neo-

liberal period after the 1970 undermining the Keynesian policies and achievements. The neoliberal policies were first implemented in Latin American countries such as Chile and Mexico, later, they

constituted the common economic policy particularly in the UK and USA and around the world after

the collapse of the socialist bloc.6 In parallel with the widespread marketization trends, the essence

have gained a commercial identity. Consequently, although slums were previously regarded solely as a means of sheltering,

they have eventually become elements with a more prominent connotation of profit making also due to remaining in the city centres. 5 Today’s most controversial and current urban regeneration applications are Sulukule and Fikirtepe urban regeneration projects. As a part of the Sulukule urban regeneration project, the Gypsies were inhabitated in TOKİ house blocks in Taşoluk. However, those who could not adapt to living in apartment blocks were soon dispersed around Sulukule. However, in Fikirtepe, spatial segregation and gentrification has paved its way in a rather mutual process. During implementation of the Fikirtepe Project, spatial mobility was observed from the project area towards other districts of Istanbul such as Fındıklı, Ünalan, Kayışdağı and Zümrütevler (AYİK, 2014:786). Both examples refer to the potential wealth and poverty areas

shaped due to urban regeneration. 6 Turkey component of the neoliberal restructuring was carried out with a number of country-specific methods. January 24, 1980 decisions is a manifestation of the neoliberal restructuring in Turkey. However, the economic and political factors such as conflicts in social life and vote concerns did not allow implementation of the decisions at that time. As a result, the




of the neoliberal period is defined as opening up of the public sphere to markets, minimization of the

state intervention in contrast to the Keynesian era while defining the new role of the state as removing obstacles before accumulation of capital.

In this process, urban space stopped being the scene of capital accumulation; rather they

became the main subjects of capital accumulation (KURTULUŞ, 2005: 62). Large cities in the central and neighboring countries were included in the league of the fast-racing cities which aim at

attracting capital. The main condition of being in this league was highlighting the historical and

cultural potential of the cities to ensure their rapid deindustrialization. Many European cities were deindustrialized quickly. However, the industry has shifted towards the Asian countries with cheaper

labor force. As a result, the outlook of the dilapidated urban centers has started to change by means

of projects such as large-scale urban regeneration projects, shopping centers, and luxurious

residential sites. As a social consequence, the population that had previously migrated from rural areas in the first period of industrial capitalism was now considered to be the redundant elements that

need to be evacuated from the city center in the context of neoliberal urban policy. The most crucial

component of the evacuation attempt was constituted by urban regeneration projects.

Within the framework of such a structural framework, Kuştepe settlement is a slum

settlement created during the 1950s Istanbul. Most of the slum settlements in those years were built

illegally on the lands belonging to other persons or the state. It is worth noting that though Kuştepe poses a typical slum area with its appearance and physical structure (Figure 1), it cannot be referred

as a slum area as regards to its formation. The urbanization process in Kuştepe was promoted by the

state. In 1954, the urbanization of settlement began with transporting of the Gypsies from

Zincirlikuyu to Kuştepe by the state. Later, another group living behind today’s Türkiye Newspaper Hospital (former Bulgarian Hospital) were placed here, which accelerated the urbanization in

Kuştepe. Following that, Kuştepe were inhabited quickly by the people moving here from

Sultanahmet Aharkapı, Surdibi, Çapa-Çukurbostan, Kuledibi, Vefa and Gönen (TANYERİ, 2010: 10). Although the Gypsies were the earliest inhabitants here and constitute the majority of the

population, Kuştepe has taken a heterogeneous structure in time as a result of migration from various

areas.

September 12, 1980 military intervention has led to implementation of the neoliberal prescription by military means, which could not be put into practice by political means until then (DURMUŞ, 2011: 132-133).

10 Uğurcan AYİK



Figure 1: The housing pattern in Kuştepe

In Kuştepe, also amount of the population varies in different periods with no certainty. It is said that there were 306 households during the first years, which is around 1954, while the number

increased up to 1000 in 1955 hosting 5.000 people (TANYERİ, 2010: 12). It goes without saying

that this case was largely caused by the rapid migration from other parts of Istanbul and Turkey to Kuştepe. Kuştepe urbanization process also attracted attention in printed media in that period. It is

noted that many slum areas in Kuştepe were destroyed and the people were placed in these places,

the government had to invite people to Kuştepe due to not being able to cope with the reality of slums

despite repeatedly demolishing such places people, and most of the comers started to live in tents because they could not build their homes, which resulted in the dominant view of tents across

Kuştepe (KIVANÇ, 1955). It is a significant process as it summarizes the building of Kuştepe.

