Preservation of 20th-Century Residential Areas and a Proposal for Karabük Yenişehir Settlement
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Post-War Housing Estates and Their Conservation Status
1.2. Theoretical Framework: Notions of Importance
1.3. Legal Status and Practices of Modern Heritage in Türkiye
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Karabük Yenişehir Settlement and Conservation Status
2.2. Structure of the Method
- Technological: Does the work employ innovative modern technology to solve structural, programmatic, or aesthetic challenges?
- Social: Does the design reflect the changing social patterns of 20th-century life? Did the designer attempt to improve either living or working conditions or human behaviors through the work’s form or function?
- Artistic and Aesthetic: Does the work exhibit skill at composition, handling of proportion, scale and material, and detail?
- Canonic: Is the work and/or architect famous or influential? Is it exemplary work?
- Referential: Did this work exert an influence on subsequent designers as a result of one or more of its attributes?
- Integrity: Is the original design intent apparent? Have material changes been made which compromise the architectural integrity of the structure or site?
3. Results
3.1. Practicing of the Method
3.1.1. Attributes and Categorization of Buildings in the Area
3.1.2. Determining the Importance of Selected Buildings Using the AHP Method
4. Discussion
Recommendations Based on the Study Data
- Functional and structural importance;
- One of the most important cultural and social buildings for the public;
- Specific in terms of mass, interiors, facade, and form;
- One of the first Cinema Buildings in Türkiye.
- The first high building and an apartment block in Karabük;
- Specific in terms of mass, interiors, facade, and form;
- Functional and structural importance.
- Variety of interiors and qualified façade;
- Providing social facilities;
- Changing living standards;
- Has limited public use.
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Rowlands, R.; Musterd, S.; van Kempen, R. Mass Housing in Europe, Multiple Faces of Development, Change and Response; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Hess, D.B.; Tammaru, T.; Ham, M.V. Lessons Learned from a Pan-European Study of Large Housing Estates: Origin, Trajectories of Change and Future Prospects. In Housing Estates in Europe Poverty, Ethnic Segregation and Policy Challenges; Hess, D.B., Tammaru, T., Ham, M.V., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Hasche, K. Local and Transnational: Modern European Housing Estates As Heritage. In Proceedings of the 14th International Docomomo Conference-Adaptive Reuse: The Modern Movement towards the Future, Lisbon, Portugal, 6–9 September 2016; pp. 731–735. [Google Scholar]
- Mohtat, N.; Zargar, A. Sustainability evaluation of post-disaster housing reconstruction after 55 years: Rudak village, Iran. Int. J. Disaster Resil. Built Environ. 2018, 9, 294–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Historic England. Domestic 4: Modern Houses and Housing—Listing Selection Guide; Historic England: Hertfordshire, UK, 2017; Available online: https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/dlsg-modern-housing/ (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Cantacuzino, S. Community Building and Representation, Identification and Documentation of Modern Heritage; van Oers, R., Haraguchi, S., Eds.; UNESCO World Heritage Centre: Paris, France, 2003; pp. 52–58. [Google Scholar]
- Avrami, E.; Mason, R. Mapping the Issue of Values, Values in Heritage Management Emerging Approaches and Research Directions; Avrami, E., Macdonald, S., Mason, R., Myers, D., Eds.; The Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2019; pp. 9–33. [Google Scholar]
- ICOMOS. The Burra Charter: The Australian ICOMOS Charter for the Places of Cultural Significance; ICOMOS: Canberra, Australia, 1979. [Google Scholar]
