Reading housing satisfaction parameters over housing mobility in the redevelopment process: Sarigol, Istanbul, Turkey

Figures & data

Figure 1. The location of Sarigol in Istanbul (highways, bridges).

Table 1. Profile attributes of the groups in Sarigol

	Stabiles		Departers		Newcomers
Educational status	Primary school graduate		Primary school graduate		University graduate
Monthly housing income	Approximately 500 USD		500–1250 USD		500–1250 USD
Ownership of housing	Current housing	Previous housing	Current housing	Previous housing	Current housing	Previous housing
	100%	100%	73%	64%	81%	78%
Professional status	Retiree		Retiree		Salaried employee
Previous period of residency	More than 20 years		More than 20 years		1–5 years: 41%; 5–10 years: 24%; 10–20 years: 13%; more than 20 years: 22%
Location of previous housing	All previous houses were located in Sarigol		All previous houses were located in Sarigol.		Location of previous houses: GOP, Sarıgol, Besyuzevler, Alibeykoy
Location of new housing	Sarıgol		Undemolished squatters in Sarigol and surrounding neighborhoods, hometown		Sarıgol
Current housing expenses	100% increased		46% increased; 27% unchanged; 27% decreased		76% increased;;11% unchanged; 13% decreased
Do you consider moving following the redevelopment process?	17% of the population consider moving after redevelopment		“Close to Sarigol”		11% of the population consider moving after redevelopment
	“To surrounding neighborhoods”		“For cheaper rent”		“To surrounding neighborhoods”
	“We can sell our property at high prices”
Where do you move?	Hometown, or another house in Sarigol		Sarıgol, or somewhere close to Sarigol		They do not consider moving

Figure 2. Housing area redevelopment site, Sarigol (GOPAS, 2015).

Figure 3. Changing in texture, Sarigol housing redevelopment site (research area) (Gaziosmanpasa Municipality Report, 2014).

Figure 4. Before/after Sarigol’s shanty texture, 2014/High-rise blocks redeveloped in Sarigol, 2016.

Figure 5. Sarigol housing area redevelopment project modelling (GOPAS, 2015).

Figure 6. User groups in Sarigol redevelopment area.

Table 2. The main seven factors of semi-structured, in-depth interviews

Seven factors of semi-structured in-depth interviews
Physical properties of the housing	Type of housing
	Size
	Satisfaction from bathroom facilities
Environmental factors	Housing fabric density
	Population density
Comfort conditions	Humidity
	Thermal performance
	Smell
Physical environment qualities	Location
	Transportation to work and friends
	Equipment
Social environment qualities	Neighborliness
	Structure of social environment
	Sense of belonging
Security facilities	Earthquake risk management
	Safety of life and property
	Child safety
User profiles	Stabiles
	Departers
	Newcomers

Table 3. Perceptual attributes of housing mobility

	Stabiles	Departers	Newcomers
Best quality of former house	“It was our personal house”	“I had a sense of routine within my familiar neighborhood”	“We had a terrace”
			“It was the neighborhood”
	“There were no interferences”		I was born in”
	“We used to do whatever we wanted”		“It was much bigger”
Worst quality of former house		“It was old”	“There was no parking space”
	“It was a squatter house”		“It was too busy”
	“It was dilapidated”		“I did not like my neighbors”
			“It was old”
			“It was far away from my relatives”
Best quality of new house	“New, modern, safe, good, of high quality”	“There are not many”	“Close to relatives”
			“It is a gated community”
			“It is new and well-maintained”
Worst quality of new house	“Dues”	“High rents.”	“The surrounding buildings”
	“I cannot do whatever I want”	“Earthquake concerns due to poor construction quality”	“Some neighbors”
	“We have no terrace”	“New surroundings”	“Uncertainty of the redevelopment process”
	“We are not familiar with apartment buildings”

Table 4. Quality-satisfaction codes according to groups

Group 1: Individuals living in Sarigol previously who continue to live there	Group 2: Previous Sarigol residents who leave after the redevelopment process	Group 3: Individuals not previously living in Sarigol who decide to move after redevelopment process
Stabiles	Departers	Newcomers
• Newer buildings • Sense of belonging • Housing expenses • Private houses with gardens • Low construction quality of new buildings	• Housing expenses • Installments • Sense of belonging • Rent	• Gated community • Investment • Location • Crime

Table 5. Suggestions for the process of urban transformation

Prior to transformation	Transformation process	After transformation
Suggestions for the process of urban transformation
• The profile of the affected population should be presented. Suitable projects should be designed for user groups • Expectations of different user groups should be met through alternative designs • Social fabric should be protected amid aims to transform the neighborhood and integrate all groups • Forced displacement should be prevented • Action plans should be designed for tenants and departers • The aim of the transformation should be social, physical and economic sustainability, education, diminishing cultural differences and effects of social exclusion	Participation of user groups in the process should be ensured Agents of the urban transformation should trust each other Departers should also be included in the process. (information, education, economic support and problem-solving) Problems of stabiles should be solved	Poverty of user groups should be reduced Opportunities such as education, work, easy terms of payment, low housing expenses, suitable policies for low income groups should be provided Support for social, psychological and cultural losses should also be provided
A transformation fund should be created

Gaziosmanpasa Municipality Report. (2014). Retrieved May 6, 2017, from http://www.bing.com/cr?IG=C745357336C443BBA52A613E05C6735F&CID=3033969E216566EE20809C6B206367D5&rd=1&h=VJm8m0IxduFVy88oFvojLcJHrxHRFubTdOU-q5_jTkY&v=1&r=http%3a%2f%2fwww.gaziosmanpasa.bel.tr%2f&p=DevEx,5063.1

 Google Scholar