See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338422981

An Alternative Approach for the Low-Income Housing Projects in Turkey: The

Example of Quinta Monroy, Chile

Conference Paper · June 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 570

1 author:

Emre Dedekargınoğlu
Hacettepe University
6 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Emre Dedekargınoğlu on 07 January 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH FOR THE
LOW-INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS IN TURKEY:
THE EXAMPLE OF QUINTA MONROY, CHILE
EMRE DEDEKARGINOĞLU
Emre Dedekargınoğlu, Research Assistant, Interior Architecture and Environmental Design Department, Hacettepe
University

ABSTRACT
Like most of the developing countries, Turkey faces the problem of rapid urbanization and urban sprawl in many of its
cities. The migration process from the rural areas to the urban districts, started with the 1950s due to the economical,
technological and sociological changes, created a demographic oversaturation in metropolitan areas and resulted with
an enormous demand of housing and employment in a short period of time. The lack of proper housing and employment
opportunities had conditioned the rural population to apply their own solutions with their own facilities. As a result,
gecekondus, the squatter settlements similar to favelas or slums, were started to be seen in various amounts on the
peripheries or the inhabited estates within İstanbul, Ankara and İzmir.
Being an important issue in Turkey for nearly sixty years; gecekondus are still being built and used by the low-income
people. Since 2003, the state institution TOKİ has been regulating urban renewal projects throughout the country in order
to revitalize and improve the conditions of the gecekondu areas. As of 2016, TOKİ had applied over 500.000 social housing
projects and in the long term, the institution is planning to transform all gecekondu districts. In spite of its important
statistical performance, TOKİ receives critical feedback for its urban renewal projects and regulation policies. Architects
and designers continuously point out the single-type design approach of the applied projects and the applicability of the
preferred spatial settings for different range of users. The projects are also a matter of debate for the gecekondu dwellers,
as they cannot settle for the idea of living in a high-rise apartment and fail to achieve the sociocultural unity they have
had in gecekondu districts. For these reasons, the state and its institutions will need to re-evaluate the general urban
renewal approach and policies in order to strengthen their applicability and success rate.
Since squatter settlements are also a world-wide issue, there has been some alternative architectural approaches in order
to solve them for good. The urban renewal project of Quinta Monroy, which is located in the city of Iquique, Chile, is an
important example of incremental housing and now seen as a successful project which provides a solution as a result of
careful analyzation of the needs, user cooperation and collaboration and conscious design. Due to the respectful
feedback, the project has been implemented into various low-income areas in Chile and acts as a role model for a refined
urban renewal solution.
Consequently, this paper will provide a summarization of the spatial typologies held in gecekondus and urban renewal
projects which are applied by TOKİ and an analyzation of Quinta Monroy project in terms of its design and construction
process. It is the main aim of this paper to present an alternative urban renewal approach for Turkish low-income
population which is more inclusive, collaborative, responsive to the user needs and respectful to traditional spatial
configurations.

