A Dilemma of Integrity in the Implementation of Conservation Development Plans in Bursa, a World Heritage Site in Turkey

Abstract

Conservation of historic areas defining the urban identity of the cities emerged in research on urban planning activities in Turkey only after the 1970s. However, the term ‘integrity’ was yet to be included in the national conservation legislation. In the historic city of Bursa, however, conservation decisions on the sustainability of traditional fabric had already been taken in 1960 with Piccinato’s plan. Accordingly, demolished landmark buildings in the Historic Trade Centre were reconstructed; so although authenticity was lost, the spatial integrity of the area was kept. Afterward, thirteen conservation plans for historic regions were prepared from 1981 to 2007, with the participation of experts from various institutions. The primary aims of these plans were to provide structural and spatial integrity of associated historic areas, improve living conditions, and avoid gentrification during the urban development of Bursa. However, it is impossible due to the lack of a holistic approach to the application process.
 This study aims to present the dilemma observed in implementing conservation decisions taken from the 1980s until the 2000s, which pose problems regarding the integrity of the historic urban fabric in Bursa. It sets off with a brief description of the significance of integrity in urban conservation while highlighting Bursa as a pioneering city, where holistic decisions on the sustainability of its historic urban identity were taken through conservation development plans –much earlier than the rest of the country. The contradictions between conservation plans and their implemented forms are subsequently discussed to understand the level of achievement in ensuring the integrity of its urban identity. Hence, it is claimed that the traditional urban fabric of Bursa could not be preserved with its natural and architectural values since the aim of holistic conservation in related plans was implemented inconsistently.