**4. Urban renewal and changing Kayseri city**

The city of Kayseri, where the first practices of urban planning activities in Turkey were initiated and which remained at the forefront of the planned development process since the proclamation of the Republic, was selected as the study area. Kayseri's urban renewal process showed considerable similarities to the trends in Turkey. After the defeat of Ottoman Empire, the Turkish Republic was founded in 1923. In this period, the main purpose of the state was to reconstruct the national economy and make institutional developments in the economy. In order to create the new and modern environments, the state made reforms and applied new master plans for eliminating the effects of World War I and transforming the traditional Turkish society into a modern one. The national economic policies were applied in order to establish a bourgeoisie class and to fasten the social-economic transformation [44].

Big public works and urban reconstruction projects were applied in Turkish cities in the process of the establishment of the new country. Danger plan for Izmir, prost plan for Istanbul and Öelsner-Aru plan for Kayseri are examples of master plans at this period [44, 45]. The planned development and modernization

*Landscape Reclamation - Rising From What's Left*

tion or supervision or allowance.

illegal and non-standard slums in city centers [40].

Under Risk of Natural Disasters" entered into force in May 2012.

environmental characteristics, as the overall effect of these implications.

The urban renewal projects are generally put into practice in order to improve the unplanned and problematic areas, occupied public lands, regions under disaster risks, and cultural and historic areas surrounded by the illegal settlements. It can be stated that the project areas are generally located around the city centers, where the land is of relatively higher value. In Turkey, the urban renewal projects

public amenities, and specific emphasis to the people having a low level of income) were put aside and the economic growth measured by the concentration of private investment became the sole criterion of the success for urban revitalization.

law applied to the urban renewal projects is Law No. 5393 municipal law.

By the 2000s, the partnerships between local authorities and private sector arose. The urban renewal projects are implemented not only in slum areas but also in areas that are sensitive to natural hazards. Until 2012, there was no general law enacted for the urban renewal projects. The urban renewal projects were applied either regionspecific laws or Law No. 5393 and 5272 municipality law. The urban renewal projects were applied by the authorized agencies. According to Article 73 of Law No. 5272 municipal law, these authorized agencies are metropolitan municipalities, country municipalities within the boundary of the metropolitan municipality, provincial municipalities, and municipalities larger than the population of 50,000. The current

According to this law, "The municipality shall implement urban transformation and development projects in order to create residential areas, industrial zones, commercial areas, techno-parks, recreational areas and any sort of social reinforcement areas, to reconstruct and restore the wearing segments of city, to protect the historical and cultural structure of city, and to take measures against the earthquake risk. In order for an area to be declared as urban transformation and development area, one or several of aforementioned criteria shall be found within the borders of municipal or neighboring borders." The law does not allow the metropolitan municipalities to declare urban renewal and development area without any limita-

The 1999 İzmit earthquake was the crucial point for the urban renewal projects in Turkey. The government aimed to identify high-risk areas that are sensitive to possible natural hazards and re-arrange building stock that is out of standards. The government, private sector, and real estate investment trusts have attention on

After 2011 van earthquake, the government took serious steps for demolishing illegal buildings and regenerating old ones; therefore Law No. 6306, known as "Urban Regeneration Law," officially named as "Law on Restructuring of Areas

After 2012, the urban renewal became one of the most frequently discussed problems in Turkey's urbanization process and practice. The law takes the earthquake risk as base and it addresses the renewal of buildings, which are in danger of an earthquake. The law defines the implementation processes and tools for both property- and area-based regeneration projects. Law No. 6306 introduced the term "risky building" and it defines this term as the buildings located in any area that is under the risk of an earthquake or the buildings scientifically and technically found to face the danger of collapse or get seriously damaged in an earthquake. The law simplifies the process of demolishing of a risky building and constructing a new one. Since the entry of the Law No. 6306, a significant increase was observed in the numbers of property- and area-led regeneration projects. To date, due to their widespread effects on the socio-cultural and physical texture of the city and the project-based renewal projects were widely discussed. While the existing buildings are renewed through the property-led renewal, a significant transformation is also observed in the residential areas from the aspects of physical, social and economic

**24**

activities played important role in Kayseri since the proclamation of the republic. Until the 2000s, it can be said that the renewal processes of the city have developed according to the plan (**Table 3**).

