Large scale projects and heritage preservation in Istanbul

1

group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

Renata Ramazanova, Sofia Rostilova, Diana Nakhodkina

Keywords: urban regeneration progect, heritage preservation, fragmentation

ABSTRACT

This paper overlooks recent urban studies on the large-scale development projects of the last twenty years in the Beyoglu district of Istanbul and its relations to heritage preservation of this area. The Final Design Studio - History of Architecidea behind this research was to attain an in-depth understanding of ture the transformation caused by the macro-scale regeneration policies Professor: Paolo Scrivano Assistants: Valeria Casali, Nicole De and its impact on heritage and therefore on society.

Togni The first part of the paper presents a contextual background of the urban transformation of the Beyoglu district and its historical development from early settlements in the Byzantine era till the rapid urbanization in 1950. Following the features of the development of the port city and the the neoliberal urban development as a prior state policy to meet market-driven demands in the urban land of the late 20th century and, on the other hand, uprising community organizations resisting state’s urban policies, its impact of globalization on the circulation and economy of the district. The case studies presented in the second part of this paper critically analyzes the two large scale projects carried out in the Beyoglu after 2005 with its relation to the context and heritage preservation. After this, the paper tries to evaluate the problems and future risks of Halic port - the area where our group is developing the project, taking in consideration also the real project in this zone that is currently under construction.

2

group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

CONTENTS

Abstract

1

Introduction

3

1. Historical development of Beyoglu distric 2. Neo-liberal urban policy of Istanbul 3. Urban redevelopment projects and heritage preservation in Beyoglu district 4. Aims nd Methodology

Urban redevelopment projects of Beyoglu after the 2005:

3 3 4 4

5

1: Taksim

5

2: Galata port

8

3: Halic port

10

Conclusions

11

Bibliography

12

3

group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

INTRODUCTION Historical development of Beyoglu district.

To understand better the historical and socio-economic richness of the area this paper starts with a brief historical summary.

The Beyoğlu settlement is located on the European side of the Istnabul along the Golden Horn facing the old city across the bay.

It was formerly an important Genoese colony that attracted companies engaged in sea trade on the Mediterranean. Consistently, unsettled coasts of Galata territory became dominated by Genoese, Venetian and Pisan merchants city-states structures, which form a flourishing trade center. In the 15th century Ottoman Empire following the conquest of Constantinople occupied the coast and low-lying areas of Pera, however the European presence in the area did not end. As can be found in the miniature art created by Ottoman artist Matrakçı Nasuh in the 16th century (pic.1), Galata Tower and its surroundings, as well as the area outside the walls of Galata, were located among vineyards and orchards, where only a few buildings were present. pic.1 An Istanbul miniature by Matrakçı Nasuh, 1533 source: https://lij.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaggine:Matrak%C3%A7%C4%B1_Nasuh_-_%C4%B0stanbul.jpg

[1] Development of neoliberal urban policy in Turkey during the last thirty years is addressed within two periods.

The first period begins with economic restructuring policies of the 1980s. This period is signified by Structural Adjustment Policies and the deregulation of the trade and finance systems under the impact of increased market forces. The second period, the 2000s, involves legal and institutional restructuring mainly inspired by the EU alignment process.

(Kayasu and Yetiskul, 2014)

Following the Ottoman Empire’s new policies the establishment of permanent embassies was carried out starting from the first French embassy that symbolized an exceptional non-ideological alliance between Muslim and Christian states. (Freeze, 2006). After the settlement of other embassies, the region in the 17th century became the hub for foreigners and non-muslims and therefore the Westernization affected the buildings constructed along the embassies and palaces: theaters, newspaper bureaus, hotels and shopping arcades were a part of daily life of the locals. Moreover, the “port city” features like warehouses, shipyards and docks were built to supply the trade needs and therefore today constitute the valuable industrial heritage. A culturally rich environment dictated the construction of diverse religious structures like synagogues, churches and mosques and other typologies like schools and cultural centers used by ethnical minorities. Overall, the location and socio-economic characteristics of the settlement, which has been shaped over time by life itself, have many important reference points to be considered concerning conservation, use, and development within the context of the conditions specific to “identity”, “belonging” and “location”.

