Cover page image source: New York Tribune, 5 April 1925, “The pedestrian’s predicament” cited in Pushkarev, B. S., Zupan, J. M., (1975), Urban Space for Pedestrians, p.16 2
Contested Spaces 1 Introduction: The development of a sustainable society is one of the most pressing issues the human race will face in the 21st century. A city without sustainable transport cannot be considered sustainable; it must prioritise pedestrians and cyclists over vehicle transport, providing uninterrupted routes. This essay analyses the types of obstruction that have an impact on pedestrian and cycle transport by considering examples in London and Ankara. It investigates different scales of movement, types of connection, definitions of boundaries, and the clash and overlap between different movement modes as well as conflicts between public and private spaces. It provides an overview of where and how contested spaces manifest themselves in the city, what planning processes have detrimental effects on sustainable transport behaviour and how progressive policies and planning can enhance the sustainability of a city.
2 Motivation: 2.1
Why sustainable?
Since the industrial revolution energy use per capita across the world has been growing at an ever-increasing rate. It is well recognised that the burning of fossil fuels is causing serious damage to the environment. It is also recognised that the world's readily accessible fossil fuel deposits will be depleted in the foreseeable future, necessitating a change in lifestyle whether we like it or not. Even before they can run out, many countries are recognising the security benefits of, as David MacKay (2008) puts it, not being dependent on ‘imports from untrustworthy foreigners’.
2.2
Why cities?
At the same time that per capita energy consumption has been increasing, people have been flocking to the city at an ever increasing rate. The growth of cities and the global increase in energy consumption are inextricably linked. Year
Percent of global Global carbon population in emissions cities (million tonnes) 1900 15% 546 1950 29% 1,630 2000 47% 6,278 2005 49% 7,985 Table 1. Relationship between the population and carbon emissions Source: Rode (2009); Girardet (2008 p. 3); Baumert, et al. (2005 p. 4) Cities now consume 75% of the world's resources, despite covering just 2% of its surface area (Girardet, 2008 p. 4). With such a great percentage of the world's population in cities, and the much higher per-capita energy consumption of city-dwellers compared to rural inhabitants, any attempt to reduce the impact of climate change or reduce the world's dependence on fossil fuels must focus on the role of the city. As Herbert Girardet (2008 p. 17) succinctly puts it, ‘In a world of cities, sustainable development must be sustainable urban development. There will be no sustainable world without sustainable cities.’
2.3
Why transport?
The contribution of transport to global CO2 emissions has increased in both absolute and relative terms from roughly 3 billion tonnes of CO2 per year (19%) in 1971 to nearly 7 billion tonnes of CO2 per year (29%) in 2001 (Banister, 2005 p. 1).
3
With such a large percentage of the world's population living in cities, and with transport contributing such a large amount to global carbon emissions, it is worth investigating the reasons why city-dwellers do and do not use sustainable transport, recognising that the motivations of transport users are not always simple. Such investigations will allow planners to understand what factors may be inhibiting the greater uptake of already available modes of sustainable transport, and to make the urgent changes to city designs needed to reduce society's dependence on fossil fuels. ‘Any endorsement will also have to recognise the critical role of urban building typologies and that of accessibility based on proximity, mobility and connectivity rather than simply expanding transport infrastructure (Rode, 2009).’ This essay analyses the frequently overlooked details that may have detrimental effects on sustainable transport modes such as walking and cycling in London and Ankara. Large scale top-down planning policies frequently manifest themselves as small and pedestrian scale interventions which are often overlooked. However, analysing the impact of smaller issues on the day-to-day life and habits of a city's inhabitants can be instructive, providing insight into the macro-scale effects of planning policies.
2.4
Why walk?
Walking is clean, secure, cheap, instantly available and requires no special equipment (to buy, or be stolen). In fact, for distances of up to a kilometre walking is the ideal mode of transport. It is by far the most popular recreational activity can be enjoyed by people of all ages and physical conditions, and requires no special skill (Cavill, 2003). Moreover, 'in the midst of an epidemic of obesity in Western societies [it is] one of our most costeffective health measures.’ (NHANES, 1999 cited in Napier, 2000)
2.5
Why cycle?
For distances from half a km up to about six km cycling is the fastest means of transport in the city and offers an opportunity for health and physical fitness by regular exercise. Car usage can be shifted to bicycle usage especially for short distances without reducing mobility or speed.
Figure 1. Comparative table of journey speeds in the urban environment Source: ECMT, (2004 p. 23) Cycling is cost-effective, produces no pollutants or intrusive noise, and bicycles require little space to store. Moreover, there is the question of 'liveability'. Although silent and pollution-free vehicles would greatly improve the environmental sustainability of a city and the quality of life of its citizens, as long as the private car is used to the same degree it is at present it will still necessitate a vast infrastructural network and will dominate the city, making it a hostile environment for people. Walking and cycling together create a livelier, richer, and more human-scale city setting, and improve the quality of the city space. Replacing wide congested roads with pedestrians and cyclists can rescue a city, transforming it into a people-friendly environment with liveable streets.
2.6
What are these contested spaces?
In a city most of the time, one can read the boundaries between different transport modes or between public and private property. These boundaries offer a clue to the existence of contested spaces. They can manifest themselves as the line between a cycle path and a road, or a footbridge over a road, or a possible pavement that is blocked by a private use. 4
This essay defines the contested spaces as the occasional clash and overlaps between different transport modes and activities. It particularly focuses on where the continuity of some sustainable transport modes (walking and cycling) is interrupted in the city by vehicle traffic or by some planning decisions. Table 2 below categorises the contested space types which are analysed in this essay. Category Discontinuity Barrier Domination Deprioritisation Clutter
2.7
Example Footpaths that disappear and leave pedestrians to walk on the road Physical efforts to prevent people from following the city’s natural ‘desire lines’ Cyclists forced to share a road with heavy fast moving vehicles will lead to some potential cyclists choosing an alternative. Providing cyclists/pedestrians with very short green signals and long waits. Badly designed footbridges, street furniture or advertising panels blocking the footpath. Table 2. Categorisation of contested spaces
Why London and Ankara?
