Defne Apartment (1960)

After the declaration of Ankara as the capital, city grew rapidly in early Republican years. Ankara where the urban and public space was built together after the proclamation of the Republic.  1950s is the one of the most important turning points in the urbanization process because between 1930-1940s Ankara needed to grow up by government support. In this period second national architectural movement was widespread Architect Kemalettin was the one of the pioneers. After this period, population was increase so needs of housing was also increase. Privatization of building the national architect reflect their style. While new techniques have begun to be used that are reinforced concreate and steel, building start simplification. Architects were affected by Brutalism and rationalism movement. So, after 1950, the modern architecture movement began to show itself.   In this period the urban mobility and social life in urban start transform. Cebesi, Maltepe and Esat neighbourhoods became the sub-centre of the city with the growth of Ankara. In Seyranbağları, Esat there were vineyards with maximum 2 storey vineyard houses. This part of Ankara began to change shape with urbanization rural to urban. The first photograph is from 1953 Esat, Seyranbağları and second photograph is from today same area we can observe how the city has changed.

Defne Apartment is the one of the examples of moden architecture in 1950 and 1980 period in Ankara. It is located crossroad of Bardacık Street in Esat, Ankara.  Bardacık Street is the parallel of the Esat Street which is the one of main commercial streets. All buildings are parallel with Bardacık Street but Defne Apartment İs located with a small angle by referencing from other street.

 

It was designed by High Engineer Haluk Derman who is the member of Mühendisler Yuvası Kooperaifi and also Defne Apartment was built by this cooperative. Even though Defne Apartment was approved in 1959 as basement and two storey vineyard houses, it was added 2 storey and terrace with renovation project in 1960. It occurs before the construction. The main reason of renovation project is increasing population of Ankara and need for housing. There were vineyards with two storey apartments in Esat and Seyranbağları. It was designed this type of housing but increasing of population cause renovation project. Also, Esat neighbourhood have easy access everywhere and close the centre of Ankara. So, it was preferred by government employee and it has to transform rural to urban context. Today the building consists of a basement floor, ground floor and three standard floor and terraces. Basement floor also have windows because the entrance of building under the street level. There are 7 step level differences between street level and entrance of apartment. As far as I am considered, most of the old building do not have ramps. And Defne apartment is one of them. It is reinforced concreate building.

 So, left and right side there are garden that surround the apartment all sides. The well-structured lean planning approach of the building is a distinctive feature of the residential buildings of the period. There is no big entrance of building. The pathway of the apartment as an open space entrance. While enter the building, you face with centralized circulation element. I didn’t have chance to experience the building and also plans that I found from the Municipality can’t read clearly because the plans are handwritten by Haluk Derman so Sivil Mimari Bellek Ankara helps me this analysis also I can observe the building from outside. Defne Apartment is placed on both sides of the centralized circulation, so that there are two symmetrical plans on the one floor. The apartments are accessed through a small entrance in the centre. The hall and bedrooms are separated with the help of this entrance. It is also connected to the kitchen, lounge and two bedrooms opposite the entrance and a small space where the bathroom opens. The terrace floor of the building has a different plan solution. Defne apartment consists of a single mass which is activated by the addition of balconies on each facade. Two facade has large windows that open to balconies that connect two side bedrooms and salons. Symmetrical effect of the balcony broken by balustrades with asymmetric arrangement.  First two photographs are drawing that project approved in 1959. Second photograph is from today. We can observe asymmetric approach on balconies.

Left and rift side balconies connect kitchen and second bedrooms but there is no opening kitchen to balconies. Kitchen have small window. Bedrooms that requires more privacy the rooms are located on the rear façade to see the garden. On the main faced horizontal linear elements were used to break the sun in the in the middle axis where the circulation occurs. Opposite facade where bedrooms located on the middle axis there is no openings.

 In the time building need to heat insulation. In 2000s the PVC covering was trendy and this period building covered with PVC. I think, this method weakens the characterise of the façade. Because, PVC also have linear quality. Today condition of building, some balconies have been closed and some have blinds. The main gate of the building has changed. Original balcony and stair railings available except one balcony that chance the railing with blinds and some balcony have satellite. So, these are affecting the facade appearance. I think disruptive applications should not be allowed because building loses its identity. I think, the building has been part of the natural neighbourhood life. Buildings shapes according to usage culture of society but we can protect the identity of the building outline.