This city was partially planned for the public investments in the 1/8000 scale schematic Çaylak plan, which has been prepared in 1933. As a reflection of this modernist approach, the urban plan of this city was prepared by Kemal Ahmet Aru-Öelsner from a holistic approach in the year 1945. In the plan prepared by him, the gridded urban design incorporating the wide boulevards, which was accepted as the main representation of those years and constituting the main pattern of the city, became dominant.

After the 1950s, the squatter housing areas became apparent in city pattern. The migration from rural to urban areas formed housing problem in cities, because the housing stock was not enough for newcomers. They constructed substandard housing units on the public land. At the beginning of the 1960s, some of the squatter housing districts transformed into illegal, and high rise apartment stocks, whereas the vote potential of squatter housing districts has been used by politicians. In this period, Kayseri began to canalize their capital, which they had been accumulating through commerce, into industrial investment and, as a result, urban mobilization began.

Another important period is the one after 1970. The second master plan prepared by Yavuz Taşçı, an architect, in 1975, the city center was reinforced and a


**27**

**Table 4.**

*Urban renewal areas in Kayseri province.*

*Project-Based Urban Renewal and Transformation of Urban Landscape in Turkey*

still characteristic features of the city of Kayseri [45–47].

development plan with a single center and linear form were designed. In this period, the city's traditional districts (which were filled with ornate mansion-houses mostly dating from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries) were demolished. Besides, the historical trade center was transformed into the modern city business center. New housing development areas were set across from the west to the east side of the city. Therefore, the city was converted from compact to linear form. The development plan suggested constructing broad boulevards and high-rise buildings which are

In 1986, a new master development plan was prepared by Topaloğlu and Berksan. Similar to the previous period, high-rise buildings and housing projects for middle and upper-income groups increased and the use of new materials and techniques was common in this period [45]. The first renewal projects were per-

During the 1990s, in Kayseri, market-based policies became more important for the city. The period that began under Karatepe's leadership in 1994 demonstrated that these municipal practices favored export-oriented policies and the liberalization of the Turkish economy [48, 49]. The privatization of municipal services continued at a greater level, especially after 1999. This process entailed a model popularly known as build-operate-transfer. During this period, the basic spatial practices were large-scale housing projects, transport and infrastructure projects, thematic-parks and sports facilities, museums, historic urban texture renewal projects, traditional public spaces projects (streets, squares, and parks) and mixed-

Depending on the initiatives taken in laws regarding the urban transformation in the 2000s, the renewal practices gained significant speed in Kayseri city and entire country world In Kocasinan district, Ziyagökalp, Yenidoğan, Seyrani, Ahi Evran, Yunusemre, Argıncık, Yeşil Mahalle, Kuşcu, Oruçreis, Mithatpaşa, Erkilet, Yıldızevler, and Uğurevler neighborhoods were announced as the urban renewal areas under the conditions specified by law on municipalities No. 5393 Art. 73. But, besides these squatter areas, also the neighborhoods that are nearby the city center

**District Neighborhood Area (ha) Population (persons)**

Total 593.21 21,566

Kocasinan Ahievran 25.5 240 Kocasinan Cırkalan 260.55 397 Kocasinan Sahabiye 50 5341 Kocasinan Seyrani 5.1 340 Kocasinan Uğurevler 87.23 6240 Kocasinan Yunus Emre 7.3 780 Kocasinan Yıldızevler 27 1628 Kocasinan Ziya Gökalp 23.25 1568 Melikgazi Anbar 5.8 268 Melikgazi Karacaoğlu 3.7 284 Melikgazi Küçük Ali 3.5 336 Melikgazi Kazım Karabekir 32 1392 Melikgazi Yeni Mahalle 85.53 2752

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84391*

formed at the parcel-level by contractors.

use projects [45, 48].

**Table 3.** *Urban landscape and urban renewal pattern in Kayseri.*

#### *Project-Based Urban Renewal and Transformation of Urban Landscape in Turkey DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84391*

development plan with a single center and linear form were designed. In this period, the city's traditional districts (which were filled with ornate mansion-houses mostly dating from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries) were demolished. Besides, the historical trade center was transformed into the modern city business center. New housing development areas were set across from the west to the east side of the city. Therefore, the city was converted from compact to linear form. The development plan suggested constructing broad boulevards and high-rise buildings which are still characteristic features of the city of Kayseri [45–47].

In 1986, a new master development plan was prepared by Topaloğlu and Berksan. Similar to the previous period, high-rise buildings and housing projects for middle and upper-income groups increased and the use of new materials and techniques was common in this period [45]. The first renewal projects were performed at the parcel-level by contractors.

