Search

Poverty is at the forefront of the basic components that reveal the need for urban transformation. In our country, the transformation of urban areas takes place especially in poor neighborhoods. The basic discourse in the implementations is the "low quality of life" and "the right to live humanely" of the poor neighborhoods. However, the results of the implementation in our country, as in many other times in the world, show us that urban transformation does not increase the quality of life of poor neighborhoods, but the "relative" quality of the space. This situation shows that while the quality of the space increases "relatively", two forms of behavior emerge for the urban poor: In the first case, the poor are displaced by public power and forced to settle elsewhere and borrow money. In the second case, the poor either create new areas of poverty or are included in existing areas of poverty, as they cannot afford the cost of the changed space. However, the result is the same in both cases: After the urban transformation, the poor can no longer live in their old neighborhoods and poverty spreads through the city by leaps and bounds. Often the process results in dispossession for the poor. This result refutes the basic claim and aim of urban transformation practices that increase the quality of life. The quality of life of the poor living in the urban transformation area does not increase; on the contrary, they are affected more negatively by reasons such as their displacement and even their dispossession. What has changed is not only their living spaces, but also their socio-cultural and economic lives. Due to their alienation from their social environment, the problems of integration with the city increase and this situation brings along many other socio-economic problems. This study focuses on the problem of how the poor can stay in place while improving the quality of life in the field of urban transformation. It will seek a solution to this problem by bringing a different perspective to urban transformation approaches. The relative quality of the place, the quality of life will be discussed from the perspective of the local community and the results of the survey conducted by Fatih Municipality in 2006 in the area will be read and interpreted from this perspective. Interviews were also held with real estate consultants to observe the change in economic conditions in the region. The study aims to explain the subject through the Sulukule experience, which was experienced only a few years ago and in which irreparable results emerged, and to create a comprehensive framework for the principles to be adopted for similar projects in the future. Today, Sulukule is no longer in place. In New Sulukule, mostly foreign nationals live as owners or tenants. The real inhabitants of Sulukule, on the other hand, were first sent to the Tasoluk region, but they could not live here and settled again near Sulukule, where they could not return. This situation clearly shows that the transformation made in the region does not benefit the people of the region and does not improve their quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]