This essay considers the situation in Ankara and London not to compare the state of their sustainable transport directly but because they offer an interesting variety of obstructions to walking and cycling. Despite the two city's great differences in terms of public transport, culture and many other aspects, they both have contested spaces which have harmful effects on sustainable public movement. London is an established Western European city and has a density network of public transport; trains, light rail, buses, and boats that combine to provide more than 3 billion individual passenger journeys per year (TfL, 2010). In contrast, Ankara is a young, fast growing capital city which has not yet developed an effective public transport system. Where London offers secure pedestrian routes and is beginning to offer cycling routes, Ankara city centre fails to provide safe pavements or cycle-paths, and is especially unable to answer the needs of those who are less able to walk.
Figure 2. Visually impaired pedestrian in London
Figure 3. Disabled pedestrian in Ankara
On the other hand, Ankara offers hope for change with its heavily out-doors life style citizens who are less resistant to change and open to new developments. Although London does offer secure pedestrian and cycling routes, it also appears to be unable to resist gated developments (see section 4.2.1) and other planned, rather than thoughtless, pedestrian and cyclist obstructions. All these points raise the question of why these differences arise, and whether one city can learn from the other, or perhaps solutions in one city are not suitable for the other. Focusing on these two cities allowed many different aspects of the issue of contested space to be considered as well as where it is likely to occur and how it can best be managed.
5
3 Ankara: Ankara experienced possibly its most significant change and phenomenal growth after it became the capital city of the newly founded Turkish Republic in 1923, at which point it was an insignificant town of just 35,000 people. The city grew rapidly and Hermann Jansen, a well-known German architect, was commissioned to create Ankara’s ‘master plan’. Construction began in 1934 (Cengizkan, 2010). Jansen’s envisaged population of 300,000 for 1978 was reached In 1950s (Kızılay Kent Merkezi Calısma Grubu (KKMCG), 2004). Ankara can be thought of as having an "old town" and a "new town." The old town, known as Ulus, has many ancient buildings dating back to Ottoman, Byzantine, and even Roman times, with narrow streets and alley ways best explored on foot. The new town, known as Yenişehir (“New city”), is centred around Kızılay, Ankara's main square and is home to everything one would expect in a modern city in terms of hotels, shopping malls, high rise buildings as well as wide multi-lane roads. In the period after World War II, Turkey, like many other developing countries, faced rapid urbanisation. Ankara and Istanbul both experienced annual growth rates of up to 6% (Tekeli, 2009). With massive urban migration and with so little pre-existing infrastructure the city suffered from non organised settlements. However this essay focuses not on the transport problems that occur in the illegal or un-planned settlements at the relatively new outskirts of Ankara, but instead on the problems in the planned city, that have happened despite, or even because of planning. It is going to look at the very heart of the city, which in the past offered good living standards for everyone, investigating developments to the city centre implemented over the last 15 years by the municipal government, and consider how and why things have changed.
3.1
When did things start to change?
In the 1980s changing government policy led to a focus on roads as the solution to Turkey's transport problems, which had a major impact on the way the city developed, but the major changes in Ankara city centre started in 1994 with the change in Ankara Metropolitan Municipality power. One of the new mayor Melih Gökçek's primary concerns was the city's transport problem. His new team’s vision for solving the congested roads was widening them, especially in the city centre; closing as many roads as possible to pedestrians, and re-directing them to various underpasses and footbridges; and of course building many vehicle tunnels and bridges across the whole Yenisehir area. The new municipal power’s acts faced strong objections from the Chamber of Architects and Urban Designers, various engineering authorities and non-governmental organisations. Metropolitan municipality faced several court cases, losing some of them. Crowds protested against its projects. Mayor Gökçek though has never wavered from his goal of speeding up the traffic as much as possible through the heart of the city, and proudly stated on TV that "Everyone has a hobby; and traffic is mine!".
Figure 4. Melih Gökçek, Mayor of Ankara, showing one of his creations
3.2
Where do the contested spaces occur in Ankara?
Streets can be hostile for pedestrians in many developed cities. However, governments and local authorities have started to see the situation differently in the last twenty five years in many European countries, considering the importance of ‘liveable streets’. Prior to that, managing road space was focused on getting vehicle traffic from A to B as quickly as possible. Stewart (2001) notes the introduction of traffic calming, cycle lanes, and bus priority
6
measures have all been introduced since then in the UK. This raises the question of why this has not occurred in Ankara. Kızılay Square is well known in Ankara as a place to meet, shop, work and gather. It is, however, quite different from the main squares found in most European capital cities; it has wide roads, speedy vehicle traffic and a dangerously hostile environment for anyone travelling on foot.
Figure 5. 23rd April festival celebration in Kızılay Square
3.2.1
Figure 6. An ordinary day in Kızılay Square
Barrier:
The most obvious manifestation of a contested space is a physical barrier obstructing the natural flow. On 3rd October 2003, Ankara Metropolitan Municipality closed down all street level pedestrian access in Kızılay Square, placing glass barriers beside the roads to prevent pedestrians crossing and improve traffic flow. Pedestrians were forced to use the underground passes to cross the roads.
Figure 7. Pedestrians using underground passes
Figure 8. Pedestrians jumping on the barriers
On 7th October, six professional bodies affiliated with the Turkish Architects and Engineers Chambers Association (TMMOB) protested strongly and released a press statement entitled "We urge people in Ankara to resist this development."
Figure 9. “We want our pedestrian crossings back.” On 10th October, the Municipal Government introduced concrete barriers following breakages of the glass ones.
7
th
Figure 10. Kızılay Square on 10 October 2003 As protests escalated, the metropolitan municipality carried out an informal survey using voting booths in Kızılay which came back in favour of the changes. On 25th October the press revealed serious irregularities in the survey, and three days later an 18-thousand-signature petition demanding the re-opening of the pedestrian crossings was handed to the municipality. The case went to trial and on 11th November the result came back in favour of the protesters (KKMCG, 2004). On 19th November 2003, the barriers across Kızılay Square were finally removed and the light crossings were re-introduced though the time allocated to pedestrian traffic was 25 seconds instead of the 35 seconds it had been previously (TMMOB, 2003).
3.2.2
Discontinuity:
It is not difficult to come to the conclusion that pedestrians are considered with disdain (if they are considered at all) during the municipality's improvement projects. For instance the footbridges along Mithatpasa and Mesrutiyet Roads clearly block the existing pavements, forcing pedestrians onto the street. Pavements around these areas are perennially broken, full of hazardous holes and bumps. Moreover, because these structures are so impractical pedestrians find their way across the road through the heavy flowing traffic.