Mecidiyeköy settlement within borders of Şişli district, where Kuştepe is located, remained as a rural area from its establishment during the Ottoman period until the 1950s. However, merging

of the Levent, Zincirlikuyu and Maslak line with Mecidiyeköy and planning of those sites as business

centers and luxury residences has changed the face of the area a lot. Today business centers are in a dominant position in Mecidiyeköy. Besides, the residences, shopping malls, business areas, and

brand housing projects along the Büyükdere Avenue constitute the dominant tissue in Şişli (Figure

2). Kuştepe settlement is one of the few slum areas remaining in Şisli within this structure. It is

essential for municipal administrators to transform this area in order to adopt it to the urban macro form. On the other hand, such transformation project bears certain potential risks such as the loss of

important elements like the living culture, solidarity networks and the mosaic with other ethnic

groups created by the Gypsies. Seeing a negative example of transformed Sulukule of Gypsies in Istanbul, it needs discussing how to realize transformation of Kuştepe without giving rise to a second

Sulukule case. Present study is carried out departing from this basic problem.




Figure 2: Geographical location of Kuştepe and surrounding urban fabric

Findings and Discussion

Many slum areas in Istanbul show structures similar in many respects. Kuştepe overlaps with

such slum areas in demographic sense. Of 498 survey respondents, 245 (49,2%) were female, the

rest of 253 (50,8%) were male. In relation with education level, 160 of the participants were uneducated (32,1%), 194 were (39%) graduate of elementary-secondary and equivalent schools, 117

(23,5%) were graduates of secondary education-high school, and lastly 27 were (5,4%) graduated

from university. In relation with marital status, 384 of the participants (77,1%) were married, while 84 persons (16,9%) were single, and 30 persons (6%) were divorced (SONAR , 2015). In Turkey,

slum areas have emerged as poverty areas since the initial formation. Initially having emerged as

informal settlements, slum settlements have continued to remain as a space of poverty regardless of

the extent at which they have been legalized in the course of time. Kuştepe is a representative sample of the areas depicting the profile of poverty in slum areas. Income level of the sample group reveals

that 322 people (64.7%) have an income level between 0-1500 TL. There were only 61 participants

(12,2%) with an income level above 2000 TL. Hence, it can be said thatKuştepe is a poverty venue (Figure 3).

In Turkey, slums constitute the type of housing which dominated 1950s covering the rapid

urbanization of Istanbul. In the course of time, the earliest generation which settled was followed by other generations resulting in expansion of population in slum areas ultimately influencing the whole

city. Of the participants, 200 people (40,2%) stated that they have lived in Kuştepe since they were

born. Another 152 people (30,5%) stated that they have been living in Kuştepe for more than 21

years (Figure 4). These indicators are closely related to reaching the borders of settlement in Istanbul today. Even though the population of Istanbul is rapidly growing from year to year, it is clear that

12 Uğurcan AYİK



immigration from outside, except for the Syrians who have recently immigrated due to the political

reasons, does not contribute to such a rapid inhabitation. This situation is also manifested in Kuştepe. Only 92 of the study participants (18,4%) reported to have lived in Kuştepe for 1-10 years (Figure

4). The data imply that the inhabitants of Kuştepe have gradually urbanized.7

Figure 3: Income level in Kuştepe (SONAR, 2015). Figure 4: Period of living in Kuştepe

(SONAR, 2015).

In Turkey, one of the legitimacy pillars of recent urban regeneration projects is the discourse

that the slum areas are physically unable to respond to certain needs. Although this situation has

certain foundations, the main criterion is constituted by opinions of the subjects regarding the space.

According to the survey results, 408 of the respondents in Kuştepe (82%) said they were satisfied with their home. The number of those dissatisfied with their home remained at 39 (7.8%) (Figure 5).