(Erbas, 2019) Neo-liberal urban policy of Istanbul Following the economic restructuring policies of the 1980’s the market demands became the main driver in urban land and property stocks [1]. The neoliberal urban policy in Istanbul shifted the focus from managing the negative external effects caused by accelerated urbanization towards fixing the problems of new policies consequences - socio-spatial restructuring in Turkey. Increased market forces led to the motivation of the central government to increase the urban and property values by implementing the large scale urban regeneration projects.

4

group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

Urban redevelopment projects and heritage preservation in Beyoglu district Between 2002 and 2007, Istanbul saw a construction boom due to the deregulation of urban planning systems and development constraints, which encouraged governmental agencies and private developers to undertake massive urban projects. With development licenses and minimum requirements and quality, the pattern of growth adds to an increasing and cumulative shortage of housing supply (GYODER 2016). Istanbul’s unplanned and unregulated growth necessitates drastic interventions in the built environment in the form of ‘renewal’ or ‘transformation’ projects due to escalating infrastructure and socioeconomic structure challenges, as well as the city’s severe seismic hazard (Kuyucu and Ünsal 2010). However, the city’s present urban renewal efforts do not appear to be a viable solution to these issues.(Shirazi, Ercut, 2014) With the adoption of the Beyoglu Conservation Plan in 2011, neoliberal urban strategies and investment priorities of the state and market were established in order to lure more commercial and touristic amenities to Beyoglu.However, no synthesis works on the interaction between the different regions on which it was divided [2] and the planning area covered by the plan reports exist. The plan decisions that will be made in these places that were left out of the Beyoglu conservation master plan process will, however, eventually affect the entire Beyoglu. The fact that initiatives being done by other waterfront zones, such as the Perşembe Bazaar and Haliçport, are deemed separate from the Beyoglu conservation master plan, harms the plans’ integrity and fragments the planning process, as well as changes the land use of the surrounfing areas. It is also obvious that an urban fabric’s history is inextricably linked to its conventional way of life, and that when social and physical values are ignored, the historical character of space vanishes along with spatial changes.

(Erbey, 2017) Aims and Methodology The main goal of the thesis is to analyze the relationship between recent urban regeneration projects and the heritage that existed or still exists in the planned zone. In particular, the research aims to understand the consequences of the two large scale projects implemented in the Beyoglu district in terms of preservation of historical urban fabric, social balance and heritage and tries to evaluate the perspectives of the design project site. After setting the aims of the paper, the Background Research Phase took place, where we reviewed the bibliography regarding history, economy and the social situation in Istanbul and in particular the Beyoglu area, the collected data is reflected in the introduction of the paper. From this point [2] These zones are designated as Galata-Karaköy-Tünel and its surround- the research concentrates on the two case studies that were chosen among other examples of contemporary large scale projects in ings, Istiklal StreetÇukurcuma- ToBeyoglu due to the availability of a great amount of information and phane and its surroundings, Cihangir-Gümüşsuyu-Taksim Square and its the similar characteristics with our project site. After that the paper surroundings, Talimhane-Tarlabaşı and analyzes the design project site, a former Halic port, and evaluates its surroundings, and Haliç Shipyard and its prospects with implementation of strategies that our group deits surroundings. signed.

5

group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

TAKSIM [3] In 2011, UNESCO, in its Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscape, defines the concept of Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) as follows: a historical urban landscape should be understood as a place where cultural and natural values coexist in the form of historic strata to reveal the relation of an urban settlement with the urban context and geography to which it is bound, rather than the concepts of “historical centre” or “community” (2005).

In the article “Changing Cities and Changing Memories” Erbey questions the applicability of the concept of Historical Urban Landscape in Turkey [3], which emphasises the fact that urban development strategies can become beneficial for conservation areas. The author proposes a notion of “urban memory” as a new indicator for the HUL approach through the revision of priorities on historical heritage during the urban transformation.

According to Erbey, the implementation tools of urban development in Turkey vary on the conservation and planning legislation, yet they are local or fragmented and independent from the strategic planning. Such approaches lead to prioritising the urban development strategies over the persistence of urban cultural heritage and its conservation policies (2017).