- Havinga, L.; Colenbrander, B.; Schellen, H. Heritage attributes of post-war housing in Amsterdam. Front. Arch. Res. 2020, 9, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spoormans, L.; Roders, A.P. Methods in Assessing The Values of Architecture in Residential Neighborhoods. Int. J. Build. Pathol. Adapt. 2021, 39, 490–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, C.; Manly, C.; Webb, J. Celebrating a 1970s Housing Estate; IHBC, Institue of Historic Building Conservation: Wiltshire, UK; Cathedral Communications Limited: Wiltshire, UK, 2014; Volume 133, Available online: https://ihbconline.co.uk/cont_arch/?cat=2 (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Blain, C. Second Life of A Brutalist Icon: EDF’s Housing Towers; Report to The Getty Consevation Institute. Case Studies from the Field: Energy & Climate Management in Modern Buildings; Lacth, Ensap de Lille, hal-04644936. 2016. Available online: https://hal.science/hal-04644936/document (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Glendinning, M. Mass Housing Modern Architecture and State Power a Global History; Bloomsbury Publishing Plc: London, UK, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Elmer, S. Excalibur: Open Garden Estates, Excalibur: Open Garden Estates. 2017. Available online: https://architectsforsocialhousing.co.uk/2017/06/26/estates-of-memory-the-excalibur-estate/ (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Harnack, M.; Heger, N. HIDDEN CHAMPIONS Perceptions, Values, and Preconception of large-scale post-WWII Housing Estates in Frankfurt Rhine-Main Region. DOCOMOMO J. 2023, 68, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samuelsson, N. Challenge of Demographic Change Recognizing General and Site-Specific Aspects in Large Housing Estates, Large Housing Estates under Socialism Experiences and Perspectives on Sustainable Development of Mass Housing Districts; Engel, B., Rogge, N., Eds.; Verlag: Bielefeld, Germany, 2024; pp. 185–198. [Google Scholar]
- Korableva, E.; Gizatullina, E. Perceptions and Constructed Marginality in Soviet and Post-Soviet Large Housing Estates: The Case of Saint Petersburg, Russia, Large Housing Estates under Socialism Experiences and Perspectives on Sustainable Development of Mass Housing Districts; Engel, B., Rogge, N., Eds.; Verlag: Bielefeld, Germany, 2024; pp. 157–168. [Google Scholar]
- Lelévrier, C.; Melic, T. Impoverishment and Social Fragmentation in Housing Estates of the Paris Region, France, Housing Estates in Europe; Hess, D.B., Tammaru, T., van Ham, M., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- UNESCO World Heritage Centre. The Operational Guidelines on the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines (accessed on 9 September 2024).
- Macdonald, S.; Ostergren, G. Developing a Historic Thematic Framework to Assess the Significance of Twentieth-Century Cultural Heritage: An Initiative of the ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Twentieth-Century Heritage, Los Angeles; The Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- DOCOMOMO. New International Selection, Full Documentation Fiche. Available online: https://docomomoaustralia.com.au/pdf/Fiche_2005/Duration.pdf (accessed on 9 September 2024).
- UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Berlin Modernism Housing Estates—UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1239/ (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Le Havre, the City Rebuilt by Auguste Perret—UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1181 (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Corovic, D.; Milinkovic, M.; Vasiljevic, N.; Tilinger, D.; Mitrovic, S.; Vuksanovic-Macura, Z. Investigating Spatial Criteria for the Urban Landscape Assessment of Mass Housing Heritage: The Case of the Central Zone of New Belgrade. Land 2024, 13, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glendinning, M. Mass Housing as Cultural Heritage: Contrasts of Reception and Valorisation in Eastern Asia, Europe and North America. In Kultur–Erbe–Ethik »Heritage« Im Wandel Gesellschaftlicher Orientierungen; Kren, R., Leisch-Kiesl, M., Eds.; Transcript Verlag: Bielefeld, Germany, 2020; pp. 143–154. [Google Scholar]
