Tolga ÜNLÜ

Managing the Urban Change: A Morphological Perspective for Planning

This study questions the awareness of planners on the intrinsic qualitiesof the built environment in shaping of urban form in Turkey throughouta centennial period after foundation of Turkish Republic in 1923. Itsuggests a morphological framework, to develop such an evaluation,which is based on three basic principles: the historicity of urban forms,the hierarchical nesting of urban form elements, and their reconciliationwithin a complex interaction with each other in a part-to-wholerelationship. It is regarded as an initial attempt to develop a briefdiscussion about a morphological perspective to be utilized in planningpractice. It is asserted that the centennial development of planningpractice in Turkey brought to light that the professionals lost theirconcern on the intrinsic qualities of urban form, on how it is evolvedhistorically, and on how its elements are related to each other. Theyabandoned themselves to the relative ease of application of insensitiveplanning with high confidence on the decency and convenience ofprocedural functioning of planning. It reveals that there is a need for amorphological perspective that would take into account themorphological unity of urban form elements within their interplay inorder to develop a responsive planning approach.

PDF

___

Akcan, E. (2012). Architecture in translation: Germany, Turkey and the modern house. Durham: Duke University Press.
Alexander C. (1966). A city is not a tree. Design 206:47–55
Alexander C., Neis H., Anninou A. & King I. (1987). A new theory of urban design. Oxford University Press, New York
Balamir, M. (1975). ‘Kat Mu lkiyeti ve Kentleşmemiz’ (‘The process of ownership fragmentation in Turkish urbanization’), Middle East Technical University, Journal of the Faculty of Architecture 1 (2), 295–319.
Barke, M. (2003). The lifespan of a typological form?. Urban Morphology 15:21–38
Barke, M. (2015). Further thoughts on research and practice in urban morphology: a British perspective. Urban Morphology 19(1):96-99.
Barke, M. (2018). The Importance of Urban Form as an Object of Study. In Oliveira V (ed) Teaching Urban Morphology. Springer, Cham, pp.11-30.
Barke, M. (2019). Why study urban morphology? The views of ISUF members, Urban Morphology 23(2):105-14
Bilgin, İ. (1999). ‘Modernization’, in Sey, Y. (ed.) Housing and settlement in Anatolia: a historical perspective (Tepe Architectural Culture Centre, İstanbul) 247–361.
Bobek, H. (1927). Grundfragen der Stadtgeographie, Geogr. Anz. 28, 213-24.
Booth, P. (1995). ‘Zoning or Discretionary Action: Certainty and Responsiveness in Implementing Planning Policy’, Journal of Planning Education and Research (14):103-112.
Borsi, K. (2015). Drawing the region: Hermann Jansen’s vision of Greater Berlin in 1910. The Journal of Architecture, 20(1), 47-72.
Bozdoğan, S. (2001). Modernism and Nation Building. Seattle:University of Washington Press.
Bozdoğan, S. & Akcan, E. (2012). Turkey: modern architects in history. Reaktion, London
Cataldi, G. (2003) From Muratori to Caniggia: the origins and development of Italian school of design typology. Urban Morphology 1:96–99
Conzen, M.R.G. (1958) The growth and character of Whitby. In: Daysh GHJ (ed) A survey of Whitby and the surrounding area. Shakespeare Head Press, Eton, pp 49–89
Conzen, M. R. G. (1960). Alnwick: Northumber- land: a study in town-plan analysis. Institute of British Geographers Publication 27. George Philip, London.
Conzen MRG (1969) Alnwick, Northumberland: a study in townplan analysis, 2nd edn. Institute of British Geograpers Publication 27. London: Institute of British Geographers.
Conzen, M.R.G. (1975). Geography and townscape conservation. In: Uhlig H, Lienau C (eds) Anglo-German symposium in applied geography. Lenz, Giessen, pp 95–102
Conzen, M. R. G. (2004). Thinking about urban form: papers on urban morphology (Conzen, M. P., ed.). Peter Lang, Bern.
Cullen G (1961). Townscape. Reinhold, New York
Gu K (2018). Exploring Urban Morphology as Urban Design Pedagogy. In Oliveira V (ed) Teaching Urban Morphology. Springer, Cham, pp.145-158.
Günay, B. (2005). Türkiye mimarlığ: gelenek, yöre, doğ, batı (Architecture in Turkey: tradition, locality, east, west). Şhir Plancıları Odası, Ankara.
Hall, T. (2008). The form-based development plan: bridging the gap between theory and practice in urban morphology. Urban Morphology, 12(1):77–95
Hedman, R. & Jaszenski, A. (1984). Fundamentals of urban design. APA Press, Chicago
Jacobs, A. & Appleyard, D. (1987). Toward an Urban Design Manifesto, Journal of the American Planning Association, 53:1, 112-120
Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. Vintage Books, New York
