Good news about the new emphasis on heritage. The issue of what is heritage and deserving of conservation is always a problem.
The images of Taksim Meydani (both architecture and landscape) would make me think ‘where in world is this’ and I’m afraid the answer could be ‘anywhere’ or ‘everywhere’. I might have plumped for Croydon, UK.

The status of the heritage and town planning movement in Turkey: conservation is a big and growing area of historic monuments, including mosques, churches, military sites (e.g. the C19th forts around Edirne). The mayor of Istanbul,Kadir Topbaş, is a conservation architect so lots of fairly radical building conservation projects underway.

The Ataturk revolution is associated with the CHP (Republican People’s Party) and the mildly Islamic AKP (Justice and Development Party) is not an enthusiast for the evidence of the Revolution and has been in power since 2002 so places such as Gezi Park is in rather rough shape or for instance the AKM Concert Hall in Taksim Square has lain derelict since 2008 when it closed for refurbishment.

Current landscape design proposals for Taksim Meydani following last year’s pedestrianisation and major road tunnel construction are on
http://www.arkitera.com/haber/19644
The Istanbul Municipality on 5 February 2014 reported that this scheme was to go out to tender in March, and nothing later findable today on the Municipality’s website, see http://www.ibb.gov.tr/en-us/Pages/Home_Page.aspx

Yours,
Robert

I am wondering what is the status of the heritage and town planning movement in Turkey? It would seem that the work of Prost and the involvement of Ataturk in the commissioning are significant facts for the identity of modern Turkey that ought to be taken into account in any proposals for redevelopment.

Here is another paper on the work of Prost in Istanbul.[ http://www.az.itu.edu.tr/azv8no1web/10-bilsel-08-01.pdf ]

Apparently the demolition of the Barracks was controversial at the time and remains controversial today. The reasons for this controversy may also be an important part of the contemporary development dialogue and protest?

Fear not: I am as much avec coulottes as sans coulottes (especially if running). But just as I think ‘something for nothing’ is bad principle for welfare claimants so I think ‘something for nothing’ is a bad principle for the land owning class. I don’t think they should have financial benefits denied to the rest of us. Also, though the point is related, I think that something resembling a tax on betterment is right. Or, since betterment is not easy to calculate, there could be a wealth tax or a property tax.
When driving round Britain I often think that the hereditary landowners do the best job of managing land.
There was a terrible case with the city of Birmingham. The Cadbury family owned a large area of farmland south of the city. Since they wanted it to be kept as green belt, and never built upon, they gave it to the City Corporation with the best legal protection the best lawyers could provide. The City Corporation waited a few years and then decided to use it as cheap land for social housing. The Cadbury family took them to court – and lost. I think was very bad faith by the City Corporation – though I do not think the Cadbury family should have been further enriched by getting the 10,000% profit from the conversion of farmland to development land.

I am not sure if the problems in Turkey are equivalent to the hereitary private landownership issue in the UK? Perhaps Mustafa or Selcuk could enlighten me on this? Is Gezi Park private land?

Yes, cities do need very long term landscape plans.

If Gezi Park is private land the citizens of Turkey with the fund raising and organising assistance of Turkey’s landscape architects should unite together (a little money from a lot of people) and buy it from the Aga owners. The Turkish government may be will to assist with grants or facilitate the purchase themselves?

This would be a much better solution than people losing their lives over the development of the park.

Thank you for the information and comment. My thought about a competition is that it would help to internationalise the issue of open space protection.
As discussed in the blog post on Banstead Downs the struggle against feudalism continued for a long time in England. In fact one could argue that it still continues. The descendents of the feudal lords remain by far the largest land owners. So if the economy grows, and more land is required, they sell a little land at astronomical prices and get enough money for their families to live on for a few more generations. This is what happens in London’s ‘green belt’. Londoners think of it as public green space but most of it is in private ownership. When permission is given to build on it the value of a hectare of land increases by somewhere between 5000% and 10,000%. Easy money.
I like Christine’s idea for an ideas competition ‘to reconstruct the memory of the lost (fragmented) spaces of the green spaces from Taksim to the sea.’ In fact this may be a good time to launch a landscape strategy for Istanbul. It could begin with a single ‘green wedge’ and grow into a vast system. Another comparison with London can be made. In the middle of the Second World War (1943-4) a landscape architect (Patrick Abercrombie) produced an Open Space Plan for London. One of its main features was a Regional Part in the Lea Valley. Nothing much happened until a Lea Valley Park Act was passed by parliament in 1966. And even then, nothing much happened until planning began for the 2012 Olympic Games. I travelled through the area again last week. The actualy Olympic Park was a little disappointing but the influence of this development on the rest of the Lea Valley is wonderful. It is becoming a really nice and really intersting place.
So my conclusion is that cities need VERY LONG TERM LANDSCAPE PLANS and, in most cases, will have to wait a long time for them to be implemented. If there are no ideas ‘on the table’ then there is nothing to implement. I regard Abercrombie as the real planner of the 2012 Olympic Park. His plan was funded by the government but was NEVER adopted as official government policy. The pen is mightier than the sword. Ideas are mightier than the pen and the sword.

Perhaps some person will come up with the idea of a virtual shopping mall that people can access from the square via publically available touchscreens and internet portals?

An ideas competition could also use the theory of Deconstruction to reconstruct the memory of the lost (fragmented) spaces of the green spaces from Taksim to the sea.

It may be that the government may be willing to consider alternative forms of economic use? Or they may already be committed to particular stakeholder retail groups?

Are they attempting to solve congestion issues or access issues with the proposal to have roads under Taksim?

The design of Leicester Square in London has, as discussed, changed many times. It is now good. Observing this has left me with the idea that it is hard to get the design of a public open space right ‘at one go’. If a competition for Taksim is organised please let me know, so that we can help with the publicity. I think there is much to be said for an Ideas Competition. People like having an interesting project to think about and, as with the Tiananmen Square competition, are not too much concerned about prizes or even about the implementation of their ideas. An international competition at the meeting point of Europe and Asia could appeal to many people.