Figure 11. Mesrutiyet Street pavement
Figure 12. Mithatpasa Street pavement
Figure 13. Mesrutiyet Street unused footbridge
Figure 14. Mithatpasa Street unused footbridge
8
3.2.3
Clutter:
Unnecessary and thoughtlessly positioned street furniture such as new lamp posts or advertising panels further reduces the already limited pavement space.
Figure 15. Advertising Panel on Selanik Street
Figure 16. Akay Street pavement
Figure 17. Street lamp blocking the pavement, Mesrutiyet Street
Figure 18. Blocked pavement detail
The Metropolitan Municipality's arts vision is also ambiguous. Unusable and even unreachable expensive looking street decorations are frequent in the capital city, as well as some temporary pieces whose purpose is not always clear.
Figure 19. Inaccessible application on Eskisehir Street
Figure 20. Inflatable gorilla in K覺z覺lay Square
9
These sculptural city pieces clearly have little to do with Turkish traditional arts or culture and it is difficult to understand what aesthetic vision they come from. Moreover, they often cause further interruption to pedestrian movement in the city with the barriers around them.
3.2.4
Domination:
Since 1994, Ankara Metropolitan Municipality has continuously widened the roads in the city centre in an effort to eliminate traffic congestion and decrease journey times for car owners. Ataturk Boulevard (the main boulevard joining the old and new city centres), Eskisehir Street and many large boulevards were turned into motorways cutting the city centre to pieces with their many vehicle tunnels and bridges. On these roads pedestrians can only cross through footbridges or underground passages while on some other streets there is no safe way to cross at all. The needs of a wide variety of potential users of public transport such as the elderly and children have not been taken into account (Senbil, 2010). Potential pedestrians are obliged to own a car. Ever widening roads lead inevitably to the disappearance of pavements. It is clear that between Ankara's evergrowing traffic and its increasingly overlooked pedestrians, the competition is rather one-sided.
Figure 22. Ataturk Boulevard and disappearing pavement
Figure 21. Cinnah Street and disappearing pavement
3.2.5
Big picture
All these new roads and impractical pedestrian routes cause significant problems to pedestrians and make it impossible to cycle in the city without risking death or serious injury due to the heavy fast moving traffic. Furthermore, these road expansions not only make the current circumstances worse, but are also clearly a waste of public funds. They make what should be a very manageable pedestrian size city centre a nightmare as an experience.
Figure 23. Congested traffic on Ataturk Boulevard
10
It is difficult to understand the apparent inability of Ankara's decision makers to see the big picture of sustainability and the inevitable future of the city. It would seem that for the past 15 years ever-wider roads have been seen by the municipal government as an improvement to the city without considering the impact these changes cause to non-drivers. Faster roads caused a consequent increase in fatalities in the city (Atak, 2008; Senbil, 2010), and during the peakhours it is easy to see that the wider roads are not an answer to the traffic congestion that they are trying to improve but the very cause of it. In Ankara one cannot help but feel that one is in a world built for cars and that there is no space for pedestrians.
Figure 24. Pedestrians' survival in Ankara
3.3
So how did we get here?
The very short answer is that Ankara’s Metropolitan Government for the past 16 years has wanted to build roads. However given the clearly disastrous results of this policy, this raises the question of how the government can be sufficiently popular to stay in power. A full analysis of that is well beyond the scope of this essay. However, any such analysis would have to recognise that Ankara has (at least) two very distinct demographic groups in its 4.5 million population (TSI, 2009). One of these groups has a rural/village background, for many of which a new motorway is a positive sign of development and progress. Many of these people do not experience the city centre in their day to day lives - this author recalls her surprise at speaking to a 20 year-old working in a glass factory and living in suburban Ankara who was born and bred in Ankara but had never been to Kızılay, the city's main square. This population is generally uneducated, poor and open to exploitation, but does provide a huge number of votes to the current party, who often supply impermanent solutions for the lives of these people such as free heating coal and food. The second distinct group consists of the educated, though not necessarily wealthy people who are in need of good public transport links and desire a liveable and pleasant city centre. Ankara is a city full of universities and people who seek higher education. It has a distinct background and history of high level civil servants, engineers, professors, teachers and doctors. These people although a relative minority in the city are the people who from time to time fight against the interventions of the municipality. Because walking is so ubiquitous, there are no powerful lobbies or advocacy groups as there are, for example, for motorists. In the eyes of the governing bodies as Goodman (2003) puts it walking is “invisible” and people find their way through sometimes heavy traffic, sometimes between several obstructions. It is so flexible that it is often taken for granted, especially in Ankara where it is possible to observe that, over time, citizens get used to, or at least resigned to, the changes and stop questioning why they are forced to walk on the roads instead of the pavements.
Figure 25. Pedestrians of Kızılay
11
4 London: The streets of London also have changed greatly over the past sixty years. Until the mid-1950s London street space was shared between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles equally (Stewart, 2001 p. 3). But all that changed with the rapid increase in private car ownership. Cars started dominating the roads, the cities, people's minds and the way they behave. It became received wisdom that London needed more roads, wider roads, and faster ways to get from A to B. At the same time, non-automobile modes had to fight over any remaining funds. Until relatively recently, funding for bike lanes or introducing new and safer routes for pedestrians was not a priority. London is far more advanced than Ankara when it comes to public transport, links and health and safety. It has secured rules, standards and relatively free movement for pedestrians, disabled people and cyclists. However, there is still room for improvement. Although there are many more cyclists in London than there were just 10 years ago, it is still not enough to ensure a fully sustainable future city. The city is full of difficulties for prospective cyclists and pedestrians.
4.1
Recent changes and why they are not enough?