 

 

The Declaration of San Antonio

The Declaration of San Antonio was the result of a symposium in Texas in 1996 on the subject of authenticity in the conservation and management of the cultural heritage of the Americas. The symposium includes nature, definition, proofs, and management of authenticity about the architectural, urban, archaeological and cultural landscape heritage of the Americas in an assembly. According to the Declaration of San Antonio, it is important to understand the social value of the site not just the significance of the physical fabric. For example, social identity, history of the site, used materials, social values and stewardship economy of the country should be considered to understand the social value of the site not just the significance of physical fabric. As I understand authenticity is characteristic features reflects the cultural heritage values of the place.

According to the declaration of San Antonia, there are seven consideration and analysis. First one is authenticity and identity. Atheneite is directly related to our cultural identity that is the core of the community and national life. The culture and heritage of America are different from other continents because language societal, structures, economic means, spiritual beliefs vary within America thanks to immigrations. Also, these diversities unify the Americans and part of their national identities. The second one is authenticity and history that crucial elements for the identification of its authenticity. History of the site is important to the origins and analyse of the site according to communities. The history of a site should not be manipulated to enhance the dominant values of certain groups. If it is manipulated, the history of the site would lose their identity. Authenticity and materials are a tangible cultural heritage that gives information about past life conditions and their identity. For example, material and using techniques it can be unique for site thus, it can be a clue of their life ecosystem and weather condition also using different materials is related to the architectural style of the site. According to restoration, they emphasize that only the historic fabric is authentic and they reject the reliance on conjecture or hypotheses for restoration. Missing elements should be replaced according to the cultural characteristic of each country to preserve the identity of structure. Forth one is social values that is about sustains communal life settlement patterns, land-use practices and religious that effect directly identity of a culture. Protecting social values is complex because of their unique development and there are so many separate interest groups in America. The last one is authenticity and economics that is physical fabric. Tourism is one of the sources for local and national economies. However economic concerns for tourism revenue cannot be allowed. Because the authenticity of fabric and context can be diminished or threatened and messages of the values can be changed

As a result, according to The San Antonio Declaration, there is a direct connection between authenticity and identity. I think that cultural identity is the foundation of the cultural heritage of each country and its conservation. While we evaluate the authenticity of the city, we should consider their identity and heritage values of the city. Understanding of the history of site, significance, values associated with a site and materials and techniques are important to identify the authenticity of the country.

The Declaration of San Antonio (1996) – International Council on Monuments and Sites

Comparison on Athens&Venice Charter and Amsterdam Declaration

Mid-20th century, the conservation and restoration of cultural and natural assets have a subject that dares discussed by all countries. The subject has been improved definition and protection principles that chance over time. The Athens Charter (1931), The Venice Charter (1964) and the Declaration of Amsterdam (1975) are significant reports which are published internationally. Scientific conservation theories are discussion topic in this period. These documents are general for international qualifications. However, each country considers its condition, problem, facilities according to the basic principle of conservation. These three documents main purpose that increase international concern over conserving past for the future. We should consider the period, characteristic of the country while we compare the similarities and differences of these reports.

 The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments (1931) was the first published report to characterize a set of essential standards for guiding conservation practice. It contributed towards the improvement of a wide international movement on heritage conservation. It focuses on the protection of historical monuments. It mentions about conservation” That, in each country, the architects and curators of monuments should collaborate with specialists in the physical, chemical, and natural sciences with a view to determining the methods to be adopted in specific cases”. Also, Venice Charter (1964) – The International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites is the second report which defines historic monuments, sets out some basic guidelines over their conservation and restoration. It states that monuments will be preserved not only as works of art but also as historical evidence. According to The Declaration of Amsterdam (1975), it emphasizes the require for a common European approach and concerted activity over the protection of Europe’s architectural heritage. Any action on historical structures under the name of conservation and restoration should be documented and published appropriately.

People are becoming more conscious about ancient monuments as a common heritage because these are human value and our history. So, our responsibility for them is protected for the future. In the Athens Charter (1931) and the Declaration of Amsterdam (1975), they emphasize education for all age groups. Thanks to educations about conservation and values of a culture are important for the survival of the architectural heritage.

