THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SPACES IN SIVEREK TRADITIONAL SETTLEMENT

Authors

  • Mazlum Kalak Gazi Üniversity
  • Rana Karasözen Eskisehir Technical University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2021.164

Keywords:

Public space, Private space, In betwen space, Traditional Housing, Siverek

Abstract

Purpose

Traditional houses are living spaces that the user shapes over time according to specific environmental factors and needs, which come together in a certain pattern forming some key parts of the traditional settlement texture. This pattern, which also reflects the local culture, is created by the relationships among the public, private, and intermediate spaces. The traditional Siverek architectural settlement is quite rich in such spaces. The main elements that form the urban pattern are the squares and streets that form public spaces, the houses representing the private space, and the in-between spaces such as texture-specific dead-end streets and archways that bridge these two types of spaces. However, due to the uninformed and miscalculated interventions in the original texture, mistimed protection measures, and failure to produce solutions for preservation, these architectural gems are at risk of extinction. At this point, two problems have been identified. The first is the preservation of the historical fabric. Another problem is the incompatibility of the newly planned areas with the old texture and housing layout. The purpose of this study is to provide guidance for new planning by analyzing the spatial arrangement of the traditional Siverek settlement.

Design/Methodology/Approach

In this context, from public spaces to residential private spaces, the spaces and their spatial relationships in the Siverek settlement plan were examined in a hierarchical order. The interrelationships among the spatial elements specific to the original texture of Siverek were discussed, and their status regarding their functional and spatial features in the urban texture were explained.

Findings

As a result of the study, it is stated that the traditional settlement texture and architecture of Siverek should be documented and preserved. Furthermore, considering the fact that the physical and social components that shape the spatial elements of the traditional fabric remain valid today, the need to transfer spatial formations and spatial hierarchies between public and private spaces to new designs on the settlement scale and building scale was emphasized.

Social/Practical Implications

It will serve as a guide for consideration in future designs of the city of Siverek, not by imitating traditional forms, but by analyzing spatial setup.

Originality/Value

This study is the first study on the public and private space relationship in Siverek.

Author Biographies

Mazlum Kalak, Gazi Üniversity

Mazlum Kalak received his MS degree from Anadolu University in the major of architecture. He currently works as a research assistant in the Architecture Department of Gazi University. He continues his education as a doctorate student in the field of Architecture.

Rana Karasözen, Eskisehir Technical University

Rana Karasözen received her MS degree from Anadolu University and Ph.D from Istanbul Technical University. She currently works at Eskişehir Technical University, Department of Architecture, as an associate Prof. of History of Architecture.

References

Akpirinç, H. H. (2012). Siverek İlçe Merkezinin Coğrafi Etüdü (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Kahramanmaraş: Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi.

Aydemir, Ş. (2004). Kentsel Arazi Kullanım Modelleri Ve Fizksel Gelişme Formlar. Ş. Aydemir, S. Aydemir, D. Şen Beyazlı, Ö. Nermin, A. M. Öksüz, S. Cenap, . . . Y. Aydın Türk içinde, Kentsel Alanların Planlanması ve Tasarımı (s. 119-140). Trabzon: Akademi Kitabevi.

Çelik, B. (2008). Arkeolojide Urfa. İstanbul: Şanlıurfa Valiliği İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü Yayınları.

Doğan, H. (2016). The Interaction Between Public and Private Space inTraditional Environments: The Case of KabaltıHouses in Urfa. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Gazimağusa, Kuzey Kıbrıs: Doğu Akdeniz Üniversitesi.

Erdönmez , M., & Akı, A. (2005). Açık Kamusal Kent Mekanlarinin Toplum İlişkilerindeki Etkileri. Megaron, 1(1), 67-87.

Erdönmez, M. (2005). . Açık Kamusal Kent Mekanlarının Toplumsal İlişkileri Yapılandırmadaki Rolü, Büyükdere - Levent - Maslak Aksı. Doktora tez.İstanbul: Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi.

Eyüce , A. (2005). Geleneksel Yapılar Ve Mekanlar. İstanbul: Birsen Yayınevi.

Gökgür, P. (2008). Kentsel Mekanda Kamusal Alanın Yeri. İstanbul: Bağlam Yayıncılık.

Grosz, E. (2001). Architecture from the outside: essays on virtual and real space. Cambridge : MIT Press.

Gürallar, N. (2009). Kamu - Kamusal Alan - Kamu Yapıları - Kamusal Mekân: Modernite Öncesi ve Sonrası için Bir Terminoloji Tartışması. Mimarlık Degisi 350, 52-55.

Habraken, N. (1998). The Structure of the Ordinary: form and control in the built environment. Cambridge Mass: MIT Press.

Hasol, D. (2017). Ansiklopedik Mimarlık Sözlüğü. İstanbul: Yem Yayın.

Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Kalak, M. (2018). Siverek Geleneksel Yerleşimini Biçimlendiren Mekansal Ögeler. Eskişehir. Yüksek Lisans Tezi: Anadolu Üniversitesi.

Kandemir, Ö. (2017). Architectural and Urban Identity Transformation of Eskisehir. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering , 245.

Karaman, A. (1991). Karaman, A. (1991). Toplu Konut Alanlarının Tasarımında Sosyo-Kültürel Veriler: Bazı İlke ve Ölçütlerin İrdelenmesi. Yapı Dergisi(118), 35-41.

Keleş, R. (1980). Kentbilim Terimleri Sözlüğü. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.

Közcü , H. (2016). Urfa Mimarisinde Kabaltılar. (N. Karadağ, Dü.) Şanlıurfa: Şanlıurfa Büyükşehir Belediyesi.

Kuban, D. (1968). Anadolu Türk Şehri, Tarihî Gelişmesi, Sosyal ve Fizikî Özellikleri. Vakıflar Dergisi, 53-73.

Kuban, D. (1970). 100 Soruda Türkiye Sanat Tarihi. İstanbul: Çağdaş Yayınları.

Madanipour, A. (1996). Design of Urban Space. An Inquiry into a Socio-spatial Process. UCL DISCOVERY, 23(2), 158.

Nooraddin, H. (2002). In-between space: Towards establishing new methods in Street Design. Global Built Environment Review, 50-57.

Özgültekin, R., Akman, E., Demirbağ, H., & Sun, K. (2003). Tarihi ve Kültürüyle SİVEREK. Ankara: Siverek Kaymakamlığı Yayınları.

Rapoport, A. (1969). House Form And Culture. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Rapoport, A. (1977). Human Aspects of Urban Form. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Sennett, R. (2002). Kamusal insanın Çöküşü. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.

Sınmaz, S., & Ahsen Özdemir , H. (2016). Türkiye Şehir Planlama Pratiğinin Kentsel Morfoloji ve Tipoloji Üzerindeki Etkileri, Siverek Kenti İçin Bir Değerlendirme. İdeal Kent(18), 8-33.

Tanyeli, U. (1987). Anadolu-Türk Kentinde Fiziksel Yapının Evrim Süreci (11.-15.yy). İstanbul: Doktora Tezi: İTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi.

Downloads

Published

21-06-2021

How to Cite

Kalak, M., & Karasözen, R. (2021). THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SPACES IN SIVEREK TRADITIONAL SETTLEMENT. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 9(1), 381–403. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2021.164

Issue

Section

Articles