INTRODUCTION
The concept of housing is crucial in order to provide sheltering in a secure and healthy environment. According to its user,
a house bears a sociocultural importance and a personal meaning. Tekeli (2012) states that a house owns various roles
such as being a shelter, a product, an investment, a tool for securing the tenure and a dynamic device that organizes
social relationships and cultural environment. A house is the result of the economic, social, political and humanistic
necessities and acts as a basic requirement of the societies.
The urbanization process, which became common after Industrial Revolution, had affected nearly all countries in a
growing pace. While most of the developed countries handled the urbanization process harmoniously, developing
countries faced an instable period resulting with poverty, mandatory migration and irregular urbanization. As the
industrialization in greater cities of the developing countries rendered the agriculture-driven economy less popular,
migration movements from rural to industrialized areas started to occur in order to sustain the rural-based people
economically. Since the industrialized cities fail to absorb the heavy population intake, the demand for housing stock also
could not be satisfied by the local administrations. On the other hand, limited economical means of the migrated
population also paved the way for housing stock problems. The Challenge Of Slums, a report which is published by UN-
HABITAT (2003), implies that nearly one-third of the world population lacks adequate housing and proper sanitary
installations and low-income populations in the developing countries are even unable to fund themselves for the
cheapest housing units available.
As a developing country, Turkey also went through the similar pattern and faced the lack of proper housing stock starting
with 1950s. After II. World War, the proposal of Marshall Aid helped the state to introduce machine-driven agriculture
and the industrialization in greater cities but it therewith decreased the need for raw man-power and created an
unemployed population in rural areas. Since the metropole cities like İstanbul, İzmir and newly-founded capital city
Ankara were developing both industrially and socioeconomically, Turkey’s demographic dynamic was reshaped with the
pushing effect from the rural areas and pulling effect from the urbanised regions. The early 1950s brought a heavy
population intake to Turkish metropole cities as well as problems like poverty, unemployment and most importantly the
lack of housing stock. Keleş (2012) states that insufficient housing stock and limited economic capabilities of the rural
population rendered them to provide a solution on their own. The result was gecekondu (built-overnight) buildings, the
squatter settlements built upon empty lands on the peripheries of cities with any material available.
The Turkish word gecekondu is a local term offered by the locals and its formation consists of two words, gece (night)
and the verb, konmak (to settle) which means that “the dwelling was built in one night” (Yörükan, 2006; Çakır, 2011). In
1966, gecekondu houses were officially recognised by the state with the legislated Gecekondu Law. The law, which is still
in force with some additions, defined gecekondu houses as “the illegal buildings built upon the lands without the
permission of the legal landowner and without obeying to the general provisions and the town planning and construction
legislations”. The lack of an effective policy and the constant compensation from the state administrations had
transformed gecekondu houses to a housing type which has its own sociocultural structure and lifestyle and solidified
their existence in many Turkish cities. According to Tatlıdil (1989), gecekondu derives its dwellers “a social and economic
insurance, which the city life fails to provide, with the value-norm relationships it had conceived in its essence”. Thus it
can be said that gecekondu houses, in time, started to carry different sub-meanings and became a multidimensional
phenomenon.
Though no official reports are provided by the Turkish state, UN-HABITAT’s statistical information on the official website
imply that in 2009, Turkey had 6.7 million people living in gecekondu houses, creating %9 of the total population then.
Most recent report from Ankara Metropolitan Municipality in 2013 reports that the capital city held over 150.000
gecekondu houses and roughly 640.000 people living inside these settlements. According to these statistics, it can be said
that gecekondu houses are still an important problem in Turkish cities.
After 1999 İzmit and Düzce earthquakes, urban renewal concept became an important agenda owing to the Turkey’s
landscapes’ proneness to earthquakes and the insufficient quality of the existing building stock in many areas, primarily
gecekondu settlements. Founded as a state institution in order to supply funds for housing projects in 1984, TOKİ was
assigned with extensive warrants by the government and became the leading actor for the proposed urban renewal
projects in 2004. Since then, TOKİ has constructed over 700.000 buildings within the scope of various urban renewal
projects. However, the role of TOKİ in transforming gecekondu settlements into urban renewal projects with high-rise
social buildings had also received critical backlash. Main criticism towards the institution was the proposal of a single-
type spatial typology to gecekondu dwellers without respecting their sociocultural structure and lifestyle routines. This
enforced situation, as Heper (1978) underlines, results as “relocation of the gecekondu dwellers from a social building to
another gecekondu area”, therefore it raises a question mark upon the effectiveness of TOKİs urban renewal policies.
Since the multidimensional contexture of gecekondu concept brings various needs to be analysed, the general urban
renewal policy and approach in Turkey has to be re-evaluated and transformed according to the needs and lifestyle
patterns of its main targeted population.
With all these points in mind, this study will provide the Quinta Monroy project as an alternative to the urban renewal
projects in Turkey. The study firstly presents definitive information about the gecekondu as a Turkish squatter experience
and TOKİ as the main conductor of urban renewal projects in Turkey. The latter chapters focus on spatial analyzation of
a selected TOKİ social housing project and analyzation of the key subject of the study; Quinta Monroy project.