- Dragutinovic, A.; Pottgiesser, U.; Vos, E.D.; Melenhorst, M. Modernism in Belgrade: Classification of Modernist Housing Buildings 1919–1980. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2017, 245, 052075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordero Ampuero, A.; Gil Manso, M.; Muñoz, M. A Townscape in Evolution: Caño Roto Modern Heritage, 1957–2023. Heritage 2024, 7, 2348–2369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roberts, D. Make public: Performing public housing in Erno, Goldfinger’s Balfron Tower. J. Archit. 2017, 22, 123.e150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alghamdi, N.; Alnaim, M.M.; Alotaibi, F.; Alzahrani, A.; Alosaimi, F.; Ajlan, A.; Alkhudhayri, Y.A.; Alshathri, A. Documenting Riyadh City’s Significant Modern Heritage: A Methodological Approach. Buildings 2023, 13, 2818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aslanoğlu, İ. Erken Cumhuriyet Dönemi Mimarlığı 1923–1938; Bilge Kültür Sanat: İstanbul, Turkey, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Bozdoğan, S. Modernizm Ve Ulusun İnşası, Erken Cumhuriyet Türkiyesi’nde Mimari Kültür; Metis Yayınları: İstanbul, Turkey, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Madran, E. Namık Kemal Mahallesi. Solfasol Gazetesi 2013, 23, 12–13. [Google Scholar]
- Karabey, H. Planlanıp Gerçekleştirilmesinden 60 Yıl Sonra, Değişen Koşullar ve Kullanıcı Talepleri Doğrultusunda Levent Mahallesi’nin Geleceği. Mimarist 2018, 61, 61–66. [Google Scholar]
- Baturayoğlu Yöney, N.B. Modern Bir Planlama Deneyimi; Ataköy. Mimarist 2018, 61, 58–68. [Google Scholar]
- Altınay, A.; Nalçakan, A. Kişisel Tanıklıklar Bağlamında Mekânsal Okumalar ve Değerlendirmeler: Bir Bellek Mekânı Olarak Ankara Saraçoğlu Mahallesi. Ank. Araştırmaları Derg. 2021, 9, 1–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yildiz, D. Evaluating Change in Housing for Sustainable Development: Kosuyolu Case in İstanbul. Open House Int. 2015, 40, 55–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de la Torre, M.; Mason, R. Introduction. In Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage Research Report; de la Torre, M., Ed.; The Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2002; pp. 3–4. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, L. Uses of Heritage; Routledge: London, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Poulios, I. The Past in The Present A Living Heritage Approach-Meteora, Greece; Ubiquity Press: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Poulios, I. Discussing Strategy in Heritage Conservation: A Living Heritage Approach as an Example of Strategic Innovation. J. Cult. Herit. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2014, 4, 16–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riegl, A. Translated as “The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin”. A J. Ideas Crit. Archit. Oppos. Monum. /Mem. 1982, 25, 21–51. [Google Scholar]
- UNESCO. UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage, UNESCO World Heritage Centre—Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. Available online: https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/convention-concerning-protection-world-cultural-and-natural-heritage (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Simmonds, J. UNESCO World Heritage Convention. Art Antiq. Law 1997, 2, 251–281. [Google Scholar]
- Byrne, D. Western Hegemony in Archaeological Heritage Management. Hist. Anthropol. 1991, 5, 269–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jokilehto, J. The context of the Venice Charter (1964). Conserv. Manag. Archaeol. Sites 1998, 2, 229–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- English Heritage. Statements of Heritage Significance: Analysing Significance in Heritage Assets Historic England Advice Note 12. Available online: https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/statements-heritage-significance-advice-note-12/heag279-statements-heritage-significance/ (accessed on 9 September 2024).
