Document : “THE 3rd BRIDGE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT” / sept. 2010
Preface of the report :
” Throughout history, bridges have always adapted themselves to the changes in the mobility, socio-economic relationships and living spaces of human beings; in early days as tree branches over streams and later as essential transportation solutions which connect two shores, get over steep slopes or traverse deep valleys. While structural properties, workmanship, engineering solutions and technology have developed over the years, the scope of constructing bridges has never changed: Providing and improving accessibility solely for human beings and their activities. Simple suspension bridges in the Black Sea region that take rough village roads from one side to the other side of brooks, stony arch bridges built to facilitate trading activities along the Silk Road (that lies between Mesopotamia and Anatolia), railway bridges traversing over riverbeds at the bottom of deep valleys in East Anatolia and reinforced concrete bridges over streams separating the historic and modern urban fabric, and many others are examples of such structures established in this region to achieve the main goal of bridges.
Bridges could only reach their ultimate goal if and only if they help students travelling to their schools on foot easily cross the river on their way, enable trading and the fair distribution of the products and revenue, shorten the villagers’ way to the town; in other words improve the accessibility of individuals especially in economic and social aspects while interacting with the nature properly. In the light of the function of the bridges in the city life, it is not possible to naively defend the plans to build a new bridge every 10 year for an extremely important city like Istanbul that is located at a critical and unique geography while its natural resources are under severe threats by the ever-increasing population and new settlement demands. Consequently, properly understanding what had really happened and how the city was affected after the introduction of the first two bridges uniting two sides of Istanbul, will lead to more conscious evaluations of the proposed 3rd and maybe 4th bridges.
Considering both the central government’s and the local administrative bodies’ decision making processes and approved tolerance levels, in order to make a more realistic and down-to-earth judgment about the proposed 3rd Bridge Project, the evaluations will be undertaken with a multi-faceted approach by assessing its effects on physical and social structure of the city, its legal status and economic outlook, and its necessity and value in the future transportation system of Istanbul. This report which addresses the necessity of a new highway bridge with a scientific and justifiable approach is the product of a social nous that looks for a comprehensive answer to the transportation problems and advocates for economically stable, fairer, more sensible and sustainable solutions for the environment and the human life rather than simply building new highway bridges. The report is prepared by the efforts of tenths of academicians, specialists from relevant professional chambers, journalists, researchers and members of non-governmental organizations associated with the 3rd Bridge Commission led by the UCTEA1 Chamber of Urban Planners with an aim to revitalize the talks about the 3rd Bridge Project by referring to science and common sense and sharing the advancements of the project with masses in a translucent way.
With our special thanks to everybody involved and every effort put in the campaign against the 3rd Bridge Project and similar projects that will adversely affect and irreversibly revolutionize the future of Istanbul …”
UCTEA Chamber of Urban Planners Istanbul Branch
Website of the UCTEA (TMMOB) : http://www.spoist.org/