Gecekondu Phenomenon
Squatter settlements are a common problem in many developing countries. As a result of the intense migration
movements by the rural population who wants to have better life and job opportunities; these settlements are built on
the empty lands in peripheries or centre regions of the cities, without taking the legal permissions from the state or the
landowners. In time, squatter settlements started to form neighbourhoods in their surroundings as the state authorities’
overlooked and understood them as “a temporary situation”. However, the progression of these dwellings proved them
to be permanent, therefore squatter settlements commenced to get recognition and basic infrastructure services were
introduced by the local administrations in time.
The formation of squatter settlements is shaped by common characteristics. The construction process of a squatter house
is depending on the financial possibilities, technical information and available resources of the constructor. The housing
units are constructed with the simplest construction methods in a time span short as possible. According to these factors,
squatter houses generally bear similar spatial typologies and the interior space acts as a multifunctional environment in
which the family members continue their daily life routines. The materials which were generally used in the construction
process could be mud brick, concrete brick, straw, wood planks and recycled materials, which are easy to obtain and can
directly affect the construction quality.
As it is pointed out by UN-HABITAT (2003, p. 82), many countries have introduced specialized terms in their languages in
order to identify the squatter settlements within their territories. These terms can be exemplified as barriadas, pueblos
juvenes (Peru), villa miseria (Argentina) or ciudades de refugio (Columbia) in Spanish; bustee (Kolkata and Delhi) or chawl
(Mumbai) in Indian languages; bidonville (Morocco and Algeria) in French; favela, morro or comunidade (Brazil) in
Portuguese and gecekondu in Turkish (Karpat, 1976, p. 11).

Figure 1. View of a gecekondu district in Ankara

Gecekondu is an important phenomenon in Turkey’s sociocultural structure. First appeared on the outer edges of main
cities in post-II. World War era, gecekondus spread quickly and developed gradually. Primarily owning a sheltering
function to its residents, gecekondu also bears different symbolical meanings, such as acting as a social insurance device
for the family or providing an important social environment with strong relations. Also the dwellers’ “participation in the
construction of their houses can create emotional ties to them” (Erman, 1997, p. 99). According to Acaroğlu (1973, p. 5),
gecekondu is a buffer mechanism that sustains social security and lowers the tension which can occur in economy and
industry as a result of the rough transition from agriculture-based economy towards industry-based economy. Keleş
(2012, p. 498) states that gecekondus are “an unequivocal product” of population floods from villages to the cities in
relation with the social and economic development ranges of the respective countries. As an alternative thought,
Şenyapılı (2004, p. 273) supports that gecekondus and gecekondu dwellers have provided their own solution contrary to
a potential problem of disintegration from the city.
Regarding the spatial properties of a gecekondu, Ray (1997, p. 165) shares the idea of “an architecture that was quick
and nimble on its roaming feet”. This statement underlines two crucial points of gecekondu construction. First, a
gecekondu must be built rapidly in order to inhabit it as soon as possible and prevent demolition by the municipality.
Second, a gecekondu is a housing unit which has a continuous construction process, therefore it can be expanded when
there is a need and necessary resources and land area are available. This additive process provides a flexibility to the
gecekondu on the horizontal surface, consequently as the family grows, the need for additional spaces can be met
through introducing new ones adjacent to the main space.

