sütluce market - istanbul
 

          In a general attempt to understand Istanbul’s main matters, what stands out in the studies, analysis and news, is the production of space dictated by neoliberal policies, in witch the private capital/investment has priority above public interest. These policies, also seen in many other metropolis of developing countries results, in a general picture, an intense privatization of the soil, in detriment of the public realm.

          The riots that took place in May 2013 in the city “exploded” after the announcement that the a shopping mall would be constructed where today

relies the Taksim Gezi Park, one of the few remaining public and green spaces in district, central Istanbul. The population went massively to the

streets to defend what they say is ‘one of the last places one can rest without spending money’ and a key square for political gathering and social mixing.

         Seems reasonable to state that the struggle for public pace in the city derives from ‘perverse’ administration and politics, but also a matter of land, connections and location. If there were enough places to expand “healthy”, and if there was a better distribution of public transport the battle against space and soil could be somehow less unfair. Therefore, the analysis went on the direction of understanding the qualities and peculiarities of istanbul’s public space and the connections of tissue, between metropolitan infrastructure and local small scale spaces and ways. The contrast between the scale of the metropolis, the contingent of people, infra-structure, supplies in one side, and the very picturesque scenarios of public life inside the studied mahalles, is what stands out as most peculiar and interesting about Istanbul Culture. Understanding those peculiarities so that one could act precisely in order to deliver an appropriate public space to the city, that can be properly appropriated by it’s inhabitants is the goal of the proposal.

          The synthesis of the approach relies on mixing activities that would gather people coming from all Istanbul, with activities more likely to be attract

neighbourhood public, creating a bond, a possible new realm for public space. Added to that, a proper pedestrian connection, that had shown

also in istanbul to be an axe capable of generating public interaction/use. The different ‘permanent/temporary/perdiodic/mutable activities’ come

here as tool to understand, atract an mix those different levels of community, being the defining element above and under the element of the

surface.