From Lost Space to Urban Public Space- Evaluating Terminal Kadiköy Based on Sustainable Placemaking Criteria

In the bustling, concrete heart of modern cities, there are often awkward, forgotten corners left behind by the very infrastructure meant to connect us. These are the spaces beneath towering overpasses, the shadowed voids under elevated train tracks, and the unused land squeezed between highways and neighborhoods. Urban planners and geographers call these "lost spaces." They are not merely empty lots; they are areas that have lost their sense of place, often becoming unsafe, unwelcoming, or simply invisible to the people living nearby. The challenge for city designers is not just to fill these gaps, but to transform them into "places" that people actually want to be in. This process is known as placemaking. It goes beyond simple construction; it is about weaving together safety, community identity, nature, and economic life to create spaces where people can gather, rest, and interact. When done well, these regenerated areas become vital public rooms for the city, turning dead zones into vibrant hubs of social life.

A recent study by researchers Aliye Ceren Onur and Jülide Alp from Maltepe University in Istanbul investigates whether this ideal of placemaking was achieved in one specific, high-profile transformation. They focused on Terminal Kadıköy, a massive public transport hub built on the Anatolian side of Istanbul. For years, the area beneath the city's elevated railway lines was a classic "lost space"—a dark, unused passage that served only as a thoroughfare. The city decided to turn this into a mixed-use destination featuring culture, art, and dining, aiming to create a lively public square similar to famous projects in London or Barcelona. The researchers set out to evaluate this new space not just by how it looks, but by how well it functions as a sustainable public place. To do this, they compared Terminal Kadıköy against three other successful projects around the world that had turned similar under-bridge spaces into public parks and cultural hubs: a project in Boston, a bookstore and art space in another part of Istanbul, and a cultural center in Coimbatore, India.

The researchers developed a specific set of rules to judge these spaces, looking at five key areas: whether the community was involved in the design, how easy it was to walk or bike there, if the space encouraged social mixing and economic activity, and how well it respected the natural environment. When they applied these criteria to the worldwide examples, they found strong patterns of success. The Boston project, for instance, turned a dangerous underpass into a safe, open park with art installations and green pockets, managed with input from a community steering committee. The project in Coimbatore used the shade of the flyover and the breeze from a nearby lake to create a cool, inviting space filled with markets and performance areas, designed to be a flood buffer for the city. Even the local Istanbul bookstore project, though smaller, successfully integrated greenery and art into a chaotic traffic zone, creating a permeable space where people could walk safely.

However, when the researchers turned their attention to Terminal Kadıköy, the picture became complicated. On the surface, the transformation was impressive. The new terminal is undeniably accessible, sitting right next to major train and bus lines, and it is filled with activity. It features a high-speed train station, dozens of shops and restaurants, and a cultural center designed to attract thousands of visitors daily. The design includes green roofs and vertical gardens, and the architects selected specific local trees to help cool the area. Yet, when measured against the principles of sustainable placemaking, significant cracks appeared. The study found that the project was driven almost entirely by top-down decisions from the national government, with local neighborhood groups, non-profit organizations, and even the local city council excluded from the planning process. This lack of participation meant the final design did not fully align with the needs or safety plans of the immediate community.

The most critical finding concerned the balance between buildings and nature. While the project promised a vibrant public space, the actual amount of green space was surprisingly low. The researchers calculated that only about 20 percent of the total area is dedicated to greenery, while nearly 40 percent is covered by buildings and paved surfaces. This is a stark contrast to the other projects, which prioritized open parks and natural buffers. In Terminal Kadıköy, the green areas are often just small "pockets" of trees rather than large, open fields. This is a serious issue because the site sits directly over a stream that is prone to flooding and is designated as a crucial emergency gathering point for earthquakes. The other successful projects used their large green spaces to absorb floodwaters and provide safe zones during disasters, but Terminal Kadıköy's heavy construction leaves little room for such natural protection. The concrete channels enclosing the stream offer no flexibility for rising water levels.

Furthermore, the study highlighted that the economic model of Terminal Kadıköy leans heavily toward private profit rather than public benefit. The space is packed with 108 commercial units, creating a bustling atmosphere, but the researchers noted that this density creates a "market-oriented" environment that feels more like a shopping mall than a true public square. The open squares and gathering areas are often ill-defined and hard to use for lingering; they feel more like corridors for moving through than places to sit and stay. While the project succeeds in bringing culture and food to the area, it fails to provide the deep, inclusive social environment that characterizes the best examples of placemaking. The local community had warned that the high density of buildings would overwhelm the narrow streets and old infrastructure of the neighborhood, and the study confirms that traffic pressure has indeed increased, particularly during major events at the nearby football stadium.

The researchers conclude that while Terminal Kadıköy has successfully turned a dark, forgotten space into a bright, accessible, and active part of the city, it falls short of being a truly sustainable public space. It missed the mark on the most important elements of placemaking: listening to the people who live there, protecting the natural environment from floods and earthquakes, and prioritizing open, free space over commercial density. The transformation was technically impressive but socially and environmentally incomplete. The study suggests that for a city to truly heal its lost spaces, it must look beyond just building new facilities and focus on the process of creation itself, ensuring that the final result serves the public good and the natural world, not just the market.