Figure 2. The expansion of a gecekondu unit

The term, oda (room) is the basic element of Turkish housing culture. In a traditional Turkish house, the room can serve
for multiple functions like eating, sleeping or resting and has the obligatory accessories for fulfilling these functions. It is
a large space in where most of the daily life runs and it offers a flexibility for the dweller to expand or diminish the space
size when needed. The room also acts as the main space type for a gecekondu, however its functional identity is different
and it lacks necessary accessories which help to run daily life inside. The room in a gecekondu is a space which is to be
used mainly for sheltering. The main characteristic for the gecekondu is the spatial typology that consists of rooms with
25-35 m2 size and the flexibility to add new rooms to the core structure according to the need and facilities. Şenyapılı
(1986, p. 156) offers an equation (P = f (A, F, M, T, Y)) that explains the criteria for a gecekondu’s interior space
organization. Accordingly, the plan of gecekondu (P) is shaped by its relation with the land (A), financial capabilities (F),
the quality of available materials and their stock (M), the availability of obligatory technical construction information and
experience (T) and the possibility for demolishment of the dwelling (Y). In reference to the equation, it can be understood
that a gecekondu is not constructed with a proper plan in mind, instead its spatial typology and organization is designated
mostly instinctively with a need for new spaces and to achieve the most minimal financial loss in a possible situation of
demolition.
In later years, as the gecekondu dwellers were able to live in more stable conditions, a specialized room for the parents
was introduced. Kitchen became an integral part of interior configuration, whereas bathrooms, which were thought as a
small space for taking baths instantly, started to be integrated within the core structure. Dimensions of spaces and
openings had remained similarly minimal in order to reduce the heat loss. Since the gecekondu was used mainly for
sheltering purposes, the plots which surround the gecekondu were started to being used as gardens and became a social
gathering point for the gecekondu dwellers.
Nevertheless, being a distinctive solution towards insufficient housing options, gecekondu was never regarded highly by
the society and government. In time, political parties have recognised gecekondu districts with their vote potential and
made promises of municipality services. Soon, the gecekondu problem was stuck in “demolish-rebuild” continuum and a
satisfactory solution both for the dwellers and the society could not have been achieved.

Urban Renewal in Turkey and TOKİ

Urban renewal is an important and contemporary subject throughout many countries. As the cities grow, areas with
illegal settlements, regions that are prone to natural disaster effects or divisions which are economically unsustainable
can be built, hence there occurs a necessity to renew or rehabilitate these kind of territories for recovering them. In the
present day, many developed and developing countries are implementing urban renewal projects in the major cities. The
aim of these projects are to raise the spatial quality and to provide the residents healthier life conditions within the cities.
Urban renewal concept in Turkey first come into question in the beginning of 1980s and the main concern was to provide
regulations for city centres and gecekondu regions. The article no. 57 in 1982 Constitution of Turkey points out that the
Turkish state is to take necessary precautions to fulfil the necessary housing demand and to support the social housing
ventures within a planning framework which would conserve the city characteristics and environmental conditions.
During the 1990s, first urban renewal attempts in Turkey; Portakal Çiçeği and Ankara Vadisi projects were applied in
capital city Ankara.
After 1999 İzmit and Düzce earthquakes, the quality of the available building stock in Turkey was publicly questioned and
criticized. According to Kahya and Töre (2014, pp. 648-649), current building stock was started to take form in 1950s, in
time when the state failed to support its industrialization policy with equivalent housing policies and investments. As a
result, regions which hold low-quality building stock, as well as gecekondu regions, were placed under high-risk category
and possible urban renewal projects became a current issue in Ankara, İstanbul and İzmir.
TOKİ (Toplu Konut İdaresi Başkanlığı - Housing Developing Administration) is currently the most important actor in
construction sector and leading institution for the production of social housing projects in Turkey. Founded in 1984 by
the state for providing financial support to housing production and cooperatives, it has been refunctioned by the 58.
Government in 2003 and granted with extensive warrants for the planning and application of upcoming housing projects.
In TOKİ’s 2010-2011 Corporate Identity Report, it is clearly stated that urban renewal projects are an official state policy
(T.C Başbakanlık Toplu Konut İdaresi Başkanlığı, 2011). According to official operational report of May 2016, TOKİ had
constructed over 710.000 housing units and %85 percent of its total production belongs to social housings projects.
TOKİ generally cooperates with municipalities in the planning process of an urban renewal project. Several parameters
like legal issues, geological properties of the project region and socioeconomic conditions of the target population are
taken into consideration and a proposal is made accordingly. After both parties’ agreement, the proposed region is
announced as an urban renewal area by the municipality and every householder residing in the region is accepted as a
beneficiary.
TOKİ implements two different models while applying the urban renewal projects. First model is “renewal with
relocation”; which means that the householders will be relocated to another region in the city and will be warranted with
an equivalent estate. Second model is “renewal on site”; which means that the householders will be in the same region
and will have its house when the project is complete. The implementation of these models varies according to the
agreement between the householders and TOKİ.
The urban renewal projects cleared many old squatter settlements in metropolitan cities and resulted with nearly
100.000 houses that offer better living conditions with easy payments. But the projects that TOKİ had built in Turkish
cities often get criticism in context of architectural design and socioeconomic conditions. Critics are commonly
concentrated on one-sided and repetitive spatial design approach, the lack of user participation in design process, the
incompatibility of constructed buildings with the urban fabric and the mechanization of neighbour relationships.
According to Tekeli (2014, p. 162), TOKİ’s projects put gecekondu dwellers into an envisaged lifestyle which they cannot
easily settle in. Another critic states that TOKİ housings are offering a renewal that is only on physical level and the social,
economic and cultural properties of the people living in the target regions are not being considered (Bektaş & Yücel,
2013, p. 128). A remarkable criticism underlines that the projects are aesthetically and authentically unappealing and
constructed with the minimum expenditures, moreover they fail to provide qualified daily life standards (Savran & Bay,
2014, pp. 1080-1081).