Keskinok, Ç. (2006). Şehirciliğmizin yüzyılını değrlendirirken (On the evaluation of a century of our urbanism). In: Keskinok Ç (ed) Kentleşme siyasaları (Urbanization policies). Kaynak, Istanbul, pp 213–218
Kropf, K. (1996). Urban tissue and the character of towns. Urban Design International 1:247–263
Kropf, K. (2014). Ambiguity in the definition of built form. Urban Morphology 18(1):41–57
Kropf, K. (2017). The handbook of urban morphology. Chichester, Wiley
Kropf, K. & Ferguson, P. (2014). City of Bath morphological study. Built Form Resource, Oxford
Larkham, P.J. (2006). The study of urban form in Great Britain. Urban Morphology 10(2):117–141
Loius, H. (1936). Die geographische Gliederung von Gross-Berlin’, in Louis, H. and Panzer, W. (er.) Landerkundliche Forschung: Krebs-Festschrift içinde (s.146-171), Engelhorn, Stuttgart.
Lynch K (1960) The image of the city. MIT Press, Massachusetts
Lynch K (1981) Good City Form, MIT: Cambridge Massachusetts Moudon, A.V. (1997). Urban morphology as an emerging interdisciplinary field. Urban Morphology 1(1):3–10
Oliveira, V. (2006). The morphological dimension of municipal plans. Urban Morphology 10(2):101–113
Oliveira, V. (2016). Urban morphology: an introduction to the study of the physical form of cities. Springer, Dordrecht
Oliveira, V. & Sousa, S. (2012). Urban morphology in planning practice. Urban Morphology 16(1):80–82
Oliveira, V., Silva, M. & Samuels, I. (2014). Urban morphological research and planning practice: a Portuguese assessment. Urban Morphology 18(1):23–39
Öncel, A. D. (2010). Apartman: Galata’da yeni bir konut tipi (Apartment: a new housing type in Galata). Kitap, İstanbul.
Panerai P., Castex J., Depaule, J. C. & Samuels, I. (2004). Urban forms: the death and life of the urban block. Oxford: Architectural Press.
Rykwert, J. (2010). The Seduction of Place. Oxford: University of Oxford Press.
Saban Okesli, D. (2009). Hermann Jansen’s planning principles and his urban legacy in Adana. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 26(2), 45-67.
Samuels, I. (1990). Architectural practice and urban morphology. In: Slater TR (ed) The built form of Western cities. Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp 415–435
Samuels, I. (1997). A typomorphological approach to design. Urban Design International 4:129–141
Samuels, I. (2019a). Research and Practice, in V. Oliveira (ed.), J.W.R. Whitehand and the Historico-geographical Approach to Urban Morphology, Springer, Cham, p. 115- 131.
Samuels, I. (2019b). Mind the gap, Urban Morphology 23(2):169- 70
Scheer, B.C. (2008). Urban morphology and urban design. Urban Morphology 12(2):131–133
Scheer, B.C. (2010). Evolution of urban form: typology for planners and architects. APA, Chicago
Schlüter, O. (1899). Bemerkungen zur Siedelungs-geographie, Geographische Zeitschrift, 5, 65– 84.
Sey, Y. (1998a). ‘Cumhuriyet döneminde Türkiye’de mimarlık ve yapı’ (‘Production of architecture and building during the Republican period’), in Sey, Y. (ed.) 75 yılda değişen kent ve mimarlık (75 years of urban and architectural change) (Tarih Vakfı, İstanbul) 25–40.
Sey, Y. (1998b). ‘Cumhuriyet döneminde konut’ (‘Housing during the Republican period’), in Sey, Y. (ed.) 75 yılda değişen kent ve mimarlık (75 years of urban and architectural change) (Tarih Vakfı, İstanbul) 273–300.
Tankut, G. (1993). Bir bas ̧kentin imarı (Development of a capital city). Anahtar, istanbul
Tibbalds, F. (2001). Making people-friendly towns. Taylor & Francis, London
Trancik. R. (1986). Finding Lost Space: Theories of Urban Design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Urban Task Force (1999). Towards an urban renaissance. DETR, London
Ünlü, T. & Baş, Y. (2017). Morphological processes and the making of residential forms: morphogenetic types in Turkish cities. Urban Morphology 21(2):105-122
Ward, S. (1992). The Garden City introduced. Ward, S. (Der.) The Garden City: Past, present and future içinde. Oxon: Spon.
Whitehand, J. W. R. (1981). ‘Conzenian ideas: extension and development’, in Whitehand, J. W. R. (ed.) The urban landscape: historical development and management. Papers by M. R. G. Conzen Institute of British Geographers Special Publication 13 (Academic Press, London) 127-52.
Whitehand, J.W.R. (2001). British urban morphology: the Conzenian tradition. Urban Morphology 5(2):103–109
Whitehand, J.W.R. (2005). The problem of anglophone squint. Area 37:228–230
Whitehand, J.W.R. (2007). Conzenian urban morphology and urban landscapes. In: Proceedings of the 6th international space syntax symposium, Istanbul
Whitehand, J.W.R. (2009). The structure of urban landscapes: strengthening research and practice. Urban Morphology 13(1):5–27
Whitehand, J.W.R. (2012). Issues in urban morphology. Urban Morphology 16(1):55–65
Whitehand, J.W.R. (2019). ISUF and Urban Morphology: 25 years on and counting, Urban Morphology 23(2):103–4