THE URBAN AND ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF VOYVODA STREET FROM PAST TO PRESENT

Authors

  • Serengül Seçmen İstanbul Technical University
  • Elif Süyük Makaklı Işık UniversityArchitecture and Design Faculty

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2021.148

Abstract

Purpose

Voyvoda Street in Galata district of Istanbul originated centuries ago at the inner walls of the medieval city and was one of the most significant of its era, which has preserved its unique character and urban identity. In the nineteenth century, it became an important financial axis for the city. This study aims to understand the factors which determined the axial character of Voyvoda Street and its urban identity. The street, which is under the influence of new dynamics is examined in relation to spatial and functional transformation.

Design/Methodology/Approach

The analysis was developed by two essential components: the street and the buildings that define the character of the street by its architectural components, and their functional transformation since the nineteenth century. The axial character of the street has been evaluated due to selected criteria. The data is based on literature review, the survey of historical maps, visual materials such as photographs and gravure prints, and on-site observations.

Findings

The street has been shaped and transformed by social, political, and economic developments, external and internal migrations, the influence of modernist architectural movements, urban reforms, Western innovations in transportation, and technical developments. Voyvoda Street’s strong character as an axis is determined by its historical buildings, which are attached to each other continuously that form a wall defining the boundaries of the street. It is one of the essential pedestrian connections and functions as a path. Since most of the buildings lost their original functions, following the re-use for various needs, the service and cultural industries have become dominant. Although the historical characters of some buildings have been changed by new additions, the original silhouette of the nineteenth century is still dominant. 

Research Limitations/Implications

Visual materials and resources of some buildings were available in detail, while for some of them, the materials were limited.

Originality/Value

The previous studies concentrated on urban, and architectural aspects of Galata district as a whole, whereas this study focused on the urban identity of Voyvoda Street. The street and the historical buildings that define the axial character and the image of the street by its architectural components, and their functional transformation have been analyzed. 

Author Biographies

Serengül Seçmen, İstanbul Technical University

Serengül Seçmen currently works at Bahçeşehir University, Department of Architecture as an Assistant Prof. Dr. since 2019. She received her Urban Design Master degree from Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University in 2005. After working professionally on several architectural projects, she got her PhD from the City and Regional Planning Department of Istanbul Technical University in 2019.

Elif Süyük Makaklı, Işık UniversityArchitecture and Design Faculty

Elif Süyük Makaklı currently works at Işık University, Department of Architecture, as an Associate Prof. She received her Ph.D. at Vienna University of Technology Faculty of Architecture. She worked as an architect in different offices and firms in İstanbul and Vienna. She is conducting research activities in the areas of architectural design, traditional architecture, technology and architecture.

References

Akin, G. (2011). 20. Yüzyıl Başında İstanbul: Toplumsal ve Mekansal Farklılaşma, Osmanlı Başkentinden Küreselleşen İstanbul’a: Mimarlık ve Kent 1910-2010. İstanbul, Osmanlı Bankası Arşiv ve Araştırma Merkezi.

Akin, N. (1998). 19. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında Galata ve Pera. Literatür Yayıncılık.

Akpınar, İ. (2011). Osmanlı Başkentinden Küreselleşen İstanbul’a: Mimarlık ve Kent 1910-2010. Osmanlı Bankası Arşiv ve Araştırma Merkezi.

Alpay, S. (2007). Voyvoda (Bankalar) Caddesi’nin Tarihsel Gelişimi ve Hezaren Han, Master of Science Thesis, Yildiz Technical University, Institute of Science.

Altan, B. (2007). ‘Arşiv Belgeleri Işığında Hezaren Han’ın Yapısal Çözümlemesi, Master of Science Thesis, Istanbul Technical University, Institute of Science.

Ashworth, G. J. & Tunbridge, J. E. (1990). The Tourist-Historic City. Belhaven.

Ashworth, G. J. & Larkham, P. J. (1994). Building a New Heritage: Tourism, Culture and Identity in the New Europe. London, Routledge.

Bandarin, F. and Van Oers, R. (2012). The Historic Urban Landscape. Hoboken Wiley.

Bandarin, F. and Van Oers, R. (2015). Introduction Urban Conservation and the End of Planning, In F, Bandarin, and Oers, V (Eds.). Reconnecting the City. Wiley, UK.

Batur, A. (1996). Dünya Kenti İstanbul. Yapı Kredi Yayınları.

Batur, A. (2001). Galata and Pera, A Short History: Urban Development Architecture and Today. ARI: The Bulletin of the Istanbul Technical University, 55(1), 1-10.

Bilgin, I. (2010). İstanbul 1910-2010, Kent, Yapılı Çevre ve Mimarlık Sergisi Kataloğu. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.

Bullen, P. A., &Love, P. E. D. (2010). The rhetoric of adaptive reuse or reality of demolition: Views from the field. Cities, 27, 215–224.

Can, C. (1999). Tanzimat and Architecture. In N.Akın (Eds.) 7 Centuries of Ottoman Architecture: A Supra-National Heritage. İstanbul, Yapı-Endüstri Merkezi Publications.

Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T. and Tiesdell, S. (2003). The Dimensions of Urban Design. In M. Carmona et al. (Eds.) Public Places – Urban Spaces. Oxford, Architectural Press.

Celik, Z. (1998). 19. Yüzyılda Osmanlı Başkenti Değişen Istanbul. Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları.