Figure 3. TOKİ social housing apartments in Bursa

While being statistically successful, TOKİ’s projects, with their simplistic and monotypic façades and interior space
organizations, created radical structural clusters which really stands out in the cityscape. Davis points out that “the
incompatibility of peripheral, high-rise housing with the social structures and informal economies of poor communities is,
of course, ancient history: it’s an original sin repeated over decades by urban reformers everywhere” (2007, p. 64). This
statement also questions how effective is the high-rise social housing for gecekondu dwellers since they cannot recreate
the interwoven social relationships and fail to settle for the lifestyle in a high-rise apartment. As a result, it can be said
that TOKİ’s urban renewal policy would benefit from an overhaul and can be transformed into a multifaceted approach
that would respect Turkish lifestyle, housing culture and values. The institution had recently made changes in its policy
accordingly and declared that upcoming social housing projects would no longer use verticality but opt for horizontality
with maximum 4 or 5 storeys, with façade designs presenting the local architectural characteristics of the targeted
regions.

A Spatial Analysis of a TOKİ Social Housing Project

TOKİ’s urban renewal projects share common spatial configurations and organization schemes that led to a monotypic
architectural language. The institution generally preferred tunnel formwork method during construction and applied
standardised plan schemes in interior space organization. The apartments were categorized as high-rise structures which
have minimum twelve storeys or higher.
TOKİ’s current urban renewal policy is emphasizing horizontality of apartments with maximum 4 or 5 storeys and façade
designs which borrow elements from local architectural features. It should be noted that this proceeding paper will not
mention about this up-to-date policy since the related projects are in construction process, correspondingly measurable
data of the projects is not yet available.
This subsection will provide a spatial analysis of a social housing project which was applied in Ankara to a gecekondu
district, Çinçinbağları. In Figure 4, gecekondu settlements prior to the project’s application and the final state of the
project can be seen.
Figure 4. Gültepe district before and after the urban renewal project

The exemplary apartment plan in Figure 5 shows symmetrically arranged houses which are aligned around two linear
axes. The interior service area which has a hall, elevator, stairs and gallery space has a linear plan and placed in a central
location. The linear axes cut through the longitudinal and transversal midpoints of the plan scheme and organize the
placement of housings. All storeys have four houses and their plan schemes are completely identical.