The recent introduction of municipal rental bikes and bike-superhighways in London has undoubtedly made a difference to the way people move about the city. TfL intends that the Cycle Superhighways will encourage enough people to get on their bikes that cycling will eventually reach critical mass as a mode of transport and will be 'self-sustaining'. However, London Assembly Transport Committee’s (LATC) recent report reveals that the outcome is far less than what was anticipated. The survey that was carried out found that less than one per cent of cycle journeys are replacing those previously made by car; TfL’s planning assumptions were for a five per cent shift from car to bike. Moreover 60% of the survey respondents stated that they did not feel safer using the cycle-superhighways and two-thirds did not feel they were respected by other road users. 'The Mayor’s ambition is for the planned 12 cycle superhighways to generate 120,000 additional cycle trips per day. The two pilot cycle superhighways are attracting 5,000 cyclists per day and only one per cent of respondents to our survey had started cycling specifically as a result. (LATC, 2010) ' This lack of success so far can perhaps be explained using the requirements for a cycle friendly system put forward by Ploeger (2003 p. 269): Requirements of a Cycle Friendly System Resistance Cycling requires effort on the part of the cyclist. Cyclists will appreciate a system that is comfortable and direct Surroundings A pleasant cycle route through attractive surroundings will be more popular than an equally fast and safe route through a noisy and unattractive area. Vulnerability Cyclists are keenly aware of their vulnerability when sharing the road with motorised vehicles. Measures to minimise the chances of being involved in an accident will improve the success of a cycle network. Stress Many things from heavy traffic to unlit cycle-paths can lead to the sensation of danger as well as the reality. Cyclists need to feel secure. Coherence Infrastructure must be joined up. A single missing or poorly thought out element can spoil the cyclist's journey. Table 3. Requirements of a cycle-friendly network This essay pays particular attention to the final two points, and considers how the same measures can be applied to the pedestrian network also, arguing that it is essential that route should be not just secure but also a pleasant walking environment if we are to achieve sustainable transport.
4.2
Where do the contested spaces occur in London?
London has cycle lanes and safer pavements for pedestrians than Ankara. However, it contains its own contested spaces.
4.2.1
Walking in London: Barriers and Discontinuity ‘Walking is one of the first things a child wants to do, and one of the last things an adult wants to give up, yet as a society we have been taking walking for granted.’ (London Walking Forum, 2000 cited in Cavill, 2003)
12
Figure 26 and Figure 32 present and analyse the contested spaces this author faced on two recent experimental walks around London’s Docklands. Route-1 was taken from a residential development in East India to the nearest shopping area, Canary Wharf. The blockages, mainly caused by the clashes between gated developments and what is, or should be, a public footpath, are marked up on the map below.
Route taken
Route desired
Figure 26. Map showing Route-1 Blockage-1 was a signed pedestrian route that was blocked off by a gated development, which was clearly a barrier type contested space.
Figure 27. Blockage-1
Figure 28. Bloackage-1 detail
To bypass blockage-1 pedestrians use a longer route, between a busy six-lane motorway and industrial developments.
Figure 29. Route next to the motorway
13
Blockage-2 was a lack of passage across the water. A residential development was defining its boundaries not by the gates but by the water this time. This was a discontinuity for pedestrians to follow the natural desire lines of the route.
Figure 30. Blockage-2 Blockage-3 was again a gated development fence forcing pedestrians to use a longer route next to heavy traffic and through industrial areas.
Figure 31. Blockage-3
In the case of the blockages described above, there is a clear conflict between the rights of local residents and public. As a consequence, the total journey distance increased from a possible 1.87 km to 3.04 km for pedestrians. Route-2 was a walk along the Thames from Canary Wharf to Island Gardens. Again the blockages on the route are marked up on the map below:
Figure 33. Repeated attempts to walk along the waterfront were thwarted by gates between residential developments.
Figure 32. Map showing Route-2 Canary Wharf to Island Gardens
Route taken
Route desired
During this route all three blockages were caused by gated developments.
14
Figure 34. Blockage-1 and consequent route taken next to vehicle traffic
Figure 35. Blockage-2 and consequent route taken next to vehicle traffic
Figure 36. Blockage-3 and consequent route taken next to vehicle traffic As a consequence, the total journey distance increased from a possible 3.51 km to 4.51 km for pedestrians. This journey ended at Island Gardens DLR station where there was a sign reminding all passengers of the discontinuities in the network faced by cyclists (Figure 37), which brings us to the two obvious clashes between the newly introduced cycle superhighway and vehicle movement.
Figure 37. : “Bikes are not allowed on DLR unless they are folded away.�
15
4.2.2
Cycling in London: Domination and Deprioritisation
Figure 38. Cycle Superhighway/loading bay Firstly, in Figure 38 it is easy to differentiate the red marked bays on the blue cycle path. These are the loading and unloading bays for vehicles (TfL, n.d.). In other words the blue cycle paths offer a priority route for cyclists unless there are cars parked there. Blue cycle paths also clash with bus stops in many points (Figure 39).
Figure 39. Cycle Superhighway/bus stop It is worth noting that superhighways are not everywhere and for many Londoners the decision to cycle to work will require a safe route for the entire journey. One busy junction where cyclists are not given the priority can alter both the perception and reality of safe travel, so influence travel decisions. There are many dangerous cycle crossings around London where cyclists are forced to cross potentially lethal lanes of fast-moving traffic, such as the junction between M1 and A41 where there isn’t even a sign warning drivers that cyclists might be crossing (Figure 40)( LCC, 2010).
Figure 40. Dangerous cycle crossing on A41
16
4.2.3
Big picture
All these intrusions have two types of effect on people's behaviour. The primary effect of good infrastructure is the number of people who decide to cycle based on this. However, there is also the secondary effect: fewer cars and more cyclists leads to more aware drivers and safer roads which leads more cyclists on roads. It is a virtuous circle, with cycling getting safer as it gets more popular: The below graph shows the direct relationship between the number of cyclists on the streets and the casualties.
Figure 41. Inverse relationship between bicycle use and casualties Source: ECMT, 2004, p. 30 It is reasonable to assume that providing more and better walking routes would increase not only the number of pedestrian trips on those routes, but would also encourage these same pedestrians to walk on other routes. Open spaces would be occupied more and the roads would be for people not for the cars.
5 Getting it right 5.1
Sustainable future?
Both Ankara and London need to look at how other cities have achieved a sustainable future with sustainable transport. While it is clear that provision for car-based mobility will continue to be an important part of traffic management planning, finding ways to encourage more use of alternative modes of transport (public transport, cycling and walking) must be the goal of any sustainable urban policy.
5.1.1
Compact City
Since the 1950s the expectation of high levels of car use has led planners to design cities around road specifications, effectively encouraging ever-increasing car use. Many modern cities in today’s world have been designed around private cars. As transport by car becomes integral to city planning, the street corners and the shapes and surfaces of public spaces are all determined for the benefit of the motorists. Eventually the entire city, from its curbs, lamp posts and railings, is designed according to this one criterion (Rogers, 1997). It is easy to see such interventions especially in Ankara (Figure 21). Richard Rogers proposes a “Compact City� model to address these issues, accommodating a diversity of overlapping private and public activities (Figure 42, Figure 43). The creation of the modern compact city demands the rejection of single-function development and the dominance of the car to create lively sustainable neighbourhoods, re-balancing the use of our streets in favour of the pedestrian and the community (Rogers, 1997).