Yet, under another question it was found out that 354 people (71.1%) support the Kuştepe urban

regeneration project. There were only 21 participants (4,2%) with an opposite view about the project (Figure 6). This situation clearly points to a contradiction in Kuştepe. The satisfaction level of the

home as high as 80% is expected to pull down the support rate for the regeneration project on a linear

logic. Thus, it can be inferred that merely satisfaction with home is not a stand-alone factor in the context of transformation projects. Likewise, in response for the reasons of supporting the project

under the next question, it was determined that many other factors were involved such as green space,

serenity, happiness, cleanliness and tidiness, security and social facilities. Yet, during face-to-face

interviews, even a more influential factor was identified. Majority of the inhabitants of Kuştepe approach the upcoming urban regeneration project with concern of getting a share from the financial

value to be born by the regeneration project. Therefore, although the level of satisfaction with current

homes is as high as 80%, the respondents seem to expect to live much more comfortably in another district of Istanbul thanks to the rental earnings to be gained from the regeneration. Another variable

supporting this situation can be the high rate of those who would prefer to obtain a new flat. When

asked about their preference of home after the regeneration project, 361 people (72.5%) responded

that they would opt for a new flat to be built in this area. 36 people (7.2%) said they would sell their current home, 71 people (14.3%) said they would accept the money to be paid for expropriation of

the land and home, and 30 people (6%) said they would buy an equivalent flat (Figure 7). As one

overlooks the data holistically, it can be understood that the Kuştepeli residents comprehend correctly the dispossession movements in the other areas of regeneration correctly. But there is drawback that

such approach is mainly based on the personal financial concerns rather than ownership of the urban

7 It may be an insufficient argument to measure the extent at which Kuştepe inhabitants own the urban values only with the lenght of time they lived in Kuştepe. In another study carried out on Kuştepe during a different period, different data were

used which indicate that Kuştepe population has urbanized. In that study, which was carried out on 500 participants, it was found out that 62,1% of the families are comprised of 4 or less people, religious marriage is in the minority in all educational groups, and only 3% of the families prefer religious ceremony for marriage of their children (KAZGAN, 1999: 19-20). All of the data point out that Kuştepe residents have spent great efforts towards assimilation of urban culture since 1954.

1%25%

39%

20%

12% 3%

No Income 500-1000 TL

1001-1500TL 1501-2000TL

2000TL+ No Comment

40%

5%7%6%

11%

31%

Sınce I Was Born 1-3 Years

4-6 Years 7-10 Years

11-20 Years 21+




space. This is one of the insider threats that could destroy the cultural texture especially in a

settlement with rich Gypsy culture like Kuştepe.

Figure 5: Level of satisfaction with homes (Sonar, 2015). Figure 6: Level of support for urban

regeneration

Figure 7: Plans for post-regeneration period (Sonar, 2015).

In relation with urban regeneration, security issue is raised as another argument following physical deterioration. From both surveys and interviews it was concluded that there is partial

security vulnerability in Kuştepe. A large part of such vulnerability is due to the drug dealing in

Kuştepe. While 247 participants from the study sample (79,2%) indicated drug dealing as a security

problem, while the others chose options such as no security, brawls and all other security-related problems (Figure 8). It must also be noted that security problems in the neighborhood is more of an

external threat. The field survey revealed that security problems are widespread in the center of

Kuştepe, which at the same time hosts drug trade and the busiest parts of everyday life. On one side, people have their tea or coffee; on the other side, drug trade is carried out as close as 5-10 meters

away (Personal Observation).

40%

42%

10% 5% 3%

Really SatısfıedSatısfıedFaırly Satısfıed/All RıghtDıssatısfıedTotally Satısfıed

50%

21%2%

2%25%

I Defınetly WantI WantI Don't WantI Don't Want At AllUndecıded

7%

73%

14%6%

Sellıng the Current Home

Obtaınıng a New Flat ın Exchange For the Current Home

Acceptıng Payment For The Land and Home Exproprıatıon

Buyıng An Equıvalent Flat ın Another Dıstrıct

14 Uğurcan AYİK



Figure 8: Reasons for Insecurity (Sonar, 2015).