During the 1990s, in Kayseri, market-based policies became more important for the city. The period that began under Karatepe's leadership in 1994 demonstrated that these municipal practices favored export-oriented policies and the liberalization of the Turkish economy [48, 49]. The privatization of municipal services continued at a greater level, especially after 1999. This process entailed a model popularly known as build-operate-transfer. During this period, the basic spatial practices were large-scale housing projects, transport and infrastructure projects, thematic-parks and sports facilities, museums, historic urban texture renewal projects, traditional public spaces projects (streets, squares, and parks) and mixeduse projects [45, 48].

Depending on the initiatives taken in laws regarding the urban transformation in the 2000s, the renewal practices gained significant speed in Kayseri city and entire country world In Kocasinan district, Ziyagökalp, Yenidoğan, Seyrani, Ahi Evran, Yunusemre, Argıncık, Yeşil Mahalle, Kuşcu, Oruçreis, Mithatpaşa, Erkilet, Yıldızevler, and Uğurevler neighborhoods were announced as the urban renewal areas under the conditions specified by law on municipalities No. 5393 Art. 73. But, besides these squatter areas, also the neighborhoods that are nearby the city center


#### **Table 4.**

*Urban renewal areas in Kayseri province.*

*Landscape Reclamation - Rising From What's Left*

according to the plan (**Table 3**).

33 Çaylak plan Modernist

1945 Oelsner-Aru

1986 Topaloğlu-Berksan plan

plan

activities played important role in Kayseri since the proclamation of the republic. Until the 2000s, it can be said that the renewal processes of the city have developed

**Plans Impact of plan on urban landscape Urban renewal patterns**

Urban rehabilitation (on existing

Urban revitalization (on existing

Urban rehabilitation (on existing

Urban conservation (on urban

Urban rehabilitation (on existing

Urban revitalization (on existing

Urban rehabilitation (on existing

Urban conservation (on urban

Urban renewal (on squatter

Urban redevelopment (Gated

urban texture)

housing stock) Clearance (on traditional housing texture)

urban texture)

historical site)

urban texture) Urban redevelopment Urban renewal (on squatter

housing stock)

urban texture)

historical site)

areas)

sites)

areas)

The distinction of the old and new city part

Reflection of modernization on space Destruction of an urban site

Grid system neighborhood Establishment of public spaces

Detached, extroverted houses

Sectoral distinction in the city Metropolitan city vision Identify urban sites

Linear development Metropolitan city approach Shrinkage of historical site boundaries

2006 Doğan plan Urban expansion as a spreading "oil stain" Radial urban texture

Density increase

Grid urban texture Urban projects

Gated sites

*Urban landscape and urban renewal pattern in Kayseri.*

Multistory construction Building layout flexible/uncertain

Transition to multistory construction

Building pressure on natural and urban sites

Transformation of squatter areas into multistory residential areas

Expansion of municipal boundaries and merger with semi-rural settlements

Urban renewal as an intervention tool

Mass housing construction

Grid system Garden city effect

1975 Taşçı plan Linear development

This city was partially planned for the public investments in the 1/8000 scale schematic Çaylak plan, which has been prepared in 1933. As a reflection of this modernist approach, the urban plan of this city was prepared by Kemal Ahmet Aru-Öelsner from a holistic approach in the year 1945. In the plan prepared by him, the gridded urban design incorporating the wide boulevards, which was accepted as the main representation of those years and constituting the main pattern of the city, became dominant. After the 1950s, the squatter housing areas became apparent in city pattern. The migration from rural to urban areas formed housing problem in cities, because the housing stock was not enough for newcomers. They constructed substandard housing units on the public land. At the beginning of the 1960s, some of the squatter housing districts transformed into illegal, and high rise apartment stocks, whereas the vote potential of squatter housing districts has been used by politicians. In this period, Kayseri began to canalize their capital, which they had been accumulating through commerce, into industrial investment and, as a result, urban mobilization began. Another important period is the one after 1970. The second master plan prepared by Yavuz Taşçı, an architect, in 1975, the city center was reinforced and a

**26**

**Table 3.**

and have a historical background and subjected to habitability certification such as Sahabiye, Küçük Ali, Battalgazi, and Karacaoğlu neighborhoods were also declared as the urban renewal zones (**Table 4**).