- Avrami, E.; Mason, R.; de la Torre, M. Values and Heritage Conservation Research Report; The Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Kerr, J.S. A Guide to The Preparation of Conservation Plans for Places of European Cultural Significance. In The Seventh Edition Conservation Plan; Australia ICOMOS (1982): Melbourne, Australia, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Mason, R. Assessing Values in Conservation Planning: Methodological Issues and Choices. In Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage Research Report; de la Torre, M., Ed.; The Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2002; pp. 5–30. [Google Scholar]
- DOCOMOMO International. How to Evaluate Modern, DOCOMOMO. Available online: https://docomomo-us.org/ (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- DOCOMOMO Türkiye. Ulusal Çalişma Grubu Yapi/Yerleşim Tanitim Formu. Available online: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ijUSG65a-GQyvmUwA5tBsRcWR9Rbz7m2/edit (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- ICOMOS. Madrid Document Approaches for The Conservation of Twentieth-Century Architectural Heritage; ICOMOS: Madrid, Spain, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- ICOMOS. Approaches To the Conservation of Twentieth—Century Cultural Heritage; ICOMOS: Yeni Delhi, India, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Council of Europe Committee of Ministers. On the Protection of the Twentieth Century Architectural Heritage, Recommendation No. R (91) 13. 9 September 1991. Available online: https://www.patrimoniocultural.gov.pt/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/1991__recomendacao_no_r_91_13_sobre_a_protecao_do_patrimonio_arquitetonico_do_seculo_xx-conselho_da_europa.pdf (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Tekeli, D. Cumhuriyet Dönemi Mimarlık Mirasımız Korunamaz Mı? Mimarist 2018, 2, 42–43. [Google Scholar]
- Coşkun, S. Yakın Geçmişin Mirası: İstanbul’un Cumhuriyet Dönemi Mimarisi. Mimarist 2018, 2, 65–69. [Google Scholar]
- Baturayoğlu Yöney, N. Modern Mimarlık Mirasının Kabulü ve Korunması: Uluslararası Ölçüt ve İlkelere İlişkin Bir Değer-lendirme. Restorasyon-Konserv. Çalışmaları 2014, 1, 62–74. [Google Scholar]
- UrbanGrowth NSW. Parramatta North Urban Renewal Cumberland Precinct and Sports and Leisure Precinct Re-zoning Ap-plication Built Heritage Assessment, Parramatta North Urban Renewal Area—State Significant Site—Assessment Report. Available online: https://www.nsw.gov.au/ (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Council of Europe. Guidance On Heritage Assessment—Our Cultural Diversity Is What Unites Us; Council of Europe: Strasbourg, France, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Isakhan, B. Creating the Iraq Cultural Property Destruction Database: Calculating A Heritage Destruction Index. Int. J. Herit. Stud. 2015, 21, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dastgerdi, A.S.; De Luca, G. Specifying the Significance of Historic Sites in Heritage Planning. Conserv. Sci. Cult. Herit. 2018, 18, 29–39. [Google Scholar]
- Cunha Ferreira, T.; Romão, X.; Freitas, P.M.; Mendonça, H. Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Analysis of a Coastal Concrete Heritage Structure. Heritage 2023, 6, 6153–6171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saaty, T.L. How To Make A Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Interfaces 1994, 24, 19–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yetkin, E.G.; Koç, İ. Taşınmaz Kültür Varlıklarının Tarihi Değerinin Belirlenmesinde Kullanılacak Analitik Bir Model Önerisi. Artium 2022, 10, 36–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gang, S.; Chang-Ming, Y.; Chen, H.; Yan-Ping, H. Application of Value Assessment Weights in Conservation of Modern Architectural Heritage. TELKOMNIKA Indones. J. Electr. Eng. 2014, 12, 8312–8318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gang, S.; Chang-Ming, Y.; Chen, H.; Yan-Ping, H. Weights of the Value Assessment Indıcators in Integrated Conservation of Modern Architectural Heritage. J. Appl. Sci. 2014, 14, 580–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Saggaf, A.; Nasir, H.; Hegazy, T. An Analytical Hierarchy Process-Based System To Evaluate The Life-Cycle Performance Of Buildings At Early Design Stage. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 31, 101364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Božić, S.; Vujičić, M.D.; Kennell, J.; Besermenji, S.; Solarević, M. Sun, Sea and Shrines: Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to Assess the Attractiveness of Six Cultural Heritage Sites in Phuket (Thailand). Geogr. Pannonica 2018, 22, 121–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yau, Y. Multi-criteria decision making for urban built heritage conservation: Application of the analytic hierarchy process. J. Build. Apprais. 2009, 4, 191–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baturayoğlu Yöney, N.; Salman, Y.; Omay Polat, E. “Turkey”, Time Frames Conservation Policies for Twentieth—Century Architectural Heritage; Carughi, U., Visone, M., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Alatlı, İ.; Aygün, A.; Omay Polat, E.; Salman, Y. Ulusal Envanter Oluşturma Yolunda Kategorik Bir Seçki Denemesi. In Dosya 43 Modern Mimarlık Mirası; TMMOB Mimarlar Odası Ankara Şubesi: Ankara, Turkey, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Bozdoğan, S. Türkiye’de Modernleşme ve Ulusal Kimlik; Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları: İstanbul, Turkey, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Özgönül, N. Koruma Sivil Mimarlık Çalıştay Notları; Vehbi Koç Ankara Araştırmaları Uygulama ve Araştırma Merkezi, VEKAM: İstanbul, Turkey, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Cengizkan, A. Fabrika’da Barınmak, Erken Cumhuriyet Dönemi’nde Türkiye’de İşçi Konutları: Yaşam, Mekan ve Kent; Arkadaş Yayınları: Ankara, Turkey, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Eres, Z. Türkiye’de Planlı Kırsal Yerleşmelerin Tarihsel Gelişimi Ve Erken Cumhuriyet Dönemi Planlı Kırsal Mimarisinin Korunması Sorunu. Ph.D. Thesis, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul, Turkey, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Bayraktar, N. Ankara’da 1930–1980 Yılları Arası Sivil Mimari Kültür Mirası: Araştırma, Belgeleme ve Koruma Ölçütleri Geliştirme Projesi, TUBİTAK 1001 Projesi, Ankara, Turkey. 2014. Available online: https://vekam.ku.edu.tr/en/vekam/projects/completed-projects/civilian-architectural-memory-of-ankara-in-the-period-1930-1980-research-documentation-and-conservation-measures-project/ (accessed on 15 August 2024).
- Kaya, S. İdeoloji, Gündelik Yaşam Pratikleri Ve Mekan Etkileşiminde Karabük Demir Çelik Fabrikaları Yerleşiminden Öğrendiklerimiz. Master’s Thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Turkey, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Öktem, S. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nde Modernleşme Hareketi; Karabük Demir Çelik Fabrikaları Yerleşim Örneği. Master’s Thesis, İTÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul, Turkey, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Özkan Altinöz, M. Endüstri Kenti Karabük’ün Sosyal Yaşantısının Şekillenişinde Yenişehir Sineması’nın Rolü. İnsan Ve Toplum Bilim. Araştırmaları Derg. 2015, 4, 83–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalyoncu, H. Cumhuriyet Kenti Karabük; Karabük Belediyesi Kültür Yayınları: Karabük, Turkey, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Onur, B. Endüstri Kenti Karabük’ün Modern Mahallesi Yenişehir’de Konut Tipolojileri. Avrupa Bilim Ve Teknol. Derg. 2021, 23, 666–677. [Google Scholar]
- Archive of the Directorate of Karabük Cultural Heritage Preservation Regional Council, Karabük, Turkey.
- Brunnelli, M. Introduction to the Analytic Hierarchy Process; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Saaty, T.L. Decision Making with the Analytic Process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 2008, 1, 83–98. [Google Scholar]
- Saaty, T.L. Relative Measurement and its Generalization in Decision Making Why Pairwise Comparisons Are Central in Mathematics for The Measurement of Intangible Factors The Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process. RACSAM—Rev. De La Real Acad. De Cienc. Exactas Fis. Y Naturales. Ser. A. Mat. 2008, 102, 251–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO. World Heritage Committee, Nara Document on Authenticity (1994), The NARA Document on Authenticity (1994)—International Council on Monuments and Sites. Available online: https://www.icomos.org/ (accessed on 9 August 2024).