Lastly, all these data regarding Kuştepe demonstrate that a positive value is attached to the

concept of urban regeneration. Nevertheless, it should be reiterated that such an attachment is

dependent on the expectation of rental gain from the project. With the aim of measuring this positive

value, a more comprehensive variable was used and the respondents were asked what associations the Kuştepe regeneration project has. Of the sample group, 215 people (43,2%) referred to urban

transformation. They also added green space, parks, gardens, secure neighbourhood, a new district

and a clean living space. Another 11 respondents (2,2%) noted that they do not want the project (Figure 9). This phenomenon is similar in other slums in Turkey.8

Figure 9: Associations regarding urban regeneration in the context of Kuştepe (Sonar, 2015).

Conclusions and Recommendations

Cities in the 21st century are exposed to the marketization process which is dominated by neoliberal dynamics in both global scale and specific context of Turkey. In this process expressed as

urban cities, the dominant macro form in cities becomes luxury housing, shopping malls, residences,

and large-scale urban renewal projects. The efforts to become a global city also give rise to emerging

8 Similar conclusions can be drawn from the field study carried out in Fikirtepe as another slum area of Istanbul. In present study, majority of the respondents were found to attribute positive values urban regeneration. Such that they chose the

options of change and beautification of the environment and innovation when asked what they understand from urban regeneration. The response above might have been given under the influence of the and rent-seeking and passivity against the spatial segregation to be caused by the incompatibility with the socio-economic structure which will be formed after the project (AYİK, 2014: 104 ).

79%

7%6%

8%

Drug Dealıng

No Securıty

Brawls

All Other Securıty- Related Problems

43%

4%12%6%

8%

2%

3% 22%

Urban Regeneratıon Green Space/Garden

Secure Neıghbourhood A New Neıghbourhood

A Clean Lıvıng Space We Don't Want/We are Happy

Others No Comment




of winners and losers in the urban space. In general, investment groups are winners, whereas the

lower class population groups remain in loser position though they create the city. For the last 5 years when urban regeneration work has become more intensive, serious vertical and horizontal

movements have taken place in Istanbul. In general, in spaces that have gone through transformation,

vertical movement is observed. On the other hand, the population groups that migrated before transformation create new poverty areas elsewhere in the city. In this sense, urban regeneration

projects do not remain faithful to the original, rather taking forward the concern for rent income.

The urban regeneration in Kuştepe faces the threat of disappareance of the existing cultural structure and solidarity networds in addition to these risks outlined herein. Also as evidenced by the

field study, Kuştepe urban regeneration project is seen as a rent income generating factor by social

groups living in this space. Vast majority of the population seem to focus on the financial income

which will be generated by the rent increase on the project. This brings in one positive and one negative consequence. Direct opposition to dispossession is the positive result, while the negative

outcome can be explained as deteriorating of the urban space and ownership of the living place. This

is the basic dilemma of today's urban regeneration works where they reach a deadlock.

Departing from this dilemma, it was concluded that the concept of "right to the city"

frequently discussed in recent urban criticisms has not matured yet in areas such as Kuştepe and

Fikirtepe which have a high amount of rent. It is essential that right to the city as a progressive concept for the sake of ownership of the city must be given tangible value in Istanbul, which has high

historical value. Increasing of the tangible visibility is undoubtedly dependent on social grouping in

the area of transformation. This form of organization not only carries the potential to offer ownership

of urban space but also also can put forward the argument that the city can not be comprehended with merely rental expectations. Consequently, on one hand, it introduces the possibility of

preventing negative consequences frequently discussed lately such as spatial segregation and

gentrification. On the other hand, the opportunity of hosting classes in the same space could become concrete.

REFERENCES

Avci, S. (1993). Türkiye'de Şehir ve Şehirli Nüfusun Dağılışı. Türk Coğrafya Dergisi (Sayı 28), 249-269.

Avci, S. (2005). 2 Papers About Urbanization In Turkey- Cities and Urban Population & Faults,

Earthquakes and Cities. İstanbul: Çantay.

Ayik, U. (2014). Fikirtepe Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi Örneğinden Hareketle Siyasal Alandaki

Hegemonik Söylemin Kentsel Mekâna Yansımaları. Coğrafyacılar Derneği Uluslararası

Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı (s. 780-788). Muğla: Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi.