As a result of the sequence of planning implementations, the square of Taksim emerges as a fragment of a historical city that illustrates these challenges and the risk of losing the characteristics of its historical identity. The key study illustrates the issues of the continuity of urban memories, accumulated in different historical levels of the places, and their integration with a rapid change in Global Istanbul.

In today’s Istanbul, Taksim is the source of water distribution, an important transportation node both for vehicles and pedestrians, as well as the cultural and economical centre of the neighbourhood. On the other hand, it is the “place of the dead” where the Armenian, Greek and Muslim cemeteries are located. Taksim Square is surrounded by Taksim Gezi Park, the Atatürk Cultural Centre, the Marmara Hotel and an Ottoman-style water storage tank ‘maksem’. It has a significant value in the urban identity of Istanbul and in the memory of the inhabitants and is among the most important public spaces of Istanbul along with its importance in many other aspects (Özaydın, 2012). For a better understanding of the significance of Taksim in the context of pic. 2 Taksim square historical periods.

Source: Erbey, D. 2017. “Changing Cities social memory, its historical formation will be examined (pic. 2), and Changing Memories: The Case of particularly focusing on the urban development of the late twenTaksim Square, Istanbul.” tieth-century neoliberal policies.

Taksim Square got its name from Taksim Maksem, which was built in 1839 to transfer the water comes to the European part of Istanbul toward the three zones of the city. This area was a narrow dense space with old houses before becoming an urban square (Gülersoy,1986). Even though the Maksem carries an important identity of the place, its existence is not evident as it is placed on the corner of the square and it lost its initial function. During the early Republican period, Taksim was an important tool for the establishment of the national identity of Turkey, which was proclaimed by the erection of the Taksim Monument (pic. 3). The monument had a great political, social and urban meaning as Taksim became one of the pic. 3 The new erected situation of the first built in Istanbul public square for ceremonies, starting with Taksim monument. Source: Ç. Gülersoy, the Republic declaration (Erbey, 2017).

Taksim: Bir Meydanın Hikayesi, İstanbul Kitaplığı: Istnabul, p. 84, 1986.

6

group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

In the 1940s during the massive reconstruction in Turkey, the declining urban context of Taksim was subject to modernisation. According to Wagner et al. (2013), in that era’s understanding of conservation, demolition was a valid method for new city developments (pic.4). Ruined or damaged buildings were demolished to create new public spaces, while the streets leading to them were expanded and paved. Authors state that the Prost Plan [4] in 1937 is perhaps the most comprehensive planning experiment in Istanbul’s Republican history. Henri Prost submitted the first master “plan de concentration” [5] in 1937 (pic.5), where he included wide boulevards joining the functional areas, wide squares and eighteen parks. The parks were the comprehensive system of public spaces located in the empty spaces after the fires or replacing cemeteries. Particularly, it proposed the Taksim Gezi Park and the Cultural Valley between Beyoğlu and Şişli, while the Artillery Barracks [6] were demolished.

This plan was aimed at neighbourhood infrastructure: a theatre, conference halls, gathering halls, clubs, bus terminals, post office, and parking lots (Beyoğlu Municipality, Urban Planning Department, 2014).

Taksim Gezi Park is characterised by Erbey as a crucial public space ‘cultural asset’ along with a symbolic stage of representation of culture and urban development of the early Republican period (2017). The park integrated the multiple layers of collective memory as well as it contributed to the spatial identity of Taksim (Özaydın, 2012). Moreover, it was a distinctive urban component of the city’s green infrastructural development, proposed by Prost. The wide public spaces were not a typical organisation of space for the Muslim Ottoman state [7]. The design of the master plan tended to a more hygienic built environment, a new mixed population [8] public space and thus a radical change in urban welfare, the plans which “will shake old Istanbul to a great extent” (Prost, 1943). In fact, the master plan was not only aimed to visual beautification and the connection of several regions, but also to a strong political and social transformation of the Muslim Ottoman population into secular citizens of a nation-state. pic. 4 Construction in Tarlabası (left), Construction in Taksim (middle) and A Protest for Galata Port Project (right).

The placard reads ‘No Pass for Galata Port!’ (upper). Source: Hürriyet (2015b) (left), Radikal (2014) (middle) and Hürriyet (2014) (bottom).