17
Figure 42. Zoning of activities leads to reliance on the Figure 43. Compact nodes reduce travel and allow private car. walking and cycling Source: Rogers, 1997, p.39
5.1.2
City centre
To turn a pedestrian and cyclist hostile city centre into an attractive and lively realm, some strict strategies and commitments need to be made. Narrowing carriageways and introducing speed limits can be effective measures to discourage driving. However, for people to choose an alternative to driving they must have an alternative. Without a continuous pedestrian and cycle route throughout the city, it is not possible to encourage people to use these modes of transport. Where road space is restricted, providing adequate space for these alternative modes may require a reallocation of highway capacity. When the roads under consideration are already highly congested, it is typically assumed that reducing the capacity available for cars will result in increased traffic congestion in the surrounding streets. However, many case studies presented in “Reclaiming city streets for people - Chaos or quality of life?” clearly demonstrate that when city centre pedestrianisation projects take place after an initial ‘adjustment’ period, drivers soon became used to the new road layout and any initial congestion was short-lived. (ECDGE, n.d.)
Figure 44. Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners: Grand Paris Proposal
18
It is not unreasonable to expect that much smaller, electric vehicles may be used in the future and that these might be better integrated with pedestrians and cyclists (Figure 44), but only a well established walking and cycling environment together create a livelier, richer, and more human-scale city setting, and improve the quality of the city space. Replacing wide congested roads with pedestrians and cyclists can rescue a city, transforming it into a people-friendly public realm with liveable streets.
5.2
An example
As of 2008 cycling levels in the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark are more than ten times higher than in the UK (Pucher; Buehler, 2008).
Figure 45. Trend in kilometres cycled per inhabitant per day in the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and the UK (1978– 2005); Sources: Danish Ministry of Transport (2007); Department for Transport (2007); German Federal Ministry of Transport (2007); Netherlands Ministry of Transport (2007)
Cycling has been popular in the Netherlands for the past thirty years; in 1989, 29% of all trips in the Netherlands were made by bicycle, as compared to 4% in Great Britain (Bracher, 1989 cited in McClintock, 1992). Having said that, cycling has not always thrived in the Netherlands (Dutch Bicycling Council, 2006 cited in Pucher; Buehler, 2008). Across Western Europe cycling levels dropped dramatically between 1950 and 1975 with the introduction of the private automobile. While in general the bicycle was viewed as a dangerous anachronism, local policies varied from active discouragement of cycling to reluctant acceptance, with consequent differences in the degree of drop. In the mid 1970s, partly as a result of the oil shock, cycling enjoyed renewed interest. This renaissance was particularly pronounced in the Netherlands where cycle use had remained relatively high. However it was only through a massive reversal in transport and urban planning policies in the mid-1970s that cycling was revived to its current successful state. In other countries attempts to encourage cycling failed to reach 'critical mass' and consequently were largely ineffective.
19
Figure 46. Reconstructed trend lines of the bicycle share in the total number of car, bicycle, motoped and public transportation trips in nine West European Cities, 1920-1995 (in %) Source: A.A. Albert de la Bruheze and F.C.A Veraart, 1999: 34
Figure 47. Trend in kilometres cycled per inhabitant per year in the Netherlands and the UK (1952-2006) (percent relative to 1950 level); Sources: Department for Transport (2007); Netherlands Ministry of Transport (2007) There are ‘excellent alternatives to the private car in the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany, including cycling as well as walking and public transport. As is most evident in Denmark and the Netherlands, safe and convenient cycling reduces the need for car ownership, thus making the city centres much more people-focused than carfocused and so more enjoyable places for the citizens. A considerably higher percentage of all trips in European cities are shorter than 2.5 km: 44% in the Netherlands, 37% in Denmark and 41% in Germany. In the UK, only 30% of trips are shorter than 2.5 km, perhaps due to more extensive sprawl in Britain than in the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany (German Federal Ministry of Transport, 2003; U.S. Department of Transportation, 2003; National Statistical Office of Denmark, 2005; Statistics Netherlands, 2007; Department for Transport, 2007 cited in Pucher & Buehler, 2008). Density and accessibility are some of the main points that make cycling and walking an acceptable and enjoyable transport mode in these cities.
20
Figure 48. Mixed mode transport in the Netherlands Pucher and Buehler (2008) argue that the key to achieving high levels of cycling is a fully integrated end-to-end system, comprising a good quality cycle network (safe intersections and separate cycle facilities on arterial routes), plenty of cycle parking, particularly at train and bus stations, and strong education of both cyclists and motorists. The development of a user-friendly cycle network is aided by a strict land-use policy that encourages compact mixed-use development which is more conducive to cycling and walking. As well as encouraging cycling, the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany discourage driving in central cities by making it expensive to drive a car and difficult to own one. Without the combination of a well co-ordinated carrot-and-stick approach combined with restricted land-use policies, it would have been impossible for these countries to promote cycling so successfully (Pucher & Buehler, 2008). Dutch, German and Danish cities have focused on serving people, making their cities people-friendly rather than car-friendly, and thus more liveable and more sustainable than British cities. They prioritise pedestrians and cyclists throughout the city rather than introducing faster routes for vehicles. Pedestrians' day to day experience is the top priority and contested spaces are designed in favour of them; vehicle traffic is stopped completely if necessary for the convenience of pedestrians while cyclists are given advanced green lights at most intersections (Pucher & Buehler, 2008)(Figure 49). Figure 49. Advanced green light for cyclists in Amsterdam
6 What could be done in Ankara and London: Although both cities still appear to favour cars over cyclists and pedestrians and there is plenty of room for improvement in the current situation, progressive policies and planning can enhance the popularity of using these transport modes, and by doing so secure a sustainable future. ‘As dynamic and reflexive organisms, cities can be quickly mobilised to implement and test new approaches while receiving immediate feedback from residents.(Rode, 2009)’ Supporting sustainable transport in cities would offer benefits both locally and globally in a relatively short time scale. For an effective implementation, the decision makers should consider aspects of cycling and walking in a city from many perspectives and change their priority measures. To have a sustainable transport infrastructure, pedestrians must get top priority, followed by cyclists, public transport, and private cars respectively. De Geyter(2002) recommends: ‘applications of a general tactic that simultaneously concentrates on local conditions and consists of universal models that can be applied everywhere, a kind of toolkit.’ (Xaveer De Geyter Architects, 2002 p. 17) The change in approach needed in our new mental toolkit is presented by Banister (2005) as an alternative mind-set to deal with the contested spaces that occur in different cities (see Table 4).