Figure 5. Plan scheme of TOKİ Gültepe 2. Phase project, Apartment Type C

The plan schemes for the houses do not represent an ordinated spatial design idea. Entrance area acts as the main centre
inside the house and provides a transitional area for other spaces. In terms of interior dimensions, hall area has a
significant importance since most of the daily life runs inside halls. Bathroom and WC are placed across the hall area and
close to the entrance of the house. Kitchen has a rectangular plan and offers one-wall kitchen layout for its users. The
rooms are located behind the hall/bathroom axis but only the room adjacent to the hall has more privacy since the other
two rooms are directly opening to the hallway.
The interior organization inside the houses is preferred to be arranged with functions in mind. Hall, as the main daily life
hub inside the house, has nearly 22 m2 space. The second largest area in terms of dimensions is the entrance/hallway and
it covers an area of 14 m2. The rooms and the kitchen are planned to have more compact dimensions and secondary
space roles. The location of bathroom and WCs are debatable, since they are very close to the entrance and provide little
privacy for the users.

Figure 5. TOKİ Gültepe 2. Phase project, Apartment Type C, a house plan scheme

The interior space organization of TOKİ projects could be summarised as; 1) a hierarchically central service area which
organizes the main plan organization in the apartment; 2) a grid-based and symmetrically arranged structural system; 3)
house plans that were arranged according to the spatial functions.
It is possible to see the similar spatial typologies in other housing projects which were constructed under the supervision
of TOKİ. The general approach towards social housing projects were to implement basic spatial organizations with little
variations, thus TOKİ projects would not differ radically and convey a similar architectural character both in interior and
exterior spaces.
High-rise apartment solution in urban renewal projects is a critical decision which is still being debated in Turkey.
Nevertheless, the recent policy change of TOKİ, which took horizontality as the main priority in housing construction, also
solidifies the judgmental public opinion concerning high-rise buildings.

An Alternative Social Housing Approach: Quinta Monroy, Chile

Many countries are facing squatter settlements issue especially in Asia, Africa and South America. While the
governments’ tactics and the application of urban renewal remain roughly same for the majority of the countries, there
are also several attempts which handle the squatter settlement problem in a different way.
Incremental housing is a remarkable transformation model, which was first applied in India with Aranya Social Housing
project. The main idea behind the incremental housing model is to build a core house with horizontality in mind, so that
the house must own spaces for services areas and openings that would allow the dweller to expand the house according
to his needs in the middle or long term. In other words, it represents an economically viable way to adapt the house to
the changing number of total dwellers (Neves & Amado, 2014, p. 2). Incremental housing also provides a flexibility to the
urban designers, as it makes the possible expansion process more predictable and controllable.
Quinta Monroy project is an important example of incremental housing and had also been widely acclaimed worldwide.
Constructed between 2002 and 2004 in Iquique, a town close to Santiago, to a region where squatter settlements were
existing nearly for thirty years; the project concluded with providing houses for 93 families that have been residing there
in shanty houses.
Figure 6. Quinta Monroy region before the project

Chilean architecture firm, Elemental conveyed a different approach in order to meet the demands of the people living in
the region since there was a tight budget available for the project. The firm defended that instead of building a house
with low-quality materials and small dimensions, it would be more beneficial to build “half of a good house”; which means
that the firm is to construct the core structure and the service areas, which the dwellers cannot build with their own
capabilities and to provide empty areas within the lot for future expansions. (Aravena & Iacobelli, 2012, p. 17). They also
offered that social housing must be low-rise and serve to enough density of population and must not include features
like elevator, which demand periodic maintenance and degrade the house’s worth in time. The house’s expansion
capability is also necessary for setting middle class standards in the long term (Aravena & Iacobelli, 2012, p. 21).
During the planning process, the firm made an extensive research about the spatial typologies which can be commonly
found in Chilean cities. Their findings implied that none of the existing typologies could offer a suitable solution for Quinta
Monroy. As a result, Elemental came up with a unique typology offering that promotes the placement of the families into
a durable city region; an incremental housing approach that would not hurt the social structure, feasibility of secure and
economic expansions and participatory design process with the dwellers. In order to fund the land cost, the firm coined
the term, “parallel house”. Accordingly, a parallel house would contain two different housing units in one total structure
in a rectangular plan. The house on the ground floor would provide a horizontal expansion, while the house on the upper
floor would also have a vertical expansion option since it was to have two-storey structure. By this means, an optimum
land usage would be achieved for a neighbourhood which would hold nearly hundred families intact on the land.

