Kentsel Dönüşüm Ve Bir Dağıtım Modeli Önerisi

Abstract

Bu tezin amacı köhneyen, yıpranan, eskiyen, savaşla tahrip olan, işlevini yitiren, afet riski taşıyan yerleşim bölgelerinin, gecekondu ve kaçak yapılaşmanın olduğu alanların yeniden yaşanabilir kentlere dönüştürülmesi için yapılması gerekli projeler bütününün belirlenmesi ve uygulamaya konulmasıdır. Bu dönüşüm nasıl olmalıdır? Yeni alt ve üst yapılar ve planlama modeli nasıl kurgulanmalıdır? Bu bölgelerde yaşayan ve çalışan insanların ekonomik, sosyal, kültürel seviyeleri nasıl yükseltilmelidir? Kentler, yapılar ve insanlar nasıl dönüştürülmelidir? Dünyada eski kentlerin yerine, yeni kentler inşa edilirken, tüm bu problemler çözülerek ekonomik, sosyal, kültürel seviyesi yüksek kentli bireylerin yaşayacağı; yeni mühendislik, altyapı ve üst yapı projelerinin (enerji verimliliği ve karbon salınımını esas alan) gerçekleştirildiği, ekolojik kent yaklaşımının egemen olduğu yeni kentler yaratılmıştır. Dönüşüm süreci, 1950’li yıllardan itibaren evrimleşerek mülkiyet ve barınma sorununu çözen kentsel dönüşüm yaklaşımlarından, günümüzdeki yeni yaklaşımlara ulaşılmıştır. Yeni kentsel dönüşümün temel bileşenleri; 1. Fiziksel Boyut, 2. Sosyal Boyut, 3. Yeni Ekonomi Yaratmak, 4. Kentsel Dönüşümün Finansmanı ve 5. Dönüşümün Hukuksal Boyutu olarak tez içinde ana hatlarıyla açıklanmıştır. Türkiye’de mülkiyet sorununun çözümlendiği dağıtımın matematiksel modeli hukuk başlığı altında incelenmiştir. Türkiye’de günümüzde kentsel dönüşüm, Dünya’daki 1980’li yılların yaklaşımlarıyla, sadece mülkiyet sorununun çözümlendiği, konut üretiminin gerçekleştiği kent modeli olarak gerçekleşmektedir. Afet riski altındaki Türkiye için kentsel dönüşüm gereklidir ve hızla başlanarak sonuçlandırılmalıdır ve 21. yüzyılın kentlerini yaratmak için bir fırsat olarak değerlendirilmelidir. 31 Mayıs 2012 Tarihinde yürürlüğe giren Afet Riski Altındaki Alanların Dönüştürülmesi Hakkında Kanun, riskli yapıların yıkımını belirlemiş, fakat mülkiyet ve barınma sorununu çözmekte bile yetersiz kalan genel kurallar içeren, Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı’na aşırı yetkiler veren, demokrasi kültüründen uzak bir yasal düzenlemedir. Dünyanın ulaştığı yeni kentsel dönüşümünden çok farklı, insanı yok sayan bir yaklaşım ortaya koymaktadır. Bu nedenle Türkiye için yeni bir kentsel dönüşüm modeli ortaya konulmuş ve bu modelin hukuksal boyutunun en önemli parametresi olan dağıtım (konut + mülkiyet) modeli belirlenmiş ve uygulaması test edilmiştir. Böylece mülkiyet sorunundaki gelişigüzel dağıtım uygulamaları bir modele dayandırılmıştır.