21
Contrasting approaches to transport planning The conventional approach The new perspective Transport planning and engineering Sustainable urban development and transport Physical dimensions Social dimensions Mobility Accessibility Traffic focus, particularly on the car People focus, either in (or on) a vehicle or on foot Large in scale Local in scale Street as a road Street as a space Motorized transport All modes of transport often in a hierarchy with pedestrian and cyclist at the top and car users at the bottom Forecasting traffic Visioning on cities Modelling approaches Scenario development and modelling Economic evaluation Multicriteria analysis to take account of environmental and social concerns Travel as a derived demand Travel as a valued activity as well as a derived demand Demand-based Management-based Speeding up traffic Slowing movement down Travel time minimization Reasonable travel times Segregation of people and traffic Integration of people and traffic Table 4. Contrasting approaches to transport planning; Source: (Banister, 2005 p. 238)
6.1
In London:
London gives an impression that it is putting much effort into improving its cycle infrastructure, and thus its sustainability credentials, but the take-up has so far been less than originally anticipated. The London Assembly Transport Committee (LATC) recommends greater consistency in the measures along the route would help this situation, such as a uniform width cycle path, improvements to unsafe junctions and 20 mph speed limits on busy sections, as well as detailed consultation with cycling organisations and London Boroughs (LATC, 2010). However, to achieve a sustainable transport system all these proposals and recommendations remain small scale interventions. For London to have any hope of achieving sustainable transport and becoming a sustainable city, radical changes need to be made. Creating green cycle and pedestrian routes instead of creating unsecure cycle paths and pavements next to a heavy traffic flow should be a priority, combined with strict enforcement of cyclists' and pedestrians' rights to educate motorists and change public perceptions. Some important points to consider for promotion of cycling are to • • • • • • •
increase cost of auto use, clarify cyclists’ legal rights, expand bicycle facilities, make all urban roads accessible to bikes, hold special promotions, link cycling to well-being, broaden and intensify political action. (Komanoff, 2003)
There is clearly contention between private developments and what are, or should be, public rights of way. These developments make it impossible to enjoy the nicest parts of the city, and at the same time encourage people to make pedestrian-scale trips by car. As shown in Figure 27 above, there was at some point a walking route along the bank of the Thames. Such public walking routes should be immutable and non-negotiable. They would be clearly defined between different parts of the city, and would have priority over new gated developments or motorways. The introduction of such a policy would doubtless cause much debate, but its implementation would alter the way people experience the city as a pleasant environment. It would encourage people to spend more time outdoors and create a healthier and sociable lifestyle. People in London are perhaps more aware of the need for a sustainable future than Ankara, thus they would be more open to radical changes and proposals to secure this. Although imposing restrictions on car-use and providing more space for pedestrians and cyclists would be contentious, the Cambridge case study presented in “Reclaiming city streets for people” document (ECDGE, n.d.) shows clear benefits. Many Londoners remember
22
the peace they have enjoyed when visiting Cambridge with its quieter, safer city centre environment following the removal of through car traffic.
6.2
In Ankara:
Ankara has not even begun the journey towards sustainability. The car is king and under the current administration is gaining more power with every new express route through the city. It takes many years and huge expenditure of public funds to build each massive motorway through the city centre, and each one proves to be a disappointment and not reduce traffic congestion. Until the municipal government recognises that there is a problem, it is not possible to consider a solution. The local governing bodies should consult professional specialised bodies such as Chamber of Architects and Urban Designers before making expensive changes to the city’s infrastructure. Preparing a general city transport agenda and yearly goals in city planning terms and publishing these would help the municipality to provide consistently a high level of service throughout the city as well as encouraging the mayor to see the city’s future from a sustainability point of view.
‘‘The change that is needed – from roads for traffic to streets for people – is so fundamental that it requires a strong, imaginative lead from Government. It cannot be left to local authorities acting in isolation.’ (Stewart, 2001 p. 11)
There is, however, some progress in Ankara. An analysis and improvement report prepared by EGO in 1982 suggested the pedestrianisation of many streets around Kizilay Square (KKMCG, 2004). Izmir Street was one of the few lucky ones, and was eventually transformed in 2003 showing that it is possible to turn an unfriendly city street into a lively area (Figure 50, Figure 51).
Figure 50. Izmir Street before pedestrianisation
Figure 51. Izmir Street after pedestrianisation
Ankara has a lot to learn to secure a safe and accessible city setting for pedestrians and even to make it possible to cycle through the city. Some basic design criteria, already adopted in London, are listed below:
6.2.1
Pavements: Pedestrian routes should be separated from the vehicle road with buffers such as green strips or bicycle paths. Also they should be designed and built in a continuous sufficient width throughout the city and the city improvements should secure these measures throughout.
23
6.2.2
Ramps: Ramps are used not only by wheelchair users but also by people with vision problems, elderly, sick or pregnant people, and they should be designed to appropriate standards, (gradients, sizes, material differences) accordingly. Especially in this instance Ankara can learn a great deal from London.
6.2.3
Marked pedestrian crossings: The design and application of these crossings is important for both pedestrians and drivers. Everything from the shape of the crossing, to the road markings should be developed in a way to ensure the safety and the movement flexibility of pedestrians.
6.2.4
Public transport stops:
Successful meeting points between pedestrian movement and public transport are essential for fully sustainable transport in a city. Public transport stops should be easily reachable and provide shelter from wind and rain. Integration between public transport and cycle routes should also be considered. Allocated areas for cycle parking near public transport stops is a widely used approach in modern cities.
6.2.5
Pavement lighting: Pavements must be safe and well lit for pedestrians at all times. Crossings, corner points and meeting areas should be particularly well lit. Lighting units should be considered as city furniture that is going to be a part of the outdoors life day and night. They should be designed in conjunction with the other city furniture, and designed on a pedestrian scale.