[4] The architect and city planner Henri Prost (1874-1959) was invited in 1937 to establish a master plan to beautify and modernise the city of Istanbul. pic. 5 The First Master Plan of Istanbul, Henri Prost, 1937. Source: Source: IFA/ AA Archive, HP_PHO_30-4_3

The neoliberal policies adopted by Turkey after 1980 have also affected the Taksim. They meant to reshape the arrangement of public spaces for market-driven demands, developing production, commerce and tourism sectors. From one side, the square has begun to regain its former vitality, forgotten after the May 1 Incident [9].

7

group 2

[5] See İ.Akpınar, “The Rebuilding of Istanbul”, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, UCL Bartlett, University of London, 2003; İ.Y. Akpınar, İstanbul’da Modern bir Pay-ı Taht: Prost planı çerçevesinde Menderes’in icraatı”, C. Bilsel, P. Pinon, ed. İmparatorluk başkentinden Cumhuriyet’in Modern Kentine: Henri Prost’un İstanbul Planlaması (1936-1951), İstanbul Araştırmaları Enstitüsü, 2010, s.167199; C. Bilsel, “Henri Prost’un İstanbul Planlaması (1936-1951): Nazım Planlar ve Kentsel Operasyonlarla Kentin Yapısal Dönüşümü”, C.Bilsel, P.Pinon, ed. İmparatorluk Başkentinden Cumhuriyet’in Modern Kentine: Henri Prost’un [6]The Taksim Military Barracks or Halil Pasha Artillery Barracks were built in 1806, During the 31 March Incident in 1909, the Barracks building suffered considerable damage, and waited to be repaired. Its internal courtyard was later transformed into the Taksim Stadium in 1921. The stadium was closed and demolished during the construction and renovation works of Taksim Square and Taksim Gezi Park.

[7]This study is aware that the 18th Century public spaces along with the Golden Horn and Bosphorus were exceptional.

Some researchers also argue that the fountain and its surroundings can also be accepted as a ‘public space’ (Wagner et al., 2013).

[8]Prost consciously repeated the reasoning behind the existence of parks as “in order to take women and children out of their cages”. Public spaces make women “visible” in the cultural framework of Islam. Source: Prost Notes, IFA/AAarchive.

[9]The May 1 Incident was an attack on leftist demonstrators on 1 May 1977 (International Workers’ Day) in Taksim Square [10] Beyoğlu and Taksim Square were again a topic of debate at the time that the “Wealth Party” won the İstanbul municipal election in 1994. pic. 6 Taksim Square before the pedestrianizing project. Source: https://ibbqr. ibb.gov.tr/taksim-meydani-cevre-duzenleme-insaati/ pic. 7 Undefined space emerged after the Taksim Square Pedestrianizing Project. Source: http://www.kanalistanbul.com.tr/taksim-meydani-yayalastir-

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

On the other side, newly erected commercial buildings interrupted the organic process of urbanisation of inhabitants, as well it caused to lose especially and formal memories of the square (Erbey, 2017).

Meanwhile, a new wave of political change arrived in 1994 [10], which debated the Taskim’s nation-state identity and aimed to bring back the initial cultural and traditional structure of Beyoglu. There were several projects, symbolising the nation-state and Islam discussed, such as the example construction of a mosque. Within the upcoming century, Taksim Square became the scene of identity wars, led by government policies but resisted by the inhabitants and professional institutions.

In 2010 Beyoğlu district was subject to the Conservation Development Plan, aiming to preserve historical artefacts, and cultural and architectural values in their distinctiveness, as well as continue participation of lost artefacts identified with the historical and cultural identity of the district (Öztemiz,2012). The Taksim Pedestrianisation Project, the Taksim Gezi park demolition and the design of new Taksim Barracks within the Conservation Plan recently evoked heated debates both in research and social communities. The pedestrianisation of the square, supposed that the vehicles were the biggest problem of the square, however, according to Erbey, the transportation facilities had merged to the memory of the urban memory of the square in coexistence with the pedestrians. The project proposal to place vehicles under the ground would transform the space into the void, without human scale and its original identity in relation to the historical landmarks of the square. Even though the court cancelled the project in 2013, some of the changes irreversibly changed the image of the square (pic. 6-7). Moreover, the social demonstrations on the square were banned due to the pedestalizing project, causing the disappearance of the social aspect of the urban memory.