- Archive of Kardemir Iron and Steel Factory, Karabük, Turkey.
- Kalyoncu, H. Zaman, Mekan Ve Anılarla Karabük; Kardemir Yayınları: Karabük, Turkey, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Özkan, M. Karabük’te Modern Mimarinin Oluşumunda Yüksek Mimar Münci Tangör’ün Rolü Ve Yapıları”; Kuruluşundan Bugüne Karabük Ve Demir-Çelik Sempozyumu: Karabük, Türkiye, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Öktem, S. Karabük Demir Çelik Fabrikaları ve Yerleşimi, Fabrika’da Barınmak Erken Cumhuriyet Dönemi’nde Türkiye’de Işçi Ko-nutları: Yaşam, Mekan ve Kent; Cengizkan, A., Ed.; Arkadaş Yayınları: Ankara, Türkiye, 2009; pp. 157–175. [Google Scholar]
- Mu, E.; Pereyra-Rojas, M. Practical Decision Making An Introduction to the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Using Super Decisions V2; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Super Decisions. Super Decisions. Available online: http://www.superdecisions.com (accessed on 15 August 2024).
Burra Charter, 1979 [8] | Kerr, 2013 [48] | Avrami et al., 2000 [47] | Mason, 2002 [49] |
---|---|---|---|
1. Groups and individuals with associations with the place | minimum number of persons having the necessary range of skills between them directly relevant to the assessment of the particular place | 1. Stakeholders; | 1. Insiders |
professionals | public officials | ||
2. persons involved in the management of the place | academics | bureaucrats | |
community members | policymakers | ||
2. Potential stakeholders; | conservation professionals | ||
the individual, the family, the local community, an academic discipline or professional community, an ethnic or religious group, a region, a nation-state, macrostates, the world. | other experts invited into the process | ||
2. Outsiders | |||
everyone else with a stake in the heritage in question but with little or no leverage on the process | |||
3. Potential stakeholders | |||
a future exercise some interest in the heritage site in question—future generations |
Docomomo International [50] | Docomomo Türkiye [51] | ICOMOS, ISC 20C, Madrid—New Delhi Document, (2017) [52,53] | Council of EuroPE (1991) [54] | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Intrinsic value | Technical -Technological | Technical | Tangible values | Physical location | Aesthetic |
Social | Social | Views | History of technology | ||
Artistic and Aesthetic | Cultural and aesthetic | Design (for example, form and spatial relationships; colour schemes and cultural plantings; construction systems, fabric, technical equipment, as well as aesthetic qualities) | Political | ||
Integrity | Historic | Intangible values | Historic | Cultural | |
Comparative significance | Canonic | Social | Economic | ||
Referential | Scientific | Social development | |||
Spiritual associations | |||||
Evidence of creative genius |
Mason, 2002 [49] | Kerr, 2013 [48] | Council of Europe, 2005 [59] | Isakhan, 2014 [60] | Docomomo [21] |
---|---|---|---|---|
Degree of Importance of a Particular Value | Significance | Importance, Interest | Value | Group |
Unique | (Potential) | Of regional or local importance | No value | Local |
Important | Little | Of special national interest | Unknown | National |
Typical etc. | Some | Of outstanding national importance | Limited | International |
Considerable | Internationally important | Some | ||
Exceptional | Considerable | |||
Exceptional |
Decision Maker | Description |
---|---|
DM1 | Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Karabuk University |
DM2 | Architect, Karabük Municipality |
DM3 | Art history expert in the Directorate of Karabük Regional Council for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage |
DM4 | Professor, Department of Art History, Karabuk University |
DM5 | Art history expert in the Directorate of Karabük Regional Council for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage |
DM6 | Lecturer in the Department of Restoration at Karabuk University and member of Karabük Regional Council for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage |
DM7 | Associate Professor, Department of Art History, old member of Karabük Regional Council for the Preservation of Cultural Heritage |
DM8 | Lecturer, Department of Restoration in Karabuk University |
DM9 | Architect, Lecturer, Researcher |
Criteria | Building | DM1 | DM2 | DM3 | DM4 | DM5 | DM6 | DM7 | DM8 | DM9 | Group Decision | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Technological | Sub-Criteria-1 | CB | 0.64 | 0.74 | 0.33 | 0.79 | 0.63 | 0.79 | 0.33 | 0.66 | 0.76 | 0.60 | |
EC | 0.10 | 0.06 | 0.33 | 0.15 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.33 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.12 | 0.48 | ||
KH | 0.26 | 0.19 | 0.33 | 0.07 | 0.28 | 0.13 | 0.33 | 0.28 | 0.17 | 0.20 | 0.12 | ||
Sub-Criteria-2 | CB | 0.64 | 0.78 | 0.33 | 0.23 | 0.75 | 0.19 | 0.23 | 0.54 | 0.15 | 0.36 | 0.26 | |
EC | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.33 | 0.67 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.10 | 0.07 | 0.12 | |||
KH | 0.26 | 0.14 | 0.33 | 0.10 | 0.17 | 0.73 | 0.71 | 0.36 | 0.79 | 0.32 | |||
Social | Sub-Criteria-1 | CB | 0.33 | 0.58 | 0.33 | 0.70 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.37 | 0.33 | 0.47 | 0.48 | |
EC | 0.33 | 0.37 | 0.33 | 0.23 | 0.07 | 0.20 | 0.58 | 0.33 | 0.05 | 0.22 | 0.36 | ||
KH | 0.33 | 0.05 | 0.33 | 0.08 | 0.20 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.33 | 0.47 | 0.15 | 0.19 | ||
Sub-Criteria-2 | CB | 0.29 | 0.17 | 0.33 | 0.18 | 0.73 | 0.07 | 0.31 | 0.16 | 0.46 | 0.24 | 0.30 | |
EC | 0.08 | 0.61 | 0.33 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.25 | 0.06 | 0.15 | |||
KH | 0.63 | 0.22 | 0.33 | 0.75 | 0.20 | 0.73 | 0.49 | 0.59 | 0.48 | 0.45 | |||
Artistic and Aesthetic | Sub-Criteria | CB | 0.29 | 0.77 | 0.33 | 0.70 | 0.73 | 0.70 | 0.15 | 0.34 | 0.48 | 0.44 | |
EC | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.33 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.10 | |||
KH | 0.63 | 0.07 | 0.33 | 0.23 | 0.20 | 0.23 | 0.79 | 0.55 | 0.46 | 0.31 | |||
Canonic | Sub-Criteria-1 | CB | 0.43 | 0.74 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.79 | 0.54 | 0.47 | 0.54 | |
EC | 0.14 | 0.06 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.13 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.11 | 0.47 | ||
KH | 0.43 | 0.19 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.08 | 0.36 | 0.47 | 0.26 | 0.12 | ||
Sub-Criteria-2 | CB | 0.47 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.73 | 0.24 | 0.20 | 0.64 | 0.58 | 0.39 | 0.32 | |
EC | 0.07 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.20 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.12 | |||
KH | 0.47 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.20 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 0.29 | 0.37 | 0.38 | |||
Referential | Sub-Criteria | CB | 0.24 | 0.33 | 0.43 | 0.10 | 0.73 | 0.13 | 0.14 | 0.29 | 0.47 | 0.26 | |
EC | 0.09 | 0.33 | 0.43 | 0.23 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.14 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.12 | |||
KH | 0.67 | 0.33 | 0.14 | 0.67 | 0.20 | 0.80 | 0.71 | 0.65 | 0.47 | 0.45 | |||
Integrity | Sub-Criteria | CB | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.69 | 0.77 | 0.76 | 0.78 | 0.75 | 0.76 | 0.58 | 0.61 | |
EC | 0.14 | 0.33 | 0.22 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.11 | |||
KH | 0.53 | 0.33 | 0.09 | 0.16 | 0.17 | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.17 | 0.37 | 0.20 |
DM1 | DM2 | DM3 | DM4 | DM5 | DM6 | DM7 | DM8 | DM9 | Group Decision | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A-Cinema Building | 0.376 | 0.518 | 0.409 | 0.474 | 0.731 | 0.496 | 0.359 | 0.471 | 0.498 | 0.471 |
B-Engineers Club | 0.120 | 0.264 | 0.330 | 0.211 | 0.071 | 0.097 | 0.180 | 0.116 | 0.056 | 0.135 |
C-Kübana Houses | 0.504 | 0.217 | 0.261 | 0.316 | 0.198 | 0.407 | 0.461 | 0.413 | 0.446 | 0.347 |