6.2.6
Underground passes and footbridges:
In Ankara pedestrian underground passes and footbridges are the most common answer to a contested space problem. However, internationally they are considered as the last resort. These passages should be positioned only where there is no other way for pedestrians to cross in a direct way, if possible where the topography helps pedestrians to cross without much energy and they should be usable by all groups including the disabled and elderly.
6.2.7
In general:
Ankara can benefit from its skilled citizens’ abilities. It has the potential in itself though the authorities need to stop building and be receptive to the research and proposals prepared by competent bodies such as TMMOB. Ankara city centre is relatively smaller than London and consists of widely mixed used buildings. The scale of the city could be easily manageable by the implementation of a secure walking and cycling network. Citizens of Ankara are used to living with a top-down authoritarian approach to city planning so the big changes in infrastructure and life-style that would be required to make Ankara a sustainable city could be achieved with relatively little resistance.
24
7 Conclusion: Re-designing our cities offers the greatest opportunity to resolve today's impending environmental and energy crisis. This essay provided an overview of contested spaces in Ankara and London that, while small in scale, mirror the policies that make these cities. It showed where these clashes occur for the pedestrians and cyclists and how possible improvements could encourage the change towards a more people-friendly and sustainable environment. Increasing the popularity and possibility of walking and cycling is key to creating an enjoyable and thriving city, and a lively and healthy community. Progressive policies and planning can enhance the popularity of using these transport modes, and by doing so secure a sustainable future, but the policies must be coordinated, ambitious, and large-scale. It is not enough to stitch narrow cycle paths next to busy car-based roads. In both London and Ankara big changes need to be made but there is hope. London citizens are perhaps more aware of the need for a sustainable future than Ankara so, may be more open to the idea of radical changes. In Ankara, while there is much further to go to achieve sustainability, citizens are used to living with a top-down authoritarian approach to city planning so the big changes in infrastructure and life-style that would be required to make Ankara a sustainable city could be achieved with relatively little resistance. Governing bodies need to change the way that they think. To make a difference, bigger and braver moves need to be made. The dominance of the car culture needs to be challenged to transform hostile roads into liveable streets. As designers we need to set up our new toolkit, re-think, get excited and fundamentally change the vision of the public, and thus the future.
25
8 References: Albayrak, Z. (2003), Figure 8. Pedestrians jumping on the barriers, [Photograph and article] [Online], Altgecit kavga cikardi, Available at: http://www.radikal.com.tr/haber.php?haberno=91762, [Accessed 28 December 2010] Atak, E., Karaduman, S. (2004), Figure 6. An ordinary day in Kızılay Square; Figure 9. “We want our pedestrian crossings back.”; Figure 10. Kızılay Square on 10th October 2003, [Photograph] [Online], Kızılay Yaya Gecitleri Mucadelesi, Available at: http://www.ankaramplatformu.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=91:Kızılay-yaya-gectlermuecadeles-&catid=44:blge-belge&Itemid=18, [Accessed 12 December 2010] Atak, E. (2006), Figure 22. Ataturk Boulevard and disappearing pavement, [Photograph] Atak, E. (2008), Figure 2. Visually impaired pedestrian in London; Figure 3. Disabled pedestrian in Ankara; Figure 11. Mesrutiyet Street pavement; Figure 12. Mithatpasa Street pavement; Figure 15. Advertising Panel on Selanik Street; Figure 16. Akay Street pavement, [Photograph] [PDF], Ankara’da Yaya Olmak – Ankara ve Cagdas Kenlerin Kisa Bir Karsilastirmasi. Banister (2005, p.1) Unsustainable Transport - City transport in the new century, London: Routledge. Bruheze, A. (1999), Bicycle use in twentieth century Western Europe - The comparison of nine cities, School of Philosophy and Social Sciences, Centre for Studies of Science, Technology and Society, University of Twente. [PDF][Online], Available at: http://www.velomondial.net/velomondiall2000/PDF/BRUHEZE.PDF, [Accessed 27 December 2010] Cavill, N. (2003), The potential of non-motorised transport for promoting health. [ed.] Rodney Tolley. Sustainable transport - Planning for walking and cycling in urban environments. Cambridge : Woodhead, pp. 159-171. Cengizkan, A. (2010), Türkiye için Modern ve Planlı bir Başkent Kurmak: Ankara 1920-1950 (Article for Goethe-Institute, Ankara) [Online] Available at: http://www.goethe.de/ins/tr/ank/prj/urs/geb/sta/trindex.htm, [Accessed 11 December 2010] Cumhuriyet Ankara (2009), Figure 4. Melih Gökçek, Mayor of Ankara, showing one of his creations, ‘Trafik Sorunu Katlı Kavşaklarla Çözülemez’, [Newspaper article] [Online], Available at: http://www.yapi.com.tr/Haberler/trafik-sorunu-katlikavsaklarla-cozulemez_66772.html, [Accessed 11 December 2010] Girardet, H. (1999), Creating Sustainable Cities, Totnes, Devon: Green Books for The Schumacher Society. Girardet, H. (2008), Cities People Planet – Urban Development and Climate Change Second Edition, Chichester: John Wiley. Goodman, R. (2003), The decline of everyday walking in the UK: explanations and policy implications. [ed.] Rodney Tolley. Sustainable transport - Planning for walking and cycling in urban environments. Cambridge : Woodhead, pp. 70-83. Google maps (2010) Hembrow, D., (2010), More on London’s Superhighways – Barclays Cycle Superhighway Boundary Lines [Short film and article] [Online] Available at: http://hembrow.blogspot.com/2010/07/more-on-londons-superhighways.html, [Accessed 20 December 2010] ECMT - European Conference Of Ministers of Transport (2004), Implementing Sustainable Urban Travel Policies: Moving Ahead - National Policies to Promote Cycling, Paris: OECD. Erdoğan, İ. (2008), Figure 5. 23rd April festival celebration in Kızılay Square, [Photograph] [Online], Kortej Geçişi, Available at: http://wowturkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50616, [Accessed 27 December 2010] European Commission, Directorate-General for the Environment (n.d.), Reclaiming city streets for people - Chaos or quality of life? [PDF][Online], Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/pubs/pdf/streets_people.pdf, [Accessed 1 January 2011] Kızılay Kent Merkezi Calısma Grubu (KKMCG) (2004), Kızılay'da Yayalar ve Yaya Ulaşımı: Sorunlar, Sebepler ve Sürecler, Ankara : TMMOB Mimarlar Odası Ankara Subesi.