In Melikgazi district, the project processes of Kazım Karabekir and Anbar neighborhoods within the scope of law No. 6306 on renewal of regions under the risk of disaster were almost completed, and the implementation stage was started. Besides the renewal of 593.21 ha area influencing 21,000 users in Kayseri province, also the urban renewal requests were placed for Argıncık, Yeşil Mahalle, Kuşçu Mahallesi, Mithatpaşa, Erkilet, Bahçeşehir, Yavuzlar, Oruç Reis, Pervane neighborhoods and (in Melikgazi district) Kılıçarslan, Battalgazi and Seyitgazi neighborhoods.

## **5. Findings and discussion**

Thirteen areas, which are to be subjects of a renewal project, have been determined in the light of the information gained from Melikgazi and Kocasinan. According to the examinations, the formation ideas of the areas in Kayseri, which were 1944 Oelsner-Aru plan, 1975 Yavuz Taşçı plan, 1986 Toplağlu- Berksan, 2006 Doğan plan already transformed or whose renewal decisions were taken, are mostly based upon 2006 plan decisions. The reason for this situation, after 2000, as a result of the economic growth of the city of Kayseri, it is the increase of renewal pressure in the space depending on the competitive processes.

Kayseri is going through a period of urban projects changing the urban landscape. However, the previous researches showed that the number of holistic projects with economic, social, and physical objectives is limited. Investigating Kayseri from the aspects of the basic characteristics of urban regeneration areas and categorizing the city as area-based and site-specific projects, it can be seen that the site-specific projects are at the forefront.

When we consider the renewal process as a whole; we can identify the things below;

#### **5.1 Homogeneous architecture and urban environments**

Even handle with best intentions and professional care, larger areas designed by single designers or groups of designers lack the heterogeneity of urban neighborhoods (**Figure 2**).

The Turkish word for "neighborhood" is mahalle. While the mahalle is the urban residential space, this word also refers to a space of social memory in Turkish popular culture defined by familiarity, belonging and tolerance in a local. In these areas, where people feeling belonging to the neighborhood live, people are in a close relationship in their daily lives. The physical renewal affects the social structure deeply (**Figure 3**).

In the neighborhoods that have been partially transformed, there are problems of not only of the new gentry but also a homogenous urban usage. These areas

**29**

**Figure 3.**

*Project-Based Urban Renewal and Transformation of Urban Landscape in Turkey*

quickly turned into the centers of new life and got invaded by the cafes, restaurants, boutiques. For this reason, they became the areas attracting tourists at most and los-

Without careful public interference, private initiatives as well as government-led projects both lead to a complete change of inhabitants as well as urban character. Before the projects, the social geography of the neighborhoods was marked by its heterogeneous population, which suffered from poverty and the impacts of forced migration to this area because of poverty concentrated in this neighborhood. The central location of the neighborhood, which offers easy access to the informal labor markets in the center, cheap rent levels available abandoned building stock underlies the existence of very diverse and the least privileged groups in the neighborhood. After this project, the people living in the area started to leave there. No social policies, programs were integrated into the culture and tourism-based urban renewal scheme and no fixed measures were undertaken in order to keep the current population of Kayseri urban site in the area while improving their living conditions.

In the case of renewal, in accordance with the general view, urban densities need to be increased in order to create a viable economic model without re-placing original inhabitants. However, in areas such as Sahabiye, Yeni Mahalle and Ahi Evran neighborhoods (**Figure 4**), higher densities increase the pressure on infrastructure, roads and public facilities. Because of these insufficient systems, quality of life is reduced and does not provide planning standards. In addition, these projects are exemplary and rapid transformations are observed in the neighborhoods, city

A new texture, that cannot be adapted and articulated with the existing texture

In the case of models such as "Support," it may sometimes be very hard to draw the attention of developers because the areas in urgent need of transformation are not the primary targets in order to achieve a higher economic gain in the city. Investors do not show any interest in places where weathered and unqualified housing stock, such as the Fevzi Çakmak Quarter and Argıncık Quarter, are high. The most important reason for this is the fact that because of the lack of

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84391*

ing the sense of a real urban neighborhood.

centers and city boundaries after these applications.

is formed, the urban landscape is deteriorating in its entirety.

*Homogenous urban environments (Kazım Karabekir Neighborhoods) (2018) [50].*

**5.2 Possible gentrification**

**5.3 Extreme densities**

**5.4 No interest by developers**

**Figure 2.** *Homogeneous architecture (Karacaoğlu, Anbar, Mithatpaşa Neighborhoods, 2018) [49].*

quickly turned into the centers of new life and got invaded by the cafes, restaurants, boutiques. For this reason, they became the areas attracting tourists at most and losing the sense of a real urban neighborhood.