Besides, The Declaration of Amsterdam (1975) and The Venice Charter (1964) focus on the conservation of architectural heritage ought to become a necessary portion of urban and regional planning. Actions evaluate in an urban scale.  The Venice Charter (1964) mention these principles as “The concept of a historic monument embraces not only the single architectural work but also the urban or rural setting in which is found the evidence of a particular civilization, a significant development or a historic event”.

http://www.icomos.org.tr/?Sayfa=Digeruluslararasibildirgeler&dil=en

 

Restoration (Wlliam Morsis, John Ruskin, Viollet le Duc)

William Moris

John Ruskin

In the 19th century, reconstructions exit from England. Ruskin and William Morris are defender Anti-restoration” or “conservation. According to Ruskin, restoration is the biggest destruction for building. After restoration nothing remains. Restoration is nonsense, and impossible. It’s like giving life to a dead.it is the destruction of building because the restoration ways ruin the original beauty.  Also, they supported the idea that monuments and buildings belonged to humanity. The monuments of ancient times must be preserved by architects and techniques of restoration must be chanced according the characteristic feature of structure. The anti-restoration views of J. Ruskin and W. Morris conduced to established Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings in 1877 and it is still active.

                           

According to Viollete le Duc thoughts who was an architect, restoration definition is different from them. It means re-establish it in a finished state. The restoration is appropriate a building served modern purpose.

I think that nowadays restoration of building is important for maintaining and reusing building. I am not against of modern restoration but it should be consistent with style of building, techniques, material of building and urban context. It’s like reinterpretation. For example, Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. It is combination of new and historical building.

 

GAZİANTEP REPORT (WHAT TO CONSERVE)

Gaziantep is one of the first settlement of Anatolia it is located at the intersection of Mesopotamia and Mediterranean Region, the city has hosted many civilizations and maintained its importance every period of history that Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Bronze, Hittite, Assyrian, Persian, Alexander the Great, Kingdom of Seleucids, Roman, Byzantine, Seljuk, and Ottoman. Thanks to migrations and location on historical silk road, it has very rich culture. Before the visiting Gaziantep, I had some research about Gaziantep culture, architecture style and foods this information made me more excited. Our task was analysing the street façade it means analysing the relations historical and contemporary examples. Also, in our studio lectures our friends made presentation about hot and arid climate which is Gaziantep climate and Gaziantep traditional architecture style. So, in this report include what is conserved and preserved what is not preserved and my observations and interpretation.

First of all, we visited the Zeugma Mosaic Museum which is the one of the biggest mosaic museums in the world. When I entered the inside of the museum, lighting of the museum and mosaics was very impressive for me. The most of the mosaics have been preserved.

This mosaic called Çingene most of people say it is a Mono Lisa of Gaziantep. The other impressive part is they used natural rocks instead of painting. But I didn’t like some exhibition ways. For example, they prefer to used printing where mosaics are not found. The other example is column that are given collapse effect. I think they could be better. It is look not realistic.

Secondly, we visited Gaziantep Castle which is very big and located the hill of Gaziantep. The bridge was damaged so they built a metal bridge. I think, it is not restoration. It is only finding solution to reach to castle. In my opinion restoration should be two types which are continuation of historical monument and opposite of history is modern.

 While I was visiting the castle, I was always thinking how would I do restoration. I think something are going wrong. Structures that built to conserve the castle need more maintenance. There is coffee shop inside the castle, it could be different like part of the castle or it might never have been.

Our third station is old city centre that include very unique structures such as mosque, bedesten, bazaar. I analysed the city centre according to chancing function and historical and contemporary architecture relation. I think we were lucky we analysed the street façade. I can observe the relation between historical and contemporary architecture.

Historical building is modified according to changes in functions. For example, streets are very narrow, sidewalk are also very narrow. So, the old city needs parking areas which didn’t predict in the past. But I think, it doesn’t mean that lets use the old building as a car park. They almost damaged the historical texture of city. This Han name is Emirali Han. It looks like they didn’t expend energy to conserve it. It looks abandoned. There are many examples in Gaziantep like Emirali Han.

According to relation historical and contemporary architecture, I think new buildings weren’t designed in harmony in the existing building context. Historical structures are landmarks for the city. But because of the new building they lost their importance. The historical building mostly 2 floors. But the new building have 4 or 5 floor. It can be but they shouldn’t be side by side. They should try to control new and historical buildings relation for new generations.

Although I criticize historical building new function and building relations, historical building is still standing and impressive against everting for future.