26
Komanoff, C. (2003), Bicycle transport in the US: recent trends and policies. [ed.] Rodney Tolley. Sustainable transport Planning for walking and cycling in urban environments. Cambridge : Woodhead, pp. 450-464. London Assembly Transport Committee (2010) Pedal power: the cycle hire scheme and cycle superhighways,London : Greater London Authority. London Cycling Campaign (LCC) (2010), A41 cyclist fatality highlights lethal London junctions, [Short film] [Online], Available at: http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1877, [Accessed 7 January 2011] MacKay, D., (2008), Sustainable Energy - Without the Hot Air – 10 Page Synopsis [e-book] Available at: http://www.withouthotair.com/, [Accessed 10 January 2010] McClintock, H., (1992), The Bicycle and City Traffic, London: Belhaven. McClintock, H., (2002), Planning for cycling, Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing Naparstek, A., (2006), Figure 48. Mixed mode transport in the Netherlands, Cyclists and Pedestrians: Fighting Over the Scraps, [Photograph and article] [Online] Available at: http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/11/06/cyclists-and-pedestrians-fighting-over-the-scraps/, [Accessed 8 January 2011] Napier, I. (2003), The Walking Economy. [ed.] Rodney Tolley. Sustainable transport - Planning for walking and cycling in urban environments. Cambridge : Woodhead, pp. 159-171. Özbay, A. (2010), Figure 20. Inflatable gorilla in Kızılay Square, [Photograph] [Online]. Available at: http://forum.arkitera.com/showthread.php/20851-G%C3%B6k%C3%A7ek-ten-%C5%9Eikayet%C3%A7iyim. [Accessed 11 December 2010] Öztürk, A., (2009), Figure 14, Üstgeçit Değil ‘Süs Geçit’, Cumhuriyet, [Online], 29 May. Available at: http://www.yapi.com.tr/Haberler/ustgecit-degil-sus-gecit_69395.html, [Accessed 14 November2010] Panoramio, (2009),
Figure 13, Türkiyə Ankara Məşrutiyət Caddəsi, [Photograph] [Online].
Available at: http://www.panoramio.com/photo/30210478, [Accessed 14 December2010] Ploeger, J., (2003), Infrastructure planning for cycling. [ed.] Rodney Tolley. Sustainable transport: Planning for walking and cycling in urban environments. Cambridge : Woodhead, pp. 267-281. Pucher, J., Buehler, R. (2008), Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from The Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany. 4, s.l. : Routledge, July 2008, Transport Reviews, Vol. 28, pp. 495-528. Pushkarev, B. S., Zupan, J. M., (1975), Urban Space for Pedestrians, Cambridge, Mass.; London: M.I.T. Press. Ratedesi, (2009), Bicycle Policy 's-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands), [Short film][Online], Available at: http://www.ratedesi.com/video/v/xgiJqbhhU3c/Bicycle-Policy-%27s-Hertogenbosch-%28Netherlands%29, [Accessed 10 December 2010] Real Cycling (2010), Figure 38. Cycle Superhighway/loading bay; Figure 39. Cycle Superhighway/bus stop, Cycle Superhighway 7: Fading fast, [Online], 16 June. Available at: http://realcycling.blogspot.com/2010/06/cycle-superhighway7-fading-fast.html, [Accessed 14 December 2010] Rode, P., (2009), Istanbul, City of Intersections – Urban Age Newspaper. City Making as Climate Policy, [Online], pp.10-11 Available at: http://www.urban-age.net/publications/newspapers/istanbul/media/UrbanAgeIstanbulNewspaper_en.pdf [Accessed 3 October 2010] Rogers, R., Gumuchdjian P., (1997), Cities for a small planet, London: Faber and Faber Limited.
27
Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners: Grand Paris Proposal 2030, Figure 44. Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners: Grand Paris Proposal, [Picture and article] [Online], Available at: http://www.designboom.com/weblog/cat/9/view/5760/rogers-stirkharbour-partners-grand-paris-proposal-2030.html, [Accessed 28 December 2010] Senbil, M., 2010, Bir zamanlarin baskent Ankara’sinin bir ulasim plani vardi, Milliyet Blog. [Article][Online] Available at: http://blog.milliyet.com.tr/Bir_zamanlarin_Baskent_Ankara_sinin_bir_ulasim_plani_vardi_/Blog/?BlogNo=241916) [Accessed 10 December 2010] Stewart, J. (2001), Roads for People - Policies for Liveable Streets, London: Fabian Society. Super Stock Photography, Figure 49. Advanced green light for cyclists in Amsterdam, Traffic light for biker, Amsterdam, Holland. [Photograph] [Online]. Available at: http://www.superstock.com/stock-photos-images/1566-251259, [Accessed 10 December 2010] Tekeli, I. (2009), Istanbul, City of Intersections – Urban Age Newspaper. Cities in Modern Turkey, [Online], pp.16-18 Available at: http://www.urban-age.net/publications/newspapers/istanbul/media/UrbanAgeIstanbulNewspaper_en.pdf [Accessed 3 October 2010] Tolley, R., (2003), Sustainable transport: Planning for walking and cycling in urban environments / edited by Rodney Tolley, Boca Raton, FL: CRC; Cambridge: Woodhead. Transport for London, (20 December 2010), Increasing numbers of Londoners swapping their car for public transport, TfL. [Online] Available at: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/17814.aspx, [Accessed 6 January 2011] Transport for London, Parking and Loading, TfL. [Online] Available at: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/finesandregulations/949.aspx, [Accessed 21 December 2010] Tuncel, H., (2010), Figure 17. Street lamp blocking the pavement, Mesrutiyet Street; Figure 18. Blocked pavement detail[Photograph] Turkish Architects and Engineers Chambers Association (TMMOB) (2003), [PDF] [Online], Available at: http://www.mimarlarodasiankara.org/dosya/bulten-17.pdf, [Accessed 6 January 2011] Turkish Statistical Institute, Adrese Dayali Nufus Kayit Sistemi Nufus Sayimi Sonuclari. [Online] Available at: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/jsp/duyuru/upload/vt/vt.htm, [Accessed 28 December 2010] Wikipedia, History of Ankara. [Online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ankara, [Accessed 10 December 2010] Wikipedia, Ankara. [Online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ankara, [Accessed 10 December 2010] Xaveer De Geyter Architects, (2002), After Sprawl, Rotterdam : NAi Publishers.
28