Dokmeci, V., Altunbas, U., & Yazgi, B. (2007). Revitalisation of the main street of a distinguished old neighbourhood in Istanbul. European Planning Studies, 15(1), 153–166.

Eldem, E. (1999). Bankalar Caddesi: Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Voyvoda Caddesi. Osmanlı Bankası Arşiv ve Araştırma Merkezi. Tarih Vakfı.

Eldem, E. (2000). İstanbul: İmparatorluk Payitahtından Periferleşmiş bir Başkente. In E. Eldem; D. Goffman; B. Masters; translation S. Yalçın. Doğu ve Batı kenti arasında Osmanlı Kenti: Halep, İzmir, İstanbul. İstanbul, Tarih Vakfı Yayınları.

Eroğlu, Ö. (1992). Sur İçi Galata’sı Üzerine Bir Deneme, Istanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Yüksek Lisans Tezi.

Eyice, S. (1996). Galata Kulesi, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Araştırmaları Merkezi, İslam Ansiklopedisi, (13), 313-316.

García-Hernández M, De la Calle-Vaquero M, Yubero C. (2017). Cultural Heritage and Urban Tourism: Historic City Centres under Pressure. Sustainability, 9(8), 13-46.

Gençer, C. İ., Çokuğraş, I, (2016). Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Kentsel Mekânın Düzenlenmesi: İstanbul Örneği (1820–1900). Megaron, 11(1), 1-14.

Gibberd, F. (1955). Town Design. Architectural Press.

Gospodini, A. (2004). Urban Morphology and Place Identity in European Cities: Built Heritage and Innovative Design. Journal of Urban Design, 9(2), 225-248.

Gutman, R. (1986). The Street Generation. In S. Anderson (Eds.). On Streets. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Güvenç, M., et al., (2012). Azman Sanayi Kentinden Kentsel Bölgeye. In İstanbul 1910-2010, Kent, Yapılı Çevre ve Mimarlık Sergisi Kataloğu. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi.

Hansen, H. (2012, February 12). The Istanbul Art-Boom Bubble. The New York Times Magazine, Retrieved from URL www.nytimes.com.

Hartshorn, T.A. (1992). Interpreting the City. Canada, Jon Wiley and Sons.

Harvey, D. (2008). The Right to the City. New Left Review, 53, 23-40.

Hegemann, W. & Peets, E. (1922). The American Vitrivius, An Architect’s Handbook of Civic Art. Benjamin Blom.

Hosagrahar, J. (2015). Knowledge and Planning Tools. In F. Bandarin and O. Van (Eds.). Reconnecting the City. Wiley, UK.

Kostof, S. (1992). The City Assembled. Bullfinch Press.

Kuban, D. (1998). Kent ve Mimarlık Üzerine İstanbul Yazıları. Yem Yayınları.

Kuban, D. (2016). Osmanlı Mimarisi. Yem Yayınları.

Larkham, P. & Jones, A. (1993). The character of conservation areas in Great Britain. Town Planning Review, 64(4), 395–413.

Lowenthal, D., &Binney, D. (1981). Caring for the past: Changing attitudes. In D. Lowenthal & D. Binney (Eds.). Our past before us: Why do we save it?. London, Temple Smith.

Lynch, K (1960). The Image of the City. MIT Press.

Mehta, V. (2013). The Street: A Quintessential Social Public Space. Routledge. ISBN: 0415527104, 9780415527101.

Moudon, A.V. (1991). Public Streets for Public Use. Columbia University Press. ISBN: 0231075995, 9780231075992.

Moughtin, C. (2003). Urban Design: Street and Square. Architectural Press.

Norberg-Schulz, C. (1971). Existence, Space and Architecture. Cox and Wyman.

Norberg-Schulz, C. (1980). Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture. Academy Editions.

Ortayli, I. (2016). Eski Beyoğlu’ndan Çizgiler. İnkılap Kitabevi.

Özbay, C., Candan, B. A., (2014). Sunuş, In C. Özbay and B. A. Candan Yeni İstanbul Çalışmaları. İstanbul, Metis Yayıncılık.

Plevoets, B., & Van Cleempoel, K. (2013). Adaptive reuse as an emerging discipline: An historic survey. In G. Carns (Eds.) Reinventing architecture and interiors: a socio-political view on building adaptation, London, Libri Publishers.

Powell, K. (1999). Architecture reborn. Converting old buildings for new uses. Rizzoli International Publications.

Rapoport, A. (1987) Pedestrian Street Use: Culture and Perception. In A. V. Moudon (Eds.) Public Streets for Public Uses. Portland, VNR.

Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. Pion.

Schumacher, T. (1986) Buildings and streets. In S. Anderson (Eds.) On Streets (pp.132–149). MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Scott, F. (2008). On altering architecture. Routledge.

Smithson, A. and Smithson, P. (1967). Urban Structuring. Studio Vista.

Steele, F. (1981). The Sense of Place. Boston, CBI.

Tunbridge, J. E. & Ashworth, G. J. (1996). Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict. Chichester, Wiley.

Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping Street, City. Culture and Society, 3, 281–291.

Downloads

Published

21-06-2021

How to Cite

Seçmen, S., & Süyük Makaklı, E. (2021). THE URBAN AND ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF VOYVODA STREET FROM PAST TO PRESENT . ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 9(1), 01–24. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2021.148

Issue

Section

Articles