The purpose of this thesis is to designate and put into practice the entire bounden projects in order to transform the dilapidated, worn-out, frazzling, war-ravaged, vestigial, residential areas with disaster risk, squatter settlements and illegal buildings into habitable cities. How should this transformation be occurred? How should the planning model of the new infrastructures and built up areas be fictionalized? How should the economic, social, cultural levels of the people living and working in these areas be improved? How the cities, buildings and should people be transformed? In the world, while constructing the new cities in the place of the old cities, by solving all of these problems, the new cities were created where the ecologic approach is dominated, high economic, social, cultural leveled urban population live, new engineering, infrastructure and superstructure projects (based on energy efficiency and carbon emissions) are included. By evolving from the 1950’s, the transformation process reached to today’s new approach from the approaches that solve the issue of ownership and housing. Basic components of a new urban regeneration; 1. Physical Dimension, 2. Social Dimension, 3. Creating a New Economy, 4. Financing of Regeneration and 5. Legislative Aspects of Transformation is defined as and the components were explained with the outline in the thesis. Mathematical model of the distribution solving the ownership issue in Turkey was analyzed under the title of law. Today, with the world’s 1980s regeneration approaches, the urban regeneration in Turkey only solves the property issue and practices building construction. The urban regeneration is essential for Turkey which is under the risk of the disaster and should be started and finalized rapidly. Urban regeneration is also a chance for creating the 21st Century’s cities. The Law of Transforming the Disaster Risk Areas -entered into force on 31 May 2012-is a legal arrangement which has identified the destruction of the hazardous buildings but comprising the general rules that are even inadequate to solve property and housing issue, giving too much authorization to the Ministry of Environment and Urbanism, and is far apart from the democracy culture. It reveals a very different approach from the urban regeneration approach that the world has achieved today. In Turkey practices, urban regeneration projects are not taking the social regeneration into the consideration. Moreover working or residential population of project area are mostly directed to worse economic levels and conditions. In Turkey practices: • urban regeneration should be applied as a holistic way and should be evaluated as a combination of project titles including physical, social, creation of the new economy projects • main targets of planning should depend on laws. There should be regulations like: the multiplier in a certain projects area cannot be over 20% of mean multiplier of neighbour areas • green building certificate and local condition should be applied as engineering projects in Turkey with carbon emission standards and energy efficiency standards • social regeneration should be argued with a sustainable project logic with its own resources and with its regulations • in the Project areas; Local Neighbourhood Trusts should be established to ensuring the sustainability of social regeneration. • sustainability and participation in urban regeneration projects should be related to the law. • all main dimensions of urban regeneration (physical, social, economic, financial and legal) should be related to the law (Similarly to Istanbul Urban Development Regulatory). • there should be a “division model solving the ownership problems” which developed regarding to real estate regulations, development regulations, social regulations, judgments of ECHR (European court of human rights) and to the existing situation. • in the special case of gecekondu areas, regarding to the right of housing, the existing rights that are not depending on official registrations, however it should be issued to legal ownership in form of independent units. In this case, urban regeneration in gecekondu areas should not be only a cost of debris process or a charging based process for the gecekondu people. • urban regeneration projects should be produced (architecture, engineering, social and economic) and implemented by the approval of Municipality, Ministry or Boards. The holistic and problem solving projects should be issued to tender the way that TOKI do. In this line, projects would be easier to apply and the financing problems can be solved. • planning should consider the whole city with a holistic approach including transportation, infrastructure and other project details. • engineering and infrastructure projects should be able to compete with the global applications. • it should be learned and known that, in urban regeneration areas, to signing or sketching the plan areas as Commercial, Industrial or IT is not serving to create the new economy, economic regeneration can be only applied with detailed analysis and researches. The economy projects should be implemented which prepared by city economist. Because of the local demand, the neighbourhoods as Zeytinburnu, Laleli and Sultanahmet had a spontaneous economic development due to the lack of professionally prepared projects. • plans should be produced according to the economic models. In case of Sultanahmet, as a cultural tourism area, it would be proposed 5 star hotels as structured in block scale. A new model of urban regeneration for Turkey was revealed and the model of the distribution (housing + ownership), which is the most important parameter of this model’s legal dimension, was determined and implementation of the model was tested. Thus, random distribution applications in the ownership issues were based on a model within this thesis.