8

group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

Another direction of the Conservation policy was the rebuilding of the Artillery Barracks as a shopping mall, on the site of cut Gezi Park.

This is a paradoxical situation, as Gezi Park, which was built after the demolition of the Artillery Barracks, accumulated its own historpic. 9 Taksim Barracks after its demoical and urban identity, and it met the threat of demolition for the lition. Source: Ç. Gülersoy, Taksim: Bir re-construction of newer barracks (pic. 8-10). This project became Meydanın Hikayesi, İstanbul Kitaplığı: the battlefield of social resilience. The Gezi uprising in June 2013 Istnabul, p. 84, 1986. may be considered a reaction to the overall neoliberal state policy pic. 10 Taksim barracks revitalization in urban planning and the demand of the local communities for the project. Source: https://www.diken.com. development of a democratic state (Yetiskul et al., 2015). pic. 8 Taksim Barracks before its demolition. Source: Ç. Gülersoy, Taksim: Bir Meydanın Hikayesi, İstanbul Kitaplığı: Istnabul, p. 84, 1986.

tr/topbastan-mujde-topcu-kislasi-da-kabatas-meydan-projesi-de-yapilacak/

GALATA PORT Another direction of the Conservation policy was the rebuilding of the Artillery Barracks as a shopping mall, on the site of cut Gezi Park.

This is a paradoxical situation, as Gezi Park, which was built after the demolition of the Artillery Barracks, accumulated its own historical and urban identity, and it met the threat of demolition for the re-construction of newer barracks (pic. 8-10). This project became the battlefield of social resilience. The Gezi uprising in June 2013 may be considered a reaction to the overall neoliberal state policy in urban planning and the demand of the local communities for the development of a democratic state (Yetiskul et al., 2015).

Such a rich background of the area and presence of multiculturalism, with a mix of people from different races, religions, and backgrounds, living together and shaping a new city is crucial for understanding it. Variety can create conformations between people, but talking about Istanbul we see how differences help people to create something historically outstanding. To create a better future, and better places to live in, we need to understand the past, so this historical background is crucial for mastery of the atmosphere of the place.

9

group 2

(pic.12 Galata port, 2021, Source: <https://archello.com/es/project/galataport-2>)

(pic.13 photo of “Viking Sky” in Galata port, 2021, Source: <https://galataport.com/en/ press-releases/viking-sky-arrives-to-galataport-istanbul-a-sign-of-revitalized-cruise-tourism>)

(pic. 11, Galataport in 1910; Source: <https://galataport.com/en/heritage/ cinili-han>)

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

The context of the Galata port, which was opened in 2021, is a seaport that was working till the end of the 2000s when it was decided by the Turkish government that the area needed to have an urban transformation, as it could not catch up with the new rising amount of tourists and new needs. With new urban policies, the government decided to create a mixed-use space that would have the capability to serve the high flow of people. With that, they cleared the area from the slums and subjected it to gentrification (Islam, 2010). From one point it was a great economical boost for the area, as new businesses were willing to come there, real estate properties raised in price, and the overlook of the area improved significantly, creating a possibility for the government of the district to invest money into the restoration projects and preserve, restore the cultural heritage of the area with new economical boost (pic. 12). Also, looking at the overall image of the residents there, it was clear that the majority of them adopted a ‘new’ image of the area and wanted to correspond to it. On the other hand, for creating such a large-scale project, with the improvement of the “whole image of the area” a great number of slums were demolished and a lot of houses were roughly renovated, demolishing the cultural face of the area and breaking the connections between people and their heritage. Besides, the renovation of the Galata port was mainly subjected to the idea of enlarging it and adding a capacity to serve big cruise ships that can come to the historical part of the city. With that, it is impossible to deny that visual and noise pollution of the area changed drastically, as the number of tourists increased, with the presence of the big structures in the areas (Sevgi, 2013), which damage the human scale of the area and confront the surrounding architecture (pic.13).