Name and Picture | Significance/Values | Notes | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
| It is the only listed building in the area. Compared to many other buildings, it is one of the most authentic and preserved. | The restoration of the building will be started soon. | |
Cinema Building | Exceptional Significance | ||
| The fact that the balconies on the rear facades are closed in the flats, which have not undergone large-scale interior changes, creates a negative situation. | Removing the extensions, especially on the rear facade, would be appropriate. | |
Kübana Houses | High Significance | ||
| The surrounding buildings, which are additions, constitute negativity. The recently repaired building is not yet open to public use. | It would be appropriate to remove the additions around the building and open it to public use. | |
Engineers’ Club | Moderate Significance |
Levels | Justification |
---|---|
Exceptional Significance | Rare or outstanding element contributing to the place |
High Significance | High level of original design |
Alterations do not detract from its significance | |
Moderate Significance | Altered or modified elements |
Elements with low heritage value but which contribute to the significance of the place | |
Little Significance | Alterations detract from its significance |
Elements with low quality | |
A large number and difficult to interpret | |
Intrusive/demaged | Damaging to the place or incompatible |
Name and Picture | Significance/Values | Notes | Recommendations |
---|---|---|---|
Eighty-seven blocks of single-storey workers’ houses. Simple, Frame masonry construction system. | Building elements are poorly maintained. Add-ons such as tents-garages create a negative image. | It would be appropriate to make simple repairs, renew the damaged building elements, and remove the add-ons that create facade pollution. | |
Çamlık Houses | Little Significance | ||
Thirty-five blocks of two-storey officers’ houses. Simple, frame masonry construction system. | Building elements are poorly maintained. Add-ons such as tents-garages create a negative image. | It would be appropriate to make simple repairs, renew the damaged building elements, and remove the add-ons that create facade pollution. | |
Officers Houses | Little Significance | ||
Eleven blocks of two stories high, managers’ houses. Simple, frame masonry construction system. | It is more well-maintained than other types of houses. | It is more well-maintained than other types of houses. | |
Managers Houses | Little Significance | ||
Five blocks of bachelor worker houses. Simple, frame masonry construction system. | The building elements are in disrepair. | It would be appropriate to make simple repairs, renew the damaged building elements, and remove the add-ons that create facade pollution. | |
Bachelor Worker Houses | Little Significance | ||
Thirty-four blocks of officers’ flats and two stories high. Simple, frame masonry construction. | It is more well-maintained than other types of houses. Add-ons such as tents-garages create a negative image. | It would be appropriate to remove the additions that create facade pollution. | |
Officers Flats | Little Significance |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nartkaya, E.; Dinçer, A.E. Preservation of 20th-Century Residential Areas and a Proposal for Karabük Yenişehir Settlement. Buildings 2024, 14, 2984. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14092984
Nartkaya E, Dinçer AE. Preservation of 20th-Century Residential Areas and a Proposal for Karabük Yenişehir Settlement. Buildings. 2024; 14(9):2984. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14092984
Chicago/Turabian StyleNartkaya, Esra, and Ahmet Emre Dinçer. 2024. "Preservation of 20th-Century Residential Areas and a Proposal for Karabük Yenişehir Settlement" Buildings 14, no. 9: 2984. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14092984