Figure 7. Construction process of the ground floor

The construction process of the project started with the division of region into 9x9 meters square lots and the
construction of 6x6 meters floor bases. The house on the ground floor has a horizontal expansion area and has built-in
service areas.
Figure 8. Construction process of the structure

In order to separate ground floor from the upper floor and provide a base for the upper housing, a reinforced concrete
slab was built. The slab also defines the expansion area of the ground floor house.

Figure 9. Construction process of the upper floor

The house on the upper floor has two storeys, therefore it is suitable for horizontal and vertical expansion. The C-shaped
structural wall acts as a dividing element that adds rhythm to the façade and it also provides sound insulation and fire
protection to the general structure. The access to the upper floor is ensured with the stairs in order to cut an extra
expenditure and prevent any aesthetical incompatibility within the main structure. The stairs’ placement was also
carefully considered in order to not hinder the entrance to houses on the ground floor.
Figure 10. Interior view from the house.

The interior organization of the houses were evaluated and decided with the participation of squatter dwellers. This
approach enabled both the designers and the dwellers to reach satisfactory results. The interiors do not have distinct
room identifications and the spaces were left undivided (see Figure 11) in order to provide the flexibility to be shaped by
the user. Instead, the firm had chosen to construct the service areas from the budget since a service area cannot be built
without professional assistance. The material selections or decoration details in interior spaces were left to the dwellers’
choice, in order to enable them to furnish and personalize their houses according to their demands, thereby the dwellers
inhabited the building in its rough work state. The firm also organized workshops and seminars in order to educate the
dwellers on how they can build expansion areas and sustain their homes in a secure and healthy environment.

Figure 11. Plan of a ground floor house

Briefly, Quinta Monroy project is a forethoughtful attempt to re-evaluate the concept of social housing. The incremental
housing idea derives a secure structure that is open to future expansions in the most economic and simplistic way. The
project also underlines the importance of the careful analyzation of the needs and demands of the low-income population
and collaborative design process which includes the users of the house as the main decision makers.
Figure 12. General view of Quinta Monroy houses