To sum up, we are seeing that Galataport had a huge impact on the picture of the district and its connection with the city, in which we saw different effects, positive and negative. This project is opened very recently and maybe it is not fair to jump to the conclusions, but looking so far we can say that it did not stay in the melancholic idea of the glamorous past of the Galata area and was able to create a new image of the coastline, but this also created a controversion of the future and the past, not blending.

10 group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

HALIC PORT Looking at the Beyoglu district in the map it is hard not to see the black isolated island of land in the middle - Halic shipyards. Currently abandoned area was established in the fifteenth century and was the main sea trade point of the internal city’s harbor in the Byzantine area. During the Ottoman period the image of the area changed from the parks and picnic area to the industrial center of the city.

Great number of factories and plants were needed in the city at the time, a harshly polluted area and tended to the creation of the slums around, as the district was not ready to meet the number of residents, who needed to live close to the factories. In the 1980s it became clear that the center of the city should not have that much industry, so the transformation of the area, with the idea of rethinking industrial heritage, began (pic.14). (Mevlüde; Sanatlar; Mimar, 2003) Pic. 14: Initiators of projects along Halic Source: (Geambazu Serin 2014)

Pic. 15: Art workshop in halic shipyard Source: <http://www.xinhuanet.com/ english/2020-11/14/c_139514500.htm>

Pic. 16-17: Renders of the project under construction Source: <https://www.theplan.it/award2019-mixeduse/tersane-istanbul-halic-shipyards-1>

Main changes that are happening in the golden horn are redevelopment of the existing buildings and giving them new purposes, such as exhibition centers, museums and offices. These improvements give new meaning to the post industrial zone, saving the Ottoman industrial heritage. (Kıasıf, 2018) However, after the decision to close factories and ottoman shipyards, the following initiatives to regenerate Halic’s waterfront showed no intention of resolving the social and economic burning issues of the neighboring communities. The whole level of the area changed significantly as people were leaving it, having no work place or enough social features there (Geambazu, 2019).

“With empty convention centers in the middle of poor neighborhoods, a few art galleries right beside demolished historic buildings, and newly built museums next to squatter housing”. (Bezmez 2008 pp. 817), (pic. 15)

11 group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

So, the main problems of the area are fragmentation and segregation, and any project that should be realized in this area should also work with the surroundings, because it is clear that small improvements will not save the whole district. Looking at the project, which is in the construction phase right now in Halic shipyards, we can highlight that the main problem there was lack of transparency during the planning process and inability of the municipality to communicate with the residents (Geambazu, 2019). The project suggests creation of new office buildings, hotels and shopping centers, architecture of which will resemble the industrial past of the area, and saving just some of the existing buildings (pic 16-17).

In our proposal the main problem that we wanted to solve is fragmentation of the area, that is why we suggested the blending of the residential blocks into the area and creation of new public spaces for the district, another solution that we implemented - better availability. We restore the sea transportation node in the area and add a new bus line in the district for better connection of two opposite sides of Beougly.

To sum up, Halic shipyards are one of the blank spots in the Golden Horn shoreline, with strong Ottoman industrial character, that should be rethought in order to bring unity to the area. In the project under construction, we are seeing this lack of connection with the surrounding area and there is a possibility that this project will lead to desertification of the area, enhancing the segregation there.

CONCLUSION Area of Beyoglu has a rich history, which reflects in the architectural heritage of it, affected by urban transformation in the twentieth century. Main focus of the district’s redevelopment was given to neoliberal politics, which resulted in the construction of the largescale project around the district. Through the series of analyzed key studies, we saw the conflict between the continuity of historical heritage and rapid economical, social and cultural development of the last century. The Taksim square neo-liberal policy of the 20th century and the recent urban policies caused changes in the urban environment, its functions and physicality, which resulted in the deterioration of the identity and memory of the place. Nevertheless, the restoration and rehabilitation of the public space should not only be focused on the renewal of its physical identity, it should incorporate broader interdisciplinary research on the historical and cultural framework, as well as the social survey and participation. In Galataport it was clear how large-scale projects can improve the overall image, but also enhance the desertification there. Same might be implied to the Halic port project, where the overall idea of industrial Ottoman has a resemblance, but the project does not integrate with the surroundings. Finally, showing large scale projects’ influence on the heritage of the beyoglu district and its effects on the society.