Ayik, U. (2014). Mekânsal ve Toplumsal Yansımalarıyla Türkiye'de Kentsel Dönüşüm Projelerine

Coğrafi Bakış: Fikirtepe Örneği Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. İstanbul: İstanbul

Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.

Beşiktepe, C. (2007). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Kentler ve İstanbul. TMMOB İstanbul Kent Sempozyumu (s. 46-56). İstanbul: TMMOB İstanbul İl Koordinasyon Kurulu.

Durmuş, M. (2011). 12 Eylül Askeri Darbesinin Ekonomi Politiği. Memleket Siyaset Yönetim.(15),

s. 96-138.

16 Uğurcan AYİK



Engels, F. (1999). The Condition of the Working Class in England. New York: Oxford University

Press.

Ersoy, M. (2001). Sanayisizleşme Süreci ve Kentler. Praksis Dergisi(2), 32-52.

Foggo, H. (2007). Kenti Değil Sahiplerini Yenileme Projesi. İstanbul Dergisi(60), s.127-129.

Harvey, D. (1992). The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Oxford: Blackwell.

Karadağ, A. & Miroğlu, G. (2011). Bayraklı Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi Üzerine Coğrafi

Değerlendirmeler. Türk Coğrafya Dergisi, 21-32.

Kazgan, G. (1999). Kuştepe Araştırması. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.

Kivanç, H. (1955, Ağustos 22). Şehir İçinde Şehir Yaratanlar Arasında. Ekim 23, 2015 tarihinde

http://gazetearsivi.milliyet.com.tr/:http://gazetearsivi.milliyet.com.tr/Ara.aspx?araKelime=

ku%C5%9Ftepe&isAdv=false adresinden alındı

Kurtuluş, H. (2005). Kente Bir Sosyo Mekânsal Ölçek Olarak Bakmak ve Kentsel Dönüşüm.

Evrensel Kültür Dergisi(164), 60-64.

Pacione, M. (2005). Urban Geography- A Global Perspective. London and New York: Routledge.

Smith, N. (1996). The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City. Londra:

Routledge.

Smith, N. (2002). New Globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as Global Urban Strategy. Antipode(34), 427-450.

Sonar. (2015). Şişli İlçesi (Kuştepe) Kentsel Dönüşüm Araştırması. İstanbul: SONAR İletişim

Reklam ve Araştırma.

Şen, B. (2011). Kentsel Mekânda Üçlü İttifak: Sanayisizleşme, Soylulaştırma, Yeni Orta Sınıf. İstanbul Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi(44), 1-21.

Tanyeri, N. (2010). Bir Şehir Kuruyorum. İstanbul: Kastaş Yayınları.

Tüik, 2015. Genel Nüfus Sayımları. http://tuikapp.tuik.gov.tr/nufusmenuapp/menu.zul

Tümertekin, E., & ÖZGÜÇ, N. (2014). Coğrafya- Geçmiş, Kavramlar, Coğrafyacılar. İstanbul:

Çantay.

Türkün, A. (2014). Mülk, Mahal, İnsan İstanbul'da Kentsel Dönüşüm. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi

Üniversitesi Yayınları.

Türkün, A., Aslan, Ş., & Şen, B. (2014). 1923-1980 Döneminde Kentsel Politikalar ve İstanbul'da

Konut Alanlarının Gelişimi Mevzuat, Aktörler ve Hâkim Söylem. A. TÜRKÜN içinde,

Mülk, Mahal, İnsan İstanbul'da Kentsel Dönüşüm (s. 43-78). İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.

Citation Information/Kaynakça Bilgisi

Ayik, U., (2015). “A Gypsy Neighbourhood On The Brink Of Transformation: Urban Regeneration In Kuştepe / Dönüşümün Eşiğinde Bir Roman Mahallesi: Kuştepe’de Kentsel Dönüşüm”,

TURKISH STUDIES -International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of

Turkish or Turkic-, ISSN: 1308-2140, (Prof. Dr. H. Ömer Karpuz Armağanı), Volume 10/14 Fall 2015, ANKARA/TURKEY, www.turkishstudies.net, DOI Number:

http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.9015, p. 1-16.

Date post:	18-Nov-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	gantep
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

A Gypsy Neighborhood On the Brink Of Transformation: Urban Regeneration in Kuştepe

Documents