CONCLUSION
Gecekondu is still an important issue in Turkey. While the country had seen a dramatic increase in the construction market
since the last decade, an effective solution for the gecekondu dwellers is yet to be reached. Although TOKİ has
transformed many gecekondu regions with urban renewal projects, the gecekondu problem continued to exist in a
different context. The critics for TOKİ concentrate on the lack of participatory design, monotypic architectural language
and the incompatibility of the projects with the city fabric. Specifically, for gecekondu dwellers, the obligation of living in
high-rise apartments creates a sociocultural problem since they cannot experience the social life they had in gecekondu
regions. For these reasons, the current social housing production in Turkey can benefit from a proper re-evaluation in
order to functionalize better.
Quinta Monroy project in Chile is a prominent example of conscious social housing. The incremental housing principle
provides a responsive solution for the formation characteristics and spatial properties of a gecekondu house. With an
economic and simplistic design approach, the squatter dwellers in Quinta Monroy region benefit from a proper house
that has a well-set infrastructure and a secure and healthy construction. The low-rise character of the buildings also led
them to sustain their distinctive social life. The project also contribute to the technical awareness and sustainability of
the built environment since the residents are, by the workshops and seminars, educated for constructing their own
expansion units.
As a result, Quinta Monroy project is an important example of contemporary social housing that would also provide hints
for the urban renewal projects in Turkey. Recently announced urban renewal policy of TOKİ favours low-rise apartments
with local architectural features within mahalle (neighbourhood) formations and nineteen new projects have been
planned in seventeen Turkish cities. It is expected from the upcoming urban renewal projects to present more conscious,
sustainable and forethoughtful solutions for the low-income population in Turkey.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to thank Assoc. Prof. Bilge Sayıl Onaran and Assoc. Prof. Nur Ozanözgü for their guidance and
valuable comments on this proceeding paper.
 REFERENCES
[1] Acaroğlu, İ., 1973. Türkiye'deki Kentlerde Gecekondu Önleme Bölgeleri İçin Yer Seçimi Ölçütleri: (Gecekondunun
Özellikleri ve Planlama Yaklaşımları). Ankara: TÜBİTAK Yapı Araştırma Enstitüsü.
[2] Aravena, A. & Iacobelli, A., 2012. Elemental: Incremental Housing and Participatory Design Manual, Ostfildern: Hatje
Cantz Verlag.
[3] Bektaş, Y. & Yücel, C., 2013. Ankara-Altındağ Tepesi Gecekondu Bölgesi’nde Mekansal Ayrışmanın Gözlenmesine
Yönelik Bir Araştırma. Megaron, 8(2), pp. 115-129.
[4] Çakır, S., 2011. Türkiye'de Göç, Kentleşme / Gecekondu Sorunu ve Üretilen Politikalar. SDÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi,
Issue 23, pp. 209-223.
[5] Davis, M., 2007. Planet of Slums. New York: Verso.
[6] Erman, T., 1997. Squatter Housing versus Apartment Housing: Turkish Rural-to-Urban Migrant Residents's Perspective.
Habitat International, 28(1), pp. 91-106.
[7] Heper, M., 1978. Gecekondu Policy in Turkey. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University Publications.
[8] Kahya, N. & Töre, E., 2014. TOKİ'siz Bir Dönüşümün Tahayyülü: Şanlıurfa Kültür Eksenli Dönüşebilir mi? Kocaeli, Kocaeli
Üniversitesi, pp. 645-661.
[9] Karpat, K., 1976. The Gecekondu. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[10] Keleş, R., 2012. Kentleşme Politikası. Ankara: İmge Yayınevi.
[11] Mahmud, S. & Duyar-Kienast, U., 2001. Spontaneous Settlements in Turkey and Bangladesh: Preconditions of
Emergence and Environmental Quality of Gecekondu Settlements and Bustees. Cities, 18(4), pp. 271-280.
[12] Neves, S. O. & Amado, M., 2014. Incremental Housing as a method to the Sustainable Habitat. Admedabad, CEPT
University, pp. 1-8.
[13] Ray, M.-A., 1997. Gecekondu. Architecture of the Everyday. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, pp. 165-177.
[14] Savran, S. & Bay, E., 2014. Kentsel Dönüşüm Uygulamalarının Kentsel ve Mimari Estetik Bağlamında
Değerlendirilmesi. Kocaeli, Kocaeli Üniversitesi, pp. 1069-1100.
[15] Şenyapılı, T., 1986. On Physical Aspects of Squatters in Turkey. ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), pp. 143-166.
[16] Şenyapılı, T., 2004. "Baraka"dan Gecekonduya - Ankara'da Kentsel Mekanın Dönüşümü: 1923-1960. İstanbul: İletişim
Yayınları.
[17] T.C Başbakanlık Toplu Konut İdaresi Başkanlığı, 2011. TOKİ Kurum Profili 2010-2011. [Online]
Available at: http://www.toki.gov.tr/AppResources/UserFiles/files/TOKI-11_TRK.pdf
[18] Tatlıdil, E., 1989. Kentleşme ve Gecekondu. İzmir: Ege Üniversitesi.
[19] Tekeli, İ., 2012. Türkiye'de Yaşamda ve Yazında Konutun Öyküsü (1923-1980). İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları.
[20] Tekeli, İ., 2014. Türkiye'nin Uyguladığı Kentsel Dönüşüm Yaklaşımını Değerlendirmek. Kocaeli, Kocaeli Üniversitesi,
pp. 151-163.
[21] UN-HABITAT, 2003. The Challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human Settlements 2003. London: Routledge.
[22] Yörükan, T., 2006. Gecekondular ve Gecekondu Bölgelerinin Sosyo-Kültürel Özellikleri. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım

V i e w p u b l i c a t i o n s t a t s