12 group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

BIBLIOGRAPHY Erbas, Adem Erdem. 2018. “Cultural Heritage Conservation and Culture-Led Tourism Conflict within the Historic Site in Beyoğlu, Istanbul,” WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment 217, 217 (January). Southampton: W I T Press. doi:10.2495/SDP180551.

Erbey, D. 2017. “Changing Cities and Changing Memories: The Case of Taksim Square, Istanbul,” International Journal of Culture and History (EJournal) 3, 3 (4). EJournal Publishing: 203–12. doi:10.18178/ ijch.2017.3.4.101.

Frazee, Charles A. 2006. Catholics and Sultans: The Church and the Ottoman Empire 1453–1923. Cambridge University Press.

Gozde, Çakır, and Kıasıf. 2018. “The Effects of Cultural Purpose Transformation of Industrial Heritage Structures on the Social Development of Haliç Region.”

Gülersoy, Çelik. 1986. Taksim. İstanbul: İstanbul Kitaplığı.

“GYODER.” 2016.

Kapti, Mevlüde, Mimar Sinan, and Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi. 2003.

“The Preservation and Rehabilitation of Haliç (The Golden Horn) District in Istanbul as Industrial Heritage TÜBA-TÜKSEK View Project.”

Moody, Kim. 2008. “Neoliberalism: The Shadow of Class,” Dialectical Anthropology 32, 32 (1–2). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands: 53–58. doi:10.1007/s10624-008-9038-9.

Özaydın, Gülşen. 2012. “‘Taksim’in Üstü Altına İniyor!,’” Mimarlık, , no. 364 (March). https://search.proquest.com/docview/1832236582. Özlü, N., Gratien Ch. Producing Pera: A levantine family and the remaking of Istanbul. Ottoman History Podcast, 2013, No. 90. Available at: https://www.ottomanhistorypodcast.com/2013/01/pera-istanbul-architecture.html Chris Gratien. https://www.ottomanhistorypodcast.com/2013/01/ pera-istanbul-architecture.html. Öztemiz., I. 2012. “Koruma Amaçli İmar Planlarinin Kentsel Tasarim Göre Değerlendirilmesi: Beyoğlu Koruma Amaçli Nazim Planı Örneği .” Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University: İstanbul.

Povilaitienė, Ingrida. 2016. “Residents’ Sense of the Place in Galata Neighbourhood, in Istanbul,” Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 15, 15 (2). Exeley Inc: 13–19. doi:10.5755/j01. sace.15.2.15121.

Serin, Geambazu. 2014. “Dimensions of Urban Waterfront Regeneration: Case Study of Halic/ The Golden Horn; An Assessment of Obstacles and Opportunities for Inclusiveness.” Omega 20. Elsevier

13 group 2

LARGE SCALE PROJECTS AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN BEYOGLU

n.d. “Dynamics of Public Urban Waterfront Regeneration in Istanbul; The Case of Halic Shipyard Conservation.”

Sevgi, Hande. 2013. “The Galataport Project and Its Impact.” https:// www.academia.edu/. https://www.academia.edu/9525711/The_Galataport_Project_and_Its_Impact.

Shirazi Reaza, M., and Erkut Gülden. 2014. Dimensions of Urban Re-Development. Berlin: Endformat GmbH. “Spatial Planning: Beyoğlu Presentation, Beyoğlu Municipality, Urban Department.” n.d. In .

Tolga, Islam. 2010. “Current Urban Discourse, Urban Transformation and Gentrification in Istanbul,” Architectural design 80, 80 (1). Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd: 58–63. doi:10.1002/ad.1011.

“World Heritage, UNESCO, 15th General Assembly of States Parties, WHC-05/15.GA/7.” n.d. In .

Yetiskul, Emine, Serap Kayasü, and Suna Yaşar Ozdemir. 2016. “Local Responses to Urban Redevelopment Projects: The Case of Beyoğlu, Istanbul,” Habitat international 51, 51 (February). Elsevier Ltd: 159– 67. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.10.019.